I am not familiar with that command, but I think LVD stands for landmark
vector difference, it is a method of doing surface based registration.  I
suspect that what you need is to replace the atlas spec file with a spec
file containing an atlas on your desired sphere.  I also suspect that the
deformation map file is being used for a different purpose than
deformation, for instance to get parameters and what kind of method to use
to generate the registration.  I am guessing the individual spec file isn't
on a standard mesh yet?  If it is not on a standard mesh, I don't see how
it could be applying a deformation before it registers it or at least
resamples it onto a standard mesh (and I would not expect it to apply a
deformation other than that obtained by the registration afterwards).

I can only make a wild guess as to what the comment about "fixed for new
spheres" is about, but I suspect the behavior it refers to has not been
changed, partly because my wild guess is that it was based on misuse of a
command, and partly because caret5 hasn't been modified much recently.

Tim

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Colin Reveley <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> I'm very sorry I see it's basically trivial to register in both
> directions. My registrations can be tricky though.
>
> if caret command has been fixed for new spheres, I'd be most grateful to
> learn how I might leverage that. It also simplifies the scripts in places.
>
> I need a replacement for *.LVD.deform_map presumably?
>
> many thanks.
>
> On 17 February 2012 19:15, <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Send caret-users mailing list submissions to
>>        [email protected]
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>        http://brainvis.wustl.edu/mailman/listinfo/caret-users
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>        [email protected]
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>        [email protected]
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of caret-users digest..."
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>   1. Re: Interspecies comparisons - creating a new atlas for a
>>      different primate species (Timothy Coalson)
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Timothy Coalson <[email protected]>
>> To: "Caret, SureFit, and SuMS software users" <
>> [email protected]>
>> Cc:
>> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 12:31:56 -0600
>> Subject: Re: [caret-users] Interspecies comparisons - creating a new
>> atlas for a different primate species
>> The new atlases we are making (I think they may be included in the 5.65
>> release, but I am not sure, the fs_LR atlases are the ones I mean) use this
>> new kind of sphere.  If you want to take a look at node spacing regularity,
>> there is an option in caret to generate the node areas of a surface under
>> Surface->Region Of Interest Operations...
>>
>> Select all the nodes (clicking select with the default settings should do
>> this), click next, select "Assign metric with node areas", click the
>> "Assign Metric Node Areas" button, and there you have it.  Of course, the
>> node regularity on the sphere doesn't translate directly to node regularity
>> on subject surfaces, there is distortion inherent to registering on a
>> sphere, since the brain isn't a sphere, but it should help.
>>
>> The new sphere code is only used in a few commands, so I would have to
>> know more about what commands generate the surfaces in your current methods
>> to hazard a guess at whether you would need to do something different to
>> get a new sphere.
>>
>> Tim
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Colin Reveley <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> Tim - what you say is interesting.
>>>
>>> I have actually wondered about node spacing in fiducial surfaces
>>> registered to F99 via macaque.sphere6.
>>>
>>> It's not always 100% super straight forward to register (without lots of
>>> crossovers and issues). I'm fairly pleased with what I have. the matches
>>> are quite good.
>>>
>>> however, for my purposes, a node spacing that is a regular as possible
>>> in the context just of registering my surface to F99 has real advantages,
>>> because I use nodes as tractography seeds and I'd like their spacing to be
>>> roughly even.
>>>
>>> Might I benefit from trying your new approach? How hard would it be? f99
>>> is still 73730, as are all the atlas files. DVE's most recent free surfer
>>> macaque to F99 tutorial still very much uses 73730.
>>>
>>> My surfaces are from FS and look pretty evenly spaced. So maybe register
>>> F99 on to my mesh, and make a deform_map for the F99 data? essentially
>>> following the menu driven landmark pinned reg.
