Next Article in Journal
Weak Solutions for Time-Fractional Evolution Equations in Hilbert Spaces
Next Article in Special Issue
Some Dynamic Inequalities via Diamond Integrals for Function of Several Variables
Previous Article in Journal
The Systematic Risk at the Crisis—A Multifractal Non-Uniform Wavelet Systematic Risk Estimation
Previous Article in Special Issue
Influence of Fin Length on Magneto-Combined Convection Heat Transfer Performance in a Lid-Driven Wavy Cavity
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Certain Coefficient Estimate Problems for Three-Leaf-Type Starlike Functions

1
School of Mathematics and Statistics, Anyang Normal University, Anyang 455002, China
2
Institute of Numerical Sciences, Kohat University of Science and Technology, Kohat 26000, Pakistan
3
Government Degree College Mardan, Mardan 23200, Pakistan
4
Department of Mathematics, Anand International College of Engineering, Jaipur 303012, India
5
Nonlinear Dynamics Research Center (NDRC), Ajman University, Ajman AE 346, United Arab Emirates
6
International Center for Basic and Applied Sciences, Jaipur 302029, India
7
Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, The University of Jordon, Amman 11942, Jordan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Fractal Fract. 2021, 5(4), 137; https://doi.org/10.3390/fractalfract5040137
Submission received: 30 July 2021 / Revised: 12 September 2021 / Accepted: 15 September 2021 / Published: 24 September 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advanced Trends of Special Functions and Analysis of PDEs)

Abstract

:
In our present investigation, some coefficient functionals for a subclass relating to starlike functions connected with three-leaf mappings were considered. Sharp coefficient estimates for the first four initial coefficients of the functions of this class are addressed. Furthermore, we obtain the Fekete–Szegö inequality, sharp upper bounds for second and third Hankel determinants, bounds for logarithmic coefficients, and third-order Hankel determinants for two-fold and three-fold symmetric functions.

1. Introduction and Preliminary Results

Let the family of all the functions f that are analytic in U = z C : z < 1 be represented by A and have the series form
f ( z ) = z + n = 2 a n z n , z U .
By convention, S represents a subfamily of class A containing all the functions that are univalent in U and satisfy the normalization property f ( 0 ) = 0 = f ( 0 ) 1 . In geometric function theory, a key problem of analytic functions is their connection with coefficient estimates for these functions. In 1916, Bieberbach conjectured that | a n |   n , n = 2 , 3 , This famous coefficient problem, the “Bieberbach conjecture”, played an important role in research in this field for decades until, in 1984, Louis de Branges proved this result; see [1]. During 1916–1984, researchers used different techniques and established a lot of coefficient results for various subclasses of S . The subclasses worth mentioning here are the class S * , of starlike functions; the class K , of convex functions; and R , known as the functions of bounded turning. They are defined as below:
S * = f S : z f ( z ) f ( z ) > 0 , z U , K = f S : z f ( z ) f ( z ) > 0 , z U , R = f S : f ( z ) > 0 , z U ,
respectively. These classes can also be defined with the help of the subordination relation. We say that, for analytic functions, f 1 z is to be subordinated to f 2 z in the region U and denoted mathematically as f 1 z f 2 z if a function u ( z ) , known as the Schwarz function, satisfies the conditions u ( z ) 1 and u ( 0 ) = 1 , such that f 1 z = f 2 u ( z ) . Moreover, if f 2 z , belongs to S , then due to [2,3], the following equivalent conditions will be true
f 1 U f 2 U and f 1 0 = f 2 0 .
Thus, one can define S * ψ , K ψ and R ψ as:
S * ψ = f S : z f ( z ) f ( z ) ψ = 1 + z 1 z , z U , K ψ = f S : z f ( z ) f ( z ) ψ = 1 + z 1 z , z U , R ψ = f S : f ( z ) ψ = 1 + z 1 z , z U .
In (2), if the right hand side is changed, the several well-known subfamilies are originated. For example, if we put ψ = 1 + A z 1 + B z , we obtain the Janowski-type class of starlike functions; see [4] for details. Meanwhile, if we change the parameters A and B by 1 2 α ans 1 , respectively, then we obtain a family of starlike mappings of order α ; these were defined and discussed in [5]. Additionally, for the choice of ψ = 1 + 2 π 2 log 1 + z 1 z 2 , we obtained a corresponding class of starlike functions, introduced by Ronning; see [6]. Furthermore, if ψ = 1 + z , we obtain the class starlike function related to the lemniscate of the Bernoulli domain, defined by Cho et al. [7,8]. Goel and Kumar, in [9], defined the class S S G * , the family of starlike mappings connected with a type of mapping known as modified sigmoid functions. Moreover, if we use ψ = 1 + sin z , we obtain a subclass of starlike mappings in relation to the sine function; for details, see [10]. Mendiratta et al. The authors of [11] obtained a subfamily of strongly starlike mappings connected with the exponential function for the choice of ψ = e z . Sharma et al. [12] derived a subfamily of starlike mappings associated with a cardoid domain.
In a similar way, one can find various important subclasses of these functions in [13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21] for some specific value of ψ . Of these, some well-known ones are the mappings associated with and related to Bell numbers, curves that are shell-like in association with Fibonacci numbers, and mappings associated with the conic domains.
Lately, utilizing the techniques of Ma and Minda [22], Gandhi [23] defined a family of starlike functions associated with a three-leaf function, i.e.,
S 3 L * = f A : z f ( z ) f ( z ) 1 + 4 5 z + 1 5 z 4 , ( z U ) ,
and characterized it with some important properties.
For the function f that has the form (1), Pommerenke [24,25] defined the Hankel determinant H q , n f with the parameter q , and n N = 1 , 2 , 3 , , as follows:
H q , n f = a n a n + 1 a n + q 1 a n + 1 a n + 2 a n + q a n + q 1 a n + q a n + 2 q 2 .
For some subclasses related to the class A , the bounds of H q , n f , for any fixed integer q and n, are evaluated. Almost all the subclasses related to the class S were investigated for the sharp estimates of H 2 , 2 f = a 2 a 4 a 3 2 by Janteng et al. [8,26]. However, for the family of close-to-convex functions, the sharp estimates are still not known (see [27]). On the other hand, Krishna et al. [28] proved the better estimate of H 2 , 2 f for a subfamily of Bazilevič functions. More detailed work on H 2 , 2 f can be seen in [29,30,31,32,33] and also the references cited therein.
The determinant
H 3 , 1 f = 1 a 2 a 3 a 2 a 3 a 4 a 3 a 4 a 5
is known as the third-order Hankel determinant, and an estimate of this Hankel determinant H 3 , 1 f is more difficult than the second Hankel determinant; that is why a lot of researchers have focused on this field. In 1966–1967, Pommerenke defined the Hankel determinant, but it was not evaluated till the year 2010. In 2010, Babalola [34] was the first researcher who worked on H 3 , 1 f and successfully obtained the upper bounds of H 3 , 1 f related to the classes S * ,   K and R . Following this result, a few researchers extended this work for the various subcollections of univalent and holomorphic functions; see [35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47]. In the year 2017, Zaprawa [48] developed their work by proving
H 3 , 1 f 1 , for f S * , 49 540 , for f K , 41 60 , for f R .
Additionally, he asserted that the inequality above is not sharp. For sharpness, he considered the subfamily of S * , C and R functions to define them with m-fold symmetry, acquiring a sharp bound. In 2018, Kowalczyk et al. [49] and Lecko et al. [50] obtained sharp inequalities, which are
H 3 , 1 f 4 / 135 , and H 3 , 1 f 1 / 9 ,
for the classes K and S * 1 / 2 , where the symbol S * 1 / 2 represents the subcollection of starlike functions of order 1 / 2 . In [51], an improved bound H 3 , 1 f 8 / 9 for f S * was given, which is not the best possible.
Our main purpose in this article is to first study four sharp coefficient estimates, the Fekete–Szegö inequality and sharp second Hankel determinant, the third-order Hankel determinant, the bounds for logarithmic coefficients, and the two- and three-fold symmetric functions.

2. The Sets of Lemmas

Let P be the subclass of mappings p that are analytic in D with p ( z ) > 0 and its series form, as follows:
p ( z ) = 1 + n = 1 c n z n z D .
Lemma 1.
If p ( z ) P and it is of the form (6), then
c n 2 f o r n 1 ,
c n + k δ c n c k 2 f o r 0 δ 1 ,
and for ξ C
c 2 ξ c 1 2 2 max 1 ; 2 ξ 1 ,
and for real λ
c 3 λ c 2 2 4 λ + 2 , i f λ 0 , 2 , i f   0 λ 1 , 4 λ 2 , i f λ 1 .
For the results in (7) and (8), see [52]. Additionall, see [53] for (9) and [22] for (10).
Lemma 2
([54]). Let p P have the representation of the form (6); then, for any real numbers α , β and γ
α c 1 3 β c 1 c 2 + γ c 3 2 α + 2 β 2 α + 2 α β + γ
Lemma 3
([55]). Let m , n , l and r satisfy the inequalities 0 < m < 1 , 0 < r < 1 and
8 r 1 r m n 2 l 2 + m r + m n 2 + m 1 m n 2 r m 2 4 m 2 1 m 2 r 1 r .
If p P and has power series (6), then
l c 1 4 + r c 2 2 + 2 m c 1 c 3 3 2 n c 1 2 c 2 c 4 2 .
Lemma 4
([53]). Let h P have the series expansion of the form (6). Then, for x, z D ¯ = D { 1 } ,
2 c 2 = c 1 2 + x ( 4 c 1 2 ) ,
4 c 3 = c 1 3 + 2 ( 4 c 1 2 ) c 1 x c 1 ( 4 c 1 2 ) x 2 + 2 ( 4 c 1 2 ) ( 1 | x | 2 ) z .

