2009Canadian Journal of Forest ResearchRequires access

Assessing the goodness of fit of forest models estimated by nonlinear mixed-model methods

Shongming Huang, Shawn X. Meng, Yuqing Yang

Open publisher page 46 citations

Abstract

In this study we examined various measures, including the concordance correlation (CC) coefficient, for determining the goodness of fit of forest models estimated by nonlinear mixed-model (NLMM) methods. Based on the volume–age data for black spruce, we analyzed the use of CC and other traditional goodness-of-fit measures such as coefficient of determination (R2), mean bias, percent bias, root mean square error, and graphic techniques on both the population and subject-specific levels within the NLMM framework. We also examined the relationship between goodness-of-fit measures and the number of observations per subject. We found that the standard overall goodness-of-fit measures commonly reported on combined data from different subjects were generally insufficient in determining the goodness of fitted models. We recommend that CC and other selected goodness-of-fit measures be calculated for individual subjects, and that the frequency distributions of the calculated values be examined and used as the principal criteria for determining the goodness of fit of forest models estimated by NLMM methods and for comparing alternative models and covariance structures. We also emphasized the importance of using pertinent graphic techniques to assess the appropriateness of NLMMs, especially at the subject-specific level, wherein lies the main interest of NLMMs.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

In this study we examined various measures, including the concordance correlation (CC) coefficient, for determining the goodness of fit of forest models estimated by nonlinear mixed-model (NLMM) methods. Based on the volume–age data for black spruce, we analyzed the use of CC and other traditional goodness-of-fit measures such as coefficient of determination (R2), mean bias, percent bias, root mean square error, and graphic techniques on both the population and subject-specific levels within the NLMM framework. We also examined the relationship between goodness-of-fit measures and the number of observations per subject. We found that the standard overall goodness-of-fit measures commonly reported on combined data from different subjects were generally insufficient in determining the goodness of fitted models. We recommend that CC and other selected goodness-of-fit measures be calculated for individual subjects, and that the frequency distributions of the calculated values be examined and used as the principal criteria for determining the goodness of fit of forest models estimated by NLMM methods and for comparing alternative models and covariance structures. We also emphasized the importance of using pertinent graphic techniques to assess the appropriateness of NLMMs, especially at the subject-specific level, wherein lies the main interest of NLMMs.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 46 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

In this study we examined various measures, including the concordance correlation (CC) coefficient, for determining the goodness of fit of forest models estimated by nonlinear mixed-model (NLMM) methods. Based on the volume–age data for black spruce, we analyzed the use of CC and other traditional goodness-of-fit measures such as coefficient of determination (R2), mean bias, percent bias, root mean square error, and graphic techniques on both the population and subject-specific levels within the NLMM framework. We also examined the relationship between goodness-of-fit measures and the number of observations per subject. We found that the standard overall goodness-of-fit measures commonly reported on combined data from different subjects were generally insufficient in determining the goodness of fitted models. We recommend that CC and other selected goodness-of-fit measures be calculated for individual subjects, and that the frequency distributions of the calculated values be examined and used as the principal criteria for determining the goodness of fit of forest models estimated by NLMM methods and for comparing alternative models and covariance structures. We also emphasized the importance of using pertinent graphic techniques to assess the appropriateness of NLMMs, especially at the subject-specific level, wherein lies the main interest of NLMMs.

Key concepts: Goodness of fit, Statistics, Mathematics, Population, Covariance, Econometrics, Demography, Sociology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Assessing the goodness of fit of forest models estimated by nonlinear mixed-model methods — Research Paper | ScholarLens