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

sparsEDA integration #966

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Mar 24, 2024
Merged

Conversation

stasinos
Copy link
Contributor

The sparsEDA algorithm detects the tonic component in EDA and returns: a driver, SCL (tonic component), and MSE (residual). This is incompable with eda_phasic() which expects a (tonic,phasic) pair, see also Issue #964 .

This PR resolves Issue #964 by making _eda_phasic_sparsEDA() return a (tonic,phasic) pair where tonic is SCL and phasic is the difference between the original signal and the tonic component detected by sparsEDA,

@stasinos stasinos marked this pull request as draft February 17, 2024 08:20
The input was resampled to 8Hz as required by
sparsEDA, but the padded signalAdd variable that
is actually used was assigned before resampling.
@pull-request-size pull-request-size bot added size/M and removed size/S labels Feb 17, 2024
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Feb 17, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (56aba7f) 54.59% compared to head (0d271d8) 55.93%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##              dev     #966      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   54.59%   55.93%   +1.34%     
==========================================
  Files         304      304              
  Lines       14325    14325              
==========================================
+ Hits         7821     8013     +192     
+ Misses       6504     6312     -192     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@stasinos stasinos marked this pull request as ready for review February 17, 2024 13:38
@stasinos
Copy link
Contributor Author

The documentation check fails somewhere unrelated to this PR

@DominiqueMakowski
Copy link
Member

Thanks a lot for this @stasinos and sorry I've been away from NK for some time, will review this asap!

@DominiqueMakowski DominiqueMakowski merged commit 2f923ce into neuropsychology:dev Mar 24, 2024
7 of 8 checks passed
Copy link

welcome bot commented Mar 24, 2024

landing
Congrats on merging your first pull request! 🎉🍾 We're looking forward to your next one!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants