[PRE REVIEW]: Two R packages for matrix operations using Intel oneMKL

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @R-OneMKL (Pei-Shan Yen)
Repository: https://github.com/R-OneMKL/oneMKL.MatrixCal
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): main
Version: v1.0.0
Editor: Pending
Reviewers: Pending
Managing EiC: Arfon Smith

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/638c3c686d69e9eb7bae81a1138df78b"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/638c3c686d69e9eb7bae81a1138df78b/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/638c3c686d69e9eb7bae81a1138df78b/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/638c3c686d69e9eb7bae81a1138df78b)

Author instructions

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

@R-OneMKL 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]

Couldn't check the bibtex because branch name is incorrect: paper

[editorialbot]

Couldn't check the bibtex because branch name is incorrect: paper

[arfon]

@editorialbot set main as branch

[editorialbot]

Done! branch is now main

[arfon]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[arfon]

@editorialbot check repository

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.02 s (753.7 files/s, 82903.8 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C++                              6             66            354            755
R                                7             71            296            263
Markdown                         2             23              0             74
TeX                              1              4              0             45
YAML                             1              2              4             19
C/C++ Header                     1              1              0              3
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            18            167            654           1159
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 1036

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

mlpack 3: a fast, flexible machine learning library
Submitting author: @rcurtin
Handling editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman (Active)
Reviewers: @rasbt, @MikeInnes, @mlgill
Similarity score: 0.8085

kerasR: R Interface to the Keras Deep Learning Library
Submitting author: @statsmaths
Handling editor: @karthik (Retired)
Reviewers: @kaneplusplus
Similarity score: 0.8060

nnTensor: An R package for non-negative matrix/tensor decomposition
Submitting author: @kokitsuyuzaki
Handling editor: @prashjha (Active)
Reviewers: @Stat-Cook, @oneilsh
Similarity score: 0.8053

Ginkgo: A high performance numerical linear algebra library
Submitting author: @pratikvn
Handling editor: @mjsottile (Retired)
Reviewers: @adam-m-jcbs, @zeroset
Similarity score: 0.8048

iml: An R package for Interpretable Machine Learning
Submitting author: @christophM
Handling editor: @leeper (Retired)
Reviewers: @nhejazi
Similarity score: 0.8020

⚠️ 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 before considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[arfon]

@R-OneMKL – due to the relatively small size of this code, the editors will now discuss if it meets the substantial scholarly effort criterion for review by JOSS. We should get back to you sometime next week. If you want to 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

[arfon]

@editorialbot query scope

[editorialbot]

Submission flagged for editorial review.

[arfon]

@R-OneMKL - thanks for your submission to JOSS. Unfortunately, after review by the JOSS editorial team we've determined that 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.

[arfon]

@editorialbot reject

[editorialbot]

Paper rejected.