1.This paper lacks novelty and is only a combination of some existing approaches, such as Qu et al. (2020). Moreover, I find that the equations are similar.
2.The motivation is not clear at all. The introduction should be carefully revised to make this paper easy to follow.
3.I find the experimental analysis is vague, and why the model works better is not clear. No case studies and no detailed ablation analysis.
2.The motivation is not clear at all. The introduction should be carefully revised to make this paper easy to follow.