[PRE REVIEW]: Fortuna.jl: Structural and System Reliability Analysis in Julia

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @AkchurinDA (Damir Akchurin) Repository: https://github.com/AkchurinDA/Fortuna.jl Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): JOSS Version: V0.10.0 Editor: @jbytecode Reviewers: @baxmittens, @rafaelorozco Managing EiC: Daniel S. Katz

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/9df63bb9d4f1722272f85a0fc2249856"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/9df63bb9d4f1722272f85a0fc2249856/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/9df63bb9d4f1722272f85a0fc2249856/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/9df63bb9d4f1722272f85a0fc2249856)

Author instructions

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

@AkchurinDA 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]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1016/j.jcsr.2023.108327 is OK
- 10.1016/j.jocs.2020.101204 is OK
- 10.1016/j.jcsr.2023.108210 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.03349 is OK
- 10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000002 is OK
- 10.18637/jss.v098.i16 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.05161 is OK
- 10.1137/141000671 is OK
- 10.1108/JSFE-07-2016-0010 is OK
- 10.1016/j.strusafe.2005.03.002 is OK
- 10.48550/ARXIV.1607.07892 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.06189 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ress.2012.10.008 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: A Review of Recent Features and Improvements Added...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Turing: A Language for Flexible Probabilistic Infe...

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90  T=0.08 s (1046.2 files/s, 117581.6 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julia                           46            980            982           3280
SVG                              3              0              0           1813
Markdown                        22            446              0           1229
TeX                              2             24              0            328
YAML                             7              0              3            185
TOML                             2              4              0             39
CSS                              1              2              6              7
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            83           1456            991           6881
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

   207	Damir Akchurin
    15	CompatHelper Julia
    14	AkchurinDA
     2	dependabot[bot]

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 990

✅ 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:

Copulas.jl: A fully Distributions.jl-compliant copula package Submitting author: @lrnv Handling editor: @osorensen (Active) Reviewers: @lucaferranti, @AnderGray Similarity score: 0.7982

GaussianRandomFields.jl: A Julia package to generate and sample from Gaussian random fields Submitting author: @PieterjanRobbe Handling editor: @jbytecode (Active) Reviewers: @ziyiyin97, @shahmoradi Similarity score: 0.7789

GlobalSensitivity.jl: Performant and Parallel Global Sensitivity Analysis with Julia Submitting author: @Vaibhavdixit02 Handling editor: @jbytecode (Active) Reviewers: @zhenwu0728, @storyetfall Similarity score: 0.7659

POMDPStressTesting.jl: Adaptive Stress Testing for Black-Box Systems Submitting author: @mossr Handling editor: @sbenthall (Active) Reviewers: @jarvist, @sambitdash Similarity score: 0.7448

GeoStats.jl -- High-performance geostatistics in Julia Submitting author: @juliohm Handling editor: @lheagy (Retired) Reviewers: @wkearn, @ziotom78 Similarity score: 0.7375

⚠️ 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.

[danielskatz]

👋 @jbytecode - I know you are at your editing limit, but this submission made me think of you 🙂 so I thought I would check and see if you wanted to take it; perhaps one of your current submissions are close to complete?

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot invite @jbytecode as editor

[editorialbot]

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

[akchurinda]

Hi,

I would like to suggest the following potential reviewers for the paper based on their respective research domains listed here:

• baxmittens - uncertainty quantification
• rafaelorozco - uncertainty quantification

I would also be happy to provide a list of potential reviewers outside of that list.

Thank you.

[jbytecode]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

@danielskatz sure!

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @jbytecode is now the editor

[jbytecode]

👋👋👋 Dear @baxmittens, @rafaelorozco 👋👋👋

Would you be willing to assist in reviewing this submission for JOSS (Journal of Open Source Software)?

JOSS publishes articles about open source research software. The submission I'd like you to review is titled:

[PRE REVIEW]: Fortuna.jl: Structural and System Reliability Analysis in Julia

You can find more information at the top of this Github issue (Provided above link).

The review process at JOSS is unique: it takes place in a GitHub issue, is open, and author-reviewer-editor conversations are encouraged. If you have any questions please let me know.

This is the pre-review issue. After setting at least 2 reviewers we will start the review process in a separate thread. In that thread, there will be nearly 25 check items for each single reviewer.

Thank you in advance!

@rafaelorozco - I know you have one more workload at JOSS, but I think you can sequentially handle them. Please tell me otherwise.

[akchurinda]

Hi, @jbytecode,

Thanks for agreeing to be the editor!

I have a quick question: It is OK if I update the paper (fixed a few typos and improved the readability of a few sentences) before the reviewers get assigned?

[jbytecode]

@AkchurinDA - Sure. Apply your changes and trig an @editorialbox generate pdf command here. Could you please, if possible, provide some more potential reviewers in case we fail to get a response from the invited ones.

[akchurinda]

Thanks, @jbytecode!

Sure, here is a list of 3 potential external reviewers who work in the field of structural and system reliability analysis and with whom I don't have any conflicts of interest:

• Dr. Brennan Bean
• Dr. Abbie B. Liel
• Dr. Jared DeBock

[akchurinda]

@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:

[jbytecode]

@AkchurinDA - We need their GitHub handles to communicate with. Please provide GitHub usernames without using the @ character. You can use the search tool: https://reviewers.joss.theoj.org/reviewers

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

OpenGeoSysUncertaintyQuantification.jl: a Julia library implementing an uncertainty quantification toolbox for OpenGeoSys Submitting author: @baxmittens Handling editor: @kanishkan91 (Active) Reviewers: @ziyiyin97, @dannys4 Similarity score: 0.8069

GaussianRandomFields.jl: A Julia package to generate and sample from Gaussian random fields Submitting author: @PieterjanRobbe Handling editor: @jbytecode (Active) Reviewers: @ziyiyin97, @shahmoradi Similarity score: 0.7720

GlobalSensitivity.jl: Performant and Parallel Global Sensitivity Analysis with Julia Submitting author: @Vaibhavdixit02 Handling editor: @jbytecode (Active) Reviewers: @zhenwu0728, @storyetfall Similarity score: 0.7634

POMDPStressTesting.jl: Adaptive Stress Testing for Black-Box Systems Submitting author: @mossr Handling editor: @sbenthall (Active) Reviewers: @jarvist, @sambitdash Similarity score: 0.7483

UncertainData.jl: a Julia package for working with measurements and datasets with uncertainties. Submitting author: @kahaaga Handling editor: @oliviaguest (Active) Reviewers: @dmbates, @ahwillia Similarity score: 0.7290

⚠️ 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.

[akchurinda]

@jbytecode

Oh, sorry, I think I misunderstood. These people are outside of the JOSS' list of reviewers and I don't know their GitHub handles.

I would propose the following potential reviewers from the list:

• dannys4 - uncertainty quantification, numerical methods
• ziyiyin97 - uncertainty quantification, numerical methods
• dmbates - statistics
• ahwillia - statistics

[danielskatz]

reviewers don't have to be from the list - that's just a source of possible reviewers...

[jbytecode]

@danielskatz - Thank you very much for the explanation. I had already mentioned that we only need GitHub account names. The list keeps the information of those who want to review for JOSS, but of course, we can invite other GitHub accounts from outside as well.

[danielskatz]

Editors can also search for GitHub accounts of potential reviewers, or contact them via email, where they may either say that they have a GitHub account already or are willing to create one to do the review.

[jbytecode]

@danielskatz - Sure! At least one of the suggested people has a GitHub account, and I will try to invite them if we don't get a response from the ones we've already invited.

[jbytecode]

Notes to everyone: I have sent an invitation email to Dr. Abbie B. Liel and Dr. Jared DeBock.

Dr. Brennan Bean had an easily accessible GitHub address, so I will send the invitation to them in the preview issue here.

[jbytecode]

Dear Dr. Brennan Bean (@beanb2)

I'm writing to you because you have been suggested as a potential reviewer for a paper in JOSS (Journal of Open Source Software).

Would you be willing to assist in reviewing this submission for JOSS?

JOSS publishes articles about open source research software. The submission I'd like you to review is titled:

Fortuna.jl: Structural and System Reliability Analysis in Julia (https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6931)

You can find more information at the top of this Github issue (Provided above link).

The review process at JOSS is unique: it takes place in a GitHub issue, is open, and author-reviewer-editor conversations are encouraged. If you have any questions please let me know.

If you accept reviewing, you can post a message in the GitHub link https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6931

Thank you in advance!

[beanb2]

Thank you for the offer. I would normally be very interested in this kind of opportunity and hope that JOSS will keep me in mind for future reviews. That said, I my wife is recovering from cancer treatment and I am unable to take on any additional responsibilities for the next 6 weeks. Assuming you want a timely review, I will need to pass on this offer.

Brennan

From: Mehmet Hakan Satman @.> Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2024 11:08 AM To: openjournals/joss-reviews @.> Cc: Brennan Bean @.>; Mention @.> Subject: Re: [openjournals/joss-reviews] [PRE REVIEW]: Fortuna.jl: Structural and System Reliability Analysis in Julia (Issue #6931)

Dear Dr. Brennan Bean @.***https://github.com/beanb2)

I'm writing to you because you have been suggested as a potential reviewer for a paper in JOSS (Journal of Open Source Software).

Would you be willing to assist in reviewing this submission for JOSS?

JOSS publishes articles about open source research software. The submission I'd like you to review is titled:

Fortuna.jl: Structural and System Reliability Analysis in Julia (#6931https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6931)

You can find more information at the top of this Github issue (Provided above link).

The review process at JOSS is unique: it takes place in a GitHub issue, is open, and author-reviewer-editor conversations are encouraged. If you have any questions please let me know.

If you accept reviewing, you can post a message in the GitHub link #6931https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6931

Thank you in advance!

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6931#issuecomment-2198623490, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AETAHGAFQEGWUPSEJSJLRI3ZKA3O5AVCNFSM6AAAAABJ6NQOK6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDCOJYGYZDGNBZGA. You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.@.>>

[jbytecode]

@beanb2 - I hope you quickly make positive progress in health matters, please let’s stay in touch. Thank you for the reply.