search

openjournals / joss-reviews

Reviews for the Journal of Open Source Software
Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal
707 stars 37 forks source link

[REVIEW]: CRE: An R package for interpretable discovery and inference of heterogeneous treatment effects #5587

Closed editorialbot closed 9 months ago

editorialbot commented 1 year ago

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@naeemkh<!--end-author-handle-- (Naeem Khoshnevis) Repository: https://github.com/NSAPH-Software/CRE Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): JOSS Version: ver0.2.5 Editor: !--editor-->@spholmes<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @salleuska, @carlyls Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.10278296

Status

status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/86a406543801a395248821c08c7ec03d"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/86a406543801a395248821c08c7ec03d/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/86a406543801a395248821c08c7ec03d/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/86a406543801a395248821c08c7ec03d)

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

@salleuska & @carlyls, 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:

@editorialbot generate my checklist

The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @spholmes know.

✨ 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 ✨

Checklists

📝 Checklist for @salleuska

📝 Checklist for @carlyls

editorialbot commented 9 months ago 
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1111/insr.12427 is OK
- 10.1214/21-aoas1579 is OK
- 10.1073/pnas.1510489113 is OK
- 10.1016/j.artint.2018.07.007 is OK
- 10.1145/2939672.2939874 is OK
- 10.1287/ijoc.2021.1143 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2009.09036 is OK
- 10.1002/sim.4322 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2008.00707 is OK
- 10.1214/19-BA1195 is OK
- 10.1287/ijoc.2021.1143 is OK
- 10.1145/3368555.3384456 is OK
- 10.1214/aos/1032181158 is OK
- 10.1007/978-0-387-21606-5 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4614-6849-3 is OK
- 10.1002/sim.8924 is OK
- 10.1111/j.1467-9868.2010.00740.x is OK
- 10.1198/jcgs.2010.08162 is OK
- 10.1214/18-AOS1709 is OK
- 10.2307/2290910 is OK
- 10.1002/dir.10035 is OK
- 10.1073/pnas.1804597116 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None
Naeemkh commented 9 months ago

Thanks @spholmes, we found two other references and corrected them.

We released the package on CRAN: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/CRE/index.html (v0.2.5) Also we archived the release on Zenodo: https://zenodo.org/records/10278296 DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.10278296

Please let us know if we need to take any other actions. Thanks, The authors

spholmes commented 9 months ago

@editorialbot generate pdf

editorialbot commented 9 months ago

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

spholmes commented 9 months ago

@editorialbot set 10.5281/zenodo.10278296 as archive

editorialbot commented 9 months ago

Done! archive is now 10.5281/zenodo.10278296

spholmes commented 9 months ago

@editorialbot set v0.2.5 as version

editorialbot commented 9 months ago

Done! version is now v0.2.5

spholmes commented 9 months ago

@Naeemkh , thanks to @carlyls and @salleuska for all the help with reviewing, I am going to recommend to the EIC that we accept the paper now.

spholmes commented 9 months ago

@editorialbot recommend-accept

editorialbot commented 9 months ago 
Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...
editorialbot commented 9 months ago 
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1111/insr.12427 is OK
- 10.1214/21-aoas1579 is OK
- 10.1073/pnas.1510489113 is OK
- 10.1016/j.artint.2018.07.007 is OK
- 10.1145/2939672.2939874 is OK
- 10.1287/ijoc.2021.1143 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2009.09036 is OK
- 10.1002/sim.4322 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2008.00707 is OK
- 10.1214/19-BA1195 is OK
- 10.1287/ijoc.2021.1143 is OK
- 10.1145/3368555.3384456 is OK
- 10.1214/aos/1032181158 is OK
- 10.1007/978-0-387-21606-5 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4614-6849-3 is OK
- 10.1002/sim.8924 is OK
- 10.1111/j.1467-9868.2010.00740.x is OK
- 10.1198/jcgs.2010.08162 is OK
- 10.1214/18-AOS1709 is OK
- 10.2307/2290910 is OK
- 10.1002/dir.10035 is OK
- 10.1073/pnas.1804597116 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None
editorialbot commented 9 months ago

:warning: Error preparing paper acceptance. The generated XML metadata file is invalid. 

ID ref-wang2022causal already defined
Naeemkh commented 9 months ago

Thanks, @spholmes. I have removed the duplicate reference. Could you please rerun the last command? Thank you.

spholmes commented 9 months ago

@editorialbot recommend-accept

editorialbot commented 9 months ago 
Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...
editorialbot commented 9 months ago 
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1111/insr.12427 is OK
- 10.1214/21-aoas1579 is OK
- 10.1073/pnas.1510489113 is OK
- 10.1016/j.artint.2018.07.007 is OK
- 10.1145/2939672.2939874 is OK
- 10.1287/ijoc.2021.1143 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2009.09036 is OK
- 10.1002/sim.4322 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2008.00707 is OK
- 10.1214/19-BA1195 is OK
- 10.1145/3368555.3384456 is OK
- 10.1214/aos/1032181158 is OK
- 10.1007/978-0-387-21606-5 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4614-6849-3 is OK
- 10.1002/sim.8924 is OK
- 10.1111/j.1467-9868.2010.00740.x is OK
- 10.1198/jcgs.2010.08162 is OK
- 10.1214/18-AOS1709 is OK
- 10.2307/2290910 is OK
- 10.1002/dir.10035 is OK
- 10.1073/pnas.1804597116 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None
editorialbot commented 9 months ago

:wave: @openjournals/bcm-eics, this paper is ready to be accepted and published.

Check final proof :point_right::page_facing_up: Download article

If the paper PDF and the deposit XML files look good in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/pull/4820, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the command @editorialbot accept

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented 9 months ago

@Naeemkh I am the AEiC and here to help process final steps. I have checked the paper, this review, your repository, and the archive link. Most is in order, however I do have the below points that require your attention:

On the archive link:

On the paper:

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented 9 months ago

@editorialbot set ver0.2.5 as version

editorialbot commented 9 months ago

Done! version is now ver0.2.5

Naeemkh commented 9 months ago

Thanks @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman, I fixed the paper related issues and pushed the changes. However, I am not sure about the version. Should I take any action for that? Please let me know.

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented 9 months ago

@editorialbot generate pdf

editorialbot commented 9 months ago

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

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented 9 months ago

@Naeemkh yes please manually edit the archive on ZENODO to update the version tag to match the one we've assigned here (which also matches your GitHub listed version tag). Thanks

Naeemkh commented 9 months ago

Thanks for clarifying. I updated the version on Zenodo. Now it reads ver0.2.5. Thanks.

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented 9 months ago

@editorialbot accept

editorialbot commented 9 months ago 
Doing it live! Attempting automated processing of paper acceptance...
editorialbot commented 9 months ago

Ensure proper citation by uploading a plain text CITATION.cff file to the default branch of your repository.

If using GitHub, a Cite this repository menu will appear in the About section, containing both APA and BibTeX formats. When exported to Zotero using a browser plugin, Zotero will automatically create an entry using the information contained in the .cff file.

You can copy the contents for your CITATION.cff file here:

CITATION.cff

``` cff-version: "1.2.0" authors: - family-names: Cadei given-names: Riccardo orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2416-8943" - family-names: Khoshnevis given-names: Naeem orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4315-1426" - family-names: Lee given-names: Kwonsang orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5823-4331" - family-names: Garcia given-names: Daniela Maria orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3226-3561" - family-names: Stoffi given-names: Falco J. Bargagli orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6131-8165" contact: - family-names: Khoshnevis given-names: Naeem orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4315-1426" doi: 10.5281/zenodo.10278296 message: If you use this software, please cite our article in the Journal of Open Source Software. preferred-citation: authors: - family-names: Cadei given-names: Riccardo orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2416-8943" - family-names: Khoshnevis given-names: Naeem orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4315-1426" - family-names: Lee given-names: Kwonsang orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5823-4331" - family-names: Garcia given-names: Daniela Maria orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3226-3561" - family-names: Stoffi given-names: Falco J. Bargagli orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6131-8165" date-published: 2023-12-15 doi: 10.21105/joss.05587 issn: 2475-9066 issue: 92 journal: Journal of Open Source Software publisher: name: Open Journals start: 5587 title: "CRE: An R package for interpretable discovery and inference of heterogeneous treatment effects" type: article url: "https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.05587" volume: 8 title: "CRE: An R package for interpretable discovery and inference of heterogeneous treatment effects" ```

If the repository is not hosted on GitHub, a .cff file can still be uploaded to set your preferred citation. Users will be able to manually copy and paste the citation.

Find more information on .cff files here and here.

editorialbot commented 9 months ago

🐘🐘🐘 👉 Toot for this paper 👈 🐘🐘🐘

editorialbot commented 9 months ago

🚨🚨🚨 THIS IS NOT A DRILL, YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED A PAPER INTO JOSS! 🚨🚨🚨

Here's what you must now do:

  1. Check final PDF and Crossref metadata that was deposited :point_right: https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/pull/4845
  2. Wait five minutes, then verify that the paper DOI resolves https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.05587
  3. If everything looks good, then close this review issue.
  4. Party like you just published a paper! 🎉🌈🦄💃👻🤘

Any issues? Notify your editorial technical team...

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented 9 months ago

@Naeemkh congratulations on this JOSS publication! :christmas_tree: :gift: :partying_face:

Thanks for editing @spholmes ! And a special thank you to the reviewers: @salleuska, @carlyls !

editorialbot commented 9 months ago

:tada::tada::tada: Congratulations on your paper acceptance! :tada::tada::tada:

If you would like to include a link to your paper from your README use the following code snippets:

Markdown:
[![DOI](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.05587/status.svg)](https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.05587)

HTML:
<a style="border-width:0" href="https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.05587">
  <img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.05587/status.svg" alt="DOI badge" >
</a>

reStructuredText:
.. image:: https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.05587/status.svg
   :target: https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.05587

This is how it will look in your documentation:

DOI

We need your help!

The Journal of Open Source Software is a community-run journal and relies upon volunteer effort. If you'd like to support us please consider doing either one (or both) of the the following:

Naeemkh commented 9 months ago

I would like to express my profound gratitude to all who have contributed to this submission. Special thanks go to @spholmes for the meticulous editorial work. I am also deeply appreciative of the valuable contributions and insights from our esteemed reviewers, @salleuska and @carlyls. My heartfelt thanks also extend to @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman for expertly facilitating and moderating the process.