View written solutionFree
Correct answer: 5
Let where is any real polynomial of degree at most .
We must find the minimum possible value of where denotes the number of distinct real roots of .
1. First understand the structure of
Since we see that and are always roots of , each of multiplicity at least .
Therefore:
- ,
- so has at least two distinct real roots: and .
Hence,
2. Use Rolle's theorem on
Since has distinct real roots at and , Rolle's theorem applied to on gives at least one real root of in .
Thus,
So immediately,
But this is not enough; we need the exact minimum.
3. Compute derivatives in a useful form
Let Then So with Hence
Therefore always has factors and , confirming the roots .
Let Then Since has degree at most , has degree at most .
Now differentiate again:
In particular, evaluate at : But because vanishes at . Thus
So:
- if , then is also a root of ;
- if , then is also a root of .
4. Try to make the total as small as possible
To minimize , we want:
- as few real roots of as possible,
- as few real roots of as possible.
Since already has roots at , the best hope is Then must have at least one real root between and . Could we make If yes, total would be .
But there is a stronger obstruction.
5. Show that must have at least 3 distinct real roots if
Assume we choose so that has exactly the two real roots and . Then these are consecutive real roots of , so by Rolle there is at least one root of in .
Now examine behavior outside this interval.
Because and has no real roots other than , the polynomial has no real roots. Therefore has constant sign on .
Hence for , since , the sign of is the same constant sign on both intervals and . Inside , since , the sign of is the opposite constant sign. Thus the sign pattern of is:
- one constant sign on ,
- opposite sign on ,
- original sign again on .
So changes sign at both and .
Therefore:
- on , must go from its limiting sign at to at with a sign change there, forcing an extremum of in , hence a root of there;
- on , Rolle already gives one root of ;
- on , similarly there must be another root of .
Hence,
So if , then
6. Could taking more roots for reduce the sum?
If , then at best by Rolle between consecutive roots of . So
If , the sum is even larger.
Therefore for all ,
7. Construct an example attaining 5
We now need an example with equality. Take Then
Compute derivatives: So the distinct real roots of are thus
Next, Its distinct real roots are thus
Therefore,
So the minimum possible value is
8. Comparison with stored answer
Stored correct answer: .
Our derived answer matches it.
More from Functions
- Let the function f : [0, 1] R be defined by Then the value of …2020 · Numerical
- Let the function be defined by Suppose the function f has a local minimum at precisely when …2020 · Numerical
- Let X be a set with exactly 5 elements and Y be a set with exactly 7 elements. If is the number of one-one functions from X to Y and is the number of onto functions from Y to X, then the value of …2018 · Numerical
- Let and (Here, the inverse…2018 · MCQ
- Let S = {1, 2, 3, .........., 9}. For k = 1, 2, .........., 5, let Nk be the number of subsets of S, each containing five elements out of which exactly k are odd. Then N1 + N2 + N3 + N4 + N5 =2017 · MCQ
- Let for all and g(x) = for all x R. Let denote f(g(x)) and denote g(f(x)).…2015 · Multiple correct
- For every pair of continuous function f, g : [0, 1] R such that max {f(x) : x [0, 1]} = max {g(x) : x [0, 1]}. The correct statement(s) is (are)2014 · Multiple correct
- Let be given by . Then,2014 · Multiple correct