Conversation
|
Using the pipeline from this PR I get nice reports and the following decoding performance on my tapping data for tapping with left hand vs tapping with right hand... FYI: @agramfort @larsoner Edit: fixed filtering issue in example after suggestion by @agramfort |
|
@rob-luke we should come back to this -- now that I'm more familiar with mne-bids-pipeline I think it wouldn't be too bad to get this working. Do you want to try a new PR with the latest file structure? If you don't have time I could take a stab at it |
Agreed! My plan of attack here is:
If you want to take a stab at this, then go wild :) I will be doing the items above in that order unless there is a reason not too. |
|
FYI. fNIRS is now merged into BIDS main. So I will move on to adding complete support in MNE-BIDS. |
|
Go go go @rob-luke 🚀 |

Hi, would you like to add support for fNIRS to mne-bids-pipeline?
This is an issue as PR. And allowed me to understand this package and determine what would be needed for it to run well with fNIRS data. It has the following issues to be addressed before a review is appropriate:
mne.Report. See MRG: Add fnirs and snirf support to report mne-python#9443Wait for the fNIRS BIDS spec to be accepted. See progress here: [ENH] BEP030: Functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy bids-standard/bids-specification#802As discussed in MNE-BIDS repo we will proceed as the spec is almost complete.AKA this PR is a total house of cards. But if its here and public I won't lose it and maybe it will be useful to someone else why I tick off the points above.Things are stabilising now, so I will come back to this soon.