Skip to main content

On preservation of binomial operators

Abstract

Binomial operators are the most important extension to Bernstein operators, defined by

$$ \bigl(L^{Q}_{n} f\bigr) (x)=\frac{1}{b_{n}(1)} \sum ^{n}_{k=0}\binom { n}{k } b_{k}(x)b_{n-k}(1-x)f\biggl( \frac{k}{n}\biggr),\quad f\in C[0, 1], $$

where \(\{b_{n}\}\) is a sequence of binomial polynomials associated to a delta operator Q. In this paper, we discuss the binomial operators \(\{L^{Q}_{n} f\}\) preservation such as smoothness and semi-additivity by the aid of binary representation of the operators, and present several illustrative examples. The results obtained in this paper generalize what are known as the corresponding Bernstein operators.

Introduction

Bernstein operators, also known as Bernstein polynomials, are typical positive linear operators, defined as follows:

$$ (B_{n}f) (x)=\sum_{k=0}^{n} \binom {n }{k}x^{k}(1-x)^{n-k}f\biggl( \frac{k}{n}\biggr),\quad n=1,2,\ldots , $$

which were first introduced by Bernstein in [6], and more detailed discussions were given by Lorentz in [19]. Thanks to its simple and graceful form, as well as the favorable properties of approximation and preservation, Bernstein operators have attracted a good deal of attention, with hundreds of related research publications [2, 7, 9, 1113, 17, 19, 28, 29, 38]. Due to the properties of approximation and preservation, Bernstein operators are applied to CAGD (computer aided geometric design) and IM (industrial manufacture). For example, Bézier nets, which are powerful tools to express and design curves and surfaces in CAGD, are constructed by Bernstein operators.

For Bernstein operators, there are various extensions and modifications. Among them, binomial operators should be the most important extension as they maintain key structural characteristics of Bernstein operators, which were first introduced by Popoviciu in [27], defined as follows:

$$ \bigl(L_{n}^{Q}f\bigr) (x)=\frac{1}{b_{n}(1)}\sum _{k=0}^{n}\binom {n }{k}b_{k}(x)b_{n-k}(1-x)f \biggl( \frac{k}{n}\biggr),\quad f\in C[0,1], $$

where \(\{b_{n}\}\) is a sequence of binomial polynomials, that is, \(b_{n}(x)\) is a polynomial of exact degree n satisfying, for any \(x,y\in [0,1]\),

$$ b_{n}(x+y)=\sum_{k=0}^{n} \binom {n }{k}b_{k}(x)b_{n-k}(y), $$

and Q is a delta operator uniquely determined by the sequence of binomial polynomials \(\{b_{n}\}\). These sequences and their generalizations have been studied by many mathematicians [10, 15, 22, 24, 25, 3336]. In [32], Roman and Rota pointed out that many polynomial sequences occurring in various mathematical circumstances turn out to be of binomial type. The study of binomial polynomial sequences may go back to Bell [5], but at that time, one only used the less efficient generating function method. Before 1970, Mullin and Rota in [26] introduced a simpler and more convenient operator method, umbral calculus, which is a linear-algebraic theory used to study certain types of polynomial functions that play an important role in applied mathematics [3, 18].

Preservation of operators belong to theoretical basis of CAGD, involving preservation of smoothness, preservation of shape, one-side approximation, variation diminishing, the best constants in approximation of preservation and so on, on which there has been considerable research in [1, 3, 8, 16, 18, 20, 40]. Here we would also like to mention Refs. [39, 41], in which the authors investigate properties of preserving shape such as convexity, star-shape, semi-additivity and those under the average for the Szász–Kantorovich operators and Baskakov–Kantorovich operators, respectively.

For binomial operators, their approximation and preservation have been considered in [4, 23]. In [23], we may observe preservation of monotonicity, convexity and Lipschitz for the binomial operators, but still there are many other problems of preservation to explore, which is a main motivation of this article. In the present paper we show the binomial operators preserving smoothness and semi-additivity, which appear in the third section. In the next section, we introduce some relevant notations and the corresponding preservation of Bernstein operators.

Bernstein operators and preservation

First,we define some classes of functions.

A function f is said to be upper semi-additive (lower semi-additive) on \([0,1]\), if it satisfies

$$ f(x+y)\leq f(x)+f(y) \qquad \bigl(f(x+y)\geq f(x)+f(y) \bigr)\quad \forall x,y \in [0,1]. $$

Let \(M>0\) and \(0<\alpha \leq 1\), we define

$$ \operatorname {Lip}_{M}\alpha =\bigl\{ f\in C[0,1]: \forall t\in [0,1], \mbox{s.t. }\omega (f;t)\leq Mt^{\alpha }\bigr\} , $$

where \(\omega (f;t)\) is the modulus of continuity of f, defined by

$$ \omega (f;t)=\sup_{ \vert x-y \vert \leq t, x,y\in [0,1]}{ \bigl\vert f(y)-f(x) \bigr\vert }. $$

We denote a continuous modulus function on \([0,1]\) by \(\omega (t)\), that is, \(\omega (t)\) is non-decreasing, upper semi-additive on \([0,1]\) and \(\lim_{t\rightarrow +0}\omega (t)=\omega (0)=0\). If it satisfies the inequality \(\omega (f;t)\leq \omega (t)\), then we write \(f\in H^{\omega }\). From [37] we can find that, if \(f\in C[0,1]\), then \(\omega (f;t)\) is a continuous modulus function, and conversely, if f is a continuous modulus function on \([0,1]\), then \(\omega (f;t)=f(t)\), \(t\in [0,1]\).

Next, we set out for some well-known results on preservation of smoothness for Bernstein operators as follows ([20], Theorem A).

Theorem A

  1. (a)

    If \(f\in H^{\omega }\), then \(B_{n}f\in H^{2\omega }\), for all \(n\geq 1\), and the constant 2 is optimal.

  2. (b)

    If ω is concave (upper convex) and \(f\in H^{\omega }\), then \(B_{n}f\in H^{\omega }\), for all \(n\geq 1\).

  3. (c)

    If f is upper semi-additive (lower semi-additive) on \([0,1]\), then so is \(B_{n}f\).

  4. (d)

    Let \(\omega (t)\) be a continuous modulus function on \([0,1]\), then so is \(B_{n}(\omega ;t)\), and \(B_{n}(\omega ;t) \leq {2\omega (t)}\), for all \(n\geq 1\). Particularly, if \(\omega (t)\) is concave (upper convex), then so is \(B_{n}(\omega ;t)\), and \(B_{n}(\omega ;t) \leq {\omega (t)}\), for all \(n\geq 1\).

Binomial operators and preservation

It is well known that the behavior of an operator strongly depends on its structure. From [40] we can find binomial operators have the following so-called binary representation similar to Bernstein operators.

Lemma

Let \(L_{n}^{Q}\) be binomial operators defined above, then

$$\begin{aligned}& \bigl(L_{n}^{Q}f\bigr) (x)=\frac{1}{b_{n}(1)}\sum _{k=0}^{n}\sum _{l=0}^{n-k}B_{nkl}(x,y)f\biggl( \frac{k}{n}\biggr); \\& \bigl(L_{n}^{Q}f\bigr) (y)=\frac{1}{b_{n}(1)}\sum _{k=0}^{n}\sum _{l=0}^{n-k}B_{nkl}(x,y)f\biggl( \frac{k+l}{n}\biggr), \end{aligned}$$

where

$$ B_{nkl}= \frac{n!}{k!l!(n-k-l)!}b_{k}(x)b_{l}(y-x)b_{n-k-l}(1-y),\quad x\leq y. $$

In this section we suppose all binomial operators \(L_{n}^{Q}\) to be positive and denote \(L_{n}^{Q}\in \mathcal {B}\). By the lemma, we can obtain the following theorem.

Theorem 3.1

If \(L_{n}^{Q}\in \mathcal {B}\), then \(\omega (L_{n}^{Q}f;h)\leq {2\omega (f;h)}\), for all \(n\geq 1\), and the constant 2 is optimal.

