This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

Connection coefficients for ultraspherical polynomials with argument doubling and generalized bispectrality

Maxim Derevyagin MD, Department of Mathematics
University of Connecticut
341 Mansfield Road, U-1009
Storrs, CT 06269-1009, USA
[email protected]
 and  Jeffrey S. Geronimo JG, School of Mathematics, Georgia Institute of Technology, 686 Cherry Street, Atlanta, GA 30332–0160, USA [email protected] Dedicated to the memory of Richard Askey
Abstract.

We start by presenting a generalization of a discrete wave equation that is satisfied by the entries of the matrix coefficients of the refinement equation corresponding to the multiresolution analysis of Alpert. The entries are in fact functions of two discrete variables and they can be expressed in terms of the Legendre polynomials. Next, we generalize these functions to the case of the ultraspherical polynomials and show that these new functions obey two generalized eigenvalue problems in each of the two discrete variables, which constitute a generalized bispectral problem. At the end, we make some connections to other problems.

Key words and phrases:
Orthogonal polynomials, ultraspherical polynomials, discrete wave equation, generalized eigenvalue problem, bispectral problem
1991 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary 33C45, 39A14; Secondary 65Q10, 42C05, 42C40.

1. Introduction

Let {Pn}n=0\{P_{n}\}_{n=0}^{\infty} and {Qn}n=0\{Q_{n}\}_{n=0}^{\infty} be two families of orthonormal polynomials whose orthogonality measures are dμd\mu and dνd\nu, respectively. Then one can see that

Pi(t)=j=0ici,jQj(t),P_{i}(t)=\sum_{j=0}^{i}c_{i,j}Q_{j}(t),

where the coefficients ci,jc_{i,j} can be found in the following way

ci,j=Pi(t)Qj(t)𝑑ν(t).c_{i,j}=\int P_{i}(t)Q_{j}(t)\,d\nu(t).

These coefficients are called connection coefficients and their nonnegativity for some particular cases of the ultraspherical polynomials is useful in the proof of the positivity of a certain F23{}_{3}F_{2} function, which in turn, based on the work of Gasper and Askey and Gasper, played a significant role in the first proof of the Bieberbach conjecture [2]. Also there has been much work proving the nonnegativity of integrals of products of orthogonal polynomials times certain functions which was initiated by Askey in the late 1960’s. These studies have been stimulated by the fact that some of those integrals have combinatorial interpretations (see [11]).

Another instance that we would like to mention is that in some early work leading to the theory of bispectral problems a matrix S1S_{1}, whose entries are

(S1)i,j=aΩPi(t)Pj(t)𝑑μ(t)(S_{1})_{i,j}=\int_{a}^{\Omega}P_{i}(t)P_{j}(t)\,d\mu(t)

for some real aa and Ω\Omega, was considered (for instance, see [9]). The question was to find eigenvectors of S1S_{1}. Since S1S_{1} is a full matrix, this is not an easy task. However, it was proposed to find a tridiagonal matrix commuting with S1S_{1} in order to reduce the original problem to a problem of finding eigenvectors of the tridiagonal matrix, which is an easier and well understood problem. It was shown to be possible to construct such tridiagonal matrices for some families of orthogonal polynomials and this is one of the fundamental ideas in the theory of bispectral problems.

The last instance to bring up here is that in [8] the Alpert multiresolution analysis was studied in detail and important in this study was the integral

fi,j=01p^i(t)p^j(2t1)𝑑t,f_{i,j}=\int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}_{i}(t)\hat{p}_{j}(2t-1)dt,

where p^i\hat{p}_{i} is the orthonormal Legendre polynomial, i.e. p^j(t)=kjtj+lower degree terms\hat{p}_{j}(t)=k_{j}t^{j}+\text{lower degree terms} with kj>0k_{j}>0 and for any two nonnegative integers kk and ll we have

11p^k(t)p^l(t)𝑑t={0,kl;1,k=l.\int_{-1}^{1}\hat{p}_{k}(t)\hat{p}_{l}(t)dt=\begin{cases}0,\,\,k\neq l;\\ 1,\,\,k=l.\end{cases}

These coefficients are entries in the refinement equation associated with this multiresolution analysis. The fact that the Legendre polynomials are involved in the above integral allowed the authors in [8] to obtain many types of recurrence formulas in ii and jj including a generalized eigenvalue problem in each of the indices. These two equations together give rise to a bispectral generalized eigenvalue problem.

We begin by discussing a common property of the coefficients in all the above-mentioned cases: they satisfy a generalized 2D discrete wave equation. Then we observe numerically that a damped oscillatory behavior takes place in the case of the ultraspherical generalization of the coefficients fi,jf_{i,j}. In particular with

fi,j(λ)=01p^i(λ)(t)p^j(λ)(2t1)(t(1t))λ1/2𝑑t,f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j}=\int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{i}(t)\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{j}(2t-1)(t(1-t))^{\lambda-1/2}dt,

where p^i(λ){\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{i}} are the orthonormal ultraspherical polynomials and λ>1/2\lambda>\ -1/2 we find the asymptotic formula

fi,j(λ)=kjcos(π(j+λ2i2+14))πiλ+1/2+O(1iλ+3/2),f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j}=k_{j}\frac{\cos\left(\pi\left(j+\frac{\lambda}{2}-\frac{i}{2}+\frac{1}{4}\right)\right)}{\sqrt{\pi}i^{\lambda+1/2}}+O\left(\frac{1}{i^{\lambda+3/2}}\right),

where

kj=12j+12λ(2λ)jj!(λ)j(λ+1)jλΓ(2λ)Γ(2j+2λ+1)(λ+12)jk_{j}=\frac{1}{2^{j+1-2\lambda}}\sqrt{\frac{(2\lambda)_{j}}{j!(\lambda)_{j}(\lambda+1)_{j}\lambda\Gamma(2\lambda)}}\Gamma(2j+2\lambda+1)(\lambda+\frac{1}{2})_{j}

which confirms the damped oscillatory behavior. We also derive some related properties and show that fi,j(λ)f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j} satisfy a bispectral generalized eigenvalue problem of the form

A~ifi,j(λ)=(j+λ12)(j+λ+12)Bifi,j(λ),A^jfi,j(λ)=(i+λ+12)(i+λ12)B^jfi,j(λ),\begin{split}\tilde{A}_{i}f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j}=(j+\lambda-\frac{1}{2})(j+\lambda+\frac{1}{2})B_{i}f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j},\\ \hat{A}_{j}f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j}=(i+\lambda+\frac{1}{2})(i+\lambda-\frac{1}{2})\hat{B}_{j}f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j},\end{split}

where A~i\tilde{A}_{i}, BiB_{i} are tridiagonal operators or second order linear difference operators acting on ii and A^j\hat{A}_{j}, B^j\hat{B}_{j} are tridiagonal operators acting on jj. Each of the two above-given relations is a generalized eigenvalue problem and the theory of such problems is intimately related to biorthogonal rational functions (for instance, see [10], [12], [16]).

The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 a vast generalization of the above integral is shown to give rise to a 2D wave equation and solutions to the special case of the above integral are plotted to show the oscillations. In Section 3 the Legendre case above is analyzed and various properties of the coefficients fi,jf_{i,j} are derived. One point of this section is to derive the orthogonality property of these coefficients using that they come from special functions. In Section 4 the Legendre polynomials are replaced by the ultraspherical polynomials and their scaled weight. Here it is shown that the coefficients fi,j(λ)f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j} satisfy a wave equation and also a bispectral generalized eigenvalue problem. Two proofs are given developing the generalized eigenvalue problem. One is based on the fact that the polynomials satisfy a differential equation and has the flavor of the proof given in [9] and the second follows from the formula for fi,j(λ)f_{i,j}^{(\lambda)} in terms of a F12{}_{2}F_{1} hypergeometric function. The two proofs emphasize different aspects of the problem that maybe useful when viewing other orthogonal polynomial systems. In Section 5 connections are made to various other problems.

2. The 2D discrete wave equation

Let {Pn}n=0\{P_{n}\}_{n=0}^{\infty} and {Qn}n=0\{Q_{n}\}_{n=0}^{\infty} be two families of orthonormal polynomials with respect to two probability measures or, equivalently, two families that obey the three-term recurrence relations

an+1Pn+1(t)+bnPn(t)+anPn1(t)=tPn(t),n=0,1,2,a_{n+1}P_{n+1}(t)+b_{n}P_{n}(t)+a_{n}P_{n-1}(t)=tP_{n}(t),\quad n=0,1,2,\dots

and

cn+1Qn+1(t)+dnQn(t)+cnQn1(t)=tQn(t),n=0,1,2,,c_{n+1}Q_{n+1}(t)+d_{n}Q_{n}(t)+c_{n}Q_{n-1}(t)=tQ_{n}(t),\quad n=0,1,2,\dots,

where the coefficients ana_{n} and cnc_{n} are positive and the coefficients bnb_{n} and dnd_{n} are real. In particular, the first relations are

a1P1(t)+b0P0(t)=tP0(t),c1Q1(t)+d0Q0(t)=tQ0(t).a_{1}P_{1}(t)+b_{0}P_{0}(t)=tP_{0}(t),\quad c_{1}Q_{1}(t)+d_{0}Q_{0}(t)=tQ_{0}(t).

Therefore we can set a0=c0=0a_{0}=c_{0}=0 for the coefficients to be defined for n=0,1,2,n=0,1,2,\dots. Since the families are orthonormal with respect to probability measures we know that

P0=1,Q0=1,P_{0}=1,\quad Q_{0}=1,

which are the initial conditions that allow to reconstruct each of the systems from the corresponding recurrence relation. It should be stressed here that by imposing these particular initial conditions we implicitly assume that the corresponding orthogonality measures are probability measures.

In addition, suppose we are given a measure σ\sigma on {\mathbb{R}} with finite moments. Then, let us consider the coefficients

(2.1) ui,j=Pi(t)Qj(αt+β)𝑑σ(t),u_{i,j}=\int_{{\mathbb{R}}}P_{i}(t)Q_{j}(\alpha t+\beta)d\sigma(t),

where α0\alpha\neq 0 and β\beta are complex numbers. It turns out that these coefficients constitute a solution of a generalized wave equation on the two dimensional lattice.

Theorem 2.1 (cf. Theorem 2.1 from [11]).

We have that

(2.2) ai+1ui+1,j+biui,j+aiui1,j=cj+1αui,j+1+djβαui,j+cjαui,j1a_{i+1}u_{i+1,j}+b_{i}u_{i,j}+a_{i}u_{i-1,j}=\frac{c_{j+1}}{\alpha}u_{i,j+1}+\frac{d_{j}-\beta}{\alpha}u_{i,j}+\frac{c_{j}}{\alpha}u_{i,j-1}

for i,j=0i,j=0, 11, 22, ….

Proof.

From (2.1) and the three-term recurrence relations we get that

ai+1ui+1,j+biui,j+aiui1,j\displaystyle a_{i+1}u_{i+1,j}+b_{i}u_{i,j}+a_{i}u_{i-1,j}
=(ai+1Pi+1(t)+biPi(t)+aiPi1(t))Qj(αt+β)𝑑σ(t)\displaystyle=\int_{{\mathbb{R}}}(a_{i+1}P_{i+1}(t)+b_{i}P_{i}(t)+a_{i}P_{i-1}(t))Q_{j}(\alpha t+\beta)d\sigma(t)
=tPi(t)Qj(αt+β)𝑑σ(t)\displaystyle=\int_{{\mathbb{R}}}tP_{i}(t)Q_{j}(\alpha t+\beta)d\sigma(t)
=1αPi(t)(αt+β)Qj(αt+β)𝑑σ(t)βαPi(t)Qj(αt+β)𝑑σ(t)\displaystyle=\frac{1}{\alpha}\int_{{\mathbb{R}}}P_{i}(t)(\alpha t+\beta)Q_{j}(\alpha t+\beta)d\sigma(t)-\frac{\beta}{\alpha}\int_{{\mathbb{R}}}P_{i}(t)Q_{j}(\alpha t+\beta)d\sigma(t)
=1αPi(t)(cj+1Qj+1(αt+β)+djQj(αt+β)+cjQj1(αt+β))𝑑σ(t)\displaystyle=\frac{1}{\alpha}\int_{{\mathbb{R}}}P_{i}(t)(c_{j+1}Q_{j+1}(\alpha t+\beta)+d_{j}Q_{j}(\alpha t+\beta)+c_{j}Q_{j-1}(\alpha t+\beta))d\sigma(t)
βαui,j\displaystyle-\frac{\beta}{\alpha}u_{i,j}
=cj+1αui,j+1+djαui,j+cjαui,j1βαui,j\displaystyle=\frac{c_{j+1}}{\alpha}u_{i,j+1}+\frac{d_{j}}{\alpha}u_{i,j}+\frac{c_{j}}{\alpha}u_{i,j-1}-\frac{\beta}{\alpha}u_{i,j}

and thus (2.2) holds. ∎

Remark 2.2.

