Preserving properties of subordination and superordination of analytic functions involving the Wright generalized hypergeometric function (Q2868769)
From MaRDI portal
| This is the item page for this Wikibase entity, intended for internal use and editing purposes. Please use this page instead for the normal view: scientific article |
scientific article; zbMATH DE number 6239450
| Language | Label | Description | Also known as |
|---|---|---|---|
| English | Preserving properties of subordination and superordination of analytic functions involving the Wright generalized hypergeometric function |
scientific article; zbMATH DE number 6239450 |
Statements
19 December 2013
0 references
analytic function
0 references
subordination
0 references
superordination
0 references
Wright generalized hypergeometric function
0 references
Preserving properties of subordination and superordination of analytic functions involving the Wright generalized hypergeometric function (English)
0 references
In the paper some subordination and superordination preserving results are obtained. These results are of the following type. Let \(\theta_p^{l,m}[\alpha_1,A_1,B_1]f(z)\) be the Dziok-Raina-Srivastava operator [\textit{J. Dziok} et al., Proc. Jangjeon Math. Soc. 7, No. 1, 43--55 (2004; Zbl 1060.30017)]. Let \(f\), \(g\) be analytic \(p\)-valent functions and let NEWLINE\[NEWLINE \mathfrak{Re}\left\{1+\frac{z\phi''(z)}{\phi'(z)}\right\}>-\delta, NEWLINE\]NEWLINE where NEWLINE\[NEWLINE \phi(z)=\left(\frac{\theta_p^{l,m}[\alpha_1+1,A_1,B_1]g(z)}{\theta_p^{l,m}[\alpha_1,A_1,B_1]g(z)}\right) \left(\frac{\theta_p^{l,m}[\alpha_1,A_1,B_1]g(z)}{z^p}\right)^\mu\;\;(\mu>0; |z|<1), NEWLINE\]NEWLINE and where \(\alpha_1\), \(A_1\), \(\ldots\), \(\alpha_l\), \(A_l\) and \(\beta_1\), \(B_1\), \(\ldots\), \(\beta_m\), \(B_m\) (\(l,m\) positive integer) are positive real parameters such that \(1+B_1+\ldots+B_m-(A_1+\ldots+A_l)>0\), and \(\delta\) is given by NEWLINE\[NEWLINE \delta=\frac{A_1^2+\mu^2\alpha_1^2-|A_1^2-\mu^2\alpha_1^2|}{4\mu A_1\alpha_1}. NEWLINE\]NEWLINE Then the subordination condition NEWLINE\[NEWLINE \left(\frac{\theta_p^{l,m}[\alpha_1+1,A_1,B_1]f(z)}{\theta_p^{l,m}[\alpha_1,A_1,B_1]f(z)}\right) \left(\frac{\theta_p^{l,m}[\alpha_1,A_1,B_1]f(z)}{z^p}\right)^\mu\prec NEWLINE\]NEWLINE NEWLINE\[NEWLINE \left(\frac{\theta_p^{l,m}[\alpha_1+1,A_1,B_1]g(z)}{\theta_p^{l,m}[\alpha_1,A_1,B_1]g(z)}\right) \left(\frac{\theta_p^{l,m}[\alpha_1,A_1,B_1]g(z)}{z^p}\right)^\mu NEWLINE\]NEWLINE implies that NEWLINE\[NEWLINE \left(\frac{\theta_p^{l,m}[\alpha_1,A_1,B_1]f(z)}{z^p}\right)^\mu\prec \left(\frac{\theta_p^{l,m}[\alpha_1,A_1,B_1]g(z)}{z^p}\right)^\mu NEWLINE\]NEWLINE and the function NEWLINE\[NEWLINE \left(\frac{\theta_p^{l,m}[\alpha_1,A_1,B_1]g(z)}{z^p}\right)^\mu NEWLINE\]NEWLINE is the best dominant.
0 references