Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Statistics for Biology and Health ((SBH))

  • 1535 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter explores some alternatives to maximum likelihood estimation by the EM algorithm. Newton’s method and scoring usually converge faster than the EM algorithm. However, the trade-offs of programming ease, numerical stability, and speed of convergence are complex, and statistical geneticists should be fluent in a variety of numerical optimization techniques for finding maximum likelihood estimates. Outside the realm of maximum likelihood, Bayesian procedures have much to offer in small to moderate-sized problems. For those uncomfortable with pulling prior distributions out of thin air, empirical Bayes procedures can be an appealing compromise between classical and Bayesian methods. This chapter illustrates some of these well-known themes in the context of allele frequency estimation and linkage analysis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bernardo JM (1976) Algorithm AS 103: psi (digamma) function. Appl Statist 25: 315–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bradley EL (1973) The equivalence of maximum likelihood and weighted least squares estimates in the exponential family. J Amer Stat Assoc 68: 199–200

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Charnes A, Frome EL, Yu PL (1976) The equivalence of generalized least squares and maximum likelihood in the exponential family. J Amer Stat Assoc 71: 169–171

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Conn AR, Gould NIM, Toint PL (1991) Convergence of quasi-Newton matrices generated by the symmetric rank one update. Math Prog 50: 177–195

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Davidon WC (1959) Variable metric methods for minimization. AEC Research and Development Report ANL-5990, Argonne National Laboratory

    Google Scholar 

  6. Edwards A, Hammond HA, Jin L, Caskey CT, Chakraborty R (1992) Genetic variation at five trimeric and tetrameric tandem repeat loci in four human population groups. Genomics 12: 241–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Efron B, Hinkley DV (1978) Assessing the accuracy of the maximum likelihood estimator: Observed versus expected Fisher information. Biometrika 65: 457–487

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Ferguson TS (1996) A Course in Large Sample Theory. Chapman & Hall, London

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Hille E (1959) Analytic Function Theory Vol 1. Blaisdell Ginn, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Jennrich RI, Moore RH (1975) Maximum likelihood estimation by means of nonlinear least squares. Proceedings of the Statistical Computing Section: American Statistical Association 57–65

    Google Scholar 

  11. Khalfan HF, Byrd RH, Schnabel RB (1993) A theoretical and experimental study of the symmetric rank-one update. SIAM J Optimization 3: 1–24

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Kingman JFC (1993) Poisson Processes. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Lange K (1995) Applications of the Dirichlet distribution to forensic match probabilities. Genetica 96: 107–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Lee PM (1989) Bayesian Statistics: An Introduction. Edward Arnold, London.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Miller KS (1987) Some Eclectic Matrix Theory. Robert E Krieger Publishing, Malabar, FL

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Mosimann JE (1962) On the compound multinomial distribution, the multivariate /3-distribution, and correlations among proportions. Biometrika 49: 65–82

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Ott J (1985) Analysis of Human Genetic Linkage. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  18. Rao CR (1973) Linear Statistical Inference and its Applications, 2nd ed. Wiley, New York

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Schneider BE (1978) Algorithm AS 121: trigamma function. Appl Statist 27: 97–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Yasuda N (1968) Estimation of the inbreeding coefficient from phenotype frequencies by a method of maximum likelihood scoring. Biometrics 24: 915–934

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2002 Springer-Verlag New York, Inc.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lange, K. (2002). Newton’s Method and Scoring. In: Mathematical and Statistical Methods for Genetic Analysis. Statistics for Biology and Health. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-21750-5_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-21750-5_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4684-9556-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-387-21750-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics