By Anonymous User
Review Details
Reviewer has chosen to be Anonymous
Overall Impression: Good
Content:
Technical Quality of the paper: Good
Originality of the paper: Yes, but limited
Adequacy of the bibliography: Yes
Presentation:
Adequacy of the abstract: Yes
Introduction: background and motivation: Good
Organization of the paper: Satisfactory
Level of English: Satisfactory
Overall presentation: Good
Detailed Comments:
The revised version of the paper has been considerably improved and the authors have managed to address the reviewers' comments as outlined below:
- The examples added in Sections 2 and 4 help to position the role of the proposed model within real-world scenarios of the traffic domain.
- The updated sections 2, 3, and 4 offer a review of previous research, enhanced by the inclusion of a new Figure 2. This figure schematically shows two main architectural patterns in neuro-symbolic methods for robust reasoning.
- The updated discourse in Section 5 further strengthens the position paper by addressing the limitations and clarifying the drawbacks of NeSy reasoning within the context of traffic scenarios.
In light of the aforementioned updates, I recommend accepting the position paper.