Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I have two vectors of variables, $X$, and $\beta_0$ that I am writing about.

Each are indexed by $i=1,\ldots,n$

If I want to talk about $X_i$ and $\beta_{0_i}$, using \beta_{0_i}, the $i$ on the beta is too small to see. Even if I use \beta{_0}_i: $\beta{_0}_i$, the $0$ seems to get in the way of making a visual comparison. Is there any reason not to use $\beta_{0,i}$, since the $0$ is not really an index?

At this point, I am sure that I am over-thinking this, but before I go with $\beta_{0,i}$, I'd appreciate feedback - and other suggestions as well.

share|cite|improve this question
Do you mean $0$ (zero) or $o$ (oh)? The title and the post are inconsistent. – Asaf Karagila Jun 28 '12 at 20:50
Honestly, I would suggest $(\beta_0)_i$. – Arturo Magidin Jun 28 '12 at 20:51
@AsafKaragila I call it "beta naught", so I suppose "zero" – Abe Jun 28 '12 at 20:51
@ArturoMagidin I am reluctant to use that because it appears with too many other parentheses, such as $Var(g(\beta{_0}_i))$ – Abe Jun 28 '12 at 20:53
Then I would suggest using the index as a superindex instead of a subindex (with suitable explanation ahead of time). – Arturo Magidin Jun 28 '12 at 20:54

That (or any other easy to read notation) is perfectly fine, so long as you explain it clearly. I also happen to be growing more and more fond of a raised index as well, so perhaps something like $\beta_0 = (\beta_0^1, \beta_0^2, \dots)$, or the other standard $(\beta_0)_i$.

share|cite|improve this answer

If you’re not going to have $\beta_1$, $\beta_2$, etc., then use a single different letter. If there will be all those other betas, you might even consider using prefixes, such as $_2\beta_i$ or $^3\beta_i$.

I might also point out that any notation has no intrinsic meaning: you have to explain any notation you use. And clearly, please!

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.