-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13
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
Add Miniscope-DAQ-V4
and CaImAn
trigger
#13
Conversation
Co-authored-by: Kabilar Gunalan <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Kabilar Gunalan <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Kabilar Gunalan <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Kabilar Gunalan <[email protected]>
remove 2p terms and adapt with inscopix miniscope
Miniscope-DAQ-V4
.Miniscope-DAQ-V4
and MiniAn
.
Miniscope-DAQ-V4
and CaImAn triggerMiniscope-DAQ-V4
and CaImAn
trigger
Hi @tdincer, this pull request is ready for review. Let's try to merge by Friday, April 29. Thanks! |
filename_hash = '.' + str(dict_to_uuid(dict(**key, **params))) | ||
|
||
if not os.path.isfile(output_dir / filename_hash): | ||
run_caiman(file_paths=avi_files, |
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.
I'm seeing an error here, related to caiman's fit_file
:
TypeError: fit_file() got an unexpected keyword argument 'output_dir'
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.
Ah yes, this feature is currently being evaluated in this pull request.
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.
Assuming a release this week, how should we document the current functionality to a potential user who sees the tutorial video next week?
Co-authored-by: Chris Brozdowski <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Chris Brozdowski <[email protected]>
element_miniscope/miniscope.py
Outdated
|
||
@classmethod | ||
def insert_new_params(cls, processing_method: str, paramset_id: int, | ||
paramset_desc: str, params: dict): |
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.
I suggest optional insert of processing method in parent table. Suggestion below would also require an edit to the parent table insert
I think we also need a docstring here, especially if we're headed in the direction of documentation via site rendering of docstrings.
paramset_desc: str, params: dict): | |
paramset_desc: str, params: dict, | |
processing_method_desc: str=''): |
element_miniscope/miniscope.py
Outdated
def populate_all(display_progress=True): | ||
|
||
populate_settings = {'display_progress': display_progress, | ||
'reserve_jobs': False, | ||
'suppress_errors': False} |
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.
To put these within the schema is a departure from convention elsewhere. Do we want this in the schema or in a workflow process.py
script?
If in the workflow, I would also allow move the reserve_jobs
and suppress_errors
to the arguments with the same defaults.
def populate_all(display_progress=True): | |
populate_settings = {'display_progress': display_progress, | |
'reserve_jobs': False, | |
'suppress_errors': False} | |
def populate_all(display_progress=True, reserve_jobs=False, suppress_errors=False): | |
populate_settings = {'display_progress': display_progress, | |
'reserve_jobs': reserve_jobs, | |
'suppress_errors': suppress_errors} |
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.
Thanks @CBroz1. I would suggest moving this function to the element
so that it is not duplicated across each users' workflows. And if you agree, we can then make this update across the other element
and workflow
repositories.
Good point regarding the arguments. I have committed your suggestion.
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.
Noted in datajoint-elements issue 98
Co-authored-by: Chris Brozdowski <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Thinh Nguyen <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Thinh Nguyen <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Thinh Nguyen <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Thinh Nguyen <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Thinh Nguyen <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Thinh Nguyen <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Thinh Nguyen <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Chris Brozdowski <[email protected]>
imaging
andscan
modules into oneminiscope
moduleelement-interface