Thanks I'll look at that. Time consuming is something I do.

I hope to make something of it with available tools.

There are issues as you say. Conceptual issues.

I would say it helps to have high bvals, high snr, high ang res and
therefore a plausible diffusion signal, at least for 1st dist, in gm. which
we do.

that way you can seed and target one voxel up into the GM from a WM surface
(or one down, or mix it up, and so on, but gm termini and seeds are an
option)

DW in GM is an area of research of particular interest to the guy who
scanned the brain. But he's got the knowledge and the fancy equipment.

not that a 10T MRI scanner or whatever it is for the connectome isn't
fancy. is it even legal for persons? ;-> I think it isn't in the uk
actually. not that there is one. there isn't.



>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Matt Glasser <m...@ma-tea.com>
> To: "'Caret, SureFit, and SuMS software users'" <
> caret-users@brainvis.wustl.edu>
> Cc:
> Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 19:12:08 -0600
> Subject: Re: [caret-users] FA->surefit
> **
>
> Hi Colin,****
>
> ** **
>
> I have used the mean of f (mean_f1samples + mean_f2samples +
> mean_f3samples) to make surfaces from diffusion data.  I threshold the
> image and then do manual editing to clean it up.  It is timeconsuming, but
> possible to get high quality surfaces from this.  I would note that
> surface-based tractography has some significant technical issues that need
> to be addressed before it will do what we want it to.  This is something we
> are working on together with Oxford.  ****
>
> ** **
>
> Peace,****
>
> ** **
>
> Matt. ****
>
> ** **
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From:* **caret-users-boun...@brainvis.wustl.edu** [mailto:**
> caret-users-boun...@brainvis.wustl.edu**] *On Behalf Of *Colin Reveley
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 10, 2012 5:05 PM
> *To:* caret-users@brainvis.wustl.edu
> *Subject:* [caret-users] FA->surefit****
>
> ** **
>
> Before I hit my head against it pointlessly, but because there could be
> value in it, how much luck am I likely to have have in making a surface
> from a fractional asisotropy volume, or similar (something non-tensor
> that's a bit more complicated but still FA like to the eye, or else eg mean
> diffusivity)****
>
> ** **
>
> the point is to make masks from the caret surface that make sense in
> diffusion space (don't cross WM/GM boundaries as the diffusion measure sees
> them, rather than as a T1-like sequence sees them. this impacts on the
> probability that a streamline will hit a mask in gray or white, where gray
> always has low likelihood but white has high likelihood that the stream may
> be on its way somewhere else. )****
>
> ** **
>
> It strikes me as worth something (registered to the rest...)  in the
> context of everything else I'm looking at.****
>
> ** **
>
> It also strikes me as not worth it if it is just simply going to be yet
> another lengthy project to get it to work. ****
>
> ** **
>
> Have surfaces been made from any diffusion maps using surfeit?****
>
> ** **
>
> mean diffusivity seems non-silly. I've got about ten million other maps.
> name it I have it.****
>
> ** **
>
> thanks as always****
>
> ** **
>
> best,****
>
> ** **
>
> Colin****
>
> _______________________________________________
> caret-users mailing list
> caret-users@brainvis.wustl.edu
> http://brainvis.wustl.edu/mailman/listinfo/caret-users
>
>
_______________________________________________
caret-users mailing list
caret-users@brainvis.wustl.edu
http://brainvis.wustl.edu/mailman/listinfo/caret-users

Reply via email to