Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 551

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Maximizing Generalized Linear Mixed Model Likelihoods With an Automated Monte Carlo EM Algorithm

Open access
Booth, James G., Hobert, James P.·1999·Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology

Abstract

Summary: Two new implementations of the EM algorithm are proposed for maximum likelihood fitting of generalized linear mixed models. Both methods use random (independent and identically distributed) sampling to construct Monte Carlo approximations at the E-step. One approach involves generating random samples from the exact conditional distribution of the random effects (given the data) by rejection sampling, using the marginal distribution as a candidate. The second method uses a multivariate t importance sampling approximation. In many applications the two methods are complementary. Rejection sampling is more efficient when sample sizes are small, whereas importance sampling is better with larger sample sizes. Monte Carlo approximation using random samples allows the Monte Carlo error at each iteration to be assessed by using standard central limit theory combined with Taylor series methods. Specifically, we construct a sandwich variance estimate for the maximizer at each approximate E-step. This suggests a rule for automatically increasing the Monte Carlo sample size after iterations in which the true EM step is swamped by Monte Carlo error. In contrast, techniques for assessing Monte Carlo error have not been developed for use with alternative implementations of Monte Carlo EM algorithms utilizing Markov chain Monte Carlo E-step approximations. Three different data sets, including the infamous salamander data of McCullagh and Nelder, are used to illustrate the techniques and to compare them with the alternatives. The results show that the methods proposed can be considerably more efficient than those based on Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithms. However, the methods proposed may break down when the intractable integrals in the likelihood function are of high dimension.

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 · 10.1111/1467-9868.00176

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 551

Metadata

Authors
Booth, J. G., & Hobert, J. P.
Venue
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology
Published
1999-01-01
Volume
61
Issue
1
Pages
265-285
ISSN
  • 1369-7412 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9868
OpenAlex
W2090692107
Cited by
551
References
2
FWCI
19.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Maximizing Generalized Linear Mixed Model Likelihoods With an Automated Monte Carlo EM Algorithm. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1467-9868.00176
The paper
Booth, J. G., & Hobert, J. P. (1999). Maximizing Generalized Linear Mixed Model Likelihoods With an Automated Monte Carlo EM Algorithm. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9868.00176

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.