Talk:Integration by parts
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
||||||||||
| |||||||||||
.svg){kind=small} | Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
(Untitled section)[edit]
- An alternative notation has the advantage that the factors of the original expression are identified as f and g
Why is that an advantage? It seems arbitrary to say it's better to call them f and g than to call them u and v. Michael Hardy 00:27, 15 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- That's not what I meant. The "classic" notation tells you what to do when you are integrating "f(x)g'(x)". The "alternative" integrates "f(x)g(x)". See? -- Tarquin 18:58, 15 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Please revise the "recursive formulation" section[edit]
I suggest the author of section 4 “recursive formulation” http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Integration_by_parts&action=edit§ion=4 of the article Integration_by_parts to revise the recursive formula that is suspected to be mistaken or notation needs to be further clarified. It seems to differ from the corresponding formula in Mathworld: http://mathworld.wolfram.com/IntegrationbyParts.html. Consider inclusion of another term on RHS, integral of product of some functions.
Q: Recursive formulation[edit]
In the section Recursive formulation, what are the ? Are they distinct?
Thanks!
Naming of tabular form[edit]
I am in strong doubt about most of the given names for the tabular form of repeated integration by parts. Especially, I have a hard time to assume that this film title is really given in the cited reference. Purgy (talk) 17:18, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
Weird formatting glitch on the desktop version[edit]
There's a strange math formatting glitch occurring on this page, though only on the desktop version, with a wide page. The formatting for "dv = v'(x)dx" in the third paragraph mysteriously has the second v rotated 90 degrees counter-clockwise, as well as mirrored (I think). Worth noting is that this doesn't show up on the mobile version, neither in the app or on en.m.wikipedia.org, and it disappears when the window is made narrower. I would attempt to fix it, but I'm personally entirely clueless on why this occurs
On further inspection, there are lots of occurrences of this glitch on this page, seemingly at random. There's more twisted vs, but I've also spotted at least one x, and even a prime.