Rewrite, for ,
in terms of the inverse hyperbolic sine.
Recall the logarithmic form of arsinh. Solving for gives
Note the under the root: the standard form has no free parameter, so the given expression must first be scaled into that shape. This expression appears constantly as the antiderivative of , which is why the rewrite is worth knowing.
Scale the variable by . Substituting into the identity:
Simplify the radical. Combining over and using so that :
The assumption is essential here; for an absolute value would appear and the final constant would change.
Combine the two terms over .
using .
Rearrange to answer the question.
The two expressions differ only by the additive constant , which is exactly why both appear as valid antiderivatives of in different tables.
Verify numerically. With and : the left side is , and ✓.
Need to solve a different problem like this? Open the solver →