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.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

The standard way to produce a superscript check mark in latex would be something like


(this is a notation often used for the dual of a locally free sheaf $\mathcal{E}$.) An alternative using the amsxtra package would be


but this looks exactly the same. If I correctly understand, it's really just a shortcut for the former code.

Personally, I find this version of a superscript check unaesthetic. In particular, I think it should be shallower. I could probably go searching in comprehensive symbol lists for something I like better, but I believe I'll end up with a better solution if I ask here.

What is a good way to produce a more aesthetic (and in particular, shallower) version of a superscript check mark in math mode?

share|improve this question
Note: While I find useful the answers describing how to rescale the \vee symbol, I was kind of hoping for suggestions for better symbols altogether. In addition to shallowness, I'd like a symbol with varying thickness, and perhaps even a tiny bit of curvature. – Charles Staats Apr 20 '12 at 2:48
Thanks for providing these clarifications of your objective. Could you post a hand-drawn image of the "ideal" symbol shape you have in mind? "Varying [stroke] thickness" and a "tiny bit of curvature" might indicate that you're looking for a custom-made symbol. – Mico Apr 20 '12 at 3:20
@Mico: If it takes a custom-made symbol, it's not worth the effort. But if I have the chance, I'll try to do as you ask. In the meantime, think loosely of a stylized "flying bird." – Charles Staats Apr 20 '12 at 13:50
Another thought: perhaps what I really want is a way to write something that should really be \check{\mathcal{E}}, but with the check mark moved to the right on account of the size of the character. – Charles Staats Apr 20 '12 at 14:04
up vote 8 down vote accepted

this is probably heresy, but you might consider using the \check accent over "nothing":

check accent as superscript

the vertical position can be adjusted by inserting a zero-width \vrule as the "nothing":

   \mathcal{E}\,\check{} \quad
   \mathcal{E}\,\check{\vrule height1.3ex width0pt}
share|improve this answer

Adjust \raisebox and \scalebox arguments as needed. The extra $ around the \vee look unnecessary, but they're actually required.



share|improve this answer

How about a macro \smvee (short for "small vee"), implemented in the following MWE:

$\mathcal{E}^{\vee}$, $\mathcal{E}\smvee$

enter image description here

Addendum: Relative to the "ordinary" \vee in a superscript position, the height of the \smvee symbol is about 30% smaller. The amount of the vertical displacement in the macro (0.9ex) was chosen so that the upper endpoints of the (small) vee line up with the upper endpoint of the \mathcal{E} character. You may wish to adjust this to suit your personal preferences.

share|improve this answer

The amssymb package offers \checkmark that has "varying thickness" and "a tiny bit of curvature":

enter image description here

\usepackage{amssymb,amsxtra}% http://ctan.org/pkg/{amssymb,amsxtra}
\usepackage{graphicx}% http://ctan.org/pkg/graphicx
$\mathcal{E}^{\vee}$ \par
$\mathcal{E}\spcheck$ \par
$\dual$ \par

From the above MWE, you only need graphicx and amssymb.

share|improve this answer
Thanks for the suggestion, but I would also like to have a symmetric mark. – Charles Staats Apr 20 '12 at 13:49

Sorry for the late answer, but I just had the very same problem. My solution is the following: use a single-guillemot character, and rotate+stretch it using graphicx.

Sample output


The result is visually more elegant, as the resulting character has a varying line width.

share|improve this answer
Welcome to TeX.SX! – Andrew Swann Jul 10 '14 at 9:45
I really like this one -- I'd suggest to use \textnormal{\guilsinglleft} to not have the command looking wired in italic environments (say, if you want to use it in a theorem environment). – Christian Stump Aug 6 '14 at 8:37

Your Answer


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.