[REVIEW]: Flux: Seamless machine learning with Julia #602
Comments
|
Hello human, I'm @whedon. I'm here to help you with some common editorial tasks. @ysimillides 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:
For a list of things I can do to help you, just type: |
|
|
@MikeInnes this is where the review takes place. |
|
@ysimillides @vchuravy thanks for reviewing this submission 🚀 I've created tick boxes for the both of you at the top of this issue. You can leave review comments here but for larger items we suggest you open an issue on the project repo and link to it here. Let me know if you have questions. Let the reviewing begin 🎉 |
|
@davidbarber @taheris are you interested in reviewing this submission for JOSS as well? Review is focused largely on the software and also a short paper 🔖 |
|
@ChrisRackauckas also mentioned an interest in reviewing, if we're going for 3. |
|
Great the more the better. @ChrisRackauckas I've created a check list for you at the top of this issue as well. |
|
The invitation seems to not have worked. |
@ChrisRackauckas - I just re-invited you. |
|
I think I will need to step down after reading the conflict of interests policy. I am currently (well just started) working with @MikeInnes on a publication which utilizes Flux.jl and so someone with less experience of the software, it's community, and its authors can probably do a more impartial scientific assessment, though I will still go through and open docs PRs where I see fit. |
|
Thanks @ChrisRackauckas that sounds good |
|
I also have to report a potential COI, @MikeInnes and I recently co-authored a (publication)[http://www.sysml.cc/doc/37.pdf]. |
|
I've tried to address @ysimillides comments, he can say if that's sufficient. As no other reviewers have stepped up over a month, seems like it might be challenging to get more review on this. Is there any chance of moving forward with the one review? |
|
@MikeInnes Thanks! Everything looks good on my end now. |
|
@whedon generate pdf |
|
|
@MikeInnes I've reviewed the paper. About the statement
would you be able to add one or more references for this? |
|
I've updated the paper a little to reference some of the NLP work that's out there via Minibatch.jl and the model zoo. It's a bit tricky that a lot of the really neat stuff is either industrial or in preparation / review right now (indeed a big part of the motivation for this submission is so that they can cite us :) |
|
@whedon generate pdf |
|
|
@MikeInnes thanks for updating the paper. BTW if works are in submission and you'd like to cite them you could cite the DOI of a pre-print for instance. |
|
I'll poke those folks in case there are any public DOIs around that I can cite, but if this paper can go through before then I'm equally happy to leave it. |
|
No luck on the DOIs, is there anything else blocking this at this point? |
|
@MikeInnes thanks, all boxes are ticked and it looks like we are all set. I recommend acceptance of this submission. |
|
@ysimillides thanks for reviewing this submission! 🚀 |
|
Alright, that's up! https://zenodo.org/record/1240350 |
|
@arfon over to you. We are all set. |
|
@whedon set 10.5281/zenodo.1240350 as archive |
|
OK. 10.5281/zenodo.1240350 is the archive. |
|
Awesome, thanks @arfon and @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman, and @ysimillides for the review! |
|
@ysimillides - many thanks for your review and to @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman for editing this one ✨ @MikeInnes - your paper is now accepted and your DOI is https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.00602 ⚡ 🚀 💥 |
|
🎉🎉🎉 Congratulations on your paper acceptance! 🎉🎉🎉 If you would like to include a link to your paper from your README use the following code snippet: This is how it will look in your documentation: We need your help! Journal of Open Source Software is a community-run journal and relies upon volunteer effort. If you'd like to support us please consider doing either one (or both) of the the following:
|
|
Congratulations @MikeInnes 🍰 |
whedon
added
published
Submitting author: @MikeInnes (Michael Innes)
Repository: https://github.com/FluxML/Flux.jl
Version: v0.4.1
Editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman
Reviewer: @ysimillides
Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.1240350
Status
Status badge code:
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
@ysimillides, please carry out your review in this issue by updating the checklist below. If you cannot edit the checklist please:
The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.theoj.org/about#reviewer_guidelines. Any questions/concerns please let @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman know.
Conflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper
paper.mdfile include a list of authors with their affiliations?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: