[PRE REVIEW]: CtrlAer: A MicroPython package and embedded domain specific language for real-time control of piezoelectric atomisers

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @hessammehr (S. Hessam M. Mehr)
Repository: https://github.com/MehrResearch/ctrlaer/
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): paper
Version: 0.2.0
Editor: Pending
Reviewers: Pending
Managing EiC: Kevin M. Moerman

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/382d8fd1d193dc4d01c93d50837f605a"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/382d8fd1d193dc4d01c93d50837f605a/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/382d8fd1d193dc4d01c93d50837f605a/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/382d8fd1d193dc4d01c93d50837f605a)

Author instructions

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

@hessammehr 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

- 10.1039/D4DD00139G is OK

🟡 SKIP DOIs

- None

❌ MISSING DOIs

- None

❌ INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90  T=0.03 s (307.8 files/s, 281115.5 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SVG                              1            526              1           6390
Python                           2             31              3            116
Markdown                         2             37              0            113
YAML                             2              9              4             62
TeX                              1              1              0             14
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                             8            604              8           6695
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

    31	Hessam Mehr

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 972

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

[editorialbot]

License info:

🔴 Failed to discover a valid open source license

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

py-opc: operate the Alphasense OPC-N2 from a raspberry pi or other popular microcontrollers/microcomputers
Submitting author: @dhhagan
Handling editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman (Active)
Reviewers: @tshu
Similarity score: 0.7025

Pybehave: a hardware agnostic, Python-based framework for controlling behavioral neuroscience experiments
Submitting author: @theonlydvr
Handling editor: @sappelhoff (Active)
Reviewers: @tuliofalmeida, @alustig3
Similarity score: 0.6939

MAHOS: Measurement Automation Handling and Orchestration System
Submitting author: @ktahar
Handling editor: @arfon (Active)
Reviewers: @sidihamady, @aquilesC
Similarity score: 0.6917

Pyrokinetics - A Python library to standardise gyrokinetic analysis
Submitting author: @bpatel2107
Handling editor: @kellyrowland (Active)
Reviewers: @the-rccg, @rogeriojorge
Similarity score: 0.6910

chombo-discharge: An AMR code for gas discharge simulations in complex geometries
Submitting author: @rmrsk
Handling editor: @ppxasjsm (Active)
Reviewers: @jannisteunissen, @michellegurevich
Similarity score: 0.6792

⚠️ 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.

[hessammehr]

Potential reviewers: mjwilkins18, ktahar, finsberg

Also added license file.

[hessammehr]

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello @hessammehr, here are the things you can ask me to do:

# List all available commands
@editorialbot commands

# Get a list of all editors's GitHub handles
@editorialbot list editors

# Adds a checklist for the reviewer using this command
@editorialbot generate my checklist

# Set a value for branch
@editorialbot set joss-paper as branch

# Run checks and provide information on the repository and the paper file
@editorialbot check repository

# Check the references of the paper for missing DOIs
@editorialbot check references

# Generates the pdf paper
@editorialbot generate pdf

# Generates a LaTeX preprint file
@editorialbot generate preprint

# Get a link to the complete list of reviewers
@editorialbot list reviewers

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@hessammehr thanks for your submission to JOSS. Unfortunately, given its small size and limited functionality, this submission doesn't meet our substantial scholarly effort criterion.

One possible alternative to JOSS is to follow GitHub's guide on how to create a permanent archive and DOI for your software. This DOI can then be used by others to cite your work.

We will now proceed to reject this submission.

Note that the above conclusion does not mean the work is not useful or of a bad quality, it simply means it is not in scope for JOSS based on the above criteria.

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@editorialbot reject

[editorialbot]

Paper rejected.

[hessammehr]

@Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman thanks for this feedback. In terms of meeting substantial scholarly effort criteria with respect to size, I would be interested to know whether the embedded nature of this project has been taken into account. Due to limited resources on the target device and specifically the PIO machinery, projects of this nature will inherently be smaller in size, despite the significant technical challenge, in this case to achieve correct, gap-free operation via the state machines. Functionality-wise as well, this software has already enabled a recent academic publication with more projects underway or under review. It can be used to control a range of laboratory equipment where no high-level programmable options currently exist. Finally, the development and experimental testing of this package has been a focus in our group over the last six months, something perhaps not directly reflected by the commit count as most development/testing primarily took place on-device.

I would be grateful for the opportunity to include this contribution in the peer review process. I also appreciate that the hardware focus of this work may complicate editorial assessment from a scientific computing point of view, in which case a second independent assessment would be greatly appreciated.