MRG: "GFP" trace in STC time viewer is actually RMS #8965
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
hoechenberger
force-pushed
the
stc-rms
branch
2 times, most recently
from
b8e3513 to
ab2afcf
Compare
hoechenberger
force-pushed
the
stc-rms
branch
from
ab2afcf to
c56048e
Compare
I've also rearranged the formula such that it becomes immediately obvious that we're dealing with RMS values. See mne-tools#8775 for our lengthy discussion on this for sensor-level data.
hoechenberger
force-pushed
the
stc-rms
branch
from
c56048e to
300bc18
Compare
hoechenberger
changed the title
Member
Author
Member
|
Well maybe not but it’s bad practice I would say. It advertised not optimal code for no reason
|
Member
Author
|
@agramfort Ok I've addressed this, also in |
Member
|
FYI this had CI failures beyond just pip and pip pre, fixed by #8971 |
Member
Author
|
Thanks for taking care of this, @larsoner |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I've also rearranged the respective formula such that it becomes immediately obvious that we're dealing with RMS values.
See #8775 for our lengthy discussion on GFP vs RMS naming, albeit for sensor-level data.