The name is absent



22

Figure 2.2: Illustration of the distribution of the latent variable vil in the model
described in (2.2)-(2.4) when the covariate takes values —1 and 1. Here we consider:
J = I type of toxicity, no patient-specific random effect ri, G = 2 components in the
mixture of normals and three,
K = 2, possible ordinal outcomes. In both mixtures,
the darkly shaded, lightly shaded and white areas correspond to the probabilities πι⅛
of the ordinal outcome taking the values 0, 1 and 2, respectively.

On the other, large values of G may overparameterize the model leading to poorly
mixing Markov chains. Alternatively, using reversible jump MCMC (Green, 1995),
G could be included in the parameter vector and estimated as part of the inference.
But since the parameters of interest are the cell probabilities πj⅛, and inference on
mixture-specific parameters is not of interest we prefer the approach with fixed large
values of
G. Formally implied inference on the parameters of the mixture model,
including
μjg and pjg, should not be interpreted. Problems related to label switching
(arbitrary permutation of the terms in the mixture) and node duplication (replicating



More intriguing information

1. How much do Educational Outcomes Matter in OECD Countries?
2. The role of statin drugs in combating cardiovascular diseases
3. Macro-regional evaluation of the Structural Funds using the HERMIN modelling framework
4. Financial Market Volatility and Primary Placements
5. Are combination forecasts of S&P 500 volatility statistically superior?
6. The Role of Land Retirement Programs for Management of Water Resources
7. The name is absent
8. THE ECONOMICS OF COMPETITION IN HEALTH INSURANCE- THE IRISH CASE STUDY.
9. Declining Discount Rates: Evidence from the UK
10. Creating a 2000 IES-LFS Database in Stata