Mathematics 2024 Paper II 50 marks Prove

Paper II — Q4

(a) Consider the polynomial ring Z[x] over the ring Z of integers. Let S be an ideal of Z[x] generated by x. Show that S is prime…

(a)

Consider the polynomial ring Z[x] over the ring Z of integers. Let S be an ideal of Z[x] generated by x. Show that S is prime but not a maximal ideal of Z[x]. 15 marks

(b)

Find the upper and lower Riemann integrals for the function f defined on [0, 1] as follows: f(x) = (1-x²)^½, if x is rational; f(x) = (1-x), if x is irrational. Hence, show that f is not Riemann integrable on [0, 1]. 15 marks

(c)

The personnel manager of a company wants to assign officers A, B and C to the regional offices at Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata and Chennai. The cost of relocation (in thousand Rupees) of the three officers at the four regional offices are given below:

OfficerDelhiMumbaiKolkataChennai
A16222420
B10322616
C10204630

Find the assignment which minimizes the total cost of relocation and also determine the minimum cost. 20 marks

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें
(a)

पूर्णांकों के वलय Z पर बहुपद वलय Z[x] का विचार कीजिए। मान लीजिए x द्वारा जनित Z[x] की एक गुणजावली S है। दर्शाइए कि S, Z[x] की एक अभाज्य गुणजावली है लेकिन उच्चिष्ट गुणजावली नहीं है। (15 अंक)

(b)

[0, 1] पर परिभाषित निम्नलिखित फलन f के लिए ऊपर तथा निम्न रीमान समाकल ज्ञात कीजिए: f(x) = (1-x²)^½, यदि x परिमेय है; f(x) = (1-x), यदि x अपरिमेय है। अतः दर्शाइए कि [0, 1] पर f रीमान समाकलनीय नहीं है। (15 अंक)

(c)

एक कंपनी का कर्मिक प्रबंधक, अधिकारियों A, B और C को क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों दिल्ली, मुंबई, कोलकाता और चेन्नई में नियुक्त करना चाहता है। चार क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों में इन तीन अधिकारियों के स्थानांतरण की लागत (हजार रुपयों में) नीचे दी गई है: [तालिका दी गई है] वह नियतन (असाइनमेंट) ज्ञात कीजिए, जो स्थानांतरण की कुल लागत को न्यूनतम करता है और न्यूनतम लागत भी निर्धारित कीजिए। (20 अंक)

Q4 of the 2024 UPSC Mains Mathematics Paper II, as printed
The question as printed in the 2024 Mathematics paper

The figure this question refers to, in words

The question paper is a scan and the diagram did not survive as text. This is the figure as read from the original page — every component, value and label — so the question can be worked from the text below.

(c) A table with 4 rows and 5 columns giving relocation costs (in thousand Rupees) of three officers at four regional offices: Header row 1: Blank in column 1, 'Office' spanning columns 2 to 5 Header row 2: 'Officer', 'Delhi', 'Mumbai', 'Kolkata', 'Chennai' Row 1: 'A', '16', '22', '24', '20' Row 2: 'B', '10', '32', '26', '16' Row 3: 'C', '10', '20', '46', '30'

Model answer

Written by UPSC Answer Check against this question's marking rubric, to the expected length. UPSC does not publish answers for Mains — this is one way to score well, not an official key.

(a) Let S = (x) in Z[x]. Define φ: Z[x] → Z by φ(p(x)) = p(0). This is a surjective ring homomorphism. Its kernel is exactly the set of polynomials with constant term 0, which is S. Hence Z[x]/S ≅ Z. Since Z is an integral domain, S is prime.

To see that S is not maximal, consider T = (2, x). Every element of T has even constant term, so 1 ∉ T; hence T is a proper ideal of Z[x]. Also S ⊊ T, because 2 ∈ T but 2 ∉ S. Thus S is contained properly in a proper ideal, so S is not maximal. Final: S is prime but not maximal.

(b) Let P = {0 = x₀ < x₁ < ... < xₙ = 1} be any partition, and let Iᵢ = [xᵢ₋₁, xᵢ]. Since rationals and irrationals are both dense in R, on each Iᵢ the rational values of f are √(1-x²) and the irrational values are 1-x. Both functions are decreasing on [0, 1].

For 0 ≤ t ≤ 1, √(1-t²) ≥ 1-t, because 1-t² - (1-t)² = 2t(1-t) ≥ 0. Therefore, on Iᵢ, Mᵢ = sup f = √(1-xᵢ₋₁²), mᵢ = inf f = 1-xᵢ. Hence the upper and lower Darboux sums are U(P,f) = Σ Δxᵢ √(1-xᵢ₋₁²), L(P,f) = Σ Δxᵢ (1-xᵢ), where Δxᵢ = xᵢ - xᵢ₋₁.

The upper Riemann integral is inf_P U(P,f) = ∫₀¹ √(1-x²) dx = π/4, the area of a quarter unit circle. The lower Riemann integral is sup_P L(P,f) = ∫₀¹ (1-x) dx = 1/2.

Since π/4 ≠ 1/2, the upper and lower integrals are unequal. Therefore f is not Riemann integrable on [0, 1]. Final: upper integral = π/4, lower integral = 1/2; f is not Riemann integrable.

(c) This is an assignment problem. Since there are 3 officers and 4 offices, add a dummy officer D with zero cost to every office to make a 4×4 matrix. The cost matrix in thousand Rupees is: A: 16 22 24 20 B: 10 32 26 16 C: 10 20 46 30 D: 0 0 0 0

Use the Hungarian method. Row reduction gives: A: 0 6 8 4 B: 0 22 16 6 C: 0 10 36 20 D: 0 0 0 0 Column minima are all 0, so the matrix is unchanged.

Cover zeros with the Delhi column and the dummy row D. The minimum uncovered entry is 4. Subtract it from uncovered entries and add it at intersections. This gives: A: 0 2 4 0 B: 0 18 12 2 C: 0 6 32 16 D: 4 0 0 0

Next cover zeros with the Delhi column, the Chennai column, and the dummy row D. The minimum uncovered entry is 2. Subtract and add appropriately: A: 0 0 2 0 B: 0 16 10 2 C: 0 4 30 16 D: 6 0 0 2

Next cover zeros with the Delhi column and rows A and D. The minimum uncovered entry is 2. Subtract and add appropriately: A: 2 0 2 0 B: 0 14 8 0 C: 0 2 28 14 D: 8 0 0 2

Now an optimal zero assignment is: A → Mumbai, B → Chennai, C → Delhi, D → Kolkata.

Thus the real assignment is A to Mumbai, B to Chennai, C to Delhi, leaving Kolkata vacant. The minimum total cost is 22 + 16 + 10 = 48 thousand Rupees = ₹48,000.

Final: A → Mumbai, B → Chennai, C → Delhi; minimum relocation cost = ₹48,000.

What "Prove" is asking you to do

Establish that the statement holds for every case it claims, not for one representative case. The argument must be closed: each line follows from a definition, a hypothesis, or a named theorem you are entitled to use.

Structure that answers it

Given and to prove, restated → theorem or construction to be used, named → the argument line by line → conclusion stated as proved

Where marks are lost

Testing one example, which illustrates but proves nothing. On an if and only if claim, proving one direction and stopping forfeits that half outright, and degenerate cases — zero, the empty set, the equality case — have to be disposed of rather than assumed away.

All UPSC directive words, compared →

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

(a) justify: claim > 3-4 reasons > evidence > conclusion | (b) calculate: given > formula > substitution > result with units > interpretation | (c) calculate: given > formula > substitution > result with units > interpretation Full marks: Rigorous proofs with named theorems; complete Hungarian method steps.

Key points expected

  • Define S = (x) as ideal generated by x
  • Show Z[x]/S is isomorphic to Z
  • Prove Z is an integral domain
  • Show S is not maximal (e.g., (x,2) exists)
  • Identify sup/inf of f on any subinterval
  • Calculate upper Riemann integral value
  • Calculate lower Riemann integral value
  • Show upper integral is not equal to lower

Evaluation rubric

Each sub-part is marked on its own, against the marks and word limit printed on the paper.

  1. (a) Prove S is prime but not maximal in Z[x]. 15 marks

    justify— claim → 3-4 reasons → evidence → conclusion

    Must cover

    • Define S = (x) as ideal generated by x
    • Show Z[x]/S is isomorphic to Z
    • Prove Z is an integral domain
    • Show S is not maximal (e.g., (x,2) exists)

    Loses marks

    • Confusing prime with maximal ideal
    • Failing to show quotient is domain

    Earns more

    • Explicitly state definition of prime ideal
    • Explicitly state definition of maximal ideal
    • Use First Isomorphism Theorem by name

    Extra mark

    • Mention Z[x] is not a PID
  2. (b) Compute upper/lower integrals and prove non-integrability. 15 marks

    calculate— given → formula → substitution → result with units → interpretation

    Must cover

    • Identify sup/inf of f on any subinterval
    • Calculate upper Riemann integral value
    • Calculate lower Riemann integral value
    • Show upper integral is not equal to lower

    Loses marks

    • Assuming continuity implies integrability
    • Incorrect calculation of sup/inf

    Earns more

    • State Riemann integrability criterion
    • Note density of rationals/irrationals

    Extra mark

    • Sketch graph of the two component functions
  3. (c) Find minimum cost assignment for 3 officers to 4 offices. 20 marks

    calculate— given → formula → substitution → result with units → interpretation

    Must cover

    • Balance the 3x4 cost matrix (add dummy row)
    • Perform row and column reductions
    • Draw minimum number of lines for optimality
    • Determine final assignment and total cost

    Loses marks

    • Skipping balancing step
    • Incorrect final cost calculation

    Earns more

    • Show intermediate steps of Hungarian method
    • Verify optimality condition

    Extra mark

    • Alternative method noted briefly

Practice this exact question

Write your answer and it is marked point by point against the model answer above — what you covered, what you missed, what you got wrong.

Evaluate my answer →

More from Mathematics 2024 Paper II