What is the Pattern in the Integration of (x^n)(e^x) dx?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter zketrouble
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dx Patterns
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the integration of the function (x^n)(e^x) dx, exploring patterns observed in the results of integrating this function for various values of n. Participants consider methods for proving the observed pattern and discuss related mathematical concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a table of results for the integral of (x^n)(e^x) for n=0 to n=5, noting a pattern in the coefficients of the resulting polynomial.
  • Another participant suggests that mathematical induction is not necessary to prove the pattern, implying that differentiation could suffice.
  • A later reply demonstrates how to verify the correctness of the integral by differentiating the expression obtained for n=5, showing that it yields the original integrand.
  • One participant introduces the concept of generating functions, proposing that derivatives of a generating function can be used to compute the integrals of the form (x^n)(e^x).
  • Another participant confirms the correctness of the result and mentions a recursive relationship involving integration by parts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the correctness of the observed pattern and the methods proposed for proving it, though there are differing opinions on the necessity of mathematical induction versus differentiation.

Contextual Notes

The discussion does not resolve the specific steps required to formally prove the pattern, and the implications of using different methods (induction vs. differentiation) remain open to interpretation.

zketrouble
Messages
47
Reaction score
0
so I just introduced myself to the concept of integration by parts a few days ago, and today for practice I decided to try to redo one of the examples given in a youtube video without the assistance of youtube. That problem was int. (x^2)(e^x) dx, for which the answer is (e^x)(x^2 -2x + 2). So then I tried to integrate (x^3)(e^x), (x^4)(e^x), and so on, a drew the results in a table:

y = int. (x^n)(e^x)

n=0; y = e^x
n=1; y = e^x(x-1)
n=2; y = e^x(x^2 - 2x + 2)
n=3; y = e^x(x^3 - 3x^2 + 6x -6)
n=4; y = e^x(x^4 - 4x^3 + 12x^2 - 24x + 24)
n=5; y = e^x(x^5 - 5x^4 + 20x^3 - 60x^2 + 120x -120)

I noticed a pattern, and I'm curious as to how I would formally prove this pattern:

(x^n)(e^x) dx =
(e^x){x^n - nx^(n-1) + n(n-1)x^(n-2) - n(n-1)(n-2)x^(n-3) + n(n-1)(n-2)(n-3)x^(n-4)...-+-+-+...}

It is very likely that the procedures necessary to prove this are way beyond my current calculus skills, but I'm curious anyway to see what the folks here at PF can come up with to prove/disprove my assumption that the above statement is true.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
It's not calculus needed to prove the general 'n' case, but mathematical induction.

Yay, 10^2^2 posts :biggrin:
 
silly me...forgot all of the + c every time. :p
 
>n=5; y = e^x(x^5 - 5x^4 + 20x^3 - 60x^2 + 120x -120)
>I noticed a pattern, and I'm curious as to how I would formally prove this pattern:

You don't need induction to prove your pattern. If you take the derivative of one of your examples

d/dx [e^x(x^5 - 5x^4 + 20x^3 - 60x^2 + 120x -120)] =
e^x(x^5 - 5x^4 + 20x^3 - 60x^2 + 120x -120)
+e^x(5x^4 - 20x^3 + 60x^2 -120x + 120) = e^x x^5

you can see that every term but the first vanishes. Since the expression produces the derivative you wanted (e^x x^5), it must be the correct antiderivative (though any constant can be added of course). Just do the same thing with your formula and you've proven it.
 
Last edited:
An advanced concept that is very useful here is that of a generating function. Consider

F(a) = \int e^{ax} dx= \frac{e^{ax}}{a} + c.

We can compute

\frac{d^nF(a)}{da^n} = \int x^n e^{ax} dx,

so that

I_n = \int x^n e^x dx = \left. \frac{d^nF(a)}{da^n}\right|_{a=1}.

Therefore we can generate any of the I_n just by computing derivatives of F(a). These derivatives are just the same derivatives that you compute when integrating by parts.
 
your result is correct

let In be your integral; if you integrate by parts In = xnex - nIn-1
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K