-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Dear Doug et al.,
I'm trying to test mri_label2label because we've observed some strange results in the download for:
freesurfer-Linux-rh9-stable-pub-v3.0.2
To test the program, I thought it would be sensible to map a label of one subject onto itself, with a different label filename for the output. So I created a large label in a subject rh inflated surface and saved it to X.label file. I then tried to run mri_label2label using the same srcsubject and target subject, with a different name for the target label, ie:
mri_label2label \ - --srclabel $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/$label \ - --trglabel $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/$newlabel \ - --srcsubject ${srcsubject} \ - --trgsubject ${srcsubject} \ - --regmethod surface --hemi $hemi --trgsurf pial
In effect, this should be equivalent to:
cd $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/ cp $label $newlabel
That is, the label mapping onto the same subject surface should be identical. It is not. Can you please try to replicate this result? I would like to know if it is particular to the setup here. If you find a bug in mri_label2label, please forward a fix ASAP, as we are trying to complete some analysis that depends on mapping labels across subjects.
Thanks, Darren
- --
Darren L. Weber, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Scholar
Dynamic Neuroimaging Laboratory, UCSF Department of Radiology, 185 Berry Street, Suite 350, Box 0946, San Francisco, CA 94107, USA.
Tel: +1 415 353-9444 Fax: +1 415 353-9421 www: http://dnl.ucsf.edu/users/dweber
"To explicate the uses of the brain seems as difficult a task as to paint the soul, of which it is commonly said, that it understands all things but itself." Thomas Willis (The Anatomy of the Brain and Nerves, 1664)
The label coords as created by tksurfer should be that of the white surface, so you're really just changing the coords from that of white to that of pial. Can you try removing --trgsurf pial from your cmd and see if the labels are the same?
doug
Darren Weber wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Dear Doug et al.,
I'm trying to test mri_label2label because we've observed some strange results in the download for:
freesurfer-Linux-rh9-stable-pub-v3.0.2
To test the program, I thought it would be sensible to map a label of one subject onto itself, with a different label filename for the output. So I created a large label in a subject rh inflated surface and saved it to X.label file. I then tried to run mri_label2label using the same srcsubject and target subject, with a different name for the target label, ie:
mri_label2label \
- --srclabel $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/$label \
- --trglabel $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/$newlabel \
- --srcsubject ${srcsubject} \
- --trgsubject ${srcsubject} \
- --regmethod surface --hemi $hemi --trgsurf pial
In effect, this should be equivalent to:
cd $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/ cp $label $newlabel
That is, the label mapping onto the same subject surface should be identical. It is not. Can you please try to replicate this result? I would like to know if it is particular to the setup here. If you find a bug in mri_label2label, please forward a fix ASAP, as we are trying to complete some analysis that depends on mapping labels across subjects.
Thanks, Darren
Darren L. Weber, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Scholar
Dynamic Neuroimaging Laboratory, UCSF Department of Radiology, 185 Berry Street, Suite 350, Box 0946, San Francisco, CA 94107, USA.
Tel: +1 415 353-9444 Fax: +1 415 353-9421 www: http://dnl.ucsf.edu/users/dweber
"To explicate the uses of the brain seems as difficult a task as to paint the soul, of which it is commonly said, that it understands all things but itself." Thomas Willis (The Anatomy of the Brain and Nerves, 1664) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFEtDeZxaCYN7qs0v4RApcvAKCBTkFl5dOPIaAVD0Qv5vejQ7E+3wCglb2U LXK6ke2GQGjDITqafbLtVGk= =5OcG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
It probably won't be the same as a cp in any case, as you will go through some resampling steps.
cheers, Bruce On Tue, 11 Jul 2006, Doug Greve wrote:
The label coords as created by tksurfer should be that of the white surface, so you're really just changing the coords from that of white to that of pial. Can you try removing --trgsurf pial from your cmd and see if the labels are the same?
doug
Darren Weber wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Dear Doug et al.,
I'm trying to test mri_label2label because we've observed some strange results in the download for:
freesurfer-Linux-rh9-stable-pub-v3.0.2
To test the program, I thought it would be sensible to map a label of one subject onto itself, with a different label filename for the output. So I created a large label in a subject rh inflated surface and saved it to X.label file. I then tried to run mri_label2label using the same srcsubject and target subject, with a different name for the target label, ie:
mri_label2label \
- --srclabel $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/$label \
- --trglabel $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/$newlabel \
- --srcsubject ${srcsubject} \
- --trgsubject ${srcsubject} \
- --regmethod surface --hemi $hemi --trgsurf pial
In effect, this should be equivalent to:
cd $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/ cp $label $newlabel
That is, the label mapping onto the same subject surface should be identical. It is not. Can you please try to replicate this result? I would like to know if it is particular to the setup here. If you find a bug in mri_label2label, please forward a fix ASAP, as we are trying to complete some analysis that depends on mapping labels across subjects.
Thanks, Darren
Darren L. Weber, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Scholar
Dynamic Neuroimaging Laboratory, UCSF Department of Radiology, 185 Berry Street, Suite 350, Box 0946, San Francisco, CA 94107, USA.
Tel: +1 415 353-9444 Fax: +1 415 353-9421 www: http://dnl.ucsf.edu/users/dweber
"To explicate the uses of the brain seems as difficult a task as to paint the soul, of which it is commonly said, that it understands all things but itself." Thomas Willis (The Anatomy of the Brain and Nerves, 1664) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFEtDeZxaCYN7qs0v4RApcvAKCBTkFl5dOPIaAVD0Qv5vejQ7E+3wCglb2U LXK6ke2GQGjDITqafbLtVGk= =5OcG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
I think it should be the same. When the source and target subjs are the same, there should not be any resampling.
On Tue, 11 Jul 2006, Bruce Fischl wrote:
It probably won't be the same as a cp in any case, as you will go through some resampling steps.
cheers, Bruce On Tue, 11 Jul 2006, Doug Greve wrote:
The label coords as created by tksurfer should be that of the white surface, so you're really just changing the coords from that of white to that of pial. Can you try removing --trgsurf pial from your cmd and see if the labels are the same?
doug
Darren Weber wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Dear Doug et al.,
I'm trying to test mri_label2label because we've observed some strange results in the download for:
freesurfer-Linux-rh9-stable-pub-v3.0.2
To test the program, I thought it would be sensible to map a label of one subject onto itself, with a different label filename for the output. So I created a large label in a subject rh inflated surface and saved it to X.label file. I then tried to run mri_label2label using the same srcsubject and target subject, with a different name for the target label, ie:
mri_label2label \
- --srclabel $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/$label \
- --trglabel $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/$newlabel \
- --srcsubject ${srcsubject} \
- --trgsubject ${srcsubject} \
- --regmethod surface --hemi $hemi --trgsurf pial
In effect, this should be equivalent to:
cd $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/ cp $label $newlabel
That is, the label mapping onto the same subject surface should be identical. It is not. Can you please try to replicate this result? I would like to know if it is particular to the setup here. If you find a bug in mri_label2label, please forward a fix ASAP, as we are trying to complete some analysis that depends on mapping labels across subjects.
Thanks, Darren
Darren L. Weber, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Scholar
Dynamic Neuroimaging Laboratory, UCSF Department of Radiology, 185 Berry Street, Suite 350, Box 0946, San Francisco, CA 94107, USA.
Tel: +1 415 353-9444 Fax: +1 415 353-9421 www: http://dnl.ucsf.edu/users/dweber
"To explicate the uses of the brain seems as difficult a task as to paint the soul, of which it is commonly said, that it understands all things but itself." Thomas Willis (The Anatomy of the Brain and Nerves, 1664) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFEtDeZxaCYN7qs0v4RApcvAKCBTkFl5dOPIaAVD0Qv5vejQ7E+3wCglb2U LXK6ke2GQGjDITqafbLtVGk= =5OcG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
This is an example of diff output for the test without the --trgsurf option:
endorphin.14> diff --side-by-side DLWeber_rh_ACC.label DLWeber_surface_rh_ACC.label | head - #!ascii label , from subject ucsf_wa #!ascii label , from subject ucsf_wa 660 660 106091 3.122 21.824 57.650 0.000000 | 106091 2.037 22.222 57.359 0.000000 106981 7.056 22.926 59.092 0.000000 | 106981 7.114 22.942 59.024 0.000000 106982 6.147 22.676 59.500 0.000000 | 106982 6.137 22.636 59.159 0.000000 106983 5.178 22.521 58.995 0.000000 | 106983 4.816 22.583 58.765 0.000000 106984 4.149 22.523 58.728 0.000000 | 106984 3.440 22.988 58.509 0.000000 106985 3.138 22.925 58.465 0.000000 | 106985 2.206 23.278 58.150 0.000000 106991 7.153 22.847 58.153 0.000000 | 106991 7.272 22.963 58.219 0.000000 106992 6.603 22.649 58.357 0.000000 | 106992 6.639 22.730 58.329 0.000000
Are these values just from different layers in the rh.<surf> data?
Thanks, Darren
Doug Greve wrote:
I think it should be the same. When the source and target subjs are the same, there should not be any resampling.
On Tue, 11 Jul 2006, Bruce Fischl wrote:
It probably won't be the same as a cp in any case, as you will go through some resampling steps.
cheers, Bruce On Tue, 11 Jul 2006, Doug Greve wrote:
The label coords as created by tksurfer should be that of the white surface, so you're really just changing the coords from that of white to that of pial. Can you try removing --trgsurf pial from your cmd and see if the labels are the same?
doug
Darren Weber wrote:
Dear Doug et al.,
I'm trying to test mri_label2label because we've observed some strange results in the download for:
freesurfer-Linux-rh9-stable-pub-v3.0.2
To test the program, I thought it would be sensible to map a label of one subject onto itself, with a different label filename for the output. So I created a large label in a subject rh inflated surface and saved it to X.label file. I then tried to run mri_label2label using the same srcsubject and target subject, with a different name for the target label, ie:
mri_label2label \ --srclabel $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/$label \ --trglabel $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/$newlabel \ --srcsubject ${srcsubject} \ --trgsubject ${srcsubject} \ --regmethod surface --hemi $hemi --trgsurf pial
In effect, this should be equivalent to:
cd $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/ cp $label $newlabel
That is, the label mapping onto the same subject surface should be identical. It is not. Can you please try to replicate this result? I would like to know if it is particular to the setup here. If you find a bug in mri_label2label, please forward a fix ASAP, as we are trying to complete some analysis that depends on mapping labels across subjects.
Thanks, Darren
--
Darren L. Weber, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Scholar
Dynamic Neuroimaging Laboratory, UCSF Department of Radiology, 185 Berry Street, Suite 350, Box 0946, San Francisco, CA 94107, USA.
Tel: +1 415 353-9444 Fax: +1 415 353-9421 www: http://dnl.ucsf.edu/users/dweber
"To explicate the uses of the brain seems as difficult a task as to paint the soul, of which it is commonly said, that it understands all things but itself." Thomas Willis (The Anatomy of the Brain and Nerves, 1664)
_______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
Hmmm, I just tried this and did not have a problem. There's something funny going on here. The indices for both labels are the same, only the cooridnates are different. This means that the source label and the new label are using different surfaces. Are you sure you created the source label from the white surface? Can you take your new label and generate another new label in the same way?
doug
Darren Weber wrote:
This is an example of diff output for the test without the --trgsurf option:
endorphin.14> diff --side-by-side DLWeber_rh_ACC.label DLWeber_surface_rh_ACC.label | head - #!ascii label , from subject ucsf_wa #!ascii label , from subject ucsf_wa 660 660 106091 3.122 21.824 57.650 0.000000 | 106091 2.037 22.222 57.359 0.000000 106981 7.056 22.926 59.092 0.000000 | 106981 7.114 22.942 59.024 0.000000 106982 6.147 22.676 59.500 0.000000 | 106982 6.137 22.636 59.159 0.000000 106983 5.178 22.521 58.995 0.000000 | 106983 4.816 22.583 58.765 0.000000 106984 4.149 22.523 58.728 0.000000 | 106984 3.440 22.988 58.509 0.000000 106985 3.138 22.925 58.465 0.000000 | 106985 2.206 23.278 58.150 0.000000 106991 7.153 22.847 58.153 0.000000 | 106991 7.272 22.963 58.219 0.000000 106992 6.603 22.649 58.357 0.000000 | 106992 6.639 22.730 58.329 0.000000
Are these values just from different layers in the rh.<surf> data?
Thanks, Darren
Doug Greve wrote:
I think it should be the same. When the source and target subjs are the same, there should not be any resampling.
On Tue, 11 Jul 2006, Bruce Fischl wrote:
It probably won't be the same as a cp in any case, as you will go through some resampling steps.
cheers, Bruce On Tue, 11 Jul 2006, Doug Greve wrote:
The label coords as created by tksurfer should be that of the white surface, so you're really just changing the coords from that of white to that of pial. Can you try removing --trgsurf pial from your cmd and see if the labels are the same?
doug
Darren Weber wrote:
Dear Doug et al.,
I'm trying to test mri_label2label because we've observed some strange results in the download for:
freesurfer-Linux-rh9-stable-pub-v3.0.2
To test the program, I thought it would be sensible to map a label of one subject onto itself, with a different label filename for the output. So I created a large label in a subject rh inflated surface and saved it to X.label file. I then tried to run mri_label2label using the same srcsubject and target subject, with a different name for the target label, ie:
mri_label2label \ --srclabel $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/$label \ --trglabel $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/$newlabel \ --srcsubject ${srcsubject} \ --trgsubject ${srcsubject} \ --regmethod surface --hemi $hemi --trgsurf pial
In effect, this should be equivalent to:
cd $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/ cp $label $newlabel
That is, the label mapping onto the same subject surface should be identical. It is not. Can you please try to replicate this result? I would like to know if it is particular to the setup here. If you find a bug in mri_label2label, please forward a fix ASAP, as we are trying to complete some analysis that depends on mapping labels across subjects.
Thanks, Darren
--
Darren L. Weber, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Scholar
Dynamic Neuroimaging Laboratory, UCSF Department of Radiology, 185 Berry Street, Suite 350, Box 0946, San Francisco, CA 94107, USA.
Tel: +1 415 353-9444 Fax: +1 415 353-9421 www: http://dnl.ucsf.edu/users/dweber
"To explicate the uses of the brain seems as difficult a task as to paint the soul, of which it is commonly said, that it understands all things but itself." Thomas Willis (The Anatomy of the Brain and Nerves, 1664)
Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
I defined the label on the inflated surface, I don't know what the coordinates are mapped into when they are saved from tksurfer. I guess the vertex numbers go through a lookup into the orig surface to get those coordinates.
When I ran the label2label mapping a second time, using the results of the first mapping, the results are identical! That confirms the integrity of the mri_label2label process.
So, tksurfer is mapping coordinates to a different surface (orig) to the surface used in mri_label2label (white). So, the coordinates of a label saved from tksurfer cannot be compared with the output of mri_label2label, even when the vertex indices are identical. There is nothing in the .label file to indicate what surface it belongs to.
Thanks, Darren
Doug Greve wrote:
Hmmm, I just tried this and did not have a problem. There's something funny going on here. The indices for both labels are the same, only the cooridnates are different. This means that the source label and the new label are using different surfaces. Are you sure you created the source label from the white surface? Can you take your new label and generate another new label in the same way?
doug
Darren Weber wrote:
This is an example of diff output for the test without the --trgsurf option:
endorphin.14> diff --side-by-side DLWeber_rh_ACC.label DLWeber_surface_rh_ACC.label | head - #!ascii label , from subject ucsf_wa #!ascii label , from subject ucsf_wa 660 660 106091 3.122 21.824 57.650 0.000000 | 106091 2.037 22.222 57.359 0.000000 106981 7.056 22.926 59.092 0.000000 | 106981 7.114 22.942 59.024 0.000000 106982 6.147 22.676 59.500 0.000000 | 106982 6.137 22.636 59.159 0.000000 106983 5.178 22.521 58.995 0.000000 | 106983 4.816 22.583 58.765 0.000000 106984 4.149 22.523 58.728 0.000000 | 106984 3.440 22.988 58.509 0.000000 106985 3.138 22.925 58.465 0.000000 | 106985 2.206 23.278 58.150 0.000000 106991 7.153 22.847 58.153 0.000000 | 106991 7.272 22.963 58.219 0.000000 106992 6.603 22.649 58.357 0.000000 | 106992 6.639 22.730 58.329 0.000000
Are these values just from different layers in the rh.<surf> data?
Thanks, Darren
Doug Greve wrote:
I think it should be the same. When the source and target subjs are the same, there should not be any resampling.
On Tue, 11 Jul 2006, Bruce Fischl wrote:
It probably won't be the same as a cp in any case, as you will go through some resampling steps.
cheers, Bruce On Tue, 11 Jul 2006, Doug Greve wrote:
The label coords as created by tksurfer should be that of the white surface, so you're really just changing the coords from that of white to that of pial. Can you try removing --trgsurf pial from your cmd and see if the labels are the same?
doug
Darren Weber wrote:
Dear Doug et al.,
I'm trying to test mri_label2label because we've observed some strange results in the download for:
freesurfer-Linux-rh9-stable-pub-v3.0.2
To test the program, I thought it would be sensible to map a label of one subject onto itself, with a different label filename for the output. So I created a large label in a subject rh inflated surface and saved it to X.label file. I then tried to run mri_label2label using the same srcsubject and target subject, with a different name for the target label, ie:
mri_label2label \ --srclabel $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/$label \ --trglabel $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/$newlabel \ --srcsubject ${srcsubject} \ --trgsubject ${srcsubject} \ --regmethod surface --hemi $hemi --trgsurf pial
In effect, this should be equivalent to:
cd $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/ cp $label $newlabel
That is, the label mapping onto the same subject surface should be identical. It is not. Can you please try to replicate this result? I would like to know if it is particular to the setup here. If you find a bug in mri_label2label, please forward a fix ASAP, as we are trying to complete some analysis that depends on mapping labels across subjects.
