diff --git a/src/uu/factor/BENCHMARKING.md b/src/uu/factor/BENCHMARKING.md
index 7b611db4b..6bf9cbf90 100644
--- a/src/uu/factor/BENCHMARKING.md
+++ b/src/uu/factor/BENCHMARKING.md
@@ -9,7 +9,6 @@ They are located outside the `uu_factor` crate, as they do not comply
 with the project's minimum supported Rust version, *i.e.* may require
 a newer version of `rustc`.
 
-
 ## Microbenchmarking deterministic functions
 
 We currently use [`criterion`] to benchmark deterministic functions,
@@ -20,8 +19,9 @@ the hardware, operating system version, etc., but they are noisy and affected
 by other tasks on the system (browser, compile jobs, etc.), which can cause
 `criterion` to report spurious performance improvements and regressions.
 
-This can be mitigated by getting as close to [idealised conditions][lemire]
+This can be mitigated by getting as close to [idealized conditions][lemire]
 as possible:
+
 - minimize the amount of computation and I/O running concurrently to the
   benchmark, *i.e.* close your browser and IM clients, don't compile at the
   same time, etc. ;
@@ -29,15 +29,13 @@ as possible:
 - [isolate a **physical** core], set it to `nohz_full`, and pin the benchmark
   to it, so it won't be preempted in the middle of a measurement ;
 - disable ASLR by running `setarch -R cargo bench`, so we can compare results
-  across multiple executions.  
-
+  across multiple executions.
 
 [`criterion`]: https://bheisler.github.io/criterion.rs/book/index.html
 [lemire]: https://lemire.me/blog/2018/01/16/microbenchmarking-calls-for-idealized-conditions/
 [isolate a **physical** core]: https://pyperf.readthedocs.io/en/latest/system.html#isolate-cpus-on-linux
 [frequency stays constant]: ... <!-- ToDO -->
 
-
 ### Guidance for designing microbenchmarks
 
 *Note:* this guidance is specific to `factor` and takes its application domain
@@ -45,30 +43,29 @@ into account; do not expect it to generalize to other projects.  It is based
 on Daniel Lemire's [*Microbenchmarking calls for idealized conditions*][lemire],
 which I recommend reading if you want to add benchmarks to `factor`.
 
-1. Select a small, self-contained, deterministic component  
+1. Select a small, self-contained, deterministic component
    `gcd` and `table::factor` are good example of such:
    - no I/O or access to external data structures ;
    - no call into other components ;
-   - behaviour is deterministic: no RNG, no concurrency, ... ;
+   - behavior is deterministic: no RNG, no concurrency, ... ;
    - the test's body is *fast* (~100ns for `gcd`, ~10µs for `factor::table`),
      so each sample takes a very short time, minimizing variability and
      maximizing the numbers of samples we can take in a given time.
 
-2. Benchmarks are immutable (once merged in `uutils`)  
+2. Benchmarks are immutable (once merged in `uutils`)
    Modifying a benchmark means previously-collected values cannot meaningfully
    be compared, silently giving nonsensical results.  If you must modify an
    existing benchmark, rename it.
 
-3. Test common cases  
+3. Test common cases
    We are interested in overall performance, rather than specific edge-cases;
-   use **reproducibly-randomised inputs**, sampling from either all possible
+   use **reproducibly-randomized inputs**, sampling from either all possible
    input values or some subset of interest.
 
-4. Use [`criterion`], `criterion::black_box`, ...  
+4. Use [`criterion`], `criterion::black_box`, ...
    `criterion` isn't perfect, but it is also much better than ad-hoc
    solutions in each benchmark.
 
-
 ## Wishlist
 
 ### Configurable statistical estimators
@@ -77,7 +74,6 @@ which I recommend reading if you want to add benchmarks to `factor`.
 where the code under test is fully deterministic and the measurements are
 subject to additive, positive noise, [the minimum is more appropriate][lemire].
 
-
 ### CI & reproducible performance testing
 
 Measuring performance on real hardware is important, as it relates directly
@@ -95,19 +91,17 @@ performance improvements and regressions.
 [`cachegrind`]: https://www.valgrind.org/docs/manual/cg-manual.html
 [`iai`]: https://bheisler.github.io/criterion.rs/book/iai/iai.html
 
-
-### Comparing randomised implementations across multiple inputs
+### Comparing randomized implementations across multiple inputs
 
 `factor` is a challenging target for system benchmarks as it combines two
 characteristics:
 
-1. integer factoring algorithms are randomised, with large variance in
+1. integer factoring algorithms are randomized, with large variance in
    execution time ;
 
 2. various inputs also have large differences in factoring time, that
    corresponds to no natural, linear ordering of the inputs.
 
-
 If (1) was untrue (i.e. if execution time wasn't random), we could faithfully
 compare 2 implementations (2 successive versions, or `uutils` and GNU) using
 a scatter plot, where each axis corresponds to the perf. of one implementation.