[PRE REVIEW]: MAHOS: Measurement Automation Handling and Orchestration System

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @ktahar (Kosuke Tahara)
Repository: https://github.com/ToyotaCRDL/mahos
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch):
Version: v0.2.2
Editor: @arfon
Reviewers: @FWuellhorst, @sidihamady, @aquilesC
Managing EiC: Kyle Niemeyer

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/e8c1073c9ef24b593aa83ab92eb7ed89"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/e8c1073c9ef24b593aa83ab92eb7ed89/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/e8c1073c9ef24b593aa83ab92eb7ed89/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/e8c1073c9ef24b593aa83ab92eb7ed89)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @ktahar. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@ktahar 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:

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

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:

@editorialbot commands

For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1126/science.276.5321.2012 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.076401 is OK
- 10.1088/0953-8984/18/21/S08 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.05304 is OK
- 10.1016/j.softx.2017.02.001 is OK
- 10.5281/zenodo.3732545 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.61 s (841.9 files/s, 185132.1 lines/s)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                      files          blank        comment           code
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                          208           8656           3539          38288
HTML                             65          10832            199          30337
Qt                               19              0              0           7985
SVG                             125              6             18           7685
reStructuredText                 67            985           1041            950
CSS                               6            185             42            842
JavaScript                        8            124            183            778
TOML                             10             85              3            566
TeX                               1              7              0            112
YAML                              3              7             18             76
Markdown                          1              9              0             62
make                              1              8              0             25
Bourne Again Shell                1              2              0             18
JSON                              1              0              0             12
INI                               1              0              1              7
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            517          20906           5044          87743
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 525

[editorialbot]

👉📄 Download article proof 📄 View article proof on GitHub 📄 👈

[kyleniemeyer]

Hi @ktahar, thanks for your submission to JOSS. We will use this pre-review issue to assign an editor and find reviewers.

Unfortunately, the editors who have expertise in this area are not available to edit this right now, so I need to put your submission on our waitlist until someone becomes available to handle it.

[ktahar]

Hello @kyleniemeyer. I understood the situation. Thank you.

[ktahar]

Hello @kyleniemeyer.
Is there a possibility that the review is started in near future, or anything I can do to proceed?

[arfon]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @arfon is now the editor

[arfon]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

👉📄 Download article proof 📄 View article proof on GitHub 📄 👈

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

AixCaliBuHA: Automated calibration of building and HVAC systems
Submitting author: @FWuellhorst
Handling editor: @fraukewiese (Active)
Reviewers: @samanmostafavi, @shamsiharis
Similarity score: 0.8209

Pybotics: Python Toolbox for Robotics
Submitting author: @engnadeau
Handling editor: @kyleniemeyer (Active)
Reviewers: @adi3, @CameronDevine
Similarity score: 0.8195

GAMA: Genetic Automated Machine learning Assistant
Submitting author: @PGijsbers
Handling editor: @arokem (Retired)
Reviewers: @jsgalan
Similarity score: 0.8179

dymos: A Python package for optimal control of multidisciplinary systems
Submitting author: @robfalck
Handling editor: @dpsanders (Retired)
Reviewers: @goerz, @thowell
Similarity score: 0.8129

AutoGAMESS: A Python package for automation of GAMESS(US) Raman calculations
Submitting author: @Cavenfish
Handling editor: @jedbrown (Active)
Reviewers: @arosen93, @shivupa, @colleeneb
Similarity score: 0.8116

⚠️ Note to editors: If these papers look like they might be a good match, click through to the review issue for that paper and invite one or more of the authors before before considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[arfon]

👋 @FWuellhorst @engnadeau @robfalck @PGijsbers – would any of you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? The submission under consideration is MAHOS: Measurement Automation Handling and Orchestration System, https://github.com/ToyotaCRDL/mahos

The review process at JOSS is unique: it takes place in a GitHub issue, is open, and author-reviewer-editor conversations are encouraged. You can learn more about the process in these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html

Based on your experience, and possibly related submissions by yourselves already published here, we think you might be able to provide a great review of this submission. Please let me know if you think you can help us out!

Many thanks
Arfon

[PGijsbers]

Unfortunately, the similarity to my paper is a false positive. I do not have experience with experimental research in a laboratory setting, and such would find it hard to assess the need for this package or its quality. For those reasons, I do not want to review this package.

[FWuellhorst]

I could provide a review. However, I will be on vacation for the next weeks. I can only start the review in mid of November.

[arfon]

@ktahar – could you take a look a this list of potential reviewers and identify a few people who would be good candidates to review this submission?

[robfalck]

Unfortunately Im not able to provide a review at this time.

…

On Sun, Oct 1, 2023, 9:14 AM Arfon Smith ***@***.***> wrote: 👋 @FWuellhorst <https://github.com/FWuellhorst> @engnadeau <https://github.com/engnadeau> @robfalck <https://github.com/robfalck> @PGijsbers <https://github.com/PGijsbers> – would any of you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? The submission under consideration is MAHOS: Measurement Automation Handling and Orchestration System, https://github.com/ToyotaCRDL/mahos The review process at JOSS is unique: it takes place in a GitHub issue, is open, and author-reviewer-editor conversations are encouraged. You can learn more about the process in these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html Based on your experience, and possibly related submissions by yourselves already published here, we think you might be able to provide a great review of this submission. Please let me know if you think you can help us out! Many thanks Arfon — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#5720 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAFK3IMQJ54JDRNUWXZYBGTX5FUDJANCNFSM6AAAAAA2733VLY> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[ktahar]

Hi @arfon, thank you for handling this.
I found several people who could be good reviewer candidates: @aquilesC @mcbed @caldarolamartin @sidihamady

[arfon]

👋 @aquilesC @mcbed @caldarolamartin @sidihamady – would any of you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? The submission under consideration is MAHOS: Measurement Automation Handling and Orchestration System, https://github.com/ToyotaCRDL/mahos

The review process at JOSS is unique: it takes place in a GitHub issue, is open, and author-reviewer-editor conversations are encouraged. You can learn more about the process in these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html

Based on your experience, and possibly related submissions by yourselves already published here, we think you might be able to provide a great review of this submission. Please let me know if you think you can help us out!

Many thanks
Arfon

[sidihamady]

Hi,
Yes, I can manage to free up time.
Regards,
Sidi

[aquilesC]

Yes, count me in!

[arfon]

@editorialbot add @FWuellhorst as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@FWuellhorst added to the reviewers list!

[arfon]

@editorialbot add @sidihamady as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@sidihamady added to the reviewers list!

[arfon]

@editorialbot add @aquilesC as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@aquilesC added to the reviewers list!

[arfon]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in #5938.

[arfon]

@FWuellhorst, @sidihamady, @aquilesC, @ktahar – see you over in #5938 where the actual review will take place.