- Research
- Open access
- Published:
Generalized integral Jensen inequality
Journal of Inequalities and Applications volume 2024, Article number: 25 (2024)
Abstract
In this paper we introduce necessary and sufficient conditions for a real-valued function to be preinvex. Some properties of preinvex functions and new versions of Jensen’s integral type inequality in this setting are given. Several examples are also involved.
1 Introduction and preliminary
The important role played by Jensen’s inequality as an application of convex functions in mathematics, statistics, economics, probability theory, etc. is well known, see [14, 20]. Many other inequalities can be obtained from it. A function \(f: I\subseteq {\mathbb{R}} \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}\) is said to be convex if
for every \(x, y \in I \) and \(t \in [0, 1] \). The classical integral form of Jensen’s inequality states that
where g is an integrable function on \([c,d]\) with \(a\leq g(x)\leq b\) and f is a convex function on \([a,b]\). In recent years, many papers dealing with refinements of Jensen’s inequality for important generalized convex functions have appeared in the literature, see [6–8, 11, 16, 18, 22, 23] and the references therein.
The analogue of the arithmetic mean in the context of finite measure spaces \((X, \Sigma , \mu )\) is the integral arithmetic mean, which, for a μ-integrable function \(f:X\rightarrow{\mathbb{R}}\), is the number
In probability theory, \(M_{1}(f)\) represents the mathematical expectation of the random variable f. There are many results on the integral arithmetic mean. A basic one is the integral form of Jensen’s inequality:
Theorem 1.1
Let \((X, \Sigma , \mu )\) be a finite measure space and \(g:X\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) be a μ-integrable function. If f is a convex function given on an interval \(I\subseteq \mathbb{R}\) that includes the image of g, then \(M_{1}(g)\in I\) and
provided that \(f o g\) is μ-integrable.
A significant generalization of convex functions is that of invex functions introduced by Hanson in [5]. Recall some notions in the invexity analysis that will be used throughout the paper. A set \(S\subseteq {\mathbb{R}}\) is said to be invex with respect to the map \(\eta :S\times S\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) if
for every \(x,y\in S\) and \(t\in [0,1]\). It is obvious that every convex set is invex with respect to the map \(\eta (x,y)=x-y\), but there exist invex sets that are not convex. Recall that for \(x,y\in S\) the η-path \(P_{xy}\) is a subset of S defined by
An important generalization of convex functions is the class of preinvex functions introduced in [24, 25] by Weir and Mond and Weir and Jeyakumar and then applied to the establishment of the sufficient optimality conditions and duality in nonlinear programming. There have been some works in the literature that are investigated by preinvex functions (e.g. see [1, 2, 10, 12, 13, 21, 25–27] and the references therein).
Let \(S\subseteq {\mathbb{R}}\) be an invex set with respect to \(\eta :S\times S\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\). Then the function \(f:S\rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}\) is said to be preinvex with respect to η if
for every \(x,y\in S\) and \(t\in [0,1]\). Every convex function is preinvex with respect to the map \(\eta (x,y)=x-y\), but the converse does not hold. Recall that the mapping \(\eta :S\times S\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) is said to satisfy the conditions C if
for every \(x,y\in S\) and \(t \in [0,1]\). From conditions C we have
for every \(x,y\in S\) and every \(t_{1},t_{2}\in [ 0, 1 ]\). The Hermite–Hadamard inequality for preinvex functions is introduced in [19] as follows:
where \(a,b \in S\). Since then, numerous articles have been published in this category (see, for example, [9, 12] and the references therein). It would be worthwhile to give the exact (precise conditions) Jensen’s inequality for preinvex functions. We also recall the following theorem from [14, p. 25].
Theorem 1.2
Let \(f:I\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) be a convex function on the interval \(I\subseteq \mathbb{R}\). Then f is continuous on the \({\textit{i}nt}(I)\) and has finite one-sided derivatives \(f_{-}^{\prime}(x)\) and \(f_{+}^{\prime}(x)\) at every point \(x\in {\textit{i}nt}(I)\). Moreover,
for every \(y\in I\).
The main purpose of this paper is to introduce some generalized versions of integral Jensen’s inequality for preinvex functions defined on the invex subsets of a real line.
2 Main results
In this section we establish some versions of integral Jensen-type inequality for preinvex functions. At first, to reach our goal, in the following result some necessary and sufficient conditions for a real-valued function to be preinvex are introduced.
Proposition 2.1
Let \(S\subseteq \mathbb{R}\) be an invex set with respect to \(\eta : S \times S\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\). Suppose that f is a real-valued function on S. Then:
(i) If \(f:S\rightarrow \mathbb{R} \) is a preinvex function and η satisfies conditions C, then the restriction of f to any η-path in S is a convex function.
(ii) If for every \(x,y\in S, f(x+\eta (y,x))\leq f(y)\) and the restriction of f to any η-path in S is a convex function, then f is a preinvex function on S.
Proof
(i) Suppose that f is preinvex on S and \(x,y\in S\). Assume that \(z,w\in P_{xy}\) with \(z=x+t_{1}\eta (y,x)\) and \(w=x+t_{2}\eta (y,x)\) for some \(t_{1},t_{2}\in [0,1]\). By using (4) for every \(\lambda \in [0,1]\), we obtain
From this and the preinvexity of f we deduce that
which shows thatf is convex on \(P_{xy}\).
(ii) Let \(x,y\in S\) and \(t\in [0,1]\). By the convexity of f on the \(P_{xy}\), we have
which shows the preinvexity of f on S, and the proof is completed. □
Remark 2.1
Note that Pavić in [19, p. 3576] Theorem 5.4 introduced a similar result to Proposition 2.1 (i) by using the convexity of a preinvex function on each invex hall in \({\mathbb{R}}^{n}\) instate of η-paths. But we do not know in general whether for each η the corresponding invex hall and η-paths are equivalent or not?
Note that by Proposition 2.1 we can construct several examples of preinvex functions. The next example illustrates how Proposition 2.1 works for particular nontrivial functions η and f.
Example 2.1
Let \(S:=[-3,-2]\cup [-1,2]\). It is easy to see that S is an invex set with respect to \(\eta : S \times S\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) defined by
Moreover, η satisfies condition C (see [26, p., 231]). Then
Define the function \(f:S\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) as follows:
We see that for every \(x,y\in S\), \(f(y+\eta (x,y))\leq f(x)\) and η satisfies condition C. Simple computation shows that the restriction of f to any η-path \(P_{yx}\) in S is a convex function. Now, by Proposition 2.1 (ii), f is a preinvex function on S.
In the next example we obtain a preinvex function by combining Theorem 5 in [4, p. 319] and Theorem 1.2 in [24, p. 178].
Example 2.2
Let \(S:=\mathbb{R}\). Define the map η as follows:
Then the function \(f:S\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) defined by \(f(x):= -4|x|+3e^{-|x|}\) is a preinvex function on S, which is not convex.
A generalization of Theorem 1.2 is given in the following theorem.
Theorem 2.1
Let \(S\subseteq \mathbb{R}\) be an invex set with respect to \(\eta : S \times S\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\), and η satisfies conditions C. Suppose that \(f:S\rightarrow \mathbb{R} \) is a preinvex function. Then:
(i) f has finite left and right derivatives at each point of \(int (S)\);
(ii) for every \(x,y\in int (S)\) with \(\eta (x,y)\neq 0\), we have
Proof
(i) Let \(x\in int(S)\). By the invexity of S there exist \(x_{1},x_{2} \in S\) and \(\delta >0\) such that
for all \(t\in [0,\delta )\). Pick
It is easy to see that \(A_{1}, A_{2},A:=A_{1}\cup A_{2}\) are convex sets and x is an interior point of S. Since f is preinvex on S, by Proposition 2.1 (i), f is convex on A. Therefore, both \(f_{-}^{\prime}(x)\) and \(f_{+}^{\prime}(x)\) are finite by Theorem 1.2.
(ii) Let \(x,y\in int (S)\) and \(t\in (0,1)\). By the preinvexity of f, we have
Dividing by t and taking limit as \(t\rightarrow 0\) imply that
□
The following example fulfills the conditions of Theorem 2.1.
Example 2.3
Pick \(S:=[-2,2]\) and define the mapping \(\eta : S \times S\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) as follows:
Then S is an invex set with respect to \(\eta (x,y)\), and η satisfies condition C. Now, the function \(f:S\rightarrow {\mathbb{R}} \) defined as \(f(x):= -2|x|\) is a preinvex function and has finite left and right derivatives at each point of \(int (S)=(-2,2)\), (see [27, p., 611]).
First of our approach is the following special case.
Theorem 2.2
Let \(S\subseteq \mathbb{R}\) be an invex set with respect to \(\eta : S \times S\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\), and η satisfies conditions C. Suppose that \(f:S\rightarrow \mathbb{R} \) is a preinvex function. Assume that \(g : J\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) is an integrable function for some interval \(J\subseteq \mathbb{R}\). Let \(c,\,d\in J\), \(c< d\) be such that for every \(x\in [c,d]\), \(g(x)\in P_{ab} (\textit{or } P_{ba})\) for \(a:=g(c), b:=g(d) (\textit{or } b:=g(c), a:=g(d))\). Then the following inequality holds:
provided that \(fog\) is integrable, where \(\int _{P_{ab}}\) is denoted for integral over \(P_{ab}\).
Proof
Let \(a, b\in S\). By Proposition 2.1, f is convex on \(P_{ab} (\text{or } P_{ba})\). Hence, (7) is an immediate consequence of Jensen’s inequality (1). □
The following example gives an application of Theorem 2.2.
Example 2.4
Pick \(S:=I_{1}\cup I_{4}\), where
Define the mapping \(\eta : S \times S\rightarrow S\) as follows:
It is easy to see that S is an invex set with respect to \(\eta : S \times S\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) and η satisfies condition C. Define the integrable function \(g:[-\frac{\pi}{2}, \frac{\pi}{2}]\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) as
Moreover, by using Proposition 2.1, the function \(f:S\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) defined by
is a preinvex function. Let \(c,d\in [-\frac{\pi}{2}, \frac{\pi}{2}] \) with \(c< d\) and \(g(c):=b, g(d):=a\). To examine Theorem 2.2, we consider four cases.
(i) If \(a,b\in I_{i}, i=1,2,3\), then \(P_{ab}\) is the line segment between a and b; hence we obtain (7) by using Jensen’s inequality (1).
(ii) If \(a\in I_{4}\) and \(b\in I_{1}\), then \(c\in [-\frac{\pi}{2},0), d\in [0,\frac{\pi}{2}]\), and \(\eta (a,b)= -3-b\), so \(P_{ba}=[b, -3]\). Therefore,
Now, by Theorem 2.2, we have
(iii) If \(a\in I_{1}\) and \(b\in I_{2}\), then \(c\in [0,\frac{\pi}{4}], d\in [-\frac{\pi}{2},0)\), and \(\eta (a,b)= -1-b\), so \(P_{ba}=[-1, b]\). Hence
Thus by Theorem 2.2 we get
(iv) If \(a\in I_{1}\) and \(b\in I_{3}\), then \(c\in [\frac{\pi}{4},\frac{\pi}{2}], d\in [-\frac{\pi}{2},0)\), and \(\eta (a,b)= -b\), so \(P_{ba}=[0, b]\). Hence by (10) we have
So using Theorem 2.2 implies that
Motivated by [14, Theorem 1.8.1, p. 47] and [20, Theorem 2.23, p. 64], we introduce the following theorem, which is a generalization of Jensen’s Theorem 1.1 in the preinvex functions setting.
Theorem 2.3
Let \((X,\Sigma , \mu )\) be a finite measure space and \(g : X \rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) be a μ-integrable function. Suppose that \(S\subseteq \mathbb{R}\) is an invex set with respect to \(\eta : S \times S\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) and S includes the image of g. If \(f:S\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) is a preinvex function, then:
(i) \(M_{1}(g)\in S\);
(ii) If \(\psi (x):=\eta (g(x),M_{1}(g))\) and \(\psi (x)\neq 0\) for every \(x\in S\) such that \(g(x)\neq M_{1}(g)\), then there exists \(K\in \mathbb{R}\) such that the following inequality holds:
provided that ψ and \(fog\) are μ-integrable.
Proof
(i) If \(M_{1}(g)\notin S\), then \(g(x)\neq M_{1}(g)\) for every \(x\in X\), hence the function \(h:X\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) defined by \(h(x):=M_{1}(g)-g(x)\) (or −h) is a positive function and
which is a contradiction.
(ii) If \(M_{1}(g)\in {\mathrm{int}}(S)\) and \(K:=f_{+}^{\prime}(M_{1}(g))\), then by Theorem 2.1 we have
for every \(x\in X\), and (14) follows by integrating both sides of (15) over X. Now, suppose that \(M_{1}(g):=b\) is a boundary point of S. Since \(\int _{X}(M_{1}(g)-g(x))\,d\mu =0\), so we have \(g=M_{1}(g)\) almost everywhere. Let \(A:=\{x\in X| g(x)=M_{1}(g)\}\), then
and
equality in (14) holds if we choose \(K=0\). □
The following corollary is an immediate consequence of Theorem 2.3.
Corollary 2.1
Suppose that the conditions of Theorem 2.3are satisfied. Additionally, if
then
Note that in the trivial case if \(\eta (y,x):=y-x\), then S and f will be a convex set and a convex function, respectively, and Corollary 2.1 gives us the usual Jensen’s inequality presented in Theorem 1.1. In the following corollary we obtain the left-hand side of Hermite–Hadamard inequality as a consequence of Theorem 2.3.
Corollary 2.2
Under the conditions of Theorem 2.3, if \(a, b\in S\) with \(\eta (b,a)\neq 0\) and \(a< a+\eta (b,a)\), then we have
Proof
Let the function \(g:P_{ab}\rightarrow P_{ab}\) be defined by \(g(x)=x\). It is easy to see that
and
Now, if we use the change of variable \(x:=a+s\eta (b,a), s\in [0,1]\), then by (4) we obtain
Therefore, by Corollary 2.1, we deduce that
which is the left-hand side of inequality (5), and the proof is completed. □
To introduce an application of Theorem 2.3, we recall the definition of a special measure from [15, p. 262] and [17, p. 469], see also [3, 55–69]..
Definition 2.1
A real Borel measure μ on \(I=[a,b]\) is said to be
Steffensen–Popoviciu measure provided that
-
(i)
\(\mu (I)>0\),
-
(ii)
\(\int _{a}^{b} f(x)\,d\mu (x)\geq 0\) for every nonnegative \(f \in C\).
Several examples of Steffensen–Popoviciu measures can be found in [17, p. 471].
Example 2.5
Set \(X:=[-1,1]\). According to [17, p. 471], \(d\mu (x):= (x^{2}-a)\,dx\) for every \(0< a<\frac{1}{3}\) is a Steffensen–Popoviciu measure on X. Choose \(a:=\frac{1}{6}\). Then we have
Define the μ-integrable function \(g:X\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) as follows:
Note that \(\text{Im} (g)=[-2,2]\), and by simple computation we obtain
Pick \(S:=[-2,2]\) and consider the mapping η defined in Example 2.3. Since \(f_{1}(x):=e^{x}\) is an increasing and convex function on \([-2,2]\) and \(h(x):=-2|x|\) is a preinvex function on \([-2,2]\), so by Theorem 5 in [4, p. 319] the function
is a preinvex function (which is not convex). Since
therefore by using Theorem 2.3 and equality (21), we get
Taking into account that \(4{x}^{{2}}-2\geq 0\) on \([-1,-\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}]\cup [\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2},1]\) and \(4{x}^{{2}}-2\leq 0\) on \([-\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}, \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}]\), by using the definition of η, we obtain
Therefore, by combining (22) and (23), we have
3 Conclusions
In this paper, we have used the class of preinvex functions, which is an important generalization of the class of convex functions. Some generalized versions of integral Jensen’s inequality are introduced in Theorems 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3. Theorem 2.3 is a new approach to Jensen’s integral inequality that is an improvement of Theorem 1.1. A version of Hermite–Hadamard inequality is also obtained as a consequence. The study of integral Jensen’s inequality for other types of generalized convex functions are our intend to explore in future works.
Data availability
There are no data that we needed for this manuscript.
References
Antczak, T.: Mean value in invexity analysis. Nonlinear Anal. 60, 1471–1484 (2005)
Barani, A., Pouryayevali, M.R.: Invex sets and preinvex functions on Reimannian manifolds. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 328, 767–779 (2007)
Dragomir, S.S., Pearce, C.E.M.: Selected Topics on Hermite–Hadamard Inequalities and Applications (RGMIA Monographs https://rgmia.org/monographs/hermite_hadamard.html). Victoria University (2000)
Giorgi, G.: Some remarks on preinvex functions and other generalized convex functions. Math. Rep. 10(60), 317–325 (2008)
Hanson, M.A.: On sufficiency of the Kuhn–Tucker conditions. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 80, 545–550 (1981)
Horvath, L.: Inequalities corresponding to the classical Jensen’s inequality. J. Math. Inequal. Appl. 3, 189 (2009)
Horvath, L.: A refinements of the integral form from Jensen’s inequality. J. Inequal. Appl. 2012, 178 (2012)
Khan, M.B., Srivastava, H.M., Mohammed, P.O., Nonlaopon, K., Hamed, Y.S.: Some new Jensen, Schur and Hermite–Hadamard inequalities for log convex fuzzy interval-valued functions. AIMS Math. 7(3), 4338–4358 (2022)
Latif, M.A., Dragomir, S.S.: New inequalities Hermite–Hadamard and Fejér type via preinvexity. J. Comput. Anal. Appl. 19, 1–16 (2015)
Liu, C., Yang, X.: Characterizations of the approximate solution sets of nonsmooth optimization problems and its applications. Optim. Lett. (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11590-014-0780-4
Matković, A., Pečarić, J.E.: A variant of Jensen’s inequality for convex functions of several variables. J. Math. Inequ. Appl. 1, 45–51 (2007)
Matłoka, M.: Inequalities for h-preinvex functions. Appl. Math. Comput. 15, 52–57 (2014)
Mohan, S.R., Neogy, S.K.: On invex sets and preinvex function. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 189, 901–908 (1995)
Niculescu, C.P.: Convex Functions and Their Applications. A Contemporary Approach. Sringer, New York (2006)
Niculescu, C.P.: On a result of G. Bennett. Bull. Math. Soc. Sci. Math. Roumanie Tome 54(102), 261–267 (2011)
Niculescu, C.P., Spridon, C.I.: New Jensen-type inequalities. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 401, 343–348 (2013)
Niculescu, C.P., Stanescu, M.M.: The Steffensen–Popoviciu measures in the context of quasiconvex functions. J. Math. Inequal. 11, 469–483 (2017)
Pavić, Z., Pečarić, J.E., Perić, I.: Integral, discrete and functional variants of Jensen’s inequality. J. Math. Inequ. Appl. 5, 253–264 (2011)
Pavić, Z., Wu, S., Novoselac, V.: Important inequalities for preinvex functions. J. Nonlinear Sci. Appl. 9, 3570–3579 (2016)
Pečarić, J.E., Proschan, F., Tong, Y.L.: Convex Functions, Partial Orderings and Statistical Applications. Academic Press, San Diego (1992)
Peng, Z., Liu, Y., Long, X.J.: Remarks on new properties of preinvex functions. Mod. Appl. Sci. 3, 11–16 (2009)
Sayyari, Y., Barsam, H., Sattarzadeh, A.R.: On new refinement of the Jensen inequality using uniformly convex functions with applications. Appl. Anal. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036811.2023.2171873
Srivastava, H.M., Mehrez, S., Sitnik, S.M.: Hermite–Hadamard-type integral inequalities for convex functions and their applications. Mathematics 10, Article ID 3127 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3390/math10173127
Weir, T., Jeyakumar, V.: A class of nonconvex functions and mathematical programming. Bull. Aust. Math. Soc. 38, 177–189 (1988)
Weir, T., Mond, B.: Preinvex functions in multiple objective optimization. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 136, 29–38 (1998)
Yang, X.M., Li, D.: On properties of preinvex functions. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 256, 229–241 (2001)
Yang, X.M., Yang, X.Q., Teo, K.L.: Generalized invexity and generalized invariant monotonocity. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 117, 607–625 (2003)
Funding
Not applicable.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors take equal part in the preparation of this manuscript. All author read and approved it for submission in Journal of Inequalities ans Applications.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Nazari Pasari, S., Barani, A. & Abbasi, N. Generalized integral Jensen inequality. J Inequal Appl 2024, 25 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13660-024-03106-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13660-024-03106-4