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 19, 2019 09:36AM
Hi Dan,

This is akin to resting state analysis, except that you are correct, censoring is not an option here (unless it were combined across the 2 runs, would be more difficult to script). Censoring is okay for seed-based correlations, but that is because all voxels would have the same censoring. Here, you might want to just skip it.

Using 'basic' and 'demean' should lead to the exact same results, except for the polort 0 terms (which you will probably never see). The 'deriv' case also regresses the 6 first differences, so those results will differ. In this case, akin to resting state, it would probably be better to include the deriv terms, too, especially since you will probably not be censoring.

- rick
Subject Author Posted

the problem about“cnesor”and “regress_apply_mot_types”in afni_proc.py

Dan February 19, 2019 01:46AM

Re: the problem about“cnesor”and “regress_apply_mot_types”in afni_proc.py

rick reynolds February 19, 2019 09:36AM

Re: the problem about“cnesor”and “regress_apply_mot_types”in afni_proc.py Attachments

Dan February 19, 2019 10:32PM

Re: the problem about“cnesor”and “regress_apply_mot_types”in afni_proc.py

rick reynolds February 21, 2019 10:03AM

Re: the problem about“cnesor”and “regress_apply_mot_types”in afni_proc.py

Dan February 22, 2019 09:16AM