Thanks, Darren
--
Darren L. Weber, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Scholar
Dynamic Neuroimaging Laboratory, UCSF Department of Radiology, 185 Berry Street, Suite 350, Box 0946, San Francisco, CA 94107, USA.
Tel: +1 415 353-9444 Fax: +1 415 353-9421 www: http://dnl.ucsf.edu/users/dweber
"To explicate the uses of the brain seems as difficult a task as to paint the soul, of which it is commonly said, that it understands all things but itself." Thomas Willis (The Anatomy of the Brain and Nerves, 1664)
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
In order to help us help you, please follow the steps in: surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting
Hi Darren,
I just found out that when you save a label in tksurfer, it saves it using the orig surface coords, which explains the discrepancy. Try running label2label with --trgsurf orig. Alternatively, you can save your label in the white surface if you start up tksurfer with -orig white
doug
Darren Weber wrote:
This is an example of diff output for the test without the --trgsurf option:
endorphin.14> diff --side-by-side DLWeber_rh_ACC.label DLWeber_surface_rh_ACC.label | head - #!ascii label , from subject ucsf_wa #!ascii label , from subject ucsf_wa 660 660 106091 3.122 21.824 57.650 0.000000 | 106091 2.037 22.222 57.359 0.000000 106981 7.056 22.926 59.092 0.000000 | 106981 7.114 22.942 59.024 0.000000 106982 6.147 22.676 59.500 0.000000 | 106982 6.137 22.636 59.159 0.000000 106983 5.178 22.521 58.995 0.000000 | 106983 4.816 22.583 58.765 0.000000 106984 4.149 22.523 58.728 0.000000 | 106984 3.440 22.988 58.509 0.000000 106985 3.138 22.925 58.465 0.000000 | 106985 2.206 23.278 58.150 0.000000 106991 7.153 22.847 58.153 0.000000 | 106991 7.272 22.963 58.219 0.000000 106992 6.603 22.649 58.357 0.000000 | 106992 6.639 22.730 58.329 0.000000
Are these values just from different layers in the rh.<surf> data?
Thanks, Darren
Doug Greve wrote:
I think it should be the same. When the source and target subjs are the same, there should not be any resampling.
On Tue, 11 Jul 2006, Bruce Fischl wrote:
It probably won't be the same as a cp in any case, as you will go through some resampling steps.
cheers, Bruce On Tue, 11 Jul 2006, Doug Greve wrote:
The label coords as created by tksurfer should be that of the white surface, so you're really just changing the coords from that of white to that of pial. Can you try removing --trgsurf pial from your cmd and see if the labels are the same?
doug
Darren Weber wrote:
Dear Doug et al.,
I'm trying to test mri_label2label because we've observed some strange results in the download for:
freesurfer-Linux-rh9-stable-pub-v3.0.2
To test the program, I thought it would be sensible to map a label of one subject onto itself, with a different label filename for the output. So I created a large label in a subject rh inflated surface and saved it to X.label file. I then tried to run mri_label2label using the same srcsubject and target subject, with a different name for the target label, ie:
mri_label2label \ --srclabel $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/$label \ --trglabel $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/$newlabel \ --srcsubject ${srcsubject} \ --trgsubject ${srcsubject} \ --regmethod surface --hemi $hemi --trgsurf pial
In effect, this should be equivalent to:
cd $SUBJECTS_DIR/${srcsubject}/label/ cp $label $newlabel
That is, the label mapping onto the same subject surface should be identical. It is not. Can you please try to replicate this result? I would like to know if it is particular to the setup here. If you find a bug in mri_label2label, please forward a fix ASAP, as we are trying to complete some analysis that depends on mapping labels across subjects.
Thanks, Darren
--
Darren L. Weber, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Scholar
Dynamic Neuroimaging Laboratory, UCSF Department of Radiology, 185 Berry Street, Suite 350, Box 0946, San Francisco, CA 94107, USA.
Tel: +1 415 353-9444 Fax: +1 415 353-9421 www: http://dnl.ucsf.edu/users/dweber
"To explicate the uses of the brain seems as difficult a task as to paint the soul, of which it is commonly said, that it understands all things but itself." Thomas Willis (The Anatomy of the Brain and Nerves, 1664)
Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
-
Bruce Fischl -
Darren Weber -
Doug Greve