BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//HiPEDS – EPSRC Centre for Doctoral Training - ECPv6.15.11//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-WR-CALNAME:HiPEDS – EPSRC Centre for Doctoral Training
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://wp.doc.ic.ac.uk/hipeds
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for HiPEDS – EPSRC Centre for Doctoral Training
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:UTC
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0000
TZOFFSETTO:+0000
TZNAME:UTC
DTSTART:20140101T000000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=UTC:20160111T160000
DTEND;TZID=UTC:20160111T170000
DTSTAMP:20260508T145410
CREATED:20160107T124743Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20160129T153930Z
UID:1238-1452528000-1452531600@wp.doc.ic.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Seminar: The past and future of Random Field Theory for neuroimaging inference
DESCRIPTION:Speaker name: Prof. Thomas E. Nichols \nAbstract: A fundamental goal in “brain mapping” with functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) is localising the parts of the brain activated by a task.  The standard tool for making this inference has been Random Field Theory (RFT)\, a collection of results for Gaussian Processes of the null statistic image (implemented in the two most widely used packages\, SPM & FSL).  RFT provides inference on individual voxels (voxel-wise) and sets of contiguous suprathreshold voxels (cluster-wise) while controlling the familywise error rate\, the chance of one or more false positives over the brain.  I will discuss how RFT methods have been used for the past 25 years\, show some small-scale evaluations that pointed to problems with RFT when the degrees-of-freedom are low.  I will then show results from a recent study based on the wealth of (1000’s of) publicly available resting-state fMRI datasets; these massive evaluations show that\, even with n=20 or 40 subjects\, RFT suffers from slightly conservative voxel-wise inferences and catastrophically liberal cluster-wise inferences.  I will discuss the reasons for these failures of RFT and practical solutions going forward. \nSeminar Slides from Prof. Nichols’ Talk
URL:https://wp.doc.ic.ac.uk/hipeds/event/seminar-the-past-and-future-of-random-field-theory-for-neuroimaging-inference/
LOCATION:Huxley Building\, Room 217/218\, Imperial College London\, London\, SW7 2AZ\, United Kingdom
ORGANIZER;CN="Ira Ktena":MAILTO:ira.ktena@imperial.ac.uk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=UTC:20151201T110000
DTEND;TZID=UTC:20151201T120000
DTSTAMP:20260508T145410
CREATED:20151124T220742Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20151201T143832Z
UID:1200-1448967600-1448971200@wp.doc.ic.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Seminar: Validating Optimizations of Concurrent C/C++ Programs
DESCRIPTION:Speaker: Viktor Vafeiadis \nThe talk will discuss recent work on checking the correctness of LLVM compiler optimisations on C11 programs as far as concurrency is concerned. We have built a validator checks that optimisations performed by the compiler do not change memory accesses in ways disallowed by the C11 and/or LLVM memory models. Although the LLVM concurrency model has not yet fully been formalised\, our experiments highlight an important difference between the C11 and LLVM memory models\, which has led to some misunderstanding among compiler developers\, which in turn led to concurrency-specific compilation errors. This is joint work with Soham Chakraborty. \nSlides available here
URL:https://wp.doc.ic.ac.uk/hipeds/event/seminar-validating-optimizations-of-concurrent-cc-programs/
LOCATION:Huxley Building Room 218\, Imperial College London\, London\, SW7 2AZ\, United Kingdom
ORGANIZER;CN="Ira Ktena":MAILTO:ira.ktena@imperial.ac.uk
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR