In this task, you are given a paper review. Based on the review, your job is to identify language and generate "en" if the review is in English or generate "es" if the review is in Spanish. Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link].

Input: Consider Input: As you noted for Figure 5 Left, sometimes it seems sufficient to tune learning rates. I see your argument for Figure 6 Right,  but  1) not for all good learning rates make Adam fail, I guess you selected the one where it did (note that Adam was several times faster than Eve in the beginning) 2) I don't buy "Eve always converges" because you show it only for 0.1 and since Eve is not Adam, 0.1 of Adam is not 0.1 of Eve because of d_t.   To my understanding, you define d_t over time with 3 hyperparameters. Similarly, one can define d_t directly. The behaviour of d_t that you show is not extraordinary and can be parameterized. If Eve is better than Adam, then looking at d_t we can directly see whether we underestimated or overestimated learning rates. You could argue that Eve does it automatically but you do tune learning rates for each problem individually anyway.

Output: en


Input: Consider Input: This work reframes paragraph vectors from a generative point of view and in so doing, motivates the existing method of inferring paragraph vectors as well as applying a L2 regularizer on the paragraph embeddings. The work also motivates joint learning of a classifier on the paragraph vectors to perform text classification.  The paper has numerous citation issues both in formatting within the text and the formatting of the bibliography, e.g. on some occasions including first names, on others not. I suggest the authors use a software package like BibTex to have a more consistent bibliography. There seems to be little novelty in this work.   The authors claim that there is no proposed method for inferring unseen documents for paragraph vectors. This is untrue. In the original paragraph vector paper, the authors show that to get a new vector, the rest of the model parameters are held fixed and gradient descent is performed on the new paragraph vector. This means the original dataset is not needed when inferring a paragraph vector for new text. This work seems to be essentially doing the same thing when finding the MAP estimate for a new vector. Thus the only contribution from the generative paragraph vector framing is the regularization on the embedding matrix.  The supervised generative paragraph vector amounts to jointly training a linear classifier on the paragraph vectors, while inference for the paragraph vector is unchanged. For the n-gram based approach, the authors should cite Li et al., 2015.  In the experiments, table 1 and 2 are badly formatted with .0 being truncated. The authors also do not state the size of the paragraph vector. Finally the SGPV results are actually worse than that reported in the original paragraph vector paper where SST-1 got 48.7 and SST-2 got 86.3.  Bofang Li, Tao Liu, Xiaoyong Du, Deyuan Zhang, Zhe Zhao, Learning Document Embeddings by Predicting N-grams for Sentiment Classification of Long Movie Reviews, 2015.

Output: en


Input: Consider Input: Poca información sobre aspectos técnicos utilizados en el desarrollo del sistema.


Output: es