[REVIEW]: DuoDIC: 3D Digital Image Correlation in MATLAB

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @danasolav (Dana Solav)
Repository: https://github.com/SolavLab/DuoDIC
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch):
Version: v1.1.0
Editor: @diehlpk
Reviewers: @abhishektha, @mr53563
Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.6673060

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/cd98bc67c6d762e996be45d65f667357"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/cd98bc67c6d762e996be45d65f667357/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/cd98bc67c6d762e996be45d65f667357/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/cd98bc67c6d762e996be45d65f667357)

Reviewers and authors:

Please avoid lengthy details of difficulties in the review thread. Instead, please create a new issue in the target repository and link to those issues (especially acceptance-blockers) by leaving comments in the review thread below. (For completists: if the target issue tracker is also on GitHub, linking the review thread in the issue or vice versa will create corresponding breadcrumb trails in the link target.)

Reviewer instructions & questions

@mrudangm & @abhishektha, your review will be checklist based. Each of you will have a separate checklist that you should update when carrying out your review.
First of all you need to run this command in a separate comment to create the checklist:

@editorialbot generate my checklist

The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @diehlpk know.

✨ Please start on your review when you are able, and be sure to complete your review in the next six weeks, at the very latest ✨

Checklists

📝 Checklist for @abhishektha

📝 Checklist for @mr53563

[editorialbot]

Hello humans, 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

[diehlpk]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[diehlpk]

@editorialbot check references

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=1.33 s (112.4 files/s, 36797.9 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MATLAB                         126           4641          12062          24788
C++                             15            818           1408           4351
Markdown                         4            131              0            315
TeX                              1             16              0            211
C/C++ Header                     3             68             84            168
Java                             1              8              7             23
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                           150           5682          13561          29856
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2843725 is OK
- 10.1109/34.888718 is OK
- 10.1109/CVPR.1997.609468 is OK
- 10.1007/s11340-015-0009-1 is OK
- 10.1007/s10439-015-1384-6 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ijengsci.2014.07.001 is OK
- 10.1007/s10439-017-1840-6 is OK
- 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2017.01.026 is OK
- 10.3390/app11114904 is OK
- 10.1088/1361-6501/aac55b is OK
- 10.1007/s11340-016-0233-3 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.00506 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 2043

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2843725 is OK
- 10.1109/34.888718 is OK
- 10.1109/CVPR.1997.609468 is OK
- 10.1007/s11340-015-0009-1 is OK
- 10.1007/s10439-015-1384-6 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ijengsci.2014.07.001 is OK
- 10.1007/s10439-017-1840-6 is OK
- 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2017.01.026 is OK
- 10.3390/app11114904 is OK
- 10.1088/1361-6501/aac55b is OK
- 10.1007/s11340-016-0233-3 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.00506 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

👉📄 Download article proof 📄 View article proof on GitHub 📄 👈

[editorialbot]

⚠️ An error happened when generating the pdf.

[diehlpk]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=1.33 s (112.4 files/s, 36797.9 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MATLAB                         126           4641          12062          24788
C++                             15            818           1408           4351
Markdown                         4            131              0            315
TeX                              1             16              0            211
C/C++ Header                     3             68             84            168
Java                             1              8              7             23
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                           150           5682          13561          29856
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

@openjournals/dev Could you please have a look?

[mr53563]

@editorialbot generate my checklist

[editorialbot]

@mr53563 I can't do that because you are not a reviewer

[diehlpk]

@editorialbot add @mr53563 as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@mr53563 added to the reviewers list!

[diehlpk]

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello @diehlpk, here are the things you can ask me to do:

# List all available commands
@editorialbot commands

# Add to this issue's reviewers list
@editorialbot add @username as reviewer

# Remove from this issue's reviewers list
@editorialbot remove @username from reviewers

# Get a list of all editors's GitHub handles
@editorialbot list editors

# Assign a user as the editor of this submission
@editorialbot assign @username as editor

# Remove the editor assigned to this submission
@editorialbot remove editor

# Remind an author or reviewer to return to a review after a 
# certain period of time (supported units days and weeks)
@editorialbot remind @reviewer in 2 weeks

# Check the references of the paper for missing DOIs
@editorialbot check references

# Perform checks on the repository
@editorialbot check repository

# Adds a checklist for the reviewer using this command
@editorialbot generate my checklist

# Set a value for version
@editorialbot set v1.0.0 as version

# Set a value for archive
@editorialbot set 10.21105/zenodo.12345 as archive

# Set a value for branch
@editorialbot set joss-paper as branch

# Generates the pdf paper
@editorialbot generate pdf

# Recommends the submission for acceptance
@editorialbot recommend-accept

# Flag submission with questionable scope
@editorialbot query scope

# Get a link to the complete list of reviewers
@editorialbot list reviewers

# Open the review issue
@editorialbot start review

[diehlpk]

@editorialbot remove @mrudangm from reviewers

[editorialbot]

@mrudangm removed from the reviewers list!

[diehlpk]

Hi @mr53563 how is your review going?

[danasolav]

Hi @diehlpk
Do we need more reviewers? I suggested a few in the meta-review, but can try to think of more.

[diehlpk]

Hi @diehlpk
Do we need more reviewers? I suggested a few in the meta-review, but can try to think of more.

Hi @danasolav, no we are fine.

[diehlpk]

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello @diehlpk, here are the things you can ask me to do:

# List all available commands
@editorialbot commands

# Add to this issue's reviewers list
@editorialbot add @username as reviewer

# Remove from this issue's reviewers list
@editorialbot remove @username from reviewers

# Get a list of all editors's GitHub handles
@editorialbot list editors

# Assign a user as the editor of this submission
@editorialbot assign @username as editor

# Remove the editor assigned to this submission
@editorialbot remove editor

# Remind an author or reviewer to return to a review after a 
# certain period of time (supported units days and weeks)
@editorialbot remind @reviewer in 2 weeks

# Check the references of the paper for missing DOIs
@editorialbot check references

# Perform checks on the repository
@editorialbot check repository

# Adds a checklist for the reviewer using this command
@editorialbot generate my checklist

# Set a value for version
@editorialbot set v1.0.0 as version

# Set a value for archive
@editorialbot set 10.21105/zenodo.12345 as archive

# Set a value for branch
@editorialbot set joss-paper as branch

# Generates the pdf paper
@editorialbot generate pdf

# Recommends the submission for acceptance
@editorialbot recommend-accept

# Flag submission with questionable scope
@editorialbot query scope

# Get a link to the complete list of reviewers
@editorialbot list reviewers

# Open the review issue
@editorialbot start review

[diehlpk]

There are some invalid ISBN values in the bib file

@danasolav could you please check that?

[danasolav]

@diehlpk I deleted the unnecessary ISBNs. Could you please try again?
The updated release: https://github.com/SolavLab/DuoDIC/releases/tag/v1.1.0
The new DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6673060

[diehlpk]

@editorialbot set 10.5281/zenodo.6673060 as archive

[editorialbot]

Done! Archive is now 10.5281/zenodo.6673060

[diehlpk]

@editorialbot recommend-accept

[editorialbot]

Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2843725 is OK
- 10.1109/34.888718 is OK
- 10.1109/CVPR.1997.609468 is OK
- 10.1007/s11340-015-0009-1 is OK
- 10.1007/s10439-015-1384-6 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ijengsci.2014.07.001 is OK
- 10.1007/s10439-017-1840-6 is OK
- 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2017.01.026 is OK
- 10.3390/app11114904 is OK
- 10.1088/1361-6501/aac55b is OK
- 10.1007/s11340-016-0233-3 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.00506 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

👋 @openjournals/joss-eics, this paper is ready to be accepted and published.

Check final proof 👉 openjournals/joss-papers#3293

If the paper PDF and the deposit XML files look good in openjournals/joss-papers#3293, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the command @editorialbot accept

[arfon]

@editorialbot accept

[editorialbot]

Doing it live! Attempting automated processing of paper acceptance...

