-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 68
[WIP] Phase consistency measures #263
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
|
I think adding these phase measures makes sense! In terms of scope, mostly we've stuck to measures applied to single signals (univariate), but I think adding some relatively simple bivariate phase measure things that one might want to use, is totally reasonable! I have a quick implementation of PLV that I use sometimes that I think should be fairly solid, if you want to use / add that:
|
|
Sorry for the delayed response, I was out last week. Glad you think this was a reasonable addition. I was fascinated by the paper, wrote the code to do it and figured it could be useful to others. Thanks for the PLV snippet. I'll add that sometime soon. This and #264 can go in after the 2.2.0 release. The new release is ready on my end, but I can always re-review or ask someone else in the lab to help with reviews as I know you're busy, no worries either way! |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #263 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 97.58% 97.54% -0.04%
==========================================
Files 94 96 +2
Lines 2482 2567 +85
==========================================
+ Hits 2422 2504 +82
- Misses 60 63 +3
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
I was exploring the phase relationship between spikes and lfp and came across a few methods that may be useful additions. Currently, this adds pairwise phase consistency (Vinck et al. 2010). This PR or future PRs could also include phase-locking value.