rd.edu[
>> freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.**harvard.edu]
>> on behalf of clarissa yasuda [clayas...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 12:54 AM
>> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
>> Subject: [Freesurfer] different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.0
>>
>>
gt; From: freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> [freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu] on behalf of clarissa yasuda
> [clayas...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 12:54 AM
> To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> Subject: [Freesurfer] different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2
Hi Clarissa
have you visually inspected them? Does one version look more accurate
than another to you? We do system tests on things like subcortical
volumes before releasing a version and our tests show that the accuracy
in these structures has not changed, so I'm not sure what the source of
a
[clayas...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 12:54 AM
To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Subject: [Freesurfer] different results between 5.1.0 and 5.2.0
Dear FreeSurfer Experts
As in some other posts, I have also observed some differences between the two
releases. The values from cuneus (thic
Dear FreeSurfer Experts
As in some other posts, I have also observed some differences between the
two releases. The values from cuneus (thickness) are similar to the post
from Ritobrato Datta, Ph.D. on 18 march.
But I also observed some differences in volume of right / left thalami.
Did anybody
