Fig. 14.

Qualitative comparison of reconstruction methods in the subject space. Visual comparisons of different reconstruction methods for a B1 (left) and an A (right) case where challenging target stacks were (automatically) selected. Additional visualizations associated with the For the group A case (b), additional visualizations are provided to assess the outlier-rejection performance (Fig. 16) and for template space comparisons (Inline Supplementary Fig. S6). Dilated SRR (M) masks were used for visual cropping. SRR (M) without outlier rejection (OR) presents various artifacts. Similarly, the localization masks as used for SRR (L) lead to poor reconstruction outcomes despite the use of outlier rejection. The outlier-robust results SRR (M) and the proposed SRR (S) based on manual and automated brain masks, respectively, provide successful reconstructions and are, visually, almost indistinguishable. Green arrows indicate artifacts in SRR (M) without OR that are eliminated using our proposed OR method. Red arrows show differences between our proposed method and Kainz et al. (M).