Dear all, Is the latest January dev release compatible with the previous one (Oct 2005) with regards to surface-based measures? Are there any differences in the segmentation algorithms or in the implementation of these algorithms which might cause differences in the surface files? Thanks, Sasha
Disclaimer: The materials in this e-mail are private and may contain Protected Health Information. Please note that e-mail is not necessarily confidential or secure. Your use of e-mail constitutes your acknowledgment of these confidentiality and security limitations. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender via telephone or return e-mail.
results are definitely *not* guaranteed to be the same. We will be doing an official release in the next few weeks, and we advise that people rerun all their datasets through the new tools, which should be doable in a mostly automated fashion (or stick with the existing tools for the remainder of a study).
Bruce
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006, Sasha Wolosin wrote:
Dear all, Is the latest January dev release compatible with the previous one (Oct 2005) with regards to surface-based measures? Are there any differences in the segmentation algorithms or in the implementation of these algorithms which might cause differences in the surface files? Thanks, Sasha
Disclaimer: The materials in this e-mail are private and may contain Protected Health Information. Please note that e-mail is not necessarily confidential or secure. Your use of e-mail constitutes your acknowledgment of these confidentiality and security limitations. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender via telephone or return e-mail. _______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
Hi
I'm sorry, but I am very confused about the current freesurfer versions. What versions are currently being sourced for the standard and developmental versions? Is there anyway that when we source the current code something in the terminal would give us the version number (and the compilation date if this can change without changing the version number).
Dan Wakeman
results are definitely *not* guaranteed to be the same. We will be doing an official release in the next few weeks, and we advise that people rerun all their datasets through the new tools, which should be doable in a mostly automated fashion (or stick with the existing tools for the remainder of a study).
Bruce
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006, Sasha Wolosin wrote:
Dear all, Is the latest January dev release compatible with the previous one (Oct 2005) with regards to surface-based measures? Are there any differences in the segmentation algorithms or in the implementation of these algorithms which might cause differences in the surface files? Thanks, Sasha
Disclaimer: The materials in this e-mail are private and may contain Protected Health Information. Please note that e-mail is not necessarily confidential or secure. Your use of e-mail constitutes your acknowledgment of these confidentiality and security limitations. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender via telephone or return 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
Dan,
If you are internal to the NMR Center, then you should use an internal distributions described here:
https://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/InternalFreeSurferDistributions
For these internal users, the 'dev' environment is built every night, and doesn't have a version number. The 'std', or stable, version is rebuilt only when a major bug is found and fixed. It is version 2.2.
External users (those who don't have NMR access) have two web-accessible distribution options: the stable version (ie v2.2), and a 'dev' version, which is a snapshot taken of the internal 'dev' release.
This 'dev' version has been made available in recent months to let users have access to the newest subcortical segmentation code, and numerous other minor bug fixes. Very soon, a new stable release, v3.0, will be released. It will be a fully tested branch of the 'dev' release, very close to the one just posted on the web this Jan 28th for public consumption. Once this stable release is made available, we will discontinue public 'dev' releases, as they create confusion.
The --all-info flag given to a binary will return version and build information.
Another bit of information: generally, but not exclusively, posters to the Freesurfer mailing list are users external to the NMR Center. NMR Center users, who discover some problem with the nightly 'dev' build, are encouraged to post to the martinos-tech Yahoo group. That way the FreeSurfer mailing list, which goes out to several hundred people around the world, is retained for info relevant to the larger user group. A summary of the mailing lists is here:
https://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/FreeSurferSupport
Nick
On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 17:45 -0500, dwakeman@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu wrote:
Hi
I'm sorry, but I am very confused about the current freesurfer versions. What versions are currently being sourced for the standard and developmental versions? Is there anyway that when we source the current code something in the terminal would give us the version number (and the compilation date if this can change without changing the version number).
Dan Wakeman
results are definitely *not* guaranteed to be the same. We will be doing an official release in the next few weeks, and we advise that people rerun all their datasets through the new tools, which should be doable in a mostly automated fashion (or stick with the existing tools for the remainder of a study).
Bruce
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006, Sasha Wolosin wrote:
Dear all, Is the latest January dev release compatible with the previous one (Oct 2005) with regards to surface-based measures? Are there any differences in the segmentation algorithms or in the implementation of these algorithms which might cause differences in the surface files? Thanks, Sasha
Disclaimer: The materials in this e-mail are private and may contain Protected Health Information. Please note that e-mail is not necessarily confidential or secure. Your use of e-mail constitutes your acknowledgment of these confidentiality and security limitations. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender via telephone or return 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
Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
-
Bruce Fischl -
dwakeman＠nmr.mgh.harvard.edu -
Nick Schmansky -
Sasha Wolosin