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: This paper is motivated by the ability that human's visual system can recognize contents of environment by from critical features, and tried to investigate whether neural networks can also have this kind of ability.  Specifically, the paper proposed to use Auto-Encoder (AE) as the network to reconstruct the low fidelity of visual input. Moreover, similar to Mnih et al. (2014),  the paper also proposed to use a recurrent fashion to mimic the sequential behavior the  human visual system.   I think the paper is well motivated. However, there are several concerns: 1. The baselines of the paper are too weak. Nearest neighbor, bilinear, bicubic and cubic interpolations without any learning procedure are of course performed worse than AE based models. The author should compare with the STOA methods such as

Output: en


Input: Consider Input: Approaches like adaptive dropout also have the binary mask as a function of input to a neuron very similar to the proposed approach. It is not clear, even from the new draft, how the proposed approach differs to Adaptive dropout in terms of functionality. The experimental validation is also not extensive since comparison to SOTA is not included.

Output: en


Input: Consider Input: This work investigates the performance of transfer learning from resource-rich setup (BookTest, CNN/Daily Mail corpora) to low-resource (bAbI, SQuAD benchmarks) settings. Experiments show poor improvements in 0-shot learning. However, when the model is exposed to few training instances some improvements are observed.  The claims made here require a more comprehensive analysis. I criticize the use of bAbI as a low-resource real-world scenario. bAbI is designed as a unit test and is far from representing many natural language phenomena. Thus, the claims related to bAbI can only be weak evidence for questioning transfer learning high-resource to low-resource in real-world scenarios. I highly recommend using recently proposed real-world scenarios [1,2].  More importantly, the work does not explain why and how do we get improvement using transfer learning. They remotely address this by hypothesizing the knowledge of transfer is not just encoded in embeddings but also in the model. Considering the related work [3], these claims bring a marginal novelty and still "how and why" should be central in this work.    [1]


Output: en