Share via

Possible bug in Formula Editor

Anonymous
2021-10-15T11:57:53+00:00

I'm trying to enter mathematical formulas in word using the formula editor.

Specifically, I'm trying to enter \hat{x}_t in linear latex format, but upon conversion to professional, word makes \widehat{x_t} out of it which is obviously wrong, the hat should only be on the x. Similarly, \mathbf{x}_t is converted to \mathbf{x}_\mathbf{t}.

I can enter the correct format when using the buttons from the ribbon which, however, is not very productive. However, once I convert the correctly displayed formula to linear, it shows {\hat{x}}_{t}. So I can deal with this, but it's not nice. One can also spell {\mathbf{x}}_{t} to get the correct professional result, but converting it back to linear from professional results in \mathbf{x}_t again ....

On the same line P_{t|t}=\mathcal{N} is invariably converted and displayed as P_{t|t=\mathcal{N}} and I have not found a work around yet.

Are thus just bugs, or am I doing something wrong? I do have fairly good experience in LaTeX and am pretty sure my syntax is not obscure.

Any help is greatly appreciated.

Microsoft 365 and Office | Word | For business | Windows

Locked Question. This question was migrated from the Microsoft Support Community. You can vote on whether it's helpful, but you can't add comments or replies or follow the question.

0 comments

11 answers

Sort by: Most helpful
Most helpful Newest Oldest
  1. Anonymous
    2021-10-18T07:12:59+00:00

    I fear I may not have explained well enough what is the problem here. Pls see the recording below. Clearly, the formula changes when changing between professional and linear format several times. This cannot be correct behavior.

    Thanks again for your consideration.

    Was this answer helpful?

    1 person found this answer helpful.
    0 comments
  2. Anonymous
    2021-10-15T18:54:53+00:00

    Hi Ivy,

    thanks a lot, that looks better, but is still not fully correct.

    The subscripted t's shouldn't be bold though, while \mu and \Sigma should be bold. And (non-)boldness should stay no matter how often I switch between linear mode and professional mode, shouldn't it?

    I'm surprised at the really verbose syntax of t|t as \left.t\right|t - I don't normally need this in LaTeX - checked in overleaf or markdown - why is that necessary in Word?

    Best

    Joerg

    Was this answer helpful?

    0 comments
  3. Anonymous
    2021-10-15T18:27:03+00:00

    Hi JoergRei，

    May I know if the below equations are correct?

    Welcome to post back if you need further help.

    Best Regards,

    Ivy

    Was this answer helpful?

    0 comments
  4. Anonymous
    2021-10-15T17:55:27+00:00

    Thanks a lot for your help,

    so it seems that \mathbit instead of \mathbf works a bit better - pun intended ...

    Now pls. try {\mathbit{x}}_t for a bold x with a non-bold subscript t. Then change to professional format and back again to linear format - suddenly the subscript is also bold ...

    The other minimal example that gives still problems is P_{t|t}=\mathcal{N} and for some real fun try P_{t|t}=\mathcal{N}({\mathbf{x}}_t;{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_{t|t}, {\mathbf{\Sigma}}_{t|t}) which should show up as

    Notice the bold x, bold mu and bold Sigma and the caligraphic N

    Thanks a lot again for your help.

    Was this answer helpful?

    0 comments
  5. Anonymous
    2021-10-15T17:00:20+00:00

    Hi

    Thanks for posting in our community.

    We found that if we use the text that you provided, we did have the same result as yours. But you want the hat should only be on the X, we suggest you use this text and see the result:

    About other math equations, could you provide the original equations so that we can help you convert them to Liner LaTex format in Word?

    Best Regards,

    Ivy

    Was this answer helpful?

    0 comments