[Mne_analysis] question regarding mne_do_forward_solution

[Dykstra, Andrew]

Thanks all for the replies.

So, unless some change in the coordinate transforms has occurred between 
the raw and evoked files, there should be no difference when using 
either for computing the forward solution, correct?

Cheers,
Andy

-- 
Andrew R. Dykstra, PhD
Auditory Cognition Lab
Neurologie und Poliklinik
Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg
Im Neuenheimer Feld 400
69120 Heidelberg

"How small the cosmos.  How paltry and puny compared to human consciousness . . . to a single individual recollection." - Vladimir Nabokov

On 01/29/2013 09:16 AM, Alexandre Gramfort wrote:
> hi,
>
> unless something happened to the raw file since the evoked
> was computed the measurement information (channel
> location, head transformation etc.) should be identical between the raw
> and the evoked fif file. I guess this recommendation is mostly
> to avoid mistakes when you work on a particular evoked dataset.
>
> Best,
> Alex
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 5:33 AM, Hari Bharadwaj
> <hari at nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote:
>> Hi Andy,
>>     I am guessing that is there just to remind us that we could have
>> applied transformations to the head coordinate frame like when using
>> 'maxfilter -trans ...' and hence it is best to use the --meas file to
>> which the inverse generated from this particular forward would be
>> applied.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Hari
>>
>>
>> On Mon, January 28, 2013 11:31 am, Andrew R. Dykstra wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Is there a reason for the following text regarding the --meas argument of
>>> mne_do_forward_solution:
>>>
>>> "It is recommended that the average file is employed for evoked-response
>>> data and the original raw data file otherwise."
>>>
>>> If all the measurement file contributes is the sensor location/orientation
>>> info and the device-head transform, does it matter from which file - raw
>>> or
>>> averaged - these data are pulled?  The quoted text from the manual would
>>> suggest that a new forward solution be computed for each average file even
>>> if they all derive from the same raw measurement, but that doesn't seem to
>>> make sense.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Andy
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Mne_analysis mailing list
>>> Mne_analysis at nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
>>> https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/mne_analysis
>>
>> --
>> Hari Bharadwaj
>> PhD Candidate, Biomedical Engineering,
>> Boston University
>> 677 Beacon St.,
>> Boston, MA 02215
>>
>> Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging,
>> Massachusetts General Hospital
>> 149 Thirteenth Street,
>> Charlestown, MA 02129
>>
>> hari at nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
>> Ph: 734-883-5954
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mne_analysis mailing list
>> Mne_analysis at nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
>> https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/mne_analysis
>>
>>
>> The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is
>> addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail
>> contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at
>> http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in error
>> but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properly
>> dispose of the e-mail.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Mne_analysis mailing list
> Mne_analysis at nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/mne_analysis