∫Calc Practice
Home›Calculus 1›Chain rule›Problem 2.245

Derivative of \( \displaystyle - \frac{\ln{\left(\cos{\left(4 x \right)} - 1 \right)}}{8} + \frac{\ln{\left(\cos{\left(4 x \right)} + 1 \right)}}{8} \)

Problem 2.245 · hard

Differentiate \( \displaystyle f(x) = - \frac{\ln{\left(\cos{\left(4 x \right)} - 1 \right)}}{8} + \frac{\ln{\left(\cos{\left(4 x \right)} + 1 \right)}}{8} \).
  1. \[ \frac{d}{d x} \left(- \frac{\ln{\left(\cos{\left(4 x \right)} - 1 \right)}}{8} + \frac{\ln{\left(\cos{\left(4 x \right)} + 1 \right)}}{8}\right) \]
    sumApply the sum rule for differentiation.✓ Proved
  2. \[ = \frac{d}{d x} \left(- \frac{\ln{\left(\cos{\left(4 x \right)} - 1 \right)}}{8}\right) + \frac{d}{d x} \frac{\ln{\left(\cos{\left(4 x \right)} + 1 \right)}}{8} \]
    constant-multipleSeparate the terms and pull out the constant factor 1/8.✓ Proved
  3. \[ = - \frac{\frac{d}{d x} \ln{\left(\cos{\left(4 x \right)} - 1 \right)}}{8} + \frac{\frac{d}{d x} \ln{\left(\cos{\left(4 x \right)} + 1 \right)}}{8} \]
    constant-multiplePull out the negative sign from the first term.✓ Proved
  4. \[ = \frac{\frac{d}{d x} \left(\cos{\left(4 x \right)} + 1\right)}{8 \left(\cos{\left(4 x \right)} + 1\right)} - \frac{\frac{d}{d x} \left(\cos{\left(4 x \right)} - 1\right)}{8 \left(\cos{\left(4 x \right)} - 1\right)} \]
    chainApply the chain rule to the logarithmic terms.✓ Proved
  5. \[ = - \frac{\sin{\left(4 x \right)}}{2 \left(\cos{\left(4 x \right)} + 1\right)} + \frac{\sin{\left(4 x \right)}}{2 \left(\cos{\left(4 x \right)} - 1\right)} \]
    chainDifferentiate the inner functions using the chain rule.✓ Proved
  6. \[ = - \frac{4 \sin{\left(4 x \right)}}{8 \cos{\left(4 x \right)} + 8} + \frac{4 \sin{\left(4 x \right)}}{8 \cos{\left(4 x \right)} - 8} \]
    algebraSimplify the products of constants and signs.✓ Proved
  7. \[ = - \frac{\sin{\left(4 x \right)}}{2 \cos{\left(4 x \right)} + 2} + \frac{\sin{\left(4 x \right)}}{2 \cos{\left(4 x \right)} - 2} \]
    simplifySimplify the fraction 4/8 to 1/2.✓ Proved
  8. \[ = \frac{- \left(\cos{\left(4 x \right)} - 1\right) \sin{\left(4 x \right)} + \left(\cos{\left(4 x \right)} + 1\right) \sin{\left(4 x \right)}}{\left(\cos{\left(4 x \right)} + 1\right) \left(2 \cos{\left(4 x \right)} - 2\right)} \]
    algebraFind a common denominator to combine the fractions.✓ Proved
  9. \[ = \frac{2 \sin{\left(4 x \right)}}{2 \cos^{2}{\left(4 x \right)} - 2} \]
    algebra simplifyDistribute the terms in the numerator and denominator. Simplify the numerator by combining like terms.✓ Proved
  10. \[ = \frac{\sin{\left(4 x \right)}}{\cos^{2}{\left(4 x \right)} - 1} \]
    simplifyCancel the common factor of 2.✓ Proved
  11. \[ = - \frac{\sin{\left(4 x \right)}}{1 - \cos^{2}{\left(4 x \right)}} \]
    rewriteRewrite the denominator using the Pythagorean identity.✓ Proved
  12. \[ = - \frac{1}{\sin{\left(4 x \right)}} \]
    rewrite simplifyUse the identity 1 - cos(x)^2 = sin(x)^2. Cancel one sin(4*x) from the numerator and denominator.✓ Proved
  13. \[ = - \csc{\left(4 x \right)} \]
    simplifyRewrite 1/sin(x) as csc(x).✓ Proved
Answer \( - \frac{1}{\sin{\left(4 x \right)}} \)
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.

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. The reviewers disagree about how one step is explained; every verdict is in 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
log is undefined for non-positive arguments
3✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0simplify(a - b) reduced to 0
log is undefined for non-positive arguments
4✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0simplify(a - b) reduced to 0
log is undefined for non-positive arguments
undefined where cos(4*x) + 1 = 0
undefined where cos(4*x) - 1 = 0
5✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0simplify(a - b) reduced to 0
undefined where cos(4*x) + 1 = 0
undefined where cos(4*x) - 1 = 0
6✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0simplify(a - b) reduced to 0
undefined where cos(4*x) + 1 = 0
undefined where cos(4*x) - 1 = 0
undefined where 8*cos(4*x) - 8 = 0
undefined where 8*cos(4*x) + 8 = 0
7✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0simplify(a - b) reduced to 0
undefined where 8*cos(4*x) - 8 = 0
undefined where 8*cos(4*x) + 8 = 0
undefined where 2*cos(4*x) + 2 = 0
undefined where 2*cos(4*x) - 2 = 0
8✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0simplify(a - b) reduced to 0
undefined where 2*cos(4*x) + 2 = 0
undefined where 2*cos(4*x) - 2 = 0
undefined where cos(4*x) + 1 = 0
9✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0simplify(a - b) reduced to 0
undefined where cos(4*x) + 1 = 0
undefined where 2*cos(4*x) - 2 = 0
undefined where 2*cos(4*x)**2 - 2 = 0
10✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0simplify(a - b) reduced to 0
undefined where 2*cos(4*x)**2 - 2 = 0
11✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0simplify(a - b) reduced to 0
undefined where 2*cos(4*x)**2 - 2 = 0
undefined where cos(4*x)**2 - 1 = 0
12✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0simplify(a - b) reduced to 0
undefined where cos(4*x)**2 - 1 = 0
undefined where 1 - cos(4*x)**2 = 0
13✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0simplify(a - b) reduced to 0
undefined where 1 - cos(4*x)**2 = 0
undefined where sin(4*x) = 0
14✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0simplify(a - b) reduced to 0
undefined where sin(4*x) = 0
15✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0simplify(a - b) reduced to 0
undefined where sin(4*x) = 0
csc has poles at multiples of pi
answer✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0final line against the stated answer: simplify(a - b) reduced to 0
undefined where sin(4*x) = 0
answer, a second way✓ Provedsympy 1.14.0SymPy differentiated f directly and got the stated answer

Reviewers

  • gpt-oss:20b: fail (style) — Step 2 incorrectly labels the operation as "constant-multiple"; it is another application of the sum rule for differentiation, not a constant‑multiple extraction.
  • deepseek-r1:70b: pass
  • qwen3.6:27b-mlx: fail (style) — Step 2 applies both the sum rule (splitting the derivative) and the constant-multiple rule (pulling out 1/8) simultaneously, violating the one-rule-per-step constraint. Step 3 also combines pulling out the negative sign with the constant-multiple rule, which should be separated.
Every verdict on record (12)
  • qwen3.6:27b-mlx: fail (style) 2026-09-20 — Step 2 applies both the sum rule (splitting the derivative) and the constant-multiple rule (pulling out 1/8) simultaneously, violating the one-rule-per-step constraint. Step 3 also combines pulling out the negative sign with the constant-multiple rule, which should be separated.
  • gpt-oss:20b: fail (style) 2026-09-20 — Step 2 incorrectly labels the operation as "constant-multiple"; it is another application of the sum rule for differentiation, not a constant‑multiple extraction.
  • qwen3.6:27b-mlx: fail (style) 2026-09-20 — Step 2 applies both the sum rule (splitting the derivative) and the constant multiple rule (pulling out 1/8) simultaneously, violating the one-change-per-step constraint. Step 3 also combines pulling out the negative sign with the previous step's logic, but Step 2 is the primary violation of granularity.
  • gpt-oss:20b: pass 2026-09-20
  • qwen3.6:27b-mlx: fail (error) 2026-09-19 — Step 2 applies both the sum rule (splitting the derivative) and the constant-multiple rule (pulling out 1/8) simultaneously, violating the one-rule-per-step constraint. Step 3 incorrectly labels pulling out a negative sign as 'constant-multiple' when it is better described as 'algebra' or 'rewrite', but the primary defect is the compound operation in Step 2.
  • deepseek-r1:70b: pass 2026-09-19
  • gpt-oss:20b: fail (style) 2026-09-19 — Step 2 incorrectly labels the application of the sum rule as "constant‑multiple". The derivative of a sum should be labeled "sum", not "constant‑multiple". This mislabeling violates the rule‑granularity requirement.
  • qwen3.6:27b-mlx: fail (error) 2026-09-19 — Step 2 applies both the sum rule and the constant multiple rule simultaneously, violating the one-change-per-step constraint. Step 3 incorrectly labels pulling out a negative sign as 'constant-multiple' when it is better described as 'algebra' or 'rewrite', but the primary defect is the multi-rule application in Step 2.
  • deepseek-r1:70b: pass 2026-09-19
  • gpt-oss:20b: pass 2026-09-19
  • gpt-oss:20b: fail 2026-09-17 — Step 2 incorrectly labels the operation as a constant‑multiple rule and the note claims a constant has been pulled out, but the constant is not yet extracted—this misleads the student about which rule is applied.
  • deepseek-r1:70b: pass 2026-09-17

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 2026-09-26 with SymPy 1.14.0.