Open khl02007 opened 2 years ago
@khl02007 was this fixed?
will test this out and let you know
oops, sorry I thought this was the one about masking out single samples. I don't think there has been a PR to address this - I had opened it to ask you guys your thoughts. what do you think - specify frames before and after, or keep the ms before and after and just infer the number of frames it corresponds to with the explicit timestamps?
@khl02007 I would keep ms_before
and ms_after
and add optionally frames_before
and frames_after
. If the latter are givem, the ms_*
params are ignored. @khl02007 does that sound ok?
@alejoe91 that sounds like it would work. happy new year!
Happy new year to you too Kyu!!!
By the way, happy to make these changes and submit a PR if you are OK with that
I'm super OK with that! :)
@alejoe91 Did this idea never pan out? Does RemoveArtifactsRecording
now have that functionality?
RemoveArtifactsRecording
takes as inputlist_triggers
, which are in frames. On the other hand,ms_before
andms_after
are in milliseconds. This is converted to frames using the sampling rate later. As a result, one cannot make use ofms_before
andms_after
if one uses explicit timestamps (perhaps because there are missing samples in the recording). @alejoe91 @samuelgarcia what do you think about changing this such thatget_times
is used to infer the conversion from ms to frames? This means the padding must be computed separately for each trigger, so the performance may take a hit. Alternatively, could make the user specifyframes_before
andframes_after
, which are computed manually before calling remove artifact.