search

openjournals / joss-reviews

Reviews for the Journal of Open Source Software
Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal
694 stars 36 forks source link

[PRE REVIEW]: BoARIO: A Python package implementing the ARIO indirect economic cost model #6307

Closed editorialbot closed 3 months ago

editorialbot commented 5 months ago

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@spjuhel<!--end-author-handle-- (Samuel Juhel) Repository: https://github.com/spjuhel/BoARIO Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: v0.5.3 Editor: !--editor-->@crvernon<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @mwt, @potterzot Managing EiC: Olivia Guest

Status

status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/71386aa01a292ecff8bafe273b077701"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/71386aa01a292ecff8bafe273b077701/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/71386aa01a292ecff8bafe273b077701/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/71386aa01a292ecff8bafe273b077701)

Author instructions

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

@spjuhel 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 commented 5 months ago

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 commented 5 months ago 
Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.20 s (585.9 files/s, 225516.8 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HTML                            30           6466            119          23856
Python                          20            910           1298           5013
SVG                              7              0              0           1718
CSS                             11            232             86           1166
JavaScript                      12            161            238           1017
TeX                              4             50              4            673
reStructuredText                21            601            625            657
Markdown                         5             48              0            196
TOML                             1              9              0             79
YAML                             4             11             14             76
JSON                             1              0              0             36
DOS Batch                        1              8              1             26
make                             1              5              7             16
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                           118           8501           2392          34529
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository
editorialbot commented 5 months ago

Wordcount for paper.md is 1109

editorialbot commented 5 months ago 
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1111/jiec.12715 is OK
- 10.1021/es300171x is OK
- 10.2139/ssrn.4101276 is OK
- 10.1093/reep/rez004 is OK
- 10.5334/jors.251 is OK
- 10.1029/2020ef001616 is OK
- 10.5281/zenodo.8383171 is OK
- 10.1038/s41562-020-0896-8 is OK
- 10.1007/s10584-010-9979-2 is OK
- 10.1016/j.jedc.2011.10.001 is OK
- 10.1007/s10584-010-9978-3 is OK
- 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01046.x is OK
- 10.1111/risa.12090 is OK
- 10.1007/s12665-011-1078-9 is OK
- 10.1007/s11069-013-0788-6 is OK
- 10.1111/risa.12300 is OK
- 10.1029/2018ef000839 is OK
- 10.1038/s41893-020-00646-7 is OK
- 10.1080/19475705.2018.1489312 is OK
- 10.31223/x5qd6b is OK
- 10.1038/s41558-018-0173-2 is OK
- 10.1088/1748-9326/ab3306 is OK
- 10.1093/bioinformatics/bts480 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- 10.2139/ssrn.3285818 may be a valid DOI for title: EUREGIO: The construction of a global IO DATABASE with regional detail for Europe for 2000-2010

INVALID DOIs

- None
editorialbot commented 5 months ago

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

editorialbot commented 5 months ago

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

AgentPy: A package for agent-based modeling in Python Submitting author: @JoelForamitti Handling editor: @sbenthall (Active) Reviewers: @jamesdamillington, @martibosch Similarity score: 0.8122

CoPro: a data-driven modelling framework for conflict risk projections Submitting author: @JannisHoch Handling editor: @sbenthall (Active) Reviewers: @soodoku, @sbenthall Similarity score: 0.8041

GeoBO: Python package for Multi-Objective Bayesian Optimisation and Joint Inversion in Geosciences Submitting author: @sebhaan Handling editor: @hugoledoux (Active) Reviewers: @npetra, @sgkang Similarity score: 0.8017

IPART: A Python Package for Image-Processing based Atmospheric River Tracking Submitting author: @Xunius Handling editor: @kbarnhart (Retired) Reviewers: @sadielbartholomew, @rabernat Similarity score: 0.7995

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: 0.7965

⚠️ 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 commented 5 months ago

👋 @spjuhel thank you for choosing JOSS! I need to find you an editor (who will then find you reviewers). In the meantime, can you check the missing DOI above and change 2-3 citations I noticed to avoid double brackets, please? 😊

spjuhel commented 5 months ago

:wave: @oliviaguest, and thank you for your time, I'm excited to submit to JOSS !

I made the modifications. Please tell me if you require anything else !

spjuhel commented 5 months ago

@editorialbot generate pdf

editorialbot commented 5 months ago

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

editorialbot commented 5 months ago

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

AgentPy: A package for agent-based modeling in Python Submitting author: @JoelForamitti Handling editor: @sbenthall (Active) Reviewers: @jamesdamillington, @martibosch Similarity score: 0.8126

IPART: A Python Package for Image-Processing based Atmospheric River Tracking Submitting author: @Xunius Handling editor: @kbarnhart (Retired) Reviewers: @sadielbartholomew, @rabernat Similarity score: 0.8023

GeoBO: Python package for Multi-Objective Bayesian Optimisation and Joint Inversion in Geosciences Submitting author: @sebhaan Handling editor: @hugoledoux (Active) Reviewers: @npetra, @sgkang Similarity score: 0.8022

CoPro: a data-driven modelling framework for conflict risk projections Submitting author: @JannisHoch Handling editor: @sbenthall (Active) Reviewers: @soodoku, @sbenthall Similarity score: 0.8016

Riroriro: Simulating gravitational waves and evaluating their detectability in Python Submitting author: @wvanzeist Handling editor: @dfm (Active) Reviewers: @GregoryAshton, @katiebreivik Similarity score: 0.7956

⚠️ 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 commented 4 months ago

@dfm @hugoledoux @sbenthall do you have capacity coming up? ☺️

dfm commented 4 months ago

@oliviaguest — I'm catching up on the AASS track backlog, so I can't help with this one!

hugoledoux commented 4 months ago

sorry not really, I am already behind with other submissions (and I feel bad about it...)

crvernon commented 4 months ago

@editorialbot assign me as editor

editorialbot commented 4 months ago

Assigned! @crvernon is now the editor

crvernon commented 4 months ago

👋 @mwt - Would you be willing to review this submission to JOSS? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html

crvernon commented 4 months ago

👋 @rickecon - Would you be willing to review this submission to JOSS? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html

crvernon commented 3 months ago

@editorialbot add @mwt as reviewer

Thanks @mwt , sorry I missed your thumbs-up on this!

editorialbot commented 3 months ago

@mwt added to the reviewers list!

crvernon commented 3 months ago

👋 @yasinkutuk - Would you be willing to review this submission to JOSS? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html

crvernon commented 3 months ago

👋 @bbortey9 - Would you be willing to review this submission to JOSS? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html

spjuhel commented 3 months ago

:wave: Everyone, @crvernon,

I have made some changes to the package since my initial submission, notably in order to publish it on conda-forge, improve the CI/CD pipeline. The latest version is now 0.5.7, should I update the submission?

crvernon commented 3 months ago

@spjuhel sure, you can update the code/paper at this point. Our goal is to help make your software, and how you communicate it to a general audience, better throughout the course of this review. So once we hit full review (when I can confirm one more reviewer), you will get feedback from them throughout the process as well. Thanks!

crvernon commented 3 months ago

👋 @potterzot - Would you be willing to review this submission to JOSS? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html

potterzot commented 3 months ago

Hi @crvernon I'd be happy to review this.

crvernon commented 3 months ago

Great, thanks @potterzot !

crvernon commented 3 months ago

@editorialbot add @potterzot as reviewer

editorialbot commented 3 months ago

@potterzot added to the reviewers list!

crvernon commented 3 months ago

👋 - Alright @spjuhel, @mwt, @potterzot - I am going to close this Pre-Review and kick off the full review which you should receive a notification for. Thanks!

crvernon commented 3 months ago

@editorialbot start review

editorialbot commented 3 months ago

OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6547.