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  

|
May 02, 2016 04:13PM
Hi Sam,

That is a good point.

When estimating the blur in the resting state data, it
probably makes sense to use the all_runs dataset (the
"uncleaned" time series - which has all of the noise).
Of course, in this context, one might argue about exactly
what noise means. But in theory, resting state data
should lack the strong BOLD signals that might have a
meaningful effect on the blur estimates.

Generally the all_runs and errts time series have very
similar smoothness levels, but I could imagine that
after the regression operation, especially with any
bandpass regression, the smoothness could be affected.

Because of that potential effect, I will adjust the
examples to use -regress_est_blur_epits.

If you go that route, consider using both options to
compare with. Hopefully that will be comforting
(assuming they are similar).

- rick
Subject Author Posted

3dFWHMx conundrum?

storrisi April 27, 2016 12:29PM

Re: 3dFWHMx conundrum?

Bob Cox May 02, 2016 01:45PM

Re: 3dFWHMx conundrum?

rick reynolds May 02, 2016 04:13PM