Kirby 1

Madison Kirby
AP Calculus
Mrs. Tallman
23 March 2015
Riemann Sums
With different concepts of calculus come different applications. One such concept is
estimating the area beneath the function, or curve. Finding the area under the curve of a
derivative function will make it possible to calculate the original functions total change. For
example, if the rate of change of a cars distance travelled is given in an equation, the area under
the curve can be used to calculate the total distance the car would travel. Generally, the area is
between an interval which would then give the total distance of the car within that interval. To
calculate this area a few different methods are employed.
The first way to calculate the area under the curve is through the use of the Riemann sum.
The Riemann Sum is an approximation of the definite integral of f (x) , with respect to

and in the interval of [a ,b ] . This operation makes use of rectangles to approximate areas.
Take note of approximate. Riemann Sums do not compute an exact value, but only estimate the
area under the curve. The rectangles stretch from the x-axis to the function, with widths all being
of equal size. The areas of these rectangles are then added together to estimate the total area.
There are three different ways to set up the rectangles: left, right, and midpoint, each shown
below.

Kirby 2

Figure 1. Left Riemann Sum (Foerster)

Figure 1 above shows how the rectangles are drawn for rectangles aligned to the left. The
height of these rectangles would be when the left side of the rectangle reaches the function. In
more mathematical lingo, the height of the rectangles is determined by the y-value that results
from the function f(x) when x is at the lowest value that is still in that specific rectangle.
Whatever sizes the rectangles are, the area is calculated and the sum is found. As mentioned
previously, their base widths remain the same while the heights may differ based on the function.

Figure 2. Right Riemann Sum (Foerster)

For right Riemann Sums, shown in Figure 2 above, the height of the rectangles is
determined by the functions y-value on the far right of the base of each rectangle. So, once the
rectangles right corner touches the function, the height is determined.

Kirby 3

Figure 3. Midpoint Riemann Sum (Foerster)

Figure 3 displays the midpoint Riemann Sum drawing. For this method, the height of the
rectangles is determined by the functions y-value in the center of the base of each rectangle. The
rectangles stretch to reach the function at the middle of their width. Also, there are upper and
lower Riemann Sums. In these methods the heights are the highest and lowest y-values within
the width of the rectangle. Some heights may be on the right side, some on the left, middle, or
elsewhere.

Figure 4. Left Riemann Sum Example

Figure 4 shows an application for the left Riemann sum with the function
f ( x )=(x3)4 +2( x3)34 ( x3 ) +5 . The dotted lines show where the interval lies, at x=1
and x=5. Since the height is found from the leftmost point of the rectangle, this means the height
of the first rectangle is f ( 1 )=13 , and the height of the second rectangle is f ( 3 ) =5 . To

Kirby 4
calculate the Riemann Sum, the areas of the two rectangles must be found and added together.

This is done using the formula

Rn= f (c k ) x k . The
k=1

number of rectangles, f ( x ) is the function,

the rectangles, and

xk

Rn

is the solution, n is the

x represents the values that are the height of

is the width of the rectangles. To find the Riemann sum by hand, first

calculate the areas of the two rectangles using area=length width . The widths are 2 units and
heights are 13 and 5 units, which result in the areas being 26 and 10 units2, which becomes a
total of 36 units2. Another form to write this in is f ( 1 ) ( 2 )+ f ( 3 ) ( 2 )=36 .

Figure 5. Right Riemann Sum Example

Above, Figure 5 shows the rectangles and function for a right Riemann Sum example.
Figure 5 uses the same formula as in Figure 4, except this time the height of the rectangles is
dependent upon the rightmost side. The dotted lines are also the same, representing the interval
from x=1 to x=5. The height of the first rectangle is f ( 3 ) =5 , and the height of the second

Kirby 5
rectangle is f ( 5 ) =29 . To calculate the Riemann sum, use the same formula as described in
Figure 4 or find the areas of the two rectangles. Each rectangle has a width of 2 units with
heights at 5 and 29 units. This means that the areas are 10 and 58 units2, which comes to a total
of 68 units2. This is also written as f ( 3 ) ( 2 ) +f ( 5 ) ( 2 )=68 .

Figure 6. Midpoint Riemann Sum Example

The midpoint Riemann Sum example for the function used in Figure 4 is shown in Figure
6 above. The interval remains the same and is still shown with the dotted lines. The height of
each of the two rectangles is determined by where the function and the rectangles midpoint
touch. Keeping this in mind, the height of the first rectangle is f ( 2 )=8 and the height of the

second rectangle is f ( 4 )=4 . The same formula mentioned with Figure 4 will calculate this
area, however to do this by hand the areas must be found separately and then added together.
Each rectangle still has a width of 2 units and with their heights at 8 and 4 units, the areas come

Kirby 6
out to be 16 and 8 units2, or 24 units2 in total. Another way to write this is
f ( 2 ) ( 2 )+ f ( 4 ) ( 2 )=24 .

Figure 7. Upper Riemann Sum Example

Figure 7 shows the upper Riemann Sum for the function used in Figure 4. The height of
each rectangle is determined by the highest y-value of the function that lies within the width of
the rectangles. Which means that the height of the first rectangle is f ( 1 )=13 and the height of

the second rectangle is f ( 5 ) =29 . When using a calculator, the formula mentioned earlier is
used again. When calculating by hand, the areas are each found to be 26 and 58 units2, which
totals 84 units2. This can also be written as f ( 1 ) ( 2 )+ f ( 5 ) ( 2 )=84 .

Figure 8. Lower Riemann Sum Example

Kirby 7
Figure 8 shows an example of a lower Riemann sum. The same function is used as in
Figure 4. Here, the heights are determined by the lowest y-value within the width of each
rectangle. The height of the first rectangle is f ( 3 ) =5 and the height of the second rectangle is

approximately f ( 3.68 ) =3 .12. With a calculator, use the formula mentioned above. By hand,
the areas must be found and added together. In this problem, the areas come out to be 10 and
approximately 6.25 units2, which total to 16.25 units2. This is also written as
f ( 3 ) ( 2 ) +f ( 3.12 ) ( 2 )=16.25 .
Another way to determine the area under the curve is through the use of the trapezoid
rule, which is a very similar method to Riemann Sums. Instead of using rectangles, the trapezoid
rule uses trapezoids, hence the name. Because the trapezoid rule is able to fit to the curve more
accurately that the rectangles because of the shape of the trapezoids, the results are more accurate
representations, however, this is also just an estimate of the area under the curve and not an exact
computation. Every trapezoid in a problem has the same width for its base along the x-axis. The
length of each leg is the y-value of the function at that particular height of that leg. What this
means is that the legs stretch from the x-axis until they reach the function.

Figure 9. Trapezoid Rule Example

Kirby 8
Figure 9 displays the example for the trapezoid rule using the function from Figure 4.
Here, however, there are four trapezoids because there are four intervals within the interval from
x=1 to x=5. Since there are four trapezoids in the interval and each trapezoid has the same width,
each unit must be 4 units in width. As mentioned earlier, the height of each leg is determined by
the y-value of the function at the same x-value as the leg. This means that the height of the first
leg of the first trapezoid is f ( 1 )=13 , the second leg is f ( 2 )=8 , and so on. As with
Riemann Sums, to find the solution, the sum of the areas of the shapes must be found. This is

done with the formula

1
1
Tn
T n= x [ f ( a ) +f ( x 1 ) +f ( x 2 ) + f ( x3 ) + +f ( x n1 ) + f ( b ) ]
.
is the
2
2

solution, f (x) is the function, a and b are the upper and lower limits of the interval,

and x

is the width of each trapezoid where

x1 , x2 , x3

, and so on, are spaced x

x=

ba
. In the equation, the values of
n

units apart. Instead of doing it this way, the total can

also be calculated by hand. To properly calculate this way, each area must be found separately

using the area formula of area=

base 1

height (base 1+ base2 )

. The vertical legs are substituted in for
2

and base 2 , and the horizontal width of each region is substituted for height .

From here, the areas are computed to be 10.5, 6.5, 4.5, and 16.5 units2, which totals to 38 units2.

Kirby 9

Substituting into the formula above,

1
1
T n=1[ f ( 1 ) + f ( 2 ) + f ( 3 ) +f ( 4 ) + f ( 5 ) ]
, which also
2
2

results in 38 units2.

Furthermore, there is yet another method one can use to determine the area under a curve.
This method is Simpsons rule. Of all three methods, Simpsons rule is the most accurate and still
has steps similar to the other two. Similar to how Riemann Sums uses rectangles and the
trapezoid rule uses trapezoids, Simpsons rule estimates the area by using parabolas. Their
curved shape is what makes this method able to fit the function more accurately and thus produce
the most accurate solutions of the three. Simpsons rule separates the interval into vertical
sections with equal widths. This method requires that the number of sections to be even so this
means there must be an odd number of data points.

Figure 10. Simpsons Rule Example (Foerster)

Figure 10 compares a trapezoid rule graph, on the left, to a Simpsons rule graph, on the
right. First, each graph shows how the top of the trapezoid rule is a linear function graph that
leaves large errors between the line and the function, and how the top of the Simpsons rule
graph is a quadratic function graph that still leaves errors, but the errors are much smaller. The
spaces are the errors with the methods. The bigger the errors are, the more inaccurate the result
will be. The smaller the errors are, the more accurate the results will be because they are able to

Kirby 10
fit to the curve better. Simpsons rule formula is

1
( x)( y 0 + 4 y 1+ 2 y 2 +4 y 3+ 2 y 4+ +2 y n2+ 4 y n1 + y n )
. Once again, x
3

is the width of

each strip and n is the number of subintervals. If Simpsons rule is calculated using the
function in Figure 4, the values would be substituted in and become

1
(1)(13+ 4 8+2 5+ 4 4+29)
. This calculates the area to be 33.33 units2.
3
To compare and contrast each of these three methods, Riemann Sums, trapezoid rule, and
Simpsons rule, it would be noted how each is used to approximate the area under the curve of a
function within an interval. Each method splits up the interval into subintervals of different
shapes, Riemann Sums using rectangles, trapezoid rule using trapezoids, and Simpsons rule
using parabolas. Of the three, the method that is able to fit the curve the best and thus result in
the most accurate answers is Simpsons rule. Every method becomes more and more accurate
when the number of strips increases. This is because the smaller the intervals, the closer to the
curve the shapes are going to get. The limit of each method as n approaches , or as
x

approaches 0, is the definite integral of the function within the same interval, which

means that

(each method)
f ( x) dx=lim
x 0
a

Kirby 11

Figure 11. Mean Value Theorem in Integral Form Example

Above is an illustration of the Mean Value Theorem in integral form for the same
function used in Figure 4. MVT for integrals states that for a continuous function, there will be at
least one point where the exact value of a function equals the average value of that function over
a given interval. This means that if a function f (x) is continuous on the closed interval [a, b],

f (x) dx

then there exists at least one point x=c in [a, b] for which f ( c )= y = a
av

ba

, or,

f ( c ) ( ab )= f ( x) dx .
a
Keeping MVT in mind and combining it with the idea behind Riemann Sums, the area
under the curve can be found more accurately. The MVT is used to find the average value of the
function within one subinterval. This value is then used as the height. With the function shown in
Figure 11, MVT computes an average value of 8.2 for the first subinterval and a value of 8.2 for
the second subinterval. In the first interval, c=1.9, and the second interval, c=4.37. In Figure 11,
these points are shown with the large black dots. Each rectangle is 8.2 units tall and 2 units wide,

Kirby 12
so their sum can be written as f(1.9)(2)+f(1.9)(2)=32.8, which equals an area of 32.8 units2. This
value is the same as the value that is found from calculating this area with the definite integral
from 1 to 5. So, using the definite integral process or simply using MVT with the concepts of
Riemann Sums will produce the same answer.
Now that all of this calculus information is explained, it is time to apply it to a problem.
For example, there is a spherical hot air balloon that expands as the air inside it is heated. The
balloons radius is represented by a function r (t) , where the radius, r , is measured in feet

and the time, t , is measured in seconds. When t

is between 0 and 12, the graph of r (t)

is concave down and this function can be differentiated twice.

Table 1. Rate of Change of the Radius Over Time
t (seconds) 0
1
4
7
11
12
r(t) (ft/sec) 5.7 4.0 2.0 1.4 0.5 0.4
Table 1 gives selected values of the rate of change r '(t) of the radius of the balloon
over the time interval 0 t 12 . It can be seen that the rate decreases as time increases. The
amount that the rate decreases is at uneven intervals. This rate of change is represented by the
function r '(t) , which is the derivative of r (t) .
If it is given that the radius of the balloon is 32 feet when t=7, then it is possible to
estimate the radius of the balloon when t=7.2. This can be done using the tangent line
approximation at t=7. Using this information, the equation for this tangent line is found to be
f ( x )=1.4 x +32 . Plugging in 7.2 for

in this function results in the value of 10.08, which

Kirby 13
is the approximate radius of the balloon at t=7.2. With this calculation, the result is greater than
the true value because the tangent line used to approximate it will have a positive slope but the
function used to model the true radius is concave down, so the slope ends up decreasing over
time. So, as the value of t moves away from 7, the tangent line at t=7 will become more and
more inaccurate by representing a value higher than the actual value.
Next, the rate of change of the volume of the balloon with respect to time when t=7 must
be found. The rate of change of the volume of the balloon with respect to time when t=7 can be
calculated by differentiating the equation for the volume of a sphere. The formula for volume of

4
2
v = r2
a sphere is
, and the derivative of this is v ' =4 r . Since the radius at t=7 is 32, 32
3

is substituted into the equation for r

and results in 4096, meaning that the rate of change of

the volume of the balloon is 4096 ft3/sec. The unit ft3/sec is used because this process is
calculating the volume in feet with respect to time in seconds, so feet cubed over seconds.
With this data, a Riemann Sum can be calculated. For this example a right Riemann Sum
with 5 subintervals shall be used. The definite integral from 0 to 12 of r '(t) can be
approximated using the values from Table one and the example previously mentioned, right
Riemann Sum with 5 subintervals. The formula would become
r ' ( 1 ) ( 1 )+ r ' ( 4 ) ( 3 ) +r ' (7)(3)+r '(11)(3)+r ' ( 12 ) (1) , which results in 16.1. What this means is
that the total change of the balloons radius from t=0 to t=12 is 16.1 ft. The units here are feet
because the problem is dealing with the radius, which was in feet. This value is greater than the

Kirby 14
12

true value of

r ' ( t ) dt
0

because it uses a right Riemann sum, which uses the highest value in

the width thus overestimating the area under the curve.

To conclude, estimating the area under the curve may sound complex, however there are
a multitude of simple methods that make comprehension of this topic very easy. With the first
method being Riemann Sums, the trapezoid rule and Simpsons rule build upon the basic
concepts to display how accuracies can vary for the same values simply from different shapes.
The Mean Value Theorem for integrals also plays a significant role because of its accuracy and
development upon the concept of Riemann Sums. Without first understand the idea behind
Riemann Sums, understand the other methods would be much more difficult. Although some
math concepts are more difficult to relate to real life situations, Riemann Sums are actually quite
applicable. Many situations, such as cars movement, hot air balloons volume, and many more are
all understandable and solvable using these methods. This just goes to show that math is
everywhere.

Kirby 15
Works Cited
Foerster, Paul A. Calculus: Concepts and Applications. Emeryville, CA: Key Curriculum, 2005.
Print.