One possibility is to use my technique at How are big operators defined? to define \varsum
, which takes the \Sigma
glyph from the same font family and scales it to the size of \sum
.
This approach has the advantage of using a glyph already in that font family. However, you may find the weight too heavy is the downside.
Note that I don't have the neo Euler font, so I demonstrate below with the eulervm
package. After showing the \Sigma
glyph on the first line, I then compare equations using \sum
and \varsum
in all math styles.
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{eulervm,scalerel,mathtools}
\DeclareMathOperator*{\varsum}{\scalerel*{\Sigma}{\sum}}
\begin{document}
\begin{align}
\Sigma &= 0\\
(x+a)^n &= \sum_{k=0}^{n}\binom{n}{k} x^k a^{n-k}\\
(x+a)^n &= \varsum_{k=0}^{n}\binom{n}{k} x^k a^{n-k}
\end{align}
\begin{align}
(x+a)^n &= \textstyle\sum_{k=0}^{n}\binom{n}{k} x^k a^{n-k}\\
(x+a)^n &= \textstyle\varsum_{k=0}^{n}\binom{n}{k} x^k a^{n-k}
\end{align}
\[
\scriptstyle(x+a)^n = \sum_{k=0}^{n}\binom{n}{k} x^k a^{n-k}\\
\]
\[
\scriptstyle(x+a)^n = \varsum_{k=0}^{n}\binom{n}{k} x^k a^{n-k}\\
\]
\[
\scriptscriptstyle(x+a)^n = \sum_{k=0}^{n}\binom{n}{k} x^k a^{n-k}\\
\]
\[
\scriptscriptstyle(x+a)^n = \varsum_{k=0}^{n}\binom{n}{k} x^k a^{n-k}\\
\]
\end{document}
And here is a version that takes the \Sigma
glyph in \scriptstyle
by defining \varsum
as
\DeclareMathOperator*{\varsum}{\scalerel*{\scriptstyle\Sigma}{\sum}}
It produces a wider result