Abstract
In this paper, we consider three sums of finite products of Chebyshev polynomials of two different kinds, namely sums of finite products of the second and third kind Chebyshev polynomials, those of the second and fourth kind Chebyshev polynomials, and those of the third and fourth kind Chebyshev polynomials. As a generalization of the classical linearization problem, we represent each of such sums of finite products as linear combinations of Hermite, generalized Laguerre, Legendre, Gegenbauer, and Jacobi polynomials. These are done by explicit computations and the coefficients involve terminating hypergeometric functions , , and .
Keywords:
sums of finite products; Chebyshev polynomials of the second; third and fourth kinds; terminating hypergeometric functions MSC:
11B83; 33C05; 33C15; 33C20; 33C45
1. Introduction and Preliminaries
The classical linearization problem consists of determining the coefficients in the expansion of the product of two polynomials and in terms of arbitrary polynomial sequence . See [1].
There are several special cases of this: If , then it is called either the standard linearization or a Clebsch–Gordan-type problem:
If , then it is known as the connection problem:
If, furthermore, in (3), then it is called the inversion problem.
Let be nonnegative integers with . Here, as one motivation for the present research, we would like to generalize the linearization problem in (1) and consider the following three sums of finite products of Chebyshev polynomials of two different kinds:
where , and are respectively Chebyshev polynomials of the second, third, and fourth kinds, and the sums are over all nonnegative integers, with . Then, we will represent each of the sums of finite products in Equations (4)–(6) as linear combinations of Hermite polynomials , generalized Laguerre polynomials , Legendre polynomials , Gegenbauer polynomials , and Jacobi polynomials (see Theorems 1–3).
As another motivation for the present study, we would like to mention a convolution identity of Bernoulli polynomials that yields the famous Faber–Pandharipande–Zagier identity and Miki’s identity. For this, let us first recall that the Bernoulli polynomials are given by
Then, let us put
In the Introduction of [2], we noted that the following identity can be derived from the Fourier expansion of . Here, is the fractional part of x, for any real number x:
where are the harmonic numbers.
Furthermore, (7) can be modified to give
Let and in (8) give respectively Faber–Pandharipande–Zagier identity (see [3]) and a slight variant of Miki’s identity (see [4,5,6,7]). It is worth noting that our methods are very simple at the level of Fourier series expansions, whereas the other approaches in [4,5,6,7] use different methods from one another and are quite involved.
Before we state our main results in Theorems 1–3, we will fix notations that will be used throughout this paper and recall some basic facts about orthogonal polynomials that will be needed.
Let n be a nonnegative integer. Then, the falling factorial polynomials and the rising factorial polynomials are respectively given by
The two factorial polynomials are related by
where is the gamma function. The hypergeometric function is defined by
Next, we will recall some very basic facts about Chebyshev polynomials of the second kind , the third kind , and the fourth kind (see [8,9]). In addition, we will state those facts about Hermite polynomials , extended Laguerre polynomials , Legendre polynomials , Gegenbauer polynomials , and Jacobi polynomials (see [10,11,12,13,14]). We let the reader refer to the standard books [15,16,17] for further details on these family of orthogonal polynomials.
In terms of generating functions, the above mentioned orthogonal polynomials are given as follows:
In terms of explicit expressions, they are given as follows:
2. Statements of Results
The following three theorems are the main results of this paper, all of which are new. Here, we note that we treat sums of finite products of Chebyshev polynomials of two different kinds, whereas all the results so far, except for [18], treated sums of finite products of some polynomials of single kind.
Theorem 1.
Let be nonnegative integers with . Then, we have the following identities:
Here, , for , and .
Theorem 2.
Let be nonnegative integers with . Then, we have the following representations:
Theorem 3.
Let be nonnegative integers with . Then, we have the following expressions:
Before we move on to the next section, we would like to recall some of the related previous works. In [19], sums of finite products of Chebyshev polynomials of the first, third, and and fourth kinds were represented in terms of . In addition, in [20], sums of finite products of Chebyshev polynomials of the second kind were expressed in terms of the same orthogonal polynomials. Here, we emphasize that, except for the paper [18], which considered the sums of finite products in (4)–(6) and represented them in terms of all kinds of Chebyshev polynomials, all of the results so far have treated sums of finite products of some polynomials of single type. For further details on these, we let the reader refer to the references in [19,20].
3. Proofs of Theorems 1 and 2
In this section, we will show Theorems 1 and 2. For this, we first state Propositions 1 and 2 that will be needed in showing Theorems 1–3. Here, we note that (a), (b), (c), (d), and (e) of Proposition 1 are respectively from (3.7) of [11], (2.3) of [13], (2.3) of [12], (2.3) of [9], and (2.7) of [14]. In fact, all the formulas in Proposition 1 follow from the orthogonalities of (see (32)–(36) in [19]), and Rodrigues’ and Rodrigues-type formulas for those orthogonal polynomials (see (27)–(31)), and integration by parts.
Proposition 1.
Let be a polynomial of degree n. Then, the following hold:
(a) , where
(b) , where
(c) , where
(d) , where
(e) , where
The next proposition was stated in [19].
Proposition 2.
Let be nonnegative integers. Then, we have the following:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d) .
Lemmas 1 and 2 in the following can be shown by using (17)–(19) and were derived in [18]. However, for the sake of completeness and in view of its importance, we repeat the proof for Lemma 1. Lemma 2 can be proved analogously to Lemma 1.
Lemma 1.
Let be nonnegative integers with . Then, we have the following identity:
where the sum is over all nonnegative integers , with .
Proof.
Let . Then, we observe that
Lemma 2.
Let be nonnegative integers with . Then, the following identity holds:
where the sum is over all nonnegative integers , with .
Now, we are going to show Theorem 1. With as in (4), we put
Here, we note from (a) of Proposition 2 that
This shows (31) of Theorem 1.
Next, we let
Then, from (b) of Proposition 1, (48), and (52), integration by parts k times and proceeding just as in (54), we obtain
This completes the proof for (32) of Theorem 1.
Let us put
From (c) of Proposition 1, (48), and (52), integration by parts k times, (b) of Proposition 2 and after some simplifications, we obtain
This shows (35) of Theorem 1
Let us set
From (d) of Proposition 1, (48) and (52), integration by parts k times, (c) of Proposition 2 and after some simplifications, we have
This shows (36) of Theorem 1.
Let us let
From (e) of Proposition 1, (48) and (52), integration by parts k times, (d) of Proposition 2 and after some simplifications, we get
It can be seen that the innermost sum of (67) is equal to
This finishes up the proof for (35) of Theorem 1.
For Theorem 2, we only need to observe the following. From (48) and (50), we see that the only difference between and (see (4), (5)) are the alternating sign in their sums. These result in the differences , for (33) and (38), (35) and (40), (36) and (41), the difference , for (34) and (39), and the difference , for (37) and (42).
4. Proof of Theorem 3
Here, we will show only (45) and (47) in Theorem 3, while leaving (43), (44) and (46) as exercises to the reader.
Lemma 3.
Let be nonnegative integers with . The following identity holds:
Proof.
The identity in (69) is stated in [18] and can be deduced from (16) and (17). On the other hand, the identity in (70) follows from the elementary observation
□
With as in (6), we put
Then, from (c) of Proposition 1, (70) and (52), (b) of Proposition 2, integration by parts k times and after some simplifications, we have
By making use of (10), we see that (72) is equal to
This shows (45) of Theorem 3.
Lastly, we let
Then, from (e) of Proposition 1, (70) and (52), (d) of Proposition 2, integration by parts k times and after some simplifications, we obtain
This completes the proof for (45) of Theorem 3.
5. Further Remarks
Here, we note that (36) and (41) can be simplified further by making use of Gauss summation formula when . For this, let us recall the Gauss summation formula:
We also need the following formulas:
We also observe the following:
Assume now that . Then, from (76), we have
Now, from (83), we obtain the following alternative expressions for (36) and (41).
Theorem 4.
Let be nonnegetive integers satisfying . Then, we have the following alternative expressions for (36) and (41):
6. Conclusions
Let be nonnegative integers with . Then, we considered sums of finite products of Chebyshev polynomials of two different kinds, namely those of the second and third kind Chebyshev polynomials in (4), those of the second and fourth kind Chebyshev polynomials in (5), and those of the third and fourth kind Chebyshev polynomials in (6).
As one motivation of the present research, we noticed that this problem can be viewed as a generalization of the classical linearization problem. As another motivation, we explained that the standard linearlization problem for Bernoulli polynomials yields the identity (47) which in turn gives a variant of Miki’s identity and the famous Faber–Pandharipande–Zagier identity.
In a related paper [18], we represented each of , and as linear combinations of all kinds of Chebyshev polynomials. Here, as a continuation of this work, we expressed each of them as linear combinations of the orthogonal polynomials , and . We saw that the coefficients involve some terminating hypergeometric functions , , and . These were done by explicit computations.
We emphasize that, whereas all the results so far, except for [18], treated sums of finite products of some polynomials of a single kind, this paper considered those of two different kinds. We would like to continue to study this line of research, as our immediate future projects. Indeed, the cases of sums of finite products of Chebyshev polynomials of the first kind and those of some other kind have not been treated here, as they are of a somewhat different nature. The results on them will appear elsewhere. Finally, it is very likely that the problems of expressing sums of finite products of orthogonal polynomials in terms of other orthogonal polynomials can be generalized to the cases of q-orthogonal polynomials.
Author Contributions
T.K. and D.S.K. conceived of the framework and structured the whole paper; D.S.K. and T.K. wrote the paper; J.K. paid for the article processing charge of the paper; H.L. typed the paper; D.S.K. and T.K. completed the revision of the article. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MEST) (No. 2017R1E1A1A03070882).
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
- Sánchez-Ruiz, J.; Dehesa, J.S. Some connection and linearization problems for polynomials in and beyond the Askey scheme. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2001, 133, 579–591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, T.; Kim, D.S.; Jang, L.C.; Jang, G.-W. Sums of finite products of Genocchi functions. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2017, 2017, 268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faber, C.; Pandharipande, R. Hodge Integrals and Gromov-Witten Theory. Invent. Math. 2000, 139, 173–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dunne, G.V.; Schubert, C. Bernoulli Number Identities from Quantum Field Theory and Topological String Theory. Commun. Number Theory Phys. 2013, 7, 225–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gessel, I.M. On Miki’s identity for Bernoulli numbers. J. Number Theory 2005, 110, 75–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miki, H. A relation between Bernoulli numbers. J. Number Theory 1978, 10, 297–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shiratani, K.; Yokoyama, S. An application of p-adic convolutions. Mem. Fac. Sci. Kyushu Univ. Ser. Math. 1982, 36, 73–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, D.S.; Dolgy, D.V.; Kim, T.; Rim, S.-H. Identities involving Bernoulli and Euler polynomials arising from Chebyshev polynomials. Proc. Jangjeon Math. Soc. 2012, 15, 361–370. [Google Scholar]
- Kim, D.S.; Kim, T.; Lee, S.-H. Some identities for Bernoulli polynomials involving Chebyshev polynomials. J. Comput. Anal. Appl. 2014, 16, 172–180. [Google Scholar]
- Kim, D.S.; Kim, T.; Rim, S.-H. Some identities involving Gegenbauer polynomials. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2012, 219, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, D.S.; Kim, T.; Rim, S.-H.; Lee, S.H. Hermite polynomials and their applications associated with Bernoulli and Euler numbers. Discret. Dyn. Nat. Soc. 2012, 2012, 974632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, D.S.; Rim, S.-H.; Kim, T. Some identities on Bernoulli and Euler polynomials arising from orthogonality of Legendre polynomials. J. Inequal. Appl. 2012, 227, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, T.; Kim, D.S. Extended Laguerre polynomials associated with Hermite, Bernoulli, and Euler numbers and polynomials. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2012, 2012, 957350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, T.; Kim, D.S.; Dogy, D.V. Some identities on Bernoulli and Hermite polynomials associated with Jacobi polynomials. Discret. Dyn. Nat. Soc. 2012, 2012, 584643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Andrews, G.E.; Askey, R.; Roy, R. Special Functions, in Encylopedia of Mathematics and Its Applications 71; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- Beals, R.; Wong, R. Special Functions and Orthogonal Polynomials; Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics 153; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Mason, J.C.; Handscomb, D.C. Chebyshev Polynomials; CHAPMAN & Hall/CRC: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Kim, T.; Dolgy, D.V.; Kim, D.S. Representing sums of finite products of Chebyshev polynomials of the second kind and Fibonacci polynomials in terms of Chebyshev polynomials. Adv. Stud. Contemp. Math. (Kyungshang) 2018, 28, 321–335. [Google Scholar]
- Kim, T.; Kim, D.S.; Dology, D.V.; Kim, D. Representation by several orthogonal polynomials for sums of finite products of Chebysehv polynomials of the first, third and fourth kinds. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2019, 2019, 110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, T.; Kim, D.S.; Kwon, J.; Dolgy, D.V. Expressing sums of finite products of Chebyshev polynomials of the second kind and of Fibonacci polynomials by several orthogonal polynomials. Mathematics 2018, 10, 210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
© 2020 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 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).