Skip to content

Conversation

mgxd
Copy link
Collaborator

@mgxd mgxd commented Sep 24, 2025

Closes #3498

@mgxd mgxd changed the title enh: add boldref / sbrefs to source metadata enh: add boldref / sbref to source metadata Sep 24, 2025
Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 24, 2025

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 5 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 0.42%. Comparing base (26a4c7b) to head (ed1e936).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
fmriprep/workflows/bold/base.py 0.00% 2 Missing ⚠️
fmriprep/workflows/bold/fit.py 0.00% 2 Missing ⚠️
fmriprep/workflows/base.py 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (26a4c7b) and HEAD (ed1e936). Click for more details.

HEAD has 8 uploads less than BASE
Flag BASE (26a4c7b) HEAD (ed1e936)
9 1
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #3532       +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   73.72%   0.42%   -73.31%     
==========================================
  Files          60      59        -1     
  Lines        4757    4733       -24     
  Branches      615     614        -1     
==========================================
- Hits         3507      20     -3487     
- Misses       1109    4713     +3604     
+ Partials      141       0      -141     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@mgxd mgxd marked this pull request as ready for review September 25, 2025 19:28
@mgxd
Copy link
Collaborator Author

mgxd commented Sep 25, 2025

Looking at the boldref sources for one of the CI runs.. the idea behind this change was to make it easier to trace whether an sbref or the hmc boldref (which is a derivative of the bold series itself) was used to create it. I don't think we should include working directory files in the sources, so we could consider a few options:

  • Backtracking to the first 'source' file (raw / derivative) and pass that along as a source
  • Saving additional outputs

@effigies
Copy link
Member

effigies commented Sep 25, 2025

Just to pull the contents:

sub-02_task-cuedSGT_run-01_desc-coreg_boldref.json

{
  "Sources": [
    "/scratch/fmriprep_25_2_wf/sub_02_wf/bold_task_cuedSGT_run_01_echo_1_wf/bold_fit_wf/hmc_boldref_wf/gen_avg/sub-02_task-cuedSGT_run-01_echo-1_bold_valid_average.nii.gz",
    "bids::sub-02/func/sub-02_task-cuedSGT_run-01_from-boldref_to-auto00000_mode-image_desc-fmap_xfm.txt",
    "/scratch/fmriprep_25_2_wf/sub_02_wf/fmap_preproc_wf/wf_auto_00000/bs_filter/fmap_syn0Warp_Hz_trans_coeff000.nii.gz"
  ]
}

@effigies
Copy link
Member

I think this just shows that we're not using the outputs of a datasink in our buffers. I'll fix that.

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.

Improve consistency in referring to BOLD reference in reports
2 participants