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  

|
December 16, 2009 01:29PM

Hi Tyler,

My feeling is that it would be a bit hit-and-miss whether 2D
registration would help. One would certainly need to work
hard to get the subjects positioned straight in the scanner.
If a nod isn't just a sagittal motion, all bets are off, as
the motion goes out of plane.

---

In any case, I would not expect the extra regressors to be
close enough to be a worry in terms of collinearity. That
would be an equal concern for the normal 6 parameters, yet
it is very rare to see any warnings.

But even if they were close to collinear, one could probably
ignore it. It doesn't matter which of the motion regressors
eats up more variance, it just matters that motion is accounted
for in the regression. As long as the regressors of interest
are not similar to the motion parameters, it should be okay.

- rick

Subject Author Posted

2dImReg, 3dvolreg, and regression

Tyler December 16, 2009 11:42AM

Re: 2dImReg, 3dvolreg, and regression

rick reynolds December 16, 2009 01:29PM

Re: 2dImReg, 3dvolreg, and regression

Tyler December 16, 2009 02:16PM