[REVIEW]: ProMCDA: A Python package for Probabilistic Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@Flaminietta<!--end-author-handle-- (Flaminia Catalli) Repository: https://github.com/wetransform-os/ProMCDA Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): main Version: v1.1.0 Editor: !--editor-->@galessiorob<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @limengbinggz, @B3J4y Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.13694286

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/cd66aa1ed9ff89b5519d977f4a16379d"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/cd66aa1ed9ff89b5519d977f4a16379d/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/cd66aa1ed9ff89b5519d977f4a16379d/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/cd66aa1ed9ff89b5519d977f4a16379d)

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

@limengbinggz & @B3J4y, 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 @galessiorob 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 @limengbinggz

📝 Checklist for @B3J4y

📝 Checklist for @paulrougieux

[editorialbot]

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

[galessiorob]

👋 @mspada @Flaminietta apologies for the delay! Summer got in the way, but I think this is pretty close to ready for publishing! A few things before we do that:

• I checked out a PR with some edit suggestions for the paper, feel free to adopt as much as you like
• @paulrougieux given how long this paper has been in the editing queue and the fact that we have two complete reviews (thank you @B3J4y and @limengbinggz) I have removed you from the reviewers list, but please feel free to volunteer to review upcoming papers that would benefit from your expertise
• Once you review the paper suggestions and we have the final version, we'll need you to deposit your software in Zenodo and post the DOI here and the most recent version. After that, we can set the final version, generate a final proof, and have an Editor in Chief do the publishing.

So close! I'll check in soon, thanks again for lending your expertise @B3J4y @limengbinggz

[galessiorob]

@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:

[galessiorob]

@mspada @Flaminietta could you review this version with the changes, please? If you are satisfied you can deposit your software in Zenodo and post the DOI here and the most recent version. I can kick off the publishing steps after that.

[galessiorob]

Post-Review Checklist for Editor and Authors

Additional Author Tasks After Review is Complete

• Double check authors and affiliations (including ORCIDs)
• Make a release of the software with the latest changes from the review and post the version number here. This is the version that will be used in the JOSS paper.
• Archive the release on Zenodo/figshare/etc and post the DOI here.
• Make sure that the title and author list (including ORCIDs) in the archive match those in the JOSS paper.
• Make sure that the license listed for the archive is the same as the software license.

Editor Tasks Prior to Acceptance

• [x] Read the text of the paper and offer comments/corrections (as either a list or a pull request)
• [x] Check that the archive title, author list, version tag, and the license are correct
• [x] Set archive DOI with @editorialbot set <DOI here> as archive
• [x] Set version with @editorialbot set <version here> as version
• [ ] Double check rendering of paper with @editorialbot generate pdf
• [x] Specifically check the references with @editorialbot check references and ask author(s) to update as needed
• [x] Recommend acceptance with @editorialbot recommend-accept

[mspada]

Hi @galessiorob,

• we just checked the last version of the manuscript and made a correction in the bibliography by adding a missing doi. Now the paper is fine from our side and all the different links (incl. ORCID) and affiliations are correct.
• We made the release of ProMCDA as requested. The release version number is v1.1.0
• we archive the release to Zenodo as requested. All the provided info are in line with the ones in the paper. The Zenodo doi is https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13694286

Let us know if you need something else from us. Thank you for the support @mspada and @Flaminietta

[galessiorob]

@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:

[galessiorob]

@editorialbot check references

[editorialbot]

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

✅ OK DOIs

- 10.1007/s10669-020-09784-x is OK
- 10.1016/j.envsoft.2021.105208 is OK
- 10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00163-X is OK
- 10.1016/j.dss.2022.113848 is OK
- 10.1016/j.softx.2023.101368 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.04567 is OK
- 10.1016/j.envsoft.2020.104890 is OK
- 10.1016/j.omega.2017.04.007 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4757-2500-1_2 is OK
- 10.1007/0-387-31099-1_2 is OK
- 10.1007/s11205-017-1832-9 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.06.009 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105731 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ijggc.2016.08.023 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4939-3094-4_12 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.05.014 is OK

🟡 SKIP DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: The global competitiveness report 2018

❌ MISSING DOIs

- None

❌ INVALID DOIs

- https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2404.06370 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix

[galessiorob]

@mspada and @Flaminietta thanks for the swift changes! Could you check that last DOI that is showing up as invalid, please? Just remove the "https://doi.org/" prefix

And the "The global competitiveness report 2018", could you add it too, please?

