Skip to content

Update for MaxWell systems #1738

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

Closed
wants to merge 10 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

cmccrimmon
Copy link

MaxWell channel-electrode mappings may not be bijective (see #1703). Throw a warning rather than an error if this is the case and address this correctly downstream in spikeinterface modules.

Correct duplicate channel_id assignments within stream (keep first instance)
MaxWell sometimes creates non-bijective channel-electrode  mapping. Warn users but allow to proceed as this will be dealt with in neobaseextractor in spikeinterface.
@samuelgarcia
Copy link
Contributor

Hi.
Unfortunatly, this is not possible, we need to ensure that the ids are unique.
What we can do is to use the channel name in maxwell (which can be none unique).
And also we could have a hook in maxwell channel_ids generation a check of unicity and in case it is not unique make a transformation of the id to make it unique (like adding the index of the channel)
What do you think ?

@h-mayorquin
Copy link
Contributor

Using names should be OK, right? Then people can use the "use_names_as_ids" in SpikeInterface

https://github.com/SpikeInterface/spikeinterface/blob/fb72ed2af963e257a2a12b1d4280f622c259c7c3/src/spikeinterface/extractors/neoextractors/maxwell.py#L33-L35

They names are also propagated as a property that can be used in SpikeInterface to fix things downstream.

@cmccrimmon
Copy link
Author

Using names should be OK, right? Then people can use the "use_names_as_ids" in SpikeInterface

https://github.com/SpikeInterface/spikeinterface/blob/fb72ed2af963e257a2a12b1d4280f622c259c7c3/src/spikeinterface/extractors/neoextractors/maxwell.py#L33-L35

They names are also propagated as a property that can be used in SpikeInterface to fix things downstream.

Yes, using names should be fine as these are propagated and can be subsequently dealt in SpikeInterface. A singular enforcement of uniqueness should be implemented here then (throw out any duplicated names after the first) as required.

@zm711
Copy link
Contributor

zm711 commented Jul 7, 2025

We discussed this in our meeting and we can't have this change in Neo-baserawio. We will need to fix this at the Maxwell level. Feel free to open an issue to discuss this more.

@zm711 zm711 closed this Jul 7, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants