Hsu:

Thanks for the nice draft presentation. In general, the contents and structure reads good. It's a choice of style. I think it's a little bit too many words. Many statements can be saved in presentation instead of writing. 

p2. The key message of searching for s(bb) is not highlighted
     First search of s(VV) for high mass is done, and this is a dedicated search in s(bb) for low mass should be emphasized.  I would save a few other descriptions of the model. Instead, highlight the important feature of this analysis

p5 Defines resolved vs merged, but p4 claim resolved vs boosted. It's better to unify the notation.

p6 method -> methods

p7 If I were you, I'll replace all the figures with one performance plots which show the mass-agnostic performance

p8 I think this is too much detail for such a short talk. This can be in the backup slide

p9 95% -> 95% C.L.

p9 If I were you, I'll show one figure of the mono-SVV results, and then show this new mono-Sbb results. These two figures will show complementary of two searches.

p10. It will be nice to add one bullet to highlight how relic density enters the consideration

p11
preliminary result -> preliminary results
blinded result -> blinded results