[Mne_analysis] SNR estimate for single trials

[A. Klimovich-Smith]

Hi Alex,

Thanks for the clarification.

Ana

On 2017-03-30 12:09, Alexandre Gramfort wrote:
> hi Ana,
> 
> yes 1 is typically what is used if you estimate things on single 
> trials.
> 
> I think we should update this example to clarify / change this.
> 
> See https://github.com/mne-tools/mne-python/issues/4131
> 
> Alex
> 
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 6:47 AM, A. Klimovich-Smith <ak798 at cam.ac.uk> 
> wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>> 
>> I want to ask what would be the recommended SNR amplitude estimate 
>> when
>> computing single trial source estimates with
>> mne-python(apply_inverse/apply_inverse_epochs)?
>> 
>> I looked at this tutorial
>> http://martinos.org/mne/stable/auto_examples/inverse/plot_compute_mne_inverse_epochs_in_label.html
>> 
>> and for single trial SNR is kept the same as for the evoked data -
>> default 3. Would it not make sense to reduce it to less (e.g. 1, I 
>> have
>> been using previously with mne-c) if we know that single trials are 
>> much
>> noisier?
>> 
>> Thanks for your help,
>> Ana
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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