Box some equations inside align

I'm trying to make something like this:

But I have just can't figure out how. I have tried with empheq and tikz, but I can't get it to work with only some boxes inside align. I have also tried with \boxed and \Aboxed, no success either.

I have a few example of what I have tried:

\documentclass[12pt]{article}
\usepackage[danish]{babel}
\usepackage [utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage{moreverb}
\usepackage{listings}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{verbatim}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{empheq}

\begin{document}
\begin{align*}
& 1 &(p \wedge q) \wedge r && \text{premise} \\
& 2 & p \wedge q && \wedge_e_1 1 \\
& 3 & r && \wedge_e_2 1 \\
& 4 & p && \wedge_e_1 2 \\
& 5 & q && \wedge_e_2 2 \\
& 6 & q \wedge r && \wedge_i 5,3 \\
& 7 & p \wedge (q \wedge r) && \wedge_1 4,6
\end{align*}
\end{document}


This gives me something like the format but no boxes. Then I thought I could ditch the first column by just numerate the equations on the left with: \documentclass[12pt, leqno]{article}, but I have no idea on have I'm going to box some of the lines.

So I hope one of you experts can help me make something like this in Latex.

EDIT: I'm getting a bit closer my goal, I have now succesfully mad one box:

$$\begin{tabular}{ccl} 1 & \neg p \rightarrow p & \text{premise} \\ \cline{2-3} 2 & \multicolumn{1}{|c}{\neg p} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\text{assumption}} \\ 3 & \multicolumn{1}{|c}{p} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\rightarrow_e 2,1} \\ 4 & \multicolumn{1}{|c}{\bot} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\neg_e 3,2} \\ \cline{2-3} 5 & \neg \neg p & \neg_i 2-4 \\ 6 & p & \neg \neg_e 5 \end{tabular}$$


So the question is now. How do I make a Box inside the Box?

• Welcome to TeX.SX! Please help us to help you and add a minimal working example (MWE) that illustrates your problem. It will be much easier for us to reproduce your situation and find out what the issue is when we see compilable code, starting with \documentclass{...} and ending with \end{document}. – user31729 Sep 20 '14 at 15:17
• As long as it looks something like the image, then I don't really care how it's done. I just normally use align to equations. – Kasperhogh Sep 20 '14 at 15:33
• In your edit, where exactly do you want to put the first box and the second? You may use the MWE I provided to get what you are looking for. – azetina Sep 20 '14 at 21:01

Here is a MWE using the tikzmark library.

\documentclass[letterpaper]{article}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{array}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usetikzlibrary{tikzmark}

\begin{document}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\begin{tabular}{l@{\hspace{2em}}ll}
1 & $p\wedge q\rightarrow r$ & premise\\
2 & \pgfmark{a}$p$ & assumption\\
3 & \pgfmark{c}$q$ & assumption\\
4 & $p\wedge q$ & $\wedge i\ 2,3$\pgfmark{d}\\
5 & $q\rightarrow r$ & $\rightarrow i\ 3-5$\pgfmark{b}\\
6 & $p\rightarrow (q\rightarrow r)$ & $\rightarrow i\ 2-6$
\end{tabular}
\tikz [remember picture]{
\draw [overlay,->] ([shift={(-1em,2ex)}]pic cs:a) rectangle ([shift={(1.5em,-1.25ex)}]pic cs:b);
\draw [overlay,->] ([shift={(-0.75em,2ex)}]pic cs:c) rectangle ([shift={(2.5em,-1.25ex)}]pic cs:d);}
\end{document}


On a quick note, since most of your content is to be in mathmode, you can use an array instead of a tabular. I have edited your example below:

{\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
$\begin{array}{ccl} 1 & \neg p \rightarrow p & \text{premise} \\ \cline{2-3} 2 & \multicolumn{1}{|c}{\neg p} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\text{assumption}} \\ 3 & \multicolumn{1}{|c}{\pgfmark{e}p} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\rightarrow_e 2,1\pgfmark{f}} \\ 4 & \multicolumn{1}{|c}{\bot} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\neg_e 3,2} \\ \cline{2-3} 5 & \neg \neg p & \neg_i 2-4 \\ 6 & p & \neg \neg_e 5 \end{array}$}
\tikz [remember picture]{%
\draw [overlay,->] ([shift={(-1.5em,2ex)}]pic cs:e) rectangle ([shift={(2em,-1.25ex)}]pic cs:f);}

• You are a lifesaver. I used the array solution you came up with. Brilliant. i would never have figured this out myself – Kasperhogh Sep 21 '14 at 18:53
• @Kasperhogh Glad it helped. Don't hesitate to ask any questions here at TeX.SX and happy TeXing! – azetina Sep 22 '14 at 0:59