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
case 'randomisation'
fprintf('\nPerforming condition-label randomisation test of RDM relatedness (fixed effects).\n');
nRandomisations = userOptions.nRandomisations;
for rdmI = 1:numel(candRDMs)
% do the randomisation test, also keep the randomistion correltions
% in a separte matrix
rdms(rdmI,:) = vectorizeRDM(meanCandRDMs(:,:,rdmI));
end
[n,n]=size(meanRefRDM);
exhaustPermutations = false;
if n < 8
allPermutations = exhaustivePermutations(n);
nRandomisations = size(allPermutations, 1);
exhaustPermutations = true;
warning('(!) Comparing RDMs with fewer than 8 conditions (per conditions set) will produce unrealiable results!\n + I''ll partially compensate by using exhaustive instead of random permutations...');
end%if
Performing condition-label randomisation test of RDM relatedness (fixed effects).
Undefined function or variable 'exhaustivePermutations'.
Error in rsa.compareRefRDM2candRDMs (line 622)
allPermutations = exhaustivePermutations(n);
The bug comes in the randomisation and seems to be driven by the fact that one of the model rdms had nans in it.
Should the possibility of having nans in the model RDMs be added to the toolbox?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The bug comes in the randomisation and seems to be driven by the fact that one of the model rdms had nans in it.
Should the possibility of having nans in the model RDMs be added to the toolbox?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: