2

Proof needn't be a rigourous , but should give an insight of how $n^{th}$ derivative test (higher order derivative test) works as i know how to use it in application but i don't much understand it ,especially the inflexion point thing.

L.K.
  • 729
  • 5
  • 22

3 Answers3

17

For intuition, you can think about the Taylor series of a function $f$ near a point $x_0 \in \mathbb R$: \begin{equation} f(x) \approx f(x_0) + f'(x_0)(x - x_0) + \frac12 f''(x_0)(x - x_0)^2 + \cdots + \frac{1}{n!} f^{(n)}(x_0)(x - x_0)^n. \end{equation}

What happens if the first $n - 1$ derivatives of $f$ at $x_0$ are equal to $0$ (and $f^{(n)}(x_0) \neq 0$)? Then those terms disappear, leaving us with \begin{equation} f(x) \approx f(x_0) + \frac{1}{n!} f^{(n)}(x_0)(x - x_0)^n. \tag{$\spadesuit$} \end{equation} And this approximation is good when $x$ is close to $x_0$.

We can easily visualize the graph of the right hand side of $(\spadesuit)$. Doing so suggests that if $n$ is even, then $f$ has a local extremum at $x_0$, and if $n$ is odd then $f$ has an inflection point at $x_0$.

Here are some graphs to help with the visualization.

Brad
  • 5,156
  • 2
  • 19
  • 50
littleO
  • 51,938
  • Is it really necessary to use hearts for equation labels? :) –  Jun 30 '14 at 02:09
  • 2
    @NotNotLogical haha, what's the normal way to make equation labels on math.stackexchange? – littleO Jun 30 '14 at 02:48
  • 1
    No idea, but I think most people just number their equations $(1),;(2),...$ and so on. But hearts are fine! I suppose they add a little visual "spice"... anyway, nice answer :) +1 –  Jun 30 '14 at 03:38
  • 1
    If you want to use equation labels you should just use the \tag{} function instead of messing with spacing. If you use \qquad to try and place tags it shifts the equation to the left. I have edited the tag in for you but feel free to roll it back if you do not want it. I just changed it to \tag{$\spadesuit$}. – Brad Jun 30 '14 at 05:13
  • @Brad Awesome, thank you! – littleO Jun 30 '14 at 05:18
  • @ littleO what about Rn(Remainder). It cant be omitted. Isn't it?? – Prasanna Venkatesan May 27 '16 at 15:24
  • @Prasanna This is just an intuitive argument, not a rigorous proof. A rigorous proof would have to account for the remainder term. – littleO May 27 '16 at 23:00
  • @littleO thanks for the reply. can you please suggest a website or something containing rigorous proof? I've searched and hasn't found one yet. – Prasanna Venkatesan May 28 '16 at 05:17
  • Indeed, this is not a rigorous proof. – uniquesolution Jul 20 '16 at 07:24
  • @uniquesolution Note that the question says "Proof needn't be rigorous". – littleO Jul 20 '16 at 08:18
  • It is not a proof at all, rigorous or not. Even if you add the missing details, you still are using the fact that the n'th derivative is continuous, a fact which is neither needed nor given. A correct proof, rigorous or not, will have to use other arguments. – uniquesolution Jul 20 '16 at 12:11
  • 1
    @Prasanna Here is a carefully written fully detailed rigorous proof: https://faculty.utrgv.edu/eleftherios.gkioulekas/papers/submitted/2nd-deriv-gen.pdf – uniquesolution Jul 21 '16 at 06:20
6

Let $f$ be $C^k$ (i.e., differentiable $k$ times with continuous $k$th derivative; we can relax this condition a bit, but it's not really useful here) on a neighborhood of a point $x$ , which we'll assume without loss of generality is $0$. Then by Taylor's theorem, we have $$f(x) = f(0) + f'(0)x + \frac{1}{2}f''(0)x + \cdots + \frac{1}{k!} f^{(k)}(0) x^k + o(x^k)$$ near $x = 0$. If the first $(k-1)$st derivatives vanish then we're left with $$f(x) = \frac{1}{k!}f^{(k)}(0) x^k + o(x^k).$$ Near $0$, the term $\frac{1}{k!} f^{(k)}(0) x^k$ dominates the sum above. If $k$ is even, then $x^k$ has a minimum at $x = 0$, which turns into a minimum or maximum of $f$ depending on the sign of $f^{(k)}(0)$. If $k$ is odd, then $f$ behaves like $x^k$ near $0$, which has neither a minimum nor a maximum at $x = 0$.

anomaly
  • 25,364
  • 5
  • 44
  • 85
1

The following is based off patterns I have noticed and seems to make some sense (to me at least).

The derivative can be seen as having a special space; related to the original function, such that it's correlation to the original function corresponds to its 'n' . Think of it like using a ruler with a certain degree of accuracy. Each derivative can be seen as using more and more precise units of measurement. Let me try to explain.

The initial measure of change ${\frac {\rm d^0}{{\rm d^0}x}}f \left( x \right)$can be said to measure change at a scale of "identity space." Because the projected identity space , space is equal to that of the initial space which the function lies in (ie. Euclidean Orthogonal...other coordinate systems also), its graph will be equal to the original function.

The next derivative ${\frac {\rm d^1}{{\rm d^1}x}}f \left( x \right)$will set up a space, which resembles the function $a+x^0 = a+1$.This means that the "scale" of the derivative becomes sensitive to changes where the original function becomes a constant...(at 0). It takes this point of constant change and maps it to a zero (when $f(x)$changes from $a+1\mapsto a+x$.[form, imagine creating the function as you ride along it, and the type of degrees you would have to use to mimic the type of changes]).

The derivative after that ${\frac {\rm d^2}{{\rm d^2}x}}f \left( x \right)$, sets up a space resembling $a+x^1=a+x$.Causing the derivative to become 'sensitive' to when the original function changes relative to the degree, meaning it maps points when $f(x)$ changes from a $ a+x\mapsto a+x^2 $[form] This change is called the inflection point. Note(Imagine plotting and function= $ a+x$ , onto an inflection point of another function. Notice that the function being analyzed crosses the function =$a+x$.)

Each time a derivative is taken it makes this "scale" more exact (while leaving out less exact "scales"), leading to ${\frac {\rm d^n}{{\rm d^n}x}}f \left( x \right)$ measuring at a scale of $a+x^{(n-1)}$;

Thus: $ \frac{d ^{n }}{d ~x ^{ n }}f \left(x \right)=0~,\forall \Delta f \left(x \right)\mid \exists \Delta f \left(x \right):~a + x _{ {\it form} }^{n -1}~~~\mapsto ~a + x _{{\it form} }^{n }$

$\therefore\frac{d ^{n }}{d x ^{n }}f \left(x \right):\left\{\Delta f \left(x \right): \left( a+ x _{{\it form} }^{n -1}\mapsto a+ x _{{\it form} }^{n }, \right )\right\}\mapsto 0~ \mathop{\rm } $ in initial coordinate system.

(Says the derivative maps points which it is "sensitive to to zero")

Numoru
  • 43