Empty elements as dots in matrix











up vote
6
down vote

favorite












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 at 21:47















up vote
6
down vote

favorite












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 at 21:47













up vote
6
down vote

favorite









up vote
6
down vote

favorite











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 at 21:18









user91822

1354




1354












  • 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 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 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 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 at 21:47










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
8
down vote



accepted










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 at 0:18


















up vote
4
down vote













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 at 0:20


















up vote
3
down vote













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 at 0:24










  • Please see my update for doing this.
    – AboAmmar
    Dec 9 at 16:31


















up vote
1
down vote













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 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',
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








up vote
8
down vote



accepted










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 at 0:18















up vote
8
down vote



accepted










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 at 0:18













up vote
8
down vote



accepted







up vote
8
down vote



accepted






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 at 22:05

























answered Dec 8 at 21:53









egreg

704k8618763155




704k8618763155












  • 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 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 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 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 at 0:18










up vote
4
down vote













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 at 0:20















up vote
4
down vote













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 at 0:20













up vote
4
down vote










up vote
4
down vote









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 at 21:33









nidhin

3,279927




3,279927












  • Honestly, I had never thought of using 'hfil'. Thank you for the pointer.
    – user91822
    Dec 9 at 0:20


















  • Honestly, I had never thought of using 'hfil'. Thank you for the pointer.
    – user91822
    Dec 9 at 0:20
















Honestly, I had never thought of using 'hfil'. Thank you for the pointer.
– user91822
Dec 9 at 0:20




Honestly, I had never thought of using 'hfil'. Thank you for the pointer.
– user91822
Dec 9 at 0:20










up vote
3
down vote













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 at 0:24










  • Please see my update for doing this.
    – AboAmmar
    Dec 9 at 16:31















up vote
3
down vote













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 at 0:24










  • Please see my update for doing this.
    – AboAmmar
    Dec 9 at 16:31













up vote
3
down vote










up vote
3
down vote









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 at 16:29

























answered Dec 8 at 22:19









AboAmmar

32.1k22781




32.1k22781












  • 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 at 0:24










  • Please see my update for doing this.
    – AboAmmar
    Dec 9 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 at 0:24










  • Please see my update for doing this.
    – AboAmmar
    Dec 9 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 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 at 0:24












Please see my update for doing this.
– AboAmmar
Dec 9 at 16:31




Please see my update for doing this.
– AboAmmar
Dec 9 at 16:31










up vote
1
down vote













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 at 0:25

















up vote
1
down vote













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 at 0:25















up vote
1
down vote










up vote
1
down vote









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 at 21:52









prt13463

765




765








  • 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 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 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 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 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.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • 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

How did Captain America manage to do this?

Image
2 How does Captain America lift Thor's hammer? In Avengers: Age of Ultron , he is not worthy but how he is worthy in this film. plot-explanation marvel-cinematic-universe avengers-age-of-ultron avengers-endgame share | improve this question edited 19 mins ago A J ♦ 42.7k 16 229 246 asked 39 mins ago Andi AR Andi AR 325 1 4 14
Read more

迪纳利

Image
迪纳利峰 位于迪纳利国家公园和保留区的迪纳利峰（旧名麦金利峰） 最高点 海拔 20,237英尺（6,168米）   NGVD 29 . [1] [2] 相對高度 20,073英尺（6,118米） 列表 各洲最高峰列表 特独立山峰 各国最高点列表 美国最高点  排名第一 [3] 坐标 63°04′10″N 151°00′27″W  /  63.06944°N 151.00750°W  / 63.06944; -151.00750  ( Mount McKinley ) 坐标： 63°04′10″N 151°00′27″W  /  63.06944°N 151.00750°W  / 63.06944; -151.00750  ( Mount McKinley )   地理 位置   美國阿拉斯加州迪纳利自治市镇 迪纳利国家公园和保留区 山脈 阿拉斯加山脉 攀山 首次登頂 （ 英语 ： First ascent ） 1913年6月7日 哈德逊·史塔克 哈里·卡斯坦斯 沃尔特·哈珀 罗伯特·塔特姆 最簡路線 西坡路线（攀登冰川/雪） 迪纳利 （北阿萨巴斯卡语支、 英语： Denali ， / d ᵻ ˈ n ɑː l i / ，直译“高山”），1917年至2015年官方名称为 麦金利山 （另译作 麦金利峰 ， 英语： Mount McKinley ），位于阿拉斯加州东南部、阿拉斯加山脉中段，海拔6194米，是北美洲最高峰，也是美国的最高峰。它的俄语名称是 Большая Гора ， 罗马化：Bolshaya Gora ，意思是“大山”。 迪纳利山地区拥有变幻莫测的高山风、典型的北极植被以及野生动植物。这里大部分地区终年积雪，山间经常浓雾不断，雾气在皑皑白雪中缭绕弥漫时，几百米之外的景物便不可见。夏季，迪纳利山的青青山坡上鲜花盛开，紫色的杜鹃和精巧的铃状石南花随处可见。迪纳利山还是世界登山爱好者的汇集之地。每年5月到7月有数百人登山，只有一半不到的人能登顶成功。一次登山约花3个星期。 2015年8月31日，美國政府宣佈將山名由“麦金利山”改回原名“迪纳利山”。美國內政部發表聲
Read more

南乌拉尔铁路局

Image
南乌拉尔铁路局 Южно-Уральская железная дорога 成立 1934年1月4日 国家   蘇聯（1934年—1991年）   俄羅斯（1991年—） 总部 车里雅宾斯克 隶属 俄罗斯铁路股份公司 路局代码 80 铁路里程 4,934.9公里 奖项 网址 http://yuzd.rzd.ru/ 查 论 编 南乌拉尔铁路局 （俄语： Южно-Уральская железная дорога ， 羅馬化： Yuzhno-Uralskaya zheleznaya doroga ，简称 ЮУЖД ）是俄罗斯铁路股份公司属下的铁路管理局之一，总部位于车里雅宾斯克，负责管辖俄罗斯联邦乌拉尔南部地区的铁路系统，范围包括奥伦堡州、车里雅宾斯克州、库尔干州的大部分铁路，以及萨马拉州、斯维尔德洛夫斯克州、巴什科尔托斯坦共和国的少部分铁路，并有部分铁路延伸至或穿过哈萨克斯坦境内。南乌拉尔铁路局的营业里程为4,934.9公里，与伏尔加铁路局、古比雪夫铁路局、斯维尔德洛夫斯克铁路局、西西伯利亚铁路局相邻，并与南方的哈萨克斯坦铁路连接。 外部链接 （俄文） Южно-Уральская железная дорога — филиал ОАО РЖД （俄文） 南乌拉尔铁路局管辖路线图（一） （俄文） 南乌拉尔铁路局管辖路线图（二） 查 论 编 俄罗斯铁路（集团）股份公司 十月铁路局 · 莫斯科铁路局 · 北高加索铁路局 · 高尔基铁路局 · 古比雪夫铁路局 · 北方铁路局 · 伏尔加铁路局 · 东南铁路局 · 斯维尔德洛夫斯克铁路局 · 南乌拉尔铁路局 · 西西伯利亚铁路局 · 克拉斯诺亚尔斯克铁路局 · 东西伯利亚铁路局 · 后贝加尔铁路局 · 远东铁路局 · 加里宁格勒铁路局 This page is only for reference, If you need detailed information, please check here
Read more