Only the first reason is correct (NNs are good at data with dimensional relationships). The second reason is pretty bogus (text/images more graspable). It's va

Only the first reason is correct (NNs are good at data with dimensional relationships). The second reason is pretty bogus (text/images more graspable). It's valid if you're talking about mass media / popular press. But for research papers 1) images / large snippets of text are actually a negative since images take a lot of space and 2) the people doing peer review are expert scientists. They know the benchmarks and the theory.