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].

Paper fácil de leer y bien escrito.  Está en la línea de los trabajos de INFONOR.  Sin embargo, no queda claro cómo aplica la "Teoría de la relevancia", es demasiado escueto en este ámbito del artículo que a mi parecer es lo más importante. Por lo que no es posible dar una opinión certera sobre el trabajo.  Se sugiere expandir la sección 2.2, en lo referente a cómo los aspectos para determinar la relevancia son utilizados o mezclados para determinar si una "news" es relevante o no.  La herramienta elaborada es interesante como también los elementos utilizados en su desarrollo.
es

Authors' response well answered my questions. Thanks.  Evaluation not changed.  ###  This paper proposes a neural model for generating tree structure output from scratch. The model does 1) separate the recurrence between depths and siblings; 2) separate the topology and label generation, and outperforms previous methods on a benchmark IFTTT dataset. Compared to previous tree-decoding methods, the model avoids manually annotating subtrees with special tokens, and thus is a very good alternative to such problems. The paper does solid experiments on one synthetic dataset, and outperforms alternative methods on one real-world IFTTT dataset.   There are couple of interesting results in the paper that I believe is worth further investigation. Firstly, on the synthetic dataset, the precision drops rapidly with the number of nodes. Is it because that the vector representation of the sequential encoder fails to provide sufficient information of long sequences, such that the tree decoder can not do a good job? Or is it because that such tree decoder is not tolerant to the long sequence input, i.e., large tree structure? I believe that it is important to understand this before a better model can be developed. For example, if it is the fault of encoder, maybe an attention layer can be added, as in a seq-to-seq model, to preserve more information of the input sequence.   Moreover, besides only showing how the precision changes with the number of nodes in the tree, it might be interesting to investigate how it goes with 1) number of depths; 2) number of widths; 3) symmetricity; etc. Moreover, as greedy search is used in decoding, it might be interesting to see how it helps, if it does, to use beam-search in tree decoding.   On the IFTTT dataset, listing more statistics about this dataset might be helpful for better understanding the difficulty of this task. How deep are the trees? How large are the vocabularies on both language and program sides?  The paper is well written, except for minor typo as mentioned in my pre-review questions.   In general, I believe this is a solid paper, and more can be explored in this direction. So I tend to accept it.
en

El trabajo compara cuatro arquitecturas de navegación autónoma para robots móviles, las arquitecturas reactivo puro, redes neuronales, lógica difusa y una arquitectura hibrida neuro-difusa.  EL trabajo está bien planteado, el trabajo experimental parece replicable y los resultados presentados suenan coherenten.  El principal aspecto a mejorar sería el análisi/discusion de los resultados, el cual se puede desarrollar más.

es