Hi Ely, If you perform the same steps shown in the fix_3_clean.m file on the same data, you should get the same results.
Peace, Matt. From: <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of "Ely, Benjamin" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Friday, September 16, 2016 at 12:17 PM To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: [HCP-Users] MELODIC denoising vs. released ICA-FIX datasets Hi all, I ran a test recently comparing "aggressive" vs. "soft" denoising in MELODIC on an HCP resting-state run, regressing out the "bad" components found in the rfMRI_REST1_LR_hp2000.ica/.fix file (I believe the location of this info is different in the newer release but I'm working off HCP500 data). Both denoising methods gave similar results which also looked similar to the released HCP ICA-FIX denoised timeseries (i.e. rfMRI_REST1_LR_hp2000_clean.nii.gz), but I expected the soft denoised MELODIC output to be identical, which it was not. Is there a step I'm missing, or did you run the ICA component regression with a different tool? Thank you! -Ely _______________________________________________ HCP-Users mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> 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. _______________________________________________ HCP-Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users
