4

Is there a mathmode command for these two symbols:

enter image description here

enter image description here

?

Their size and usage is going to be those of \wedge and \vee so they should match.

4
  • The normal \triangle is not enough, I suppose?
    – user31729
    Apr 8, 2015 at 10:55
  • I hope the upper angle is more acute so that it is can be used as an operation(=operator). Apr 8, 2015 at 11:03
  • That depends on your taste ;-)
    – user31729
    Apr 8, 2015 at 11:04
  • I think \vee and \wedge are good I'm looking for something like them. Apr 8, 2015 at 11:05

3 Answers 3

7

Picture mode to the rescue!

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{pict2e}

\makeatletter
\newcommand{\cwedge}{\mathbin{\mathpalette\do@cwedge\relax}}
\newcommand{\do@cwedge}[2]{%
    \sbox\z@{$#1\m@th\wedge$}%
    \dimen@=\ht\z@
    \unitlength=.005\wd\z@
    \count@=\dimen@ 
    \divide\count@\unitlength
    \begin{picture}(200,\count@)
    \roundjoin
    \polygon(25,0)(100,\count@)(175,0)
    \end{picture}%
}
\newcommand{\cvee}{\mathbin{\mathpalette\do@cvee\relax}}
\newcommand{\do@cvee}[2]{%
    \sbox\z@{$#1\m@th\vee$}%
    \dimen@=\ht\z@
    \unitlength=.005\wd\z@
    \count@=\dimen@ 
    \divide\count@\unitlength
    \begin{picture}(200,\count@)
    \roundjoin
    \polygon(25,\count@)(100,0)(175,\count@)
    \end{picture}%
}
\makeatother

\begin{document}

$A\wedge B\cwedge C_{\wedge\cwedge}$

$A\vee B \cvee C_{\vee\cvee}$

\end{document}

enter image description here

I measure the \vee and \wedge symbol (at the current size), then build the symbol with \polygon. Note that \vee and \wedge have small sidebearings, that I computed by eye to be 1/8 of the total width. (I checked the figure by superimposing the two symbols.)


Improved version

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{pict2e}

\makeatletter
\newcommand{\cveewedge@measure}[2]{%
  \sbox\z@{$#1\m@th#2$}%
  \dimen@=1.05\ht\z@
  \unitlength=.005\wd\z@
  \count@=\dimen@ 
  \divide\count@\unitlength
  \ifx#1\scriptstyle
    \linethickness{0.8\@wholewidth}%
  \else
    \ifx#1\scriptscriptstyle
      \linethickness{0.65\@wholewidth}%
    \fi
  \fi
}

\newcommand{\cwedge}{\mathbin{\mathpalette\do@cwedge\relax}}
\newcommand{\do@cwedge}[2]{%
  \cveewedge@measure{#1}{\wedge}
  \begin{picture}(200,\count@)
  \roundjoin
  \polygon(25,0)(100,\count@)(175,0)
  \end{picture}%
}
\newcommand{\cvee}{\mathbin{\mathpalette\do@cvee\relax}}
\newcommand{\do@cvee}[2]{%
  \cveewedge@measure{#1}{\vee}
  \begin{picture}(200,\count@)
  \roundjoin
  \polygon(25,\count@)(100,0)(175,\count@)
  \end{picture}%
}
\makeatother

\begin{document}

$A\wedge B\cwedge C_{\wedge\cwedge_{\wedge\cwedge}}$

$A\vee B \cvee C_{\vee\cvee_{\vee\cvee}}$

\end{document}

enter image description here

Now working also with \boldmath and even \bm

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{pict2e,pdftexcmds,bm}

\makeatletter
\newcommand{\cveewedge@measure}[2]{%
  \sbox\z@{$#1\m@th#2$}%
  \dimen@=1.05\ht\z@
  \unitlength=.005\wd\z@
  \count@=\dimen@ 
  \divide\count@\unitlength
  \ifx#1\scriptstyle
    \linethickness{0.8\@wholewidth}%
  \else
    \ifx#1\scriptscriptstyle
      \linethickness{0.65\@wholewidth}%
    \fi
  \fi
  \ifnum\pdf@strcmp{\math@version}{bold}=\z@
    \linethickness{1.5\@wholewidth}
  \fi
}

\newcommand{\cwedge}{\mathbin{\mathpalette\do@cwedge\relax}}
\newcommand{\do@cwedge}[2]{%
  \cveewedge@measure{#1}{\wedge}
  \begin{picture}(200,\count@)
  \roundjoin
  \polygon(25,0)(100,\count@)(175,0)
  \end{picture}%
}
\newcommand{\cvee}{\mathbin{\mathpalette\do@cvee\relax}}
\newcommand{\do@cvee}[2]{%
  \cveewedge@measure{#1}{\vee}
  \begin{picture}(200,\count@)
  \roundjoin
  \polygon(25,\count@)(100,0)(175,\count@)
  \end{picture}%
}
\makeatother

\begin{document}

$A\bm{\cwedge}B$

$A\wedge B\cwedge C_{\wedge\cwedge_{\wedge\cwedge}}$

$A\vee B \cvee C_{\vee\cvee_{\vee\cvee}}$

\boldmath

$A\wedge B\cwedge C_{\wedge\cwedge_{\wedge\cwedge}}$

$A\vee B \cvee C_{\vee\cvee_{\vee\cvee}}$

\end{document}

enter image description here

7
  • The lines of the new symbols are thinner for me. Apr 8, 2015 at 11:52
  • I see no thinner line. They are a bit thicker in subscripts, actually.
    – egreg
    Apr 8, 2015 at 11:58
  • i.stack.imgur.com/JBiLe.png Apr 8, 2015 at 12:11
  • for me \boldmath is active. Apr 8, 2015 at 12:12
  • @MinimusHeximus Well, it would be nice if you had added it in the question: how do you think we can guess?
    – egreg
    Apr 8, 2015 at 12:14
2

You can get these from the MnSymbol package:

\documentclass[12pt,a4paper]{article}
\usepackage{MnSymbol}
\begin{document}

$$ \medtriangledown $$

$$\medtriangleup \qquad  \wedge \qquad \vee $$

\end{document}

enter image description here

5
  • i.stack.imgur.com/jR19r.png. They are good but they don't match like vee and wedge. can you fix it? Apr 8, 2015 at 11:14
  • @MinimusHeximus What don't they match?
    – cfr
    Apr 8, 2015 at 11:25
  • @cfr they are not standing in one line. But I fixed it with using \raisebox{0.7\depth}{$\!\medtriangledown\!$} and \raisebox{-1.0\depth}{$\!\medtriangleup\!$} but raisebox is a text command I hope I can find a mathmode one. Apr 8, 2015 at 11:31
  • 1
    Usual caveat: loading MnSymbol changes the shape of all math symbols.
    – egreg
    Apr 8, 2015 at 11:41
  • sorry for changing selected answer. Apr 8, 2015 at 11:43
1

The stmaryroad fonts have triangles with a shape close to to what you want; aimple solutions consists in scaling their bold version:

\documentclass{article}

\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{stmaryrd}
\newcommand\smalltriangleup{\mathbin{\raisebox{\dimexpr\depth-0.2pt\relax}{\scalebox{0.6}{$ \boldsymbol\bigtriangleup$}}}}
\newcommand\smalltriangledown{\mathbin{\raisebox{\dimexpr\depth-0.2pt\relax}{\scalebox{0.6}{$ \boldsymbol\bigtriangledown$}}}}

\begin{document}

\[ A \wedge B\qquad A \smalltriangleup B \]%
\[ A\vee D\qquad A \smalltriangledown B \]%

\end{document} 

enter image description here

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .