try it with a prestim of 0
Ben Letham wrote:
> Yes, the paradigm came from optseq2 with a PSD window 0 19.2 0.4.
>
> Looking more into the details, it seems that the design is pretty
> ill-conditioned, cond(Xn'*Xn) is 6.2e5, and the cut-off in
> fast_selxavg3.m is 1e4.
>
> Like I said, the design
Yes, the paradigm came from optseq2 with a PSD window 0 19.2 0.4.
Looking more into the details, it seems that the design is pretty
ill-conditioned, cond(Xn'*Xn) is 6.2e5, and the cut-off in
fast_selxavg3.m is 1e4.
Like I said, the design came from optseq2 and the cost/efficiency is
the same as o
Did you optimize the stimulus schedule with the idea that you would do
sub-TR FIR estimation? Eg, you would have had to have run optseq2 with
this in mind. If not, then you probably cannot do an FIR analysis.
Instead, assume a shape (eg, -gammafit 2.25 1.25)
doug
Ben Letham wrote:
> Hello,
>
>
Hello,
I'm trying to run selxavg3-sess for an analysis with TER < TR, and it
errors with "design is ill-conditioned". I searched the mailing list
archive, and the only past problem of this sort that I found was
associated with a faulty tpef file, which I am not using.
The details: There is only o
