My SGY values are still approximately 16 Mpc off from what the Kim+2016 group is using. This week, I was running diagnostic tests on the code to try to isolate what exactly is causing this discrepancy. I was also comparing my numbers for two filament galaxies to those on Nasa's Extragalactic Database (NED). Preliminary results show that NED's numbers are consistent with ours, which is reassuring. We emailed the Kim+2016 group, and their answer appears to have contradicted what was written in their paper. One of our collaborators also emailed us with a suggestion that the Kim+2016 group uses an atypical number for the recession velocity of Virgo, so correcting for this might completely correct our SGY values. Hopefully this can all get figured out soon.