I found the writing style of this paper to be rather colloquial. For example, they use the word wrapper several times in the beginning of the paper, each time seemingly in a different context with a different meaning. I think they could have simplified the description of their booted wrapper technique.

I also think that the way in which they report their results, in a matter-of-fact way, is good in the sense that they try to present crisp findings, but I think they fall short of providing enough analysis as to why the results are the way they are. Perhaps this is because their method did not do significantly better than the other methods: Figure 4 in which their BWI method is merely "competitive".