Derivative of \( \displaystyle \frac{3 \ln{\left(\tan{\left(2 x + 1 \right)} + \sec{\left(2 x + 1 \right)} \right)}}{2} \)
Problem 2.1084 · hard
Differentiate \( \displaystyle f(x) = \frac{3 \ln{\left(\tan{\left(2 x + 1 \right)} + \sec{\left(2 x + 1 \right)} \right)}}{2} \).
- \[ \frac{d}{d x} \frac{3 \ln{\left(\tan{\left(2 x + 1 \right)} + \sec{\left(2 x + 1 \right)} \right)}}{2} \]derivativeStart with the derivative of the function.✓ Proved
- \[ = \frac{3 \frac{d}{d x} \ln{\left(\tan{\left(2 x + 1 \right)} + \sec{\left(2 x + 1 \right)} \right)}}{2} \]constant-multiplePull out the constant factor.✓ Proved
- \[ = \frac{3 \frac{d}{d x} \left(\tan{\left(2 x + 1 \right)} + \sec{\left(2 x + 1 \right)}\right)}{2 \left(\tan{\left(2 x + 1 \right)} + \sec{\left(2 x + 1 \right)}\right)} \]logarithmicApply the chain rule for the natural logarithm.✓ Proved
- \[ = \frac{3 \left(\frac{d}{d x} \tan{\left(2 x + 1 \right)} + \frac{d}{d x} \sec{\left(2 x + 1 \right)}\right)}{2 \left(\tan{\left(2 x + 1 \right)} + \sec{\left(2 x + 1 \right)}\right)} \]sumDifferentiate the sum inside the parentheses.✓ Proved
- \[ = \frac{3 \left(\tan{\left(2 x + 1 \right)} \sec{\left(2 x + 1 \right)} \frac{d}{d x} \left(2 x + 1\right) + \sec^{2}{\left(2 x + 1 \right)} \frac{d}{d x} \left(2 x + 1\right)\right)}{2 \left(\tan{\left(2 x + 1 \right)} + \sec{\left(2 x + 1 \right)}\right)} \]chainApply the chain rule to each trigonometric term.≈ Checked numerically
- \[ = \frac{3 \left(2 \tan{\left(2 x + 1 \right)} \sec{\left(2 x + 1 \right)} + 2 \sec^{2}{\left(2 x + 1 \right)}\right)}{2 \left(\tan{\left(2 x + 1 \right)} + \sec{\left(2 x + 1 \right)}\right)} \]algebraEvaluate the derivative of the inner linear function.✓ Proved
- \[ = 3 \sec{\left(2 x + 1 \right)} \]algebra simplify simplifyFactor out the common term 2*sec(2*x + 1). Cancel the common term (sec(2*x + 1) + tan(2*x + 1)) from the numerator and denominator. Final simplification.✓ Proved
Answer \( \frac{3}{\cos{\left(2 x + 1 \right)}} \)
Mind the domain. The answer is also defined at points where f(x) is not. Substituting there gives a number that is not a slope of f.
✓ Nihil obstat Lines: 9 proved, 1 checked numerically. The answer was also checked a second way, without looking at the solution. Reviewers found nothing wrong with the explanation.
The full receipt
| Line | Status | Checked by | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ✓ Proved | sympy 1.14.0 | line 1 is the problem as stated |
| 2 | ✓ Proved | sympy 1.14.0 | simplify(a - b) reduced to 0 log is undefined for non-positive arguments tan has poles at odd multiples of pi/2 sec has poles at odd multiples of pi/2 |
| 3 | ✓ Proved | sympy 1.14.0 | simplify(a - b) reduced to 0 log is undefined for non-positive arguments tan has poles at odd multiples of pi/2 sec has poles at odd multiples of pi/2 undefined where tan(2*x + 1) + sec(2*x + 1) = 0 |
| 4 | ✓ Proved | sympy 1.14.0 | simplify(a - b) reduced to 0 tan has poles at odd multiples of pi/2 sec has poles at odd multiples of pi/2 undefined where tan(2*x + 1) + sec(2*x + 1) = 0 |
| 5 | ≈ Checked numerically | sympy 1.14.0 | sympy 1.14.0: simplify left 3*(tan(2*x + 1)**2 - sec(2*x + 1)**2 + 1)/(tan(2*x + 1) + sec(2*x + 1)); numeric agreement only, at 24 of 24 sampled points tan has poles at odd multiples of pi/2 sec has poles at odd multiples of pi/2 undefined where tan(2*x + 1) + sec(2*x + 1) = 0 |
| 6 | ✓ Proved | sympy 1.14.0 | simplify(a - b) reduced to 0 tan has poles at odd multiples of pi/2 sec has poles at odd multiples of pi/2 undefined where tan(2*x + 1) + sec(2*x + 1) = 0 |
| 7 | ✓ Proved | sympy 1.14.0 | simplify(a - b) reduced to 0 tan has poles at odd multiples of pi/2 sec has poles at odd multiples of pi/2 undefined where tan(2*x + 1) + sec(2*x + 1) = 0 |
| 8 | ✓ Proved | sympy 1.14.0 | simplify(a - b) reduced to 0 sec has poles at odd multiples of pi/2 |
| 9 | ✓ Proved | sympy 1.14.0 | simplify(a - b) reduced to 0 sec has poles at odd multiples of pi/2 |
| answer | ✓ Proved | sympy 1.14.0 | final line against the stated answer: simplify(a - b) reduced to 0 undefined where cos(2*x + 1) = 0 |
| answer, a second way | ✓ Proved | sympy 1.14.0 | SymPy differentiated f directly and got the stated answer |
Reviewers
gpt-oss:20b: passqwen3.6:27b-mlx: pass — The solution correctly applies the chain rule, sum rule, and trigonometric derivatives. Each step isolates a single transformation, and the labels accurately reflect the operations performed.
Every verdict on record (4)
qwen3.6:27b-mlx: pass 2026-09-28 — The solution correctly applies the chain rule, sum rule, and trigonometric derivatives. Each step isolates a single transformation, and the labels accurately reflect the operations performed.gpt-oss:20b: pass 2026-09-28qwen3.6:27b-mlx: pass 2026-09-28 — The solution correctly applies differentiation rules step-by-step, adhering to the one-change-per-step constraint. The algebraic simplifications are valid, and the final result matches the stated answer.gpt-oss:20b: fail (style) 2026-09-28 — Step 6 labels the evaluation of the inner derivative as "algebra"; it actually applies the derivative rule to the linear function 2*x+1. The label should be "derivative" (or a combination of "derivative" and "constant-multiple"), not "algebra".
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
gemma4:26b, checked 2026-09-28 with SymPy 1.14.0.