Difference between revisions of "Projects:DBP2:Harvard:Registration Documentation:Compare"
From NAMIC Wiki
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
==Rigid== | ==Rigid== | ||
| − | [[File:T2-baseline rigid target FSL slicer.png| | + | {| |
| + | [[File:T2-baseline rigid target FSL slicer.png|900px|thumb|left| Rigid registration comparison: Very similar, only small differences viewable. Both are properly aligned. ]] | ||
| + | |} | ||
| + | |||
| + | :Rigid registration is very similar between the two tools. Differences are only visible when switching back and forth in slicer. The Slicer registration seems slightly more diffuse, but both seem to be properly aligned for further bspline registration. | ||
==BSpline== | ==BSpline== | ||
| − | [[File:T2-baseline rig-bspline target FSL slicer.png | | + | [[File:T2-baseline rig-bspline target FSL slicer.png |900px|thumb|left| BSpline warp comparison: FSL is quite good, Slicer is OK, but much worse. Both have slight troubles in lower frontal and temporal, and some issues at back of brain.]] |
| − | Bspline registration shows some differences between the two tools. FSL produces a good registration, only really having trouble in the bottom few slices of the brain when looking at the temporal lobe, and at the very front of the brain, though it does match much of the DTI distortion. Slicer does not fare as well, working only in the middle portion of the brain. It does not match the DTI distortion as well, leaving more of the frontal lobe and back of the brain mismatched. Also, FSL produces a deformation volume that can be used to transform a label map, while Slicer's output transform does not seem to accurately match the volume it created. | + | |
| + | :Bspline registration shows some differences between the two tools. FSL produces a good registration, only really having trouble in the bottom few slices of the brain when looking at the temporal lobe, and at the very front of the brain, though it does match much of the DTI distortion. Slicer does not fare as well, working only in the middle portion of the brain. It does not match the DTI distortion as well, leaving more of the frontal lobe and back of the brain mismatched. Also, FSL produces a deformation volume that can be used to transform a label map, while Slicer's output transform does not seem to accurately match the volume it created. | ||
| + | |||
| + | =Case to case registration= | ||
Revision as of 19:40, 26 May 2009
Home < Projects:DBP2:Harvard:Registration Documentation:CompareUNDER CONSTRUCTION
This page aims to create a concise comparison of registration methods to show the difference in quality of registration between FSL 4.1 and Slicer 3.3.
Other types of registrations and a link to the files used can be found here.
Note: for FSL all files need to be in nifti format. For me, FSL was interpreting my masked baseline image strangely so I had to flip the nrrd before converting to nifti using unu flip. If you encounter problems while trying this yourself, view your nifti files in FSL before registration to see if they are oriented properly.
T2 to Baseline registration
In this registration we take a masked T2 image as our source, and register it to the corresponding masked baseline image target using FSL's FLIRT and FNIRT tools, and in Slicer 3 by the 'Registration -> Rigid Registration' and 'Registration -> Deformable BSpline Registration' modules.
Rigid
- Rigid registration is very similar between the two tools. Differences are only visible when switching back and forth in slicer. The Slicer registration seems slightly more diffuse, but both seem to be properly aligned for further bspline registration.
BSpline
- Bspline registration shows some differences between the two tools. FSL produces a good registration, only really having trouble in the bottom few slices of the brain when looking at the temporal lobe, and at the very front of the brain, though it does match much of the DTI distortion. Slicer does not fare as well, working only in the middle portion of the brain. It does not match the DTI distortion as well, leaving more of the frontal lobe and back of the brain mismatched. Also, FSL produces a deformation volume that can be used to transform a label map, while Slicer's output transform does not seem to accurately match the volume it created.
