I came across this proposition while trying to prove that a function was injective: if $a>b$ then $a^a>b^b$, where $a$ and $b$ are real numbers bigger than $1$. Intuitively it (somehow) makes sense but I wonder if a rigorous proof can be made. But, the initial problem I was trying to solve was to show that $f(x)=x^x$, where $x$ is just a positive real number, is injective. As the "contrapositive method" from the definition of an injective function didn't work out, I figured I could just show that my function was strictly increasing or decreasing, therefore the function would be injective. I looked at the graph of this function and I noticed I have a turning point at $x=1/e$ (as the user MXYMXY pointed out). Thus I had two cases for my function.

  • $\begingroup$ I didn't read the question properly at first. Sorry. $\endgroup$ Feb 14, 2016 at 0:44

5 Answers 5


You're asking to prove that the map $f(x):=x^x=\exp(x\log x)$ is strictly increasing. But since $x\mapsto x$ and $x\mapsto\log x$ are both strictly increasing and the first one is $>1$ in $\Bbb R_{>1}$, their product is such (in $\Bbb R_{>1}$).

Then the exponential is strictly increasing too, so $f$ is the composition of strictly increasing maps, thus itself is strictly increasing too.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ You should point out where you are using $x>1$. It is not true in general that the product of two strictly increasing functions is strictly increasing, take as an example the functions $x$ and $x$ with product $x^2$. $\endgroup$
    – Carsten S
    Feb 14, 2016 at 13:48
  • $\begingroup$ You're right, thanks. I'm gonna fix $\endgroup$
    – Joe
    Feb 14, 2016 at 14:02

If $a\gt b$ and $a\gt1$ and $b\gt1$ and $a,b\in\mathbb{R}$ then this implies:$$a^b\gt b^b\tag{1}$$

Also, if $a\gt b$ then this implies:$$a^a\gt a^b\tag{2}$$

Now, making use of result (1) in result (2) yields:$$a^a\gt a^b\gt b^b$$

  • 5
    $\begingroup$ @BenjaminDickman read the restriction in the question, that a and b are both greater than 1. $\endgroup$ Feb 14, 2016 at 6:27
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The notation $(a,b) \in \mathbb{R}$ is confusing, since $(a,b)$ looks as a pair. I'd write that without parentheses: $a,b \in \mathbb{R}$. $\endgroup$
    – chi
    Feb 14, 2016 at 18:40
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @chi Thanks for heads up - duly noted and changed. $\endgroup$
    – Mufasa
    Feb 14, 2016 at 19:41
  • $\begingroup$ Why is assuming that $a^b > b^b$ and that $a^a > a^b$ any more "basic" than assuming that $a^a > b^b$, I wonder? $\endgroup$
    – fgp
    Feb 14, 2016 at 22:15

Note that the derivative of $x^x$ is $(\ln(x)+1)x^x>0$(see here) if $x>e^{-1}$, implying $x^x$ is a strictly increasing function if $x>e^{-1}$.

This implies your claim is true not only when $a,b>1$ but also $a,b>e^{-1}$


Try this sequence of inequalities: $$b^b < b^a < a^a $$


Since $a > b > 1$, and since $\log(x)$ is an increasing function of $x$, then $$\log(a) > \log(b) > 0.$$ Multiplying these two inequalities together: $$a > b > 1$$ and $$\log(a) > \log(b) > 0$$ gives you $$a\log(a) > b\log(b).$$ By a property of logarithms ($x\log(x) = \log(x^x)$), this implies $$\log(a^a) > \log(b^b).$$ Again, since $\log(x)$ is an increasing function of $x$, we obtain $$a^a > b^b.$$



Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.