Fantastic!
Best
Torben
> On 5 Feb 2019, at 11.25, Christian Gaser <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Dear Torben,
>
>
> On 5 Feb 2019, at 11:14, Torben Lund wrote:
>
>> Dear Christian
>>
>> Along the same lines. It would be great with a map that stored where the topological defects are located.
> This defect map is save if you increase verbosity level to 3 in cat_defaults:
> cat.extopts.verb = 3; % verbose output: 1 - default; 2 - details; 3 - write debugging files
>
> Best,
>
> Christian
>
>>
>>
>> Best
>> Torben
>>
>>
>>
>>> Den 5. feb. 2019 kl. 09.35 skrev Christian Gaser <[log in to unmask]>:
>>>
>>> Dear Christian,
>>>
>>> On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 18:01:13 +0000, Christian N. <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I assume that the "Size of topology defects" number, which appears in the report sheet after every CAT12 segmentation, indicates the number of uncorrected errors found during surface reconstruction.
>>>
>>> The Euler number gives rather a link to the number of defects. However, even for a small number of defects there might be quite large defects that might affect quality of surface reconstruction.
>>>
>>> If I am right, do you know if there is any "standard" threshold from which I should start excluding subjects? Would it be wise to include only those subjects with 0 topology errors?
>>> No, this would be quite painful, because this is rather unlikely. You should check data with many defects (large Euler number) and/or larger defect sizes more carefully, but there is no specific threshold or rule of thumb to reject data.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Christian
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
|