[PRE REVIEW]: A Python module to combine p values arising from discrete tests

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @Wrzlprmft (Gerrit Ansmann)
Repository: https://github.com/BPSB/combine-p-values-discrete
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch):
Version: 1.2.1
Editor: @vissarion
Reviewers: @steppi, @mdhaber
Managing EiC: Arfon Smith

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/ec8a185cc7c9c7880ee77bba4078e01f"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/ec8a185cc7c9c7880ee77bba4078e01f/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/ec8a185cc7c9c7880ee77bba4078e01f/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/ec8a185cc7c9c7880ee77bba4078e01f)

Author instructions

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

@Wrzlprmft 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=0.04 s (564.6 files/s, 63530.2 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                          14            398            393           1375
reStructuredText                 2             83             15            164
make                             1             28              6            143
YAML                             4             10              0             80
TeX                              1              5              0             44
Markdown                         1             13              0             41
JSON                             1              0              0             11
INI                              1              0              0              4
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            25            537            414           1862
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 634

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1080/01621459.1962.10482147 is OK
- 10.1093/biomet/asx076 is OK
- 10.18637/jss.v101.i01 is OK
- 10.2466/pr0.95.2.449-458 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

⚠️ An error happened when generating the pdf. Author (Gerrit Ansmann) is missing affiliation.

[Wrzlprmft]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

tukey_hsd: An Accurate Implementation of the Tukey Honestly Significant Difference Test in Python
Submitting author: @mdhaber
Handling editor: @mikldk (Retired)
Reviewers: @mcavs, @acolum
Similarity score: 0.8024

Multiple Inference: A Python package for comparing multiple parameters
Submitting author: @dsbowen
Handling editor: @vissarion (Active)
Reviewers: @blakeaw, @mattpitkin, @nhejazi
Similarity score: 0.7955

robnptests -- An R package for robust two-sample location and dispersion tests
Submitting author: @s-abbas
Handling editor: @jbytecode (Active)
Reviewers: @mingzehuang, @msalibian
Similarity score: 0.7951

Autorank: A Python package for automated ranking of classifiers
Submitting author: @sherbold
Handling editor: @arfon (Active)
Reviewers: @JonathanReardon, @ejhigson
Similarity score: 0.7934

NEEP: null empirically estimated p-values for high-throughput molecular survival analysis
Submitting author: @scwest
Handling editor: @majensen (Active)
Reviewers: @SiminaB, @majensen
Similarity score: 0.7930

⚠️ 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.

[Wrzlprmft]

Some suggestions for reviewers:

• Lucas Roberts (involved in SciPy’s combine_pvalues)
• Albert Steppi (involved in SciPy’s combine_pvalues)
• Micheal Dewey (author of related R package)
• Ozan Cinar (author of related R package)
• Wolfgang Viechtbauer (author of related R package)

[arfon]

@Wrzlprmft - thanks for your submission to JOSS. We're currently managing a large backlog of submissions and the editor most appropriate for your area is already rather busy.

For now, we will need to waitlist this paper and process it as the queue reduces. Thanks for your patience!

[arfon]

@editorialbot invite @vissarion as editor

👋 @vissarion – would you be willing to edit this submission for JOSS?

[editorialbot]

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

[vissarion]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @vissarion is now the editor

[vissarion]

👋 @rlucas7, @ozancinar, @steppi 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

[steppi]

Hi @vissarion. I’d be happy to help review this.

[vissarion]

@editorialbot add @steppi as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@steppi added to the reviewers list!

[ozancinar]

Apologies for my late response. I'm afraid I can't take this review task at the moment, I'm sorry.

[vissarion]

Hi @mdhaber, @dsbowen, @s-abbas, @sherbold, @scwest, 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

[mdhaber]

Yes, I can review.

[sherbold]

Sorry, I am currently buried under a pile of work and would only be available in January. If that is not too late, I can do this, otherwise.

[s-abbas]

Hi @vissarion,

I could carry out a review. However, I am not a Python expert and wouldn't be able to start before the end of next week. If that is not a problem, I'm happy to help.

[vissarion]

@editorialbot add @mdhaber as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@mdhaber added to the reviewers list!

[vissarion]

@s-abbas thanks for your reply and willingness to help, we have two reviewers now so we will proceed with them.
@mdhaber & @steppi you have been assigned as reviewers. Many thanks!

[vissarion]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in #6096.