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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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
[ENH] microelectrode electrophysiology specification (BEP032) #1705
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
[ENH] microelectrode electrophysiology specification (BEP032) #1705
Changes from 20 commits
7ec5d5e
2f393ca
648781a
d3c9996
08c92cd
e2030ac
53f1087
fa648fe
eef67df
27547f9
a6ae5e2
9a20e4b
7609276
9be41f9
983975a
1afdc40
6b39d64
f08b163
73012b3
a46e439
05e9611
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.
I'd really recommend renaming the rotation axes to yaw, roll, and pitch (that would be the analogous angle order). There was no consensus either way on the google docs discussion. Someone said both are confusing, which I guess might be expected, but alpha, beta, gamma, are just more confusing...
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 -- very adhoc. Let's discuss in google doc
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.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oG-C8T-dWPqfVzL2W8HO3elWK8NIh2cOCPssRGv23n0/edit?disco=AAAA4fkI4eY
Could you chime in? I think the other guy commenting might be amenable to accepting this as well.
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 that both are confusing, but at least alpha, beta and gamma are SO confusing that everyone realizes that additional specification is needed to define them properly. With roll, yaw and pitch it seems at first that all is clear, until you have a number of different people go through different use cases. See the more challenging examples that I posted on the google doc under https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oG-C8T-dWPqfVzL2W8HO3elWK8NIh2cOCPssRGv23n0/edit?disco=AAAA4fkI4eY
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.
@robertoostenveld sorry, I only now saw the update, reply there. I don't think confusion on purpose is good in this case, because the documentation is very eclectic so we might be sending people down rabbit holes. Wiki, where people will invariably go first, does a particularly poor job explaining both euler and TB angles for the casual non-mathematics-versed user. The only thing that wiki has going for it here are the aircraft animations on the TB page. Yaw, Pitch, Roll, will be intuited correctly as long as we specify the starting postion. That we can do (1) as (I think, it's pretty vague) is currently proposed, aligning the implant with the world coordinate system (meaning most implants will be at yaw 0 pitch -90 roll 0) or (2) relative to the implantation stereotax normal (meaning most implants will be at 0 0 0).
For comparison, Euler commonly has the normal pointing up so most implants will be.... 0 -180 0 🤔
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.
in the last BEP032 meeting we discussed further and wanted to follow this approach now (based on the Allen Inst. standard and IBL standard):
Assumption: x,y,z is posterior, ventral, right (unit needs to be specified).
Translational origin (0,0,0) needs to be defined (typically Bregma for rodents).
Rotational origin (0,0,0) is the probe facing up with the tip facing forward. Rotations are all clockwise in degrees and around the tip. For multi-shank probes, the “tip” of the probe is defined as the end of the left shank if you are looking at the electrodes.
The depth (unit needs to be specified) is a translation in the direction that the tip is pointing.
We need to add a “probe_model”, which references probeinterface_library
NOTE: We need to change the electrode x,y,z.
X,y,z in BIDS refers to location in brain, not on probe.
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.
The “reference atlas” if you visually verify the area is basically the atlas you looked at before you nod and said “eh, good enough”. This seems at once an overly detailed (does this really matter? the coordinates are commonly given with sub-mm precision) and underdetermined (what coordinates did you look at in the atlas?). I think it's best just to drop this.