[PRE REVIEW]: ComFiT: a python library for computational field theory with topological defects

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@vidarsko<!--end-author-handle-- (Vidar Skogvoll) Repository: https://github.com/vidarsko/ComFiT Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: v1.4.2 Editor: !--editor-->@lucydot<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @flokno, @sharanroongta, @sbacchio Managing EiC: Kyle Niemeyer

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7fa0aca16b8652afacb2548b87bf0132"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7fa0aca16b8652afacb2548b87bf0132/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7fa0aca16b8652afacb2548b87bf0132/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7fa0aca16b8652afacb2548b87bf0132)

Author instructions

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

@vidarsko 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 1.90  T=0.13 s (1539.4 files/s, 272281.5 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                         160           3014           2427           6531
Markdown                        13           1005              0           2773
Jupyter Notebook                15              0          17616            681
TeX                              1             32              0            240
YAML                             4             31              6            195
SVG                              2              1              1             96
CSS                              1              2              1             16
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                           196           4085          20051          10532
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

   472  Vidar Skogvoll
   269  jonasron
    77  Jonas Rønning
     2  MilosJoks
     1  Harish P Jain
     1  Milos Joksimovic

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 920

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

[editorialbot]

License info:

✅ License found: MIT License (Valid open source OSI approved license)

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1103/PhysRevLett.78.401 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevE.59.1574 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevE.85.011153 is OK
- 10.1006/jcph.2002.6995 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevE.95.052144 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.255501 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevE.93.042137 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevE.93.032106 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevB.103.014107 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevB.103.224107 is OK
- 10.1016/j.jmps.2022.104932 is OK
- 10.1088/1361-651X/ac9493 is OK
- 10.1038/s41524-023-01077-6 is OK
- 10.1039/D3SM00316G is OK
- 10.1088/1367-2630/ab95de is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevResearch.5.023108 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: A Unified Perspective on Two-Dimensional Quantum T...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Symmetry, Topology, and Crystal Deformations: A Ph...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Topological Defects and Flows in BECs and Active M...

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:

[kyleniemeyer]

@editorialbot invite @lucydot as editor

Hi @lucydot, sorry for the second invitation, but this also looks to be in your wheelhouse- could you edit?

[editorialbot]

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

[vidarsko]

Thanks for starting the review! Here are some suggestions of possible reviewers based on their stated topic areas and programming language:

• sharanroongta
• ml-evs
• yw-fang
• flokno

[lucydot]

No problem @kyleniemeyer - yes, this looks up my alley!

[lucydot]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @lucydot is now the editor

[lucydot]

@sharanroongta @flokno @sbacchio - hello 👋 - are you able to review this JOSS submission? For those who like PDEs / Python...

(edited to remove QM reference!)

[lucydot]

I'll hold off pinging some more potential reviewers, given its been the Easter weekend.

[sharanroongta]

Dear @lucydot . Thanks for the opportunity, but I would pass this one. I have no or very limited working knowledge of QM, so probably someone else is better suited. Thanks.

[vidarsko]

Thanks for considering!

I want to add to the discussion that the project is mostly about solving physics PDEs in general and less about QM in particular (the QM part mostly serves as an example system for tutorial purposes).

This to not scare off any potential reviewers.

[lucydot]

Hi @sharanroongta - yes, please see message above from the author ☝️ , in case you can reconsider. If not, thank you for your reply and hope we can work on a future review. Best, Lucy.

[sbacchio]

Dear @lucydot, I could review this one. Though, could you please guide me through the procedure? Cheers, Simone

[flokno]

Hi @lucydot, I can provide the review!

[sharanroongta]

Hi @lucydot .. thanks for the clarification. If you still need a reviewer, I can also do it. Thanks

[vidarsko]

Dear @lucydot, it seems that there are enough reviewers. What is the next step?

[lucydot]

Excellent, @flokno @sharanroongta and @sbacchio - I will add you all as reviewers, thank you for agreeing to review this submission to JOSS ⭐

If you haven't reviewed for JOSS before, you can find some detailed information about the review process on the documentation pages: reviewing for JOSS, review criteria, review checklist. You don't need to read this all, but it gives some context if wanted.

The key things that are different from standard journals are: i) everything happens in a Github review thread; ii) the review is a conversation back and forth - you do not need to do you review in a single step; iii) the review is structured in that you work your way through a checklist.

We ask that reviews are completed in about 4 weeks. We advise you start the review early, as it is an iterative process between reviewers and authors.

I will now ask editorialbot to generate a new issue thread which is where the review will take place (this is the pre-review thread). Instructions for you (to generate your review checklist) will be provided there.

If you have any other questions, do not hesitate to contact me. Discussion on the review thread is the best place to contact me, but you can also contact me via email (l.whalley@northumbria.ac.uk) if there is something you'd rather not be public.

[lucydot]

@editorialbot add @flokno as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@flokno added to the reviewers list!

[lucydot]

@editorialbot add @sharanroongta as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@sharanroongta added to the reviewers list!

[lucydot]

@editorialbot add @sbacchio as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@sbacchio added to the reviewers list!

[lucydot]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6599.