-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38
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]: Multivariate Covariance Generalized Linear Models in Python: The mcglm library #5818
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:
|
Checking the BibTeX entries failed with the following error:
|
|
Wordcount for |
Failed to discover a |
@editorialbot generate pdf |
@jeancmaia – 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! |
@jeancmaia Thank you for your submission to JOSS. We are currently facing a backlog of submissions in this track. Can you please follow up by looking at the list of editors to help me identify an editor that closely matches the topic of your submission? When you reach this page, please scroll down to Topic Editors. Please note that I am not asking you to suggest reviewers at this stage. Please simply list the GitHub IDs of prospective topic editors without using the @. Please reply to this thread by listing up to three GitHub IDs only (one per line). Once I have this information, I can move the submission out of waitlist status. |
melissawm |
Hi @gkthiruvathukal - I was skimming through the backlog and saw this review waitlisted. I'd be happy to edit if it's still waiting for editorial capacity? I've worked with a few regression packages so it could be a good fit. |
Just following up here with @AJQuinn – feel free to take this one (I'll go ahead and assign you now). |
@editorialbot assign @AJQuinn as editor |
Assigned! @AJQuinn is now the editor |
@editorialbot generate pdf |
Five most similar historical JOSS papers: PyGModels: A Python package for exploring Probabilistic Graphical Models with Graph Theoretical Structures BGGM: Bayesian Gaussian Graphical Models in R GGLasso - a Python package for General Graphical Lasso computation gmr: Gaussian Mixture Regression VBLinLogit: Variational Bayesian linear and logistic regression |
@AJQuinn – these recommendations might be useful ☝️ |
@editorialbot check references |
|
Hi @jeancmaia - I'll be your editor during the review processing. First job is to find some reviewers to take a look over the toolbox and paper. Could you take a look at the DOIs in the paper - there are few missing/invalid in our automated checking tool. I think two things may be going on. There are a lot more references in your bib than are referenced in the paper, and many of the references don't include an explicit doi within the paper info. eg within https://github.com/jeancmaia/mcglm/blob/main/paper.bib
should include doi line
you can rerun the reference check to see any changes with the relevant editorialbot line above |
👋 Hello - @eigenfoo, @inakleinbottle, @soodoku and @ejolly would any of you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? The code repository and paper details are further up in this thread. We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html - please check them out for more information and please feel free to ask questions in this thread. Cheers! |
hey @AJQuinn, thanks for getting in touch. Unfortunately, I can't take it on. Is there a way to opt out of the JOSS pool of reviewers? |
Hi @soodoku - no problem, thanks for letting me know. I believe you can deselect an ' Available to review' checkbox on your reviewer profile page here: https://reviewers.joss.theoj.org/ Let me know if you run into problems with this. Thanks for your past reviews! |
@editorialbot check references |
|
Fantastic - thanks @jeancmaia |
👋 Hello - @Spaak would you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? The code repository and paper details are further up in this thread. We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html - please check them out for more information and please feel free to ask questions in this thread. Cheers! |
👋 Hello - @wmvanvliet @tpurcell90 would you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? The code repository and paper details are further up in this thread. We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html - please check them out for more information and please feel free to ask questions in this thread. Cheers! |
👋 Hello - @vankesteren would you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? The code repository and paper details are further up in this thread. We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html - please check them out for more information and please feel free to ask questions in this thread. Cheers! |
Normally I would, but I am moving to the USA from Europe later this month so I can't confirm that I will be able to actually do the tests in a timely manner |
@AJQuinn Yes, happy to review. |
Great - thank you @Spaak! @tpurcell90 - no problem, thanks for letting me know. All the best for the move. |
@editorialbot add @Spaak as reviewer |
@Spaak added to the reviewers list! |
👋 Hello - @arunmano121 @bkrayfield would either of you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? The code repository and paper details are further up in this thread. We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html - please check them out for more information and please feel free to ask questions in this thread. Cheers! |
@AJQuinn - Yes, happy to do it. |
@AJQuinn - my apologies, I am unable to review at this time due to upcoming travel.
Best regards,
Arun Manohar
…--
Sent from my phone
On Nov 8, 2023, at 8:27 AM, bkrayfield ***@***.***> wrote:
@AJQuinn<https://github.com/AJQuinn> - Yes, happy to do it.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#5818 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ATAHAZU57YWJOHG77PXPRGLYDOXHVAVCNFSM6AAAAAA4PXPH5SVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTQMBSGI2DANZRGY>.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
Thank you @bkrayfield, No problem @arunmano121 - thanks for letting me know. |
@editorialbot add @bkrayfield as reviewer |
@bkrayfield added to the reviewers list! |
@editorialbot start review |
OK, I've started the review over in #6037. |
Submitting author: @jeancmaia (Jean Carlos Maia)
Repository: https://github.com/jeancmaia/mcglm
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): main
Version: 0.2.1
Editor: @AJQuinn
Reviewers: @Spaak, @bkrayfield
Managing EiC: George K. Thiruvathukal
Status
Status badge code:
Author instructions
Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @jeancmaia. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.
@jeancmaia 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: