[PRE REVIEW]: Algorithms for SEM-EDS Mineral Dust Classification

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @weber1158 (Austin M. Weber)
Repository: https://github.com/weber1158/eds-classification
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch):
Version: v1.3.0
Editor: Pending
Reviewers: Pending
Managing EiC: Kristen Thyng

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/c2564d4c44b4ee77c24ac32f7431a6b2"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/c2564d4c44b4ee77c24ac32f7431a6b2/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/c2564d4c44b4ee77c24ac32f7431a6b2/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/c2564d4c44b4ee77c24ac32f7431a6b2)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @weber1158. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@weber1158 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

- 10.1016/j.gloplacha.2022.103837 is OK
- 10.1029/2002GL016641 is OK
- 10.1111/j.1600-0889.2011.00550.x is OK
- 10.5194/acp-23-3861-2023 is OK
- 10.1017/jog.2016.8 is OK
- 10.5194/cp-17-1341-2021 is OK
- 10.1017/S143192762200023X is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4020-2841-0 is OK
- 10.2138/am.2010.3371 is OK
- 10.1016/j.cageo.2021.104949 is OK
- 10.1613/jair.953 is OK

🟡 SKIP DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: Elements
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Synthetic Minority Over-sampling Technique (SMOTE)

❌ MISSING DOIs

- None

❌ INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90  T=0.05 s (519.2 files/s, 163118.7 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julia                            3            145            492           2475
MATLAB                          18            195           1231           2193
Markdown                         4            255              0            496
TeX                              1             12              0            130
Jupyter Notebook                 1              0           1066             79
YAML                             1              1              4             23
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            28            608           2793           5396
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

    72	Austin M. Weber

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 1194

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

[editorialbot]

License info:

✅ License found: MIT License (Valid open source OSI approved license)

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

LIBSsa: an open source software for analyzing LIBS spectra
Submitting author: @kstenio
Handling editor: @csoneson (Active)
Reviewers: @domna, @alberto-battistel, @Tillsten
Similarity score: 0.6962

CoreBreakout: Subsurface Core Images to Depth-Registered Datasets
Submitting author: @rgmyr
Handling editor: @kbarnhart (Retired)
Reviewers: @brendonhall, @JesperDramsch, @jessepisel
Similarity score: 0.6829

Lightshow: a Python package for generating computational x-ray absorption spectroscopy input files
Submitting author: @matthewcarbone
Handling editor: @ppxasjsm (Active)
Reviewers: @maurov, @larsenkg
Similarity score: 0.6824

LiberTEM: Software platform for scalable multidimensional data processing in transmission electron microscopy
Submitting author: @uellue
Handling editor: @majensen (Active)
Reviewers: @alvarolopez, @fedorov
Similarity score: 0.6781

GrainSizeTools: a Python script for grain size analysis and paleopiezometry based on grain size
Submitting author: @marcoalopez
Handling editor: @lheagy (Retired)
Reviewers: @lheagy, @jsta
Similarity score: 0.6777

⚠️ 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.

[kthyng]

Hi @weber1158 and thanks for your submission! I am looking for some specific items to make sure your submission fits our requirements at a high level (not at the more detailed review level) before moving on to finding an editor or putting this on our waitlist if no relevant editors are available. I'll comment over time as I have a chance to go through them:

• OSI-approved license
• Installation instructions
• Documentation exists at all
• Tests of some sort
• Check paper (make sure compiles, read through, check for length 250-1000 words)
• Substantial scholarly effort
• Clear research application

In the meantime, please take a look at the comments above ⬆️ from the editorialbot to address any DOI, license, or paper issues if you're able (there may not be any), or suggest reviewers. For reviewers, please suggest 5 reviewers from the database listed above or your own (non-conflicted) extended network. Their github handles are most useful to receive but please don't use "@" to reference them since it will prematurely ping them.

[weber1158]

Hi @kthyng, thank you for looking into my submission!

Below are 5 potential reviewers that I found in the database, listed in alphabetical order:

• ajinkyakadu
• chadagreene
• dxm447
• larsenkg
• ThFriedrich