# Latex: “curly N” for neighborhood in Graph Theory context [duplicate]

How to do the "curly N" for neighborhood in Graph Theory context? Please see the image attached.

• \mathcal{N} (in math-mode) perhaps? – user31729 Sep 12 '15 at 13:48
• Welcome to TeX.SX! You can have a look at our starter guide to familiarize yourself further with our format. And you might want to check out “How to look up a symbol?” for ideas how you can easily find a particular symbol. – Philipp Imhof Sep 12 '15 at 13:48
• Thanks for answer. But '\mathcal' do not do the trick. Also I tried all command presented in the link below: (latex.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_LaTeX_symbols) – sci9 Sep 12 '15 at 13:58
• @sci9 Using Zapf Chancery as a mathematical alphabet is at least unfortunate, but more, simply a disaster. The font has many features which make it incompatible with spacing in mathematical typesetting. Both your original image and the reproduction by Gonzalo are ugly beyond acceptable. – yo' Sep 12 '15 at 14:16
• an alphabet in the chancery tradition, but without the (unsuitable for math) flourishes is euler script (texdoc euscript), designed by hermann zapf at the urging of don knuth. the "N" from that alphabet would seem an acceptable substitute for the intended use. – barbara beeton Sep 12 '15 at 14:53

This, at least the "N", is Zapf Chancery math alphabet:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage{newtxmath}
\DeclareMathAlphabet{\mathpzc}{T1}{pzc}{m}{it}

\begin{document}

$\mathpzc{N}_{i}(t)$

\end{document}


Notice, however, that this will produce ugly results (See yo's comment) since the subscript clashes with the lower right embellishment of the "N"; one could try raising a little the subscript as I did in the example code (and perhaps was done to get the image in the question), but all and all, the result is not satisfactory; what if the subscript had been a "j"?

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage{newtxmath}
\DeclareMathAlphabet{\mathpzc}{T1}{pzc}{m}{it}

\begin{document}

Ugly:
$\mathpzc{N}_{i}(t)\quad \mathpzc{N}_{\raisebox{0.5pt}[0pt][0pt]{$\scriptstyle i$}}(t)$

Terribly ugly: $\mathpzc{N}_{j}(t)$

\end{document}


As concluding remark, it would be better to use another glyph. barbara beeton's suggestion is to use the Euler Script alphabet. Here's a comparison:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage{newtxmath}
\usepackage{euscript}
\DeclareMathAlphabet{\mathpzc}{T1}{pzc}{m}{it}

\begin{document}

$\mathpzc{N}_{i}(t)\quad\EuScript{N}_{i}(t)$

\end{document}


• Merci beaucoup. – sci9 Sep 12 '15 at 14:00
• Needed to say, do you really want the stroke of the letter clashing into the lower index? – yo' Sep 12 '15 at 14:14
• @yo' Yes, that's ugly. I'm still trying to identify the font for the "i" and the "t" in the question since the clash is less noticeable with that font. Do you happen to know which font is? – Gonzalo Medina Sep 12 '15 at 14:16
• No, and I don't have LaTeX here to make some tests. But the true problem is not in this font, it's in Chancery being a bad choice from the beginning, the clash in the image in the question is as bad as the one in your answer. BTW, the glyph in the question is slightly different from what you show -- any idea why? – yo' Sep 12 '15 at 14:19
• @yo' No idea. Are they really different or is it just a result of different zooming in the images? – Gonzalo Medina Sep 12 '15 at 14:26