[PRE REVIEW]: Starmatrix: Modelling nucleosynthesis of galactic chemical elements

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@xuanxu<!--end-author-handle-- (Juanjo Bazán) Repository: https://github.com/xuanxu/starmatrix Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: v1.7.0 Editor: !--editor-->@danielskatz<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @CFGrote, @ygrange Managing EiC: Kevin M. Moerman

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/35c924541de86ca264e090f0b80efbd7"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/35c924541de86ca264e090f0b80efbd7/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/35c924541de86ca264e090f0b80efbd7/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/35c924541de86ca264e090f0b80efbd7)

Author instructions

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

@xuanxu 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 @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=0.06 s (645.1 files/s, 77997.8 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                          25            808            403           2261
reStructuredText                 9            260             52            714
Markdown                         3             52              0            131
TeX                              1              9              0            128
YAML                             2              7             73             40
make                             1              4              6              9
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            41           1140            534           3283
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1086/171066 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stx419 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361/201730522 is OK
- 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 is OK
- 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361:20053590 is OK
- 10.1007/978-94-017-1778-6_6 is OK
- 10.1086/392523 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-4365/aad691 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 885

[editorialbot]

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

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@xuanxu thanks for this submission. Our editors in this domain are currently all busy handling other submissions. Hence I've assigned the wait listed label. We will assign an editor once one becomes available.

[xuanxu]

@editorialbot check references

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1086/171066 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stx419 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361/201730522 is OK
- 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 is OK
- 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361:20053590 is OK
- 10.1007/978-94-017-1778-6_6 is OK
- 10.1086/392523 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-4365/aad691 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- Errored finding suggestions for "Galactic chemical enrichment with new metallicity ...", please try later

INVALID DOIs

- None

[danielskatz]

@xuanxu - I'll go ahead and take this as editor. Can you suggest some reviewers, as discussed in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/4409#issue-1243170590 ?

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @danielskatz is now the editor

[xuanxu]

A few suggestions for potential reviewers:

zpace
bmorris3
nespinoza
hayesla 
CFGrote

[danielskatz]

👋 @zpace & @bmorris3 - Would either or both of you be willing to review this submission for JOSS?

[danielskatz]

👋 @nespinoza & @hayesla - Would either or both of you be willing to review this submission for JOSS?

[danielskatz]

👋 @CFGrote - Would you be willing to review this submission for JOSS?

[nespinoza]

Hey @danielskatz! Sorry, can't; very busy until August. Sorry!

[CFGrote]

Hi @danielskatz, happily accepting your invitation to review this submission.

[danielskatz]

Thanks @CFGrote - I'll add you in the system, but we won't actually start the review until we find one more reviewer

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot add @CFGrote as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@CFGrote added to the reviewers list!

[danielskatz]

👋 @xuanxu - do you have any more suggestions for potential reviewers?

[bmorris3]

Hi @danielskatz, sorry I'm busy with an international move for a bit.

[hayesla]

hi @danielskatz - I'm really sorry but I will not have time to review this over the next few weeks! Apologies

[danielskatz]

👋 @xuanxu - I could really use a few more suggestions for possible reviewers

[xuanxu]

@danielskatz here are some more options:

barentsen
ygrange
jessie-dotson
benjaminrose
warrickball
HeloiseS
mattpitkin

[danielskatz]

👋 @barentsen & @ygrange - We need one more reviewer for this submission - Are either of you willing?

[ygrange]

Oh that actually looks interesting, I have done some abundance stuff in the past so I could pick it up. But I have to say that I will probably have zero time the coming two weeks, so at earliest I could start looking at this in three weeks.

[danielskatz]

Thanks @ygrange - that sounds fine. I'll add you and start the review, with the understanding that you may not start immediately. I probably also will forget this and will ask you how things are going too soon, so please remind me of my error then :)

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot add @ygrange as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@ygrange added to the reviewers list!

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/4461.