[PRE REVIEW]: Parallel Implementation of Continuum Damage Mechanics Simulations using FEM and MATLAB

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @Habiba-Eldababy (Habiba Eldababy)
Repository: https://github.com/Habiba-Eldababy/Parallel-CDM
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch):
Version: MATLAB R2022b
Editor: @diehlpk
Reviewers: @vijaysm, @tiburoch, @chennachaos
Managing EiC: Arfon Smith

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/14264ce4699f0fccc0a41d19c2f9ada7"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/14264ce4699f0fccc0a41d19c2f9ada7/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/14264ce4699f0fccc0a41d19c2f9ada7/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/14264ce4699f0fccc0a41d19c2f9ada7)

Author instructions

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

@Habiba-Eldababy 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

- 10.1115/1.3101670 is OK
- 10.1007/s00466-024-02473-5 is OK
- 10.1016/j.cma.2022.115766 is OK

🟡 SKIP DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: Choose Between Thread-Based and Process-Based Envi...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Compare Performance of parfor, parfeval, and spmd
- No DOI given, and none found for title: spmd - Execute code in parallel on workers of para...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: parfor – Execute for-loop iterations in parallel o...

❌ MISSING DOIs

- 10.1007/978-3-642-18255-6 may be a valid DOI for title: A course on damage mechanics
- 10.1615/intjmultcompeng.v6.i3.50 may be a valid DOI for title: A nonlinear dual-domain decomposition method: Appl...

❌ INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90  T=0.04 s (1561.3 files/s, 108850.5 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MATLAB                          60            891           1072           2324
TeX                              1              8              0             62
Markdown                         2             24              0             57
YAML                             1              1              4             19
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            64            924           1076           2462
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

    22	Habiba-Eldababy

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 1445

🔴 Failed to discover a Statement of need section in paper

[editorialbot]

License info:

✅ License found: MIT License (Valid open source OSI approved license)

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

PDLSM-FEM: Solver of Coupled Peridynamics Least Squares Minimization with Finite Element Method
Submitting author: @QibangLiu
Handling editor: @prashjha (Active)
Reviewers: @TLCFEM, @karthikncsu, @Balaje
Similarity score: 0.6999

BasicTools: a numerical simulation toolbox
Submitting author: @fbordeu
Handling editor: @diehlpk (Active)
Reviewers: @hvonwah, @sthavishtha
Similarity score: 0.6947

SeismicMesh: Triangular meshing for seismology
Submitting author: @krober10nd
Handling editor: @meg-simula (Retired)
Reviewers: @nschloe, @jorgensd
Similarity score: 0.6926

NLMech: Implementation of finite difference/meshfree discretization of nonlocal fracture models
Submitting author: @diehlpk
Handling editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman (Active)
Reviewers: @vijaysm, @chennachaos
Similarity score: 0.6855

cRacklet: a spectral boundary integral method library for interfacial rupture simulation
Submitting author: @tiburoch
Handling editor: @diehlpk (Active)
Reviewers: @srmnitc, @kylebeggs
Similarity score: 0.6833

⚠️ 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.

[arfon]

@Habiba-Eldababy - thanks for your submission to JOSS. We're currently managing a large backlog of submissions and the editor most appropriate for your area is already rather busy.

While we are waiting, could you please:

• Fix the DOIs (noting that @editorialbot's suggestions are not always right), you can, then use the following commands (one at a time, as the first line of a new comment) to regenerate the PDF and check the references:

@editorialbot generate pdf
@editorialbot check references

• Explain how this software is tested? Being able to test the capabilities of software is important (and required for JOSS as part of the review). Please explain here how a user might do this.
• The paper is also a little long (and appears to be missing a Statement of need section), could you please work on that too. Thank you!

For now, we will need to waitlist this paper and process it as the queue reduces. Thanks for your patience!

[kyleniemeyer]

@Habiba-Eldababy before we assign an editor, can you please address the question about how your software is tested? We don't require automated testing / continuous integration, but software does need to have tests set up somehow.

[kyleniemeyer]

@diehlpk assuming the software will move to review after addressing the above questions, would you be able to edit this one?

[diehlpk]

Yes, but I can only start mid of December.

[Habiba-Eldababy]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

⚠️ An error happened when generating the pdf.

[Habiba-Eldababy]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

PDLSM-FEM: Solver of Coupled Peridynamics Least Squares Minimization with Finite Element Method
Submitting author: @QibangLiu
Handling editor: @prashjha (Active)
Reviewers: @TLCFEM, @karthikncsu, @Balaje
Similarity score: 0.6999

BasicTools: a numerical simulation toolbox
Submitting author: @fbordeu
Handling editor: @diehlpk (Active)
Reviewers: @hvonwah, @sthavishtha
Similarity score: 0.6995

SeismicMesh: Triangular meshing for seismology
Submitting author: @krober10nd
Handling editor: @meg-simula (Retired)
Reviewers: @nschloe, @jorgensd
Similarity score: 0.6931

cRacklet: a spectral boundary integral method library for interfacial rupture simulation
Submitting author: @tiburoch
Handling editor: @diehlpk (Active)
Reviewers: @srmnitc, @kylebeggs
Similarity score: 0.6854

NLMech: Implementation of finite difference/meshfree discretization of nonlocal fracture models
Submitting author: @diehlpk
Handling editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman (Active)
Reviewers: @vijaysm, @chennachaos
Similarity score: 0.6849

⚠️ 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.

[Habiba-Eldababy]

Hi @arfon @kyleniemeyer ! Thank you for your initial comments and feedback. I have updated the DOIs and renamed the statement of need section. There are instructions for testing and running the code in the README file. Please let me know if you need any additional information.

[kyleniemeyer]

Thank you, @Habiba-Eldababy. I think this looks sufficient to begin review, although reviewers may have additional feedback.

[kyleniemeyer]

@editorialbot assign @diehlpk as editor

with the understanding that @diehlpk will begin handling the submission mid-December. Thanks!

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @diehlpk is now the editor

[diehlpk]

Hi @QibangLiu do you have time to review the paper?

[diehlpk]

Hi @fbordeu do you have time to review this paper?

[diehlpk]

Hi @krober10nd do you have time to review the paper?

[krober10nd]

Thanks but respectfully decline. I do not have the time at the moment.

[fbordeu]

Hi @fbordeu do you have time to review this paper?

Hi @diehlpk, I have the time to review the paper but I don't have access to a MATLAB licence to test (and play) with the library

[diehlpk]

Hi @fbordeu do you have time to review this paper?

Hi @diehlpk, I have the time to review the paper but I don't have access to a MATLAB licence to test (and play) with the library

Thanks. However, we can not provide you with a MATLAB license.

[diehlpk]

Hi @tiburoch do you have time to review this paper?

[diehlpk]

Hi @vijaysm do you have time to review this paper?

[vijaysm]

@diehlpk I should be able to start the review after January 15th, if that is acceptable. Else, I will have to decline due to travel.

[diehlpk]

@diehlpk I should be able to start the review after January 15th, if that is acceptable. Else, I will have to decline due to travel.

That is fine. I am off for winter break myself.

[diehlpk]

@editorialbot add @vijaysm as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@vijaysm added to the reviewers list!

[diehlpk]

Hi @chennachaos do you have time to review this paper?

[tiburoch]

Hi @diehlpk, yes, I can review this paper.

[diehlpk]

@editorialbot add @tiburoch as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@tiburoch added to the reviewers list!

[diehlpk]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in #7610.

[chennachaos]

Hi @diehlpk, It looks like you have enough reviewers. I am happy to review this if needed.

[diehlpk]

Hi @diehlpk, It looks like you have enough reviewers. I am happy to review this if needed.

@chennachaos I would like to add you as a third reviewer.

[diehlpk]

@editorialbot add @chennachaos as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@chennachaos added to the reviewers list!