Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Journal of Function Spaces
Volume 2015, Article ID 452823, 5 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/452823
Research Article

Sharp Bounds for Toader Mean in terms of Arithmetic and Second Contraharmonic Means

1School of Distance Education, Huzhou Broadcast and TV University, Huzhou 313000, China
2School of Mathematics and Computation Science, Hunan City University, Yiyang 413000, China

Received 25 April 2015; Accepted 10 September 2015

Academic Editor: Lars E. Persson

Copyright © 2015 Wei-Mao Qian et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

We present the best possible parameters and such that double inequalities , hold for all with , where , and are the arithmetic, second contraharmonic, and Toader means of and , respectively.

1. Introduction

For the Toader mean [1], second contraharmonic mean , and arithmetic mean of and are given by respectively, where is the complete elliptic integral of the second kind. The Toader mean is well known in mathematical literature for many years; it satisfies for all and , where stands for the symmetric complete elliptic integral of the second kind (see [24]); therefore it cannot be expressed in terms of the elementary transcendental functions.

Recently, the Toader mean has been the subject of intensive research. In particular, many remarkable inequalities for the Toader mean can be found in the literature [59].

Let , , and . Then the th power mean , th Gini mean , th Lehmer mean , and th generalized Seiffert mean are defined by respectively. It is well known that , , , and are continuous and strictly increasing with respect to and for fixed with , respectively.

Vuorinen [10] conjectured that inequality holds for all with . This conjecture was proved by Qiu and Shen [11] and Barnard et al. [12], respectively.

Alzer and Qiu [13] presented a best possible upper power mean bound for the Toader mean as follows: for all with .

In [14, 15], the authors found the best possible parameters and such that double inequalities and hold for all with .

Chu and Wang [16] proved that double inequality holds for all with if and only if and .

Inequality (8) leads to for all with .

Let with be fixed and . Then it is not difficult to verify that is continuous and strictly increasing on . Note that

Motivated by inequalities (9) and (10), it is natural to ask what are the best possible parameters, and , such that double inequalities hold for all with ? The main purpose of this paper is to answer this question.

2. Main Results

In order to prove our main results we need some basic knowledge and two lemmas, which we present in this section.

For the complete elliptic integral of the first kind is defined by

We clearly see that and and satisfy formulas (see [17, Appendix E, p. 474-475])

Lemma 1 (see [17, Theorem 1.25]). Let , be continuous on and differentiable on , and on . If is increasing (decreasing) on , then so are If is strictly monotone, then the monotonicity in the conclusion is also strict.

Lemma 2 (see [17, Theorem 3.21]). (1) Function is strictly increasing from to .
(2) Function is strictly decreasing from to if .

Theorem 3. Double inequality holds for all with if and only if and ….

Proof. Since , , and are symmetric and homogeneous of degree 1, without loss of generality, we assume that . Let . Then (1) and (2) lead toWe clearly see that inequality (16) is equivalent toIt follows from (17) and (18) thatLetThen simple computations lead toFrom Lemmas 1 and 2 together with (21) and (22) we know that is strictly increasing on andTherefore, Theorem 3 follows from (19)–(21) and (23) together with the monotonicity of .

Theorem 4. Let , . Then double inequality holds for all with if and only if … and ….

Proof. Let and . We first prove thatfor all with .
Without loss of generality, we assume that . Let and . Then (2) leads toIt follows from (17) and (27) thatLetThen making use of Lemma 2 and simple computations lead toWe divide the proof into two cases.
Case 1. Consider . Then (34) becomesIt follows from Lemma 2(1) and (33) together with (36) that for all .
Therefore, inequality (25) follows easily from (28)–(31) and (37).
Case 2. Consider . Then (32), (34), and (35) lead toIt follows from Lemma 2(1), (33), (39), and (40) that there exists such that for and for . Then (30) leads to the conclusion that is strictly decreasing on and strictly increasing on .
Therefore, inequality (26) follows easily from (28), (29), (31), (38), and the piecewise monotonicity of .
Next, we prove that is the best possible parameter on such that inequality holds for all with .
Indeed, if , then (34) leads to and there exists such that for .
Equations (28)–(31) and inequality (42) imply that for .
Finally, we prove that is the best possible parameter on such that double inequality for all with .
In fact, if , then (32) leads to and there exists such thatfor .
Equations (28) and (29) together with inequality (45) imply that for .

Let , , , , , , and . Then Theorems 3 and 4 lead to Corollary 5 as follows.

Corollary 5. Double inequalities hold for all .

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China under Grants 11371125, 11401191, and 61374086, the Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province under Grant LY13A010004, the Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province under Grant 12C0577, and the Natural Science Foundation of the Zhejiang Broadcast and TV University under Grant XKT-15G17.

References

  1. G. Toader, “Some mean values related to the arithmetic-geometric mean,” Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, vol. 218, no. 2, pp. 358–368, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  2. E. Neuman, “Bounds for symmetric elliptic integrals,” Journal of Approximation Theory, vol. 122, no. 2, pp. 249–259, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  3. H. Kazi and E. Neuman, “Inequalities and bounds for elliptic integrals,” Journal of Approximation Theory, vol. 146, no. 2, pp. 212–226, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  4. H. Kazi and E. Neuman, “Inequalities and bounds for elliptic integrals II,” in Special Functions and Orthogonal Polynomials, Contemporary Mathematics 471, pp. 127–138, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, USA, 2008. View at Google Scholar
  5. Y.-M. Chu, M.-K. Wang, and X.-Y. Ma, “Sharp bounds for Toader mean in terms of contraharmonic mean with applications,” Journal of Mathematical Inequalities, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 161–166, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  6. Y.-Q. Song, W.-D. Jiang, Y.-M. Chu, and D.-D. Yan, “Optimal bounds for Toader mean in terms of arithmetic and contraharmonic means,” Journal of Mathematical Inequalities, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 751–757, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  7. W.-H. Li and M.-M. Zheng, “Some inequalities for bounding Toader mean,” Journal of Function Spaces and Applications, vol. 2013, Article ID 394194, 5 pages, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  8. Y. Hua and F. Qi, “A double inequality for bounding Toader mean by the centroidal mean,” Proceedings—Mathematical Sciences, vol. 124, no. 4, pp. 527–531, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  9. Y. Hua and F. Qi, “The best bounds for Toader mean in terms of the centroidal and arithmetic means,” Filomat, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 775–780, 2014. View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  10. M. Vuorinen, “Hypergeometric functions in geometric function theory,” in Special Functions and Differential Equations (Madras, 1977), pp. 119–126, Allied Publishers, New Delhi, India, 1998. View at Google Scholar
  11. S.-L. Qiu and J.-M. Shen, “On two problems concerning means,” Journal of Hangzhou Institute of Electronic Engineering, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 1–7, 1997 (Chinese). View at Google Scholar
  12. R. W. Barnard, K. Pearce, and K. C. Richards, “An inequality involving the generalized hypergeometric function and the arc length of an ellipse,” SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 693–699, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  13. H. Alzer and S.-L. Qiu, “Monotonicity theorems and inequalities for the complete elliptic integrals,” Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol. 172, no. 2, pp. 289–312, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  14. Y.-M. Chu, M.-K. Wang, S.-L. Qiu, and Y.-F. Qiu, “Sharp generalized Seiffert mean bounds for Toader mean,” Abstract and Applied Analysis, vol. 2011, Article ID 605259, 8 pages, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  15. Y.-M. Chu and M.-K. Wang, “Inequalities between arithmetic-geometric, Gini, and Toader means,” Abstract and Applied Analysis, vol. 2012, Article ID 830585, 11 pages, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  16. Y.-M. Chu and M.-K. Wang, “Optimal Lehmer mean bounds for the Toader mean,” Results in Mathematics, vol. 61, no. 3-4, pp. 223–229, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  17. G. D. Anderson, M. K. Vamanamurthy, and M. K. Vuorinen, Conformal Invariants, Inequalities, and Quasiconformal Maps, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA, 1997. View at MathSciNet