Comments on Arxiv Paper 1712.03198

Compiling some random, nitpicky comments on this generally excellent paper;

Pg 2 — 
Paragraph “This article outlines…” seems mostly unnecessary given the abstract and the following paragraph.

Perhaps clarify that ADMEP is a new method (or cite it.)

Sentence: “Section 8.1…” seems like the order should be reversed to mention 8 before 8.1.

“This excludes the article types: tutorial in biostatistics, commentary, book review, correction, letter to the editor and authors’ response. In total, this returned 264 research articles.” I would suggest: “In the volume, there were a total of 264 articles after removing the following article types: tutorial in biostatistics, commentary, book review, correction, letter to the editor and authors’ response” (The phrase “this returned” seemed to imply a different search than what I think you meant.)

Pg 9 — 
“ are, to all intents and purposes, truly random” — I’m annoyed by this only because for cryptographic purposes this is very untrue. I’d prefer “are, for all statistical purposes, truly random”