open-discussion
open-discussion > RE: Templates for ParaToSPHARM Mesh & ShapeMANCOV
Jul 26, 2011 08:07 PM | Beatriz Paniagua
RE: Templates for ParaToSPHARM Mesh & ShapeMANCOV
Hi Sylvia,
You want to be consistent in your analysis, and so you should select the same surfSPHARM.coef file for all your population. Usually we use the surfSPHARM in the original space (not the ellalign one). I would use the one that is in your Template folder. If you dont have a Template folder, just use the first one.
If you are using ParaToSPHARMMesh and not ParaToSPHARMMeshCLP you have to convert to meta. However, I would recommend to use the CLP versions of all that commands because are the ones we mantain and debug. The rest are obsolete.
I hope that helps.
Regards,
BEATRIZ
For the flipTemplate for cases after the first, I used the
_SPHARM.coef file computed from ParaToSPHARM. Does it matter if it
is the _SPHARM.coef or the SPHARM_ellalign.coef?
You want to be consistent in your analysis, and so you should select the same surfSPHARM.coef file for all your population. Usually we use the surfSPHARM in the original space (not the ellalign one). I would use the one that is in your Template folder. If you dont have a Template folder, just use the first one.
For the regTemplate, I am not sure what mesh file to use for
Procrustes alignment. I attempted using the triangular surface mesh
computed from GenParaMesh (_surf.vtk) but it gave me this
error:
vnl_error_matrix_dimension:vnl_tag_mul: Dimensions [3,32062] and [4002,3] do not match
Here
you need to use the surfSPHARM.vtk as well, that is why there is
discordance with the points. Your surf.vtk still does not have
correspondence, your surfSPHARM.vtk does. I will use the one that
is the Template folder, if you dont have it just use the first one
you compute.vnl_error_matrix_dimension:vnl_tag_mul: Dimensions [3,32062] and [4002,3] do not match
For the Procrustes, do I only apply it to the 2nd case and after?
Also, just to confirm, do I need to convert the .vtk to .meta to
use as template in the command line?
With regard to whether or not you apply to the 2nd case and after,
i would always compute the first individually and then making a
script to compute the rest (including the first with the first).
That makes it much easier.If you are using ParaToSPHARMMesh and not ParaToSPHARMMeshCLP you have to convert to meta. However, I would recommend to use the CLP versions of all that commands because are the ones we mantain and debug. The rest are obsolete.
As for ShapeMANCOVA, would it be possible to compare several images
individually of the same item (imaged at sequential times) to each
other instead of comparing groups?
Of
course! The fact you set correspondence in the whole population
doesnt mean you have to analyze them altogether. You decide how you
write your csv file.I hope that helps.
Regards,
BEATRIZ
Threaded View
| Title | Author | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Sylvia Hon | Jul 26, 2011 | |
| Sylvia Hon | Jul 27, 2011 | |
| Beatriz Paniagua | Jul 29, 2011 | |
| Beatriz Paniagua | Jul 26, 2011 | |