From cf54ccca37d27480dbf8d59eb027300518f7ad75 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Johannes Ranke Last change 1 July 2022,
-built on 20 Apr 2023
+built on 19 May 2023
Source: vignettes/web_only/dimethenamid_2018.rmd
dimethenamid_2018.rmd
plot(mixed(f_parent_mkin_const["SFO", ]))
Using biexponential decline (DFOP) results in a slightly more random scatter of the residuals:
+plot(mixed(f_parent_mkin_const["DFOP", ]))
The population curve (bold line) in the above plot results from taking the mean of the individual transformed parameters, i.e. of log k1 @@ -239,7 +239,7 @@ dominates the average. This is alleviated if only rate constants that pass the t-test for significant difference from zero (on the untransformed scale) are considered in the averaging:
+plot(mixed(f_parent_mkin_const["DFOP", ]), test_log_parms = TRUE)
While this is visually much more satisfactory, such an average procedure could introduce a bias, as not all results from the individual @@ -251,7 +251,7 @@ degradation model and the error model (see below).
predicted residues is reduced by using the two-component error model: +plot(mixed(f_parent_mkin_tc["DFOP", ]), test_log_parms = TRUE)
However, note that in the case of using this error model, the fits to the Flaach and BBA 2.3 datasets appear to be ill-defined, indicated by @@ -341,7 +341,7 @@ effects does not improve the fits.
The selected model (DFOP with two-component error) fitted to the data assuming no correlations between random effects is shown below.
-plot(f_parent_nlme_dfop_tc)
plot(f_parent_nlme_dfop_tc)
Degradation model | @@ -614,13 +614,13 @@ satisfactory precision. -
---|