You are Here: Home >< Maths

# Oxford MAT 2013/2014 Watch

1. Someone tell me how 3)iv) is done and 2)ii)a)? I think I know how but I have too much homework to catch up on. I want to know to improve my maths.
2. (Original post by DFranklin)
I doubt it, since the fact they gave both "possible" answers implies they wanted you to choose the "correct" one.

I'm just arrogant enough to think that if I'm not sure what the correct answer is, it's not a very fair question. [Although I could just be being stupid or forgetful about a standard definition].

I'm interested to see what RichE has to say about it.
assume you have f(x)=x
then f'(x) =1 , right?
the f(2x)=2x and f'(2x)=2 . this is the first and correct interpretation.
using the other interpretation , you get derivative of f(2x)= f'(2X) *2= 2*2=4 which is obv wrong
3. (Original post by Khallil)
I just did the first 5 multiple choice questions and got BCCBA.
(Also I didn't do this paper, I'm just curious)

Edit, I just did G and got D as my answer.
Should be ACDB for the first 4 as I can recall.

Posted from TSR Mobile
4. (Original post by Noble.)
I take it as meaning the second in your original post (i.e. to differentiate it using the chain rule on the 2x as opposed to just on some t and subbing in t=2x at the end). But you're right, the question is ambiguous.
The "exam savvy" part of me agrees - (particularly since my I think many people would find the first solution by "accident", so it would only be stronger candidates who made the mistake of using the second second solution), but the consensus on here seemed to be that the first interpretation was correct. (I haven't read that much of the thread though).
5. (Original post by Khallil)
I just did the first 5 multiple choice questions and got BCCBA.
(Also I didn't do this paper, I'm just curious)

Edit, I just did G and got D as my answer.
I'm pretty sure for the first one the answer is (a) - unless I can't even solve quadratic equations properly anymore.

For distinct real roots the discriminant must be greater than 0, so

6. (Original post by Noble.)
I'm pretty sure for the first one the answer is (a) - unless I can't even solve quadratic equations properly anymore.

For distinct real roots the discriminant must be greater than 0, so

Oh yea! I completed neglected the fact that can be less than 2
7. (Original post by kapur)
assume you have f(x)=x
then f'(x) =1 , right?
the f(2x)=2x and f'(2x)=2 . this is the first and correct interpretation.
using the other interpretation , you get derivative of f(2x)= f'(2X) *2= 2*2=4 which is obv wrong
Neither of these really correspond to what I wrote (and I can't really make sense of your reasoning, to be honest),

Let's make a concrete example of 1C:

Let h(x) = 2, g(x) = 2(x-1), f(x) = x^2. Then f'(x) = 2x = g(x+1), g'(x) = h(x-1).

So I think we can all agree that f''(x) = 2, and f(2x) = 4x^2. So the question is,
does f''(2x) = 2 (because f''(x) = 2 everywhere, and so when we evaluate it at 2x we still get 2).

Or does f''(2x) = 8, because if q(x) = f(2x), then q(x) = 4x^2 and so q''(x) = 8.

Looking around, I believe the standard notation for the 2nd interpretation would be f(2x)'', and so f''(2x) implies the 1st case. Which does make a certain amount of sense, but it's pretty darn subtle.

Note that as I understand these standards, with your example the correct answer is f'(2x) = 1.
8. (Original post by DFranklin)
Neither of these really correspond to what I wrote (and I can't really make sense of your reasoning, to be honest),

Let's make a concrete example of 1C:

Let h(x) = 2, g(x) = 2(x-1), f(x) = x^2. Then f'(x) = 2x = g(x+1), g'(x) = h(x-1).

So I think we can all agree that f''(x) = 2, and f(2x) = 4x^2. So the question is,
does f''(2x) = 2 (because f''(x) = 2 everywhere, and so when we evaluate it at 2x we still get 2).

Or does f''(2x) = 8, because if q(x) = f(2x), then q(x) = 4x^2 and so q''(x) = 8.

Looking around, I believe the standard notation for the 2nd interpretation would be f(2x)'', and so f''(2x) implies the 1st case. Which does make a certain amount of sense, but it's pretty darn subtle.

Note that as I understand these standards, with your example the correct answer is f'(2x) = 1.
really? you think the derivative of 2x is 1?
9. (Original post by kapur)
really? you think the derivative of 2x is 1?
lol you do realise that

a) the person you're talking to is a Cambridge maths graduate

b) does not mean
10. (Original post by Noble.)
lol you do realise that

a) the person you're talking to is a Cambridge maths graduate

b) does not mean
unless f(x)=x ... as i said
11. (Original post by kapur)
really? you think the derivative of 2x is 1?
No, I think the derivative of f(t) = t, evaluated when t = 2x, is 1.
12. (Original post by Tarquin Digby)
Nah, pretty sure I'm right. And (c) doesn't have multiple interpretations, the answer is d. (remember chain rule)
You might want to note that the way you write the chain rule using dashes f'(x) etc. looks like:

If , then (see for example http://math.kennesaw.edu/~sellerme/s.../chainrule.pdf)

note that this implies f'(g(x)) is NOT the derivative of f(g(x)), since if it was, f'(g(x)) would equal F'(x) by definition.

That said, it seems confusion about a subtle issue in notation is a rotten way of losing all the marks on a question (even if it's just a multiple choice one).
13. (Original post by henpen)
Another possibility was to notice that

,thus

is a solution (although I forgot to undo the transformation: I'm happy that part wasn't multiple choice!).

The stars and bars method killed question 5 very quickly.

I was under the impression that . I dislike Leibniz notation.
You mean Lagrange, right? I made the same mistake, I got confused by the notation as well.
And yes, there are infinitely many solutions for f(t) for every g(t) that follows the condition we deduced in 2.ii.b.

(Original post by DFranklin)
I doubt it, since the fact they gave both "possible" answers implies they wanted you to choose the "correct" one.

I'm just arrogant enough to think that if I'm not sure what the correct answer is, it's not a very fair question. [Although I could just be being stupid or forgetful about a standard definition].

I'm interested to see what RichE has to say about it.
Someone actually checked Wolfram Alpha.
Differentiating f(t) twice, then putting t=2x seems to be the standard interpretation. This is probably the only thing that I got completely wrong on the paper. I'm feeling terribly annoyed.
14. (Original post by souktik)
Differentiating f(t) twice, then putting t=2x seems to be the standard interpretation. This is probably the only thing that I got completely wrong on the paper. I'm feeling terribly annoyed.
Well, if you weren't happy with that question I'd say you're in pretty good company!

And of course, if that's the only major mistake you made, you don't have much to worry about!
15. (Original post by DFranklin)
Well, if you weren't happy with that question I'd say you're in pretty good company!

And of course, if that's the only major mistake you made, you don't have much to worry about!
What makes it more annoying is that I had initially interpreted the notation the right way. Thinking about it too much screwed me. Ah well, nothing I can do about it now. Hey, have you looked at 1. I, by any chance? That's the only other MCQ for which my answer didn't match with someone. I got (b) 28. I looked at it in binary. If the first two digits of a number are 10 in binary, its function is +1. If 11, then -1. So equal +1's and -1's from 2 till 63. 1 is +1, 64-95 are +1, 96-100 are -1. +28 total. Anything I messed up?

Posted from TSR Mobile
16. (Original post by souktik)
What makes it more annoying is that I had initially interpreted the notation the right way. Thinking about it too much screwed me. Ah well, nothing I can do about it now. Hey, have you looked at 1. I, by any chance? That's the only other MCQ for which my answer didn't match with someone. I got (b) 28. I looked at it in binary. If the first two digits of a number are 10 in binary, its function is +1. If 11, then -1. So equal +1's and -1's from 2 till 63. 1 is +1, 64-95 are +1, 96-100 are -1. +28 total. Anything I messed up?
Yes I agree with 28. (Also verified by writing a small computer program, for that 3rd unbiased opinion...)
17. (Original post by DFranklin)
Yes I agree with 28. (Also verified by writing a small computer program, for that 3rd unbiased opinion...)
Thank you, that's a relief!

Posted from TSR Mobile
18. Here's how I did C, and I got that the answer was (c).

f'(x) = g(x+1) ((given))
We can call f'(x)=F(x) to avoid confusion, so F(x)=g(x+1)
Therefore F(2x)=g(2x+1)
Differentiate both sides, using the chain rule, to get 2F'(2x)=2g'(2x+1)
F'(2x)=g'(2x+1)
F'(2x)=h((2x+1)-1)=h(2x)
19. (Original post by Noble.)
I take it as meaning the second in your original post (i.e. to differentiate it using the chain rule on the 2x as opposed to just on some t and subbing in t=2x at the end). But you're right, the question is ambiguous.
Hey, is there any chance that you could convince the MAT checkers that that's the correct interpretation?

Posted from TSR Mobile
20. The fu-? c) wasn't c?....
Also, the chain rule isn't expected for the MAT.
Posted from TSR Mobile

TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

This forum is supported by:
Updated: November 6, 2014
Today on TSR

### Degrees to get rich!

... and the ones that won't

### Women equal with Men?

Discussions on TSR

• Latest
• ## See more of what you like on The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

• Poll
Useful resources

Can you help? Study help unanswered threadsStudy Help rules and posting guidelinesLaTex guide for writing equations on TSR

## Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups
Discussions on TSR

• Latest
• ## See more of what you like on The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

• The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.