Tag Info

New answers tagged

3

Instead of (mis-)using a combination of gather and aligned you could use a normal tabular with a p{}-type column for the descriptions. This could be wrapped up in a custom environment, eqdescription or something. The example below uses the center and the tabular environments but it uses the internal commands in the definition of eqdescription, i.e., \center ...


0

You can halve the line spacing and add an extra empty line when needed. \usepackage{setspace} %[...] \begin{spacing}{0.5} \begin{gather} \text{LBG} [\%] = \frac{\text{AP}_\text{L}}{\text{AP}_\text{G}} \cdot 100\\ \begin{aligned} \\ &\text{LBG} &&= &&\text{Lieferbereitschaftsgrad} \\~\\ ...


0

Try this. I've added a negative space, but this isn't a good solution, IMHO :-( \begin{gather} \text{LBG} [\%] = \frac{\text{AP}_\text{L}}{\text{AP}_\text{G}} \cdot 100\\ \begin{aligned} \\ &\text{LBG} &&= &&\text{Lieferbereitschaftsgrad} \\ &\text{AP}_\text{L} &&= &&\text{S\"amtliche ...


1

The point here is that LaTeX is in trouble because it won't stretch the spaces before the equation in a non-exaggerated way (I can't explain what it "exaggerated" to LaTeX) that sends the equation down, so it keeps the equation up and gives you an Overfull \hbox warning. One way to solve this is to force the linebreak, thus generating the opposite warning ...


5

margins are never “enforced”, but if you write something that can't fit in the printing area, you get a warning (“overful \hbox”). the optimum solution is to rewrite so the problem doesn't occur in the first place. in default of that, put \linebreak[4] before your bit of maths; the line will now be under-full (with an appropriate warning), but that’s as ...


4

A blank line is converted to \par, which is illegal in align and all math display environment. There are also some other glitches in your code: \documentclass[12pt]{article} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsthm} \usepackage{mathtools} \newcommand{\mfunction}[4]{% \ifnum#4=0\relax M_{#1_{#2,#3}}% \else M_{#1_{#2,#3}^{k}}% \fi } ...


2

Delete the blank line after \def \lnum{#4}.


4

I'll just turn this into an answer. amsmath provides very few symbols, so in most cases [1] you need to load both amsmath and amssymb [1] Some font packages provide the exact same set of symbols as amssymb, in which case you need to either not load amssymb at all, or make sure amssymb is loaded first, such that the font package and override the symbols ...


6

\documentclass[a4paper,12pt]{article} \usepackage[fleqn]{amsmath} \begin{document} \noindent Default indentation: \begin{equation} a+b=42 \end{equation} % Now I want no indention for a single equation: {\setlength{\mathindent}{0cm} \begin{equation} a+b=42 \end{equation}}% % Now I'd like to get the default again: \begin{equation} a+b=42 \end{equation} ...


3

\text honors the surrounding font. A better approach to get the desired font and the proper spacing is to use \DeclareMathOperator: \documentclass[11pt]{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem} \DeclareMathOperator{\Func}{Function} \begin{document} $\text{Function}(x) = 1\quad\Func(x) = 1$ \begin{theorem} $\text{Function}(x) = ...


3

I would cut the equations in one of these two ways — two lines is enough. I changed the summation index to what I think it is really, and used the \mathclap and \MoveEqLeft commands from mathtools to prevent too much horizontal spacing around the equal sign. Also, writing ‘Index’ in math mode makes this word look as the succession of 5 variables, not as a ...


2

You're abusing \left and \right, to begin with. None of their occurrences in your code is needed, actually. Here's my proposal, using \substack for avoiding a too long subscript to the summation and “smashing” its bottom. I omitted \forall that's usually implied in the notation and also *, that is not frequently used in mathematics to denote multiplication ...


