Abstract
In this paper, we present a very accurate approximation for the gamma function:
as , and we prove that the function is strictly decreasing and convex from onto , where
Keywords: Gamma function, Monotonicity, Convexity, Approximation
Introduction
The Stirling formula states that
1.1 |
for . The gamma function for is a generalization of the factorial function n! and has important applications in various branches of mathematics; see, for example, [1–6] and the references cited therein.
There are many refinements for the Stirling formula; see, for example, Burnside’s [7], Gosper [8], Batir [9], Mortici [10]. Many authors pay attention to find various better approximations for the gamma function, for instance, Ramanujan [11, P. 339], Smith [12, Eq. (42)], [13], Mortici [14], Nemes [15, Corollary 4.1], Yang and Chu [16, Propositions 4 and 5], Chen [17].
More results involving the approximation formulas for the factorial or gamma function can be found in [16, 18–27] and the references cited therein. Several nice inequalities between gamma function and the truncations of its asymptotic series can be found in [28, 29].
Now let us focus on the Windschitl approximation formula (see [12, Eq. (42)], [13]) defined by
1.2 |
As shown in [17], the rate of Windschitl’s approximation converging to is like as , and it is faster on replacing by
1.3 |
(see [13]). These results show that and are excellent approximations for the gamma function.
In 2009, Alzer [30] proved that, for all ,
1.4 |
with the best possible constants and . Lu, Song and Ma [31] extended Windschitl’s formula to
with . An explicit formula for determining the coefficients of () was given in [32, Theorem 1] by Chen. Another asymptotic expansion
1.5 |
was presented in the same reference [32, Theorem 2].
Motivated by the above comments, the aim of this paper is to provide a more accurate Windschitl type approximation:
1.6 |
as . Our main result is the following theorem.
Theorem 1
The function
is strictly decreasing and convex from onto , where
Lemmas
An important research subject in analyzing inequality is to convert an univariate into the monotonicity of functions [33–35]. Since the function contains gamma and hyperbolic functions, it is very hard to deal with its monotonicity and convexity by usual approaches. For this purpose, we need the following lemmas, which provide a new way to prove our result.
Lemma 1
The inequality
holds for .
Proof
Let
Then by the recurrence formula [36, p. 260, (6.4.6)]
we have
It then follows that
which proves the desired inequality, and the proof is done. □
Lemma 2
The inequalities
2.1 |
hold for .
Proof
It was proved in [29, Theorem 1] that, for integer , the double inequality
2.2 |
holds for . Taking yields
which is equivalent to the first inequality of (2.1) for all .
Since , making a change of variable we obtain
which proves the second one, and the proof is complete. □
The following lemma offers a simple criterion to determine the sign of a class of special polynomial on given interval contained in without using Descartes’ rule of signs, which play an important role in studying certain special functions; see for example [37, 38]. A series version can be found in [39].
Lemma 3
([37, Lemma 7])
Let and with and let be a polynomial of degree n defined by
2.3 |
where , for with . Then there is a unique number satisfying such that for and for .
Consequently, for given , if then for and if then for .
Proof of Theorem 1
With the aid of the lemmas in Sect. 2, we can prove Theorem 1.
Proof of Theorem 1
Differentiation yields
Since , it suffices to prove for . Replacing x by in Lemma 1 leads to
which indicates that
Arranging gives
where . Applying the first inequality of (2.1) we have
where with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .
It remains to prove for . Since for , 1, 2, 3, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 21, 22 and for , 6, 7, 10, 11, 15, 16, 19, 20, we have
Clearly, the coefficients of the polynomial satisfy the conditions in Lemma 3, and
It then follows that for , and so is , which implies for . Consequently, for all . This completes the proof. □
As a direct consequence of Theorem 1, we immediately get the following.
Corollary 1
For , the double inequality
holds with the best constant
Set
Then it is easy to check that, for ,
That is to say, is decreasing and convex on , and so is the function by Theorem 1.
Corollary 2
The function
is strictly decreasing and convex from onto , where
Remark 1
Corollary 2 offers another approximation formula
3.1 |
Also, for ,
with the best constant
Numerical comparisons
It is well known that an excellent approximation for the gamma function is fairly accurate but relatively simple. In this section, we list some known approximation formulas for the gamma function and compare them with given by (1.3) and our new one defined by (1.6).
It has been shown in [17] that, as , Ramanujan’s [11, P. 339] approximation formula holds,
and Smith’s one [12, Eq. (42)],
Nemes’ one [15, Corollary 4.1],
and Chen’s one [17],
4.1 |
Moreover, it is easy to check that Nemes’ result [13] is another one,
4.2 |
and so are Yang and Chu’s [16, Propositions 4 and 5] ones,
and we have Windschitl one [13],
For our new ones given in (1.6) and its counterpart given in (3.1), we easily check that
which show that the rates of and converging to are both as .
From these, we see that our new Windschitl type approximation formulas and are best among those listed above, which can also be seen from Table 1.
Table 1.
x | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 1.114 × 10−4 | 1.398 × 10−4 | 1.832 × 10−4 | 2.407 × 10−5 |
2 | 1.900 × 10−6 | 2.222 × 10−6 | 2.668 × 10−6 | 2.308 × 10−7 |
5 | 4.353 × 10−9 | 4.956 × 10−9 | 5.743 × 10−9 | 1.249 × 10−10 |
10 | 3.609 × 10−11 | 4.088 × 10−11 | 4.710 × 10−11 | 2.785 × 10−13 |
20 | 2.864 × 10−13 | 3.240 × 10−13 | 3.727 × 10−13 | 5.634 × 10−16 |
50 | 4.713 × 10−16 | 5.330 × 10−16 | 6.129 × 10−16 | 1.492 × 10−19 |
100 | 3.684 × 10−18 | 4.166 × 10−18 | 4.791 × 10−18 | 2.918 × 10−22 |
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express their sincere thanks to the editors and reviewers for their great efforts to improve this paper. This work was supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (No. 2015ZD29) and the Higher School Science Research Funds of Hebei Province of China (No. Z2015137).
Authors’ contributions
All authors contributed equally to the writing of this paper. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Footnotes
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Contributor Information
Zhen-Hang Yang, Email: yzhkm@163.com.
Jing-Feng Tian, Email: tianjf@ncepu.edu.cn.
References
- 1.Anderson G.D., Vamanamurthy M.K., Vuorinen M. Conformal Invariants, Inequalities, and Quasiconformal Maps. New York: Wiley; 1997. [Google Scholar]
- 2.Anderson G.D., Vamanamurthy M.K., Vuorinen M. Topics in special functions II. Conform. Geom. Dyn. 2007;11:250–270. doi: 10.1090/S1088-4173-07-00168-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Wang M.K., Chu Y.M., Song Y.Q. Asymptotical formulas for Gaussian and generalized hypergeometric functions. Appl. Math. Comput. 2016;276:44–60. [Google Scholar]
- 4. Wang, M.K., Li, Y.M., Chu, Y.M.: Inequalities and infinite product formula for Ramanujan generalized modular equation function. Ramanujan J. (2017). 10.1007/s11139-0176-9888-3
- 5.Wang M.K., Chu Y.M., Jiang Y.P. Ramanujan’s cubic transformation inequalities for zero-balanced hypergeometric functions. Rocky Mt. J. Math. 2016;46(2):679–691. doi: 10.1216/RMJ-2016-46-2-679. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Wang M.K., Chu Y.M. Refinements of transformation inequalities for zero-balanced hypergeometric functions. Acta Math. Sci. Ser. B Engl. Ed. 2017;37(3):607–622. doi: 10.1016/S0252-9602(17)30026-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Burnside W. A rapidly convergent series for Messenger Math. 1917;46:157–159. [Google Scholar]
- 8.Gosper R.W. Decision procedure for indefinite hypergeometric summation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 1978;75:40–42. doi: 10.1073/pnas.75.1.40. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Batir N. Sharp inequalities for factorial n. Proyecciones. 2008;27(1):97–102. doi: 10.4067/S0716-09172008000100006. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Mortici C. On the generalized Stirling formula. Creative Math. Inform. 2010;19(1):53–56. [Google Scholar]
- 11.Ramanujan S. The Lost Notebook and Other Unpublished Papers. Berlin: Springer; 1988. [Google Scholar]
- 12. Smith, W.D.: The gamma function revisited (2006). http://schule.bayernport.com/gamma/gamma05.pdf
- 13.http://www.rskey.org/CMS/the-library/11
- 14.Mortici C. A new fast asymptotic series for the gamma function. Ramanujan J. 2015;38(3):549–559. doi: 10.1007/s11139-014-9589-0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Nemes G. New asymptotic expansion for the gamma function. Arch. Math. (Basel) 2010;95:161–169. doi: 10.1007/s00013-010-0146-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Yang Z.-H., Chu Y.-M. Asymptotic formulas for gamma function with applications. Appl. Math. Comput. 2015;270:665–680. [Google Scholar]
