Skip to content
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

Improving split of multiple runs #232

Closed
smoia opened this issue Jun 11, 2020 · 5 comments
Closed

Improving split of multiple runs #232

smoia opened this issue Jun 11, 2020 · 5 comments

Comments

@smoia
Copy link
Member

smoia commented Jun 11, 2020

Detailed Description

Reporting from #206 on @sangfrois behalf:

The next step will be to reduce user's inputs in phys2bids by detecting the number of triggers in each run automatically.
Either by looking in the DICOM registry or directly computing the time difference between subsequent triggers.
That way, an individual file will require less attention to pass through phys2bids workflow, and the user will be able to process batches of files.

@sangfrois, could you please explain a bit more what you meant? You can edit this message and complete it as you think is more appropriate.

Context / Motivation

Possible Implementation

@sangfrois
Copy link
Member

(I can't edit your description)

@tsalo
Copy link
Member

tsalo commented Jun 16, 2020

Either by looking in the DICOM registry or directly computing the time difference between subsequent triggers.

@sangfrois this sounds similar to #219, which detects missing trigger periods (and missing scans) by comparing the time differences for both physio triggers and scan onsets from the BIDS dataset.

@sangfrois
Copy link
Member

@tsalo Yes, exactly.

let's have touch base in jitsi room during the breakout session of the hackathon to discuss everything!

I'm having difficulty grasping every aspect of your PR, and am sure we can join forces!

@smoia
Copy link
Member Author

smoia commented Jul 30, 2020

@sangfrois can we close this issue?

@sangfrois
Copy link
Member

@smoia yes absolutely

@tsalo tsalo closed this as completed Jul 30, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants