Subordination by Certain Multivalent Functions Associated with Fractional Integral Operator

Abstract

The object of the present paper is to investigate some mapping properties of subordinations by certain multivalent functions in the open unit disk associated with fractional integral operator. Furthermore, some applications to the integral operator are also pointed out.

Share and Cite:

Choi, J. (2025) Subordination by Certain Multivalent Functions Associated with Fractional Integral Operator. Journal of Applied Mathematics and Physics, 13, 1073-1084. doi: 10.4236/jamp.2025.134055.

1. Introduction

Let =( U ) denote the class of analytic functions in the open unit disk U={ z:zand| z |<1 } . For a and n={ 1,2, } , let

[ a,n ]={ f:f( z )=a+ a n z n + a n+1 z n+1 + }.

Let f and g be members of . Then the function f is said to be subordinate to g , or g is said to be superordinate to f , written fg or f( z )g( z ) , if there exists a function w , analytic in U such that w( 0 )=0 , | w( z ) |<1 ( zU ) and f( z )=g( w( z ) ) ( zU ) . We also observe that f( z )g( z ) in U if and only if f( 0 )=g( 0 ) and f( U )g( U ) whenever g is univalent in U . Though there were several results on differential implications, a systematic study on this was started by Miller and Mocanu [1]. The first order differential subordination is defined as follows.

Definition 1.1. ([1]) Let ϕ: 2 and let h be univalent in U . If p is analytic in U and satisfies the differential subordination

ϕ( p( z ),z p ( z ) )h( z )( zU ), (1.1)

then p is called a solution of the differential subordination. The univalent function q is called a dominant of the solution of the differential subordination, or more simply a dominant if pq for all p satisfying (1.1).

Moreover, we denote by Q the class of function f that are analytic and injective on U ¯ \E( f ) , where

E( f )={ ζU: lim zζ f( z )= },

and are such that f ( ζ )0 for ζU\E( f ) .

We also denote γ * by the class of univalent functions q with q( 0 )=1 satisfying the following condition:

Re[ ( 1γ ) z q ( z ) q( z ) +γ( ( z q ( z ) ) q ( z ) ) ]>0( γ;zU ).

Then, we note that 1 * is the class of convex (not necessarily normalized) function in U .

Let A( p ) denote the class of functions f( z ) of the form

f( z )= z p + k=1 a k+p z k+p ( p ), (1.2)

which are analytic in the open unit disk U . Also, let a , b and c be complex numbers with c0,1,2, . Then the Gaussian/classical hypergeometric function   2 F 1 ( a,b;c;z ) is defined by

  2 F 1 ( a,b;c;z )= n=0 ( a ) n ( b ) n ( c ) n z n n! , (1.3)

where ( δ ) n is the Pochhammer symbol defined, in terms of the Gamma function, by

( δ ) n = Γ( δ+n ) Γ( δ ) ={ 1 ( n=0 ) δ( δ+1 )( δ+n1 ) ( n ).

The hypergeometric function   2 F 1 ( a,b;c;z ) is analytic in U and if a or b is a negative integer, then it reduces to a polynomial.

Various definition of operators of fractional calculus (that is, fractional integral and fractional derivative) are available in the literature (cf., e.g., [2]-[5]). We state here the following definition due to Saigo [6] (see also [7] [8]).

Definition 1.2. For λ>0 , μ , ν , the fractional integral operator 0,z λ,μ,ν is defined by

0,z λ,μ,ν f( z )= z λμ Γ( λ ) 0 z ( zζ ) λ1 2 F 1 ( λ+μ,ν;λ;1 ζ z )f( ζ )dζ ,

where   2 F 1 is the Gaussian hypergeometric function defined by (1.3) and f( z ) is taken to be an analytic function in a simply-connected region of the z -plane containing the origin with the order

f( z )=O( | z | ϵ )( z0 )

for ϵ>max{ 0,μν }1 , and the multiplicity of ( zζ ) λ1 is removed by requiring that log( zζ ) to be real when zζ>0 .

With the aid of the above definition, Owa et al. [8] defined a modification of the fractional integral operator J 0,z λ,μ,ν by

J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z )= Γ( p+1μ )Γ( λ+p+1+ν ) Γ( p+1 )Γ( p+1μ+ν ) z μ 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) (1.4)

for f( z )A( p ) and μνp<1 . Then it is observed that J 0,z λ,μ,ν also maps A( p ) onto itself as follows :

J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z )= z p + k=1 ( p+1 ) k ( p+1μ+ν ) k ( p+1μ ) k ( p+1+λ+ν ) k a k+p z k+p (1.5)

( λ>0;μνp<1;fA( p ) ).

We note that

J 0,z 0,0,ν f( z )=f( z )

J 0,z γδ+1,0,δ2 f( z )= γ,δ f( z )( fA( 1 );γ+1>δ>0 )

J 0,z λ,0,μp f( z )= Q μ λ f( z )( fA( p );λ>0;μ>1 ),

where γ,δ and Q μ λ are the integral operators introduced by Choi et al. [9] and Liu [10].

It is easily verified from (1.5) that

z ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) ) =( λ+ν+p ) J 0,z λ1,μ,ν f( z )( λ+ν ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ). (1.6)

The identity (1.5) plays an important and significant role in obtaining our results.

Making use of the principle of subordination, various subordination theorems involving certain integral operators for analytic functions in U were investigated Bulboacă [11] [12], Miller et al. [13] and Owa and Srivastava [14]. Recently, Kumar et al. [15] gave an unified approach to study the properties of all these linear operators by considering the aspect that these operators satify recurrence relation of some common forms. They studied properties of integral transforms in a similar way. Furthermore, the study of the subordination properties and their dual problems for various operators is a significant role in pure and applied mathematics. For some recent developments one may refer to [16]-[19].

In the present paper, we investigate the subordination results by certain multivalent functions associated with fractional integral operator J 0,z λ,μ,ν . Some interesting applications to the integral operator are also considered.

2. Subordination Results Involving Fractional Integral Operator

In this section, we prove the subordination theorems involving the fractional

integral operator J 0,z λ,μ,ν defined by (1.4). The following results will be required in our investigation.

Lemma 2.1. ([20]) Let pQ with p( 0 )=a and let q( z )=a+ a n z n + be analytic in U with q( z ) a and n . If q is not subordinate to p , then there exist points z 0 = r 0 e iθ U and ζ 0 U\E( f ) , for which

q( U r 0 )p( U ),q( z 0 )=p( ζ 0 )and z 0 q ( z 0 )=m ζ 0 p ( ζ 0 )( mn ).

Lemma 2.2. ([1]) Let h be convex univalent in U and let A0 . Suppose that M>4/ h ( 0 ) and that B( z ) and D( z ) are analytic with D( 0 )=0 and satisfy

Re{ B( z ) }A+M| d( z ) |( zU ).

If p , with p( 0 )=h( 0 ) satisfies

A z 2 p ( z )+B( z )z p ( z )+p( z )+D( z )h( z )( zU ),

then p( z )h( z ) ( zU ) .

A function L( z,t ) defined on U×[ 0, ) is called the subordination chain (or Löwner chain)if L( ,t ) is analytic and univalent in U for all t[ 0, ) , L( z, ) is continuously differentiable on [ 0, ) for all zU and L( z,s )L( z,t ) ( zU;0s<t ) .

Lemma 2.3. ([21]) The function L( z,t )= a 1 ( t )z+ with

a 1 ( t )0and lim t | a 1 ( t ) |=.

Suppose that L( ,t ) is analytic in U for all t0 , L( z, ) is continuously differentiable 0n [ 0, ) for all zU . If L( z,t ) satisfies

Re{ zL( z,t ) z L( z,t ) t }>0( zU;0t< )

and

| L( z,t ) | K 0 | a 1 ( t ) |( | z |< r 0 <1;0 )

for some positive constant K 0 and r 0 , then L( z,t ) is a subordination chain.

We begin by proving the following theorem.

Theorem 2.1. Let λ>1 and μνp<1 . Also let f,gA( p ) with

Re{ α( λ+ν+p ) J 0,z λ1,μ,ν g( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) }>0( α\{ 0 };λ+ν+p0;zU ). (2.1)

If the function h γ *   ( 0γ1 ) and

[ ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) ) α ] 1γ [ J 0,z λ1,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ1,μ,ν g( z ) ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) ) α1 ] γ h( z ), (2.2)

then

( J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) ) α h( z ).

Proof. Let us define the function q by

q( z )= ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) ) α ( f,gA( p );α\{ 0 };zU ). (2.3)

A simple calculation using (1.6) and (2.3) gives

J 0,z λ1,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ1,μ,ν g( z ) ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) ) α1 =q( z )+ z q ( z ) α( λ+ν+p )H( z ) , (2.4)

where

H( z )= J 0,z λ1,μ,ν g( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) ( zU ).

We note that the assumption (2.1) implies that H( z )0 ( zU ) . Hence, combining (2.3) and (2.4), we have

[ ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) ) α ] 1γ [ J 0,z λ1,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ1,μ,ν g( z ) ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) ) α1 ] γ =q( z ) ( 1+ z q ( z ) q( z ) 1 α( λ+ν+p )H( z ) ) γ . (2.5)

Thus, from (2.5), we need to prove the following subordination implication:

q( z ) ( 1+ z q ( z ) q( z ) 1 α( λ+ν+p )H( z ) ) γ h( z )q( z )h( z )( zU ). (2.6)

For the particular case γ=1 , the implication (2.6) becomes

q( z )+ z q ( z ) α( λ+ν+p )H( z ) h( z )q( z )h( z )( zU ). (2.7)

According to Lemma 2.2 for A=0 and D( z )=0 and by applying the inequality (2.1), we deduce that the above implication (2.7) holds true.

Now we will show that our result for the case γ1 . Without loss of generality, we can assume that h satisfies the conditions of Theorem 2.1 on the closed disk U ¯ and h ( ζ )0 ( ζU ) . If not, then we replace f,g,h and H by

f r ( z )=f( rz ), g r ( z )=g( rz ), h r ( z )=h( rz )and H r ( z )=H( rz ),

respectively, where 0<r<1 and then h r is univalent on U ¯ . Since

q r ( z ) ( 1+ z q r ( z ) q r ( z ) 1 α( λ+ν+p ) H r ( z ) ) γ h r ( z )( zU ),

where q r ( z )=q( rz ) ( 0<r<1;zU ) , we would then prove that

q r ( z ) h r ( z )( 0<r<1;zU ),

and by letting r 1 , we obtain q( z )h( z )  ( zU ) .

If we suppose that the implication (2.6) is not true, that is,

q( z )h( z )( zU ),

then, from Lemma 1, there exist point z 0 U and ζ 0 U such that

q( z 0 )=h( ζ 0 )and z 0 q ( z 0 )=m ζ 0 h ( ζ 0 )( m1 ). (2.8)

To prove the implication (2.6), we define the function L:U×[ 0, ) by

L( z,t )=h( z ) [ 1+t z h ( z ) h( z ) 1 α( λ+ν+p )H( z 0 ) ] γ = a 1 ( t )z+,

and we will prove that L( z,t ) is a subordination chain. At first, we note that L( z,t ) is analytic in | z |<r<1 , for sufficient small r>o and for all t0 . We also have that L( z,t ) is continuously differentiable on [ 0, ) for each | z |<r<1 . A simple computation show that

a 1 ( t )= L( 0,t ) z = h ( 0 )[ 1+ tγ α( λ+ν+p )H( z 0 ) ]

From the assumptions h ( 0 )0 and (2.1) with 0<γ1 , we deduce

Re[ 1+ tγ α( λ+ν+p )H( z 0 ) ]1>0( t0 ). (2.9)

Hence we have a 1 ( t )0 ( t0 ) and also we observe that lim t | a 1 ( t ) |= .

While, by a direct computation, we obtain

Re{ zL( z,t )/ z L( z,t )/ t }= t γ Re[ ( 1γ ) z h ( z ) h( z ) +γ( 1+ z h ( z ) h ( z ) ) ] + 1 γ Re{ α( λ+ν+p )H( z 0 ) }. (2.10)

By applying the assumptions h γ * and (2.1) to (2.10), we have

Re{ zL( z,t )/ z L( z,t )/ t }>0( zU;0t< ),

which completes the proof of the first condition of Lemma 2.3. Furthermore, we obtain

| L( z,t ) a 1 ( t ) | 1 γ = | h( z ) h ( 0 ) | 1 γ | 1+t z h ( z ) h( z ) 1 α( λ+ν+p )H( z 0 ) | | 1+ γt α( λ+ν+p )H( z 0 ) | 1 γ 1 γ | h( z ) h ( 0 ) | 1 γ [ | z h ( z ) h( z ) |+ | γ z h ( z ) h( z ) | | 1+ γt α( λ+ν+p )H( z 0 ) | ] 1 | 1+ γt α( λ+ν+p )H( z 0 ) | 1 γ 1 1 γ| h ( 0 ) | | h( z ) h ( 0 ) | 1 γ 1 [ | z h ( z ) |+ γ| h( z ) |+| z h ( z ) | | 1+ γt α( λ+ν+p )H( z 0 ) | ] 1 | 1+ γt α( λ+ν+p )H( z 0 ) | 1 γ 1 . (2.11)

Since h γ * , the function h may be written by

h( z )=h( 0 )+ h ( 0 )G( z )( zU ), (2.12)

where G is a normalized univalent function in U . Moreover, for function G , we have the following sharp growth and distortion results [21]:

r ( 1+r ) 2 | G( z ) | r ( 1r ) 2 ( | z |=r<1 ) (2.13)

and

1r ( 1+r ) 3 | G ( z ) | 1+r ( 1r ) 3 ( | z |=r<1 ). (2.14)

Hence, by using the equations (2.9), (2.12), (2.13) and (2.14) to (2.11), we can find easily an upper bound for the right-hand side of (2.12). Thus the function L( z,t ) satisfies the second condition of Lemma 2.3, which proves that L( z,t ) is a subordination chain. In particular, we note from the definition of subordination chain that

h( z )=L( z,0 )L( z,t )( zU;t0 ). (2.15)

Making use of (2.5) and (2.8), we have

[ ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z 0 ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z 0 ) ) α ] 1γ [ J 0,z λ1,μ,ν f( z 0 ) J 0,z λ1,μ,ν g( z 0 ) ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z 0 ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z 0 ) ) α1 ] γ =q( z 0 ) ( 1+ z 0 q ( z 0 ) q( z 0 ) 1 α( λ+ν+p )H( z 0 ) ) γ =h( ζ 0 ) ( 1+m ζ 0 h ( ζ 0 ) h( ζ 0 ) 1 α( λ+ν+p )H( z 0 ) ) γ =L( ζ 0 ,m )( m1 ).

Then, according to (2.15), we deduce that

[ ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z 0 ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z 0 ) ) α ] 1γ [ J 0,z λ1,μ,ν f( z 0 ) J 0,z λ1,μ,ν g( z 0 ) ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z 0 ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z 0 ) ) α1 ] γ =L( ζ 0 ,m )L( U,0 )=h( U ). (2.16)

But the relation (2.16) contradicts the assumption (2.2), and hence we finally conclude that q( z )h( z ) ( zU ) . This evidently completes the proof of Theorem 2.1.

Taking g( z )= z p in Theorem 1, we get the following corollary:

Corollary 2.1. Let λ>1 and μνp<1 and let fA( p ) . If the function h γ * ( 0γ1 ) and

[ ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) z p ) α ] 1γ [ J 0,z λ1,μ,ν f( z ) z p ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) z p ) α1 ] γ h( z )

( α\{ 0 };Re{ α( λ+ν+p ) }>0;zU ),

then

( J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) z p ) α h( z ).

Theorem 2.2. Let λ>1 and μνp<1 . Also let f,gA( p ) with

Re{ α( λ+ν+p ) J 0,z λ1,μ,ν g( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) }>0( α\{ 0 };λ+ν+p0;zU ).

If the function h 1 * and

( 1β ) ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) ) α +β J 0,z λ1,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ1,μ,ν g( z ) ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) ) α1 h( z )( β0;zU ),

then

( J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) ) α h( z ).

Proof. Let us define the function q as in the proof of Theorem 2.1 by

q( z )= ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) ) α ( f,gA( p );α\{ 0 };zU ).

Then, by applying the equations (2.3) and (2.4), we have

( 1β ) ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) ) α +β J 0,z λ1,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ1,μ,ν g( z ) ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) ) α1 =q( z )( 1+ z q ( z ) q( z ) β α( λ+ν+p )H( z ) ).

The remaining part of the proof in Theorem 2.2 is much akin to that of Theorem 2.1 and so we omit the detailed proof.

Putting α=1 in Theorem 2.2, we obtain the following result.

Corollary 2.2. Let λ>1 and μνp<1 . Also let f,gA( p ) with

Re{ ( λ+ν+p ) J 0,z λ1,μ,ν g( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) }>0( λ+ν+p0;zU ).

If the function h 1 * and

( 1β )( J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) )+β J 0,z λ1,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ1,μ,ν g( z ) h( z )( β0;zU ),

then

J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) h( z ).

For σ>p and fA( p ) , we consider the generalized Bernardi-Livera-Livingston operator σ defined by (cf. [9] [22]-[24])

σ ( f )( z ):= σ+p z σ 0 z t σ1 f( t )dt . (2.17)

Now, we obtain the following subordination properties involving the integral operator defined by (2.17).

Theorem 2.3. Let λ>0 and μνp<1 . Also let f,gA( p ) with

Re{ α( σ+p ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( g )( z ) }>0( α\{ 0 };σ>p;zU ),

where σ is given by (2.17). If the function h γ * ( 0γ1 ) and

[ ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( f )( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( g )( z ) ) α ] 1γ [ J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( f )( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( g )( z ) ) α1 ] γ h( z ),

then

( J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( f )( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( g )( z ) ) α h( z ).

Proof. From (2.17) we have

z ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( f )( z ) ) =( σ+p ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z )σ J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( f )( z ). (2.18)

Let us define the function q by

q( z )= ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( f )( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( g )( z ) ) α ( f,gA( p );α\{ 0 };zU ). (2.19)

A simple calculation using (2.18) and (2.19) gives

J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( f )( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( g )( z ) ) α1 =q( z )+ z q ( z ) α( σ+p )H( z ) , (2.20)

where

H( z )= J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( g )( z ) ( zU ).

We also note that from the assumption, H( z )0 ( zU ) . Hence, combining (2.19) and (2.20), we have

[ ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( f )( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( g )( z ) ) α ] 1γ [ J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( f )( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( g )( z ) ) α1 ] γ =q( z ) ( 1+ z q ( z ) q( z ) 1 α( σ+p )H( z ) ) γ . (2.21)

The remaining part of the proof is much akin to that of Theorem 2.1 and so we may omit for the proof involved.

Letting α=1 and γ=1 in Theorem 2.3, we have the following Corollary.

Corollary 2.3. Let λ>0 and μνp<1 . Also let f,gA( p ) with

Re{ ( σ+p ) J 0,z λ1,μ,ν g( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( g )( z ) }>0( σ>p;zU ),

where σ is given by (2.17). If the function h 1 * and

J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) h( z ),

then

J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( f )( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( g )( z ) h( z ).

Theorem 2.4. Let λ>0 and μνp<1 . Also let f,gA( p ) with

Re{ α( σ+p ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( g )( z ) }>0( α\{ 0 };σ>p;zU ).

where σ is given by (2.17). If the function h 1 * and

( 1β ) ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( f )( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( g )( z ) ) α +β J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) ( J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( f )( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( g )( z ) ) α1 h( z )( β0;zU ),

then

( J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( f )( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( g )( z ) ) α h( z ).

The proof of Theorem 2.4 is similar to that of Theorem 2.2 and so the details may be omitted.

Putting α=1 in Theorem 2.4, we obtain the following result.

Corollary 2.4. Let λ>0 and μνp<1 . Also let f,gA( p ) with

Re{ ( σ+p ) J 0,z λ1,μ,ν g( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( g )( z ) }>0( σ>p;zU ).

where σ is given by (2.17). If the function h 1 * and

( 1β )( J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( f )( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( g )( z ) )+β J 0,z λ,μ,ν f( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν g( z ) h( z )( β0;zU ),

then

J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( f )( z ) J 0,z λ,μ,ν σ ( g )( z ) h( z ).

3. Conclusion

Fractional calculus is one of the most intensively developing areas of the mathematical analysis. The fractional calculus operators have gone deep across into the realm of the theory of univalent and multivalent functions. In this present paper, we have found some mapping properties of subordinations by certain multivalent functions in the open unit disk associated with fractional integral operator. Further research can be conducted based on this paper by using various operators of fractional calculus in geometric function theory.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Daegu National University of Education Research grant in 2024.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

References

[1] Miller, S.S. and Mocanu, P.T. (2000) Differential Subordination, Theory and Application. Marcel Dekker, Inc.
[2] Kamble, P.N., Shrigan, M.G. and Srivastava, H.M. (2017) A Novel Subclass of Univalent Functions Involving Operators of Fractional Calculus. International Journal of Apllied Mathematics, 30, 501-514.
https://doi.org/10.12732/ijam.v30i6.4
[3] Samko, S.G., Kilbas, A.A. and Marichev, O.I. (1993) Fractional Integral and Derivatives, Theory and Applications. Gordon and Breach Science Publishers.
[4] Srivastava H.M. and Buschman, R.G. (1992) Theory and Applications of Convolution Integral Equations. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8092-2
[5] Szatmari, E. (2018) Some Properties of Analytic Functions Obtained by Using a Fractional Operator. Asia Pacific Journal of Mathematics, 5, 151-172.
[6] Saigo, M. (1977) A Remark on Integral Operators Involving the Gauss Hypergeometric Functions. Mathematical Reports of College of General Education, Kyushu University, 11, 135-143.
[7] Choi, J.H. (2007) Note on Differential Subordination Associated with Fractional Integral Operator. Far East Journal of Mathematical Sciences, 26, 499-511.
[8] Owa, S., Saigo, M. and Srivastava, H.M. (1989) Some Characterization Theorems for Starlike and Convex Functions Involving a Certain Fractional Integral Operator. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 140, 419-426.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-247x(89)90075-9
[9] Choi, J.H., Saigo, M. and Srivastava, H.M. (2002) Some Inclusion Properties of a Certain Family of Integral Operators. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 276, 432-445.
https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-247x(02)00500-0
[10] Liu, J. (2004) Notes on Jung-Kim-Srivastava Integral Operator. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 294, 96-103.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmaa.2004.01.040
[11] Bulboacă, T. (1997) Integral Operators that Preserve the Subordination, Bull. Korean Mathematical Society, 32, 627-636.
[12] Bulboacă, T. (2003) Subordinations by Alpha-Convex Functions. Kodai Mathematical Journal, 26, 267-278.
https://doi.org/10.2996/kmj/1073670608
[13] Miller, S.S., Mocanu, P.T. and Reade, M.O. (1984) Subordination-Preserving Integral Operators. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 283, 605-615.
https://doi.org/10.1090/s0002-9947-1984-0737887-4
[14] Owa, S. and Srivastava, H.M. (2004) Some Subordination Theorems Involving a Certain Family of Integral Operators. Integral Transforms and Special Functions, 15, 445-454.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10652460410001727563
[15] Kumar, S.S., Kumar, V. and Ravichandran, V. (2013) Subordination and Superordination for Multivalent Functions Defined by Linear Operators. Tamsui Oxford Journal of Information and Mathematical Sciences, 29, 361-387.
[16] Cho, N.E., Kumar, S., Kumar, V., Ravichandran, V. and Srivastava, H.M. (2019) Starlike Functions Related to the Bell Numbers. Symmetry, 11, Article 219.
https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11020219
[17] Güney, H.Ö., Breaz, D. and Owa, S. (2023) Some Properties for Subordinations of Analytic Functions. Axioms, 12, Article 131.
https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms12020131
[18] Naraghi, H., Najmadi, P. and Taherkhani, B. (2021) New Subclass of Analytic Functions Defined by Subordination. International Journal of Nonlinear Analysis and Applications, 12, 847-855.
[19] Oros, G.I., Oros, G. and Owa, S. (2023) Subordination Properties of Certain Operators Concerning Fractional Integral and Libera Integral Operator. Fractal and Fractional, 7, Article 42.
https://doi.org/10.3390/fractalfract7010042
[20] Miller, S.S. and Mocanu, P.T. (1981) Differential Subordinations and Univalent Functions. Michigan Mathematical Journal, 28, 157-171.
https://doi.org/10.1307/mmj/1029002507
[21] Pommerenke, C. (1975) Univalent Functions. Vanderhoeck and Ruprecht, Göttingen.
[22] Bernardi, S.D. (1969) Convex and Starlike Univalent Functions. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 135, 429-446.
https://doi.org/10.1090/s0002-9947-1969-0232920-2
[23] Libera, R.J. (1965) Some Classes of Regular Univalent Functions. Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, 16, 755-758.
https://doi.org/10.1090/s0002-9939-1965-0178131-2
[24] Srivastava, H.M. and Owa, S. (1992) Current Topics in Analytic Function Theory. World Scientific.
https://doi.org/10.1142/1628

Copyright © 2025 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.