Freesurfer

freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu

17 participants
30086 discussions

mri_binzrize (flag --wm )
by Alshikho, Mohamad J. 31 Jul '14

31 Jul '14

Hi, I have a question about the flag " -wm" in mri_binarize: The following segments IDs 8 2 41 82 251 252 253 254 255 are included in this flag (based on the summary of this command line when I run it). Kindly what is the segment ID (Right-non-WM-hypointensities) means? and why the (left-non-WM-hypointensities ) is not included in this flag? Also what is maximum number of segments IDs that I can include in this command line using the flag -match ? Thanks, Mohamad

3 4

Error in recon-all
by stdp82＠virgilio.it 31 Jul '14

31 Jul '14

Hi list, during recon-all, I have this error in three subjects (some months ago I analyzed them with success): Loading source label.No such file or directoryERROR reading /Applications/freesurfer/subjects/subject_prova/Con13/fsaverage/label/lh.perirhinal.labelDarwin iMac-di-Stefano.local 12.5.0 Darwin Kernel Version 12.5.0: Sun Sep 29 13:33:47 PDT 2013; root:xnu-2050.48.12~1/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64 recon-all -s SUBJECTS_DIR exited with ERRORS at Thu Jul 31 07:48:56 CEST 2014 This is the log file is attached. Thank you very much. Regards, Stefano

2 1

freesurfer FSL installation
by mahsa abadian 31 Jul '14

31 Jul '14

I have installed freesurfer V5 on my system (ubuntu 12.4) and there is no FSL in this path /usr/local/freesurfer. I think FSL has not been installed ad I want to install FSL compeletly in ubuntu there are two questions: 1. Should I write any command in terminal before doing anything else? I have understand from mail-list that I must remove FSL but there is no FSL to remove. 2.Should I make any changes to my .tcshrc file( freesurfer environment variable) to install FSL? please guide me to install FSL. I would be very appreciate if anybody could help me. mahsa

3 2

PostDoc Position in Network Imaging / Post-Processing for Epilepsy
by Niels Focke 31 Jul '14

31 Jul '14

We are currently seeking a Postdoctoral Researcher (Akademischer Mitarbeiter) for the AG Translational Neuroimaging, Neurological Clinic and Hertie Institute for Clinical Brain Research in Tübingen (Germany). to work on post-processing of functional and structural MRI / network analysis (graph-theory, classification algorithms, EEG-fMRI) in the context of epilepsy. For details please see the attached PDF. Informal inquiries can be done via E-Mail (niels.focke(a)uni-tuebingen.de) http://www.hih-tuebingen.de/stellenangebote/stellenangebote-fuer-wissenschaf tler/postdoc-position-translational-neuroimaging/ __________________________________________________________________________ Dr. Niels Focke Oberarzt Abt. Neurologie mit Schwerpunkt Epileptologie Universitätsklinikum Tübingen AG Translationale Bildgebung Hertie Institut für Klinische Hirnforschung Werner Reichhardt Centre for Integrative Neuroscience

1 0

Re: [Freesurfer] question regarding control point edits
by Adam Mezher 30 Jul '14

30 Jul '14

Hi Bruce, Thanks a lot for your help thus far. I've edited, computed, and applied the average bias to the error subjects' orig.mgz files. However, I'm not sure how to re-run all autorecon steps for these cases using the newly created orig.mgz (with bias applied). Thoughts? Thanks, Adam Hi Adam it depends on the source of the bias. If it is fixed in the coordinate system of the scanner you could correct a few, then try using mri_compute_bias and mri_apply_bias to see if it helps (it computes an average bias field in scanner coords, then applies it to a new dataset) cheers Bruce On Wed, 23 Jul 2014, Adam Mezher wrote: > > Hi Bruce, > > Yeah that was my thinking as well. So, if after running 500 subjects through > FS and 100 need similar edits in the anterior temporal lobes, we will have > no choice but to perform manual edits for each case individually? > > Thanks for clarifying! > > Adam Mezher > > > > > > > > Hi Adam > > I don't think so as how would we don't know where the anterior temporal > lobe at that stage in the process. > Bruce > > > On > Tue, 22 Jul 2014, Adam Mezher wrote: > > > Hi FreeSurfer group, > > I was wondering if there is a way to include control points in my command > > line when I run recon-all. We are working with a large dataset and many of > > the subjects have underestimations in the anterior temporal lobes so it > > would be beneficial to expand the WM surface slightly on numerous cases > > rather than doing control point edits on each case individually. > > > > Thank you, > > Adam Mezher > > > > > _______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing listFreesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.eduhttps://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 athttp://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.

2 1

Anterior Temporal Lobe / Pial Reconstruction Troubles - part 1
by Las Blawimo 30 Jul '14

30 Jul '14

Dear Dr. Fischl, Thanks for your quick reply. Attached you will find some images (image 1&2) showing the issues we're having (I'll send a second e-mail including image 3&4). The images are as follows: 1.) sagittal_1353_norm2+3T_vs_default -> the v5.3 suggested norm2 flags (from the release notes) and the -3T flag vs. the default v5.3 pipeline. Blue is the norm2/3T flag pipeline, yellow is the default. 2.) sagittal_1353_wusl_vs_default->v5.3 using the -washu_mprage flag, obvious improvement in temporal lobe pial surface. Blue is -washu_mprage flag, yellow is the default v5.3 pipeline 3.) axial_1353_norm2+3T_white -> The white surface, which appears OK using v5.3 with the suggested norm2 parameters and the -3T flag 4.) axial_1353_wusl_white_error -> the white surface, with an obvious error in the lh_postcentral area, using the -washu_mprage flag. Let me know if you have any suggestions on other parameters I should try to improve the temporal lobe pial surface, without compromising the white matter surface reconstruction. Sincerely, Las

3 3

proportion of surface area of significant region
by Lars M. Rimol 30 Jul '14

30 Jul '14

Hi Bruce, I would like to be able to tell what proportion of a region of interest (ROI), as defined in atlas space by e.g. Desikan-Killiany, that shows a significant effect (based on a p-map). For now I overlay the p-map on the inflated surface of fsaverage in tksurfer and eyeball the proportion. Given a p-map, if I find the FDR threshold and identify the vertices within a given ROI that have a p-value greater than the threshold, then I can find the proportion of the ROI that is suprathreshold. E.g., I find 1986 suprathreshold vertices in "bankssts" out of 2137, so 93% of vertices in bankssts show a significant effect. My question is: Does that tell me anything about what proportion of the ROI's surface area is affected in atlas space? Obviously, if the faces were uniform, there would be a 1 to 1 relationship between #vertices and area. In the original tesselation of any dataset the size of the faces is uniform, but that changes with topology fix and deformation. I assume that is true also for fsaverage? (so I can't assume [#sig vertices] / [# tot vertices] == the proportion of the ROI's area that is significant in atlas space) I can find the surface area of the suprathreshold region for my sample (or any subset thereof) by looking at a mean area map. But I'm unsure how to do that for fsaverage itself? Is there information on regional surface area directly available? Or would using getFaceArea.m or getFacesArea.m or similar functions be a solution? Thank you! LMR --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi Lars, yes, the size of the faces is initially fixed - we cover the surface of each segmented wm voxel that borders non wm with 2 triangles. This gets changed by both the topology correction and the surface deformation. Note that the fsaverage surface area is less than any individual subject due to smoothing of the surface, which is why we include a correction factor in the fsaverage surfaces. cheers, Bruce On Wed, 16 Sep 2009, Lars M. Rimol wrote: Hi, I have a few questions about the surface processing stream: I compared ?h.orig.nofix, ?h.orig, ?h.sphere and ?h.sphere.reg files. The number of triangles and vertices changes between the first two but after that they're constant. But the numbers are different across subjects. For fsaverage the number of vertices is consistently 163 842 and the number of faces 327 680. Therefore, I assume that during the tesselation step in the processing stream, different subjects get different numbers of vertices due to differences in brain size. (And that the fsaverage numbers reflect average brain size.) Is that correct? And does this mean that the size of the faces/triangles is uniform across all locations and subjects, at least before the topology fix? Thank you! Lars M. Rimol -- yours, Lars M. Rimol, PhD St. Olavs Hospital Trondheim, Norway

2 1

qdec problem
by Emilia Johansson 30 Jul '14

30 Jul '14

Hello, When I use qdec I can´t change the threshold values and I don't have the Design Matrix Type option (DODS, DOSS). I'm using ubuntu 13.10, freesurfer 5.3.0 and qdec 1.5. Any suggestions of what can be the problem? Do I need to download something more? I don't get any error messages when I run qdec. Best regards, Emilia

2 1

qdec _FDR report question (why the result of cluster stats table not match with the statistic map)
by Wang, Guoying 30 Jul '14

30 Jul '14

Dear Freesurfer experts, I am facing the problem to report the significant clusters which was calculated by QDEC. I did the group comparison between healthy and patients in cortical thickness, setting the threshold as FDR=0.05.however, the result of thickness map seems quite different from the contrast stats table. In the statistic map, Some area (e.g. occipital region, pre and post central gyri)showed clearly decreased In patients, but not shown in contrast output table. Why this happened? I really appreciated your help. Please find the corresponding file attached. [cid:image001.jpg@01CFAC1C.967AB680] [cid:image003.jpg@01CFAC1C.967AB680] Thanks for your help ! Best Guoying

2 1

T2-space vs T2-space-FLAIR
by Satrajit Ghosh 30 Jul '14

30 Jul '14

hi bruce, is there any difference from freesurfer's perspective of using T2-space or T2-space-flair? cheers, satra

3 7

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Freesurfer