[PRE REVIEW]: PyKronecker: A Python Library for the Efficient Manipulation of Kronecker Products and Related Structures

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@nickelnine37<!--end-author-handle-- (Edward Antonian) Repository: https://github.com/nickelnine37/pykronecker Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: 0.1.1 Editor: !--editor-->@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @JulianKarlBauer, @nicoguaro Managing EiC: Arfon Smith

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/0946dc0f465819544e228a6acb96bf24"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/0946dc0f465819544e228a6acb96bf24/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/0946dc0f465819544e228a6acb96bf24/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/0946dc0f465819544e228a6acb96bf24)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @nickelnine37. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@nickelnine37 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=0.04 s (967.8 files/s, 124431.4 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SVG                              1              0             17           1360
Python                          14            624            399           1113
Markdown                        18            425              0            894
TeX                              1             23              0            155
YAML                             4             13              5             82
INI                              1              2              0             21
TOML                             1              2              0              8
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            40           1089            421           3633
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 1450

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1109/TNNLS.2017.2727545 is OK
- 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 is OK
- 10.1109/TC.1981.6312174 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- 10.21105/jcon.00015 may be a valid DOI for title: A general-purpose toolbox for efficient Kronecker-based learning
- 10.1137/141000671 may be a valid DOI for title: Julia: A fresh approach to numerical computing
- 10.1090/s0025-5718-1973-0395196-6 may be a valid DOI for title: Efficient Computer Manipulation of Tensor Products with Applications to Multidimensional Approximation
- 10.1145/355826.355831 may be a valid DOI for title: Efficient Computer Manipulation of Tensor Products

INVALID DOIs

- https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-0427(00)00393-9 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.softx.2019.100361 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix

[arfon]

@editorialbot query scope

@nickelnine37 – 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.

[nickelnine37]

Thank you for you comments. Here is a list of people who could be potential reviewers, extracted from your suggested list:

janfb victorapm Athene-ai fredstro turgeonmaxime Daniel-Dodd fabian-sp mdhaber max-little tonyewong mhu48

[nickelnine37]

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello @nickelnine37, here are the things you can ask me to do:

# List all available commands
@editorialbot commands

# Get a list of all editors's GitHub handles
@editorialbot list editors

# Check the references of the paper for missing DOIs
@editorialbot check references

# Perform checks on the repository
@editorialbot check repository

# Adds a checklist for the reviewer using this command
@editorialbot generate my checklist

# Set a value for branch
@editorialbot set joss-paper as branch

# Generates the pdf paper
@editorialbot generate pdf

# Generates a LaTeX preprint file
@editorialbot generate preprint

# Get a link to the complete list of reviewers
@editorialbot list reviewers

[nickelnine37]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

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

[nickelnine37]

@editorialbot check references

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1109/TNNLS.2017.2727545 is OK
- 10.1016/S0377-0427(00)00393-9 is OK
- 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 is OK
- 10.1016/j.softx.2019.100361 is OK
- 10.21105/jcon.00015 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.1502.05767 is OK
- 10.1137/141000671 is OK
- 10.2307/3609497 is OK
- 10.1090/s0025-5718-1973-0395196-6 is OK
- 10.1145/355826.355831 is OK
- 10.1109/TC.1981.6312174 is OK
- 10.1145/225545.225548 is OK
- 10.1145/3291041 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[kthyng]

Hi @nickelnine37! The editorial board is enthusiastic about this submission. I will remove the scope query label now.

[kthyng]

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman did you want to edit this one?

[kthyng]

@editorialbot invite @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman as editor

[editorialbot]

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman is now the editor

[nickelnine37]

Hi, @kthyng - thank you for progressing this on,

And thank you @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman for agreeing to edit - greatly appreciated.

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@nickelnine37 you are welcome. I will be looking for reviewers. Let me know if you'd like to suggest reviewers at this time. If so, please mentioned their GitHub handles here but leave out the @ symbol so they are not tagged yet.

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@dfm @nicoguaro @likask @lizarett @JulianKarlBauer would be interested in reviewing this work for JOSS? Also let me know if I am relying on your review efforts too often :) thank you so much for the help some of you have provided to us in the past already!!!!

[nickelnine37]

Thanks @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman. Here are some names I took from the bottom of the provided spreadsheet who could also be a good match for review.

janfb victorapm Athene-ai fredstro turgeonmaxime Daniel-Dodd fabian-sp mdhaber max-little tonyewong mhu48

[nickelnine37]

@mikechantler

[JulianKarlBauer]

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman I am interested in reviewing the PyKronecker contribution to JOSS.

[nicoguaro]

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman, I can help. As I mentioned in Twitter, I might go a little bit slower with this one.

[nickelnine37]

@bev-o-neill

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@editorialbot add @JulianKarlBauer as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@JulianKarlBauer added to the reviewers list!

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@editorialbot add @nicoguaro as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@nicoguaro added to the reviewers list!

[nickelnine37]

@garethpeters78

[nickelnine37]

Thanks @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman, and thank you @nicoguaro, @JulianKarlBauer for agreeing to review. @mikechantler, @garethpeters78 and I all look forward to your feedback.

One thought I have is that, in order to reproduce the performance claims in the paper, some config is required, especially to run on a GPU. I don't think Binder supports GPUs, so perhaps the best option would be to use Google colab, or maybe just provide a Docker file to run in GPU-capable cloud environment. Let me know if you have any thoughts on this.

[danielskatz]

👋 @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman - I see you have 2 reviewers signed up. Do you think you need another, or is this ready to start the review process?

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/4900.