|
|
 |
| Exponential decay growth model with E... |
 
|
| Message/Author |
|
|
|
|
Trying to fit exponential decay growth model with estimator = bayes, can't get around this problem:
*** ERROR
For analysis with ESTIMATOR=BAYES, NEW parameters must appear on the
left-hand side in at least one MODEL CONSTRAINT equation.
No equation found containing parameter on the left-hand side: ERATE
Is there a work-around?
MODEL:
INIT BY ANX1@1;
INIT BY ANX2-ANX5* (L12-L15);
RATE BY ANX1@0;
RATE BY ANX2-ANX5* (L22-L25);
ASYMP BY ANX1@0;
ASYMP BY ANX2-ANX5* (L32-L35);
!Name means of latent vars.
[ASYMP] (AS); [INIT] (IN); [RATE@0];
MODEL CONSTRAINT:
!Create a new var equals for mean of latent rate of change.
NEW(ERATE);
L12=exp(-1*Erate); L13=exp(-2*Erate); L14=exp(-3*Erate); L15=exp(-4*Erate);
L22=(AS - IN)*1*exp(-1*Erate);
L23=(AS - IN)*2*exp(-2*Erate);
L24=(AS - IN)*3*exp(-3*Erate);
L25=(AS - IN)*4*exp(-4*Erate);
L32=1-exp(-1*Erate);
L33=1-exp(-2*Erate);
L34=1-exp(-3*Erate);
L35=1-exp(-4*Erate); |
|
|
|
|
| Mplus Bayes does not currently accept restrictions on parameters like here, only new, free parameters (so LHS). Don't know about a work-around except to try ML (with BS). |
|
|
|
|
Ah... that's a shame. I'll need to stick with ML then.
The issue that I'm getting with this approach (and hence the motivation for trying Bayesian estimation) is that I keep getting a negative variance estimate for RATE (and it's not very close to zero, so no quick 'fixing to close to 0' type solution seems correct!).
I've tried fixing it to be > 0 but then I get a correlation > 1 popping up... |
|
|
|
|
| Could you use exp(erate) instead of erate to keep it non-negative? With ML, that is. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
