[PRE REVIEW]: gym-electric-motor (GEM): A Python toolbox for the simulation of electric drive systems

[whedon]

Submitting author: @wkirgsn (Wilhelm Kirchgässner) Repository: https://github.com/upb-lea/gym-electric-motor Version: v0.2.1 Editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Reviewers: @moorepants, @dineshresearch Managing EiC: Daniel S. Katz

:warning: JOSS reduced service mode :warning:

Due to the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, JOSS is currently operating in a "reduced service mode". You can read more about what that means in our blog post.

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @wkirgsn. Currently, there isn't an JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@wkirgsn if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). In addition, this list of people have already agreed to review for JOSS and may be suitable for this submission (please start at the bottom of the list).

Editor instructions

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

@whedon commands

[whedon]

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

:warning: JOSS reduced service mode :warning:

Due to the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, JOSS is currently operating in a "reduced service mode". You can read more about what that means in our blog post.

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

@whedon commands

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

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

Software report (experimental):

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.84  T=0.67 s (258.5 files/s, 72470.0 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SVG                             24            244              5          29650
Python                          67           2402           5161           8999
reStructuredText                74            479            427            710
Markdown                         5            146              0            438
DOS Batch                        1              8              1             27
TeX                              1              5              1             26
YAML                             1              4              0             22
make                             1              4              6             10
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                           174           3292           5601          39882
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statistical information for the repository '2275' was gathered on 2020/05/29.
The following historical commit information, by author, was found:

Author                     Commits    Insertions      Deletions    % of changes
Arne Traue                       9           762            284            0.61
Deployment Bot (from             1         23827          28561           30.41
Joni Airaksinen                  1             1              1            0.00
Maximilian Schenke               2           785             72            0.50
Wilhelm Kirchgaessne             8         37980          23597           35.75
max-schenke                     14          2319           1194            2.04
walli                            1             4              4            0.00
wallscheid                       3            15             15            0.02
wkirgsn                         15         28835          23999           30.67

Below are the number of rows from each author that have survived and are still
intact in the current revision:

Author                     Rows      Stability          Age       % in comments
Arne Traue                  712           93.4          1.6                6.04
Maximilian Schenke          424           54.0          2.5                5.42
Oliver Wallscheid             3          100.0          1.4                0.00
Wilhelm Kirchgaessne       7606           20.0          3.6               14.09
max-schenke                1699           73.3          1.5                8.30
walli                         4          100.0          1.2                0.00
wkirgsn                    6114           21.2          3.8               12.53

[whedon]

Reference check summary:

OK DOIs

- None

MISSING DOIs

- https://doi.org/10.1163/2214-8647_bnp_e612900 may be missing for title: Keras

INVALID DOIs

- None

[whedon]

:point_right: Check article proof :page_facing_up: :point_left:

[danielskatz]

👋 @wkirgsn - Thanks for your submission to JOSS. As described in our blog post announcing the reopening of JOSS, we're currently working in a "reduced service mode", limiting the number of papers assigned to any individual editor.

Since reopening JOSS last week, we've had > 60 papers submitted and as such, yours has been put in our backlog that we will be working through over the coming weeks and months.

Thanks in advance for your patience!

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@danielskatz I can take this one

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@whedon assign @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman as editor

[whedon]

OK, the editor is @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@cybanical I hope you are doing well! I think this JOSS submission looks like your cup of tea. Would you be able to help review this?

Here is the short paper: https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/blob/joss.02275/joss.02275/10.21105.joss.02275.pdf and the software: https://github.com/upb-lea/gym-electric-motor

(perhaps you can also update your GitHub profile with your full name and a professional link e.g. https://www.media.mit.edu/people/mcarney/overview/)

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@YashBansod @moorepants @podhrmic would you be interested in reviewing this submission for JOSS (The Journal of Open Source Software): gym-electric-motor (GEM): A Python toolbox for the simulation of electric drive systems

The review takes place on GitHub and focuses on this short paper: https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/blob/joss.02275/joss.02275/10.21105.joss.02275.pdf and the software: https://github.com/upb-lea/gym-electric-motor

You can tell me if you are interested by replying here. Once I have sufficient reviewers I'll open a dedicated review issue.

