Before modeling begins there is a question and, often, data. If data are
observational, then exploratory data analysis (EDA) is the initial step
that determines relationships between variables and spatio-temporal
trends. Following EDA we apply a Bayesian model in rjags.
Data: you can download Breeding bird survey, explanation and data, with supporting data.
BBSexampleTime.rdata is on
githubSoftware
Get the updated clarkFunctions2024.R file on Sakai:
source('clarkFunctions2024.r')
rjags: If you are on a mac, you may have trouble
installing rjags. If so, use this
link to download the newest version of JAGS. Then install and load
packages:
library( rjags )
library( maps )
library( coda )
library( TruncatedNormal )
library( lattice )
library( maps )
library( repmis )
Here is some background on wood thrush migration
review unit 3 answers
Still a few camera traps need completion: wildlifeinsights.org. (Recall, the account is approved by submitting this form).
this vignette objectives:
factorsrjags for Bayesian analysisThe migratory wood thrush population is declining. There are multiple threats, both here in the temperate zone and in their tropical wintering grounds in Central America. Stanley et al. (2015) quantified declines in wood thrush abundance in the breeding range by region, and they related it to forest cover. They used tracking data to determine if regional differences in the US might be explained by the fact that birds summer and wintering grounds were linked. I used this example to examine changes in abundance using the breeding-bird survey (BBS) data. Specifically, we will ask whether or not wood thrush populations could be in decline in NC and, if so, which variables in the BBS data might help us understand it.
Wood thrush populations may be declining.
R?Data manipulation remains the most time-consuming element of analysis. The popularity of R begins with the flexibility it provides for data structures and management.
A user can interact with R at a range of levels.
High-level interactions with transparent functions like lm
(linear regression) require little more than specification of predictors
and a response variable. At the same time, R allows for
low-level algorithm development. In fact, functions written in C++ and
Fortran can be compiled and used directly with R. This
combination of high- and low-level interaction allows one to enter at
almost any degree of sophistication, then advance, without requiring a
change in software.
The Wickam article is a good background on data structures. Here is his list of the most common problems with data structures:
The most important concept to take from this article is that of observations by variables, the basic structure needed for data modeling.
This section on R application follows the introduction in
the vignette on Introduction to
R.
When I open R studio I am in a directory. I can interact directly
with files that are in my working directory. To interact with a file in
a different directory, I need to either supply a path to
the directory that it occupies, or I set my working directory using the
Session tab in Rstudio.
I can determine which directory I am in with the function
getwd(). I can move to a different director using
setwd(pathToThere).
Here I am:
getwd()
## [1] "/Users/jimclark/Library/CloudStorage/Box-Box/Home Folder jimclark/Private/classes/bayesClass2024spring/4bbs"
Syntax for paths is standard unix/linux. I move down a directory by
giving a path with the directory name followed by /. I can
move up directory by starting the path with "..".
As discussed above, files are identified by their location, or
path, and the file name. The path can be
relative to the current directory. To determine which files are in my
current directory, I use list.files(). This returns a
character vector of file names. To find the names of files
in a different directory I need to include the path. This
code works for me, because the paths match the locations of directories
relative to my current directory:
list.files() # files in current directory
list.files("../dataFiles/") # in dataFiles
list.files("../dataFiles/dataBBS") # in dataFiles/dataBBS
I interact with files through functions that allow me to
access their contents or create new files to hold content that is
currently in my working environment. Common formats for data include
.txt and .csv files, but there are dozens of
others.
An internet search will often locate an R package that
reads a specific file type. Some files may require modification, either
to make them readable or to extract information they contain that is not
extracted by the package I find to read them. The R function
readLines allows the desperate measure of reading files
line-by-line. This might be needed when, say, a .txt file
contains non-ASCII characters. If I have an unfamiliar file type, I
start with google.
R has its own compression format .rdata that is commonly
used for data when there are multiple objects that will be processed and
stored together. These files are accessed through the
load function.
Here I load observations contained in two objects, xdata
(predictors) and ydata (bird counts) from the internet. The
function source_data from package repmis wraps
the load within a function that downloads the file
first:
d <- "https://github.com/jimclarkatduke/gjam/blob/master/BBSexampleTime.rdata?raw=True"
source_data(d)
## [1] "xdata" "ydata" "missingEffort" "timeList"
## [5] "edata"
The consol displays names of objects loaded into the working
environment. Here are a few lines of xdata:
| lon | lat | Route | soil | nlcd | year | temp | StartWind | StartSky | juneTemp | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1-0 | -78.37957 | 33.98146 | 1 | Spodosols | forest | 1964 | NA | NA | NA | 25.6 |
| 1-1 | -78.37957 | 33.98146 | 1 | Spodosols | forest | 1965 | NA | NA | NA | 24.5 |
| 1-2 | -78.37957 | 33.98146 | 1 | Spodosols | forest | 1966 | 24.4 | 2 | 2 | 23.8 |
| 1-3 | -78.37957 | 33.98146 | 1 | Spodosols | forest | 1967 | 26.9 | 2 | 2 | 24.1 |
| 1-4 | -78.37957 | 33.98146 | 1 | Spodosols | forest | 1968 | 23.1 | 2 | 2 | 25.4 |
Here are a few lines of ydata:
| MourningDove | Red-belliedWoodpecker | ChimneySwift | EasternWood-Pewee | BlueJay | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1-0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1-1 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
| 1-2 | 12 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 16 |
| 1-3 | 51 | 5 | 4 | 8 | 19 |
| 1-4 | 15 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 27 |
The modes of these objects are mode(xdata) = list and
mode(ydata) = matrix. I created these objects from files on
the BBS site.
The data.frame xdata holds information about each
observation, including location (lon, lat), the observation
Route, the soil type (a factor),
the nlcd land cover type.
One of the important things about this structure is the alignment of
observations in xdata and ydata. In fact, they
could be the same file. I’ve separated them here because there are a
large number of species in ydata, and I don’t want the
extra effort needed to extract them from a larger file.
data.frame
Data are often stored in formats that are not amendable to analysis;
reformatting is required. For analysis I typically want a
matrix or data.frame with observations as rows
and variables as columns, OxV format.
Many data sets are not organized as OxV, often for good reasons, but they must be put in OxV format for analysis. Here are terms I use:
| terms | definition |
|---|---|
| observation | what I record at a site/location/plot, numeric or not |
| sample | observations-by-variables matrix or
data.frame |
| design matrix | observations-by-variables matrix, any
factors converted to indicators |
| covariate | a predictor that takes continuous values |
| factor | a discrete predictor that can have 2, 3, … levels |
| level | a factor has at least 2 |
| main effect | an individual predictor |
| interaction | a combination of more than one predictor |
The list saved as xdata looks like a
matrix. I find the dimensions of xdata with a
call to dim(xdata) = [2751, 18]. These two numbers are rows
and columns, respectively. Recall that although xdata has
rows and columns, it is not stored as a R matrix, because
it may include factors or even characters. A
data.frame is rendered as rows and columns for the benefit
of the user, but it is not stored as a matrix and, thus,
does not admit matrix operations. The columns of a
data.frame must have the same lengths, but they do not need
to be of the same mode. In fact, a data.frame
is a type of list.
Although I cannot do numeric operations across columns of a
list, a data.frame is useful for structuring
data. If all elements of a data.frame are
numeric, then the data.frame can be converted
to a numeric matrix using the
function as.matrix.
A related object in R is the tribble, see a description
here ??tribble. Some data.frame behaviors can
be troublesome if you are not familiar with them. These will come up as
we proceed. Because there is so much code available that uses the
data.frame, I will continue to use it here.
Previously, we used sapply to explore the objects in a
data.frame:
sapply( xdata, is.numeric ) # is each column numeric?
## insert groups times lon lat Route soil
## TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE
## nlcd year temp StartWind StartSky precSite precAnom
## FALSE TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE
## defSite defAnom winterTmin juneTemp
## TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE
which( sapply( xdata, is.factor ) ) # which columns are factors?
## soil nlcd
## 7 8
I’ll expand on factors in the next section.
Exercise 1: Are there character variables
in xdata? How did you find out?
Exploratory data analysis (EDA) is the first step required for an analysis. EDA helps to determine if the scientific question can be answered with the data at hand. It guides model development and computation.
The relationships between variables must be understood before any modeling begins. Do data provide sufficient coverage in space, time, and predictor and response variables? Are there relationships between variables? Is there ‘signal’? In this section I learn about the data through EDA.
An observation is a route-year, and that is how
xdata is organized. It is observations by
variables. If I want to examine counts of wood thrush as
routes (rows) by years columns. As previously,
I can use match. At the end of the vignette on Introduction to R
there was a problem that required the same operation, so I put it in the
functions vec2Mat and mat2Vec that are now in
clarkFunctions2024.R.
The next thing I do is create a routeYear variable to
identify observations. One routeYear is a single
observations:
xdata$routeYear <- paste( xdata$Route, xdata$year, sep = '_' )
Now I use the vec2Mat function I created to create a
routeByYr matrix. To check this function I
then invert the operation using mat2Vec. Because this
second function cannot know how rows were organized in the original
ydata, I use the newly created xdata$routeYear
to compare the reconstructed routeYr with
ydata[,spec]:
spec <- 'WoodThrush'
routeByYr <- vec2Mat( ydata[,spec], xdata$Route, xdata$year ) # counts
routeYr <- mat2Vec( routeByYr, include.na = F )
all.equal( ydata[,spec], routeYr[xdata$routeYear,'x'] ) # yes (except names)
## [1] "names for target but not for current"
The all.equal function says that these two objects are
the same. The routeByYr matrix holds the
WoodThrush counts organized by route and year:
| 1964 | 1965 | 1966 | 1967 | 1968 | 1969 | 1970 | 1971 | 1972 | 1973 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 5 |
| NA | NA | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 0 | 1 | 4 | 11 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 19 | 1 | 35 |
| NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |
The matrix routeByYr helps to visualize each
Route as a time series. Missing values, NA are
routes that we note counted in that year.
The wood thrush summer range (orange) includes North Carolina. The winter range is in Central America (blue).
We can also obtain marginal summaries and express them as counts per effort (CPE),
cByYr <- colSums( routeByYr, na.rm=T ) # counts by year
nByYr <- colSums( routeByYr*0+1, na.rm=T ) # no. routes by year (why does this work?)
nByYr <- table( xdata$year ) # another method
CPE <- cByYr/nByYr # counts per route by year
To explore the data I first generate a map of the observations. Here is a map of the routes:
map( 'county', xlim = c(-85, -75), ylim = c(33.6, 36.8), col='grey')
map( 'state', add=T)
points( xdata$lon, xdata$lat, pch = 16 )
Route locations.
I see balanced coverage in space, from mountains to coast.
I now examine counts for wood thrush, using symbol size to represent
the species count and color to represent the variables for moisture
deficit.
yspec <- ydata[, spec ]
cy <- tapply(yspec, xdata$Route, mean, na.rm=T) # route means
wi <- match( as.numeric(names(cy)), xdata$Route ) # index for each route
ll <- xdata[ wi, c('lon','lat') ] # locations
def <- xdata$defSite[wi] # route moisture deficit
Now I assign colors to def that range from wet (blue) to
dry (brown). The function colorRampPalette generates a new
function that takes the number of colors needed,
nlev, and interpolates a new sequence of nlev
colors.
ramp <- c("#2166ac", "#01665e", "#d8b365", "#8c510a") # color ramp
nlevs <- 20 # no. of colors in sequence
df <- seq( min(def), max(def), length = nlevs ) # sequence spanning range of def
colT <- colorRampPalette( ramp ) # new function to assign colors
cols <- colT(nlevs) # interpolated to no. of levels
di <- findInterval(def, df, all.inside = T) # assign color level
There is now one moisture deficit value (def) for each
Route. Their locations, as lon /lat are held in
ll. Here is a histogram of def:
hist( def, nclass = nlevs, col = cols, border = cols, main = '' )
Annual moisture deficit ranges from negative (wet) to positive (dry).
Note dry colors are positive. Here they are on the map:
map( 'county', xlim = c(-85, -75), ylim = c(33.6, 36.8), col = 'grey' )
map( 'state', add = T )
cex <- 6*cy/max(cy, na.rm=T) # symbol size scaled to counts
points( ll[,1], ll[,2], pch = 16, cex = cex, col = cols[di] ) # note how colors handled
title(spec)
Wet colors are confined to western mountains. Large symbols indicate high counts.
Exercise 2. What does this map tell us about the spatial distribution of bird counts and the moisture deficits where they are common?
To explore this question I need to structure the BBS data. Again, an
observation includes information (Route, Year)
and the count for each species that is seen or heard. It
includes a description of the weather, which affects behavior. From the
table above, a sample is an observations-by-variables
matrix or data.frame. It is the fundamental
unit for analysis; I draw inference from a sample. This
format is OxV (‘obs by variables’) format. The
design matrix is a matrix, which is
numeric. It contains predictors, which can be main effects and
interactions. It can include covariates and factors. It can be analyzed,
because it is numeric.
If a variable is stored as a character it may need to be
declared a factors. Confusion can arise when a factor is
represented by integer values, e.g., \(1, 2,
\dots\); it will be analyzed as a factor only if I declare it
with factor(variable). When the data.frame is
converted to a design matrix, the factor
levels each occupy a column of zeros and ones (more on this later).
Here are raw observations plotted by year:
plot(xdata$year, ydata[,'WoodThrush'], xlab = 'Year', ylab = 'Wood thrush counts',
cex = .4, pch = 16, bty = 'n', col = cols[di] )
Here is a sum by route-year:
thrush <- tapply(yspec, list( route = xdata$Route, year = xdata$year),
mean, na.rm=T)
Take a look at the structure of the matrix thrush. Here
I add the mean taken over all routes in a given year:
thrushYear <- colMeans( thrush, na.rm=T) # average by year
year <- as.numeric(names(thrushYear)) # all years in the study
plot(xdata$year, ydata[,'WoodThrush'], xlab = 'Year',
ylab = 'Wood thrush counts', cex = .5, pch = 16, bty = 'n', col = cols[di] )
lines(year, thrushYear, col='white', lwd=5)
lines(year, thrushYear, lwd=2)
thrushQuant <- apply( thrush, 2, quantile, na.rm=T) # quantiles for counts
lines(year, thrushQuant[2,], col='white', lwd=5)
lines(year, thrushQuant[4,], col='white', lwd=5)
lines(year, thrushQuant[2,], lwd=1)
lines(year, thrushQuant[4,], lwd=1)
Counts in time with quantiles
Exercise 3. Can we tell from this plot if birds are declining? Are there alternative explanations?
I start by exploring the data to get a better idea of sample effort in space and time. Here is a map to see where samples are located in the state, and the relationships between variables:
par( mfrow = c(1,2), bty = 'n', mar = c(4,3,1,3) ) # observations by year
hist( xdata$year, main='', xlab = 'Year', nclass=60 ) # routes by year
title('effort by year')
xdata$Route <- as.numeric( as.character(xdata$Route) ) # if it's a factor
effortByRoute <- tapply( xdata$year*0 + 1, xdata$Route, sum, na.rm = T )
mm <- match( names(effortByRoute), xdata$Route )
lonLat <- xdata[mm, c('lon','lat')]
routeSummary <- data.frame( route = xdata$Route[mm], lonLat, effort = effortByRoute )
map('county', region = 'north carolina', col = 'grey') # symbols scaled by obs per route
points( routeSummary$lon, routeSummary$lat, cex = .03*effortByRoute, pch=16 )
title('effort by route')
Distribution in space and time.
The big change in effort after 1987 needs more thought. Which sites were added? Here’s a map:
firstYr <- tapply(xdata$year, xdata$Route, min, na.rm=T) # yr a route started
firstYr <- firstYr[ as.character(routeSummary$route) ]
routeSummary <- cbind( routeSummary, firstYr )
col <- rep('blue', nrow(routeSummary)) # early routes
col[ routeSummary[, 'firstYr'] > 1987 ] <- 'darkgreen' # added later
map('county',region = 'north carolina')
points( routeSummary$lon, routeSummary$lat, cex=.055*routeSummary$effort, pch=16, col = 'white' )
points( routeSummary$lon, routeSummary$lat, cex=.05*routeSummary$effort, pch=16, col=col)
Early (blue) and late (green) routes
Are these sites changing the distribution of data with respect to, say, temperature?
plot(xdata$year, xdata$juneTemp, cex=.2, xlab = 'Year', ylab='degrees C', bty = 'n' )
title('Temperature trend')
routes <- sort(unique(routeSummary$route))
nroute <- length(routes)
for(i in 1:nroute){
wi <- which(xdata$Route == routes[i])
lines(xdata$year[wi], xdata$juneTemp[wi], col = col[i])
}
tmu <- tapply(xdata$juneTemp, xdata$year, mean, na.rm=T)
years <- as.numeric(names(tmu))
lines( years, tmu, col=2, lwd = 3) # annual average T
Temperature trends by route.
Exercise 4. What do the sizes of the symbols in the map indicate? How would I determine if adding new sites after 1987 has biased the sample toward warmer or cooler temperatures? What about the distribution of data suggests that trends in time for bird abundances could be hard to estimate?
What is observed in a given year could depend less on the mean temperature for the site, but instead on the anomaly–is it a warm or cold time relative to the site mean? Here are June temperatures represented as anomalies from the site mean:
# overall trend
trend <- lm(tmu ~ years)
# local anomaly
tmuByRoute <- tapply(xdata$juneTemp, xdata$Route, mean, na.rm=T)
tanomaly <- xdata$juneTemp - tmuByRoute[ as.character(xdata$Route) ]
plot(xdata$year, tanomaly, cex=.2, bty = 'n' )
abline(h = 0, lty=2)
Temperature anomalies
cor( tanomaly, ydata[,spec] ) # correlation with thrush
## [1] -0.08288059
Exercise 5. Does the temperature anomaly explain variation in wood thrush count?
