Open Access

Optimal power mean bounds for Yang mean

Journal of Inequalities and Applications20142014:401

https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2014-401

Received: 23 June 2014

Accepted: 25 September 2014

Published: 16 October 2014

Abstract

In this paper, we prove that the double inequality M p ( a , b ) < U ( a , b ) < M q ( a , b ) holds for all a , b > 0 with a b if and only if p 2 log 2 / ( 2 log π log 2 ) = 0.8684 and q 4 / 3 , where U ( a , b ) and M r ( a , b ) are the Yang and r th power means of a and b, respectively.

MSC:26E60.

Keywords

Yang mean power mean Neuman-Sándor mean

1 Introduction

Let p R and a , b > 0 with a b . Then the p th power mean M p ( a , b ) of a and b is given by
M p ( a , b ) = ( a p + b p 2 ) 1 / p ( p 0 ) , M 0 ( a , b ) = a b .

The main properties for the power mean are given in [1]. It is well known that M p ( a , b ) is strictly increasing with respect to p R for fixed a , b > 0 with a b . Many classical means are the special cases of the power mean, for example, M 1 ( a , b ) = 2 a b / ( a + b ) = H ( a , b ) is the harmonic mean, M 0 ( a , b ) = a b = G ( a , b ) is the geometric mean, M 1 ( a , b ) = ( a + b ) / 2 = A ( a , b ) is the arithmetic mean, and M 2 ( a , b ) = ( a 2 + b 2 ) / 2 = Q ( a , b ) is the quadratic mean.

Let L ( a , b ) = ( b a ) / ( log b log a ) , P ( a , b ) = ( a b ) / [ 2 arcsin ( ( a b ) / ( a + b ) ) ] , M ( a , b ) = ( a b ) / [ 2 sinh 1 ( ( a b ) / ( a + b ) ) ] , I ( a , b ) = ( a a / b b ) 1 / ( a b ) / e and T ( a , b ) = ( a b ) / [ 2 arctan ( ( a b ) / ( a + b ) ) ] be the logarithmic, first Seiffert, Neuman-Sándor, identric, and second Seiffert means of two distinct positive real numbers a and b, respectively. Then it is well known that the inequalities
H ( a , b ) < G ( a , b ) < L ( a , b ) < P ( a , b ) < I ( a , b ) < A ( a , b ) < M ( a , b ) < T ( a , b ) < Q ( a , b )

hold for all a , b > 0 with a b .

Recently, the bounds for certain bivariate means in terms of the power mean have been the subject of intensive research. Seiffert [2] proved that the inequalities
2 π M 1 ( a , b ) < P ( a , b ) < M 1 ( a , b ) < T ( a , b ) < M 2 ( a , b )

hold for all a , b > 0 with a b .

Jagers [3] proved that the double inequality
M 1 / 2 ( a , b ) < P ( a , b ) < M 2 / 3 ( a , b )

holds for all a , b > 0 with a b .

In [4, 5], Hästö established that
P ( a , b ) > M log 2 / log π ( a , b ) , P ( a , b ) > 2 2 π M 2 / 3 ( a , b )

for all a , b > 0 with a b .

Witkowski [6] proved that the double inequality
2 2 π M 2 ( a , b ) < T ( a , b ) < 4 π M 1 ( a , b )

holds for all a , b > 0 with a b .

In [7], Costin and Toader presented the result that
M log 2 / ( log π log 2 ) ( a , b ) < T ( a , b ) < M 5 / 3 ( a , b )

for all a , b > 0 with a b .

Chu and Long [8] proved that the double inequality
M p ( a , b ) < M ( a , b ) < M q ( a , b )

holds for all a , b > 0 with a b if and only if p log 2 / log [ 2 log ( 1 + 2 ) ] = 1.224 and q 4 / 3 .

The following sharp bounds for the logarithmic and identric means in terms of the power means can be found in the literature [916]:
M 0 ( a , b ) < L ( a , b ) < M 1 / 3 ( a , b ) , M 2 / 3 ( a , b ) < I ( a , b ) < M log 2 ( a , b ) , M 0 ( a , b ) < L 1 / 2 ( a , b ) I 1 / 2 ( a , b ) < M 1 / 2 ( a , b ) , M log 2 / ( 1 + log 2 ) ( a , b ) < L ( a , b ) + I ( a , b ) 2 < M 1 / 2 ( a , b )

for all a , b > 0 with a b .

Recently, Yang [17] introduced the Yang mean U ( a , b ) of two distinct positive real numbers a and b as follows:
U ( a , b ) = a b 2 arctan a b 2 a b ,
and he proved that the inequalities
P ( a , b ) < U ( a , b ) < T ( a , b ) , G ( a , b ) T ( a , b ) A ( a , b ) < U ( a , b ) < P ( a , b ) Q ( a , b ) A ( a , b ) , Q 1 / 2 ( a , b ) [ 2 G ( a , b ) + Q ( a , b ) 3 ] 1 / 2 < U ( a , b ) < Q 2 / 3 ( a , b ) [ G ( a , b ) + Q ( a , b ) 2 ] 1 / 3 , G ( a , b ) + Q ( a , b ) 2 < U ( a , b ) < [ 2 3 ( G ( a , b ) + Q ( a , b ) 2 ) 1 / 2 + 1 3 Q 1 / 2 ( a , b ) ] 2

hold for all a , b > 0 with a b .

In [18], Yang et al. presented several sharp bounds for the Yang mean U ( a , b ) in terms of the geometric mean G ( a , b ) and quadratic mean Q ( a , b ) .

The main purpose of this article is to find the greatest value p and the least value q such that the double inequality
M p ( a , b ) < U ( a , b ) < M q ( a , b )

holds for all a , b > 0 with a b .

2 Lemmas

In order to prove our main results we need several lemmas, which we present in this section.

Lemma 2.1 Let f 1 : ( 0 , 1 ) × R R be defined by
f 1 ( x , p ) = ( 1 x 2 ) ( 1 + x p ) x ( 1 + x 2 ) ( 1 + x p 1 ) 2 arctan 1 x 2 x .
(2.1)
Then
  1. (1)

    f 1 ( x , p ) is strictly decreasing with respect to x on ( 0 , 1 ) if and only if p 4 / 3 ;

     
  2. (2)

    f 1 ( x , p ) is strictly increasing with respect to x on ( 0 , 1 ) if and only if p 1 / 2 .

     
Proof It follows from (2.1) that
f 1 ( x , p ) x = ( 1 x ) x p 1 / 2 2 ( 1 + x 2 ) 2 ( x + x p ) 2 f 2 ( x , p ) ,
(2.2)
where
f 2 ( x , p ) = x 1 p ( 1 + x 5 x 2 3 x 3 ) + x p ( 3 + 5 x x 2 + x 3 ) ( 2 p 1 ) + 4 x 4 x 3 + ( 2 p 1 ) x 4 .
(2.3)
  1. (1)
    If f 1 ( x , p ) is strictly decreasing with respect to x on ( 0 , 1 ) , then (2.2) leads to the conclusion that f 2 ( x , p ) < 0 for all x ( 0 , 1 ) . In particular, from (2.3) we have
    lim x 1 f 2 ( x , p ) 1 x = 24 ( p 4 3 ) 0 .
    (2.4)
     

Therefore, p 4 / 3 follows from (2.4).

If p 4 / 3 , then it follows from (2.3) that
f 2 ( x , p ) p = [ x p ( x 3 x 2 + 5 x + 3 ) + x 1 p ( 3 x 3 + 5 x 2 x + 1 ) ] log x 2 ( 1 x 4 ) < 0
(2.5)

for all x ( 0 , 1 ) .

Equation (2.3) and inequality (2.5) lead to the conclusion that
f 2 ( x , p ) f 2 ( x , 4 3 ) = x 1 / 3 3 ( 1 x 2 / 3 ) 3 × ( 3 x 8 / 3 + 5 x 7 / 3 + 9 x 2 + 12 x 5 / 3 + 6 x 4 / 3 + 12 x + 9 x 2 / 3 + 5 x 1 / 3 + 3 ) < 0
(2.6)

for all x ( 0 , 1 ) .

Therefore, f 1 ( x , p ) is strictly decreasing with respect to x on ( 0 , 1 ) follows from (2.2) and (2.6).
  1. (2)

    If f 1 ( x , p ) is strictly increasing with respect to x on ( 0 , 1 ) , then (2.2) leads to the conclusion that f 2 ( x , p ) > 0 for all x ( 0 , 1 ) . In particular, we have f 2 ( 0 + , p ) 0 and we assert that p 1 / 2 . Indeed, from (2.3) we clearly see that f 2 ( 0 + , p ) = for p > 1 , f 2 ( 0 + , 1 ) = 2 , f 2 ( 0 + , 0 ) = 4 , f 2 ( 0 + , p ) = for p < 0 , and f 2 ( 0 + , p ) = 1 2 p for 0 < p < 1 .

     
If p 1 / 2 , then inequality (2.5) holds again. It follows from (2.3) and (2.5) that
f 2 ( x , p ) f 2 ( x , 1 2 ) = 2 x 1 / 2 ( 1 x ) ( x 2 + 2 x 3 / 2 + 4 x + 2 x 1 / 2 + 1 ) > 0
(2.7)

for all x ( 0 , 1 ) .

Therefore, f 1 ( x , p ) is strictly increasing with respect to x on ( 0 , 1 ) follows from (2.2) and (2.7). □

Lemma 2.2 Let f 1 : ( 0 , 1 ) × R R be defined by (2.1). Then
  1. (1)

    f 1 ( x , p ) > 0 for all x ( 0 , 1 ) if and only if p 4 / 3 ;

     
  2. (2)

    f 1 ( x , p ) < 0 for all x ( 0 , 1 ) if and only if p 1 / 2 .

     
Proof (1) If f 1 ( x , p ) > 0 for all x ( 0 , 1 ) , then from (2.1) and the L’Hôpital rules we have
lim x 1 f 1 ( x , p ) ( 1 x ) 3 = 1 12 ( 3 p 4 ) 0

and p 4 / 3 .

If p 4 / 3 , then (2.1) and Lemma 2.1(1) lead to the conclusion that f 1 ( x , p ) > f 1 ( 1 , p ) = 0 for all x ( 0 , 1 ) .
  1. (2)

    If f 1 ( x , p ) < 0 for all x ( 0 , 1 ) , then f 1 ( 0 + , p ) 0 . We claim that p 1 / 2 . Indeed, it follows from (2.1) that f 1 ( 0 + , p ) = + if p > 1 / 2 .

     

If p 1 / 2 , then (2.1) and Lemma 2.1(2) lead to the conclusion that f 1 ( x , p ) < f 1 ( 1 , p ) = 0 for all x ( 0 , 1 ) . □

Lemma 2.3 Let f 3 : ( 0 , 1 ) × R R be defined by
f 3 ( x , p ) = x 1 2 p + x 2 2 p 5 x 3 2 p 3 x 4 2 p + 3 + 5 x x 2 + x 3 ( 2 p 1 ) x p + 4 x 1 p 4 x 3 p + ( 2 p 1 ) x 4 p .
(2.8)

Then 4 f 3 ( x , p ) / x 4 < 0 for all x ( 0 , 1 ) if p ( 1 , 4 / 3 ) .

Proof It follows (2.8) that
x p + 4 4 f 3 ( x , p ) x 4 = x 1 p ( a 3 x 3 + a 2 x 2 + a 1 x + a 0 ) + b 4 x 4 + b 3 x 3 + b 1 x + b 0 ,
(2.9)
where
a 3 = 3 ( 2 p 1 ) ( 2 p 2 ) ( 2 p 3 ) ( 2 p 4 ) < 0 ,
(2.10)
a 2 = 10 p ( 2 p 1 ) ( 2 p 2 ) ( 2 p 3 ) > 0 ,
(2.11)
a 1 = 2 p ( 2 p 1 ) ( 2 p + 1 ) ( 2 p 2 ) > 0 ,
(2.12)
a 0 = 2 p ( 2 p 1 ) ( 2 p + 1 ) ( 2 p + 2 ) < 0 ,
(2.13)
b 4 = ( 2 p 1 ) ( p 1 ) ( p 2 ) ( p 3 ) ( p 4 ) < 0 ,
(2.14)
b 3 = 4 p ( p 1 ) ( p 2 ) ( p 3 ) < 0 ,
(2.15)
b 1 = 4 p ( p 1 ) ( p + 1 ) ( p + 2 ) > 0 ,
(2.16)
b 0 = p ( 2 p 1 ) ( p + 1 ) ( p + 2 ) ( p + 3 ) < 0 .
(2.17)
From (2.11)-(2.13) and (2.16) together with (2.17) we get
a 2 x 2 + a 1 x + a 0 < a 2 + a 1 + a 0 = 4 p ( 2 p 1 ) ( 10 p 2 21 p + 17 ) < 0 ,
(2.18)
b 1 x + b 0 < b 1 + b 0 = p ( p + 2 ) ( p + 1 ) ( 2 p 2 + p + 1 ) < 0
(2.19)

for all x ( 0 , 1 ) .

Therefore, Lemma 2.3 follows easily from (2.9), (2.10), (2.14), (2.15), (2.18), and (2.19). □

Lemma 2.4 Let f 3 : ( 0 , 1 ) × R R be defined by (2.8). Then 2 f 3 ( x , p ) / x 2 < 0 for all x ( 0 , 1 ) if p ( 1 / 2 , 4 / 3 ) .

Proof It follows from (2.8) that
x p + 2 2 f 3 ( x , p ) x 2 = 6 x p + 3 + ( 2 p 1 ) ( p 3 ) ( p 4 ) x 4 2 x p + 2 3 ( 2 p 3 ) ( 2 p 4 ) x 4 p 5 ( 2 p 2 ) ( 2 p 3 ) x 3 p + ( 2 p 1 ) ( 2 p 2 ) x 2 p 2 p ( 2 p 1 ) x 1 p 4 ( p 2 ) ( p 3 ) x 3 + 4 p ( p 1 ) x p ( 2 p 1 ) ( p + 1 ) ,
(2.20)
2 f 3 ( x , p ) x 2 | x = 1 = 48 ( 4 3 p ) ( 3 2 p ) < 0 ,
(2.21)
3 f 3 ( x , p ) x 3 | x = 1 = 88 p 3 300 p 2 + 380 p 144 .
(2.22)

We divide the proof into two cases.

Case 1. p ( 1 / 2 , 1 ] . Then from
( 2 p 1 ) ( p 3 ) ( p 4 ) > 0 , 3 ( 2 p 3 ) ( 2 p 4 ) < 0 , 5 ( 2 p 2 ) ( 2 p 3 ) 0 , ( 2 p 1 ) ( 2 p 2 ) 0 , 2 p ( 2 p 1 ) < 0 , 4 ( p 2 ) ( p 3 ) < 0 , 4 p ( p 1 ) < 0 , p ( 2 p 1 ) ( p + 1 ) < 0 , 0 < x 4 x p + 3 < x 4 p x 3 x p + 2 < x 3 p x 2 < x 2 p x < x 1 p 1
and (2.20) we clearly see that
x p + 2 2 f 3 ( x , p ) x 2 < [ 6 + ( 2 p 1 ) ( p 3 ) ( p 4 ) ] x 4 p + [ 2 3 ( 2 p 3 ) ( 2 p 4 ) 5 ( 2 p 2 ) ( 2 p 3 ) + ( 2 p 1 ) ( 2 p 2 ) 2 p ( 2 p 1 ) 4 ( p 2 ) ( p 3 ) + 4 p ( p 1 ) p ( 2 p 1 ) ( p + 1 ) ] x 4 p = 8 ( 3 p 4 ) ( 2 p 3 ) x 4 p < 0

for all x ( 0 , 1 ) .

Case 2. p ( 1 , 4 / 3 ] . Then (2.22) leads to
3 f 3 ( x , p ) x 3 | x = 1 = 88 ( p 1 ) ( p 53 44 ) 2 + 887 22 ( p 1 ) + 24 > 0 .
(2.23)

It follows from Lemma 2.3 and (2.23) that 2 f 3 ( x , p ) / x 2 is strictly increasing with respect to x on ( 0 , 1 ) .

