okay, Rahul is looking into it.
On Wed, 21 Jun 2006, Jeffrey Spielberg
wrote:
Hi, sorry, I meant the cortical parcellation, the one that is used in
aparc+aseg.mgz (I believe this uses the desikan killiany atlas?), thanks,
Jeff
On 6/20/06, Bruce Fischl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'll leave 2 for Doug. In 1. by segmentation do you mean the wm.mgz
volume? Or the cortical parcellation? If the latter, which one (as we
generate two by default).
cheers,
Bruce
On Tue, 20 Jun 2006, Jeffrey Spielberg
wrote:
> Hi, I had a couple of questions regarding cortical/subcortical
segmentation-
>
> 1. In our cortical segmentation we keep getting what look to be
inaccurate
> segmentation of the rostral and caudal acc. It looks some of what
should be
> labeled as one of those two areas is getting labelled corpus callosum or
> "unlabelled subcortical" instead, sometimes fairly large chunks. Does
this
> indicate any problem earlier in the processing stream, and is there
anything
> that can be done to prevent this? If not I saw that both tksurfer and
> tkmedit can be used to edit the segmentation, what would be the easiest
way
> to do this?
>
> 2. When registering a freesurfer anatomical to Feat output (using
> reg-feat2anat) the registration seems to be somewhat inaccurate.
> Registering brainmask.mgz to our example_func using flirt has given us a
> better registration so far. Since reg-feat2anat seems to use flirt in
its
> registration I was wondering what the difference might be resulting
from.
> Does reg-feat2anat use T1.mgz as it's reference scan, and if so is there
any
> way to have it use brainmask instead, as that seems to give better
results?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Jeff
>
_______________________________________________
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
