trial datasets

Dear all, when new users arrive at YNiC, some would like to practice using data analysis scripts before they record their own data. As such, we would like to document some of the paradigms that have already been recorded. We would not want to know in detail the specifics of your project, just the basics to allow for a sensible analysis. For example, the following may be enough: "In the data for project Pxxxx, responses were recorded in continuous mode to visual stimuli. There were four conditions which had the respective trigger codes 4150, 4152, 4154 and 4156. Triggers 4150 and 4152 had a group code of 2, and triggers 4154 and 4156 had group codes of 4. Participants made responses to some trials, which have a response code of 32. Suggested epochs for data analysis are 150ms pre-trigger and 900ms post-trigger. Data was recorded for participants Rxxxx, Rxxxy ... Rxyyx." With this information new Users could run a trial analysis without any necessary knowledge of your hypothesis, but enough information about your stimulus parameters to run practice analyses on your data. If you we be happy to provide this information about your data we would be most grateful. We would then put this in some shared space for all Users to access. If however you would like to give a more detailed account of your experiment, then this could contribute towards the initiative that Tony prompted in the email copied below. With thanks, Michael -- Dr Michael Simpson Science Liaison Officer York Neuroimaging Centre Innovation Way York YO10 5DG Tel: 01904 567614 Web: http://www.ynic.york.ac.uk *_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_ Copy of mail from Tony Morland date 25th October. Dear All, Since the first beamforming course a number of people have been asking questions like; What can beamforming really do? If I do this and get that, what does it mean? Is beamoforming precise enough to distinguish between activity in brain area A and B? If I do X will it result in data that can be analysed with beamforming? Can virtual electrode traces allow latencies to be measured in brain areas A and B and do they make sense? If I filter in this frequency band rather than that band why do I get this result? The answers to many of these questions are empirical and although Will et al have been striving to test, retest and validate the methods, there will always be questions that can't quite be answered unless more data is acquired/analysed. It appears necessary therefore to start bench marking the beamforming methods that are available. The aim is to undertake a series of empirical studies that will reflect, in broad terms, the types of paradigm used by investigators. My personal preference would be for a set of basic experiments to be devised for which results are predictable and could be compared with previous research. I accept that this is a conservative aim, but the data sets acquired are likely to be the most informative about the capabilities of the beamforming analysis tools. The data acquired would also offer us an excellent resource for training any researchers wishing to undertake investigations using beamforming. Before devising new experiments it would be worth reviewing previous studies undertaken at YNiC to see whether they can be used to bench mark the beamforming methods. To this end, I would be grateful if you could provide me with details of data that you think are suitable for bench marking beamforming. The most helpful form for the information would be the following: Project Number and Title Number of participants and their registered numbers Paradigm used Relevant research (the study replicated) Predicted outcome What you want to test with beamforming Ethical concerns/limitations concerning use of the data I will review the forthcoming information and after that will arrange a brainstorming session on how best to move things forward. Thanks Tony