Geometric series
Problem 7.5 · easy Video
Does \( \displaystyle \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} - 4 \left(\frac{3}{2}\right)^{n - 1} \) converge? If so, find its sum.
- \[ -4 \]The first term, a.
- \[ \frac{3}{2} \]The common ratio, r.
- |r| = 3/2 ≥ 1, so the series diverges.
Answer \( \text{diverges} \)
Lines: 3 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. How we verify
The full receipt
| Line | Status | Checked by | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Not checked | — | both sides are the same expression: the line states a value, and the working that produced it is not on the line |
| 2 | Not checked | — | both sides are the same expression: the line states a value, and the working that produced it is not on the line |
| 3 | Not checked | — | a sentence; read, not computed |
| answer, a second way | ✓ Checked independently | sympy 1.14.0 + mpmath 1.3.0 | the terms do not shrink (60th term checked) |
Reviewers
gpt-oss:20b: passqwen3.6:27b-mlx: fail (error) — The divergence test requires |r| > 1, not |r| >= 1. The case |r| = 1 is inconclusive for the geometric series formula (though it still diverges, the reasoning provided is technically incorrect as a general rule).
Every verdict on record (6)
qwen3.6:27b-mlx: fail (error) 2026-09-28 — The divergence test requires |r| > 1, not |r| >= 1. The case |r| = 1 is inconclusive for the geometric series formula (though it still diverges, the reasoning provided is technically incorrect as a general rule).gpt-oss:20b: pass 2026-09-28qwen3.6:27b-mlx: pass 2026-09-27 — The solution correctly identifies the series as geometric with |r| > 1 and correctly concludes divergence.gpt-oss:20b: pass 2026-09-27qwen3.6:27b-mlx: pass 2026-09-26 — The solution correctly identifies the series as geometric with |r| > 1 and applies the divergence test for geometric series. The conclusion is sound.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/geometric_series, checked 2026-10-13 with SymPy 1.14.0.