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  

|
November 09, 2017 08:56PM
Hi Robin,

It should make a difference, but we do not expect it to be big.
And actually, why would aligning to any particular volume be
necessarily better than another from that perspective?

What we hope is that alignment to a different volume mostly
amounts to a constant shift among all motion parameters,
akin to offsetting them by the parameter difference between
the base volumes in question. And a constant shift in them,
per run or across, would have no effect on them in the
regression (it would be absorbed by the constant polort
terms).

So again, there will be some difference, but it should be
small. The advantage of using the min outlier is that it
should be more robust, since that volume should at least
not be corrupted by motion.

- rick
Subject Author Posted

Aligning to a previous run: Effects on motion regressors?

Robin November 09, 2017 06:51PM

Re: Aligning to a previous run: Effects on motion regressors?

rick reynolds November 09, 2017 08:56PM

Re: Aligning to a previous run: Effects on motion regressors?

Robin November 10, 2017 04:53AM

Re: Aligning to a previous run: Effects on motion regressors?

rick reynolds November 15, 2017 09:27AM