abstract: This paper is a sample adapted from the -LaTeX document testmath.tex to illustrate the use of the document class `w-art` and publication-specific variants of that class for WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim.
address: First address; Second address
author: L. First Author[^1]; L. Second Author; L. Third Author
title: Sample paper for the **w-art** class

\[1994/12/01\]

[^2]

# Introduction

This paper contains examples of various features from -LaTeX.

# Enumeration of Hamiltonian paths in a graph

Let $\mathbf{A}=(a_{ij})$ be the adjacency matrix of graph $G$. The corresponding Kirchhoff matrix $\mathbf{K}=(k_{ij})$ is obtained from $\mathbf{A}$ by replacing in $-\mathbf{A}$ each diagonal entry by the degree of its corresponding vertex; i.e., the $i$th diagonal entry is identified with the degree of the $i$th vertex. It is well known that $$\det\mathbf{K}(i|i)=\text{ the number of spanning trees of $G$},
\quad i=1,\dots,n$$ where $\mathbf{K}(i|i)$ is the $i$th principal submatrix of $\mathbf{K}$.

    \det\mathbf{K}(i|i)=\text{ the number of spanning trees of $G$},

Let $C_{i(j)}$ be the set of graphs obtained from $G$ by attaching edge $(v_iv_j)$ to each spanning tree of $G$. Denote by $C_i=\bigcup_j
C_{i(j)}$. It is obvious that the collection of Hamiltonian cycles is a subset of $C_i$. Note that the cardinality of $C_i$ is $k_{ii}\det
\mathbf{K}(i|i)$. Let $\widehat X=\{\hat x_1,\dots,\hat x_n\}$.

    $\wh X=\{\hat x_1,\dots,\hat x_n\}$

Define multiplication for the elements of $\widehat X$ by $$\label{multdef}
\hat x_i\hat x_j=\hat x_j\hat x_i,\quad \hat x^2_i=0,\quad
i,j=1,\dots,n.$$ Let $\hat k_{ij}=k_{ij}\hat x_j$ and $\hat k_{ij}=-\sum_{j\not=i} \hat
k_{ij}$. Then the number of Hamiltonian cycles $H_c$ is given by the relation $$\label{H-cycles}
\biggl(\prod^n_{\,j=1}\hat x_j\biggr)H_c=\frac{1}{2}\hat k_{ij}\det
\widehat{\mathbf{K}}(i|i),\qquad i=1,\dots,n.$$ The task here is to express in a form free of any $\hat x_i$, $i=1,\dots,n$. The result also leads to the resolution of enumeration of Hamiltonian paths in a graph.

It is well known that the enumeration of Hamiltonian cycles and paths in a complete graph $K_n$ and in a complete bipartite graph $K_{n_1n_2}$ can only be found from *first combinatorial principles* . One wonders if there exists a formula which can be used very efficiently to produce $K_n$ and $K_{n_1n_2}$. Recently, using Lagrangian methods, Goulden and Jackson have shown that $H_c$ can be expressed in terms of the determinant and permanent of the adjacency matrix . However, the formula of Goulden and Jackson determines neither $K_n$ nor $K_{n_1n_2}$ effectively. In this paper, using an algebraic method, we parametrize the adjacency matrix. The resulting formula also involves the determinant and permanent, but it can easily be applied to $K_n$ and $K_{n_1n_2}$. In addition, we eliminate the permanent from $H_c$ and show that $H_c$ can be represented by a determinantal function of multivariables, each variable with domain $\{0,1\}$. Furthermore, we show that $H_c$ can be written by number of spanning trees of subgraphs. Finally, we apply the formulas to a complete multigraph $K_{n_1\dots n_p}$.

The conditions $a_{ij}=a_{ji}$, $i,j=1,\dots,n$, are not required in this paper. All formulas can be extended to a digraph simply by multiplying $H_c$ by 2.

# Main Theorem

Let $\mathbf{B}=(b_{ij})$ be an $n\times n$ matrix. Let $\mathbf{n}=\{1,
\dots,n\}$. Using the properties of , it is readily seen that

Let $\widehat Y=\{\hat y_1,\dots,\hat y_n\}$. Define multiplication for the elements of $\widehat Y$ by $$\hat y_i\hat y_j+\hat y_j\hat y_i=0,\quad i,j=1,\dots,n.$$ Then, it follows that

Note that all basic properties of determinants are direct consequences of Lemma  . Write $$\label{sum-bij}
\sum_{j\in\mathbf{n}}b_{ij}\hat y_j=\sum_{j\in\mathbf{n}}b^{(\lambda)}
_{ij}\hat y_j+(b_{ii}-\lambda_i)\hat y_i\hat y$$ where $$b^{(\lambda)}_{ii}=\lambda_i,\quad b^{(\lambda)}_{ij}=b_{ij},
\quad i\not=j.$$ Let $\mathbf{B}^{(\lambda)}=(b^{(\lambda)}_{ij})$. By and , it is straightforward to show the following result:

Before proceeding with our discussion, we pause to note that Theorem  yields immediately a fundamental formula which can be used to compute the coefficients of a characteristic polynomial :

Let $$\mathbf{K}(t,t_1,\dots,t_n)
=\begin{pmatrix} D_1t&-a_{12}t_2&\dots&-a_{1n}t_n\\
-a_{21}t_1&D_2t&\dots&-a_{2n}t_n\\
\hdotsfor[2]{4}\\
-a_{n1}t_1&-a_{n2}t_2&\dots&D_nt\end{pmatrix},$$

    \begin{pmatrix} D_1t&-a_{12}t_2&\dots&-a_{1n}t_n\\
    -a_{21}t_1&D_2t&\dots&-a_{2n}t_n\\
    \hdotsfor[2]{4}\\
    -a_{n1}t_1&-a_{n2}t_2&\dots&D_nt\end{pmatrix}

where $$D_i=\sum_{j\in\mathbf{n}}a_{ij}t_j,\quad i=1,\dots,n.$$

Set $$D(t_1,\dots,t_n)=\frac{\delta}{\delta t}\relax
  \ifx\right\right\relax \left.\fi\det\mathbf{K}(t,t_1,\dots,t_n)
\right\rvert_{t=1}.$$ Then $$\label{sum-Di}
D(t_1,\dots,t_n)
=\sum_{i\in\mathbf{n}}D_i\det\mathbf{K}(t=1,t_1,\dots,t_n; i|i),$$ where $\mathbf{K}(t=1,t_1,\dots,t_n; i|i)$ is the $i$th principal submatrix of $\mathbf{K}(t=1,t_1,\dots,t_n)$.

Theorem   leads to $$\label{detK1}
\det\mathbf{K}(t_1,t_1,\dots,t_n)
=\sum_{I\in\mathbf{n}}(-1)^{\left\lvert I\right\rvert}t^{n-\left\lvert I\right\rvert}
\prod_{i\in I}t_i\prod_{j\in I}(D_j+\lambda_jt_j)\det\mathbf{A}
^{(\lambda t)}(\overline{I}|\overline I).$$ Note that $$\label{detK2}
\det\mathbf{K}(t=1,t_1,\dots,t_n)=\sum_{I\in\mathbf{n}}(-1)^{\left\lvert I\right\rvert}
\prod_{i\in I}t_i\prod_{j\in I}(D_j+\lambda_jt_j)\det\mathbf{A}
^{(\lambda)}(\overline{I}|\overline{I})=0.$$

Let $t_i=\hat x_i,i=1,\dots,n$. Lemma   yields $$\begin{gathered}
\biggl(\sum_{\,i\in\mathbf{n}}a_{l _i}x_i\biggr)
\det\mathbf{K}(t=1,x_1,\dots,x_n;l |l )\\
=\biggl(\prod_{\,i\in\mathbf{n}}\hat x_i\biggr)
\sum_{I\subseteq\mathbf{n}-\{l \}}
(-1)^{\left\lvert I\right\rvert}\mathop{\mathrm{per}}\mathbf{A}^{(\lambda)}(I|I)
\det\mathbf{A}^{(\lambda)}
(\overline I\cup\{l \}|\overline I\cup\{l \}).
\label{sum-ali}
\end{gathered}$$

    \begin{multline}
    \biggl(\sum_{\,i\in\mathbf{n}}a_{l _i}x_i\biggr)
    \det\mathbf{K}(t=1,x_1,\dots,x_n;l |l )\\
    =\biggl(\prod_{\,i\in\mathbf{n}}\hat x_i\biggr)
    \sum_{I\subseteq\mathbf{n}-\{l \}}
    (-1)^{\envert{I}}\per\mathbf{A}^{(\lambda)}(I|I)
    \det\mathbf{A}^{(\lambda)}
    (\overline I\cup\{l \}|\overline I\cup\{l \}).
    \label{sum-ali}
    \end{multline}

By , , and , we have

# Application

We consider here the applications of Theorems  and   to a complete multipartite graph $K_{n_1\dots n_p}$. It can be shown that the number of spanning trees of $K_{n_1\dots n_p}$ may be written $$\label{e:st}
T=n^{p-2}\prod^p_{i=1}
(n-n_i)^{n_i-1}$$ where $$n=n_1+\dots+n_p.$$

It follows from Theorems  and   that $$\label{e:barwq}
\begin{split}
H_c&=\frac1{2n}
\sum^n_{{l}=0}(-1)^{l}(n-{l})^{p-2}
\sum_{l _1+\dots+l _p=l}\prod^p_{i=1}
\binom{n_i}{l _i}\\
&\quad\cdot[(n-l )-(n_i-l _i)]^{n_i-l _i}\cdot
\biggl[(n-l )^2-\sum^p_{j=1}(n_i-l _i)^2\biggr].\end{split}$$

    ... \binom{n_i}{l _i}\\

and $$\label{joe}
\begin{split}
H_c&=\frac12\sum^{n-1}_{l =0}
(-1)^{l}(n-l )^{p-2}
\sum_{l _1+\dots+l _p=l}
\prod^p_{i=1}\binom{n_i}{l _i}\\
&\quad\cdot[(n-l )-(n_i-l _i)]^{n_i-l _i}
\left(1-\frac{l _p}{n_p}\right)
[(n-l )-(n_p-l _p)].
\end{split}$$

The enumeration of $H_c$ in a $K_{n_1\dotsm n_p}$ graph can also be carried out by Theorem   or   together with the algebraic method of . Some elegant representations may be obtained. For example, $H_c$ in a $K_{n_1n_2n_3}$ graph may be written $$\label{j:mark}
\begin{split}
H_c=&
\frac{n_1!\,n_2!\,n_3!}
{n_1+n_2+n_3}\sum_i\left[\binom{n_1}{i}
\binom{n_2}{n_3-n_1+i}\binom{n_3}{n_3-n_2+i}\right.\\
&+\left.\binom{n_1-1}{i}
\binom{n_2-1}{n_3-n_1+i}
\binom{n_3-1}{n_3-n_2+i}\right].\end{split}$$

# Secret Key Exchanges

Modern cryptography is fundamentally concerned with the problem of secure private communication. A Secret Key Exchange is a protocol where Alice and Bob, having no secret information in common to start, are able to agree on a common secret key, conversing over a public channel. The notion of a Secret Key Exchange protocol was first introduced in the seminal paper of Diffie and Hellman . presented a concrete implementation of a Secret Key Exchange protocol, dependent on a specific assumption (a variant on the discrete log), specially tailored to yield Secret Key Exchange. Secret Key Exchange is of course trivial if trapdoor permutations exist. However, there is no known implementation based on a weaker general assumption.

