[PRE REVIEW]: SolvationAnalysis: A Python toolkit for understanding liquid solvation structure in classical molecular dynamics simulations

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@orionarcher<!--end-author-handle-- (Orion Cohen) Repository: https://github.com/MDAnalysis/solvation-analysis Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: v0.2.0 Editor: !--editor-->@zhubonan<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @amritagos, @arose Managing EiC: Daniel S. Katz

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/96ae8210fc318e903cf6461fb3b979fc"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/96ae8210fc318e903cf6461fb3b979fc/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/96ae8210fc318e903cf6461fb3b979fc/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/96ae8210fc318e903cf6461fb3b979fc)

Author instructions

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

@orionarcher 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=0.12 s (575.5 files/s, 99269.7 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                          29           1146           2606           3804
Markdown                        10            113              1            409
Jupyter Notebook                 7              0           2741            324
YAML                             8             33             24            179
TeX                              1             12              0            141
reStructuredText                10             23             31             45
Bourne Shell                     1              5              8             28
DOS Batch                        1              8              1             27
make                             1              4              6             10
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            68           1344           5418           4967
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1002/jcc.21787 is OK
- 10.25080/majora-629e541a-00e is OK
- 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 is OK
- 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55 is OK
- 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 is OK
- 10.5281/zenodo.3509134 is OK
- 10.1016/j.nanoen.2019.103881 is OK
- 10.1021/acsami.1c23934 is OK
- 10.1021/acsenergylett.9b02118 is OK
- 10.1126/sciadv.adc9721 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 509

[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]

@editorialbot invite @richardjgowers as editor

[editorialbot]

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@editorialbot invite @zhubonan as editor

[editorialbot]

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

[zhubonan]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @zhubonan is now the editor

[zhubonan]

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

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

# List all available commands
@editorialbot commands

# Add to this issue's reviewers list
@editorialbot add @username as reviewer

# Remove from this issue's reviewers list
@editorialbot remove @username from reviewers

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

# Assign a user as the editor of this submission
@editorialbot assign @username as editor

# Remove the editor assigned to this submission
@editorialbot remove editor

# Remind an author, a reviewer or the editor to return to a review after a 
# certain period of time (supported units days and weeks)
@editorialbot remind @reviewer in 2 weeks

# 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 version
@editorialbot set v1.0.0 as version

# Set a value for archive
@editorialbot set 10.21105/zenodo.12345 as archive

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

# Set a value for repository
@editorialbot set https://github.com/organization/repo as repository

# Mention the EiCs for the correct track
@editorialbot ping track-eic

# Generates the pdf paper
@editorialbot generate pdf

# Recommends the submission for acceptance
@editorialbot recommend-accept

# Generates a LaTeX preprint file
@editorialbot generate preprint

# Flag submission with questionable scope
@editorialbot query scope

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

# Open the review issue
@editorialbot start review

[zhubonan]

@orionarcher Thanks for your submission to JOSS 🚀. I have started the process of finding potential reviewers.

It would be very useful if you can suggest some potential reviewers with expertise in the area. Please do not directly @ them under this issue at this stage. Thanks!

[zhubonan]

We have found two reviewers - @amritagos and @arose who have kindly agreed to review the package.

[zhubonan]

@editorialbot add @amritagos as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@amritagos added to the reviewers list!

[zhubonan]

@editorialbot add @arose as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@arose added to the reviewers list!

[zhubonan]

@editorialbot list reviewers

[editorialbot]

Here's the current list of reviewers: https://bit.ly/joss-reviewers

[zhubonan]

@editorialbot start review

[orionarcher]

Thanks for administrating @zhubonan!

[zhubonan]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/5183.