[PRE REVIEW]: PhaseFieldX: An Open-Source Framework for Advanced Phase-Field Simulations

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@CastillonMiguel<!--end-author-handle-- (Miguel Castillón de Miguel) Repository: https://github.com/CastillonMiguel/phasefieldx Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: v0.0.2 Editor: !--editor-->@zhubonan<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @finsberg, @IgorBaratta Managing EiC: Kyle Niemeyer

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7111b621625200b3d2c4b199ea9568c0"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7111b621625200b3d2c4b199ea9568c0/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7111b621625200b3d2c4b199ea9568c0/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7111b621625200b3d2c4b199ea9568c0)

Author instructions

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

@CastillonMiguel 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=0.14 s (876.4 files/s, 74605.3 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                          69           1679           3343           3071
reStructuredText                36            425            369            347
CSV                              3              2              0            189
GLSL                             3            110            403            135
XML                              5              0              0            125
TeX                              1              9              2             86
YAML                             2              3              0             47
Markdown                         1             15              0             34
DOS Batch                        1              8              1             26
TOML                             1              2              0             20
make                             1              4              7              9
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                           123           2257           4125           4089
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

    22  CastillonMiguel

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.5281/zenodo.10447666 is OK
- 10.1145/3524456 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.03982 is OK
- 10.1145/2566630 is OK
- 10.1007/s00466-014-1109-y is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2010.04.011 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmps.2009.04.011 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2019.112731 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 393

✅ 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:

FeenoX: a cloud-first finite-element(ish) computational engineering tool Submitting author: @gtheler Handling editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman (Active) Reviewers: @vijaysm, @AnjaliSandip, @chennachaos Similarity score: 0.7195

PDLSM-FEM: Solver of Coupled Peridynamics Least Squares Minimization with Finite Element Method Submitting author: @QibangLiu Handling editor: @prashjha (Active) Reviewers: @TLCFEM, @karthikncsu, @Balaje Similarity score: 0.7166

scikit-fem: A Python package for finite element assembly Submitting author: @kinnala Handling editor: @meg-simula (Retired) Reviewers: @thelfer, @AnjaliSandip Similarity score: 0.7158

ngsxfem: Add-on to NGSolve for geometrically unfitted finite element discretizations Submitting author: @schruste Handling editor: @meg-simula (Retired) Reviewers: @mscroggs, @mikaem Similarity score: 0.7146

Simframe: A Python Framework for Scientific Simulations Submitting author: @stammler Handling editor: @taless474 (Retired) Reviewers: @schruste, @lucaferranti Similarity score: 0.7135

⚠️ 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]

@editorialbot invite @zhubonan as editor

Hi @zhubonan, this looks to be close to your area of expertise. Can you handle this submission?

[editorialbot]

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

[zhubonan]

Happy to take this one.

[kyleniemeyer]

@editorialbot assign @zhubonan as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @zhubonan is now the editor

[CastillonMiguel]

@editorialbot check references

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.5281/zenodo.10447666 is OK
- 10.1145/3524456 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.03982 is OK
- 10.1145/2566630 is OK
- 10.1016/j.cma.2010.04.011 is OK
- 10.1016/j.jmps.2009.04.011 is OK
- 10.1007/s00466-014-1109-y is OK
- 10.1016/j.cma.2019.112731 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[zhubonan]

Hello @stammler, @lcao11 and @gtheler. 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.

[gtheler]

Thank you @zhubonan but Python is outside my field of expertise.

[zhubonan]

Pinging @stammler, @lcao11 again - please let me know if you can help with this submission. Thanks.

[zhubonan]

Hi @CastillonMiguel, could you please help suggest some reviewers? Thanks

[CastillonMiguel]

Hi @zhubonan, sure! I suggest the following reviewers: @finsberg, @IgorBaratta, @chennachaos, and @tjhei. Thanks!

[zhubonan]

Hello @finsberg, @chennachaos, and @tjhei 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.

[finsberg]

@zhubonan I would be happy to review this submission

[zhubonan]

@editorialbot add @finsberg as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@finsberg added to the reviewers list!

[zhubonan]

Hello @IgorBaratta 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.

[IgorBaratta]

Hi @zhubonan , I'd be happy to review this submission.

[zhubonan]

@editorialbot add @IgorBaratta as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@IgorBaratta added to the reviewers list!

[zhubonan]

@editorialbot start-review

[editorialbot]

I'm sorry human, I don't understand that. You can see what commands I support by typing:

@editorialbot commands

[zhubonan]

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello @zhubonan, here are the things you can ask me to do:

# List all available commands
@editorialbot commands

# Add to this issue's reviewers list
@editorialbot add @username as reviewer

# Remove from this issue's reviewers list
@editorialbot remove @username from reviewers

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

# Assign a user as the editor of this submission
@editorialbot assign @username as editor

# Remove the editor assigned to this submission
@editorialbot remove editor

# Remind an author, a reviewer or the editor to return to a review after a 
# certain period of time (supported units days and weeks)
@editorialbot remind @reviewer in 2 weeks

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

# Set a value for version
@editorialbot set v1.0.0 as version

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

# Set a value for repository
@editorialbot set https://github.com/organization/repo as repository

# Set a value for the archive DOI
@editorialbot set 10.5281/zenodo.6861996 as archive

# Mention the EiCs for the correct track
@editorialbot ping track-eic

# 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

# Recommends the submission for acceptance
@editorialbot recommend-accept

# Generates a LaTeX preprint file
@editorialbot generate preprint

# Flag submission with questionable scope
@editorialbot query scope

# Get a link to the complete list of reviewers
@editorialbot list reviewers

# Creates a post-review checklist with editor and authors tasks
@editorialbot create post-review checklist

# Open the review issue
@editorialbot start review

[zhubonan]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/7307.