3.4 Integration by Substitution
We don’t have many integration rules. For quite a few of the problems we see, the rules won’t directly apply; we’ll have to do some algebraic manipulation first. In practice, it is much harder to write down the antiderivative of a function than it is to find a derivative. (In fact, it’s very easy to write a function that doesn’t have any antiderivative you can find with algebra, although proving that it doesn’t have an antiderivative is much more difficult.)
The Substitution Method (also called
With substitution, we will substitute
Try
Video Demonstration
u-Substitution
© 2014 Eric Bancroft
The -Substitution Method for Antiderivatives
The goal is to turn
- Let
be some part of the integrand. A good first choice is one step inside the messiest bit. - Compute
. - Translate all your
‘s into ‘s everywhere in the integral, including the . When you’re done, you should have a new integral that is entirely in . If you have any ‘s left, then that’s an indication that the substitution didn’t work or isn’t complete; you may need to go back to step 1 and try a different choice for . - Integrate the new
-integral, if possible. If you still can’t integrate it, go back to step 1 and try a different choice for . - Finally, substitute back
‘s for ‘s everywhere in your answer.
Example 1
Evaluate
Answer:
This integrand is more complicated than anything in our list of basic integral formulas, so we’ll have to try something else. The only tool we have is substitution, so let’s try that!
Let
Compute
Translate all your
Integrate the new
Finally, substitute back
Thus we have found
How would we check this? By differentiating:
Video Demonstration
Examples
© 2014 Eric Bancroft
Example 2
Evaluate
Answer:
This integral is not in our list of building blocks. But notice that the derivative of
Let
Luckily, that is on our list of building block formulas:
Finally, translating back:
Example 3
Evaluate
a.
b.
Answer:
a. This is not a basic integral, but the composition is less obvious. Here, we can treat the denominator as the inside of the
Let
Using our basic formulas,
Undoing the substitution,
b. It is tempting to start this problem the same way we did the last, but if we try it will not work, since the numerator of this fraction is not the derivative of the denominator. Instead, we need to try a different approach. For this problem, we can use some basic algebra:
We can integrate this using our basic rules, without needing substitution:
Substitution and Definite Integrals
When you use substitution to help evaluate a definite integral, you have a choice for how to handle the limits of integration. You can do either of these, whichever seems better to you. The important thing to remember is that the original limits of integration were values of the original variable (say,
You can solve the antiderivative as a side problem, translating back to
You can substitute for the limits of integration at the same time as you’re substituting for everything inside the integral, and then skip the translate back into
Method 1 seems more straightforward for most students, but it can involve some messy algebra. Method 2 is often neater and usually involves fewer steps.
Example 4
Evaluate
Answer:
We’ll need substitution to find an antiderivative, so we’ll need to handle the limits of integration carefully. Let’s solve this example both ways.
Doing the antiderivative as a side problem:
Step One – find the antiderivative, using substitution: Let
Translating back to x:
Step Two – evaluate the definite integral:
Substituting for the limits of integration: Let
Video Demonstration
Definite Integrals and u-Substitution
© 2014 Eric Bancroft
Example 5
Evaluate
Answer:
I can see the derivative of
Let