Hi - there are no major conceptual changes - just a series of minor
tweaks in different programs used. On linux the two versions take
pretty much the same time. On a G5 Mac here I'm getting 1765s for
FSL3.2 and 2543s for FSL3.3 actual compute time on an example
dataset. I think this is mostly explained by extra robustness
checking in FLIRT and in the conversion of siena_diff from C to C++
for compatibility with the rest of FSL (we've nearly finished killing
off all the old C code). Both versions give almost the same answer
(-3.708 and -3.658).
Hence I think all is well, and would just recommend using purely
FSL3.3 for these analyses.
Cheers.
On 30 May 2007, at 23:38, Zografos Caramanos wrote:
> Hello again!
>
> Can anyone please describe/summarize the differences between
> running SIENA
> v-2.3 (FSL v-3.2beta, FLIRT version 5.2, FAST Version 3.5) and the
> current
> SIENA v-2.4 (FSL v-3.3.11, FLIRT version 5.4.2, FAST Version 3.53)
> -- or
> point me to such a description/summary.
>
> My Scan-Rescan results with v-2.4 seem to suggest that it is more
> robust
> than v-2.3, but each run of SIENA v-2.4 takes about 60 minutes as
> opposed to
> about 20 minutes for SIENA v-2.3 (running on a Dual 2GHz PowerPC G5
> with
> 2-GB DDR SDRAM and Mac OS X v-10.4.8) and I am curious as to what is
> responsible for this.
>
> Cheers!
> Aki
>
> Zografos Caramanos, M.A.
> Magnetic Resonance Studies Unit
> Montreal Neurological Institute, McGill University
> (e-mail) [log in to unmask]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Stephen M. Smith, Professor of Biomedical Engineering
Associate Director, Oxford University FMRIB Centre
FMRIB, JR Hospital, Headington, Oxford OX3 9DU, UK
+44 (0) 1865 222726 (fax 222717)
[log in to unmask] http://www.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/~steve
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
|