Can the Integral of e^(ax) - e^(bx) be Simplified?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter eof
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integral
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the integral of the expression \(\int_0^\infty \frac{e^{ax}-e^{bx}}{(1+e^{ax})(1+e^{bx})}\). Participants explore methods for simplifying this integral, including partial fraction decomposition and potential shortcuts, while considering convergence conditions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Debate/contested, Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant outlines a method involving partial fractions to simplify the integral, suggesting that it can be calculated in a straightforward but messy manner.
  • Another participant expresses skepticism about the existence of a quicker method for solving the integral.
  • A third participant notes that additional conditions were provided to ensure convergence but struggles to identify useful assumptions.
  • One participant proposes an alternative approach to the first partial fraction separation, suggesting a quicker method by manipulating the numerator.
  • Another participant questions the feasibility of completing the integral in under two minutes, indicating that it seems challenging.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the existence of a simpler method for solving the integral, and there are differing opinions on the feasibility of completing the calculation quickly.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention additional conditions for convergence, but these conditions are not specified, leaving some assumptions unresolved.

eof
Messages
57
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I friend of mine gave me the following integral to calculate:

\int_0^\infty \frac{e^{ax}-e^{bx}}{(1+e^{ax})(1+e^{bx})}

This can de done by first doing partial fractions which gives you

\int_0^\infty \frac{1}{1+e^{bx}}-\frac{1}{1+e^{ax}}

then we can calculate each one by substituting t=1+e^{ax} (and similarly for the other term). Hence

dx=\frac{dt}{a(t-1)},

and finally after doing partial fraction again after the substitution, it boils down to

<br /> \frac{(a-b)\ln 2}{ab}+\lim_{x\rightarrow\infty}\ln\frac{(1+e^{ax})^b}{(1+e^{bx})^a}<br /> =\frac{(a-b)\ln 2}{ab}

where the second term disappears. The calculation is straightforward, though quite messy. This had been on an actuarial exam a few years ago where they were actually expecting you to calculate it in under 2 minutes.

I've been trying to figure out if there is an "easier" way to see the answer, but haven't come up with anything useful. I can't convert it into any known integral from Fourier analysis or see how to apply the calculus of residues or something similar. Any ideas?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There's no particulr reason for why there should exist a quicker way of doing this
 
Yeah, I've been thinking about the same thing and that is puzzling me. :)

EDIT: There were some extra conditions given (to ensure that it really converges), but I can't come up with an assumption that would do any good either.
 
For the first partial fraction separation, you don't actually need to the full partial fractions alculation. Notice that you can add 0 = 1 -1 to the numerator, which gives you (1 + e^(ax)) - (1 + e^(bx)), so you can split it up within seconds to get to your second line.

For the second partial fraction expansion, you can probably just look at it and guess what the coefficients need to be instead of working them out. You have A/t + B/(t-1), so looking at that, A = -1, B = 1 should do the job, as you can check pretty quickly.

If you cut corners like that instead of doing the full calculation of the partial fraction separation, it should really cut down on the time taken to do that integral.
 
How do you know it was under 2 minutes? That seems a bit difficult.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K