Good points! I (partly) see the light :)
Still (please correct me if I'm wrong), creating a study specific
average subject for visualizing the "average" anatomy doesn't address
the issue of whether the method by which those subjects were brought
into register (i.e., via sphere.reg using a term i
Hi Mike,
imagine you had only on subject your study. Then using the buckner
atlas as an overlay (or fsaverage, which is kind of equivalent) would not
be representative at all. If the registration works perfectly and you have
a fair number of subjects then there probably isn't much difference,
Hi Bruce,
Re your 2nd point: My assumption was that very few FS users are actually
creating their own atlases. To do that you need to do (much) more than
just run make_average_subject, right? (Namely, create your own .gcs
file for annotations, and .tif for registration, correct? And isn't
that
Hi Mike,
a couple of things. One is that creating your own average will give you a
better ability to see what the true anatomical localization of your effects
are. Another is that you can re-register your subjects to your own atlas,
and possibly obtain better registration, particularly if your
