Abstract
Sharp bounds are given for the second Hankel determinant of the logarithmic coefficients of strongly starlike and strongly convex functions.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
Denote by \(\mathcal H\) the class of analytic functions in \(\mathbb D:= \left\{ z \in \mathbb C: |z|<1 \right\} \) with Taylor expansion
and let \(\mathcal A\) be the subclass of f normalized by \(f'(0)=1.\) Let \(\mathcal S\) denote the subclass of univalent functions in \(\mathcal A\).
For \(f\in \mathcal S\), logarithmic coefficients \(\gamma _n:=\gamma _n(f)\) of f are defined by
and play a crucial role in the theory of univalent functions, and in articular to prove the Milin conjecture ([19], see also [7, p. 155]). We note that for the class \(\mathcal S\) sharp estimates are known only for \(\gamma _1\) and \(\gamma _2,\) namely,
Estimating the modulus of logarithmic coefficients for \(f\in \mathcal S\) and various subclasses has been considered recently by several authors (e.g., [1, 2, 5, 8, 12, 24]).
For \(q,n \in \mathbb N,\) the Hankel determinant \(H_{q,n}(f)\) of \(f\in \mathcal A\) of the form (1) is defined as
and in particular many authors have examined the second and the third Hankel determinants \(H_{2,2}(f)\) and \(H_{3,1}(f)\) over selected subclasses of \(\mathcal A,\) (see e.g., [4, 11] with further references). We note that \(H_{2,1}(f)=a_3-a_2^2\) is the well known coefficient functional which for \(\mathcal S\) was studied first in 1916 by Bieberbach (see e.g., [9, Vol. I, p. 35]).
Based on the these ideas, in this paper and in [10] we propose research study of the Hankel determinants \(H_{q,n}(F_f/2)\) which entries are logarithmic coefficients of f. We are therefore concerned with
Differentiating (2) and using (1) we obtain
and so
Note that when \(f\in \mathcal S,\) then for \(f_\theta (z):=\textrm{e}^{-\textrm{i}\theta }f(\textrm{e}^{\textrm{i}\theta }z),\ \theta \in \mathbb R,\)
so \(|H_{2,1}(F_{f_\theta }/2)|\) is rotationally invariant.
In this paper we find sharp upper bounds for \(H_{2,1}(F_f/2)\) in the case when f is strongly starlike or strongly convex function of order \(\alpha ,\) defined respectively as follows. Given \(\alpha \in (0,1],\) a function \(f\in \mathcal A\) is called strongly starlike of order \(\alpha \) if
Also, a function \(f\in \mathcal A\) is called strongly convex of order \(\alpha \) if
We denote these classes by \(\mathcal S^*_\alpha \) and \(\mathcal S^c_\alpha \) respectively, noting that \(\mathcal S^*_1=:\mathcal S^*\) and \(\mathcal S^c_1=:\mathcal S^c\) are the classes of starlike and convex functions, respectively.
The class of strongly starlike functions was introduced by Stankiewicz [21, 22], and independently by Brannan and Kirwan [3] (see also [9, Vol. I, pp. 137-142]). Stankiewicz [22] found an external geometrical characterization of strongly starlike functions and Brannan and Kirwan gave a geometrical condition called \(\delta \)-visibility, which is sufficient for functions to be strongly starlike. Subsequently Ma and Minda [16] proposed an internal characterization of functions in \(\mathcal S_\alpha ^*\) based on the concept of k-starlike domains. Further results regarding the geometry of strongly starlike functions were given in [14, Chapter IV], [15] and [23].
In view of (6) and (7) both classes \(\mathcal S^*_\alpha \) and \(\mathcal S^c_\alpha \) can be represented using the Carathéodory class \(\mathcal P\), i.e., the class of analytic functions p in \(\mathbb D\) of the form
having a positive real part in \(\mathbb D.\) Thus the coefficients of functions in \(\mathcal S^*_\alpha \) and \(\mathcal S^c_\alpha \) have a convenient representation in terms of the coefficients of functions in \(\mathcal P.\) Therefore obtaining the upper bound of \(H_{2,1}(F_f/2),\) we base our analysis on well-known expressions for \(c_2\) (e.g., [20, p. 166]), and \(c_3\) (Libera and Zlotkiewicz [17, 18]), and \(c_4\) obtained recently in [13], all of which are contained in the following lemma [13]. Let \(\overline{\mathbb D}:=\{z\in \mathbb C:|z|\le 1\}\) and \(\mathbb T:=\{z\in \mathbb C:|z|= 1\}.\)
Lemma 1
If \(p \in {\mathcal P}\) and is given by (6) with \(c_1\ge 0,\) then
and
for some \(\zeta _1\in [0,1]\) and \(\zeta _2,\zeta _3\in \overline{\mathbb D}.\)
For \(\zeta _1\in \mathbb T,\) there is a unique function \(p\in \mathcal P\) with \(c_1\) as in (9), namely,
For \(\zeta _1\in \mathbb D\) and \(\zeta _2\in \mathbb T,\) there is a unique function \(p\in \mathcal P\) with \(c_1\) and \(c_2\) as in (9)–(10), namely,
For \(\zeta _1,\zeta _2\in \mathbb D\) and \(\zeta _3\in \mathbb T,\) there is a unique function \(p\in \mathcal P\) with \(c_1,\) \(c_2\) and \(c_3\) as in (9)–(11), namely,
We will also use the following lemma.
Lemma 2
[6] Given real numbers A, B, C, let
I. If \(AC\ge 0,\) then
II. If \(AC<0,\) then
where
2 Strongly starlike functions
We prove the following sharp inequality for \(|H_{2,1}(F_f/2)|\) for the class \(\mathcal S^*_\alpha .\)
Theorem 1
If \(f\in \mathcal S^*_\alpha ,\) \(\alpha \in (0,1],\) then
The inequality is sharp.
Proof
Fix \(\alpha \in (0,1]\) and let \(f \in \mathcal S^*_\alpha \) be given by (1). Then by (6),
for some \(p \in \mathcal P\) given by (8). Substituting (1) and (8) into (15) and equating coefficients gives
Since the class \(\mathcal S^*_\alpha \) is invariant under the rotations and (5) holds, we may assume that \(a_2\ge 0\), so by (16) that \(c_1 \ge 0,\) i.e., in view of (9) that \(\zeta _1\in [0,1].\) Hence from (4) and (9)–(11) we obtain
A. Suppose that \(\zeta _1=1.\) Then by (17), for \(\alpha \in (0,1],\)
B. Suppose that \(\zeta _1=0.\) Then by (17), for \(\alpha \in (0,1],\)
C. Suppose that \(\zeta _1\in (0,1).\) Then since \(|\zeta _3|\le 1\) from (17) we obtain
where
Since \(AC<0,\) we now apply Lemma 2 only for the case II.
C1. Note that the inequality
is equivalent to
which evidently holds for \(\zeta _1\in (0,1).\)
However, the inequality \(|B|<2(1-|C|)\) is equivalent to \(\alpha \zeta _1^2<-(1-\zeta _1^2)(3-\zeta _1^2),\) which is false for \(\zeta _1\in (0,1).\)
C2. Since
and
a simple calculation shows that the inequality
is false for \(\zeta _1\in (0,1).\)
C3. Next note that the inequality
is equivalent to \((\alpha -1)(\alpha ^2-\alpha -8)\zeta _1^4-6(\alpha ^2+\alpha -4)\zeta _1^2+9\alpha \le 0.\) However the last inequality is false for \(\zeta _1\in (0,1)\) since \((\alpha -1)(\alpha ^2-\alpha -8)\ge 0\) and \(\alpha ^2+\alpha -4<0\) for \(\alpha \in (0,1].\)
C4. Note that the inequality
is equivalent to
where
We see that for \(\alpha \in (0,1],\)
and the discriminant \(\varDelta :=144(4+4\alpha -\alpha ^3)>0\) for \(\alpha \in (0,1].\) Thus we consider
From (21) it follows that \(t_2<0\) and so it remains to check if \(0<t_1<1.\) The inequality \(t_1>0\) is equivalent to \(8\alpha +7\alpha ^2-2\alpha ^3-\alpha ^4>0\) which is true for \(\alpha \in (0,1].\) Further, the inequality \(t_1<1\) can be written as
which is true since
Therefore (20), and so (19) is valid for \(0< \zeta _1\le \zeta ':=\sqrt{t_1}.\) Then by (19), Lemma 2 and the fact that \(\varphi \) decreases, we obtain
where
C5. It remains to consider the last case in Lemma 2, which in view of C4, holds for \(\zeta '<\zeta _1<1.\) Then by (18),
where
To see that the last inequality in (23) is true, note that the function \(\psi \) is decreasing, since
for \(\zeta '< t<1.\)
Simple but tedious computations show that
Hence from (22) and (23) we see that
D. Summarizing from parts A-C we see that inequality (14) follows.
Equality holds for the function \(f\in \mathcal A\) given by (15), where
Then \(c_1=c_3=0\) and \(c_2=2,\) so by (16), \(a_2=a_4=0\) and \(a_3=\alpha \), and therefore by (3), \(\gamma _1=\gamma _3=0\) and \(\gamma _2=\alpha /2,\) which completes the proof of the theorem. \(\square \)
For \(\alpha =1\) we obtain the following result for the class \(\mathcal S^*\) of starlike functions [10].
Corollary 1
If \(f\in \mathcal S^*,\) then
The inequality is sharp.
3 Strongly convex functions
We prove the following sharp inequality for \(|H_{2,1}(F_f/2)|\) in the class \(\mathcal S^c_\alpha .\)
Theorem 2
If \(f\in \mathcal S^c_\alpha ,\) \(\alpha \in (0,1],\) then
Both inequalities are sharp.
Proof
Fix \(\alpha \in (0,1]\) and let \(f \in \mathcal S^c_\alpha \) be given by (1). Then by (7),
for some \(p \in \mathcal P\) given by (8). Substituting (1) and (8) into (26) and equating coefficients we obatin
As in the proof of Theorem 1 we may assume that \(c_1 \ge 0,\) i.e., in view of (9) that \(\zeta _1\in [0,1].\) Hence from (4) and (9)–(11) we have
A. Suppose that \(\zeta _1=1.\) Then by (28), for \(\alpha \in (0,1],\)
B. Suppose that \(\zeta _1=0.\) Then from (28), for \(\alpha \in (0,1],\)
C. Suppose that \(\zeta _1\in (0,1).\) Since \(|\zeta _3|\le 1\) from (28) we obtain
where
Since \(AC<0,\) we apply Lemma 2 only in the case II.
C1. Note that the inequality
is equivalent to \(-2(2+\alpha ^2)(4-\zeta _1^2)\le 9\alpha ^2(2+\zeta _1^2),\) which evidently holds for \(\zeta _1\in (0,1).\)
Moreover, the inequality \(|B|<2(1-|C|)\) is equivalent to \(3\alpha \zeta _1^2< -2(1-\zeta _1)(2-\zeta _1),\) which is false for \(\zeta _1\in (0,1).\)
C2. Since
and
we see that the inequality
is false for \(\zeta _1\in (0,1).\)
C3. Next observe that the inequality
is equivalent to
where
Note that \(8\alpha ^2-6\alpha +16>0\) for \(\alpha \in (0,1]\) and \(-3\alpha ^3+4\alpha ^2-12\alpha +8\ge 0\) for \(\alpha \in (0,\alpha _0],\) where \(\alpha _0\approx 0.74858\dots .\) Thus for \(\alpha \in (0,\alpha _0]\) inequality (32) is evidently false. If \(\alpha \in (\alpha _0,1]\), then \(\varDelta :=4\left( 52\alpha ^4-72\alpha ^3+217\alpha ^2-144\alpha +64\right) >0,\) and so we consider
Observe now that \(t_1>1.\) Indeed, the inequality \(t_1>1\) is equivalent to the evidently true inequality
since the right hand side is negative for all \(\alpha \in (\alpha _0,1].\) Further, \(t_2<0.\) Indeed this inequality is equivalent to \(-3\alpha ^3+4\alpha ^2-12\alpha +8<0\) which clearly holds for \(\alpha \in (\alpha _0,1].\) Thus we deduce that the inequality (32) is false.
C4. Note next that the inequality
is equivalent to
where
so that \(\varDelta :=4\left( 52\alpha ^4+72\alpha ^3+217\alpha ^2+144\alpha +64\right) >0\) for \(\alpha \in (0,1].\) Therefore \(s_1<0,\) where
Moreover \(0<s_2<1\) holds. Indeed, both inequalities \(s_2>0\) and \(s_2<1\) are equivalent to the evidently true inequalities
and
respectively. Thus (34), and so (33) is valid only when
where
Since
we see that for \(0<\alpha \le 1/3,\) the function \(\varphi \) decreases and so
In the case \(1/3<\alpha \le 1,\)
is a unique critical point of \(\varphi \), which is a maximum.
It remains therefore to establish the second inequality, i.e., \(u_0<\zeta _1,\) which is equivalent to
and since
for \(\alpha \in (0,1],\) we deduce that \(u_0<\zeta _1.\)
Thus for \(1/3<\alpha \le 1,\) we have
C5. We now consider the last case in Lemma 2, which in view of C4 holds for \(\zeta '<\zeta _1<1.\) Then by (31),
where
To show that the last inequality in (38) holds, observe that \(\psi \) is decreasing. Indeed, by a simple computation,
for \(\zeta '<u<1.\) Note that
which is clearly true for \(0<\alpha \le 2/\sqrt{7}.\) If \(2/\sqrt{7}<\alpha \le 1,\) then
for \(\zeta '<u<1.\) Further
Thus from (39) and (40) it follows that \(\psi '(u)<0\) for \(\zeta '<u<1,\) so \(\psi \) decreases and hence
Simple but tedious computations show that
and so from (41), (35) and (37) we deduce that for \(\alpha \in (0,1/3],\)
and for \(\alpha \in (1/3,1],\)
D. It remains to compare the bounds in (29), (30), (35) and (37). The inequality
is trivial, and the inequality
is equivalent to
which is clearly true, and the inequality
is equivalent to the evidently true inequality \((3\alpha -1)^2\ge 0.\)
Thus summarizing the results in parts A-C we see that (25) is established.
We finally show that the inequalities in (25) are sharp. When \(\alpha \in (0,1/3],\) equality holds for the function \(f\in \mathcal A\) given by (26) with p given by (24). In this case \(c_1=c_3=0\) and \(c_2=2,\) so by (27), \(a_2=a_4=0\) and \(a_3=\alpha /3\) and therefore \(\gamma _1=\gamma _3=0\) and \(\gamma _2=\alpha /6.\)
When \(\alpha \in (1/3,1],\) equality holds for the function \(f\in \mathcal A\) given by (26), where p is given by (12) with \(\zeta _1=u_0=:\tau ,\) and \(u_0\) given by (36), \(\zeta _2=-1\) and \(\zeta _3=1,\) i.e.,
which completes the proof of the theorem. \(\square \)
For \(\alpha =1\) we obtain the sharp inequality for the class \(\mathcal S^c\) of convex functions [10].
Corollary 2
If \(f\in \mathcal S^c,\) then
The inequality is sharp.
Availability of data and material
The manuscript has no associated data.
References
Ali, M.F., Vasudevarao, A.: On logarithmic coefficients of some close-to-convex functions. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 146, 1131–1142 (2018)
Ali, M. F., Vasudevarao, A., Thomas, D. K.: On the third logarithmic coefficients of close-to-convex functions. Curr. Res. Math. Comput. Sci. II, ed. A. Lecko, Publisher UWM, Olsztyn, 271–278 (2018)
Brannan, D.A., Kirwan, W.E.: On some classes of bounded univalent functions. J. Lond. Math. Soc. 2(1), 431–443 (1969)
Cho, N.E., Kowalczyk, B., Kwon, O.S., Lecko, A., Sim, Y.J.: The bound of the Hankel detrminant for strongly starlike functions of order alpha. J. Math. Ineq. 11(2), 429–439 (2017)
Cho, N. E., Kowalczyk, B., Kwon, O. S., Lecko, A., Sim, Y. J.: On the third logarithmic coefficient in some subclasses of close-to-convex functions. Rev. R. Acad. Cienc. Exactas Fís. Nat.(Esp.) 114, Art: 52, 1–14 (2020)
Choi, J.H., Kim, Y.C., Sugawa, T.: A general approach to the Fekete-Szegö problem. J. Math. Soc. Jpn. 59, 707–27 (2007)
Duren, P.T.: Univalent Functions. Springer-Verlag, New York Inc (1983)
Girela, D.: Logarithmic coefficients of univalent functions. Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. 25, 337–350 (2000)
Goodman, A.W.: Univalent Functions. Mariner, Tampa, Florida (1983)
Kowalczyk, B., Lecko, A.: Second Hankel determinant of logarithmic coefficients of convex and starlike functions. Bull. Aust. Math. Soc. 105, 458–467 (2022)
Kowalczyk, B., Lecko, A., Sim, Y.J.: The sharp bound for the Hankel determinant of the third kind for convex functions. Bull. Aust. Math. Soc. 97, 435–445 (2018)
Kumar, U.P., Vasudevarao, A.: Logarithmic coefficients for certain subclasses of close-to-convex functions. Monatsh. Math. 187(3), 543–563 (2018)
Kwon, O.S., Lecko, A., Sim, Y.J.: On the fourth coefficient of functions in the Carathéodory class. Comput. Methods Funct. Theory 18, 307–314 (2018)
Lecko, A.: Some Methods in the Theory of Univalent Functions. Oficyna Wydawnicza Poltechniki Rzeszowskiej, Rzeszów (2005)
Lecko, A.: Strongly starlike and spirallike functions. Ann. Polon. Math. 85(2), 165–192 (2005)
Ma, W., Minda, D.: An internal geometric characterization of strongly starlike functions. Ann. Univ. Mariae Curie Skłodowska Sect. A. 20, 89–97 (1991)
Libera, R.J., Zlotkiewicz, E.J.: Early coefficients of the inverse of a regular convex function. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 85(2), 225–230 (1982)
Libera, R.J., Zlotkiewicz, E.J.: Coefficient bounds for the inverse of a function with derivatives in \({\cal{P}}\). Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 87(2), 251–257 (1983)
Milin, I. M.: Univalent Functions and Orthonormal Systems. Izdat. “Nauka”, Moscow (1971) (in Russian); English transl., American Mathematical Society, Providence (1977)
Pommerenke, C.: Univalent Functions. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen (1975)
Stankiewicz, J.: Quelques problèmes extrémaux dans les classes des fonctions \(\alpha \)-angulairement étoilées. Ann. Univ. Mariae Curie-Skłodowska Sect. A 20, 59–75 (1966)
Stankiewicz, J.: On a family of starlike functions. Ann. Univ. Mariae Curie-Skłodowska Sect. A 22-24, 175–181 (1968-1970)
Sugawa, T.: A self-duality of strong starlikeness. Kodai Math. J. 28, 382–389 (2005)
Thomas, D.K.: On logarithmic coefficients of close to convex functions. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 144, 1681–1687 (2016)
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express their thanks to the referees for their constructive advices and comments that helped to improve this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Kowalczyk, B., Lecko, A. The second Hankel determinant of the logarithmic coefficients of strongly starlike and strongly convex functions. Rev. Real Acad. Cienc. Exactas Fis. Nat. Ser. A-Mat. 117, 91 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-023-01427-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-023-01427-5