2

Use instead align \begin{align*} Index = &\sum_{\forall a,b \in set, a \neq b} \left[ 5*k_{X}\left(i_{a,b}\right)*{I}_{\left[i_{a,b} \in E_{X}\right]} + \right. \\ & \left. + 3*k_{Y}\left(i_{a,b}\right) * {I}_{\left[i_{a,b} \in E_{Y}\right]} + 2*k_{Z}\left(i_{a,b}\right)* {I}_{\left[i_{a,b} \in E_{Z}\right]}\right] \end{align*}


2

You must have \left[ and \right] in the same line or you separate by \right. in the first line and \left. in the last line. \begin{equation} \label{eq:1b} \begin{split} Index & = \sum_{\forall a,b \in set, a \neq b}\left[ \right.\\ & 5*k_{X}\left(i_{a,b}\right)*\mathds{I}_{\left[i_{a,b} \in E_{X}\right]} + \\ & ...


3

Here is one way to use the alignat environment: Notes: Replaced the \intertext with \shortintertext as I think that looks better when you have very small text as it adds less vertical space before and after the text. Used \mathrlap to ensure that portions of some lines did not affect the alignment in the other lines. Aligned as many of the binary ...


4

The \allowdisplaybreaks macro changes the \interdisplaylinepenalty parameter. You can undo the effect of \allowdisplaybreaks using \interdisplaylinepenalty=10000 Try commenting \interdisplaylinepenalty=10000 in the example below to see the effect. \documentclass{article} \addtolength\textheight{1cm} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{lipsum} ...


3

I think it would be much too complicated to use alignat. Actually you only need one aligned environment. Note the \! to have an exact (first) alignment. I don't see the necessity of aligning the + signs of the second and third lines of the alignment. I prefer aligning differently, so as to show clearly the third line is the continuation of the second ; I ...


1

Here is a solution which doesn't used an environment: \documentclass[draft,a4paper,landscape]{amsart} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsthm} \usepackage{newlfont} \usepackage{mathtools} \begin{document} \noindent $a = x_{1} + iy_{1}$ and $z = x_{2} + iy_{2}$. \begin{align*} \big\vert 1 - \overline{a}z \big\vert^{2} &= \big\vert ...


2

A better solution is to use the ntheorem package: \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amssymb} \newcommand{\qedsymbol}{$\Box$} \usepackage[fleqn]{amsmath} \usepackage[amsmath,amsthm,thmmarks]{ntheorem} \begin{document} This is a statement. Make it long enough that the right margin is clearly delimited. \begin{proof} Use an explicit tag to get the qed ...


4

Thanks to http://tex.stackexchange.com/users/31729/christian-hupfer 's link the following code fixes your problem. It appears that Egreg's solution requires ampersands at the start of each line. \documentclass{article} \usepackage{mathtools} \newcounter{multialign} \makeatletter %% see http://tex.stackexchange.com/a/191379/5001 for the original definition ...


2

You can use the fact that amsmath defines big operators in a uniform way; for instance \sum is redefined to use \sum@ surrounded by suitable macros. \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{xparse} \ExplSyntaxOn \NewDocumentCommand{\makesmaller}{m} { \goblin_makesmaller:n { #1 } } \cs_new_protected:Npn \goblin_makesmaller:n #1 { ...


1

You can define a \tsum command, just like there exists a \frac command. And also an \msum command (medium-sized sum), based on the nccmath package. Another solution would be to use the `tabstackenginepackage and its\alignCenterstack` command. Here is a demonstration of all theses possibilities, with different vertical alignments: \documentclass{article} ...


2

As a workaround you can use \textstyle inside the aligned environment: \documentclass{standalone} \usepackage{amsmath} \begin{document} text $\begin{aligned}\textstyle \sum_{i=1}^\infty&=1\\ \textstyle \sum_{i=1}^\infty&=1 \end{aligned}$ more text \end{document} But it would be better to find better solution. It's more like a hack.


