[REVIEW]: respdetect: A Matlab tool for detecting breath events from whale biologger data

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @ashleyblawas (Ashley Blawas)
Repository: https://github.com/ashleyblawas/respdetect
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch):
Version: v1.0.0
Editor: @kthyng
Reviewers: @sfregosi, @smnnlt
Archive: Pending

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/a23ed8e527ddeac304d76252a39d8b57"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/a23ed8e527ddeac304d76252a39d8b57/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/a23ed8e527ddeac304d76252a39d8b57/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/a23ed8e527ddeac304d76252a39d8b57)

Reviewers and authors:

Please avoid lengthy details of difficulties in the review thread. Instead, please create a new issue in the target repository and link to those issues (especially acceptance-blockers) by leaving comments in the review thread below. (For completists: if the target issue tracker is also on GitHub, linking the review thread in the issue or vice versa will create corresponding breadcrumb trails in the link target.)

Reviewer instructions & questions

@sfregosi & @smnnlt, your review will be checklist based. Each of you will have a separate checklist that you should update when carrying out your review.
First of all you need to run this command in a separate comment to create the checklist:

@editorialbot generate my checklist

The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @kthyng know.

✨ Please start on your review when you are able, and be sure to complete your review in the next six weeks, at the very latest ✨

Checklists

@sfregosi, please create your checklist typing: @editorialbot generate my checklist

@smnnlt, please create your checklist typing: @editorialbot generate my checklist

[editorialbot]

Hello humans, 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

- 10.1111/j.1748-7692.2008.00255.x is OK
- 10.1242/jeb.243872 is OK
- 10.1093/icb/45.2.305 is OK
- 10.1016/j.dsr2.2007.01.001 is OK
- 10.1016/j.dsr2.2006.11.009 is OK
- 10.1126/science.aao2740 is OK
- 10.1242/jeb.023366 is OK
- 10.1242/jeb.137513 is OK
- 10.1016/j.jembe.2014.05.014 is OK
- 10.1073/pnas.1914273116 is OK
- 10.1139/Z10-080 is OK
- 10.1139/z83-086 is OK
- 10.1111/j.1748-1716.1995.tb09834.x is OK

🟡 SKIP DOIs

- None

❌ MISSING DOIs

- None

❌ INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.98  T=0.02 s (999.0 files/s, 99695.9 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MATLAB                          17            368            464           1262
TeX                              1             13              0            167
Markdown                         2             27              0             60
YAML                             1              1              4             19
Text                             3              2              0              8
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            24            411            468           1516
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

   212	Ashley Blawas

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 695

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

[editorialbot]

License info:

🟡 License found: GNU General Public License v3.0 (Check here for OSI approval)

[kthyng]

Let me know if you have any questions!

👋🏼 @ashleyblawas @sfregosi, @smnnlt this is the review thread for the paper. All of our communications will happen here from now on.

As a reviewer, the first step is to create a checklist for your review by entering

@editorialbot generate my checklist

as the top of a new comment in this thread.

These checklists contain the JOSS requirements. As you go over the submission, please check any items that you feel have been satisfied. The first comment in this thread also contains links to the JOSS reviewer guidelines.

The JOSS review is different from most other journals. Our goal is to work with the authors to help them meet our criteria instead of merely passing judgment on the submission. As such, the reviewers are encouraged to submit issues and pull requests on the software repository. When doing so, please mention openjournals/joss-reviews#7858 so that a link is created to this thread (and I can keep an eye on what is happening). Please also feel free to comment and ask questions on this thread. In my experience, it is better to post comments/questions/suggestions as you come across them instead of waiting until you've reviewed the entire package.

Please feel free to ping me (@kthyng) if you have any questions/concerns.

[editorialbot]

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