Skip to main content
. 2002 Sep;120(3):369–393. doi: 10.1085/jgp.20028583

TABLE V.

Comparisons of Log-likelihood and AIC Values for Schemes B1–I1

Scheme −70 mV −110 mV −150 mV
LL AIC LL AIC LL AIC
B1 398,409 15 461,905 15 260,617 15
C1 398,362 16 461,871 16 260,606 16
C2 399,441 12 462,675 12 261,402 12
C3 399,441 11 462,675 11 261,402 11
C4 399,061 13 462,477 13 261,307 13
D1 398,633 14 461,958 14 260,874 14
E1 400,796 10 463,522 10 262,221 10
F1 401,027 6 463,642 2 262,310 3
F2 400,846 9 463,569 9 262,253 9
F3 401,018 8 463,635 7 262,287 8
F4 401,027 5 463,642 1 262,310 2
G1 401,024 7 463,641 2 262,292 7
G2 401,037 1 463,638 6 262,306 4
G3 401,036 4 463,641 5 262,306 5
H1 401,038 3 463,638 8 262,306 6
I1 401,039 1 463,643 2 262,314 1

Log-likelihood (LL) values were generated by maximum likelihood fitting using the program MIL (Qin et al., 1996). AIC ranks were assigned as described in the text.