-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 39
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
[PRE REVIEW]: Analix: an external agent detection software based on magnetoelastic sensors #7116
Comments
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:
For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:
|
Software report:
Commit count by author:
|
Paper file info: 📄 Wordcount for ✅ The paper includes a |
|
License info: 🟡 License found: |
Five most similar historical JOSS papers: mhealthtools: A Modular R Package for Extracting Features from Mobile and Wearable Sensor Data Biosensor Framework: A C# Library for Affective Computing PYDAQ: Data Acquisition and Experimental Analysis with Python subMALDI: an open framework R package for processing irregularly-spaced mass spectrometry data PCRedux: A Quantitative PCR Machine Learning Toolkit |
@andreatta-ale thanks for this submission. I am the AEiC on this track and here to help process the initial steps. Before we proceed, please can you have a look at the following points:
|
@editorialbot check references |
|
@editorialbot check references |
|
@andreatta-ale can you please respond to my queries above ☝️ |
Dear Kevin,
I apologize for the delay in my response. I am still in the process of familiarizing myself with this review procedure.
Regarding the inquiries:
1. I have addressed some of the DOI issues and am currently revising the references. Many of these sources are books or government websites, which do not have DOIs available for citation.
2. As per your suggestion, I have created a Contributing.md file, which I will push alongside the new README. Upon reviewing the current README file, I noticed that many of the comments within it serve as part of our documentation. Consequently, I am also in the process of rewriting the README to better reflect this.
3. We had proposed documentation on how to run the code in the previous README, and I am revising this as well.
4. The project does not include automated testing.
5. The 'app' folder contains the core code. There are only three original Jupyter Notebooks: Classifier.ipynb, I_am_here_to_test_the_model.ipynb, and analysis_script.ipynb. Additionally, the folder contains source data, which is essential for anyone who wishes to test the entire project codebase. The remaining files consist of the packages and resources I utilized during the project's development and execution, such as Python packages and the virtual environment. I assumed it would be beneficial to include all relevant components in the repository. However, I seek your guidance on whether the repository should contain only the original artifacts.
Thank you in advance for your insights and contributions.
Best regards,
Alessandro
…________________________________
From: Kevin Mattheus Moerman ***@***.***>
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2024 06:44
To: openjournals/joss-reviews ***@***.***>
Cc: Alê Andreatta ***@***.***>; Mention ***@***.***>
Subject: Re: [openjournals/joss-reviews] [PRE REVIEW]: Analix: an external agent detection software based on magnetoelastic sensors (Issue #7116)
@andreatta-ale<https://github.com/andreatta-ale> can you please respond to my queries above ☝️
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#7116 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG2V43ETBTL6JR46ZDCTFTLZTWLXVAVCNFSM6AAAAABMXSQFPKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDGMJUHA2DEMZRHA>.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
@andreatta-ale thanks for working on some of the points I listed. Your response indicated some work is still in progress. Can you confirm this work is now completed? If not I would recommend we reject this submission at the moment and you may resubmit in the future once the work has been completed. |
@andreatta-ale please confirm if all points have now been addressed. |
@andreatta-ale after reviewing your comments above in more detail, I have come to the conclusion that this submission is not suitable for JOSS as it stands. The project lacks (automated) testing, consists of only 3 original Jupyter notebooks (which is not sufficient to pass our substantial scholarly effort criteria), and the project organisation is not well done. Hence we will now proceed to reject this submission from JOSS. It may be possible to consider a future re-submission. If you did the following:
Note that one possible alternative to JOSS is to follow GitHub's guide on how to create a permanent archive and DOI for your software. This DOI can then be used by others to cite your work. |
@editorialbot reject |
Paper rejected. |
Hello, @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman. |
Submitting author: @andreatta-ale (Alessandro Josue da Silva Andreatta)
Repository: https://github.com/andreatta-ale/external-agents-detector
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): main
Version: v1
Editor: Pending
Reviewers: Pending
Managing EiC: Kevin M. Moerman
Status
Status badge code:
Author instructions
Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @andreatta-ale. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.
@andreatta-ale 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:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: