# Could “const for all” mean the constants are different?

I read this in a paper:

$$\lambda_m = \mbox{const} \quad \mbox{for all} \quad m \in \left\{1,2,\cdots,M\right\}$$

Does this mean that all $\lambda_m$ are the same, or that they're all constant functions, but with different constants?

The context:

-
Without context, this is impossible to answer. –  Phira May 30 '12 at 15:03
It's from Some Improvements in the Measurement of Variable Latency Acoustically Evoked Potentials in Human EEG. I'll supply some more context. –  Johan May 30 '12 at 15:10
I'm not allowed to post images, so could someone edit this into the question? i.stack.imgur.com/ZIoIe.png –  Johan May 30 '12 at 15:14
Usually this notation means that each $\lambda_m$ is constant, but the constants can be different. Otherwise the constant should be given a name, e.g. $\lambda_m = C$ where $C$ is constant, or they could just write $\lambda_1 = \cdots = \lambda_m = \text{const}$. –  Yuval Filmus May 30 '12 at 15:22
@Mark: even so it is worth saving a click –  Henry May 30 '12 at 17:35
show 1 more comment

I agree with Yuval Filmus's comment both in the abstract and in the specific. That is, generally we would write something like $$\lambda_n = \lambda_m \qquad \forall n,m\in\mathbb{N}$$ or $$\lambda_1 = \lambda_2 = \cdots = \lambda_n = \cdots$$ or $$\lambda_n = C \qquad \forall n \in\mathbb{N}$$ if we want it to mean that all of the $\lambda_n$ are equal.
This is also the case, I believe, in the context. Note that the author refers to functions $e_m(k) = e(k - \lambda_m)$ and states that
i.e., all $e_m(k)$ have identical shape and can differ only by a time-shift (latency) $\lambda_m$.
If all $\lambda_m$ were to be the same constant, there's hardly any point in defining $e_m$'s as different functions! Hence it is more natural to interpret the statement as requiring that $\lambda_m$ being independent of $k$, with the possibility that $\lambda_n\neq \lambda_m$.