∫Calc Practice
Home›Calculus 1›Product rule›Problem 2.1249

Derivative of \( \displaystyle \frac{\left(\sin{\left(4 x + 1 \right)} - \cos{\left(4 x + 1 \right)}\right) e^{4 x + 1}}{4} \)

Problem 2.1249 · hard

Differentiate \( \displaystyle f(x) = \frac{\left(\sin{\left(4 x + 1 \right)} - \cos{\left(4 x + 1 \right)}\right) e^{4 x + 1}}{4} \).
  1. \[ \frac{d}{d x} \frac{\left(\sin{\left(4 x + 1 \right)} - \cos{\left(4 x + 1 \right)}\right) e^{4 x + 1}}{4} \]
    constant-multipleFactor out the constant 1/4.✓ Proved
  2. \[ = \frac{\frac{d}{d x} \left(\sin{\left(4 x + 1 \right)} - \cos{\left(4 x + 1 \right)}\right) e^{4 x + 1}}{4} \]
    productApply the product rule.✓ Proved
  3. \[ = \frac{\left(\sin{\left(4 x + 1 \right)} - \cos{\left(4 x + 1 \right)}\right) \frac{d}{d x} e^{4 x + 1}}{4} + \frac{e^{4 x + 1} \frac{d}{d x} \left(\sin{\left(4 x + 1 \right)} - \cos{\left(4 x + 1 \right)}\right)}{4} \]
    chainApply the chain rule to each part.✓ Proved
  4. \[ = \left(\sin{\left(4 x + 1 \right)} - \cos{\left(4 x + 1 \right)}\right) e^{4 x + 1} + \frac{\left(4 \sin{\left(4 x + 1 \right)} + 4 \cos{\left(4 x + 1 \right)}\right) e^{4 x + 1}}{4} \]
    algebraDifferentiate the sine and cosine terms using the chain rule.✓ Proved
  5. \[ = 2 e^{4 x + 1} \sin{\left(4 x + 1 \right)} \]
    algebra simplify simplifyDistribute the exponential term. Combine like terms. Simplify the final expression.✓ Proved
Answer \( 2 e^{4 x + 1} \sin{\left(4 x + 1 \right)} \)

Every line of this solution was proved by the computer algebra system SymPy. The answer was also checked a second way, without looking at the solution. A reviewer's objection to the explanation stands; see the receipt.

The full receipt
LineStatusChecked byDetail
1✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0line 1 is the problem as stated
2✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0simplify(a - b) reduced to 0
3✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0simplify(a - b) reduced to 0
4✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0simplify(a - b) reduced to 0
5✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0simplify(a - b) reduced to 0
6✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0simplify(a - b) reduced to 0
7✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0simplify(a - b) reduced to 0
answer✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0final line against the stated answer: simplify(a - b) reduced to 0
answer, a second way✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0SymPy differentiated f directly and got the stated answer

Reviewers

  • gpt-oss:20b: fail (error) — Step 3 incorrectly labels the application of the product rule as "chain"; Step 4 incorrectly labels the differentiation of the sine and cosine terms as "algebra" when it is a chain rule application. These mislabelings violate the rule‑granularity requirement.
  • qwen3.6:27b-mlx: fail (error) — Step 3 is labeled 'chain' but performs the product rule expansion (Step 2's label was 'product' but the step didn't expand). Step 4 is labeled 'algebra' but performs differentiation (chain rule on sin/cos/exp). The labels are swapped and incorrect for the operations performed.
Every verdict on record (4)
  • qwen3.6:27b-mlx: fail (error) 2026-09-29 — Step 3 is labeled 'chain' but performs the product rule expansion (Step 2's label was 'product' but the step didn't expand). Step 4 is labeled 'algebra' but performs differentiation (chain rule on sin/cos/exp). The labels are swapped and incorrect for the operations performed.
  • gpt-oss:20b: fail (error) 2026-09-29 — Step 3 incorrectly labels the application of the product rule as "chain"; Step 4 incorrectly labels the differentiation of the sine and cosine terms as "algebra" when it is a chain rule application. These mislabelings violate the rule‑granularity requirement.
  • qwen3.6:27b-mlx: fail (error) 2026-09-29 — Step 3 is labeled 'chain' but performs the product rule expansion (Step 2's label) and leaves the derivatives unevaluated. Step 4 is labeled 'algebra' but performs the actual differentiation of the inner functions using the chain rule. The labels for steps 3 and 4 are swapped/misapplied.
  • gpt-oss:20b: fail (error) 2026-09-29 — Step 3 applies both the product rule and the chain rule, but is labeled only as "chain". The step changes more than one thing at once, violating the single‑rule‑per‑step rule.

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 2026-09-29 with SymPy 1.14.0.