search

openjournals / joss-reviews

Reviews for the Journal of Open Source Software
Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal
725 stars 38 forks source link

[REVIEW]: pyforce: Python Framework for data-driven model Order Reduction of multi-physiCs problEms #6950

Open editorialbot opened 5 months ago

editorialbot commented 5 months ago

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@Steriva<!--end-author-handle-- (Stefano Riva) Repository: https://github.com/ERMETE-Lab/ROSE-pyforce Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: v0.1.2 Editor: !--editor-->@Fei-Tao<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @ShimingYIN, @damar-wicaksono, @alberto743 Archive: Pending

Status

status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/b3bc9aaecef1a8e0919310833eb76c2c"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/b3bc9aaecef1a8e0919310833eb76c2c/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/b3bc9aaecef1a8e0919310833eb76c2c/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/b3bc9aaecef1a8e0919310833eb76c2c)

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

@ShimingYIN & @damar-wicaksono & @alberto743, 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:

@editorialbot generate my checklist

The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @Fei-Tao 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 @damar-wicaksono

📝 Checklist for @alberto743

📝 Checklist for @ShimingYIN

editorialbot commented 5 months ago

Hello humans, 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 commented 5 months ago 
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1016/j.nucengdes.2024.113105 is OK
- 10.1063/1.168744 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2401.07300 is OK
- 10.5281/zenodo.10447666 is OK
- 10.1515/9783110671490 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.1905.05982 is OK
- 10.1016/j.cma.2015.01.018 is OK
- 10.1016/j.cma.2022.115773 is OK
- 10.1002/nme.4747 is OK
- 10.1016/j.anucene.2022.109538 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None
editorialbot commented 5 months ago

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90  T=0.13 s (569.8 files/s, 166008.6 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                          29           1335           2238           2938
Jupyter Notebook                17              0           9305           2921
SVG                              1              0              0            708
TeX                              2             41              0            378
Markdown                         4             86              0            270
GLSL                             3             34             73            129
reStructuredText                10             86            166            104
YAML                             3             11             12             80
DOS Batch                        1              8              1             26
make                             1              4              7              9
Bourne Shell                     1              0              1              5
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            72           1605          11803           7568
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

    38  Stefano Riva
    35  Steriva
     5  Neko-tan
editorialbot commented 5 months ago

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 663

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

editorialbot commented 5 months ago

License info:

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

editorialbot commented 5 months ago

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

alberto743 commented 4 months ago

Review checklist for @alberto743

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

Functionality

Documentation

Software paper

damar-wicaksono commented 4 months ago

Review checklist for @damar-wicaksono

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

Functionality

Documentation

Software paper

ShimingYIN commented 4 months ago

Review checklist for @ShimingYIN

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

Functionality

Documentation

Software paper

alberto743 commented 4 months ago

Fix license text: https://github.com/ERMETE-Lab/ROSE-pyforce/issues/6

Steriva commented 4 months ago

License text has been fixed with pull request #7

damar-wicaksono commented 2 months ago

@editorialbot commands

editorialbot commented 2 months ago

Hello @damar-wicaksono, here are the things you can ask me to do:


# List all available commands
@editorialbot commands

# Get a list of all editors's GitHub handles
@editorialbot list editors

# Adds a checklist for the reviewer using this command
@editorialbot generate my checklist

# Set a value for branch
@editorialbot set joss-paper as branch

# Run checks and provide information on the repository and the paper file
@editorialbot check repository

# Check the references of the paper for missing DOIs
@editorialbot check references

# Generates the pdf paper
@editorialbot generate pdf

# Generates a LaTeX preprint file
@editorialbot generate preprint

# Get a link to the complete list of reviewers
@editorialbot list reviewers
damar-wicaksono commented 2 months ago

@editorialbot generate pdf

editorialbot commented 2 months ago

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

alberto743 commented 1 month ago

@Fei-Tao Sorry, I am very late with this review. I hope to complete in the next weeks.

Fei-Tao commented 1 month ago

No problem. Thanks for your update. Looking forward to your reviews.

On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 12:49 PM Alberto @.***> wrote:

@Fei-Tao https://github.com/Fei-Tao Sorry, I am very late with this review. I hope to complete in the next weeks.

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6950#issuecomment-2411772160, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/A2NSR3XESKWWDKLSZ6K4UZ3Z3PYYNAVCNFSM6AAAAABKIBZMWCVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDIMJRG43TEMJWGA . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

damar-wicaksono commented 1 month ago

Hi @Fei-Tao,

I've completed my portion of the review. I raised several comments and suggestions regarding the package, its documentation and accompanying paper (please refer to the linked Issues in this thread). The authors have addressed these points satisfactorily.

The package implements a range of DDROM techniques that I believe will be valuable to its target audience. The documentation includes detailed tutorials that showcase the package's capabilities, particularly in the context of nuclear engineering and related fields (as advertised), making them well-suited to its intended users. The documentation is well-structured and comprehensive, and the paper is well-written.

I am pleased to support the publication of this package in JOSS.

Fei-Tao commented 1 month ago

Hi @damar-wicaksono, thanks for your effort in helping improve this submission. Appreciate your time.

@ShimingYIN and @alberto743, would you please complete your reviewing at your convenience? Thanks again for agreeing to review this submission.

ShimingYIN commented 1 month ago

Hi @damar-wicaksono, thanks for your effort in helping improve this submission. Appreciate your time.

@ShimingYIN and @alberto743, would you please complete your reviewing at your convenience? Thanks again for agreeing to review this submission.

@Fei-Tao Sorry for being so late. I've started with this review and hope to finish it within the coming week.