Review.md

@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ Remember that `alpha=1.0` posteriors should look bad for these events - they wou
 | GW191222A | Krishnendu | [link](O3b-Results/GW191222A) |  | <br> Shall we check if we are using the same distance priors for both LI and Bilby runs?  **TB:** we checked and we are using the same distance priors|
 | GW200219A | Krishnendu | [link](O3b-Results/GW200219A) |  | <br> $`\chi_{eff}`$ posterior is different, do we understand this?  **TB**: chi_eff posteriors for bilby-liv look to me very similar to other ones before reweighting. After reweighting it is broader, but it should not be compared with lal posterior (during o3 only 1D A_alpha posterior was reweighted)|
 | GW200202A | Krishnendu | [link](O3b-Results/GW200202A) |  | <br> $`\chi_{eff}`$ posterior is different, do we understand this? <br> <br> I think it will be also good to compare the prior distributions used for LI and Bilby runs to see these differences are caused by the difference in prior. |
-| S191109a | Naresh | [link](O3b-Results/S191109a) |  | <br> Slight difference is observed in the distributions of chirp mass, mass ratio and chi effective in all of these runs. Your comments addressing these would be helpful. |
+| S191109a | Naresh | [link](O3b-Results/S191109a) |  | <br> Slight difference is observed in the distributions of chirp mass, mass ratio and chi effective in all of these runs. Your comments addressing these differences would be helpful. |
 | S191129a | Naresh | [link](O3b-Results/S191129a) |  |  |
 | S191215a | Naresh | [link](O3b-Results/S191215a) |  |  |
 | S200129a | Naresh | [link](O3b-Results/S200129a) |  |  |