Two of my columns have extra space before them which is not supposed to be there. I think the issue has to do with using \multicolumn inside a table with type X columns.

enter image description here

My source code:

\documentclass{IEEEtran}


\usepackage{fontspec}


\usepackage{tabularx}

    \newcolumntype{C}{ >{ \arraybackslash \Centering } X }

    \renewcommand \tabularxcolumn [1] {  >{ \centering } m{#1} }



\renewcommand{\tabularxcolumn}[1]{ >{\centering}m{#1} }


\usepackage{booktabs}

\usepackage{ragged2e}

\usepackage{makecell}

\usepackage{multirow}
\setlength\extrarowheight{10pt}

\usepackage{float}

\usepackage[defaultmathsizes, subdued, italic, LGRgreek, symbolre, symbolmisc]{mathastext}

\newcommand{\multcolhsize}[1]{\dimexpr #1\hsize + #1\tabcolsep + \tabcolsep \relax}

\usepackage{adjustbox}

\begin{document}

\newcommand{\RERInteractionSumm}{\sum_{j \in \mathnormalbold{R}, \thinspace j \neq i} P_{R, \thinspace j}^{\adjustbox{raise=0.1\baselineskip}{*}} \thinspace w_{ij}}

\begin{table*}[htb]

    % Table options

        % Caption
        \caption{Comparison of SDSCR obtained by}
        \label{table:SDSCR_full_v_app_27}

        % Center the table
        \centering


    \begin{tabularx}{\textwidth}{>{\hsize=0.9\hsize}C |>{\hsize=0.9\hsize}C |>{\hsize=0.9\hsize}C |>{\hsize=1.35\hsize}C |>{\hsize=1.35\hsize}C |>{\hsize=0.9\hsize}C |>{\hsize=0.9\hsize}C |>{\hsize=0.9\hsize}C |>{\hsize=0.9\hsize}C}

        \toprule


        $\left| V_{R, \thinspace i} \right|^{2}$ &  $\left| Z_{RR, \thinspace ii} \right|$& $P_{R, \thinspace i}^{\adjustbox{raise=0.05\baselineskip}{*}}$
        & \multicolumn{2}{>{\hsize=\multcolhsize{2}}C|}{
                        $ \displaystyle \RERInteractionSumm$
                                                    }
        & \multicolumn{2}{>{\hsize=\multcolhsize{2}}C|}{
                        $\left| S_{eq, \thinspace i}^{\adjustbox{raise=0.05\baselineskip}{*}} \right|$
                                                        }
        & \multicolumn{2}{>{\hsize=\multcolhsize{2}}C}{$SDSCR_{i}$}
        \\
        \Xhline{0.2mm}


        $0.992$ & $0.0941$ & $3$ & $-1.05-0.095j$ & $-0.95-0.513j$ & $1.95$ & $2.11$ & $5.41$ & $4.99$
        \\


        $0.995$ & $0.0921$ & $3$ & $-1.08-0.108j$ & $-0.97-0.529j$ & $1.92$ & $2.10$ & $5.62$ & $5.16$
        \\


        $0.997$ & $0.0910$ & $3$ & $-1.09-0.115j$ & $-0.98-0.537j$ & $1.91$ & $2.09$ & $5.73$ & $5.25$
        \\

        $0.999$ & $0.0900$ & $3$ & $-1.11-0.124j$ & $-1.00-0.547j$ & $1.90$ & $2.08$ & $5.86$ & $5.35$
        \\


        $1.001$ & $0.0886$ & $3$ & $-1.12-0.132j$ & $-1.01-0.557j$ & $1.88$ & $2.07$ & $6.01$ & $5.46$
        \\

        $1.003$ & $0.0872$ & $3$ & $-1.14-0.143j$ & $-1.02-0.569j$ & $1.86$ & $2.06$ & $6.16$ & $5.58$
        \\

        $1.005$ & $0.0858$ & $3$ & $-1.16-0.154j$ & $-1.04-0.582j$ & $1.85$ & $2.05$ & $6.34$ & $5.72$
        \\

        $1.007$ & $0.0843$ & $3$ & $-1.18-0.166j$ & $-1.06-0.596j$ & $1.83$ & $2.04$ & $6.54$ & $5.87$
        \\

        $1.009$ & $0.0827$ & $3$ & $-1.21-0.180j$ & $-1.07-0.612j$ & $1.80$ & $2.02$ & $6.77$ & $6.04$
        \\

        $1.011$ & $0.0809$ & $3$ & $-1.23-0.196j$ & $-1.09-0.630j$ & $1.78$ & $2.01$ & $7.02$ & $6.23$
        \\

        \bottomrule



    \end{tabularx}

\end{table*}


\end{document}
  • The width calculations for the three header cells that span two columns each are incorrect. Anyway, it's not even necessary to calculate their widths. It suffices to the the basic c column type: \multicolumn{2}{c}{...} – Mico Nov 17 at 21:11
  • 1
    In addition to what @Mico said, I would never use tabularx for a data table of numbers, X columns are all about line breaking of text to a calculated width. – David Carlisle Nov 17 at 21:41
  • don't use math italic for multi-letter words, as you image shows they are spaced incorrectly for a word, use \mathrm{eq} and \mathrm{SDSCR} – David Carlisle Nov 17 at 21:42
  • Using a tabularx environment for the table at hand seems like vast overkill. Moreover, one of the hallmark capabilities of a tabularx environment, viz., automatic line breaking, is never used. I suggest you use an array environment or, if the tabular must absolutely, positively, span the width of both columns, a tabular* environment. With either environment, there's no need to calculate cell widths, etc.

