-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Simplify structure #17
Conversation
This is looking good. One question I have is: what are the condition_indices indexing? In some cases, maybe 0,1,2,3 makes sense, but I think often it might make more sense to list the conditions. Maybe we could add a |
When I was re-writing this I was thinking that we could add an extra column for the conditions. I was thinking that we could make that extra column a link to either indexed stimuli or a column of a dynamic table or whatever. But now, I think what you proposal is simpler and maybe better. Just pass a vector with conditions as string as you mention. Note that with this could also make |
README.md
Outdated
milliseconds_from_event_to_first_bin = -50.0 # The first bin is 50 ms before the event | ||
bin_width_in_milliseconds = 100.0 | ||
name = "BinnedAignedSpikesForMyPurpose" | ||
description = "Spike counts that is binned and aligned to events." | ||
binned_aligned_spikes = BinnedAlignedSpikes( | ||
data=data, | ||
event_timestamps=event_timestamps, | ||
timestamps=timestamps, | ||
bin_width_in_milliseconds=bin_width_in_milliseconds, | ||
milliseconds_from_event_to_first_bin=milliseconds_from_event_to_first_bin, | ||
description=description, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this does not have event conditions
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, I introduce the possibility of storing multiple conditions in the next section. I think it makes presentation easier if less concepts are introduced at the same time.
I really think it could use an optional argument |
Let's do this! |
@bendichter this should be ready. I separated the condition_labels request in #18 to simplify the discussion. Let me know what you think. |
* add condition labels * Update src/pynwb/ndx_binned_spikes/__init__.py * Update spec/ndx-binned-spikes.extensions.yaml * remove automatic creation of labels in the mock * typo on the spec generation --------- Co-authored-by: Ben Dichter <[email protected]>
Follow up from #16
Uses a single structure instead of two as in the aferomentioned PR.
A good place to start the review will be to read the documentation:
https://github.com/catalystneuro/ndx-binned-spikes/tree/simplify_structure