Give number to entire set of numbered equations (without this number to be displayed
I really can t find an answer to this question (so it just might be a super stupid question or...) but how can we give to a numbered set of equations a "supra" number without this number to be really mentioned in the final document (because it simply doesn t exist). I d like to reference to an entire set of equations lateron in my text.
For instance I d like to have this example set of equations to have a "secret" "supra"-number
begin{flalign}
lambda_t&=c_t... tag{3.4a} \
lambda_tw_t&=theta ... tag{3.4b} \
y_t&=a_t^{alpha_N}....tag{3.4c} \
...
end{flalign}
I d be so happy if someone has an idea and could help me please
Regards
equations numbering flalign
edited Mar 8 at 10:50
AboAmmar
34.4k32985
asked Mar 8 at 10:44
RuthRuth
11
add a comment |
I really can t find an answer to this question (so it just might be a super stupid question or...) but how can we give to a numbered set of equations a "supra" number without this number to be really mentioned in the final document (because it simply doesn t exist). I d like to reference to an entire set of equations lateron in my text.
For instance I d like to have this example set of equations to have a "secret" "supra"-number
begin{flalign}
lambda_t&=c_t... tag{3.4a} \
lambda_tw_t&=theta ... tag{3.4b} \
y_t&=a_t^{alpha_N}....tag{3.4c} \
...
end{flalign}
I d be so happy if someone has an idea and could help me please
Regards
equations numbering flalign
edited Mar 8 at 10:50
AboAmmar
34.4k32985
asked Mar 8 at 10:44
RuthRuth
11
add a comment |
I really can t find an answer to this question (so it just might be a super stupid question or...) but how can we give to a numbered set of equations a "supra" number without this number to be really mentioned in the final document (because it simply doesn t exist). I d like to reference to an entire set of equations lateron in my text.
For instance I d like to have this example set of equations to have a "secret" "supra"-number
begin{flalign}
lambda_t&=c_t... tag{3.4a} \
lambda_tw_t&=theta ... tag{3.4b} \
y_t&=a_t^{alpha_N}....tag{3.4c} \
...
end{flalign}
I d be so happy if someone has an idea and could help me please
Regards
equations numbering flalign
edited Mar 8 at 10:50
AboAmmar
34.4k32985
asked Mar 8 at 10:44
RuthRuth
11
I really can t find an answer to this question (so it just might be a super stupid question or...) but how can we give to a numbered set of equations a "supra" number without this number to be really mentioned in the final document (because it simply doesn t exist). I d like to reference to an entire set of equations lateron in my text.
For instance I d like to have this example set of equations to have a "secret" "supra"-number
begin{flalign}
lambda_t&=c_t... tag{3.4a} \
lambda_tw_t&=theta ... tag{3.4b} \
y_t&=a_t^{alpha_N}....tag{3.4c} \
...
end{flalign}
I d be so happy if someone has an idea and could help me please
Regards
equations numbering flalign
equations numbering flalign
edited Mar 8 at 10:50
AboAmmar
34.4k32985
asked Mar 8 at 10:44
RuthRuth
11
edited Mar 8 at 10:50
AboAmmar
34.4k32985
asked Mar 8 at 10:44
RuthRuth
11
edited Mar 8 at 10:50
AboAmmar
34.4k32985
edited Mar 8 at 10:50
AboAmmar
34.4k32985
edited Mar 8 at 10:50
AboAmmar
34.4k32985
34.4k32985
asked Mar 8 at 10:44
RuthRuth
11
asked Mar 8 at 10:44
RuthRuth
11
asked Mar 8 at 10:44
RuthRuth
11
11
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
You can put a subequations environment around your formulas, then you do not even need tags:
documentclass{article}
usepackage{amsmath}
begin{document}
begin{subequations}label{eqs:abc}
begin{flalign}
lambda_t&=c_t...\
lambda_tw_t&=theta ... \
y_t&=a_t^{alpha_N}....\
...
end{flalign}
end{subequations}
Ref: ref{eqs:abc}
end{document}
answered Mar 8 at 10:54
Marcel KrügerMarcel Krüger
12.8k11636
Thank you so much! I knew that the tagging-thing was somehow strange, but an additional problem I have is, that this set of equations belongs to section 3.3 of my work. However, it is the only set of equations in this section and working with subequations makes these equations beeing numbered 3.3.1a, 3.3.1a and so on (which doesn t make sense as there is no 3.3.2...). I´d like them to be be numbered 3.3a & so o, but I need the subequations-definition in order to give them one label for further referencing.. right? Or is there any chance to change their numbering while still using subequations?
– Ruth
Mar 9 at 9:31
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "85"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f478390%2fgive-number-to-entire-set-of-numbered-equations-without-this-number-to-be-displ%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
You can put a subequations environment around your formulas, then you do not even need tags:
documentclass{article}
usepackage{amsmath}
begin{document}
begin{subequations}label{eqs:abc}
begin{flalign}
lambda_t&=c_t...\
lambda_tw_t&=theta ... \
y_t&=a_t^{alpha_N}....\
...
end{flalign}
end{subequations}
Ref: ref{eqs:abc}
end{document}
answered Mar 8 at 10:54
Marcel KrügerMarcel Krüger
12.8k11636
Thank you so much! I knew that the tagging-thing was somehow strange, but an additional problem I have is, that this set of equations belongs to section 3.3 of my work. However, it is the only set of equations in this section and working with subequations makes these equations beeing numbered 3.3.1a, 3.3.1a and so on (which doesn t make sense as there is no 3.3.2...). I´d like them to be be numbered 3.3a & so o, but I need the subequations-definition in order to give them one label for further referencing.. right? Or is there any chance to change their numbering while still using subequations?
– Ruth
Mar 9 at 9:31
add a comment |
You can put a subequations environment around your formulas, then you do not even need tags:
documentclass{article}
usepackage{amsmath}
begin{document}
begin{subequations}label{eqs:abc}
begin{flalign}
lambda_t&=c_t...\
lambda_tw_t&=theta ... \
y_t&=a_t^{alpha_N}....\
...
end{flalign}
end{subequations}
Ref: ref{eqs:abc}
end{document}
answered Mar 8 at 10:54
Marcel KrügerMarcel Krüger
12.8k11636
Thank you so much! I knew that the tagging-thing was somehow strange, but an additional problem I have is, that this set of equations belongs to section 3.3 of my work. However, it is the only set of equations in this section and working with subequations makes these equations beeing numbered 3.3.1a, 3.3.1a and so on (which doesn t make sense as there is no 3.3.2...). I´d like them to be be numbered 3.3a & so o, but I need the subequations-definition in order to give them one label for further referencing.. right? Or is there any chance to change their numbering while still using subequations?
– Ruth
Mar 9 at 9:31
add a comment |
You can put a subequations environment around your formulas, then you do not even need tags:
documentclass{article}
usepackage{amsmath}
begin{document}
begin{subequations}label{eqs:abc}
begin{flalign}
lambda_t&=c_t...\
lambda_tw_t&=theta ... \
y_t&=a_t^{alpha_N}....\
...
end{flalign}
end{subequations}
Ref: ref{eqs:abc}
end{document}
answered Mar 8 at 10:54
Marcel KrügerMarcel Krüger
12.8k11636
You can put a subequations environment around your formulas, then you do not even need tags:
documentclass{article}
usepackage{amsmath}
begin{document}
begin{subequations}label{eqs:abc}
begin{flalign}
lambda_t&=c_t...\
lambda_tw_t&=theta ... \
y_t&=a_t^{alpha_N}....\
...
end{flalign}
end{subequations}
Ref: ref{eqs:abc}
end{document}
answered Mar 8 at 10:54
Marcel KrügerMarcel Krüger
12.8k11636
answered Mar 8 at 10:54
Marcel KrügerMarcel Krüger
12.8k11636
answered Mar 8 at 10:54
Marcel KrügerMarcel Krüger
12.8k11636
answered Mar 8 at 10:54
Marcel KrügerMarcel Krüger
12.8k11636
12.8k11636
Thank you so much! I knew that the tagging-thing was somehow strange, but an additional problem I have is, that this set of equations belongs to section 3.3 of my work. However, it is the only set of equations in this section and working with subequations makes these equations beeing numbered 3.3.1a, 3.3.1a and so on (which doesn t make sense as there is no 3.3.2...). I´d like them to be be numbered 3.3a & so o, but I need the subequations-definition in order to give them one label for further referencing.. right? Or is there any chance to change their numbering while still using subequations?
– Ruth
Mar 9 at 9:31
add a comment |
Thank you so much! I knew that the tagging-thing was somehow strange, but an additional problem I have is, that this set of equations belongs to section 3.3 of my work. However, it is the only set of equations in this section and working with subequations makes these equations beeing numbered 3.3.1a, 3.3.1a and so on (which doesn t make sense as there is no 3.3.2...). I´d like them to be be numbered 3.3a & so o, but I need the subequations-definition in order to give them one label for further referencing.. right? Or is there any chance to change their numbering while still using subequations?
– Ruth
Mar 9 at 9:31
Thank you so much! I knew that the tagging-thing was somehow strange, but an additional problem I have is, that this set of equations belongs to section 3.3 of my work. However, it is the only set of equations in this section and working with subequations makes these equations beeing numbered 3.3.1a, 3.3.1a and so on (which doesn t make sense as there is no 3.3.2...). I´d like them to be be numbered 3.3a & so o, but I need the subequations-definition in order to give them one label for further referencing.. right? Or is there any chance to change their numbering while still using subequations?
– Ruth
Mar 9 at 9:31
Thank you so much! I knew that the tagging-thing was somehow strange, but an additional problem I have is, that this set of equations belongs to section 3.3 of my work. However, it is the only set of equations in this section and working with subequations makes these equations beeing numbered 3.3.1a, 3.3.1a and so on (which doesn t make sense as there is no 3.3.2...). I´d like them to be be numbered 3.3a & so o, but I need the subequations-definition in order to give them one label for further referencing.. right? Or is there any chance to change their numbering while still using subequations?
– Ruth
Mar 9 at 9:31
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f478390%2fgive-number-to-entire-set-of-numbered-equations-without-this-number-to-be-displ%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
