From: ICLR.cc/2022/Workshop/GTRL/Paper4/Authors
title: Response
comment: In the full version of our paper (https://arxiv.org/abs/2202.04579), the model by Hansen & Gebhart is discussed at great length in the main text of the paper and even has a whole section dedicated to its theoretical analysis. Because the paper had to be significantly compressed for the workshop, all these analyses and comparisons, together with many other parts of the paper, have been moved to the appendix (see Appendix C and G). In this process, we have accidentally omitted citing their paper in the main text of the workshop version, but we will certainly do so in the final version.

From: ICLR.cc/2022/Workshop/GTRL/Paper4/Area_Chair_ZbDx
title: Prior work should be cited in place and the differences between this work and prior work should be explained clearly.
comment: 
I read the paper and also visited again the prior work of Hansen & Gebhart. It seems that there are many areas of overlap between the two and it is not clear what the contribution of this paper versus prior work. It is very important that the authors explain very clearly what their contribution are in contrast to other work in place. For instance, when you give a definition that is inspired/extracted from the prior work, it must be mentioned in place and not moved to an obscure area in the prior work section (only). This way the reader understands who did what exactly.

From: ICLR.cc/2022/Workshop/GTRL/Program_Chairs
title: Paper Decision
decision: Accept (Spotlight)
comment: Reviewers unanimously suggested a spotlight presentation. We are happy to follow this recommendation and encourage the authors to use the feedback to improve their paper before the start of the workshop.