6

I'd like to use underbrace in a formula:

\begin{IEEEeqnarray}{r/C/l?s}
P_{a} \left( a | \gamma, \epsilon, \hat{K} \right)
 & = & \frac{1}{1 + \frac{\gamma}{\epsilon} \times
\underbrace{
 \frac{\alpha_{X} \left( p_{f} | \hat{K} \right)} {\alpha_{Y} \left( a | \hat{S} \right)}
}_{\Gamma \left( a | \hat{K} \right)}
}
 & \IEEEnonumber
\end{IEEEeqnarray}

Compared to the formula without underbrace, the the underbraced part is enlarged:

\begin{IEEEeqnarray}{r/C/l?s}
P_{a} \left( a | \gamma, \epsilon, \hat{K} \right)
 & = & \frac{1}{1 + \frac{\gamma}{\epsilon} \times
% \underbrace{
 \frac{\alpha_{X} \left( p_{f} | \hat{K} \right)} {\alpha_{Y} \left( a | \hat{S} \right)}
% }_{\Gamma \left( a | \hat{K} \right)}
}
 & \IEEEnonumber
\end{IEEEeqnarray}

How can I avoid the change of the font-size when underbracing parts of a formula?

7

Add \textstyle inside \underbrace; better, define a new command.

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{IEEEtrantools}
\newcommand{\tunderbrace}[1]{\underbrace{\textstyle#1}}

\begin{document}
\begin{IEEEeqnarray}{r/C/l?s}
P_{a} ( a | \gamma, \epsilon, \hat{K} )
 & = & \frac{1}{1 + \frac{\gamma}{\epsilon} \times
\tunderbrace{
 \frac{\alpha_{X} ( p_{f} | \hat{K} )} {\alpha_{Y} ( a | \hat{S} )}
}_{\Gamma ( a | \hat{K} )}
}
 & \IEEEnonumber
\end{IEEEeqnarray}
\end{document}

enter image description here

By the way, you should have discovered why using indiscriminately \left and \right is wrong.

You probably also want to use \mid instead of |:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{IEEEtrantools}
\newcommand{\tunderbrace}[1]{\underbrace{\textstyle#1}}

\begin{document}
\begin{IEEEeqnarray}{r/C/l?s}
P_{a} ( a \mid \gamma, \epsilon, \hat{K} )
 & = & \frac{1}{1 + \frac{\gamma}{\epsilon} \times
\tunderbrace{
 \frac{\alpha_{X} ( p_{f} \mid \hat{K} )} {\alpha_{Y} ( a \mid \hat{S} )}
}_{\Gamma ( a \mid \hat{K} )}
}
 & \IEEEnonumber
\end{IEEEeqnarray}
\end{document}

enter image description here

  • 1
    I would use a different name for \mid. This looks like conditional propability, i.e. \let\mid\given would make more sense as a first approx, i.e. P_a(a \given y,\epsilon,\hat{K}) it makes a lot more sense when reading the than using \mid. And as a second approx I'd use a macro that allowed \given to grow along the outer fences. – daleif Jan 20 '14 at 16:11
  • 1
    @daleif OFFTOPIC! I usually prefer \newcommand\given{\,|\,} because in that context the large spacing around \mid doesn't look good, IMHO. – Manuel Jan 20 '14 at 16:12
  • 1
    @Manuel, I do the same thing, but I tend to use \: not, \,, but that is a personal preference. Though, since \given can be used in many different contexts, I have a definition for each, such that the macro that gives the outer fences redefines \given, then e.g. a \Set{a\in A \given a^2>0} does not need to have the same symbol as used in a conditional propability. – daleif Jan 20 '14 at 16:20
6

The following example is based on egreg's solution (last example with \mid). It defines \KeepStyleUnderBrace that also works for the other math styles automatically:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{IEEEtrantools}

\newcommand*{\KeepStyleUnderBrace}[1]{%
  \mathop{%
    \mathchoice
    {\underbrace{\displaystyle#1}}%
    {\underbrace{\textstyle#1}}%
    {\underbrace{\scriptstyle#1}}%
    {\underbrace{\scriptscriptstyle#1}}%
  }\limits
}

\begin{document}
  \begin{IEEEeqnarray}{r/C/l?s}
    P_{a} ( a \mid \gamma, \epsilon, \hat{K} )
    & = &
    \frac{1}{1 + \frac{\gamma}{\epsilon} \times
      \KeepStyleUnderBrace{
        \frac{\alpha_{X} ( p_{f} \mid \hat{K} )}
             {\alpha_{Y} ( a \mid \hat{S} )}
      }_{\Gamma ( a \mid \hat{K} )}
    }
    & \IEEEnonumber
  \end{IEEEeqnarray}
\end{document}

Result

  • 1
    This is a great kludge. IMHO this should be the default behaviour of \underbrace. – ScumCoder Sep 30 '16 at 13:19

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.