Empty elements as dots in matrix












6















I need to create a determinant (vmatrix) as shown in this picture.enter image description here So, I wrote a simple LaTEX file for testing purposes as follows:



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}



usepackage{amsmath}



begin{document}



begin{equation*}

        begin{vmatrix}

                0     &cdot &cdot &0     &a_{1} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} alpha_{n} &cdot &cdot &a_{1} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} kappa_{n} \

                cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot                                      &cdot &cdot &cdot \

                0     &cdot &cdot &0     &a_{n} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} alpha_{n} &cdot &cdot &a_{n} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} kappa_{n} \

                -1    &cdot &cdot &0     &alpha_{1}                                 &cdot &cdot &kappa_{1} \

                cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot                                      &cdot &cdot &cdot \

                0     &cdot &cdot &-1    &alpha_{n}                                 &cdot &cdot &kappa_{n}

        end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}


When the above file gets compiled with TeXLive on a Linux desktop computer, it produces the following ugly result:enter image description here I thought using hdotsfor{} for the horizontal line, but the spacing between the dots is too close. If there is a simple way to tell hdotsfor{} to skip every dot, I believe that would do. However, perhaps someone here knows a much better way.






matrices







share|improve this question























  • hdotsfor has an optional argument which is a multiplier for the amount of space between consecutive dots, so you could try hdotsfor[2]{<number of rows>}. I'm not sure if it'd look good though, since they wouldn't align with the dots in your first row.

    – Circumscribe
    Dec 8 '18 at 21:47
















6















I need to create a determinant (vmatrix) as shown in this picture.enter image description here So, I wrote a simple LaTEX file for testing purposes as follows:



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}



usepackage{amsmath}



begin{document}



begin{equation*}

        begin{vmatrix}

                0     &cdot &cdot &0     &a_{1} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} alpha_{n} &cdot &cdot &a_{1} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} kappa_{n} \

                cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot                                      &cdot &cdot &cdot \

                0     &cdot &cdot &0     &a_{n} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} alpha_{n} &cdot &cdot &a_{n} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} kappa_{n} \

                -1    &cdot &cdot &0     &alpha_{1}                                 &cdot &cdot &kappa_{1} \

                cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot                                      &cdot &cdot &cdot \

                0     &cdot &cdot &-1    &alpha_{n}                                 &cdot &cdot &kappa_{n}

        end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}


When the above file gets compiled with TeXLive on a Linux desktop computer, it produces the following ugly result:enter image description here I thought using hdotsfor{} for the horizontal line, but the spacing between the dots is too close. If there is a simple way to tell hdotsfor{} to skip every dot, I believe that would do. However, perhaps someone here knows a much better way.






matrices







share|improve this question























  • hdotsfor has an optional argument which is a multiplier for the amount of space between consecutive dots, so you could try hdotsfor[2]{<number of rows>}. I'm not sure if it'd look good though, since they wouldn't align with the dots in your first row.

    – Circumscribe
    Dec 8 '18 at 21:47














6












6








6


0






I need to create a determinant (vmatrix) as shown in this picture.enter image description here So, I wrote a simple LaTEX file for testing purposes as follows:



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}



usepackage{amsmath}



begin{document}



begin{equation*}

        begin{vmatrix}

                0     &cdot &cdot &0     &a_{1} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} alpha_{n} &cdot &cdot &a_{1} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} kappa_{n} \

                cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot                                      &cdot &cdot &cdot \

                0     &cdot &cdot &0     &a_{n} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} alpha_{n} &cdot &cdot &a_{n} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} kappa_{n} \

                -1    &cdot &cdot &0     &alpha_{1}                                 &cdot &cdot &kappa_{1} \

                cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot                                      &cdot &cdot &cdot \

                0     &cdot &cdot &-1    &alpha_{n}                                 &cdot &cdot &kappa_{n}

        end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}


When the above file gets compiled with TeXLive on a Linux desktop computer, it produces the following ugly result:enter image description here I thought using hdotsfor{} for the horizontal line, but the spacing between the dots is too close. If there is a simple way to tell hdotsfor{} to skip every dot, I believe that would do. However, perhaps someone here knows a much better way.






matrices







share|improve this question














I need to create a determinant (vmatrix) as shown in this picture.enter image description here So, I wrote a simple LaTEX file for testing purposes as follows:



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}



usepackage{amsmath}



begin{document}



begin{equation*}

        begin{vmatrix}

                0     &cdot &cdot &0     &a_{1} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} alpha_{n} &cdot &cdot &a_{1} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} kappa_{n} \

                cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot                                      &cdot &cdot &cdot \

                0     &cdot &cdot &0     &a_{n} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} alpha_{n} &cdot &cdot &a_{n} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} kappa_{n} \

                -1    &cdot &cdot &0     &alpha_{1}                                 &cdot &cdot &kappa_{1} \

                cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot                                      &cdot &cdot &cdot \

                0     &cdot &cdot &-1    &alpha_{n}                                 &cdot &cdot &kappa_{n}

        end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}


When the above file gets compiled with TeXLive on a Linux desktop computer, it produces the following ugly result:enter image description here I thought using hdotsfor{} for the horizontal line, but the spacing between the dots is too close. If there is a simple way to tell hdotsfor{} to skip every dot, I believe that would do. However, perhaps someone here knows a much better way.






matrices




matrices






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked Dec 8 '18 at 21:18









user91822user91822

1425




1425













  • hdotsfor has an optional argument which is a multiplier for the amount of space between consecutive dots, so you could try hdotsfor[2]{<number of rows>}. I'm not sure if it'd look good though, since they wouldn't align with the dots in your first row.

    – Circumscribe
    Dec 8 '18 at 21:47



















  • hdotsfor has an optional argument which is a multiplier for the amount of space between consecutive dots, so you could try hdotsfor[2]{<number of rows>}. I'm not sure if it'd look good though, since they wouldn't align with the dots in your first row.

    – Circumscribe
    Dec 8 '18 at 21:47

















hdotsfor has an optional argument which is a multiplier for the amount of space between consecutive dots, so you could try hdotsfor[2]{<number of rows>}. I'm not sure if it'd look good though, since they wouldn't align with the dots in your first row.

– Circumscribe
Dec 8 '18 at 21:47





hdotsfor has an optional argument which is a multiplier for the amount of space between consecutive dots, so you could try hdotsfor[2]{<number of rows>}. I'm not sure if it'd look good though, since they wouldn't align with the dots in your first row.

– Circumscribe
Dec 8 '18 at 21:47










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















8














This seems a good approximation:



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}



usepackage{amsmath}



newcommand{widedots}{%

  .cleadershbox to 2tabcolsep{hss.hss}hfill.%

  hspace*{0pt}%

}



begin{document}



begin{equation*}

newcommand{ak}[2]{%

  makebox[14tabcolsep][s]{$displaystyle a_{#2}#1_1+dots+k_{#2}#1_n$}%

}

begin{vmatrix}

 0 & . & . &  0 & ak{alpha}{1} & . & . & ak{kappa}{1} \

 . & . & . &  . & widedots      & . & . & widedots      \

 0 & . & . &  0 & ak{alpha}{n} & . & . & ak{kappa}{n} \

-1 & . & . &  0 & alpha_{1}     & . & . & kappa_{1}     \

 . & . & . &  . & widedots      & . & . & widedots      \

 0 & . & . & -1 & alpha_{n}     & . & . & kappa_{n}

end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}


enter image description here



The value 14tabcolsep has been determined by first looking at the entries at their natural width.



Even better than the original if we make -1 to hide its width.



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}



usepackage{amsmath}



newcommand{widedots}{%

  .cleadershbox to 2tabcolsep{hss.hss}hfill.%

  hspace*{0pt}%

}



begin{document}



begin{equation*}

newcommand{ak}[2]{%

  makebox[14tabcolsep][s]{$displaystyle a_{#2}#1_1+dots+k_{#2}#1_n$}%

}

newcommand{?}{makebox[0pt]{$-1$}}

begin{vmatrix}mspace{8mu}

begin{matrix}

 0 & . & . &  0 & ak{alpha}{1} & . & . & ak{kappa}{1} \

 . & . & . &  . & widedots      & . & . & widedots      \

 0 & . & . &  0 & ak{alpha}{n} & . & . & ak{kappa}{n} \

? & . & . &  0 & alpha_{1}     & . & . & kappa_{1}     \

 . & . & . &  . & widedots      & . & . & widedots      \

 0 & . & . & ? & alpha_{n}     & . & . & kappa_{n}

end{matrix}mspace{3mu}

end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}


enter image description here



With dots and hdotsfor:



begin{equation*}

newcommand{ak}[2]{a_{#2}#1_1+dots+k_{#2}#1_n}

begin{vmatrix}

 0 & dots &  0 & ak{alpha}{1} & dots & ak{kappa}{1} \

hdotsfor{6} \

 0 & dots &  0 & ak{alpha}{n} & dots & ak{kappa}{n} \

-1 & dots &  0 & alpha_{1}     & dots & kappa_{1}     \

hdotsfor{6} \

 0 & dots & -1 & alpha_{n}     & dots & kappa_{n}

end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}


enter image description here






share|improve this answer


























  • Although I may not be able to decipher how your code works, it looks like the one with the capability of hiding the with of -1 fits my need. I have a feeling after perusing your code, I will understand better. Thank you.

    – user91822
    Dec 9 '18 at 0:18



















4














One way is to manually put dots with some horizontal space.



enter image description here



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}

usepackage{amsmath}

begin{document}



begin{equation*}

        begin{vmatrix}

                0     &cdot &cdot &0     &a_{1} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} alpha_{n} &cdot &cdot &a_{1} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} kappa_{n} \

                cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot hfil hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot                               &cdot &cdot &cdot hfil hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot  \

                0     &cdot &cdot &0     &a_{n} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} alpha_{n} &cdot &cdot &a_{n} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} kappa_{n} \

                -1    &cdot &cdot &0     &alpha_{1}                                 &cdot &cdot &kappa_{1} \

                cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot hfil hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot                                      &cdot &cdot &cdot hfil hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot  \

                0     &cdot &cdot &-1    &alpha_{n}                                 &cdot &cdot &kappa_{n}

        end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}





share|improve this answer
























  • Honestly, I had never thought of using 'hfil'. Thank you for the pointer.

    – user91822
    Dec 9 '18 at 0:20



















3














Defining two newcommands twodts and fivedts for empty columns and rows can simplify the table. 



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}

usepackage{amsmath}



begin{document}



newcommand{twodts}{begin{tabular}{@{}cc@{}}$cdot$&$cdot$end{tabular}}

newcommand{fivedts}{begin{tabular}{@{}*5{c}@{}}$cdot$&$cdot$&$cdot$&$cdot$&$cdot$end{tabular}}



begin{equation*}

  begin{array}{|cccccc|}

    0     & twodts & 0     & a_1 alpha_1+ cdots +k_1 alpha_n & twodts & a_1 kappa_1+ cdots +k_1 kappa_n \

    cdot & twodts & cdot & fivedts                           & twodts & fivedts                           \

    0     & twodts & 0     & a_n alpha_1+ cdots +k_n alpha_n & twodts & a_n kappa_1+ cdots +k_n kappa_n \

    -1    & twodts & 0     & alpha_1                           & twodts & kappa_1                           \

    cdot & twodts & cdot & fivedts                           & twodts & fivedts                           \

    0     & twodts & -1    & alpha_n                           & twodts & kappa_n

  end{array}

end{equation*}



end{document}



enter image description here




Update:



You can easily adapt my answer to add six dots instead of five like this:



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}

usepackage{amsmath,array}



begin{document}



deftwocdots{$cdot$&$cdot$}

newcommand{twodts}{begin{tabular}{@{}cc@{}}twocdotsend{tabular}}

newcommand{sixdts}{begin{tabular}{@{}*6{c}@{}}twocdots&twocdots&twocdotsend{tabular}}



begin{equation*}

  begin{array}{|cccccc|}

    0     & twodts & 0     & a_1 alpha_1+ cdots +k_1 alpha_n & twodts & a_1 kappa_1+ cdots +k_1 kappa_n \

    cdot & twodts & cdot & sixdts                            & twodts & sixdts                            \

    0     & twodts & 0     & a_n alpha_1+ cdots +k_n alpha_n & twodts & a_n kappa_1+ cdots +k_n kappa_n \

    -1    & twodts & 0     & alpha_1                           & twodts & kappa_1                           \

    cdot & twodts & cdot & sixdts                            & twodts & sixdts                            \

    0     & twodts & -1    & alpha_n                           & twodts & kappa_n

  end{array}

end{equation*}



end{document}



enter image description here







share|improve this answer


























  • This looks pretty simple and good solution. Since there is still some gaps that seems to be able to put one more dot when using the `fivedts' command, I wonder if this command can be modded to accommodate the gap. I tried to modify with a "sixdots" and it does not work, unfortunately. Anyway, thank you too.

    – user91822
    Dec 9 '18 at 0:24











  • Please see my update for doing this.

    – AboAmmar
    Dec 9 '18 at 16:31



















1














Would this be acceptable?



enter image description here



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}



usepackage{amsmath}



begin{document}



begin{equation*}

           begin{vmatrix}

            0     &cdots &0     &a_{1} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} alpha_{n} &cdots     &a_{1} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} kappa_{n} \

            vdots &ddots &vdots &vdots &ddots  &vdots \

            0     &cdots & 0     &a_{n} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} alpha_{n} &cdots  &a_{n} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} kappa_{n} \

            -1    &cdots &0     &alpha_{1}  &cdots &kappa_{1} \

            vdots &ddots &vdots &vdots   &ddots &vdots \

            0     &cdots & -1    &alpha_{n}  &cdots &kappa_{n}

    end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}





share|improve this answer



















  • 1





    This is I usually do and I don't think it will do for me. Sorry and I try to stick closer to the example I posted above. Anyway, thank you.

    – user91822
    Dec 9 '18 at 0:25













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


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f463868%2fempty-elements-as-dots-in-matrix%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes








4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









8














This seems a good approximation:



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}



usepackage{amsmath}



newcommand{widedots}{%

  .cleadershbox to 2tabcolsep{hss.hss}hfill.%

  hspace*{0pt}%

}



begin{document}



begin{equation*}

newcommand{ak}[2]{%

  makebox[14tabcolsep][s]{$displaystyle a_{#2}#1_1+dots+k_{#2}#1_n$}%

}

begin{vmatrix}

 0 & . & . &  0 & ak{alpha}{1} & . & . & ak{kappa}{1} \

 . & . & . &  . & widedots      & . & . & widedots      \

 0 & . & . &  0 & ak{alpha}{n} & . & . & ak{kappa}{n} \

-1 & . & . &  0 & alpha_{1}     & . & . & kappa_{1}     \

 . & . & . &  . & widedots      & . & . & widedots      \

 0 & . & . & -1 & alpha_{n}     & . & . & kappa_{n}

end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}


enter image description here



The value 14tabcolsep has been determined by first looking at the entries at their natural width.



Even better than the original if we make -1 to hide its width.



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}



usepackage{amsmath}



newcommand{widedots}{%

  .cleadershbox to 2tabcolsep{hss.hss}hfill.%

  hspace*{0pt}%

}



begin{document}



begin{equation*}

newcommand{ak}[2]{%

  makebox[14tabcolsep][s]{$displaystyle a_{#2}#1_1+dots+k_{#2}#1_n$}%

}

newcommand{?}{makebox[0pt]{$-1$}}

begin{vmatrix}mspace{8mu}

begin{matrix}

 0 & . & . &  0 & ak{alpha}{1} & . & . & ak{kappa}{1} \

 . & . & . &  . & widedots      & . & . & widedots      \

 0 & . & . &  0 & ak{alpha}{n} & . & . & ak{kappa}{n} \

? & . & . &  0 & alpha_{1}     & . & . & kappa_{1}     \

 . & . & . &  . & widedots      & . & . & widedots      \

 0 & . & . & ? & alpha_{n}     & . & . & kappa_{n}

end{matrix}mspace{3mu}

end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}


enter image description here



With dots and hdotsfor:



begin{equation*}

newcommand{ak}[2]{a_{#2}#1_1+dots+k_{#2}#1_n}

begin{vmatrix}

 0 & dots &  0 & ak{alpha}{1} & dots & ak{kappa}{1} \

hdotsfor{6} \

 0 & dots &  0 & ak{alpha}{n} & dots & ak{kappa}{n} \

-1 & dots &  0 & alpha_{1}     & dots & kappa_{1}     \

hdotsfor{6} \

 0 & dots & -1 & alpha_{n}     & dots & kappa_{n}

end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}


enter image description here






share|improve this answer


























  • Although I may not be able to decipher how your code works, it looks like the one with the capability of hiding the with of -1 fits my need. I have a feeling after perusing your code, I will understand better. Thank you.

    – user91822
    Dec 9 '18 at 0:18
















8














This seems a good approximation:



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}



usepackage{amsmath}



newcommand{widedots}{%

  .cleadershbox to 2tabcolsep{hss.hss}hfill.%

  hspace*{0pt}%

}



begin{document}



begin{equation*}

newcommand{ak}[2]{%

  makebox[14tabcolsep][s]{$displaystyle a_{#2}#1_1+dots+k_{#2}#1_n$}%

}

begin{vmatrix}

 0 & . & . &  0 & ak{alpha}{1} & . & . & ak{kappa}{1} \

 . & . & . &  . & widedots      & . & . & widedots      \

 0 & . & . &  0 & ak{alpha}{n} & . & . & ak{kappa}{n} \

-1 & . & . &  0 & alpha_{1}     & . & . & kappa_{1}     \

 . & . & . &  . & widedots      & . & . & widedots      \

 0 & . & . & -1 & alpha_{n}     & . & . & kappa_{n}

end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}


enter image description here



The value 14tabcolsep has been determined by first looking at the entries at their natural width.



Even better than the original if we make -1 to hide its width.



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}



usepackage{amsmath}



newcommand{widedots}{%

  .cleadershbox to 2tabcolsep{hss.hss}hfill.%

  hspace*{0pt}%

}



begin{document}



begin{equation*}

newcommand{ak}[2]{%

  makebox[14tabcolsep][s]{$displaystyle a_{#2}#1_1+dots+k_{#2}#1_n$}%

}

newcommand{?}{makebox[0pt]{$-1$}}

begin{vmatrix}mspace{8mu}

begin{matrix}

 0 & . & . &  0 & ak{alpha}{1} & . & . & ak{kappa}{1} \

 . & . & . &  . & widedots      & . & . & widedots      \

 0 & . & . &  0 & ak{alpha}{n} & . & . & ak{kappa}{n} \

? & . & . &  0 & alpha_{1}     & . & . & kappa_{1}     \

 . & . & . &  . & widedots      & . & . & widedots      \

 0 & . & . & ? & alpha_{n}     & . & . & kappa_{n}

end{matrix}mspace{3mu}

end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}


enter image description here



With dots and hdotsfor:



begin{equation*}

newcommand{ak}[2]{a_{#2}#1_1+dots+k_{#2}#1_n}

begin{vmatrix}

 0 & dots &  0 & ak{alpha}{1} & dots & ak{kappa}{1} \

hdotsfor{6} \

 0 & dots &  0 & ak{alpha}{n} & dots & ak{kappa}{n} \

-1 & dots &  0 & alpha_{1}     & dots & kappa_{1}     \

hdotsfor{6} \

 0 & dots & -1 & alpha_{n}     & dots & kappa_{n}

end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}


enter image description here






share|improve this answer


























  • Although I may not be able to decipher how your code works, it looks like the one with the capability of hiding the with of -1 fits my need. I have a feeling after perusing your code, I will understand better. Thank you.

    – user91822
    Dec 9 '18 at 0:18














8












8








8







This seems a good approximation:



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}



usepackage{amsmath}



newcommand{widedots}{%

  .cleadershbox to 2tabcolsep{hss.hss}hfill.%

  hspace*{0pt}%

}



begin{document}



begin{equation*}

newcommand{ak}[2]{%

  makebox[14tabcolsep][s]{$displaystyle a_{#2}#1_1+dots+k_{#2}#1_n$}%

}

begin{vmatrix}

 0 & . & . &  0 & ak{alpha}{1} & . & . & ak{kappa}{1} \

 . & . & . &  . & widedots      & . & . & widedots      \

 0 & . & . &  0 & ak{alpha}{n} & . & . & ak{kappa}{n} \

-1 & . & . &  0 & alpha_{1}     & . & . & kappa_{1}     \

 . & . & . &  . & widedots      & . & . & widedots      \

 0 & . & . & -1 & alpha_{n}     & . & . & kappa_{n}

end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}


enter image description here



The value 14tabcolsep has been determined by first looking at the entries at their natural width.



Even better than the original if we make -1 to hide its width.



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}



usepackage{amsmath}



newcommand{widedots}{%

  .cleadershbox to 2tabcolsep{hss.hss}hfill.%

  hspace*{0pt}%

}



begin{document}



begin{equation*}

newcommand{ak}[2]{%

  makebox[14tabcolsep][s]{$displaystyle a_{#2}#1_1+dots+k_{#2}#1_n$}%

}

newcommand{?}{makebox[0pt]{$-1$}}

begin{vmatrix}mspace{8mu}

begin{matrix}

 0 & . & . &  0 & ak{alpha}{1} & . & . & ak{kappa}{1} \

 . & . & . &  . & widedots      & . & . & widedots      \

 0 & . & . &  0 & ak{alpha}{n} & . & . & ak{kappa}{n} \

? & . & . &  0 & alpha_{1}     & . & . & kappa_{1}     \

 . & . & . &  . & widedots      & . & . & widedots      \

 0 & . & . & ? & alpha_{n}     & . & . & kappa_{n}

end{matrix}mspace{3mu}

end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}


enter image description here



With dots and hdotsfor:



begin{equation*}

newcommand{ak}[2]{a_{#2}#1_1+dots+k_{#2}#1_n}

begin{vmatrix}

 0 & dots &  0 & ak{alpha}{1} & dots & ak{kappa}{1} \

hdotsfor{6} \

 0 & dots &  0 & ak{alpha}{n} & dots & ak{kappa}{n} \

-1 & dots &  0 & alpha_{1}     & dots & kappa_{1}     \

hdotsfor{6} \

 0 & dots & -1 & alpha_{n}     & dots & kappa_{n}

end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}


enter image description here






share|improve this answer















This seems a good approximation:



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}



usepackage{amsmath}



newcommand{widedots}{%

  .cleadershbox to 2tabcolsep{hss.hss}hfill.%

  hspace*{0pt}%

}



begin{document}



begin{equation*}

newcommand{ak}[2]{%

  makebox[14tabcolsep][s]{$displaystyle a_{#2}#1_1+dots+k_{#2}#1_n$}%

}

begin{vmatrix}

 0 & . & . &  0 & ak{alpha}{1} & . & . & ak{kappa}{1} \

 . & . & . &  . & widedots      & . & . & widedots      \

 0 & . & . &  0 & ak{alpha}{n} & . & . & ak{kappa}{n} \

-1 & . & . &  0 & alpha_{1}     & . & . & kappa_{1}     \

 . & . & . &  . & widedots      & . & . & widedots      \

 0 & . & . & -1 & alpha_{n}     & . & . & kappa_{n}

end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}


enter image description here



The value 14tabcolsep has been determined by first looking at the entries at their natural width.



Even better than the original if we make -1 to hide its width.



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}



usepackage{amsmath}



newcommand{widedots}{%

  .cleadershbox to 2tabcolsep{hss.hss}hfill.%

  hspace*{0pt}%

}



begin{document}



begin{equation*}

newcommand{ak}[2]{%

  makebox[14tabcolsep][s]{$displaystyle a_{#2}#1_1+dots+k_{#2}#1_n$}%

}

newcommand{?}{makebox[0pt]{$-1$}}

begin{vmatrix}mspace{8mu}

begin{matrix}

 0 & . & . &  0 & ak{alpha}{1} & . & . & ak{kappa}{1} \

 . & . & . &  . & widedots      & . & . & widedots      \

 0 & . & . &  0 & ak{alpha}{n} & . & . & ak{kappa}{n} \

? & . & . &  0 & alpha_{1}     & . & . & kappa_{1}     \

 . & . & . &  . & widedots      & . & . & widedots      \

 0 & . & . & ? & alpha_{n}     & . & . & kappa_{n}

end{matrix}mspace{3mu}

end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}


enter image description here



With dots and hdotsfor:



begin{equation*}

newcommand{ak}[2]{a_{#2}#1_1+dots+k_{#2}#1_n}

begin{vmatrix}

 0 & dots &  0 & ak{alpha}{1} & dots & ak{kappa}{1} \

hdotsfor{6} \

 0 & dots &  0 & ak{alpha}{n} & dots & ak{kappa}{n} \

-1 & dots &  0 & alpha_{1}     & dots & kappa_{1}     \

hdotsfor{6} \

 0 & dots & -1 & alpha_{n}     & dots & kappa_{n}

end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}


enter image description here







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Dec 8 '18 at 22:05

























answered Dec 8 '18 at 21:53









egregegreg

719k8719053204




719k8719053204













  • Although I may not be able to decipher how your code works, it looks like the one with the capability of hiding the with of -1 fits my need. I have a feeling after perusing your code, I will understand better. Thank you.

    – user91822
    Dec 9 '18 at 0:18



















  • Although I may not be able to decipher how your code works, it looks like the one with the capability of hiding the with of -1 fits my need. I have a feeling after perusing your code, I will understand better. Thank you.

    – user91822
    Dec 9 '18 at 0:18

















Although I may not be able to decipher how your code works, it looks like the one with the capability of hiding the with of -1 fits my need. I have a feeling after perusing your code, I will understand better. Thank you.

– user91822
Dec 9 '18 at 0:18





Although I may not be able to decipher how your code works, it looks like the one with the capability of hiding the with of -1 fits my need. I have a feeling after perusing your code, I will understand better. Thank you.

– user91822
Dec 9 '18 at 0:18











4














One way is to manually put dots with some horizontal space.



enter image description here



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}

usepackage{amsmath}

begin{document}



begin{equation*}

        begin{vmatrix}

                0     &cdot &cdot &0     &a_{1} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} alpha_{n} &cdot &cdot &a_{1} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} kappa_{n} \

                cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot hfil hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot                               &cdot &cdot &cdot hfil hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot  \

                0     &cdot &cdot &0     &a_{n} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} alpha_{n} &cdot &cdot &a_{n} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} kappa_{n} \

                -1    &cdot &cdot &0     &alpha_{1}                                 &cdot &cdot &kappa_{1} \

                cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot hfil hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot                                      &cdot &cdot &cdot hfil hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot  \

                0     &cdot &cdot &-1    &alpha_{n}                                 &cdot &cdot &kappa_{n}

        end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}





share|improve this answer
























  • Honestly, I had never thought of using 'hfil'. Thank you for the pointer.

    – user91822
    Dec 9 '18 at 0:20
















4














One way is to manually put dots with some horizontal space.



enter image description here



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}

usepackage{amsmath}

begin{document}



begin{equation*}

        begin{vmatrix}

                0     &cdot &cdot &0     &a_{1} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} alpha_{n} &cdot &cdot &a_{1} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} kappa_{n} \

                cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot hfil hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot                               &cdot &cdot &cdot hfil hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot  \

                0     &cdot &cdot &0     &a_{n} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} alpha_{n} &cdot &cdot &a_{n} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} kappa_{n} \

                -1    &cdot &cdot &0     &alpha_{1}                                 &cdot &cdot &kappa_{1} \

                cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot hfil hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot                                      &cdot &cdot &cdot hfil hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot  \

                0     &cdot &cdot &-1    &alpha_{n}                                 &cdot &cdot &kappa_{n}

        end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}





share|improve this answer
























  • Honestly, I had never thought of using 'hfil'. Thank you for the pointer.

    – user91822
    Dec 9 '18 at 0:20














4












4








4







One way is to manually put dots with some horizontal space.



enter image description here



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}

usepackage{amsmath}

begin{document}



begin{equation*}

        begin{vmatrix}

                0     &cdot &cdot &0     &a_{1} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} alpha_{n} &cdot &cdot &a_{1} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} kappa_{n} \

                cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot hfil hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot                               &cdot &cdot &cdot hfil hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot  \

                0     &cdot &cdot &0     &a_{n} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} alpha_{n} &cdot &cdot &a_{n} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} kappa_{n} \

                -1    &cdot &cdot &0     &alpha_{1}                                 &cdot &cdot &kappa_{1} \

                cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot hfil hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot                                      &cdot &cdot &cdot hfil hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot  \

                0     &cdot &cdot &-1    &alpha_{n}                                 &cdot &cdot &kappa_{n}

        end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}





share|improve this answer













One way is to manually put dots with some horizontal space.



enter image description here



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}

usepackage{amsmath}

begin{document}



begin{equation*}

        begin{vmatrix}

                0     &cdot &cdot &0     &a_{1} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} alpha_{n} &cdot &cdot &a_{1} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} kappa_{n} \

                cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot hfil hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot                               &cdot &cdot &cdot hfil hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot  \

                0     &cdot &cdot &0     &a_{n} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} alpha_{n} &cdot &cdot &a_{n} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} kappa_{n} \

                -1    &cdot &cdot &0     &alpha_{1}                                 &cdot &cdot &kappa_{1} \

                cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot &cdot hfil hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot                                      &cdot &cdot &cdot hfil hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot hfil cdot  \

                0     &cdot &cdot &-1    &alpha_{n}                                 &cdot &cdot &kappa_{n}

        end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}






share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered Dec 8 '18 at 21:33









nidhinnidhin

3,3521927




3,3521927













  • Honestly, I had never thought of using 'hfil'. Thank you for the pointer.

    – user91822
    Dec 9 '18 at 0:20



















  • Honestly, I had never thought of using 'hfil'. Thank you for the pointer.

    – user91822
    Dec 9 '18 at 0:20

















Honestly, I had never thought of using 'hfil'. Thank you for the pointer.

– user91822
Dec 9 '18 at 0:20





Honestly, I had never thought of using 'hfil'. Thank you for the pointer.

– user91822
Dec 9 '18 at 0:20











3














Defining two newcommands twodts and fivedts for empty columns and rows can simplify the table. 



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}

usepackage{amsmath}



begin{document}



newcommand{twodts}{begin{tabular}{@{}cc@{}}$cdot$&$cdot$end{tabular}}

newcommand{fivedts}{begin{tabular}{@{}*5{c}@{}}$cdot$&$cdot$&$cdot$&$cdot$&$cdot$end{tabular}}



begin{equation*}

  begin{array}{|cccccc|}

    0     & twodts & 0     & a_1 alpha_1+ cdots +k_1 alpha_n & twodts & a_1 kappa_1+ cdots +k_1 kappa_n \

    cdot & twodts & cdot & fivedts                           & twodts & fivedts                           \

    0     & twodts & 0     & a_n alpha_1+ cdots +k_n alpha_n & twodts & a_n kappa_1+ cdots +k_n kappa_n \

    -1    & twodts & 0     & alpha_1                           & twodts & kappa_1                           \

    cdot & twodts & cdot & fivedts                           & twodts & fivedts                           \

    0     & twodts & -1    & alpha_n                           & twodts & kappa_n

  end{array}

end{equation*}



end{document}



enter image description here




Update:



You can easily adapt my answer to add six dots instead of five like this:



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}

usepackage{amsmath,array}



begin{document}



deftwocdots{$cdot$&$cdot$}

newcommand{twodts}{begin{tabular}{@{}cc@{}}twocdotsend{tabular}}

newcommand{sixdts}{begin{tabular}{@{}*6{c}@{}}twocdots&twocdots&twocdotsend{tabular}}



begin{equation*}

  begin{array}{|cccccc|}

    0     & twodts & 0     & a_1 alpha_1+ cdots +k_1 alpha_n & twodts & a_1 kappa_1+ cdots +k_1 kappa_n \

    cdot & twodts & cdot & sixdts                            & twodts & sixdts                            \

    0     & twodts & 0     & a_n alpha_1+ cdots +k_n alpha_n & twodts & a_n kappa_1+ cdots +k_n kappa_n \

    -1    & twodts & 0     & alpha_1                           & twodts & kappa_1                           \

    cdot & twodts & cdot & sixdts                            & twodts & sixdts                            \

    0     & twodts & -1    & alpha_n                           & twodts & kappa_n

  end{array}

end{equation*}



end{document}



enter image description here







share|improve this answer


























  • This looks pretty simple and good solution. Since there is still some gaps that seems to be able to put one more dot when using the `fivedts' command, I wonder if this command can be modded to accommodate the gap. I tried to modify with a "sixdots" and it does not work, unfortunately. Anyway, thank you too.

    – user91822
    Dec 9 '18 at 0:24











  • Please see my update for doing this.

    – AboAmmar
    Dec 9 '18 at 16:31
















3














Defining two newcommands twodts and fivedts for empty columns and rows can simplify the table. 



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}

usepackage{amsmath}



begin{document}



newcommand{twodts}{begin{tabular}{@{}cc@{}}$cdot$&$cdot$end{tabular}}

newcommand{fivedts}{begin{tabular}{@{}*5{c}@{}}$cdot$&$cdot$&$cdot$&$cdot$&$cdot$end{tabular}}



begin{equation*}

  begin{array}{|cccccc|}

    0     & twodts & 0     & a_1 alpha_1+ cdots +k_1 alpha_n & twodts & a_1 kappa_1+ cdots +k_1 kappa_n \

    cdot & twodts & cdot & fivedts                           & twodts & fivedts                           \

    0     & twodts & 0     & a_n alpha_1+ cdots +k_n alpha_n & twodts & a_n kappa_1+ cdots +k_n kappa_n \

    -1    & twodts & 0     & alpha_1                           & twodts & kappa_1                           \

    cdot & twodts & cdot & fivedts                           & twodts & fivedts                           \

    0     & twodts & -1    & alpha_n                           & twodts & kappa_n

  end{array}

end{equation*}



end{document}



enter image description here




Update:



You can easily adapt my answer to add six dots instead of five like this:



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}

usepackage{amsmath,array}



begin{document}



deftwocdots{$cdot$&$cdot$}

newcommand{twodts}{begin{tabular}{@{}cc@{}}twocdotsend{tabular}}

newcommand{sixdts}{begin{tabular}{@{}*6{c}@{}}twocdots&twocdots&twocdotsend{tabular}}



begin{equation*}

  begin{array}{|cccccc|}

    0     & twodts & 0     & a_1 alpha_1+ cdots +k_1 alpha_n & twodts & a_1 kappa_1+ cdots +k_1 kappa_n \

    cdot & twodts & cdot & sixdts                            & twodts & sixdts                            \

    0     & twodts & 0     & a_n alpha_1+ cdots +k_n alpha_n & twodts & a_n kappa_1+ cdots +k_n kappa_n \

    -1    & twodts & 0     & alpha_1                           & twodts & kappa_1                           \

    cdot & twodts & cdot & sixdts                            & twodts & sixdts                            \

    0     & twodts & -1    & alpha_n                           & twodts & kappa_n

  end{array}

end{equation*}



end{document}



enter image description here







share|improve this answer


























  • This looks pretty simple and good solution. Since there is still some gaps that seems to be able to put one more dot when using the `fivedts' command, I wonder if this command can be modded to accommodate the gap. I tried to modify with a "sixdots" and it does not work, unfortunately. Anyway, thank you too.

    – user91822
    Dec 9 '18 at 0:24











  • Please see my update for doing this.

    – AboAmmar
    Dec 9 '18 at 16:31














3












3








3







Defining two newcommands twodts and fivedts for empty columns and rows can simplify the table. 



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}

usepackage{amsmath}



begin{document}



newcommand{twodts}{begin{tabular}{@{}cc@{}}$cdot$&$cdot$end{tabular}}

newcommand{fivedts}{begin{tabular}{@{}*5{c}@{}}$cdot$&$cdot$&$cdot$&$cdot$&$cdot$end{tabular}}



begin{equation*}

  begin{array}{|cccccc|}

    0     & twodts & 0     & a_1 alpha_1+ cdots +k_1 alpha_n & twodts & a_1 kappa_1+ cdots +k_1 kappa_n \

    cdot & twodts & cdot & fivedts                           & twodts & fivedts                           \

    0     & twodts & 0     & a_n alpha_1+ cdots +k_n alpha_n & twodts & a_n kappa_1+ cdots +k_n kappa_n \

    -1    & twodts & 0     & alpha_1                           & twodts & kappa_1                           \

    cdot & twodts & cdot & fivedts                           & twodts & fivedts                           \

    0     & twodts & -1    & alpha_n                           & twodts & kappa_n

  end{array}

end{equation*}



end{document}



enter image description here




Update:



You can easily adapt my answer to add six dots instead of five like this:



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}

usepackage{amsmath,array}



begin{document}



deftwocdots{$cdot$&$cdot$}

newcommand{twodts}{begin{tabular}{@{}cc@{}}twocdotsend{tabular}}

newcommand{sixdts}{begin{tabular}{@{}*6{c}@{}}twocdots&twocdots&twocdotsend{tabular}}



begin{equation*}

  begin{array}{|cccccc|}

    0     & twodts & 0     & a_1 alpha_1+ cdots +k_1 alpha_n & twodts & a_1 kappa_1+ cdots +k_1 kappa_n \

    cdot & twodts & cdot & sixdts                            & twodts & sixdts                            \

    0     & twodts & 0     & a_n alpha_1+ cdots +k_n alpha_n & twodts & a_n kappa_1+ cdots +k_n kappa_n \

    -1    & twodts & 0     & alpha_1                           & twodts & kappa_1                           \

    cdot & twodts & cdot & sixdts                            & twodts & sixdts                            \

    0     & twodts & -1    & alpha_n                           & twodts & kappa_n

  end{array}

end{equation*}



end{document}



enter image description here







share|improve this answer















Defining two newcommands twodts and fivedts for empty columns and rows can simplify the table. 



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}

usepackage{amsmath}



begin{document}



newcommand{twodts}{begin{tabular}{@{}cc@{}}$cdot$&$cdot$end{tabular}}

newcommand{fivedts}{begin{tabular}{@{}*5{c}@{}}$cdot$&$cdot$&$cdot$&$cdot$&$cdot$end{tabular}}



begin{equation*}

  begin{array}{|cccccc|}

    0     & twodts & 0     & a_1 alpha_1+ cdots +k_1 alpha_n & twodts & a_1 kappa_1+ cdots +k_1 kappa_n \

    cdot & twodts & cdot & fivedts                           & twodts & fivedts                           \

    0     & twodts & 0     & a_n alpha_1+ cdots +k_n alpha_n & twodts & a_n kappa_1+ cdots +k_n kappa_n \

    -1    & twodts & 0     & alpha_1                           & twodts & kappa_1                           \

    cdot & twodts & cdot & fivedts                           & twodts & fivedts                           \

    0     & twodts & -1    & alpha_n                           & twodts & kappa_n

  end{array}

end{equation*}



end{document}



enter image description here




Update:



You can easily adapt my answer to add six dots instead of five like this:



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}

usepackage{amsmath,array}



begin{document}



deftwocdots{$cdot$&$cdot$}

newcommand{twodts}{begin{tabular}{@{}cc@{}}twocdotsend{tabular}}

newcommand{sixdts}{begin{tabular}{@{}*6{c}@{}}twocdots&twocdots&twocdotsend{tabular}}



begin{equation*}

  begin{array}{|cccccc|}

    0     & twodts & 0     & a_1 alpha_1+ cdots +k_1 alpha_n & twodts & a_1 kappa_1+ cdots +k_1 kappa_n \

    cdot & twodts & cdot & sixdts                            & twodts & sixdts                            \

    0     & twodts & 0     & a_n alpha_1+ cdots +k_n alpha_n & twodts & a_n kappa_1+ cdots +k_n kappa_n \

    -1    & twodts & 0     & alpha_1                           & twodts & kappa_1                           \

    cdot & twodts & cdot & sixdts                            & twodts & sixdts                            \

    0     & twodts & -1    & alpha_n                           & twodts & kappa_n

  end{array}

end{equation*}



end{document}



enter image description here








share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Dec 9 '18 at 16:29

























answered Dec 8 '18 at 22:19









AboAmmarAboAmmar

33.6k22883




33.6k22883













  • This looks pretty simple and good solution. Since there is still some gaps that seems to be able to put one more dot when using the `fivedts' command, I wonder if this command can be modded to accommodate the gap. I tried to modify with a "sixdots" and it does not work, unfortunately. Anyway, thank you too.

    – user91822
    Dec 9 '18 at 0:24











  • Please see my update for doing this.

    – AboAmmar
    Dec 9 '18 at 16:31



















  • This looks pretty simple and good solution. Since there is still some gaps that seems to be able to put one more dot when using the `fivedts' command, I wonder if this command can be modded to accommodate the gap. I tried to modify with a "sixdots" and it does not work, unfortunately. Anyway, thank you too.

    – user91822
    Dec 9 '18 at 0:24











  • Please see my update for doing this.

    – AboAmmar
    Dec 9 '18 at 16:31

















This looks pretty simple and good solution. Since there is still some gaps that seems to be able to put one more dot when using the `fivedts' command, I wonder if this command can be modded to accommodate the gap. I tried to modify with a "sixdots" and it does not work, unfortunately. Anyway, thank you too.

– user91822
Dec 9 '18 at 0:24





This looks pretty simple and good solution. Since there is still some gaps that seems to be able to put one more dot when using the `fivedts' command, I wonder if this command can be modded to accommodate the gap. I tried to modify with a "sixdots" and it does not work, unfortunately. Anyway, thank you too.

– user91822
Dec 9 '18 at 0:24













Please see my update for doing this.

– AboAmmar
Dec 9 '18 at 16:31





Please see my update for doing this.

– AboAmmar
Dec 9 '18 at 16:31











1














Would this be acceptable?



enter image description here



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}



usepackage{amsmath}



begin{document}



begin{equation*}

           begin{vmatrix}

            0     &cdots &0     &a_{1} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} alpha_{n} &cdots     &a_{1} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} kappa_{n} \

            vdots &ddots &vdots &vdots &ddots  &vdots \

            0     &cdots & 0     &a_{n} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} alpha_{n} &cdots  &a_{n} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} kappa_{n} \

            -1    &cdots &0     &alpha_{1}  &cdots &kappa_{1} \

            vdots &ddots &vdots &vdots   &ddots &vdots \

            0     &cdots & -1    &alpha_{n}  &cdots &kappa_{n}

    end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}





share|improve this answer



















  • 1





    This is I usually do and I don't think it will do for me. Sorry and I try to stick closer to the example I posted above. Anyway, thank you.

    – user91822
    Dec 9 '18 at 0:25


















1














Would this be acceptable?



enter image description here



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}



usepackage{amsmath}



begin{document}



begin{equation*}

           begin{vmatrix}

            0     &cdots &0     &a_{1} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} alpha_{n} &cdots     &a_{1} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} kappa_{n} \

            vdots &ddots &vdots &vdots &ddots  &vdots \

            0     &cdots & 0     &a_{n} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} alpha_{n} &cdots  &a_{n} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} kappa_{n} \

            -1    &cdots &0     &alpha_{1}  &cdots &kappa_{1} \

            vdots &ddots &vdots &vdots   &ddots &vdots \

            0     &cdots & -1    &alpha_{n}  &cdots &kappa_{n}

    end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}





share|improve this answer



















  • 1





    This is I usually do and I don't think it will do for me. Sorry and I try to stick closer to the example I posted above. Anyway, thank you.

    – user91822
    Dec 9 '18 at 0:25
















1












1








1







Would this be acceptable?



enter image description here



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}



usepackage{amsmath}



begin{document}



begin{equation*}

           begin{vmatrix}

            0     &cdots &0     &a_{1} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} alpha_{n} &cdots     &a_{1} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} kappa_{n} \

            vdots &ddots &vdots &vdots &ddots  &vdots \

            0     &cdots & 0     &a_{n} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} alpha_{n} &cdots  &a_{n} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} kappa_{n} \

            -1    &cdots &0     &alpha_{1}  &cdots &kappa_{1} \

            vdots &ddots &vdots &vdots   &ddots &vdots \

            0     &cdots & -1    &alpha_{n}  &cdots &kappa_{n}

    end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}





share|improve this answer













Would this be acceptable?



enter image description here



documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}



usepackage{amsmath}



begin{document}



begin{equation*}

           begin{vmatrix}

            0     &cdots &0     &a_{1} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} alpha_{n} &cdots     &a_{1} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{1} kappa_{n} \

            vdots &ddots &vdots &vdots &ddots  &vdots \

            0     &cdots & 0     &a_{n} alpha_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} alpha_{n} &cdots  &a_{n} kappa_{1}+ cdots +k_{n} kappa_{n} \

            -1    &cdots &0     &alpha_{1}  &cdots &kappa_{1} \

            vdots &ddots &vdots &vdots   &ddots &vdots \

            0     &cdots & -1    &alpha_{n}  &cdots &kappa_{n}

    end{vmatrix}

end{equation*}



end{document}






share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered Dec 8 '18 at 21:52









prt13463prt13463

1407




1407








  • 1





    This is I usually do and I don't think it will do for me. Sorry and I try to stick closer to the example I posted above. Anyway, thank you.

    – user91822
    Dec 9 '18 at 0:25
















  • 1





    This is I usually do and I don't think it will do for me. Sorry and I try to stick closer to the example I posted above. Anyway, thank you.

    – user91822
    Dec 9 '18 at 0:25










1




1





This is I usually do and I don't think it will do for me. Sorry and I try to stick closer to the example I posted above. Anyway, thank you.

– user91822
Dec 9 '18 at 0:25







This is I usually do and I don't think it will do for me. Sorry and I try to stick closer to the example I posted above. Anyway, thank you.

– user91822
Dec 9 '18 at 0:25




















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














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f463868%2fempty-elements-as-dots-in-matrix%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

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







-

Popular posts from this blog

Bundesstraße 106

Image
Dieser Artikel beschreibt die Bundesstraße 106 in Deutschland. Zur gleichnamigen Straße in Österreich siehe Mölltal Straße. Vorlage:Infobox hochrangige Straße/Wartung/DE-B Bundesstraße 106 in Deutschland Karte Basisdaten Betreiber: Deutschland  Bundesrepublik Deutschland Straßenbeginn: Wismar ( 53° 54′  N , 11° 24′  O 53.900536 11.396875 ) Straßenende: Schwerin ( 53° 36′  N , 11° 24′  O 53.592785 11.404892 ) Gesamtlänge: 40,7 km Bundesland: Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Ausbauzustand: zweistreifig [1] Bundesstraße 106 in Schwerin (Umgehungsstraße) Straßenverlauf Land Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Landkreis Nordwestmecklenburg Ortsumgehung Wismar Wallensteingraben über   Dorf Mecklenburg Wallensteingraben Groß Stieten Bad Kleinen OT Niendorf Bahnstrecke Lübeck–Bad Kleinen Zickhusen Lübstorf Klein Trebbow OT Kirch Stück
Read more

Verónica Boquete

Image
Verónica Boquete im Trikot der Nationalmannschaft (2013) Personalia Name Verónica Boquete Giadans Geburtstag 9. April 1987 Geburtsort Santiago de Compostela, Spanien Größe 159 cm Position Mittelfeld / Sturm Juniorinnen Jahre Station 2001–2005 Xuventú Aguiño Frauen Jahre Station Spiele (Tore) 1 2005–2008 Prainsa Zaragoza 83 (40) 2008–2010 Espanyol Barcelona 53 (30) 2010 Buffalo Flash 9 0 (9) 2010 Chicago Red Stars 3 0 (1) 2010–2011 Espanyol Barcelona 26 (41) 2011 Philadelphia Independence 13 0 (5) 2011 Energija Woronesch 5 0 (1) 2012–2014 Tyresö FF 39 (14) 2014 Portland Thorns FC 15 0 (4) 2014–2015 1. FFC Frankfurt 23 0 (7) 2015–2016 FC Bayern München 9 0 (0) 2016–2018 Paris Saint-Germain 31 0 (8) 2018 Peking BG Phoenix 2019– Utah Royals FC 0 0 (0) Nationalmannschaft Jahre Auswahl
Read more

Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten

Image
Die Lage des Ida-Boy-Ed-Gartens, rot markiert Der Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten Der Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten, Blick von der Wakenitzmauer durch das Tor in der Stadtmauer Der Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten ist eine Straße der Lübecker Altstadt. Inhaltsverzeichnis 1 Lage 2 Geschichte 3 Literatur 4 Weblinks Lage | Der etwa 90 Meter lange Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten befindet sich an der nördlichen Spitze der Altstadtinsel, vor dem Burgtor. Die in einem Bogen durch eine Grünanlage hangaufwärts führende Straße verbindet die Wakenitzmauer mit der Burgtorbrücke. Geschichte | Der heutige Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten wurde ursprünglich als Verlängerung der Wakenitzmauer angelegt. 1903 wurde in den erhaltenen Teil der mittelalterlichen Stadtmauer, an dem die Wakenitzmauer bei der Einmündung der Kaiserstraße begann, ein Tor mit einem großen Bogen für die Durchführung der Straße und zwei kleineren seitlichen Öffnungen für Fußgänger gebrochen, um für die neu errichteten Wohnhäuser in diesem Bereich
Read more