Closed editorialbot closed 5 months ago
Hello humans, 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
Software report:
github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88 T=0.02 s (1630.1 files/s, 128369.0 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language files blank comment code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R 23 96 354 1206
XML 1 0 2 441
Markdown 3 52 0 151
TeX 1 11 0 99
YAML 3 17 8 80
Bourne Shell 1 1 0 2
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM: 32 177 364 1979
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository
Wordcount for paper.md
is 708
:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
OK DOIs
- 10.1137/141000671 is OK
- 10.1007/s10260-022-00655-0 is OK
- 10.5281/zenodo.7488440 is OK
- 10.18637/jss.v082.i05 is OK
MISSING DOIs
- 10.3150/18-bej1057 may be a valid DOI for title: Bootstrapping INAR Models
- 10.1111/j.1752-1688.1985.tb05379.x may be a valid DOI for title: Some simple models for discrete variate time series
- 10.1214/aop/1176994950 may be a valid DOI for title: Discrete analogues of self-decomposability and stability
INVALID DOIs
- None
Opened an issue over at the package Repo (HERE) for comments and questions.
:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:
I completed the checklist, the issues I opened have been addressed.
:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:
Hello @SaranjeetKaur just checking in! How are things going on your end for this review? :)
Hey @SaranjeetKaur, @crsl4, just a kindly reminder that we are still waiting for the second review :)
Hi Folks! As much as I want to do this, I have a very tight schedule currently. Hence, I would request you to relieve me from this.
Hi @SaranjeetKaur I am happy to wait for you to complete this review. How much time do you think you would need?
I am occupied until mid October.
It is so hard to find reviewers, so let's do this! I will try to find a reviewer to replace you, but if unsuccessful, we'll welcome your review in mid-October. Thanks @SaranjeetKaur !
@MFaymon Please share any recommendations of reviewers that you might have. Thanks!
I suggest Dr. Philipp Wittenberg from Helmut-Schmidt-University Hamburg as reviewer. Part of his research deals with autoregressive counts. I suppose that @wittenberg is his GitHub profile.
Hello @wittenberg, would you be interested in reviewing this manuscript? Thanks for considering it!
Hi @crsl4, I can do the review for this manuscript.
Thank you Philipp!
@editorialbot add @wittenberg as reviewer
@wittenberg added to the reviewers list!
@editorialbot please provide Review checklist
I'm sorry human, I don't understand that. You can see what commands I support by typing:
@editorialbot commands
Hello @wittenberg @SaranjeetKaur, any updates on reviews? Thanks!
Hi @crsl4,
Sorry, I don't have the time to pick up on this!
Hello @wittenberg any updates on your review?
Tagging also @SaranjeetKaur in case your plate is clearer now and could finish the review π€.
I have created an issue at the package repository (https://github.com/MFaymon/spINAR/issues/5) to encourage discussion and feedback.
thank you! @MFaymon can you take a look?
Thanks a lot for the review @wittenberg! I adressed all the suggestions for improvement, see (https://github.com/MFaymon/spINAR/issues/5), @crsl4.
@MFaymon Thank you for considering and implementing the suggestions. @crsl4 and @editorialbot, all the issues have been addressed.
@crsl4 Does anything else need to be done from my side?
@crsl4 β I think this submission is good to move forward to the last checks before recommending acceptance here?
Yes, that's true! I'll do the last checks.
@editorialbot set <DOI here> as archive
@editorialbot set <version here> as version
@editorialbot generate pdf
@editorialbot check references
and ask author(s) to update as needed@editorialbot recommend-accept
@MFaymon please go over the authors' tasks, and I will do the editor's tasks.
Version number of latest submission to CRAN: v0.2.0 DOI of latest Zenodo release: 10.5281/zenodo.10944202
The latest CRAN release is not published yet but submitted and on it's way. We also checked the other author's tasks, so there should be nothing left to do from our side :)
Now, the latest CRAN release has been published, @crsl4 .
@crsl4 just a gentle reminder that everything is completed here from the author's side
Yes, sorry for the slowness! I have a difficult deadline for May 3, but I will do this immediately after that.
@editorialbot generate pdf
:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:
@editorialbot check references
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
OK DOIs
- 10.1137/141000671 is OK
- 10.1007/s10260-022-00655-0 is OK
- 10.5281/zenodo.7488440 is OK
- 10.18637/jss.v082.i05 is OK
MISSING DOIs
- No DOI given, and none found for title: First-order integer-valued autoregressive (INAR(1)...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Efficient estimation of auto-regression parameters...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: The integer valued autoregressive (INAR(p)) model
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Conditional maximum-likelihood estimates for INAR(...
- 10.1111/j.1467-9892.2012.00809.x may be a valid DOI for title: First-order integer valued AR processes with zero ...
- 10.3150/18-bej1057 may be a valid DOI for title: Bootstrapping INAR Models
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Some simple models for discrete variate time serie...
- 10.1016/j.ijforecast.2004.11.001 may be a valid DOI for title: Bayesian predictions of low count time series
- 10.1214/aop/1176994950 may be a valid DOI for title: Discrete analogues of self-decomposability and sta...
- 10.1002/(sici)1099-095x(199907/08)10:4<395::aid-env364>3.3.co;2-d may be a valid DOI for title: Integer valued autoregressive models for tipping b...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: An Introduction to Discrete-Valued Time Series
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Categorical Times Series Analysis and Applications...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Comp...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: ZINARp: Simulate INAR/ZINAR(p) Models and Estimate...
INVALID DOIs
- None
@editorialbot set v0.2.0 as version
Done! version is now v0.2.0
Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@MFaymon<!--end-author-handle-- (Maxime Faymonville) Repository: https://github.com/MFaymon/spINAR Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: v0.2.0 Editor: !--editor-->@crsl4<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @ManuelStapper, @SaranjeetKaur, @wittenberg Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.10944202
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
@ManuelStapper & @SaranjeetKaur, your review will be checklist based. Each of you will have a separate checklist that you should update when carrying out your review. First of all you need to run this command in a separate comment to create the checklist:
The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @crsl4 know.
β¨ 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 β¨
Checklists
π Checklist for @ManuelStapper
π Checklist for @SaranjeetKaur
π Checklist for @wittenberg