[FieldTrip] more on artfifact rejection

[Stephen Whitmarsh]

Dear Kambiz,

Please note there is a short description of the use of ft_databrowser in the
walkthrough:
http://fieldtrip.fcdonders.nl/walkthrough#visual_data_inspection

As well as some documentation on visual artifact rejection
<http://fieldtrip.fcdonders.nl/walkthrough#visual_data_inspection>
http://fieldtrip.fcdonders.nl/tutorial/visual_artifact_rejection

<http://fieldtrip.fcdonders.nl/tutorial/visual_artifact_rejection>Best,
Stephen

On 28 January 2011 13:43, Robert Oostenveld <r.oostenveld at donders.ru.nl>wrote:

> Dear Kambiz
>
> Although other people's preferences might differ, I would suggest that you
> use visual inspection to detect your artifacts. For trial-based data you
> cannot apply filter padding. The consequence is that the automatic artifact
> detection routine implemented in fieldtrip is likely to suffer from false
> alarms at the edges of your trials, and reduced sensitivity away from the
> edges.
>
> Visual detection of artifacts can be done using ft_rejectvisual (check out
> the three options it has), and using ft_databrowser.
>
> best regards,
> Robert
>
>
> On 28 Jan 2011, at 6:06, Tavabi, Kambiz wrote:
>
> > Greetings - this has been an informative discussion. My question remains
> is , what is the consensus on an approach for automatic artifact rejection
> with trial (CTF) data? E.g., could one use the artifact rejection section of
> Michael's code without any padding? I have not found any tutorials or
> suggestions on how to use the artifact rejection tools on trial data...have
> I missed something.
> > -Kambiz
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> fieldtrip mailing list
> fieldtrip at donders.ru.nl
> http://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/fieldtrip
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.science.ru.nl/pipermail/fieldtrip/attachments/20110128/08fd94aa/attachment-0002.html>