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  

Previous Message Next Message
Message List New Topic Print View
|
Ana Bedacarratz
July 23, 2015 09:55PM
Hi Rick,

You are correct, we are not using afni_proc.py. It also occurs to me that we have multiband data, with a TR of .43 seconds, and improved spatial resolution. Not sure if that plays a role, but it is the first time I deal with this type of data and the first time I get such a low blur estimate.

The command we are trying to use is 3dFWHMx -combine -input errts+tlrc -out blur, for each subject. What mask would be appropriate to use if not the automask? If we ran 3dDeconvolve on data that we masked out per run and then using a combined mask tranformed to percent signal change, would that same combined mask be appropriate for masking in 3dFWHM?

I appreciate your help!

Ana
Reply Quote
RSS
Subject Author Posted

3dFWHMx returns spatial smoothness values that are 50% of the blur applied

Ana Bedacarratz July 22, 2015 04:03PM

Re: 3dFWHMx returns spatial smoothness values that are 50% of the blur applied

rick reynolds July 22, 2015 04:34PM

Re: 3dFWHMx returns spatial smoothness values that are 50% of the blur applied

Ana Bedacarratz July 23, 2015 09:55PM

Re: 3dFWHMx returns spatial smoothness values that are 50% of the blur applied

rick reynolds July 24, 2015 10:18AM