Index: doc/theses/colby_parsons_MMAth/text/mutex_stmt.tex
===================================================================
--- doc/theses/colby_parsons_MMAth/text/mutex_stmt.tex	(revision 9171456b2a1bc5b89549d97ced24a2388e00a1b0)
+++ doc/theses/colby_parsons_MMAth/text/mutex_stmt.tex	(revision 2e7a299ad51edb6d34971ddaf98d68e555e25fc4)
@@ -350,5 +350,5 @@
 
 The benchmark used to evaluate the avoidance algorithms repeatedly acquires a fixed number of locks in a random order and then releases them.
-The pseudocode for the deadlock avoidance benchmark is shown in \VRef[Listing]{l:deadlock_avoid_pseudo}.
+The pseudocode for the deadlock avoidance benchmark is shown in \VRef[Figure]{l:deadlock_avoid_pseudo}.
 To ensure the comparison exercises the implementation of each lock avoidance algorithm, an identical spinlock is implemented in each language using a set of builtin atomics available in both \CC and \CFA.
 The benchmarks are run for a fixed duration of 10 seconds and then terminate.
@@ -357,6 +357,6 @@
 The median is calculated and is plotted alongside the 95\% confidence intervals for each point.
 
-\begin{cfa}[caption={Deadlock avoidance benchmark pseudocode},label={l:deadlock_avoid_pseudo}]
-
+\begin{figure}
+\begin{cfa}
 size_t n_locks; $\C{// number of locks}$
 size_t n_thds; $\C{// number of threads}$
@@ -387,6 +387,8 @@
     printf( "%lu\n", total );
 }
-
-\end{cfa}
+\end{cfa}
+\caption{Deadlock avoidance benchmark pseudocode}
+\label{l:deadlock_avoid_pseudo}
+\end{figure}
 
 The performance experiments were run on the following multi-core hardware systems to determine differences across platforms: