relevant to the NeurIPS community " (R1) and to be addressing " a well-motivated problem " (R3) in " an important area "

We thank the reviewers for their useful and thoughtful feedback. We are glad to see that our work was found " highly That is, " the experiments show that the proposed method outperforms the baselines and We address the reviewers' comments below and ' we refer to our method for noisy inference. " How does the estimation error [of Will it change the claims of the paper? Thus, our claims are unaffected. While we share the reviewers' desire for convergence guarantees, we also note that Thus, we go from Eq. 7 to Eq. 8 by swapping Re. the noiseless case, see Figure 1 In Eq. 7, the prior density is included in The ablation studies are mentioned in the text, and fully reported in the Supplement (E.3, 'Lesion study').