[cybanical]

Oh man, I wish I could. I'm really overwhelmed with work right now. Trying to get an open-hardware respirator shipped right now. osrdesign.org. http://osrdesign.org

_____ *MATTHEW CARNEY, PhD | Research Affiliate *| Mechatronics Design Engineer MIT Media Lab | Biomechatronics http://biomech.media.mit.edu 75 Amherst St. | E14-274G | Cambridge, MA 02142 USA matthematic.com | @matt.thematic https://www.instagram.com/matt.thematic/ | LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/matthematic/

On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 4:24 AM Kevin Mattheus Moerman < notifications@github.com> wrote:

@cybanical https://github.com/cybanical I hope you are doing well! I think this JOSS submission looks like your cup of tea. Would you be able to help review this? (perhaps you can also update your GitHub profile with your full name and a professional link e.g. https://www.media.mit.edu/people/mcarney/overview/) Here is the short paper:

https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/blob/joss.02275/joss.02275/10.21105.joss.02275.pdf and the software: https://github.com/upb-lea/gym-electric-motor

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/2275#issuecomment-636298353, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA3L456BIDURGDEWWJ3ABNDRUC7DZANCNFSM4NOBAILQ .

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@YashBansod @moorepants @podhrmic :point_up: would you be interested in helping with this review for JOSS? Thanks.

[moorepants]

I'll review. What's the deadline?

[moorepants]

I just noticed this: https://arxiv.org/abs/1910.09434 It isn't clear if this JOSS paper would be a duplicate publication.

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@whedon assign @moorepants as reviewer

[whedon]

OK, @moorepants is now a reviewer

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

Thanks @moorepants for pointing this out:

I just noticed this: https://arxiv.org/abs/1910.09434 It isn't clear if this JOSS paper would be a duplicate publication.

It does happen, and is allowed (and sometime even encouraged), for authors to publish a long traditional paper in a different journal which describes the background, theory, and typically some research findings/conclusions obtained with the software in full. Often authors publish the JOSS paper first and refer to the JOSS paper in this more traditional long article. The review of the traditional long paper should not focus on the software though so it is not a duplicate in that sense.

Perhaps @wkirgsn can clarify more on this arxiv preprint. What is the focus of that preprint and how does it differ from this JOSS submission? Has another paper on this been published anywhere? Can you please cite any such papers in the JOSS paper as well?

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@mprice9 @JFDuval @bmagyar @tud-dri would you be interested in reviewing this submission for JOSS (The Journal of Open Source Software): gym-electric-motor (GEM): A Python toolbox for the simulation of electric drive systems

The review takes place on GitHub and focuses on this short paper: https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/blob/joss.02275/joss.02275/10.21105.joss.02275.pdf and the software: https://github.com/upb-lea/gym-electric-motor

You can tell me if you are interested by replying here. Once I have sufficient reviewers I'll open a dedicated review issue.

[wkirgsn]

Dear @moorepants and @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman,

as already pointed out by Mr. Moerman, the arxiv paper represents a traditional long paper that describes the background and theory behind electric motor control, and emphasizes the potential in data-driven learning of a control scheme through reinforcement learning, for which gym-electric-motor is a new platform. Conversely, the JOSS paper focuses on the toolbox itself and the software used.

The order of submission is due to us learning about JOSS just recently. In contrast to arxiv.org, having our toolbox included in a peer-reviewed journal that JOSS is increases the accountability and credibility of this open software.

In case of further concerns regarding overlaps, I would like to point out JOSS' preprint policy.

[bmagyar]

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Thanks for the invite but at this time I can't guarantee a timely review, I have to pass.

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@bmagyar We understand if you cannot review at this time. However, we do not expect the same "timely review" as usual given the COVID 19 crisis. We can be much more flexible with time. If given this you can help here let me know otherwise no worries and thanks for your response.

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@YashBansod @podhrmic @horychen @epezent @JFDuval @sichkar-valentyn @kimukook would you be interested in reviewing this submission for JOSS (The Journal of Open Source Software): gym-electric-motor (GEM): A Python toolbox for the simulation of electric drive systems

The review takes place on GitHub and focuses on this short paper: https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/blob/joss.02275/joss.02275/10.21105.joss.02275.pdf and the software: https://github.com/upb-lea/gym-electric-motor

You can tell me if you are interested by replying here. Once I have sufficient reviewers I'll open a dedicated review issue.

[JFDuval]

Hey Kevin,

Thank you for thinking about me but I'm not sure I'm the best reviewer. However, I can recommend someone: Alejandro Azocar (afazocar@umich.edu)

On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 4:23 AM Kevin Mattheus Moerman < notifications@github.com> wrote:

@YashBansod https://github.com/YashBansod @podhrmic https://github.com/podhrmic @horychen https://github.com/horychen @epezent https://github.com/epezent @JFDuval https://github.com/JFDuval @sichkar-valentyn https://github.com/sichkar-valentyn @kimukook https://github.com/kimukook would you be interested in reviewing this submission for JOSS (The Journal of Open Source Software) https://joss.theoj.org: gym-electric-motor (GEM): A Python toolbox for the simulation of electric drive systems

The review takes place on GitHub and focuses on this short paper:

https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/blob/joss.02275/joss.02275/10.21105.joss.02275.pdf and the software: https://github.com/upb-lea/gym-electric-motor

You can tell me if you are interested by replying here. Once I have sufficient reviewers I'll open a dedicated review issue.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/2275#issuecomment-654090515, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAXCXAWUDEQ2II2QUGMTC3DR2GCXXANCNFSM4NOBAILQ .

-- Jean-François (JF) Duval

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@JFDuval thanks. @afazocar would you be interested in reviewing this submission for JOSS (The Journal of Open Source Software): gym-electric-motor (GEM): A Python toolbox for the simulation of electric drive systems

The review takes place on GitHub and focuses on this short paper: https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/blob/joss.02275/joss.02275/10.21105.joss.02275.pdf and the software: https://github.com/upb-lea/gym-electric-motor

You can tell me if you are interested by replying here. Once I have sufficient reviewers I'll open a dedicated review issue.

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@wkirgsn if you could recommend reviewers at this point that would be helpful. Thanks.

[wkirgsn]

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman I can recommend the following experts:

• https://github.com/christiankral
• https://github.com/AHaumer
• https://github.com/dineshresearch
• https://github.com/madcowswe

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@christiankral @dineshresearch @madcowswe would you be interested in reviewing this submission for JOSS (The Journal of Open Source Software): gym-electric-motor (GEM): A Python toolbox for the simulation of electric drive systems

The review takes place on GitHub and focuses on this short paper: https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/blob/joss.02275/joss.02275/10.21105.joss.02275.pdf and the software: https://github.com/upb-lea/gym-electric-motor

You can tell me if you are interested by replying here. Once I have sufficient reviewers I'll open a dedicated review issue.

[epezent]

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman, thank you for the consideration but I don't currently have the bandwidth or experience with reinforcement learning to provide a high-quality review.

I can recommend my colleague @nathandunk

[dineshresearch]

Hello Kevin Mattheus Moerman,

I can do the review as I have the relevant experience in terms of technical expertise and I will provide my review by the end of this week

On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 4:42 PM Kevin Mattheus Moerman < notifications@github.com> wrote:

@christiankral https://github.com/christiankral @dineshresearch https://github.com/dineshresearch @madcowswe https://github.com/madcowswe would you be interested in reviewing this submission for JOSS (The Journal of Open Source Software) https://joss.theoj.org: gym-electric-motor (GEM): A Python toolbox for the simulation of electric drive systems

The review takes place on GitHub and focuses on this short paper:

https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/blob/joss.02275/joss.02275/10.21105.joss.02275.pdf and the software: https://github.com/upb-lea/gym-electric-motor

You can tell me if you are interested by replying here. Once I have sufficient reviewers I'll open a dedicated review issue.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/2275#issuecomment-657207537, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AGIAFMXYFZD6MK4DNKMIXFDR3GLBXANCNFSM4NOBAILQ .

-- Kind Regards Amara Dinesh Kumar “Alone we can do so little and together we can do much” — Helen Keller Research Info https://sites.google.com/view/dineshkumaramara/home | Github Profile https://github.com/dineshresearch | Cybersecurity-Lab@CEN https://vinayakumarr.github.io/Cybersecurity-Lab-at-CEN/ | ComputationalThinking@CEN https://vinayakumarr.github.io/ComputationalThinking-Lab-at-CEN/ | ControlsLab http://cen-controls-lab.github.io/

[christiankral]

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman I am sorry, but I have no time resources this summer to carefully review this paper.

[madcowswe]

Thanks for the invitation! I probably don't have time for a complete review, but here are some things I noticed while quickly looking at the paper:

1. Figure1: The convention I am used to (passive sign convention), the arrows for Usup and Uin should point from bottom to up (the other way).
2. Figrue1: The omega_me direction is ambigous as it's annotated to the rotation arrows in both directions
3. Figure 2: It seems that the dq frame presented for the bottom right plot (the current) is the rotor frame. However, the dq frame I am expecting for an asynchronous motor is one where the d axis is aligned to the rotor flux.

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@whedon add @dineshresearch as reviewer

[whedon]

OK, @dineshresearch is now a reviewer

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@madcowswe thanks for those comments. I'll reproduce them in the review issue. If you feel like you can provide more feedback let me know and I could still add you as a reviewer. The review may take some time so if you are able to help that would be great. If not no worries. Thanks.

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@whedon start review

[whedon]

OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/2498.