old and new rt2ms performance discrepancy
A user is reporting performance discrepancy between the old and new rt2ms. Two separate issues have been reported. Sample datasets are provided for each case.
Case (1): PI is mentioning a file called “SOH.RT” , that she is able to process and read with the old rt2ms, but the new rt2ms is not reading it.
Note 1: I asked around EPIC about "SOH.RT" and no one knew what it is (possibly an older reftek model/configuration). Note 2: None of this data is collected with our refteks.
From PI:
"The attached sample data "KIA.zip" is a Reftek data example that has an SOH.RT file instead of 000000000_00000000. When I try to use the newer version of rt2ms in exploratory model (e.g., rt2ms -d KIA -e), I get an error that says:
Data streams 0 missing! State of health files required to gather parfile information for CF card directory: KIA. Skipping directory.This always happens when I have SOH.RT state-of-health files, so I had to run these with the older rt2ms version. Also, for what it’s worth, the sohviewer doesn’t seem to like the SOH.RT files either."
Case (2): PI is reporting that she is getting an error processing another set of reftek data which the old rt2ms is able to process.
From PI:
"The attached file called "ST17.zip" also didn’t work with the new rt2ms. In that case, when I run the exploratory mode option, I get an error that says:
File “/opt/anaconda3/envs/passoft3/lib/python3.10/site-packages/rt2ms_py3/parameter_file.py”, line 194, in check_params if refchan == ‘1’ and channel[-1] != ‘Z’: IndexError: string index out of rangeYou’ll notice that the state-of-health file in this case is named 11032200_00000000 instead of 000000000_00000000, so I thought maybe that was the issue. But after some further testing, I don’t think that is actually the case."
Attachments:
- KIA.zip
- ST17.zip