AFNI Message Board

Dear AFNI users-

We are very pleased to announce that the new AFNI Message Board framework is up! Please join us at:

https://discuss.afni.nimh.nih.gov

Existing user accounts have been migrated, so returning users can login by requesting a password reset. New users can create accounts, as well, through a standard account creation process. Please note that these setup emails might initially go to spam folders (esp. for NIH users!), so please check those locations in the beginning.

The current Message Board discussion threads have been migrated to the new framework. The current Message Board will remain visible, but read-only, for a little while.

Sincerely, AFNI HQ

History of AFNI updates  

|
March 31, 2015 06:30PM
Hi guys,

We have a stochastic problem at our scanner that goes, for example, as follows:

-We intend to get, say, 3 runs each of 128 acquisitions of EPI data and 128 acquisitions-worth of physio data. From time to time, however, we come up one acquisition short of a full 4D series (literally, not in the sense that I'm trying to call someone crazy by saying that they are "one acquisition short of a full 4D series") for one of the runs so that we're left with the situation:
Run 1: 128 TRs; 128 lines of physio data
Run 2: 127 TRs; 128 lines of physio data
Run 3: 128 TRs; 128 lines of physio data

...where Run 2 is missing the first acquisition...

Considering also that we want to drop the first five TRs, I attempt to account for everything via the following:

afni_proc.py -subj_id ${subj_id} \
-dsets ${episcan}_R1+orig'[5..127]' ${episcan}_R2+orig'[4..126]' ${episcan}_R3+orig'[5..127]' \
-copy_anat ${anat}+orig \
-blocks despike ricor tshift align tlrc volreg mask scale regress \
-ricor_regs_nfirst 5 \
-ricor_regs Physio-Reg*.slibase.1D \
-ricor_regress_method per-run \
-tlrc_NL_warp \
-volreg_tlrc_warp \
-volreg_base_ind 1 1 \
-regress_stim_times ./MSQ_times*.1D \
-regress_stim_labels catch_trial nonself_actual_actual nonself_actual_ideal nonself_ideal_ideal self_actual_actual self_actual_ideal self_ideal_ideal \
-regress_opts_3dD \
-jobs 4 \
-regress_basis GAM \
-regress_censor_motion 0.2 \
-regress_censor_outliers 0.1 \
-regress_apply_mot_types demean deriv \
-execute

So, given that we have an unequal number of TRs to remove at the beginning, I'm removing them "manually" with sub-brick notation as opposed to using -tcat_remove_first_trs. Further, I'm telling ricor to ignore the first 5 TRs, as well. However, these two methods are not communicating: ERROR: ricor NT != dset len (123, 128).

How shall I go about reconciling all this? Sorry for my relative newb-ish-ness at afni_proc...

Paul



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/31/2015 09:26PM by paul.hamilton.
Subject Author Posted

aligning EPI and physio

paul.hamilton March 31, 2015 06:30PM

Re: aligning EPI and physio

rick reynolds March 31, 2015 09:59PM

Re: aligning EPI and physio

paulhami April 01, 2015 12:00AM

Re: aligning EPI and physio

rick reynolds April 01, 2015 04:31PM

Re: aligning EPI and physio

paulhami April 01, 2015 09:35PM

Re: aligning EPI and physio

rick reynolds April 02, 2015 08:44AM

Re: aligning EPI and physio

rick reynolds April 02, 2015 12:01PM

Re: aligning EPI and physio

paul.hamilton April 14, 2015 06:44PM