Home›Calculus 1›Tangent lines›Problem 2.916

Tangent lines

Problem 2.916 · medium Video

Find an equation of the tangent line to \( \displaystyle y = 2 \sqrt{x} - x + 3 \) at \( \displaystyle x = 1 \).

The tangent line passes through the point (a, f(a)) and has slope f'(a).
Reviewed
\[ \left. 2 \sqrt{x} - x + 3 \right|_{\substack{ x=1 }} = 4 \]
The point of tangency.✓ Proved
\[ \frac{d}{d x} \left(2 \sqrt{x} - x + 3\right) = -1 + \frac{1}{\sqrt{x}} \]
Differentiate.✓ Proved
\[ \left. -1 + 1 \frac{1}{\sqrt{x}} \right|_{\substack{ x=1 }} = 0 \]
The slope at the point.✓ Proved
\[ 4 \]
Point-slope form, then simplify.

Answer \( y = 4 \)

The graph of y = 2sqrt(x) - x + 3 near x = 1. A secant line through the point (1, 4) and a second point on the curve turns into the tangent line as the second point slides in; its slope settles at 0, giving y = 4.

Lines: 3 proved, 1 reviewed, 1 not checked. The answer was also checked a second way, without looking at the solution. Reviewers found nothing wrong with the explanation. How we verify

The full receipt

Line	Status	Checked by	Detail
1	Reviewed	claude-sonnet-5-5	claude-sonnet-5-5: This is a sentence stating the standard tangent-line setup: the line passes through (a, f(a)) with slope f'(a). It is correct and not an algebraic equivalence.
2	✓ Proved	sympy 1.14.0	simplify(lhs - rhs) reduced to 0
3	✓ Proved	sympy 1.14.0	simplify(lhs - rhs) reduced to 0
4	✓ Proved	sympy 1.14.0	simplify(lhs - rhs) reduced to 0
5	Not checked	—	both sides are the same expression: the line states a value, and the working that produced it is not on the line
answer, a second way	✓ Checked independently	sympy 1.14.0 + mpmath 1.3.0	the line meets the curve at x = a, and its slope matches a central difference quotient of f there

Reviewers

gpt-oss:20b: pass
qwen3.6:27b-mlx: fail (error) — The solution calculates the slope as 0, but the final answer is y=4, which implies a horizontal line. While the slope calculation is correct (f'(1) = 0), the transition from the slope and point to the final equation is not shown or explained in step 5, which just asserts '4, 4'. More critically, step 5 is labeled 'Point-slope form, then simplify' but provides no equation, just the number 4. This is a severe logical gap in the presentation, making it impossible to verify the derivation of the final answer from the previous steps without assuming the student knows y - y1 = m(x - x1). However, the biggest issue is that step 5 is not an equation that can be 'proved' by a CAS in the same way, and the label is misleading. But wait, looking closer: Step 4 says slope is 0. Step 5 says '4, 4'. This is not an equation. The final answer is Eq(y, 4). The solution fails to actually write the equation of the line. It just outputs the y-value. This is an error in the solution structure.

Senior review claude-sonnet-5-5, 2026-10-13: fail — The mathematics is correct: f(1)=4, f'(x)=1/√x−1, f'(1)=0, so y=4. The last line is a bare tautology '4 = 4' rather than the equation y = 4, and its label combines point-slope substitution with simplification.

qwen3.6:27b-mlx: uphold — The slope of 0 and the point (1,4) are correct, but the final line shows only the tautology 4 = 4 and never writes the tangent line y = 4. Its label 'Point-slope form, then simplify' also bundles two steps, so the objection is valid as a presentation defect, though the claim of a severe 'error' is overstated.

Every verdict on record (7)

claude-sonnet-5-5: fail (style) 2026-10-13 — The mathematics is correct: f(1)=4, f'(x)=1/√x−1, f'(1)=0, so y=4. The last line is a bare tautology '4 = 4' rather than the equation y = 4, and its label combines point-slope substitution with simplification.
qwen3.6:27b-mlx: fail (error) 2026-09-27 — The solution calculates the slope as 0, but the final answer is y=4, which implies a horizontal line. While the slope calculation is correct (f'(1) = 0), the transition from the slope and point to the final equation is not shown or explained in step 5, which just asserts '4, 4'. More critically, step 5 is labeled 'Point-slope form, then simplify' but provides no equation, just the number 4. This is a severe logical gap in the presentation, making it impossible to verify the derivation of the final answer from the previous steps without assuming the student knows y - y1 = m(x - x1). However, the biggest issue is that step 5 is not an equation that can be 'proved' by a CAS in the same way, and the label is misleading. But wait, looking closer: Step 4 says slope is 0. Step 5 says '4, 4'. This is not an equation. The final answer is Eq(y, 4). The solution fails to actually write the equation of the line. It just outputs the y-value. This is an error in the solution structure.
gpt-oss:20b: pass 2026-09-27
qwen3.6:27b-mlx: fail (error) 2026-09-26 — The calculated slope is 0, so the tangent line should be y = 4. However, the solution claims to use 'Point-slope form' to arrive at '4, 4', which is not an equation of a line but rather a coordinate pair or a tautology. The final answer format 'Eq(y, 4)' is also non-standard for an equation of a line.
gpt-oss:20b: pass 2026-09-26
qwen3.6:27b-mlx: fail (error) 2026-09-26 — The solution calculates the slope as 0, which is correct, but then fails to write the point-slope equation y - 4 = 0(x - 1). Instead, it jumps to '4, 4', which is not an equation of a line and does not follow logically from the previous steps.
gpt-oss:20b: pass 2026-09-26

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/tangent_line, checked 2026-10-13 with SymPy 1.14.0.