Example 1: Anti derivatives of , and by inspection
Write an anti derivative for each of the following functions using the method of inspection:
(i) (ii) (iii)
(i) We know .
So an anti derivative of is .
(ii) We know
So an anti derivative of is .
(iii) We know
Combining these, , .
So an anti derivative of is .
Want the reason behind every step, the basics and the checks?
An anti derivative of is any function with . "Inspection" means we do not use a formula for integrals at all: we run through derivatives we already know, find one that produces (or a constant multiple of it), and then adjust the constant. Every answer can be checked by differentiating it, and that check is the whole definition of being right.
- Given
- (i) , all real ; (ii) , all real ; (iii) , .
- To find
- One function in each case with wherever is defined.
- Plan
- For each part: recall a derivative that "looks like" ; fix the constant factor; then differentiate the guess to confirm it. In part (iii) treat and separately, because only exists for .
Basics you need
is an anti derivative (or an integral) of on an interval when at every point of it. If is one, so is for every constant , since a constant has derivative 0. Basics: integration undoes differentiation
, , for . Basics: powers of x and the power rule
. For example . This is where the factor 2 in part (i) comes from. Basics: substitution, the chain rule backwards
when and when . So is defined for every . Basics: logarithms and 1/x
Part (i): an anti derivative of
Find a derivative that produces
The function whose derivative is a cosine is a sine. Try . By the chain rule (inner , outer ):
This is the method of inspection: we search our memory of derivatives for one whose result has the right shape. gives the right function, , but with an unwanted factor 2 produced by the inner function .Standard formula (ii) of Section 7.2: ; chain rule from Chapter 5. Basics: the chain rule backwardsRemove the extra factor 2
Divide both sides by 2. A constant factor can be moved inside the derivative:
So an anti derivative of is .
for any constant . Halving the guess halves its derivative, which turns into exactly .Constant multiple rule for derivatives. Basics: integration undoes differentiationCheck: differentiate the answer
This holds for every real . Adding any constant also gives an anti derivative, so the full family is .
An anti derivative is defined by its derivative, so differentiating the answer is a complete check, not just a spot test.
Part (ii): an anti derivative of
Recognise each term as a derivative
By the power rule :
Each term already carries the "right" coefficient: is exactly what differentiates to, and is exactly what differentiates to. No adjustment of constants is needed.Standard formula (i) of Section 7.2. Basics: powers of x and the power ruleAdd them
The derivative of a sum is the sum of the derivatives, so
So an anti derivative of is , for every real .
Because differentiation works term by term, we may find an anti derivative of each term separately and add them. For integrals this is Property (III) of Section 7.2.1, proved just before this example.Check: differentiate the answer
The full family is .
Part (ii), Step 2 was already this check written the other way round; repeating it as the last step makes the habit explicit.
Part (iii): an anti derivative of ,
The positive side,
We know
So on , is an anti derivative of .
The power rule cannot help here: , and with would divide by zero. That is why formula (i) excludes , and why the logarithm is needed.Derivative of (Chapter 5, Theorem 5). Basics: logarithms and 1/xThe negative side,
For , does not exist, but , so does. By the chain rule (inner , outer ):
The question allows every , including negative , so an answer that only works for would be incomplete. The two minus signs cancel, so has exactly the derivative we want on the negative side.Chain rule. Basics: the chain rule backwardsCombine the two sides with
Since for and for , Part (iii), Steps 1 and 2 say together
So is an anti derivative of , valid on and on .
One formula, , covers both sides: it equals on the right of 0 and on the left. This is standard formula (xii) of Section 7.2, which the book now proves.Standard formula (xii), Section 7.2. Basics: logarithms and 1/xCheck: differentiate the answer at a negative and a positive point
At : near , and its derivative is , the value of there. At : the derivative of is . Both match .
The family of anti derivatives is written . (Strictly, because splits the domain into two separate intervals, the constant may even be different on the two sides. The book does not discuss this, but its Note after the formula list reminds us that the interval on which a function is defined must be kept in mind.)
The general statement in Part (iii), Step 3 already is the check; testing one point on each side shows concretely that both branches are needed and both work.
(i) An anti derivative of is , for all real .
(ii) An anti derivative of is , for all real .
(iii) An anti derivative of is , for .
Adding any constant gives another anti derivative in each case. This agrees with the textbook's solution.
Section 7.8 will show that for any anti derivative . A computer can find the left side by adding up very many thin strips, without knowing , so comparing the two sides is an independent check:
| Part | Interval | Sum of thin strips | |
|---|---|---|---|
| (i) | |||
| (ii) | |||
| (iii) |
Part (iii) was tested on negative numbers on purpose: would not even be defined there, but gives the right value.
- Writing for part (i). Its derivative is , twice too big. The inner function contributes a factor 2 when differentiating, so integrating must divide by 2.
- Using the power rule on . is meaningless; is exactly the excluded case of formula (i).
- Writing for part (iii). That only works for . The question allows all , and is needed for negative .
- Thinking the answer is unique. The question asks for an anti derivative; is just as correct as .
- Integration by inspection: guess from a known derivative, fix the constant factor, check by differentiating.
- If the inside of a function is (here ), the anti derivative carries a factor .
- , with the modulus, because the integrand lives on both sides of 0.
Every fact used, and where it comes from
| Fact | Used in | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Anti derivative: ; also works | All parts | Section 7.2 (Lesson: integration as anti-differentiation) |
| Part (i), Step 1 | Standard formula (ii), Section 7.2 | |
| Part (ii), Step 1 | Standard formula (i), Section 7.2 | |
| Chain rule | Part (i), Step 1; Part (iii), Step 2 | Theorem 4, Section 5.3.1 (Basics: the chain rule backwards) |
| , | Part (iii), Step 1 | Theorem 5, Section 5.4 |
| , | Part (iii), Step 3 | Standard formula (xii), Section 7.2; proved in Example 1 |
| Constant multiple and sum rules for derivatives | Part (i), Step 2; Part (ii), Step 2 | Chapter 5, Section 5.3 (algebra of derivatives) |
Tell us if something on this page is wrong or unclear, or if you would like a fuller explanation, another method or a new feature. Send feedback on this problem →