joss-reviews
joss-reviews copied to clipboard
openjournals
[PRE REVIEW]: MOTrainer: Distributed Measurement Operator Trainer for Data Assimilation Applications
Submitting author: @rogerkuou (Ou Ku) Repository: https://github.com/VegeWaterDynamics/motrainer Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: v0.1.3 Editor: @srmnitc Reviewers: Pending Managing EiC: Kristen Thyng
Status
Status badge code:
HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/0ec1cefe66e3d09476dad0fe3b918c35"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/0ec1cefe66e3d09476dad0fe3b918c35/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/0ec1cefe66e3d09476dad0fe3b918c35)
Author instructions
Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @rogerkuou. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.
@rogerkuou 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
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
Software report:
github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88 T=0.06 s (802.0 files/s, 129411.1 lines/s)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language files blank comment code
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python 12 241 331 904
Markdown 12 179 0 445
Jupyter Notebook 6 0 4309 298
YAML 6 17 7 156
TOML 1 16 6 128
TeX 1 7 0 76
Bourne Shell 1 10 5 48
JSON 4 0 0 47
Bourne Again Shell 1 5 4 11
HTML 1 2 0 9
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM: 45 477 4662 2122
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
OK DOIs
- 10.1109/JSTARS.2014.2325780 is OK
- 10.1080/02723646.2016.1236606 is OK
- 10.5334/jors.148 is OK
MISSING DOIs
- 10.25080/majora-7b98e3ed-013 may be a valid DOI for title: Dask: Parallel Computation with Blocked algorithms and Task Scheduling
INVALID DOIs
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2022.113116 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2015.09.009 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:
Five most similar historical JOSS papers:
ADaPT-ML: A Data Programming Template for Machine Learning
Submitting author: @nulberry
Handling editor: @jmschrei (Active)
Reviewers: @aaronpeikert, @wincowgerDEV
Similarity score: 0.8103
uDALES: large-eddy-simulation software for urban flow, dispersion, and microclimate modelling
Submitting author: @tomgrylls
Handling editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman (Active)
Reviewers: @wimvanderbauwhede, @p-costa, @ashwinvis
Similarity score: 0.8094
DASF: A data analytics software framework for distributed environments
Submitting author: @d-eggert
Handling editor: @martinfleis (Active)
Reviewers: @cjwu, @pritchardn
Similarity score: 0.8090
MCSD: A MATLAB Tool for Monte-Carlo Simulations of Diffusion in biological Tissues
Submitting author: @davidnsousa
Handling editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman (Active)
Reviewers: @nnadeau, @mwacaan
Similarity score: 0.8088
OpenOA: An Open-Source Codebase For Operational Analysis of Wind Farms
Submitting author: @jordanperr
Handling editor: @sjpfenninger (Retired)
Reviewers: @gschivley, @brynpickering
Similarity score: 0.8082
⚠️ 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.
@editorialbot query scope
@rogerkuou – due to the relatively small size of this code, the editors will now discuss if it meets the substantial scholarly effort criterion for review by JOSS. We should get back to you sometime next week. If you want to fix the DOIs (noting that @editorialbot's suggestions are not always right), you can, then use the following commands (one at a time, as the first line of a new comment) to regenerate the PDF and check the references.
@editorialbot generate pdf @editorialbot check references
@rogerkuou - thanks for your submission to JOSS. This submission has passed an initial scope review. We're currently managing a large backlog of submissions and the editor most appropriate for your area is already rather busy.
For now, we will need to waitlist this paper and process it as the queue reduces. Thanks for your patience!
@editorialbot invite @srmnitc as editor
:wave: @srmnitc – would you be willing to edit this submission for JOSS? It feels somewhat close(ish!) to 'research data management'.
@arfon It is slightly of my expertise, but I think I can manage to edit this.
@rogerkuou I will be the handling editor for this submission. The next step would be to find some reviewers for the submission. Unfortunately, I am on holidays from tomorrow, but I will be back next week.
Meanwhile, feel free to ask me any questions here. Any suggestions that you might have for reviewers is also welcome!
Hi @srmnitc, Thanks a lot! And also thanks @arfon for the scope-review!
For now, I do not have any questions. If there turns out to be anything unclear for the tests or documentation, just let me know.
And @srmnitc hope you enjoy the holiday! Have a good one.
:wave: @nulberry @d-eggert @KwickSilver @abhishektiwari , would any of you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? As you know, we carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines. Thanks!
Hi Sarath,
The paper seems interesting, and I'm eager to contribute to the review process. Could you please include me as a reviewer as well?
Thank you, Shantanu
On Fri, 5 Apr 2024 at 04:01, The Open Journals editorial robot < @.***> wrote:
@abhishektiwari https://github.com/abhishektiwari added to the reviewers list!
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6351#issuecomment-2039511815, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABCUHHMV5K2YS7GLGKMVQWLY32AB7AVCNFSM6AAAAABDGXL2X2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDAMZZGUYTCOBRGU . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>
@rogerkuou We have two reviewers already, but I will give a bit more time for the others to respond, and then we will get started with the reviews.
@srmnitc The publication looks interesting, but I have no time available at the moment, sorry.
@srmnitc Thanks a lot! No problem, just take the time you need. @KwickSilver and @abhishektiwari Thanks for taking time to review this paper!
@KwickSilver and @abhishektiwari thanks for agreeing to be reviewers. I will now start the review thread.
OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6591.