[FieldTrip] keeptrials = 'yes' with DICS does not keep trials

[Xie Wanze]

Hi Stephen,
I met the same issue last year when I did my source analysis and functional
connectivity analysis. I asked it through the maillist but no one seemed to
have an answer.
What I ended up with doing was to maunally calculate the source analysis
with the spatial filter for each single trial. So,1. Use the
ft_sourceanalysis to get the filter. 2. Multiply the filter with your
single trial data with a loop or whatever.

Wanze
Stephen Whitmarsh <stephen.whitmarsh at gmail.com>于2017年7月4日 周二上午9:52写道：

> Hi Lorenzo,
>
> Thanks, I will give it a try tomorrow, but the documentation suggest that
> it's not what I want: Just for clarity, I would like to use the same filter
> on separate trials.
>
> Best wishes,
> Stephen
>
> On 4 July 2017 at 18:32, Lorenzo Magazzini <magazzinil at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Stephen,
>>
>> Perhaps you could try to add the option cfg.rawtrial = 'yes'.
>>
>> I'm not entirely sure, but maybe by using a precomputed filter, the same
>> filter is applied to each single trial separately (rather than constructing
>> a different filter individually for each trial, which I guess is not what
>> you want to do).
>>
>> Lorenzo
>>
>>
>>
>> Lorenzo Magazzini, PhD
>>
>> Research Associate
>>
>> CUBRIC
>>
>> Cardiff University
>>
>> Cardiff CF24 4HQ
>>
>> Tel: +44 (0)2920 870090 <+44%2029%202087%200090>
>>
>> *http://psych.cf.ac.uk/contactsandpeople/magazzinil.php
>> <http://psych.cf.ac.uk/contactsandpeople/magazzinil.php>*
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4 July 2017 at 17:03, Stephen Whitmarsh <stephen.whitmarsh at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> I am now trying to use the DICS method for sourceanalysis, with
>>> 'powandcsd' output from ft_freqanalysis as its input and using a
>>> precomputed filter and leadfield. However, I would like to keep my separate
>>> trial estimates in the final source analysis, and while the documentation
>>> suggests I should be able to get that with cfg.keeptrials, but this doesn't
>>> have the expected effect.
>>>
>>> I previously made workaround using PCC on fourier data instead (see
>>> below), I think to deal with this issue. I was wondering if this is still
>>> the recommended option, i.e. workaround? Alternatively, and perhaps
>>> preferably, would someone have a suggestion for a solution consistent with
>>> the DICS implementation?
>>>
>>> Thanks for your time,
>>> Stephen
>>>
>>> % source analysis
>>> cfg.method           = 'pcc';
>>> ...
>>> cfg.keeptrials       = 'yes';
>>> cfg.pcc.keepmom      = 'yes';
>>> cfg.pcc.fixedori     = 'no';
>>> source_control       = ft_sourceanalysis(cfg, FFT);
>>>
>>> and then:
>>>
>>> % project moment and tapers
>>> cfg = [];
>>> cfg.projectmom = 'no';
>>> cfg.keeptrials = 'yes';
>>> cfg.powmethod  = 'lambda1';
>>> source         = ft_sourcedescriptives(cfg,source);
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> fieldtrip mailing list
>>> fieldtrip at donders.ru.nl
>>> https://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/fieldtrip
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> fieldtrip mailing list
>> fieldtrip at donders.ru.nl
>> https://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/fieldtrip
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> fieldtrip mailing list
> 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/20170704/c5ba0403/attachment-0002.html>