This paper got mixed reviews initially. On the positive side, most of the reviewers agree the idea of this paper is interesting and novel. The results are good. However, on the negative side, they also share concerns on the potentially high computation complexity of the proposed method and clarity on the presentation of this paper. In the author's response, they provide additional experiments that indeed help and two reviewers increase their ratings. However, the concerns on the computation cost and presentation still remain. Reviewers also exchange their opinion in the discussion phase. AC reads the paper and would like to encourage to explore novel idea. The potentially high cost would be an issue of the proposed method but seems addressable in the future. Based on this consideration, AC recommends acceptance. Authors should include their promised revision into the final version and improve the presentation quality.