Area between curves
Sketch a parabola and a straight line that cross it twice, and a lens-shaped sliver of the plane gets trapped between them. How big is that sliver? "Area under a curve" only tells you the area from a curve down to the x-axis; it says nothing about the region squeezed between two curves. Area between curves closes that gap: intersect the two curves to find where the region starts and ends, decide which curve is "on top," and integrate the gap between them. It is the second and final idea of the CBSE Class 12 chapter Applications of Integrals, applied to standard shapes — lines, circles, parabolas, ellipses — that a student can sketch and intersect algebraically. Everything here rests on one earlier skill: single-curve area, done twice and subtracted.
The area enclosed between two curves and from their left intersection to their right intersection is the definite integral of (upper curve minus lower curve) over that interval.
The core idea
Two curves and typically enclose a region between two intersection points. Everything about the problem is decided at those two points, so finding them always comes first.
Step 1 — Intersect. Solve for the x-coordinates and (with ) where the curves cross. These become the limits of integration.
Step 2 — Order them. Between and , one curve sits above the other. Test any point strictly inside — plug it into both functions and see which value is bigger. That one is "upper" on this stretch.
Step 3 — Integrate the gap. If on , the enclosed area is
where: is the upper curve, is the lower curve, and is the interval between consecutive intersection points. The rule in words: area = integral of (top curve) minus integral of (bottom curve), taken only over the stretch where that ordering is fixed. If the curves swap places — cross a third time inside — a single integral is no longer valid; split at the crossing point and add instead, always subtracting lower from upper on each sub-piece. In CBSE problems the two curves are always drawn from a short, standard list — straight lines, circles , parabolas in standard form, and ellipses — precisely so that Step 1's intersection equation is always solvable by hand, usually reducing to a linear or quadratic equation once one curve's expression is substituted into the other. Recognising the shape of each curve from its equation, before attempting any algebra, is what makes Step 2's "which one is on top" judgment fast rather than guesswork. Sometimes it is easier to treat as a function of — for instance a circle written as next to a vertical line . The same logic runs sideways:
where: is whichever curve lies further to the right and further to the left, over the y-interval between their intersection points. Choosing - or -integration is purely a convenience call — pick whichever makes the algebra (usually a square root) simpler to handle.
The goal here is to compute, from start to finish, the exact enclosed area between the parabola and the line — the standard shape of problem this topic is built around, needing an intersection step, an ordering step, and an integration step done correctly in that order.
Step 1. Find the intersection points by substituting the line into the parabola. Since , put for in : , giving and . The curves meet at and , so the limits of integration are , .
Step 2. Decide which curve is upper. On the interval write the parabola as (upper branch, since the region of interest is above the x-axis). Test : the parabola gives , the line gives . The parabola is above the line throughout .
Step 3. Set up the integral with parabola minus line: .
Step 4. Integrate term by term: and , so .
Step 5. Evaluate at the bounds: at , ; at every term is . Subtracting gives the final area.
Worked example
Problem. Verify the same result by integrating with respect to instead, using the right-hand halves (from the parabola) and (from the line), between and .
Step 1. For a fixed height , the line's -value is and the parabola's -value is . At : line gives , parabola gives , so the line lies to the right of the parabola — line minus parabola is the correct order here.
Step 2. Set up .
Step 3. Integrate: . Both routes agree: square units, confirming the x-integration answer.
Competitive stretch
The same method scales to conics. For the circle cut by the line , sketch first: the circle has radius centred at the origin, and the vertical line slices off a smaller segment on the right. Intersecting gives , so — the chord runs from to . Doubling the upper half and integrating from to , the smaller segment works out to square units, using the standard result with . The setup logic — intersect, order, integrate — is identical to the parabola-and-line case above; only the antiderivative changes because the boundary is curved rather than straight. This is exactly why the chapter insists on standard-form conics: their antiderivatives are all in the toolkit a Class 12 student already carries.
Common traps
- Subtracting in the wrong order. Upper minus lower, always — swapping it silently flips the sign of the answer.
- Using one integral when the curves cross three times. If the "upper" curve changes partway through, split the integral at every crossing point instead of integrating straight across.
- Guessing the limits from a rough sketch. Always solve algebraically for exact intersection points; eyeballing a graph can shift the bounds and the answer.
- Picking the wrong segment in circle or ellipse problems. A chord cuts the conic into a "smaller" and a "larger" piece — reread the question to see which one is wanted before integrating.
Ask the tutor: Want to try a fresh pair of curves — say an ellipse and a line — and walk through the intersection-to-integral setup together?
How is this different from finding the area under a single curve?
Area under a single curve measures the region between the curve and the x-axis. Area between curves measures the region trapped between two curves, using the axis as a special case where one of the "curves" happens to be . The method is the same integral, just applied to (upper minus lower) instead of (curve minus zero), so everything you already know about setting up and evaluating a definite integral carries over directly.
What if I cannot tell which curve is on top just by looking at the graph?
Pick any convenient x-value strictly between the two intersection points and plug it into both functions. Whichever gives the larger y-value is the upper curve on that whole stretch, since the curves cannot cross again without your equation producing another root in that interval. This test point method is faster and safer than trusting a rough hand sketch.
Do I have to integrate with respect to x, or can I always use y?
Either works as long as both curves can be written as functions of that variable over the region — the choice is about convenience, not correctness. If solving for in terms of avoids an awkward square root (as with a circle sliced by a vertical line), integrate with respect to ; if the curves are naturally given as , stick with . Some problems, like the worked example above, can be checked both ways and must agree — and doing both is a reliable way to catch an arithmetic slip before it costs marks. If you get different final areas from the two routes, trust neither answer until you find where the two setups disagree.