Closed editorialbot closed 5 months ago
Done! archive is now 10.5281/zenodo.11213255
Paper mostly looks good, but the $\Delta G_f^0$ on line 60 is still messed-up. Try doing it as $\Delta G_f^0$
instead of whatever it is now?
@editorialbot generate pdf
:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:
@editorialbot generate pdf
:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:
@rkurchin I have corrected the delta G_f^°
similar to delta G_r^°
in the paper.
@editorialbot recommend-accept
Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
OK DOIs
- 10.1063/1.4812323 is OK
- 10.1016/0098-3004(92)90029-Q is OK
- 10.3133/wri994259 is OK
- 10.3133/tm6a43 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4419-0455-3 is OK
- 10.1007/978-3-319-97625-9 is OK
- 10.1103/physrevb.85.235438 is OK
- 10.1021/acs.chemmater.7b03980 is OK
- 10.1021/acs.chemmater.7b03980.s001 is OK
MISSING DOIs
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Atlas d’Équilibres Électrochimiques: Eau Oxygénée
INVALID DOIs
- None
:wave: @openjournals/bcm-eics, this paper is ready to be accepted and published.
Check final proof :point_right::page_facing_up: Download article
If the paper PDF and the deposit XML files look good in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/pull/5365, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the command @editorialbot accept
@rkurchin Do I have to do something regarding the final proof read?
@mohitpundir as AEiC for JOSS I will now help to process this submission for acceptance in JOSS. I have checked this review, your repository, the archive link, and the paper. Most seems in order, however the below are some points that require your attention:
1.1.1
(it appears to only list a v3.0
). I do see that the ZENODO archive listing has 1.1.1
, however you should also have such a tagged release on the repository. We need to ensure that the version here matches the ZENODO archive listed license, but also that this version is a tagged release on the repository. So please do let us know if you will create a release with the label 1.1.1
, or if a different tag is used and if the ZENODO listed version and the one here will need to be updated. Thanks. Please check these typos:
elminiates
-> eliminates
exhange
-> exchange
elecrons
-> electrons
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Thank you for the suggestions. I have addressed the above points.
@editorialbot set v1.1.1 as version
Done! version is now v1.1.1
@editorialbot generate pdf
:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:
@mohitpundir one final point is to edit the version tag for ZENODO to read v1.1.1
, so to include the v
as well.
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Thanks. I have added the v
to ZENODO tag.
@mohitpundir great. All looks good to go then.
@editorialbot accept
Doing it live! Attempting automated processing of paper acceptance...
@mohitpundir congratulations on this JOSS publication!!!!
Thanks for editing @rkurchin !
And a special thank you to the reviewers: @yaomz16, @sudarshanv01 !!
Ensure proper citation by uploading a plain text CITATION.cff file to the default branch of your repository.
If using GitHub, a Cite this repository menu will appear in the About section, containing both APA and BibTeX formats. When exported to Zotero using a browser plugin, Zotero will automatically create an entry using the information contained in the .cff file.
You can copy the contents for your CITATION.cff file here:
``` cff-version: "1.2.0" authors: - email: akorber@student.ethz.ch family-names: Korber given-names: Anja - email: ffurcas@ethz.ch family-names: Furcas given-names: Fabio E. orcid: "https://orcid.org/0009-0003-9420-058X" - email: mpundir@ethz.ch family-names: Pundir given-names: Mohit orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7244-7416" - email: dkammer@ethz.ch family-names: Kammer given-names: David S. orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3782-9368" - email: uangst@ethz.ch family-names: Angst given-names: Ueli M. orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2603-4757" contact: - email: mpundir@ethz.ch family-names: Pundir given-names: Mohit orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7244-7416" doi: 10.5281/zenodo.11213255 message: If you use this software, please cite our article in the Journal of Open Source Software. preferred-citation: authors: - email: akorber@student.ethz.ch family-names: Korber given-names: Anja - email: ffurcas@ethz.ch family-names: Furcas given-names: Fabio E. orcid: "https://orcid.org/0009-0003-9420-058X" - email: mpundir@ethz.ch family-names: Pundir given-names: Mohit orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7244-7416" - email: dkammer@ethz.ch family-names: Kammer given-names: David S. orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3782-9368" - email: uangst@ethz.ch family-names: Angst given-names: Ueli M. orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2603-4757" date-published: 2024-05-29 doi: 10.21105/joss.06536 issn: 2475-9066 issue: 97 journal: Journal of Open Source Software publisher: name: Open Journals start: 6536 title: PourPy - A python package to generate potential-pH diagrams type: article url: "https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.06536" volume: 9 title: PourPy - A python package to generate potential-pH diagrams ```
If the repository is not hosted on GitHub, a .cff file can still be uploaded to set your preferred citation. Users will be able to manually copy and paste the citation.
🐘🐘🐘 👉 Toot for this paper 👈 🐘🐘🐘
🚨🚨🚨 THIS IS NOT A DRILL, YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED A PAPER INTO JOSS! 🚨🚨🚨
Here's what you must now do:
Any issues? Notify your editorial technical team...
Hi! Really happy to see new and more Pourbaix diagram software, particularly with an API that's more friendly to corrosion domain experts.
I'm not sure if this is the appropriate venue to raise this point, but I don't think it's correct to say that pymatgen's energy minimization routines are performed at each pH-potential point. Pymatgen forms a pourbaix stability envelope on the basis of half-space intersections, which has quickhull's time-complexity O(n log n), worst case O(n^2), where n is the number of unique species present. As far as I can tell, the authors use a strategy which has a similar time-complexity, although I might be mistaken about that. I'm not sure whether ASE uses a pH-potential point-wise minimization (which I'd guess should be O(m n log n), where m is the total resolution, which can indeed be more expensive) but the way ASE plots look in their examples suggests that that's the strategy.
@montoyjh Thank you for bringing this to our notice. Definitely it has been an overlook from our side. We would be happy to correct this mistake in the description of the pymatgen in the paper.
Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@mohitpundir<!--end-author-handle-- (Mohit Pundir) Repository: https://gitlab.com/cmbm-ethz/pourbaix-diagrams Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: v1.1.1 Editor: !--editor-->@rkurchin<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @yaomz16, @sudarshanv01 Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.11213255
Status
Status badge code:
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
@yaomz16 & @sudarshanv01, 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:
The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @rkurchin 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 @yaomz16
📝 Checklist for @sudarshanv01