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  

|
February 21, 2003 03:09PM
Hi,
I am new to AFNI and don't have a local expert to get me started, so I have a very basic question.

I used 3dDeconvolve on each individual data set to create a bucket of several contrasts for each individual (using the 3dvolreg output as regressors in the baseline model). I then used 3dmerge to create thresholded and spatially smoothed maps. Now I am trying to determine which voxels are active across the entire cohort. My understanding is that I should use 3dttest, which computes the mean of each voxel across all subjects. To keep things simple, I decided to start with a group of 2 subjects. I typed:

3dttest -prefix contrast1 -base1 0 -set2 subject1/merged-data+tlrc subject2/merged-data+tlrc

The resulting map was very odd-looking. Although there were some small clusters in regions that corresponded to activated regions in subject 1 or 2, there were also several large Jackson Pollack-ish swaths of color in regions that were not activated in either subject 1 or 2, and regions were missing from the "group map" that should have been there.

I thought it might be because I used the output from 3dmerge, so I tried it again, using the output from 3dDeconvolve:

3dttest -prefix contrast1 -base1 0 \
-set2 'subject1/my-deconvolution+tlrc[2]' 'subject2/mydeconvolution+tlrc[2]'

The results were again quite odd - the map was covered with very small, confetti-like "activations", again in regions where neither individual subject was active.

Then I tried using the baseline sub-briks as set1:

3dttest -prefix contrast1 -paired -set1 'subject1/my-deconvolution+tlrc[0]' 'subject2/mydeconvolution+tlrc[0]' -set2 'subject1/my-deconvolution+tlrc[2]' 'subject2/mydeconvolution+tlrc[2]'

which produced large clusters, but mostly in regions that were not active in either of the two individuals.

Am I mis-understanding how to use 3dttest? Why should the output from the 3 things I tried look so radically different from each other? What do I need to do to get a map that looks something like the average of the 2 individual maps?

Thank you!
Sara

Subject Author Posted

3dttest

Sara February 21, 2003 03:09PM

Re: 3dttest

Christine Smith February 21, 2003 05:29PM

Re: 3dttest

Sara February 25, 2003 11:00AM

Re: 3dttest

Christine Smith February 26, 2003 03:57PM

Re: 3dttest

Sara March 04, 2003 12:54PM