[PRE REVIEW]: Efficient Polyhedral Gravity Modeling in Modern C++ and Python

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @schuhmaj (Jonas Schuhmacher)
Repository: https://github.com/esa/polyhedral-gravity-model
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): main
Version: v2.1.0
Editor: @dfm
Reviewers: @mikegrudic, @santisoler
Managing EiC: Dan Foreman-Mackey

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7d01f903d9d137c08240185331f91606"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7d01f903d9d137c08240185331f91606/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7d01f903d9d137c08240185331f91606/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7d01f903d9d137c08240185331f91606)

Author instructions

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

@schuhmaj 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 (995.2 files/s, 107000.7 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C++                             17            409            221           2324
C/C++ Header                    17            270           1060            700
Python                          11            244            321            668
Markdown                         3            147              0            410
CMake                           15            116            103            288
YAML                             8             14             30            260
reStructuredText                11            207            287            255
Jupyter Notebook                 1              0            651            160
TeX                              1             15              0            135
DOS Batch                        1              8              1             26
make                             1              4              7              9
INI                              1              0              0              4
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            87           1434           2681           5239
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 1024

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.21105/joss.02338 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- 10.1007/s00190-009-0310-9 may be a valid DOI for title: Recursive algorithms for the computation of the potential harmonic coefficients of a constant density polyhedron
- 10.1190/geo2010-0334.1 may be a valid DOI for title: Analytical computation of the full gravity tensor of a homogeneous arbitrarily shaped polyhedral source using line integrals
- 10.1111/1365-2478.13134 may be a valid DOI for title: A computational review of the line integral analytical formulation of the polyhedral gravity signal
- 10.1038/s44172-022-00050-3 may be a valid DOI for title: Geodesy of irregular small bodies via neural density fields
- 10.1190/1.1444944 may be a valid DOI for title: On the singularities of the gravity field of a homogeneous polyhedral body
- 10.1007/s001900050074 may be a valid DOI for title: Determination of the potential of homogeneous polyhedral bodies using line integrals
- 10.1145/2629697 may be a valid DOI for title: TetGen, a Delaunay-based quality tetrahedral mesh generator
- 10.1016/j.earscirev.2021.103739 may be a valid DOI for title: On the use of spherical harmonic series inside the minimum Brillouin sphere: Theoretical review and evaluation by GRAIL and LOLA satellite data
- 10.1109/iciecs.2010.5677738 may be a valid DOI for title: Modeling and Analysis of Gravity Field of 433Eros Using Polyhedron Model Method

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

pytreegrav: A fast Python gravity solver
Submitting author: @mikegrudic
Handling editor: @dfm (Active)
Reviewers: @adrn, @maxwelltsai
Similarity score: 0.8239

GRChombo: An adaptable numerical relativity code for fundamental physics
Submitting author: @kaclough
Handling editor: @rkurchin (Active)
Reviewers: @sbozzolo, @rashti-alireza
Similarity score: 0.8148

ExaFMM: a high-performance fast multipole method library with C++ and Python interfaces
Submitting author: @tingyu66
Handling editor: @poulson (Retired)
Reviewers: @berenger-eu, @pitsianis
Similarity score: 0.8144

iharm3D: Vectorized General Relativistic Magnetohydrodynamics
Submitting author: @bprather
Handling editor: @eloisabentivegna (Active)
Reviewers: @bgiacoma, @cpalenzuela
Similarity score: 0.8118

papaya2: 2D Irreducible Minkowski Tensor computation
Submitting author: @skapfer
Handling editor: @hugoledoux (Active)
Reviewers: @kenohori, @rmjarvis
Similarity score: 0.8108

⚠️ 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.

[dfm]

@schuhmaj — Thanks for your submission! I am working to assign an editor, but in the meantime can you please check those DOIs recommended by the bot above ☝️ and add them to your bibliography if appropriate.

[schuhmaj]

@editorialbot set joss-pre-review as branch

[editorialbot]

Done! branch is now joss-pre-review

[schuhmaj]

@editorialbot check references

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1007/s00190-009-0310-9 is OK
- 10.1190/geo2010-0334.1 is OK
- 10.1111/1365-2478.13134 is OK
- 10.1038/s44172-022-00050-3 is OK
- 10.1190/1.1444944 is OK
- 10.1007/s001900050074 is OK
- 10.1145/2629697 is OK
- 10.1016/j.earscirev.2021.103739 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.02338 is OK
- 10.1109/iciecs.2010.5677738 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[schuhmaj]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

pytreegrav: A fast Python gravity solver
Submitting author: @mikegrudic
Handling editor: @dfm (Active)
Reviewers: @adrn, @maxwelltsai
Similarity score: 0.8266

GRChombo: An adaptable numerical relativity code for fundamental physics
Submitting author: @kaclough
Handling editor: @rkurchin (Active)
Reviewers: @sbozzolo, @rashti-alireza
Similarity score: 0.8181

ExaFMM: a high-performance fast multipole method library with C++ and Python interfaces
Submitting author: @tingyu66
Handling editor: @poulson (Retired)
Reviewers: @berenger-eu, @pitsianis
Similarity score: 0.8162

iharm3D: Vectorized General Relativistic Magnetohydrodynamics
Submitting author: @bprather
Handling editor: @eloisabentivegna (Active)
Reviewers: @bgiacoma, @cpalenzuela
Similarity score: 0.8157

CEGO: C++11 Evolutionary Global Optimization
Submitting author: @ianhbell
Handling editor: @jedbrown (Active)
Reviewers: @sarats, @sjvrijn, @mmenickelly
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.

[schuhmaj]

@editorialbot set main as branch

[editorialbot]

Done! branch is now main

[schuhmaj]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

pytreegrav: A fast Python gravity solver
Submitting author: @mikegrudic
Handling editor: @dfm (Active)
Reviewers: @adrn, @maxwelltsai
Similarity score: 0.8266

GRChombo: An adaptable numerical relativity code for fundamental physics
Submitting author: @kaclough
Handling editor: @rkurchin (Active)
Reviewers: @sbozzolo, @rashti-alireza
Similarity score: 0.8181

ExaFMM: a high-performance fast multipole method library with C++ and Python interfaces
Submitting author: @tingyu66
Handling editor: @poulson (Retired)
Reviewers: @berenger-eu, @pitsianis
Similarity score: 0.8162

iharm3D: Vectorized General Relativistic Magnetohydrodynamics
Submitting author: @bprather
Handling editor: @eloisabentivegna (Active)
Reviewers: @bgiacoma, @cpalenzuela
Similarity score: 0.8157

CEGO: C++11 Evolutionary Global Optimization
Submitting author: @ianhbell
Handling editor: @jedbrown (Active)
Reviewers: @sarats, @sjvrijn, @mmenickelly
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.

[schuhmaj]

@schuhmaj — Thanks for your submission! I am working to assign an editor, but in the meantime can you please check those DOIs recommended by the bot above ☝️ and add them to your bibliography if appropriate.

@dfm Thank you very much. I've reviewed and added the missing DOIs 👍

[schuhmaj]

@dfm Sorry to bother you, but is it my responsibility to find the reviewers from the bot's suggested papers/ the list, or is there a process in place? I am not 100% sure since this is my first submission, and I thought I better ask.

[dfm]

@schuhmaj — Thanks for reaching out and for your patience! It is not your responsibility to select reviewers; I'm still working on assigning an editor to lead the process and they will find reviewers. Unfortunately we have a bit of a backlog so I've been struggling to get someone signed up but I hope to have it sorted ASAP. Thanks again for your patience!!

[dfm]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @dfm is now the editor

[dfm]

@schuhmaj — Thanks again for your patience! I'll take this review through the next steps now. First, I'll work to recruit reviewers, then we'll get the main review started in a new thread. Please let me know if you have any questions as we go!

[schuhmaj]

@dfm Okay 👍 Thank you very much. So far, I don't have any questions, but I'll let you know if anything comes up.

[dfm]

@schuhmaj — I'm sorry about the delay on this review. I've struggled to find reviewers for this submission through my usual channels. I'm going to ping a few potential reviewers here on GitHub, but if you have any suggestions for good reviewers from this list or your network, please let me know. If you mention a GitHub username, please don't tag them (i.e. dfm instead of @dfm). Thanks for your patience!

[dfm]

👋 @santisoler, @mikegrudic — Would 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

[mikegrudic]

Gladly

[dfm]

@editorialbot add @mikegrudic as reviewer

🎉 Thanks @mikegrudic! As soon as we have a second reviewer assigned, we'll get the main review started in a new thread.

[editorialbot]

@mikegrudic added to the reviewers list!

[santisoler]

Sorry for the delayed reply, I was on vacations the past two weeks. I'll gladly review this submission!

[dfm]

@editorialbot add @santisoler as reviewer

@santisoler — No worries and thanks for the response! This is great.

Now that we have two reviewers, I'll get the main review thread started. Thanks again to all!!

[editorialbot]

@santisoler added to the reviewers list!

[dfm]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in #6384.