Closed marouenbg closed 3 years ago
Dear Marouen,
Thank you for your helpful comments and for reviewing our submission! I addressed your suggestions in two PRs for your comments regarding the tool (#128) and the text (#129). I agree, that your reformulation will improve the manuscript! Regarding
- Currently 9 software toolboxes support PEtab as an input format, among them COPASI, d2d, Would it be possible to complete the list?
I added a link to the PEtab documentation, that gives a dynamically updated list with detailed overview over tools + support (as there are to my knowledge more tools who will have a PEtab support soon).
Great! Thank you.
yaml2sbml's implementation was executed flawlessly with a complete set of docs and several examples. These are my comments in relation the review process https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/3215
Comments on the paper:
These are a few suggestions for the authors about the main text.
Currently 9 software toolboxes support PEtab as an input format, among them COPASI, d2d, Would it be possible to complete the list?
Due to the aforementioned tools, model simulation or parameter estimation has become a matter of a few lines of code or clicks I suggest using Thanks to the aforementioned tools
Hence ODE model definition is a relevant bottleneck, I would suggest: However, ODE model definition is often a bottleneck
Python-based model editor that allows one to generate My suggestion: Python-based model editor that allows to generate
Figure 1 gives an overview over of the typical Figure 1 gives an overview of the typical