Given an equation of the form (2.2) then due to the Favard theorem the coefficients will uniquely determine the families {Pn}n=0\{P_{n}\}_{n=0}^{\infty} and {Qn}n=0\{Q_{n}\}_{n=0}^{\infty} of orthonormal polynomials. The measure σ\sigma is responsible for the initial state when j=0j=0 and jj can be thought of as a discrete time. Namely, for a solution of the form (2.1) to exist they need to satisfy the initial condition

ui,0=Pi(t)𝑑σ(t),u_{i,0}=\int_{{\mathbb{R}}}P_{i}(t)d\sigma(t),

which means that given initial function ui,0u_{i,0} of the discrete space variable ii, σ\sigma needs to be found. The latter problem is a generalized moment problem and in this particular case it is equivalent to a Hamburger moment problem.

It is also worth mentioning here that another type of cross-difference equations on +2{\mathbb{Z}}^{2}_{+} was recently discussed in [3] and the construction was based on multiple orthogonal polynomials. Type I Legendre-Angelesco multiple orthogonal polynomials also arise in the wavelet construction proposed by Alpert [7].

Next, consider a particular case of the above scheme where PnP_{n} and QnQ_{n} are both orthonormal Legendre polynomials p^n\hat{p}_{n} and so verify the three-term recurrence relation

(n+1)(2n+1)(2n+3)p^n+1(t)+n(2n1)(2n+1)p^n1(t)=tp^n(t),\frac{(n+1)}{\sqrt{(2n+1)(2n+3)}}\hat{p}_{n+1}(t)+\frac{n}{\sqrt{(2n-1)(2n+1)}}\hat{p}_{n-1}(t)=t\hat{p}_{n}(t),

for n=0,1,2,n=0,1,2,\dots. Set σ\sigma to be the Lebesgue measure on the interval [0,1][0,1]. As a result, the coefficients (2.1) take the form

(2.3) fi,j=01p^i(t)p^j(2t1)𝑑t.f_{i,j}=\int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}_{i}(t)\hat{p}_{j}(2t-1)dt.

It is not so hard to see that the polynomials p^j(2t1)\hat{p}_{j}(2t-1) are orthogonal on the interval [0,1][0,1] with respect to the Lebesgue measure, consequently

(2.4) fi,j=0,j>i=0,1,2,.f_{i,j}=0,\quad j>i=0,1,2,\dots.

Since the coefficients of the three-term recurrence relation for the Legendre polynomials are explicitly known, the coefficients of equation (2.2) become explicit as well. The following Corollary can be found in [8].

Corollary 2.3.

The function fi,jf_{i,j} satisfies,

(2.5) j+1(2j+1)(2j+3)fi,j+1+fi,j+j(2j1)(2j+1)fi,j1==2(i+1)(2i+1)(2i+3)fi+1,j+2i(2i1)(2i+1)fi1,j\begin{split}\frac{j+1}{\sqrt{(2j+1)(2j+3)}}f_{i,j+1}+f_{i,j}+\frac{j}{\sqrt{(2j-1)(2j+1)}}f_{i,j-1}=\\ =\frac{2(i+1)}{\sqrt{(2i+1)(2i+3)}}f_{i+1,j}+\frac{2i}{\sqrt{(2i-1)(2i+1)}}f_{i-1,j}\end{split}

for i,j=0i,j=0, 11, 22, ….

Below is the MATLAB generated graphical representation of some behavior of the solution fi,jf_{i,j} to equation (2.5), which is a generalization of the discretized wave equation.

Refer to caption
Figure 1. This picture demonstrates the moving wave. Here, one can see two graphs of the function f=f(i)=fi,jf=f(i)=f_{i,j} of the discrete space variable ii at the two different discrete times j=15j=15 and j=20j=20.

To sum up, we would like to point out here that the form (2.1) of solutions of the discrete wave equations is very useful for understanding the behavior of solutions because there are many asymptotic results for a variety of families of orthogonal polynomials.

3. Some further analysis of the coefficients fi,jf_{i,j}

In this section, we will obtain some properties of the coefficients fi,jf_{i,j} based on the intuition and observations developed in [8]. In particular, we will rederive and expand upon some orthogonality properties of the coefficients fi,jf_{i,j}.

We begin with the following statement, which is based on formula (2.3) and some known properties of the Legendre polynomials.

Theorem 3.1.

Let kk and ll be two nonnegative integer numbers. Then one has

(3.1) j=0fk,jfl,j={0,if k and l are of the same parity but not equal;1,ifk=l;(1)k+l+12k!l!2k+12l+12k+l1(kl)(k+l+1)((k2)!)2((l12)!)2,if k and l are of opossite parity.\sum_{j=0}^{\infty}f_{k,j}f_{l,j}=\begin{cases}0,\,\,\text{if $k$ and $l$ are of the same parity but not equal};\\ 1,\,\,\text{if}\,\,k=l;\\ (-1)^{\frac{k+l+1}{2}}\frac{k!l!\sqrt{2k+1}\sqrt{2l+1}}{2^{k+l-1}(k-l)(k+l+1)((\frac{k}{2})!)^{2}((\frac{l-1}{2})!)^{2}},\,\,\text{if $k$ and $l$ are of opossite parity}.\end{cases}
Proof.

Without loss of generality, we can assume that klk\leq l. Next observe that due to (2.4) the left-hand side of formula (3.1) is truncated to

j=0fk,jfl,j=j=0kfk,jfl,j,\sum_{j=0}^{\infty}f_{k,j}f_{l,j}=\sum_{j=0}^{k}f_{k,j}f_{l,j},

which can be written as

j=0kfk,jfl,j=j=0k01p^k(x)p^j(2x1)𝑑x01p^l(y)p^j(2y1)𝑑y.\sum_{j=0}^{k}f_{k,j}f_{l,j}=\sum_{j=0}^{k}\int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}_{k}(x)\hat{p}_{j}(2x-1)dx\int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}_{l}(y)\hat{p}_{j}(2y-1)dy.

One can rewrite the expression in the following manner

j=0kfk,jfl,j=01p^l(y)(01p^k(x)j=0kp^j(2x1)p^j(2y1)dx)𝑑y.\sum_{j=0}^{k}f_{k,j}f_{l,j}=\int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}_{l}(y)\left(\int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}_{k}(x)\sum_{j=0}^{k}\hat{p}_{j}(2x-1)\hat{p}_{j}(2y-1)dx\right)dy.

Since the Christoffel-Darboux kernel 2j=0kp^j(2x1)p^j(2y1)\displaystyle{2\sum_{j=0}^{k}\hat{p}_{j}(2x-1)\hat{p}_{j}(2y-1)} is a reproducing kernel, we get

j=0kfk,jfl,j=201p^k(y)p^l(y)𝑑y.\sum_{j=0}^{k}f_{k,j}f_{l,j}=2\int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}_{k}(y)\hat{p}_{l}(y)dy.

Next recall that one can explicitly compute the quantity

01p^k(y)p^l(y)𝑑y\int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}_{k}(y)\hat{p}_{l}(y)dy

for any nonnegative integers kk and ll. If kk and ll have the same parity the symmetry properties of the Legendre polynomials allow the above integral to be extended to the full orthonality interval [1,1][-1,1] which gives the first two parts of the Theorem. The third case of formula (3.1) is a consequence of [4, p.173, Art. 91, Example 2]. ∎

One can also compute the inner product of vectors fi,jf_{i,j} taken the other way.

Theorem 3.2.

Let kk and ll be two nonnegative integer numbers. Then one has

(3.2) i=0fi,kfi,l={0,kl;1/2,ifk=l.\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}f_{i,k}f_{i,l}=\begin{cases}0,\,\,k\neq l;\\ 1/2,\,\,\text{if}\,\,k=l.\end{cases}
Proof.

Let nn be a nonnegative integer. Then we can write

i=0nfi,kfi,l=i=0n01p^i(x)p^k(2x1)𝑑x01p^i(y)p^l(2y1)𝑑y,\sum_{i=0}^{n}f_{i,k}f_{i,l}=\sum_{i=0}^{n}\int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}_{i}(x)\hat{p}_{k}(2x-1)dx\int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}_{i}(y)\hat{p}_{l}(2y-1)dy,

which can be rewritten as follows

i=0nfi,kfi,l=11p^k(2x1)χ[0,1](x)(i=0n(11p^l(2y1)χ[0,1](y)p^i(y)𝑑y)p^i(x))𝑑x.\sum_{i=0}^{n}f_{i,k}f_{i,l}=\int_{-1}^{1}\hat{p}_{k}(2x-1)\chi_{[0,1]}(x)\left(\sum_{i=0}^{n}\left(\int_{-1}^{1}\hat{p}_{l}(2y-1)\chi_{[0,1]}(y)\hat{p}_{i}(y)dy\right)\hat{p}_{i}(x)\right)dx.

Since the polynomials p^i\hat{p}_{i} form an orthonormal basis in L2([1,1],dt)L_{2}([-1,1],dt) we know that

i=0n(11p^l(2y1)χ[0,1](y)p^i(y)𝑑y)p^i(x)L2([1,1],dt)p^l(2x1)χ[0,1](x)\sum_{i=0}^{n}\left(\int_{-1}^{1}\hat{p}_{l}(2y-1)\chi_{[0,1]}(y)\hat{p}_{i}(y)dy\right)\hat{p}_{i}(x)\xrightarrow{L_{2}([-1,1],dt)}\hat{p}_{l}(2x-1)\chi_{[0,1]}(x)

as nn\to\infty. As a result we arrive at the following relation

i=0fi,kfi,l=11p^k(2x1)χ[0,1](x)p^l(2x1)χ[0,1](x)𝑑x=01p^k(2x1)p^l(2x1)𝑑x=1211p^k(t)p^l(t)𝑑t,\begin{split}\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}f_{i,k}f_{i,l}=&\int_{-1}^{1}\hat{p}_{k}(2x-1)\chi_{[0,1]}(x)\hat{p}_{l}(2x-1)\chi_{[0,1]}(x)dx\\ =&\int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}_{k}(2x-1)\hat{p}_{l}(2x-1)dx=\frac{1}{2}\int_{-1}^{1}\hat{p}_{k}(t)\hat{p}_{l}(t)dt,\end{split}

which finally gives (3.2). ∎

As a consequence we can say a bit more about the asymptotic behavior of the coefficients fi,jf_{i,j}.

Corollary 3.3.

Let kk be a fixed nonnegative integer number. Then

fi,k0f_{i,k}\longrightarrow 0

as ii\to\infty.

Proof.

The statement immediately follows from the fact that the series

i=0fi,k2\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}f_{i,k}^{2}

converges. ∎

Remark 3.4.

From (3.2) one gets that

i=0fi,j2=1/2\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}f_{i,j}^{2}=1/2

for any nonnegative jj. This means that the energy of the wave represented by f=f(i)=fi,jf=f(i)=f_{i,j} is conserved over the discrete time jj.

Remark 3.5.

The fact that fi,kf_{i,k} can be represented as a hypergeometric function allows a more precise asymptotic estimate; see formula (4.21).

4. The case of ultraspherical polynomials

In this section we will carry over our findings from the case of Legendre polynomials to the case of the family of ultraspherical polynomials which include the Legendre polynomials as a special case.

Recall that for λ>1/2\lambda>-1/2 an ultraspherical polynomial p^n(λ)(t)\hat{p}_{n}^{(\lambda)}(t) is a polynomial of degree nn that is the orthonormal polynomial with respect to the measure

(1t2)λ1/2dt.(1-t^{2})^{\lambda-1/2}dt.

In an analogous way to fi,jf_{i,j}, let us consider the function of the discrete variables ii and jj

(4.1) fi,j(λ)=01p^i(λ)(t)p^j(λ)(2t1)(t(1t))λ1/2𝑑tf^{(\lambda)}_{i,j}=\int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}_{i}^{(\lambda)}(t)\hat{p}_{j}^{(\lambda)}(2t-1)(t(1-t))^{\lambda-1/2}dt

and notice that

fi,j=fi,j(1/2).f_{i,j}=f_{i,j}^{(1/2)}.

While this generalization allows us to consider a more general case, the connection to multiresolution analysis seems to be lost due to the weight and there is no evident relation to multiresolution analysis for arbitrary λ>1/2\lambda>-1/2. Still, such a deformation of the coefficients fi,jf_{i,j} gives an insight on how all these objects are connected to various problems some of which were mentioned in the introduction.

Also, it is worth mentioning that the polynomials p^j(λ)(2t1)\hat{p}_{j}^{(\lambda)}(2t-1) are orthogonal with respect to the measure

(t(1t))λ1/2dt.(t(1-t))^{\lambda-1/2}dt.

Next since the ultraspherical polynomials satisfy the three-term recurrence relation [17]

12(n+1)(n+2λ)(n+λ)(n+λ+1)p^n+1(λ)(t)+12n(n+2λ1)(n+λ1)(n+λ)p^n1(λ)(t)=tp^n(λ)(t)\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\frac{(n+1)(n+2\lambda)}{(n+\lambda)(n+\lambda+1)}}\hat{p}_{n+1}^{(\lambda)}(t)+\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\frac{n(n+2\lambda-1)}{(n+\lambda-1)(n+\lambda)}}\hat{p}_{n-1}^{(\lambda)}(t)=t\hat{p}_{n}^{(\lambda)}(t)

the following corollary of Theorem 2.1 is immediate.

Corollary 4.1.

The function fi,j(λ)f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j} satisfies

(4.2) 12(j+1)(j+2λ)(j+λ)(j+λ+1)fi,j+1(λ)+fi,j(λ)+12j(j+2λ1)(j+λ1)(j+λ)fi,j1(λ)==(i+1)(i+2λ)(i+λ)(i+λ+1)fi+1,j(λ)+i(i+2λ1)(i+λ1)(i+λ)fi1,j(λ)\begin{split}\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\frac{(j+1)(j+2\lambda)}{(j+\lambda)(j+\lambda+1)}}f_{i,j+1}^{(\lambda)}+f_{i,j}^{(\lambda)}+\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\frac{j(j+2\lambda-1)}{(j+\lambda-1)(j+\lambda)}}f_{i,j-1}^{(\lambda)}=\\ =\sqrt{\frac{(i+1)(i+2\lambda)}{(i+\lambda)(i+\lambda+1)}}f_{i+1,j}^{(\lambda)}+\sqrt{\frac{i(i+2\lambda-1)}{(i+\lambda-1)(i+\lambda)}}f_{i-1,j}^{(\lambda)}\end{split}

for i,j=0i,j=0, 11, 22, ….

As one can see from the above statement, the function fi,j(λ)f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j} is a solution of a discrete wave equation and Figure 2 demonstrates how the function changes with λ\lambda when jj is fixed.

Refer to caption
Figure 2. This picture shows the λ\lambda-evolution of the function f(λ)=f(λ)(i)=fi,j(λ)f^{(\lambda)}=f^{(\lambda)}(i)=f_{i,j}^{(\lambda)} of the discrete space variable ii when the discrete time jj is fixed and j=15j=15.

It is not so hard to see that it is possible to generalize (3.1) and (3.2) to the case of the ultraspherical polynomials.

Theorem 4.2.

Let kk and ll be two nonnegative integer numbers. Then one has

(4.3) j=0fk,j(λ)fl,j(λ)=122λ01p^k(λ)(y)p^l(λ)(y)(y(1y))λ12𝑑y\sum_{j=0}^{\infty}f_{k,j}^{(\lambda)}f_{l,j}^{(\lambda)}=\frac{1}{2^{2\lambda}}\int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}_{k}^{(\lambda)}(y)\hat{p}_{l}^{(\lambda)}(y)(y(1-y))^{\lambda-\frac{1}{2}}dy

for any λ>1/2\lambda>-1/2 and

(4.4) i=0fi,k(λ)fi,l(λ)=01p^k(λ)(2x1)p^l(λ)(2x1)x2λ1(1x1+x)λ12𝑑x\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}f_{i,k}^{(\lambda)}f_{i,l}^{(\lambda)}=\int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}_{k}^{(\lambda)}(2x-1)\hat{p}_{l}^{(\lambda)}(2x-1)x^{2\lambda-1}\left(\frac{1-x}{1+x}\right)^{\lambda-\frac{1}{2}}dx

provided that λ>0\lambda>0.

Proof.

As before we can assume that klk\leq l therefore,

j=0fk,j(λ)fl,j(λ)=j=0kfk,j(λ)fl,j(λ)=01p^l(λ)(y)(01p^k(λ)(x)j=0kp^j(λ)(2x1)p^j(λ)(2y1)(x(1x))λ12dx)(y(1y))λ12𝑑y.\sum_{j=0}^{\infty}f_{k,j}^{(\lambda)}f_{l,j}^{(\lambda)}=\sum_{j=0}^{k}f_{k,j}^{(\lambda)}f_{l,j}^{(\lambda)}=\\ \int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}_{l}^{(\lambda)}(y)\left(\int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}_{k}^{(\lambda)}(x)\sum_{j=0}^{k}\hat{p}_{j}^{(\lambda)}(2x-1)\hat{p}_{j}^{(\lambda)}(2y-1)(x(1-x))^{\lambda-\frac{1}{2}}dx\right)(y(1-y))^{\lambda-\frac{1}{2}}dy.

Since the Christoffel-Darboux kernel

22λj=0kp^j(λ)(2x1)p^j(λ)(2y1)2^{2\lambda}\sum_{j=0}^{k}\hat{p}_{j}^{(\lambda)}(2x-1)\hat{p}_{j}^{(\lambda)}(2y-1)

is a reproducing kernel in the corresponding L2L_{2}-space, we get

j=0fk,j(λ)fl,j(λ)=122λ01p^k(λ)(y)p^l(λ)(y)(y(1y))λ12𝑑y.\sum_{j=0}^{\infty}f_{k,j}^{(\lambda)}f_{l,j}^{(\lambda)}=\frac{1}{2^{2\lambda}}\int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}_{k}^{(\lambda)}(y)\hat{p}_{l}^{(\lambda)}(y)(y(1-y))^{\lambda-\frac{1}{2}}dy.

To prove the second equality, consider the following representation of the finite sum

i=0nfi,k(λ)fi,l(λ)=11p^k(λ)(2x1)χ[0,1](x)xλ1/2(1+x)λ1/2Pn(x)(1x2)λ1/2𝑑x,\sum_{i=0}^{n}f_{i,k}^{(\lambda)}f_{i,l}^{(\lambda)}=\int_{-1}^{1}\hat{p}_{k}^{(\lambda)}(2x-1)\chi_{[0,1]}(x)\frac{x^{\lambda-1/2}}{(1+x)^{\lambda-1/2}}P_{n}(x)(1-x^{2})^{\lambda-1/2}dx,

where

Pn(x)=i=0n11(p^l(λ)(2y1)χ[0,1](y))yλ1/2(1+y)λ1/2pi(λ)(y)(1y2)λ1/2dy)p^i(λ)(x).P_{n}(x)=\sum_{i=0}^{n}\int_{-1}^{1}\left(\hat{p}_{l}^{(\lambda)}(2y-1)\chi_{[0,1]}(y))\frac{y^{\lambda-1/2}}{(1+y)^{\lambda-1/2}}p_{i}^{(\lambda)}(y)(1-y^{2})^{\lambda-1/2}dy\right)\hat{p}_{i}^{(\lambda)}(x).

If λ>0\lambda>0 then

Pn(x)L2([1,1],(1x2)λ1/2dx)p^l(λ)(2x1)χ[0,1](x)xλ1/2(1+x)λ1/2P_{n}(x)\xrightarrow{L_{2}([-1,1],(1-x^{2})^{\lambda-1/2}dx)}\hat{p}_{l}^{(\lambda)}(2x-1)\chi_{[0,1]}(x)\frac{x^{\lambda-1/2}}{(1+x)^{\lambda-1/2}}

as nn\to\infty. Next since the functional

F(g)=11p^k(λ)(2x1)χ[0,1](x)xλ1/2(1+x)λ1/2g(x)(1x2)λ1/2𝑑x,F(g)=\int_{-1}^{1}\hat{p}_{k}^{(\lambda)}(2x-1)\chi_{[0,1]}(x)\frac{x^{\lambda-1/2}}{(1+x)^{\lambda-1/2}}g(x)(1-x^{2})^{\lambda-1/2}dx,

is continuous for λ>0\lambda>0 we arrive at the following

i=0fi,k(λ)fi,l(λ)=01p^k(λ)(2x1))p^l(λ)(2x1)x2λ1(1x1+x)λ12dx\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}f_{i,k}^{(\lambda)}f_{i,l}^{(\lambda)}=\int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}_{k}^{(\lambda)}(2x-1))\hat{p}_{l}^{(\lambda)}(2x-1)x^{2\lambda-1}\left(\frac{1-x}{1+x}\right)^{\lambda-\frac{1}{2}}dx

which completes the proof. ∎

Remark 4.3.

The first integral in the above Theorem can be evaluated with the use of the equations (4.7.30) in [17]. With

Ik,l1=12λkkklIk,l2,I^{1}_{k,l}=\frac{1}{2^{\lambda}}k_{k}k_{l}I^{2}_{k,l},

where

kl=2l(λ)l(λ+1)ll!(2λ)l,k_{l}=2^{l}\sqrt{\frac{(\lambda)_{l}(\lambda+1)_{l}}{l!(2\lambda)_{l}}},

and

Ik,l2=01pkλ(y)piλ(y)(y(1y))λ1/2𝑑y.I^{2}_{k,l}=\int_{0}^{1}p_{k}^{\lambda}(y)p_{i}^{\lambda}(y)(y(1-y))^{\lambda-1/2}dy.

