Skip to content

Conversation

oesteban
Copy link
Member

@oesteban oesteban commented Nov 18, 2019

The new demean function works with the median or the mode (default) for a more robust result (to revise after #50 is merged)

@oesteban oesteban requested a review from mattcieslak November 18, 2019 20:51
@oesteban oesteban force-pushed the enh/phdiff-better-demean-demode branch from fdc4ac5 to 97c91ce Compare November 19, 2019 00:52
oesteban added a commit to oesteban/sdcflows that referenced this pull request Nov 19, 2019
oesteban added a commit to oesteban/sdcflows that referenced this pull request Nov 19, 2019
@oesteban oesteban force-pushed the enh/phdiff-better-demean-demode branch from 97c91ce to 7038c1f Compare November 19, 2019 06:17
@oesteban oesteban marked this pull request as ready for review November 19, 2019 06:43
The new demean function works with the median or the mode (default)
for a more robust result.
@oesteban oesteban force-pushed the enh/phdiff-better-demean-demode branch from 7038c1f to f8707f6 Compare November 19, 2019 06:50
Copy link
Collaborator

@mattcieslak mattcieslak left a 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

@oesteban
Copy link
Member Author

If I'm not wrong, the demeaning comes from the historic epiunwarp.fsl script. Its a massaging that makes sense anyways (e.g. it improves a bit the two phases result because the distributions are better aligned).

Finally, I believe Jenkinson's 2003 paper would cover this.

@oesteban oesteban force-pushed the enh/phdiff-better-demean-demode branch from f3ce624 to 3d1757c Compare November 19, 2019 21:17
@oesteban oesteban merged commit de565dc into nipreps:master Nov 19, 2019
oesteban added a commit to oesteban/sdcflows that referenced this pull request Nov 25, 2019
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.
oesteban added a commit to oesteban/sdcflows that referenced this pull request Nov 25, 2019
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.
@oesteban oesteban deleted the enh/phdiff-better-demean-demode branch December 18, 2019 23:45
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants