Re: Change of NSIG or R matrix
Xinting,
First of all 'successful minimization' has nothing to do with a good model. NONMEM's internal decision to declare success or termination is often a pseudo-random choice. If you look at the sigdigs of the estimate you will typically find that the lowest value is 2.9 and many others are greater than 5. This gives you a clue to which parameters are well determined and which are less well known. It is a not a YES/NO decision.
Second, NSIG determines the number of significant digits in the parameter estimates. If you choose a number less than 3 then it means you don't care if the answer is 10.1 or 10.9. They both have 2 sig digs but the estimates differ by nearly 10%. There is a large body of empirical literature that has relied on NSIG=3 (or more). I do not see any reason to ignore this in order to get a meaningless "minimization successful" message from a random number generator.
I look forward to hearing from "many" to understand why they believe that "minimization successful" indicates that the model results are somehow better even though the parameter estimates have hardly any significant digits.
Nick
Quoted reply history
On 22/10/2013 9:17 p.m., Xinting Wang wrote:
> Dear Nick,
>
> Thank you very much for your suggestion. Could you explain a little bit about the statement regarding NSIG < 3? I seem to remember that many suggested to use a smaller NSIG to get a successful minimization.
>
> Dear Leonid,
>
> I read about the recommendation of SIGL, NSIG and TOL, but I am not quite familiar with the use of these options in subroutine ADVAN4. If I set SIGL a fixed value, let's say 12, and NSIG 3, does this mean I also have to identify a value for TOL in $subroutine? I appreciate your help very much.
>
> Thank you both.
>
> Regards
>
> On 8 October 2013 21:59, Leonid Gibiansky < [email protected] < mailto: [email protected] >> wrote:
>
> Yes, it should be fine to use S matrix if you cannot get default
> to run, and use NSIG larger or smaller than default value of 3
> (although this is not guaranteed, usually NSIG does not change the
> OF value or parameter estimates in any significant way). Note that
> Nonmem manual recommends that SIGL >= 3*NSIG, TOL >= SIGL.
> Separate SIGL can be set on COV step, and it is recommended that
> SIGL >= 4*NSIG on COV step. In real life I've seen many examples
> where larger NSIG and SIGL resulted in successful COV step, and
> also many examples when default values were better (in getting COV
> step). UNCONDITIONAL on COV step allows you to run COV even when
> minimization ended with some error.
>
> Contrary to Nick's experience, I found that COV step is useful as
> it reveals which of the model parameters are poorly estimated, and
> that CI based on SE are usually quite good and are in a general
> agreement with the bootstrap CI, but it may depend on the problem.
>
> Leonid
>
> --------------------------------------
> Leonid Gibiansky, Ph.D.
> President, QuantPharm LLC
> web: www.quantpharm.com http://www.quantpharm.com
> e-mail: LGibiansky at quantpharm.com http://quantpharm.com
> tel: (301) 767 5566 <tel:%28301%29%20767%205566>
>
> On 10/8/2013 3:57 AM, Xinting Wang wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> I have a naive question regarding the modeling building process in
> NONMEM. With more and more covariates added in the model, I
> often come
> across an error message saying that "ERROR 134", or R MATRIX
> SINGULAR.
>
> After searching from the internet, I learned that changing NSIG in
> $ESTIMATION and MATRIX=S in $COV would be helpful for both
> problems
> respectively. And from my own experience, it dose help with
> the modeling
> building.
>
> However, my concern is, I used different NSIG and MATRIX in
> the previous
> steps. Is it proper to use different NSIGs and MATRICE in a
> single model
> building? If not, could you please explain this a little bit?
>
> Thank you in advance!
>
> Best Regards
> --
> Xinting
> Wang
>
> --
> Xinting
--
Nick Holford, Professor Clinical Pharmacology
Dept Pharmacology & Clinical Pharmacology, Bldg 503 Room 302A
University of Auckland,85 Park Rd,Private Bag 92019,Auckland,New Zealand
office:+64(9)923-6730 mobile:NZ +64(21)46 23 53
email: [email protected]
http://holford.fmhs.auckland.ac.nz/
Holford NHG. Disease progression and neuroscience. Journal of Pharmacokinetics
and Pharmacodynamics. 2013;40:369-76
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10928-013-9316-2
Holford N, Heo Y-A, Anderson B. A pharmacokinetic standard for babies and
adults. J Pharm Sci. 2013:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jps.23574/abstract
Holford N. A time to event tutorial for pharmacometricians. CPT:PSP. 2013;2:
http://www.nature.com/psp/journal/v2/n5/full/psp201318a.html
Holford NHG. Clinical pharmacology = disease progression + drug action. British
Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. 2013:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bcp.12170/abstract