Tommi,
Do you have a machine on which this script can run without the glibc
error? I have been able to recreate the error you see in a debugger on
inv, but can't figure out what is going wrong. (Doug, the glibc error
occurs when fclose is called on line 565 of mriFunctionalDataAccess.c).
Doug or
Hi,
I'm seeing some odd behavior in t-values and p-values exported from
FreeSurfer. In geeky detail:
fit a linear model using FreeSurfer, saving t and p-values
convert output files to ascii
load ascii files into R
convert the FreeSurfer "p-values" into real p-values via
lh.pval <- 10^(-1*abs(free
This might seem like an odd question, but why do you expect the t values
to be t-distributed? Remember, they will only be t-distributed under the
null. If you have an effect, and I assume you do, then all bets are off.
Try doing the same thing with synthetic guassian noise (mri_glmfit will
do t
Actually, it is an excellent question, and gets at the heart of my
research-- rather than saying all bets are off, using the skew of the
t-values to gauge the effect (or number of hypothesis/vertices where we
have an effect).
My big problem is that I can't investigate the distribution of the
t-val
When you do the p->t conversion, are you assuming a two-sided t? Do you
want to try the --synth option (it's a lot easier when you *know* they
should be t).
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, it is an excellent question, and gets at the heart of my
research-- rather than saying all bets a
Sorry, I don't think there is. It is a little bit easier to manage with
isxconcat-sess.
Dan Dillon wrote:
Dear FreeSurfers,
I have two groups (patients vs. controls) whose data I'd like to
compare using intergroupavg-sess. Here's the problem: I ran identical
analyses on the two groups, b
> When you do the p->t conversion, are you assuming a two-sided t?
You may have spotted my silly user error...
> Do you
> want to try the --synth option (it's a lot easier when you *know* they
> should be t).
Yes.
Thanks for your suggestions!
+glenn
>
>
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>Actuall
Ok, but my automatic procedure constructed the ROI
masks on the lh.sphere (not on lh.sphere.reg)of the
fsaverage subject.
Is it wrong to compute the area of a ROI in the
fsaverage spherical surface by adding the areas of the
triangular faces inside this region? (The area of each
triangular face be
Nick,
Thanks for looking into this - we are stalled in our analysis until we
find a way around this!
The answer to your question is no - I have tried the command in cuzco (via
ssh), ai (directly), and inv (directly), and I receive the glibc error on
all of them. If you think it would be a good i
