Thanks so much for the clarification.

Since I'm somewhat new to MCMC algorithms, tour explanation will really
help me explain it to others.

Peggy

On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Anastasia Yendiki <
[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Peggy - The reinit option is meant to use when you don't have a
> valid-appearing tract the first time (you have a tract that looks like a
> single line, which means that the first initialization of the path was
> poor, i.e., outside the white matter or something like that). If you have a
> valid-appearing tract with the first initialization, but not with another
> initialization, then the first one is the one to keep. If you have a case
> where you have different results but you are unsure which one is valid, I
> can look at it if you upload here:
>         https://gate.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/filedrop2/
>
> The nsample is the number of path samples that are saved and added up to
> give you the final path distribution. In principle, if you found that you
> were not converging reliably to the same solution with this number of
> samples (with a valid initialization), you would increase the number.
>
> The number of burn-in samples is a number of samples that are run in the
> very beginning and discarded, before the nsample samples that are actually
> saved. As long as the algorithm starts from a resonable initial guess, this
> shouldn't have much of an effect. The nkeep parameter means that 1 sample
> path is saved for every nkeep sample paths that are drawn. Not keeping
> every sample increases independence between samples. These are standard
> aspects of an MCMC algorithm.
>
> a.y
>
> On Mon, 15 Dec 2014, Peggy Skelly wrote:
>
>  I've been interested in these 2 questions, since I have similar
>> issues:https://www.mail-archive.com/freesurfer@nmr.
>> mgh.harvard.edu/msg38213.html
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg39282.html
>>
>> What does it mean if I find a valid-appearing tract with reinit=0, but
>> then lose it with reinit=1?
>>
>> How much variability should I expect in the path stats between runs using
>> the same parameters?
>> I haven't gotten as far as the previous question to see if statistical
>> significance changes, but since I'm looking at longitudinal data, I
>> expect the actual white matter changes over time to be rather small.
>>
>> How do the dmrirc parameters nburnin, nsample, and nkeep affect the MCMC
>> process and results?
>> Since the built in randomness should decrease the number of samples is
>> increase, should I just increase nsample?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Peggy
>>
>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Freesurfer mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
>
>
> The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it
> is
> addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the
> e-mail
> contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance
> HelpLine at
> http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in
> error
> but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and
> properly
> dispose of the e-mail.
>
>
_______________________________________________
Freesurfer mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer


The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is
addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail
contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at
http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in error
but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properly
dispose of the e-mail.

Reply via email to