Printer Friendly

Coefficient estimates for close-to-convex functions with argument [beta].

1 Introduction

Let A be the family of functions f analytic in the unit disc D = {z [member of] C : [absolute value of z] < 1}, and [A.sub.1] be the subset of A consisting of functions / which are normalized by f(0) = f'(0) - 1 = 0. A function f [member of] [A.sub.1] is said to be starlike (denoted by f [member of] [S.sup.*]) if f maps D univalently onto a domain starlike with respect to the origin.


[P.sub.[beta]] = {p [member of] A: p(0) = 1, Re [e.sup.i[beta]] p > o} .

Here and hereafter we always suppose -[pi]/2 < [beta] < [pi]/2. It is easy to see that

p [member of] [P.sub.[beta]] [??] [e.sup.i[beta]] p - i sin [beta]/cos [beta] [member of][P.sub.0]. (1)

Herglotz representation formula (see [4]) together with (1) yield the following equivalence

p [member of] [P.sub.[beta]] [??] p(z) = [[integral].sub.[partial derivative]D] 1 + [e.sup.-2i[beta]]xz/1 - xz d[mu](x) (2)

for a Borel probability measure [mu] on the boundary [partial derivative]D of D. This correspondence is 1-1.

Since Vo is the well-known Caratheodory class, we call [P.sub.[beta]] the tilted Caratheodory class by angle [beta]. Some equivalent definitions and basic estimates are known (for a short survey, see [7]).

Definition 1. A function f [member of] [A.sub.1] is said to be close-to-convex (denoted by f [member of] CL) if there exist a starlike function g and a real number [beta] [member of](-[pi]/2, [pi]/2) such that

zf'/g [member of][P.sub.[beta]].

This definition involving a real number [beta] is slightly different from the original one due to Kaplan [5]. An equivalent definition of CL by using Kaplan class and some related sets of univalent functions can be found in [6]. If we specify the real number [beta] in the above definition, the corresponding function is called a close-to-convex function with argument [beta] and we denote the class of all such functions by CL([beta]) (see [1, II, Definition 11.4]). Note that the union of class CL([beta]) over [beta] [member of] (-[pi]/2, [pi]/2) is precisely CL while the intersection is the class of convex functions. These results were given in [2] without proof. Since the former one is obvious, we will only give an outline of the proof of the latter one. Choose a sequence {[[beta].sub.n]} [subset] (-[pi]/2, [pi]/2) such that [[beta].sub.n] [right arrow] [pi]/2 as n [right arrow] [infinity]. The assertion follows from the facts that the class of starlike functions is compact in the sense of locally uniform convergence and any function sequence {[p.sub.n]} where [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] converges to the constant function 1 locally uniform as [[beta].sub.n] [right arrow]/2.

In the literature, when studying the close-to-convex functions, some authors focus only on the case [beta] = 0. A. W. Goodman and E. B. Saff [2] were the first to point out explicitly that CL([beta]) and CL are different when [beta] [not equal to] 0 and more deeply the class CL([beta]) has no inclusion relation with respect to [beta]. Therefore it is useful to consider the individual class CL([beta]). The present paper follows their way in this direction and improves their result concerning the class CL([beta]);

Theorem A (Goodman-Saff [2]) Suppose f(z) = z + [[infinity].summation over (n=2)] [a.sub.n][z.sup.n] [member of] CL([beta]) for a

[beta] [member of] (-[pi]/2, [pi]/2). Then

[absolute value of [a.sub.n]] [less than or equal to] 1 + (n - 1) cos [beta].

for n = 2,3, ... . If either n = 2 or [beta] = 0, the inequality is sharp.

In the above mentioned paper, they also stated that the problem of finding the maximum for [absolute value of [a.sub.n]] in the class CL([beta]) was difficult for n [greater than or equal to] 3. With regard to their problem, in the present paper we shall establish the following theorems:

Theorem 1. Suppose f(z) = z + [[infinity].summation over ([a.sub.n][z.sup.n])][member of] CL([beta]) for a [beta] [member of] (-[pi]/2, [pi]/2), then the sharp inequality


holds for n = 2,3, ... . Extremal functions are given by

f'(z) = 1/[(1 - yz).sup.2] 1 + [e.sup.2i[beta]][yu.sub.n]z/1 - [yu.sub.n]z

for y [member of] [partial derivative]D, where [u.sub.n] [member of] [partial derivative]D is a point at which the above maximum is attained.

We mention here that it seems that there are no extremal functions other than the form given above in Theorem 1. Theorem A follows from Theorem 1 immediately by the elementary inequality


for any u [member of] [partial derivative]D.

The expression in (3) is implicit. When n = 3, we can give a more concrete estimate and also show the extremal functions are unique;

Theorem 2. Suppose f(z) = z + [[infinity].summation over (n=2)][a.sub.n][z.sup.n] [member of] CL([beta]), then the sharp inequality

[absolute value of [a.sub.3]] [less than or equal to] 2 cos [beta]/3 [square root of 5 + 9/4 [cos.sup.2] [beta] + 13/1 - [t.sub.0]] (4)

holds, where [t.sub.0] is the unique root of the equation

[t.sup.3] - (4/3 [cos.sup.2] [beta] + 6) [t.sup.2] + (40/9 [cos.sup.2] [beta] + 9) t + 4 [cos.sup.2] [beta] - 4 = 0 (5)

in 0 [less than or equal to] t < 1. Equality holds in (4) if and only if

f'(z) = 1/[(1 - yz).sup.2] 1 + [e.sup.-2i[beta]][yu.sub.3]z/1 - [yu.sub.3]z

for some y [member of] [partial derivative]D, where


Remark 1. Comparing Theorem A and Theorem 2, it is not difficult to see that

1 + 2 cos [beta] = 2 cos [beta]/3 [square root of 5 + 9/4 [cos.sup.2] [beta] + 13/1 - [t.sub.0]]

if and only if

[t.sub.0] = 9-9 cos [beta]/9 + 4 cos [beta].

Since this [t.sub.0] is a root of (5) in [0,1) only when [beta] = 0, Theorem A is sharp only when [beta] = 0 for n = 3.

Finally we give an example to show how Theorem 2 works.

Example. Let [beta] = [pi]/4. Applying Mathematica, we may get the root of equation (5) which belongs to [0,1) is 0.201 ..., therefore in this case


which is less than 1 + [square root of 2][approximately equal to] 2.414 by Theorem A.

2 Proof of Theorems

In order to prove our theorems, we shall need the following lemma

Lemma 1. (see [3] p. 52) If f [member of] [S.sup.*], then there exists a Borel probability measure v on [partial derivative]D such that

f(z) = [[integral].sub.[partial derivative]D z/[(1 - yz).sup.2] dv (y).

Proof of Theorem 1:

Equivalence (2) and Lemma 1 imply that if f [member of] CL([beta]), then there exist two Borel probability measures [mu] and v on [partial derivative]D such that f' can be represented as

f'(z) = [[integral].sub.[partial derivative]D][[integral].sub.[partial derivative]D] 1/[(1 - yz).sup.2] 1 + [e.sup.- 2i[beta]] xz/1 - xz d[mu](x)dv(y).

Thus in order to estimate the coefficients of f, it is sufficient to estimate those of functions

1/[(1 - yz).sup.2] 1 + [e.sup.-2i[beta]] xz/1 - xz

when [absolute value of] = [absolute value of] y] = 1.





after letting u = x/y, we can easily obtain (3). The extremal functions can be obtained easily by the proof of this theorem.

Proof of Theorem 2: By Theorem 1, we have the sharp inequality



h([alpha]) = [[absolute value of 1 + [2e.sup.i[alpha]] + 3/1 + [e.sup.-2i[beta]][e.sup.2i[alpha]]].sup.2]. (6)

Straightforward calculations give



h'([alpha]) = -4 sin [alpha] - 12 sin 2[beta] + 3[alpha]/2 cos [alpha]/2/cos [beta]

= -(10 sin [alpha] + 6 sin 2[alpha]) - 6 tan [beta] (cos 2[alpha] + cos [alpha]), (8)

h"([alpha]) = -(10 cos [alpha] + 12 cos 2[alpha] + 6 tan [beta] (2 sin 2[alpha] + sin [alpha]). (9)

Since h'([pi]) = 0 and h"([pi]) < 0, h([alpha]) attains a local maximum h([pi]) = (9 - 8 [cos.sup.2] [beta]) I(4 cos2 ft) at n. It follows from h(n) < h(0) that n is not a global maximum point of h(tx). Since h([alpha]) is periodic and continuous, its maximum point exists over (-[pi], [pi]), thus we may suppose that h(a) attains its maximum at some point [[alpha].sub.0] in (-[pi], [pi]), then

h'([[alpha].sub.0]) = 0 (10)


h"([[alpha].sub.0]) [less than or equal to] 0. (11)

Combining (8) and (10), we may represent tan [beta] in term of [[alpha].sub.0];

tan [beta] = - 5 sin [[alpha].sub.0] + 3 sin 2[[alpha].sub.0]/3(cos [[alpha].sub.0] + cos 2[[alpha].sub.0]). (12)

Substituting it into (9) shows



11 + 11 cos [alpha] + 4 [sin.sup.2] [alpha] cos [alpha] > 0

whenever - [pi] < [alpha] < [pi], hence from (11) and (13), we deduce that

cos [[alpha].sub.0] + cos 2[[alpha].sub.0] > 0

which is fulfilled only when cos [[alpha].sub.0] > 1/2 i.e. [[alpha].sub.0] [member of] (-[pi]/3, [pi]/3).

Let g([[alpha].sub.0]) denote the quantity given in the right hand side of (12). Since g'([alpha]) < 0 over (-[pi]/3, [pi]/3), there exists one and only one [[alpha].sub.0] which satisfies (10) and (11) and h([alpha]) assumes its maximum

5 + 9/4 [cos.sup.2] [beta] + 13/1 - 4 [sin.sup.2] [[alpha].sub.0]/2

at [[alpha].sub.0]

(8) and (10) also imply

cos [[alpha].sub.0]/2 (2 sin [[alpha].sub.0]/2 + 3 sin 3[[alpha].sub.0] + 2[beta]/2/cos [beta]) = 0 (14)

Since [[alpha].sub.0] [not equal to] [pi], after letting [x.sub.0] = sin([[alpha].sub.0]/2), (14) implies that xq is the unique root of the following equation

11x - [12x.sup.3] + 3 tan [beta] [square root of 1 - [x.sup.2]](1 - [4x.sup.2]) = 0.

in (-1/2,1/2). Writing [t.sub.0] = [4x.sup.2.sub.0] and t = [4x.sup.2], we get [t.sub.0] is a root of equation (5) in [0,1).

Let v(t) be the polynomial in the left hand of (5), it is easy to verify that v(0) [less than or equal to] 0, v(1) > 0 and v'(t) > 0 in 0 [less than or equal to] t < 1 which together assure the uniqueness of root [t.sub.0] [member of] [0,1) of equation (5).

Therefore Theorem 2 is complete.

Acknowledgements: The author is grateful to Professor Toshiyuki Sugawa for his constant encouragement and useful discussions during the preparation of this paper. I also would like to acknowledge the referee for corrections.


[1] A. W. Goodman, Univalent Functions, 2 vols., Mariner Publishing Co. Inc., 1983.

[2] A. W. Goodman and E. B. Saff, On the definition of a close-to-convex function, Internat. J. Math. Math. Sci. Vol. 1(1978) 125-132.

[3] D. J. Hallenbeck and T. H. MacGregor, Linear Problems and Convexity Techniques in Geometric Function theory, Pitman(1984).

[4] G. Herglotz, Uber Potenzreihen mit positivem, reellen Teil in Einheitskreis, Ber. Verh. Sachs. Akad. Wiss. Leipzig(1911) 501-511.

[5] W. Kaplan, Close-to-convex schlicht functions, Michigan Math. J., 1(1952) 169185.

[6] S. Ruscheweyh, Convolution in Geometric Function Theory, Sem. Math. Sup. 83, University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada 1982.

[7] Limei Wang, The tilted Caratheodory class and its applications, In preparation.

Limei Wang *

* This work is a part of the author's Ph.D. thesis, under the supervision of Professor Toshiyuki Sugawa.

Received by the editors January 2010.

Communicated by F. Brackx.

2000 Mathematics Subject Classification : Primary 30C45.

Division of Mathematics

Graduate School of Information Sciences

Tohoku University, Sendai

980-8579 JAPAN

COPYRIGHT 2011 Belgian Mathematical Society
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2011 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Wang, Limei
Publication:Bulletin of the Belgian Mathematical Society - Simon Stevin
Article Type:Report
Date:May 1, 2011
Previous Article:Certain conformal-like infinitesimal symmetries and the curvature of a compact Riemannian manifold.
Next Article:Convolution of harmonic mappings on the exterior unit disk and the generalized hypergeometric functions.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2021 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters