# Point Correspondence Issue **URL:** \ **Category:** Uncategorized\ **Created:** [November 23, 2021, 6:24pm UTC](https://shapeworks.discourse.group/t/point-correspondence-issue/66 "2021-11-23T18:24:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![andie\_sieja](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ee59a6/32.png) [@andie\_sieja](https://shapeworks.discourse.group/u/andie_sieja)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2021, 6:24pm UTC](https://shapeworks.discourse.group/t/point-correspondence-issue/66/1 "2021-11-23T18:24:10Z")
Hi everyone, I am working with a data set of about 447 atrial fibrillation patients. I am looking at the left atrium and am having some trouble with my point correspondence. I was wondering if anyone had some advice on what parameters I should adjust to improve this correspondence? I have attached some screenshots of what my shapes are looking like and my current parameters. Thanks, Andie ![Screen Shot 2021-11-23 at 8.49.46 AM](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/free1/uploads/shapeworks/original/1X/541a6ad9ecc5a14f8adbd34dc2e4863c41578bce.jpeg) ![Screen Shot 2021-11-23 at 8.52.57 AM](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/free1/uploads/shapeworks/original/1X/d05a75fd7f8c24eccfd1fca2b4dc80bfb1563785.jpeg) ![Screen Shot 2021-11-23 at 11.05.33 AM](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/free1/uploads/shapeworks/original/1X/889f239ef6b4df476963af71efa52b4771c74300.png) ---
**Author:** ![amorris](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/73ab20/32.png) [@amorris](https://shapeworks.discourse.group/u/amorris)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2021, 7:21pm UTC](https://shapeworks.discourse.group/t/point-correspondence-issue/66/2 "2021-11-23T19:21:12Z")
Hi, I would first recommend targeting a lower number of particles and ensuring that you have a reasonable model there. I would suggest something like 256 particles, or even 128 to start. If there is not a good model at this level, further splits will just make things worse. Besides that, I would recommend an `initial_relative_weighting` of `0.05` and a `relative_weighting` of `1.0` to start. I think you can reduce the number of iterations, probably 1000 per split and I wouldn’t worry too much about the optimization iterations until you confirm that you have a consistent correspondence, so I would set it to 500 iterations or so. Also, did you try on a smaller dataset first, maybe 50 shapes instead of the full 447? ---
**Author:** ![andie\_sieja](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ee59a6/32.png) [@andie\_sieja](https://shapeworks.discourse.group/u/andie_sieja)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2021, 10:26pm UTC](https://shapeworks.discourse.group/t/point-correspondence-issue/66/3 "2021-11-23T22:26:23Z")
Thank you for these suggestions. I took them into account and there are still correspondence issues. These are what my shapes are looking like. ![Screen Shot 2021-11-23 at 3.25.16 PM](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/free1/uploads/shapeworks/original/1X/cd4e0c074757c239747e526568ea480a2e24527b.jpeg) ![Screen Shot 2021-11-23 at 3.25.06 PM](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/free1/uploads/shapeworks/original/1X/cd7a283cc4ca2d90ebe1098587c3e02689cd5e4b.jpeg) ---
**Author:** ![andie\_sieja](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ee59a6/32.png) [@andie\_sieja](https://shapeworks.discourse.group/u/andie_sieja)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2021, 10:26pm UTC](https://shapeworks.discourse.group/t/point-correspondence-issue/66/4 "2021-11-23T22:26:51Z")
Do you have any other parameter suggestions? ---
**Author:** ![amorris](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/73ab20/32.png) [@amorris](https://shapeworks.discourse.group/u/amorris)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2021, 10:44pm UTC](https://shapeworks.discourse.group/t/point-correspondence-issue/66/5 "2021-11-23T22:44:22Z")
These are the reconstructions? Can you show what it looks like on the groomed models? Can you point me to this data (on SCI filesystem)? ---
**Author:** ![andie\_sieja](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ee59a6/32.png) [@andie\_sieja](https://shapeworks.discourse.group/u/andie_sieja)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2021, 11:29pm UTC](https://shapeworks.discourse.group/t/point-correspondence-issue/66/6 "2021-11-23T23:29:14Z")
I am unsure how to view the groomed models as I ran this from the terminal and not the studio originally. They are on glados in CIBC. ---
**Author:** ![andie\_sieja](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ee59a6/32.png) [@andie\_sieja](https://shapeworks.discourse.group/u/andie_sieja)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2021, 11:33pm UTC](https://shapeworks.discourse.group/t/point-correspondence-issue/66/7 "2021-11-23T23:33:21Z")
I am running them again in studio right now to visualize the groomed models. ---
**Author:** ![andie\_sieja](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ee59a6/32.png) [@andie\_sieja](https://shapeworks.discourse.group/u/andie_sieja)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2021, 11:40pm UTC](https://shapeworks.discourse.group/t/point-correspondence-issue/66/8 "2021-11-23T23:40:46Z")
![Screen Shot 2021-11-23 at 4.40.01 PM](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/free1/uploads/shapeworks/original/1X/8892edbf2f9a2fc76d7f492d7b39a55f66ab78ee.jpeg) ![Screen Shot 2021-11-23 at 4.39.49 PM](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/free1/uploads/shapeworks/original/1X/746e2b0f727473000ccb1b4417ad5e1b726f2448.jpeg)