2

I'm using libertine with newtxmath. Actually it is very good but some symbols don't seem good to me as in the figure. enter image description here

Can I use different font from these symbols like given below without changing the other ones? (these are from mathpazo.)

enter image description here

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[english]{babel}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage[lining]{libertine}
\usepackage[libertine,cmintegrals]{newtxmath}
\usepackage{ucs}
\usepackage{amsfonts,amsmath,amssymb}
\usepackage{graphicx}
%------------TIKZ-PGF----------------
\usepackage{tikz,pgf,pgfplots}
\pgfplotsset{compat=1.10}
\usepgfplotslibrary{fillbetween}
\usetikzlibrary{shapes.multipart}
\usetikzlibrary{patterns}
%---------------------------------

\begin{document}

\[
f\left(  \mathbf{x}|\theta\right)  =\underset{h\left(  \mathbf{x}\right)
}{\underbrace{1}}\cdot\underset{g_{1}\left(  T\left(  \mathbf{X}_{1}\right)
|\mu\right)  }{\underbrace{\left(  2\pi\sigma^{2}\right)  ^{-n/2}\exp\left[
-\frac{n\left(  \overline{x}-\mu\right)  ^{2}}{2\sigma^{2}}\right]  }%
}\underset{g_{2}\left(  T\left(  \mathbf{X}_{2}\right)  |\sigma\right)
}{\underbrace{\exp\left[  \frac{-1}{2\sigma^{2}}\sum\left(  x_{i}-\overline
{x}\right)  ^{2}\right]  }}%
\]
\[\sqrt{\exp\left[  \frac{-1}{2\sigma^{2}}\sum\left(  x_{i}-\overline
{x}\right)  ^{2}\right]}\]

$\forall\exists= \pm+-$
\end{document}
  • Which font(s) do you want them to come from? – cfr Apr 21 '14 at 3:31
  • for example computer modern or mathpazo. – mert Apr 21 '14 at 6:31
  • 1
    newtxmath provides alternatives for \forall and \exists, namely \forallAlt and \existxAlt – Guido Apr 21 '14 at 8:48
  • 1
    @Guido did you mean \existsAlt? – cfr Apr 21 '14 at 11:40
  • 1
    @cfr yes I did :-( – Guido Apr 21 '14 at 12:17
2

Adding the following at the end of your preamble should do the trick:

\DeclareSymbolFont{mysymbols}     {OMS}{cmsy}{m}{n}
\SetSymbolFont{mysymbols}  {bold}{OMS}{cmsy}{b}{n}
\DeclareSymbolFont{myoperators}   {OT1}{cmr} {m}{n}
\SetSymbolFont{myoperators}{bold}{OT1}{cmr} {bx}{n}
\DeclareMathSymbol{\forall}{\mathord}{mysymbols}{"38}
\DeclareMathSymbol{\exists}{\mathord}{mysymbols}{"39}
\DeclareMathSymbol{\pm}{\mathbin}{mysymbols}{"06}
\DeclareMathSymbol{+}{\mathbin}{myoperators}{"2B}
\DeclareMathSymbol{-}{\mathbin}{mysymbols}{"00}
\DeclareMathSymbol{=}{\mathrel}{myoperators}{"3D}

Here's the full MWE:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage[lining]{libertine}
\usepackage[libertine,cmintegrals]{newtxmath}
% \usepackage{ucs}% not compatible with utf8 inputenc - see output!
\usepackage{amsfonts,amsmath,amssymb}
\DeclareSymbolFont{mysymbols}     {OMS}{cmsy}{m}{n}
\SetSymbolFont{mysymbols}  {bold}{OMS}{cmsy}{b}{n}
\DeclareSymbolFont{myoperators}   {OT1}{cmr} {m}{n}
\SetSymbolFont{myoperators}{bold}{OT1}{cmr} {bx}{n}
\DeclareMathSymbol{\forall}{\mathord}{mysymbols}{"38}
\DeclareMathSymbol{\exists}{\mathord}{mysymbols}{"39}
\DeclareMathSymbol{\pm}{\mathbin}{mysymbols}{"06}
\DeclareMathSymbol{+}{\mathbin}{myoperators}{"2B}
\DeclareMathSymbol{-}{\mathbin}{mysymbols}{"00}
\DeclareMathSymbol{=}{\mathrel}{myoperators}{"3D}

\begin{document}

\[
f\left(  \mathbf{x}|\theta\right)  =\underset{h\left(  \mathbf{x}\right)
}{\underbrace{1}}\cdot\underset{g_{1}\left(  T\left(  \mathbf{X}_{1}\right)
|\mu\right)  }{\underbrace{\left(  2\pi\sigma^{2}\right)  ^{-n/2}\exp\left[
-\frac{n\left(  \overline{x}-\mu\right)  ^{2}}{2\sigma^{2}}\right]  }%
}\underset{g_{2}\left(  T\left(  \mathbf{X}_{2}\right)  |\sigma\right)
}{\underbrace{\exp\left[  \frac{-1}{2\sigma^{2}}\sum\left(  x_{i}-\overline
{x}\right)  ^{2}\right]  }}%
\]
\[\sqrt{\exp\left[  \frac{-1}{2\sigma^{2}}\sum\left(  x_{i}-\overline
{x}\right)  ^{2}\right]}\]

$\forall \exists \pm = + -$
\end{document}

Note that combining ucs with [utf8]{inputenc} produces warnings in the output. I've commented out ucs here but see the compilation output for other options.

The result:

Adjusted maths

  • is it also possible to use "=" symbol from computer modern? – mert Apr 21 '14 at 12:35
  • 1
    @mert See my edit. Sorry, I didn't have time to find all the bits I needed to complete this earlier as I had to go out. This code should, I think, meet all the desiderata. – cfr Apr 21 '14 at 14:56
  • @mert No problem ;). – cfr Apr 21 '14 at 18:11

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.