ReviewFormat.txt

* Overall Review
Please briefly summarize the main points and contributions of this paper.
xxx

* Paper Strength 
Please provide a list of the strengths of this paper, including but not limited to: innovative and practical methodology, insightful empirical findings or in-depth theoretical analysis, well-structured review of relevant literature, and any other factors that may make the paper valuable to readers. (Maximum length: 2,000 characters) 
(1) xxx
(2) xxx
(3) xxx
...

* Paper Weakness 
Please provide a numbered list of your main concerns regarding this paper (so authors could respond to the concerns individually). These may include, but are not limited to: inadequate implementation details for reproducing the study, limited evaluation and ablation studies for the proposed method, correctness of the theoretical analysis or experimental results, lack of comparisons or discussions with widely-known baselines in the field, lack of clarity in exposition, or any other factors that may impede the reader's understanding or benefit from the paper. Please kindly refrain from providing a general assessment of the paper's novelty without providing detailed explanations. (Maximum length: 2,000 characters) 
(1) xxx
(2) xxx
(3) xxx
...

* Questions To Authors And Suggestions For Rebuttal 
Please provide a numbered list of specific and clear questions that pertain to the details of the proposed method, evaluation setting, or additional results that would aid in supporting the authors' claims. The questions should be formulated in a manner that, after the authors have answered them during the rebuttal, it would enable a more thorough assessment of the paper's quality. (Maximum length: 2,000 characters)
xxx

*Overall score (1-10)
The paper is scored on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the full mark, and 6 stands for borderline accept. Then give the reason for your rating.
xxx