Review Comment:
Thanks to the authors for providing a color-coded paper and a thorough cover letter. I do really appreciate your effort! The paper got significantly improved and thus, hopefully will achieve a significant impact in the DH community.
# Long-term stable URL for resources assess:
The paper presents a novel DNN model for QA over genealogical data. Neither the raw GEDCOM data, nor the KG, nor the Gen-SQuAD data nor the fine-tuned QA is publicly available - due to GDPR constraints as the authors explain in their cover letter. None of the criteria below can be assessed due to being protected under the European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and Israeli Protection of Privacy Regulations. The model, the vocabulary, tokenizer config, special chars mapping, and other configurations are available to the reviewers.
The new version of the paper allows replicability in a sense, that users would need to use their model, the presented model, and their dataset to calculate numbers. Still, the numbers from the paper cannot be reproduced but that is not a big issue in this case-
The new assessment of the long-term stable URL (which is currently not long-term stable) is: (A) A READMe, example file, and example code are available.. (B) it depends, see above, (C) yes, (D) given the paper. yes. Overall, the authors did a good job of enhancing the resource material.
# Review
The authors propose an end-to-end QA approach for the field of genealogy, a first in the field. The authors use existing semi-structured data (RDF+full-text) and convert it into a form that is suitable for machine-reading/comprehension algorithms.
## Introduction
The introduction reads well and allows laypersons to get familiar with the problem at hand. The motivation and the contributions are clear.
## Related Work
The related work section is convincing and covers all standard literature for DNNs as well as QA. It is also a good read for beginners, as it introduces all main concepts in detail. Figures one, four, and five help to understand the standard as well as the proposed QA pipeline.
## Method
The new version of the chapter reads really well!
## Experimental design
The experimental design section is also well-written and easy to follow.
## Results
The results section is quite easy to understand and up to par. An ablation study was performed on the input parameter (degree).
|