deletions | additions       diff --git a/results.tex b/results.tex  index 6a928b4..6786d85 100644  --- a/results.tex  +++ b/results.tex 
...
Figure \ref{fig:mass_pdfs} shows the superimposed, one-dimensional marginal posterior PDFs and cumulative density functions (CDFs) for the chirp mass (centered on each mean) and mass ratio for all $250$ events. Also shown are the PDFs and CDFs averaged over all $250$ posteriors, representing a typical event's posterior distributions. Chirp-mass distributions are usually well approximated by normal distributions about the mean, while mass ratio estimates have broad support across most of the prior range.  To trace individual parameter uncertainties across the population we use the fractional uncertainties $\sigma_{\{\mathcal{M}_\mathrm{c},~q\}}/\{\langle\mathcal{M}_\mathrm{c}\rangle,~\langle q\rangle\}$, where $\sigma_x$ and $\langle x\rangle$ are the standard deviation and mean of the distributions respectively.Figure \ref{fig:mass_std_snr} shows the distribution of chirp-mass and mass-ratio fractional uncertainties, with colors corresponding to the S/N recovered by the detection pipeline.  The average fractional uncertainties in chirp mass and mass ratio for the simulated population are $0.0675\%$ and $28.7\%$. The fractional uncertainties for both the chirp mass and the mass ratio both decrease as S/N increases as shown in \ref{fig:Mc_q_std_snr}, which also shows results from the non-spinning analysis. As expected from Fisher Matrix studies (\citet[e.g.]{FinnChernoff}), all except the $\sigma_q/\langle q\rangle$ from the spinning analysis appear to be inversely proportional to the S/N: this is better fit as $\propto \rho^{-1/2}$. The mass-ratio uncertainty from the spinning analysis does not improve as rapidly with increasing S/N as a consequence of the mass--spin degeneracy.   
...