[PRE REVIEW]: A Python Library for Pre- and Post-Processing of DAMASK Simulations

editorialbot commented 4 months ago

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@MarDiehl@zhubonan<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @hakonanes, @mkuehbach Managing EiC: Kevin M. Moerman

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/248965d62a17b4ffc396f6f71facc4b5"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/248965d62a17b4ffc396f6f71facc4b5/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/248965d62a17b4ffc396f6f71facc4b5/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/248965d62a17b4ffc396f6f71facc4b5)

Author instructions

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

@MarDiehl 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 commented 4 months ago

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 commented 4 months ago

Checking the BibTeX entries failed with the following error:

Failed to parse BibTeX on value "-731" (NAME) [#<BibTeX::Bibliography data=[11]>, "@", #<BibTeX::Entry >, {:author=>["James Ahrens and Berk Geveci and Charles Law"], :booktitle=>["Visualization Handbook"], :editor=>["Charles D. Hansen and Chris R. Johnson"], :publisher=>["Elsevier"], :title=>["{ParaView}: An End-User Tool for Large Data Visualization"], :year=>["2005"], :pages=>"717"}]

editorialbot commented 4 months ago

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90  T=0.89 s (454.1 files/s, 359120.6 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
XML                             53              0              8         169681
YAML                           127            459             45          70221
Fortran 90                      87           7838           3833          23904
diff                            76            553           8711          11980
Python                          42           3485           5518          11001
JSON                             2              0              0           2054
TeX                              1             24              0            260
CMake                            6             86            209            248
SVG                              2              0              0            212
C                                1             26              2             95
Markdown                         2             35              0             88
Bourne Shell                     1             13             10             62
zsh                              1             11              9             55
MATLAB                           1              7              2             29
make                             1              6              3             18
Jupyter Notebook                 1              0            259             17
INI                              1              0              0             16
TOML                             1              1              0              5
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                           406          12544          18609         289946
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

  6837  Martin Diehl
  1327  Martin  Diehl
  1185  Test User
   924  Philip  Eisenlohr
   782  Philip Eisenlohr
   495  Christoph   Kords
   325  Sharan Roongta
   290  Pratheek    Shanthraj
   263  Franz   Roters
   139  Vitesh Shah
   128  Franz Roters
   105  Luc Hantcherli
    92  Daniel Otto de Mentock
    82  Luv Sharma
    69  Haiming Zhang
    64  zhangc43
    57  chen
    56  Tias    Maiti
    53  f.basile
    52  Claudio Zambaldi
    52  Su  Leen    Wong
    43  Denny   Tjahjanto
    31  Chen    Zhang
    28  Zhuowen Zhao
    26  Mahesh  Balasubramaniam
    20  Chen Zhang
    19  Alankar Alankar
    18  Abisheik Panneerselvam
    18  Jaeyong Jung
    17  Fengbo Han
    17  Krishna Komerla
    17  Sharan
    14  Chen
    14  Pratheek Shanthraj
    14  William Counts
    14  Yi-Chin Yang
    13  Aritra  Chakraborty
    13  Aritra Chakraborty
    13  Yun Jo  Ro
    12  Samad Vakili
    11  Nan Jia
    11  Taymor  El  Achkar
    10  Eureka Pai
    10  d.mentock
     9  Harsha  Phukan
     9  Onur    Guevenc
     8  Nader   Zaafarani
     7  Yi Hu
     6  David   Mercier
     6  Eralp   Demir
     6  Nikhil Prabhu
     6  Ruxin Zhang
     6  Yannick Naunheim
     5  Chuanlai Liu
     5  Noriki  Fujita
     5  Tias Maiti
     4  Eureka Pai Kulyadi
     4  navyanthkusam
     3  Arka Lahiri
     3  Cathy Bing
     3  Ding    Wang
     3  Duancheng   Ma
     3  Jennifer Nastola
     3  Yang Su
     3  brendanvk
     2  Brendan Vande Kieft
     2  Bret    Dunlap
     2  David   Cereceda    Senas
     2  Henry   Hutasoit
     2  Satyapriya Gupta
     2  Shah Vitesh
     2  Shaokang    Zhang
     2  Sheng Zhang
     2  Yang    Su
     2  tiasmaiti
     1  1a2a34v
     1  Amrit Jena
     1  Arko Jyoti Bhattacharjee
     1  Brendan Robert Vande Kieft
     1  ChuanlaiLiu
     1  Hongmei Li
     1  Javier Velo
     1  Kieran David Nehil-Puleo
     1  Mingxuan Lin
     1  Ricardo Lebensohn
     1  Satya Gupta
     1  Sehar   Abbas
     1  Tobias  Binder
     1  Unknown
     1  Vitesh
     1  Yannick Naunheim
     1  yi_work

editorialbot commented 4 months ago

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 916

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

editorialbot commented 4 months ago

License info:

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

editorialbot commented 4 months ago

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

editorialbot commented 4 months ago

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

scikit-fem: A Python package for finite element assembly Submitting author: @kinnala Handling editor: @meg-simula (Retired) Reviewers: @thelfer, @AnjaliSandip Similarity score: 0.7497

h5fortran: object-oriented polymorphic Fortran interface for HDF5 file IO Submitting author: @scivision Handling editor: @pdebuyl (Active) Reviewers: @milancurcic, @bast Similarity score: 0.7441

scida: scalable analysis for scientific big data Submitting author: @cbyrohl Handling editor: @mbobra (Active) Reviewers: @egaraldi, @kyleaoman Similarity score: 0.7362

Simmate: a framework for materials science Submitting author: @jacksund Handling editor: @rkurchin (Active) Reviewers: @bocklund, @utf Similarity score: 0.7355

$hp\mathrm{3D}$: A Scalable MPI/OpenMP $hp$-Adaptive Finite Element Software Library for Complex Multiphysics Applications Submitting author: @stefanhenneking Handling editor: @jedbrown (Active) Reviewers: @peterrum, @likask Similarity score: 0.7294

⚠️ 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.

MarDiehl commented 4 months ago

License info:

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

The license is AGPL-3.0-or-later, GitHub does not detect it properly

MarDiehl commented 4 months ago

For the software report: Since this paper is only about the python code, only the python subfolder should be considered for statistics.

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented 4 months ago

@editorialbot invite @zhubonan as editor

editorialbot commented 4 months ago

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented 4 months ago

@editorialbot check references

editorialbot commented 4 months ago

Checking the BibTeX entries failed with the following error:

Failed to parse BibTeX on value "-731" (NAME) [#<BibTeX::Bibliography data=[11]>, "@", #<BibTeX::Entry >, {:author=>["James Ahrens and Berk Geveci and Charles Law"], :booktitle=>["Visualization Handbook"], :editor=>["Charles D. Hansen and Chris R. Johnson"], :publisher=>["Elsevier"], :title=>["{ParaView}: An End-User Tool for Large Data Visualization"], :year=>["2005"], :pages=>"717"}]

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented 4 months ago

@MarDiehl can you try to resolve this error? :point_up:

If you make any updates to the .bib file, you can call @editorialbot check references here again, to check the references again. You can also call @editorialbot generate pdf to update the paper once the check is passing.

MarDiehl commented 4 months ago

@editorialbot check references

editorialbot commented 4 months ago

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1016/j.commatsci.2018.04.030 is OK
- 10.1186/2193-9772-3-5 is OK
- 10.1107/S1600576720011103 is OK
- 10.1088/0965-0393/23/8/083501 is OK
- 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 is OK
- 10.1038/sdata.2016.18 is OK
- 10.1016/B978-012387582-2/50038-1 is OK
- 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55 is OK
- 10.1016/j.cma.2011.01.002 is OK
- 10.1002/nme.2579 is OK
- 10.1145/1966895.1966900 is OK
- 10.1007/s40192-017-0084-5 is OK
- 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 is OK
- 10.25080/Majora-92bf1922-00a is OK
- 10.21105/joss.01450 is OK
- 10.1016/j.msea.2022.143471 is OK
- 10.4028/www.scientific.net/SSP.160.63 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- 10.1107/s1600576716012942 may be a valid DOI for title: Orientations–perfectly colored
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Hierarchical Data Format, version 5
- No DOI given, and none found for title: The Visualization Toolkit (4th ed.)
- No DOI given, and none found for title: YAML
- 10.1016/j.cma.2011.01.002 may be a valid DOI for title: Large-scale 3D random polycrystals for the finite ...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: pytest x.y
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Python and HDF5

INVALID DOIs

- None

MarDiehl commented 4 months ago

@editorialbot generate pdf

zhubonan commented 4 months ago

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman happy to take this one!

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented 3 months ago

@editorialbot assign @zhubonan as editor

editorialbot commented 3 months ago

Assigned! @zhubonan is now the editor

zhubonan commented 3 months ago

Hello @SunilAnandatheertha @kinnala @alizma Would you be able to review this submission? According to your profiles in the reviewer information system, this work seems to fit your area of expertise.

Thanks in advance.

zhubonan commented 3 months ago

Hi @MarDiehl, could you please suggest some reviewers? You can comment with their github handles here. But please don't directly '@' them. Thanks in advance.

MarDiehl commented 3 months ago

sergiolucarini
hakonanes
rquey
MHenrich1990
s5409693 (recent publication on different topic)
mkuehbach (former colleague, joint publication in 2020)

zhubonan commented 2 months ago

Hello @sergiolucarini @hakonanes @mkuehbach Would you be able to review this submission? The process of reviewing for JOSS is unique and takes place on GitHub. This involves reviewing the manuscript and installing/testing/reading the underlying code. You can learn more about it here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html#reviewing-for-joss

Please let me know if you are able/unable to review. Your response is greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

mkuehbach commented 2 months ago

@zhubonan that work is something I can imagine myself reviewing

hakonanes commented 2 months ago

I'd be happy to review.

zhubonan commented 2 months ago

@editorialbot add @hakonanes as reviewer

editorialbot commented 2 months ago

@hakonanes added to the reviewers list!

zhubonan commented 2 months ago

@editorialbot add @mkuehbach as reviewer

editorialbot commented 2 months ago

@mkuehbach added to the reviewers list!

zhubonan commented 2 months ago

@hakonanes and @mkuehbach Thanks for agreeing to review!

zhubonan commented 2 months ago

@editorialbot start review

editorialbot commented 2 months ago

OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/7164.

zhubonan commented 3 weeks ago

Hi @s5409693 and @rquey, we are in need of an extra reviewer for this submission, "A Python Library for Pre- and Post-Processing of DAMASK Simulations". Would you be happy to help review it?

The process of reviewing for JOSS is unique and takes place on GitHub. This involves reviewing the manuscript and installing/testing/reading the underlying code. You can learn more about it here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html#reviewing-for-joss

Please let me know if you are able/unable to review. Your response is greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

s5409693 commented 3 weeks ago

Hi Bonan Zhu,

I am honored to be considered as a JOSS reviewer, but unfortunately, I’m currently not able to provide a thorough review, so I have to decline. Sorry about that.

Best,

Paul

From: Bonan Zhu @.> Sent: Friday, November 1, 2024 3:25 PM To: openjournals/joss-reviews @.> Cc: Seibert, Paul @.>; Mention @.> Subject: Re: [openjournals/joss-reviews] [PRE REVIEW]: A Python Library for Pre- and Post-Processing of DAMASK Simulations (Issue #6986)

Hi @s5409693 https://github.com/s5409693 and @rquey https://github.com/rquey , we are in need of an extra reviewer for this submission, "A Python Library for Pre- and Post-Processing of DAMASK Simulations". Would you be happy to help review it?

The process of reviewing for JOSS is unique and takes place on GitHub. This involves reviewing the manuscript and installing/testing/reading the underlying code. You can learn more about it here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html#reviewing-for-joss

Please let me know if you are able/unable to review. Your response is greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6986#issuecomment-2451960344 , or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ASFLXBZACECUGWGV6RDHVFLZ6OFKDAVCNFSM6AAAAABK4MEGKSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDINJRHE3DAMZUGQ . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

MarDiehl commented 1 week ago

@zhubonan: In my opinion, the following people are good candidates for a second review

MRezaYaghoobi
aaditya8959
tori-miller

zhubonan commented 1 week ago

Hi @MRezaYaghoobi, @aaditya8959 and @tori-miller, we are in need of an extra reviewer for this submission, "A Python Library for Pre- and Post-Processing of DAMASK Simulations". Would you be happy to help review it?

The process of reviewing for JOSS is unique and takes place on GitHub. This involves reviewing the manuscript and installing/testing/reading the underlying code. You can learn more about it here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html#reviewing-for-joss

Please let me know if you are able/unable to review. Your response is greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

tori-miller commented 1 week ago

I'm sorry, I don't think my DAMASK skills are sufficient to be able to evaluate this paper.

From: Bonan Zhu @.> Sent: Friday, November 15, 2024 11:02 AM To: openjournals/joss-reviews @.> Cc: Miller,Victoria Mayne @.>; Mention @.> Subject: Re: [openjournals/joss-reviews] [PRE REVIEW]: A Python Library for Pre- and Post-Processing of DAMASK Simulations (Issue #6986)

[External Email]

Hi @MRezaYaghoobihttps://github.com/MRezaYaghoobi, @aaditya8959https://github.com/aaditya8959 and @tori-millerhttps://github.com/tori-miller, we are in need of an extra reviewer for this submission, "A Python Library for Pre- and Post-Processing of DAMASK Simulations". Would you be happy to help review it?

The process of reviewing for JOSS is unique and takes place on GitHub. This involves reviewing the manuscript and installing/testing/reading the underlying code. You can learn more about it here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html#reviewing-for-joss

Please let me know if you are able/unable to review. Your response is greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6986#issuecomment-2479310354, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALOY3UFRHHDKTBAR2A7SGIL2AYLLBAVCNFSM6AAAAABK4MEGKSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDINZZGMYTAMZVGQ. You are receiving this because you were mentioned.

MarDiehl commented 6 days ago

some further suggestions

mgroeber
imikejackson
drowenhorst-nrl

and active developers from https://github.com/mtex-toolbox/mtex

openjournals / joss-reviews

[PRE REVIEW]: A Python Library for Pre- and Post-Processing of DAMASK Simulations #6986

Status