Next Article in Journal
The Computational Assessment on the Performance of Products with Multi-Parts Using the Gompertz Distribution
Previous Article in Journal
Privacy-Preserving and Verifiable Personalized Federated Learning
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Bounds for Hermitian Toeplitz and Hankel Determinants for a Certain Subclass of Analytic Functions Related to the Sine Function

by
Thatamsetty Thulasiram
1,
Sekar Kalaiselvan
2,
Daniel Breaz
3,*,
Kuppuswamy Suchithra
1 and
Thirumalai Vinjimur Sudharsan
4,*
1
Department of Mathematics, A.M. Jain College, Chennai 600114, India
2
Department of Mathematics, Guru Nanak College, Chennai 600042, India
3
Department of Mathematics, University of Alba Iulia, 510009 Alba Iulia, Romania
4
Department of Mathematics, SIVET College, Chennai 600073, India
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Symmetry 2025, 17(3), 362; https://doi.org/10.3390/sym17030362
Submission received: 11 January 2025 / Revised: 17 February 2025 / Accepted: 24 February 2025 / Published: 27 February 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Mathematics)

Abstract

:
This study of Hankel and Hermitian Toeplitz determinants is one of the major areas of interest in Geometric function theory and has wide applications in the areas of signal processing and Applied Mathematics. In our present investigations, we define a new subclass of normalized analytic functions H ( λ ) ( λ 0 ) , defined using a subordination relation with the sine function K ( z ) = 1 + s i n z . For the class H ( λ ) , coefficient estimates, upper and lower bounds for the Hermitian Toeplitz determinants of second and third order are found. In addition, estimates are provided for the second and third-order Hankel determinants for the class H ( λ ) .

1. Introduction

Let the class of normalized analytic functions of the form
f ( z ) = z + n = 2 a n z n
defined on the open unit disk D : = { z C : | z | < 1 } be denoted by A and let S be the subclass of A consisting of univalent functions.
The class of Caratheodory functions denoted by P consists of analytic functions p ( z ) given by
p ( z ) = 1 + p 1 z + p 2 z 2 + p 3 z 3 + ,
where Re ( p ( z ) ) > 0 for z D and p ( 0 ) = 1 .
An analytic function f is subordinate to another analytic function g, denoted by f g , if there exists an analytic function ω with | ω ( z ) | < | z | and ω ( 0 ) = 0 such that f ( z ) = g ( ω ( z ) ) . If g is univalent then f ( z ) g ( z ) f ( 0 ) = g ( 0 ) and f ( D ) g ( D ) .
Let ϕ ( z ) be an analytic function with a positive real part on D with ϕ ( 0 ) = 1 , ϕ ( 0 ) > 0 , which maps the unit disk D onto a starlike region with respect to 1 and is symmetric with respect to the real axis. In 1992, Ma and Minda [1] defined the classes
S ϕ = f A : z f ( z ) f ( z ) ϕ ( z ) ( z D )
and
C ϕ = f A : 1 + z f ( z ) f ( z ) ϕ ( z ) ( z D ) .
The above functions are called as functions of Ma and Minda type. It is noted that S 1 + z 1 z = S and C 1 + z 1 z = C , i.e., the well-known classes of starlike and convex functions.
The class M λ ( ϕ ) of normalized analytic functions f ( z ) satisfying
z f ( z ) f ( z ) + λ z 2 f ( z ) f ( z ) ϕ ( z ) ( λ 0 )
was considered by Darus et al. [2], who investigated the bounds of the Feketo–Szegö functional | a 3 μ a 2 2 | , where μ , is real.
For a function f A given by (1), Noonan and Thomas [3] defined the qth Hankel determinant as
H q n ( f ) = a n a n + 1 a n + q 1 a n + 1 a n + 2 a n + q a n + q 1 a n + q a n + 2 q 2
where a 1 = 1 , q , n N : = { 1 , 2 , 3 } .
In particular,
H 2 1 ( f ) = 1 a 2 a 2 a 3 = a 3 a 2 2 , H 2 2 ( f ) = a 2 a 3 a 3 a 4 = a 2 a 4 a 3 2
and
H 3 1 ( f ) = 1 a 2 a 3 a 2 a 3 a 4 a 3 a 4 a 5 = a 3 ( a 2 a 4 a 3 2 ) a 4 ( a 4 a 2 a 3 ) + a 5 ( a 3 a 2 2 ) .
The study of coefficient problems is indispensable in the area of univalent function theory. In 1960, Pommerenke [4] started researching Hankel determinants for functions that are starlike and univalent. The optimal bound for | H 2 n ( f ) | of areally mean p-valent functions was computed by Hayman in [5]. Janteng et al. [6] determined the precise upper limit for the second Hankel determinant for classes of starlike and convex functions. Subsequently, for the class of convex functions C, the authors of [7] estimated the bound for the third Hankel determinant as | H 3 1 ( f ) | 4 135 and established the sharpness of the bound by providing an extremal function f ( z ) = a r c t a n z for which the equality holds, and Arif [8] obtained a non-sharp bound for the fourth Hankel determinant for functions with bounded turning. The authors of [9] used the concept of subordination to improve an existing bound of the third Hankel determinant for f, satisfying z f ( z ) f ( z ) 1 + z . Further, Vijayalakshmi et al. [10] investigated the bounds of the third-order Hankel determinant for a generalized class of analytic functions, which reduces to a class of functions with bounded turning. Furthermore, Cho and Kumar determined the bound for | a 5 | and computed a non-sharp bound on the third and fourth Hankel determinants for starlike functions associated with a lune-shaped region in [11]. Recently, Breaz et al. [12] have obtained the upper bound for the third Hankel determinant for functions f involving the quantities z f ( z ) f ( z ) , | l o g z f ( z ) f ( z ) | and ( z f ( z ) ) f ( z ) associated with the exponential function e z .
The Hermitian Toeplitz determinant, a special case of the Hankel determinant defined by the coefficients { a k } k 2 of the function f A given by (1) is described by Hartman and Winter [13] as follows:
det ( T m , n ( f ) ) = a n a n + 1 a n + m 1 a n + 1 ¯ a n a n + m 2 a n + m 1 ¯ a n + m 2 ¯ a n
where a 1 = 1 , m , n N .
In particular,
det T 2 , 1 ( f ) = 1 a 2 a 2 ¯ 1 = 1 | a 2 | 2 ,
and
det ( T 3 , 1 ( f ) ) = 1 a 2 a 3 a 2 ¯ 1 a 2 a 3 ¯ a 2 ¯ 1 = 2 R e ( a 2 2 a 3 ¯ ) 2 | a 2 | 2 | a 3 | 2 + 1 .
Hermitian Toeplitz matrices and their determinants find extensive applications in various fields. In signal processing, Hermitian Toeplitz matrices serve as autocorrelation matrices and their determinants are useful to study statistical properties like power spectra and the presence of periodic components [14], and they are used in linear prediction theory to model signals and estimate their parameters. Furthermore, Hermitian Toeplitz and Hankel matrices are used for efficient data transmission and reception in aircraft communication [15].
This study of Hankel and Hermitian Toeplitz in the area of univalent function theory has gained momentum in recent years. For second and third-order Toeplitz determinants whose components are Taylor’s coefficients of functions f in S, the sharp upper bounds were estimated by Ali et al. [16] for subclasses of starlike and convex functions. Cudna et al. [17] estimated the sharp lower and upper bounds for second and third-order Hermitian Toeplitz determinants for the classes of starlike and convex functions of order α . The bounds for | a n | , n = 2 , 3 , for the classes of starlike and convex functions related to a shell-like curve domain connected with Fibonacci numbers are estimated in [18,19]. Kumar et al. [20] obtained the bounds for | a n | , n = 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 for the classes of Janowski-type starlike functions and estimated the sharp lower and upper bounds on second and third-order Hermitian Toeplitz determinants, generalizing the results of [17]. Later, Lecko et. al [21] obtained bounds for second- and third-order Hermitian Toeplitz determinants for certain subclasses of analytic functions. Recently, by using the concept of subordination, Gurusamy et al. [22] estimated the bounds of second and third-order Hermitian Toeplitz determinants for some subclasses of analytic functions associated with exponential functions.
Consider the function K ( z ) = 1 + s i n z , which is analytic and univalent in D . The image of the unit disc under this function is found with the aid of MATLAB R2021a as a sine curve region on the right half plane and is given in Figure 1.
Further, it is noted that the range K ( D ) is symmetric with respect to the real axis and R e ( K ( D ) ) > 0 , for z D with K ( 0 ) = 1 , K ( 0 ) > 0 . Moreover, the domain is starlike with respect to the point K ( 0 ) = 1 .
In [23], Cho et al. introduced the class S s of univalent functions, which is defined such that the quantity z f ( z ) f ( z ) is subordinate to the function K ( z ) = 1 + s i n z , and they established the radii of starlikeness and convexity for functions in S s . This work propelled the study on the sine curve domain and has gained interest in recent years. Briefly, Arif et al. [24] estimated the bounds of the third Hankel determinant for functions in classes S s , C : = { f A : 1 + z f ( z ) f ( z ) 1 + s i n z ( z D ) } and R s i n : = { f A : f ( z ) 1 + s i n z ( z D ) } . For f in S s , Zhang and Tang [25] obtained the bounds for the coefficients a k , k = 2 to 7 and established the following: | H 2 1 ( f ) | 1 2 , | H 2 2 ( f ) | 1 4 , | a 2 a 3 a 4 | 1 3 , | a 2 a 5 a 3 a 4 | 11 56 , | a 5 a 2 a 4 | 13 32 , | a 5 a 3 a 4 2 | 97 324 and | H 4 1 ( f ) | 0.81945 . The fourth Hankel determinant for the class C was obtained by Zulfiqar et al. [26]. For the class of starlike functions with respect to symmetric points related to the sine function, Ghaffar et al. [27] estimated the upper bounds on the third Hankel determinant. Further, Bilal Khan et al. [28] gave the bounds for the third Hankel determinant for the class S s using logarithmic coefficients. The third Hankel determinant for subclasses of analytic and m-fold symmetric functions involving the sine domain was given by Alahmade et al. [29]. The upper bounds for Hermitian Toeplitz determinants of second and third order for S ( ϕ ) and C ( ϕ ) were obtained by Surya Giri and Sivaprasad Kumar [30], who further deduced the results for different choices of ϕ . Recently, Kamali and Alina [31] obtained the bounds for the second and third-order Hankel determinants for functions in S s and C that are associated with a differential operator.
Motivated by the class studied by Darus et al. [2] and the aforementioned works, in this paper, we estimate the coefficient bounds, upper and lower bounds for Hermitian Toeplitz determinants, and estimates for second and third-order Hankel determinants for a class of analytic functions related to a sine curve region, using the technique of subordination.

2. Preliminaries

In this section, we provide the definition and Lemmas that are required to establish the main results in the subsequent sections.
  Definition 1. 
For λ 0 , let H ( λ ) denote the class of functions f A , which satisfies the subordination relation
z f ( z ) + λ z 2 f ( z ) f ( z ) 1 + s i n z , z D .
In order to prove that class H ( λ ) is non-empty, we provide the following example:
  Example 1. 
Let f : D C be defined by
f ( z ) = z + a z 2 , 0 a 1 10 λ + 1 , λ 0 , f H ( λ ) .
Therefore, for z D ,
z f ( z ) + λ z 2 f ( z ) f ( z ) = 1 + 2 a ( λ + 1 ) z 1 + a z : = g λ ( z ) .
For 0 a 1 10 λ + 1 , we see that g λ maps the unit disc onto the open disc that is symmetric about the real axis. The image is obtained using MATLAB R2021a SOFTWARE. The region inside the red colour curve denotes the image of unit disk D under the mapping K ( z ) = 1 + s i n z and the region inside the green colour curve denotes the image of unit disk D under the mapping g λ ( z ) . The images of unit disk under K ( z ) and g λ ( z ) for different values of λ and a in the range specified are given in Figure 2, Figure 3 and Figure 4.
  Remark 1. 
For λ = 0 , the class H ( λ ) reduces to the class S s studied by Zhang and Tang [25].
  Lemma 1 
([32]). If p P is of the form (2) with R e ( p ( z ) ) > 0 ( z D ) , then
  • ( i ) 2 p 2 = p 1 2 + ( 4 p 1 2 ) x ,
  • ( i i ) 4 p 3 = p 1 3 + 2 ( 4 p 1 2 ) p 1 x ( 4 p 1 2 ) p 1 x 2 + 2 ( 4 p 1 2 ) ( 1 | x | 2 ) z ,
for some complex number x , z satisfying | x | 1 a n d | z | 1 .
  Lemma 2 
([33]). If p P , then for all m , n N ,
| μ p n p m p m + n | 2 , 0 μ 1 2 | 2 μ 1 | , elsewhere .
  Lemma 3 
([34]). If p P , then
| p 2 p 1 2 2 | 2 | p 1 2 | 2 .
Finally, we recall that if f A and g ( z ) = e i θ f ( e i θ z ) , θ R then, g A . It can be easily seen that H ( λ ) and the functionals | a 4 a 2 a 3 | , det ( T ( 2 , 1 ) f ) , det ( T ( 3 , 1 ) ( f ) ) , | H 2 1 ( f ) | , | H 2 2 ( f ) | and | H 3 1 ( f ) | are rotationally invariant. Due to this condition, without loss of generality, we may assume that the second coefficient, namely p 1 , is positive and p 1 [ 0 , 2 ] is used in all considerations.

3. Coefficient Estimates

In the following result, we find the coefficient bounds for f H ( λ ) .
  Theorem 1. 
If f of the form (1) is in H ( λ ) , then, for λ 0 ,
| a 2 | 1 1 + 2 λ ,
| a 3 | 1 2 ( 1 + 3 λ ) ,
| a 4 | 1 3 ( 1 + 4 λ ) 1 + 102 λ 2 + 37 λ + 2 18 3 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) if λ [ 0 , 5 8 ] 1 3 ( 1 + 4 λ ) 1 + 54 λ 2 + 13 λ 6 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) if λ > 5 8 ,
| a 5 | 3 ( 1 + 4 λ ) 8 ( 1 + 3 λ ) ( 1 + 5 λ ) .
The first two bounds are the best possible.
  Proof. 
Let the function f H ( λ ) . Then, for some p P , we can write
z f ( z ) + λ z 2 f ( z ) f ( z ) = 1 + s i n p ( z ) 1 p ( z ) + 1 .
From the above equality, we have
  z + n = 2 ( 1 + ( n 1 ) λ ) n a n z n   = z + p 1 2 + a 2 z 2 + p 2 2 p 1 2 4 + p 1 2 a 2 + a 3 z 3 + ( p 3 2 + 5 p 1 3 48 p 1 p 2 2 +   p 2 2 p 1 2 4 a 2 + p 1 2 a 3 + a 4 ) z 4 + ( p 4 2 p 1 p 3 2 + 5 p 1 2 p 2 16 p 2 2 4 p 1 4 32   + p 3 2 + 5 p 1 3 48 p 1 p 2 2 a 2 + p 2 2 p 1 2 4 a 3 + p 1 2 a 4 + a 5 ) z 5 + .
Equating the coefficients of z n on both sides, we obtain
a 2 = p 1 2 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ,
a 3 = 1 2 ( 1 + 3 λ ) p 2 2 λ p 1 2 2 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ,
a 4 = 1 3 ( 1 + 4 λ ) p 3 2 p 1 p 2 ( 24 λ 2 + 12 λ + 1 ) 8 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) + p 1 3 ( 30 λ 2 + λ 1 ) 48 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) ,
