is data the root of the dataset; the directory that dataset_description.json lives in? If not the subject directories should be moved to the datasets root directory.
If so there are two possible things that the validator may be taking issue with: data/sub-001/ses-1/func/sub-001_ses-1_acq-ert_task-ert_bold.nii.gzz
^ the file extension in this filename has an extra z, gzz → gz
data/sub-001/ses-1/func/sub-001_ses-2_acq-rest2_task-rest2_bold.nii.gz
^ this files says ses-2 but its in the ses-1 directory.
you don’t need the acq-<label> since the task names are enough to differentiate between files.
Not sure this applies to your data because I don’t know your full scanning protocols, but one “session” can have multiple files. It is not that one “session” must contain one BOLD. Rather, one session can contain your ert and rest acquisitions, as long as they were collected in the same session (that is, one sequence after the other).
You have the task name rest2 which implies the existence of rest1. Multiple runs of rest should have _task-rest_run-01_ or _task-rest_run-02_ in the filename. This way, it is clear that these are both the same task (resting state), but different runs of it. And similar to what I said in the previous point, multiple runs of data can be contained in different sessions. You should mainly only have multiple sessions if data are collected of multiple days.
Hi rwblair! Thanks for your quick response. Yes data is the root that contains .bidsignore, dataset_description.json, participants.tsv and README.
I’m sorry, the gzz → gz was a typo in this comment.
The ses inconsistency was also a typo in the comment.
Thanks for being sharp, I fixed them in the comments!
Task names (e.g. task-ert) differntiate between func files. I also have dwi files. I then have fmaps for both func and dwi data so I’m using acq. Since dwi doesn’t have a task field the only consistent way to disciminate I saw was using a acquisition field (or adding a task field to the dwi data, but that doesn’t seem to make sense)
Thanks. I have two sessions (follow-up) that contain multiple func scans.
Good idea about adding a run field for the separate rest scans; I’ll get that implemented.
But currently, nothing seems to be out of the ordinary despite BIDS validators errors, right?
