[PRE REVIEW]: Systems Neuro Browser (SNUB)

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @calebweinreb (Caleb Weinreb)
Repository: https://github.com/calebweinreb/SNUB
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch):
Version: 0.0.3
Editor: @emdupre
Reviewers: @niksirbi, @vigji, @lucasmiranda42
Managing EiC: Kevin M. Moerman

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/928e9ddfa36d45872e03fbdaf3d66f9c"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/928e9ddfa36d45872e03fbdaf3d66f9c/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/928e9ddfa36d45872e03fbdaf3d66f9c/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/928e9ddfa36d45872e03fbdaf3d66f9c)

Author instructions

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

@calebweninreb if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). You can search the list of people that have already agreed to review and may be suitable for this submission.

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=0.19 s (369.0 files/s, 146549.1 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JavaScript                      13           2405           2470           9222
HTML                            11            419             33           3585
Python                          29            809            888           3560
SVG                              1              0              0           2671
CSS                              5            192             35            763
reStructuredText                 4            158            163            121
Markdown                         2             25              0             90
TeX                              1              8              0             85
YAML                             2              4             10             27
DOS Batch                        1              8              1             26
make                             1              4              7              9
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            70           4032           3607          20159
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 420

[editorialbot]

Failed to discover a Statement of need section in paper

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.5281/zenodo.6795163 is OK
- 10.7554/eLife.63720 is OK
- 10.48550/ARXIV.1802.03426 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

SCONE: Open Source Software for Predictive Simulation of Biological Motion
Submitting author: @tgeijten
Handling editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman (Active)
Reviewers: @modenaxe, @demotu
Similarity score: 0.8137

BIDSonym: a BIDS App for the pseudo-anonymization of neuroimaging datasets
Submitting author: @peerherholz
Handling editor: @oliviaguest (Active)
Reviewers: @deep-introspection, @chrisgorgo, @neuromusic
Similarity score: 0.8121

BrainGlobe Atlas API: a common interface for neuroanatomical atlases
Submitting author: @adamltyson
Handling editor: @oliviaguest (Active)
Reviewers: @typically, @vitay
Similarity score: 0.8110

SpmImage Tycoon: Organize and analyze scanning probe microscopy data
Submitting author: @alexriss
Handling editor: @jgostick (Active)
Reviewers: @jingpengw, @kasasxav
Similarity score: 0.8107

BayesianNetwork: Interactive Bayesian Network Modeling and Analysis
Submitting author: @paulgovan
Handling editor: @katyhuff (Retired)
Reviewers: @rgiordan
Similarity score: 0.8096

⚠️ Note to editors: If these papers look like they might be a good match, click through to the review issue for that paper and invite one or more of the authors before considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@editorialbot invite @emdupre as editor

[editorialbot]

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

[emdupre]

Thanks for the invitation, @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman ! Happy to take this.

[emdupre]

@editorialbot assign @emdupre as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @emdupre is now the editor

[emdupre]

👋 Hi @calebweinreb, and thanks for your submission to JOSS !

If you have suggestions for potential reviewers, please let me know by listing their names or GitHub handles (without the @, so they don't receive a notification) here.

You can suggest reviewers from any relevant project, though we often recommend starting with this database of people who have already agreed to review for JOSS.

I'll put together a list of folks to reach out to as reviewers based on these suggestions and my own recommendations. I'll update this thread with that outreach.

[calebweinreb]

Hi! Here are the handles of some people who seemed well-suited based on their profiles:

vigji
niksirbi
TomDonoghue
felixhenninger

jbohnslav and AlexEMG are not in the database but could review well.

[emdupre]

Thank you, @calebweinreb !

While I look through these suggestions, could you please also address this EditorialBot comment ?

Failed to discover a Statement of need section in paper

You can find more information on what we expect in JOSS submissions in our documentation on "What should my paper contain?".

[calebweinreb]

I added a Statement of need calebweinreb/SNUB@f5fdcb8

Thanks for the heads up!

[emdupre]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

SCONE: Open Source Software for Predictive Simulation of Biological Motion
Submitting author: @tgeijten
Handling editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman (Active)
Reviewers: @modenaxe, @demotu
Similarity score: 0.8226

BrainGlobe Atlas API: a common interface for neuroanatomical atlases
Submitting author: @adamltyson
Handling editor: @oliviaguest (Active)
Reviewers: @typically, @vitay
Similarity score: 0.8217

NiBetaSeries: task related correlations in fMRI
Submitting author: @jdkent
Handling editor: @arokem (Retired)
Reviewers: @snastase
Similarity score: 0.8184

BayesianNetwork: Interactive Bayesian Network Modeling and Analysis
Submitting author: @paulgovan
Handling editor: @katyhuff (Retired)
Reviewers: @rgiordan
Similarity score: 0.8159

MNE-BIDS: Organizing electrophysiological data into the BIDS format and facilitating their analysis
Submitting author: @sappelhoff
Handling editor: @arokem (Retired)
Reviewers: @jdkent, @TomDonoghue
Similarity score: 0.8157

⚠️ Note to editors: If these papers look like they might be a good match, click through to the review issue for that paper and invite one or more of the authors before considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[emdupre]

👋 Hi @vigji, @niksirbi, and @tgeijten,

Would you be willing to review Systems Neuro Browser (SNUB) for JOSS (the Journal of Open Source Software)?

You can learn more about reviewing for JOSS -- including our conflict of interest policy -- here.

The review takes place on GitHub and focuses on the software and this short paper:
https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/blob/joss.06114/joss.06114/10.21105.joss.06114.pdf

If you're available to review this work, please let me know and I'll add you as a reviewer.

🌟 Generally, we ask that all reviews are completed within six weeks, although I know that many of us are out-of-office during the holiday season. So please let me know if you'd be available on this six week timeline, or if you'd need a slightly longer window.

Once I have sufficient reviewers I'll open a dedicated review issue.

Thank you for considering !

[niksirbi]

👋 Hi @emdupre, thanks for pinging me.

SNUB looks very interesting and relevant to my work, I'll be happy to review it!
Six weeks sounds feasible, so sign me up.

Thanks,
Niko

[tgeijten]

Hi @emdupre, I'm sorry but this paper is unrelated to my work and outside my area of expertise.

[vigji]

Hi @emdupre! Thanks for the invitation, this indeed looks within my scope of interest, I would be happy to review it.

Six weeks sound reasonable!

[emdupre]

Thank you for your responses, @niksirbi, @tgeijten, and @vigji ! I appreciate your considered (and quick !) follow-up. @tgeijten, please feel free to mute this thread so you don't receive any additional pings !

@niksirbi and @vigji, I'll add you as reviewers on this issue now. I'll try to identify one additional reviewer, and then we can proceed with the review !

[emdupre]

@editorialbot add @niksirbi as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@niksirbi added to the reviewers list!

[emdupre]

@editorialbot add @vigji as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@vigji added to the reviewers list!

[emdupre]

👋 Hi @jbohnslav,

Would you be willing to review Systems Neuro Browser (SNUB) for JOSS (the Journal of Open Source Software)?

You can learn more about reviewing for JOSS -- including our conflict of interest policy -- here.

The review takes place on GitHub and focuses on the software and this short paper:
https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/blob/joss.06114/joss.06114/10.21105.joss.06114.pdf

If you're available to review this work, please let me know and I'll add you as a reviewer.

🌟 Generally, we ask that all reviews are completed within six weeks, although I know that many of us are out-of-office during the holiday season. So please let me know if you'd be available on this six week timeline, or if you'd need a slightly longer window.

Once I have sufficient reviewers I'll open a dedicated review issue.

Thank you for considering !

[emdupre]

👋 Hi @lucasmiranda42 ,

Would you be willing to review Systems Neuro Browser (SNUB) for JOSS (the Journal of Open Source Software)?

You can learn more about reviewing for JOSS -- including our conflict of interest policy -- here.

The review takes place on GitHub and focuses on the software and this short paper:
https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/blob/joss.06114/joss.06114/10.21105.joss.06114.pdf

If you're available to review this work, please let me know and I'll add you as a reviewer.

🌟 Generally, we ask that all reviews are completed within six weeks, although I know that many of us are out-of-office during the holiday season. So please let me know if you'd be available on this six week timeline, or if you'd need a slightly longer window.

Once I have sufficient reviewers I'll open a dedicated review issue.

Thank you for considering !

[emdupre]

👋 Hi everyone, and happy new year !

Given that we're now on the other side of the holidays, I'd like to go ahead and get this started. @jbohnslav and @lucasmiranda42, please let me know by end of the week if you'd be available to review SNUB ; otherwise, we'll move forward with @niksirbi and @vigji as confirmed reviewers !

[niksirbi]

Happy New Year!

Confirming that I'm happy to start reviewing SNUB next week.

[lucasmiranda42]

Happy new year! I'd also be happy to review this one :)

[vigji]

Happy new year! I've start opening issues on SNUB repo to discuss with the author, I'll link everything here in a final review at the end.

[emdupre]

Thank you for confirming, @vigji, @niksirbi, and @lucasmiranda42 !

@lucasmiranda42, I'll add you as a reviewer now and then open the deviated review issue !

We now have a sufficient number of reviewers for SNUB, but thank you for considering this invitation, @jbohnslav 🌻

[emdupre]

@editorialbot add @lucasmiranda42 as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@lucasmiranda42 added to the reviewers list!

[emdupre]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in #6187.