2

Recently I was told that scientific papers in English use - log_e while French papers use - ln to denote natural logarithms.

The two notations mean the same but I was told that using the notation ln for natural logarithms in English scientific papers is wrong. But I have always been using log for log-base-10 and ln for natural logarithms. (At least this was what I was taught in school)

Do such notations vary from language to language?

I am referring to the publications specific to IEEE, Elsevier etc. related to the Electrical and Electronics field.

TheBatmanWhoLaughs
  • 328
  • 2
  • 3
  • 13

1 Answers1

2

Regarding natural logarithm:
To my experience everyone knows ln(x) = loge(x) Usage of either is more related to the field of science, where engineers and physicists typically use loge(x) and mathematicians use ln(x), but I've never seen an actual convention from IEEE on this.
I'd recommend you using the one you are familiar with, so you are consistent throughout your own work (That is the most important).

Regarding base-10-logarithm:
Using log(x) for base-10-logarithm is often seen in engineering. However, I must advise against that because mathematicians use log(x) for natural logarithm, making both usecases ambiguous.
Try to put in log(x) to any calculator and it will assume natural logarithm. I have seen a ton of errors and misunderstandings arrise from this.
Some engineers argues that base-10-logarithm is implied since engineers only work in base-10, however this is not true - "Trust me. I'm an Engineer"

Always write logbase(x) or ln(x) to be explicit about the base used.

Martin
  • 120
  • 1
  • 10