[PRE REVIEW]: ScatteringOptics.jl: An Interstellar Scattering Framework in the Julia Programming Language

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @annatartaglia (Anna Tartaglia)
Repository: https://github.com/EHTJulia/ScatteringOptics.jl
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch):
Version: v0.1.2
Editor: @dfm
Reviewers: @Edenhofer, @tomkimpson
Managing EiC: Dan Foreman-Mackey

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/80e98109e1499d2f0f8e15838a3b272b"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/80e98109e1499d2f0f8e15838a3b272b/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/80e98109e1499d2f0f8e15838a3b272b/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/80e98109e1499d2f0f8e15838a3b272b)

Author instructions

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

@annatartaglia 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=0.02 s (1381.0 files/s, 140520.8 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOML                             3            283              1           1300
Julia                           18            181             76            734
TeX                              1             17              0            245
Markdown                         6             68              0            214
YAML                             4              3              6            128
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            32            552             83           2621
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 1264

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1088/0004-637X/805/2/180 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-4357/833/1/74 is OK
- 10.3847/2041-8205/820/1/L10 is OK
- 10.3847/0004-637X/826/2/170 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-4357/aadcff is OK
- 10.3847/2041-8213/ac6674 is OK
- 10.3847/2041-8213/ac6675 is OK
- 10.3847/2041-8213/ac6429 is OK
- 10.3847/2041-8213/ac6736 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.04457 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.1209.5145 is OK
- 10.1146/annurev.aa.28.090190.003021 is OK
- 10.1098/rsta.1992.0090 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/238.3.963 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/238.3.995 is OK
- 10.1017/S1743921314000775 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

vSmartMOM.jl: an Open-Source Julia Package for Atmospheric Radiative Transfer and Remote Sensing Tools
Submitting author: @RupeshJey
Handling editor: @pdebuyl (Active)
Reviewers: @jimmielin, @arjunsavel
Similarity score: 0.8530

NuclearToolkit.jl: A Julia package for nuclear structure calculations
Submitting author: @SotaYoshida
Handling editor: @rkurchin (Active)
Reviewers: @mdavezac, @villaa
Similarity score: 0.8496

PiSCAT: A Python Package for Interferometric Scattering Microscopy
Submitting author: @po60nani
Handling editor: @emdupre (Active)
Reviewers: @ziatdinovmax, @aquilesC
Similarity score: 0.8376

Comrade: Composable Modeling of Radio Emission
Submitting author: @ptiede
Handling editor: @arfon (Active)
Reviewers: @mileslucas, @cescalara
Similarity score: 0.8336

Vlasiator.jl: A Julia package for processing Vlasiator data
Submitting author: @henry2004y
Handling editor: @pdebuyl (Active)
Reviewers: @ranocha, @tkoskela
Similarity score: 0.8265

⚠️ 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.

[dfm]

@editorialbot query scope

@annatartaglia — Thanks for your submission! Given the small size of this code base, I have submitted this pre-review for editorial review with respect to the "substantial scholarly effort" submission requirement. This usually takes a week or two and I'll report back here as soon as I hear back from the rest of the editorial board.

[editorialbot]

Submission flagged for editorial review.

[dfm]

@annatartaglia — Thanks for your patience! The editorial team has decided that your submission has passed the initial scope review and we'll move it to review as soon as possible. Unfortunately our editors are currently working at capacity so I'm going to add the waitlist label, and I'll update here as soon as a suitable editor comes available to handle the review process.

[kazuakiyama]

@dfm Thank you very much for sharing this update. As a co-author of this submission, I have a question as this paper is our first experience working with JOSS. We have kept the package somewhat frozen since the submission to JOSS because potential reviewers may want to see the version of the submission. As the review may take longer, I would like to ask if we are allowed to keep the package continuously developed and updated. At the time of the submission, the package already had a full function of simulating scattering effects enough to work as a standalone package but we want to extend their functionalities.

[dfm]

@kazuakiyama - sorry about my double comment! I slightly misspoke in the previous version. You should absolutely feel free to continue development and it would be fine to indicate to the reviewers which branch / version of the docs / subset of features they should consider. But you shouldn't feel the need to pause development for the review!!

[dfm]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

@annatartaglia, @kazuakiyama — Thanks for your patience! I can now take over this submission as editor. I'm sorry about the slow turnaround - we've been recently overloaded, and trying to catch up.

My first step will be to recruit two reviewers. Please take a look at the reviewer database to see if you can identify anyone who might be a good fit. Please mention their GitHub username here, but don't tag them (i.e. dfm not @dfm). Thanks!

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @dfm is now the editor

[dfm]

👋 @tomkimpson, @Edenhofer, @kiranshila — Would any of you be available and willing to review this submission for JOSS? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html

[Edenhofer]

I'm happy to review the submission :)

[dfm]

@editorialbot add @Edenhofer as reviewer

Thanks @Edenhofer!!

[editorialbot]

@Edenhofer added to the reviewers list!

[tomkimpson]

Also happy to review if a second is needed

[dfm]

@editorialbot add @tomkimpson as reviewer

That would be great - thank you @tomkimpson!!

[editorialbot]

@tomkimpson added to the reviewers list!

[dfm]

@editorialbot start review

This command will get the main review started in a new thread and we'll all head over there for the next steps. Thanks all!

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in #6354.