[editorialbot]

🐦🐦🐦 👉 Tweet for this paper 👈 🐦🐦🐦

[editorialbot]

🚨🚨🚨 THIS IS NOT A DRILL, YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED A PAPER INTO JOSS! 🚨🚨🚨

Here's what you must now do:

0. Check final PDF and Crossref metadata that was deposited 👉 Creating pull request for 10.21105.joss.04279 joss-papers#3306
1. Wait a couple of minutes, then verify that the paper DOI resolves https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.04279
2. If everything looks good, then close this review issue.
3. Party like you just published a paper! 🎉🌈🦄💃👻🤘

Any issues? Notify your editorial technical team...

[arfon]

@abhishektha, @mr53563 – many thanks for your reviews here and to @diehlpk for editing this submission! JOSS relies upon the volunteer effort of people like you and we simply wouldn't be able to do this without you ✨

@danasolav – your paper is now accepted and published in JOSS ⚡🚀💥

[editorialbot]

🎉🎉🎉 Congratulations on your paper acceptance! 🎉🎉🎉

If you would like to include a link to your paper from your README use the following code snippets:

Markdown:
[![DOI](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.04279/status.svg)](https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.04279)

HTML:
<a style="border-width:0" href="https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.04279">
  <img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.04279/status.svg" alt="DOI badge" >
</a>

reStructuredText:
.. image:: https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.04279/status.svg
   :target: https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.04279

This is how it will look in your documentation:

We need your help!

The Journal of Open Source Software is a community-run journal and relies upon volunteer effort. If you'd like to support us please consider doing either one (or both) of the the following:

• Volunteering to review for us sometime in the future. You can add your name to the reviewer list here: https://joss.theoj.org/reviewer-signup.html
• Making a small donation to support our running costs here: https://numfocus.org/donate-to-joss

[danasolav]

Thank you! @diehlpk @abhishektha @mr53563 @arfon

[danasolav]

@diehlpk @arfon
I found out that my ORCID number was wrong. Can it still be corrected? I just pushed this change to the paper on the repository.
Sorry about that...

[diehlpk]

@diehlpk @arfon
I found out that my ORCID number was wrong. Can it still be corrected? I just pushed this change to the paper on the repository.
Sorry about that...

@danasolav I think it's possible to correct that, however, I do not have the permissions to do it.

@arfon should be able to do it.

[danasolav]

Hi @arfon, would you be able to correct my ORCID number in the published paper?
Thanks

[arfon]

@editorialbot re-accept

[editorialbot]

I'm sorry human, I don't understand that. You can see what commands I support by typing:

@editorialbot commands

[arfon]

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello @arfon, here are the things you can ask me to do:

# List all available commands
@editorialbot commands

# Add to this issue's reviewers list
@editorialbot add @username as reviewer

# Remove from this issue's reviewers list
@editorialbot remove @username from reviewers

# Get a list of all editors's GitHub handles
@editorialbot list editors

# Assign a user as the editor of this submission
@editorialbot assign @username as editor

# Remove the editor assigned to this submission
@editorialbot remove editor

# Remind an author or reviewer to return to a review after a 
# certain period of time (supported units days and weeks)
@editorialbot remind @reviewer in 2 weeks

# Check the references of the paper for missing DOIs
@editorialbot check references

# Perform checks on the repository
@editorialbot check repository

# Adds a checklist for the reviewer using this command
@editorialbot generate my checklist

# Set a value for version
@editorialbot set v1.0.0 as version

# Set a value for archive
@editorialbot set 10.21105/zenodo.12345 as archive

# Set a value for branch
@editorialbot set joss-paper as branch

# Set a value for repository
@editorialbot set https://github.com/organization/repo as repository

# Reject paper
@editorialbot reject

# Withdraw paper
@editorialbot withdraw

# Invite an editor to edit a submission (sending them an email)
@editorialbot invite @(.*) as editor

# Generates the pdf paper
@editorialbot generate pdf

# Recommends the submission for acceptance
@editorialbot recommend-accept

# Accept and publish the paper
@editorialbot accept

# Update data on an accepted/published paper
@editorialbot reaccept

# Flag submission with questionable scope
@editorialbot query scope

# Get a link to the complete list of reviewers
@editorialbot list reviewers

# Open the review issue
@editorialbot start review

[arfon]

@editorialbot reaccept

[editorialbot]

Rebuilding paper!

[editorialbot]

🌈 Paper updated!

New PDF and metadata files 👉 openjournals/joss-papers#3523