[PRE REVIEW]: LorenzCycleToolkit: A Comprehensive Python Tool for Analyzing Atmospheric Energy Cycles

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@daniloceano<!--end-author-handle-- (Danilo Couto de Souza) Repository: https://github.com/daniloceano/LorenzCycleToolkit Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): joss-submission Version: v1.0.0 Editor: !--editor-->@observingClouds<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @einaraz, @amylu00 Managing EiC: Kristen Thyng

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/c1ad50dd5ed033837a64dc1f9f3ff643"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/c1ad50dd5ed033837a64dc1f9f3ff643/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/c1ad50dd5ed033837a64dc1f9f3ff643/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/c1ad50dd5ed033837a64dc1f9f3ff643)

Author instructions

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

@daniloceano 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=0.07 s (1502.2 files/s, 131394.1 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                          30            997           1315           4072
CSV                             46              0              0            959
SVG                              1              1              1            472
reStructuredText                14            128            178            208
Markdown                         3             50              0            126
TeX                              1             13              0            126
YAML                             3             24              0             90
DOS Batch                        1              8              1             26
Bourne Shell                     1              7              0             12
make                             1              4              7              9
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                           101           1232           1502           6100
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

   469  daniloceano
    83  Danilo Couto d Souza
    24  Danilo Couto de Souza

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 1127

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

[editorialbot]

License info:

🟡 License found: GNU General Public License v3.0 (Check here for OSI approval)

[editorialbot]

:warning: An error happened when generating the pdf.

[daniloceano]

@editorialbot commands

[kthyng]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

:warning: An error happened when generating the pdf.

[kthyng]

@daniloceano Can you take a look to see what's breaking the paper compilation?

[daniloceano]

Reviewers suggestions:

• Mattia Almansi
• @koldunovn
• Harald von Waldow

[editorialbot]

:warning: An error happened when generating the pdf.

[daniloceano]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[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:

xeofs: Comprehensive EOF analysis in Python with xarray Submitting author: @nicrie Handling editor: @samhforbes (Active) Reviewers: @DamienIrving, @malmans2 Similarity score: 0.7303

diyepw: A Python package for Do-It-Yourself EnergyPlus weather file generation Submitting author: @amandadsmith Handling editor: @timtroendle (Retired) Reviewers: @samuelduchesne, @fneum Similarity score: 0.7269

RESOURCECODE: A Python package for statistical analysis of sea-state hindcast data Submitting author: @NRaillard Handling editor: @marcosvital (Active) Reviewers: @krober10nd, @platipodium, @malmans2 Similarity score: 0.7246

SWAMPE: A Shallow-Water Atmospheric Model in Python for Exoplanets Submitting author: @kathlandgren Handling editor: @dfm (Active) Reviewers: @mark-hammond, @imalsky Similarity score: 0.7223

OpenOA: An Open-Source Codebase For Operational Analysis of Wind Farms Submitting author: @jordanperr Handling editor: @sjpfenninger (Retired) Reviewers: @gschivley, @brynpickering Similarity score: 0.7213

⚠️ 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.

[daniloceano]

@kthyng solved! Thank you.

[kthyng]

Hi @daniloceano and thanks for your submission! I am looking for some specific items to make sure your submission fits our requirements at a high level (not at the more detailed review level) before moving on to finding an editor or putting this on our waitlist if no relevant editors are available. I'll comment over time as I have a chance to go through them:

• [x] OSI-approved license
• [ ] Installation instructions
• [x] Documentation
• [x] Tests of some sort
• [x] Check paper (make sure compiles, read through, check for length 250-1000 words)
• [x] Substantial scholarly effort
• [x] Clear research application/in scope

In the meantime, please take a look at the comments above ⬆️ from the editorialbot to address any DOI, license, or paper issues if you're able (there may not be any), or suggest reviewers. For reviewers, please suggest 5 reviewers from the database listed above or your own (non-conflicted) extended network. Their github handles are most useful to receive but please don't use "@" to reference them since it will prematurely ping them.

[daniloceano]

@kthyng Reviewers suggestions:

• Jack Atkinson
• Mattia Almansi
• @koldunovn
• @ali-ramadhan
• Harald von Waldow

[kthyng]

Please check the capitalization in your references. You can preserve capitalization by placing {} around characters/words in your .bib file.

[kthyng]

@daniloceano also:

• can you make a release on PyPI or is there a technical difficulty with doing so?

[kthyng]

@observingClouds Could you edit this submission? I have just a few lingering comments above to be addressed.

[kthyng]

@editorialbot invite @observingClouds as editor

[editorialbot]

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

[daniloceano]

@kthyng:

Please check the capitalization in your references. You can preserve capitalization by placing {} around characters/words in your .bib file.

Thank you for your feedback. I have made an attempt to address the capitalization issue in the titles by enclosing key terms and acronyms in curly braces {}. However, I am not entirely sure if this fully resolves the concern. Could you please clarify if there are any specific instances or additional elements that need to be adjusted?

@daniloceano also:

• can you make a release on PyPI or is there a technical difficulty with doing so?

Regarding the PyPI release, it is now completed. You can find it at https://pypi.org/project/LorenzCycleToolkit/. Please note that I encountered some minor issues along the way, which necessitated updating the version to 1.0.3. Should I pull the changes from the main branch to the submission branch?

[observingClouds]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @observingClouds is now the editor

[kthyng]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[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:

xeofs: Comprehensive EOF analysis in Python with xarray Submitting author: @nicrie Handling editor: @samhforbes (Active) Reviewers: @DamienIrving, @malmans2 Similarity score: 0.7313

diyepw: A Python package for Do-It-Yourself EnergyPlus weather file generation Submitting author: @amandadsmith Handling editor: @timtroendle (Retired) Reviewers: @samuelduchesne, @fneum Similarity score: 0.7274

SWAMPE: A Shallow-Water Atmospheric Model in Python for Exoplanets Submitting author: @kathlandgren Handling editor: @dfm (Active) Reviewers: @mark-hammond, @imalsky Similarity score: 0.7237

RESOURCECODE: A Python package for statistical analysis of sea-state hindcast data Submitting author: @NRaillard Handling editor: @marcosvital (Active) Reviewers: @krober10nd, @platipodium, @malmans2 Similarity score: 0.7227

SpeedyWeather.jl: Reinventing atmospheric general circulation models towards interactivity and extensibility Submitting author: @milankl Handling editor: @kthyng (Active) Reviewers: @vavrines, @natgeo-wong, @slayoo Similarity score: 0.7214

⚠️ 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.

[kthyng]

Should I pull the changes from the main branch to the submission branch?

Since the review hasn't started, yes I think get everything into the review branch as up to date as possible so that it is all reviewed.

Could you please clarify if there are any specific instances or additional elements that need to be adjusted?

I don't see anything that needs to be capitalized now — I generally check for proper nouns, etc.

[kthyng]

Thanks @observingClouds!

[daniloceano]

Since the review hasn't started, yes I think get everything into the review branch as up to date as possible so that it is all reviewed.

I’ve pulled all the latest changes from the main branch into the joss-submission branch. Thank you.

[observingClouds]

Thanks @daniloceano, I'm the editor for this submission and am now searching for reviewers. As soon as I find two reviewers the interactive review starts :smile:

[observingClouds]

@editorialbot add @einaraz as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@einaraz added to the reviewers list!

[observingClouds]

@editorialbot add @amylu00 as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@amylu00 added to the reviewers list!

[observingClouds]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/7139.