search

programminghistorian / ph-submissions

The repository and website hosting the peer review process for new Programming Historian lessons
http://programminghistorian.github.io/ph-submissions
135 stars 112 forks source link

Simulations in historical research: How to create an agent-based model of communication networks #605

Open hawc2 opened 3 months ago

hawc2 commented 3 months ago

Programming Historian in English has received a proposal for a lesson, "Simulations in historical research: How to create an agent-based model of communication networks" by @merrygin and @maltevogl.

I have circulated this proposal for feedback within the English team. We have considered this proposal for:

We are pleased to have invited @merrygin and @maltevogl to develop this Proposal into a Submission to be developed under the guidance of @digitalkosovski as editor.

The Submission package should include:

We ask @merrygin and @maltevogl to share their Submission package with our Publishing team by email, copying in @digitalkosovski.

We've agreed a submission date of April. We ask @merrygin and @maltevogl to contact us if they need to revise this deadline.

When the Submission package is received, our Publishing team will process the new lesson materials, and prepare a Preview of the initial draft. They will post a comment in this Issue to provide the locations of all key files, as well as a link to the Preview where contributors can read the lesson as the draft progresses.

_If we have not received the Submission package by April, @digitalkosovski will attempt to contact @merrygin and @maltevogl. If we do not receive any update, this Issue will be closed.

Our dedicated Ombudspersons are Ian Milligan (English), Silvia Gutiérrez De la Torre (español), Hélène Huet (français), and Luis Ferla (português) Please feel free to contact them at any time if you have concerns that you would like addressed by an impartial observer. Contacting the ombudspersons will have no impact on the outcome of any peer review.

digitalkosovski commented 3 months ago

Dear @merrygin and @maltevogl, I hope you're both well. I'll be working as editor for this lesson.

In our previous communication by email last week, you asked for some initial feedback on the basis of the first draft you sent on Colab, which you also kindly sent to me in a .md file.

The draft you shared is an excellent starting point for the lesson. Much of it is structured already, the theoretical grounds are clear, and much of the code is written. I would like to offer some comments and advice before you send a full submission package:

1) I would especially advise you to be careful with the 8,000 word-limit, as the first draft is already long, and there are still some sections that need to be written. Part (1) is very interesting and well written, but it is also conceptually dense, so given the word limit you might choose to cut or reduce some parts, and rely instead on references (these will, in any case, be of use for readers who want to delve deeper into the subject after your lesson). One thing that could perhaps render this first part more accessible is the use of one or two images, or conceptual schemes, to illustrate some of your points.

  1. Watch out for issues in the structure of the lesson. I noticed a problem with the order of sections in Part 2, with Part 2.2. coming before Part 2.1. Because of this, I couldn't tell whether you mean to discuss mesa or the case study first. As far as I could tell, there is also a Part II, but no Part I.

  2. The code gave me some errors when running it on Colab, please double check it in your full submission.

  3. You mention that you will use available data from the LetterSampo project, but this doesn't come up again after the introduction. As far as I could tell, the lesson gives the tools to create the simulation model, but you don't actually draw on that data. Have I perhaps missed something here? Or is it only that the model shares some of the same features of that data set? If it is the latter option, I would recommend rephrasing that idea to make it clearer.

These are all initial recommendations based on my first reading of the draft, and I hope that they will be of use to you when working on your full submission. As mentioned in the message above, we will be waiting for the submission package by April. In the meantime, please feel free to write with any questions or doubts. I'm looking forward to reading your full draft, this is a very exciting lesson and I'm glad to be able to give you a hand in the process.

charlottejmc commented 3 months ago

Hello @digitalkosovski, @merrygin and @maltevogl,

You can find the key files here:

You can review a preview of the lesson here:

I noticed a couple things when setting this file up, which I've listed below:

Please feel free to make your subsequent edits directly to the markdown file here on Github!

Thank you ✨

anisa-hawes commented 3 months ago

Thank you for setting up this preview @charlottejmc!

--

Hello Jascha @merrygin and Malte @maltevogl,

I've sent you both invitations to join us as Outside Collaborators here on GitHub. This will give you the Write access you'll need to edit your lesson directly. (There's no need to use the Git Pull Request system in our ph-submissions repository).

Please let us know if you encounter any practical problems as you work with Agustín @digitalkosovski to shape this draft towards its Initial Edit. Charlotte and I are here to help!

Best, Anisa

merrygin commented 2 months ago

Hi @anisa-hawes @digitalkosovski and @charlottejmc - thank you for setting everything up and providing us with feedback! We will start updating our submission in the coming days. All best, Jascha

merrygin commented 2 months ago

Dear @anisa-hawes @digitalkosovski and @charlottejmc thanks for your patience so far! I just submitted our first change to the draft .md of @maltevogl and I. We worked on the original colab file we sent you to be able to test the code and write each other comments, which is why the .md here lay dormant for the past weeks.

We already tried to address some of your feedback, especially that towards structural inconsistencies, the danger of too much text as well as the code not working.

We tried to overhaul Part I to make the methodological introduction to simulations more approachable and less overwhelming. We now try to start at the historical interest for the subject matter and work step-by-step towards why simulations are useful for this. In order to do this, we also slightly changed the structure of the lesson compared to our initial submission.

The code should also be functional now and we extended it to include some visualization elements, especially an interactable interface inside the juptyer notebook. If you'd like to test the functionality of the code, you can try it here in the original colab.

There is still a lot to do, most importantly writing up Part III, cleaning up and finishing the text of Part II and reiterating on Part I, too, including all references / the bibliography as well as setting up a (external) document that systematically summarizes the model and would be a very good end point of the lesson, showing what could be done further with the model.

Unfortunately, all this is likely a bit too much for us to finish by end of April next week. So if it wouldn't be too much of an ask, we would kindly request if we might take a couple more weeks for getting everything ready.

All best, Jascha

digitalkosovski commented 2 months ago

Dear @merrygin and @maltevogl , thanks for keeping us posted. It all sounds good and I'm confident about your coming submission. As for your request, you can indeed take some extra days/weeks to finish the draft. Keep up the good work!

merrygin commented 1 month ago

Dear all, Just as a heads-up for you and a self-imposed deadline for us: We are currently finishing up the last edits and are hoping to get everything done for the next steps by Sunday. Thanks for your continued patience! All best, Jascha

anisa-hawes commented 1 month ago

Thank you for the update Jascha @merrygin and Malte @maltevogl! I'm just tagging Agustín @digitalkosovski here so that everyone is in the loop.

Please let @charlottejmc or I know if you need any practical assistance. We're here to help ☺️

merrygin commented 1 month ago

Thank you for the update Jascha @merrygin and Malte @maltevogl! I'm just tagging Agustín @digitalkosovski here so that everyone is in the loop.

Please let @charlottejmc or I know if you need any practical assistance. We're here to help ☺️

Thanks a lot! The main objective left is to make everything neater (but still short enough) language-wise and to get all the references in. Sadly, it didn't work out entirely today due to a very stubborn sickness, sorry for that! But we are actually almost done, should be finished by tomorrow or Tuesday at latest. I hope this is still fine for everybody!

Have a nice remainder of the weekend! All best, Jascha

merrygin commented 1 month ago

Dear @digitalkosovski , @charlottejmc and @anisa-hawes

I've pushed our finished version now, sorry again for the delays! As I wrote in the commit message, we are still a bit over the word/code-limit, I think, but are unsure which sections would be the most 'shorten-able' ones in your opinion. Also, we included Aleksandra Kaye and Raphael Schlattmann in the authors section, hoping that this is alright. They both helped us with extensive editing work and comments on the content already for the first version of our submission and for this round again. I (Jascha) forgot to mention them in the first contacts, sorry!

Hope you are all doing well! All best, Jascha and @maltevogl

merrygin commented 1 month ago

Oh, also, we used a certain way of inserting references for now, without knowing if this is the preferred one for you. Of course, we'll adapt that to whatever you like us to! Same goes for the actual reference style, which we have not standardized yet, for the same reason.

anisa-hawes commented 1 month ago

Hello Jascha @merrygin, Malte @maltevogl, Aleksandra and Raphael

Hello Jascha, Could you share Aleksandra's and Raphael's GitHub handles with us?

Thank you for your work on this submission!

I've made some adjustments to the file:

We use The Chicago Manual of Style, 17th Edition Notes and Bibliography system for endnotes. We insert [^1], [^2], etc. into the text, and cross reference these tag in an endnotes list [^1]:, [^2]:.

You can review the preview here: https://programminghistorian.github.io/ph-submissions/en/drafts/originals/agent-based-model-communication-networks.

If you're happy with the preview now, I think we are ready to hand this on to @digitalkosovski for the Initial Edit ☺️

maltevogl commented 1 month ago

Dear @anisa-hawes

thanks a lot for these adjustments! The preview looks really amazing already. The handle of Aleksandra is @Aleks-Kaye and the one of Raphael is @raphschlatt.

For the missing citations I have to refer to @merrygin .

The in-text references were meant as footnotes for the paragraph text. If that format does not work, maybe they could be converted to endnotes similar to the treatment of citations and referenced with e.g. [^a], [^b] to distinguish from citations?

In Paragraph # 60 there seems to be a formatting error? It starts with ```python id=”tQl5YRxWeonN” “"” and the fourth level header is not picked up. Other then that it looks great!

anisa-hawes commented 1 month ago

Thank you, @maltevogl.

I've removed that cell id id="tQl5YRxWeonN": https://github.com/programminghistorian/ph-submissions/commit/d7df79c76358ca7ea1e8983b4f33c7b8f1b4abcf. Apologies for missing that one!

I'm unclear what you mean by footnotes for the paragraph text. We can add in an endnote to provide a note at those two lines, just let us know which works you intended to reference Jascha @merrygin?

I'm confident that the header is display correctly. The typography in our Previews is slightly different than in our published lessons, but you can see how #### Header 4 will render in a published lesson here: https://programminghistorian.org/en/lessons/designing-a-timeline-tabletop-simulator#windows.

anisa-hawes commented 1 month ago

Hello Jascha @merrygin, Malte @maltevogl, Aleksandra @Aleks-Kaye, and Raphael @raphschlatt.

What's happening now?

Your lesson has been moved to the next phase of our workflow which is Phase 2: Initial Edit.

In this phase, your editor Agustín @digitalkosovski will read your lesson, and provide some initial feedback. Agustín will post feedback and suggestions as a comment in this issue, so that you can revise your draft in the following phase (Phase 3: Revision 1).

%%{init: { 'logLevel': 'debug', 'theme': 'dark', 'themeVariables': {
              'cScale0': '#444444', 'cScaleLabel0': '#ffffff',
              'cScale1': '#882b4f', 'cScaleLabel1': '#ffffff',
              'cScale2': '#444444', 'cScaleLabel2': '#ffffff'
       } } }%%
timeline
Section Phase 1 <br> Submission
Who worked on this? : Publishing Assistant (@charlottejmc) 
All  Phase 1 tasks completed? : Yes
Section Phase 2 <br> Initial Edit
Who's working on this? : Editor (@digitalkosovski)  
Expected completion date? : July 6
Section Phase 3 <br> Revision 1
Who's responsible? : Authors (@@merrygin, @maltevogl, @Aleks-Kaye, and @raphschlatt) 
Expected timeframe? : ~30 days after feedback is received

Note: The Mermaid diagram above may not render on GitHub mobile. Please check in via desktop when you have a moment.

merrygin commented 3 weeks ago

Thank you, @maltevogl.

I've removed that cell id id="tQl5YRxWeonN": d7df79c. Apologies for missing that one!

I'm unclear what you mean by footnotes for the paragraph text. We can add in an endnote to provide a note at those two lines, just let us know which works you intended to reference Jascha @merrygin?

I'm confident that the header is display correctly. The typography in our Previews is slightly different than in our published lessons, but you can see how #### Header 4 will render in a published lesson here: https://programminghistorian.org/en/lessons/designing-a-timeline-tabletop-simulator#windows.

Hi @anisa-hawes , thanks for your edits also from my side! I inserted the two missing references now. They must have slipped through in the last edit, sorry!

Regarding the two in-text references at lines 248 / 261 and 397 / 410: They were intended as footnotes or just comments on the text, i.e., the reference at 248 refers to "footnote" 261, where details about 'RandomActivation' are supposed to be explained. Maybe we could just include these as endnotes instead - or we could try to work them into the main body of the text. We were just thinking that this probably would work and cut down on words at the same time.

digitalkosovski commented 3 weeks ago

Dear @maltevogl and @merrygin,

Many thanks for sending the full draft. After having a quick look at it, I have the impression that you've significantly improved the previous draft (which was very good to begin with), and I expect that there won't be much work to do at this point.

Given that the summer break is approaching, I think we should start the external reviewing process as soon as possible. So my intention is to come back to you next week with a couple of remarks and suggestions so we can speed up the process. Hopefully we can do phases 2 and 3 in just a couple of weeks and launch the external reviews in July already.

Best, Agustín

digitalkosovski commented 3 weeks ago

Dear @maltevogl and @merrygin

I've gone through the lesson, and as I expected, I think you've done great work and there are very few suggestions I have before we go to external review.

The lesson is very clear and friendly in spite of the complexity of the subject. You’ve added great references, including some to other PH lessons, and I also appreciate that you’ve added some thoughts and external links concerning the data and the research but in a very efficient way, providing readers with interesting and relevant information, but without overloading the lesson itself with heavy research content.

I just have a few observations and suggestions:

1) In the beginning, you discuss the installation of mesa and of Python. But perhaps it’s also worth mentioning that the lesson also requires solid Python skills. Many readers have notions of Python and many digital historians can code on Python, but my feeling is that a big part of them actually limit themselves to using certain libraries. This lesson requires knowing what classes are about, and it mentions matters of inheritance (child classes, etc), so it does tread on ground that not all historians might be familiar with. We tag lessons according to their difficulty to give readers some orientation in advance, but I still think it would be appropriate for you to include a short comment about the Python skills needed to understand this lesson.

  1. Paragraph 47, line 171. You write: “Before we finally start coding, a last couple of remarks have to be made about key concepts in Agent-based Modeling that will reappear in Part 2 in a practical way.” This is probably something that remained from a previous version that had a different structure, because at this point we are already in Part 2. Please correct that in order to avoid any confusion for the reviewers.

  2. You discuss data visualization with matplotlib and also state things like “You’ll should see something like the distribution above” (paragraph 77, line 359), but you haven't included any images. Should you maybe include some to illustrate those cases?

  3. I see two things that look like formatting problems or missing references in paragraph 68, line 265 and paragraph 87, line 410

Maybe @anisa-hawes can confirm?

As you can see, these are all very minor observations, but I think it could be useful to address these things before sending the lesson for external review. If you agree with these observations, I hope you can work on them in the next couple of weeks and send a new version by late June or early July. That will allow us to do the reviews over the summer and contact you again by the end of the summer break.

I hope all of this helps. The lesson is fascinating and to my understanding, extremely useful. I'm very much looking forward to seeing it online.

All the best, Agustín

merrygin commented 3 weeks ago

Dear @digitalkosovski

thanks for the super fast and useful feedback - I'll have some time tomorrow and on Friday to address it, so we hopefully can keep up your great pace!

Regarding 3., the data visualization: should we drop the images in a particular place and mark the corresponding places to insert them in a certain way? This was an artifact of us building the lesson as a notebook, by the way, but of course the code's results are missing in the pure markdown... we did not think that through, to be honest. Images of the results are totally fine, I think, how about you @maltevogl ?

All best, Jascha

anisa-hawes commented 3 weeks ago

Thank you for the clarification about those two references, Jascha @merrygin. I've adjusted the endnote sequence so that these explanatory notes are integrated: https://github.com/programminghistorian/ph-submissions/commit/38948f335e6b06e78d0989540c62ed82543042b5

Hello Agustín @digitalkosovski. I wasn't certain what these two references were intended to be, but I understand now and we have integrated them into the endnote sequence as numbers 20 and 21. Let us know if this makes good sense to you, or if you'd rather those notes were integrated into the main body text.

maltevogl commented 3 weeks ago

Dear @anisa-hawes , dear @digitalkosovski

thanks again for the super fast feedback! We can certainly add images. We are just not sure of the integration in the markdown file. Every run of the notebook generates the visuals, and we can download them independently . For the interface I would suggest a screenshot to show to the readers what to expect.

I also agree with @merrygin , that we should be able to finish the changes this week.

All the best

Malte

anisa-hawes commented 3 weeks ago

Thank you, @maltevogl.

Please email any additional images to @charlottejmc (programming.assistant[@]programminghistorian.org) in .png or .jpg format (maximum of 840px on the longest edge). Charlotte will process these and slot in the code needed to display them.

If you could also share the accompanying alt-text (visual description of figure image) and caption text, that would be great.

Thank you!

digitalkosovski commented 3 weeks ago

Thank you all for your quick replies.

So if I understand correctly, the issues in paragraphs 68 and 87 that I noticed were just references that had been left inside the text but were meant as footnotes? I've seen notes 20 and 21 and, if I remember correctly, they were in the main body text. Can you please confirm @anisa-hawes ? Everything looks good to me now.

As for the rest, @maltevogl and @merrygin , everything sounds great. We'll be waiting for the new version and the pictures then.

All the best, Agustín

anisa-hawes commented 3 weeks ago

That's correct @digitalkosovski. Jascha explained that those two notes were intended to be endnotes so I have integrated them into the sequence.

digitalkosovski commented 3 weeks ago

Fantastic, all good on my end then! We'll be waiting for the next draft and the pictures then.

anisa-hawes commented 3 weeks ago

Hello Jascha @merrygin, Malte @maltevogl, Aleksandra @Aleks-Kaye, and Raphael @raphschlatt.

What's happening now?

Your lesson has been moved to the next phase of our workflow which is Phase 3: Revision 1.

This phase is an opportunity for you to revise your draft in response to @digitalkosovski's initial feedback.

Jascha and Malte already have the 'write access' they need to edit your draft directly. Aleksandra @Aleks-Kaye, and Raphael @raphschlatt, please let me know if either of you need access? We ask authors to work on their own files with direct commits: we prefer you don't fork our repo, or use the Pull Request system to edit in ph-submissions. With 'write access', you can make direct commits to your file here: /en/drafts/originals/agent-based-model-communication-networks.md. @charlottejmc and I can help if you encounter any practical problems!

When you and Agustín are all happy with the revised draft, we will move forward to Phase 4: Open Peer Review.

%%{init: { 'logLevel': 'debug', 'theme': 'dark', 'themeVariables': {
              'cScale0': '#444444', 'cScaleLabel0': '#ffffff',
              'cScale1': '#882b4f', 'cScaleLabel1': '#ffffff',
              'cScale2': '#444444', 'cScaleLabel2': '#ffffff'
       } } }%%
timeline
Section Phase 2 <br> Initial Edit
Who worked on this? : Editor (@digitalkosovski) 
All  Phase 2 tasks completed? : Yes
Section Phase 3 <br> Revision 1
Who's working on this? : Authors (@merrygin, @maltevogl, @Aleks-Kaye + @raphschlatt)  
Expected completion date? : July 14
Section Phase 4 <br> Open Peer Review
Who's responsible? : Reviewers (TBC) 
Expected timeframe? : ~60 days after request is accepted

Note: The Mermaid diagram above may not render on GitHub mobile. Please check in via desktop when you have a moment.

Aleks-Kaye commented 3 weeks ago

Dear @anisa-hawes ,

Thank you for your message. Yes, please could you give me access.

Best wishes, Aleks

raphschlatt commented 3 weeks ago

Dear https://github.com/anisa-hawes @anisa-hawes ,

Yes, I would also like to have access.