>>>
>>> Other than fiducials (WM,GM, mean) the topos and other surfaces are made
>>> with caret operations. I'm guessing if I repeat those operations with
>>> caret5.65, it will follow the new scheme of things in terms of how node
>>> spacing is decided?
>>>
>>> Colin Reveley, sussex.
>>>
>>> On 17 February 2012 05:17, <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Send caret-users mailing list submissions to
>>>>        [email protected]
>>>>
>>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>>>        http://brainvis.wustl.edu/mailman/listinfo/caret-users
>>>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>>>        [email protected]
>>>>
>>>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>>>        [email protected]
>>>>
>>>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>>>> than "Re: Contents of caret-users digest..."
>>>>
>>>> Today's Topics:
>>>>
>>>>   1. Re: caret-users Digest, Vol 101, Issue 2 (Colin Reveley)
>>>>   2. Interspecies comparisons - creating a new atlas for a
>>>>      different primate species (Tristan Chaplin)
>>>>   3. Re: Interspecies comparisons - creating a new atlas for a
>>>>      different primate species (Timothy Coalson)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Colin Reveley <[email protected]>
>>>> To: <[email protected]>
>>>> Cc:
>>>> Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 18:52:56 +0000
>>>> Subject: Re: [caret-users] caret-users Digest, Vol 101, Issue 2
>>>> One would expect the caret GUI to become unresponsive, and also expect
>>>> the process to be listed as "not responding" in the task manager even if
>>>> things were going well.
>>>>
>>>> but it crashes.
>>>>
>>>> might I suggest the neurodebian virtual machine? there is a 32bit
>>>> windows version. Loads of great stuff on there including caret.
>>>>
>>>> http://neuro.debian.net/vm.html#installation
>>>>
>>>> even if things are slow due to hardware limitations you may have, you
>>>> could segment in the virtual machine, and then use caret in plain windows
>>>> to work with the results.
>>>>
>>>> hope helps,
>>>>
>>>> Colin
>>>>
>>>> On 16 February 2012 18:00, <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Send caret-users mailing list submissions to
>>>>>        [email protected]
>>>>>
>>>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>>>>        http://brainvis.wustl.edu/mailman/listinfo/caret-users
>>>>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>>>>        [email protected]
>>>>>
>>>>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>>>>        [email protected]
>>>>>
>>>>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>>>>> than "Re: Contents of caret-users digest..."
>>>>>
>>>>> Today's Topics:
>>>>>
>>>>>   1. Not Responding Error (Maestri, Matthew)
>>>>>   2. Re: Not Responding Error (Donna Dierker)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>> From: "Maestri, Matthew" <[email protected]>
>>>>> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>>>>> Cc:
>>>>> Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 20:07:37 +0000
>>>>> Subject: [caret-users] Not Responding Error
>>>>>
>>>>> Matthew Maestri****
>>>>>
>>>>> [email protected]****
>>>>>
>>>>> caret5****
>>>>>
>>>>> CARET v5.65 (Jan. 27, 2012)****
>>>>>
>>>>> Windows XP****
>>>>>
>>>>> After I hit the ‘OK’ button for the *Segmenting an Anatomical 
>>>>> Volume*process to begin, the program froze. No specific error message was 
>>>>> given
>>>>> but it did say that the program was *Not Responding*. After this, the
>>>>> program closed. This happened twice. Do you know of any reason why this 
>>>>> may
>>>>> have occurred? Thanks.****
>>>>>
>>>>> Run the tutorial from the website****
>>>>>
>>>>> Not Responding error and then it closes****
>>>>>
>>>>> It should segment an anatomical volume****
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>> From: Donna Dierker <[email protected]>
>>>>> To: "Caret, SureFit, and SuMS software users" <
>>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>> Cc:
>>>>> Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 15:59:48 -0600
>>>>> Subject: Re: [caret-users] Not Responding Error
>>>>> Not really, but if you are using a non-English character set,
>>>>> switching to an English one seems to solve all sorts of seemingly 
>>>>> unrelated
>>>>> problems.
>>>>>
>>>>> It has been a very long time since I have segmented on Windows, but
>>>>> from what I recall, Caret launched from a command prompt, and you could
>>>>> often see progress messages echo to the command prompt terminal.  Do you
>>>>> see any messages at all there before it closes?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Feb 15, 2012, at 2:07 PM, Maestri, Matthew wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > Matthew Maestri
>>>>> >
>>>>> > [email protected]
>>>>> >
>>>>> > caret5
>>>>> >
>>>>> > CARET v5.65 (Jan. 27, 2012)
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Windows XP
>>>>> >
>>>>> > After I hit the ‘OK’ button for the Segmenting an Anatomical Volume
>>>>> process to begin, the program froze. No specific error message was given
>>>>> but it did say that the program was Not Responding. After this, the 
>>>>> program
>>>>> closed. This happened twice. Do you know of any reason why this may have
>>>>> occurred? Thanks.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Run the tutorial from the website
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Not Responding error and then it closes
>>>>> >
>>>>> > It should segment an anatomical volume
>>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>> > 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
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Tristan Chaplin <[email protected]>
>>>> To: "Caret, SureFit, and SuMS software users" <
>>>> [email protected]>
>>>> Cc:
>>>> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 11:56:45 +1100
>>>> Subject: [caret-users] Interspecies comparisons - creating a new atlas
>>>> for a different primate species
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> A while back I asked about creating standard mesh of 73,730 nodes,
>>>> similar to what is used for PALS atlas.  I never got a chance to follow it
>>>> up then but I'd like to give it a go now.  It seemed at the time that the
>>>> knowledge for creating such meshes was limited to a select few so if anyone
>>>> has any experience with this or has the contact details of someone I would
>>>> greatly appreciate hearing from them.
>>>>
>>>> The reason for creating this mesh is for making atlas for the marmoset
>>>> monkey.  We are very interested registering this atlas to the macaque
>>>> monkey and doing analyses similar to Hill et al. (2010).
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Tristan Chaplin
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 16:04, Tristan Chaplin <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Ok thanks for the information.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 03:25, Donna Dierker 
>>>>> <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 02/01/2011 07:31 PM, Tristan Chaplin wrote:
>>>>>> > Hi,
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I've been reading about the creation of your atlases, and I see that
>>>>>> > PALS and the macaque atlases have standard size mesh of 73,730
>>>>>> nodes.
>>>>>> >  I was wondering, is this the same across species to allow
>>>>>> > interspecies registration?  i.e. is it still possible to do
>>>>>> > interspecies comparisons of other species with different size
>>>>>> meshes?
>>>>>> Possible, but more difficult.  Not to say that achieving vertex
>>>>>> correspondence across species is trivial.  Interspecies comparisons
>>>>>> are
>>>>>> really hard.  I think David Van Essen is the only one in our lab that
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> doing them, although Matt Glasser might also be doing some.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I was also wondering how the standard mesh was was actually made.
>>>>>>  The
>>>>>> > PALS paper refers to the Saad 2004 paper, which I think uses SUMA.
>>>>>> >  SUMA has a program called MapIcosahedron to create standard meshes.
>>>>>> >  Is this still how you would recommend making a standard mesh?
>>>>>> Tim Coalson (a student who works summers here) also developed a
>>>>>> utility
>>>>>> that creates meshes of specified resolution.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Making a standard mesh is not something I ever do.  You do it with a
>>>>>> specific motivation -- typically some other important data is already
>>>>>> available on that mesh.  And the way you usually get your data on that
>>>>>> mesh is to register it to an atlas target already on that mesh.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you are talking about creating, say, a sparser mesh for mice/rats,
>>>>>> then you're out of my orbit.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Thanks,
>>>>>> > Tristan
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>> > 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
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Timothy Coalson <[email protected]>
>>>> To: "Caret, SureFit, and SuMS software users" <
>>>> [email protected]>
>>>> Cc:
>>>> Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 23:08:30 -0600
>>>> Subject: Re: [caret-users] Interspecies comparisons - creating a new
>>>> atlas for a different primate species
>>>> We have moved away from the 73730 mesh, we are now using a new method
>>>> to generate meshes which results in much more regular node spacing.  Making
>>>> a sphere is actually relatively easy, especially with the new release of
>>>> caret.  The hard part is making it into an atlas, which I defer to someone
>>>> else.  The command:
>>>>
>>>> caret_command -surface-create-spheres
>>>>
>>>> Will generate a pair of matched left/right spheres (mirror node
>>>> correspondence, topologies with normals oriented out).  I think that
>>>> command made it into the 5.65 release, if not you can use spec file change
>>>> resolution, and grab just the new sphere, and ditch the rest.  The odd bit
>>>> about spec file change resolution, though, is if you give it an old node
>>>> count, like 73730, it will give you the old sphere (this is in case someone
>>>> is relying on its old behavior).  However, ask it for 73731 nodes, and you
>>>> will get a new highly regular sphere instead (though it won't have 73730
>>>> nodes, because the 73730 node mesh wasn't a regularly divided geodesic
>>>> sphere, but it will give you something close).  If all else fails, there
>>>> are a few spheres in the caret data directory.
>>>>
>>>> Tim
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Tristan Chaplin <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> A while back I asked about creating standard mesh of 73,730 nodes,
>>>>> similar to what is used for PALS atlas.  I never got a chance to follow it
>>>>> up then but I'd like to give it a go now.  It seemed at the time that the
>>>>> knowledge for creating such meshes was limited to a select few so if 
>>>>> anyone
>>>>> has any experience with this or has the contact details of someone I would
>>>>> greatly appreciate hearing from them.
>>>>>
>>>>> The reason for creating this mesh is for making atlas for the marmoset
>>>>> monkey.  We are very interested registering this atlas to the macaque
>>>>> monkey and doing analyses similar to Hill et al. (2010).
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Tristan Chaplin
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 16:04, Tristan Chaplin <
>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok thanks for the information.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 03:25, Donna Dierker <[email protected]
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 02/01/2011 07:31 PM, Tristan Chaplin wrote:
>>>>>>> > Hi,
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > I've been reading about the creation of your atlases, and I see
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> > PALS and the macaque atlases have standard size mesh of 73,730
>>>>>>> nodes.
>>>>>>> >  I was wondering, is this the same across species to allow
>>>>>>> > interspecies registration?  i.e. is it still possible to do
>>>>>>> > interspecies comparisons of other species with different size
>>>>>>> meshes?
>>>>>>> Possible, but more difficult.  Not to say that achieving vertex
>>>>>>> correspondence across species is trivial.  Interspecies comparisons
>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>> really hard.  I think David Van Essen is the only one in our lab
>>>>>>> that is
>>>>>>> doing them, although Matt Glasser might also be doing some.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > I was also wondering how the standard mesh was was actually made.
>>>>>>>  The
>>>>>>> > PALS paper refers to the Saad 2004 paper, which I think uses SUMA.
>>>>>>> >  SUMA has a program called MapIcosahedron to create standard
>>>>>>> meshes.
>>>>>>> >  Is this still how you would recommend making a standard mesh?
>>>>>>> Tim Coalson (a student who works summers here) also developed a
>>>>>>> utility
>>>>>>> that creates meshes of specified resolution.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Making a standard mesh is not something I ever do.  You do it with a
>>>>>>> specific motivation -- typically some other important data is already
>>>>>>> available on that mesh.  And the way you usually get your data on
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> mesh is to register it to an atlas target already on that mesh.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you are talking about creating, say, a sparser mesh for mice/rats,
>>>>>>> then you're out of my orbit.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Thanks,
>>>>>>> > Tristan
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> > 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
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to