Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 40 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Sign up[REVIEW]: CaPS: Casimir Effect in the Plane-Sphere Geometry #2011
Comments
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Hello human, I'm @whedon, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks. @eschnett, @jwuttke it looks like you're currently assigned to review this paper If you haven't already, you should seriously consider unsubscribing from GitHub notifications for this (https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews) repository. As a reviewer, you're probably currently watching this repository which means for GitHub's default behaviour you will receive notifications (emails) for all reviews To fix this do the following two things:
For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:
For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
HI @eschnett & @jwuttke - thanks for agreeing to review this submission! Your job is to review the paper and the repository according to the criteria in your review list in the first comment in this issue, and check things off as you find them satisfactory. If you see things that you think need to be changed, open an issue in the source repository (and add a note about this review issue to link them to here), or if they are small, just state them here in this issue. Please also read the first 2 comments in this issue carefully. Let me know if you have any questions. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
I submitted 7 issues. Otherwise I am very satisfied with project & paper, and I recommend acceptance in JOSS. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Thanks! Can you put the URL of this issue (#2011) in the issues you opened? This helps us view them from here, where we can see if they are open or closed, for example |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@michael-hartmann - My issues are suggestions, not imperatives. I hope you will find some of them useful, but you are free to disagree. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@danielskatz I am working on the issues right now. @jwuttke Thank you for your suggestions. I agree with your issues and I will fix them as soon as possible. :-) |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@michael-hartmann You might want to refer to a particular version number (release) of the software in the paper. The current release is 0.4.2, while the master branch is 0.5. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@eschnett My plan is actually make the 0.5 release as soon as all the changes from the review are implemented. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@michael-hartmann If you do, consider referencing this version in the paper. Also consider getting a DOI for that version (e.g. from Zenodo); I don't know whether JOSS recommends this anyway. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@michael-hartmann Do you describe the state of the art for numerical Casimir calculations in your paper? Are there other, similar packages available? What are their limitations? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@eschnett - part of the JOSS acceptance process is declaring a specific version (often new at that time), so don't worry about this too much at this point |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
The first paragraph on the second page of the proof describes the numerical problems that render the evaluation of the Casimir free energy difficult when the sphere radius is much larger than the separation between sphere and plate. (This case is experimentally the most interesting case.). The second paragraph on the second page describes how we solve these numerical issues. I am not aware of any other available package to compute the Casimir free energy for this configuration. Also, nobody in the Casimir community has published exact numerical data for experimentally relevant parameters (there are lot of papers that use approximations, though.). Therefore, I think our approach is the state-of-the-art. @eschnett Does this answer your question? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@michael-hartmann Do you want to add a note corresponding to your second paragraph above to the paper? This knowledge will tell others that your work is unique, instead of you not ignoring the competition. |
whedon commentedJan 13, 2020
•
edited by eschnett
Submitting author: @michael-hartmann (Michael Hartmann)
Repository: https://github.com/michael-hartmann/caps/
Version: 0.5
Editor: @danielskatz
Reviewer: @eschnett, @jwuttke
Archive: Pending
Status
Status badge code:
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
@eschnett & @jwuttke, please carry out your review in this issue by updating the checklist below. If you cannot edit the checklist please:
The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @danielskatz know.
Review checklist for @eschnett
Conflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper
Review checklist for @jwuttke
Conflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper