{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mne-tools/mne-python/issues/5754","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mne-tools/mne-python","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mne-tools/mne-python/issues/5754/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mne-tools/mne-python/issues/5754/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mne-tools/mne-python/issues/5754/events","html_url":"https://github.com/mne-tools/mne-python/pull/5754","id":385449141,"node_id":"MDExOlB1bGxSZXF1ZXN0MjM0NDE3OTU3","number":5754,"title":"[MRG] ENH: alternative layout of extra points in interpolation","user":{"login":"mmagnuski","id":8452354,"node_id":"MDQ6VXNlcjg0NTIzNTQ=","avatar_url":"https://avatars0.githubusercontent.com/u/8452354?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/mmagnuski","html_url":"https://github.com/mmagnuski","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mmagnuski/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mmagnuski/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mmagnuski/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mmagnuski/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mmagnuski/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mmagnuski/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mmagnuski/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mmagnuski/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mmagnuski/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":39,"created_at":"2018-11-28T20:44:46Z","updated_at":"2018-12-13T17:21:30Z","closed_at":null,"author_association":"MEMBER","pull_request":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mne-tools/mne-python/pulls/5754","html_url":"https://github.com/mne-tools/mne-python/pull/5754","diff_url":"https://github.com/mne-tools/mne-python/pull/5754.diff","patch_url":"https://github.com/mne-tools/mne-python/pull/5754.patch"},"body":"Implements the extra points layout for topo interpolation discussed in #5315 \r\nIt may eliminate the issues raised in #5315 but it might be suboptimal in some standard cases. For example this is a frontal theta topography before this PR:\r\n<img src=\"https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/8452354/49180525-37e00c80-f355-11e8-9013-ee5da9f386ab.png\" width=\"300px\">\r\nand this is after:\r\n<img src=\"https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/8452354/49180535-3f9fb100-f355-11e8-9b53-8aaa26e24a0b.png\" width=\"300px\">\r\n\r\nI must say I prefer the \"before\" topo in this case (the \"after\" looks like a laughing cyclops in a party hat). Probably the extra points are too close to channels. I'll check that later. Also - masking using convex hull (but slightly less extended than here) might make it better.\r\n\r\n### TODO:\r\n- [ ] resolve what to do when `outlines='skirt'`\r\n- [ ] add whats new\r\n- [x] add tests\r\n- [x] special case for colinear points when `extrapolate='local'`\r\n- [x] test extra points on the head circle\r\n- [x] use median inter-channel distance\r\n- [x] take convex hull from triangulation to use Delaunay only once"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mne-tools/mne-python/issues/comments/447050637","html_url":"https://github.com/mne-tools/mne-python/pull/5754#issuecomment-447050637","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mne-tools/mne-python/issues/5754","id":447050637,"node_id":"MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ0NzA1MDYzNw==","user":{"login":"larsoner","id":2365790,"node_id":"MDQ6VXNlcjIzNjU3OTA=","avatar_url":"https://avatars1.githubusercontent.com/u/2365790?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/larsoner","html_url":"https://github.com/larsoner","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/larsoner/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/larsoner/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/larsoner/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/larsoner/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/larsoner/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/larsoner/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/larsoner/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/larsoner/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/larsoner/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2018-12-13T17:21:30Z","updated_at":"2018-12-13T17:21:30Z","author_association":"MEMBER","body":">  It's true that 'head' is more similar to what we had previously but would we want to extrapolate to the whole head circle by default when one uses only a subset of channels?\r\n\r\nFor now/this PR yes; in the follow-up deprecation PR, no.\r\n\r\nMy idea is to have this PR only be about adding an `extrapolate` argument whose current default (`'head'`?) does whatever 0.17 does, but adds another option `'local'` that extrapolates to within a small neighborhood of the convex hull of the (flattened) sensor positions."}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"larsoner"}}