SVG lines under other already created "objects"
How to use z-index in svg elements?
Why do Lagrange Multipliers work? I know that the Lagrange multiplier method helps us evaluate critical points of $f$ on the closed boundary of the restriction.   In other words we solve:$$\nabla f=\lambda \nabla g$$  But why does this method actually work? Can someone please give me an explanation. Thank you! Is the "Final Release" a "Development Release"? Update  appear to have been updated recently (as of writing this the last update appears to have taken place on 3rd of June) to include the following statement:  The -d switch is necessary to upgrade from Ubuntu 18.04 LTS as upgrades have not yet been enabled and will only be enabled after the first point release of 20.04 LTS.  Also note that .  TLDR (as of 15 Aug 2020):   is the canonical tracking document for the first Focal Fossa point-release (20.04.1). It’s a live document. The Ubuntu release team will be updating it as we work on releasing 20.04.1. […] Upgrades from 18.04 to 20.04.1 are still disabled as we are working through a few upgrade blockers   Edit The answers (so far) do not answer the question. The question is pretty simple. Ubuntu.com points to a &quot;FinalRelease&quot;, which turns out to be a &quot;Development Release&quot;, see evidence below. I'm not asking how and when to upgrade. I'm pointing out what seems to me to be an apparent inconcistency (in semantics, linguistics, logic) in the way Ubuntu names or labels its releases. From an answer to the question I'd except someone to pick up and acknowledge this inconsistency. An answer could start with a &quot;Yes, ...&quot; or a &quot;No, ...&quot;, for starters. (Moreover, a good answer could distinguish between the release being in dev stage and/or the upgrade process (e.g. from LTS to LTS) being in dev stage, if appropriate.) This question, as I see it, is not a duplicate. Futher, I think it is a question which deserves a non-patronizing answer. Thanks.   indicates that today (23rd April 2020) the new Ubuntu 20.04 LTS is to be released.  See &quot;condensed screenshot&quot; here:  Indeed, it seems that that's what happened, see  and :  However, when following the instructions to upgrade (from 18.04 LTS to 20.04 LTS) found  and elsewhere (edit: actually , too!), even prior to the July point release, I'm a bit confused to see that the instruction is to use update-manager -d which also points to the &quot;Development Release&quot; (see screenshot below) rather than the &quot;FinalRelease&quot; (see screenshot and link above). Is the &quot;Final Release&quot; (which I'm after) the/a &quot;Development Release&quot;? Why isn't it called something like &quot;Production Release&quot; or &quot;Final Release&quot;? When will it no longer be referred to as &quot;Development Release&quot;? In July? I'm confused :( Soft version of the maximum function? In the book Deep Learning, it says the softmax function is de facto a soft argmax function, and the corresponding soft version of the maximum function is $$\text{softmax} (z)^T z$$ How to understand the latter? I am new to Salesforce and hence a lot of silly questions. What is the rational behind defining future methods as Static? I mean has these methods been not static what harm would have they caused? What is the Relationship between the Rank and the Number of Eigenvalues? for (a) it says it can't be rank 1 because there is only one non zero eigenvalue? I understand it can't be 0 or 3 but I don't understand how you can conclude we have 2 just by knowing how many eigenvalues we have. Multiple Damage Resistance Similar questions to this have been asked, but I wasn't able to find one that answers this specifically.  Say that you have resistance to slashing damage as well as resistance to fire damage (no caveats to nonmagical damage or not).  You are fighting someone who has a flaming greataxe (just an enchanted item) that deals 1d12+STR slashing damage, plus 1d6 fire damage on hit and they hit you.    How do you calculate the damage?   (1d12+1d6+STR)/2 (1d12/2) + (1d6/2) + STR (1d12+STR/2) + (1d6/2) something else? Power Series proofs $$\alpha(x) =\sum_{j=0}^\infty \frac{x^{3j}}{(3j)!}$$  $$\beta(x) = \sum_{j=0}^\infty \frac{x^{3j+2}}{(3j+2)!}$$  $$\gamma(x) = \sum_{j=0}^\infty \frac{x^{3j+1}}{(3j+1)!}$$  Show that $\alpha(x+y) = \alpha(x)α(y) + \beta(x)\gamma(y) + \beta(y)\gamma(x)$ for every $x, y \in\mathbb R$.  Show that $\alpha(x)^3 + \beta(x)^3 + \gamma(x)^3 − 3\alpha(x)\beta(x)\gamma(x) = 1$ for every $x\in\mathbb R$.  My work:  Ive noticed that $$\sinh(x)=\sum_{j=0}^\infty \frac{x^{2j+1}}{(2j+1)!}$$ and $$\cosh(x)=\sum_{j=0}^\infty \frac{x^{2j}}{(2j)!}$$ Can hyperbolic trig identies be used to solve these and if so how? How far do you go with const?  Do you just make functions const when necessary or do you go the whole hog and use it everywhere?  For example, imagine a simple mutator that takes a single boolean parameter:  void SetValue(const bool b) { my_val_ = b; }   Is that const actually useful?  Personally I opt to use it extensively, including parameters, but in this case I wonder if it's worthwhile?  I was also surprised to learn that you can omit const from parameters in a function declaration but can include it in the function definition, e.g.:  .h file  void func(int n, long l);   .cpp file  void func(const int n, const long l)   Is there a reason for this? It seems a little unusual to me. Holomorphic function $f:B(0,1) \to B(1,4)$ with $f(0)=3$ and $f(\frac{1}{2})=1$ Problem  Find all holomorphic functions $f:B(0,1) \to B(1,4)$ that verify $f(0)=3$ and $f(\frac{1}{2})=1$.  I have no idea how to attack this problem,since it comes after an exercise related to Schwarz lemma, I thought that maybe the idea is to somehow apply the lemma in this problem as well, but if that is the case, I don't know how could I use it. I would appreciate suggestions. What is ground and what does it do? Is it acceptable to vote to close a question without leaving a comment? Although  is obviously an exceptionally poor question, it still amazes me that 5 people can vote to close and yet not one of them leave a comment to help explain how the poster can improve their question.  I see loads of similar examples where questions from new users are closed and heavily voted down without anyone taking any effort to explain why - not a pleasant experience for new users.  Is there anything that can be done to encourage users to leave comments when voting to close? When to use an object pronoun or a possessive adjective before a gerund Sorry to start a subjective question, but want to understand "own.sty" file.  Other than all \usepackage{} what sort of other commands can be added to the makeyourown.sty file.  Can you include \let command, and \newcommands in it.   What sort of precaution / structure newbies should follow. Why using IN(...) when selecting on indexed fields, will kill the performance of SELECT query? Proof that $(x-1)^2$ divides a $nx^{n+1} – (n+1)x^{n}+1$ Suppose $f$ is a continuous single-variable function, prove that:  $$2\int_a^b \int_a^x f(x)f(y) \, dy \, dx = \left[ \int_a^b f(x) \, dx \right]^2$$  This question was just on my Calculus III final exam and I couldn't figure it out, could someone provide some insight, please? How to avoid overflow using \IEEEpubid on the first column? I am trying to write a journal paper using the IEEEtran.cls template.  My problem is that the Publication ID Mark overflows into my thanks section.  This is the bottom of the title page:    From the documentation of IEEEtran.cls we see that:    I included the command \IEEEpubidadjcol into the second column. This prevents the overflow in the second column as you can see in my previous image, but lets the first column run freely.  I tried including \IEEEpubidadjcol into the first column aswell, but that causes compilation errors.  Please, could you give me some hint on how to solve this problem without doing something illegal with respect to the IEEE modus operandi?  EDIT:  As the answer suggests, the problem can be solved using the \IEEEpubidadjcol command twice. When I tried this, I got an error:  Infinite glue shrinkage found in box being split   In spite of this error a correct pdf is produced. The error goes away when I do not include packages fixltx2e and dblfloatfix. I would have read this about 20-25 years ago.  I believe the subject was an alien individual, but it could have been a non-standard human instead.  The hook of the story was that the subject lacked an organ like the  that allows the halves of the brain to communicate efficiently, allowing the illusion of a single consciousness.  The subject is conscious, and has thoughts, but is subject to hearing commands like "Wash your hands!" "Fetch water!" within its head.  I recall the subject (and others like the subject) believing that the voices are their gods talking to them.  To the reader it becomes clear that this is a separate part of the subject's own mind that is responsible for long-term planning and simply can't communicate with the rest of the mind in the way a "normal" human is accustomed to. Example where $f\circ g$ is bijective, but neither $f$ nor $g$ is bijective Can anyone come up with an explicit example of two functions $f$ and $g$ such that: $f\circ g$ is bijective, but neither $f$ nor $g$ is bijective?  I tried the following: $$f:\mathbb{R}\rightarrow \mathbb{R^{+}} $$ $$f(x)=x^{2}$$  and  $$g:\mathbb{R^{+}}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$$ $$g(x)=\sqrt{x}$$  $f$ is not injective, and $g$ is not surjective, but $f\circ g$ is bijective  Any other examples? Should I flag/down-vote "Draft Answers"? I've been finding "answers" that are slapped together and submitted, with the sometimes explicit intention of "I'm going to edit this".  e.g.   This seems silly, and I think ought to be discouraged.  Is the proper response "oh, how annoying", commenting, down-voting, flagging?  I'm heistant on the last two becuase sometimes they are edited (sometimes within the 5min grace) and become good answers, and then there's an unnecessary dv or flag.