diff --git a/draft.tex b/draft.tex
index a9bb747..d512e1d 100644
--- a/draft.tex
+++ b/draft.tex
@@ -283,14 +283,15 @@
 where ${\cal{N}}_{\lambda}^{(\ell)}$ is a normalisation factor, and 
 ${\cal{F}}^{(T)}_{\lambda}(q^{2})$ and $\mathcal{H}_\lambda(q^{2})$ 
 are referred to ``local'' and ``non-local'' hadronic matrix elements, respectively.  
-{\color{red} While the form factors ${\cal{F}}^{(T)}_{\lambda}(q^{2})$ parametrise 
-the fact that the interaction happens inside the hadrons},
+The ${\cal{F}}^{(T)}_{\lambda}(q^{2})$ are form factors, 
+%While the form factors ${\cal{F}}^{(T)}_{\lambda}(q^{2})$ parametrise 
+%the fact that the interaction happens inside the hadrons},
 %While the form factors ${\cal{F}}^{(T)}_{\lambda}(q^{2})$ can be taken from~\cite{Straub:2015ica}\footnote{In order 
 %to guarantee a good agreement between Light-Cone Sum Rules~\cite{Ball:1998kk,Khodjamirian:2006st} 
 %and Lattice results~\cite{Becirevic:2006nm,Horgan:2013hoa}, 
 %sure full agreement among the LCSRs and Lattice results.
 %uncertainties on the form factors parameters are doubled with respect to Ref.~\cite{Straub:2015ica}},
-the $\mathcal{H}_\lambda(q^{2})$ encode the aforementioned non-factorisable
+while $\mathcal{H}_\lambda(q^{2})$ encode the aforementioned non-factorisable
 hadronic contributions and
 are described using two complementary parametrisations~\cite{Bobeth:2017vxj,Hurth:2017sqw} - 
 for brevity only a subset of results is shown for the latter approach.
@@ -329,8 +330,8 @@
 and fixed to its SM value, given its universal coupling to photons
 and the strong constraint from radiative $B$ decays~\cite{Paul:2016urs}. 
 In the following, all the right-handed WCs are fixed to their SM values, \textit{i.e.} $\WC_i^{\prime\,(\mu,e)} = 0$,
-{\color{red} while a sensitivity study on the determination of the WCs $\WC_9^{\prime\,(\mu)}$ and  $\WC_{10}^{\prime\,(\mu)}$
-is detailed in the appendix.}
+while sensitivity studies on the determination of the WCs $\WC_9^{\prime\,(\mu)}$ and  $\WC_{10}^{\prime\,(\mu)}$
+are detailed in the appendix.
 
 Signal-only ensembles of pseudo-experiments are generated with
 sample size corresponding roughly to the yields foreseen in LHCb Run-II [$8\,$fb$^{-1}$] and future upgrades 
@@ -353,10 +354,10 @@
 Within the SM setup the Wilson coefficients are set to  
 $\mathcal{C}^{\rm{SM}}_9 = 4.27$, $\mathcal{C}^{\rm{SM}}_{10} = - 4.17$ and $\mathcal{C}^{\rm{SM}}_7 = -0.34$ (see~\cite{Bobeth:2017vxj} and references therein), 
 corresponding to a fixed renormalisation scale of $\mu = 4.2\,$GeV.
-{\color{red} This baseline model is modified for two NP benchmark points (BMP), 
+This baseline model is modified for two NP benchmark points (BMP), 
 $\Delta\WC_9 = - 1$ and $\Delta\WC_9 = - \Delta\WC_{10} = - 0.7$,
-respectively referred to as \texttt{BMP}$_{\WC_9}$ and \texttt{BMP}$_{\WC_{9,10}}$, 
-where NP is inserted only in the case of muons, \textit{i.e.} $\WC_i^{(e)} = \WC_i^{\rm{SM}}$.}
+referred respectively to as \texttt{BMP}$_{\WC_9}$ and \texttt{BMP}$_{\WC_{9,10}}$,  
+where NP is inserted only in the case of muons, \textit{i.e.} $\WC_i^{(e)} = \WC_i^{\rm{SM}}$.
 %This baseline model is modified in the case of muons for two NP benchmark points (BMP), 
 %\textit{i.e.} $\WC_9^{(e)} = \WC^{\rm{SM}}_9 = \WC^{(\mu)}_9 + 1$ and 
 %{\color{red} $\WC^{\rm{NP}(\mu)}_9 = - 1$ }
@@ -391,10 +392,10 @@
 
