[PRE REVIEW]: MyPTV: A Python Package for 3D Particle Tracking

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @ronshnapp (Ron Shnapp)
Repository: https://github.com/ronshnapp/MyPTV
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): JOSS_paper
Version: v0.2
Editor: @jgostick
Reviewers: @leahmendelson
Managing EiC: Kevin M. Moerman

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/b19c0c3a7d02bfa0686ab4021dfb1692"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/b19c0c3a7d02bfa0686ab4021dfb1692/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/b19c0c3a7d02bfa0686ab4021dfb1692/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/b19c0c3a7d02bfa0686ab4021dfb1692)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @ronshnapp. Currently, there isn't an JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@ronshnapp if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). In addition, this list of people have already agreed to review for JOSS and may be suitable for this submission (please start at the bottom of the list).

Editor instructions

The JOSS submission bot @editorialbot is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @editorialbot can do for you type:

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello human, 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

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.08 s (389.8 files/s, 94121.3 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                          18           1136           1082           1990
TeX                              4            522             26            950
Jupyter Notebook                 2              0           1046            232
YAML                             4              7              4            104
Markdown                         2             52              0             92
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            30           1717           2158           3368
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 1185

[editorialbot]

Failed to discover a valid open source license

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.254504 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevX.11.031060 is OK
- 10.1109/TPAMI.2015.2414427 is OK
- 10.3354/meps300105 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- 10.1017/s0022112008000141 may be a valid DOI for title: A Lagrangian investigation of the small-scale features of turbulent entrainment through particle tracking and direct numerical simulation
- 10.1088/0957-0233/19/7/075105 may be a valid DOI for title: Tracking Lagrangian trajectories in position–velocity space

INVALID DOIs

- https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-0233/8/12/017 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00190953 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0009357 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-005-0068-7 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-43555-2 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112004003283 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.fluid.010908.165210 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112000001658 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s10494-015-9616-2 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-005-0031-7 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2017.0235 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1708888114 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2019.36 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
- https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240963 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix

[editorialbot]

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

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@ronshnapp thanks for this submission. I am currently checking if this work is in scope for JOSS. In the mean time can you:

• work on those potentially missing/invalid DOI's? You can call @editorialbot check references to check the references again and use @editorialbot generate pdf to update the paper.
• add an OSI approved license. The best thing to do is to add a plane LICENSE file to your repository, that way GItHub and our systems pick up on it easily too.

[editorialbot]

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

[ronshnapp]

@editorialbot check references

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1088/0957-0233/8/12/017 is OK
- 10.1007/BF00190953 is OK
- 10.1063/5.0009357 is OK
- 10.1007/s00348-005-0068-7 is OK
- 10.1038/s41598-019-43555-2 is OK
- 10.1017/S0022112004003283 is OK
- 10.1146/annurev.fluid.010908.165210 is OK
- 10.1017/S0022112000001658 is OK
- 10.1017/S0022112008000141 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.254504 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevX.11.031060 is OK
- 10.1088/0957-0233/19/7/075105 is OK
- 10.1007/s10494-015-9616-2 is OK
- 10.1007/s00348-005-0031-7 is OK
- 10.1098/rspb.2017.0235 is OK
- 10.1109/TPAMI.2015.2414427 is OK
- 10.1073/pnas.1708888114 is OK
- 10.3354/meps300105 is OK
- 10.1038/sdata.2019.36 is OK
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0240963 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[ronshnapp]

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman
Thanks for your suggestions. I updated the DOIs and added the MIT LIECENSE file.

[ronshnapp]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

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

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@editorialbot check repository

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.09 s (352.9 files/s, 85204.4 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                          18           1136           1082           1990
TeX                              4            521             26            952
Jupyter Notebook                 2              0           1046            232
YAML                             4              7              4            104
Markdown                         2             52              0             92
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            30           1716           2158           3370
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 1185

[arfon]

@ronshnapp - thanks for your submission to JOSS. We're currently managing a large backlog of submissions and the editor most appropriate for your area (@kyleniemeyer) is already rather busy.

For now, we will need to waitlist this paper and process it as the queue reduces. Thanks for your patience!

[danielskatz]

👋 @eloisabentivegna and @kyleniemeyer - I just wanted to check if either of you are able to edit this submission at this time. If not, we may have to keep it waitlisted until one of you can.

[jgostick]

I could potentially review this one. Not done PV imaging before, but lots of other 3D imaging stuff. I'll wait for your ok before assigning myself, since you've already asked a few others.

[danielskatz]

@jgostick - did you mean edit? If so, please go ahead and assign it to yourself, and remove the waitlisted label

[jgostick]

Oops, yes I meant edit. Ok, I'll take this one.

[jgostick]

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello @jgostick, 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

[jgostick]

@editorialbot assign @jgostick as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @jgostick is now the editor

[jgostick]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

Can't start a review without reviewers

[jgostick]

@editorialbot add @leahmendelson as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@leahmendelson added to the reviewers list!

[jgostick]

Hi @ronshnapp, can I ask why alexlib is not listed as an author on this submission? I see they contributed ~600 lines of code and deleted ~20,000 lines. This is small compared to your contributions, but is not nothing.

[jgostick]

@leahmendelson, the review will start once I find a second, so hold tight. For now you can browse a recently completed review to get a sense of what you're in for

[ronshnapp]

Hi @jgostick - thanks for being editor!
Fair point; @alexlib - would you like to coauthor? Let me know and I'll add you when the revision comes.

[alexlib]

Thanks @ronshnapp but it is your own work :) good luck

[jgostick]

I cannot seem to find a second reviewer, so I'm going to start this now before @leahmendelson changes her mind!

[jgostick]

@editorialbot add @leahmendelson as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@leahmendelson is already included in the reviewers list

[jgostick]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in #4398.