(Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian...
-
Upload
stuart-owen -
Category
Documents
-
view
222 -
download
4
Transcript of (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian...
![Page 1: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
FILFIL
(Epoch &) (Epoch &) Event-related fMRIEvent-related fMRISPM Course 2002SPM Course 2002
(Epoch &) (Epoch &) Event-related fMRIEvent-related fMRISPM Course 2002SPM Course 2002
Christian BuechelChristian Buechel
Karl FristonKarl Friston
Rik HensonRik Henson
Oliver JosephsOliver Josephs
Wellcome Department of Cognitive Neurology &Wellcome Department of Cognitive Neurology &
Institute of Cognitive NeuroscienceInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience
University College LondonUniversity College London
UKUK
![Page 2: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
FILFIL
Epoch vsEpoch vs Event-related fMRIEvent-related fMRIEpoch vsEpoch vs Event-related fMRIEvent-related fMRI
“PET Blocked conception”(scans assigned to conditions)
Boxcar function
…
A B A B…
…… …
Condition A
Scans 21-30Scans 1-10
Condition B
Scans 11-20…
“fMRI Epoch conception”(scans treated as timeseries)
Convolved with HRF
=>
“fMRI Event-related conception”
Deltafunctions
DesignMatrix
![Page 3: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
FILFIL
OverviewOverviewOverviewOverview
1. Advantages of efMRI1. Advantages of efMRI
2. BOLD impulse response2. BOLD impulse response
3. General Linear Model3. General Linear Model
4. Temporal Basis Functions4. Temporal Basis Functions
5. Timing Issues5. Timing Issues
6. Design Optimisation6. Design Optimisation
7. Nonlinear Models7. Nonlinear Models
8. Example Applications8. Example Applications
1. Advantages of efMRI1. Advantages of efMRI
2. BOLD impulse response2. BOLD impulse response
3. General Linear Model3. General Linear Model
4. Temporal Basis Functions4. Temporal Basis Functions
5. Timing Issues5. Timing Issues
6. Design Optimisation6. Design Optimisation
7. Nonlinear Models7. Nonlinear Models
8. Example Applications8. Example Applications
![Page 4: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
FILFIL
1. Randomised1. Randomised trialtrial order orderc.f. confounds of blocked designs (Johnson et al 1997)c.f. confounds of blocked designs (Johnson et al 1997)
1. Randomised1. Randomised trialtrial order orderc.f. confounds of blocked designs (Johnson et al 1997)c.f. confounds of blocked designs (Johnson et al 1997)
Advantages ofAdvantages of Event-related fMRIEvent-related fMRIAdvantages ofAdvantages of Event-related fMRIEvent-related fMRI
![Page 5: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
FILFIL
Randomised
O1 N1 O3O2 N2
Blocked
O1 O2 O3 N1 N2 N3
Data
ModelO = Old WordsN = New Words
![Page 6: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
FILFIL
1. Randomised trial order 1. Randomised trial order c.f. confounds of blocked designs (Johnson et al 1997)c.f. confounds of blocked designs (Johnson et al 1997)
2. Post hoc / subjective classification of trials2. Post hoc / subjective classification of trialse.g, according to subsequent memory (Wagner et al 1998)e.g, according to subsequent memory (Wagner et al 1998)
1. Randomised trial order 1. Randomised trial order c.f. confounds of blocked designs (Johnson et al 1997)c.f. confounds of blocked designs (Johnson et al 1997)
2. Post hoc / subjective classification of trials2. Post hoc / subjective classification of trialse.g, according to subsequent memory (Wagner et al 1998)e.g, according to subsequent memory (Wagner et al 1998)
Advantages ofAdvantages of Event-related fMRIEvent-related fMRIAdvantages ofAdvantages of Event-related fMRIEvent-related fMRI
![Page 7: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
FILFIL
R R RF F
R = Words Later Remembered
F = Words Later Forgotten
Event-Related ~4s
Data
Model
![Page 8: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
FILFIL
1. Randomised trial order 1. Randomised trial order c.f. confounds of blocked designs (Johnson et al 1997)c.f. confounds of blocked designs (Johnson et al 1997)
2. Post hoc / subjective classification of trials2. Post hoc / subjective classification of trialse.g, according to subsequent memory (Wagner et al 1998)e.g, according to subsequent memory (Wagner et al 1998)
3. Some events can only be indicated by subject (in time)3. Some events can only be indicated by subject (in time)e.g, spontaneous perceptual changes (Kleinschmidt et al 1998)e.g, spontaneous perceptual changes (Kleinschmidt et al 1998)
1. Randomised trial order 1. Randomised trial order c.f. confounds of blocked designs (Johnson et al 1997)c.f. confounds of blocked designs (Johnson et al 1997)
2. Post hoc / subjective classification of trials2. Post hoc / subjective classification of trialse.g, according to subsequent memory (Wagner et al 1998)e.g, according to subsequent memory (Wagner et al 1998)
3. Some events can only be indicated by subject (in time)3. Some events can only be indicated by subject (in time)e.g, spontaneous perceptual changes (Kleinschmidt et al 1998)e.g, spontaneous perceptual changes (Kleinschmidt et al 1998)
Advantages ofAdvantages of Event-related fMRIEvent-related fMRIAdvantages ofAdvantages of Event-related fMRIEvent-related fMRI
![Page 9: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
FILFIL
![Page 10: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
FILFIL
1. Randomised trial order 1. Randomised trial order c.f. confounds of blocked designs (Johnson et al 1997)c.f. confounds of blocked designs (Johnson et al 1997)
2. Post hoc / subjective classification of trials2. Post hoc / subjective classification of trialse.g, according to subsequent memory (Wagner et al 1998)e.g, according to subsequent memory (Wagner et al 1998)
3. Some events can only be indicated by subject (in time)3. Some events can only be indicated by subject (in time)e.g, spontaneous perceptual changes (Kleinschmidt et al 1998)e.g, spontaneous perceptual changes (Kleinschmidt et al 1998)
4. Some trials cannot be blocked4. Some trials cannot be blocked e.g, “oddball” designs (Clark et al., 2000)e.g, “oddball” designs (Clark et al., 2000)
1. Randomised trial order 1. Randomised trial order c.f. confounds of blocked designs (Johnson et al 1997)c.f. confounds of blocked designs (Johnson et al 1997)
2. Post hoc / subjective classification of trials2. Post hoc / subjective classification of trialse.g, according to subsequent memory (Wagner et al 1998)e.g, according to subsequent memory (Wagner et al 1998)
3. Some events can only be indicated by subject (in time)3. Some events can only be indicated by subject (in time)e.g, spontaneous perceptual changes (Kleinschmidt et al 1998)e.g, spontaneous perceptual changes (Kleinschmidt et al 1998)
4. Some trials cannot be blocked4. Some trials cannot be blocked e.g, “oddball” designs (Clark et al., 2000)e.g, “oddball” designs (Clark et al., 2000)
Advantages ofAdvantages of Event-related fMRIEvent-related fMRIAdvantages ofAdvantages of Event-related fMRIEvent-related fMRI
![Page 11: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
FILFIL
Time…
“Oddball”
![Page 12: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
FILFIL
1. Randomised trial order 1. Randomised trial order c.f. confounds of blocked designs (Johnson et al 1997)c.f. confounds of blocked designs (Johnson et al 1997)
2. Post hoc / subjective classification of trials2. Post hoc / subjective classification of trialse.g, according to subsequent memory (Wagner et al 1998)e.g, according to subsequent memory (Wagner et al 1998)
3. Some events can only be indicated by subject (in time)3. Some events can only be indicated by subject (in time)e.g, spontaneous perceptual changes (Kleinschmidt et al 1998)e.g, spontaneous perceptual changes (Kleinschmidt et al 1998)
4. Some trials cannot be blocked4. Some trials cannot be blockede.g, “oddball” designs (Clark et al., 2000)e.g, “oddball” designs (Clark et al., 2000)
5. More accurate models even for blocked designs?5. More accurate models even for blocked designs?e.g, “state-item” interactions (Chawla et al, 1999)e.g, “state-item” interactions (Chawla et al, 1999)
1. Randomised trial order 1. Randomised trial order c.f. confounds of blocked designs (Johnson et al 1997)c.f. confounds of blocked designs (Johnson et al 1997)
2. Post hoc / subjective classification of trials2. Post hoc / subjective classification of trialse.g, according to subsequent memory (Wagner et al 1998)e.g, according to subsequent memory (Wagner et al 1998)
3. Some events can only be indicated by subject (in time)3. Some events can only be indicated by subject (in time)e.g, spontaneous perceptual changes (Kleinschmidt et al 1998)e.g, spontaneous perceptual changes (Kleinschmidt et al 1998)
4. Some trials cannot be blocked4. Some trials cannot be blockede.g, “oddball” designs (Clark et al., 2000)e.g, “oddball” designs (Clark et al., 2000)
5. More accurate models even for blocked designs?5. More accurate models even for blocked designs?e.g, “state-item” interactions (Chawla et al, 1999)e.g, “state-item” interactions (Chawla et al, 1999)
Advantages ofAdvantages of Event-related fMRIEvent-related fMRIAdvantages ofAdvantages of Event-related fMRIEvent-related fMRI
![Page 13: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
FILFILBlocked Design
O1 O2 O3 N1 N2 N3
“Epoch” model
Data
Model
“Event” model
O1 O2 O3 N1 N2 N3
![Page 14: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
FILFIL
1. 1. Less efficient for detecting effects than are blocked designs Less efficient for detecting effects than are blocked designs (see later…) (see later…)
2. Some psychological processes may be better blocked 2. Some psychological processes may be better blocked (eg task-switching, attentional instructions)(eg task-switching, attentional instructions)
3. Sequential dependencies may interact with event-types3. Sequential dependencies may interact with event-types(eg Change/No-change trials, (eg Change/No-change trials, Duzel & Heinze, 2002Duzel & Heinze, 2002))
1. 1. Less efficient for detecting effects than are blocked designs Less efficient for detecting effects than are blocked designs (see later…) (see later…)
2. Some psychological processes may be better blocked 2. Some psychological processes may be better blocked (eg task-switching, attentional instructions)(eg task-switching, attentional instructions)
3. Sequential dependencies may interact with event-types3. Sequential dependencies may interact with event-types(eg Change/No-change trials, (eg Change/No-change trials, Duzel & Heinze, 2002Duzel & Heinze, 2002))
(Disa(Disadvantage of dvantage of Randomised Designs)Randomised Designs)(Disa(Disadvantage of dvantage of Randomised Designs)Randomised Designs)
![Page 15: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
FILFIL
OverviewOverviewOverviewOverview
1. Advantages of efMRI1. Advantages of efMRI
2. BOLD impulse response2. BOLD impulse response
3. General Linear Model3. General Linear Model
4. Temporal Basis Functions4. Temporal Basis Functions
5. Timing Issues5. Timing Issues
6. Design Optimisation6. Design Optimisation
7. Nonlinear Models7. Nonlinear Models
8. Example Applications8. Example Applications
1. Advantages of efMRI1. Advantages of efMRI
2. BOLD impulse response2. BOLD impulse response
3. General Linear Model3. General Linear Model
4. Temporal Basis Functions4. Temporal Basis Functions
5. Timing Issues5. Timing Issues
6. Design Optimisation6. Design Optimisation
7. Nonlinear Models7. Nonlinear Models
8. Example Applications8. Example Applications
![Page 16: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
FILFIL
• Function of blood oxygenation, flow, Function of blood oxygenation, flow, volume (Buxton et al, 1998)volume (Buxton et al, 1998)
• Peak (max. oxygenation) 4-6s Peak (max. oxygenation) 4-6s poststimulus; baseline after 20-30spoststimulus; baseline after 20-30s
• Initial undershoot can be observed Initial undershoot can be observed (Malonek & Grinvald, 1996)(Malonek & Grinvald, 1996)
• Similar across V1, A1, S1…Similar across V1, A1, S1…
• … … but differences across:but differences across: other regions (Schacter et al 1997) other regions (Schacter et al 1997)
individuals (Aguirre et al, 1998)individuals (Aguirre et al, 1998)
• Function of blood oxygenation, flow, Function of blood oxygenation, flow, volume (Buxton et al, 1998)volume (Buxton et al, 1998)
• Peak (max. oxygenation) 4-6s Peak (max. oxygenation) 4-6s poststimulus; baseline after 20-30spoststimulus; baseline after 20-30s
• Initial undershoot can be observed Initial undershoot can be observed (Malonek & Grinvald, 1996)(Malonek & Grinvald, 1996)
• Similar across V1, A1, S1…Similar across V1, A1, S1…
• … … but differences across:but differences across: other regions (Schacter et al 1997) other regions (Schacter et al 1997)
individuals (Aguirre et al, 1998)individuals (Aguirre et al, 1998)
BOLD Impulse ResponseBOLD Impulse ResponseBOLD Impulse ResponseBOLD Impulse Response
BriefStimulus
Undershoot
InitialUndershoot
Peak
![Page 17: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
FILFIL
• Early event-related fMRI studies Early event-related fMRI studies used a long Stimulus Onset used a long Stimulus Onset Asynchrony (SOA) to allow BOLD Asynchrony (SOA) to allow BOLD response to return to baselineresponse to return to baseline
• However, if the BOLD response is However, if the BOLD response is explicitly modelled, overlap between explicitly modelled, overlap between successive responses at short SOAs successive responses at short SOAs can be accommodatedcan be accommodated……
• … … particularly if responses are particularly if responses are assumed to superpose linearlyassumed to superpose linearly
• Short SOAs are more sensitive…Short SOAs are more sensitive…
• Early event-related fMRI studies Early event-related fMRI studies used a long Stimulus Onset used a long Stimulus Onset Asynchrony (SOA) to allow BOLD Asynchrony (SOA) to allow BOLD response to return to baselineresponse to return to baseline
• However, if the BOLD response is However, if the BOLD response is explicitly modelled, overlap between explicitly modelled, overlap between successive responses at short SOAs successive responses at short SOAs can be accommodatedcan be accommodated……
• … … particularly if responses are particularly if responses are assumed to superpose linearlyassumed to superpose linearly
• Short SOAs are more sensitive…Short SOAs are more sensitive…
BOLD Impulse ResponseBOLD Impulse ResponseBOLD Impulse ResponseBOLD Impulse Response
BriefStimulus
Undershoot
InitialUndershoot
Peak
![Page 18: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
FILFIL
OverviewOverviewOverviewOverview
1. Advantages of efMRI1. Advantages of efMRI
2. BOLD impulse response2. BOLD impulse response
3. General Linear Model3. General Linear Model
4. Temporal Basis Functions4. Temporal Basis Functions
5. Timing Issues5. Timing Issues
6. Design Optimisation6. Design Optimisation
7. Nonlinear Models7. Nonlinear Models
8. Example Applications8. Example Applications
1. Advantages of efMRI1. Advantages of efMRI
2. BOLD impulse response2. BOLD impulse response
3. General Linear Model3. General Linear Model
4. Temporal Basis Functions4. Temporal Basis Functions
5. Timing Issues5. Timing Issues
6. Design Optimisation6. Design Optimisation
7. Nonlinear Models7. Nonlinear Models
8. Example Applications8. Example Applications
![Page 19: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
FILFIL
General General Linear Linear (Convolution) (Convolution) ModelModelGeneral General Linear Linear (Convolution) (Convolution) ModelModel
GLM for a single voxel:
Y(t) = x(t) h(t) +
x(t) = stimulus train (delta functions)
x(t) = (t - nT)
h(t) = hemodynamic (BOLD) response
h(t) = ßi fi(t)
fi(t) = temporal basis functions
Y(t) = ßi fi (t - nT) +
GLM for a single voxel:
Y(t) = x(t) h(t) +
x(t) = stimulus train (delta functions)
x(t) = (t - nT)
h(t) = hemodynamic (BOLD) response
h(t) = ßi fi(t)
fi(t) = temporal basis functions
Y(t) = ßi fi (t - nT) + Design Matrix
convolution
T 2T 3T ...
x(t) h(t)= ßi fi (t)
sampled each scan
![Page 20: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
FILFIL
General Linear Model (in SPM)General Linear Model (in SPM)General Linear Model (in SPM)General Linear Model (in SPM)
Auditory words
every 20s
SPM{F}SPM{F}
0 time {secs} 300 time {secs} 30
Sampled every TR = 1.7s
Design matrix, Design matrix, XX
[ƒ[ƒ11(u)(u)x(t) |ƒx(t) |ƒ22(u)(u)x(t) x(t)
|...]|...]
…
(Orthogonalised) (Orthogonalised) Gamma Gamma functions ƒfunctions ƒii(u) of (u) of
peristimulus time uperistimulus time u
![Page 21: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
FILFIL
OverviewOverviewOverviewOverview
1. Advantages of efMRI1. Advantages of efMRI
2. BOLD impulse response2. BOLD impulse response
3. General Linear Model3. General Linear Model
4. Temporal Basis Functions4. Temporal Basis Functions
5. Timing Issues5. Timing Issues
6. Design Optimisation6. Design Optimisation
7. Nonlinear Models7. Nonlinear Models
8. Example Applications8. Example Applications
1. Advantages of efMRI1. Advantages of efMRI
2. BOLD impulse response2. BOLD impulse response
3. General Linear Model3. General Linear Model
4. Temporal Basis Functions4. Temporal Basis Functions
5. Timing Issues5. Timing Issues
6. Design Optimisation6. Design Optimisation
7. Nonlinear Models7. Nonlinear Models
8. Example Applications8. Example Applications
![Page 22: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
FILFIL
Temporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis Functions
• Fourier SetFourier SetWindowed sines & cosinesWindowed sines & cosinesAny shape (up to frequency limit)Any shape (up to frequency limit)Inference via F-testInference via F-test
• Fourier SetFourier SetWindowed sines & cosinesWindowed sines & cosinesAny shape (up to frequency limit)Any shape (up to frequency limit)Inference via F-testInference via F-test
![Page 23: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
FILFIL
Temporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis Functions
• Finite Impulse ResponseFinite Impulse ResponseMini “timebins” (selective Mini “timebins” (selective
averaging)averaging)AAny shapeny shape (up to bin-width (up to bin-width))Inference via F-testInference via F-test
• Finite Impulse ResponseFinite Impulse ResponseMini “timebins” (selective Mini “timebins” (selective
averaging)averaging)AAny shapeny shape (up to bin-width (up to bin-width))Inference via F-testInference via F-test
![Page 24: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
FILFIL
Temporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis Functions
• Fourier SetFourier SetWindowed sines & cosinesWindowed sines & cosinesAny shape (up to frequency limit)Any shape (up to frequency limit)Inference via F-testInference via F-test
• Gamma FunctionsGamma FunctionsBounded, asymmetrical (like Bounded, asymmetrical (like
BOLD)BOLD)Set of different lagsSet of different lagsInference via F-testInference via F-test
• Fourier SetFourier SetWindowed sines & cosinesWindowed sines & cosinesAny shape (up to frequency limit)Any shape (up to frequency limit)Inference via F-testInference via F-test
• Gamma FunctionsGamma FunctionsBounded, asymmetrical (like Bounded, asymmetrical (like
BOLD)BOLD)Set of different lagsSet of different lagsInference via F-testInference via F-test
![Page 25: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
FILFIL
Temporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis Functions
• Fourier SetFourier SetWindowed sines & cosinesWindowed sines & cosinesAny shape (up to frequency limit)Any shape (up to frequency limit)Inference via F-testInference via F-test
• Gamma FunctionsGamma FunctionsBounded, asymmetrical (like BOLD)Bounded, asymmetrical (like BOLD)Set of different lagsSet of different lagsInference via F-testInference via F-test
• ““Informed” Basis SetInformed” Basis SetBest guess of canonical BOLD responseBest guess of canonical BOLD responseVariability captured by Taylor Variability captured by Taylor
expansion expansion “Magnitude” inferences via t-“Magnitude” inferences via t-testtest…?…?
• Fourier SetFourier SetWindowed sines & cosinesWindowed sines & cosinesAny shape (up to frequency limit)Any shape (up to frequency limit)Inference via F-testInference via F-test
• Gamma FunctionsGamma FunctionsBounded, asymmetrical (like BOLD)Bounded, asymmetrical (like BOLD)Set of different lagsSet of different lagsInference via F-testInference via F-test
• ““Informed” Basis SetInformed” Basis SetBest guess of canonical BOLD responseBest guess of canonical BOLD responseVariability captured by Taylor Variability captured by Taylor
expansion expansion “Magnitude” inferences via t-“Magnitude” inferences via t-testtest…?…?
![Page 26: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
FILFIL
Temporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis Functions
““Informed” Basis SetInformed” Basis Set (Friston et al. 1998)(Friston et al. 1998)
• Canonical HRF (2 gamma functions)Canonical HRF (2 gamma functions)
““Informed” Basis SetInformed” Basis Set (Friston et al. 1998)(Friston et al. 1998)
• Canonical HRF (2 gamma functions)Canonical HRF (2 gamma functions)
Canonical
![Page 27: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
FILFIL
Temporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis Functions
““Informed” Basis SetInformed” Basis Set (Friston et al. 1998)(Friston et al. 1998)
• Canonical HRF (2 gamma functions)Canonical HRF (2 gamma functions)
plusplus Multivariate Taylor expansion in: Multivariate Taylor expansion in:
time (time (Temporal DerivativeTemporal Derivative))
““Informed” Basis SetInformed” Basis Set (Friston et al. 1998)(Friston et al. 1998)
• Canonical HRF (2 gamma functions)Canonical HRF (2 gamma functions)
plusplus Multivariate Taylor expansion in: Multivariate Taylor expansion in:
time (time (Temporal DerivativeTemporal Derivative))
CanonicalTemporal
![Page 28: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
FILFIL
Temporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis Functions
““Informed” Basis SetInformed” Basis Set (Friston et al. 1998)(Friston et al. 1998)
• Canonical HRF (2 gamma functions)Canonical HRF (2 gamma functions)
plusplus Multivariate Taylor expansion in: Multivariate Taylor expansion in:
time (time (Temporal DerivativeTemporal Derivative))
width (width (Dispersion DerivativeDispersion Derivative))
““Informed” Basis SetInformed” Basis Set (Friston et al. 1998)(Friston et al. 1998)
• Canonical HRF (2 gamma functions)Canonical HRF (2 gamma functions)
plusplus Multivariate Taylor expansion in: Multivariate Taylor expansion in:
time (time (Temporal DerivativeTemporal Derivative))
width (width (Dispersion DerivativeDispersion Derivative))
CanonicalTemporalDispersion
![Page 29: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
FILFIL
Temporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis Functions
““Informed” Basis SetInformed” Basis Set (Friston et al. 1998)(Friston et al. 1998)
• Canonical HRF (2 gamma functions)Canonical HRF (2 gamma functions)
plusplus Multivariate Taylor expansion in: Multivariate Taylor expansion in:
time (time (Temporal DerivativeTemporal Derivative))
width (width (Dispersion DerivativeDispersion Derivative))
• ““Magnitude” inferences via t-test on Magnitude” inferences via t-test on canonical parameterscanonical parameters (providing (providing canonical is a good fit…more later)canonical is a good fit…more later)
““Informed” Basis SetInformed” Basis Set (Friston et al. 1998)(Friston et al. 1998)
• Canonical HRF (2 gamma functions)Canonical HRF (2 gamma functions)
plusplus Multivariate Taylor expansion in: Multivariate Taylor expansion in:
time (time (Temporal DerivativeTemporal Derivative))
width (width (Dispersion DerivativeDispersion Derivative))
• ““Magnitude” inferences via t-test on Magnitude” inferences via t-test on canonical parameterscanonical parameters (providing (providing canonical is a good fit…more later)canonical is a good fit…more later)
CanonicalTemporalDispersion
![Page 30: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
FILFIL
Temporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis FunctionsTemporal Basis Functions
““Informed” Basis SetInformed” Basis Set (Friston et al. 1998)(Friston et al. 1998)
• Canonical HRF (2 gamma functions)Canonical HRF (2 gamma functions)
plusplus Multivariate Taylor expansion in: Multivariate Taylor expansion in:
time (time (Temporal DerivativeTemporal Derivative))
width (width (Dispersion DerivativeDispersion Derivative))
• ““Magnitude” inferences via t-test on Magnitude” inferences via t-test on canonical parameterscanonical parameters (providing (providing canonical is a good fit…more later)canonical is a good fit…more later)
• ““Latency” inferences via testLatency” inferences via testss on on ratioratio of of derivativederivative : : canonical parameters canonical parameters (more later…(more later…))
““Informed” Basis SetInformed” Basis Set (Friston et al. 1998)(Friston et al. 1998)
• Canonical HRF (2 gamma functions)Canonical HRF (2 gamma functions)
plusplus Multivariate Taylor expansion in: Multivariate Taylor expansion in:
time (time (Temporal DerivativeTemporal Derivative))
width (width (Dispersion DerivativeDispersion Derivative))
• ““Magnitude” inferences via t-test on Magnitude” inferences via t-test on canonical parameterscanonical parameters (providing (providing canonical is a good fit…more later)canonical is a good fit…more later)
• ““Latency” inferences via testLatency” inferences via testss on on ratioratio of of derivativederivative : : canonical parameters canonical parameters (more later…(more later…))
CanonicalTemporalDispersion
![Page 31: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
FILFIL
(Other Approaches)(Other Approaches)(Other Approaches)(Other Approaches)
• Long Stimulus Onset Asychrony (SOA)Can ignore overlap between responses (Cohen et al 1997)
… but long SOAs are less sensitive• Fully counterbalanced designs
Assume response overlap cancels (Saykin et al 1999)Include fixation trials to “selectively average” response even at short SOA (Dale & Buckner, 1997)
… but unbalanced when events defined by subject• Define HRF from pilot scan on each subject
May capture intersubject variability (Zarahn et al, 1997)
… but not interregional variability • Numerical fitting of highly parametrised response functions
Separate estimate of magnitude, latency, duration (Kruggel et al 1999)
… but computationally expensive for every voxel
![Page 32: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
FILFIL
Temporal Basis Sets: Which One?Temporal Basis Sets: Which One?Temporal Basis Sets: Which One?Temporal Basis Sets: Which One?
+ FIR+ Dispersion+ TemporalCanonical
…canonical + temporal + dispersion derivatives appear sufficient
…may not be for more complex trials (eg stimulus-delay-response)
…but then such trials better modelled with separate neural components (ie activity no longer delta function) + constrained HRF (Zarahn,
1999)
In this example (rapid motor response to faces, Henson et al, 2001)…
![Page 33: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
FILFIL
Temporal Basis Sets: InferencesTemporal Basis Sets: InferencesTemporal Basis Sets: InferencesTemporal Basis Sets: Inferences
• How can inferences be made in hierarchical models (eg, “Random Effects” analyses over, for example, subjects)?
1. Univariate T-tests on canonical parameter alone? may miss significant experimental variabilitycanonical parameter estimate not appropriate index of “magnitude” if real responses are non-canonical (see later)
2. Univariate F-tests on parameters from multiple basis functions?need appropriate corrections for nonsphericity (Glaser et al, 2001)
3. Multivariate tests (eg Wilks Lambda, Henson et al, 2000)not powerful unless ~10 times as many subjects as parameters
![Page 34: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
FILFIL
OverviewOverviewOverviewOverview
1. Advantages of efMRI1. Advantages of efMRI
2. BOLD impulse response2. BOLD impulse response
3. General Linear Model3. General Linear Model
4. Temporal Basis Functions4. Temporal Basis Functions
5. Timing Issues5. Timing Issues
6. Design Optimisation6. Design Optimisation
7. Nonlinear Models7. Nonlinear Models
8. Example Applications8. Example Applications
1. Advantages of efMRI1. Advantages of efMRI
2. BOLD impulse response2. BOLD impulse response
3. General Linear Model3. General Linear Model
4. Temporal Basis Functions4. Temporal Basis Functions
5. Timing Issues5. Timing Issues
6. Design Optimisation6. Design Optimisation
7. Nonlinear Models7. Nonlinear Models
8. Example Applications8. Example Applications
![Page 35: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
FILFIL
Timing IssuesTiming IssuesTiming IssuesTiming Issues
• Typical TR for 48 slice EPI at Typical TR for 48 slice EPI at 3mm spacing is ~ 4s3mm spacing is ~ 4s
• Typical TR for 48 slice EPI at Typical TR for 48 slice EPI at 3mm spacing is ~ 4s3mm spacing is ~ 4s
Scans TR=4s
![Page 36: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
FILFIL
Timing IssuesTiming IssuesTiming IssuesTiming Issues
• Typical TR for 48 slice EPI at Typical TR for 48 slice EPI at 3mm spacing is ~ 4s3mm spacing is ~ 4s
• Sampling at [0,4,8,12…] post- Sampling at [0,4,8,12…] post- stimulus may miss peak signalstimulus may miss peak signal
• Typical TR for 48 slice EPI at Typical TR for 48 slice EPI at 3mm spacing is ~ 4s3mm spacing is ~ 4s
• Sampling at [0,4,8,12…] post- Sampling at [0,4,8,12…] post- stimulus may miss peak signalstimulus may miss peak signal
Scans
Stimulus (synchronous)
TR=4s
SOA=8s
Sampling rate=4s
![Page 37: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
FILFIL
Timing IssuesTiming IssuesTiming IssuesTiming Issues
• Typical TR for 48 slice EPI at Typical TR for 48 slice EPI at 3mm spacing is ~ 4s3mm spacing is ~ 4s
• Sampling at [0,4,8,1Sampling at [0,4,8,122…] post- …] post- stimulus may miss peak signalstimulus may miss peak signal
• Higher effective sampling by: 1. Higher effective sampling by: 1. AsynchronyAsynchrony eg eg SOA=1.5TRSOA=1.5TR
• Typical TR for 48 slice EPI at Typical TR for 48 slice EPI at 3mm spacing is ~ 4s3mm spacing is ~ 4s
• Sampling at [0,4,8,1Sampling at [0,4,8,122…] post- …] post- stimulus may miss peak signalstimulus may miss peak signal
• Higher effective sampling by: 1. Higher effective sampling by: 1. AsynchronyAsynchrony eg eg SOA=1.5TRSOA=1.5TR
Stimulus (asynchronous)
Scans TR=4s
SOA=6s
Sampling rate=2s
![Page 38: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
FILFIL
Timing IssuesTiming IssuesTiming IssuesTiming Issues
• Typical TR for 48 slice EPI at Typical TR for 48 slice EPI at 3mm spacing is ~ 4s3mm spacing is ~ 4s
• Sampling at [0,4,8,1Sampling at [0,4,8,122…] post- …] post- stimulus may miss peak signalstimulus may miss peak signal
• Higher effective sampling by: Higher effective sampling by: 1. 1. AsynchronyAsynchrony eg eg SOA=1.5TRSOA=1.5TR 2. Random 2. Random Jitter Jitter eg eg SOA=(2±0.5)TRSOA=(2±0.5)TR
• Typical TR for 48 slice EPI at Typical TR for 48 slice EPI at 3mm spacing is ~ 4s3mm spacing is ~ 4s
• Sampling at [0,4,8,1Sampling at [0,4,8,122…] post- …] post- stimulus may miss peak signalstimulus may miss peak signal
• Higher effective sampling by: Higher effective sampling by: 1. 1. AsynchronyAsynchrony eg eg SOA=1.5TRSOA=1.5TR 2. Random 2. Random Jitter Jitter eg eg SOA=(2±0.5)TRSOA=(2±0.5)TR
Stimulus (random jitter)
Scans TR=4s
Sampling rate=2s
![Page 39: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
FILFIL
Timing IssuesTiming IssuesTiming IssuesTiming Issues
• Typical TR for 48 slice EPI at Typical TR for 48 slice EPI at 3mm spacing is ~ 4s3mm spacing is ~ 4s
• Sampling at [0,4,8,1Sampling at [0,4,8,122…] post- …] post- stimulus may miss peak signalstimulus may miss peak signal
• Higher effective sampling by: Higher effective sampling by: 1. 1. AsynchronyAsynchrony eg eg SOA=1.5TRSOA=1.5TR 2. Random 2. Random Jitter Jitter eg eg SOA=(2±0.5)TRSOA=(2±0.5)TR
• Better response characterisation Better response characterisation (Miezin et al, 2000)(Miezin et al, 2000)
• Typical TR for 48 slice EPI at Typical TR for 48 slice EPI at 3mm spacing is ~ 4s3mm spacing is ~ 4s
• Sampling at [0,4,8,1Sampling at [0,4,8,122…] post- …] post- stimulus may miss peak signalstimulus may miss peak signal
• Higher effective sampling by: Higher effective sampling by: 1. 1. AsynchronyAsynchrony eg eg SOA=1.5TRSOA=1.5TR 2. Random 2. Random Jitter Jitter eg eg SOA=(2±0.5)TRSOA=(2±0.5)TR
• Better response characterisation Better response characterisation (Miezin et al, 2000)(Miezin et al, 2000)
Stimulus (random jitter)
Scans TR=4s
Sampling rate=2s
![Page 40: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
FILFIL
Timing IssuesTiming IssuesTiming IssuesTiming Issues
• ……but “Slice-timing Problem”but “Slice-timing Problem”(Henson et al, 1999)(Henson et al, 1999)
Slices acquired at different times, Slices acquired at different times, yet model is the same for all slicesyet model is the same for all slices
• ……but “Slice-timing Problem”but “Slice-timing Problem”(Henson et al, 1999)(Henson et al, 1999)
Slices acquired at different times, Slices acquired at different times, yet model is the same for all slicesyet model is the same for all slices
![Page 41: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
FILFIL
Timing IssuesTiming IssuesTiming IssuesTiming Issues
• ……but “Slice-timing Problem”but “Slice-timing Problem”(Henson et al, 1999)(Henson et al, 1999)
Slices acquired at different times, Slices acquired at different times, yet model is the same for all slicesyet model is the same for all slices
=> different results (using canonical => different results (using canonical HRF) for different reference slicesHRF) for different reference slices
• ……but “Slice-timing Problem”but “Slice-timing Problem”(Henson et al, 1999)(Henson et al, 1999)
Slices acquired at different times, Slices acquired at different times, yet model is the same for all slicesyet model is the same for all slices
=> different results (using canonical => different results (using canonical HRF) for different reference slicesHRF) for different reference slices
Bottom SliceTop Slice
SPM{t} SPM{t}
TR=3s
![Page 42: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
FILFIL
Timing IssuesTiming IssuesTiming IssuesTiming Issues
• ……but “Slice-timing Problem”but “Slice-timing Problem”(Henson et al, 1999)(Henson et al, 1999)
Slices acquired at different times, Slices acquired at different times, yet model is the same for all slicesyet model is the same for all slices
=> different results (using canonical => different results (using canonical HRF) for different reference slicesHRF) for different reference slices
• Solutions:Solutions:
1. Temporal interpolation of data1. Temporal interpolation of data… but less good for longer … but less good for longer
TRsTRs
• ……but “Slice-timing Problem”but “Slice-timing Problem”(Henson et al, 1999)(Henson et al, 1999)
Slices acquired at different times, Slices acquired at different times, yet model is the same for all slicesyet model is the same for all slices
=> different results (using canonical => different results (using canonical HRF) for different reference slicesHRF) for different reference slices
• Solutions:Solutions:
1. Temporal interpolation of data1. Temporal interpolation of data… but less good for longer … but less good for longer
TRsTRs
Interpolated
SPM{t}
Bottom SliceTop Slice
SPM{t} SPM{t}
TR=3s
![Page 43: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
FILFIL
Timing IssuesTiming IssuesTiming IssuesTiming Issues
• ……but “Slice-timing Problem”but “Slice-timing Problem”(Henson et al, 1999)(Henson et al, 1999)
Slices acquired at different times, Slices acquired at different times, yet model is the same for all slicesyet model is the same for all slices=> different results (using canonical => different results (using canonical HRF) for different reference slicesHRF) for different reference slices
• Solutions:Solutions:
1. Temporal interpolation of data1. Temporal interpolation of data… but less good for longer … but less good for longer
TRsTRs2. 2. More general basis set (e.g., with More general basis set (e.g., with
temporal derivatives)temporal derivatives)… but inferences via F-test… but inferences via F-test
• ……but “Slice-timing Problem”but “Slice-timing Problem”(Henson et al, 1999)(Henson et al, 1999)
Slices acquired at different times, Slices acquired at different times, yet model is the same for all slicesyet model is the same for all slices=> different results (using canonical => different results (using canonical HRF) for different reference slicesHRF) for different reference slices
• Solutions:Solutions:
1. Temporal interpolation of data1. Temporal interpolation of data… but less good for longer … but less good for longer
TRsTRs2. 2. More general basis set (e.g., with More general basis set (e.g., with
temporal derivatives)temporal derivatives)… but inferences via F-test… but inferences via F-test
Derivative
SPM{F}
Interpolated
SPM{t}
Bottom SliceTop Slice
SPM{t} SPM{t}
TR=3s
![Page 44: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
FILFIL
BOLDBOLD Response Latency (Linear) Response Latency (Linear)BOLDBOLD Response Latency (Linear) Response Latency (Linear)
• Assume the real response, r(t), is a scaled (by ) version of the canonical, f(t), but delayed by a small amount dt:
r(t) = f(t+dt) ~ f(t) + f ´(t) dt 1st-order Taylor
R(t) = ß1 f(t) + ß2 f ´(t) GLM fit
= ß1 dt = ß2 / ß1
ie, Latency can be approximated by the ratio of derivative-to-canonical parameter estimates (within limits of first-order approximation, +/-
1s)
(Henson et al, 2002)(Liao et al, submitted)
• If the fitted response, R(t), is modelled by the canonical + temporal derivative:
• Then canonical and derivative parameter estimates, ß1 and ß2, are such that :
![Page 45: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
FILFIL
BOLD Response Latency (Linear)BOLD Response Latency (Linear)
DelayedResponses
(green/ yellow)
Canonical
ß2 /ß1
Actuallatency, dt,vs. ß2 / ß1
CanonicalDerivative
Basis Functions
Face repetition reduces latency as well as magnitude of fusiform response
ß1 ß1 ß1 ß2ß2ß2
ParameterEstimates
![Page 46: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
FILFIL
A. Decreased
B. Advanced
C. Shortened (same integrated)
D. Shortened (same maximum)
A. Smaller Peak
B. Earlier Onset
C. Earlier Peak
D. Smaller Peakand earlier Peak
Neural Response Latency?Neural Response Latency?Neural Response Latency?Neural Response Latency?
Neural BOLD
![Page 47: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
FILFIL
BOLDBOLD Response Latency (Iterative) Response Latency (Iterative)BOLDBOLD Response Latency (Iterative) Response Latency (Iterative)
• Numerical fitting of explicitly Numerical fitting of explicitly parameterised canonical HRF parameterised canonical HRF (Henson et al, 2001)(Henson et al, 2001)
• Distinguishes between Distinguishes between OnsetOnset and and PeakPeak latency… latency…
……unlike temporal derivative…unlike temporal derivative…
… …and which may be important for and which may be important for interpreting neural changes interpreting neural changes (see previous slide)(see previous slide)
• Distribution of parameters Distribution of parameters tested nonparametrically tested nonparametrically (Wilcoxon’s T over subjects)(Wilcoxon’s T over subjects)
• Numerical fitting of explicitly Numerical fitting of explicitly parameterised canonical HRF parameterised canonical HRF (Henson et al, 2001)(Henson et al, 2001)
• Distinguishes between Distinguishes between OnsetOnset and and PeakPeak latency… latency…
……unlike temporal derivative…unlike temporal derivative…
… …and which may be important for and which may be important for interpreting neural changes interpreting neural changes (see previous slide)(see previous slide)
• Distribution of parameters Distribution of parameters tested nonparametrically tested nonparametrically (Wilcoxon’s T over subjects)(Wilcoxon’s T over subjects)
Height
Peak Delay
Onset Delay
![Page 48: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
FILFIL
BOLDBOLD Response Latency (Iterative) Response Latency (Iterative)BOLDBOLD Response Latency (Iterative) Response Latency (Iterative)
No difference in Onset Delay, wT(11)=35
240ms Peak DelaywT(11)=14, p<.05
0.34% Height Change wT(11)=5, p<.001
Most parsimonious account is that repetition reduces duration of neural activity…
D. Shortened (same maximum)
Neural
D. Smaller Peakand earlier Peak
BOLD
![Page 49: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
FILFIL
• Four-parameter HRF, nonparametric Random Effects (SNPM99)
• Advantages of iterative vs linear:1. Height “independent” of shape
Canonical “height” confounded by latency (e.g, different shapes across subjects); no slice-timing error
2. Distinction of onset/peak latency Allowing better neural inferences?
• Disadvantages of iterative:
1. Unreasonable fits (onset/peak tension) Priors on parameter distributions? (Bayesian estimation)
2. Local minima, failure of convergence?
3. CPU time (~3 days for above)
Height
Peak Delay
Onset Delay
Dispersion
BOLDBOLD Response Latency (Iterative) Response Latency (Iterative)BOLDBOLD Response Latency (Iterative) Response Latency (Iterative)
Different fitsacross subjects
Heightp<.05 (cor)
1-2SNPM
FIR used to deconvolve data,before nonlinear fitting over PST
![Page 50: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
FILFIL
OverviewOverviewOverviewOverview
1. Advantages of efMRI1. Advantages of efMRI
2. BOLD impulse response2. BOLD impulse response
3. General Linear Model3. General Linear Model
4. Temporal Basis Functions4. Temporal Basis Functions
5. Timing Issues5. Timing Issues
6. Design Optimisation6. Design Optimisation
7. Nonlinear Models7. Nonlinear Models
8. Example Applications8. Example Applications
1. Advantages of efMRI1. Advantages of efMRI
2. BOLD impulse response2. BOLD impulse response
3. General Linear Model3. General Linear Model
4. Temporal Basis Functions4. Temporal Basis Functions
5. Timing Issues5. Timing Issues
6. Design Optimisation6. Design Optimisation
7. Nonlinear Models7. Nonlinear Models
8. Example Applications8. Example Applications
![Page 51: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
FILFIL
Design EfficiencyDesign EfficiencyDesign EfficiencyDesign Efficiency
• Maximise Maximise detectabledetectable signal signal (assume noise independent)(assume noise independent)
• Minimise variability of parameter Minimise variability of parameter estimates (efficient estimation) estimates (efficient estimation)
• Efficiency of estimation Efficiency of estimation covariance of (contrast of) covariance of (contrast of) covariates (Friston et al. 1999)covariates (Friston et al. 1999)
trace trace { { ccT T ((XXTTXX))-1 -1 cc } }-1-1
• = maximise bandpassed energy = maximise bandpassed energy (Josephs & Henson, 1999)(Josephs & Henson, 1999)
• Maximise Maximise detectabledetectable signal signal (assume noise independent)(assume noise independent)
• Minimise variability of parameter Minimise variability of parameter estimates (efficient estimation) estimates (efficient estimation)
• Efficiency of estimation Efficiency of estimation covariance of (contrast of) covariance of (contrast of) covariates (Friston et al. 1999)covariates (Friston et al. 1999)
trace trace { { ccT T ((XXTTXX))-1 -1 cc } }-1-1
• = maximise bandpassed energy = maximise bandpassed energy (Josephs & Henson, 1999)(Josephs & Henson, 1999)
![Page 52: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
FILFIL
Design EfficiencyDesign EfficiencyDesign EfficiencyDesign Efficiency
• Maximise Maximise detectabledetectable signal signal (assume noise independent)(assume noise independent)
• Minimise variability of parameter Minimise variability of parameter estimates (efficient estimation) estimates (efficient estimation)
• Efficiency of estimation Efficiency of estimation covariance of (contrast of) covariance of (contrast of) covariates (Friston et al. 1999)covariates (Friston et al. 1999)
trace trace { { ccT T ((XXTTXX))-1 -1 cc } }-1-1
• = maximise bandpassed energy = maximise bandpassed energy (Josephs & Henson, 1999)(Josephs & Henson, 1999)
• Maximise Maximise detectabledetectable signal signal (assume noise independent)(assume noise independent)
• Minimise variability of parameter Minimise variability of parameter estimates (efficient estimation) estimates (efficient estimation)
• Efficiency of estimation Efficiency of estimation covariance of (contrast of) covariance of (contrast of) covariates (Friston et al. 1999)covariates (Friston et al. 1999)
trace trace { { ccT T ((XXTTXX))-1 -1 cc } }-1-1
• = maximise bandpassed energy = maximise bandpassed energy (Josephs & Henson, 1999)(Josephs & Henson, 1999)
Events (A-B)
![Page 53: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
FILFIL
Design EfficiencyDesign EfficiencyDesign EfficiencyDesign Efficiency
• Maximise Maximise detectabledetectable signal signal (assume noise independent)(assume noise independent)
• Minimise variability of parameter Minimise variability of parameter estimates (efficient estimation) estimates (efficient estimation)
• Efficiency of estimation Efficiency of estimation covariance of (contrast of) covariance of (contrast of) covariates (Friston et al. 1999)covariates (Friston et al. 1999)
trace trace { { ccT T ((XXTTXX))-1 -1 cc } }-1-1
• = maximise bandpassed energy = maximise bandpassed energy (Josephs & Henson, 1999)(Josephs & Henson, 1999)
• Maximise Maximise detectabledetectable signal signal (assume noise independent)(assume noise independent)
• Minimise variability of parameter Minimise variability of parameter estimates (efficient estimation) estimates (efficient estimation)
• Efficiency of estimation Efficiency of estimation covariance of (contrast of) covariance of (contrast of) covariates (Friston et al. 1999)covariates (Friston et al. 1999)
trace trace { { ccT T ((XXTTXX))-1 -1 cc } }-1-1
• = maximise bandpassed energy = maximise bandpassed energy (Josephs & Henson, 1999)(Josephs & Henson, 1999)
Convolved with HRF
![Page 54: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
FILFIL
Design EfficiencyDesign EfficiencyDesign EfficiencyDesign Efficiency
• Maximise Maximise detectabledetectable signal signal (assume noise independent)(assume noise independent)
• Minimise variability of parameter Minimise variability of parameter estimates (efficient estimation) estimates (efficient estimation)
• Efficiency of estimation Efficiency of estimation covariance of (contrast of) covariance of (contrast of) covariates (Friston et al. 1999)covariates (Friston et al. 1999)
trace trace { { ccT T ((XXTTXX))-1 -1 cc } }-1-1
• = maximise bandpassed energy = maximise bandpassed energy (Josephs & Henson, 1999)(Josephs & Henson, 1999)
• Maximise Maximise detectabledetectable signal signal (assume noise independent)(assume noise independent)
• Minimise variability of parameter Minimise variability of parameter estimates (efficient estimation) estimates (efficient estimation)
• Efficiency of estimation Efficiency of estimation covariance of (contrast of) covariance of (contrast of) covariates (Friston et al. 1999)covariates (Friston et al. 1999)
trace trace { { ccT T ((XXTTXX))-1 -1 cc } }-1-1
• = maximise bandpassed energy = maximise bandpassed energy (Josephs & Henson, 1999)(Josephs & Henson, 1999)
Sampled every TR
![Page 55: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
FILFIL
Design EfficiencyDesign EfficiencyDesign EfficiencyDesign Efficiency
• Maximise Maximise detectabledetectable signal signal (assume noise independent)(assume noise independent)
• Minimise variability of parameter Minimise variability of parameter estimates (efficient estimation) estimates (efficient estimation)
• Efficiency of estimation Efficiency of estimation covariance of (contrast of) covariance of (contrast of) covariates (Friston et al. 1999)covariates (Friston et al. 1999)
trace trace { { ccT T ((XXTTXX))-1 -1 cc } }-1-1
• = maximise bandpassed energy = maximise bandpassed energy (Josephs & Henson, 1999)(Josephs & Henson, 1999)
• Maximise Maximise detectabledetectable signal signal (assume noise independent)(assume noise independent)
• Minimise variability of parameter Minimise variability of parameter estimates (efficient estimation) estimates (efficient estimation)
• Efficiency of estimation Efficiency of estimation covariance of (contrast of) covariance of (contrast of) covariates (Friston et al. 1999)covariates (Friston et al. 1999)
trace trace { { ccT T ((XXTTXX))-1 -1 cc } }-1-1
• = maximise bandpassed energy = maximise bandpassed energy (Josephs & Henson, 1999)(Josephs & Henson, 1999)
Smoothed (lowpass filter)
![Page 56: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
FILFIL
Design EfficiencyDesign EfficiencyDesign EfficiencyDesign Efficiency
• Maximise Maximise detectabledetectable signal signal (assume noise independent)(assume noise independent)
• Minimise variability of parameter Minimise variability of parameter estimates (efficient estimation) estimates (efficient estimation)
• Efficiency of estimation Efficiency of estimation covariance of (contrast of) covariance of (contrast of) covariates (Friston et al. 1999)covariates (Friston et al. 1999)
trace trace { { ccT T ((XXTTXX))-1 -1 cc } }-1-1
• = maximise bandpassed energy = maximise bandpassed energy (Josephs & Henson, 1999)(Josephs & Henson, 1999)
• Maximise Maximise detectabledetectable signal signal (assume noise independent)(assume noise independent)
• Minimise variability of parameter Minimise variability of parameter estimates (efficient estimation) estimates (efficient estimation)
• Efficiency of estimation Efficiency of estimation covariance of (contrast of) covariance of (contrast of) covariates (Friston et al. 1999)covariates (Friston et al. 1999)
trace trace { { ccT T ((XXTTXX))-1 -1 cc } }-1-1
• = maximise bandpassed energy = maximise bandpassed energy (Josephs & Henson, 1999)(Josephs & Henson, 1999)
Highpass filtered
![Page 57: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
FILFIL
Design EfficiencyDesign EfficiencyDesign EfficiencyDesign Efficiency
• Maximise Maximise detectabledetectable signal signal (assume noise independent)(assume noise independent)
• Minimise variability of parameter Minimise variability of parameter estimates (efficient estimation) estimates (efficient estimation)
• Efficiency of estimation Efficiency of estimation covariance of (contrast of) covariance of (contrast of) covariates (Friston et al. 1999)covariates (Friston et al. 1999)
trace trace { { ccT T ((XXTTXX))-1 -1 cc } }-1-1
• = maximise bandpassed energy = maximise bandpassed energy (Josephs & Henson, 1999)(Josephs & Henson, 1999)
• Maximise Maximise detectabledetectable signal signal (assume noise independent)(assume noise independent)
• Minimise variability of parameter Minimise variability of parameter estimates (efficient estimation) estimates (efficient estimation)
• Efficiency of estimation Efficiency of estimation covariance of (contrast of) covariance of (contrast of) covariates (Friston et al. 1999)covariates (Friston et al. 1999)
trace trace { { ccT T ((XXTTXX))-1 -1 cc } }-1-1
• = maximise bandpassed energy = maximise bandpassed energy (Josephs & Henson, 1999)(Josephs & Henson, 1999)
![Page 58: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
FILFIL
Efficiency - Single Event-typeEfficiency - Single Event-typeEfficiency - Single Event-typeEfficiency - Single Event-type
• Design parametrised by:Design parametrised by:
SOASOAminmin Minimum SOA Minimum SOA
• Design parametrised by:Design parametrised by:
SOASOAminmin Minimum SOA Minimum SOA
![Page 59: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
FILFIL
Efficiency - Single Event-typeEfficiency - Single Event-typeEfficiency - Single Event-typeEfficiency - Single Event-type
• Design parametrised by:Design parametrised by:
SOASOAminmin Minimum SOA Minimum SOA
p(t)p(t) Probability of event Probability of event at each at each
SOASOAminmin
• Design parametrised by:Design parametrised by:
SOASOAminmin Minimum SOA Minimum SOA
p(t)p(t) Probability of event Probability of event at each at each
SOASOAminmin
![Page 60: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
FILFIL
Efficiency - Single Event-typeEfficiency - Single Event-typeEfficiency - Single Event-typeEfficiency - Single Event-type
• Design parametrised by:Design parametrised by:
SOASOAminmin Minimum SOA Minimum SOA
p(t)p(t) Probability of event Probability of event at each at each
SOASOAminmin
• DeterministicDeterministicp(t)=1 iff t=nTp(t)=1 iff t=nT
• Design parametrised by:Design parametrised by:
SOASOAminmin Minimum SOA Minimum SOA
p(t)p(t) Probability of event Probability of event at each at each
SOASOAminmin
• DeterministicDeterministicp(t)=1 iff t=nTp(t)=1 iff t=nT
![Page 61: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
FILFIL
Efficiency - Single Event-typeEfficiency - Single Event-typeEfficiency - Single Event-typeEfficiency - Single Event-type
• Design parametrised by:Design parametrised by:
SOASOAminmin Minimum SOA Minimum SOA
p(t)p(t) Probability of event Probability of event at each at each
SOASOAminmin
• DeterministicDeterministicp(t)=1 iff t=nTp(t)=1 iff t=nT
• Stationary stochastic Stationary stochastic p(t)=constant<1p(t)=constant<1
• Design parametrised by:Design parametrised by:
SOASOAminmin Minimum SOA Minimum SOA
p(t)p(t) Probability of event Probability of event at each at each
SOASOAminmin
• DeterministicDeterministicp(t)=1 iff t=nTp(t)=1 iff t=nT
• Stationary stochastic Stationary stochastic p(t)=constant<1p(t)=constant<1
![Page 62: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
FILFIL
Efficiency - Single Event-typeEfficiency - Single Event-typeEfficiency - Single Event-typeEfficiency - Single Event-type
• Design parametrised by:Design parametrised by:
SOASOAminmin Minimum SOA Minimum SOA
p(t)p(t) Probability of event Probability of event
at each at each SOASOAminmin
• DeterministicDeterministicp(t)=1 iff t=nTp(t)=1 iff t=nT
• Stationary stochastic Stationary stochastic p(t)=constantp(t)=constant
• Dynamic stochasticDynamic stochasticp(t) varies (eg p(t) varies (eg
blocked)blocked)
• Design parametrised by:Design parametrised by:
SOASOAminmin Minimum SOA Minimum SOA
p(t)p(t) Probability of event Probability of event
at each at each SOASOAminmin
• DeterministicDeterministicp(t)=1 iff t=nTp(t)=1 iff t=nT
• Stationary stochastic Stationary stochastic p(t)=constantp(t)=constant
• Dynamic stochasticDynamic stochasticp(t) varies (eg p(t) varies (eg
blocked)blocked) Blocked designs most efficient! (with small SOAmin)
![Page 63: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/63.jpg)
FILFIL
4s smoothing; 1/60s highpass filtering4s smoothing; 1/60s highpass filtering4s smoothing; 1/60s highpass filtering4s smoothing; 1/60s highpass filtering
Efficiency - Multiple Event-typesEfficiency - Multiple Event-typesEfficiency - Multiple Event-typesEfficiency - Multiple Event-types
• Design parametrised by:Design parametrised by:SOASOAminmin Minimum SOA Minimum SOA
ppii((hh)) Probability of event-type Probability of event-type i i
given history given history hh of last of last mm events events
• With With nn event-types event-types ppii((hh)) is a is a
nnmm n n Transition MatrixTransition Matrix
• Example: Randomised ABExample: Randomised AB
AA BBAA 0.50.5
0.5 0.5
BB 0.50.5 0.50.5
=> => ABBBABAABABAAA...ABBBABAABABAAA...
• Design parametrised by:Design parametrised by:SOASOAminmin Minimum SOA Minimum SOA
ppii((hh)) Probability of event-type Probability of event-type i i
given history given history hh of last of last mm events events
• With With nn event-types event-types ppii((hh)) is a is a
nnmm n n Transition MatrixTransition Matrix
• Example: Randomised ABExample: Randomised AB
AA BBAA 0.50.5
0.5 0.5
BB 0.50.5 0.50.5
=> => ABBBABAABABAAA...ABBBABAABABAAA...
Differential Effect (A-B)
Common Effect (A+B)
![Page 64: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/64.jpg)
FILFIL
4s smoothing; 1/60s highpass filtering4s smoothing; 1/60s highpass filtering4s smoothing; 1/60s highpass filtering4s smoothing; 1/60s highpass filtering
Efficiency - Multiple Event-typesEfficiency - Multiple Event-typesEfficiency - Multiple Event-typesEfficiency - Multiple Event-types
• Example: Alternating ABExample: Alternating AB AA BB
AA 001 1 BB 11 00
=> => ABABABABABAB...ABABABABABAB...
• Example: Alternating ABExample: Alternating AB AA BB
AA 001 1 BB 11 00
=> => ABABABABABAB...ABABABABABAB...Alternating (A-B)
Permuted (A-B)
• Example: Permuted ABExample: Permuted AB
AA BB
AAAA 0 0 11
ABAB 0.50.5 0.5 0.5
BABA 0.50.5 0.50.5
BBBB 1 1 00
=> => ABBAABABABBA...ABBAABABABBA...
![Page 65: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/65.jpg)
FILFIL
4s smoothing; 1/60s highpass filtering4s smoothing; 1/60s highpass filtering4s smoothing; 1/60s highpass filtering4s smoothing; 1/60s highpass filtering
Efficiency - Multiple Event-typesEfficiency - Multiple Event-typesEfficiency - Multiple Event-typesEfficiency - Multiple Event-types
• Example: Null eventsExample: Null events
AA BB
AA 0.330.330.330.33
BB 0.330.33 0.330.33
=> => ABAB-BAA--B---ABB...-BAA--B---ABB...
• Efficient for differential Efficient for differential andand main effects at short SOAmain effects at short SOA
• Equivalent to stochastic SOA Equivalent to stochastic SOA (Null Event like third (Null Event like third unmodelled event-type) unmodelled event-type)
• Selective averaging of data Selective averaging of data (Dale & Buckner 1997)(Dale & Buckner 1997)
• Example: Null eventsExample: Null events
AA BB
AA 0.330.330.330.33
BB 0.330.33 0.330.33
=> => ABAB-BAA--B---ABB...-BAA--B---ABB...
• Efficient for differential Efficient for differential andand main effects at short SOAmain effects at short SOA
• Equivalent to stochastic SOA Equivalent to stochastic SOA (Null Event like third (Null Event like third unmodelled event-type) unmodelled event-type)
• Selective averaging of data Selective averaging of data (Dale & Buckner 1997)(Dale & Buckner 1997)
Null Events (A+B)
Null Events (A-B)
![Page 66: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/66.jpg)
FILFIL
Efficiency - ConclusionsEfficiency - ConclusionsEfficiency - ConclusionsEfficiency - Conclusions
• Optimal design for one contrast may not be optimal for another Optimal design for one contrast may not be optimal for another
• Blocked designs generally most efficient with short SOAs Blocked designs generally most efficient with short SOAs (but earlier restrictions and problems of interpretation…)(but earlier restrictions and problems of interpretation…)
• With randomised designs, optimal SOA for differential effect With randomised designs, optimal SOA for differential effect (A-B) is minimal SOA (assuming no saturation), whereas (A-B) is minimal SOA (assuming no saturation), whereas optimal SOA for main effect (A+B) is 16-20soptimal SOA for main effect (A+B) is 16-20s
• Inclusion of null events improves efficiency for main effect at Inclusion of null events improves efficiency for main effect at short SOAs (at cost of efficiency for differential effects)short SOAs (at cost of efficiency for differential effects)
• If order constrained, intermediate SOAs (5-20s) can be optimal; If order constrained, intermediate SOAs (5-20s) can be optimal; If SOA constrained, pseudorandomised designs can be If SOA constrained, pseudorandomised designs can be optimal (but may introduce context-sensitivity)optimal (but may introduce context-sensitivity)
• Optimal design for one contrast may not be optimal for another Optimal design for one contrast may not be optimal for another
• Blocked designs generally most efficient with short SOAs Blocked designs generally most efficient with short SOAs (but earlier restrictions and problems of interpretation…)(but earlier restrictions and problems of interpretation…)
• With randomised designs, optimal SOA for differential effect With randomised designs, optimal SOA for differential effect (A-B) is minimal SOA (assuming no saturation), whereas (A-B) is minimal SOA (assuming no saturation), whereas optimal SOA for main effect (A+B) is 16-20soptimal SOA for main effect (A+B) is 16-20s
• Inclusion of null events improves efficiency for main effect at Inclusion of null events improves efficiency for main effect at short SOAs (at cost of efficiency for differential effects)short SOAs (at cost of efficiency for differential effects)
• If order constrained, intermediate SOAs (5-20s) can be optimal; If order constrained, intermediate SOAs (5-20s) can be optimal; If SOA constrained, pseudorandomised designs can be If SOA constrained, pseudorandomised designs can be optimal (but may introduce context-sensitivity)optimal (but may introduce context-sensitivity)
![Page 67: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/67.jpg)
FILFILSOA=4s SOA=16s
A+
BA
lt A
-BR
an A
-B
Time Freq Time Freq
![Page 68: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/68.jpg)
FILFIL
OverviewOverviewOverviewOverview
1. Advantages of efMRI1. Advantages of efMRI
2. BOLD impulse response2. BOLD impulse response
3. General Linear Model3. General Linear Model
4. Temporal Basis Functions4. Temporal Basis Functions
5. Timing Issues5. Timing Issues
6. Design Optimisation6. Design Optimisation
7. Nonlinear Models7. Nonlinear Models
8. Example Applications8. Example Applications
1. Advantages of efMRI1. Advantages of efMRI
2. BOLD impulse response2. BOLD impulse response
3. General Linear Model3. General Linear Model
4. Temporal Basis Functions4. Temporal Basis Functions
5. Timing Issues5. Timing Issues
6. Design Optimisation6. Design Optimisation
7. Nonlinear Models7. Nonlinear Models
8. Example Applications8. Example Applications
![Page 69: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/69.jpg)
FILFIL
Volterra series Volterra series - a general nonlinear input-output model- a general nonlinear input-output model
y(t) = y(t) = 11[u(t)] + [u(t)] + 22[u(t)] + .... + [u(t)] + .... + nn[u(t)] + ....[u(t)] + ....
nn[u(t)] = [u(t)] = .... .... h hnn(t(t11,..., t,..., tnn)u(t - t)u(t - t11) .... u(t - t) .... u(t - tnn)dt)dt1 1 .... dt.... dtnn
Volterra series Volterra series - a general nonlinear input-output model- a general nonlinear input-output model
y(t) = y(t) = 11[u(t)] + [u(t)] + 22[u(t)] + .... + [u(t)] + .... + nn[u(t)] + ....[u(t)] + ....
nn[u(t)] = [u(t)] = .... .... h hnn(t(t11,..., t,..., tnn)u(t - t)u(t - t11) .... u(t - t) .... u(t - tnn)dt)dt1 1 .... dt.... dtnn
Nonlinear ModelNonlinear ModelNonlinear ModelNonlinear Model
[u(t)][u(t)] response y(t)response y(t)input u(t)input u(t)
Stimulus functionStimulus function
kernels (h)kernels (h) estimateestimate
![Page 70: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/70.jpg)
FILFIL
Nonlinear ModelNonlinear ModelNonlinear ModelNonlinear Model
Friston et al (1997)Friston et al (1997)
Friston et al (1997)Friston et al (1997)
SPM{F} testing HSPM{F} testing H00: kernel coefficients, h = 0: kernel coefficients, h = 0
kernel coefficients - hkernel coefficients - h
SPM{F}SPM{F}p < 0.001p < 0.001
![Page 71: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/71.jpg)
FILFIL
Nonlinear ModelNonlinear ModelNonlinear ModelNonlinear Model
Friston et al (1997)Friston et al (1997)
Friston et al (1997)Friston et al (1997)
SPM{F} testing HSPM{F} testing H00: kernel coefficients, h = 0: kernel coefficients, h = 0
Significant nonlinearities at SOAs 0-10s:Significant nonlinearities at SOAs 0-10s: (e.g., underadditivity from 0-5s)(e.g., underadditivity from 0-5s)
kernel coefficients - hkernel coefficients - h
SPM{F}SPM{F}p < 0.001p < 0.001
![Page 72: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/72.jpg)
FILFIL
Nonlinear EffectsNonlinear EffectsNonlinear EffectsNonlinear Effects
Underadditivity at short SOAsUnderadditivity at short SOAsLinearPrediction
VolterraPrediction
![Page 73: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/73.jpg)
FILFIL
Nonlinear EffectsNonlinear EffectsNonlinear EffectsNonlinear Effects
Underadditivity at short SOAsUnderadditivity at short SOAsLinearPrediction
VolterraPrediction
![Page 74: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/74.jpg)
FILFIL
Nonlinear EffectsNonlinear EffectsNonlinear EffectsNonlinear Effects
Underadditivity at short SOAsUnderadditivity at short SOAsLinearPrediction
VolterraPrediction
Implicationsfor Efficiency
![Page 75: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/75.jpg)
FILFIL
OverviewOverviewOverviewOverview
1. Advantages of efMRI1. Advantages of efMRI
2. BOLD impulse response2. BOLD impulse response
3. General Linear Model3. General Linear Model
4. Temporal Basis Functions4. Temporal Basis Functions
5. Timing Issues5. Timing Issues
6. Design Optimisation6. Design Optimisation
7. Nonlinear Models7. Nonlinear Models
8. Example Applications8. Example Applications
1. Advantages of efMRI1. Advantages of efMRI
2. BOLD impulse response2. BOLD impulse response
3. General Linear Model3. General Linear Model
4. Temporal Basis Functions4. Temporal Basis Functions
5. Timing Issues5. Timing Issues
6. Design Optimisation6. Design Optimisation
7. Nonlinear Models7. Nonlinear Models
8. Example Applications8. Example Applications
![Page 76: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/76.jpg)
FILFIL
Example 1: Intermixed Trials (Henson et al 2000)Example 1: Intermixed Trials (Henson et al 2000)Example 1: Intermixed Trials (Henson et al 2000)Example 1: Intermixed Trials (Henson et al 2000)
• Short SOA, fully randomised, Short SOA, fully randomised, with 1/3 null eventswith 1/3 null events
• Faces presented for 0.5s against Faces presented for 0.5s against chequerboard baseline, chequerboard baseline, SOA=(2 ± 0.5)s, TR=1.4sSOA=(2 ± 0.5)s, TR=1.4s
• Factorial event-types:Factorial event-types: 1. 1. Famous/Nonfamous (F/N)Famous/Nonfamous (F/N) 2. 2. 1st/2nd Presentation (1/2)1st/2nd Presentation (1/2)
• Short SOA, fully randomised, Short SOA, fully randomised, with 1/3 null eventswith 1/3 null events
• Faces presented for 0.5s against Faces presented for 0.5s against chequerboard baseline, chequerboard baseline, SOA=(2 ± 0.5)s, TR=1.4sSOA=(2 ± 0.5)s, TR=1.4s
• Factorial event-types:Factorial event-types: 1. 1. Famous/Nonfamous (F/N)Famous/Nonfamous (F/N) 2. 2. 1st/2nd Presentation (1/2)1st/2nd Presentation (1/2)
![Page 77: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/77.jpg)
FILFIL
Lag=3Lag=3
Famous Nonfamous (Target)
. . .
