Issue in syntax highlighting

[exatoa]

I appreciate you for developing this tool.

During I'm using the tool, I faced an issue regarding the syntax highlighting.

See the below image, I copied some text from a web and mixed it to show the issue. I can compile this tex file well, but in the source, it seems that I missed '$'.

When I remove '%' at the first line or insert a blank line after the '%', it becomes normal. And also When I remove "~\" before the "cite{}" at the second line, it becomes normal too.

There are so many types of triggers to make this issue, so I'm not sure which is the root cause.

I copied the text for your replication.

%
Some notes. ly replacing the $w$ worst(See Section~\ref{section:problem}) could do Join in other ways as well~\cite{MSC1001}. Second, $M$ could also be based not on $P$ but on all $(\tau_i, a_{i,k})$ previously individuals in $P$, that is, $P^{-}$, with the $Q$ new children. In other words, $\{\tau_1 \leftarrow (P - P^{-}) \cup Q\}$. But you tested individuals: $\mathbf{t}/T_i$ why waste information: $\tau_i$ is $\mathbb{T}=[0, \mathbf{t}]$.
$\lambda_s$, $\lambda_x$, and  $\lambda_p$ could also be based not on $P$ but on all $(\tau_i, a_{i,k})$ (See Section~\ref{section:problem}) Some notes. First, the Join operation in Line 17 is often done by simply Some notes. First, the Join operation in Line 17 is often done by simply $w$ worst(See Section~\ref{section:problem}) could do Join in other ways as well. Second, $M$ could also be based not on $P$ but on all $(\tau_i, a_{i,k})$ previously individuals in $P$, that