Re: [Freesurfer] mris_preproc with --xhemi

2013-04-03 Thread Gabriel Gonzalez Escamilla
By real I was reffering to the interpretation differences of using the lh-rh diff maps or the LI maps.Bests,Gabriel.El 02/04/13, Douglas N Greve  gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu escribió:I don't know what you mean by real. Is the LI not real? The LI will remove the effect of scaling (eg, brain size).On 04/02/2013 04:48 PM, Gabriel Gonzalez Escamilla wrote: So, this means that the real differences is as Yizhou wrote? One measures the asymmetry (measured as the difference between lh-rh),  and the LI or --paired-diff-norm will tell the extent of this asymmetry. Regards, Gabriel. El 02/04/13, *Douglas N Greve * gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu escribió: sorry, I misspoke, the p-value will be different (perhaps very different) between LI and --paired-diff. The p-value should not change between LI and --paired-diff-norm; these two maps differ only by a scale which is removed in the t-ratio. doug On 04/02/2013 01:15 PM, Yizhou Ma wrote:   If I do use the LI maps to perform my stats, which would be the   difference in interpretation between the results of using the   --paired-diff maps, and the standarized LI maps?  The p-value will not change since the LI is just a scaled version  of the  paired-diff  dougIn my opinion, the interpretation will be different, and the  difference just depends on the difference between (lh-rh) and LI  themselves. The former tells you if the lh is bigger than the rh in  absolute values, while the latter tells you to what extent it is  asymmetrical. The latter is not a scaled, but a standarized version of  the former. Which you use in your study really depends on which you  are interested in conceptually.On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Douglas N Greve  gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu mailto:gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu  gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu wrote:   I think it is best to do it before the smoothing, though my  results did  not really change when I did it after.  doug    On 04/02/2013 12:07 PM, Gabriel Gonzalez Escamilla wrote:   sorry I meant to do the division, to standarize the LI after the   smoothing.     El 02/04/13, *Gabriel Gonzalez Escamilla * ggon...@upo.es  mailto:ggon...@upo.es ggon...@upo.es ggon...@upo.es escribió:   Dear Doug,     Interesting but, if I'm understanding this well, to get a  normal LI,   the --paired-diff-norm should be divided by 2 not multiplied,  isn't it?     standardLI = (lh-rh)/(lh+rh)   FS_LI = (lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2) -- as you are dividing the  denominator,   your LI will be twice an standard one.     Further, this division should be done before the smoothing,  right?     If I do use the LI maps to perform my stats, which would be the   difference in interpretation between the results of using the   --paired-diff maps, and the standarized LI maps?     Regards,   Gabriel.       El 29/03/13, *Douglas N Greve * gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu  mailto:gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu  escribió:   The --xhemi flag causes both the left and right hemispheres of  each   subject to be stacked into the output file. So the output file  will   have   number of subjects x2 frames. The order is subject1.lh,  subject1.rh,   subject2.lh, subject2.rh, ...     If you add the --paired-diff, then you will get number of  frames =   number of subjects, and each frame will be subject1.lh-rh,   subject2.lh-rh, etc     If you use the --paired-diff-norm instead, then you will get  what you   want subject1.(lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2),  subject2.(lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2), etc.     Note that most laterality indices (LI) are (lh-rh)/(lh+rh),  so you   would   need to multiply the paired-diff-norm by 2.     Finally, I want to point out that it may be better to smooth  before   computing the LI because the LI computation is non-linear and  it has   the   potential to divide by a noisy number. To do this, run  without the   --paired-diff flags, then smooth, then run     mri_concat yourfile.smoothed.mgh --paired-diff-norm --o   yourfile.smoothed.LI.mgh     In my study, I ran it both ways and it did not make a  difference, but I   think smoothing before LI is the safer bet.     doug       On 03/29/2013 12:33 PM, Ejoe Yizhou Ma wrote:    Hi freesurfer experts,       I'm investigating lh-to-rh asymmetry and am following  instructions on    this page :http://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/Xhemi.    My question is, what does the --xhemi flag do in the  mris_preproc    command? It seems to me that it calculates (lh-rh) value  at each    vertex for every subject. (I tried to use the same subject  for each    pair of input for --paired-diff, and the result is not a  all-zero    output.)       It 

Re: [Freesurfer] mris_preproc with --xhemi

2013-04-02 Thread Gabriel Gonzalez Escamilla
Dear Doug,Interesting but, if I'm understanding this well, to get a normal LI, the --paired-diff-norm should be divided by 2 not multiplied, isn't it?standardLI = (lh-rh)/(lh+rh)FS_LI = (lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2) -- as you are dividing the denominator, your LI will be twice an standard one.Further, this division should be done before the smoothing, right?If I do use the LI maps to perform my stats, which would be the difference in interpretation between the results of using the --paired-diff maps, and the standarized LI maps?Regards,Gabriel.El 29/03/13, Douglas N Greve  gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu escribió:The --xhemi flag causes both the left and right hemispheres of each subject to be stacked into the output file. So the output file will have number of subjects x2 frames. The order is subject1.lh, subject1.rh, subject2.lh, subject2.rh, ...If you add the --paired-diff, then you will get number of frames = number of subjects, and each frame will be subject1.lh-rh, subject2.lh-rh, etcIf you use the --paired-diff-norm instead, then you will get what you want subject1.(lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2), subject2.(lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2), etc.Note that most laterality indices (LI) are (lh-rh)/(lh+rh), so you would need to multiply the paired-diff-norm by 2.Finally, I want to point out that it may be better to smooth before computing the LI because the LI computation is non-linear and it has the potential to divide by a noisy number. To do this, run without the --paired-diff flags, then smooth, then runmri_concat yourfile.smoothed.mgh --paired-diff-norm --o yourfile.smoothed.LI.mghIn my study, I ran it both ways and it did not make a difference, but I think smoothing before LI is the safer bet.dougOn 03/29/2013 12:33 PM, Ejoe Yizhou Ma wrote: Hi freesurfer experts, I'm investigating lh-to-rh asymmetry and am following instructions on  this page :http://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/Xhemi. My question is, what does the --xhemi flag do in the mris_preproc  command? It seems to me that it calculates (lh-rh) value at each  vertex for every subject. (I tried to use the same subject for each  pair of input for --paired-diff, and the result is not a all-zero  output.) It would also be nice if someone can tell me how to realize my final  goal, which is to get the (lh-rh)/[(lh+rh)/2] value at each vertex for  each subject in a .mgh file. Thanks, Cherry ___ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer-- Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D.MGH-NMR Centergr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.eduPhone Number: 617-724-2358Fax: 617-726-7422Bugs: surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReportingFileDrop: www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.htmlOutgoing: ftp://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/transfer/outgoing/flat/greve/___Freesurfer mailing listFreesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.eduhttps://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurferThe information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it isaddressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mailcontains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine athttp://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in errorbut does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properlydispose of the e-mail.-- --PhD. student Gabriel González-EscamillaLaboratory of Functional NeuroscienceDepartment of Physiology, Anatomy, and Cell BiologyUniversity Pablo de OlavideCtra. de Utrera, Km.141013 - Seville- Spain -Email: ggon...@upo.eshttp://www.upo.es/neuroaging/es/
___
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
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.


Re: [Freesurfer] mris_preproc with --xhemi

2013-04-02 Thread Gabriel Gonzalez Escamilla
sorry I meant to do the division, to standarize the LI after the smoothing.El 02/04/13, Gabriel Gonzalez Escamilla  ggon...@upo.es escribió:Dear Doug,Interesting but, if I'm understanding this well, to get a normal LI, the --paired-diff-norm should be divided by 2 not multiplied, isn't it?standardLI = (lh-rh)/(lh+rh)FS_LI = (lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2) -- as you are dividing the denominator, your LI will be twice an standard one.Further, this division should be done before the smoothing, right?If I do use the LI maps to perform my stats, which would be the difference in interpretation between the results of using the --paired-diff maps, and the standarized LI maps?Regards,Gabriel.El 29/03/13, Douglas N Greve  gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu escribió:The --xhemi flag causes both the left and right hemispheres of each subject to be stacked into the output file. So the output file will have number of subjects x2 frames. The order is subject1.lh, subject1.rh, subject2.lh, subject2.rh, ...If you add the --paired-diff, then you will get number of frames = number of subjects, and each frame will be subject1.lh-rh, subject2.lh-rh, etcIf you use the --paired-diff-norm instead, then you will get what you want subject1.(lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2), subject2.(lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2), etc.Note that most laterality indices (LI) are (lh-rh)/(lh+rh), so you would need to multiply the paired-diff-norm by 2.Finally, I want to point out that it may be better to smooth before computing the LI because the LI computation is non-linear and it has the potential to divide by a noisy number. To do this, run without the --paired-diff flags, then smooth, then runmri_concat yourfile.smoothed.mgh --paired-diff-norm --o yourfile.smoothed.LI.mghIn my study, I ran it both ways and it did not make a difference, but I think smoothing before LI is the safer bet.dougOn 03/29/2013 12:33 PM, Ejoe Yizhou Ma wrote: Hi freesurfer experts, I'm investigating lh-to-rh asymmetry and am following instructions on  this page :http://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/Xhemi. My question is, what does the --xhemi flag do in the mris_preproc  command? It seems to me that it calculates (lh-rh) value at each  vertex for every subject. (I tried to use the same subject for each  pair of input for --paired-diff, and the result is not a all-zero  output.) It would also be nice if someone can tell me how to realize my final  goal, which is to get the (lh-rh)/[(lh+rh)/2] value at each vertex for  each subject in a .mgh file. Thanks, Cherry ___ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer-- Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D.MGH-NMR Centergr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.eduPhone Number: 617-724-2358Fax: 617-726-7422Bugs: surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReportingFileDrop: www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.htmlOutgoing: ftp://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/transfer/outgoing/flat/greve/___Freesurfer mailing listFreesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.eduhttps://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurferThe information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it isaddressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mailcontains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine athttp://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in errorbut does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properlydispose of the e-mail.-- --PhD. student Gabriel González-EscamillaLaboratory of Functional NeuroscienceDepartment of Physiology, Anatomy, and Cell BiologyUniversity Pablo de OlavideCtra. de Utrera, Km.141013 - Seville- Spain -Email: ggon...@upo.eshttp://www.upo.es/neuroaging/es/
-- --PhD. student Gabriel González-EscamillaLaboratory of Functional NeuroscienceDepartment of Physiology, Anatomy, and Cell BiologyUniversity Pablo de OlavideCtra. de Utrera, Km.141013 - Seville- Spain -Email: ggon...@upo.eshttp://www.upo.es/neuroaging/es/
___
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
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.


Re: [Freesurfer] mris_preproc with --xhemi

2013-04-02 Thread Douglas N Greve

On 04/02/2013 12:02 PM, Gabriel Gonzalez Escamilla wrote:
 Dear Doug,

 Interesting but, if I'm understanding this well, to get a normal LI, 
 the --paired-diff-norm should be divided by 2 not multiplied, isn't it?

 standardLI = (lh-rh)/(lh+rh)
 FS_LI = (lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2) -- as you are dividing the denominator, 
 your LI will be twice an standard one.
oops, sorry, you're right

 Further, this division should be done before the smoothing, right?
I don't think it will matter.

 If I do use the LI maps to perform my stats, which would be the 
 difference in interpretation between the results of using the 
 --paired-diff maps, and the standarized LI maps?
The p-value will not change since the LI is just a scaled version of the 
paired-diff
doug

 Regards,
 Gabriel.


 El 29/03/13, *Douglas N Greve * gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu escribió:
 The --xhemi flag causes both the left and right hemispheres of each
 subject to be stacked into the output file. So the output file will have
 number of subjects x2 frames. The order is subject1.lh, subject1.rh,
 subject2.lh, subject2.rh, ...

 If you add the --paired-diff, then you will get number of frames =
 number of subjects, and each frame will be subject1.lh-rh,
 subject2.lh-rh, etc

 If you use the --paired-diff-norm instead, then you will get what you
 want subject1.(lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2), subject2.(lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2), etc.

 Note that most laterality indices (LI) are (lh-rh)/(lh+rh), so you would
 need to multiply the paired-diff-norm by 2.

 Finally, I want to point out that it may be better to smooth before
 computing the LI because the LI computation is non-linear and it has the
 potential to divide by a noisy number. To do this, run without the
 --paired-diff flags, then smooth, then run

 mri_concat yourfile.smoothed.mgh --paired-diff-norm --o
 yourfile.smoothed.LI.mgh

 In my study, I ran it both ways and it did not make a difference, but I
 think smoothing before LI is the safer bet.

 doug


 On 03/29/2013 12:33 PM, Ejoe Yizhou Ma wrote:
  Hi freesurfer experts,
 
  I'm investigating lh-to-rh asymmetry and am following instructions on
  this page :http://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/Xhemi.
  My question is, what does the --xhemi flag do in the mris_preproc
  command? It seems to me that it calculates (lh-rh) value at each
  vertex for every subject. (I tried to use the same subject for each
  pair of input for --paired-diff, and the result is not a all-zero
  output.)
 
  It would also be nice if someone can tell me how to realize my final
  goal, which is to get the (lh-rh)/[(lh+rh)/2] value at each vertex for
  each subject in a .mgh file.
 
  Thanks,
  Cherry
 
 
  ___
  Freesurfer mailing list
  Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
  https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer

 -- 
 Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D.
 MGH-NMR Center
 gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
 Phone Number: 617-724-2358
 Fax: 617-726-7422

 Bugs: surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting
 FileDrop: www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html
 Outgoing: ftp://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/transfer/outgoing/flat/greve/

 ___
 Freesurfer mailing list
 Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
 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.


 -- 
 --
 PhD. student Gabriel González-Escamilla
 Laboratory of Functional Neuroscience
 Department of Physiology, Anatomy, and Cell Biology
 University Pablo de Olavide
 Ctra. de Utrera, Km.1
 41013 - Seville
 - Spain -

 Email: ggon...@upo.es
 http://www.upo.es/neuroaging/es/ 

-- 
Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D.
MGH-NMR Center
gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Phone Number: 617-724-2358
Fax: 617-726-7422

Bugs: surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting
FileDrop: www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html
Outgoing: ftp://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/transfer/outgoing/flat/greve/

___
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer


Re: [Freesurfer] mris_preproc with --xhemi

2013-04-02 Thread Douglas N Greve
I think it is best to do it before the smoothing, though my results did 
not really change when I did it after.
doug


On 04/02/2013 12:07 PM, Gabriel Gonzalez Escamilla wrote:
 sorry I meant to do the division, to standarize the LI after the 
 smoothing.

 El 02/04/13, *Gabriel Gonzalez Escamilla * ggon...@upo.es escribió:
 Dear Doug,

 Interesting but, if I'm understanding this well, to get a normal LI, 
 the --paired-diff-norm should be divided by 2 not multiplied, isn't it?

 standardLI = (lh-rh)/(lh+rh)
 FS_LI = (lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2) -- as you are dividing the denominator, 
 your LI will be twice an standard one.

 Further, this division should be done before the smoothing, right?

 If I do use the LI maps to perform my stats, which would be the 
 difference in interpretation between the results of using the 
 --paired-diff maps, and the standarized LI maps?

 Regards,
 Gabriel.


 El 29/03/13, *Douglas N Greve * gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu escribió:
 The --xhemi flag causes both the left and right hemispheres of each
 subject to be stacked into the output file. So the output file will 
 have
 number of subjects x2 frames. The order is subject1.lh, subject1.rh,
 subject2.lh, subject2.rh, ...

 If you add the --paired-diff, then you will get number of frames =
 number of subjects, and each frame will be subject1.lh-rh,
 subject2.lh-rh, etc

 If you use the --paired-diff-norm instead, then you will get what you
 want subject1.(lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2), subject2.(lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2), etc.

 Note that most laterality indices (LI) are (lh-rh)/(lh+rh), so you 
 would
 need to multiply the paired-diff-norm by 2.

 Finally, I want to point out that it may be better to smooth before
 computing the LI because the LI computation is non-linear and it has 
 the
 potential to divide by a noisy number. To do this, run without the
 --paired-diff flags, then smooth, then run

 mri_concat yourfile.smoothed.mgh --paired-diff-norm --o
 yourfile.smoothed.LI.mgh

 In my study, I ran it both ways and it did not make a difference, but I
 think smoothing before LI is the safer bet.

 doug


 On 03/29/2013 12:33 PM, Ejoe Yizhou Ma wrote:
  Hi freesurfer experts,
 
  I'm investigating lh-to-rh asymmetry and am following instructions on
  this page :http://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/Xhemi.
  My question is, what does the --xhemi flag do in the mris_preproc
  command? It seems to me that it calculates (lh-rh) value at each
  vertex for every subject. (I tried to use the same subject for each
  pair of input for --paired-diff, and the result is not a all-zero
  output.)
 
  It would also be nice if someone can tell me how to realize my final
  goal, which is to get the (lh-rh)/[(lh+rh)/2] value at each vertex 
 for
  each subject in a .mgh file.
 
  Thanks,
  Cherry
 
 
  ___
  Freesurfer mailing list
  Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
  https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer

 -- 
 Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D.
 MGH-NMR Center
 gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
 Phone Number: 617-724-2358
 Fax: 617-726-7422

 Bugs: surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting
 FileDrop: www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html
 Outgoing: ftp://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/transfer/outgoing/flat/greve/

 ___
 Freesurfer mailing list
 Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
 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.


 -- 
 --
 PhD. student Gabriel González-Escamilla
 Laboratory of Functional Neuroscience
 Department of Physiology, Anatomy, and Cell Biology
 University Pablo de Olavide
 Ctra. de Utrera, Km.1
 41013 - Seville
 - Spain -

 Email: ggon...@upo.es
 http://www.upo.es/neuroaging/es/

 -- 
 --
 PhD. student Gabriel González-Escamilla
 Laboratory of Functional Neuroscience
 Department of Physiology, Anatomy, and Cell Biology
 University Pablo de Olavide
 Ctra. de Utrera, Km.1
 41013 - Seville
 - Spain -

 Email: ggon...@upo.es
 http://www.upo.es/neuroaging/es/ 

-- 
Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D.
MGH-NMR Center
gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Phone Number: 617-724-2358
Fax: 617-726-7422

Bugs: surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting
FileDrop: www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html
Outgoing: ftp://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/transfer/outgoing/flat/greve/

___
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer


Re: [Freesurfer] mris_preproc with --xhemi

2013-04-02 Thread Yizhou Ma
 If I do use the LI maps to perform my stats, which would be the
 difference in interpretation between the results of using the
 --paired-diff maps, and the standarized LI maps?
The p-value will not change since the LI is just a scaled version of the
paired-diff
doug


In my opinion, the interpretation will be different, and the difference
just depends on the difference between (lh-rh) and LI themselves. The
former tells you if the lh is bigger than the rh in absolute values, while
the latter tells you to what extent it is asymmetrical. The latter is not a
scaled, but a standarized version of the former. Which you use in your
study really depends on which you are interested in conceptually.


On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Douglas N Greve
gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.eduwrote:

 I think it is best to do it before the smoothing, though my results did
 not really change when I did it after.
 doug


 On 04/02/2013 12:07 PM, Gabriel Gonzalez Escamilla wrote:
  sorry I meant to do the division, to standarize the LI after the
  smoothing.
 
  El 02/04/13, *Gabriel Gonzalez Escamilla * ggon...@upo.es escribió:
  Dear Doug,
 
  Interesting but, if I'm understanding this well, to get a normal LI,
  the --paired-diff-norm should be divided by 2 not multiplied, isn't it?
 
  standardLI = (lh-rh)/(lh+rh)
  FS_LI = (lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2) -- as you are dividing the denominator,
  your LI will be twice an standard one.
 
  Further, this division should be done before the smoothing, right?
 
  If I do use the LI maps to perform my stats, which would be the
  difference in interpretation between the results of using the
  --paired-diff maps, and the standarized LI maps?
 
  Regards,
  Gabriel.
 
 
  El 29/03/13, *Douglas N Greve * gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu escribió:
  The --xhemi flag causes both the left and right hemispheres of each
  subject to be stacked into the output file. So the output file will
  have
  number of subjects x2 frames. The order is subject1.lh, subject1.rh,
  subject2.lh, subject2.rh, ...
 
  If you add the --paired-diff, then you will get number of frames =
  number of subjects, and each frame will be subject1.lh-rh,
  subject2.lh-rh, etc
 
  If you use the --paired-diff-norm instead, then you will get what you
  want subject1.(lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2), subject2.(lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2), etc.
 
  Note that most laterality indices (LI) are (lh-rh)/(lh+rh), so you
  would
  need to multiply the paired-diff-norm by 2.
 
  Finally, I want to point out that it may be better to smooth before
  computing the LI because the LI computation is non-linear and it has
  the
  potential to divide by a noisy number. To do this, run without the
  --paired-diff flags, then smooth, then run
 
  mri_concat yourfile.smoothed.mgh --paired-diff-norm --o
  yourfile.smoothed.LI.mgh
 
  In my study, I ran it both ways and it did not make a difference, but I
  think smoothing before LI is the safer bet.
 
  doug
 
 
  On 03/29/2013 12:33 PM, Ejoe Yizhou Ma wrote:
   Hi freesurfer experts,
  
   I'm investigating lh-to-rh asymmetry and am following instructions on
   this page :http://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/Xhemi.
   My question is, what does the --xhemi flag do in the mris_preproc
   command? It seems to me that it calculates (lh-rh) value at each
   vertex for every subject. (I tried to use the same subject for each
   pair of input for --paired-diff, and the result is not a all-zero
   output.)
  
   It would also be nice if someone can tell me how to realize my final
   goal, which is to get the (lh-rh)/[(lh+rh)/2] value at each vertex
  for
   each subject in a .mgh file.
  
   Thanks,
   Cherry
  
  
   ___
   Freesurfer mailing list
   Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
   https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
 
  --
  Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D.
  MGH-NMR Center
  gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
  Phone Number: 617-724-2358
  Fax: 617-726-7422
 
  Bugs: surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting
  FileDrop: www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html
  Outgoing:
 ftp://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/transfer/outgoing/flat/greve/
 
  ___
  Freesurfer mailing list
  Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
  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.
 
 
  --
  --
  PhD. student Gabriel González-Escamilla
  Laboratory of Functional Neuroscience
  Department of Physiology, Anatomy, and Cell Biology
  University Pablo de Olavide
  Ctra. de Utrera, Km.1
  

Re: [Freesurfer] mris_preproc with --xhemi

2013-04-02 Thread Douglas N Greve

sorry, I misspoke, the p-value will be different (perhaps very 
different) between LI and --paired-diff. The p-value should not change 
between LI and --paired-diff-norm; these two maps differ only by a scale 
which is removed in the t-ratio.
doug


On 04/02/2013 01:15 PM, Yizhou Ma wrote:
  If I do use the LI maps to perform my stats, which would be the
  difference in interpretation between the results of using the
  --paired-diff maps, and the standarized LI maps?
 The p-value will not change since the LI is just a scaled version of the
 paired-diff
 doug


 In my opinion, the interpretation will be different, and the 
 difference just depends on the difference between (lh-rh) and LI 
 themselves. The former tells you if the lh is bigger than the rh in 
 absolute values, while the latter tells you to what extent it is 
 asymmetrical. The latter is not a scaled, but a standarized version of 
 the former. Which you use in your study really depends on which you 
 are interested in conceptually.


 On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Douglas N Greve 
 gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu mailto:gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu wrote:

 I think it is best to do it before the smoothing, though my
 results did
 not really change when I did it after.
 doug


 On 04/02/2013 12:07 PM, Gabriel Gonzalez Escamilla wrote:
  sorry I meant to do the division, to standarize the LI after the
  smoothing.
 
  El 02/04/13, *Gabriel Gonzalez Escamilla * ggon...@upo.es
 mailto:ggon...@upo.es escribió:
  Dear Doug,
 
  Interesting but, if I'm understanding this well, to get a
 normal LI,
  the --paired-diff-norm should be divided by 2 not multiplied,
 isn't it?
 
  standardLI = (lh-rh)/(lh+rh)
  FS_LI = (lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2) -- as you are dividing the
 denominator,
  your LI will be twice an standard one.
 
  Further, this division should be done before the smoothing, right?
 
  If I do use the LI maps to perform my stats, which would be the
  difference in interpretation between the results of using the
  --paired-diff maps, and the standarized LI maps?
 
  Regards,
  Gabriel.
 
 
  El 29/03/13, *Douglas N Greve * gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
 mailto:gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu escribió:
  The --xhemi flag causes both the left and right hemispheres of
 each
  subject to be stacked into the output file. So the output file
 will
  have
  number of subjects x2 frames. The order is subject1.lh,
 subject1.rh,
  subject2.lh, subject2.rh, ...
 
  If you add the --paired-diff, then you will get number of frames =
  number of subjects, and each frame will be subject1.lh-rh,
  subject2.lh-rh, etc
 
  If you use the --paired-diff-norm instead, then you will get
 what you
  want subject1.(lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2),
 subject2.(lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2), etc.
 
  Note that most laterality indices (LI) are (lh-rh)/(lh+rh), so you
  would
  need to multiply the paired-diff-norm by 2.
 
  Finally, I want to point out that it may be better to smooth
 before
  computing the LI because the LI computation is non-linear and
 it has
  the
  potential to divide by a noisy number. To do this, run without the
  --paired-diff flags, then smooth, then run
 
  mri_concat yourfile.smoothed.mgh --paired-diff-norm --o
  yourfile.smoothed.LI.mgh
 
  In my study, I ran it both ways and it did not make a
 difference, but I
  think smoothing before LI is the safer bet.
 
  doug
 
 
  On 03/29/2013 12:33 PM, Ejoe Yizhou Ma wrote:
   Hi freesurfer experts,
  
   I'm investigating lh-to-rh asymmetry and am following
 instructions on
   this page :http://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/Xhemi.
   My question is, what does the --xhemi flag do in the
 mris_preproc
   command? It seems to me that it calculates (lh-rh) value at each
   vertex for every subject. (I tried to use the same subject
 for each
   pair of input for --paired-diff, and the result is not a
 all-zero
   output.)
  
   It would also be nice if someone can tell me how to realize
 my final
   goal, which is to get the (lh-rh)/[(lh+rh)/2] value at each
 vertex
  for
   each subject in a .mgh file.
  
   Thanks,
   Cherry
  
  
   ___
   Freesurfer mailing list
   Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
 mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
   https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
 
  --
  Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D.
  MGH-NMR Center
  gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu mailto:gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
  Phone Number: 617-724-2358 tel:617-724-2358
  Fax: 617-726-7422 tel:617-726-7422
 
  Bugs: surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting
 

Re: [Freesurfer] mris_preproc with --xhemi

2013-04-02 Thread Gabriel Gonzalez Escamilla
So, this means that the real differences is as Yizhou wrote?One measures the asymmetry (measured as the difference between lh-rh), and the LI or --paired-diff-norm will tell the extent of this asymmetry.Regards,Gabriel.El 02/04/13, Douglas N Greve  gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu escribió:sorry, I misspoke, the p-value will be different (perhaps very different) between LI and --paired-diff. The p-value should not change between LI and --paired-diff-norm; these two maps differ only by a scale which is removed in the t-ratio.dougOn 04/02/2013 01:15 PM, Yizhou Ma wrote:  If I do use the LI maps to perform my stats, which would be the  difference in interpretation between the results of using the  --paired-diff maps, and the standarized LI maps? The p-value will not change since the LI is just a scaled version of the paired-diff doug In my opinion, the interpretation will be different, and the  difference just depends on the difference between (lh-rh) and LI  themselves. The former tells you if the lh is bigger than the rh in  absolute values, while the latter tells you to what extent it is  asymmetrical. The latter is not a scaled, but a standarized version of  the former. Which you use in your study really depends on which you  are interested in conceptually. On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Douglas N Greve  gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu mailto:gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu wrote: I think it is best to do it before the smoothing, though my results did not really change when I did it after. doug On 04/02/2013 12:07 PM, Gabriel Gonzalez Escamilla wrote:  sorry I meant to do the division, to standarize the LI after the  smoothing.   El 02/04/13, *Gabriel Gonzalez Escamilla * ggon...@upo.es mailto:ggon...@upo.es ggon...@upo.es escribió:  Dear Doug,   Interesting but, if I'm understanding this well, to get a normal LI,  the --paired-diff-norm should be divided by 2 not multiplied, isn't it?   standardLI = (lh-rh)/(lh+rh)  FS_LI = (lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2) -- as you are dividing the denominator,  your LI will be twice an standard one.   Further, this division should be done before the smoothing, right?   If I do use the LI maps to perform my stats, which would be the  difference in interpretation between the results of using the  --paired-diff maps, and the standarized LI maps?   Regards,  Gabriel.    El 29/03/13, *Douglas N Greve * gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu mailto:gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu escribió:  The --xhemi flag causes both the left and right hemispheres of each  subject to be stacked into the output file. So the output file will  have  number of subjects x2 frames. The order is subject1.lh, subject1.rh,  subject2.lh, subject2.rh, ...   If you add the --paired-diff, then you will get number of frames =  number of subjects, and each frame will be subject1.lh-rh,  subject2.lh-rh, etc   If you use the --paired-diff-norm instead, then you will get what you  want subject1.(lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2), subject2.(lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2), etc.   Note that most laterality indices (LI) are (lh-rh)/(lh+rh), so you  would  need to multiply the paired-diff-norm by 2.   Finally, I want to point out that it may be better to smooth before  computing the LI because the LI computation is non-linear and it has  the  potential to divide by a noisy number. To do this, run without the  --paired-diff flags, then smooth, then run   mri_concat yourfile.smoothed.mgh --paired-diff-norm --o  yourfile.smoothed.LI.mgh   In my study, I ran it both ways and it did not make a difference, but I  think smoothing before LI is the safer bet.   doug    On 03/29/2013 12:33 PM, Ejoe Yizhou Ma wrote:   Hi freesurfer experts,     I'm investigating lh-to-rh asymmetry and am following instructions on   this page :http://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/Xhemi.   My question is, what does the --xhemi flag do in the mris_preproc   command? It seems to me that it calculates (lh-rh) value at each   vertex for every subject. (I tried to use the same subject for each   pair of input for --paired-diff, and the result is not a all-zero   output.)     It would also be nice if someone can tell me how to realize my final   goal, which is to get the (lh-rh)/[(lh+rh)/2] value at each vertex  for   each subject in a .mgh file.     Thanks,   Cherry       ___   Freesurfer mailing list   Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu   https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer   --  Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D.  

Re: [Freesurfer] mris_preproc with --xhemi

2013-04-02 Thread Douglas N Greve

I don't know what you mean by real. Is the LI not real? The LI will 
remove the effect of scaling (eg, brain size).

On 04/02/2013 04:48 PM, Gabriel Gonzalez Escamilla wrote:
 So, this means that the real differences is as Yizhou wrote?

 One measures the asymmetry (measured as the difference between lh-rh), 
 and the LI or --paired-diff-norm will tell the extent of this asymmetry.

 Regards,
 Gabriel.


 El 02/04/13, *Douglas N Greve * gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu escribió:

 sorry, I misspoke, the p-value will be different (perhaps very
 different) between LI and --paired-diff. The p-value should not change
 between LI and --paired-diff-norm; these two maps differ only by a scale
 which is removed in the t-ratio.
 doug


 On 04/02/2013 01:15 PM, Yizhou Ma wrote:
   If I do use the LI maps to perform my stats, which would be the
   difference in interpretation between the results of using the
   --paired-diff maps, and the standarized LI maps?
  The p-value will not change since the LI is just a scaled version 
 of the
  paired-diff
  doug
 
 
  In my opinion, the interpretation will be different, and the
  difference just depends on the difference between (lh-rh) and LI
  themselves. The former tells you if the lh is bigger than the rh in
  absolute values, while the latter tells you to what extent it is
  asymmetrical. The latter is not a scaled, but a standarized version of
  the former. Which you use in your study really depends on which you
  are interested in conceptually.
 
 
  On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Douglas N Greve
  gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu mailto:gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu 
 gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu wrote:
 
  I think it is best to do it before the smoothing, though my
  results did
  not really change when I did it after.
  doug
 
 
  On 04/02/2013 12:07 PM, Gabriel Gonzalez Escamilla wrote:
   sorry I meant to do the division, to standarize the LI after the
   smoothing.
  
   El 02/04/13, *Gabriel Gonzalez Escamilla * ggon...@upo.es
  mailto:ggon...@upo.es ggon...@upo.es escribió:
   Dear Doug,
  
   Interesting but, if I'm understanding this well, to get a
  normal LI,
   the --paired-diff-norm should be divided by 2 not multiplied,
  isn't it?
  
   standardLI = (lh-rh)/(lh+rh)
   FS_LI = (lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2) -- as you are dividing the
  denominator,
   your LI will be twice an standard one.
  
   Further, this division should be done before the smoothing, 
 right?
  
   If I do use the LI maps to perform my stats, which would be the
   difference in interpretation between the results of using the
   --paired-diff maps, and the standarized LI maps?
  
   Regards,
   Gabriel.
  
  
   El 29/03/13, *Douglas N Greve * gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
  mailto:gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu 
 escribió:
   The --xhemi flag causes both the left and right hemispheres of
  each
   subject to be stacked into the output file. So the output file
  will
   have
   number of subjects x2 frames. The order is subject1.lh,
  subject1.rh,
   subject2.lh, subject2.rh, ...
  
   If you add the --paired-diff, then you will get number of 
 frames =
   number of subjects, and each frame will be subject1.lh-rh,
   subject2.lh-rh, etc
  
   If you use the --paired-diff-norm instead, then you will get
  what you
   want subject1.(lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2),
  subject2.(lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2), etc.
  
   Note that most laterality indices (LI) are (lh-rh)/(lh+rh), 
 so you
   would
   need to multiply the paired-diff-norm by 2.
  
   Finally, I want to point out that it may be better to smooth
  before
   computing the LI because the LI computation is non-linear and
  it has
   the
   potential to divide by a noisy number. To do this, run 
 without the
   --paired-diff flags, then smooth, then run
  
   mri_concat yourfile.smoothed.mgh --paired-diff-norm --o
   yourfile.smoothed.LI.mgh
  
   In my study, I ran it both ways and it did not make a
  difference, but I
   think smoothing before LI is the safer bet.
  
   doug
  
  
   On 03/29/2013 12:33 PM, Ejoe Yizhou Ma wrote:
Hi freesurfer experts,
   
I'm investigating lh-to-rh asymmetry and am following
  instructions on
this page :http://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/Xhemi.
My question is, what does the --xhemi flag do in the
  mris_preproc
command? It seems to me that it calculates (lh-rh) value 
 at each
vertex for every subject. (I tried to use the same subject
  for each
pair of input for --paired-diff, and the result is not a
  all-zero
output.)
   