Therefore, 2 f 3 ( x , p ) / x 2 < 0 for all x ( 0 , 1 ) follows from (2.21) and the monotonicity of the 2 f 3 ( x , p ) / x 2 with respect to x on the interval ( 0 , 1 ) . □

Lemma 2.5 Let f 1 : ( 0 , 1 ) × R R be defined by (2.1). Then there exists λ ( 0 , 1 ) such that f 1 ( x , p ) is strictly decreasing with respect to x on the interval ( 0 , λ ] and strictly increasing with respect to x on the interval [ λ , 1 ) if p ( 1 / 2 , 4 / 3 ) .

Proof Let f 2 ( x , p ) and f 3 ( x , p ) be defined by (2.3) and (2.8), respectively. Then from (2.8) we clearly see that
f 3 ( 1 , p ) = 0 , f 3 ( 0 + , p ) = ,
(2.24)
f 3 ( x , p ) x | x = 1 = 8 ( 3 p 4 ) < 0 , lim x 0 + f 3 ( x , p ) x = + .
(2.25)

It follows from Lemma 2.4 and (2.25) that there exists λ 0 ( 0 , 1 ) such that f 3 ( x , p ) is strictly increasing with respect to x on ( 0 , λ 0 ] and strictly decreasing with respect to x on [ λ 0 , 1 ) . This in conjunction with (2.24) leads to the conclusion that there exists λ ( 0 , 1 ) such that f 3 ( x , p ) < 0 for x ( 0 , λ ) and f 3 ( x , p ) > 0 for x ( λ , 1 ) .

Note that
f 2 ( x , p ) = x p f 3 ( x , p ) .
(2.26)

Therefore, Lemma 2.5 follows from (2.2) and (2.26) together with the piecewise positive and negative of f 3 ( x , p ) on ( 0 , 1 ) . □

Lemma 2.6 Let f : ( 0 , 1 ) × R R be defined by
f ( x , p ) = log U ( 1 , x ) M p ( 1 , x ) = log 1 x 2 arctan 1 x 2 x 1 p log 1 + x p 2 ( p 0 ) ,
(2.27)
f ( x , 0 ) = lim p 0 log U ( 1 , x ) M p ( 1 , x ) = log 1 x 2 arctan 1 x 2 x 1 2 log x .
(2.28)
Then the following statements are true:
  1. (1)

    f ( x , p ) is strictly increasing with respect to x on ( 0 , 1 ) if and only if p 4 / 3 ;

     
  2. (2)

    f ( x , p ) is strictly decreasing with respect to x on ( 0 , 1 ) if and only if p 1 / 2 ;

     
  3. (3)

    If 1 / 2 < p < 4 / 3 , then there exists μ ( 0 , 1 ) such that f ( x , p ) is strictly increasing with respect to x on ( 0 , μ ] and strictly decreasing with respect to x on [ μ , 1 ) .

     
Proof It follows from (2.27) and (2.28) that
f ( x , p ) x = 1 + x p 1 2 ( 1 x ) ( 1 + x p ) arctan 1 x 2 x f 1 ( x , p ) ,
(2.29)

where f 1 ( x , p ) is defined by (2.1).

Therefore, parts (1) and (2) follow from Lemma 2.2 and (2.29).

Next, we prove part (3). If 1 / 2 < p < 4 / 3 , then (2.1) leads to
f 1 ( 0 + , p ) = + , f 1 ( 1 , p ) = 0 .
(2.30)

From Lemma 2.5 and (2.30) we clearly see that there exists μ ( 0 , 1 ) such that f 1 ( x , p ) > 0 for x ( 0 , μ ) and f 1 ( x , p ) < 0 for x ( μ , 1 ) .

Therefore, part (3) follows from (2.29) and the fact that f 1 ( x , p ) > 0 for x ( 0 , μ ) and f 1 ( x , p ) < 0 for x ( μ , 1 ) . □

3 Main results

Theorem 3.1 The double inequality
M p ( a , b ) < U ( a , b ) < M q ( a , b )

holds for all a , b > 0 with a b if and only if p p 0 = 2 log 2 / ( 2 log π log 2 ) = 0.8684 and q 4 / 3 .

Proof Since both the Yang mean U ( a , b ) and the r th power mean M r ( a , b ) are symmetric and homogeneous of degree 1, without loss of generality, we assume that a = 1 and b = x ( 0 , 1 ) .

We first prove that the inequality U ( 1 , x ) < M q ( 1 , x ) holds for all x ( 0 , 1 ) if and only if q 4 / 3 .

If q = 4 / 3 , then from (2.27) and Lemma 2.6(1) we get
log U ( 1 , x ) M 4 / 3 ( 1 , x ) = f ( x , 4 3 ) < f ( 1 , 4 3 ) = 0
(3.1)

for all x ( 0 , 1 ) .

Therefore, U ( 1 , x ) < M q ( 1 , x ) for all x ( 0 , 1 ) and q 4 / 3 follows from (3.1) and the monotonicity of the function q M q ( 1 , x ) .

If U ( 1 , x ) < M q ( 1 , x ) , then (2.27) and (2.28) lead to f ( x , q ) < 0 for all x ( 0 , 1 ) . In particular, we have
lim x 1 f ( x , q ) ( 1 x ) 2 = 1 8 ( 4 3 q ) 0

and q 4 / 3 .

Next, we prove that the inequality U ( 1 , x ) > M p ( 1 , x ) holds for all x ( 0 , 1 ) if and only if p p 0 .

If U ( 1 , x ) > M p ( 1 , x ) holds for all x ( 0 , 1 ) , then (2.27) leads to f ( x , p ) > 0 for all x ( 0 , 1 ) . In particular, we have
f ( 0 + , p ) = ( 1 p + 1 2 ) log 2 log π 0 .
(3.2)

We claim that p p 0 . Indeed, p p 0 follows from (3.2) if p > 0 , and p < p 0 is obvious if p < 0 .

If p = p 0 , then (2.27) leads to
f ( 0 + , p 0 ) = f ( 1 , p 0 ) = 0 .
(3.3)
It follows from (2.27) and (3.3) together with Lemma 2.6(3) that
log U ( 1 , x ) M p 0 ( 1 , x ) = f ( x , p 0 ) > 0
(3.4)

for all x ( 0 , 1 ) .

Therefore, U ( 1 , x ) > M p ( 1 , x ) for all x ( 0 , 1 ) and p p 0 follows from (3.4) and the monotonicity of the function p M p ( 1 , x ) . □

Theorem 3.2 Let a , b > 0 with a b . Then the double inequality
2 5 / 4 π M 4 / 3 ( a , b ) < U ( a , b ) < 2 5 / 2 π M 1 / 2 ( a , b )

holds with the best possible constants 2 5 / 4 / π and 2 5 / 2 / π .

Proof It follows from Lemma 2.6(1) and (2) together with (2.27) that
log U ( 1 , x ) M 1 / 2 ( 1 , x ) = f ( x , 1 2 ) < f ( 0 + , 1 2 ) = log 2 5 / 2 π
(3.5)
and
log U ( 1 , x ) M 4 / 3 ( 1 , x ) = f ( x , 4 3 ) > f ( 0 + , 4 3 ) = log 2 5 / 4 π
(3.6)

for all x ( 0 , 1 ) .

Therefore, 2 5 / 4 / π M 4 / 3 ( 1 , x ) < U ( 1 , x ) < 2 5 / 2 / π M 1 / 2 ( 1 , x ) for all x ( 0 , 1 ) follows from (3.5) and (3.6), and the optimality of the parameters 2 5 / 4 / π and 2 5 / 2 / π follows from the monotonicity of the functions f ( x , 1 / 2 ) and f ( x , 4 / 3 ) . □

Remark 3.1 For all a 1 , a 2 , b 1 , b 2 > 0 with a 1 / b 1 < a 2 / b 2 < 1 . Then from Lemma 2.6(1) and (2) together with (2.27) we clearly see that the Ky Fan type inequalities
M p ( a 2 , b 2 ) M p ( a 1 , b 1 ) < U ( a 2 , b 2 ) U ( a 1 , b 1 ) < M q ( a 2 , b 2 ) M q ( a 1 , b 1 )

hold if and only if p 4 / 3 and q 1 / 2 .

Let p R and L p ( a , b ) = ( a p + 1 + b p + 1 ) / ( a p + b p ) be the p th Lehmer mean of two positive real numbers and a and b. Then the function f 1 ( x , p ) defined by (2.1) can be rewritten as
f 1 ( x , p ) = ( 1 x ) [ A ( 1 , x ) L p 1 ( 1 , x ) G ( 1 , x ) Q 2 ( 1 , x ) 1 U ( 1 , x ) ] .
(3.7)

From Lemma 2.2 and (3.7) we get Remark 3.2.

Remark 3.2 The double inequality
G ( a , b ) Q 2 ( a , b ) A ( a , b ) L p 1 ( a , b ) < U ( a , b ) < G ( a , b ) Q 2 ( a , b ) A ( a , b ) L q 1 ( a , b )

holds for all a , b > 0 with a b if and only if p 4 / 3 and q 1 / 2 .

Declarations

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China under Grants 11171307 and 61374086, and the Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province under Grant LY13A010004.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
School of mathematics and Computation Science, Hunan City University
(2)
Department of Mathematics, Huzhou University

References

  1. Bullen PS, Mitrinović DS, Vasić PM: Means and Their Inequalities. Reidel, Dordrecht; 1988.View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Seiffert HJ: Aufgabe β 16. Ginkgo-Wurzel 1995, 29: 221-222.Google Scholar
  3. Jagers AA: Solution of problem 887. Nieuw Arch. Wiskd. 1994, 12: 230-231.Google Scholar
  4. Hästö PA: A monotonicity property of ratios of symmetric homogeneous means. JIPAM. J. Inequal. Pure Appl. Math. 2002. Article ID 71,3(5): Article ID 71MATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Hästö PA: Optimal inequalities between Seiffert’s mean and power mean. Math. Inequal. Appl. 2004,7(1):47-53.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Witkowski A: Interpolations of Schwab-Borchardt mean. Math. Inequal. Appl. 2013,16(1):193-206.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Costin I, Toader G: Optimal evaluations of some Seiffert-type means by power means. Appl. Math. Comput. 2013,219(9):4745-4754. 10.1016/j.amc.2012.10.091MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Chu Y-M, Long B-Y: Bounds of the Neuman-Sándor mean using power and identric means. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2013. Article ID 832591, 2013: Article ID 832591Google Scholar
  9. Alzer H: Ungleichungen für Mittelwerte. Arch. Math. 1986,47(5):422-426. 10.1007/BF01189983MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Alzer H:Ungleichungen für ( e / a ) a ( b / e ) b . Elem. Math. 1985, 40: 120-123.MATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Burk F: The geometric, logarithmic, and arithmetic mean inequality. Am. Math. Mon. 1987,94(6):527-528. 10.2307/2322844MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Lin TP: The power mean and the logarithmic mean. Am. Math. Mon. 1974, 81: 879-883. 10.2307/2319447View ArticleMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Pittenger AO: Inequalities between arithmetic and logarithmic means. Publ. Elektroteh. Fak. Univ. Beogr., Ser. Mat. Fiz. 1980,678(715):15-18.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. Pittenger AO: The symmetric, logarithmic and power means. Publ. Elektroteh. Fak. Univ. Beogr., Ser. Mat. Fiz. 1980,678(715):19-23.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Stolarsky KB: The power and generalized logarithmic means. Am. Math. Mon. 1980,87(7):545-548. 10.2307/2321420MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Alzer H, Qiu S-L: Inequalities for means in two variables. Arch. Math. 2003,80(2):201-215. 10.1007/s00013-003-0456-2MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Yang Z-H: Three families of two-parameter means constructed by trigonometric functions. J. Inequal. Appl. 2013. Article ID 541, 2013: Article ID 541Google Scholar
  18. Yang Z-H, Chu Y-M, Song Y-Q, Li Y-M: A sharp double inequality for trigonometric functions and its applications. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2014. Article ID 592085, 2014: Article ID 592085Google Scholar

Copyright

© Yang et al.; licensee Springer. 2014

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/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.