How to write cases in LaTeX?
7
I want to write following system of equation in my paper, but I don't know how:
Here is a code that I've tried, but it does not work:
Rgeqslant R_t equiv begin{cases} frac{r_{t+1} (1-W(k_t)}{f'(k{t+1}
lambda} &mbox{if } k_t < K(lambda) \
frac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})} & mbox{if } k_tgeqslant K(lambda)
end{cases}
Any suggestions will be very helpful. Thanks
math-mode cases
edited Feb 25 at 13:12
siracusa
5,05511429
asked Feb 25 at 13:02
Nurzada DiushalievaNurzada Diushalieva
362
add a comment |
7
I want to write following system of equation in my paper, but I don't know how:
Here is a code that I've tried, but it does not work:
Rgeqslant R_t equiv begin{cases} frac{r_{t+1} (1-W(k_t)}{f'(k{t+1}
lambda} &mbox{if } k_t < K(lambda) \
frac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})} & mbox{if } k_tgeqslant K(lambda)
end{cases}
Any suggestions will be very helpful. Thanks
math-mode cases
edited Feb 25 at 13:12
siracusa
5,05511429
asked Feb 25 at 13:02
Nurzada DiushalievaNurzada Diushalieva
362
1
Excuse me but the code is different from the image. Have I understood well?
– Sebastiano
Feb 25 at 13:17
3
Consider accepting one of the provided answers if your question is solved (check mark on the left hand side of the answers).
– Dr. Manuel Kuehner
Feb 25 at 13:44
I don't understand what you were having trouble with. The only error I got compiling was aboutgeqslant. What about didn't work? Or were you wanting to get something closer to your image than you have? I would say that your code gives a better output than that image.
– Teepeemm
Feb 25 at 16:57
add a comment |
7
7
7
I want to write following system of equation in my paper, but I don't know how:
Here is a code that I've tried, but it does not work:
Rgeqslant R_t equiv begin{cases} frac{r_{t+1} (1-W(k_t)}{f'(k{t+1}
lambda} &mbox{if } k_t < K(lambda) \
frac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})} & mbox{if } k_tgeqslant K(lambda)
end{cases}
Any suggestions will be very helpful. Thanks
math-mode cases
edited Feb 25 at 13:12
siracusa
5,05511429
asked Feb 25 at 13:02
Nurzada DiushalievaNurzada Diushalieva
362
I want to write following system of equation in my paper, but I don't know how:
Here is a code that I've tried, but it does not work:
Rgeqslant R_t equiv begin{cases} frac{r_{t+1} (1-W(k_t)}{f'(k{t+1}
lambda} &mbox{if } k_t < K(lambda) \
frac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})} & mbox{if } k_tgeqslant K(lambda)
end{cases}
Any suggestions will be very helpful. Thanks
math-mode cases
math-mode cases
edited Feb 25 at 13:12
siracusa
5,05511429
asked Feb 25 at 13:02
Nurzada DiushalievaNurzada Diushalieva
362
edited Feb 25 at 13:12
siracusa
5,05511429
asked Feb 25 at 13:02
Nurzada DiushalievaNurzada Diushalieva
362
edited Feb 25 at 13:12
siracusa
5,05511429
edited Feb 25 at 13:12
siracusa
5,05511429
edited Feb 25 at 13:12
siracusa
5,05511429
5,05511429
asked Feb 25 at 13:02
Nurzada DiushalievaNurzada Diushalieva
362
asked Feb 25 at 13:02
Nurzada DiushalievaNurzada Diushalieva
362
asked Feb 25 at 13:02
Nurzada DiushalievaNurzada Diushalieva
362
362
1
Excuse me but the code is different from the image. Have I understood well?
– Sebastiano
Feb 25 at 13:17
3
Consider accepting one of the provided answers if your question is solved (check mark on the left hand side of the answers).
– Dr. Manuel Kuehner
Feb 25 at 13:44
I don't understand what you were having trouble with. The only error I got compiling was aboutgeqslant. What about didn't work? Or were you wanting to get something closer to your image than you have? I would say that your code gives a better output than that image.
– Teepeemm
Feb 25 at 16:57
add a comment |
1
Excuse me but the code is different from the image. Have I understood well?
– Sebastiano
Feb 25 at 13:17
3
Consider accepting one of the provided answers if your question is solved (check mark on the left hand side of the answers).
– Dr. Manuel Kuehner
Feb 25 at 13:44
I don't understand what you were having trouble with. The only error I got compiling was aboutgeqslant. What about didn't work? Or were you wanting to get something closer to your image than you have? I would say that your code gives a better output than that image.
– Teepeemm
Feb 25 at 16:57
1
1
Excuse me but the code is different from the image. Have I understood well?
– Sebastiano
Feb 25 at 13:17
Excuse me but the code is different from the image. Have I understood well?
– Sebastiano
Feb 25 at 13:17
3
3
Consider accepting one of the provided answers if your question is solved (check mark on the left hand side of the answers).
– Dr. Manuel Kuehner
Feb 25 at 13:44
Consider accepting one of the provided answers if your question is solved (check mark on the left hand side of the answers).
– Dr. Manuel Kuehner
Feb 25 at 13:44
I don't understand what you were having trouble with. The only error I got compiling was about
geqslant. What about didn't work? Or were you wanting to get something closer to your image than you have? I would say that your code gives a better output than that image.– Teepeemm
Feb 25 at 16:57
I don't understand what you were having trouble with. The only error I got compiling was about
geqslant. What about didn't work? Or were you wanting to get something closer to your image than you have? I would say that your code gives a better output than that image.– Teepeemm
Feb 25 at 16:57
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
12
I would load the mathtools package, which is a superset of the amsmath package, and employ that package's dcases* environment.
documentclass{article}
usepackage{mathtools} % for 'dcases*' env.
begin{document}
[
Rge R_t equiv
begin{dcases*}
frac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})}frac{1-W(k_t)}{lambda}
& if $k_t < K(lambda)$,, \[1ex]
frac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})}
& if $k_tge K(lambda)$,.
end{dcases*}
]
end{document}
answered Feb 25 at 13:19
MicoMico
281k31384773
1
Is this command better than the usualcasescommand?
– knzhou
Feb 25 at 16:38
2
@knzhou - I wouldn't say thatdcasesis necessarily better thancases, certainly not in the sense of it being *always and everywhere" better thancases. Thedindcasesdenotes "automatic display-style math mode. It's handy if one has to typeset expressions such asfrac, which might look a whole lot better when rendered in display-style math mode rather than in text-style math mode. Conversely,casesis much more parsimonious, space-wise, thandcases. If conserving space is an important criterion, by all means go withcases.
– Mico
Feb 25 at 16:44
2
Makes sense, thanks! I was just asking in casecaseshad been declared obsolete by people in the know for some reason, like how[ ... ]is supposed to be strictly better than$$ ... $$.
– knzhou
Feb 25 at 16:50
add a comment |
4
Welcome to TeX.SE. Here my (fast) proposal from your original code:
documentclass[12pt]{article}
usepackage{amsmath,amssymb}
begin{document}
[Rgeqslant R_t equiv begin{cases} dfrac{r_{t+1} (1-W(k_t))}{f'(k{t+1}
lambda)} &mbox{if } k_t < K(lambda) \
&\
dfrac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})} & mbox{if } k_tgeqslant K(lambda)
end{cases}]
end{document}
EDIT: By correct comment of @Yorgos:
documentclass[12pt]{article}
usepackage{amsmath,amssymb}
begin{document}
[
Rgeqslant R_t equiv
begin{cases}
dfrac{r_{t+1} (1-W(k_t))}{f'(k{t+1} lambda)}
& text{if } k_t < K(lambda) \
&\ % blank row
dfrac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})}
& text{if } k_tgeqslant K(lambda)
end{cases}
]
end{document}
edited Feb 25 at 13:21
Mico
281k31384773
answered Feb 25 at 13:06
SebastianoSebastiano
10.4k42060
1
i don't think thatmboxis necessary, since&aligns. also i preferequationenvironment, since it allows for numbering the equation
– Yorgos
Feb 25 at 13:09
1
@Yorgos I accept your suggestion correctly. I have only taken the code from the user. :(
– Sebastiano
Feb 25 at 13:11
1
@Sebastiano Thanks a lot :)
– Nurzada Diushalieva
Feb 25 at 13:21
I believe that thek{t+1}term in the first denominator should be changed tok_{t+1}.
– Mico
Feb 25 at 13:22
@Mico Thank you very much for edit and all ....You're right for you comment.
– Sebastiano
Feb 25 at 15:58
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
});
}
});
draft saved
draft discarded
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%2f476591%2fhow-to-write-cases-in-latex%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
12
I would load the mathtools package, which is a superset of the amsmath package, and employ that package's dcases* environment.
documentclass{article}
usepackage{mathtools} % for 'dcases*' env.
begin{document}
[
Rge R_t equiv
begin{dcases*}
frac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})}frac{1-W(k_t)}{lambda}
& if $k_t < K(lambda)$,, \[1ex]
frac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})}
& if $k_tge K(lambda)$,.
end{dcases*}
]
end{document}
answered Feb 25 at 13:19
MicoMico
281k31384773
1
Is this command better than the usualcasescommand?
– knzhou
Feb 25 at 16:38
2
@knzhou - I wouldn't say thatdcasesis necessarily better thancases, certainly not in the sense of it being *always and everywhere" better thancases. Thedindcasesdenotes "automatic display-style math mode. It's handy if one has to typeset expressions such asfrac, which might look a whole lot better when rendered in display-style math mode rather than in text-style math mode. Conversely,casesis much more parsimonious, space-wise, thandcases. If conserving space is an important criterion, by all means go withcases.
– Mico
Feb 25 at 16:44
2
Makes sense, thanks! I was just asking in casecaseshad been declared obsolete by people in the know for some reason, like how[ ... ]is supposed to be strictly better than$$ ... $$.
– knzhou
Feb 25 at 16:50
add a comment |
12
I would load the mathtools package, which is a superset of the amsmath package, and employ that package's dcases* environment.
documentclass{article}
usepackage{mathtools} % for 'dcases*' env.
begin{document}
[
Rge R_t equiv
begin{dcases*}
frac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})}frac{1-W(k_t)}{lambda}
& if $k_t < K(lambda)$,, \[1ex]
frac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})}
& if $k_tge K(lambda)$,.
end{dcases*}
]
end{document}
answered Feb 25 at 13:19
MicoMico
281k31384773
1
Is this command better than the usualcasescommand?
– knzhou
Feb 25 at 16:38
2
@knzhou - I wouldn't say thatdcasesis necessarily better thancases, certainly not in the sense of it being *always and everywhere" better thancases. Thedindcasesdenotes "automatic display-style math mode. It's handy if one has to typeset expressions such asfrac, which might look a whole lot better when rendered in display-style math mode rather than in text-style math mode. Conversely,casesis much more parsimonious, space-wise, thandcases. If conserving space is an important criterion, by all means go withcases.
– Mico
Feb 25 at 16:44
2
Makes sense, thanks! I was just asking in casecaseshad been declared obsolete by people in the know for some reason, like how[ ... ]is supposed to be strictly better than$$ ... $$.
– knzhou
Feb 25 at 16:50
add a comment |
12
12
12
I would load the mathtools package, which is a superset of the amsmath package, and employ that package's dcases* environment.
documentclass{article}
usepackage{mathtools} % for 'dcases*' env.
begin{document}
[
Rge R_t equiv
begin{dcases*}
frac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})}frac{1-W(k_t)}{lambda}
& if $k_t < K(lambda)$,, \[1ex]
frac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})}
& if $k_tge K(lambda)$,.
end{dcases*}
]
end{document}
answered Feb 25 at 13:19
MicoMico
281k31384773
I would load the mathtools package, which is a superset of the amsmath package, and employ that package's dcases* environment.
documentclass{article}
usepackage{mathtools} % for 'dcases*' env.
begin{document}
[
Rge R_t equiv
begin{dcases*}
frac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})}frac{1-W(k_t)}{lambda}
& if $k_t < K(lambda)$,, \[1ex]
frac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})}
& if $k_tge K(lambda)$,.
end{dcases*}
]
end{document}
answered Feb 25 at 13:19
MicoMico
281k31384773
answered Feb 25 at 13:19
MicoMico
281k31384773
answered Feb 25 at 13:19
MicoMico
281k31384773
answered Feb 25 at 13:19
MicoMico
281k31384773
281k31384773
1
Is this command better than the usualcasescommand?
– knzhou
Feb 25 at 16:38
2
@knzhou - I wouldn't say thatdcasesis necessarily better thancases, certainly not in the sense of it being *always and everywhere" better thancases. Thedindcasesdenotes "automatic display-style math mode. It's handy if one has to typeset expressions such asfrac, which might look a whole lot better when rendered in display-style math mode rather than in text-style math mode. Conversely,casesis much more parsimonious, space-wise, thandcases. If conserving space is an important criterion, by all means go withcases.
– Mico
Feb 25 at 16:44
2
Makes sense, thanks! I was just asking in casecaseshad been declared obsolete by people in the know for some reason, like how[ ... ]is supposed to be strictly better than$$ ... $$.
– knzhou
Feb 25 at 16:50
add a comment |
1
Is this command better than the usualcasescommand?
– knzhou
Feb 25 at 16:38
2
@knzhou - I wouldn't say thatdcasesis necessarily better thancases, certainly not in the sense of it being *always and everywhere" better thancases. Thedindcasesdenotes "automatic display-style math mode. It's handy if one has to typeset expressions such asfrac, which might look a whole lot better when rendered in display-style math mode rather than in text-style math mode. Conversely,casesis much more parsimonious, space-wise, thandcases. If conserving space is an important criterion, by all means go withcases.
– Mico
Feb 25 at 16:44
2
Makes sense, thanks! I was just asking in casecaseshad been declared obsolete by people in the know for some reason, like how[ ... ]is supposed to be strictly better than$$ ... $$.
– knzhou
Feb 25 at 16:50
1
1
Is this command better than the usual
cases command?– knzhou
Feb 25 at 16:38
Is this command better than the usual
cases command?– knzhou
Feb 25 at 16:38
2
2
@knzhou - I wouldn't say that
dcases is necessarily better than cases, certainly not in the sense of it being *always and everywhere" better than cases. The d in dcases denotes "automatic display-style math mode. It's handy if one has to typeset expressions such as frac, which might look a whole lot better when rendered in display-style math mode rather than in text-style math mode. Conversely, cases is much more parsimonious, space-wise, than dcases. If conserving space is an important criterion, by all means go with cases.– Mico
Feb 25 at 16:44
@knzhou - I wouldn't say that
dcases is necessarily better than cases, certainly not in the sense of it being *always and everywhere" better than cases. The d in dcases denotes "automatic display-style math mode. It's handy if one has to typeset expressions such as frac, which might look a whole lot better when rendered in display-style math mode rather than in text-style math mode. Conversely, cases is much more parsimonious, space-wise, than dcases. If conserving space is an important criterion, by all means go with cases.– Mico
Feb 25 at 16:44
2
2
Makes sense, thanks! I was just asking in case
cases had been declared obsolete by people in the know for some reason, like how [ ... ] is supposed to be strictly better than $$ ... $$.– knzhou
Feb 25 at 16:50
Makes sense, thanks! I was just asking in case
cases had been declared obsolete by people in the know for some reason, like how [ ... ] is supposed to be strictly better than $$ ... $$.– knzhou
Feb 25 at 16:50
add a comment |
4
Welcome to TeX.SE. Here my (fast) proposal from your original code:
documentclass[12pt]{article}
usepackage{amsmath,amssymb}
begin{document}
[Rgeqslant R_t equiv begin{cases} dfrac{r_{t+1} (1-W(k_t))}{f'(k{t+1}
lambda)} &mbox{if } k_t < K(lambda) \
&\
dfrac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})} & mbox{if } k_tgeqslant K(lambda)
end{cases}]
end{document}
EDIT: By correct comment of @Yorgos:
documentclass[12pt]{article}
usepackage{amsmath,amssymb}
begin{document}
[
Rgeqslant R_t equiv
begin{cases}
dfrac{r_{t+1} (1-W(k_t))}{f'(k{t+1} lambda)}
& text{if } k_t < K(lambda) \
&\ % blank row
dfrac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})}
& text{if } k_tgeqslant K(lambda)
end{cases}
]
end{document}
edited Feb 25 at 13:21
Mico
281k31384773
answered Feb 25 at 13:06
SebastianoSebastiano
10.4k42060
1
i don't think thatmboxis necessary, since&aligns. also i preferequationenvironment, since it allows for numbering the equation
– Yorgos
Feb 25 at 13:09
1
@Yorgos I accept your suggestion correctly. I have only taken the code from the user. :(
– Sebastiano
Feb 25 at 13:11
1
@Sebastiano Thanks a lot :)
– Nurzada Diushalieva
Feb 25 at 13:21
I believe that thek{t+1}term in the first denominator should be changed tok_{t+1}.
– Mico
Feb 25 at 13:22
@Mico Thank you very much for edit and all ....You're right for you comment.
– Sebastiano
Feb 25 at 15:58
add a comment |
4
Welcome to TeX.SE. Here my (fast) proposal from your original code:
documentclass[12pt]{article}
usepackage{amsmath,amssymb}
begin{document}
[Rgeqslant R_t equiv begin{cases} dfrac{r_{t+1} (1-W(k_t))}{f'(k{t+1}
lambda)} &mbox{if } k_t < K(lambda) \
&\
dfrac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})} & mbox{if } k_tgeqslant K(lambda)
end{cases}]
end{document}
EDIT: By correct comment of @Yorgos:
documentclass[12pt]{article}
usepackage{amsmath,amssymb}
begin{document}
[
Rgeqslant R_t equiv
begin{cases}
dfrac{r_{t+1} (1-W(k_t))}{f'(k{t+1} lambda)}
& text{if } k_t < K(lambda) \
&\ % blank row
dfrac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})}
& text{if } k_tgeqslant K(lambda)
end{cases}
]
end{document}
edited Feb 25 at 13:21
Mico
281k31384773
answered Feb 25 at 13:06
SebastianoSebastiano
10.4k42060
1
i don't think thatmboxis necessary, since&aligns. also i preferequationenvironment, since it allows for numbering the equation
– Yorgos
Feb 25 at 13:09
1
@Yorgos I accept your suggestion correctly. I have only taken the code from the user. :(
– Sebastiano
Feb 25 at 13:11
1
@Sebastiano Thanks a lot :)
– Nurzada Diushalieva
Feb 25 at 13:21
I believe that thek{t+1}term in the first denominator should be changed tok_{t+1}.
– Mico
Feb 25 at 13:22
@Mico Thank you very much for edit and all ....You're right for you comment.
– Sebastiano
Feb 25 at 15:58
add a comment |
4
4
4
Welcome to TeX.SE. Here my (fast) proposal from your original code:
documentclass[12pt]{article}
usepackage{amsmath,amssymb}
begin{document}
[Rgeqslant R_t equiv begin{cases} dfrac{r_{t+1} (1-W(k_t))}{f'(k{t+1}
lambda)} &mbox{if } k_t < K(lambda) \
&\
dfrac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})} & mbox{if } k_tgeqslant K(lambda)
end{cases}]
end{document}
EDIT: By correct comment of @Yorgos:
documentclass[12pt]{article}
usepackage{amsmath,amssymb}
begin{document}
[
Rgeqslant R_t equiv
begin{cases}
dfrac{r_{t+1} (1-W(k_t))}{f'(k{t+1} lambda)}
& text{if } k_t < K(lambda) \
&\ % blank row
dfrac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})}
& text{if } k_tgeqslant K(lambda)
end{cases}
]
end{document}
edited Feb 25 at 13:21
Mico
281k31384773
answered Feb 25 at 13:06
SebastianoSebastiano
10.4k42060
Welcome to TeX.SE. Here my (fast) proposal from your original code:
documentclass[12pt]{article}
usepackage{amsmath,amssymb}
begin{document}
[Rgeqslant R_t equiv begin{cases} dfrac{r_{t+1} (1-W(k_t))}{f'(k{t+1}
lambda)} &mbox{if } k_t < K(lambda) \
&\
dfrac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})} & mbox{if } k_tgeqslant K(lambda)
end{cases}]
end{document}
EDIT: By correct comment of @Yorgos:
documentclass[12pt]{article}
usepackage{amsmath,amssymb}
begin{document}
[
Rgeqslant R_t equiv
begin{cases}
dfrac{r_{t+1} (1-W(k_t))}{f'(k{t+1} lambda)}
& text{if } k_t < K(lambda) \
&\ % blank row
dfrac{r_{t+1}}{f'(k_{t+1})}
& text{if } k_tgeqslant K(lambda)
end{cases}
]
end{document}
edited Feb 25 at 13:21
Mico
281k31384773
answered Feb 25 at 13:06
SebastianoSebastiano
10.4k42060
edited Feb 25 at 13:21
Mico
281k31384773
edited Feb 25 at 13:21
Mico
281k31384773
edited Feb 25 at 13:21
Mico
281k31384773
281k31384773
answered Feb 25 at 13:06
SebastianoSebastiano
10.4k42060
answered Feb 25 at 13:06
SebastianoSebastiano
10.4k42060
answered Feb 25 at 13:06
SebastianoSebastiano
10.4k42060
10.4k42060
1
i don't think thatmboxis necessary, since&aligns. also i preferequationenvironment, since it allows for numbering the equation
– Yorgos
Feb 25 at 13:09
1
@Yorgos I accept your suggestion correctly. I have only taken the code from the user. :(
– Sebastiano
Feb 25 at 13:11
1
@Sebastiano Thanks a lot :)
– Nurzada Diushalieva
Feb 25 at 13:21
I believe that thek{t+1}term in the first denominator should be changed tok_{t+1}.
– Mico
Feb 25 at 13:22
@Mico Thank you very much for edit and all ....You're right for you comment.
– Sebastiano
Feb 25 at 15:58
add a comment |
1
i don't think thatmboxis necessary, since&aligns. also i preferequationenvironment, since it allows for numbering the equation
– Yorgos
Feb 25 at 13:09
1
@Yorgos I accept your suggestion correctly. I have only taken the code from the user. :(
– Sebastiano
Feb 25 at 13:11
1
@Sebastiano Thanks a lot :)
– Nurzada Diushalieva
Feb 25 at 13:21
I believe that thek{t+1}term in the first denominator should be changed tok_{t+1}.
– Mico
Feb 25 at 13:22
@Mico Thank you very much for edit and all ....You're right for you comment.
– Sebastiano
Feb 25 at 15:58
1
1
i don't think that
mbox is necessary, since & aligns. also i prefer equation environment, since it allows for numbering the equation– Yorgos
Feb 25 at 13:09
i don't think that
mbox is necessary, since & aligns. also i prefer equation environment, since it allows for numbering the equation– Yorgos
Feb 25 at 13:09
1
1
@Yorgos I accept your suggestion correctly. I have only taken the code from the user. :(
– Sebastiano
Feb 25 at 13:11
@Yorgos I accept your suggestion correctly. I have only taken the code from the user. :(
– Sebastiano
Feb 25 at 13:11
1
1
@Sebastiano Thanks a lot :)
– Nurzada Diushalieva
Feb 25 at 13:21
@Sebastiano Thanks a lot :)
– Nurzada Diushalieva
Feb 25 at 13:21
I believe that the
k{t+1} term in the first denominator should be changed to k_{t+1}.– Mico
Feb 25 at 13:22
I believe that the
k{t+1} term in the first denominator should be changed to k_{t+1}.– Mico
Feb 25 at 13:22
@Mico Thank you very much for edit and all ....You're right for you comment.
– Sebastiano
Feb 25 at 15:58
@Mico Thank you very much for edit and all ....You're right for you comment.
– Sebastiano
Feb 25 at 15:58
add a comment |
draft saved
draft discarded
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.
draft saved
draft discarded
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%2f476591%2fhow-to-write-cases-in-latex%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
1
Excuse me but the code is different from the image. Have I understood well?
– Sebastiano
Feb 25 at 13:17
3
Consider accepting one of the provided answers if your question is solved (check mark on the left hand side of the answers).
– Dr. Manuel Kuehner
Feb 25 at 13:44
I don't understand what you were having trouble with. The only error I got compiling was about
geqslant. What about didn't work? Or were you wanting to get something closer to your image than you have? I would say that your code gives a better output than that image.– Teepeemm
Feb 25 at 16:57