[PRE REVIEW]: Can you predict the future? A tutorial for the National Ecological Observatory Network Ecological Forecasting Challenge

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@OlssonF<!--end-author-handle-- (Freya Olsson) Repository: https://github.com/OlssonF/NEON-forecast-challenge-workshop Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): main Version: v1.1.0 Editor: !--editor-->@acocac<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: Pending Managing EiC: Lorena Barba

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://jose.theoj.org/papers/37e9e48c49abf89a619b787d106d79bd"><img src="https://jose.theoj.org/papers/37e9e48c49abf89a619b787d106d79bd/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://jose.theoj.org/papers/37e9e48c49abf89a619b787d106d79bd/status.svg)](https://jose.theoj.org/papers/37e9e48c49abf89a619b787d106d79bd)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSE @OlssonF. Currently, there isn't a JOSE editor assigned to your paper.

@OlssonF if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). You can search the list of people that have already agreed to review and may be suitable for this submission.

Editor instructions

The JOSE submission bot @editorialbot is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @editorialbot can do for you type:

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello human, I'm @editorialbot, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks.

For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:

@editorialbot commands

For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.02 s (569.7 files/s, 178106.2 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Markdown                         5            451              0           1837
Rmd                              4            400            592            599
TeX                              1              9              0            105
R                                2              9              7             32
YAML                             1              1              4             18
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            13            870            603           2591
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.5281/zenodo.8316965 is OK
- 10.1002/fee.2616 is OK
- 10.1002/ecs2.2567 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.01686 is OK
- 10.1073/pnas.1710231115 is OK
- 10.1111/2041-210X.13955 is OK
- 10.1515/9781400885459 is OK
- 10.21105/jose.00198 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 2340

[labarba]

@OlssonF 👋 Let me start with an apology: I am the editor-in-chief and I have neglected JOSE for several months due to plain overwhelm. I have cut down on other service and am back here with intention of reviving our little alt-journal. Thank you for your submission! Given the time that has passed, do you have updates to the paper?

[editorialbot]

:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:

[OlssonF]

@labarba Since the submission we have continued to develop and improve the tutorial and so some edits have been made to the code. We have made some minor edits to the paper.md this week that reflect these changes.

For reviewers, we would suggest S. K. Morgan Ernest, who recently published with you. In addition, from your reviewers database we suggest Jeffrey Hollister and/or Jem Stachelek, both R coders with backgrounds in ecology.

Thanks

[OlssonF]

@labarba Hi Lorena, we were wondering if there has been any been any progress on the reviews of our submission?

Thanks Freya

[labarba]

@editorialbot @acocac as editor

[editorialbot]

I'm sorry human, I don't understand that. You can see what commands I support by typing:

@editorialbot commands

[labarba]

@editorialbot invite @acocac as editor

[editorialbot]

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

[acocac]

@editorialbot assign @acocac as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @acocac is now the editor

[acocac]

@editorialbot check repository

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90  T=0.02 s (787.3 files/s, 246135.9 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Markdown                         5            463              0           1824
Rmd                              4            400            596            596
TeX                              1              9              0            105
R                                2              9              7             32
YAML                             1              1              4             18
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            13            882            607           2575
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

   141  LAPTOP-FO87M896reya
    28  Freya Olsson
     4  rqthomas
     3  github-actions
     2  Cayelan Carey
     1  Carl Boettiger
     1  Mary Lofton
     1  Quinn Thomas
     1  QuinnThomas

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 2344

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

[editorialbot]

License info:

✅ License found: MIT License (Valid open source OSI approved license)

[acocac]

@editorialbot check references

[editorialbot]

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.5281/zenodo.8316965 is OK
- 10.1002/fee.2616 is OK
- 10.1002/ecs2.2567 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.01686 is OK
- 10.1073/pnas.1710231115 is OK
- 10.1111/2041-210X.13955 is OK
- 10.1515/9781400885459 is OK
- 10.21105/jose.00198 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[acocac]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:

[acocac]

@OlssonF thanks for submitting the education material of the NEON Forecasting Challenge. I wondered if you can consider to make a shorter version (max 4 pages). Please note that the submission guideline suggest a maximum of 1000 words. Due to the nature of your work, I think you should target 4 pages (without references). For instance, you can make a shorter version of The tutorial section (and include it in the README of the repository instead). I'm sharing below what the guideline indicates in regards to a limited content in the article.

JOSE papers contain a limited set of metadata, plus Summary & Reference sections. We explicitly do not publish long-form articles, because the scholarship represented by a JOSE article is contained in the software or learning modules themselves. Expected length is around 1000 words max.

[OlssonF]

@acocac thank you for the feedback. We had completed edits to the paper.md, removing > 1000 words and have pushed these changes to the repository.

Thanks

[acocac]

@editorialbot check repository

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90  T=0.02 s (762.3 files/s, 243874.7 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Markdown                         5            464              0           1822
Rmd                              3            366            648            511
R                                3             53             44            114
TeX                              1              9              0            105
YAML                             1              1              4             18
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            13            893            696           2570
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

   151  LAPTOP-FO87M896reya
    28  Freya Olsson
     4  rqthomas
     3  github-actions
     2  Cayelan Carey
     1  Carl Boettiger
     1  Mary Lofton
     1  Quinn Thomas
     1  QuinnThomas

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 1662

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

[editorialbot]

License info:

✅ License found: MIT License (Valid open source OSI approved license)

[acocac]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:

[acocac]

Hi @OlssonF - thanks for implementing the suggested changes.

I've contacted two of the suggested reviewers. I'll share updates soon 👍.

[acocac]

@OlssonF I haven't received any response from the suggested reviewers. I'll try to find other volunteers from the JOSE list. Thanks for the understanding.

[acocac]

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello @acocac, here are the things you can ask me to do:

# List all available commands
@editorialbot commands

# Add to this issue's reviewers list
@editorialbot add @username as reviewer

# Remove from this issue's reviewers list
@editorialbot remove @username from reviewers

# Get a list of all editors's GitHub handles
@editorialbot list editors

# Assign a user as the editor of this submission
@editorialbot assign @username as editor

# Remove the editor assigned to this submission
@editorialbot remove editor

# Remind an author, a reviewer or the editor to return to a review after a 
# certain period of time (supported units days and weeks)
@editorialbot remind @reviewer in 2 weeks

# Adds a checklist for the reviewer using this command
@editorialbot generate my checklist

# Set a value for version
@editorialbot set v1.0.0 as version

# Set a value for branch
@editorialbot set jose-paper as branch

# Set a value for repository
@editorialbot set https://github.com/organization/repo as repository

# Set a value for the archive DOI
@editorialbot set 10.5281/zenodo.6861996 as archive

# Mention the EiCs for the correct track
@editorialbot ping track-eic

# Run checks and provide information on the repository and the paper file
@editorialbot check repository

# Check the references of the paper for missing DOIs
@editorialbot check references

# Generates the pdf paper
@editorialbot generate pdf

# Recommends the submission for acceptance
@editorialbot recommend-accept

# Generates a LaTeX preprint file
@editorialbot generate preprint

# Flag submission with questionable scope
@editorialbot query scope

# Get a link to the complete list of reviewers
@editorialbot list reviewers

# Creates a post-review checklist with editor and authors tasks
@editorialbot create post-review checklist

# Open the review issue
@editorialbot start review

[acocac]

@editorialbot list reviewers

[editorialbot]

Here's the current list of reviewers: https://bit.ly/jose-reviewers