Add affinity proteomics SDRF annotationsFeat/affinity proteomics

[deeptijk]

Summary:

• 22 SDRF files promoted under datasets/PAD*/
• 10,102 total dataset rows
• Source names updated to use deposited sample IDs
• characteristics[sample type] annotated using deposited NPX/ADAT sample role metadata
• Olink and SomaScan affinity metadata retained from primary matrices

Validation:

• Local structural checks passed for 44 TSV copies
• No duplicate headers
• No ragged rows
• source name is first column
• characteristics[sample type] is present and uses guideline values

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Chores
  • Enhanced dataset validation workflow with specialized validation rules for proteomics datasets, ensuring more accurate validation results.

[qodo-code-review]

Qodo reviews are paused for this user.

Troubleshooting steps vary by plan Learn more →

On a Teams plan?
Reviews resume once this user has a paid seat and their Git account is linked in Qodo.
Link Git account →

Using GitHub Enterprise Server, GitLab Self-Managed, or Bitbucket Data Center?
These require an Enterprise plan - Contact us
Contact us →

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Review was skipped due to path filters

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)

• .DS_Store is excluded by !**/.DS_Store

CodeRabbit blocks several paths by default. You can override this behavior by explicitly including those paths in the path filters. For example, including **/dist/** will override the default block on the dist directory, by removing the pattern from both the lists.

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 7c3cbcc2-4153-4a82-b376-1b6e605d08dd

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:

• 🔍 Trigger review

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The GitHub Actions SDRF validation workflow is updated to branch on filename: dataset files with basenames starting with PAD are validated using -t affinity-proteomics, while all other files continue using --use_ols_cache_only. No other workflow logic changes.

Changes

SDRF Validation Workflow — Conditional Template Selection

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Conditional validation branch for PAD files .github/workflows/validate-sdrf.yml	Replaces the single parse_sdrf validate-sdrf command in the loop with an if/else block: files whose basename starts with PAD invoke validate-sdrf with -t affinity-proteomics; all other files keep the existing --use_ols_cache_only invocation.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

Poem

A rabbit hopped through datasets wide,
And found some PADs that needed a guide.
"Affinity-proteomics!" it tapped with its paw,
While others got ols_cache—no flaw!
Each file validated, tucked in just right,
The workflow now branches with fluffy delight. 🐇

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title 'Add affinity proteomics SDRF annotations' accurately summarizes the main change of adding 22 affinity proteomics SDRF files with proper annotations, though the subtitle 'Feat/affinity proteomics' appears to be formatting noise.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[deeptijk]

@ypriverol ..Can you check these?

[ypriverol]

@deeptijk these datasets are failing.

[ypriverol]

@deeptijk ?