Professional Documents
Culture Documents
net/publication/236246959
CITATIONS READS
3 2,363
2 authors:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Juan Carlos Ponce Campuzano on 20 May 2014.
To cite this article: Antonio Rivera-Figueroa & Juan Carlos Ponce-Campuzano (2012): Derivative,
maxima and minima in a graphical context, International Journal of Mathematical Education in
Science and Technology, 44:2, 284-299
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation
that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any
instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary
sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,
demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
284 Classroom Notes
1. Introduction
The concept of the derivative has a geometric origin. While the theory of the
derivative can be constructed with few geometric illustrations or even without them,
geometric figures are a source of ideas for formal proofs. The formal treatment of the
derivative and their geometric interpretations are inseparable in the development of
the theory and in the process of understanding.
In undergraduate calculus courses, the learning of differential calculus presents a
myriad of difficulties for students. The literature confirms what many teaching
calculus experience, students can acquire the skills for performing calculations while
maintaining shallow understanding and, in some cases, fundamental misconceptions
(see, e.g. [1–6]).
In the middle of the last century, Prenowitz [7] attributed the difficulties of the
learning of calculus to the concepts, techniques and applications often involved. For
Prenowitz, novice calculus students experience difficulties when they try to
understand and apply the concepts of calculus for solving problems. More recent
research attributes the origin of these difficulties in teaching itself, that is, the
performance of the teacher [8].
A deeper learning of the properties and applications of the derivative to the study
of functions may be achieved when teachers present lessons within a highly graphic
context, linking the geometric illustrations to formal proofs. In fact, when students
are first learning the derivative and its application to functions, they often lack the
mathematical maturity to grasp the formal proofs of the results, for example the
mean value theorem. For this reason, the teaching of calculus, at the undergraduate
Figure 1. The relationship between the sign of the derivative and the monotonicity of a
function.
level, should rely heavily on graphics specially designed to communicate the ideas
that we wish to teach.
An example of a theorem, whose proof is based on the mean value theorem,
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 18:49 10 March 2013
states that if the derivative of a function f is positive (negative) on an interval, then the
function f is increasing (decreasing).
The relationship between the sign of the derivative and the monotonicity of a
function (increasing or decreasing) are interpreted, in textbooks, with images like the
ones showed in Figure 1 (see, e.g. [9–14]).
The converse of the above theorem is false, a counterexample is the function
f ðxÞ ¼ x3 . This function is not only increasing but strictly increasing, that is, the next
implication is true
x1 , x2 2 R, x1 4 x2 ) f ðx1 Þ 4 f ðx2 Þ:
However, it is false that f 0 ðxÞ 4 0 for every real number x, since f 0 ð0Þ ¼ 0.
A converse version of this theorem is: if a function is increasing and differentiable
on an interval, then its derivative is non-negative. One difference between the two
theorems is that the latter can be proved directly using the definition of the
derivative, while the former requires the mean value theorem. The next statements
incorporate both of them (the text above the arrow indicates on what the proof is
based):
Mean Value Theorem
f 0 ðxÞ 4 0 on I ) f increasing on I
definition of derivative 0
f increasing and differentiable on I ) f ðxÞ 0 on I:
f 0 ðxÞ 0 on I ) f increasing on I
f 0 ðxÞ 4 0 on I ) f strictily increasing on I:
A subtle fact about the first derivative criterion, which certainly stands against
our intuition, is that the condition of the sign of the derivative is sufficient but not
necessary. For instance, a differentiable function can have a maximum value at a
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 18:49 10 March 2013
point x; however, it may happen that the derivative is not positive, for the points
belonging to any neighbourhood on the left side of the point x. Without any doubt,
our intuition and a graph like the above (Figure 2) can lead us to believe that the
condition is necessary and sufficient. In the next section, we extend this discussion
and provide a counterexample.
The second derivative criterion has an advantage over the first derivative
criterion as it avoids the problem of determining the sign of a function in an interval.
With the second criterion, it is sufficient to determine the sign of the second
derivative at a single point. In this sense, it is easier to apply the second derivative
criterion than the first derivative criterion, but the second derivative does not always
exists, which is either a drawback or a disadvantage. In such cases, the first derivative
criterion could be the only option.
In this article, we have raised points that are not often considered in textbooks.
The first being the concept of the derivative and its geometric interpretation. The
second being the conditions of necessity or sufficiency of the criteria for determining
the maxima and minima of a function.
in the closed interval ½1, 1. If we apply formally the differentiation rules, we obtain
x
f 0 ðxÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi :
1 x2
It is easy to see that its domain is the open interval 1 5 x 5 1. Outside this
interval f 0 ðxÞ is not defined because for jxj 1, we have 1 x2 0. From the
formula for f 0 ðxÞ it is often concluded that the function f ðxÞ is differentiable in
1 5 x 5 1 but not on the extreme points of the interval, that is, 1 and 1. The
conclusion is correct but the argument is not valid.
As another example, consider the function
1 1
hðxÞ ¼ log :
1 þ x2 2
If we apply formally and without consideration1 the differentiation rules to the
function hðxÞ, we get
4x
h0 ðxÞ ¼ :
ðx2 þ 1Þðx2 1Þ
The domain of h0 ðxÞ consists of all x not equal to 1 or 1, but this set is
not the domain of the function hðxÞ. For instance, the function h0 ðxÞ is defined
at x ¼ 2, but the function hðxÞ is not defined at this point, and therefore it
makes no sense to compute the derivative of h at x ¼ 2. In other words, the
derivative of h does not exist at x ¼ 2. In this case, h0 ðxÞ is not the derivative
function of hðxÞ.
The above example is a sophisticated form of the trivial case g(x) ¼ log x. This
function is defined for all positive real numbers, but it is not defined neither at zero
nor for negative numbers. However g’(x) ¼ 1/x is defined for all x not equal to 0, that
is, g0 (x) is defined for negative numbers even when the derivative of g(x) does not
exist at those points (see Figure 3). In addition, a function h, whose derivative is
h0 (x) ¼ 1/ x, is given by h(x) ¼ log|x| which is derivable at every x6¼0. Another
example is the function f(x) ¼ log(1/(1+x2) 1). The application of differentiation
formal rules leads us to f0 (x) ¼ 2/(x(x2 þ 1)). This function is defined for all x not
International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology 289
equal to 0, however f (x) is not defined at any real number. We might say that the
domain of f (x) is the empty set.
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 18:49 10 March 2013
1 if x 4 0
f 0 ðxÞ ¼ :
1 if x 5 0
Students usually attribute the non-differentiability at a point as a result of the
graph having a peak at that point. Hence, the non-differentiability is interpreted as
the existence of peaks on the graphs.
Now consider the next function
2
x if x 0
gðxÞ ¼ xjxj ¼ 2
:
x if x 5 0
In this case, although the students have had the experience of finding the
derivative of the absolute value function, some of them do not know how to proceed.
Even without making calculations they assume that the function is not differentiable
at x 6¼ 0 due to the presence of jxj. Some students proceed by finding the formal
derivative, that is
0 2x if x 0
g ðxÞ ¼ :
2x if x 5 0
Fortunately, or maybe we should say unfortunately, they get the right answer
despite its lack of analysis and procedural performance characterized by unreflective
application of formulas. However, it is common that students do not realize that the
point x ¼ 0 deserves special treatment. Figure 4 illustrates the graphs of gðxÞ
and g0 ðxÞ.
The above examples are particular cases of piecewise-defined functions. The
practice of finding the derivative of a function without reflection is revealed when we
ask students to find the derivative of such functions.
As another example, consider the next two functions
290 Classroom Notes
Figure 5. Two different piecewise-functions: (a) graph f (x); (b) graph g(x).
83 2 8
>
> x 1 if 1 x 1 >
> x3 1 if 1 x 1
<2 < 2 1
f ðxÞ ¼ 3x 52 if 1 x 2 ; gðxÞ ¼ 1
x þ 2 4 if 1 x 2 :
>
> >
>
: :
ðx 1Þ3 þ 52 if 2 x 3 2x þ 2 if 2 x 3
If we ask students to find the derivative of every function, the common answer is
8 8
>
> 3x if 1 x 1 >
> 3x2 if 1 x 1
< <
f 0 ðxÞ ¼ 3 if 1 x 2 ; g0 ðxÞ ¼ 2 x þ 12 if 1 x 2 :
>
> >
>
: :
3ðx 1Þ2 if 2 x 3 2 if 2 x 3
Students usually operate with differential formal rules in every expression.
However, f 0 ðxÞ is certainly the derivative function of f ðxÞ but g0 ðxÞ is not the
derivative function of gðxÞ. We can understand these situations by looking at the
graphs of the functions f ðxÞ and gðxÞ (Figure 5). When we analyze the differentiation
of a function of this kind, we should consider the extreme points of the
corresponding intervals to the different formulas involved in the definition. At
those extreme points, the left and right derivatives as well as the continuity of the
function must be considered.
International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology 291
f ðxÞ f ðaÞ
xa
related to the slopes of secant lines to the graph.
According to the above meaning of the derivative, we can point out two
observations:
(a) We give this meaning to the derivative based on a process involving a limit of
geometric objects, such as the secant lines.
(b) We give the meaning of the derivative as a slope of a tangent line, assuming
implicitly that we have the concept of tangent line to a curve. This
assumption is trivialized for curves, which are usually used as an illustrative
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 18:49 10 March 2013
purpose (Figure 5). The curves are usually simple and in most cases it is not
necessary to give any explanation of the meaning of tangent line. It is enough
to give an intuitive idea and the visual image for showing that the straight
line ‘touches’ the curve at a point. Then it is accepted, without any doubt,
that the derivative corresponds to the slope of a tangent line. Hence it is
natural that we establish the tangent line, to the graph of the function f at the
point ða, f ðaÞÞ, given by the equation y ¼ f 0 ðaÞðx aÞ þ f ðaÞ.
In a first course of calculus, in general, teachers and students are not aware that
the derivative defines the tangent line, which it is defined through the previous
equation. For this reason students are surprised and reluctant to accept the
relationship of tangency for curves of more complex forms, this concept of tangent
line is much simpler. For example, the function
(
1 2
x sin x1 þ x if x 6¼ 0
hðxÞ ¼ 10
0 if x ¼ 0
Figure 6. Graph of hðxÞ with the tangent line at the point ð0, 0Þ.
292 Classroom Notes
is differentiable at x ¼ 0, so the graph has defined the tangent line at the point ð0, 0Þ
and that is precisely the line whose equation is y ¼ x. However, the geometric
situation is not easily accepted by the student when he looks at the graph and its
tangent line (Figure 6). In this example, the tangent to the curve at ð0, 0Þ does not
correspond to the intuitive idea that we use to give meaning to the derivative, in a first
calculus course, it is difficult to imagine the meaning that this definition may have.
This is a first criterion for determining the maxima and minima of a function. In
other words, this theorem says that a necessary condition for a differentiable
function, having a maximum or a minimum at a point, is that its derivative at that
point is zero. To justify this criterion, textbooks usually refer to two figures is shown
in Figure 7.
The formal proof is very simple and it does not require the mean value theorem
as required by other criteria for maximum and minimum, but in a first calculus
course may be sufficiently taught via the graphical interpretation. A point where the
derivative is zero, the tangent to the graph is horizontal; intuitively this occurs at
points where there is a maximum or a minimum value.
The above statement may be appropriate for the teaching of calculus in a first
undergraduate course; however, it is incomplete and inaccurate because, at first
glance, some conditions are not explicit. In that statement, if the domain of the
function is an interval of the form ½, , then the point a, where it reaches a
maximum or minimum, can be neither nor , i.e. 5 a 5 . If a is one of the
endpoints then is not necessarily f 0 ðaÞ ¼ 0. If a is a point on the domain ½, that
satisfies 5 a 5 , we say that a is an interior point of the domain f. If the domain of
a function consists of all real numbers, then every point is an interior point. In
general, a point a is an interior point of the domain of a function, if it belongs to
some interval c 5 x 5 d that is contained in the domain. The condition that the point
a is an interior point of the domain is important for what we have called the first
criterion for maxima and minima.
As an example, let the function be
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
f ðxÞ ¼ ðx3 x2 2x þ 1Þ 1 1 x2 :
Figure 8. (a) Graph of f ðxÞ and (b) graph of f ðxÞ with other scale.
The domain of this function is the closed interval ½1, 1 and f is differentiable at
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 18:49 10 March 2013
every x such that 1 5 x 5 1. The formula for f ðxÞ does not allows us to define it
out of the interval ½1, 1. Now, its derivative is given by
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1 x2 ð3x2 2x 2Þ þ 4x4 3x3 7x2 þ 3x þ 2
f 0 ðxÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi :
1 x2
This derivative can also be written as
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1 x 2 3x2 2x þ 4x4 3x3 7x2 þ 3x 2 1 1 x2
f 0 ðxÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi þ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi :
1 x2 1 x2
Clearly, f 0 ðxÞ vanishes at x ¼ 0. So x ¼ 0 is a critical point of f ðxÞ. In fact, this
function has a minimum at this point with a value f ð0Þ ¼ 0. But we can verify
without difficulty that f ð1Þ ¼ 1. So f ð0Þ ¼ 0 is not the minimum of f ðxÞ. The
minimum value of f ðxÞ is precisely f ð1Þ ¼ 1.
In Figure 8, we observe a change of scale in the y-axis, which allows us to observe
that the function actually has a minimum value (local or relative) at x ¼ 0. We can
also see from the graph of the function that f reaches a maximum value at some point
in the interval 0 5 x 5 1, but the maximum value is not the absolute maximum of
f ðxÞ. The function reaches its absolute maximum at x ¼ 1. In short, the function
f ðxÞ reaches its maximum value at x ¼ 1 and its minimum value at x ¼ 1, but at
these points the derivative is not zero and, in fact, f is not even a differentiable
function at these points.
other side, the derivative is negative on the left side and positive on the right side then
f ðxÞ has a minimum at the critical point.
In practice, it is difficult to apply this criterion because this requires finding a
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 18:49 10 March 2013
suitable neighbourhood of the critical point where the derivative has an algebraic
sign on the right side of the critical point and the opposite algebraic sign on the
left side. Determining the algebraic sign of a function can be a difficult problem. For
example, consider the function
f ðxÞ ¼ 2 cos x þ x sin x:
The derivative of this function is
f 0 ðxÞ ¼ x cos x sin x:
It is easy to verify that x ¼ 0 is a critical point, that is f 0 ð0Þ ¼ 0. However, to seek
the algebraic sign of the derivative for x 4 0 and for x 5 0 near to x ¼ 0 can be a
difficult task.
The CFD is applied when, in theory, it is possible to find a neighbourhood of the
critical point where the derivative has a sign on the left side of the critical point and
opposite sign on the right side. So this criterion may fail for two reasons:
(i) the derivative has the same algebraic sign to the left and right sides of the
critical point and
(ii) there does not exist a neighbourhood of the critical point such that the
derivative has a single algebraic sign to the left or to the right sides.
These two cases correspond to the negation of the premise in the statement
of the criterion. In the case (i), if the derivative has the same sign throughout a
neighbourhood of the critical point, with the exception of the critical point
where it takes the value zero, then the function is increasing or decreasing
in that neighbourhood, and therefore has neither a maximum nor minimum
at the critical point. On the other hand, in the case (ii) the CFD is not
applicable.
An example for the latter case is the function, defined as follows:
8
>
<2 x2
if x 6¼ 0
f ðxÞ ¼ 1 þ sin2 12 :
>
:
2 if x ¼ 0
International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology 295
we have
f 0 ðxÞ
40
x x0
for all points x sufficiently close x0 , both to the right and the left sides of x0 . If x lies
on the left side, x x0 5 0, then we have f 0 ðxÞ 5 0. If x lies on the right side,
x x0 4 0, then we have f 0 ðxÞ 4 0. Using the CFD, it follows that f ðxÞ has a
minimum at x0 . Figure 11 contains the relevant information that allows us to recall
the CSD.
In Figure 11, we see explicitly the sufficient conditions, i.e. f 00 ðx0 Þ 5 0 and
00
f ðx0 Þ 4 0 for the function f having a maximum and a minimum value, respectively;
however, these conditions are not necessary. A simple example that illustrates this
fact is f ðxÞ ¼ x4 . In this case, f ðxÞ has a critical point at x ¼ 0 and also a minimum at
this point too, however f 00 ð0Þ ¼ 0, so that, it is not necessary that the condition
f 00 ð0Þ 4 0. This example shows us that the CSD fails because f 00 is zero at the critical
point. However, the CFD is applicable.
Another example is the function gðxÞ ¼ x3 . In this case g0 ðxÞ ¼ 3x2 for all real
number x and the function has a critical point at x ¼ 0. Since g00 ð0Þ ¼ 0, the CSD
fails, as well as the CFD, because the first derivative is positive at every point x 6¼ 0.
Note that the CFD does not indicate what happens in the case where the derivative
has the same algebraic sign to the right and left side of the critical point. We
complement this criterion by adding that when the derivative has the same algebraic
sign in a neighbourhood of the critical point (except at the critical point where the
derivative is zero), the function has neither a minimum nor a maximum at that point.
With this extended version, we can confirm that the above function has neither a
maximum nor a minimum.
The second derivative must exist and it must be different to zero at the
critical point in order to apply the CSD. Thus, the criterion fails when either the
second derivative does not exist or it is equal to zero. An interesting case is
when there is no second derivative at the critical point. For example, the
function
2
x if x 0
f ðxÞ ¼ xjxj ¼
x2 if x 5 0
has a derivative at all points, including x ¼ 0 and its derivative is given by
f 0 ðxÞ ¼ 2jxj 4 0 for all x 2 R, however there is no second derivative, so the CSD
cannot applied. This is a case similar to the function gðxÞ ¼ x3 in the sense that the
CFD cannot be applied. However, the extended version of this criterion can be
applied here.
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 18:49 10 March 2013
On one hand, the function GðxÞ has a minimum at x ¼ 0, but G00 ð0Þ does not exist
and therefore we cannot apply the CSD. On the other hand, HðxÞ is two times
differentiable at the critical point x ¼ 0 and Hð0Þ is a minimum, but none of the
criteria can be applied either.
5. Final remark
In undergraduate calculus courses, a highly graphical context is recommended to
further deeper understanding of various concepts and results about the derivative.
However, as teachers, we should be aware that this context has limitations. With the
examples discussed in this article, we try to emphasize this fact, which is often
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 18:49 10 March 2013
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions to
improve the quality of this article. Also, particular thanks to Kelly E. Matthews, Lecturer in
Higher Education at the University of Queensland (Australia), for her insightful and
thoughtful comments.
Note
1. Consider: To think about carefully. Merriam Webster Dictionary 2011.
References
[9] T.M. Apostol, Calculus: One-variable Calculus, with an Introduction to Linear Algebra,
Vol. 1, Wiley, New York, 1967.
[10] J. Leithhold, Calculus 7, 7th ed., HarperCollins College Div, New York, 1995.
[11] A. Rivera, Cálculo y sus Fundamentos para Ingenierı´a y Ciencias, Editorial Patria, México,
2007.
[12] M. Spivak, Calculus, Publish or Perish, Houston, TX, 1994.
[13] J. Stewart, Calculus, 6th ed., Brooks/Cole, Belmont, CA, 2007.
[14] G.B. Thomas, M.D. Weir, and J. Hass, Thoma’s Calculus, 12th ed., Addison Wesley,
Boston, MA, 2009.
1. Introduction
Most of Dynamic Geometry (DG) environments incorporate primitive predicates for
computing the perpendicular bisector of two points or a segment, and the parabola
defined by a point and its directrix. These cases are particular instances of general
bisectors. The bisector of two geometric elements is the locus of a point that moves
while remaining equidistant respect to those elements. Since its definition is so
simple, it is not surprising that DG users, both teachers and students, frequently deal
with bisector constructions. However, most of these constructions are limited to
exhibit a graphical trace of the sought locus and there is no algebraic knowledge
about them. The aim of this note is to perform a systematic discussion of the
construction of bisectors between point and curves in a DG environment.
Furthermore, some considerations about automatically obtaining their algebraic
characterization are given. We also discuss the differences between answers coming
from the DG environment and the symbolic ones.
Section 2 deals with bisectors between point and general lines. We study and
propose dynamic constructions for bisectors, and a symbolic method for computing
the equations of objects containing the bisector is recalled. Section 3 describes the
computation of curve/curve bisectors. Since the approach taken here is based on
envelopes, we show that a closed-form answer is returned just for low-degree curves.
*Email: fbotana@uvigo.es
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2012.690900