Re: Equation Array
Thanks Paul, I've tried it but the first column is right aligned and
the third is left aligned. I'm kind of new on the subject and the
references I have from a friend make them left and right aligned,
respectively. Is there an standard way of aligning them?
-
Julio Rojas
jcredbe...@gmail.com
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Paul A. Rubin<ru...@msu.edu> wrote:
> Julio Rojas wrote:
>>
>> Thanks, I've already done that, but no option seems to be of help. I'm
>> trying to put an integer programing model and every restriction should
>> be numbered and aligned like:
>>
>> Maximize Z (1)
>> Subject to:
>> Z=sum(Xi) (2)
>> Xi+Xj<=1 for all i,j in P, i> Xi,Xj in {0,1} for all i,j in P (4)
>>
>> So, some rows are numbered, the left column is left aligned and the
>> right column is right aligned. How can this numbered array be done?
>> -
>> Julio Rojas
>> jcredbe...@gmail.com
>>
>>
>>
>> 2009/9/2 Ignacio García <ignacio.gmora...@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> Julio Rojas <jcredbe...@...> writes:
>>>
>>>> Dear all, is there a way to individually label some equations of an
>>>> equation array? Or some rows from an array?
>>>> -
>>>> Julio Rojas
>>>> jcredbe...@...
>>>>
>>> Please have a look at Help>Math (or Ecuaciones) where you can
>>> find a very fine description of this issue in the section 19,
>>> 19.3 and/or 19.4.
>>>
>
> Julio,
>
> Actually, I think what you want is in section 19.1. Inside an equation
> array environment, Alt-m n toggles numbering of the entire array (separate
> number on each line), while Alt-m Shift-n toggles numbering of just the line
> the cursor occupies.
>
> BTW, I too write integer programs. A while back I came across a reference
> to an article ("Avoid eqnarray!" by Lars Madsen, The PracTeX Journal #4,
> 2006) that claims that eqnarray is somehow evil. The complaints are mainly
> about spacing (including the possibility that equation numbers are
> overwritten or crowded off the line). He recommends AMS math environments
> or the mathenv package. Then again, I came across a post on sci.op-research
> that as I recall advocated eqnarray.
>
> Anyway, here's an alternative I found somewhere:
>
> \begin{alignat*}{7}
> & \text{maximize } & z= & & 2x_{1} & & + & & 3x_{2} & & + & & 4x_{3}\\
> & \text{subject to: } & & & 44x_{1} & & & & & & + & & 50x_{3} &
> \ge900\\
> & & & & & & & & & & & & \llap{\ensuremath{x_{1},x_{2},x_{3}}} &
> \ge0
> \end{alignat*}
>
> FWIW,
> Paul
>
>
Re: Equation Array
Julio,
Julio Rojas wrote:
Thanks Paul, I've tried it but the first column is right aligned and
the third is left aligned.
In the alignat* example? Shouldn't be -- the alignment alternates
right-left-right, so the first and third columns should have the same
alignment. Note that the first column is intentionally left empty, so
that the 'maximize' and 'subject to' are in the second column (and hence
left-aligned).
I'm kind of new on the subject and the
references I have from a friend make them left and right aligned,
respectively. Is there an standard way of aligning them?
I'm not sure there's a generally accepted standard. I like to put the
keywords (maximize, s.t.) in one column, the objective function and LHS
of constraints in a second column, the constraint direction (=,<,>) in a
third column, the RHS in the fourth column and any indexing stuff in a
fifth column, so I usually use eqnarray (critics be damned). If I'm
going to use alignat, then I'll put max/s.t. in column 2 (left aligned),
the LHS _and_ =/>/< in the third column (right aligned), the RHS in the
fourth column (left aligned) and indexing in the fifth column (right
aligned), which should work pretty well (it avoids gratuitous space in
the middle of the constraints).
I guess it's a matter of taste (unless the constraints get long enough
that eqnarray sends the equation numbers into another galaxy).
/Paul
-
Julio Rojas
jcredbe...@gmail.com
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Paul A. Rubin<ru...@msu.edu> wrote:
Julio Rojas wrote:
Thanks, I've already done that, but no option seems to be of help. I'm
trying to put an integer programing model and every restriction should
be numbered and aligned like:
Maximize Z (1)
Subject to:
Z=sum(Xi) (2)
Xi+Xj<=1 for all i,j in P, i:
Julio Rojas <jcredbe...@...> writes:
Dear all, is there a way to individually label some equations of an
equation array? Or some rows from an array?
-
Julio Rojas
jcredbe...@...
Please have a look at Help>Math (or Ecuaciones) where you can
find a very fine description of this issue in the section 19,
19.3 and/or 19.4.
Julio,
Actually, I think what you want is in section 19.1. Inside an equation
array environment, Alt-m n toggles numbering of the entire array (separate
number on each line), while Alt-m Shift-n toggles numbering of just the line
the cursor occupies.
BTW, I too write integer programs. A while back I came across a reference
to an article ("Avoid eqnarray!" by Lars Madsen, The PracTeX Journal #4,
2006) that claims that eqnarray is somehow evil. The complaints are mainly
about spacing (including the possibility that equation numbers are
overwritten or crowded off the line). He recommends AMS math environments
or the mathenv package. Then again, I came across a post on sci.op-research
that as I recall advocated eqnarray.
Anyway, here's an alternative I found somewhere:
\begin{alignat*}{7}
& \text{maximize } & z= & & 2x_{1} & & + & & 3x_{2} & & + & & 4x_{3}\\
& \text{subject to: } & & & 44x_{1} & & & & & & + & & 50x_{3} &
\ge900\\
& & & & & & & & & & & & \llap{\ensuremath{x_{1},x_{2},x_{3}}} &
\ge0
\end{alignat*}
FWIW,
Paul
Re: Equation Array
I made it with eqarray, but it "only" allows me to have 3 columns. How
did you add more columns?
I tried using alignat and it works ok, except for the fact that LyX
doesn't show proper alignment (only the first column is right aligned,
while all of the others are left aligned.
Thanks for your help.
-
Julio Rojas
jcredbe...@gmail.com
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 6:00 PM, Paul A. Rubin<ru...@msu.edu> wrote:
> Julio,
>
> Julio Rojas wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Paul, I've tried it but the first column is right aligned and
>> the third is left aligned.
>
> In the alignat* example? Shouldn't be -- the alignment alternates
> right-left-right, so the first and third columns should have the same
> alignment. Note that the first column is intentionally left empty, so that
> the 'maximize' and 'subject to' are in the second column (and hence
> left-aligned).
>
>> I'm kind of new on the subject and the
>> references I have from a friend make them left and right aligned,
>> respectively. Is there an standard way of aligning them?
>
> I'm not sure there's a generally accepted standard. I like to put the
> keywords (maximize, s.t.) in one column, the objective function and LHS of
> constraints in a second column, the constraint direction (=,<,>) in a third
> column, the RHS in the fourth column and any indexing stuff in a fifth
> column, so I usually use eqnarray (critics be damned). If I'm going to use
> alignat, then I'll put max/s.t. in column 2 (left aligned), the LHS _and_
> =/>/< in the third column (right aligned), the RHS in the fourth column
> (left aligned) and indexing in the fifth column (right aligned), which
> should work pretty well (it avoids gratuitous space in the middle of the
> constraints).
>
> I guess it's a matter of taste (unless the constraints get long enough that
> eqnarray sends the equation numbers into another galaxy).
>
> /Paul
>
>> -
>> Julio Rojas
>> jcredbe...@gmail.com
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Paul A. Rubin<ru...@msu.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>> Julio Rojas wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, I've already done that, but no option seems to be of help. I'm
>>>> trying to put an integer programing model and every restriction should
>>>> be numbered and aligned like:
>>>>
>>>> Maximize Z (1)
>>>> Subject to:
>>>> Z=sum(Xi) (2)
>>>> Xi+Xj<=1 for all i,j in P, i>>> Xi,Xj in {0,1} for all i,j in P (4)
>>>>
>>>> So, some rows are numbered, the left column is left aligned and the
>>>> right column is right aligned. How can this numbered array be done?
>>>> -
>>>> Julio Rojas
>>>> jcredbe...@gmail.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2009/9/2 Ignacio García <ignacio.gmora...@gmail.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>> Julio Rojas <jcredbe...@...> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear all, is there a way to individually label some equations of an
>>>>>> equation array? Or some rows from an array?
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> Julio Rojas
>>>>>> jcredbe...@...
>>>>>>
>>>>> Please have a look at Help>Math (or Ecuaciones) where you can
>>>>> find a very fine description of this issue in the section 19,
>>>>> 19.3 and/or 19.4.
>>>>>
>>> Julio,
>>>
>>> Actually, I think what you want is in section 19.1. Inside an equation
>>> array environment, Alt-m n toggles numbering of the entire array
>>> (separate
>>> number on each line), while Alt-m Shift-n toggles numbering of just the
>>> line
>>> the cursor occupies.
>>>
>>> BTW, I too write integer programs. A while back I came across a
>>> reference
>>> to an article ("Avoid eqnarray!" by Lars Madsen, The PracTeX Journal #4,
>>> 2006) that claims that eqnarray is somehow evil. The complaints are
>>> mainly
>>> about spacing (including the possibility that equation numbers are
>>> overwritten or crowded off the line). He recommends AMS math
>>> environments
>>> or the mathenv package. Then again, I came across a post on
>>> sci.op-research
>>> that as I recall advocated eqnarray.
>>>
>>> Anyway, here's an alternative I found somewhere:
>>>
>>> \begin{alignat*}{7}
>>> & \text{maximize } & z= & & 2x_{1} & & + & & 3x_{2} & & + & &
>>> 4x_{3}\\
>>> & \text{subject to: } & & & 44x_{1} & & & & & & + & & 50x_{3} &
>>> \ge900\\
>>> & & & & & & & & & & & & \llap{\ensuremath{x_{1},x_{2},x_{3}}}
>>> &
>>> \ge0
>>> \end{alignat*}
>>>
>>> FWIW,
>>> Paul
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
Re: Equation Array
Julio Rojas wrote: I made it with eqarray, but it "only" allows me to have 3 columns. How did you add more columns? Oops -- forgot about that. I'm not very consistent in what I use (I just went back and loaded some old papers to look). Sometimes I use eqnarray (which is locked into three columns), in which case I put "maximize" and "subject to" in the left column, indexing in the right column and everything else in the middle. Most times I create a display equation, then create an array with five columns, and go from there. I think I've used alignat once or twice. Seems to me there's some objection to using a plain old array, I think maybe relating to vertical space (not sure), but I'm not much concerned with aesthetics, and array is for me the easiest route. I tried using alignat and it works ok, except for the fact that LyX doesn't show proper alignment (only the first column is right aligned, while all of the others are left aligned. But it comes out right in the DVI/PDF output, which is all I worry about. Thanks for your help. My pleasure, Paul
Equation
Hello. How do I align the equation, with item 1? See attached file. Thanks -- Ing. Alexis Salcedo ECUACIÓN.lyx Description: application/lyx
Re: Equation
On Aug 22, 2009, at 9:36 AM, Alexis Salcedo wrote: Hello. How do I align the equation, with item 1? See attached file. Thanks Can you be more specific? What do you men by align?
Re: Equation
Alexis Salcedo wrote: Hello. How do I align the equation, with item 1? See attached file. Thanks Is this what you had in mind? (Disclaimer: horrible kludge. LaTeX purists, please don't hate me!) /Paul ECUACIÓN2.lyx Description: application/lyx
Equation
Hello. How do I align the equation, with item 1? See attached file. Thanks -- Ing. Alexis Salcedo ECUACIÓN.lyx Description: application/lyx
Re: Equation
On Aug 22, 2009, at 9:36 AM, Alexis Salcedo wrote: Hello. How do I align the equation, with item 1? See attached file. Thanks Can you be more specific? What do you men by align?
Re: Equation
Alexis Salcedo wrote: Hello. How do I align the equation, with item 1? See attached file. Thanks Is this what you had in mind? (Disclaimer: horrible kludge. LaTeX purists, please don't hate me!) /Paul ECUACIÓN2.lyx Description: application/lyx
Equation
Hello. How do I align the equation, with item 1? See attached file. Thanks -- Ing. Alexis Salcedo ECUACIÓN.lyx Description: application/lyx
Re: Equation
On Aug 22, 2009, at 9:36 AM, Alexis Salcedo wrote: Hello. How do I align the equation, with item 1? See attached file. Thanks Can you be more specific? What do you men by "align?"
Re: Equation
Alexis Salcedo wrote: Hello. How do I align the equation, with item 1? See attached file. Thanks Is this what you had in mind? (Disclaimer: horrible kludge. LaTeX purists, please don't hate me!) /Paul ECUACIÓN2.lyx Description: application/lyx
Change display equation to ams align
If I typed in an equation as display, and then decide I'd like to turn it to ams align (multiline), how can I do this without loosing everything I already typed? Selecting the equation, then insert/math/ams align is exactly the way to destroy your work.
RE: Change display equation to ams align
If I typed in an equation as display, and the decide I'd like to turn it to ams align (multiline), how can I do this without loosing everything I already typed? Selecting the equation, then insert/math/ams align is exactly the way to destroy your work. Don't select the equation then :). If your cursor is in the equation, then Insert-Math-AMS Align converts your equation type. Better is to use Edit-Math-Change Formula Type-etc. Vincent
RE: Change display equation to ams align
Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote: If I typed in an equation as display, and the decide I'd like to turn it to ams align (multiline), how can I do this without loosing everything I already typed? Selecting the equation, then insert/math/ams align is exactly the way to destroy your work. Don't select the equation then :). If your cursor is in the equation, then Insert-Math-AMS Align converts your equation type. Better is to use Edit-Math-Change Formula Type-etc. Vincent Thanks. Missed that.
Change display equation to ams align
If I typed in an equation as display, and then decide I'd like to turn it to ams align (multiline), how can I do this without loosing everything I already typed? Selecting the equation, then insert/math/ams align is exactly the way to destroy your work.
RE: Change display equation to ams align
If I typed in an equation as display, and the decide I'd like to turn it to ams align (multiline), how can I do this without loosing everything I already typed? Selecting the equation, then insert/math/ams align is exactly the way to destroy your work. Don't select the equation then :). If your cursor is in the equation, then Insert-Math-AMS Align converts your equation type. Better is to use Edit-Math-Change Formula Type-etc. Vincent
RE: Change display equation to ams align
Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote: If I typed in an equation as display, and the decide I'd like to turn it to ams align (multiline), how can I do this without loosing everything I already typed? Selecting the equation, then insert/math/ams align is exactly the way to destroy your work. Don't select the equation then :). If your cursor is in the equation, then Insert-Math-AMS Align converts your equation type. Better is to use Edit-Math-Change Formula Type-etc. Vincent Thanks. Missed that.
Change display equation to ams align
If I typed in an equation as display, and then decide I'd like to turn it to ams align (multiline), how can I do this without loosing everything I already typed? Selecting the equation, then insert/math/ams align is exactly the way to destroy your work.
RE: Change display equation to ams align
>If I typed in an equation as display, and the >decide I'd like to turn it to ams align (multiline), >how can I do this without loosing everything I already typed? > >Selecting the equation, then insert/math/ams align is >exactly the way to destroy your work. Don't select the equation then :). If your cursor is in the equation, then Insert->Math->AMS Align converts your equation type. Better is to use Edit->Math->Change Formula Type->etc. Vincent
RE: Change display equation to ams align
Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote: >>If I typed in an equation as display, and the >>decide I'd like to turn it to ams align (multiline), >>how can I do this without loosing everything I already typed? >> >>Selecting the equation, then insert/math/ams align is >>exactly the way to destroy your work. > > Don't select the equation then :). > > If your cursor is in the equation, then Insert->Math->AMS Align converts > your equation type. Better is to use Edit->Math->Change Formula > Type->etc. > > Vincent Thanks. Missed that.
Repeating a multi-line equation
Hi, I'm working on a document that looks like this: Lots of text Multi-line equation #1 More text Multi-line equation #2 More text ... Summary of useful equations: Multi-line equation #1 Multi-line equation #2 Ideally, if I change something, I should only have to change it in one place. One approach would be to use math macros. However, it seems impossible to insert a multi-line AMS environment inside a math macro. Probably a better solution would be to insert a cross-reference which somehow reproduces the original equation. Anyone know of a package that does this? Thanks! -Ben
Repeating a multi-line equation
Hi, I'm working on a document that looks like this: Lots of text Multi-line equation #1 More text Multi-line equation #2 More text ... Summary of useful equations: Multi-line equation #1 Multi-line equation #2 Ideally, if I change something, I should only have to change it in one place. One approach would be to use math macros. However, it seems impossible to insert a multi-line AMS environment inside a math macro. Probably a better solution would be to insert a cross-reference which somehow reproduces the original equation. Anyone know of a package that does this? Thanks! -Ben
Repeating a multi-line equation
Hi, I'm working on a document that looks like this: Lots of text Multi-line equation #1 More text Multi-line equation #2 More text ... Summary of useful equations: Multi-line equation #1 Multi-line equation #2 Ideally, if I change something, I should only have to change it in one place. One approach would be to use math macros. However, it seems impossible to insert a multi-line AMS environment inside a math macro. Probably a better solution would be to insert a cross-reference which somehow reproduces the original equation. Anyone know of a package that does this? Thanks! -Ben
How to insert text in a multiline equation?
Hi,
I want to insert text in a multiline equation, for example,
a = 1, if some condition is met
2, if some condition is met
like \text{if some condition is met} in TeX.
How can I do this in LyX?
Thank you very much!
Re: How to insert text in a multiline equation?
Ming Jiang schrieb:
Hi,
I want to insert text in a multiline equation, for example,
a = 1, if some condition is met
2, if some condition is met
like \text{if some condition is met} in TeX.
How can I do this in LyX?
Thank you very much!
Take a look at the math-manual (to be found under help in your menu
bar), should be section 18...
Regards,
Florian
Re: How to insert text in a multiline equation?
Ming Jiang schrieb:
Hi,
I want to insert text in a multiline equation, for example,
a = 1, if some condition is met
2, if some condition is met
like \text{if some condition is met} in TeX.
How can I do this in LyX?
Thank you very much!
For the text, you can simply use the \text command, lyx recognizes it.
Another possibility is the mbox (see section 9).
Regards,
Florian
Re: How to insert text in a multiline equation?
Ming Jiang schrieb:
I want to insert text in a multiline equation, for example,
a = 1, if some condition is met
2, if some condition is met
like \text{if some condition is met} in TeX.
How can I do this in LyX?
Use the shortcut Alt+M M which inserts math text. For more info about LyX and formula typesetting
also have a look at LyX's math manual that you find in the Help menu.
regards Uwe
How to insert text in a multiline equation?
Hi,
I want to insert text in a multiline equation, for example,
a = 1, if some condition is met
2, if some condition is met
like \text{if some condition is met} in TeX.
How can I do this in LyX?
Thank you very much!
Re: How to insert text in a multiline equation?
Ming Jiang schrieb:
Hi,
I want to insert text in a multiline equation, for example,
a = 1, if some condition is met
2, if some condition is met
like \text{if some condition is met} in TeX.
How can I do this in LyX?
Thank you very much!
Take a look at the math-manual (to be found under help in your menu
bar), should be section 18...
Regards,
Florian
Re: How to insert text in a multiline equation?
Ming Jiang schrieb:
Hi,
I want to insert text in a multiline equation, for example,
a = 1, if some condition is met
2, if some condition is met
like \text{if some condition is met} in TeX.
How can I do this in LyX?
Thank you very much!
For the text, you can simply use the \text command, lyx recognizes it.
Another possibility is the mbox (see section 9).
Regards,
Florian
Re: How to insert text in a multiline equation?
Ming Jiang schrieb:
I want to insert text in a multiline equation, for example,
a = 1, if some condition is met
2, if some condition is met
like \text{if some condition is met} in TeX.
How can I do this in LyX?
Use the shortcut Alt+M M which inserts math text. For more info about LyX and formula typesetting
also have a look at LyX's math manual that you find in the Help menu.
regards Uwe
How to insert text in a multiline equation?
Hi,
I want to insert text in a multiline equation, for example,
a = 1, if some condition is met
2, if some condition is met
like \text{if some condition is met} in TeX.
How can I do this in LyX?
Thank you very much!
Re: How to insert text in a multiline equation?
Ming Jiang schrieb:
Hi,
I want to insert text in a multiline equation, for example,
a = 1, if some condition is met
2, if some condition is met
like \text{if some condition is met} in TeX.
How can I do this in LyX?
Thank you very much!
Take a look at the math-manual (to be found under "help" in your menu
bar), should be section 18...
Regards,
Florian
Re: How to insert text in a multiline equation?
Ming Jiang schrieb:
Hi,
I want to insert text in a multiline equation, for example,
a = 1, if some condition is met
2, if some condition is met
like \text{if some condition is met} in TeX.
How can I do this in LyX?
Thank you very much!
For the text, you can simply use the \text command, lyx recognizes it.
Another possibility is the mbox (see section 9).
Regards,
Florian
Re: How to insert text in a multiline equation?
Ming Jiang schrieb:
I want to insert text in a multiline equation, for example,
a = 1, if some condition is met
2, if some condition is met
like \text{if some condition is met} in TeX.
How can I do this in LyX?
Use the shortcut "Alt+M M" which inserts math text. For more info about LyX and formula typesetting
also have a look at LyX's math manual that you find in the Help menu.
regards Uwe
Re: why doesn't \numberwithin{equation}{section} work?
On 2009-02-21, Paul A. Rubin wrote:
Erez Yerushalmi wrote:
I've been using \numberwithin{equation}{section} in the preamble for
quite some time.
Every time I open a new template, it takes me some time until the PDF
output doesn't get jammed with a crash.
In Document Settings... Math Options, uncheck Use AMS math package
automatically and check Use AMS math package instead, and it will work.
Alternatively, write in your preamble
\usepackage{amsmath}
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
so everything required is in one place.
AFAIK, LyX does not load amsmath with options, so the second
\usepackage{amsmath} included by the LyX-automatism will be silently
ignored. (If you get a package already loaded with options ... error,
my knowledge is wrong.)
Günter
Re: why doesn't \numberwithin{equation}{section} work?
Thanks, that is useful!
I prefer keeping it organized in the preamble.
Erez
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 7:34 AM, Guenter Milde mi...@users.berlios.dewrote:
On 2009-02-21, Paul A. Rubin wrote:
Erez Yerushalmi wrote:
I've been using \numberwithin{equation}{section} in the preamble for
quite some time.
Every time I open a new template, it takes me some time until the PDF
output doesn't get jammed with a crash.
In Document Settings... Math Options, uncheck Use AMS math package
automatically and check Use AMS math package instead, and it will
work.
Alternatively, write in your preamble
\usepackage{amsmath}
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
so everything required is in one place.
AFAIK, LyX does not load amsmath with options, so the second
\usepackage{amsmath} included by the LyX-automatism will be silently
ignored. (If you get a package already loaded with options ... error,
my knowledge is wrong.)
Günter
--
Erez Yerushalmi
PhD Student
Warwick University, UK
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/research/phds/3rd_year/yerushalmi
Re: why doesn't \numberwithin{equation}{section} work?
On 2009-02-21, Paul A. Rubin wrote:
Erez Yerushalmi wrote:
I've been using \numberwithin{equation}{section} in the preamble for
quite some time.
Every time I open a new template, it takes me some time until the PDF
output doesn't get jammed with a crash.
In Document Settings... Math Options, uncheck Use AMS math package
automatically and check Use AMS math package instead, and it will work.
Alternatively, write in your preamble
\usepackage{amsmath}
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
so everything required is in one place.
AFAIK, LyX does not load amsmath with options, so the second
\usepackage{amsmath} included by the LyX-automatism will be silently
ignored. (If you get a package already loaded with options ... error,
my knowledge is wrong.)
Günter
Re: why doesn't \numberwithin{equation}{section} work?
Thanks, that is useful!
I prefer keeping it organized in the preamble.
Erez
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 7:34 AM, Guenter Milde mi...@users.berlios.dewrote:
On 2009-02-21, Paul A. Rubin wrote:
Erez Yerushalmi wrote:
I've been using \numberwithin{equation}{section} in the preamble for
quite some time.
Every time I open a new template, it takes me some time until the PDF
output doesn't get jammed with a crash.
In Document Settings... Math Options, uncheck Use AMS math package
automatically and check Use AMS math package instead, and it will
work.
Alternatively, write in your preamble
\usepackage{amsmath}
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
so everything required is in one place.
AFAIK, LyX does not load amsmath with options, so the second
\usepackage{amsmath} included by the LyX-automatism will be silently
ignored. (If you get a package already loaded with options ... error,
my knowledge is wrong.)
Günter
--
Erez Yerushalmi
PhD Student
Warwick University, UK
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/research/phds/3rd_year/yerushalmi
Re: why doesn't \numberwithin{equation}{section} work?
On 2009-02-21, Paul A. Rubin wrote:
> Erez Yerushalmi wrote:
>> I've been using \numberwithin{equation}{section} in the preamble for
>> quite some time.
>> Every time I open a new template, it takes me some time until the PDF
>> output doesn't get jammed with a crash.
> In Document > Settings... > Math Options, uncheck "Use AMS math package
> automatically" and check "Use AMS math package" instead, and it will work.
Alternatively, write in your preamble
\usepackage{amsmath}
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
so everything required is in one place.
AFAIK, LyX does not load amsmath with options, so the second
\usepackage{amsmath} included by the LyX-automatism will be silently
ignored. (If you get a "package already loaded with options ..." error,
my knowledge is wrong.)
Günter
Re: why doesn't \numberwithin{equation}{section} work?
Thanks, that is useful!
I prefer keeping it organized in the preamble.
Erez
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 7:34 AM, Guenter Milde <mi...@users.berlios.de>wrote:
> On 2009-02-21, Paul A. Rubin wrote:
> > Erez Yerushalmi wrote:
>
> >> I've been using \numberwithin{equation}{section} in the preamble for
> >> quite some time.
> >> Every time I open a new template, it takes me some time until the PDF
> >> output doesn't get jammed with a crash.
>
> > In Document > Settings... > Math Options, uncheck "Use AMS math package
> > automatically" and check "Use AMS math package" instead, and it will
> work.
>
> Alternatively, write in your preamble
>
> \usepackage{amsmath}
> \numberwithin{equation}{section}
>
> so everything required is in one place.
>
> AFAIK, LyX does not load amsmath with options, so the second
> \usepackage{amsmath} included by the LyX-automatism will be silently
> ignored. (If you get a "package already loaded with options ..." error,
> my knowledge is wrong.)
>
> Günter
>
>
--
Erez Yerushalmi
PhD Student
Warwick University, UK
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/research/phds/3rd_year/yerushalmi
Re: why doesn't \numberwithin{equation}{section} work?
Hi Paul,
Thanks a lot
That fixed it.
I learned something new today.
Best Regards, Erez
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 8:36 PM, Paul A. Rubin ru...@msu.edu wrote:
Erez Yerushalmi wrote:
I've been trying to figure this out for a long time. Maybe one of you can
help me?
I've been using \numberwithin{equation}{section} in the preamble for
quite some time. Every time I open a new template, it takes me some time
until the PDF output doesn't get jammed with a crash.
This must mean I don't really understand something.
When I remove \numberwithin{equation}{section} from the preamble, pdf
output works fine.
When I put it back in, Lyx pdf output crashes.
In Document Settings... Math Options, uncheck Use AMS math package
automatically and check Use AMS math package instead, and it will work.
The \numberwithin macro is part of the AMS package, so if the AMS package
is not loaded, you get the aforementioned LaTeX error. The ...
automatically setting (default) tells LyX to keep an eye out for things in
the body of the document that require AMS math, and load the AMS package if
and only if it finds any of them. The test document _body_ did not contain
anything that triggered loading of AMS math. Either LyX does not look for
references to AMS macros in the preamble or it doesn't recognize
\numberwithin as one of them. This also sometimes happens when someone uses
an AMS macro in the body but puts it in ERT, rather than having LyX insert
it.
/Paul
--
Erez Yerushalmi
PhD Student
Warwick University, UK
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/research/phds/3rd_year/yerushalmi
Re: why doesn't \numberwithin{equation}{section} work?
Hi Paul,
Thanks a lot
That fixed it.
I learned something new today.
Best Regards, Erez
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 8:36 PM, Paul A. Rubin ru...@msu.edu wrote:
Erez Yerushalmi wrote:
I've been trying to figure this out for a long time. Maybe one of you can
help me?
I've been using \numberwithin{equation}{section} in the preamble for
quite some time. Every time I open a new template, it takes me some time
until the PDF output doesn't get jammed with a crash.
This must mean I don't really understand something.
When I remove \numberwithin{equation}{section} from the preamble, pdf
output works fine.
When I put it back in, Lyx pdf output crashes.
In Document Settings... Math Options, uncheck Use AMS math package
automatically and check Use AMS math package instead, and it will work.
The \numberwithin macro is part of the AMS package, so if the AMS package
is not loaded, you get the aforementioned LaTeX error. The ...
automatically setting (default) tells LyX to keep an eye out for things in
the body of the document that require AMS math, and load the AMS package if
and only if it finds any of them. The test document _body_ did not contain
anything that triggered loading of AMS math. Either LyX does not look for
references to AMS macros in the preamble or it doesn't recognize
\numberwithin as one of them. This also sometimes happens when someone uses
an AMS macro in the body but puts it in ERT, rather than having LyX insert
it.
/Paul
--
Erez Yerushalmi
PhD Student
Warwick University, UK
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/research/phds/3rd_year/yerushalmi
Re: why doesn't \numberwithin{equation}{section} work?
Hi Paul,
Thanks a lot
That fixed it.
I learned something new today.
Best Regards, Erez
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 8:36 PM, Paul A. Rubin <ru...@msu.edu> wrote:
> Erez Yerushalmi wrote:
>
>>
>> I've been trying to figure this out for a long time. Maybe one of you can
>> help me?
>>
>> I've been using \numberwithin{equation}{section} in the preamble for
>> quite some time. Every time I open a new template, it takes me some time
>> until the PDF output doesn't get jammed with a crash.
>> This must mean I don't really understand something.
>>
>> When I remove \numberwithin{equation}{section} from the preamble, pdf
>> output works fine.
>> When I put it back in, Lyx pdf output crashes.
>>
>>
> In Document > Settings... > Math Options, uncheck "Use AMS math package
> automatically" and check "Use AMS math package" instead, and it will work.
>
> The \numberwithin macro is part of the AMS package, so if the AMS package
> is not loaded, you get the aforementioned LaTeX error. The "...
> automatically" setting (default) tells LyX to keep an eye out for things in
> the body of the document that require AMS math, and load the AMS package if
> and only if it finds any of them. The test document _body_ did not contain
> anything that triggered loading of AMS math. Either LyX does not look for
> references to AMS macros in the preamble or it doesn't recognize
> \numberwithin as one of them. This also sometimes happens when someone uses
> an AMS macro in the body but puts it in ERT, rather than having LyX insert
> it.
>
> /Paul
>
>
--
Erez Yerushalmi
PhD Student
Warwick University, UK
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/research/phds/3rd_year/yerushalmi
why doesn't \numberwithin{equation}{section} work?
Hi All,
I've been trying to figure this out for a long time. Maybe one of you can
help me?
I've been using \numberwithin{equation}{section} in the preamble for
quite some time.
Every time I open a new template, it takes me some time until the PDF output
doesn't get jammed with a crash.
This must mean I don't really understand something.
When I remove \numberwithin{equation}{section} from the preamble, pdf
output works fine.
When I put it back in, Lyx pdf output crashes.
My errors are the following:
error Undefined control sequence, with description
\numberwithin{equation}{section} % #section.#equation
The control sequence at the end of the top line
of your error message was never \def'ed. If you have
misspelled it (e.g., `\hobx'), type `I' and the correct
spelling (e.g., `I\hbox'). Otherwise just continue,
and I'll forget about whatever was undefined.
second error: LaTeX Error: Missing \begin{document}.
with description:
\numberwithin{equation}{section} % #section.#equation
You're in trouble here. Try typing return to proceed.
If that doesn't work, type X return to quit.
I'm attaching the lyx file. Please look at the preample.
Thanks a lot, Erez
--
Erez Yerushalmi
PhD Student
Warwick University, UK
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/research/phds/3rd_year/yerushalmi
test.lyx
Description: application/lyx
Re: why doesn't \numberwithin{equation}{section} work?
Erez Yerushalmi wrote:
I've been trying to figure this out for a long time. Maybe one of you
can help me?
I've been using \numberwithin{equation}{section} in the preamble for
quite some time.
Every time I open a new template, it takes me some time until the PDF
output doesn't get jammed with a crash.
This must mean I don't really understand something.
When I remove \numberwithin{equation}{section} from the preamble, pdf
output works fine.
When I put it back in, Lyx pdf output crashes.
In Document Settings... Math Options, uncheck Use AMS math package
automatically and check Use AMS math package instead, and it will work.
The \numberwithin macro is part of the AMS package, so if the AMS
package is not loaded, you get the aforementioned LaTeX error. The ...
automatically setting (default) tells LyX to keep an eye out for things
in the body of the document that require AMS math, and load the AMS
package if and only if it finds any of them. The test document _body_
did not contain anything that triggered loading of AMS math. Either LyX
does not look for references to AMS macros in the preamble or it doesn't
recognize \numberwithin as one of them. This also sometimes happens
when someone uses an AMS macro in the body but puts it in ERT, rather
than having LyX insert it.
/Paul
why doesn't \numberwithin{equation}{section} work?
Hi All,
I've been trying to figure this out for a long time. Maybe one of you can
help me?
I've been using \numberwithin{equation}{section} in the preamble for
quite some time.
Every time I open a new template, it takes me some time until the PDF output
doesn't get jammed with a crash.
This must mean I don't really understand something.
When I remove \numberwithin{equation}{section} from the preamble, pdf
output works fine.
When I put it back in, Lyx pdf output crashes.
My errors are the following:
error Undefined control sequence, with description
\numberwithin{equation}{section} % #section.#equation
The control sequence at the end of the top line
of your error message was never \def'ed. If you have
misspelled it (e.g., `\hobx'), type `I' and the correct
spelling (e.g., `I\hbox'). Otherwise just continue,
and I'll forget about whatever was undefined.
second error: LaTeX Error: Missing \begin{document}.
with description:
\numberwithin{equation}{section} % #section.#equation
You're in trouble here. Try typing return to proceed.
If that doesn't work, type X return to quit.
I'm attaching the lyx file. Please look at the preample.
Thanks a lot, Erez
--
Erez Yerushalmi
PhD Student
Warwick University, UK
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/research/phds/3rd_year/yerushalmi
test.lyx
Description: application/lyx
Re: why doesn't \numberwithin{equation}{section} work?
Erez Yerushalmi wrote:
I've been trying to figure this out for a long time. Maybe one of you
can help me?
I've been using \numberwithin{equation}{section} in the preamble for
quite some time.
Every time I open a new template, it takes me some time until the PDF
output doesn't get jammed with a crash.
This must mean I don't really understand something.
When I remove \numberwithin{equation}{section} from the preamble, pdf
output works fine.
When I put it back in, Lyx pdf output crashes.
In Document Settings... Math Options, uncheck Use AMS math package
automatically and check Use AMS math package instead, and it will work.
The \numberwithin macro is part of the AMS package, so if the AMS
package is not loaded, you get the aforementioned LaTeX error. The ...
automatically setting (default) tells LyX to keep an eye out for things
in the body of the document that require AMS math, and load the AMS
package if and only if it finds any of them. The test document _body_
did not contain anything that triggered loading of AMS math. Either LyX
does not look for references to AMS macros in the preamble or it doesn't
recognize \numberwithin as one of them. This also sometimes happens
when someone uses an AMS macro in the body but puts it in ERT, rather
than having LyX insert it.
/Paul
why doesn't \numberwithin{equation}{section} work?
Hi All,
I've been trying to figure this out for a long time. Maybe one of you can
help me?
I've been using \numberwithin{equation}{section} in the preamble for
quite some time.
Every time I open a new template, it takes me some time until the PDF output
doesn't get jammed with a crash.
This must mean I don't really understand something.
When I remove \numberwithin{equation}{section} from the preamble, pdf
output works fine.
When I put it back in, Lyx pdf output crashes.
My errors are the following:
error Undefined control sequence, with description
\numberwithin{equation}{section} % #section.#equation
The control sequence at the end of the top line
of your error message was never \def'ed. If you have
misspelled it (e.g., `\hobx'), type `I' and the correct
spelling (e.g., `I\hbox'). Otherwise just continue,
and I'll forget about whatever was undefined.
second error: LaTeX Error: Missing \begin{document}.
with description:
\numberwithin{equation}{section} % #section.#equation
You're in trouble here. Try typing to proceed.
If that doesn't work, type X to quit.
I'm attaching the lyx file. Please look at the preample.
Thanks a lot, Erez
--
Erez Yerushalmi
PhD Student
Warwick University, UK
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/research/phds/3rd_year/yerushalmi
test.lyx
Description: application/lyx
Re: why doesn't \numberwithin{equation}{section} work?
Erez Yerushalmi wrote:
I've been trying to figure this out for a long time. Maybe one of you
can help me?
I've been using \numberwithin{equation}{section} in the preamble for
quite some time.
Every time I open a new template, it takes me some time until the PDF
output doesn't get jammed with a crash.
This must mean I don't really understand something.
When I remove \numberwithin{equation}{section} from the preamble, pdf
output works fine.
When I put it back in, Lyx pdf output crashes.
In Document > Settings... > Math Options, uncheck "Use AMS math package
automatically" and check "Use AMS math package" instead, and it will work.
The \numberwithin macro is part of the AMS package, so if the AMS
package is not loaded, you get the aforementioned LaTeX error. The "...
automatically" setting (default) tells LyX to keep an eye out for things
in the body of the document that require AMS math, and load the AMS
package if and only if it finds any of them. The test document _body_
did not contain anything that triggered loading of AMS math. Either LyX
does not look for references to AMS macros in the preamble or it doesn't
recognize \numberwithin as one of them. This also sometimes happens
when someone uses an AMS macro in the body but puts it in ERT, rather
than having LyX insert it.
/Paul
labeling parts of an equation
I want to label parts of an equation (such as with overset).
There are two problems when using overset
1. If equation elements are of different height then labels come out in
different heights
2. If the label is wider than the equation element it ruins spacing (the
equation gets spaces around the element
Is there a better way to do it?
For example
I_{\mathbf{p}}^{bf}=\overset{\mbox{normalization}}{\overbrace{\frac{1}{W_{\mathbf{p}}^{bf\sum_{\mathbf{q}\in\mathcal{S}}\overset{\mbox{space}}{\overbrace{G_{\sigma_{s}}\left(\left\Vert
\mathbf{p}-\mathbf{q}\right\Vert
\right)}}\overset{\mbox{Intensity}}{\overbrace{G_{\sigma_{r}}\left(\left\Vert
I_{\mathbf{p}}-I_{\mathbf{q}}\right\Vert \right)}}I_{\mathbf{q}}
If you paste this into a math environment you will see that it just comes out
wrong
Re: labeling parts of an equation
Micha Feigin schrieb: I want to label parts of an equation (such as with overset). There are two problems when using overset 1. If equation elements are of different height then labels come out in different heights When it is important that they all are in the same height, then use a vertical phantom inset. This is described in sec. 3.7 and used in sec. 5.2 of LyX's math manual that you find in the Help menu. 2. If the label is wider than the equation element it ruins spacing (the equation gets spaces around the element This can be solved with the \mathclap trick that is described in sec. 10.2 of the Math manual. Attached is a LyX file with possible solutions. regards Uwe newfile5.lyx Description: application/lyx
labeling parts of an equation
I want to label parts of an equation (such as with overset).
There are two problems when using overset
1. If equation elements are of different height then labels come out in
different heights
2. If the label is wider than the equation element it ruins spacing (the
equation gets spaces around the element
Is there a better way to do it?
For example
I_{\mathbf{p}}^{bf}=\overset{\mbox{normalization}}{\overbrace{\frac{1}{W_{\mathbf{p}}^{bf\sum_{\mathbf{q}\in\mathcal{S}}\overset{\mbox{space}}{\overbrace{G_{\sigma_{s}}\left(\left\Vert
\mathbf{p}-\mathbf{q}\right\Vert
\right)}}\overset{\mbox{Intensity}}{\overbrace{G_{\sigma_{r}}\left(\left\Vert
I_{\mathbf{p}}-I_{\mathbf{q}}\right\Vert \right)}}I_{\mathbf{q}}
If you paste this into a math environment you will see that it just comes out
wrong
Re: labeling parts of an equation
Micha Feigin schrieb: I want to label parts of an equation (such as with overset). There are two problems when using overset 1. If equation elements are of different height then labels come out in different heights When it is important that they all are in the same height, then use a vertical phantom inset. This is described in sec. 3.7 and used in sec. 5.2 of LyX's math manual that you find in the Help menu. 2. If the label is wider than the equation element it ruins spacing (the equation gets spaces around the element This can be solved with the \mathclap trick that is described in sec. 10.2 of the Math manual. Attached is a LyX file with possible solutions. regards Uwe newfile5.lyx Description: application/lyx
labeling parts of an equation
I want to label parts of an equation (such as with overset).
There are two problems when using overset
1. If equation elements are of different height then labels come out in
different heights
2. If the label is wider than the equation element it ruins spacing (the
equation gets spaces around the element
Is there a better way to do it?
For example
I_{\mathbf{p}}^{bf}=\overset{\mbox{normalization}}{\overbrace{\frac{1}{W_{\mathbf{p}}^{bf\sum_{\mathbf{q}\in\mathcal{S}}\overset{\mbox{space}}{\overbrace{G_{\sigma_{s}}\left(\left\Vert
\mathbf{p}-\mathbf{q}\right\Vert
\right)}}\overset{\mbox{Intensity}}{\overbrace{G_{\sigma_{r}}\left(\left\Vert
I_{\mathbf{p}}-I_{\mathbf{q}}\right\Vert \right)}}I_{\mathbf{q}}
If you paste this into a math environment you will see that it just comes out
wrong
Re: labeling parts of an equation
Micha Feigin schrieb: I want to label parts of an equation (such as with overset). There are two problems when using overset 1. If equation elements are of different height then labels come out in different heights When it is important that they all are in the same height, then use a vertical phantom inset. This is described in sec. 3.7 and used in sec. 5.2 of LyX's math manual that you find in the Help menu. 2. If the label is wider than the equation element it ruins spacing (the equation gets spaces around the element This can be solved with the \mathclap trick that is described in sec. 10.2 of the Math manual. Attached is a LyX file with possible solutions. regards Uwe newfile5.lyx Description: application/lyx
custom equation numbering
How do I change an equation number that was chosen automatically from forcing a particular number or symbol? That is, I want the analog of \tag in Latex For example, I have an equation that is numbered (5) which is chosen by default because it comes after (4). That's the correct normal behavior of course. However, I want to break briefly out of the default and number this one equation (3') because it is a variant of a previous equation numbered (3). Thanks! -Ivan
Re: custom equation numbering
Ivan Werning wrote: How do I change an equation number that was chosen automatically from forcing a particular number or symbol? That is, I want the analog of \tag in Latex For example, I have an equation that is numbered (5) which is chosen by default because it comes after (4). That's the correct normal behavior of course. However, I want to break briefly out of the default and number this one equation (3') because it is a variant of a previous equation numbered (3). Well, \tag will work. Stick the cursor in the equation. If it's already being numbered, M-m n will remove the automatic number. Then enter '\tag' followed by space, which will create a widget. In the widget, type '\ensuremath' followed by a space to get a nested widget. Type 3' (or 3^\prime if you're a purist) in the inner widget (no parentheses). The display in the GUI is, ah, less than esthetically pleasing, but it comes out right in the DVI. The inner widget is needed to get you into math mode if you're going to use a superscript. I'm not sure if there's a more LyXish way to do it. HTH, Paul
Re: custom equation numbering
Hi Ivan, Just to follow up on Paul's solution, you can go one step further and make the equation number automatic. Suppose that you have equation (3) and you also have a rewritten form of that equation, call it (3'). Do all of the steps that Paul has indicated, except rather than putting in the number 3, click on the cross-reference tool in the LyX toolbar. Then select the equation of interest and then apply. To refer to equation 3' elsewhere in the paper is a little in-elegant -- insert the cross reference to point to the original form of the equation, then go into math mode (inline equation) right after the cross reference and insert the prime symbol. Now, if you add or delete equations before the original equation, all of the numbers automatically update. -Neil = Neil Hepburn, Economics Instructor Department of Social Sciences, Augustana Faculty University of Alberta 4901-46 Avenue Camrose, Alberta T4V 2R3 Phone (780) 679-1588 email nhepb...@augustana.ca On 14-Dec-08, at 9:24 AM, Paul A. Rubin wrote: Ivan Werning wrote: How do I change an equation number that was chosen automatically from forcing a particular number or symbol? That is, I want the analog of \tag in Latex For example, I have an equation that is numbered (5) which is chosen by default because it comes after (4). That's the correct normal behavior of course. However, I want to break briefly out of the default and number this one equation (3') because it is a variant of a previous equation numbered (3). Well, \tag will work. Stick the cursor in the equation. If it's already being numbered, M-m n will remove the automatic number. Then enter '\tag' followed by space, which will create a widget. In the widget, type '\ensuremath' followed by a space to get a nested widget. Type 3' (or 3^\prime if you're a purist) in the inner widget (no parentheses). The display in the GUI is, ah, less than esthetically pleasing, but it comes out right in the DVI. The inner widget is needed to get you into math mode if you're going to use a superscript. I'm not sure if there's a more LyXish way to do it. HTH, Paul
Re: custom equation numbering
Thanks Neil and Paul. Indeed, using the LaTeX command \tag seems like the best thing I could find---thanks for the specific tips regarding math modes and cross referencing, which I guess are good ideas, I had never thought of, in LaTeX editing as well. One of the greatest things of LyX is that it still allows entering LaTeX quite easily. I really value that. Although it would be nice for LyX to allow custom equation numbering natively, given how standard it is. -Ivan On Dec 14, 2008, at 12:20 PM, Neil Hepburn wrote: Hi Ivan, Just to follow up on Paul's solution, you can go one step further and make the equation number automatic. Suppose that you have equation (3) and you also have a rewritten form of that equation, call it (3'). Do all of the steps that Paul has indicated, except rather than putting in the number 3, click on the cross-reference tool in the LyX toolbar. Then select the equation of interest and then apply. To refer to equation 3' elsewhere in the paper is a little in-elegant -- insert the cross reference to point to the original form of the equation, then go into math mode (inline equation) right after the cross reference and insert the prime symbol. Now, if you add or delete equations before the original equation, all of the numbers automatically update. -Neil = Neil Hepburn, Economics Instructor Department of Social Sciences, Augustana Faculty University of Alberta 4901-46 Avenue Camrose, Alberta T4V 2R3 Phone (780) 679-1588 email nhepb...@augustana.ca On 14-Dec-08, at 9:24 AM, Paul A. Rubin wrote: Ivan Werning wrote: How do I change an equation number that was chosen automatically from forcing a particular number or symbol? That is, I want the analog of \tag in Latex For example, I have an equation that is numbered (5) which is chosen by default because it comes after (4). That's the correct normal behavior of course. However, I want to break briefly out of the default and number this one equation (3') because it is a variant of a previous equation numbered (3). Well, \tag will work. Stick the cursor in the equation. If it's already being numbered, M-m n will remove the automatic number. Then enter '\tag' followed by space, which will create a widget. In the widget, type '\ensuremath' followed by a space to get a nested widget. Type 3' (or 3^\prime if you're a purist) in the inner widget (no parentheses). The display in the GUI is, ah, less than esthetically pleasing, but it comes out right in the DVI. The inner widget is needed to get you into math mode if you're going to use a superscript. I'm not sure if there's a more LyXish way to do it. HTH, Paul
custom equation numbering
How do I change an equation number that was chosen automatically from forcing a particular number or symbol? That is, I want the analog of \tag in Latex For example, I have an equation that is numbered (5) which is chosen by default because it comes after (4). That's the correct normal behavior of course. However, I want to break briefly out of the default and number this one equation (3') because it is a variant of a previous equation numbered (3). Thanks! -Ivan
Re: custom equation numbering
Ivan Werning wrote: How do I change an equation number that was chosen automatically from forcing a particular number or symbol? That is, I want the analog of \tag in Latex For example, I have an equation that is numbered (5) which is chosen by default because it comes after (4). That's the correct normal behavior of course. However, I want to break briefly out of the default and number this one equation (3') because it is a variant of a previous equation numbered (3). Well, \tag will work. Stick the cursor in the equation. If it's already being numbered, M-m n will remove the automatic number. Then enter '\tag' followed by space, which will create a widget. In the widget, type '\ensuremath' followed by a space to get a nested widget. Type 3' (or 3^\prime if you're a purist) in the inner widget (no parentheses). The display in the GUI is, ah, less than esthetically pleasing, but it comes out right in the DVI. The inner widget is needed to get you into math mode if you're going to use a superscript. I'm not sure if there's a more LyXish way to do it. HTH, Paul
Re: custom equation numbering
Hi Ivan, Just to follow up on Paul's solution, you can go one step further and make the equation number automatic. Suppose that you have equation (3) and you also have a rewritten form of that equation, call it (3'). Do all of the steps that Paul has indicated, except rather than putting in the number 3, click on the cross-reference tool in the LyX toolbar. Then select the equation of interest and then apply. To refer to equation 3' elsewhere in the paper is a little in-elegant -- insert the cross reference to point to the original form of the equation, then go into math mode (inline equation) right after the cross reference and insert the prime symbol. Now, if you add or delete equations before the original equation, all of the numbers automatically update. -Neil = Neil Hepburn, Economics Instructor Department of Social Sciences, Augustana Faculty University of Alberta 4901-46 Avenue Camrose, Alberta T4V 2R3 Phone (780) 679-1588 email nhepb...@augustana.ca On 14-Dec-08, at 9:24 AM, Paul A. Rubin wrote: Ivan Werning wrote: How do I change an equation number that was chosen automatically from forcing a particular number or symbol? That is, I want the analog of \tag in Latex For example, I have an equation that is numbered (5) which is chosen by default because it comes after (4). That's the correct normal behavior of course. However, I want to break briefly out of the default and number this one equation (3') because it is a variant of a previous equation numbered (3). Well, \tag will work. Stick the cursor in the equation. If it's already being numbered, M-m n will remove the automatic number. Then enter '\tag' followed by space, which will create a widget. In the widget, type '\ensuremath' followed by a space to get a nested widget. Type 3' (or 3^\prime if you're a purist) in the inner widget (no parentheses). The display in the GUI is, ah, less than esthetically pleasing, but it comes out right in the DVI. The inner widget is needed to get you into math mode if you're going to use a superscript. I'm not sure if there's a more LyXish way to do it. HTH, Paul
Re: custom equation numbering
Thanks Neil and Paul. Indeed, using the LaTeX command \tag seems like the best thing I could find---thanks for the specific tips regarding math modes and cross referencing, which I guess are good ideas, I had never thought of, in LaTeX editing as well. One of the greatest things of LyX is that it still allows entering LaTeX quite easily. I really value that. Although it would be nice for LyX to allow custom equation numbering natively, given how standard it is. -Ivan On Dec 14, 2008, at 12:20 PM, Neil Hepburn wrote: Hi Ivan, Just to follow up on Paul's solution, you can go one step further and make the equation number automatic. Suppose that you have equation (3) and you also have a rewritten form of that equation, call it (3'). Do all of the steps that Paul has indicated, except rather than putting in the number 3, click on the cross-reference tool in the LyX toolbar. Then select the equation of interest and then apply. To refer to equation 3' elsewhere in the paper is a little in-elegant -- insert the cross reference to point to the original form of the equation, then go into math mode (inline equation) right after the cross reference and insert the prime symbol. Now, if you add or delete equations before the original equation, all of the numbers automatically update. -Neil = Neil Hepburn, Economics Instructor Department of Social Sciences, Augustana Faculty University of Alberta 4901-46 Avenue Camrose, Alberta T4V 2R3 Phone (780) 679-1588 email nhepb...@augustana.ca On 14-Dec-08, at 9:24 AM, Paul A. Rubin wrote: Ivan Werning wrote: How do I change an equation number that was chosen automatically from forcing a particular number or symbol? That is, I want the analog of \tag in Latex For example, I have an equation that is numbered (5) which is chosen by default because it comes after (4). That's the correct normal behavior of course. However, I want to break briefly out of the default and number this one equation (3') because it is a variant of a previous equation numbered (3). Well, \tag will work. Stick the cursor in the equation. If it's already being numbered, M-m n will remove the automatic number. Then enter '\tag' followed by space, which will create a widget. In the widget, type '\ensuremath' followed by a space to get a nested widget. Type 3' (or 3^\prime if you're a purist) in the inner widget (no parentheses). The display in the GUI is, ah, less than esthetically pleasing, but it comes out right in the DVI. The inner widget is needed to get you into math mode if you're going to use a superscript. I'm not sure if there's a more LyXish way to do it. HTH, Paul
custom equation numbering
How do I change an equation number that was chosen automatically from forcing a particular number or symbol? That is, I want the analog of \tag in Latex For example, I have an equation that is numbered "(5)" which is chosen by default because it comes after "(4)". That's the correct normal behavior of course. However, I want to break briefly out of the default and number this one equation "(3')" because it is a variant of a previous equation numbered "(3)". Thanks! -Ivan
Re: custom equation numbering
Ivan Werning wrote: How do I change an equation number that was chosen automatically from forcing a particular number or symbol? That is, I want the analog of \tag in Latex For example, I have an equation that is numbered "(5)" which is chosen by default because it comes after "(4)". That's the correct normal behavior of course. However, I want to break briefly out of the default and number this one equation "(3')" because it is a variant of a previous equation numbered "(3)". Well, \tag will work. Stick the cursor in the equation. If it's already being numbered, M-m n will remove the automatic number. Then enter '\tag' followed by space, which will create a widget. In the widget, type '\ensuremath' followed by a space to get a nested widget. Type "3'" (or "3^\prime" if you're a purist) in the inner widget (no parentheses). The display in the GUI is, ah, less than esthetically pleasing, but it comes out right in the DVI. The inner widget is needed to get you into math mode if you're going to use a superscript. I'm not sure if there's a more LyXish way to do it. HTH, Paul
Re: custom equation numbering
Hi Ivan, Just to follow up on Paul's solution, you can go one step further and make the equation number automatic. Suppose that you have equation (3) and you also have a rewritten form of that equation, call it (3'). Do all of the steps that Paul has indicated, except rather than putting in the number 3, click on the cross-reference tool in the LyX toolbar. Then select the equation of interest and then apply. To refer to equation 3' elsewhere in the paper is a little in-elegant -- insert the cross reference to point to the original form of the equation, then go into math mode (inline equation) right after the cross reference and insert the prime symbol. Now, if you add or delete equations before the original equation, all of the numbers automatically update. -Neil = Neil Hepburn, Economics Instructor Department of Social Sciences, Augustana Faculty University of Alberta 4901-46 Avenue Camrose, Alberta T4V 2R3 Phone (780) 679-1588 email nhepb...@augustana.ca On 14-Dec-08, at 9:24 AM, Paul A. Rubin wrote: Ivan Werning wrote: How do I change an equation number that was chosen automatically from forcing a particular number or symbol? That is, I want the analog of \tag in Latex For example, I have an equation that is numbered "(5)" which is chosen by default because it comes after "(4)". That's the correct normal behavior of course. However, I want to break briefly out of the default and number this one equation "(3')" because it is a variant of a previous equation numbered "(3)". Well, \tag will work. Stick the cursor in the equation. If it's already being numbered, M-m n will remove the automatic number. Then enter '\tag' followed by space, which will create a widget. In the widget, type '\ensuremath' followed by a space to get a nested widget. Type "3'" (or "3^\prime" if you're a purist) in the inner widget (no parentheses). The display in the GUI is, ah, less than esthetically pleasing, but it comes out right in the DVI. The inner widget is needed to get you into math mode if you're going to use a superscript. I'm not sure if there's a more LyXish way to do it. HTH, Paul
Re: custom equation numbering
Thanks Neil and Paul. Indeed, using the LaTeX command \tag seems like the best thing I could find---thanks for the specific tips regarding math modes and cross referencing, which I guess are good ideas, I had never thought of, in LaTeX editing as well. One of the greatest things of LyX is that it still allows entering LaTeX quite easily. I really value that. Although it would be nice for LyX to allow custom equation numbering natively, given how standard it is. -Ivan On Dec 14, 2008, at 12:20 PM, Neil Hepburn wrote: Hi Ivan, Just to follow up on Paul's solution, you can go one step further and make the equation number automatic. Suppose that you have equation (3) and you also have a rewritten form of that equation, call it (3'). Do all of the steps that Paul has indicated, except rather than putting in the number 3, click on the cross-reference tool in the LyX toolbar. Then select the equation of interest and then apply. To refer to equation 3' elsewhere in the paper is a little in-elegant -- insert the cross reference to point to the original form of the equation, then go into math mode (inline equation) right after the cross reference and insert the prime symbol. Now, if you add or delete equations before the original equation, all of the numbers automatically update. -Neil = Neil Hepburn, Economics Instructor Department of Social Sciences, Augustana Faculty University of Alberta 4901-46 Avenue Camrose, Alberta T4V 2R3 Phone (780) 679-1588 email nhepb...@augustana.ca On 14-Dec-08, at 9:24 AM, Paul A. Rubin wrote: Ivan Werning wrote: How do I change an equation number that was chosen automatically from forcing a particular number or symbol? That is, I want the analog of \tag in Latex For example, I have an equation that is numbered "(5)" which is chosen by default because it comes after "(4)". That's the correct normal behavior of course. However, I want to break briefly out of the default and number this one equation "(3')" because it is a variant of a previous equation numbered "(3)". Well, \tag will work. Stick the cursor in the equation. If it's already being numbered, M-m n will remove the automatic number. Then enter '\tag' followed by space, which will create a widget. In the widget, type '\ensuremath' followed by a space to get a nested widget. Type "3'" (or "3^\prime" if you're a purist) in the inner widget (no parentheses). The display in the GUI is, ah, less than esthetically pleasing, but it comes out right in the DVI. The inner widget is needed to get you into math mode if you're going to use a superscript. I'm not sure if there's a more LyXish way to do it. HTH, Paul
Problems with equation numbering in appendix
Hi all, I find that in my document (with documentclass report), unless I disable numbering on all equations, I get the error \mathrm allowed only in math mode. Does anyone know how to fix this issue or work around it to get equation numbering working in the appendices? thanks, Manoj
Re: Problems with equation numbering in appendix
I should add that I can't reproduce this in a small test document. Has anyone experienced some change in settings or some latex code snippet import which has caused this? -- Manoj Manoj Rajagopalan wrote: Hi all, I find that in my document (with documentclass report), unless I disable numbering on all equations, I get the error \mathrm allowed only in math mode. Does anyone know how to fix this issue or work around it to get equation numbering working in the appendices? thanks, Manoj
Re: Problems with equation numbering in appendix
I fixed this by using the 'appendix' package. This is a hack. I wonder what caused latex to break in my appendices. -- Manoj Manoj Rajagopalan wrote: I should add that I can't reproduce this in a small test document. Has anyone experienced some change in settings or some latex code snippet import which has caused this? -- Manoj Manoj Rajagopalan wrote: Hi all, I find that in my document (with documentclass report), unless I disable numbering on all equations, I get the error \mathrm allowed only in math mode. Does anyone know how to fix this issue or work around it to get equation numbering working in the appendices? thanks, Manoj
Problems with equation numbering in appendix
Hi all, I find that in my document (with documentclass report), unless I disable numbering on all equations, I get the error \mathrm allowed only in math mode. Does anyone know how to fix this issue or work around it to get equation numbering working in the appendices? thanks, Manoj
Re: Problems with equation numbering in appendix
I should add that I can't reproduce this in a small test document. Has anyone experienced some change in settings or some latex code snippet import which has caused this? -- Manoj Manoj Rajagopalan wrote: Hi all, I find that in my document (with documentclass report), unless I disable numbering on all equations, I get the error \mathrm allowed only in math mode. Does anyone know how to fix this issue or work around it to get equation numbering working in the appendices? thanks, Manoj
Re: Problems with equation numbering in appendix
I fixed this by using the 'appendix' package. This is a hack. I wonder what caused latex to break in my appendices. -- Manoj Manoj Rajagopalan wrote: I should add that I can't reproduce this in a small test document. Has anyone experienced some change in settings or some latex code snippet import which has caused this? -- Manoj Manoj Rajagopalan wrote: Hi all, I find that in my document (with documentclass report), unless I disable numbering on all equations, I get the error \mathrm allowed only in math mode. Does anyone know how to fix this issue or work around it to get equation numbering working in the appendices? thanks, Manoj
Problems with equation numbering in appendix
Hi all, I find that in my document (with documentclass report), unless I disable numbering on all equations, I get the error "\mathrm allowed only in math mode". Does anyone know how to fix this issue or work around it to get equation numbering working in the appendices? thanks, Manoj
Re: Problems with equation numbering in appendix
I should add that I can't reproduce this in a small test document. Has anyone experienced some change in settings or some latex code snippet import which has caused this? -- Manoj Manoj Rajagopalan wrote: Hi all, I find that in my document (with documentclass report), unless I disable numbering on all equations, I get the error "\mathrm allowed only in math mode". Does anyone know how to fix this issue or work around it to get equation numbering working in the appendices? thanks, Manoj
Re: Problems with equation numbering in appendix
I fixed this by using the 'appendix' package. This is a hack. I wonder what caused latex to break in my appendices. -- Manoj Manoj Rajagopalan wrote: I should add that I can't reproduce this in a small test document. Has anyone experienced some change in settings or some latex code snippet import which has caused this? -- Manoj Manoj Rajagopalan wrote: Hi all, I find that in my document (with documentclass report), unless I disable numbering on all equations, I get the error "\mathrm allowed only in math mode". Does anyone know how to fix this issue or work around it to get equation numbering working in the appendices? thanks, Manoj
Re: How to number an inline equation
Kuang Chen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The ONLY difference is that those real display equations created by CTRL+SHIFT+M has a larger spacings away from its adjacent paragraphs, which I don't quite look like. Make sure that the display equation is in the _same_ paragraph as the text above/below. In some classes, it makes a big difference. JMarc
Re: How to number an inline equation
Kuang Chen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The ONLY difference is that those real display equations created by CTRL+SHIFT+M has a larger spacings away from its adjacent paragraphs, which I don't quite look like. Make sure that the display equation is in the _same_ paragraph as the text above/below. In some classes, it makes a big difference. JMarc
Re: How to number an inline equation
Kuang Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The ONLY difference is that those real display equations created by > CTRL+SHIFT+M has a larger spacings away from its adjacent paragraphs, > which I don't quite look like. Make sure that the display equation is in the _same_ paragraph as the text above/below. In some classes, it makes a big difference. JMarc
How to number an inline equation
Hi, Here is the situation: I have a bunch of inline equations to number. They have \displaystyle, are centered on a separate line. So basically they look like a real display-styled equations. The ONLY difference is that those real display equations created by CTRL+SHIFT+M has a larger spacings away from its adjacent paragraphs, which I don't quite look like. Then I found I couldn't number my pseudo-displaystyle equation. So I was wondering if anyone have any clue about how to do this, or EQUIVALENTLY, how can I modify the style of real displaystyle equation which can be numbered, such that their spacing become less? Thanks in advance!
Re: How to number an inline equation
Kuang Chen wrote:
Here is the situation: I have a bunch of inline equations to number. They have \displaystyle, are centered on a separate line. So basically they look like a real display-styled equations. The ONLY difference is that those real display equations created by CTRL+SHIFT+M has a larger spacings away from its adjacent paragraphs, which I don't quite look like.
Then I found I couldn't number my pseudo-displaystyle equation. So I was
wondering if anyone have any clue about how to do this,
This is not a good way of doing it (also paragraph indentation becomes
wrong).
or EQUIVALENTLY, how can I modify the style of real displaystyle equation which can be numbered, such that their spacing become less?
That's the better way to look for.
A small google search brings up:
http://osdir.com/ml/tex.tugindia/2007-03/msg00049.html
Two skips namely, \abovedisplayskip and \belowdisplayskip control
the vertical space above and below an equation. You might play
with these two skips with different values and arrive at the
optimal ones for your document.
So something like \setlength{\abovedisplayskip}{-0.5\baselineskip} at
the beginning of the document?
/Konrad
Re: How to number an inline equation
Kuang Chen wrote: Hi, Konrad: Problem solved. I found the reason seems to be that spacing is big whenever I want to insert a real display equation in a separate line. However if I insert it right after a paragraph by ctrl+alt+n, a new box will also show up on a new line below the paragraph, but the spacing is normal. Any idea why? Yes, because starting a new line means starting a new paragraph (you might have to read up what a paragraph means in latex). And each paragraphs gets extra space. But usually you want your equations to be part of the same paragraph as the surrondind text (so no 'enter' before and after the text). It's the same in Latex. /Konrad
How to number an inline equation
Hi, Here is the situation: I have a bunch of inline equations to number. They have \displaystyle, are centered on a separate line. So basically they look like a real display-styled equations. The ONLY difference is that those real display equations created by CTRL+SHIFT+M has a larger spacings away from its adjacent paragraphs, which I don't quite look like. Then I found I couldn't number my pseudo-displaystyle equation. So I was wondering if anyone have any clue about how to do this, or EQUIVALENTLY, how can I modify the style of real displaystyle equation which can be numbered, such that their spacing become less? Thanks in advance!
Re: How to number an inline equation
Kuang Chen wrote:
Here is the situation: I have a bunch of inline equations to number. They have \displaystyle, are centered on a separate line. So basically they look like a real display-styled equations. The ONLY difference is that those real display equations created by CTRL+SHIFT+M has a larger spacings away from its adjacent paragraphs, which I don't quite look like.
Then I found I couldn't number my pseudo-displaystyle equation. So I was
wondering if anyone have any clue about how to do this,
This is not a good way of doing it (also paragraph indentation becomes
wrong).
or EQUIVALENTLY, how can I modify the style of real displaystyle equation which can be numbered, such that their spacing become less?
That's the better way to look for.
A small google search brings up:
http://osdir.com/ml/tex.tugindia/2007-03/msg00049.html
Two skips namely, \abovedisplayskip and \belowdisplayskip control
the vertical space above and below an equation. You might play
with these two skips with different values and arrive at the
optimal ones for your document.
So something like \setlength{\abovedisplayskip}{-0.5\baselineskip} at
the beginning of the document?
/Konrad
Re: How to number an inline equation
Kuang Chen wrote: Hi, Konrad: Problem solved. I found the reason seems to be that spacing is big whenever I want to insert a real display equation in a separate line. However if I insert it right after a paragraph by ctrl+alt+n, a new box will also show up on a new line below the paragraph, but the spacing is normal. Any idea why? Yes, because starting a new line means starting a new paragraph (you might have to read up what a paragraph means in latex). And each paragraphs gets extra space. But usually you want your equations to be part of the same paragraph as the surrondind text (so no 'enter' before and after the text). It's the same in Latex. /Konrad
How to number an inline equation
Hi, Here is the situation: I have a bunch of inline equations to number. They have \displaystyle, are centered on a separate line. So basically they look like a real display-styled equations. The ONLY difference is that those real display equations created by CTRL+SHIFT+M has a larger spacings away from its adjacent paragraphs, which I don't quite look like. Then I found I couldn't number my pseudo-displaystyle equation. So I was wondering if anyone have any clue about how to do this, or EQUIVALENTLY, how can I modify the style of real displaystyle equation which can be numbered, such that their spacing become less? Thanks in advance!
Re: How to number an inline equation
Kuang Chen wrote:
Here is the situation: I have a bunch of inline equations to number. They have \displaystyle, are centered on a separate line. So basically they look like a real display-styled equations. The ONLY difference is that those real display equations created by CTRL+SHIFT+M has a larger spacings away from its adjacent paragraphs, which I don't quite look like.
Then I found I couldn't number my pseudo-displaystyle equation. So I was
wondering if anyone have any clue about how to do this,
This is not a good way of doing it (also paragraph indentation becomes
wrong).
or EQUIVALENTLY, how can I modify the style of real displaystyle equation which can be numbered, such that their spacing become less?
That's the better way to look for.
A small google search brings up:
http://osdir.com/ml/tex.tugindia/2007-03/msg00049.html
Two skips namely, \abovedisplayskip and \belowdisplayskip control
the vertical space above and below an equation. You might play
with these two skips with different values and arrive at the
optimal ones for your document.
So something like \setlength{\abovedisplayskip}{-0.5\baselineskip} at
the beginning of the document?
/Konrad
Re: How to number an inline equation
Kuang Chen wrote: Hi, Konrad: Problem solved. I found the reason seems to be that spacing is big whenever I want to insert a real display equation in a separate line. However if I insert it right after a paragraph by ctrl+alt+n, a new box will also show up on a new line below the paragraph, but the spacing is normal. Any idea why? Yes, because starting a new line means starting a new "paragraph" (you might have to read up what a paragraph means in latex). And each paragraphs gets extra space. But usually you want your equations to be part of the same paragraph as the surrondind text (so no 'enter' before and after the text). It's the same in Latex. /Konrad
Equation numbering
Hi, I use Lyx 1.5.1 on Mac OS. Right now I have all my equations numbered but the label appears to the far right of the equation, I'm wondering if its possible to make the label appear at the far left of the equation. Thank you very much for your help, Paulina
Re: Equation numbering
HI Paula Piece of cake. In LyX, go into Document - Settings. On the Document Class page there is an area for class options. Put leqno in the custom options box and it will use the leqno LaTeX option which puts equations on the left. -Neil = Neil Hepburn, Economics Instructor Department of Social Sciences, Augustana Faculty University of Alberta 4901-46 Avenue Camrose, Alberta T4V 2R3 Phone (780) 679-1588 email [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 26-Nov-08, at 7:36 PM, Paulina Restrepo wrote: Hi, I use Lyx 1.5.1 on Mac OS. Right now I have all my equations numbered but the label appears to the far right of the equation, I'm wondering if its possible to make the label appear at the far left of the equation. Thank you very much for your help, Paulina
Equation numbering
Hi, I use Lyx 1.5.1 on Mac OS. Right now I have all my equations numbered but the label appears to the far right of the equation, I'm wondering if its possible to make the label appear at the far left of the equation. Thank you very much for your help, Paulina
Re: Equation numbering
HI Paula Piece of cake. In LyX, go into Document - Settings. On the Document Class page there is an area for class options. Put leqno in the custom options box and it will use the leqno LaTeX option which puts equations on the left. -Neil = Neil Hepburn, Economics Instructor Department of Social Sciences, Augustana Faculty University of Alberta 4901-46 Avenue Camrose, Alberta T4V 2R3 Phone (780) 679-1588 email [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 26-Nov-08, at 7:36 PM, Paulina Restrepo wrote: Hi, I use Lyx 1.5.1 on Mac OS. Right now I have all my equations numbered but the label appears to the far right of the equation, I'm wondering if its possible to make the label appear at the far left of the equation. Thank you very much for your help, Paulina
Equation numbering
Hi, I use Lyx 1.5.1 on Mac OS. Right now I have all my equations numbered but the label appears to the far right of the equation, I'm wondering if its possible to make the label appear at the far left of the equation. Thank you very much for your help, Paulina
Re: Equation numbering
HI Paula Piece of cake. In LyX, go into Document -> Settings. On the "Document Class" page there is an area for class options. Put leqno in the custom options box and it will use the leqno LaTeX option which puts equations on the left. -Neil = Neil Hepburn, Economics Instructor Department of Social Sciences, Augustana Faculty University of Alberta 4901-46 Avenue Camrose, Alberta T4V 2R3 Phone (780) 679-1588 email [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 26-Nov-08, at 7:36 PM, Paulina Restrepo wrote: Hi, I use Lyx 1.5.1 on Mac OS. Right now I have all my equations numbered but the label appears to the far right of the equation, I'm wondering if its possible to make the label appear at the far left of the equation. Thank you very much for your help, Paulina
Equation array and two column layout
Dear all, I'm finishing a paper with the two columned article class. I have a problem with some equation arrays that are two big for this format. They span over the other column or over the margins, even with an smaller font (\scriptstyle). What can I do to solve this problem? Should I use an even smaller font (\scriptscriptstyle)? How can I break the line in an equation array and put the right hand of the array under the first part, but slightly to the right? The kind of equation array I'm using is conditional: d= a+b, if a1 a-b, if a1 0,if a=1 Hope you can help me. - Julio Rojas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Equation array and two column layout
Hello Julio,
i do not know if i've understood your question.
Anyway, probably you can be interested one of this...
First solution:
press CTRL+L entering in ERT mode and then:
\begin{eqnarray}
d = a + b, if a1 \nonumber \\
= a-b, if a1 \nonumber \\
=0, if a=1 \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Second solution (i think better for you):
press CTRL+L entering in ERT mode and then:
$$ d = \left\{
\begin{array}{rl} a+b \mbox{ if a1} \\
a-b \mbox{ if a1} \\
0 \mbox{ if a=1} \\
\end{array}
\right. $$
I hope it'll be usefull for you.
Bye,
Vittorio
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Julio Rojas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear all, I'm finishing a paper with the two columned article class. I
have a problem with some equation arrays that are two big for this
format. They span over the other column or over the margins, even with
an smaller font (\scriptstyle). What can I do to solve this problem?
Should I use an even smaller font (\scriptscriptstyle)? How can I
break the line in an equation array and put the right hand of the
array under the first part, but slightly to the right?
The kind of equation array I'm using is conditional:
d= a+b, if a1
a-b, if a1
0,if a=1
Hope you can help me.
-
Julio Rojas
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Vittorio Zuccalà
Re: Equation array and two column layout
Thank you Vittorio. What I would like with this matrix is that the
right column can overfill the left one and viceversa. That way I can
have the long equations and the cases in two lines (eq. on the left
column, cases on the right column) every other line.
d= a+b+c+d+e+f+g
if a,b,c,d,e,f,g 1
a-b-c-d-e-f-g
if a,b,c,d,e,f,g1
With this arrangement I can include the equations in just one column
of the two column paper. Is this something usual to do? What is the
regular way of handling the case of a series of long equations in
two columned papers?
Thanks in advance.
-
Julio Rojas
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 2:50 PM, Vittorio Zuccala'
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Julio,
i do not know if i've understood your question.
Anyway, probably you can be interested one of this...
First solution:
press CTRL+L entering in ERT mode and then:
\begin{eqnarray}
d = a + b, if a1 \nonumber \\
= a-b, if a1 \nonumber \\
=0, if a=1 \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Second solution (i think better for you):
press CTRL+L entering in ERT mode and then:
$$ d = \left\{
\begin{array}{rl} a+b \mbox{ if a1} \\
a-b \mbox{ if a1} \\
0 \mbox{ if a=1} \\
\end{array}
\right. $$
I hope it'll be usefull for you.
Bye,
Vittorio
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Julio Rojas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear all, I'm finishing a paper with the two columned article class. I
have a problem with some equation arrays that are two big for this
format. They span over the other column or over the margins, even with
an smaller font (\scriptstyle). What can I do to solve this problem?
Should I use an even smaller font (\scriptscriptstyle)? How can I
break the line in an equation array and put the right hand of the
array under the first part, but slightly to the right?
The kind of equation array I'm using is conditional:
d= a+b, if a1
a-b, if a1
0,if a=1
Hope you can help me.
-
Julio Rojas
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Vittorio Zuccalà
