Ha, that’s funny. The dimensions seem perfectly fine to me …
Juan Eugenio Iglesias
ERC Senior Research Fellow
Translational Imaging Group
University College London
http://www.jeiglesias.com
http://cmictig.cs.ucl.ac.uk/
On 30 Mar 2017, at 09:16, Ferdi van de Kamp
mailto:ferdivdk...@gmail.com>> w
Hi Eugenio,
I've been trying figure out what is going on and part of the problem seems
to be a buggy scheduler, which cannot be remedied at the moment. E.g. 64G
maxvmem is reached in one subject within 12 seconds (when running a batch
of over 100 participants). Running it again later (in a very sm
Hi Ferdi,
Sorry for the late response.
Is this a standard resolution (1mm) T1? I’m very surprised; it’s never required
more than 14GB on our data.
Cheers,
/Eugenio
Juan Eugenio Iglesias
ERC Senior Research Fellow
Translational Imaging Group
University College London
http://www.jeiglesias.com
http
Hi all,
I believe the website warns for high demands of memory, claiming it may
take up to 10G for this processing step. However, when I run this on
cluster the memory demands go up to 30G. This is still for one subject
using one scan. Is this to be expected, has something changed in the
processin
