Efficient Composition of Functions for the Chain Rule Problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter dekoi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Chain Chain rule
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the composition of functions in the context of applying the chain rule, specifically for the function y=√(x+√(x+√(x))). Participants are exploring ways to break down this function into smaller, more manageable components.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to identify smaller functions that can be composed to recreate the original function. There is a debate over the efficiency of the proposed functions and whether they adequately simplify the composition.

Discussion Status

Some participants are questioning the efficiency of the suggested functions and the clarity of the proposed compositions. There is a mix of agreement on the validity of certain approaches, while others express confusion about the reasoning behind them. Guidance has been offered regarding the structure of the compositions, but no consensus has been reached on the most effective method.

Contextual Notes

Participants are grappling with the idea of what constitutes a "small" function in the context of composition and are reflecting on their assumptions about efficiency in function composition.

dekoi
I have the function:

[tex]y=\sqrt{x+\sqrt{x+\sqrt{x}}}[/tex]

I need to find separate, smaller functions which will result in the composition of this function.

I tried but all I ended up with was:
[tex]f(x)=\sqrt{x}[/tex]
[tex]g(x)=x+\sqrt{x+\sqrt{x}}[/tex]

Therefore, [tex]y=f(g(x))[/tex]

However, this is obviously a very inefficient way of finding the composition of this function.

Can anyone lead me in the right direction?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
dekoi said:
I have the function:
[tex]y=\sqrt{x+\sqrt{x+\sqrt{x}}}[/tex]
I need to find separate, smaller functions which will result in the composition of this function.
I tried but all I ended up with was:
[tex]f(x)=\sqrt{x}[/tex]
[tex]g(x)=x+\sqrt{x+\sqrt{x}}[/tex]
Therefore, [tex]y=f(g(x))[/tex]
However, this is obviously a very inefficient way of finding the composition of this function.
Can anyone lead me in the right direction?
How about,
[tex]f(x)=\sqrt{x}[/tex]
[tex]g(x)=\sqrt{x+f(x)}[/tex]
then,
[tex]f(g(x)) = \sqrt{x + \sqrt{x}}[/tex]
[tex]g(f(g(x))) = \sqrt{x + \sqrt{x + \sqrt{x}}}[/tex]
 
I don't see how that works, Fermat.

If
[tex]f(x)=\sqrt{x}[/tex]
and
[tex]g(x)=\sqrt{x+f(x)}[/tex],
then

[tex]f(g(x)) = \sqrt{\sqrt{x + \sqrt{x}}}[/tex]

Right?
You are substituting [tex]g(x)[/tex] under the squareroot of [tex]f(x)[/tex].
 
If you're applying the chain rule, you'll always be going from the outside in. Can you
clarify what you mean by "obviously inefficient"?
 
It's inefficient because I'm splitting up my "big" function into a small function and another big function.

Shouldn't my composition functions all be small, simple functions?

Nothing like [tex]g(x)=x+\sqrt{x+\sqrt{x}}[/tex]
 
Fermat... how does what you told me to do work? I don't understand.
 
I think your way works fine. I have tried but can't find a more elegant way to make the composite right now. You have a simple [tex]f(g(x))[/tex] composite. That's easy to take the derivative of.

You could rewrite your g(x) as [tex]x + f(x+f(x))[/tex] if you wanted.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K