1. Introduction
First, we start with the Opial inequality. Opial [
1] proved in 1960 the following inequality: If
is such that
and
for
, then:
where
is the best possible.
This inequality has been generalized and extended in many different directions (for more details see e.g., [
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9]).
Now we continue with the following result. In 2009, Krulić, K. et al., in [
10] observed two measure spaces
,
and the general integral operator
defined by:
where
is a measurable function,
is measurable and non-negative, and
The authors proved the weighted inequality by using Jensen’s inequality and Fubini’s theorem. Their result is:
where
is a non-negative measurable function,
is integrable on
for each fixed
,
v is defined on
by
is a convex function on an interval
, and
is such that
for all
. We mention that inequality (
4) unifies and generalizes many of the results of this type (including the classical ones by Hardy, Hilbert and Godunova).
In the sequel, let
be a measure space and let
be a symmetric non-negative or nonpositive function such that
is defined by:
and
. In the rest of the paper we assume that all integrals are well defined. We continue with the following result that is given in [
11].
Theorem 1. Let be a symmetric nonpositive or non-negative function. If f is a positive convex function, and g a positive concave function on an interval , is either nonpositive or non-negative, such that and u is defined by: The following inequality:holds, where K is defined by (
6).
In our main results, we will use the following generalized Montgomery identity:
Theorem 2 ([
12])
. Let , be such that is absolutely continuous, an open interval, and . Then the following identity holds: whereIn case the sum is empty, so the identity (9) reduces to the well-known: Montgomery identitywhere is the Peano kernel, defined by: Now we recall the definition of new Green functions. For any function
, we can easily show by integrating by parts that the following is valid:
where the function
is Green’s function of the boundary value problem
and is defined by:
The function is convex under u and s, it is a symmetric nonpositive function and it is continuous under s and continuous under u.
Here we give three new types of Green’s functions defined on
as follows:
All three functions are continuous, symmetric and convex with respect to both variables u and s.
Lemma 1. Let be defined by (13)–(15). Then for every function , it holds that: In paper [
11], you can see results involving the Green function defined by:
Motivated by those results we give general Opial type inequalities. The new inequalities are not direct generalizations of the Opial inequality. They are of Opial type because the integrals contain function and its integral representation. There are many papers involving Green functions; here we mention only a few of them. In [
13] you can find results involving Sherman’s inequality and new Green’s functions. Here we also mention new results about Hilbert-type inequalities; see [
14,
15,
16]. This paper is organized in the following way: after the Introduction, where we recall the original Opial inequality from 1960 and also provide newer results involving two measure spaces,
Section 2 follows. There we give our main results. They contain two functions—convex and concave—and four new Green’s functions. In this section there are many new results, six new Theorems and many new Corollaries. In
Section 3, titled Grüss and Ostrowski type inequalities related to the generalized Opial type inequality, we also provide many new results. We conclude our paper with the Discussion.
2. The Main Results
We give our first result, which involves two functions, one positive convex and the other a positive concave function.
Theorem 3. Let f be a positive convex function and g a positive concave function on an interval . Then the inequality:holds for all nonpositive or non-negative functions . Proof. Function
defined by (
12) is a nonpositive symmetric function so we can apply Theorem 1. Let
,
. Then
and inequality (
8) becomes (
20) so the proof is complete. □
Now we give a special case of Theorem 3 for .
Remark 1. If then inequality (20) becomes: We continue with the other three new Green’s functions. We will give the result without the proof since the proof is similar to the proof of Theorem 3.
Corollary 1. If f is a positive convex function and g is a positive concave function on an interval , then the following inequalities:hold for all nonpositive or non-negative functions . The results given in Theorem 3 and Corollary 1 are new. Similar results can be found in paper [
11].
We continue with the following result.
Theorem 4. Let be a symmetric nonpositive or non-negative function. If f is a positive convex function , g a positive concave function on an interval , is either nonpositive or non-negative, such that , u defined by (7), is defined by (6) and is defined by (12). Then the following result follows: Proof. For every function
, the following is valid:
where
is Green’s function defined by (
12). Now we insert (
26) to (
8) and we get:
Now we rearrange the integrals and get (
25). □
Remark 2. If the inequality (25) becomes: We continue with analogue results with three other Green functions.
Corollary 2. If is a symmetric nonpositive or non-negative function, f a positive convex function , g a positive concave function on an interval , is either nonpositive or non-negative, such that , u is defined by (7), is defined by (6) and are defined by (13)–(15), then the following results follow: Proof. Similar to the proof of Theorem 4. □
Remark 3. If the inequalities (29)–(31) reduce to: We continue with the following result. It holds only for and since they are non-negative functions.
Theorem 5. If f is a positive convex function such that , g a positive concave function on an interval , is either non-negative or nonpositive such that , u is defined by (7), is defined by (6) and are defined by (14) and (15) then the following statements are equivalent: Proof. We only give the proof for ; the proof for is similar.
(i) ⇒ (ii): Let (i) hold. We consider the Green function
defined by (
14). We know that function
is positive and convex on
, so (
34) holds for
;
(ii) ⇒ (i): Let (ii) holds. Every function
,
, can be written in the form (
16). Therefore by some simple calculations, we deduce:
Since
(
36) reduces to:
Since
f is convex, therefore
for
. Furthermore, if for every
the inequality (
34) holds, then the right hand side of (
37) is non-negative and hence (
36) holds. □
Now we continue with the following result.
Theorem 6. Let , be such that is absolutely continuous, is an open interval, , . Let f be a positive convex function such that , g is a positive concave function on an interval , is either non-negative or nonpositive, such that , u defined by (7), is defined by (6), are defined by (12)–(15) and is defined by (10). Then the following results follow: Proof. Fix
. Using (
11), (
16)–(
18) in
we obtain:
- (i)
Differentiating (
9) twice with respect to
s and rearranging the terms, we get:
Substituting (
43) in (
42) we obtain (
38);
- (ii)
Replacing
f with
and then
n with
in (
9), we have:
this implies that:
Combining (
44) with (
42), we get (
40). □
Notice that in Theorem 6 we calculated, under some conditions, the difference between the right-hand and left-hand side of inequality
8.
Theorem 7. Suppose that all assumptions of Theorem 6 hold. Let for even n the function be n-convex andThen the following inequalities hold: Proof. - (i)
Since the function f is n-convex, we have . It is also obvious that if n is even then because:
Case I: If
, then
and hence
Also
and
So in this case from (
39) we have
.
Case II: If
, then
and
are non positive. As
n is even so we have
; also
So in this case from (
39) we have
.
Now using (
45) and the positivity of
and
in (
38) we get (
46);
- (ii)
The proof is similar to the proof of part (i).
□
We continue with the last result in this section.
Theorem 8. Let , be such that is absolutely continuous, an open interval, , and . Let g be a positive concave function on an interval , is either non-negative or nonpositive, such that , u is defined by (7), is defined by (6) and are defined by (12)–(15). If n is even and f is an n-convex function, then (46) and (47) hold. Moreover, if (46) and (47) hold and the functions defined by:where are convex on , then Proof. Since the functions
,
,
, are convex, so it holds that
. Applying Theorem 6, we obtain (
46) and (
47).
Since (
46) holds, the right hand side of (
46) can be rewritten in the form:
where
is defined by (
49). Since
is convex, therefore by Theorem 1 we have:
i.e., the right hand side of (
46) is non-negative, so the inequality (
8) immediately follows. Similarly, we may get (
8) by using the convexity of
□
3. Grüss and Ostrowski Type Inequalities Related to the Generalized Opial Type Inequality
Cerone et al. [
17] considered Čebyšev functional
for Lebesgue integrable functions
, proving the following two results which contain the Grüss and Ostrowski type inequalities.
Theorem 9. Let be a Lebesgue integrable function and be absolutely continuous with Then The constant in (52) is the best possible. Theorem 10. Let be monotonic nondecreasing and be absolutely continuous with Then The constant in (53) is the best possible. Using the previous two theorems we obtain upper bounds for the identities related to generalizations of the Opial type inequality.
To avoid many notations, under the assumptions of Theorem 6, we define functions
and
from
to
by:
Theorem 11. Let , be such that is absolutely continuous with , , , be defined as in (54) and (55) respectively. Then, - (i)
The remainder , defined bysatisfies the estimation - (ii)
The remainder , defined bysatisfies the estimation
Proof. - (i)
Comparing (
38) and (
57) we get
Applying Theorem 9 for
and using the Čebyšev functional, we get:
Therefore from (
62) and (
63) we get (
58);
- (ii)
Similarly to part (i), we obtain (
61).
□
We recall that the symbol
(
) denotes the space of
power integrable functions defined on the interval
, equipped with the norm
and the space of essentially bounded functions on
, denoted by
, with the norm
Theorem 12. Let , be such that is monotonic nondecreasing on and let , , , be defined as in (54) and (55) respectively. Then: - (i)
The remainder defined by (57) satisfies the estimation - (ii)
The remainder defined by (60) satisfies the estimation
Proof. - (i)
Applying Theorem 10 for
and using Čebyšev functional, we get:
Therefore, from (
66) and (
67), we get (
64).
- (i)
Similarly, we can prove (
65).
□
In the following theorem we present Ostrowski type inequality related to generalizations of Opial’s inequality.
Theorem 13. Let , be a pair of conjugate exponents, i.e., and . Let be such that Let and , , be defined as in (54), (55), respectively. Then the following inequalities hold. - (i)
The constant is sharp for and the best possible for ; - (ii)
The constant is sharp for and the best possible for .
Proof. The proof is similar to the proof of Theorem 12 in [
13]. □
More results of this type, but involving Sherman’s inequality, can be found in paper [
13].