Hello, freesurfer experts
We are doing the structure scan on the adolescents. One potential problem is
the head movement from the participants. But so far from the image, it looks
ok.
The question is
1 What is the visual check after autorecon3? We did the visual check after
autorecon1 a
after autorecon3 look at the two .annot files and see if they seem
accurate. If so, then the spherical morph worked.
cheers,
Bruce
On Mon, 13 Apr 2009,
karlkarl wrote:
Hello, freesurfer experts
We are doing the structure scan on the adolescents. One potential problem is
the head movement
I think this may have slipped through the cracks, so I am posting it again. I
apologize if this has been answered already. If the information is available
elsewhere and I happened to miss it, please let me know.
-Original Message-
From: Dankner, Nathan (NIH/NIMH) [F]
Sent: Thu 4/9/200
Hi Nate,
sorry, I think we were each waiting for someone else to answer :). I'm not
sure about the BrainSegVol. It shouldn't include ventricle in principle,
but in practice it might. Probably the easiest thing to do is to use
mri_label_volume -a aseg.mgz
which will give you the volume of all
Did you look at the Brain Volume wiki page? To find it, go to our wiki
and type in "BrainSegVol" in the search box and hit the "Text" button.
doug
Dankner, Nathan (NIH/NIMH) [F] wrote:
I think this may have slipped through the cracks, so I am posting it again. I
apologize if this has been an
I've checked out the wiki, and it brings up a couple of other questions. I
don't seem to have the BrainSegVolNoVent measure...maybe this is an issue with
versions? I ran the mri_label_volume command that Bruce provided. There was
roughly a 300,000 mm^3 difference between the output of the mri
Not having BrainSegVolNoVent might just mean that you have an old
version. It was added two years ago, but I'm not sure which build that
would have gotten into. Not sure about the discrepancy with
mri_label_volume.
doug
Dankner, Nathan (NIH/NIMH) [F] wrote:
I've checked out the wiki, and it
probably partial volume correction, which is a good thing to do.
On Mon, 13
Apr 2009, Douglas N Greve wrote:
Not having BrainSegVolNoVent might just mean that you have an old version. It
was added two years ago, but I'm not sure which build that would have gotten
into. Not sure about the disc
Ok, sorry to be a bother, but I just want to be sure I'm getting accurate
volumes here. Using the mri_label_volume method on one particular scan, the
output volume is 500,000 mm^3 less than that of BrainSegVolNotVent (which is
approx 1.2 million mm^3). Bruce, I know you mentioned that this is
Hi,
Does mni152.register.dat map from fsaverage to mni152 or vice versa?
Specifically, I'm using an fsaverage surface that I want to project onto
mni152 volume using surf2vol. Should I invert the matrix?
Thanks,
Yigal
___
Freesurfer mailing list
Fre
you don't need to invert it, just use as is.
doug
Yigal Agam wrote:
Hi,
Does mni152.register.dat map from fsaverage to mni152 or vice versa?
Specifically, I'm using an fsaverage surface that I want to project
onto mni152 volume using surf2vol. Should I invert the matrix?
Thanks,
Yigal
11 matches
Mail list logo