You are on page 1of 142

Journal of Inequalities in Pure and

Applied Mathematics
http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
Volume 4, Issue 3, Article 63, 2003

A SURVEY ON CAUCHY-BUNYAKOVSKY-SCHWARZ TYPE DISCRETE


INEQUALITIES
S.S. DRAGOMIR
S CHOOL OF C OMPUTER S CIENCE AND M ATHEMATICS
V ICTORIA U NIVERSITY, PO B OX 14428,
MCMC 8001, M ELBOURNE ,
V ICTORIA , AUSTRALIA .
sever.dragomir@vu.edu.au

Received 22 January, 2003; accepted 14 May, 2003


Communicated by P.S. Bullen

A BSTRACT. The main purpose of this survey is to identify and highlight the discrete inequalities
that are connected with (CBS)− inequality and provide refinements and reverse results as well
as to study some functional properties of certain mappings that can be naturally associated with
this inequality such as superadditivity, supermultiplicity, the strong versions of these and the
corresponding monotonicity properties. Many companion, reverse and related results both for
real and complex numbers are also presented.

Key words and phrases: Cauchy-Bunyakovsky-Schwarz inequality, Discrete inequalities.

2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. 26D15, 26D10.

C ONTENTS
1. Introduction 4
2. (CBS) – Type Inequalities 5
2.1. (CBS) −Inequality for Real Numbers 5
2.2. (CBS) −Inequality for Complex Numbers 6
2.3. An Additive Generalisation 7
2.4. A Related Additive Inequality 8
2.5. A Parameter Additive Inequality 10
2.6. A Generalisation Provided by Young’s Inequality 11
2.7. Further Generalisations via Young’s Inequality 12
2.8. A Generalisation Involving J−Convex Functions 16
2.9. A Functional Generalisation 18
2.10. A Generalisation for Power Series 19
2.11. A Generalisation of Callebaut’s Inequality 21
2.12. Wagner’s Inequality for Real Numbers 22
2.13. Wagner’s inequality for Complex Numbers 24
ISSN (electronic): 1443-5756
c 2003 Victoria University. All rights reserved.
010-03
2 S.S. D RAGOMIR

References 26
3. Refinements of the (CBS) −Inequality 28
3.1. A Refinement in Terms of Moduli 28
3.2. A Refinement for a Sequence Whose Norm is One 29
3.3. A Second Refinement in Terms of Moduli 31
3.4. A Refinement for a Sequence Less than the Weights 33
3.5. A Conditional Inequality Providing a Refinement 35
3.6. A Refinement for Non-Constant Sequences 37
3.7. De Bruijn’s Inequality 40
3.8. McLaughlin’s Inequality 41
3.9. A Refinement due to Daykin-Eliezer-Carlitz 42
3.10. A Refinement via Dunkl-Williams’ Inequality 43
3.11. Some Refinements due to Alzer and Zheng 45
References 50
4. Functional Properties 51
4.1. A Monotonicity Property 51
4.2. A Superadditivity Property in Terms of Weights 52
4.3. The Superadditivity as an Index Set Mapping 54
4.4. Strong Superadditivity in Terms of Weights 55
4.5. Strong Superadditivity as an Index Set Mapping 57
4.6. Another Superadditivity Property 59
4.7. The Case of Index Set Mapping 61
4.8. Supermultiplicity in Terms of Weights 63
4.9. Supermultiplicity as an Index Set Mapping 67
References 71
5. Reverse Inequalities 72
5.1. The Cassels’ Inequality 72
5.2. The Pólya-Szegö Inequality 73
5.3. The Greub-Rheinboldt Inequality 75
5.4. A Cassels’ Type Inequality for Complex Numbers 75
5.5. A Reverse Inequality for Real Numbers 77
5.6. A Reverse Inequality for Complex Numbers 79
5.7. Shisha-Mond Type Inequalities 82
5.8. Zagier Type Inequalities 83
5.9. A Reverse Inequality in Terms of the sup −Norm 85
5.10. A Reverse Inequality in Terms of the 1−Norm 87
5.11. A Reverse Inequality in Terms of the p−Norm 90
5.12. A Reverse Inequality Via an Andrica-Badea Result 92
5.13. A Refinement of Cassels’ Inequality 94
5.14. Two Reverse Results Via Diaz-Metcalf Results 97
5.15. Some Reverse Results Via the Čebyšev Functional 99
5.16. Another Reverse Result via a Grüss Type Result 105
References 107
6. Related Inequalities 109
6.1. Ostrowski’s Inequality for Real Sequences 109
6.2. Ostrowski’s Inequality for Complex Sequences 110
6.3. Another Ostrowski’s Inequality 111
6.4. Fan and Todd Inequalities 113
6.5. Some Results for Asynchronous Sequences 114
6.6. An Inequality via A − G − H Mean Inequality 115
6.7. A Related Result via Jensen’s Inequality for Power Functions 116
6.8. Inequalities Derived from the Double Sums Case 117

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 3

6.9. A Functional Generalisation for Double Sums 118


6.10. A (CBS) −Type Result for Lipschitzian Functions 119
6.11. An Inequality via Jensen’s Discrete Inequality 121
6.12. An Inequality via Lah-Ribarić Inequality 122
6.13. An Inequality via Dragomir-Ionescu Inequality 123
6.14. An Inequality via a Refinement of Jensen’s Inequality 124
6.15. Another Refinement via Jensen’s Inequality 127
6.16. An Inequality via Slater’s Result 129
6.17. An Inequality via an Andrica-Raşa Result 131
6.18. An Inequality via Jensen’s Result for Double Sums 132
6.19. Some Inequalities for the Čebyšev Functional 134
6.20. Other Inequalities for the Čebyšev Functional 136
6.21. Bounds for the Čebyšev Functional 137
References 140
Index 141

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
4 S.S. D RAGOMIR

1. I NTRODUCTION
The Cauchy-Bunyakovsky-Schwarz inequality, or for short, the (CBS)− inequality, plays an
important role in different branches of Modern Mathematics including Hilbert Spaces Theory,
Probability & Statistics, Classical Real and Complex Analysis, Numerical Analysis, Qualitative
Theory of Differential Equations and their applications.
The main purpose of this survey is to identify and highlight the discrete inequalities that
are connected with (CBS)− inequality and provide refinements and reverse results as well as
to study some functional properties of certain mappings that can be naturally associated with
this inequality such as superadditivity, supermultiplicity, the strong versions of these and the
corresponding monotonicity properties. Many companions and related results both for real and
complex numbers are also presented.
The first section is devoted to a number of (CBS)− type inequalities that provides not only
natural generalizations but also several extensions for different classes of analytic functions of
a real variable. A generalization of the Wagner inequality for complex numbers is obtained.
Several results discovered by the author in the late eighties and published in different journals
of lesser circulation are also surveyed.
The second section contains different refinements of the (CBS)− inequality including de
Bruijn’s inequality, McLaughlin’s inequality, the Daykin-Eliezer-Carlitz result in the version
presented by Mitrinović-Pečarić and Fink as well as the refinements of a particular version
obtained by Alzer and Zheng. A number of new results obtained by the author, which are
connected with the above ones, are also presented.
Section 4 is devoted to the study of functional properties of different mappings naturally
associated to the (CBS)− inequality. Properties such as superadditivity, strong superadditivity,
monotonicity and supermultiplicity and the corresponding inequalities are mentioned.
In the next section, Section 5, reverse results for the (CBS)− inequality are surveyed. The
results of Cassels, Pólya-Szegö, Greub-Rheinbold, Shisha-Mond and Zagier are presented with
their original proofs. New results and versions for complex numbers are also obtained. Reverse
results in terms of p−norms of the forward difference recently discovered by the author and
some refinements of Cassels and Pólya-Szegö results obtained via Andrica-Badea inequality
are mentioned. Some new facts derived from Grüss type inequalities are also pointed out.
Section 6 is devoted to various inequalities related to the (CBS)− inequality. The two in-
equalities obtained by Ostrowski and Fan-Todd results are presented. New inequalities obtained
via Jensen type inequality for convex functions are derived, some inequalities for the Čebyşev
functionals are pointed out. Versions for complex numbers that generalize Ostrowski results are
also emphasised.
It was one of the main aims of the survey to provide complete proofs for the results consid-
ered. We also note that in most cases only the original references are mentioned. Each section
concludes with a list of the references utilized and thus may be read independently.
Being self contained, the survey may be used by both postgraduate students and researchers
interested in Theory of Inequalities & Applications as well as by Mathematicians and other
Scientists dealing with numerical computations, bounds and estimates where the (CBS)− in-
equality may be used as a powerful tool.
The author intends to continue this survey with another one devoted to the functional and
integral versions of the (CBS)− inequality. The corresponding results holding in inner-product
and normed spaces will be considered as well.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 5

2. (CBS) – T YPE I NEQUALITIES


2.1. (CBS) −Inequality for Real Numbers. The following inequality is known in the lit-
erature as Cauchy’s or Cauchy-Schwarz’s or Cauchy-Bunyakovsky-Schwarz’s inequality. For
simplicity, we shall refer to it throughout this work as the (CBS) −inequality.

Theorem 2.1. If ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) and b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) are sequences of real numbers, then
n
!2 n n
X X X
2
(2.1) ak b k ≤ ak b2k
k=1 k=1 k=1

with equality if and only if the sequences ā and b̄ are proportional, i.e., there is a r ∈ R such
that ak = rbk for each k ∈ {1, . . . , n} .

Proof. (1) Consider the quadratic polynomial P : R → R,


n
X
(2.2) P (t) = (ak t − bk )2 .
k=1

It is obvious that
n
! n
! n
X X X
P (t) = a2k 2
t −2 ak b k t+ b2k
k=1 k=1 k=1

for any t ∈ R.
Since P (t) ≥ 0 for any t ∈ R it follows that the discriminant ∆ of P is negative, i.e.,
n
!2 n n
1 X X
2
X
0≥ ∆= ak b k − ak b2k
4 k=1 k=1 k=1

and the inequality (2.1) is proved.


(2) If we use Lagrange’s identity
n n n
!2 n
X X X 1X
(2.3) a2i b2i − ai b i = (ai bj − aj bi )2
i=1 i=1 i=1
2 i,j=1
X
= (ai bj − aj bi )2
1≤i<j≤n

then (2.1) obviously holds.


The equality holds in (2.1) iff
(ai bj − aj bi )2 = 0
for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} which is equivalent with the fact that ā and b̄ are proportional. 

Remark 2.2. The inequality (2.1) apparently was firstly mentioned in the work [2] of A.L.
Cauchy in 1821. The integral form was obtained in 1859 by V.Y. Bunyakovsky [1]. The cor-
responding version for inner-product spaces obtained by H.A. Schwartz is mainly known as
Schwarz’s inequality. For a short history of this inequality see [3]. In what follows we use the
spelling adopted in the paper [3]. For other spellings of Bunyakovsky’s name, see MathSciNet.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
6 S.S. D RAGOMIR

2.2. (CBS) −Inequality for Complex Numbers. The following version of the (CBS) −inequality
for complex numbers holds [4, p. 84].
Theorem 2.3. If ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) and b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) are sequences of complex numbers,
then
2
X n n
X X n
2
(2.4) ak b k ≤ |ak | |bk |2 ,



k=1 k=1 k=1

with equality if and only if there is a complex number c ∈ C such that ak = cb̄k for any
k ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
Proof. (1) For any complex number λ ∈ C one has the equality
n n
ak − λb̄k 2 =
X X  
(2.5) ak − λb̄k āk − λ̄bk
k=1 k=1
n n n
!
X 2 2
X 2
X
= |ak | + |λ| |bk | − 2 Re λ̄ ak b k .
k=1 k=1 k=1

If in (2.5) we choose λ0 ∈ C,
Pn
ak b k
λ0 := Pnk=1 2, b̄ 6= 0
k=1 |b k |
then we get the identity
n n 2
| nk=1 ak bk |
P
X 2 X 2
(2.6) 0≤ ak − λ0 b̄k =
|ak | − Pn 2 ,
k=1 k=1 k=1 |bk |

which proves (2.4).


By virtue of (2.6), we conclude that equality holds in (2.4) if and only if ak = λ0 b̄k
for any k ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
(2) Using Binet-Cauchy’s identity for complex numbers
n
X n
X n
X n
X
(2.7) xi yi zi ti − xi ti zi yi
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1
n
1X
= (xi zj − xj zi ) (yi tj − yj ti )
2 i,j=1
X
= (xi zj − xj zi ) (yi tj − yj ti )
1≤i<j≤n

for the choices xi = āi , zi = bi , yi = ai , ti = b̄i , i = {1, . . . , n}, we get


2
n n n n
X X X 1X
(2.8) |ai |2 |bi |2 − ai b i = |āi bj − āj bi |2

i=1 i=1

i=1
2 i,j=1
X
= |āi bj − āj bi |2 .
1≤i<j≤n

Now the inequality (2.4) is a simple consequence of (2.8).


The case of equality is obvious by the identity (2.8) as well.


J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 7

Remark 2.4. By the (CBS) −inequality for real numbers and the generalised triangle inequal-
ity for complex numbers

n
X Xn
|zi | ≥ zi , zi ∈ C, i ∈ {1, . . . , n}


i=1 i=1
we also have n 2 !2
X n
X n
X n
X
2
ak b k ≤ |ak bk | ≤ |ak | |bk |2 .



k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

Remark 2.5. The Lagrange identity for complex numbers stated in [4, p. 85] is wrong. It
should be corrected as in (2.8).
2.3. An Additive Generalisation. The following generalisation of the (CBS) −inequality
was obtained in [5, p. 5].
Theorem 2.6. If ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) , c̄ = (c1 , . . . , cn ) and d̄ = (d1 , . . . , dn )
are sequences of real numbers and p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn ) , q̄ = (q1 , . . . , qn ) are nonnegative, then
X n n
X X n Xn Xn X n
2 2 2 2
(2.9) p i ai qi b i + pi ci qi di ≥ 2 p i ai c i qi bi di .
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1
If p̄ and q̄ are sequences of positive numbers, then the equality holds in (2.9) iff ai bj = ci dj for
any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
Proof. We will follow the proof from [5].
From the elementary inequality
(2.10) a2 + b2 ≥ 2ab for any a, b ∈ R
with equality iff a = b, we have
(2.11) a2i b2j + c2i d2j ≥ 2ai ci bj dj for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
Multiplying (2.11) by pi qj ≥ 0, i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} and summing over i and j from 1 to n, we
deduce (2.9).
If pi , qj > 0 (i = 1, . . . , n) , then the equality holds in (2.9) iff ai bj = ci dj for any i, j ∈
{1, . . . , n} . 
Remark 2.7. The condition ai bj = ci dj for ci 6= 0, bj 6= 0 (i, j = 1, . . . , n) is equivalent with
ai d
ci
= bjj (i, j = 1, . . . , n) , i.e., ā, c̄ and b̄, d̄ are proportional with the same constant k.
Remark 2.8. If in (2.9) we choose pi = qi = 1 (i = 1, . . . , n) , ci = bi , and di = ai
(i = 1, . . . , n) , then we recapture the (CBS) −inequality.
The following corollary holds [5, p. 6].
Corollary 2.9. If ā, b̄, c̄ and d̄ are nonnegative, then
" n n n n
# n n
1 X 3 X 3 X
3
X
3
X
2 2
X
(2.12) a ci b di + c i ai di bi ≥ ai c i b2i d2i ,
2 i=1 i i=1 i i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

" n n n n
# n
!2
1 X 2 X X X X
(2.13) a bi di · b2i ai ci + c2i bi di · d2i ai ci ≥ ai bi ci di .
2 i=1 i i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

Another result is embodied in the following corollary [5, p. 6].

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
8 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Corollary 2.10. If ā, b̄, c̄ and d̄ are sequences of positive and real numbers, then:
" n n n n
# n n
1 X a3i X b3i X X X
2
X
(2.14) + ai c i bi di ≥ ai b2i ,
2 i=1 ci i=1 di i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

" n n n n
# n
!2
1 X a2i bi X b2i ai X X X
(2.15) + bi c i ai di ≥ ai b i .
2 i=1 ci i=1 di i=1 i=1 i=1

Finally, we also have [5, p. 6].


Corollary 2.11. If ā, and b̄ are positive, then
 !2  !2
n 3 Xn 3 n n n n
1 X ai bi X X
2
X X
− ai b i  ≥ ai b2i − ai b i ≥ 0.
2 i=1 bi i=1 ai i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

The following version for complex numbers also holds.


Theorem 2.12. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) , c̄ = (c1 , . . . , cn ) and d̄ = (d1 , . . . , dn )
be sequences of complex numbers and p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn ) , q̄ = (q1 , . . . , qn ) are nonnegative.
Then one has the inequality
n n n n
" n n
#
X X X X X X
(2.16) pi |ai |2 qi |bi |2 + pi |ci |2 qi |di |2 ≥ 2 Re pi ai c̄i qi bi d¯i .
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

The case of equality for p̄, q̄ positive holds iff ai bj = ci dj for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
Proof. From the elementary inequality for complex numbers
|a|2 + |b|2 ≥ 2 Re ab̄ , a, b ∈ C,
 

with equality iff a = b, we have


¯
|ai |2 |bj |2 + |ci |2 |dj |2 ≥ 2 Re ai c̄i bj dj
 
(2.17)
for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} . Multiplying (2.17) by pi qj ≥ 0 and summing over i and j from 1 to
n, we deduce (2.16).
The case of equality is obvious and we omit the details. 
Remark 2.13. Similar particular cases may be stated but we omit the details.
2.4. A Related Additive Inequality. The following inequality was obtained in [5, Theorem
1.1].
Theorem 2.14. If ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) are sequences of real numbers and
c̄ = (c1 , . . . , cn ) , d̄ = (d1 , . . . , dn ) are nonnegative, then
n
X n
X n
X n
X n
X n
X
(2.18) di ci a2i + ci di b2i ≥ 2 c i ai di bi .
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

If ci and di (i = 1, . . . , n) are positive, then equality holds in (2.18) iff ā = b̄ = k̄ where


k̄ = (k, k, . . . , k) is a constant sequence.
Proof. We will follow the proof from [5].
From the elementary inequality
(2.19) a2 + b2 ≥ 2ab for any a, b ∈ R

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 9

with equality iff a = b; we have


(2.20) a2i + b2j ≥ 2ai bj for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
Multiplying (2.20) by ci dj ≥ 0, i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} and summing over i from 1 to n and over j
from 1 to n, we deduce (2.18).
If ci , dj > 0 (i = 1, . . . , n) , then the equality holds in (2.18) iff ai = bj for any i, j ∈
{1, . . . , n} which is equivalent with the fact that ai = bi = k for any i ∈ {1, . . . , n} . 

The following corollary holds [5, p. 4].


Corollary 2.15. If ā and b̄ are nonnegative sequences, then
" n n n n
# n n
1 X
3
X X X
3
X
2
X
(2.21) ai bi + ai bi ≥ ai b2i ;
2 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

" n n n n
# n
!2
1 X X 2 X X X
(2.22) ai a bi + bi b2i ai ≥ ai b i .
2 i=1 i=1 i i=1 i=1 i=1

Another corollary that may be obtained is [5, p. 4 – 5].


Corollary 2.16. If ā and b̄ are sequences of positive real numbers, then
n
Pn 1 Pn 1
X a2i + b2i i=1 ai i=1
(2.23) ≥ Pn 1 bi ,
i=1
2a b
i i i=1 ai bi

n n n n
X X 1 X 1 X
(2.24) ai + bi ≥ 2n2 ,
i=1 i=1
b i i=1
a i i=1

and
n n n
X a2 + b 2i i
X 1 X1
(2.25) n ≥ .
i=1
2a2i b2i a b
i=1 i i=1 i

The following version for complex numbers also holds.


Theorem 2.17. If ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) are sequences of complex numbers, then
for p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn ) and q̄ = (q1 , . . . , qn ) two sequences of nonnegative real numbers, one has
the inequality
n n n n
" n n
#
X X X X X X
(2.26) qi pi |ai |2 + pi qi |bi |2 ≥ 2 Re p i ai qi b̄i .
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

For p̄, q̄ positive sequences, the equality holds in (2.26) iff ā = b̄ = k̄ = (k, . . . , k) .
The proof goes in a similar way with the one in Theorem 2.14 on making use of the following
elementary inequality holding for complex numbers
|a|2 + |b|2 ≥ 2 Re ab̄ , a, b ∈ C;
 
(2.27)
with equality iff a = b.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
10 S.S. D RAGOMIR

2.5. A Parameter Additive Inequality. The following inequality was obtained in [5, Theorem
4.1].
Theorem 2.18. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be sequences of real numbers and
c̄ = (c1 , . . . , cn ) , d̄ = (d1 , . . . , dn ) be nonnegative. If α, β > 0 and γ ∈ R such that γ 2 ≤ αβ,
then
Xn X n Xn n
X Xn n
X
2 2
(2.28) α di ai c i + β ci bi di ≥ 2γ c i ai di bi .
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

Proof. We will follow the proof from [5].


Since α, β > 0 and γ 2 ≤ αβ, it follows that for any x, y ∈ R one has
(2.29) αx2 + βy 2 ≥ 2γxy.
Choosing in (2.29) x = ai , y = bj (i, j = 1, . . . , n) , we get
(2.30) αa2i + βb2j ≥ 2γai bj for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
If we multiply (2.30) by ci dj ≥ 0 and sum over i and j from 1 to n, we deduce the desired
inequality (2.28). 
The following corollary holds.
Corollary 2.19. If ā and b̄ are nonnegative sequences and α, β, γ are as in Theorem 2.18, then

n
X n
X n
X n
X n
X n
X
(2.31) α bi a3i + β ai b3i ≥ 2γ a2i b2i ,
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

n n n n n
!2
X X X X X
(2.32) α ai a2i bi +β bi b2i ai ≥ 2γ ai b i .
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

The following particular case is important [5, p. 8].


Theorem 2.20.PLet ā, b̄ be sequences of real numbers. If p̄ is a sequence of nonnegative real
numbers with ni=1 pi > 0, then:
n n Pn Pn Pn
i=1 pi ai bi Pi=1 pi ai i=1 pi bi
X X
2 2
(2.33) p i ai p i bi ≥ n .
i=1 i=1 i=1 pi

In particular,
n n n n n
X X 1X X X
(2.34) a2i b2i ≥ ai b i ai bi .
i=1 i=1
n i=1 i=1 i=1

Proof. We will follow the proof from [5, p. 8]. Pn 2


PIf we choose inPTheorem 2.18, ci = di = pi (i = 1, . . . , n) and α = i=1 pi bi , β =
n 2 n
i=1 pi ai , γ = i=1 pi ai bi , we observe, by the (CBS) −inequality with the weights pi
(i = 1, . . . , n) one has γ 2 ≤ αβ, and then by (2.28) we deduce (2.33). 
Remark 2.21. If we assume that ā and b̄ are asynchronous, i.e.,
(ai − aj ) (bi − bj ) ≤ 0 for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} ,
then by Čebyšev’s inequality
n
X n
X n
X n
X
(2.35) p i ai pi bi ≥ pi p i ai b i
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 11

respectively
n
X n
X n
X
(2.36) ai bi ≥ n ai b i ,
i=1 i=1 i=1

we have the following refinements of the (CBS) −inequality


n n Pn Pn Pn
i=1 pi ai bi Pi=1 pi ai i=1 pi bi
X X
2 2
(2.37) p i ai p i bi ≥ n
i=1 i=1 i=1 pi
n
!2
X
≥ p i ai b i
i=1
Pn
provided i=1 pi ai bi ≥ 0, respectively
n n n n n n
!2
X X 1X X X X
(2.38) a2i b2i ≥ ai b i ai bi ≥ ai b i
i=1 i=1
n i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1
Pn
provided i=1 ai bi ≥ 0.
2.6. A Generalisation Provided by Young’s Inequality. The following result was obtained
in [5, Theorem 5.1].
Theorem 2.22. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) , p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn ) and q̄ = (q1 , . . . , qn )
be sequences of nonnegative real numbers and α, β > 1 with α1 + β1 = 1. Then one has the
inequality
n
X n
X n
X n
X n
X n
X
(2.39) α qi pi bβi +β pi qi aαi ≥ αβ p i bi q i ai .
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

If p̄ and q̄ are sequences of positive real numbers, then the equality holds in (2.39) iff there
exists a constant k ≥ 0 such that aαi = bβi = k for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
Proof. It is, by the Arithmetic-Geometric inequality [6, p. 15], well known that
1 1 1 1 1 1
(2.40) x + y ≥ x α y β for x, y ≥ 0, + = 1, α, β > 1
α β α β
with equality iff x = y.
Applying (2.40) for x = aαi , y = bβj (i, j = 1, . . . , n) we have

(2.41) αbβj + βaαi ≥ αβai bj for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n}

with equality iff aαi = bβj for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} .


If we multiply (2.41) by qi pj ≥ 0 (i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n}) and sum over i and j from 1 to n we
deduce (2.39).
The case of equality is obvious by the above considerations. 
The following corollary is a natural consequence of the above theorem.
Corollary 2.23. Let ā, b̄, α and β be as in Theorem 2.22. Then
n n n n n n
1 X X α+1 1 X X β+1 X 2 X 2
(2.42) bi a + ai b ≥ ai bi ;
α i=1 i=1 i β i=1 i=1 i i=1 i=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
12 S.S. D RAGOMIR

n n n n n
!2
1X X α 1X X β X
(2.43) ai b i ai + bi ai b i ≥ ai b i .
α i=1 i=1 β i=1 i=1 i=1

The following result which provides a generalisation of the (CBS) −inequality may be ob-
tained by Theorem 2.22 as well [5, Theorem 5.2].
Theorem 2.24. Let x̄ and ȳ be sequences of positive real numbers. If α, β are as above, then
n n
! n n
!2
1 X α 2−α 1 X β 2−β X X
(2.44) x y + x y · yi2 ≥ xi yi .
α i=1 i i β i=1 i i i=1 i=1
The equality holds iff x̄ and ȳ are proportional.
xi xi
Proof. Follows by Theorem 2.22 on choosing pi = qi = yi2 , ai = yi
, bi = yi
, i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .

Remark 2.25. For α = β = 2, we recapture the (CBS) −inequality.
Remark 2.26. For ai = |zi | , bi = |wi | , with zi , wi ∈ C; i = 1, . . . , n, we may obtain similar
inequalities for complex numbers. We omit the details.
2.7. Further Generalisations via Young’s Inequality. The following inequality is known in
the literature as Young’s inequality
1 1
(2.45) pxq + qy p ≥ pqxy, x, y ≥ 0 and + = 1, p > 1
p q
q p
with equality iff x = y .
The following result generalising the (CBS) −inequality was obtained in [7, Theorem 2.1]
(see also [8, Theorem 1]).
Theorem 2.27. Let x̄ = (x1 , . . . , xn ) , ȳ = (y1 , . . . , yn ) be sequences of complex numbers and
p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn ) , q̄ = (q1 , . . . , qn ) be two sequences of nonnegative real numbers. If p > 1,
1
p
+ 1q = 1, then
n n n n n n
1X X 1X X X X
(2.46) pk |xk |p qk |yk |p + qk |xk |q pk |yk |q ≥ pk |xk yk | qk |xk yk | .
p k=1 k=1
q k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

Proof. We shall follow the proof in [7].


Choosing x = |xj | |yi | , y = |xi | |yj | , i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} , we get from (2.45)
(2.47) q |xi |p |yj |p + p |xj |q |yi |q ≥ pq |xi yi | |xj yj |
for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
Multiplying with pi qj ≥ 0 and summing over i and j from 1 to n, we deduce the desired
result (2.46). 
The following corollary is a natural consequence of the above theorem [7, Corollary 2.2] (see
also [8, p. 105]).
Corollary 2.28. If x̄ and ȳ are as in Theorem 2.27 and m̄ = (m1 , . . . , mn ) is a sequence of
nonnegative real numbers, then
n n n n n
!2
1 X X 1 X X X
(2.48) mk |xk |p mk |yk |p + mk |xk |q mk |yk |q ≥ mk |xk yk | ,
p k=1 k=1
q k=1 k=1 k=1
1 1
where p > 1, p
+ q
= 1.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 13

Remark 2.29. If in (2.48) we assume that mk = 1, k ∈ {1, . . . , n} , then we obtain [7, p. 7]


(see also [8, p. 105])
n n n n n
!2
1X X 1 X X X
(2.49) |xk |p |yk |p + |xk |q |yk |q ≥ |xk yk | ,
p k=1 k=1
q k=1 k=1 k=1

which, in the particular case p = q = 2 will provide the (CBS) −inequality.


The second generalisation of the (CBS) −inequality via Young’s inequality is incorporated
in the following theorem [7, Theorem 2.4] (see also [8, Theorem 2]).
Theorem 2.30. Let x̄, ȳ, p̄, q̄ and p, q be as in Theorem 2.27. Then one has the inequality
n n n n
1X p
X q 1X q
X
(2.50) pk |xk | qk |yk | + qk |xk | pk |yk |p
p k=1 k=1
q k=1 k=1
n
X n
X
p−1
≥ pk |xk | |yk | qk |xk | |yk |q−1 .
k=1 k=1

Proof. We shall follow the proof in [7].


|x |
Choosing in (2.45), x = |yjj | , y = |x i|
|yi |
, we get
 q  p
|xj | |xi | |xi | |xj |
(2.51) p +q ≥ pq
|yj | |yi | |yi | |yj |
for any yi 6= 0, i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
It is easy to see that (2.51) is equivalent to
(2.52) q |xi |p |yj |q + p |yi |p |xj |q ≥ pq |xi | |yi |p−1 |xj | |yj |q−1
for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
Multiplying (2.52) by pi qj ≥ 0 (i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n}) and summing over i and j from 1 to n, we
deduce the desired inequlality (2.50). 
The following corollary holds [7, Corollary 2.5] (see also [8, p. 106]).
Corollary 2.31. Let x̄, ȳ, m̄ and p̄, q̄ be as in Corollary 2.28. Then
n n n n
1X p
X q 1X q
X
(2.53) mk |xk | mk |yk | + mk |xk | mk |yk |p
p k=1 k=1
q k=1 k=1
n
X n
X
p−1
≥ mk |xk | |yk | mk |xk | |yk |q−1 .
k=1 k=1

Remark 2.32. If in (2.53) we assume that mk = 1, k ∈ {1, . . . , n} , then we obtain [7, p. 8]


(see also [8, p. 106])
n n n n n n
1X p
X q 1X q
X p
X p−1
X
(2.54) |xk | |yk | + |xk | |yk | ≥ |xk | |yk | |xk | |yk |q−1 ,
p k=1 k=1
q k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

which, in the particular case p = q = 2 will provide the (CBS) −inequality.


The third result is embodied in the following theorem [7, Theorem 2.7] (see also [8, Theorem
3]).

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
14 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Theorem 2.33. Let x̄, ȳ, p̄, q̄ and p, q be as in Theorem 2.27. Then one has the inequality
n n n n
1X p
X q 1X p
X
(2.55) pk |xk | qk |yk | + qk |xk | pk |yk |q
p k=1 k=1
q k=1 k=1
n
X n
X
≥ pk |xk yk | pk |xk |p−1 |yk |q−1 .
k=1 k=1

Proof. We shall follow the proof in [7].


|yi | |xi |
If we choose x = |y j|
and y = |x j|
in (2.45) we get
 q  p
|yi | |xi | |xi | |yi |
p +q ≥ pq ,
|yj | |xj | |xj | |yj |
for any xi , yj 6= 0, i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} , giving
(2.56) q |xi |p |yj |q + p |yi |q |xj |p ≥ pq |xi yi | |xj |p−1 |yj |q−1
for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
Multiplying (2.56) by pi qj ≥ 0 (i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n}) and summing over i and j from 1 to n, we
deduce the desired inequality (2.55). 
The following corollary is a natural consequence of the above theorem [8, p. 106].
Corollary 2.34. Let x̄, ȳ, m̄ and p̄, q̄ be as in Corollary 2.28. Then one has the inequality:
X n Xn X n n
X
(2.57) mk |xk |p mk |yk |q ≥ mk |xk yk | mk |xk |p−1 |yk |q−1 .
k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

Remark 2.35. If in (2.57) we assume that mk = 1, k = {1, . . . , n} , then we obtain [7, p. 8]


(see also [8, p. 10])
n
X n
X n
X n
X
p q
(2.58) |xk | |yk | ≥ |xk yk | |xk |p−1 |yk |q−1 ,
k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

which, in the particular case p = q = 2 will provide the (CBS) −inequality.


The fourth generalisation of the (CBS) −inequality is embodied in the following theorem
[7, Theorem 2.9] (see also [8, Theorem 4]).
Theorem 2.36. Let x̄, ȳ, p̄, q̄ and p, q be as in Theorem 2.27. Then one has the inequality
n n n n
1X 2
X q 1X 2
X
(2.59) pk |xk | qk |yk | + pk |yk | qk |xk |p
q k=1 k=1
p k=1 k=1
n n
X X 2 2
≥ qk |xk yk | pk |xk | q |yk | p .
k=1 k=1

Proof. We shall follow the proof in [7].


2 2
Choosing in (2.45), x = |xi | q |yj | , y = |xj | |yi | p , we get
2 2
(2.60) p |xi |2 |yj |q + q |xj |p |yi |2 ≥ pq |xi | q |yi | p |xj yj |
for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
Multiply (2.60) by pi qj ≥ 0 (i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n}) and summing over i and j from 1 to n, we
deduce the desired inequality (2.60). 

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 15

The following corollary holds [7, Corollary 2.10] (see also [8, p. 107]).
Corollary 2.37. Let x̄, ȳ, m̄ and p, q be as in Corollary 2.28. Then one has the inequality:
n n n n
1X 2
X q 1X 2
X
(2.61) mk |xk | mk |yk | + mk |yk | mk |xk |p
q k=1 k=1
p k=1 k=1
n n
X X 2 2
≥ mk |xk yk | mk |xk | q |yk | p .
k=1 k=1

Remark 2.38. If in (2.61) we take mk = 1, k ∈ {1, . . . , n} , then we get


n n n n n n
1X X 1X X X X 2 2
(2.62) |xk |2 |yk |q + |yk |2 |xk |p ≥ |xk yk | |xk | q |yk | p ,
q k=1 k=1
p k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

which, in the particular case p = q = 2 will provide the (CBS) −inequality.


The fifth result generalising the (CBS) −inequality is embodied in the following theorem [7,
Theorem 2.12] (see also [8, Theorem 5]).
Theorem 2.39. Let x̄, ȳ, p̄, q̄ and p, q be as in Theorem 2.27. Then one has the inequality
n n n n
1X 2
X q 1X 2
X
(2.63) pk |xk | qk |yk | + pk |yk | qk |xk |p
p k=1 k=1
q k=1 k=1
n n
X 2 2 X
≥ pk |xk | |yk |p q qk |xk |p−1 |yk |q−1 .
k=1 k=1

Proof. We will follow the proof in [7].


2 2
|yi | q p
Choosing in (2.45), x = |yj |
, y = |x|xij| | , yi , xj 6= 0, i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} , we may write
2
!q 2
!p 2 2
|yi | q |xi | p |yi | q |xi | p
p +q ≥ pq ,
|yj | |xj | |xj | |yj |

from where results


2 2
(2.64) p |yi |2 |xj |p + q |xi |2 |yj |q ≥ pq |xi | p |yi | q |xj |p−1 |yj |q−1
for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
Multiplying (2.64) by pi qj ≥ 0 (i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n}) and summing over i and j from 1 to n,
we deduce the desired inequality (2.63). 

The following corollary holds [7, Corollary 2.13] (see also [8, p. 108]).
Corollary 2.40. Let x̄, ȳ, m̄ and p, q be as in Corollary 2.28. Then one has the inequality:
n n n n
1X 2
X q 1X 2
X
(2.65) mk |xk | mk |yk | + mk |yk | mk |xk |p
p k=1 k=1
q k=1 k=1
n n
X 2 2 X
≥ mk |xk | |yk |p q mk |xk |p−1 |yk |q−1 .
k=1 k=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
16 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Remark 2.41. If in (2.46) we choose mk = 1, k ∈ {1, . . . , n} , then we get [7, p. 10] (see also
[8, p. 108])
n n n n n n
1X 2
X q 1X 2
X p
X 2 2 X
(2.66) |xk | |yk | + |yk | |xk | ≥ |xk | p |yk | q |xk |p−1 |yk |q−1 ,
p k=1 k=1
q k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

which in the particular case p = q = 2 will provide the (CBS) −inequality.


Finally, the following result generalising the (CBS) −inequality holds [7, Theorem 2.15]
(see also [8, Theorem 6]).
Theorem 2.42. Let x̄, ȳ, p̄, q̄ and p, q be as in Theorem 2.27. Then one has the inequality:
n n n n
1X X 1X X
(2.67) pk |xk |2 qk |yk |p + qk |yk |2 pk |xk |q
p k=1 k=1
q k=1 k=1
n n
X 2 X 2
≥ pk |xk | p |yk | qk |xk | q |yk | .
k=1 k=1

Proof. We shall follow the proof in [7].


From (2.45) one has the inequality
 2
p  2
q 2 2
(2.68) q |xi | p |yj | + p |xj | q |yi | ≥ pq |xi | p |yi | |xj | q |yj |

for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} .


