Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Adding robustica option to ICA decomposition to achieve consistent results #1013
Adding robustica option to ICA decomposition to achieve consistent results #1013
Changes from 42 commits
f4eaa3e
b0cac3a
55c2ae4
cd55a3f
2d9b007
09e565e
fc5f9ea
4fc3043
a20ff57
cc5e05d
a449fec
78c8140
ac85e6a
979d026
71d8d4a
cac38cd
5fcf148
b7d08e9
a113423
b60e9a6
45c95ce
8e6878f
88fd148
a221e72
8622a9b
419e9d4
d29a91b
efb712e
dee68ec
171a835
4b86fe2
c01ec51
cd50037
54a4ac3
9bb021a
cd29060
2a868e3
ed10ade
8a14277
b793d83
1b1eb38
87965f4
8743aca
42372e3
3d88eb4
1aac94a
2b0ef67
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
will "repeatedly " run
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@BahmanTahayori: This particular fix has already been addressed in 8743aca, but for the sake of future interactions, you can propose such fixes on GitHub in a way that maintainers can accept with a single button press: https://haacked.com/archive/2019/06/03/suggested-changes/ (you may have previously interacted with this mechanism when I was proposing modifications on your fork).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks @Lestropie. Will consider it for the next time.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@tsalo I'm still a bit confused about the dependabot. How do we set this up so that it requires a minimum bersion of 0.1.4, but will also automatically open a pull request when new versions of robustica are released?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think something like "robustica>=0.1.4,<=0.1.4" should work.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks @handwerkerd and @tsalo for your comments. I applied all the required changes. Regarding the clustering results, the code is ready and I generate a figure to visualise the clustering in 2D (going from high dimension to low dimension) using TSNE, https://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/generated/sklearn.manifold.TSNE.html. I can show the results with or without the noise cluster. I have attached an example for these two cases (the red dots are clustered as noise). In my local code, the result is saved in the "figure" directory but I have not added it to the HTML report. What are your thoughts on adding them to the HTML report? Which figure should be added?
I think now that this PR is ready, it is better to finalise it and then we will add these results and the
iq
variable in a separate PR.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Let me see if I correctly understand these figure: Each small circle is a component from one iteration of fastICA. The black circle are the components that were deemed part of stable clusters and the red circles are the components that didn't end up in any cluster. The blue lines connect the components in a cluster. I'm assuming the final stable component is some type of centroid for each cluster? As an evaluation tool, the ideal would be every combined is in a small, tight circle, but we can see some are in longer lines and some are a bit farther apart. With the plot with the red dots, in the top center, I see a grouping of 3 clusters with red in-between which would tell me that the algorithm picked 3 stable components from this cluster, but, with a few more/different iterations, the expact placement of those stable components in this space might have been slightly different.
Is this description correct?
I do think this is useful and could be added to the html report, but let's definitely do that as a separate PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, your description is correct. I used a convex hull to draw the blue line around each cluster. The centroid is calculated in
robustica
(_compute_centroids). Your explanation about the 3 clusters at the top centre is excellent. With a few more or less iterations those three could be combined into 1 cluster.I will do it in a separate PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it should be a different PR. We want to merge this and have RobustICA available for users as soon as possible, and I see the figure as an extra really but not part of the core functionality.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hey @BahmanTahayori, could you please share the code you used to generate these figures? Or direct me to a branch or PR where you have this?
I cannot find the separate PR you mentioned in your comment. Thanks!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually, I think I found it looking into your GitHub profile.
It is this function here, right? 👇
https://github.com/BahmanTahayori/tedana_florey/blob/70a5d1a5d9730bd99ad98bf711d7f3de00d990cf/tedana/reporting/static_figures.py#L805
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There's a PR on @BahmanTahayori's fork; we have used fork PRs for internal assistance / revision / discussion prior to proposals to ME-ICA.
BahmanTahayori#7
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That is the function that has been added, @eurunuela and the figure is saved as a PNG file in the \figure folder. However, as @Lestropie mentioned, we go through an internal review first. I have an updated version of the code, but it has not yet been finalised. Will work on it and keep you posted.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We probably want to open an issue so we can discuss where we move these defaults.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I opened #1132.