Worked solution
Choose a valid substitution and assess the resulting estimate
(i) Expand in ascending powers of x, up to and including the term in .
(ii) Find the range of values of x for which the expansion is valid.
(iii) By putting into the expansion found in (i), find an approximate value of correct to 4 decimal places.
(iv) Two students suggested alternative substitutions to find an approximate value of .
| Brian | Clare |
|---|---|
Without performing any calculations, identify the student who made an unacceptable estimate. Explain your answer.
(v) Use the substitution suggested by the other student to find another estimate for correct to 4 decimal places. Explain why this new approximation is better.
[2011/CJC/JC1/MYE/5(modified)]
CJC · Lecture · Example 5
(i) Separate the two real cube-root factors
The Teacher supplies the normalization left blank in the Student copy. Let . Using real cube roots near zero,
Here , so the prefactor is . Both copies then print the two complete binomial brackets:
(i) Keep the quadratic cross-product
Both copies simplify these brackets to
The quadratic coefficient includes the product of the two linear terms:
This is the requested quadratic approximation; later terms begin at order .
(ii) Intersect the two transformed conditions
Both copies state and . Their intersection is .
The second interval line labels its factor , but the preceding derivation uses . This is a source exponent-sign typo, preserved in the native text and corrected explicitly here. The stated sufficient interval remains for the factor actually being expanded.
(iii) Substitute 8/11 and round the estimate correctly
Both copies print the substitution setup:
The Teacher completes , hence . The printed decimal is 1.4958. Independently, , so the correctly rounded estimate to four decimal places is 1.4959. This rounds the estimate; it does not certify accuracy to four decimal places relative to the true cube root.
(iv) Reject Brian without evaluating the approximation
The Student leaves this answer blank. The Teacher identifies Brian, because x=3 does not satisfy . Clare’s lies inside that interval. No numerical evaluation is needed for this rejection.
(v) Use Clare’s substitution and isolate the required cube root
Both copies print the second substitution setup:
The Teacher completes
(v) Explain the improvement and distinguish a heuristic from a guarantee
The Teacher says Clare’s estimate is better because is closer to zero than . Both copies remark that using the first few Maclaurin terms gives a better approximation when x is closer to zero. For a fixed expansion and truncation near zero this is a useful guide; it is not a universal monotonic-error theorem across all functions and signed inputs.
The source gives the true value approximately as 1.71. Independently, ; the absolute errors of and are about 0.214108 and 0.012246 respectively, confirming the improvement in this example. Both the first and second substitutions are inside the convergence interval, so convergence alone does not guarantee a good quadratic estimate.
Common mistakes
Do not omit the product of linear terms, substitute outside the series interval, or confuse rounding an estimate with a bound on its true error.
Solution notes
Original attribution retained: [2011/CJC/JC1/MYE/5(modified)]. No printed marks.
Student/Teacher differences compared through the complete five-part question. Printed 1.4958 and interval-factor positive exponent retained in native transcription, with explicit rounding and exponent corrections.