Behavioral Genetics Models

Mis-specification and model fit interpretation of univariate ACE
I am new to statistical modelling for genetic analysis and after conducting a round of univariate analysis (prior to a future multivariate one) using the umxACE function I have a few questions I would like to ask for help with.

Test Moderation of Standardized Variance Components
since in the conventional moderated ACE model proposed by Purcell it is only possible to test whether there is a significant moderation of the unstandardized genetic, shared and unshared variance components in a phenotype, I was wondering whether it is also possible to test if there is a significant moderation of the standardized variance components.

Modified CP model
I am trying to fit a model (I am not sure if it will be possible) like the one in the attached figure.
I am trying to do it by modifying this script (CP model with one latent factor):
# Fit Common Pathway ACE Model
# ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
nl <- 1
- Read more about Modified CP model
- 10 comments
- Log in or register to post comments

umxsexlim command-different results in each run for the exact same command
I am trying to conduct a multivariate sex-limitation model. I am not sure why, but when I run the exact same command I get different results in each run (and in some of the runs, the results don't really correspond with the raw data and don't make sense).
I assume that this is the result of an unstable solution. However, I don't get any warning messages that indicate there is anything wrong, or that could direct me what to do.
The script is attached. Do you have an idea what could be the problem?

Bivariate ACE model with covariates for ordinal variables
I couldn't find any existing OpenMx codes to conduct bivariate genetic modelling for ordinal variables with covariates, so I've adapted Hermine Mae's twoACEvo.R code (bivariate ACE model for ordinal variables) by adding covariates to the code. I thought it was quite straightforward, but when I ran the code I got the following error:
Error in as.vector(data) :
no method for coercing this S4 class to a vector



Inconsistency between global chi-square difference tests and t-tests
I've specified a multivariate ACE model and found that the z/t-tests produce substantially different p-values than the chi-square difference test per parameter constrained to zero. My recollection is that these tests should produce equivalent results but I recall reading somewhere that at relatively small n (here, n = 260 pairs), the global test may have more power. Does anyone know if this is likely correct or if there are methods papers address it? Could the difference be due to correlations among the z/t-tests? Not sure what's going on here.

Problem to get the genetic correlations
I have fitted a 4-variate model and I have fixed A to 0 for one of these phenotypes. The model fits OK but I am struggled to obtain the genetic correlations.
This is the output from the model but as one of the A parameters is fixed to 0 I get these results:
- Read more about Problem to get the genetic correlations
- 8 comments
- Log in or register to post comments

ACE with moderator- warning in output
Mx starting optimization; number of parameters = 7
*** WARNING! ***
I am not sure I have found a solution that satisfies
Kuhn-Tucker conditions for a minimum.
NAG's IFAIL parameter is 6
Looks like I got stuck here. Check the following:
1. The model is correctly specified
2. Starting values are good
3. You are not already at the solution
- Read more about ACE with moderator- warning in output
- 1 comment
- Log in or register to post comments
Pagination
- Previous page
- Page 8
- Next page