With the use of the formulas alluded to above in [17] we find

I2k,2l2\displaystyle I^{2}_{2k,2l} =(1)k+l(1/2)k(1/2)lΓ(λ+12)2(k+λ)k(l+λ)lΓ(2λ+1)\displaystyle=(-1)^{k+l}\frac{(1/2)_{k}(1/2)_{l}\Gamma(\lambda+\frac{1}{2})^{2}}{(k+\lambda)_{k}(l+\lambda)_{l}\Gamma(2\lambda+1)}
j=0k(k)j(k+λ)j(λ+1/2)2j(1)j(1/2)j(2λ+1)2jF34(l,l+λ,j+λ2+14,j+λ2+3412,j+λ+1,j+λ+12; 1),\displaystyle\sum_{j=0}^{k}{\frac{(-k)_{j}(k+\lambda)_{j}(\lambda+1/2)_{2j}}{(1)_{j}(1/2)_{j}(2\lambda+1)_{2j}}{}_{4}F_{3}\left({-l,l+\lambda,j+\frac{\lambda}{2}+\frac{1}{4},j+\frac{\lambda}{2}+\frac{3}{4}\atop\frac{1}{2},j+\lambda+1,j+\lambda+\frac{1}{2}};\ 1\right)},
I2k,2l+12\displaystyle I^{2}_{2k,2l+1} =(1)k+l(1/2)k(3/2)lΓ(λ+12)Γ(λ+32)(k+λ)k(l+λ+1)lΓ(2λ+2)\displaystyle=(-1)^{k+l}\frac{(1/2)_{k}(3/2)_{l}\Gamma(\lambda+\frac{1}{2})\Gamma(\lambda+\frac{3}{2})}{(k+\lambda)_{k}(l+\lambda+1)_{l}\Gamma(2\lambda+2)}
j=0k(k)j(k+λ)j(λ+3/2)2j(1)j(1/2)j(2λ+2)2jF34(l,l+λ+1,j+λ2+34,j+λ2+5432,j+λ+1,j+λ+32; 1),\displaystyle\sum_{j=0}^{k}{\frac{(-k)_{j}(k+\lambda)_{j}(\lambda+3/2)_{2j}}{(1)_{j}(1/2)_{j}(2\lambda+2)_{2j}}{}_{4}F_{3}\left({-l,l+\lambda+1,j+\frac{\lambda}{2}+\frac{3}{4},j+\frac{\lambda}{2}+\frac{5}{4}\atop\frac{3}{2},j+\lambda+1,j+\lambda+\frac{3}{2}};\ 1\right)},

and

I2k+1,2l+12\displaystyle I^{2}_{2k+1,2l+1} =(1)k+l(3/2)k(3/2)lΓ(λ+12)Γ(λ+52)(k+λ+1)k(l+λ+1)lΓ(2λ+3)\displaystyle=(-1)^{k+l}\frac{(3/2)_{k}(3/2)_{l}\Gamma(\lambda+\frac{1}{2})\Gamma(\lambda+\frac{5}{2})}{(k+\lambda+1)_{k}(l+\lambda+1)_{l}\Gamma(2\lambda+3)}
j=0k(k)j(k+λ+1)j(λ+5/2)2j(1)j(3/2)j(2λ+3)2jF34(l,l+λ+1,j+λ2+54,j+λ2+7432,j+λ+2,j+λ+32; 1).\displaystyle\sum_{j=0}^{k}{\frac{(-k)_{j}(k+\lambda+1)_{j}(\lambda+5/2)_{2j}}{(1)_{j}(3/2)_{j}(2\lambda+3)_{2j}}{}_{4}F_{3}\left({-l,l+\lambda+1,j+\frac{\lambda}{2}+\frac{5}{4},j+\frac{\lambda}{2}+\frac{7}{4}\atop\frac{3}{2},j+\lambda+2,j+\lambda+\frac{3}{2}};\ 1\right)}.

Note that all of the above hypergeometric functions are balanced. Furthermore for λ=1/2\lambda=1/2 one of the terms in the numerator cancels a denoninator term so they all become balanced F23{}_{3}F_{2}’s and can be summed using the Pfaff-Saalschiitz formula. The remaining sums in turn reduce to the Legendre case discussed earlier.

At this point we are unable to determine whether for certain values of λ\lambda the above sums simplify or there is any orthogonality as in the Legendre case. Another interesting problem is the asymptotics of the above sums.

A formula for the second integral in the above Theorem maybe obtained using equation (4.7.6) (first formula) in [17] and is

01p^k(λ)(2x1)p^l(λ)(2x1)x2λ1(1x1+x)λ12𝑑x\displaystyle\int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}_{k}^{(\lambda)}(2x-1)\hat{p}_{l}^{(\lambda)}(2x-1)x^{2\lambda-1}\left(\frac{1-x}{1+x}\right)^{\lambda-\frac{1}{2}}dx
=(1)k+lkkλklλ(λ+12)k(λ+12)l(k+2λ)k(l+2λ)lΓ(λ+1/2)\displaystyle=(-1)^{k+l}k^{\lambda}_{k}k^{\lambda}_{l}\frac{(\lambda+\frac{1}{2})_{k}(\lambda+\frac{1}{2})_{l}}{(k+2\lambda)_{k}(l+2\lambda)_{l}}\Gamma(\lambda+1/2)
×j=0in=0l(k)j(k+2λ)j(i)n(i+2λ)nΓ(j+n+2λ)(1)j(λ+1/2)j(1)n(λ+1/2)nΓ(j+n+3λ+1/2)\displaystyle\times\sum_{j=0}^{i}\sum_{n=0}^{l}\frac{(-k)_{j}(k+2\lambda)_{j}(-i)_{n}(i+2\lambda)_{n}\Gamma(j+n+2\lambda)}{(1)_{j}(\lambda+1/2)_{j}(1)_{n}(\lambda+1/2)_{n}\Gamma(j+n+3\lambda+1/2)}
×F12(λ1/2,j+n+2λj+n+3λ+1/2;1).\displaystyle\times{}_{2}F_{1}\left({\lambda-1/2,j+n+2\lambda\atop j+n+3\lambda+1/2};\ -1\right).

The next step is to obtain a generalized eigenvalue problem which will be a 1D-relation for the function fi,j(λ)f_{i,j}^{(\lambda)} unlike (4.2). Our first approach uses the fact that the ultraspherical polynomials satisfy second order differential equations and apparently the approach can be generalized to the case of polynomials satisfying differential equations such as Krall polynomials, Koornwinder’s generalized Jacobi polynomials and some Sobolev orthogonal polynomials.

Theorem 4.4.

Let jj be a fixed nonnegative integer number. Then the function f=f(i)=fi,j(λ)f=f(i)=f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j} of the discrete variable ii satisfies the generalized eigenvalue problem

(4.5) 2((i+λ)21/4)(i+λ+32)i+2λ(i+1)(i+λ+1)(λ+i)fi+1,j(λ)++2((i+λ)21/4)(i+λ32)i(i1+λ)(i1+2λ)(λ+i)fi1,j(λ)=(j+λ12)(j+λ+12)[2(i+λ1/2)i+2λ(i+1)(i+λ+1)(λ+i)fi+1,j(λ)+4fi,j(λ)+2(i+λ+1/2)i(i1+λ)(i1+2λ)(λ+i)fi1,j(λ)],2((i+\lambda)^{2}-1/4)(i+\lambda+\frac{3}{2})\sqrt{\frac{i+2\lambda}{(i+1)(i+\lambda+1)(\lambda+i)}}f_{i+1,j}^{(\lambda)}+\\ +2((i+\lambda)^{2}-1/4)(i+\lambda-\frac{3}{2})\sqrt{\frac{i}{(i-1+\lambda)(i-1+2\lambda)(\lambda+i)}}f_{i-1,j}^{(\lambda)}=\\ (j+\lambda-\frac{1}{2})(j+\lambda+\frac{1}{2})\Big{[}2(i+\lambda-1/2)\sqrt{\frac{i+2\lambda}{(i+1)(i+\lambda+1)(\lambda+i)}}f_{i+1,j}^{(\lambda)}+4f_{i,j}^{(\lambda)}+\\ 2(i+\lambda+1/2)\sqrt{\frac{i}{(i-1+\lambda)(i-1+2\lambda)(\lambda+i)}}f_{i-1,j}^{(\lambda)}\Big{]},

for i=0i=0, 11, 22, …and, here, the number (j+λ12)(j+λ+12)(j+\lambda-\frac{1}{2})(j+\lambda+\frac{1}{2}) is the corresponding generalized eigenvalue.

Remark 4.5.

For the case λ=1/2\lambda=1/2, formula (4.5) was obtained in [8].

Proof.

To make all the formulas shorter and, more importantly transparent, let us introduce the following operators

Ai\displaystyle A_{i} =2(i+λ+32)i+2λ(i+1)(i+λ+1)(λ+i)E+\displaystyle=2(i+\lambda+\frac{3}{2})\sqrt{\frac{i+2\lambda}{(i+1)(i+\lambda+1)(\lambda+i)}}E_{+}
+2(i+λ32)i(i1+λ)(i1+2λ)(λ+i)E\displaystyle+2(i+\lambda-\frac{3}{2})\sqrt{\frac{i}{(i-1+\lambda)(i-1+2\lambda)(\lambda+i)}}E_{-}
(4.6) =ai+1E++ai1E\displaystyle=a_{i+1}E_{+}+a_{i-1}E_{-}

and

Bi\displaystyle B_{i} =4I+2(i+λ1/2)i+2λ(i+1)(i+λ+1)(λ+i)E+\displaystyle=4I+2(i+\lambda-1/2)\sqrt{\frac{i+2\lambda}{(i+1)(i+\lambda+1)(\lambda+i)}}E_{+}
+2(i+λ+1/2)i(i1+λ)(i1+2λ)(λ+i)E\displaystyle+2(i+\lambda+1/2)\sqrt{\frac{i}{(i-1+\lambda)(i-1+2\lambda)(\lambda+i)}}E_{-}
(4.7) =4I+bi+1E++bi1E,\displaystyle=4I+b_{i+1}E_{+}+b_{i-1}E_{-},

where II is the identity operator and E+E_{+}, EE_{-} are the forward and backward shift operators on ii, respectively. With these notations, equation (4.5) can be rewritten as

(4.8) (i(i+2λ)+λ21/4)Aifi,j(λ)=(j(j+2λ)+λ21/4)Bifi,j(λ)(i(i+2\lambda)+\lambda^{2}-1/4)A_{i}f_{i,j}^{(\lambda)}=(j(j+2\lambda)+\lambda^{2}-1/4)B_{i}f_{i,j}^{(\lambda)}

or

(4.9) i(i+2λ)Aifi,j(λ)+(λ21/4)(AiBi)fi,j(λ)=j(j+2λ)Bifi,j(λ).i(i+2\lambda)A_{i}f_{i,j}^{(\lambda)}+(\lambda^{2}-1/4)(A_{i}-B_{i})f_{i,j}^{(\lambda)}=j(j+2\lambda)B_{i}f_{i,j}^{(\lambda)}.

Notice that

AiBi\displaystyle A_{i}-B_{i} =4I+4i+2λ(i+1)(i+λ+1)(λ+i)E+\displaystyle=-4I+4\sqrt{\frac{i+2\lambda}{(i+1)(i+\lambda+1)(\lambda+i)}}E_{+}
(4.10) 4i(i1+λ)(i1+2λ)(λ+i)E\displaystyle-4\sqrt{\frac{i}{(i-1+\lambda)(i-1+2\lambda)(\lambda+i)}}E_{-}

As is known [17], the ultraspherical polynomials satisfy the differential equation

(4.11) ddt((t(1t))λ+1/2ddtp^j(λ)(2t1))+j(j+2λ)(t(1t))λ1/2p^j(λ)(2t1)=0.\frac{d}{dt}((t(1-t))^{\lambda+1/2}\frac{d}{dt}\hat{p}_{j}^{(\lambda)}(2t-1))+j(j+2\lambda)(t(1-t))^{\lambda-1/2}\hat{p}_{j}^{(\lambda)}(2t-1)=0.

Thus after two integration by parts we have

j(j+2λ)Bifi,j(λ)=01ddt((t(1t))λ+1/2ddtBip^i(λ)(t))p^j(λ)(2t1)𝑑t=01((t(1t)d2dt2+(λ+1/2)(12t)ddt)Bip^i(λ)(t))p^j(λ)(2t1)(t(1t))λ1/2𝑑t=01((1t2)d2dt2(2λ+1)tddt)Bip^i(λ)(t))p^λj(2t1)(t(1t))λ1/2dt01((t1)d2dt2+(λ+1/2)ddt)Bip^i(λ)(t))p^λj(2t1)(t(1t))λ1/2dt.\begin{split}j(j+2\lambda)B_{i}f_{i,j}^{(\lambda)}=-\int_{0}^{1}\frac{d}{dt}((t(1-t))^{\lambda+1/2}\frac{d}{dt}B_{i}\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{i}(t))\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{j}(2t-1)dt\\ =-\int_{0}^{1}((t(1-t)\frac{d^{2}}{dt^{2}}+(\lambda+1/2)(1-2t)\frac{d}{dt})B_{i}\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{i}(t))\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{j}(2t-1)(t(1-t))^{\lambda-1/2}dt\\ =-\int_{0}^{1}((1-t^{2})\frac{d^{2}}{dt^{2}}-(2\lambda+1)t\frac{d}{dt})B_{i}\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{i}(t))\hat{p}^{\lambda}_{j}(2t-1)(t(1-t))^{\lambda-1/2}dt\\ -\int_{0}^{1}((t-1)\frac{d^{2}}{dt^{2}}+(\lambda+1/2)\frac{d}{dt})B_{i}\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{i}(t))\hat{p}^{\lambda}_{j}(2t-1)(t(1-t))^{\lambda-1/2}dt.\end{split}

Now

((1t2)d2dt2(2λ+1)tddt)Bip^i(λ)(t))=(i+1)(i+1+2λ)bi+1p^(λ)i+1(t)+i(i+2λ)bip^i(λ)(t)+(i1)(i1+2λ)bi1p^i1(λ)(t).\begin{split}-((1-t^{2})\frac{d^{2}}{dt^{2}}-(2\lambda+1)t\frac{d}{dt})B_{i}\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{i}(t))=(i+1)(i+1+2\lambda)b_{i+1}\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{i+1}(t)\\ +i(i+2\lambda)b_{i}\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{i}(t)+(i-1)(i-1+2\lambda)b_{i-1}\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{i-1}(t).\end{split}

Since

(i±1)(i±1+2λ)2(i+λ12)i(i+2λ)2(i+λ±32)4(λ21/4)=0,(i\pm 1)(i\pm 1+2\lambda)2(i+\lambda\mp\frac{1}{2})-i(i+2\lambda)2(i+\lambda\pm\frac{3}{2})\mp 4(\lambda^{2}-1/4)=0,

it follows that

(j(j+2λ)Bii(i+2λ)Ai(λ21/4)(AiBi))fi,j(λ)\displaystyle(j(j+2\lambda)B_{i}-i(i+2\lambda)A_{i}-(\lambda^{2}-1/4)(A_{i}-B_{i}))f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j}
=01((t1)d2dt2+(λ+1/2)ddt)Bip^i(λ)(t))p^(λ)j(2t1)(t(1t))λ1/2dt\displaystyle=-\int_{0}^{1}((t-1)\frac{d^{2}}{dt^{2}}+(\lambda+1/2)\frac{d}{dt})B_{i}\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{i}(t))\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{j}(2t-1)(t(1-t))^{\lambda-1/2}dt
(4.12) +4(i(i+2λ)+λ21/4)01p^i(λ)(t)p^j(λ)(2t1)(t(1t))λ1/2𝑑t.\displaystyle+4(i(i+2\lambda)+\lambda^{2}-1/4)\int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{i}(t)\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{j}(2t-1)(t(1-t))^{\lambda-1/2}dt.

We note that

bi+1=4i+λ1/2i+1ai+1=4(1+λ3/2i+1)ai+1b_{i+1}=4\frac{i+\lambda-1/2}{i+1}a_{i+1}=4(1+\frac{\lambda-3/2}{i+1})a_{i+1}

and

bi1=4i+λ+1/2i+2λ1ai=4(1λ3/2i+2λ1)ai.b_{i-1}=4\frac{i+\lambda+1/2}{i+2\lambda-1}a_{i}=4(1-\frac{\lambda-3/2}{i+2\lambda-1})a_{i}.

The substitution of these relations in (4) leads to the following

Bip^i(λ)(t)\displaystyle B_{i}\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{i}(t) =4(1+λ3/2i+1)ai+1p^i+1(λ)(t)+4(1λ3/2i+2λ1)aip^i1(λ)(t)+4p^i(λ)(t)\displaystyle=4(1+\frac{\lambda-3/2}{i+1})a_{i+1}\hat{p}_{i+1}^{(\lambda)}(t)+4(1-\frac{\lambda-3/2}{i+2\lambda-1})a_{i}\hat{p}_{i-1}^{(\lambda)}(t)+4\hat{p}_{i}^{(\lambda)}(t)
=4(1+t+λ3/2i+1t)p^i(λ)(t)8ai(λ3/2)(λ+i)(i+1)(i+2λ1)p^i1(λ)(t)).\displaystyle=4(1+t+\frac{\lambda-3/2}{i+1}t)\hat{p}_{i}^{(\lambda)}(t)-8a_{i}\frac{(\lambda-3/2)(\lambda+i)}{(i+1)(i+2\lambda-1)}\hat{p}_{i-1}^{(\lambda)}(t)).

Using the first equation in [17, equation (4.7.28)] gives

ddtp^i1(λ)(t)=2(i+λ1)aii(tddtp^i(λ)(t)ip^i(λ)(t))\frac{d}{dt}\hat{p}_{i-1}^{(\lambda)}(t)=2\frac{(i+\lambda-1)a_{i}}{i}(t\frac{d}{dt}\hat{p}_{i}^{(\lambda)}(t)-i\hat{p}_{i}^{(\lambda)}(t))

so we find

ddtBip^i(λ)(t)\displaystyle\frac{d}{dt}B_{i}\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{i}(t) =4ddt(1+t+λ3/2i+1t)p^i(λ)(t)8ai(λ3/2)(λ+i)(i+1)(i+2λ1)ddtp^i1(λ)(t))\displaystyle=4\frac{d}{dt}(1+t+\frac{\lambda-3/2}{i+1}t)\hat{p}_{i}^{(\lambda)}(t)-8a_{i}\frac{(\lambda-3/2)(\lambda+i)}{(i+1)(i+2\lambda-1)}\frac{d}{dt}\hat{p}_{i-1}^{(\lambda)}(t))
=4(λ1/2)p^i(λ)(t)+4(1+t)ddtp^i(λ)(t).\displaystyle=4(\lambda-1/2)\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{i}(t)+4(1+t)\frac{d}{dt}\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{i}(t).

Thus we have

((1t)ddt(λ+1/2))ddtBip^i(λ)(t)\displaystyle((1-t)\frac{d}{dt}-(\lambda+1/2))\frac{d}{dt}B_{i}\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{i}(t)
=4((1t2)d2dt2(2λ+1)tddt(λ21/4))p^i(λ)(t)\displaystyle=4((1-t^{2})\frac{d^{2}}{dt^{2}}-(2\lambda+1)t\frac{d}{dt}-(\lambda^{2}-1/4))\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{i}(t)

and the result follows. ∎

Remark 4.6.

At first, we can see that equation (4.5) has the form

A~ifi,j(λ)=(j+λ12)(j+λ+12)Bifi,j(λ),\displaystyle\tilde{A}_{i}f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j}=(j+\lambda-\frac{1}{2})(j+\lambda+\frac{1}{2})B_{i}f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j},

where

A~i=(i+λ1/2)(i+λ+1/2)Ai,\tilde{A}_{i}=(i+\lambda-1/2)(i+\lambda+1/2)A_{i},

the operators AiA_{i} and BiB_{i} are given by (4) and (4), respectively. At second, the above-given proof shows that the three-term recurrence relation (4.5) is a consequence of the fact that ultraspherical polynomials are eigenfunctions of a second order differential operator of a specific form. However, there is another way to see the validity of equation (4.5).

We first prove the following statement.

Proposition 4.7.

The following representation holds

(4.13) fi,j(λ)={0,i<j;123j+1i!(λ+1)i(2λ)i(2λ)jj!(λ)i(λ)j(λ+1)j(i+2λ)j(λ+12)j(ij)!F12(i+j,i+j+2λ2j+2λ+1;12),ij.f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j}=\begin{cases}0,\,\,i<j;\\ \frac{1}{2^{3j+1}}\sqrt{\frac{i!(\lambda+1)_{i}(2\lambda)_{i}(2\lambda)_{j}}{j!(\lambda)_{i}(\lambda)_{j}(\lambda+1)_{j}}}\frac{(i+2\lambda)_{j}}{(\lambda+\frac{1}{2})_{j}(i-j)!}{}_{2}F_{1}\left({-i+j,\ i+j+2\lambda\atop 2j+2\lambda+1};\ \frac{1}{2}\right),\,i\geq j.\end{cases}
Proof.

Write

(4.14) fi,j(λ)=ki,j,λ01pi(λ)(t)pj(λ)(2t1)(t(1t))λ1/2𝑑t,f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j}=k_{i,j,\lambda}\int_{0}^{1}p_{i}^{(\lambda)}(t)p_{j}^{(\lambda)}(2t-1)(t(1-t))^{\lambda-1/2}dt,

where pn(λ)p_{n}^{(\lambda)} is the monic orthogonal polynomial and

(4.15) ki,j,λ=Γ(λ+1)Γ(λ+12)π2i+j+2λ+1(λ)i(λ+1)ii!(2λ)i(λ)j(λ+1)jj!(2λ)j.k_{i,j,\lambda}=\frac{\Gamma(\lambda+1)}{\Gamma(\lambda+\frac{1}{2})\sqrt{\pi}}2^{i+j+2\lambda+1}\sqrt{\frac{(\lambda)_{i}(\lambda+1)_{i}}{i!(2\lambda)_{i}}}\sqrt{\frac{(\lambda)_{j}(\lambda+1)_{j}}{j!(2\lambda)_{j}}}.

If we denote the integral in equation (4.14) as I(1)I^{(1)} we find using the representation

pi(λ)(t)=2i(λ+12)i(i+2λ)iF12(i,i+2λλ+12;1t2),p^{(\lambda)}_{i}(t)=2^{i}\frac{(\lambda+\frac{1}{2})_{i}}{(i+2\lambda)_{i}}{}_{2}F_{1}\left({-i,\ i+2\lambda\atop\lambda+\frac{1}{2}};\ \frac{1-t}{2}\right),

and set

(4.16) I(1)=2i+j(1)j(λ+12)i((i+2λ)i)(λ+12)j((j+2λ)j)I(2),I^{(1)}=2^{i+j}(-1)^{j}\frac{(\lambda+\frac{1}{2})_{i}}{((i+2\lambda)_{i})}\frac{(\lambda+\frac{1}{2})_{j}}{((j+2\lambda)_{j})}I^{(2)},

with

I(2)\displaystyle I^{(2)} =01F12(i,i+2λλ+12;1t2)F12(j,j+2λλ+12;t)(t(1t))λ1/2𝑑t\displaystyle=\int_{0}^{1}{}_{2}F_{1}\left({-i,\ i+2\lambda\atop\lambda+\frac{1}{2}};\ \frac{1-t}{2}\right){}_{2}F_{1}\left({-j,\ j+2\lambda\atop\lambda+\frac{1}{2}};\ t\right)(t(1-t))^{\lambda-1/2}dt
=k=0i(i)k(i+2λ)k(1)k(λ+12)k2kn=0j(j)n(j+2λ)n(1)n(λ+12)n01(1t)k+λ1/2tn+λ1/2𝑑t.\displaystyle=\sum_{k=0}^{i}\frac{(-i)_{k}(i+2\lambda)_{k}}{(1)_{k}(\lambda+\frac{1}{2})_{k}2^{k}}\sum_{n=0}^{j}\frac{(-j)_{n}(j+2\lambda)_{n}}{(1)_{n}(\lambda+\frac{1}{2})_{n}}\int_{0}^{1}(1-t)^{k+\lambda-1/2}t^{n+\lambda-1/2}dt.

The integral can be evaluated as Γ(k+λ+12)Γ(n+λ+12)Γ(k+n+2λ+1)=(λ+12)k(λ+12)nΓ(λ+12)2(2λ+1)k(k+2λ+1)nΓ(2λ+1)\frac{\Gamma(k+\lambda+\frac{1}{2})\Gamma(n+\lambda+\frac{1}{2})}{\Gamma(k+n+2\lambda+1)}=\frac{(\lambda+\frac{1}{2})_{k}(\lambda+\frac{1}{2})_{n}\Gamma(\lambda+\frac{1}{2})^{2}}{(2\lambda+1)_{k}(k+2\lambda+1)_{n}\Gamma(2\lambda+1)}. From the Chu-Vandermonde formula the sum on nn yields

n=0j(j)n(j+2λ)n(1)n(k+2λ+1)n=(kj+1)j(k+2λ+1)j,\sum_{n=0}^{j}\frac{(-j)_{n}(j+2\lambda)_{n}}{(1)_{n}(k+2\lambda+1)_{n}}=\frac{(k-j+1)_{j}}{(k+2\lambda+1)_{j}},

and the sum on kk now becomes

k=ji(i)k(i+2λ)k(kj+1)j(1)k(2λ+1)k(k+2λ+1)j2k=k=0ij(i)k+j(i+2λ)k+j(k+1)j(1)k+j(2λ+1)k+j(k+j+2λ+1)j2k+j.\sum_{k=j}^{i}\frac{(-i)_{k}(i+2\lambda)_{k}(k-j+1)_{j}}{(1)_{k}(2\lambda+1)_{k}(k+2\lambda+1)_{j}2^{k}}=\sum_{k=0}^{i-j}\frac{(-i)_{k+j}(i+2\lambda)_{k+j}(k+1)_{j}}{(1)_{k+j}(2\lambda+1)_{k+j}(k+j+2\lambda+1)_{j}2^{k+j}}.

With the identities

(k+b)j=(j+b)k(b)j(b)k,(a)k+j=(a+j)k(a)j,(k+b)_{j}=\frac{(j+b)_{k}(b)_{j}}{(b)_{k}},\ (a)_{k+j}=(a+j)_{k}(a)_{j},

the above sum becomes

k=0ij(i)k+j(i+2λ)k+j(k+1)j(1)k+j(2λ+1)k+j(k+j+2λ+1)j2k+j\displaystyle\sum_{k=0}^{i-j}\frac{(-i)_{k+j}(i+2\lambda)_{k+j}(k+1)_{j}}{(1)_{k+j}(2\lambda+1)_{k+j}(k+j+2\lambda+1)_{j}2^{k+j}}
=\displaystyle= (i)j(i+2λ)j(1)j(2λ+1)j(j+2λ+1)jk=0ij(i+j)k(i+j+2λ)j(1)j(2j+2λ+1)k12k\displaystyle\frac{(-i)_{j}(i+2\lambda)_{j}(1)_{j}}{(2\lambda+1)_{j}(j+2\lambda+1)_{j}}\sum_{k=0}^{i-j}\frac{(-i+j)_{k}(i+j+2\lambda)_{j}}{(1)_{j}(2j+2\lambda+1)_{k}}\frac{1}{2^{k}}
=\displaystyle= (i)j(i+2λ)j(1)j(2λ+1)j(j+2λ+1)jF12(i+j,i+j+2λ2j+2λ+1;12).\displaystyle\frac{(-i)_{j}(i+2\lambda)_{j}(1)_{j}}{(2\lambda+1)_{j}(j+2\lambda+1)_{j}}{}_{2}F_{1}\left({-i+j,\ i+j+2\lambda\atop 2j+2\lambda+1};\ \frac{1}{2}\right).

Combining all this together gives the result. ∎

The above hypergeometric representation (4.13) for fi,j(λ)f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j} gives a recurrence relation among them.

Another Proof of Theorem 4.4.

To see this use the contiguous relation (see [2, equation (2.5.15)])

2b(cb)(ba1)F12(a1,b+1c;12)\displaystyle 2b(c-b)(b-a-1){}_{2}F_{1}\left({a-1,\ b+1\atop c};\ \frac{1}{2}\right)
(ba)(b+a1)(2cba1)F12(a,bc;12)\displaystyle-(b-a)(b+a-1)(2c-b-a-1){}_{2}F_{1}\left({a,\ b\atop c};\ \frac{1}{2}\right)
2a(bc)(ba+1)F12(a+1,b1c;12)=0,\displaystyle-2a(b-c)(b-a+1){}_{2}F_{1}\left({a+1,\ b-1\atop c};\ \frac{1}{2}\right)=0,

which with a=i+j,b=i+j+2,a=-i+j,\ b=i+j+2, and c=2j+2λ+1c=2j+2\lambda+1 yields the relation

(2i+2λ1)(j+2λ+1)i+2λ(i+1)(i+λ+1)(λ+i)(i+1j)fi+1,j(λ)\displaystyle(2i+2\lambda-1)(j+2\lambda+1)\sqrt{\frac{i+2\lambda}{(i+1)(i+\lambda+1)(\lambda+i)}}(i+1-j)f^{(\lambda)}_{i+1,j}
(2j+2λ1)(2j+2λ+1)fi,j(λ)\displaystyle-(2j+2\lambda-1)(2j+2\lambda+1)f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j}
(4.17) +(2i+2λ+1)(ij1)i(i1+λ)(i1+2λ)(λ+i)(i+j2λ1)fi1,j(λ)=0.\displaystyle+(2i+2\lambda+1)(i-j-1)\sqrt{\frac{i}{(i-1+\lambda)(i-1+2\lambda)(\lambda+i)}}(i+j-2\lambda-1)f^{(\lambda)}_{i-1,j}=0.

The latter relation leads to (4.5). ∎

A generalized eigenvalue problem can also be found for ii fixed. To this end we need to use the relation

F12(n,bc;x)=(b)n(c)n(x)nF12(n,cn+1bn+1; 1/x).{}_{2}F_{1}\left({-n,\ b\atop c};\ x\right)=\frac{(b)_{n}}{(c)_{n}}(-x)^{n}{}_{2}F_{1}\left({-n,\ -c-n+1\atop-b-n+1};\ 1/x\right).

Therefore we find

F12(i+j,i+j+2λ2j+2λ+1; 1/2)\displaystyle{}_{2}F_{1}\left({-i+j,\ i+j+2\lambda\atop 2j+2\lambda+1};\ 1/2\right)
(4.18) =(i+j+2λ)ij(2j+2λ+1)ij(2)jiF12(i+j,ij2λ2i2λ+1; 2).\displaystyle=\frac{(i+j+2\lambda)_{i-j}}{(2j+2\lambda+1)_{i-j}}(-2)^{j-i}{}_{2}F_{1}\left({-i+j,\ -i-j-2\lambda\atop-2i-2\lambda+1};\ 2\right).

Following the steps used to obtain the recurrence formula for jj fixed in the second proof we find that

cjfi,j1(λ)+djfi,j+1(λ)+ejfi,j(λ)=0,\displaystyle c_{j}f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j-1}+d_{j}f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j+1}+e_{j}f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j}=0,

where

cj=2(i+j+2λ1)(ij+1)(2j+2λ+1)(j+λ+1),c_{j}=-2(i+j+2\lambda-1)(i-j+1)(2j+2\lambda+1)(j+\lambda+1),
dj=4(ij1)(i+j+2λ+1)(j+λ12)j(j+1)(j+λ1)(j+λ+1)(j+2λ1)(j+2λ),d_{j}=-4(i-j-1)(i+j+2\lambda+1)(j+\lambda-\frac{1}{2})\sqrt{\frac{j(j+1)(j+\lambda-1)(j+\lambda+1)}{(j+2\lambda-1)(j+2\lambda)}},

and

ej\displaystyle e_{j} =2(2i+2λ+1)(2i+2λ1)(j+λ+1)j(j+λ)(j+λ1)(j+2λ1)\displaystyle=-2(2i+2\lambda+1)(2i+2\lambda-1)(j+\lambda+1)\sqrt{\frac{j(j+\lambda)(j+\lambda-1)}{(j+2\lambda-1)}}
+6(2j+2λ1)(2j+2λ+1)(j+λ+1)j(j+λ1)(j+λ)(j+2λ1).\displaystyle+6(2j+2\lambda-1)(2j+2\lambda+1)(j+\lambda+1)\sqrt{\frac{j(j+\lambda-1)(j+\lambda)}{(j+2\lambda-1)}}.

Since

(i+j+2λ1)(ij±1)=(i+λ+12)(i+λ12)(j+λ12)(j+λ32)(i+j+2\lambda\mp 1)(i-j\pm 1)=(i+\lambda+\frac{1}{2})(i+\lambda-\frac{1}{2})-(j+\lambda\mp\frac{1}{2})(j+\lambda\mp\frac{3}{2})

the above recurrence can be recast as the generalized eigenvalue equation

A^jfi,j(λ)=(i+λ+12)(i+λ12)B^jfi,j(λ),\hat{A}_{j}f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j}=(i+\lambda+\frac{1}{2})(i+\lambda-\frac{1}{2})\hat{B}_{j}f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j},

where the operator A^j\hat{A}_{j} is the second order difference operator

A^j\displaystyle\hat{A}_{j} =(2j+2λ+1)(2j+2λ1))(3(j+λ+1)I\displaystyle=(2j+2\lambda+1)(2j+2\lambda-1))\bigg{(}3(j+\lambda+1)I
(4.19) +(j+λ+32)(j+1)(j+λ+1)(j+λ)(j+2λ)E^+\displaystyle+(j+\lambda+\frac{3}{2})\sqrt{\frac{(j+1)(j+\lambda+1)}{(j+\lambda)(j+2\lambda)}}\hat{E}_{+}
+(j+λ32)(j+λ+1)(j+2λ1)j(j+λ)(j+λ1)E^),\displaystyle+(j+\lambda-\frac{3}{2})(j+\lambda+1)\sqrt{\frac{(j+2\lambda-1)}{j(j+\lambda)(j+\lambda-1)}}\hat{E}_{-}\bigg{)},

the operator B^j\hat{B}_{j} is another second order difference operator given by the formula

B^j\displaystyle\hat{B}_{j} =4(j+λ+1)I\displaystyle=4(j+\lambda+1)I
(4.20) +(2j+2λ1)(j+1)(j+λ+1)(j+λ)(j+2λ)E^+\displaystyle+(2j+2\lambda-1)\sqrt{\frac{(j+1)(j+\lambda+1)}{(j+\lambda)(j+2\lambda)}}\hat{E}_{+}
+(2j+2λ+1)(j+λ+1)(j+2λ1)j(j+λ)(j+λ1)E^),\displaystyle+(2j+2\lambda+1)(j+\lambda+1)\sqrt{\frac{(j+2\lambda-1)}{j(j+\lambda)(j+\lambda-1)}}\hat{E}_{-}\bigg{)},

the operator II is the identity operator, and E^+\hat{E}_{+}, E^\hat{E}_{-} are the forward and backward shift operators on jj, respectively. Thus we have just proved the following statement.

Theorem 4.8.

Let ii be a fixed nonnegative integer number. Then the function f=f(j)=fi,j(λ)f=f(j)=f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j} of the discrete variable jj satisfies the generalized eigenvalue problem

A^jfi,j(λ)=(i+λ+12)(i+λ12)B^jfi,j(λ)\hat{A}_{j}f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j}=(i+\lambda+\frac{1}{2})(i+\lambda-\frac{1}{2})\hat{B}_{j}f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j}

for i=0i=0, 11, 22, …and where the operators A^j\hat{A}_{j} and B^j\hat{B}_{j} are given by (4) and (4), respectively. Also, here, (i+λ+12)(i+λ12)(i+\lambda+\frac{1}{2})(i+\lambda-\frac{1}{2}) is the corresponding generalized eigenvalue.

Remark 4.9.

For the case λ=1/2\lambda=1/2, Theorem 4.8 was obtained in [8].

Using the asymptotic results for the Gauss hypergeometric function from [13] and [19] (see also [15], [18]) one can easily get asymptotic behavior of the solution fi,j(λ)f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j} for jj fixed and when ii tends to infinity.

Theorem 4.10.

For sufficiently large ii the following formula holds

(4.21) fi,j(λ)=kjcos(π(j+λ2i2+14))πiλ+1/2+O(1iλ+3/2),f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j}=k_{j}\frac{\cos\left(\pi\left(j+\frac{\lambda}{2}-\frac{i}{2}+\frac{1}{4}\right)\right)}{\sqrt{\pi}i^{\lambda+1/2}}+O\left(\frac{1}{i^{\lambda+3/2}}\right),

where

(4.22) kj=12j+12λ(2λ)jj!(λ)j(λ+1)jλΓ(2λ)Γ(2j+2λ+1)(λ+12)j.k_{j}=\frac{1}{2^{j+1-2\lambda}}\sqrt{\frac{(2\lambda)_{j}}{j!(\lambda)_{j}(\lambda+1)_{j}\lambda\Gamma(2\lambda)}}\Gamma(2j+2\lambda+1)(\lambda+\frac{1}{2})_{j}.
Proof.

According to Proposition 4.7 for iji\geq j we have

fi,j(λ)=123j+1i!(λ+1)i(2λ)i(2λ)jj!(λ)i(λ)j(λ+1)j(i+2λ)j(λ+12)j(ij)!F12(i+j,i+j+2λ2j+2λ+1;12).f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j}=\frac{1}{2^{3j+1}}\sqrt{\frac{i!(\lambda+1)_{i}(2\lambda)_{i}(2\lambda)_{j}}{j!(\lambda)_{i}(\lambda)_{j}(\lambda+1)_{j}}}\frac{(i+2\lambda)_{j}}{(\lambda+\frac{1}{2})_{j}(i-j)!}{}_{2}F_{1}\left({-i+j,\ i+j+2\lambda\atop 2j+2\lambda+1};\ \frac{1}{2}\right).

Then, since

i!(λ+1)i(2λ)i(λ)i(i+2λ)j(ij)!=1λΓ(2λ)i(2j+λ)(1+O(1/i)),\sqrt{\frac{i!(\lambda+1)_{i}(2\lambda)_{i}}{(\lambda)_{i}}}\frac{(i+2\lambda)_{j}}{(i-j)!}=\sqrt{\frac{1}{\lambda\Gamma(2\lambda)}}i^{(2j+\lambda)}(1+O(1/i)),

formula (4.21) follows from [13, formula (36)]. ∎

Remark 4.11.

Formula (4.21) along with the fact that fi,j(λ)=0f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j}=0 for i<ji<j show that the moving wave behavior of the solution demonstrated in Figure 1 is also characteristic for the solution fi,j(λ)f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j} of the discrete wave equation (4.2) for any λ>1/2\lambda>-1/2.

Another useful asymptotic is when i=k1ti=k_{1}t and j=k2tj=k_{2}t where k1>k2k_{1}>k_{2} are fixed and tt is large.

Theorem 4.12.

For k1tk_{1}t and k2tk_{2}t integers with k1>k2>0k_{1}>k_{2}>0, and 2k2k1>1\frac{\sqrt{2}k_{2}}{k_{1}}>1

(4.23) fk1t,k2t(λ)=c(ϵ,λ)2k1t+1(k1t)12(1+b^(ϵ)ϵb^(ϵ))(k1k2)t(1+2ϵb^(ϵ)1+ϵ)(k1+k2)t+2λ(1+O(1/t)),f^{(\lambda)}_{k_{1}t,k_{2}t}=\frac{c(\epsilon,\lambda)}{2^{k_{1}t+1}(k_{1}t)^{\frac{1}{2}}}\left(\frac{1+\hat{b}(\epsilon)}{\epsilon-\hat{b}(\epsilon)}\right)^{(k_{1}-k_{2})t}\left(\frac{1+2\epsilon-\hat{b}(\epsilon)}{1+\epsilon}\right)^{(k_{1}+k_{2})t+2\lambda}(1+O(1/t)),

where

(4.24) c(ϵ,λ)=ϵλ1π(1ϵ2)(2ϵ21)12,c(\epsilon,\lambda)=\epsilon^{\lambda}\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi(1-\epsilon^{2})(2\epsilon^{2}-1)^{\frac{1}{2}}}},

ϵ=k2k1\epsilon=\frac{k_{2}}{k_{1}}, and b^(ϵ)=2ϵ21\hat{b}(\epsilon)=\sqrt{2\epsilon^{2}-1}.

Proof.

In this case the representation given by equation (4) is most convenient. An application of the transformation T3 in [15] yields

F12(i+j,ij2λ2i2λ+1; 2)\displaystyle{}_{2}F_{1}\left({-i+j,\ -i-j-2\lambda\atop-2i-2\lambda+1};\ 2\right)
=2ij1(ij)!(i+j+2λ+1)ij1F12(i+j+1,i+j+2λ+12; 1/2)\displaystyle=\frac{2^{i-j-1}(i-j)!}{(i+j+2\lambda+1)_{i-j-1}}{}_{2}F_{1}\left({-i+j+1,\ i+j+2\lambda+1\atop 2};\ 1/2\right)
=2i+j+2λ1(ij)!(i+j+2λ+1)ij1F12(ij+1,ij2λ+12; 1/2),\displaystyle=-\frac{2^{i+j+2\lambda-1}(i-j)!}{(i+j+2\lambda+1)_{i-j-1}}{}_{2}F_{1}\left({i-j+1,\ -i-j-2\lambda+1\atop 2};\ 1/2\right),

where Euler’s transformation has been used to obtain the last equality. Thus with the use of the duplication formula for the Γ\Gamma function it follows

(4.25) fi,j(λ)=di,jF12(ij+1,ij2λ+12; 1/2),f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j}=d_{i,j}{}_{2}F_{1}\left({i-j+1,\ -i-j-2\lambda+1\atop 2};\ 1/2\right),

where

di,j=(1)ij+12j+2λ1(i+λ)(j+λ)i!Γ(2λ+j)j!Γ(2λ+i).d_{i,j}=(-1)^{i-j+1}2^{j+2\lambda-1}\sqrt{\frac{(i+\lambda)(j+\lambda)i!\Gamma(2\lambda+j)}{j!\Gamma(2\lambda+i)}}.

This becomes

dk1t,k2t\displaystyle d_{k_{1}t,k_{2}t} =(1)(ij+12j+2λ1(j2λi2λ2)1/2(1+O(1/i)\displaystyle=(-1)^{(i-j+1}2^{j+2\lambda-1}\left(\frac{j^{2\lambda}}{i^{2\lambda-2}}\right)^{1/2}(1+O(1/i)
(4.26) =(1)(k1k2)t+12k2t+2λ1(k2k1)λ(k1t)(1+O(1/t)).\displaystyle=(-1)^{(k_{1}-k_{2})t+1}2^{k_{2}t+2\lambda-1}\left(\frac{k_{2}}{k_{1}}\right)^{\lambda}(k_{1}t)(1+O(1/t)).

The hypergeometric function on the right hand side of equation (4.25) is in the form to use the type B formulas in [15] and leads to considering the hypergeometric function F12(ϵ1w+1,w2λ+12; 1/2){}_{2}F_{1}\left({\epsilon_{1}w+1,\ -w-2\lambda+1\atop 2};\ 1/2\right) where ϵ1w\epsilon_{1}w is an integer. Equation (4.4) in [15] shows that the saddle points occur at 1+ϵ12±(1+ϵ12)22ϵ1\frac{1+\epsilon_{1}}{2}\pm\sqrt{(\frac{1+\epsilon_{1}}{2})^{2}-2\epsilon_{1}}. If the discriminant is positive both saddles are real and equation (4.9) in [15] yields

F12(ϵ1w+1,w2λ+12; 1/2)\displaystyle{}_{2}F_{1}\left({\epsilon_{1}w+1,\ -w-2\lambda+1\atop 2};\ 1/2\right)
=(1)ϵ1w+1w32πϵ1b(ϵ1)(1+ϵ1+b(ϵ1)1ϵ1b(ϵ1))ϵ1w(3ϵ1b(ϵ1))w+2λ2w+4λ+12(1+O(1/w)),\displaystyle=\frac{(-1)^{\epsilon_{1}w+1}}{w^{\frac{3}{2}}\sqrt{\pi\epsilon_{1}b(\epsilon_{1})}}(\frac{1+\epsilon_{1}+b(\epsilon_{1})}{1-\epsilon_{1}-b(\epsilon_{1})})^{\epsilon_{1}w}\frac{(3-\epsilon_{1}-b(\epsilon_{1}))^{w+2\lambda}}{2^{w+4\lambda+\frac{1}{2}}}(1+O(1/w)),

where

(4.27) b(ϵ1)=(1+ϵ1)28ϵ1.b(\epsilon_{1})=\sqrt{(1+\epsilon_{1})^{2}-8\epsilon_{1}}.

With ϵ1=k1k2k1+k2\epsilon_{1}=\frac{k_{1}-k_{2}}{k_{1}+k_{2}} and w=(k1+k2)tw=(k_{1}+k_{2})t the above equations yield (4.23).

Remark 4.13.

When the discriminant is negative, the two saddle points are conjugates of each other and so in this case equation (4.7) in [15] is used to obtain the asymptotics for F12(ϵ1t+1,t2λ+12; 1/2){}_{2}F_{1}\left({\epsilon_{1}t+1,\ -t-2\lambda+1\atop 2};\ 1/2\right) which then are used to obtain the asymptotics of fk1t,k2t(λ)f^{(\lambda)}_{k_{1}t,k_{2}t}.

We finish this section with a couple of statements where we start with the recurrence formulas. Write the recurrence formula in equation (4.5) as

(4.28) ai,jfi+1,j(λ)+bi,jfi,j(λ)+ci,jfi1,j(λ)=0,a_{i,j}f^{(\lambda)}_{i+1,j}+b_{i,j}f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j}+c_{i,j}f^{(\lambda)}_{i-1,j}=0,

and the recurrence formula in jj as

(4.29) a^i,jfi,j+1(λ)+b^i,jfi,j(λ)+c^i,jfi,j1(λ)=0,\hat{a}_{i,j}f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j+1}+\hat{b}_{i,j}f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j}+\hat{c}_{i,j}f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j-1}=0,

with ij0i\geq j\geq 0.

We can now prove the following simple statement.

Proposition 4.14.

Given ai,ja_{i,j}, bi,jb_{i,j}, ci,jc_{i,j} and λ>1/2\lambda>-1/2. For each j>0j>0 the unique solution of equation (4.28) with initial conditions

fj1,j=0,fj,j=01p^j(λ)(t)p^j(λ)(2t1)(t(1t))λ1/2𝑑tf_{j-1,j}=0,\quad f_{j,j}=\int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{j}(t)\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{j}(2t-1)(t(1-t))^{\lambda-1/2}dt

is the function

fi,j=Ii,j(λ):=01p^i(λ)(t)p^j(λ)(2t1)(t(1t))λ1/2𝑑t.f_{i,j}=I^{(\lambda)}_{i,j}:=\int_{0}^{1}\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{i}(t)\hat{p}^{(\lambda)}_{j}(2t-1)(t(1-t))^{\lambda-1/2}dt.

If j=0j=0, λ>1/2\lambda>-1/2, and λ1/2\lambda\neq 1/2 then f0,0=I0,0(λ)f_{0,0}=I_{0,0}^{(\lambda)} gives the unique solution fi,0=Ii,0(λ)f_{i,0}=I^{(\lambda)}_{i,0}. If λ=1/2\lambda=1/2 then the initial conditions f0,0=I0,0(1/2)f_{0,0}=I^{(1/2)}_{0,0} and f1,0=I1,0(1/2)f_{1,0}=I^{(1/2)}_{1,0} are needed to give fi,j=Ii,j(1/2)f_{i,j}=I^{(1/2)}_{i,j}.

Proof.

For j>0,ai,j0j>0,\ a_{i,j}\neq 0 for iji\geq j so the result follows from equation (4.28). For j=0j=0 and λ1/2,c0,0=0a0,0\lambda\neq 1/2,\ c_{0,0}=0\neq a_{0,0} so that only f0,0f_{0,0} is needed to compute f1,0f_{1,0}. The remaining fi,jf_{i,j} are computed in the standard fashion from equation (4.28). For the last case when λ=1/2,a0,0=0=bi,0\lambda=1/2,\ a_{0,0}=0=b_{i,0} so f2,0=c1,0a1,0f0,0f_{2,0}=\frac{c_{1,0}}{a_{1,0}}f_{0,0} and f3,0=c2,0a2,0f1,0f_{3,0}=\frac{c_{2,0}}{a_{2,0}}f_{1,0}. The remaining fi,0f_{i,0} are computed in the same way using the fact that ai,00a_{i,0}\neq 0 for i>0i>0. ∎

Similarly, for the recurrence in jj we have the following.

Proposition 4.15.

Given ai,ja_{i,j}, bi,jb_{i,j}, ci,jc_{i,j} and λ>1/2\lambda>-1/2, for each i>0i>0 the unique solution of equation (4.29) with initial conditions fj,j+1=0f_{j,j+1}=0 and fj,j=Ij,j(λ)f_{j,j}=I_{j,j}^{(\lambda)} is fi,j=Ii,j(λ)f_{i,j}=I^{(\lambda)}_{i,j}.

