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]: MDL Suite: A language, generator and compiler for describing mazes #1815
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. @rreinecke, @gradvohl 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.
@Akash-Nag Please fix akashnag/MDL-Suite#3 (and akashnag/MDL-Suite#2 ) to enable me to further review your submission. Thanks! |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@Akash-Nag please address the following issues akashnag/MDL-Suite#5 akashnag/MDL-Suite#6 . Especially the automated tests will help to understand your code better. Without them I'm currently not able to proceed with the review. Please also consider improving your code documentation further. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
All the issues raised by the reviewers have been resolved, except for the
Tests. Incorporating JUnit tests is difficult for a project of this type
since this is not a library that can be invoked. Instead, it is a tool
whose output is an image file. Obviously, checking whether the generated
maze-image conforms to the input specifications requires visual inspection
or outlandish AI-driven image recognition algorithms beyond the scope of
this project. For internal functions which do not generate the image
directly, it may be possible to write tests but the difficulty there lies
with the fact that most of these functions work with matrices, and again,
checking whether these maze matrices conform to the specifications will
require their own algorithms that are unknown to me. The code for the tests
will, in all likelihood, be larger and more complicated than the source
code itself. Therefore, I would request you to kindly proceed with the
review for this project as it stands now. For your reference, I have made
the following changes:
1. The readme now contains detailed installation and build instructions,
names of contributors, etc.
2. The JavaDocs has been made available
3. A shell script has been provided for automated generation of random
mazes, for testing purposes
…On Sat, 2 Nov 2019, 19:25 Daniel S. Katz, ***@***.***> wrote:
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Regarding the docs, I think the author solved this issue. However, when I tried to run, I still get the following error:
Should I run it with a specific java version? If so, this should be highlighted in the |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
The specific version of Java with which to run this tool has already been
highlighted in the readme under the "Dependencies and Build Instructions"
section, namely: Oracle Java 10.0.2
…On Mon, 4 Nov 2019, 05:20 André Leon S. Gradvohl, ***@***.***> wrote:
Regarding the docs, I think the author solved this issue. However, when I
tried to run, I still get the following error:
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.UnsupportedClassVersionError: mdlg/MDLG has been compiled by a more recent version of the Java Runtime (class file version 54.0), this version of the Java Runtime only recognizes class file versions up to 52.0
at java.lang.ClassLoader.defineClass1(Native Method)
at java.lang.ClassLoader.defineClass(ClassLoader.java:756)
at java.security.SecureClassLoader.defineClass(SecureClassLoader.java:142)
at java.net.URLClassLoader.defineClass(URLClassLoader.java:468)
at java.net.URLClassLoader.access$100(URLClassLoader.java:74)
at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:369)
at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:363)
at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:362)
at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:418)
at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:352)
at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:351)
at sun.launcher.LauncherHelper.checkAndLoadMain(LauncherHelper.java:495)
Should I run it with a specific java version? If so, this should be
highlighted in the README.md. as well as in the docs.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1815?email_source=notifications&email_token=ALUWTR7IFRZ63NSHQ25ZT23QR5PVXA5CNFSM4JBKNNM2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEC6AGDQ#issuecomment-549192462>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALUWTR4YX2MGCMKH6YCBXNTQR5PVXANCNFSM4JBKNNMQ>
.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@drvinceknight @danielskatz I cannot confirm the statement given by @Akash-Nag . Yes all other concerns except the community guidelines and tests have been addressed. However, I do not agree with the assessment that unit tests are impossible and I find it bewildering that our suggestions as reviewers are fully ignored. I understand that JOSS has a very constructive review process, thus I opened an issue more than two weeks ago suggesting unit tests and that I would be happy to provide additional inputs if necessary. This was completely ignored by @Akash-Nag till the statement above was given. As a computer scientist I cannot agree that test are not possible. Leaving the image generation aside, the software contains a maze generator that is able to produce random mazes. It is unclear to me if they are always solvable? If so, how do you prove that? Can they also be unsolvable? It seems you are using recursive-division to generate them. Then at least test the method that is implementing that algorithm. @Akash-Nag writes that the software is intended to be used for research. IF that is the case it needs to be clear how the software works. You can only ensure this by providing test cases that verify this behavior. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@Akash-Nag I fully agree with @rreinecke and do not feel that tests are impossible. Is this something you will be able to address? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
I apologize for any misunderstanding that may have occurred. I never
intended to say that tests would be impossible, but only very difficult
given the type of the project.
Furthermore, I was not sure which aspects of the project could be actually
tested as I was sure that neither the maze image generation nor the path
markers could be feasibly tested to ensure they conform to the
specifications. Due to this confusion I was not able to reply to the issue,
but in restrospect I think I should have asked for more clarification, and
I am very sorry for that. However, now that you mention about the proof of
solvability of the generated mazes, I think there will be two ways of going
about it.
Firsly, there can be a formal proof of the correctness of the algorithm in
the paper itself, but I think the format of JOSS papers will not be able to
accomodate that. Secondly, I can include a function which, given a
generated maze matrix, will print out any one path (as a list of
coordinates) from the entrance to the exit, or alternately, a test which
will return true/false depending on whether or not a path exists. Kindly
state which do you want.
…On Mon, 4 Nov 2019, 23:12 Vince Knight, ***@***.***> wrote:
@Akash-Nag <https://github.com/Akash-Nag> I fully agree with @rreinecke
<https://github.com/rreinecke> and do not feel that tests are impossible.
Is this something you will be able to address?
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1815?email_source=notifications&email_token=ALUWTR4NUO5LSGGWS5SVVN3QSBNHJA5CNFSM4JBKNNM2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEDADEYI#issuecomment-549466721>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALUWTRZTHEIKXYDJ2ZPJURDQSBNHJANCNFSM4JBKNNMQ>
.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@Akash-Nag please see akashnag/MDL-Suite#5 for reply and further discussion. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@Akash-Nag any update on this? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@drvinceknight I've asked him the same last week and it seems that he is very busy and currently not able to complete the suggested changes. I've suggested a re-submission to him but advised him to ask the handling editor (aka you) about how to handle this. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Thanks, I'll wait to hear from them to confirm before I close this. @openjournals/jose-eics can I confirm the process for closing ("rejecting for now") a submission? Is it as simple as closing this issue or is there some @whedon magic I should use instead? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
You can add the "paused" label |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@drvinceknight for tracking completed reviews via e.g. publons this labeling is not really satisfying. If this project is never revived this does not count as a review. I'm very happy to review for JOSS anytime but it would be nice if you guys would appreciate that work with a completed review mail that at least allows to track that effort. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@drvinceknight kindly advise regarding the process of resubmission. I'm sorry for not being able to make the necessary changes right now as I am very busy with too many unforeseen assignments. I apologize for the inconvenience caused. Please advise whether I should withdraw the paper (from JOSS website) and then resubmit later? Or, can/should this review be just paused, etc. in some way? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@rreinecke I understand completely. Thank you again for your time and work reviewing the paper. It's greatly appreciated. @rreinecke and @Akash-Nag I am just clarifying the process myself via email, I will get back to you here as soon as I'm confident in the correct path forward. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Hi @rreinecke and @Akash-Nag. Thank you for your patience. I completely realise the effort and need for recognition of said effort of reviewers @rreinecke so once again; thank you and hopefully I can explain the options available so that we can choose the best one that importantly works for @Akash-Nag and the paper. Option 1: The paper is withdrawn. This is the best option if @Akash-Nag is unlikely to come back to this in the next 3 months or so. Option 2: We leave the paused option - this is best if @Akash-Nag is likely to come back to this in the next 3 months or so. @rreinecke I can set @whedon up to set a reminder so that we all do not forget, in which case in 3 months time we can revisit and if @Akash-Nag is unlikely to make progress we can go with option 1 at that stage. Which way forward is preferable at this stage? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Hi,
Personally I would have liked to go with Option 1 at this stage
because I do not want to make a commitment I am not sure I can keep,
considering my present engagements. However, as @rreinecke put forward
an important point regarding his review efforts, I do not want to
undermine that. Therefore, I would like to go with Option 2 and kindly
ask @drvinceknight to mark this review as paused, and I would try my
best to complete the tests, etc. within the 3 months duration.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Assuming this is fine with you @rreinecke then the review is marked as pause. I will set a reminder for all of us of 3 months. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@whedon remind @Akash-Nag in three months |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Hi,
My paper/project was on pause as you might remember because I was not
able to complete the requirements then. I have now updated my
repository with JUnit tests, but I am not sure how to change the
status of the project. Therefore, I am replying to this email.
@rreinecke Could you please check if these were the tests you wanted,
and if anything more is required?
On 03/12/2019, whedon ***@***.***> wrote:
Reminder set for @drvinceknight in three months
--
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#1815 (comment)
Akash Nag
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
I have removed the pause label. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@Akash-Nag Well done. See akashnag/MDL-Suite#5 for my reply. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@Akash-Nag looks like we are almost done from my side. See akashnag/MDL-Suite#7 and akashnag/MDL-Suite#8 |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@whedon generate pdf |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@drvinceknight @Akash-Nag all done and accepted from my side. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
From my side is also ok. Congrats. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
… On Sun, 9 Feb 2020, 18:30 André Leon S. Gradvohl, ***@***.***> wrote:
From my side is also ok. Congrats.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1815?email_source=notifications&email_token=ALUWTR7FJ7SCNFIJM5QP5QDRB75AJA5CNFSM4JBKNNM2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOELGLXSY#issuecomment-583842763>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALUWTR2CY2OWYDZB4G3PZZTRB75AJANCNFSM4JBKNNMQ>
.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@whedon generate proof |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
I'm sorry human, I don't understand that. You can see what commands I support by typing:
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@whedon check references |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@whedon generate pdf |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@Akash-Nag it looks like you are missing two DOIs:
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
I have now added the 2 missing DOIs to the references.
Thanks,
…On 10/02/2020, Vince Knight ***@***.***> wrote:
@Akash-Nag it looks like you are missing two DOIs:
- https://doi.org/10.1109/confluence.2014.6949354 may be missing for title:
Survey on techniques used in autonomous maze solving robot
- https://doi.org/10.3758/brm.40.1.353 may be missing for title: Maze Suite
1.0: A complete set of tools to prepare, present, and analyze navigational
and spatial cognitive neuroscience experiments
--
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#1815 (comment)
--
Akash Nag
Department of Computer Science
M.U.C. Women's College,
Burdwan 713104, West Bengal, India
Mobile: (+91) 98322-58023
E-mail: nag.akash.cs@gmail.com
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This is to inform you that I have updated my username (reclaimed my older profile), and I had already informed @arfon that I was going to do so. For the time being, GitHub will automatically redirect my old repository for this review at: https://github.com/Akash-Nag/MDL-Suite to the new repository at: https://github.com/akashnag/MDL-Suite till any new user claims my now-defunct username and creates a new repository with the same name. I kindly request the journal admin to update my repository URL for this paper to: https://github.com/akashnag/MDL-Suite so that any inadvertent links to a different repository do not occur in future. Thanks |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@akashnag done. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@whedon check references |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Sorry @akashnag but you haven't added the DOIs correctly, the DOI for the first one is actually just |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
I'm sorry, I have now correctly updated the DOIs.
…On 12/02/2020, Vince Knight ***@***.***> wrote:
Sorry @akashnag but you haven't added the DOIs correctly, the DOI for the
first one is actually just `10.1109/confluence.2014.6949354 ` here's a full
example of a bib file if that's helpful:
https://github.com/drvinceknight/Nashpy/blob/master/paper.bib
--
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#1815 (comment)
--
Akash Nag
Department of Computer Science
M.U.C. Women's College,
Burdwan 713104, West Bengal, India
Mobile: (+91) 98322-58023
E-mail: nag.akash.cs@gmail.com
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@whedon check references |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@whedon generate pdf |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Ok everything looks good to me. @akashnag could you make a tagged release and archive. Once you've done that can you report the version number and archive DOI here. Please make sure that the archive deposit has the correct metadata (title and author list). |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@drvinceknight - before you turn this over to the EiCs, please also proof-read the paper and references and make sure you are satisfied with them |
whedon commentedOct 16, 2019
•
edited by arfon
Submitting author: @akashnag (Akash Nag)
Repository: https://github.com/akashnag/MDL-Suite
Version: 1.0
Editor: @drvinceknight
Reviewer: @rreinecke, @gradvohl
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
@rreinecke & @gradvohl, 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 @drvinceknight know.
Review checklist for @rreinecke
Conflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper
Review checklist for @gradvohl
Conflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper