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

Re-use "contrast weight matrix" from stato #305

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Apr 20, 2015

Conversation

cmaumet
Copy link
Member

@cmaumet cmaumet commented Apr 16, 2015

This is a proposal to re-use the term "contrast weight matrix" from STATO, in place of nidm:ContrastWeights.

The STATO term was created following discussions at ISA-tools/stato#23 and is defined by "a contrast weight matrix is a information content entity which holds a set of contrast weight, coefficient used in a weighting sum of means defining a contrast".

How would you feel about this?

@cmaumet cmaumet force-pushed the contrast_weights_from_stato branch 3 times, most recently from 002184f to 3a08074 Compare April 16, 2015 14:44
@nicholst
Copy link
Contributor

STATO's definition is awkward but accurate. +1 for re-use.

@khelm
Copy link
Contributor

khelm commented Apr 17, 2015

"a contrast weight matrix is a information content entity which holds a set of contrast weight, coefficient used in a weighting sum of means defining a contrast".

Wow. I think @nicholst calling it just "awkward" is rather charitable. I, on the other hand, would just say that it makes no sense as written and they should be alerted to fix it.

@nicholst nicholst mentioned this pull request Apr 17, 2015
@nicholst
Copy link
Contributor

Well, the odd grammatical number issues were discussed but honestly I got lost and didn't follow up with the STATO folks. See the discussion at stato/#23, where it's noted that all STATO class labels have to be singular.

I've added a new comment to that stato/#23 and hopefully we can get it cleaned up. It is the right concept, and it was originally added at our request, but between basing the definition on Wikipedia and shoe-horning it into the STATO world, it got mangled.

@jbpoline
Copy link
Contributor

I left a comment on the ISA-tools/stato#23, but did not try to work on the "information content" thing - It does not make much sense to me though.

@cmaumet cmaumet force-pushed the contrast_weights_from_stato branch from 3a08074 to dca23f6 Compare April 20, 2015 08:43
@cmaumet
Copy link
Member Author

cmaumet commented Apr 20, 2015

@nicholst, @khelm, @jbpoline: I think it's important to note that the textual definition of stato:'contrast weight matrix' closely follows its logical definition:

stato:'contrast weight matrix' subClassOf obo:'has part' some stato:'contrast weight'
stato:'contrast weight matrix' subClassOf obo:'is about' stato:contrast
stato:'contrast weight matrix' subClassOf obo:'information content entity'

Where each stato (and obo) term is separately defined:

  • stato:'contrast weight': "a contrast weight is a coefficient which multiplies a group mean, part of a linear combinaison defining a constrast as a weighted sum of group means, giving a 'weight' to a specific group mean hence the name."
  • stato:contrast: "A contrast is the weighted sum of group means, the c_j coefficients represent the assigned weights of the means (these must sum to 0 for orthogonal contrasts)"

@cmaumet cmaumet force-pushed the contrast_weights_from_stato branch from dca23f6 to df5c363 Compare April 20, 2015 09:02
@cmaumet
Copy link
Member Author

cmaumet commented Apr 20, 2015

(Rebased on master).

I am going to merge this update as I think discussions regarding the definition will be carried on at ISA-tools/stato#23.

@cmaumet cmaumet added the merge label Apr 20, 2015
cmaumet pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 20, 2015
Re-use "contrast weight matrix" from stato
@cmaumet cmaumet merged commit 496df44 into incf-nidash:master Apr 20, 2015
@cmaumet cmaumet deleted the contrast_weights_from_stato branch April 20, 2015 09:10
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants