Rescaling by the voxel mean will mess up the intensity normalization.
Try making your analysis (mkanalysis-sess) with -no-inorm and see if the
results are more consistent. They will not be exact because the raw
mean time course is not used to create the cespct. Rather it is the
regression coefficient of the mean offset regressor. They should be
pretty close though.
On 6/7/16 12:22 AM, S.V.Shepherd [work] wrote:
Hi all,
I ran an analysis on data after dividing each voxel mean across the
run, and then multiplying by 100. (My intuition was that the percent
signal change should be more consistent across varying SNR that the
non-normalized betas).
I had naively expected ces.nii and cespct.nii to be equivalent in this
case, but in fact, cespct.nii is steeply larger and only imperfectly
correlated with ces.nii. What am I missing?
stephen
_stephen v. shepherd phd_
The Rockefeller University / 1230 York Avenue / New York NY 10065-6307
USA // 212.327.7699
_______________________________________________
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
_______________________________________________
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is
addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail
contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at
http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in error
but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properly
dispose of the e-mail.
