You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Given that fsLR only describes the surface space, and the volume space of current CIFTI outputs (i.e., MNI152NLin6Asym) is only implied by convention, I think we should add volspace-MNI152NLin6Asym to fsLR-space CIFTI outputs. The volspace entity was proposed in BEP011 Structural Derivatives.
I also was thinking about the density and resolution entities. Does it make sense to use 91k as shorthand for den-32k + res-2, or should we change that?
Do you have any interest in helping implement the feature?
Yes
Additional information / screenshots
This stems from #3330.
This will require changes to sMRIPrep, Nibabies, and ASLPrep at minimum.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I've closed that BIDS PR in favor of using +s (@effigies' idea), so I'm going to close this issue. I can open new issues if relevant changes need to be made to fMRIPrep.
What would you like to see added in fMRIPrep?
Given that fsLR only describes the surface space, and the volume space of current CIFTI outputs (i.e., MNI152NLin6Asym) is only implied by convention, I think we should add
volspace-MNI152NLin6Asym
to fsLR-space CIFTI outputs. The volspace entity was proposed in BEP011 Structural Derivatives.I also was thinking about the density and resolution entities. Does it make sense to use 91k as shorthand for den-32k + res-2, or should we change that?
Do you have any interest in helping implement the feature?
Yes
Additional information / screenshots
This stems from #3330.
This will require changes to sMRIPrep, Nibabies, and ASLPrep at minimum.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: