00290: metadata reorganization #2
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,203 @@ | ||
| # Proposal: Metadata organization improvement | ||
|
|
||
| Author(s): Laurent Vallet ([@LaurentPV](https://github.com/LaurentPV)), Ethan Li ([@ethanjli](https://github.com/ethanjli)) | ||
|
|
||
| Last updated: 2023-11-27 | ||
|
|
||
| Discussion at: <https://github.com/PlanktoScope/PlanktoScope/issues/290> | ||
|
|
||
| ## Abstract | ||
|
|
||
| This design document proposes a reorganization of the metadata fields into three JSON files, in order to: | ||
|
|
||
| - Organize metadata fields between the configuration files in a more logical way which makes it easier to find specific fields. | ||
| - Make it easy for a user to share their `config.json` file, so that they can make their Planktoscope settings available for reuse on other machines or by other users, but without sharing any personal information or hardware-specific information (e.g. machine serial number). | ||
| - Have a more precise `hardware.json` file for debugging and for holding all information about a specific machine (e.g. which will be useful for FairScope). | ||
| - Create a `personal_info.json` file which eventually could be encrypted and used to commit modifications to the machine, upload datasets to Ecotaxa, or provide other other user-oriented features in the future. | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you explain what you meant by this? |
||
| - Improve data quality by adding more relevant scientific variables to the metadata. | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Can you provide one or two examples of scientific variables which this proposal will add to the metadata in order to improve the quality of the data? |
||
|
|
||
| ## Background | ||
|
|
||
| Currently, the PlanktoScope software stores metadata in two configuration files: | ||
|
|
||
| - [`hardware.json`](https://github.com/PlanktoScope/device-backend/tree/v2023.9.0-beta.1/default-configs) | ||
| - This file contains parameters to configure the hardware, but it does not describe the characteristics of the hardware. | ||
| - Depending on the PlanktoScope hardware version selected by the user in the Node-RED dashboard, a `hardware.json` file for that version is copied from `/home/pi/device-backend/default-configs` to `/home/pi/PlanktoScope`. | ||
| - Here is an example of the contents of the `hardware.json` file: | ||
| ``` | ||
| { | ||
| "stepper_reverse": false, | ||
| "microsteps": 256, | ||
| "focus_steps_per_mm": 40, | ||
| "pump_steps_per_ml": 2045, | ||
| "focus_max_speed": 5, | ||
| "pump_max_speed": 50, | ||
| "stepper_type": "pscope_hat", | ||
| "red_gain": 2.4, | ||
| "blue_gain": 1.35, | ||
| "analog_gain": 1.0, | ||
| "digital_gain": 1.0, | ||
| "acq_fnumber_objective": 12, | ||
| "process_pixel_fixed": 0.88 | ||
| } | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| - [`config.json`](https://github.com/PlanktoScope/PlanktoScope/tree/software/v2023.9.0-beta.1/software/node-red-dashboard/default-configs) | ||
| - This file contains inputs entered by the user in the Node-RED dashboard to describe their sample and to configure image acquisition. | ||
| - Depending on the PlanktoScope hardware version selected by the user in the Node-RED dashboard, a `config.json` file for that version is copied from `/home/pi/PlanktoScope/software/node-red-dashboard/default-configs` to `/home/pi/PlanktoScope` | ||
| - Here is an example of the contents of the `config.json` file: | ||
| ``` | ||
| { | ||
| "sample_project": "Project's name", | ||
| "sample_id": 1, | ||
| "sample_ship": "Vessel name", | ||
| "sample_operator": "Operator's name", | ||
| "sample_sampling_gear": "net", | ||
| "sample_gear_net_opening": 40, | ||
| "acq_id": 1, | ||
| "acq_instrument": "PlanktoScope v2.5", | ||
| "acq_celltype": 300, | ||
| "acq_minimum_mesh": 10, | ||
| "acq_maximum_mesh": 200, | ||
| "acq_volume": 1, | ||
| "object_depth_min": 1, | ||
| "object_depth_max": 2, | ||
| "process_id": 1, | ||
| "nb_frame": 100, | ||
| "sleep_before": 0.5, | ||
| "imaging_pump_volume": 0.01 | ||
| } | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| Both of these configuration files are used by the Node-RED dashboard for saving metadata persistently across restart, but some metadata information set by the user in the Node-RED dashboard is not persisted. | ||
| Both persisted and unpersisted metadata fields are assembled into a `metadata.json` file for each raw dataset, which is created by the Python backend's `ImagerProcess` module as part of image acquisition. | ||
| We have a ["Metadata Compilation" spreadsheet](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1TSIaOFEIMvvYyqAFrsiZxVtGXZvWVdZbWO_LU-2A_TE/edit?usp=drive_link) which describes every metadata field; only fields from that spreadsheet with field names containing one of the following prefixes are exported to the `metadata.json` file: | ||
| - `sample_` | ||
| - `acq_` | ||
| - `object_` | ||
| - `process_` | ||
|
|
||
| ## Proposal | ||
|
|
||
| We propose to add a third file, to be named `personal_info.json`, which will store the user's personal information as well as information about the scientific mission for which the PlanktoScope is being operated. | ||
| We also propose to add some more metadata fields to improve the metadata exported to Ecotaxa. | ||
| Finally, we propose to reorganize existing metadata fields between three files, according to the following rules: | ||
|
|
||
| - The `hardware.json` file should only have information about the hardware characteristics of the PlanktoScope. | ||
| This file should only be modified by the user when we cannot determine the information automatically (such as from the custom PlanktoScope HAT's EEPROM). | ||
| In such situations, the user should only need to select the PlanktoScope's hardware version and its serial number (assuming their PlanktoScope has a standard hardware configuration). | ||
| - Here is an example of our proposal for the contents of the `hardware.json` file: | ||
| ``` | ||
| { | ||
| "inst_serial_number": "U072", | ||
| "acq_inst_name": "PlanktoScope", | ||
| "acq_inst_version": "v2.6.1", | ||
| "acq_rpi_model": "Raspberry Pi 4 4Gb", | ||
| "acq_camera_model": "Raspberry Pi High Quality Camera", | ||
| "acq_HAT_model": "FairScope_HAT v1.3", | ||
| "acq_objective_focal_length": 12, | ||
| "acq_tube_focal_length": 25, | ||
| "acq_LED_model": "Adafruit - 754", | ||
| "acq_pump_model": "Kamoer - KAS B12 SF", | ||
| "acq_flowcell_model": "FairScope Capillary - 300 um", | ||
| "microsteps": 256, | ||
| "pump_max_speed": 50, | ||
| "pump_steps_per_ml": 2045, | ||
| "stepper_reverse": false, | ||
| "process_id": "1", | ||
| "process_pixel_size": 0.75 | ||
| } | ||
| ``` | ||
| - The `config.json` file should only store acquisition settings and camera settings selected by the user via the GUI. | ||
| Exchanging this file should assure a comparable result. | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure what you mean by this (exchanging the file with whom/what? What should the result be comparable to?). Can you explain a bit more? |
||
| - Here is an example of our proposal for the contents of the `config.json` file: | ||
| ``` | ||
| { | ||
| "acq_camera_iso": 100, | ||
| "acq_focus_max_speed": 5, | ||
| "acq_camera_shutter_speed": 125, | ||
| "acq_camera_white_balance": false, | ||
| "acq_volume_interframe": 0.01, | ||
| "acq_nb_frames" : 10, | ||
| "focus_steps_per_mm": 40, | ||
| "sleep_before": 0.5, | ||
| "object_camera_gain_analog": 1, | ||
| "object_camera_gain_digital": 1, | ||
| "object_camera_gain_red": 1.5, | ||
| "object_camera_gain_blue": 1.9 | ||
| } | ||
| ``` | ||
| - The `personal_info.json` file should store information entered by the user (via the GUI) about the identity of the user/team, information about the mission where the PlanktoScope is being deployed, and Ecotaxa login credentials for the PlanktoScope software to interact with the Ecotaxa API (especially for exporting data directly to EcoTaxa). | ||
| This file could be shared between team members using Planktoscopes for the same mission, to assure that an identical protocol/equipment used information. | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. This line originally said "to assure an identical protocol/equipment used information", but I'm not sure what that means. Can you explain a bit more? |
||
| - Here is an example of our proposal for the contents of the `personal_info.json` file: | ||
| ``` | ||
| { | ||
| "sample_project": "FairScope Factory Settings", | ||
| "sample_operator": "Thibaut Pollina", | ||
| "sample_vessel": "La Baraka", | ||
