Re: [Freesurfer] Quality of surface-based alignment

2014-11-04 Thread Matt Glasser
What criteria would you use to determine one alignment was better than
another?

Peace,

Matt.

From:  Caspar M. Schwiedrzik cschwie...@mail.rockefeller.edu
Reply-To:  Freesurfer support list freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Date:  Tuesday, November 4, 2014 at 7:17 AM
To:  Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Subject:  [Freesurfer] Quality of surface-based alignment

Hi Freesurfers, 
I was wondering whether there is a good way to assess post-hoc how well the
alignment between two surfaces was. I wouldn't like to run the alignment
again, but I could, if necessary. I would like to compare this alignment to
a bunch of other alignments to see whether it was worse than the others.
Thanks, Caspar

___ Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
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.

___
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
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.


Re: [Freesurfer] Quality of surface-based alignment

2014-11-04 Thread Bruce Fischl
Hi Caspar

the easiest way it so look at the parcellations and see if they are 
accurate. Note that we do subject-to-atlas alignment, not 
subject-to-subject (you get the latter by composing two atlas transforms)

cheers
Bruce
On 
Tue, 4 Nov 2014, Caspar M. Schwiedrzik wrote:

 Hi Freesurfers,
 I was wondering whether there is a good way to assess post-hoc how well the
 alignment between two surfaces was. I wouldn't like to run the alignment
 again, but I could, if necessary. I would like to compare this alignment to
 a bunch of other alignments to see whether it was worse than the others.
 Thanks, Caspar
 
 

___
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
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.



Re: [Freesurfer] Quality of surface-based alignment

2014-11-04 Thread Caspar M. Schwiedrzik
Hi Bruce and Matt,
I should specify that I am working with non-human primate data, so
unfortunately, looking at the parcellations would not work. I am aligning
individuals to a a custom template that I made.
I was wondering whether there is maybe an output file that has something
numerical on how much one surface had to be transformed to be aligned to
the other.
I could alternatively compute the square difference between the two
surfaces, or something like that.
Thanks! Caspar

2014-11-04 11:19 GMT-05:00 Bruce Fischl fis...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu:

 Hi Caspar

 the easiest way it so look at the parcellations and see if they are
 accurate. Note that we do subject-to-atlas alignment, not
 subject-to-subject (you get the latter by composing two atlas transforms)

 cheers
 Bruce
 On
 Tue, 4 Nov 2014, Caspar M. Schwiedrzik wrote:

  Hi Freesurfers,
  I was wondering whether there is a good way to assess post-hoc how well
 the
  alignment between two surfaces was. I wouldn't like to run the alignment
  again, but I could, if necessary. I would like to compare this alignment
 to
  a bunch of other alignments to see whether it was worse than the others.
  Thanks, Caspar
 
 
 
 ___
 Freesurfer mailing list
 Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
 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.


___
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
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.


Re: [Freesurfer] Quality of surface-based alignment

2014-11-04 Thread Douglas N Greve
You can look at how well the curvature and/or sulcal maps from your 
template overlay on the individual.
doug

On 11/04/2014 11:46 AM, Caspar M. Schwiedrzik wrote:
 Hi Bruce and Matt,
 I should specify that I am working with non-human primate data, so 
 unfortunately, looking at the parcellations would not work. I am 
 aligning individuals to a a custom template that I made.
 I was wondering whether there is maybe an output file that has 
 something numerical on how much one surface had to be transformed to 
 be aligned to the other.
 I could alternatively compute the square difference between the two 
 surfaces, or something like that.
 Thanks! Caspar

 2014-11-04 11:19 GMT-05:00 Bruce Fischl fis...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu 
 mailto:fis...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu:

 Hi Caspar

 the easiest way it so look at the parcellations and see if they are
 accurate. Note that we do subject-to-atlas alignment, not
 subject-to-subject (you get the latter by composing two atlas
 transforms)

 cheers
 Bruce
 On
 Tue, 4 Nov 2014, Caspar M. Schwiedrzik wrote:

  Hi Freesurfers,
  I was wondering whether there is a good way to assess post-hoc
 how well the
  alignment between two surfaces was. I wouldn't like to run the
 alignment
  again, but I could, if necessary. I would like to compare this
 alignment to
  a bunch of other alignments to see whether it was worse than the
 others.
  Thanks, Caspar
 
 
 
 ___
 Freesurfer mailing list
 Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
 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.




