deletions | additions       diff --git a/subsection_Intensity_statistics_We_show__.tex b/subsection_Intensity_statistics_We_show__.tex  index 3a4b8ff..3dec9ce 100644  --- a/subsection_Intensity_statistics_We_show__.tex  +++ b/subsection_Intensity_statistics_We_show__.tex 
...
We show the colorplots for all intensity statistics in Figure ???. With the exception of the Cramer statistic, we find that these statistics exhibit strong sensitivities to changes in stellar mass-loss rates. As seen in their colorplots, the largest distances appear when any strong wind model (W1) is compared to either a weak wind model (W2) or a purely turbulent model (TXt0).The Kurtosis, Skewness, and SCF are clear examples of this, as they display a sensitivity trend among pairings. These statistics yield the largest distances between pairs of W1 and TXt0, followed by pairs of W1 and W2. And, they capture similar, weaker sensitivities between pairs of W2 and TXt0.   The sensitivity hierarchy/trend with wind strength is less clear for the PDF and PCA. We find that time evolution randomly impacts the magnitude of these statistics' strong wind distances. Weaker wind comparisons among the PDF appear to be correlated to magnetic field strength, given their structure. This does not occur in the PCA. PCA and SCF.  since its distances for W2are quite small. Thus, it is only weakly sensitive to magnetic field strength. %Weaker wind comparisons appear correlated to changes in magnetic field strength, given their distance trends.   %this blurring is not only noticeable in comparisons involving W1, but also structured in those between weaker wind models. We find the blurring to be associated with time evolution, %(and potentially magnetic field strength),