diff --git a/src/background/parsers.pdf b/src/background/parsers.pdf
index 0867609..83491d1 100644
Binary files a/src/background/parsers.pdf and b/src/background/parsers.pdf differ
diff --git a/src/background/parsers.tex b/src/background/parsers.tex
index 0f37371..446dfde 100644
--- a/src/background/parsers.tex
+++ b/src/background/parsers.tex
@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ \subsection{The \texttt{parsley} Library}
 \langle \mathit{atom} \rangle &::= \text{`\texttt{(}'} \; \langle \mathit{expr} \rangle \; \text{`\texttt{)}'} \enspace | \enspace
                                 \langle \mathit{number} \rangle
 \end{align*}
-\caption{The grammar in \textsc{ebnf}.}
+\caption{The grammar in e\textsc{bnf}.}
 \label{fig:simple-grammar-ebnf}
 \end{subfigure}
 \hfill
diff --git a/src/evaluation/evaluation.pdf b/src/evaluation/evaluation.pdf
index 516524d..bbd5beb 100644
Binary files a/src/evaluation/evaluation.pdf and b/src/evaluation/evaluation.pdf differ
diff --git a/src/evaluation/evaluation.tex b/src/evaluation/evaluation.tex
index 2518b68..f0e7d56 100644
--- a/src/evaluation/evaluation.tex
+++ b/src/evaluation/evaluation.tex
@@ -20,8 +20,6 @@ \section{Removing Left-Recursion}\label{sec:eval-leftrec}
   \item How clear was the output? How does it compare to an idiomatic, manually fixed version?
   \item Does the output compile?
 \end{itemize}
-% Given the nature of the transformation, it is difficult to provide quantitative metrics for evaluation, so the focus will be on qualitative aspects.
-% Given the lack of a direct competitor, the evaluation will be based on the author's experience with the tool and the quality of the output produced.
 %
 The following examples assume the existence of a \scala{number} parser, defined the same way as earlier in \cref{sec:background-parsers}:
 \begin{minted}{scala}
@@ -241,6 +239,9 @@ \subsection*{Summary}
 \end{itemize}
 
 % TODO: library ergonomics - see ethan's thesis
+% e.g. Introduce implicit conversions rule -- stunted because no in-editor support
+% want to be able to preview changes in editor, and also apply auto-fixes one by one
+
 % TODO: benchmarks here?
 
 % A large corpus of student WACC parsers is available to evaluate the real-world applicability of \texttt{parsley-garnish}.
diff --git a/src/introduction/introduction.pdf b/src/introduction/introduction.pdf
index e277fe1..cfc96e2 100644
Binary files a/src/introduction/introduction.pdf and b/src/introduction/introduction.pdf differ
diff --git a/src/introduction/introduction.tex b/src/introduction/introduction.tex
index 7732b46..4367521 100644
--- a/src/introduction/introduction.tex
+++ b/src/introduction/introduction.tex
@@ -65,6 +65,9 @@
 A linter with knowledge of the \texttt{parsley} library could help users by providing \emph{relevant} suggestions at the \emph{precise} location of the issue:
 \begin{minted}{scala}
 lazy val expr: Parsley[Float] = (expr, char('+') ~> term).zipped(_ + _)
+\end{minted}
+\vspace{-4ex}
+\begin{minted}[baselinestretch=1]{scala}
 //       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 // Warning: This parser is left-recursive, which will cause an infinite loop when parsing.
 // Suggestion: Refactor using chain combinators from the parsley.expr module,
@@ -77,6 +80,9 @@
 Thus, a linter could also aid users in learning about \texttt{parsley} idioms and best practices:
 \begin{minted}{scala}
 lazy val atom: Parsley[Float] = char('(') ~> expr <~ char(')') | number
+\end{minted}
+\vspace{-4ex}
+\begin{minted}[baselinestretch=1]{scala}
 //                              ^^^^^^^^^            ^^^^^^^^^
 // Info: Explicit usage of the 'char' combinator may not be necessary.
 // Suggestion [auto-fix available]: Use implicit conversions:
@@ -88,6 +94,7 @@
 //                                 ─┬─            ─┬─
 //      Remove char combinators ────┴──────────────┘
 \end{minted}
+% ^ why do the box chars not connect vertically??
 %
 The aim of \texttt{parsley-garnish} is to provide relevant linting rules, like the above, to guide users towards writing improved \texttt{parsley} code.
 With useful hints and automatic fixes, our hypothetical user can be steered towards a correct and idiomatic parser:
@@ -102,7 +109,7 @@
 \end{minted}
 %
 With this definition of \scala{expr}, the parser is able to parse left-associative expressions without left-recursion, and the syntactic noise of the \scala{char} combinators has been removed.
-Executing \scala{expr.parse("1+2*3/4")} now correctly evaluates to \scala{2.5}!
+Executing \scala{expr.parse("1+2*3/4")} now evaluates to \scala{2.5}, as expected!
 
 % Introduces domain-specific lint rules for Parsec-style parser combinator libraries
 % Implementation of these rules for Parsley Scala