Skip to main content

Optimal Inequalities for Generalized Logarithmic, Arithmetic, and Geometric Means

Abstract

For , the generalized logarithmic mean , arithmetic mean , and geometric mean of two positive numbers and are defined by , for , , for , , and , , for , and , , for , and , , and , respectively. In this paper, we find the greatest value (or least value , resp.) such that the inequality (or , resp.) holds for (or , resp.) and all with .

1. Introduction

For , the generalized logarithmic mean and power mean with parameter of two positive numbers and are defined by

(1.1)

and

(1.2)

respectively. It is well known that both means are continuous and increasing with respect to for fixed and . Recently, both means have been the subject of intensive research. In particular, many remarkable inequalities involving and can be found in the literature [19]. Let

(1.3)

, and be the arithmetic, identric, logarithmic, geometric, and harmonic means of two positive numbers and , respectively. Then

(1.4)

for all .

In [10], Carlson proved that

(1.5)

for all with .

The following inequality is due to Sándor [11, 12]:

(1.6)

In [13], Lin established the following results: (1) implies that for all with ; (2) implies that for all with ; (3) implies that there exist such that ; (4) implies that there exist such that . Hence the question was answered: what are the least value and the greatest value such that the inequality holds for all with .

Pittenger [14] established that

(1.7)

for all , where

(1.8)

Here, and are sharp and inequality (1.7) becomes equality if and only if or or . The case reduces to Lin's results [13]. Other generalizations of Lin's results were given by Imoru [15].

Recently, some monotonicity results of the ratio between generalized logarithmic means were established in [1618].

The aim of this paper is to prove the following Theorem 1.1.

Theorem 1.1.

Let and with , then

(1) for ;

(2) for , and for , moreover, in each case, the bound for the sum is optimal.

2. Proof of Theorem 1.1

In order to prove our Theorem 1.1 we need a lemma, which we present in this section.

Lemma 2.1.

For and one has

(1)If , then for ;

(2)If , then for , for , and for .

Proof.

  1. (1)

    If , then we clearly see that

    (2.1)

for .

If , then

(2.2)

for .

Therefore, Lemma 2.1() follows from (2.1) and (2.2).

  1. (2)

    If , then

    (2.3)

Therefore, Lemma 2.1(2) follows from (2.3).

Proof of Theorem 1.1.

Proof.

() If , then (1.1) leads to

(2.4)

() We divide the proof into two cases.

Case 1.

or . From inequalities (1.5) and (1.6) we clearly see that

(2.5)

for , and

(2.6)

for .

Case 2.

. Without loss of generality, we assume that . Let , then (1.1) leads to

(2.7)

Let , then simple computations yield

(2.8)
(2.9)

where

(2.10)

Note that

(2.11)
(2.12)
(2.13)
(2.14)
(2.15)
(2.16)
(2.17)
(2.18)

where is defined as in Lemma 2.1.

We divide the proof into five subcases.

Subcase 2 A.

. From (2.18) and Lemma 2.1() we clearly see that for and for , then we know that is strictly decreasing in and strictly increasing in . Now from the monotonicity of and (2.17) together with the fact that we clearly see that for , then from (2.7)–(2.15) and for we get for .

Subcase 2 B.

. Then (2.18) and Lemma 2.1(1) lead to

(2.19)

for .

From (2.7)–(2.17) and (2.19) together with the fact that for we know that for .

Subcase 2 C.

. Then (2.18) and Lemma 2.1(1) imply that

(2.20)

for .

From (2.7)–(2.17), (2.20) and for we know that for .

Subcase 2 D.

. Then (2.19) again yields, and for follows from (2.7)–(2.17) and (2.19) together with .

Subcase 2 E.

. Then (2.20) is also true, and for follows from (2.7)–(2.17), (2.20) and the fact that .

Next, we prove that the bound for the sum is optimal in each case. The proof is divided into six cases.

Case 1.

. For any and , then (1.1) leads to

(2.21)

where

Let making use of Taylor expansion, one has

(2.22)

Equations (2.21) and (2.22) imply that for any , there exists , such that for any and .

Case 2.

. For any and , from (1.1) we have

(2.23)

where

Let making use of Taylor expansion, one has

(2.24)

Equations (2.23) and (2.24) imply that for any , there exists , such that for and .

Case 3.

. For and , we get

(2.25)

where

Let making use of Taylor expansion, one has

(2.26)

Equations (2.25) and (2.26) imply that for any and any , there exists , such that for .

Case 4.

. For any and , we get

(2.27)

where

Let using Taylor expansion we have

(2.28)

Equations (2.27) and (2.28) show that for any and any , there exists , such that for .

Case 5.

. For any and , we have

(2.29)

where

Let making use of Taylor expansion we get

(2.30)

Equations (2.29) and (2.30) imply that for any and any , there exists , such that for .

Case 6.

. For any and , we get

(2.31)

where

Let , using Taylor expansion we have

(2.32)

From (2.31) and (2.32) we know that for any and any , there exists , such that for .

At last, we propose two open problems as follows.

Open Problem 1

What is the least value such that the inequality

(2.33)

holds for and all with ?

Open Problem 2

What is the greatest value such that the inequality

(2.34)

holds for and all with ?

References

  1. Alzer H: Ungleichungen für Mittelwerte. Archiv der Mathematik 1986, 47(5):422–426. 10.1007/BF01189983

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Alzer H, Qiu S-L: Inequalities for means in two variables. Archiv der Mathematik 2003, 80(2):201–215. 10.1007/s00013-003-0456-2

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Burk F: The geometric, logarithmic and arithmetic mean inequality. The American Mathematical Monthly 1987, 94(6):527–528. 10.2307/2322844

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Janous W: A note on generalized Heronian means. Mathematical Inequalities & Applications 2001, 4(3):369–375.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Leach EB, Sholander MC: Extended mean values. II. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 1983, 92(1):207–223. 10.1016/0022-247X(83)90280-9

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Sándor J: On certain inequalities for means. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 1995, 189(2):602–606. 10.1006/jmaa.1995.1038

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Sándor J: On certain inequalities for means. II. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 1996, 199(2):629–635. 10.1006/jmaa.1996.0165

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Sándor J: On certain inequalities for means. III. Archiv der Mathematik 2001, 76(1):34–40. 10.1007/s000130050539

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Shi M-Y, Chu Y-M, Jiang Y-P: Optimal inequalities among various means of two arguments. Abstract and Applied Analysis 2009, 2009:-10.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Carlson BC: The logarithmic mean. The American Mathematical Monthly 1972, 79: 615–618. 10.2307/2317088

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Sándor J: On the identric and logarithmic means. Aequationes Mathematicae 1990, 40(2–3):261–270.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Sándor J: A note on some inequalities for means. Archiv der Mathematik 1991, 56(5):471–473. 10.1007/BF01200091

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Lin TP: The power mean and the logarithmic mean. The American Mathematical Monthly 1974, 81: 879–883. 10.2307/2319447

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Pittenger AO: Inequalities between arithmetic and logarithmic means. Publikacije Elektrotehničkog Fakulteta. Serija Matematika i Fizika 1981, (678–715):15–18.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Imoru CO: The power mean and the logarithmic mean. International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences 1982, 5(2):337–343. 10.1155/S0161171282000313

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Chen Ch-P: The monotonicity of the ratio between generalized logarithmic means. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 2008, 345(1):86–89. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2008.03.071

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Li X, Chen Ch-P, Qi F: Monotonicity result for generalized logarithmic means. Tamkang Journal of Mathematics 2007, 38(2):177–181.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Qi F, Chen Sh-X, Chen Ch-P: Monotonicity of ratio between the generalized logarithmic means. Mathematical Inequalities & Applications 2007, 10(3):559–564.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank the anonymous referee for their very careful reading of the manuscript and fruitful comments and suggestions. This research is partly supported by N S Foundation of China under Grant 60850005, and N S Foundation of Zhejiang Province under Grants D7080080 and Y607128.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yu-Ming Chu.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Long, BY., Chu, YM. Optimal Inequalities for Generalized Logarithmic, Arithmetic, and Geometric Means. J Inequal Appl 2010, 806825 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/806825

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/806825

Keywords

  • Open Problem
  • Simple Computation
  • Taylor Expansion
  • Intensive Research
  • Monotonicity Result