New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[REVIEW]: PyNomaly #845

Open
whedon opened this Issue Jul 24, 2018 · 23 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
5 participants
@whedon
Collaborator

whedon commented Jul 24, 2018

Submitting author: @vc1492a (Valentino Constantinou)
Repository: https://www.github.com/vc1492a/PyNomaly
Version: v0.2.0
Editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman
Reviewers: @llllllllll
Archive: Pending

Status

status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="http://joss.theoj.org/papers/f4d2cfe680768526da7c1f6a2c103266"><img src="http://joss.theoj.org/papers/f4d2cfe680768526da7c1f6a2c103266/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](http://joss.theoj.org/papers/f4d2cfe680768526da7c1f6a2c103266/status.svg)](http://joss.theoj.org/papers/f4d2cfe680768526da7c1f6a2c103266)

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.)

Reviewer instructions & questions

@yzhao062, @llllllllll, please carry out your review in this issue by updating the checklist below. If you cannot edit the checklist please:

  1. Make sure you're logged in to your GitHub account
  2. Be sure to accept the invite at this URL: https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/invitations

The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.theoj.org/about#reviewer_guidelines. Any questions/concerns please let @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman know.

Please try and complete your review in the next two weeks

Review checklist for @yzhao062

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

  • Repository: Is the source code for this software available at the repository url?
  • License: Does the repository contain a plain-text LICENSE file with the contents of an OSI approved software license?
  • Version: Does the release version given match the GitHub release (v0.2.0)?
  • Authorship: Has the submitting author (@vc1492a) made major contributions to the software? Does the full list of paper authors seem appropriate and complete?

Functionality

  • Installation: Does installation proceed as outlined in the documentation?
  • Functionality: Have the functional claims of the software been confirmed?
  • Performance: If there are any performance claims of the software, have they been confirmed? (If there are no claims, please check off this item.)

Documentation

  • A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
  • Installation instructions: Is there a clearly-stated list of dependencies? Ideally these should be handled with an automated package management solution.
  • Example usage: Do the authors include examples of how to use the software (ideally to solve real-world analysis problems).
  • Functionality documentation: Is the core functionality of the software documented to a satisfactory level (e.g., API method documentation)?
  • Automated tests: Are there automated tests or manual steps described so that the function of the software can be verified?
  • Community guidelines: Are there clear guidelines for third parties wishing to 1) Contribute to the software 2) Report issues or problems with the software 3) Seek support

Software paper

  • Authors: Does the paper.md file include a list of authors with their affiliations?
  • A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
  • References: Do all archival references that should have a DOI list one (e.g., papers, datasets, software)?

Review checklist for @llllllllll

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

  • Repository: Is the source code for this software available at the repository url?
  • License: Does the repository contain a plain-text LICENSE file with the contents of an OSI approved software license?
  • Version: Does the release version given match the GitHub release (v0.2.0)?
  • Authorship: Has the submitting author (@vc1492a) made major contributions to the software? Does the full list of paper authors seem appropriate and complete?

Functionality

  • Installation: Does installation proceed as outlined in the documentation?
  • Functionality: Have the functional claims of the software been confirmed?
  • Performance: If there are any performance claims of the software, have they been confirmed? (If there are no claims, please check off this item.)

Documentation

  • A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
  • Installation instructions: Is there a clearly-stated list of dependencies? Ideally these should be handled with an automated package management solution.
  • Example usage: Do the authors include examples of how to use the software (ideally to solve real-world analysis problems).
  • Functionality documentation: Is the core functionality of the software documented to a satisfactory level (e.g., API method documentation)?
  • Automated tests: Are there automated tests or manual steps described so that the function of the software can be verified?
  • Community guidelines: Are there clear guidelines for third parties wishing to 1) Contribute to the software 2) Report issues or problems with the software 3) Seek support

Software paper

  • Authors: Does the paper.md file include a list of authors with their affiliations?
  • A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
  • References: Do all archival references that should have a DOI list one (e.g., papers, datasets, software)?
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@whedon

whedon Jul 24, 2018

Collaborator

Hello human, I'm @whedon. I'm here to help you with some common editorial tasks. @yzhao062 it looks like you're currently assigned as the reviewer for this paper 🎉.

⭐️ Important ⭐️

If you haven't already, you should seriously consider unsubscribing from GitHub notifications for this (https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews) repository. As a reviewer, you're probably currently watching this repository which means for GitHub's default behaviour you will receive notifications (emails) for all reviews 😿

To fix this do the following two things:

  1. Set yourself as 'Not watching' https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews:

watching

  1. You may also like to change your default settings for this watching repositories in your GitHub profile here: https://github.com/settings/notifications

notifications

For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:

@whedon commands
Collaborator

whedon commented Jul 24, 2018

Hello human, I'm @whedon. I'm here to help you with some common editorial tasks. @yzhao062 it looks like you're currently assigned as the reviewer for this paper 🎉.

⭐️ Important ⭐️

If you haven't already, you should seriously consider unsubscribing from GitHub notifications for this (https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews) repository. As a reviewer, you're probably currently watching this repository which means for GitHub's default behaviour you will receive notifications (emails) for all reviews 😿

To fix this do the following two things:

  1. Set yourself as 'Not watching' https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews:

watching

  1. You may also like to change your default settings for this watching repositories in your GitHub profile here: https://github.com/settings/notifications

notifications

For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:

@whedon commands
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@whedon

whedon Jul 24, 2018

Collaborator
Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...
Collaborator

whedon commented Jul 24, 2018

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@whedon
Collaborator

whedon commented Jul 24, 2018

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Jul 24, 2018

Member

@vc1492a @yzhao062 this is where the review takes place. I aim to find more reviewers but to avoid further delay we can get started here.
@yzhao062 could you provide an estimate as to when you think you'll be able to finish the review? Thanks! 🤖 🚀

Member

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Jul 24, 2018

@vc1492a @yzhao062 this is where the review takes place. I aim to find more reviewers but to avoid further delay we can get started here.
@yzhao062 could you provide an estimate as to when you think you'll be able to finish the review? Thanks! 🤖 🚀

@vc1492a

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@vc1492a

vc1492a Jul 25, 2018

@yzhao062 Current GitHub release is 0.2.1, as PyNomaly received an update after submission.

vc1492a commented Jul 25, 2018

@yzhao062 Current GitHub release is 0.2.1, as PyNomaly received an update after submission.

@yzhao062

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@yzhao062

yzhao062 Jul 25, 2018

Collaborator

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman @vc1492a I am about to start by following the review schedule above. Given I need some time to familiarize myself with the process, I would say 7-10 days is a safe estimate (should be faster though).

Collaborator

yzhao062 commented Jul 25, 2018

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman @vc1492a I am about to start by following the review schedule above. Given I need some time to familiarize myself with the process, I would say 7-10 days is a safe estimate (should be faster though).

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Jul 27, 2018

Member

@yzhao062 thanks. Okay, let me know if you need help.

Member

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Jul 27, 2018

@yzhao062 thanks. Okay, let me know if you need help.

@yzhao062

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@yzhao062

yzhao062 Aug 1, 2018

Collaborator

Hi @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman @vc1492a ,

I have followed the tasklist to conduct the first round review and marked most of the items as done. There are 2 items unchecked and want to list them below:

  1. Functionality documentation: the parameters are introduced in readme.MD. Given there are only 2 parameters to tweak (extent and n_neighbors), it should be fine without a full documentation (e.g. readthedocs). However, it may be helpful to open another section to list the the default values (0.997 and 10) and your recommendations for picking the parameters.

  2. Automated tests: it could be helpful to include some basic tests to make sure the model is running. For example, it is easy to generate some pseudo data and use loOP to do a classification and verify the result, which could at least make sure it is doing the job on the simplest data. Feel free to use the data_generation model here if that saves some time.

Other than those two items, I think it is a very solid and useful package to go which I used in my last paper. Since I am a first-time reviewer, please advise what is the best way to address the above two tasks.

Thanks,
Yue

Collaborator

yzhao062 commented Aug 1, 2018

Hi @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman @vc1492a ,

I have followed the tasklist to conduct the first round review and marked most of the items as done. There are 2 items unchecked and want to list them below:

  1. Functionality documentation: the parameters are introduced in readme.MD. Given there are only 2 parameters to tweak (extent and n_neighbors), it should be fine without a full documentation (e.g. readthedocs). However, it may be helpful to open another section to list the the default values (0.997 and 10) and your recommendations for picking the parameters.

  2. Automated tests: it could be helpful to include some basic tests to make sure the model is running. For example, it is easy to generate some pseudo data and use loOP to do a classification and verify the result, which could at least make sure it is doing the job on the simplest data. Feel free to use the data_generation model here if that saves some time.

Other than those two items, I think it is a very solid and useful package to go which I used in my last paper. Since I am a first-time reviewer, please advise what is the best way to address the above two tasks.

Thanks,
Yue

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Aug 17, 2018

Member

@vc1492a how are you getting on? Are you able to respond to the issues raised by @yzhao062 ? Thanks

Member

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Aug 17, 2018

@vc1492a how are you getting on? Are you able to respond to the issues raised by @yzhao062 ? Thanks

@vc1492a

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@vc1492a

vc1492a Aug 17, 2018

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Thanks for the message. I was under the impression that the work would be reviewed by a second reviewer prior to moving to the revision process. As such, I have not yet started on the recommendations @yzhao062 provided above but please let me know whether I should move forward with the revision process. I can get started in the next few days, and should be able to provide solutions to the above recommendations in about two weeks time.

vc1492a commented Aug 17, 2018

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Thanks for the message. I was under the impression that the work would be reviewed by a second reviewer prior to moving to the revision process. As such, I have not yet started on the recommendations @yzhao062 provided above but please let me know whether I should move forward with the revision process. I can get started in the next few days, and should be able to provide solutions to the above recommendations in about two weeks time.

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Aug 20, 2018

Member

@vc1492a I am searching for a second reviewer but please do start working on the revision process already.

Member

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Aug 20, 2018

@vc1492a I am searching for a second reviewer but please do start working on the revision process already.

@vc1492a

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@vc1492a

vc1492a Aug 20, 2018

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Thanks for reply. Will get started on the revision process and will get back in touch once I have pushed the suggested changes.

vc1492a commented Aug 20, 2018

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Thanks for reply. Will get started on the revision process and will get back in touch once I have pushed the suggested changes.

@vc1492a

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@vc1492a

vc1492a Aug 30, 2018

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman I have addressed the issues raised by @yzhao062. Additional documentation for parameter has been added to the readme, and a series of automated tests are available in the PyNomaly/tests directory (using pytest). Additionally, examples have been added to the examples directory. Please let me know if there's any additional items I should address.

vc1492a commented Aug 30, 2018

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman I have addressed the issues raised by @yzhao062. Additional documentation for parameter has been added to the readme, and a series of automated tests are available in the PyNomaly/tests directory (using pytest). Additionally, examples have been added to the examples directory. Please let me know if there's any additional items I should address.

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Aug 30, 2018

Member

@llllllllll is this something you'd be interested in reviewing?

Member

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Aug 30, 2018

@llllllllll is this something you'd be interested in reviewing?

@llllllllll

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@llllllllll

llllllllll Aug 31, 2018

Collaborator

I am interested in this, but I am moving tomorrow and will need a few days to unpack. I can look at this in a week or so.

Collaborator

llllllllll commented Aug 31, 2018

I am interested in this, but I am moving tomorrow and will need a few days to unpack. I can look at this in a week or so.

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Aug 31, 2018

Member

@llllllllll great thanks. I'll add you as reviewer and look forward to seeing your comments. All the best with the move 🏡

Member

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Aug 31, 2018

@llllllllll great thanks. I'll add you as reviewer and look forward to seeing your comments. All the best with the move 🏡

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman
Member

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Aug 31, 2018

@whedon assign @llllllllll as reviewer

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@whedon

whedon Aug 31, 2018

Collaborator

OK, the reviewer is @llllllllll

Collaborator

whedon commented Aug 31, 2018

OK, the reviewer is @llllllllll

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Aug 31, 2018

Member

@yzhao062 could you respond to how @vc1492a has dealt with your feedback? Thanks

Member

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Aug 31, 2018

@yzhao062 could you respond to how @vc1492a has dealt with your feedback? Thanks

@yzhao062

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@yzhao062

yzhao062 Aug 31, 2018

Collaborator

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman will do a review in 3 days for sure:)

Collaborator

yzhao062 commented Aug 31, 2018

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman will do a review in 3 days for sure:)

@yzhao062

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@yzhao062

yzhao062 Sep 3, 2018

Collaborator

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman I have successfully run the newly added tests. I am confident it is a sound and useful package! Great work @vc1492a ! I think it is good to go:)

Collaborator

yzhao062 commented Sep 3, 2018

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman I have successfully run the newly added tests. I am confident it is a sound and useful package! Great work @vc1492a ! I think it is good to go:)

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Sep 10, 2018

Member

Thanks @yzhao062 for your end of the review work! 🎉

Member

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Sep 10, 2018

Thanks @yzhao062 for your end of the review work! 🎉

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman Sep 10, 2018

Member

@vc1492a we will now await @llllllllll review comments.

Member

Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman commented Sep 10, 2018

@vc1492a we will now await @llllllllll review comments.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment