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

Add codespell support (config, workflow to detect/not fix) and make it fix a typo #1

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Aug 30, 2024
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension


Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
6 changes: 6 additions & 0 deletions .codespellrc
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
[codespell]
# Ref: https://github.com/codespell-project/codespell#using-a-config-file
skip = .git*,*.pdf,.codespellrc
check-hidden = true
# ignore-regex =
# ignore-words-list =
25 changes: 25 additions & 0 deletions .github/workflows/codespell.yml
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
# Codespell configuration is within .codespellrc
---
name: Codespell

on:
push:
branches: [main]
pull_request:
branches: [main]

permissions:
contents: read

jobs:
codespell:
name: Check for spelling errors
runs-on: ubuntu-latest

steps:
- name: Checkout
uses: actions/checkout@v4
- name: Annotate locations with typos
uses: codespell-project/codespell-problem-matcher@v1
- name: Codespell
uses: codespell-project/actions-codespell@v2
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion docs/projects/qa.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
# Quality Assesment (QA)
# Quality Assessment (QA)

While traditionally regarded as noise, systemic physiological processes are frequently shown to be linked with cognitive processes and may contribute valuable information to fMRI studies. Recognizing this, neuroimaging research increasingly draws upon concurrent recordings of peripheral physiology to enhance fMRI analysis. However, the usefulness of physiological data is contingent upon the quality of the recordings as well as expertise in data handling. Not only is quality assessment a tedious process, but the assessments can also vary significantly between raters. While there are manual and template-based tools for assessing peak detection quality (physiopy’s peakdet, PhysIO, etc.), and automated exclusion criteria based on statistical summary metrics, we are not aware of automated approaches that can provide a rapid, effective determination of quality on the whole-scan or windowed level.

Expand Down
Loading