Hello Mark,
i´m now testing fast with all possible options, but maybe u can tell me:
what would be the options using fast and get the most approximatly
results next to fast in the older version (fast v3.x (3.5 or so i
guess)(i´ll give the exact version number later...))
This would be a great Help!
Thx a lot
Oliver
Mark Jenkinson schrieb:
> Hi,
>
> Neighbourhood can have a significant influence via the MRF (adjustable
> via -H) and
> so this could be causing what you see. The other thing might be the
> bias field if
> these voxels are in very different locations. Have you checked the
> bias field output?
>
> As for number of classes - it is still prominently displayed on the
> GUI and
> available as the first option on the command line (-n).
>
> All the best,
> Mark
>
>
> On 24 Jan 2009, at 21:13, Oliver Trebbe wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> i dont get, why a black and a white 'voxel' (low ad high intensity)
>> are clustert with same probability...
>> Maybe it is neighborhood connected but there is such 'high edge',
>> that there cant be a connected area...
>> After the newest Version of fast isnt it possbile to use it to
>> segment other things instead of WM GM and CSF in a brain extracted
>> Image?
>> can´t i segment a Volume into 2 classes anymore?
>>
>>
>> Greetings
>>
>> Oliver
>>
>>
>> Mark Jenkinson schrieb:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Have you tried modifying the number of iterations (-I) the
>>> spatial MRF (-H) or the bias field smoothing (-l) ?
>>> These parameters can all have a strong effect (as can some
>>> of the other parameters too, but I'd start with the ones above).
>>>
>>> It will help if you can identify what you think is going wrong.
>>>
>>> Does the bias field look OK? It shouldn't show visible anatomical
>>> detail, and the restored image should have a nicer histogram.
>>>
>>> Are the results too smooth (decreasing -H might help) or maybe
>>> not smooth enough (increase -H)?
>>>
>>> Also - have you done brain extraction with BET? This is essential
>>> for getting good results.
>>>
>>> Finally, are you looking at the hard segmentations of the PVEs?
>>> It is the PVEs that we recommend as the most useful outputs,
>>> and these can look different than the hard segmentations around
>>> the boundaries.
>>>
>>> All the best,
>>> Mark
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 24 Jan 2009, at 11:40, Oliver Trebbe wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello ,
>>>>
>>>> after i tried my method with the new FAST version, but the results
>>>> are bad!
>>>> so i suggesting using the old FAST version. (dont know what exactly
>>>> changed, but the stuff im segmenting is bad clustert, not like id
>>>> wanted it or guessed it..)
>>>>
>>>> So far
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Oliver Trebbe
>>>> Department of Neurology
>>>> University of Muenster
>>>> 48129 Muenster, Germany
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Oliver Trebbe
>> Department of Neurology
>> University of Muenster
>> 48129 Muenster, Germany
>>
>
--
Oliver Trebbe
Department of Neurology
University of Muenster
48129 Muenster, Germany
|