Almost-converses to the AM-GM inequality - MathOverflow most recent 30 from http://mathoverflow.net2013-06-20T06:11:58Zhttp://mathoverflow.net/feeds/question/122411http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/rdfhttp://mathoverflow.net/questions/122411/almost-converses-to-the-am-gm-inequalityAlmost-converses to the AM-GM inequalityVincenzo2013-02-20T15:28:54Z2013-02-24T21:02:25Z
<p>Let us consider the Arithmetic Mean -- Geometric Mean inequality for nonnegative real numbers: </p>
<p>$$ GM := (a_1 a_2 \ldots a_n)^{1/n} \le \frac{1}{n} \left( a_1 + a_2 + \ldots + a_n \right) =: AM. $$</p>
<p>It is known that the converse inequality ($\ge$) holds if and only if all the $a_i$'s are the same. </p>
<p>Therefore, we can expect that if the $a_i$'s are <em>almost</em> the same, then a converse inequality <em>almost</em> holds.
For example, we may look for an inequality of the form $AM \le GM + f(\Delta,n)$ where $\Delta$ is the ratio between $\max_i a_i$ and $\min_i a_i$, but this is just one possibility. </p>
<p>Are there any natural ways to formalize the above intuition? </p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/122411/almost-converses-to-the-am-gm-inequality/122443#122443Answer by Liviu Nicolaescu for Almost-converses to the AM-GM inequalityLiviu Nicolaescu2013-02-20T19:39:27Z2013-02-24T18:12:47Z<p>Here is an old result of Siegel that is related to your question.</p>
<p>Set</p>
<p>$$ s=s(a_1,\dotsc, a_n)=\frac{1}{n} (a_1+\cdots +a_n), $$</p>
<p>$$ p= p(a_1,\dotsc, a_n), $$</p>
<p>$$ \Delta= \Delta(a_1,\dotsc, a_n)=\prod_{i,j}(a_i-a_j)^2. $$</p>
<p>The AM-GM inequality reads</p>
<p>$$\frac{s^n}{p}\geq 1. $$</p>
<p>Observe that $s$ is homogeneous of degree $1$, $p$ is homogeneous of degree $n$ and $\Delta$ is homogeneous of degree $n(n-1)$ in the variables $a_j$. In particular, the ration</p>
<p>$$ R= \frac{p^{n-1}}{\Delta} $$</p>
<p>is homogeneous of degree $0$.
Note that $\Delta=0$ when two of the numbers $a_j$ are equal. In particular, large $\Delta $ would mean that the numbers are "far from being equal". Equivalently the larger $\Delta$ is, the more "dispersed" are the numbers $a_j$.</p>
<p>One can ask how dispersed can the numbers $a_j$ be given that $s$ and $p$ are fixed.</p>
<p>In other words we ask to find</p>
<p>$$\max \Delta(a_1,\dotsc, a_n)$$</p>
<p>given that</p>
<p>$$s(a_1,\dotsc, a_n)=s_0,\;\;p(a_1,\dotsc, a_n)=p_0. $$</p>
<p>This constrained maximum exists and can be described <em>explicitly</em> as the discriminant of a certain Laguerre polynomial. I will denote it by $\Delta_\max(s_0,p_0)$. </p>
<p>I will set</p>
<p>$$ \rho=\rho(s_0,p_0)= \frac{p_0^{n-1}}{\Delta_\max(s_0,p_0)}. $$</p>
<p>Then there exists an <em>explicit</em> but <em>very complicated</em> strictly decreasing continuous function</p>
<p>$$ F_n: (0,\infty)\to (1,\infty) $$</p>
<p>such that</p>
<p>$$\lim_{t\to\infty} F_n(t)=1, $$</p>
<p>$$ \frac{s_0^n}{p_0}= F_n(\rho)= F_n\left( \frac{p_0^{n-1}}{\Delta_\max(s_0,p_0)}\right). $$</p>
<p>A few things a bout the function $F_n$. It is described as a composition $Q_n\circ P_n^{-1}$, were </p>
<p>$$ Q_n: (0,\infty)\to (1,\infty) $$</p>
<p>is a strictly decreasing <em>very explicit</em> rational function and </p>
<p>$$P_n:(0,\infty)\to (0,\infty) $$</p>
<p>is a <em>very explict</em> and strictly increasing polynomial such that $P_n(0)=0$. This implies the sharper inequality</p>
<p>$$ s(a_1, \dotsc, a_n)^n \geq F\left(\frac{p(a_1,\dotsc, a_n)^{n-1}}{\Delta(a_1,\dotsc, a_n)}\right)p(a_1,\dotsc, a_n), $$</p>
<p>with equality iff</p>
<p>$$ \Delta(a_1,\dotsc,a_n)=\Delta_\max(s,p). $$</p>
<p>For more details see Sec. 8.6 of the beautiful book <strong>Special Functions</strong> by G.E. Andrews, R. Askey, R. Roy.</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/122411/almost-converses-to-the-am-gm-inequality/122444#122444Answer by Max Alekseyev for Almost-converses to the AM-GM inequalityMax Alekseyev2013-02-20T19:40:41Z2013-02-21T15:44:12Z<p>Power mean inequality can give many bounds for the difference between AM and GM. Most simple is
$$AM - GM \leq \max_i a_i - \min_i a_i.$$
Another bound is
$$AM - GM \leq AM - HM = \frac{a_1+\dots+a_n}{n} - \frac{n}{1/a_1 + \dots + 1/a_n}$$
etc.</p>
<p>See <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalized_mean#Generalized_mean_inequality" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalized_mean#Generalized_mean_inequality</a></p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/122411/almost-converses-to-the-am-gm-inequality/122446#122446Answer by Mark Meckes for Almost-converses to the AM-GM inequalityMark Meckes2013-02-20T19:53:08Z2013-02-20T19:53:08Z<p>It's not precisely what you asked about, but <a href="http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-540-36428-3_11?LI=true" rel="nofollow">this paper</a> by Gluskin and Milman shows that, for "most" sequences $a_1, \dotsc, a_n$, the AM-GM inequality can be reversed up to a multiplicative constant. The paper contains a number of observations which come closer to directly addressing your question.</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/122411/almost-converses-to-the-am-gm-inequality/122461#122461Answer by Will Sawin for Almost-converses to the AM-GM inequalityWill Sawin2013-02-20T21:27:11Z2013-02-20T21:27:11Z<p>The left and right sides are both continuous functions.</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/122411/almost-converses-to-the-am-gm-inequality/122828#122828Answer by Felix Goldberg for Almost-converses to the AM-GM inequalityFelix Goldberg2013-02-24T21:02:25Z2013-02-24T21:02:25Z<p>Proposition 1 in <a href="http://vuir.vu.edu.au/17286/" rel="nofollow">this paper</a> might be what you are looking for.</p>