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:

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 10, 2022 10:41AM
Hi, Zixun-

OK, thanks for sharing the data.

A couple things to note: The EPI dataset has a wide range of values, from -637911 to 314724, but it also includes supertiny, nonzero values, of order 10**-28 and 10**-31. The mask that is being used with it also doesn't seem to perfectly fit the data.

The large range of values isn't really a problem, but I am surprised to see it. The source of the calfun errors is having entire time series that have supertiny nonzero values---the mask doesn't remove those. Also, automasking didn't work well with this dset because it has a somewhat filamentary spatial structure. So, to generate a mask where time series were non-zero and non-supertiny, I did the following:
3dcalc                                                                       \
    -a          DSET_EPI'[0]'                                                \
    -expr       'step(a-0.001)+step(-a-0.001)'                               \
    -prefix     mask_estimate2.nii.gz                                        \
(Note that you could adjust the windowing around zero, which is masking out anything that has magnitude <0.001.)

After doing that, I reran your 3dFWHMx command:
3dFWHMx                                                                      \
    -detrend  2                                                              \
    -mask  mask_estimate2.nii.gz \
    -dset     sub-012_task-motor_acq-ME5_negDelta_R2_star.nii.gz             \
    -acf      sub-012_task-motor_negDelta_R2_star    >> output3dFWHMx
... and there were no calfun errors. Therefore, those were a result of the supertiny nonzero values, or quasi-zero time series, being present in the non-masked region.

The resulting ACF image looked pretty reasonable, I would say. Though, I will note again the caveat that this program was designed for working on residual datasets.

Subject Author Posted

-detrend option in 3dFWHMx vs 3dDetrend

Zixun March 30, 2022 02:55AM

Re: -detrend option in 3dFWHMx vs 3dDetrend

ptaylor April 06, 2022 09:56PM

Re: -detrend option in 3dFWHMx vs 3dDetrend

Zixun May 06, 2022 07:23AM

Re: -detrend option in 3dFWHMx vs 3dDetrend

ptaylor May 10, 2022 10:41AM