[PRE REVIEW]: seesus: a social, environmental, and economic sustainability classifier for Python

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@caimeng2<!--end-author-handle-- (Meng Cai) Repository: https://github.com/caimeng2/seesus Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: v1.2.0 Editor: !--editor-->@oliviaguest<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @varsha2509, @luyuhao0326 Managing EiC: Olivia Guest

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/6bfbe71ac4a3f4799c6cbbfb15a07ff6"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/6bfbe71ac4a3f4799c6cbbfb15a07ff6/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/6bfbe71ac4a3f4799c6cbbfb15a07ff6/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/6bfbe71ac4a3f4799c6cbbfb15a07ff6)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @caimeng2. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@caimeng2 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=0.06 s (299.5 files/s, 71052.8 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HTML                             7             95              0           2244
Python                           6             60            153           1056
TeX                              1             12              0            142
Markdown                         2             32              0             95
Jupyter Notebook                 1              0            540             28
TOML                             1              2              0             26
YAML                             1              1              4             18
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            19            202            697           3609
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 938

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1002/bse.2195 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.05124 is OK
- 10.1016/j.enpol.2008.02.039 is OK
- 10.1007/s10668-016-9801-z is OK
- 10.3390/ECP2023-14728 is OK
- 10.1007/978-981-10-3521-0_31 is OK
- 10.3390/su14053095 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- 10.5040/9781509934058.0025 may be a valid DOI for title: Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

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

[caimeng2]

Thanks, bot! Here are three potential reviewers:

Cesar Aybar: https://github.com/csaybar Qiusheng Wu: https://github.com/giswqs Caleb Lucas: https://github.com/caleblucas

[caimeng2]

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello @caimeng2, 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

[oliviaguest]

@caimeng2 can you check the DOIs, please?

[caimeng2]

@editorialbot check references

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1002/bse.2195 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.05124 is OK
- 10.1016/j.enpol.2008.02.039 is OK
- 10.1007/s10668-016-9801-z is OK
- 10.3390/ECP2023-14728 is OK
- 10.5040/9781509934058.0025 is OK
- 10.1007/978-981-10-3521-0_31 is OK
- 10.3390/su14053095 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[caimeng2]

@editorialbot check repository

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.06 s (308.7 files/s, 73251.7 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HTML                             7             95              0           2244
Python                           6             60            153           1056
TeX                              1             12              0            143
Markdown                         2             32              0             95
Jupyter Notebook                 1              0            540             28
TOML                             1              2              0             26
YAML                             1              1              4             18
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            19            202            697           3610
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 938

[caimeng2]

@caimeng2 can you check the DOIs, please?

Done. Thanks for the reminder.

[caimeng2]

@editorialbot check repository

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.07 s (285.4 files/s, 68215.1 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HTML                             7             95              0           2244
Python                           6             60            153           1056
TeX                              1             12              0            143
Markdown                         2             33              0             97
Jupyter Notebook                 1              0            563             29
TOML                             1              2              0             26
YAML                             1              1              9             18
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            19            203            725           3613
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 938

[caimeng2]

@editorialbot check references

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1002/bse.2195 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.05124 is OK
- 10.1016/j.enpol.2008.02.039 is OK
- 10.1007/s10668-016-9801-z is OK
- 10.3390/ECP2023-14728 is OK
- 10.5040/9781509934058.0025 is OK
- 10.1007/978-981-10-3521-0_31 is OK
- 10.3390/su14053095 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[caimeng2]

@editorialbot list editors

[editorialbot]

List of JOSS editors

@AJQuinn
@AoifeHughes
@Bisaloo
@Fei-Tao
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman
@Nikoleta-v3
@adi3
@adonath
@ajstewartlang
@arfon
@atrisovic
@bmcfee
@britta-wstnr
@cMadan
@chartgerink
@crsl4
@crvernon
@csoneson
@danasolav
@danielskatz
@dfm
@dhhagan
@diazrenata
@diehlpk
@drvinceknight
@elbeejay
@eloisabentivegna
@emdupre
@fabian-s
@faroit
@fboehm
@fraukewiese
@galessiorob
@gkthiruvathukal
@graciellehigino
@hugoledoux
@ivastar
@jarvist
@jbytecode
@jedbrown
@jgostick
@jmschrei
@jsta
@kellyrowland
@kthyng
@kyleniemeyer
@lpantano
@lucydot
@luizirber
@majensen
@marcosvital
@martinfleis
@matthewfeickert
@mbarzegary
@mbobra
@mstimberg
@observingClouds
@olexandr-konovalov
@oliviaguest
@osorensen
@pdebuyl
@phibeck
@philipcardiff
@pibion
@plaplant
@ppxasjsm
@prashjha
@richardjgowers
@rkurchin
@samhforbes
@sbenthall
@spholmes
@timtroendle
@vissarion
@warrickball
@xuanxu
@zhubonan

[caimeng2]

@editorialbot list reviewers

[editorialbot]

Please log in the JOSS Reviewers site to search through the list of current reviewers.

[caimeng2]

@oliviaguest Happy New Year! Are there any updates on the status of this submission? Many thanks!

[oliviaguest]

@caimeng2 I am sorry things are taking so long, I am wondering why we are so over-capacity at JOSS. I will address this by handling this myself. ☺️

[oliviaguest]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @oliviaguest is now the editor

[oliviaguest]

@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:

ur-scape: harnessing data for stakeholder participation in city-making processes Submitting author: @luyuhao0326 Handling editor: @hugoledoux (Active) Reviewers: @winstonyym, @cforgaci Similarity score: 0.7936

besos: Building and Energy Simulation, Optimization and Surrogate Modelling Submitting author: @TheoChristiaanse Handling editor: @sjpfenninger (Retired) Reviewers: @fneum, @willu47 Similarity score: 0.7890

LISC: A Python Package for Scientific Literature Collection and Analysis Submitting author: @TomDonoghue Handling editor: @danielskatz (Active) Reviewers: @timClicks, @linuxscout Similarity score: 0.7863

PyEI: A Python package for ecological inference Submitting author: @karink520 Handling editor: @drvinceknight (Active) Reviewers: @matt-graham, @pmyteh Similarity score: 0.7825

cosasi: Graph Diffusion Source Inference in Python Submitting author: @lucasmccabe Handling editor: @danielskatz (Active) Reviewers: @sara-02, @zoometh Similarity score: 0.7815

⚠️ 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 considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[oliviaguest]

@luyuhao0326, @caleblucas, @csaybar, @dionhaefner, @LSRathore, @varsha2509 can all of you review this please? ☺️

[caimeng2]

@caimeng2 I am sorry things are taking so long, I am wondering why we are so over-capacity at JOSS. I will address this by handling this myself. ☺️

Thank you so much!!

[luyuhao0326]

@oliviaguest thanks for the invitation. I can certainly review this submission. However, I am not proficient in Python to provide constructive feedback on coding. Please let me know if JOSS would like me to review other aspects of the submission. Happy 2024.

[varsha2509]

Thanks for tagging @oliviaguest. Happy to review this. I'll get back to you on this by the end of this week.

[dionhaefner]

Not this time, sorry.

[LSRathore]

@oliviaguest, sorry cant do it due to unavailability.

[caleblucas]

@oliviaguest I am unable to right due to other commitments, apologies!Best,CalebOn Jan 9, 2024, at 12:10, Lokendra singh rathore @.***> wrote: @oliviaguest, sorry cant do it due to unavailability.

—Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

[oliviaguest]

@luyuhao0326 you can review aspects other than the code itself, like installation and running, right? :blush:

[oliviaguest]

@editorialbot add @varsha2509 to reviewers

[editorialbot]

@varsha2509 added to the reviewers list!

[oliviaguest]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6244.