 ___
 Freesurfer mailing list
 Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
 https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer

-- 
Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D.
MGH-NMR Center
gr...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Phone Number: 617-724-2358
Fax: 617-726-7422

Bugs: surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting
FileDrop: https://gate.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/filedrop2
www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html
Outgoing: ftp://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/transfer/outgoing/flat/greve/

___
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer


Re: [Freesurfer] Quality of surface-based alignment

2014-11-04 Thread Bruce Fischl
oh, I see. I would paint the folding patterns on the sphere.reg and 
toggle back and forth between them to see if they look right. 
Alternatively you could draw some sulci onto one of your datasets (this 
is easy to do in tksurfer) and use mri_label2label to map it to others 
and see if they land in the right place (central sulcus, calcarine, 
sylvian, etc...)
On Tue, 4 Nov 2014, Caspar M. Schwiedrzik wrote:

 Hi Bruce and Matt,
 I should specify that I am working with non-human primate data, so
 unfortunately, looking at the parcellations would not work. I am aligning
 individuals to a a custom template that I made.
 I was wondering whether there is maybe an output file that has something
 numerical on how much one surface had to be transformed to be aligned to the
 other.
 I could alternatively compute the square difference between the two
 surfaces, or something like that.
 Thanks! Caspar
 
 2014-11-04 11:19 GMT-05:00 Bruce Fischl fis...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu:
   Hi Caspar

   the easiest way it so look at the parcellations and see if they
   are
   accurate. Note that we do subject-to-atlas alignment, not
   subject-to-subject (you get the latter by composing two atlas
   transforms)

   cheers
   Bruce
   On
   Tue, 4 Nov 2014, Caspar M. Schwiedrzik wrote:

Hi Freesurfers,
I was wondering whether there is a good way to assess post-hoc
   how well the
alignment between two surfaces was. I wouldn't like to run the
   alignment
again, but I could, if necessary. I would like to compare this
   alignment to
a bunch of other alignments to see whether it was worse than
   the others.
Thanks, Caspar
   
   
   
 ___
 Freesurfer mailing list
 Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
 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.
 
 
 

___
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer


Re: [Freesurfer] Quality of surface-based alignment

2014-11-04 Thread Caspar M. Schwiedrzik
Thanks! But there is nothing like a number I could pull from the
registration process, e.g. the distances of the vertices in registration
space? Caspar

2014-11-04 11:51 GMT-05:00 Bruce Fischl fis...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu:

 oh, I see. I would paint the folding patterns on the sphere.reg and
 toggle back and forth between them to see if they look right.
 Alternatively you could draw some sulci onto one of your datasets (this
 is easy to do in tksurfer) and use mri_label2label to map it to others
 and see if they land in the right place (central sulcus, calcarine,
 sylvian, etc...)
 On Tue, 4 Nov 2014, Caspar M. Schwiedrzik wrote:

  Hi Bruce and Matt,
  I should specify that I am working with non-human primate data, so
  unfortunately, looking at the parcellations would not work. I am aligning
  individuals to a a custom template that I made.
  I was wondering whether there is maybe an output file that has something
  numerical on how much one surface had to be transformed to be aligned to
 the
  other.
  I could alternatively compute the square difference between the two
  surfaces, or something like that.
  Thanks! Caspar
 
  2014-11-04 11:19 GMT-05:00 Bruce Fischl fis...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu:
Hi Caspar
 
the easiest way it so look at the parcellations and see if they
are
accurate. Note that we do subject-to-atlas alignment, not
subject-to-subject (you get the latter by composing two atlas
transforms)
 
cheers
Bruce
On
Tue, 4 Nov 2014, Caspar M. Schwiedrzik wrote:
 
 Hi Freesurfers,
 I was wondering whether there is a good way to assess post-hoc
how well the
 alignment between two surfaces was. I wouldn't like to run the
alignment
 again, but I could, if necessary. I would like to compare this
alignment to
 a bunch of other alignments to see whether it was worse than
the others.
 Thanks, Caspar



  ___
  Freesurfer mailing list
  Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
  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.
 
 
 
 
 ___
 Freesurfer mailing list
 Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
 https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer

___
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
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.