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

Ability to change AP rise time parameters #194

Closed
alexyonk opened this issue Dec 30, 2020 · 6 comments
Closed

Ability to change AP rise time parameters #194

alexyonk opened this issue Dec 30, 2020 · 6 comments

Comments

@alexyonk
Copy link

I've looked through the documentation and I haven't found what I'm looking for specifically. I'm trying to change the rise time window from 0-100% (time difference between AP_begin_index to peak_index) to 10-90%. Is this a possibility with this algorithm?

@wvangeit
Copy link
Contributor

wvangeit commented Jan 4, 2021

At the moment this feature is implemented as the difference between the time of the peak and the start of the spike (using the respective features to calculate these):

aprisetime[i] = t[peakindices[i]] - t[apbeginindices[i]]

With the 10-90% do you mean the voltage is at 10-90% of the AP amplitude?

@alexyonk
Copy link
Author

For example, say that the AP_begin_voltage occurs at 0mV and the peak_voltage is 100mV. Instead of calculating the full rise time (0 - 100), is there a way to calculate the time it takes to rise from 10% to 90% of the voltage?

@wvangeit
Copy link
Contributor

Unfortunately I don't think we have a feature that can be used for that. It could be implemented, I only wonder how we should parametrize it. I assume we don't want to fix the 10%-90% levels

@alexyonk
Copy link
Author

I would agree with the last statement. According to a more experienced colleague, the calculations relating to rise time are variable (10-90%, 20-80%, etc.). Would it be possible to include both rise_begin_perc and rise_end_perc as global settings that can be modified by the user similar to interp_step and voltage_base_start_perc?

@wvangeit
Copy link
Contributor

@AurelienJaquier or @anilbey Could you have a look at adding this to the feature? The default should be the old behavior. Thanks.

@AurelienJaquier
Copy link
Collaborator

This issue should have been solved with PR #198

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