-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[joss-review] Feedback on draft #30
Comments
Hi @musoke , thanks for your suggestions. I think I've implemented them all in the latest draft. Please see the latest PDF and let me know what you think. We decided to cite a couple of existing papers using our code which provide more details on comparisons of our approach with existing approaches. The details required to compare the approaches felt a bit too technical for this paper. |
This looks good! |
openjournals/joss-reviews#6667
The paper is much improved since the initial submission 馃槃
These comments are in reference to the latest draft (paper.pdf).
Writing
The balance between summary and statement of need seems off.
The JOSS docs ask for "A summary describing the high-level functionality and purpose of the software for a diverse, non-specialist audience." I was expecting the summary to be similar to an abstract: first and shorter.
I would suggest adding sentences similar to the current lines 16-20 (about HERA/LOFAR/MWA and what they hope to learn) and 31-32 (your approach) to the start. Only explain details of 21cm after convincing the reader that it is interesting.
Figure: Say explicitly that inferred parameters on the left are the same coefficients as on the right.
Explain the quantities in the figure. Is this a power spectrum of 21-cm signal? Or hydrogen density?
Give an equation for$\Delta^2(k) = \sum ...$ as well as the current textual descritption.
State of the field
References
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: