7.2
CiteScore
3.7
Impact Factor
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
ABUNDANCE ESTIMATION IN AN ARID ENVIRONMENT
Case Study
Editorial
Invited review
Letter to the Editor
Original Article
REVIEW
Review Article
SHORT COMMUNICATION
7.2
CiteScore
3.7
Impact Factor
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
ABUNDANCE ESTIMATION IN AN ARID ENVIRONMENT
Case Study
Editorial
Invited review
Letter to the Editor
Original Article
REVIEW
Review Article
SHORT COMMUNICATION
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
23 (
2
); 163-166
doi:
10.1016/j.jksus.2010.07.001

Radii problems for certain analytic functions

Mathematics Department, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology, Islamabad, Pakistan

⁎Tel.: +92 3335067889. bushramalik07@yahoo.com (Bushra Malik)

Disclaimer:
This article was originally published by Elsevier and was migrated to Scientific Scholar after the change of Publisher.

Available online 1 August 2010

Peer-review under responsibility of King Saud University.

Abstract

In this paper, we study some radii problems for certain classes of analytic functions. These results generalize some of the previously known radii problems such as the radius of convexity for starlikness and radius of quasi-convexity for close-to-convex functions. Also, it is shown that some of these radii are best possible.

Keywords

Bounded boundary rotation
Bounded radius rotation
Convolution
Ruscheweyh derivative
1

1 Introduction

Let A n be the class of analytic functions f,

(1.1)
f ( z ) = z + m = n a m + 1 z m + 1 , n 1 , which are analytic in the unit disc E = { z : | z | < 1 } . We shall need the following known classes (Noor, 2008) in our discussion. Let, for 0 γ , β < 1 ,
(1.2)
p ( z ) = 1 + m = n a m z m , z E ,
we have, P ( γ , n ) = { p : p is analytic in E , given by (1.2), Rep ( z ) > γ } S ( γ , n ) = f : f A n and zf f P ( γ , n ) C ( γ , n ) = f : f A n and 1 + zf f P ( γ , n ) . It is clear that
(1.3)
f C ( γ , n ) zf S ( γ , n ) .
For n = 1 , these classes have been introduced by Robertson (1963). K ( β , γ ) = f : f A n and zf g P ( β , n ) for some g S ( γ , n ) C ( β , γ ) = f : f A n and ( zf ) g P ( β , n ) for some g C ( γ , n ) . We note here that
(1.4)
f C ( β , γ ) zf K ( β , γ ) .
These classes have been studied by Noor (1987) for n = 1 .

Now, we have the definition of following classes for k 2 , P k ( γ , n ) = p : p ( z ) = k 4 + 1 2 p 1 ( z ) - k 4 - 1 2 p 2 ( z ) , p 1 , p 2 P ( γ , n ) P k ( γ , n ) = { p : p P k ( γ , n ) } V k ( γ , n ) = f : f A n and 1 + zf f P k ( γ , n ) R k ( γ , n ) = f : f A n and zf f P k ( γ , n ) . We note that P 2 ( γ , n ) = P ( γ , n ) . The class P k ( 0 , 1 ) = P k was introduced and discussed by Pinchuk (1971), where he defined it as follows: P k = p : p ( z ) = 1 2 - π π 1 + ze - it 1 - ze - it d μ ( t ) , - π π d μ ( t ) = 2 , - π π d μ ( t ) k . It is easy to see that P k ( γ , n ) = ( 1 - γ ) P k ( 0 , n ) + γ and P 2 ( 0 , 1 ) = P is the class of functions with positive real part. It is clear that

(1.5)
f V k ( γ , n ) zf R k ( γ , n ) . The classes V k ( 0 , 1 ) = V k and R k ( 0 , 1 ) = R k are the well-known classes of functions with bounded boundary rotation and bounded radius rotation, respectively.

Let f j ( z ) , j = 1 , 2 in A n be given by f j ( z ) = z + m = n a m + 1 , j z m + 1 , n 1 , z E .

Then the Hadamard product or convolution ( f 1 f 2 ) ( z ) of f 1 and f 2 is defined by

(1.6)
( f 1 f 2 ) ( z ) = z + m = n a m + 1 , 1 a m + 1 , 2 z m + 1 , n 1 , z E . By using the Hadamard product, we define the well-known Ruscheweyh derivative (see Rucheweyh, 1975) as following.

Denote by D α : A n A n the operator defined by D α f ( z ) = z n ( 1 - z ) 1 + α f ( z ) , α > - 1 . For α = m N 0 = { 0 , 1 , 2 } , we can write D m f ( z ) = z ( 1 - z ) 1 + m f ( z ) = z ( z m - 1 f ( z ) ) ( m ) m ! . Also, for Ruscheweyh derivative D α , the following identity is known (see Fukui and Sakaguchi, 1980).

For a real number α ( α > - 1 ) , we have

(1.7)
z ( D α f ( z ) ) = ( α + 1 ) D α + 1 f ( z ) - α D α f ( z ) . Recently, the Ruscheweyh derivative has been studied in Noor and Hussain (2008).

We now have the following classes which have been introduced and studied in Noor (1991), for the case n = 1 , S α ( γ , n ) = { f A n : D α f S ( γ , n ) , α > - 1 , z E } C α ( γ , n ) = { f A n : D α f C ( γ , n ) , α > - 1 , z E } K α ( β , γ ) = { f A n : D α f K ( β , γ ) , α > - 1 , z E } and C α ( β , γ ) = { f A n : D α f C ( β , γ ) , α > - 1 , z E } .

2

2 Preliminary results

The following lemmas will be used.

Lemma 2.1

Let h P ( 0 , n ) = P n for z E . Then

  1. h ( z ) h ( z ) 2 n | z | n - 1 1 - | z | 2 n

  2. | zh ( z ) | 2 n | z | n Reh ( z ) 1 - | z | 2 n

  3. 1 - | z | n 1 + | z | n Reh ( z ) | h ( z ) | 1 + | z | n 1 - | z | n .

For (i) we refer to MacGraw (1963), (ii) will be found in Bernardi (1974) and for (iii) (see Shah, 1972).

The following Lemma can easily be shown by using Lemma 2.1.

Lemma 2.2

Let p P ( γ , n ) for z = re i θ E . Then 1 + ( 2 γ - 1 ) r n 1 + r n Rep ( z ) | p ( z ) | 1 - ( 2 γ - 1 ) r n 1 - r n and | zp ( z ) | 2 n ( 1 - γ ) r n Rep ( z ) ( 1 - r n ) [ 1 + ( 1 - 2 γ ) r n ] .

3

3 Main results

Theorem 3.1

Let f , g A n and let f g P n , where g V k ( γ , n ) . Then f V k ( γ , n ) for | z | < r 0 , where

(3.1)
r 0 n = r 0 n ( γ , n ) = 1 - γ ( n - γ + 1 ) + n 2 - 2 γ n + 2 n . This result is sharp.

Proof

We can write f ( z ) = g ( z ) h ( z ) , where g V k ( γ , n ) , h P n , z E . Logarithmic differentiation yields, ( zf ( z ) ) f ( z ) = ( zg ( z ) ) g ( z ) + zh ( z ) h ( z ) = H ( z ) + zh ( z ) h ( z ) , h P k ( γ , n ) = k 4 + 1 2 { ( 1 - γ ) H 1 ( z ) + γ } - k 4 - 1 2 { ( 1 - γ ) H 2 ( z ) + γ } + zh ( z ) h ( z ) , where H i P n , i = 1 , 2 .

This gives us 1 1 - γ ( zf ( z ) ) f ( z ) - γ = k 4 + 1 2 H 1 ( z ) + 1 1 - γ zh ( z ) h ( z ) - k 4 - 1 2 H 2 ( z ) + 1 1 - γ zh ( z ) h ( z ) . Now, for i = 1 , 2 , we use Lemma 2.1, with | z | = r , to have Re H i ( z ) + 1 1 - γ zh ( z ) h ( z ) ReH i ( z ) - 1 1 - γ zh ( z ) h ( z ) 1 - r n 1 + r n - 1 ( 1 - γ ) 2 nr n ( 1 - r 2 n ) = ( 1 - γ ) ( 1 - r n ) 2 - 2 γ r n ( 1 - γ ) ( 1 - r 2 n ) = ( 1 - γ ) - 2 ( n - γ + 1 ) r n + ( 1 - γ ) r 2 n ( 1 - γ ) ( 1 - r 2 n ) . Therefore, for | z | < r 0 where r 0 is as stated in (3.1), Re H i ( z ) + 1 1 - γ zh ( z ) h ( z ) > 0 . This implies that 1 1 - γ ( zf ( z ) ) f ( z ) - γ P k ( 0 , n ) for | z | < r 0 , which leads us to the required result that f V k ( γ , n ) for | z | < r 0 , where r 0 is as given in (3.1).

Sharpness can be seen by taking H i ( z ) = h ( z ) = 1 - z n 1 + z n P n .

Theorem 3.2

Let f , g A n and g P 2 ( γ , n ) = P ( γ , n ) in E. If f g P ( γ , n ) , then f V 2 ( 0 , n ) for | z | < r 1 where r 1 is given by

(3.2)
r 1 n = 1 2 n ( 1 - γ ) + 4 n 2 ( 1 - γ ) 2 + 1 . This result is also sharp.

Proof

Let f ( z ) g ( z ) = h ( z ) , where h P ( γ , n ) . Then f ( z ) f ( z ) = h ( z ) h ( z ) + g ( z ) g ( z ) . That is ( zf ( z ) ) f ( z ) = zh ( z ) h ( z ) + zp ( z ) p ( z ) + 1 , where g = p P ( γ , n ) in E .

Now, using Lemma 2.2, we have

(3.3)
Re ( zf ( z ) ) f ( z ) 1 - 4 n ( 1 - γ ) r n ( 1 - r n ) ( 1 + r n ) = 1 - 4 n ( 1 - γ ) r n - r 2 n 1 - r 2 n . The right hand side of the above inequality (3.3) is positive for | z | < r 1 , where r 1 is given by (3.2).

The sharpness can seen by considering g ( z ) = 0 z 1 - ( 2 γ - 1 ) t n 1 - t n dt , h ( z ) = 1 - ( 2 γ - 1 ) z n 1 - z n and f ( z ) = 0 z 1 - ( 2 γ - 1 ) t n 1 - t n 2 dt . The inclusion results for the classes S α ( γ , n ) , C α ( γ , n ) , K α ( β , γ ) and C α ( β , γ ) , with n = 1 , have been studied by Noor (1991). We here deal with the converse case in general. □

Theorem 3.3

Let f S α ( γ , n ) , α 0 . Then f S α + 1 ( γ , n ) for | z | < r 0 ( α , γ ) is given as

(3.4)
r 0 n = r 0 n ( α , γ ) = 1 + α ( 1 - γ + n ) + ( 1 - γ + n ) 2 - ( 1 + α ) ( 1 - 2 γ - α ) .

Proof

Since f S α ( γ , n ) , so we can write it as ( zD α f ( z ) ) D α f ( z ) = H ( z ) = ( 1 - γ ) h ( z ) + γ , where H P ( γ , n ) and so h P ( 0 , n ) = P n . Now using (1.7), we have D α + 1 f ( z ) D α f ( z ) = 1 1 + α ( zD α f ( z ) ) D α f ( z ) + α = 1 1 + α { ( 1 - γ ) h ( z ) + γ + α } . Differentiating both sides logarithmically, we have z ( D α + 1 f ( z ) ) D α + 1 f ( z ) = ( zD α f ( z ) ) D α f ( z ) + ( 1 - γ ) zh ( z ) ( 1 - γ ) h ( z ) + γ + α = ( 1 - γ ) h ( z ) + γ + ( 1 - γ ) zh ( z ) ( 1 - γ ) h ( z ) + γ + α , or 1 1 - γ z ( D α + 1 f ( z ) ) D α + 1 f ( z ) - γ = h ( z ) + zh ( z ) ( 1 - γ ) h ( z ) + γ + α . Therefore, Re 1 1 - γ z ( D α + 1 f ( z ) ) D α + 1 f ( z ) - γ = Re h ( z ) + zh ( z ) ( 1 - γ ) h ( z ) + γ + α .

By using Lemma 2.1 for | z | = r < 1 , we have Re 1 1 - γ z ( D α + 1 f ( z ) ) D α + 1 f ( z ) - γ Reh ( z ) 1 - 2 nr n 1 - r 2 n ( 1 - γ ) 1 - r n 1 + r n + γ + α = Reh ( z ) ( 1 + α ) - 2 ( 1 - γ + n ) r n + ( 1 - 2 γ - α ) r 2 n ( 1 + α ) - 2 ( 1 - γ ) r n + ( 1 - 2 γ - α ) r 2 n . The right hand side of above inequality is positive if r n < r 0 n and so is given by (3.4).

As a special case, when α = 0 , n = 1 and γ = 0 , we obtain the radius of convexity 2 - 3  for starlike functions. □

Theorem 3.4

Let for α 0 , f C α ( γ , n ) in E. Then f C α + 1 ( γ , n ) for | z | < r 0 = r 0 ( α , γ ) , where r 0 is given by (3.4).

Proof

By using the definition of C α ( γ , n ) , we have f C α ( γ , n ) D α f C ( γ , n ) in E . z ( D α f ) S ( γ , n ) in E . D α ( zf ) S ( γ , n ) in E . zf S α + 1 ( γ , n ) in | z | < r 0 . D α + 1 ( zf ) S ( γ , n ) in | z | < r 0 . z ( D α + 1 f ) S ( γ , n ) in | z | < r 0 . D α + 1 f C ( γ , n ) in | z | < r 0 . f C α + 1 ( γ , n ) in | z | < r 0 , which is the required result. □

Theorem 3.5

Let for α 0 , f K α ( β , γ ) in E. Then f K α + 1 ( β , γ ) for | z | < r 0 = r 0 ( α , γ ) , where r 0 is given by (3.4).

Proof

Since f K α ( β , γ ) , there exists g S ( γ , n ) such that

(3.5)
z ( D α f ( z ) ) D α g ( z ) = ( 1 - β ) h ( z ) + β , h P ( 0 , n ) . Also, since g S ( γ , n ) , we can write
(3.6)
z ( D α g ( z ) ) D α g ( z ) = ( 1 - γ ) H ( z ) + γ , H P ( 0 , n ) .

Using (1.7), we have z ( D α + 1 f ( z ) ) D α + 1 g ( z ) = D α + 1 ( zf ( z ) ) D α + 1 g ( z ) = 1 1 + α z ( D α ( zf ( z ) ) ) + α 1 + α D α ( zf ( z ) ) 1 1 + α z ( D α g ( z ) ) + α 1 + α D α g ( z ) = z ( D α ( zf ( z ) ) ) D α g ( z ) + α D α ( zf ( z ) ) D α g ( z ) z ( D α g ( z ) ) D α g ( z ) + α .

By using (3.5) and (3.6), we have

(3.7)
z ( D α + 1 f ( z ) ) D α + 1 g ( z ) = z ( D α ( zf ( z ) ) ) D α g ( z ) + α { ( 1 - β ) h ( z ) + β } ( 1 - γ ) H ( z ) + γ + α .

From (3.5), we have z ( D α f ( z ) ) = D α g ( z ) { ( 1 - β ) h ( z ) + β } . Differentiating both sides, we have z ( z ( D α f ( z ) ) ) = ( 1 - β ) zh ( z ) ( D α g ( z ) ) + ( D α g ( z ) ) { ( 1 - β ) h ( z ) + β } . That is,

(3.8)
z ( D α ( zf ( z ) ) ) D α g ( z ) = ( 1 - β ) zh ( z ) + { ( 1 - γ ) H ( z ) + γ } { ( 1 - β ) h ( z ) + β } . Using (3.8) in (3.7), we obtain 1 1 - β z ( D α + 1 f ( z ) ) D α + 1 g ( z ) - β = h ( z ) + zh ( z ) ( 1 - γ ) H ( z ) + γ + α . Now Re 1 1 - β z ( D α + 1 f ( z ) ) D α + 1 f ( z ) - β = Reh ( z ) 1 - 2 nr n 1 - r n ( 1 - γ ) 1 - r n 1 + r n + γ + α . We note that right hand side is positive for | z | < r 0 = r 0 ( α , γ ) given by (3.4) and also g S α ( γ , n ) for | z | < r 0 . Hence f K α + 1 ( β , γ ) for | z | < r 0 . □

As a special case, when α = 0 , β = 0 , γ = 0 and n = 1 , we obtain the radius of quasi-convexity 2 - 3 for close-to-convex functions.

Using the same method as in Theorem 3.4 with the relation (1.4), we can easily prove the following result.

Theorem 3.6

Let f C α ( β , γ ) for α 0 , z E . Then f C α + 1 ( β , γ ) for | z | < r 0 = r 0 ( α , γ ) , where r 0 is given by (3.4).

References

  1. , . New distortion theorems for functions of positive real part and applications to the partial sum of univalent convex function. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.. 1974;45:113-118.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. , , . An extension of theorem of S. Ruscheweyh. Bull. Fac. Ed. Wakayama Univ. Natur. Sci.. 1980;29:1-3.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. , . The radius of univalence of certain analytic functions. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.. 1963;14:214-220.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. , . On quasi-convex and related topics. Int. J. Math. Math. Sci.. 1987;10:241-258.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. , . On some applications of the Ruscheweyh derivatives. Math. Japonica. 1991;36:869-874.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. , . On some differential operators for certain class of analytic functions. J. Math. Ineq.. 2008;2:129-137.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. , , . On certain analytic functions associated with Ruscheweyh derivative and bounded mocanu variations. J. Math. Anal. Appl.. 2008;340:1144-1152.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. , . Functions with bounded boundary rotation. Israel J. Math.. 1971;10:7-16.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. , . On the theory of univalent functions. Ann. Math.. 1963;37:374-408.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. , . New criteria for univalent functions. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.. 1975;49(1):109-115.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. , . On the univalence of some analytic functions. Pacific J. Math.. 1972;43:239-250.
    [Google Scholar]
Show Sections