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

Ambigous statistics-volume arguments when not using t1-volume gray matter maps in input #829

Closed
AudreyDuran opened this issue Dec 8, 2022 · 4 comments
Labels
inactive Issue or request has gone stale

Comments

@AudreyDuran
Copy link
Contributor

AudreyDuran commented Dec 8, 2022

This is not a bug I guess but more an improvement request.

I used statistics-volume on t1-volume output but not on gray matter maps. So I set measure_label to "whitematter" and the custom_file argument accordingly. It ran, but the results were stored in a statistics_volume/group_comparison_measure-graymatter folder. This is because t1-volume assumes that the input is going to be gray matter, which I find strange because other probability maps are outputted by the t1-volume pipeline.

What I suggest would be either :

  • update t1-volume argument with something like t1-volume-gm
  • or to remove the assumption that t1-volume is necessarily gm maps use the measure_label anyway in the output folder / files names if it is set (and remove this line)
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Mar 9, 2023

This issue is considered stale because it has not received further activity for the last 14 days. You may remove the inactive label or add a comment, otherwise it will be closed after the next 14 days.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the inactive Issue or request has gone stale label Mar 9, 2023
@NicolasGensollen NicolasGensollen removed the inactive Issue or request has gone stale label Mar 9, 2023
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jun 8, 2023

This issue is considered stale because it has not received further activity for the last 14 days. You may remove the inactive label or add a comment, otherwise it will be closed after the next 14 days.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the inactive Issue or request has gone stale label Jun 8, 2023
@NicolasGensollen NicolasGensollen removed the inactive Issue or request has gone stale label Jun 8, 2023
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Sep 7, 2023

This issue is considered stale because it has not received further activity for the last 14 days. You may remove the inactive label or add a comment, otherwise it will be closed after the next 14 days.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the inactive Issue or request has gone stale label Sep 7, 2023
@NicolasGensollen NicolasGensollen removed the inactive Issue or request has gone stale label Sep 7, 2023
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Dec 7, 2023

This issue is considered stale because it has not received further activity for the last 14 days. You may remove the inactive label or add a comment, otherwise it will be closed after the next 14 days.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the inactive Issue or request has gone stale label Dec 7, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Dec 22, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
inactive Issue or request has gone stale
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants