19

Let $a,b,c,d>0$, show that

$$\dfrac{1}{4}\left(\dfrac{a^2}{b}+\dfrac{b^2}{c}+\dfrac{c^2}{d}+\dfrac{d^2}{a}\right)\ge \sqrt[4]{\dfrac{a^4+b^4+c^4+d^4}{4}}$$

I know this is interesting inequality,and Mathlinks can't solution,Thank you for you help

also can see this:http://www.artofproblemsolving.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=595079

today,when I see this secrets in inequalitys Volume 1,(Pham kim Hung) page 205

let $a,b,c,d>0$ prove that $$\sum_{cyc}\dfrac{a^2}{b}\ge 2\sqrt{2}\sqrt[4]{a^4+b^4+c^4+d^4}$$

I can't prove it,can you help me? Thank you

math110
  • 93,304
  • Have you tried to combine different mean inequalities? – Surb Jun 30 '14 at 10:05
  • After applying Holder, it suffices to prove that $\dfrac{(\sum\limits_{cyc} a)^6}{(\sum\limits_{cyc} a^2b^2)^2} \ge 4^3 (\sum\limits_{cyc} a^4)$, which can be proved if one shows $\sum\limits_{cyc {a,b,c,d}} 2ab(a^2+b^2) \le \frac{1}{16}(a+b+c+d)^4$ .. but not sure if the second inequality is true .. I'm stuck here. :-) – r9m Jul 02 '14 at 03:08
  • today,when I see this secrets in inequalitys Volume 1,(Pham kim Hung) page 205

    let $a,b,c,d>0$ prove that $$\sum_{cyc}\dfrac{a^2}{b}\ge 2\sqrt{2}\sqrt[4]{a^4+b^4+c^4+d^4}$$

    – math110 Jul 02 '14 at 05:51
  • If a, b, c, d satisfy the inequality, then so does ka, kb, kc, kd for any positive k. Don't know if this helps at all. – DavidButlerUofA Jul 03 '14 at 03:25
  • I can show that $\frac{a^2}{b} + \frac{b^2}{c} + \frac{c^2}{d} +\frac{d^2}{a} \geq a+b+c+d \geq \sqrt[4]{a^4 +b^4 + c^4 + d^4}$ but the dividing by 4's are a bit tricky. – DavidButlerUofA Jul 03 '14 at 14:56
  • 3
    It is false, more than tricky, since $$\frac{a+b+c+d}{4}\leq\sqrt[4]{\frac{a^4+b^4+c^4+d^4}{4}}$$ by AM-"$4$M". – Jack D'Aurizio Jul 03 '14 at 20:50
  • Ah yes. Ah well. – DavidButlerUofA Jul 06 '14 at 06:02
  • @didgogns We can reduce this inequality to a polynomial inequality of eighth degree. We'll obtain something, which seems true, but I still have no a proof. – Michael Rozenberg Mar 21 '19 at 11:38

2 Answers2

6

Question:

Given $a,b,c,d > 0$, show that

$$ \frac{1}{4} \left( \frac{a^2}{b} + \frac{b^2}{c} + \frac{c^2}{d} + \frac{d^2}{a} \right) \ge \sqrt[4]{ \frac{a^4 + b^4 + c^4 + d^4 }{4} } $$


Write

$$ Q(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4) = \frac{1}{4} \left( \frac{x_1^2}{x_2} + \frac{x_2^2}{x_3} + \frac{x_3^2}{x_4} + \frac{x_4^2}{x_1} \right) - \left( \frac{ x_1^4 + x_2^4 + x_3^4 + x_4^4}{4} \right)^\tfrac{1}{4} $$

Find extreme value for $Q$:

$$ \frac{\partial Q}{\partial x_k} = \frac{1}{2} \frac{x_k}{x_{|k+1|}} - \frac{1}{4} \frac{x_{|k-1|}^2}{x_k^2} - \frac{1}{4} x_k^3 \left( \frac{ x_1^4 + x_2^4 + x_3^4 + x_4^4}{4} \right)^{-\tfrac{3}{4}} = 0,\tag{1} $$

where $x_{|k\pm1|}$ is the cyclic index, thus $x_{|0|} = x_4$ and $x_{|5|} = x_1$. The extreme value is obtained for $x_1=x_2=x_3=x_4=x$ and

$$ Q(x,x,x,x) = 0. $$

We also have

$$ \frac{\partial^2 Q}{\partial x_k^2} = \frac{1}{2} \frac{1}{x_{|k+1|}} + \frac{1}{2} \frac{x_{|k-1|}^2}{x_k^3} + \frac{3}{16} x_k^6 \left( \frac{ x_1^4 + x_2^4 + x_3^4 + x_4^4}{4} \right)^{-\tfrac{7}{4}} - \frac{3}{4} x_k^2 \left( \frac{ x_1^4 + x_2^4 + x_3^4 + x_4^4}{4} \right)^{-\tfrac{3}{4}}, $$

and for $x_1=x_2=x_3=x_4=x$ we obtain

$$ \frac{\partial^2 Q}{\partial x_k^2} = \frac{7}{16} \frac{1}{x} \ge 0, $$

therefore

$$ Q(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4) \ge 0, $$

whence

$$\frac{1}{4} \left( \frac{x_1^2}{x_2} + \frac{x_2^2}{x_3} + \frac{x_3^2}{x_4} + \frac{x_4^2}{x_1} \right) \ge \left( \frac{ x_1^4 + x_2^4 + x_3^4 + x_4^4}{4} \right)^\tfrac{1}{4}. $$


To show that the stationary solution is unique.

From equation (1) follows that

$$ 2 \frac{x_{k+1}}{x_{k+2}} - \frac{x_{k}^2}{x_{k+1}^2} = \left( 2 \frac{x_{k+2}}{x_{k+3}} - \frac{x_{k+1}^2}{x_{k+2}^2} \right) \frac{x_{k+1}^3}{x_{k+2}^3}. $$

Let us define

$$ \xi_k = \frac{x_k}{x_{k+1}}, $$

then we obtain

$$ 2 \xi_{k+1} - \xi_k^2 = \Big( 2 \xi_{k+2} - \xi_{k+1}^2 \Big) \xi_{k+1}^3, $$

and it is clear that $\xi_k = 1$ is a solution. Let us write

$$ \xi_k = 1 + \phi_k, $$

then we obtain

$$ \phi_{k+2} = \frac{ \phi_{k+1}^5 + 5 \phi_{k+1}^4 + 10 \phi_{k+1}^3 + 8 \phi_{k+1}^2 + 3 \phi_{k+1} - \phi_{k}^2 - 2 \phi_k}{ \Big( 1 + \phi_{k+1} \Big)^2 }.\tag{2} $$

Note that for $\phi_\jmath > -1$, we obtain

$$ \begin{eqnarray} \textrm{sgn}\Big( \phi_{k+1}^5 + 5 \phi_{k+1}^4 + 10 \phi_{k+1}^3 + 8 \phi_{k+1}^2 + 3 \phi_{k+1} \Big) &=& \textrm{sgn}\Big(\phi_{k+1}\Big),\\ \textrm{sgn}\Big( \phi_{k}^2 - 2 \phi_k \Big) &=& \textrm{sgn}\Big(\phi_k\Big), \end{eqnarray} $$

whence we have the properties

$$ \begin{array}{ccccc} \phi_k \le 0 &\wedge& \phi_{k+1} \ge 0 &\Rightarrow& \phi_{k+2} \ge 0,\\ \phi_k \ge 0 &\wedge& \phi_{k+1} \le 0 &\Rightarrow& \phi_{k+2} \le 0.\\ \end{array} $$

We can use these properties to find "valid cycles":

$$ \begin{array}{ccccccccccc} \phi_k = 0 && \phi_{k+1} = 0 &\Rightarrow& \phi_{k+2} = 0 &\Rightarrow& \phi_{k+3} = 0\\ \phi_k = 0 && \color{red}{\phi_{k+1} < 0} &\Rightarrow& \phi_{k+2} < 0 && \phi_{k+3} < 0 && \phi_k = 0 &\Rightarrow& \color{red}{\phi_{k+1} > 0}\\ \color{red}{\phi_k = 0} && \phi_{k+1} < 0 &\Rightarrow& \phi_{k+2} < 0 && \phi_{k+3} > 0 &\Rightarrow& \color{red}{\phi_k > 0}\\ \color{red}{\phi_k = 0} && \phi_{k+1} > 0 &\Rightarrow& \phi_{k+2} > 0 && \phi_{k+3} < 0 &\Rightarrow& \color{red}{\phi_k < 0}\\ \phi_k = 0 && \color{red}{\phi_{k+1} > 0} &\Rightarrow& \phi_{k+2} > 0 && \phi_{k+3} > 0 && \phi_k = 0 &\Rightarrow& \color{red}{\phi_{k+1} < 0}\\ \hline \phi_k < 0 && \phi_{k+1} < 0 && \phi_{k+2} < 0 && \phi_{k+3} < 0\\ \color{red}{\phi_k < 0} && \phi_{k+1} < 0 && \phi_{k+2} < 0 && \phi_{k+3} > 0 &\Rightarrow& \color{red}{\phi_k > 0}\\ \phi_k < 0 && \phi_{k+1} < 0 && \phi_{k+2} > 0 &\Rightarrow& \phi_{k+3} > 0\\ \phi_k < 0 && \color{red}{\phi_{k+1} > 0} &\Rightarrow& \phi_{k+2} > 0 && \phi_{k+3} > 0 && \phi_{k} < 0 &\Rightarrow& \color{red}{\phi_{k+1} < 0}\\ \phi_k > 0 && \color{red}{\phi_{k+1} < 0} &\Rightarrow& \phi_{k+2} < 0 && \phi_{k+3} < 0 && \phi_{k} > 0 &\Rightarrow& \color{red}{\phi_{k+1} > 0}\\ \phi_k > 0 && \phi_{k+1} < 0 &\Rightarrow& \phi_{k+2} < 0 && \phi_{k+3} > 0 &\Rightarrow& \phi_k > 0\\ \phi_k > 0 && \phi_{k+1} > 0 && \phi_{k+2} < 0 &\Rightarrow& \phi_{k+3} < 0\\ \color{red}{\phi_k > 0} && \phi_{k+1} > 0 && \phi_{k+2} > 0 && \phi_{k+3} < 0 &\Rightarrow& \color{red}{\phi_k < 0}\\ \phi_k > 0 && \phi_{k+1} > 0 && \phi_{k+2} > 0 && \phi_{k+3} > 0\\ \end{array} $$

Therefore we only have the following valid cycles

$$ \begin{array}{cccc} 0&0&0&0\\ -&-&-&-\\ -&-&+&+\\ +&+&+&+\\ \end{array} $$

However the cycles

$$ \begin{array}{cccc} -&-&-&-\\ +&+&+&+\\ \end{array} $$

can be excluded for $\xi_1 \xi_2 \xi_3 \xi_4 = 1$.

What is left to show is that the cycle $--++$ leads to contradiction.

To be continued...

  • 2
    In order to prove that the only stationary point occurs in $x_1=x_2=x_3=x_4$, how do you solve the polynomial equations given by the Lagrange condition? – Jack D'Aurizio Jul 06 '14 at 13:28
  • 2
    It seems highly unlikely that there are other stationary points, but this needs to be shown if this is to be a full solution. Adding the four Lagrange conditions (times $x_k$) gives the equal case of the inequality so it seems to me that proving uniqueness of the stationary point might be equivalent (or just as hard) as proving the inequality in the first place. – Winther Jul 08 '14 at 18:15
  • @JackD'Aurizio - you are correct. I have added this to the post, but it is not yet completed... I am still working on it... – johannesvalks Jul 09 '14 at 17:50
  • have you tried using the Implicit Function Theorem to assert the uniqueness of the $(1,1,1,1) ?$ It might work. – dezdichado Nov 27 '20 at 17:51
1

The above answer by johannesvalks "is not yet completed", as johannesvalks himself points out. Here is a new answer without calculus.

Rewrite the question as follows: Show that $$ f = (a b c d)^4\left(\dfrac{a^2}{b}+\dfrac{b^2}{c}+\dfrac{c^2}{d}+\dfrac{d^2}{a}\right)^4 - 64 (a b c d)^4\left({{a^4+b^4+c^4+d^4}}\right) \ge 0 $$

Due to cyclicity, we can demand that $d = \min\{a,b,c,d\}$. Due to homogeneity, we can demand that $d=1$. Hence we need to show $$ f = \left(a^3c+ab^3 + abc^3 + bc\right)^4 - 64 (a b c)^4\left({{a^4+b^4+c^4+1}}\right) \ge 0 $$ Now this has become an inhomogeneous polynomial of degree 20.

We now distinguish cases for $a,b,c$. As $1 = d = \min\{a,b,c,d\}$, we write $a = 1+A$, $b = 1+B$, $c = 1+C$, with $A,B,C \ge 0$. Indeed, we are not going to use $A,B,C$. When doing so, and fully expanding (by computer) $f$, we obtain terms with negative sign, which (without further processing) makes the result inconclusive.

Remark: "Standard" Buffalo Way doesn't succeed here, since we have to construct all 6 cases of the ordering of $A,B,C$. In the two cases where we let $a=1+x$; $c = 1+x+y$; $b=1+x+y+z$, and $c=1+x$; $a = 1+x+y$; $b=1+x+y+z$, with $x,y,z \ge 0$, we obtain after fully expanding (by computer) $f$, terms with negative sign.

Instead, we consider the following 4 cases:

Case 1: $A<B+C$; $B<A+C$; $C<A+B$. Visually, these three conditions are met if $A,B,C$ are "similar" in value. In this case, we can write $A = x+y$, $B= y+z$, $C= x+z$, with $x,y,z \ge 0$. This is possible, since $x = \frac{A+C-B}{2}$, and cyclically for $y,z$. Inserting $a = 1 + x+y$ etc. into $f$ and fully expanding (by computer) gives the expression $f_1$ in the appendix below, which clearly is nonnegative since all terms have positive sign.

Further cases: Note that for $A,B,C \ge 0$, only one of the conditions $A<B+C$; $B<A+C$; $C<A+B$ can be violated. Proof: suppose the first two conditions indeed are reverted to $A \ge B +C$ and $B\ge A+C$; then we add these two conditions and have $C \le 0$ which is a contradiction. The same argument holds cyclically. Hence we only need to consider one reverted inequality in $A,B,C$ (3 more cases). This covers all possible cases.

Case 2: Visually, this condition is met if $a$ is "largest" in value. $A \ge B +C$; $B<A+C$; $C<A+B$. Writing $B=x$; $C = y$; $A = x+y+z$, with $x,y,z \ge 0$, satisfies these conditions. Inserting $a = 1 + x+y+z$, $b = 1 + x$, $c = 1 + y$ into $f$ and fully expanding (by computer) gives the expression $f_2$ in the appendix below, which clearly is nonnegative since all terms have positive sign.

Case 3: As case 2, with $b$ the largest value. Inserting $b = 1 + x+y+z$ etc. into $f$ and fully expanding (by computer) gives the expression $f_3$ in the appendix below, which clearly is nonnegative since all terms have positive sign.

Case 4: As case 2, with $c$ the largest value. Inserting $c = 1 + x+y+z$ etc. into $f$ and fully expanding (by computer) gives the expression $f_4$ in the appendix below, which clearly is nonnegative since all terms have positive sign.

This proves the claim. $\qquad \Box$


Appendix: The four cases are given as a diary file from MATLAB (The "*"s have been removed). The diary comes as files, as the number of letters exceeds the limit allowed to be put in directly as text. MATLAB diary allows to re-perform the calculations, if wished. Obviously, the results are VERY lengthy, however the relevant fact to notice is that there are no terms with negative signs in the expanded versions of $f_1, f_2, f_3, f_4$, which can safely be verified by actually searching the files for minus signs (and not finding any in the expanded versions).

enter image description here

enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here

enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here

Andreas
  • 15,175