On Aug 23, 2012, at 12:02 AM, Ingmar Visser wrote: > > It's fine. Just interpret them as you would any other (lower is > better). > > > And it is the printed logLik that is out of step here. log- > likelihoods _should_ be negative. > > That is not quite the case; in models with small variances log- > likelihoods can easily become positive, consider eg: > > > dnorm(0,0,0.1,log=T) > [1] 1.383647 >
We must be using different definitions of likelihood. (I do understand that densities can be greater than one when the domain is restricted.) -- David. > hth, Ingmar > > > -- > David. > > > On 22 August 2012 16:43, Gary Dong <pdxgary...@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear R users, > > I obtained negative AIC and BIC and positive Loglik values in a gls > model. > Is this normal? how should I interpret them? Thanks! > > AIC BIC logLik > -659.978 -587.5541 345.989 > > Best > Gary > > > David Winsemius, MD > Alameda, CA, USA > > > ______________________________________________ > R-help@r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help > PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code. > David Winsemius, MD Alameda, CA, USA [[alternative HTML version deleted]] ______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