[mspada]

@galessiorob for the "The global competitiveness report 2018" there is no doi, but just an ISBN, should I added it or not?

[mspada]

@galessiorob Do we need to create an additional Release after updating the paper with the doi problem?

[galessiorob]

Do we need to create an additional Release after updating the paper with the doi problem?

I don't believe so, but will ask the Editor in Chief

"The global competitiveness report 2018" there is no doi, but just an ISBN, should I added it or not?

Yes, let's add it please, and we can also ask the Editor, we'll leave a note. Thanks!

[mspada]

Hi @galessiorob, we removed the "https://doi.org/" prefix where requested and added the ISBN to the report. Should we generate a new tag? Thanks

[galessiorob]

@editorialbot check references

[editorialbot]

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

✅ OK DOIs

- 10.1007/s10669-020-09784-x is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2404.06370 is OK
- 10.1016/j.envsoft.2021.105208 is OK
- 10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00163-X is OK
- 10.1016/j.dss.2022.113848 is OK
- 10.1016/j.softx.2023.101368 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.04567 is OK
- 10.1016/j.envsoft.2020.104890 is OK
- 10.1016/j.omega.2017.04.007 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4757-2500-1_2 is OK
- 10.1007/0-387-31099-1_2 is OK
- 10.1007/s11205-017-1832-9 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.06.009 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105731 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ijggc.2016.08.023 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4939-3094-4_12 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.05.014 is OK

🟡 SKIP DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: The global competitiveness report 2018

❌ MISSING DOIs

- None

❌ INVALID DOIs

- None

[galessiorob]

@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:

[galessiorob]

@editorialbot set 10.5281/zenodo.13694286 as archive

[editorialbot]

Done! archive is now 10.5281/zenodo.13694286

[galessiorob]

@editorialbot set v1.1.0 as version

[editorialbot]

Done! version is now v1.1.0

[galessiorob]

@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:

[galessiorob]

@editorialbot recommend-accept

[editorialbot]

Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...

[editorialbot]

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

✅ OK DOIs

- 10.1007/s10669-020-09784-x is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2404.06370 is OK
- 10.1016/j.envsoft.2021.105208 is OK
- 10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00163-X is OK
- 10.1016/j.dss.2022.113848 is OK
- 10.1016/j.softx.2023.101368 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.04567 is OK
- 10.1016/j.envsoft.2020.104890 is OK
- 10.1016/j.omega.2017.04.007 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4757-2500-1_2 is OK
- 10.1007/0-387-31099-1_2 is OK
- 10.1007/s11205-017-1832-9 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.06.009 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105731 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ijggc.2016.08.023 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4939-3094-4_12 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.05.014 is OK

🟡 SKIP DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: The global competitiveness report 2018

❌ MISSING DOIs

- None

❌ INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

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

IDREFS attribute rid references an unknown ID "TableU0025202"
IDREFS attribute rid references an unknown ID "TableU0025203"
IDREFS attribute rid references an unknown ID "TableU0025201"

[galessiorob]

Found the issue with the table ids pointed above, here's a PR that removes the spaces. I think this should fix it. @mspada @Flaminietta

[mspada]

Hi @galessiorob, we just merged your push into the main. Let's hope it will work out now. Thanks! @mspada and @Flaminietta

[galessiorob]

@editorialbot recommend-accept

[editorialbot]

Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...

[editorialbot]

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

✅ OK DOIs

- 10.1007/s10669-020-09784-x is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2404.06370 is OK
- 10.1016/j.envsoft.2021.105208 is OK
- 10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00163-X is OK
- 10.1016/j.dss.2022.113848 is OK
- 10.1016/j.softx.2023.101368 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.04567 is OK
- 10.1016/j.envsoft.2020.104890 is OK
- 10.1016/j.omega.2017.04.007 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4757-2500-1_2 is OK
- 10.1007/0-387-31099-1_2 is OK
- 10.1007/s11205-017-1832-9 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.06.009 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105731 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ijggc.2016.08.023 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4939-3094-4_12 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.05.014 is OK

🟡 SKIP DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: The global competitiveness report 2018

❌ MISSING DOIs

- None

❌ INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

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

IDREFS attribute rid references an unknown ID "Table2"
IDREFS attribute rid references an unknown ID "Table3"
IDREFS attribute rid references an unknown ID "Table1"

[galessiorob]

@oliviaguest would you mind taking a look at this Table ID issue in the formatting of md to XML, please? This is the last thing to check off before publishing. Thanks in advance!

[paulrougieux]

@galessiorob I checked all items in the check list, sorry for the delay.