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  

Previous Message Next Message
Message List New Topic Print View
|
rick reynolds
August 17, 2021 08:43PM
Hi Ian,

I replied to that old post (a little late). Thanks for pointing it out.

It seems likely that Gang used 1s as basically the greatest common divisor of 3s (stim) and 2s (TR), so that the resulting oversampled timing would indeed be "TR-locked" at 1s. Personally, I like to upsample more than that, as it makes the deconvolution/reconvolution steps close to inverses of each other. And that comes with nice properties rather than the side-effects that come with a slow filter. There is a similar but still different PPI analysis at AFNI_data6/FT_analysis/PPI. README.txt is actually the main script.

Does that seem reasonable?

- rick
Reply Quote
RSS
Subject Author Posted

Using sub_TR for gPPI script

brainboi August 16, 2021 09:06PM

Re: Using sub_TR for gPPI script

rick reynolds August 17, 2021 08:43PM

Re: Using sub_TR for gPPI script

prerona August 18, 2021 06:30PM

Re: Using sub_TR for gPPI script

rick reynolds August 19, 2021 09:01AM

Re: Using sub_TR for gPPI script

prerona August 20, 2021 07:17PM

Re: Using sub_TR for gPPI script

brainboi August 27, 2021 04:58PM