And just to bring this discussion full circle, how does the training set for the subcortical segmentation relate?? Is the training set (and associated manual labeling) that is used for the subcortical segmentation composed of the same 39 subjects used for both the current spherical template and the Desikan cortical atlas?
thanks, Mike H. On Wed, 2009-04-22 at 12:55 -0400, Bruce Fischl wrote: > Hi Jennifer, > > the spherical stuff has nothing to do with the CMA. And in fact the > spherical registration itself is not based on any manual labelings, just > estimates of cortical geometry from a set of training subjects. The > cortical parcellations do depend on manual labelings, but this is also > not the CMA. Rather there are two sets - one done by Rahul Desikan (39 > subjects I think) and the other by Christophe Destrieux (12 or 14 > subjects). The current spherical template we use is from the same 39 that > Rahul labeled. > > cheers, > Bruce > > > On Wed, 22 Apr 2009, Juranek, Jenifer wrote: > > > Is any information about the manually-parcellated (CMA) training set used > > to create the spherical template used in fsv4.*? The information reported > > in Cerebral Cortex (2004) 14(1):11-22 reports 36 MRI volumes from an > > ongoing study. > > > > Does this sound about right? > > Or have there been any updates to the spherical template since then? > > > > Many Thanks for any info, > > Jenifer > > > _______________________________________________ > Freesurfer mailing list > Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu > https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer _______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
