help
help > RE: node number in swc File
Sep 17, 2010 01:09 AM | Hanchuan Peng
RE: node number in swc File
One way to fix is to replace node numbers in the new swc using the
old node numbers if they share the same coordinates, and add new
node numbers if there are additional nodes being added. But I can
also see this could become ugly, because V3D allows nodes share the
same coordinate, but have different indexes.
You may write a plugin directly to re-join neuron structure if you are unhappy about the speed, :-) Or you can dig the V3D core code....
Originally posted by Jichao Chen:
You may write a plugin directly to re-join neuron structure if you are unhappy about the speed, :-) Or you can dig the V3D core code....
Originally posted by Jichao Chen:
I have some analysis code that depends on the
node number increases centrifugally. I could write some code to
post-process the swc result from V3D, but do you have an easy fix
within V3D? The node number initially increases centrifugally when
I use V3D to trace the structure. But if I decompose or edit the
structure, the node number becomes decreasing centrifugally within
a segment and stay this way (i.e. the node order does not reverse
back to the original even if I decompose or edit the structure
again). Does this suggest the decompose function can be somehow
modified to dictate the node number be the same as the
original?
As to the difference in speed between the rejoin and decompose function, it is only obvious when dealing with structures with hundreds of branches. I imagine that the decompose function involves breaking the structure into segments at branching points while the rejoin function involves removing redundant branching points (i.e. the ending node of an upstream segment is the beginning node of the corresponding downstream segment). If this is the case, the two functions should be similar in speed. That's why I think the difference in speed might be caused by some inefficiency when the node number is reversed.
Thanks again,
Jichao
[/userquote]
As to the difference in speed between the rejoin and decompose function, it is only obvious when dealing with structures with hundreds of branches. I imagine that the decompose function involves breaking the structure into segments at branching points while the rejoin function involves removing redundant branching points (i.e. the ending node of an upstream segment is the beginning node of the corresponding downstream segment). If this is the case, the two functions should be similar in speed. That's why I think the difference in speed might be caused by some inefficiency when the node number is reversed.
Thanks again,
Jichao
[/userquote]
Threaded View
| Title | Author | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Jichao Chen | Sep 14, 2010 | |
| Hanchuan Peng | Sep 15, 2010 | |
| Jichao Chen | Sep 16, 2010 | |
| Hanchuan Peng | Sep 17, 2010 | |
