The contents of the Q3 files appear to be: 1. 100307_3T_Structural_preproc.zip 2. 3. Thu Aug 29 18:30:20 CDT 2013 4. Structural Pipeline v2.0 5. Execution 1 6. 7. These data were generated and made available by the Human Connectome Project...
--Greg ____________________________________________________________________ Greg Burgess, Ph.D. Staff Scientist, Human Connectome Project Washington University School of Medicine Department of Neuroscience Phone: 314-362-7864 Email: [email protected] > On Dec 15, 2015, at 10:31 AM, Timothy B. Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Matthew, > > Re: Your question 1) below about detected which release data is part of > > I can't really speak to differentiating between Q1 vs. Q2 vs Q3 data, but I > can think of a technique that should work and be scriptable for detecting > whether a subject's data is from the 500subjects release or the 900subjects > release. The technique would be based on the contents of at least 1 release > notes file for the subject. > > If you have downloaded the structurally preprocessed data package for a > subject (e.g. 100307_3T_Structural_preproc.zip) and unzipped that package, > then you should have a sub-directory below the directory at which you did the > unzipping named 100307 and a sub-directory below that named release-notes. In > the 100307/release-notes sub-directory, you should find a file named > Structural_preproc.txt (the release notes for the Structural_preproc package). > > I think it might be slightly problematic to count on the modification date of > that release notes file as an indication of whether the data is part of the > 500subjects release or 900subjects release. In my opinion it is too easy for > that file modification date to be inadvertently changed or updated. (The tool > used to unzip the package may not preserve modification dates; someone might > accidentally touch the file and thus change it's modification date; someone > may edit the file intending to simply look at it, accidentally add a space, > and save the result.) I think it would be more reliable to differentiate > between the 500subjects release and the 900subjects release based on the > contents of the release notes file. (I'm supposing that people are unlikely > to purposely change the contents of these files and wouldn't be likely to > accidentally change the date written in the file or substantially change the > contents.) > > For the 500subjects release, the first few lines of the release notes file > should look something like the following (without the line numbers): > • 100307_3T_Structural_preproc.zip > • > • Sat Mar 29 13:21:24 CDT 2014 > • Structural Pipeline v3.1 > • Execution 1 > • > • These data were generated and made available by the Human Connectome > Project, ... > For the 900subjects release, the first few lines of the release notes file > should look something like the following (without the line numbers): > • 100307_3T_Structural_preproc.zip > • > • Mon Nov 30 23:44:34 CST 2015 > • > • These data were generated and made available by the Human Connectome > Project, > Since all the Structural Preproc packages for the 900subjects release were > finalized after 31 Oct 2015, you could read in the 3rd line of the release > notes file, parse the date, and check to see if the date is before or after > 31 Oct 2015. If it is before 31 Oct 2015, then the data is from the > 500subjects release. If it's after 31 Oct 2015, then the data is from the > 900subjects release. > > If parsing and comparing the dates is cumbersome, you could also simply look > at the contents of line 4 in the release notes file. If it starts with > "Structural Pipeline" then you're working with 500subjects data. If it is a > blank line, then you're working with 900subjects data. (In the 900subjects > form of the release notes, the pipeline version numbers come at the end of > the release notes file instead of right after the date.) > > If you don't have the structurally preprocessed data for a subject, you could > probably extrapolate this technique to use the release notes file for the > package(s) you do have. > > Off hand, I don't know what the release notes files look like for Q1, Q2, and > Q3, but if you have some of that data, you might be able to extend this > method to differentiate between those releases by examining the contents of > those release notes files. > > I realize that this isn't a particularly elegant mechanism. Maybe someone > else can think of a quicker or more elegant solution (maybe simply based on > the presence or absence of a particular file generated by the pipelines.) > > The above technique should allow you to differentiate between releases, but > as for your question 2), detecting the version of the image reconstruction > algorithm applied, I don't have a good answer for that. > > Hope this is at least somewhat helpful, > > Tim > > On Tue, Dec 8, 2015, at 04:26, Matthew George Liptrot wrote: >> Hi, >> >> 1) I understand that some of the processing of HCP data is different for the >> different releases (Q1, Q2/3, 500subjects etc). >> Is there a scriptable way to see which version/release my downloaded data >> came from? (I am working on several different HCP releases with various >> groups of co-workers and it would be nice if my scripts could check for this >> automatically) >> >> 2) I also understand that the image reconstruction method is different for >> some releases (From the wiki: “Two versions of the image reconstruction >> algorithm applied to dMRI and fMRI data have been used in HCP to date: >> version r177 for subjects scanned in Q1 through mid-Q3, version r227 for >> subjects scanned mid-Q3 and after. “) >> Again, is there any scriptable way to check which version was used for data >> that is already downloaded? (Same reason as above) >> >> Many thanks, >> >> M@ >> -- >> Matthew George Liptrot >> >> >> Department of Computer Science >> University of Copenhagen >> & >> Section for Cognitive Systems >> Department of Applied Mathematics and Computer Science >> Technical University of Denmark >> >> http://about.me/matthewliptrot >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> HCP-Users mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users >> > -- > Timothy B. Brown > Business & Technology Application Analyst III > Pipeline Developer (Human Connectome Project) > tbbrown(at)wustl.edu > ________________________________________ > The material in this message is private and may contain Protected Healthcare > Information (PHI). > 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 > [email protected] > http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users > _______________________________________________ HCP-Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users
