Next Article in Journal
Adaptive Multiple Testing Procedure for Clinical Trials with Urn Allocation
Next Article in Special Issue
Certain Results on Fuzzy p-Valent Functions Involving the Linear Operator
Previous Article in Journal
Staircase Recognition and Localization Using Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) for Cleaning Robot Application
Previous Article in Special Issue
New Criteria for Starlikness and Convexity of a Certain Family of Integral Operators
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Bounds for Toeplitz Determinants and Related Inequalities for a New Subclass of Analytic Functions

1
School of Mathematics and Computer Sciences, Chifeng University, Chifeng 024000, China
2
Department of Mathematics, COMSATS University Islamabad, Islamabad 45550, Pakistan
3
Department of Mathematics, Government Postgraduate College Mandian, Abbottabad 22010, Pakistan
4
Department of Mathematics, COMSATS University Islamabad, Abbottabad Campus, Abbottabad 22060, Pakistan
5
Department of Basic Sciences, Preparatory Year Deanship, King Faisal University, Al Ahsa 31982, Saudi Arabia
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Mathematics 2023, 11(18), 3966; https://doi.org/10.3390/math11183966
Submission received: 27 July 2023 / Revised: 4 September 2023 / Accepted: 5 September 2023 / Published: 18 September 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Topics in Geometric Function Theory)

Abstract

:
In this article, we use the q-derivative operator and the principle of subordination to define a new subclass of analytic functions related to the q-Ruscheweyh operator. Sufficient conditions, sharp bounds for the initial coefficients, a Fekete–Szegö functional and a Toeplitz determinant are investigated for this new class of functions. Additionally, we also present several established consequences derived from our primary findings.

1. Introduction

Let A represent the set of all complex valued mappings u of the form
u ( z ) = z + n = 2 b n z n ,
which are analytic in the open unit disc O = { z C : | z | < 1 } . A function u is classified as univalent in O if it never repeats the same value. The subclass of A containing univalent functions is denoted as S .
We represent by P the set comprising all analytic functions h of the form
h ( z ) = 1 + n = 1 p n z n ,
such that R e ( h ( z ) ) > 0 in O . A function u belonging to the class A is referred to as a starlike function (represented as u S * ) and a convex function (represented as u C ) if it meets the following inequality conditions:
Re z u ( z ) u ( z ) > 0 , ( z O )
and
Re 1 + z u ( z ) u ( z ) > 0 , ( z O ) .
The sets S * δ and C δ of starlike and convex functions of order δ ( where 0 δ < 1 ) , respectively, are defined as follows:
S * δ = u A : Re z u ( z ) u ( z ) > δ , ( z O )
and
C δ = u A : Re 1 + z u ( z ) u ( z ) > δ , ( z O ) .
For γ = 0 , it can be seen that S * 0 = S * and C ( 0 ) = C .
The families t UCV and t US * of t-uniformly convex functions and t-uniformly starlike functions are defined by Kanas and Wisniowska [1,2] as follows:
t UCV = u A : t z u ( z ) u ( z ) 1 < Re z u ( z ) u ( z ) , z O , t 0
and
t US * = u A : t z u z u z 1 < Re z u z u z , z O , t 0 .
These two classes are generalizations of the classes of convex univalent functions and uniformly starlike functions, defined by Goodman [3]. In a similar way, Wang et al. [4] studied the subfamilies S * ( γ , δ ) and C ( γ , δ ) of analytic functions defined by the following inequalities, respectively:
z u z u z 1 < δ γ z u z u z + 1 , z O
and
z u ( z ) u ( z ) 1 < δ γ z u ( z ) u ( z ) + 1 , z O ,
where 0 < γ 1 , 0 < δ 1 .
Let u , v A , define their convolution by
u * v ( z ) = z + n = 2 b n a n z n ,
where, u is given by (1) and
v ( z ) = z + n = 2 a n z n , ( z O ) .
The investigation of integral and differential operators has been a valuable area of research since the inception of the theory of analytic functions. The introduction of the first integral operator can be attributed to Alexander [5] in 1915. These operators have been examined from various perspectives, including the incorporation of quantum calculus. The study of q-calculus has recently gained attention due to its wide applications in applied sciences. Jackson [6,7] was the pioneer in defining q-analogues of derivatives using q-calculus. Using q-derivatives, Ismail et al. ([8]) defined and investigated q-starlike functions, prompting the further exploration of q-calculus within the domain of geometric functions theory (GFT). Subsequently, several q-extensions of integral and differential operators have been defined. Kanas and Răducanu [9] defined the q-Ruscheweyh differential operator, and Noor et al. in [10] studied the q-Bernardi integral operator. Furthermore, as a q-analogue of the operator given in [11], Govindaraj and Sivasubramanian [12] defined the q-Salagean operator. The studies by authors [13,14,15] also highlight significant contributions to the q-generalizations of certain subclasses of analytic functions. Recently, Srivastava [16] published a comprehensive review article that serves as a valuable resource for researchers and scholars involved in GFT and q-calculus.
Now, let us revisit some definitions and details regarding q-calculus, which will enhance our understanding of this new article.

2. Preliminaries

Definition 1 
([17]). The q-number [ s ] q for 0 < q < 1 is defined as
[ s ] q = 1 q s 1 q , ( s C ) .
In particular, for s = n N = { 1 , 2 , 3 , } ,
[ n ] q = k = 0 n 1 q k .
The nth q-factorial [ n ] q ! is defined as
[ n ] q ! = k = 1 n [ k ] q , ( n N ) .
For n = 0 , we have [ 0 ] q ! = 1 .
Definition 2 
([17]). For any complex number s, the q-generalized Pochhammer symbol [ s ] q , n is defined as
[ s ] q , n = [ s ] q [ s + 1 ] q [ s + 2 ] q [ s + n 1 ] q , ( n N ) .
For n = 0 , [ s ] q , 0 = 1 .
Definition 3 
([6]). For 0 < q < 1 , the q-difference operator D q : A A for u A is defined as follows:
( D q u ) ( z ) = u ( z ) u ( q z ) z q z , if z 0 , u ( 0 ) , if z = 0 .
For u of the form (1), we have
( D q u ) ( z ) = 1 + n = 2 [ n ] q b n z n 1 .
It can be noted that
lim q 1 [ n ] q = n
and
lim q 1 ( D q u ) ( z ) = u ( z ) .
Definition 4 
([9]). For u A , the q-Ruscheweyh differential operator L q λ : A A is defined as
L q λ ( u ( z ) ) = ϕ ( q , λ + 1 ; z ) * u ( z )
= z + n = 2 ψ n , λ , q b n z n ,
where λ > 1 ,
ϕ ( q , λ + 1 ; z ) = z + n = 2 ψ n , λ , q z n
and
ψ n , λ , q = Γ q ( λ + n ) ( n 1 ) ! Γ q [ λ + 1 ] = [ λ + 1 ] q [ λ + 2 ] q . . . [ λ + n 1 ] q [ n 1 ] q ! = [ λ + 1 ] q , n 1 [ n 1 ] q ! .
The operator L q λ satisfies the following identity:
z D q ( L q λ u ( z ) ) = 1 + [ λ ] q q λ L q λ + 1 u ( z ) [ λ ] q q λ L q λ u ( z ) .
In particular, for λ = n W = { 0 , 1 , 2 , 3 , } ,
L q 0 ( u ( z ) ) = u ( z ) , L q 1 ( u ( z ) ) = z D q u ( z ) , L q n ( u ( z ) ) = z [ n ] q ! D q n z n 1 u ( z ) .
Note that
D q ( L q λ u ( z ) ) = 1 + n = 2 [ n ] q ψ n , λ , q b n z n 1 ,
and
lim q 1 L q λ ( u ( z ) ) = L λ ( u ( z ) ) ,
which shows that when q 1 , the operator defined in Definition 4 reduces to the operator defined by Ruscheweyh [18].
Definition 5. 
A function u A is said to belong to the class S ( λ , q ) if the following inequality holds:
z D q ( L q λ u ( z ) ) L q λ u ( z ) 1 < q q z D q ( L q λ u ( z ) ) L q λ u ( z ) + 1 , z O ,
where 0 < q 1 . Equivalently,
z D q ( L q λ u ( z ) ) L q λ u ( z ) 1 + q z 1 q 2 z .
Remark 1. 
For specific values of λ and q 1 , we have the following special cases:
  • If λ = 0 and q 1 , then S ( λ , q ) = S * , which is the familiar subclass of starlike functions.
  • If λ = 1 and q 1 , then S ( λ , q ) = C , the family of normalized univalent convex functions.
Noonan and Thomas [19] introduced the following m n t h Hankel determinant of u given by (1), where m 1 , n 1 and b 1 = 1 .
H m ( n ) = b n b n + 1 b n + m 1 b n + 1 b n + 2 b n + m b n + m 1 b n + m b n + 2 m 2 .
In particular, for m = 2 and n = 1 , the Hankel determinant H m ( n ) reduces to the famous Fekete–Szegö functional:
H 2 ( 1 ) = 1 b 2 b 2 b 3 = b 3 b 2 2 .
This functional is further generalized as
b 3 μ b 2 2
where μ is any complex or real number.
The significance of the Hankel determinant is evident in the field of singularity theory [20], and it proves beneficial in the examination of power series with integer coefficients (see [21,22,23]). Several researchers have established upper bounds for H m ( n ) across various values of m and n, for numerous subclasses of analytic functions (see, for example, [24,25,26,27,28]).
For a function u represented by Equation (1), the symmetric Toeplitz determinant T m ( n ) is defined as
T i ( j ) = b n b n + 1 b n + m 1 b n + 1 b n b n + m 2 b n + m 1 b n + m 2 b n ,
where m 1 , n 1 and b 1 = 1 . In particular,
T 2 ( 1 ) = 1 b 2 b 2 1 , T 2 ( 2 ) = b 2 b 3 b 3 b 2 , T 2 ( 3 ) = b 3 b 4 b 4 b 3 , T 3 ( 1 ) = 1 b 2 b 3 b 2 1 b 2 b 3 b 2 b 1 , T 3 ( 2 ) = b 2 b 3 b 4 b 3 b 2 b 3 b 4 b 3 b 2 .
In recent times, a number of researchers have focused on exploring the bounds of the Toeplitz determinant T m ( n ) for various families of analytic functions (see, for example, [29,30,31,32]). In the investigation of Toeplitz determinants, the research conducted in [33,34] incorporates elements of quantum calculus, while [35] explores a set of analytic functions introduced through the utilization of the Borel distribution.
Our main results rely on the utilization of the following Lemmas for their proof.
Lemma 1 
([36]). If h ( z ) = 1 + p 1 z + p 2 z 2 + is an analytic function with a positive real part in O and μ is a complex number, then
| p 2 μ p 1 2 | 2 max 1 , | 2 μ 1 | .
The inequality is sharp for the functions given by
h ( z ) = 1 + z 1 z , h ( z ) = 1 + z 2 1 z 2 , z O .
Lemma 2 
([37]). If h ( z ) = 1 + p 1 z + p 2 z 2 + is an analytic function with a positive real part in O , then
| p n | 2 .
The inequality is sharp for the function given by
h ( z ) = 1 + z 1 z , z O .
Lemma 3 
([38]). If h ( z ) = 1 + p 1 z + p 2 z 2 + is an analytic function with a positive real part in O , and μ is a complex number, then
p n μ p k p n k 2 max 1 , 2 μ 1 ,
for all n , k N and k < n . The inequality is sharp for the function given by
h ( z ) = 1 + z 1 z , z O .

3. Main Results

The following result gives the sufficient conditions for the functions belonging to the class S ( λ , q ) .
Theorem 1. 
Let u A be given by Equation (1), satisfying
n = 2 ψ n , λ , q ( 1 + q 2 ) [ n ] q ( 1 q ) | b n | q ( 1 + q ) .
Then, u S ( λ , q ) .
Proof. 
Let
F ( z ) = z D q ( L q λ u ( z ) ) L q λ u ( z ) .
Then,
F ( z ) 1 q + q 2 F ( z ) = z D q ( L q λ u ( z ) ) L q λ u ( z ) 1 q + q 2 z D q ( L q λ u ( z ) ) L q λ u ( z ) = z D q ( L q λ u ( z ) ) L q λ u ( z ) q L q λ u ( z ) + q 2 z D q ( L q λ u ( z ) ) = ( z + n = 2 [ n ] q ψ n , λ , q b n z n ) ( z + n = 2 ψ n , λ , q b n z n ) q ( z + n = 2 ψ n , λ , q b n z n ) + q 2 ( z + n = 2 ψ n , λ , q [ n ] q b n z n ) = n = 2 ( [ n ] q 1 ) ψ n , λ , q b n z n 1 ( q + q 2 ) + n = 2 ( q + q 2 [ n ] q ) ψ n , λ , q b n z n 1 n = 2 | [ n ] q 1 | | ψ n , λ , q | | b n | | z n 1 | | q + q 2 | n = 2 | q + q 2 [ n ] q | | ψ n , λ , q | | b n | | z n 1 | n = 2 ( [ n ] q 1 ) ψ n , λ , q | b n | ( q + q 2 ) n = 2 ( q + q 2 [ n ] q ) ψ n , λ , q | b n | 1 ,
which shows
F ( z ) 1 q + q 2 F ( z ) = w ( z )
is a Schwarz function and we can write
F ( z ) = 1 + q w ( z ) 1 q 2 w ( z ) F ( z ) 1 + q z 1 q 2 z .
Hence, the result follows. □
Theorem 2. 
Let u S ( λ , q ) be given by Equation (1), then
| b 2 | 1 + q ψ 2 , λ , q ,
| b 3 | 1 + q + q 2 ψ 3 , λ , q ,
| b 4 | ( 1 + q ) ( 1 + q 2 ) ψ 4 , λ , q .
All the inequalities are sharp for the function g ( z ) , given by the equation
z D q ( L q λ f ( z ) ) L q λ f ( z ) = 1 + q z 1 q 2 z .
Proof. If u S ( λ , q ) , then
z D q ( L q λ u ( z ) ) L q λ u ( z ) = 1 + q w ( z ) 1 q 2 w ( z ) , z O .
Let
z D q ( L q λ u ( z ) ) L q λ u ( z ) = 1 + n = 1 c n z n .
Then, using Equations (4) and (5), we have
z + n = 2 [ n ] q ψ n , λ , q b n z n = z + n = 2 ψ n , λ , q b n z n + n = 1 c n z n + 1 + n = 1 c n z n n = 2 ψ n , λ , q b n z n .
Using Cauchy product formula [20] and simplifying it, we obtain
n = 2 [ n ] q 1 ψ n , λ , q b n c n 1 z n = n = 3 k = 3 n c n k + 1 ψ k 1 , λ , q b k 1 z n .
Comparing coefficients of z 2 , z 3 , z 4 and simplifying, we have
c 1 = [ 2 ] q 1 ψ 2 , λ , q b 2 ,
c 2 = [ 3 ] q 1 ψ 3 , λ , q b 3 [ 2 ] q 1 ψ 2 , λ , q 2 b 2 2 ,
c 3 = [ 4 ] q 1 ψ 4 , λ , q b 4 ψ 3 , λ , q ψ 2 , λ , q b 3 b 2 [ 3 ] q + [ 2 ] q 2 + [ 2 ] q 1 ψ 2 , λ , q 3 b 2 3 .
Using Equations (17)–(19) in Equation (15), we obtain
z D q ( L q λ u ( z ) ) L q λ u ( z ) = 1 + [ 2 ] q 1 ψ 2 , λ , q b 2 z + [ 3 ] q 1 ψ 3 , λ , q b 3 [ 2 ] q 1 ψ 2 , λ , q 2 b 2 2 z 2
+ [ 4 ] q 1 ψ 4 , λ , q b 4 ψ 3 , λ , q ψ 2 , λ , q b 3 b 2 [ 3 ] q + [ 2 ] q 2 + [ 2 ] q 1 ψ 2 , λ , q 3 b 2 3 z 3 +
Taking w ( z ) = ω 1 z + ω 2 z 2 + ω 3 z 3 + , we have
1 + q w ( z ) 1 q 2 w ( z ) = 1 + ( q + q 2 ) ω 1 z + ( q + q 2 ) ( ω 2 + q 2 ω 1 2 ) z 2
+ ( q + q 2 ) ( ω 3 + 2 q 2 ω 1 ω 2 + q 4 ω 1 3 ) z 3 + .
We also know that for each Schwartz function w ( z ) = ω 1 z + ω 2 z 2 + ω 3 z 3 + , there is a function h ( z ) = 1 + p 1 z + p 2 z 2 + p 3 z 3 + with a positive real part such that
1 + w ( z ) 1 w ( z ) = h ( z ) ,
which implies
ω 1 = p 1 2 , ω 2 = 1 2 p 2 1 2 p 1 2 , ω 3 = 1 2 p 3 1 2 p 1 p 2 + 1 8 p 1 3 .
Using values of ω 1 , ω 2 and ω 3 in Equation (21), we obtain
1 + q w ( z ) 1 q 2 w ( z ) = 1 + q + q 2 2 p 1 z + q + q 2 2 p 2 1 q 2 2 p 1 2 z 2
+ q + q 2 2 p 3 ( 1 q 2 ) p 1 p 2 + ( 1 q 2 ) 2 4 p 1 3 z 3 + .
In view of (14), comparing the coefficients of z from (20) and (22), we have
[ 2 ] q 1 ψ 2 , λ , q b 2 = q + q 2 2 p 1 ,
which implies
b 2 = 1 + q 2 ψ 2 , λ , q p 1 .
Taking the modulus and applying Lemma 2, we obtain the desired inequality (10).
Comparing the coefficients of z 2 from (20) and (22), we have
[ 3 ] q 1 ψ 3 , λ , q b 3 [ 2 ] q 1 ψ 2 , λ , q 2 b 2 2 = q + q 2 2 p 2 1 q 2 2 p 1 2 .
Using Equation (23) and (24) simplifying it, we obtain
b 3 = 1 2 ψ 3 , λ , q p 2 + q + q 2 2 p 1 2 .
Taking the modulus and applying Lemma 1, we obtain the desired inequality (10).
Comparing the coefficients of z 3 from Equations (20) and (22), we have
[ 4 ] q 1 ψ 4 , λ , q b 4 ψ 3 , λ , q ψ 2 , λ , q b 3 b 2 [ 3 ] q + [ 2 ] q 2 + [ 2 ] q 1 ψ 2 , λ , q 3 b 2 3 = q + q 2 2 p 3 ( 1 q 2 ) p 1 p 2 + ( 1 q 2 ) 2 4 p 1 3 .
Using Equations (23) and (24) and simplifying the above equation, we obtain
b 4 = 1 + q 2 ( 1 + q + q 2 ) ψ 4 , λ , q p 3 + q ( 1 + 2 q ) 2 p 1 p 2 + q 3 ( 1 + q ) 4 p 1 3 .
The last equation can be rearranged as
b 4 = 1 + q 2 ( 1 + q + q 2 ) ψ 4 , λ , q p 3 + q ( 1 + 2 q ) 4 p 1 p 2 + q ( 1 + 2 q ) 4 p 1 p 2 + q 2 ( 1 + q ) ( 1 + 2 q ) p 1 2 .
Taking the absolute value and applying Lemmas 1–3, we obtain
| b 4 | 1 + q 2 ( 1 + q + q 2 ) ψ 4 , λ , q 2 q ( 1 + 2 q ) 2 + 1 + q ( 1 + 2 q ) 2 q 2 ( 1 + q ) 1 + 2 q + 1 ,
which yields the inequality ().
The series expansion of f ( z ) given by (13) is
f ( z ) = z + 1 + q ψ 2 , λ , q z 2 + 1 + q + q 2 ψ 3 , λ , q z 3 + ( 1 + q ) ( 1 + q 2 ) ψ 4 , λ , q z 4 + ,
which clearly demonstrates the sharpness of the inequalities (10)–(). □
Theorem 3. 
Let u S ( λ , q ) be given by Equation (1); then, for any μ C ,
| b 3 μ b 2 2 | 1 ψ 3 , λ , q max 1 , μ ( 1 + q ) 2 ψ 3 , λ , q ψ 2 , λ , q 2 q ( 1 + q ) 1 .
The sharp bound occurs for the function f ( z ) described by Equation (13) under the condition that μ ( 1 + q ) 2 ψ 3 , λ , q ψ 2 , λ , q 2 q ( 1 + q ) 1 1 . Alternatively, if this condition is not met, the sharp bound pertains to the function g ( z ) defined by the equation
z D q ( L q λ g ( z ) ) L q λ g ( z ) = 1 + q z 2 1 q 2 z 2 .
Proof. Using Equations (23) and (24), we can write
b 3 μ b 2 2 = 1 2 ψ 3 , λ , q p 2 + q + q 2 2 p 1 2 μ 1 + q 2 ψ 2 , λ , q p 1 2 = 1 2 ψ 3 , λ , q p 2 μ ( 1 + q ) 2 ψ 3 , λ , q 2 ψ 2 , λ , q 2 q ( 1 + q ) 2 p 1 2 .
Applying modulus and using Lemma 1, we obtain the required inequality. □
Corollary 1. 
Let u S ( λ , q ) be given by Equation (1); then, for any ν R , we have
| b 3 ν b 2 2 | 1 ψ 3 , λ , q 1 + q ( 1 + q ) ν ( 1 + q ) 2 ψ 3 , λ , q ψ 2 , λ , q 2 , if ν q ψ 2 , λ , q 2 ( 1 + q ) ψ 3 , λ , q , 1 ψ 3 , λ , q , if q ψ 2 , λ , q 2 ( 1 + q ) ψ 3 , λ , q ν ( 2 + q + q 2 ) ψ 2 , λ , q 2 ( 1 + q ) 2 ψ 3 , λ , q , 1 ψ 3 , λ , q ν ( 1 + q ) 2 ψ 3 , λ , q ψ 2 , λ , q 2 q ( 1 + q ) 1 , if ν ( 2 + q + q 2 ) ψ 2 , λ , q 2 ( 1 + q ) 2 ψ 3 , λ , q .
Proof.
ν ( q + 1 ) 2 ψ 3 , λ , q ψ 2 , λ , q 2 q ( q + 1 ) 1 1 , 1 ν ( q + 1 ) 2 ψ 3 , λ , q ψ 2 , λ , q 2 q ( q + 1 ) 1 1 , q ψ 2 , λ , q 2 ( q + 1 ) ψ 3 , λ , q ν ( 2 + q + q 2 ) ψ 2 , λ , q 2 ( q + 1 ) 2 ψ 3 , λ , q ,
therefore, the result follows. □
Example 1. 
For λ = 1 , the function
f ( z ) = z 1 z = z + z 2 + z 3 + z 4 +
is such that
z D q ( L q λ f ( z ) ) L q λ f ( z ) = z D q ( z D q f ( z ) ) z D q f ( z ) = 1 + q z 1 q 2 z ,
which shows that f S ( 1 , q ) , for all 0 < q < 1 . Since for λ = 1 , ψ n , λ , q = ψ n , 1 , q = [ n ] q , (29) can be written as
| b 3 ν b 2 2 | 1 ν , if ν 1 1 [ 3 ] q , 1 [ 3 ] q , if 1 1 [ 3 ] q ν 1 + 1 [ 3 ] q , ν 1 , if ν 1 + 1 [ 3 ] q .
For f ( z ) represented by Equation (30),
ν = 1 1 [ 4 ] q , | b 3 ν b 2 2 | = 1 1 1 [ 4 ] q ( 1 ) 2 = 1 ν , ν = 1 , | b 3 ν b 2 2 | = 1 ( 1 ) ( 1 ) 2 = 0 < 1 [ 3 ] q , ν = 1 + 1 [ 4 ] q , | b 3 ν b 2 2 | = 1 1 + 1 [ 4 ] q ( 1 ) 2 = ν 1 .
This confirms the validity of Corollary 1, for the function f ( z ) represented by Equation (30), considering certain particular values of ν.

4. Toeplitz Determinant

In this section, we will find sharp bounds for the Toeplitz determinants T 2 ( 1 ) , T 2 ( 2 ) , T 2 ( 3 ) , T 3 ( 1 ) and T 3 ( 2 ) for the functions belonging to the class S ( λ , q ) .
Theorem 4. 
If u S ( λ , q ) , then
| T 2 ( 1 ) | 1 + ( 1 + q ) 2 ψ 2 , λ , q 2 , | T 2 ( 2 ) | ( 1 + q ) 2 ψ 2 , λ , q 2 + ( 1 + q + q 2 ) 2 ψ 3 , λ , q 2 , | T 2 ( 3 ) | ( 1 + q + q 2 ) 2 ψ 3 , λ , q 2 + ( 1 + q ) ( 1 + q 2 ) 2 ψ 4 , λ , q 2 .
All the inequalities are sharp for the function
g ( z ) = z + i ( 1 + q ) ψ 2 , λ , q z 2 1 + q + q 2 ψ 3 , λ , q z 3 i ( 1 + q ) ( 1 + q 2 ) ψ 4 , λ , q z 4 + ,
which is the solution of
z D q ( L q λ g ( z ) ) L q λ g ( z ) = 1 + i q z 1 i q 2 z .
Proof. Let u S ( λ , q ) be given by Equation (1); then,
T 2 ( n ) = b n b n + 1 b n + 1 b n = b n 2 b n + 1 2 .
Taking absolute and applying triangle inequality, we have
| T 2 ( n ) | = | b n 2 b n + 1 2 | | b n 2 | + | b n + 1 2 | .
Taking n = 1 , n = 2 , and n = 3 and using inequalities (10)–(), we obtain the required inequalities. □
Corollary 2 
([39]). If u S * , then
| T 2 ( 1 ) | 5 , | T 2 ( 2 ) | 13 , | T 2 ( 3 ) | 25 .
The inequalities are sharp for the function
g ( z ) = z ( 1 i z ) 2 = z + i 2 z 2 3 z 3 i 4 z 4 + .
Proof. Using λ = 0 and taking limit q 1 , we obtain the desired inequalities. □
Corollary 3 
([39]). If u C , then
| T 2 ( n ) | 2 , for all n N .
The inequality is sharp for the function
g ( z ) = z 1 i z = z + i z 2 z 3 i z 4 + .
Proof. Using λ = 1 and taking limit q 1 , we obtain the desired inequality. □
Example 2. 
The function
v ( z ) = 4 z ( 2 z ) 2 = z + z 2 + 3 4 z 3 + 1 2 z 4 +
is a starlike function because
Re z v ( z ) v ( z ) = Re 2 + z 2 z = 4 | z | 2 4 + | z | 2 4 Re ( z ) > 0 .
For the function v ( z ) given by Equation (36), we have
| T 2 ( 1 ) | = 0 < 5 , | T 2 ( 2 ) | = 7 16 < 13 , | T 2 ( 3 ) | = 5 16 < 25 ,
which validates Corollary 2 for the function v S * .
Theorem 5. 
If u S ( λ , q ) , then
| T 3 ( 1 ) | 1 + 2 ( 1 + q ) 2 ψ 2 , λ , q 2 + ( 1 + q + q 2 ) ψ 3 , λ , q 2 2 ( 1 + q ) 2 ψ 3 , λ , q ψ 2 , λ , q 2 q ( 1 + q ) 1 .
The inequality is sharp for the function g ( z ) defined in Equation (32).
Proof. Let u S ( λ , q ) be given by Equation (1), then
T 3 ( 1 ) = 1 b 2 b 3 b 2 1 b 2 b 3 b 2 1 = 1 2 b 2 2 + 2 b 2 2 b 3 b 3 2 .
Taking the absolute and applying triangle inequality, we can write
| T 3 ( 1 ) | = | 1 2 b 2 2 + 2 b 2 2 b 3 b 3 2 | 1 + 2 | b 2 | 2 + | b 3 | | b 3 2 b 2 2 | .
Using inequalities (10) and (11) and applying Theorem 3, we obtain the required result. □
Corollary 4 
([39]). If u S * , then
| T 3 ( 1 ) | 24 .
Proof. Using λ = 0 and taking limit q 1 , we obtain the desired inequalities. □
Corollary 5 
([39]). If u C , then
| T 3 ( 1 ) | 4 .
The inequality is sharp for the function g ( z ) defined by Equation (35).
Proof. Using λ = 1 and taking limit q 1 , we obtain the desired inequalities. □
Theorem 6. 
If u S ( λ , q ) , then
| T 3 ( 2 ) | 4 1 + q ψ 2 , λ , q + ( 1 + q ) ( 1 + q 2 ) ψ 4 , λ , q α 1 + 4 | α 2 | + 2 α 3 + α 4 1 2 α 5 ,
where
α 1 = ( 1 + q ) 2 4 ψ 2 , λ , q 2 , α 2 = q 3 ( 1 + q ) 3 16 ( 1 + q + q 2 ) ψ 2 , λ , q ψ 4 , λ , q q 2 ( 1 + q ) 2 8 ψ 3 , λ , q 2 , α 3 = 1 2 ψ 3 , λ , q 2 , α 4 = ( 1 + q ) 2 4 ( 1 + q + q 2 ) ψ 2 , λ , q ψ 4 , λ , q , α 5 = 2 q ( 1 + q + q 2 ) ψ 2 , λ , q ψ 4 , λ , q ( 1 + q ) ψ 3 , λ , q 2 q ( 1 + 2 q ) 2 .
The inequality is sharp for the function g ( z ) defined in Equation (32).
Proof. Let u S ( λ , q ) be given by Equation (1), then
T 3 ( 1 ) = b 2 b 3 b 4 b 3 b 2 b 3 b 4 b 3 b 2 = ( b 2 b 4 ) ( b 2 2 2 b 3 2 + b 2 b 4 ) .
Taking the absolute value, we can write
| T 3 ( 2 ) | = | b 2 b 4 | | b 2 2 2 b 3 2 + b 2 b 4 | .
Using inequalities (10) and (12), we obtain
| b 2 b 4 | | b 2 | + | b 4 | 1 + q ψ 2 , λ , q + ( 1 + q ) ( 1 + q 2 ) ψ 4 , λ , q .
Using Equations (23)–(25), we can write
b 2 2 2 b 3 2 + b 2 b 4 = 1 + q 2 ψ 2 , λ , q p 1 2 2 1 2 ψ 3 , λ , q p 2 + q + q 2 2 p 1 2 2 + 1 + q 2 ψ 2 , λ , q p 1 1 + q 2 ( 1 + q + q 2 ) ψ 4 , λ , q p 3 + q ( 1 + 2 q ) 2 p 1 p 2 + q 3 ( 1 + q ) 4 p 1 3 = ( 1 + q ) 2 4 ψ 2 , λ , q 2 p 1 2 + q 3 ( 1 + q ) 3 16 ( 1 + q + q 2 ) ψ 2 , λ , q ψ 4 , λ , q q 2 ( 1 + q ) 2 8 ψ 3 , λ , q 2 p 1 4 1 2 ψ 3 , λ , q 2 p 2 2 + ( 1 + q ) 2 4 ( 1 + q + q 2 ) ψ 2 , λ , q ψ 4 , λ , q p 1 p 3 2 q ( 1 + q + q 2 ) ψ 2 , λ , q ψ 4 , λ , q ( 1 + q ) ψ 3 , λ , q 2 q ( 1 + 2 q ) 2 p 2 p 1 = α 1 p 1 2 + α 2 p 1 4 α 3 p 2 2 + α 4 p 1 ( p 3 α 5 p 1 p 2 ) .
Taking the absolute value, applying the triangle inequality and using Lemmas 2 and 3, we have
| b 2 2 2 b 3 2 + b 2 b 4 | 4 ( α 1 + 4 | α 2 | + α 3 + α 4 | 1 2 α 5 | ) .
Using inequalities (38) and (39) in (37), we obtain the required result. □
Corollary 6 
([39]). If u S * , then
| T 3 ( 2 ) | 84 .
Proof. Using λ = 0 and taking limit q 1 , we obtain the desired inequalities. □
Corollary 7 
([39]). If u C , then
| T 3 ( 2 ) | 4 .
The inequality is sharp for the function g ( z ) defined by Equation (35).
Proof.Using λ = 1 and taking limit q 1 , we obtain the required inequality. □

5. Conclusions

In this article, we have defined a new subclass of analytic functions associated with the q-Ruscheweyh operator. After finding sufficient conditions for the analytic functions belonging to this class, we establish sharp bounds for the initial coefficients, second- and third-order Toeplitz determinants and the Fekete–Szegö functional for the functions belonging to the newly defined class. We also demonstrate several established corollaries of our primary findings to highlight the interrelation between existing and novel research.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, H.T.; methodology, H.T. and I.G.; validation, S.H. and S.N.; formal analysis, I.G. and S.H.; writing—original draft, I.G.; writing—review and editing, H.T. and S.N.; supervision, S.H.; funding acquisition, H.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The following funding organizations provided assistance to the first author in this work: (i) the Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant 11561001 and the Natural Science Foundation of Inner Mongolia of China under Grant 2022MS01004; (ii) the program for Young Talents of Science and Technology in Universities of Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region under Grant NJYT-18-A14; and (iii) the program for Key Laboratory Construction of Chifeng University (no. CFXYZD202004) and the Research and Innovation Team of Complex Analysis and Nonlinear Dynamic Systems of Chifeng University (no. cfxykycxtd202005).

Data Availability Statement

No data were used to support this study.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the editor and the anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments and suggestions, which helped us to improve the manuscript. This work was supported by the Deanship of Scientific Research, the Vice Presidency for Graduate Studies and Scientific Research, King Faisal University, Saudi Arabia (Grant no. 4141).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Kanas, S.; Wisniowska, A. Conic regions and k-uniform convexity. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 1999, 105, 327–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Kanas, S.; Wisniowska, A. Conic domains and starlike functions. Rev. Roum. Math. Pures Appl. 2000, 45, 647–657. [Google Scholar]
  3. Goodman, A.W. On uniformly convex functions. Ann. Pol. Math. 1991, 56, 87–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Wang, Z.G.; Jiang, Y.P. On certain subclasses of close to-convex and quasi-convex functions with respect to 2k-symmetric conjugate points. J. Math. Appl. 2007, 29, 167–179. [Google Scholar]
  5. Alexander, J.W. Functions which map the interior of the unit circle upon simple regions. Ann. Math. 1915, 17, 12–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Jackson, F.H. On q-functions and a certain difference operator. Earth Environ. Sci. Trans. R. Soc. Edinb. 1909, 46, 253–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Jackson, F.H. On q-definite integrals. Quart. J. Pure Appl. Math. 1910, 41, 193–203. [Google Scholar]
  8. Ismail, M.E.H.; Merkes, E.; Styer, D. A generalization of starlike functions. Complex Var. Theory Appl. 1990, 14, 77–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Kanas, S.; Răducanu, D. Some class of analytic functions related to conic domains. Math. Slovaca 2014, 64, 1183–1196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Noor, K.I.; Riaz, S.; Noor, M.A. On q-Bernardi integral operator. TWMS J. Pure Appl. Math. 2017, 8, 3–11. [Google Scholar]
  11. Sălăgean, G.S. Subclasses of univalent functions. In Lecture Notes in Mathematics; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 1983. [Google Scholar]
  12. Govindaraj, M.; Sivasubramanian, S. On a class of analytic functions related to conic domains involving q-calculus. Anal. Math. 2017, 43, 457–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Cotîrlǎ, L.I.; Murugusundaramoorthy, G. Starlike functions based on Ruscheweyh q-differential operator defined in Janowski domain. Fractal Fract. 2023, 7, 148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Aouf, M.K.; Murugusundaramoorthy, G. On a subclass of uniformly convex functions defined by the Dziok-Srivastava operator. Austral. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2008, 5, 3. [Google Scholar]
  15. Tang, H.; Vijaya, K.; Murugusundaramoorthy, G.; Sivasubramanian, S. Partial sums and inclusion relations for analytic functions involving (p, q)-differential operator. Open Math. 2021, 19, 329–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Srivastava, H.M. Operators of basic (or q-) calculus and fractional q-calculus and their applications in geometric function theory of complex analysis. Iran. J. Sci. Technol. Trans. A Sci. 2020, 44, 327–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Gasper, G.; Rahman, M. Basic hypergeometric Series Encyclopedia of Mathematics and Its Applications; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1990; Volume 35. [Google Scholar]
  18. Ruscheweyh, S. New criteria for univalent functions. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1975, 49, 109–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Noonan, J.W.; Thomas, D.K. On the second Hankel derminant of areally mean p-valent functions. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 1976, 223, 337–346. [Google Scholar]
  20. Dienes, P. The Taylor Series: An Introduction to the Theory of Functions of a Complex Variable; New York-Dover Publishing Company: Mineola, NY, USA, 1957. [Google Scholar]
  21. Cantor, D.G. Power series with integral coefficients. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 1963, 69, 362–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Edrei, A. Sur les determinants recurrents et less singularities d’une fonction donée por son developpement de Taylor. Comput. Math. 1940, 7, 20–88. [Google Scholar]
  23. Polya, G.; Schoenberg, I.J. Remarks on de la Vallee Poussin means and convex conformal maps of the circle. Pac. J. Math. 1958, 8, 259–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Janteng, A.; Abdul-Halim, S.; Darus, M. Coefficient inequality for a function whose derivative has positive real part. J. Inequal. Pure Appl. Math. 2006, 7, 50. [Google Scholar]
  25. Mahmood, S.; Srivastava, H.M.; Khan, N.; Ahmad, Q.Z.; Khan, B.; Ali, I. Upper bound of the third Hankel determinant for a subclass of q-starlike functions. Symmetry 2019, 11, 347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Mishra, A.K.; Gochhayat, P. Second, Hankel determinant for a class of analytic functions defined by fractional derivative. Internat. J. Math. Math. Sci. 2008, 2008, 153280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Raza, M.; Malik, S.N. Upper bound of third Hankel determinant for a class of analytic functions related with lemniscate of Bernoulli. J. Inequal. Appl. 2013, 2013, 412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Singh, G.; Singh, G. On the second Hankel determinant for a new subclass of analytic functions. J. Math. Sci. Appl. 2014, 2, 1–3. [Google Scholar]
  29. Ayinla, R.; Bello, R. Toeplitz determinants for a subclass of analytic functions. J. Progress. Res. Math. 2021, 18, 99–106. [Google Scholar]
  30. Radhika, V.; Sivasubramanian, S.; Murugusundaramoorthy, G.; Jahangiri, J.M. Toeplitz matrices whose elements are the coefficients of functions with bounded boundary rotation. J. Complex Anal. 2016, 2016, 4960704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Radhika, V.; Sivasubramanian, S.; Murugusundaramoorthy, G.; Jahangiri, J.M. Toeplitz matrices whose elements are coefficients of Bazilevič functions. Open Math. 2018, 16, 1161–1169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Ramachandran, C.; Kavitha, D. Toeplitz determinant for some subclasses of analytic functions. Glob. J. Pure Appl. Math. 2017, 13, 785–793. [Google Scholar]
  33. Srivastava, H.M.; Ahmad, Q.Z.; Khan, N.; Khan, N.; Khan, B. Hankel and Toeplitz determinants for a subclass of q-starlike functions associated with a general conic domain. Mathematics 2019, 7, 181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Tang, H.; Khan, S.; Hussain, S.; Khan, N. Hankel and Toeplitz determinant for a subclass of multivalent q-starlike functions of order α. AIMS Math. 2021, 6, 5421–5439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Wanas, A.K.; Sakar, F.M.; Oros, G.I.; Cotîrlă, L.-I. Toeplitz Determinants for a Certain Family of Analytic Functions Endowed with Borel Distribution. Symmetry 2023, 15, 262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Ma, W.; Minda, D. A unified treatment of some special classes of univalent functions. In Proceedings of the Conference on Complex Analysis; Li, Z., Ren, F., Yang, L., Zhang, S., Eds.; International Press: New York, NY, USA, 1994; pp. 157–169. [Google Scholar]
  37. Duren, P.L. Univalent Functions; Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany; New York, NY, USA, 1983; Volume 259. [Google Scholar]
  38. Hayami, T.; Owa, S. Generalized Hankel determinant for certain classes. Int. J. Math. Anal. 2010, 4, 2573–2585. [Google Scholar]
  39. Ali, M.F.; Thomas, D.K.; Vasudevarao, A. Toeplitz determinants whose elements are the coefficients of analytic and univalent functions. Bull. Austral. Math. Soc. 2018, 97, 253–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
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

Tang, H.; Gul, I.; Hussain, S.; Noor, S. Bounds for Toeplitz Determinants and Related Inequalities for a New Subclass of Analytic Functions. Mathematics 2023, 11, 3966. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11183966

AMA Style

Tang H, Gul I, Hussain S, Noor S. Bounds for Toeplitz Determinants and Related Inequalities for a New Subclass of Analytic Functions. Mathematics. 2023; 11(18):3966. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11183966

Chicago/Turabian Style

Tang, Huo, Ihtesham Gul, Saqib Hussain, and Saima Noor. 2023. "Bounds for Toeplitz Determinants and Related Inequalities for a New Subclass of Analytic Functions" Mathematics 11, no. 18: 3966. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11183966

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