Dear Bruce, Doug, Nick, and other co-workers,
As authors of the recent paper “The effects of FreeSurfer version,
workstation type, and Macintosh operating system version on
anatomical volume and cortical thickness measurements” we would like
to take the opportunity to respond to the numerous
bottom line is can we trust freesurfer cortical thickness results
and a recent paper my group published seems to give very strong
positive answer to the question.
paper - cortical thinning in psychopathy, it's on the wiki publication list.
All of the areas reported
overlap with the areas that ha
Hi Bruce et al,
I may be late to the discussion, but wanted to share some insights given
that we've had some headaches trying to get identical results
on presumptively identical systems for FreeSurfer and other tools, I wanted
to add my two cents. Ultimately, of course, the systems were not 100%
i
Mike,
I have run such tests in the past (which showed about 2-3% variability in
hippo volume due to randomness) and Doug has done similar tests, but
admittedly running a large scale analysis and showing the results on a
wiki page would be useful. Something like running our Buckner40 and/or
ADNI60
Peter,
Thanks for this info. The Mac OS versions compared in the paper were 10.5
and 10.6 (Leopard and Snow Leopard). One of the major changes between
these two versions was the switch from a 32b kernel to a 64b kernel
(whereas Snow Leopard and Lion both use a 64b kernel). I havent been able
to
Please post it on PLoS One homepage. According to the policies of this
journal, you are allowed to respond to each paper directly on the same page
as the article. You don't need to submit it as a paper and won't go through
a review process.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Peter J. Molfese <
pm
Nick might have, not sure. Are you volunteering Mike :)
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012, Michael Harms wrote:
>
> I'm curious: For comparison to the results in that paper, has anyone
> quantified the variability that results when one runs the same FS
> version repeatedly on the same subject, but with a diffe
I'm curious: For comparison to the results in that paper, has anyone
quantified the variability that results when one runs the same FS
version repeatedly on the same subject, but with a different random seed
each time? That is, how much of the difference is related to math
libraries vs. intrinsic
p.s. I should add that we've known about this effect for a while (as the
authors in the paper state), but haven't had the time to track it down.
Since it's an avoidable source of variance (by controlling what computers
you run the analysis on), it's lower on our list of priorities than other
im
Hi Peter
thanks for the info. Feel free to post this on one of the *many* blogs
howling for our blood :) I think that the effects in the paper reflect
default floating point settings in gcc on 32-bit vs. 64-bit, although we
haven't really investigated as it doesn't seem like a wise use of limi
We run things on an Xgrid cluster that is now a mixture of Macs running Snow
Leopard (10.6.8) and Lion (10.7.x). We found the results given from
asegstats2table and aparcstats2table are identical after running 100 subjects
on both Mac OS X 10.7.4 and 10.6.8 with Freesurfer 5.1. I also ran a few
Hi,
The paper entitled
“The Effects of FreeSurfer Version, Workstation Type,
and Macintosh Operating System Version on Anatomical
Volume and Cortical Thickness Measurements”,
PLoSONE, Vol 7(6), e38234 (2012)
may be of interest to all of you. It can be found at:
http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journ
12 matches
Mail list logo
