Hi Jeff - Questions about bedpostx output files are best addressed to the FSL list, as it's an FSL program that is not developped by us. The appropriate info to provide them is the FSL (rather than freesurfer) version numbers.
a.y On Tue, 11 Feb 2014, jwa...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu wrote: > Hello all, > > I have run bedpostx on a series of DTI scans over ~1 year, the earlier > ones in stable 5.1 and later ones in 5.3. I'm seeing quite a lot of > variability in intensity from the earlier to later versions - re-running > bedpostx in 5.3 on an older scan and comparing with 5.1 yields up to 10% > variation in intensity at any given voxel between versions. I've > been comparing the mean_f1 images by subtracting the (new - old) using > fslmaths. The differences are not isolaed to surfaces, but can also be > deep in the white matter or parenchyma. Has anyone else seen this? > > Thanks, > Jeff > _______________________________________________ > 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 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.