Recall that some variables are stored as factors:
which( sapply(xdata, is.factor) )
## soil nlcd
## 7 8
Here I note that variables clearly recorded as factor levels are not
stored that way. The variables StartWind and
StartSky are potentially important, because they affect
bird activity. From documentation I learned that wind codes are an
ordered factor. Here are sky classification codes used in the original
data:
| Sky | description | new name |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | Clear or few clouds | clear |
| 1 | Partly cloudy (scattered) or variable sky | clouds |
| 2 | Cloudy (broken) or overcast | clouds |
| 4 | Fog or smoke | fogSmoke |
| 5 | Drizzle | rain |
| 7 | Snow | snow |
| 8 | Showers | rain |
| 9 | N/A | unknown |
A common problem with factors is that the representation of levels
can be highly uneven, which has a big impact on a model fit. Each
factor level will be treated like an intercept in model
fitting. The version of xdata loaded here has nine levels
from the BBS data aggregated into four. They are currently not stored as
factors, but I can change that by declaring them to be factors.
To appreciate how they are treated in model fitting, try a simple
example with the variable xdata$startWind. Here is the
effect of ignoring that this is a factor:
# create a factor version for each variable
xdata$routeFactor <- as.factor(xdata$Route)
xdata$StartWindFactor <- as.factor(xdata$StartWind)
xdata$SkyFactor <- as.factor(xdata$StartSky)
fit1 <- glm(yspec ~ xdata$StartWind, family = poisson) # WRONG: fitted as non-factor
fit2 <- glm(yspec ~ xdata$StartWindFactor, family = poisson) # CORRECT
summary(fit1)
##
## Call:
## glm(formula = yspec ~ xdata$StartWind, family = poisson)
##
## Deviance Residuals:
## Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
## -4.4627 -2.5917 -0.9182 1.2063 12.6804
##
## Coefficients:
## Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)
## (Intercept) 2.310526 0.015492 149.143 <2e-16 ***
## xdata$StartWind -0.012172 0.008676 -1.403 0.161
## ---
## Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
##
## (Dispersion parameter for poisson family taken to be 1)
##
## Null deviance: 17421 on 2078 degrees of freedom
## Residual deviance: 17419 on 2077 degrees of freedom
## (672 observations deleted due to missingness)
## AIC: 24753
##
## Number of Fisher Scoring iterations: 5
summary(fit2)
##
## Call:
## glm(formula = yspec ~ xdata$StartWindFactor, family = poisson)
##
## Deviance Residuals:
## Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
## -4.5468 -2.5462 -0.9225 1.2632 12.7635
##
## Coefficients:
## Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)
## (Intercept) 2.281335 0.009269 246.131 < 2e-16 ***
## xdata$StartWindFactor2 0.054364 0.015747 3.452 0.000556 ***
## xdata$StartWindFactor3 -0.005901 0.023337 -0.253 0.800385
## xdata$StartWindFactor4 -0.185720 0.043225 -4.297 1.73e-05 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
##
## (Dispersion parameter for poisson family taken to be 1)
##
## Null deviance: 17421 on 2078 degrees of freedom
## Residual deviance: 17385 on 2075 degrees of freedom
## (672 observations deleted due to missingness)
## AIC: 24722
##
## Number of Fisher Scoring iterations: 5
plot( jitter(xdata$StartWind), yspec, cex=.2, xlab = 'StartWind factor level',
ylab = 'Wood thrush counts', bty = 'n' )
Wind is a discrete factor.
Exercise 6. What is the difference in your interpretation of the wind variable in the two fits? Explain what the coefficients mean in the two fits.
Exercise 7. From the object trend, is
temperature increasing or decreasing on average? Is this trend
‘significant’? Does it differ by site? Hint: consider including route as
a factor.
To examine trends in counts over time I start with scatter plots and a spline function for counts by year. To highlight the range of abundance I use a heat color gradient from blue (low) to red (high). I overlay a spline fit to summarize mean trends:
par( mfcol=c(1,2),bty='n', mar=c(4,4,2,.5) )
ramp <- c('#b2e2e2','#2ca25f','#005824') # color gradient
nlev <- max(yspec) + 1
ylim <- c(0,80)
cf <- colorRampPalette( ramp )(nlev)
plot( jitter(xdata$year), jitter(yspec), col=cf[yspec+1], cex=.4, pch=15,
xlab='year', ylab='count', ylim=ylim)
spl <- spline(yspec ~ xdata$year)
lines(spl,lwd=5,col='white')
lines(spl)
nc <- 30 # frequency before 1985, after 2000
y1 <- 1:(nc-1)
sc <- c(round(y1/nc*nlev,0), nlev)
old <- hist(yspec[xdata$year <= 1987],plot=F, breaks=c(0,sc))
new <- hist(yspec[xdata$year >= 2000],plot=F, breaks=c(0,sc))
plot(NULL,xlim=c(0,.15),ylim=ylim, ylab='',xlab='frequency')
colorSegment(old$density, old$mids, ramp, nc, lwd=2)
colorSegment(new$density, new$mids, ramp, nc, lwd=3)
text( .04, 24, 'pre-1987')
text( .07, 10, 'post-2000')
Counts shaded by abandance and spline fit at left. Frequencies of counts before 1985 and after 2000 at right.
Exercise 8. How does the distribution of counts change after 1987?
Unlike the linear regression for continuous responses, with a Gaussian likelihood, the observations in this example are discrete counts. The linear model is not appropriate because observations can only be non-negative integers $ = 0, 1, 2, $.
Here is a simple generalized linear regression (GLM) model, more precisely termed a Poisson regression to fit parameters:
\[ \begin{aligned} y_i &\sim Poi(\lambda_i) \\ \log(\lambda_i) &= \mathbf{x}'_i \boldsymbol{\beta} \end{aligned} \] The term GLM refers to fact that there is a linear function of parameters (second line) embedded within a non-Gaussian distribution. The first line is a Poisson distribution. The Poisson distribution has one parameter, an intensity \(\lambda > 0\). It describes count data \(y \in \{0, 1, \dots\}\), i.e., non-negative integers. The Poisson has the unusual property that \(\lambda\) is both the mean and the variance of the distribution, \(E[y] = Var[y] = \lambda\).
The second line is linear in parameters, but it is a non-linear function of \(\lambda\). In this context, the log function is called the link function, connecting the linear model to the Poisson sampling distribution.
For a sample of \(n\) observations, the likelihood is
\[[\mathbf{y}|\mathbf{X},
\boldsymbol{\beta}] = \prod_{i=1}^n Poi(y_i | \lambda_i)\] where
\(\mathbf{y}\) is the length-\(n\) vector of counts, and \(\mathbf{X}\) is the \(n \times p\) matrix of predictor variables.
The R function glm can be used to fit GLMs. I give it a
formula, the data, and model,
family=distribution("link"). I include some predictors from
the BBS data,
fit <- glm(yspec ~ temp + year + StartWindFactor, data=xdata, family=poisson("log"))
summary(fit)
##
## Call:
## glm(formula = yspec ~ temp + year + StartWindFactor, family = poisson("log"),
## data = xdata)
##
## Deviance Residuals:
## Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
## -6.8752 -2.2054 -0.7085 1.1847 9.7254
##
## Coefficients:
## Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)
## (Intercept) 63.5837470 0.9715180 65.448 < 2e-16 ***
## temp -0.0213270 0.0020261 -10.526 < 2e-16 ***
## year -0.0304594 0.0004853 -62.758 < 2e-16 ***
## StartWindFactor2 -0.0745468 0.0159526 -4.673 2.97e-06 ***
## StartWindFactor3 -0.1264779 0.0235340 -5.374 7.69e-08 ***
## StartWindFactor4 -0.3814783 0.0433770 -8.794 < 2e-16 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
##
## (Dispersion parameter for poisson family taken to be 1)
##
## Null deviance: 17420 on 2077 degrees of freedom
## Residual deviance: 13607 on 2072 degrees of freedom
## (673 observations deleted due to missingness)
## AIC: 20945
##
## Number of Fisher Scoring iterations: 5
This code says that I want a GLM model for response (counts)
y with two covariates, temp + year, and one
factor, StartWindFactor. I want a log link, i.e., \(\log(\lambda_i) = \mathbf{x}'_i
\boldsymbol{\beta}\).
Exercise 9. Which variables in this GLM appear to be important and why?
I now turn to a Bayesian implementation. The package used here
rjags uses Markov Chain Monte Carlo simulation. We’ll
discuss that in coming vignettes.
The model I fit now includes a prior distribution for coefficients,
\[ \begin{aligned} \left[ \boldsymbol{\beta} | \mathbf{X}, \mathbf{y} \right] &\propto \prod_{i=1}^n Poi(y_i | \lambda_i) \times \prod_p N \left(\beta_p | 0, 10^5 \right) \\ \log(\lambda_i) &= \mathbf{x}'_i \boldsymbol{\beta} \end{aligned} \]
The first line holds on the right side the likelihood and a normal prior disribution for each \(\beta_p\). This prior distribution is non-informative, because the variance is so large as to make the prior flat.
Graphical model for the Bayesian GLM.
The graph does not include a box for \(\lambda\), because it is a deterministic transformation of \(\beta\) and \(\mathbf{x}\). Consider that I could have written the likelihood \(Poi(y_i | \lambda_i)\) as \(Poi(y_i | \lambda_i)\) as \(Poi \left( y_i | \exp \left[\mathbf{x}'_i \boldsymbol{\beta} \right] \right)\).
For this example I use a package rjags. There are \(p\) predictors, typically the first is an
intercept. As before, elements of the length-\(p\) vector of coefficients \(\boldsymbol{\beta} = (\beta_1, \dots,
\beta_p)\) are multiplied by corresponding elements in the design
vector \(\mathbf{x}_i = (1, x_{i2}, \dots
x_{i,p})\). The design matrix organizes the
vectors \(\mathbf{x}_i: i = 1, \dots,
n\) into a \(n \times p\) matrix
\(\mathbf{X}\).
I set up the design matrix using the function
model.matrix. There are missing values in
xdata, which affects how I implement
model.matrix. The default treatment of missing values in R
packages is to disregard the entire observation. To see where missing
values occur you could do this:
which(is.na(xdata),arr.ind=T). The design matrix
constructed by model.matrix follows this convention, so I
need to subject y to the same treatment. I get
X and y with the same observation omitted this
way:
y <- ydata[,spec]
xmiss <- which(is.na(xdata),arr.ind=T)
X <- model.matrix(y ~ temp + year + StartWindFactor, data=xdata)
Y <- model.frame(y ~ temp + year + StartWindFactor, data=xdata)$y
I take a moment to look at the design matrix X,
head(X)
| (Intercept) | temp | year | StartWindFactor2 | StartWindFactor3 | StartWindFactor4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1-2 | 1 | 24.4 | 1966 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| 1-3 | 1 | 26.9 | 1967 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| 1-4 | 1 | 23.1 | 1968 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| 1-5 | 1 | 26.7 | 1969 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| 1-6 | 1 | 21.1 | 1970 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
The three indicator columns for the factor StartWind
contain 1’s for the non-reference levels of this factor. The reference
level is the first level,
attr(xdata$StartWindFactor,'levels')
## [1] "1" "2" "3" "4"
Again, there is no column for level 1, because this is
the intercept. Thus, the coefficients for other levels are relative to
level 1.
I discuss theory and algorithms for Gibbs sampling in later units.
For now, I simply implement rjags, using the model graph to
discuss the fit at a high level.
For rjags I have to remember that the variance of the
normal distribution is parameterized as a precision
equal to 1/variance. To keep this straight, here is parameterization for
the variance in the normal distribution as used in three contexts:
| context | notation | which parameter? |
|---|---|---|
| text | \(N(\mu,\sigma^2)\) | variance \(\sigma^2\) |
| most R | dnorm(x, mu, sigma) |
standard deviation \(\sigma\) |
jags |
dnorm(mu, tau) |
precision \(\tau = \sigma^{-1}\) |
This block of code sets up the model that will be stored in a file
jagsWoodThrush.txt. The structure is
cat( model string, file ). This code will write the
model string to file. I will read this file
when I run jags. The model looks like
executable code, but it actually is setting up the graph. Note two
for loops. The first loops over observations, defining the
likelihood, as given in the equation above. The second loops over
elements in the coefficient vector \(\boldsymbol{\beta}\).
file <- "jagsWoodThrush.txt" # model file
# set up the 'graph'
cat("model{
for(i in 1:n){
Y[i] ~ dpois(lambda[i])
lambda[i] <- exp( inprod(beta[],X[i,]) )
}
for (i in 1:p) {
beta[i] ~ dnorm(0, 1.0E-5)
}
}", file = file)
I can find the file generated by this code in my working directory.
