u-substitution
-substitution is essentially the reverse chain rule. Use it when one function is nested inside another, and the derivative of the inner function (or something close to it) also appears in the integrand. By temporarily switching to a new variable, you can simplify the integral and apply basic integration rules more directly.
Step-by-step process
Step 1: Choose .
Pick the “inner” function. Look for something nested, or an expression whose derivative shows up elsewhere in the integrand. Avoid choosing , since that doesn’t simplify anything.
Step 2: Differentiate .
Differentiate with respect to :
Then rewrite it in differential form:
For clarity, an additional step is to solve for :
Step 3: Rewrite the integral in terms of .
Substitute both and into the integral. After this step, all -terms should cancel, leaving an integral written entirely in terms of .
Step 4: Integrate with respect to .
Apply the usual integration rules, treating as the variable. For an indefinite integral, include the constant of integration .
Step 5: Plug back in.
Write your answer in terms of the original variable.
Example 1: Basic nested functions
Solution
The expression is the nested function inside the cosine, so choose
Differentiate:
This matches the that is also in the integrand. To make the substitution more explicit, solve for by dividing both sides by :
Then substituting and into the integral:
Lastly, back-substitute so that the final answer is written in terms of :
Example 2: Rational functions
For fractions, a common strategy is to choose as the denominator (or a nested part of it). That often produces a factor that can cancel with the numerator.
Solution
Let
Then
Solve for :
Rewrite the integral in terms of :
Example 3: Negative exponential powers
When a fraction features an exponential in the denominator, rewriting it as a product with a negative power cleanly exposes the nested exponent.
Solution
First, rewrite the integral as a product:
Now choose :
The nested function is , so let
Solving for ,
Now rewrite the integral in terms of :
Example 4: Logarithms
The following example also involves a quotient, but choosing simply swaps variables without changing the form of the integral, which does not help simplify it.
Choosing is also ineffective because the resulting term appears in the denominator, not the numerator.
Solution
Using trial-and-error is a standard part of finding the right substitution. Recall the derivative rule:
This structure is present in the integrand.
If we choose , then
Then , and the integral in terms of is
Example 5: Extended substitution technique
Sometimes, choosing leaves a leftover in the integrand. An additional algebraic step is needed to express all remaining variables in terms of .
Solution
Let
The remaining issue is the outside of the square root. The trick is to rewrite your original definition of and solve for :
Now rewrite the integral:
Distribute :
Integrate term-by-term:
The next example combines extended substitution with an extra algebraic step: splitting the numerator apart to isolate the terms needed.
Solution
Let
Notice that our only gives a single , while the numerator is . To resolve this, split the higher power into separate components:
Then applying the extended substitution technique,
Squaring both sides,
Substituting these components into the integral gives
To integrate, expand the numerator and separate the fraction:
Definite integrals and changing bounds
When you use -substitution on a definite integral, you have two standard ways to finish the problem.
Option 1: Change the bounds
Convert the limits from -values to -values. Then you can evaluate the antiderivative in terms of without switching back to .
Option 2: Don’t change the bounds.
Find the antiderivative, convert back to after integrating, and then evaluate using the original -bounds.
Example
If the substitution is made, choose the resulting expression that is equivalent to
First, can be expressed as a quotient:
Then if ,
and
Next, transform the bounds:
When (lower bound),
When (upper bound),
Then the integral in terms of is
So the correct answer choice is .
Now that we have established the correct equivalent expression in terms of , we can evaluate the definite integral.
Alternatively, with option 2, keep the original -bounds, integrate, and then back-substitute the original -expression before evaluating.