1. Introduction
We start with a brief overview of some basic notions and results about the linear space of polynomials in one variable
where
or
Let
be the algebraic dual space of
, i.e., the set of all linear functionals from
to
Here,
is the action of
on
. We denote by
the moment of order
n of the linear functional
In the sequel, we recall some useful operations in
and some of their properties. For
u and
v in
,
in
b and
c in
with
let
and
be the linear functionals defined by duality [
1,
2,
3,
4].
- -
The derivative of a linear functional Its moments are
- -
The left-multiplication of a linear functional by a polynomial .
The corresponding moments are
- -
The Cauchy product of two linear functionals.
where the right-multiplication of
v by
p is a polynomial given by
Its moments are
- -
The Dirac delta linear functional at a point
Given
is the Dirac linear functional at point
defined by
In the sequel, we denote Notice that is the unit element for the Cauchy product of linear functionals.
- -
The division of a linear functional by a polynomial of first degree.
Its moments are
- -
The dilation of a linear functional.
The corresponding moments are
- -
The shift of a linear functional.
Its moments are
- -
The σ-transformation of a linear functional.
Its moments are
As usual,
will denote the
nth derivative of
with the convention
By referring to [
3],
has an inverse for the Cauchy product, denoted by
i.e., if and only if
Recall that is said to be symmetric if for all Moreover, u is symmetric if and only if or, equivalently,
Definition 1 ([5]). A linear functional is said to be weakly-regular if where then Definition 2 ([1,3]). A linear functional is said to be regular (quasi-definite, according to [6]), if there exists a sequence of monic polynomials in , such that where ( is the Kronecker delta). In this case,
is said to be a monic orthogonal polynomial sequence with respect to
u (in short, MOPS). Any regular linear functional on polynomials is weakly-regular. The converse is not true; see [
5].
Definition 3 ([1,6,7]). A linear functional is said to be positive (resp. positive-definite), if (resp. ), for all Proposition 1 ([1,6,7]). Let The following statements are equivalent. - (i)
u is positive-definite.
- (ii)
There exists a MOPS in such that for every where for all
This contribution aims to introduce the analog of the exponential function in the framework of linear functionals and then provide some of its properties. First of all, we must specify that the Cauchy exponential of a linear functional is also a linear functional. We will denote it as
On the other hand, it satisfies
Here,
is the Cauchy product of
and
The Cauchy exponential of a linear functional on the linear space of polynomials can be defined in several equivalent ways. The easiest one, which fits best with the theory of linear functionals on the linear space of polynomials, is based on its moments. Indeed, the moments of
can be defined in an iterate way as follows:
Once defined, we highlight several formulas and properties satisfied by the Cauchy exponential map as a function from
to
, and to compute the Cauchy exponential of some classical linear functionals (see [
6,
8,
9]).
Among others, the following formulas: are deduced.
for every
u in
and every
in
where
The manuscript is structured as follows. In
Section 2, we first introduce the notion of the Cauchy exponential of a linear functional on the linear space of polynomials. Second, we establish several formulas and properties satisfied by the Cauchy exponential map. In
Section 3, we compute the Cauchy power of some special linear functionals by using some properties of the Cauchy exponential map. In
Section 4, we give necessary and sufficient conditions on a given linear functional on the linear space of polynomials for its Cauchy exponential will be weakly-regular. In
Section 5, we establish a necessary and sufficient condition on a given linear functional in the linear space of polynomials so that its Cauchy exponential will be positive-definite. This enables us to give a new characterization of the positive-definite of a linear functional on the linear space of polynomials. Finally, some open problems concerning orthogonal polynomials associated with the Cauchy exponential function of a linear functional are stated.
3. Cauchy Power of a Linear Functional
We start recalling the following formulas.
Lemma 3 ([2,3,10]). For any u, v in , any and any a, c in where we have For any
u in
and any arbitrary non-negative integer number
we can define the Cauchy power of order
n of
u, denoted by
as follows
When recall that u is invertible. In such a case, we can extend the definition of to negative integer numbers n as follows
In [
11], we have deduced that
More generally, we have
Proposition 5. For any the following properties hold.
- (i)
For every positive integer number n we have - (ii)
If , then for every integer number
Proof. We proceed by induction. If
then
Therefore, the statement is true. We assume that the statement is true for
i.e.,
From the previous Lemma, we get
Thus, if the statement is true for then it also holds for . Hence, (i) holds.
Assume that
. Then
u is invertible and
Clearly, the statement (ii) is true, for
it comes back to
Let
n be a negative integer number
By (i) and Lemma 3, we have
Hence, (ii) holds. □
First application. Recall that the moments of the classical Bessel linear functional
with parameter
are
Equivalently, see [
7,
8,
9],
Proposition 6. For any integer number m and , we have
- (i)
- (ii)
Proof. We start by showing that Indeed, observe that If we compute the first moments of and multiply the last equation by after using (27) and an easy computation, we find By the uniqueness of the solution of the last equation, By Proposition 4, (i), we get Since then Thus, Hence, (i) holds.
Let m be a non-zero integer. By (17) and the last property (i), we get Hence, (ii) holds. □
Second application. Let first recall that the moments of the generalized Bessel linear functional
with parameter
, a symmetric
—semi-classical linear functional of class one, see [
8,
9], are
Equivalently,
satisfies the Pearson equation:
Proposition 7. For any integer number m and , we have
- (i)
- (ii)
Proof. First, let us show that Indeed, we have If we compute the first moments of and then multiply the last equation by we get after using (27) and an easy computation, By the uniqueness of the solution of this equation, we get By Proposition 4, (i), we get However, since it follows that Hence, (i) holds.
Let m be a non-zero integer number. By (17) and the last property (i), we get Hence, (ii) holds. □
Third application. Recall that the moments with respect to the sequence
of the classical Jacobi linear functional
with parameter
a non-integer number, are
Equivalently, (see [
1,
7,
8])
Notice that the shifted linear functional
satisfies
Proposition 8. For any non-zero complex number c and any positive integer number we have
- (i)
For any non-integer complex number α such is a non-integer number, Equivalently, - (ii)
For any pair of non-integer complex numbers such that is a non-integer number, Equivalently,
Proof. Let be a fixed non-integer complex number. First, let’s show that Indeed, if we put , then Since, then If we multiply both hand sides of the last equation by we get i.e., This implies that By Proposition 4, (i), Since, then Hence, the first statement in (i) holds.
Let n be a non-zero integer number and be a non-integer complex number such that is a non-integer number. From (17) and the previous property (i), we get Therefore, By applying the operator and using (26), we get This yields
Hence, the second statement in (i) holds.
Let
be a pair of non-integer complex numbers such that
is a non-integer number. We can write
Finally, if we apply the operator
and we use (26), we find
Hence, (ii) holds. □
4. Weak-Regularity Property
We start with the following Lemma.
Lemma 4. For any , if is weakly-regular, then is also weakly-regular.
Proof. Assume that
is such that
is weakly-regular. Suppose that there exists
such that
Necessarily,
Indeed, if we suppose that
then
This is a contradiction, because
and
From (7), (27) and the definition of Cauchy exponential of a linear functional, we obtain
Multiplying both hand sides of the last equation by and assuming , we get This is a contradiction, taking into account is weakly-regular and the fact that , and so that □
Proposition 9. For any u in , the following statements are equivalent.
- (i)
is weakly-regular.
- (ii)
is weakly-regular. Otherwise, we must have
Proof. . Assume that is weakly-regular. Suppose that is not weakly-regular. Then there exists , with minimum degree, such that and We have to treat two cases.
First case: In such a situation and then . In this case, and then This contradicts the assumption is weakly-regular.
Second case: Therefore, there exists such that Thus, and so that . This is a contradiction.
Hence,
. By Lemma 4, if
is weakly-regular,
is also weakly-regular. Assume that
Then, there exists
with minimum degree that satisfies
We have
The last equation can not be simplified. Otherwise, suppose that it can be simplified by
, where
Then,
Then,
The simplification by
requires the two following conditions:
The simplification gives By the definition of the Cauchy exponential, By (27), it follows that If we multiply both hand sides of the last equation by and we use the property , we get This contradicts the fact that A is of minimum degree such that
If
, then it satisfies
where
which can not be simplified. Moreover,
. Indeed, if
then
. This implies
This is a contradiction. For the sequel, notice that
V is weakly-regular if and only if
is weakly-regular. Indeed, suppose that there exists a non-zero polynomial
with a minimal degree such that
. Thus, we have
Since the pseudo-class (see [
11]) of
V is equal to
, then
A divides
. So, there exists
such that
From (
36) and (37), we have
So, where Since , then Moreover, This contradicts the fact that is of minimal degree such that Thus, V is weakly-regular and then is also weakly-regular. □
5. A Du-Laguerre–Hahn Property
In what follows, let
For any
u in
, the non-singular lowering operator
D on the linear space of polynomials is defined by [
10,
11]
Let us give some fundamental properties satisfied by the non-singular lowering operator
Linearity:
Under the condition for all integer , we can see that for all
Symmetry:
When u is symmetric, i.e., and the MPS is symmetric, then the polynomial sequence defined by is also symmetric.
By transposition of the operator
D, we obtain
Then,
If we set
we have
and we can write
The following product rule is a straightforward consequence of the previous definitions and formulas
For any
, let
be the unique linear functional defined by [
2]
Let
be the sequence of monic polynomials defined by
where
S is given by (
46). Observe that
Clearly,
is an Appell sequence with respect to
In addition, the polynomial sequence
can be characterized by
Proposition 10. For any we have Proof. Assume that
and recall that
is defined by
Observe that
because
From (
48) taken with
, we have
By the uniqueness of the solution of each of (
53) and (
54), we deduce
This yields the desired result, according to (
46), where
. □
Setting
According to (
49) and (
50), we can say that
Lemma 5. For any the monic polynomial sequence defined by satisfies Proof. Assume that
Notice that (57) can be rewritten as
If we multiply both hand sides of the last equation by
x and we use (58), then we obtain
However, from
and while taking into account (
56), we get
Then, (
61) gives
Hence, the desired result. □
6. A New Characterization of Positive-Definiteness
We start with the two following technical Lemmas.
Lemma 6 ([5]). For any the following statements are equivalent. - (i)
w is positive-definite.
- (ii)
w is weakly-regular and positive.
Lemma 7. For any there exists with such that Proof. Assume that
We always have
where
From (
59) and (
60), we have
where
□
Theorem 1. For any linear functional such that is weakly-regular, the following statements are equivalent.
- (i)
is positive-definite.
- (ii)
For any , the polynomial has at least one real zero.
Proof. Let such that is positive-definite. Suppose that there exists , and such that has not real zeros. Clearly, . Without loss of generality, we can suppose that the leading coefficient of p is positive. Then is a positive polynomial. Under the assumption is positive-definite, then we get This is a contradiction, because by the definition of . Thus, must have at least one real zero.
. Let and . Let
If i.e., then we have
If there exists , such that by virtue of Lemma 7. By the assumption, there exists such that Then, Thus, is a positive linear functional. Since is weakly-regular, it follows that is positive-definite, according to Lemma 6. □
Corollary 1. For any weakly-regular linear functional , the following statements are equivalent.
- (i)
w is positive-definite.
- (ii)
For any , the polynomial has at least one real zero.
Proof. Let
. By Proposition 3, (iii), there exists a unique
such that
By Lemma 7, Theorem 1, and under the assumption
w is weakly-regular, we infer that
w is positive-definite, if and only if
has at least one real zero, for all
where
,
Let
,
We always have
where
Then,
This concludes the proof. □