mne-tools / mne-tools/mne-python

Consider adding (correct) proportion of variance explained by ICA components to Report

Open
#12,157 4 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

API needs-discussion
Dominant language
Python
Stars
3.5k
Forks
1.6k
Avg merge
1d 6h
Merged PRs (30d)
100

Description

We removed it because the calculation was incorrect. The correct approach may be too time-consuming, though

See https://github.com/mne-tools/mne-python/pull/12156#issuecomment-1787746407 for discussion

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

The issue names no files, tests, or entry points. Start by reading the discussion on pull request #12156, especially the linked comment, to understand why the previous calculation was removed and what a correct approach requires. Done means the Report includes a validated proportion of variance explained by ICA components.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
python
Domain
data-visualization, machine-learning
Issue type
Feature
Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Needs clarification
Newbie friendliness
25/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.