January 13, 2017 at 3:16 PM
> *From:* "Douglas N Greve" <gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> *To:* freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> *Subject:* Re: [Freesurfer] surface based analysis (projfrac)
> These differences are hard to track down because they are so subtle.
>
> Y
...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] surface based analysis (projfrac)
These differences are hard to track down because they are so subtle.
You may want to use our PET module, which includes PVC
http://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/PetSurfer
On
cwp
> 0.01". How can I check that this differnce is a real differnce and
> not related to partial volume effect?
> Best,
> John
> *Sent:* Friday, January 13, 2017 at 2:46 PM
> *From:* "Douglas N Greve" <gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> *To:* freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvar
s ?
> Best,
> John
> *Sent:* Friday, January 13, 2017 at 12:21 PM
> *From:* "Douglas N Greve" <gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> *To:* freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> *Subject:* Re: [Freesurfer] surface based analysis (projfrac)
>
>
> On 01/12/2017 05:20 PM, Jo
t; *From:* "Douglas N Greve" <gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> *To:* freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> *Subject:* Re: [Freesurfer] surface based analysis (projfrac)
>
>
> On 01/12/2017 05:20 PM, John Anderson wrote:
> > Thank you very much Doug and thank you for
me effect be avoided by using larger
> numbers for "projfrac" ?
No, PVEs can't be avoided that way.
> Bests,
> John
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 12, 2017 at 5:08 PM
> *From:* "Douglas N Greve" <gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> *To:* freesurfer@nmr.mgh.har
bers for "projfrac" ?
No, PVEs can't be avoided that way.
> Bests,
> John
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 12, 2017 at 5:08 PM
> *From:* "Douglas N Greve" <gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> *To:* freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> *Subject:* Re: [Freesurfer] surface
PM
From: "Douglas N Greve" <gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] surface based analysis (projfrac)
yes, that is correct. However, understand that there might only be a
difference of 1mm between those two locations, so it could easily be
> John
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 10, 2017 at 10:51 AM
> *From:* "Douglas Greve" <gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
> *To:* freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> *Subject:* Re: [Freesurfer] surface based analysis (projfrac)
>
> When you say in the corpus callosum, do y
Bests,
John
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2017 at 10:51 AM
From: "Douglas Greve" <gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] surface based analysis (projfrac)
When you say in the corpus callosum, do you mean in WM? The
When you say in the corpus callosum, do you mean in WM? The
surface-based analysis is only for cortical GM. If you mean in GM near
the CC, then the analysis is appropriate. The projfrac parameter sets
the sampling location between the white and pial surfaces where 0.5
means half way.
On
11 matches
Mail list logo