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 27, 2016 12:29AM
Hello Afni experts,

I have a question about my design that I ran through 3Ddeconvolve with the no data option.

I want to run a secondary analysis just looking at congruent and incongruent trials for the task. When I run the timing through the no data option it notes very good for each matrix, but when i run 1d_tool.py to look at the correlations it says the correlation between congruent and incongruent regressors is high. I just want to check and see if I will be able to deconvolve it. Here is the output for both below. Thank you!

Tara


++ 3dDeconvolve: AFNI version=AFNI_2011_12_21_1014 (Mar 2 2015) [64-bit]
++ Authored by: B. Douglas Ward, et al.
++ using TR=2 seconds for -stim_times and -nodata
++ using NT=412 time points for -nodata
++ Input polort=3; Longest run=412.0 s; Recommended minimum polort=3 ++ OK ++
++ -stim_times using TR=2 s for stimulus timing conversion
++ -stim_times using TR=2 s for any -iresp output datasets
++ [you can alter the -iresp TR via the -TR_times option]
++ ** -stim_times NOTE ** guessing GLOBAL times if 1 time per line; LOCAL otherwise
++ ** GUESSED ** -stim_times 1 using LOCAL times
++ ** GUESSED ** -stim_times 2 using LOCAL times
------------------------------------------------------------
GLT matrix from 'SYM: incongruent -congruent':
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 1

++ Number of time points: 412 (no censoring)
+ Number of parameters: 10 [8 baseline ; 2 signal]
++ Wrote matrix values to file nodata.xmat.1D
++ ----- Signal+Baseline matrix condition [X] (412x10): 2.20943 ++ VERY GOOD ++
++ ----- Signal-only matrix condition [X] (412x2): 1.05394 ++ VERY GOOD ++
++ ----- Baseline-only matrix condition [X] (412x8): 1.01109 ++ VERY GOOD ++
++ ----- polort-only matrix condition [X] (412x8): 1.01109 ++ VERY GOOD ++
++ Wrote matrix values to file nodata_XtXinv.xmat.1D
++ +++++ Matrix inverse average error = 4.35916e-16 ++ VERY GOOD ++
++ Matrix setup time = 0.01 s

Stimulus: congruent
h[ 0] norm. std. dev. = 0.1730

Stimulus: incongruent
h[ 0] norm. std. dev. = 0.1699

General Linear Test: contrast_incon_con
LC[0] norm. std. dev. = 0.1377


[miskovi2@psy-imglab-7 emo1]$ 1d_tool.py -cormat_cutoff 0.1 -show_cormat_warnings -infile nodata.xmat.1D

Warnings regarding Correlation Matrix: nodata.xmat.1D

severity correlation cosine regressor pair
-------- ----------- ------ ----------------------------------------
high: -0.658 0.105 ( 8 vs. 9) congruent#0 vs. incongruent#0
Subject Author Posted

Question about 3Ddeconvolve no data

tamiskovich March 27, 2016 12:29AM

Re: Question about 3Ddeconvolve no data

rick reynolds March 28, 2016 07:44PM

Re: Question about 3Ddeconvolve no data

tamiskovich March 30, 2016 02:36PM

Re: Question about 3Ddeconvolve no data

rick reynolds March 30, 2016 04:08PM

Re: Question about 3Ddeconvolve no data

tamiskovich April 11, 2016 05:13PM