Update on Overleaf.

1 files changed, 3 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/eval.tex b/eval.tex
index 4b07961..976a1ce 100644
--- a/eval.tex
+++ b/eval.tex
@@ -40,7 +40,8 @@
     Intel i++ & $\ge 1$\\
     \bottomrule
   \end{tabular}
-  \caption{Unique bugs found in each tool. \JW{is `all versions' correct here? and should we add version numbers like in the Venn?}\YH{Yes it is actually correct here, I don't mind adding the specific version either though}}
+  \caption{Unique bugs found in each tool. %\JW{is `all versions' correct here? and should we add version numbers like in the Venn?}\YH{Yes it is actually correct here, I don't mind adding the specific version either though}\JW{Ok let's leave it as-is.}
+  }
   \label{tab:unique_bugs}
 \end{table}
 
@@ -111,7 +112,7 @@ Interestingly, as an indicator of reliability of HLS tools, the blue ribbon show
     \node[white] at (2,2.5) {36};
     \node[white] at (4,2.25) {41};
   \end{tikzpicture}
-  \caption{A Sankey diagram that tracks 3645 test-cases through three different versions of Vivado HLS. The ribbons collect the test-cases that pass and fail together. The 3573 test-cases that pass in all three versions are not depicted.
+  \caption{A Sankey diagram that tracks 3645 test-cases through three different versions of Vivado HLS. The ribbons collect the test-cases that pass and fail together. The black bars are labelled with the total number of test-case failures per version. The 3573 test-cases that pass in all three versions are not depicted.
   }\label{fig:sankey_diagram}
 \end{figure}
 % \NR{Why are there missing numbers in the ribbons?}