Dear Douglas
I will apprecite it if you can please clarify this simple question.
If I optimise my design using Optseq, do you know if this de convolution process is implemented in SPM or any other software? and it is part of the processing behind the scenes? Or do I have to account for this using a specific software.
Many tha is
Aser
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
-------- Original message --------
From: fmri2013 <fmri2013@gmail.com>
Date: 10/11/2017 19:30 (GMT+00:00)
To: Freesurfer support list <freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] Optseq and de convolution for rapid designs
Many thanks Douglas
If I optimise my design using Optseq, do you know if this de convolution process is implemented in SPM or any other software? and it is part of the processing behind th3 scenes? Or do I have to account for this using a specific software.
Aser
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
-------- Original message --------
From: Douglas Greve <greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
Date: 10/11/2017 19:24 (GMT+00:00)
To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] Optseq and de convolution for rapid designs
It is because the random jitter creates differential amounts of
overlap. Imagine if you have A=C+D and B=C-D. You know A and B,
but you want C and D. You have two equations and two unknowns, so
you can solve for C and D from A and B eventhough C and D
"overlap" in A and B and you never see C or D by themselves. This
is a type of deconvolution
On 11/10/17 11:38 AM, Aser A wrote:
Hi all
I used Optseq
to optimize rapid event designs with multiple conditions . I
have a theortical question : how it is possible to distingwoh
the close by trials ? Is it by de convoution ? How is it
possible to deal with overallped trials ?
Is it because the
conditions are random so that when averaging them the distingwoh is
possible?
Many thanks
Aser
_______________________________________________
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer