gam
objects. For a single fitted gam
object, Wald tests of
the significance of each parametric and smooth term are performed. Otherwise
the fitted models are compared using an analysis of deviance table. The tests
are usually approximate, unless the models are un-penalized. Simulation evidence
suggests that best p-value performance results from using ML estimated smoothing parameters.## S3 method for class 'gam':
anova(object, ..., dispersion = NULL, test = NULL,
alpha = 0, freq = FALSE)
## S3 method for class 'anova.gam':
print(x, digits = max(3, getOption("digits") - 3),...)
gam
as produced by gam()
.anova.gam
object produced by a single model call to anova.gam()
."Chisq"
, "F"
or "Cp"
.summary.gam
for details.summary.gam
for details.anova.gam
produces output identical to
anova.glm
, which it in fact uses.In the single model case an object of class anova.gam
is produced,
which is in fact an object returned from summary.gam
.
print.anova.gam
simply produces tabulated output.
anova.glm
is
used. If only one model is provided then the significance of each model term
is assessed using Wald tests: see summary.gam
for details of the
actual computations.
In the latter case print.anova.gam
is used as the
printing method. Note that the p-values for smooth terms are approximate only:
simulation evidence suggests that they work best with REML or ML smoothness selection.gam
, predict.gam
,
gam.check
, summary.gam
library(mgcv)
set.seed(0)
dat <- gamSim(5,n=200,scale=2)
b<-gam(y ~ x0 + s(x1) + s(x2) + s(x3),data=dat)
anova(b)
b1<-gam(y ~ x0 + s(x1) + s(x2),data=dat)
anova(b,b1,test="F")
Run the code above in your browser using DataLab