1. Introduction
The concept of a coherent pair of measures on the real line was introduced by Iserles et al. [
1] in the framework of the theory of polynomials orthogonal with respect to a Sobolev inner product associated with a pair of nontrivial positive measures
supported on the real line. This Sobolev inner product is defined by:
where
p and
q are polynomials with real coefficients and
is a nonnegative real number.
The pair of measures
is said to be coherent if the corresponding sequences of monic orthogonal polynomials
and
satisfying:
with
for
. Assuming (
2), if
denotes the sequence of monic orthogonal polynomials associated with the Sobolev inner product, then there exists a nice algebraic relation with the sequence of monic orthogonal polynomials
with respect to the measure
. Indeed,
Meijer in [
2] proved that if
is a coherent pair of positive measures supported on the real line, i.e., (
2) holds, then one of the measures is classical (Laguerre or Jacobi), and its companion is the rational perturbation of it.
What was proven by Meijer [
2] is slightly more general than what is stated above. He dealt with orthogonal polynomials with respect to a pair of quasi-definite linear functionals on the set of polynomials with real coefficients, and he proved that one of such linear functionals must be classical, i.e., either a Laguerre, or Jacobi, or Bessel linear functional. Notice that positive definite linear functionals are associated with nontrivial probability measures supported on the real line (see [
3]). Thus, Meijer [
2] also determined all the possible coherent pairs of positive measures supported in the real line.
The relation (
3) is very useful when we study analytic properties of the corresponding Sobolev orthogonal polynomials. In particular, outer relative asymptotics have been deeply analyzed in the literature (see [
4,
5], as well as the recent survey [
6], where an updated list of references concerning this topic is presented).
In [
7], the authors showed that there are Sobolev inner products of the type (
1) where the pair of measures
is not coherent, but the relation (
3) still holds ([
7], Theorem 4.1), or in other words, a combination of Sobolev orthogonal polynomials as:
can be written as a linear combination of orthogonal polynomials
and
, where the measure
is closely related to the measures
and
( [
7], Theorem 3.1).
The results obtained in [
7] can be covered by extending the concept of coherence (see [
8]). It is important to observe that given the Sobolev inner product as (
1), if the sequences
and
satisfy (
3), then:
with
, for
. When (
5) holds (see [
9]), the pair
is referred to as a
-coherent pair. In this case, one of the measures must be semiclassical of class at most 1, and the other one is a rational perturbation of it. Semiclassical orthogonal polynomials have been introduced in [
10,
11]. A nice survey about this topic is [
12]. In particular, the concept of the class of the corresponding linear functional plays a central role in the study of the algebraic properties of semiclassical orthogonal polynomials. The class
is constituted by the classical orthogonal polynomials (Hermite, Laguerre, Jacobi, and Bessel). The classification of semiclassical orthogonal polynomials of Class 1 appears in [
13].
Several generalizations of the concept of coherent pair have been extensively studied and documented. The more general case of coherence for standard orthogonal polynomials corresponds to the concept of - coherence of order , and it is defined as follows.
Definition 1. Let be a pair of positive Borel measures and and the corresponding SMOPs. is a -coherent pair of measures of order if the corresponding monic orthogonal polynomial sequence (MOPS) satisfies:where , and 0 0 are sequences of numbers with . If then we will say that is an -coherent pair of measures of order m. The notion of “
-coherence” was introduced in [
14] for order one, where the natural connection with Sobolev polynomials orthogonal with respect to the inner product (
1) is presented. In [
15], the inverse problem of order
was studied. In the framework of order
m, the connection with Sobolev polynomials orthogonal with respect to the inner product:
was analyzed in [
16] and for
-coherent pairs in [
17]. With this terminology, if (
5) holds, then the pair
is
-coherent of order one. The
-coherent pairs of order one were studied in [
18]. The
-coherence of order one was proposed in [
19] through the so-called
k-coherence. Of course, the zero-coherence is the coherence defined in [
1], and the one-coherence was defined in [
18]. The one-coherence was also studied in [
20], but from a more general approach considering pairs of quasi-definite functionals and proving that if
is a one-coherent pair, then
u and
v must be semiclassical of classes at most
and
respectively. In [
21,
22], direct and inverse problems associated with
-coherence of order zero were studied. As for the solution of the inverse problem for the
-coherence of order one, in [
23], a rational relation satisfied by the linear functional was obtained. In [
24,
25], a direct problem associated with the
-coherence of order zero was analyzed. Additional studies on the
-coherence of order zero appeared in [
26]. Finally, an inverse problem associated with the
-coherence of order zero was studied in [
27], where the interesting topic about when the
-coherence algebraic relation is
non-degenerate was analyzed, i.e., conditions in such a way that the
-coherence relation cannot be reduced to a
-coherence relation with either
or
are given.
If the measures involved in (
1) are symmetric, i.e., their odd moments are zero, in [
1], the concept of a symmetrically-coherent pair of measures was introduced. Indeed, a pair of symmetric measures
is said to be symmetrically coherent if their corresponding sequences of monic orthogonal polynomials
and
satisfy:
with
for
.
In [
2], H. G. Meijer proved that if
is a symmetrically-coherent pair of positive measures supported on the real line, i.e., (
8) holds, then one of such measures is symmetric and classical (Hermite or Gegenbauer) and the other one is a rational perturbation of it. Analytic properties of the corresponding sequences of Sobolev orthogonal polynomials have been studied in the literature (see [
6] and the references therein). Indeed, the main tool is the existence of an algebraic relation:
where
, for
and
, denotes the sequence of monic orthogonal polynomials associated with the Sobolev inner product (
1), where
and
are symmetric measures. (
9) is an important tool to study such Sobolev orthogonal polynomials. Indeed, in [
28], it was proven that if (
9) holds, then:
with
, for
. Some examples of symmetric measures whose sequences of orthogonal polynomials satisfy (
10) have been studied in [
28]. Asymptotic properties of the corresponding sequences of orthogonal polynomials and the location of their zeros were analyzed in [
29,
30] for the Gegenbauer case, as well as in [
31,
32] for the Hermite case. The aim of the present contribution is to find all the symmetric pairs of measures such that (
10) holds.
Semiclassical symmetric linear functionals of order at most two are the natural framework of our study. They have been analyzed by many authors (see [
33,
34,
35,
36,
37], among others). On the other hand, the so-called symmetrization process for linear functionals (see [
3]) will play a central role in this contribution. In [
38], the class of the symmetrized linear functional associated with a semiclassical linear functional has been studied. Notice that this process can also be considered in the framework of Sobolev inner products (see [
39]).
The structure of this manuscript is the following. In
Section 2, the basic background about linear functionals and orthogonal polynomials is presented. A special emphasis on semiclassical linear functionals is given. The symmetrization process for linear functionals is also analyzed. Moreover, the main results about
-coherent pairs of measures are summarized. By using a symmetrization process, in
Section 3, we study pairs
whose respective symmetrized pairs
are symmetric
-coherent pairs. Finally, in
Section 4, we deduce all positive-definite symmetric
-coherent pairs
when either
u or
v are of class
.
2. Preliminaries
Let be the linear space of polynomials with complex coefficients. Its topological dual space will be denoted by . will represent the linear subspace of polynomials of degree at most If then will denote the action of the linear functional U on the polynomial . with is said to be the sequence of moments associated with
Definition 2. For any polynomial q and , we define the operator as follows: If
and
,
, a displacement of
denoted by
is defined as follows:
for every
If
then the linear functional
is defined by:
The linear functional
given by
,
,
, is said to be the
Dirac delta linear functional at
c. Let
, and let
be a polynomial of degree
n with zeros
,
, of multiplicities
, respectively, i.e.,
. Then, for every
we define
as follows:
where
is the interpolatory polynomial:
There,
is the polynomial of degree at most
such that
,
and
As an illustrative example, when
with
, the zeros of
are
. Then, if
, we get:
Furthermore, if
, we deduce:
Besides, if
then
, and we conclude that:
On the other hand, if
i.e.,
has a zero of multiplicity
then for any linear functional
U:
where
denotes the Taylor polynomial of degree
of the polynomial
p around
When
we will write
Definition 3. Given , the Pochhammer symbol is defined by and
Lemma 1. Let and Then, for , we get: Remark 1. Since then also
If
then the (distributional) derivative of
denoted by
is the linear functional such that:
Given
,
U is said to be
quasi-definite or
regular (see [
3,
12]) if the leading principal submatrices of the Hankel matrix
are non-singular. If all of them have a positive determinant, then
U is said to be a
positive definite linear functional. In this case, there exists a positive Borel measure
supported on an infinite set
such that:
Proposition 1 ([
3])
. Let . U is quasi-definite if and only if there exists a sequence of monic polynomials with such that for and for every Such a sequence is said to be a monic orthogonal polynomial sequence (MOPS) with respect to the functional Proposition 2 ([
3])
. Let be a quasi-definite linear functional, and let be the corresponding MOPS. If for every then is quasi-definite. Furthermore, if is the corresponding MOPS, then:Moreover, if U is positive-definite in then is also positive-definite on if and only if The polynomial is called the monic Kernel polynomial corresponding to U whit κ-parameter zero. The above proposition defines a mapping in the linear space of quasi-definite linear functionals. A natural question can be posed. Is this mapping one-to-one? The answer is no. It is well known that there exist infinitely many MOPS generating the same sequence of Kernel polynomials of the -parameter. The next result gives the answer to this question.
Theorem 1 ([
40])
. Let be a quasi-definite linear functional and its corresponding MOPS. Let be the linear functional with , . Then, v is quasi-definite if and only if where is the Kernel polynomial associated with Besides , the MOPS associated with satisfies:with and To conclude this section, we state a lemma that will be needed later on.
Lemma 2. If are related by , then .
Proof. For any polynomial it is enough to consider the action of the linear functional defined as above, on . □
2.1. Semiclassical and Classical Linear Functionals
Let
and
be two nonzero polynomials such that
and
with leading coefficients
and
respectively.
is said to be an
admissible pair if either
or if
then
for every
.
is said to be a
semiclassical linear functional if there exists an admissible pair
, where
is monic, such that the following differential relation holds,
If
is a semiclassical linear functional, then the nonnegative integer number:
is said to be the class of
U. Here,
denotes the set of all admissible pairs of nonzero polynomials
such that (
20) holds. With respect to the class of a semiclassical linear functional, we describe the next irreducibility condition.
Proposition 3 ([
12])
. Suppose that is semiclassical and The class of U is a non-negative real number if and only if:for every zero c of Next, we summarize some characterizations of semiclassical linear functionals.
Theorem 2 (see [
12])
.Let u be a quasi-definite linear functional and the corresponding MOPS. u is semiclassical of class s if and only if one of the next equivalent conditions holds.(A) There exists a polynomial with such that the MOPS satisfies:with and (B) There exists a monic polynomial such that the sequence is quasi-orthogonal of order s with respect to i.e.,and: Remark 2. Notice that the classification of semiclassical quasi-definite linear functionals of class is given in [13]. The semiclassical linear functionals of Class 2
are described in [41]. is said to be
classical if its class is
i.e., there exist nonzero polynomials
and
with
and
such that (
20) holds. In this case, the MOPS associated with
U is called a
classical MOPS. Up to an affine transformation on the variable, the Hermite, Laguerre, Bessel, and Jacobi polynomials are the classical MOPS (see
Table 1). Besides, except the Bessel polynomials, if
U is classical, then, under certain restrictions on the parameters, it is positive-definite, and it has an integral representation with respect to a weight function
on an interval
, as described in
Table 2.
The shifted Jacobi functional on a finite interval
will be denoted by
and
Furthermore, the shifted Laguerre functional on
will be denoted by
and
In this way, the Jacobi functional
satisfies:
and:
The Laguerre functional
satisfies:
and:
2.2. Symmetric Linear Functionals
A linear functional
is called symmetric if
for every
(see [
3] for other characterizations of symmetric regular linear functionals). If
is symmetric and quasi-definite and
is its corresponding MOPS, then we can define
by:
and the sequences of monic polynomials
and
by:
Theorem 3 ([
3])
. If is a symmetric and quasi-definite linear functional and is its corresponding MOPS, then defined by (23), is quasi-definite. Besides, and defined by (24) are the MOPS with respect to and respectively. Conversely, if
is quasi-definite, we can define the symmetric linear functional
given by:
Theorem 4 ([
3])
. If and are quasi-definite linear functionals on and and are their corresponding MOPS, then the symmetric linear functional defined by (25) is quasi-definite, and its MOPS is given by (24). Remark 3. Notice that are the kernel polynomials with κ-parameter zero associated with Besides, U is called the symmetrized linear functional of
Theorem 5 ([
3])
. U is positive definite on if and only if and are positive-definite on with . Now, we deduce some interesting consequences of (
14).
Lemma 3. Let U be the symmetrization of Let σ be a polynomial with nonzero simple zeros. Then, for every polynomial q, we get: Proof. If
let
, where
and
for
Then, from (
14):
and from (
15):
then:
Besides, since
U is the symmetrization of
then for any polynomial
,
and as a consequence,
□
Given a semiclassical quasi-definite linear functional , the semiclassical character of the symmetrized linear functional of , its class and the respective Pearson equation are described in the next theorem.
Theorem 6 ([
38])
. Let be semiclassical of class satisfying the Pearson equation:and is a quasi-definite linear functional and . Then, the symmetrization of is semiclassical of class s satisfying the Pearson equation:where the number s and the polynomials ϕ and ψ are defined according to the next cases:(i)Ifthen:and (ii)Ifthen:and (iii)If then:and Corollary 1. If s is odd, the polynomials ϕ and ψ in (28) are, respectively, odd and even functions. If s is even, the polynomials ϕ and ψ in (28) are, respectively, even and odd functions. In the cases and , where the weight functions are on and on , respectively, the new weight functions associated with the symmetrized linear functionals and are on (the generalized Gegenbauer weight) and on (the generalized Hermite weight), respectively. Notice that and for any polynomial
If u is a positive-definite linear functional, with weight function on the interval and if p and q are polynomials, then the linear functional with weight (provided this is a weight function) will be represented by
Remark 4. In the symmetric framework, the quasi-definite semiclassical linear functionals of Class 1
were described in [38], and in [37], the symmetric quasi-definite linear functionals of Class 2
were given. Finally, examples of symmetric semiclassical linear functionals of Class 3
were studied in [42]. 2.3. -Coherent Pairs
In [
9], the
-coherence relation:
was studied, where
and
are orthogonal with respect to quasi-definite linear functionals
u and
respectively. In such a paper, the following result is proven.
Theorem 7 ([
9])
. If is a (-coherent pair given by (32), such that (or, equivalently, for then:(i) Either u is a semiclassical linear functional of class at most , i.e., there exist polynomials and φ with and such that: (ii) Or v is a semiclassical linear functional of class at most i.e., there exist polynomials and φ with and such that:Furthermore, there exists a constant ζ such that the pair satisfies: Moreover, in [
9], all
-coherent pairs of linear functionals were determined. Besides, in each case
(i) and
(ii) of the above theorem, the pair
is called either
type I or
type II, respectively.
2.4. Symmetric -Coherent Pairs
From now on,
U and
V will denote two symmetric quasi-definite linear functionals, and
and
will be their corresponding MOPS, respectively. For the above linear functionals, the normalization
is assumed, as well as the existence of sequences of nonzero real numbers
and
with
such that:
holds. In this case,
is said to be a
symmetric -
coherent pair.
In [
28], the relation (
34) was studied. Indeed, when
U is a classical linear functional, the authors obtained the coefficients of the three-term recurrence relation that the MOPS
satisfies. Besides, its companion linear functional is a rational modification of
U.
Lemma 4 ([
9])
. Let be a symmetric -coherent pair given by (34). and if and only if for Since
U and
V are symmetric quasi-definite linear functionals, from (
24), we can define:
where
,
and
are the MOPS with respect to
,
,
, and
respectively.
Next, we will deduce some relevant results to be used in the sequel. For
and from (
34), we obtain:
where:
and for
:
where:
Let us define
,
. Then:
if and only if:
and inductively, we can prove that
for
On the other hand, for
, we define
Then:
if and only if:
Furthermore,
,
On the other hand, let us consider the linear functional
and its expansion in terms of the dual basis
associated with
Namely,
where
if
is odd. If
then we can apply the distributional derivative on both sides, and we obtain:
where
is the dual basis associated with
. Since
then:
In an analogous way, for
we consider
and, as above,
and
if
is even. Then,
and:
Next, we summarize the above results.
Proposition 4. For , there exist polynomials and with , such that:with ,Moreover,and: 3. Symmetric -Coherent Pairs and Symmetrization
The concept of symmetric
-coherent pair was introduced in [
9] where, among others, the relation between connection coefficients in the coherence relation and recurrence coefficients for the MOPS, and the particular case when
u is classical, were deeply studied. The associated inverse problem was solved in [
43]. Namely,
Theorem 8. Let be a symmetric (1,1)-coherent pair. There exist polynomials , B, and C with , and such that:where: Depending on the nature of the zeros of
it is possible to refine the rational relation (
40). Besides, according to (
41),
A is an even function. In this way, either
,
or
In the sequel, we will assume that
Next, we study each case.
Definition 4. Given an even polynomial p of degree , the polynomial , with of , is defined as .
Lemma 5. (i) Let u and v be the symmetrized functionals of and respectively. If ϕ and ψ are even polynomials such that , holds, then . Besides, the converse also holds.
(ii) If u and v satisfy , where ϕ and ψ are even polynomials, then .
3.1. Case
If
, then (
40) can be written as
, as well as
and
As a consequence,
, where
and
Thus,
Since
, we deduce
From this expression, taking into account
, we get
. As a consequence,
, where
is a even and monic polynomial with
. From (
43),
According to (
42),
, then from (
38), we get:
For
, multiplying (
35) by
, we deduce
. On the other hand, from the above expressions, we get:
i.e.,
If a symmetric
-coherent pair
satisfies (
44), then:
Through the symmetrization process, we can find pairs
of symmetric linear functionals such that (
46) holds. Among such pairs, we will identify all the symmetric
-coherent ones later on.
Lemma 6. (i) For , (35) implies:where . (ii) For , (35) yields:where Proof. We will prove (ii). The proof of (i) is similar. The Pearson-type relation is equivalent to:
For every polynomial
p,
and from (
47):
Thus, our statement follows. □
From the previous lemma, we get that
implies:
On the other hand,
is equivalent to:
and
yields:
On the other hand, let u and v be the symmetrizations of and respectively. Then,
Lemma 7. u and v satisfy (46) if and only if and satisfy: Proof. We assume that
Let
p be any polynomial. Then:
On the other hand, assume that If , then As a consequence, . □
Taking derivatives on both sides of (
51) and by using (
48), we get:
If we multiply by
x, then from (
51):
and, equivalently,
Next we summarize the above results.
Proposition 5. If and is a symmetric -coherent pair, then satisfy (51) and:where:and:Moreover, and As a consequence, is a semiclassical linear functional of class at most 2
. In the sequel, given a linear functional
and its symmetrized
and
will denote the corresponding moment sequences. From (
37), we get
with
After some straightforward calculations, we get:
where
are the coefficients of the three-term recurrence relation that the MOPS
satisfies. Then:
In particular,
From (
51) and taking into account that
is a linear functional of class
according to the above classification, we can find its companion
As a consequence, we can deduce all the candidates
to be symmetric
-coherent pairs. From (
52), we get:
In the sequel, we consider . The case will not be considered. From the classification of the semiclassical linear functionals of class , we will analyze the semiclassical character of taking into account the algebraic structure of
3.1.1. of Class
In order to arrive at a classical case, we start the discussion by considering the following situations:
(i)
,
From (
52), we get
or, equivalently,
It is easy to see that
and
. Thus, if
then
is the Bessel classical functional, since:
(ii)
,
. Then,
. This yields:
where
and
. If
then
, i.e., the Jacobi classical functional on
such that:
(iii)
,
. From (
52), we get
and:
Then,
and
. If:
and
, we get
i.e.,
is the classical Laguerre linear functional.
Remark 5. We do not consider since in such a case, is the classical Hermite functional.
3.1.2. of Class
In order to analyze the semiclassical case when , we will discuss two possible situations in order to reduce the degrees of the polynomials involved in the initial Pearson equation.
(a)
(i),
. From (
52):
If:
then you can reduce the Pearson equation to:
and you have here
,
and
If
then
corresponds to the case
of Belmehdi’s classification in [
13], and as a consequence,
.
(ii),
. In this case:
Then:
If
then
, and according to the case
in [
13],
has an integral representation in terms of the weight function
, on
with
,
,
(iii),
,
. Then,
If:
this corresponds to the case
in [
13] with
on
with the conditions
,
,
(b)
(i),
. As above, if
then:
and according to the case
in [
13], we obtain an integral representation of
in terms of the weight function:
on
with
,
(ii),
. Then,
, when
This is the case
in [
13] with
on
and the conditions
,
(iii),
. If
then
, and according to the case
in [
13], we get that
is represented in terms of the weight function
, on
,
,
.
As in the classical case, it is possible to reduce (
51). Indeed, the general form of the Pearson equation is:
Taking derivatives in (
51) and using (
48), we get
. In other words,
and as a consequence,
Remark 6. Notice that according to Theorem 6, we get , and as a consequence, the class of u is .
3.2. Case
In this case, the following result is obtained in [
43].
Theorem 9. Suppose that Then, there exist odd and even polynomials and respectively, with and such that:As a consequence, v is a semiclassical linear functional of class at most Besides:holds, where . Furthermore, . Multiplying in (
55) by
if we define
where
is an even polynomial of degree
and using the symmetrization process, after straightforward calculations, we get:
and:
Notice that
is semiclassical of class
Next, the class of
will be analyzed according to the zeros of
3.2.1. Semiclassical of Class
(A1) In this case, (
57) can be written as
. Since
is classical, we can reduce the degree of the polynomials involved in this relation in one degree, namely
. Since:
if
, equivalently,
, then
. In such a way, it is well known that
.
(A2) (
57) reads
. Since:
if
then
. This means that
and:
(A3) If then . As a consequence,
On one hand, from the symmetrization process and since the class of
is
the class
s of
v is determined by the polynomial
. Indeed, if
then
. If
then
In
Table 3, we describe the conditions leading to
.
Next, we will prove that we can reduce (
60) in order to obtain:
where
. In general, the Pearson equation is:
or, equivalently,
under the condition
The case A1, where
is the classical Bessel functional, reads as:
Then,
, and the above differential relation can be written as:
with the condition
Furthermore, in this case, the linear functionals
and
are related by
, and as a consequence,
From (
59) and (
63), we get:
The action of the linear functionals of both sides on
yields:
As a consequence,
Thus,
In a similar way, in the case A2, we get:
The action of the linear functional of both sides on
yields:
or, equivalently,
Then:
In this case, since
it is well known that:
In other words,
If
then
. Notice that this up to
for this value.In the same way, for the case A3, (
60) becomes:
when
. This means that
3.2.2. Semiclassical of Class
From (
57), the following situations appear.
A,
(A1),
and
. This corresponds to the case A
in [
13], where:
with the condition
Since
, the above condition means
and
In addition,
.
(A2),
and
. This corresponds to the case
in [
13], where
satisfies
, and:
taking into account that for every polynomial
p and
The affine transformation
yields:
As a consequence,
,
.
(A3),
. This corresponds to the case
in [
13], where
satisfies:
and it has the integral representation:
with the conditions
,
B,
(B1),
. This corresponds to the case
in [
13], where
satisfies
and has the integral representation:
with the conditions
,
and
(B2),
. This is the case
in [
13], where
satisfies:
Besides, for
, we get:
(B3),
. This corresponds to the case
in [
13], where
satisfies:
and it has the integral representation:
with the conditions
,
and
Now, we will analyze the reduction of (
60) in the positive-definite case in order to get integral representations of such linear functionals. Then, we assume that
has an integral representation in terms of a weight function
on an interval
with
that is:
First, we analyze the
and
cases. We get the rational relation
with
in
and
in
Besides:
where
in B2. By using (
59) and (
60), we get:
Since:
we get:
for every polynomial
In particular, for
:
Next, we deal with
When
,
is positive-definite if
Taking into account that in this case,
then:
and
if
In a similar way, we get
, and
is positive definite if
. After straightforward calculations, we obtain:
Thus,
if
In
and
, we get:
where
in
An iteration of the above procedure yields:
Then:
On the one hand, in A3:
Then,
. In this way, the case A3 will not be considered. On the other hand, in the case B1:
and thus,
and
Then,
and:
Therefore,
if
In the case B3, we cannot simplify the factor
However, we get:
and, as a consequence,
Then,
, and
satisfies
, as well as:
4. Positive-Definite Symmetric -Coherent Pairs
According to the functionals and obtained in the previous section when , or respectively, the symmetrization process allows us to recover the original symmetric functionals u and v, and as a consequence, we get a classification of symmetric -coherent pairs. Of course, if we recover one pair , we must also prove that it is a symmetric -coherent one. For this purpose, we state the next results.
Theorem 10 ([
43])
. Let u be a symmetric, semiclassical, and quasi-definite linear functional of odd class s satisfying:where and Notice that, ϕ and ψ are even and odd polynomials, respectively. will denote the corresponding MOPS. We assume that the linear functional is quasi-definite, with as the corresponding MOPS. Then:with Theorem 11. Let u be a symmetric, semiclassical, and quasi-definite linear functional of even class s satisfying:where and Notice that ϕ and ψ are odd and even polynomials, respectively. will denote the corresponding MOPS. We assume that the linear functional is quasi-definite, and is the corresponding MOPS. Then:with Proof. It is enough to expand the sequence in terms of the basis and to consider its quasi-orthogonal character described in Theorem 2, B). □
As a consequence of the above theorems, we get the next result.
Corollary 2. Let u be as above with class s either 1
or Let v denote a symmetric and quasi-definite linear functional such that there exist even polynomials p and with and such that:holds. In addition, let be the MOPS associated with Then, is a symmetric -coherent pair. Proof. We consider the above theorems with
and
, respectively. In both cases, we get:
and:
where
. From the above equations, we obtain:
where
for every
n. □
4.1. Case
According to Theorem 6, if the class of
is
then the class of
u is either 0 or
The classical cases (Gegenbauer, Hermite) have been analyzed in [
9]. We suppose that
i.e.,
(i) If
, assuming that
then
satisfies:
(ii) If
assuming that
then:
Notice that
(iii) If
assuming
then
and:
On the other hand, if is of class , then from the symmetrization theorem, we deduce that the class of u is . Next, we will describe u according to
(i) If and then . Thus, .
(ii) If
then
u satisfies
, and it has the integral representation:
with the conditions
,
,
.
(iii) If
with
then
u satisfies
. Moreover,
with the conditions
,
.
(iv) If
then
u satisfies
, as well as:
with
.
(v) If
then
u satisfies
. Moreover,
with the conditions
,
(vi) If
then
u satisfies
, and it has the integral representation:
under the conditions
,
Since in the previous cases,
u and
v are related by:
then according to Corollary 2, in each case, the pair
is a symmetric
-coherent pair. Next, the corresponding symmetric
-coherent pairs are described in the positive-definite framework.
Theorem 12. Let be a symmetric -coherent pair satisfying:such that is an even polynomial with and u is a semiclassical linear functional of class at most In addition, u and v are positive-definite, and in (40). (A) u of class .
If and either or then:and: . If and , then and .
(B) u of class
. If , , , and either or then:and: If with , and either or then:and: If , , and then:and: If , , , and then:and: . If , , , and either or then:and: 4.2. Case
When is a semiclassical linear functional of class , the class of v is either 0 or When the class of v is , we get and , which are nonpositive-definite linear functionals. Next, we describe the cases when the class of v is according to the expression of .
(i) If , then , and it satisfies . Notice that this is not a positive-definite case.
(ii) If and then ; moreover, .
(iii) If
then
v satisfies
, and as a consequence,
. Thus,
If is a semiclassical linear functional of class , notice that, according to Theorem 6, v must be semiclassical of class . Next, we describe the possible choices for v.
(iv) If then v satisfies , i.e., .
(v) If
then
,
, and
v satisfies:
with
.
(vi) If
,
,
,
then
v satisfies:
i.e.,
(vii) If
,
,
and
then:
and
.
(viii) If
then
v satisfies
and:
Moreover,
In Cases (i)–(v) and (vii), we will assume that
From (
58), we get:
Taking into account
then:
As a consequence,
is semiclassical of class at most
According to Theorem 6 and Corollary 2, since
, then the class of
u must be at most 2, and the pairs
are symmetric
-coherent. For Cases (vi) and (viii), we get
and
, respectively. Then, it is enough to apply the arguments of the above lemma, but by using the fact that
v is of class
For the positive-definite case, the previous analysis is summarized next.
Theorem 13. Let be a symmetric -coherent pair satisfying:such that ϕ is an even polynomial with and v is semiclassical of class at most In addition, let us assume that u and v are positive-definite, as well as in (40) , . (A) v classical.
If then , , i.e., the classical Gegenbauer functional. Thus: (B) v of Class 1.
If , then:and: . If then:and: (C) v of Class 2.
If , then:and: If , , , and then:and: If , , , , then:and: If , then:as well as: