From f1e4ebdba3c05e1c5d83eeb338c62fc3227b1a1a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Yann Herklotz <git@yannherklotz.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2021 15:58:09 +0100
Subject: Add new results

---
 proof.tex | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

(limited to 'proof.tex')

diff --git a/proof.tex b/proof.tex
index fe76db8..058969a 100644
--- a/proof.tex
+++ b/proof.tex
@@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ In the following lemma, $\yhfunction{spec\_htl}$ is the top-level specification
 
 \subsubsection{From Specification to Simulation}
 
-To prove that the specification predicate implies the desired forward simulation, we must first define a relation that matches each 3AC state to an equivalent HTL state.  This relation also captures the assumptions made about the 3AC code that we receive from \compcert{}.% so that these assumptions can be used to prove the translations correct.  
+To prove that the specification predicate implies the desired forward simulation, we must first define a relation that matches each 3AC state to an equivalent HTL state.  This relation also captures the assumptions made about the 3AC code that we receive from \compcert{}. % so that these assumptions can be used to prove the translations correct.
 These assumptions then have to be proven to always hold assuming the HTL code was created by the translation algorithm.  Some of the assumptions that need to be made about the 3AC and HTL code for a pair of states to match are:
 
 \begin{itemize}
-- 
cgit 

