adjusting styling again

_posts/2024-10-21-building-an-assignment-algorithm-2.markdown

@@ -156,10 +156,14 @@ Finally, we landed on using the Z-score for aggregate compromise. The Z-score is
 <details class="no-italic"><summary>Click the 'more' button for to see how we compared compromise and surplus difference exactly, along with the rationale.</summary>
 <br>
 <br>
-<p>
-    \(\text{sorting score} \\= standardisedSurplusScore - standardisedCompromiseScore \)
-</p>
-
+\[
+\begin{align}
+\text{sorting score} &= \text{standardisedSurplusScore} \\
+&- \text{standardisedCompromiseScore}
+\end{align}
+\]
+<br>
+<br>
 <p>
     Where the \(\text{standardisedCompromiseScore}\) is: 
 </p>
@@ -169,9 +173,11 @@ Finally, we landed on using the Z-score for aggregate compromise. The Z-score is
 \left( \frac{\text{attendee Z score}}{2.72} \right)^3
 \]
 
-<p style="font-size: smaller; text-align: right;">
-    N.B. The Z score is calculated with <b>the median to avoid extreme value skewing.
-</p>
+<div style="display: flex; justify-content: flex-end;">
+    <p style="font-size: smaller; width: 50%; text-align: right;">
+        N.B. The Z score is calculated with the median to avoid extreme value skewing.
+    </p>
+</div>
 
 <p>
     And the \(\text{standardisedSurplusScore}\) is:
@@ -211,6 +217,8 @@ Finally, we landed on using the Z-score for aggregate compromise. The Z-score is
 \text{attendee surplus difference}
 \]
 
+<br>
+<br>
 <div>
 <h4>
     The rationale behind this was as follows: