Welcome to MathOverflow

Question

1

Let f be a completely monotonic function with $f(0)=1$, that is, $ f:[0, \infty) \rightarrow (0,1] $. My question is:

Is f log concave, that is, is $(logf)''<0$ or equivalently $ f f''< f'^2 $. ?

And what hapens if $f(0)=\infty$, that is if the function is: $ f:(0, \infty) \rightarrow (0,\infty) $.

flag	asked Jan 25 2012 at 18:30 J M del Castillo 11●1

Mark Meckes · Answer 1 · 2012-01-25 19:00:49Z UTC

2

A counterexample in the second case is $f(x) = e^{1/x}$. A counterexample in the first case is then $f(x) = e^{1/(x+1) - 1}$.

answered Jan 25 2012 at 19:00

Mark Meckes
5,982●8●31

	Log of both examples is like 1/x, which satisfies the negative derivative condition. What am I missing that makes them counterexamples? Gerhard "Ask Me About System Design" Paseman, 2012.01.25 – Gerhard Paseman Jan 25 2012 at 19:36
	Both functions are log-convex, not log-concave. – Mark Meckes Jan 25 2012 at 20:01
	So then when the original poster says (log f)' < 0, they mean f is log convex? Gerhard "Sometimes Confuses Up And Down" Paseman, 2012.01.25 – Gerhard Paseman Jan 25 2012 at 21:07
	The poster said (log f)''<0 (second derivative, not first). Although that's apparently the opposite of what was meant. – Mark Meckes Jan 26 2012 at 15:10

S. Sra · Answer 2 · 2012-01-25 21:44:39Z UTC

2

Exercise 6 of this book shows that if $f: (0,\infty) \to \mathbb{R}$ is completely monotonic, then it must be log-convex. Hence, your second claim holds, with concavity replaced by convexity.

edited Jan 25 2012 at 21:44

answered Jan 25 2012 at 21:39

S. Sra
10k●1●16●44

Jose M Del Castillo · Answer 3 · 2012-01-26 13:15:19Z UTC

Actually, I meant log-convex instead of log-concave. I missed a minus sign in my derivations and this led to the conjecture that log(f) should be concave. I have found a more complete answer in this paper:

Inequalities for Real Powers of Completely Monotonic Functions H. van Haeringen JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS AND APPLICATIONS Volume 210, Issue 1, 1 June 1997, Pages 102–113

Theorem 1 establishes a series of inequalities for the derivatives of c.m. functions. In particular, by taking n=0 and m=1 in 3.2 we get the log-convexity of f. I suggest to read this paper because of the relrevance of Theorem 1.

Does complete monotonicity of f imply log-concavity of f?

Remember to vote up questions/answers you find interesting or helpful (requires 15 reputation points)

3 Answers

You can accept an answer to one of your own questions by clicking the check mark next to it. This awards 15 reputation points to the person who answered and 2 reputation points to you.