diff --git a/Manuscript/SRGGW.tex b/Manuscript/SRGGW.tex
index 8380811..e915b7d 100644
--- a/Manuscript/SRGGW.tex
+++ b/Manuscript/SRGGW.tex
@@ -708,12 +708,10 @@ Therefore, it seems that the effect of the TDA can not be systematically predict
   \centering
   \caption{First ionization potential in eV calculated using $\Delta$CCSD(T) (reference), HF, $G_0W_0$@HF, qs$GW$ and SRG-qs$GW$. The statistical descriptors are computed for the errors with respect to the reference.}
   \label{tab:tab1}
-  
+  \begin{ruledtabular}
   \begin{tabular}{lccccc}
-    \hline
-    \hline
-    molecule  & $\Delta$CCSD(T) & HF & $G_0W_0$@HF & qs$GW$ & SRG-qs$GW$ \\
-     &  &  & $\eta=0.001$ & $\eta=0.1$ & $s=100$ \\
+    Mol.  & $\Delta$CCSD(T) & HF & $G_0W_0$@HF & qs$GW$ & SRG-qs$GW$ \\
+     &  &  & $\eta=\num{e-3}$ & $\eta=\num{e-1}$ & $s=\num{e2}$ \\
     \hline
     \ce{He}      & 24.54 & 24.98 & 24.59  & 24.58 & 24.54 \\
     \ce{Ne}      & 21.47 & 23.15 & 21.46  & 21.83 & 21.59 \\
@@ -743,9 +741,8 @@ Therefore, it seems that the effect of the TDA can not be systematically predict
     SDE             &  & 0.71 & 0.39 & 0.18 & 0.15 \\
     Min             &  & -0.50 & -0.29 & -0.16 & -0.15 \\
     Max            &  & 2.35 & 1.56 & 0.56 & 0.42 \\
-    \hline
-    \hline
   \end{tabular}
+  \end{ruledtabular}
 \end{table}
 
 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
@@ -798,13 +795,12 @@ That would be nice to understand clearly why qsGWTDHF is worse (screening, gap,
 
 \begin{table}
   \centering
-  \caption{First ionization potential in eV calculated using $G_0W_{\text{TDA},0}$@HF, qs$GW_{\text{TDA}}$ and SRG-qs$GW_{\text{TDA}}$. The statistical descriptors are computed for the errors with respect to the reference.}
+  \caption{First ionization potential in eV calculated using $G_0W_0^{\text{TDA}x}$@HF, qs$GW^{\text{TDA}}$ and SRG-qs$GW^{\text{TDA}}$. The statistical descriptors are computed for the errors with respect to the reference.}
   \label{tab:tab1}
+  \begin{ruledtabular}
   \begin{tabular}{lccc}
-    \hline
-    \hline
-    molecule & $G_0W_{\text{TDA},0}$@HF & qs$GW_{\text{TDA}}$ & SRG-qs$GW_{\text{TDA}}$  \\
-     & $\eta=0.001$ & $\eta=0.05$ & $s=100$  \\
+    Mol. & $G_0W_0^{\text{TDA}}$@HF & qs$GW^{\text{TDA}}$ & SRG-qs$GW^{\text{TDA}}$  \\
+     & $\eta=\num{e-3}$ & $\eta=\num{5e-2}$ & $s=\num{e2}$  \\
     \hline
     \ce{He}    & 24.45 & 24.48 & 24.39 \\
     \ce{Ne}    & 20.85 & 21.23 & 20.92 \\
@@ -837,6 +833,7 @@ That would be nice to understand clearly why qsGWTDHF is worse (screening, gap,
     \hline
     \hline
   \end{tabular}
+  \end{ruledtabular}
 \end{table}
 
 Part on EA: