Math calculator

Partial Fraction Decomposition Calculator

One substitution per term, not a simultaneous system.

Split it into simple fractions

By the cover-up method, one substitution per term.

Highest power first, so 5x − 4 is “5, −4”.

So (x − 1)(x − 2) is “1, 2”.

(5x − 4) / (x − 1)(x − 2)

−1/(x − 1) + 6/(x − 2)

Each term found by covering its own factor and evaluating the rest at that root — one substitution each, rather than a simultaneous system.

One term per linear factor. A numerator of zero means that term is absent entirely.
NumeratorOver
−1(x − 1)
6(x − 2)

Original

(5x − 4) / (x − 1)(x − 2)

a proper rational function

Decomposition

−1/(x − 1) + 6/(x − 2)

a sum of simple fractions

Terms

2

one per distinct linear factor

  • Solved by the cover-up method rather than by equating coefficients: to find the numerator over (x − r), cover that factor and evaluate everything else at x = r. It is one substitution per term instead of a simultaneous system.
  • It works because multiplying through by (x − r) and then setting x = r kills every other term at once — each one still has an (x − r) factor left in it.
  • A coefficient that comes out as exactly zero means that term is absent from the decomposition entirely, which is a real answer rather than a rounding.
  • The fraction has to be PROPER — numerator degree below denominator degree — before any of this applies. An improper one needs polynomial division first, and the decomposition is of the remainder.
  • This is what makes many integrals tractable: 1/((x − 1)(x − 2)) has no obvious antiderivative, and split into 1/(x − 2) − 1/(x − 1) it is two logarithms. That is the reason the technique exists.

Every decomposition here is verified by recombining it and comparing with the original at sample points.

What this tool shows

The cover-up method finds each numerator with a single substitution: cover that factor and evaluate everything else at its root. It works because multiplying through by (x − r) and setting x = r kills every other term at once.

  • Decomposing into distinct linear factors
  • The cover-up method, and why it works
  • Why the fraction must be proper first
  • What a repeated root needs instead
  • Why a zero coefficient is a real answer
  • Why the technique exists at all
Cover-up method Verified by recombining Improper refused Why it exists

Distinct linear factors. Repeated roots are refused with the reason.

Updated 7 September 2026 · Works in any browser, no installation

Cover each factor and evaluate the rest at its root. For (5x − 4) / ((x−1)(x−2)): cover (x−1), put x = 1 into the rest, and get −1. Cover (x−2), put x = 2, and get 6. So the decomposition is −1/(x−1) + 6/(x−2).

At a glance

Formula shown
For P(x) / ((x − r₁)…(x − rₙ)) with distinct roots, the numerator over (x − rᵢ) is P(rᵢ) divided by the product of the other factors evaluated at rᵢ. That is the cover-up rule.
Scenario support
Preparing a rational function for integration; inverting a Laplace transform; simplifying a transfer function.
Educational estimate
Planning support from the values you enter — not professional advice.

Why the cover-up works

It looks like a trick and it is a proof in disguise.

Start from P(x)/((x−1)(x−2)) = A/(x−1) + B/(x−2) and multiply everything by (x−1). The left side loses that factor. The A term loses it too. But the B term still has an (x−1) in the numerator.

Now set x = 1. That (x−1) becomes zero, so the B term vanishes entirely, and what remains is A = P(1)/(1−2).

Covering the factor and substituting is exactly that sequence, done mentally. Every other term is killed because every other term still carries the factor you multiplied by.

The alternative — multiplying out and equating coefficients — gives the same answer and needs a simultaneous system. For three or four factors that is a great deal more work for no more insight.

It has to be proper

Partial fractions only apply to a proper fraction: numerator degree strictly below denominator degree.

If it is not, divide first. Polynomial long division gives a polynomial plus a proper remainder, and the remainder is what gets decomposed.

So (x² + 1)/((x−1)(x−2)) becomes 1 + (3x − 1)/((x−1)(x−2)), and only the second part needs this method.

Skipping the division does not produce a slightly wrong answer — it produces no answer, because the assumed form has too few degrees of freedom to match. This page refuses the input rather than returning something plausible.

Repeated and quadratic factors

Two cases need more terms than this page provides, and it refuses them rather than approximating.

A repeated linear factor (x−r)² needs two terms: A/(x−r) + B/(x−r)². In general a factor repeated k times needs k terms with rising powers, and the cover-up method finds only the highest one directly.

An irreducible quadratic x² + bx + c needs a linear numerator: (Ax + B)/(x² + bx + c). One unknown is not enough, because the factor has two roots and they are complex.

The counting rule is simple: the total number of unknowns always equals the degree of the denominator. If your assumed form has fewer, it cannot work — and that is the check to make before starting.

Why the technique exists

Partial fractions exist to make integration possible, and that is worth stating plainly because it is otherwise a curious piece of algebra with no obvious purpose.

1/((x−1)(x−2)) has no obvious antiderivative. Split into 1/(x−2) − 1/(x−1) it is two logarithms, and the integral falls out immediately.

Every rational function can be integrated this way, which is a genuinely strong result: the antiderivative is always some combination of logarithms, arctangents and rational terms. Nothing else is needed.

The same decomposition serves inverse Laplace transforms, where each simple fraction corresponds to a known transform pair — which is how differential equations get solved in engineering.

Where it gets used

Integration. The standard method for any rational function, and the reason the technique is taught at all.

Laplace transforms. Inverting a transfer function means decomposing it and matching each term to a table entry.

Control theory. A system’s response is read off its poles, and partial fractions separate the contribution of each one.

Series. Telescoping sums often come from a partial fraction split — 1/(n(n+1)) becomes 1/n − 1/(n+1), and the sum collapses.

Sources and methodology

The decomposition is standard algebra; these are the references.

Method. The cover-up method is used rather than equating coefficients, because it needs one substitution per term instead of solving a simultaneous system, and because it makes the reason visible. Improper fractions and repeated roots are refused with their own explanations rather than approximated, since each needs a genuinely different method. The suite verifies every decomposition by recombining it and comparing with the original at sample points away from the poles, which no coefficient error could survive. That engine is verified on every change against 99 hand-written assertions, including that every decomposition recombines to the original rational function at four sample points, and that an improper fraction and a repeated root are each refused with the correct reason. The count and the per-case breakdown are published on the formula verification page.

Related calculators

Where this goes next:

Polynomial DivisionDivide polynomials by long division or synthetic division, with the quotient, the remainder, the remainder theorem check and every stage of the working.
Quadratic FormulaSolve any quadratic with exact roots — surds stay surds and a negative discriminant gives the complex pair — plus the vertex, the factored form and every step of the working.
Logarithm RulesExpand or condense a logarithm step by step, with the rule that produced each term — and an explicit statement that log(a + b) is not log a + log b.
Cubic EquationSolve any cubic exactly when it has a rational root — deflate and finish with the quadratic formula — and by the trigonometric form when it does not, with the discriminant saying which case you are in.
System of EquationsSolve linear systems in up to six unknowns with exact fractions — row operations, the matrix form, Cramer’s rule, and the parametric family when there is no single answer.
Simplify FractionsReduce a fraction to lowest terms with both routes to the divisor shown side by side — Euclid line by line and the shared primes — and a stated proof when nothing can be cancelled.

More in Math, or browse all calculators.

Read the guide

An improper fraction needs polynomial division first — the Polynomial Division Calculator does that step.

Educational use disclaimer

This is an educational tool. It handles distinct linear factors; repeated factors and irreducible quadratics need additional terms this page does not cover.

How we calculate · Found an error? email us

Authorship & verification

Written and maintained by , a business operator who builds spreadsheet-based calculators.

What's changed (3 updates)

Published 7 September 2026

  1. Published the partial fractions page using the cover-up method — one substitution per term rather than a simultaneous system — and explaining why it works: multiplying through by (x − r) and setting x = r kills every other term at once, because each still carries that factor.
  2. Refuses an improper fraction and a repeated root with their own reasons rather than approximating, since each needs a genuinely different method: polynomial division first for one, rising-power terms for the other.
  3. Says why the technique exists at all — 1/((x−1)(x−2)) has no obvious antiderivative and splits into two logarithms — because otherwise it is a curious piece of algebra with no visible purpose.

Add this calculator to your site

Responsive embed — and private: nothing your visitors type leaves their browser.