3. Upper Bound H 3 , 1 f for Set S 3 L *

Theorem 1.
Let f ( z ) S 3 L * be of the form (1); then:
a 2 4 5 ,
a 3 2 5 ,
a 4 4 15 ,
a 5 1 5 .
All these bounds are sharp for the functions defined below, respectively.
f 1 z = z exp 0 z 4 5 + 1 5 t 3 d t = z + 4 5 z 2 + ,
f 2 z = z exp 0 z 4 5 t + 1 5 t 7 d t = z + 2 5 z 3 + ,
f 3 z = z exp 0 z 4 5 t 2 + 1 5 t 11 d t = z + 4 15 z 4 + ,
f 4 z = z exp 0 z 4 5 t 3 + 1 5 t 15 d t = z + 1 5 z 5 + .
Proof. 
Since f S 3 L * , there exists an analytic function w ( z ) , w ( z ) 1 and w 0 = 0 , such that
z f ( z ) f ( z ) = 1 + 4 5 w ( z ) + 1 5 w ( z ) 4 .
Denote
Ψ w z = 1 + 4 5 w ( z ) + 1 5 w ( z ) 4 ,
and
k ( z ) = 1 + c 1 z + c 2 z 2 + = 1 + w z 1 w z .
Obviously, the function k ( z ) P and w ( z ) = k ( z ) 1 k ( z ) + 1 . This gives
w ( z ) = k ( z ) 1 k ( z ) + 1 = c 1 z + c 2 z 2 + c 3 z 3 + 2 + c 1 z + c 2 z 2 + c 3 z 3 + ,
and
1 + 4 5 w ( z ) + 1 5 w ( z ) 4 = 1 + 2 5 c 1 z + 2 5 c 2 1 5 c 1 2 z 2 + 1 10 c 1 3 2 5 c 2 c 1 + 2 5 c 3 z 3 + 3 80 c 1 4 + 3 10 c 1 2 c 2 2 5 c 3 c 1 1 5 c 2 2 + 2 5 c 4 z 4 + .
while
z f ( z ) f ( z ) = 1 + a 2 z + 2 a 3 a 2 2 z 2 + a 2 3 3 a 2 a 3 + 3 a 4 z 3 + a 2 4 + 4 a 2 2 a 3 4 a 2 a 4 2 a 3 2 + 4 a 5 z 4 + .
Upon equating the coefficients of (22) and (23), we obtain
a 2 = 2 5 c 1 ,
a 3 = 1 5 c 2 1 50 c 1 2 ,
a 4 = 1 250 c 1 3 4 75 c 2 c 1 + 2 15 c 3 ,
a 5 = 81 40 , 000 c 1 4 + 643 37 , 000 c 1 2 c 2 7 150 c 3 c 1 3 100 c 2 2 + 1 10 c 4 .
Now, applying (7), to Equation (24), we obtain
a 2 4 5 .
Applying (8) with n = k = 1 , to Equation (25), we obtain
a 3 2 5 .
From the application of Lemma 2 to Equation (26), we obtain
a 4 4 15 .
Now,
a 5 = 1 10 81 4000 c 1 4 643 3700 c 1 2 c 2 + 7 15 c 3 c 1 + 3 10 c 2 2 c 4 ,
applying Lemma 3, with l = 81 4000 , r = 3 10 , m = 7 30 and n = 643 5550 ; all the conditions of Lemma 3 are satisfied, so
a 5 = 1 10 81 4000 c 1 4 643 3700 c 1 2 c 2 + 7 15 c 3 c 1 + 3 10 c 2 2 c 4 1 10 × 2 = 1 5 .
Hence, complete the proof. □
Theorem 2.
Let f ( z ) S 3 L * be of the form (1). Then,
a 3 ζ a 2 2 2 5 max 1 , 4 5 2 ζ 1 for ζ C .
The result is sharp for the function defined in Equation (19).
Proof. 
Since from (24) and (25), we have
a 3 ζ a 2 2 = 1 5 c 2 8 ζ + 1 10 c 1 2 ,
by applying (9) to the above equation, we obtain the desired result. □
For ζ = 1 , we obtain the corollary stated below:
Corollary 1.
Let f ( z ) S 3 L * be of the form (1). Then
a 3 a 2 2 2 5 .
The bound is sharp for the function defined in Equation (19).
Theorem 3.
Let f ( z ) S 3 L * be of the form (1). Then,
a 3 λ a 2 2 16 λ + 8 25 , i f λ 1 8 , 2 5 , i f 1 8 λ 9 8 , 16 λ + 8 25 , i f λ 9 8 .
Proof. 
Since from (24) and (25) , we have
a 3 λ a 2 2 = 1 5 c 2 8 λ + 1 10 c 1 2 ,
by applying (10) to the above equation, we obtain the desired result. □
Theorem 4.
Let f ( z ) S 3 L * be of the form (1). Then,
a 4 a 2 a 3 4 15 .
The estimate is sharp for the function defined in Equation (20).
Proof. 
Since from (24)–(26), we have
a 4 a 2 a 3 = 3 250 c 1 3 2 15 c 1 c 2 + 2 15 c 3 ,
now, the implementation of Lemma 2 to above equation leads us to the desired result. □
Theorem 5.
Let f ( z ) S 3 L * be of the form (1). Then,
a 2 a 4 a 3 2 4 25 .
The result is sharp for the function defined in Equation (19).
Proof. 
Since from (24)–(26), we have
a 2 a 4 a 3 2 = 3 2500 c 1 4 1 75 c 1 2 c 2 + 4 75 c 3 c 1 1 25 c 2 2 ,
using (12) and (13) to put c 2 and c 3 in terms of c 1 and directly state that c 1 = c with c 0 , 2 , we have
a 2 a 4 a 3 2 = 1 100 4 c 2 2 x 2 1 75 4 c 2 x 2 c 2 + 2 75 4 c 2 1 x 2 c z 4 1875 c 4 .
Applying a triangular inequality along with z 1 and x = b with b 0 , 1 , we have
a 2 a 4 a 3 2 1 100 4 c 2 2 b 2 + 1 75 4 c 2 b 2 c 2 + 2 75 4 c 2 1 b 2 c + 4 1875 c 4 = H c , b .
Since H c , b is an increasing function with respect to b so H c , b H c , 1 , putting b = 1 in the above, we obtain
a 2 a 4 a 3 2 1 100 4 c 2 2 + 1 75 4 c 2 c 2 + 4 1875 c 4 = G c .
Now,
G c = 3 625 c 3 4 75 c , G c = 9 625 c 2 4 75 .
Clearly, G c < 0 for c = 0 , so the maximum is attained at c = 0 ; hence,
a 2 a 4 a 3 2 4 25 .
 □
Now, one comes to the third Hankel determinant:
Theorem 6.
Let f ( z ) S 3 L * be of the form (1). Then,
H 3 , 1 f 242 1125 0.215 .
Proof. 
From (5) , we have
H 3 , 1 f a 3 a 2 a 4 a 3 2 + a 4 a 4 a 2 a 3 + a 3 a 3 a 2 2 ,
and using (15)–(17), (29), (31) and (32), we obtain the required result. □
For function f of class S , we denote the logarithmic coefficients with γ n = γ n f , and they are defined by the following series expansion:
log f z z = 2 n = 1 γ n z n .
The logarithmic coefficients of function f given in (1) are as follows:
γ 1 = 1 2 a 2 ,
γ 2 = 1 2 a 3 1 2 a 2 2 ,
γ 3 = 1 2 a 4 a 2 a 3 + 1 3 a 2 3 .
Theorem 7.
Let f ( z ) S 3 L * be of the form (1); then,
γ 1 2 5 ,
γ 2 1 5 ,
γ 3 6 25 .
The first two bounds are sharp.
Proof. 
From Equations (33) to (35), we obtain
γ 1 = 1 5 c 1 , γ 2 = 1 10 c 2 1 2 c 1 2 , γ 3 = 1 2 3 250 c 1 3 2 15 c 1 c 2 + 2 15 c 3 + 4 75 c 1 2 .
The bounds of γ 1 , γ 2 follow from Lemma 1, and γ 3 follows from Lemmas 1 and 2. □

4. Bounds of H 3 , 1 f for Two-Fold and Three-Fold Symmetric Functions

Let m N = 1 , 2 , 3 , ; if a rotation of domain D about the origin through an angle 2 π m carries itself on the domain, D is called m-fold symmetric. It is very clear to see that an analytic function f is m-fold symmetric in D , if
f e 2 π m z = e 2 π m f z , z D .
By S m , we mean the set of m-fold symmetric univalent functions having the following series form:
f z = z + k = 1 a m k + 1 z m k + 1 , z D .
The subclass S 3 L * m is a set of m-fold symmetric starlike functions associated with a modified sigmoid function. More precisely, an analytic function f of the form (38) belongs to class S 3 L * m if and only if
z f z f z = 1 + 4 5 p z 1 p z + 1 + 1 5 p z 1 p z + 1 4 , p P m ,
where the set P m is defined by
P m = p P : p z = 1 + k = 1 c m k z m k , z D .
Theorem 8.
If f S 3 L * 2 is of the form (38), then
H 3 , 1 f 2 25 .
Proof. 
Since f S 3 L * 2 , there exists a function p P 2 such that
z f z f z = 1 + 4 5 p z 1 p z + 1 + 1 5 p z 1 p z + 1 4 .
Using the series form (38) and (40), when m = 2 in the above relation, we have
a 3 = 1 5 c 2 ,
a 5 = 1 10 c 4 3 100 c 2 2 .
Now, using (42) and (43), we obtain
H 3 , 1 f = a 3 a 5 a 3 2 = 1 50 c 2 c 4 7 10 c 2 2
Now, using (7) and (8) with the above, we obtain the required result. □
Theorem 9.
If f S 3 L * 3 is of the form (38), then
H 3 , 1 f 16 225 .
The result is sharp for the function defined in (20).
Proof. 
Since f S 3 L * 3 , there exists a function p P 3 such that
z f z f z = 1 + 4 5 p z 1 p z + 1 + 1 5 p z 1 p z + 1 4 .
Using the series form (38) and (40), when m = 3 in above relation, we have
a 4 = 2 15 c 3 ,
Now,
H 3 , 1 f = a 4 2 .
Therefore,
H 3 , 1 f = 4 225 c 3 2 = 4 225 c 3 2
Using (7), we obtain the desired result. □

5. Conclusions

In the present article, we find four initial sharp coefficient bounds, the sharp Fekete–Szegö inequality, the sharp second Hankel determinant, the third Hankel determinant, and the bounds for logarithmic coefficients, and at last, we find out the bounds of H 3 , 1 f for two-fold and three-fold symmetric functions for the class S 3 L * . Obtaining a sharp estimate for the third Hankel determinant is still an open problem for a considered class. Additionally, there is an opportunity for researchers to investigate the generalized Zalcman conjecture, Krushkal inequality and fourth-order Hankel determinant for this class.

Author Contributions

All the authors jointly worked on the results. Conceptualization, L.S., M.G.K., B.A., W.K.M., P.A., S.M.; investigation, L.S., M.G.K., and P.A.; writing—original draft, L.S., M.G.K., B.A., W.K.M., and P.A.; writing—review and editing, L.S., M.G.K., B.A., W.K.M., P.A., S.M.; funding acquisition, L.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Foundation of Excellent Youth Teachers of Colleges and Universities of Henan Province under grant no. 2019GGJS195.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

We are sincerely grateful to the referees of this article, who provided valuable comments and advice, enabling the revision and improvement of the results of the paper in the present form.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. De Branges, L. A proof of the Bieberbach conjecture. Acta Math. 1985, 154, 137–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Miller, S.S.; Mocanu, P.T. Second order differential inequalities in the complex plane. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1978, 65, 289–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Miller, S.S.; Mocanu, P.T. Differential Subordinations. In Theory and Applications; Series on Monographs and Textbooks in Pure and Appl. Math. No. 225; Marcel Dekker Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2000; pp. 101–105. [Google Scholar]
  4. Janowski, W. Extremal problems for a family of functions with positive real part and for some related families. Ann. Pol. Math. 1970, 23, 159–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Robertson, M.S. Certain classes of starlike functions. Michigari Math. J. 1985, 32, 135–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ronning, F. Uniformly convex functions and a corresponding class of starlike functions. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1993, 118, 189–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Sokół, J. Radius problem in the class 𝒮*. Appl. Math. Comput. 2009, 214, 569–573. [Google Scholar]
  8. Jangteng, A.; Halim, S.A.; Darus, M. Coefficient inequality for starlike and convex functions. Int. J. Ineq. Math. Anal. 2007, 1, 619–625. [Google Scholar]
  9. Goel, P.; Kumar, S. Certain class of starlike functions associated with Modified sigmoid function. Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. 2019, 43, 957–991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Cho, N.E.; Kumar, V.; Kumar, S.; Ravichandran, V. Radius problems for starlike functions associated with the Sine function. Bull. Iran. Math. Soc. 2019, 45, 213–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Mendiratta, R.; Nagpal, S.; Ravichandran, V. On a subclass of strongly starlike functions associated with exponential function. Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. 2015, 38, 365–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Sharma, K.; Jain, N.K.; Ravichandran, V. Starlike functions associated with a cardioid. Afr. Mat. 2016, 27, 923–939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Agarwal, P.; Deniz, S.; Jain, S.; Alderremy, A.A.; Aly, S. A new analysis of a partial differential equation arising in biology and population genetics via semi analytical techniques. Phys. A Stat. Mech. Appl. 2020, 542, 122769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Attiya, A.A.; Lashin, A.M.; Ali, E.E.; Agarwal, P. Coefficient Bounds for Certain Classes of Analytic Functions Associated with Faber Polynomial. Symmetry 2021, 13, 302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Cho, N.E.; Kumar, S.; Kumar, V.; Ravichandran, V.; Serivasatava, H.M. Starlike functions related to the Bell numbers. Symmetry 2019, 11, 219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Dzoik, J.; Raina, R.K.; Sokół, J. On certain subclasses of starlike functions related to a shell-like curve connected with Fibonacci numbers. Math. Comput. Model. 2013, 57, 1203–1211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Kanas, S.; Răducanu, D. Some class of analytic functions related to conic domains. Math. Slovaca 2014, 64, 1183–1196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Kumar, S.; Ravichandran, V. A subclass of starlike functions associated with rational function. Southeast Asian Bull. Math. 2016, 40, 199–212. [Google Scholar]
  19. Salahshour, S.; Ahmadian, A.; Senu, N.; Baleanu, D.; Agarwal, P. On Analytical Solutions of the Fractional Differential Equation with Uncertainty: Application to the Basset Problem. Entropy 2015, 17, 885–902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Yassen, M.F.; Attiya, A.A.; Agarwal, P. Subordination and Superordination Properties for Certain Family of Analytic Functions Associated with Mittag—Leffler Function. Symmetry 2020, 12, 1724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Zhou, S.-S.; Areshi, M.; Agarwal, P.; Shah, N.A.; Chung, J.D.; Nonlaopon, K. Analytical Analysis of Fractional-Order Multi-Dimensional Dispersive Partial Differential Equations. Symmetry 2021, 13, 939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Ma, W.; Minda, M. A unified treatment of some special classes of univalent functions. In Proceedings of the Conference on Complex Analysis; Li, Z., Ren, F., Yang, L., Zhang, S., Eds.; International Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1992; pp. 157–169. [Google Scholar]
  23. Gandhi, S. Radius estimates for three leaf function and convex combination of starlike functions. In Mathematical. Analysis 1: Approximation Theory. ICRAPAM; Deo, N., Gupta, V., Acu, A., Agrawal, P., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2018; Volume 306. [Google Scholar]
  24. Pommerenke, C. On the coefficients and Hankel determinants of univalent functions. J. Lond. Math. Soc. 1966, 41, 111–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Pommerenke, C. On the Hankel determinants of univalent functions. Mathematika 1967, 14, 108–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Jangteng, A.; Halim, S.A.; Darus, M. Coefficient inequality for a function whose derivative has a positive real part. J. Inequal. Pure Appl. Math. 2006, 7, 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  27. Răducanu, D.; Zaprawa, P. Second Hankel determinant for close-to-convex functions. Comptes Rendus Math. 2017, 355, 1063–1071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Krishna, D.V.; RamReddy, T. Second Hankel determinant for the class of Bazilevic functions. Stud. Univ. Babes-Bolyai Math. 2015, 60, 413–420. [Google Scholar]
  29. Bansal, D. Upper bound of second Hankel determinant for a new class of analytic functions. Appl. Math. Lett. 2013, 23, 103–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Lee, S.K.; Ravichandran, V.; Supramaniam, S. Bounds for the second Hankel determinant of certain univalent functions. J. Inequal. Appl. 2013, 281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Liu, M.S.; Xu, J.F.; Yang, M. Upper bound of second Hankel determinant for certain subclasses of analytic functions. Abstr. Appl Anal. 2014, 603180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Noonan, J.W.; Thomas, D.K. On the second Hankel determinant of areally mean p-valent functions. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 1976, 223, 337–346. [Google Scholar]
  33. Orhan, H.; Magesh, N.; Yamini, J. Bounds for the second Hankel determinant of certain bi-univalent functions. Turk. J. Math. 2016, 40, 679–687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Babalola, K.O. On H3(1) Hankel determinant for some classes of univalent functions. Inequal. Theory Appl. 2010, 6, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  35. Arif, M.; Noor, K.N.; Raza, M. Hankel determinant problem of a subclass of analytic functions. J. Inequal. Appl. 2012, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Altinkaya, S.; Yalçin, S. Third Hankel determinant for Bazilevič functions. Adv. Math. 2016, 5, 91–96. [Google Scholar]
  37. Bansal, D.; Maharana, S.; Prajapat, J.K. Third order Hankel Determinant for certain univalent functions. J. Korean Math. Soc. 2015, 52, 1139–1148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Cho, N.E.; Kowalczyk, B.; Kwon, O.S.; Lecko, A.; Sim, J. Some coefficient inequalities related to the Hankel determinant for strongly starlike functions of order alpha. J. Math. Inequal. 2017, 11, 429–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Krishna, D.V.; Venkateswarlua, B.; RamReddy, T. Third Hankel determinant for bounded turning functions of order alpha. J. Niger. Math. Soc. 2015, 34, 121–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Raza, M.; Malik, S.N. Upper bound of third Hankel determinant for a class of analytic functions related with lemniscate of Bernoulli. J. Inequal. Appl. 2013, 412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Shanmugam, G.; Stephen, B.A.; Babalola, K.O. Third Hankel determinant for α-starlike functions. Gulf J. Math. 2014, 2, 107–113. [Google Scholar]
  42. Zhang, H.Y.; Tang, H.; Niu, X.M. Third order Hankel determinat for certain class of analytic functions related with exponential function. Symmetry 2018, 10, 501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Trąbka-Więclaw, K. On coefficient problems for functions connected with the sine function. Symmetry 2021, 13, 1179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Esmail, S.; Agrawal, P.; Aly, S. A novel analytical approach for advection diffusion equation for radionuclide release from an area source. Nuclear Eng. Technol. 2020, 52, 819–826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Morales-Delgado, V.F.; Gómez-Aguilar, J.F.; Saad, K.M.; Khan, M.A.; Agrawal, P. Analytic solution for oxygen diffusion from capillary to tissues involving external force effects: A fractional calculus approach. Phys. A Stat. Mech. Its Appl. 2019, 523, 48–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Kwun, Y.C.; Zahra, M.; Farid, G.; Agrawal, P.; Kang, S.M. Some General Integral Operator Inequalities Associated with -Quasiconvex Functions. Math. Probl. Eng. 2021, 2021, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Agarwal, P.; Kadakal, M.; İşcan, İ.; Chu, Y.-M. Better Approaches for n-Times Differentiable Convex Functions. Mathematics 2020, 8, 950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Zaprawa, P. Third Hankel determinants for subclasses of univalent functions. Mediterr. J. Math. 2017, 14, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Kowalczyk, B.; Lecko, A.; Sim, Y.J. The sharp bound of the Hankel determinant of the third kind for convex functions. Bull. Aust. Math. Soc. 2018, 97, 435–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Lecko, A.; Sim, Y.J.; Śmiarowska, B. The sharp bound of the Hankel determinant of the third kind for starlike functions of order 1/2. Complex Anal. Oper. Theory 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Kwon, O.S.; Lecko, A.; Sim, Y.J. The bound of the Hankel determinant of the third kind for starlike functions. Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. 2018, 42, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Keogh, F.; Merkes, E. A coefficient inequality for certain subclasses of analytic functions. Proc Am. Math. Soc. 1969, 20, 8–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Libera, R.J.; Zlotkiewicz, E.J. Coefficient bounds for the inverse of a function with derivative in 𝒫. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1983, 87, 251–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Arif, M.; Raza, M.; Tang, H.; Hussain, S.; Khan, H. Hankel determinant of order three for familiar subsets of analytic functions related with sine function. Open Math. 2019, 17, 1615–1630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Ravichandran, V.; Verma, S. Bound for the fifth coefficient of certain starlike functions. Comptes Rendus Math. 2015, 353, 505–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Shi, L.; Khan, M.G.; Ahmad, B.; Mashwani, W.K.; Agarwal, P.; Momani, S. Certain Coefficient Estimate Problems for Three-Leaf-Type Starlike Functions. Fractal Fract. 2021, 5, 137. https://doi.org/10.3390/fractalfract5040137

AMA Style

Shi L, Khan MG, Ahmad B, Mashwani WK, Agarwal P, Momani S. Certain Coefficient Estimate Problems for Three-Leaf-Type Starlike Functions. Fractal and Fractional. 2021; 5(4):137. https://doi.org/10.3390/fractalfract5040137

Chicago/Turabian Style

Shi, Lei, Muhammad Ghaffar Khan, Bakhtiar Ahmad, Wali Khan Mashwani, Praveen Agarwal, and Shaher Momani. 2021. "Certain Coefficient Estimate Problems for Three-Leaf-Type Starlike Functions" Fractal and Fractional 5, no. 4: 137. https://doi.org/10.3390/fractalfract5040137

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop