Necessary and sufficient conditions for a class of functions and their reciprocals to be logarithmically completely monotonic

Yu-Pei Lv; Tian-Chuan Sun; Yu-Ming Chu

doi:10.1186/1029-242X-2011-36

Research
Open Access

Necessary and sufficient conditions for a class of functions and their reciprocals to be logarithmically completely monotonic

Yu-Pei Lv¹,
Tian-Chuan Sun¹ and
Yu-Ming Chu¹Email author

Journal of Inequalities and Applications20112011:36

https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2011-36

Received: 9 February 2011
Accepted: 22 August 2011
Published: 22 August 2011

Abstract

We prove that the function F_α,β(x) = x^αΓ^β(x)/Γ(βx) is strictly logarithmically completely monotonic on (0, ∞) if and only if (α, β) ∈ {(α, β) : β > 0, β ≥ 2α + 1, β ≥ α + 1}\{(α, β) : α = 0, β = 1} and that [F_α,β(x)]^-1 is strictly logarithmically completely monotonic on (0, ∞) if and only if (α, β) ∈ {(α, β ) : β > 0, β ≤ 2α + 1, β ≤ α + 1}\{(α, β ) : α = 0, β = 1}.

2010 Mathematics Subject Classification: 33B15; 26A48.

Keywords

completely monotonic
logarithmically completely monotonic
gamma function

1 Introduction

For real and positive values of x the Euler gamma function Γ and its logarithmic derivative ψ, the so-called digamma functions are defined by

Γ (x) = \int_{0}^{\infty} t^{x - 1} e^{- t} d t,

(1.1)

ψ (x) = \frac{Γ^{'} (x)}{Γ (x)} = - γ + \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{e^{- t} - e^{- x t}}{1 - e^{- t}} d t,

(1.2)

where γ = 0.5772 ··· is the Euler's constant.

For extension of these functions to complex variable and for basic properties see [1]. Over the last half century, many authors have established inequalities and monotonicity for these functions [2–22].

We know that a real-valued function f : I → ℝ is said to be completely monotonic on I if f has derivatives of all orders on I and

{(- 1)}^{n} f^{(n)} (x) \geq 0

(1.3)

for all x ∈ I and n ≥ 0. Moreover, f is said to be strictly completely monotonic if inequalities (1.3) are strict.

We also know that a positive real-valued function f : I → (0, ∞) is said to be logarithmically completely monotonic on I if f has derivatives of all orders on I and its logarithm log f satisfies

{(- 1)}^{k} {[l o g f (x)]}^{(k)} \geq 0

(1.4)

for all x ∈ I and k ∈ ℕ. Moreover, f is said to be strictly logarithmically completely monotonic if inequalities (1.4) are strict.

Recently, the completely monotonic or logarithmically completely monotonic functions have been the subject of intensive research. In particular, many complete monotonicity and logarithmically complete monotonicity properties related to the gamma function, psi function, and polygamma function can be found in the literature [17, 18, 23–37]. In 1997, Merkle [38] proved that $F (x) = \frac{Γ (2 x)}{Γ^{2} (x)}$ is strictly log-concave on (0, ∞). Later, Chen [39] showed that ${[F (x)]}^{- 1} = \frac{Γ^{2} (x)}{Γ (2 x)}$ is strictly logarithmically completely monotonic on (0, ∞). In [40], Li and Chen proved that $F_{β} (x) = \frac{Γ^{β} (x)}{Γ (β x)}$ is strictly logarithmically completely monotonic on (0, ∞) for β > 1, and that [F_β (x)]^-1 is strictly logarithmically completely monotonic on (0, ∞) for 0 < β < 1. The purpose of this article is to generalize Li and Chen's result. Our main result is as follows.

Theorem 1.1 Let α ∈ ℝ, β > 0 and F_α,β(x) = x^α Γ^β(x)/Γ(βx), then

(1)

F _α,β(x) is strictly logarithmically completely monotonic on (0, ∞) if and only if (α, β) ∈ {(α, β) : β > 0, β ≥ 2α + 1, β ≥ α + 1}\{(α, β) : α = 0, β = 1};
(2)

[F _α,β(x)]^-1 is strictly logarithmically completely monotonic on (0, ∞) if and only if (α, β) ∈ {(α, β) : β > 0, β ≤ 2α + 1, β ≤ α + 1}\{(α, β) : α = 0, β = 1}.

2 Lemma

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

Lemma 2.1 Let α ∈ ℝ, β ∈ (0, 1) ∪ (1, ∞) and

h (t) = - α e^{- (β + 1) t} + (α + 1) e^{- β t} + (α - β) e^{- t} + β - α - 1 .

Then the following statements are true:

(1)

If β ≤ α + 1 and β ≤ 2α + 1, then h(t) < 0 for t ∈ (0, ∞);
(2)

If α + 1 < β < 2α + 1, then there exists λ ₁ ∈ (0, ∞) such that h(t) < 0 for t ∈ (0, λ ₁) and h(t) > 0 for t ∈ (λ ₁, ∞);
(3)

If β ≥ α + 1 and β ≥ 2α + 1, then h(t) > 0 for t ∈ (0, ∞);
(4)

If 2α + 1 < β < α + 1, then there exists λ ₂ ∈ (0, ∞) such that h(t) > 0 for t ∈ (0, λ ₂) and h(t) < 0 for t ∈ (λ ₂, ∞).

Proof Let h₁(t) = e^{(β + 1)t}h'(t) and

h_{2} (t) = e^{- t} h_{1}^{'} (t)

. Then simple computations lead to

h (0) = 0,

(2.1)

\begin{align} h^{'} (t) & = α (β + 1) e^{- (β + 1) t} - β (α + 1) e^{- β t} - (α - β) e^{- t}, \\ h_{1} (0) & = h^{'} (0) = 0, \end{align}

(2.2)

\begin{align} h_{1} (t) & = α (β + 1) - β (α + 1) e^{t} - (α - β) e^{β t}, \\ {h^{'}}_{1} (t) & = - β (α + 1) e^{t} - β (α - β) e^{β t}, \end{align}

(2.3)

h_{2} (0) = h_{1}^{'} (0) = β (β - 2 α - 1),

(2.4)

h_{2} (t) = - β (α + 1) - β (α - β) e^{(β - 1) t}

(2.5)

and

h_{2}^{'} (t) = β (β - 1) (β - α) e^{(β - 1) t} .

(2.6)

(1)

If β ≤ α + 1 and β ≤ 2α + 1, then we divide the proof into four cases.

Case 1 If 0 < β < 1 and α < β ≤ 2α + 1, then from (2.4) and (2.6) we clearly see that

h_{2} (0) \leq 0,

(2.7)

h_{2}^{'} (t) < 0 .

(2.8)

Therefore, h(t) < 0 for t ∈ (0, ∞), which follows from (2.7) and (2.8) together with (2.1) and (2.2).

Case 2 If 0 < β < 1 and β ≤ α, then (2.5) and (2.6) lead to

lim_{t \to + \infty} h_{2} (t) = - β (α + 1) < 0,

(2.9)

h_{2}^{'} (t) \geq 0 .

(2.10)

Therefore, h(t) < 0 for t ∈ (0, ∞), which follows from (2.9) and (2.10) together with (2.1) and (2.2).

Case 3 If 1 < β ≤ α, then (2.4) and (2.6) lead to

h_{2} (0) < 0,

(2.11)

h_{2}^{'} (t) \leq 0 .

(2.12)

From equations (2.1) and (2.2) together with inequalities (2.11) and (2.12), we clearly see that h(t) < 0 for t ∈ (0, ∞).

Case 4 If β > 1 and α < β ≤ α + 1, then we clearly see that

lim_{t \to + \infty} h (t) = β - α - 1 \leq 0 .

(2.13)

From (2.3)-(2.6), we know that

lim_{t \to + \infty} h_{1} (t) = + \infty,

(2.14)

h_{2} (0) < 0,

(2.15)

lim_{t \to + \infty} h_{2} (t) = + \infty,

(2.16)

h_{2}^{'} (t) > 0 .

(2.17)

From (2.15)-(2.17), we clearly see that there exists t₁> 0 such that h₂(t) < 0 for t ∈ (0, t₁) and h₂(t) > 0 for t ∈ (t₁, ∞). Hence, h₁(t) is strictly decreasing in [0, t₁] and strictly increasing in [t₁, ∞).

From (2.2) and (2.14) together with the monotonicity of h₁(t), we know that there exists t₂> 0 such that h₁(t) < 0 for t ∈ (0, t₂) and h₁(t) > 0 for t ∈ (t₂, ∞). Hence, h(t) is strictly decreasing in [0, t₂] and strictly increasing in [t₂, ∞).

Therefore, h(t) < 0 for t ∈ (0, ∞) follows from (2.1) and (2.13) together with the monotonicity of h(t).

(2) If α + 1 < β < 2α + 1, then we clearly see that

lim_{t \to + \infty} h (t) = β - α - 1 > 0

(2.18)

and (2.14)-(2.17) hold again. From the proof of Case 4 in Lemma 2.1(1), we know that there exists λ > 0 such that h(t) is strictly decreasing in [0, λ] and strictly increasing in [λ, ∞).

Therefore, Lemma 2.1(2) follows from (2.1) and (2.18) together with the monotonicity of h(t).

(3) If β ≥ α + 1 and β ≥ 2α + 1, then we divide the proof into three cases.

Case I If β > 1 and β ≥ 2α + 1, then

β > α

(2.19)

and it follows from (2.4) that

h_{2} (0) \geq 0 .

(2.20)

Equation (2.6) and inequality (2.19) lead to

h_{2}^{'} (t) > 0 .

(2.21)

Therefore, h(t) > 0 for t ∈ (0, ∞) follows from (2.1), (2.2), (2.20), and (2.21).

Case II If 0 < β < 1 and α ≤ -1, then from (2.5) and (2.6) we clearly see that

lim_{t \to + \infty} h_{2} (t) = - β (α + 1) \geq 0,

(2.22)

h_{2}^{'} (t) < 0 .

(2.23)

Inequalities (2.22) and (2.23) imply that

h_{2} (t) > 0

(2.24)

for t ∈ (0, ∞).

Therefore, h(t) > 0 for t ∈ (0, ∞) follows from (2.1) and (2.2) together with (2.24).

Case III If 0 < α + 1 ≤ β < 1, then we clearly see that

lim_{t \to + \infty} h (t) = β - α - 1 \geq 0 .

(2.25)

It follows from (2.3)-(2.6) that

lim_{t \to + \infty} h_{1} (t) = - \infty,

(2.26)

h_{2} (0) = β (β - 2 α - 1) > 0,

(2.27)

lim_{t \to + \infty} h_{2} (t) = - β (α + 1) < 0,

(2.28)

h_{2}^{'} (t) < 0 .

(2.29)

Inequalities (2.27)-(2.29) imply that there exists t₃> 0 such that h₂(t) > 0 for t ∈ (0, t₃) and h₂(t) < 0 for t ∈ (t₃, ∞). Hence, h₁(t) is strictly increasing in [0, t₃] and strictly decreasing in [t₃, ∞).

It follows from (2.2) and (2.26) together with the monotonicity of h₁(t) that there exists t₄> 0 such that h₁(t) > 0 for t ∈ (0, t₄) and h₁(t) < 0 for t ∈ (t₄, ∞). Hence, h(t) is strictly increasing in [0, t₄] and strictly decreasing in [t₄, ∞).

Therefore, h(t) > 0 for t ∈ (0, ∞) follows from (2.1) and (2.25) together with the monotonicity of h(t).

(4) If 2α + 1 < β < α + 1, then we clearly see that

lim_{t \to + \infty} h (t) = β - α - 1 < 0

(2.30)

and (2.26)-(2.29) hold again.

From the proof of Case III in Lemma 2.1(3) we know that there exists μ > 0 such that h(t) is strictly increasing in [0, μ] and strictly decreasing in [μ, ∞).

Therefore, Lemma 2.1(4) follows from (2.1) and (2.30) together with the monotonicity of h(t).

3 Proof of Theorem 1.1

Proof of Theorem 1.1 Let E₁ = {(α, β) : 0 < β < 1, β ≥ α + 1}, E₂ = {(α, β) : β > 1, β ≥ 2α +1}, E₃ = {(α, β) : α < 0, β = 1}, E₄ = {(α, β) : α = 0, β = 1}, E₅ = {(α, β) : α + 1 < β < 2α + 1}, E₆ = {(α, β) : β > 0, 2α + 1 < β < α + 1}, E₇ = {(α, β) : 0 < β < 1, β ≤ 2α + 1}, E₈ = {(α, β) : β > 1, β ≤ α + 1} and E₉ = {(α, β) : α > 0, β = 1}. Then

\begin{gathered} {(α, β) : α \in ℝ, β > 0} = \cup_{i = 1}^{9} E_{i}, \\ {(α, β) : β > 0, β \geq 2 α + 1, β \geq α + 1} \ {(α, β) : α = 0, β = 1} = E_{1} \cup E_{2} \cup E_{3}, \\ {(α, β) : β > 0, β \leq 2 α + 1, β \leq α + 1} \ {(α, β) : α = 0, β = 1} = E_{7} \cup E_{8} \cup E_{9} . \end{gathered}

(1)

We divide the proof of Theorem 1.1(1) into five cases.

Case 1.1 (α, β) ∈ E₁ ∪ E₂. From (1.1), (1.2), and applying

ψ^{m} (x) = (- {1)}^{m + 1} \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{t^{m}}{1 - e^{- t}} e^{- x t} d t (x > 0, m = 1,2,...),

we obtain for n ≥ 1,

\begin{array}{l} {(- 1)}^{n} {[\log F_{α, β} (x)]}^{(n)} \\ = (- {1)}^{n} [{(- 1)}^{n - 1} \frac{α (n - 1)!}{x^{n}} + β ψ^{(n - 1)} (x) - β^{n} ψ^{(n - 1)} (β x)] \\ = - α \int_{0}^{\infty} s^{n - 1} e^{- x s} d s + β \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{s^{n - 1}}{1 - e^{- s}} e^{- x s} d s - β^{n} \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{t^{n - 1}}{1 - e^{- t}} e^{- β x t} d t \\ = - α β^{n} \int_{0}^{\infty} t^{n - 1} e^{- β x t} d t + β^{n + 1} \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{t^{n - 1}}{1 - e^{- β t}} e^{- β x t} d t - β^{n} \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{t^{n - 1}}{1 - e^{- t}} e^{- β x t} d t \\ = β^{n} \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{t^{n - 1} e^{- β x t}}{(1 - e^{- t}) (1 - e^{- β t})} h (t) d t, \end{array}

(3.1)

where

h (t) = - α e^{- (β + 1) t} + (α + 1) e^{- β t} + (α - β) e^{- t} - α + β - 1 .

(3.2)

Therefore, F_α,β(x) is strictly logarithmically completely monotonic on (0, ∞), which follows from (3.1) and (3.2) together with Lemma 2.1(3).

Case 1.2 (α, β) ∈ E₃. Then we clearly see that

{(- 1)}^{n} {[l o g F_{α, β} (x)]}^{(n)} = (- {1)}^{n} \frac{α (n - 1)! (- {1)}^{n - 1}}{x^{n}} = - \frac{α (n - 1)!}{x^{n}} > 0

(3.3)

for all x > 0.

Therefore, F_α,β(x) is strictly logarithmically completely monotonic on (0, ∞), which follows from (3.3).

Case 1.3 (α,β) ∈ E₄. Then F_α,β(x) = 1 and

{(- 1)}^{n} {[l o g F_{α, β} (x)]}^{(n)} = 0 .

(3.4)

Therefore, F_α,β(x) is not strictly logarithmically completely monotonic on (0, ∞), which follows from (3.4).

Case 1.4 (α, β) ∈ E₅∪E₆∪E₇∪E₈. Then F_α,β(x) is not strictly logarithmically completely monotonic on (0, ∞), which follows from Lemmas 2.1(2), 2.1(4), 2.1(1), and equations (3.1) and (3.2).

Case 1.5 (α, β) ∈ E₉. Then

{(- 1)}^{n} {[l o g F_{α, β} (x)]}^{(n)} = - \frac{α (n - 1)!}{x^{n}} < 0

(3.5)

for all x > 0.

Therefore, F_α,β(x) is not strictly logarithmically completely monotonic on (0, ∞), which follows from (3.5).

(2)

We divide the proof of Theorem 1.1(2) into five cases.

Case 2.1 (α, β) ∈ E₇ ∪ E₈. Then from (3.1) we get

\begin{gathered} {(- 1)}^{n} {l o g {[F_{α, β} (x)]}^{- 1}}^{(n)} \\ = - β^{n} \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{t^{n - 1} e^{- β x t}}{(1 - e^{- t}) (1 - e^{- β t})} h (t) d t, \end{gathered}

(3.6)

where

h (t) = - α e^{- (β + 1) t} + (α + 1) e^{- β t} + (α - β) e^{- t} - α + β - 1 .

(3.7)

Therefore, [F_α,β(x)]^-1 is strictly logarithmically completely monotonic on (0, ∞), which follows from (3.6) and (3.7) together with Lemma 2.1(1).

Case 2.2 (α, β) ∈ E₉. Then

{(- 1)}^{n} {l o g {[F_{α, β} (x)]}^{- 1}}^{(n)} = \frac{α (n - 1)!}{x^{n}} > 0

(3.8)

for all x > 0.

Therefore, [F_α,β(x)]^-1 is strictly logarithmically completely monotonic on (0, ∞), which follows from (3.8).

Case 2.3 (α, β) ∈ E₄. Then [F_α,β(x)]^-1 = 1 and

{(- 1)}^{n} {l o g {[F_{α, β} (x)]}^{- 1}}^{(n)} = 0 .

(3.9)

Therefore, [F_α,β(x)]^-1 is not strictly logarithmically completely monotonic on (0, ∞), which follows from (3.9).

Case 2.4 (α, β) ∈ E₁ ∪ E₂ ∪ E₅ ∪ E₆. Then [F_α,β(x)]^-1 is not strictly logarithmically completely monotonic on (0, ∞), which follows from equations (3.6) and (3.7) and Lemmas 2.1(3), 2.1(2) and 2.1(4).

Case 2.5 (α, β) ∈ E₃. Then

{(- 1)}^{n} {l o g {[F_{α, β} (x)]}^{- 1}}^{(n)} = \frac{α (n - 1)!}{x^{n}} < 0

(3.10)

for all x > 0.

Therefore, [F_α,β(x)]^-1 is not strictly logarithmically completely monotonic on (0, ∞), which follows from (3.10). □

Declarations

Acknowledgements

This study is partly supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant no. 11071069), the Innovation Team Foundation of the Department of Education of Zhejiang Province (Grant no. T200924), and the Natural Science Foundation of the Department of Education of Zhejiang Province (Grant no. Y200805602).

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)

Department of Mathematics, Huzhou Teachers College, Huzhou, 313000, PR China

References

Whittaker ET, Watson GN: A Course of Modern Analysis. Cambridge University Press, New York; 1962.Google Scholar
Chu Y-M, Zhang X-M, Zhang Zh-H: The geometric convexity of a function involving gamma function with applications. Commun Korean Math Soc 2010,25(3):373–383. 10.4134/CKMS.2010.25.3.373MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Zhang X-M, Chu Y-M: A double inequality for gamma function. J Inequal Appl 2009, 2009: 1–7. Article ID 503782MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Zhao T-H, Chu Y-M, Jiang Y-P: Monotonic and logarithmically convex properties of a function involving gamma functions. J Inequal Appl 2009, 2009: 1–13. Article ID 728612MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Zhang X-M, Chu Y-M: An inequality involving the gamma function and the psi function. Int J Mod Math 2008,3(1):67–73.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Chu Y-M, Zhang X-M, Tang X-M: An elementary inequality for psi function. Bull Inst Math Acad Sin 2008,3(3):373–380.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Song Y-Q, Chu Y-M, Wu L-L: An elementary double inequality for gamma function. Int J Pure Math 2007,38(4):549–554.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Guo B-N, Qi F: Two new proofs of the complete monotonicity of a function involving the PSI function. Bull Korean Math Soc 2010,47(1):103–111. 10.4134/BKMS.2010.47.1.103MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Chen Ch-P, Qi F, Srivastava HM: Some properties of functions related to the gamma and psi functions. Int Trans Spec Funct 2010,21(1–2):153–164.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Qi F: A completely monotonic function involving the divided difference of the psi function and an equivalent inequality involving sums. ANZIAM J 2007,48(4):523–532. 10.1017/S1446181100003199MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Qi F, Guo B-N: Monotonicity and convexity of ratio between gamma functions to different powers. J Indones Math Soc 2005,11(1):39–49.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Chen Ch-P, Qi F: Inequalities relating to the gamma function. Aust J Math Anal Appl 2004,1(1):1–7. Article 3MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Guo B-N, Qi F: Inequalities and monotonicity for the ratio of gamma functions. Taiwan J Math 2003,7(2):239–247.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Qi F: Monotonicity results and inequalities for the gamma and incomplete gamma functions. Math Inequal Appl 2002,5(1):61–67.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Qi F, Mei J-Q: Some inequalities of the incomplete gamma and related functions. Z Anal Anwendungen 1999,18(3):793–799.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Qi F, Guo S-L: Inequalities for the incomplete gamma and related functions. Math Inequal Appl 1999,2(1):47–53.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Alzer H: Some gamma function inequalities. Math Comp 1993,60(201):337–346. 10.1090/S0025-5718-1993-1149288-7MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Alzer H: On some inequalities for the gamma and psi functions. Math Comp 1997,66(217):373–389. 10.1090/S0025-5718-97-00807-7MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Anderson GD, Qiu S-L: A monotonicity property of the gamma function. Proc Am Math Soc 1997,125(11):3355–3362. 10.1090/S0002-9939-97-04152-XMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Kershaw D: Some extensions of W. Gautschi's inequalities for the gamma function. Math Comp 1983,41(164):607–611.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Merkle M: Logarithmic convexity and inequalities for the gamma function. J Math Anal Appl 1996,203(2):369–380. 10.1006/jmaa.1996.0385MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Palumbo B: A generalization of some inequalities for the gamma function. J Comput Appl Math 1998,88(2):255–268. 10.1016/S0377-0427(97)00187-8MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Alzer H, Berg Ch: Some classes of completely monotonic functions II. Ramanujan J 2006,11(2):225–248. 10.1007/s11139-006-6510-5MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Alzer H: Sharp inequalities for the digamma and polygamma functions. Forum Math 2004,16(2):181–221. 10.1515/form.2004.009MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Alzer H, Batir N: Monotonicity properties of the gamma function. Appl Math Lett 2007,20(7):778–781. 10.1016/j.aml.2006.08.026MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Clark WE, Ismail MEH: Inequalities involving gamma and psi functions. Anal Appl 2003,1(1):129–140. 10.1142/S0219530503000041MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Elbert Á, Laforgia A: On some properties of the gamma function. Proc Am Math Soc 2000,128(9):2267–2673.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Bustoz J, Ismail MEH: On gamma function inequalities. Math Comp 1986,47(176):659–667. 10.1090/S0025-5718-1986-0856710-6MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Ismail MEH, Lorch L, Muldoon ME: Completely monotonic functions associated with the gamma function and its q-analogues. J Math Anal Appl 1986,116(1):1–9. 10.1016/0022-247X(86)90042-9MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Babenko VF, Skorokhodov DS: On Kolmogorov-type inequalities for functions defined on a semiaxis. Ukr Math J 2007,59(10):1299–1312.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Muldoon ME: Some monotonicity properties and characterizations of the gamma function. Aequationes Math 1978,18(1–2):54–63. 10.1007/BF01844067MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Qi F, Yang Q, Li W: Two logarithmically completely monotonic functions connected with gamma function. Int Trans Spec Funct 2006,17(7):539–542. 10.1080/10652460500422379MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Qi F, Niu D-W, Cao J: Logarithmically completely monotonic functions involving gamma and polygamma functions. J Math Anal Approx Theory 2006,1(1):66–74.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Qi F, Chen Sh-X, Cheung W-S: Logarithmically completely monotonic functions concerning gamma and digamma functions. Int Trans Spec Funct 2007,18(6):435–443. 10.1080/10652460701318418MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Qi F: A class of logarithmically completely monotonic functions and the best bounds in the first Kershaw's double inequality. J Comput Appl Math 2007,206(2):1007–1014. 10.1016/j.cam.2006.09.005MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Chen Ch-P, Qi F: Logarithmically complete monotonicity properties for the gamma function. Aust J Math Anal Appl 2005,2(2):1–9. Article 8MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Chen Ch-P, Qi F: Logarithmically completely monotonic functions relating to the gamma function. J Math Anal Appl 2006,321(1):405–411. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2005.08.056MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Merkle M: On log-convexity of a ratio of gamma functions. Univ Beograd Publ Elektrotehn Fak Ser Mat 1997, 8: 114–119.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Chen Ch-P: Complete monotonicity properties for a ratio of gamma functions. Univ Beograd Publ Elektrotehn Fak Ser Mat 2005, 16: 26–28.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Li A-J, Chen Ch-P: Some completely monotonic functions involving the gamma and polygamma functions. J Korean Math Soc 2008,45(1):273–287. 10.4134/JKMS.2008.45.1.273MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

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