1. Introduction
Coefficient problems of analytic functions have always been of the great interest to researchers. Let
be a class of functions of the form
which are analytic in the open unit disk
. There are many papers in which the
n-th coefficient
has been estimated in various subclasses of analytic functions. The difference of the moduli of successive coefficients
of a certain class of functions was also estimated (see, for example, [
1,
2,
3,
4]). The idea of estimating the difference of successive coefficients
follows from the obvious inequality
Robertson [
5] proved that
for the class of convex functions. Some bounds of
for convex functions satisfying an additional condition that the second coefficient is fixed were obtained by Li and Sugawa in [
6]. Under this additional condition Peng and Obradović [
7] found the estimates of
and
for a few subclasses of univalent functions.
Motivated by the idea of considering univalent functions with the second coefficient fixed, we discuss a particular subclass of the class of close-to-convex functions. In this class, we find the bounds of the difference of successive coefficients and the sum of successive coefficients. Moreover, we estimate the sum of the first n coefficients, the n-th coefficient and the functional .
Let us start with the notation and the definitions. By
we denote the class of analytic functions
q with a positive real part in
, having the Taylor series expansion
A subclass of
consisting of functions with real coefficients is denoted by
.
Let
denote the class of typically real functions, i.e., functions
which satisfy the condition
for all
. All coefficients of any
are real. This results in the symmetry of
with respect to the real axis. It is worth recalling that there exists a unique correspondence between the functions in
and
(see, [
8])
Let
denote the class of starlike functions, i.e., functions
such that
for all
. Given that
and
, a function
is called close-to-convex with argument
with respect to
g if
The class of all functions satisfying (
3) is denoted by
(see [
9]). Coefficient problems for the class
, where
k is the Koebe function
, were discussed in a few papers (see, for example, [
10,
11,
12,
13]).
In this paper we consider the subclass
of close-to-convex functions
, where
. It follows from the definition of
that
or equivalently,
where
q is in
.
Directly from the properties of
, it follows that
is a convex family, i.e.,
providing that
and
. Moreover, the following property of symmetry is valid in
: if
, then
,
. It is clear that
and
are mutually symmetric with respect to the real axis. Other important properties of
are given in the three following theorems (see, [
14]).
Theorem 1. If is of the Form (1), then . Theorem 2. If , then f is convex in the direction of the imaginary axis.
Theorem 3. Let all coefficients of f given by (1) be real. Then, In the above,
denotes the class of functions of the Form (
1) which are convex in the direction of the imaginary axis and have all real coefficients. Robertson [
15] proved that
From (
5), it follows that
and
where
are the coefficients of functions from the class
.
In this paper we find bounds of different functionals depending on the second coefficient
of
. In fact, it is more convenient to express our results in terms of
, applying the correspondence
To make the results more legible, we define the class
,
as follows
Observe that in two particular cases: when or , the class consists of only one function. Namely, if , then ; so is the only member of . If , then and is the only member of .
For
given by (
1) we define
Moreover, for
given by (
2) we define
2. Auxiliary Lemmas
In order to prove our results, we need a few lemmas concerning functions in the class
. The first one is known as Caratheodory’s lemma (see, for example, [
16]). The second one is due to Hayami and Owa ([
17]) and the third one is the result of Libera and Złotkiewicz ([
18,
19]).
Lemma 1 ([
16])
. If is given by (2), then the sharp inequality holds for . Lemma 2 ([
17])
. If and , then the sharp estimateholds for , . Lemma 3 ([
18,
19])
. If , then- (i)
,
- (iI)
,
for some x and y such that , .
If
, then
If
, then
The following lemmas were proved by Brown (Theorem 2.1 with
and
in [
20]) and Lecko (Corollary 2.3 in [
21]).
Lemma 4 ([
20]).
If is given by (2), thenand Lemma 5 ([
21]).
If is given by (2), thenand The next two lemmas relate to the bounds of functionals
and
defined in (
12) and (
13).
Lemma 6. If is given by (2) and , thenandEquality holds for Function (14), if n is even and , and if and for all positive integers n. Proof. Let
n be even. We can write
or
Applying Formula (
17) we obtain
or
which results in
This proves (
18).
Let
n be odd. Then
so
which is equivalent to (
19).
It is easy to check that
, if
h is given by (
14),
n is even and
. Equalities for the cases
and
are also easy to verify. □
If we take instead of in Lemma 6, then we obtain the estimate of .
Lemma 7. If is given by (2) and , thenandEquality holds for Function (14), if n is even and and if and for all positive integers n. The last lemma is a special case of a more general result due to Choi, Kim and Sugawa [
22]. Let
. Define
5. Bounds of
In this section we determine the bounds of the functional
defined in (
11), i.e., we find estimates of the sum of the first
n coefficients of
. To prove the main theorem of this section, we use the following three theorems. The proof of the first one is analogous to the proof of Theorem 4.
Theorem 8. If , , then For we have .
From (
7) we obtain that, if
,
, then
Theorem 9. If , , then the following sharp inequality holds Proof. From (
7) and (
8) we obtain
The application of Lemma 3 leads to
The estimates (
33) and (
34) are sharp. Both equalities hold for the function given by (
25). □
Theorem 10. If , , then the following sharp inequality holds Proof. From (
7) and (
8) we obtain
The application of Lemma 3 leads to
If
or
, we immediately obtain
or
, respectively. Now, we assume that
. We have
with
We use Lemma 8. For
we have:
Thus, for
, we obtain
Clearly,
for
. Then the inequality
holds for
. So, for
we have
For
we obtain
The sharpness of the bounds follows from Lemmas 3 and 8. It is easy to check that the equality in the estimate of
for
holds for
f given by (
26).
Now, we can state the main theorem of this section.
Theorem 11. If , then
- (i)
for odd numbers n, and we have - (ii)
for even numbers n, and we have - (iii)
for even numbers n, and we have - (iv)
for even numbers n, and we have
where . Equality holds for , if .
Proof. If
n is odd,
, then from (
11) we have
Taking into account Theorems 8 and 9, for
we get
If
n is even,
, then from (
11) we have
Taking into account Theorem 8, we obtain
By applying Theorem 10 and making a simple calculation, we obtain the desired estimate of
for even
n.
Taking in Theorem 11, we obtain the sharp bound . The sharpness of this result is a simple consequence of the sharpness of Theorems 8–10. □
6. Bounds of
In all results presented above, the estimates of the functionals defined for functions depend on the fixed second coefficient. Consequently, the natural question arises about the bound of the n-th coefficient.
Observe that the function
f given by (
1) has all even coefficients equal to 1, independently the second coefficient. Therefore, we may pose a question about the bounds of odd coefficients when
is fixed or the bounds of all coefficients under the assumption that
is fixed. We shall give the answer to the second question provided that
is a real number.
We need the lemma which is a simple consequence of the set of variability of , where and are the coefficients of a function .
Lemma 9. If , then .
In view of this lemma, we immediately get that, if and , then . Now, we are ready to derive the bound of for .
Theorem 12. If and , thenand Observe that these estimates are sharp if
, which means that
. The above four cases produce
, which clearly holds for
. In this case, the corresponding function
q in the class
is of the form
. Moreover, the bounds from Theorem 12 are also sharp for
if
and if
with even
k. If
, then
. In this case, by Lemma 9,
. Hence,
and the corresponding function
is of the form
for which
Proof of Theorem 12. Let
. From (
8) it follows that
Now, it is enough to apply Lemma 4 (in its general version) and the relation
.
For even n the proof is similar. □