Mike,
Hi, a new mris_convert I’ve posted to the ftp site corrects this problem. It
will now store the volume geometry info into two giiCoordSys structs, which an
updated freeview will be able to read. mris_convert is here:
ftp://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/pub/dist/freesurfer/misc/linux-centos
Hi Kristina,
Sorry, I misread your email slightly. I don't believe it is possible to
get total CSF without some additional non-T1-weighted scans. The closest
you can get is adding up all the ventricular volumes.
http://www.mail-archive.com/freesurfer%40nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/msg26258.html
http
Hi Nick,
That works PERFECTLY! Thank you so much, it has been a big help!
I hope I may ask you another question:
I am actually trying to convert each freesurfer-label (from
aparc.annot) into separate surfaces (not gifti-labels)
So ideally I would convert lh.precentral.label > lh.precentral.gii.
Hi Bastian
do you mean a surface that is only a piece of th original surface? You can
use label2patch for that, but I'm not sure if we can convert patches to
gifti. You should ask the FSL crew about label2surf though - we can't help
with that.
cheers
Bruce
On Thu,
29 May 2014, Bastian Cheng
FS experts,
The aim of this mail is about some errors I had encountered when I try to
generate a table from some *.stats files obtained after a longitudinal
analysis.
After running the command :
*long_stats_slopes --qdec ./qdec/longi_presentacio.qdec.table.dat
--stats aseg.stats --meas v
Hi Tudor,
I don't think there is a way to speed things up.
Let me know if you find a case where the template is blurry or has
ghosts. It should not happen, but if it does it indicates a bad
registratration, you'd have to run the mri_robust_template command with
different parameters manually th
Hi Victor,
I am also not sure, but why not use the flags
--stack-rate and --stack-pc1 in the long_stats_slopes. It should do the
trick.
Best, Martin
On 05/29/2014 11:47 AM, Victor Montal Blancafort wrote:
FS experts,
The aim of this mail is about some errors I had encountered when I try
Yes! It worked!
Thank you so much for all your help!
Best Regards,
Saloni
On 28 May 2014 23:31, Douglas N Greve wrote:
>
> Daniel found your problem as he mentioned in his previous email (see
> below). Change the qdec table to have the name of the subject be
> 54987500_output.
>
> Also, I
Tudor,
in your virtual machine, make sure the 3D rendering option, or 'use
hardware rendering' (or something like that) is enabled. this would be on
the Windows VM config side of things. otherwise it will do software
rendering which is painfully slow.
Nick
> Hi Tudor,
>
> I don't think there
Dear Anastasia et al.
I have data DTI that has multiple b-values. I worked around this by
skipping '-tensor', and sym linking 'mean_fsumsamples.nii.gz' to
'dtifit_FA.nii.gz'. However, at the end of 'trac-path', there is an
error thrown. Specifically when 'dmri_pathstats' is called, because it
I'm trying to convert a surface label to a nifti file to use with
functional surface data that is already in nifti format. The ultimate goal
is to be able to use the converted surface label as a seed in gPPI analyses
that is run in MATLAB.
I've been able to use volume based seeds for the MNI305 su
Hi
Due to aberrantly high for a few of the subjects, I ran recon-all
-autorecon2-wm -randomness -autorecon3 –hemi ?h before, calculating the
localGI index. However, I intended to use these data in a longitudinal
stream. These subject that were reprocessed using recon-all
-autorecon2-wm -ra
Hi
help lme_mass_FDR
and
help /lme_mass_FDR2/
For help with input and output?
Knut J
On 05/26/2014 11:24 AM, Nandita Vijayakumar wrote:
Hi FS team,
I was wondering if you could help me with FDR correction for linear
mixed models within Matlab. I have run FDR2 correction using the
follo
Hi Knut,
Basically as you reprocessed totally your surfaces, yes it is safer to
reprocess the longitudinal stream to make sure that everything is coherent.
As for the smoothing, lGI is already inherently very smoothed, so you
definitely have to take a lower FWHM than for thickness. When you ru
Hi Marie
Thank you for your reply. I have one additional question. Is there any
difference in results when using Matlab 2012a compared to Matlab 2013b
for localGI?
Best regards,
Knut J
On 05/29/2014 11:05 PM, Marie Schaer wrote:
> Hi Knut,
>
> Basically as you reprocessed totally your surfa
Hi Knut,
No, there is no difference in the results. At some point we had an issue with
Matlab 2013, which was solved in the last FreeSurfer version. This issue makes
the lGI crash, but as soon as it is solved the computation gets to the end with
similar results independently on the Matlab vers
16 matches
Mail list logo