I'm wondering if I can "trust" the standard estimates, and simply report the boundary estimates without confidence limits, or if the Profile likelihood results are alerting me to a deeper problem in the model. I'm using data cloning to explore any problems, but this doesn't work so well when the profile likelihood routine throws errors, because I don't think the program is returning the proper profile estimates.
Any advice would be appreciated. The estimates I am getting are generally consistent with what I expect based on other features of the data set.
This is output from the default estimation options:
- Code: Select all
30:f 0.2624716 0.1697179 0.0824103 0.8359561
31:f 0.7578689 0.5119190 0.2278903 2.5203588
32:f 0.1085695E-007 0.7446060E-005 0.9107025E-011 0.1294313E-004
33:f 0.1413096E-011 0.0000000 0.1413096E-011 0.1413096E-011
And this is what happens with the profile likelihood when it throws underflow errors (with SA in this case):
- Code: Select all
30:f 0.2604790 0.1673543 0.1914167E-011 0.8360978E+020
31:f 0.7691676 0.5085021 0.1511681E-019 0.2468910E+021
32:f 0.1015309E-019 0.2596587E-017 0.1015309E-019 0.2353853E+018
33:f 0.1511490E-011 0.0000000 0.1511490E-011 0.2300445E-011
I put a seasonal constraint on f, and typically the latter half of the year we don't see much recruitment, so zeroes make biological sense to me.
Is it ok to report a boundary estimate without a CI? (I've seen it here and there...)