Closed Farnazmdi closed 2 years ago
Merging #952 (7995a40) into master (c3c75f8) will decrease coverage by
0.36%
. The diff coverage is9.09%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #952 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 82.65% 82.29% -0.37%
==========================================
Files 28 28
Lines 2243 2253 +10
==========================================
Hits 1854 1854
- Misses 389 399 +10
Flag | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
unittests | 82.29% <9.09%> (-0.37%) |
:arrow_down: |
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
lineage/plotTree.py | 0.00% <0.00%> (ø) |
|
lineage/tests/test_BaumWelch.py | 100.00% <100.00%> (ø) |
:mega: Codecov can now indicate which changes are the most critical in Pull Requests. Learn more
@Farnazmdi this is failing because cell.state
is None. Did you possibly pickle the tHMM objects before they were fit?
Sorry about this. I will fix it tonight. I saved all models created from BIC analysis (1, 2, 3, .. state tHMM objects) so we don't have to fit the model again with the optimal number of states. I have not assigned states to those tHMMobjs created from BIC fitting and pickled. This is failing probably in one or two figures that I forgot to add the state assignment code.
That's reasonable. Just trying to help with where the problem lies.
I also think it's better to not commit these figure files. The pickle files now keep the results reproducible.
I removed all svg files that could be recreated. Had to make some changes to the functions to automatically generate those figures in the cartoon
folder.
This should be ready now. I will merge it if it is alright? The changes are mostly just to the figures, with a minor change to the BW test and the addition of a function to plotTree to create those samples of lineage trees we use in lapatinib and gemcitabine figures.
Let me go through it carefully first. Will do so in a bit.
Thank you, merging..
This branch just updated all figures according to the new fitting. The only thing that I "changed" was that in the BIC figure, we were fitting and calculating for 1, 2, .., 7 states and pick the best number then run the model again with those number of states. What I did in this branch is that during the BIC fitting, I save the tHMMobjects and recall the one that we pick based on the BIC. This way the BIC value matches the tHMMobj we pick.