Here is an analysis with rjags. Below is a
function jags.model that I use to run a MCMC. The first
line defines data as an object that I call
dataList. Note that each of the objects in this list is
used in the model. Arguments to
function jags.model specify initial values for estiamtes
(inits), the file holding the model, the
number of times the simulation will be repeated (n.chains)
and n.adapt or “burnin”. Several lines determine the number
of MCMC chains, the number of burnin iterations, and the total number of
iterations n.inter. I save objects for later analysis as a
compressed file:
dataList <- list(Y = Y, X = X, n = nrow(X), p = ncol(X)) # specify data objects
save( dataList, file='jagsData.Rdata')
# computation
outjags <- jags.model(data = dataList, inits = NULL, file = file,
n.chains = 3, n.adapt = 500 ) # translate graphical model in file
## Compiling model graph
## Resolving undeclared variables
## Allocating nodes
## Graph information:
## Observed stochastic nodes: 2078
## Unobserved stochastic nodes: 6
## Total graph size: 19897
##
## Initializing model
params <- 'beta'
output <- coda.samples( outjags, params, n.iter = 5000 ) # posterior simulation
summary( output )
##
## Iterations = 501:5500
## Thinning interval = 1
## Number of chains = 3
## Sample size per chain = 5000
##
## 1. Empirical mean and standard deviation for each variable,
## plus standard error of the mean:
##
## Mean SD Naive SE Time-series SE
## beta[1] 5.189551 2.704865 2.209e-02 1.2215808
## beta[2] -0.011593 0.002189 1.787e-05 0.0001967
## beta[3] -0.001331 0.001349 1.101e-05 0.0006120
## beta[4] 0.053291 0.016804 1.372e-04 0.0003988
## beta[5] -0.001114 0.023930 1.954e-04 0.0003854
## beta[6] -0.187601 0.043809 3.577e-04 0.0006562
##
## 2. Quantiles for each variable:
##
## 2.5% 25% 50% 75% 97.5%
## beta[1] 0.397136 2.900134 5.2317030 7.5102618 9.704023
## beta[2] -0.016096 -0.013045 -0.0115820 -0.0100760 -0.007313
## beta[3] -0.003573 -0.002472 -0.0013665 -0.0002177 0.001042
## beta[4] 0.020374 0.041920 0.0533381 0.0647435 0.086029
## beta[5] -0.048636 -0.017196 -0.0008988 0.0149631 0.045203
## beta[6] -0.274283 -0.217651 -0.1875291 -0.1573784 -0.103582
summary( window(output, start = 501) ) # remove early iterations
##
## Iterations = 501:5500
## Thinning interval = 1
## Number of chains = 3
## Sample size per chain = 5000
##
## 1. Empirical mean and standard deviation for each variable,
## plus standard error of the mean:
##
## Mean SD Naive SE Time-series SE
## beta[1] 5.189551 2.704865 2.209e-02 1.2215808
## beta[2] -0.011593 0.002189 1.787e-05 0.0001967
## beta[3] -0.001331 0.001349 1.101e-05 0.0006120
## beta[4] 0.053291 0.016804 1.372e-04 0.0003988
## beta[5] -0.001114 0.023930 1.954e-04 0.0003854
## beta[6] -0.187601 0.043809 3.577e-04 0.0006562
##
## 2. Quantiles for each variable:
##
## 2.5% 25% 50% 75% 97.5%
## beta[1] 0.397136 2.900134 5.2317030 7.5102618 9.704023
## beta[2] -0.016096 -0.013045 -0.0115820 -0.0100760 -0.007313
## beta[3] -0.003573 -0.002472 -0.0013665 -0.0002177 0.001042
## beta[4] 0.020374 0.041920 0.0533381 0.0647435 0.086029
## beta[5] -0.048636 -0.017196 -0.0008988 0.0149631 0.045203
## beta[6] -0.274283 -0.217651 -0.1875291 -0.1573784 -0.103582
plot( output, bty = 'n' )
Note the difference in coefficients when summary was
used with the start = 501. Now I reinitialize using the
coefficients from the previous fitted model:
What do the trace plots suggest about the model fit?
I now have an object outjags of
class "rjags" and an object output of class
mcmc.list, which contains MCMC chains, in addition to other
information about the model and fit. It contains lists within lists. I
first want to plot the chains. I then generate some plots. This involves
aggregating chains. We’ll discuss that in the next few
meetings.
par(mfrow=c(7,2), mar=c(3,3,1,1), bty='n')
allchains <- numeric(0)
nchains <- length(output)
for(i in 1:nchains){
allchains <- rbind(allchains,output[[i]])
}
allchains <- as.mcmc(allchains)
xyplot(output) # using lattice for individual chains
densityplot(output) # density for individual chains
densityplot(allchains) # density for combined chains
Note that the last densityplot of allchains
combines the three MCMC chains. `
Exercise 10: Why is the wood thrush declining? Has the model converged? Repeat this analysis with a different species, then identify differences between the glm and Bayesian results.
A minimal knowledge of data types and storage modes is needed to manipulate objects in R. Functions are available from the base R package. They are supplemented by others that can be installed from the CRAN website, github, sourceforge, or even developed yourself.
Data analysis begins with data formatting and exploration. Data analysis requires OxV (observations \(\times\) variables) format. I review packages and functions that can help.
The example using Poisson regression provides an introduction to
generalized linear models (GLMs), by conventional maximum likelihood
(glm).
We will learn about how a Bayesian analysis like this works. For now, a first experience with rjags sets us up for modeling that we’ll discuss in the next weeks.