Exercises — Direct comparison test
Throughout we use the DCT exactly as stated in the parent: for terms with eventually,
Our two benchmark families — memorise them, they appear in almost every solution:

The picture above is the whole game: "convergence flows DOWN, divergence flows UP." Every solution below is just picking the right friend to compare with, and pointing the arrow the right way.
Level 1 — Recognition
Here you only decide which direction the comparison must point. No heavy algebra.
Recall Solution 1.1
Goal = convergence, so we must trap our series under a finite roof. That means must be bigger (an upper bound) and must converge. Concretely: , and is a -series with → converges. Answer: bigger and convergent.
Recall Solution 1.2
Goal = divergence, so we push up from an infinite floor: must be smaller (a lower bound) and divergent. Concretely is itself a -series with , so it diverges outright — but as a comparison, note , and the smaller harmonic diverges. Answer: smaller and divergent.
Recall Solution 1.3
Yes. is geometric with , , so it converges. The inequality provides a bigger convergent partner — the correct arrow for a convergence claim. Valid. ✅
Level 2 — Application
Now build the actual inequality and conclude.
Recall Solution 2.1
Guess: dominant power → behaves like → converges. Since for all , we get . is a -series, → converges. Bigger convergent roof ⇒ converges. ✅
Recall Solution 2.2
Guess: → diverges. We need a smaller divergent partner. Since for , we have . diverges (harmonic). Smaller divergent floor ⇒ diverges. ✅ Why ? We deliberately inflate the denominator to a clean multiple of so the term collapses to a harmonic-type lower bound.
Recall Solution 2.3
wiggles in , so ; in particular the term is . Bound the numerator by its maximum: . , → converges. Bigger convergent roof ⇒ converges. ✅
Recall Solution 2.4
The denominator is dominated by , and , so . is geometric with , → converges. Bigger convergent roof ⇒ converges. ✅
Level 3 — Analysis
Here the inequality needs shaping, or you must decide the direction of the algebra yourself.
Recall Solution 3.1
Guess: → converges. Need a bigger convergent partner. For , (since ). Therefore . converges (). ⇒ converges. ✅ Why the move? Directly points the wrong way for convergence, so we manufacture a valid upper bound by controlling how much dips below .
Recall Solution 3.2
Guess: → like → converges (). Since , , so . converges. Bigger convergent roof ⇒ converges. ✅
Recall Solution 3.3
Guess: ratio → geometric-like, converges. Need a bigger convergent partner. For , . Actually simpler: for (since gives ). So . is geometric with → converges. Bigger convergent roof ⇒ converges. ✅
Recall Solution 3.4
Key fact: for all (the log grows slower than the line). So for . diverges (harmonic). Smaller divergent floor ⇒ diverges. ✅ Why compare to ? We suspect divergence because is smaller than , so is larger than — we sit above a known-infinite floor.
Level 4 — Synthesis
Combine tools, or split a series into pieces.
Recall Solution 4.1
Both pieces are non-negative, so a valid single upper bound is a sum of upper bounds. Each piece converges: () and (geometric ). A sum of two convergent series converges. With DCT directly: for (since for ; check small separately — finitely many terms don't matter). converges. ⇒ converges. ✅
Recall Solution 4.2
Since , the numerator for (equality only shrinks it). For , . So . diverges (harmonic). Smaller divergent floor ⇒ diverges. ✅ Insight: the dominant term is ; the is a bounded nuisance we absorb with a lower bound.
Recall Solution 4.3
Guess: top , bottom → like → converges. Upper bound: (since ) and . So Geometric → converges. Bigger convergent roof ⇒ converges. ✅
Level 5 — Mastery
Subtle cases: sharp thresholds, near-misses, and knowing when DCT is the wrong tool.
Recall Solution 5.1
Try DCT: — but diverges, so a smaller-than-divergent comparison is useless. And for large — but converges, so a bigger-than-convergent comparison is also useless. DCT is squeezed out from both sides. Correct tool — Integral test: . The integral diverges, so the series diverges. ✅ Lesson: DCT needs a benchmark on the correct side; this series lives between the two benchmark families, so DCT can't reach it — you escalate to the integral test.
Recall Solution 5.2
Terms change sign, so DCT does not apply directly (it needs ). Instead compare absolute values: , and converges. By DCT the series of absolute values converges, hence the original is absolutely convergent (Absolute convergence), therefore convergent. ✅ Why the detour? DCT's proof rests on monotone partial sums, which requires non-negative terms — so we apply it to instead.
Recall Solution 5.3
Claim: converges iff (same threshold as the pure -series).
- If : for , (since gives ), so . converges (). Bigger convergent roof ⇒ converges.
- If : , so . diverges (). Smaller divergent floor ⇒ diverges. Both directions pinned by DCT. Answer: converges . ✅
Recall Solution 5.4
For we have (the sine never overshoots its input on where it's non-negative; here , so ). Thus . converges. Bigger convergent roof ⇒ converges. ✅ Why ? It's the clean upper bound that converts a transcendental term into a -series comparison — the whole reason DCT is powerful.
Recall One-paragraph recap
Every problem reduced to one question: which trusted friend, on which side? Convergence ⇒ trap under a bigger convergent roof (numerator up, denominator down). Divergence ⇒ push above a smaller divergent floor (numerator down, denominator up). When the target squeezes between benchmarks (logs!) or changes sign, DCT alone can't do it — reach for the Integral test, Limit comparison test, or Absolute convergence.
Connections
- Direct comparison test — the parent this page drills.
- p-series test — benchmark used in almost every solution.
- Geometric series — benchmark for the -type problems.
- Harmonic series — the go-to divergent floor.
- Integral test — rescues Exercise 5.1.
- Limit comparison test — the gentler alternative when inequalities fight back.
- Absolute convergence — the fix for sign-changing Exercise 5.2.
- Monotone convergence theorem — why non-negativity is non-negotiable.