emdupre
commented
2 years ago Hi @conorheins ,
Thank you for your patience on this ! I've consulted with other JOSS editors and have outlined a list of next steps that I hope will be helpful. I'm detailing them below, and please do let me know if you have any questions in addressing them.
- [x] It would be best to directly cite the arXiv companion piece in the JOSS article such that the relationship between the two is clearly documented in the publication. This will help readers to consult the appropriate resource, as necessary, and maintain a record of both pieces. I would suggest including this citation in the
Statement of Needsection to expand on your stated goal of increasing the "accessibility and exposure of the active inference framework to researchers, engineers, and developers with diverse disciplinary backgrounds." - [x] Thank you for standardizing the arXiv references ! I received a bit more information on the best practice in formatting these. Could you please modify them to include the
eprint,archivePrefix, andprimaryClassfields? So, for example, for millidge2021understanding the reference would be:@misc{millidge2021understanding, title={Understanding the origin of information-seeking exploration in probabilistic objectives for control}, author={Millidge, Beren and Tschantz, Alexander and Seth, Anil and Buckley, Christopher}, eprint={2103.06859v7}, archivePrefix={arXiv}, primaryClass={cs.LG}, year={2021} }- [x] For
van2021chance, could you update the reference from the arXiv preprint to the published Neural Computation article:@article{10.1162/neco_a_01427, author={van de Laar, Thijs and Senoz, Ismail and {\"O}z{\c{c}}elikkale, Ay{\c{c}}a and Wymeersch, Henk}, title = {Chance-Constrained Active Inference}, journal = {Neural Computation}, volume = {33}, number = {10}, pages = {2710-2735}, year = {2021}, month = {09}, issn = {0899-7667}, doi = {10.1162/neco_a_01427}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1162/neco\_a\_01427}, eprint = {https://direct.mit.edu/neco/article-pdf/33/10/2710/1963501/neco\_a\_01427.pdf}, }
- [x] For
Pending these changes, could you then please:
- [x] Make a tagged release of your software, and list the version tag of the archived version here.
- [x] Archive the reviewed software in Zenodo or a similar service (e.g., figshare, an institutional repository)
- [x] Check the archival deposit (e.g., in Zenodo) has the correct metadata (e.g., the JOSS paper and software archive have the same title and author listing)
- [x] List the DOI of the archived version here.
I can then move forward with accepting the submission 🚀
conorheins
editorialbot
kyleniemeyer
Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@conorheins<!--end-author-handle-- (Conor Heins) Repository: https://github.com/infer-actively/pymdp Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): master Version: v0.0.5 Editor: !--editor-->@emdupre<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @seankmartin, @patrickmineault Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.6484849
: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:
Reviewers and authors:
Please avoid lengthy details of difficulties in the review thread. Instead, please create a new issue in the target repository and link to those issues (especially acceptance-blockers) by leaving comments in the review thread below. (For completists: if the target issue tracker is also on GitHub, linking the review thread in the issue or vice versa will create corresponding breadcrumb trails in the link target.)
Reviewer instructions & questions
@seankmartin & @patrickmineault, please carry out your review in this issue by updating the checklist below. If you cannot edit the checklist please:
The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @emdupre know.
✨ Please start on your review when you are able, and be sure to complete your review in the next six weeks, at the very latest ✨
Review checklist for @seankmartin
✨ Important: Please do not use the Convert to issue functionality when working through this checklist, instead, please open any new issues associated with your review in the software repository associated with the submission. ✨
Conflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper
Review checklist for @patrickmineault
✨ Important: Please do not use the Convert to issue functionality when working through this checklist, instead, please open any new issues associated with your review in the software repository associated with the submission. ✨
Conflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper