Hi Trisanna
let's take a step back - what exactly are you trying to achieve? If it is
to make a map of the probability that a fold occurs at a specific location
then you should not be smoothing at all. And I don't understand why you
would be labeling a fold in the volume - why not just label i
I guess I can't really advise you since I don't understand the
application. what will you do with this smoothed map? There is no fixed
smoothing kernel applicable for volume or surface-based analysis.
Usually it depends on the spatial extent of the effect you are looking for.
On 05/24/2017 05:
hmmm, I agree with Doug. Why would you want to smooth? The probability
maps will have their own smoothness, which will reflect how well they
register across subjects
cheers
Bruce
On Wed, 24 May 2017, Trisanna Sprung-Much wrote:
> Hi Doug
> I'm doing just that - creating a statistical probabilit
Hi Doug
I'm doing just that - creating a statistical probability map to look at the
overlap across the 40 subjects for a given sulcus. When we do this
volumetrically it is traditional to smooth using FWHM of 3mm (about the
width of a sulcus). *I was told for surface data it needs to be more than
t
not sure what you are trying to do or why you would want to smooth the
prob map
On 05/24/2017 05:03 PM, Trisanna Sprung-Much wrote:
> Hi there
>
> I labelled sulci in 40 T1 volumes and have created surface overlays
> using mri_vol2surf and then registered these to fsaverage using
> mri_surf2su
Hi there
I labelled sulci in 40 T1 volumes and have created surface overlays using
mri_vol2surf and then registered these to fsaverage using mri_surf2surf. I
want to generate a statistical probability map using mri_concat and then
mris_fwhm for each sulcus. What is an acceptable FWHM to use? It is
