[Freesurfer] Very different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.0

Dear FreeSurfer Experts, I ran FreeSurfer 5.1.0 and FreeSurfer 5.2.0 on identical set of 161 subjects, and I'm interested in rh_superior_temporal_sulcus_thickness in particular. Previously, the mean thickness is 2.24 mm in 5.1.0; now it is 3.28 mm in 5.2.0. They are significantly different, t(1

Re: [Freesurfer] Very different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.0

: [Freesurfer] Very different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.0 Dear FreeSurfer Experts, I ran FreeSurfer 5.1.0 and FreeSurfer 5.2.0 on identical set of 161 subjects, and I'm interested in rh_superior_temporal_sulcus_thickness in particular. Previously, the mean thickness is 2.24 mm in 5.1.0; n

Re: [Freesurfer] Very different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.0

gt; >- Original Message - >From: Daniel Yang >To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu >Sent: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 17:44:44 -0400 (EDT) >Subject: [Freesurfer] Very different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.0 > >Dear FreeSurfer Experts, > >I ran FreeSurfer 5.1.

Re: [Freesurfer] Very different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.0

hool of Medicine >>3rd Floor, Room 312 >>3710 Hamilton Walk (Goddard Laboratories) >>Philadelphia, PA 19104-6241 >>email - rida...@mail.med.upenn.edu >> >> >>----- Original Message - >>From: Daniel Yang >>To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu >>Sent: Mo

Re: [Freesurfer] Very different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.0

to >>>1.9 in V1, fs 5.2 is giving me V1 thickness in the range of 2 to 2.3. >>> >>>Ritobrato Datta, Ph.D. >>>Post Doctoral Researcher >>>Department of Neurology >>>University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine >>>3rd Floor, Room 312

Re: [Freesurfer] Very different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.0

; subjects. While fs 5.1 estimated mean thickness in the range of 1.5 to >>>> 1.9 in V1, fs 5.2 is giving me V1 thickness in the range of 2 to 2.3. >>>> >>>> Ritobrato Datta, Ph.D. >>>> Post Doctoral Researcher >>>> Department of Neur

Re: [Freesurfer] Very different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.0

in V1, fs 5.2 is giving me V1 thickness in the range of 2 to 2.3. > >>> > >>>Ritobrato Datta, Ph.D. > >>>Post Doctoral Researcher > >>>Department of Neurology > >>>University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine > >>>3rd Floor,

Re: [Freesurfer] Very different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.0

; >>Matt. > >> > >>On 3/18/13 5:13 PM, "Ritobrato Datta" wrote: > >> > >>>I concur. I have seen similar results in primary visual cortex from ~40 > >>>subjects. While fs 5.1 estimated mean thickness in the range of 1.5 to > >&

Re: [Freesurfer] Very different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.0

le.edu>>, "freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu<mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>" mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] Very different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.0 You'll find attached some pr

Re: [Freesurfer] Very different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.0

esday, April 10, 2013 10:49 AM > To: Bruce Fischl > Cc: Daniel Yang , "freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu" > > Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] Very different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.0 > > You'll find attached some preliminary data of the comparison we did > among versions

Re: [Freesurfer] Very different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.0

Daniel, We're repeating our paired-analysis of thickness measures between 5.1 and 5.2. In the meantime, to check for correctness, open the brain.finalsurfs.mgz file with the surfaces overlayed, and check the intensity value of the voxels which appear to be non-cortical 'black spaces', relative to

Re: [Freesurfer] Very different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.0

is...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>>, "freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu<mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>" mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] Very different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.

Re: [Freesurfer] Very different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.0

Thanks Nick! I have uploaded the relevant files to you. Thanks, Daniel -- Yung-Jui "Daniel" Yang, PhD Postdoctoral Researcher Yale Child Study Center New Haven, CT (203) 737-5454 On 4/10/13 1:19 PM, "Nick Schmansky" wrote: >Daniel, > >We're repeating our paired-analysis of thickness meas

Re: [Freesurfer] Very different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.0

Looking at the image posted previously. https://yalesurvey.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_ddwW7I9yMQuCtPn I think it is pretty clear the 5.1 picture has better gray/white contrast. It is a very subtle difference, but you can see it if you look at some pieces of wm that were "missed" by 5.2 in this

Re: [Freesurfer] Very different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.0

The 5.2 image has been smoothed, by a small degree, relative to 5.1. Either prior to FS processing or by FS, it would seem. On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 3:29 AM, Christopher Bell < christopherbell2...@gmail.com> wrote: > Looking at the image posted previously. > > https://yalesurvey.qualtrics.com

Re: [Freesurfer] Very different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.0

>> Daniel >> >> >> -- >> Yung-Jui "Daniel" Yang, PhD >> Postdoctoral Researcher >> Yale Child Study Center >> New Haven, CT >> (203) 737-5454 >> >> From: Pedro Paulo de Magalhães Oli