Multiplying (2.68) by pi qj ≥ 0 (i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n}) and summing over i and j from 1 to n, we
deduce the desired inequality (2.67). 
The following corollary also holds [7, Corollary 2.16] (see also [8, p. 108]).
Corollary 2.43. With the assumptions in Corollary 2.28, one has the inequality
n n   X n n
X 2
X 1 p 1 q 2 X 2
(2.69) mk |xk | mk |yk | + |yk | ≥ mk |xk | p |yk | mk |xk | q |yk | .
k=1 k=1
p q k=1 k=1

Remark 2.44. If in (2.69) we choose mk = 1 (k ∈ {1, . . . , n}) , then we get


n n   Xn n
X 2
X 1 p 1 q 2 X 2
(2.70) |xk | |yk | + |yk | ≥ |xk | p |yk | |xk | q |yk | ,
k=1 k=1
p q k=1 k=1

which, in the particular case p = q = 2, provides the (CBS) −inequality.


2.8. A Generalisation Involving J−Convex Functions. For a > 1, we denote by expa the
function
(2.71) expa : R → (0, ∞) , expa (x) = ax .
Definition 2.1. A function f : I ⊆ R → R is said to be J−convex on an interval I if
 
x+y f (x) + f (y)
(2.72) f ≤ for any x, y ∈ I.
2 2
It is obvious that any convex function on I is a J convex function on I, but the converse does
not generally hold.
The following lemma holds (see [7, Lemma 4.3]).

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 17

Lemma 2.45. Let f : I ⊆ R → R be a J−convex function on I, a > 1 and x, y ∈ R\ {0} with


loga x2 , loga y 2 ∈ I. Then loga |xy| ∈ I and

{expb [f (loga |xy|)]}2 ≤ expb f loga x2 expb f loga y 2


   
(2.73)
for any b > 1.
Proof. I, being an interval, is a convex set in R and thus
1
loga x2 + loga y 2 ∈ I.

loga |xy| =
2
Since f is J−convex, one has
 
1 2 2

(2.74) f (loga |xy|) = f loga x + loga y
2
f (loga x2 ) + f (loga y 2 )
≤ .
2
Taking the expb in both parts, we deduce
f (loga x2 ) + f (loga y 2 )
 
expb [f (loga |xy|)] ≤ expb
2
 21
= expb f loga x2 expb f loga y 2
   
,
which is equivalent to (2.73). 

The following generalisation of the (CBS) −inequality in terms of a J− convex function


holds [7, Theorem 4.4].
Theorem 2.46. Let f : I ⊆ R → R be a J−convex function on I, a, b > 1 and ā =
(a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) sequences of nonzero real numbers. If loga a2k , loga b2k ∈ I
for all k ∈ {1, . . . , n} , then one has the inequality:
( n )2 n n
X X  X
2
expb f loga b2k .
  
(2.75) expb [f (loga |ak bk |)] ≤ expb f loga ak
k=1 k=1 k=1

Proof. Using Lemma 2.45 and the (CBS) −inequality one has
n
X
expb [f (loga |ak bk |)]
k=1
n
X  1
expb f loga a2k expb f loga b2k 2
   

k=1
n n n n
! 12
X
2
 12 o2 X  1 o2
expb f loga b2k 2
   
≤ expb f loga ak
k=1 k=1

which is clearly equivalent to (2.75). 


Remark 2.47. If in (2.75) we choose a = b > 1 and f (x) = x, x ∈ R, then we recapture the
(CBS) −inequality.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
18 S.S. D RAGOMIR

2.9. A Functional Generalisation. The following result was proved in [10, Theorem 2].
Theorem 2.48. Let A be a subset of real numbers R, f : A → R and ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) ,
b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) sequences of real numbers with the properties that
(i) ai bi , a2i , b2i ∈ A for any i ∈ {1, . . . , n} ,
(ii) f (a2i ) , f (b2i ) ≥ 0 for any i ∈ {1, . . . , n} ,
(iii) f 2 (ai bi ) ≤ f (a2i ) f (b2i ) for any i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
Then one has the inequality:
" n #2 n n
X X X
2
f b2i .

(2.76) f (ai bi ) ≤ f ai
i=1 i=1 i=1

Proof. We give here a simpler proof than that found in [10].


We have

X n X n
f (ai bi ) ≤ |f (ai bi )|



i=1 i=1
n
X  1   1
f a2i 2 f b2i 2


i=1
"
n  n 
# 12
X
2
 12 2 X  1 2
f b2i 2
 
≤ f ai (by the (CBS)-inequality)
i=1 i=1
" n n
# 21
X X
2 2

= f ai f bi
i=1 i=1
and the inequality (2.76) is proved. 
Remark 2.49. It is obvious that for A = R and f (x) = x, we recapture the (CBS) −inequality.

Assume that ϕ : N → N is Euler’s indicator. In 1940, T. Popoviciu [11] proved the following
inequality for ϕ
[ϕ (ab)]2 ≤ ϕ a2 ϕ b2 for any natural number a, b;
 
(2.77)
with equality iff a and b have the same prime factors.
A simple proof of this fact may be done by using the representation
   
1 1
ϕ (n) = n 1 − ··· 1 − ,
p1 pk
where n = pα1 1 pα2 2 · · · pαk k [9, p. 109].
The following generalisation of Popoviciu’s result holds [10, Theorem 1].
Theorem 2.50. Let ai , bi ∈ N (i = 1, . . . , n) . Then one has the inequality
" n #2 n n
X X X
2
ϕ b2i .

(2.78) ϕ (ai bi ) ≤ ϕ ai
i=1 i=1 i=1

Proof. Follows by Theorem 2.48 on taking into account that, by (2.77),


[ϕ (ai bi )]2 ≤ ϕ a2i ϕ b2i for any i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
 

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 19

Further, let us denote by s (n) the sum of all relatively prime numbers with n and less than
n. Then the following result also holds [10, Theorem 1].
Theorem 2.51. Let ai , bi ∈ N (i = 1, . . . , n) . Then one has the inequality
" n #2 n n
X X X
2
s b2i .

(2.79) s (ai bi ) ≤ s ai
i=1 i=1 i=1

Proof. It is known (see for example [9, p. 109]) that for any n ∈ N one has
1
(2.80) s (n) = nϕ (n) .
2
Thus
1 1
[s (ai bi )]2 = a2i b2i ϕ2 (ai bi ) ≤ a2i b2i ϕ a2i ϕ b2i = s a2i s b2i
   
(2.81)
4 4
for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
Using Theorem 2.48 we then deduce the desired inequality (2.79). 
The following corollaries of Theorem 2.48 are also natural to be considered [10, p. 126].
Corollary 2.52. Let ai , bi ∈ R (i = 1, . . . , n) and a > 1. Denote expa x = ax , x ∈ R. Then
one has the inequality
" n #2 n n
X X X
2
expa b2i .

(2.82) expa (ai bi ) ≤ expa ai
i=1 i=1 i=1

Corollary 2.53. Let ai , bi ∈ (−1, 1) (i = 1, . . . , n) and m > 0. Then one has the inequality:
" n #2 n n
X 1 X 1 X 1
(2.83) m ≤ 2 m 2 m
.
i=1
(1 − a i b i ) i=1
(1 − a i ) i=1
(1 − b i )

2.10. A Generalisation for Power Series. The following result holds [12, Remark 2].
P∞ k
Theorem 2.54. Let F : (−r, r) → R, F (x) = k=0 αk x with αk ≥ 0, k ∈ N. If ā =
(a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) are sequences of real numbers such that
(2.84) ai bi , a2i , b2i ∈ (−r, r) for any i ∈ {1, . . . , n} ,
then one has the inequality:
n n
" n
#2
X X X
2 2

(2.85) F ai F bi ≥ F (ai bi ) .
i=1 i=1 i=1

Proof. Firstly, let us observe that if x, y ∈ R such that xy, x2 , y 2 ∈ (−r, r) , then one has the
inequality
[F (xy)]2 ≤ F x2 F y 2 .
 
(2.86)
Indeed, by the (CBS) −inequality, we have
" n #2 n n
X X X
k k 2k
(2.87) αk x y ≤ αk x αk y 2k , n ≥ 0.
k=0 k=0 k=0

Taking the limit as n → ∞ in (2.87), we deduce (2.86).

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
20 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Using the (CBS) −inequality and (2.86) we have



Xn X n
F (ai bi ) ≤ |F (ai bi )|



i=1 i=1
n
X  1   1
F a2i 2 F b2i 2


i=1
( n )1
X   n 
1 2 X
 2
1 2
F a2i 2 F b2i 2
 

i=1 i=1
" n n
# 12
X X
2 2

= F ai F bi ,
i=1 i=1

which is clearly equivalent to (2.85). 

The following particular inequalities of (CBS) −type hold [12, p. 164].


(1) If ā, b̄ are sequences of real numbers, then one has the inequality
n n
" n #2
X X X
exp a2k exp b2k ≥
 
(2.88) exp (ak bk ) ;
k=1 k=1 k=1
n n
" n
#2
X X X
2 2
 
(2.89) sinh ak sinh bk ≥ sinh (ak bk ) ;
k=1 k=1 k=1
n n
" n
#2
X X X
a2k b2k

(2.90) cosh cosh ≥ cosh (ak bk ) .
k=1 k=1 k=1

(2) If ā, b̄ are such that ai , bi ∈ (−1, 1) , i ∈ {1, . . . , n} , then one has the inequalities
n n
" n #2
X X X
2 2

(2.91) tan ak tan bk ≥ tan (ak bk ) ;
k=1 k=1 k=1
n n
" n
#2
X X X
2 2

(2.92) arcsin ak arcsin bk ≥ arcsin (ak bk ) ;
k=1 k=1 k=1

" n 
# " n 
# ( " n 
#)2
1 + a2 1 + b2
  
Y
k
Y
k
Y 1 + ak b k
(2.93) ln ln ≥ ln ;
k=1
1 − a2k k=1
1 − b2k k=1
1 − ak b k

" n  # " n  # ( " n  #)2


Y 1 Y 1 Y 1
(2.94) ln ln ≥ ln ;
k=1
1 − a2k k=1
1 − b2k k=1
1 − ak b k

n n
" n #2
X 1 X 1 X 1
(2.95) m m ≥ , m > 0.
k=1
(1 − a2k ) k=1 (1 − b2k ) k=1
(1 − ak bk )m

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 21

2.11. A Generalisation of Callebaut’s Inequality. The following result holds (see also [12,
Theorem 2] for a generalisation for positive linear functionals).
P∞ k
Theorem 2.55. Let F : (−r, r) → R, F (x) = k=0 αk x with αk ≥ 0, k ∈ N. If ā =
(a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) are sequences of nonnegative real numbers such that

(2.96) ai bi , aαi bi2−α , a2−α


i bαi ∈ (0, r) for any i ∈ {1, . . . , n} ; α ∈ [0, 2] ,

then one has the inequality


" n
#2 n n
X X X
aαi b2−α F a2−α bαi .

(2.97) F (ai bi ) ≤ F i i
i=1 i=1 i=1

Proof. Firstly, we note that for any x, y > 0 such that xy, xα y 2−α , x2−α y α ∈ (0, r) one has

[F (xy)]2 ≤ F xα y 2−α F x2−α y α .


 
(2.98)

Indeed, using Callebaut’s inequality, i.e., we recall it [4]

m
!2 m m
X X X
(2.99) αi xi yi ≤ αi xαi yi2−α αi x2−α
i yiα ,
i=1 i=1 i=1

we may write, for m ≥ 0, that

m
!2 m m
X X i X i
(2.100) αi xi y i ≤ αi xα y 2−α αi x2−α y α .
i=0 i=0 i=0

Taking the limit as m → ∞, we deduce (2.98).


Using the (CBS) −inequality and (2.98) we may write:
n n
X X
F (ai bi ) ≤ |F (ai bi )|



i=1 i=1
n
X  21   1
F aαi b2−α F a2−α bαi 2

≤ i i
i=1
( n )1
X   n 
1 2 X
 2
1 2
F aαi b2−α F a2−α bαi 2
 
≤ i
2
i
i=1 i=1
" n n
# 21
X X
2−α
F aαi bi F a2−α α

= i bi
i=1 i=1

which is clearly equivalent to (2.97). 

The following particular inequalities also hold [12, pp. 165-166].

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
22 S.S. D RAGOMIR

(1) Let ā and b̄ be sequences of nonnegative real numbers. Then one has the inequalities
" n
#2 n n
X X X
exp aαk b2−α exp ak2−α bαk ;

(2.101) exp (ak bk ) ≤ k
k=1 k=1 k=1
" n
#2 n n
X X X
aαk b2−α sinh ak2−α bαk ;

(2.102) sinh (ak bk ) ≤ sinh k
k=1 k=1 k=1
" n
#2 n n
X X X
aαk bk2−α cosh a2−α bαk .

(2.103) cosh (ak bk ) ≤ cosh k
k=1 k=1 k=1

(2) Let ā and b̄ be such that ak , bk ∈ (0, 1) for any k ∈ {1, . . . , n} . Then one has the
inequalities:
" n
#2 n n
X X X
tan aαk b2−α tan ak2−α bαk ;

(2.104) tan (ak bk ) ≤ k
k=1 k=1 k=1

" n
#2 n n
X X X
aαk bk2−α arcsin ak2−α bαk ;

(2.105) arcsin (ak bk ) ≤ arcsin
k=1 k=1 k=1

( " n 
#)2 " n 
# " n 
#
1 + aα b2−α 1 + a2−α bα
  
Y 1 + ak b k Y
k k
Y
k k
(2.106) ln ≤ ln ln ;
k=1
1 − ak b k k=1
1 − aαk b2−α
k k=1
1 − a2−α
k bαk

( " n  #)2 " n  # " n  #


Y 1 Y 1 Y 1
(2.107) ln ≤ ln ln .
k=1
1 − ak b k k=1
1 − aαk b2−α
k k=1
1 − a2−α
k bαk

2.12. Wagner’s Inequality for Real Numbers. The following generalisation of the (CBS) −
inequality for sequences of real numbers is known in the literature as Wagner’s inequality [15],
or [14] (see also [4, p. 85]).

Theorem 2.56. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) and b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be sequences of real numbers. If


0 ≤ x ≤ 1, then one has the inequality

n
!2
X X
(2.108) ak b k + x ai b j
k=1 1≤i6=j≤n
" n
#" n
#
X X X X
≤ a2k + 2x ai aj b2k + 2x bi bj .
k=1 1≤i<j≤n k=1 1≤i<j≤n

Proof. We shall follow the proof in [13] (see also [4, p. 85]).

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 23

For any x ∈ [0, 1] , consider the quadratic polynomial in y

n
" n
#2
X 2
X
P (y) := (1 − x) (ak y − bk ) + x (ak y − bk )
k=1 k=1
" n n n
#
X X X
= (1 − x) y 2 a2k − 2y ak b k + b2k
k=1 k=1 k=1
 !2 ! ! !2 
n
X n
X n
X n
X
+ x y 2 ak − 2y ak bk + bk 
k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1
 !2  " #
n
X n
X n
X n
X n
X
= (1 − x) a2k + x ak  y 2 − 2y (1 − x) ak b k + x ak bk
k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

n n
!2
X X
+ (1 − x) b2k + x bk
k=1 k=1
  !2 
Xn n
X n
X 
= a2k + x  ak − 2
ak y2
 
k=1 k=1 k=1
" n n n n
!#
X X X X
− 2y ak b k + x ak bk − ak b k
k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1
 !2 
n
X n
X n
X
+ b2k + x  bk − b2k  .
k=1 k=1 k=1

Since, it is obvious that:


n
!2 n
X X X
ak − a2k = 2 ai aj ,
k=1 k=1 1≤i<j≤n
n
X Xn n
X X
ak bk − ak b k = ai b j
k=1 k=1 k=1 1≤i6=j≤n

and
n
!2 n
X X X
bk − b2k = 2 bi bj ,
k=1 k=1 1≤i<j≤n

we get

n
!
X X
P (y) = a2k + 2x ai aj y2
k=1 1≤i<j≤n
n
! n
X X X X
− 2y ak b k + x ai b j + b2k + 2x bi bj .
k=1 1≤i6=j≤n k=1 1≤i<j≤n

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
24 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Taking into consideration, by the definition of P, that P (y) ≥ 0 for any y ∈ R, it follows that
the discriminant ∆ ≤ 0, i.e.,

n
!2
1 X X
0≥ ∆= ak b k + x ai b j
4 k=1 1≤i6=j≤n
n
! n
!
X X X X
− a2k + 2x ai aj b2k + 2x bi bj
k=1 1≤i<j≤n k=1 1≤i<j≤n

and the inequality (2.108) is proved. 

Remark 2.57. If x = 0, then from (2.108) we recapture the (CBS) −inequality for real num-
bers.

2.13. Wagner’s inequality for Complex Numbers. The following inequality which provides
a version for complex numbers of Wagner’s result holds [16].

Theorem 2.58. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) and b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be sequences of complex numbers.


Then for any x ∈ [0, 1] one has the inequality

" n
#2
X  X 
(2.109) Re ak b̄k + x Re ai b̄j
k=1 1≤i6=j≤n
" n
#" n
#
X X X X
|ak |2 + 2x |bk |2 + 2x

≤ Re (ai āj ) Re bi b̄j .
k=1 1≤i<j≤n k=1 1≤i<j≤n

Proof. Start with the function f : R → R,

n
n 2
X X
2
(2.110) f (t) = (1 − x) |tak − bk | + x (tak − bk ) .


k=1 k=1

We have

n
X 
(2.111) f (t) = (1 − x) (tak − bk ) tāk − b̄k
k=1
n n
! n n
!
X X X X
+x t ak − bk t āk − b̄k
k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1
" n n n n
#
X 2
X X X 2
2
= (1 − x) t |ak | − t bk āk − t ak b̄k + |bk |
k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1
" n n n n n n
#
X 2
X X X X X 2
+ x t2 |ak | − t bk āk − t ak b̄k + |bk |
k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 25

 
X 2
n
n
X
= (1 − x) |ak |2 + x ak  t2


k=1 k=1
" n
" n n
##
X  X X
+ 2 (1 − x) Re ak b̄k + x Re ak b̄k t
k=1 k=1 k=1
2
n
X Xn
+ (1 − x) |bk |2 + x bk .


k=1 k=1

Observe that
2
Xn n
X
(2.112) ak = ai āj



k=1 i,j=1
X n X
= |ai |2 + ai āj
i=1 1≤i6=j≤n
n
X X X
= |ai |2 + ai āj + ai āj
i=1 1≤i<j≤n 1≤j<i≤n
Xn X
= |ai |2 + 2 Re (ai āj )
i=1 1≤i<j≤n

and, similarly,

X 2 X
n n X
|bi |2 + 2

(2.113) bk = Re bi b̄j .



k=1 i=1 1≤i<j≤n

Also
n
X n
X n
X X
ak b̄k = ai b̄i + ai b̄j
k=1 k=1 i=1 1≤i6=j≤n

and thus
n n
! n
X X X  X 
(2.114) Re ak b̄k = Re ai b̄i + Re ai b̄j .
k=1 k=1 i=1 1≤i6=j≤n

Utilising (2.112) – (2.114), by (2.111), we deduce


" n
#
X X
(2.115) f (t) = |ak |2 + 2x Re (ai āj ) t2
k=1 1≤i<j≤n
" n
# n
X X X X
|bk |2 + 2x
  
+2 Re ak b̄k + x Re ai b̄j t+ Re bi b̄j .
k=1 1≤i6=j≤n k=1 1≤i<j≤n

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
26 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Since, by (2.110), f (t) ≥ 0 for any t ∈ R, it follows that the discriminant of the quadratic
function given by (2.115) is negative, i.e.,
1
0≥ ∆
4
" n #2
X  X 
= Re ak b̄k + x Re ai b̄j
k=1 1≤i6=j≤n
" n
#" n
#
X 2
X X 2
X 
− |ak | + 2x Re (ai āj ) |bk | + 2x Re bi b̄j
k=1 1≤i<j≤n k=1 1≤i<j≤n

and the inequality (2.109) is proved. 


Remark 2.59. If x = 0, then we get the (CBS) −inequality
" n #2 n n
X X 2
X
|bk |2 .

(2.116) Re ak b̄k ≤ |ak |
k=1 k=1 k=1

R EFERENCES
[1] V.Y. BUNIAKOWSKI, Sur quelques inégalités concernant les intégrales aux differences finies,
Mem. Acad. St. Petersburg, (7) 1 (1859), No. 9, 1-18.
[2] A.L. CAUCHY, Cours d’Analyse de l’École Royale Polytechnique, I re Partie, Analyse Algébrique,
Paris, 1821.
[3] P. SCHREIDER, The Cauchy-Bunyakovsky-Schwarz inequality, Hermann Graßmann (Lieschow,
1994), 64–70.
[4] D.S. MITRINOVIĆ, J.E. PEČARIĆ AND A.M. FINK, Classical and New Inequalities in Analysis,
Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht/Boston/London, 1993.
[5] S.S. DRAGOMIR, On some inequalities (Romanian), “Caiete Metodico Ştiinţifice”, No. 13, 1984,
pp. 20. Faculty of Mathematics, Timişoara University, Romania.
[6] E.F. BECKENBACH AND R. BELLMAN, Inequalities, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Göttingen-
Heidelberg, 1961.
[7] S.S. DRAGOMIR, On Cauchy-Buniakowski-Schwartz’s Inequality for Real Numbers (Romanian),
“Caiete Metodico-Ştiinţifice”, No. 57, pp. 24, 1989. Faculty of Mathematics, Timişoara University,
Romania.
[8] S.S. DRAGOMIR AND J. SÁNDOR, Some generalisations of Cauchy-Buniakowski-Schwartz’s
inequality (Romanian), Gaz. Mat. Metod. (Bucharest), 11 (1990), 104–109.
[9] I. CUCUREZEANU, Problems on Number Theory (Romanian), Ed. Technicǎ, Bucharest, 1976.
[10] S.S. DRAGOMIR, On an inequality of Tiberiu Popoviciu (Romanian), Gaz. Mat. Metod.,
(Bucharest) 8 (1987), 124–128. ZBL No. 712:110A.
[11] T. POPOVICIU, Gazeta Matematicǎ, 16 (1940), p. 334.
[12] S.S. DRAGOMIR, Inequalities of Cauchy-Buniakowski-Schwartz’s type for positive linear func-
tionals (Romanian), Gaz. Mat. Metod. (Bucharest), 9 (1988), 162–164.
[13] T. ANDRESCU, D. ANDRICA AND M.O. DRÎMBE, The trinomial principle in obtaining inequal-
ities (Romanian), Gaz. Mat. (Bucharest), 90 (1985), 332–338.
[14] P. FLOR, Über eine Unglichung von S.S. Wagner, Elemente Math., 20 (1965), 136.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 27

[15] S.S. WAGNER, Amer. Math. Soc., Notices, 12 (1965), 220.


[16] S.S. DRAGOMIR, A version of Wagner’s inequality for complex numbers, submitted.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
28 S.S. D RAGOMIR

3. R EFINEMENTS OF THE (CBS) −I NEQUALITY


3.1. A Refinement in Terms of Moduli. The following result was proved in [1].
Theorem 3.1. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) and b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be sequences of real numbers. Then
one has the inequality
n n n
!2 n n n n

X X X X X X X
2 2
(3.1) ak bk − ak b k ≥ ak |ak | bk |bk | − ak |bk | |ak | bk ≥ 0.


k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

Proof. We will follow the proof from [1].


For any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} the next elementary inequality is true:
(3.2) |ai bj − aj bi | ≥ ||ai bj | − |aj bi || .
By multiplying this inequality with |ai bj − aj bi | ≥ 0 we get
(3.3) (ai bj − aj bi )2 ≥ |(ai bj − aj bi ) (|ai | |bj | − |aj | |bi |)|
= |ai |ai | bj |bj | + bi |bi | aj |aj | − |ai | bi aj |bj | − ai bj |aj | |bi || .
Summing (3.3) over i and j from 1 to n, we deduce
n
X
(ai bj − aj bi )2
i,j=1
X n


a i |a i | b j |b j | + b i |b i | aj |a j | − |a i | b i a j |b j | − a i b j |a j | |b i |

i,j=1

X n
≥ (ai |ai | bj |bj | + bi |bi | aj |aj | − |ai | bi aj |bj | − ai bj |aj | |bi |) ,


i,j=1

giving the desired inequality (3.1). 


The following corollary is a natural consequence of (3.1) [1, Corollary 4].
Corollary 3.2. Let ā be a sequence of real numbers. Then
n n
!2 n n n

1 X
2 1 X 1
X 1 X 1 X
(3.4) ak − ak ≥ ak |ak | − ak · |ak | ≥ 0.

n k=1 n k=1 n k=1 n k=1 n k=1

There are some particular inequalities that may also be deduced from the above Theorem 3.1
(see [1, p. 80]).
(1) Suppose that for ā and b̄ sequences of real numbers, one has sgn (ak ) = sgn (bk ) =
ek ∈ {−1, 1} . Then one has the inequality
n n n
!2 n n n
!2
X X X X X X
(3.5) a2k b2k − ak b k ≥ ek a2k ek b2k − ek ak bk ≥ 0.
k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

(2) If ā = (a1 , . . . , a2n ) , then we have the inequality


2n
" 2n #2 2n 2n

X X X X
2 k k
(3.6) 2n ak − (−1) ak ≥ ak (−1) |ak | ≥ 0.


k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 29

(3) If ā = (a1 , . . . , a2n+1 ) , then we have the inequality


2n+1 2n+1
!2 2n+1 2n+1
X X X X
(3.7) (2n + 1) a2k − (−1)k ak ≥ ak (−1)k |ak | ≥ 0.


k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

The following version for complex numbers is valid as well.


Theorem 3.3. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) and b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be sequences of complex numbers.
Then one has the inequality
n n
n 2 n n n n

X X X X X X X
(3.8) |ai |2 |bi |2 − ai b i ≥ |ai | āi |bi | bi − |ai | bi |bi | āi ≥ 0.


i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

Proof. We have for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} that


|āi bj − āj bi | ≥ ||ai | |bj | − |aj | |bi || .
Multiplying by |āi bj − āj bi | ≥ 0, we get

|āi bj − āj bi |2 ≥ ||ai | āi |bj | bj + |aj | āj |bi | bi − |ai | bi |bj | āj − |bi | āi |aj | bj | .
Summing over i and j from 1 to n and using the Lagrange’s identity for complex numbers:
2
n n n n
X 2
X 2
X 1X
|ai | |bi | − ai b i = |āi bj − āj bi |2

i=1 i=1

i=1
2 i,j=1

we deduce the desired inequality (3.8). 


Remark 3.4. Similar particular inequalities may be stated, but we omit the details.
3.2. A Refinement for a Sequence Whose Norm is One. The following result holds [1, The-
orem 6].
Theorem 3.5. Let ā = (a P1 , . . . , an ), b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be sequences of real numbers and ē =
(e1 , . . . , en ) be such that ni=1 e2i = 1. Then the following inequality holds
" n #2
X n Xn X Xn X n X n Xn
2 2
(3.9) ai bi ≥ ak b k − ek ak ek bk + ek ak ek bk


i=1 i=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1
n
!2
X
≥ ak b k .
k=1

Proof. We will follow the proof from [1].


From the (CBS) −inequality, one has

n
" n
! #2 n
" n
! #2
X X X X
(3.10) ak − ei ai ek bk − ei bi ek
k=1 i=1 k=1 i=1
( n " n
! #" n
! #)2
X X X
≥ ak − ei ai ek bk − ei bi ek .
k=1 i=1 i=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
30 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Pn 2
Since k=1 ek = 1, a simple calculation shows that
n
" n
! #2 n n
!2
X X X X
ak − ei ai ek = a2k − ek ak ,
k=1 i=1 k=1 k=1
n
" n
! #2 n n
!2
X X X X
bk − ei bi ek = b2k − ek bk ,
k=1 i=1 k=1 k=1

and
n
" n
! #" n
! # n n n
X X X X X X
ak − ei ai ek bk − ei bi ek = ak bk − ek ak ek bk
k=1 i=1 i=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

and then the inequality (3.10) becomes


 !2   n !2 
Xn Xn X n
X
(3.11)  a2k − ek ak   b2k − ek bk 
k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

n n n
!2
X X X
≥ ak b k − ek ak ek bk ≥ 0.
k=1 k=1 k=1

Using the elementary inequality


m2 − l2 p2 − q 2 ≤ (mp − lq)2 ,
 
m, l, p, q ∈ R
for the choices
n
! 12
n

n
! 12
X X X
m= a2k , l= ek ak , p= b2k


k=1 k=1 k=1
Xn
and q = ek bk


k=1

the above inequality (3.11) provides the following result



n
! 21 n
! 21 n n
2
X X X X
(3.12) a2k b2k − ek ak ek bk 


k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1
n n n
2
X X X
≥ ak b k − ek ak ek bk .


k=1 k=1 k=1

Since
n
! 21 n
! 12
n n

X X X X
a2k b2k ≥ ek ak ek bk


k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

then, by taking the square root in (3.12) we deduce the first part of (3.9).
The second part is obvious, and the theorem is proved. 

The following corollary is a natural consequence of the above theorem [1, Corollary 7].

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 31

Pn
Corollary 3.6. Let ā, b̄, ē be as in Theorem 3.5. If k=1 ak bk = 0, then one has the inequality:

n n n
!2 n
!2
X X X X
(3.13) a2k b2k ≥ 4 ek ak ek bk .
k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

The following inequalities are interesting as well [1, p. 81].


(1) For any ā, b̄ one has the inequality
n n
" n n n
n n
#2
X X X 1 X X 1 X X
(3.14) a2k b2k ≥ ak b k − ak bk + ak bk

k=1 k=1

k=1
n k=1 k=1 n k=1 k=1
n
!2
X
≥ ak b k .
k=1
Pn
(2) If k=1 ak bk = 0, then
n n n
!2 n
!2
X X 4 X X
(3.15) a2k b2k ≥ 2 ak bk .
k=1 k=1
n k=1 k=1

In a similar manner, we may state and prove the following result for complex numbers.
Theorem 3.7. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ), b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be sequences of complex Pn numbers and
ē = (e1 , . . . , en ) a sequence of complex numbers satisfying the condition i=1 |ei |2 = 1. Then
the following refinement of the (CBS) −inequality holds
n n
" n n n
n n
#2
X X X X X X X
2 2
(3.16) |ai | |bi | ≥ ak b̄k − ak ēk · ek b̄k + ak ēk · ek b̄k


i=1 i=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1
2
X n
≥ ak b̄k .


k=1

The proof is similar to the one in Theorem 3.5 on using the corresponding (CBS) −inequality
for complex numbers.
Remark 3.8. Similar particular inequalities may be stated, but we omit the details.
3.3. A Second Refinement in Terms of Moduli. The following lemma holds.
Lemma 3.9. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) beP a sequence of real numbers and p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn ) a
sequence of positive real numbers with ni=1 pi = 1. Then one has the inequality:
n n
!2 n n n

X X X X X
2
(3.17) p i ai − p i ai ≥ pi |ai | ai − pi |ai | p i ai .


i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

Proof. By the properties of moduli we have


(ai − aj )2 = |(ai − aj ) (ai − aj )| ≥ |(|ai | − |aj |) (ai − aj )|
for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} . This is equivalent to
(3.18) a2i − 2ai aj + a2j ≥ ||ai | ai + |aj | aj − |ai | aj − |aj | ai |
for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} .

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
32 S.S. D RAGOMIR

If we multiply (3.18) by pi pj ≥ 0 and sum over i and j from 1 to n we deduce


Xn Xn n
X n
X n
X n
X
pj pi a2i − 2 p i ai p j aj + pi pj a2j
j=1 i=1 i=1 j=1 i=1 j=1
n
X
≥ pi pj |ai | ai + |aj | aj − |ai | aj − |aj | ai
i,j=1
n
X
≥ pi pj (|ai | ai + |aj | aj − |ai | aj − |aj | ai ) ,


i,j=1

which is clearly equivalent to (3.17). 


Using the above lemma, we may prove the following refinement of the (CBS) -inequality.
Theorem 3.10. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) and b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be two sequences of real numbers.
Then one has the inequality
n n n
!2 n n n n

X X X X X X X
(3.19) a2i b2i − ai b i ≥ a2i · sgn (ai ) |bi | bi − |ai bi | ai bi ≥ 0.


i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

Proof. If we choose (for ai 6= 0, i ∈ {1, . . . , n}) in (3.17), that


a2 bi
pi := Pn i 2
, xi = , i ∈ {1, . . . , n} ,
k=1 ak ai
we get
n  2 n
!2
X a2i bi X a2i bi
Pn 2
· − Pn 2
·
i=1 k=1 ak ai i=1 k=1 ak ai
n n n
a2i a2i 2

X bi bi X bi X ai b i

≥ · − ·
Pn
2
Pn 2
Pn 2
k=1 ak ai ai k=1 ak
ai

i=1 i=1 i=1 k=1 ak ai

from where we get


Pn |a |
n Pn 2 Pn Pn
X b2 ( i=1 ai bi )
i=1
i
ai
|b |
i ib i=1 |ai bi | i=1 ai bi

Pn i − Pn 2 ≥ n − 2
a2k 2
( nk=1 a2k )
P
k=1 ak

( k=1 a2k )
P
i=1 k=1
which is clearly equivalent to (3.19). 
The case for complex numbers is as follows.
Lemma 3.11. Let z̄ = (z1 , . . . , zn ) be aPsequence of complex numbers and p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn ) a
sequence of positive real numbers with ni=1 pi = 1. Then one has the inequality:
2
X n X n Xn n
X n
X
2
(3.20) pi |zi | − pi zi ≥ pi |zi | zi − pi |zi | pi zi .


i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

Proof. By the properties of moduli for complex numbers we have


|zi − zj |2 ≥ |(|zi | − |zj |) (zi − zj )|
for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} , which is clearly equivalent to
|zi |2 − 2 Re (zi z̄j ) + |zj |2 ≥ ||zi | zi + |zj | zj − zi |zj | − |zi | zj |
for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} .

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 33

If we multiply with pi pj ≥ 0 and sum over i and j from 1 to n, we deduce the desired
inequality (3.20). 

Now, in a similar manner to the one in Theorem 3.10, we may state the following result for
complex numbers.

Theorem 3.12. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) (ai 6= 0, i = 1, . . . , n) and b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be two se-


quences of complex numbers. Then one has the inequality:

n n
n 2 n n n

X X X X |a | X X
i
(3.21) |ai |2 |bi |2 − āi bi ≥ |bi | bi − |ai | bi āi bi ≥ 0.

i=1 i=1

i=1
ai i=1

i=1 i=1

3.4. A Refinement for a Sequence Less than the Weights. The following result was obtained
in [1, Theorem 9] (see also [2, Theorem 3.10]).

Theorem 3.13. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ), b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be sequences of real numbers and


p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn ), q̄ = (q1 , . . . , qn ) be sequences of nonnegative real numbers such that pk ≥ qk
for any k ∈ {1, . . . , n} . Then we have the inequality

n n

n

n n
! 21 2
X X X X X
(3.22) pk a2k pk b2k ≥  (pk − qk ) ak bk + qk a2k qk b2k 


k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1
" n n #2
X X
≥ (pk − qk ) ak bk + q k ak b k


k=1 k=1
n
!2
X
≥ p k ak b k .
k=1

Proof. We shall follow the proof in [1].


Since pk − qk ≥ 0, then the (CBS) −inequality for the weights rk := pk − qk will give

n n
! n n
! " n
#2
X X X X X
(3.23) pk a2k − qk a2k pk b2k − qk b2k ≥ (pk − qk ) ak bk .
k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

Using the elementary inequality

(ac − bd)2 ≥ a2 − b2 c2 − d2 ,
 
a, b, c, d ∈ R

for the choices


n
! 21 n
! 12 n
! 12
X X X
a= pk a2k , b= qk a2k , c= pk b2k
k=1 k=1 k=1

and
n
! 12
X
d= qk b2k
k=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
34 S.S. D RAGOMIR

we deduce by (3.23) that



n
! 21 n
! 12 n
! 12 n
! 12 2
X X X X
(3.24)  pk a2k pk b2k − qk a2k qk b2k 
k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1
" n
#2
X
≥ (pk − qk ) ak bk .
k=1

Since, obviously,
n
! 21 n
! 12 n
! 12 n
! 12
X X X X
pk a2k pk b2k ≥ qk a2k qk b2k
k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

then, by (3.24), on taking the square root, we would get


n
! 12 n
! 12 n
! 12 n
! 21 n
X X X X X
pk a2k pk b2k ≥ qk a2k qk b2k + (pk − qk ) ak bk ,


k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

which provides the first inequality in (3.22).


The other inequalities are obvious and we omit the details. 

