2

I am wrting this equation with

\begin{eqnarray}
u_k^{n+1}=\argmin_{u_k \epsilon X} 
 \left\lbrace \alpha \left|\left|\partial_t\left[\left(\delta(t)+\frac{j}{\pi t}\right)*u_k(t)\right]e^{-j\omega_kt}\right|\right|_2^2
\\ +\left|\left| f(t)-\sum_i u_i(t) + \frac{\lambda(t)}{2} \right|\right|_2^2  \right\rbrace
\end{eqnarray}

but getting error

 ! Extra }, or forgotten \right.][1]
5

You have not balanced \left and \rights across line break. Further, better not use eqnarray but use amsmath facilities like align etc.

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{mathtools}
\DeclareMathOperator*{\argmin}{arg\,min}
\begin{document}
  \begin{equation}
  \begin{multlined}
u_k^{n+1}=\argmin_{u_k \epsilon X}
 \left\lbrace \alpha \left|\left|\partial_t\left[\left(\delta(t)+\frac{j}{\pi t}\right)*u_k(t)\right]e^{-j\omega_kt}\right|\right|_2^2 \right.\\ 
\left.+\left|\left| f(t)-\sum_i u_i(t) + \frac{\lambda(t)}{2} \right|\right|_2^2  \right\rbrace
\end{multlined}
\end{equation}
\end{document}

I have used multlined from mathtools (which also loads amsmath).

enter image description here

Improved version:

Instead of using \left and \right pair (which gives more space as noted by Mico and needs to be balanced across lines), you can use Biggl and Biggr from amsmath. Here is a screen shot from amsldoc page 15, (texdoc amsldoc):

enter image description here

And for double bar use a \DeclarePairedDelimiter like

 \DeclarePairedDelimiter{\norm}{\lVert}{\rVert}

and use it like \norm[\bigg]{<content>} (Thanks to Mico)

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{mathtools}
\DeclareMathOperator*{\argmin}{arg\,min}
\DeclarePairedDelimiter{\norm}{\lVert}{\rVert}
\begin{document}
  \begin{equation}
  \begin{multlined}
    u_k^{n+1}=\argmin_{u_k \epsilon X}
        \Biggl\lbrace \alpha \norm[\bigg]{\partial_t\left[\left(\delta(t)+\frac{j}
            {\pi t}\right)*u_k(t)\right]e^{-j\omega_kt}}_2^2 \\
        +\norm[\bigg]{f(t)-\sum_i u_i(t) + \frac{\lambda(t)}{2}}_2^2  \Biggr\rbrace
\end{multlined}
\end{equation}
\end{document}

enter image description here

One could, as suggested by @MaxNoe, get automatic sizing of the double vertical bars by using the "starred" version of the command, viz., \norm*{<content>}. However, in the example at hand, doing so would generate delimiters that are too large -- hence the use of the explicit sizing directive, \norm[\bigg]{<content>}, in the code above.

  • The \left|\left| and \right|\right| instructions leave too much whitespace between the vertical bars. Since the bars presumably denote a "norm", it would be better to write either \left\lVert and \right\rVert or, better still, set up a norm "operator" via \DeclarePairedDelimiter{\norm}{\lVert}{\rVert} in the preamble and then write \norm[\bigg]{...} in the equation. – Mico Feb 4 '15 at 11:57
  • \left|\left| schould be \left\Vert, possibly with a \DeclarePairedDelimiter – MaxNoe Feb 4 '15 at 11:57
  • haha, same time – MaxNoe Feb 4 '15 at 11:57
  • @Mico I was in a hurry to go home. Thanks, now answer updated. – user11232 Feb 4 '15 at 12:26
  • you can use the starred version of \norm to get the size automatically, \norm*{\frac{1}{2}} – MaxNoe Feb 4 '15 at 12:29

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.