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

inverse solutions - add checks in hasfilter #2233

Open
wants to merge 9 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

mcpiastra
Copy link
Contributor

  • added check that the user did not specify leadfield options in case the input already contains the leadfield
  • added check that the user did not specify inverse solution parameters in case the input already contains the filter

This relates to the PR #2231.

- added check that the user did not specify leadfield options in case the input already contains the leadfield
- added check that the user did not specify inverse solution parameters in case the input already contains the filter
@mcpiastra mcpiastra changed the title inverse DICS - add checks in hasfilter inverse solutions - add checks in hasfilter Apr 24, 2023
no checks on filter, since no filter used here
no hasfilter here, only hasleadfield
doubt: is the check on LF backprojection redundant now?
only checked for lambda atm
@mcpiastra
Copy link
Contributor Author

the first commit is about the empty-checks in DICS.
these checks might be missing in ft_inverse_dipolefit, where there is no hasfilter, no hasleadfield, no leadfieldopt.
all other inverse solutions have been modified. when no invopt was present, I put a check only in the numerical parameter of the inverse solution. not sure about this.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

1 participant