# Tag Info

## Hot answers tagged math-mode

7

You can use the gathered environment inside equation. MWE \documentclass{article} \usepackage{mathtools} \begin{document} \begin{equation*} \left. \begin{gathered} p \\ p \rightarrow r \\ q \rightarrow \neg r \end{gathered} \right\rbrace \quad\Rightarrow\quad\neg q \end{equation*} \end{document} Output

7

Everything weird will happen if you have more than one letter in the argument of \specialvar or something that's not a letter, but here it is: \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amssymb} \newcommand{\specialvar}[1]{% \ifnum\lccode#1=#1 \mathrm{#1}% \else \mathbb{#1}% \fi } \begin{document} $$\specialvar{t} \in \specialvar{T}$$ ...

7

You need to enclose the two summation symbols in \mathop{} and then place \limits after that. \documentclass{article} \begin{document} $$\frac{\mathop{\sum\sum}\limits_{i \neq j} \sum\limits_{x}\sum\limits_{y}[\pi_{x(i),y(j)} - \pi_{x(i)}\pi_{y(j)}]}{\sigma^2_X}$$ \end{document}

7

Another solution with \dcases* from mathtools \documentclass{article} \usepackage{mathtools} \begin{document} $x+y = \begin{dcases*} \text{true,} & if 0 < x < 5 \\ \text{false,} & otherwise \end{dcases*}$ \end{document} Output

6

Even after smashing the label width (the usual culprit as addressed in the linked question), the brace cannot shrink any more because it is the smallest size provided in Computer Modern. Some font/symbol packages define smaller curly braces. The only one I can think of off the top of my head is MnSymbol, which is unfortunate because it has several ...

6

\documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \begin{document} $x+y = \begin{cases} \mbox{true,} & \mbox{if } 0 < x < 5 \\ \mbox{false,} & \mbox{otherwise} \end{cases}$ \end{document} would give you:

5

Here's some possibility allowing you to easily define different integral symbols with decorations adapting to the math style: The code: \documentclass{article} \usepackage{graphicx} \usepackage{amssymb} \def\IntKern{} \newcommand\MySymbolint[2][0pt]{% \mathchoice ...

4

There is a minimum size of the underbrace and there's nothing to do with it, unless a different strategy is used: TikZ bracket decorations, that are just awful, in my opinion underbrackets instead of underbraces The best strategy, however, is to use underbraces in very rare occasions. If you want that the underbrace is slimmer and shorter, you can ...

4

You want it like this? \documentclass{article} \usepackage{mathtools} \begin{document} $\left( x-1 \right) (\underbrace{\text{du}}_{ \mathclap{\text{what is this?}} })$ \end{document}

4

Please unlearn your habit of using \left ... \right all over Drop the [], they do nothing to the interpretation of that column use the s column, and in that column just write say \meter In code \documentclass[10pt,a4paper]{report} \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{graphicx} ...

3

It's been too long since I looked at the code, but it seems that the test does not work in math mode, so to fix it for this case, I stuffed it in an \mbox and saved an intermediate flag. And in case one wonders why I resort to an intermediate flag \tmp, it is to keep the actual output outside of the \mbox, which will allow it to take on the current ...

2

This should let you start. Use the aligned environment to get the equation split in two lines. MWE \documentclass[10pt,a4paper]{article} \pagestyle{plain} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{amsthm} \usepackage{bm} \usepackage{IEEEtrantools} \begin{document} \begin{IEEEeqnarray*}{rCl} \Sigma^{*}(\hat{\bm{\beta}}^{S+})&= ...

2

Here is a work around using ulem package. Adjust 0.55ex in \setlength{\ULdepth}{0.55ex} %% adjust this Code: \documentclass[12pt]{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage[normalem]{ulem} \setlength{\ULdepth}{0.55ex} %% adjust this \begin{document} \uline{$X/P$} \end{document} Or if you really want to reduce the size: ...

2

Sometimes you may want to pass LaTeX code as an argument to another program. In that case the code is typically wrapped in quotes. Using quote to mean a prime will confuse the second program. For example to type TeX in graphical output of MATLAB one may use something like str='$$F^\prime$$' text(0,0,str,'Interpreter','latex') to print $F'$ at location ...

2

You can revert to a classical array environment. \documentclass[12pt]{scrartcl} \usepackage{mathtools} \begin{document} \begin{gather*} \left. \begin{array}{c} p \\ p \rightarrow r \\ q \rightarrow \neg r \end{array} \right\rbrace \end{gather*} \end{document}

2

This can be done with the help of the collcell package (loads array). Just define your column as \newcolumntype{U}{>{$[\collectcell\si} l <{\endcollectcell]$}} and you're done. MWE \documentclass[10pt,a4paper]{report} \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{graphicx} ...

2

You add no meaning with the units in brackets; in my opinion it's even wrong, as usually brackets denote abstract dimensions, such as “length·time–1” or “force·length”. The s column type is what you're looking for. I also removed all \: spacing commands, which are wrong, and set “eff” in upright type. Note also that Where:\bigskip would allow a page break ...

2

Both “Hom” and ”H” are similar to “log”, so they should be typeset in the text font (upright). However it's not a sin to have different opinions. The most important thing is that you use macro definitions: \DeclareMathOperator{\Hom}{Hom}% preferred %\DeclareMathOperator{\Hom}{\mathnormal{Hom}}% with Euler type \DeclareMathOperator{\HH}{H}% preferred ...

1

The use of the array environment in your equation or inline math would be the easiest solution I suppose. It also doesn't really require a gather*or gatheredenvironment: \documentclass{article} \begin{document} \[ \left. \begin{array}{c} p \\ p \rightarrow r \\ q \rightarrow \neg r \\ ...

1

Very straightforward with a stack. \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage[usestackEOL]{stackengine} \stackMath \begin{document} \begin{equation*} \left.\Centerstack{ p \\ p \rightarrow r \\ q \rightarrow \neg r }\right\} \Rightarrow \neg q \end{equation*} \end{document}

1

You could create a smaller version of the slash symbol. The screenshot below illustrates its look in the second "X over P" expression. \documentclass{article} \usepackage{graphicx} \newcommand\smalldiv{\smash{\raisebox{0.29ex}{\scalebox{0.8}{/}}}} \begin{document} $\underline{\smash{X/P}}$ \underline{$X\smalldiv P$} \end{document} The optimal adjustment ...

1

If you use lualatex, you can place the \limits outside of the braces: {\sum\sum}\limits_{i\neq j} However, this will throw an error if compiled with pdflatex or xelatex, then you need a \mathop: \mathop{\sum\sum}\limits_{i\neq j} If you need this more often, you can define a new mathoperator (needs amsmath), if you use the starred Version, the default ...

Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible