deletions | additions       diff --git a/section_Statistical_Analysis_label_distance__.tex b/section_Statistical_Analysis_label_distance__.tex  index 8b6c9b2..3815d3a 100644  --- a/section_Statistical_Analysis_label_distance__.tex  +++ b/section_Statistical_Analysis_label_distance__.tex 
...
\section{Statistical Analysis}\label{distance}  RB \& SO (e.g. implications for observations)  We use pseudo-distance metrics to efficiently study differences between all synthetic observations. Section 3 identifies qualitative differences between a run with strong feedback and one that is purely turbulent. Expanding upon this, we now quantify all simulation differences and determine the sensitivities of our the  statistics to stellar mass-loss rates (winds) and rates,  magnetic field strength (local environment). strength, and evolutionary time.  This allows us to check if our the  previously identified features actually pinpoint signatures of feedback, rather than those specifically  corresponding to any combination ofour  simulation parameters. For each statistic, we produce a color-plot showing distances between all simulation pairs. Figures ???, ???, and ??? display all of our the  color-plots. Here, we provide a brief method for analyzing one. Each colored square represents the distance between one simulation pair, denoted by the horizontal and vertical indices. The colorbar denotes the distance values, whose range depends on the statistic. For a complete description of the distance metrics, we refer the reader to Koch et al. (2016). We arrange the simulations in order to easily compare strong wind models (W1) with weaker wind models (W2) or purely-turbulent models (T).%(The ordering also allows to compare weaker wind models with themselves or purely turbulent models).  Table ??? provides a summary of our findings, though which  we discussthem  in \S\ref{Intensity Statistics}, \S\ref{conclude}  sec 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3.