Take the 2-minute tour ×
TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of TeX, LaTeX, ConTeXt, and related typesetting systems. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I am having an issue with the automatic LaTeX equation and label formatting on one of my longer equations (see results below).

Minimum Working Example

\documentclass[11pt]{article}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{epstopdf}
\usepackage{xfrac}
\usepackage[a4paper]{geometry}
\geometry{top=1in, bottom=1in,
      left=1in, right=1in}
\usepackage[usenames,dvipsnames]{color}
\newcommand{\Cline}[2][red]{
\text{\oalign{$#2$\cr\color{#1}\leaders\hrule height 0.80pt\hfil\cr}}}

\begin{document}
\numberwithin{equation}{section}

\begin{equation}
a=b
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
a=b
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
a=b
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
a=b
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
a=b 
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
a=b
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
a=b
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
a=b
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
a=b
\end{equation}

\noindent Expanding the covariant derivatives then yields
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
R^{\sigma}_{\mu\rho\nu} = \bar{R}^{\sigma}_{\mu\rho\nu} &+\tfrac{1}{2} \bar{g}^{\sigma\beta}\partial_{\rho}\bigl(\partial_{\mu}h_{\nu\beta} -\! \bar{\Gamma}^{\tau}_{\mu\nu}h_{\tau\beta} -\! \Cline[Orange]{\bar{\Gamma}^{\tau}_{\mu\beta}h_{\tau\nu}}\bigr) +\tfrac{1}{2} \bar{g}^{\sigma\beta}\partial_{\rho}\bigl(\partial_{\nu}h_{\mu\beta} -\! \bar{\Gamma}^{\tau}_{\mu\nu}h_{\tau\beta} -\! \Cline[Magenta]{\bar{\Gamma}^{\tau}_{\nu\beta}h_{\tau\mu}}\bigr) \\ &-\tfrac{1}{2} \bar{g}^{\sigma\beta}\partial_{\rho}\bigl(\partial_{\beta}h_{\mu\nu} -\! \Cline[Orange]{\bar{\Gamma}^{\tau}_{\beta\mu}h_{\tau\nu}} -\! \Cline[Magenta]{\bar{\Gamma}^{\tau}_{\beta\nu}h_{\tau\mu}}\bigr) -\tfrac{1}{2} \bar{g}^{\sigma\alpha}\partial_{\nu}\bigl(\partial_{\mu}h_{\rho\alpha} -\! \bar{\Gamma}^{\tau}_{\mu\rho}h_{\tau\alpha} -\! \Cline[Green]{\bar{\Gamma}^{\tau}_{\mu\alpha}h_{\tau\rho}}\bigr) \\ &-\tfrac{1}{2} \bar{g}^{\sigma\alpha}\partial_{\nu}\bigl(\partial_{\rho}h_{\mu\alpha} -\! \bar{\Gamma}^{\tau}_{\rho\mu}h_{\tau\alpha} -\! \Cline[Blue]{\bar{\Gamma}^{\tau}_{\rho\alpha}h_{\tau\mu}}\bigr) +\tfrac{1}{2} \bar{g}^{\sigma\alpha}\partial_{\nu}\bigl(\partial_{\alpha}h_{\mu\rho} -\! \Cline[Green]{\bar{\Gamma}^{\tau}_{\alpha\mu}h_{\tau\rho}} -\! \Cline[Blue]{\bar{\Gamma}^{\tau}_{\alpha\rho}h_{\tau\mu}}\bigr).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
With the symmetries of the Christoffel symbols, the underlined terms cancel, whereas the
\end{document}

Equation (0.10)

The MWE above gives the result enter image description here

I think this looks ugly.

Equation (0.9)

Here is what the same equation looks like if you delete on of the $a=b$ equation:

enter image description here

I think that this formatting looks better, with the label at the side. LaTeX is obviously following some predefined rule about spacing, the label won't fit in the above example, so it puts it at the bottom. Is there a nice way to over-rule this? Or, is there a way to move my equation slightly to the left so that the label would fit according to what LaTeX 'thinks' is best.

share|improve this question
    
The problem is that your label gets too wide... –  vonbrand Feb 26 '13 at 15:34
2  
Perhaps split before the first +? That also separates the part of the formula you are really messing with... –  vonbrand Feb 26 '13 at 15:36
    
@vonbrand's first comment: You don't say. –  User 17670 Feb 26 '13 at 15:46
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 1 down vote accepted

It's a quick hack and not exactly user-friendly, but a simple \hspace{-1cm} right after \begin{split} does the trick:

output

Of course you can mess with the actual value inside \hspace to your fancy, so long as it's negative (a positive argument will obviously move it to the right).

share|improve this answer
1  
I would prefer \mkern-5mu –  Harish Kumar Feb 26 '13 at 15:23
    
Plain TeX is weird. While I barely know what that means, \hspace is more clear as to what it's doing. What does \mkern do differently from \hspace (or \kern, for all that matters)? –  Sean Allred Feb 26 '13 at 15:25
    
@vermiculus -- your hack assumes that the two text lines shown begin paragraphs. otherwise, the equation will be shifted beyond the left margin, which isn't such a good idea. and, looking at the mwe, the text does not begin paragraphs. –  barbara beeton Feb 27 '13 at 21:04
    
@barbarabeeton -- I tried the MWE straight from the question. When it comes right down to it, the only other option is somehow altering the size of the reference (possibly rotation? it would be interesting to see), the spacing/sizing of the mathematics, rearrange the equation itself, or sacrifice the margins. It is by all means a hack, but it's one that seems to get the job done for this application. Other applications will undoubtedly need fiddling with the length (or better yet, runtime-calculation of the lengths required). It's a sacrifice. –  Sean Allred Feb 27 '13 at 21:19
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.