====== s005 ======

====== Negative Responses ======

| area | loc1 | loc2 | loc3 | loc4 | notes |
| V1 in | loc1_rV1_neg_in(11) |  |  |  |  |
| V1 out |  |  |  |  |  |
| V2 in | loc1_rV2v_neg_in(26) | loc2_lV2v_neg_in(23) | loc3_lV2d_neg_in(11) | hole | cued>>>uncued |
| V2 out | loc1_rV2v_neg_out(21) | loc2_lV2v_neg_out(25) | loc3_lV2d_neg_out(31) | loc4_rV2d_neg_out(24) | cued>uncued |
| V2 both | loc1_rV2v_neg_both(47) | loc2_lV2v_neg_both(48) | loc3_lV2d_neg_both(42) | loc4_rV2d_neg_both(24) only out!! |  |
| V3 in |  |  |  | hole |  |
| V3 out |  |  |  | loc4_rV3d_neg_out(21) |  |
| V3 both | loc1_rV3v_neg_both() | loc2_lV3v_neg_both() | loc3_lV3d_neg_both() | loc4_rV3d_neg_both() |  |
| allVisualAreas | loc1_negs(57) | loc2_negs(48) | loc3_negs(42) | loc4_negs(45) | loc3's highest r2 voxels have a pretty large post bump (0.2%) |

=== right hemisphere ===

loc1_rV1(27): split patches, but very distinctly within V1. used to be a lot larger, so i saved another roi just in case _tooLarge. not really finding neg_out.

loc1_rV1_neg_in(11): very large neg, and cleans up rV1 responses is not included.

loc1_rV2v(13): surrounded by inner and outer negative responses. gaps are bigger in tiering, very distinct tiering.

loc1_rV2v_neg_in(26): large

loc1_rV2v_neg_out(21):  on outer edge, distinct.

loc1_rV3v(35): very nice, small negative gamma post peak. good tiering.

loc1_rhV4(13): very subtle tiering strong response.  veyr clean.

loc1_rV3A(16): really nice, tiered slightly.

loc4_rV1(15): cleaned up manually and reduced noise. good response, but not as smooth.

loc4_rV2d(16): cleaned up manually. not as strong as V3d and sort of looks like 2 peaks... 12.5 ped looks flat.

loc4_rV3d(16): not the cleanest, but tiering is very wide and 12.5 response is almost flat.

loc4_rV3A(11): super large r^2. no tiering, but very pretty HDR.

loc4_rhV4(9): looks great.  but very scattered on flatmap, although agrees with localizer.  tiering is visible... leaving this one be for now...



=== left hemisphere ===

loc2_lV1(26): split in two, tiering is not very obvious.

loc2_lV2v(9): much of it negative. manually excluded negatives. result is wavy... HDR, not so clean, but definitely tiered.

loc2_lV2v_neg_in(25): tiered and distinct.

loc2_lV2v_neg_out(25): distinct. 

loc2_lV3v(25): tiering visible, a little pointy.

loc2_lhV4(7): clean response, but no tiering.  tiny compared to loc3, so cut off?

loc2_lV3A(9): a bit split, but very large HDR.  not really tiered.  looks like V1...

loc3_lV1(11): tiered but peaks not too big.

loc3_lV2d(3): literally nonexistent!!  managed to find 3 voxels that does seem to be HDR... very dirty...

loc3_lV3d(14): nice and strong, tiered.

loc3_lhV4(41): beautiful. tiered.  strong.

loc3_lV3A(12): really clean, but doesn't look to be particularly modulated by ped. 

== Concatenation ==

V1: [hdr15/fit1 ? ? 15/1] looks slightly skewed, but works. according to fits, cueFour too high, but cued >> uncued.  looked at targ, and the amplitude is highest for cueFour_targ!!

V2: [hdr15/fit1 ? ? 15/1] fits negative for the uncued conditions.  cued>> uncued, targ> cuednontarg.  very clear.  nice!!

V3: [hdr15/fit1 ? ? 15/1] identical to V2.