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

Update bst_connectivity.m #583

Closed

Conversation

danielemarinazzo
Copy link
Contributor

Specified that wPLI is not the debiased one (see #571), and added the debiased version commented below. This until we figure out how to implement the debiased wPLI in time domain

Specified that wPLI is not the debiased one (see brainstorm-tools#571), and added the debiased version commented below. This until we figure out how to implement the debiased wPLI in time domain
@ftadel
Copy link
Member

ftadel commented Sep 21, 2022

@Moo-Marc
Can you please review this PR?
Are there things to change in the documentation or the process GUI?

Thanks

@Moo-Marc
Copy link
Collaborator

I'm working on a PR for proper file averaging that will incorporate these fixes and allow the debiased version. We can close this PR once I submit it.

@danielemarinazzo
Copy link
Contributor Author

since this is taking long, wouldn't be good to merge this PR for the moment, which anyway clarifies things albeit some measures still need to be developed?

@Moo-Marc
Copy link
Collaborator

Moo-Marc commented Mar 2, 2023

Hi Daniele,

I expect to get back to this within a few weeks so I'd suggest to wait. I'd avoid merging a "fix" or new option that is itself known to be problematic (the trial averaging issue).

@danielemarinazzo
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sure nevermind. Just to be clear, this PR is not a fix for the trial averaging, it's just the current version, but with the non debiased wPLI, and the debiased one commented.

@rcassani
Copy link
Collaborator

The proposed changes were included in PR #632, which was merged in 24e3d22

@rcassani rcassani closed this Aug 23, 2023
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.

None yet

4 participants