JOSS: paper section comments

[jsheunis]

The review checklist states:

• Summary: Has a clear description of the high-level functionality and purpose of the software for a diverse, non-specialist audience been provided?
• A statement of need: Does the paper have a section titled 'Statement of need' that clearly states what problems the software is designed to solve, who the target audience is, and its relation to other work?
• State of the field: Do the authors describe how this software compares to other commonly-used packages?

My comments:

• Summary: there are a number of references to machine learning tools in the summary that, in my opinion, do not convey the message optimally for a "diverse, non-specialist audience". I suggest moving those references to the next paragraph where the tools are also mentioned and where they do fit the message. It still makes sense to perhaps mention some of them in the summary, but more as examples of integrated tools so as to illustrate your tool's strong point of interoperability with common machine learning tools.
• A statement of need: the part about "[pybci's] relation to other work" is missing in this section.
• State of the field: this whole section is missing in the paper.

[LMBooth]

Hi @jsheunis , i've made another draft of the summary and statement of need with your comments in mind. I've also added a state of the field section