     %
 \end{enumerate}
-{\color{red}On the other hand, form factors parameters are taken from~\cite{Straub:2015ica} and, in order 
+On the other hand, form factors parameters are taken from~\cite{Straub:2015ica} and, in order 
 to guarantee a good agreement between Light-Cone Sum Rules~\cite{Ball:1998kk,Khodjamirian:2006st} 
 and Lattice results~\cite{Becirevic:2006nm,Horgan:2013hoa}, 
-their uncertainties are doubled with respect to Ref.~\cite{Straub:2015ica}.}
+their uncertainties are doubled with respect to Ref.~\cite{Straub:2015ica}.
 %
 %The stability of the model and the convergency to the global minimum is enforced by
 %repeating the fit with randomised starting parameters; 
@@ -428,11 +429,11 @@
 %Furthermore, we note that, as commonly stated in the literature (see \textit{e.g.} recent review in Ref.~\cite{Capdevila:2017ert}),  
 %the determination of $\WC_{10}^{(\mu,e)}$ is insensitive to the lack of knowledge on the 
 %non-local hadronic effects and thus independent of any model assumption.
-
-{\color{red}We note that, as commonly stated in the literature (see \textit{e.g.} recent review in Ref.~\cite{Capdevila:2017ert}),  
+%
+We note that, as commonly stated in the literature (see \textit{e.g.} recent review in Ref.~\cite{Capdevila:2017ert}),  
 the determination of $\WC_{10}^{(\mu,e)}$ is insensitive to the lack of knowledge on the 
 non-local hadronic effects. Nevertheless, its precision is still bounded to the uncertainties on the form factors, 
-that are found to be the limiting factor by the time of \lhcb Upgrade [$50\,$fb$^{-1}$].}
+that are found to be the limiting factor by the end of Run-II. 
 %
 \begin{figure}[bth!]
 %\begin{center}
@@ -465,9 +466,10 @@
 Both LHCb Upgrade and Belle II experiments have comparable sensitivities (within $8.0-10\,\sigma$), 
 while LHCb High-Lumi has an overwhelming significance.  
 These unprecedented datasets will not only yield insights on this phenomena but also 
-enable a deeper understanding of the nature of NP,
-{\color{red}in fact, the clear advantage of the proposed pseudo-observables $\Delta\WC_i$ is that they are 
-insensitive to both local and non-local hadronic uncertainties.}
+enable a deeper understanding of the nature of NP - 
+insensitive to both local and non-local hadronic uncertainties.
+%The clear advantage of the proposed pseudo-observables $\Delta\WC_i$ is that they are 
+%insensitive to both local and non-local hadronic uncertainties.}
 %Note that these unprecedented dataset will enable insight towards the nature of NP. 
 %
 %the \lhcb Run II, $7.6(8.4)\,\sigma$ for \belle II 50~ab$^{-1}$ dataset and 
@@ -491,13 +493,15 @@
 }
 \end{figure}
 
-{\color{red}As mentioned above, experimental resolution effects and detector acceptance/efficiency 
-are ignored in this work, as they would require additional information from the current \textit{B}-physics
-experiments. Nevertheless, a first preliminary study}
+Experimental resolution and detector acceptance/efficiency effects  
+are not considered in this work; 
+further information from current (non-public) or planned \textit{B}-physics experiments are necessary to extend this discussion. 
+%as they would require additional information from the current \textit{B}-physics experiments. 
+Nevertheless, preliminary studies  
 %Modelling detector effects such as \qsq and angles resolution, detector acceptance/efficiency, 
 %is hardly possible without access to (non-public) information of the current 
 %\textit{B}-physics experiments.
-on the impact of a finite \qsq resolution is performed 
+on the impact of a finite \qsq resolution are performed 
 assuming a \qsq-constant asymmetric smearing of the di-lepton invariant mass 
 in the electron mode; the size and asymmetry of such smearing is naively chosen
 to reproduce the mass fits of Ref.~\cite{Aaij:2017vbb}.
@@ -515,9 +519,9 @@
 %description of the non-local hadronic effects in the generation of the pseudo-experiments.
 %In this way we analyse potential issues that can rise if the truncation 
 %$\mathcal{H}_\lambda[z^n]$ is not a good description of nature.
-{\color{red} Another important test to probe the stability of the model consists in 
+Another important test to probe the stability of the model consists in 
 analysing potential issues that can rise if the truncation 
-$\mathcal{H}_\lambda[z^n]$ is not a good description of nature.}
+$\mathcal{H}_\lambda[z^n]$ is not a good description of nature.
 We proceed as follows: we generate ensembles with non-zero coefficients for 
 $\mathcal{H}_\lambda[z^3]$ and $\mathcal{H}_\lambda[z^4]$, and we perform the fit 
 with $\mathcal{H}_\lambda[z^2]$.
@@ -542,7 +546,7 @@
 This relies on a shared parametrisation of the local (form-factors) and non-local ($\mathcal{H}_\lambda[z^n]$)
 hadronic matrix elements between the muonic and electronic channels, 
 that in turn enables the determination of the observables of interest
-free from any parametric theoretical uncertainty.  
+free from any theoretical uncertainty.  
 In addition, this simultaneous analysis is more robust against 
 experimental effects such
 as mismodeling of the detector resolution, since most parameters are