The paper discusses different learning algorithm for Multi-Agent systems. For that purpose, a few terms are introduced in chapter two, so that the reader has the basic knowledge needed to understand later remarks. The author then goes on to explain the different difficulties in the field of reinforcement learning for Multi-Agent systems. Afterwards, algorithms are introduced, which handle at least one of the difficulties mentioned earlier.
Finally, it seems as if a discussion of these algorithm would follow, but this part is not finished, yet.
The paper has a good structure and is, for the most part, easy to follow. Important terms are introduced early.
On the other hand, one or two chapters are completely missing and a section in chapter three is not finished, yet.
Additionally, some sentences miss words, sometimes even the predicate.
The contents of the paper were clearly separated from other topics. Sentences were, for the most part, short and easy to understand. The passive voice was only used rarely and in appropriate situations.
There are a few things to say about the English of the author:
-Nouns have often been needlessly capitalized,
-“I” was used four times in the abstract,
-and certain things were spelled inconsistently (for instance: use-case vs use case, Machine Learning Algorithm vs Machine Learning algorithm)
Furthermore, there are a few sections that can be merged (2.3-2.5 and maybe 3.3-3.4), to reduce the number of headings on a single page. Additionally, I found some paragraphs which could be divided in smaller paragraphs. I marked them on the print-out of your paper.
Finally, the acronym “MAS” was used without introduction. It is possible to guess it’s meaning, but not every reader may manage to do that.
Other minor improvements include the usage of the Latex math environment in section 2.1 (Usage: $n*m$. Output: n· m in cursive), as well es the adherence of the llncs style guidelines (Subsubsection headings need a dot at the end, headings should be capitalized except for conjunctions, propositions and articles)
Although I listed mainly negative points, don’t worry. As you can see, most of the stuff I have criticized is not about the structure or the content (the important parts) and can easily be fixed.
Major revision. Reasons: A whole chapter is missing, another section is not finished and both grammar and orthography need some love.
I have sent you my feedback via email.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *