diff --git a/Notes_CSF/Theory_CFG_CIPSI.org b/Notes_CSF/Theory_CFG_CIPSI.org
index 089e296c..511af0d1 100644
--- a/Notes_CSF/Theory_CFG_CIPSI.org
+++ b/Notes_CSF/Theory_CFG_CIPSI.org
@@ -1,11 +1,14 @@
 #+TITLE: CFG CIPSI
-#+AUTHOR: Vijay Gopal Chilkuri (vijay.gopal.c@gmail.com)
+#+AUTHOR: Vijay Gopal Chilkuri
+#+EMAIL: vijay.gopal.c@gmail.com
 #+DATE: 2020-12-08 Tue 08:27
 #+startup: latexpreview
+#+STARTUP: inlineimages
+
 
 #+LATEX_HEADER: \usepackage{braket}
 
-* Biblio 
+* Biblio
 * Theoretical background
 
   Here we describe the main theoretical background and definitions of the
@@ -14,7 +17,7 @@
   definitions of the overlap, one-particle, and two-particle matrix-elements. Finally,
   an algorithm is presented for the sigma-vector (\( \sigma \)-vector defined later) calculation using
   the CFG basis.
-  
+
 
 ** Definitinon of CI basis
 
@@ -41,7 +44,7 @@
     \(\ket{^S\Phi_i}\).
     The coefficients \(O^b_{a,k}\) depend only on the number of SOMOs
     in \(\Phi_i\).
-    
+
     Each CFG contains a list of CSFs related to it which describes the
     spin part of the wavefunction (see Eq: [[Eq:definebasis3]]) which is
     encoded in the BFs as shown below in Eq: [[Eq:definebasis5]].
@@ -52,7 +55,7 @@
     \ket{^S\Phi_i} = \left\{ \ket{^S\Phi^1_i}, \ket{^S\Phi^2_i}, \dots, \ket{^s\Phi^{\Ncsf}_i} \right\}
     \end{equation}
 
-    
+
 
     #+NAME: Eq:definebasis4
     \begin{equation}
@@ -130,52 +133,52 @@
     The matrix-element (ME) evaluation follows a similar logic as the evalulation of
     the overlap. However, here the metric is the one-, or two-particle operator \(\hat{E}_{pq}\)
     or \(\hat{E}_{pq}\hat{E}_{rs}\) as shown in Eq: [[Eq:defineme1]] and Eq: [[Eq:defineme2]].
-    
+
     #+NAME: Eq:defineme1
     \begin{equation}
     \braket{^S\Phi^k_i|\hat{O}_{pq}|^S\Phi^l_j} = \left( C_{i,1} \right)^{\dagger} \mathbf{O}_i\cdot\mathbf{A}^{pq}_{ij}\cdot\mathbf{O}_j C_{j,1}
     \end{equation}
-    
+
     #+NAME: Eq:defineme2
     \begin{equation}
     \braket{^S\Phi^k_i|\hat{O}_{pq,rs}|^S\Phi^l_j} = \sum_K \left( C_{i,1} \right)^{\dagger} \mathbf{O}_i\cdot\mathbf{A}^{pq}_{ik}\cdot\mathbf{O}_k \mathbf{O}_k\cdot\mathbf{A}^{rs}_{kj}\cdot\mathbf{O}_j  C_{j,1}
     \end{equation}
 
-    
-    Where, \(\hat{O}_{pq}\) and \(hat{O}_{pq,rs}\) represent an arbitrary one-, and 
-    two-particle operators respectively. Importantly, the one-, and two-particle 
-    matrix-element evaluation can be recast into an effecient matrix multiplication 
-    form which is crucial for a fast evaluation of the action of the operators 
+
+    Where, \(\hat{O}_{pq}\) and \(hat{O}_{pq,rs}\) represent an arbitrary one-, and
+    two-particle operators respectively. Importantly, the one-, and two-particle
+    matrix-element evaluation can be recast into an effecient matrix multiplication
+    form which is crucial for a fast evaluation of the action of the operators
     \(\hat{O}_{pq}\) and \(hat{O}_{pq,rs}\). The matrix \(\mathbf{A}^{pq}_{ij}\) contains
-    the result of the operation \(\braket{^S\Phi^k_i|\hat{O}_{pq}|^S\Phi^l_j}\) in terms 
+    the result of the operation \(\braket{^S\Phi^k_i|\hat{O}_{pq}|^S\Phi^l_j}\) in terms
     of BFs and is therefore of size \(NCSF(i) \textit{x} NBF(i)\). In this formulation, the determinant basis is entirely avoided.
     Note that the size and contents of the matrix \(\mathbf{A}^{pq}_{ij}\) depends
     only on the total number of SOMOs and the total spin \(S\), therefore, an optimal
     prototyping scheme can be deviced for a rapid calculaiton of these matrix contractions.
-    The resolution of identity (RI) is used to evaluate the two-particle operator since 
-    this alleviates the necessacity to explicity construct two-particle matrix-elements 
+    The resolution of identity (RI) is used to evaluate the two-particle operator since
+    this alleviates the necessacity to explicity construct two-particle matrix-elements
     \(\braket{^S\Phi^k_i|\hat{O}_{pq,rs}|^S\Phi^l_j}\) directly.
-    
+
 ** Sigma-vector evaluation
 
     Once the \(\mathbf{A}^{pq}_{ij}\) matrices have been constructed for the given
     selected list of CFGs, the prototype lists for the \(\mathbf{A}^{pq}_{ij}\) matrices
-    can be constructed. Following this, one can proceede to the evaluation of the sigma-vector 
-    as defined in the Eq [[Eq:definesigma1]]. 
-    
-    
+    can be constructed. Following this, one can proceede to the evaluation of the sigma-vector
+    as defined in the Eq [[Eq:definesigma1]].
+
+
     #+NAME: Eq:definesigma1
     \begin{equation}
-    \sigma = \sum_{pq} \tilde{h}_{pq}\hat{E}_{pq}|\ket{^S\Phi^l_j} + \frac{1}{2}\sum_{pq,rs} g_{pq,rs} \hat{E}_{pq}\hat{E}_{rs}|\ket{^S\Phi^l_j} 
+    \sigma = \sum_{pq} \tilde{h}_{pq}\hat{E}_{pq}|\ket{^S\Phi^l_j} + \frac{1}{2}\sum_{pq,rs} g_{pq,rs} \hat{E}_{pq}\hat{E}_{rs}|\ket{^S\Phi^l_j}
     \end{equation}
-    
+
     The one-electron part of the sigma-vector can be calculated as shown in Eq: [[Eq:defineme1]]
-    and the two-electron part can be calculated using the RI as shown in Eq: [[Eq:defineme2]]. 
+    and the two-electron part can be calculated using the RI as shown in Eq: [[Eq:defineme2]].
     The most expensive part involves the two-particle operator as shown on the RHS of Eq: [[Eq:definesigma1]].
     In this CFG formulation, the cost intensive part of the sigma-vector evaluation has been recast
     into an efficient BLAS matrix multiplication operation. Therefore, this formulation is the most efficient
     albeit at the cost of storing the prototype matrices \(\mathbf{A}^{pq}_{ij}\). However, where the total spin
-    is small and the largest number of SOMOs does not exceed 14, the \(\mathbf{A}^{pq}_{ij}\) matrices 
+    is small and the largest number of SOMOs does not exceed 14, the \(\mathbf{A}^{pq}_{ij}\) matrices
     can be stored in memory.
 
-    
+