Next Article in Journal
Consistent Markov Edge Processes and Random Graphs
Previous Article in Journal
Hierarchical Line Loss Allocation Methods for Low-Voltage Distribution Networks with Distributed Photovoltaics
Previous Article in Special Issue
On Certain Subclasses of Analytic Functions Associated with a Symmetric q-Differential Operator
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Sharp Functional Inequalities for Starlike and Convex Functions Defined via a Single-Lobed Elliptic Domain

by
Adel Salim Tayyah
1,†,
Sarem H. Hadi
2,3,*,†,
Abdullah Alatawi
4,†,
Muhammad Abbas
5,† and
Ovidiu Bagdasar
6,7,*
1
Department of Cybersecurity, College of Computer Science and Information Technology, University of Al-Qadisiyah, Diwaniyah 58002, Iraq
2
Department of Mathematics, College of Education for Pure Sciences, University of Basrah, Basrah 61001, Iraq
3
Department of Business Management, Al-Imam University College, Balad 34011, Iraq
4
Department of Scientific and Applied Materials, King Abdullah Air Defence Academy, Taif 26315, Saudi Arabia
5
Department of Mathematics, Abdul Wali Khan University Mardan, Mardan 23200, Pakistan
6
Data Science Research Centre, College of Science & Engineering, University of Derby, Derby DE22 1GB, UK
7
Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Exact Sciences, “1 Decembrie 1918” University of Alba Iulia, 510009 Alba Iulia, Romania
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Mathematics 2025, 13(21), 3367; https://doi.org/10.3390/math13213367
Submission received: 15 September 2025 / Revised: 12 October 2025 / Accepted: 21 October 2025 / Published: 22 October 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Topics in Geometric Function Theory, 2nd Edition)

Abstract

In this paper, we introduce two novel subclasses of analytic functions, namely, starlike and convex functions of Ma–Minda-type, associated with a newly proposed domain. We set sharp bounds on the basic coefficients of these classes and provide sharp estimates of the second- and third-order Hankel determinants, demonstrating the power of our analytic approach, the clarity of its results, and its applicability even in unconventional domains.

1. Introduction

Let A denote the class of normalized analytic functions in the open unit disk D : = { z C : | z | < 1 } , which admit the Taylor series expansion
f ( z ) = z + n = 2 a n z n , z D .
In this setting, we denote by S the subclass of A consisting of functions that are univalent in D .
It is worth noting that the study of the class S has a rich history in geometric function theory. One of the most celebrated problems in this area was the Bieberbach conjecture, proposed in 1916, which asserted that if f S , then | a n | n for every n 2 . The first cases were settled gradually: | a 2 | 2 was established by Bieberbach himself, while the case n = 3 was proved by Löwner using the differential equations that now bear his name. Subsequent contributions by Schaeffer, Spencer, Jenkins, Garabedian, Schiffer, Pedersen, and Ozawa extended the range of verified cases through a variety of analytic and variational techniques. The conjecture remained in full generality for decades until de Branges, in 1985, settled the problem for all n 2 by employing methods involving hypergeometric functions. This landmark result highlights the deep significance of coefficient problems in the theory of univalent functions.
An analytic function f is said to be subordinate to another analytic function g, denoted by f g , if there exists a Schwarz function w, analytic in D with w ( 0 ) = 0 and | w ( z ) | < 1 , such that f ( z ) = g ( w ( z ) ) . In the special case when g is univalent and f ( 0 ) = g ( 0 ) , the subordination relation ensures that f ( D ) g ( D ) .
Let ϕ be an analytic and univalent function in D such that ϕ ( 0 ) = 1 , ϕ ( 0 ) > 0 , and whose image is symmetric with respect to the real axis. Under these assumptions, Ma and Minda [1] extended the notion of classical starlike and convex functions by introducing the subclasses
S * ( ϕ ) : = f A : z f ( z ) f ( z ) ϕ ( z ) , C ( ϕ ) : = f A : 1 + z f ( z ) f ( z ) ϕ ( z ) .
To position the present work within the existing literature and highlight its novelty, we provide a brief overview of selected starlike function classes in Table 1. These classes are constructed by choosing specific functions and include notable examples such as the various Ma–Minda-type classes introduced in recent years [2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]. Table 1 summarizes these classes, their defining functions, and key references. This overview illustrates the research gaps that motivated the present study and emphasizes how our approach, focusing on a single-lobed elliptic domain and combining geometric analysis with computational tools, extends and advances the state-of-the-art methods.
In the present work, instead of choosing ϕ ( z ) to map onto the right half-plane, we consider a univalent function ϕ ( z ) that maps the unit disk D onto a domain resembling a single-lobed elliptical region. Based on this choice, we introduce two classes of functions, which can be seen as particular instances of this general setting.
S L E * : = f A : z f ( z ) f ( z ) ϕ L E ( z ) , z D ,
and
C L E : = f A : 1 + z f ( z ) f ( z ) ϕ L E ( z ) , z D .
where these classes are characterized via the analytic function ϕ L E : D C , which satisfies the following formula:
ϕ L E ( z ) = 2 2 z 2 2 1 + sin 1 2 z 3 = 1 + z 3 + z 2 12 + 11 z 3 324 5 z 4 864 + , z D .
It is clear from Figure 1 that the curves do not intersect themselves, which supports the fact that the function is univalent. This observation can be easily verified using computational software such as Mathematica or Maple, since our function is somewhat complicated and providing a formal proof of univalence is challenging.
Motivated by these challenges, the present work aims to introduce two specific subclasses of univalent functions associated with a single-lobed elliptical domain, denoted as S L E * and C L E , and to determine sharp bounds for their coefficients and the third-order Hankel determinant. This study extends the classical framework of starlike and convex functions by incorporating geometric considerations of the image domain. Meanwhile, the next two results establish explicit representation formulas for functions belonging to the classes S L E * and C L E .
Theorem 1.
Let f be analytic in D . Then f S L E * if and only if
f ( z ) = z exp 0 z N ( ς ) 1 ς d ς , z D ,
for some analytic function N ( z ) satisfying the subordination N ( z ) ϕ L E ( z ) .
Proof. 
Assume f S L E * . Define the functions
N ( ς ) : = ς f ( ς ) f ( ς ) , and r ( ς ) : = f ( ς ) ς .
Then, it follows that N ( ς ) ϕ L E and r ( ς ) 0 . Applying logarithmic differentiation to r ( ς ) , we obtain
r ( ς ) r ( ς ) = N ( ς ) 1 ς , ς D .
Integrating Equation (6) from 0 to z yields the representation in Equation (5). □
Corollary 1.
Let g be analytic in D . Then, g C L E if and only if
g ( z ) = 0 z exp 0 w N ( ς ) 1 ς d ς d w , z D ,
for some analytic function N ( z ) subordinate to ϕ L E .
Proof. 
This result is an immediate consequence of the classical Alexander relation between the classes S L E * and C L E . □
Below, we provide examples to demonstrate that the introduced classes are non-empty. These examples also serve to support the sharpness of the conjectures that will be presented in the coefficient estimation section.
Example 1.
Let us define the following analytic functions:
N 1 ( z ) = 1 + z sin z 5 , N 2 ( z ) = 1 + z e z 7 , N 3 ( z ) = 1 + 3 z z 3 15 .
It can be readily verified that N i ( 0 ) = 1 and the image of N i over the unit disk satisfies N i ( D ) ϕ L E ( D ) for i = 1 , 2 , 3 . Given that ϕ L E S , this inclusion implies that N i ϕ L E for i = 1 , 2 , 3 . Consequently, by invoking Theorem 1 and Corollary 1, it follows that the corresponding functions f i ( z ) (or g i ( z ) ), i = 1 , 2 , 3 , defined accordingly, lie within the classes S L E * (or C L E ) (as illustrated in Figure 2). The corresponding functions are given by
f 1 ( z ) = z exp 1 cos z 5 = z + z 3 10 z 5 300 7 z 7 18000 + , f 2 ( z ) = z exp e z 1 7 = z + z 2 7 + 4 z 3 49 + 71 z 4 2058 + 243 z 5 19208 + , f 3 ( z ) = z exp 9 z z 3 45 = z + z 2 5 + z 3 50 47 z 4 2250 197 z 5 45000 + .
Furthermore,
g 1 ( z ) = z + z 3 30 z 5 1500 z 7 18000 + , g 2 ( z ) = z + z 2 14 + 4 z 3 147 + 71 z 4 8232 + 243 z 5 96040 + , g 3 ( z ) = z + z 2 10 + z 3 150 47 z 4 9000 197 z 5 225000 + .
Figure 2 below illustrates the required inclusion, demonstrating that the introduced function classes are non-empty.
Example 2.
The following formula yields an infinite number of functions:
s n ( z ) = z exp 0 z 1 ( 2 ς 2 n ) / 2 1 + sin 1 2 ς n / 3 ς d ς , z D , n = 1 , 2 , 3 , ,
belonging to S L E * . In particular,
s 1 ( z ) = z + z 2 3 + 7 z 3 72 + 61 z 4 1944 + 281 z 5 46656 + ,
s 2 ( z ) = z + z 3 6 + 5 z 5 144 + 77 z 7 7776 + ,
s 3 ( z ) = z + z 4 9 + 13 z 7 648 + 97 z 10 17496 + ,
s 4 ( z ) = z + z 5 12 + z 9 72 + .
Example 3.
The following formula yields an infinite number of functions:
c n ( z ) = 0 z exp 0 w 1 ( 2 ς 2 n ) / 2 1 + sin 1 2 ς n / 3 ς d ς d w , z D , n = 1 , 2 , 3 , ,
belonging to C L E , and
c 1 ( z ) = z + z 2 6 + 7 z 3 216 + 61 z 4 7776 + 281 z 5 233280 + ,
c 2 ( z ) = z + z 3 18 + z 5 144 + 11 z 7 7776 + ,
c 3 ( z ) = z + z 4 36 + 13 z 7 4536 + 97 z 10 174960 ,
c 4 ( z ) = z + z 5 60 + z 9 648 + .
The qth Hankel determinant for analytic functions f A was introduced by Pommerenke [10] and is defined 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 , n 1 , q 1 .
In general, sharp bounds for the second Hankel determinant
| H 2 , 2 ( f ) | = a 2 a 3 a 3 a 4 = a 2 a 4 a 3 2 ,
for various subclasses of univalent functions can often be derived relatively easily using standard techniques (see, e.g., [11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20]). However, determining sharp bounds for the third Hankel determinant
| H 3 , 1 ( f ) | = a 1 a 2 a 3 a 2 a 3 a 4 a 3 a 4 a 5 .
Since a 1 = 1 in this case, the formula simplifies to
| H 3 , 1 ( f ) | = 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 Hankel determinants, particularly of higher order, has gained increasing attention in geometric function theory due to their deep connections with coefficient problems and complex analytic structures. While the second Hankel determinant has been extensively analyzed for various subclasses of univalent functions, sharp bounds for the third-order determinant remain more challenging, motivating further investigation. Moreover, recent advances in defining univalent functions through image domains with specific geometric properties, such as elliptical regions, provide new opportunities to extend classical results (see [21,22,23]). To date, only a few sharp bounds have been obtained, while several non-sharp bounds for H 3 , 1 ( f ) have been reported in the literature, e.g., [24,25,26,27,28,29]. Recently, some authors [30,31,32,33,34,35] have successfully established sharp estimates for H 3 , 1 ( f ) in certain subclasses of univalent functions.
Despite previous studies providing both sharp and non-sharp estimates for the third-order Hankel determinant in various subclasses, precise bounds for functions associated with single-lobed elliptical domains remain unexplored. This motivates the present work, which aims to establish accurate coefficient bounds and determinant estimates, thereby contributing to a deeper understanding of univalent function theory in geometrically defined domains and laying the groundwork for further investigations.

2. Fundamental Lemmas

The fundamental lemmas serve as essential analytical tools for establishing the subsequent results. They provide core estimates and inequalities for the coefficients of functions belonging to the Carathéodory class P , as given by the expression
p ( z ) = 1 + n = 1 c n z n , z D ,
which will be employed in proving the main results.
Lemma 1
([36]). Let p P with Equation (19). Then,
| c k | 2 , k N ,
| c k + n μ c k c n | 2 , μ ( 0 , 1 ] , k , n N ,
| c 2 η c 1 2 | 2 max { 1 , | 2 η 1 | } , η C .
Lemma 2
([37]). Let p P with Equation (19), and suppose R [ 0 , 1 ] satisfies R ( 2 R 1 ) S R . Then,
| S c 1 3 2 R c 1 c 2 + c 3 | 2 .
Lemma 3
([38]). Let α , β , γ , and ζ satisfy α , ζ ( 0 , 1 ) with
8 ζ ( 1 ζ ) ( α β 2 γ ) 2 + ( α ( ζ + α ) β ) 2 + α ( 1 α ) ( β 2 ζ α ) 2 4 ζ α 2 ( 1 α ) 2 ( 1 ζ ) .
Then, for p P with Equation (19), we have
γ c 1 4 + ζ c 2 2 + 2 α c 1 c 3 3 2 β c 1 2 c 2 c 4 2 .
Lemma 4
([39,40,41]). Let p P with Equation (17). Then,
2 c 2 = c 1 2 + ζ ( 4 c 1 2 ) ,
4 c 3 = c 1 3 + 2 ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 ζ ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 ζ 2 + 2 ( 4 c 1 2 ) ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) η ,
8 c 4 = c 1 4 + ( 4 c 1 2 ) ζ c 1 2 ( ζ 2 3 ζ + 3 ) + 4 ζ 4 ( 4 c 1 2 ) ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) c 1 ( ζ 1 ) η + ζ ¯ η 2 ( 1 | η | 2 ) ρ ,
for some ρ , ζ , η such that max { | ρ | , | ζ | , | η | } 1 .

3. Estimate of 2nd Hankel Determinant

In this section, we aim to compute the initial coefficients a n for n = 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 by determining their sharp bounds for both our classes.
Theorem 2.
Let f S L E * . Then
| a 2 | 1 3 , | a 3 | 1 6 , | a 4 | 1 9 , | a 5 | 1 12 .
These estimates are sharp by Equations (9)–(12).
Proof. 
Let f S L E * . Then,
z f ( z ) f ( z ) = 2 2 ( ω ( z ) ) 2 2 1 + sin 1 2 ω ( z ) 3 , z D ,
for some Schwarz function ω ( z ) .
It is possible to assume the existence of a function p P . Then, a well-known relation connects it to a Schwarz function, which can be expressed as follows:
p ( z ) = 1 + ω ( z ) 1 ω ( z ) = 1 + c 1 z + c 2 z 2 + c 3 z 3 + .
Hence,
ω ( z ) = 1 2 c 1 z + 1 2 c 2 1 4 c 1 2 z 2 + 1 8 c 1 3 1 2 c 1 c 2 + 1 2 c 3 z 3 + 1 2 c 4 1 2 c 1 c 3 1 4 c 2 2 1 16 c 1 4 + 3 8 c 1 2 c 2 z 4 + .
Substituting Equation (29) into Equation (28), and performing some simplifications, we obtain
1 + a 2 z + ( a 2 2 + 2 a 3 ) z 2 + a 2 3 + 2 a 2 ( a 2 2 a 3 ) a 2 a 3 + 3 a 4 z 3 + a 2 4 3 a 2 2 a 3 + 3 ( a 2 2 a 3 ) a 3 + a 3 2 + 2 a 2 ( a 2 3 + 2 a 2 a 3 a 4 ) 2 a 2 a 4 + 4 a 5 z 4 + = 1 + c 1 z 6 + 3 c 1 2 + 8 c 2 48 z 2 + 11 c 1 3 2592 1 48 c 1 ( c 1 2 2 c 2 ) + c 1 3 4 c 1 c 2 + 4 c 3 24 z 3 + ( 5 c 1 4 13824 11 c 1 2 ( c 1 2 2 c 2 ) 1728 + 3 c 1 4 12 c 1 2 c 2 + 4 c 2 2 + 8 c 1 c 3 192 + c 1 4 + 6 c 1 2 c 2 4 c 2 2 8 c 1 c 3 + 8 c 4 48 ) z 4 + ,
Now, by comparing the coefficients of both sides of Equation (30), it follows that
a 2 = 1 6 c 1 ,
a 3 = 1 12 ( c 2 5 24 c 1 2 ) ,
a 4 = 1 18 ( 61 864 c 1 3 432 864 c 1 c 2 + c 3 ) ,
a 5 = 1 746496 ( 7776 c 1 2 c 2 9072 c 2 2 16416 c 1 c 3 + 31104 c 4 1123 c 1 4 ) ,
These formulas express the initial coefficients a 2 , a 3 , a 4 , a 5 explicitly in terms of the coefficients c 1 , c 2 , c 3 , c 4 of the auxiliary function p ( z ) defined in Equation (29).
From Equations (20) and (31), it follows that
| a 2 | 1 3 .
Also, from Equations (22) and (32), we obtain
| a 3 | 1 6 .
We can also rewrite Equation (33) in the following form:
a 4 = 1 18 61 864 c 1 3 2 · 216 864 c 1 c 2 + c 3 .
Assuming R = 216 864 [ 0 , 1 ] and S = 61 864 , the inequality R ( 2 R 1 ) S R is satisfied. Accordingly, using Equation (23), we obtain
| a 4 | 1 9 .
We can rewrite Equation (34) as follows:
a 5 = 1 24 γ c 1 4 + ζ c 2 2 + 2 α c 1 c 3 3 2 β c 1 2 c 2 c 4 ,
where
γ = 1123 31104 , ζ = 7 24 , α = 19 72 , β = 1 6 .
Since
8 ζ ( 1 ζ ) ( α β 2 γ ) 2 + ( α ( ζ + α ) β ) 2 + α ( 1 α ) ( β 2 ζ α ) 2 = 0.002 ,
and
4 ζ α 2 ( 1 α ) 2 ( 1 ζ ) = 0.031 ,
then, applying Equation (24) in Lemma 3, we obtain
| a 5 | 1 12 .
The desired estimates are thus established. □
Motivated by the sharp bounds obtained for the initial coefficients, we propose the following conjecture for higher-order coefficients:
Conjecture 1.
Let  f S L E * . Then,
| a k | 1 3 ( k 1 ) , k = 2 , 3 , .
Theorem 3.
Let  f C L E . Then,
| a 2 | 1 6 , | a 3 | 1 18 , | a 4 | 1 36 , | a 5 | 1 60 .
These estimates are sharp by Equations (14)–(17).
Proof. 
Let f C L E . Then,
1 + z f ( z ) f ( z ) = 2 2 ( ω ( z ) ) 2 2 1 + sin 1 2 ω ( z ) 3 , z D ,
for some Schwarz function ω ( z ) satisfying Equation (29). Substituting Equation (29) into Equation (35), followed by algebraic simplification, leads to
1 + 2 z a 2 + z 2 ( 4 a 2 2 + 6 a 3 ) + 2 z 3 ( 4 a 2 3 9 a 2 a 3 + 6 a 4 ) + z 4 6 ( 4 a 2 2 3 a 3 ) a 3 + 2 a 2 ( 8 a 2 3 + 12 a 2 a 3 4 a 4 ) 24 a 2 a 4 + 20 a 5 + = 1 + c 1 z 6 + 3 c 1 2 + 8 c 2 48 z 2 + 11 c 1 3 2592 1 48 c 1 ( c 1 2 2 c 2 ) + c 1 3 4 c 1 c 2 + 4 c 3 24 z 3 + ( 5 c 1 4 13824 11 c 1 2 ( c 1 2 2 c 2 ) 1728 + 3 c 1 4 12 c 1 2 c 2 + 4 c 2 2 + 8 c 1 c 3 192 + c 1 4 + 6 c 1 2 c 2 4 c 2 2 8 c 1 c 3 + 8 c 4 48 ) z 4 + .
By comparing the corresponding coefficients of both sides in Equation (36), the following relations are obtained:
a 2 = c 1 12 ,
a 3 = 1 36 ( c 2 5 24 c 1 2 ) ,
a 4 = 1 72 ( 61 864 c 1 3 432 864 c 1 c 2 + c 3 ) ,
a 5 = 1 3732480 ( 1123 c 1 4 9072 c 2 2 16416 c 1 c 3 + 7776 c 1 2 c 2 + 31104 c 4 ) ,
The remaining steps of the proof follow precisely the same framework employed in the proof of Theorem 2. In particular, the argument is completed by applying Lemmas 1–3 in the same logical order and deductive sequence. Hence, the structure of the proof is finalized, and its validity is thus established. □
We conclude this section by presenting the following conjecture, which arises naturally from the estimates established in the above theorem, reflecting the sharp estimates obtained for the initial coefficients and generalizing them to higher-order coefficients.
Conjecture 2.
Let  f C L E . Then
| a k | 1 3 k ( k 1 ) , k = 2 , 3 , .
In subsequent estimates, we examined sharp bounds of the second-order Hankel determinant for analytic classes (starlike and convex).
Theorem 4.
Let f S L E * . Then
| a 2 a 4 a 3 2 | 1 36 .
The sharpness is attained for the function given by Equation (10).
Proof. 
Starting from the established coefficient relationships, we can express
a 2 a 4 a 3 2 = 263 746496 c 1 4 1 576 c 1 2 c 2 1 144 c 2 2 + 1 108 c 1 c 3 .
By applying Lemma 4 with the substitutions c 1 = c , | η | = 1 , and y = | δ | , we obtain
| a 2 a 4 a 3 2 | = | 47 746496 c 4 1 432 ( 4 c 2 ) c 2 δ 2 + 1 3456 ( 4 c 2 ) c 2 δ + 1 216 c ( 4 c 2 ) ( 1 | δ | 2 ) η 1 576 ( 4 c 2 ) 2 δ 2 | .
Applying the triangle inequality and taking absolute values leads to
| a 2 a 4 a 3 2 | 47 746496 c 4 + 1 432 ( 4 c 2 ) c 2 y 2 + 1 3456 ( 4 c 2 ) c 2 y + 1 216 c ( 4 c 2 ) ( 1 y 2 ) + 1 576 ( 4 c 2 ) 2 y 2 : = M ( y , c ) .
In order to proceed, we aim to maximize M ( y , c ) . Differentiating M ( y , c ) with respect to y, we obtain
M y = 1 216 ( 4 c 2 ) c 2 y + 1 3456 ( 4 c 2 ) c 2 1 108 c ( 4 c 2 ) y + 1 288 ( 4 c 2 ) 2 y = 1 3456 ( 4 c 2 ) 48 y + 4 y c 2 32 c y + c 2 .
It is easy to verify that M y 0 for y [ 0 , 1 ] . Therefore, the function M ( y , c ) attains its maximum at y = 1 , which gives
M ( c ) M ( 1 , c ) = 47 746496 c 4 + 1 384 ( 4 c 2 ) c 2 + 1 576 ( 4 c 2 ) 2 .
Next, we determine the value of c that maximizes M ( c ) . Differentiating M ( c ) with respect to c, we find
M ( c ) = 1 186624 c ( 1296 + 601 c 2 ) .
Setting M ( c ) = 0 yields three roots: c = 0 and two complex roots. Since c = 0 is the only root in the interval [ 0 , 2 ] and M ( 0 ) < 0 , the maximum occurs at c = 0 . Thus, we obtain
| a 2 a 4 a 3 2 | M ( 1 , 0 ) = 1 36 .
This completes the argument, confirming the stated inequality. □
By adopting a reasoning analogous to that employed for the class S L E * , the proof for the class C L E follows similarly. Hence, we state the result without providing the full proof.
Theorem 5.
Let f C L E . Then
| a 2 a 4 a 3 2 | 1 324 .
The bound is sharp and is attained by the function given in Equation (15).
After obtaining precise estimates for the initial coefficients and the second-order Hankel determinants, we naturally proceed to study the third-order Hankel determinants. This transition reflects the direct connection between the function coefficients and the associated geometric analyses, allowing for more complete and accurate results.

4. Third Hankel Determinants

In this section, we present a precise and systematic methodology for establishing the sharp upper bounds of the third-order Hankel determinants for both classes S L E * and C L E . The approach adopted here carefully combines analytical techniques and the application of previously developed lemmas, aiming to provide a rigorous and comprehensive treatment of these extremal problems.
Theorem 6.
Let f S L E * . Then,
| H 3 , 1 ( f ) | 1 81 .
This upper bound is sharp by Equation (11).
Proof. 
Let f S L E * . Given the rotational invariance of the class S L E * and the functional H 3 , 1 ( f ) , it is permissible to restrict c 1 to the interval [ 0 , 2 ] without loss of generality. Substituting Equations (31)–(34) into Equation (18), we arrive at
H 3 , 1 ( f ) = 1 483729408 ( 16957 c 1 6 88668 c 1 4 c 2 + 113832 c 1 3 c 3 + 113724 c 1 2 c 2 2 909792 c 1 2 c 4 + 1353024 c 1 c 2 c 3 769824 c 2 3 + 1679616 c 2 c 4 1492992 c 3 2 ) .
By making use of Equations (25)–(27) and simplifying the expressions, we obtain
88 668 c 1 4 c 2 = 44 334 c 1 6 + ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 4 ζ
113 832 c 1 3 c 3 = 28 458 ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 4 ζ 2 + 56 916 c 1 3 ( 4 c 1 2 ) ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) η + 56 916 ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 4 ζ + 28 458 c 1 6
113 724 c 1 2 c 2 2 = 28 431 c 1 6 + 56 862 ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 4 ζ + 28 431 ( 4 c 1 2 ) 2 c 1 2 ζ 2
909 792 c 1 2 c 4 = 454 896 ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 2 η 2 ζ ¯ 341 172 ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 4 ζ 2 + 454 896 ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 3 η + 454 896 ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 2 ζ 2 + 113 724 ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 4 ζ 3 + 113 724 c 1 6 + 454 896 ( 1 | η | 2 ) ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 2 ρ + 341 172 ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 4 ζ 454 896 ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 3 ζ η
1 353 024 c 1 c 2 c 3 = 169 128 ( 4 c 1 2 ) 2 c 1 2 ζ 3 169 128 ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 4 ζ 2 + 338 256 ( 4 c 1 2 ) 2 ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) c 1 ζ η + 338 256 ( 4 c 1 2 ) 2 c 1 2 ζ 2 + 338 256 ( 4 c 1 2 ) ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) c 1 3 η + 507 384 ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 4 ζ + 169 128 c 1 6
769 824 c 2 3 = 96 228 c 1 6 + 288 684 ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 4 ζ + 288 684 ( 4 c 1 2 ) 2 c 1 2 ζ 2 + 96 228 ( 4 c 1 2 ) 3 ζ 3
1 679 616 c 2 c 4 = 104 976 c 1 6 + 104 976 ( 4 c 1 2 ) 2 c 1 2 ζ 4 + 419 904 ( 4 c 1 2 ) 2 ζ 3 314 928 ( 4 c 1 2 ) 2 c 1 2 ζ 3 + 104 976 ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 4 ζ 3 419 904 ( 4 c 1 2 ) ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) c 1 2 η 2 ζ ¯ 419 904 ( 4 c 1 2 ) 2 ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) ζ η 2 ζ ¯ + 419 904 ( 4 c 1 2 ) ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) ( 1 | η | 2 ) c 1 2 ρ + 419 904 ( 4 c 1 2 ) 2 ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) ( 1 | η | 2 ) ζ ρ 419 904 ( 4 c 1 2 ) 2 ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) c 1 ζ 2 η + 419 904 ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 3 η + 419 904 ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 4 ζ 419 904 ( 4 c 1 2 ) ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) c 1 3 ζ η + 419 904 ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) ( 4 c 1 2 ) 2 c 1 ζ η 419 904 ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 2 ζ 2 104 976 ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 4 ζ 2 + 524 880 ( 4 c 1 2 ) 2 c 1 2 ζ 2
1 492 992 c 3 2 = 93 312 c 1 6 + 93 312 ( 4 c 1 2 ) 2 c 1 2 ζ 4 373 248 ( 4 c 1 2 ) 2 c 1 2 ζ 3 + 373 248 ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) 2 ( 4 c 1 2 ) 2 η 2 + 373 248 ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 4 ζ 186 624 ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 4 ζ 2 + 373 248 ( 4 c 1 2 ) 2 c 1 2 ζ 2 + 373 248 ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 3 η + 746 496 ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) ( 4 c 1 2 ) 2 c 1 ζ η 373 248 ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) ( 4 c 1 2 ) 2 c 1 ζ 2 η
Before presenting the final expressions for H 3 , 1 ( f ) , we decompose each contributing term by substituting the identities from Lemma 4 and the coefficient relations, resulting in the following detailed components:
H 3 , 1 ( f ) = 1 483 729 408 I 0 ( c , ζ ) + I 1 ( c , ζ ) η + I 2 ( c , ζ ) η 2 + Ψ ( c , ζ , η ) ρ ,
I 0 ( c , ζ ) = 352 c 1 6 + ( 4 c 1 2 ) [ ( 4 c 1 2 ) ( 11 664 ζ 4 c 1 2 + 229 635 ζ 2 c 1 2 + 34 992 ζ 3 14 580 ζ 3 c 1 2 ) + ( 6 372 ζ c 1 4 8 748 ζ 3 c 1 4 + 225 234 ζ 2 c 1 4 874 800 ζ 2 c 1 2 ) ] ,
I 1 ( c , ζ ) = ( 4 c 1 2 ) ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) ( 11 664 ζ c 1 46 656 ζ 2 c 1 ) ( 4 c 1 2 ) 13 068 c 1 3 + 34 992 ζ c 1 3 ,
I 2 ( c , ζ ) = ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) ( 4 c 1 2 ) ( 46 656 | ζ | 2 373 248 ) ( 4 c 1 2 ) + 34 992 ζ ¯ c 1 2 ,
Ψ ( c , ζ , η ) = ( 1 | η | 2 ) ( 1 | ζ | 2 ) ( 4 c 1 2 ) 34 992 c 1 2 + 419 904 ( 4 c 1 2 ) ζ ,
for some ρ , ζ , η such that max { | ρ | , | ζ | , | η | } 1 .
After replacing | ζ | with x, | η | with y,and setting c : = c 1 . Since the assumption that | ρ | 1 , then the expression simplifies to the following:
| H 3 , 1 ( f ) | 1 483729408 | I 0 ( c , ζ ) | + | I 1 ( c , ζ ) | y + | I 2 ( c , ζ ) | y 2 + | Ψ ( c , ζ , η ) | 1 483729408 T ( c , x , y ) ,
where
T ( c , x , y ) = v 0 ( c , x ) + v 1 ( c , x ) y + v 2 ( c , x ) y 2 + v 3 ( c , x ) ( 1 y 2 ) ,
with
v 0 ( c , x ) = 352 c 6 + ( 4 c 2 ) [ ( 4 c 2 ) ( 11664 x 4 c 2 + 229635 x 2 c 2 + 34992 x 3 + 14580 x 3 c 2 ) + ( 6372 x c 4 + 8748 x 3 c 4 + 225234 x 2 c 4 + 874800 x 2 c 2 ) ] , v 1 ( c , x ) = ( 4 c 2 ) ( 1 x 2 ) ( 11664 x c + 46656 x 2 c ) ( 4 c 2 ) + 13068 c 3 + 34992 x c 3 , v 2 ( c , x ) = ( 1 x 2 ) ( 4 c 2 ) ( 46656 x 2 + 373248 ) ( 4 c 2 ) + 34992 x c 2 , v 3 ( c , x ) = ( 1 x 2 ) ( 4 c 2 ) 34992 c 2 + 419904 ( 4 c 2 ) x .
To accomplish this, the analysis must be conducted in three distinct parts: first, within the interior of the domain S = [ 0 , 2 ] × [ 0 , 1 ] × [ 0 , 1 ] ; second, on its boundary faces; and finally, along its edges.
Case I: In order to examine how the function T ( c , x , y ) changes as y varies, we proceed by evaluating its partial derivative with respect to y:
T y = ( 4 c 2 ) ( 1 x 2 ) [ 108 ( 432 c x ( 1 + 4 x ) + c 3 ( 121 216 x + 432 x 2 ) 3456 ( 8 9 x + x 2 ) y + 216 c 2 ( 35 39 x + 4 x 2 ) y ) ] .
Imposing the condition T y = 0 , we obtain
y = c 121 c 2 + 1296 x + 216 x 4 c 2 ( 2 x 1 ) 216 ( x 1 ) 4 4 c 2 ( 8 x ) 3 c 2 = y p .
If y p is a critical point within Λ , which possible only if
121 c 3 + 1296 x c + 216 4 c 2 c x ( 1 + 2 x ) + 864 ( 1 x ) 4 c 2 ( 8 x ) < 648 ( 1 x ) c 2
and
c 2 > 16 ( 8 x ) ( 35 4 x ) .
Now, only a solution that can meet both the inequalities in Equations (42) and (43) will be accepted as a critical point. Assuming ( x ) = 16 ( 8 x ) ( 35 4 x ) and ( x ) = 48 ( 35 4 x ) 2 < 0 , which yields to ( x ) is decreasing function, that is
c 2 > 112 31 .
Suppose ( x ) = 16 ( 8 x ) ( 35 4 x ) . Thus, ( x ) decreases over ( 0 , 1 ) . Thus, c 2 > 0 , and a straightforward task illustrates that Equation (42) will not hold for all values of x ( 0 , 1 ) . This implies that we have not found a critical point for T in ( 0 , 2 ) × ( 0 , 1 ) × ( 0 , 1 ) .
Case II: Interior of all six faces of the cuboid
(i) If c = 0 , the function T reduces
h 1 ( x , y ) = 559872 x 3 + 6718464 1 x 2 x 1 y 2 + 16 1 x 2 46656 x 2 + 373248 y 2 ,
then
h 1 y = 32 1 x 2 46656 x 2 + 373248 y 13436928 x 1 x 2 y 0 for y ( 0 , 1 ) ,
which implies that h 1 has no optimal points in ( 0 , 1 ) × ( 0 , 1 ) .
(ii) If c = 2 , we obtain
T ( 2 , x , y ) = 22528 .
(iii) If x = 0 , we get
h 2 ( c , y ) = 352 c 6 + 34992 4 c 2 c 2 1 y 2 + 373248 4 c 2 2 y 2 + 13068 4 c 2 c 3 y ,
then h 2 y = 0 gives
y = 121 c 3 216 35 c 2 128 .
The range of y ( 0 , 1 ) , if c > c 0 1.94313 Also h 2 c = 0 gives
2112 c 5 26136 c 4 y 69984 c 3 1 y 2 1492992 4 c 2 c y 2 + 69984 4 c 2 c 1 y 2 + 39204 4 c 2 c 2 y .
Putting the value of y gives
3637095 c 9 369172968 c 7 + 3240787200 c 5 9602924544 c 3 + 9172942848 c = 0 .
Solving c within the range ( 0 , 2 ) , we have c 1.42775 . This indicates that the function T ( c , 0 , y ) has no optimal solution.
(iv) If q = 1 , then the function T reduces
h 3 ( c , 1 , y ) = 15877 c 6 1925424 c 4 + 7313328 c 2 + 559872
then h 3 c = 0 gives the critical point c 1.39499 , which yields that the maximum value of h 3 is 7.6171 . (i.e., ( h 3 7.6171 ) ) .
(v) If y = 0 , the function T reduces
h 4 ( c , x ) = 139968 c 2 34992 c 4 + 352 c 6 + 6718464 x 3359232 c 2 x + 445392 c 4 x 6372 c 6 x + 7033392 c 2 x 2 1775952 c 4 x 2 + 4401 c 6 x 2 6158592 x 3 + 3312576 c 2 x 3 466560 c 4 x 3 + 5832 c 6 x 3 + 186624 c 2 x 4 93312 c 4 x 4 + 11664 c 6 x 4 .
Thus
h 4 c = 69984 c 5 x 4 + 34992 c 5 x 3 + 26406 c 5 x 2 38232 c 5 x + 2112 c 5 373248 c 3 x 4 1866240 c 3 x 3 7103808 c 3 x 2 + 1781568 c 3 x 139968 c 3 + 373248 c x 4 + 6625152 c x 3 + 14066784 c x 2 6718464 c x + 279936 c
and
h 4 x = 46656 c 6 x 3 + 17496 c 6 x 2 + 8802 c 6 x 6372 c 6 373248 c 4 x 3 1399680 c 4 x 2 3551904 c 4 x + 445392 c 4 + 746496 c 2 x 3 + 9937728 c 2 x 2 + 14066784 c 2 x 3359232 c 2 18475776 x 2 + 6718464 .
Computation shows that the system of equations h 4 c = 0 and h 4 x = 0 have no exact solution in ( 0 , 2 ) × ( 0 , 1 ) .
(vi) on the face y = 1 , the function T reduces
h 5 ( c , x ) = 11664 c 6 x 4 + 5832 c 6 x 3 + 4401 c 6 x 2 6372 c 6 x + 352 c 6 46656 c 5 x 4 + 23328 c 5 x 3 + 59724 c 5 x 2 23328 c 5 x 13068 c 5 139968 c 4 x 4 11664 c 4 x 3 2137536 c 4 x 2 9504 c 4 x + 373248 c 4 + 373248 c 3 x 4 46656 c 3 x 3 425520 c 3 x 2 + 46656 c 3 x + 52272 c 3 + 559872 c 2 x 4 186624 c 2 x 3 + 9786096 c 2 x 2 + 139968 c 2 x 2985984 c 2 746496 c x 4 186624 c x 3 + 746496 c x 2 + 186624 c x 746496 x 4 + 559872 x 3 5225472 x 2 + 5971968 .
Thus
h 5 c = 69984 c 5 x 4 + 34992 c 5 x 3 + 26406 c 5 x 2 38232 c 5 x + 2112 c 5 233280 c 4 x 4 + 116640 c 4 x 3 + 298620 c 4 x 2 116640 c 4 x 65340 c 4 559872 c 3 x 4 46656 c 3 x 3 8550144 c 3 x 2 38016 c 3 x + 1492992 c 3 + 1119744 c 2 x 4 139968 c 2 x 3 1276560 c 2 x 2 + 139968 c 2 x + 156816 c 2 + 1119744 c x 4 373248 c x 3 + 19572192 c x 2 + 279936 c x 5971968 c 746496 x 4 186624 x 3 + 746496 x 2 + 186624 x
and
h 5 x = 186624 c + 139968 c 2 + 46656 c 3 9504 c 4 23328 c 5 6372 c 6 10450944 x + 1492992 c x + 19572192 c 2 x 851040 c 3 x 4275072 c 4 x + 119448 c 5 x + 8802 c 6 x + 1679616 x 2 559872 c x 2 559872 c 2 x 2 139968 c 3 x 2 34992 c 4 x 2 + 69984 c 5 x 2 + 17496 c 6 x 2 2985984 x 3 2985984 c x 3 + 2239488 c 2 x 3 + 1492992 c 3 x 3 559872 c 4 x 3 186624 c 5 x 3 + 46656 c 6 x 3 .
Similar computation indicates that the system of equations h 4 c = 0 and h 4 x = 0 have no exact solution in ( 0 , 2 ) × ( 0 , 1 ) .
Case III: 12 edges of the cuboid
(i) If x = y = 0 , then
h 6 ( c ) = 352 c 6 34992 c 4 + 139968 c 2 ,
for h 6 c = 0 gives the critical point c 1.43677 , where the max value is achieved as follows
h 6 ( c ) 142920 .
(ii) x = 0 , y = 1 , then
h 7 ( c ) = 352 c 6 13068 c 5 + 373248 c 4 + 52272 c 3 2985984 c 2 + 5971968 ,
It is readily to show that h 7 c 0 , which indicates that the function is decreasing. Furthermore, the maximum value is accurate at c = 0
h 7 ( c ) 5971968 .
(iii) If c = x = 0 , then
h 8 ( y ) = 5971968 y 2 ,
It is clear that h 8 c > 0 , which shows that h 8 is increasing function and the max value is obtained, when y = 1
h 8 ( y ) = 5971968 .
(iv) For x = y = 1 and x = 1 , y = 0 , it follows that
h 9 ( c ) = T ( c , 1 , 1 ) = T ( c , 1 , 0 ) = 15877 c 6 1925424 c 4 + 7313328 c 2 + 559872 ,
Setting  h 9 c = 0 , we obtain a critical point c = 1.39499 . At this value of c, the function h 9 ( c ) reaches its highest value, which is
h 9 ( c ) 7.61719 .
(v) If c = 0 and x = 1 , then
h 1 0 ( y ) = T ( 0 , 1 , y ) = 559872 .
(vi) On c = 2 , it follows that
T ( 2 , 0 , y ) = T ( 2 , 1 , y ) = T ( 2 , x , 0 ) = T ( 2 , x , 1 ) = 22528 .
(vii) If c = 0 and y = 0 , then
h 11 ( x ) = 559872 x 11 x 2 12 ,
and computation generates that h 11 x 0 , which means h 1 1 is decreasing function and its maximum value achieves when x = 0 ; that is,
h 11 ( x ) 0 .
(viii) On the edge c = 0 and y = 1 , then
h 12 ( x ) = 746496 x 4 + 559872 x 3 5225472 x 2 + 5971968 ,
For h 12 x = 0 , we obtain a critical value x = 0 , where the maximum value of h 12 ( x ) is
h 12 ( x ) 5971968 .
Hence, we deduce that
T ( c , x , y ) 5971968 .
Then, the value of inequality H 3 , 1 ( f ) is
| H 3 , 1 ( f ) | 1 81 = 0.01234 .
Thus, the inequality stands proven. □
Theorem 7.
Let f C L E . Then,
H 3 , 1 ( f ) 1 1296 .
This upper bound is sharp by Equation (16).
Proof. 
Assume that f C L E . Due to the rotational invariance of both the class C L E and the functional H 3 , 1 ( f ) , one may restrict the first coefficient to the range c 1 [ 0 , 2 ] without loss of generality. By substituting Equations (37)–(40) into Equation (18), the expression for the Hankel determinant takes the form
H 3 , 1 ( f ) = 1 19349176320 ( 40963 c 1 6 247968 c 1 4 c 2 + 297216 c 1 3 c 3 + 422496 c 1 2 c 2 2 2052864 c 1 2 c 4 + 2612736 c 1 c 2 c 3 1721088 c 2 3 + 4478976 c 2 c 4 3732480 c 3 2 ) .
Proceeding in a manner similar to the computations carried out in the proof of Theorem 6, and upon substituting | ζ | = x , | η | = y , and c : = c 1 , we arrive at
| H 3 , 1 ( f ) | 1 19349176320 T ( c , x , y ) ,
where
T ( c , x , y ) = v 0 ( c , x ) + v 1 ( c , x ) y + v 2 ( c , x ) y 2 + v 3 ( c , x ) ( 1 y 2 ) ,
with
v 0 ( c , x ) = 1589 c 6 + ( 4 c 2 ) [ ( 4 c 2 ) 259200 x 3 + 2539512 x 2 c 2 + 18144 x 3 c 2 + 46656 x 4 c 2 + 2146176 x 2 c 2 + 769824 c 4 + 12960 x c 4 + 867456 x 2 c 4 + 23328 x 3 c 4 ] , v 1 ( c , x ) = ( 4 c 2 ) ( 1 x 2 ) ( 4 c 2 ) ( 93312 x c + 186624 x 2 c ) + 38016 c 3 + 93312 x c 3 , v 2 ( c , x ) = ( 1 x 2 ) ( 4 c 2 ) ( 933120 + 186624 x 2 ) ( 4 c 2 ) + 93312 c 2 x , v 3 ( c , x ) = ( 4 c 2 ) ( 1 x 2 ) 93312 c 2 + 1119744 ( 4 c 2 ) x .
By performing the calculations for the above equations and using the techniques adopted in Theorem 6, we arrive at
| H 3 , 1 | 1 19349176320 T ( 0 , x , 1 ) = 1 1296 .
The proof is now complete. □

5. Conclusions

In this work, within the framework of Ma and Minda’s differential subordination and by introducing a novel lobed elliptical domain for the function ϕ ( z ) , we have developed new subclasses of starlike and convex functions. Our analysis included deriving precise estimates for the initial coefficients up to the fifth order and determining sharp bounds for the second- and third-order Hankel determinants, verifying the sharpness of these results for both classes. Figure illustrations and analytical computations confirmed the non-emptiness of the introduced classes, highlighting the practical relevance of our approach. These results offer potential applications in geometric function theory, particularly in studying coefficient problems for complex analytic functions, as well as in computational and geometric modeling of analytic mappings. Furthermore, this study opens avenues for future research, including the exploration of additional subclasses associated with similar or more generalized domains, the investigation of higher-order Hankel determinants, and the integration of computational tools for broader experimental validation. The proposed domain can also be applied to other topics, such as those discussed in [42,43,44]. Overall, our findings contribute to advancing the understanding of geometric structures in analytic function theory and provide a foundation for subsequent theoretical and applied developments.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.S.T. and S.H.H.; methodology, A.S.T., S.H.H. and A.A.; software, A.S.T., S.H.H. and A.A.; validation, A.S.T., S.H.H., A.A., M.A. and O.B.; formal analysis, A.S.T., S.H.H. and A.A.; investigation, A.S.T., S.H.H., A.A., M.A. and O.B.; resources, A.S.T., S.H.H. and A.A.; data curation, S.H.H.; writing—original draft preparation, A.S.T., S.H.H., A.A., M.A. and O.B.; writing—review and editing, A.S.T. and S.H.H.; visualization, A.S.T., S.H.H., A.A., M.A. and O.B.; supervision, A.S.T. and S.H.H.; project administration, S.H.H.; funding acquisition, A.S.T., S.H.H., M.A. and O.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the “1 Decembrie 1918” University of Alba Iulia through scientific research funds.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Acknowledgments

The researchers would like to express their sincere gratitude to the editors and reviewers for their valuable efforts that contributed to improving the quality of this 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 Proceeding of the Conference on Complex Analysis; Li, Z., Ren, F., Yang, L., Zhang, S., Eds.; International Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1994; pp. 157–169. [Google Scholar]
  2. Mendiratta, R.; Nagpal, S.; Ravichandran, V. On a subclass of strongly starlike functions associated with exponential function. Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. 2015, 38, 365–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Goel, P.; Kumar, S.S. Certain class of starlike functions associated with modified sigmoid function. Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. 2020, 43, 957–991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Mendiratta, R.; Nagpal, S.; Ravichandran, V. A subclass of starlike functions associated with left-half of the lemniscate of Bernoulli. Int. J. Math. 2014, 25, 1450090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Raina, R.K.; Sokół, J. Some properties related to a certain class of starlike functions. Comptes Rendus Math. 2015, 353, 973–978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Sharma, K.; Jain, N.K.; Ravichandran, V. Starlike functions associated with a cardioid. Afr. Math. 2016, 27, 923–939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Tayyah, A.S.; Atshan, W.G. Starlikeness and bi-starlikeness associated with a new Carathéodory function. J. Math. Sci. 2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Mundalia, M.; Kumar, S.S. On a subfamily of starlike functions related to hyperbolic cosine function. J. Anal. 2023, 31, 2043–2062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Tayyah, A.S.; Hadi, S.H.; Wang, Z.-G.; Lupaş, A.A. Classes of Ma–Minda type analytic functions associated with a kidney-shaped domain. AIMS Math. 2025, 10, 22445–22470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Pommerenke, C. On the coefficients and Hankel determinants of univalent functions. J. Lond. Math. Soc. 1966, 14, 111–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Cho, N.E.; Kowalczyk, B.; Kwon, O.S.; Lecko, A.; Sim, Y.J. The bounds of some determinants for starlike functions of order α. Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. 2018, 41, 523–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Janteng, A.; Halim, S.A.; Darus, M. Coefficient inequality for a function whose derivative has a positive real part. J. Inequal. Pure Appl. Math. 2006, 7, 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  13. Lee, S.K.; Ravichandran, V.; Supramanian, S. Bound for the second Hankel determinant of certain univalent functions. J. Inequal. Appl. 2013, 2013, 281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Raducanu, D.; Zaprawa, P. Second Hankel determinant for the close-to-convex functions. Comptes Rendus Math. 2017, 355, 1063–1071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Sim, Y.J.; Lecko, A.; Thomas, D.K. The second Hankel determinant for strongly convex and Ozaki close-to-convex functions. Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. 2021, 200, 2515–2533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Sokól, J.; Thomas, D.K. The second Hankel determinant for α-convex functions. Lith. Math. J. 2018, 58, 212–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Hadi, H.S.; Shaba, T.G.; Madhi, Z.S.; Darus, M.; Lupaş, A.A.; Tchier, F. Boundary values of Hankel and Toeplitz determinants for q-convex functions. MethodsX 2024, 13, 102842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Hadi, S.H.; Darus, M.; Ibrahim, R.W. Hankel and Toeplitz determinants for q-starlike functions involving a q-analog integral operator and q-exponential function. J. Funct. Spaces 2025, 2025, 2771341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Alsoboh, A.; Tayyah, A.S.; Amourah, A.; Al-Maqbali, A.A.; Al Mashraf, K.; Sasa, T. Hankel determinant estimates for bi-Bazilevič-type functions involving q-Fibonacci numbers. Eur. J. Pure Appl. Math. 2025, 18, 6698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. El-Ityan, M.; Sabri, M.A.; Hammad, S.; Frasin, B.; Al-Hawary, T.; Yousef, F. Third-order Hankel determinant for a class of bi-univalent functions associated with sine function. Mathematics 2025, 13, 2887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Arif, M.; Abbas, M.; Alhefthi, R.K.; Breaz, D.; Cotîrlă, L.-I.; Rapeanu, E. Some analysis of the coefficient-related problems for functions of bounded turning associated with a symmetric image domain. Symmetry 2023, 15, 2090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Arif, M.; Barukab, O.M.; Afzal Khan, S.; Abbas, M. The sharp bounds of Hankel determinants for the families of three-leaf-type analytic functions. Fractal Fract. 2022, 6, 291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Peng, Z.; Arif, M.; Abbas, M.; Cho, N.E.; Alhefthi, R.K. Sharp coefficient problems of functions with bounded turning subordinated to the domain of cosine hyperbolic function. AIMS Math. 2024, 9, 15761–15781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Bansal, D.; Maharana, S.; Prajapat, J.K. Third order Hankel determinant for certain univalent functions. J. Korean Math. Soc. 2015, 52, 1139–1148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Raza, M.; Malik, S.N. Upper bound of the third Hankel determinant for a class of analytic functions related with lemniscate of Bernoulli. J. Inequal. Appl. 2013, 412, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Zaprawa, P. Third Hankel determinants for classes of univalent functions. Mediterr. J. Math. 2017, 14, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Zaprawa, P. Hankel determinants for univalent functions related to the exponential function. Symmetry 2019, 11, 211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Shi, L.; Srivastava, H.M.; Arif, M.; Hussain, S.; Khan, H. An investigation of the third Hankel determinant problem for certain subfamilies of univalent functions involving the exponential function. Symmetry 2019, 11, 598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Lupaş, A.A.; Tayyah, A.S.; Sokół, J. Sharp bounds on Hankel determinants for starlike functions defined by symmetry with respect to symmetric domains. Symmetry 2025, 17, 1244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Banga, S.; Kumar, S.S. The sharp bounds of the second and third Hankel determinants for the class S L * . Math. Slovaca 2020, 70, 849–862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kowalczyk, B.; Lecko, A.; Sim, Y.J. The sharp bound of the Hankel determinant of the third kind for convex functions. Bull. Aust. Math. Soc. 2018, 97, 435–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kowalczyk, B.; Lecko, A.; Lecko, M.; Sim, Y.J. The sharp bound of the third Hankel determinant for some classes of analytic functions. Bull. Korean Math. Soc. 2018, 55, 1859–1868. [Google Scholar]
  33. Kwon, O.S.; Lecko, A.; Sim, Y.J. The bound of the Hankel determinant of the third kind for starlike functions. Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. 2019, 42, 767–780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Lecko, A.; Sim, Y.J.; Smiarowska, B. The sharp bound of the Hankel determinant of the third kind for starlike functions of order 1/2. Complex Anal. Oper. Theory 2019, 13, 2231–2238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Riaz, A.; Raza, M.; Thomas, D.K. The Third Hankel determinant for starlike functions associated with sigmoid functions. Forum Math. 2022, 34, 137–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Keogh, F.R.; Merkes, E.P. A coefficient inequality for certain classes of analytic functions. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1969, 20, 8–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Efraimidis, I. A generalization of Livingston’s coefficient inequalities for functions with positive real part. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2016, 435, 369–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Ravichandran, V.; Verma, S. Bound for the fifth coefficient of certain starlike functions. Comptes Rendus Math. 2015, 353, 505–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Pommerenke, C. Univalent Functions; Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht: Göttingen, Germany, 1975. [Google Scholar]
  40. Libera, R.J.; Zlotkiewicz, E.J. Early coefficients of the inverse of a regular convex function. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1982, 85, 225–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Kwon, O.S.; Lecko, A.; Sim, Y.J. On the fourth coefficient of functions in the Carathéodory class. Comput. Methods Funct. Theory 2018, 18, 307–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Rao, N.; Farid, M.; Jha, N.K. A study of (σ, μ)-Stancu-Schurer as a new generalization and approximations. J. Inequal. Appl. 2025, 2025, 104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. El-Ityan, M.; Amourah, A.; Hammad, S.; Buti, R.; Alsoboh, A. New Subclass of Bi-Univalent Functions Involving the Wright Function Associated with the Jung–Kim–Srivastav Operator. Gulf J. Math. 2025, 19, 451–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. El-Ityan, M.; Al-Hawary, T.; Frasin, B.A.; Aldawish, I. A New Subclass of Bi-Univalent Functions Defined by Subordination to Laguerre Polynomials and the (p, q)-Derivative Operator. Symmetry 2025, 17, 982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Plot of the unit disk mapped under ϕ L E ( ζ ) .
Figure 1. Plot of the unit disk mapped under ϕ L E ( ζ ) .
Mathematics 13 03367 g001
Figure 2. Plot boundaries of N 1 ( D ) , N 2 ( D ) , N 3 ( D ) , ϕ L E ( D ) as colors green, blue, red, and black, respectively.
Figure 2. Plot boundaries of N 1 ( D ) , N 2 ( D ) , N 3 ( D ) , ϕ L E ( D ) as colors green, blue, red, and black, respectively.
Mathematics 13 03367 g002
Table 1. Examples of starlike function classes with their associated functions.
Table 1. Examples of starlike function classes with their associated functions.
S * ( φ ) φ ( z ) References
S e * e z [2]
S S G * 2 1 + e z [3]
S R L * 2 ( 2 1 ) 1 z 1 + 2 ( 2 1 ) z [4]
S * z + 1 + z 2 [5]
S C * 1 + 4 z 3 + 2 z 2 3 [6]
S H * 1 + z + 1 3 z 2 1 9 z 3 [7]
S ϱ * cosh z [8]
S k * 2 4 ( 1 + e 2 z ) 2 3 [9]
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

Tayyah, A.S.; Hadi, S.H.; Alatawi, A.; Abbas, M.; Bagdasar, O. Sharp Functional Inequalities for Starlike and Convex Functions Defined via a Single-Lobed Elliptic Domain. Mathematics 2025, 13, 3367. https://doi.org/10.3390/math13213367

AMA Style

Tayyah AS, Hadi SH, Alatawi A, Abbas M, Bagdasar O. Sharp Functional Inequalities for Starlike and Convex Functions Defined via a Single-Lobed Elliptic Domain. Mathematics. 2025; 13(21):3367. https://doi.org/10.3390/math13213367

Chicago/Turabian Style

Tayyah, Adel Salim, Sarem H. Hadi, Abdullah Alatawi, Muhammad Abbas, and Ovidiu Bagdasar. 2025. "Sharp Functional Inequalities for Starlike and Convex Functions Defined via a Single-Lobed Elliptic Domain" Mathematics 13, no. 21: 3367. https://doi.org/10.3390/math13213367

APA Style

Tayyah, A. S., Hadi, S. H., Alatawi, A., Abbas, M., & Bagdasar, O. (2025). Sharp Functional Inequalities for Starlike and Convex Functions Defined via a Single-Lobed Elliptic Domain. Mathematics, 13(21), 3367. https://doi.org/10.3390/math13213367

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