Dear All,
This worked for me...
for x in SZ1 SZ2 SZ3
do
recon-all -i $x.nii -s $x -all -hippo-subfileds
done
Thanks for your valuable inputs...
From: Bruce Fischl fis...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
To: Watson, Christopher christopher.wat...@childrens.harvard.edu
Dear FS,
I just started reanalyzing my data using FS5.3 (based on your feedback) after
experiencing problems in the 5.0 version.
Here however, I'm having a new problem: the pial surface of a number of
subjects is missing only for the right hemisphere, while the white matter
surface looks
Hi David
there are situations in which mri_pretess can elimate pathological
configurations by removing/adding any one of a set of voxels. In those
cases the norm is used to decide among them (e.g. to remove the one that
appears least like WM or to add the one that appears most like WM)
Thanks, Bruce! -David
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 5:46 AM, Bruce Fischl fis...@nmr.mgh.harvard.eduwrote:
Hi David
there are situations in which mri_pretess can elimate pathological
configurations by removing/adding any one of a set of voxels. In those
cases the norm is used to decide among
raw_age.fsgd
Description: Binary data
Dear Freesufer experts. I am trying to run attached fsgd file in qdec or in
GLM-fit. I just want to do a group comparison in which I compare cortical
thickness between groups controlling for age.
when I run the analysis with age as a raw score - the
Hi Olof, did mri_glmfit actually run with the FSGD file? The format is
not correct. How did you convert your age variable to z? In particular,
how did you demean them? Did you compute the mean on a group basis or
for all subjects? What was your mri_glmfit command line?
doug
On 9/10/13
Gotcha, so you mean run mri_concat --conjunct on the original .mgh files first,
and then use mri_surfcluster to extract labels from the finalized .mgh.
By the way, mri_annotation2label works like a charm!
--
Yung-Jui Daniel Yang, PhD
Postdoctoral Researcher
Yale Child Study Center
New Haven, CT
Hi Maya, you could create 3 separatestacks with isxconcat-sess (A, B,
A-B), then create the mask you want with mri_binarize, something like
mri_binarize --i A.nii --min 0.1 --mask B.nii --mask-thresh 0.1
--o A-and-B.nii
Then use this as the --mask input to mri_glmfit.
You should also
When QDEC runs, it creates a y.fsgd file. Can you send me the y.fsgd for
each design?
doug
On 09/10/2013 04:13 PM, olof lindberg wrote:
Dear Douglas,
no I did not run in GLM-fit - I run in qdec
The conversion into z-scores was done in a statistical program
(statistica) and was
It is an estimate of Tal coords from the MNI305. See
http://imaging.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/imaging/MniTalairach
If you want MNI305, run mri_surfcluster with --nofixmni
doug
On 09/10/2013 05:08 PM, Yang, Daniel wrote:
Hi all,
The output of mri_surfcluster --sum shows TalX TalY TalZ. I am
Hi all,
The output of mri_surfcluster --sum shows TalX TalY TalZ. I am wondering if
they are based on the Talairach system or some sort of MNI-Talairach system. If
the latter, can you tell me something more about it? Like a webpage that
describes its relationship between the MNI152 or the
Thanks, Doug. I am really hoping to get MNI152 (because I also use fsl). Are
MNI305 and MNI152 the same? How can I obtain MNI152 coordinates?
Best,
Daniel
--
Yung-Jui Daniel Yang, PhD
Postdoctoral Researcher
Yale Child Study Center
New Haven, CT
(203) 737-5454
On 9/10/13 5:14 PM, Douglas N
Hi Suzanne, I'll cc the FS list so others can benefit ...
On 09/09/2013 06:02 AM, Suzanne Oosterwijk wrote:
Hi Doug,
I have two follow-up questions to enhance my own understanding of
Freesurfer. I know that MC simulations take into account the
smoothness of the data. I noticed that the
You can compute a vertexwise correction using gaussian random fields
(instead of using clusters). This is done with mri_glmfit-sim, thought I
don't think that many people use it.
doug
On 09/09/2013 09:11 AM, Bruce Fischl wrote:
Hi Damien
Doug can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think
Hi Francesco,
Could you maybe send a snapshot of the brainmask and wm volumes where you
are seeing this?
If you deleted any voxels on the wm mask then they should be a value of 1.
You might want to look at the ?h.orig.nofix surfaces to see if that area
in question looks better (or at least
How did you do the transfer? What was your cmd line?
doug
On 09/10/2013 05:31 PM, krista kelly wrote:
Hello,
I am looking at cortical thickness and surface area using Freesurfer.
I have transferred label V1 from freesurfer onto the brains of my
participants and when I view them on the
Hi Yang, I've computed a matrix that should do the trick. If you are in
matlab, then
M = [0.9975 -0.00730.0176 -0.0429
0.01461.0009 -0.00241.5496
-0.0130 -0.00930.99711.1840
0 0 01.]
P305 = [MNI305x MNI305y MNI305z 1]';
Hi All,
I have two conditions of interest in my GLM analysis, Condition A and
Condition B. I would like to make a contrast of Condition A and Condition B
that includes only those vertices that are significantly positively
activated when compared to the Passive Viewing baseline. In other words, I
after motiioncor was runned sucessfully,getting error with talairach.comand
was as given bellow
[root@ml freesurfer]# recon-all -talairach -subjid Stress_v12
Terminal window display was as shown bellow
Subject Stamp: freesurfer-Linux-centos4-stable-pub-v5.3.0
Current Stamp:
19 matches
Mail list logo