In this present investigation, the authors obtain Fekete-Szegö inequality for certain normalized analytic function f(ζ) defined on the open unit disk for which
(f′(ζ)ϑ(ζf′(ζ)f(ζ))1−ϑ≺1+sinζ;(0≤ϑ≤1)
lies in a region starlike with respect to 1 and symmetric with respect to the real axis. As a special case of this result, the Fekete-Szegö inequality for a class of functions defined through Poisson distribution series is obtained. Further, we discuss the second Hankel inequality for functions in this new class.
Citation: Huo Tang, Gangadharan Murugusundaramoorthy, Shu-Hai Li, Li-Na Ma. Fekete-Szegö and Hankel inequalities for certain class of analytic functions related to the sine function[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 6365-6380. doi: 10.3934/math.2022354
[1] | Yasmina Khiar, Esmeralda Mainar, Eduardo Royo-Amondarain, Beatriz Rubio . High relative accuracy for a Newton form of bivariate interpolation problems. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(2): 3836-3847. doi: 10.3934/math.2025178 |
[2] | Chih-Hung Chang, Ya-Chu Yang, Ferhat Şah . Reversibility of linear cellular automata with intermediate boundary condition. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(3): 7645-7661. doi: 10.3934/math.2024371 |
[3] | Yongge Tian . Miscellaneous reverse order laws and their equivalent facts for generalized inverses of a triple matrix product. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(12): 13845-13886. doi: 10.3934/math.2021803 |
[4] | Yang Chen, Kezheng Zuo, Zhimei Fu . New characterizations of the generalized Moore-Penrose inverse of matrices. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(3): 4359-4375. doi: 10.3934/math.2022242 |
[5] | Pattrawut Chansangiam, Arnon Ploymukda . Riccati equation and metric geometric means of positive semidefinite matrices involving semi-tensor products. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(10): 23519-23533. doi: 10.3934/math.20231195 |
[6] | Zongcheng Li, Jin Li . Linear barycentric rational collocation method for solving a class of generalized Boussinesq equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(8): 18141-18162. doi: 10.3934/math.2023921 |
[7] | Maolin Cheng, Bin Liu . A novel method for calculating the contribution rates of economic growth factors. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(8): 18339-18353. doi: 10.3934/math.2023932 |
[8] | Wenyue Feng, Hailong Zhu . The orthogonal reflection method for the numerical solution of linear systems. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(6): 12888-12899. doi: 10.3934/math.2025579 |
[9] | Junsheng Zhang, Lihua Hao, Tengyun Jiao, Lusong Que, Mingquan Wang . Mathematical morphology approach to internal defect analysis of A356 aluminum alloy wheel hubs. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(4): 3256-3273. doi: 10.3934/math.2020209 |
[10] | Sizhong Zhou, Quanru Pan . The existence of subdigraphs with orthogonal factorizations in digraphs. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(2): 1223-1233. doi: 10.3934/math.2021075 |
In this present investigation, the authors obtain Fekete-Szegö inequality for certain normalized analytic function f(ζ) defined on the open unit disk for which
(f′(ζ)ϑ(ζf′(ζ)f(ζ))1−ϑ≺1+sinζ;(0≤ϑ≤1)
lies in a region starlike with respect to 1 and symmetric with respect to the real axis. As a special case of this result, the Fekete-Szegö inequality for a class of functions defined through Poisson distribution series is obtained. Further, we discuss the second Hankel inequality for functions in this new class.
Throughout this article, Cm×n denotes the collection of all m×n matrices over the field of complex numbers, A∗ denotes the conjugate transpose of A∈Cm×n, r(A) denotes the rank of A∈Cm×n, R(A) denotes the range of A∈Cm×n, Im denotes the identity matrix of order m, and [A,B] denotes a row block matrix consisting of A∈Cm×n and B∈Cm×p. The Moore-Penrose generalized inverse of A∈Cm×n, denoted by A†, is the unique matrix X∈Cn×m satisfying the four Penrose equations
(1) AXA=A, (2) XAX=X, (3) (AX)∗=AX, (4) (XA)∗=XA. |
Further, we denote by
PA=AA†, EA=Im−AA† | (1.1) |
the two orthogonal projectors induced from A∈Cm×n. For more detailed information regarding generalized inverses of matrices, we refer the reader to [2,3,4].
Recall that the well-known Kronecker product of any two matrices A=(aij)∈Cm×n and B=(bij)∈Cp×q is defined to be
A⊗B=(aijB)=[a11Ba12B⋯a1nBa21Ba22B⋯a2nB⋮⋮⋱⋮am1Bam2B⋯amnB]∈Cmp×nq. |
The Kronecker product, named after German mathematician Leopold Kronecker, was classified to be a special kind of matrix operation, which has been regarded as an important matrix operation and mathematical technique. This product has wide applications in system theory, matrix calculus, matrix equations, system identification and more (cf. [1,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,16,18,19,20,21,23,24,25,27,28,33,34]). It has been known that the matrices operations based on Kronecker products have a series of rich and good structures and properties, and thus they have many significant applications in the research areas of both theoretical and applied mathematics. In fact, mathematicians established a variety of useful formulas and facts related to the products and used them to deal with various concrete scientific computing problems. Specifically, the basic facts on Kronecker products of matrices in the following lemma were highly appraised and recognized (cf. [15,17,21,32,34]).
Fact 1.1. Let A∈Cm×n, B∈Cp×q, C∈Cn×s, and D∈Cq×t. Then, the following equalities hold:
(A⊗B)(C⊗D)=(AC)⊗(BD), | (1.2) |
(A⊗B)∗=A∗⊗B∗, (A⊗B)†=A†⊗B†, | (1.3) |
PA⊗B=PA⊗PB, r(A⊗B)=r(A)r(B). | (1.4) |
In addition, the Kronecker product of matrices has a rich variety of algebraic operation properties. For example, one of the most important features is that the product A1⊗A2 can be factorized as certain ordinary products of matrices:
A1⊗A2=(A1⊗Im2)(In1⊗A2)=(Im1⊗A2)(A1⊗In2) | (1.5) |
for any A1∈Cm1×n1 and A2∈Cm2×n2, and the triple Kronecker product A1⊗A2⊗A3 can be written as
A1⊗A2⊗A3=(A1⊗Im2⊗Im3)(In1⊗A2⊗Im3)(In1⊗In2⊗A3), | (1.6) |
A1⊗A2⊗A3=(In1⊗A2⊗Im3)(In1(In1⊗In2⊗A3)(A1⊗Im2⊗Im3), | (1.7) |
A1⊗A2⊗A3=(Im1⊗Im2⊗A3)(A1⊗In2⊗In3)(Im1⊗A2⊗In3) | (1.8) |
for any A1∈Cm1×n1, A2∈Cm2×n2 and A3∈Cm3×n3, where the five matrices in the parentheses on the right hand sides of (1.5)–(1.8) are usually called the dilation expressions of the given three matrices A1, A2 and A3, and the four equalities in (1.5)–(1.8) are called the dilation factorizations of the Kronecker products A1⊗A2 and A1⊗A2⊗A3, respectively. A common feature of the four matrix equalities in (1.5)–(1.8) is that they factorize Kronecker products of any two or three matrices into certain ordinary products of the dilation expressions of A1, A2 and A3. Particularly, a noticeable fact we have to point out is that the nine dilation expressions of matrices in (1.5)–(1.8) commute each other by the well-known mixed-product property in (1.2) when A1, A2 and A3 are all square matrices. It can further be imagined that there exists proper extension of the dilation factorizations to Kronecker products of multiple matrices. Although the dilation factorizations in (1.5)–(1.8) seem to be technically trivial in form, they can help deal with theoretical and computational issues regarding Kronecker products of two or three matrices through the ordinary addition and multiplication operations of matrices.
In this article, we provide a new analysis of performances and properties of Kronecker products of matrices, as well as present a wide range of novel and explicit facts and results through the dilation factorizations described in (1.5)–(1.8) for the purpose of obtaining a deeper understanding and grasping of Kronecker products of matrices, including a number of analytical formulas for calculating ranks, dimensions, orthogonal projectors, and ranges of the dilation expressions of matrices and their algebraic operations.
The remainder of article is organized as follows. In section two, we introduce some preliminary facts and results concerning ranks, ranges, and generalized inverses of matrices. In section three, we propose and prove a collection of useful equalities, inequalities, and formulas for calculating the ranks, dimensions, orthogonal projectors, and ranges associated with the Kronecker products A1⊗A2 and A1⊗A2⊗A3 through the dilation expressions of A1, A2 and A3 and their operations. Conclusions and remarks are given in section four.
One of the remarkable applications of generalized inverses of matrices is to establish various exact and analytical expansion formulas for calculating the ranks of partitioned matrices. As convenient and skillful tools, these matrix rank formulas can be used to deal with a wide variety of theoretical and computational issues in matrix theory and its applications (cf. [22]). In this section, we present a mixture of commonly used formulas and facts in relation to ranks of matrices and their consequences about the commutativity of two orthogonal projectors, which we shall use as analytical tools to approach miscellaneous formulas related to Kronecker products of matrices.
Lemma 2.1. [22,29] Let A∈Cm×n and B∈Cm×k. Then, the following rank equalities
r[A,B]=r(A)+r(EAB)=r(B)+r(EBA), | (2.1) |
r[A,B]=r(A)+r(B)−2r(A∗B)+r[PAPB,PBPA], | (2.2) |
r[A,B]=r(A)+r(B)−r(A∗B)+2−1r(PAPB−PBPA), | (2.3) |
r[A,B]=r(A)+r(B)−r(A∗B)+r(P[A,B]−PA−PB+PAPB) | (2.4) |
hold. Therefore,
PAPB=PBPA⇔P[A,B]=PA+PB−PAPB⇔r(EAB)=r(B)−r(A∗B)⇔r[A,B]=r(A)+r(B)−r(A∗B)⇔R(PAPB)=R(PBPA). | (2.5) |
If PAPB=PBPA, PAPC=PCPA and PBPC=PCPB, then
P[A,B,C]=PA+PB+PC−PAPB−PAPC−PBPC+PAPBPC. | (2.6) |
Lemma 2.2. [30] Let A,B and C∈Cm×m be three idempotent matrices. Then, the following rank equality
r[A,B,C]=r(A)+r(B)+r(C)−r[AB,AC]−r[BA,BC]−r[CA,CB] +r[AB,AC,BA,BC,CA,CB] | (2.7) |
holds. As a special instance, if AB=BA, AC=CA and BC=CB, then
r[A,B,C]=r(A)+r(B)+r(C)−r[AB,AC]−r[BA,BC]−r[CA,CB]+r[AB,AC,BC]. | (2.8) |
The formulas and facts in the above two lemmas belong to mathematical competencies and conceptions in ordinary linear algebra. Thus they can easily be understood and technically be utilized to establish and simplify matrix expressions and equalities consisting of matrices and their generalized inverses.
We first establish a group of formulas and facts associated with the orthogonal projectors, ranks, dimensions, and ranges of the matrix product in (1.5).
Theorem 3.1. Let A1∈Cm1×n1 and A2∈Cm2×n2, and denote by
M1=A1⊗Im2, M2=Im1⊗A2 |
the two dilation expressions of A1 and A2, respectively. Then, we have the following results.
(a) The following orthogonal projector equalities hold:
PA1⊗A2=PM1PM2=PM2PM1=PA1⊗PA2. | (3.1) |
(b) The following four rank equalities hold:
r[A1⊗Im2,Im1⊗A2]=m1m2−(m1−r(A1))(m2−r(A2)), | (3.2) |
r[A1⊗Im2,Im1⊗EA2]=m1m2−(m1−r(A1))r(A2), | (3.3) |
r[EA1⊗Im2,Im1⊗A2]=m1m2−r(A1)(m2−r(A2)), | (3.4) |
r[EA1⊗Im2,Im1⊗EA2]=m1m2−r(A1)r(A2), | (3.5) |
and the following five dimension equalities hold:
dim(R(M1)∩R(M2))=r(M1M2)=r(A1)r(A2), | (3.6) |
dim(R(M1)∩R⊥(M2))=r(M1EM2)=r(A1)(m2−r(A2)), | (3.7) |
dim(R⊥(M1)∩R(M2))=r(EM1M2)=(m1−r(A1))r(A2), | (3.8) |
dim(R⊥(M1)∩R⊥(M2))=r(EM1EM2)=(m1−r(A1))(m2−r(A2)), | (3.9) |
dim(R(M1)∩R(M2))+dim(R(M1)∩R⊥(M2))+dim(R⊥(M1)∩R⊥(M2)) +dim(R⊥(M1)∩R⊥(M2))=m1m2. | (3.10) |
(c) The following range equalities hold:
R(M1)∩R(M2)=R(M1M2)=R(M2M1)=R(A1⊗A2), | (3.11) |
R(M1)∩R⊥(M2)=R(M1EM2)=R(EM2M1)=R(A1⊗EA2), | (3.12) |
R⊥(M1)∩R(M2)=R(EM1M2)=R(M2EM1)=R(EA1⊗A2), | (3.13) |
R⊥(M1)∩R⊥(M2)=R(EM1EM2)=R(EM2EM1)=R(EA1⊗EA2), | (3.14) |
(R(M1)∩R(M2))⊕(R⊥(M1)∩R(M2))⊕(R(M1)∩R⊥(M2))⊕(R⊥(M1)∩R⊥(M2))=Cm1m2. | (3.15) |
(d) The following orthogonal projector equalities hold:
PR(M1)∩R(M2)=PM1PM2=PA1⊗PA2, | (3.16) |
PR(M1)∩R⊥(M2)=PM1EM2=PA1⊗EA2, | (3.17) |
PR⊥(M1)∩R(M2)=EM1PM2=EA1⊗PA2, | (3.18) |
PR⊥(M1)∩R⊥(M2)=EM1EM2=EA1⊗EA2, | (3.19) |
PR(M1)∩R(M2)+PR⊥(M1)∩R(M2)+PR(M1)∩R⊥(M2)+PR⊥(M1)∩R⊥(M2)=Im1m2. | (3.20) |
(e) The following orthogonal projector equalities hold:
P[A1⊗Im2,Im1⊗A2]=PA1⊗Im2+Im1⊗PA2−PA1⊗PA2=Im1m2−EA1⊗EA2, | (3.21) |
P[A1⊗Im2,Im1⊗EA2]=PA1⊗Im2+Im1⊗EA2−PA1⊗EA2=Im1m2−EA1⊗PA2, | (3.22) |
P[EA1⊗Im2,Im1⊗A2]=EA1⊗Im2+Im1⊗PA2−EA1⊗PA2=Im1m2−PA1⊗EA2, | (3.23) |
P[EA1⊗Im2,Im1⊗EA2]=EA1⊗Im2+Im1⊗EA2−EA1⊗EA2=Im1m2−PA1⊗PA2. | (3.24) |
Proof. It can be seen from (1.2) and (1.4) that
PM1PM2=(A1⊗Im2)(A1⊗Im2)†(Im1⊗A2)(Im1⊗A2)†=(A1⊗Im2)(A†1⊗Im2)(Im1⊗A2)(Im1⊗A†2)=(PA1⊗Im2)(Im1⊗PA2)=PA1⊗PA2,PM2PM1=(Im1⊗A2)(Im1⊗A2)†(A1⊗Im2)(A1⊗Im2)†=(Im1⊗A2)(Im1⊗A†2)(A1⊗Im2)(A†1⊗Im2)=(Im1⊗PA2)(PA1⊗Im2)=PA1⊗PA2, |
thus establishing (3.1).
Applying (2.1) to [A1⊗Im2,Im1⊗A2] and then simplifying by (1.2)–(1.4) yields
r[A1⊗Im2,Im1⊗A2]=r(A1⊗Im2)+r((Im1m2−(A1⊗Im2)(A1⊗Im2)†)(Im1⊗A2))=r(A1⊗Im2)+r((Im1m2−(A1⊗Im2)(A†1⊗Im2))(Im1⊗A2))=r(A1⊗Im2)+r((Im1m2−(A1A†1)⊗Im2)(Im1⊗A2))=m2r(A1)+r((Im1−A1A†1)⊗Im2)(Im1⊗A2))=m2r(A1)+r((Im1−A1A†1)⊗A2))=m2r(A1)+r(Im1−A1A†1)r(A2)=m2r(A1)+(m1−r(A1))r(A2)=m1m2−(m1−r(A1))(m2−r(A2)), |
as required for (3.2). In addition, (3.2) can be directly established by applying (2.5) to the left hand side of (3.2). Equations (3.3)–(3.5) can be obtained by a similar approach. Subsequently by (3.2),
dim(R(M1)∩R(M2))=r(M1)+r(M2)−r[M1,M2]=r(A1)r(A2), |
as required for (3.6). Equations (3.7)–(3.9) can be established by a similar approach. Adding (3.7)–(3.9) leads to (3.10).
The first two equalities in (3.11) follow from (3.6), and the last two range equalities follow from (3.1).
Equations (3.12)–(3.14) can be established by a similar approach. Adding (3.11)–(3.14) and combining with (3.10) leads to (3.15).
Equations (3.16)–(3.19) follow from (3.11)–(3.14). Adding (3.16)–(3.19) leads to (3.20).
Under (3.1), we find from (2.5) that
P[M1,M2]=PM1+PM2−PM1PM2=PA1⊗Im2+Im1⊗PA2−PA1⊗PA2=Im1m2−EA1⊗EA2, |
as required for (3.21). Equations (3.22)–(3.24) can be established by a similar approach.
Equation (3.2) was first shown in [7]; see also [27] for some extended forms of (3.2). Obviously, Theorem 3.1 reveals many performances and properties of Kronecker products of matrices, and it is no doubt that they can be used as analysis tools to deal with various matrix equalities composed of algebraic operations of Kronecker products of matrices. For example, applying the preceding results to the Kronecker sum and difference A1⊗Im2±Im1⊗A2 for two idempotent matrices A1 and A2, we obtain the following interesting consequences.
Theorem 3.2. Let A1∈Cm1×m1 and A2∈Cm2×m2. Then, the following rank inequality
r(A1⊗Im2+Im1⊗A2)≥m1r(A2)+m2r(A1)−2r(A1)r(A2) | (3.25) |
holds. If A1=A21 and A2=A22, then the following two rank equalities hold:
r(A1⊗Im2+Im1⊗A2)=m1r(A2)+m2r(A1)−r(A1)r(A2), | (3.26) |
r(A1⊗Im2−Im1⊗A2)=m1r(A2)+m2r(A1)−2r(A1)r(A2). | (3.27) |
Proof. Equation (3.25) follows from applying the following well-known rank inequality (cf. [22])
r(A+B)≥r[AB]+r[A,B]−r(A)−r(B) |
and (2.1) to A1⊗Im2+Im1⊗A2. Specifically, if A1=A21 and A2=A22, then it is easy to verify that (A1⊗Im2)2=A21⊗Im2=A1⊗Im2 and (Im1⊗A2)2=Im1⊗A22=Im1⊗A2 under A21=A1 and A22=A2. In this case, applying the following two known rank formulas
r(A+B)=r[ABB0]−r(B)=r[BAA0]−r(A),r(A−B)=r[AB]+r[A,B]−r(A)−r(B), |
where A and B are two idempotent matrices of the same size (cf. [29,31]), to A1⊗Im2±Im1⊗A2 and then simplifying by (2.1) and (3.2) yields (3.26) and (3.27), respectively.
Undoubtedly, the above two theorems reveal some essential relations among the dilation forms of two matrices by Kronecker products, which demonstrate that there still exist various concrete research topics on the Kronecker product of two matrices with analytical solutions that can be proposed and obtained. As a natural and useful generalization of the preceding formulas, we next give a diverse range of results related to the three-term Kronecker products of matrices in (1.6).
Theorem 3.3. Let A1∈Cm1×n1,A2∈Cm2×n2 and A3∈Cm3×n3, and let
X1=A1⊗Im2⊗Im3, X2=Im1⊗A2⊗Im3, X3=Im1⊗Im2⊗A3 | (3.28) |
denote the three dilation expressions of A1, A2 and A3, respectively. Then, we have the following results.
(a) The following three orthogonal projector equalities hold:
PX1=PA1⊗Im2⊗Im3, PX2=Im1⊗PA2⊗Im3, PX3=Im1⊗Im2⊗PA3, | (3.29) |
the following equalities hold:
PX1PX2=PX2PX1=PA1⊗PA2⊗Im3, | (3.30) |
PX1PX3=PX3PX1=PA1⊗Im2⊗PA3, | (3.31) |
PX2PX3=PX3PX2=Im1⊗PA2⊗PA3, | (3.32) |
and the equalities hold:
PA1⊗A2⊗A3=PX1PX2PX3=PA1⊗PA2⊗PA3. | (3.33) |
(b) The following eight rank equalities hold:
r[A1⊗Im2⊗Im3,Im1⊗A2⊗Im3,Im1⊗Im2⊗A3] =m1m2m3−(m1−r(A1))(m2−r(A2))(m3−r(A3)), | (3.34) |
r[A1⊗Im2⊗Im3,Im1⊗A2⊗Im3,Im1⊗Im2⊗EA3] =m1m2m3−(m1−r(A1))(m2−r(A2))r(A3), | (3.35) |
r[A1⊗Im2⊗Im3,Im1⊗EA2⊗Im3,Im1⊗Im2⊗A3] =m1m2m3−(m1−r(A1))r(A2)(m3−r(A3)), | (3.36) |
r[EA1⊗Im2⊗Im3,Im1⊗A2⊗Im3,Im1⊗Im2⊗A3] =m1m2m3−r(A1)(m2−r(A2))(m3−r(A3)), | (3.37) |
r[A1⊗Im2⊗Im3,Im1⊗EA2⊗Im3,Im1⊗Im2⊗EA3] =m1m2m3−(m1−r(A1))r(A2)r(A3), | (3.38) |
r[EA1⊗Im2⊗Im3,Im1⊗A2⊗Im3,Im1⊗Im2⊗EA3] =m1m2m3−r(A1)(m2−r(A2))r(A3), | (3.39) |
r[EA1⊗Im2⊗Im3,Im1⊗EA2⊗Im3,Im1⊗Im2⊗A3] =m1m2m3−r(A1)r(A2)(m3−r(A3)), | (3.40) |
r[EA1⊗Im2⊗Im3,Im1⊗EA2⊗Im3,Im1⊗Im2⊗EA3]=m1m2m3−r(A1)r(A2)r(A3), | (3.41) |
the following eight dimension equalities hold:
dim(R(X1)∩R(X2)∩R(X3))=r(A1)r(A2)r(A3), | (3.42) |
dim(R(X1)∩R(X2)∩R⊥(X3))=r(A1)r(A2)(m3−r(A3)), | (3.43) |
dim(R⊥(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R(X3))=r(A1)(m2−r(A2))r(A3), | (3.44) |
dim(R⊥(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R(X3))=(m1−r(A1))r(A2)r(A3), | (3.45) |
dim(R(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R⊥(X3))=r(A1)(m2−r(A2))(m3−r(A3)), | (3.46) |
dim(R⊥(X1)∩R(X2)∩R⊥(X3))=(m1−r(A1))r(A2)(m3−r(A3)), | (3.47) |
dim(R⊥(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R(X3))=(m1−r(A1))(m2−r(A2))r(A3), | (3.48) |
dim(R⊥(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R⊥(X3))=(m1−r(A1))(m2−r(A2))(m3−r(A3)), | (3.49) |
and the following dimension equality holds:
dim(R(X1)∩R(X2)∩R(X3))+dim(R(X1)∩R(X2)∩R⊥(X3)) +dim(R⊥(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R(X3))+dim(R⊥(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R(X3)) +dim(R(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R⊥(X3))+dim(R⊥(X1)∩R(X2)∩R⊥(X3)) +dim(R⊥(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R(X3))+dim(R⊥(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R⊥(X3)=m1m2m3. | (3.50) |
(c) The following eight groups of range equalities hold:
R(X1)∩R(X2)∩R(X3)=R(X1X2X3)=R(A1⊗A2⊗A3), | (3.51) |
R(X1)∩R(X2)∩R⊥(X3)=R(X1X2EX3)=R(A1⊗A2⊗EA3), | (3.52) |
R(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R(X3)=R(X1EX2X3)=R(A1⊗EA2⊗A3), | (3.53) |
R⊥(X1)∩R(X2)∩R(X3)=R(EX1X2X3)=R(EA1⊗A2⊗A3), | (3.54) |
R(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R⊥(X3)=R(X1EX2EX3)=R(A1⊗EA2⊗EA3), | (3.55) |
R⊥(X1)∩R(X2)∩R⊥(X3)=R(EX1X2EX3)=R(EA1⊗A2⊗EA3), | (3.56) |
R⊥(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R(X3)=R(X1EX2X3)=R(EA1⊗EA2⊗A3), | (3.57) |
R⊥(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R⊥(X3)=R(EX1EX2EX3)=R(EA1⊗EA2⊗EA3), | (3.58) |
and the following direct sum equality holds:
(R(X1)∩R(X2)∩R(X3))⊕(R⊥(X1)∩R(X2)∩R(X3))⊕(R(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R(X3))⊕(R(X1)∩R(X2)∩R⊥(X3))⊕(R⊥(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R(X3))⊕(R⊥(X1)∩R(X2)∩R⊥(X3))⊕(R(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R⊥(X3))⊕(R⊥(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R⊥(X3))=Cm1m2m3. | (3.59) |
(d) The following eight orthogonal projector equalities hold:
PR(X1)∩R(X2)∩R(X3)=PA1⊗PA2⊗PA3, | (3.60) |
PR(X1)∩R(X2)∩R⊥(X3)=PA1⊗PA2⊗EA3, | (3.61) |
PR(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R(X3)=PA1⊗EA2⊗PA3, | (3.62) |
PR⊥(X1)∩R(X2)∩R(X3)=EA1⊗PA2⊗PA3, | (3.63) |
PR(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R⊥(X3)=PA1⊗EA2⊗EA3, | (3.64) |
PR⊥(X1)∩R(X2)∩R⊥(X3)=EA1⊗PA2⊗EA3, | (3.65) |
PR⊥(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R(X3)=EA1⊗EA2⊗PA3, | (3.66) |
PR⊥(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R⊥(X3)=EA1⊗EA2⊗EA3, | (3.67) |
and the following orthogonal projector equality holds:
PR(X1)∩R(X2)∩R(X3)+PR(X1)∩R(X2)∩R⊥(X3) +PR(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R(X3)+PR⊥(X1)∩R(X2)∩R(X3) +PR(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R⊥(X3)+PR⊥(X1)∩R(X2)∩R⊥(X3) +PR⊥(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R(X3)+PR⊥(X1)∩R⊥(X2)∩R⊥(X3)=Im1m2m3. | (3.68) |
(e) The following eight orthogonal projector equalities hold:
P[A1⊗Im2⊗Im3,Im1⊗A2⊗Im3,Im1⊗Im2⊗A3]=Im1m2m3−EA1⊗EA2⊗EA3, | (3.69) |
P[A1⊗Im2⊗Im3,Im1⊗A2⊗Im3,Im1⊗Im2⊗EA3]=Im1m2m3−EA1⊗EA2⊗PA3, | (3.70) |
P[A1⊗Im2⊗Im3,Im1⊗EA2⊗Im3,Im1⊗Im2⊗A3]=Im1m2m3−EA1⊗PA2⊗EA3, | (3.71) |
P[EA1⊗Im2⊗Im3,Im1⊗A2⊗Im3,Im1⊗Im2⊗A3]=Im1m2m3−PA1⊗EA2⊗EA3, | (3.72) |
P[A1⊗Im2⊗Im3,Im1⊗EA2⊗Im3,Im1⊗Im2⊗EA3]=Im1m2m3−EA1⊗PA2⊗PA3, | (3.73) |
P[EA1⊗Im2⊗Im3,Im1⊗A2⊗Im3,Im1⊗Im2⊗EA3]=Im1m2m3−PA1⊗EA2⊗PA3, | (3.74) |
P[EA1⊗Im2⊗Im3,Im1⊗EA2⊗Im3,Im1⊗Im2⊗A3]=Im1m2m3−PA1⊗PA2⊗EA3, | (3.75) |
P[EA1⊗Im2⊗Im3,Im1⊗EA2⊗Im3,Im1⊗Im2⊗EA3]=Im1m2m3−PA1⊗PA2⊗PA3. | (3.76) |
Proof. By (1.1)–(1.3),
PX1=(A1⊗Im2⊗Im3)(A1⊗Im2⊗Im3)†=(A1⊗Im2⊗Im3)(A†1⊗Im2⊗Im3)=(A1A†1)⊗Im2⊗Im3=PA1⊗Im2⊗Im3, |
thus establishing the first equality in (3.29). The second and third equalities in (3.29) can be shown in a similar way. Also by (1.1)–(1.3),
PA1⊗A2⊗A3=(A1⊗A2⊗A3)(A1⊗A2⊗A3)†=(A1⊗A2⊗A3)(A†1⊗A†2⊗A†3)=(A1A†1)⊗(A2A†2)⊗(A3A†3)=PA1⊗PA2⊗PA3, | (3.77) |
and by (1.2) and (3.29),
PX1PX2PX3=(PA1⊗Im2⊗Im3)(Im1⊗PA2⊗Im3)(Im1⊗Im2⊗PA3)=PA1⊗PA2⊗PA3. | (3.78) |
Combining (3.77) and (3.78) leads to (3.33).
By (2.1), (1.2)–(1.4) and (3.2),
r[A1⊗Im2⊗Im3,Im1⊗A2⊗Im3,Im1⊗Im2⊗A3]=r(A1⊗Im2⊗Im3)+r((Im1−A1A†1)⊗[A2⊗Im3,Im2⊗A3])=m2m3r(A1)+r(Im1−A1A†1)r[A2⊗Im3,Im2⊗A3]=m2m3r(A1)+(m1−r(A1))(m2m3−(m2−r(A2))(m3−r(A3)))=m1m2m3−(m1−r(A1))(m2−r(A2))(m3−r(A3)), |
thus establishing (3.34). Equations (3.35)–(3.41) can be established in a similar way.
By (3.11), we are able to obtain
R(X1)∩R(X2)=R(X1X2)=R(X2X1)=R(A1⊗A2⊗Im3). |
Consequently,
R(X1)∩R(X2)∩R(X3)=R(X1X2)∩R(X3)=R(X1X2X3)=R(A1⊗A2⊗A3), |
as required for (3.51). Equations (3.52)–(3.58) can be established in a similar way. Adding (3.51)–(3.58) leads to (3.59).
Taking the dimensions of both sides of (3.51)–(3.58) and applying (1.4), we obtain (3.42)–(3.50).
Equations (3.60)–(3.68) follow from (3.51)–(3.59).
Equations (3.69)–(3.77) follow from (2.6) and (3.30)–(3.32).
In addition to (3.28), we can construct the following three dilation expressions
Y1=Im1⊗A2⊗A3, Y2=A1⊗Im2⊗A3 and Y3=A1⊗A2⊗Im3 | (3.79) |
from any three matrices A1∈Cm1×n1,A2∈Cm2×n2 and A3∈Cm3×n3. Some concrete topics on rank equalities for the dilation expressions under vector situations were considered in [26]. Below, we give a sequence of results related to the three dilation expressions.
Theorem 3.4. Let Y1, Y2 and Y3 be the same as given in (3.79). Then, we have the following results.
(a) The following three projector equalities hold:
PY1=Im1⊗PA2⊗PA3, PY2=PA1⊗Im2⊗PA3 and PY3=PA1⊗PA2⊗Im3. | (3.80) |
(b) The following twelve matrix equalities hold:
PY1PY2=PY2PY1=PY1PY3=PY3PY1=PY2PY3=PY3PY2=PY1PY2PY3=PY1PY3PY2=PY2PY1PY3=PY2PY3PY1=PY3PY1PY2=PY3PY2PY1=PA1⊗PA2⊗PA3. | (3.81) |
(c) The following rank equality holds:
r[Y1,Y2,Y3]=m1r(A2)r(A3)+m2r(A1)r(A3)+m3r(A1)r(A2)−2r(A1)r(A2)r(A3). | (3.82) |
(d) The following range equality holds:
R(Y1)∩R(Y2)∩R(Y3)=R(A1⊗A2⊗A3). | (3.83) |
(e) The following dimension equality holds:
dim(R(Y1)∩R(Y2)∩R(Y3))=r(A1)r(A2)r(A3). | (3.84) |
(f) The following projector equality holds:
PR(Y1)∩R(Y2)∩R(Y3)=PA1⊗PA2⊗PA3. | (3.85) |
(g) The following projector equality holds:
P[Y1,Y2,Y3]=Im1⊗PA2⊗PA3+PA1⊗Im2⊗PA3+PA1⊗PA2⊗Im3−2(PA1⊗PA2⊗PA3). | (3.86) |
Proof. Equation (3.80) follows directly from (3.79), and (3.81) follows from (3.80). Since PY1, PY2 and PY3 are idempotent matrices, we find from (2.8) and (3.80) that
r[Y1,Y2,Y3]=r[PY1,PY2,PY3]=r(PY1)+r(PY2)+r(PY3) −r[PY1PY2,PY1PY3]−r[PY2PY1,PY2PY3]−r[PY3PY1,PY3PY1] +r[PY1PY2,PY1PY3,PY2PY2]=r(PY1)+r(PY2)+r(PY3)−2r(PA1⊗PA2⊗PA3)=m1r(A2)r(A3)+m2r(A1)r(A3)+m3r(A1)r(A2)−2r(A1)r(A2)r(A3), |
thus establishing (3.82). Equations (3.83)–(3.86) are left as exercises for the reader.
There are some interesting consequences to Theorems 3.3 and 3.4. For example, applying the following well-known rank inequality (cf. [22]):
r(A+B+C)≥r[ABC]+r[A,B,C]−r(A)−r(B)−r(C) |
to the sums of matrices in (3.28) and (3.80) yields the two rank inequalities
r(A1⊗Im2⊗Im3+Im1⊗A2⊗Im3+Im1⊗Im2⊗A3)≥m1m2r(A3)+m1m3r(A2)+m2m3r(A1)−2m1r(A2)r(A3)−2m2r(A1)r(A3) −2m3r(A1)r(A2)+2r(A1)r(A2)r(A3) |
and
r(Im1⊗A2⊗A3+A1⊗Im2⊗A3+A1⊗A2⊗Im3)≥m1r(A2)r(A3)+m2r(A1)r(A3)+m3r(A1)r(A2)−4r(A1)r(A2)r(A3), |
respectively, where A1∈Cm1×m1,A2∈Cm2×m2 and A3∈Cm3×m3.
We presented a new analysis of the dilation factorizations of the Kronecker products of two or three matrices, and obtained a rich variety of exact formulas and facts related to ranks, dimensions, orthogonal projectors, and ranges of Kronecker products of matrices. Admittedly, it is easy to understand and utilize these resulting formulas and facts in dealing with Kronecker products of matrices under various concrete situations. Given the formulas and facts in the previous theorems, there is no doubt to say that this study clearly demonstrates significance and usefulness of the dilation factorizations of Kronecker products of matrices. Therefore, we believe that this study can bring deeper insights into performances of Kronecker products of matrices, and thereby can lead to certain advances of enabling methodology in the domain of Kronecker products. We also hope that the findings in this resultful study can be taken as fundamental facts and useful supplementary materials in matrix theory when identifying and approaching various theoretical and computational issues associated with Kronecker products of matrices.
Moreover, the numerous formulas and facts in this article can be extended to the situations for dilation factorizations of multiple Kronecker products of matrices, which can help us a great deal in producing more impressive and useful contributions of researches related to Kronecker products of matrices and developing other relevant mathematical techniques applicable to solving practical topics. Thus, they can be taken as a reference and a source of inspiration for deep understanding and exploration of numerous performances and properties of Kronecker products of matrices.
The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.
The authors would like to express their sincere thanks to anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions.
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
[1] | S. S. Miller, P. T. Mocanu, Differential subordinations: Theory and applications, Series on Monographs and Textbooks in Pure and Applied Mathematics, No. 225, CRC Press, 2000. |
[2] |
L. De Branges, A proof of the Bieberbach conjecture, Acta Math., 154 (1985), 137–152. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02392821 doi: 10.1007/BF02392821
![]() |
[3] | W. Ma, D. Minda, A unified treatment of some special classes of univalent functions, In: Proceeding of the International Conference on Complex Analysis at the Nankai Institute of Mathematics, International Press, 1992,157–169. |
[4] | W. Janowski, Extremal problems for a family of functions with positive real part and for some related families, Annales Polonici Mathematici, Institute of Mathematics Polish Academy of Sciences, 23 (1970), 159–177. |
[5] | M. S. Robertson, Certain classes of starlike functions, Mich. Math. J., 32 (1985), 135–140. |
[6] | F. Ronning, Uniformly convex functions and a corresponding class of starlike functions, Proc. Am. Math. Soc., 118 (1993), 189–196. |
[7] |
J. Sokół, Radius problem in the class SL∗, Appl. Math. Comput., 214 (2009), 569–573. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2009.04.031 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2009.04.031
![]() |
[8] |
M. Mohsin, S. N. Malik, Upper bound of third hankel determinant for class of analytic functions related with lemniscate of bernoulli, J. Inequal. Appl., 2013 (2013), 412. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2013-412 doi: 10.1186/1029-242X-2013-412
![]() |
[9] | R. K. Raina, J. Sokół, On coefficient estimates for a certain class of starlike functions, Hacet. J. Math. Stat., 44 (2015), 1427–1433. |
[10] |
K. Sharma, N. K. Jain, V. Ravichandran, Starlike functions associated with a cardioid, Afr. Mat., 27 (2016), 923–939. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13370-015-0387-7 doi: 10.1007/s13370-015-0387-7
![]() |
[11] |
L. Shi, I. Ali, M. Arif, N. E. Cho, S. Hussain, H. Khan, A study of third hankel determinant problem for certain subfamilies of analytic functions involving cardioid domain, Mathematics, 7 (2019), 418. https://doi.org/10.3390/math7050418 doi: 10.3390/math7050418
![]() |
[12] |
R. Mendiratta, S. Nagpal, V. Ravichandran, On a subclass of strongly starlike functions associated with exponential function, Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc., 38 (2015), 365–386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40840-014-0026-8 doi: 10.1007/s40840-014-0026-8
![]() |
[13] |
L. Shi, H. M. Srivastava, M. Arif, S. Hussain, H. Khan, An investigation of the third Hankel determinant problem for certain subfamilies of univalent functions involving the exponential function, Symmetry, 11 (2019), 598. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11050598 doi: 10.3390/sym11050598
![]() |
[14] |
A. Alotaibi, M. Arif, M. A. Alghamdi, S. Hussain, Starlikeness associated with cosine hyperbolic function, Mathematics, 8 (2020), 1118. https://doi.org/10.3390/math8071118 doi: 10.3390/math8071118
![]() |
[15] |
N. E. Cho, V. Kumar, S. S. Kumar, V. Ravichandran, Radius problems for starlike functions associated with the sine function, Bull. Iran. Math. Soc., 45 (2019), 213–232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41980-018-0127-5 doi: 10.1007/s41980-018-0127-5
![]() |
[16] |
M. Arif, M. Raza, H. Tang, S. Hussain, H. Khan, Hankel determinant of order three for familiar subsets of analytic functions related with sine function, Open Math., 17 (2019), 1615–1630. https://doi.org/10.1515/math-2019-0132 doi: 10.1515/math-2019-0132
![]() |
[17] |
K. Bano, M. Raza, Starlike functions associated with cosine functions, Bull. Iran. Math. Soc., 47 (2021), 1513–1532. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41980-020-00456-9 doi: 10.1007/s41980-020-00456-9
![]() |
[18] |
N. E. Cho, S. Kumar, V. Kumar, V. Ravichandran, H. M. Srivasatava, Starlike functions related to the Bell numbers, Symmetry, 11 (2019), 219. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11020219 doi: 10.3390/sym11020219
![]() |
[19] |
L. Shi, I. Ali, M. Arif, N. E. Cho, S. Hussain, H. Khan, A study of third Hankel determinant problem for certain subfamilies of analytic functions involving cardioid domain, Mathematics, 7 (2019), 418. https://doi.org/10.3390/math7050418 doi: 10.3390/math7050418
![]() |
[20] |
J. Dzoik, R. K. Raina, J. Sokół, On a class of starlike functions related to a shell-like curve connected with Fibonacci numbers, Math. Comput. Model., 57 (2013), 1203–1211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2012.10.023 doi: 10.1016/j.mcm.2012.10.023
![]() |
[21] |
S. Kanas, D. Răducanu, Some class of analytic functions related to conic domains, Math. Slovaca, 64 (2014), 1183–1196. https://doi.org/10.2478/s12175-014-0268-9 doi: 10.2478/s12175-014-0268-9
![]() |
[22] | S. Kumar, V. Ravichandran, A subclass starlike functions associated with a rational function, South East Asian Bull. Math., 40 (2016), 199–212. |
[23] |
J. W. Noonan, D. K. Thomas, On the second Hankel determinant of areally mean p-valent functions, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 223 (1976), 337–346. https://doi.org/10.1090/S0002-9947-1976-0422607-9 doi: 10.1090/S0002-9947-1976-0422607-9
![]() |
[24] |
M. Fekete, G. Szegö, Eine benberkung uber ungerada schlichte funktionen, J. London Math. Soc., s1-8 (1933), 85–89. https://doi.org/10.1112/jlms/s1-8.2.85 doi: 10.1112/jlms/s1-8.2.85
![]() |
[25] |
W. Koepf, On the Fekete-Szegö problem for close-to-convex functions, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 101 (1987), 89–95. https://doi.org/10.2307/2046556 doi: 10.2307/2046556
![]() |
[26] |
W. Koepf, On the Fekete-Szegö problem for close-to-convex functions Ⅱ, Arch. Math., 49 (1987), 420–433. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01194100 doi: 10.1007/BF01194100
![]() |
[27] |
D. Bansal, Upper bound of second Hankel determinant for a new class of analytic functions, Appl. Math. Lett., 26 (2013), 103–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aml.2012.04.002 doi: 10.1016/j.aml.2012.04.002
![]() |
[28] | A. Janteng, S. A. Halim, M. Darus, Coefficient inequality for a function whose derivative has a positive real part, J. Inequal. Pure Appl. Math., 7(2006), 50. |
[29] | A. Janteng, S. A. Halim, M. Darus, Hankel determinant for starlike and convex functions, Int. J. Math. Anal., 1 (2007), 619–625. |
[30] |
S. K. Lee, V. Ravichandran, S. Subramaniam, Bounds for the second Hankel determinant of certain univalent functions, J. Inequal. Appl., 2013 (2013), 281. https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2013-281 doi: 10.1186/1029-242X-2013-281
![]() |
[31] |
G. Murugusundaramoorthy, T. Bulboac˘a, Hankel determinants for new subclasses of analytic functions related to a Shell shaped region, Mathematics, 8 (2020), 1041. https://doi.org/10.3390/math8061041 doi: 10.3390/math8061041
![]() |
[32] |
S. K. Lee, K. Kanika, V. Ravichandran, Radius of starlikeness for classes of analytic functions, Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc., 43 (2020), 4469–4493. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40840-020-01028-0 doi: 10.1007/s40840-020-01028-0
![]() |
[33] |
M. G. Khan, B. Ahmad, J. Sokol, Z. Muhammad, W. K. Mashwani, R. Chinram, et al., Coefficient problems in a class of functions with bounded turning associated with sine function, Eur. J. Pure Appl. Math., 14 (2021), 53–64. https://doi.org/10.29020/nybg.ejpam.v14i1.3902 doi: 10.29020/nybg.ejpam.v14i1.3902
![]() |
[34] | H. Y. Zhang, H. Tang, L. N. Ma, Upper bound of third Hankel determinant for a class of analytic functions, Pure Appl. Math., 33 (2017), 211–220. |
[35] |
H. Y. Zhang, H. Tang, A study of fourth-order Hankel determinants for starlike functions connected with the sine function, J. Funct. Spaces, 2021 (2021), 9991460. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/9991460 doi: 10.1155/2021/9991460
![]() |
[36] |
H. Y. Zhang, R. Srivastava, H. Tang, Third-order Hankel and Toeplitz determinants for starlike functions connected with the sine function, Mathematics, 7 (2019), 404. https://doi.org/10.3390/math7050404 doi: 10.3390/math7050404
![]() |
[37] |
Z. Paweł, O. Milutin, T. Nikola, Third Hankel determinant for univalent starlike functions, RACSAM, 115 (2021), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-020-00977-2 doi: 10.1007/s13398-020-00977-2
![]() |
[38] |
H. Tang, S. Khan, S. Hussain, N. Khan, Hankel and Toeplitz determinant for a subclass of multivalent q-starlike functions of order α, AIMS Math., 6 (2021), 5421–5439. https://doi.org/10.3934/math.2021320 doi: 10.3934/math.2021320
![]() |
[39] | U. Grenander, G. Szegö, Toeplitz forms and their applications, California Monographs in Mathematical Sciences, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1958. |
[40] |
R. J. Libera, E. J. Zlotkiewicz, Coefficient bounds for the inverse of a function with derivative in P, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 87 (1983), 251–257. https://doi.org/10.1090/S0002-9939-1983-0681830-8 doi: 10.1090/S0002-9939-1983-0681830-8
![]() |
[41] | W. Ma, D. Minda, A unified treatment of some special classes of univalent functions, In: Proceedings of the Conference on Complex Analysis, International Press, 1992. |
[42] |
S. Porwal, An application of a Poisson distribution series on certain analytic functions, J. Complex Anal., 2014 (2014), 984135. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/984135 doi: 10.1155/2014/984135
![]() |
[43] |
G. Murugusundaramoorthy, Subclasses of starlike and convex functions involving Poisson distribution series, Afr. Mat., 28 (2017), 1357–1366. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13370-017-0520-x doi: 10.1007/s13370-017-0520-x
![]() |
[44] | G. Murugusundaramoorthy, K. Vijaya, S. Porwal, Some inclusion results of certain subclass of analytic functions associated with Poisson distribution series, Hacet. J. Math. Stat., 45 (2016), 1101–1107. |
[45] |
S. Porwal, M. Kumar, A unified study on starlike and convex functions associated with Poisson distribution series, Afr. Mat., 27 (2016), 1021–1027. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13370-016-0398-z doi: 10.1007/s13370-016-0398-z
![]() |
[46] | H. M. Srivastava, G. Kaur, G. Singh, Estimates of the fourth Hankel determinant for a class of analytic functions with bounded turnings involving cardioid domains, J. Nonlinear Convex Anal., 22 (2021), 511–526. |
[47] |
H. M. Srivastava, B. Khan, N. Khan, M. Tahir, S. Ahmad, N. Khan, Upper bound of the third Hankel determinant for a subclass of q− starlike functions associated with the q− exponential function, Bull. Sci. Math., 167 (2021), 102942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bulsci.2020.102942 doi: 10.1016/j.bulsci.2020.102942
![]() |
[48] |
Q. X. Hu, H. M. Srivastava, B. Ahmad, N. Khan, M. G. Khan, W. K. Mashwani, et al., A subclass of multivalent Janowski type q− starlike functions and its consequences, Symmetry, 13 (2021), 1275. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym13071275 doi: 10.3390/sym13071275
![]() |
[49] |
H. M. Srivastava, A. K. Wanas, R. Srivastava, Applications of the q− Srivastava-Attiya operator involving a certain family of bi-univalent functions associated with the Horadam polynomials, Symmetry, 13 (2021), 1230. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym13071230 doi: 10.3390/sym13071230
![]() |
[50] |
H. M. Srivastava, N. Khan, M. Darus, S. Khan, Q. Z. Ahmad, S. Hussain, Fekete-Szegö type problems and their applications for a subclass of q− starlike functions with respect to symmetrical points, Mathematics, 8 (2020), 842. https://doi.org/10.3390/math8050842 doi: 10.3390/math8050842
![]() |
[51] |
H. M. Srivastava, C. Kizilateş, A parametric kind of the Fubini-type polynomials, RACSAM, 113 (2019), 3253–3267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-019-00687-4 doi: 10.1007/s13398-019-00687-4
![]() |
[52] |
H. M. Srivastava, Operators of basic (or q−) calculus and fractional q− calculus and their applications in geometric function theory of complex analysis, Iran. J. Sci. Technol. Trans. Sci., 44 (2020), 327–344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40995-019-00815-0 doi: 10.1007/s40995-019-00815-0
![]() |
[53] |
B. Khan, Z. G. Liu, H. M. Srivastava, N. Khan, M. Daru, M. Tahir, A study of some families of multivalent q− starlike functions involving higher-order q− derivatives, Mathematics, 8 (2020), 1470. https://doi.org/10.3390/math8091470 doi: 10.3390/math8091470
![]() |
[54] | H. M. Srivastava, Some parametric and argument variations of the operators of fractional calculus and related special functions and integral transformations, J. Nonlinear Convex Anal., 22 (2021), 1501–1520. |