# Truncated Exponential Series Inequality

# Truncated Exponential Series Inequality

### Check out John Cook's explanation of truncated exponential series inequality.

Join the DZone community and get the full member experience.

Join For FreeHortonworks Sandbox for HDP and HDF is your chance to get started on learning, developing, testing and trying out new features. Each download comes preconfigured with interactive tutorials, sample data and developments from the Apache community.

Define *T _{n}* to be the Taylor series for exp(

*x*) truncated after

*n*terms:

How does this function compare to its limit, exp(*x*)? We might want to know because it’s often useful to have polynomial upper or lower bounds on exp(*x*).

For *x* > 0 it’s clear that exp(*x*) is larger than *T _{n}*(

*x*) since the discarded terms in the power series for exp(

*x*) are all positive.

The case of *x* < 0 is more interesting. There exp(*x*) > *T _{n}*(

*x*) if

*n*is odd and exp(

*x*) <

*T*(

_{n}*x*) if

*n*is even.

Define *f _{n}*(

*x*) = exp(

*x*) –

*T*(

_{n}*x*). If

*x*> 0 then

*f*(

_{n}*x*) > 0.

We want to show that if *x* < 0 then *f _{n}*(

*x*) > 0 for odd

*n*and

*f*(

_{n}*x*) < 0 for even

*n*.

For *n* = 1, note that *f*_{1} and its derivative are both zero at 0. Now suppose *f*_{1} is zero at some point *a* < 0. Then by Rolle’s theorem, there is some point *b* with *a <* *b* < 0 where the derivative of *f*_{1} is 0. Since the derivative of *f*_{1} is also zero at 0, there must be some point *c* with *b* < *c* < 0 where the second derivative of *f*_{1} is 0, again by Rolle’s theorem. But the second derivative of *f*_{1} is exp(*x*) which is never 0. So our assumption *f*_{1}(*a*) = 0 leads to a contradiction.

Now *f*_{1}(0) = 0 and *f*_{1}(*x*) ≠ 0 for *x* < 0. So *f*_{1}(*x*) must be always positive or always negative. Which is it? For negative *x*, exp(*x*) is bounded and so

*f*_{1}(*x*) = exp(*x*) – 1 – *x*

is eventually dominated by the –*x* term, which is positive since *x* is negative.

The proof for *n* = 2 is similar. If *f*_{2}(*x*) is zero at some point *a* < 0, then we can use Rolle’s theorem to find a point *b* < 0 where the derivative of *f*_{2} is zero, and a point *c* < 0 where the second derivative is zero, and a point *d* < 0 where the third derivative is zero. But the third derivative of *f*_{2} is exp(*x*) which is never zero.

As before the contradiction shows *f*_{2}(*x*) ≠ 0 for *x* < 0. So is *f*_{2}(*x*) always positive or always negative? This time we have

*f*_{2}(*x*) = exp(*x*) – 1 – *x* – *x*^{2}/2

which is eventually dominated by the –*x*^{2} term, which is negative.

For general *n*, we assume *f _{n}* is zero for some point

*x*< 0 and apply Rolle’s theorem

*n*+1 times to reach the contradiction that exp(

*x*) is zero somewhere. This tells us that

*f*(

_{n}*x*) is never zero for negative

*x*. We then look at the dominant term –

*x*to argue that

^{n}*f*is positive or negative depending on whether

_{n}*n*is odd or even.

Another way to show the sign of *f _{n}*(

*x*) for negative

*x*would be to apply the alternating series theorem to

*x*= -1.

Hortonworks Community Connection (HCC) is an online collaboration destination for developers, DevOps, customers and partners to get answers to questions, collaborate on technical articles and share code examples from GitHub. Join the discussion.

Published at DZone with permission of John Cook , DZone MVB. See the original article here.

Opinions expressed by DZone contributors are their own.

## {{ parent.title || parent.header.title}}

## {{ parent.tldr }}

## {{ parent.linkDescription }}

{{ parent.urlSource.name }}