![Page 78: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/78.jpg)
FILFIL
Example 1: Intermixed Trials (Henson et al 2000)Example 1: Intermixed Trials (Henson et al 2000)Example 1: Intermixed Trials (Henson et al 2000)Example 1: Intermixed Trials (Henson et al 2000)
• Short SOA, fully randomised, Short SOA, fully randomised, with 1/3 null eventswith 1/3 null events
• Faces presented for 0.5s against Faces presented for 0.5s against chequerboard baseline, chequerboard baseline, SOA=(2 ± 0.5)s, TR=1.4sSOA=(2 ± 0.5)s, TR=1.4s
• Factorial event-types:Factorial event-types: 1. 1. Famous/Nonfamous (F/N)Famous/Nonfamous (F/N) 2. 2. 1st/2nd Presentation (1/2)1st/2nd Presentation (1/2)
• Interaction (F1-F2)-(N1-N2) Interaction (F1-F2)-(N1-N2) masked by main effect (F+N)masked by main effect (F+N)
• Right fusiform interaction of Right fusiform interaction of repetition priming and familiarityrepetition priming and familiarity
• Short SOA, fully randomised, Short SOA, fully randomised, with 1/3 null eventswith 1/3 null events
• Faces presented for 0.5s against Faces presented for 0.5s against chequerboard baseline, chequerboard baseline, SOA=(2 ± 0.5)s, TR=1.4sSOA=(2 ± 0.5)s, TR=1.4s
• Factorial event-types:Factorial event-types: 1. 1. Famous/Nonfamous (F/N)Famous/Nonfamous (F/N) 2. 2. 1st/2nd Presentation (1/2)1st/2nd Presentation (1/2)
• Interaction (F1-F2)-(N1-N2) Interaction (F1-F2)-(N1-N2) masked by main effect (F+N)masked by main effect (F+N)
• Right fusiform interaction of Right fusiform interaction of repetition priming and familiarityrepetition priming and familiarity
![Page 79: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/79.jpg)
FILFIL
Example 2: Post hoc classification (Henson et al 1999)Example 2: Post hoc classification (Henson et al 1999)Example 2: Post hoc classification (Henson et al 1999)Example 2: Post hoc classification (Henson et al 1999)
• Subjects indicate whether Subjects indicate whether studied (Old) words: studied (Old) words:
i) evoke recollection of i) evoke recollection of prior occurrence (R) prior occurrence (R)
ii) feeling of familiarity ii) feeling of familiarity without recollection (K)without recollection (K)
iii) no memory (N)iii) no memory (N)
• Random Effects analysis Random Effects analysis on canonical parameter on canonical parameter estimate for event-typesestimate for event-types
• Fixed SOA of 8s => sensitive to Fixed SOA of 8s => sensitive to differential but not main effect differential but not main effect (de/activations arbitrary)(de/activations arbitrary)
• Subjects indicate whether Subjects indicate whether studied (Old) words: studied (Old) words:
i) evoke recollection of i) evoke recollection of prior occurrence (R) prior occurrence (R)
ii) feeling of familiarity ii) feeling of familiarity without recollection (K)without recollection (K)
iii) no memory (N)iii) no memory (N)
• Random Effects analysis Random Effects analysis on canonical parameter on canonical parameter estimate for event-typesestimate for event-types
• Fixed SOA of 8s => sensitive to Fixed SOA of 8s => sensitive to differential but not main effect differential but not main effect (de/activations arbitrary)(de/activations arbitrary)
SPM{t} SPM{t} R-K
SPM{t} SPM{t} K-R
![Page 80: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/80.jpg)
FILFIL
Example 3: Subject-defined events (Portas et al 1999)Example 3: Subject-defined events (Portas et al 1999)Example 3: Subject-defined events (Portas et al 1999)Example 3: Subject-defined events (Portas et al 1999)
• Subjects respond when Subjects respond when “pop-out” of 3D percept “pop-out” of 3D percept from 2D stereogramfrom 2D stereogram
• Subjects respond when Subjects respond when “pop-out” of 3D percept “pop-out” of 3D percept from 2D stereogramfrom 2D stereogram
![Page 81: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/81.jpg)
FILFIL
![Page 82: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/82.jpg)
FILFIL
Example 3: Subject-defined events (Portas et al 1999)Example 3: Subject-defined events (Portas et al 1999)Example 3: Subject-defined events (Portas et al 1999)Example 3: Subject-defined events (Portas et al 1999)
• Subjects respond when Subjects respond when “pop-out” of 3D percept “pop-out” of 3D percept from 2D stereogramfrom 2D stereogram
• Popout response also Popout response also produces toneproduces tone
• Control event is response to Control event is response to tone during 3D percepttone during 3D percept
• Subjects respond when Subjects respond when “pop-out” of 3D percept “pop-out” of 3D percept from 2D stereogramfrom 2D stereogram
• Popout response also Popout response also produces toneproduces tone
• Control event is response to Control event is response to tone during 3D percepttone during 3D percept
Temporo-occipital differential activation
Pop-out
Control
![Page 83: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/83.jpg)
FILFIL
Example 4: Oddball Paradigm (Strange et al, 2000)Example 4: Oddball Paradigm (Strange et al, 2000)Example 4: Oddball Paradigm (Strange et al, 2000)Example 4: Oddball Paradigm (Strange et al, 2000)
• 16 same-category words 16 same-category words every 3 secs, plus … every 3 secs, plus …
• … … 1 perceptual, 1 semantic, 1 perceptual, 1 semantic, and 1 emotional oddballand 1 emotional oddball
• 16 same-category words 16 same-category words every 3 secs, plus … every 3 secs, plus …
• … … 1 perceptual, 1 semantic, 1 perceptual, 1 semantic, and 1 emotional oddballand 1 emotional oddball
![Page 84: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/84.jpg)
FILFIL
WHEAT
BARLEY
OATS
HOPS
RYE
…
~3s
CORN
Perceptual Oddball
PLUG
Semantic Oddball
RAPE
Emotional Oddball
![Page 85: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/85.jpg)
FILFIL
Example 4: Oddball Paradigm (Strange et al, 2000)Example 4: Oddball Paradigm (Strange et al, 2000)Example 4: Oddball Paradigm (Strange et al, 2000)Example 4: Oddball Paradigm (Strange et al, 2000)
• 16 same-category words 16 same-category words every 3 secs, plus … every 3 secs, plus …
• … … 1 perceptual, 1 semantic, 1 perceptual, 1 semantic, and 1 emotional oddballand 1 emotional oddball
• 16 same-category words 16 same-category words every 3 secs, plus … every 3 secs, plus …
• … … 1 perceptual, 1 semantic, 1 perceptual, 1 semantic, and 1 emotional oddballand 1 emotional oddball
Right Prefrontal Cortex
Par
amet
er E
stim
ates
Controls
Oddballs
•3 nonoddballs randomly 3 nonoddballs randomly matched as controlsmatched as controls
•Conjunction of oddball vs. Conjunction of oddball vs. control contrast images: control contrast images: generic deviance detectorgeneric deviance detector
![Page 86: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/86.jpg)
FILFIL
• Epochs of attention to: Epochs of attention to: 1) motion, or 2) 1) motion, or 2)
colourcolour
• Events are target stimuli Events are target stimuli differing in motion or colourdiffering in motion or colour
• Randomised, long SOAs to Randomised, long SOAs to decorrelate epoch and event-decorrelate epoch and event-related covariatesrelated covariates
• Interaction between epoch Interaction between epoch (attention) and event (attention) and event (stimulus) in V4 and V5(stimulus) in V4 and V5
• Epochs of attention to: Epochs of attention to: 1) motion, or 2) 1) motion, or 2)
colourcolour
• Events are target stimuli Events are target stimuli differing in motion or colourdiffering in motion or colour
• Randomised, long SOAs to Randomised, long SOAs to decorrelate epoch and event-decorrelate epoch and event-related covariatesrelated covariates
• Interaction between epoch Interaction between epoch (attention) and event (attention) and event (stimulus) in V4 and V5(stimulus) in V4 and V5
Example 5: Epoch/Event Interactions (Chawla et al 1999)
attention to motion
attention to colour
Interaction between attention and stimulus motion change in V5
![Page 87: (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 (Epoch &) Event-related fMRI SPM Course 2002 Christian Buechel Karl Friston Rik Henson Oliver Josephs Wellcome.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062422/56649f255503460f94c3c392/html5/thumbnails/87.jpg)
FILFIL