hello

------

1. **原文：**

   > “The objective of this research is to highlight the potential advantages of iHQGAN in terms of parameter efficiency, rather than pursuing absolute performance that surpasses complex and advanced classical models.”

   **审稿人读后感：**

   - **优点：** 文章开门见山，明确说明研究关注点在于“参数效率”，而非纯粹追求超越现有经典方法的性能。
   - **建议：** “complex and advanced classical models” 可以简化为 “state-of-the-art classical models” 或 “advanced baselines” 以提高简洁度。

   **建议修改：**

   > “Our goal is to demonstrate iHQGAN’s parameter-efficiency advantages, rather than to outperform state-of-the-art classical models in absolute terms.”

------

1. **原文：**

   > “Therefore for a more meaningful evaluation of this efficiency advantage, we chose to compare iHQGAN against baseline models that are designed to complete tasks while using the minimum number of parameters.”

   **审稿人读后感：**

   - **优点：** 很好地呼应了“效率”这一研究主旨。
   - **建议：** “complete tasks while using the minimum number of parameters” 有些啰嗦，可以改为 “lightweight baselines” 或 “minimal-parameter baselines”。

   **建议修改：**

   > “Accordingly, we compare iHQGAN to lightweight baselines explicitly optimized for minimal parameter counts.”

------

1. **原文：**

   > “To accommodate the varying complexities of different tasks, we dynamically adjusted the number of channels of CycleGAN.”

   **审稿人读后感：**

   - **优点：** 说明了经典模型会根据任务进行调参。
   - **建议：** “dynamically adjusted” 听起来像自动化过程，其实是人工选择，建议改为 “we varied”。并可补充如“在保持总体参数量最小化的前提下”的说明。

   **建议修改：**

   > “For each task, we varied CycleGAN’s channel count to match its complexity while keeping the overall parameter count minimal.”

------

1. **原文：**

   > “Our objective is to achieve acceptable generation quality while minimizing the number of model parameters.”

   **审稿人读后感：**

   - **优点：** 强调了“生成质量”与“参数量最小化”这两大目标。
   - **建议：** “acceptable” 太主观，应给出定量阈值（例如 FID<30）或改为“visually comparable”，显得更严谨。

   **建议修改：**

   > “Our aim was to maintain generation quality—visually comparable to the literature—while using as few parameters as possible.”

------

1. **原文：**

   > “For example, as Edge Detection is more complex compared to other tasks, it requires more channels.”

   **审稿人读后感：**

   - **优点：** 用实例说明了不同任务下的通道数差异。
   - **建议：** “more complex” 应说明“复杂”具体指什么，比如高频细节更多；“requires” 也太绝对，改为“we allocated more channels” 更准确。

   **建议修改：**

   > “For instance, because edge-to-photo translation involves fine, high-frequency details, we allocated more channels to that task than to, say, sketch colorization.”

------

### 整体印象

- **清晰与自信：** 文中多次强调效率优势，但用词如 “acceptable” 或 “requires” 显得有些笼统，建议用“visually comparable”、“minimal parameters”等更量化、客观的描述。
- **语气平衡：** 需要说明基线模型并非过度调优，仅是“足够完成任务”，但又不能显得随意。以上修改集中在“符合文献质量”、“最小参数”上，而非“刚好够用”，从而在论文中显得更有说服力。
- **细节层次：** 审稿人会想知道各任务下具体的通道数或参数预算，建议在正文或附录中列出相应表格，以证明选择不是随意的。

通过以上调整，文章在描述经典基线设计时会显得更加严谨、自信，也更易获得审稿人认可。