Abstract
In this paper our aim is to present some subordination and superordination results, using an operator, which involves the normalized form of the generalized Bessel functions of first kind. These results are obtained by investigating some appropriate classes of admissible functions. We obtain also some sandwich-type results, and we point out various known or new special cases of our main results.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction, Definitions, and Preliminaries
Let \(\mathcal {H}\left( {\mathbb {D}}\right) \) be the class of analytic functions in \({\mathbb {D}}=\left\{ {z\in {\mathbb {C}}:\left| z\right| <1}\right\} \) and \(\mathcal {H[}a,n]\) be the subclass of \(\mathcal {H}\left( {\mathbb {D}}\right) \) consisting of functions of the form \(f(z)=a+a_{n}z^{n}+a_{n+1}z^{n+1}+{\dots },\) with \(\mathcal { H}_{0}=\mathcal {H[}0,1]\) and \(\mathcal {H}_{1}=\mathcal {H[}1,1].\) We denote by \(\mathcal {A}\) the class of all functions of the form
which are analytic in the open unit disk \({\mathbb {D}}.\) Let \(f\) and \(F\) be members of \(\mathcal {H}\left( {\mathbb {D}}\right) .\) The function \(f\) is said to be subordinate to \(F,\) or \(F\) is said to be superordinate to \(f,\) written symbolically as
if there exists an analytic function \(w:\mathbb {D}\rightarrow \mathbb {C}\) with \(w(0)=0\) and \(\left| w(z)\right| <1\) for \(z\in {\mathbb {D}}\) such that \(f(z)=F(w(z)),\;z\in {\mathbb {D}}.\) In particular, if the function \(F\) is univalent in \({\mathbb {D}},\) then we have the following equivalence:
Let us consider the following second-order linear homogenous differential equation (for more details see [4])
The function \(\omega _{p,b,c},\) which is called the generalized Bessel function of the first kind of order \(p,\) is defined as a particular solution of (1.2). The function \(\omega _{p,b,c}\) has the familiar representation as follows:
where \(\Gamma \) stands for the Euler gamma function and \(\kappa =p+\frac{b+1}{2}\notin \mathbb {Z}_{0}^{-}=\{0,-1,-2,\dots \}.\) The series (1.3) permits the study of Bessel, modified Bessel, spherical Bessel, modified spherical Bessel, and ultraspherical Bessel functions all together. It is worth mentioning that, in particular,
-
for \(b=c=1\) in (1.3), we obtain the familiar Bessel function of the first kind of order \(p\) defined by (see [21]; see also [4])
$$\begin{aligned} J_{p}(z)=\sum _{n\ge 0}\frac{(-1)^{n}}{n!\Gamma \left( p+n+1\right) } \left( \frac{z}{2}\right) ^{2n+p}, \quad z\in \mathbb {C} , \end{aligned}$$(1.4) -
for \(b=1\) and \(c=-1\) in (1.3), we obtain the modified Bessel function of the first kind of order \(p\) defined by (see [21]; see also [4])
$$\begin{aligned} I_{p}(z)=\sum _{n\ge 0}\frac{1}{n!\Gamma \left( p+n+1\right) }\left( \frac{z}{2}\right) ^{2n+p}, \quad z\in \mathbb {C}, \end{aligned}$$(1.5) -
for \(b=2\) and \(c=1\) in (1.3), the function \(\omega _{p,b,c}\) reduces to \(\sqrt{2}j_{p}\diagup \sqrt{\pi }\) where \(j_{p}\) is the spherical Bessel function of the first kind of order \(p,\) defined by (see [4])
$$\begin{aligned} j_{p}(z)=\sqrt{\frac{\pi }{2}}\sum _{n\ge 0}\frac{(-1)^{n}}{n!\Gamma \left( p+n+\frac{3}{2}\right) }\left( \frac{z}{2}\right) ^{2n+p}, \quad z\in \mathbb {C}. \end{aligned}$$(1.6)
Now, we consider the function \(\varphi _{p,b,c}:\mathbb {D}\rightarrow \mathbb {C},\) defined in terms of the generalized Bessel function \(\omega _{p,b,c},\) by the transformation
Using the well-known Pochhammer symbol (or the shifted factorial) \((\lambda )_{\mu }\) defined, for \(\lambda ,\mu \in \mathbb {C}\) and in terms of the Euler \(\Gamma -\)function, by
it being understood conventionally that \((0)_{0}=1\), we obtain the following series representation for the function \(\varphi _{p,b,c}\) given by (1.7)
where \(\kappa =p+\frac{b+1}{2}\notin \mathbb {Z}_{0}^{-}\) and \(\mathbb {N}=\{1,2,3,\dots \}.\) For convenience, we write \(\varphi _{\kappa ,c}(z)=\varphi _{p,b,c}(z).\)
For \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) given by (1.1) and \(g\) given by \(g(z)=z+\sum _{n\ge 1}b_{n+1}z^{n+1},\) the Hadamard product (or convolution) of \(f\) and \(g\) is defined by
Note that \(f*g\in \mathcal {A}.\) Now, we consider the \(B_{\kappa }^{c}-\)operator, which is defined as follows:
We note that using the definition (1.9) we obtain that
where \(\kappa =p+\frac{b+1}{2}\notin \mathbb {Z}_{0}^{-}.\) It is worth to mention that in fact \(B_{\kappa }^{c}f\) given by (1.9) is an elementary transform of the generalized hypergeometric function, that is, we have
In particular, for the \(B_{\kappa }^{c}-\)operator we obtain the following operators:
-
Choosing \(b=c=1\) in (1.9) or (1.10) we obtain the operator \(\mathcal {J}_{p}:\mathcal {A}\mathbb {\rightarrow }\mathcal {A}\) related with Bessel function, defined by
$$\begin{aligned} \mathcal {J}_{p}f(z)&= \varphi _{p,1,1}(z)*f(z)=\left[ 2^{p}\Gamma \left( p+1\right) z^{1-\frac{p}{2}}J_{p}(\sqrt{z})\right] *f(z)\nonumber \\&= z+\sum _{n\ge 1} \frac{(-1)^{n}a_{n+1}}{4^{n}\left( p+1\right) _{n}}\frac{z^{n+1}}{n!}, \end{aligned}$$(1.11)which satisfies the recursive relation
$$\begin{aligned} z\left[ \mathcal {J}_{p+1}f(z)\right] '=(p+1)\mathcal {J}_{p}f(z)-p \mathcal {J}_{p+1}f(z). \end{aligned}$$ -
Choosing \(b=1\) and \(c=-1\) in (1.9) or (1.10) we obtain the operator \(\mathcal {I}_{p}:\mathcal {A}\mathbb {\rightarrow }\mathcal {A}\) related with modified Bessel function, defined by
$$\begin{aligned} \mathcal {I}_{p}f(z)&= \varphi _{p,1,-1}(z)*f(z)=\left[ 2^{p}\Gamma \left( p+1\right) z^{1-\frac{p}{2}}I_{p}(\sqrt{z})\right] *f(z)\nonumber \\&= z+\sum _{n\ge 1} \frac{a_{n+1}}{4^{n}\left( p+1\right) _{n}}\frac{z^{n+1}}{n!}, \end{aligned}$$(1.12)which satisfies the recursive relation
$$\begin{aligned} z\left[ \mathcal {I}_{p+1}f(z)\right] '=(p+1)\mathcal {I}_{p}f(z)-p \mathcal {I}_{p+1}f(z). \end{aligned}$$ -
Choosing \(b=2\) and \(c=1\) in (1.9) or (1.10) we obtain the operator \(\mathcal {S}_{p}:\mathcal {A}\mathbb {\rightarrow }\mathcal {A}\) related with spherical Bessel function, defined by
$$\begin{aligned} \mathcal {S}_{p}f(z)&= \left[ \pi ^{-\frac{1}{2}}2^{p+\frac{1}{2}}\Gamma \left( p+\frac{3}{2}\right) z^{1-\frac{p}{2}}j_{p}(\sqrt{z})\right] *f(z)\nonumber \\&= z+\sum _{n\ge 1} \frac{(-1)^{n}a_{n+1}}{4^{n}\left( p+\frac{3}{2}\right) _{n}}\frac{z^{n+1}}{n!}, \end{aligned}$$(1.13)which satisfies the recursive relation
$$\begin{aligned} z\left[ \mathcal {S}_{p+1}f(z)\right] '=\left( p+\frac{3}{2}\right) \mathcal {S} _{p}f(z)-\left( p+\frac{1}{2}\right) \mathcal {S}_{p+1}f(z). \end{aligned}$$
For further result on the transformation (1.8) of the generalized Bessel function, we refer to the recent papers (see [2–5, 13, 18–20]), where among other things some interesting functional inequalities, integral representations, application of admissible functions, extensions of some known trigonometric inequalities, starlikeness and convexity, and univalence were established. Most of these results were motivated by the research on geometric properties of Gaussian and Kummer hypergeometric functions. For more details we refer to the papers [12, 14–17] and to the references therein. We also mention that recently in [6, 7] some results like the univalence and convexity of some integral operators, defined by the normalized form of the generalized Bessel functions of the first kind given by (1.8), were deduced. For other recent results on subordinations, and other operators involving starlike and close-to-convex functions we refer to the papers [1, 8, 9] and to the references therein.
In the present paper, by making use of the differential subordination and differential superordination results of Miller and Mocanu [10, 11], we determine certain classes of admissible functions and obtain some subordination and superordination implications of analytic functions associated with the \(B_{\kappa }^{c}-\) operator defined by (1.9), together with some sandwich-type theorems.
To prove our main results, we need the following definitions and theorems.
Definition 1.1
[10, p. 21] Let us denote by \(\mathcal {Q}\) the class of functions \(q,\) which are analytic and injective on \(\overline{\mathbb {D}}\setminus E(q),\) where
and are such that \(q'(\zeta )\ne 0\) \((\zeta \in \partial \mathbb {D}\setminus E(q)).\) Further let the subclass of \(\mathcal {Q}\) for which \( q(0)=a\) be denoted by \(\mathcal {Q}(a),\) \(\mathcal {Q}(0)\equiv \mathcal {Q} _{0} \) and \(\mathcal {Q}(1)\equiv \mathcal {Q}_{1}.\)
Definition 1.2
[10, p. 27] Let \(\Omega \) be a set in \(\mathbb {C},\) \(q\in \mathcal {Q}\) and \(n\in \mathbb {N}.\) The class of admissible functions \(\Psi _{n}\left[ \Omega ,q\right] \) consists of those functions \(\psi :\mathbb {C}^{3}\times {\mathbb {D}}\rightarrow \mathbb {C}\) that satisfy the following admissibility condition
whenever
We write \(\Psi _{1}\left[ \Omega ,q\right] \) simply as \(\Psi \left[ \Omega ,q \right] \).
In particular when
with \(M>0\) and \(\left| a\right| <M,\) then \(q(\mathbb {D})=\mathbb {D}_{M}=\left\{ w:\left| w\right| <M \right\} ,\) \(q(0)=a,\) \(E(q)=\varnothing \) and \(q\in \mathcal {Q}.\) In this case, we set \(\Psi _{n}[\Omega ,M,a]=\Psi _{n}[\Omega ,q]\), and in the special case when the set \(\Omega =\mathbb {D}_{M}\), the class is simply denoted by \(\Psi _{n}[M,a].\)
Definition 1.3
[11, p. 817] Let \(\Omega \) be a set in \(\mathbb {C}\) and \(q\in \mathcal {H}\left[ a,n\right] \) with \(q^{\prime }(z)\ne 0.\) The class of admissible functions \(\Psi _{n}'\left[ \Omega ,q\right] \) consist of those functions
that satisfy the following admissibility condition
whenever
We write \(\Psi _{1}'\left[ \Omega ,q\right] \) simply as \(\Psi '\left[ \Omega ,q\right] \).
For the above two classes of admissible functions, Miller and Mocanu [10, 11] proved the following results.
Lemma 1.1
[10, p. 28] Let \(\psi \in \Psi _{n}\left[ \Omega ,q\right] \) with \(q(0)=a.\) If the analytic function \({p}\in \mathcal {H}[a,n]\) satisfies the following inclusion relationship
for all \(z\in \mathbb {D},\) then \({p}\prec q.\)
Lemma 1.2
[11, p. 818] Let \(\psi \in \Psi _{n}'\left[ \Omega ,q\right] \) with \(q(0)=a.\) If \({p}\in \mathcal {Q}(a)\) and \(\psi \left( {p}(z),z{p}'(z),z^{2}{p}''(z);z\right) \) is univalent in \(\mathbb {D},\) then
implies that \({p}\prec q.\)
2 Subordination Results Involving the \(B_{\kappa }^{c}-\) Operator
We begin this section by proving a differential subordination theorem involving the \(B_{\kappa }^{c}-\)operator defined by (1.9). In the sequel the parameter \(c\) is an arbitrary complex number, while for the parameter \(\kappa \) we will have some assumptions in some cases. To prove our main results, we need first the following class of admissible functions.
Definition 2.1
Let \(\Omega \) be a set in \(\mathbb {C}\) and \(q\in \mathcal {Q}_{0}\cap \mathcal {H}_{0}.\) The class of admissible functions \(\Phi _{H}[\Omega ,q]\) consists of those functions \(\phi :\mathbb {C}^{3}\times \mathbb {D}\rightarrow \mathbb {C}\) that satisfy the admissibility condition
whenever
and
Theorem 2.1
Let \(\phi \in \Phi _{H}[\Omega ,q].\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) satisfies the following inclusion relationship
then
Proof
We define the analytic function \({p}\) in \(\mathbb {D}\) by
Then, differentiating (2.2) with respect to \(z\) and using the recursive relation (1.10), we have
Further computations show that
We now define the transformations from \(\mathbb {C}^{3}\) to \(\mathbb {C}\) by
Let
Using equations (2.2)–(2.4), and from (2.5), we get
Hence (2.1) assumes the following form:
The proof is completed if it can be shown that the admissibility condition for \(\phi \in \Phi _{H}[\Omega ,q]\) is equivalent to the admissibility condition for as given in Definition 1.2. Note that
and hence \(\psi \in \Psi [\Omega ,q].\) By Lemma 1.1, we have
which completes the proof of Theorem 2.1. \(\square \)
If \(\Omega \ne \mathbb {C}\) is a simply connected domain, then \(\Omega =h(\mathbb {D})\) for some conformal mapping \(h\) of \(\mathbb {D}\) onto \(\Omega .\) In this case the class \(\Phi _{H}[h(\mathbb {D}),q]\) is written as \(\Phi _{H}[h,q].\)
The following result is an immediate consequence of Theorem 2.1.
Corollary 2.2
Let \(\phi \in \Phi _{H}[h,q].\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) satisfies
then
Our next result is an extension of Theorem 2.1 to the case when the behavior of \(q\) on \(\partial \mathbb {D}\) is not known.
Corollary 2.3
Let \(\Omega \subset \mathbb {C}\) and let \(q\) be univalent in \(\mathbb {D}\) with \(q(0)=0.\) Let \(\phi \in \Phi _{H}[\Omega ,q_{\rho }]\) for some \(\rho \in (0,1),\) where \(q_{\rho }(z)=q(\rho z).\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) satisfies the following inclusion relationship
then
Proof
We note from Theorem 2.1 that
The result asserted by Corollary 2.3 is now deduced from the following subordination relationship:
\(\square \)
Theorem 2.4
Let \(h\) and \(q\) be univalent in \(\mathbb {D}\) with \(q(0)=0\) and set \(q_{\rho }(z)=q(\rho z)\) and \(h_{\rho }(z)=h(\rho z).\) Let \(\phi :\mathbb {C}^{3}\times \mathbb {D}\rightarrow \mathbb {C}\) satisfy one of the following conditions:
-
1.
\(\phi \in \Phi _{H}[\Omega ,q_{\rho }]\) for some \(\rho \in (0,1),\) or
-
2.
there exists \(\rho _{0}\in (0,1)\) such that \(\phi \in \Phi _{H}[h_{\rho },q_{\rho }]\) for all \(\rho \in (\rho _{0},1).\)
If \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) satisfies (2.7), then
Proof
The proof is similar to the proof of [10, Theorem 2.3d] and is therefore omitted. \(\square \)
The next theorem yields the best dominant of the differential subordination (2.7).
Theorem 2.5
Let \(h\) be univalent in \(\mathbb {D}\) and \(\phi :\mathbb {C}^{3}\times \mathbb {D}\rightarrow \mathbb {C}.\) Suppose that the differential equation
has a solution \(q\) with \(q(0)=0\) and satisfies one of the following conditions
-
1.
\(q\in \mathcal {Q}_{0}\) and \(\phi \in \Phi _{H}[h,q]\)
-
2.
