deletions | additions       diff --git a/FitResults.tex b/FitResults.tex  index b4cb74d..6a5fe92 100644  --- a/FitResults.tex  +++ b/FitResults.tex 
...
As is visible from Table~\ref{tab:FitResults} and appears clearly Fig.~\ref{fig:FitResults}, it is only with the TLEP high-statistics data samples that a model-independent precision systematically below 1\% (and at times approaching the per-mil level), required for the coupling measurements to become sensitive to (multi-)TeV new physics.It is also important to compare the projections of TLEP and ILC to those from the HL-LHC, to evaluate the added value of an $\epem$ Higgs factory after $3~\inab$ of proton-proton collision data.  It is also important to compare the projections of TLEP and ILC to those from the HL-LHC, to evaluate the added value of an $\epem$ Higgs factory after $3~\inab$ of proton-proton collision data.  A truly model-independent fit cannot be performed from proton-proton collision data : the total decay width cannot be determined and the ${\rm H \to c\bar c}$ decay cannot be isolated by the LHC detectors. Additional assumptions thus need to be made for a meaningful comparison with $\epem$ Higgs factories. Here, constraints similar to those used in Ref.~\cite{Barger_Ishida_Keung_2012} are applied : it is assumed that no Higgs boson exotic decays take place, and that deviations of the charm and top couplings are correlated. The CMS report~\cite{cite:CMS} submitted to the recent European Strategy Update Workshop contains estimates of the CMS results with $3~\inab$ with similar hypotheses, in two scenarios: Scenario 1 with all systematic uncertainties unchanged, and Scenario 2, with experimental systematic uncertainties scaling like $1/\sqrt{L}$ and theoretical errors halved. These estimates are displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:HLLHC} and compared to a fit of the TLEP and ILC projections made under the same hypotheses.