[PRE REVIEW]: FELINE: A tool to detect emission line galaxies in 3d data

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @enthusi (Martin Wendt)
Repository: https://github.com/enthusi/feline
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch):
Version: 1.0.0
Editor: @ivastar
Reviewers: @smutch, @bronreichardtchu
Managing EiC: Dan Foreman-Mackey

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/a575acd1ffab0604de7e26eb83fd9bdc"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/a575acd1ffab0604de7e26eb83fd9bdc/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/a575acd1ffab0604de7e26eb83fd9bdc/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/a575acd1ffab0604de7e26eb83fd9bdc)

Author instructions

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

@enthusi 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

- 10.1051/0004-6361/201629507 is OK
- 10.1117/12.856027 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361/202244187 is OK
- 10.1002/asna.20220091 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stad357 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stad3764 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361/202348725 is OK

🟡 SKIP DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: MUSE Commissioning

❌ MISSING DOIs

- None

❌ INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90  T=0.06 s (522.3 files/s, 165458.5 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                          19           1455           2899           4091
Markdown                         5            112              0            380
C                                1             60             46            302
CUDA                             1             29             25            200
make                             1             31              4            135
TeX                              1             10              0            134
YAML                             2             14              4             75
Bourne Shell                     1             16             15             67
JSON                             1              0              0             34
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            32           1727           2993           5418
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

   108	osoth
   101	Oskar Soth
    82	marvin
    34	soth1
    20	Martin Wendt
     2	Marvin Henschel
     1	enthusi

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 1002

🔴 Failed to discover a Statement of need section in paper

[editorialbot]

License info:

✅ License found: BSD 3-Clause "New" or "Revised" License (Valid open source OSI approved license)

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

disksurf: Extracting the 3D Structure of Protoplanetary Disks
Submitting author: @richteague
Handling editor: @christinahedges (Retired)
Reviewers: @emptymalei, @cpinte
Similarity score: 0.7196

Astronomical échelle spectroscopy data analysis with muler
Submitting author: @gully
Handling editor: @xuanxu (Active)
Reviewers: @bmorris3, @wtgee
Similarity score: 0.7183

special: A Python package for the spectral characterization of directly imaged low-mass companions
Submitting author: @VChristiaens
Handling editor: @dfm (Active)
Reviewers: @QuentChangeat, @jgagneastro
Similarity score: 0.7167

FASMA 2.0: A Python package for stellar parameters and chemical abundances
Submitting author: @MariaTsantaki
Handling editor: @xuanxu (Active)
Reviewers: @warrickball, @ipelupessy
Similarity score: 0.7122

popkinmocks: mock IFU datacubes for modelling stellar populations and kinematics
Submitting author: @prashjet
Handling editor: @plaplant (Active)
Reviewers: @apoudel2014, @Jammy2211
Similarity score: 0.7114

⚠️ 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 considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[dfm]

@enthusi — Thanks for your submission! All the suitable JOSS editors are currently working at capacity so I'm going to "waitlist" this review until an editor with the relevant expertise is available to take it on. Thanks for your patience!

[enthusi]

Potential reviewers according to their expertise (just exemplary, not exclusive, of course):
Ole Streicher (olebole)
Simon Mutch (smutch)
Amit Poudel (apoudel2014)

[ivastar]

@editorialbot assign @ivastar as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @ivastar is now the editor

[ivastar]

@enthusi I will be taking over as editor of this submission. I will be looking for reviewers for the next week or two. I see you have already made recommendations for reviewers above, thank you! In the mean time, the Statement of Need is one of the required sections in the manuscript:

A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?

Could you please add it?

[enthusi]

Could you please add it?

Thank you and greetings! I have added it on the main repository.

[ivastar]

@editorialbot add @smutch as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@smutch added to the reviewers list!

[enthusi]

We have an accepted yet unpublished survey paper which used Feline extensively and it would be great if we could link to the JOSS entry once available. Is there any planned schedule for the review (clearly just a lower limit, not upper limit)?

[smutch]

I can start my review first thing next week. I hadn't started thus far as I've been waiting for the review process to be initiated.

[ivastar]

@enthusi I'm sorry for the delay! I've reached out to over a dozen potential reviewers and received almost no responses. I'm still looking for a second reviewer.

[enthusi]

Oh, if it helps for finding reviewers: the actual code part is in C/OpenMP and not very complex.
The Python code is for minor preprocessing and otherwise merely for plotting the outcome.
The CUDA is fully optional and just replaces the main C part, so it is not even required at all.
Thanks alot for your efforts and reply.

[enthusi]

I just updated the JOSS paper (merely adding a reference to the mentioned survey paper) in the repository.

[ivastar]

@editorialbot add @bronreichardtchu as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@bronreichardtchu added to the reviewers list!

[ivastar]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in #7528.