Adding the posterior covariance functionality#134
Open
lauracarlton wants to merge 3 commits intodevfrom
Open
Conversation
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
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
I have added a get_posterior_covariance function to the image recon object. There is now an additional parameter passed to create an image recon object - lambda_R. I have checked the outputs on the ball squeezing dataset and the images and timeseries match exactly without spatial basis functions. The magnitude images should be unchanged from all prior results but t-statistics are updated due to the update to posterior covariance. I am getting some differences in the output with spatial bases for both magnitude and t-stat so I am still working on debugging that issue.