5

Possible Duplicate:
Command for argmin or argmax?

How to put indices under "argmin" in: \operatorname{argmin}_{z} ?

For the sum we can do something like: \sum\limits_{z}, but it does not work for the argmin example.

EDIT MWE:

\begin{equation}
\label{myequation}
  F = 
  \begin{cases}
    n + b + 1 & \text{if $a \neq \emptyset$}\\
    \tilde{z} = \operatornamewithlimits{argmin}_{\tilde{z}}\operatorname{dist}(z, \tilde{z}) & \text{otherwise}
  \end{cases}
\end{equation}
Improve this question
3
  • @egreg this does not work, I need z under argmin as a limit ! Also, I have the formula inside a \begin{equation} ... \end{equation} bloc, and it seems that I can not put [ \operatornamewithlimits{argmin}_z ] inside this bloc !
    – user995434
    Jul 8, 2012 at 16:21
  • 1
    Please, look at the linked question. Defining \DeclareMathOperator*{\argmin}{argmin} and using \argmin in the body of the document is the best strategy. In your case the limits are not put under "argmin" because cases typesets its lines in textstyle. Load mathtools and use its dcases environment.
    – egreg
    Jul 8, 2012 at 16:30
  • 1
    @user995434 -- you need to insert \displaystyle before the \operatornamewithlimits'. the cases` environment is based on matrix, which assumes \textstyle by default. this isn't very well documented, so i'll add a note to improve the situation the next time the documentation is updated.
    – barbara beeton
    Jul 8, 2012 at 16:41

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
3

Use \operatornamewithlimits{argmin}\limits_{\tilde{z}} to put a z tilda underneath the argmin. Full example:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\begin{document}

\begin{equation} 
\operatornamewithlimits{argmin}_z= \ldots
\end{equation}

\begin{equation}
\label{myequation}
  F = 
  \begin{cases}
    n + b + 1 & \text{if $a \neq \emptyset$}\\

    \tilde{z} = \operatornamewithlimits{argmin}\limits_{\tilde{z}}\operatorname{dist}(z, \tilde{z}) & \text{otherwise}
  \end{cases}
\end{equation}
\end{document}
Improve this answer
9
  • 1
    The long command name has been obsolete for some years; indeed it's in amsopn just for back compatibility: \def\operatornamewithlimits{\operatorname*}
    – egreg
    Jul 8, 2012 at 15:36
  • 1
    I know that! The macro name \operatornamewithlimits is selfexplanatory, but \operatorname* not ...
    – user2478
    Jul 8, 2012 at 15:41
  • 1
    Maybe, but it's undocumented.
    – egreg
    Jul 8, 2012 at 15:42
  • @egreg -- niggle: if you check texdoc amsopn, \operatornamewithlimits is documented (and said to be retained "for the time being" for backwards compatibility), but operatorname* is not, except in the cited definition. (of course, the number of people who actually read the amsopn-specific documentation probably approaches zero.)
    – barbara beeton
    Jul 8, 2012 at 15:56
  • 1
    @barbarabeeton The *-variant is in amsldoc.pdf, of course. Not that many people read this one, either. :(
    – egreg
    Jul 8, 2012 at 15:58

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .