: [Freesurfer] projfrac question
Can you try it again? this time use -projfrac 0.2 pf020 (ie, add
"pf020" after 0.2). Then when you use mkanalysis-sesss, add -expkey
pf020 to the command line. The pf020 will be included in the output file
name to make it unique. This allows you to us
freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> on behalf of Greve, Douglas
> N.,Ph.D.
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 6, 2019 7:06:44 PM
> *To:* freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> *Subject:* Re: [Freesurfer] projfrac question
> This does appear to be a bug. Are you using FS version 6? If so, I p
...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
on behalf of Greve, Douglas N.,Ph.D.
Sent: Wednesday, March 6, 2019 7:06:44 PM
To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] projfrac question
This does appear to be a bug. Are you using FS version 6? If so, I put a
test in that distriubtion called preproc-sess.test
gt;
>
> *Zahra (Mona) Nasiriavanaki*
>
> Postdoctoral Research Fellow
>
> Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging
>
> Massachusetts General Hospital
>
> 149 13th Street, 149-2615
>
> Charlestown, MA, USA, 02129
>
>
>
> -------
02129
From: Nasiriavanaki, Zahra
Sent: Friday, March 1, 2019 11:52:21 AM
To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] projfrac question
Yes, I found it.
I should mention that, this log file is the result of today's preprocessing
(-projfrac 0.2) which
Input reg is LTA
From: freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
on behalf of Greve, Douglas N.,Ph.D.
Sent: Friday, March 1, 2019 11:09:30 AM
To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] projfrac question
that is part of the bbregister command. Ca
oun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
<mailto:freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
on behalf of Greve, Douglas N.,Ph.D.
<mailto:dgr...@mgh.harvard.edu>
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2019 2:54:51 PM
To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu<mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] pr
--gm-gt-wm 0.5
Thanks
Mona
From: freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
on behalf of Greve, Douglas N.,Ph.D.
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2019 2:54:51 PM
To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] projfrac question
I would have
---
> *From:* freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> on behalf of Greve, Douglas
> N.,Ph.D.
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 28, 2019 2:41:25 PM
> *To:* freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> *Subject:* Re: [Freesurfer] projfrac question
>
From: freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
on behalf of Greve, Douglas N.,Ph.D.
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2019 2:41:25 PM
To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] projfrac question
The projfrac function might not be working in the way that you think. It
might
The projfrac function might not be working in the way that you think. It
might not actually be re-running anything. Did preproc-sess finish
faster than you would have expected? You can try deleting the projfrac
output and re-running. You can also run preproc-sess with -force, but
this will forc
Dear Freesurfers
Hi
I was trying to look at the activation in different cortical layers in a single
subject.
I ran my preproc-sess command three times, once without using -projfrac flag,
once -projfrac 0.5 and lastly -projfrac 0.2
The activation patterns are exactly the same.
My voxel size
12 matches
Mail list logo
