[PRE REVIEW]: MontePy: a Python library for reading, editing, and writing MCNP input files.

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@micahgale<!--end-author-handle-- (Micah D. Gale) Repository: https://github.com/idaholab/MontePy Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): joss_submit Version: v0.2.7 Editor: !--editor-->@kellyrowland<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: Pending Managing EiC: Kyle Niemeyer

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/e5b5dc8cea19605a1507dd4d420d5199"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/e5b5dc8cea19605a1507dd4d420d5199/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/e5b5dc8cea19605a1507dd4d420d5199/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/e5b5dc8cea19605a1507dd4d420d5199)

Author instructions

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

@micahgale 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]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.2172/1889957 is OK
- 10.1080/00295639.2022.2153617 is OK
- 10.1016/J.ENG.2017.04.016 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.04735 is OK
- 10.1016/j.anucene.2014.07.048 is OK
- 10.2172/1884737 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: MCNP User’s Manual: Code Version 6.2
- No DOI given, and none found for title: SLY (Sly Lex Yacc)
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Advanced Test Reactor User Guide

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90  T=0.15 s (1227.2 files/s, 164215.7 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                          92           2499           3526          13123
reStructuredText                72            670            546           1448
SVG                              1              0              0           1056
Markdown                         6             93              0            368
YAML                             2             27              1            277
TeX                              1             12              0             99
TOML                             1             12              1             75
Jupyter Notebook                 1              0            135             29
DOS Batch                        1              8              1             26
Bourne Shell                     2              9              1             24
make                             1              4              7              9
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                           180           3334           4218          16534
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

  1772  Micah D. Gale
   732  Micah Gale
    52  Travis J. Labossiere-Hickman
    17  Gale, Micah David
     5  Brenna A. Carbno
     3  Labossiere-Hickman, Travis James
     3  Wendy Skinner

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 2187

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

[editorialbot]

License info:

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

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

Monte Carlo / Dynamic Code (MC/DC): An accelerated Python package for fully transient neutron transport and rapid methods development Submitting author: @jpmorgan98 Handling editor: @kellyrowland (Active) Reviewers: @lewisfish, @szabo137 Similarity score: 0.7117

WATTS: Workflow and template toolkit for simulation Submitting author: @paulromano Handling editor: @danielskatz (Active) Reviewers: @sskutnik, @munkm, @yadudoc Similarity score: 0.7085

polypy - Analysis Tools for Solid State Molecular Dynamics and Monte Carlo Trajectories Submitting author: @symmy596 Handling editor: @richardjgowers (Active) Reviewers: @hmacdope, @lscalfi Similarity score: 0.6984

PYroMat: A Python package for thermodynamic properties Submitting author: @jranalli Handling editor: @jgostick (Active) Reviewers: @espottesmith, @fwitte Similarity score: 0.6981

PyMedPhys: A community effort to develop an open, Python-based standard library for medical physics applications Submitting author: @Matthew-Jennings Handling editor: @osorensen (Active) Reviewers: @ProfLeao, @gbaltz Similarity score: 0.6848

⚠️ Note to editors: If these papers look like they might be a good match, click through to the review issue for that paper and invite one or more of the authors before considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[kyleniemeyer]

Hello @MicahGale, sorry for the delay in processing this. Unfortunately, we do not have any editors available to handle your submission right now, so I have to put this on our waitlist. In the meantime, any reviewer recommendations would be welcome (though please don't actually tag/request folks yourself).

[MicahGale]

MISSING DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: MCNP User’s Manual: Code Version 6.2```

The MCNP 6.3 manual does have a DOI number on OSTI. I will have to check but changing to citing the 6.3 manual will probably make sense.

- No DOI given, and none found for title: SLY (Sly Lex Yacc)

Nothing can be done here.

- No DOI given, and none found for title: Advanced Test Reactor User Guide

This report is on OSTI as an INL external report, and it's odd that it doesn't have a DOI. I will ask around to see if this can be given a DOI.

[MicahGale]

Hello @MicahGale, sorry for the delay in processing this. Unfortunately, we do not have any editors available to handle your submission right now, so I have to put this on our waitlist. In the meantime, any reviewer recommendations would be welcome (though please don't actually tag/request folks yourself).

Thank you @kyleniemeyer for the update, and moving this along for the time being. I will get you a list of potential reviewers in the next few days.

Just as a heads up I will be on vacation starting next week through August 12, and won't be checking GitHub during that time. If needed @tjlaboss should be able to address most concerns about this paper during that time.

[MicahGale]

For reviews might I suggest:

• Paul Romano (@paulromano)
• Colin Josey (cjosey@lanl.gov)
• Madicken Munk (@munkm)

[tjlaboss]

The MCNP 6.3 manual does have a DOI number on OSTI. I will have to check but changing to citing the 6.3 manual will probably make sense.

This makes sense to me. Not only is MCNP6.3 the most recent version at time of submission, but also its documentation has been cleaned up and expanded since 6.2.

[cmarmo]

Hello @kyleniemeyer , Chiara speaking here, I am currently serving as editor in chief for pyOpenSci: @MicahGale submitted MontePy to pyOpenSci, without knowing we have a collaboration with JOSS.

I cannot guarantee to find an editor faster than JOSS, but moving forward via pyOpenSci we can probably optimize the number of volounteers mobilized for this review: would that sound reasonable?

[kellyrowland]

@kyleniemeyer 👋 I could take this on as editor.

[kyleniemeyer]

@editorialbot assign @kellyrowland as editor

Thank you!

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @kellyrowland is now the editor

[kyleniemeyer]

@cmarmo sorry, I just saw your note about pyOpenSci. Normally, for rOpenSci and pyOpenSci, our fast-track process kicks in after the package was reviewed and approved there, to avoid reviewing the same things twice. Then, the JOSS editor essentially just checks for scope and then reviews the paper.

If @MicahGale is fine with it, we can pause the JOSS review until the pyOpenSci review has concluded, and then handle the paper fast-track acceptance afterwards. (This will probably take the same amount of time anyways!)

[MicahGale]

That sounds good to me.

[cmarmo]

@kyleniemeyer , I'm having trouble finding editors this summer, but I think the "pyOpenSci then JOSS" workflow can save reviewers some time. On the other hand, you've already found an editor.

So, I dare to imagine a scenario... let me know if it could be feasible...

What if @kellyrowland would be interested in being an editor for the pyOpenSci submission? It looks to me like she would be a perfect fit! And we are always happy to have new collaborators!