testing my sans math template

main.tex

@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
 \documentclass[11pt]{article}
-\usepackage{chao}
+% \usepackage{chao}
+\usepackage[sans]{myctex}
 % \usepackage{natbib}
 
 
@@ -64,7 +65,7 @@ For graphs with constant genus, \cite{lee_genus_2010} gives a $O(\sqrt{\log g})$
 
 \section{Approximations}
 Techniques for approximating \scut{}.
-\subsection{LP $\Theta(\log n)$ - \nonuscut{}}
+\subsection{LP \texorpdfstring{$\Theta(\log n)$}{θ(log n)} - \nonuscut{}}
 
 \begin{minipage}{0.47\linewidth}
 \begin{equation}\label{IP}
@@ -149,7 +150,7 @@ The gap can be improved to $\log k$ through a stronger metric embedding theorem
 I believe the later method is more general and works for \nonuscut{}, while the former method is limited to \uscut{}. However, the proof in \cite{leighton_multicommodity_1999} may have connections with the proof of Bourgain's thm? Why does their method fail to work on \nonuscut{}?
 \end{remark}
 
-\subsection{SDP $O(\sqrt{\log n})$ - \uscut{}}
+\subsection{SDP \texorpdfstring{$O(\sqrt{\log n})$}{O(√log n)} - \uscut{}}
 This $O(\sqrt{\log n})$ approximation via SDP is developed in \cite{arora_expander_2004}. This is also described in \cite[section 15.4]{Williamson_Shmoys_2011}.
 
 \begin{equation*}