I used the DFNC toolbox on my GIFT-calculated ICs, and followed all of the steps done in past research (e.g., as in Allen et al 2014). However, clustering for both 4 and 6 states, many subjects are only spending time in 2-3 of the states. Computing a histogram on 'fraction of time in state' values, 0 represents around half of the total number of values across subjects.
Is this something that is common? What might lead this to be the case? I'm not sure if these results suggest that something is awry - it seems to be out of sorts with previously published results. The dataset itself is certain to be reliable and has undergone appropriate pre-processing, with n=221.
Thank you,
Manesh
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Hi there,
I used the DFNC toolbox on my GIFT-calculated ICs, and followed all of the steps done in past research (e.g., as in Allen et al 2014). However, clustering for both 4 and 6 states, many subjects are only spending time in 2-3 of the states. Computing a histogram on 'fraction of time in state' values, 0 represents around half of the total number of values across subjects.
Is this something that is common? What might lead this to be the case? I'm not sure if these results suggest that something is awry - it seems to be out of sorts with previously published results. The dataset itself is certain to be reliable and has undergone appropriate pre-processing, with n=221.
Thank you,
Manesh