Dear FS team,
My question is how I should extract the measure of pial surface area from a
significant cluster after group-analysis. I performed statistical analysis in
QDEC, choosing pial surface area as the measure. I found a significant cluster.
Now I would to extract the surface area of this
Dear Freesurfer experts,
I am reposting my question from early this week since it is not
answered. Any help much appreciated.
My question is about the measure of pial surface area. Following a group
comparison and correction in QDEC, I found a significant cluster (size:
760mm^2) when
Dear Freesurfer experts,
I am reposting my question from early this week since it is not
answered. Any help much appreciated.
My question is about the measure of pial surface area. Following a
group comparison and correction in QDEC, I found a significant cluster (size:
760mm^2) when
Thank you for your comment, Bruce.
Regardless of technical issues, I am still troubled by the
small magnitude of extracted value of pial surface area. Following group
comparison and correction in QDEC, there is a significant cluster (size: 760
mm^2). In order to make a bar group of group means,
Dear FS team:
I want to ask for some advice on how to extract the values
of pial surface area. I use QDEC to perform a surface-based F-test. The
measurement is area.pial and the smoothing is 10 in QDEC. After correction,
there is one significant cluster with
size of ~760 mm^2. The problem comes
Dear
Freesurfer Experts:
I repost a
question I have when applying Monte Carlo simulation to control for multiple
comparisons. Your help is much appreciated.
I did the
correction via QDEC GUI. In the section of Monte Carlo Null-Z
simulation, I
set Threshold: 2.0 (0.01) and Sign: neg.
Dear Freesurfer Experts:
I would appreciate your help in clarifying one issue I have
when applying Monte Carlo simulation to control for multiple comparisons.
First, I did the correction via QDEC GUI. In the section of Monte Carlo Null-Z
simulation, I set Threshold: 2.0 (0.01) and Sign: neg.
se 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 compari
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:
Dear Freesurfer experts,
I repost my question from
yesterday since it is not answered. Thanks in advance for any help.
After running Monte Carlo simulation from the command line,
I noticed two cluster summary files are produced for each contrast:
cache.th20.neg.sig.cluster.summary and
Dear Experts,
After running Monte Carlo simulation from the command line,
I noticed two cluster summary files are produced for each contrast:
cache.th20.neg.sig.cluster.summary and mc-z.neg.th20.sig.cluster.summary.
They are quite similar, with different number of surviving clusters in some
Dear Freesurfer experts:
we would appreciate if anyone could advise on the sign
choice of Monte Carlo simulation, a
question we posted 2 days ago.
In examining QDEC results of a contrast of interest, we noticed
the results are mainly in cold color (blue), with only two small clusters in
warm
Dear experts:
In examining QDEC results of a contrast of interest, I
noticed the results are mainly in cold color (blue), with only two small
clusters in warm color (red). When I proceeded with Monte Carlo simulation, if
I chose the abs as the sign option in simulation, then no clusters
13 matches
Mail list logo
