I broke up with neovim....vim is my best friend now

dot_vim/plugged/vimtex/test/test-formatting/test-05.tex

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+Therefore, in that case the observed dynamics cannot be truly
+Markovian. We can still approximately capture the observed density dynamics
+with eq.~\ref{eq:fpe}; however the local coefficients are then effectively
+averages over the co-evolving unobserved distribution. For example, $\vec
+v(\vec x,t)=\int p(\vec x^u|\vec x,t)v(\vec x,\vec x^u,t)dx^u$. This has some
+important consequences. First, the effective Markovian coefficients $\vec v,
+\lambda, D$, will generally depend on time, reflecting the time evolution of
+the hidden $p(\vec x^u)$ over the time scale of the experiment. Second, the
+effective coefficients may also depend on the initial condition: a cell
+population started concentrated around label $\vec x_0$ implies a certain
+distribution over $x^u$ when sampled at label $\vec x$ some time later; another
+population started around $\vec x_1$ carries a different history when it, too,
+visits $\vec x$ later. Therefore, for instance the effective drift $\vec v(\vec
+x)$ will be different in the two cases. We conclude that, if unobserved degrees
+of freedom have dynamics on the time scale of the experiment eq.~\ref{eq:fpe}
+is an approximation whose coefficients become \emph{non-universal} (dependent
+on intial conditions) and \emph{time-dependent}.