Sorry for spamming, but the second I pressed "send" I realized that I could
simply set the time points correctly as NewEvoked.times =
OriginalEvoked.times. That seems to work fine and that would solve my main
question.
However, I am still puzzled about the mentioned timing issue (samples in
steps of 2ms). Is this something I should worry about? Or is this something
to be expected, considering the down-sampling (or some other factor?)?
Thanks and regards,
D.
Sorry for spamming, but the second I pressed "send" I realized that I
could simply set the time points correctly as NewEvoked.times =
OriginalEvoked.times. That seems to work fine and that would solve my main
question.
This is not a safe operation because it creates inconsistencies between
various parameters of the EvokedArray object.
Given `tmin` in the `EvokedArray` constructor and `info['sfreq']`, you
should be able to get `evoked.times` to be correct (assuming equal spacing
of samples, which is implicitly required for EvokedArray). Perhaps you
weren't setting `tmin` properly, or `info['sfreq']` was not set to the
correct value?
Regarding to/frame dataframe, I would instead just use `evoked.data`
directly as a NumPy array, do my computations there, and then create a new
object with EvokedArray.