It would also be nice if someone can tell me how to realize
  my final
goal, which is to get the 

[Freesurfer] mris_preproc with --xhemi

2013-03-29 Thread Ejoe Yizhou Ma
Hi freesurfer experts,

I'm investigating lh-to-rh asymmetry and am following instructions on this
page :http://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/Xhemi.
My question is, what does the --xhemi flag do in the mris_preproc
command? It seems to me that it calculates (lh-rh) value at each vertex for
every subject. (I tried to use the same subject for each pair of input for
--paired-diff, and the result is not a all-zero output.)

It would also be nice if someone can tell me how to realize my final goal,
which is to get the (lh-rh)/[(lh+rh)/2] value at each vertex for each
subject in a .mgh file.

Thanks,
Cherry
___
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
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.


Re: [Freesurfer] mris_preproc with --xhemi

2013-03-29 Thread Douglas N Greve
The --xhemi flag causes both the left and right hemispheres of each 
subject to be stacked into the output file. So the output file will have 
number of subjects x2 frames. The order is subject1.lh, subject1.rh, 
subject2.lh, subject2.rh, ...

If you add the --paired-diff, then you will get number of frames = 
number of subjects, and each frame will be subject1.lh-rh, 
subject2.lh-rh, etc

If you use the --paired-diff-norm instead, then you will get what you 
want subject1.(lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2), subject2.(lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2), etc.

Note that most laterality indices (LI) are (lh-rh)/(lh+rh), so you would 
need to multiply the paired-diff-norm by 2.

Finally, I want to point out that it may be better to smooth before 
computing the LI because the LI computation is non-linear and it has the 
potential to divide by a noisy number. To do this, run without the 
--paired-diff flags, then smooth, then run

mri_concat yourfile.smoothed.mgh --paired-diff-norm --o 
yourfile.smoothed.LI.mgh

In my study, I ran it both ways and it did not make a difference, but I 
think smoothing before LI is the safer bet.

doug


On 03/29/2013 12:33 PM, Ejoe Yizhou Ma wrote:
 Hi freesurfer experts,

 I'm investigating lh-to-rh asymmetry and am following instructions on 
 this page :http://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/Xhemi.
 My question is, what does the --xhemi flag do in the mris_preproc 
 command? It seems to me that it calculates (lh-rh) value at each 
 vertex for every subject. (I tried to use the same subject for each 
 pair of input for --paired-diff, and the result is not a all-zero 
 output.)

 It would also be nice if someone can tell me how to realize my final 
 goal, which is to get the (lh-rh)/[(lh+rh)/2] value at each vertex for 
 each subject in a .mgh file.

 Thanks,
 Cherry


 ___
 Freesurfer mailing list
 Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
 https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer

-- 
Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D.
MGH-NMR Center
gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Phone Number: 617-724-2358
Fax: 617-726-7422

Bugs: surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting
FileDrop: www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html
Outgoing: ftp://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/transfer/outgoing/flat/greve/

___
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
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.



Re: [Freesurfer] mris_preproc with --xhemi

2013-03-29 Thread Ejoe Yizhou Ma
Thanks, Doug. This is very helpful!


On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Douglas N Greve gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
 wrote:

 The --xhemi flag causes both the left and right hemispheres of each
 subject to be stacked into the output file. So the output file will have
 number of subjects x2 frames. The order is subject1.lh, subject1.rh,
 subject2.lh, subject2.rh, ...

 If you add the --paired-diff, then you will get number of frames =
 number of subjects, and each frame will be subject1.lh-rh,
 subject2.lh-rh, etc

 If you use the --paired-diff-norm instead, then you will get what you
 want subject1.(lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2), subject2.(lh-rh)/((lh+rh)/2), etc.

 Note that most laterality indices (LI) are (lh-rh)/(lh+rh), so you would
 need to multiply the paired-diff-norm by 2.

 Finally, I want to point out that it may be better to smooth before
 computing the LI because the LI computation is non-linear and it has the
 potential to divide by a noisy number. To do this, run without the
 --paired-diff flags, then smooth, then run

 mri_concat yourfile.smoothed.mgh --paired-diff-norm --o
 yourfile.smoothed.LI.mgh

 In my study, I ran it both ways and it did not make a difference, but I
 think smoothing before LI is the safer bet.

 doug


 On 03/29/2013 12:33 PM, Ejoe Yizhou Ma wrote:
  Hi freesurfer experts,
 
  I'm investigating lh-to-rh asymmetry and am following instructions on
  this page :http://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/Xhemi.
  My question is, what does the --xhemi flag do in the mris_preproc
  command? It seems to me that it calculates (lh-rh) value at each
  vertex for every subject. (I tried to use the same subject for each
  pair of input for --paired-diff, and the result is not a all-zero
  output.)
 
  It would also be nice if someone can tell me how to realize my final
  goal, which is to get the (lh-rh)/[(lh+rh)/2] value at each vertex for
  each subject in a .mgh file.
 
  Thanks,
  Cherry
 
 
  ___
  Freesurfer mailing list
  Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
  https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer

 --
 Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D.
 MGH-NMR Center
 gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
 Phone Number: 617-724-2358
 Fax: 617-726-7422

 Bugs: surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting
 FileDrop: www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html
 Outgoing: ftp://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/transfer/outgoing/flat/greve/

 ___
 Freesurfer mailing list
 Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
 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
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
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.