[JOSS REVIEW] Suggestions for Software Paper

[xin-huang]

This is a part of the JOSS review (openjournals/joss-reviews#2643)

1. As the checklist suggests, a Summary section is required in the paper.
2. Although the authors discussed some other simulators (DEAP and Axelrod) in the statement of need, I suggest the authors separate these discussion into a State of the field section, as the checklist suggests, or merge them into the Introduction section.

[rozmanowna]

Thank you for the comments @xin-huang!

I added Summary and State of the field sections as you suggested.

Here is the link to new pdf paper: openjournals/joss-reviews#2643 (comment)

[xin-huang]

Hi @rozmanowna, thanks for revising the paper.
But I still feel confused about this sentence

Notably, another powerful Python package - Axelrod - allows to model evolution of cooperation in various strategies, but unlike Moran Pycess is limited to Prisoners’Dilemma only (The Axelrod project developers, 2016)

It looks like the exact meaning should be
Notably, another powerful Python package - Axelrod - is limited to Prisoners' Dilemma, while Moran Pycess allows to model evolution of cooperation in various strategies

Another concern is "population's evolution" in the Summary section. I feel it is redundant to say population's evolution. I think simply using evolution is OK.

[rozmanowna]

Thank you @xin-huang, I have addressed your additional suggestions.

Here is the link to new pdf paper: openjournals/joss-reviews#2643 (comment)

[xin-huang]

Thanks @rozmanowna, I have no further concerns.