width of undersets

[Micha]

How do I get undersets not to make the spacing of the equation wrong when the 
width of the underset is wider than the equation?


doing $a+\underset{description}{underbrace{b}}+c$ comes out as
a+  b  +c
}
   description

instead of

   a+b+c
 }
description

thanks

Re: width of undersets

[Paul A. Rubin]

On 4/4/2010 7:56 AM, Micha wrote:

How do I get undersets not to make the spacing of the equation wrong
when the width of the underset is wider than the equation?

doing $a+\underset{description}{underbrace{b}}+c$ comes out as
a+ b +c
}
description

instead of

a+b+c
}
description

thanks




I suspect what you want is the following (in a math inset):

1. type \underset (space);
2. in the upper box of the inset, type \underbrace (space);
3. enter the formula in the innermost inset;
4. enter the description in the bottom space.

/Paul

Re: width of undersets

[Micha]

On 04/04/2010 18:30, Paul A. Rubin wrote:

On 4/4/2010 7:56 AM, Micha wrote:

How do I get undersets not to make the spacing of the equation wrong
when the width of the underset is wider than the equation?

doing $a+\underset{description}{underbrace{b}}+c$ comes out as
a+ b +c
}
description

instead of

a+b+c
}
description

thanks




I suspect what you want is the following (in a math inset):

1. type \underset (space);
2. in the upper box of the inset, type \underbrace (space);
3. enter the formula in the innermost inset;
4. enter the description in the bottom space.

/Paul



That is what I'm doing, the problem is that the spacing is all wrong. The reply 
ruined the spaces so I'll use underscores instead. Using your method I get


a + _ b __ + c
_ }
_ description

While what I want is

a + b + c
___ }
description

here, _ are spaces and } denotes the underbrace (which is supposed to be only 
under b)


I remember seeing a solution a couple of years back or so on this list so I know 
it's possible, but can't find it anymore.

Re: width of undersets

[Paul A. Rubin]

On 4/4/2010 1:14 PM, Micha wrote:

On 04/04/2010 18:30, Paul A. Rubin wrote:

On 4/4/2010 7:56 AM, Micha wrote:

How do I get undersets not to make the spacing of the equation wrong
when the width of the underset is wider than the equation?

doing $a+\underset{description}{underbrace{b}}+c$ comes out as
a+ b +c
}
description

instead of

a+b+c
}
description

thanks




I suspect what you want is the following (in a math inset):

1. type \underset (space);
2. in the upper box of the inset, type \underbrace (space);
3. enter the formula in the innermost inset;
4. enter the description in the bottom space.

/Paul



That is what I'm doing, the problem is that the spacing is all wrong.
The reply ruined the spaces so I'll use underscores instead. Using your
method I get

a + _ b __ + c
_ }
_ description

While what I want is

a + b + c
___ }
description

here, _ are spaces and } denotes the underbrace (which is supposed to be
only under b)

I remember seeing a solution a couple of years back or so on this list
so I know it's possible, but can't find it anymore.



Putting the underbrace under just the b is easy.  If 'b' is replaced by 
a sufficiently long expression, the brace will stretch to the width of 
the expression, but if 'b' is literally one character, the brace will be 
wider than b. Are you asking how to make the brace narrower?  I don't 
know if that can be done.


If you're doing what I wrote before (but with the brace only under b) 
and there's extra space surrounding b that annoys you, I suspect it's 
from the brace, not from the description.


As a side note, I noticed that when putting the brace under b only, 
sometimes the space between + and c was short-changed. That can be 
corrected by inserting space manually.


/Paul

Re: width of undersets

[Micha]

On 04/04/2010 23:20, Paul A. Rubin wrote:

On 4/4/2010 1:14 PM, Micha wrote:

On 04/04/2010 18:30, Paul A. Rubin wrote:

On 4/4/2010 7:56 AM, Micha wrote:

How do I get undersets not to make the spacing of the equation wrong
when the width of the underset is wider than the equation?

doing $a+\underset{description}{underbrace{b}}+c$ comes out as
a+ b +c
}
description

instead of

a+b+c
}
description

thanks




I suspect what you want is the following (in a math inset):

1. type \underset (space);
2. in the upper box of the inset, type \underbrace (space);
3. enter the formula in the innermost inset;
4. enter the description in the bottom space.

/Paul



That is what I'm doing, the problem is that the spacing is all wrong.
The reply ruined the spaces so I'll use underscores instead. Using your
method I get

a + _ b __ + c
_ }
_ description

While what I want is

a + b + c
___ }
description

here, _ are spaces and } denotes the underbrace (which is supposed to be
only under b)

I remember seeing a solution a couple of years back or so on this list
so I know it's possible, but can't find it anymore.



Putting the underbrace under just the b is easy. If 'b' is replaced by a
sufficiently long expression, the brace will stretch to the width of the
expression, but if 'b' is literally one character, the brace will be
wider than b. Are you asking how to make the brace narrower? I don't
know if that can be done.

If you're doing what I wrote before (but with the brace only under b)
and there's extra space surrounding b that annoys you, I suspect it's
from the brace, not from the description.

As a side note, I noticed that when putting the brace under b only,
sometimes the space between + and c was short-changed. That can be
corrected by inserting space manually.

/Paul


The behavior is to expand the whole block of b, underbrace and description to 
the width of the block. The brace is as wide as b, not as wide as the 
description (I'm actually using an arrow in this case, but it doesn't matter), 
my problem is with the bock width, not the brace width.


I ended up inserting negative vspace, although I seem to recall that there was a 
more correct solution to the problem.

Re: width of undersets

[Micha]

On 04/04/2010 23:47, Micha wrote:

On 04/04/2010 23:20, Paul A. Rubin wrote:

On 4/4/2010 1:14 PM, Micha wrote:

On 04/04/2010 18:30, Paul A. Rubin wrote:

On 4/4/2010 7:56 AM, Micha wrote:

How do I get undersets not to make the spacing of the equation wrong
when the width of the underset is wider than the equation?

doing $a+\underset{description}{underbrace{b}}+c$ comes out as
a+ b +c
}
description

instead of

a+b+c
}
description

thanks




I suspect what you want is the following (in a math inset):

1. type \underset (space);
2. in the upper box of the inset, type \underbrace (space);
3. enter the formula in the innermost inset;
4. enter the description in the bottom space.

/Paul



That is what I'm doing, the problem is that the spacing is all wrong.
The reply ruined the spaces so I'll use underscores instead. Using your
method I get

a + _ b __ + c
_ }
_ description

While what I want is

a + b + c
___ }
description

here, _ are spaces and } denotes the underbrace (which is supposed to be
only under b)

I remember seeing a solution a couple of years back or so on this list
so I know it's possible, but can't find it anymore.



Putting the underbrace under just the b is easy. If 'b' is replaced by a
sufficiently long expression, the brace will stretch to the width of the
expression, but if 'b' is literally one character, the brace will be
wider than b. Are you asking how to make the brace narrower? I don't
know if that can be done.

If you're doing what I wrote before (but with the brace only under b)
and there's extra space surrounding b that annoys you, I suspect it's
from the brace, not from the description.

As a side note, I noticed that when putting the brace under b only,
sometimes the space between + and c was short-changed. That can be
corrected by inserting space manually.

/Paul


The behavior is to expand the whole block of b, underbrace and
description to the width of the block. The brace is as wide as b, not as
wide as the description (I'm actually using an arrow in this case, but
it doesn't matter), my problem is with the bock width, not the brace width.

I ended up inserting negative vspace, although I seem to recall that
there was a more correct solution to the problem.


sorry, of course it's a hspace, not a vspace. And this is what I was trying to 
achieve, just I was hoping not to have to resort to hspace:


I(x,y,\hspace{-0.9em}\underset{\substack{\downarrow\\
\mbox{scale}
}
}{t}\hspace{-0.9em})=I(x,y,0)\otimes\hspace{-5em}\underset{\substack{\downarrow\\
\mbox{Gaussian filter with zero}\\
\mbox{mean and variance t}
}
}{G}\hspace{-5em}\left(t\right)

Re: width of undersets

[Paul Rubin]

Micha mi...@... writes:


 I(x,y,\hspace{-0.9em}\underset{\substack{\downarrow\\
 \mbox{scale}
 }
 }{t}\hspace{-0.9em})=I(x,y,0)\otimes\hspace{-5em}
 \underset{\substack{\downarrow\\
 \mbox{Gaussian filter with zero}\\
 \mbox{mean and variance t}
 }
 }{G}\hspace{-5em}\left(t\right)

You can omit the \hspace commands and change all three instances
of \mbox{...} to \makebox[0pt]{...}.

/Paul

width of undersets

[Micha]

How do I get undersets not to make the spacing of the equation wrong when the 
width of the underset is wider than the equation?


doing $a+\underset{description}{underbrace{b}}+c$ comes out as
a+  b  +c
}
   description

instead of

   a+b+c
 }
description

thanks

Re: width of undersets

[Paul A. Rubin]

On 4/4/2010 7:56 AM, Micha wrote:

How do I get undersets not to make the spacing of the equation wrong
when the width of the underset is wider than the equation?

doing $a+\underset{description}{underbrace{b}}+c$ comes out as
a+ b +c
}
description

instead of

a+b+c
}
description

thanks




I suspect what you want is the following (in a math inset):

1. type \underset (space);
2. in the upper box of the inset, type \underbrace (space);
3. enter the formula in the innermost inset;
4. enter the description in the bottom space.

/Paul

Re: width of undersets

[Micha]

On 04/04/2010 18:30, Paul A. Rubin wrote:

On 4/4/2010 7:56 AM, Micha wrote:

How do I get undersets not to make the spacing of the equation wrong
when the width of the underset is wider than the equation?

doing $a+\underset{description}{underbrace{b}}+c$ comes out as
a+ b +c
}
description

instead of

a+b+c
}
description

thanks




I suspect what you want is the following (in a math inset):

1. type \underset (space);
2. in the upper box of the inset, type \underbrace (space);
3. enter the formula in the innermost inset;
4. enter the description in the bottom space.

/Paul



That is what I'm doing, the problem is that the spacing is all wrong. The reply 
ruined the spaces so I'll use underscores instead. Using your method I get


a + _ b __ + c
_ }
_ description

While what I want is

a + b + c
___ }
description

here, _ are spaces and } denotes the underbrace (which is supposed to be only 
under b)


I remember seeing a solution a couple of years back or so on this list so I know 
it's possible, but can't find it anymore.

Re: width of undersets

[Paul A. Rubin]

On 4/4/2010 1:14 PM, Micha wrote:

On 04/04/2010 18:30, Paul A. Rubin wrote:

On 4/4/2010 7:56 AM, Micha wrote:

How do I get undersets not to make the spacing of the equation wrong
when the width of the underset is wider than the equation?

doing $a+\underset{description}{underbrace{b}}+c$ comes out as
a+ b +c
}
description

instead of

a+b+c
}
description

thanks




I suspect what you want is the following (in a math inset):

1. type \underset (space);
2. in the upper box of the inset, type \underbrace (space);
3. enter the formula in the innermost inset;
4. enter the description in the bottom space.

/Paul



That is what I'm doing, the problem is that the spacing is all wrong.
The reply ruined the spaces so I'll use underscores instead. Using your
method I get

a + _ b __ + c
_ }
_ description

While what I want is

a + b + c
___ }
description

here, _ are spaces and } denotes the underbrace (which is supposed to be
only under b)

I remember seeing a solution a couple of years back or so on this list
so I know it's possible, but can't find it anymore.



Putting the underbrace under just the b is easy.  If 'b' is replaced by 
a sufficiently long expression, the brace will stretch to the width of 
the expression, but if 'b' is literally one character, the brace will be 
wider than b. Are you asking how to make the brace narrower?  I don't 
know if that can be done.


If you're doing what I wrote before (but with the brace only under b) 
and there's extra space surrounding b that annoys you, I suspect it's 
from the brace, not from the description.


As a side note, I noticed that when putting the brace under b only, 
sometimes the space between + and c was short-changed. That can be 
corrected by inserting space manually.


/Paul

Re: width of undersets

[Micha]

On 04/04/2010 23:20, Paul A. Rubin wrote:

On 4/4/2010 1:14 PM, Micha wrote:

On 04/04/2010 18:30, Paul A. Rubin wrote:

On 4/4/2010 7:56 AM, Micha wrote:

How do I get undersets not to make the spacing of the equation wrong
when the width of the underset is wider than the equation?

doing $a+\underset{description}{underbrace{b}}+c$ comes out as
a+ b +c
}
description

instead of

a+b+c
}
description

thanks




I suspect what you want is the following (in a math inset):

1. type \underset (space);
2. in the upper box of the inset, type \underbrace (space);
3. enter the formula in the innermost inset;
4. enter the description in the bottom space.

/Paul



That is what I'm doing, the problem is that the spacing is all wrong.
The reply ruined the spaces so I'll use underscores instead. Using your
method I get

a + _ b __ + c
_ }
_ description

While what I want is

a + b + c
___ }
description

here, _ are spaces and } denotes the underbrace (which is supposed to be
only under b)

I remember seeing a solution a couple of years back or so on this list
so I know it's possible, but can't find it anymore.



Putting the underbrace under just the b is easy. If 'b' is replaced by a
sufficiently long expression, the brace will stretch to the width of the
expression, but if 'b' is literally one character, the brace will be
wider than b. Are you asking how to make the brace narrower? I don't
know if that can be done.

If you're doing what I wrote before (but with the brace only under b)
and there's extra space surrounding b that annoys you, I suspect it's
from the brace, not from the description.

As a side note, I noticed that when putting the brace under b only,
sometimes the space between + and c was short-changed. That can be
corrected by inserting space manually.

/Paul


The behavior is to expand the whole block of b, underbrace and description to 
the width of the block. The brace is as wide as b, not as wide as the 
description (I'm actually using an arrow in this case, but it doesn't matter), 
my problem is with the bock width, not the brace width.


I ended up inserting negative vspace, although I seem to recall that there was a 
more correct solution to the problem.

Re: width of undersets

[Micha]

On 04/04/2010 23:47, Micha wrote:

On 04/04/2010 23:20, Paul A. Rubin wrote:

On 4/4/2010 1:14 PM, Micha wrote:

On 04/04/2010 18:30, Paul A. Rubin wrote:

On 4/4/2010 7:56 AM, Micha wrote:

How do I get undersets not to make the spacing of the equation wrong
when the width of the underset is wider than the equation?

doing $a+\underset{description}{underbrace{b}}+c$ comes out as
a+ b +c
}
description

instead of

a+b+c
}
description

thanks




I suspect what you want is the following (in a math inset):

1. type \underset (space);
2. in the upper box of the inset, type \underbrace (space);
3. enter the formula in the innermost inset;
4. enter the description in the bottom space.

/Paul



That is what I'm doing, the problem is that the spacing is all wrong.
The reply ruined the spaces so I'll use underscores instead. Using your
method I get

a + _ b __ + c
_ }
_ description

While what I want is

a + b + c
___ }
description

here, _ are spaces and } denotes the underbrace (which is supposed to be
only under b)

I remember seeing a solution a couple of years back or so on this list
so I know it's possible, but can't find it anymore.



Putting the underbrace under just the b is easy. If 'b' is replaced by a
sufficiently long expression, the brace will stretch to the width of the
expression, but if 'b' is literally one character, the brace will be
wider than b. Are you asking how to make the brace narrower? I don't
know if that can be done.

If you're doing what I wrote before (but with the brace only under b)
and there's extra space surrounding b that annoys you, I suspect it's
from the brace, not from the description.

As a side note, I noticed that when putting the brace under b only,
sometimes the space between + and c was short-changed. That can be
corrected by inserting space manually.

/Paul


The behavior is to expand the whole block of b, underbrace and
description to the width of the block. The brace is as wide as b, not as
wide as the description (I'm actually using an arrow in this case, but
it doesn't matter), my problem is with the bock width, not the brace width.

I ended up inserting negative vspace, although I seem to recall that
there was a more correct solution to the problem.


sorry, of course it's a hspace, not a vspace. And this is what I was trying to 
achieve, just I was hoping not to have to resort to hspace:


I(x,y,\hspace{-0.9em}\underset{\substack{\downarrow\\
\mbox{scale}
}
}{t}\hspace{-0.9em})=I(x,y,0)\otimes\hspace{-5em}\underset{\substack{\downarrow\\
\mbox{Gaussian filter with zero}\\
\mbox{mean and variance t}
}
}{G}\hspace{-5em}\left(t\right)

Re: width of undersets

[Paul Rubin]

Micha mi...@... writes:


 I(x,y,\hspace{-0.9em}\underset{\substack{\downarrow\\
 \mbox{scale}
 }
 }{t}\hspace{-0.9em})=I(x,y,0)\otimes\hspace{-5em}
 \underset{\substack{\downarrow\\
 \mbox{Gaussian filter with zero}\\
 \mbox{mean and variance t}
 }
 }{G}\hspace{-5em}\left(t\right)

You can omit the \hspace commands and change all three instances
of \mbox{...} to \makebox[0pt]{...}.

/Paul

width of undersets

[Micha]

How do I get undersets not to make the spacing of the equation wrong when the 
width of the underset is wider than the equation?


doing $a+\underset{description}{underbrace{b}}+c$ comes out as
a+  b  +c
}
   description

instead of

   a+b+c
 }
description

thanks

Re: width of undersets

[Paul A. Rubin]

On 4/4/2010 7:56 AM, Micha wrote:

How do I get undersets not to make the spacing of the equation wrong
when the width of the underset is wider than the equation?

doing $a+\underset{description}{underbrace{b}}+c$ comes out as
a+ b +c
}
description

instead of

a+b+c
}
description

thanks




I suspect what you want is the following (in a math inset):

1. type \underset (space);
2. in the upper box of the inset, type \underbrace (space);
3. enter the formula in the innermost inset;
4. enter the description in the bottom space.

/Paul

Re: width of undersets

[Micha]

On 04/04/2010 18:30, Paul A. Rubin wrote:

On 4/4/2010 7:56 AM, Micha wrote:

How do I get undersets not to make the spacing of the equation wrong
when the width of the underset is wider than the equation?

doing $a+\underset{description}{underbrace{b}}+c$ comes out as
a+ b +c
}
description

instead of

a+b+c
}
description

thanks




I suspect what you want is the following (in a math inset):

1. type \underset (space);
2. in the upper box of the inset, type \underbrace (space);
3. enter the formula in the innermost inset;
4. enter the description in the bottom space.

/Paul



That is what I'm doing, the problem is that the spacing is all wrong. The reply 
ruined the spaces so I'll use underscores instead. Using your method I get


a + _ b __ + c
_ }
_ description

While what I want is

a + b + c
___ }
description

here, _ are spaces and } denotes the underbrace (which is supposed to be only 
under b)


I remember seeing a solution a couple of years back or so on this list so I know 
it's possible, but can't find it anymore.

Re: width of undersets

[Paul A. Rubin]

On 4/4/2010 1:14 PM, Micha wrote:

On 04/04/2010 18:30, Paul A. Rubin wrote:

On 4/4/2010 7:56 AM, Micha wrote:

How do I get undersets not to make the spacing of the equation wrong
when the width of the underset is wider than the equation?

doing $a+\underset{description}{underbrace{b}}+c$ comes out as
a+ b +c
}
description

instead of

a+b+c
}
description

thanks




I suspect what you want is the following (in a math inset):

1. type \underset (space);
2. in the upper box of the inset, type \underbrace (space);
3. enter the formula in the innermost inset;
4. enter the description in the bottom space.

/Paul



That is what I'm doing, the problem is that the spacing is all wrong.
The reply ruined the spaces so I'll use underscores instead. Using your
method I get

a + _ b __ + c
_ }
_ description

While what I want is

a + b + c
___ }
description

here, _ are spaces and } denotes the underbrace (which is supposed to be
only under b)

I remember seeing a solution a couple of years back or so on this list
so I know it's possible, but can't find it anymore.



Putting the underbrace under just the b is easy.  If 'b' is replaced by 
a sufficiently long expression, the brace will stretch to the width of 
the expression, but if 'b' is literally one character, the brace will be 
wider than b. Are you asking how to make the brace narrower?  I don't 
know if that can be done.


If you're doing what I wrote before (but with the brace only under b) 
and there's extra space surrounding b that annoys you, I suspect it's 
from the brace, not from the description.


As a side note, I noticed that when putting the brace under b only, 
sometimes the space between + and c was short-changed. That can be 
corrected by inserting space manually.


/Paul

Re: width of undersets

[Micha]

On 04/04/2010 23:20, Paul A. Rubin wrote:

On 4/4/2010 1:14 PM, Micha wrote:

On 04/04/2010 18:30, Paul A. Rubin wrote:

On 4/4/2010 7:56 AM, Micha wrote:

How do I get undersets not to make the spacing of the equation wrong
when the width of the underset is wider than the equation?

doing $a+\underset{description}{underbrace{b}}+c$ comes out as
a+ b +c
}
description

instead of

a+b+c
}
description

thanks




I suspect what you want is the following (in a math inset):

1. type \underset (space);
2. in the upper box of the inset, type \underbrace (space);
3. enter the formula in the innermost inset;
4. enter the description in the bottom space.

/Paul



That is what I'm doing, the problem is that the spacing is all wrong.
The reply ruined the spaces so I'll use underscores instead. Using your
method I get

a + _ b __ + c
_ }
_ description

While what I want is

a + b + c
___ }
description

here, _ are spaces and } denotes the underbrace (which is supposed to be
only under b)

I remember seeing a solution a couple of years back or so on this list
so I know it's possible, but can't find it anymore.



Putting the underbrace under just the b is easy. If 'b' is replaced by a
sufficiently long expression, the brace will stretch to the width of the
expression, but if 'b' is literally one character, the brace will be
wider than b. Are you asking how to make the brace narrower? I don't
know if that can be done.

If you're doing what I wrote before (but with the brace only under b)
and there's extra space surrounding b that annoys you, I suspect it's
from the brace, not from the description.

As a side note, I noticed that when putting the brace under b only,
sometimes the space between + and c was short-changed. That can be
corrected by inserting space manually.

/Paul


The behavior is to expand the whole block of b, underbrace and description to 
the width of the block. The brace is as wide as b, not as wide as the 
description (I'm actually using an arrow in this case, but it doesn't matter), 
my problem is with the bock width, not the brace width.


I ended up inserting negative vspace, although I seem to recall that there was a 
more "correct" solution to the problem.

Re: width of undersets

[Micha]

On 04/04/2010 23:47, Micha wrote:

On 04/04/2010 23:20, Paul A. Rubin wrote:

On 4/4/2010 1:14 PM, Micha wrote:

On 04/04/2010 18:30, Paul A. Rubin wrote:

On 4/4/2010 7:56 AM, Micha wrote:

How do I get undersets not to make the spacing of the equation wrong
when the width of the underset is wider than the equation?

doing $a+\underset{description}{underbrace{b}}+c$ comes out as
a+ b +c
}
description

instead of

a+b+c
}
description

thanks




I suspect what you want is the following (in a math inset):

1. type \underset (space);
2. in the upper box of the inset, type \underbrace (space);
3. enter the formula in the innermost inset;
4. enter the description in the bottom space.

/Paul



That is what I'm doing, the problem is that the spacing is all wrong.
The reply ruined the spaces so I'll use underscores instead. Using your
method I get

a + _ b __ + c
_ }
_ description

While what I want is

a + b + c
___ }
description

here, _ are spaces and } denotes the underbrace (which is supposed to be
only under b)

I remember seeing a solution a couple of years back or so on this list
so I know it's possible, but can't find it anymore.



Putting the underbrace under just the b is easy. If 'b' is replaced by a
sufficiently long expression, the brace will stretch to the width of the
expression, but if 'b' is literally one character, the brace will be
wider than b. Are you asking how to make the brace narrower? I don't
know if that can be done.

If you're doing what I wrote before (but with the brace only under b)
and there's extra space surrounding b that annoys you, I suspect it's
from the brace, not from the description.

As a side note, I noticed that when putting the brace under b only,
sometimes the space between + and c was short-changed. That can be
corrected by inserting space manually.

/Paul


The behavior is to expand the whole block of b, underbrace and
description to the width of the block. The brace is as wide as b, not as
wide as the description (I'm actually using an arrow in this case, but
it doesn't matter), my problem is with the bock width, not the brace width.

I ended up inserting negative vspace, although I seem to recall that
there was a more "correct" solution to the problem.


sorry, of course it's a hspace, not a vspace. And this is what I was trying to 
achieve, just I was hoping not to have to resort to hspace:


I(x,y,\hspace{-0.9em}\underset{\substack{\downarrow\\
\mbox{scale}
}
}{t}\hspace{-0.9em})=I(x,y,0)\otimes\hspace{-5em}\underset{\substack{\downarrow\\
\mbox{Gaussian filter with zero}\\
\mbox{mean and variance t}
}
}{G}\hspace{-5em}\left(t\right)

Re: width of undersets

[Paul Rubin]

Micha  writes:


> I(x,y,\hspace{-0.9em}\underset{\substack{\downarrow\\
> \mbox{scale}
> }
> }{t}\hspace{-0.9em})=I(x,y,0)\otimes\hspace{-5em}
> \underset{\substack{\downarrow\\
> \mbox{Gaussian filter with zero}\\
> \mbox{mean and variance t}
> }
> }{G}\hspace{-5em}\left(t\right)

You can omit the \hspace commands and change all three instances
of \mbox{...} to \makebox[0pt]{...}.

/Paul