1
1 Introduction
Let
be a convex mapping defined on the interval I of real numbers and
with
. The following double inequality:
(1)
is known in the literature as Hermite–Hadamard inequality for convex mappings. Note that some of the classical inequalities for means can be derived from (1) for appropriate particular selections of the mapping f. Both inequalities hold in the reversed direction if f is concave.
It is well known that the Hermite–Hadamard’s inequality plays an important role in nonlinear analysis. Over the last decade, this classical inequality has been improved and generalized in a number of ways; there have been a large number of studies on Hermite–Hadamard’s inequality reporting its role in nonlinear analysis (Alomari et al., 2009; Azpeitia, 1994; Bakula and Pečarić, 2004; Dragomir and Pearce, 2000), later, this classical inequality has been improved (Kırmacı and Dikici, 2013; Set et al., 2011; Latif and Dragomir, 2012; Ozdemir et al., 2010) and is generalized in a number of ways (Hussain et al., 2009; Sarikaya and Aktan, 2011; Sarikaya et al., 2014a).
Let us now consider a bidemensional interval
in
with
and
. A mapping
is said to be convex on
if the following inequality:
(2)
holds, for all
and
. A function
is said to be convex on the co-ordinates on
if the partial mappings
,
and
,
are convex where defined for all
and
(Dragomir and Pearce, 2000).
A formal definition for co-ordinated convex function may be stated as follows:
Definition 1
A function
will be called co-ordinated convex on
, for all
and
, if the following inequality holds:
(3)
Clearly, every convex function is co-ordinated convex. Furthermore, there exist co-ordinated convex function which is not convex (Dragomir, 2001). Several recent studies have expressed concerns on Hermite–Hadamard’s inequality for some convex function on the co-ordinates on a rectangle from the plane
(Sarikaya and Yaldiz, 2013; Ozdemir et al., 2011; Sarikaya et al., 2012; Sarikaya et al. (2014c)). More details, one can consult Sarikaya (2014), Sarikaya et al. (2014b) and Sarikaya (2015).
Earlier, Dragomir (2001) establish the following inequality of Hermite–Hadamard type for co-ordinated convex mapping on a rectangle from the plane
. Later, another proof of a special version of the following theorem, using the definition of the co-ordinated convex function was reported (Sarikaya and Yaldiz, 2013).
Theorem 2
Suppose that
is co-ordinated convex on
. Then one has the inequalities:
(4)
The above inequalities are sharp.
In the following section, some relevant definitions and mathematical preliminaries of fractional calculus theory are presented. For more details, one can consult Gorenflo and Mainardi (1997), Kilbas et al. (2006), Samko et al. (1993), Miller and Ross (1993).
Definition 3
Let
. The Riemann–Liouville integrals
and
of order
with
are defined by
(5)
(6)
respectively. Here,
is the Gamma function.
It is remarkable that Sarikaya et al. (2012) first give the following interesting integral inequalities of Hermite–Hadamard type involving Riemann–Liouville fractional integrals.
Theorem 4
Let
be a positive function with
and
. If f is a convex function on
, then the following inequalities for fractional integrals hold:
(7)
with
.
Meanwhile, Sarikaya et al. (2012) presented the following important integral identity including the first-order derivative of f to establish many interesting Hermite–Hadamard type inequalities for convexity functions via Riemann–Liouville fractional integrals of the order
.
Lemma 5
Let
be a differentiable mapping on
with
. If
, then the following equality for fractional integrals holds:
(8)
(9)
Definition 6
Let
. The Riemann–Liouville integrals
and
of order
with
are defined by
(10)
(11)
(12)
and
(13)
respectively. Similar to Definitions 3 and 6 we introduce the following fractional integrals:
(14)
(15)
(16)
(17)
Objective of the present study is to state and prove the Hermite–Hadamard type inequality for co-ordinated convex mapping on a rectangle from the plane
. In order to achieve our goal, we first give two important identities and then by using these identities we prove some integral inequalities. We have obtained some results which are a simpler proof of the results presented by Sarikaya (2012).
2
2 Main results
To establish our main results, we need the following first identity:
Lemma 7
Let
be a partial differentiable mapping on
in
with
and
and
. Then the following equality holds:
(18)
where
(19)
and
(20)
Proof
For any
and
, we have
(21)
Choose
in (21), respectively, we get
(22)
(23)
(24)
and
(25)
Adding these four integrals side by side, we obtain
(26)
Multiplying (26) by
and integrating the resulting equality with respect to
on
, we have
(27)
Thus, in (27) by means of simple calculations, we have
(28)
Multiplying (26) by
and integrating the resulting equality with respect to
on
, and by similar calculations, we have
(29)
Multiplying (26) by
and integrating the resulting equality with respect to
on
, we have
(30)
Multiplying (26) by
and integrating the resulting equality with respect to
on
, we have
(31)
Adding these (28)–(31) side by side, which completes the proof.
Corollary 8
If we take
in Lemma 7, we get
(32)
Theorem 9
Let
be a partial differentiable mapping on
in
with
and
and
. If
, i.e
, then one has the inequality:
(33)
Proof
From Lemma 7, taking the modulus, it follows that
(34)
(35)
Since
, we get
(36)
(37)
This completes the proof.
Corollary 10
If we take
in Theorem 9, we get
(38)
Theorem 11
Let
be a partial differentiable mapping on
in
with
and
and
. If
is a convex function on the co-ordinates on
, then the following inequality holds:
(39)
Proof
Since
is co-ordinates on
, we know that
(40)
From Lemma 7, we have
(41)
By using co-ordinated convexity of
, we get
(42)
(43)
(44)
With a simple calculation, we have
(45)
(46)
Similarly, we also have the following equalities
(47)
(48)
and
(49)
Adding these (46)–(49) side by side, if we put in (44), we obtain (39). This completes the proof of the theorem.
Corollary 12
If we take
in Theorem 11, we get
(50)
Lemma 13
Let
be a partial differentiable mapping on
in
with
and
. Then the following equality holds:
(51)
Proof
Choose
and
in (21), we have
(52)
Multiplying (52) by
and integrating the resulting equality with respect to
on
, we get
(53)
By simple calculations, we have
(54)
Multiplying (52) by
, integrating the resulting equality with respect to
on
, and by similar methods above we have
(55)
Multiplying (52) by
integrating the resulting equality with respect to
on
, and by similar methods above we have
(56)
Multiplying (52) by
integrating the resulting equality with respect to
on
, and by similar methods above we have
(57)
Adding these (54)–(57) side by side and multiplying both sides by
, we get the desired equality (51).
Corollary 14
If we take
in Lemma 13, we get
(58)
Theorem 15
Let
be a partial differentiable mapping on
in
with
and
. If
, then the following equality holds:
(59)
Proof
In Lemma 13, taking the modulus, it follows that
(60)
(61)
for
.
Remark 16
If we take
in Theorem 15, we get
(62)
which is proved by Sarikaya in Sarikaya (2012).
Theorem 17
Let
be a partial differentiable mapping on
in
with
and
. If
is a convex function on the co-ordinates on
, then the following equality holds:
(63)
(64)
Proof
Since
is co-ordinates on
, we know that
(65)
From Lemma 13, using co-ordinated convexity of
, we have
(66)
(67)
(68)
With a simple calculation, we have
(69)
(70)
Similarly, we also have the following equalities
(71)
(72)
and
(73)
Thus, if we put the last four equalities in (68), we obtain (64). This completes the proof of the theorem.
Corollary 18
If we take
in Theorem 17, we get
(74)