Dear Wen, Without looking at the exact calls, I would suspect that this difference may arise from the difference in how data smoothness is estimated - in the GUI pipeline ( FEAT? ) the smoothness is estimated from the residuals, while in easythresh it is estimated from the stat itself. Without knowing the ground-truth result, generally the FEAT results would be expected to be more accurate. Kind Regards Matthew -------------------------------- Dr Matthew Webster FMRIB Centre John Radcliffe Hospital University of Oxford On 14 May 2019, at 16:28, Leslie Cao <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Leslie Cao <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> Date: Wed, May 8, 2019 at 3:40 PM Subject: cluster correction using easythresh and GUI To: FSL - FMRIB's Software Library <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> Dear FSL experts, I am working on the cluster correction of an interaction image and found different results using easythresh and GUI. If I corrected the image at 3.1 0.01 in the GUI, there is nothing significant. However, if I correct the same zfstat image using easythresh at 3.1 0.01, I got two significant clusters. Is there an explaination for why this happened? Is the easythresh version valid? Thanks, Wen ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the FSL list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=FSL&A=1 ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the FSL list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=FSL&A=1