Add differential peak calling extension#2
Conversation
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 7611f07405
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
Fix for #2 (comment)
Tests: pytest --keep-workflow-wd tests/test_07_differential.yml (SLURM 12859643) |
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
cutandrun/workflows/cutandrun.nf
Lines 37 to 39 in d7bddb2
The new -entry DIFFERENTIAL_ONLY workflow is meant to consume precomputed manifests via --differential_from_run, but workflows/cutandrun.nf still executes at import time and unconditionally exits if params.input is unset. Because main.nf includes workflows/cutandrun.nf regardless of the selected entrypoint, invoking nextflow run main.nf -entry DIFFERENTIAL_ONLY --differential_from_run … without a samplesheet will hit the exit at load time and terminate before the differential-only workflow can start. The input check needs to be gated so it only runs when the CUTANDRUN workflow is actually executed.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
Fix for #2 (review)
Tests: pytest --keep-workflow-wd tests/test_07_differential.yml (SLURM 12859800) |
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 32264bc90c
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
Fix for #2 (comment)
Tests: pytest --keep-workflow-wd tests/test_07_differential.yml (SLURM 12859903) |
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 528d3f9dd8
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
Fix for #2 (comment)
Tests: pytest --keep-workflow-wd tests/test_07_differential.yml (SLURM 12860059) |
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
cutandrun/workflows/cutandrun.nf
Lines 7 to 12 in 14e761e
The new DIFFERENTIAL_ONLY entrypoint can’t actually run without the full reference inputs because workflows/cutandrun.nf still invokes WorkflowCutandrun.initialise unconditionally. That initializer (lib/WorkflowCutandrun.groovy:25–36) errors out when params.fasta or params.gtf are unset, so running nextflow run main.nf -entry DIFFERENTIAL_ONLY --differential_from_run … --gene_bed … fails before the entry workflow starts unless users also supply a genome FASTA and GTF—inputs the entry was meant to avoid. Please gate the initialisation or relax those checks for the differential-only path so the new entry is usable with just the manifests/gene_bed it requires.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
Fix for #2 (comment)
Tests: pytest --keep-workflow-wd tests/test_07_differential.yml (SLURM 12860193) |
|
Fix for #2 (review)
Tests: pytest --keep-workflow-wd tests/test_07_differential.yml (SLURM 12860193) |
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 315dcc66e7
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
Fix for #2 (comment)
Tests: pytest --keep-workflow-wd tests/test_07_differential.yml (SLURM 12860462) |
|
@codex review |
1 similar comment
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 17fa79c473
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
Full pytest suite passed: 296 tests, 1 warning. Slurm job 12889297 COMPLETED 0:0 (02:43:02). Log: /scratch/users/dhusmann/runs/pytest_full/20260104_181233/logs/pytest_full_12889297.out |
|
Normalization tweak in bc423f2.\n\n- When spike-in/MS scaling is applied, CPM is now skipped (scaling becomes the normalization), and applied_steps reflects that; this avoids cancellation/double-scaling while keeping factors effective (#2 (comment)). |
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: bc423f2cb0
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
Cache lookup tweak in 687d16d.\n\n- differential-only now accepts cached chipbinner windows even if --blacklist isn’t provided, by only enforcing the hash match when a blacklist path is set (#2 (comment)). |
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 687d16dd25
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
Spike-in validation in d3d4c9e.\n\n- ChIPBinner now errors (allow_partial -> SKIP) if --use-spikein is set and any sample is missing a spikein_scale_factor, preventing mixed scaling states (#2 (comment)). |
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: d3d4c9eb65
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
Allow-partial fix in dd781b6.\n\n- Window lookup now happens inside the try/except so missing/invalid windows fall back to SKIP when --allow-partial is set (#2 (comment)). |
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: dd781b6338
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
Posthoc spike-in auto fix in 4725d67.\n\n- When differential_use_spikein=auto in posthoc mode, we now infer Spikein vs non-Spikein from the manifest normalisation_mode column and broadcast that value to DiffBind/ChIPBinner/SPAN (#2 (comment)). |
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 4725d67527
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
Fixes review items in 865bd9b: normalize SKIPPED→SKIP in differential summaries, add per-method MultiQC tables (chipbinner/span), validate --mode in span_diff.py, and avoid Channel redefinition in differential_peak_calling. The remote --gene_bed handling in differential-only was already fixed in c86079c (file() + gunzip), so that thread is resolved as well. Addresses #2 (comment) and #2 (comment). |
|
@codex review |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Bravo. ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍. Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback". |
|
✅ Full pytest-workflow suite passed on Sherlock (Slurm). Branch: Most recent test-history entry ( 2026-01-12 — pytest-suite (Slurm)
|
|
@codex review |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Hooray! ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍. Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback". |
Summary
Testing