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

Complex Float32 data are not well handle #103

Closed
aTrotier opened this issue Sep 9, 2022 · 4 comments
Closed

Complex Float32 data are not well handle #103

aTrotier opened this issue Sep 9, 2022 · 4 comments

Comments

@aTrotier
Copy link
Contributor

aTrotier commented Sep 9, 2022

While working on a benchmark against bart (which is using Float32). I wanted to create a data acq with that possibility.
One of the issue was in CartesianTrajectory3D

I had to change the type of the keyword parameters to Float32

T=Float32
 tr = MRIBase.CartesianTrajectory3D(Float32,128,128,numSlices=128,TE=T(0),AQ=T(0))

Should we change that ?

It is also the same issue for the reconstruction regularization parameters

@tknopp
Copy link
Member

tknopp commented Sep 9, 2022

yes these need to be fixed but in a clever way. The point is that the user will often specify TE, AQ, lambda ... using Float64 even if the data should be reconstructed in Float32. Thus, these parameters should be promoted to the eltype of the array instead of enforcing them to be of the same type as the array (or in this case the first argument of the function).

@aTrotier
Copy link
Contributor Author

aTrotier commented Sep 9, 2022 via email

@migrosser
Copy link
Contributor

Commit d1efe5d should fix the issue with the type of TE and AQ in the trajectories. Furthermore, I changed setupIterativeReco so that the type of lambda is adapted to the underlying datatype in AcquisitionData in commit b84a9ee

@aTrotier
Copy link
Contributor Author

aTrotier commented Oct 1, 2022 via email

@aTrotier aTrotier closed this as completed Oct 5, 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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants