Derivatives of inverse trigonometric functions
Every time you differentiate , , or , you are using one of six standard results that sit right after the chain rule in the Continuity and Differentiability chapter. These formulas turn up constantly — inside JEE-style composite functions, inside implicit differentiation problems, and inside the trickiest substitution questions where an ugly expression under or collapses to something simple once you spot the right trig identity. Getting comfortable with all six derivatives, their domains, and the chain rule wrapped around them is one of the highest-yield investments you can make in this chapter. This section builds the six formulas from first principles for , states the full family, works two representative problems — one plain chain-rule application and one substitution-based simplification — and flags the sign and domain traps that examiners love to test.
The derivatives of the six inverse trigonometric functions are fixed algebraic expressions in (never containing an inverse trig function themselves), each valid only on a specific domain, and differentiating a composite inverse-trig expression means applying one of these six formulas together with the chain rule — or, better, simplifying the argument with a trigonometric substitution first.
The core idea
Because , , and so on are defined as the inverses of trig functions restricted to a principal-value branch, their derivatives can be found by implicit differentiation of the corresponding direct trig equation. The result is a short, memorisable table.
where: is the point at which the derivative is evaluated, and the domain restriction next to each formula is where the corresponding inverse function is differentiable — outside it the expression is either undefined or the formula does not apply. Three sub-points are worth holding onto before you touch a single problem.
The co-function pattern. Each "co" function — , , — has exactly the negative of the derivative of its partner (, , respectively). If you remember only the first three formulas, you can write down the other three by flipping the sign.
The chain rule wraps every formula. When the argument is a function rather than plain , for example , the derivative picks up a factor of :
This is the single most common source of lost marks: forgetting the factor entirely.
Simplify before you differentiate. A large class of problems present an intimidating argument inside or that becomes trivial after a trigonometric substitution such as or , using identities like the double-angle formulas. Spotting this pattern before reaching for the chain rule saves several lines of algebra and avoids sign errors.
Why these formulas work
Setting up the goal. The full goal is to derive for starting only from the definition of as the inverse of sine restricted to the principal branch , using implicit differentiation and the Pythagorean identity — the same method then reproduces all five remaining formulas by an identical pattern applied to , , and so on.
Step 1. Let . By definition of the inverse function, this means , with restricted to the principal branch .
Step 2. Differentiate both sides of implicitly with respect to , treating as a function of . The left side needs the chain rule: .
Step 3. Solve for : , valid wherever , i.e. away from , which corresponds to .
Step 4. Express in terms of using , so . On the principal branch , cosine is never negative, so we take the positive root: .
Step 5. Substitute back into Step 3 to get for , exactly the stated formula. The other five formulas follow from the identical three-step pattern (differentiate implicitly, solve for the derivative in terms of the direct trig function, rewrite that function in terms of using an identity and the correct sign on the relevant branch) applied to , , , , and in turn.
Worked example
Differentiate with respect to , then extend the method to using a substitution.
Step 1. For , identify the composite structure: outer function with inner function .
Step 2. Differentiate the outer function with respect to using the standard formula, then substitute : .
Step 3. Differentiate the inner function: . By the chain rule, .
Step 4. Now the second, harder function: for . Substitute , so and for . Then by the double-angle identity.
Step 5. Since , the doubled angle lies exactly inside the principal branch, so and . Differentiating this simplified form directly gives .
Final answers: for , and for .
Competitive stretch
If instead the problem gave with , the same substitution turns the argument into , so . For (i.e. ), lies in the principal branch of , giving , and hence the same derivative — a good check that different-looking arguments can collapse to the same simplified answer.
Common traps
- Mixing up the sign between a function and its co-function derivative, e.g. writing instead of the correct negative sign.
- Forgetting the domain restrictions. The formulas for and hold only for ; for and , only for , and the in the denominator must not be dropped.
- Forgetting to apply the chain rule when the argument is not simply , e.g. differentiating as instead of .
- Choosing the wrong substitution range, so the simplified angle falls outside the principal-value branch, making a cancellation like invalid — always check the branch before dropping the outer and inner inverse functions.
Ask the tutor: Want to practice picking the right substitution for a gnarly inverse-trig argument, with guided hints on tracking the principal-value branch?
Why does the derivative of sin inverse x not contain any inverse trig function itself?
Because after implicit differentiation you get , not itself, and can always be rewritten purely in terms of using the Pythagorean identity (with the correct sign fixed by the principal branch). This is exactly what makes the six results usable as plain algebraic formulas rather than something you would need to re-derive every time — the inverse function only appears in the original problem, never in the final derivative.
How do I know which trigonometric substitution to try in a simplification problem?
Look at the structure of the argument. An expression like or inside or strongly suggests a double-angle identity, so try . An expression with or inside suggests and the tangent double-angle formula. Matching the algebraic shape of the argument to a known double-angle or triple-angle identity is the fastest way to pick the right substitution.
Do I need to memorise the sec inverse and csc inverse derivatives separately, or can I derive them on the spot?
Either works, but memorising the co-function pattern is faster in an exam: once you know , the csc inverse derivative is automatically its negative. If you forget the exact form, you can always re-derive it in under a minute using the same implicit-differentiation method used for sin inverse, starting from and using (with handled via the sign of on the two branches).