# Tag Info

2

You can try with flalign \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath,amssymb} \begin{document} \noindent Some equations: \begin{flalign} && f(n) &= 8,199 \times 10^{-6} n + 8,418 & \{n \in \mathbb{N}\} \label{equ:Laufzeit} \\ && t_e &\leq \frac{t_i}{5} & \{t_e \in \mathbb{Q}^+\},\;\{t_i \in \mathbb{N}\;|\;5f(n) \leq t_i ...

0

Why don't use align for both purposes? align is totally fine also for a single equation \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{amsfonts} \begin{document} \begin{align} t_e &\leq \frac{t_i}{5} && \{t_e \in \mathbb{Q}^+\},\;\{t_i \in \mathbb{N}\} \label{equ:MaxAusführungszeit} \end{align} \end{document}

2

You have a large 6x6 matrix. I know of no fully automated method to make it fit into the available width of the text block, unless it entails reducing the font size to the point where it becomes necessary to supply a magnifying glass. I can suggest two "manual" adjustment methods, though: Assuming the textblock is fairly wide and the font size is not too ...

1

For such a cases is intended multlined environment from mathools package: \documentclass[12pt,border=1mm,preview]{standalone} \usepackage{mathtools} \begin{document} \begin{gather} Eq1 \\ Eq2 \\ % and long equation Eq3 a=\begin{multlined}[t] \text{first part of very long equation}\\ \text{second part of long equation}\\ \text{and ...

0

I may be able to offer a set of ugly abominations of dirty solutions here, for which I will probably get bashed from more advanced users ^_^. So take them only as last resort. If too long means too wide and too wide means slightly too wide, then you may do something like \documentclass{article}% \usepackage{graphicx} \begin{document}% % ...

1

Here's another solution that keeps your basic align/array setup. The desired alignment is achieved by (a) measuring the width of the largest fractional term and (b) placing the 0-terms in boxes of said width. I would further like to suggest that you (i) insert a bit of whitespace between the three equations and (ii) indicate explicitly the dependence of ...

1

You can use cases environment for this kind of equations. For your problem You could define multicases envinment and use phantom command to get correct alignment: \documentclass[11pt]{scrreprt} \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} %\usepackage[latin1]{inputenc} \usepackage{amsmath} \makeatletter \newenvironment{multicases}[1] {\let\@ifnextchar\new@ifnextchar ...

2

Use the p column specifier instead of r: \begin{array}{>{\RaggedLeft$}p{6em}<{$}l} It needs the $..$ definition because its contents is in text mode: \documentclass[11pt]{scrreprt} \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{array,ragged2e} \begin{document} \begin{align}\label{eq:RawOffsetCalculation} ...

1

Do it manually, with \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \begin{document} \begin{align} \ \frac{d\langle v_{dcL} \rangle _0}{dt}&=\frac{1}{C_{dcL}}\Big[2 \langle S_{D2} \rangle ^R_1\langle i_{tp} \rangle ^R_1+\\ &\langle S_{D2} \rangle ^I_1\langle i_{tp} \rangle ^I_1-\langle S_{i1} \rangle ^R_1\langle i_{fi1} \rangle ^R_1 ...

2

In addition to Christian Hupfer's answer, some more fundamental guidance for the future: When LaTeX prints an error message, it breaks or ends the line at the point where the error occurs. Or, more precisely, to quote accurately from the manual: The error locator line is broken at the point where TeX stopped reading the input. In other words (in this ...

0

Hm, very unusual request ... however if you persist, try \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{tabularx} \begin{document} \begin{subequations} \begin{tabularx}{\hsize}{@{}XXXc@{}} $$\label{eq:UBCs_D100} Re = \frac{U L}{\nu}, \notag \addtocounter{equation}{1}$$ ...

2

So you want to align something? \begin{align} f(x)&=y &&\text{tralala} \end{align} if you want to stick with equation you could simply tell latex to ignore the width of the text $$f(x)=y \rlap{\quad \text{tralala}}$$

2

To get aligned to line up with the first line remember the [t] option. Don't use \text for anything but textual comments in display math. This _\text{el} is not a textual comment. Better to use another construction. \documentclass[a4paper]{memoir} \usepackage{mathtools} \DeclareMathOperator\Tr{Tr} % for text only subscripts ...

1

It's easiest to \let the defcounter to that of equation within your environment(s). That way defcounter is stepped whenever equation would be: \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \newcounter{defcounter} \makeatletter \newenvironment{defeq}{% \let\c@equation\c@defcounter% equation is equivalent to defcounter ...

1

Method Insert math macro (from the menu or the "\foo:=" button on the toolbar) a. For Name type say "qp" . b. For TeX type exactly "\mathbb Q ^\scalebox{.5 {#1" The result should look like "Q\scalebox{.5}{#1}". This will be output in the LaTeX. c. For Lyx type say "\mathbb Q ^#1 _\circ". The result should look like "Q°#1". This will be displayed in ...

3

There's no need to issue \singlespacing, which is causing your vertical mis-alignment. Regardless, you can also use a tabular to stack content vertically within math mode: \documentclass{article} \setlength{\parindent}{0pt} \setlength{\parskip}{12pt plus 1pt minus 1pt} \usepackage{amsmath,array,setspace} \usepackage[margin=25mm]{geometry} % Margins ...

3

Use the \tag{<your label>} command to insert a custom label as you wish like this \tag{*}: \documentclass[12pt]{report} \usepackage{braket} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsmath} \begin{document} \textbf{Proof-} Every element of $\Delta(G)\Delta(G,N)\subset N'$ can be written as $$(x-1)y(n-1)$$ where $$x,y\in G$$ and $$n\in N$$. Now, because we ...

2

Without expl3, you can convert integers to whatever you want with: \ifcase#1\or\or bis\or ter\or quater\or quinquies\or sexies\or septies\or octies\or novies\or decies\fi By substituting #1 by the number you want. In this case, we can create a macro, and pass \value{equation} as argument. In any case, I don't know what's the way the arabic numbers in ...

4

Perhaps the following set of commands might be something you're interested in: \documentclass{article} \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} \usepackage[frenchb]{babel} \usepackage{mathtools,refcount,xparse} % http://tex.stackexchange.com/a/254255/5764 \ExplSyntaxOn \seq_new:N \bislist \seq_set_split:Nnn \bislist {;} ...

1

I propose two solutions: with a multline environment, and with aligned together with the facilities of mathtools, which extends (and loads) amsmath. I don't this the split equation that looks like a matrix is a good layout – unless I didn't understand what you meant. Note eqnarray shouldn't be used: use align from amsmath instead. ...

2

Not sure, if I got you right, but here you are: % arara: pdflatex \documentclass[12pt,oneside,a4paper]{report} \pagestyle{plain} \usepackage[% ,total={6.8 in,9.1 in} ,top=1.1 in ,left=0.8 in ]{geometry} \usepackage{mathtools} % loads amsmath \usepackage{bm} \begin{document} ...

1

The command to remove the equation number is \notag. Here a MWE. \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \begin{document} \begin{gather} \rho=a*b \notag\\ \alpha=2*\rho. \end{gather} \end{document}

5

Try $$\begin{gathered} \rho=a*b \\ \alpha=2*\rho. \label{eqn_one} \end{gathered}$$ equation provides one number for content, which is in gathered environment. Number is vertically centered. It centers two equations. For use of gathered, you need load package amsmath in preamble.

0

Here are two alternatives: The first uses a different symbol to indicate the footnote. The second re-words the sentences to eliminate a use of footnote. \documentclass[12pt]{article} \usepackage[symbol*]{footmisc} \DefineFNsymbols*{lamport}{\dagger\ddagger\S\P\|% {**}{\dagger\dagger}{\ddagger\ddagger} } \begin{document} ... To fulfil this requirement, ...

2

Avoid footnotes to math material (and avoid footnotes in general). In this case you should at least have the footnote marker after the comma, but it's just less confusing. I'd reword the paragraph, taking also into account the fact that εmach is an important ingredient in the formula; footnotes should only contain material that can be skipped. ...

0

I suggest the following rewrite that does not need a footnote: ... multiplied by $1+\epsilon_\textnormal{mach}$ where $\epsilon_\textnormal{mach}$ is the smallest number such that $\epsilon_\textnormal{mach} + 1 > 1$. I fully agree with daleif that footnote markers (whether they are numerical or letters or symbolics) are just confusing when applied to ...

1

How about putting the whole thing into a figure (one-column document) or figure* environment (two-column document)? I.e., you could do something like: \begin{figure}% \begin{align} I(a,b) &= \int_{[a,b]} x^d\lambda (x) \\ &= \frac{1}{10^b a!}\int_{[a,b]} x^6\lambda (x) \end{align} \end{figure}% Your equation would float, so it would not ...

1

For maximum readability, you may put the equation at the bottom of the page like this (without the need to modify the equation at all): \documentclass{article} \usepackage{multicol,amsmath,lipsum} \usepackage[margin=2cm]{geometry} \begin{document} \begin{multicols}{2} % \enlargethispage{-2cm} \begin{picture}(0,0) ...

1

The best approach would be to introduce some new symbols such as Z=\sin(\theta_3-\theta_2) in order to get it easier to read and shorter to typeset. Assuming that you need all those terms in one equation, you could possibly do like the following: % arara: pdflatex \documentclass[twocolumn]{article} \usepackage{mathtools} \usepackage{blindtext} ...

2

We can make the whole group fit one column if we break some equations and use the \medmath command (from nccmath) which reduces the formulae size by ~80%. I add another solution based on the split environment from cuted (a component of the sttools bundle) which allows to have full width formulae in a two-column environment, but in contrast to table*, is ...

3

My understanding of the equations you're trying to display isn't sufficient to judge if it's sensible to introduce additional line breaks in order to make them fit in a single column of the two-column document layout that's provided by the IEEEtran class. If it doesn't really make sense to introduce additional line breaks, I would suggest that you place ...

5

You can use the half of the height of the node content (roughly) to adjust the baseline \documentclass{article} \usepackage{tikz} \begin{document} \lambda = \begin{tikzpicture}[baseline={(0,{-0.5*height("$\alpha_2$")*1pt})}] \draw(1,0) -- (3,0) node[below,midway]{$\scriptstyle\alpha_2$}; \draw[fill=white]foreach\x in{1,2,3}{(\x ...

3

This can also be done with TABstacks. EDITED for =& the TABstack norm, instead of &=, so as to get proper spacing around the =. \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath,tabstackengine} \stackMath \begin{document} \setstackgap{L}{15pt} \alignLongstack{ A =& 0011 0000 0_2\\ S =& 1101 0000 0_2\\ P =& 0000 ...

7

Use the tbtags option to the amsmath package: tb stands for "top or bottom"; when the equation numbers are on the right the tag will be placed at the bottom of the block, when the numbering is on the left, the tags will be placed at the top. The opposite option is centertags. The split environment is defined by the amsmath package, but if you load ...

3

I'd propose something like this: The code: \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \begin{document} \begin{multline*} f_{xx}(t,x) = \dfrac{1}{\alpha}\biggl(-\dfrac{x\left( \exp(x^2/4t) \left(2t+x^2\right) \right)}{2t} \cdot 2t^{5/2} \bigl(\exp(x^2/4t)+\sqrt{1/t}\, \bigr)^2\bigr) \\ - \bigl( ( \exp(x^2/4t) ( 2t - x^2 ) +2\sqrt{t} \bigr) ...

1

I suggest you indent the second line relative to the first and indent the third line even more to indicate the mathematical structure of the full formula; as per your follow-up comment, I've placed square brackets around the material in lines two and three; replace the two \sqrt{\dfrac{1}{t}} subformulas with \sqrt{1/t}; not use \left( and \right to ...

2

\documentclass[10pt,a4paper]{article} \usepackage{amsmath} % for equation* and bmatrix environment \usepackage{anyfontsize} \setcounter{MaxMatrixCols}{20} % for the large matrices \begin{document} I'm trying to figure out the pattern here. You might consider a submatrix representation of the form \begin{equation*} \left( \begin{array}{c|c|c|c} A(1,1) ...

3

Your input \Big1+( should be 1+\Bigl( Also the other \Big tokens should be changed: use \Bigl in front of an opening delimiter and \Bigr in front of a closing delimiter. Similarly for \Bigg, which should be either \Biggl or \Biggr. Use \exp, not {\rm exp} and \,\mathrm{d} in place of {\rm d}. The \rm command has been deprecated for 20 years. If you ...

1

Using stacks: \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath,stackengine} \stackMath \begin{document} $\sum_{p,q}g^{pq}A_{1\ldots \stackengine{2pt} {\scriptstyle p} {\scriptstyle\text{ath position}\rule[1pt]{2ex}{.5pt}\mkern-5mu\raisebox{1.1pt} {\stackon[-.1pt]{\rule{.5pt}{9.1pt}}{\uparrow}}}{U}{r}{F}{T}{S} \ldots \stackengine{2pt} {\scriptstyle ... 0 A simpler, yet not exactly identical, solution without using tikz is: \documentclass{article} \begin{document} \[ \begin{array}{c} A_{1\ldots pq\ldots4}\\ \;\;\swarrow\;\searrow\\ a\mbox{th position}\qquad b\mbox{th position} \end{array}$ \end{document}

0

Do you want this? \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \newcommand\Item[1][]{% \ifx\relax#1\relax \item \else \item[#1] \fi \abovedisplayskip=0pt\abovedisplayshortskip=0pt~\vspace*{-\baselineskip}} \begin{document} \begin{enumerate} \item \begin{enumerate} \Item \begin{align*} A \cap (B \cup C) & = x \in A \cap ...

2

This is not exactly what you want, but tray, maybe you liked ... \documentclass[12pt,border=2mm,preview]{standalone} \usepackage{array,amsmath} \usepackage{lipsum} \begin{document} \lipsum[1] \begin{minipage}[t]{0.48\hsize} $$\label{eq:i} \tag{i} a=b$$ \end{minipage}\quad\begin{minipage}[t]{0.48\hsize} ...

4

Here is an idea: pass the alignment operator & into the macro when you need it and {} otherwise. Keeps it simple. \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \newcommand\myeq[1]{2y_3 #1= x} \begin{document} \noindent Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, $\myeq{}$, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna ...

2

Based on Bernad's answer, I propose using widetext. Yes, this fails "Fit [...] in a single column", but I assume this is useful nonetheless. \documentclass[twocolumn]{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{lipsum} \usepackage{widetext} \setlength{\columnsep}{0.6cm} \begin{document} \lipsum[2] % \begin{widetext} \begin{align*} \begin{bmatrix} ...

0

add “floatperchapter” at the option of \documentclass[]{}

2

A solution combining a smaller font size, the flalign* environment and breaking the middle matrix in two: \documentclass[twocolumn]{article} \usepackage{geometry} \usepackage{mathtools} \usepackage{lipsum} \setlength{\columnsep}{0.6cm} \begin{document} \lipsum[2] % {\footnotesize\setlength\arraycolsep{3pt} \begin{flalign*} & \mathrlap{ ...

0

Try this: \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \begin{document} \begin{equation*}\left(\begin{array}{c} x_n \\ y_n \\ z_n \end{array} \right) = \left( \begin{array}{ccc} \cos\theta\cos\psi & -\cos\phi\sin\psi +\sin\phi\sin\theta\cos\psi & \sin\phi\sin\psi +\cos\phi\cos\psi\sin\theta \\ \cos\theta\sin\psi & \cos\phi\cos\psi ...

5

It is best to divide this up into smaller elements, the 3x3 matrix is simply too big. Giving names to the columns and writing them out separately provides narrower text. Below I give two version, the first using the convenient amsmath package, the second with standard LaTeX commands. In the standard LaTeX version, note that array is appropriate in math ...

2

Use multline or split provided by amsmath package. Use multline to split equations without alignment (first line left, last line right) Use split to split equations with alignment Here are examples: The codes are as follows: (i).Use equation: $$1+2+3+4+8x+7=1+2+3+4+4x+35 \\ \Rightarrow x=7$$ (ii).Use \emph{multline} to ...

3

You'd probably need something like this (simple cases cannot handle this) \documentclass[a4paper]{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \begin{document} \left\{\begin{aligned} f(x)&=\tfrac{1}{12} \cdot r, & g(x) &= \tfrac{1}{24} \cdot x, & x&<12 \\ f(x)&=1, &g(x) &= \tfrac{1}{8} \cdot x - 1, & ...

Top 50 recent answers are included