Evert 1

Lauren Evert
Mrs. Tallman
AP Calculus
21 March 2016
Riemann Sums and Other Integral Estimators
Two major components of calculus are the derivative and integral. Both of these topics
have been previously discussed in previous papers, however, there is more than what was
originally explained. In particular, there are more to definite integrals than using the fundamental
theorem of calculus. Another way to calculate the area under the curve within an interval, the
definite integral, is to find the area of different shapes put together under the curve to estimate
the area.
One of these estimation methods involves using multiple rectangles stacked together
underneath the curve. The area of each of these rectangles is added together to approximate the
area under the curve; this is known as finding the Riemann sum. The area of a rectangle can be
found by multiplying the base by the height. The same method is used here. When finding the
area of a rectangle on a coordinate plane, the base of each rectangle is x, and this value depends
on n, the number of rectangles being used. The base length is calculated by dividing the change
in x by the number of rectangles. For example, if the area under the curve f(x) is being found
within the interval of 0 to 10 and five rectangles are being used, then the base is equal to two

units, because

100
=2 . The height of each rectangle is determined by a value f(x) on each
5

rectangle. The question then follows: Where on the curve within the rectangle is the height taken
from? The point at which f(x) is calculated depends on which Riemann sum one is trying to find.

Evert 2
The options of where to calculate f(x) within the rectangles are: the upper value (the height of the
highest point on the curve within the rectangle), lower value (the height of the lowest point on
the curve within the rectangle), left (the height of the leftmost x-value), right (the height of the
rightmost x-value), or midpoint value (the height at the midpoint x-value of the rectangle). Once
one of these options is selected, the choice remains the same for all of the rectangles in the
Riemann sum. To find the Riemann sum, the following equation is used.
Rn= x f ( x 1 ) + x f ( x 2 ) + x f ( x 3 ) +
Where x is the width of each rectangle and f(x) is the height. F(x) will change for each
Riemann sum based on which type is being found as previously explained. Each of the types of
Riemann sums listed above will approximate the definite integral. However, there are certain
times where one type may be more useful than another. The lower Riemann sum is used to find
the smallest area under the curve, and always underestimates the definite integral. The upper
Riemann sum will yield the largest estimated area, and will always overestimate the definite
integral. Both of these facts must be taken into account when choosing which Riemann sum to
take.
The five types of Riemann sums listed previously can be illustrated using the curve
4
3
f ( x )=( x3 ) +2 ( x 3 ) 4(x3)+5 , as shown in the following figures. Each of the examples

will use one of the five types of Riemann sums on the interval from x = 1 to x = 5 using two
rectangles. This will make the x value equal to 2 for every example shown.

Figure 1. Left Riemann Sum

Evert 3
Figure 1 shows the rectangles used for the left Riemann sum of the curve above. The
calculations below show how the area was estimated, using the formula detailed above.
Rn= x f ( x 1 ) + x f ( x 2 ) + x f ( x 3 ) +
R2= x f ( x 1 ) + x f ( x 2 )
R2=213+25
R2=36 square units

Figure 2. Right Riemann Sum

Figure 2 shows the rectangles for a right Riemann sum for the curve. Because the right
most f(x) value for the second rectangle is much higher than the left most value for the second
rectangle, this estimated area is much higher than in the left sum which is clearly shown in the
calculations below.
R2= x f ( x 1 ) + x f ( x 2 )
R2=25+229
R2=68 square units

Evert 4

Figure 3. Midpoint Riemann Sum

Figure 3 shows the rectangles for a midpoint Riemann sum for the curve. This estimated
area is much lower than the right sum and is also lower than in the left sum which is clearly
shown in the calculations below.
R2= x f ( x 1 ) + x f ( x 2 )
R2=28+24
R2=24 square units

Figure 4. Upper Riemann Sum

Figure 4 shows the rectangles for an upper Riemann sum for the curve. This estimated
area is an extreme overestimate (as shown by the graph). The area of the two rectangles is higher
than any of the previously calculated Riemann sums which is shown below.
R2= x f ( x 1 ) + x f ( x 2 )
R2=213+229
R2=84 square units

Evert 5

Figure 5. Lower Riemann Sum

R2= x f ( x 1 ) + x f ( x 2 )
R2=25+23.123
R2=16.2454 square units
Figure 5 shows the rectangles for a lower Riemann sum for the curve. This estimated area
is much lower than any of the previously estimated areas. In comparison to the upper Riemann
sum, it is almost 70 square units smaller. As stated previously, and proven in Figures 1-5, the
estimated area produced by this estimation method will vary based on which Riemann sum is
used.
Another way to estimate the area under the curve is to use the trapezoid rule. As implied
by the name, the trapezoid rule uses trapezoids to estimate the area as opposed to the rectangles
used in Riemann sums. The area under the curve is divided into multiple trapezoids, the areas of
each trapezoid are found, and those areas are added together to estimate the definite integral. x
is still the width of each trapezoid, just like it was the length of the base of each rectangle for

Riemann sums, and it is still found the same way:

ba
=x , the change in x divided by the
n

number of trapezoids. The formula for the trapezoid rule is similar to that of Riemann sums, but
the area formula for rectangles is replaced with the area formula of a trapezoid as shown here:
T n= x

f ( x 1 ) +f ( x 2 )
f ( x2 ) + f ( x 3)
f ( x3 )+ f ( x4 )
+ x
+ x
+
2
2
2

) (

) (

Evert 6

The area formula for a trapezoid is

1
( b 1+ b 2 ) h , where b1 and b2 are the two different
2

length bases, and h is the height of the trapezoid. When using the trapezoid rule, the f(x) values
are used as base values, and x is the height of each trapezoid.
To illustrate this method, the same curve used to demonstrate Riemann sums will be used.

Figure 6. Trapezoid rule for f ( x )=( x3 )4 +2 ( x 3 )34( x3)+5

As seen in Figure 6, the graph is broken up into four trapezoids that can be used to
estimate the area under a curve. This method tends to be more accurate than Riemann sums
because there is less over/under estimation, but there are still instances where this occurs. Even
in the graph shown above, the first, third, and fourth trapezoids above overestimate the area, and
in the third trapezoid, the area is underestimated by the trapezoid. Below are calculations that
show what the area is estimated to be using this trapezoid method.
f x 1 ) + f ( x2 )
f ( x 2 ) +f ( x 3 )
f ( x3 )+ f ( x4 )
f ( x4)+ f ( x5 )
+ x
+ x
+ x
2
2
2
2

T 4= x

((

T 4= x

( f ( 1) +2 f ( 2) )+ x ( f ( 2) +f2 ( 3) )+ x( f ( 3)+2f ( 4 ) )+ x ( f ( 4) +2 f (5 ) )

T 4=1

) (

) (

8+5
5+ 4
4+29
+1
+1
+1
( 13+8
2 ) ( 2 ) ( 2 ) ( 2 )

T 4=10.5+6.5+ 4.5+16.5

) (

Evert 7
T 4=38 squareunits
This value is most similar to the left Riemann sum. However, because two f(x) values were used
as opposed to one, this should be the better approximate of the two.
The final way that can be used to estimate the definite integral of a function is called
Simpsons rule. The formula for this method is shown below.
S n=

x
(f ( x 0 ) +4 f ( x 1 ) +2 f ( x 2 ) +4 f ( x 3 )+ ...+ 2 f ( x n2 ) + 4 f ( xn1 ) + f ( x n ))
3

Instead of using the area of different shapes (such as rectangles or trapezoids like the previous
methods), Simpsons rule uses the area of different parabolic regions. In the formula, the starting
value of f ( x 0 ) and the ending value of f ( x n ) , are multiplied by one, and the rest of the
values are multiplied by either two or four, which alternates throughout the formula starting with
four. Because of this alternating nature, the n value, or the number of parabolic regions, must be
even to account for it, which is different than the other formulas.
All three methods: Riemann sums, the trapezoid rule, and Simpsons rule, can be used to
estimate the definite integral of a function. Each method uses differently shaped regions to find
the area under a curve: Riemann sums uses rectangles; the trapezoid rule uses trapezoids; and
Simpsons rule uses parabolic regions. In general, because of the shapes used to estimate each,
Simpsons rule tends to be more accurate than the first two. This is because the parabolic regions
of Simpsons rule take into account the various bends and curves of the graph while Riemann
sums and the trapezoid rule often over or under estimate the area, sometimes greatly depending
on the graph. Of the three methods, Riemann sums are generally the least accurate simply
because only one f(x) value is used in the formula for each rectangle, while two f(x) values are
used for each trapezoid in the trapezoid rule formula, and many f(x) values are taken into

Evert 8
account for Simpsons rule. By having the most f(x) values accounted for, Simpsons rule is able
to give the best approximation for the area under the curve.
Another part that is key to understanding the definite integral is the Mean Value Theorem
for integrals (MVT). The MVT states that if a function f is continuous on the closed interval

[a,b], then there exists a number C such that f ( c )=

1
f ( x ) dx
ba a

(Simmons). This means that

for any continuous function, the area calculated for the definite integral is equal to the area of a
rectangle, which is found by multiplying f(c) and x, the change in x. Using the function
4

f ( x )=( x3 ) +2 ( x 3 ) 4(x3)+5

as before, this can be illustrated using two rectangles,

one from 1 to 3 and one from 3 to 5. The calculation below is for C1, the rectangle from 1 to 3.
b

1
f ( x ) dx
ba a
( x3 )
[ 4+2 ( x3 )3 4 ( x3 )+ 5 ]dx
f ( c )=

1
f ( c 1 )=

31 1
3
5
4
1 ( x3) (x3)
f ( c 1 )=
+
2 ( x3 )2+5 x
21
5
2
3

5
4
( 13 )5 ( 13 )4
1 ( 33 ) (33 )
f ( c 1 )=
+
2 ( 33 )2 +53 [
+
2 ( 13 )2+51]
21
5
2
5
2
1
f ( c 1 )= ( ( 15 )(1.4 ) )
2

f ( c 1 )=8.2 units

By using the method shown above, the area of the second rectangle from 3 to 5 can also
be found as 8.2 square units. Both rectangles are shown on a graph below.

Evert 9

Figure 7. MVT for Integrals

The two differently shaded regions shown above are the two rectangles used to find the
definite integral. The calculations to find the definite integral are shown below. Unlike the three
methods explained earlier in the paper, the MVT finds the actual value for the definite integral of
the curve rather than estimating it.
A= x( f ( c 1 ) +f ( c2 ) )

A= (2 )( 8.2+8.2 )

A=32.8 square units

This means the definite integral for the curve f ( x )=( x3 )4 +2 ( x 3 )34 ( x3 ) +5 is 32.8
square units. Out of all the Riemann sums calculated previously, the left sum was the closest to
this value, at 36 square units. This was even closer than the trapezoid rule approximation, which
was 38 units. This is atypical and only occurred because the curve used in this example allowed
the left Riemann sum to over and under estimate approximately the same amount which allowed
the estimate to get close to the actual value for the definite integral found using the MVT.
Riemann sums and other estimators can be applied to real-life scenarios. For example,
suppose there is a spherical hot air balloon, whose radius is expanding when the air in the
balloon is heated. The radius in feet of the balloon is modeled by a twice-differentiable function r
of time t, where t is in minutes. For 0<t <12 the graph is concave down. The balloons radius

Evert 10
is 32 feet at 7 minutes. The table below gives selected values of the rate of change of the radius
of the balloon.
t (seconds)
r(t) (ft/sec)

0
5.7

1
4.0

4
2.0

7
1.4

11
0.5

12
0.4

In this example, the balloon riders would like to know the radius of the balloon when t =
7.2. To estimate this, the tangent line approximation at t = 7 may be used as shown below.
r ( 7.2 ) r ( 7 ) +r ' ( 7 ) t

r ( 7.2 ) r ( 7 ) +r ' ( 7 ) (7.27 )

r ( 7.2 ) 32+1.40.2

r ( 7.2 ) r ( 7 ) +r ' ( 7 )0.2

r ( 7.2 ) 32.28 feet

The graph is concave down between 0 and 12, which means that this method of approximation
may have over estimated the true value for the radius of the balloon. Because the graph is
concave down, this would be on the positive side of the graph, above the curve.
Using the methods in this paper, the rate of change of the balloons volume can also be
found. When time is seven minutes, the rate of change of the radius is shown below.
4
V = r3
3
dV 4
2 dr
= 3 r
dt 3
dt
dV
2 dr
=4 r
dt
dt
dV
=4 (32)2 1.4
dt
dV
=18015.15 cubic feet /meter
dt
Finally, Riemann sums can be used to estimate the definite integral from 0 to 12 minutes.
This definite integral is the change in the radius of the balloon over the course of 12 minutes. The
calculations for a Riemann sum with five subintervals (rectangles) are shown below.

Evert 11
Rn= x f ( x 1 ) + x f ( x 2 ) + x f ( x 3 ) + x f ( x 4 ) + x f ( x 5 ) + x f ( x 6 ) +
R5= x r ' ( t 1 ) + x r ' ( t 2 ) + x r ' ( t 3 ) + x r ' ( t 4 )+ x r ' ( t 5 )
R5=1r ' ( t 1 ) +3r ' ( t 2 ) +3r ' ( t 3 ) + 4r ' ( t 4 ) + 1r ' ( t 5 )

R5=14 +32+31.4+ 40.5+10.4

R5=16.6 feet
It is important to notice that the five rectangles used for this Riemann sum do not have
equal widths; the widths are the change in value of the time, as shown in the table. This is why
the first term has a x value of 1, and the second has one of 3, etc. These x values also
demonstrate that a right Riemann sum was used because the values given were at the right most
boundary of each rectangle from 0 to 12. Because the graph is concave down, a right Riemann
sum will underestimate the actual definite integral of the function, so this value for the change in
the radius is less than the actual change in the radius would be.
Definite integrals can be estimated in many ways: Riemann sums, trapezoid rule,
Simpsons Law. All of these topics can be used to have a greater understanding of what the
integral is and therefore a greater understanding of calculus as a whole.

Evert 12
Works Cited
Simmons, Bruce. "Mathwords: Mean Value Theorem for Integrals." Mathwords: Mean Value
Theorem for Integrals. Bruce Simmons, 28 July 2014. Web. 18 Mar. 2016.
<http://www.mathwords.com/m/mean_value_theorem_integrals.htm>.

Weisstein, Eric M. "Riemann Sum." -- from Wolfram MathWorld. Wolfram Research, 2015.
Web. 18 Mar. 2016. <http://mathworld.wolfram.com/RiemannSum.html>.