∫Calc Practice

Conservative fields and potential functions

Problem 12.283 · easy

Is \( \displaystyle \mathbf F = \left(y\right)\mathbf i + \left(2 x + 2 y\right)\mathbf j \) conservative? If so, find a potential function \( \displaystyle f \).
  1. \[ \left[\begin{matrix}\frac{\partial}{\partial x} \left(2 x + 2 y\right)\\\frac{d}{d y} y\end{matrix}\right] = \left[\begin{matrix}2\\1\end{matrix}\right] \]
    Compare ∂Q/∂x with ∂P/∂y.✓ Proved
  2. They differ, so curl F ≠ 0 and F is not conservative: no potential exists.
Answer \( \text{not conservative} \)

Lines: 1 proved, 1 not checked. The answer was also checked a second way, without looking at the solution. The reviewers disagree about how one step is explained; every verdict is in the receipt.

The full receipt
LineStatusChecked byDetail
1✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0simplify(lhs - rhs) reduced to 0
2Not checked—a sentence; read, not computed
answer, a second way✓ Checked independentlysympy 1.14.0 + mpmath 1.3.0∂Q/∂x − ∂P/∂y recomputed: not identically zero

Reviewers

  • gpt-oss:20b: pass
  • qwen3.6:27b-mlx: inconclusive — reviewer response could not be parsed: { "verdict": "fail", "severity": "error", "notes": "The solution computes the diagonal entries of the Jacobian matrix (divergence components) instead of the off-diagonal entries required for the 2D cu
Every verdict on record (4)
  • qwen3.6:27b-mlx: inconclusive 2026-10-11 — reviewer response could not be parsed: { "verdict": "fail", "severity": "error", "notes": "The solution computes the diagonal entries of the Jacobian matrix (divergence components) instead of the off-diagonal entries required for the 2D cu
  • gpt-oss:20b: pass 2026-10-11
  • qwen3.6:27b-mlx: pass 2026-10-11
  • gpt-oss:20b: pass 2026-10-11

Proved: SymPy reduced the difference between the two sides to zero. Checked independently: a separate method, named above, confirmed it. Checked numerically: the two sides agree at every sampled point, which is evidence, not proof. Reviewed: a model or a person read it; that is all a sentence can have. Solution by generator:structured/conservative_fields, checked 2026-10-11 with SymPy 1.14.0.