Hi Gari they overlap as the labels represent every location that could possibly be in either label. Unless we could predict them perfectly they have to overlap, since they share a border. With 5.2 we will include different default thresholds, but at the moment you have to do it yourself. You could do a max probability in matlab, or load them in tksurfer and threshold them manually to remove overlap.
cheers Bruce On Mon, 6 Aug 2012, Garikoitz Lerma Usabiaga wrote: > Hi Bruce, > thanks for your answer. > > I am mapping a volume ROI (BA45) from SPM in MNI 152 space to fsaverage (the > result is the red ROI). The problem is that: > - when I load the BA45.label from FS in order to compare, they are not quite > similar. My main problem is to know if the differences are acceptable or not > and what method should I use to check the validity. > - Secondary problem: when I load both the lh.BA45.label and lh.BA44.label, > they overlap. I didn't create those labels, they are the ones that come in > fsaverage/label. I don't understand how can they overlap (in the > lh.aparc.annot or lh.aparc.a2009s.annot those areas don't overlap at all). > > > Thanks again for your help, > Gari > > > > > > > On 2012-08-06, at 15:27, Bruce Fischl <fis...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote: > >> Hi Gari >> >> sorry, I'm a bit confused. Are you using the individual subject estimates of >> 44 and 45 generated by FreeSurfer, or mapping them from MNI space? In either >> case you can get overlap unless you pick the most probably label at each >> point. >> >> cheers >> Bruce >> >> >> On Mon, 6 Aug 2012, Garikoitz Lerma Usabiaga wrote: >> >>> Hi freesurfers experts, >>> this is (please check attached image) the best I got when trying to map a >>> volume ROI (BA45 in MarsBar = MNI_Frontal_Inf_Tri_L_roi) to freesurfer >>> using mri_vol2surf. >>> I used /freesurfer/average/mni152.register.dat instead of spmregister since >>> the ROI was already in mni152 2mm, the registration was perfect -checked >>> with tkregister2. >>> >>> - I obtained the red area of the image, which is outside of the >>> ROI45.label. Considering that the source was not exactly the same, could I >>> consider it acceptable for cortical thickness analysis? >>> - Why are the 44 and 45 overlapping? >>> >>> Thank you very much and sorry for the multiple questions, >>> Gari >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> 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
