按审稿意见模板从总体评价、论文优点、论文不足、给作者的问题与 rebuttal 建议、总分评分五个维度输出评审，每条不超过 2000 字，适合编辑与审稿人撰写结构化评审意见。

中文版提示词

请按以下模板撰写这篇论文的审稿意见：

* 总体评价
请简要总结这篇论文的主要观点与贡献。
xxx

* 论文优点
请列出论文的优点，包括但不限于：方法与思路创新且实用、实证发现深刻或理论分析深入、文献综述结构清晰，以及其他使论文对读者有价值的因素。（最多 2000 字）
(1) xxx
(2) xxx
(3) xxx

* 论文不足
请以编号列表列出你对论文的主要担忧（以便作者逐条回应）。包括但不限于：复现研究的实现细节不足、所提方法的评估与消融研究有限、理论分析或实验结果正确性、缺乏与领域公认基线的对比或讨论、表述不够清晰，或其他可能妨碍读者理解或获益的因素。请勿在没有详细说明的情况下笼统评价论文新颖性。（最多 2000 字）
(1) xxx
(2) xxx
(3) xxx

* 给作者的问题与 rebuttal 建议
请以编号列表列出具体、清晰的问题，涉及所提方法的细节、评估设置或有助于支撑作者结论的补充结果。问题应能在作者 rebuttal 回答后，帮助你更全面地评估论文质量。（最多 2000 字）

* 总分（1-10）
论文按 1-10 分评分，10 分为满分，6 分为 borderline accept。请给出评分并说明理由。
xxx

论文内容：[在此粘贴论文]

英文版提示词

Please write a review of this paper using the following template:

* Overall Review
Briefly summarize the main points and contributions of this paper.
xxx

* Paper Strength
Provide a numbered list of the strengths of this paper, including but not limited to: innovative and practical methodology, insightful empirical findings or in-depth theoretical analysis, a well-structured review of relevant literature, and any other factors that make the paper valuable to readers. (Maximum length: 2,000 characters)
(1) xxx
(2) xxx
(3) xxx

* Paper Weakness
Provide a numbered list of your main concerns about this paper (so the authors can respond to each individually). These may include, but are not limited to: inadequate implementation details for reproducing the study, limited evaluation and ablation studies, the correctness of the theoretical analysis or experimental results, lack of comparison or discussion with widely recognized baselines, lack of clarity in exposition, or any other factors that may impede the reader's understanding or benefit. Please refrain from giving a general assessment of the paper's novelty without detailed explanations. (Maximum length: 2,000 characters)
(1) xxx
(2) xxx
(3) xxx

* Questions To Authors And Suggestions For Rebuttal
Provide a numbered list of specific and clear questions about the details of the proposed method, the evaluation setting, or additional results that would help support the authors' claims. After the authors answer them in the rebuttal, these questions should enable a more thorough assessment of the paper's quality. (Maximum length: 2,000 characters)

* Overall Score (1-10)
Score the paper on a scale of 1 to 10, where 10 is full marks and 6 means borderline accept. Give the score and the reason for your rating.
xxx

Paper content: [paste the paper here]

🛠️ **适用 AI 工具**：ChatGPT、Claude、Kimi、豆包、DeepSeek、通义千问