[PRE REVIEW]: Correlated random walk propagation of cosmic rays in magnetic turbulence

[whedon]

Submitting author: @reichherzerp (Patrick Reichherzer) Repository: https://gitlab.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/reichp2y/rwpropa Version: v1.0.0 Editor: Pending Reviewer: Pending Managing EiC: Kristen Thyng

: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.

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/e9f493bd20e903f98a484a971c6f646a"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/e9f493bd20e903f98a484a971c6f646a/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/e9f493bd20e903f98a484a971c6f646a/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/e9f493bd20e903f98a484a971c6f646a)

Author instructions

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

@reichherzerp 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

[kthyng]

@whedon check repository

[whedon]

Wordcount for paper.md is 1681

[whedon]

Software report (experimental):

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.04 s (411.3 files/s, 112243.6 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                          11            536            938           1022
TeX                              1             21              0            335
Markdown                         2            115              0            267
Jupyter Notebook                 4              0           1480            198
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            18            672           2418           1822
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statistical information for the repository '7e45917b17f32406071af444' was
gathered on 2021/09/24.
The following historical commit information, by author, was found:

Author                     Commits    Insertions      Deletions    % of changes
Patrick Reichherzer            264          4828           1988          100.00

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
Patrick Reichherzer        2496           51.7          0.8               12.54

[kthyng]

Hi @reichherzerp and thanks for your submission. Since it is on the border of our acceptable size, I am going to ping the editorial board to check it out in more detail to make sure it is in scope. This process will take 1-2 weeks, thanks for your patience.

[kthyng]

@whedon query scope

[whedon]

Submission flagged for editorial review.

[danielskatz]

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

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

[danielskatz]

@whedon check references

[whedon]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1088/0004-637X/806/2/217 is OK
- 10.1088/1674-4527/16/10/162 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-4357/ab643b is OK
- 10.22323/1.395.0468 is OK
- 10.1098/rsif.2008.0014 is OK
- 10.1086/148912 is OK
- 10.1063/1.4928940 is OK
- 10.1063/1.4807033 is OK
- 10.1088/1475-7516/2017/06/046 is OK
- 10.1088/1475-7516/2016/05/038 is OK
- 10.1088/1475-7516/2017/02/015 is OK
- 10.1086/306470 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/staa2533 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevD.65.023002 is OK
- 10.1086/307452 is OK
- 10.1016/j.physrep.2020.05.002 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-4365/ac1517 is OK
- 10.3847/2041-8213/aa6aa6 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- 10.22323/1.395.0978 may be a valid DOI for title: CRPropa 3.2: a framework for high-energy astroparticle propagation

INVALID DOIs

- None

[kyleniemeyer]

Hello @reichherzerp, thanks for your patience. We have reviewed your submission, and have decided that your submission is out of scope at this time, due to not meeting the substantial scholarly effort criterion for review by JOSS.

However, we do think that this could be reviewed by JOSS if you add tests and proper packaging, and make it a bit easier for reviewers to verify the performance claims. If you can improve on those three areas, we would welcome a resubmission.

Alternatively, we have other suggestions for how you might receive credit for your work as is.

[kyleniemeyer]

@whedon reject

[whedon]

Paper rejected.