The mask sort of covers the whole brain (see attached). It may be due
to the display thresholding, when I viewed the path.pd.nii.gz using
fslview, the tract actually has been recovered as compared to the
previous one (old_path.png).

However, the path.pd still does seem normal, i.e. with quite a few
extraordinary high intensity (probability, yellow)?

Thanks.

ping

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Anastasia Yendiki
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Ping - Do the corresponding brain masks in diffusion space
> (dlabel/diff/aparc+aseg_mask.bbr.nii.gz and aparc+aseg_mask.flt.nii.gz) now
> cover the entire brain well, after the aparc+aseg fixes?
>
> a.y
>
> On Tue, 18 Oct 2011, Ping-Hong Yeh wrote:
>
>> Hi Anastasia,
>>
>> I got fixed of the aparc+aseg (see aparc+aseg.png) in one of
>> problematic data and re-ran the trac-all following your suggestions.
>> However, the segmented forceps major using "FLIRT" still not getting
>> good result (see flt.png) though "BBR" one is OK (see bbr.png).
>> Similarly the segmented L CST using BBR looks weird, but the ones
>> using FLIRT seem OK.
>> It appear  the problems are not simply due to the poor segmentation
>> from the T1 recon-all.
>>
>> Any further suggestions?
>>
>> BR,
>> Ping
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 11:04 AM, Anastasia Yendiki
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Ping-Hong,
>>>
>>> Yes, you can set usemaskanat = 0 in your dmrirc, and then the brain mask
>>> will be extracted from the DWI data by the bet tool, instead of using the
>>> aparc+aseg.
>>>
>>> But, and this is a big but, TRACULA uses the aparc+aseg to constrain the
>>> tractography solutions, i.e. the aparc+aseg is where the UnderLying
>>> Anatomy
>>> in TRACULA comes from. So the quality of the trac-all results depend on
>>> the
>>> quality of the aparc+aseg regardless of where your mask came from.
>>>
>>> a.y
>>>
>>> On Fri, 14 Oct 2011, Ping-Hong Yeh wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Anastasia,
>>>>
>>>> Can trac-all just use the mask in diffusion native space (by setting
>>>> "usemaskanat = 0"?  ) so I get around the T1 segmentation problem from
>>>> FS recon?
>>>>
>>>> It seems that there is no quick answer on fixing the aparc+aseg?
>>>>
>>>> Thank you,
>>>> p
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 10:35 PM, Anastasia Yendiki
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll have to refer you back to the freesurfer list for that one. There
>>>>> are
>>>>> people with much more expertise than me on troubleshooting the
>>>>> recon-all
>>>>> stream.
>>>>>
>>>>> Once you get your recons fixed, you'll have to rerun all trac-all steps
>>>>> except 1.1 (image corrections).
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 11 Oct 2011, Ping-Hong Yeh wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The original aparc+aseg are not good, at least for these two cases. So
>>>>>> which parameters in recon-all should be tweaked?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Anastasia Yendiki
>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is the original aparc+aseg from the freesurfer recon not good either
>>>>>>> (from
>>>>>>> mri/aparc+aseg.mgz)? Or is it messed up only after registration into
>>>>>>> diffusion space (dlabel/diff/aparc+aseg.flt.nii.gz,
>>>>>>> dlabel/diff/aparc+aseg.bbr.nii.gz)? This will determine if the
>>>>>>> freesurfer
>>>>>>> recon needs to be fixed or if the registration needs to fixed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, 11 Oct 2011, Ping-Hong Yeh wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> yeap, the aparc+aseg_masks are not good.
>>>>>>>> Any way to fix this? Thanks.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Anastasia Yendiki
>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I see, the mask may be the answer to the initialization failures!
>>>>>>>>> It
>>>>>>>>> seems
>>>>>>>>> like the fmajor you sent me also has its endings masked out? That'd
>>>>>>>>> cause
>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>> to fail. I wish I'd thought of this earlier!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> With usemaskanat = 1, the mask that's used is a slightly dilated
>>>>>>>>> version
>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>> the aparc+aseg from the FS recon, mapped to diffusion space. So if
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> aparc+aseg has those parts missing, or if the diffusion-anatomical
>>>>>>>>> registration is not good, parts will be masked out that shouldn't.
>>>>>>>>> The
>>>>>>>>> anatomical mask can be found in dlabel/diff/aparc+aseg_mask* (if
>>>>>>>>> you've
>>>>>>>>> run
>>>>>>>>> both flirt and bbregister registrations, there'll be 2 of them).
>>>>>>>>> Does
>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>> mask look like something went wrong?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 11 Oct 2011, Ping-Hong Yeh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I used the default, i.e. set usemaskanat =1, but it looks that
>>>>>>>>>> tracts
>>>>>>>>>> were not reconstructed at the place where it was masked out (see
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> cross-bar at L_unc.png).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I still have no luck in fixing the initialization issue (see
>>>>>>>>>> fmajor.png for example).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 3:19 PM, Anastasia Yendiki
>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Ping - If you're using the anatomical brain as a mask (set
>>>>>>>>>>> usemaskanat
>>>>>>>>>>> =
>>>>>>>>>>> 1, which is the default), then the diffusion-based mask won't
>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>>> effect
>>>>>>>>>>> on your outputs.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> BTW, have you had any luck with your initialization issues? Sorry
>>>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>> haven't
>>>>>>>>>>> had another chance to look at your data since we last emailed, I
>>>>>>>>>>> got
>>>>>>>>>>> bogged
>>>>>>>>>>> down with some other stuff.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> a.y
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 11 Oct 2011, Ping-Hong Yeh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Anastasia,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to lower the bet threshold value by "set thrbet = 0.01"
>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>> skull-stripping because some of the brains have been cut, but it
>>>>>>>>>>>> does
>>>>>>>>>>>> not seem to  make any changes (see attached).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Any suggestion? Thank you,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ping
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 12:09 PM, Anastasia Yendiki
>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes! Please add the "set reinit = 1" to the file that you pass
>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -c.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2011, Ping-Hong Yeh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so I should pass with the -c argument instead?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 12:04 PM, Anastasia Yendiki
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That file gets overwritten by whatever is in the file that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pass
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -c argument to trac-all. Sorry for the confusion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2011, Ping-Hong Yeh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I edited the file under scripts/dmrirc.local
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Anastasia Yendiki
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Ping - Thanks for trying that. When you say in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dmrirc.local,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mean that you edit the file under scripts/dmrirc.local, or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pass to trac-all as "-c dmrirc"?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a.y
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2011, Ping-Hong Yeh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Anastasia,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've rerun NCNC0047, the one I sent you, and another one,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not help fixing the tracts.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I redone trac-all -prior with "set reinit =1" in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dmrirc.local
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and then trac-all -path
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any further suggestions? Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ping
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Anastasia Yendiki
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I wonder if the problem is with the replacement
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> executables
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> snow
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leopard. They should not have a time stamp of April 14th,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> how
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that could've happened.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you please try copying the version that I'm attaching
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> first
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trac-all -prior and then trac-all -path with it?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If this version works, I'll have to reupload it and let
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everyone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know. Thanks!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2011, Ping-Hong Yeh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The dmri_* files in the $freesurfer/bin are all after
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> May,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2011
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (see
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attached).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the one version, which failed on the MAC, has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> replaced
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the newer version. Is there a way to make sure the old
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been deleted?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Anastasia Yendiki
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The problem would be if the programs that trac-all runs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (dmri_*)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version earlier than the stable 5.1 release, which was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> made
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> late
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> May. Do you think you might have a different version on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> machine
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whatever reason?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2011, Ping-Hong Yeh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, Anastasia,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Most of the T1 segmentation results were done on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> another
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> machine
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> using
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> V4.4.0, but the one running trac-all is on the machine
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "freesurfer-i686-apple-darwin9.8.0-stable5-20110525".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cause
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the problem?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> p
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Anastasia Yendiki
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, Ping, I got the files. The Apr 14th build
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stamp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suspicious,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> since the official 5.1 release was a month later, and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> initialization
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues were mostly what I was debugging during that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> month.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version of freesurfer installed?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2011, Ping-Hong Yeh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Anastasia,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I followed the instruction on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/FtpFileExchange
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see if you can find the file there. Indeed I've
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> re-run
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sent
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you last night, now it seems OK for that particular
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> case.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've loaded another one to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (still
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> loading while writing this email), which has severe
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ventricular
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dilatation and the result of right anterior thalamic
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> radiation
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> path
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not right.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've attached the picture of another case failed at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> forceps
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> major
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the first attempt, and the snapshot after manually
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> picking
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> initial
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> points. The gray scale intensity is still not right,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i.e.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> initial
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> path is very high (yellow), the others are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> significantly
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> low,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not I've usually seen. Does the gray scale still
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> represent
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> likelihood (probability) of path or something else
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here is the output of dmri_train --all-info:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ProgramName: dmri_train  ProgramArguments:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --all-info
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  ProgramVersion:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> $Name:  $  TimeStamp: 2011/09/29-16:41:32-GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  BuildTimeStamp:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apr
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 14
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2011 15:35:19  CVS:   User: twbrkmp2  Machine:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> twbrkmp2s-Mac-Pro-5.local  Platform: Darwin
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  PlatformVersion:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10.8.0
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CompilerName: GCC  CompilerVersion: 40200
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ping
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Anastasia Yendiki
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Ping - Did you try to attach it to your email? I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please try our file drop site:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  https://www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a.y
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 28 Sep 2011, Ping-Hong Yeh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Anastasia,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've loaded the file, pingforAY.tar.gz
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This example data set failed in forceps major in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flt
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> L
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> slfp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bbr.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you very much.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ping
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 6:17 PM, Anastasia Yendiki
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Ping - You can upload your data if you want me
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> look
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. The initial points ideally should be along the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> midline
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pathway,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> starting from one end region of the pathway and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other end region. (The default number is 5
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> control
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> points
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "set
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ncpts = ..." in your dmrirc to change that.)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. You can look in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> $FREESURFER_HOME/bin/dmrirc.example
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> how
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specify
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the field map inputs. They don't need to have the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> same
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> matrix
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> size
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resolution as the DWIs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3a. If it's the initialization that's failed, the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> output
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> initial path and nothing else (which is I think
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mean
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "fewer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> voxels").
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3b. The diffusion model used here is the same as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ball-and-stick
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> model
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that FSL uses. If the threshold you're referring
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> minimum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> volume
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraction for the anisotropic compartments of that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> model,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "set
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fmin =
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ..." in your dmrirc to choose one.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I hope this helps a bit!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a.y
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 28 Sep 2011, Ping-Hong Yeh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Anastasia,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've tried both options, the choice 1 fixed some
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cases,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not all; and the choice 2 did not work at all.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> missed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something here.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Few more questions:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Will the initial points have to include the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> points
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> around
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> start,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way, and end points of the tracts need to be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> segmented?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enter the points in the main stem of tracts?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Will EPI distortion correction, like using
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> field
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> map,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> preprocessing steps help co-registration and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thus
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> improving
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> labeling? So far more than 80% (4 out of 5 data
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sets)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> data
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have at least one suboptimal tract, either in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flt
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bbr.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (BTW,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flag will call B0 fieldmaps (or phase and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> magnitude
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> images)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> distortion correction? Do the fieldmap images
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> need
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> same
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> matrix size and resolution as DWI? )
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3.  I wonder why these suboptimal segmented
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tracts
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> terribly
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> off the white matter paths but just fewer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> voxels?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Would
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> probabilistic tractography implemented in FSL be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> working
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> around this problem by lowering the threshold
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tract
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> segmentation?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ping
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Anastasia
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yendiki
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Ping - There are 2 possibilities:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. You can try to fiddle with the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> initialization
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> points
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yourself
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sure they're well in the CST. The point
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> coordinates
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> saved
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> text
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - look at the --init argument of the dmri_paths
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> command
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> line,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> find in trac-all.log.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. You can let trac-all select a different
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> initialization
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> adding
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "set
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reinit = 1" to your dmrirc file, then running
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trac-all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -prior
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Once you change the initialization by doing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> either
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> above,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> need
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to run trac-all -path to reconstruct this path
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You can change the pathlist in dmrirc to do
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> path
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> failed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We jump through various hoops to make sure this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sort
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> happen
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but in a few cases it can't be prevented,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unfortunately.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let me know if this has helped or if you have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> questions!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a.y
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 22 Sep 2011, Ping-Hong Yeh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Anastasia,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The both ends were not terribly off of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> white
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> matter,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lower end was a bit off at the level of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decussation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suggestion
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixing this?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ping
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Anastasia
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yendiki
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Ping - It looks like the path
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> initialization
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> may
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> failed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> algorithm needs an initial guess for the path
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> iterates
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> initial guess is chosen based on the tracts
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> atlas
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> subject
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is not perfectly aligned with the atlas this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> initial
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> guess
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> end
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> up
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going off the white matter for example. Does
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blue
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> line
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> snapshot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> look like it may not coincide well with you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> subject's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CST,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> off
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> white matter close to the end, etc?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a.y
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 22 Sep 2011, Ping-Hong Yeh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The segmented left CST tracts of one of our
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3T
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> data
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> satisfactory, which has only few voxels with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1000
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gray
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> values
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (see
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attached snapshot pictures for "trac-all"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "cst_prob").
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> manually tracking using deterministic
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tractography
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seems
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OK
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (see
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cst_stremline). Any suggestions on which
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> step
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> may
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> go
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrong
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trac-all?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ping
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The information in this e-mail is intended
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whom
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> addressed. If you believe this e-mail was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sent
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> e-mail
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contains patient information, please contact
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Partners
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Compliance
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HelpLine at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> e-mail
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sent
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but does not contain patient information,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> please
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contact
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sender
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> properly
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dispose of the e-mail.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>

<<attachment: Picture 169.png>>

<<attachment: old_path.pd.png>>

_______________________________________________
Freesurfer mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer


The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is
addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail
contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at
http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in error
but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properly
dispose of the e-mail.

Reply via email to