Are you sure that there is duplication of actual *data* on the different
drives? Just because a subject ID appears on multiple drives doesn’t mean that
data under that subject ID is the same on the drives.
Cheers,
-MH
--
Michael Harms, Ph.D.
1. I don’t know, but perhaps someone from NRG can answer.
2. Those are different smoothing levels. I do not recommend using more than
s4 and personally don’t use anything but s2. You can see Coalson et al 2018
PNAS: https://www.pnas.org/content/115/27/E6356.short for the deleterious
Hi HCP gurus:
I'm reposting the following question(s) in hopes that one of you knows the
answer.
(1)
On looking through the data, it appears that there is duplication between the
drives delivered. Is that intentional? We received 12 drives, but four of them
appear to be duplicates.
Tractography visualization is somewhat rough around the edges. What was
the full probtrackx command you used? Do you have bingham parameter
volumes for the fiber orientations (mean, stdev, theta, phi, psi, ka, kb),
or only the fiber orientation sample volumes?
Tim
On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 7:48
Hi,
It isn’t surprising that data will be missing in some subjects, due either to
problems at the scanner, or problems during processing.
Cheers,
-MH
--
Michael Harms, Ph.D.
---
Associate Professor of Psychiatry
Washington University
Thanks Keith! I am currently working with the Movie Task fMRI 2mm/32k
FIX-Denoised (Compact) dataset, and I noticed the issues below:
1) Two subjects (126931 and 74) do not have MSMAll-registered
time-series data.
2) Five subjects (181636, 473952, 536647, 552241, and 973770) have two runs
Good morning, I would like to transform my data obtained with fsl's probtackx,
to visualized them with wb_view. But the instructions to run the command is not
clear for me. I've tried several choices but there is always something missing
or nor recognized (I'm very naive with all this.. just
