Cauchy mean value theorem Created 2026-10-07 Updated 2026-10-25
For and real-valued functions that are continuous on the closed interval and differentiable on the open interval , there exists with
Apply Rolle's theorem to the linear combination , which has equal endpoint values. The displayed product identity permits zero derivatives. For the ratio form, additionally assume for every . Then Rolle's theorem ensures , so both denominators below are nonzero:
Neither derivative needs to be continuous, and may vanish. Choosing recovers the mean value theorem; the ratio form also gives the zero-over-zero endpoint case of L'Hôpital's rule. [ref]
By the definition of little o notation, the required quotient is
As , write this as . L'Hôpital's rule applies to this infinite-over-infinite ratio and gives
Therefore . The logarithm is negative on this approach, which is consistent with a quotient tending to zero from below; little o notation concerns the limiting ratio, not its sign.[ref]
Now impose the stated zero endpoint values and nonvanishing assumptions near . For each , applying the proved identity on gives some such that
As , every possible also tends to . Explicitly, for any , choose a right neighborhood of where . If lies in it, so does , and therefore . This proves the endpoint zero-over-zero form of L'Hôpital's rule:
No continuity of either derivative is required, only their ratio limit and the given nonvanishing conditions.
First : otherwise Rolle's theorem would produce a point with , contrary to the hypothesis. Define
It is continuous on , differentiable inside, and vanishes at both endpoints. Rolle's theorem gives a with
The two denominators are nonzero, so this proves Cauchy's mean value theorem:
When , apply that theorem on for each . Rolle's theorem again ensures , and some satisfies . As , the trapped point also tends to . Therefore
This proves the stated endpoint case of L'Hôpital's rule. It does not assume continuity of the derivatives; only the indicated derivative-ratio limit is used. The same trapping argument also works for an extended infinite limit if that convention is allowed.
Set and . Both vanish at zero. For , their derivative ratio is
Twice differentiability at makes both quotients tend to . Apply the endpoint L'Hôpital's rule proved in part (iii) for . For the other side use the reflected positive variable ; and are even, so their quotient is unchanged. Thus the two-sided limit is
This is the second-order central difference limit. The proof only uses differentiability of at and differentiability nearby; it does not incorrectly assume is continuous.
As , L'Hôpital's rule gives , so
The quadratic becomes
For , its maximum root is
Both numerator and denominator have a double zero at one. Applying L'Hôpital's rule twice gives
Alternatively and , giving the same result from a Taylor expansion.
The numerator and denominator both vanish at zero. The fundamental theorem of calculus differentiates the numerator, while the denominator derivative is nonzero near zero. L'Hôpital's rule therefore gives
L'Hôpital's rule applies to a quotient of differentiable functions near a limiting point, excluding that point itself, provided there. If the quotient has an indeterminate form or , and the limit of exists as a finite or infinite value , then
The rule also applies to one-sided limits and to limits at infinity, under the corresponding hypotheses. Existence of the derivative-ratio limit and the indeterminate-form hypotheses are required; an arbitrary quotient cannot be replaced by a quotient of derivatives.
Write the product as a quotient with indeterminate form . By L'Hôpital's rule,