  a 5 = 1 4 ( 1 + 5 λ ) [ p 4 2 p 1 p 3 ( 24 λ 2 + 11 λ + 1 ) 8 ( 1 + 4 λ ) ( 1 + 2 λ ) p 2 2 ( 1 + 6 λ ) 8 ( 1 + 3 λ ) p 1 2 p 2 ( 360 λ 3 + 180 λ 2 + 18 λ + 1 ) 48 ( 1 + 4 λ ) ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) p 1 4 ( 216 λ 3 48 λ 2 43 λ 5 ) 288 ( 1 + 4 λ ) ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) ] .
Since | p n | 2 (see [35]) from (9), we have
| a 2 | 1 1 + 2 λ .
Applying Lemma 2 to (10), we obtain
| a 3 | 1 2 ( 1 + 3 λ ) .
Now, by rearranging the terms and making use of triangle inequality, (11) becomes
| a 4 | 1 3 ( 1 + 4 λ ) [ 1 2 | ( 24 λ 2 + 12 λ + 1 ) p 1 p 2 3 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) p 3 | +   | p 1 p 2 ( 24 λ 2 + 12 λ + 1 ) 24 ( 1 + 3 λ ) ( 1 + 2 λ ) + p 1 3 ( 30 λ 2 + λ 1 ) 48 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) | ] .
In virtue of Lemma 2, the above reduces to
| a 4 | 1 3 ( 1 + 4 λ ) 1 + | p 1 p 2 ( 24 λ 2 + 12 λ + 1 ) 24 ( 1 + 3 λ ) ( 1 + 2 λ ) + p 1 3 ( 30 λ 2 + λ 1 ) 48 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) | .
Applying Lemma 1 and Lemma 3, and letting p 1 = p , p [ 0 , 2 ] , we have
  | a 4 | 1 3 ( 1 + 4 λ ) 1 + p ( 24 λ 2 + 12 λ + 1 ) 12 ( 1 + 3 λ ) ( 1 + 2 λ ) + p 3 ( 30 λ 2 + λ 1 ) 48 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) : = F 1 ( p , λ ) .
Now,
F 1 p = 1 3 ( 1 + 4 λ ) ( 24 λ 2 + 12 λ + 1 ) 12 ( 1 + 3 λ ) ( 1 + 2 λ ) + p 2 ( 30 λ 2 + λ 1 ) 16 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) .
For λ [ 0 , 5 8 ] , we see that F 1 p > 0 for p [ 0 , 2 3 ) and F 1 p < 0 for p ( 2 3 , 2 ] . This implies that F 1 ( p , λ ) increases in [ 0 , 2 3 ) , decreases in ( 2 3 , 2 ] and the maximum value of F 1 ( p , λ ) occurs at p = 2 3 .
Therefore,
| a 4 | F 1 ( 2 3 , λ ) = 1 3 ( 1 + 4 λ ) 1 + 102 λ 2 + 37 λ + 2 18 3 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) .
For λ > 5 8 , we see that F 1 p > 0 for p [ 0 , 2 ] and the maximum value of F 1 ( p , λ ) occurs at p = 2 .
Therefore,
| a 4 | F 1 ( 2 , λ ) = 1 3 ( 1 + 4 λ ) 1 + 54 λ 2 + 13 λ 6 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) .
After a suitable rearrangement of terms in (12), applying the triangle inequality followed by Lemma 2, we have
| a 5 | 1 4 ( 1 + 5 λ ) [ 1 + | p 1 4 ( 216 λ 3 48 λ 2 43 λ 5 ) 288 ( 1 + 4 λ ) ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) p 2 2 ( 1 + 6 λ ) 8 ( 1 + 3 λ ) p 1 2 p 2 ( 360 λ 3 + 180 λ 2 + 18 λ + 1 ) 48 ( 1 + 4 λ ) ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) | ] .  
By making use of Lemma 1 and letting p 1 = p , p [ 0 , 2 ] , we obtain
  | a 5 | 1 4 ( 1 + 5 λ ) [ 1 + | p 4 ( 216 λ 3 48 λ 2 43 λ 5 ) 288 ( 1 + 4 λ ) ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) p 2 ( 360 λ 3 + 180 λ 2 + 18 λ + 1 ) 24 ( 1 + 4 λ ) ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) ( 1 + 6 λ ) 2 ( 1 + 3 λ ) | ] : = 1 4 ( 1 + 5 λ ) ( 1 + | F 2 ( p , λ ) | ) .  
By the second derivative test, we see that F 2 ( p , λ ) attains the maximum at p = 0 .
Thus,
| a 5 | 3 ( 1 + 4 λ ) 8 ( 1 + 3 λ ) ( 1 + 5 λ ) .
The equality for the bounds given in (13) and (14) is obtained by taking
z f n ( z ) + λ z 2 f n ( z ) f n ( z ) = 1 + s i n ( ω ( z ) ) n 1 .
For the given functions
f 2 ( z ) = z + z 2 1 + 2 λ , n = 2 ,
f 3 ( z ) = z + z 3 2 ( 1 + 3 λ ) , n = 3 .
The proof of our theorem is complete. □
For the choice of λ = 0 , the above theorem reduces to the results of Zhang and Tang [25], as given in the following corollary.
  Corollary 1 
([25]). If f of the form (1) is in S s , then | a 2 | 1 ,   | a 3 | 1 2 ,   | a 4 | 0.344 ,   | a 5 | 3 8 .

4. Hermitian Toeplitz Determinant

In this section, the upper and lower bounds for det ( T ( 2 , 1 ) ( f ) ) and det ( T ( 3 , 1 ) ( f ) ) for f H ( λ ) are estimated.
  Theorem 2. 
If f of the form (1) is in H ( λ ) , then, for λ 0 ,
1 1 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 det ( T ( 2 , 1 ) ( f ) ) 1 .
The bounds are sharp.
  Proof. 
Consider det T 2 , 1 ( f ) = 1 | a 2 | 2 .
From (9), we have
det T 2 , 1 ( f ) = 1 p 1 2 4 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 .
Since | p 1 | 2 (see in [35]), it is observed that
1 p 1 2 4 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 1 and 1 p 1 2 4 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 1 1 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 .
Therefore,
1 1 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 det T 2 , 1 ( f ) 1 ,
which gives the desired result.
The upper bound is sharp for f 0 ( z ) = z , and the lower bound is sharp for
f 1 ( z ) = z + 1 1 + 2 λ z 2 .
For λ = 0 we have the following corollary due to Surya Giri and Sivaprasad Kumar [30].
  Corollary 2 
([30]). If f of the form (1) is in S s , then 0 det ( T ( 2 , 1 ) ( f ) ) 1 .
  Theorem 3. 
If f of the form (1) is in H ( λ ) , then, for λ 0 ,
σ 1 ( λ ) det ( T 3 , 1 ( f ) ) 1 ,
where
  σ 1 ( λ ) = 1 48 λ 2 + 30 λ + 5 λ + 5 4 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 3 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2 .
  Proof. 
Consider
det ( T 3 , 1 ( f ) ) = 2 R e ( a 2 2 a 3 ¯ ) 2 | a 2 | 2 | a 3 | 2 + 1 .
Using (9), (10), and Lemma 1,
2 R e ( a 2 2 a 3 ¯ ) = 1 16 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 ( 1 + 3 λ ) p 1 4 1 + 2 λ + p 1 2 ( 4 p 1 2 ) R e ( x ¯ ) .
Now, from (9),
2 | a 2 | 2 = p 1 2 2 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 .
Further, using (10) and Lemma 1,
| a 3 | 2 = 1 16 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2 [ p 1 4 4 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 + ( 4 p 1 ) 2 | x | 2 4 + 2 ( R e ( x ¯ ) ) ( 4 p 1 2 ) p 1 2 4 λ p 1 2 ( 4 p 1 2 ) | x | ( 1 + 2 λ ) ] .
Substituting (20)–(22) in (19), we obtain
det ( T 3 , 1 ( f ) ) = 1 + 1 16 ( 1 + 2 λ 2 ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) p 1 4 1 + 2 λ + p 1 2 ( 4 p 1 ) 2 R e ( x ¯ ) p 1 2 2 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2   1 16 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2 [ p 1 4 4 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 + ( 4 p 1 ) 2 | x | 2 4 + 2 ( R e ( x ¯ ) ) ( 4 p 1 2 ) p 1 2 4 λ p 1 2 ( 4 p 1 2 ) | x | ( 1 + 2 λ ) ] : = F ( p 1 2 , | x | , R e ( x ¯ ) , λ ) .
Since | R e ( x ¯ ) | | x | , from (22) we obtain
det ( T 3 , 1 ( f ) ) F ( p 1 2 , | x | , | x | , λ ) and det ( T 3 , 1 ( f ) ) F ( p 1 2 , | x | , | x | , λ ) .
Letting p 1 2 : = t [ 0 , 4 ] and | x | : = y [ 0 , 1 ] , we have
det ( T 3 , 1 ( f ) ) 1 + 1 16 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 ( 1 + 3 λ ) t 2 1 + 2 λ + t ( 4 t ) y t 2 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2   1 16 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2 [ t 2 4 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 + ( 4 t ) 2 y 2 4 + 2 y t ( 4 t ) 4 λ t ( 4 t ) y ( 1 + 2 λ ) ] : = F ( t , y , λ )
and
det ( T 3 , 1 ( f ) ) 1 + 1 16 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 ( 1 + 3 λ ) t 2 1 + 2 λ t ( 4 t ) y t 2 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2   1 16 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2 [ t 2 4 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 + ( 4 t ) 2 y 2 4 2 y t ( 4 t ) 4 + λ t ( 4 t ) y ( 1 + 2 λ ) ] : = G ( t , y , λ ) .
We observe that
F ( 0 , y , λ ) = 1 y 2 16 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2 1 ,
F ( 4 , y , λ ) = 1 48 λ 2 + 30 λ + 5 4 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 3 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2 1 ,
  F ( t , 0 , λ ) = 1 + t 2 16 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 3 ( 1 + 3 λ ) t 4 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 t 2 64 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2 1
and
F ( t , 1 , λ ) = 1 + 1 16 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 ( 1 + 3 λ ) t 2 1 + 2 λ + t ( 4 t ) t 2 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2   1 16 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2 t 2 4 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 + ( 4 t ) 2 4 + 2 t ( 4 t ) 4 λ t ( 4 t ) ( 1 + 2 λ ) 1 .
By the second derivative test, we see that there are no critical points for F ( t , y , λ ) in the domain ( 0 , 4 ) × ( 0 , 1 ) .
Therefore,
max ( 0 t 4 , 0 y 1 ) F ( t , y , λ ) = 1 .
By a similarly proceeding, we obtain the minimum of G ( t , y , λ ) as
min ( 0 t 4 , 0 y 1 ) G ( t , y , λ ) = 1 48 λ 2 + 30 λ + 5 4 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 3 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2 : = σ 1 ( λ ) .
Hence,
σ 1 ( λ ) det ( T 3 , 1 ( f ) ) 1 ,
which completes the proof. □
For λ = 0 , we have the following corollary obtained by Surya Giri and Sivaprasad Kumar [30].
  Corollary 3 
([30]). If f of the form (1) is in S s , then 1 4 det ( T 3 , 1 ( f ) ) 1 .

5. Hankel Determinant

In this section, the upper bounds for the second- and third-order Hankel determinants for f H ( λ ) are determined.
  Theorem 4. 
If f of the form (1) is in H ( λ ) , then, for λ 0 ,
| H 2 1 ( f ) | = | a 3 a 2 2 | 1 2 ( 1 + 3 λ ) .
  Proof. 
From (9) and (10), we have
| H 2 1 ( f ) | = | a 3 a 2 2 | = ( 2 λ 2 + 4 λ + 1 ) 4 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 ( 1 + 3 λ ) p 1 2 p 2 4 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 1 4 ( 1 + 3 λ ) ( 2 λ 2 + 4 λ + 1 ) ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 p 1 2 p 2 .
In view of Lemma 2, the above inequality becomes
| H 2 1 ( f ) | 1 2 ( 1 + 3 λ ) ,
which gives the desired result. □
For λ = 0 , the above Theorem 4 reduces to the following corollary, obtained earlier by Zhang and Tang [25].
  Corollary 4 
([25]). If f of the form (1) is in S s , then | H 2 1 ( f ) | 1 2 .
  Theorem 5. 
If f of the form (1) is in H ( λ ) , then for, λ 0 ,
| H 2 2 ( f ) | 1 4 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2 .
  Proof. 
Consider
  | H 2 2 ( f ) | = | a 2 a 4 a 3 2 | .
From (9)–(11), we have
| a 2 a 4 a 3 2 | = | p 1 p 3 12 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) p 1 2 p 2 ( 6 λ 2 + 6 λ + 1 ) 48 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2 + p 1 4 ( 30 λ 2 17 λ 1 ) 48 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) | : = | F ( p 1 , p 2 , p 3 , λ ) | .
In virtue of Lemma 1, the above reduces to
F ( p 1 , p 2 , p 3 , λ ) = p 1 4 + 2 p 1 2 x ( 4 p 1 2 ) ( 4 p 1 2 ) p 1 2 x 2 48 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) + p 1 ( 4 p 1 2 ) ( 1 | x | 2 ) z 24 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ )   ( p 1 2 x ( 4 p 1 2 ) ( 6 λ 2 + 6 λ + 1 ) 3 p 1 4 ( 30 λ 2 17 λ 1 ) ) 288 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2   p 1 4 ( 6 λ 2 + 6 λ + 1 ) 96 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2 ( p 1 4 + x 2 ( 4 p 1 2 ) 2 64 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2 2 p 1 2 x ( 4 p 1 2 ) 48 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2   : = F ( p 1 , x , λ ) .
Letting p 1 = p , p [ 0 , 2 ] , | x | = t , t [ 0 , 1 ] , we have
F ( p 1 , x , λ ) = p 4 + 2 p 2 t ( 4 p 2 ) ( 4 p 2 ) p 2 t 2 48 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) + p ( 4 p 2 ) ( 1 t 2 ) z 24 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ )   ( p 2 t ( 4 p 2 ) ( 6 λ 2 + 6 λ + 1 ) 3 p 4 ( 30 λ 2 17 λ 1 ) ) 288 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2   p 4 ( 6 λ 2 + 6 λ + 1 ) 96 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2 ( p 4 + x 2 ( 4 p 2 ) 2 64 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2 2 p 2 x ( 4 p 2 ) 48 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2   : = F ( p , t , λ ) .
For any t ( 0 , 1 ) , p ( 0 , 2 ) and λ 0 , we have
F t = 4 t ( 4 p 2 ) 48 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) + t ( 4 p 2 ) 2 32 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2 + 2 p 2 λ ( 4 p 2 ) 48 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2 ( 1 + 2 λ ) > 0 .
This implies that F ( p , t , λ ) is an increasing function with respect to t, for t [ 0 , 1 ] . By the second derivative test, we see that there are no critical points for F ( p , t , λ ) in (0,1) and F ( p , t , λ ) attains a maximum at t = 1 and
F ( p , 1 , λ ) = ( 12 λ 2 22 λ 5 ) p 4 576 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 ( 1 + 3 λ 2 ) + ( 4 p 2 ) 2 64 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2 + 2 p 2 λ ( 4 p 2 ) 48 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2 ( 1 + 2 λ ) : = G ( p , λ ) .
Now, by applying the second derivative test, we see that G attains the maximum at p = 0 and, therefore,
| a 2 a 4 a 3 2 | G ( 0 , λ ) = 1 4 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 2 ,
which completes the proof. □
For λ = 0 , the above Theorem 5 reduces to the result of Zhang and Tang [25] given by the following corollary.
  Corollary 5 
([25]). If f of the form (1) is in S s , then | a 2 a 4 a 3 2 | 1 4 .
  Theorem 6. 
If f of the form (1) is in H ( λ ) , then, for λ 0 ,
| a 4 a 2 a 3 | 1 3 ( 1 + 4 λ ) .
  Proof. 
From (9)–(11), we have
| a 4 a 2 a 3 | = | ( 24 λ 2 + 24 λ + 4 ) p 1 p 2 24 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) ( 1 + 4 λ ) ( 60 λ 3 + 104 λ 2 + 17 λ 1 ) p 1 3 144 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 ( 1 + 3 λ ) ( 1 + 4 λ ) p 3 6 ( 1 + 4 λ ) | .
Using Lemma 1, we have
  | a 4 a 2 a 3 | = | ( 24 λ 2 + 24 λ + 4 ) p 1 ( p 1 2 + x ( 4 p 1 2 ) ) ) 24 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) ( 1 + 4 λ ) ( 60 λ 3 + 104 λ 2 + 17 λ 1 ) p 1 3 144 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 ( 1 + 3 λ ) ( 1 + 4 λ )   p 1 3 + 2 p 1 x ( 4 p 1 2 ) ( 4 p 1 2 ) p 1 x 2 + 2 ( 4 p 1 2 ) ( 1 | x | 2 ) z 24 ( 1 + 4 λ ) | .
Letting p 1 = p , p [ 0 , 2 ] and | x | = t , x [ 0 , 1 ] , we have
  | a 4 a 2 a 3 | | ( 24 λ 2 + 24 λ + 4 ) p ( p 2 + t ( 4 p 2 ) ) 24 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) ( 1 + 4 λ ) ( 60 λ 3 + 104 λ 2 + 17 λ 1 ) p 3 144 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 ( 1 + 3 λ ) ( 1 + 4 λ )   p 3 + 2 p t ( 4 p 2 ) ( 4 p 2 ) p t 2 + 2 ( 4 p 2 ) ( 1 t 2 ) z 24 ( 1 + 4 λ ) | : = | H ( p , t , λ ) | .
For any t ( 0 , 1 ) , p ( 0 , 2 ) and λ 0 , we have
H t = ( 4 p 2 ) ( p 2 ) t 24 ( 1 + 4 λ ) < 0 , t ( 0 , 1 ) .
This implies H ( p , t , λ ) is a decreasing function with respect to t, and by the second derivative test, we see that there are no critical points in (0,1), and H ( p , t , λ ) attains the maximum at t = 0 and
H ( p , 0 , λ ) = ( 12 λ 3 + 6 λ 2 + 37 λ + 7 ) P 3 144 ( 1 + 2 λ ) 2 ( 1 + 3 λ ) ( 1 + 4 λ ) + 4 p 2 12 ( 1 + 4 λ ) : = K ( p , λ ) .
By applying the second derivative test, we see that K ( p , λ ) attains the maximum at p = 0 and
| a 4 a 2 a 3 | K ( 0 , λ ) = 1 3 ( 1 + 4 λ ) ,
which completes the proof. □
For λ = 0 , the above Theorem 6 reduces to the following corollary, obtained earlier by Zhang and Tang [25].
  Corollary 6 
([25]). If f of the form (1) is in S s , then
| a 4 a 2 a 3 | 1 3 .
  Remark 2. 
(i)    From (14) and (26), we have
| a 3 | | H 2 2 ( f ) | 1 8 ( 1 + 3 λ ) 3 : = K 1 ( λ ) .
 (ii) 
From (15), (16), and (27), we have
| a 4 | | a 4 a 2 a 3 | 1 9 ( 1 + 4 λ ) 2 1 + 102 λ 2 + 37 λ + 2 18 3 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) if λ [ 0 , 5 8 ] 1 9 ( 1 + 4 λ ) 2 1 + 54 λ 2 + 13 λ 6 ( 1 + 2 λ ) ( 1 + 3 λ ) if λ > 5 8 : = K 2 ( λ ) .
 (iii) 
From (17) and (24), we have
| a 5 | | H 2 1 ( f ) | 3 8 ( 1 + 3 λ ) ( 1 + 5 λ ) : = K 3 ( λ ) .
  Theorem 7. 
If f of the form (1) is in H ( λ ) , then, for λ 0 ,
| H 3 1 ( f ) | K 1 ( λ ) + K 2 ( λ ) + K 3 ( λ ) .
  Proof. 
Consider
| H 3 1 ( f ) | = a 3 | H 2 2 ( f ) | a 4 ( a 4 a 2 a 3 ) + a 5 | H 2 1 ( f ) | | a 3 | | H 2 2 ( f ) | + | a 4 | | a 4 a 2 a 3 | + | a 5 | | H 2 1 ( f ) | .
From Remark 2, we obtain the required result. □
For λ = 0 in the above theorem, we obtain the following corollary.
  Corollary 7. 
If f of the form ( 1 ) is in S s , then
| H 3 1 ( f ) | 11 18 + 3 24 .
  Remark 3. 
The sharpness of the results in Theorems 3–7 are to be examined.

6. Conclusions

In the present investigation, we determined the coefficient estimates, bounds for the second and third-order Hankel determinants for a new subclass H ( λ ) of analytic functions defined by subordination to a domain involving the sine function. Further, bounds for the second and third-order Hermtian Toeplitz determinants for the class H ( λ ) are estimated. However, the sharpness of some of the results obtained are yet to be explored. It would be intriguing to determine the estimates of | H 4 1 ( f ) | and d e t ( T 4 , 1 ( f ) ) for the class H ( λ ) . Additionally, an attempt to apply these observations in areas under the broad spectra of Physics and Engineering will serve as a future scope of this study.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, T.T., S.K. and K.S.; Methodology, S.K., K.S. and T.V.S.; Software, S.K.; Validation, T.T., D.B. and K.S.; Formal analysis, T.T., D.B. and K.S.; Investigation, T.T., S.K., D.B. and T.V.S.; Writing—original draft, S.K. and K.S.; Writing—review and editing, T.T., K.S. and T.V.S.; Supervision, D.B., K.S. and T.V.S. All authors have read and approved the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

No data were used to support this study.

Acknowledgments

The authors are thankful to the reviewers for their invaluable comments and suggestions which have helped to revise and improve the quality and presentation of the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Ma, W.; Minda, D. A unified treatment of some special classes of univalent functions. In Proceedings of the Conference on Complex Analysis; International Press Inc.: Somerville, MA, USA; New York, NY, USA, 1992; pp. 157–169. [Google Scholar]
  2. Darus, M.; Shanmugam, T.N.; Sivasubramanian, S. Fekete-Szegö inequality for a certain class of analytic functions. Mathematica 2007, 49, 29–34. [Google Scholar]
  3. Noonan, J.W.; Thomas, D.K. On the second Hankel determinant of areally mean p-valent functions. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 1976, 223, 337–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Pommerenke, C. On the coefficients and Hankel determinants of univalent functions. J. Lond. Math. Soc. 1966, 41, 111–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Hayman, W.K. On the second Hankel determinant of mean univalent functions. Proc. London Math. Soc. 1968, 18, 77–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Janteng, A.; Halim, S.A.; Darus, M. Hankel determinant for starlike and convex functions. Int. J. Math. Anal. 2007, 1, 619–625. [Google Scholar]
  7. 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. 2018, 97, 435–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Arif, M.; Rani, L.; Raza, M.; Zaprawa, P. Fourth Hankel determinant for the family of functions with bounded turning. Bull. Korean Math. Soc. 2018, 55, 1703–1711. [Google Scholar]
  9. Sokół, J.; Thomas, D.K. Further results on a class of starlike functions related to the Bernoulli lemniscate. Houston J. Math. 2018, 44, 83–95. [Google Scholar]
  10. Vijayalakshmi, S.P.; Sudharsan, T.V.; Breaz, D.; Subramanian, K.G. Bounds on the third order Hankel determinant for certain subclasses of analytic functions. An. Ştiinţ. Univ. Ovidius Constanţa Ser. Mat. 2017, 25, 199–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Cho, N.E.; Kumar, V. Initial coefficients and fourth Hankel determinant for certain analytic functions. Miskolc. Math. Notes 2020, 21, 763–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Breaz, D.; Cătaş, A.; Cotîrlă, L.T. On the upper bound of the third Hankel determinant for certain class of analytic functions related with exponential function. An. Ştiinţ. Univ. Ovidius Constanţa Ser. Mat. 2022, 30, 75–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Hartman, P.; Wintner, A. The spectra of Toeplitz’s matrices. Amer. J. Math. 1954, 76, 867–882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Stoica, P.; Moses, R.L. Spectral Analysis of Signals; Prentice Hall: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  15. Poisel, R.A. Digital Comunications: Fundamentals and Applications; Pearson Education: London, UK, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  16. Firoz Ali, M.D.; Thomas, D.K.; Vasudevarao, A. Toeplitz determinants whose elements are the coefficients of analytic and univalent functions. Bull. Aust. Math. Soc. 2018, 97, 253–264. [Google Scholar]
  17. Cudna, K.; Kwon, O.S.; Lecko, A.; Sim, Y.J.; Śmiarowska, B. The second and third-order Hermitian Toeplitz determinants for starlike and convex functions of order α. Bol. Soc. Mat. Mex. 2020, 26, 361–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Dziok, J.; Raina, R.K.; Sokół, J. Certain results for a class of convex functions related to a shell-like curve connected with Fibonacci numbers. Comput. Math. Appl. 2011, 61, 2605–2613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Dziok, J.; Raina, R.K.; Sokół, J. On a class of starlike functions related to a shell-like curve connected with Fibonacci numbers. Math. Comput. Model. 2013, 57, 1203–1211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Kumar, V.; Rekha, S.; Cho, N.E. Sharp estimation of Hermitian-Toeplitz determinants for Janowski type starlike and convex functions. Miskolc. Math. Notes 2020, 21, 939–952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Lecko, A.; Śmiarowska, B. The third-order Hermitian Toeplitz determinant for some classes of analytic functions. J. Math. Inequal. 2023, 17, 931–942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Gurusamy, P.; Jayasankar, R.; Sivasubramanian, S. The Second and Third Order Hermitian Toeplitz Determinants for Some Subclasses of Analytic Functions Associated with Exponential Function, Synergies in Analysis, Discrete Mathematics, Soft Computing and Modelling; Springer Nature: Singapore, 2023; pp. 1–16. [Google Scholar]
