[PRE REVIEW]: Generating synthetic star catalogs from simulated data for next-gen observatories with py-ananke

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @athob (Adrien C. R. Thob)
Repository: https://github.com/athob/py-ananke
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch):
Version: v1.0.0
Editor: @warrickball
Reviewers: @rrjbca, @lheckmann
Managing EiC: Dan Foreman-Mackey

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/357c0445d891fc10e1b0ca4dba1e3cc0"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/357c0445d891fc10e1b0ca4dba1e3cc0/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/357c0445d891fc10e1b0ca4dba1e3cc0/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/357c0445d891fc10e1b0ca4dba1e3cc0)

Author instructions

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

@athob 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]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.03 s (636.7 files/s, 142143.6 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TeX                              1            111              0           1635
Python                          14            219            387            733
Markdown                         2             94              0            175
YAML                             2              5             11             74
Jupyter Notebook                 1              0            990             31
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            20            429           1388           2648
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 2923

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.3847/1538-4365/ab5b9d is OK
- 10.1007/s11214-006-8315-7 is OK
- 10.3847/2041-8213/ac947c is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stac3347 is OK
- 10.3847/2041-8213/acade4 is OK
- 10.3847/2041-8213/acad00 is OK
- 10.3847/2041-8213/acad01 is OK
- 10.3847/2041-8213/acb3a5 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-4365/acaaa9 is OK
- 10.3847/2041-8213/acc94b is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stad1629 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-4357/acc2bc is OK
- 10.3847/1538-4357/acec76 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2306.02465 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.1110.3193 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361/202141938 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-4357/ab042c is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.1902.05569 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2306.12302 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2306.11784 is OK
- 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17187.x is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/sts028 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stu1023 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stu1227 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stu1536 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stu1738 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stu2058 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stv725 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stv627 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stv1937 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stv1190 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stw2035 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stv2484 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stw1862 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stx1160 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stx3040 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stx3112 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stx3304 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/sty1780 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/sty1690 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stx3124 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stz968 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-4357/ab0654 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stz937 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/staa2453 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-4357/abcafa is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stab322 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361/202039429 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stac3489 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stad513 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stad1205 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stad2419 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stac3620 is OK
- 10.3847/2041-8205/827/2/L23 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361/201833051 is OK
- 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x is OK
- 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 is OK
- 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 is OK
- 10.5281/zenodo.8364959 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f is OK
- 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361/201732493 is OK
- 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4842-2677-3_5 is OK
- 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11043.x is OK
- 10.1088/0004-637X/730/1/3 is OK
- 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21948.x is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stu2029 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stu1605 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stv1281 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stt1034 is OK
- 10.3847/0004-637X/822/2/73 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/77 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361:20020612 is OK
- 10.1086/588526 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361:20078467 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361:20054163 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/sty2745 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/staa3356 is OK
- 10.1038/s41550-020-1131-2 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361/201936866 is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevD.104.043530 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ascom.2022.100667 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2202.06797 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-4357/acc582 is OK
- 10.1088/0004-6256/150/5/150 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-4365/aae9f0 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-4365/ac00b3 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2306.16475 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361/202039657 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361/202243940 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- 10.1088/0004-637x/730/1/3 may be a valid DOI for title: Galaxia: A Code to Generate a Synthetic Survey of the Milky Way

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

SNEWPY: A Data Pipeline from Supernova Simulations to Neutrino Signals
Submitting author: @JostMigenda
Handling editor: @dfm (Active)
Reviewers: @apizzuto, @PeterDenton
Similarity score: 0.8288

SkyPy: A package for modelling the Universe
Submitting author: @rrjbca
Handling editor: @arfon (Active)
Reviewers: @cescalara, @rmorgan10
Similarity score: 0.8253

FASMA 2.0: A Python package for stellar parameters and chemical abundances
Submitting author: @MariaTsantaki
Handling editor: @xuanxu (Active)
Reviewers: @warrickball, @ipelupessy
Similarity score: 0.8228

Starmatrix: Modelling nucleosynthesis of galactic chemical elements
Submitting author: @xuanxu
Handling editor: @danielskatz (Active)
Reviewers: @CFGrote, @ygrange
Similarity score: 0.8226

popsynth: A generic astrophysical population synthesis framework
Submitting author: @grburgess
Handling editor: @xuanxu (Active)
Reviewers: @HeloiseS, @warrickball
Similarity score: 0.8221

⚠️ 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]

@editorialbot query scope

@athob — Thanks for your submission! Given the small size of the main code base, I have submitted this pre-review for editorial review. This usually takes a week or two and I'll report back here as soon as I hear back from the rest of the editorial board.

Should we also be reviewing https://github.com/athob/py-EnBiD-ananke and https://github.com/athob/py-Galaxia-ananke? Please feel free to provide any extra context that would be useful for the team when looking at the scholarly effort of this submission. Thanks!

[editorialbot]

Submission flagged for editorial review.

[athob]

Hi @dfm, thanks for your message!

Indeed the submodule repositories of py-EnBiD-ananke and py-Galaxia-ananke should be considered part of this submission as well.

Additionally, I would like to bring to your attention to some extent the submodule repository galaxia-ananke in py-Galaxia-ananke. The reason I say "to some extent" is that the state of the codebase at commit 295326d represents the software used by co-author Robyn Sanderson in the original ananke framework from Sanderson et al. 2020 (with the addition of LSST isochrones by co-author Nicolás Garavito-Camargo, addition that should be considered part of this submission). That software itself was also a modified iteration of the original Galaxia software by co-author Sanjib Sharma (Sharma et al. 2011). That said, all the modifications made since commit 295326d are contributions that can be considered integral to this submission.

While reviewing the criteria outlined in the Substantial Scholarly Effort Guidelines, I noticed that the last criterion evaluates the likelihood of py-ananke getting cited. I have addressed this aspect in a dedicated section titled 'Past and Ongoing Applications' within the paper. Several ongoing projects are currently utilizing this new software and are committed to citing it. It's important to note that py-ananke was specifically designed to address usability inefficiencies present in the original ananke framework introduced by Sanderson et al. in 2020. The usability challenges associated with the original framework have necessitated significant efforts in past projects utilizing ananke, which would have been alleviated had py-ananke been available then.

I would appreciate your feedback on the aforementioned points. If there are any additional inquiries or clarifications needed, please feel free to let me know. Thanks for your time and consideration, I am looking forward to hearing back from you after the editorial board's response.

[warrickball]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @warrickball is now the editor

[warrickball]

Hi @athob,

Thanks for the explanation. We've agreed that between this principal repo and the two submodules, the code is substantial enough to proceed with the review. I'll start looking for reviewers. For simplicity, I'll say that the repos to be considered part of the review are:

• py-ananke
• py-EnBiD-ananke
• py-Galaxia-ananke

[athob]

Hi @warrickball,

Thanks for your message and for the decision, I am looking forward to hearing from you regarding the review.

[warrickball]

@editorialbot add @rrjbca as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@rrjbca added to the reviewers list!

[warrickball]

@editorialbot add @lheckmann as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@lheckmann added to the reviewers list!

[warrickball]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in #6234.