Skip to main content
SingaporeMathsSyllabus dot point

How does proof by mathematical induction establish a result for every positive integer?

Use the principle of mathematical induction to prove statements about sums of series, divisibility and other results indexed by the positive integers

A focused answer to the H2 Mathematics outcome on mathematical induction. The base case, the inductive step, writing a rigorous proof, and applying induction to series sums and divisibility results.

Generated by Claude Opus 4.89 min answer

Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed

Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page

Jump to a section
  1. What this dot point is asking
  2. The answer
  3. Examples in context
  4. Try this

What this dot point is asking

SEAB wants you to prove statements indexed by the positive integers using the principle of mathematical induction: establish a base case, assume the result for n=kn = k, prove it for n=k+1n = k + 1, and conclude. The commonest applications are sums of series and divisibility results.

The answer

The principle

To prove a statement P(n)P(n) for all integers n≥1n \geq 1:

  1. Base case. Show P(1)P(1) is true.
  2. Inductive step. Assume P(k)P(k) is true for some k≥1k \geq 1 (the inductive hypothesis), and use this to prove P(k+1)P(k + 1).
  3. Conclusion. Since P(1)P(1) holds and each true case forces the next, P(n)P(n) holds for all n≥1n \geq 1.

The image is a row of dominoes: the base case topples the first, the inductive step guarantees each topples the next, so all fall.

Structuring a series proof

For a sum, the inductive step starts from the assumed sum to kk terms and adds the (k+1)(k+1)th term. The algebra goal is to massage this into exactly the formula with nn replaced by k+1k + 1. Factor out common terms early to keep the working clean.

Structuring a divisibility proof

For "expr(n)\mathrm{expr}(n) is divisible by dd", write the hypothesis as expr(k)=dm\mathrm{expr}(k) = d m for some integer mm, then manipulate expr(k+1)\mathrm{expr}(k+1) to expose a factor of dd, using the hypothesis to substitute.

Writing it rigorously

State P(n)P(n) explicitly, carry out the base case with both sides evaluated, label the inductive hypothesis, derive the k+1k+1 case, and finish with the standard concluding sentence. Markers reward this exact scaffolding.

Examples in context

Example 1. Verifying a summation result. The standard result ∑r=1nr=n(n+1)2\sum_{r=1}^{n} r = \dfrac{n(n+1)}{2} can be proved by induction: the step adds k+1k + 1 to k(k+1)2\dfrac{k(k+1)}{2} to get (k+1)(k+2)2\dfrac{(k+1)(k+2)}{2}, confirming the closed form rather than just asserting it.

Example 2. Divisibility in number theory. Proving n3−nn^3 - n is divisible by 66 for all nn uses induction with the hypothesis k3−k=6mk^3 - k = 6m; expanding (k+1)3−(k+1)(k+1)^3 - (k+1) and substituting shows the result extends, a typical discrete-mathematics application.

Try this

Q1. State the three parts of a proof by mathematical induction. [2 marks]

  • Cue. Base case (P(1)P(1) true), inductive step (P(k)⇒P(k+1)P(k) \Rightarrow P(k+1)), conclusion (by the principle, true for all nn).

Q2. In an induction proof of a sum, what do you add to the assumed sum to kk terms? [1 mark]

  • Cue. The (k+1)(k+1)th term of the series.

Q3. For a divisibility proof that 7n−17^n - 1 is divisible by 66, write down the inductive hypothesis. [2 marks]

  • Cue. Assume 7k−1=6m7^k - 1 = 6m for some integer mm.

Exam-style practice questions

Practice questions written in the style of SEAB exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.

Original6 marksProve by induction that ∑r=1nr(r+1)=n(n+1)(n+2)3\displaystyle\sum_{r=1}^{n} r(r+1) = \dfrac{n(n+1)(n+2)}{3} for all positive integers nn.
Show worked answer →

Let P(n)P(n) be the statement ∑r=1nr(r+1)=n(n+1)(n+2)3\sum_{r=1}^{n} r(r+1) = \dfrac{n(n+1)(n+2)}{3}.

Base case n=1n = 1: LHS =1×2=2= 1 \times 2 = 2; RHS =1×2×33=2= \dfrac{1 \times 2 \times 3}{3} = 2. So P(1)P(1) holds.

Inductive step: assume P(k)P(k) true, that is ∑r=1kr(r+1)=k(k+1)(k+2)3\sum_{r=1}^{k} r(r+1) = \dfrac{k(k+1)(k+2)}{3}.

Then ∑r=1k+1r(r+1)=k(k+1)(k+2)3+(k+1)(k+2)=(k+1)(k+2)(k3+1)=(k+1)(k+2)k+33=(k+1)(k+2)(k+3)3\sum_{r=1}^{k+1} r(r+1) = \dfrac{k(k+1)(k+2)}{3} + (k+1)(k+2) = (k+1)(k+2)\left(\dfrac{k}{3} + 1\right) = (k+1)(k+2)\dfrac{k+3}{3} = \dfrac{(k+1)(k+2)(k+3)}{3}.

This is the formula with n=k+1n = k + 1, so P(k)⇒P(k+1)P(k) \Rightarrow P(k+1).

Since P(1)P(1) holds and P(k)⇒P(k+1)P(k) \Rightarrow P(k+1), by induction P(n)P(n) holds for all positive integers nn.

Markers reward a clear statement of P(n)P(n), the base case, the assumption, correct algebra to reach the k+1k+1 form, and the concluding sentence.

Original5 marksProve by induction that 5n−15^n - 1 is divisible by 44 for all positive integers nn.
Show worked answer →

Let P(n)P(n) be the statement that 5n−15^n - 1 is divisible by 44.

Base case n=1n = 1: 51−1=45^1 - 1 = 4, divisible by 44. So P(1)P(1) holds.

Inductive step: assume 5k−1=4m5^k - 1 = 4m for some integer mm. Then 5k+1−1=5⋅5k−1=5(4m+1)−1=20m+5−1=20m+4=4(5m+1)5^{k+1} - 1 = 5 \cdot 5^k - 1 = 5(4m + 1) - 1 = 20m + 5 - 1 = 20m + 4 = 4(5m + 1), which is divisible by 44.

So P(k)⇒P(k+1)P(k) \Rightarrow P(k+1). Since P(1)P(1) holds, by induction 5n−15^n - 1 is divisible by 44 for all positive integers nn.

Markers reward the base case, expressing 5k−1=4m5^k - 1 = 4m, the manipulation extracting a factor of 44, and the conclusion.

Related dot points