# how to draw the following schematic diagram using Tikz?

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usetikzlibrary{shapes,arrows}
\begin{document}
\tikzstyle{block} = [draw, fill=white, rectangle,
minimum height=3em, minimum width=6em]
\tikzstyle{sum} = [draw, fill=white, rectangle, node distance=1cm]
\tikzstyle{input} = [coordinate]
\tikzstyle{output} = [coordinate]

\begin{tikzpicture}[auto, node distance=2cm,>=latex']
\node [input, name=input] {};
\node [sum, right of=input] (sum) {S};
\node [block, right of=S] (E) {E};
\node [block, right of=E] (I) {I};
\node [block, above of=I] (J) {J};
\node [block, below of=J] (T) {T};

\node [output, below of=S] (output) {};
\node [output, below of=E] (output) {};
\node [output, below of=I] (output) {};
\node [output, right of=J] (output) {};
\node [output, right of=T] (output) {};

\draw [draw,->] (input) -- node {$A$} (S);
\draw [draw,->] (input) -- node {$\Lambda$} (S);
\draw [->] (S) -- node[name=$m \beta \left( \frac{I+l J}{N} \right)$] {$m \beta \left( \frac{I+l J}{N} \right)$} (E);
\draw [->] (S) -- node[name=$(1-m) \beta \left( \frac{I+l J}{N} \right)$] {$m \beta \left( \frac{I+l J}{N} \right)$} (I);
\draw [->] (E) -- node[name=k] {$k$} (I);
\draw [->] (I) -- node[name=n] {$k$} (J);
\draw [->] (I) -- node[name=$r_1$] {$r_1$} (T);
\draw [->] (J) -- node[name=$r_2$] {$r_2$} (T);
\draw [->] (T) -- node[name=$q\delta$] {$q\delta$} (E);
\draw [->] (T) -- node[name=$(1-q)\delta$] {$q\delta$} (S);

\draw [->] (s) -- node [name=$\mu$] {$\mu$}(output);
\draw [->] (E) -- node [name=$\mu$] {$\mu$}(output);
\draw [->] (I) -- node [name=$\mu+d_1$] {$\mu$}(output);
\draw [->] (J) -- node [name=$\mu+d_2$] {$\mu$}(output);
\draw [->] (T) -- node [name=$\mu$] {$\mu$}(output);

\end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}


• You are not really asking any questions. -all you do is ask for someone to do your work. Is your code not working? How does it fail? What problem do you have? – hpekristiansen Mar 19 at 22:06
• it is not working – Getachew Tilahun Mar 19 at 22:07
• Ok. How is it not working? What is causing you problems? Is there an error message, or an unexpected result? You need to edit your question to contain an explanation and an actually question. – hpekristiansen Mar 19 at 22:11
• there is the error message not display any diagram – Getachew Tilahun Mar 19 at 22:20
• Read the error message. If you do not understand it, then copy it into your question, and ask about it. In line 13 you call your node sum, but refer to it in line 14 as S. – hpekristiansen Mar 19 at 22:34

After some weeding I arrive at

\documentclass[tikz,border=3.14mm]{standalone}
\usetikzlibrary{positioning}
\begin{document}

\begin{tikzpicture}[auto, node distance=2cm,>=latex,block/.style={draw, fill=white, rectangle,
minimum height=3em, minimum width=6em}]
\node[block] (S) {S};
\node[block, right=of S] (E) {E};
\node[block, right=of E] (I) {I};
\node[block, above right=of I] (J) {J};
\node[block, below right=of I] (T) {T};
%
\draw[->] (S) -- ++ (0,2) -| node[pos=0.25,above]{$(1-m) \beta \left( \frac{I+l J}{N} \right)$} (I);
\draw[->] (S) -- node[pos=0.5,below]{$m \beta \left( \frac{I+l J}{N}\right)$}(E);
\draw[->] (E) -- node[pos=0.5,above]{$k$} (I);
\draw[->] (E.90) -- ++ (0,0.5) node[right] {$\mu$};
\draw[->] (I.20) -- node[pos=0.5,above,sloped] {$n$} (J.180);
\draw[->] (I.-20) -- node[pos=0.5,below,sloped] {$r_1$} (T.180);
\draw[->] (J) -- node[pos=0.5,right] {$r_2$} (T);
\draw[->] (T.-135) -- ++ (0,-1) -| node[pos=0.25] {$q\delta$} (E);
\draw[->] (T.-45) -- ++ (0,-2) -| node[pos=0.25] {$(1-q)\delta$} (S.-45);
\draw[->] (S.-135) -- ++ (0,-1) node[below]{$\mu$};
\draw[<-] (S.160) -- ++ (-1,0) node[left] {$\Lambda$};
\draw[<-] (S.200) -- ++ (-1,0) node[left] {$A$};
\draw[->] (T.0) -- ++ (1,0) node[right]{$\mu$};
\draw[->] (J.0) -- ++ (1,0) node[right]{$\mu+d_2$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}


Note:

1. \tikzstyle is deprecated.
2. So is the arrows library.
3. And the positioning syntax you were using.
4. You cannot give nodes a name that is a formula.
5. It is not particularly useful to give different nodes the same names.
6. This code can be optimized further. It is an attempted compromise between elegance and being very explicit and thus more understandable.
• Darn you :-) I should have known you were awake, I got only one percent of it untangled in the last 30 mins, but am learning some TikZ at last :-) I see you 3.14 and raise you tau scientificamerican.com/article/… – KJO Mar 20 at 1:55
• @KJO Sorry, I didn't know you were looking at it. (After looking at it I figured that the quickest way is to copy the formulae, delete the rest and draw it more or less from scratch.) – marmot Mar 20 at 1:57