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].

[EX Q]: Problemas de Fondo: Los autores presentan los resultados de un proyecto de interoperabilidad entre plataformas, definen los estándares para la creación de contenido, sin embargo, los argumentos utilizados para seleccionar el modelo carecen de validación.  Se esperaría al menos la validación de dos o más plataformas antes de definir y concluir que lo propuesto es la mejor selección.  La encuesta aplicada a 50 personas no describe en que plataformas se realizó y a qué tipo de público objetivo.   Problemas de Forma: - Palabras sin tilde: último, validó, módulo. - Inicio de frases sin mayúsculas. - No se respeta el márgen en la tabla. - Los títulos de las figuras se encuentran en páginas diferentes. - La enumeración de los dispositivos es confusa y sin formato.
[EX A]: es

[EX Q]: This paper is a well written paper. This paper can be divided into 2 parts: 1.Adversary training on ImageNet  2.Empirical study of label leak, single/multiple step attack, transferability and importance of model capacity  For part [1], I don’t think training without clean example will not make reasonable ImageNet level model. Ian’s experiment in “Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examples” didn't use BatchNorm, which may be important for training large scale model. This part looks like an extension to Ian’s work with Inception-V3 model. I suggest to add an experiment of training without clean samples.  For part [2], The experiments cover most variables in adversary training, yet lack technical depth.  The depth, model capacity experiments can be explained by regularizer effect of adv training;  Label leaking is novel; In transferability experiment with FGSM, if we do careful observe on some special MNIST FGSM example, we can find augmentation effect on numbers, which makes grey part on image to make the number look more like the other numbers. Although this effect is hard to be observed with complex data such as CIFAR-10 or ImageNet, they may be related to the authors' observation "FGSM examples are most transferable".    In this part the authors raise many interesting problems or guess, but lack theoretical explanations.   Overall I think these empirical observations are useful for future work.
[EX A]: en

[EX Q]: •I recommend to change the paper title in order to be according to paper‘ body •Review the English grammar, some but not all of the errors founded in the review are:  •Abstract   o what does it mean that for them?--> what does it mean that for them?   o …utilized to represent its appropriateness.--> …utilized to represent their appropriateness.   •Introducction   o …has like first phase… --> ?   o auscultating --> is it a verb?   •Background   o A systematic mapping study is a methodology that is used --> A systematic mapping study is a methodology used   o …of existing research on performance evaluation… -->…of existing research on the performance evaluation…   o Only Dieste and Juristo’s work [10] deals --> Only the work of Dieste and Juristo [10] deals   •Methodology   o Review the use of –ly with the verb to be   o Third question: What kind of studies does use with a higher frequency certain constructs for   o appropriateness of techniques? --> ? review the types question structure   •Classification schema   o In order to answer the research questions, the literature review focused --> literature or mapping?   •Analysis of the result   o in Figure 1 en DCM format -->in Figure 1 en DCM format.   o article --> paper   •Conclusions and future works   o For this reason, it is necessary that more proposals are carried out to help --> For this reason, it is necessary to carry out more proposals to help   •Figures: be careful on the figure´s title, the title must be following the figure  •Type of studies  •Paragraph after figure 5: Experimental (paragraph) o experiment (figure)  •Techniques considered: I recommend performing a mapping between domains and techniques and or with the constructors and show the a graphic of the results instead of the figure 8
[EX A]:
en