On 10/14/2010 12:51 PM, Bruno L. Giordano wrote: > Hi Donna, > > thank you very much for the prompt feedback! > >> Now we distinguish creating, say, average fiducial surfaces from >> creating atlases. One can generate the former without generating the >> latter, which is more involved. It would help if I knew more about what >> you're trying to do. > > Sure, my goal is not to create an atlas, but to create a surface > representations from my 20 subject. Let's call this a target. > > Most of my fMRI effects are around Heschl gyrus, so I am not > completely satisfied with using an atlas to get a sense of where > exactly they are located. I would also like to include the transverse > temporal sulcus in the registration (and perhaps some additional > landmark), and show on the rendered surface with the projected > functionals how variable the landmarks I choose are. > > Right now my plan is to (I analyzed everything in SPM): > > 1. create a target surface from the SPM-normalized T1s of each of the > participants: this is not a very nice representation, but it shows > very clear landmarks (with the possible exception of the ventral > medial wall); So far, so good. What software will you use to generate the surfaces? > 2. project the surfaces of the participants (derived from > SPM-normalized T1s) onto this target surface; This isn't really clear. As best I can discern, you mean register your subjects to the PALS-B12 target atlas, at which time your various coord files, including fiducial/midthickness coord files, will get resampled onto the PALS-B12 73730 standard mesh. > 3. create a new improved target surface by averaging those coming out > from 2. (eventually include the additional temporal landmarks at this > point and not at 1.). Why? What is your motivation for creating a customized target, instead of using PALS-B12? What is different about your subjects? > 4. project the surfaces of the participants used at 2. on the new target; > 5. average surfaces coming out at 4; > 6. project my functionals (group results) onto the average surface > from 5. Normally, we would register the subjects to PALS-B12 and do averaging/statistics on the metric files (think vertex:scalar pairs), rendering the results on standard PALS-B12 views (inflated, very inflated, or flat). > > Would this sound like a good procedure? The value added of steps 3-6 is lost on me. It sounds like a lot of work for little gain. > > Thank you again! > > Bruno > > > > >>> Thank you! >>> >>> Bruno >>> _______________________________________________ >>> caret-users mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://brainvis.wustl.edu/mailman/listinfo/caret-users >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> caret-users mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://brainvis.wustl.edu/mailman/listinfo/caret-users >> . >>
_______________________________________________ caret-users mailing list [email protected] http://brainvis.wustl.edu/mailman/listinfo/caret-users
