-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
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
support Proteome Discoverer for DDA modules #474
Comments
We still need to handle the column headers (sample names may change). I don't think that we can have a classical matching that would look for exact match in column headers. We also need to parse the parameter files. Right now I see 2:
|
@RobbinBouwmeester:
We would have to specifically look for search engines? Another question for you: we discussed using the file |
For parameters we used to have the option to upload two files, but we might have even removed that. I know there were also some issue with regards to some formats (with regards to protein names) to get things parsed correctly. @rodvrees added a notebook that parses the input files so we can process them in proteobench. |
Great! Thanks. So for now, we can parse the input files ourselves with @rodvrees's notebooks. |
If I'm thinking about the same thing as @RobbinBouwmeester, that notebook is specifically for MSAID data, where protein info and precursor info have to be mapped across different files. What specifically needs to happen in this case? I've never worked with PD output so if you have an example I can extend/generalize the notebook. |
It is "just" that the column names are not understandable directly (and I did not find any safe way to make them understandable) when we want to match columns to samples. |
Okay so that's indeed very comparable to the problem we had with MSAID, I can generalize that notebook further then. Can you perhaps send me the data? |
I am on it:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: