general-discussion > RE: Sica stage failing in twins
Aug 28, 2012  08:08 AM
RE: Sica stage failing in twins
Hi Pierre,
Thanks very much!

That's an interesting idea. I am not sure this is going to work optimally though. You'll only run a rigid-body coregistration between the twins. Even though they have similar brains, this may not be enough to cover up the differences. Also that means that you will use only one of the T1 scan to run the coregistration in stereotaxic space. A better solution would be to have a hierarchical scheme, where twins T1 scans are first (non-linearly) coregistered on each other, before a single transformation to stereotaxic space is estimated. This will however highly bias the data of twin pairs, which will be way better coregistered than between-twins data. This may or may not be a problem (it will be if you are testing some kind of heritability). This may not be easy to work around in any case because the twins's brains are more similar than unrelated brains in the first place. Tough one. Needless to say, no twins coregistration strategy was implemented in NIAK. Could be a neat idea for a summer student though.

That seems like a really good suggestion. I've been getting around the brain similarity issue by doing separate multistat runs, first taking the difference between twin pairs, and then combining those differences. So, having the twin pairs nonlinearly registered would improve the inter-twin comparison, and the linear registration between the resulting difference images would still be just as good as before, correct?

To implement this heirarchical strategy can I just calculate the nl xfm files for twin A to B, transform both the anatomical and functional, and use those as inputs for the pipeline? Is there any reason the motion correction and normalization etc have to happen in the subject's native space?
I don't relly get where that error could come from. It says it doesn't find the randperm function which doesn't make sense (that's a standard command). There must be something going on with the configuration of the machine that's running the job. I'd try to restart the pipeline a couple of times before giving up and looking for a bug. Let me know if that error is reproducible.

Excellent, thanks. I'll look into this.
Regards,
KC
reply reply with quote
Threaded View
TitleAuthorDate
Sica stage failing in twinsKevin CaseyAug 22, 2012
      RE: Sica stage failing in twinsPierre BellecAug 27, 2012
            RE: Sica stage failing in twinsKevin CaseyAug 28, 2012