1. Leaving x on both sides of an inverse formula
the whole questionWhat not to write
“, so .”
What to write
“, so , and . So .”
Why: Nothing is solved while is on both sides. Collect every term containing , factor out, and only then divide.
MATH 203 Calculus I • Concordia University, Montreal
This sheet is not a summary of section 1.6 of Thomas' Calculus: you already have the course notes. It answers one question only, what makes students lose marks on inverse functions and logarithms in MATH 203 at Concordia University, and which precise gesture avoids each loss. The inverse trigonometric functions are left to their own chapter.
The idea of an inverse is rarely the problem. The marks go in the algebra inside it: an unknown that appears twice and is never collected, a logarithm law that does not exist, and a domain that nobody checked at the end. Your scientific calculator computes and only, so it will not catch any of these for you.
The thread of the chapter
When the unknown sits in two places, in a numerator and a denominator, and , and , it must be COLLECTED on one side and FACTORED out before anything else; and since an inverse swaps inputs and outputs, every answer ends with a domain check, the piece where is one-to-one, the positive arguments of , the range that becomes a domain.
The restriction is part of the formula. Without , the formula is a whole parabola, which is not one-to-one and is the inverse of nothing.
Each row reads from left to right: the assumptions, then the result. A red cell is not an answer, it is the finding that the form settles nothing and the instruction to rewrite it. Every case is followed by a worked example.
Read a line as: the expression of the first column, under the condition of the second, equals the third. The red lines are rules that do not exist: each is refuted by two numbers, and the method says what to do instead.
| Expression | Condition | Equals |
|---|---|---|
| , | ||
| Example: . | ||
| , | ||
| Example: , which checks in . | ||
| Example: . | ||
| , , | ||
| Example: , between and since . | ||
| no law rule that does not exist | ||
| Example: , while . What to do: Isolate the exponential first, or multiply by to get a quadratic: becomes . | ||
| not rule that does not exist | ||
| Example: At : , while . What to do: Set and solve the quadratic in ; only equals . | ||
| , | not rule that does not exist | |
| Example: , while . What to do: A quotient of logarithms is a CHANGE OF BASE: . | ||
The conditions of the first four lines are what produces the rejected roots: combining two logarithms into one enlarges the domain, and the test at the end restores it.
These are the errors I correct most often in session. Each one costs marks on a paper, even when the reasoning behind it is right.
What not to write
“, so .”
What to write
“, so , and . So .”
Why: Nothing is solved while is on both sides. Collect every term containing , factor out, and only then divide.
What not to write
“, so and .”
What to write
“ requires , so for . Check: and .”
Why: Squaring loses the sign condition. The full parabola gives , two inputs for one output, so it is not an inverse; the figure of the first block shows the half that is.
What not to write
“, so and .”
What to write
“With : , or , so or , both positive, both kept.”
Why: The power law moves an exponent INSIDE the logarithm. In the square is outside; the two functions only agree at and , as the figure shows.
What not to write
“ gives , so or .”
What to write
“Domain: . The candidates are and ; is rejected because is undefined. Solution: .”
Why: The quotient law and clearing the denominator both enlarge the domain. The domain is written BEFORE the algebra and applied after it, with the reason.
What not to write
“ gives or ; is negative, so it is rejected.”
What to write
“At : and , so both logarithms exist. Solutions: and .”
Why: A candidate is rejected only when it makes an ARGUMENT zero or negative in the original equation. Its own sign does not matter.
What not to write
“, so .”
What to write
“Multiply by : , , so or .”
Why: There is no law for . When the unknown sits in and , multiplying by gathers it into one quadratic in .
What not to write
“.”
What to write
“, consistent with .”
Why: The argument goes on top: . Bracketing by powers of the base catches the inversion in five seconds.
What not to write
“The graph of is the graph of reflected in the -axis.”
What to write
“The graph of is the reflection of the graph of in the line : becomes .”
Why: The -axis reflection replaces by and gives ; the inverse swaps the COORDINATES, which is the mirror .
Look at where the unknown sits before writing anything: the form picks the method
If powers with unrelated bases, the unknown in both exponents → take of both sides, distribute, collect the terms, factor
Example: : ,
If and together → multiply by , set , solve the quadratic, reject
Example: : or , or
If a sum or difference of logarithms → write the domain, combine into one logarithm, remove it, test each candidate
Example: : , rejected
If logarithms in different bases → change of base to a single base first
Example: : ,
If squared, or in a quadratic → set , solve for , then
Example: : or , or
If the unknown in the denominator of an exponent → isolate the power, take , solve for the reciprocal, then invert
Example: :
The last step of every branch is the same: test each candidate in the ORIGINAL equation, and write the reason for each rejection.
A marker ticks steps. Here they are in order, with the concluding sentence expected word for word.
When to use it: Any question that asks for , its formula, its domain or one of its values
Concluding sentence
“ is one-to-one. From we get , so for . Check: and .”
The trap: Stopping at a line with on both sides, or writing the formula without its domain.
Marking: Typically 2 marks for one-to-one and the range, 4 for the algebra, 2 for the domain, 2 for the check.
Five minutes of checking recover more marks than one more problem started in a hurry.
One value through f and back
After finding , compute at an easy input, then at the output: you must get the input back.
and . A swapped fraction would give and fail at once.
Bracket a logarithm by powers of its base
Before trusting a calculator value, place the argument between two powers of the base.
, so is between and : is plausible, is not.
Substitute into the ORIGINAL equation
Put every kept solution into the equation as it was given, not the combined one. It catches both a wrong root and a forgotten rejection.
satisfies , but does not exist.
The domain of the inverse is the range
Compare the domain you wrote for with the values actually takes. They must be the same set.
never takes the value , so cannot exist, and indeed it would be .
Let . Show that is one-to-one, find its range, and find with its domain.
Every step must be justified as on a MATH 203 final.
Step 1
Rewrite . As increases, increases, decreases, so increases: is one-to-one.
Why
Splitting off the constant puts the unknown in ONE place, which makes both the monotonicity and the range readable without any derivative.
Step 2
takes every value in , so takes every value in and every value in .
Why
The range is announced before the formula: it will be the domain of , and the next steps must find it again.
Step 3
, so . Collect: , and factor: , so .
Why
This is the gesture of the chapter: appears in two terms, and only collecting and factoring isolates it. Dividing needs , which the range guarantees.
Step 4
requires , that is . Then , so on .
Why
The condition of gives back exactly the range of step 2: two independent roads to the same set is the best check of the domain.
Step 5
Check: , and .
Why
One value through and back takes twenty seconds and catches a swapped fraction or a sign lost while collecting.
The conclusion, written out
“ is increasing, hence one-to-one, with range . Its inverse is for .”
The classic mistake on this problem: Taking of the numerator and the denominator separately, , which leaves trapped in two logarithms; or giving the formula with no domain.
Check that the function is one-to-one, restricting its domain if needed. Write y equals f of x, clear the denominators, move every term that contains x to one side, factor x out and divide. Rename x and y, and write the domain of the inverse, which is the range of the original function. Finish by checking one value through f and back.
Combining logarithms and clearing denominators enlarge the domain. The difference ln of x plus 4 minus ln of x minus 2 only exists when x is greater than 2, but the combined equation also accepts x equals minus 1. Reject a candidate only when it makes the argument of a logarithm zero or negative in the original equation; a negative candidate can be a perfectly valid solution.
Use the change of base formula: log base 3 of 20 equals ln 20 divided by ln 3, about 2.7268. The argument goes on top. Check it by bracketing: 20 is between 3 squared and 3 cubed, so the answer must be between 2 and 3. Getting 0.3667 means the fraction was typed upside down.
No. Two ln x equals ln of x squared, because the power law moves an exponent that is inside the logarithm. The square of ln x squares the value of the logarithm, and it has no simpler form. At x equals e the first gives 1 and the second 2. In an equation, substitute t for ln x and solve the quadratic in t.
© Ahmed Squalli Houssaini. Revision sheet published at www.letuteurscientifique.ca/en/fiches/math203-inverse-functions-logarithms. Free for personal and classroom use; republishing it elsewhere requires written permission (legal notice).