Hi -
Wrt group-ICA, it makes no difference what order the data was fed into the MIGP
group-PCA.
Wrt the 4 chunks combined into the node timeseries in the 500-subject PTN
release: the order is always the following, so you will need to take into
account the information you pasted below if you want to know about how this
interacts with session orderings.
ff{1}=sprintf('%s/%d/RESOURCES/rfMRI_REST1_LR_FIX/rfMRI_REST1_LR/rfMRI_REST1_LR_Atlas_hp2000_clean.dtseries.nii',SUBJECTS,subID);
ff{2}=sprintf('%s/%d/RESOURCES/rfMRI_REST1_RL_FIX/rfMRI_REST1_RL/rfMRI_REST1_RL_Atlas_hp2000_clean.dtseries.nii',SUBJECTS,subID);
ff{3}=sprintf('%s/%d/RESOURCES/rfMRI_REST2_LR_FIX/rfMRI_REST2_LR/rfMRI_REST2_LR_Atlas_hp2000_clean.dtseries.nii',SUBJECTS,subID);
ff{4}=sprintf('%s/%d/RESOURCES/rfMRI_REST2_RL_FIX/rfMRI_REST2_RL/rfMRI_REST2_RL_Atlas_hp2000_clean.dtseries.nii',SUBJECTS,subID);
Cheers, Steve.
ps - for the 900 PTN release we will be releasing the code used to generate it.
> On 25 Nov 2015, at 01:17, Mary Beth <m...@jhmi.edu> wrote:
>
> The subject-specific parcel timeseries were provided in a single text file
> for each model order with 4800 time points each. I am trying to figure out if
> time points 2401-3600 from those text files always correspond to the LR
> session from Day 2, or if they correspond to the RL session from Day 2 for
> the handful of subjects collected before 1 October 2012 and the LR session
> from Day 2 for everyone else. I just want to make sure that I label
> everything correctly.
>
> I hope this clarifies my question. Thanks again for your help.
>
> -mb
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015, 19:29 Glasser, Matthew <glass...@wustl.edu
> <mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>> wrote:
> I’m still not following why it matters.
>
> Peace,
>
> Matt.
>
> From: Mary Beth <m...@jhmi.edu <mailto:m...@jhmi.edu>>
> Date: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 6:18 PM
> To: Matt Glasser <glass...@wustl.edu <mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>>,
> "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org <mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>"
> <hcp-users@humanconnectome.org <mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>>
> Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] phase encoding and group ICA
>
> I just want to make sure I'm comparing apples to apples when I use the
> subject-specific timeseries.
>
> best,
> mb
>
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 7:11 PM Glasser, Matthew <glass...@wustl.edu
> <mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>> wrote:
> Why does the order of the individual subject sessions matter for group ICA or
> PTNs?
>
> Peace,
>
> Matt.
>
> From: <hcp-users-boun...@humanconnectome.org
> <mailto:hcp-users-boun...@humanconnectome.org>> on behalf of Mary Beth
> <m...@jhmi.edu <mailto:m...@jhmi.edu>>
> Date: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 5:59 PM
> To: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org <mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>"
> <hcp-users@humanconnectome.org <mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>>
> Subject: [HCP-Users] phase encoding and group ICA
>
> Hi all,
>
> According to this page
> http://www.humanconnectome.org/documentation/Q1/data-in-this-release.html
> <http://www.humanconnectome.org/documentation/Q1/data-in-this-release.html>,
> prior to 1 October 2012, the first resting state session of each visit was
> acquired with RL phase encoding, and the second session was acquired with LR
> phase encoding (RL/LR). After this date, the first visit continued to be
> acquired in the RL/LR order, but the second visit was acquired in the
> opposite order, with the LR acquisition followed by the RL acquisition
> (LR/RL).
>
> Here's my question: prior to group ICA and the generation of subject-specific
> sets of node timeseries in the August, 2014 “HCP500-PTN”
> (Parcellation+Timeseries+Netmats) data release, were the sessions for
> subjects acquired before 1 October 2012 reordered to match the order of
> sessions for subjects acquired after 1 October 2012?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Mary Beth
> _______________________________________________
> HCP-Users mailing list
> HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org <mailto:HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org>
> http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users
> <http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users>
>
>
>
> The materials in this message are private and may contain Protected
> Healthcare Information or other information of a sensitive nature. If you are
> not the intended recipient, be advised that any unauthorized use, disclosure,
> copying or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this
> information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error,
> please immediately notify the sender via telephone or return mail.
>
>
>
>
> The materials in this message are private and may contain Protected
> Healthcare Information or other information of a sensitive nature. If you are
> not the intended recipient, be advised that any unauthorized use, disclosure,
> copying or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this
> information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error,
> please immediately notify the sender via telephone or return mail.
>
> _______________________________________________
> HCP-Users mailing list
> HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org
> http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen M. Smith, Professor of Biomedical Engineering
Head of Analysis, Oxford University FMRIB Centre
FMRIB, JR Hospital, Headington, Oxford OX3 9DU, UK
+44 (0) 1865 222726 (fax 222717)
st...@fmrib.ox.ac.uk http://www.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/~steve
<http://www.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/~steve>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stop the cultural destruction of Tibet <http://smithinks.net/>
_______________________________________________
HCP-Users mailing list
HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org
http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users
