Dear Freesurfer Experts,
I would like the mean surface area measures of each cluster i found in qdec. I
used qdec for a group comparison in surface area between a
patient group and a healthy control group. I found 4 different significant
clusters (FDR corrected). I would like to extract the mean
Does the beta permit volumes bigger than 256^3 voxels? just askingand
just asking about raw dimensions in unit-voxels at the start of pipeline
cheers
Colin
On 18 January 2013 17:00, wrote:
> Send Freesurfer mailing list submissions to
> freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
>
> To subscri
Hi Alex
the vertices are about 1mm apart. I'll leave 1 for Doug
Bruce
On Sat, 19 Jan 2013,
Alex Kell wrote:
Hi Freesurfers,
I have two unrelated questions.
1. I want to pre-whiten some functional data without running a GLM on them
(we're going to run the GLM in matlab). It looks like fsfast
Hi Freesurfers,
I have two unrelated questions.
1. I want to pre-whiten some functional data without running a GLM on them
(we're going to run the GLM in matlab). It looks like fsfast does
autocorrelation correction as a part of the selxavg3-sess wrapper. I tried
poking around on the wiki and m
Hi Salil - It's a well-known (see email archives) compatibility issue with
the newer version of bedpostx, that has different command-line arguments
than it used to. You can run bedpostx directly on the command line for
now. This is solved in the next version of trac-all.
a.y
On Sat, 19 Jan
Hi Paul
thanks for the clarification, the 178 time points would have been
shocking (but pretty cool!). I'll leave this for Martin to answer,
although you might try reposting in a week or two if he doesn't since
he's trying to finish something and pretty busy.
Bruce
On Sat, 19 Jan 2013, paul
Dear Freesurfer Experts,
I am running freesurfer (centos4 64 bit v5.10) and a fsl 5.0.2.1 (compiled
from source code) on a cluster running ubuntu 12.04 and the debian version
of sun grid engine. I have successfully run freesurfer and trac-all -prep
using this configuration. However, when I try to
Sorry, that should be 4 separate anatomical scans of the same person
On 19 Jan 2013, at 03:57, "Bruce Fischl" wrote:
> Really? 178 separate anatomical scans of the same person?
>
>
>
> On Jan 18, 2013, at 4:31 PM, paul horton wrote:
>
>> Hi Bruce and Martin,
>>
>> Thanks for your replies.
