What AIC is necessary to select this model? I have read this page but am a little confused and I think a real example might help solidify the idea in my mind regarding how to use the AIC in model selection.
Equivalence of AIC and p-values in model selection
Say I have two nested models (that differ in 6 parameters) - these are from real data. The simpler model is mod1 and the more complex, mod2.
> AIC(mod1)
[1] 191.2335
> AIC(mod2)
[1] 190.5257

> BIC(mod1)
[1] 206.9418
> BIC(mod2)
[1] 225.084

> lmtest::lrtest(mod1,mod2)
Likelihood ratio test

Model 1: y ~ x1 + x2 + x3 + x4
Model 2: y ~ x1(NLR) + rcs(x2) + x3 + x4
  #Df  LogLik Df  Chisq Pr(>Chisq)  
1   5 -90.617                       
2  11 -84.263  6 12.708    0.04792 *
---
Signif. codes:  0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1

The p-value from the LR test would suggest that the model fit is compromised with the simpler model (and thus mod2 is better).
The AIC is lower for mod2 but not by a margin that I think suggests it's the optimal fit. What I want to know is how much lower (on 6 df) does the AIC need to be for mod2 (the more complex model in this case) to justify the extra parameters? Is it 6 x 2 = 12 units?
Clearly the BIC would suggest mod1.

How big a difference in AIC you need to be able to say 'mod2 is better than mod1' is going to depend a bit on your field, your data, your sample sizes etc. Generally, in ecology, models are considered approximately equal (in terms of performance) if the AIC value for two models is within 2 AIC.
As you pointed out, BIC favours mod1 over mod2 because BIC is a system of model evaluation that more strongly 'penalizes' having more variables/ predictors, and mod1 has fewer predictors. This results in more conservative approach. Choosing the appropriate metric will depend on your data and your question, but this paper may be helpful: Model selection for ecologists: the worldviews of AIC and BIC.
