Priyanka Goel
Department of Applied Mathematics, Delhi Technological University, Delhi–110042, India
priyanka.goel0707@gmail.com and S. Sivaprasad Kumar∗Department of Applied Mathematics, Delhi Technological University, Delhi–110042, India
spkumar@dce.ac.in
Abstract.
In the present investigation, we study the class of Sigmoid starlike functions, given by
in context of estimating the sharp radius constants associated with several known subclasses of starlike functions. Further, graphical validation for the sharpness of results is also provided.
∗Corresponding Author
The first author is supported by The Council of Scientific and Industrial Research(CSIR). Ref.No.:08/133(0018)/2017-EMR-I.
1. Introduction
Let be the class of analytic functions defined on , satisfying and
of the form
We denote by and let be the class of univalent functions. For the functions and we say that is subordinate to written as if it is possible to write for some Schwarz function Let and denote respectively the class of starlike and convex functions. Note that if we consider the class of starlike and convex functions are denoted by and respectively. For we now define the Carathéodory class containing functions of the form with on Using subordination, Ma and Minda [11] defined a general subclass of starlike functions, given by For different choices of authors have defined several subclasses of and examined these classes for different geometric properties. These classes will be described in the text wherever needed. In 2020, we introduced the class of Sigmoid starlike functions by taking the Modified Sigmoid function and denote it by [3]. The image of under the Modified Sigmoid function is denoted by . In [3], we present some basic geometry of this function, prove several inclusion relationships, obtain some coefficient bounds, and study mainly first-order differential subordination results. Later in [8], we proved various second and third order differential subordination results for Sigmoid starlike functions. Soon the class gained popularity and attracted many authors to study further in context of various aspects such as coefficient problems and convolution results (see [6, 13]). In continuation of these works, we now investigate for radius problems. We present in this paper, radius estimates for in conjunction with a bunch of other subclasses of starlike functions. Further, we consider certain families of analytic functions, which are characterized by the ratio of its functions with a specific function and obtain - radius for these families. We extensively use the following lemma in order to prove our main results:
The result follows with sharpness due to the function given by
∎
Corollary 2.4.
The sharp -radius for is The bound is sharp for
Corollary 2.5.
The sharp -radius for is The bound is sharp for
Before we proceed to our next result, we need to recall the following classes:
For the class defined by Kargar et al. [5]. In [7], Khatter et al. generalized
and to and respectively, for .
Theorem 2.6.
The radius estimates of Sigmoid starlikeness, for the classes and are given by
, where
In particular,
where In particular,
All estimates are sharp.
Proof.
(i)
Let Then and thus
Using Lemma 1.1, it can be said that the above disk lies in if This further implies Sharpness holds for the function
It can be verified with the following graph that touches the boundary of at the points Note that the domain denotes the image of mapped by the function
Sharpness for
Sharpness for
Figure 1.
(ii)
Let then and therefore on
By Lemma 1.1, it is clear that for the above disk to lie in we need which upon simplification yields Note that for the function
the result is sharp. The sharpness of this result can be verified by the following graph, where denotes the image of mapped by .
Sharpness for
Sharpness for
Figure 2.
(iii)
Let then So on
By Lemma 1.1, if which is equivalent to The result is sharp for the function
and is validated by the following graph. The image of mapped by is denoted by .
Sharpness for
Sharpness for
Figure 3.
∎
Before we proceed further, let us recall the following classes: In [14], Mendiratta et al. considered the class of starlike functions associated with right lemniscate of Bernoulli, denoted by where is given by
The class of cardioid starlike functions, denoted by defined by Sharma et al. [18]. For Kumar and Ravichandran [10] introduced by taking as
Theorem 2.7.
The sharp -radius for the classes and is given by:
which is equivalent to This result is sharp for the following function
where
The sharpness of this bound can be verified from Figure 4(i).
(ii)
Let then we have Therefore on we get
which if not exceeds implies that lies in by Lemma 1.1. Solving this, we get In order to verify the sharpness of this result, we consider the following function.
Clearly and moreover touches the boundary of at the point as shown in Figure 4(ii).
(iii)
Let then
where Thus on
In view of Lemma 1.1, if Solving this inequality, we obtain . The equality of the radius estimate holds for the function
Figure 4(iii) verifies the sharpness of the result. Note that and denote the image of mapped by for and repectively.
Figure 4.
∎
Let us recall the following classes in order to obtain our next result. By taking , Sharma et al. [19] introduced Similarly, Kumar and Gangania [9] intoduced by taking as the cardioid function.
Theorem 2.8.
The sharp radii for the classes and is given by
where is the smallest positive root of the equation
Proof.
Let then Therefore on
Now by using Lemma 1.1, the above disk lies inside the domain if Solving this equation, we obtain the desired bound of The result is sharp for the function
Let then it is clear that So we have
By using Lemma 1.1, we can say that if which is equivalent to The sharpness of the result can be verified by the function The following graph depicts the sharpness of both the estimates. Note that the image of mapped by and are respectively denoted by and
Sharpness of
Sharpness of
Figure 5.
∎
Now we consider the following classes for our next result. The class defined by Wani and Swaminathan [21] by taking as and the class , introduced by Cho et al. [2].
Theorem 2.9.
The -radius for the classes and is given by:
which is the smallest positive root of the equation
Proof.
Let then Thus on
which if, not greater than is sufficient to conclude that by Lemma 1.1. Note that for the above inequality holds and hence the result.
Let then So on we have
Now by using Lemma 1.1, we observe that for to belong to it is sufficient to prove that Solving this inequality, we obtain the desired result.
∎
Further let us consider the classes, introduced by Ali et al. [1], defined as follows:
Theorem 2.10.
The radius of the class is given by
The estimate is sharp.
Proof.
Let then there exists such that
By Lemma 2.2, we have on the following inequalities
(2.2)
Further, note that which upon logarithmic differentiation yields
By Lemma 1.1, it is clear that if the quantity does not exceed This leads us to Solving this inequality, we obtain The sharpness of the bound can be verified by the functions
Clearly and which belongs to So and
The image domain of mapped by touches the boundary of at the points
∎
Theorem 2.11.
The radius of the class is given by
The estimate is sharp.
Proof.
Let Now, let us define
so that where and From (2.3) and Lemma 2.2, we have
In view of Lemma 1.1, is a member of if Equivalently, Solving this inequality, we obtain The sharpness of the bound can be verified by the functions
Clearly and Hence is a member of and
The radius estimate is sharp since maps onto a domain which touches the boundary of at
∎
In order to prove it suffices to show that in view of Lemma 1.1. This inequality reduces to Solving this, we obtain The sharpness of the bound can be verified by the functions
Note that
which implies that Moreover, it can be observed that the domain touches the boundary of at
∎
Theorem 2.13.
The radius of the class is given by
The estimate is sharp.
Proof.
Let Now, suppose where is a convex function.
As deduced in the last theorem, we know that By using Lemma 2.2, we obtain
For each the quantity is less than 1 and thus Lemma 1.1 implies that provided
This inequality reduces to
Solving this inequality, we obtain The functions
validate the sharpness of the bound. Note that and which implies Moreover, it can be observed that maps onto a domain that touches the boundary of at
∎
For Reade [16] introduced the class of close-to-starlike functions of type given by
Theorem 2.14.
The sharp radius for the class is given by
Proof.
Let Then there is some function such that Using Lemma 2.2, we get
Let then there exists some such that Using Lemma 2.2, we have
This further implies that
Now, by using 1.1 it follows that provided This inequality, after a few steps, reduces to the following
Solving this inequality gives us The sharpness of the result can be verified by the function Clearly this function satisfy and thus
Also, at the points the function touches the boundary of
∎
For the class introduced by Uralegaddi et al. [20] is given by
In terms of subordination, the above class can be written as
Theorem 2.16.
The radius for the class is given by
The result is sharp for the function
The proof of the above theorem is omitted here as it is much similar to the proof of Theorem 2.14.
Next we consider the class of convex functions of order Note that this class is a generalization of the class which can be obtained by setting
Theorem 2.17.
Let then f is convex of order in where is the smallest positive root of
Proof.
Let then and thus there exists a function with and such that
Differentiating the above equation logarithmically, we obtain
Note that
which is greater than provided The result is sharp for the function
∎
Corollary 2.18.
The sharp radius of convexity for the functions in is
References
[1]R. M. Ali, N. K. Jain and V. Ravichandran, On the radius constants for classes of analytic functions, Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. (2) 36 (2013), no. 1, 23–38.
[2]N. E. Cho, V. Kumar, S. S. Kumar and V. Ravichandran, Radius problems for starlike functions associated with the sine function, Bull. Iranian Math. Soc. 45 (2019), no. 1, 213–232.
[3]P. Goel and S. Sivaprasad Kumar,Certain class of starlike functions associated with modified sigmoid function, Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. 43 (2020), no. 1, 957–991.
[4]W. Janowski, Extremal problems for a family of functions with positive real part and for some related families, Ann. Polon. Math. 23 (1970/71), 159–177.
[5]R. Kargar, A. Ebadian and J. Sokół, On Booth lemniscate and starlike functions, Anal. Math. Phys. 9 (2019), no. 1, 143–154.
[6]M. G. Khan, B. Ahmad, G. Murugusundaramoorthy, R. Chinram, and W. K. Mashwani, Applications of modified sigmoid functions to a class of starlike functions, J. Funct. Spaces 2020, doi.org/10.1155/2020/8844814
[7]K. Khatter, V. Ravichandran and S. Sivaprasad Kumar, Starlike functions associated with exponential function and the lemniscate of Bernoulli, Rev. R. Acad. Cienc. Exactas Fís. Nat. Ser. A Mat. RACSAM 113 (2019), no. 1, 233–253.
[8]S. S. Kumar and P. Goel, Starlike functions and higher order differential subordinations, Rev. R. Acad. Cienc. Exactas Fís. Nat. Ser. A Mat. RACSAM 114 (2020), no. 4, Paper No. 192, 23 pp.
[9]S. S. Kumar and G. Kamaljeet, A cardioid domain and starlike functions, Anal. Math. Phys. 11 (2021), no. 2, Paper No. 54, 34 pp.
[10] S. Kumar and V. Ravichandran, A subclass of starlike functions associated with a rational function, Southeast Asian Bull. Math. 40 (2016), no. 2, 199–212.
[11]W. C. Ma and D. Minda, A unified treatment of some special classes of univalent functions, in Proceedings of the Conference on Complex Analysis (Tianjin, 1992), 157–169, Conf. Proc. Lecture Notes Anal., I, Int. Press, Cambridge, MA.
[12]T. H. MacGregor, The radius of univalence of certain analytic functions, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 14 (1963), 514–520.
[13]W. K. Mashwani, B. Ahmad, N. Khan, M. G. Khan, S. Arjika, B. Khan and R. Chinram, Fourth Hankel determinant for a subclass of starlike functions based on modified sigmoid, J. Funct. Spaces 2021, doi.org/10.1155/2021/6116172
[14]R. Mendiratta, S. Nagpal and V. Ravichandran, A subclass of starlike functions associated with left-half of the lemniscate of Bernoulli, Internat. J. Math. 25 (2014), no. 9, 1450090, 17 pp.
[15]V. Ravichandran, F. Rønning and T. N. Shanmugam, Radius of convexity and radius of starlikeness for some classes of analytic functions, Complex Variables Theory Appl. 33 (1997), no. 1-4, 265–280.
[16]M. O. Reade, On close-to-convex univalent functions, Michigan Math. J. 3 (1955), 59–62.
[17] G. M. Shah, On the univalence of some analytic functions, Pacific J. Math. 43 (1972), 239–250.
[18]K. Sharma, N. K. Jain and V. Ravichandran, Starlike functions associated with a cardioid, Afr. Mat. 27 (2016), no. 5-6, 923–939.
[19]P. Sharma, R. K. Raina and J. Sokół, Certain Ma-Minda type classes of analytic functions associated with the crescent-shaped region, Anal. Math. Phys. 9 (2019), no. 4, 1887–1903.
[20]B. A. Uralegaddi, M. D. Ganigi and S. M. Sarangi, Univalent functions with positive coefficients, Tamkang J. Math. 25 (1994), no. 3, 225–230.
[21]L. A. Wani and A. Swaminathan, Starlike and convex functions associated with a nephroid domain, Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. 44 (2021), no. 1, 79–104.