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

[FIX] The rationale column of comptable gets updated when no manacc is given #855

Merged
merged 4 commits into from Mar 15, 2022

Conversation

eurunuela
Copy link
Collaborator

Closes #854 .

Changes proposed in this pull request:

  • Check that the given ctab is Rica's by looking at the column names.
  • Update the rationale of comptable with selection.manual_selection(comptable, acc=manacc).

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 9, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #855 (4d9cccf) into main (eaa0920) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #855   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.27%   93.28%           
=======================================
  Files          27       27           
  Lines        2217     2218    +1     
=======================================
+ Hits         2068     2069    +1     
  Misses        149      149           
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
tedana/workflows/tedana.py 89.96% <100.00%> (+0.03%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update eaa0920...4d9cccf. Read the comment docs.

Comment on lines 744 to 745
manacc = comptable.index[comptable["classification"] == "accepted"].tolist()
comptable, metric_metadata = selection.manual_selection(comptable, acc=manacc)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think we can assume that an updated component table reflects manual classification. For example, if we get AROMA working, we could run the same data through both tedana and AROMA to produce merged classifications derived from both workflows.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Okay, would you be happy if we updated the rationale column instead?

Copy link
Member

@tsalo tsalo Mar 10, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hopefully once we have the decision tree refactor done and have switched from rationales to the messages we plan to use, we can just require classification tools to update that information. In the mean time, I think your empty string solution is great. On RICA's side, could you update the rationale column as well?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree things will be different soon, but users need a fix now.

Re Rica: I could make Rica update the rationale to say "manual" or something similar.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, if Rica could updated the rationale for any component with an updated classification, that would be optimal. "Manual" or "I001" would both work well.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Will work on adding that to Rica, maybe while I do some scanning tomorrow.

Thanks for the feedback Taylor!

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

PR #42 in Rica adds this functionality.

Copy link
Member

@tsalo tsalo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM!

Copy link
Member

@handwerkerd handwerkerd left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Some of this might get superseded by the changes with the decision tree modularization, but this is a good change for the current code.

@eurunuela
Copy link
Collaborator Author

eurunuela commented Mar 15, 2022

Some of this might get superseded by the changes with the decision tree modularization, but this is a good change for the current code.

Thank you Dan! Just wanna make sure users using the current version don't run into issues :)

Edit: merging now.

@eurunuela eurunuela merged commit a529ed4 into ME-ICA:main Mar 15, 2022
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Reclassifying accepted to rejected raises an error when using Rica's ctab but not manacc
3 participants