4.1.16 · D4Calculus I — Limits & Derivatives

Exercises — Chain rule — proof, composite function derivatives

1,739 words8 min readBack to topic

The one-line tool we lean on the whole way down:


Level 1 — Recognition

Can you identify the outer function and inner function , and apply the rule once?

Problem 1.1

Differentiate .

Recall Solution 1.1

Identify the two machines. Outer , inner . Differentiate each. (power rule on the shell); (derivative of a line). Multiply, plug the inside back in.

Problem 1.2

Differentiate .

Recall Solution 1.2

Outer . Inner . Notice the inside stays inside the — only the outer rate changes.

Problem 1.3

Differentiate .

Recall Solution 1.3

Outer (the exponential is its own derivative). Inner .


Level 2 — Application

Combine the chain rule with power, product-of-constants, and known derivatives.

Problem 2.1

Differentiate .

Recall Solution 2.1

Rewrite as . Outer . Inner . The and the combine to — clean cancellation.

Problem 2.2

Differentiate .

Recall Solution 2.2

Outer . Inner .

Problem 2.3

Differentiate .

Recall Solution 2.3

Outer . Inner . Note always, so is defined for all and no domain worry arises.


Level 3 — Analysis

Multiple layers, and combining the chain rule with the Product rule / Quotient rule.

Problem 3.1

Differentiate (meaning ).

Recall Solution 3.1

Three layers: outermost cube, then , then . Peel outside-in.

  • Cube: evaluated at .
  • : derivative .
  • : derivative . Multiply all three:

Problem 3.2

Differentiate .

Recall Solution 3.2

This is a product , and the second factor needs the chain rule. Product rule: with , .

  • .
  • (chain rule: outer , inner ). Assemble:

Problem 3.3

Differentiate .

Recall Solution 3.3

Quotient rule: with , .

  • .
  • (chain rule).
  • . Multiply top and bottom by to clear the inner fraction:

Level 4 — Synthesis

Build the composite yourself: implicit differentiation and inverse-function derivatives are the chain rule in disguise.

Problem 4.1

The curve passes through . Using Implicit differentiation, find there.

Recall Solution 4.1

Treat as a function of : then is a composite , so its derivative needs the chain rule: Differentiate both sides of : At : . Geometry check: the radius to has slope ; the tangent is perpendicular, slope . ✓ (see figure).

Figure — Chain rule — proof, composite function derivatives

Problem 4.2

Let (strictly increasing, so invertible). Find using the Inverse function derivative.

Recall Solution 4.2

The identity is a composite. Chain-rule both sides: Find : solve . Try : . ✓ So . , so .

Problem 4.3

A balloon is a sphere with volume . Air is pumped so that . Using Related rates, find when .

Recall Solution 4.3

depends on , and depends on — a composite . Chain rule in Leibniz form: . At : .


Level 5 — Mastery

Subtle cases: repeated nesting, the proof's own machinery, and where naïve cancellation would break.

Problem 5.1

Differentiate (a genuine triple nest).

Recall Solution 5.1

Layers, outside-in: , then , then .

  • derivative at : .
  • derivative at : .
  • derivative: . Multiply all three:

Problem 5.2

Let for and . It is known that . This hits infinitely often as , so is zero for infinitely many nonzero . Explain in one paragraph why the chain rule for still gives , even though the naïve "divide by " derivation is illegal here.

Recall Solution 5.2

The error-function proof never divides by . Recall from the parent note: with and , write Set . This equation is a multiplication, valid even when (both sides are then ). Dividing by : As : continuous ⇒ , and . So the whole product . The infinitely-many zero 's do no harm because they never sit in a denominator. This is exactly the pathology the [!mistake] "steel-man" in the parent note warned about.

Problem 5.3

In the rigorous proof the term relies on . Which single property of guarantees as , and what theorem supplies it?

Recall Solution 5.3

Continuity of at : , i.e. . It is guaranteed because is differentiable, and differentiable ⇒ continuous — see Continuity implies differentiability fails converse. (The converse fails: continuity alone would not give us , which we also need for the factor.)


Connections