Proof

By the definition of the sequence of binomial polynomials, we can derive easily

$$ \frac{1}{b_{n}(1)}\sum_{k=0}^{n}\sum _{l=0}^{n-k}B_{nkl}(x,y)=1. $$

By the definition of \(B_{nkl}(x,y)\) and exchanging the order of the sum, we have

$$ \begin{aligned} & \frac{1}{b_{n}(1)}\sum _{k=0}^{n}\sum_{l=0}^{n-k}B_{nkl}(x,y) \frac{l}{n} \\ &\quad = \frac{1}{b_{n}(1)}\sum_{k=0}^{n} \sum_{l=0}^{n-k} \frac{n!}{k!l!(n-k-l)!}b_{k}(x)b_{l}(y-x)b_{n-k-l}(1-y) \frac{l}{n} \\ &\quad = \frac{1}{b_{n}(1)}\sum_{l=0}^{n} \binom {n}{l}b_{l}(y-x) \frac{l}{n}\sum _{k=0}^{n-l}\binom {n-l}{k}b_{k}(x)b_{n-l-k}(1-y) \\ &\quad = \frac{1}{b_{n}(1)}\sum_{l=0}^{n} \binom {n}{l}b_{l}(y-x)b_{n-l}(x+1-y) \frac{l}{n} \\ &\quad =y-x. \end{aligned} $$

Now let \(f\in C[0,1]\) and \({t,\tau }\in [0,1]\), then

$$ \bigl\vert f(t)-f(\tau ) \bigr\vert \leq \biggl(1+\frac{ \vert t-\tau \vert }{h} \biggr)\omega (f;h),\quad h>0. $$

By the identities above and \(L_{n}^{Q}\in \mathcal {B}\), we obtain

$$ \begin{aligned} \bigl\vert \bigl(L_{n}^{Q}f \bigr) (y)-\bigl(L_{n}^{Q}f\bigr) (x) \bigr\vert &\leq \frac{1}{b_{n}(1)}\sum_{k=0}^{n}\sum _{l=0}^{n-k}B_{nkl}(x,y) \biggl\vert f \biggl(\frac{k+l}{n} \biggr)-f \biggl(\frac{k}{n} \biggr) \biggr\vert \\ &\leq \frac{1}{b_{n}(1)}\sum_{k=0}^{n} \sum_{l=0}^{n-k}B_{nkl}(x,y) \biggl(1+\frac{l}{nh} \biggr)\omega (f;h) \\ &\leq \omega (f;h) \Biggl(\frac{1}{b_{n}(1)}\sum _{k=0}^{n} \sum_{l=0}^{n-k}B_{nkl}(x,y)+ \frac{1}{b_{n}(1)}\frac{1}{h}\sum_{k=0}^{n} \sum_{l=0}^{n-k}B_{nkl}(x,y) \frac{l}{n} \Biggr) \\ &=\omega (f;h) \biggl(1+\frac{y-x}{h} \biggr), \end{aligned} $$

from which it follows that

$$ \begin{aligned} \sup_{ \vert x-y \vert \leq h, x,y\in [0,1]} \bigl\vert \bigl(L_{n}^{Q}f\bigr) (y)-\bigl(L_{n}^{Q}f \bigr) (x) \bigr\vert &\leq 2\omega (f;h), \end{aligned} $$

which means that \(\omega (L_{n}^{Q}f;h)\leq {2\omega (f;h)}\). From Theorem A in Sect. 2, we know the constant 2 is optimal. □

According to Theorem 3.1, it is easy to get the following corollary.

Corollary 1

If \(f\in H^{\omega }\), then \(L_{n}^{Q}f\in H^{2\omega }\), for all \(n\geq 1\).

When \(\omega (t)\) is concave (upper convex), the constant 2 above could be substituted for by 1.

Theorem 3.2

If \(\omega (t)\) is concave (upper convex) and \(f\in H^{\omega }\), then \(L_{n}^{Q}f\in H^{\omega }\), for all \(n\geq 1\).

Proof

By the lemma, direct computation gives, for \(x,y\in [0,1]\), \(x\leq y\),

$$ \begin{aligned} \bigl\vert \bigl(L_{n}^{Q}f \bigr) (y)-\bigl(L_{n}^{Q}f\bigr) (x) \bigr\vert &\leq \frac{1}{b_{n}(1)}\sum_{k=0}^{n}\sum _{l=0}^{n-k}B_{nkl}(x,y) \biggl\vert f \biggl(\frac{k+l}{n} \biggr)-f \biggl(\frac{k}{n} \biggr) \biggr\vert \\ &\leq \frac{1}{b_{n}(1)}\sum_{k=0}^{n} \sum_{l=0}^{n-k}B_{nkl}(x,y) \omega \biggl(f;\frac{l}{n} \biggr) \\ &\leq \frac{1}{b_{n}(1)}\sum_{k=0}^{n} \sum_{l=0}^{n-k}B_{nkl}(x,y) \omega \biggl(\frac{l}{n} \biggr) \\ &= \frac{1}{b_{n}(1)}\sum_{l=0}^{n} \binom {n }{l}b_{l}(y-x)b_{n-l}\bigl(1-(y-x)\bigr) \omega \biggl(\frac{l}{n} \biggr) \\ &=L_{n}^{Q}(\omega ;y-x), \end{aligned} $$

namely,

$$ \omega \bigl(L_{n}^{Q}f;y-x\bigr)\leq L_{n}^{Q}(\omega ;y-x). $$

From [23], we see that, if \(f(x)\) is concave (upper convex) on \([0,1]\), then

$$ L_{n}^{Q}(f;x)\leq B_{n}(f;x)\leq f(x),\quad x\in [0,1], $$

therefore

$$ \omega \bigl(L_{n}^{Q}f;y-x\bigr)\leq \omega (y-x), $$

which means that \(\omega (L_{n}^{Q}f;h)\leq {\omega (h)}\), that is, \(L_{n}^{Q}f\in H^{\omega }\). This completes the proof. □

In particular, on taking \(\omega (h)=h^{\alpha }\), by Theorem 3.2 we have the following result, which can be found in [27, 30].

Corollary 2

Let \(L_{n}^{Q}\in \mathcal {B}\). If \(f\in \operatorname {Lip}_{M}\alpha \), then so is \(L_{n}^{Q}f\).

Theorem 3.3

If f is upper semi-additive (lower semi-additive) on \([0,1]\), then so is \(L_{n}^{Q}f\), for all \(n\geq 1\).

Proof

By the lemma and the upper semi-additivity of f, we have

$$\begin{aligned} L_{n}^{Q}f(y)&= \frac{1}{b_{n}(1)}\sum_{k=0}^{n}\sum _{l=0}^{n-k}B_{nkl}(x,y)f \biggl(\frac{k+l}{n} \biggr) \\ &\leq \frac{1}{b_{n}(1)}\sum_{k=0}^{n} \sum_{l=0}^{n-k}B_{nkl}(x,y) \biggl[f \biggl(\frac{k}{n} \biggr)+f \biggl(\frac{l}{n} \biggr) \biggr] \\ &= \frac{1}{b_{n}(1)}\sum_{k=0}^{n} \sum_{l=0}^{n-k}B_{nkl}(x,y)f \biggl( \frac{k}{n}\biggr) + \frac{1}{b_{n}(1)}\sum _{k=0}^{n} \sum_{l=0}^{n-k}B_{nkl}(x,y)f \biggl(\frac{l}{n} \biggr) \\ &=L_{n}^{Q}(f;x)+ \frac{1}{b_{n}(1)}\sum _{k=0}^{n}\sum_{l=0}^{n-k}B_{nkl}(x,y)f \biggl(\frac{l}{n} \biggr). \end{aligned}$$

By the definition of \(B_{nkl}(x,y)\) and exchanging the order of the sum, we have

$$ \frac{1}{b_{n}(1)}\sum_{k=0}^{n}\sum _{l=0}^{n-k}B_{nkl}(x,y)f\biggl( \frac{l}{n}\biggr)=L_{n}^{Q}(f;y-x). $$

Thus,

$$ L_{n}^{Q}f(y)\leq L_{n}^{Q}(f;x)+L_{n}^{Q}(f;y-x),\quad x,y\in [0,1], x \leq y, $$

from which one derives the binomial operators to preserve the upper semi-additivity. That completes the proof. □

Theorem 3.4

If \(\omega (h)\) be a continuous modulus function on \([0,1]\), then so is \(L_{n}^{Q}(\omega ;h)\), and \(L_{n}^{Q}(\omega ;h)\leq {2\omega (h)}\), for all \(n\geq 1\); if \(\omega (h)\) is concave (upper convex), then so is \(L_{n}^{Q}(\omega ;h)\), and \(L_{n}^{Q}(\omega ;h)\leq {\omega (h)}\), for all \(n\geq 1\).

Proof

From [4, 23] we know that, if \(\omega (h)\) is a continuous modulus function, then \(L_{n}^{Q}(\omega ;h)\) is continuous, non-decreasing and satisfying \(\lim_{h\rightarrow 0_{+}}L_{n}^{Q}(\omega ;h)=L_{n}^{Q}( \omega ;0)=\omega (0)=0\), for all \(n\geq 1\), and Theorem 3.3 tells us that \(L_{n}^{Q}(\omega ;h)\) is upper semi-additive for all \(n\geq 1\), so \(L_{n}^{Q}(\omega ;h)\) is a continuous modulus function on \([0,1]\), for all \(n\geq 1\).

If \(\omega (h)\) is concave, it follows from [23, Theorem 2.4] that \(L_{n}^{Q}(\omega ;h)\) is concave and \(L_{n}^{Q}(\omega ;h)\leq B_{n}(\omega ;h)\leq \omega (h)\). However, if \(\omega (h)\) is not concave, then, by [37, Lemma 7.1.5], there is a concave continuous modulus function \(\omega ^{\ast }(h)\) such that

$$ \omega (h) \leq \omega ^{\ast }(h) \leq 2\omega (h). $$

Hence,

$$ L_{n}^{Q}(\omega ;h)\leq L_{n}^{Q} \bigl(\omega ^{\ast };h\bigr)\leq \omega ^{\ast }(h) \leq 2 \omega (h). $$

This finishes the proof. Along the same lines, we may prove that binomial operators preserve lower semi-additivity. □

As an application of these theorems above, in the following we give several specific cases.

Case 3.1

If the delta operator \(Q=D\) (ordinary differential operator), then the associated sequence of binomial polynomials is \(\{x^{n}\}\), that is, \(b_{k}(x)=x^{k}\), therefore the corresponding binomial operator is

$$ L_{n}^{D}(f;x)=\sum_{k=0}^{n} \binom {n }{k}x^{k}(1-x)^{n-k}f\biggl( \frac{k}{n}\biggr),\quad f\in C[0,1]. $$

As is well known, this is the case of the famous Bernstein operators. In this case, Theorems 3.13.4 as well as their corollaries hold for the binomial operators \(L_{n}^{D}\).

Case 3.2

If the delta operator \(Q=\triangle =e^{D}-I\) (forward difference operator), then the corresponding binomial operators are

$$ L_{n}^{\triangle }=\frac{1}{n!} \sum _{k=0}^{n} f \biggl( \frac{k}{n} \biggr) \binom {n }{k} \prod_{i=0}^{k-1}(x+i) \prod_{j=0}^{n-k-1}(1-x+j), $$

which are called Stancu operators [36]. Since the sequence of binomial polynomials associated to is

$$ b_{n}(x)=(x)_{n}=x(x+1)\cdots (x+n-1),\quad n=0,1,\ldots , $$

which implies \(L_{n}^{\triangle }\in \mathcal {B}\), Theorems 3.13.4 as well as their corollaries hold for all for the binomial operators \(L_{n}^{\triangle }\).

Remark 1

Since when the delta operator \(Q=\nabla =I-e^{-D}\) (back difference operator), associated to which is the sequence of binomial polynomials \(b_{n}(x)=[x]_{n}=x(x-1)\cdots (x-n+1)\), \(n=0,1,\ldots \) , the corresponding binomial operators \(L_{n}^{\nabla }\) are not well defined, in this case being replaced by (see [40])

$$ \bigl(L_{n}^{\nabla }f\bigr) (x)=\frac{1}{b_{n}(n)}\sum _{k=0}^{n}\binom {n }{k}b_{k}(nx)b_{n-k}(n-nx)f \biggl( \frac{k}{n}\biggr),\quad f\in C[0,1]. $$

Obviously, it is not positive, therefore Theorems 3.13.4 as well as their corollaries are no longer true for the binomial operators \(L_{n}^{\nabla }\).

Case 3.3

If the delta operator \(Q=T=\ln (I+D)\) (Touchard operator), then

$$ t_{n}(x)=e^{-x} \sum_{k=0}^{\infty } \frac{k^{n}}{k!}x^{k} $$

is the sequence of binomial polynomials associated to T, which implies \(L_{n}^{T}\in \mathcal {B}\), therefore Theorems 3.13.4 as well as their corollaries hold all for this binomial operator.

Remark 2

Here the results in Cases 3.2 and 3.3 are new. Binomial operators preserving star-shape and shape under the average we may study elsewhere.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

References

  1. 1.

    Adell, J.A., de la Cal, J.: Bernstein-type operators diminish the φ-variation. Constr. Approx. 12, 489–507 (1996)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Adell, J.A., Palomares, A.P.: Best constants in preservation inequalities concerning the first modulus and Lipschitz classes for Bernstein-type operator. J. Approx. Theory 93, 128–139 (1998)

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Adell, J.A., Perez-Pulomares, P.: Stochastic orders in preservation properties by Bernstein-type operators. Adv. Appl. Probab. 31, 492–509 (1999)

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Agratini, O.: Binomial polynomials and their applications in approximation theory. Conf. Semin. Mat. Univ. Bari 281, 1–22 (2001)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Bell, E.T.: Invariant sequences. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 14(12), 901–904 (1929)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Bernstein, S.N.: Démonstration du théoréme de Weierstrass, fondeé sur le calcul des probabilityés. Commun. Soc. Math. Kharkow (2) 13, 1–2 (1912–13)

  7. 7.

    Brown, B.M., Elliott, D., Paget, D.F.: Lipschitz constants for the Bernstein polynomials of a Lipschitz continuous function. J. Approx. Theory 49(2), 196–199 (1987)

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Cal, J., Cárcamo, J.: On certain best constants for Bernstein-type operators. J. Approx. Theory 113, 189–206 (2001)

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Carbone, I.: Shape proserving properties of some positive linear operators on unbounded intervals. J. Approx. Theory 93, 140–156 (1998)

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Crǎciun, M.: Approximation operators constructed by means of Sheffer sequences. Rev. Anal. Numér. Théor. Approx. 30(2), 135–150 (2001)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Devore, R.A., Lorentze, G.G.: Constructive Approximation. Springer, Berlin (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Gal, S.G., Gupta, V.: Quantitative estimates for a new complex Durrmeyer operator in compact disks. Appl. Math. Comput. 218(6), 2944–2951 (2011)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Gupta, V., Aral, A.: Bernstein Durrmeyer operators based on two parameters. Facta Univ., Ser. Math. Inform. 31(1), 79–95 (2016)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Ioan, G.: On global smoothness preservation by Bernstein operators. J. Comput. Anal. Appl. 3(3), 249–257 (2001)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Ismail, M.: Polynomials of binomial type and approximation theory. J. Approx. Theory 23, 177–186 (1978)

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Khan, M.K.: On the monotonicity of positive linear operators. J. Approx. Theory 92, 22–37 (1998)

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Khan, M.K., Vecchia, B.D., Fassih, A.: On the monotonicity of positive linear operators. J. Approx. Theory 92, 22–37 (1998)

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Khna, M.K., Peters, M.A.: Lipschitz constants for some approximation operators of Lipschitz continuous. J. Approx. Theory 59, 307–315 (1989)

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Knoop, H.B., Zhou, X.-L.: The lower estimate for linear positive (II). Results Math. 25, 315–330 (1994)

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Li, Z.-K.: Bernstein polynomials and modulus of continuity. J. Approx. Theory 102, 171–174 (2000)

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Lorentz, G.G.: Bernstein Polynomials. University of Toronto Press, Toronto (1953)

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Lupas, A.: Approximation operators of binomial type. In: New Developments in Approximation Theory (Dortmund, 1998). International Series of Numerical Mathematics, vol. 132, pp. 175–198. Birkhäuser, Basel (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Lupas, A.: Approximation Operators of Binomial Type. International Series of Numerical Mathematics, vol. 132, pp. 175–198 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Lupas, L., Lupas, A.: Polynomials of binomial type and approximation operators. Stud. Univ. Babeş–Bolyai, Math. 32(4), 61–69 (1987)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Moldovan, G.: Generalizations of the S.N. Bernstein operators. Ph.D. thesis, Cluj Napoca, Romania (1971)

  26. 26.

    Mullin, R., Rota, G.C.: On the foundations of combinatorial theory (III), theory of binomial enumeration. In: Graph Theory and Its Applications, pp. 167–213. Academic Press, New York (1970)

    Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Popoviciu, T.: Remarques sur les polynômes binomiaux. Bull. Soc. Sci. Cluj (Rom.) 6, 146–148 (1931)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Popoviciu, T.: Sur l’approximation des fonctions convexs d’ordre supérieur. Mathematica 10, 49–54 (1935)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Popoviciu, T.: About the Best Polynomial Approximation of Continuous Functions. Mathematical Monography. Sect. Mat. Uni. Cluj, fasc. (III), vol. 22 (1937)

  30. 30.

    Roman, S.M.: The Umbral Calculus. Academic Press, New York (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Roman, S.M.: The umbral calculus. In: Advanced Linear Algebra, vol. 27, pp. 95–188. Springer, New York (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Roman, S.M., Rota, G.C.: The umbral calculus. Adv. Math. 27(2), 95–188 (1978)

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Rota, G.C., Kahaner, D., Odlyzko, A.: Finite operator calculus. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 42, 685–760 (1973)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Rota, G.C., Shen, J.-H., Taylor, B.D.: All polynomials of binomial type are represented by Abel polynomials. Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa, Cl. Sci. 25(4), 731–738 (1997)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Sablonnier, P.: Positive Bernstein–Sheffer operators. J. Approx. Theory 83, 330–341 (1995)

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Stancu, D.D., Occorsio, M.R.: On approximation by binomial operators of Tiberiu Popviciu type. Rev. Anal. Numér. Théor. Approx. 27(1), 167–181 (1998)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Sun, Y.-S.: Approximation Theory of Functions, vol. I. Beijing Normal University Press, Beijing (1989) (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Totik, V.: Approximation by Bernstein polynomials. Am. J. Math. 116(4), 995–1018 (1994)

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Zhang, C.-G.: Shape preserving properties of the Szász–Kantorovich operators. Acta Math. Appl. Sin. 28(3), 497–505 (2005)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Zhang, C.-G., Wang, S.-F.: Structure properties for binomial operators. J. Funct. Spaces 2019, Article ID 5483451 (2019)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Zhang, C.-G., Zhu, Z.-H.: Preservation properties of the Baskakov–Kantorovich operators. Comput. Math. Appl. 57, 1450–1455 (2009)

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the referee for careful review of the manuscript and useful proposals to improve the paper.

Funding

Supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China (11671271).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

All of this manuscript was equally contributed to by the authors. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chungou Zhang.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

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/.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, C., Meng, X. & Zhang, J. On preservation of binomial operators. J Inequal Appl 2021, 50 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13660-021-02579-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Bernstein operators
  • Delta operators
  • Binomial operators
  • Binary representation
  • Preservation
  • Smoothness
  • Semi-additivity
\