While I do like the general underlying idea, there are several severe weaknesses present in this work – leading me to lean towards rejection of the manuscript in its current form. The two main areas of concern are briefly listed here, with details explained in the ‘Questions’ part:
### 1) Lacking quality of the “Domain Transformation” part
This is arguably the KEY part of the paper, and needs significant improvement in two points: Underlying intuition/motivation/justification, as well as technical correctness and clarity. There are several fundamental points that are unclear to me and require significant improvement and clarification; This applies to both clarity in terms of writing but, more importantly, to the quality of the approach and justifications/underlying motivations.
Please see the “Questions” part for details.
### 2) Lacking detail in experiment description:
Description of experimental details would significantly benefit from increased clarity to allow the user to better judge the results, which is very difficult in the manuscript’s current state; See "Questions" for further details.
2) Lacking detail in experiment description: Description of experimental details would significantly benefit from increased clarity to allow the user to better judge the results, which is very difficult in the manuscript’s current state; See "Questions" for further details.