Review Comment:
Authors have revised the paper which is now much more readable and understandable the before.
The paper is much more clear and more easy to follow. Examples have also been improved and are helping a lot to follow the points of the authors.
The paper illustrates well what could be a neuro-symbolic system and what could mean neuro-symbolic integration. The application is also quite useful and well adapted to the purpose.
Moreover, the presentation of examples has been improved and it is much more easy to read and understand the curves and the results in pages 18 and 19.
The paper can be accepted in the journal.
A few comments are following and should be checked by the authors.
In page 2, line 16, "ego network" is mentioned but not explained.
In page 3, line 23, DS is used but this abbreviation should also be made explicit, such as DS (deductive system).
In page 4, line 25, the sentence is strange, should it be instead: Note that all relationships in KG_comp are NOT necessarily true?
Again writing "true relationships" is a bit misleading, maybe authors should complete as "relationships declared as true (w.r.t. domain knowledge for example)".
in page 5,
in line 9: KGE is a knowledge graph embedding model over KG...
in line 41: KGE is a machine learning model...
Should we consider that this is the same thing? In this case authors should explain why.
line 11: a Horn clause (and not clauseS)
lines 16 and 17: what is a "limited variable"?
|