① It seems to me that visually, F5 appears to be a more reliable peak than F4? But the result given is F4 as TRUE and F5 as FALSE.
② Additionally, I would like to ask why we should judge whether it is TRUE or FALSE based on the smoothed EIC from the original. From my perspective, the unsmoothed original on the left and the one smoothed by pyEVA on the right look quite different.
③ Does pyEVA draw the EIC RT range too wide? (±60s), but many peak extraction software rtmin and rtmax may only be a part of 20s of the EIC drawn by pyEVA. Does this mean that the peak extraction software's boundary determination is too small? Or does it mean that the peak extraction area is correct, but the comparison of the EIC should be left to the model to determine between the rtmin and rtmax regions?
① It seems to me that visually, F5 appears to be a more reliable peak than F4? But the result given is F4 as TRUE and F5 as FALSE.
② Additionally, I would like to ask why we should judge whether it is TRUE or FALSE based on the smoothed EIC from the original. From my perspective, the unsmoothed original on the left and the one smoothed by pyEVA on the right look quite different.
③ Does pyEVA draw the EIC RT range too wide? (±60s), but many peak extraction software rtmin and rtmax may only be a part of 20s of the EIC drawn by pyEVA. Does this mean that the peak extraction software's boundary determination is too small? Or does it mean that the peak extraction area is correct, but the comparison of the EIC should be left to the model to determine between the rtmin and rtmax regions?