| "sample_method": "Pump Samplers", | ||
| "sample_id": "Sample_1", | ||
| "sample_net_mesh_size": 20, | ||
| "sample_sieve_mesh size": 200, | ||
| "sample_net_mouth_diameter": 30, | ||
| "acq_id": "Tank_B", | ||
| "object_depth_min": 0, | ||
| "object_depth_max": 0, | ||
| "process_id": "1" | ||
| } | ||
| ``` | ||
| - This new file could be stored at `/home/pi/PlanktoScope/`, alongside the two other configuration files. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Rationale | ||
|
|
||
| By making the naming and organization of metadata fields more logical, we can make it easier for developers and users to find the necessary metadata fields when they inspect the metadata files as part of debugging or modifying their Planktoscopes. | ||
|
|
||
| Having three files instead of two to simplify and reorganize the metadata may seem to be counterproductive. | ||
| An alternative solution could be to improve the organization of the json file with nested objects, such as `personal_info: {"key":"value", ...}` and `settings:{"key":"value", ...}`. | ||
| However, separating different group of metadata fields into different files based on when/how those metadata files need to be changed/shared makes it easy to replace the values of one group of fields just by overwriting one file. | ||
| This is an advantage of having multiple metadata files rather than a single metadata file. | ||
|
|
||
| The use and limitations of prefixes (`acq_`, `object_`, `sample_`, `process_`) in the metadata field names is motivated by following EcoTaxa's metadata field naming system. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Compatibility | ||
|
|
||
| There should be no compatibility issue unless we couple this proposal with the loading of `hardware.json` metadata fields from data stored in the PlanktoScope HAT's EEPROM. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Implementation | ||
|
|
||
| The implementation impacts both the Node-RED dashboard and the Python backend. | ||
|
|
||
| ### Python Backend | ||
| The following files will be impacted: | ||
|
|
||
| - `device-backend/control/pscopehat/planktoscope/imager/_init_.py` | ||
| - `device-backend/control/adafruithat/planktoscope/imager/_init_.py` | ||
| - `device-backend/control/pscopehat/planktoscope/stepper.py` | ||
| - `device-backend/control/adafruithat/planktoscope/stepper.py` | ||
|
|
||
| These files will need to be modified to: | ||
|
|
||
| - Load the `config.json` file in addition to the `hardware.json` file, in order to retrieve the metadata field values which this proposal moved from `hardware.json` latter file to the `config.json` file. | ||
| - Change the names of metadata fields according to this proposal. | ||
|
|
||
| ### Node-RED Dashboard | ||
| The following files will be impacted: | ||
|
|
||
| - `adafruithat.json` | ||
| - `pscopehat.json` | ||
|
|
||
| The files will need to be modified to: | ||
|
|
||
| - Load the new variables implemented in `hardware.json` and `config.json`. | ||
| - Rename global variables in the Node-RED flows to match the metadata field names in the JSON files. | ||
| - Create the `personal_info.json` file if it does not already exist. | ||
| - Load metadata fields from `personal_info.json` as global variables in the Node-RED flows. | ||
| - Add new GUI input fields to set the values of new metadata fields as needed. | ||
| - Write metadata values to the three JSON files at the end of each process (Sample, Optic Configuration, Fluidic Acquisition) | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ## Open issues (if applicable) | ||
|
|
||
| - Maybe in a community-based meeting we should iterate on this proposal with recommendations from users, e.g. about which metadata fields they would like to retrieve with their exported data. | ||
| - Is there a version of the software that is not compatible with an old version of the hardware (to evaluate the compatibility issues)? | ||
|
|
||
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This line originally said "have all the information about a specific machine for Fairscope use", but I'm not sure what you meant by that. I changed that text to "all information about a specific machine (e.g. which will be useful for FairScope)", but I'm still not sure what you specifically mean. Can you explain a bit more?