-
-
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]: pyOMA2: a Python module to conduct operational modal analysis #7293
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: PySPOD: A Python package for Spectral Proper Orthogonal Decomposition (SPOD) SHARPy: A dynamic aeroelastic simulation toolbox for very flexible aircraft and wind turbines ViMag: A Visual Vibration Analysis Toolbox RECOLO: A Python package for the reconstruction of surface pressure loads from kinematic fields using the virtual fields method AeroAcoustics.jl: A Julia package for aeroacoustics |
Hi @kyleniemeyer, the old module was more a collection of functions with a gui, while the new module leverages classes flexibility so to offer many more functionalities such as the ability to process multi-setup experiments, to have interactive plots to select the poles (or peaks) to extract, the possibility to define the geometry of the tested structure and plot/animate the mode shapes, storing and retrieving results and more. You can check by yourself if you want to, new repo: https://github.com/dagghe/pyOMA2 |
@editorialbot invite @faroit as editor Hi @faroit, could you edit this? To my eyes it seems in the neighborhood of your signal processing background. |
Invitation to edit this submission sent! |
@editorialbot assign @faroit as editor @kyleniemeyer sure! |
Assigned! @faroit is now the editor |
Hi @faroit, I had a look at the JOSS reviewers list and think that the following user could be a fit based on their background: e-dub, Nitnelav, joaoadelazzari, CWillberg, arunmano121. |
@dagghe sorry for the delay. I am starting the request for reviewers today |
@e-dub, @Nitnelav, @joaoadelazzari, @CWillberg, @arunmano121 would any of you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? The JOSS review process takes place on GitHub and focuses on the software and a short paper. We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html The software under review is https://github.com/dagghe/pyOMA2 This issue is a "pre-review" issue in which reviewers are assigned. Once sufficient reviewers are recruited we will open a dedicated review issue where the review will take place. |
Dear @faroit, Thank you for your request. Unfortunately, I do not have the time at the moment to review the submission. Best regards, |
Hello, Yes you can count me in ! |
@editorialbot add @Nitnelav to reviewers |
@Nitnelav added to the reviewers list! |
@dagghe we are still short of one reviewer. Do you happen to have a list of more people or peers I could contact, as this isn't my exact field of research? |
Hi @faroit, I noticed that e-dub gave your request a thumbs-up but didn’t reply. Others I know with expertise in both Python and structural dynamics are Janko Slavic (from the University of Ljubljana) and Gunnstein Thomas Frøseth (from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology). However, I’m currently working on a STAR paper with both of them, so I’m not sure if that might be considered a conflict of interest?! |
Hi everyone, I would be happy to review this work. |
👋 thanks @e-dub happy to add you! |
@editorialbot add @e-dub to reviewers |
@e-dub added to the reviewers list! |
@dagghe thanks for flagging this. This would indeed be a conflict of interest wrt to the JOSS policy https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html#joss-conflict-of-interest-policy Happy to look further now finding more suitable reviewers. Let me know if you have more suggestions on your side as well |
@faroit I did a quick search on GitHub and these are my suggestions:
P.S. |
Submitting author: @dagghe (Dag)
Repository: https://github.com/dagghe/pyOMA2
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Joss
Version: 1.0.0
Editor: @faroit
Reviewers: @Nitnelav, @e-dub
Managing EiC: Kyle Niemeyer
Status
Status badge code:
Author instructions
Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @dagghe. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.
@dagghe 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: