| Exam Board | CAIE |
|---|---|
| Module | P2 (Pure Mathematics 2) |
| Year | 2010 |
| Session | June |
| Marks | 4 |
| Paper | Download PDF ↗ |
| Mark scheme | Download PDF ↗ |
| Topic | Numerical integration |
| Type | Over/underestimate justification with graph |
| Difficulty | Moderate -0.3 This is a straightforward application of the trapezium rule with only two intervals (minimal computation) followed by a standard concavity reasoning question. The function evaluation is simple with a calculator, and determining over/under-estimate from the curve's shape is a routine skill tested at this level. Slightly easier than average due to minimal computational demand. |
| Spec | 1.09f Trapezium rule: numerical integration |
| Answer | Marks | Guidance |
|---|---|---|
| (i) State or imply correct ordinates \(0.27067..., 0.20521..., 0.14936...\) | B1 | |
| Use correct formula, or equivalent, correctly with \(h = 0.5\) and three ordinates | M1 | |
| Obtain answer \(0.21\) with no errors seen | A1 | [3] |
| (ii) Justify statement that the trapezium rule gives an over-estimate | B1 | [1] |
**(i)** State or imply correct ordinates $0.27067..., 0.20521..., 0.14936...$ | B1 |
Use correct formula, or equivalent, correctly with $h = 0.5$ and three ordinates | M1 |
Obtain answer $0.21$ with no errors seen | A1 | [3]
**(ii)** Justify statement that the trapezium rule gives an over-estimate | B1 | [1]2\\
\includegraphics[max width=\textwidth, alt={}, center]{af7c2b6e-1293-4744-8ea0-927fea5ab4ec-2_531_949_431_598}
The diagram shows part of the curve $y = x \mathrm { e } ^ { - x }$. The shaded region $R$ is bounded by the curve and by the lines $x = 2 , x = 3$ and $y = 0$.\\
(i) Use the trapezium rule with two intervals to estimate the area of $R$, giving your answer correct to 2 decimal places.\\
(ii) State, with a reason, whether the trapezium rule gives an under-estimate or an over-estimate of the true value of the area of $R$.
\hfill \mbox{\textit{CAIE P2 2010 Q2 [4]}}