Bohr radius for subordination and $K$-quasiconformal harmonic mappings
ZhiHong Liu, Saminathan Ponnusamy

TL;DR
This paper investigates the Bohr radius for $K$-quasiconformal harmonic mappings in the unit disk, focusing on cases where the analytic part is subordinate to convex or univalent functions, providing bounds depending on geometric properties.
Contribution
It establishes new bounds for the Bohr radius for $K$-quasiconformal harmonic mappings with subordinate analytic parts, depending on geometric properties of the image domain.
Findings
Derived bounds for the Bohr radius depending on $ ext{dist}( ext{0}, ext{boundary})$
Provided estimates for the maximal radius $r^*$ based on geometric properties and $K$
Extended results for cases with $b_1=0$ and as $K o \infty$
Abstract
The present article concerns the Bohr radius for -quasiconformal sense-preserving harmonic mappings in the unit disk for which the analytic part is subordinated to some analytic function , and the purpose is to look into two cases: when is convex, or a general univalent function in . The results state that if and , then \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}(|a_n|+|b_n|)r^n\leq \dist (\varphi(0),\partial\varphi(\ID)) ~\mbox{ for $r\leq r^*$} and give estimates for the largest possible depending only on the geometric property of and the parameter . Improved versions of the theorems are given for the case when and corollaries are drawn for the case when .
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAnalytic and geometric function theory · Holomorphic and Operator Theory · Differential Equations and Boundary Problems
Bohr radius for subordination and -quasiconformal harmonic mappings
ZhiHong Liu
Z. Liu, College of Science, Guilin University of Technology, Guilin 541004, Guangxi, People’s Republic of China.
and
Saminathan Ponnusamy
S. Ponnusamy, Department of Mathematics, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai-600 036, India
Abstract.
The present article concerns the Bohr radius for -quasiconformal sense-preserving harmonic mappings in the unit disk for which the analytic part is subordinated to some analytic function , and the purpose is to look into two cases: when is convex, or a general univalent function in . The results state that if and , then
[TABLE]
and give estimates for the largest possible depending only on the geometric property of and the parameter . Improved versions of the theorems are given for the case when and corollaries are drawn for the case when .
Key words and phrases:
Harmonic mappings, starlike and convex functions, Bohr radius, subordination, -quasiconformal mappings
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary: 30A10, 30C45, 30C62; Secondary: 30C75
File: 1905.10334.tex, printed: 19-3-2024, 17.22
1. Introduction and Preliminaries
A classical theorem of Bohr states that [7], if is a bounded analytic function on the open unit disk , with power series of the form , then
[TABLE]
and the constant , often called the Bohr radius, cannot be improved. This inequality known as Bohr’s inequality, was originally obtained in 1914 by H. Bohr for . The fact that the inequality is actually true for and that is the best possible constant was obtained independently by M. Riesz, I. Schur and F. Wiener. Bohr’s and Wiener’s proofs can be found in [7]. Several improved versions of the Bohr inequality are established.
For example, in a related development, Kayumov and Ponnusamy [15] gave several improved versions of Bohr’s inequality. Some of them may now be recalled.
Theorem A**.**
Suppose that is analytic in , in and denotes the area of the image of the subdisk under the mapping . Then
[TABLE]
and the constants and cannot be improved. Moreover,
[TABLE]
and the constants and cannot be improved.
Theorem B**.**
Suppose that is analytic in and in . Then we have
- (1)
* and the constants and cannot be improved.* 2. (2)
* and the constant cannot be improved.* 3. (3)
* and the constant cannot be improved.*
For the last two decades, Bohr’s inequality has been revived and improved in many ways due to the discovery of generalizations to domains in and to more abstract settings. For background information about this result and further work related to Bohr’s phenomenon, we refer to the recent surveys by Abu-Muhanna et al. [3], Bénéteau et al. [6], Ismagilov et al. [10], Kayumova et al. [12] and the references therein. Some of the recent results from [4, 13, 14, 15] are included in the latest two surveys. More generally, harmonic version of Bohr’s inequality was discussed by Kayumov et al. in [16] which will also be recalled below. For certain other results on harmonic Bohr’s inequality, we refer to [16, 9]. We refer to [18] for Bohr’s inequality for the class of harmonic -Bloch-type mappings as a generalization of harmonic -Bloch mappings and to [5] for the class of quasi-subordinations.
A harmonic mapping defined on is a complex-valued function , where and are real-valued harmonic functions of . It follows that admits the representation , where and are analytic in known as the analytic and co-analytic parts of , respectively. We follow the convention that so that the representation is unique and is called the canonical representation of and thus and admit power series expansions of the form
[TABLE]
A locally univalent harmonic function in is said to be sense-preserving if the Jacobian of given by , is positive in ; or equivalently, its dilatation is an analytic function in which maps into itself (See [17] or [8]).
If a locally univalent and sense-preserving harmonic mapping satisfies the condition
[TABLE]
then is called -quasiconformal harmonic mapping on , where (cf. [19, 11], and also [21] for some recent investigation on harmonic -quasiconformal self-mapping of ). Obviously corresponds to the case . Harmonic extension of the classical Bohr theorem was established in [16]. For example, they proved the following results.
Theorem C**.**
Suppose that is a sense-preserving –quasiconformal harmonic mapping of the disk , where is a bounded function in . Then we have
- (1)
* The constant is sharp.* 2. (2)
* The constant is sharp.*
Theorem D**.**
Suppose that either or , where and are bounded analytic functions in . Then
[TABLE]
This number is sharp.
The purpose of this article is to determine the Bohr radius for the class of -quasiconformal sense-preserving harmonic mappings , where is subordinate to , where is either a general function in the convex family or in the univalent family.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we present main definitions and necessary lemmas that are required to state and prove our main results. Section 3 begins with examples containing test functions for which our main results could be used to derive several new theorems and corollaries, and then we state and prove our main theorems and several of their consequences. More precisely Theorems 1 and 2 generalize Theorem A(1) whereas Theorems 3 and 4 essentially deal with the case when the subordinating function is univalent instead of convex. The article concludes with a conjecture.
2. Necessary Lemmas
We need to recall some basic notions and results on subordination.
Definition 1**.**
Let and be analytic in with . Then we say that is subordinate to (written by or ) if
[TABLE]
for some analytic function on with for . When is univalent, precisely when and .
For basic details and results on subordination classes, see for example [8, Chapter 6] or [20, p. 35]. Let denote the class of all univalent analytic mappings on normalized by and . Denote by and the subclass of of mappings that map onto starlike and convex domains, respectively. See [8] for details on these classes and many other related subclasses of . If is univalent, then the following coefficient inequalities are well-known.
Theorem E**.**
(L. de Branges’ Theorem) Suppose that and . If , then for .
Because if and only if , and , Theorem E, in particular gives the following:
- (1)
if , then for ; 2. (2)
if , then for .
Throughout this paper, we denote the class of all analytic functions in subordinate to a fixed univalent function in by
[TABLE]
We say that the family has Bohr’s phenomenon if for any and there is an , , such that (see [1, 3])
[TABLE]
where denotes the distance between and the boundary of .
We observe that if with , then , and so that (2.1) (and hence (1.1)) holds with .
We can easily to obtain the following two lemmas from [8, p. 195-196] (see also [3, 20]).
Lemma A**.**
Let be an analytic univalent map from onto a simply connect domain . Then
[TABLE]
If , then
[TABLE]
Lemma B**.**
Let be an analytic univalent map from onto a convex domain . Then
[TABLE]
If , then
[TABLE]
Particularly, the well-known Growth Theorem implies that if then
[TABLE]
and if then
[TABLE]
See [8, Theorems 2.6 and 2.15] or [20, p. 22]. Note that (2.3) and (2.4) follow from Lemmas A and B, respectively.
The following lemma plays an important role in the proof of our results.
Lemma C**.**
(see [16, Lemma 2.1])* Suppose that and are two analytic functions in the unit disk such that in and for some . Then*
[TABLE]
3. Main results and their proofs
Before we state and prove our main theorems, it is worth pointing out that our approach provides many results by different choices of in the main theorems. To demonstrate this, we first present a set of test functions for which our results are applicable.
Examples 1**.**
- (a)
For and , consider
[TABLE]
Then it is easy to see that , because
[TABLE]
and for , maps onto the exterior of the ellipse bounded by
[TABLE]
Also, we see that is univalent in . 2. (b)
For , consider the univalent function
[TABLE]
Then it can be easily seen that maps onto the complement of segment and thus,
[TABLE] 3. (c)
For and , consider
[TABLE]
Using the range of the function , it can be easily shown that maps onto the complex plane with slits along half-lines and such that and
[TABLE]
Obviously, is univalent and starlike in .
In particular, for or , set , where . Then we obtain that the function
[TABLE]
maps onto the complex plane with slits along half-lines and such that and
[TABLE] 4. (d)
For , consider the function
[TABLE]
We see that it is univalent in if and only if . The function in general is not starlike, for example, for , this function is known to be close-to-convex (univalent) but is not starlike in .
In particular, for , we may write as
[TABLE]
where and It follows that maps the disk onto the half-plane and maps the half-plane onto the parabolic region
[TABLE]
Consequently, for , maps onto a parabolic region such that
[TABLE] 5. (e)
For , consider
[TABLE]
where . Then it is a simple exercise to show that maps onto the strip with and such that
[TABLE]
Note that is convex. 6. (f)
For , consider
[TABLE]
Then we see that maps onto the right half-plane such that and
[TABLE]
Clearly, is convex. 7. (g)
For , the function
[TABLE]
is univalent in and
[TABLE] 8. (h)
For , the function
[TABLE]
is univalent (and is in fact starlike of order ) in and
[TABLE]
The following result is a generalization of [16, Theorems 1.1 and 1.3] (see also Theorem A) for appropriate choices of .
Theorem 1**.**
Suppose that is a -quasiconformal sense-preserving harmonic mapping in and , where is univalent and convex in . Then
[TABLE]
The result is sharp.
Proof.
By assumption and is a convex domain. Then, by Lemma B, we have
[TABLE]
Consequently,
[TABLE]
Because is a -quasiconformal sense-preserving harmonic mapping so that in , where , by Lemma C and the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, it follows that
[TABLE]
Thus, we have
[TABLE]
which is less than or equal to for . Substituting gives the desired result.
In order to prove the sharpness, we consider
[TABLE]
and , where . Then it is easy to see that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
So it is a simple exercise to yield
[TABLE]
which is bigger than or equal to if and only if
[TABLE]
This shows that the number cannot be improved since could be chosen so close to from left. This completes the proof. ∎
Also, it is interesting to note that when (or, equivalently, ) one retrieves Aizenberg’s [2] result, according to which for convex functions , the Bohr inequality (1.1) holds with as its Bohr radius. Because of its independent interest, it might be worth stating the following two corollaries.
Corollary 1**.**
Suppose that is a sense-preserving harmonic mapping in and , where is univalent and convex in . Then
[TABLE]
for . The number is sharp.
Proof.
Allow in the proof of Theorem 1. Indeed, since is locally univalent and sense-preserving in , we have in and thus, we can allow to obtain the desired conclusion. ∎
If we choose with , then and and this clearly give the following corollary (see also [16] or Theorem C with ).
Corollary 2**.**
Suppose that is a sense-preserving harmonic mapping of the disk , where in . Then the following sharp inequality hold:
[TABLE]
Theorem 2**.**
Suppose that is a -quasiconformal sense-preserving harmonic mapping in and , where is univalent and convex in . Then
[TABLE]
for , where is the positive root of the equation
[TABLE]
and . The number cannot be replaced by the number greater than , where is the positive root of the equation
[TABLE]
Proof.
As is analytic and convex in , by (2.4) and Lemma B, we have
[TABLE]
so that
[TABLE]
Because is locally univalent and -quasiconformal sense-preserving harmonic mapping with , Schwarz’s lemma gives that is analytic in and in . Thus, we have
[TABLE]
Integrate this inequality on the circle , we obtain
[TABLE]
By using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, it follows that
[TABLE]
Consequently, by combining (3.3) with the last inequality, and (2.2), we find that
[TABLE]
where the last inequality holds if and only if
[TABLE]
The above inequality holds for , where is the positive root of the equation (3.1).
Finally, we consider the functions
[TABLE]
Then we find that
[TABLE]
so that
[TABLE]
which is less than or equal to only in the case when , where is the positive root of the equation (3.2). ∎
Setting we see that Theorem 2 contains the classical Bohr theorem. The case leads to
Corollary 3**.**
Suppose that is a sense-preserving harmonic mapping in and , where is univalent and convex in . Then
[TABLE]
for , where is the positive root of the equation
[TABLE]
The number cannot be replaced by the number greater than , where is the positive root of the equation
[TABLE]
Remark 1**.**
Corollary 3 shows that the radius obtained in Theorem 2 is close to the sharp value.
Theorem 3**.**
Suppose that is a -quasiconformal sense-preserving harmonic mapping in and , where is analytic and univalent in . Then
[TABLE]
for , where is the root of the equation
[TABLE]
in the interval and .
Proof.
By the assumption and Lemma A, it follows that and thus,
[TABLE]
Moreover, because in , as in the proof of Theorem 1, it follows from Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and Lemma C with that
[TABLE]
and thus, we have
[TABLE]
which is less than or equal to if and only if
[TABLE]
This gives , where is as in the statement. ∎
Remark 2**.**
Theorem 3 for reduces to a result of Abu-Muhanna [1] with the sharp Bohr radius as .
Corollary 4**.**
Suppose that is a sense-preserving harmonic mapping in and , where is analytic and univalent in . Then
[TABLE]
for , where is the root of the equation
[TABLE]
in the interval .
Proof.
Allow in Theorem 3. ∎
Remark 3**.**
When in Corollary 4 is univalent and , then the result can be improved (see also Corollary 5).
Our next result is to improve Theorem 3 when .
Theorem 4**.**
Suppose that is a -quasiconformal sense-preserving harmonic mapping in and , where is univalent in . Then
[TABLE]
for , where is the positive real root of the equation
[TABLE]
in the interval and . The number cannot be replaced by the number greater than , where is the positive root of the equation
[TABLE]
Proof.
By assumption is analytic and univalent in , and thus, by (2.3) and Theorem E, we have
[TABLE]
so that
[TABLE]
As in the proof of Theorem 2, it follows that
[TABLE]
By using the classical Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, we deduce that
[TABLE]
Consequently, by combining (3.6) with the last inequality, we find that
[TABLE]
This gives , where is the positive real root of the equation (3.4) in the interval .
Finally, we consider the functions
[TABLE]
So we find that
[TABLE]
and thus, we have
[TABLE]
which is less than or equal to only in the case when , where is the positive root of the equation (3.5). ∎
Corollary 5**.**
Suppose that is a sense-preserving harmonic mapping in and , where is univalent in . Then
[TABLE]
for , where is the positive real root of the equation
[TABLE]
in the interval . The number cannot be replaced by the number greater than , where is the positive root of the equation
[TABLE]
In view of Corollaries 3 and 5 (see also Theorems 2 and 4 to propose general conjectures), it is natural to propose in particular the following two conjectures.
Conjecture 1**.**
Suppose that is a sense-preserving harmonic mapping in and .
- (a)
If is univalent and convex in , then
[TABLE]
for , where is the positive root of the equation (3.2). 2. (b)
If is univalent in , then the inequality (3.7) holds for , where is the positive real root of the equation (3.5).
Acknowledgments
The research of the first author was supported by the Foundation of Guilin University of Technology under Grant No. GUTQDJJ2018080, the Natural Science Foundation of Guangxi under Grant No. 2018GXNSFAA050005. The research was financially supported by Hunan Provincial Key Laboratory of Mathematical Modeling and Analysis in Engineering (Changsha University of Science Technology). The work of the second author is supported in part by Mathematical Research Impact Centric Support (MATRICS) grant, File No.: MTR/2017/000367, by the Science and Engineering Research Board (SERB), Department of Science and Technology (DST), Government of India.
Conflict of Interests
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Y. Abu-Muhanna, Bohr’s phenomenon in subordination and bounded harmonic classes , Complex Var. Elliptic Equ. 55 (11) (2010), 1071–1078.
- 2[2] L. Aizenberg, Generalization of results about the Bohr radius for power series , Stud. Math. 180 (2007), 161–168.
- 3[3] Y. Abu-Muhanna, R. M. Ali and S. Ponnusamy, On the Bohr inequality , In ”Progress in Approximation Theory and Applicable Complex Analysis” (Edited by N. K. Govil et al. ), Springer Optimization and Its Applications 117 (2016), 265–295.
- 4[4] R. M. Ali, R. W. Barnard and A. Yu. Solynin, A note on the Bohr s phenomenon for power series , J. Math. Anal. Appl. 449 (1) (2017), 154–167.
- 5[5] S. A. Alkhaleefah, I. R. Kayumov, and S. Ponnusamy, On the Bohr inequality with a fixed zero coefficient , Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., (2019), To appear.
- 6[6] C. Bénéteau, A. Dahlner and D. Khavinson, Remarks on the Bohr phenomenon , Comput. Methods Funct. Theory 4 (1) (2004), 1–19.
- 7[7] H. Bohr, A theorem concerning power series , Proc. London Math. Soc. 13 (2) (1914), 1–5.
- 8[8] P. Duren, Univalent Functions , Springer-Verlag, New York, 1983.
