<div dir="ltr">Hi Jon,<br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2015-05-23 16:37 GMT+02:00 Jon Houck <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jhouck@unm.edu" target="_blank">jhouck@unm.edu</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">I've been playing with the lcmv beamformer, which via a series of unfortunate results led me to notice that the rank estimates from cov.compute_whitener and raw.estimate_rank are a little high for my sss'd data. Is there some other way to do this that is sss-aware? I stole some bits of code from test_proc_history.py to retrieve the rank from the maxfilter processing history for files that I know have had sss applied, i.e., <div><br></div><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><div>mf = <a href="http://raw.info" target="_blank">raw.info</a>['proc_history'][0]['max_info']</div></div><div><div>rank = _get_sss_rank(mf)</div></div></blockquote><div><div><br></div><div>to feed into lcmv, but wasn't sure if there was a way to do this that would also test whether sss was done without prior knowledge of the processing history. </div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>If proc history is empty no SSS was done.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><div>For instance, I could always test for the existence of max_info. If it helps, in my case raw.estimate_rank returns 280, compute_whitener/prepare_noise_cov says 296, while the processing history says 66. This is in 0.10.</div><div><br></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>is there any way for you to share some data so I could play with it.<br></div><div>I'm surprised that you see this mismatch.</div><div>The emprirical estimation is backed by unit tests and a couple of informal test on different data and is</div><div>supposed to recognize the SSS rank.</div><div>In fact discrepancies between the proc info and the empirical rank estimate may point out problems with the data processing or the data itself. </div><div><br></div><div>Best,</div><div>Denis</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><div></div><div>Thanks,</div><div><br></div><div>Jon</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div><br></div></div></div></div>
</div></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Mne_analysis mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Mne_analysis@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu" target="_blank">Mne_analysis@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu</a><br>
<a href="https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/mne_analysis" target="_blank">https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/mne_analysis</a><br>
<br>
<br>
The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is<br>
addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail<br>
contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at<br>
<a href="http://www.partners.org/complianceline" target="_blank">http://www.partners.org/complianceline</a> . If the e-mail was sent to you in error<br>
but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properly<br>
dispose of the e-mail.<br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div>