☰

为什么不显示标题

tag-icon • tag-icon ltablex
为什么不显示标题

我使用 ltabulex 制作长表格。表格显示正常，但标题未显示在表格上方。有人知道原因吗？

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{tabularx}
\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{multirow}
\usepackage{ltxtable}
\usepackage{ltablex}
\usepackage(tabularx)
\begin{document}

\begin{ltablex}
\small
  \caption{Summary of Multipliers}\label{Lit Summary table}
    \begin{tabularx}{\textwidth}{p{2cm}p{2cm}XX}
    \hline\hline
    \textbf{Study} & \textbf{Geographical Location and Level} & \textbf{Identification} & \textbf{Multiplier Result} \\ \hline \hline
    \citeA{acconcia2014mafia} & Italy Local Level & Looked at a situation when local governments were dismissed and public funding was severely reduced in Italy is response to being infiltrated by the mafia.   & 1.5 on impact, growing to 1.9 when dynamic effects are included. \\ \hline
    \citeA{auerbach} & US Federal Level & Extended SVAR approach & 0-0.5 in Expansion and 1.0-1.5 in Recession \\ \hline \citeA{Barro} & US Federal Level & Spending multipliers are identified primarily from variations in defense spending, especially changes associated with buildups and aftermaths of wars. & 0.4-0.5 contemporaneously, 0.6-0.7 2 years later and if multiplier is permanent then this adds 0.1-0.2 to the multiplier  \\ \hline \citeA{Clemens2012} & US State Level & Instrumented on the variation in the strictness states' balanced budget requirements to determine the level as a means of measuring the level of spending cuts during a recession & 0.4 however it may be higher if states receive windfall funding \\ \hline \citeA{fazzari2015state} & US State Level & Bayesian model comparison and generalized impulse response analysis to test for nonlinearities in the responses of output to government spending & 0.8 for states with low slack and 1.6 for states with high slack \\ \hline \citeA{fishback2015multiplier} & US State Level & Panel of annual Federal expenditure in each State during the 1930s & 0.96 when Federal transfer payments are excluded falling to 0.83 when they are included  \\ \hline \citeA{Ilzetzki} & 44 countries around the world (20 high-income and 24 low income) & SVAR approach on a novel dataset & High income countries tend to have a statistically significant positive fiscal multiplier while the opposite is true of developing countries and Investment in infrastructure could lead to a higher multiplier \\ \hline \citeA{michaillat2014theory} & US Federal Level & Simple search-and-matching model to highlight the key economic forces of the multiplier & The multiplier doubles when unemployment rises from 5\% to 8\% \\ \hline  \citeA{nakamura2014fiscal} & US State Level & Instrumented on the fact that when national spending on the military rises by 1 percentage point of GDP in the US, different states, depending on their exposure to military spending, experience different levels of military build-up & 1.5 growing to 2.0 at zero lower bound \\ \hline     \citeA{ramey2011identifying} & US Federal Level & Looked at the military build-up during significant wars throughout the 20\textsuperscript{th} century in the US &  0.6-1.2 \\ \hline   \citeA{Ramey2018} & US Federal Level & Analysed quarterly US data over a 120 year period using the local projection method developed by \citeA{Jorda} & 0.3-1.5 depending on the methodology and robustness check they used.  \\ \hline \citeA{shoag2010impact} & US State Level & Instrumented on the windfall gains that US states receive from investing public pension funds & Baseline multiplier over 2, rising to over 3 in times of economic slack \\ \hline \citeA{suarez2016estimating} & US County Level & Instrumented on Federal transfers to local counties due to changes in population forecasts between Census and Non-census years & 1.7-2 rising in counties experiencing economic slack \\ \hline 
    \end{tabularx}
\end{ltablex}

\end{document}

答案1

使用xltabular同名的包和环境：

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{multirow}
\usepackage{xltabular}

\begin{document}

\small
\begin{xltabular}{\textwidth}{l p{2cm}XX}
\caption{Summary of Multipliers}\label{Lit Summary table}\\\hline\hline
\textbf{Study} & \textbf{Geographical Location and Level} & \textbf{Identification} & \textbf{Multiplier 
Result} \\ \hline \hline
\cite{acconcia2014mafia} & Italy Local Level & Looked at a situation when local governments were dismissed 
and public funding was severely reduced in Italy is response to being infiltrated by the mafia.   & 1.5 on 
impact, growing to 1.9 when dynamic effects are included. \\ \hline
\cite{auerbach} & US Federal Level & Extended SVAR approach & 0-0.5 in Expansion and 1.0-1.5 in Recession \\ 
\hline \cite{Barro} & US Federal Level & Spending multipliers are identified primarily from variations in 
defense spending, especially changes associated with buildups and aftermaths of wars. & 0.4-0.5 
contemporaneously, 0.6-0.7 2 years later and if multiplier is permanent then this adds 0.1-0.2 to the 
multiplier  \\ \hline 
\cite{Clemens2012} & US State Level & Instrumented on the variation in the strictness states' balanced budget 
requirements to determine the level as a means of measuring the level of spending cuts during a recession & 
0.4 however it may be higher if states receive windfall funding \\ \hline 
\cite{fazzari2015state} & US State Level & Bayesian model comparison and generalized impulse response 
analysis to test for nonlinearities in the responses of output to government spending & 0.8 for states with 
low slack and 1.6 for states with high slack \\ \hline 
\cite{fishback2015multiplier} & US State Level & Panel of annual Federal expenditure in each State during the 
1930s & 0.96 when Federal transfer payments are excluded falling to 0.83 when they are included  \\ \hline 
\cite{Ilzetzki} & 44 countries around the world (20 high-income and 24 low income) & SVAR approach on a novel 
dataset & High income countries tend to have a statistically significant positive fiscal multiplier while the 
opposite is true of developing countries and Investment in infrastructure could lead to a higher multiplier 
\\ \hline \cite{michaillat2014theory} & US Federal Level & Simple search-and-matching model to highlight the 
key economic forces of the multiplier & The multiplier doubles when unemployment rises from 5\% to 8\% \\ 
\hline  
\cite{nakamura2014fiscal} & US State Level & Instrumented on the fact that when national spending on the 
military rises by 1 percentage point of GDP in the US, different states, depending on their exposure to 
military spending, experience different levels of military build-up & 1.5 growing to 2.0 at zero lower bound 
\\ \hline     
\cite{ramey2011identifying} & US Federal Level & Looked at the military build-up during significant wars 
throughout the 20\textsuperscript{th} century in the US &  0.6-1.2 \\ \hline   
\cite{Ramey2018} & US Federal Level & Analysed quarterly US data over a 120 year period using the local 
projection method developed by \cite{Jorda} & 0.3-1.5 depending on the methodology and robustness check they 
used.  \\ \hline 
\cite{shoag2010impact} & US State Level & Instrumented on the windfall gains that US states receive from 
investing public pension funds & Baseline multiplier over 2, rising to over 3 in times of economic slack \\ 
\hline 
\cite{suarez2016estimating} & US County Level & Instrumented on Federal transfers to local counties due to 
changes in population forecasts between Census and Non-census years & 1.7-2 rising in counties experiencing 
economic slack \\ \hline 
\end{xltabular}

\end{document}

第一页：

在此处输入图片描述

如果你不能使用xltabular（例如在 Overleaf）那么使用包ltablex：

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{multirow}
\usepackage{ltablex}

\begin{document}

    \small
    \begin{tabularx}{\textwidth}{l p{2cm}XX}
        \caption{Summary of Multipliers}\label{Lit Summary table}\\\hline\hline
        \textbf{Study} & \textbf{Geographical Location and Level} & \textbf{Identification} & 
        \textbf{Multiplier 
            Result} \\ \hline \hline
        \cite{acconcia2014mafia} & Italy Local Level & Looked at a situation when local governments were 
        dismissed 
        and public funding was severely reduced in Italy is response to being infiltrated by the mafia.   & 
        1.5 on 
        impact, growing to 1.9 when dynamic effects are included. \\ \hline
        \cite{auerbach} & US Federal Level & Extended SVAR approach & 0-0.5 in Expansion and 1.0-1.5 in 
        Recession \\ 
        \hline \cite{Barro} & US Federal Level & Spending multipliers are identified primarily from 
        variations in 
        defense spending, especially changes associated with buildups and aftermaths of wars. & 0.4-0.5 
        contemporaneously, 0.6-0.7 2 years later and if multiplier is permanent then this adds 0.1-0.2 to the 
        multiplier  \\ \hline 
        \cite{Clemens2012} & US State Level & Instrumented on the variation in the strictness states' 
        balanced budget 
        requirements to determine the level as a means of measuring the level of spending cuts during a 
        recession & 
        0.4 however it may be higher if states receive windfall funding \\ \hline 
        \cite{fazzari2015state} & US State Level & Bayesian model comparison and generalized impulse response 
        analysis to test for nonlinearities in the responses of output to government spending & 0.8 for 
        states with 
        low slack and 1.6 for states with high slack \\ \hline 
        \cite{fishback2015multiplier} & US State Level & Panel of annual Federal expenditure in each State 
        during the 
        1930s & 0.96 when Federal transfer payments are excluded falling to 0.83 when they are included  \\ 
        \hline 
        \cite{Ilzetzki} & 44 countries around the world (20 high-income and 24 low income) & SVAR approach on 
        a novel 
        dataset & High income countries tend to have a statistically significant positive fiscal multiplier 
        while the 
        opposite is true of developing countries and Investment in infrastructure could lead to a higher 
        multiplier 
        \\ \hline \cite{michaillat2014theory} & US Federal Level & Simple search-and-matching model to 
        highlight the 
        key economic forces of the multiplier & The multiplier doubles when unemployment rises from 5\% to 
        8\% \\ 
        \hline  
        \cite{nakamura2014fiscal} & US State Level & Instrumented on the fact that when national spending on 
        the 
        military rises by 1 percentage point of GDP in the US, different states, depending on their exposure 
        to 
        military spending, experience different levels of military build-up & 1.5 growing to 2.0 at zero 
        lower bound 
        \\ \hline     
        \cite{ramey2011identifying} & US Federal Level & Looked at the military build-up during significant 
        wars 
        throughout the 20\textsuperscript{th} century in the US &  0.6-1.2 \\ \hline   
        \cite{Ramey2018} & US Federal Level & Analysed quarterly US data over a 120 year period using the 
        local 
        projection method developed by \cite{Jorda} & 0.3-1.5 depending on the methodology and robustness 
        check they 
        used.  \\ \hline 
        \cite{shoag2010impact} & US State Level & Instrumented on the windfall gains that US states receive 
        from 
        investing public pension funds & Baseline multiplier over 2, rising to over 3 in times of economic 
        slack \\ 
        \hline 
        \cite{suarez2016estimating} & US County Level & Instrumented on Federal transfers to local counties 
        due to 
        changes in population forecasts between Census and Non-census years & 1.7-2 rising in counties 
        experiencing 
        economic slack \\ \hline 
    \end{tabularx}

\end{document}

答案2

通过改为ltablex表，您的代码可以工作，但是您的代码有一些错误，我已改为\citeA，\cite希望您可能有标签的定义\citeA。请参考以下修改后的标签：

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{multirow}
\usepackage{ltxtable}
\usepackage{ltablex}
\usepackage{tabularx}

\begin{document}

\begin{table}
\small
  \caption{Summary of Multipliers}\label{Lit Summary table}
    \begin{tabularx}{\textwidth}{p{2cm}p{2cm}XX}
    \hline\hline
    \textbf{Study} & \textbf{Geographical Location and Level} & \textbf{Identification} & \textbf{Multiplier Result} \\ \hline \hline
    \cite{acconcia2014mafia} & Italy Local Level & Looked at a situation when local governments were dismissed and public funding was severely reduced in Italy is response to being infiltrated by the mafia.   & 1.5 on impact, growing to 1.9 when dynamic effects are included. \\ \hline
    \cite{auerbach} & US Federal Level & Extended SVAR approach & 0-0.5 in Expansion and 1.0-1.5 in Recession \\ \hline \cite{Barro} & US Federal Level & Spending multipliers are identified primarily from variations in defense spending, especially changes associated with buildups and aftermaths of wars. & 0.4-0.5 contemporaneously, 0.6-0.7 2 years later and if multiplier is permanent then this adds 0.1-0.2 to the multiplier  \\ \hline \cite{Clemens2012} & US State Level & Instrumented on the variation in the strictness states' balanced budget requirements to determine the level as a means of measuring the level of spending cuts during a recession & 0.4 however it may be higher if states receive windfall funding \\ \hline \cite{fazzari2015state} & US State Level & Bayesian model comparison and generalized impulse response analysis to test for nonlinearities in the responses of output to government spending & 0.8 for states with low slack and 1.6 for states with high slack \\ \hline \cite{fishback2015multiplier} & US State Level & Panel of annual Federal expenditure in each State during the 1930s & 0.96 when Federal transfer payments are excluded falling to 0.83 when they are included  \\ \hline \cite{Ilzetzki} & 44 countries around the world (20 high-income and 24 low income) & SVAR approach on a novel dataset & High income countries tend to have a statistically significant positive fiscal multiplier while the opposite is true of developing countries and Investment in infrastructure could lead to a higher multiplier \\ \hline \cite{michaillat2014theory} & US Federal Level & Simple search-and-matching model to highlight the key economic forces of the multiplier & The multiplier doubles when unemployment rises from 5\% to 8\% \\ \hline  \cite{nakamura2014fiscal} & US State Level & Instrumented on the fact that when national spending on the military rises by 1 percentage point of GDP in the US, different states, depending on their exposure to military spending, experience different levels of military build-up & 1.5 growing to 2.0 at zero lower bound \\ \hline     \cite{ramey2011identifying} & US Federal Level & Looked at the military build-up during significant wars throughout the 20\textsuperscript{th} century in the US &  0.6-1.2 \\ \hline   \cite{Ramey2018} & US Federal Level & Analysed quarterly US data over a 120 year period using the local projection method developed by \cite{Jorda} & 0.3-1.5 depending on the methodology and robustness check they used.  \\ \hline \cite{shoag2010impact} & US State Level & Instrumented on the windfall gains that US states receive from investing public pension funds & Baseline multiplier over 2, rising to over 3 in times of economic slack \\ \hline \cite{suarez2016estimating} & US County Level & Instrumented on Federal transfers to local counties due to changes in population forecasts between Census and Non-census years & 1.7-2 rising in counties experiencing economic slack \\ \hline 
    \end{tabularx}
\end{table}

\end{document}

相关内容