[FieldTrip] mtmfft vs. mtmconvol

[Schoffelen, J.M. (Jan Mathijs)]

Dear Bumper,

It may be helpful to provide the list with some example code + data, should anybody be keen to look into this.

Best,
Jan-Mathijs



On 09 Aug 2016, at 19:19, Pomper, Ulrich <u.pomper at ucl.ac.uk<mailto:u.pomper at ucl.ac.uk>> wrote:

bump....
Has anybody encountered this issue before?
Any suggestion would be highly appreciated!
Many Thanks!


________________________________
From: fieldtrip-bounces at science.ru.nl<mailto:fieldtrip-bounces at science.ru.nl> <fieldtrip-bounces at science.ru.nl<mailto:fieldtrip-bounces at science.ru.nl>> on behalf of Pomper, Ulrich <u.pomper at ucl.ac.uk<mailto:u.pomper at ucl.ac.uk>>
Sent: 05 August 2016 17:25
To: fieldtrip at science.ru.nl<mailto:fieldtrip at science.ru.nl>
Subject: [FieldTrip] mtmfft vs. mtmconvol

Dear all,

I have a question regarding different results I get from spectral analysis using mtmfft versus mtmconvol.
In short, the spectral power across frequencies is very similar for both methods, but for some reason my results are an order of magnitude larger when using mtmconvol. In other words, the power spectral density plots for both methods are highly overlapping, but only after I multiply the results of mtmfft by 10.

Is there any evident reason for this? Are the two methods just outputting different units/ scales?

(I ran both using almost identical settings. For mtmconvol I used a single timepoint at the center of my data period, with a taper length identical to the length of the data period used in mtmfft. All other parameters are the same).

Cheers,
Ulrich




_______________________________________________
fieldtrip mailing list
fieldtrip at donders.ru.nl<mailto:fieldtrip at donders.ru.nl>
https://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/fieldtrip


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.science.ru.nl/pipermail/fieldtrip/attachments/20160810/0cb9ee01/attachment-0002.html>