[REVIEW]: micompm - A MATLAB/Octave toolbox for multivariate independent comparison of observations #430
Status badge code:
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) 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.)
@jordigh, please carry out your review in this issue by updating the checklist below (please make sure you're logged in to GitHub). The reviewer guidelines are available here: http://joss.theoj.org/about#reviewer_guidelines. Any questions/concerns please let @cMadan know.
Conflict of interest
Code of Conduct
If you haven't already, you should seriously consider unsubscribing from GitHub notifications for this (https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews) repository. As as reviewer, you're probably currently watching this repository which means for GitHub's default behaviour you will receive notifications (emails) for all JOSS reviews
To fix this do the following two things:
For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:
Okay, I worked through the tutorial. I think I can tick off all the checkboxes except for the following:
I worked with Octave. I noticed some slightly different outputs for some of the tutorial examples, including some NaNs instead of some very small numbers. I don't know where the rounding errors came from.
I was unable to generate the LaTeX output as shown there. For some reason, none of the tickmarks by tikz would show up, although I could see the axes. It would help to have a complete source code of the intended LaTeX file to compile.
I've worked through the raised points as follows:
Concerning the small differences between MATLAB and Octave results. As described in the User Guide, Octave uses a different way (when compared to MATLAB) of determining the statistics on some of the performed statistical tests. The outputs in the tutorial are from MATLAB, thus the differences stated in the review. I've performed a large number of tests to determine if these MATLAB vs Octave differences are meaningful, but the p-values were consistently similar. I've also validated these conclusions with R. Thus one will get to the same conclusion (on sample similarity or otherwise) using either software.
I believe to have addressed the raised points. If there is anything else I can do please let me know.
If you would like to include a link to your paper from your README use the following code snippet:
This is how it will look in your documentation:
We need your help!
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: