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

Mass proficient extraction for NAS storage #342

Merged
merged 44 commits into from
Aug 22, 2023
Merged

Mass proficient extraction for NAS storage #342

merged 44 commits into from
Aug 22, 2023

Conversation

alex-l-kong
Copy link
Contributor

@alex-l-kong alex-l-kong commented Apr 6, 2023

What is the purpose of this PR?

Closes #327. Closes #322.

How did you implement your changes

See issue link.

Remaining issues

Need to test this on Christine's run next week.

@alex-l-kong alex-l-kong self-assigned this Apr 6, 2023
@alex-l-kong alex-l-kong marked this pull request as draft April 6, 2023 23:15
@review-notebook-app
Copy link

Check out this pull request on  ReviewNB

See visual diffs & provide feedback on Jupyter Notebooks.


Powered by ReviewNB

@alex-l-kong alex-l-kong marked this pull request as ready for review April 18, 2023 01:19
Copy link
Contributor

@srivarra srivarra left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!

@camisowers
Copy link
Contributor

Agreed, looks good!

Copy link
Member

@ngreenwald ngreenwald left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good. You should also confirm that the offsets are being handled correctly for mass extraction, since I remember some trickiness about the sign of the proficient and deficient extraction.

Should be straightforward to extract proficient, deficient, and the whole range, and make sure that proficient + deficient = combined

src/toffy/watcher_callbacks.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@alex-l-kong
Copy link
Contributor Author

Looks good. You should also confirm that the offsets are being handled correctly for mass extraction, since I remember some trickiness about the sign of the proficient and deficient extraction.

Should be straightforward to extract proficient, deficient, and the whole range, and make sure that proficient + deficient = combined

Proficient + deficient unfortunately does not equal combined via the current offset. For most channels, the vast majority of values (about 95-99%) match up, but some channels (ex. Noodle, Fe, Au) have little in common between proficient + deficient and combined. Other channels like H3K27me3 and H3K9ac are also a bit more problematic (70-79%).

In terms of offset, I've been working with:

  • Combined from -0.3 to 0.3
  • Proficient from 0 to 0.3
  • Deficient from -0.3 to 0

@alex-l-kong
Copy link
Contributor Author

alex-l-kong commented Jul 14, 2023

Need to test this PR on the next CIMAC/SPAIN runs before requesting a review.

@alex-l-kong
Copy link
Contributor Author

alex-l-kong commented Aug 15, 2023

Per our meeting a few weeks ago, we'll be reverting the definition of deficient and proficient back to:

  • Deficient: (-0.3, 0)
  • Proficient: (0, 0.3)

The long-term project would be for someone in the lab to granularly test each channel and see which ones need customized extraction ranges.

Copy link
Member

@ngreenwald ngreenwald left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good, see below

pyproject.toml Show resolved Hide resolved
src/toffy/watcher_callbacks.py Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@srivarra srivarra left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good. Just a comment about the setting the ranges.

src/toffy/watcher_callbacks.py Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@srivarra srivarra left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Wild stuff!

@ngreenwald ngreenwald merged commit 49d26ab into main Aug 22, 2023
4 checks passed
@ngreenwald ngreenwald deleted the prof_extract branch August 22, 2023 19:57
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.

Extract proficient data to account for NAS bin file deletion NAS-friendly extraction
4 participants