DPABI/DPABISurf/DPARSF

Dear all,

                Recently, I met some problems when I  used Dpabi for fMRI data preprocessing .

                1) Usually,after normalization,  error "Function 'subsindex' is not defined for values of class 'matlab.ui.Figure'." will be reported in matlab so that we couln't obtain PicturesForChkNormalization files. Our version of matlab is 2017b in Ubuntu 16.04, how do we work out this problem? Or what's recommend version  of matlab?

Dear DPABI users

Would it possible to generate a QA report for ROI outlines overlay on the top of functional & strcutral images in MNI space?

Thanks for considering my request.

Best wishes

Larry

Dear Prof. Yan,

The TDA module was performed to calculate the concordance (the dynamic metrics was calculated before, e.g. the alff+falff, reho, DC and GSCorr ) and the error information was as follows,

Calculating Functional Connectivity by Seed based Correlation Anlyasis finished, elapsed time: 23.6406 seconds.

Warning: Directory already exists.

> In DPABI_TDA_run at 228

  In DPABI_TDA>btnRun_Callback at 931

Dear all,

I want to use the data preprocessed to do the later analysis such as build a martix. But some subjects has limited timeseries when I finished scrubbing,which may result in a strange result. So I want to know how many time timeseries left in a subject( for my case ,the total time series are 180,first 5 were revoved at the very beginning part) is enough for further analysis.

Sincerely,

Lin

Dear YAN Chao-Gan

i analyse rfMRI using DPARSF version 4.3 advanced

i get  the following error when Bet begin 

Dear all, 

I have troubling in using  the mutiple  comparation correction in stastical analysis in dpabi .  1.The pic1 shows the error when I was using PT with TECE . It still happened when I changed to the latest version of dpabi or using windows10 or mac system.

Dear all:

          when  I use viewer in dpabi , i  cannot use surface view with brainnet viewer because it showed there was some mistakes.  Thanks for anyone can tell me what was wrong. Details are in the pic.

Hello pro Yan，

The article with data processed by dparsf was returned by the editor

And the reviewer asked us to re-do a rest-state analysis，and set the voxel size into 2*2*2 mm（3*3*3 previous by default） to map our activation analysis

Bur the results were strange and unreasonable

So i checked the normalize results，it seemed that i can not change the voxel size

Here are two normalized results for  one identical participate