Dear Doug, Thank you for your clarification. It sounds the right way for 
correction is:mri_glmfit-sim \ --glmdir lh.gender_age.glmdir \ --cache 4
neg \ --cwp  0.05\ --2spaces

One last question: Is the resulting "cache.th40.neg.sig.cluster.summary"
the right file to look for post-correction cluster information? The (old) 
manual said
results should be stored in a files starting with "mc-z", but the
"cache....summary" file is the only summary file FS produces after
running the script above...

thank you.

Karl

********************************************************
In the first command you only used 5 samples in your simulation. If you 
read the "Notes" section below the command, you'll see that this should 
be something like 5000. Only 5 was used because it would take very long 
to run. In general, you don't need to run the simulation because it has 
already been run and the data tabulated (this is what is accessed in the 
2nd command line).On 03/02/2016 10:03 PM, Karl Liu wrote:
>
> Dear Freesurfer experts:
>
>
> I ran into a confusing problem when applying Monte Carlo simulation to 
> control for multiple comparisons. I am using the buckner data from 
> tutorial dataset.
>
>
> I first tried the simulation based on Freesurfer;s 2012 manual:
>
> (http://www.freesurfer.net/pub/docs/tarballs_for_courses/FreeSurferTutorial-2012.pdf)
>
>
> mri_glmfit-sim \ --glmdir lh.gender_age.glmdir \ --sim mc-z 5 4 
> mc-z.negative \ --sim-sign neg --cwpvalthresh 0.05\ --overwrite
>
>
> This produced a "mc-z.negative.sig.cluster.summary". In this text, no 
> clusters survived correction.
>
>
> Later on, I applied on a slightly different script, based on 
> Freesurfer tutorial
>
> (http://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/FsTutorial/GroupAnalysis#ClusterwiseCorrectionforMultipleComparisons)
>
>
> mri_glmfit-sim \ --glmdir lh.gender_age.glmdir \ --cache 4 neg \ 
> --cwp  0.05\ --2spaces
>
>
>  It produced a "cache.th40.neg.sig.cluster.summary" this time. But 
> according to this result, 22 clusters survived.
>
>
> Now I am quite confused, because both corrections have the same 
> voxel-wise (p=0.001) and cluster-wise (p=0.05) threshold. Where the 
> drastic discrepancies come from and which result is more reliable?
>
>
>  Many thinks in advance.
>
> Best,
>
> Karl
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Freesurfer mailing list
> Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer

-- 
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
FileDrop: https://gate.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/filedrop2
www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html
Outgoing: ftp://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/transfer/outgoing/flat/greve/

_______________________________________________
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 erro  
                                  
_______________________________________________
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.

Reply via email to