 |
 |
Hi that points to some difference in pre-processing - to see what's going on check the report.log in the ica folder and compare against report.log and report.com in the feat run. You should be looking for differences in the call to slicetimer and ip. If you find that the melodic run results in a lot of components which show a checkerboard pattern then it's likely that something went wrong with the slice timing correction cheers christian On 22 Dec 2006, at 18:24, James N. Porter wrote: > Hello- > > I'm pretty new to FSL, and have just bumped into a perplexing item > with MELODIC. I have four sessions of a task, and when I run > MELODIC as an option in FEAT I get an ICA report with 59-62 > components per session. However, if I do a stand-alone run of > MELODIC, I get back from 120-188 components. In FEAT I get to > choose the Interleaved Slice Timing Correction, so in MELODIC I'm > inputing a slice order file. The TR, Highpass filter, and MCFLIRT > correction are identical in FEAT and MELODIC runs. Does MELODIC > somehow use information from the EVs I specified when it is run > from FEAT, or is there something else I should be looking for that > is driving the discrepancy between FEAT-based and MELODIC-based ICA > results? > > -- > Jim Porter > TRiCAM Lab Coordinator > Elliott Hall N437 > 612.624.3892 > www.psych.umn.edu/research/tricam -- Christian F. Beckmann Oxford University Centre for Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Brain, John Radcliffe Hospital, Headington, Oxford OX3 9DU, UK Email: [log in to unmask] - http://www.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/~beckmann/ Phone: +44(0)1865 222551 Fax: +44(0)1865 222717