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  

|
October 11, 2018 02:25PM
> I was wondering if at this stage it would be appropriate to replace the second-level generated mask (mask.nii)
> with a grey matter only or ROI mask and still get accurate smoothing estimates?

If the quality of the gray matter or ROI mask is reasonable and you can justify its usage for group analysis, it's probably fine. On the other hand, since the estimation of spatial relatedness is an approximation step anyway, I would simply use the whole brain mask to estimate the spatial relatedness. A smaller mask may compromise the estimation accuracy as you've already found out. The reason could be that a smaller mask may distort the estimation especially when the mask contains narrow and tortuous regions.

Gang
Subject Author Posted

Using 3dFWHMx & 3dClustSim for clusterwise correction in SPM

ibreukelaar October 10, 2018 08:09PM

Re: Using 3dFWHMx & 3dClustSim for clusterwise correction in SPM

gang October 11, 2018 02:25PM

Re: Using 3dFWHMx & 3dClustSim for clusterwise correction in SPM

ibreukelaar October 11, 2018 07:14PM

Re: Using 3dFWHMx & 3dClustSim for clusterwise correction in SPM

gang October 11, 2018 08:12PM

Re: Using 3dFWHMx & 3dClustSim for clusterwise correction in SPM

ibreukelaar October 11, 2018 09:35PM