Open robertoostenveld opened 1 year ago
also tagging @dungscout96 who was involved in the construction of the example.
the directory structure is
ds004117der
├── ds004117der
│ ├── sub-001
│ │ └── ses-01
│ │ └── eeg
│ ├── sub-002
│ │ └── ses-01
│ │ └── eeg
where I guess the top-level directory is the raw, and the folder inside it is the derivative. However, there should be a derivative
folder level in between like this
ds004117raw
├── derivatives
| └── ds004117der
according to https://bids-specification.readthedocs.io/en/stable/05-derivatives/01-introduction.html#file-naming-conventions I think the derivative data should be distinguished from the raw data by a desc-<label>
entity.
there is no descriptions.tsv
file as discussed in #8
Regarding the directory structure, I am not sure whether my assumption at https://github.com/bids-standard/bep021/issues/9#issuecomment-1725542841 holds. It rather seems that there is a copy of the same directory in the directory, and that both are derived. The metadata seems to be exactly the same, including the GeneratedBy
in the dataset_description.json
The folder in the subfolder was an issue associated with copying the data to Google Drive. I have removed the subfolder. I was under the impression that the inclusion of the raw data was not mandatory.
I have updated the data (see the link above) - I have also removed the data itself to make it lightweight.
the inclusion of the raw data was not mandatory.
Correct. If the dataset has "DatasetType": "derivative"
in its dataset_description.json
, then it would be recognized as a standalone derivative dataset.
On https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1UepEeZ80wpPxU-OhmiR9oGphomwRR2oX @arnodelorme shared an example derivative EEG dataset. This issue serves to share comments on that draft dataset.