Editors and reviewers

[asmeurer]

To submit to PeerJ Computer Science, we need to suggest at least 2 editors and at least 2 reviewers (and oppose any with conflicts of interest). Here are the editors for the "scientific computing and simulation" subject, which seems to be the closest subject fit (I have also listed the paper under the "software engineering" subject).

For reviewers, there are no pre-selected names.

[asmeurer]

Oh, and their policy:

Reviewers must not be in the same institution or have authored a paper in the past 5 years with any of your co-authors.

[ashutoshsaboo]

Ohh Does that mean that, the 2 editors and 2 reviewers whom we select will only review our paper for deciding whether to publish this paper or not? Or what does that mean? @asmeurer

[aterrel]

Suggestions:

People I know:

• William Stein (Sage author)
• Konrad Hinsen (Python scientific author, editor CISE)
• Andreas Kloeckner (Pymbolic author)
• Steven Johnson (Julia author)
• Alan Edelman (Julia author)
• Tim Daly (Axiom author)

Others

• Devs for Ginac (Richard B. Kreckel for example)
• John Verzani (Sympy.jl author)

[aterrel]

If you want I can start emailing these folks and see what we get. Is there a place that peerj describes the editor and review process?

[certik]

Is the review public? Thanks @aterrel for the initiative, that's fine with me, but I'll let @asmeurer to have a final say on this.

[aterrel]

For editors I would put Daniel Katz and Tamara Kolda

[asmeurer]

This is the best page I can find for it https://peerj.com/about/aims-and-scope/cs#peer-review-criteria. If you find a better document on their peer review process let us know.

Regarding the editor suggestions, @scopatz made the same suggestions (Daniel Katz and Tamara Kolda). I will select them.

[certik]

It looks like the reviews are public, for each article you can find all the reviews in the "Peer Review history" link for each article with all the history and editor's comments, e.g.:

https://peerj.com/articles/cs-55/reviews/
https://peerj.com/articles/cs-58/reviews/

I like that. It also looks like the reviewer can choose to be either anonymous, or not (either way the text of the review itself is public).

[scopatz]

+1 to @aterrel's suggestions

[asmeurer]

I also agree with Andy's suggestions.

[certik]

@asmeurer what is the status of this? Were the two reviewers suggested to the journal? What are the next steps?

[asmeurer]

PeerJ notified me that an editor was assigned on June 23 (did not specify who). I don't know if I will receive an additional notification when peer reviewers are found, or only once their review has finished.

[certik]

@asmeurer thank you. If you could keep updating this issue with the progress as you hear things, that would be great.

[asmeurer]

I will. Sorry for not updating you all earlier. I've been focused on other things.