Authors who submit their computational models to the CoMSES Net Computational Model Library can request peer review of their models. If the model passes review, models will be granted a peer reviewed badge and a DOI.
Models must remain private during peer review so that you can continue to adjust your computational model files and metadata to address any reviewer concerns raised during the peer review process. Publishing a codebase release locks the files associated with that release (but not the metadata), so you would need to draft a new release to address any reviewer concerns related to the files included in your codebase release.
The CoMSES Net Computational Model Peer Review process is not intended to be time-intensive and consists of a simple checklist to verify that a computational model’s source code and documentation meets baseline standards derived from good enough practices in the software engineering and scientific communities we serve. Through this process we hope to foster higher quality models shared in the community for reuse, reproducibility, and advancement of the field in addition to supporting the emerging practice of software citation.
Reviewers should evaluate the computational model according to the following criteria:
For previous examples of computational models that have passed peer review, please visit the Computational Model Library.
We do not ask that reviewers assess whether the model is theoretically sound, has scientific merit or is producing correct outputs. That said, reviewers are free to raise any concerns they may have in their private correspondence with the review editors if they detect “red flags” in the code.