Skip to content
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: Process multiple tasks jointly? #820

Open
larsoner opened this issue Nov 29, 2023 · 2 comments
Open

ENH: Process multiple tasks jointly? #820

larsoner opened this issue Nov 29, 2023 · 2 comments

Comments

@larsoner
Copy link
Member

I have a dataset that I'm BIDSifying. For each subject we have the following based on how I'm BIDSifying the data:

  1. Resting state data (task="rest")
  2. One run of auditory localizer data (task="localizer")
  3. Several runs of task data (task="speech", run="01" | "02" | ...)

I'd like to preprocess these all at once using the same SSP or ICA. It would be nice to be able to do task = ["rest", "localizer", "speech"] for example. But then there's an issue where each task can have a different set of runs, so maybe we'd also need to allow runs to be a dict specifying runs on a per-task basis. Thoughts @hoechenberger ? If no objection then I can try implementing this and running it on my data.

Things will get trickier later when I might want to be able to epoch data differently for the localizer vs the speech for example, but at least getting the preprocessing done for all of these (and probably just doing epoching for localizer to start) would be a huge help.

What wouldn't work is processing the localizer separately from the speech task since the spatial processing steps (SSP/ICA) need to be identical for them, but that looks like my only option currently.

@larsoner
Copy link
Member Author

@hoechenberger this is a blocker for some analyses that I need to run, any objection to task-as-list (plus runs as dict with keys corresponding to task names and values being str ('all') or list of str)?

@hoechenberger
Copy link
Member

Hey no objections at all, but at this time I cannot give any input on implementation details

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants