You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Copy file name to clipboardExpand all lines: examples/how_to/benchmark_with_hybrid_recordings.py
+2-1Lines changed: 2 additions & 1 deletion
Original file line number
Diff line number
Diff line change
@@ -276,7 +276,8 @@
276
276
# From the performance plots, we can see that there is no clear "winner", but `Kilosort3` definitely performs worse than the other options.
277
277
#
278
278
# Although non of the sorters find all units perfectly, `Kilosort2.5`, `Kilosort4`, and `SpyKING CIRCUS 2` all find around 10-12 hybrid units with accuracy greater than 80%.
279
-
# `Kilosort4` has a better overall curve, being able to find almost all units with an accuracy above 50%. `Kilosort2.5` performs well when looking at precision (finding all spikes in a hybrid unit), at the cost of lower recall (finding spikes when it shouldn't).
279
+
# `Kilosort4` has a better overall curve, being able to find almost all units with an accuracy above 50%. `Kilosort2.5` performs well when looking at precision (not finding spikes
280
+
# when it shouldn’t), but it has a lower recall (finding all spikes in the ground truth).
0 commit comments