Skip to content
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

Examples for Microscopy BEP031 #286

Merged
merged 49 commits into from
Jan 12, 2022
Merged

Conversation

mariehbourget
Copy link
Contributor

@mariehbourget mariehbourget commented Sep 16, 2021

This PR provides 2 example datasets for Microscopy data (BEP031, @mariehbourget, @jcohenadad).

  • micr_SEM: 1 sample, multisession, in PNG format
  • micr_SPIM: 2 samples, with multiple chunks, in OME-TIFF format

As discussed, OME-TIFF files are small 1x1x1 pixel files in order to preserve metadata for validation.

The microscopy validator is not ready yet but should follow in about 2 weeks.
The example datasets may be updated while finalizing the validator and after community review of the BEP031 spec.

Thanks to @etiennebergeron for his help building the datasets!

etiennebergeron and others added 30 commits August 3, 2021 11:54
…N fields in the 'sem002' subject's file sidecar.
…le'. Added it to the 'sem001' dataset and incorporated the session folder structure for 'sem002'.
…added multiple samples per subject and removed the column 'derived_from' in samples.tsv.
…r SPIM dataset, snd session for SEM dataset, etc.).
Copy link
Contributor

@Remi-Gau Remi-Gau left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Small thing to add when this is ready to merge (not urgent)

a summary table in the README.md of the repo

https://github.com/bids-standard/bids-examples#dataset-index

@guiomar
Copy link
Contributor

guiomar commented Nov 16, 2021

Hi @mariehbourget! I think that it might be convenient that the 4 chunks of the samples A and B of the example microscopy/SPIM001 have a corresponding json file, indicating the ChunkTransformationMatrix.
I think (in line with what we had discussed for the specs), this may help to ilustrate the use of this new chunk feature.

@mariehbourget
Copy link
Contributor Author

mariehbourget commented Nov 16, 2021

Hi @mariehbourget! I think that it might be convenient that the 4 chunks of the samples A and B of the example microscopy/SPIM001 have a corresponding json file, indicating the ChunkTransformationMatrix. I think (in line with what we had discussed for the specs), this may help to ilustrate the use of this new chunk feature.

Hi @guiomar, thank you for this suggestion. I had a similar thought yesterday. My issue is that those examples are "empty" data. So they are just empty 1x1x1 pixel files. I was wondering if adding chunk transformation to empty images would be more confusing. But I agree this could help to have an example so I think we could explain it in the README of the dataset.
I'll keep you updated with the progress on this.

@mariehbourget
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @Remi-Gau, we are updating our examples and have a small question.
For the microscopy examples in this repo (and the external examples we put together), what should be the BIDSVersion in the dataset_description.json file?
It is 1.6.0 at the moment but that version does not include microscopy. Should we put v1.6.1-dev (current version of the "latest" doc) or 1.7.0 (even though 1.7.0 is not released yet)?
Thanks!

@Remi-Gau
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @Remi-Gau, we are updating our examples and have a small question. For the microscopy examples in this repo (and the external examples we put together), what should be the BIDSVersion in the dataset_description.json file? It is 1.6.0 at the moment but that version does not include microscopy. Should we put v1.6.1-dev (current version of the "latest" doc) or 1.7.0 (even though 1.7.0 is not released yet)?

I would say that it should be 1.7.0. One of the long term goal would be to have the validator check that a dataset fits the requirements of the BIDS version mentioned in the description. For you it will be version 1.7.

That being said I just realized that this means that some of the BIDS datasets for PET need to have their version number bumped up to 1.6.0. @mariehbourget are you sure you don't want to join us as maintainers: you definitely have a knack for internal consistency. 😍 👍

@mariehbourget
Copy link
Contributor Author

mariehbourget commented Nov 30, 2021

Following the Microscopy BEP community review, we will update the examples in this repo in-parallel with the implementation of the validator.
Here is a list of the changes that will be made:

  • In SPIM: Add 1 JSON file per chunk with examples of the ChunkTransformationMatrix and ChunkTransformationAxis field, with explanation in the README.
  • Update the value of the SampleEnvironement field to "ex vivo" instead of "exvivo", both in SEM and SPIM.
  • Update data type to micr instead of microscopy, both in SEM and SPIM
  • Update BIDSVersion to 1.7.0 in dataset_description.json of both SEM and SPIM
  • Add a summary table in the README.md of the repo
  • Corrections to OME-TIFF XML metadata

@mariehbourget
Copy link
Contributor Author

mariehbourget commented Dec 6, 2021

@guiomar, as you suggested, we added examples of the ChunkTransfomrationMatrix and ChunkTransfomrationMatrixAxis fields in the JSON files of the micr_SPIM example dataset.

@Remi-Gau, the examples are completed with the latest changes from the community review. I also included the summary table in the README.md file.
EDIT: we found some issues in our OME-TIFF XML metadata, we will need to update the files soon (so not completed yet)

@mariehbourget
Copy link
Contributor Author

mariehbourget commented Dec 15, 2021

Just as a follow-up:
The OME-TIFF XML metadata are corrected.
The examples are now complete.

@rwblair rwblair merged commit 482cc91 into bids-standard:master Jan 12, 2022
@sappelhoff sappelhoff added this to the 1.7.0 milestone Jan 16, 2022
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.

7 participants