Difference between revisions of "Karamata's Inequality"
m |
m (`) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | '''Karamata's Inequality''' states that if <math>( | + | '''Karamata's Inequality''' states that if <math>(a_i)</math> [[Majorization|majorizes]] <math>(b_i)</math> and <math>f</math> is a [[convex function]], then |
− | < | + | <cmath>\sum_{i=1}^{n}f(a_i)\geq \sum_{i=1}^{n}f(b_i)</cmath> |
==Proof== | ==Proof== | ||
+ | We will first use an important fact: | ||
+ | <cmath>\text{If }f(x)\text{ is convex over the interval }(a, b)\text{, then }\forall \hspace{2mm} a\leq x_1\leq x_2 \leq b \text{ and } \Gamma(x, y):=\frac{f(y)-f(x)}{y-x}, \Gamma(x_1, x)\leq \Gamma (x_2, x)</cmath> | ||
+ | |||
+ | This is proven by taking casework on <math>x\neq x_1,x_2</math>. If <math>x<x_1</math>, then | ||
+ | <cmath>\Gamma(x_1, x)=\frac{f(x_1)-f(x)}{x_1-x}\leq \frac{f(x_2)-f(x)}{x_2-x}=\Gamma(x_2, x)</cmath> | ||
+ | |||
+ | A similar argument shows for other values of <math>x</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Now, define a sequence <math>C</math> such that: | ||
+ | <cmath>c_i=\Gamma(a_i, b_i)</cmath> | ||
+ | |||
+ | Define the sequences <math>A_i</math> such that | ||
+ | <cmath>A_i=\sum_{j=1}^{i}a_j, A_0=0</cmath> | ||
+ | and <math>B_i</math> similarly. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Then, assuming <math>a_i\geq a_{i+1}</math> and similarily with the <math>b_i</math>'s, we get that <math>c_i\geq c_{i+1}</math>. Now, we know: | ||
+ | <cmath>\sum_{i=1}^{n}f(a_i) - \sum_{i=1}^{n}f(b_i)=\sum_{i=1}^{n}f(a_i)-f(b_i)=sum_{i=1}^{n}c_i(a_i-b_i)=\sum_{i=1}^{n}c_i(A_i-A_{i-1}-B_i+B_{i+1})=\sum_{i=1}^{n}c_i(A_i-B_i) - \sum_{i=1}^{n}f(b_i)</cmath> | ||
+ | |||
+ | Now, we know that | ||
{{stub}} | {{stub}} | ||
Revision as of 13:26, 14 August 2018
Karamata's Inequality states that if majorizes and is a convex function, then
Proof
We will first use an important fact:
This is proven by taking casework on . If , then
A similar argument shows for other values of .
Now, define a sequence such that:
Define the sequences such that and similarly.
Then, assuming and similarily with the 's, we get that . Now, we know:
Now, we know that This article is a stub. Help us out by expanding it.