  • I would also like to suggest that you omit all vertical lines —-they’re not needed —- and be less generous with the value of \extrarowheight.

    enter image description here


\documentclass{IEEEtran}

\usepackage{fontspec}
\usepackage{array,ragged2e,booktabs,float}
\newcolumntype{C}{>{\Centering\arraybackslash} X }
\setlength\extrarowheight{4pt}

\usepackage[defaultmathsizes, subdued, italic, 
    LGRgreek, symbolre, symbolmisc]{mathastext}
\newcommand{\RERInteractionSumm}{%
   \sum_{j\in\mathbf{R},j\neq i} P_{R,j}^* w_{ij}}

\begin{document}
\begin{table*}[htb]
\caption{Comparison of SDSCR obtained by...}
\label{table:SDSCR_full_v_app_27}

\centering
%% First version: use an 'array' env.

$\begin{array}{@{} *{9}{c} @{}}
\toprule
| V_{R,i}|^{2} & | Z_{RR,ii}| & P_{R,i}^* & 
\multicolumn{2}{c}{\displaystyle\RERInteractionSumm}& 
\multicolumn{2}{c}{| S_{eq,  i}^*|}& 
\multicolumn{2}{c@{}}{\mathrm{SDSCR}_{i}}
\\
\cmidrule(r){1-1}
\cmidrule(lr){2-2}
\cmidrule(lr){3-3}
\cmidrule(lr){4-5}
\cmidrule(lr){6-7}
\cmidrule(l){8-9}
0.992 & 0.0941 & 3 & -1.05-0.095j & -0.95-0.513j & 1.95 & 2.11 & 5.41 & 4.99
\\
0.995 & 0.0921 & 3 & -1.08-0.108j & -0.97-0.529j & 1.92 & 2.10 & 5.62 & 5.16
\\
0.997 & 0.0910 & 3 & -1.09-0.115j & -0.98-0.537j & 1.91 & 2.09 & 5.73 & 5.25
\\
0.999 & 0.0900 & 3 & -1.11-0.124j & -1.00-0.547j & 1.90 & 2.08 & 5.86 & 5.35
\\
1.001 & 0.0886 & 3 & -1.12-0.132j & -1.01-0.557j & 1.88 & 2.07 & 6.01 & 5.46
\\
1.003 & 0.0872 & 3 & -1.14-0.143j & -1.02-0.569j & 1.86 & 2.06 & 6.16 & 5.58
\\
1.005 & 0.0858 & 3 & -1.16-0.154j & -1.04-0.582j & 1.85 & 2.05 & 6.34 & 5.72
\\
1.007 & 0.0843 & 3 & -1.18-0.166j & -1.06-0.596j & 1.83 & 2.04 & 6.54 & 5.87
\\
1.009 & 0.0827 & 3 & -1.21-0.180j & -1.07-0.612j & 1.80 & 2.02 & 6.77 & 6.04
\\
1.011 & 0.0809 & 3 & -1.23-0.196j & -1.09-0.630j & 1.78 & 2.01 & 7.02 & 6.23
\\
\bottomrule
\end{array}$

\vspace{1cm}

%%% Second version: use a 'tabular*' env.
\setlength\tabcolsep{0pt}
\begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}} *{9}{c} }
\toprule
$| V_{R,i}|^{2}$ & $| Z_{RR,ii}|$ & $P_{R,i}^*$ & 
\multicolumn{2}{c}{$\displaystyle\RERInteractionSumm$}& 
\multicolumn{2}{c}{$| S_{eq,  i}^*|$}& 
\multicolumn{2}{c}{$\mathrm{SDSCR}_{i}$}
\\
\cmidrule{1-1}
\cmidrule{2-2}
\cmidrule{3-3}
\cmidrule{4-5}
\cmidrule{6-7}
\cmidrule{8-9}
$0.992$ & $0.0941$ & $3$ & $-1.05-0.095j$ & $-0.95-0.513j$ & $1.95$ & $2.11$ & $5.41$ & $4.99$
\\
$0.995$ & $0.0921$ & $3$ & $-1.08-0.108j$ & $-0.97-0.529j$ & $1.92$ & $2.10$ & $5.62$ & $5.16$
\\
$0.997$ & $0.0910$ & $3$ & $-1.09-0.115j$ & $-0.98-0.537j$ & $1.91$ & $2.09$ & $5.73$ & $5.25$
\\
$0.999$ & $0.0900$ & $3$ & $-1.11-0.124j$ & $-1.00-0.547j$ & $1.90$ & $2.08$ & $5.86$ & $5.35$
\\
$1.001$ & $0.0886$ & $3$ & $-1.12-0.132j$ & $-1.01-0.557j$ & $1.88$ & $2.07$ & $6.01$ & $5.46$
\\
$1.003$ & $0.0872$ & $3$ & $-1.14-0.143j$ & $-1.02-0.569j$ & $1.86$ & $2.06$ & $6.16$ & $5.58$
\\
$1.005$ & $0.0858$ & $3$ & $-1.16-0.154j$ & $-1.04-0.582j$ & $1.85$ & $2.05$ & $6.34$ & $5.72$
\\
$1.007$ & $0.0843$ & $3$ & $-1.18-0.166j$ & $-1.06-0.596j$ & $1.83$ & $2.04$ & $6.54$ & $5.87$
\\
$1.009$ & $0.0827$ & $3$ & $-1.21-0.180j$ & $-1.07-0.612j$ & $1.80$ & $2.02$ & $6.77$ & $6.04$
\\
$1.011$ & $0.0809$ & $3$ & $-1.23-0.196j$ & $-1.09-0.630j$ & $1.78$ & $2.01$ & $7.02$ & $6.23$
\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular*}
\end{table*}

\end{document}
  • 1
    +1 for not using my package:-) – David Carlisle Nov 17 at 21:43

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

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