I am not working on epilepsy research, so I may not fully understand how seizure annotation is typically handled.
Please correct me if I am mistaken.
I was reviewing the labeling logic and wanted to confirm if this might be a potential issue.
The current code labels a window as seizure only if it contains the seizure start or end point:
What about a window that falls completely inside a seizure interval (containing neither the start nor the end point)? For example:
Seizure interval: [1000, 5000]
Window: [2000, 4560]
Intuitively, I would expect this window to be labeled as seizure as well, since it contains seizure activity. However, under the current logic, it seems it would be labeled as 0.
Is this behavior by design? Or should the logic check for overlap between the window and the seizure interval instead?
Thank you for your time and for sharing the code!
I am not working on epilepsy research, so I may not fully understand how seizure annotation is typically handled.
Please correct me if I am mistaken.
I was reviewing the labeling logic and wanted to confirm if this might be a potential issue.
The current code labels a window as seizure only if it contains the seizure start or end point:
What about a window that falls completely inside a seizure interval (containing neither the start nor the end point)? For example:
Seizure interval: [1000, 5000]
Window: [2000, 4560]
Intuitively, I would expect this window to be labeled as seizure as well, since it contains seizure activity. However, under the current logic, it seems it would be labeled as 0.
Is this behavior by design? Or should the logic check for overlap between the window and the seizure interval instead?
Thank you for your time and for sharing the code!