Add Results.tex for baseline profile

Chapters/Methodology.tex

@@ -8,9 +8,9 @@ This chapter describes the methodology used to benchmark and analyze
 peer-to-peer mesh VPN implementations. The evaluation combines
 performance benchmarking under controlled network conditions with a
 structured source code analysis of each implementation. The
-benchmarking framework prioritizes reproducibility at every layer;
+benchmarking framework prioritizes reproducibility at every layer,
 from pinned dependencies and declarative system configuration to
-automated test orchestration; enabling independent verification of
+automated test orchestration, enabling independent verification of
 results and facilitating future comparative studies.
 
 \section{Experimental Setup}
@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ identical specifications:
 \end{itemize}
 
 The presence of hardware cryptographic acceleration is relevant because
-many VPN implementations leverage AES-NI for encryption, and the results
+many VPN implementations use AES-NI for encryption, and the results
 may differ on systems without these features.
 
 \subsection{Network Topology}
@@ -114,10 +114,10 @@ Table~\ref{tab:benchmark_suite} summarises each benchmark.
   \end{tabular}
 \end{table}
 
-The first four benchmarks use well-known network testing tools.
-The remaining three target workloads that are closer to real-world
-usage. The subsections below describe the configuration details
-that the table does not capture.
+The first four benchmarks use well-known network testing tools;
+the remaining three target workloads closer to real-world usage.
+The subsections below describe configuration details that the table
+does not capture.
 
 \subsection{Ping}
 
@@ -320,7 +320,7 @@ Each metric is summarized as a statistics dictionary containing:
 \begin{itemize}
     \bitem{min / max:} Extreme values observed
     \bitem{average:} Arithmetic mean across samples
-    \bitem{p25 / p50 / p75:} Quartiles via pythons
+    \bitem{p25 / p50 / p75:} Quartiles via Python's
     \texttt{statistics.quantiles()} method
 \end{itemize}
 
@@ -351,7 +351,7 @@ hyperfine's built-in statistical output.
 \section{Source Code Analysis}
 
 To complement the performance benchmarks with architectural
-understanding, a structured source code analysis was conducted for
+understanding, we conducted a structured source code analysis of
 all ten VPN implementations. The analysis followed three phases.
 
 \subsection{Repository Collection and LLM-Assisted Overview}
@@ -377,9 +377,8 @@ aspects:
   \item Resilience / Central Point of Failure
 \end{itemize}
 
-Every claim in the generated overview was required to reference the
-specific file and line range in the repository that supports it,
-enabling direct verification.
+Each agent was required to reference the specific file and line
+range supporting every claim, enabling direct verification.
 
 \subsection{Manual Verification}
 
@@ -392,19 +391,19 @@ automated summaries remained superficial.
 \subsection{Feature Matrix and Maintainer Review}
 
 The findings from both the automated and manual analysis were
-consolidated into a comprehensive feature matrix cataloguing 131
-features across all ten VPN implementations. The matrix covers
+consolidated into a feature matrix cataloguing 131 features across
+all ten VPN implementations. The matrix covers
 protocol characteristics, cryptographic primitives, NAT traversal
 strategies, routing behavior, and security properties.
 
 The completed feature matrix was published and sent to the respective
-VPN maintainers for review. Maintainer feedback was incorporated as
-corrections and clarifications, improving the accuracy of the final
-classification.
+VPN maintainers for review. We incorporated their feedback as
+corrections and clarifications to the final classification.
 
 \section{Reproducibility}
 
-Reproducibility is ensured at every layer of the experimental stack.
+The experimental stack pins or declares every variable that could
+affect results.
 
 \subsection{Dependency Pinning}
 
@@ -524,7 +523,7 @@ VPNs were selected based on:
     \bitem{Decentralization:} Preference for solutions without mandatory
     central servers, though coordinated-mesh VPNs were included for comparison.
     \bitem{Active development:} Only VPNs with recent commits and
-    maintained releases were considered (with the exception of VPN Cloud).
+    maintained releases were considered (with the exception of VpnCloud).
     \bitem{Linux support:} All VPNs must run on Linux.
 \end{itemize}