Dear FS experts, I ran surface based analysis using PET maps, and the pipeline reported, in FS list, by multiple colleagues as the following:
* spmregister --s subj --mov pet.nii --reg reg.dat --out pet_t1.mgh
* mris_preproc --target fsaverage --hemi lh --iv subj1/ubject1_pet.nii subject1/pet/pet_2_T1_register.dat ..... --projfrac 0.5 --out lh.mgh
* mri_surf2surf --hemi lh --s fsaverage --fwhm 6 --cortex --sval lh.mgh --tval lh.sm6.mgh
* mri_glmfit--y lh.sm6.mgh--fsgd fsgd.txt--C 2gc0.mtx --surf fsaverage lh --cortex --glmdir lh.glmdir//
* then mri_glmfit-sim to correct for multiple comparison.
I wanted to know the correct usage of the flag "projfrac" in the command "mris_preproc":
My understanding is that this flag control running the surface based analysis far from the surface (i.e. close to the surface or deep in the white matter)
* If it is 0.5 ==> that means the surface based analysis is running in the middle area between white and pial
* if it is zero ==> the surface based analysis is running close to white matter
* if it is +1 ==> that means the surface based analysis is running close to the pial
* if it is -1 ==> that means the surface based analysis is running deep in the white matter
Kindly:
1. Is this correct?
2. Can I use values like -2 or -3 ... etc to run the analysis deep in the white matter. I aim to run surface based analysis on multiple layers of the brain deep from the pial to investigate how the PET signal is going to change between these layers?
3. What is the difference between the flag "projfrac" and the flag "projdis"
4. If I replace the PET maps in the previous pipeline by diffusion maps? Is it keep valid for diffusion data?
Many Thank! Mohamad
On 11/04/2016 07:25 AM, Alshikho, Mohamad J. wrote:
Dear FS experts,
I ran surface based analysis using PET maps, and the pipeline reported, in FS list, by multiple colleagues as the following:
·spmregister --s subj --mov pet.nii --reg reg.dat --out pet_t1.mgh
·mris_preproc --target fsaverage --hemi lh --iv subj1/ubject1_pet.nii subject1/pet/pet_2_T1_register.dat ..... --projfrac 0.5 --out lh.mgh
·mri_surf2surf --hemi lh --s fsaverage --fwhm 6 --cortex --sval lh.mgh --tval lh.sm6.mgh
·mri_glmfit--y lh.sm6.mgh--fsgd fsgd.txt--C 2gc0.mtx --surf fsaverage lh --cortex --glmdir lh.glmdir//
·then mri_glmfit-sim to correct for multiple comparison.
I wanted to know the correct usage of the flag “*_projfrac_*” in the command "*_mris_preproc_*":
My understanding is that this flag control running the surface based analysis far from the surface (i.e. close to the surface or deep in the white matter)
·If it is 0.5 èthat means the surface based analysis is running in the middle area between white and pial
·if it is zero èthe surface based analysis is running close to white matter
·if it is +1 èthat means the surface based analysis is running close to the pial
·if it is -1 èthat means the surface based analysis is running deep in the white matter
Kindly:
1.Is this correct?
Yes
2.Can I use values like -2 or -3 ... etc to run the analysis deep in the white matter. I aim to run surface based analysis on multiple layers of the brain deep from the pial to investigate how the PET signal is going to change between these layers?
In principle, yes, but often what happens is that when you follow the normal vector into the white matter that far, you end up in GM or CSF and not WM.
3.What is the difference between the flag "*_projfrac_*" and the flag "*_projdis_*"
projdist will project an absolute distance (in mm). projfrac will project a fraction of the thickness (as you describe above)
4.If I replace the PET maps in the previous pipeline by diffusion maps? Is it keep valid for diffusion data?
I guess it depends on what you mean by "valid". As I mention above, it will not necessarily sample WM, and that probably invalidates it somewhat
Many Thank!
Mohamad
Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
Thank you Doug! Kindly in the attached figure are the "projfrac" values for #4 and #5 correct for at which level the analysis will be carried out.
-----Original Message----- From: freesurfer-bounces@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu [mailto:freesurfer-bounces@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Douglas N Greve Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 10:29 AM To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] mris_preproc
On 11/04/2016 07:25 AM, Alshikho, Mohamad J. wrote:
Dear FS experts,
I ran surface based analysis using PET maps, and the pipeline reported, in FS list, by multiple colleagues as the following:
·spmregister --s subj --mov pet.nii --reg reg.dat --out pet_t1.mgh
·mris_preproc --target fsaverage --hemi lh --iv subj1/ubject1_pet.nii subject1/pet/pet_2_T1_register.dat ..... --projfrac 0.5 --out lh.mgh
·mri_surf2surf --hemi lh --s fsaverage --fwhm 6 --cortex --sval lh.mgh --tval lh.sm6.mgh
·mri_glmfit--y lh.sm6.mgh--fsgd fsgd.txt--C 2gc0.mtx --surf fsaverage lh --cortex --glmdir lh.glmdir//
·then mri_glmfit-sim to correct for multiple comparison.
