[PRE REVIEW]: GWSurrogate: A Python package for gravitational wave surrogate models

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@sfield17<!--end-author-handle-- (Scott Field) Repository: https://github.com/sxs-collaboration/gwsurrogate Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): joss_paper Version: v1.1.6 Editor: !--editor-->@plaplant<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @GarethCabournDavies, @Ceciliogq Managing EiC: Dan Foreman-Mackey

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7ff281e029882d8f40ecd56ec92541f1"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7ff281e029882d8f40ecd56ec92541f1/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7ff281e029882d8f40ecd56ec92541f1/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7ff281e029882d8f40ecd56ec92541f1)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @sfield17. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@sfield17 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=0.10 s (641.8 files/s, 257794.1 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                          34           2093           3435           5435
Jupyter Notebook                16              0          11095           1471
HTML                             1             50              5           1468
C                                2             82            128            301
Markdown                         4             81              0            254
TeX                              1             11              0            153
YAML                             3             10             24             76
MATLAB                           1             75            170             51
Bourne Shell                     2              6              2             16
C/C++ Header                     1              0              0             12
TOML                             1              0              0              6
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            66           2408          14859           9243
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

   484  Scott Field
   103  Vijay Varma
    47  Chad Galley
    26  Jonathan Blackman
    19  sfield17
    14  Jooheon
    11  Kevin Barkett
     8  Tousif Islam
     6  Leo C. Stein
     4  Duncan Macleod
     3  Raffi Enficiaud
     1  Alexander Harvey Nitz
     1  Dwyer Deighan
     1  tausigmaislam

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1103/PhysRevX.4.031006 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.121102 is OK
- 10.1088/1361-6382/aa7649 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevD.95.104023 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevD.99.064045 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevD.108.064027 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevD.106.044001 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevResearch.1.033015 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevD.102.024031 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevD.101.081502 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevD.106.104025 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: Waveform Modelling for the Laser Interferometer Sp...

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 1216

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

[editorialbot]

License info:

🟡 License found: Other (Check here for OSI approval)

[editorialbot]

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

[dfm]

@sfield17 — Thanks for your submission! All the suitable JOSS editors are currently working at capacity so I'm going to "waitlist" this review until an editor with the relevant expertise is available to take it on. Thanks for your patience!

[dfm]

@editorialbot invite @plaplant as editor

[editorialbot]

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

[plaplant]

@editorialbot assign @plaplant as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @plaplant is now the editor

[plaplant]

@sfield17 — Thanks for your patience! I will be the editor for this submission. I will begin the review process by reaching out to potential reviewers. Once two have agreed to review this submission, we can begin the actual review process.

If you know of anyone who might be suitable, please feel free to let me know and I can reach out to them. On my end, I will add reviewers to this issue as they agree. Let me know if you have any questions!

[sfield17]

Hi Paul,

Here are a few potential reviewers. All of these folks are involved in gravitational wave science and have contributed to various public codes used in our community. Many are also experts in gravitational wave modeling.

Patricia Schmidt Ian Harry Hector Estelles Cecilio Garcia-Quiros Duncan Macleod Raffi Enficiaud

I've never participated in a JOSS review before, so I don't know how this works. For contact purposes, do you need their email addresses or GitHub IDs?

Scott

On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 5:20 PM Paul La Plante @.***> wrote:

@sfield17 https://github.com/sfield17 — Thanks for your patience! I will be the editor for this submission. I will begin the review process by reaching out to potential reviewers. Once two have agreed to review this submission, we can begin the actual review process.

If you know of anyone who might be suitable, please feel free to let me know and I can reach out to them. On my end, I will add reviewers to this issue as they agree. Let me know if you have any questions!

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6858#issuecomment-2229460948, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABZNHPHAFM3WLPGBL5TY2YDZMQ4IDAVCNFSM6AAAAABI76QJTGVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDEMRZGQ3DAOJUHA . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

[plaplant]

@sfield17 — Scott, thanks for the suggestions! It makes my job easier, which usually means the review begins sooner 🙂

I was able to find contact information for everyone on the list from a quick web search, so I will begin reaching out. As folks agree to review, I will be adding them to this issue. Let me know if you have any other questions.

[plaplant]

@editorialbot add @GarethCabournDavies as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@GarethCabournDavies added to the reviewers list!

[plaplant]

@editorialbot add @Ceciliogq as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@Ceciliogq added to the reviewers list!

[plaplant]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/7073.