Maximum of the function F(X)=X*(1+X)^0.5

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mike s
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function Maximum
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the function F(x) = x√(1+x) and the characterization of the point x = -1 in terms of local maxima. Participants are examining whether x = -1 qualifies as a local maximum given the function's behavior around that point.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Some participants explore the definition of local maxima, questioning the applicability of the term at boundary points. Others discuss the implications of the function being undefined for values less than -1 and the significance of the gradient at that point.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with participants presenting differing views on the definition of local maxima and the relevance of boundary conditions. Some guidance has been offered regarding the nature of maxima in constrained scenarios, but no consensus has been reached.

Contextual Notes

There is a noted ambiguity regarding the definitions of local maxima in relation to boundary points and the implications of the function's domain. Participants acknowledge that different texts may define these concepts variably.

Mike s
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Hello,
Is x=-1 local maximum of [itex]F(x)=x\sqrt{1+x}[/itex]?
On the one hand, [itex]F(-1+\delta)<F(-1)[/itex] for [itex]0<\delta<1[/itex].
However, [itex]F(-1-\delta)[/itex] is not defined.
As far a I know, the point x=a is considered local maximum, if there exists small neighborhood [itex]\delta[/itex] such that [tex]F(a)>F(x)[/tex] for every [itex]a-\delta<x<a+\delta[/itex].

So is x=-1 a local maximum or not?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I believe that the term "local maximum" is not applicable because the concept of neighbourhood does not exist about the point x=-1 as you have pointed out.

Rather this is what we call a "boundary maximum". If you look at the gradient of F(x) at x=-1, it is undefined, as opposed to 0 gradient for stationary maxima/minima.

It is worth noting that boundary points are always "maximum" or "minimum" (except when the curve is level about that point).
 
Mike s said:
Hello,
Is x=-1 local maximum of [itex]F(x)=x\sqrt{1+x}[/itex]?
On the one hand, [itex]F(-1+\delta)<F(-1)[/itex] for [itex]0<\delta<1[/itex].
However, [itex]F(-1-\delta)[/itex] is not defined.
As far a I know, the point x=a is considered local maximum, if there exists small neighborhood [itex]\delta[/itex] such that [tex]F(a)>F(x)[/tex] for every [itex]a-\delta<x<a+\delta[/itex].

So is x=-1 a local maximum or not?

Yes, it is. It satisfies F(-1) > F(x) for all sufficiently small |x+1| with x > -1. In this problem it is impossible to compare F(-1) to F(x) for x < -1, but that is not really the reason that x = -1 is a local max. In the presence of constraints a local max or min need not have derivative = 0, and whether or not the function could be defined outside the interval is not particularly important; for example, for the problem min/max f(x) = x, subject to 0 <= x <= 1, x = 0 is a min and x = 1 is a max. These two statements are true even though f(x) is perfectly well defined outside the interval.

Note: you may find that some writers disagree with these statements. However, they are commonly asserted in modern treatments of optimization theory and practice; they are really matters of definition, not of substance.

RGV
 
Ray Vickson said:
Note: you may find that some writers disagree with these statements. However, they are commonly asserted in modern treatments of optimization theory and practice; they are really matters of definition, not of substance.
Agreed. Most texts do define local maxima/minima as being on an open interval. In a closed interval, it is trivial as the endpoints certainly must be minima/maxima.

For all practical purposes though, it doesn't matter if its "local" or "not local". It's not going to affect your calculations or results, so don't fret too much over it.
 
I understand, thanks for both of you.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K