deletions | additions       diff --git a/Discussion.tex b/Discussion.tex  index e2846d9..87d5fbb 100644  --- a/Discussion.tex  +++ b/Discussion.tex 
...
{\frac{g}{g_{\odot}}} \simeq {\left( \frac{\nu_{\rm{max}}}{\nu_{\rm{max}, \ \odot}} \right)} {\left( \frac{T_{\rm{eff}}}{T_{\rm{eff}, \ \odot}} \right)}^{0.5}.  \end{equation}  However, when \citet{gau13} and \citet{gau14} analyzed the oscillation modes to estimate global asteroseismic parameters, only one set of modes was found. Of the 15 oscillating red giants in eclipsing binaries in the \emph{Kepler} field, KIC 9246715 is the only one with a pair of giant stars (the rest are composed of a giant star and a main sequence star). The oscillation spectrum as well as its representation as an \'echelle diagram is shown in Figure \ref{fig:seismo} (I'LL SEND THE PLOTS). The mode amplitudes are low ($A_{\rm{max}}(l=0) \simeq 15$ ppm, and not 6.6 as erroneously reported by \citealt{gau14}), report and the light curve displays a significant  photometric relative  variability as large as 2\%, and speculate 2\% peak-to-peak. \citet{gau14} speculated  that star spots may be responsible for inhibiting oscillations on the smaller star. star, as they observed on other five systems.  Even though the star's oscillation was analyzed by \citet{gau14}, we reestimated $\nu_{\rm{max}}$ and $\Delta\nu$ in the same way, but by using the whole \textit{Kepler} dataset (Q0 to Q17). Differences with respect to previous estimates are minute but we keep the new ones as reference: $\nu_{\rm{max}} = 106.4 \pm 0.8$ and $\Delta\nu=8.31\pm0.01$. They also report $M = 2.06 \pm 0.13 \ M_{\odot}$ and $R = 8.10 \pm 0.18 \ R_{\odot}$ by assuming $T_{\rm{eff}} = 4857 \ \rm{K}$ and rearranging Equations \ref{density} and \ref{gravity} to yield \begin{equation} \label{radeq}  \left( \frac{R}{R_\odot} \right) \simeq \left( \frac{\nu_{\rm{max}}}{\nu_{\rm{max, \ \odot}}} \right) \left( \frac{\Delta \nu}{\Delta \nu_\odot} \right)^{-2} {\left( \frac{T_{\rm{eff}}}{T_{\rm{eff, \ \odot}}} \right)}^{0.5} 
...