Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 862

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Newton—Raphson and EM Algorithms for Linear Mixed-Effects Models for Repeated-Measures Data

Lindstrom, Mary J., Bates, Douglas M.·1988·Journal of the American Statistical Association

Abstract

We develop an efficient and effective implementation of the Newton—Raphson (NR) algorithm for estimating the parameters in mixed-effects models for repeated-measures data. We formulate the derivatives for both maximum likelihood and restricted maximum likelihood estimation and propose improvements to the algorithm discussed by Jennrich and Schlüchter (1986) to speed convergence and ensure a positive-definite covariance matrix for the random effects at each iteration. We use matrix decompositions to develop efficient and computationally stable implementations of both the NR algorithm and an EM algorithm (Laird and Ware 1982) for this model. We compare the two methods (EM vs. NR) in terms of computational order and performance on two sample data sets and conclude that in most situations a well-implemented NR algorithm is preferable to the EM algorithm or EM algorithm with Aitken's acceleration. The term repeated measures refers to experimental designs where there are several individuals and several measurements taken on each individual. In the mixed-effects model each individual's vector of responses is modeled as a parametric function, where some of the parameters or “effects” are random variables with a multivariate normal distribution. This model has been successful because it can handle unbalanced data (different designs for different individuals), missing data (observations on all individuals are taken at the same design points, but some individuals have missing data), and jointly dependent random effects. The price for this flexibility is that the parameter estimates may be difficult to compute. We propose some new methods for implementing the EM and NR algorithms and draw conclusions about their performance. We also discuss extensions of the mixed-effects model to incoporate nonindependent conditional error structure and nested-type designs.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/01621459.1988.10478693

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 862

Metadata

Authors
Lindstrom, M. J., & Bates, D. M.
Venue
Journal of the American Statistical Association
Published
1988-12
Volume
83
Issue
404
Pages
1014-1022
ISSN
  • 0162-1459 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-274X
OpenAlex
W2081283602
Cited by
862
References
0
FWCI
5.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Newton—Raphson and EM Algorithms for Linear Mixed-Effects Models for Repeated-Measures Data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/01621459.1988.10478693
The paper
Lindstrom, M. J., & Bates, D. M. (1988). Newton—Raphson and EM Algorithms for Linear Mixed-Effects Models for Repeated-Measures Data. Journal of the American Statistical Association. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1988.10478693

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.