Since c^i,j,b^i,j\hat{c}_{i,j},\ \hat{b}_{i,j}, and a^i,j\hat{a}_{i,j} are not equal to zero for iji\geq j the result follows from equation (4.29).

5. Connections to other problems

Recall that it is said that a function Ψ(x,y)\Psi(x,y) is a solution of a bispectral problem if it satisfies the following

AΨ(x,y)=g(y)Ψ(x,y)BΨ(x,y)=f(x)Ψ(x,y),\begin{split}A\Psi(x,y)&=g(y)\Psi(x,y)\\ B\Psi(x,y)&=f(x)\Psi(x,y),\end{split}

where AA, BB are some operators, with AA acting only on xx and BB acting only on yy, and ff, gg are some functions [6]. It is shown in [14] that if AA and BB are tridiagonal operators then the solutions of the corresponding discrete bispectral problem are related to the Askey-Wilson polynomials.

The problem we are dealing with in this paper is the following generalization of a bispectral problem:

(5.1) AΨ(i,j)=g(j)BΨ(i,j)CΨ(i,j)=f(i)DΨ(i,j),\begin{split}A\Psi(i,j)&=g(j)B\Psi(i,j)\\ C\Psi(i,j)&=f(i)D\Psi(i,j),\end{split}

where ii, jj are discrete variables, the operators AA and BB are tridiagonal operators acting on the index ii, and CC, DD are tridiagonal operators acting on the index jj. Note that each equation in (5.1) is a generalized eigenvalue problem and, hence, the problem (5.1) includes a bispectral problem as a particular case (for instance when BB and DD are the identity operators).

Setting Ψ(i,j)=fi,j(λ)\Psi(i,j)=f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j} we see that Theorems 4.4 and 4.8 tell us that fi,j(λ)f^{(\lambda)}_{i,j} is a solution of a generalized bispectral problem of the form (5.1). Actually, it would be nice to find a characterization of such generalized bispectral problems similar to what was done in [14] for discrete bispectral problems. It would also be interesting to study the consistency relations for the system (4.15), (4.14) and those relations will constitute a nonlinear system of difference equations on the coefficients of (4.15), (4.14).

Another link that is worth discussing here is the relation to linear spectral transformations. To see this in its simplest form, let us consider two families p^j(1/2)(t)\hat{p}_{j}^{(1/2)}(t) and p^j(3/2)(t)\hat{p}_{j}^{(3/2)}(t) of the ultraspherical polynomials. That is, we consider the two measures on [1,1][-1,1]

dμ1/2(t)=dt,dμ3/2(t)=(1t2)dt,d\mu_{1/2}(t)=dt,\quad d\mu_{3/2}(t)=(1-t^{2})dt,

which are clearly related in the following manner

(5.2) dμ1/2(t)=dμ3/2(t)(1t2).d\mu_{1/2}(t)=\frac{d\mu_{3/2}(t)}{(1-t^{2})}.

In such a case, one usually says that dμ1/2(t)d\mu_{1/2}(t) is a Geronimus transformation of dμ3/2(t)d\mu_{3/2}(t) of the second order or dμ1/2(t)d\mu_{1/2}(t) is the inverse quadratic spectral transform of dμ3/2(t)d\mu_{3/2}(t) (for instance, see [1]). As a matter of fact, the Geronimus transformation of dμ3/2(t)d\mu_{3/2}(t) is more general than just (5.2) and it has the form

dμ(G)(t)=dμ3/2(t)(1t2)+Mδ1+Nδ1,d\mu^{(G)}(t)=\frac{d\mu_{3/2}(t)}{(1-t^{2})}+M\delta_{-1}+N\delta_{1},

where δa\delta_{a} denotes the Dirac delta function supported at aa and MM, NN are some nonegative real numbers. For the corresponding orthogonal polynomials we have that

p^i(G)(t)=α(1,i)p^i(3/2)(t)+α(2,i)p^i1(3/2)(t)+α(3,i)p^i2(3/2)(t),\hat{p}_{i}^{(G)}(t)=\alpha(1,i)\hat{p}_{i}^{(3/2)}(t)+\alpha(2,i)\hat{p}_{i-1}^{(3/2)}(t)+\alpha(3,i)\hat{p}_{i-2}^{(3/2)}(t),

where α(1,i)\alpha(1,i), α(2,i)\alpha(2,i), and α(3,i)\alpha(3,i) are some coefficients and they are of the form (2.1). For instance, in the simplest case (5.2), introducing the coefficients

fi,j(1/2,3/2)=11p^i(1/2)(t)p^j(3/2)(t)(1t2)𝑑tf_{i,j}^{(1/2,3/2)}=\int_{-1}^{1}\hat{p}_{i}^{(1/2)}(t)\hat{p}_{j}^{(3/2)}(t)(1-t^{2})dt

leads to the relation

(5.3) p^i(1/2)(t)=fi,i(1/2,3/2)p^i(3/2)(t)+fi,i1(1/2,3/2)p^i1(3/2)(t)+fi,i2(1/2,3/2)p^i2(3/2)(t),\hat{p}_{i}^{(1/2)}(t)=f_{i,i}^{(1/2,3/2)}\hat{p}_{i}^{(3/2)}(t)+f_{i,i-1}^{(1/2,3/2)}\hat{p}_{i-1}^{(3/2)}(t)+f_{i,i-2}^{(1/2,3/2)}\hat{p}_{i-2}^{(3/2)}(t),

where

fi,i2(1/2,3/2)=ki2,i2,3/2ki,i,1/2,fi,i1(1/2,3/2)=0fi,i(1/2,3/2)=ki,i,1/2ki,i,3/2f_{i,i-2}^{(1/2,3/2)}=-\sqrt{\frac{k_{i-2,i-2,3/2}}{k_{i,i,1/2}}},\quad f_{i,i-1}^{(1/2,3/2)}=0\quad f_{i,i}^{(1/2,3/2)}=\sqrt{\frac{k_{i,i,1/2}}{k_{i,i,3/2}}}

and ki,j,λk_{i,j,\lambda} is defined by formula (4.15). In fact, this can be generalized to the case of arbitrary Geronimus transformation but the formulas will get messier.

Due to Theorem 2.1, the coefficients fi,j(1/2,3/2)f_{i,j}^{(1/2,3/2)} satisfy the discrete wave equation in question. Besides, formula (5.3) shows that in the sequence fi,j(1/2,3/2)f_{i,j}^{(1/2,3/2)} when jj is fixed there are at most three nonzero coefficients and we know how to find them explicitly. Moreover, returning to the moving wave interpretations we did before we see that in this case we have a localized wave and below is the simulation.

Refer to caption
Figure 3. This picture shows three graphs of the function f=f(1/2,3/2)(i)=fi,j(1/2,3/2)f=f^{(1/2,3/2)}(i)=f^{(1/2,3/2)}_{i,j} of the discrete space variable ii at the three different discrete times j=15j=15, j=30j=30, and j=45j=45.

The phenomenon of localized waves is related to the fact that the measures are related to one another through spectral transformations. Still, one can define even more general coefficients

fi,j(λ,μ)=11p^i(λ)(t)p^j(μ)(t)(1t2)μ1/2𝑑tf_{i,j}^{(\lambda,\mu)}=\int_{-1}^{1}\hat{p}_{i}^{(\lambda)}(t)\hat{p}_{j}^{(\mu)}(t)(1-t^{2})^{\mu-1/2}dt

and, as before, they form a solution to a wave equation. Moreover, these coefficients are known explicitly [2, Section 7.1] and are called the connection coefficients. It will be shown in a forthcoming paper that the family fi,j(λ,μ)f_{i,j}^{(\lambda,\mu)} is also a solution of a bispectral problem of the form (5.1). In addition, the coefficients

fi,j,k(1,1,1)=2π11pi(1)(t)pj(1)(t)pk(1)(t)(1t2)1/2𝑑t,f_{i,j,k}^{(1,1,1)}=\frac{2}{\pi}\int_{-1}^{1}p_{i}^{(1)}(t)p_{j}^{(1)}(t)p_{k}^{(1)}(t)(1-t^{2})^{1/2}dt,

where the polynomials pi(1)(t)p_{i}^{(1)}(t) are the monic Chebyshev polynomials of second kind, count Dyck paths [5]. Thus, it would be interesting to find out if the coefficients fi,j,k(1,1,1)f_{i,j,k}^{(1,1,1)} still satisfy some generalized eigenvalue problems and in which case if such generalized eigenvalue problems admit a combinatorial interpretation.

Acknowledgments. M.D. was supported in part by the NSF DMS grant 2008844. The authors are grateful to Erik Koelink for interesting and helpful remarks. They are also indebted to the anonymous referees for suggestions that helped to improve the presentation of the results. J.G. would like to thank J.G. for the support.

References

  • [1] M. Alfaro, A. Peña, M.L. Rezola, F. Marcellán, Orthogonal polynomials associated with an inverse quadratic spectral transform, Comput. Math. Appl. 61 (2011), 888–900.
  • [2] G.E. Andrews, R. Askey, R. Roy, Special functions. Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, 71. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999.
  • [3] A.I. Aptekarev, M. Derevyagin, W. Van Assche, On 2D discrete Schrödinger operators associated with multiple orthogonal polynomials, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 48 (2015), 065201.
  • [4] W. E. Byerly, An elementary treatise on Fourier’s series and spherical, cylindrical, and ellipsoidal harmonics, with applications to problems in mathematical physics, Dover Publications, Inc., New York, 1959.
  • [5] M. de Sainte-Catherine, G. Viennot, Combinatorial interpretation of integrals of products of Hermite, Laguerre and Tchebycheff polynomials, Orthogonal polynomials and applications (Bar-le-Duc, 1984), 120–128, Lecture Notes in Math., 1171, Springer, Berlin, 1985.
  • [6] J.J. Duistermaat, F. A. Grünbaum, Differential equations in the spectral parameter, Comm. Math. Phys. 103 (1986), no. 2, 177–240.
  • [7] J. S. Geronimo, P. Iliev, W. Van Assche, Alpert Multiwavelets and Legendre-Angelesco multiple orthogonal polynomials, SIAM. J. Math. Anal. 49 (2017), no. 1, 626–645.
  • [8] J.S. Geronimo, F. Marcellán, On Alpert multiwavelets. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 143 (2015), no. 6, 2479–2494.
  • [9] F. A. Grünbaum, A new property of reproducing kernels for classical orthogonal polynomials, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 95 (1983), no. 2, 491–500.
  • [10] D. Gupta, D. Masson, Contiguous relations, continued fractions and orthogonality, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 350 (1998), no. 2, 769–808.
  • [11] M. Ismail, A. Kasraoui, J. Zeng, Separation of variables and combinatorics of linearization coefficients of orthogonal polynomials, J. Combin. Theory Ser. A 120 (2013), no. 3, 561–599.
  • [12] M. Ismail, D. Masson, Generalized orthogonality and continued fractions, J. Approx. Theory 83 (1995), no. 1, 1–40.
  • [13] D.S. Jones, Asymptotics of the hypergeometric function. Applied mathematical analysis in the last century, Math. Methods Appl. Sci. 24 (2001), no. 6, 369–389.
  • [14] F. Levstein, L.F. Matusevich, The discrete version of the bispectral problem. In: (The bispectral problem (Montreal, PQ, 1997), 93–104, CRM Proc. Lecture Notes, 14, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1998.
  • [15] R. B. Paris, Asymptotics of the Gauss hypergeometric function with large parameters, I, J. Class. Anal. 2 (2013), no. 2, 183–203.
  • [16] V. Spiridonov, A. Zhedanov, Spectral transformation chains and some new biorthogonal rational functions, Comm. Math. Phys. 210 (2000), no. 1, 49–83.
  • [17] G. Szegő, Orthogonal polynomials. Fourth edition., American Mathematical Society, Colloquium Publications, Vol. XXIII. American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I., 1975.
  • [18] N.M. Temme, Large parameter cases of the Gauss hypergeometric function, J. Comput. Appl. Math. 153 (2003), no. 1-2, 441–462.
  • [19] G.N. Watson, Asymptotic expansions of hypergeometric functions, Trans. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 22 (1918) 277–308.