Reviewer has chosen not to be AnonymousOverall Impression:
AcceptTechnical Quality of the paper:
Clear noveltyData availability:
All used and produced data (if any) are FAIR and openly available in established data repositoriesLength of the manuscript:
The length of this manuscript is about right
Summary of paper in a few sentences (summary of changes and improvements for
second round reviews):
This is a revision of a paper developing a rather detailed model of sarcasm detection.
Reasons to accept:
I feel that nearly all of my concerns about the first draft have been adressed and the paper has become much more reproducible. I congratulate the authors from the substantial improvements made.
Reasons to reject:
The only issues lingering I see is the following:
* Starting on page 2 or so the authors' literature review reports a bunch of accuracy and f-score numbers from unrelated corpora. As I said in my initial review, these are misleading and should be removed since the authors develop their own corpus. These prior results are uninformative---in fact misleading---and there's no obvious way to put them in context of the current paper, short of having the authors run their system on these corpora.
Meta-Review by Editor
Submitted by Tobias Kuhn on
The reviewers agree that this manuscript should be accepted, with only one remaining issue still to be addressed. Moreover, for the final publication, the dataset should be made available in a persistent way through one of the established third-party data repositories. I recommend Zenodo.org for that. Apart from that, the paper is ready for publication.
Tobias Kuhn (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1267-0234)
Dataset files uploaded on Zenodo.org
Submitted by Richa Sharma on
As per your kind suggestion we have uploaded dataset files on Zenodo.org. Following is the link to the datasets.
Kindly let us know if any other requirement is to be fulfilled.