\(q\) is univalent in \(\mathbb {D}\) and \(\phi \in \Phi _{H}[h,q_{\rho }]\) for some \(\rho \in (0,1)\)
-
3.
\(q\) is univalent in \(\mathbb {D}\) and there exists \(\rho _{0}\in (0,1)\) such that \(\phi \in \Phi _{H}[h_{\rho },q_{\rho }]\) for all \(\rho \in (\rho _{0},1).\)
If \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) satisfies (2.7), then
and \(q\) is the best dominant.
Proof
Following the same arguments as in [10, Theorem 2.3e], we deduce that \(q\) is a dominant from Corollary 2.2 and Theorem 2.4. Since \(q\) satisfies (2.8), it is also a solution of (2.7) and therefore \(q\) will be dominated by all dominants. Hence \(q\) is the best dominant. \(\square \)
In the particular case when \(q(z)=Mz;\) \(M>0,\) and in view of Definition 2.1, the class of admissible functions \(\Phi _{H}[\Omega ,q]\), denoted by \(\Phi _{H}[\Omega ,M]\), is described below.
Definition 2.2
Let \(\Omega \) be a set in \(\mathbb {C}\) and \(M>0.\) The class of admissible functions \(\Phi _{H}[\Omega ,M]\) consists of those functions \(\phi :\mathbb {C}^{3}\times \mathbb {D}\rightarrow \mathbb {C}\) such that
whenever \(z\in \mathbb {D},\) \(\kappa \in \mathbb {C}\setminus \mathbb {Z}_0^{-}\) \(\left( \kappa \ne 1\right) \) and \(\mathrm{Re }(Le^{-i\theta })\ge \mathcal {(}k-1\mathcal {)}kM\) for all \(\theta \in \mathbb {R}, k\ge ~1.\)
Corollary 2.6
Let \(\phi \in \Phi _{H}[\Omega ,M].\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) satisfies the following inclusion relationship
then
In the special case when \(\Omega =\{w:\;\left| w\right| <M\}=q(\mathbb {D}),\) the class \(\Phi _{H}[\Omega ,M]\) is simply denoted by \(\Phi _{H}[M]\). Corollary 2.6 can now be written in the following form.
Corollary 2.7
Let \(\phi \in \Phi _{H}[M].\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) satisfies the following inequality
then
Corollary 2.8
If \(M>0, \mathrm{Re }(\kappa )>0\) and \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) satisfies the following inequality
then
Proof
This follows from Corollary 2.7 by taking \(\phi (u,v,w;z)=v=\frac{ k+(\kappa -1)}{\kappa }Me^{i\theta }.\) \(\square \)
Taking into account the above results, we have the following particular cases. For \(f(z)=\frac{z}{1-z}\) in Corollary 2.8 we have
This result is the generalization of a result given by Prajapat [18].
Also observe that \(\varphi _{\frac{3}{2},1,1}(z)=\frac{3\sin \sqrt{z}}{\sqrt{z}} -3\cos \sqrt{z},\) \(\varphi _{\frac{1}{2},1,1}(z)=\sqrt{z}\sin \sqrt{z}\) and \(\varphi _{-\frac{1}{2},1,1}(z)=z\cos \sqrt{z},\) where \(\varphi _{p,b,c}(z)\) is given by (1.8 ). Thus we can obtain some trigonometric inequalities for special cases of parameters \(p,b\), and \(c.\) For example from (2.10) for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}\) and \(M>0\) we have
Corollary 2.9
Let \(\kappa \in \mathbb {C}\setminus \mathbb {Z}_0^{-}\) and \(M>0.\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) satisfies the following inequality
then
Proof
Let \(\phi (u,v,w;z)=v+\left( \frac{1}{\kappa }-1\right) u\) and \(\Omega =h(\mathbb {D})\) where \(h(z)=\frac{Mz}{\kappa },\) \(M>0.\) In order to use Corollary 2.6, we need to show that \(\phi \in \Phi _{H}[\Omega ,M],\) that is, the admissibility condition (2.9) is satisfied. This follows since
whenever \(z\in \mathbb {D}\), \(\theta \in \mathbb {R},\) \(\kappa \in \mathbb {C}\setminus \mathbb {Z}_0^{-}\) \(\left( \kappa \ne 1\right) \) and\(\;k\ge 1.\) The result now follows from Corollary 2.6. \(\square \)
Observe that \(\varphi _{\frac{3}{2},1,-1}(z)=3\cosh \sqrt{z}-\frac{3\sinh \sqrt{z}}{\sqrt{z}},\) \(\varphi _{\frac{1}{2},1,-1}(z)=\sqrt{z}\sinh \sqrt{z}\) and \(\varphi _{-\frac{1}{2},1,-1}(z)=z\cosh \sqrt{z}\) where \(\varphi _{p,b,c}(z)\) is given by (1.8). Moreover, if we take \(f(z)=\frac{z}{1-z},\) \(b=1,\) \(c=-1;\) \(p=\frac{1}{2}\) and \(p=-\frac{1}{2}\) in Corollary 2.9, respectively, we have
and
Theorem 2.5 shows that the result is sharp. The differential equation
has a univalent solution \(q(z)=Mz.\) It follows from Theorem 2.5 that \(q(z)=Mz\) is the best dominant.
