Processing math: 100%
Research article

Cost and performance of carbon risk in socially responsible mutual funds

  • Received: 31 January 2023 Revised: 22 February 2023 Accepted: 24 February 2023 Published: 06 March 2023
  • JEL Codes: G11, G17, G23, G2, N20, Q56

  • Investors and other financial actors are attracted by the role of socially responsible (SR) mutual funds in the transition to a low-carbon economy. In response to the demand for more information, Morningstar reported the level of carbon risk of funds by using the following indicators: Carbon Risk, Carbon Management, Carbon Operations risk and Carbon Exposure. Dealing with a sample of 3370 equity SR mutual funds worldwide from 2017 to 2021, this study analyzes the relationships between these indicators and the expense ratio and performance of the funds. In general, the results point to funds with lower carbon scores that have lower fees and perform better than those with higher scores. Considering the effects of the COVID-19 crisis, this evidence holds true for most of the sample period analyzed. With a spatial analysis, although the evidence generally holds, regional differences are found. Thus, funds that invest in the USA and Canada are on average cheaper and show lower carbon scores, while funds that are oriented to other areas, such as emerging markets, are more expensive and show higher scores. In summary, there is good news for the utility function of the investor and the planet: Green investing is cheaper and better.

    Citation: Juan Carlos Matallín-Sáez, Amparo Soler-Domínguez. Cost and performance of carbon risk in socially responsible mutual funds[J]. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2023, 7(1): 50-73. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2023003

    Related Papers:

    [1] Mohammad Faisal Khan, Jongsuk Ro, Muhammad Ghaffar Khan . Sharp estimate for starlikeness related to a tangent domain. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(8): 20721-20741. doi: 10.3934/math.20241007
    [2] Muhammad Ghaffar Khan, Nak Eun Cho, Timilehin Gideon Shaba, Bakhtiar Ahmad, Wali Khan Mashwani . Coefficient functionals for a class of bounded turning functions related to modified sigmoid function. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 3133-3149. doi: 10.3934/math.2022173
    [3] Muhammad Ghaffar Khan, Sheza.M. El-Deeb, Daniel Breaz, Wali Khan Mashwani, Bakhtiar Ahmad . Sufficiency criteria for a class of convex functions connected with tangent function. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(7): 18608-18624. doi: 10.3934/math.2024906
    [4] Muhammmad Ghaffar Khan, Wali Khan Mashwani, Lei Shi, Serkan Araci, Bakhtiar Ahmad, Bilal Khan . Hankel inequalities for bounded turning functions in the domain of cosine Hyperbolic function. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(9): 21993-22008. doi: 10.3934/math.20231121
    [5] Pinhong Long, Xing Li, Gangadharan Murugusundaramoorthy, Wenshuai Wang . The Fekete-Szegö type inequalities for certain subclasses analytic functions associated with petal shaped region. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(6): 6087-6106. doi: 10.3934/math.2021357
    [6] Huo Tang, Muhammad Abbas, Reem K. Alhefthi, Muhammad Arif . Problems involving combinations of coefficients for the inverse of some complex-valued analytical functions. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 28931-28954. doi: 10.3934/math.20241404
    [7] Jianhua Gong, Muhammad Ghaffar Khan, Hala Alaqad, Bilal Khan . Sharp inequalities for q-starlike functions associated with differential subordination and q-calculus. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 28421-28446. doi: 10.3934/math.20241379
    [8] Daud Mohamad, Nur Hazwani Aqilah Abdul Wahid, Nurfatin Nabilah Md Fauzi . Some properties of a new subclass of tilted star-like functions with respect to symmetric conjugate points. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(1): 1889-1900. doi: 10.3934/math.2023097
    [9] Huo Tang, Shahid Khan, Saqib Hussain, Nasir Khan . Hankel and Toeplitz determinant for a subclass of multivalent q-starlike functions of order α. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(6): 5421-5439. doi: 10.3934/math.2021320
    [10] K. R. Karthikeyan, G. Murugusundaramoorthy, N. E. Cho . Some inequalities on Bazilevič class of functions involving quasi-subordination. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(7): 7111-7124. doi: 10.3934/math.2021417
  • Investors and other financial actors are attracted by the role of socially responsible (SR) mutual funds in the transition to a low-carbon economy. In response to the demand for more information, Morningstar reported the level of carbon risk of funds by using the following indicators: Carbon Risk, Carbon Management, Carbon Operations risk and Carbon Exposure. Dealing with a sample of 3370 equity SR mutual funds worldwide from 2017 to 2021, this study analyzes the relationships between these indicators and the expense ratio and performance of the funds. In general, the results point to funds with lower carbon scores that have lower fees and perform better than those with higher scores. Considering the effects of the COVID-19 crisis, this evidence holds true for most of the sample period analyzed. With a spatial analysis, although the evidence generally holds, regional differences are found. Thus, funds that invest in the USA and Canada are on average cheaper and show lower carbon scores, while funds that are oriented to other areas, such as emerging markets, are more expensive and show higher scores. In summary, there is good news for the utility function of the investor and the planet: Green investing is cheaper and better.



    Let S denote the class of univalent functions which are analytic in the open unit disk D={zC:|z|<1} of the form

    f(z)=z+n=2anzn(zD). (1.1)

    Let P represent a class of analytic functions within the unit disk D of the form

    p(z)=1+n=1cnzn(zD) (1.2)

    and satisfy the condition of (p(z))>0. It is easy to know from the conclusion of [1], for p(z)P, there exists a Schwarz function w(z), making

    p(z)Pp(z)=1+w(z)1w(z).

    In 1976, Noonan and Thomas [2] defined the qth Hankel determinant for a function fS of form (1.1) as

    Hq,n(f)=|anan+1an+q1an+1an+2an+qan+q1an+qan+2q2|,

    where a1=1,n1,q1. In particular, we have

    H2,1(f)=a3a22,
    H2,2(f)=a2a4a23,
    H3,1(f)=a3(a2a4a23)a4(a4a2a3)+a5(a3a22)

    and

    H4,1(f)=a7H3,1(f)a6δ1+a5δ2a4δ3,

    where

    δ1=a3(a2a5a3a4)a4(a5a2a4)+a6(a3a22),
    δ2=a3(a3a5a24)a5(a5a2a4)+a6(a4a2a3),
    δ3=a4(a3a5a24)a5(a2a5a3a4)+a6(a2a4a23).

    Next, we recall the definition of subordination. We assume that f1 and f2 are two analytic functions in D. Then, we say that the function f1 is subordinate to the function f2, as we write f1(z)f2(z), for all zD. Then, there exists a Schwarz function w(z) with w(0)=0 and |w(z)|<1 to satisfy

    f1(z)=f2(w(z)).

    Now, we consider the following class S(g) as follows:

    S(g)={fS:zf(z)f(z)g(z)}, (1.3)

    where g is an analytic univalent function with positive real part in D, and g maps D onto a region starlike with respect to g(0)=1, g(0)>0, and is symmetric about the real axis. The class S(g) was introduced by Ma and Minda [3]. If we vary the function g on the right side of (1.3), we will obtain different results. In recent years, many researchers have also conducted a lot of research on this and obtained a series of conclusions. Some of them are as follows:

    (1) For g=21+ez, which was defined in [4].

    (2) For g=1+z, it has been further studied in [5].

    (3) For g=1+43z+23z2, it was introduced in [6] and further investigated in [7].

    (4) For g=ez, it was defined and studied in [8].

    (5) For g=z+1+z2, the class is denoted by Sl, and it was further studied in [9].

    (6) For g=1+sinh1z, the class Sp=S(1+sinh1z) was studied by Kumar and Arora [10].

    (7) For g=coshz, the class Scosh=S(g(z)) was introduced by Alotaibi et al. [11].

    The Fekete-Szegö inequality is one of the inequalities for the coefficients of univalent analytic functions found by Fekete and Szegö. The Fekete-Szegö inequality of various analytic functions has been studied by many researchers in the last few decades, for example, Huo Tang defined certain class of analytic functions related to the sine function (see [12])

    f(ζ)θ(ζf(ζ)f(ζ))1θ1+sin(ζ);(fS,0θ1)

    and investigated the upper bound of the second Hankel determinant and the Fekete-Szegö inequality for functions in this class. Many papers have been devoted to researching the Fekete-Szegö inequality for various sub-class functions (see [13,14]). Therefore, the study of the Fekete-Szegö inequality for different analytic functions is valuable and of great significance.

    In recent years, many papers have been devoted to finding the upper bounds of Hankel determinants for various sub-classes of analytic functions as well. For the basics and preliminaries, the readers are advised to see the academic achievements in [15,16,17,18]. Guangadharan studied a class of bounded turning functions related to the three leaf function in [19]. From this, it can be seen that the research on Hankel determinants of various analytic functions has become popular. Therefore, it is an interesting and hot topic to investigate the Hankel determinants for various classes of analytic functions. In addition, it is worth mentioning that a class of star like functions associated with the modified sigmoid function was defined by Goel and Kumar [20],

    SSG={fS:zf(z)f(z)21+ez}.

    Apart from the above, the coefficient bounds for certain analytic functions have been studied by many researchers, see [21,22,23,24,25]. Further, many star like functions have been defined and studied as well, see [26,27,28,29]. Not long ago, another class of analytic functions associated with the modified sigmoid function was defined and studied by Muhammad Ghaffar Khan [4],

    RSG={fS:f(z)21+ez}.

    It is well known that for each univalent function fS, there is an inverse function f1(w) which can be defined in (|w|<r;r14), where

    f1(w)=wa2w2+(2a22a3)w3(5a325a2a3+a4)w4+.

    A function fS is said to be bi-univalent in D if there exists a function gS such that g(z) is a univalent extension of f1 to D. Brannan [30] studied classes of bi-univalent functions and obtained estimates for their initial coefficients. Many classes of bi-univalent funtions were introduced and further studied in the past few years. Inspired by all the aforementioned works, in this paper we investigate another certain class of analytic functions H(λ,ψ), which are related to the modified sigmoid function, and discuss the upper bound of the fourth-order Hankel determinant in special cases, here we use another method to obtain improved results compared to [20]. And we also obtain the upper bound of third-order Hankel determinant of its inverse function. Furthermore, we discuss the Fekete-Szegő inequality for functions in this class when λ[0,1] and ψ=21+ez. Finally, we estimate the upper bounds of the initial coefficients for functions in this class when λ[0,1], ψ(0)=1, and ψ(0)>0, where its inverse function f1 also belongs to this class.

    Definition 1.1. Assume that fS, 0λ1, (f(z))1λ and (2zf(z)f(z)f(z))λ are analytic in D with f(z)0, and f(z)f(z) for all zD{0}. Furthermore, (f(z))λ = 1 at z=0, ψ(z) is a univalent and analytic function. Then, f(z) is said to be in the class H(λ,ψ) if the following condition is satisfied:

    (1λ)(f(z))1λ+λ(2zf(z)f(z)f(z))λψ(z).

    For convenience, we denote

    H(λ)=H(λ,21+ez).

    Remark 1.1. For any λ[0,1], we have that f(z)=zH(λ) always holds.

    Below we will evaluate bounds of the first six initial coefficients and non-sharp bound of the third Hankel determinant for functions belonging to H(1).

    Theorem 2.1. Let fH(1) and be of form (1.1). Then,

    |a2|14, (2.1)
    |a3|14, (2.2)
    |a4|18, (2.3)
    |a5|18, (2.4)
    |a6|731576, (2.5)
    |a7|388937241920. (2.6)

    The first four inequalities are sharp.

    We need the following lemmas to prove the above theorem:

    Lemma 2.1. [4] Let pP, then |cn|2.

    Lemma 2.2. [17] Let pP, then for all n,mN, if 0ζ1, there is |cm+nζcmc1|2. If ζ<0 or ζ>1, there is |cm+nζcmc1|2|2ζ1|.

    Lemma 2.3. [4] Let pP, then

    |αc31βc1c2+γc3|2|α|+2|β2α|+2|αβ+γ|,

    where α, β and γ are real numbers.

    Lemma 2.4. [4] Let α, β, γ, and ζ satisfy the inequalities 0<γ<1,0<β<1, and

    8β(1β)[(γζ2α)2+(γ(β+γ)ζ)2]+γ(1γ)(ζ2βγ)24γ2(1γ)2β(1β).

    If pP, then

    |αc41+βc22+2γc1c332ζc21c2c4|2.

    Proof. If fH(1), there exists a Schwarz function w(z) to satisfy

    2zf(z)f(z)f(z)=21+ew(z).

    Also, if pP, it can be written in terms of the Schwarz function w(z) as

    p(z)=1+c1z+c2z2+c3z3+=1+w(z)1w(z),

    or equivalently,

    w(z)=p(z)1p(z)+1=12c1z+(12c214c21)z2+(18c3112c1c2+12c3)z3+. (2.7)

    Now, we set

    2zf(z)f(z)f(z)=1+b1z+b2z2+b3z3+b4z4+b5z5+b6z6+=21+ew(z). (2.8)

    In addition,

    2zf(z)f(z)f(z)=1+2a2z+3a3z2+5a5z4+6a6z5+7a7z6+1+a3z2+a5z4+a7z6+. (2.9)

    Using (2.8) and (2.9), we can get

    b1=2a2, (2.10)
    b2=2a3, (2.11)
    b3=4a42a2a3, (2.12)
    b4=4a52a23, (2.13)
    b5=6a64a3a4+2a2a232a2a5, (2.14)
    b6=6a74a3a5+2a232a3a5. (2.15)

    Substituting (2.7) into the right side of (2.8), by simplifying, using (2.10)–(2.15), and comparing the coefficients on both sides of the equation, we can get

    a2=18c1, (2.16)
    a3=12(c24c218), (2.17)
    a4=14(124c31732c1c2+c34), (2.18)
    a5=116(116c41916c21c2+c1c3+38c22c4), (2.19)
    a6=16b5+23a3a413a2a23+13a2a5, (2.20)
    a7=16b6+a3(3a5a23)3+a3a53, (2.21)

    where

    b5=13072(5c61+122c41c2288c31c3432c21c22+528c21c4+1056c1c2c3768c1c5+176c32768c2c4384c23+768c6),
    b6=15160960(2537c7150400c51c2+204960c41c3+409920c31c22483840c4c311451520c21c2c3+887040c21c5483840c1c32+1774080c1c2c4+887040c1c231290240c1c6+887040c22c31290240c2c51290240c3c4+1290240c7).

    Applying Lemma 2.1, we have

    |a2|14.

    The above inequality is sharp with extremal function f(z)=z021+etdt.

    |a3|=18|c212c21|14.

    The above inequality is sharp for the function p(z)=(1+z2)/(1z2).

    Applying Lemma 2.3, we have

    |a4|14[2|124|+2|732112|+2|124732+14|]=18.

    The above inequality is sharp with extremal function f(z)=z021+et3dt.

    Applying Lemma 2.4, we have

    |a5|=|116(116c41916c21c3+c1c3+38c22c4)|18.

    The above inequality is sharp for the function p(z)=(1+z4)/(1z4).

    Applying the triangle inequality, we have

    |16b5|118432(122|c1|4|c25122c21|+1056|c1||c3||c2311c21|+528|c1|2|c4911c22|+768|c6c1c5|+768|c2||c48889c22|+384|c3|2).

    By applying Lemmas 2.1 and 2.2, we have

    |16b5|355288,

    and then applying the triangle inequality and (2.1)–(2.4), we have

    |23a3a413a2a23+13a2a5|23|a3||a4|+13|a2||a3|2+13|a2||a5|7192,

    and from (2.20) we can obtain

    |a6|355288+7192=731576.

    By applying triangle inequality, we have

    |16b6|130965760(20965760|c1|4|c3105427c1c2|+483840|c1|3|c46172c21|+1290240|c1||c61116c1c5|+1774080|c1||c2||c4911c1c3|+887040|c2|2|c3611c1c2|+1290240|c7c2c5|+1290240|c3||c41116c1c3|+2537|c1|7).

    Then, from (2.2) and Lemmas 2.1, 2.2, and 2.4, we have

    |16b6|381377241920,
    |a3(2a5a23)3|=124|a3||332c41+12c22+c1c31116c21c2c4|148.

    From (2.2) and (2.4), we have

    |a3a53|196.

    Then, applying the triangle inequality and (2.21), we can get

    |a7|381377241920+148+196=388937241920.

    This completes our proof.

    Theorem 2.2. If f of the form (1.1) belongs to H(1), then

    |a3a22|14.

    The result is sharp for the function p(z)=(1+z2)/(1z2).

    Proof. Using (2.16), (2.17), and Lemma 2.2, we have

    |a3a22|=18|c258c21|14.

    Theorem 2.3. If f of the form (1.1) belongs to H(1), then

    |a2a3a4|18.

    The result is sharp with the extremal function f(z)=z021+et3dt.

    Proof. Using (2.16)–(2.18), we can get

    |a2a3a4|=|7384c319128c1c2+116c3|.

    Applying Lemma 2.3,

    |7384c319128c1c2+116c3|2|7384|+2|91287192|+2|73849128+116|=18.

    Theorem 2.4. If f of the form (1.1) belongs to H(1), then

    |a2a4a23|116.

    The result is sharp with the extremal function f(z)=z021+et3dt.

    Proof. Using (2.16)–(2.18), we can get

    |a2a4a23|=164|16c41+916c21c2+12c1c3c22|.

    Now, in order to get the desired bound, we shall prove that

    |16c41+916c21c2+12c1c3c22|4. (2.22)

    Next we will use the following Lemma:

    Lemma 2.5. [17] Let pP. Then, there exists some x, y with |x|1,|y|1 such that

    2c2=c21+x(4c21),
    4c3=c31+2c1x(4c21)(4c21)c1x2+2(4c21)(1|x|2)y.

    Using the invariant property under rotation, we can assume that c=c1[0,2], and then from Lemma 2.5, substituting the expression for c2, c3 and simplifying, we can obtain

    16c41+916c21c2+12c1c3c22=196c4+132c2(4c2)x14(4c2)(412c2)x2+14c(4c2)(1|x|2)y.

    If c=0, there is

    |16c41+916c21c2+12c1c3c22|=4|x|24.

    If c=2, there is

    |16c41+916c21c2+12c1c3c22|=16.

    Next, we will discuss the case of c(0,2). At this time,

    16c41+916c21c2+12c1c3c22=14c(4c2)[px2+qx+t+(1|x|2)y],

    where

    p=c282c,q=c8,t=c324(4c2),

    and then we denote

    I=14c(4c2)[px2+qx+t+(1|x|2)y],

    where p<0,q>0, and t<0 always holds due to the fact that c(0,2). Then, by using the triangle inequality, we have

    |I|14c(4c2)(1|x|2+|p||x|2+|q||x|+|t|)=14c(4c2)[(p+1)|x|2+q|x|t+1].

    Since q2(p+1)<0 always holds, we can obtain

    |I|14c(4c2)(p+qt)=548c4118c2+4=f(c).

    By computation, it can be revealed that

    f(c)<max{f(0),f(2)}=4.

    In summary, |I|4, that is, (2.22) holds, which evidently yields

    |16c41+916c21c2+12c1c3c22|4.

    This completes the proof.

    Theorem 2.5. If f of the form (1.1) belongs to H(1), then

    |H3,1(f)|116.

    Proof.

    H3,1(f)=a3(a2a4a23)a4(a4a2a3)+a5(a3a22).

    By using the triangle inequality, we have

    |H3,1(f)||a3||a2a4a23|+|a4||a4a2a3|+|a5||a3a22|.

    According to Theorem 2.1, we have

    |a3|14,|a4|18,|a5|18.

    According to Theorems 2.2–2.4, we have

    |a2a4a23|116,|a4a2a3|18,|a3a22|14.

    Therefore,

    |H3,1(f)|116.

    Below we will evaluate the non-sharp bound of the fourth determinant for functions belonging to H(1).

    Theorem 3.1. If f of the form (1.1) belongs to H(1), then

    |a2a5a3a4|116.

    Proof. Using (2.16)–(2.19), we can get

    |a2a5a3a4|=|16144c5113072c31c21256c21c3+1256c1c22+1128c1c41128c2c3|.

    Then, by applying the triangle inequality, we have

    |a2a5a3a4|13072|c31(c2c212)|+1128|c2(c3c1c22)|+1128|c1(c4c1c32)|.

    We denote |c1|=c, and from Lemmas 2.1 and 2.2 we can obtain

    |c31(c2c212)|c3(212c2),1128|c2(c3c1c22)|132,1128|c1(c4c1c32)|c64.

    Thus,

    |a2a5a3a4|13072c3(2c22)+c64+132=G(c),
    G(c)=5c46144+c2512+1640c[0,2].

    Therefore,

    G(c)G(2)=116.

    This completes the proof.

    Theorem 3.2. If f of the form (1.1) belongs to H(1), then

    |a5a2a4|18.

    Proof. By using (2.16), (2.18), and (2.19), we have

    |a5a2a4|=116|112c414364c21c2+98c1c3+38c22c4|.

    By applying Lemma 2.4, we can get the sharp result for the function p(z)=(1+z4)/(1z4).

    Theorem 3.3. If f of the form (1.1) belongs to H(1), then

    |a3a5a24|689+14439216.

    Proof. Using (2.17)–(2.19), we can obtain

    |a3a5a24|=|536864c611912288c41c2+1384c31c3+4716384c21c221256c21c411024c1c2c331024c32+1128c2c41256c23|.

    By applying the triangle inequality, we get

    |a3a5a24|536864|c1|6+149152|c2||76c41141c21c2+48c1c3+144c22|+1384|c3||c3132c3|+1128|c4||c212c21|.

    In order to get the desired bound, we shall prove that

    |76c41141c21c2+48c1c3+144c22|856.

    Using the invariant property under rotation, we can assume that c=c1[0,2], and then from Lemma 2.5, substituting the expression for c2, c3 and simplifying, we have

    76c41141c21c2+48c1c3+144c22=1072c4+512c2(4c2)x+48(4c2)(3c2)x2+24c(4c2)(1|x|2)y.

    If c=0,

    |76c41141c21c2+48c1c3+144c22|=576. (3.1)

    If c=2,

    |76c41141c21c2+48c1c3+144c22|=856. (3.2)

    If c0 and c2, we have

    76c41141c21c2+48c1c3+144c22=24c(4c2)[p+qx+tx2+(1|x|2)y],

    where

    p=107c348(4c2),q=17c16,t=62c2c.

    p,q>0 always holds due to the fact that c(0,2). Then, by using the triangle inequality, we have

    |76c41141c21c2+48c1c3+144c22|24c(4c2)(1|x|2+p+q|x|+|t||x|2).

    We denote

    I=24c(4c2)(1|x|2+p+q|x|+|t||x|2).

    For suitability, we divide the calculation in five cases:

    Case (I). t0 if and only if 3=c1c<2. At this time,

    I=24c(4c2)[(1+t)|x|2+q|x|+p+1],

    and when c1c<c2, there is q2(1+t)<1, where c2=16+824781. Then, we have

    I24c(4c2)4(1+t)pq24(1+t)+24c(4c2)=107c42+867128c42+c3+2c+24c(4c2)=f1(c).

    By computation, it can be revealed that

    f1(c)<856,c[c1,c2). (3.3)

    Case (II). For c[c2,2), there is q2(1+t)1, and we then have

    I24c(4c2)(p+qt)=20c4+438c2576=f2(c).

    By computation, we have

    f2(c)<856,c[c2,2). (3.4)

    Case (III). For c1>c>c3=16+814547, we have

    I=24c(4c2)[(t1)|x|2+q|x|+p+1],

    where q2(1t)<1, and we then obtain

    I24c(4c2)4(t1)pq24(t1)+24c(4c2)=107c42867128c42c32c+24c(4c2)=f3(c).

    Now, computation reveals that

    f3(c)<856,c(c3,c1). (3.5)

    Case (IV). For c3c>c4, where c4=32, there is q2(1t)>1. We can get

    I24c(4c2)(t+p+q)=76c4234c2+576=f4(c).

    A computation shows that

    f4(c)<856,c(c4,c3]. (3.6)

    Case (V). For the case of c(0,c4], we have

    I=24c(4c2)[(t1)|x|2+q|x|+p+1],

    where t1>0 holds for c(0,32). Thus, we have

    Imax{24c(4c2)(p+1),24c(4c2)(p+q+t)},

    or, equivalently,

    Imax{107c42+24c(4c2),76c4234c2+576}.

    Now, we denote

    g1(c)=107c42+24c(4c2),g2(c)=76c4234c2+576
    g1(c)=314c372c2+96,
    g1(c)=144c(471c721).

    g1(c) attains its minimum at c0=72471, g1(c0)>0, which evidently yields that g1(c)>0 holds for c(0,32). Therefore, g1(c)<g1(32)=333.84375. On the other hand,

    g2(c)<max{g2(0),g2(32)}=576.

    Thus,

    I<576,c(0,c4]. (3.7)

    From (3.11)–(3.17), we conclude that I856, which implies

    |76c41141c21c2+48c1c3+144c22|856. (3.8)

    Next, we will use the following lemma:

    Lemma 3.1. Let p(z)=1+c1z+c2z2+c3z3+P. Then, for any real number μ,

    |μc3c31|{2|μ4|(μ43),2μμμ1(43<μ).

    By Lemmas 2.1, 2.2, and 3.1, we can obtain

    |536864c61|5576,149152|c2||76c41141c21c2+48c1c3+144c22|1073072. (3.9)
    1384|c3||c3132c3|364,1128|c4||c212c21|132. (3.10)

    From (3.9) and (3.10), we have

    |a3a5a24|689+14439216.

    This completes our proof.

    Theorem 3.4. If f of the form (1.1) belongs to H(1), then

    |H4,1(f)|215139562371589120+334096.

    Proof. We can write H4,1(f) as

    H4,1(f)=a7H3,1(f)a6δ1+a5δ2a4δ3,

    where

    δ1=a3(a2a5a3a4)a4(a5a2a4)+a6(a3a22),
    δ2=a3(a3a5a24)a5(a5a2a4)+a6(a4a2a3),
    δ3=a4(a3a5a24)a5(a2a5a3a4)+a6(a2a4a23).

    By applying Theorems 2.1–2.5, 3.1–3.3, and the triangle inequality, we have

    |H4,1(f)||a7||H3,1(f)|+|a6||δ1|+|a5||δ2|+|a4||δ3|, (3.11)
    |a7||H3,1|388937241920×116=3889373870720, (3.12)
    |δ1||a3||a2a5a3a4|+|a4||a5a2a4|+|a6||a3a22|8032304, (3.13)
    |δ2||a3||a3a5a24|+|a5||a5a2a4|+|a6||a4a2a3|237112288+3256, (3.14)
    |δ3||a4||a3a5a24|+|a5||a2a5a3a4|+|a6||a2a4a23|2371+48324576. (3.15)

    Thus, from (3.11)–(3.15), we obtain

    |H4,1(f)|215139562371589120+334096.

    Theorem 4.1. If the function fH(1) given by (1.1) and f1(w)=w+n=2dnwn is the analytic continuation to D of the inverse function of f with |w|<r0, where r014 is the radius of the Koebe domain, then

    |d2|14, (4.1)
    |d3|14, (4.2)
    |d4|65384, (4.3)
    |d5|167256. (4.4)

    The first three inequalities are sharp.

    Proof. If

    f1(w)=w+n=2dnwn

    is the inverse function of f, it can be seen that

    f1(f(z))=f(f1(z))=z.

    Equivalently,

    n=1dn(z+k=2dkwk)n=z(d1=1). (4.5)

    By comparing the coefficients on both sides of (4.5), we can obtain

    d2=a2, (4.6)
    d3=2a22a3, (4.7)
    d4=(5a325a2a3+a4), (4.8)
    d5=14a4221a22a3+6a2a4+3a23a5. (4.9)

    Applying Lemmas 2.1 and 2.2, (2.16), and (2.17), we have

    |d2|=|a2|=|18c1|14,
    |d3|=18|c234c21|14.

    Applying Lemma 2.3 and (2.16)–(2.18), we have

    |d4|=|911536c3117128c1c2+116c3|2|911536|+2|1712891768|+2|91153617128+116|=65384,
    |d5|=|972048c4121128c21c2+764c1c3+9128c22116c4|.

    By applying the triangle inequality, we can get

    |d5||972048c4121128c21c2+764c1c3|+|9128c22116c4|.

    Using Lemmas 2.1 and 2.3, we have

    |972048c4121128c21c2+764c1c3|=|c1||972048c3121128c1c2+764c3|127256.

    Using Lemma 2.2, we obtain

    |9128c22116c4|=116|c498c22|532.

    Therefore,

    |d5|127256+532=167256.

    This completes the proof.

    Theorem 4.2. If the function fH(1) given by (1.1) and f1(w)=w+n=2dnwn is the analytic continuation to D of the inverse function of f with |w|<r0, where r014 is the radius of the Koebe domain, then

    |H3,1(f1)|34171147456.

    Proof. From Theorem 3.2, we have

    |d3d22|=|a22a3|14. (4.10)

    Applying (4.6)–(4.8) and (2.16)–(2.18),

    |d2d3d4|=|3a324a2a3+a4|=|731536c3115128c1c2+116c3|.

    Using Lemma 2.3,

    |d2d3d4|2|731536|+2|1512873768|+2|73153615128+116|=59384. (4.11)

    Applying (4.6)–(4.8) and (2.16)–(2.18),

    |d2d4d23|=|a42a22a3+a2a4a23|=164|17192c41+c22716c21c212c1c3|.

    We denote |c1|=c[0,2],|x|=t[0,1], and referring to Lemma 2.5, we have

    |c2|c2+t(4c2)2,|c3|c34+c(4c2)t2+(4c2)ct24+(4c2)(1t2)2.

    Using the triangle inequality, we have

    |17192c41+c22716c21c212c1c3|131192c4+(4c2)c4+(c+2)(c+4)(c2)28t2+31c2(4c2)32t=F(c,t).
    Ft=(c+2)(c+4)(c2)24t+31c2(4c2)32>0.

    Therefore,

    F(c,t)F(c,1)=31192c4+198c2+4=G(c),
    G(c)=194c(131228c2)0.

    This leads to

    G(c)G(2)=13112,
    |d2d4d23|13112164=131768. (4.12)

    Applying (4.2)–(4.4), (4.10)–(4.12), and the triangle inequality, we have

    |H3,1(f)|=|d3(d2d4d23)d4(d4d2d3)+d5(d3d22)||d3||d2d4d23|+|d4||d4d2d3|+|d5||d3d22|34171147456,

    which completes the proof.

    Theorem 5.1. If fH(λ) and is of the form (1.1), then

    |a2|18λ28λ+4,
    |a3|110λ212λ+6,
    |a3νa22|{ν[3(1λ)2+2λ2]2(1λ)λ16[3(1λ)2+2λ2][(1λ)2+λ2]2,νt1,12[3(1λ)2+2λ2],t2<ν<t1,2(1λ)λν[3(1λ)2+2λ2]16[3(1λ)2+2λ2][(1λ)2+λ2]2,νt2, (5.1)

    where

    t1=8[(1λ)2+λ2]2+2λ(1λ)3(1λ)2+2λ2,t2=2λ(1λ)8[(1λ)2+λ2]23(1λ)2+2λ2.

    The result is sharp for the function p(z)=(1+z2)/(1z2).

    Proof.

    f(z)=1+2a2z+3a3z2+4a4z3+5a5z4+,
    (1λ)(f(z))1λ=(1λ)+2(1λ)2a2z+(3(1λ)2a32(1λ)2λa22)z2+, (5.2)
    2zf(z)f(z)f(z)=1+2a2z+2a3z2+(4a42a2a3)z3+,
    λ(2zf(z)f(z)f(z))λ=λ+2λ2a2z+(2λ2a32λ2(1λ)a22)z2+. (5.3)

    In addition,

    (1λ)(f(z))1λ+λ(2zf(z)f(z)f(z))λ=21+ew(z)=1+c14z+(c24c218)z2+, (5.4)

    where

    w(z)=p(z)1p(z)+1=12c1z+(12c214c21)z2+(18c3112c2c1+12c3)z3+.
    p(z)=1+c1z+c2z2+c3z3+P.

    Substituting (5.2) and (5.3) into (5.4) and comparing the coefficients on both sides of (5.4), we can obtain

    [2(1λ)2+2λ2]a2=c14, (5.5)
    [3(1λ)2+2λ2]a3[2(1λ)2λ+2λ2(1λ)]a22=c24c218. (5.6)

    From (5.5) and (5.6), we have

    a2=c18[(1λ)2+λ2], (5.7)
    a3=13(1λ)2+2λ2A, (5.8)

    where

    A={(1λ)λ32[(1λ)2+λ2]218}c21+c24.

    Hence,

    |a3|=14[3(1λ)2+2λ2]|c2(12(1λ)λ8[(1λ)2+λ2]2)c21|,

    and, since

    |2(12(1λ)λ8[(1λ)2+λ2]2)1|=(1λ)λ4[(1λ)2+λ2]2<1λ[0,1],

    we can apply Lemma 2.2 to get

    |a3|110λ212λ+6.

    From (5.7) and (5.8), we can get

    |a3νa22|=14[3(1λ)2+2λ2]|c2{ν[3(1λ)2+2λ2]16[(1λ)2+λ2]2(1λ)λ8[(1λ)2+λ2]2+12}c21|.

    Applying Lemma 2.2, we can obtain

    |a3νa22|12[3(1λ)2+2λ2]max{1,|ν[3(1λ)2+2λ2]2(1λ)λ8[(1λ)2+λ2]2|}.

    Then, we get (5.1), which completes the proof.

    Corollary 5.1. If fH(12) and is of the form (1.1), then

    |a3νa22|{5ν220,ν2,25,65<ν<2,25ν20,ν65. (5.9)

    Now, we assume that ψ(z) is an analytic and univalent function with positive real part in D, and ψ(z) satisfies the condition of ψ(0)=1 and ψ(0)>0. It is easy to know that ψ(z) has a series expansion of the form

    ψ(z)=1+A1z+A2z2+A3z3+.

    Next, we are going to estimate the upper bounds of the initial coefficients for f, where f and f1 belong to H(λ,ψ). Since ψ(0)>0, we have A1>0.

    Remark 6.1. For ψ(z)=1+z, f(z)=z, we have that f(z) and f1(z) belong to H(λ,ψ) always holds.

    Theorem 6.1. If f, g belong to H(λ,ψ) and are of the form (1.1), where g is the inverse function of f, then we have

    |a2|min{A12[λ2+(1λ)2],A1+|A2A1|7λ28λ+3},
    |a3|min{A12λ2+3(1λ)2+A214[(1λ)2+λ2]2,A1+|A2A1|7λ28λ+3}.

    Proof. Since f,gH(λ,ψ), there exists two analytic functions u,v:DD, where u(0)=v(0)=0, such that

    (1λ)(f(z))1λ+λ(2zf(z)f(z)f(z))λ=ψ(u(z)), (6.1)
    (1λ)(g(z))1λ+λ(2zg(z)g(z)g(z))λ=ψ(v(z)). (6.2)

    Let us define the functions p and q by

    p(z)=1+p1z+p2z2+=1+u(z)1u(z),
    q(z)=1+q1z+q2z2+=1+v(z)1v(z).

    Or, equivalently,

    u(z)=p(z)1p(z)+1=12p1z+(p22p214)z2+,
    v(z)=q(z)1q(z)+1=12q1z+(q22q214)z2+.

    In addition,

    ψ(u(z))=1+12A1p1z+(A1(12p214p21)+14A2p21)z2+, (6.3)
    ψ(v(z))=1+12A1q1z+(A1(12q214q21)+14A2q21)z2+. (6.4)

    From (5.2), (5.3), (6.1), and (6.3), we have

    2[λ2+(1λ)2]a2=12A1p1, (6.5)
    [3(1λ)2+2λ2]a32λ(1λ)a22=A1(12p214p21)+14A2p21. (6.6)

    Since

    g(z)=za2z2+(2a22a3)z3(5a325a2a3+a4)z4+,

    we can obtain

    (1λ)(g(z))1λ+λ(2zg(z)g(z)g(z))λ=12[(1λ)2+λ2]a2z+[(3(1λ)2+2λ2)(2a22a3)2λ(1λ)a22]z2. (6.7)

    By using (6.2), (6.4), and (6.7), we have

    2[(1λ)2+λ2]a2=12A1q1, (6.8)
    [3(1λ)2+2λ2](2a22a3)2λ(1λ)a22=A1(12q214q21)+14A2q21. (6.9)

    From (6.5) and (6.8), we can get

    p1=q1, (6.10)

    and

    a22=A21(p21+q21)32[λ2+(1λ)2]2. (6.11)

    Since |pi|2,|qi|2(iN+), we obtain

    |a2|A12[λ2+(1λ)2]. (6.12)

    By adding (6.6) to (6.9), we can get

    a22=2A1(p2+q2)+(A2A1)(p21+q21)8(7λ28λ+3). (6.13)

    Since |pi|2and|qi|2(iN+), we can get

    |a2|A1+|A2A1|7λ28λ+3. (6.14)

    From (6.12) and (6.14), we can obtain the conclusion

    |a2|min{A12[λ2+(1λ)2],A1+|A2A1|7λ28λ+3}.

    By subtracting (6.6) from (6.9) and using (6.10), we have

    a3=A1(p2q2)4[2λ2+3(1λ)2]2+a22. (6.15)

    Using (6.10) and (6.11) in (6.15), we can obtain

    a3=A1(p2q2)4[3(1λ)2+2λ2]+A21p2116[(1λ)2+λ2]2.

    Therefore,

    |a3|A12λ2+3(1λ)2+A214[(1λ)2+λ2]2. (6.16)

    On the other hand, by using (6.10) and (6.13) in (6.15), we can obtain

    a3=A1(p2q2)4[3(1λ)2+2λ2]+A1(p2+q2)+(A2A1)p214[3(1λ)2+2λ2]8λ(1λ),

    or, equivalently,

    a3=(A1p2(14(5λ26λ+3)+14(7λ28λ+3))+A1q2(14(7λ28λ+3)14(5λ26λ+3))+(A2A1)p214(7λ28λ+3)).

    Using the triangle inequality and Lemma 2.2, we can obtain

    |a3|A17λ28λ+3+|A2A1|7λ28λ+3. (6.17)

    From (6.16) and (6.17), we have

    |a3|min{A12λ2+3(1λ)2+A214[(1λ)2+λ2]2,A1+|A2A1|7λ28λ+3},

    which completes the proof.

    Corollary 6.1. If f satisfies the condition of Theorem 6.1 and we let ψ(z)=1+43z+23z2, then

    |a2|min{23[λ2+(1λ)2],27λ28λ+3},
    |a3|min{43[2λ2+3(1λ)2]+49[(1λ)2+λ2]2,27λ28λ+3}.

    Corollary 6.2. If f satisfies the condition of Theorem 6.1 and we let fH(0,ψ), then

    |a2|min{A12,A1+|A2A1|3},
    |a3|min{A13+A214,A1+|A2A1|3}.

    Let fH(1,ψ), then

    |a2|min{A12,A1+|A2A1|2},
    |a3|min{A12+A214,A1+|A2A1|2}.

    In the present work, we defined new subclasses of analytic functions associated with the modified sigmoid function. Then, we mainly get upper bounds of the third-order Hankel determinant and fourth-order Hankel determinant in certain conditions. We also get the upper bound of the third-order Hankel determinant of its inverse function in the specific conditions mentioned above. Next, we investigated the upper bound of the Fekete-Szegö inequality for the analytic functions in the class H(λ). Finally, we estimated the upper bounds of the initial coefficients for the analytic functions in the class H(λ,ψ), where f1(z) also belongs to H(λ,ψ). The purpose of our study is to stimulate the interest of scholars in the field and to further stimulate their research in this kind of subject. In fact, this kind of problem plays a very important role in many other problems of mathematical analysis.

    We will further investigate the upper bounds of the third, fourth, and fifth-order Hankel determinants of functions belonging to H(λ) or H(λ,ψ) (0λ1). We can also research the upper bounds of the third or fourth Hankel determinant of a class of functions defined in [12]. Recently, the problems of the quantum calculus happens to provide another popular and interesting direction for researchers in complex analysis, which is evidenced by the recently-published review article by Srivastava [31]. Hence, the quantum extension of the results shown in this paper is quite worthwhile to further research. Apart from the above, we are motivated to explore how to get the upper bound of the Hankel determinant of certain analytic functions by other methods, from which we may get more precise or sharp upper bounds.

    The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.

    This study is supported by the Guangdong Provincial Natural Science Foundation's general program. Fund number: 2021A1515010374.

    Also, the authors would like to thank the anonymous referee for the very thorough reading and contributions to improve our presentation of the paper.

    The authors declare that they have no competing interests.



    [1] Barauskaite G, Streimikiene D (2021) Corporate social responsibility and financial performance of companies: The puzzle of concepts, definitions and assessment methods. Corp Soc Resp Env Ma 28: 278–287. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2048 doi: 10.1002/csr.2048
    [2] Bolton P, Kacperczyk M (2021) Do investors care about carbon risk? J Financ Econ 142: 517–549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2021.05.008 doi: 10.1016/j.jfineco.2021.05.008
    [3] Carhart MM (1997) On persistence in mutual fund performance. J Financ 52: 57–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1997.tb03808.x doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.1997.tb03808.x
    [4] Chang CE, Krueger TM, Witte HD (2019) Saving green while going green: The role of expenses in socially responsible equity mutual fund selection. Manag Financ 45: 21–35. https://doi.org/10.1108/MF-03-2018-0095 doi: 10.1108/MF-03-2018-0095
    [5] Climent F, Soriano P (2011) Green and good? The investment performance of US environmental mutual funds. J Bus Ethics 103: 275–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0865-2 doi: 10.1007/s10551-011-0865-2
    [6] Durán-Santomil P, Otero-González L, Correia-Domingues RH, et al. (2019) Does sustainability score impact mutual fund performance? Sustainability 11: 2972. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11102972 doi: 10.3390/su11102972
    [7] Elton EJ, Gruber, MJ, Blake CR (1996) Survivor bias and mutual fund performance. Rev Financ Stud 9: 1097–1120. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/9.4.1097 doi: 10.1093/rfs/9.4.1097
    [8] Elton EJ, Gruber MJ, Das S, et al. (1993) Efficiency with costly information: A reinterpretation of evidence from managed portfolios. Rev Financ Stud 6: 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/6.1.1 doi: 10.1093/rfs/6.1.1
    [9] Fama EF, French KR (2015) A five-factor asset pricing model. J Financ Econ 116: 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2014.10.010 doi: 10.1016/j.jfineco.2014.10.010
    [10] Fourati YM, Dammak M (2021) Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: International evidence of the mediating role of reputation. Corp Soc Resp Env Ma 28: 1749–1759. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2143 doi: 10.1002/csr.2143
    [11] Gil-Bazo J, Ruiz-Verdú P (2008) When cheaper is better: Fee determination in the market for equity mutual funds. J Econ Behav Organ 67: 871–885. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2007.04.003 doi: 10.1016/j.jebo.2007.04.003
    [12] Gil-Bazo J, Ruiz-Verdú P, Santos AA (2010) The performance of socially responsible mutual funds: The role of fees and management companies. J Bus Ethics 94: 243–263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0260-4 doi: 10.1007/s10551-009-0260-4
    [13] Gruber MJ (1996) Another puzzle: The growth in actively managed mutual funds. J Financ 51: 783–810. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1996.tb02707.x doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.1996.tb02707.x
    [14] Global Sustainable Investment Alliance (2020) Global Sustainable Investment Review. Biennial Report. Available from: https://www.gsi-alliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/GSIR-20201.pdf.
    [15] Hejase H, Farha C, Haddad Z, et al. (2012) Exploring the multiple benefits of CSR on organizational performance: Case of Lebanon. J Soc Sci 1: 1–23. https://doi.org/10.25255/jss.2012.1.1.1.23 doi: 10.25255/jss.2012.1.1.1.23
    [16] Kacperczyk M, Sialm C, Zheng L (2005) On the industry concentration of actively managed equity mutual funds. J Financ 60: 1983–2011. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2005.00785.x doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2005.00785.x
    [17] Kleimeier S, Viehs M (2021) Pricing carbon risk: Investor preferences or risk mitigation? Econ Lett 205: 109936. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2021.109936 doi: 10.1016/j.econlet.2021.109936
    [18] Leite C, Cortez MC, Silva F, et al. (2018) The performance of socially responsible equity mutual funds: Evidence from Sweden. Bus Ethics 27: 108–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12174 doi: 10.1111/beer.12174
    [19] Lu J, Liang M, Zhang C, et al. (2021) Assessment of corporate social responsibility by addressing sustainable development goals. Corp Soc Resp Env Ma 28: 686–703. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2081 doi: 10.1002/csr.2081
    [20] Mallett J, Michelson S (2010) Green investing: Is it different from socially responsible investing? Intl J Bus 15: 395–410.
    [21] Matallín-Sáez JC (2006) Seasonality, market timing and performance amongst bench- marks and mutual fund evaluation. J Bus Financ Account 33: 1484–1507. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5957.2006.00636.x doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5957.2006.00636.x
    [22] Matallín-Sáez JC, Soler-Domínguez A, de Mingo-López DV (2021) On management risk and price in the mutual fund industry: style and performance distribution analysis. Risk Manag 23: 150–171. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41283-021-00072-9 doi: 10.1057/s41283-021-00072-9
    [23] Matallín‐Sáez JC, Soler‐Domínguez A, de Mingo‐López DV, et al. (2019) Does socially responsible mutual fund performance vary over the business cycle? New insights on the effect of idiosyncratic SR features. Bus Ethics 28: 71–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12196 doi: 10.1111/beer.12196
    [24] Morningstar (2018a) Morningstar portfolio carbon metrics frequently asked questions. Hale, J and Koska, J, Morningstar Research.
    [25] Morningstar (2018b) Measuring transition risk in fund portfolios. The Morningstar portfolio carbon risk score. Hale, J, Morningstar Research.
    [26] Nofsinger JR, Varma A (2022) Keeping Promises? Mutual Funds' Investment Objectives and Impact of Carbon Risk Disclosures. J Bus Ethics, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-022-05264-1
    [27] Otero-González L, Durán-Santomil P (2021) Is quantitative and qualitative information relevant for choosing mutual funds? J Bus Res 123: 476–488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.015 doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.015
    [28] Pástor L, Stambaugh R (2002) Mutual fund performance and seemingly unrelated assets. J Financ Econ 63: 315–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-405X(02)00064-8 doi: 10.1016/S0304-405X(02)00064-8
    [29] Pástor L, Vorsatz MB (2020) Mutual fund performance and flows during the COVID-19 crisis. Rev Asset Pricing Stud 10: 791–833. https://doi.org/10.1093/rapstu/raaa015 doi: 10.1093/rapstu/raaa015
    [30] Reboredo JC, Otero LA (2021) Are investors aware of climate-related transition risks? Evidence from mutual fund flows. Ecol Econ 189: 107148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107148 doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107148
    [31] Reboredo JC, Otero LA (2022) Low carbon transition risk in mutual fund portfolios: Managerial involvement and performance effects. Bus Strateg Environ 31: 950–968. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2928 doi: 10.1002/bse.2928
    [32] Renneboog L, Horst JT, Zhang C (2008) The price of ethics and stakeholder governance of socially responsible funds. J Corp Financ 14: 302–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2008.03.009 doi: 10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2008.03.009
    [33] Zerbib OD (2019) The effect of pro-environmental preferences on bond prices: Evidence from green bonds. J Bank Financ 98: 39–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2018.10.012 doi: 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2018.10.012
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Huo Tang, Muhammad Abbas, Reem K. Alhefthi, Muhammad Arif, Problems involving combinations of coefficients for the inverse of some complex-valued analytical functions, 2024, 9, 2473-6988, 28931, 10.3934/math.20241404
    2. Timilehin Gideon Shaba, Ferdous M. O. Tawfiq, Daniel Breaz, Luminit̨a-Ioana Cotîrlă, New Uses of q-Generalized Janowski Function in q-Bounded Turning Functions, 2024, 12, 2227-7390, 1552, 10.3390/math12101552
    3. Timilehin Gideon Shaba, Serkan Araci, Babatunde Olufemi Adebesin, Fuat Usta, Bilal Khan, Characterization of Bi-Starlike Functions: A Daehee Polynomial Approach, 2024, 16, 2073-8994, 1640, 10.3390/sym16121640
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2023 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(2026) PDF downloads(161) Cited by(9)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog