[PRE REVIEW]: easyVAF: an R package for integrated VAF analysis

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@zhuangyh<!--end-author-handle-- (Yonghua Zhuang) Repository: https://github.com/zhuangyh/easyVAF Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: v0.1.0 Editor: Pending Reviewers: Pending Managing EiC: Arfon Smith

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/60bf09482937483be1d4a480ed90d6e1"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/60bf09482937483be1d4a480ed90d6e1/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/60bf09482937483be1d4a480ed90d6e1/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/60bf09482937483be1d4a480ed90d6e1)

Author instructions

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

@zhuangyh 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=0.03 s (370.7 files/s, 128584.8 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
XML                              1              0            133           1781
R                                4            149            107            573
Markdown                         2            104              0            292
TeX                              1             18              0            155
Rmd                              2            135            229            117
YAML                             1              1              4             18
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            11            407            473           2936
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for easyVAF_paper.md is 2076

[editorialbot]

:warning: An error happened when generating the pdf.

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.18637/jss.v067.i01 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- 10.2307/2346223 may be a valid DOI for title: Beta-Binomial Anova for Proportions
- 10.1080/01621459.1986.10478275 may be a valid DOI for title: Binary regression using an extended beta-binomial distribution, with discussion of correlation induced by covariate measurement errors
- 10.1093/biomet/66.3.585 may be a valid DOI for title: Testing the goodness of fit of the binomial distribution
- 10.2307/2529820 may be a valid DOI for title: 394: The analysis of binary responses from toxicological experiments involving reproduction and teratogenicity
- 10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x may be a valid DOI for title: Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing

INVALID DOIs

- None

[arfon]

@editorialbot query scope

@zhuangyh – due to the small size of this code, the editors will now discuss if it meets the substantial scholarly effort criterion for review by JOSS. We should get back to you sometime next week.

[editorialbot]

Submission flagged for editorial review.

[arfon]

@editorialbot reject

@zhuangyh – thanks for your submission to JOSS. Unfortunately, after review by the JOSS editorial team we've determined that this submission doesn't meet our substantial scholarly effort criterion.

One possible alternative to JOSS is to follow GitHub's guide on how to create a permanent archive and DOI for your software. This DOI can then be used by others to cite your work.

[editorialbot]

Paper rejected.