Difference between revisions of "Oct 08 2009 meeting: schedule for Oct 9"

From NAMIC Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 5: Line 5:
 
* check the quality of N3 bias correction. Ron: recovered bias field makes sense.  
 
* check the quality of N3 bias correction. Ron: recovered bias field makes sense.  
  
* learn how to manually segment sub-cortical structures
+
* learn how to manually segment sub-cortical structures -- need 3-class segmentation to do this, not ready yet
  
 
With Sandy:
 
With Sandy:

Revision as of 18:53, 9 October 2009

Home < Oct 08 2009 meeting: schedule for Oct 9

With Ron:

  • what caused the hole in Valentino data? Ron: the impression is that this is a cyst
  • check the quality of N3 bias correction. Ron: recovered bias field makes sense.
  • learn how to manually segment sub-cortical structures -- need 3-class segmentation to do this, not ready yet

With Sandy:

  • discuss EM segmenter -- talk with Chris, go through all recommendations for Ginger to take home
  • workflow -- how much benefit we can expect if we make it more complex, is it worth it (e.g., do EM segment on each subject, then re-run atlas construction without bias field, considering there is improvement)
  • can we think of quantitative criterion for bias correction with N3? -- we could script and run parameter exploration
  • check the quality of the smoothed data;

With Chris:

  • information about the second timepoint data / data transfer issue;
  • confirm there are no intellectual property issues for the workflow tools originating from VT -- can we put everything in NA-MIC sandbox to maximize reuse later?

With all:

  • look at the current results of the initial registration (up to affine)
  • build up the list of non-slicer3 tools / scripts, discuss sharing of code and data (data -- after the publication(s) are out)
  • discuss protocols on documentation;
  • conform proposed work flow;
  • discuss time-line / winter NAMIC meeting/ potential publications.