[FieldTrip] BEMCP
RICHARDS, JOHN
RICHARDS at mailbox.sc.edu
Thu Mar 17 15:57:47 CET 2016
"The correlation between concentric spheres and FEM (attached) it is not so bad” . I am not sure what you are correlating. Is this over the time of a beamformer model, or over participants with a single-time model? In either case, I think the correlations for the FEM-Concentric spheres are bad, many are less < 0.8, and a number are in the range from .9 to .95.
This result confirms the difference in the FEM and concentric-sphere models. These are exacerbated even further when you use a subject-specific realistic FEM model and a concentric spheres model.
The results between the BEMCP and concentric spheres suggests that the BEMCP model is not working. Most of the correlations should be positive. I have not used correlations as you have, but have done ROIs in an individual, and correlated the values of the ROIs over the head for one subject, or multiple subjects. I find higher correlations for the BEMCP and Concentric sphere models, than between either of these and a FEM model. However, in my case I am not using the standard model from FT, but using subject-specific BEMCP, concentric spheres, and FEM models.
If the FEM model is working for you, why not use it?
John
***********************************************
John E. Richards Carolina Distinguished Professor
Department of Psychology
University of South Carolina
Columbia, SC 29208
Dept Phone: 803 777 2079
Fax: 803 777 9558
Email: richards-john at sc.edu<mailto:richards-john at sc.edu>
HTTP: jerlab.psych.sc.edu
***********************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.science.ru.nl/pipermail/fieldtrip/attachments/20160317/9c5a956f/attachment-0002.html>
More information about the fieldtrip
mailing list