okay, Rahul is looking into it. On Wed, 21 Jun 2006, Jeffrey Spielberg wrote:
Hi, sorry, I meant the cortical parcellation, the one that is used in aparc+aseg.mgz (I believe this uses the desikan killiany atlas?), thanks, Jeff
On 6/20/06, Bruce Fischl fischl@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu wrote:
I'll leave 2 for Doug. In 1. by segmentation do you mean the wm.mgz volume? Or the cortical parcellation? If the latter, which one (as we generate two by default).
cheers, Bruce
On Tue, 20 Jun 2006, Jeffrey Spielberg wrote:
Hi, I had a couple of questions regarding cortical/subcortical
segmentation-
- In our cortical segmentation we keep getting what look to be
inaccurate
segmentation of the rostral and caudal acc. It looks some of what
should be
labeled as one of those two areas is getting labelled corpus callosum or "unlabelled subcortical" instead, sometimes fairly large chunks. Does
this
indicate any problem earlier in the processing stream, and is there
anything
that can be done to prevent this? If not I saw that both tksurfer and tkmedit can be used to edit the segmentation, what would be the easiest
way
to do this?
- When registering a freesurfer anatomical to Feat output (using
reg-feat2anat) the registration seems to be somewhat inaccurate. Registering brainmask.mgz to our example_func using flirt has given us a better registration so far. Since reg-feat2anat seems to use flirt in
its
registration I was wondering what the difference might be resulting
from.
Does reg-feat2anat use T1.mgz as it's reference scan, and if so is there
any
way to have it use brainmask instead, as that seems to give better
results?
Thanks, Jeff