In two raw ds000102 run-2 scans, 36.6% and 23.3% of selected voxels keep the fALFF difference threshold and sign in five models.

We recalculated fractional amplitude of low-frequency fluctuations (fALFF) from four raw scans selected by a prior publication, then tested whether the same voxels retained an absolute fALFF difference greater than 0.01 and the same sign across five task models. In the two run-1 scans, the models gave identical differences. In the two run-2 scans, 1,179 of 3,219 and 1,548 of 6,650 voxels selected under the primary model retained both the threshold and sign across all five models (36.626% and 23.278%). The run-2 primary sets contained 80 and 1,008 voxels with sign changes. The calculations used raw images from two participants, fixed intensity masks, and no motion or physiological regression, spatial processing, or additional fALFF scaling. A 0.01 threshold is descriptive, not a significance level. The supplied task-label fields disagree on 30 trials; neither is established as the displayed arrow sequence. The results show model-dependent selected voxel membership in these two scans. They do not identify correct labels, a neural cause, or a population effect. The same researcher reproduced the calculations from a separate package copy; this is not independent external verification.

fALFF · functional MRI · Fourier amplitude · task models · voxel selection · model sensitivity · raw images · reproducibility