-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 222
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
Contamination Percent #143
Comments
Share screenshots please. I don't know why it would be above 100. |
Hi Marius, |
I am not sure why a cluster would be labelled as good even though the contamination is computed as 100%. I'll double check, but in any case, that label is meant to be used as guidance. Works very well on some data, and poorly on other data. "Depth" is interpreted as the y-dimension of your channel map file. This won't really make an impact on the sorting in your case, it's just for visualization in Phy. |
Thank you! |
Ok, I'll have to look into that. Looks like the ones labelled as good with ContamPct=100 might have very few spikes. I thought I had a special case to exclude those, but I'll have to check it. |
Hi
Kilosort2 calculating a value named: ContamPct, which I guess should be contamination percentage.
For some of our sorting sessions this number is low for good labeled clusters and all 100 for the MUA labeled clusters. However, for the other sorting sessions ContamPct values are very different and are even more than 100 for clusters.
Is this a bug?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: