I am comparing the final beta.nii.gz by importing it to matlab and this is on individual subjects. The subjects have not moved much (less than 3 mm). But the number of voxels that have different values in betta.nii.gz are a handful which does not seem right since the fmc.nii.gz and fmcpr.nii.gz are much more differet. Also the X.mat file should contain the motion correction values since I have asked the analysis to use motion as an external regressor. But the two X.mat files in the analysis folder in the bold directory are very very similar (not identical but the difference seems to be in the 0.000001 range that might be due to some rounding errors)
One thing that puzzles me is the -funcstem in the analysis.info which is set to fmc by default. Does this force the analysis to use fmc.nii.gz az the input to the analysis? Should I make it to use fmcpr for the perrun analysis to get different results? M On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Douglas N Greve <gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>wrote: > Hi Maryam, when you say that they are practically identical, I assume that > there are at least some small differences indicating that something was > different? And what are you comparing exactly? Eg, single subject or group? > In principle, they should be pretty close to each other, it depends > entirely on how much the subject moved between runs and how much smoothing > you apply. If you have a well-behaved population, then there might not be > much of a difference. If you reduce the smoothing to 0, then you might > start to see more of an effect. > > doug > > > > On 01/22/2013 02:44 PM, Maryam Vaziri Pashkam wrote: > >> Hi Dough, >> >> This might be a very basic question: >> I would like to compare the results of an analysis with the perrun and >> persession motion correction. Here is my analysis line: >> >> >> *mkanalysis-sess \* >> >> *-analysis Cat_all_new -fsd bold -runlistfile runlist_all.txt \* >> >> *-native -mcextreg -stc siemens -fwhm 0 \* >> >> *-event-related -paradigm para_cat.par -nconditions 5 \* >> >> *-spmhrf 0 -TR 2 -refeventdur 4 -polyfit 2* >> >> * >> * >> * >> * >> >> * >> And here is what I have in my analysis info >> >> analysis Cat_1 >> mcstem fmc >> fsd bold >> runlistfile run_1.txt >> TR 2 >> RegDOF 6 >> RawSpace volume native >> mask brain >> RawFWHM 0 >> RawSTC siemens >> UseB0DC 0 >> inorm 100 >> acfbins 30 >> fixacf 1 >> acffwhm 20 >> acfsvd 0 >> designtype event-related >> nskip 0 >> polyfit 2 >> HPFCutoffHz 0 >> HeteroGCor 0 >> nconditions 5 >> parname para_cat.par >> RefEventDur 3 >> timewindow 40.000000 >> prestim 0 >> TER 0.050000 >> spmhrf 0 >> stimulusdelay -1.00000000000000000000 >> Condition 1 Condition01 >> Condition 2 Condition02 >> Condition 3 Condition03 >> Condition 4 Condition04 >> Condition 5 Condition05 >> nuisreg mcextreg 3 >> >> >> >> I preprocessed my data once using the perrun option and once using the >> persession option in two different directories and ran the analysis on both >> of those data sets. The problem is when the analysis finished the results >> where practically identical. I am not sure what is going on and can't >> figure out if the analysis in both cases is done based on the persession >> motion correction or they are both done based on the perrun motion >> correction and how I can get the analysis to run in two different ways. I >> am using freesurfer 5.1. >> >> M >> * >> > > -- > Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D. > MGH-NMR Center > gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu > Phone Number: 617-724-2358 > Fax: 617-726-7422 > > Bugs: > surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/**fswiki/BugReporting<http://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting> > FileDrop: > www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/**facility/filedrop/index.html<http://www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html> > Outgoing: ftp://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.**edu/transfer/outgoing/flat/** > greve/ <ftp://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/transfer/outgoing/flat/greve/> > > > > The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it > is > addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the > e-mail > contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance > HelpLine at > http://www.partners.org/**complianceline<http://www.partners.org/complianceline>. > If the e-mail was sent to you in error > but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and > properly > dispose of the e-mail. > >
_______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in error but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properly dispose of the e-mail.
