-
-
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]: ssdtools v2: An R package to fit Species Sensitivity Distributions #7351
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: shinyssdtools: A web application for fitting Species Sensitivity Distributions (SSDs) shinyssd v1.0: Species Sensitivity Distributions for Ecotoxicological Risk Assessment SSMSE: An R package for Management Strategy Evaluation with Stock Synthesis Operating Models fitODBOD: An R Package to Model Binomial Outcome Data using Binomial Mixture and Alternate Binomial Distributions. SurPyval: Survival Analysis with Python |
@editorialbot commands |
Hello @joethorley, here are the things you can ask me to do:
|
@editorialbot set joss-paper as branch |
Done! branch is now joss-paper |
Hi! I am interested in reviewing this article if that is possible. Thanks. |
Thanks @flor14 . A second possible reviewer is jhollist at the USEPA or failing that nanhung a toxicologist who reviewed the manuscript for v0.0.3. |
@editorialbot check references |
|
@editorialbot check references |
|
@editorialbot generate pdf |
Five most similar historical JOSS papers: shinyssdtools: A web application for fitting Species Sensitivity Distributions (SSDs) shinyssd v1.0: Species Sensitivity Distributions for Ecotoxicological Risk Assessment SSMSE: An R package for Management Strategy Evaluation with Stock Synthesis Operating Models fitODBOD: An R Package to Model Binomial Outcome Data using Binomial Mixture and Alternate Binomial Distributions. SurPyval: Survival Analysis with Python |
@joethorley Dear author, 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:
|
Note to editors, a prior paper for this project exists: https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.01082 |
@joethorley you noted that this new submission (wrt the previous paper) now also features changes like:
If you could share a bit more detail on the major changes since the previous paper, e.g. a list here, that would be helpful for the handling editor. Thanks. |
@editorialbot invite @lucydot as editor |
Invitation to edit this submission sent! |
Apologies @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman I'm now editing my maximum number of papers (4) so can't take this one on. |
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman - I reviewed all the dois previously (see futher up in chain) and fixed all that I can. The missing ones do not exist. |
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman The following is a relatively short summary of the major changes since the previous paper (v0.0.3) ssdtools 2.0.0The following arguments were added to
In addition, the following functions and arguments were added.
ssdtools 1.0.0An important change to the functionality of As a result of an international collaboration British Columbia and Canada and Australia and New Zealand selected a set of recommended distributions for model averaging and settings when generating final guidelines. The distributions are
The following distributions were added (or in the case of
The function Added following plotting functions
Soft-deprecated
ssdtools 0.3.0
ssdtools 0.2.0
ssdtools 0.1.0
Added
|
@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman i can edit this |
Thanks @fabian-s - we appreciate you being the editor! |
Hello, Regarding the review process: Is there any difference in the reviewers' checklist for a second version of a software package that has already been published? I couldn’t find any mention of this in the reviewers' guide. |
@editorialbot add @fabian-s as editor |
Assigned! @fabian-s is now the editor |
@editorialbot add @flor14 as reviewer |
@flor14 added to the reviewers list! |
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 |
@flor14 thanks for volunteering to review!
I don't think there is. We'll start the review once I've found a 2nd reviewer, sorry for the delay. |
@fabian-s |
@editorialbot add @nanhung as reviewer |
@nanhung added to the reviewers list! |
@editorialbot start review |
OK, I've started the review over in #7492. |
Submitting author: @joethorley (Joseph Thorley)
Repository: https://github.com/bcgov/ssdtools
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): joss-paper
Version: v2.0.0
Editor: @fabian-s
Reviewers: @flor14, @nanhung
Managing EiC: Kevin M. Moerman
Status
Status badge code:
Author instructions
Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @joethorley. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.
@joethorley 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: