# Automatic sorting and compression of a range of numeric-style citation call-outs

Hi All I want to display the following citation call-outs as [1-10] instead of [1-3,3-4,4-7,7-10].

I use the following code

\documentclass[a4paper,10pt,twocolumn]{article}
\usepackage[top=1in, bottom=1.25in, left=0.3in, right=0.3in]{geometry}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{dcolumn}
\usepackage{enumerate}
\renewcommand{\thesection}{\Roman{section}}
\renewcommand{\thesubsection}{\thesection.\Roman{subsection}}
\usepackage{mathrsfs,amsmath}
\usepackage{mathtools}

\bibliographystyle{unsrt}

\usepackage[section]{placeins}
\usepackage{authblk}

\begin{document}

\cite{xin2011multitaper,wang2009multitaper,al2010multitaper,%
al2010multitaper,jataprolu2012optimal,chiang2009optimal,%
yousif2014new,jataprolu2012optimal}

\bibliography{Ref}{}
\bibliographystyle{plain}

\end{document}

• Welcome! Your question may receive more attention if you provide a bib file that makes use of your citation keys, and if you strip off all unnecessary packages. I'm also struggling to understand why you call \bibliographystyle twice. – user121799 Nov 23 '17 at 5:36
• Thanks for reply! I added \bibliographystyle as I though it is necessary to exhibit the differences in a certain style – hobey omar Nov 25 '17 at 15:52

The main issue with your code is that two of the entry keys in the \cite instruction are repeated. Eliminate the repeats, and you'll immediately obtain the desired format of the sorted citation call-outs.

By the way, since there are only 6 distinct entry keys in your \cite instruction, the most you can get is [1-6], not [1-10].

Separately, do also make up your mind whether you want to employ the unsrt or the plain bibliography style. (You should have gotten a warning message about this during the BibTeX run.) There can be only one bibliography style in effect in your sample document.

A full MWE (note that I've eliminated all unnecessary instructions from the preamble):

\RequirePackage{filecontents}
\begin{filecontents}{Ref.bib}
@misc{xin2011multitaper,   author={X}, title={AA}, year=3001}
@misc{wang2009multitaper,  author={W}, title={BB}, year=3002}
@misc{al2010multitaper,    author={A}, title={CC}, year=3003}
@misc{jataprolu2012optimal,author={J}, title={DD}, year=3004}
@misc{chiang2009optimal,   author={C}, title={EE}, year=3005}
@misc{yousif2014new,       author={Y}, title={FF}, year=3006}
\end{filecontents}

\documentclass[a4paper,10pt,twocolumn]{article}
\usepackage[top=1in, bottom=1.25in,hmargin=0.3in]{geometry}

\usepackage[noadjust]{cite} % 'sort' and 'compress' are enabled by default
\bibliographystyle{unsrt}% or: \bibliographystyle{plain}

\begin{document}

al2010multitaper,jataprolu2012optimal,chiang2009optimal,%
yousif2014new,jataprolu2012optimal}

good: \cite{xin2011multitaper,wang2009multitaper,
al2010multitaper,jataprolu2012optimal,
chiang2009optimal,yousif2014new}

\bibliography{Ref}
\end{document}

• Thanks it is a big help . I 'm wondering about your data base items \begin{filecontents}{Ref.bib} @misc{xin2011multitaper, author={X}, title={AA}, year=3001} \end{filecontents} – hobey omar Nov 25 '17 at 16:09
• I use bibtex style form google scholar in separate file called Ref.bib and i wrote as follow @article{childers1977cepstrum, title={The cepstrum: A guide to processing}, author={Childers, Donald G and Skinner, David P and Kemerait, Robert C}, journal={Proceedings of the IEEE}, volume={65}, number={10}, pages={1428--1443}, year={1977}, publisher={IEEE} } – hobey omar Nov 25 '17 at 16:13
• @hobeyomar - You wrote, "I 'm wondering about your data base items". Those are obviously made up out of thin air. All I was trying to do is to create dummy entries that could be called in \cite instructions. (If you want to provide the actual, real entries, feel free to do so by editing your original query.) The point I made in the answer stands, though: How do you expect to create a citation call-out of the form [1-10] if only 6 distinct entries are being cited? Please advise. – Mico Nov 25 '17 at 17:29
• I don't argue bout "How do you expect to create a citation call-out of the form [1-10] if only 6 distinct entries are being cited?" you are true , I just repeat them as a mistake . but I just 've asked about your entry data base as I noticed from that one I followed – hobey omar Nov 25 '17 at 17:43
• @hobeyomar - I'm afraid I didn't understand what you're trying to say in your comment. Very sorry. – Mico Nov 25 '17 at 19:36