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 have two sequences of inclusions, say $A \subset B \subset C$ and $A \subset D \subset C$, and I want to combine these into one sequence. I don't know how to explain this very well, but the combined sequence should look like "a diamond" of inclusions. How can I do this in LaTeX?

EDIT: What I have in mind is something like this: diamond

share|improve this question
    
Welcome to TeX.SX! Please make your code compilable (if possible), or at least complete it with \documentclass{...}, the required \usepackage's, \begin{document}, and \end{document}. That may seem tedious to you, but think of the extra work it represents for TeX.SX users willing to give you a hand. Help them help you: remove that one hurdle between you and a solution to your problem. –  mvkorpel Jul 15 at 9:39
    
Ok, sorry, it's my first time here! Anyway, I'm looking for some code that would allow me to write the "diamond" of inclusions I was describing above. –  user59115 Jul 15 at 9:41
1  
Can you make a hand-drawn of what you want and post it here? –  Pouya Jul 15 at 9:47
    
see the new edit –  user59115 Jul 15 at 10:17

4 Answers 4

up vote 7 down vote accepted

For example (some spacing correction may be needed):

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{graphicx}

\begin{document}

\[
\rotatebox{45}{$
\begin{array}{ccc}
\rotatebox{-45}{$A$} & \subseteq & \rotatebox{-45}{$B$} \\
\rotatebox{-90}{$\subseteq$}& &\rotatebox{-90}{$\subseteq$}\\[9pt]
\rotatebox{-45}{$C$} & \subseteq &\rotatebox{-45}{$ D$}
\end{array}
$}
\]

\end{document}

enter image description here

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks! That's exactly what I had in mind –  user59115 Jul 15 at 10:54

Maybe too many features, but whenever it's possible to simplify input, it's better doing it.

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{amsmath,graphicx,xparse}

\NewDocumentCommand{\diamondinclusion}{m >{\SplitArgument{1}{\\}}m m}
 {%
  \dodiamondinclusion{#1}#2{#3}%
 }
\NewDocumentCommand{\dodiamondinclusion}{mmmm}
 {%
  \begingroup
  \setlength{\arraycolsep}{0pt}%
  \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{-2}%
  \begin{matrix}
  && #2 \\
  & \rsubseteq{45} && \rsubseteq{-45} \\
  #1 &&&& #4 \\
  & \rsubseteq{-45} && \rsubseteq{45} \\
  && #3
  \end{matrix}%
  \endgroup
 }
\NewDocumentCommand{\rsubseteq}{m}
 {%
  \rotatebox[origin=c]{#1}{$\subseteq$}%
 }

\begin{document}
\[
\diamondinclusion{A}{B\\C}{D}
\]
\end{document}

Just modify the definition of \dodiamondinc if you need changes.

enter image description here

share|improve this answer

A solution that uses pstricks and the psmatrix environment from pst-node. It is compilable with pdflatex if you set the --enable-write18 (MiKTeX) or --shell-escape (TeXLive, MacTeX).

 \documentclass[a4paper,11pt, pdf]{article}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}%
\usepackage{lmodern}

\usepackage{pst-node}


\newpsobject{ncemptyline}{ncline}{linestyle=none}
\newcommand*\ncsubset[2]{\ncemptyline{#1}{#2}\ncput[nrot=:U, npos=0.45]{\subset}}

\pagestyle{empty}

\begin{document}

\[ \begin{psmatrix}[rowsep=0.4, colsep=0.5]
 & [name = C] C \\
[name = B] B & & [name = D] D \\
 & [name = A] A \\
\ncsubset{A}{B}\ncsubset{A}{D}
\ncsubset{B}{C}\ncsubset{D}{C}
\end{psmatrix} \]

\end{document} 

enter image description here

share|improve this answer

I've been reading about 'partway modifiers' in the TikZ documentation:

\documentclass[tikz]{standalone}
\usetikzlibrary{calc}

\newcommand{\rotsym}[1]{%
    \rotatebox{#1}{$\subseteq$}%
}

\begin{document}

\begin{tikzpicture}
\node (a) at (0,0) {A};
\node (b) at (.75,.75) {B};
\node (c) at (1.5,0) {C};
\node (d) at (.75,-.75) {D};
%% TikZ documentation section 13.5.3:
\node at ($(a)!0.5!(b)$) {\rotsym{45}};
\node at ($(b)!0.5!(c)$) {\rotsym{315}};
\node at ($(c)!0.5!(d)$) {\rotsym{45}};
\node at ($(d)!0.5!(a)$) {\rotsym{315}};
\end{tikzpicture}

\end{document}

Angled diagonal symbols

There may be more compact ways of doing this, but I like the clarity and editability of this. YMMV.

share|improve this answer

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.