[DOC] Mention classification type in plot_haxby_glm_decoding.py

[TamerGezici]

Addresses issue: #4109

[github-actions]

👋 @TamerGezici Thanks for creating a PR!

Until this PR is ready for review, you can include the [WIP] tag in its title, or leave it as a github draft.

Please make sure it is compliant with our contributing guidelines. In particular, be sure it checks the boxes listed below.

• PR has an interpretable title.
• PR links to Github issue with mention Closes #XXXX (see our documentation on PR structure)
• Code is PEP8-compliant (see our documentation on coding style)
• Changelog or what's new entry in doc/changes/latest.rst (see our documentation on PR structure)

For new features:

• There is at least one unit test per new function / class (see our documentation on testing)
• The new feature is demoed in at least one relevant example.

For bug fixes:

• There is at least one test that would fail under the original bug conditions.

We will review it as quick as possible, feel free to ping us with questions if needed.

[bthirion]

Thx. Can you make sure that the length of the lines is no more than 80 characters ?
Best,

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (3ac5ebc) 91.81% compared to head (ff4144f) 91.76%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #4122      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   91.81%   91.76%   -0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         144      144              
  Lines       16241    16241              
  Branches     3386     3386              
==========================================
- Hits        14911    14904       -7     
- Misses        789      791       +2     
- Partials      541      546       +5     

Flag	Coverage Δ
macos-latest_3.10_test_plotting	91.66% <ø> (ø)
macos-latest_3.11_test_plotting	91.66% <ø> (ø)
macos-latest_3.12_test_plotting	91.66% <ø> (ø)
macos-latest_3.8_test_plotting	?
macos-latest_3.9_test_plotting	91.63% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu-latest_3.10_test_plotting	?
ubuntu-latest_3.11_test_plotting	?
ubuntu-latest_3.12_test_plotting	?
ubuntu-latest_3.12_test_pre	?
ubuntu-latest_3.8_test_min	69.06% <ø> (?)
ubuntu-latest_3.8_test_plot_min	?
ubuntu-latest_3.8_test_plotting	?
ubuntu-latest_3.9_test_plotting	?
windows-latest_3.10_test_plotting	?
windows-latest_3.11_test_plotting	?
windows-latest_3.12_test_plotting	?
windows-latest_3.8_test_plotting	?
windows-latest_3.9_test_plotting	?

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[ymzayek]

@TamerGezici thanks ! We need to break the lines up as suggested for standard formatting.

Can you also add a whatsnew entry to doc/changes/latest.rst and your name to CITATION.cff? (see https://nilearn.github.io/dev/development.html#changelog for more detail)

[ymzayek]

@TamerGezici are you able to finish this or would you like us to take over?

[TamerGezici]

I think it's good now

I have a question though, here, all-vs-one clasification is done for which "one"? Or is it all classified against one, and then averaged for all pairs of all-vs-one classifications?

It may be worth adding that to the end of DOC if that is so.

[ymzayek]

@TamerGezici it is rather the latter, each condition classified against all for each group so you end up with np.shape(list(decoder.cv_scores_.values())) of (8, 12) and the averaging is done in L183 across all groups and conditions.

[ymzayek]

You also need to add your name to CITATION.cff as a first time contributor

[TamerGezici]

Done. I didn't know a simple commit like this would qualify for that. Haha!

[Remi-Gau]

Done. I didn't know a simple commit like this would qualify for that. Haha!

You help clarifying something that was unclear to you and probably others: defo a contribution.

[bthirion]

Thx !