An integral is Type I when one or both limits of integration are infinite. We give such an integral meaning by replacing the infinite endpoint with a finite parameter, integrating in the ordinary way, and then letting that parameter run to infinity. If the resulting limit exists and is finite the integral converges; otherwise it diverges.
| Item | Statement |
|---|---|
| Type I improper integral | A definite integral in which at least one limit of integration is or |
| Case (a), upper limit infinite | |
| Case (b), lower limit infinite | |
| Case (c), both limits infinite | , and both pieces must converge on their own |
| Converges or diverges | Converges if the limit exists and is finite; diverges otherwise, including when the limit is |
| Choice of the split point | Any finite works, and every choice gives the same value |
| Classic trap | is not the definition; that symmetric limit is the Cauchy principal value |
| Benchmark that converges | |
| Benchmark that diverges | |
| Over the whole real line | |
| Exponential decay | for |
| Factorial integral | for every positive integer |
| Preview of the -test | converges exactly when |
| Limits you will keep needing | and |
The Definition
We extend one or both limits of integration to by replacing the infinite endpoint with a finite parameter and taking a limit. If the limit exists and is finite the integral converges; otherwise it diverges.
The letters are worth fixing before we start. Throughout, is the integrand, and are the two limits of integration, and whichever of them stands in for an infinite endpoint is the parameter we push to infinity. In case (c) the extra letter is a finite number of our own choosing, used only to cut the real line into two halves.
-
If is continuous on , we define
\bbox[8px, #E6F0FA, border: 3px solid #0066CC]{\int_a^\infty f(x)\,dx = \lim_{b\to\infty}\int_a^b f(x)\,dx,}provided this limit exists and is finite.
-
If is continuous on , we define
\bbox[8px, #E6F0FA, border: 3px solid #0066CC]{\int_{-\infty}^b f(x)\,dx = \lim_{a\to-\infty}\int_a^b f(x)\,dx,}provided this limit exists and is finite.
-
If is continuous on , we pick any convenient number and define
\bbox[8px, #E6F0FA, border: 3px solid #0066CC]{\int_{-\infty}^\infty f(x)\,dx = \int_{-\infty}^c f(x)\,dx + \int_c^\infty f(x)\,dx,}provided both integrals on the right converge.
If the limit is finite, the integral converges; otherwise it diverges.
Read each of these as an instruction rather than as a formula: never integrate "to infinity" directly. Integrate to a finite endpoint first, get an honest number that depends on that endpoint, and only then take the limit. Case (b) is the mirror image of case (a), reflected through the -axis, so anything you learn about one transfers immediately to the other.
How to Evaluate a Type I Integral
- Check continuity. Confirm that is continuous on the entire interval. If also blows up at some point of the interval, the integral is improper of Type II as well and must be split at that point first, before anything below applies.
- Name the infinite endpoint. Replace by a letter and by a letter . If both endpoints are infinite, split at a convenient finite first and handle the two halves separately.
- Do an ordinary definite integral. Evaluate by substitution, by parts, or by any other method. The answer is a formula in or .
- Take the limit. Let or . A finite limit means the integral converges to that number. An infinite limit, or no limit at all, means it diverges.
Step 3 is ordinary calculus. All the new content of this section lives in steps 2 and 4.
Reading the Definition Geometrically
Each of the three cases has a picture attached to it, and the pictures are the fastest way to remember which endpoint is moving.
Case (a). The left endpoint is nailed down and the right endpoint slides off to . The shaded strip is the ordinary integral ; the question is whether its area settles down to a number as the strip grows without bound.
Case (a): . The shaded area equals , and here it converges as .
Case (b). Now the right endpoint is fixed and the left endpoint slides off to . Note that starts out to the left of the -axis and keeps moving left.
Case (b): . Here , to the left of the -axis, and it moves further toward .
Case (c). Both endpoints run away at once, so we cut the line at a finite point and ask each half to converge separately. The picture below deliberately puts rather than , to make the point that is ours to choose, and it uses an that changes sign, to make the point that the definition never assumed .
Case (c): , split at . The function shown is negative just to the left of the origin and positive just to the right of it, so the two halves contribute areas of opposite sign. The definition applies to any continuous , not only to .
Three remarks follow from these pictures.
- The value of in part (c) does not matter, as long as both halves converge. Any finite value of gives the same integral, because moving transfers a single ordinary, finite integral from one half to the other.
- If on , the improper integral is the area of the unbounded region under to the right of . It may seem surprising that such a region can have finite area, but the first example below shows that it can.
- Nothing in the definition requires . When changes sign, the integral is still a limit of ordinary signed areas.
A Warning About the Symmetric Limit
A common mistake is to evaluate by the single symmetric limit
This is not the definition, and it can produce a finite value even when the integral diverges. For example,
because for every single . Yet diverges, since . The definition above requires both halves to converge independently, so diverges.
The symmetric limit hides the divergence by cancelling a growing positive area against a growing negative area at exactly the same rate. If you pair the endpoints differently the cancellation fails: . A quantity that changes when you change an arbitrary bookkeeping choice cannot be the value of the integral. The symmetric limit does have a name and a legitimate use: it is the Cauchy principal value, treated in the section on the Cauchy principal value.
Worked Examples
The first two examples are the pair every later test is calibrated against: two curves that both shrink to zero, only one of which encloses finite area.
Evaluate .
Solution
\begin{aligned} \int_1^\infty \frac{dx}{x^2} &= \lim_{b\to\infty}\int_1^b x^{-2}\,dx \\ &= \lim_{b\to\infty}\left[-\frac{1}{x}\right]_1^b \\ &= \lim_{b\to\infty}\left(1 - \frac{1}{b}\right) \\ &= 1. \end{aligned}The integral converges to . Geometrically, the region under stretching infinitely far to the right has total area exactly : the piece beyond contributes only , which we can make as small as we please.
Evaluate .
Solution
\begin{aligned} \int_1^\infty \frac{dx}{x} &= \lim_{b\to\infty}\int_1^b \frac{dx}{x} \\ &= \lim_{b\to\infty}\bigl[\ln x\bigr]_1^b \\ &= \lim_{b\to\infty}\ln b = \infty. \end{aligned}The integral diverges. The area accumulates without bound, although it does so very slowly: reaching an area of requires going out to .
The two integrals just computed have integrands that look nearly identical near , yet one converges and the other does not. Explain the difference, and illustrate it.
Solution
The curves and both pass through and both fall to zero as , yet the first gives a finite area and the second does not. The difference is not whether the integrand tends to zero: both do. The difference is how fast each decays as .
The tail estimates make this quantitative. Beyond the two remaining areas are
The first tail shrinks to zero as grows; the second never does, because can be made arbitrarily large by taking large enough, no matter how far out already is. We will quantify the general pattern precisely in the section on the -integrals, where the -test states that converges exactly when .
Both curves pass through and look nearly identical near , yet only has finite area over .
The next example is the standard doubly infinite integral, and it shows case (c) in action: split first, then take two separate limits.
Evaluate .
Solution
Split at :
For the right half:
\begin{aligned} \int_0^\infty \frac{dx}{1+x^2} &= \lim_{b\to\infty}\bigl[\arctan x\bigr]_0^b \\ &= \lim_{b\to\infty}\arctan b \\ &= \frac{\pi}{2}. \end{aligned}For the left half:
\begin{aligned} \int_{-\infty}^0 \frac{dx}{1+x^2} &= \lim_{a\to-\infty}\bigl[\arctan x\bigr]_a^0 \\ &= 0 - \lim_{a\to-\infty}\arctan a \\ &= 0 - \left(-\frac{\pi}{2}\right) \\ &= \frac{\pi}{2}. \end{aligned}Both halves converge, so
The limits and are visible as the horizontal asymptotes of . They are why the two halves of the integral each equal .
Integrals That Need Integration by Parts
Step 3 of the procedure can be any technique at all. The two examples below are the ones worth practising, because integration by parts leaves behind boundary terms such as that must themselves be sent to a limit. The rule of thumb is: carry the finite endpoint through every line, and take the limit only at the very end.
Evaluate .
Solution
Integrate by parts with and , so and . We first compute the integral over and then take the limit:
\begin{aligned} \int_0^b x\,e^{-x}\,dx &= \bigl[-xe^{-x}\bigr]_0^b + \int_0^b e^{-x}\,dx \\ &= -be^{-b} + 0 + \bigl[-e^{-x}\bigr]_0^b \\ &= -be^{-b} - e^{-b} + 1. \end{aligned}The boundary term needs its own limit. By L'Hôpital's rule applied to , which is of the form ,
and of course as well. Therefore
\begin{aligned} \int_0^\infty x\,e^{-x}\,dx &= \lim_{b\to\infty}\left(1 - be^{-b} - e^{-b}\right) \\ &= 1. \end{aligned}More generally, repeated integration by parts gives
for every positive integer . Each application of integration by parts peels one factor of off the front and multiplies by the exponent, which is exactly how a factorial is built up.
This integral defines the Gamma function: . For positive integers , but is also defined for all positive real numbers, extending the factorial to a continuous function. It is indispensable in probability, combinatorics, and mathematical physics.
The next example uses a trick worth naming: when integrating by parts twice returns the original integral, treat the integral as an unknown and solve for it algebraically.
Evaluate .
Solution
Call the integral . We integrate by parts twice on the finite integral , then take the limit as .
First integration by parts. Let and , so and :
Second integration by parts. Apply integration by parts to the remaining integral with and , so and :
Solving for the integral. Substituting the second result into the first:
\begin{aligned} \int_0^b e^{-x}\cos x\,dx &= \bigl[-e^{-x}\cos x\bigr]_0^b - \bigl[-e^{-x}\sin x\bigr]_0^b \\ &\qquad - \int_0^b e^{-x}\cos x\,dx. \end{aligned}The same integral now appears on both sides, so move it to the left:
\begin{aligned} 2\int_0^b e^{-x}\cos x\,dx &= \Bigl[-e^{-x}(\cos x-\sin x)\Bigr]_0^b \\ &= -e^{-b}(\cos b-\sin b) + 1. \end{aligned}Since , we have . Taking gives , so
The oscillation of never causes trouble here because the factor crushes it: the integrand is trapped between and , both of which have convergent integrals.
Exercises
Evaluate each of the following integrals, or show that it diverges.
Answer
- (a)
- (b)
- (c)
- (d) Diverges
Solution
(a) Integrate to first, then let :
\begin{aligned} \int_0^\infty e^{-x}\,dx &= \lim_{b\to\infty}\bigl[-e^{-x}\bigr]_0^b \\ &= \lim_{b\to\infty}\left(1 - e^{-b}\right) \\ &= 1. \end{aligned}(b) By definition:
\begin{aligned} \int_{-\infty}^0 e^{x}\,dx &= \lim_{a\to-\infty}\int_a^0 e^{x}\,dx \\ &= \lim_{a\to-\infty}\bigl[e^{x}\bigr]_a^0 \\ &= \lim_{a\to-\infty}(1 - e^{a}) \\ &= 1. \end{aligned}This is the mirror image of part (a), as case (b) of the definition always is.
(c) An antiderivative of is , which tends to as , so a finite limit is in prospect:
\begin{aligned} \int_2^\infty \frac{dx}{x^3} &= \lim_{b\to\infty}\left[-\frac{1}{2x^2}\right]_2^b \\ &= \lim_{b\to\infty}\left(\frac{1}{8} - \frac{1}{2b^2}\right) \\ &= \frac{1}{8}. \end{aligned}(d) Here , whose antiderivative is . Unlike the antiderivative in part (c), this one grows without bound, so we should expect trouble:
\begin{aligned} \int_1^b \frac{dx}{\sqrt{x}} &= \bigl[2\sqrt{x}\bigr]_1^b \\ &= 2\sqrt{b} - 2. \end{aligned}Since as , the integral diverges. The integrand does tend to zero, but far too slowly.
Evaluate .
Hint: Let .
Answer
.
Solution
By definition,
We first evaluate the integral over the finite interval . Let ; then , so . When , ; when , . Substituting:
\begin{aligned} \int_0^b x\,e^{-x^2}\,dx &= \int_0^{b^2} e^{-u}\cdot\frac{du}{2} \\ &= \frac{1}{2}\int_0^{b^2} e^{-u}\,du \\ &= \frac{1}{2}\Bigl[-e^{-u}\Bigr]_0^{b^2} \\ &= \frac{1}{2}\bigl(1-e^{-b^2}\bigr). \end{aligned}Since as , we obtain
Show that diverges.
Answer
Diverges.
Solution
Computing the antiderivative over the finite interval :
\begin{aligned} \int_1^b \sin x\,dx &= \bigl[-\cos x\bigr]_1^b \\ &= -\cos b + \cos 1 \\ &= \cos 1 - \cos b. \end{aligned}As , does not approach any limit: it oscillates between and indefinitely. Therefore does not exist, and the integral diverges.
Note that divergence here is not caused by the area growing to infinity. The partial integrals stay bounded between and ; they simply never settle on a value. A limit that fails to exist counts as divergence just as much as an infinite one.
Evaluate .
Hint: Integrate by parts.
Answer
.
Solution
Integrate by parts. Let and , so and . Then:
\begin{aligned} \int_1^b \frac{\ln x}{x^2}\,dx &= \left[-\frac{\ln x}{x}\right]_1^b + \int_1^b \frac{1}{x}\cdot\frac{dx}{x} \\ &= \left(-\frac{\ln b}{b} + \frac{\ln 1}{1}\right) + \int_1^b x^{-2}\,dx \\ &= -\frac{\ln b}{b} + 0 + \left[-\frac{1}{x}\right]_1^b \\ &= -\frac{\ln b}{b} - \frac{1}{b} + 1. \end{aligned}As :
- , by L'Hôpital's rule: has the form , and differentiating top and bottom gives .
- .
Therefore:
Evaluate .
Answer
.
Solution
Integrate by parts. Let and , so and :
\begin{aligned} \int_0^b x^2 e^{-x}\,dx &= \bigl[-x^2 e^{-x}\bigr]_0^b + 2\int_0^b x\,e^{-x}\,dx \\ &= -b^2 e^{-b} + 0 + 2\int_0^b x\,e^{-x}\,dx. \end{aligned}We showed in the worked example on that this last integral tends to . It remains to check that as . Applying L'Hôpital's rule twice to :
Taking :
This is the case of the formula .
Determine whether converges or diverges. If it converges, find its value.
Hint: Use the same technique as in the worked example on : integrate by parts twice.
Answer
Converges, with value .
Solution
We integrate by parts twice, carrying a finite upper limit throughout and taking the limit at the end. Let .
First integration by parts. Let and , so and :
\begin{aligned} \int_0^b e^{-x}\sin x\,dx &= \bigl[-e^{-x}\sin x\bigr]_0^b + \int_0^b e^{-x}\cos x\,dx \\ &= -e^{-b}\sin b + 0 + \int_0^b e^{-x}\cos x\,dx. \end{aligned}Second integration by parts. Apply integration by parts to the remaining integral. Let and , so and :
\begin{aligned} \int_0^b e^{-x}\cos x\,dx &= \bigl[-e^{-x}\cos x\bigr]_0^b - \int_0^b (-e^{-x})(-\sin x)\,dx \\ &= (-e^{-b}\cos b + 1) - \int_0^b e^{-x}\sin x\,dx. \end{aligned}Solving for the integral. Substituting this back into the first result:
Moving the integral from the right side to the left:
\begin{aligned} 2\int_0^b e^{-x}\sin x\,dx &= 1 - e^{-b}\sin b - e^{-b}\cos b \\ &= 1 - e^{-b}(\sin b + \cos b). \end{aligned}Since , we have as . Taking the limit:
Let be any real number and let be a constant. Show that converges when and find its value. What happens when ?
Answer
For the integral converges to . For it diverges.
Solution
Assume first that , so that has the antiderivative . Integrating over the finite interval :
\begin{aligned} \int_a^b e^{-kx}\,dx &= \left[-\frac{1}{k}e^{-kx}\right]_a^b \\ &= \frac{e^{-ka} - e^{-kb}}{k}. \end{aligned}Case . Then as , so and
Case . Write with . Then , so the expression above has no finite limit and the integral diverges.
Case . The integrand is the constant , and , so the integral diverges.
As a check, setting and gives , which agrees with part (a) of the first exercise. The formula also shows the useful qualitative fact that faster decay, meaning larger , gives a smaller total area.
Evaluate .
Answer
.
Solution
The antiderivative comes from the standard form with :
Because both limits are infinite, we must use case (c) and split. Take .
Right half:
\begin{aligned} \int_0^\infty \frac{dx}{x^2+4} &= \lim_{b\to\infty}\frac{1}{2}\left[\arctan\frac{x}{2}\right]_0^b \\ &= \frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\pi}{2} - 0\right) \\ &= \frac{\pi}{4}. \end{aligned}Left half:
\begin{aligned} \int_{-\infty}^0 \frac{dx}{x^2+4} &= \lim_{a\to-\infty}\frac{1}{2}\left[\arctan\frac{x}{2}\right]_a^0 \\ &= \frac{1}{2}\left(0 - \left(-\frac{\pi}{2}\right)\right) \\ &= \frac{\pi}{4}. \end{aligned}Both halves converge, so the integral converges and
Compare this with : widening the bell by a factor of while lowering its peak by a factor of has halved the total area.
Evaluate .
Hint: Let .
Answer
.
Solution
The integrand is continuous on , since there, so the only impropriety is the infinite upper limit. Work on with .
Let , so . When , ; when , . The substitution turns the integral into one of the simplest possible shapes, an inverse square in :
\begin{aligned} \int_2^b \frac{dx}{x\ln^2 x} &= \int_{\ln 2}^{\ln b} \frac{du}{u^2} \\ &= \left[-\frac{1}{u}\right]_{\ln 2}^{\ln b} \\ &= \frac{1}{\ln 2} - \frac{1}{\ln b}. \end{aligned}As we have , so and
The exponent on the logarithm is decisive, and the same substitution shows why. Applied to it produces , which tends to , so that integral diverges. Dropping the exponent from to turns a convergent integral into a divergent one, even though the change to the integrand looks slight.
Evaluate .
Answer
.
Solution
Let , so . When , ; when , :
\begin{aligned} \int_0^b \frac{dx}{(1+x)^3} &= \int_1^{1+b} u^{-3}\,du \\ &= \left[-\frac{1}{2u^2}\right]_1^{1+b} \\ &= \frac{1}{2} - \frac{1}{2(1+b)^2}. \end{aligned}As the subtracted term tends to , so
The shift by is what makes this integral behave: it moves the singularity of from off the interval, leaving only the Type I impropriety at the top. Far out, is nearly , and its antiderivative dies away to , which is exactly the behaviour that produces a finite answer.
Determine whether converges or diverges.
Answer
Diverges.
Solution
Let , so . When , ; when , :
\begin{aligned} \int_0^b \frac{2x\,dx}{1+x^2} &= \int_1^{1+b^2}\frac{du}{u} \\ &= \bigl[\ln u\bigr]_1^{1+b^2} \\ &= \ln\left(1+b^2\right). \end{aligned}As , , so the integral diverges.
The reason is visible in the integrand: for large ,
so the tail behaves like twice the tail of , which we already know diverges. Note how little separates this from the convergent case: dropping the factor gives , a perfectly finite number.
Evaluate .
Answer
.
Solution
The factor is exactly the derivative of , which invites the substitution , . When , ; when , . Then
\begin{aligned} \int_1^b \frac{\arctan x}{1+x^2}\,dx &= \int_{\pi/4}^{\arctan b} u\,du \\ &= \left[\frac{u^2}{2}\right]_{\pi/4}^{\arctan b} \\ &= \frac{(\arctan b)^2}{2} - \frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\pi}{4}\right)^2 \\ &= \frac{(\arctan b)^2}{2} - \frac{\pi^2}{32}. \end{aligned}As , , so
\begin{aligned} \int_1^\infty \frac{\arctan x}{1+x^2}\,dx &= \frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\pi}{2}\right)^2 - \frac{\pi^2}{32} \\ &= \frac{\pi^2}{8} - \frac{\pi^2}{32} \\ &= \frac{4\pi^2 - \pi^2}{32} \\ &= \frac{3\pi^2}{32} \approx 0.9253. \end{aligned}The limit was easy because is bounded: the substitution turned an infinite interval in into the finite interval in , and a bounded integrand on a finite interval cannot misbehave.
The region under for is revolved about the -axis. The resulting infinitely long solid is called Gabriel's Horn.
The horn has mouth radius at , and its cross-sectional radius shrinks to zero as grows.
- Using the disc formula , show that the volume is finite and find it.
- Using the surface formula S = 2\pi\displaystyle\int_1^\infty y\sqrt{1+(y')^2}\,dx, show that the surface area is infinite.
Answer
(a) . (b) diverges, so the surface area is infinite.
Solution
(a) The volume. With we have , so
\begin{aligned} V &= \pi\int_1^\infty \frac{dx}{x^2} \\ &= \pi\lim_{b\to\infty}\left[-\frac{1}{x}\right]_1^b \\ &= \pi\lim_{b\to\infty}\left(1-\frac{1}{b}\right) \\ &= \pi. \end{aligned}This is just the first worked example multiplied by . The horn holds exactly cubic units.
(b) The surface area. Here y' = -1/x^2, so (y')^2 = 1/x^4 and
We do not need to evaluate this. Since for all , the square root satisfies , so the integrand is larger than at every point. Therefore, for every ,
Because , the partial integrals are unbounded, so diverges: the surface area is infinite.
This is the painter's paradox. The horn can be filled with units of paint, yet no finite amount of paint suffices to coat its inner surface. The paradox dissolves once you notice that filling uses volume, which weights the radius quadratically as (convergent), while coating uses surface, which weights it only linearly as (divergent). Physical paint has thickness, and past a certain point the horn is narrower than the paint layer.
Consider .
- Show that .
- Explain why part (a) does not show that converges.
- Compute and say what it tells you.
Answer
- (a) .
- (b) Because the definition requires each half, and , to converge on its own, and diverges.
- (c) . Different pairings of the two endpoints give different answers, so no single value can be assigned; the integral diverges.
Solution
(a) For each fixed ,
\begin{aligned} \int_{-b}^{b} x\,dx &= \left[\frac{x^2}{2}\right]_{-b}^{b} \\ &= \frac{b^2}{2} - \frac{b^2}{2} \\ &= 0. \end{aligned}Every term of the family is , so the limit as is .
(b) The definition of a doubly infinite integral is case (c): choose a finite and require that both and converge. Take . The right half is
which diverges. One divergent half is enough: diverges, and the symmetric limit in part (a) has not contradicted this. What that limit did was cancel a positive area against a negative area , both of which are racing to infinity, by insisting the two endpoints move at exactly the same speed.
(c) Letting the right endpoint run out twice as fast:
\begin{aligned} \int_{-b}^{2b} x\,dx &= \left[\frac{x^2}{2}\right]_{-b}^{2b} \\ &= \frac{4b^2}{2} - \frac{b^2}{2} \\ &= \frac{3b^2}{2}, \end{aligned}which tends to . More generally, , whose limit is for , is for , and is for . The "value" therefore depends entirely on an arbitrary choice about how the two endpoints are tied together, which is precisely why the definition refuses to tie them together at all.
The symmetric answer is not meaningless, and later in this chapter it is given a name and a definition of its own. What parts (b) and (c) establish is only that it is not the same thing as convergence, and that the definition of deliberately declines to use it.