0

This question already has an answer here:

enter image description here

I already wrote my conference paper in IEEE format and the following code fits well in one column. Now, when I need it in ACM format, it won't fit in one column.

\documentclass[sigconf]{acmart}    
\usepackage{booktabs} % For formal tables

% Copyright
%\setcopyright{none}
%\setcopyright{acmcopyright}
%\setcopyright{acmlicensed}
\setcopyright{rightsretained}
%\setcopyright{usgov}
%\setcopyright{usgovmixed}
%\setcopyright{cagov}
%\setcopyright{cagovmixed}    

\usepackage{ctable}
\usepackage{multirow}
\usepackage{balance}
\usepackage[intoc]{nomencl}
\usepackage{listings}
\usepackage{multicol}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{flushend}

\copyrightyear{} 
\acmYear{} 
\setcopyright{acmcopyright}
\acmConference{}{}}
\acmPrice{}
\acmDOI{}
\acmISBN{}

\begin{document}
\title{}

\author{xxxx   xxxx}
\affiliation{%
  \institution{xx-xx-Institute\\ University of xx, xx}
}
\email{}

% The default list of authors is too long for headers}
\renewcommand{\shortauthors}{ et al.}

\begin{abstract}

\end{abstract}

%
% The code below should be generated by the tool at
% http://dl.acm.org/ccs.cfm
% Please copy and paste the code instead of the example below. 
%
 \begin{CCSXML}
<ccs2012>
<concept>
<concept_id>10002951.10003227.10003233.10003288</concept_id>
<concept_desc>Information systems~Blogs</concept_desc>
<concept_significance>300</concept_significance>
</concept>
</ccs2012>
\end{CCSXML}

\ccsdesc[300]{I}

\keywords{}

\maketitle
\input{sections/introduction}
\input{sections/relatedwork}
\input{sections/PredictingAttributes}
\input{sections/Classification}
\input{sections/PrototypeandImplementation}
\input{sections/conclusion}

\bibliographystyle{ACM-Reference-Format}
\bibliography{sample-bibliography} 

\end{document}

I am using these packages, 

    \documentclass[sigconf]{acmart}
    \usepackage{booktabs} 
    \setcopyright{rightsretained}
    \usepackage{ctable}
    \usepackage{multirow}
    \usepackage{balance}
    \usepackage[intoc]{nomencl}
    \usepackage{listings}
    \usepackage{multicol}
    \usepackage{amsmath}
    \usepackage{flushend}

marked as duplicate by Werner, user36296, Community Sep 29 '17 at 18:15

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • Can you please share your MWE correctly? New lines are completely omitted. – Sina Ahmadi Sep 21 '17 at 12:48
  • @Sina What do you mean please by MWE? sorry I heard it for the last time and I googled it without finding anything related. – Krebto Sep 21 '17 at 12:50
  • Minimum working example. Your code produces error. You should provide at least a working example so that I can make what you need. – Sina Ahmadi Sep 21 '17 at 12:52
  • Ok, I will post the whole Latex code – Krebto Sep 21 '17 at 12:53
  • please, make from your document small, complete document with only relevant packages and definition, which reproduce your problem. your table is simply to wide for one column. consider to write it over two columns. – Zarko Sep 21 '17 at 13:01
2

You can simply use scalebox{}{} in order to fit your table to your desired scale.

Here is my solution for your problem:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{graphics}


\begin{document}

\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{0.95}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{1pt}

\begin{table}
\centering
\label{fig:top20list}
\caption{List of top 20 Mutual Information Words for male (left) and female(right) class with the highest mutual information}

\scalebox{0.5}{
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
WORD & MI & PFC & PMC & F\_CT & M\_CT & WORD & MI & PFC & PMC & F\_CT & M\_CT \\ \hline
        users & 0.003 & 0.086 & 0.914 & 5 & 53 & love & 0.004 & 0.635 & 0.365 & 399 & 229 \\ \hline
        data    & 0.002 & 0.180 & 0.820 & 16 & 73 & mom & 0.004 & 0.785 & 0.215 & 117 & 32 \\ \hline
        similar & 0.002 & 0.219 & 0.781 & 25 & 89 & husband* & 0.004 & 0.796 & 0.204 & 109 & 28 \\ \hline
        its     & 0.002 & 0.371 & 0.629 & 251 & 425 & my & 0.003 & 0.557 & 0.443 & 1082 & 859 \\ \hline
        game*   & 0.002 & 0.309 & 0.691 & 80 & 179 & lunch* & 0.003 & 0.756 & 0.244  & 102  & 33 \\ \hline
        team*   & 0.002 & 0.284 & 0.716 & 55 & 139 & food* & 0.003 & 0.665 & 0.336  & 204  & 103 \\ \hline
        system* & 0.002 & 0.293 & 0.707 & 58 & 140 & lovely & 0.003 & 0.774 & 0.226  & 89  & 26 \\ \hline
        topps   & 0.002 & 0.000 & 1.000 & 0 & 21 & me & 0.003 & 0.557 & 0.443  & 873  & 694 \\ \hline
        video*  & 0.002 & 0.311 & 0.689 & 70 & 155 & meal* & 0.002 & 0.789 & 0.211  & 71  & 19 \\ \hline
        govern* & 0.002 & 0.256 & 0.744 & 32 & 93 & eating & 0.002 & 0.726 & 0.274  & 98  & 37 \\ \hline
        global* & 0.002 & 0.158 & 0.824 & 9 & 48 & her & 0.002 & 0.586 & 0.414  & 432  & 305 \\ \hline
        technologies & 0.002 & 0.042 & 0.958 & 1 & 23 & beaut* & 0.002 & 0.639 & 0.361  & 207  & 117 \\ \hline
        john    & 0.002 & 0.254 & 0.746 & 30 & 88 & baby* & 0.002 & 0.717 & 0.283  & 99  & 39 \\ \hline     
        model   & 0.002 & 0.227 & 0.773 & 20 & 68 & gorgeous* & 0.002 & 0.831 & 0.169  & 49  & 10 \\ \hline     
        web     & 0.002 & 0.273 & 0.727 & 36 & 96 & ladies & 0.002 & 0.846 & 0.154  & 44  & 8      \\ \hline
        bill    & 0.002 & 0.255 & 0.745 & 28 & 82 & cute* & 0.002 & 0.750 & 0.250  & 75  & 25      \\ \hline
        developer & 0.002 & 0.045 & 0.955 & 1 & 21 & fabulous* & 0.002 & 0.881 & 0.119  & 37  & 5      \\ \hline
        notion  & 0.001 & 0.077 & 0.923 & 2 & 24 & potato & 0.002 & 1.000 & 0.000  & 20  & 0     \\ \hline
        opera*  & 0.001 & 0.268 & 0.732 & 30 & 82 & kids* & 0.002 & 0.650 & 0.350  & 154  & 83      \\ \hline
        mike    & 0.001 & 0.176 & 0.824 & 9 & 42 & she & 0.002 & 0.579 & 0.421  & 398  & 289     \\
  \hline
    \end{tabular}
    }
\end{table}

\end{document}

The following images demonstrate your original table vs. its reduced scale.

enter image description here

  • 2
    and to article add magnifying glass for readers :-) – Zarko Sep 21 '17 at 13:02
  • I see. However, this technique can be useful in some cases where a considerably small place is needed to demonstrate a table correctly. It's definitely not the best choice though. – Sina Ahmadi Sep 21 '17 at 13:07
  • 1
    @sina, yes, this formatting is possible, but any serious publisher will refuse to accept such formatting. – Zarko Sep 21 '17 at 13:29
  • @Krebto, consider my first comment. so reduced table is worthless. – Zarko Sep 21 '17 at 13:30
  • It really depends on the article. I have ACM article full of detailed tables where using this technique didn't pose any problem. It is not my preferred way of solving the problem, but in some cases there is really no other choice. – Sina Ahmadi Sep 21 '17 at 13:36

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.