How to prove that derivatives alternate in sign?

**bkarpuz** · September 13th 2009, 05:08 AM

Dear friends, I need with the following problem.

Let $f(z):=\exp\bigg\{-\int_{0}^{1}\frac{\log(1+t z)}{t}\mathrm{d}t\bigg\}$ for $z\geq0$ .
Then, I need to prove that $(-1)^{k}f^{k}(z)\geq0$ for all $k\in\mathbb{N}$ and all $z\geq0$ .

Any help due to this direction would be very appreciated.

**Opalg** · September 14th 2009, 12:23 PM

Originally Posted by bkarpuz

Dear friends, I need with the following problem.

Let $f(z):=\exp\bigg\{-\int_{0}^{1}\frac{\log(1+t z)}{t}\mathrm{d}t\bigg\}$ for $z\geq0$ .
Then, I need to prove that $(-1)^{k}f^{k}(z)\geq0$ for all $k\in\mathbb{N}$ and all $z\geq0$ .

Any help due to this direction would be very appreciated.

This looks like a difficult and interesting problem. Obviously f(z), being an exponential, is always positive (for z>0, which I'll assume throughout). Also, $f'(z) = -z^{-1}\log(1+z)\cdot f(z)$ , which is always negative.

The second derivative is given by $f''(z) = z^{-2}\Bigl(\log(1+z) - \frac z{1+z} + \bigl(\log(1+z)\bigl)^2\Bigr)f(z)$ . This is always positive, because the function $g(z) = \log(1+z) - \frac z{1+z}$ is always positive (g(0)=0, and $g'(z) = \frac z{(1+z)^2}$ , which is positive, so g is an increasing function and therefore positive).

So even for n=2 the result is not altogether easy, and for n≥3 it gets very messy. Clearly some new idea is needed to deal with the general case.

**bkarpuz** · September 19th 2009, 10:56 PM

Originally Posted by Opalg

This looks like a difficult and interesting problem. Obviously f(z), being an exponential, is always positive (for z>0, which I'll assume throughout). Also, $f'(z) = -z^{-1}\log(1+z)\cdot f(z)$ , which is always negative.

The second derivative is given by $f''(z) = z^{-2}\Bigl(\log(1+z) - \frac z{1+z} + \bigl(\log(1+z)\bigl)^2\Bigr)f(z)$ . This is always positive, because the function $g(z) = \log(1+z) - \frac z{1+z}$ is always positive (g(0)=0, and $g'(z) = \frac z{(1+z)^2}$ , which is positive, so g is an increasing function and therefore positive).

So even for n=2 the result is not altogether easy, and for n≥3 it gets very messy. Clearly some new idea is needed to deal with the general case.

It looks hard when we do as you have shown.
With the additionional assumption $1-tz>0$ for all $t\in[0,1]$ (or equivalently $z<1$ ), we can use the Taylor expansions, i.e.,
$\mathrm{log}(1+u)=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^{k}}{k+1}u^{k+1}$ ....for all $u\in(-1,1]$
and
$\mathrm{exp}(u)=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\frac{1}{k!}u^{ k}$ ....for all $u\in(-\infty,\infty)$ .
Hence, for all $z\in[0,1)$ , we have
$f(z):=\exp\bigg\{-\int_{0}^{1}\frac{\log(1+t z)}{t}\mathrm{d}t\bigg\}$
${\color{white}{f(z)'}}=\exp\bigg\{-\int_{0}^{1}\frac{1}{t}\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^{k}}{k+1}\big(tz\big)^{k+1}\mathrm{d}t\bigg\}$
${\color{white}{f(z)'}}=\exp\bigg\{-\int_{0}^{1}\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^{k}}{k+1}z^{k+1}t^{k}\mathrm{d}t\bigg\}$ (we may reverse the order of the sum and the integral since the series converge uniformly)
${\color{white}{f(z)'}}=\exp\bigg\{\sum_{k=0}^{\inf ty}\frac{(-1)^{k+1}}{k+1}z^{k+1}\int_{0}^{1}t^{k}\mathrm{d}t\ bigg\}$
${\color{white}{f(z)'}}=\exp\bigg\{\sum_{k=0}^{\inf ty}\frac{(-1)^{k+1}}{(k+1)^{2}}z^{k}\bigg\}$
${\color{white}{f(z)'}}=\sum_{l=0}^{\infty}\frac{1} {l!}\Bigg(\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^{k+1}}{(k+1)^{2}}z^{k+1}\Bigg)^{l}.$
I have just jammed here.
There should be a way of rewriting this as follows:
$f(z):=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}c_{k}z^{k}$ ....for $z\in[0,1)$ .
Is there a formula for multiplication of power series for more than two?

I think by using that formula it will be possible to obtain the latter formula...

By the way, it is also okay for me to prove the claim on $[0,1)$ .

**bkarpuz** · September 20th 2009, 05:56 AM

(Continued). hmm, I have done something but seems more complicated now.

For all $z\in[0,1)$ , we have
$f(z)=\sum_{j=0}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^{j}}{j!}\bigg(\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^{i}}{(i+1)^{2}}z^{i}\bigg)^{j}z^{j}$ ....(apply Cauchy's multiplication formula for $j$ times)
.......' $=\sum_{j=0}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^{j}}{j!}\bigg(\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}(-1)^{i}\sum_{i_{1}=0}^{i}\sum_{i_{2}=0}^{i_{1}}$ $\cdots\sum_{i_{j-1}=0}^{i_{j-2}}\frac{1}{\big((i-i_{1})+1\big)^{2}\big((i_{1}-i_{2})+1\big)^{2}\cdots\big((i_{j-2}-i_{j-1})+1\big)^{2}\big(i_{j-1}+1\big)^{2}}z^{i}\bigg)z^{j}$
.......' $=\sum_{j=0}^{\infty}\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}\sum_{i_{1} =0}^{i}\sum_{i_{2}=0}^{i_{1}}\cdots\sum_{i_{j-1}=0}^{i_{j-2}}$ $\frac{(-1)^{i+j}}{j!\big((i-i_{1})+1\big)^{2}\big((i_{1}-i_{2})+1\big)^{2}\cdots\big((i_{j-2}-i_{j-1})+1\big)^{2}\big(i_{j-1}+1\big)^{2}}z^{i+j}$ ....(set $k:=i+j$ and $i_{0}:=j$ , then reverse the order of the sums)
.......' $=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\sum_{i_{0}=0}^{k}\sum_{i_{1}= 0}^{i_{0}}\sum_{i_{2}=0}^{i_{1}}\cdots\sum_{i_{i_{ 0}-1}=0}^{i_{i_{0}-2}}$ $\frac{(-1)^{k}}{i_{0}!\big((i_{0}-i_{1})+1\big)^{2}\big((i_{1}-i_{2})+1\big)^{2}\cdots\big((i_{i_{0}-2}-i_{i_{0}-1})+1\big)^{2}\big(i_{i_{0}-1}+1\big)^{2}}z^{k}.$
Any ideas at this point are welcome, thanks!

**Opalg** · September 21st 2009, 12:08 PM

Here are a few more thoughts on this intriguing problem. First,

$\int_0^1\frac{\log(1+tz)}tdt = \int_0^1\int_0^z\frac1{1+tx}dxdt = \int_0^z\Bigl[\frac{\log(1+tx)}x\Bigr]_0^1dx = \int_0^z\frac{\log(1+x)}xdx$

(reversing the order of integration in the double integral). Therefore

$f(z) = \exp\left\{-\int_0^1\frac{\log(1+tz)}tdt\right\} = \exp\left\{-\int_0^z\frac{\log(1+x)}xdx\right\}<br />$ .

Next, let A denote the set of all infinitely-differentiable function on the positive reals whose derivatives alternate in sign: $A := \{f\in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}_{>0})<img src=$ -1)^kf^{(k)}(x)>0\text{ for all }x>0\text{ and all }k\geqslant0\}" alt="A := \{f\in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}_{>0})

-1)^kf^{(k)}(x)>0\text{ for all }x>0\text{ and all }k\geqslant0\}" />.

Proposition. If $u\in A$ then $f(x) = \exp\bigl(-{\textstyle\int}u(x)\,dx\bigr) \in A$ .

Outline proof: The n'th derivative of f is of the form $f^{(n)}(x) = u_n(x)\exp\bigl(-{\textstyle\int}u(x)\,dx\bigr)$ , where $u_1(x) = -u(x)$ . Also, you can see by differentiating $f^{(n)}(x)$ that $u_{n+1}(x) = u_1(x)u_n(x) + u_n'(x)$ . It is then straightforward to prove by induction (using the condition $u\in A$ ) that the functions $u_n(x)$ alternate in sign, with $(-1)^{n-1}u_n(x)>0$ for all x>0 and all n.

It follows from that Proposition and the previous remarks that if the function $u(z) = z^{-1}\log(1+z)$ is in A then so is the function $f(z) = \exp\left\{-\int_0^1\frac{\log(1+tz)}tdt\right\}$ .

I suspect that the function u(z) is indeed in A, but I haven't been able to prove that. However, this seems like a step in the right direction, because u(z) is a considerably simpler-looking function than f(z).

One final thought: functions whose derivatives alternate in sign seem to occur in Boltzmann's approach to the theory of entropy. I wonder if that is where this problem originated?

**bkarpuz** · September 21st 2009, 12:20 PM

Originally Posted by Opalg

Here are a few more thoughts on this intriguing problem. First,

$\int_0^1\frac{\log(1+tz)}tdt = \int_0^1\int_0^z\frac1{1+tx}dxdt = \int_0^z\Bigl[\frac{\log(1+tx)}x\Bigr]_0^1dx = \int_0^z\frac{\log(1+x)}xdx$

(reversing the order of integration in the double integral). Therefore

$f(z) = \exp\left\{-\int_0^1\frac{\log(1+tz)}tdt\right\} = \exp\left\{-\int_0^z\frac{\log(1+x)}xdx\right\}<br />$ .

Next, let A denote the set of all infinitely-differentiable function on the positive reals whose derivatives alternate in sign: $A := \{f\in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}_{>0})<img src=$ -1)^kf^{(k)}(x)>0\text{ for all }x>0\text{ and all }k\geqslant0\}" alt="A := \{f\in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}_{>0})

-1)^kf^{(k)}(x)>0\text{ for all }x>0\text{ and all }k\geqslant0\}" />.

Proposition. If $u\in A$ then $f(x) = \exp\bigl(-{\textstyle\int}u(x)\,dx\bigr) \in A$ .

Outline proof: The n'th derivative of f is of the form $f^{(n)}(x) = u_n(x)\exp\bigl(-{\textstyle\int}u(x)\,dx\bigr)$ , where $u_1(x) = -u(x)$ . Also, you can see by differentiating $f^{(n)}(x)$ that $u_{n+1}(x) = u_1(x)u_n(x) + u_n'(x)$ . It is then straightforward to prove by induction (using the condition $u\in A$ ) that the functions $u_n(x)$ alternate in sign, with $(-1)^{n-1}u_n(x)>0$ for all x>0 and all n.

It follows from that Proposition and the previous remarks that if the function $u(z) = z^{-1}\log(1+z)$ is in A then so is the function $f(z) = \exp\left\{-\int_0^1\frac{\log(1+tz)}tdt\right\}$ .

I suspect that the function u(z) is indeed in A, but I haven't been able to prove that. However, this seems like a step in the right direction, because u(z) is a considerably simpler-looking function than f(z).

One final thought: functions whose derivatives alternate in sign seem to occur in Boltzmann's approach to the theory of entropy. I wonder if that is where this problem originated?

No, it is not related to Boltzmann's approach, I heard about this for the first time. May be I have to read about it...
By the way, is it your proposition, or did you find it somewhere else?

**bkarpuz** · September 21st 2009, 03:06 PM

Originally Posted by Opalg

Here are a few more thoughts on this intriguing problem. First,

$\int_0^1\frac{\log(1+tz)}tdt = \int_0^1\int_0^z\frac1{1+tx}dxdt = \int_0^z\Bigl[\frac{\log(1+tx)}x\Bigr]_0^1dx = \int_0^z\frac{\log(1+x)}xdx$

(reversing the order of integration in the double integral). Therefore

$f(z) = \exp\left\{-\int_0^1\frac{\log(1+tz)}tdt\right\} = \exp\left\{-\int_0^z\frac{\log(1+x)}xdx\right\}<br />$ .

Next, let A denote the set of all infinitely-differentiable function on the positive reals whose derivatives alternate in sign: $A := \{f\in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}_{>0})<img src=$ -1)^kf^{(k)}(x)>0\text{ for all }x>0\text{ and all }k\geqslant0\}" alt="A := \{f\in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}_{>0})

-1)^kf^{(k)}(x)>0\text{ for all }x>0\text{ and all }k\geqslant0\}" />.

Proposition. If $u\in A$ then $f(x) = \exp\bigl(-{\textstyle\int}u(x)\,dx\bigr) \in A$ .

Outline proof: The n'th derivative of f is of the form $f^{(n)}(x) = u_n(x)\exp\bigl(-{\textstyle\int}u(x)\,dx\bigr)$ , where $u_1(x) = -u(x)$ . Also, you can see by differentiating $f^{(n)}(x)$ that $u_{n+1}(x) = u_1(x)u_n(x) + u_n'(x)$ . It is then straightforward to prove by induction (using the condition $u\in A$ ) that the functions $u_n(x)$ alternate in sign, with $(-1)^{n-1}u_n(x)>0$ for all x>0 and all n.

Remark. This fails to hold for $n=1$ , i.e., $(-1)^{1-1}u_{1}=-u<0$ .

See the link the above discussion is mentioned to be a typo: http://www.mathhelpforum.com/math-he...594-post9.html

Originally Posted by bkarpuz

No, it is not related to Boltzmann's approach, I heard about this for the first time. May be I have to read about it...
By the way, is it your proposition, or did you find it somewhere else?

I now think that the proposition belongs to you (Opalg).

Just modified the proposition as follows.

Proposition 1. Let $u\in\mathcal{A}$ . Then $(-1)^{k}u_{k}>0$ for all $k\in\mathbb{N}$ , where
$u_{k}:=\begin{cases}1,&k=0\\ u_{k-1}^{\prime}-u_{k-1}u,&k\in\mathbb{N}\end{cases}$ ....on $[0,\infty)$ .

As Opalg mentioned that it is straight forward to prove Proposition 1 but it is a little bit tricky since the derivative of the preceding term appears in the recursion. But the following modification, which implies the one above, can be proved.

Proposition 2. Let $u\in\mathcal{A}$ , then $(-1)^{k}u_{k}\in\mathcal{A}$ for all $k\in\mathbb{N}$ .

Below, I would like to give the proof for those being interested with this problem (with the hope that myself and Opalg are not the only ones

).

Proof. Clearly, $(-1)u_{1}=u\in\mathcal{A}$ . Suppose now that $(-1)^{k}u_{k}\in\mathcal{A}$ for some $k\in\mathbb{N}$ , then for any $n\in\mathbb{N}_{0}$ , we have
$(-1)^{k+n+1}u_{k+1}^{(n)}=(-1)^{k+n+1}\big(u_{k}^{\prime}+u_{k}u_{1}\big)^{(n) }$
..................... $=(-1)^{k+n+1}\Big(u_{k}^{(n+1)}+\big(u_{k}u_{1}\big)^ {(n)}\Big)$
..................... $=(-1)^{k+n+1}\Bigg(u_{k}^{(n+1)}+\sum_{\ell=0}^{n}\bi nom{n}{\ell}u_{k}^{(\ell)}u_{1}^{(n-\ell)}\big)\Bigg)$
..................... $=(-1)^{k+n+1}u_{k}^{(n+1)}+\sum_{\ell=0}^{n}\binom{n} {\ell}\bigg((-1)^{k+\ell}u_{k}^{(\ell)}\bigg)\bigg((-1)^{1+n-\ell}u_{1}^{(n-\ell)}\bigg)\geq0,$
which proves $(-1)^{k+1}u_{k+1}\in\mathcal{A}$ .
The proof of the proposition is now complete. $\rule{0.3cm}{0.3cm}$

Corollary. If $u\in\mathcal{A}$ , then $u^{\ast}\in\mathcal{A}$ , where $u^{\ast}(z):=\exp\bigg\{-\int_{0}^{z}u(w)\mathrm{d}w\bigg\}$ for $z\geq0$ .

Proof. $(-1)^{n}\big(u^{\ast}\big)^{(n)}=(-1)^{n}u_{n}u^{\ast}>0$ for all $n\in\mathbb{N}_{0}$ . $\rule{0.3cm}{0.3cm}$

The last corollary is now applicable for the original problem.

For the rest of the proof see: http://www.mathhelpforum.com/math-he...495-post8.html

**Opalg** · September 22nd 2009, 02:26 AM

Okay, after a second sleepless night

I think I have cracked this problem.

According to my previous comment, we need to show that the function $f(x) = x^{-1}\log(1+x)$ is in the class $\mathcal A$ , namely $(-1)^nf^{(n)}(x)\geqslant0$ for all x>0 and all n.

By Leibniz's formula, $f^{(n)}(x) = \sum_{k=0}^n{n\choose k}\frac{d^{n-k}}{dx^{n-k}}\bigl(x^{-1}\bigr) \frac{d^k}{dx^k}\bigl(\log(1+x)\bigr)$ . But $\frac{d^k}{dx^k}\bigl(x^{-1}\bigr) = (-1)^kk!x^{-k-1}$ , and (for $k\geqslant1$ ) $\frac{d^k}{dx^k}\bigl(\log(1+x)\bigr) = (-1)^{k-1}(k-1)!(1+x)^{-k}$ . Therefore

$\begin{aligned}(-1)^nf^{(n)}(x) &= (-1)^n\biggl((-1)^nn!x^{-n-1}\log(1+x) \\ &\qquad\qquad + \sum_{k=1}^n{n\choose k}(-1)^{n-k}(n-k)!x^{k-n-1} (-1)^{k-1}(k-1)!(1+x)^{-k}\biggr) \\ &= n!x^{-n-1}\biggl(\log(1+x) - \sum_{k=1}^n\frac1k\Bigl(\frac x{1+x}\Bigr)^k\biggr).\end{aligned}$

So we need to show that the function $g(x) = \log(1+x) - \sum_{k=1}^n\frac1k\Bigl(\frac x{1+x}\Bigr)^k$ is positive for all x>0. But $g(0) = 0$ , so it will be sufficient to show that $g'(x)>0$ . Now $g'(x) = \frac1{1+x} - \sum_{k=1}^n\Bigl(\frac x{1+x}\Bigr)^{k-1}\frac1{(1+x)^2}$ , so the problem reduces to showing that $\sum_{k=1}^n\Bigl(\frac x{1+x}\Bigr)^{k-1} < 1+x$ . But that sum is less than the infinite sum $\sum_{k=0}^\infty\Bigl(\frac x{1+x}\Bigr)^k$ , which is a geometric series with sum $1+x$ .

That completes the proof that $f(x)\in\mathcal A$ .

**Opalg** · September 22nd 2009, 07:29 AM

Originally Posted by bkarpuz

Originally Posted by Opalg

Proposition. If $u\in A$ then $f(x) = \exp\bigl(-{\textstyle\int}u(x)\,dx\bigr) \in A$ .

Outline proof: The n'th derivative of f is of the form $f^{(n)}(x) = u_n(x)\exp\bigl(-{\textstyle\int}u(x)\,dx\bigr)$ , where $u_1(x) = -u(x)$ . Also, you can see by differentiating $f^{(n)}(x)$ that $u_{n+1}(x) = u_1(x)u_n(x) + u_n'(x)$ . It is then straightforward to prove by induction (using the condition $\color{red}u\in A$ ) that the functions $\color{red}u_n(x)$ alternate in sign, with $\color{red}(-1)^{n-1}u_n(x)>0$ for all x>0 and all n.

Remark. This fails to hold for $n=1$ , i.e., $(-1)^{1-1}u_{1}=-u<0$ .

Sorry, that was careless. I should have written $(-1)^{n}u_n(x)>0$ for all x>0 and all n. The Proposition should still be true, and tthe outline proof (with that modification) should still work.

**bkarpuz** · September 22nd 2009, 12:15 PM

Originally Posted by Opalg

Okay, after a second sleepless night

I think I have cracked this problem.

According to my previous comment, we need to show that the function $f(x) = x^{-1}\log(1+x)$ is in the class $\mathcal A$ , namely $(-1)^nf^{(n)}(x)\geqslant0$ for all x>0 and all n.

By Leibniz's formula, $f^{(n)}(x) = \sum_{k=0}^n{n\choose k}\frac{d^{n-k}}{dx^{n-k}}\bigl(x^{-1}\bigr) \frac{d^k}{dx^k}\bigl(\log(1+x)\bigr)$ . But $\frac{d^k}{dx^k}\bigl(x^{-1}\bigr) = (-1)^kk!x^{-k-1}$ , and (for $k\geqslant1$ ) $\frac{d^k}{dx^k}\bigl(\log(1+x)\bigr) = (-1)^{k-1}(k-1)!(1+x)^{-k}$ . Therefore

$\begin{aligned}(-1)^nf^{(n)}(x) &= (-1)^n\biggl((-1)^nn!x^{-n-1}\log(1+x) \\ &\qquad\qquad + \sum_{k=1}^n{n\choose k}(-1)^{n-k}(n-k)!x^{k-n-1} (-1)^{k-1}(k-1)!(1+x)^{-k}\biggr) \\ &= n!x^{-n-1}\biggl(\log(1+x) - \sum_{k=1}^n\frac1k\Bigl(\frac x{1+x}\Bigr)^k\biggr).\end{aligned}$

So we need to show that the function $g(x) = \log(1+x) - \sum_{k=1}^n\frac1k\Bigl(\frac x{1+x}\Bigr)^k$ is positive for all x>0. But $g(0) = 0$ , so it will be sufficient to show that $g'(x)>0$ . Now $g'(x) = \frac1{1+x} - \sum_{k=1}^n\Bigl(\frac x{1+x}\Bigr)^{k-1}\frac1{(1+x)^2}$ , so the problem reduces to showing that $\sum_{k=1}^n\Bigl(\frac x{1+x}\Bigr)^{k-1} < 1+x$ . But that sum is less than the infinite sum $\sum_{k=0}^\infty\Bigl(\frac x{1+x}\Bigr)^k$ , which is a geometric series with sum $1+x$ .

That completes the proof that $f(x)\in\mathcal A$ .

Leave $f$ as $f(z):=\exp\bigg\{-\int_{0}^{z}\int_{0}^{1}\frac{1}{1+tw}\mathrm{d}t\ mathrm{d}w\bigg\}$ for $z\geq0$ , and let $u(z):=\int_{0}^{1}\frac{1}{1+t z}\mathrm{d}t$ for $z\geq0$ ,
then we have $(-1)^{n}u^{(n)}(z)=n!\int_{0}^{1}\frac{t^{n}}{(1+t z)^{n+1}}\mathrm{d}t>0$ for all $z\geq0$ .

By the way, many thanks to Opalg again.

**bkarpuz** · November 21st 2009, 08:05 AM

Functions that alternate in sign with respect to its derivative are called as completely monotonic functions.

I came a cross with the reference [1] by chance, and saw that what we have done here is known from [1, Theorem 2].

References

[1] Miller and Samko, Completely monotonic functions, Integr. Transf. and Spec. Funct., vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 389--402, 2001.
http://w3.ualg.pt/~ssamko/dpapers/fi..._monotonic.pdf

Thread: How to prove that derivatives alternate in sign?

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Display

[SOLVED] How to prove that derivatives alternate in sign?

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

Alternate Form Help

Partial derivatives for the sign function

Alternate Angles In Transversal

alternate way of solution

Alternate Series Test

Search Tags