Abstract
Inspired by the construction of Bernstein and Kantorovich operators, we introduce a family of positive linear operators \(\mathcal{K}_n\) preserving the affine functions. Their approximation properties are investigated and compared with similar properties of other operators. We determine the central moments of all orders of \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n\) and use them in order to establish Voronovskaja type formulas. A special attention is paid to the shape preserving properties. The operators \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n\) preserve monotonicity, convexity, strong convexity and approximate concavity. They have also the property of monotonic convergence under convexity. All the established inequalities involving convex functions can be naturally interpreted in the framework of convex stochastic ordering.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
The classical Bernstein operators are the prototypical positive linear operators used in Approximation Theory. They approximate the continuous functions, preserve the functions \(e_0(x)=1\) and \(e_1(x)=x\) and have remarkable shape preserving properties. The classical Kantorovich operators can be used to approximate integrable functions and preserve \(e_0\), but not \(e_1\). Their properties were intensively investigated from several points of view (see, e.g., [2, 3, 7, 8, 14,15,16] and the references therein). Some papers (see, e.g., [6, 28]) are devoted to modifying the Kantorovich operators in order to preserve \(e_0\) and \(e_1\). Beside their importance in classical Aproximation Theory, the Kantorovich polynomials play an important role in the theory of generalized sampling operators. The classical sampling operators are of discrete type and use point evaluations of the approximated function f. The Kantorovich type generalized operators use mean values of f on suitable intervals and consequently perform better than the classical ones from several points of view (see, e.g., [11,12,13] and the references therein).
In this paper we introduce a family of Bernstein–Kantorovich type operators \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n\) preserving the affine functions. Their structure is inspired by the construction of the Kantorovich and Bernstein operators. The family depends on several parameters. In a limiting case the operators \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n\) reduce to Bernstein operators. For special parameters one obtains the operators investigated in [28]. As mentioned above, the classical Kantorovich operators were the starting point for new developments in the theory of generalized sampling operators, leading to important results in digital image processing with medical and industrial applications. Our modified operators \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n\) could also be used in this context.
The operators \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n\) are defined as follows. For a given integer \(n\ge 2\) let \(a_{n,1},\dots , a_{n,n-1}\) be real numbers such that
Define the functionals \(F_{n,k}: C[0,1]\rightarrow {\mathbb R}\) as
Let \(p_{n,k}(x):={n\atopwithdelims ()k}x^k(1-x)^{n-k},\,\, k=0,1,\dots ,n,\,\, x\in [0,1]\).
Consider the operators \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n\) defined by
They are positive linear operators on C[0, 1] and
where \(e_j(x):=x^j,\,\, j=0,1,\dots ,\,\, x\in [0,1].\)
Section 2 contains the Voronovskaja type formula for the sequence \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n\), which coincides with the corresponding formula for the sequence of Bernstein operators \(B_n\). Proposition 2.1 presents an example of a function for which the approximation in the sense of Voronovskaja’s formula, provided by \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n\), is better than that provided by the classical Kantorovich operators. The central moments of \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n\) are described in Proposition 2.2 and used to present the Voronovskaja formula of order two for the sequence \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n\). The operators \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n\) have useful shape preserving properties. Theorem 3.1 shows that they preserve the monotonicity. The images of a convex function f under \(B_n\), \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n\) and the genuine Berstein–Durrmeyer operators \(U_n\) are compared in Sect. 4. The proof of the main result Theorem 4.1 is based on Ohlin’s Lemma, a result from the theory of convex stochastic ordering (see, e.g., [22, 23]). In fact, all the inequalities presented in this paper and involving convex functions have natural interpretations in the framework of convex stochastic ordering. Theorem 5.1 deals with the preservation of convexity. Theorems 5.2 and 5.3 describe the behavior of the operators \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n\) with respect to the parameters in their structure. The monotonic convergence under convexity is an important property of the Bernstein operators. Theorem 6.1 shows that the operators \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n\) have also this property. Strongly convex functions and approximately concave functions were investigated in several papers. The preservation of the corresponding properties under the Bernstein operators was studied in [18]. The preservation of these properties under \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n\) is presented in Sect. 7. Section 8 is devoted to conclusions and further work.
2 Voronovskaja type results
Let \(B_n\), \(n\ge 1\), be the classical Bernstein operators,
According to Voronovskaja’s formula,
uniformly on [0, 1].
Theorem 2.1
For each \(f\in C^2[0,1]\) we have
uniformly on [0, 1].
Proof
Let us remark that for \(k=1,\dots , n-1\),
On the other hand, for \(f\in C^2[0,1]\) we have (see, e.g., [4, Lemma 4.1])
with a certain \(\xi _{n,k}\in [0,1]\). Therefore,
Using (2.3) we can write
Due to (1.1) we have
uniformly on [0, 1]. Combined with (2.1), this leads to (2.2) and the proof is finished. \(\square \)
Let \(K_n\), \(n\ge 1\), be the classical Kantorovich operators,
It is known (see [10]) that
Set \(Wf(x):=\dfrac{x(1-x)}{2}f^{\prime \prime }(x)\) (see (2.2).
Proposition 2.1
Let \(f\in C^2[0,1]\) be decreasing on [0, 1], concave on \(\left[ 0,\dfrac{1}{2}\right] \) and convex on \(\left[ \dfrac{1}{2},1\right] \).
Then,
Proof
It is easy to verify that for \(x\in \left[ 0,\frac{1}{2}\right] \),
while for \(x\in \left[ \dfrac{1}{2},1\right] \),
This concludes the proof. \(\square \)
The inequality (2.4) shows that, from the point of view of Voronovskaja’s formula, the approximation of f furnished by \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n\) is better than that provided by \(K_n\). For other results of this type see [5]. In fact, the following figures show that for the functions \(f(x)=\cos (\pi x)\) and \(f(x)=\arctan (x-1/2)\), \(x\in [0,1]\),
Remark 2.1
If \(a_{n,k}:=\dfrac{1}{n}\dfrac{k}{2k+1}\), \(k=1,\dots , n-1,\) the operators \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n\) reduce to the operators \({K_n^*}\) from [28]. A Voronovskaja type formula for the sequence \(({K_n^*})\) was proved in [28, p. 6194].
In the rest of this section we take \(a_{n,k}=\dfrac{\theta }{n}\), \(k=1,\dots , n-1\), for a given \(\theta \in (0,1]\) and we denote by \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n^{\theta }\) the corresponding operators \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n\). The next result presents the relation between central moments of \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n^{\theta }\) and those of \(B_n\).
Proposition 2.2
For \(k\ge 1\) one has
-
(i)
\({{\mathcal {K}}}_n^{\theta }\left( (t-x)^{2k};x\right) =B_n\left( (t-x)^{2k};x\right) +\displaystyle \sum _{j=1}^k\dfrac{1}{2j+1}{2k\atopwithdelims ()2j}\) \(\times \left( \dfrac{\theta }{n}\right) ^{2j}\left[ B_n\left( (t-x)^{2k-2j};x\right) -(1-x)^nx^{2k-2j}-x^n(1-x)^{2k-2j}\right] \);
-
(ii)
\({{\mathcal {K}}}_n^{\theta }\left( (t-x)^{2k-1};x\right) =B_n\left( (t-x)^{2k-1};x\right) +\displaystyle \sum _{j=1}^{k-1}\dfrac{1}{2j+1}{2k-1\atopwithdelims ()2j}\) \(\times \left( \dfrac{\theta }{n}\right) ^{2j}\left[ B_n\left( (t-x)^{2k-1-2j};x\right) +(1-x)^nx^{2k-1-2j}-x^n(1-x)^{2k-1-2j}\right] \).
Proof
The proof is based on straightforward calculation and we omit it. \(\square \)
Remark 2.2
The central moments of Bernstein operators are investigated in detail in [9, Sect. 2.9]. In particular it is known that
where [a] is the integer part of a.
Combined with Proposition 2.2 this leads to
The important conclusion is that the classical result of Sikkema [26] can be applied to the sequence \(({{\mathcal {K}}}_n^{\theta })\). So, in this case we have another proof of Theorem 2.1 and moreover, for \(f\in C^4[0,1]\), \(x\in [0,1]\),
It is well known that (see, e.g., [1])
We conclude that
3 \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n\) and increasing functions
Consider the general case, i.e., \(0<a_{n,k}\le 1/n\).
Theorem 3.1
If \(f\in C[0,1]\) is increasing, then \({{\mathcal {K}}}_nf\) is increasing.
Proof
Using \(p_{n,k}^{\prime }(x)=n\left( p_{n-1,k-1}(x)-p_{n-1,k}(x)\right) \), \(n\ge 1\), we get
Clearly
and
So, let \(k\in \{1,\dots , n-1\}\). Then
Moreover, for \(s\in \left[ \dfrac{k}{n}-a_{n,k},\dfrac{k}{n}+a_{n,k}\right] \) we have
and so
Summing-up, we see that \(({{\mathcal {K}}}_nf)^{\prime }\ge 0\). \(\square \)
4 Approximating convex functions
A well known consequence of (1.4) is
Proposition 4.1
If \(f\in C[0,1]\) is convex, then
In order to prove the main result, Theorem 4.1, we need two lemmas.
Lemma 4.1
Let \(i\ge 1\), \(j\ge 1\) be integers. Then
Proof
First, we have
Then \(\gamma _{i,j}\le \gamma _{i,1}=\left( 1+\dfrac{1}{i}\right) ^{-i}\le \dfrac{1}{2}\), and the proof is completed. \(\square \)
Lemma 4.2
(Ohlin’s Lemma) [22] Let X, Y be two random variables such that \({\mathbb E}X={\mathbb E}Y\). If the distribution functions \(F_{X}\), \(F_{Y}\) cross exactly one time, i.e., for some \(x_0\) holds
then \({\mathbb E}f(X)\le {\mathbb E}f(Y) \), for all convex functions \(f:{\mathbb R}\rightarrow {\mathbb R}\).
Remark 4.1
Szostok noticed in [27] that if the measures \(\mu _X\), \(\mu _Y\) corresponding to X, Y, respectively, are concentrated on the interval [a, b], then, in fact, the relation \({\mathbb E}f(X)\le {\mathbb E}f(Y) \) holds for all convex functions \(f:{\mathbb R}\rightarrow {\mathbb R}\) if and only if this inequality is satisfied for all continuous convex functions \(f:[a,b]\rightarrow {\mathbb R}\).
Consider the genuine Bernstein–Durrmeyer operators \(U_n\) defined by
Now we are in a position to state
Theorem 4.1
If \(a_{n,k}:=\dfrac{1}{n}\), \(1\le k\le n-1\), and \(f\in C[0,1]\) is convex, then
Proof
The first inequality is well known, as a consequence of the fact that \(B_n\) preserves the affine functions. According to the Hermite–Hadamard inequality we have
and this implies the second inequality in (4.3). So, it remains to prove that
To this end, fix \(k\in \{1,\dots ,n-1\}\) and consider a random variable X uniformly distributed on \(\displaystyle \left[ \frac{k-1}{n},\frac{k+1}{n}\right] \) and a Beta-type random variable Y having the density \((n-1)p_{n-2,k-1}(t),\,\, t\in [0,1]\). The distribution function of X is
and the distribution function of Y is
We have \({\mathbb E}X={\mathbb E}Y=\dfrac{k}{n}\), \(k=1,\dots , n-1\).
-
(1)
Let \(k=1\). Then
$$\begin{aligned} F_X(x)=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} 0,&{} x\le 0,\\ \dfrac{1}{2}nx,&{} 0<x\le \dfrac{2}{n},\\ 1,&{} x>\dfrac{2}{n}, \end{array}\right. \end{aligned}$$and
$$\begin{aligned} F_Y(x)=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} 0,&{} x\le 0,\\ 1-(1-x)^{n-1},&{} 0<x\le 1,\\ 1,&{} x\ge 1. \end{array}\right. \end{aligned}$$It is easy to prove the existence of \(x_0\in (0,1)\) from Ohlin’s Lemma.
-
(2)
The case \(k=n-1\) can be treated similarly.
-
(3)
It remains to consider the case \(2\le k\le n-2\). Define \(H(x):=F_{Y}(x)-F_X(x)\), \(x\in {\mathbb R}\). Clearly
$$\begin{aligned} H(x)\ge 0,\,\, x\in \left( -\infty ,\dfrac{k-1}{n}\right) \text { and } H(x)\le 0,\,\, x\in \left( \dfrac{k+1}{n},\infty \right) . \end{aligned}$$
Moreover, \(H\left( \dfrac{k-1}{n}\right) >0\) and \(H\left( \dfrac{k+1}{n}\right) <0\). For \(\dfrac{k-1}{n}<x<\dfrac{k+1}{n}\) we have
Using Lemma 4.1 we get
Therefore H is strictly decreasing on \(\left[ \dfrac{k-1}{n},\dfrac{k+1}{n}\right] \) and the existence of \(x_0\) from Ohlin’s Lemma is proved. Summing-up, according to Ohlin’s Lemma we have \({\mathbb E}f(X)\le {\mathbb E}f(Y) \) and this is (4.4). \(\square \)
Returning to the general case with \(0<a_{n,k}\le \dfrac{1}{n}\) we have the following two remarks
Remark 4.2
Recall the operators \({K_n^*}\) from [28] (see also Remark 2.1). Using the technique based on Ohlin’s lemma, it is not difficult to prove that for each convex function \(f\in C[0,1]\) we have
-
(i)
If \(0<a_{n,k}\le \dfrac{1}{3n},\,\, k=1,\dots ,n-1\), then \(f\le {{\mathcal {K}}}_nf\le {{\mathcal {K}}}_n^*f\);
-
(ii)
If \(\dfrac{n-1}{2n-1}\dfrac{1}{n}\le a_{n,k}\le \dfrac{1}{n},\,\, k=1,\dots , n-1\), then \(f\le {K_n^*}f\le {{\mathcal {K}}}_n f.\)
Remark 4.3
We have
Therefore, in light of the classical result of Shisha–Mond [25],
So, from this point of view, the approximation of a function \(f\in C[0,1]\) provided by \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n\) is better than that provided by \(U_n\).
5 \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n\) and convex functions
In this section we take \(a_{n,k}:=\dfrac{\theta }{n}\), \(k=1,\dots ,n-1\), for a given \(\theta \in (0,1]\). Consequently, we denote the functionals by \(F_{n,k}^{\theta }\) and the operators by \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n^{\theta }\). So, we have
Theorem 5.1
If \(f\in C[0,1]\) is convex, then \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n^{\theta }f\) is convex.
Proof
First, we have
-
(i)
In order to prove that \(F_{n,2}^{\theta }(f)-2F_{n,1}^{\theta }(f)+F_{n,0}^{\theta }(f)\ge 0\), it suffices to show that it holds for the functions \(\varphi (t)=1\), \(\varphi (t)=t\), \(\varphi (t)=\max \{t-x,0\}\), \(t,x\in [0,1]\) (see [19, p. 645, B.4. Proposition and B.4.a. Proposition]). This can be done by elementary calculations.
-
(ii)
The proof of the inequality
$$\begin{aligned} F_{n,n}^{\theta }(f)-2F_{n,n-1}^{\theta }(f)+F_{n,n-2}^{\theta }(f)\ge 0 \end{aligned}$$is similar.
-
(iii)
It remains to prove that
$$\begin{aligned} F_{n,k+2}^{\theta }(f)-2F_{n,k+1}^{\theta }(f)+F_{n,k}^{\theta }(f)\ge 0,\,\, k=1,\dots , n-3. \end{aligned}$$
This follows by integrating
on the interval \(\left[ \dfrac{k+1-\theta }{n},\dfrac{k+1+\theta }{n}\right] \).
\(\square \)
Theorem 5.2
If \(f\in C[0,1]\) is convex, then \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n^{\sigma }f\le {{\mathcal {K}}}_n^{\tau }f \) whenever \(0<\sigma <\tau \le 1\).
Proof
It suffices to prove that \(F_{n,k}^{\sigma }(f)\le F_{n,k}^{\tau }(f), k=1,\dots , n-1\). In fact, we will prove that
Indeed,
where the last inequality follows from the Hermite–Hadamard inequality. \(\square \)
In the next result we estimate the differnce between \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n^{\tau }f\) and \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n^{\sigma }f\).
Theorem 5.3
Let \(0<\sigma <\tau \le 1\), \(f\in C^2[0,1]\) and \(x\in [0,1]\). Then
where \(\Vert \cdot \Vert _{\infty }\) is the supremum norm.
Proof
Denote \(\psi _{n,k}(\theta ):=F_{n,k}^{\theta }(f),\,\,\theta \in (0,1]\). We have, for a suitable \(\theta \in (\sigma , \tau )\),
Using (5.1) we can write
Applying the trapezoidal rule we get
From (5.3) and (5.4) it follows that
Combined with (5.2) this leads to
Therefore,
and this concludes the proof. \(\square \)
Remark 5.1
For \(\sigma \rightarrow 0\), from Theorem 5.3 we get
Estimating directly with (2.3) we obtain
This produces the better result
6 Monotonic convergence under convexity
In this section we consider again the case \(a_{n,k}=\theta /n\), \(n\ge 1\), \(k=1,\dots , n-1\), for a given \(\theta \in (0,1]\).
Theorem 6.1
If \(f\in C[0,1]\) is convex, then \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n^{\theta }f\ge {{\mathcal {K}}}_{n+1}^{\theta }f\), \(n\ge 2\).
Proof
First, we have
The proof is similar to that of Proposition 2.10 from [9] and we omit it. It follows that
Since f is convex, by Jensen inequality we have
and so \(I_1\ge 0\), \(I_2\ge 0\). Concerning \(I_3\), we have
Let y(s) be a polynomial function of degree at most 1 whose graph is a support line to the graph of f(s) at \(s=\dfrac{k}{n+1}\). Then
so that
Setting \(g(s):=f(s)-y(s)\) we have \(g(s)\ge 0\) and the above inequality can be written as
Let \(h:=g\left( \dfrac{k+\theta }{n+1}\right) \). With notation from Fig. 5, using the convexity of g and elementary geometric considerations we find that \(H=\dfrac{n+1}{n}h\),
Therefore, \(J_2\ge 0\), and similarly \(J_1\ge 0\). We conclude that \({\tilde{I}}_3\ge 0\), hence \(I_3\ge 0\), and the proof is complete.
\(\square \)
Remark 6.1
Let \(\mu \), \(\nu \) be probability distributions (Borel measures on \({\mathbb R}\), \(\mu ({\mathbb R})\!=\!\nu (\mathbb R)\!=\!1\)). If \(\int \varphi (x)d\nu (x)\le \int \varphi (x)d\mu (x)\), for each \( \varphi :{\mathbb R}\rightarrow {\mathbb R} \) convex, \(\nu \) is said to be smaller than \(\mu \) in the convex stochastic order. One uses the notation \(\nu \le _{cx}\mu \) (see, e.g., [23, 24]).
The operators in this paper can be represented under the form
with suitable probability distributions \(\mu _n\), \(\nu _n\).
Moreover, they satisfy inequalities of the form (see Theorems 4.1, 5.2, 6.1)
This is equivalent to
and hence to
Therefore, Theorems 4.1, 5.2, 6.1 have natural interpretations in the theory of convex stochastic ordering.
7 \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n^{\theta }\) and strongly convex functions with modulus c
For the definitions of strongly convex functions and approximately concave functions with modulus c see, e.g., [17, 18, 20, 21] and the references therein. We need the following characterizations of these functions.
Lemma 7.1
-
(i)
A function \(f: I \rightarrow {\mathbb R}\) is strongly convex with modulus \(c>0\) if and only if the function \(g:I\rightarrow {\mathbb R}\) defined by \(g=f-ce_2\) is convex.
-
(ii)
A function \(f: I \rightarrow {\mathbb R}\) is approximately concave with modulus \(c>0\) if and only if the function \(g:I\rightarrow {\mathbb R}\) defined by \(g=f-ce_2\) is concave.
Theorem 7.1
-
(i)
If \(f\in C[0,1]\) is strongly convex with modulus c, then \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n^{\theta }\) is strongly convex with modulus \(c\left( 1-\dfrac{\theta ^2}{6}\right) \dfrac{n-1}{n}\).
-
(ii)
Let \(f\in C[0,1]\) be approximately concave with modulus c, then \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n^{\theta }\) is approximately concave with modulus \(c\left( 1-\dfrac{\theta ^2}{3\cdot 2^{n-2}}\right) \dfrac{n-1}{n}\).
Proof
(i) Let \(f\in C[0,1]\) be strongly convex with modulus c. Then \(f-ce_2\) is convex. According to Theorem 5.1, \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n^{\theta }f-c{{\mathcal {K}}}_n^{\theta }e_2\) is convex. Therefore,
We have
and so
It follows that
i.e., \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n^{\theta }f-c\left( 1-\dfrac{\theta ^2}{6}\right) \dfrac{n-1}{n}e_2\) is convex. This shows that \({{\mathcal {K}}}_n^{\theta }f\) is strongly convex with modulus \(c\left( 1-\dfrac{\theta ^2}{6}\right) \dfrac{n-1}{n}\).
(ii) The proof is similar to the previous one and we omit it. \(\square \)
8 Conclusions and further work
Let \(c \in \mathbb {R}\), \(n \in \mathbb {R}\), \(n > c\) for \(c\ge 0\) and \(-n/c=l \in \mathbb {N}\) for \(c<0\). Furthermore, let \(I_c = [0,\infty )\) for \(c\ge 0\) and \(I_c=[0,-1/c]\) for \(c < 0\). Take \(f:I_c \longrightarrow \mathbb {R}\) given in such a way that the corresponding integrals and series are convergent.
Let \(0<a_{n,k}<\dfrac{1}{n}\). Define
with the corresponding basis functions
and \( a^{c,\overline{k}} := \prod _{l=0}^{k-1} (a+cl),\quad a^{c,\overline{0}} :=1. \) As further work we propose to investigate the operators \({ {\mathcal {K}}}_{n}^{[c]}\).
We intend to consider all these modified Kantorovich operators in the framework of generalized sampling operators with applications in medical and industrial domains.
Data availability
This manuscript has no associated data.
References
Abel, U., Ivan, M.: Asymptotic expansion of the multivariate Bernstein polynomials on a simplex. Approx. Theory Appl. 16, 85–93 (2000)
Abel, U., Gupta, V.: An estimate of the rate of convergence of a Bézier variant of the Baskakov–Kantorovich operators for bounded variation functions. Demonstr. Math. 36(1), 123–136 (2003)
Acu, A.M., Gonska, H.: Classical Kantorovich operators revisited. Ukr. Math. J. 71, 843–852 (2019)
Acu, A.M., Raşa, I.: Estimates for the differences of positive linear operators and their derivatives. Numer. Algorithm 85, 191–208 (2020)
Acu, A.M., Măduţa, A.I., Raşa, I.: Voronovskaya type results and operators fixing two functions. Math. Model. Anal. 26(3), 395–410 (2021)
Agratini, O.: Kantorovich-type operators preserving affine functions. Hacet. J. Math. Stat. 45(6), 1657–1663 (2016)
Altomare, F., Cappelletti Montano, M., Leonessa, V.: Iterates of multidimensional Kantorovich-type operators and their associated positive \(C_0\)-semigroups. Stud. Univ. Babeş–Bolyai Math. 56(2), 219–235 (2011)
Altomare, F., Cappelletti Montano, M., Leonessa, V., Raşa, I.: Elliptic differential operators and positive semigroups associated with generalized Kantorovich operators. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 458, 153–173 (2018)
Bustamante, J.: Bernstein operators and their properties, Springer (2017)
Butzer, P.L.: Summability of generalized Bernstein polynomials, I. Duke Math. J. 22, 617–623 (1955)
Costarelli, D., Seracini, M., Vinti, G.: A comparison between the sampling Kantorovich algorithm for digital image processing with some interpolation and quasi-interpolation methods. Appl. Math. Comput. 374, 125046 (2020)
Costarelli, D., Vinti, G.: An inverse result of approximation by sampling Kantorovich series. Proc. Edinburgh Math. Soc. 62(1), 265–280 (2019)
Costarelli, D., Vinti, G.: Inverse results of approximation and saturation order for the sampling Kantorovich series. J. Approx. Theory 242, 64–82 (2019)
Gonska, H., Heilmann, M., Raşa, I.: Kantorovich operators of order k. Numer. Funct. Anal. Optim. 32, 717–738 (2011)
Gupta, V., Anjali: Higher order Kantorovich operators based on inverse Pólya–Eggenberger distribution. RACSAM 116, 31 (2022)
Gupta, V., Tachev, G., Acu, A.M.: Modified Kantorovich operators with better approximation properties. Numer. Algorithm 81, 125–149 (2019)
Hiriart-Urruty, J.-B., Lemaréchal, C.: Fundamentals of Convex Analysis. Springer, Berlin (2001)
Hodiş, S., Mesaroş, L., Raşa, I.: Smoothness and shape preserving properties of Bernstein semigroup. Mediterr. J. Math. 15, 96 (2018)
Marshall, A. W., Olkin, I., Arnold, B. C.: Inequalities: Theory of Majorization and Its Applications, Second Edition, Springer, (2011)
Merentes, N., Nikodem, K.: Remarks on strongly convex functions. Aequ. Math. 80, 193–199 (2010)
Nikodem, K., Rajba, T.: Ohlin and Levin–Stec̆kin-type results for strongly convex functions. Ann. Math. Sil. 34(1), 123–132 (2020)
Ohlin, J.: On a class of measures of dispersion with application to optimal reinsurance. Astin Bull. 5(2), 249–266 (1969)
Rajba, T.: On some recent applications of stochastic convex ordering theorems to some functional inequalities for convex functions: a survey, In: Brzdȩk, J., Cieplinski, K., Rassias, T. (eds.) Developments in Functional Equations and Related Topics, Springer Optimization and Its Applications, vol 124, Springer, Cham (2017)
Shaked, M., Shanthikumar, J.G.: Stochastic Orders, Springer (2007)
Shisha, O., Mond, B.: The degree of convergence of linear positive operators. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 60, 1196–1200 (1968)
Sikkema, P.C.: On some linear positive operators. Indag. Math. 32, 327–337 (1970)
Szostok, T.: Ohlin’s Lemma and some inequalities of the Hermite–Hadamard type. Aequ. Math. 89, 915–926 (2015)
Zhang, B., Yu, D., Wang, F.: Modified Bernstein–Kantorovich operators reproducing affine functions. Filomat 36(18), 6187–6195 (2022)
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to the referees for the thorough reading of the manuscript and useful comments. The recommendations and suggestions led to an improved version of the paper.
Funding
The work was supported by the project “Mathematical Methods and Models for Biomedical Applications” financed by National Recovery and Resilience Plan PNRR-III-C9-2022-I8.
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
Acu, AM., Raşa, I. & Şteopoaie, A.E. Bernstein–Kantorovich operators, approximation and shape preserving properties. Rev. Real Acad. Cienc. Exactas Fis. Nat. Ser. A-Mat. 118, 107 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-024-01605-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-024-01605-z