Back to the main page.

Bug 2593 - confusion between cfg.numcomponent and cfg.fastica.numOfIC

Reported 2014-05-27 14:09:00 +0200
Modified 2019-08-10 12:29:31 +0200
Product: FieldTrip
Component: core
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC
Operating System: Linux
Importance: P5 normal
Assigned to: Eelke Spaak
Depends on:
See also:

Johanna - 2014-05-27 14:09:25 +0200

From the help documentation, it seems possible to specify cfg.fastica.numOfIC instead of cfg.numcomponent in ft_componentanalysis. However, that is not true, since line 440 is: cfg.fastica.numOfIC = cfg.numcomponent; Thus only cfg.numcomponent can be set by the user. Should the code be changed so that either can be set by the user, or a warning in the documentation (where cfg.fastica.numOfIC is listed) and/or a warning/error at the beginning to check the cfg in case the user specified the cfg.fastica.numOfIC?

Johanna - 2014-05-27 14:14:25 +0200

Actually, the same now applies for the case of 'runica' after Roemer's recent fix for the re-opened bug 903.

Jan-Mathijs Schoffelen - 2014-05-27 15:14:51 +0200

Would it make sense to do the following: if the user specifies cfg.(icamethod).numOfIC (or however it's called for runica etc), let this take precedence over cfg.numcomponent (but throw a warning when the user defines both explicitly, and when the user defines them to be different). If cfg.(icamethod).numOfIC is not defined, use cfg.numcomponent. Something similar may also apply to dss.

Roemer van der Meij - 2014-05-27 16:25:48 +0200

(In reply to Jan-Mathijs Schoffelen from comment #2) Taking either if it is specified makes sense. When both are specified an error might be best though, as it is unclear which one to interpret.

Eelke Spaak - 2014-06-20 15:26:59 +0200

bash-4.1$ svn commit ft_componentanalysis.m test/test_bug2593.m Sending ft_componentanalysis.m Adding test/test_bug2593.m Transmitting file data .. Committed revision 9646.

Robert Oostenveld - 2019-08-10 12:29:31 +0200

This closes a whole series of bugs that have been resolved (either FIXED/WONTFIX/INVALID) for quite some time. If you disagree, please file a new issue describing the issue on