- 17.Chen C.-P. A more accurate approximation for the gamma function. J. Number Theory. 2016;164:417–428. doi: 10.1016/j.jnt.2015.11.007. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Batir N. Inequalities for the gamma function. Arch. Math. 2008;91:554–563. doi: 10.1007/s00013-008-2856-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Mortici C. An ultimate extremely accurate formula for approximation of the factorial function. Arch. Math. 2009;93(1):37–45. doi: 10.1007/s00013-009-0008-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Mortici C. New sharp inequalities for approximating the factorial function and the digamma functions. Miskolc Math. Notes. 2010;11(1):79–86. [Google Scholar]
- 21.Mortici C. Improved asymptotic formulas for the gamma function. Comput. Math. Appl. 2011;61:3364–3369. doi: 10.1016/j.camwa.2011.04.036. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Zhao J.-L., Guo B.-N., Qi F. A refinement of a double inequality for the gamma function. Publ. Math. (Debr.) 2012;80(3–4):333–342. doi: 10.5486/PMD.2012.5010. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Mortici C. Further improvements of some double inequalities for bounding the gamma function. Math. Comput. Model. 2013;57:1360–1363. doi: 10.1016/j.mcm.2012.11.020. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Qi F. Integral representations and complete monotonicity related to the remainder of Burnside’s formula for the gamma function. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2014;268:155–167. doi: 10.1016/j.cam.2014.03.004. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Lu D. A new sharp approximation for the gamma function related to Burnside’s formula. Ramanujan J. 2014;35(1):121–129. doi: 10.1007/s11139-013-9534-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Lu D., Song L., Ma C. Some new asymptotic approximations of the gamma function based on Nemes’ formula, Ramanujan’s formula and Burnside’s formula. Appl. Math. Comput. 2015;253:1–7. [Google Scholar]
- 27.Yang Z.-H., Tian J.F. Monotonicity and inequalities for the gamma function. J. Inequal. Appl. 2017;2017:317. doi: 10.1186/s13660-017-1591-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Alzer H. On some inequalities for the gamma and psi functions. Math. Comput. 1997;66(217):373–389. doi: 10.1090/S0025-5718-97-00807-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Yang Z.-H. Approximations for certain hyperbolic functions by partial sums of their Taylor series and completely monotonic functions related to gamma function. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2016;441:549–564. doi: 10.1016/j.jmaa.2016.04.029. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Alzer H. Sharp upper and lower bounds for the gamma function. Proc. R. Soc. Edinb. 2009;139A:709–718. doi: 10.1017/S0308210508000644. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Lu D., Song L., Ma C. A generated approximation of the gamma function related to Windschitl’s formula. J. Number Theory. 2014;140:215–225. doi: 10.1016/j.jnt.2014.01.023. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Chen C.-P. Asymptotic expansions of the gamma function related to Windschitl’s formula. Appl. Math. Comput. 2014;245:174–180. [Google Scholar]
- 33.Qi F., Cerone P., Dragomir S.S., Srivastava H.M. Alternative proofs for monotonic and logarithmically convex properties of one-parameter mean values. Appl. Math. Comput. 2009;208(1):129–133. [Google Scholar]
- 34.Tian J.F., Ha M.H. Properties of generalized sharp Hölder’s inequalities. J. Math. Inequal. 2017;11(2):511–525. doi: 10.7153/jmi-11-42. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Tian J.F., Ha M.H. Properties and refinements of Aczél-type inequalities. J. Math. Inequal. 2018;12(1):175–189. [Google Scholar]
- 36.Abramowttz M., Stegun I.A. Handbook of Mathematical Functions with Formulas, Graphs and Mathematical Tables. New York: Dover; 1972. [Google Scholar]
- 37.Yang Z.-H., Chu Y.-M., Tao X.-J. A double inequality for the trigamma function and its applications. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2014;2014:702718. [Google Scholar]
- 38.Yang Z.-H., Tian J. Monotonicity and sharp inequalities related to gamma function. J. Math. Inequal. 2018;12(1):1–22. [Google Scholar]
- 39. Yang, Z.-H., Tian, J.: Convexity and monotonicity for the elliptic integrals of the first kind and applications. arXiv:1705.05703 [math.CA]