Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

BIDS convention naming of topup+eddy corrected data #81

Open
tashrifbillah opened this issue May 7, 2021 · 8 comments
Open

BIDS convention naming of topup+eddy corrected data #81

tashrifbillah opened this issue May 7, 2021 · 8 comments

Comments

@tashrifbillah
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi all, I would like to know your opinion about BIDS convention naming of topup+eddy corrected data of the following two:

sub-2001_ses-1_acq-AP_dir-99_desc-XcUn_dwi.nii.gz
sub-2001_ses-1_acq-PA_dir-99_desc-XcUn_dwi.nii.gz

  • when one set of volume is corrected, we name the output:

    sub-2001_ses-1_dir-99_desc-XcUnEdEp_dwi.nii.gz1,2

    (_dir-99 is preserved)

  • when both volumes are corrected, we name the output:

    sub-2001_ses-1_dir-198_desc-XcUnEdEp_dwi.nii.gz1,2

    (_dir-99 is doubled hence _dir-198)

    The other candidate could be to drop _dir-* completely because the reader already knows about topup+eddy correction step from _desc-XcUnEdEp.


1 The rationale for dropping _acq-* is that acquisition direction-specific distortion has been corrected by topup.
2 Addition of EdEp string after _desc-XcUn signals that topup+eddy correction has been done.

@effigies @mgxd @sbouix @yrathi

@mgxd
Copy link

mgxd commented May 7, 2021

I haven't worked with DWI in BIDS much yet, but at first glance I think summing dir entities is grounds for confusion and should be avoided.

I think what would be most beneficial here is a sense of run. Looking at the diffusion specification, it could look like:

sub-2001_ses-1_acq-99_dir-AP_run-1_desc-XcUn_dwi.nii.gz
sub-2001_ses-1_acq-99_dir-PA_run-2_desc-XcUn_dwi.nii.gz

then, if you correct 1 volume, you can keep the run entity, and when you are merging volumes, drop it altogether. Besides naming, JSON sidecars would be most beneficial.

@tashrifbillah
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I think summing dir entities is grounds for confusion

Can you explain why?

@mgxd
Copy link

mgxd commented May 7, 2021

It is unclear whether the file is a processed derivative of sub-2001_ses-1_dir-198_dwi.nii.gz or 2 (or more) separate files.

Also, it seems you have the acq/dir entities switched:

The OPTIONAL acq- key/value pair corresponds to a custom label the user may use to distinguish different sets of parameters.

The OPTIONAL dir- key/value pair corresponds to a custom label the user may use to distinguish different sets of phase-encoding directions.

@effigies
Copy link

effigies commented May 7, 2021

Edit: Removed bit because I didn't realize @mgxd had posted the original spec link, and also answered your question already.

Just as a note, the next relevant section is Derivatives - File naming conventions.

Each Derivatives filename MUST be of the form: <source_entities>[_keyword-<value>]_<suffix>.<ext> (where <value> could either be an <index> or a <label> depending on the keyword; see Definitions).

I'm trying to find the text1, but there should be a rule that says you can drop source entities when they no longer apply to a file.


Re the original filenames, what does XcUn mean? Are these already derivatives?

sub-2001_ses-1_acq-AP_dir-99_desc-XcUn_dwi.nii.gz
sub-2001_ses-1_acq-PA_dir-99_desc-XcUn_dwi.nii.gz


1 Here is the text:

One exception to this rule is filename entities that are no longer relevant.

@tashrifbillah
Copy link
Collaborator Author

tashrifbillah commented May 7, 2021

Re the original filenames, what does XcUn mean?

Xc: axis alignment
Un: Gibbs unringing

Are these already derivatives?

Yes. After each process, we have appended a string to _desc-* to indicate the process that was done.

The above is consistent with the following of the linked source:

When necessary to distinguish two files that do not otherwise have a distinguishing entity, the _desc- keyword-value SHOULD be used.

@effigies
Copy link

effigies commented May 7, 2021

Got it. I think I agree with @mgxd's assessment, overall. Use dir- for PE direction. I'm not sure if acq- is buying you much unless you have different acq-s. Editing acq- downstream breaks the visual connection with the source images.

As I'm also not very familiar with diffusion techniques, if there are remaining questions, it might be a good idea to ping the BIDS-DWI community (I'd probably ask on https://neurostars.org) who may have seen similar sequences and have good suggestions.

Also:

diff

@pnlbwh pnlbwh deleted a comment from mgxd May 7, 2021
@tashrifbillah
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Just for our mental peace--is the acq and dir specification new? We have been naming as above for more than a year and I am not sure how we switched them!

@effigies
Copy link

effigies commented May 7, 2021

The acq- text has been there since 1.2.0 at least, but dir was added in 1.5.0 to match the text in functional and fieldmap data. This was intended as a clarification, not a change in meaning, and I guess we're finding out that it was indeed unclear.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants