-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 28
ENH: Do not use legacy demean function from old nipype workflows #51
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
ENH: Do not use legacy demean function from old nipype workflows #51
Conversation
fdc4ac5
to
97c91ce
Compare
97c91ce
to
7038c1f
Compare
The new demean function works with the median or the mode (default) for a more robust result.
7038c1f
to
f8707f6
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is there a citation for this? I don't see demeaning suggested in the FSL documentation
If I'm not wrong, the demeaning comes from the historic Finally, I believe Jenkinson's 2003 paper would cover this. |
af916ae
to
fa127d3
Compare
fa127d3
to
f3ce624
Compare
f3ce624
to
3d1757c
Compare
Putting together the lessons learned in nipreps#30, leveraging nipreps#52 and nipreps#53 (unfolded from nipreps#30 too), and utilizing nipreps#50 and nipreps#51, this workflow adds the phase difference map calculation, considering it one use-case of the general phase-difference fieldmap workflow. On top of this PR, we can continue the discussions held in nipreps#30. Probably, we will want to address nipreps#23 the first - the magnitude segmentation is sometimes really bad (e.g. see the phase1/2 unit test). Another discussion arisen in nipreps#30 is the spatial smoothing of the fieldmap (nipreps#22). Finally, the plan is to revise this implementation and determine whether the subtraction should happen before or after PRELUDE, and whether the arctan2 route is more interesting.
Putting together the lessons learned in nipreps#30, leveraging nipreps#52 and nipreps#53 (unfolded from nipreps#30 too), and utilizing nipreps#50 and nipreps#51, this workflow adds the phase difference map calculation, considering it one use-case of the general phase-difference fieldmap workflow. On top of this PR, we can continue the discussions held in nipreps#30. Probably, we will want to address nipreps#23 the first - the magnitude segmentation is sometimes really bad (e.g. see the phase1/2 unit test). Another discussion arisen in nipreps#30 is the spatial smoothing of the fieldmap (nipreps#22). Finally, the plan is to revise this implementation and determine whether the subtraction should happen before or after PRELUDE, and whether the arctan2 route is more interesting.
The new demean function works with the median or the mode (default) for a more robust result (to revise after #50 is merged)