  23. Cho, N.E.; Kumar, V.; Kumar, S.S.; Ravichandran, V. Radius problems for starlike functions associated with the sine function. Bull. Iran. Math. Soc. 2019, 45, 213–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Arif, M.; Raza, M.; Tang, H.; Hussain, S.; Khan, H. Hankel determinant of order three for familiar subsets of analytic functions related with sine function. Open Math. 2019, 17, 1615–1630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Zhang, H.Y.; Tang, H. A study of fourth-order Hankel determinants for starlike functions connected with the sine function. J. Funct. Spaces 2021, 2021, 9991460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Zulfiqar, F.; Malik, S.N.; Raza, M.; Ali, M.S. Fourth-order Hankel determinants and Toeplitz determinants for convex functions connected with sine functions. J. Math. 2022, 2022, 2871511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Khana, M.G.; Ahmadb, B.; Murugusundaramoorthy, G.; Mashwania, W.K.; Yalçın, S.; Shabae, T.G.; Salleh, Z. Third Hankel determinant and Zalcman functional for a class of starlike functions with respect to symmetric points related with sine function. J. Math. Computer Sci. 2022, 25, 29–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Khan, B.; Aldawish, I.; Araci, S.; Khan, M.G. Third Hankel Determinant for the Logarithmic Coefficients of Starlike Functions Associated with Sine Function. Fractal Fract. 2022, 6, 261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Alahmade, A.; Zeeshan Mujahid, Z.; Tawfiq, F.M.O.; Khan, B.; Khan, N.; Tchier, F. Third Hankel Determinant for Subclasses of Analytic and m-Fold Symmetric Functions Involving Cardioid Domain and Sine Function. Symmetry 2023, 15, 2039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Giri, S.; Sivaprasad Kumar, S. Hermitian-Toeplitz determinants for certain univalent functions. Anal. Math. Phys. 2023, 13, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kamali, M.; Riskulava Alina, A. On the upper bounds of Hankel determinants for some subclasses of univalent functions associated with sine functions. Int. J. Optim. Control. Theor. Appl. 2024, 14, 41–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Libera, R.J.; Złotkiewicz, E. Coefficient bounds for the inverse of a function with derivative in P. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 1983, 87, 251–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ravichandran, V.; Verma, S. Bound for the fifth coefficient of certain starlike functions. Comptes Rendus Math. 2015, 353, 505–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Pommerenke, C. Univalent functions. In Mathematik, Lehrbucher; Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht: Gottingen, Germany, 1975. [Google Scholar]
  35. Duren, P.L. Univalent functions. In Grundlehren Mathematischen Wissenschaften, 259 Fundamental Principles of Mathematical Sciences; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1983. [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. The image of K ( D ) .
Figure 1. The image of K ( D ) .
Symmetry 17 00362 g001
Figure 2. λ = 0 , a = 1 10 .
Figure 2. λ = 0 , a = 1 10 .
Symmetry 17 00362 g002
Figure 3. λ = 5 , a = 1 10 6 .
Figure 3. λ = 5 , a = 1 10 6 .
Symmetry 17 00362 g003
Figure 4. λ = 10 , a = 1 10 11 .
Figure 4. λ = 10 , a = 1 10 11 .
Symmetry 17 00362 g004
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Thulasiram, T.; Kalaiselvan, S.; Breaz, D.; Suchithra, K.; Sudharsan, T.V. Bounds for Hermitian Toeplitz and Hankel Determinants for a Certain Subclass of Analytic Functions Related to the Sine Function. Symmetry 2025, 17, 362. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym17030362

AMA Style

Thulasiram T, Kalaiselvan S, Breaz D, Suchithra K, Sudharsan TV. Bounds for Hermitian Toeplitz and Hankel Determinants for a Certain Subclass of Analytic Functions Related to the Sine Function. Symmetry. 2025; 17(3):362. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym17030362

Chicago/Turabian Style

Thulasiram, Thatamsetty, Sekar Kalaiselvan, Daniel Breaz, Kuppuswamy Suchithra, and Thirumalai Vinjimur Sudharsan. 2025. "Bounds for Hermitian Toeplitz and Hankel Determinants for a Certain Subclass of Analytic Functions Related to the Sine Function" Symmetry 17, no. 3: 362. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym17030362

APA Style

Thulasiram, T., Kalaiselvan, S., Breaz, D., Suchithra, K., & Sudharsan, T. V. (2025). Bounds for Hermitian Toeplitz and Hankel Determinants for a Certain Subclass of Analytic Functions Related to the Sine Function. Symmetry, 17(3), 362. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym17030362

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop