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.

If I have a table like this

\documentclass{article}

\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage[separate-uncertainty=true]{siunitx}

\begin{document}
\begin{table}
  \centering
    \begin{tabular}{
                  l   
                  S[table-format=1.1(2)]
                  S[table-format=-1.1(2)]
                  S[table-format=2.1(3)]
                  %S[table-figures-uncertainty=2,
                  %  table-number-alignment=center]
                  }   
    \toprule
    Station   & {GHI}     & {DIF}      & {DHI}       \\  
    \midrule
    BS        & 2.4 +-3.7 & -5.3 +-1.6 & 11.6 +- 7.9 \\
    HB        & 3.0 +-4.3 & -3.2 +-3.3 & 10.0 +- 9.0 \\
    PD        & 2.4 +-2.8 & -3.1 +-1.3 &  8.4 +- 6.3 \\
    TR        & 1.3 +-4.8 & -4.5 +-2.8 &  7.5 +-10.6 \\
    WB        & 0.3 +-2.7 & -3.8 +-1.9 &  4.8 +- 6.4 \\[0.5em]
    Mean      & 1.6 +-3.0 & -3.9 +-1.3 &  7.6 +- 6.5 \\
    \bottomrule
    \end{tabular}
\end{table}
\end{document}

The numbers are aligned on the decimal sign, but the uncertainties are not.

What I would like to have is that in the last column space for two numbers for the uncertainty is reserved, so that it is formatted as given in the code (uncertainties aligned on the right and a space before for instance the 7.9 in the first row of the last column).

How can I achieve this with siunitx?

share|improve this question
    
I don't know the answer, but even so you should use the table-formats 1.1(2) for the first column, -1.1(2) for the second and 2.1(3) for the third to avoid overful boxes. –  cgnieder Dec 6 '12 at 21:51
    
@cgnieder thank you. I didn't really understood table-format I think. For my question I would need something like 2.1(2.1) I think, but this doesn't work. –  bmu Dec 9 '12 at 10:10
    
What you have there in parentheses are not uncertainties but look more like estimated errors. Uncertainties result from reading errors and usually are in the magnitude of some decimal places. –  Thorsten Donig Dec 9 '12 at 10:58
1  
@ThorstenDonig The numbers are trends and resulting uncertainties of a linear linear regression. They are quite big, but they are uncertainties. However it doesn't help to answer my question. Or do you mean to give the uncertainties in a different way? –  bmu Dec 9 '12 at 11:06
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 12 down vote accepted

The siunitx package does not have any built-in facility for this. The only alignment provided in the package code is for the error to be left-aligned. Instead you can use a separate column for the uncertainties as follows:

Sample output

\documentclass{article}

\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{siunitx}

\begin{document}
\thispagestyle{empty}
\begin{table}
  \centering
  \begin{tabular}{
    l   
    S[table-format=1.1]@{\,\( \pm \)\,}
    S[table-format=1.1]
    S[table-format=-1.1]@{\,\( \pm \)\,}
    S[table-format=1.1]
    S[table-format=2.1]@{\,\( \pm \)\,}
    S[table-format=2.1]
    } 
  \toprule
  Station   & \multicolumn{2}{c}{GHI}     & \multicolumn{2}{c}{DIF}      & \multicolumn{2}{c}{DHI}       \\  
  \midrule
  BS        & 2.4 &3.7 & -5.3 &1.6 & 11.6 & 7.9 \\
  HB        & 3.0 &4.3 & -3.2 &3.3 & 10.0 & 9.0 \\
  PD        & 2.4 &2.8 & -3.1 &1.3 &  8.4 & 6.3 \\
  TR        & 1.3 &4.8 & -4.5 &2.8 &  7.5 &10.6 \\
  WB        & 0.3 &2.7 & -3.8 &1.9 &  4.8 & 6.4 \\[0.5em]
  Mean      & 1.6 &3.0 & -3.9 &1.3 &  7.6 & 6.5 \\
  \bottomrule
  \end{tabular}
\end{table}
\end{document}

Here we put the numbers and their uncertainties in to separate columns and place the plus/minus sign in the table format with appropriate spacing for convenience. The headings then need to span the two columns of the number and its uncertainty, so we input these inside \multicolumn commands.

EDIT If you wish to have an input format that is like 1.2+-3.6 then you can define a command \pmnum that takes such a number and splits it into the two column entries as follows:

\documentclass{article}

\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{siunitx}

\makeatletter
\newcommand{\pmnum}[1]{\@pmnum #1+}
\def\@pmnum#1+-#2+{\num{#1}&\num{#2}}
\makeatother

\begin{document}
\thispagestyle{empty}
\begin{table}
  \centering
  \begin{tabular}{
    l   
    S[table-format=1.1]@{\,\( \pm \)\,}
    S[table-format=2.1]
    } 
  \toprule
  Station   & \multicolumn{2}{c}{GHI} \\
  \midrule
  BS        & \pmnum{2.4+-3.7} \\
  HB        & \pmnum{3.0+-10.3} \\
  \bottomrule
  \end{tabular}
\end{table}
\end{document}
share|improve this answer
    
I'm aware that people want to do two-part columns using one piece of input. While I'm not personally keen on this (unnecessary repetition of \pm, mixing two pieces of data in one input columns, ...), I will try to look to extend the package at some stage. This may well have to wait for v3, where the idea is to further increase the 'modularisation' of the number processing and therefore to extend the range of processable numbers. –  Joseph Wright Dec 9 '12 at 11:12
    
@JosephWright What I would like to have is the ability to write something like S[table-format=2.1(2.1)] in this case. I don't really understand your comment. Is something wrong with is approach? –  bmu Dec 9 '12 at 11:30
    
@bmu table-format = 2.1(2.1) makes no sense, as the bracket form of an uncertainty is always read as applying to the least significant figures. My point is that the current code does not attempt to carry out two separate alignments (main part and uncertainty), not least because I strongly favour the more compact bracket approach over using \pm. –  Joseph Wright Dec 9 '12 at 11:44
    
But in my case I really have high uncertainties, so this would be 7.5(106) I think. From my experience this is not usual in my scientific field to give the uncertainties in that way. Further more I would like to be able to give uncertainties, which are not symmetric, something like +4/-2 which is not possible with the brackets. But you are right with the table format, something like S[table-format=2.1+-2.1] perhaps would be clearer. Is this an option? –  bmu Dec 9 '12 at 11:49
    
I had the same issue and just like the OP hoped that S[table-format=1.1(2)] or S[table-format=2.1+-2.1] would be the way to format this. –  Sicco May 3 '13 at 17:38
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.