[PRE REVIEW]: AGNI: A radiative-convective model for lava planet atmospheres

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @nichollsh (Harrison Nicholls)
Repository: https://github.com/nichollsh/AGNI
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): main
Version: v0.8.3
Editor: @arfon
Reviewers: @MartianColonist, @arjunsavel
Managing EiC: Dan Foreman-Mackey

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/380d8e608e9f863b639af76ceebc7131"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/380d8e608e9f863b639af76ceebc7131/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/380d8e608e9f863b639af76ceebc7131/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/380d8e608e9f863b639af76ceebc7131)

Author instructions

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

@nichollsh 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 1.90  T=0.08 s (713.6 files/s, 265664.3 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julia                           15           1301           1444           4387
Jupyter Notebook                10              0           9734           1216
TeX                              2             94              0            951
Markdown                         9            108              0            385
TOML                             7             37              7            322
Bourne Shell                     3             44             30            161
YAML                             3             17             11            104
SVG                              3              1              3             78
JSON                             2              0              0             30
CSS                              1              1              0              9
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            55           1603          11229           7643
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

   509	Harrison Nicholls
     2	Hamish

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 1098

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

[editorialbot]

License info:

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

[editorialbot]

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

✅ OK DOIs

- 10.1137/141000671 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-3881/153/2/56 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361/201629322 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361/201323169 is OK
- 10.1029/90jd01945 is OK
- 10.1038/s41586-023-06258-3 is OK
- 10.1029/2020JE006711 is OK
- 10.3847/PSJ/ac2580 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361/202245521 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361/201628799 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/staa2300 is OK
- 10.3390/galaxies11030075 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2409.04386 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2405.04057 is OK
- 10.1007/s11214-023-00995-7 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2405.09284 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-4357/aa784f is OK
- 10.3847/1538-4357/acdef2 is OK
- 10.1038/s41598-020-67751-7 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stad2486 is OK
- 10.1126/sciadv.abd1387 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-4357/ac1345 is OK
- 10.5281/zenodo.12190852 is OK
- 10.1017/9781316148549 is OK

🟡 SKIP DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: SOCRATES Technical Guide: Suite Of Community RAdia...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Principles of planetary climate
- No DOI given, and none found for title: The Exoplanet Handbook

❌ MISSING DOIs

- None

❌ INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

GeophysicalFlows.jl: Solvers for geophysical fluid dynamics problems in periodic domains on CPUs & GPUs
Submitting author: @navidcy
Handling editor: @pdebuyl (Active)
Reviewers: @ranocha, @eviatarbach
Similarity score: 0.7493

3D Line Radiative Transfer & Synthetic Observations with Magritte
Submitting author: @FredDeCeuster
Handling editor: @xuanxu (Active)
Reviewers: @gonsie, @CFGrote
Similarity score: 0.7400

SWAMPE: A Shallow-Water Atmospheric Model in Python for Exoplanets
Submitting author: @kathlandgren
Handling editor: @dfm (Active)
Reviewers: @mark-hammond, @imalsky
Similarity score: 0.7390

Oceananigans.jl: Fast and friendly geophysical fluid dynamics on GPUs
Submitting author: @ali-ramadhan
Handling editor: @kthyng (Active)
Reviewers: @funsim, @mancellin
Similarity score: 0.7154

PROFFASTpylot: Running PROFFAST with Python
Submitting author: @feldl
Handling editor: @rwegener2 (Active)
Reviewers: @usethedata, @simonom
Similarity score: 0.7145

⚠️ 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]

@nichollsh — Thanks for your submission! All the suitable JOSS editors are currently working at capacity so I'm going to "waitlist" this review until an editor with the relevant expertise is available to take it on. Thanks for your patience!

[nichollsh]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

GeophysicalFlows.jl: Solvers for geophysical fluid dynamics problems in periodic domains on CPUs & GPUs
Submitting author: @navidcy
Handling editor: @pdebuyl (Active)
Reviewers: @ranocha, @eviatarbach
Similarity score: 0.7426

3D Line Radiative Transfer & Synthetic Observations with Magritte
Submitting author: @FredDeCeuster
Handling editor: @xuanxu (Active)
Reviewers: @gonsie, @CFGrote
Similarity score: 0.7406

IndividualDisplacements.jl: a Julia package to simulate and study particle displacements within the climate system
Submitting author: @gaelforget
Handling editor: @kthyng (Active)
Reviewers: @milankl, @visr
Similarity score: 0.7262

vSmartMOM.jl: an Open-Source Julia Package for Atmospheric Radiative Transfer and Remote Sensing Tools
Submitting author: @RupeshJey
Handling editor: @pdebuyl (Active)
Reviewers: @jimmielin, @arjunsavel
Similarity score: 0.7239

SWAMPE: A Shallow-Water Atmospheric Model in Python for Exoplanets
Submitting author: @kathlandgren
Handling editor: @dfm (Active)
Reviewers: @mark-hammond, @imalsky
Similarity score: 0.7220

⚠️ 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.

[nichollsh]

Please note that the methods/theory paper based on AGNI has now been accepted in MNRAS.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stae2772
arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.11987

[nichollsh]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

3D Line Radiative Transfer & Synthetic Observations with Magritte
Submitting author: @FredDeCeuster
Handling editor: @xuanxu (Active)
Reviewers: @gonsie, @CFGrote
Similarity score: 0.7395

GeophysicalFlows.jl: Solvers for geophysical fluid dynamics problems in periodic domains on CPUs & GPUs
Submitting author: @navidcy
Handling editor: @pdebuyl (Active)
Reviewers: @ranocha, @eviatarbach
Similarity score: 0.7359

vSmartMOM.jl: an Open-Source Julia Package for Atmospheric Radiative Transfer and Remote Sensing Tools
Submitting author: @RupeshJey
Handling editor: @pdebuyl (Active)
Reviewers: @jimmielin, @arjunsavel
Similarity score: 0.7268

SWAMPE: A Shallow-Water Atmospheric Model in Python for Exoplanets
Submitting author: @kathlandgren
Handling editor: @dfm (Active)
Reviewers: @mark-hammond, @imalsky
Similarity score: 0.7262

IndividualDisplacements.jl: a Julia package to simulate and study particle displacements within the climate system
Submitting author: @gaelforget
Handling editor: @kthyng (Active)
Reviewers: @milankl, @visr
Similarity score: 0.7238

⚠️ 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.

[nichollsh]

Hi @dfm, thank you for considering our article for publication in JOSS.

This manuscript was submitted in September and is still marked as "waitlisted". However, I understand that potential reviewers may be busy with other submissions. Please could you give me an idea as the to the timescale for your review process? Should I expect the review for our paper to begin within the next couple of months, or is a longer timescale expected?

[dfm]

Thanks for the ping here @nichollsh! I'm going to pass the ping along to @warrickball who is now in charge of this track. He'll have a better sense of the timelines. Thanks for your patience!

[arfon]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

👋 @warrickball @nichollsh – I can take this one!

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @arfon is now the editor

[arfon]

@nichollsh – could you take a look a this list of potential reviewers and identify a few people who would be good candidates to review this submission?

I'd also love to hear if any of these individuals looks suitable from your perspective.

[nichollsh]

Thanks, @arfon. These people would seem to be appropriate reviewers for our paper:

• @arjunsavel
• @jimmielin
• @catrionamurray
• @MartianColonist
• @nenasedk
• @dhjx1996

[MartianColonist]

I am happy to review this paper for JOSS.

[arfon]

Thanks @MartianColonist! I'm hoping to find a second reviewer before we actually start the review. Please sit tight for a few days...

[arjunsavel]

I'd be glad to review this as well!

[arfon]

@editorialbot add @MartianColonist as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@MartianColonist added to the reviewers list!

[arfon]

@editorialbot add @arjunsavel as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@arjunsavel added to the reviewers list!

[arfon]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in #7726.

[arfon]

@MartianColonist, @arjunsavel, @nichollsh – see you over in #7726 where the actual review will take place.