Here is the code I have that produces the output below. I wanted to learn if there is a way to close the gap around '\cdots'. And similarly between '=' and '\sum' on left, 'sum' and '\mathbb{P}' on right.

    \mb{S}_T\\\nu_T\in\mb{P}^N(\mb{S}_T)}} \cdots

Related Latex output

Note: If the solution is complicated, no need to spend time as this document is not required to be esthetic. I only want to learn. Also, not sure about the tag.

1 Answer 1


You're getting that wide spacing because of the width of the expressions in your \substack expression. Arguably that's not really what you want.

The simplest route to what you want is to use \! to insert negative thin spaces to tighten things up (I found three \! on either side of the \cdots looked ok. It's possible to make a wrapper around \substack that will cause LaTeX to ignore its width for spacing purpose, but that brings things too close together so I would lean against that option because you'll almost certainly end up with the subscripts bumping up against each other. Here's what I did and its results:

\newcommand{\Substack}[1]{\hbox to 0pt{\hss $\substack{ #1}$\hss}}

  = \sum_{\Substack{x_T\in \mb{S}_T\\\nu_T\in\mb{P}^N(\mb{S}_T)}} \cdots
    \sum_{\Substack{x_1\in \mb{S}_1\\\nu_1\in\mb{P}^N(\mb{S}_1)}}

Appearance of above LaTeX output with overlapping subscripts

  • Thank you, \! indeed tighten a bit. Is it straightforward to do the wrapper around \substack? I just wanted to try.
    – Jo'
    Commented Oct 22, 2020 at 0:11
  • I've updated my answer with a wrapper code and its result
    – Don Hosek
    Commented Oct 22, 2020 at 1:15
  • Adding \hspace{0.6em} before and after \cdots actually worked really well, thanks.
    – Jo'
    Commented Oct 22, 2020 at 3:22

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .