Thank you for your thoughtful response. Acknowledging potential biases openly in a public forum is never easy, and in my view, it adds credibility to your words compared to leaving such matters as implicit insinuations.
That said, on page 8, the paper says that 'standard licensing agreements with commercial vendors prohibit public comparison with their offerings.' Given this inherent limitation, what alternative approach could have been taken to enable a more meaningful comparison between CT and CMP?
That said, on page 8, the paper says that 'standard licensing agreements with commercial vendors prohibit public comparison with their offerings.' Given this inherent limitation, what alternative approach could have been taken to enable a more meaningful comparison between CT and CMP?