I'm using the symbol \otimes as a unary operator and it's vertical alignment doesn't seem right to me. It wants to sit a bit below the baseline. For example, if I define \newcommand{\myop}{\ensuremath \otimes}, then $\myop I$ becomes
and $F_{\myop I}$ becomes
I tried using \raisebox to fix this, e.g.,
\newcommand{\myop}{\ensuremath \raisebox{1pt}{$\otimes$}}
This fixes $\myop I$:
But \raisebox doesn't seem to be sensitive to subscripts. The operator stays the same size while everything around it shrinks:
The problem, I think, is that \raisebox creates its own LR box, which doesn't inherit the settings in the surrounding math environment. Is there a version of \raisebox that "respects math"?
Try \mathchoice (or \mathpalette):
\newcommand{\myop}{%
\mathchoice{\raisebox{1pt}{$\displaystyle\otimes$}}
{\raisebox{1pt}{$\otimes$}}
{\raisebox{0.5pt}{$\scriptstyle\otimes$}}
{\raisebox{0.2pt}{$\scriptscriptstyle\otimes$}}}
The amsopn documentation says:
... the vertical spacing may not be optimal in script and scriptscript
sizes. Unfortunately TeX provides no easy way to do math mode vertical spacing
that varies with current math style like mu units.
$F_{\raisebox{1pt}{\scriptsize$\otimes$} I}$
Related
What column setting do you use in the IDE for the vertical edge. I use 80 columns in line mode, but I wanted to know if this is common or is there a more common standard? I have seen other options like background mode, but found it too distracting.
Vertical Edge, for those who are unfamiliar, is a line or an area which marks off the section where the code can be written. Anything beyond may not format the best way in other code readers or makes code readability tougher. Please correct if my understanding is inaccurate.
Widescreen monitors and a preference for a smaller font so I get more vertical lines makes 80 a little lacking on the wide side.
I don't have a vertical column setting. Any coding lines (usually ifs) that may be too wide, I split at logical operators. For text lines, its a bit more nebulous where I actually split them but split them conservative.
Note: Your question appears to be the same as: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/903754/do-you-still-limit-line-length-in-code and question 746853 (which I can't hyperlink to as I am a "new user")
There are four kinds of 'dashes' in LaTeX: hyphen, en-dash(--), em-dash(---) and minus $-$. They are used for, respectively, hyphenation and joining words, indicating a range, punctuation, and a mathematical symbol. My question is: how do I indicate an en-dash (range) in math mode? (as in $S=1 to 2$)? Do I have to drop out of math mode in the middle of the 'equation' ($S=1$--$2$)? Or is there a symbol I can use and stay in math mode? I tried $S=1\--2$ but this gives me a minus, not a en-dash, and $S=1--2$ gives two minuses. My guess is I am going to have to drop out of math mode but maybe there is a way to do it without that.
The simplest way is to use $S=1\mbox{--}2$. If you already have \usepackage{amsmath} in your document's preamble, however, you're better off using \text: $S=1\text{--}2$ because \text will adjust the size of the font when used in super- and subscripts: $S_{1\text{--}2}=0$.
An en dash used in math may easily be confused with a minus sign. You may want to look at other techniques for indicating a range such as ellipses (\ldots for dots on the baseline [used between commas], or \cdots for centered dots [used between centered operators such as plus signs]) or using the bracket notation. Some examples:
$S = \{1, 2, \ldots, n\}$ indicates an element in the set containing integers between 1 and $n$.
$S = [0, 1]$ indicates a real number between 0 and 1 (inclusive).
You can use \textrm which does not depend on \usepackage{amsmath}.
Some examples:
$S=1\textrm{--}2$
$S_{1\textrm{--}2}=0$ % correctly changes the font size for subscript
$S_{1\textrm{2}2}=0$ % does not change the font size :(
Or maybe use \textnormal instead of \textrm.
See also LaTeX: use \textnormal instead of \textrm (or \textsf) in math.
Well, you could use $1\mbox{--}2$, but I'd look at the list of math symbols in the symbol list. Hmm. I don't find one.
Use the command \leftrightline in the package MnSymbol. I don't know if it's the length needed for your purposes, but hopefully it will do the trick.
I am using LaTeX and the figure environment.
I am well familiar with the parameters to that environment: [htbp], and I am also generally familiar with the strategies that LaTeX takes, by default, to decide where to put each figure. For example, by placing figures at the top or bottom of the page.
What I am wondering is whether there is a package, macro, or some commands that I can give so that if I have a single-column document and I mostly have a single in-text reference to a figure, that the figure would be more likely to be placed in the same page of the reference?
For example, imagine that I have a long paragraph which in the middle has a \ref{FIG:X}. When rendered, some of the paragraph appears before the page break, and some appears after the page break. I can also place the figure command somewhere before and after the whole paragraph. Is there a way to get it to actually be placed in the same page as the actual reference?
I don't want to sound too negative, but there are occasions when what you want is almost impossible without a lot of "artificial" tuning of page breaks.
If the callout falls naturally near the bottom of a page, and the figure falls on the following page, moving the figure back one page will probably displace the callout forward.
I would recommend (as far as possible, and depending on the exact size of the figures):
Place the figures with [t] (or [h] if you must)
Place the figures as near as possible to the "right" place (differs for [t] and [h])
Include the figures from separate files with \input, which will make them much easier to move around when you're doing the final tuning
In my experience, this is a big eater-up of non-available time (:-)
In reply to Jon's comment, I think this is an inherently difficult problem, because the LaTeX guys are no slouches. You may like to read Frank Mittelbach's paper.
Yes, include float package into the top of your document and H (capital H) as a figure specifier:
\usepackage{float}
\begin{figure}[H]
.
.
.
\end{figure}
You can always add the "!" into your float-options. This way, latex tries really hard to place the figure where you want it (I mostly use [h!tb]), stretching the normal rules of type-setting.
I have found another solution:
Use the float-package. This way you can place the figures where you want them to be.
I solve this problem by always using the [h] option on floats (such as figures) so that they (mostly) go where I place them. Then when I look at the final draft, I adjust the location of the float by moving it in the LaTeX source. Usually that means moving it around the paragraph where it is referenced. Sometimes I need to add a page break at an appropriate spot.
I've found that the default placement of floats is reasonable in LaTeX, but manual adjustments are almost always needed to get things like this just right. (And sometimes it isn't possible for everything to be perfect when there are lots of floats and footnotes.)
The manual for the memoir class has some good information about how LaTeX places floats and some advice for manipulating the algorithm.
If you want force this behaviour on all of your figures try
...
\usepackage{float}
\floatplacement{figure}{H}
...
Maybe this will help you?
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{picture_name}
\end{center}
I think is better to use the graphics command when your figures run away.
I have some useful comments. Because I had similar problem with location of figures.
I used package "wrapfig" that allows to make figures wrapped by text.
Something like
...
\usepackage{wrapfig}
\usepackage{graphicx}
...
\begin{wrapfigure}{r}{53pt}
\includegraphics[width=53pt]{cone.pdf}
\end{wrapfigure}
In options {r} means to put figure from right side. {l} can be use for left side.
\setcounter{topnumber}{2}
\setcounter{bottomnumber}{2}
\setcounter{totalnumber}{4}
\renewcommand{\topfraction}{0.85}
\renewcommand{\bottomfraction}{0.85}
\renewcommand{\textfraction}{0.15}
\renewcommand{\floatpagefraction}{0.7}
http://robjhyndman.com/researchtips/latex-floats/
One way I found that helps with this is to use \include{file_with_tex_figure_commands}
(not input)
I have a two-column paper where space restrictions are very tight.
I just looked at my last version of the manuscript and saw that the upper half contains a figure (as expected), but in the lower half there is a lot of vertical space between paragraphs (enough to squeeze 10 more lines), and that LaTeX probably added it so that in the beginning of the next page a new numbered section will begin at the top of the page.
I know there's a way to adjust this so LaTeX doesn't try so hard, but I'm not sure how. any help? Thanks!
The parameter that controls inter-paragraph spacing is called \parskip(See Paragraph Spacing ). You set it (with "rubber" values) using something like:
\setlength{\parskip}{1cm plus4mm minus3mm}
The defualt value of \parskip is class dependent. The "plus" and "minus" parts tell TeX how much it can adjust the value to improve the layout (that is they make the spacing elastic, thus the "rubber" designation). Reducing (or eliminating) the "plus" part of the rubber might help.
Watch out though, you can cause other layout artifacts if you constrain TeX too much.
Other things to think about:
The widow and club penalties probably apply section headings, and may be affecting TeX's layout choices (see https://stackoverflow.com/questions/512967/how-can-one-keep-a-section-from-being-at-the-end-of-a-page-in-latex for a discussion).
You may also want to consider messing with \baselineskip which controls the allowed spacing between lines of text and can also have rubber values.
This is a common problem, and there are probably some fairly sophisticated treatments already prepared on CTAN.
\vfill before the new section worked perfectly for me.
the following latex input:
\rule{1cm}{1cm}\\
\rule{1cm}{1cm}
leaves a gap of about .35mm between the boxes. what is the length that defines this gap?
Edit: I was only partly right at first, but GoogleBooks knew. It pointed me at A Beginner's Book of TeX
By Raymond Seroul, Silvio Levy, Silvio Vieira Ferreira Levy, which says:
Three variables control this behavior \baselineskip, \lineskip and \lineskiplimit.
The default separation of lines is \baselineskip, but boxes are not allowed to come closer than \lineskiplimit. If they would, the vertical spacing is adjusted until \lineskip space lies between them...