Multi-frequency input records #49
Comments
|
Hi @bemoody , just wanted to circle back here to see if there's any updates that's happened with the WFDB-Python repo that would make reading all these files faster? I thought I saw you do something that made reading a specific case faster but not sure EDIT: I do want to have a quick test using |
|
There definitely have been some updates; the issue I mentioned above
has since been resolved and there have been some performance
improvements (I don't know how much difference they will make in
practice.)
Upgrading to wfdb-python 4.0.0 and porting from rdsamp to rdrecord
would be a good idea either way.
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
A minor issue is that it might be nice to read multi-frequency records at their original sampling rates.
(In the WFDB format, multi-frequency records are accommodated by storing multiple samples per "frame". For example, if the ECG is sampled at 250 Hz and ABP is 100 Hz, the frame frequency might be set to 50 Hz, and each frame would contain 5 samples of ECG and 2 samples of ABP.)
Currently, update_graph uses
wfdb.rdsampto read the signals, which downsamples all signals to the frame frequency:waveform-annotation/waveform-django/waveforms/dash_apps/finished_apps/waveform_vis.py
Line 1144 in 98d89fd
A better approach might be to use
wfdb.rdrecordinstead, with the argumentsmooth_frames=False. However, as of wfdb-python v3.4.1, this doesn't work consistently with single-frequency records (see MIT-LCP/wfdb-python#313).The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: