[PRE REVIEW]: A GPU-Accelerated Open-Source Python Package for Calculating Powder Diffraction, Small-Angle-, and Total Scattering with the Debye Scattering Equation

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @AndySAnker (Andy Sode Anker)
Repository: https://github.com/FrederikLizakJohansen/DebyeCalculator
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch):
Version: v1.0.0
Editor: @phibeck
Reviewers: @marcocamma, @elena-pascal, @KedoKudo
Managing EiC: Kyle Niemeyer

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/08b1afc8d8341f95553a28dbd5cb3f09"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/08b1afc8d8341f95553a28dbd5cb3f09/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/08b1afc8d8341f95553a28dbd5cb3f09/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/08b1afc8d8341f95553a28dbd5cb3f09)

Author instructions

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

@AndySAnker 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=0.09 s (343.0 files/s, 179433.3 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HTML                             6              0              0           2285
Python                           8            380            355           1441
JavaScript                       6            106            120            557
YAML                             3              5             24            260
Jupyter Notebook                 2              0           9733            257
Markdown                         2             54              0            170
CSS                              1            143              3            145
TeX                              1             14              0            123
TOML                             1              2              0             39
JSON                             1              0              0              1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            31            704          10235           5278
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 1743

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1107/S0108767394013292 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- 10.1016/c2010-0-66357-7 may be a valid DOI for title: Underneath the Bragg peaks: structural analysis of complex materials
- 10.1107/s2053273315014473 may be a valid DOI for title: Complex modeling: a strategy and software program for combining multiple information sources to solve ill posed structure and nanostructure inverse problems
- 10.1002/prot.24838 may be a valid DOI for title: BCL:: SAXS: GPU accelerated D ebye method for computation of small angle X-ray scattering profiles

INVALID DOIs

- https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-4596(77)90020-2 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

PiSCAT: A Python Package for Interferometric Scattering Microscopy
Submitting author: @po60nani
Handling editor: @emdupre (Active)
Reviewers: @ziatdinovmax, @aquilesC
Similarity score: 0.8198

PyGBe-LSPR: Python and GPU Boundary-integral solver for electrostatics
Submitting author: @ncclementi
Handling editor: @katyhuff (Retired)
Reviewers: @kyleniemeyer
Similarity score: 0.8192

pyCADMium: Chemical Atoms in Diatomic Molecules. A prolate spheroidal Python module for embedding calculations
Submitting author: @VHchavez
Handling editor: @lucydot (Active)
Reviewers: @raghurama123, @srmnitc
Similarity score: 0.8178

ParticleScattering: Solving and optimizing multiple-scattering problems in Julia
Submitting author: @bblankrot
Handling editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman (Active)
Reviewers: @ziotom78, @ysimillides
Similarity score: 0.8161

py-sc-fermi: self-consistent Fermi energies and defect concentrations from electronic structure calculations
Submitting author: @alexsquires
Handling editor: @rkurchin (Active)
Reviewers: @hongzhouye, @ajgoyal
Similarity score: 0.8156

⚠️ 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 before considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[phibeck]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @phibeck is now the editor

[phibeck]

Hi @AndySAnker, thanks for your submission. I'll be looking for reviewers next. A few things you can do to speed up the review process:

• it would be helpful if you could identify a few potential reviewers from this list https://reviewers.joss.theoj.org/reviewers (without tagging them with a @)
• there are some missing and one invalid DOI as indicated by editorialbot above. You can go ahead and fix them and regenerate the pdf using @editorialbot generate pdf
• as a side note: your paper is on the longer side (we aim for <= 1000 words, but not strict), so you could think about moving some of the function documentation into the repository directly

[FrederikLizakJohansen]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

PyGBe-LSPR: Python and GPU Boundary-integral solver for electrostatics
Submitting author: @ncclementi
Handling editor: @katyhuff (Retired)
Reviewers: @kyleniemeyer
Similarity score: 0.8175

PiSCAT: A Python Package for Interferometric Scattering Microscopy
Submitting author: @po60nani
Handling editor: @emdupre (Active)
Reviewers: @ziatdinovmax, @aquilesC
Similarity score: 0.8172

A Fast Iterative Method Python package
Submitting author: @thomgrand
Handling editor: @xuanxu (Active)
Reviewers: @lucaferranti, @RobertRosca
Similarity score: 0.8140

pyCADMium: Chemical Atoms in Diatomic Molecules. A prolate spheroidal Python module for embedding calculations
Submitting author: @VHchavez
Handling editor: @lucydot (Active)
Reviewers: @raghurama123, @srmnitc
Similarity score: 0.8135

ParticleScattering: Solving and optimizing multiple-scattering problems in Julia
Submitting author: @bblankrot
Handling editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman (Active)
Reviewers: @ziotom78, @ysimillides
Similarity score: 0.8128

⚠️ 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 before considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[AndySAnker]

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello @AndySAnker, here are the things you can ask me to do:

# List all available commands
@editorialbot commands

# Get a list of all editors's GitHub handles
@editorialbot list editors

# 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 branch
@editorialbot set joss-paper as branch

# Generates the pdf paper
@editorialbot generate pdf

# Generates a LaTeX preprint file
@editorialbot generate preprint

# Get a link to the complete list of reviewers
@editorialbot list reviewers

[AndySAnker]

@editorialbot check references

@editorialbot check repository

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1016/c2010-0-66357-7 is OK
- 10.1107/s2053273315014473 is OK
- 10.1002/prot.24838 is OK
- 10.1107/S0108767394013292 is OK
- 10.1016/0022-4596(77)90020-2 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[AndySAnker]

@editorialbot check repository

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.09 s (343.3 files/s, 179927.7 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HTML                             6              0              0           2285
Python                           8            380            355           1441
JavaScript                       6            106            120            557
YAML                             3              5             24            260
Jupyter Notebook                 2              0           9733            257
Markdown                         2             59              0            194
CSS                              1            143              3            145
TeX                              1             14              0            125
TOML                             1              2              0             39
JSON                             1              0              0              1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            31            709          10235           5304
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 1743

[phibeck]

👋 @po60nani, @ncclementi, @elena-pascal & @marcocamma, would any of you be 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

[FrederikLizakJohansen]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[FrederikLizakJohansen]

Hi @phibeck 👋, thank you for your feedback.

• As you can see, we have addressed the missing and invalid DOIs. They are no longer flagged by @editorialbot.
• Thank you for your suggestion on moving some of the function documentation into the repository - we have done exactly that.
• We see that you have already found some reviewers. We have also identified some relevant reviewers, three of which are contributors to the Mantid project, which share a common focus on supporting the processing and analysis of materials science data, albeit with different specific functionalities and target areas. All five potential reviewers have expertise in 'scattering' which we think are very relevant to review the DebyeCalculator software and paper.
  -- stuartcampbell (Contributor to Mantid, relevant topics: Neutron scattering, X-ray techniques)
  -- mdoucet (Contributor to Mantid, relevant topics: Physics, Neutron Scattering, Materials Science)
  -- jwuttke (Contributor to Mantid, relevant topics: Scattering, Diffraction)
  -- marcocamma (Employed at the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility, relevant topics: X-ray, Large facilities, Scattering)
  -- KedoKedo (relevant topics: Neutron diffraction, X-ray diffraction, Data visualization)

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

PyGBe-LSPR: Python and GPU Boundary-integral solver for electrostatics
Submitting author: @ncclementi
Handling editor: @katyhuff (Retired)
Reviewers: @kyleniemeyer
Similarity score: 0.8214

PiSCAT: A Python Package for Interferometric Scattering Microscopy
Submitting author: @po60nani
Handling editor: @emdupre (Active)
Reviewers: @ziatdinovmax, @aquilesC
Similarity score: 0.8204

pyCADMium: Chemical Atoms in Diatomic Molecules. A prolate spheroidal Python module for embedding calculations
Submitting author: @VHchavez
Handling editor: @lucydot (Active)
Reviewers: @raghurama123, @srmnitc
Similarity score: 0.8201

GPUE: Graphics Processing Unit Gross--Pitaevskii Equation solver
Submitting author: @leios
Handling editor: @labarba (Retired)
Reviewers: @mgalloy, @markbasham
Similarity score: 0.8187

ParticleScattering: Solving and optimizing multiple-scattering problems in Julia
Submitting author: @bblankrot
Handling editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman (Active)
Reviewers: @ziotom78, @ysimillides
Similarity score: 0.8142

⚠️ 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 before considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[phibeck]

Hi @FrederikLizakJohansen,

* As you can see, we have addressed the missing and invalid DOIs. They are no longer flagged by @editorialbot.
* Thank you for your suggestion on moving some of the function documentation into the repository - we have done exactly that.

Great, looks good. Thanks for the reviewer suggestions. I will come back to this depending on the response to my first invitation.

[marcocamma]

Dear @phibeck and all,
The topic looks very interesting ! I have written also some simple code for Debye scattering calculation ... that was not particularly fast ... so I am looking forward to the GPU version !
I will be happy to review the manuscript,
Looking forward to further instructions.

[phibeck]

Great, thank you @marcocamma! For now I'll be searching for 1-2 more reviewers; the next steps will be outlined once the Review issue starts.

[phibeck]

@editorialbot add @marcocamma as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@marcocamma added to the reviewers list!

[elena-pascal]

Hello,
Happy to have look at the code and manuscript.

[phibeck]

@editorialbot add @elena-pascal as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@elena-pascal added to the reviewers list!

[phibeck]

👋 @stuartcampbell & @KedoKudo, would any of you be 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

[KedoKudo]

Hi, I can help the review if still needed.

[phibeck]

Thank you, that's great. I'll close this pre-review now and start the review process over in another issue.

[phibeck]

@editorialbot add @KedoKudo as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@KedoKudo added to the reviewers list!

[phibeck]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in #6024.