tda-mapper submission

[lucasimi]

Submitting Author: (@lucasimi)
All current maintainers: (@lucasimi)
Package Name: tda-mapper
One-Line Description of Package: A Python library implementing the Mapper algorithm for Topological Data Analysis.
Repository Link: https://github.com/lucasimi/tda-mapper-python
Version submitted: v0.9.0
EiC: Szymon Moliński (@SimonMolinsky )
Editor: @yeelauren
Reviewer 1: @sampottinger
Reviewer 2: @aflip
Archive: TBD
JOSS DOI: TBD
Version accepted: TBD
Date accepted (month/day/year): TBD

---

Code of Conduct & Commitment to Maintain Package

• I agree to abide by pyOpenSci's Code of Conduct during the review process and in maintaining my package after should it be accepted.
• I have read and will commit to package maintenance after the review as per the pyOpenSci Policies Guidelines.

Description

• Include a brief paragraph describing what your package does: tda-mapper is a Python library that provides an efficient implementation of the Mapper algorithm, a powerful tool for topological data analysis. The algorithm transforms high-dimensional and complex datasets into graph representations, that are visualized through interactive plots, allowing users to explore hidden patterns, relationships, and structures within the data.

Scope

• Please indicate which category or categories.
  Check out our package scope page to learn more about our
  scope. (If you are unsure of which category you fit, we suggest you make a pre-submission inquiry):

  • Data retrieval
  • Data extraction
  • Data processing/munging
  • Data deposition
  • Data validation and testing
  • Data visualization¹
  • Workflow automation
  • Citation management and bibliometrics
  • Scientific software wrappers
  • Database interoperability

Domain Specific

• Geospatial
• Education

Community Partnerships

If your package is associated with an
existing community please check below:

• Astropy:My package adheres to Astropy community standards
• Pangeo: My package adheres to the Pangeo standards listed in the pyOpenSci peer review guidebook

• For all submissions, explain how and why the package falls under the categories you indicated above. In your explanation, please address the following points (briefly, 1-2 sentences for each):

  This library falls under the categories of "data processing/munging" and "data visualization" because it uses the Mapper algorithm to transform complex datasets into network representations, enabling users to process, analyze, and visually explore underlying structures and relationships.

• Who is the target audience and what are scientific applications of this package?

  This package is aimed at researchers and data scientists engaged in exploratory data analysis. The Mapper algorithm is particularly useful in the early stages of data exploration, helping to uncover patterns and structures that guide further, more detailed analysis. It has been successfully applied in diverse fields, including social sciences, biology, and machine learning, to gain insights into complex datasets.

• Are there other Python packages that accomplish the same thing? If so, how does yours differ?

  Several Python packages, such as GUDHI, giotto-tda, and Kepler Mapper, offer implementations of the Mapper algorithm. However, tda-mapper differs from them by prioritizing performance and scalability in higher-dimensional spaces. Specifically, it efficiently computes Mapper on high-dimensional "lenses" that are computationally challenging for traditional methods. This approach not only enables the handling of larger and more complex datasets but also results in Mapper graphs that are easier to interpret and navigate. The approach used by tda-mapper scales better with dimension, making it faster and more responsive for interactive explorations compared to conventional techniques.

• If you made a pre-submission enquiry, please paste the link to the corresponding issue, forum post, or other discussion, or @tag the editor you contacted:

  This is the link to the pre-submission enquiry: tda-mapper presubmission #219. I should also report that the methodology that this package is based on is explained more deeply in the preprint and is currently under review for publication in a peer-review scientific journal.

Technical checks

For details about the pyOpenSci packaging requirements, see our packaging guide. Confirm each of the following by checking the box. This package:

• does not violate the Terms of Service of any service it interacts with.
• uses an OSI approved license.
• contains a README with instructions for installing the development version.
• includes documentation with examples for all functions.
• contains a tutorial with examples of its essential functions and uses.
• has a test suite.
• has continuous integration setup, such as GitHub Actions CircleCI, and/or others.

Publication Options

• Do you wish to automatically submit to the Journal of Open Source Software? If so:

JOSS Checks

• The package has an obvious research application according to JOSS's definition in their submission requirements. Be aware that completing the pyOpenSci review process does not guarantee acceptance to JOSS. Be sure to read their submission requirements (linked above) if you are interested in submitting to JOSS.
• The package is not a "minor utility" as defined by JOSS's submission requirements: "Minor ‘utility’ packages, including ‘thin’ API clients, are not acceptable." pyOpenSci welcomes these packages under "Data Retrieval", but JOSS has slightly different criteria.
• The package contains a paper.md matching JOSS's requirements with a high-level description in the package root or in inst/.
• The package is deposited in a long-term repository with the DOI:

Note: JOSS accepts our review as theirs. You will NOT need to go through another full review. JOSS will only review your paper.md file. Be sure to link to this pyOpenSci issue when a JOSS issue is opened for your package. Also be sure to tell the JOSS editor that this is a pyOpenSci reviewed package once you reach this step.

Are you OK with Reviewers Submitting Issues and/or pull requests to your Repo Directly?

This option will allow reviewers to open smaller issues that can then be linked to PR's rather than submitting a more dense text based review. It will also allow you to demonstrate addressing the issue via PR links.

• Yes I am OK with reviewers submitting requested changes as issues to my repo. Reviewers will then link to the issues in their submitted review.

Confirm each of the following by checking the box.

• I have read the author guide.
• I expect to maintain this package for at least 2 years and can help find a replacement for the maintainer (team) if needed.

Please fill out our survey

• Last but not least please fill out our pre-review survey. This helps us track
  submission and improve our peer review process. We will also ask our reviewers
  and editors to fill this out.

P.S. Have feedback/comments about our review process? Leave a comment here

Editor and Review Templates

The editor template can be found here.

The review template can be found here.

Footnotes

1. Please fill out a pre-submission inquiry before submitting a data visualization package. ↩

[SimonMolinsky]

Editor in Chief checks

Hi there! Thank you for submitting your package for pyOpenSci
review. Below are the basic checks that your package needs to pass
to begin our review. If some of these are missing, we will ask you
to work on them before the review process begins.

Please check our Python packaging guide for more information on the elements
below.

• Installation The package can be installed from a community repository such as PyPI (preferred), and/or a community channel on conda (e.g. conda-forge, bioconda).
  • The package imports properly into a standard Python environment import package.
• Fit The package meets criteria for fit and overlap.
• Documentation The package has sufficient online documentation to allow us to evaluate package function and scope without installing the package. This includes:
  • User-facing documentation that overviews how to install and start using the package.
  • Short tutorials that help a user understand how to use the package and what it can do for them.
  • API documentation (documentation for your code's functions, classes, methods and attributes): this includes clearly written docstrings with variables defined using a standard docstring format.
• Core GitHub repository Files
  • README The package has a README.md file with clear explanation of what the package does, instructions on how to install it, and a link to development instructions.
  • Contributing File The package has a CONTRIBUTING.md file that details how to install and contribute to the package.
  • Code of Conduct The package has a CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md file.
  • License The package has an OSI approved license.
    NOTE: We prefer that you have development instructions in your documentation too.
• Issue Submission Documentation All of the information is filled out in the YAML header of the issue (located at the top of the issue template).
• Automated tests Package has a testing suite and is tested via a Continuous Integration service.
• Repository The repository link resolves correctly.
• Package overlap The package doesn't entirely overlap with the functionality of other packages that have already been submitted to pyOpenSci.
• Archive (JOSS only, may be post-review): The repository DOI resolves correctly.
• Version (JOSS only, may be post-review): Does the release version given match the GitHub release (v1.0.0)?

---

• Initial onboarding survey was filled out
  We appreciate each maintainer of the package filling out this survey individually. 🙌
  Thank you authors in advance for setting aside five to ten minutes to do this. It truly helps our organization. 🙌

---

---

Editor comments

[SimonMolinsky]

Hi @lucasimi

Your package is in excellent condition; we can move forward! I will start searching for an editor - but you should expect a delay because of the upcoming holidays and New Year's celebrations.

[lucasimi]

Hi @SimonMolinsky, thank you for the update and your commitment. I completely understand about the delay. Please take your time; there's no rush on my side.

[SimonMolinsky]

@lucasimi

Hopefully, we will assign the editor soon and start the review! Thanks for your patience!

[SimonMolinsky]

Hi @lucasimi !

@yeelauren will continue the review process as editor!