fix: Update missing metadata to qMRI sequences#482
Merged
effigies merged 2 commits intobids-standard:masterfrom Feb 21, 2025
Merged
fix: Update missing metadata to qMRI sequences#482effigies merged 2 commits intobids-standard:masterfrom
effigies merged 2 commits intobids-standard:masterfrom
Conversation
60b60bf to
bf7b946
Compare
Contributor
Author
|
Bump @agahkarakuzu, @ChristophePhillips. |
Remi-Gau
approved these changes
Feb 21, 2025
Contributor
Author
|
Thanks, Remi. Sorry for pestering. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
After merging bids-standard/bids-specification#2020, attempting to update the schema for the validator produces:
In most cases, the problem is that
RepetitionTimeis used instead ofRepetitionTimeExcitationin qMRI sequences. I updated across the board, even for those where it is not a required field.For
qmri_sa2rage, theNumberShotsfield is required, but absent. I don't know how to derive it; there's nothing in the paper (doi:10.1002/mrm.23145), so I just set it to 1.@agahkarakuzu @ChristophePhillips This affects examples you've provided. Can you please review these changes?