[FieldTrip] 4d data reading (248 sensor MEG system)

[Yuval Harpaz]

do you have the config file near the data?

On 10 March 2011 20:35, Mehmet-Akif Coskun <mcoskun at mail.uh.edu> wrote:

> Hi Jan,
>
>
>    Thanks for the reply. I tried reading from the raw data as suggested in
> the link and i always getting an error like below.
>
>
> hdr=ft_read_header('E:\fieldtrip_data\c,rfhp0.1Hz')
>
>
> ?? Error using ==> fseek
> Offset must be of class double
>
>
> Error in==> fileio\private\read_4d_hdr_at_183
>          fseek(fid,nbytes2 - 32, 'cof');
>
>
> Error in ==> ft_read_header_at_246
>        orig                   = read_4d_hdr(datafile,configfile)
>
>
>
>
> the data that i try to read is raw data (unprocessed) but still i can't
> read. Previously i was trying the data that has been processed to remove
> environmental noise in 4d meg system sofware, and that didnt work too.
>
>
> Which part i am missing?
>
>
> Thanks
> Mehmet
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: jan-mathijs schoffelen <jan.schoffelen at donders.ru.nl>
> Date: Thursday, March 10, 2011 2:46 am
> Subject: Re: [FieldTrip] 4d data reading (248 sensor MEG system)
> To: Email discussion list for the FieldTrip project <
> fieldtrip at donders.ru.nl>
>
> > Hi Mehmet,
>
>
>
> > Please have a look at http://fieldtrip.fcdonders.nl/getting_started/bti.
> >
>
> > I would not recommend the .xyz/.m4d variant, but would directly read
> from the raw data files. Support for .xyz/.m4d files (these files contain
> relevant header information) is implemented in fieldtrip just for backward
> compatibility. These need to be created from the raw data (using the pdf2set
> command (see the software manual of the MEG-system for reference)), but
> contain only limited header information (e.g. the balancing coefficients are
> not extracted). To me this sounds like double work, because FieldTrip can
> read the header information from the raw files directly.
> >
>
> > Good luck,
> >
>
> > Jan-Mathijs
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
>
> > On Mar 10, 2011, at 6:36 AM, Mehmet-Akif Coskun wrote:>
>
> > Hello Dear Fieldtrip users,
> >
> >
> >        I am a newbie in fieldtrip. I am having trouble reading the 4d
> data in fieldtrip. We are using a 248 sensor 4D MEG system. I have followed
> the discussion list and tried the suggestions but haven't succeeded reading
> the data. As far as i understand, i need some files (.xyz and .m4d) to be
> able to read the data but i don't also know how to obtain these files. Can
> anyone explain me the steps that i need to follow?
> >
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> > Mehmet
> > _______________________________________________
> > fieldtrip mailing list
> > fieldtrip at donders.ru.nl
> > http://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/fieldtrip
>
> >
> >
>
> Dr. J.M. (Jan-Mathijs) Schoffelen
>
> > Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour,
> > Centre for Cognitive Neuroimaging,
> > Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands
>
> > J.Schoffelen at donders.ru.nl
>
> > Telephone: 0031-24-3614793> >
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > fieldtrip mailing list
> > fieldtrip at donders.ru.nl
> > http://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/fieldtrip
>
> _______________________________________________
> fieldtrip mailing list
> fieldtrip at donders.ru.nl
> http://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/fieldtrip
>



-- 
Y.Harpaz

a link to the BIU MEG lab:
http://faculty.biu.ac.il/~goldsa/index.html

 " Why, Dan," ask the people in Artificial Intelligence, "do you waste your
time conferring with those neuroscientists? They wave their hands about
information  processing and worry about where it happens, and
which neurotransmitters are  involved, and all those boring facts, but
they haven't a clue about the computational requirements of higher
cognitive functions."  "Why," ask the neuroscientists, "do you waste your
time on the fantasies of Artificial Intelligence? They just invent
whatever machinery they want, and say unpardonably ignorant things about the
brain." The  cognitive psychologists, meanwhile, are accused of concocting
models with neither biological plausibility nor proven computational powers;
the anthropologists wouldn't know a model if they saw one, and the
philosophers, as we all know, just take in each other's laundry, warning
about confusions they themselves have created, in an arena bereft of both
data and empirically testable theories. With so many idiots working on the
problem, no wonder consciousness is still a mystery.* Philosopher Daniel
Dennet, consciousness explained, pp. 225*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.science.ru.nl/pipermail/fieldtrip/attachments/20110310/b801e900/attachment.html>