[Eeglablist] Added fields to events, which are suddenly gone

Makoto Miyakoshi mmiyakoshi at ucsd.edu
Tue Jan 24 16:45:06 PST 2017

Dear Nils,

Sorry for the trouble.
That behavior sounds very weird. I have not used that GUI function very
often, I can't say for sure. Could it be that EEG was refreshed but it was
not stored to ALLEEG, therefore once different set was selected the current
EEG is lost? Could you check your EEGLAB option to see if any related
checkboxes, such as 'keep at most one set...' item is on or off, and try on
and off... In the worst case, that's just a bug that needs to be reported
to EEGLAB bugzilla. But please carefully confirm when it specifically
occurs first. I appreciate your patience and cooperation.


On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 1:30 AM, Nils Hachmeister <
nils.hachmeister at uni-bielefeld.de> wrote:

> Hello everyone,
> I have an odd eeglab behaviour, which I don't understand: I added an
> additional field to the events in my data set in order to do some
> additional analyses. This works fine. After adding the field to each event
> in the MATLAB commandline and calling eeglab redraw I can, for instance,
> generate an Channel ERP Image using the gui, sorting trials by the new
> field.
> When I want to use this field to select epochs (via the corresponding
> menu), for instance, selecting only those epoch for which the time-locking
> event's new field-value is 0, I get a second data set and all the events
> still have the new field. That's just fine. However, going back to the
> original data set to select all epochs for which the new field's value is
> 2, I notice that the new field is gone for all the events.
> First I suspected eeglab would do some kind of consistency test, notice
> that the events have a field which is not present in the urevents and
> correct that. That's why in a second attempt I added the new field to the
> urevents (rather than the events) and then copied the new field to each
> event from its corresponding urevent.
> Again trying to select a subset of the epochs, the new field is removed
> from the original data set for both, events and urevents. Since I cannot
> see, how this might be sensible behaviour I suspect that I do something
> wrong, due to my limited understanding of the structure spanning between
> event, urevent and epoch.
> Can someone help me?!?
> Best
> Nils Hachmeister
> _______________________________________________
> Eeglablist page: http://sccn.ucsd.edu/eeglab/eeglabmail.html
> To unsubscribe, send an empty email to eeglablist-unsubscribe at sccn.uc
> sd.edu
> For digest mode, send an email with the subject "set digest mime" to
> eeglablist-request at sccn.ucsd.edu

Makoto Miyakoshi
Swartz Center for Computational Neuroscience
Institute for Neural Computation, University of California San Diego
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sccn.ucsd.edu/pipermail/eeglablist/attachments/20170124/06ce6137/attachment.html>

More information about the eeglablist mailing list