[PRE REVIEW]: OctApps: a library of Octave functions for continuous gravitational-wave data analysis

[whedon]

Submitting author: @kwwette (Karl Wette) Repository: https://github.com/octapps/octapps Version: v0.1 Editor: @danielskatz Reviewers: @stevenrbrandt

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @kwwette. The JOSS editor (shown at the top of this issue) will work with you on this issue to find a reviewer for your submission before creating the main review issue.

@kwwette if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread. In addition, this list of people have already agreed to review for JOSS and may be suitable for this submission.

Editor instructions

The JOSS submission bot @whedon is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @whedon can do for you type:

@whedon commands

[whedon]

Hello human, I'm @whedon. I'm here to help you with some common editorial tasks. @arfon it looks like you're currently assigned as the editor for this paper :tada:

For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:

@whedon commands

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

[arfon]

:wave: @kwwette, many thanks for your submission to JOSS. Do you have any suggestions for potential reviewers for your submission?

[kwwette]

@arfon Thanks!

Re. potential reviewers: from the list I'd suggest perhaps @fgnievinski, @Scivision, or @jordigh for their Octave expertise. Unfortunately I don't have any off-list reviewers to suggest: in the field of gravitational wave astronomy/astrophysics we are all part of large collaborations and publish papers with 1000+ authors, so I'm a co-author with pretty much everyone who might have scientific expertise in the field.

[kwwette]

Also re. the article proof: looks good, there are a few minor issues with the formatting of citations and references, should I be trying to correct those now? I'm also not sure whether there should be a References header between the acknowledgements and the bibliography.

[kwwette]

@whedon commands

[whedon]

Here are some things you can ask me to do:

# List all of Whedon's capabilities
@whedon commands

# Assign a GitHub user as the sole reviewer of this submission
@whedon assign @username as reviewer

# Add a GitHub user to the reviewers of this submission
@whedon add @username as reviewer

# Remove a GitHub user from the reviewers of this submission
@whedon remove @username as reviewer

# List of editor GitHub usernames
@whedon list editors

# List of reviewers together with programming language preferences and domain expertise
@whedon list reviewers

# Change editorial assignment
@whedon assign @username as editor

# Set the software archive DOI at the top of the issue e.g.
@whedon set 10.0000/zenodo.00000 as archive

# Open the review issue
@whedon start review

🚧 🚧 🚧 Experimental Whedon features 🚧 🚧 🚧

# Compile the paper
@whedon generate pdf

[kwwette]

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

[kwwette]

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

[kwwette]

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

[kwwette]

FYI I've fixed up the citations and references formatting and added a References header.

[arfon]

:wave: @mzevin1 would you be willing to review this submission for JOSS?

[michaelzevin]

Hi @arfon, I'm a member of LIGO as well (and not too versed in continuous waves science), so I may not be best suited for review.

[arfon]

Unfortunately I don't have any off-list reviewers to suggest: in the field of gravitational wave astronomy/astrophysics we are all part of large collaborations and publish papers with 1000+ authors, so I'm a co-author with pretty much everyone who might have scientific expertise in the field.

Thanks @kwwette. I'm curious how other journals manage to review gravitational wave related papers...?

@fgnievinski, @scivision, @jordigh - would you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? We'd only be asking you to review the software aspects of this (and not the gravitational wave physics!)

[arfon]

@whedon assign @danielskatz as editor

[whedon]

OK, the editor is @danielskatz

[danielskatz]

@whedon assign @stevenrbrandt as reviewer

[whedon]

OK, the reviewer is @stevenrbrandt

[danielskatz]

@whedon start review magic-word=bananas

[whedon]

OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/707. Feel free to close this issue now!