Best, Raphael

Von: Aleks-Kaye @.> Gesendet: Freitag, 14. Juni 2024 09:20 An: programminghistorian/ph-submissions @.> Cc: Raphael Schlattmann @.>; Mention @.> Betreff: Re: [programminghistorian/ph-submissions] Simulations in historical research: How to create an agent-based model of communication networks (Issue #605)

Dear @anisa-hawes https://github.com/anisa-hawes ,

Thank you for your message. Yes, please could you give me access.

Best wishes, Aleks

- Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/programminghistorian/ph-submissions/issues/605#issuecomm ent-2167394968 , or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ATUNM5DX5ZBDMJWK7YVRGUDZH KKTLAVCNFSM6AAAAABE52QKKKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDCNRXGM4TI OJWHA . You are receiving this because you were mentioned. https://github.com/notifications/beacon/ATUNM5EISBG6BQCG6HGYPJDZHKKTLA5CNFS M6AAAAABE52QKKKWGG33NNVSW45C7OR4XAZNMJFZXG5LFINXW23LFNZ2KUY3PNVWWK3TUL5UWJTU BF7JJQ.gif Message ID: @. @.

anisa-hawes commented 3 weeks ago

Thank you @Aleks-Kaye and @raphschlatt.

I've sent you both invitations so that you can join as Outside Collaborators. As I mentioned, we ask authors to work on their own files with direct commits: we prefer you don't fork our repo, or use the Pull Request system to edit in ph-submissions.

When you have accepted the invitation I've sent you, you will be able to make direct commits to your file here: /en/drafts/originals/agent-based-model-communication-networks.md.

@charlottejmc and I are here to help with any practical questions 🙂

merrygin commented 3 weeks ago

Dear @digitalkosovski @anisa-hawes and @charlottejmc

I just pushed the changes in response to your feedback and sent the images to Charlotte.

All best! Jascha

merrygin commented 3 weeks ago

Ah, I just got the email with the images back with an error. The address might be an issue with the address? I used "programming.assistant[@]programminghistorian.org" - should that work in theory @charlottejmc ?

charlottejmc commented 3 weeks ago

Sorry @merrygin, if you remove the brackets around the @, that should work!

merrygin commented 2 weeks ago

That I actually already did @charlottejmc :D So I did use 'programming.assistant@programminghistorian.org' It did not work without the brackets, either, unfortunately - I just tried it again, still nothing.

anisa-hawes commented 2 weeks ago

Apologies @merrygin! This is my mistake! 😅 publishing.assistant@programminghistorian.org.

merrygin commented 2 weeks ago

No worries! :D I've sent it to the other address now.

charlottejmc commented 2 weeks ago

Hello @merrygin,

Thanks so much for your patience with the email address. I received the files you sent! I've renamed them according to our convention (in order of appearance in the text) and uploaded them to your lesson's image folder, here. Thanks also for helpfully providing the captions and alt text in the correct spots.

Please do take a look at the edits I made in this commit, to help solve a number of queries I've outlined below:

Alt text is a descriptive element that enables screen readers to read the information conveyed in the images for people with visual impairments, different learning abilities, or who cannot otherwise view them, for example due to a slow internet connection. It's important to say that alt-text should go further than repeating the figure captions.

We have found Amy Cesal's guide to Writing Alt Text for Data Visualization useful. This guide advises that alt-text for graphs and data visualisations should consist of the following:

alt="[Chart type] of [data type] where [reason for including chart]"

What Amy Cesal's guide achieves is prompting an author to reflect on their reasons for including the graph or visualisation. What idea does this support? What can a reader learn or understand from this visual?

The Graphs section of Diagram Center's guidance is also useful. Some key points (relevant to all graph types) we can take away from it are:

For general images, Harvard's guidance notes some useful ideas. A key point is to keep descriptions simple, and adapt them to the context and purpose for which the image is being included.

Would you feel comfortable making a new draft of the alt-text for those figures? This is certainly a bit time-consuming, but we believe it is very worthwhile in terms of making your lesson accessible to the broadest possible audience. We would be very grateful for your support with this.

