[PRE REVIEW]: ATHENA: A Fortran package for neural networks

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@nedtaylor<!--end-author-handle-- (Ned Thaddeus Taylor) Repository: https://github.com/nedtaylor/athena Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): paper Version: v1.2.1 Editor: !--editor-->@HaoZeke<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @milancurcic, @awvwgk, @jrybarczyk Managing EiC: Arfon Smith

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7806cc51a998f872034abfe0bb24bc24"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7806cc51a998f872034abfe0bb24bc24/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7806cc51a998f872034abfe0bb24bc24/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7806cc51a998f872034abfe0bb24bc24)

Author instructions

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

@nedtaylor 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=0.12 s (765.7 files/s, 212587.3 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fortran 90                      74           3868           4569          14815
make                             6            138            138            664
Python                           3             46             51            224
CMake                            2             23             25            177
YAML                             1             26             57            151
Markdown                         2             50              0            143
TeX                              1              3              0             56
JSON                             2              0              0             42
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            91           4154           4840          16272
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 625

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1145/3206214.3206215 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- 10.1145/3323057.3323059 may be a valid DOI for title: A parallel Fortran framework for neural networks and deep learning

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:

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

The nnlib2 library and nnlib2Rcpp R package for implementing neural networks Submitting author: @VNNikolaidis Handling editor: @kakiac (Retired) Reviewers: @schnorr, @MohmedSoudy Similarity score: 0.7958

nnde: A Python package for solving differential equations using neural networks Submitting author: @elwinter Handling editor: @diehlpk (Active) Reviewers: @taless474, @hayesall Similarity score: 0.7953

h5fortran: object-oriented polymorphic Fortran interface for HDF5 file IO Submitting author: @scivision Handling editor: @pdebuyl (Active) Reviewers: @milancurcic, @bast Similarity score: 0.7946

NeuroDiffEq: A Python package for solving differential equations with neural networks Submitting author: @feiyu-chen96 Handling editor: @drvinceknight (Active) Reviewers: @dawbarton, @marcharper Similarity score: 0.7943

textnets: A Python package for text analysis with networks Submitting author: @jboynyc Handling editor: @gkthiruvathukal (Active) Reviewers: @sara-02, @tresoldi Similarity score: 0.7916

⚠️ 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.

[arfon]

@nedtaylor – I note that this submission appears to be on an institutionally-hosted GitLab instance. Can you confirm that this environment meets this condition around account creation to provide feedback? https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html#where-can-i-host-the-repository

[nedtaylor]

@nedtaylor – I note that this submission appears to be on an institutionally-hosted GitLab instance. Can you confirm that this environment meets this condition around account creation to provide feedback? https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html#where-can-i-host-the-repository

Hi Arfon,

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Unfortunately, you are correct that my institutionally-hosted GitLab instance does not allow user creation or setting up issues without first logging in (I thought that it had and believed I had achieved this successfully earlier, but was clearly mistaken).

Am I allowed to make a fork of my code on the general GitHub and then use that here instead? Will there be an issue with that? I assume that may require making a whole new submission, but as long as that's allowed, I will go ahead and do that.

[editorialbot]

I'm sorry @nedtaylor, I'm afraid I can't do that. That's something only editors are allowed to do.

[nedtaylor]

Hi @arfon,

I have moved my repository to GitHub. The new repository link is: https://github.com/nedtaylor/athena

I have also updated the version number to: 1.2.2

The branch name has not changed though, that is still: paper

Are these changes ones that you are allowed to implement? Hopefully the changes now allow the community to engage and provide feedback.

[HaoZeke]

@arfon I think I can handle this one

[arfon]

Amazing, thanks @HaoZeke !

[arfon]

@editorialbot assign @HaoZeke as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @HaoZeke is now the editor

[arfon]

@editorialbot set https://github.com/nedtaylor/athena as repository

[editorialbot]

Done! repository is now https://github.com/nedtaylor/athena

[HaoZeke]

@nedtaylor thanks for the submission, do you have any suggested reviewers?

[HaoZeke]

hi @milancurcic @scivision @rouson 👋 would you be interested in and available to review this JOSS submission? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html

If not, could you recommend any potential reviewers? I was hoping to have your insights because of your work on https://github.com/modern-fortran/neural-fortran

[milancurcic]

I could begin a review after March 25 if that works.

[nedtaylor]

Hi @HaoZeke. I would definitely recommend authors of neural-fortran. I'm happy to wait until the 25th of March for Milan Curcic.

If other reviewers are needed, from the JOSS reviewers list, it appears that José Luiz Rybarczyk Filho, Rocco Meli, and Pankaj K Mishra look like good fits.

Additionally, am I allowed to update the version and branch?

[HaoZeke]

@editorialbot add @milancurcic as reviewer

Thanks for the quick and affirmative response 🥳

@nedtaylor please feel free to update the version and branch as many times as necessary, only once all the reviews are in we will ask for a final archival version and zenodo tag.

[editorialbot]

@milancurcic added to the reviewers list!

[HaoZeke]

hi @jrybarczyk @RMeli @pankajkmishra 👋 would you be interested in and available to review this JOSS submission? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html

If not, could you recommend any potential reviewers?

[RMeli]

Hi @HaoZeke, I just started editing for JOSS and I'd rather edit than review at this time. However, if you struggle to find other reviewers quickly I'd be happy to review this.

Maybe @awvwgk might be interested in reviewing this submission? (Or knows someone in the Fortran community that might be interested?)

[awvwgk]

Happy to review this submission.

[jrybarczyk]

@HaoZeke , I can to review this submission.

[HaoZeke]

@editorialbot add @awvwgk as reviewer

Thanks for the prompt (and positive) response

[editorialbot]

@awvwgk added to the reviewers list!

[HaoZeke]

@editorialbot add @jrybarczyk as reviewer

Thanks for the affirmative response, will go ahead and open the review thread now :)

[editorialbot]

@jrybarczyk added to the reviewers list!

[HaoZeke]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6492.