I wanted to know the correct usage of the flag "*_projfrac_*" in the command "*_mris_preproc_*":
My understanding is that this flag control running the surface based analysis far from the surface (i.e. close to the surface or deep in the white matter)
·If it is 0.5 èthat means the surface based analysis is running in the middle area between white and pial
·if it is zero èthe surface based analysis is running close to white matter
·if it is +1 èthat means the surface based analysis is running close to the pial
·if it is -1 èthat means the surface based analysis is running deep in the white matter
Kindly:
1.Is this correct?
Yes
2.Can I use values like -2 or -3 ... etc to run the analysis deep in the white matter. I aim to run surface based analysis on multiple layers of the brain deep from the pial to investigate how the PET signal is going to change between these layers?
In principle, yes, but often what happens is that when you follow the normal vector into the white matter that far, you end up in GM or CSF and not WM.
3.What is the difference between the flag "*_projfrac_*" and the flag "*_projdis_*"
projdist will project an absolute distance (in mm). projfrac will project a fraction of the thickness (as you describe above)
4.If I replace the PET maps in the previous pipeline by diffusion maps? Is it keep valid for diffusion data?
I guess it depends on what you mean by "valid". As I mention above, it will not necessarily sample WM, and that probably invalidates it somewhat
Many Thank!
Mohamad
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 greve@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
Do you have a question about the image?
On 11/04/2016 11:09 AM, Alshikho, Mohamad J. wrote:
Thank you Doug! Kindly in the attached figure are the "projfrac" values for #4 and #5 correct for at which level the analysis will be carried out.
-----Original Message----- From: freesurfer-bounces@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu [mailto:freesurfer-bounces@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Douglas N Greve Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 10:29 AM To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] mris_preproc
On 11/04/2016 07:25 AM, Alshikho, Mohamad J. wrote:
Dear FS experts,
I ran surface based analysis using PET maps, and the pipeline reported, in FS list, by multiple colleagues as the following:
·spmregister --s subj --mov pet.nii --reg reg.dat --out pet_t1.mgh
·mris_preproc --target fsaverage --hemi lh --iv subj1/ubject1_pet.nii subject1/pet/pet_2_T1_register.dat ..... --projfrac 0.5 --out lh.mgh
·mri_surf2surf --hemi lh --s fsaverage --fwhm 6 --cortex --sval lh.mgh --tval lh.sm6.mgh
·mri_glmfit--y lh.sm6.mgh--fsgd fsgd.txt--C 2gc0.mtx --surf fsaverage lh --cortex --glmdir lh.glmdir//
·then mri_glmfit-sim to correct for multiple comparison.
I wanted to know the correct usage of the flag "*_projfrac_*" in the command "*_mris_preproc_*":
My understanding is that this flag control running the surface based analysis far from the surface (i.e. close to the surface or deep in the white matter)
·If it is 0.5 èthat means the surface based analysis is running in the middle area between white and pial
·if it is zero èthe surface based analysis is running close to white matter
·if it is +1 èthat means the surface based analysis is running close to the pial
·if it is -1 èthat means the surface based analysis is running deep in the white matter
Kindly:
1.Is this correct?
Yes
2.Can I use values like -2 or -3 ... etc to run the analysis deep in the white matter. I aim to run surface based analysis on multiple layers of the brain deep from the pial to investigate how the PET signal is going to change between these layers?
In principle, yes, but often what happens is that when you follow the normal vector into the white matter that far, you end up in GM or CSF and not WM.
3.What is the difference between the flag "*_projfrac_*" and the flag "*_projdis_*"
projdist will project an absolute distance (in mm). projfrac will project a fraction of the thickness (as you describe above)
4.If I replace the PET maps in the previous pipeline by diffusion maps? Is it keep valid for diffusion data?
I guess it depends on what you mean by "valid". As I mention above, it will not necessarily sample WM, and that probably invalidates it somewhat
Many Thank!
Mohamad
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 greve@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
Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
Hi Doug, I am sorry for sending multiple emails. I wanted to be sure that I understand it properly. Kindly: My question is regarding "projfrac = -1" and "projfrc=-2" are the pointers in the figure located correctly where the analysis will be carried out?
Thanks again
-----Original Message----- From: freesurfer-bounces@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu [mailto:freesurfer-bounces@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Douglas N Greve Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 12:09 PM To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] mris_preproc
Do you have a question about the image?
On 11/04/2016 11:09 AM, Alshikho, Mohamad J. wrote:
Thank you Doug! Kindly in the attached figure are the "projfrac" values for #4 and #5 correct for at which level the analysis will be carried out.
-----Original Message----- From: freesurfer-bounces@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu [mailto:freesurfer-bounces@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Douglas N Greve Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 10:29 AM To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] mris_preproc
On 11/04/2016 07:25 AM, Alshikho, Mohamad J. wrote:
Dear FS experts,
I ran surface based analysis using PET maps, and the pipeline reported, in FS list, by multiple colleagues as the following:
·spmregister --s subj --mov pet.nii --reg reg.dat --out pet_t1.mgh
·mris_preproc --target fsaverage --hemi lh --iv subj1/ubject1_pet.nii subject1/pet/pet_2_T1_register.dat ..... --projfrac 0.5 --out lh.mgh
·mri_surf2surf --hemi lh --s fsaverage --fwhm 6 --cortex --sval lh.mgh --tval lh.sm6.mgh
·mri_glmfit--y lh.sm6.mgh--fsgd fsgd.txt--C 2gc0.mtx --surf fsaverage lh --cortex --glmdir lh.glmdir//
·then mri_glmfit-sim to correct for multiple comparison.
I wanted to know the correct usage of the flag "*_projfrac_*" in the command "*_mris_preproc_*":
My understanding is that this flag control running the surface based analysis far from the surface (i.e. close to the surface or deep in the white matter)
·If it is 0.5 èthat means the surface based analysis is running in the middle area between white and pial
·if it is zero èthe surface based analysis is running close to white matter
·if it is +1 èthat means the surface based analysis is running close to the pial
·if it is -1 èthat means the surface based analysis is running deep in the white matter
Kindly:
1.Is this correct?
Yes
2.Can I use values like -2 or -3 ... etc to run the analysis deep in the white matter. I aim to run surface based analysis on multiple layers of the brain deep from the pial to investigate how the PET signal is going to change between these layers?
In principle, yes, but often what happens is that when you follow the normal vector into the white matter that far, you end up in GM or CSF and not WM.
3.What is the difference between the flag "*_projfrac_*" and the flag "*_projdis_*"
projdist will project an absolute distance (in mm). projfrac will project a fraction of the thickness (as you describe above)
4.If I replace the PET maps in the previous pipeline by diffusion maps? Is it keep valid for diffusion data?
I guess it depends on what you mean by "valid". As I mention above, it will not necessarily sample WM, and that probably invalidates it somewhat
Many Thank!
Mohamad
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 greve@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
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 greve@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
projfrac = -2 appears to be pointing at the ventricle. It should be 2*thickness away from the white surface into the white matter
On 11/04/2016 12:11 PM, Alshikho, Mohamad J. wrote:
Hi Doug, I am sorry for sending multiple emails. I wanted to be sure that I understand it properly. Kindly: My question is regarding "projfrac = -1" and "projfrc=-2" are the pointers in the figure located correctly where the analysis will be carried out?
Thanks again
-----Original Message----- From: freesurfer-bounces@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu [mailto:freesurfer-bounces@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Douglas N Greve Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 12:09 PM To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] mris_preproc
Do you have a question about the image?
On 11/04/2016 11:09 AM, Alshikho, Mohamad J. wrote:
Thank you Doug! Kindly in the attached figure are the "projfrac" values for #4 and #5 correct for at which level the analysis will be carried out.
-----Original Message----- From: freesurfer-bounces@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu [mailto:freesurfer-bounces@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Douglas N Greve Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 10:29 AM To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] mris_preproc
On 11/04/2016 07:25 AM, Alshikho, Mohamad J. wrote:
Dear FS experts,
I ran surface based analysis using PET maps, and the pipeline reported, in FS list, by multiple colleagues as the following:
·spmregister --s subj --mov pet.nii --reg reg.dat --out pet_t1.mgh
·mris_preproc --target fsaverage --hemi lh --iv subj1/ubject1_pet.nii subject1/pet/pet_2_T1_register.dat ..... --projfrac 0.5 --out lh.mgh
·mri_surf2surf --hemi lh --s fsaverage --fwhm 6 --cortex --sval lh.mgh --tval lh.sm6.mgh
·mri_glmfit--y lh.sm6.mgh--fsgd fsgd.txt--C 2gc0.mtx --surf fsaverage lh --cortex --glmdir lh.glmdir//
·then mri_glmfit-sim to correct for multiple comparison.
I wanted to know the correct usage of the flag "*_projfrac_*" in the command "*_mris_preproc_*":
My understanding is that this flag control running the surface based analysis far from the surface (i.e. close to the surface or deep in the white matter)
·If it is 0.5 èthat means the surface based analysis is running in the middle area between white and pial
·if it is zero èthe surface based analysis is running close to white matter
·if it is +1 èthat means the surface based analysis is running close to the pial
·if it is -1 èthat means the surface based analysis is running deep in the white matter
Kindly:
1.Is this correct?
Yes
2.Can I use values like -2 or -3 ... etc to run the analysis deep in the white matter. I aim to run surface based analysis on multiple layers of the brain deep from the pial to investigate how the PET signal is going to change between these layers?
In principle, yes, but often what happens is that when you follow the normal vector into the white matter that far, you end up in GM or CSF and not WM.
3.What is the difference between the flag "*_projfrac_*" and the flag "*_projdis_*"
projdist will project an absolute distance (in mm). projfrac will project a fraction of the thickness (as you describe above)
4.If I replace the PET maps in the previous pipeline by diffusion maps? Is it keep valid for diffusion data?
I guess it depends on what you mean by "valid". As I mention above, it will not necessarily sample WM, and that probably invalidates it somewhat
Many Thank!
Mohamad
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 greve@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
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 greve@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
Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
Thank you very much Doug!
-----Original Message----- From: freesurfer-bounces@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu [mailto:freesurfer-bounces@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Douglas N Greve Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 12:14 PM To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] mris_preproc
projfrac = -2 appears to be pointing at the ventricle. It should be 2*thickness away from the white surface into the white matter
On 11/04/2016 12:11 PM, Alshikho, Mohamad J. wrote:
Hi Doug, I am sorry for sending multiple emails. I wanted to be sure that I understand it properly. Kindly: My question is regarding "projfrac = -1" and "projfrc=-2" are the pointers in the figure located correctly where the analysis will be carried out?
Thanks again
-----Original Message----- From: freesurfer-bounces@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu [mailto:freesurfer-bounces@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Douglas N Greve Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 12:09 PM To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] mris_preproc
Do you have a question about the image?
On 11/04/2016 11:09 AM, Alshikho, Mohamad J. wrote:
Thank you Doug! Kindly in the attached figure are the "projfrac" values for #4 and #5 correct for at which level the analysis will be carried out.
-----Original Message----- From: freesurfer-bounces@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu [mailto:freesurfer-bounces@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Douglas N Greve Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 10:29 AM To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] mris_preproc
On 11/04/2016 07:25 AM, Alshikho, Mohamad J. wrote:
Dear FS experts,
I ran surface based analysis using PET maps, and the pipeline reported, in FS list, by multiple colleagues as the following:
·spmregister --s subj --mov pet.nii --reg reg.dat --out pet_t1.mgh
·mris_preproc --target fsaverage --hemi lh --iv subj1/ubject1_pet.nii subject1/pet/pet_2_T1_register.dat ..... --projfrac 0.5 --out lh.mgh
·mri_surf2surf --hemi lh --s fsaverage --fwhm 6 --cortex --sval lh.mgh --tval lh.sm6.mgh
·mri_glmfit--y lh.sm6.mgh--fsgd fsgd.txt--C 2gc0.mtx --surf fsaverage lh --cortex --glmdir lh.glmdir//
·then mri_glmfit-sim to correct for multiple comparison.
I wanted to know the correct usage of the flag "*_projfrac_*" in the command "*_mris_preproc_*":
My understanding is that this flag control running the surface based analysis far from the surface (i.e. close to the surface or deep in the white matter)
·If it is 0.5 èthat means the surface based analysis is running in the middle area between white and pial
·if it is zero èthe surface based analysis is running close to white matter
·if it is +1 èthat means the surface based analysis is running close to the pial
·if it is -1 èthat means the surface based analysis is running deep in the white matter
Kindly:
1.Is this correct?
Yes
2.Can I use values like -2 or -3 ... etc to run the analysis deep in the white matter. I aim to run surface based analysis on multiple layers of the brain deep from the pial to investigate how the PET signal is going to change between these layers?
In principle, yes, but often what happens is that when you follow the normal vector into the white matter that far, you end up in GM or CSF and not WM.
3.What is the difference between the flag "*_projfrac_*" and the flag "*_projdis_*"
projdist will project an absolute distance (in mm). projfrac will project a fraction of the thickness (as you describe above)
4.If I replace the PET maps in the previous pipeline by diffusion maps? Is it keep valid for diffusion data?
I guess it depends on what you mean by "valid". As I mention above, it will not necessarily sample WM, and that probably invalidates it somewhat
Many Thank!
Mohamad
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 greve@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
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 greve@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
Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
-
Alshikho, Mohamad J. -
Douglas N Greve