Abstract
It is very well-known that the special functions and integral operators play a vital role in the research of applied and mathematical sciences. In this paper, our aim is to present sufficient conditions for the families of integral operators containing the normalized forms of the Miller–Ross functions such that they can be univalent in the open unit disk. Moreover, we find the convexity order of these operators. In proof of results, we use some differential inequalities related with Miller–Ross functions and well-known lemmas. The various results, which are established in this paper, are presumably new, and their importance is illustrated by several interesting consequences and examples.
Keywords:
analytic functions; Miller–Ross functions; univalence; convexity; special functions; univalent functions; integral operators MSC:
30C45; 33C10
1. Introduction
Special functions are mathematical functions that lack a precise formal definition, yet they hold significant importance in various fields such as mathematical analysis, physics, functional analysis, and other branches of applied science. Despite their lack of a rigid definition, these functions are widely utilized due to their valuable properties and widespread applicability. Many elementary functions, such as exponential, trigonometric, and hyperbolic functions, are also treated as special functions. The theory of special functions has earned the attention of many researchers throughout the nineteenth century and has been involved in many emerging fields. Indeed, numerous special functions, including the generalized hypergeometric functions, have emerged as a result of solving specific differential equations. These functions have proven to be instrumental in addressing complex mathematical problems, showcasing their remarkable utility in various domains. The geometric properties such as univalence and convexity of special functions and their integral operators are important in complex analysis. Several researchers have dedicated their efforts to investigating integral operators that incorporate special functions such as the Bessel, Lommel, Struve, Wright, and Mittag–Leffler functions. These studies have focused on examining the geometric properties of these operators within various classes of univalent functions. By exploring the interplay between these integral operators and special functions, researchers have deepened our understanding of the behavior and characteristics of univalent functions in different contexts. It is noteworthy that contemporary researchers in the field are actively pursuing the development of novel theoretical methodologies and techniques that combine observational results with various practical applications. Therefore, the primary objective of this paper is to investigate the criteria for univalence and convexity of integral operators that employ Miller–Ross functions.
Let denote the class of analytic functions ℏ of the form
in the open unit disk and satisfy the standard normalization condition:
We denote by the subclass of which are also univalent in . A function is convex of order if the following condition holds:
For , define
For (), the parameters () and we define the following three integral operators:
and
by
and
Here, we need to note that, many authors have studied the integral operators (1), (2) and (3) for some specific parameters as follows:
- (1)
- (Seenivasagan and Breaz []; see also [,]);
- (2)
- (Breaz and Breaz []);
- (3)
- (Breaz et al. []);
- (4)
- (Kim and Merkes []; see also Pfaltzgraff []);
- (5)
- (Pescar []);
- (6)
- (Breaz and Breaz []; see also []);
- (7)
- (Moldoveanu and Pascu []).
Furthermore, the specific integral operators via an obvious parametric changes of the classical Bessel function of order and of the first kind by Deniz et al. [] were introduced and they worked on the univalence condition of the related integral operators. In addition, the starlikeness, convexity and uniform convexity of integral operators containing these equivalent forms of were discussed by Raza et al. [] and Deniz []. Recently, some sufficient conditions for univalence of various linear fractional derivative operators containing the normalized forms of the similar parametric variation of were investigated by Al-Khrasani et al. []. Moreover, the theory of derivatives and integrals of an arbitrary complex or real order has been utilized not only in complex analysis, but also in the mathematical analysis and modeling of real-world problems in applied sciences (see, for example, [,]).
Inspired by the studies mentioned above, in the present paper, we work on some mappings and univalence and convexity conditions for the integral operators given by (1), (2) and (3), related to the following Miller–Ross function defined by
where is the incomplete gamma function (see []).
a solution of the following ordinary differential equation
With the help of the gamma function we obtain the following series form of :
where
The function does not belong to the class . The normalization form of the function is written as
where and
Recently, Eker and Ece [] and Şeker et al. [] studied geometric and characteristic properties of this function, respectively. Also, some problems as partial sums, coefficient inequalities, inclusion relations and neighborhoods for Miller-Ross function were studied by Kazımoğlu [,].
We note that by choosing particular values for and we obtain the following functions
and
where Erf is the error function.
Let for and Consider the functions defined by
Using the functions and the integral operators given by (1), (2) and (3), we define and as follows:
and
An extensive literature in geometric function theory dealing with the geometric properties of the integral operators using different types of special functions can be found. In 2010, some integral operators containing Bessel functions were studied by Baricz and Frasin []. They obtained some sufficient conditions for univalence of these operators. The convexity and strongly convexity of the integral operators given in [] were investigated by Arif and Raza [] and Frasin []. Deniz [] and Deniz et al. [] gave convexity and univalence conditions for integral operators involving generalized Bessel Functions, respectively. Between 2018 and 2020, Mahmood et al. [], Mahmood and his co-authors [] and Din and Yalçın [] investigated the certain geometric properties such as univalence, convexity, strongly starlikeness and strongly convexity of integral operators involving Struve functions. Recently, Din and Yalçın [] obtained some sufficients condidions on starlikeness, convexity and uniformly close-to-convexity of the modified Lommel function. Park et al. [] investigated univalence and convexity conditions for certain integral operators involving the Lommel function. Srivastava and his co-authors [] studied sufficient conditions for univalence of certain integral operators involving the normalized Mittag–Leffler functions. Oros [] studied geometric properties of certain classes of univalent functions using the classical Bernardi and Libera integral operators and the confluent (or Kummer) hypergeometric function. Very recently, Raza et al. [] obtained the necessary conditions for the univalence of integral operators containing the generalized Bessel function. Studies on this subject are still ongoing.
Motivated by the these works, we obtain some sufficient conditions for the operators (5), (6) and (7), in order to be univalent in . Moreover, we determine the order of the convexity of these integral operators. By using Mathematica (version 8.0), we give some graphics that support the main results.
2. A Set of Lemmas
The following lemmas will be required in our current research.
Lemma 1
(see Pescar []). Let α and β be complex number such that
If the function satisfies the following inequality:
for all then the function defined by
is in the class
Lemma 2
(see Pascu []). Let such that If satisfies the following inequality:
for all Then, for all such that
the function defined by (8) is in the class
Lemma 3.
Proof.
The inequalities (9) and (10) were proved by Eker and Ece []. On the other hand, by using the triangle inequality and the following inequality (see [])
we have
and
Using the inequality (14), it follows that
for . Finally, applying reverse triangle inequality, we conclude that
for . Next, by combining the inequalities (17) with (18), we can easily see that
This completes the proof. □
3. Univalence and Convexity Conditions for the Integral Operator in (5)
Firstly, we take into account the integral operator defined by (5).
Theorem 1.
Let and Also, let and be in such that
Assume that these numbers satisfy the following inequality:
where Then the function defined by (5) is in the class
Proof.
Let us define the function as follows:
First of all, we observe that since for all However, we also have
Taking the logarithmic derivative of both sides of (20), we get
and, from (10) and (13), we have
where Here, we have also used the fact that the functions
defined by
are decreasing and, consequently, we have
and
Therefore, from hypothesis of theorem we obtain
which imply that the function by Lemma 1. □
Theorem 2.
Let the parameters and be as in Theorem 1. Suppose that and that the following inequality holds true:
Then the function defined by (5) is in the class
Proof.
By Lemma 2, the inequality (24) imply that the function □
Theorem 3.
Let the parameters and be as in Theorem 1. Suppose that and that the following inequality holds true:
Then the function defined by (5) with is convex of order δ given by
Proof.
The inequality (22) and hypothesis of theorem show that
As a result, the function is convex of order
□
In Theorem 1 with and we can write the following corollary.
Corollary 1.
Let and ζ be in such that and If the inequality
holds true, then the function
is in the class
Example 1.
Normally, it is almost impossible to find the geometric properties (univalent, convex, starlike, etc.) of a complex function and especially integral operators with classical methods. However, from Corollary 1 (also from Figure 1) with and we can see that the function belongs to the class
Figure 1.
Image of under .
Setting and in the Theorem 1, we can get result below.
Corollary 2.
Let and ζ be in such that and If the inequality
holds, then the function
is in the class
From Theorem 3 with and we can get result below.
Corollary 3.
Let η and ζ be complex numbers such that
Then the function
is convex of order δ given by
Let and in the Theorem 3, then we get following result.
Corollary 4.
Let η and ζ be complex numbers such that
Then the function
is convex of order δ given by
4. Univalence and Convexity Conditions for the Integral Operator in (6)
In this section, we investigate the univalence and convexity properties for the integral operator defined by (6).
Theorem 4.
Let and Also, let and be in such that
Assume that these numbers satisfy the following inequality:
where Then the function defined by (6) is in the class
Proof.
Let us define the functions by
Then Differentiating both sides of (25) logarithmically, we get
and, from (11) and (12) in Lemma 3, we obtain
Here, since the functions
defined by
are decreasing, the inequalities
and
holds. Thus, we have
Using Lemma 1 with
the inequality (28) imply that the function □
Theorem 5.
Let the parameters and be as in Theorem 4. Suppose that and that the following inequality holds true:
Then the function defined by (6) is in the normalized univalent function class
Proof.
Let us consider the function as in (25). Therefore, from (26) and hypothesis of theorem we can easily see that
By Lemma 2, with and the inequality (29) imply that the function □
Theorem 6.
Let and Also, let and be in such that
Moreover, suppose that the following inequality holds true:
where Then the function defined by (6), is convex of order δ given by
From Theorem 4 with and we can get the following result.
Corollary 5.
Let η and ζ be in such that and If these numbers satisfy the inequality:
then the function
is in the class
Example 2.
From Corollary 5 with and we have
In reality, by a simple calculation, we get
It also holds true that for all (see Figure 2). Therefore, is a convex function [[], Vol. I, p. 142]. Thus it follows from [[], Vol. I, p. 142] that belongs to the class
Figure 2.
Image of under g.
From Theorem 4 with and we can get result below.
Corollary 6.
Let η and ζ be in such that and If these numbers satisfy the follwing inequality
then the function
is in the class
From Theorem 6 with and we can get the following result.
Corollary 7.
Let η and ζ be a complex numbers such that
Then the function defined by (30) is convex of order δ given by
From Theorem 6 with and we can get the following result.
Corollary 8.
Let η and ζ be a complex numbers such that
Then the function defined by (31) is convex of order δ given by
5. Univalence and Convexity Conditions for the Integral Operator in (7)
In this section, we derive the univalence and convexity results for the integral operator defined by (7).
Theorem 7.
Let and Also, let and be in such that
Assume that these numbers satisfy the following inequality:
where Then the function defined by (7) is in the class
Proof.
Let us define the function by
so that, obviously,
and
Now we differentiate (33) logarithmically and multiply by , we obtain
Hence, from (34) we have
which, in view of Lemma 1, implies that □
Theorem 8.
Let the parameters and be as in Theorem 7. Suppose that and that the following inequality holds true:
Then the function defined by (7) is in the class
Proof.
By using (34) we obtain
which, in view of Lemma 2, implies that □
Theorem 9.
Let and Also, let and be in such that Assume that these numbers satisfy the following inequality:
where Then the function defined by (7) with is convex of order δ given by
Proof.
From (34) and hypothesis of theorem, we obtain
Therefore, the function is convex of order □
From Theorem 7 with and we can get following result.
Corollary 9.
Let and ζ be in such that If these numbers satisfy the inequality:
then the function
is in the normalized univalent function class
Example 3.
From Corollary 9 with and we obtain
From Theorem 7 with and we can get result below.
Corollary 10.
Let and ζ be in such that and If these numbers satisfy the inequality
then the function
is in the normalized univalent function class
From Theorem 9 with and we have following result.
Corollary 11.
Let η and ζ be complex numbers such that
Then the function
is convex of order δ given by
From Theorem 9 with and we have following result.
Corollary 12.
Let η and ζ be complex numbers such that
Then the function
is convex of order δ given by
Example 4.
From Corollary 12 with and we get
is convex of order
6. Conclusions
In the present investigation, we first introduced certain families of integral operators by using the Miller–Ross function which, in particular, plays a very important role in the study of pure and applied mathematical sciences. Therefore, it is important to know the geometric properties of special functions and their integral operators. For this reason, we aim to study the criteria for the univalence and convexity of these integral operators that are defined by using Miller–Ross functions. The various results, which we established in this paper, are believed to be new, and their importance is illustrated by several interesting consequences and examples together with the associated graphical illustrations.
Hopefully, the original results contained here would stimulate researchers’ imagination and inspire them, just as all the operators introduced before in studies related to functions of a complex variable have done. Other geometric properties related to them could be investigated, and also they could prove useful in introducing special classes of functions based on those properties.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, S.K., E.D. and L.-I.C.; methodology, S.K., E.D. and L.-I.C.; software, S.K., E.D. and L.-I.C.; validation, E.D. and L.-I.C.; formal analysis, S.K., E.D. and L.-I.C.; investigation, S.K., E.D. and L.-I.C.; resources, S.K., E.D. and L.-I.C.; data curation, S.K., E.D. and L.-I.C.; writing-original draft preparation, S.K., E.D. and L.-I.C.; writing-review and editing, S.K., E.D. and L.-I.C.; visualization, S.K., E.D. and L.-I.C.; supervision, E.D. and L.-I.C.; project administration, E.D. and L.-I.C.; funding acquisition, L.-I.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Data Availability Statement
Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
- Seenivasagan, N.; Breaz, D. Certain sufficient conditions for univalence. General Math. 2002, 15, 7–15. [Google Scholar]
- Baricz, A.; Frasin, B.A. Univalence of integral operators involving Bessel functions. Appl. Math. Lett. 2002, 23, 371–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Srivastava, H.M.; Deniz, E.; Orhan, H. Some general univalence criteria for a family of integral operators. Appl. Math. Comput. 2002, 215, 3696–3701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Breaz, D.; Breaz, N. Univalence conditions for certain integral operators. Stud. Univ. Babeş-Bolyai Math. 2002, 47, 9–15. [Google Scholar]
- Breaz, D.; Owa, S.; Breaz, N. A new integral univalent operator. Acta Univ. Apulensis Math. Inform. 2002, 16, 11–16. [Google Scholar]
- Kim, Y.J.; Merkes, E.P. On an integral of powers of a spirallike function. Kyungpook Math. J. 2002, 12, 249–252. [Google Scholar]
- Pfaltzgraff, J.A. Univalence of the integral of (f′(z))λ. Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. 2002, 7, 254–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pescar, V. Univalence of certain integral operators. Acta Univ. Apulensis Math. Inform. 2002, 12, 43–48. [Google Scholar]
- Breaz, D.; Breaz, N. Univalence of an integral operator. Mathematica 2002, 47, 35–38. [Google Scholar]
- Breaz, D.; Breaz, N.; Srivastava, H.M. An extension of the univalent condition for a family of integral operators. Appl. Math. Lett. 2002, 22, 41–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moldoveanu, S.; Pascu, N.N. Integral operators which preserve the univalence. Mathematica 2002, 32, 159–166. [Google Scholar]
- Deniz, E.; Orhan, H.; Srivastava, H.M. Some sufficient conditions for univalence of certain families of integral operators involving generalized Bessel functions. Taiwanese J. Math. 2002, 15, 883–917. [Google Scholar]
- Raza, M.; Noreen, S.; Malik, S.N. Geometric properties of integral operators defined by Bessel functions. J. Inequal. Spec. Funct. 2002, 7, 34–48. [Google Scholar]
- Deniz, E. Convexity of integral operators involving generalized Bessel functions. Integral Transform. Spec. Funct. 2002, 24, 201–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Kharsani, H.A.; Al-Zahrani, A.M.; Al-Hajri, S.S.; Pogany, T.K. Univalence criteria for linear fractional differential operators associated with a generalized Bessel function. Math. Commun. 2002, 21, 171–188. [Google Scholar]
- Srivastava, H.M.; Jan, R.; Jan, A.; Deebai, W.; Shutaywi, M. Fractional-calculus analysis of the transmission dynamics of the dengue infection. Chaos 2021, 31, 53130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Srivastava, H.M.; Owa, S. Univalent Functions, Fractional Calculus, and Their Applications; Halsted Press: Ultimo, Australia, 1989. [Google Scholar]
- Miller, K.S.; Ross, B. An Introduction to the Fractional Calculus and Fractional Differential Equations; John Wiley and Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Sumer Eker, S.; Ece, S. Geometric Properties of the Miller–Ross Functions. Iran. J. Sci. Technol. Trans. A Sci. 2002, 46, 631–636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Şeker, B.; Sumer Eker, S.; Çekiç, B. On Subclasses of Analytic Functions Associated with Miller–Ross-Type Poisson Distribution Series. Sahand Commun. Math. Anal. 2002, 19, 69–79. [Google Scholar]
- Kazımoğlu, S. Partial Sums of The Miller-Ross Function. Turk. J. Sci. 2021, 6, 167–173. [Google Scholar]
- Kazımoğlu, S. Neighborhoods of Certain Classes of Analytic Functions Defined By Miller-Ross Function. Caucasian J. Sci. 2021, 8, 165–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arif, M.; Raza, M. Some properties of an integral operator defined by Bessel functions. Acta Univ. Apulensis 2002, 26, 69–74. [Google Scholar]
- Frasin, B.A. Sufficient conditions for integral operator defined by Bessel functions. J. Math. Inequal. 2002, 4, 301–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mahmood, S.; Mahroz, S.; Rafiq, A.; Malik, S.N.; Raza, M. Convexity of Certain Integral Operators Defined by Struve Functions. J. Funct. Spaces 2018, 2018, 6327132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mahmood, S.; Srivastava, H.M.; Malik, S.N.; Raza, M.; Shahzadi, N.; Zainab, S. A certain family of integral operators associated with the Struve functions. Symmetry 2002, 11, 463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Din, M.U.; Srivastava, H.M.; Raza, M. Univalence of certain integral operators involving generalized Struve functions. Hacet. J. Math. Stat. 2002, 47, 821–833. [Google Scholar]
- Din, M.U.; Yalçın, S. Certain Geometric Properties Of Modified Lommel Functions. Honam Math. J. 2002, 42, 719–731. [Google Scholar]
- Park, J.H.; Srivastava, H.M.; Cho, N.E. Univalence and convexity conditions for certain integral operators associated with the Lommel function of the first kind. AIMS Math. 2002, 6, 11380–11402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Srivastava, H.M.; Frasin, B.A.; Pescar, V. Univalence of integral operators involving Mittag–Leffler functions. Appl. Math. Inform. Sci. 2002, 11, 635–641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oros, G.I. Study on new integral operators defined using confluent hypergeometric function. Adv. Difference Equ. 2002, 2021, 342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Raza, M.; Malik, S.N.; Xin, Q.; Din, M.U.; Cotirla, L.I. On Kudriasov Conditions for Univalence of Integral Operators Defined by Generalized Bessel Functions. Mathematics 2022, 10, 1361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pescar, V. A new generalization of Ahlfor’s and Becker’s criterion of univalence. Bull. Malaysian Math. Soc. 2002, 19, 53–54. [Google Scholar]
- Pascu, N.N. An Improvement of Becker’s Univalence Criterion. In Proceedings of the Commemorative Session Simion Stoilow, Brasov, Romania, 1987; pp. 43–48. [Google Scholar]
- Goodman, A.W. Univalent Functions; Mariner Publishing Company Incorporated: Tampa, FL, USA, 1983. [Google Scholar]
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. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).