Remnant-fits.md

@@ -153,10 +153,10 @@ Comments on the revised version
 > The _final_from_initial() function might also include IMRPhenomD as an option, interfacing with the Husa et al. fits used in this waveform.
 
 --> Let's revisit that function as a 4th step after adding spin evolution and surrogates, for producing the IMRPhenomPv3HM/SEOBNRv4PHM results in the 190521 implications paper.
-* [ ] I'd prefer the names switched around, e.g. non_evolved_final_mass_source -> final_mass_source_non_evolved which would put the important part first 
+* [x] I'd prefer the names switched around, e.g. non_evolved_final_mass_source -> final_mass_source_non_evolved which would put the important part first  
 --> done in f4ed12dd01c5d33e66e5ce2430bc49b0db317e9a
 * [ ]  in _final_spin_of_merger you do a manual projection in the non_precessing case. Couldn't you just call _bbh_final_spin_precessing_using_non_precessing_fit here?
-* [ ]  Also I'm somewhat confused now when/where the explicit fit arguments are passed, and when not. From the main generate_all_posterior_samples, it calls e.g. _final_spin_of_merger, which then calls final_spin_of_merger, which then has defaults method="NR", approximant="SEOBNRv4", NRfit="average". So it currently always uses those defaults, is that right? Any other options would be a future MR?  
+* [x]  Also I'm somewhat confused now when/where the explicit fit arguments are passed, and when not. From the main generate_all_posterior_samples, it calls e.g. _final_spin_of_merger, which then calls final_spin_of_merger, which then has defaults method="NR", approximant="SEOBNRv4", NRfit="average". So it currently always uses those defaults, is that right? Any other options would be a future MR?  
 --> answer from Charlie: "Yes so it currently uses those defaults. And yes, for interests of time, I will save other options for a future MR."
 
 ## Related MRs