The concept of an informationally one-way function was introduced in . We give only an informal definition here:

In the non-uniform setting show that these are not weaker than one-way functions:

We will stick to the convention introduced above of saying "non-uniform" before the theorem statement when the theorem makes use of non-uniformity. It should be understood that if nothing is said then the result holds for both the uniform and the non-uniform models.

It now follows from Theorem  that

More recently, the polynomial-time, interior point algorithms for linear programming have been extended to the case of convex quadratic programs , certain linear complementarity problems , and the nonlinear complementarity problem . The connection between these algorithms and the classical Newton method for nonlinear equations is well explained in .

# Review

We begin our discussion with the following definition:

*Proof.* We choose $\psi_0(z)$ to be a radial function depending only on $r=\left\lvert z\right\rvert$. Let $h(r)\geq 0$ be a suitable smooth function satisfying $h(r)\geq c_3$ for $1-2a<\left\lvert z\right\rvert<1-a$, and $h(r)=0$ for $\left\lvert z\right\rvert>1-\tfrac a2$. The radial Laplacian $$\Delta_0\ln\psi_0(r)=\left(\frac {d^2}{dr^2}+\frac
1r\frac d{dr}\right)\ln\psi_0(r)$$ has smooth coefficients for $r>1-2a$. Therefore, we may apply the existence and uniqueness theory for ordinary differential equations. Simply let $\ln \psi_0(r)$ be the solution of the differential equation $$\left(\frac{d^2}{dr^2}+\frac 1r\frac d{dr}\right)\ln \psi_0(r)=h(r)$$ with initial conditions given by $\ln \psi_0(1)=0$ and $\ln\psi_0'(1)=0$.

Next, let $D_\nu$ be a finite collection of pairwise disjoint disks, all of which are contained in the unit disk centered at the origin in $C$. We assume that $D_\nu=\{z\mid \left\lvert z-z_\nu\right\rvert<\delta\}$. Suppose that $D_\nu(a)$ denotes the smaller concentric disk $D_\nu(a)=\{z\mid
\left\lvert z-z_\nu\right\rvert\leq (1-2a)\delta\}$. We define a smooth weight function $\Phi_0(z)$ for $z\in C-\bigcup_\nu D_\nu(a)$ by setting $\Phi_
0(z)=1$ when $z\notin \bigcup_\nu D_\nu$ and $\Phi_
0(z)=\psi_0((z-z_\nu)/\delta)$ when $z$ is an element of $D_\nu$. It follows from Lemma  that $\Phi_ 0$ satisfies the properties:

1.  $\Phi_ 0(z)$ is bounded above and below by positive constants $c_1\leq \Phi_ 0(z)\leq c_2$.

2.  $\Delta_0\ln\Phi_ 0\geq 0$ for all $z\in C-\bigcup_\nu D_\nu(a)$, the domain where the function $\Phi_ 0$ is defined.

3.  $\Delta_0\ln\Phi_ 0\geq c_3\delta^{-2}$ when $(1-2a)\delta<\left\lvert z-z_\nu\right\rvert<(1-a)\delta$.

Let $A_\nu$ denote the annulus $A_\nu=\{(1-2a)\delta<\left\lvert z-z_\nu\right\rvert<(1-a)
\delta \}$, and set $A=\bigcup_\nu A_\nu$. The properties () and () of $\Phi_ 0$ may be summarized as $\Delta_0\ln \Phi_ 0\geq c_3\delta^{-2}\chi_A$, where $\chi _A$ is the characteristic function of $A$. ◻

Suppose that $\alpha$ is a nonnegative real constant. We apply Proposition  with $\Phi(z)=\Phi_ 0(z) e^{\alpha\left\lvert z\right\rvert^2}$. If $u\in C^\infty_0(R^2-\bigcup_\nu D_\nu(a))$, assume that $\mathcal{D}$ is a bounded domain containing the support of $u$ and $A\subset
\mathcal{D}\subset R^2-\bigcup_\nu D_\nu(a)$. A calculation gives $$\int_{\mathcal{D}}\left\lvert\overline\partial u\right\rvert^2\Phi_ 0(z) e^{\alpha\left\lvert z\right\rvert^2}
\geq c_4\alpha\int_{\mathcal{D}}\left\lvert u\right\rvert^2\Phi_ 0e^{\alpha\left\lvert z\right\rvert^2}
+c_5\delta^{-2}\int_ A\left\lvert u\right\rvert^2\Phi_ 0e^{\alpha\left\lvert z\right\rvert^2}.$$

The boundedness, property () of $\Phi_ 0$, then yields $$\int_{\mathcal{D}}\left\lvert\overline\partial u\right\rvert^2e^{\alpha\left\lvert z\right\rvert^2}\geq c_6\alpha
\int_{\mathcal{D}}\left\lvert u\right\rvert^2e^{\alpha\left\lvert z\right\rvert^2}
+c_7\delta^{-2}\int_ A\left\lvert u\right\rvert^2e^{\alpha\left\lvert z\right\rvert^2}.$$

Let $B(X)$ be the set of blocks of $\Lambda_{X}$ and let $b(X) = \left\lvert B(X)\right\rvert$. If $\phi \in Q_{X}$ then $\phi$ is constant on the blocks of $\Lambda_{X}$. $$\label{far-d}
 P_{X} = \{ \phi \in M \mid \Lambda_{\phi} = \Lambda_{X} \},
\qquad
Q_{X} = \{\phi \in M \mid \Lambda_{\phi} \geq \Lambda_{X} \}.$$ If $\Lambda_{\phi} \geq \Lambda_{X}$ then $\Lambda_{\phi} = \Lambda_{Y}$ for some $Y \geq X$ so that $$Q_{X} = \bigcup_{Y \geq X} P_{Y}.$$ Thus by Möbius inversion $$\left\lvert P_{Y}\right\rvert= \sum_{X\geq Y} \mu (Y,X)\left\lvert Q_{X}\right\rvert.$$ Thus there is a bijection from $Q_{X}$ to $W^{B(X)}$. In particular $\left\lvert Q_{X}\right\rvert = w^{b(X)}$.

Next note that $b(X)=\dim X$. We see this by choosing a basis for $X$ consisting of vectors $v^{k}$ defined by $$v^{k}_{i}=
\begin{cases} 1 & \text{if $i \in \Lambda_{k}$},\\
0 &\text{otherwise.} \end{cases}$$

    \[v^{k}_{i}=
    \begin{cases} 1 & \text{if $i \in \Lambda_{k}$},\\
    0 &\text{otherwise.} \end{cases}
    \]

In order to compute $R''$ recall the definition of $S(X,Y)$ from Lemma . Since $H \in \mathcal{B}$, $\mathcal{A}_{H} \subseteq \mathcal{B}$. Thus if $T(\mathcal{B}) = Y$ then $\mathcal{B}\in S(H,Y)$. Let $L'' = L(\mathcal{A}'')$. Then $$\label{E_SXgYy}
\begin{split}
R''&= \sum_{H\in \mathcal{B}\subseteq \mathcal{A}} (-1)^{\left\lvert\mathcal{B}\right\rvert}
t^{\dim T(\mathcal{B})}\\
&= \sum_{Y \in L''} \sum_{\mathcal{B}\in S(H,Y)}
(-1)^{\left\lvert\mathcal{B}\right\rvert}t^{\dim Y} \\
&= -\sum_{Y \in L''} \sum_{\mathcal{B}\in S(H,Y)} (-1)^
{\left\lvert\mathcal{B}- \mathcal{A}_{H}\right\rvert} t^{\dim Y} \\
&= -\sum_{Y \in L''} \mu (H,Y)t^{\dim Y} \\
&= -\chi (\mathcal{A}'',t).
\end{split}$$

*Proof.* It follows from Theorem  that $\pi(\mathcal{A},t)$ has leading term $$(-1)^{r(\mathcal{A})}\mu (\mathcal{A})t^{r(\mathcal{A})}.$$ The conclusion follows by comparing coefficients of the leading terms on both sides of the equation in Corollary . If $H$ is a separator then $r(\mathcal{A}') < r(\mathcal{A})$ and there is no contribution from $\pi (\mathcal{A}',t)$. ◻

The Poincaré polynomial of an arrangement will appear repeatedly in these notes. It will be shown to equal the Poincaré polynomial of the graded algebras which we are going to associate with $\mathcal{A}$. It is also the Poincaré polynomial of the complement $M(\mathcal{A})$ for a complex arrangement. Here we prove that the Poincaré polynomial is the chamber counting function for a real arrangement. The complement $M(\mathcal{A})$ is a disjoint union of chambers $$M(\mathcal{A}) = \bigcup_{C \in \mathop{\mathrm{Cham}}(\mathcal{A})} C.$$ The number of chambers is determined by the Poincaré polynomial as follows.

*Proof.* We check the properties required in Corollary : (i) follows from $\pi (\Phi_{ l},t) = 1$, and (ii) is a consequence of Corollary . ◻

*Proof.* We show by induction on $i$ that $$\langle \sigma_j(x',y)\rangle_{j=1}^i
=\langle \sigma_j(x,y)\rangle_{j=1}^i
=\langle \sigma_j(x,y')\rangle_{j=1}^i.$$ The induction hypothesis holds vacuously for $i=0$. Assume it holds for $i-1$, in particular $[\sigma_j(x',y)]_{j=1}^{i-1}=[\sigma_j(x,y')]_{j=1}^{i-1}$. Then one of $[\sigma_j(x',y)]_{j=i}^{\infty}$ and $[\sigma_j(x,y')]_{j=i}^{\infty}$ is a prefix of the other which implies that one of $\sigma_i(x',y)$ and $\sigma_i(x,y')$ is a prefix of the other. If the $i$th message is transmitted by $P_\mathcal{X}$ then, by the separate-transmissions property and the induction hypothesis, $\sigma_i(x,y)=\sigma_i(x,y')$, hence one of $\sigma_i(x,y)$ and $\sigma_i(x',y)$ is a prefix of the other. By the implicit-termination property, neither $\sigma_i(x,y)$ nor $\sigma_i(x',y)$ can be a proper prefix of the other, hence they must be the same and $\sigma_i(x',y)=\sigma_i(x,y)=\sigma_i(x,y')$. If the $i$th message is transmitted by ${P_{\mathcal{Y}}}$ then, symmetrically, $\sigma_i(x,y)=\sigma_i(x',y)$ by the induction hypothesis and the separate-transmissions property, and, then, $\sigma_i(x,y)=\sigma_i(x,y')$ by the implicit-termination property, proving the induction step. ◻

If $\phi$ is a protocol for $(X,Y)$, and $(x,y)$, $(x',y)$ are distinct inputs in ${S_{X,Y}}$, then, by the correct-decision property, $\langle\sigma_j(x,y)\rangle_{j=1}^\infty\ne\langle
\sigma_j(x',y)\rangle_{j=1}^\infty$.

Equation () defined ${P_{\mathcal{Y}}}$'s ambiguity set ${S_{X|Y}(y)}$ to be the set of possible $X$ values when $Y=y$. The last corollary implies that for all $y\in{S_Y}$, the multiset [^3] of codewords $\{\sigma_\phi(x,y):x\in{S_{X|Y}(y)}\}$ is prefix free.

# One-Way Complexity

${\hat C_1(X|Y)}$, the one-way complexity of a random pair ${(X,Y)}$, is the number of bits $P_\mathcal{X}$ must transmit in the worst case when ${P_{\mathcal{Y}}}$ is not permitted to transmit any feedback messages. Starting with ${S_{X,Y}}$, the support set of ${(X,Y)}$, we define ${G(X|Y)}$, the *characteristic hypergraph* of ${(X,Y)}$, and show that $${\hat C_1(X|Y)}=\lceil\,\log\chi({G(X|Y)})\rceil\ .$$

Let ${(X,Y)}$ be a random pair. For each $y$ in ${S_Y}$, the support set of $Y$, Equation () defined ${S_{X|Y}(y)}$ to be the set of possible $x$ values when $Y=y$. The *characteristic hypergraph* ${G(X|Y)}$ of ${(X,Y)}$ has ${S_X}$ as its vertex set and the hyperedge ${S_{X|Y}(y)}$ for each $y\in{S_Y}$.

We can now prove a continuity theorem.

Before proving the theorem, we state without proof three elementary remarks which will be useful in the sequel.

*Proof.* We begin by showing that $v\in BV(\Omega;\mathbf{R}^k)$ and $$\label{e:bomb}
\left\lvert Dv\right\rvert(B)\le K\left\lvert Du\right\rvert(B)\qquad\forall B\in\mathbf{B}(\Omega ),$$ where $K>0$ is the Lipschitz constant of $f$. By and by the approximation result quoted in §, it is possible to find a sequence $(u_h)\subset C^1(\Omega ;\mathbf{R}^m)$ converging to $u$ in $L^1(\Omega ;\mathbf{R}^m)$ and such that $$\lim_{h\to +\infty}\int_\Omega \left\lvert\nabla u_h\right\rvert\,dx=\left\lvert Du\right\rvert(\Omega ).$$ The functions $v_h=f(u_h)$ are locally Lipschitz continuous in $\Omega$, and the definition of differential implies that $\left\lvert\nabla v_h\right\rvert\le
K\left\lvert\nabla u_h\right\rvert$ almost everywhere in $\Omega$. The lower semicontinuity of the total variation and yield $$\begin{split}
\left\lvert Dv\right\rvert(\Omega )\le\liminf_{h\to +\infty}\left\lvert Dv_h\right\rvert(\Omega) &
=\liminf_{h\to +\infty}\int_\Omega \left\lvert\nabla v_h\right\rvert\,dx\\
&\le K\liminf_{h\to +\infty}\int_\Omega
\left\lvert\nabla u_h\right\rvert\,dx=K\left\lvert Du\right\rvert(\Omega).
\end{split}$$ Since $f(0)=0$, we have also $$\int_\Omega \left\lvert v\right\rvert\,dx\le K\int_\Omega \left\lvert u\right\rvert\,dx;$$ therefore $u\in BV(\Omega ;\mathbf{R}^k)$. Repeating the same argument for every open set $A\subset\Omega$, we get for every $B\in\mathbf{B}(\Omega)$, because $\left\lvert Dv\right\rvert$, $\left\lvert Du\right\rvert$ are Radon measures. To prove Lemma , first we observe that $$\label{e:SS}
S_v\subset S_u,\qquad\tilde v(x)=f(\tilde u(x))\qquad \forall x\in\Omega
\backslash S_u.$$ In fact, for every $\varepsilon >0$ we have $$\{y\in B_\rho(x): \left\lvert v(y)-f(\tilde u(x))\right\rvert>\varepsilon \}\subset \{y\in
B_\rho(x): \left\lvert u(y)-\tilde u(x)\right\rvert>\varepsilon /K\},$$ hence $$\lim_{\rho\to 0^+}\frac{\left\lvert\{y\in B_\rho(x): \left\lvert v(y)-f(\tilde u(x))\right\rvert>
\varepsilon \}\right\rvert}{\rho^n}=0$$ whenever $x\in\Omega \backslash S_u$. By a similar argument, if $x\in
S_u$ is a point such that there exists a triplet $(u^+,u^-,\nu_u)$ satisfying , , then $$(v^+(x)-v^-(x))\otimes \nu_v=(f(u^+(x))-f(u^-(x)))\otimes\nu_u\quad
\text{if }x\in S_v$$ and $f(u^-(x))=f(u^+(x))$ if $x\in S_u\backslash S_v$. Hence, by (1.8) we get $$\begin{split}
Jv(B)=\int_{B\cap S_v}(v^+-v^-)\otimes \nu_v\,d\mathcal{H}_{n-1}&=
\int_{B\cap S_v}(f(u^+)-f(u^-))\otimes \nu_u\,d\mathcal{H}_{n-1}\\
&=\int_{B\cap S_u}(f(u^+)-f(u^-))\otimes \nu_u\,d\mathcal{H}_{n-1}
\end{split}$$ and Lemma  is proved. ◻

To prove , it is not restrictive to assume that $k=1$. Moreover, to simplify our notation, from now on we shall assume that $\Omega = \mathbf{R}^n$. The proof of is divided into two steps. In the first step we prove the statement in the one-dimensional case $(n=1)$, using Theorem . In the second step we achieve the general result using Theorem .

## Step 1

Assume that $n=1$. Since $S_u$ is at most countable, yields that $\left\lvert\widetilde{D}v\right\rvert(S_u\backslash S_v)=0$, so that and imply that $Dv=\widetilde{D}v+Jv$ is the Radon-Nikodým decomposition of $Dv$ in absolutely continuous and singular part with respect to $\left\lvert\widetilde{D} u\right\rvert$. By Theorem , we have $$\frac{\widetilde{D}v}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert}(t)=\lim_{s\to t^+}
\frac{Dv(\mathinner{\left[t,s\right[})}
{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert(\mathinner{\left[t,s\right[})},\qquad
\frac{\widetilde{D}u}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert}(t)=\lim_{s\to t^+}
\frac{Du(\mathinner{\left[t,s\right[})}
{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert(\mathinner{\left[t,s\right[})}$$ $\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert$-almost everywhere in $\mathbf{R}$. It is well known (see, for instance, ) that every one-dimensional function of bounded variation $w$ has a unique left continuous representative, i.e., a function $\hat w$ such that $\hat w=w$ almost everywhere and $\lim_{s\to t^-}\hat w(s)=\hat w(t)$ for every $t\in
\mathbf{R}$. These conditions imply $$\hat u(t)=Du(\mathinner{\left]-\infty,t\right[}),
\qquad \hat v(t)=Dv(\mathinner{\left]-\infty,t\right[})\qquad
\forall t\in\mathbf{R}$$ and $$\label{alimo}
\hat v(t)=f(\hat u(t))\qquad\forall t\in\mathbf{R}.$$ Let $t\in\mathbf{R}$ be such that $\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert(\mathinner{\left[t,s\right[})>0$ for every $s>t$ and assume that the limits in exist. By and we get $$\begin{split}
\frac{\hat v(s)-\hat
v(t)}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert(\mathinner{\left[t,s\right[})}&=\frac {f(\hat
u(s))-f(\hat u(t))}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert(\mathinner{\left[t,s\right[})}\\
&=\frac{f(\hat u(s))-f(\hat
u(t)+\dfrac{\widetilde{D}u}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert}(t)\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u
\right\rvert(\mathinner{\left[t,s\right[}))}%
{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert(\mathinner{\left[t,s\right[})}\\
&+\frac
{f(\hat u(t)+\dfrac{\widetilde{D}u}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert}(t)\left\lvert\widetilde{D}
u\right\rvert(\mathinner{\left[t,s\right[}))-f(\hat
u(t))}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert(\mathinner{\left[t,s\right[})}
\end{split}$$ for every $s>t$. Using the Lipschitz condition on $f$ we find $$\begin{gathered}
\left\lvert\frac{\hat v(s)-\hat
v(t)}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert(\mathinner{\left[t,s\right[})} -\frac{f(\hat
u(t)+\dfrac{\widetilde{D}u}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert}(t)
\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert(\mathinner{\left[t,s\right[}))-f(\hat
u(t))}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert(\mathinner{\left[t,s\right[})}\right\rvert\\
\le K\left\lvert
\frac{\hat u(s)-\hat u(t)}
  {\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert(\mathinner{\left[t,s\right[})}
-\frac{\widetilde{D}u}{\left\lvert
\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert}(t)\right\rvert.
\end{gathered}$$ By , the function $s\to
\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert(\mathinner{\left[t,s\right[})$ is continuous and converges to 0 as $s\downarrow t$. Therefore Remark  and the previous inequality imply $$\frac{\widetilde{D}v}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert}(t)=\lim_{h\to 0^+}
\frac{f(\hat u(t)+h\dfrac{\widetilde{D}u}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert}
(t))-f(\hat u(t))}h\quad\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert\text{-a.e. in }\mathbf{R}.$$ By , $\hat u(x)=\tilde u(x)$ for every $x\in\mathbf{R}\backslash S_u$; moreover, applying the same argument to the functions $u'(t)=u(-t)$, $v'(t)=f(u'(t))=v(-t)$, we get $$\frac{\widetilde{D}v}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert}(t)=\lim_{h\to 0}
\frac{f(\tilde u(t)
+h\dfrac{\widetilde{D}u}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert}(t))-f(\tilde u(t))}{h}
\qquad\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert\text{-a.e. in }\mathbf{R}$$ and our statement is proved.

## Step 2

Let us consider now the general case $n>1$. Let $\nu\in \mathbf{R}^n$ be such that $\left\lvert\nu\right\rvert=1$, and let $\pi_\nu=\{y\in\mathbf{R}^n: \langle
y,\nu\rangle =0\}$. In the following, we shall identify $\mathbf{R}^n$ with $\pi_\nu\times\mathbf{R}$, and we shall denote by $y$ the variable ranging in $\pi_\nu$ and by $t$ the variable ranging in $\mathbf{R}$. By the just proven one-dimensional result, and by Theorem , we get $$\lim_{h\to 0}\frac{f(\tilde u(y+t\nu)+h\dfrac{\widetilde{D}u_y}{\left\lvert
\widetilde{D}u_y\right\rvert}(t))-f(\tilde u(y+t\nu))}h=\frac{\widetilde{D}v_y}{\left\lvert
\widetilde{D}u_y\right\rvert}(t)\qquad\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u_y\right\rvert\text{-a.e. in }\mathbf{R}$$ for $\mathcal{H}_{n-1}$-almost every $y\in \pi_\nu$. We claim that $$\frac{\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle }{\left\lvert\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle
\right\rvert}(y+t\nu)=\frac{\widetilde{D}u_y}
{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u_y\right\rvert}(t)\qquad\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u_y\right\rvert\text{-a.e. in }\mathbf{R}$$ for $\mathcal{H}_{n-1}$-almost every $y\in\pi_\nu$. In fact, by and we get $$\begin{gathered}
\int_{\pi_\nu}\frac{\widetilde{D}u_y}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u_y\right\rvert}\cdot\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u_y
\right\rvert\,d\mathcal{H}_{n-1}(y)=\int_{\pi_\nu}\widetilde{D}u_y\,d\mathcal{H}_{n-1}(y)\\
=\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle =\frac
{\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle }{\left\lvert\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle\right\rvert}\cdot
\left\lvert\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle \right\rvert=\int_{\pi_\nu}\frac{
\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle }{\left\lvert\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle \right\rvert}
(y+\cdot \nu)\cdot\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u_y\right\rvert\,d\mathcal{H}_{n-1}(y)
\end{gathered}$$ and follows from . By the same argument it is possible to prove that $$\frac{\langle \widetilde{D}v,\nu\rangle }{\left\lvert\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle
\right\rvert}(y+t\nu)=\frac{\widetilde{D}v_y}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u_y\right\rvert}(t)\qquad\left\lvert
\widetilde{D}u_y\right\rvert\text{-a.e. in }\mathbf{R}$$ for $\mathcal{H}_{n-1}$-almost every $y\in \pi_\nu$. By and we get $$\lim_{h\to 0}\frac{f(\tilde u(y+t\nu)+h\dfrac{\langle \widetilde{D}
u,\nu\rangle }{\left\lvert\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle \right\rvert}(y+t\nu))-f(\tilde
u(y+t\nu))}{h}
=\frac{\langle \widetilde{D}v,\nu\rangle }{\left\lvert\langle
\widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle \right\rvert}(y+t\nu)$$ for $\mathcal{H}_{n-1}$-almost every $y\in\pi_\nu$, and using again , we get $$\lim_{h\to 0}\frac{f(\tilde u(x)+h\dfrac{\langle
\widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle }{\left\lvert\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle \right\rvert}(x))-f(\tilde
u(x))}{h}=\frac{\langle \widetilde{D}v,\nu\rangle }{\left\lvert\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu
\rangle \right\rvert}(x)$$ $\left\lvert\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle\right\rvert$-a.e. in $\mathbf{R}^n$.

Since the function $\left\lvert\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle \right\rvert/\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert$ is strictly positive $\left\lvert\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle \right\rvert$-almost everywhere, we obtain also $$\begin{gathered}
\lim_{h\to 0}\frac{f(\tilde u(x)+h\dfrac{\left\lvert\langle
\widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle \right\rvert}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert}(x)\dfrac{\langle \widetilde{D}
u,\nu\rangle }{\left\lvert\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle \right\rvert}(x))-f(\tilde u(x))}{h}\\
=\frac{\left\lvert\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle \right\rvert}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert}(x)\frac
{\langle \widetilde{D}v,\nu\rangle }{\left\lvert\langle
\widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle \right\rvert}(x)
\end{gathered}$$ $\left\lvert\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle \right\rvert$-almost everywhere in $\mathbf{R}^n$.

Finally, since $$\begin{aligned}
&\frac{\left\lvert\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle \right\rvert}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert}
\frac{\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle }{\left\lvert\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle\right\rvert}
=\frac{\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle }{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert}
=\left\langle \frac{\widetilde{D}u}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert},\nu\right\rangle
        \qquad\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert\text{-a.e. in }\mathbf{R}^n\\
&\frac{\left\lvert\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle \right\rvert}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert}
\frac{\langle \widetilde{D}v,\nu\rangle }{\left\lvert\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle\right\rvert}
=\frac{\langle \widetilde{D}v,\nu\rangle }{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert}
=\left\langle \frac{\widetilde{D}v}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert},\nu\right\rangle
        \qquad\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert\text{-a.e. in }\mathbf{R}^n
\end{aligned}$$ and since both sides of are zero $\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert$-almost everywhere on $\left\lvert\langle \widetilde{D}u,\nu\rangle \right\rvert$-negligible sets, we conclude that $$\lim_{h\to 0}\frac{f\left(
\tilde u(x)+h\left\langle \dfrac{\widetilde{D}
u}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert}(x),\nu\right\rangle \right)-f(\tilde u(x))}h
=\left\langle \frac{\widetilde{D}v}{\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert}(x),\nu\right\rangle,$$ $\left\lvert\widetilde{D}u\right\rvert$-a.e. in $\mathbf{R}^n$. Since $\nu$ is arbitrary, by Remarks and  the restriction of $f$ to the affine space $T^u_x$ is differentiable at $\tilde u(x)$ for $\left\lvert\widetilde{D}
u\right\rvert$-almost every $x\in \mathbf{R}^n$ and holds.0◻

It follows from , , and that $$\label{Dt}
D(t_1,\dots,t_n)=\sum_{I\in\mathbf{n}}(-1)^{\left\lvert I\right\rvert-1}\left\lvert I\right\rvert
\prod_{i\in I}t_i\prod_{j\in I}(D_j+\lambda_jt_j)\det\mathbf{A}^{(\lambda)}
(\overline I|\overline I).$$ Let $t_i=\hat x_i$, $i=1,\dots,n$. Lemma 1 leads to $$\label{Dx}
D(\hat x_1,\dots,\hat x_n)=\prod_{i\in\mathbf{n}}\hat x_i
\sum_{I\in\mathbf{n}}(-1)^{\left\lvert I\right\rvert-1}\left\lvert I\right\rvert\mathop{\mathrm{per}}\mathbf{A}
^{(\lambda)}(I|I)\det\mathbf{A}^{(\lambda)}(\overline I|\overline I).$$ By , , and , we have the following result:

It is worth noting that $A_l ^{(\lambda)}$ of is similar to the coefficients $b_l$ of the characteristic polynomial of . It is well known in graph theory that the coefficients $b_l$ can be expressed as a sum over certain subgraphs. It is interesting to see whether $A_l$, $\lambda=0$, structural properties of a graph.

We may call a parametric representation of $H_c$. In computation, the parameter $\lambda_i$ plays very important roles. The choice of the parameter usually depends on the properties of the given graph. For a complete graph $K_n$, let $\lambda_i=1$, $i=1,\dots,n$. It follows from that $$\label{compl-gr}
A^{(1)}_l =\begin{cases} n!,&\text{if }l =1\\
0,&\text{otherwise}.\end{cases}$$ By $$H_c=\frac 12(n-1)!.$$ For a complete bipartite graph $K_{n_1n_2}$, let $\lambda_i=0$, $i=1,\dots,n$. By , $$A_l =
\begin{cases} -n_1!n_2!\delta_{n_1n_2},&\text{if }l =2\\
0,&\text{otherwise }.\end{cases}
\label{compl-bip-gr}$$ Theorem   leads to $$H_c=\frac1{n_1+n_2}n_1!n_2!\delta_{n_1n_2}.$$

Now, we consider an asymmetrical approach. Theorem leads to $$\begin{gathered}
\det\mathbf{K}(t=1,t_1,\dots,t_n;l |l )\\
=\sum_{I\subseteq\mathbf{n}-\{l \}}
(-1)^{\left\lvert I\right\rvert}\prod_{i\in I}t_i\prod_{j\in I}
(D_j+\lambda_jt_j)\det\mathbf{A}^{(\lambda)}
(\overline I\cup\{l \}|\overline I\cup\{l \}).
\end{gathered}$$

By and we have the following asymmetrical result:

# Various font features of the amsmath package

## Bold versions of special symbols

In the amsmath package boldsymbol is used for getting individual bold math symbols and bold Greek letters—everything in math except for letters of the Latin alphabet, where you'd use mathbf. For example,

    A_\infty + \pi A_0 \sim
    \mathbf{A}_{\boldsymbol{\infty}} \boldsymbol{+}
    \boldsymbol{\pi} \mathbf{A}_{\boldsymbol{0}}

looks like this: $$A_\infty + \pi A_0 \sim \mathbf{A}_{\boldsymbol{\infty}}
\boldsymbol{+} \boldsymbol{\pi} \mathbf{A}_{\boldsymbol{0}}$$

## "Poor man's bold"

If a bold version of a particular symbol doesn't exist in the available fonts, then boldsymbol can't be used to make that symbol bold. At the present time, this means that boldsymbol can't be used with symbols from the msam and msbm fonts, among others. In some cases, poor man's bold (pmb) can be used instead of boldsymbol: $$\frac{\partial x}{\partial y}
\pmb{\bigg\vert}
\frac{\partial y}{\partial z}$$

    \[\frac{\partial x}{\partial y}
    \pmb{\bigg\vert}
    \frac{\partial y}{\partial z}\]

So-called "large operator" symbols such as $\sum$ and $\prod$ require an additional command, mathop, to produce proper spacing and limits when pmb is used. For further details see *The TeXbook*. $$\sum_{\substack{i<B\\\text{$i$ odd}}}
\prod_\kappa \kappa F(r_i)\qquad
\mathop{\pmb{\sum}}_{\substack{i<B\\\text{$i$ odd}}}
\mathop{\pmb{\prod}}_\kappa \kappa(r_i)$$

    \[\sum_{\substack{i<B\\\text{$i$ odd}}}
    \prod_\kappa \kappa F(r_i)\qquad
    \mathop{\pmb{\sum}}_{\substack{i<B\\\text{$i$ odd}}}
    \mathop{\pmb{\prod}}_\kappa \kappa(r_i)
    \]

# Compound symbols and other features

## Multiple integral signs

iint, iiint, and iiiint give multiple integral signs with the spacing between them nicely adjusted, in both text and display style. idotsint gives two integral signs with dots between them. $$\begin{gathered}
\iint\limits_A f(x,y)\,dx\,dy\qquad\iiint\limits_A
f(x,y,z)\,dx\,dy\,dz\\
\iiiint\limits_A
f(w,x,y,z)\,dw\,dx\,dy\,dz\qquad\idotsint\limits_A f(x_1,\dots,x_k)
\end{gathered}$$

## Over and under arrows

Some extra over and under arrow operations are provided in the amsmath package. (Basic LaTeX provides overrightarrow and overleftarrow). $$\begin{aligned}
\overrightarrow{\psi_\delta(t) E_t h}&
=\underrightarrow{\psi_\delta(t) E_t h}\\
\overleftarrow{\psi_\delta(t) E_t h}&
=\underleftarrow{\psi_\delta(t) E_t h}\\
\overleftrightarrow{\psi_\delta(t) E_t h}&
=\underleftrightarrow{\psi_\delta(t) E_t h}
\end{aligned}$$

    \begin{align*}
    \overrightarrow{\psi_\delta(t) E_t h}&
    =\underrightarrow{\psi_\delta(t) E_t h}\\
    \overleftarrow{\psi_\delta(t) E_t h}&
    =\underleftarrow{\psi_\delta(t) E_t h}\\
    \overleftrightarrow{\psi_\delta(t) E_t h}&
    =\underleftrightarrow{\psi_\delta(t) E_t h}
    \end{align*}

These all scale properly in subscript sizes: $$\int_{\overrightarrow{AB}} ax\,dx$$

    \[\int_{\overrightarrow{AB}} ax\,dx\]

## Dots

Normally you need only type dots for ellipsis dots in a math formula. The main exception is when the dots fall at the end of the formula; then you need to specify one of dotsc (series dots, after a comma), dotsb (binary dots, for binary relations or operators), dotsm (multiplication dots), or dotsi (dots after an integral). For example, the input

    Then we have the series $A_1,A_2,\dotsc$,
    the regional sum $A_1+A_2+\dotsb$,
    the orthogonal product $A_1A_2\dotsm$,
    and the infinite integral
    \[\int_{A_1}\int_{A_2}\dotsi\].

produces

> Then we have the series $A_1,A_2,\dotsc$, the regional sum $A_1+A_2+\dotsb$, the orthogonal product $A_1A_2\dotsm$, and the infinite integral $$\int_{A_1}\int_{A_2}\dotsi$$

## Accents in math

Double accents: $$\Hat{\Hat{H}}\quad\Check{\Check{C}}\quad
\Tilde{\Tilde{T}}\quad\Acute{\Acute{A}}\quad
\Grave{\Grave{G}}\quad\Dot{\Dot{D}}\quad
\Ddot{\Ddot{D}}\quad\Breve{\Breve{B}}\quad
\Bar{\Bar{B}}\quad\Vec{\Vec{V}}$$

    \[\Hat{\Hat{H}}\quad\Check{\Check{C}}\quad
    \Tilde{\Tilde{T}}\quad\Acute{\Acute{A}}\quad
    \Grave{\Grave{G}}\quad\Dot{\Dot{D}}\quad
    \Ddot{\Ddot{D}}\quad\Breve{\Breve{B}}\quad
    \Bar{\Bar{B}}\quad\Vec{\Vec{V}}\]

This double accent operation is complicated and tends to slow down the processing of a LaTeX file.

## Dot accents

dddot and ddddot are available to produce triple and quadruple dot accents in addition to the dot and ddot accents already available in LaTeX: $$\dddot{Q}\qquad\ddddot{R}$$

    \[\dddot{Q}\qquad\ddddot{R}\]

## Roots

In the amsmath package leftroot and uproot allow you to adjust the position of the root index of a radical:

    \sqrt[\leftroot{-2}\uproot{2}\beta]{k}

gives good positioning of the $\beta$: $$\sqrt[\leftroot{-2}\uproot{2}\beta]{k}$$

## Boxed formulas

The command boxed puts a box around its argument, like fbox except that the contents are in math mode:

    \boxed{W_t-F\subseteq V(P_i)\subseteq W_t}

$$\boxed{W_t-F\subseteq V(P_i)\subseteq W_t}.$$

## Extensible arrows

xleftarrow and xrightarrow produce arrows that extend automatically to accommodate unusually wide subscripts or superscripts. The text of the subscript or superscript are given as an optional resp. mandatory argument: Example: $$0 \xleftarrow[\zeta]{\alpha} F\times\triangle[n-1]
  \xrightarrow{\partial_0\alpha(b)} E^{\partial_0b}$$

    \[0 \xleftarrow[\zeta]{\alpha} F\times\triangle[n-1]
      \xrightarrow{\partial_0\alpha(b)} E^{\partial_0b}\]

## overset, underset, and sideset

Examples: $$\overset{*}{X}\qquad\underset{*}{X}\qquad
\overset{a}{\underset{b}{X}}$$

    \[\overset{*}{X}\qquad\underset{*}{X}\qquad
    \overset{a}{\underset{b}{X}}\]

The command sideset is for a rather special purpose: putting symbols at the subscript and superscript corners of a large operator symbol such as $\sum$ or $\prod$, without affecting the placement of limits. Examples: $$\sideset{_*^*}{_*^*}\prod_k\qquad
\sideset{}{'}\sum_{0\le i\le m} E_i\beta x$$

    \[\sideset{_*^*}{_*^*}\prod_k\qquad
    \sideset{}{'}\sum_{0\le i\le m} E_i\beta x
    \]

## The text command

The main use of the command text is for words or phrases in a display: $$\mathbf{y}=\mathbf{y}'\quad\text{if and only if}\quad
y'_k=\delta_k y_{\tau(k)}$$

    \[\mathbf{y}=\mathbf{y}'\quad\text{if and only if}\quad
    y'_k=\delta_k y_{\tau(k)}\]

## Operator names

The more common math functions such as $\log$, $\sin$, and $\lim$ have predefined control sequences: `\log`, `\sin`, `\lim`. The amsmath package provides DeclareMathOperator and DeclareMathOperator\* for producing new function names that will have the same typographical treatment. Examples: $$\left\lVert f\right\rVert_\infty=
\mathop{\mathrm{ess\,sup}}_{x\in R^n}\left\lvert f(x)\right\rvert$$

    \[\norm{f}_\infty=
    \esssup_{x\in R^n}\abs{f(x)}\]

$$\mathop{\mathrm{meas}}_1\{u\in R_+^1\colon f^*(u)>\alpha\}
=\mathop{\mathrm{meas}}_n\{x\in R^n\colon \left\lvert f(x)\right\rvert\geq\alpha\}
\quad \forall\alpha>0.$$

    \[\meas_1\{u\in R_+^1\colon f^*(u)>\alpha\}
    =\meas_n\{x\in R^n\colon \abs{f(x)}\geq\alpha\}
    \quad \forall\alpha>0.\]

esssup and meas would be defined in the document preamble as

    \DeclareMathOperator*{\esssup}{ess\,sup}
    \DeclareMathOperator{\meas}{meas}

The following special operator names are predefined in the amsmath package: varlimsup, varliminf, varinjlim, and varprojlim. Here's what they look like in use: $$\begin{aligned}
&\varlimsup_{n\rightarrow\infty}
       \mathcal{Q}(u_n,u_n-u^{\#})\le0\\
&\varliminf_{n\rightarrow\infty}
  \left\lvert a_{n+1}\right\rvert/\left\lvert a_n\right\rvert=0\\
&\varinjlim (m_i^\lambda\cdot)^*\le0\\
&\varprojlim_{p\in S(A)}A_p\le0
\end{aligned}$$

    \begin{align}
    &\varlimsup_{n\rightarrow\infty}
           \mathcal{Q}(u_n,u_n-u^{\#})\le0\\
    &\varliminf_{n\rightarrow\infty}
      \left\lvert a_{n+1}\right\rvert/\left\lvert a_n\right\rvert=0\\
    &\varinjlim (m_i^\lambda\cdot)^*\le0\\
    &\varprojlim_{p\in S(A)}A_p\le0
    \end{align}

## mod and its relatives

The commands mod and pod are variants of pmod preferred by some authors; mod omits the parentheses, whereas pod omits the 'mod' and retains the parentheses. Examples: $$\begin{aligned}
x&\equiv y+1\pmod{m^2}\\
x&\equiv y+1\mod{m^2}\\
x&\equiv y+1\pod{m^2}
\end{aligned}$$

    \begin{align}
    x&\equiv y+1\pmod{m^2}\\
    x&\equiv y+1\mod{m^2}\\
    x&\equiv y+1\pod{m^2}
    \end{align}

## Fractions and related constructions

The usual notation for binomials is similar to the fraction concept, so it has a similar command binom with two arguments. Example: $$\begin{split}
\sum_{\gamma\in\Gamma_C} I_\gamma&
=2^k-\binom{k}{1}2^{k-1}+\binom{k}{2}2^{k-2}\\
&\quad+\dots+(-1)^l\binom{k}{l}2^{k-l}
+\dots+(-1)^k\\
&=(2-1)^k=1
\end{split}$$

    \begin{equation}
    \begin{split}
    [\sum_{\gamma\in\Gamma_C} I_\gamma&
    =2^k-\binom{k}{1}2^{k-1}+\binom{k}{2}2^{k-2}\\
    &\quad+\dots+(-1)^l\binom{k}{l}2^{k-l}
    +\dots+(-1)^k\\
    &=(2-1)^k=1
    \end{split}
    \end{equation}

There are also abbreviations

    \dfrac        \dbinom
    \tfrac        \tbinom

for the commonly needed constructions

    {\displaystyle\frac ... }   {\displaystyle\binom ... }
    {\textstyle\frac ... }      {\textstyle\binom ... }

The generalized fraction command genfrac provides full access to the six TeX fraction primitives: $$\begin{aligned}
\text{{\protect\normalfont\ttfamily\bslash over}: }&\genfrac{}{}{}{}{n+1}{2}&
\text{{\protect\normalfont\ttfamily\bslash overwithdelims}: }&
  \genfrac{\langle}{\rangle}{}{}{n+1}{2}\\
\text{{\protect\normalfont\ttfamily\bslash atop}: }&\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n+1}{2}&
\text{{\protect\normalfont\ttfamily\bslash atopwithdelims}: }&
  \genfrac{(}{)}{0pt}{}{n+1}{2}\\
\text{{\protect\normalfont\ttfamily\bslash above}: }&\genfrac{}{}{1pt}{}{n+1}{2}&
\text{{\protect\normalfont\ttfamily\bslash abovewithdelims}: }&
  \genfrac{[}{]}{1pt}{}{n+1}{2}
\end{aligned}$$

    \text{\cn{over}: }&\genfrac{}{}{}{}{n+1}{2}&
    \text{\cn{overwithdelims}: }&
      \genfrac{\langle}{\rangle}{}{}{n+1}{2}\\
    \text{\cn{atop}: }&\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n+1}{2}&
    \text{\cn{atopwithdelims}: }&
      \genfrac{(}{)}{0pt}{}{n+1}{2}\\
    \text{\cn{above}: }&\genfrac{}{}{1pt}{}{n+1}{2}&
    \text{\cn{abovewithdelims}: }&
      \genfrac{[}{]}{1pt}{}{n+1}{2}

## Continued fractions

The continued fraction $$\cfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}+
 \cfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}+
  \cfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}+
   \cfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}+
    \cfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}+\dotsb
}}}}}$$ can be obtained by typing

    \cfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}+
     \cfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}+
      \cfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}+
       \cfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}+
        \cfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}+\dotsb
    }}}}}

Left or right placement of any of the numerators is accomplished by using cfrac\[l\] or cfrac\[r\] instead of cfrac.

## Smash

In amsmath there are optional arguments `t` and `b` for the plain TeX command smash, because sometimes it is advantageous to be able to 'smash' only the top or only the bottom of something while retaining the natural depth or height. In the formula $X_j=(1/\sqrt{\smash[b]{\lambda_j}})X_j'$ smash`[b]` has been used to limit the size of the radical symbol.

    $X_j=(1/\sqrt{\smash[b]{\lambda_j}})X_j'$

Without the use of smash`[b]` the formula would have appeared thus: $X_j=(1/\sqrt{\lambda_j})X_j'$, with the radical extending to encompass the depth of the subscript $j$.

## The 'cases' environment

'Cases' constructions like the following can be produced using the cases environment. $$P_{r-j}=
  \begin{cases}
    0&  \text{if $r-j$ is odd},\\
    r!\,(-1)^{(r-j)/2}&  \text{if $r-j$ is even}.
  \end{cases}$$

    \begin{equation} P_{r-j}=
      \begin{cases}
        0&  \text{if $r-j$ is odd},\\
        r!\,(-1)^{(r-j)/2}&  \text{if $r-j$ is even}.
      \end{cases}
    \end{equation}

Notice the use of text and the embedded math.

## Matrix

Here are samples of the matrix environments, matrix, pmatrix, bmatrix, Bmatrix, vmatrix and Vmatrix: $$\begin{matrix}
\vartheta& \varrho\\\varphi& \varpi
\end{matrix}\quad
\begin{pmatrix}
\vartheta& \varrho\\\varphi& \varpi
\end{pmatrix}\quad
\begin{bmatrix}
\vartheta& \varrho\\\varphi& \varpi
\end{bmatrix}\quad
\begin{Bmatrix}
\vartheta& \varrho\\\varphi& \varpi
\end{Bmatrix}\quad
\begin{vmatrix}
\vartheta& \varrho\\\varphi& \varpi
\end{vmatrix}\quad
\begin{Vmatrix}
\vartheta& \varrho\\\varphi& \varpi
\end{Vmatrix}$$

    \begin{matrix}
    \vartheta& \varrho\\\varphi& \varpi
    \end{matrix}\quad
    \begin{pmatrix}
    \vartheta& \varrho\\\varphi& \varpi
    \end{pmatrix}\quad
    \begin{bmatrix}
    \vartheta& \varrho\\\varphi& \varpi
    \end{bmatrix}\quad
    \begin{Bmatrix}
    \vartheta& \varrho\\\varphi& \varpi
    \end{Bmatrix}\quad
    \begin{vmatrix}
    \vartheta& \varrho\\\varphi& \varpi
    \end{vmatrix}\quad
    \begin{Vmatrix}
    \vartheta& \varrho\\\varphi& \varpi
    \end{Vmatrix}

To produce a small matrix suitable for use in text, use the smallmatrix environment.

    \begin{math}
      \bigl( \begin{smallmatrix}
          a&b\\ c&d
        \end{smallmatrix} \bigr)
    \end{math}

To show the effect of the matrix on the surrounding lines of a paragraph, we put it here: $  \bigl( \begin{smallmatrix}
      a&b\\ c&d
    \end{smallmatrix} \bigr)$ and follow it with enough text to ensure that there will be at least one full line below the matrix.

hdotsfor`{`*number*`}` produces a row of dots in a matrix spanning the given number of columns: $$W(\Phi)= \begin{Vmatrix}
\dfrac\varphi{(\varphi_1,\varepsilon_1)}&0&\dots&0\\
\dfrac{\varphi k_{n2}}{(\varphi_2,\varepsilon_1)}&
\dfrac\varphi{(\varphi_2,\varepsilon_2)}&\dots&0\\
\hdotsfor{5}\\
\dfrac{\varphi k_{n1}}{(\varphi_n,\varepsilon_1)}&
\dfrac{\varphi k_{n2}}{(\varphi_n,\varepsilon_2)}&\dots&
\dfrac{\varphi k_{n\,n-1}}{(\varphi_n,\varepsilon_{n-1})}&
\dfrac{\varphi}{(\varphi_n,\varepsilon_n)}
\end{Vmatrix}$$

    \[W(\Phi)= \begin{Vmatrix}
    \dfrac\varphi{(\varphi_1,\varepsilon_1)}&0&\dots&0\\
    \dfrac{\varphi k_{n2}}{(\varphi_2,\varepsilon_1)}&
    \dfrac\varphi{(\varphi_2,\varepsilon_2)}&\dots&0\\
    \hdotsfor{5}\\
    \dfrac{\varphi k_{n1}}{(\varphi_n,\varepsilon_1)}&
    \dfrac{\varphi k_{n2}}{(\varphi_n,\varepsilon_2)}&\dots&
    \dfrac{\varphi k_{n\,n-1}}{(\varphi_n,\varepsilon_{n-1})}&
    \dfrac{\varphi}{(\varphi_n,\varepsilon_n)}
    \end{Vmatrix}\]

The spacing of the dots can be varied through use of a square-bracket option, for example, `\hdotsfor[1.5]{3}`. The number in square brackets will be used as a multiplier; the normal value is 1.

## The substack command

The substack command can be used to produce a multiline subscript or superscript: for example

    \sum_{\substack{0\le i\le m\\ 0<j<n}} P(i,j)

produces a two-line subscript underneath the sum: $$\sum_{\substack{0\le i\le m\\ 0<j<n}} P(i,j)$$ A slightly more generalized form is the subarray environment which allows you to specify that each line should be left-aligned instead of centered, as here: $$\sum_{\begin{subarray}{l}
        0\le i\le m\\ 0<j<n
      \end{subarray}}
 P(i,j)$$

    \sum_{\begin{subarray}{l}
            0\le i\le m\\ 0<j<n
          \end{subarray}}
     P(i,j)

## Big-g-g delimiters

Here are some big delimiters, first in normalsize: $$\biggl(\mathbf{E}_{y}
  \int_0^{t_\varepsilon}L_{x,y^x(s)}\varphi(x)\,ds
  \biggr)$$

    \[\biggl(\mathbf{E}_{y}
      \int_0^{t_\varepsilon}L_{x,y^x(s)}\varphi(x)\,ds
      \biggr)
    \]

and now in Large size: $$\biggl(\mathbf{E}_{y}
  \int_0^{t_\varepsilon}L_{x,y^x(s)}\varphi(x)\,ds
  \biggr)$$

    {\Large
    \[\biggl(\mathbf{E}_{y}
      \int_0^{t_\varepsilon}L_{x,y^x(s)}\varphi(x)\,ds
      \biggr)
    \]}

# Examples of multiple-line equation structures

**Note: Starting on this page, vertical rules are added at the margins so that the positioning of various display elements with respect to the margins can be seen more clearly.**

## Split

The split environment is not an independent environment but should be used inside something else such as equation or align.

If there is not enough room for it, the equation number for a split will be shifted to the previous line, when equation numbers are on the left; the number shifts down to the next line when numbers are on the right. $$\begin{split}
f_{h,\varepsilon}(x,y)
&=\varepsilon\mathbf{E}_{x,y}\int_0^{t_\varepsilon}
L_{x,y_\varepsilon(\varepsilon u)}\varphi(x)\,du\\
&= h\int L_{x,z}\varphi(x)\rho_x(dz)\\
&\quad+h\biggl[\frac{1}{t_\varepsilon}\biggl(\mathbf{E}_{y}
  \int_0^{t_\varepsilon}L_{x,y^x(s)}\varphi(x)\,ds
  -t_\varepsilon\int L_{x,z}\varphi(x)\rho_x(dz)\biggr)\\
&\phantom{{=}+h\biggl[}+\frac{1}{t_\varepsilon}
  \biggl(\mathbf{E}_{y}\int_0^{t_\varepsilon}L_{x,y^x(s)}
    \varphi(x)\,ds -\mathbf{E}_{x,y}\int_0^{t_\varepsilon}
   L_{x,y_\varepsilon(\varepsilon s)}
   \varphi(x)\,ds\biggr)\biggr]\\
&=h\widehat{L}_x\varphi(x)+h\theta_\varepsilon(x,y),
\end{split}$$ Some text after to test the below-display spacing.

    \begin{equation}
    \begin{split}
    f_{h,\varepsilon}(x,y)
    &=\varepsilon\mathbf{E}_{x,y}\int_0^{t_\varepsilon}
    L_{x,y_\varepsilon(\varepsilon u)}\varphi(x)\,du\\
    &= h\int L_{x,z}\varphi(x)\rho_x(dz)\\
    &\quad+h\biggl[\frac{1}{t_\varepsilon}\biggl(\mathbf{E}_{y}
      \int_0^{t_\varepsilon}L_{x,y^x(s)}\varphi(x)\,ds
      -t_\varepsilon\int L_{x,z}\varphi(x)\rho_x(dz)\biggr)\\
    &\phantom{{=}+h\biggl[}+\frac{1}{t_\varepsilon}
      \biggl(\mathbf{E}_{y}\int_0^{t_\varepsilon}L_{x,y^x(s)}
        \varphi(x)\,ds -\mathbf{E}_{x,y}\int_0^{t_\varepsilon}
       L_{x,y_\varepsilon(\varepsilon s)}
       \varphi(x)\,ds\biggr)\biggr]\\
    &=h\wh{L}_x\varphi(x)+h\theta_\varepsilon(x,y),
    \end{split}
    \end{equation}

Unnumbered version: $$\begin{split}
f_{h,\varepsilon}(x,y)
&=\varepsilon\mathbf{E}_{x,y}\int_0^{t_\varepsilon}
L_{x,y_\varepsilon(\varepsilon u)}\varphi(x)\,du\\
&= h\int L_{x,z}\varphi(x)\rho_x(dz)\\
&\quad+h\biggl[\frac{1}{t_\varepsilon}\biggl(\mathbf{E}_{y}
  \int_0^{t_\varepsilon}L_{x,y^x(s)}\varphi(x)\,ds
  -t_\varepsilon\int L_{x,z}\varphi(x)\rho_x(dz)\biggr)\\
&\phantom{{=}+h\biggl[}+\frac{1}{t_\varepsilon}
  \biggl(\mathbf{E}_{y}\int_0^{t_\varepsilon}L_{x,y^x(s)}
    \varphi(x)\,ds -\mathbf{E}_{x,y}\int_0^{t_\varepsilon}
   L_{x,y_\varepsilon(\varepsilon s)}
   \varphi(x)\,ds\biggr)\biggr]\\
&=h\widehat{L}_x\varphi(x)+h\theta_\varepsilon(x,y),
\end{split}$$ Some text after to test the below-display spacing.

    \begin{equation*}
    \begin{split}
    f_{h,\varepsilon}(x,y)
    &=\varepsilon\mathbf{E}_{x,y}\int_0^{t_\varepsilon}
    L_{x,y_\varepsilon(\varepsilon u)}\varphi(x)\,du\\
    &= h\int L_{x,z}\varphi(x)\rho_x(dz)\\
    &\quad+h\biggl[\frac{1}{t_\varepsilon}\biggl(\mathbf{E}_{y}
      \int_0^{t_\varepsilon}L_{x,y^x(s)}\varphi(x)\,ds
      -t_\varepsilon\int L_{x,z}\varphi(x)\rho_x(dz)\biggr)\\
    &\phantom{{=}+h\biggl[}+\frac{1}{t_\varepsilon}
      \biggl(\mathbf{E}_{y}\int_0^{t_\varepsilon}L_{x,y^x(s)}
        \varphi(x)\,ds -\mathbf{E}_{x,y}\int_0^{t_\varepsilon}
       L_{x,y_\varepsilon(\varepsilon s)}
       \varphi(x)\,ds\biggr)\biggr]\\
    &=h\wh{L}_x\varphi(x)+h\theta_\varepsilon(x,y),
    \end{split}
    \end{equation*}

If the option centertags is included in the options list of the amsmath package, the equation numbers for split environments will be centered vertically on the height of the split: $$\begin{split}
 \left\lvert I_2\right\rvert&=\left\lvert \int_{0}^T \psi(t)\left\{u(a,t)-\int_{\gamma(t)}^a
  \frac{d\theta}{k(\theta,t)}
  \int_{a}^\theta c(\xi)u_t(\xi,t)\,d\xi\right\}dt\right\rvert\\
&\le C_6\left\lvert \left\lvert f\int_\Omega\left\lvert \widetilde{S}^{-1,0}_{a,-}
  W_2(\Omega,\Gamma_l)\right\rvert\right\rvert
  \left\lvert \left\lvert u\right\rvert\overset{\circ}\to W_2^{\widetilde{A}}
  (\Omega;\Gamma_r,T)\right\rvert\right\rvert.
\end{split}$$ Some text after to test the below-display spacing.

Use of split within align: $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}\left\lvert I_1\right\rvert
  &=\left\lvert \int_\Omega gRu\,d\Omega\right\rvert\\
&\le C_3\left[\int_\Omega\left(\int_{a}^x
  g(\xi,t)\,d\xi\right)^2d\Omega\right]^{1/2}\\
&\quad\times \left[\int_\Omega\left\{u^2_x+\frac{1}{k}
  \left(\int_{a}^x cu_t\,d\xi\right)^2\right\}
  c\Omega\right]^{1/2}\\
&\le C_4\left\lvert \left\lvert f\left\lvert \widetilde{S}^{-1,0}_{a,-}
  W_2(\Omega,\Gamma_l)\right\rvert\right\rvert
  \left\lvert \left\lvert u\right\rvert\overset{\circ}\to W_2^{\widetilde{A}}
  (\Omega;\Gamma_r,T)\right\rvert\right\rvert.
\end{split}\label{eq:A}\\
\begin{split}\left\lvert I_2\right\rvert&=\left\lvert \int_{0}^T \psi(t)\left\{u(a,t)
  -\int_{\gamma(t)}^a\frac{d\theta}{k(\theta,t)}
  \int_{a}^\theta c(\xi)u_t(\xi,t)\,d\xi\right\}dt\right\rvert\\
&\le C_6\left\lvert \left\lvert f\int_\Omega
 \left\lvert \widetilde{S}^{-1,0}_{a,-}
  W_2(\Omega,\Gamma_l)\right\rvert\right\rvert
  \left\lvert \left\lvert u\right\rvert\overset{\circ}\to W_2^{\widetilde{A}}
  (\Omega;\Gamma_r,T)\right\rvert\right\rvert.
\end{split}
\end{aligned}$$ Some text after to test the below-display spacing.

    \begin{align}
    \begin{split}\abs{I_1}
      &=\left\lvert \int_\Omega gRu\,d\Omega\right\rvert\\
    &\le C_3\left[\int_\Omega\left(\int_{a}^x
      g(\xi,t)\,d\xi\right)^2d\Omega\right]^{1/2}\\
    &\quad\times \left[\int_\Omega\left\{u^2_x+\frac{1}{k}
      \left(\int_{a}^x cu_t\,d\xi\right)^2\right\}
      c\Omega\right]^{1/2}\\
    &\le C_4\left\lvert \left\lvert f\left\lvert \wt{S}^{-1,0}_{a,-}
      W_2(\Omega,\Gamma_l)\right\rvert\right\rvert
      \left\lvert \abs{u}\overset{\circ}\to W_2^{\wt{A}}
      (\Omega;\Gamma_r,T)\right\rvert\right\rvert.
    \end{split}\label{eq:A}\\
    \begin{split}\abs{I_2}&=\left\lvert \int_{0}^T \psi(t)\left\{u(a,t)
      -\int_{\gamma(t)}^a\frac{d\theta}{k(\theta,t)}
      \int_{a}^\theta c(\xi)u_t(\xi,t)\,d\xi\right\}dt\right\rvert\\
    &\le C_6\left\lvert \left\lvert f\int_\Omega
      \left\lvert \wt{S}^{-1,0}_{a,-}
      W_2(\Omega,\Gamma_l)\right\rvert\right\rvert
      \left\lvert \abs{u}\overset{\circ}\to W_2^{\wt{A}}
      (\Omega;\Gamma_r,T)\right\rvert\right\rvert.
    \end{split}
    \end{align}

Unnumbered align, with a number on the second split: $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}\left\lvert I_1\right\rvert&=\left\lvert \int_\Omega gRu\,d\Omega\right\rvert\\
  &\le C_3\left[\int_\Omega\left(\int_{a}^x
  g(\xi,t)\,d\xi\right)^2d\Omega\right]^{1/2}\\
&\phantom{=}\times \left[\int_\Omega\left\{u^2_x+\frac{1}{k}
  \left(\int_{a}^x cu_t\,d\xi\right)^2\right\}
  c\Omega\right]^{1/2}\\
&\le C_4\left\lvert \left\lvert f\left\lvert \widetilde{S}^{-1,0}_{a,-}
  W_2(\Omega,\Gamma_l)\right\rvert\right\rvert
  \left\lvert \left\lvert u\right\rvert\overset{\circ}\to W_2^{\widetilde{A}}
  (\Omega;\Gamma_r,T)\right\rvert\right\rvert.
\end{split}\\
\begin{split}\left\lvert I_2\right\rvert&=\left\lvert \int_{0}^T \psi(t)\left\{u(a,t)
  -\int_{\gamma(t)}^a\frac{d\theta}{k(\theta,t)}
  \int_{a}^\theta c(\xi)u_t(\xi,t)\,d\xi\right\}dt\right\rvert\\
&\le C_6\left\lvert \left\lvert f\int_\Omega
  \left\lvert \widetilde{S}^{-1,0}_{a,-}
  W_2(\Omega,\Gamma_l)\right\rvert\right\rvert
  \left\lvert \left\lvert u\right\rvert\overset{\circ}\to W_2^{\widetilde{A}}
  (\Omega;\Gamma_r,T)\right\rvert\right\rvert.
\end{split}\tag{\theequation$'$}
\end{aligned}$$ Some text after to test the below-display spacing.

    \begin{align*}
    \begin{split}\abs{I_1}&=\left\lvert \int_\Omega gRu\,d\Omega\right\rvert\\
      &\le C_3\left[\int_\Omega\left(\int_{a}^x
      g(\xi,t)\,d\xi\right)^2d\Omega\right]^{1/2}\\
    &\phantom{=}\times \left[\int_\Omega\left\{u^2_x+\frac{1}{k}
      \left(\int_{a}^x cu_t\,d\xi\right)^2\right\}
      c\Omega\right]^{1/2}\\
    &\le C_4\left\lvert \left\lvert f\left\lvert \wt{S}^{-1,0}_{a,-}
      W_2(\Omega,\Gamma_l)\right\rvert\right\rvert
      \left\lvert \abs{u}\overset{\circ}\to W_2^{\wt{A}}
      (\Omega;\Gamma_r,T)\right\rvert\right\rvert.
    \end{split}\\
    \begin{split}\abs{I_2}&=\left\lvert \int_{0}^T \psi(t)\left\{u(a,t)
      -\int_{\gamma(t)}^a\frac{d\theta}{k(\theta,t)}
      \int_{a}^\theta c(\xi)u_t(\xi,t)\,d\xi\right\}dt\right\rvert\\
    &\le C_6\left\lvert \left\lvert f\int_\Omega
      \left\lvert \wt{S}^{-1,0}_{a,-}
      W_2(\Omega,\Gamma_l)\right\rvert\right\rvert
      \left\lvert \abs{u}\overset{\circ}\to W_2^{\wt{A}}
      (\Omega;\Gamma_r,T)\right\rvert\right\rvert.
    \end{split}\tag{\theequation$'$}
    \end{align*}

## Multline

Numbered version: $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:E}
\int_a^b\biggl\{\int_a^b[f(x)^2g(y)^2+f(y)^2g(x)^2]
 -2f(x)g(x)f(y)g(y)\,dx\biggr\}\,dy \\
 =\int_a^b\biggl\{g(y)^2\int_a^bf^2+f(y)^2
  \int_a^b g^2-2f(y)g(y)\int_a^b fg\biggr\}\,dy
\end{gathered}$$ To test the use of `\label` and `\ref`, we refer to the number of this equation here: ().

    \begin{multline}\label{eq:E}
    \int_a^b\biggl\{\int_a^b[f(x)^2g(y)^2+f(y)^2g(x)^2]
     -2f(x)g(x)f(y)g(y)\,dx\biggr\}\,dy \\
     =\int_a^b\biggl\{g(y)^2\int_a^bf^2+f(y)^2
      \int_a^b g^2-2f(y)g(y)\int_a^b fg\biggr\}\,dy
    \end{multline}

Unnumbered version: $$\begin{gathered}
\int_a^b\biggl\{\int_a^b[f(x)^2g(y)^2+f(y)^2g(x)^2]
 -2f(x)g(x)f(y)g(y)\,dx\biggr\}\,dy \\
 =\int_a^b\biggl\{g(y)^2\int_a^bf^2+f(y)^2
  \int_a^b g^2-2f(y)g(y)\int_a^b fg\biggr\}\,dy
\end{gathered}$$ Some text after to test the below-display spacing.

    \begin{multline*}
    \int_a^b\biggl\{\int_a^b[f(x)^2g(y)^2+f(y)^2g(x)^2]
     -2f(x)g(x)f(y)g(y)\,dx\biggr\}\,dy \\
     =\int_a^b\biggl\{g(y)^2\int_a^bf^2+f(y)^2
      \int_a^b g^2-2f(y)g(y)\int_a^b fg\biggr\}\,dy
    \end{multline*}

## Gather

Numbered version with `\notag` on the second line: $$\begin{gathered}
D(a,r)\equiv\{z\in\mathbf{C}\colon \left\lvert z-a\right\rvert<r\},\\
\mathop{\mathrm{seg}}(a,r)\equiv\{z\in\mathbf{C}\colon
\Im z= \Im a,\ \left\lvert z-a\right\rvert<r\},\notag\\
c(e,\theta,r)\equiv\{(x,y)\in\mathbf{C}
\colon \left\lvert x-e\right\rvert<y\tan\theta,\ 0<y<r\},\\
C(E,\theta,r)\equiv\bigcup_{e\in E}c(e,\theta,r).
\end{gathered}$$

    \begin{gather}
    D(a,r)\equiv\{z\in\mathbf{C}\colon \abs{z-a}<r\},\\
    \seg(a,r)\equiv\{z\in\mathbf{C}\colon
    \Im z= \Im a,\ \abs{z-a}<r\},\notag\\
    c(e,\theta,r)\equiv\{(x,y)\in\mathbf{C}
    \colon \abs{x-e}<y\tan\theta,\ 0<y<r\},\\
    C(E,\theta,r)\equiv\bigcup_{e\in E}c(e,\theta,r).
    \end{gather}

Unnumbered version. $$\begin{gathered}
D(a,r)\equiv\{z\in\mathbf{C}\colon \left\lvert z-a\right\rvert<r\},\\
\mathop{\mathrm{seg}}(a,r)\equiv\{z\in\mathbf{C}\colon
\Im z= \Im a,\ \left\lvert z-a\right\rvert<r\},\\
c(e,\theta,r)\equiv\{(x,y)\in\mathbf{C}
 \colon \left\lvert x-e\right\rvert<y\tan\theta,\ 0<y<r\},\\
C(E,\theta,r)\equiv\bigcup_{e\in E}c(e,\theta,r).
\end{gathered}$$ Some text after to test the below-display spacing.

    \begin{gather*}
    D(a,r)\equiv\{z\in\mathbf{C}\colon \abs{z-a}<r\},\\
    \seg (a,r)\equiv\{z\in\mathbf{C}\colon
    \Im z= \Im a,\ \abs{z-a}<r\},\\
    c(e,\theta,r)\equiv\{(x,y)\in\mathbf{C}
     \colon \abs{x-e}<y\tan\theta,\ 0<y<r\},\\
    C(E,\theta,r)\equiv\bigcup_{e\in E}c(e,\theta,r).
    \end{gather*}

## Align

Numbered version: $$\begin{aligned}
\gamma_x(t)&=(\cos tu+\sin tx,v),\\
\gamma_y(t)&=(u,\cos tv+\sin ty),\\
\gamma_z(t)&=\left(\cos tu+\frac\alpha\beta\sin tv,
  -\frac\beta\alpha\sin tu+\cos tv\right).
\end{aligned}$$ Some text after to test the below-display spacing.

    \begin{align}
    \gamma_x(t)&=(\cos tu+\sin tx,v),\\
    \gamma_y(t)&=(u,\cos tv+\sin ty),\\
    \gamma_z(t)&=\left(\cos tu+\frac\alpha\beta\sin tv,
      -\frac\beta\alpha\sin tu+\cos tv\right).
    \end{align}

Unnumbered version: $$\begin{aligned}
\gamma_x(t)&=(\cos tu+\sin tx,v),\\
\gamma_y(t)&=(u,\cos tv+\sin ty),\\
\gamma_z(t)&=\left(\cos tu+\frac\alpha\beta\sin tv,
  -\frac\beta\alpha\sin tu+\cos tv\right).
\end{aligned}$$ Some text after to test the below-display spacing.

    \begin{align*}
    \gamma_x(t)&=(\cos tu+\sin tx,v),\\
    \gamma_y(t)&=(u,\cos tv+\sin ty),\\
    \gamma_z(t)&=\left(\cos tu+\frac\alpha\beta\sin tv,
      -\frac\beta\alpha\sin tu+\cos tv\right).
    \end{align*}

A variation: $$\begin{aligned}
x& =y && \text {by (\ref{eq:C})}\\
x'& = y' && \text {by (\ref{eq:D})}\\
x+x' & = y+y' && \text {by Axiom 1.}
\end{aligned}$$ Some text after to test the below-display spacing.

    \begin{align}
    x& =y && \text {by (\ref{eq:C})}\\
    x'& = y' && \text {by (\ref{eq:D})}\\
    x+x' & = y+y' && \text {by Axiom 1.}
    \end{align}

## Align and split within gather

When using the align environment within the gather environment, one or the other, or both, should be unnumbered (using the `*` form); numbering both the outer and inner environment would cause a conflict.

Automatically numbered gather with split and align\*: $$\begin{gathered}
\begin{split} \varphi(x,z)
&=z-\gamma_{10}x-\gamma_{mn}x^mz^n\\
&=z-Mr^{-1}x-Mr^{-(m+n)}x^mz^n
\end{split}\\[6pt]
\begin{align*}
\zeta^0 &=(\xi^0)^2,\\
\zeta^1 &=\xi^0\xi^1,\\
\zeta^2 &=(\xi^1)^2,
\end{align*}
\end{gathered}$$ Here the split environment gets a number from the outer gather environment; numbers for individual lines of the align\* are suppressed because of the star.

    \begin{gather}
    \begin{split} \varphi(x,z)
    &=z-\gamma_{10}x-\gamma_{mn}x^mz^n\\
    &=z-Mr^{-1}x-Mr^{-(m+n)}x^mz^n
    \end{split}\\[6pt]
    \begin{align*}
    \zeta^0 &=(\xi^0)^2,\\
    \zeta^1 &=\xi^0\xi^1,\\
    \zeta^2 &=(\xi^1)^2,
    \end{align*}
    \end{gather}

The `*`-ed form of gather with the non-`*`-ed form of align. $$\begin{gathered}
\begin{split} \varphi(x,z)
&=z-\gamma_{10}x-\gamma_{mn}x^mz^n\\
&=z-Mr^{-1}x-Mr^{-(m+n)}x^mz^n
\end{split}\\[6pt]
\begin{align} \zeta^0&=(\xi^0)^2,\\
\zeta^1 &=\xi^0\xi^1,\\
\zeta^2 &=(\xi^1)^2,
\end{align}
\end{gathered}$$ Some text after to test the below-display spacing.

    \begin{gather*}
    \begin{split} \varphi(x,z)
    &=z-\gamma_{10}x-\gamma_{mn}x^mz^n\\
    &=z-Mr^{-1}x-Mr^{-(m+n)}x^mz^n
    \end{split}\\[6pt]
    \begin{align} \zeta^0&=(\xi^0)^2,\\
    \zeta^1 &=\xi^0\xi^1,\\
    \zeta^2 &=(\xi^1)^2,
    \end{align}
    \end{gather*}

## Alignat

Numbered version: $$\begin{aligned}
{3}
V_i & =v_i - q_i v_j, & \qquad X_i & = x_i - q_i x_j,
 & \qquad U_i & = u_i,
 \qquad \text{for $i\ne j$;}\label{eq:B}\\
V_j & = v_j, & \qquad X_j & = x_j,
  & \qquad U_j & u_j + \sum_{i\ne j} q_i u_i.
\end{aligned}$$ Some text after to test the below-display spacing.

    \begin{alignat}{3}
    V_i & =v_i - q_i v_j, & \qquad X_i & = x_i - q_i x_j,
     & \qquad U_i & = u_i,
     \qquad \text{for $i\ne j$;}\label{eq:B}\\
    V_j & = v_j, & \qquad X_j & = x_j,
      & \qquad U_j & u_j + \sum_{i\ne j} q_i u_i.
    \end{alignat}

Unnumbered version: $$\begin{aligned}
3
V_i & =v_i - q_i v_j, & \qquad X_i & = x_i - q_i x_j,
 & \qquad U_i & = u_i,
 \qquad \text{for $i\ne j$;} \\
V_j & = v_j, & \qquad X_j & = x_j,
  & \qquad U_j & u_j + \sum_{i\ne j} q_i u_i.
\end{aligned}$$ Some text after to test the below-display spacing.

    \begin{alignat*}3
    V_i & =v_i - q_i v_j, & \qquad X_i & = x_i - q_i x_j,
     & \qquad U_i & = u_i,
     \qquad \text{for $i\ne j$;} \\
    V_j & = v_j, & \qquad X_j & = x_j,
      & \qquad U_j & u_j + \sum_{i\ne j} q_i u_i.
    \end{alignat*}

The most common use for alignat is for things like $$\begin{aligned}
{2}
x& =y && \qquad \text {by (\ref{eq:A})}\label{eq:C}\\
x'& = y' && \qquad \text {by (\ref{eq:B})}\label{eq:D}\\
x+x' & = y+y' && \qquad \text {by Axiom 1.}
\end{aligned}$$ Some text after to test the below-display spacing.

    \begin{alignat}{2}
    x& =y && \qquad \text {by (\ref{eq:A})}\label{eq:C}\\
    x'& = y' && \qquad \text {by (\ref{eq:B})}\label{eq:D}\\
    x+x' & = y+y' && \qquad \text {by Axiom 1.}
    \end{alignat}

[^1]: Corresponding author: e-mail: email@example.com, Phone: +00 999 999 999, Fax: +00 999 999 999

[^2]:

[^3]: A multiset allows multiplicity of elements. Hence, $\{0,01,01\}$ is prefix free as a set, but not as a multiset.