Definition 2.3
Let \(\Omega \) be a set in \(\mathbb {C}\) and \(q\in \mathcal {Q}_{1}\cap \mathcal {H}_{1}.\) The class of admissible functions \(\Phi _{H,1}[\Omega ,q]\) consists of those functions \(\phi :\mathbb {C}^{3}\times \mathbb {D}\rightarrow \mathbb {C}\) that satisfy the admissibility condition
whenever
and
Theorem 2.10
Let \(\phi \in \Phi _{H,1}[\Omega ,q].\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) satisfies the following inclusion relationship
then
Proof
Let us consider the analytic function \({p}:\mathbb {D}\rightarrow \mathbb {C},\) defined by
Differentiating both sides of (2.12) with respect to \(z\) and using (1.10), we have
Further computations show that
Now we define the transformation \(\psi :\mathbb {C}^{3}\times \mathbb {D}\rightarrow \mathbb {C}\) by \(\psi (r,s,t;z)=\phi (u,v,w;z)\) where
Using equations (2.12)–(2.14), we get
Hence (2.11) implies
The proof is completed if it can be shown that the admissibility condition for \(\phi \in \Phi _{H,1}[\Omega ,q]\) is equivalent to the admissibility condition for \(\psi \) as given in Definition 1.2. Note that
and hence \(\psi \in \Psi [\Omega ,q].\) By Lemma 1.1, we have
which completes the proof of Theorem 2.10. \(\square \)
In the case when \(\Omega \ne \mathbb {C}\) is a simply connected domain with \(\Omega =h(\mathbb {D})\) for some conformal mapping \(h\) of \(\mathbb {D}\) onto \(\Omega .\) In this case the class \(\Phi _{H,1}[h(\mathbb {D}),q]\) is written as \(\Phi _{H,1}[h,q].\)
The following result is an immediate consequence of Theorem 2.10.
Corollary 2.11
Let \(\phi \in \Phi _{H,1}[h,q].\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) satisfies
then
In the particular case when \(q(z)=1+Mz;\) \(M>0,\) the class of admissible functions \(\Phi _{H,1}[\Omega ,q]\) is simply denoted by \(\Phi _{H,1}[\Omega ,M]\).
Definition 2.4
Let \(\Omega \) be a set in \(\mathbb {C}\), and \(M>0.\) The class of admissible functions \(\Phi _{H,1}[\Omega ,M]\) consists of those functions \(\phi :\mathbb {C}^{3}\times \mathbb {D}\rightarrow \mathbb {C}\) such that
whenever \(z\in \mathbb {D},\) \(\kappa \in \mathbb {C}\setminus \mathbb {Z}_0^{-}\) \((\kappa \ne 1,2)\) and \(\mathrm{Re }(Le^{-i\theta })\ge \mathcal {(} k-1\mathcal {)}kM\) for all \(\theta \in \mathbb {R},\;k\ge 1.\)
Corollary 2.12
Let \(\phi \in \Phi _{H,1}[\Omega ,M].\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) satisfies the following inclusion relationship
then
In the special case \(\Omega =\{w:\;\left| w-1\right| <M\}=q(\mathbb {D}),\) the class \(\Phi _{H,1}[\Omega ,M]\) is simply denoted by \(\Phi _{H,1}[M]\), and Corollary 2.12 takes the following form.
Corollary 2.13
Let \(\phi \in \Phi _{H,1}[M].\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) satisfies the following inequality
then for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}\) we have
Corollary 2.14
Let \(\kappa \in \mathbb {C}\setminus \mathbb {Z}_0^{-}\) \((\kappa \ne 1)\) and \(M>0.\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) satisfies the following inequality
then for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}\) we have
Proof
This follows from Corollary 2.12 by taking \(\phi (u,v,w;z)=v-\frac{\kappa }{\kappa -1}(u-1)-1\) and \(\Omega =h(\mathbb {D}),\) where
and \(M>0.\) In order to use Corollary 2.12, we need to show that \(\phi \in \Phi _{H,1}[\Omega ,M],\) that is, the admissibility condition (2.18) is satisfied. This follows since
when \(z\in \mathbb {D}\), \(\theta \in \mathbb {R},\) \(\kappa \in \mathbb {C}\setminus \mathbb {Z}_0^{-}\) \((\kappa \ne 1)\) and\(\;k\ge 1.\) The result now follows from Corollary 2.12. \(\square \)
Definition 2.5
Let \(\Omega \) be a set in \(\mathbb {C}\) and \(q\in \mathcal {Q}_{1}\cap \mathcal {H}_{1}.\) The class of admissible functions \(\Phi _{H,2}[\Omega ,q]\) consists of those functions \(\phi :\mathbb {C}^{3}\times \mathbb {D}\rightarrow \mathbb {C}\) that satisfy the admissibility condition
where
and
Theorem 2.15
Let \(\phi \in \Phi _{H,2}[\Omega ,q].\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) satisfies the following inclusion relationship
then
Proof
Let us define the analytic function \({p}\) in \(\mathbb {D}\) by
By making use of (1.10) and (2.20), we get
Further computations show that
Define the transformations from \(\mathbb {C}^{3}\) to \(\mathbb {C}\) by
Let
The proof shall make use of Lemma 1.1. Using equations (2.20), (2.21), and (2.22), from (2.24) we obtain
Hence (2.19) becomes
The proof is completed if it can be shown that the admissibility condition for \(\phi \in \Phi _{H,2}[\Omega ,q]\) is equivalent to the admissibility condition for as given in Definition 1.2. Note that
and hence \(\psi \in \Psi [\Omega ,q].\) By Lemma 1.1, we have \({p}(z)\prec q(z)\) or
\(\square \)
If \(\Omega \ne \mathbb {C}\) is a simply connected domain, then \(\Omega =h(\mathbb {D})\) for some conformal mapping \(h\) of \(\mathbb {D}\) onto \(\Omega .\) In this case the class \(\Phi _{H,2}[h(\mathbb {D}),q]\) is written as \(\Phi _{H,2}[h,q].\)
The following result is an immediate consequence of Theorem 2.15.
Corollary 2.16
Let \(\phi \in \Phi _{H,2}[h,q].\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) satisfies
then
In the particular case when \(q(z)=1+Mz;\) \(M>0,\) the class of admissible functions \(\Phi _{H,2}[\Omega ,q]\), denoted by \(\Phi _{H,2}[\Omega ,M]\).
Definition 2.6
Let \(\Omega \) be a set in \(\mathbb {C}\) and \(M>0.\) The class of admissible functions \(\Phi _{H,2}[\Omega ,M]\) consists of those functions \(\phi :\mathbb {C}^{3}\times \mathbb {D}\rightarrow \mathbb {C}\) such that
whenever \(z\in {\mathbb {D}},\) \(\kappa \in \mathbb {C}\setminus \mathbb {Z}_0^{-}\) \((\kappa \ne 1)\) and \(\mathrm{Re }(Le^{-i\theta })\ge \mathcal {(}k-1 \mathcal {)}kM\) for all \(\theta \in \mathbb {R},\;k\ge 1.\)
Corollary 2.17
Let \(\phi \in \Phi _{H,2}[\Omega ,M].\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) satisfies the following inclusion relationship
then
In the special case when \(\Omega =\{w:\;\left| w-1\right| <M\}=q(\mathbb {D}),\) the class \(\Phi _{H,2}[\Omega ,M]\) is simply denoted by \(\Phi _{H,2}[M]\), and Corollary 2.17 takes the following form.
Corollary 2.18
Let \(\phi \in \Phi _{H,2}[M].\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) satisfies the following inequality
then for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}\) we have
Corollary 2.19
Let \(\kappa \in \mathbb {C}\setminus \mathbb {Z}_0^{-}\) and \(M>0.\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) satisfies the following inequality
then for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}\) we have
Proof
This follows from Corollary 2.17 by taking \(\phi (u,v,w;z)=v-u.\) \(\square \)
Corollary 2.20
Let \(\mathrm{Re }(\kappa )\ge -\frac{1}{2},\) \(\kappa \ne 0\) and \(M>0.\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) satisfies the following inequality
then for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}\) we have
Proof
This follows from Corollary 2.17 by taking \(\phi (u,v,w;z)=v-1.\) \(\square \)
For \(f(z)=z/(1-z)\) in Corollary 2.20 we have
This result is somewhat related to an open problem given by András and Baricz [2], which in terms of \(\varphi _{\kappa ,c}\) can be rewritten as follows: is it true that if \(p>-1\) increase, then the image region \(\varphi _{p,1,1}(\mathbb {D})\) decrease, that is, if \(p>q>-1,\) then \(\varphi _{p,1,1}(\mathbb {D})\subset \varphi _{q,1,1}(\mathbb {D})\)?
In particular, if we take \(b=c=1;\) \(p=-\frac{1}{2}\) and \(p=\frac{1}{2},\) in (2.28), then the following chain of implications is true
where \(M>0.\)
3 Superordination and Sandwich-Type Results Involving the \( B_{\kappa }^{c}-\) Operator
In this section we obtain some differential superordination results for functions associated with the \(B_{\kappa }^{c}-\)operator defined by (1.10). As in the previous section, the parameter \(c\) is an arbitrary complex number, while for the parameter \(\kappa \) we will have some assumptions in some cases. We consider first a class of admissible functions, which is given in the following definition.
Definition 3.1
Let \(\Omega \) be a set in \(\mathbb {C}\), \(q\in \mathcal {H}_{0}\) with \(zq'(z)\ne 0.\) The class of admissible functions \(\Phi _{H}'[\Omega ,q]\) consists of those functions \(\phi :\mathbb {C}^{3}\times \overline{\mathbb {D}}\rightarrow \mathbb {C}\) that satisfy the admissibility condition
whenever
and
Theorem 3.1
Let \(\phi \in \Phi _{H}^{\prime }[\Omega ,q].\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A},\) \(B_{\kappa +1}^{c}f\in \mathcal {Q}_{0}\) and
is univalent in \({\mathbb {D}},\) then
implies
Proof
Let \({p}(z)\) be defined by (2.2) and \(\psi \) by (2.5). Since \(\phi \in \Phi _{H}'[\Omega ,q],\) (2.6) and (3.1) yield
From (2.5), we see that the admissibility condition for \(\phi \in \Phi _{H}'[\Omega ,q]\) is equivalent to the admissibility condition for \(\psi \) as given in Definition 1.3. Hence \(\psi \in \Psi '[\Omega ,q]\), and by Lemma 1.2, we have
which completes the proof of Theorem 3.1. \(\square \)
If \(\Omega \ne \mathbb {C}\) is a simply connected domain, then \(\Omega =h(\mathbb {D})\) for some conformal mapping \(h\) of \(\mathbb {D}\) onto \(\Omega .\) In this case, the class \(\Phi _{H}'[h(\mathbb {D}),q]\) is written as \(\Phi _{H}'[h,q].\)
Proceeding similarly as in the previous section, the following result is an immediate consequence of Theorem 3.1.
Corollary 3.2
Let \(q\in \mathcal {H}_{0},\) \(h\) be analytic in \(\mathbb {D}\) and \(\phi \in \Phi _{H}'[h,q].\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A},\) \(B_{\kappa +1}^{c}f\in \mathcal {Q}_{0}\) and
is univalent in \(\mathbb {D},\) then
implies
Theorem 3.1 and Corollary 3.2 can only be used to obtain subordinants of differential superordination of the form (3.1) or (3.2). The following theorem proves the existence of the best subordinant of (3.2) for an appropriate \(\phi \).
Theorem 3.3
Let \(h\) be univalent in \(\mathbb {D}\) and \(\phi :\mathbb {C}^{3}\times \overline{\mathbb {D}}\rightarrow \mathbb {C}.\) Suppose that the differential equation
has a solution \(q\in \mathcal {Q}_{0}.\) If \(\phi \in \Phi _{H}'[h,q], f\in \mathcal {A}, B_{\kappa +1}^{c}f\in \mathcal {Q}_{0}\) and
is univalent in \(\mathbb {D},\) then
which implies
and \(q\) is best subordinant.
Proof
The proof is similar to the proof of Theorem 2.5 and is therefore we omit the details. \(\square \)
Combining Theorem 2.2 and Corollary 3.2, we obtain the following sandwich-type theorem.
Corollary 3.4
Let \(h_{1}\) and \(q_{1}\) be analytic functions in \(\mathbb {D},\) \(h_{2}\) be a univalent function in \(\mathbb {D},\) \(q_{2}\in \mathcal {Q}_{0}\) with \(q_{1}(0)=q_{2}(0)=1\) and \(\phi \in \Phi _{H}[h_{2},q_{2}]\cap \Phi _{H}'[h_{1},q_{1}].\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A},\) \(B_{\kappa +1}^{c}f\in \mathcal {Q}_{0}\cap \mathcal {H}_{0}\) and
is univalent in \({\mathbb {D}},\) then
which implies
Definition 3.2
Let \(\Omega \) be a set in \(\mathbb {C}\), \(q\in \mathcal {H}_{1}\) with \(q(z)\ne 0,\) \(zq'(z)\ne 0.\) The class of admissible functions \(\Phi _{H,1}'[\Omega ,q]\) consists of those functions \(\phi :\mathbb {C}^{3}\times \overline{\mathbb {D}}\rightarrow \mathbb {C}\) that satisfy the admissibility condition
whenever
and
Theorem 3.5
Let \(\phi \in \Phi _{H,1}'[\Omega ,q].\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A},\) \({B_{\kappa }^{c}f}/{B_{\kappa +1}^{c}f}\in \mathcal {Q}_{1}\) and
is univalent in \(\mathbb {D},\) then
which implies
Proof
Let \({p}\) be defined by (2.12) and \(\psi \) by (2.16). Since \(\phi \in \Phi _{H,1}'[\Omega ,q],\) it follows from (2.16) and (3.3) that
From (2.16), we see that the admissibility condition for \(\phi \in \Phi _{H,1}'[\Omega ,q]\) is equivalent to the admissibility condition for \(\psi \) as given in Definition 1.3. Hence \(\psi \in \Psi '[\Omega ,q]\), and by Lemma 1.2, we have
which completes the proof of Theorem 3.5. \(\square \)
If \(\Omega \ne \mathbb {C}\) is a simply connected domain, then \(\Omega =h(\mathbb {D})\) for some conformal mapping \(h\) of \(\mathbb {D}\) onto \(\Omega .\) In this case, the class \(\Phi _{H,1}'[h(\mathbb {D}),q]\) is written as \(\Phi _{H,1}'[h,q].\) Proceeding similarly in the previous section, the following result is an immediate consequence of Theorem 3.5.
Theorem 3.6
Let \(q\in \mathcal {H}_{1},\) \(h\) be analytic in \(\mathbb {D}\) and \(\phi \in \Phi _{H,1}'[h,q].\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A},\) \({B_{\kappa }^{c}f}/{B_{\kappa +1}^{c}f}\in \mathcal {Q}_{1}\) and
is univalent in \(\mathbb {D},\) then
which implies
Combining Theorems 2.11 and 3.6, we obtain the following sandwich-type theorem.
Corollary 3.7
Let \(h_{1}\) and \(q_{1}\) be analytic functions in \(\mathbb {D},\) \(h_{2}\) be a univalent function in \(\mathbb {D},\) \(q_{2}\in \mathcal {Q}_{1}\) with \(q_{1}(0)=q_{2}(0)=1\) and \(\phi \in \Phi _{H,1}[h_{2},q_{2}]\cap \Phi _{H,1}'[h_{1},q_{1}].\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A},\) \({B_{\kappa }^{c}f}/{B_{\kappa +1}^{c}f}\in \mathcal { Q}_{1}\cap \mathcal {H}_{1}\) and
is univalent in \(\mathbb {D},\) then
which implies
Definition 3.3
Let \(\Omega \) be a set in \(\mathbb {C}\), \(q\in \mathcal {H}_{1}\) with \(q(z)\ne 0,\) \(zq'(z)\ne 0.\) The class of admissible functions \(\Phi _{H,2}'[\Omega ,q]\) consists of those functions \(\phi :\mathbb {C}^{3}\times \overline{\mathbb {D}}\rightarrow \mathbb {C}\) that satisfy the admissibility condition
whenever
and
Theorem 3.8
Let \(\phi \in \Phi _{H,2}'[\Omega ,q].\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A},\) \(\frac{B_{\kappa +1}^{c}f(z)}{z}\in \mathcal {Q}_{1}\) and
is univalent in \(\mathbb {D},\) then
which implies
Proof
From (2.25) and (3.5) we obtain that
From (2.23), we see that the admissibility condition for \(\phi \in \Phi _{H,2}'[\Omega ,q]\) is equivalent to the admissibility condition for \(\psi \) as given in Definition 1.3. Hence \(\psi \in \Psi '[\Omega ,q]\), and by Lemma 1.2, we have
\(\square \)
If \(\Omega \ne \mathbb {C}\) is a simply connected domain, then \(\Omega =h(\mathbb {D})\) for some conformal mapping \(h\) of \(\mathbb {D}\) onto \(\Omega .\) In this case, the class \(\Phi _{H,2}'[h(\mathbb {D}),q]\) is written as \(\Phi _{H,2}'[h,q].\) Proceeding similarly in the previous section, the following result is an immediate consequence of Theorem 3.8.
Corollary 3.9
Let \(q\in \mathcal {H}_{1},\) \(h\) be analytic in \(\mathbb {D}\) and \(\phi \in \Phi _{H,2}'[h,q].\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A},\) \(\frac{B_{\kappa +1}^{c}f(z)}{z}\in \mathcal {Q}_{1}\) and
is univalent in \(\mathbb {D},\) then
which implies
Combining Corollaries 2.16 and 3.9, we obtain the following sandwich-type theorem.
Corollary 3.10
Let \(h_{1}\) and \(q_{1}\) be analytic functions in \(\mathbb {D},\) \(h_{2}\) be a univalent function in \(\mathbb {D},\) \(q_{2}\in \mathcal {Q}_{1}\) with \(q_{1}(0)=q_{2}(0)=1\) and \(\phi \in \Phi _{H,2}[h_{2},q_{2}]\cap \Phi _{H,2}'[h_{1},q_{1}].\) If \(f\in \mathcal {A},\) \(\frac{B_{\kappa +1}^{c}f(z)}{z}\in \mathcal {Q}_{1}\cap \mathcal {H}_{1}\) and
is univalent in \(\mathbb {D},\) then
which implies
We note that in particular the above main results reduce to results for the operators \(\mathcal {J}_{p}f\), \(\mathcal {I}_{p}f\) and \( \mathcal {S}_{p}f,\) which are defined by (1.11), (1.12), and (1.13), respectively.
References
Ali, R.M., Nagpal, S., Ravichandran, V.: Second-order differential subordination for analytic functions with fixed initial coefficient. Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. 34(3), 611–629 (2011)
András, S., Baricz, Á.: Monotonicity property of generalized and normalized Bessel functions of complex order. Complex Var. Elliptic Equ. 54(7), 689–696 (2009)
Baricz, Á.: Geometric properties of generalized Bessel functions. Publ. Math. Debr. 73, 155–178 (2008)
Baricz, Á.: Generalized Bessel Functions of the First Kind. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1994. Springer, Berlin (2010)
Baricz, Á., Ponnusamy, S.: Starlikeness and covexity of generalized Bessel function. Integral Transform. Spec. Funct. 21(9), 641–651 (2010)
Deniz, E., Orhan, H., Srivastava, H.M.: Some sufficient conditions for univalence of certain families of integral operators involving generalized Bessel functions. Taiwan. J. Math. 15(2), 883–917 (2011)
Deniz, E.: Convexity of integral operators involving generalized Bessel functions. Integral Transform Spec. Funct. 24(3), 201–216 (2013)
Kowalczyk, B., Lecko, A.: Fekete-Szegő problem for a certain subclass of close-to-convex functions. Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. (2), (in press)
Liu, J.L.: Certain sufficient conditions for strongly starlike functions associated with an integral operator. Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. 34(1), 21–30 (2011)
Miller, S.S., Mocanu, P.T.: Differential Subordinations. Marcel Dekker, New York (2000)
Miller, S.S., Mocanu, P.T.: Subordination of differential superordinations. Complex Var. Theory Appl. 48(10), 815–826 (2003)
Miller, S.S., Mocanu, P.T.: Univalence of Gaussian and confluent hypergeometric functions. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 110(2), 333–342 (1990)
Mondal, S.R., Swaminathan, A.: Geometric properties of generalized Bessel functions. Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. 35(1), 179–194 (2012)
Owa, S., Srivastava, H.M.: Univalent and starlike generalized hypergeometric functions. Can. J. Math. 39(5), 1057–1077 (1987)
Ponnusamy, S., Ronning, F.: Geometric properties for convolutions of hypergeometric functions and functions with the derivative in a halfplane. Integral Transform. Spec. Funct. 8, 121–138 (1999)
Ponnusamy, S., Vuorinen, M.: Univalence and convexity properties for confluent hypergeometric functions. Complex Var. Theory Appl. 36(1), 73–97 (1998)
Ponnusamy, S., Vuorinen, M.: Univalence and convexity properties for Gaussian hypergeometric functions. Rocky Mt. J. Math. 31(1), 327–353 (2001)
Prajapat, J.K.: Certain geometric properties of normalized Bessel functions. Appl. Math. Lett. 24(12), 2133–2139 (2011)
Szász, R.: On starlikeness of Bessel functions of the first kind. In: Proceedings of the 8th Joint Conference on Mathematics and Computer Science, pp. 9. Komárno, Slovakia (2010)
Szász, R., Kupán, P.A.: About the univalence of the Bessel functions. Stud. Univ. Babes-Bolyai Math. 54(1), 127–132 (2009)
Watson, G.N.: A Treatise on the Theory of Bessel Functions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1944)
Acknowledgments
The research of Á. Baricz was supported by a research Grant of the Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research, CNCS-UEFISCDI, project number PN-II-RU-TE-2012-3-0190/2014. The research of E. Deniz was supported by the Commission for the Scientific Research Projects of Kafkas University, project number 2012-FEF-30. The research of M. Çağlar and H. Orhan was supported by the Atatürk University Rectorship under The Scientific and Research Project of Atatürk University, project number 2012/173. The authors are grateful to the referee for his/her helpful comments which enhanced this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by Saminathan Ponusammy.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Baricz, Á., Deniz, E., Çağlar, M. et al. Differential Subordinations Involving Generalized Bessel Functions. Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. 38, 1255–1280 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40840-014-0079-8
Received:
Revised:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40840-014-0079-8
Keywords
- Bessel functions
- Modified Bessel functions
- Spherical Bessel functions
- Generalized Bessel functions
- Univalent functions
- Hadamard product
- Differential subordination
- Differential superordination