[PRE REVIEW]: REMix: A GAMS-based framework for energy system optimization models

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@mwetz<!--end-author-handle-- (Manuel Wetzel) Repository: https://gitlab.com/dlr-ve/esy/remix/framework Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): joss Version: 0.9.2 Editor: !--editor-->@fraukewiese<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @loeffko, @david-huck Managing EiC: Kyle Niemeyer

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/2aea6e13a5f7d48f9ebaf166f1a24aca"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/2aea6e13a5f7d48f9ebaf166f1a24aca/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/2aea6e13a5f7d48f9ebaf166f1a24aca/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/2aea6e13a5f7d48f9ebaf166f1a24aca)

Author instructions

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

@mwetz if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). You can search the list of people that have already agreed to review and may be suitable for this submission.

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=2.49 s (102.5 files/s, 495911.4 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JSON                            44              1              0        1136515
SVG                             42             44            125          76640
Python                          53           1490           2952           7481
Markdown                        61           1650              1           4600
YAML                            49            123            181            902
TeX                              2             39              0            390
TOML                             1              8              0            140
make                             1             12              0             28
CSS                              1              3              0             13
HTML                             1              0              0              6
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                           255           3370           3259        1226715
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 1233

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.12.023 is OK
- 10.1016/j.energy.2017.01.115 is OK
- 10.1016/j.renene.2016.12.043 is OK
- 10.3389/fenrg.2020.541495 is OK
- 10.1016/j.rser.2014.02.003 is OK
- 10.18419/opus-2015 is OK
- 10.3390/en12244656 is OK
- 10.3390/su10061916 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- 10.2139/ssrn.4148365 may be a valid DOI for title: Green energy carriers and energy sovereignty in a climate neutral European energy system

INVALID DOIs

- http://doi.org/10.5334/jors.188 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2016.06.021 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2021.08.016 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2021.07.005 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.06.033 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2018.07.001 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simpa.2020.100028 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1002/ese3.891 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix

[kyleniemeyer]

@editorialbot invite @fraukewiese as editor

Hi @fraukewiese, could you edit this submission?

[editorialbot]

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

FAME-Core: An open Framework for distributed Agent-based Modelling of Energy systems Submitting author: @KriNiTi Handling editor: @fraukewiese (Active) Reviewers: @xtruan, @pgranato Similarity score: 0.8396

Calliope: a multi-scale energy systems modelling framework Submitting author: @sjpfenninger Handling editor: @jedbrown (Active) Reviewers: @mdoucet, @gonsie, @ecotillasanchez Similarity score: 0.8378

CLOVER: A modelling framework for sustainable community-scale energy systems Submitting author: @phil-sandwell Handling editor: @fraukewiese (Active) Reviewers: @EwaGomez, @fneum Similarity score: 0.8368

G³M-f a global gradient-based groundwater modelling framwork Submitting author: @rreinecke Handling editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman (Active) Reviewers: @wkearn Similarity score: 0.8345

AMIRIS: Agent-based Market model for the Investigation of Renewable and Integrated energy Systems Submitting author: @KriNiTi Handling editor: @fraukewiese (Active) Reviewers: @sebastianboblest, @imcatta Similarity score: 0.8303

⚠️ Note to editors: If these papers look like they might be a good match, click through to the review issue for that paper and invite one or more of the authors before before considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[kyleniemeyer]

Hello @mwetz, we'll use this issue to assign an editor and find reviewers. Regarding the reference/DOI messages above, it looks like a handful have the https://doi.org/ prefix in the DOI field, which isn't necessary - please clean those up when you have a chance.

[fraukewiese]

Yes, I can edit this submission.

[fraukewiese]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @fraukewiese is now the editor

[fraukewiese]

@mwetz : Do you have suggestions for reviewers?

[mwetz]

@mwetz : Do you have suggestions for reviewers?

Hi @fraukewiese, Yes, we collected some options for reviewers who are working on similar models and may agree to review:

• Jann Launer (TU Delft), @jnnr
• Fabian Neumann (TU Berlin), @fneum
• Bryn Pickering (ETH Zürich), @brynpickering
• Uwe Krien (Universität Bremen), @uvchik
• Simon Hilpert (Universität Flensburg), @simnh
• Benedict Winchester (Imperial College London), @BenWinchester
• David Huckebrink (Ruhr-Universität Bochum)
• Changlong Wang (Monash University)

[mwetz]

Hello @mwetz, we'll use this issue to assign an editor and find reviewers. Regarding the reference/DOI messages above, it looks like a handful have the https://doi.org/ prefix in the DOI field, which isn't necessary - please clean those up when you have a chance.

Hi @kyleniemeyer , DOIs should be fixed now on the joss branch - thanks for the info

[fraukewiese]

@zoltanmaric @jnnr @uvchik – would any of you be willing to review this submission https://gitlab.com/dlr-ve/esy/remix/framework for JOSS? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html

[fraukewiese]

@editorialbot check references

[editorialbot]

Checking the BibTeX entries failed with the following error:

Failed to parse BibTeX on value "@" (AT) [#<BibTeX::Bibliography data=[5]>, "@", #<BibTeX::Entry >, {:title=>["{Green energy carriers and energy sovereignty in a climate neutral {E}uropean energy system}, journal = {Renewable Energy}, volume = {210}, pages = {591-603}, year = {2023}, doi = {10.1016/j.renene.2023.04.015}, url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0960148123004639}, author = {Manuel Wetzel and Hans Christian Gils and Valentin Bertsch}, keywords = {energy system modelling; renewable energy; sector integration; green hydrogen and methane; climate neutrality; REMix} "]}]

[fraukewiese]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[mwetz]

@editorialbot check references

[editorialbot]

Checking the BibTeX entries failed with the following error:

Failed to parse BibTeX on value "@" (AT) [#<BibTeX::Bibliography data=[5]>, "@", #<BibTeX::Entry >, {:title=>["{Green energy carriers and energy sovereignty in a climate neutral {E}uropean energy system}, journal = {Renewable Energy}, volume = {210}, pages = {591-603}, year = {2023}, doi = {10.1016/j.renene.2023.04.015}, url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0960148123004639}, author = {Manuel Wetzel and Hans Christian Gils and Valentin Bertsch}, keywords = {energy system modelling; renewable energy; sector integration; green hydrogen and methane; climate neutrality; REMix} "]}]

[mwetz]

@editorialbot check references

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.5334/jors.188 is OK
- 10.1016/j.eneco.2016.06.021 is OK
- 10.1016/j.renene.2021.08.016 is OK
- 10.1016/j.egyr.2021.07.005 is OK
- 10.1016/j.renene.2023.04.015 is OK
- 10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.12.023 is OK
- 10.1016/j.energy.2017.01.115 is OK
- 10.1016/j.renene.2016.12.043 is OK
- 10.3389/fenrg.2020.541495 is OK
- 10.1016/j.rser.2014.02.003 is OK
- 10.1016/j.enpol.2011.06.033 is OK
- 10.18419/opus-2015 is OK
- 10.3390/en12244656 is OK
- 10.1016/j.esr.2018.07.001 is OK
- 10.1016/j.simpa.2020.100028 is OK
- 10.3390/su10061916 is OK
- 10.1002/ese3.891 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[mwetz]

@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:

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

Calliope: a multi-scale energy systems modelling framework Submitting author: @sjpfenninger Handling editor: @jedbrown (Active) Reviewers: @mdoucet, @gonsie, @ecotillasanchez Similarity score: 0.8330

FAME-Core: An open Framework for distributed Agent-based Modelling of Energy systems Submitting author: @KriNiTi Handling editor: @fraukewiese (Active) Reviewers: @xtruan, @pgranato Similarity score: 0.8330

G³M-f a global gradient-based groundwater modelling framwork Submitting author: @rreinecke Handling editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman (Active) Reviewers: @wkearn Similarity score: 0.8294

CLOVER: A modelling framework for sustainable community-scale energy systems Submitting author: @phil-sandwell Handling editor: @fraukewiese (Active) Reviewers: @EwaGomez, @fneum Similarity score: 0.8267

AMIRIS: Agent-based Market model for the Investigation of Renewable and Integrated energy Systems Submitting author: @KriNiTi Handling editor: @fraukewiese (Active) Reviewers: @sebastianboblest, @imcatta Similarity score: 0.8253

⚠️ Note to editors: If these papers look like they might be a good match, click through to the review issue for that paper and invite one or more of the authors before before considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[fraukewiese]

@zoltanmaric @jnnr @uvchik – would any of you be willing to review this submission https://gitlab.com/dlr-ve/esy/remix/framework for JOSS? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html

[fraukewiese]

I will try to contact the potential reviewers by mail.

[fraukewiese]

@mwetz : I guess the reviewers need to have a GAMS-license to install and test the model, is that correct?

[mwetz]

@mwetz : I guess the reviewers need to have a GAMS-license to install and test the model, is that correct?

@fraukewiese : Yes, running REMix requires a GAMS license. Unfortunately, the community license is not sufficient as even simple model instances exceed the limit of variables and constraints. However, I can talk to GAMS about providing an evaluation license for reviewers if needed.

[fraukewiese]

An update: I got two negative replies, so I will try further to contact people by mail. If you have any additional suggestions for potential reviewers @mwetz please let me know :)

[fraukewiese]

@weibezahn @loeffko – would you be willing to review this submission https://gitlab.com/dlr-ve/esy/remix/framework for JOSS? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.htm

[loeffko]

Yes, I would absolutely be interested. :) At the moment, my schedule is quite full, but I would expect to find time for this around Christmas / between the years if that is sufficient.

[fraukewiese]

@loeffko - Great! I will add you as reviewer. The review will start as soon as we have found a second reviewer. Around Christman / between the years is sufficient, thanks a lot.

[fraukewiese]

@editorialbot add @loeffko as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@loeffko added to the reviewers list!

[fraukewiese]

I am currently contacting more potential reviewers that are working with GAMS via mail

[hcgils]

@fraukewiese : other potential reviewers are jkiviluo, tasqu, wesleyjcole and stuartcohen8

[fraukewiese]

Thanks a lot @hcgils

[fraukewiese]

@jkiviluo @stuartcohen8 – would you be willing to review this submission https://gitlab.com/dlr-ve/esy/remix/framework for JOSS? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.htm

[fraukewiese]

@wesleyjcole @stuartcohen8 @jkiviluo @stuartcohen8 – would you be willing to review this submission https://gitlab.com/dlr-ve/esy/remix/framework for JOSS? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.htm

[wesleyjcole]

Thansk for the invitation. I don't have bandwidth to take on any other commitments for the time being, so will need to pass.

[hcgils]

@fraukewiese: you may also ask huckebrink, JohannesEbke, cdgaete, and oruhnau if they are willing to do the review

[fraukewiese]

@huckebrink, @JohannesEbke, @cdgaete, @oruhnau - – would one of you be willing to review this submission https://gitlab.com/dlr-ve/esy/remix/framework for JOSS? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.htm

[oruhnau]

Thanks for the invitation. I am sorry, but I currently can't take on another review.

[david-huck]

I'd be happy to review the submission! I'll probably find the time to do so later this month. Let me know if that is sufficient!

[fraukewiese]

@david-huck : Great, thank you so much! I will add you as reviewer and start the review

[fraukewiese]

@editorialbot add @david-huck as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@david-huck added to the reviewers list!

[fraukewiese]

@loeffko : Sorry for letting you wait so long. It has been difficult to find a second reviewer. But now we can start the review, yeah :)