Thank you very much again, and please ask @anisa-hawes or I if you need any further support.

merrygin commented 3 days ago

Dear @charlottejmc , Thanks a lot for the feedback and sorry for my late reaction, there was a lot going on in the past days.

Indeed, although I do know in principle what alt-texts are for, I was really unsure how to approach them. The guidance in the link was really helpful and I hope the alt-texts are now a bit more sensible! I also tried to rephrase most instances of "number of agents".

I hope my changes address your queries to your satisfaction, otherwise I do have time this week to try again!

All best, Jascha

digitalkosovski commented 2 days ago

Dear @maltevogl @merrygin @Aleks-Kaye and @raphschlatt

Thank you for all your hard work. The lesson looks good to me and at this point I think we can go on to external reviews.

Best, Agustín

anisa-hawes commented 2 days ago

Hello Jascha @merrygin, Malte @maltevogl, Aleksandra @Aleks-Kaye, and Raphael @raphschlatt.

What's happening now?

Your lesson has been moved to the next phase of our workflow which is Phase 4: Open Peer Review.

This phase is an opportunity for you to hear feedback from peers in the community.

Agustín @digitalkosovski will now invite two reviewers to read your lesson, test your code, and provide constructive feedback. In the spirit of openness, reviews will be posted as comments in this issue (unless you specifically request a closed review).

After both reviews, Agustín will summarise the suggestions to clarify your priorities in Phase 5: Revision 2.

%%{init: { 'logLevel': 'debug', 'theme': 'dark', 'themeVariables': {
              'cScale0': '#444444', 'cScaleLabel0': '#ffffff',
              'cScale1': '#882b4f', 'cScaleLabel1': '#ffffff',
              'cScale2': '#444444', 'cScaleLabel2': '#ffffff'
       } } }%%
timeline
Section Phase 3 <br> Revision 1
Who worked on this? : Authors (@merrygin, @maltevogl, @Aleks-Kaye, @raphschlatt)
All  Phase 3 tasks completed? : Yes
Section Phase 4 <br> Open Peer Review
Who's working on this? : Reviewers (@LeifSch + @hluling)
Expected completion date? : Sept 5
Section Phase 5 <br> Revision 2
Who's responsible? : Authors (@merrygin, @maltevogl, @Aleks-Kaye, @raphschlatt)
Expected timeframe? : ~30 days after editor's summary

Note: The Mermaid diagram above may not render on GitHub mobile. Please check in via desktop when you have a moment.

digitalkosovski commented 1 day ago

Dear all,

During previous phases, I provided initial feedback on this lesson, then worked with Jascha @merrygin, Malte @maltevogl, Aleksandra @Aleks-Kaye, and Raphael @raphschlatt to complete a first round of revisions.

In Phase 4 Open Peer Review, we invite feedback from others in our community.

Welcome Leif Scheuermann @LeifSch and Luling Huang @hluling. By participating in this peer review process, you are contributing to the creation of a useful and sustainable technical resource for the whole community. Thank you.

Please read the lesson, test the code, and post your review as a comment in this issue by September 5. You have expressed your intention to finish sooner, but you can perfectly take some extra days and turn your reviews by early September if needed.

Reviewer Guidelines:

https://programminghistorian.org/en/reviewer-guidelines

A preview of the lesson:

https://programminghistorian.github.io/ph-submissions/en/drafts/originals/agent-based-model-communication-networks

Notes:

Anti-Harassment Policy

This is a statement of the Programming Historian's principles and sets expectations for the tone and style of all correspondence between reviewers, authors, editors, and contributors to our public forums.

Programming Historian in English is dedicated to providing an open scholarly environment that offers community participants the freedom to thoroughly scrutinize ideas, to ask questions, make suggestions, or request clarification, but also provides a harassment-free space for all contributors to the project, regardless of gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, age or religion, or technical experience. We do not tolerate harassment or ad hominem attacks of community participants in any form. Participants violating these rules may be expelled from the community at the discretion of the editorial board. If anyone witnesses or feels they have been the victim of the above described activity, please contact our ombudsperson Dr Ian Milligan. Thank you for helping us to create a safe space.