Infinite Sequences and Series (BC Only)
If the radial coordinate changes sign while the angular coordinate remains fixed, what happens to a point's location?
Not sure where it moves since radial negative values aren't allowed.
It moves across the polar axis into the opposite quadrant.
The point gets closer to the fixed pole but stays in the same quadrant.
There is no change in position since the angle doesn't change.
What is true about an alternating series with decreasing positive terms starting with a negative leading coefficient whose nth partial sum exceeds its limit by more than twice the nd-term?
It violates both Leibniz’s test for convergence and established bounds on accuracy based on following terms’ magnitudes indicating divergence or misapplication of tests/bounds.
Incorrect application of Leibniz’s test yet observes bounds rules thus implying potentially slower rate of convergence instead.
There is no violation or implication as long as subsequent terms continue decreasing which guarantees eventual conformance to established thresholds regardless of initial partial sums' exceedance.
Correct application Of Leibniz’s test indicating accelerated rate of convergence beyond expected parameters set By usual bounding principles.
If the series converges, what is the maximum value of when using the Alternating Series Error Bound to approximate the sum with ?
What is the range of values for the angle in polar coordinates?
can be any real number
Which of the following best describes the relationship between the error bound and the accuracy of an approximation?
Higher error bound indicates higher accuracy.
Higher error bound indicates lower accuracy.
Lower error bound indicates lower accuracy.
Lower error bound indicates higher accuracy.
If an alternating series has general term given by , what is the maximum possible error if we use the first five terms to approximate the sum of the series?
More than or equal to a fraction
More than a fraction
Less than a fraction
Less than or equal to a fraction
What is an effect on the convergence of a series if each term in an alternating series is replaced by , assuming that all original terms were decreasing and positive?
The series converges faster due to the natural logarithm's properties.
Convergence may be affected since doesn't necessarily decrease monotonically for all n.
Convergence isn't affected as long as all terms remain positive.
The series diverges because logarithmic functions have slower decay than polynomials or exponentials.

How are we doing?
Give us your feedback and let us know how we can improve
If a student uses the fourth term in the alternating series as an approximation for its sum, what's a possible maximum error for their estimate?
Greater than but less than
Exactly
Less than or equal to
Equal to zero since it converges absolutely.
If the alternating series has its error bound calculated using the first four terms, what is the maximum possible error?
Less than or equal to
Less than or equal to
Less than or equal to
Less than or equal to
If an alternating series satisfies for all and , what can we say about using its nth term as an error estimate when approximating its sum?
The error cannot be estimated without knowing exact values of subsequent terms.
The error will be greater than or equal to twice the absolute value of the first omitted term.
The error will be less than or equal to the absolute value of the first omitted term.
The error will oscillate between zero and twice the absolute value of any term.