Orivel Orivel
Open menu

Explain Why the Sequence Converges and Find Its Limit

Compare model answers for this Education Q&A benchmark and review scores, judging comments, and related examples.

Login or register to use likes and favorites. Register

X f L

Contents

Task Overview

Benchmark Genres

Education Q&A

Task Creator Model

Answering Models

Judge Models

Task Prompt

Consider the sequence defined by a1 = 1 and, for every integer n greater than or equal to 1, an+1 = (an + 2/an) / 2. Answer all parts: 1. Prove that every term of the sequence is positive. 2. Prove that the sequence is decreasing after the first term. 3. Prove that the sequence is bounded below. 4. Deduce that the sequence converges. 5. Find the limit and justify your answer. Your answer should be written clearly, as if for a rigorous exam solution.

Task Context

You may use standard facts from real analysis about monotone bounded sequences converging, and basic algebraic manipulations.

Judging Policy

A strong answer should correctly establish positivity for all terms, show that terms are at least the eventual limit candidate and that the recurrence makes the sequence decrease from the second term onward, and identify a valid lower bound. It should then correctly invoke the monotone convergence principle and compute the limit by passing to the limit in the recurrence with proper justification. The final limit must be correct. Minor differences in proof style are acceptable, but logical gaps on monotonicity, boundedness, or the limit equation should count against the answer.

Answers

1. Proof that every term of the sequence is positive: We can prove this by induction. Base case: a1 = 1, which is positive. Inductive step: Assume that ak is positive for some integer k >= 1. We need to show that ak+1 is also positive. ak+1 = (ak + 2/ak) / 2. Since ak > 0, then 2/ak > 0. The sum of two positive numbers (ak and 2/ak) is positive. Dividing a positive number by 2 results in a positive number. Therefore, ak+1 > 0. By induction, every term of the sequence is positive. 2. Proof that the sequence is decreasing after the first term: We need to show that an+1 <= an for n >= 1. an+1 - an = (an + 2/an...

Show Full Answer

1. Proof that every term of the sequence is positive: We can prove this by induction. Base case: a1 = 1, which is positive. Inductive step: Assume that ak is positive for some integer k >= 1. We need to show that ak+1 is also positive. ak+1 = (ak + 2/ak) / 2. Since ak > 0, then 2/ak > 0. The sum of two positive numbers (ak and 2/ak) is positive. Dividing a positive number by 2 results in a positive number. Therefore, ak+1 > 0. By induction, every term of the sequence is positive. 2. Proof that the sequence is decreasing after the first term: We need to show that an+1 <= an for n >= 1. an+1 - an = (an + 2/an) / 2 - an = (an + 2/an - 2an) / 2 = (2/an - an) / 2 = (2 - an^2) / (2an). For the sequence to be decreasing, we need an+1 - an <= 0, which means (2 - an^2) / (2an) <= 0. Since we have already proven that all terms are positive (an > 0), the denominator 2an is positive. Therefore, we need the numerator to be non-positive: 2 - an^2 <= 0, which implies an^2 >= 2. Let's check if an^2 >= 2 for n >= 2. For n=1, a1 = 1, a1^2 = 1, which is not >= 2. So the sequence is not decreasing from the first term. For n=2, a2 = (a1 + 2/a1) / 2 = (1 + 2/1) / 2 = 3/2. a2^2 = (3/2)^2 = 9/4 = 2.25, which is >= 2. Now, let's prove by induction that an^2 >= 2 for n >= 2. Base case: We've shown a2^2 = 9/4 >= 2. Inductive step: Assume ak^2 >= 2 for some integer k >= 2. We need to show that ak+1^2 >= 2. ak+1 = (ak + 2/ak) / 2. ak+1^2 = ((ak + 2/ak) / 2)^2 = (ak^2 + 4 + 4/ak^2) / 4. Since ak^2 >= 2, then 1/ak^2 <= 1/2. So, ak+1^2 = (ak^2 + 4 + 4/ak^2) / 4 >= (2 + 4 + 4(0)) / 4 = 6/4 = 1.5. This is not sufficient. Let's use a different approach for the inductive step for an^2 >= 2 for n >= 2. We know ak+1 = (ak + 2/ak) / 2. Consider ak+1^2 - 2 = ((ak + 2/ak) / 2)^2 - 2 = (ak^2 + 4 + 4/ak^2) / 4 - 2 = (ak^2 + 4 + 4/ak^2 - 8) / 4 = (ak^2 - 4 + 4/ak^2) / 4 = (ak - 2/ak)^2 / 4. Since (ak - 2/ak)^2 is a square, it is always non-negative. Thus, ak+1^2 - 2 >= 0, which means ak+1^2 >= 2. Therefore, for n >= 2, an^2 >= 2, which implies that an+1 - an <= 0. The sequence is decreasing after the first term. 3. Proof that the sequence is bounded below: From part 1, we have proven that every term of the sequence is positive. Thus, the sequence is bounded below by 0. Furthermore, from part 2, we showed that for n >= 2, an^2 >= 2, which implies an >= sqrt(2) for n >= 2. Therefore, the sequence is bounded below by sqrt(2) for n >= 2. 4. Deduction that the sequence converges: From part 2, we have shown that the sequence is decreasing for n >= 2. From part 3, we have shown that the sequence is bounded below (by sqrt(2) for n >= 2). According to the Monotone Convergence Theorem, a sequence that is both monotone (decreasing in this case) and bounded below converges to a finite limit. 5. Finding the limit and justification: Let L be the limit of the sequence. Since the sequence converges, we can take the limit of both sides of the recurrence relation: lim (an+1) = lim ((an + 2/an) / 2) As n approaches infinity, an+1 approaches L and an approaches L. So, L = (L + 2/L) / 2. Now, we solve for L: 2L = L + 2/L L = 2/L L^2 = 2 L = ±sqrt(2). Since we have proven that all terms of the sequence are positive (part 1), the limit must also be positive. Therefore, L = sqrt(2). Justification: The limit is sqrt(2) because the sequence is proven to be decreasing and bounded below by sqrt(2) for n >= 2, and the limit of the recurrence relation must satisfy L = (L + 2/L) / 2, which yields L = sqrt(2) as the only positive solution.

Result

#2

Winning Votes

0 / 3

Average Score

81

Total Score

92

Overall Comments

Answer A provides a complete and correct solution to all parts of the problem. It successfully uses induction to prove the positivity of the terms and a separate, more complex inductive proof to establish that the sequence is decreasing from the second term onward. While the logic is sound, the presentation of the proof for monotonicity is slightly convoluted, as it includes a failed attempt before presenting a successful one. The justifications for convergence and the limit are correct but lack the finer points of rigor seen in the alternative answer.

View Score Details

Correctness

Weight 45%
100

The answer is entirely correct. All proofs are valid, and the final limit is correct. The self-correction during the proof of monotonicity is handled well and leads to a correct argument.

Reasoning Quality

Weight 20%
75

The reasoning is logical and sound. The proof that an^2 >= 2 for n >= 2 is correct. However, the method is less elegant than the alternative, and the inclusion of a failed attempt, while honest, makes the argument less direct.

Completeness

Weight 15%
90

The answer addresses all five parts of the prompt thoroughly and provides a full solution.

Clarity

Weight 10%
80

The answer is clearly structured, following the numbering of the prompt. The writing is easy to follow, though the section on monotonicity is slightly convoluted due to the presentation of a failed attempt before the successful proof.

Instruction Following

Weight 10%
100

The answer perfectly follows the instructions, answering all parts of the prompt in the style of a rigorous exam solution.

Judge Models OpenAI GPT-5.2

Total Score

71

Overall Comments

Positivity and the limit computation are handled correctly, and it correctly notes the sequence increases from a1 to a2 then decreases afterward. However, the monotonicity proof is messy: it starts an induction for a_n^2≥2 but makes an incorrect inequality step, then switches approaches. Although it eventually lands on a correct identity implying a_{k+1}^2≥2, the exposition has a noticeable logical stumble. The bounded-below part is also a bit confused: it first gives 0 as a lower bound, then claims a_n≥√2 for n≥2 without clearly emphasizing that this stronger bound is what supports the monotone convergence argument for the tail. Overall correct but with weaker rigor and presentation issues.

View Score Details

Correctness

Weight 45%
75

Final limit √2 is correct and the core claims are mostly established, but the monotonicity section includes an incorrect inequality step and a somewhat patched argument, reducing reliability.

Reasoning Quality

Weight 20%
60

Reasoning is partially muddled: it attempts an induction with a wrong bound before switching methods; the final argument works but the logical flow is not consistently tight.

Completeness

Weight 15%
70

Addresses all five parts, but parts 2–3 are less cleanly connected (lower bound and monotonicity dependence could be stated more crisply).

Clarity

Weight 10%
65

Understandable but includes a false start and extra algebra that obscures the key ideas.

Instruction Following

Weight 10%
80

Follows the exam-solution style and answers all parts, though the rigor in monotonicity is a bit uneven.

Total Score

82

Overall Comments

Answer A provides a correct and complete solution to all five parts of the problem. The positivity proof by induction is clear and correct. The monotonicity proof correctly identifies that an²≥2 for n≥2 is needed and proves it, though the initial failed attempt (using a weaker bound) before arriving at the correct algebraic identity (an+1² - 2 = (an - 2/an)²/4) is somewhat messy. The boundedness, convergence, and limit computation are all correct. However, the presentation suffers from the false start in part 2, which makes the proof less elegant and slightly harder to follow.

View Score Details

Correctness

Weight 45%
90

All mathematical statements and proofs are correct. The key identity an+1² - 2 = (an - 2/an)²/4 is correctly derived and used. The limit computation is correct. Minor issue: the initial failed attempt in part 2 doesn't affect correctness but shows some inefficiency in the proof strategy.

Reasoning Quality

Weight 20%
70

The reasoning is ultimately sound but the false start in Part 2 (attempting a bound that doesn't work before finding the correct approach) detracts from the quality. The final algebraic identity approach works but is less insightful than the AM-GM approach.

Completeness

Weight 15%
85

All five parts are addressed with complete proofs. The answer establishes positivity, monotonicity, boundedness, convergence, and the correct limit. Could have been more explicit about why passing to the limit in the recurrence is valid.

Clarity

Weight 10%
65

The presentation is generally clear but the false start in Part 2 (trying a bound that doesn't work, then switching approaches) makes the proof harder to follow. The writing is functional but not polished.

Instruction Following

Weight 10%
80

Follows the instructions by addressing all five parts and writing in a proof-style format. The false start in Part 2 is somewhat inappropriate for a 'rigorous exam solution' as requested.

We analyze the sequence defined by a₁ = 1 and aₙ₊₁ = (aₙ + 2/aₙ)/2 for all n ≥ 1. --- Part 1: Every term is positive. We proceed by induction. The base case is clear: a₁ = 1 > 0. Now suppose aₙ > 0 for some n ≥ 1. Then 2/aₙ > 0, so aₙ + 2/aₙ > 0, and therefore aₙ₊₁ = (aₙ + 2/aₙ)/2 > 0. By induction, aₙ > 0 for all n ≥ 1. --- Part 2: The sequence is decreasing after the first term (i.e., aₙ₊₁ ≤ aₙ for all n ≥ 2, and more precisely aₙ₊₁ ≤ aₙ for all n ≥ 1 with equality only if aₙ = √2). We compute aₙ - aₙ₊₁: aₙ - aₙ₊₁ = aₙ - (aₙ + 2/aₙ)/2 = aₙ/2 - 1/aₙ = (aₙ² - 2)/(2aₙ). Since aₙ > 0, the sign of aₙ - aₙ₊₁...

Show Full Answer

We analyze the sequence defined by a₁ = 1 and aₙ₊₁ = (aₙ + 2/aₙ)/2 for all n ≥ 1. --- Part 1: Every term is positive. We proceed by induction. The base case is clear: a₁ = 1 > 0. Now suppose aₙ > 0 for some n ≥ 1. Then 2/aₙ > 0, so aₙ + 2/aₙ > 0, and therefore aₙ₊₁ = (aₙ + 2/aₙ)/2 > 0. By induction, aₙ > 0 for all n ≥ 1. --- Part 2: The sequence is decreasing after the first term (i.e., aₙ₊₁ ≤ aₙ for all n ≥ 2, and more precisely aₙ₊₁ ≤ aₙ for all n ≥ 1 with equality only if aₙ = √2). We compute aₙ - aₙ₊₁: aₙ - aₙ₊₁ = aₙ - (aₙ + 2/aₙ)/2 = aₙ/2 - 1/aₙ = (aₙ² - 2)/(2aₙ). Since aₙ > 0, the sign of aₙ - aₙ₊₁ equals the sign of aₙ² - 2. We first show that aₙ² ≥ 2 for all n ≥ 2 (so that the sequence is non-increasing from n = 2 onward, and strictly decreasing unless aₙ = √2). By the AM-GM inequality applied to aₙ and 2/aₙ (both positive): aₙ₊₁ = (aₙ + 2/aₙ)/2 ≥ √(aₙ · 2/aₙ) = √2. Thus aₙ₊₁ ≥ √2 for all n ≥ 1, which means aₙ ≥ √2 for all n ≥ 2. Therefore, for n ≥ 2, aₙ² ≥ 2, so aₙ - aₙ₊₁ = (aₙ² - 2)/(2aₙ) ≥ 0, i.e., aₙ₊₁ ≤ aₙ. Hence the sequence is (non-strictly) decreasing for n ≥ 2. (In fact it is strictly decreasing unless aₙ = √2 exactly, but non-strict suffices for our purposes.) Note: a₁ = 1 < √2, so a₂ = (1 + 2)/2 = 3/2 > a₁, meaning the sequence increases from n=1 to n=2, but is decreasing from n=2 onward. --- Part 3: The sequence is bounded below. From Part 2, we established via AM-GM that aₙ ≥ √2 for all n ≥ 2. Combined with a₁ = 1 > 0, every term satisfies aₙ > 0. More usefully, the subsequence (aₙ)ₙ≥₂ is bounded below by √2 > 0. Thus the sequence (aₙ)ₙ≥₂ is bounded below by √2. --- Part 4: The sequence converges. The subsequence (aₙ)ₙ≥₂ is monotonically decreasing (from Part 2) and bounded below by √2 (from Part 3). By the Monotone Convergence Theorem (every monotone bounded sequence of real numbers converges), the sequence (aₙ)ₙ≥₂ converges. Since (aₙ)ₙ≥₁ differs from (aₙ)ₙ≥₂ only by the single term a₁, the full sequence (aₙ) also converges to the same limit. --- Part 5: Finding the limit. Let L = lim_{n→∞} aₙ. Since the sequence converges, we may take limits on both sides of the recurrence: aₙ₊₁ = (aₙ + 2/aₙ)/2. Taking n → ∞ and using continuity of the right-hand side (valid since L > 0): L = (L + 2/L)/2. Multiplying both sides by 2L: 2L² = L² + 2 L² = 2 L = ±√2. Since aₙ ≥ √2 > 0 for all n ≥ 2, the limit must satisfy L ≥ √2 > 0, so we discard L = -√2. Therefore, lim_{n→∞} aₙ = √2. --- Summary: The sequence is well-defined and positive by induction. From n = 2 onward it is bounded below by √2 (by AM-GM) and decreasing (since aₙ² ≥ 2 for n ≥ 2). The Monotone Convergence Theorem guarantees convergence, and solving the fixed-point equation gives the limit √2. This sequence is precisely Newton's method applied to f(x) = x² - 2, converging to the positive square root of 2.

Result

#1 | Winner

Winning Votes

3 / 3

Average Score

95

Total Score

99

Overall Comments

Answer B is an exemplary response that is not only correct and complete but also demonstrates mathematical elegance and deeper insight. The use of the AM-GM inequality to prove that the terms are bounded below by sqrt(2) (for n>=2) is highly efficient and simultaneously establishes the key property needed for the monotonicity proof. The justifications are more rigorous, explicitly mentioning the convergence of the full sequence from its tail and using the tighter lower bound to select the correct limit. The final summary connecting the sequence to Newton's method is a valuable addition that showcases a superior understanding of the topic.

View Score Details

Correctness

Weight 45%
100

The answer is entirely correct. All mathematical statements and deductions are accurate, and the final limit is correct.

Reasoning Quality

Weight 20%
95

The reasoning is of exceptional quality. The use of the AM-GM inequality is elegant and efficient, simultaneously proving the lower bound and setting up the proof for monotonicity. The justifications are more rigorous, and the connection to Newton's method shows deep insight.

Completeness

Weight 15%
100

The answer addresses all five parts of the prompt and provides an excellent summary that adds valuable context by identifying the sequence as an application of Newton's method.

Clarity

Weight 10%
95

The answer is exceptionally clear. It is well-structured with section dividers, and the arguments are presented concisely and directly. The elegant proofs contribute to the overall clarity of the solution.

Instruction Following

Weight 10%
100

The answer perfectly follows the instructions, answering all parts of the prompt in the style of a rigorous exam solution.

Judge Models OpenAI GPT-5.2

Total Score

94

Overall Comments

Provides a clean, standard solution: positivity by induction; shows a_{n+1}≥√2 via AM-GM, implying a_n≥√2 for n≥2; then uses (a_n-a_{n+1})=(a_n^2-2)/(2a_n) to conclude the sequence is decreasing for n≥2. Boundedness below and convergence follow neatly by applying monotone convergence to the tail (n≥2), and the limit is found by passing to the limit in the recurrence with a brief continuity justification. The reasoning is coherent, rigorous, and complete.

View Score Details

Correctness

Weight 45%
95

All claims are correctly proved with standard, valid steps (induction, AM-GM, sign analysis, monotone convergence, limit equation).

Reasoning Quality

Weight 20%
90

Reasoning is direct and well-motivated: AM-GM gives the lower bound needed, then monotonicity follows cleanly from an explicit difference formula.

Completeness

Weight 15%
95

Fully addresses each requested part, including handling that the sequence only becomes decreasing after the first term and justifying passing limits via continuity/positivity.

Clarity

Weight 10%
90

Clear structure by parts, concise algebra, and explicit statements of what is being proved at each step.

Instruction Following

Weight 10%
95

Matches the prompt closely: rigorous exam-style solution, uses allowed standard facts, and justifies each deduction appropriately.

Total Score

92

Overall Comments

Answer B provides a correct, complete, and elegantly presented solution to all five parts. The positivity proof is clean. The monotonicity proof uses AM-GM to establish an≥√2 for n≥2 in a single clean step, which is more elegant than Answer A's approach. The boundedness proof follows naturally. The convergence argument correctly invokes the Monotone Convergence Theorem with a nice note about the full sequence vs. the subsequence from n≥2. The limit computation is correct and includes the important justification about continuity of the right-hand side (valid since L>0). The summary connecting this to Newton's method adds pedagogical value. Overall, the presentation is cleaner and more rigorous.

View Score Details

Correctness

Weight 45%
95

All mathematical statements and proofs are correct. The AM-GM argument is correctly applied. The limit computation is correct with proper justification about continuity. The note about the full sequence vs. subsequence in Part 4 adds rigor.

Reasoning Quality

Weight 20%
90

The reasoning is excellent throughout. The use of AM-GM to establish the lower bound is elegant and insightful. The explicit mention of continuity when passing to the limit shows strong mathematical reasoning. The connection to Newton's method in the summary demonstrates deeper understanding.

Completeness

Weight 15%
90

All five parts are addressed with complete proofs. The answer additionally notes the continuity justification for passing to the limit, addresses the full sequence vs. subsequence distinction, and provides a summary connecting to Newton's method.

Clarity

Weight 10%
90

The presentation is very clean and well-organized. Each part flows logically into the next. The use of AM-GM makes the argument more transparent. The summary at the end ties everything together nicely.

Instruction Following

Weight 10%
90

Follows all instructions well. The answer is written clearly as a rigorous exam solution, addresses all five parts, uses standard facts from real analysis as permitted, and presents a polished final product.

Comparison Summary

Final rank order is determined by judge-wise rank aggregation (average rank + Borda tie-break). Average score is shown for reference.

Judges: 3

Winning Votes

0 / 3

Average Score

81
View this answer

Winning Votes

3 / 3

Average Score

95
View this answer

Judging Results

Why This Side Won

Answer B wins because it provides the same correct mathematical content as Answer A but with superior presentation and reasoning quality. Specifically: (1) The AM-GM approach in Part 2 is more elegant and direct than Answer A's algebraic manipulation with a false start. (2) Answer B explicitly notes the continuity justification when passing to the limit. (3) Answer B correctly addresses the relationship between the subsequence from n≥2 and the full sequence in Part 4. (4) The overall presentation is cleaner without the trial-and-error visible in Answer A's Part 2. Both answers arrive at the correct limit of √2, but Answer B demonstrates stronger mathematical maturity and clearer exposition.

Judge Models OpenAI GPT-5.2

Why This Side Won

Answer B is more rigorous and better organized: it establishes the key inequality a_{n+1}≥√2 cleanly with AM-GM and uses it directly to prove monotonicity and boundedness without detours. Answer A reaches the correct conclusion but contains a misleading/incorrect intermediate inequality in its attempted induction and a less polished justification chain. Thus B is superior overall.

Why This Side Won

Answer B is superior due to its more elegant and efficient reasoning. The use of the AM-GM inequality is a more sophisticated and direct approach than Answer A's more laborious inductive proof for monotonicity. Furthermore, Answer B provides more rigorous justifications, for example by explicitly noting that the convergence of the tail of the sequence implies the convergence of the whole sequence, and by connecting the problem to the broader context of Newton's method. This demonstrates a deeper level of mathematical understanding and results in a clearer, more insightful solution.

X f L