Dear Bing,
it seems that the two results you showed come from different versions of
SPM5 as well.
So I would assume that the differences you observe are more likely to be
due to differences in SPM5 rather than differences in Matlab versions.
I would pursue with the most recent SPM5 release and most recent Matlab
(well, actually, I would personally pursue with SPM8 but that's another
story I guess).
Best regards,
Guillaume.
Bing Ye wrote:
>
> Hi Stephen:
>
> do you know what causes the difference? AND which result should i follow?
>
> bing
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Fromm, Stephen (NIH/NIMH) [C]" <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2009 12:59 pm
> Subject: RE: RE: question of the results
> To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
> Cc: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
>
>> It's not huge, but it's more than I think it should be.
>>
>> From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2009 12:49 PM
>> To: Fromm, Stephen (NIH/NIMH) [C]
>> Cc: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: RE: question of the results
>>
>> Hi Stephen:
>>
>> the attached is the results from the two versions of matlab. Do
>> you think the differece is huge?
>>
>> Could you let me know?
>>
>> THank you.
>>
>> bing
>>
>> Original Message -----
>> From: "Fromm, Stephen (NIH/NIMH) [C]" <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Friday, September 4, 2009 1:42 pm
>> Subject: RE: question of the results
>> To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
>>
>> > How little is "little"?
>> >
>> > Stephen J. Fromm, PhD
>> > Contractor, NIMH/MAP
>> > (301) 451--9265
>> > ________________________________
>> > From: [log in to unmask] [[log in to unmask]]
>> > Sent: Friday, September 04, 2009 1:38 PM
>> > To: Fromm, Stephen (NIH/NIMH) [C]
>> > Subject: Re: question of the results
>> >
>> > Thank you Stephen. THe difference is little not substantial. DO
>> > you think it is possible?
>> >
>> > thanks again.
>> >
>> > bing
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Stephen J. Fromm" <[log in to unmask]>
>> > Date: Friday, September 4, 2009 11:12 am
>> > Subject: Re: question of the results
>> > To: [log in to unmask], Bing Ye <[log in to unmask]>
>> > Cc: "Stephen J. Fromm" <[log in to unmask]>
>> >
>> > > On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 10:38:39 -0400, Bing Ye
>> > <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > >Hi all:
>> > > >
>> > > >for spm 5 result part, would i get exactly the same result
>> if i
>> > > use two
>> > > different versions of matlabs?
>> > > >
>> > > >I run spm5 from 7.1 version first and then run spm5 from 6.5
>> > > version. but for
>> > > the same subject, i got similar results not exactly the
>> same, i
>> > > wonder if the
>> > > reason is the two different versions of the matlab.
>> > >
>> > > I'd be very surprised if there was any substantial difference,
>> > > UNLESS there's
>> > > some reason that SPM5 doesn't work properly with matlab
>> > > 6.5. (But in that
>> > > case, there should be an error and it shoudl stop running.)
>> > >
>> > > The _most_ I would expect would be a difference on the order of
>> > > machine
>> > > precision. Anything larger, something funny is going on,
>> > > or maybe you made a
>> > > trivial mistake entering something.
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > >Can anybody explain?
>> > > >
>> > > >thanks a bunch.
>> > > >
>> > > >bing
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
--
Guillaume Flandin, PhD
Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging
University College London
12 Queen Square
London WC1N 3BG
|