Hacktoberfest 2026：維護者為十月標記出來的 issue，仍然開放、適合新手。 瀏覽 Hacktoberfest issue

v2: Combining experiment and condition tables

未關閉
  • 哪裡不對？
#657 1 則留言 0 個 reaction 已指派 0 人 在 GitHub 檢視

還沒有人認領這個 Issue。

評估

難度
5/5
預估耗時
一週以上
新手友好度
25/100
Issue 類型
功能
描述清晰度
需要釐清
活躍度
停滯
領域
bioinformatics

研究方向

Start by reviewing the current v2 condition table and experiment table definitions described in the issue, then compare them with the proposed long experiment-table examples. Resolve whether conditionId can be removed and how timed target changes should be represented. Done means the schema decision is agreed and its implications for existing v2 data are documented.

由索引模型根據 Issue 內容生成。

描述

Problem: The current condition table only allows entry of the conditionId, targetId and targetValue. In v1, multiple targets could be specified for each condition. This allowed description of a whole experiment in one line, but the changes had to occur at time = 0.

v2 allows different conditions to occur at different times. This is an improvement as this reflects experimental protocols better. It also allows introduction of a 'forcing function' of sorts with stepwise changes in the parameters.

I propose that the change from wide condition tables to long condition tables obviates the need for the condition table and experiment tables should have the following columns:
experimentId, time, targetId, targetValue

Example:
v1 Alkan_SciSig2018 condition table (first two entries):
conditionId | Dox_level | Gem_level | SN38_level
model1_data1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0
model1_data2 | 0.0 | 0.0003 | 0.0

v2 Alkan_SciSig2018 condition table:
conditionId | targatID | targetValue
model1_data1 | Dox_level | 0.0
model1_data1 | Gem_level | 0.0
model1_data1 | SN38_level| 0.0
model1_data2 | Dox_level | 0.0
model1_data2 | Gem_level | 0.0003
model1_data2 | SN38_level| 0.0

v2 Alkan_SciSig2018 experiment table:
experimentId | time | conditionId
experiment1 | 0 | model1_data1
experiment2 | 0 | model1_data2

Proposed v2 Alkan_SciSig2018 experiment table:
experimentId | time | targatID | targetValue
experiment1 | 0 | Dox_level | 0.0
experiment1 | 0 | Gem_level | 0.0
experiment1 | 0 | SN38_level| 0.0
experiment2 | 0 | Dox_level | 0.0
experiment2 | 0 | Gem_level | 0.0003
experiment2 | 0 | SN38_level| 0.0

If, for example, experiment2 was a pulse of Gem_level, then it would be:
experimentId | time | targatID | targetValue
experiment1 | 0 | Dox_level | 0.0
experiment1 | 0 | Gem_level | 0.0
experiment1 | 0 | SN38_level| 0.0
experiment2 | 0 | Dox_level | 0.0
experiment2 | 0 | Gem_level | 0.0003
experiment2 | 10 | Gem_level | 0.0
experiment2 | 0 | SN38_level| 0.0

The current equivalent would be:
v2 Alkan_SciSig2018 experiment table:
experimentId | time | conditionId
experiment1 | 0 | model1_data1
experiment2 | 0 | model1_data2
experiment2 | 10 | model1_data1

which would introduce two unneeded events or a new condition. Because the conditionId is used nowhere else besides the experiment table, you will be creating a bunch of conditionIds for minor benefits. I agree that the benefits would be greater if the condition table was still wide.

主要語言
沒有語言資料
星號
67
分支
16
平均合併
1 天 19 小時
30 天內合併 PR
1

環境準備

  • 沒有 Dockerfile 或 Docker Compose 檔案
  • 沒有 Pull Request 範本
  • 閱讀貢獻指南

從這裡開始

  1. 先讀完整個 Issue，再讀專案的貢獻指南。
  2. 在 Issue 下留言說明你要接手 —— 這能避免兩個人做同樣的事。
  3. Fork 儲存庫，在一個分支上完成修改。
  4. 送出 Pull Request，並在描述裡引用這個 Issue 編號。

PEtab-dev/PEtab 的其他 Issue

查看 PEtab-dev/PEtab 的全部 Issue

相似的 Issue

更多 Bioinformatics Issue

把新 issue 寄到你的電子郵件信箱

精選適合新手參與的 GitHub issue 摘要。