SlicerMorph paper

@stevenagl12 Please never upload any source code as an image! Sometimes an editor may decide put the code on your clipboard as an image, but you can detect that by seeing an image link in your post instead of test. Source code images are completely unusable - we cannot copy-paste them to try them or compare to previous revisions.

If you are discussing code snippet longer than 10-20 lines of code then upload to a gist. If you are discussing a module, create a repository on github and upload the file there (it allows other developers to clone your repository and easily propose changes via pull requests).

Ok, here is the code again. As mentioned it is the same code @smrolfe had except with ExportMorphoJFile instead of ExportMorphoJLandmarkFile for the different classes, name of the file and name of the module ExportMorphoJFile

Your gist works perfectly fine for me with the latest stable, producing the morphoj output. Please try with stable version.

And after you confirm this works as intended, if you like we can include as part of the utility modules of SlicerMorph (if it is easier for you to distribute, you don’t need to have the individual students to install this as an additional module).

I’ve also tested on a recent preview version (10/28) and it’s working with that as well.

Ok, so I have now been able to get it to work. Not sure why it wasn’t working, but I had to download the latest preview release of Slicer. The release I had before was: 4.11.0-2019-08-13 r28438 that was giving me the iterable error. I have also double checked to make sure that the exported file works in morphoJ. If you want to package it into MorphoJ that would be nice.

That’s great news. Your previous Slicer installation was much older than the current stable. There have been many bug fixes and new features added since then, so is a good idea to update (either the preview or stable). Thanks for the feedback, we will plan to add this as a utility to the SlicerMorph extension.

For slicerMorph, within the GPA process is there a way you can do a rigid registration of the landmarks instead of the typical general Procrustes alignment before running the PCA?

Currently no. At some point we will add an option to align the procrustes coordinates with principal axes of data.

18 posts were split to a new topic: Principal components analysis in SlicerMorph

By any chance have you had the time to look at my utility for the slicermorph package for approval?

@stevenagl12 Thanks for your contribution, I’ll review it shortly!