3

\documentclass{article} \usepackage{mathtools} \begin{document} \begin{align*} KP &= e^{-\lambda} \Big( \frac {\nu'}{r} +\frac {1}{r}\Big) -\frac {1}{r^2} \\[2ex] \Rightarrow \frac {dP}{dr} &= - \frac { P+\rho (P) c^2}{r(r-2u)} \Big[ \frac {K}{2} P r^3 +u \Big] \tag {**} \end {align*} \end{document}


7

Here's some more alternatives for reference: % arara: pdflatex \documentclass{report} \usepackage{mathtools} \begin{document} \[ \lim_{n\to\infty} \dfrac{1}{s_n^2}\sum_{i=1}^n \int_{|x\mathrlap{-\mu_i|>\varepsilon s_n}} (x-\mu_i)^2f_i(x)dx=0 \]% Using \verb!\limits! \[ \lim_{n\to\infty} \dfrac{1}{s_n^2}\sum_{i=1}^n ...


7

I prefer the following. The important point is that there's no value to give: it uses the \mathrlap command from mathtools and you decide at which place in the index you set it. \documentclass{report} \usepackage{mathtools} \begin{document} \[ \lim_{n\to\infty}{\dfrac{1}{s_n^2}\sum_{i=1}^n \int_{|x\mathrlap{-\mu_i|>\varepsilon s_n}} ...


6

(updated to incorporate the comments by @egreg, barbara beaton, and @DCh) I assume your document uses a roman (serif) font rather than a sans-serif font for mathematics. To ensure that constants are typeset consistently using upright Roman letters, it's handy to create a dedicated macro named, say, \ct that uses the following macros in a nested fashion: ...


3

Setting the breakable portion in a \parbox of sufficient width allows you to break it at will as well as properly align the content: \documentclass{article} \usepackage{mathtools} \usepackage[boxed,vlined,linesnumbered,noresetcount]{algorithm2e} \begin{document} \begin{algorithm}[tp] \texttt{out} $\vcentcolon=$ \textsc{foo}($\texttt{x} \rightarrow ...


2

Something like this, with adjustable indentation. The solution defines a new command called \myindent constituted with \newline and \makebox{#1}{}, taking one argument for length. Code \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage[boxed,vlined,linesnumbered,noresetcount]{algorithm2e} \newcommand{\myindent}[1]{ \newline\makebox[#1cm]{} } ...


4

There are no chapter, section or subsection environments. Don't use \begin{chapter} and similar constructions, even if they appear to work. You can make the decision about the numbering automatic: if the section counter is zero, as it is after \chapter, the theorems will be numbered “chapter.theorem”, otherwise “chapter.section.theorem”. No manual resetting ...


2

Use the chngcntr package and a manual reset before the 2nd chapter, via \setcounter{thm}{0}. There might be some resetting afterwards necessary! \documentclass{scrreprt} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amsthm} \usepackage{chngcntr}% \theoremstyle{plain}% default \newtheorem{thm}{Theorem}[section] \newtheorem{lem}[thm]{Lemma} ...


4

To get better horizontal spacing of the \oset macro -- specifically, to make its spacing the same as that of a "relational operator" (which is the case for \to) -- you could encase the macro's definition in a \mathrel wrapper. To make the \oset macro usable for different symbols/letters in the base and superscript positions, it's necessary to introduce a ...


8

\documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \DeclareMathSymbol{j}{\mathalpha}{operators}{`j} \begin{document} \begin{equation} j ~~is~~ \mathrm{j} \end{equation} \end{document}


6

\documentclass[11pt,b5paper]{scrreprt} \usepackage[left=2.8cm,right=2.8cm]{geometry} \usepackage{amsmath,amsfonts} \begin{document} \noindent\hrulefill X\hrulefill \begin{gather} \mathbf{R} = \notag\\ \begin{bmatrix} \mu + n_x^2 \left( 1 - \mu \right) & n_x n_y \left( 1 - \mu \right) - n_z \nu & n_x n_z \left( 1 - \mu \right) + ...


0

The Keplerfonts for text and math: \documentclass{article} \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} \usepackage{amsmath,bm} \usepackage{kpfonts} \usepackage[math]{blindtext} \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} \begin{document} \begin{align*} y_{it} &= \mathbf{x'_{\mathit{it}}}\bm{\beta} + \mathbf{z'_\mathit{i}} \bm{\alpha} + \varepsilon_\mathit{it} \\ &= ...


0

Here is a sample of three different math fonts: fourier, based on Adobe Utopia, completed by heuristica to have optical smallcaps, superior and inferior figures, and oldstyle figures. MinionPro, based on Adobe's Minion Pro opentype font that comes with Adobe Reader. mathdesign's garamond option, based on URW Garamond No 8, completed by garamondx to have ...


0

I used the bm package for the bold greek. The font looks like stix. \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath,stix,bm} \begin{document} \begin{equation*} \begin{split} y_{it} &= \mathbf{x'}_{it}\bm{\beta} + \mathbf{z'}_i \bm{\alpha} + \varepsilon_{it} \\ &= \mathbf{x'}_{it}\bm{\beta} + c_i + \varepsilon_{it} \end{split} ...


1

You have to use {\boldsymbol\beta}:


4

Simple I’d write it as plain text Meeting at 5:00 Or if you need it in math mode with \text $\text{5:00} + \text{1:00} = \text{6:00}$ But I can’t see a reason for that since times arn’t math and the colon can be misread as divide: 5:30 = 5/30 = \frac{5}{30}. Advanced You could even define a command to have a globe appearance that can be change later ...


0

It is my personal taste, you might not agree with me. Here is my rule of thumb. We know that the first line of all items of "list" (enumerate, itemize, etc) are left aligned. So if the item starts with a multi-line aligned equation, use aligned environment (plus t passed to its optional argument) rather than align*. See my the second item in my example ...


0

The problem is simply that you can't use align inside equation (and LaTeX will show you an error message that should tell you something is wrong with this). Just delete the \begin{equation} and \end{equation} lines. This should work fine: \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \begin{document} \begin{align} \mathbf{x_{t}=f_{t}(x_{t-1},u_{t})}\\ ...


4

\documentclass[border=12pt,preview]{standalone} % change it back to your document class \usepackage{mathtools} \begin{document} \section*{side-by-side} \begin{align} x_{t} &= f_{t}(x_{t-1},u_{t}) & y_{t} &=g_{t}(x_{t},v_{t}) \label{eq:label1} \end{align} Please see equation~\ref{eq:label1} on page~\pageref{eq:label1}. \section*{split with ...


4

\documentclass{article} \usepackage{mathtools} \begin{document} \boldmath \begin{align} \begin{aligned} x_t &= f_t(x_{t-1},u_t)\\ y_t &= g_t(x_t,v_t) \end{aligned}\label{eq:state-space&obs-equ} \end{align} \unboldmath \begin{align} x_t &= f_t(x_{t-1},u_t) & y_t &= g_t(x_t,v_t) \end{align} \end{document} However, it is not a ...


6

Here you go: \documentclass{article} \usepackage[leqno]{amsmath} \makeatletter \newcommand{\leqnomode}{\tagsleft@true} \newcommand{\reqnomode}{\tagsleft@false} \makeatother \begin{document} \begin{align} f(x) &= ax^2 + bx + c \\ g(x) &= dx^2 + ex + f \end{align} \reqnomode \begin{align} f(x) &= ax^2 + bx + c \\ g(x) &= dx^2 + ...


14

This is because Word has no descenders, while A long word and Another long word both have a descender (g). Here are some options: \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \begin{document} $\underbrace{\text{A long word}}_{=a}$, $\underbrace{\text{Another long word}}_{=b}$, $\underbrace{\text{Word}}_{=c}$ $\underbrace{\text{A long word}}_{=a}$, ...



Top 50 recent answers are included