[REVIEW]: BoboCEP: a Fault-Tolerant Complex Event Processing Engine for Edge Computing in Internet of Things #5858

editorialbot · 2023-09-20T17:08:34Z

Submitting author: @r3w0p (Alexander Power)
Repository: https://github.com/r3w0p/bobocep
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): joss
Version: 1.1.1
Editor: @vissarion
Reviewers: @abhishektiwari, @mahsan321
Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.10160409

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/e29ee1221240b13e1ae039d007f58721"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/e29ee1221240b13e1ae039d007f58721/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/e29ee1221240b13e1ae039d007f58721/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/e29ee1221240b13e1ae039d007f58721)

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

@abhishektiwari & @mahsan321, 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 @vissarion 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

📝 Checklist for @abhishektiwari

📝 Checklist for @mahsan321

The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:

editorialbot · 2023-09-20T17:08:36Z

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 · 2023-09-20T17:08:37Z

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.11 s (1356.8 files/s, 142665.8 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                         118           2613           2517           7938
reStructuredText                14            524            729            610
XML                              5              0              0            515
Markdown                         9            130              0            319
JSON                             3              0              0            240
YAML                             4             23              2            127
TeX                              1              5              0             56
DOS Batch                        1              8              1             26
make                             1              4              7              9
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                           156           3307           3256           9840
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

editorialbot · 2023-09-20T17:08:38Z

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1145/2187671.2187677 is OK
- 10.1007/s00778-019-00557-w is OK
- 10.1109/BigDataService49289.2020.00024 is OK
- 10.3390/s21165464 is OK
- 10.11606/D.45.2021.tde-24032021-145027 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

editorialbot · 2023-09-20T17:08:38Z

Wordcount for paper.md is 906

editorialbot · 2023-09-20T17:09:59Z

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

abhishektiwari · 2023-09-26T23:58:04Z

Review checklist for @abhishektiwari

Conflict of interest

I confirm that I have read the JOSS conflict of interest (COI) policy and that: I have no COIs with reviewing this work or that any perceived COIs have been waived by JOSS for the purpose of this review.

Code of Conduct

I confirm that I read and will adhere to the JOSS code of conduct.

General checks

Repository: Is the source code for this software available at the https://github.com/r3w0p/bobocep?
License: Does the repository contain a plain-text LICENSE file with the contents of an OSI approved software license?
Contribution and authorship: Has the submitting author (@r3w0p) made major contributions to the software? Does the full list of paper authors seem appropriate and complete?
Substantial scholarly effort: Does this submission meet the scope eligibility described in the JOSS guidelines
Data sharing: If the paper contains original data, data are accessible to the reviewers. If the paper contains no original data, please check this item.
Reproducibility: If the paper contains original results, results are entirely reproducible by reviewers. If the paper contains no original results, please check this item.
Human and animal research: If the paper contains original data research on humans subjects or animals, does it comply with JOSS's human participants research policy and/or animal research policy? If the paper contains no such data, please check this item.

Functionality

Installation: Does installation proceed as outlined in the documentation?
Functionality: Have the functional claims of the software been confirmed?
Performance: If there are any performance claims of the software, have they been confirmed? (If there are no claims, please check off this item.)

Documentation

A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
Installation instructions: Is there a clearly-stated list of dependencies? Ideally these should be handled with an automated package management solution.
Example usage: Do the authors include examples of how to use the software (ideally to solve real-world analysis problems).
Functionality documentation: Is the core functionality of the software documented to a satisfactory level (e.g., API method documentation)?
Automated tests: Are there automated tests or manual steps described so that the functionality of the software can be verified?
Community guidelines: Are there clear guidelines for third parties wishing to 1) Contribute to the software 2) Report issues or problems with the software 3) Seek support

Software paper

Summary: Has a clear description of the high-level functionality and purpose of the software for a diverse, non-specialist audience been provided?
A statement of need: Does the paper have a section titled 'Statement of need' that clearly states what problems the software is designed to solve, who the target audience is, and its relation to other work?
State of the field: Do the authors describe how this software compares to other commonly-used packages?
Quality of writing: Is the paper well written (i.e., it does not require editing for structure, language, or writing quality)?
References: Is the list of references complete, and is everything cited appropriately that should be cited (e.g., papers, datasets, software)? Do references in the text use the proper citation syntax?

abhishektiwari · 2023-10-14T14:50:41Z

@r3w0p please see my initial comments. I am still working to validate software functionality.

Documentation

Example usage:

Authors include automated tests to validate the software functionality but no examples implementing a real-world use case. Paper describes a use case — elderly resident were to fall in their home and require an ambulance – to describe how complex event is generated and event is triggered. I think this phenomenon will make a very good example for BoboCEP.

Software paper

Statement of need

Apart from dependability, BoboCEP enables detection of complex events at edge without need of streaming raw events to the cloud. In that sense approach is privacy protecting/preserving for use cases such as smart homes which is mentioned in following section of the paper. I will suggest calling that out in statement of need.

State of the field

Paper is very light on state of the field. Paper points to a survey by Giatrakos, N.,et al and that's all. I would like authors to clearly describe how this software compares to other commonly-used frameworks in the field. Paper does not provide required context why streaming based CEP systems can't be deployed to edge/IoT devices/gateways.

r3w0p · 2023-10-16T11:44:24Z

@abhishektiwari Thanks for your comments, I will work on them and get back to you ASAP.

@mahsan321 It says you have generated a checklist but I am not able to see it.

Alex.

r3w0p · 2023-10-22T20:17:43Z

@editorialbot generate pdf

editorialbot · 2023-10-22T20:19:00Z

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

r3w0p · 2023-10-22T20:29:42Z

@abhishektiwari

Hello, I have made the following changes:

Example Usage

In the documentation, I have introduced a new page called Use Cases which covers the Assisted Living scenario from the paper as best as I could. I could not replicate some elements of the Use Case because it is impractical (e.g., calling for an ambulance). However, I have provided working code snippets for patterns and actions. I tested the IFTTT and Twilio actions today and they both worked well.

The page can be found here:

https://github.com/r3w0p/bobocep/blob/joss/docs/use_cases.rst

Statement of Need

In the paper, I have discussed privacy, edge computing, etc., in more detail. See paragraph at Line 50.

State of the Field

In the paper, I have provided a more comprehensive review of existing CEP systems. See paragraph at Line 37.

abhishektiwari · 2023-10-23T15:00:40Z

Thanks @r3w0p

I will review later in the week

abhishektiwari · 2023-10-23T23:34:32Z

Thanks for making those changes @r3w0p. New use case page looks great and provides concrete examples.

@vissarion completed my review. Please let me know if anything else needed.

vissarion · 2023-10-24T07:57:41Z

Thanks @abhishektiwari !

@mahsan321 any news on your review?

mahsan321 · 2023-10-25T20:46:08Z

@vissarion Sorry got busy with a conference deadline. Could you assign someone else if not I will try to get it done by next week.

vissarion · 2023-10-26T07:33:03Z

Next week is fine and is much less complicated than searching for a new reviewer. Many thanks!

r3w0p · 2023-11-13T11:08:19Z

@mahsan321 @vissarion

Any progress updates?

mahsan321 · 2023-11-13T14:58:34Z

Sorry for the delay. Working on it, give me a couple of days.

mahsan321 · 2023-11-15T16:05:09Z

Review checklist for @mahsan321

Conflict of interest

I confirm that I have read the JOSS conflict of interest (COI) policy and that: I have no COIs with reviewing this work or that any perceived COIs have been waived by JOSS for the purpose of this review.

Code of Conduct

I confirm that I read and will adhere to the JOSS code of conduct.

General checks

Repository: Is the source code for this software available at the https://github.com/r3w0p/bobocep?
License: Does the repository contain a plain-text LICENSE file with the contents of an OSI approved software license?
Contribution and authorship: Has the submitting author (@r3w0p) made major contributions to the software? Does the full list of paper authors seem appropriate and complete?
Substantial scholarly effort: Does this submission meet the scope eligibility described in the JOSS guidelines
Data sharing: If the paper contains original data, data are accessible to the reviewers. If the paper contains no original data, please check this item.
Reproducibility: If the paper contains original results, results are entirely reproducible by reviewers. If the paper contains no original results, please check this item.
Human and animal research: If the paper contains original data research on humans subjects or animals, does it comply with JOSS's human participants research policy and/or animal research policy? If the paper contains no such data, please check this item.

Functionality

Installation: Does installation proceed as outlined in the documentation?
Functionality: Have the functional claims of the software been confirmed?
Performance: If there are any performance claims of the software, have they been confirmed? (If there are no claims, please check off this item.)

Documentation

A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
Installation instructions: Is there a clearly-stated list of dependencies? Ideally these should be handled with an automated package management solution.
Example usage: Do the authors include examples of how to use the software (ideally to solve real-world analysis problems).
Functionality documentation: Is the core functionality of the software documented to a satisfactory level (e.g., API method documentation)?
Automated tests: Are there automated tests or manual steps described so that the functionality of the software can be verified?
Community guidelines: Are there clear guidelines for third parties wishing to 1) Contribute to the software 2) Report issues or problems with the software 3) Seek support

Software paper

Summary: Has a clear description of the high-level functionality and purpose of the software for a diverse, non-specialist audience been provided?
A statement of need: Does the paper have a section titled 'Statement of need' that clearly states what problems the software is designed to solve, who the target audience is, and its relation to other work?
State of the field: Do the authors describe how this software compares to other commonly-used packages?
Quality of writing: Is the paper well written (i.e., it does not require editing for structure, language, or writing quality)?
References: Is the list of references complete, and is everything cited appropriately that should be cited (e.g., papers, datasets, software)? Do references in the text use the proper citation syntax?

vissarion · 2023-11-16T09:34:51Z

@mahsan321 thanks for your review. Please open issues in the repository under review to keep this thread clean of technical details.

Secondly, just like the previous reviewer couldn't run the test examples.

This is fixed, right @r3w0p?

r3w0p · 2023-11-16T11:30:49Z

Hi @mahsan321 and @vissarion

getting started document links are not working

I have pressed all of the links in the Getting Started page that I could see and they all work for me. Which were you having trouble with specifically?

I haven't changed the Getting Started page during the review process, and so the current state of the page can be found live here.

If you are referring to the [CM2012] link that sends you to the bottom of the page, then that is supposed to happen. It is a link to the paper mentioned in the References section.

just like the previous reviewer couldn't run the test examples

This was resolved in this issue.

r3w0p · 2023-11-16T12:06:22Z

@editorialbot generate pdf

r3w0p · 2023-11-16T12:07:18Z

@vissarion I have made some very minor changes to the paper just now: swapped two paragraphs around, clarified some points, simplified some explanations. It is the same content nonetheless.

editorialbot · 2023-11-21T08:29:03Z

Done! archive is now 10.5281/zenodo.10160409

vissarion · 2023-11-21T08:29:28Z

@editorialbot set 1.1.1 as version

editorialbot · 2023-11-21T08:29:31Z

Done! version is now 1.1.1

vissarion · 2023-11-21T08:31:28Z

thanks @r3w0p, now I am going to to generate the final proofs, and notify the Editor in Chief.

vissarion · 2023-11-21T08:31:57Z

@editorialbot recommend-accept

editorialbot · 2023-11-21T08:31:59Z

Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...

editorialbot · 2023-11-21T08:32:05Z

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1109/JIOT.2020.3015432 is OK
- 10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115578 is OK
- 10.1109/DCOSS.2017.14 is OK
- 10.1145/2187671.2187677 is OK
- 10.3390/iot3030019 is OK
- 10.1007/s00778-019-00557-w is OK
- 10.1109/BigDataService49289.2020.00024 is OK
- 10.3390/s21165464 is OK
- 10.11606/D.45.2021.tde-24032021-145027 is OK
- 10.1016/j.compeleceng.2021.107257 is OK
- 10.1007/s40815-021-01118-6 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

editorialbot · 2023-11-21T08:33:18Z

👋 @openjournals/csism-eics, this paper is ready to be accepted and published.

Check final proof 👉📄 Download article

If the paper PDF and the deposit XML files look good in openjournals/joss-papers#4795, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the command @editorialbot accept

r3w0p · 2023-11-21T10:26:36Z

@vissarion The final proof looks good to me. Happy to move forward if you are!

danielskatz · 2023-11-21T14:47:43Z

@r3w0p - I'm the track editor who will finish the processing of this submission. I've found a couple of small issues in the paper, as indicated in r3w0p/bobocep#10 - please merge this, and we can proceed to publication.

danielskatz · 2023-11-21T14:53:21Z

@editorialbot recommend-accept

@r3w0p - please confirm that this is ok again

editorialbot · 2023-11-21T14:53:24Z

Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...

editorialbot · 2023-11-21T14:53:29Z

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1109/JIOT.2020.3015432 is OK
- 10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115578 is OK
- 10.1109/DCOSS.2017.14 is OK
- 10.1145/2187671.2187677 is OK
- 10.3390/iot3030019 is OK
- 10.1007/s00778-019-00557-w is OK
- 10.1109/BigDataService49289.2020.00024 is OK
- 10.3390/s21165464 is OK
- 10.11606/D.45.2021.tde-24032021-145027 is OK
- 10.1016/j.compeleceng.2021.107257 is OK
- 10.1007/s40815-021-01118-6 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

editorialbot · 2023-11-21T14:54:39Z

👋 @openjournals/csism-eics, this paper is ready to be accepted and published.

Check final proof 👉📄 Download article

If the paper PDF and the deposit XML files look good in openjournals/joss-papers#4798, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the command @editorialbot accept

r3w0p · 2023-11-21T15:01:28Z

@danielskatz Yes this looks okay to me 👍

danielskatz · 2023-11-21T15:03:34Z

@editorialbot accept

editorialbot · 2023-11-21T15:03:36Z

Doing it live! Attempting automated processing of paper acceptance...

editorialbot · 2023-11-21T15:05:16Z

Ensure proper citation by uploading a plain text CITATION.cff file to the default branch of your repository.

If using GitHub, a Cite this repository menu will appear in the About section, containing both APA and BibTeX formats. When exported to Zotero using a browser plugin, Zotero will automatically create an entry using the information contained in the .cff file.

You can copy the contents for your CITATION.cff file here:

CITATION.cff

cff-version: "1.2.0"
authors:
- family-names: Power
  given-names: Alexander
  orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5348-7068"
doi: 10.5281/zenodo.10160409
message: If you use this software, please cite our article in the
  Journal of Open Source Software.
preferred-citation:
  authors:
  - family-names: Power
    given-names: Alexander
    orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5348-7068"
  date-published: 2023-11-21
  doi: 10.21105/joss.05858
  issn: 2475-9066
  issue: 91
  journal: Journal of Open Source Software
  publisher:
    name: Open Journals
  start: 5858
  title: "BoboCEP: a Fault-Tolerant Complex Event Processing Engine for
    Edge Computing in Internet of Things"
  type: article
  url: "https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.05858"
  volume: 8
title: "BoboCEP: a Fault-Tolerant Complex Event Processing Engine for
  Edge Computing in Internet of Things"

If the repository is not hosted on GitHub, a .cff file can still be uploaded to set your preferred citation. Users will be able to manually copy and paste the citation.

Find more information on .cff files here and here.

editorialbot · 2023-11-21T15:05:19Z

🐘🐘🐘 👉 Toot for this paper 👈 🐘🐘🐘

editorialbot · 2023-11-21T15:05:20Z

🚨🚨🚨 THIS IS NOT A DRILL, YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED A PAPER INTO JOSS! 🚨🚨🚨

Here's what you must now do:

Check final PDF and Crossref metadata that was deposited 👉 Creating pull request for 10.21105.joss.05858 joss-papers#4799
Wait five minutes, then verify that the paper DOI resolves https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.05858
If everything looks good, then close this review issue.
Party like you just published a paper! 🎉🌈🦄💃👻🤘

Any issues? Notify your editorial technical team...

r3w0p · 2023-11-21T15:09:48Z

@danielskatz @vissarion @abhishektiwari @mahsan321

Thanks for all your help in getting this work published!

danielskatz · 2023-11-21T15:10:43Z

Congratulations to @r3w0p (Alexander Power) and co-authors on your publication!!

And thanks to @abhishektiwari and @mahsan321 for reviewing, and to @vissarion for editing!
JOSS depends on volunteers; we couldn't do this without you!

editorialbot · 2023-11-21T15:10:45Z

🎉🎉🎉 Congratulations on your paper acceptance! 🎉🎉🎉

If you would like to include a link to your paper from your README use the following code snippets:

Markdown:
[![DOI](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.05858/status.svg)](https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.05858)

HTML:
<a style="border-width:0" href="https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.05858">
  <img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.05858/status.svg" alt="DOI badge" >
</a>

reStructuredText:
.. image:: https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.05858/status.svg
   :target: https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.05858

This is how it will look in your documentation:

We need your help!

The Journal of Open Source Software is a community-run journal and relies upon volunteer effort. If you'd like to support us please consider doing either one (or both) of the the following:

Volunteering to review for us sometime in the future. You can add your name to the reviewer list here: https://reviewers.joss.theoj.org/join
Making a small donation to support our running costs here: https://numfocus.org/donate-to-joss

editorialbot added Python review TeX Track: 7 (CSISM) Computer science, Information Science, and Mathematics labels Sep 20, 2023

editorialbot assigned vissarion Sep 20, 2023

editorialbot mentioned this issue Sep 20, 2023

[PRE REVIEW]: BoboCEP: a Fault-Tolerant Complex Event Processing Engine for Edge Computing in Internet of Things #5852

Closed

abhishektiwari mentioned this issue Oct 3, 2023

Unable to run the Flask 123 and dist abc examples r3w0p/bobocep#7

Closed

editorialbot added the recommend-accept Papers recommended for acceptance in JOSS. label Nov 21, 2023

editorialbot added accepted published Papers published in JOSS labels Nov 21, 2023

danielskatz closed this as completed Nov 21, 2023

This was referenced Jun 24, 2024

[PRE REVIEW]: Tenta: Remote and Real-Time Sensor Network Management #6926

Closed

[PRE REVIEW]: WhaleConnect: A General-Purpose, Cross-Platform Network Communication Application #6946

Closed

editorialbot mentioned this issue Nov 20, 2024

[PRE REVIEW]: Multi-Device UART Communication with the dwiBus Library #7447

Closed

[REVIEW]: BoboCEP: a Fault-Tolerant Complex Event Processing Engine for Edge Computing in Internet of Things #5858

[REVIEW]: BoboCEP: a Fault-Tolerant Complex Event Processing Engine for Edge Computing in Internet of Things #5858

Comments

editorialbot commented Sep 20, 2023 • edited Loading

Status

Reviewer instructions & questions

Checklists

editorialbot commented Sep 20, 2023

editorialbot commented Sep 20, 2023

editorialbot commented Sep 20, 2023

editorialbot commented Sep 20, 2023

editorialbot commented Sep 20, 2023

abhishektiwari commented Sep 26, 2023 • edited Loading

Review checklist for @abhishektiwari

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

Functionality

Documentation

Software paper

abhishektiwari commented Oct 14, 2023

Documentation

Example usage:

Software paper

Statement of need

State of the field

r3w0p commented Oct 16, 2023

r3w0p commented Oct 22, 2023

editorialbot commented Oct 22, 2023

r3w0p commented Oct 22, 2023

Example Usage

Statement of Need

State of the Field

abhishektiwari commented Oct 23, 2023

abhishektiwari commented Oct 23, 2023

vissarion commented Oct 24, 2023

mahsan321 commented Oct 25, 2023

vissarion commented Oct 26, 2023

r3w0p commented Nov 13, 2023

mahsan321 commented Nov 13, 2023

mahsan321 commented Nov 15, 2023 • edited Loading

Review checklist for @mahsan321

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

Functionality

Documentation

Software paper

vissarion commented Nov 16, 2023 • edited Loading

r3w0p commented Nov 16, 2023

r3w0p commented Nov 16, 2023

r3w0p commented Nov 16, 2023

editorialbot commented Nov 21, 2023

vissarion commented Nov 21, 2023

editorialbot commented Nov 21, 2023

vissarion commented Nov 21, 2023

vissarion commented Nov 21, 2023

editorialbot commented Nov 21, 2023

editorialbot commented Nov 21, 2023

editorialbot commented Nov 21, 2023

r3w0p commented Nov 21, 2023

danielskatz commented Nov 21, 2023

danielskatz commented Nov 21, 2023

editorialbot commented Nov 21, 2023

editorialbot commented Nov 21, 2023

editorialbot commented Nov 21, 2023

r3w0p commented Nov 21, 2023

danielskatz commented Nov 21, 2023

editorialbot commented Nov 21, 2023

editorialbot commented Nov 21, 2023

editorialbot commented Nov 21, 2023

editorialbot commented Nov 21, 2023

r3w0p commented Nov 21, 2023

danielskatz commented Nov 21, 2023

editorialbot commented Nov 21, 2023

editorialbot commented Sep 20, 2023 •

edited

Loading

abhishektiwari commented Sep 26, 2023 •

edited

Loading

mahsan321 commented Nov 15, 2023 •

edited

Loading

vissarion commented Nov 16, 2023 •

edited

Loading