No, it was not a problem with negative thickness but an
inaccuracy/inconsistency with the way the surfaces were computed. It is
not something that is easy to notice (which is how it made it past our QA).
I would re-run them.
doug
On 03/08/2014 11:21 PM, Gregory Kirk wrote:
> In the release not
In the release notes for 5.3 i find
Stable release version 5.3.0 is a bug fix release to correct the problem with
pial and white surface creation affecting thickness and area measures.
Is this only related to netative thickness values, which i have never found. I
have 150 subjects * 3 ti
