# Critical issues with binWidth setting in PARAMETERS file for Pyradiomics

**URL:** <https://discourse.slicer.org/t/critical-issues-with-binwidth-setting-in-parameters-file-for-pyradiomics/29286>\
**Category:** Support\
**Created:** [May 4, 2023, 10:25am UTC](https://discourse.slicer.org/t/critical-issues-with-binwidth-setting-in-parameters-file-for-pyradiomics/29286 "2023-05-04T10:25:29Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![harad](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discourse.slicer.org/harad/32/14934_2.png) [@harad](https://discourse.slicer.org/u/harad)\
**Post date:** [May 4, 2023, 10:25am UTC](https://discourse.slicer.org/t/critical-issues-with-binwidth-setting-in-parameters-file-for-pyradiomics/29286/1 "2023-05-04T10:25:29Z")

</div>

I would be grateful if anyone could help with the binWidth choice. Even after the default normalization in SlicerRadiomics (normalize: true), I observe that the intensity ranges vary among different MRIs up to over five-fold.  
My precise questions are:

- Is then the binWidth set subjectively to fall anywhere within a recommended 16-130 range for all images?
- Is it advisable to use Freedman–Diaconis rule or just the 16-130 binWidth number guesstimate?  
Many thanks in advance, Marko