On Aug 24, 2016, at 8:39 AM, evan terrell <et5ee@virginia.edu> wrote:

Thank you for your prompt and helpful replies! 

Brig, I had restarted the application before each trial. I was planning to try the commandline tool if no other solution was found. I believe the stochastic factor was corrected in the commandline code back in February when this issue was first raised. Could the same correction be made to the Studio source code? 

Murat, I have been using the default of 1000 iterations per level, but I will try with more and see if that helps.

Praful, the order of data inputs was the same for each trial, and I did have # Clusters set to 0. Out of curiosity, should the order of data input affect the results of the analysis? 

Best,

Evan

On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Praful Agrawal <prafulag@cs.utah.edu> wrote:

Hi Evan,

I would like to know if the order of inputs is same in the multiple experiments (with inconsistent results). Also, are you using selective number of shapes for reconstruction (# clusters), it is recommended that use all shapes for reconstruction (#clusters = 0).

—

Regards,

Praful

http://www.sci.utah.edu/people/prafulag.html

On Aug 23, 2016, at 1:28 PM, evan terrell <et5ee@virginia.edu> wrote:

Hello,

I'm attempting to use ShapeWorks Studio to perform a shape analysis of several samples of a biological structure. I have repeated my analysis several times using identical Groom, Optimize, and Reconstruction parameters; however, the results are quite a bit different each trial. 

I saw a similar discussion in a thread from February, but the thread stated that it was only the command line tool that was inconsistent, while Studio was repeatable. I'm not finding that to be the case. Does anyone have any suggestions for achieving repeatable results in ShapeWorks Studio?

Thanks,

Evan

--

Evan Terrell

PhD Student, Biomedical Engineering

University of Virginia

Email: et5ee@virginia.edu

Tel: (315) 706-7720