diff --git a/3-research-approach/approach.tex b/3-research-approach/approach.tex
index 661abbf..1c6e898 100644
--- a/3-research-approach/approach.tex
+++ b/3-research-approach/approach.tex
@@ -421,12 +421,9 @@ We classify continuous controllers into three types based on their objectives:
 transitory, stabilizing, and expulsory. Each type has distinct verification
 requirements that determine which formal methods tools are appropriate.
 
-\dasinline{
-  \begin{itemize}
-    \item Add figure showing the relationship between entry/exit/safety sets
-    \item Mention assume guarantee compositional stuff and how that fits in here
-  \end{itemize}
-}
+\dasinline{(1) Add figure showing the relationship between entry/exit/safety
+sets. (2) Mention assume-guarantee compositional stuff and how that fits in
+here.}
 
 \subsubsection{Transitory Modes}
 
@@ -673,7 +670,7 @@ The Emerson collaboration strengthens this work in two ways. Access to
 system experts at Emerson ensures that implementation details of the Ovation
 platform are handled correctly. Direct industry collaboration also provides an
 immediate pathway for technology transfer and alignment with practical
-deployment requirements.}\splitnote{Kapuria 2025 validates hybrid control on
+deployment requirements.\splitnote{Kapuria 2025 validates hybrid control on
 SmAHTR: formal verification (d$\mathcal{L}$ + reachability, pp.37-70) proved
 safe PHX maintenance scenario, then Simulink demo confirmed (pp.70-72). This
 two-tier approach (formal proof + simulation validation) strengthens your