The following corollary is a natural consequence of the above theorem [2, Corollary 3.11].
Corollary 3.14. Let ā, b̄ be sequences of real numbers and s̄ = (s1 , . . . , sn ) be such that
0 ≤ sk ≤ 1 for any k ∈ {1, . . . , n} . Then one has the inequalities

n n

n

n n
! 12 2
X X X X X
(3.25) a2k b2k ≥  (1 − sk ) ak bk + sk a2k sk b2k 


k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1
" n n #2
X X
≥ (1 − sk ) ak bk + s k ak b k


k=1 k=1
n
!2
X
≥ ak b k .
k=1

Remark 3.15. Assume that ā, b̄ and s̄ are as in Corollary 3.14. The following inequalities hold
(see [2, p. 15]).
a) If nk=1 ak bk = 0, then
P

n n n
!2
X X X
(3.26) a2k b2k ≥ 4 s k ak b k .
k=1 k=1 k=1
Pn
b) If k=1 sk ak bk = 0, then

n n

n
n n
! 21 2
X X X X X
(3.27) a2k b2k ≥  ak b k + αk a2k αk b2k  .


k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 35

In particular, we may obtain the following particular inequalities involving trigonometric


functions (see [2, p. 15])
n n

n

n n
! 12 2
X X X X X
(3.28) a2k b2k ≥  ak bk cos2 αk + a2k sin 2 αk b2k sin2 αk 


k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1
" n #2
X X n
≥ ak bk cos2 αk + ak bk sin2 αk


k=1 k=1
n
!2
X
≥ ak b k ,
k=1

where ak , bk , αk ∈ R, k = 1,P
. . . , n.
If one would assume that nk=1 ak bk = 0, then
n n n
!2
X X X
(3.29) a2k b2k ≥ 4 ak bk sin2 αk .
k=1 k=1 k=1
Pn
If k=1 ak bk sin2 αk = 0, then
n n

n

n n
! 21 2
X X X X X
2 2
(3.30) ak bk ≥ ak b k + a2k sin2 αk b2k sin2 αk  .


k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

3.5. A Conditional Inequality Providing a Refinement. The following lemma holds [2, Lemma
4.1].
Lemma 3.16. Consider the sequences of real numbers x̄ = (x1 , . . . , xn ) , ȳ = (y1 , . . . , yn ) and
z̄ = (z1 , . . . , zn ) . If
(3.31) yk2 ≤ |xk zk | for any k ∈ {1, . . . , n} ,
then one has the inequality:
n
!2 n n
X X X
(3.32) |yk | ≤ |xk | |zk | .
k=1 k=1 k=1

Proof. We will follow the proof in [2]. Using the condition (3.31) and the (CBS) −inequality,
we have
n n
X X 1 1
|yk | ≤ |xk | 2 |zk | 2
k=1 k=1
" n  n 
# 12
X 1
2 X 1
2
≤ |xk | 2 |zk | 2

k=1 k=1
n n
! 12
X X
= |xk | |zk |
k=1 k=1

which is clearly equivalent to (3.32). 


The following result holds [2, Theorem 4.6].

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
36 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Theorem 3.17. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ), b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) and c̄ = (c1 , . . . , cn ) be sequences of


real numbers such that
(i) |bk | + |ck | =
6 0 (k ∈ {1, . . . , n});
2|bk ck |
(ii) |ak | ≤ |bk |+|ck | for any k ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
Then one has the inequality
n Pn
|bk | nk=1 |ck |
P
X 2 k=1
(3.33) |ak | ≤ Pn .
k=1 k=1 (|bk | + |ck |)

Proof. We will follow the proof in [2]. By (ii) we observe that



2 |bk ck |  2 |bk |
|ak | ≤ ≤ for any k ∈ {1, . . . , n}
|bk | + |ck |  2 |c |
k

and thus
(3.34) xk := 2 |bk | − |ak | ≥ 0 and
zk := 2 |ck | − |ak | ≥ 0 for any k ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
A simple calculation also shows that the relation (ii) is equivalent to
(3.35) a2k ≤ (2 |bk | − |ak |) (2 |ck | − |ak |) for any k ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
If we consider yk := ak and take xk , zk (k = 1, . . . , n) as defined by (3.34), then we get
yk2 ≤ xk zk (with xk , zk ≥ 0) for any k ∈ {1, . . . , n}. Applying Lemma 3.16 we deduce

n
!2 n n
! n n
!
X X X X X
(3.36) |ak | ≤ 2 |bk | − |ak | 2 |ck | − |ak |
k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

which is clearly equivalent to (3.33). 


The following corollary is a natural consequence of the above theorem [2, Corollary 4.7].
Corollary 3.18. For any sequence x̄ and ȳ of real numbers, with |xk |+|yk | =
6 0 (k = 1, . . . , n) ,
one has:
n
2 nk=1 |xk | nk=1 |yk |
P P
X |xk yk |
(3.37) ≤ Pn .
k=1
|x k | + |yk | k=1 (|xk | + |yk |)

For two positive real numbers, let us recall the following means
a+b
A (a, b) := (the arithmetic mean)
2

G (a, b) := ab (the geometric mean)
and
2
H (a, b) := 1 1 (the harmonic mean).
a
+b
We remark that if ā = (a1 , . . . , an ), b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) are sequences of real numbers, then
obviously
n n n
!
X X X
(3.38) A (ai , bi ) = A ai , bi ,
i=1 i=1 i=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 37

and, by the (CBS) −inequality,


n n n
!
X X X
(3.39) G (ai , bi ) ≤ G ai , bi .
i=1 i=1 i=1
The following similar result for harmonic means also holds [2, p. 19].
Theorem 3.19. For any two sequences of positive real numbers ā and b̄ we have the property:
n n n
!
X X X
(3.40) H (ai , bi ) ≤ H ai , bi .
i=1 i=1 i=1

Proof. Follows by Corollary 3.18 on choosing xk = ak , yk = bk and multiplying the inequality


(3.37) with 2. 
The following refinement of the (CBS) −inequality holds [2, Corollary 4.9]. This result is
known in the literature as Milne’s inequality [8].
Theorem 3.20. For any two sequences of real numbers p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn ), q̄ = (q1 , . . . , qn ) with
|pk | + |qk | =
6 0 (k = 1, . . . , n) , one has the inequality:
n
!2 n n n n
X X
2 2
X p2k qk2 X
2
X
(3.41) p k qk ≤ p k + qk 2 2
≤ pk qk2 .
k=1 k=1
p
k=1 k
+ q k k=1 k=1

Proof. We shall follow the proof in [2]. The first inequality is obvious by Lemma 3.16 on
p2 q 2
choosing yk = pk qk , xk = p2k + qk2 and zk = p2k+qk2 (k = 1, . . . , n) .
k k
The second inequality follows by Corollary 3.18 on choosing xk = p2k and y = qk2 (k = 1,
. . . , n). 
Remark 3.21. The following particular inequality is obvious by (3.41)
n
!2 n
X X
(3.42) sin αk cos αk ≤n sin2 αk cos2 αk
i=1 i=1
n
X n
X
2
≤ sin αk cos2 αk ;
i=1 i=1

for any αk ∈ R, k ∈ {1, . . . , n} .


3.6. A Refinement for Non-Constant Sequences. The following result was proved in [3, The-
orem 1].
Theorem 3.22. Let ā = (ai )i∈N , b̄ = (bi )i∈N , p̄ = (pi )i∈N be sequences of real numbers such
that
(i) ai 6= aj and bi 6= bj for i 6= j, i, j ∈ N;
(ii) pi > 0 for all i ∈ N.
Then for any H a finite part of N one has the inequality:
!2
X X X
(3.43) pi a2i pi b2i − p i ai b i ≥ max {A, B} ≥ 0,
i∈H i∈H i∈H
where
hP i2
2
P P P
i∈H p i ai b i j∈J p j aj − i∈H pi ai j∈J p j bj
(3.44) A := max 2
pi a2i −
J⊆H
P P
J6=∅ PJ i∈H i∈J p i ai

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
38 S.S. D RAGOMIR

and
hP i2
2
P P P
i∈H p i ai b i j∈J p j bj − i∈H pi bi j∈J p j aj
(3.45) B := max 2
pi b2i −
J⊆H
P P
J6=∅ PJ i∈H i∈J p i bi
P
and PJ := j∈J pj .

Proof. We shall follow the proof in [3].


Let J be a part of H. Define the mapping fJ : R → R given by
   2
X X X X X
fJ (t) = pi a2i  pi b2i + pi (bi + t)2  −  p i ai b i + pi ai (bi + t) .
i∈H i∈H\J i∈J i∈H\J i∈J

Then by the (CBS) −inequality we have that fJ (t) ≥ 0 for all t ∈ R.


On the other hand we have
" # " #2
X X X X X
2 2 2
fJ (t) = p i ai pi bi + 2t p i b i + t PJ − p i ai b i + t p i ai
i∈H i∈H i∈H i∈H i∈J
 !2 
X X
= t2 PJ pi a2i − p i ai 
i∈H i∈J
" #
X X X X
+ 2t pi a2i p i bi − p i ai b i p i ai
i∈H i∈J i∈H i∈J
 !2 
X X X
+ pi a2i pi b2i − p i ai b i 
i∈H i∈H i∈H

for all t ∈ R.
Since
!2 !2
X X X X
PJ pi a2i − p i ai ≥ PJ pi a2i − p i ai >0
i∈H i∈J i∈J i∈J

as ai 6= aj for all i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} with i 6= j, then, by the inequality fJ (t) ≥ 0 for any t ∈ R
we get that
" #2
1 X X X X
0≥ ∆= p i ai b i p j aj − pi a2i p j bj
4 i∈H j∈J i∈H j∈J
 !2   !2 
X X X X X
− PJ pi a2i − p i ai   pi a2i pi b2i − p i ai b i 
i∈H i∈J i∈H i∈H i∈H

from where results the inequality


!2
X X X
pi a2i pi b2i − p i ai b i ≥ A.
i∈H i∈H i∈H

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 39

The second part of the proof goes likewise for the mapping gJ : R → R given by
   2
X X X X X
gJ (t) =  pi a2i + pi (ai + t)2  pi b2i −  p i ai b i + pi bi (ai + t)
i∈H\J i∈J i∈H i∈H\J i∈J

and we omit the details. 


The following corollary also holds [3, Corollary 1].
Corollary 3.23. With the assumptions of Theorem 3.22 and if
P P P 2
P 2
i∈H pi ai bi i∈H pi ai − i∈H pi ai i∈H pi bi
(3.46) C := 2 ,
PH i∈H pi a2i −
P P
i∈H p i a i

P 2
pi b2i
P P P
i∈H p i ai b i i∈H p i bi − i∈H i∈H p i ai
(3.47) D := 2 ,
2
P P
PH i∈H pi bi − i∈H pi bi
then one has the inequality
!2
X X X
(3.48) pi a2i pi b2i − p i ai b i ≥ max {C, D} ≥ 0.
i∈H i∈H i∈H

The following corollary also holds [3, Corollary 2].


Corollary 3.24. If ai , bi 6= 0 for i ∈ N and H is a finite part of N, then one has the inequality
!2
X X X
(3.49) pi a2i pi b2i − p i ai b i
i∈H i∈H i∈H
(P )
pj c2j 2
P
1 j∈H j∈H pj dj
≥ max P 2
,P 2
≥ 0,
card (H) − 1 i∈H pi ai i∈H pi bi

where
X X
(3.50) cj := aj p i ai b i − b j pi a2i , j ∈ H
i∈H i∈H
and
X X
(3.51) dj := aj pi b2i − bj pi ai bi , j ∈ H.
i∈H i∈H

Proof. Choosing in Theorem 3.22, J = {j} , we get the inequality


!2
X
2
X
2
X p2j c2j
p i ai p i bi − p i ai b i ≥ , j∈H
pj i∈H pi a2i − p2j a2j
P
i∈H i∈H i∈H
from where we obtain
! !2 
X X X X
pi a2i − pj a2j  pi a2i pi b2i − p i ai b i  ≥ pj c2j for any j ∈ H.
i∈H i∈H i∈H i∈H

Summing these inequalities over j ∈ H, we get


 !2 
X X X X X
[card (H) − 1] pi a2i  pi a2i pi b2i − p i ai b i ≥ pj c2j
i∈H i∈H i∈H i∈H j∈H

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
40 S.S. D RAGOMIR

from where we get the first part of (3.49).


The second part goes likewise and we omit the details. 
Remark 3.25. The following particular inequalities provide refinement for the (CBS) −inequality
[3, p. 60 – p. 61].
(1) Assume that ā = (a1 , . . . , an ), b = (b1 , . . . , bn ) are nonconstant sequences of real
numbers. Then
n n n
!2
X X X
(3.52) a2i b2i − ai b i
i=1 i=1 i=1


 [Pn a2 Pn b − Pn a Pn a b ]2

i=1 i i=1 i i=1 i i=1 i i
≥ max n ,
P 2
P n 2
n ai − ( i=1 ai )



i=1


2
[ ni=1 bi ni=1 ai bi − ni=1 ai ni=1 b2 ] 
P P P P
i
n .
2
n b2i − ( ni=1 bi )
P P 


i=1

(2) Assume that ā and b̄ are sequences of real numbers with not all elements equal to zero,
then
n n n
!2
X X X
(3.53) a2i b2i − ai b i
i=1 i=1 i=1
 
n n n
2
2
P P P
aj ai b i − b j ai



1 j=1

i=1 i=1
≥ max n ,
n−1
a2i

 P


i=1

n
 n n
2 
a2i − bj
P P P
aj ai b i 



j=1 i=1 i=1
n .
b2i
P 



i=1

3.7. De Bruijn’s Inequality. The following refinement of the (CBS) −inequality was proved
by N.G. de Bruijn in 1960, [4] (see also [5, p. 89]).
Theorem 3.26. If ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) is a sequence of real numbers and z̄ = (z1 , . . . , zn ) is a
sequence of complex numbers, then
2 " n n #
n n
X 1 X X X
(3.54) ak zk ≤ a2k |zk |2 + zk2 .

2


k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

Equality holds in (3.54)


Pn if 2and only if for k ∈ {1, . . . , n} , ak = Re (λzk ) , where λ is a complex
2
number such that k=1 λ zk is a nonnegative real number.
Proof. We shall follow the proof in [5, p. 89 – p. 90].

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 41

By a simultaneous rotation of all the zk ’s about the origin, we get


X n
ak zk ≥ 0.
k=1
This rotation does not affect the moduli

X n X n
ak zk , zk2 and |zk | for k ∈ {1, . . . , n} .



k=1 k=1

Hence, it is sufficient to prove inequality (3.54) for the case where nk=1 ak zk ≥ 0.
P
If we put zk = xk + iyk (k ∈ {1, . . . , n}) , then, by the (CBS) −inequality for real numbers,
we have
n 2 n
!2 n n
X X X X
2
(3.55) ak zk = ak zk ≤ ak x2k .



k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1
Since
2x2k = |zk |2 + Re zk2 for any k ∈ {1, . . . , n}
we obtain, by (3.55), that
2 " n #
n n n
X 1X 2 X X
(3.56) ak zk ≤ ak |zk |2 + Re zk2 .

2


k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1
As ! n
n
X n
X X
Re zk2 = Re zk2 ≤ zk2 ,


k=1 k=1 k=1
then by (3.56) we deduce the desired inequality (3.54). 
3.8. McLaughlin’s Inequality. The following refinement of the (CBS) −inequality for se-
quences of real numbers was obtained in 1966 by H.W. McLaughlin [7, p. 66].
Theorem 3.27. If ā = (a1 , . . . , a2n ), b̄ = (b1 , . . . , b2n ) are sequences of real numbers, then
2n
!2 " n #2 2n 2n
X X X X
2
(3.57) ai b i + (ai bn+i − an+i bi ) ≤ ai b2i
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

with equality if and only if for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n}


(3.58) ai bj − aj bi − an+i bn+j + an+j bn+i = 0
and
(3.59) ai bn+j − aj bn+i + an+i bj − an+j bi = 0.
Proof. We shall follow the proof in [6] by M.O. Drîmbe.
The following identity may be obtained by direct computation
2n 2n 2n
!2 " n #2
X X X X
(3.60) a2i b2i − ai b i − (ai bn+i − an+i bi )
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1
X
= (ai bj − aj bi − an+i bn+j + an+j bn+i )2
1≤i<j≤n
X
+ (ai bn+j − aj bn+i + an+i bj − an+j bi )2 .
1≤i<j≤n

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
42 S.S. D RAGOMIR

It is obvious that (3.57) is a simple consequence of the identity (3.60). The case of equality is
also obvious. 
Remark 3.28. For other similar (CBS) −type inequalties see the survey paper [7]. An anal-
ogous inequality to (3.57) for sequences ā and b̄ having 4n terms each may be found in [7, p.
70].
3.9. A Refinement due to Daykin-Eliezer-Carlitz. We will present now the version due to
Mitrinović, Pečarić and Fink [5, p. 87] of Daykin-Eliezer-Carlitz’s refinement of the discrete
(CBS) −inequality [8].
Theorem 3.29. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) and b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be two sequences of positive num-
bers. The ineuality
n
!2 n n n n
X X X X X
2
(3.61) ai bi ≤ f (ai bi ) g (ai bi ) ≤ ai b2i
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

holds if and only if


(3.62) f (a, b) g (a, b) = a2 b2 ,
(3.63) f (ka, kb) = k 2 f (a, b) ,
bf (a, 1) af (b, 1) a b
(3.64) + ≤ +
af (b, 1) bf (a, 1) b a
for any a, b, k > 0.
Proof. We shall follow the proof in [5, p. 88 – p. 89].
Necessity. Indeed, for n = 1, the inequality (3.61) becomes
(ab)2 ≤ f (a, b) g (a, b) ≤ a2 b2 , a, b > 0
which gives the condition (3.62).
For n = 2 in (3.61), using (3.62), we get
2a1 b1 a2 b2 ≤ f (a1 , b1 ) g (a2 , b2 ) + f (a2 , b2 ) g (a1 , b1 ) ≤ a21 b22 + a22 b21 .
By eliminating g, we get
f (a1 , b1 ) a2 b2 f (a2 , b2 ) a1 b1 a1 b 2 a2 b 1
(3.65) 2≤ · + · ≤ + .
f (a2 , b2 ) a1 b1 f (a1 , b1 ) a2 b2 a2 b 1 a1 b 2
By substituting in (3.65) a, b for a1 , b1 and ka, kb for a2 , b2 (k > 0), we get
f (a, b) 2 f (ka, kb) −2
2≤ k + k ≤2
f (ka, kb) f (a, b)
and this is valid only if k 2 f (a, b) (f (ka, kb)) = 1, i.e., the condition (3.63) holds.
Using (3.65), for a1 = a, b1 = b, a2 = b, b2 = 1, we have
f (a,1) f (b,1)
a b a b
(3.66) 2≤ f (b,1)
+ f (a,1)
≤ + .
b a
b a

The first inequality in (3.66) is always satisfied while the second inequality is equivalent to
(3.64).

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 43

Sufficiency. Suppose that (3.62) holds. Then inequality (3.61) can be written in the form
X X
2 ai b i aj b j ≤ [f (ai , bi ) g (aj , bj ) + f (aj , bj ) g (ai , bi )]
1≤i<j≤n 1≤i<j≤n
X
a2i b2j + a2j b2i .


1≤i<j≤n

Therefore, it is enough to prove

(3.67) 2ai bi aj bj ≤ f (ai , bi ) g (aj , bj ) + f (aj , bj ) g (ai , bi )


≤ a2i b2j + a2j b2i .

ai aj
Suppose that (3.64) holds. Then (3.66) holds and putting a = bi
, b= bj
in (3.66) and using
(3.63), we get
f (ai , bi ) aj bj f (aj , bj ) ai bi ai b j aj b i
2≤ · + · ≤ + .
f (aj , bj ) ai bi f (ai , bi ) aj bj aj b i ai b j

Multiplying the last inequality by ai bi aj bj and using (3.62), we obtain (3.67). 

Remark 3.30. In [8] (see [5, p. 89]) the condition (3.64) is given as

f (a, 1) f (b, 1)
(3.68) f (b, 1) ≤ f (a, 1) , 2
≤ for a ≥ b > 0.
a b2
Remark 3.31. O.E. Daykin, C.J. Eliezer and C. Carlitz [8] stated that examples for f, g satis-
fying (3.62) – (3.64) were obtained in the literature. The choice f (x, y) = x2 + y 2 , g (x, y) =
x2 y 2
x2 +y 2
will give the Milne’s inequality

n
!2 n n n n
X X  X a2i b2i X X
(3.69) ai b i ≤ a2i + b2i · 2 2
≤ 2
ai · b2i .
i=1 i=1
a
i=1 i
+ b i i=1 i=1

For a different proof of this fact, see Section 3.5.


The choice f (x, y) = x1+α y 1−α , g (x, y) = x1−α y 1+α (α ∈ [0, 1]) will give the Callebaut
inequality

n
!2 n n n n
X X X X X
(3.70) ai b i ≤ a1+α
i b1−α
i a1−α
i b1+α
i ≤ a2i · b2i .
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

3.10. A Refinement via Dunkl-Williams’ Inequality. We will use the following version of
Dunkl-Williams’ inequality established in 1964 in inner product spaces [9].

Lemma 3.32. Let a, b be two non-null complex numbers. Then



1 a b
(3.71) |a − b| ≥ (|a| + |b|) − .

2 |a| |b|

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
44 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Proof. We start with the identity (see also [5, pp. 515 – 516])
2   
a b a b ā b̄
− = − −
|a| |b| |a| |b| |a| |b|
 
a b̄
= 2 − 2 Re ·
|a| |b|
1 
= 2 |a| |b| − 2 Re a · b̄
|a| |b|
1 
2 |a| |b| − |a|2 + |b|2 − |a − b|2

=
|a| |b|
1 
|a − b|2 − (|a| − |b|)2 .

=
|a| |b|
Hence
2 2
(|a| − |b|)2 

1
2
a b
(|a| + |b|)2 − |a − b|2

|a − b| − (|a| + |b|) − =
2 |a| |b| 4 |a| |b|
and (3.71) is proved. 

Using the above result, we may prove the following refinement of the (CBS) −inequality for
complex numbers.
Theorem 3.33. If ā = (a1 , . . . , an ), b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) are two sequences of nonzero complex
numbers, then
2
X n Xn X n
2 2
(3.72) |ak | |bk | − ak b k


k=1 k=1 k=1
n 2
1 X |bi | |aj | |ai | |bj |
≥ āi bj − āj bi + āi · bj − bi · āj ≥ 0.
8 i,j=1 |ai | |bj | |bi | |aj |

Proof. The inequality (3.71) is clearly equivalent to


2
2 1 |b| |a|
(3.73) |a − b| ≥ a − b + ·a− ·b
4 |a| |b|
for any a, b ∈ C, a, b 6= 0.
We know the Lagrange’s identity for sequences of complex numbers
n n
n 2 n
X 2
X 2
X 1X
(3.74) |ak | |bk | − ak b k = |āi bj − āj bi |2 .

k=1 k=1

k=1
2 i,j=1

By (3.73), we have
2
21 |aj | |bi | |ai | |bj |
|āi bj − āj bi | ≥ āi bj − āj bi + āi bj − āj bi .
4 |ai | |bj | |aj | |bi |
Summing over i, j from 1 to n and using the (CBS) −inequality for double sums, we deduce
(3.72). 

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 45

3.11. Some Refinements due to Alzer and Zheng. In 1992, H. Alzer [10] presented the fol-
lowing refinement of the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality written in the form
n
!2 n n
X X X
(3.75) xk yk ≤ yk x2k yk .
k=1 k=1 k=1
x2
Theorem 3.34. Let xk and yk (k = 1, . . . , n) be real numbers satisfying 0 = x0 < x1 ≤ 2

· · · ≤ xnn and 0 < yn ≤ yn−1 ≤ · · · ≤ y1 . Then
n
!2 n n  
X X X
2 1
(3.76) xk yk ≤ yk xk − xk−1 xk yk ,
k=1 k=1 k=1
4
with equality holding if and only if xk = kx1 (k = 1, . . . , n) and y1 = · · · = yn .
In 1998, Liu Zheng [11] pointed out an error in the proof given in [10], which can be corrected
as shown in [11]. Moreover, Liu Zheng established the following result which sharpens (3.76).
x2
Theorem 3.35. Let xk and yk (k = 1, . . . , n) be real numbers satisfying 0 < x1 ≤ 2
≤ ··· ≤
xn
n
and 0 < yn ≤ yn−1 ≤ · · · ≤ y1 . Then
n
!2 n n
X X X
(3.77) xk yk ≤ yk δk yk ,
k=1 k=1 k=1

with
7k + 1 2 k
(3.78) δ1 = x21 and δk = xk − x2 (k ≥ 2) .
8k 8 (k − 1) k−1
Equality holds in (3.77) if and only if xk = kx1 (k = 1, . . . , n) and y1 = · · · = yn .
In 1999, H. Alzer improved the above results as follows.
To present his results, we will follow [12].
In order to prove the main result, we need some technical lemmas.
Lemma 3.36. Let xk (k = 1, . . . , n) be real numbers such that
x2 xn
0 < x1 ≤ ≤ ··· ≤ .
2 n
Then
Xn
(3.79) 2 xk ≤ (n + 1) xn ,
k=1

with equality holding if and only if xk = kx1 (k = 1, . . . , n) .


A proof of Lemma 3.36 is given in [10].
Lemma 3.37. Let xk (k = 1, . . . , n) be real numbers such that
x2 xn
0 < x1 ≤ ≤ ··· ≤ .
2 n
Then
n
!2 n
X X 3k + 1 2
(3.80) xk ≤n xk ,
k=1 k=1
4k
with equality holding if and only if xk = kx1 (k = 1, . . . , n) .

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
46 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Proof. Let
n n
!2
X 3k + 1 X
Sn = Sn (x1 , . . . , xn ) = n x2k − xk .
k=1
4k k=1
Then we have for n ≥ 2 :
n−1 n−1
X 3k + 1 X 3 (n − 1) 2
(3.81) Sn − Sn−1 = x2k − 2xn xk + xn
k=1
4k k=1
4
= f (xn ) , say.
n
We differentiate with respect to xn and use (3.79) and xn ≥ x .
n−1 n−1
This yields
n−1
0 3 (n − 1) X n
f (xn ) = xn − 2 xk ≥ xn−1 > 0
2 k=1
2
and
 
n
(3.82) f (xn ) ≥ f xn−1
n−1
n n−1
X 3k + 1 2n X 3n2
= x2k − xn−1 xk + x2n−1
k=1
4k n−1 k=1
4 (n − 1)
= Tn−1 (x1 , . . . , xn−1 ) , say.
We use induction on n to establish that Tn−1 (x1 , . . . , xn−1 ) ≥ 0 for n ≥ 2. We have T1 (x1 ) =
0. Let n ≥ 3; applying (3.79) we obtain
n−1
∂ 3n + 2 2n X
Tn−1 (x1 , . . . , xn−1 ) = xn−1 − xk
∂xn−1 2 n − 1 k=1
(n − 2) (n + 1)
≥ xn−1 > 0
2 (n − 1)
and
 
n−1
(3.83) Tn−1 (x1 , . . . , xn−1 ) ≥ Tn−1 x1 , . . . , xn−2 , xn−2 .
n−2
Using the induction hypothesis Tn−2 (x1 , . . . , xn−2 ) ≥ 0 and (3.79), we get
  " n−2
#
n−1 xn−2 X
(3.84) Tn−1 x1 , . . . , xn−2 , xn−2 ≥ (n − 1) xn−2 − 2 xk .
n−2 n−2 k=1

From (3.83) and (3.84) we conclude Tn−1 (x1 , . . . , xn−1 ) ≥ 0 for n ≥ 2, so that (3.81) and
(3.82) imply
(3.85) Sn ≥ Sn−1 ≥ · · · ≥ S2 ≥ S1 = 0.
This proves inequality (3.80). We discuss the cases of equality. A simple calculation reveals
that Sn (x1 , 2x1 , . . . , nx1 ) = 0. We use induction on n to prove the implication
(3.86) Sn (x1 , . . . , xn ) = 0 =⇒ xk = kx1 for k = 1, . . . , n.
If n = 1, then (3.86) is obviously true. Next, we assume that (3.86) holds with n − 1 instead
of n. Let n ≥ 2 and Sn (x1 , . . . , xn ) = 0. Then (3.85) leads to Sn−1 (x1 , . . . , xn−1 ) = 0 which
implies xk = kx1 for k = 1, . . . , n − 1. Thus, we have Sn (x1 , 2x1 , . . . , (n − 1) x1 , xn ) = 0
which is equivalent to (xn − nx1 ) (3xn − nx1 ) = 0. Since 3xn > nx1 , we get xn = nx1 . 

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 47

Lemma 3.38. Let xk (k = 1, . . . , n) be real numbers such that


x2 xn
0 < x1 ≤ ≤ ··· ≤ .
2 n
If the natural numbers n and q satisfy n ≥ q + 1, then
q
!2 q
X X (3n + 1) q 2 2
(3.87) 0< xk − 2qxn xk + xn .
k=1 k=1
4n

 side of (3.87) by u (xn ) . Then we differen-


Proof. We denote the expression on the right-hand
tiate with respect to xn and apply (3.79), xn ≥ nq xq and n ≥ q + 1. This yields
q
1 0 (3n + 1) q X
u (xn ) = xn − 2q xk
q 2n k=1
(3n + 1) q
≥ xn − (q + 1) xq
2n
3n − 2q − 1
≥ xq > 0.
2
Hence, we get
  q q
!2
n (3n + 1) n 2 X X
(3.88) u (xn ) ≥ u xq = xq − 2nxq xk + xk .
q 4 k=1 k=1

Let
q
(3t + 1) t X
v (t) = xq − 2t xk and t ≥ q + 1;
4 k=1

from (3.79) we conclude that


q
6t + 1 X 2q + 3
v 0 (t) = xq − 2 xk ≥ xq > 0.
4 k=1
4

This implies that the expression on the right-hand side of (3.88) is increasing on [q + 1, ∞) with
respect to n. Since n ≥ q + 1, we get from (3.88):
q q
!2
(3q + 4) (q + 1) 2 X X
(3.89) u (xn ) ≥ xq − 2 (q + 1) xq xk + xk
4 k=1 k=1
= Pq (x1 , . . . , xq ) , say.

We use induction on q to show that Pq (x1 , . . . , xq ) > 0 for q ≥ 1. We have P1 (x1 ) = 21 x21 . If
Pq−1 (x1 , . . . , xq−1 ) > 0, then we obtain for q ≥ 2 :
q−1
X (3q + 1) q 2
(3.90) Pq (x1 , . . . , xq ) > 2q (xq−1 − xq ) xk − xq−1
k=1
4
q (3q − 1) 2
+ xq = w (xq ) , say.
4

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
48 S.S. D RAGOMIR

 
q
We differentiate with respect to xq and use (3.79) and xq ≥ q−1 xq−1 . Then we get
q−1
" #
3q − 1 X
w0 (xq ) = q xq − 2 xk
2 k=1
q 2 (q + 1)
≥ xq−1
2 (q − 1)
>0
and
 
q
(3.91) w (xq ) ≥ w xq−1
q−1
q−1
" #
q 4q 2 − q − 1 X
= xq−1 xq−1 − 2 xk
q−1 4 (q − 1) k=1
(3q − 1) q 2
≥ x
4 (q − 1) q−1
> 0.
From (3.89), (3.90) and (3.91), we obtain u (xn ) > 0. 
We are now in a position to prove the following companion of inequalities (3.76) and (3.77)
(see [12]).
Theorem 3.39. The inequality
n
!2 n n  
X X X β
(3.92) xk yk ≤ yk α+ yk ,
k=1 k=1 k=1
k
holds for all natural numbers n and for all real numbers xk and yk (k = 1, . . . , n) with
x2 xn
(3.93) 0 < x1 ≤ ≤ ··· ≤ and 0 < yn ≤ yn−1 ≤ · · · ≤ y1 ,
2 n
if and only if
3
α≥ and β ≥ 1 − α.
4
Proof. First, we assume that (3.92) is valid for all n ≥ 1 and for all real numbers xk and yk
(k = 1, . . . , n) which satisfy (3.93). We set xk = k and yk = 1 (k = 1, . . . , n). Then (3.92)
leads to
 
3 3
(3.94) 0≤ α− 2n + α + 3β − (n ≥ 1) .
4 2
This implies α ≥ 34 . And, (3.94) with n = 1 yields α + β ≥ 1.
Now, we suppose that α ≥ 34 and β ≥ 1 − α. Then we obtain for k ≥ 1 :
β 1−α 3 1
≥α+ α+ ≥ + ,
k k 4 4k
so that is suffices to show that (3.92) holds with α = 4 and β = 14 . Let
3

n n n
!2
X X 3k + 1 X
F (y1 , . . . , yn ) = yk x2k yk − xk yk
k=1 k=1
4k k=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 49

and
Fq (y) = F (y, . . . , y, yq+1 , . . . , yn ) (1 ≤ q ≤ n − 1) .
We shall prove that Fq is strictly increasing on [yq+1 , ∞). Since yq+1 ≤ yq , we obtain
(3.95) Fq (yq ) ≥ Fq (yq+1 ) = Fq+1 (yq+1 ) (1 ≤ q ≤ n − 1) ,
and Lemma 3.37 imply
F (y1 , . . . , yn ) = F1 (y1 ) ≥ F1 (y2 ) = F2 (y2 ) ≥ F2 (y3 )
≥ · · · ≥ Fn−1 (yn−1 ) ≥ Fn−1 (y)
 !2 
n n
X 3k + 1 2 X
= yn2 n xk − xk  ≥ 0.
k=1
4k k=1

If F (y1 , . . . , yn ) = 0, then we conclude from the strict monotonicity of Fq and from Lemma
3.37 that y1 = · · · = yn and xk = kx1 (k = 1, . . . , n) .
It remains to show that Fq is strictly increasing on [yq+1 , ∞). Let y ≥ yq+1 ; we differentiate
Fq and apply Lemma 3.37. This yields
 !2 
q q n
0
X 3k + 1 2 X X 3k + 1 2
Fq (y) = 2y q  xk − xk  +q xk yk
k=1
4k k=1 k=q+1
4k
n q n q
X X 3k + 1 X X
+ yk x2k −2 xk yk xk
k=q+1 k=1
4k k=q+1 k=1

and !2
q q
1 00 X 3k + 1 2 X
Fq (y) = q xk − xk ≥ 0.
2 k=1
4k k=1
Hence, we have
(3.96) Fq0 (y) ≥ Fq0 (yq+1 )
n
! q q
!2 
X X 3k + 1 1 X
= 2qyq+1 + yk  x2k − xk 
k=q+1 k=1
4k q k=1
 !2 
n 2 q q
1 X  (3k + 1) q 2 X X 
+ yk xk − 2qxk xi + xi .
q k=q+1  4k i=1 i=1

From Lemma 3.37 and Lemma 3.38 we obtain Fq0 (yq+1 ) > 0, so that (3.96) implies Fq0 (y) > 0
for y ≥ yq+1 . This completes the proof of the theorem. 
Remark 3.40. The proof of the theorem reveals that the sign of equality holds in (3.92) (with
α = 34 and β = 14 ) if and only if xk = kx1 (k = 1, . . . , n) and y1 = · · · = yn .
Remark 3.41. If δk is defined by (3.78), then we have for k ≥ 2 :
  "  2 #
3 1 k (k − 1)  xk  2 xk−1
δk − + x2k = − ,
4 4k 8 k k−1
3
which implies that inequality (3.92) (with α = 4
and β = 14 ) sharpens (3.77).

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
50 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Remark 3.42. It is shown in [10] that if a sequence (xk ) satisfies x0 = 0 and 2xk ≤ xk−1 +xk+1
(k ≥ 1) , then xkk is increasing. Hence, inequality (3.92) is valid for all sequences (xk ) which
are positive and convex.
R EFERENCES
[1] S.S. DRAGOMIR AND N.M. IONESCU, Some refinements of Cauchy-Buniakowski-Schwartz in-
equality for sequences, Proc. of the Third Symp. of Math. and Its Appl., 3-4 Nov. 1989, Polytechni-
cal Institute of Timişoara, Romania, 78–82.
[2] S.S. DRAGOMIR, On Cauchy-Buniakowski-Schwartz’s inequality for real numbers (Romanian),
“Caiete Metodico Ştiinţifice”, No. 57, 1989, pp. 24. Faculty of Mathematics, Timişoara University,
Romania.
[3] S.S. DRAGOMIR, Š.Z. ARSLANAGIĆ AND D.M. MILOŠEVIĆ, On Cauchy-Buniakowski-
Schwartz’s inequality for real numbers, Mat. Bilten, 18 (1994), 57–62.
[4] N.G. de BRUIJN, Problem 12, Wisk. Opgaven, 21 (1960), 12–14.
[5] D.S. MITRINOVIĆ, J.E. PEC̆ARIĆ AND A.M. FINK, Classical and New Inequalities in Analysis,
Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht/Boston/London, 1993.
[6] M.O. DRÎMBE, A generalisation of Lagrange’s identity (Romanian), Gaz. Mat. (Bucharest), 89
(1984), 139-141.
[7] H.W. McLAUGHLIN, Inequalities complementary to the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality for finite
sums of quaternions, refinements of the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality for finite sums of real num-
bers; inequalities concerning ratios and differences of generalised means of different order, Mary-
land University, Technical Note BN-454, (1966), 129 pp.
[8] D.E. DAYKIN, C.J. ELIEZER AND C. CARLITZ, Problem 5563, Amer. Math. Monthly, 75 (1968),
p. 198 and 76 (1969), 98–100.
[9] C.F. DUNKL AND K.S. WILLIAMS, A simple inequality, Amer. Math. Monthly, 71 (1964), 53–54.
[10] H. ALZER, A refinement of the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 168 (1992),
596–604.
[11] L. ZHENG, Remark on a refinement of the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 218
(1998), 13–21.
[12] H. ALZER, On the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 234 (1999), 6–14.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 51

4. F UNCTIONAL P ROPERTIES
4.1. A Monotonicity Property. The following result was obtained in [1, Theorem].

Theorem 4.1. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ), b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be sequences of real numbers and p̄ =


(p1 , . . . , pn ) , q̄ = (q1 , . . . , qn ) be sequences of nonnegative real numbers such that pk ≥ qk for
any k ∈ {1, . . . , n} . Then one has the inequality

n
! 21 n
! 12
n

X X X
(4.1) pi a2i pi b2i − p i ai b i


i=1 i=1 i=1
n
! 12 n
! 12
n

X X X
≥ qi a2i qi b2i − qi ai bi ≥ 0.


i=1 i=1 i=1

Proof. We shall follow the proof in [1].


Since pk −qk ≥ 0, then the (CBS) −inequality for the weights rk = pk −qk (k ∈ {1, . . . , n})
will produce
n n
! n n
! " n #2
X X X X X
(4.2) pk a2k − qk a2k pk b2k − qk b2k ≥ (pk −qk ) ak bk .
k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

Using the elementary inequality

(ac − bd)2 ≥ a2 − b2 c2 − d2 ,
 
a, b, c, d ∈ R

for the choices


n
! 21 n
! 12 n
! 12
X X X
a= pk a2k , b= qk a2k , c= pk b2k and
k=1 k=1 k=1
n
! 21
X
d= qk b2k
k=1

we deduce by (4.2), that

n
! 12 n
! 12 n
! 12 n
! 21
X X X X
pk a2k pk b2k − qk a2k qk b2k
k=1 k=1
k=1 k=1

Xn Xn X n X n
≥ p k ak b k − q k ak b k ≥ p k ak b k − q k ak b k


k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

proving the desired inequality (4.1). 

The following corollary holds [1, Corollary 1].

Corollary 4.2. Let ā and b̄ be as in Theorem 4.1. Denote

Sn (1) := {x̄ = (x1 , . . . , xn ) |0 ≤ xi ≤ 1, i ∈ {1, . . . , n}} .

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
52 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Then

n
! 12 n
! 12
n

X X X
(4.3) a2i b2i − ai b i


i=1 i=1 i=1

n
! 12 n
! 12
n

X X X
= sup  xi a2i xi b2i − xi ai bi  ≥ 0.

x̄∈Sn (1) i=1 i=1

i=1

Remark 4.3. The following inequality is a natural particular case that may be obtained from
(4.1) [1, p. 79]

n
! 12 n
! 12
n

X X X
(4.4) a2i b2i − ai b i


i=1 i=1 i=1
" n
# 12 " n
# 12 n
X X X
≥ a2i trig 2 (αi ) b2i trig 2 (αi ) − ai bi trig 2 (αi ) ≥ 0,


i=1 i=1 i=1

where trig (x) = sin x or cos x, x ∈ R and ᾱ = (α1 , . . . , αn ) is a sequence of real numbers.

4.2. A Superadditivity Property in Terms of Weights. Let Pf (N) be the family of finite
parts of the set of natural numbers N, S (K) the linear space of real or complex numbers, i.e.,


S (K) := x|x = (xi )i∈N , xi ∈ K, i ∈ N

and S+ (R) the family of nonnegative real sequences. Define the mapping

! 12
X X X
(4.5) S (p, I, x, y) := pi |xi |2 pi |yi |2 − pi xi ȳi ,


i∈I i∈I i∈I

where p ∈ S+ (R) , I ∈ Pf (N) and x, y ∈ S (K) .


The following superadditivity property in terms of weights holds [2, p. 16].

Theorem 4.4. For any p, q ∈ S+ (R) , I ∈ Pf (N) and x, y ∈ S (K) we have

(4.6) S (p + q, I, x, y) ≥ S (p, I, x, y) + S (q, I, x, y) ≥ 0.

Proof. Using the (CBS) −inequality for real numbers

 12  12
(4.7) a2 + b2 c2 + d2 ≥ ac + bd; a, b, c, d ≥ 0,

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 53

we have
! 12 ! 12
X X X X
S (p, I, x, y) = pi |xi |2 + qi |xi |2 pi |yi |2 + qi |yi |2
i∈I i∈I i∈I i∈I

X X
− pi xi ȳi + qi xi ȳi


i∈I i∈I
! 12 ! 12 ! 12 ! 12
X 2
X 2
X 2
X 2
≥ pi |xi | pi |yi | + qi |xi | qi |yi |
i∈I i∈I i∈I i∈I

X X
− pi xi ȳi − qi xi ȳi


i∈I i∈I
= S (p, I, x, y) + S (q, I, x, y) ,

and the inequality (4.6) is proved. 

The following corollary concerning the monotonicity of S (·, I, x, y) also holds [2, p. 16].

Corollary 4.5. For any p, q ∈ S+ (R) with p ≥ q and I ∈ Pf (N) , x, y ∈ S (K) one has the
inequality:

(4.8) S (p, I, x, y) ≥ S (q, I, x, y) ≥ 0.

Proof. Using Theorem 4.4, we have

S (p, I, x, y) = S ((p − q) + q, I, x, y) ≥ S (p − q, I, x, y) + S (q, I, x, y)

giving
S (p, I, x, y) − S (q, I, x, y) ≥ S (p − q, I, x, y) ≥ 0

and the inequality (4.8) is proved. 

Remark 4.6. The following inequalities follow by the above results [2, p. 17].
(1) Let αi ∈ R (i ∈ {1, . . . , n}) and xi , yi ∈ K (i ∈ {1, . . . , n}) . Then one has the inequal-
ity:

n n
! 12
n

X X X
2
(4.9) |xi | |yi |2 − xi ȳi


i=1 i=1 i=1
n n
! 12
n

X X X
2 2 2
2 2
≥ |xi | sin αi |yi | sin αi − xi ȳi sin αi


i=1 i=1 i=1
n n
! 12 n
X X X
2 2
+ |xi | cos2 αi |yi | cos2 αi − xi ȳi cos2 αi ≥ 0.


i=1 i=1 i=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
54 S.S. D RAGOMIR

(2) Denote Sn (1) := {p ∈ S+ (R) |pi ≤ 1 for all i ∈ {1, . . . , n}} . Then for all x, y ∈
S (K) one has the bound (see also Corollary 4.2):
n n
! 12 n
X X X
2 2
(4.10) 0≤ |xi | |yi | − xi ȳi


i=1 i=1 i=1

n n
! 12 n 
 X X 
2 2 X
= sup pi |xi | pi |yi | − pi xi ȳi .

p∈Sn (1)  i=1

i=1

i=1

4.3. The Superadditivity as an Index Set Mapping. We assume that we are under the hy-
pothesis and notations in Section 4.2. Reconsider the functional S (·, ·, ·, ·) : S+ (R) × Pf (N) ×
S (K) × S (K) → R,
! 12
X X X
(4.11) S (p, I, x, y) := pi |xi |2 pi |yi |2 − pi xi ȳi .


i∈I i∈I i∈I

The following superadditivity property as an index set mapping holds [2].


Theorem 4.7. For any I, J ∈ Pf (N) \ {∅} with I ∩ J = ∅, one has the inequality
(4.12) S (p, I ∪ J, x, y) ≥ S (p, I, x, y) + S (p, J, x, y) ≥ 0.
Proof. Using the elementary inequality for real numbers
1 1
(4.13) a2 + b2 2 c2 + d2 2 ≥ ac + bd; a, b, c, d ≥ 0,
we have
! 12 ! 12
X X X X
S (p, I ∪ J, x, y) = pi |xi |2 + pj |xj |2 pi |yi |2 + pj |yj |2
i∈I j∈J i∈I j∈J

X X
− pi xi ȳi + pj xj ȳj


i∈I j∈J
! 12 ! 12 ! 12 ! 12
X X X X
≥ pi |xi |2 pi |yi |2 + pj |xj |2 pj |yj |2
i∈I i∈I j∈J j∈J

X X
− pi xi ȳi − pj xj ȳj


i∈I j∈J

= S (p, I, x, y) + S (p, J, x, y)
and the inequality (4.12) is proved. 
The following corollary concerning the monotonicity of S (p, ·, x, y) as an index set mapping
also holds [2, p. 16].
Corollary 4.8. For any I, J ∈ Pf (N) with I ⊇ J 6= ∅, one has
(4.14) S (p, I, x, y) ≥ S (p, J, x, y) ≥ 0.
Proof. Using Theorem 4.7, we may write
S (p, I, x, y) = S (p, (I\J) ∪ J, x, y) ≥ S (p, I\J, x, y) + S (p, J, x, y)

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 55

giving
S (p, I, x, y) − S (p, J, x, y) ≥ S (p, I\J, x, y) ≥ 0
which proves the desired inequality (4.14). 
Remark 4.9. The following inequalities follow by the above results [2, p. 17].
(1) Let pi ≥ 0 (i ∈ {1, . . . , 2n}) and xi , yi ∈ K (i ∈ {1, . . . , 2n}) . Then we have the
inequality
2n 2n
! 21 2n
X X X
(4.15) pi |xi |2 pi |yi |2 − pi xi ȳi


i=1 i=1 i=1
n n
! 12 n
X X X
≥ p2i |x2i |2 p2i |y2i |2 − p2i xi ȳi


i=1 i=1 i=1
n n
! 12 n
X X X
+ p2i−1 |x2i−1 |2 p2i−1 |y2i−1 |2 − p2i−1 x2i−1 ȳ2i−1


i=1 i=1 i=1
≥ 0.
(2) We have the bound

n n
! 21 n
X X X
(4.16) pi |xi |2 pi |yi |2 − pi xi ȳi


i=1 i=1 i=1
 ! 12 
X X
X
= sup  pi |xi |2 pi |yi |2 − pi xi ȳi  ≥ 0.

I⊆{1,...,n}
I6=∅ i∈I i∈I i∈I

(3) Define the sequence


n n
! 21
n

X X X
2 2
(4.17) Sn := pi |xi | pi |yi | − pi xi ȳi ≥ 0


i=1 i=1 i=1

where p = (pi )i∈N ∈ S+ (R) , x = (xi )i∈N , y = (yi )i∈N ∈ S (K) . Then Sn is monoton-
tic nondecreasing and we have the following lower bound
n 1 1
(4.18) Sn ≥ max pi |xi |2 + pj |xj |2 2 pi |yi |2 + pj |yj |2 2
1≤i,j≤n

− |pi xi ȳi + pj xj ȳj |

≥ 0.
4.4. Strong Superadditivity in Terms of Weights. With the notations in Section 4.2, define
the mapping
2
X X X
(4.19) S̄ (p, I, x, y) := pi |xi |2 pi |yi |2 − pi xi ȳi ,


i∈I i∈I i∈I

where p ∈ S+ (R) , I ∈ Pf (N) and x, y ∈ S (K) .

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
56 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Denote also by k·k`,H the weighted Euclidean norm


! 12
X
(4.20) kxk`,H := `i |xi |2 , ` ∈ S+ (R) , H ∈ Pf (N) .
i∈H

The following strong superadditivity property in terms of weights holds [2, p. 18].
Theorem 4.10. For any p, q ∈ S+ (R) , I ∈ Pf (N) and x, y ∈ S (K) we have
(4.21) S̄ (p + q, I, x, y) − S̄ (p, I, x, y) − S̄ (q, I, x, y)
  2
kxkp,I kykp,I
≥ det   ≥ 0.
kxkq,I kykq,I
Proof. We have
! !
X 2
X 2
X 2
X 2
(4.22) S̄ (p + q, I, x, y) = pi |xi | + qi |xi | pi |yi | + qi |yi |
i∈I i∈I i∈I i∈I
2
X X
− pi xi ȳi + qi xi ȳi


i∈I i∈I
X X X X
≥ pi |xi |2 pi |yi |2 + qi |xi |2 qi |yi |2
i∈I i∈I i∈I i∈I
!2
X X
− pi xi ȳi + qi xi ȳi


i∈I i∈I
X X
= S̄ (p, I, x, y) + S̄ (q, I, x, y) + pi |xi |2 qi |yi |2
i∈I i∈I

X X X X
+ qi |xi |2 pi |yi |2 − 2 pi xi ȳi qi xi ȳi .


i∈I i∈I i∈I i∈I

By (CBS) −inequality, we have


" # 12
X X X X X X
pi xi ȳi qi xi ȳi ≤ pi |xi |2 pi |yi |2 qi |xi |2 qi |yi |2



i∈I i∈I i∈I i∈I i∈I i∈I

and thus
X X X X
(4.23) pi |xi |2 qi |yi |2 + qi |xi |2 pi |yi |2
i∈I i∈I i∈I i∈I
 ! 21 ! 12
X X
 X 2
X 2
− 2 pi xi ȳi qi xi ȳi ≥ pi |xi | qi |yi |


i∈I i∈I i∈I i∈I
! 12 ! 12 2
X X
− qi |xi |2 pi |yi |2  .
i∈I i∈I

Utilising (4.22) and (4.23) we deduce the desired inequality (4.21). 


The following corollary concerning a strong monotonicity result also holds [2, p. 18].

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 57

Corollary 4.11. For any p, q ∈ S+ (R) with p ≥ q one has the inequality:

  2
kxkq,I kykq,I
(4.24) S̄ (p, I, x, y) − S̄ (q, I, x, y) ≥ det   ≥ 0.
kxkp−q,I kykp−q,I

Remark 4.12. The following refinement of the (CBS) −inequality is a natural consequence of
(4.21) [2, p. 19]

2
X X X
2 2
(4.25) |xi | |yi | − xi ȳi


i∈I i∈I i∈I
2
X X X
≥ |xi |2 sin2 αi |yi |2 sin2 αi − xi ȳi sin2 αi


i∈I i∈I i∈I
2
X X X
+ |xi |2 cos 2 αi |yi |2 cos 2 αi − xi ȳi cos 2 αi


i∈I i∈I i∈I
    21   12 2
P 2 2
P 2 2
  |xi | sin αi |yi | sin αi 
  i∈I i∈I 
+ det   ≥ 0.
  
    12   12 
2 2
  P 
|xi | cos 2 αi |yi | cos2 αi
P
i∈I i∈I

where αi ∈ R, i ∈ I.

4.5. Strong Superadditivity as an Index Set Mapping. We assume that we are under the hy-
pothesis and notations in Section 4.2. Reconsider the functional S̄ (·, ·, ·, ·) : S+ (R) × Pf (N) ×
S (K) × S (K) → R,

2
X X X
2 2
(4.26) S̄ (p, I, x, y) := pi |xi | pi |yi | − pi xi ȳi .


i∈I i∈I i∈I

The following strong supperadditivity property as an index set mapping holds [2, p. 18].

Theorem 4.13. For any p ∈ S+ (R) , I, J ∈ Pf (N) \ {∅} with I ∩ J = ∅ and x, y ∈ S (K) ,
we have

(4.27) S̄ (p, I ∪ J, x, y) − S̄ (p, I, x, y) − S̄ (p, J, x, y)


  2
kxkp,I kykp,I
≥ det   ≥ 0.
kxkp,J kykp,J

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
58 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Proof. We have
(4.28) S̄ (p, I ∪ J, x, y)
! !
X 2
X 2
X 2
X 2
= pi |xi | + pj |xj | pi |yi | + pj |yj |
i∈I j∈J i∈I j∈J
2
X X
− pi xi ȳi + pj xj ȳj


i∈I j∈I
X X X X
≥ pi |xi |2 pi |yi |2 + pj |xj |2 pj |yj |2
i∈I i∈I j∈J j∈J
X 2
X 2
X X
+ pi |xi | pj |yj | + pi |yi |2 pj |xj |2
i∈I j∈J i∈I j∈J
!2
X X
− pi xi ȳi + pj xj ȳj


i∈I j∈I
X X
= S̄ (p, I, x, y) + S̄ (p, J, x, y) + pi |xi |2 pj |yj |2
i∈I j∈J

X X X X
2 2
+ pi |yi | pj |xj | − 2 pi xi ȳi pj xj ȳj .


i∈I j∈J i∈I j∈I

By the (CBS) −inequality, we have


" # 21
X X X X X X
2 2 2 2
pi xi ȳi pj xj ȳj ≤ pi |xi | pi |yi | pj |xj | pj |yj |



i∈I j∈I i∈I i∈I j∈J j∈J

and thus
X X X X
(4.29) pi |xi |2 pj |yj |2 + pi |yi |2 pj |xj |2
i∈I j∈J i∈I j∈J
 ! 21 ! 12
X X X X
− 2 pi xi ȳi pj xj ȳj ≥  pi |xi |2 pj |yj |2


i∈I j∈I i∈I j∈J
! 12 ! 12 2
X X
− pi |yi |2 pj |xj |2  .
i∈I j∈J

If we use now (4.28) and (4.29), we may deduce the desired inequality (4.27). 
The following corollary concerning strong monotonicity also holds [2, p. 18].
Corollary 4.14. For any I, J ∈ Pf (N) \ {∅} with I ⊇ J one has the inequality
  2
kxkp,J kykp,J
(4.30) S̄ (p, I, x, y) − S̄ (p, J, x, y) ≥ det   ≥ 0.
kxkp,I\J kykp,I\J
Remark 4.15. The following refinement of the (CBS) −inequality is a natural consequence of
(4.27) [2, p. 19].

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 59

Suppose pi ≥ 0, i ∈ {1, . . . , 2n} and xi , yi ∈ K, i ∈ {1, . . . , 2n} . Then we have the


inequality
2
X2n X2n X 2n
2 2
(4.31) pi |xi | pi |yi | − pi xi ȳi


i=1 i=1 i=1
2
X n X n X n
≥ p2i |x2i |2 p2i |y2i |2 − p2i x2i ȳ2i


i=1 i=1 i=1
n n
n 2
X X X
2 2
+ p2i−1 |x2i−1 | p2i−1 |y2i−1 | − p2i−1 x2i−1 ȳ2i−1


i=1 i=1 i=1
    21 n  12 2
n
P 2 P 2
p |x | p2i |y2i |
 i=1 2i 2i
  
 i=1 
+ det   ≥ 0.
  
  
n
 21 n  12 
2 2
  P P 
p2i−1 |x2i−1 | p2i−1 |y2i−1 |
i=1 i=1

4.6. Another Superadditivity Property. Let Pf (N) be the family of finite parts of the set of
natural numbers, S (R) the linear space of real sequences and S+ (R) the family of nonnegative
real sequences.
Consider the mapping C : S+ (R) × Pf (N) × S (R) × S (R) → R
!2
X X X
pi a2i pi b2i −

(4.32) C p, I, a, b := p i ai b i .
i∈I i∈I i∈I

The following identity holds [3, p. 115].


Lemma 4.16. For any p, q ∈ S+ (R) one has
X
pi qj (ai bj − aj bi )2 .
  
(4.33) C p + q, I, a, b = C p, I, a, b + C q, I, a, b +
(i,j)∈I×I

Proof. Using the well-known Lagrange’s identity, we have


 1 X
(4.34) C p, I, a, b = pi pj (ai bj − aj bi )2 .
2
(i,j)∈I×I

Thus

C p + q, I, a, b
1 X
= (pi + qi ) (pj + qj ) (ai bj − aj bi )2
2
(i,j)∈I×I
1 X 1 X
= pi pj (ai bj − aj bi )2 + qi qj (ai bj − aj bi )2
2 2
(i,j)∈I×I (i,j)∈I×I
1 X 1 X
+ pi qj (ai bj − aj bi )2 + pj qi (ai bj − aj bi )2
2 2
(i,j)∈I×I (i,j)∈I×I
X
pi qj (ai bj − aj bi )2
 
= C p, I, a, b + C q, I, a, b +
(i,j)∈I×I

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
60 S.S. D RAGOMIR

since, by symmetry,
X X
pi qj (ai bj − aj bi )2 = pj qi (ai bj − aj bi )2 .
(i,j)∈I×I (i,j)∈I×I


Consider the following mapping:
 !2  12
 1 X X X
pi a2i pi b2i −
 
D p, I, a, b := C p, I, a, b 2 =  p i ai b i  .
i∈I i∈I i∈I

The following result has been obtained in [4, p. 88] as a particular case of a more general result
holding in inner product spaces.
Theorem 4.17. For any p, q ∈ S+ (R) , I ∈ Pf (N) and a, b ∈ S (R) , we have the superaddi-
tive property
  
(4.35) D p + q, I, a, b ≥ D p, I, a, b + D q, I, a, b ≥ 0.
Proof. We will give here an elementary proof following the one in [3, p. 116 – p. 117].
By Lemma 4.16, we obviously have
X
(4.36) D2 p + q, I, a, b = D2 p, I, a, b + D2 q, I, a, b + pi qj (ai bj − aj bi )2 .
  

(i,j)∈I×I

We claim that
X
pi qj (ai bj − aj bi )2 ≥ 2D p, I, a, b D q, I, a, b .
 
(4.37)
(i,j)∈I×I

Taking the square in both sides of (4.37), we must prove that


" #2
X X X X X X
(4.38) pi a2i qi b2i + qi a2i pi b2i −2 p i ai b i q i ai b i
i∈I i∈I i∈I i∈I i∈I i∈I
 !2 
X X X
≥ 4 pi a2i pi b2i − p i ai b i 
i∈I i∈I i∈I
 !2 
X X X
× qi a2i qi b2i − q i ai b i .
i∈I i∈I i∈I

Let us denote
! 21 ! 12 ! 12
X X X
a := pi a2i , x := qi a2i , b := pi b2i ,
i∈I i∈I i∈I
! 21
X X X
y := qi b2i , c := p i ai b i , z := q i ai b i .
i∈I i∈I i∈I
With these notations (4.38) may be written in the following form
2
a2 y 2 + b2 x2 − 2cz ≥ 4 a2 b2 − c2 x2 y 2 − z 2 .
 
(4.39)
Using the elementary inequality
m2 − n2 p2 − q 2 ≤ (mp − nq)2 , m, n, p, q ∈ R
 

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 61

we may state that

4 (abxy − cz)2 ≥ 4 a2 b2 − c2 x2 y 2 − z 2 ≥ 0.
 
(4.40)

Since, by the (CBS) −inequality, we observe that abxy ≥ |cz| ≥ |cz| , we can state that

a2 y 2 + b2 x2 − 2cz ≥ 2 (abxy − cz) ≥ 0

giving
2
(4.41) a2 y 2 + b2 x2 − 2cz ≥ 4 (abxy − cz)2 .

Utilizing (4.40) and (4.41) we deduce the inequality (4.39), and (4.37) is proved.
Finally, by (4.36) and (4.37) we have
2
D2 p + q, I, a, b ≥ D p, I, a, b + D q, I, a, b ,
  

i.e., the superadditivity property (4.35). 

Remark 4.18. The following refinement of the (CBS) − inequality holds [4, p. 89]
 !2  21
X X X
(4.42)  a2i b2i − ai b i 
i∈I i∈I i∈I
 !2  12
X X X
≥ a2i sin2 αi b2i sin2 αi − ai bi sin2 αi 
i∈I i∈I i∈I
 !2  12
X X X
+ a2i cos 2 αi b2i cos2 αi − ai bi cos2 αi  ≥0
i∈I i∈I i∈I

for any αi ∈ R, i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .

4.7. The Case of Index Set Mapping. Assume that we are under the hypothesis and notations
in Section 4.6. Reconsider the functional C : S+ (R) × Pf (N) × S (R) × S (R) → R given by
!2
X X X
pi a2i pi b2i −

(4.43) C p, I, a, b := p i ai b i .
i∈I i∈I i∈I

The following identity holds.

Lemma 4.19. For any I, J ∈ Pf (N) \ {∅} with I ∩ J 6= ∅ one has the identity:
X
pi pj (ai bj − aj bi )2 .
  
(4.44) C p, I ∪ J, a, b = C p, I, a, b + C p, J, a, b +
(i,j)∈I×J

Proof. Using Lagrange’s identity [5, p. 84], we may state


 1 X
(4.45) C p, K, a, b = pi pj (ai bj − aj bi )2 , K ∈ Pf (N) \ {∅} .
2
(i,j)∈K×K

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
62 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Thus

C p, I ∪ J, a, b
1 X
= pi pj (ai bj − aj bi )2
2
(i,j)∈(I∪J)×(I∪J)
1 X 1 X
= pi pj (ai bj − aj bi )2 + pi pj (ai bj − aj bi )2
2 2
(i,j)∈I×I (i,j)∈I×J
1 X 1 X
+ pi pj (ai bj − aj bi )2 + pi pj (ai bj − aj bi )2
2 2
(i,j)∈J×I (i,j)∈J×J
X
pi pj (ai bj − aj bi )2
 
= C p, I, a, b + C p, J, a, b +
(i,j)∈I×J

since, by symmetry,
X X
pi pj (ai bj − aj bi )2 = pi pj (ai bj − aj bi )2 .
(i,j)∈I×J (i,j)∈J×I


Now, if we consider the mapping
 !2  21
X X 1 X
pi a2i pi b2i −
   2
D p, I, a, b := C p, I, a, b = p i ai b i  ,
i∈I i∈I i∈I

then the following superadditivity property as an index set mapping holds:


Theorem 4.20. For any I, J ∈ Pf (N) \ {∅} with I ∩ J 6= ∅ one has
  
(4.46) D p, I ∪ J, a, b ≥ D p, I, a, b + D p, J, a, b ≥ 0.
Proof. By Lemma 4.19, we have
X
(4.47) D2 p, I ∪ J, a, b = D2 p, I, a, b + D2 p, J, a, b + pi pj (ai bj − aj bi )2
  

(i,j)∈I×J

To prove (4.46) it is sufficient to show that


X
pi pj (ai bj − aj bi )2 ≥ 2D p, I, a, b D p, J, a, b .
 
(4.48)
(i,j)∈I×J

Taking the square in (4.48), we must demonstrate that


" #2
X X X X X X
pi a2i pj b2j + pj a2j pi b2i − 2 p i ai b i p j aj b j
i∈I j∈J j∈J i∈I i∈I j∈J
 !2 
X X X
≥ 4 pi a2i pi b2i − p i ai b i 
i∈I i∈I i∈I
 !2 
X X X
× pj a2j pj b2j − p j aj b j  .
j∈J j∈J j∈J

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 63

If we denote
! 12 ! 12 ! 12
X X X
a := pi a2i , x := pj a2j , b := pi b2i ,
i∈I j∈J i∈I
! 21
X X X
y := pj b2j , c := p i ai b i , z := p j aj b j ,
j∈J i∈I j∈J

then we need to prove


2
a2 y 2 + b2 x2 − 2cz ≥ 4 a2 b2 − c2 x2 y 2 − z 2 ,
 
(4.49)
which has been shown in Section 4.6.
This completes the proof. 
Remark 4.21. The following refinement of the (CBS) −inequality holds

2n 2n 2n
!2  21
X X X
2
 p i ai pi b2i − p i ai b i 
i=1 i=1 i=1

n n n
!2  12
X X X
≥ p2i a22i p2i b22i − p2i a2i b2i 
i=1 i=1 i=1

n n n
!2  12
X X X
+ p2i−1 a22i−1 p2i−1 b22i−1 − p2i−1 a2i−1 b2i−1  ≥ 0.
i=1 i=1 i=1

4.8. Supermultiplicity in Terms of Weights. Denote by S+ (R) the set of nonnegative se-
quences. Assume that A : S+ (R) → R is additive on S+ (R) , i.e.,
(4.50) A (p + q) = A (p) + A (q) , p, q ∈ S+ (R)
and L : S+ (R) → R is superadditive on S+ (R) , i.e.,
(4.51) L (p + q) ≥ L (p) + L (q) , p, q ∈ S+ (R) .
Define the following associated functionals
L (p)
(4.52) F (p) := and H (p) := [F (p)]A(p) .
A (p)
The following result holds [3, Theorem 2.1].
Lemma 4.22. With the above assumptions, we have
(4.53) H (p + q) ≥ H (p) H (q) ;
for any p, q ∈ S+ (R) , i.e., H (·) is supermultiplicative on S+ (R) .
Proof. We shall follow the proof in [3].
Using the well-known arithmetic mean-geometric mean inequality for real numbers
αx + βy α β
(4.54) ≥ x α+β y α+β
α+β

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
64 S.S. D RAGOMIR

for any x, y ≥ 0 and α, β ≥ 0 with α + β > 0, we have successively


L (p + q)
(4.55) F (p + q) =
A (p + q)
L (p + q)
=
A (p) + A (q)
L (p) + L (q)

A (p) + A (q)
L(p) L(q)
A (p) A(p) + A (q) A(q)
=
A (p) + A (q)
A (p) F (p) + A (q) F (q)
=
A (p) + A (q)
A(p) A(q)
≥ [F (p)] A(p)+A(q) · [F (q)] A(p)+A(q)

for all p, q ∈ S+ (R) . However, A (p) + A (q) = A (p + q) , and thus (4.55) implies the
desired inequality (4.53). 

We are now able to point out the following inequality related to the (CBS) − inequality.
The first result is incorporated in the following theorem [3, p. 115].

Theorem 4.23. For any p, q ∈ S+ (R) , and a, b ∈ S (R) , one has the inequality

( " !2 PI +QI


1 X
2
X
2
X 
(4.56) (pi + qi ) ai (pi + qi ) bi − (pi + qi ) ai bi 
PI + QI i∈I i∈I i∈I

  !2 PI
1 X X X 
≥  pi a2i pi b2i − p i ai b i 
 PI 
i∈I i∈I i∈I
  !2 QI
 1 X X X 
2 2
×  q i ai qi b i − qi ai bi  > 0,
 QI 
i∈I i∈I i∈I

P P
where PI := i∈I pi > 0, QI := i∈I qi > 0.

Proof. Consider the functionals


X
A (p) := p i = PI ;
i∈I
!2
X X X
C (p) := pi a2i pi b2i − p i ai b i .
i∈I i∈I i∈I

Then A (·) is additive and C (·) is superadditive (see for example Lemma 4.16) on S+ (R) .
Applying Lemma 4.22 we deduce the desired inequality (4.56). 

The following refinement of the (CBS) −inequality holds.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 65

Corollary 4.24. For any a, b, α ∈ S (R) , one has the inequality

n n n
!2
X X X
(4.57) a2i b2i − ai b i
i=1 i=1 i=1
1
≥ Pn  n1 Pni=1 sin2 αi Pn  n1 Pni=1 cos 2 αi
1 2 1 2
i=1 sin αi
n n i=1 cos αi
Pn

n n n
!2  n1 i=1 sin2 αi
X X X
2 2
×  ai sin αi b2i sin2 αi − ai bi sin2 αi 
i=1 i=1 i=1
Pn

n n n
!2  n1 i=1 cos2 αi
X X X
2 2
×  ai cos αi b2i cos2 αi − ai bi cos2 αi  ≥ 0.
i=1 i=1 i=1

The following result holds [3, p. 116].

Theorem 4.25. For any p, q ∈ S+ (R) , and a, b ∈ S (R) , one has the inequality

" # 12 " # 12
 1 X 1 X
(4.58) (pi + qi ) a2i (pi + qi ) b2i
 PI + QI P I + Q I
i∈I i∈I
)PI +QI
1 X
− (pi + qi ) ai bi

PI + QI
i∈I
 ! 12 ! 12 PI
1 X
2 1 X
2 1
X
≥ p i ai p i bi − p i ai b i 

PI i∈I PI i∈I PI
i∈I

 ! 12 ! 12 QI
1 X 2 1 X 2 1 X
× q i ai qi b i − qi ai bi  ≥ 0.

QI i∈I QI i∈I QI
i∈I

Proof. Follows by Lemma 4.22 on taking into account that the functional

! 12 ! 12
X X X
B (p) := pi a2i pi b2i − p i ai b i


i∈I i∈I i∈I

is superadditive on S+ (R) (see Section 4.2). 

The following refinement of the (CBS) −inequality holds.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
66 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Corollary 4.26. For any a, b, α ∈ S (R) , one has the inequality

n
! 12 n
! 12
n

X X X
(4.59) a2i b2i − ai b i


i=1 i=1 i=1
1 1
≥  n1 Pni=1 sin2 αi ·  1 Pn 2
2 α n i=1 cos αi
1
Pn 2 1
Pn
n i=1 sin αi i=1n
cos i
 n1 ni=1 sin2 αi
P

n
! 12 n
! 12 n
X X
X
× a2i sin2 αi b2i sin2 αi − ai bi sin2 αi 


i=1 i=1 i=1
Pn
 ! 12 ! 21  n1 i=1 cos2 αi
n
X n
X Xn
× a2i cos2 αi b2i cos2 αi − 2
ai bi cos αi  ≥ 0.


i=1 i=1 i=1

Finally, we may also state [3, p. 117].

Theorem 4.27. For any p, q ∈ S+ (R) , and a, b ∈ S (R) , one has the inequality

"
1 X 1 X
(4.60) (pi + qi ) a2i · (pi + qi ) b2i
PI + QI i∈I PI + QI i∈I
!2  PI +Q
2
I

1 X
− (pi + qi ) ai bi 
PI + QI i∈I
 !2  P2I
1 X 2 1 X 2 1 X
≥ p i ai · p i bi − p i ai b i 
PI i∈I PI i∈I PI i∈I
 !2  Q2I
1 X 2 1 X 2 1 X
× q i ai · qi b i − q i ai b i  .
QI i∈I QI i∈I QI i∈I

Proof. Follows by Lemma 4.22 on taking into account that the functional


n n n
!2  12
X X X
D (p) :=  pi a2i pi b2i − p i ai b i 
i=1 i=1 i=1

is superadditive on S+ (R) (see Section 4.6). 

The following corollary also holds.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 67

Corollary 4.28. For any a, b, α ∈ S (R) , one has the inequality


n n n
!2  12
X X X
2
(4.61)  ai b2i − ai b i 
i=1 i=1 i=1

1 1
≥ Pn  n1 Pni=1 sin2 αi · Pn  n1 Pni=1 cos 2 αi
1 2 1
i=1 sin αi
n n i=1 cos2 αi
!2  2n1 ni=1 sin2 αi
 P

Xn Xn n
X
2 2
×  ai sin αi b2i sin2 αi − ai bi sin2 αi 
i=1 i=1 i=1
Pn

n n n
!2  2n1 i=1 cos2 αi
X X X
2 2
×  ai cos αi b2i cos2 αi − ai bi cos2 αi  ≥ 0.
i=1 i=1 i=1

4.9. Supermultiplicity as an Index Set Mapping. Denote by Pf (N) the set of all finite parts
of the natural number set N and assume that B : Pf (N) → R is set-additive on Pf (N) , i.e.,

(4.62) B (I ∪ J) = B (I) + B (J) for any I, J ∈ Pf (N) , I ∩ J 6= ∅,

and G : Pf (N) → R is set-superadditive on Pf (N) , i.e.,

(4.63) G (I ∪ J) ≥ G (I) + G (J) for any I, J ∈ Pf (N) , I ∩ J 6= ∅.

We may define the following associated functionals

G (I)
(4.64) M (I) := and N (I) := [M (I)]A(I) .
B (I)

With these notations we may prove the following lemma that is interesting in itself as well.

Lemma 4.29. Under the above assumptions one has

(4.65) N (I ∪ J) ≥ N (I) N (J)

for any I, J ∈ Pf (N) \ {∅} with I ∩ J 6= ∅, i.e., N (·) is set-supermultiplicative on Pf (N) .

Proof. Using the arithmetic mean – geometric mean inequality

αx + βy α β
(4.66) ≥ x α+β y α+β
α+β

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
68 S.S. D RAGOMIR

for any x, y ≥ 0 and α, β ≥ 0 with α + β > 0, we have successively for I, J ∈ Pf (N) \ {∅}
with I ∩ J 6= ∅ that
G (I ∪ J)
(4.67) M (I ∪ J) =
B (I ∪ J)
G (I ∪ J)
=
B (I) + B (J)
G (I) + G (J)

B (I) + B (J)
G(I) G(J)
B (I) B(I) + B (J) B(J)
=
B (I) + B (J)
B (I) M (I) + B (J) M (J)
=
B (I) + B (J)
B(I) B(J)
≥ (M (I)) B(I)+B(J) · (M (J)) B(I)+B(J) .
Since B (I) + B (J) = B (I ∪ J) , we deduce by (4.67) the desired inequality (4.65). 

Now, we are able to point out some set-superadditivity properties for some functionals asso-
ciates to the (CBS) −inequality.
The first result is embodied in the following theorem.
Theorem 4.30. If a, b ∈ S (R) , p ∈ S+ (R) and I, J ∈ Pf (N) \ {∅} so that I ∩ J 6= ∅, then
one has the inequality
  !2 PI∪J
 1 X X X 
(4.68)  pk a2k pk b2k − p k ak b k 
 PI∪J 
k∈I∪J k∈I∪J k∈I∪J
  !2 PI
1 X X X 
≥  pi a2i pi b2i − p i ai b i 
 PI 
i∈I i∈I i∈I
  !2 PJ
 1 X X X 
2 2
×  p j aj pj bj − p j aj b j  ,
 PJ 
j∈J j∈J j∈J
P
when PJ := j∈J pj .
Proof. Consider the functionals
X
B (I) := pi ;
i∈I
!2
X X X
G (I) := pi a2i pi b2i − p i ai b i .
i∈I i∈I i∈I

The functional B (·) is obviously set-additive and (see Section 4.7) the functional G (·) is set-
superadditive. Applying Lemma 4.29 we then deduce the desired inequality (4.68). 

The following corollary is a natural application.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 69

Corollary 4.31. If a, b ∈ S (R) and p ∈ S+ (R) , then for any n ≥ 1 one has the inequality

 
2n 2n 2n
!2 P2n
 1 X X X 
2 2
(4.69)  p i ai p i bi − p i ai b i 
 P2n 
i=1 i=1 i=1
  Pni=1 p2i
n n n
! 2
 1 X X X 
≥ Pn  p2i a22i p2i b22i − p2i a2i b2i 
 i=1 p2i 
i=1 i=1 i=1
( " n n
1 X X
× Pn p2i−1 a22i−1 p2i−1 b22i−1
p
i=1 2i−1 i=1 i=1
!2  ni=1 p2i−1
P

X n 
− p2i−1 a2i−1 b2i−1  .

i=1

The following result also holds.

Theorem 4.32. If a, b ∈ S (R) , p ∈ S+ (R) and I, J ∈ Pf (N) \ {∅} so that I ∩ J 6= ∅, then


one has the inequality
" # 12 " # 12 )PI∪J
 1 X 1 X 1 X
(4.70) pk a2k pk b2k − p k ak b k

 PI∪J P I∪J P I∪J
k∈I∪J k∈I∪J k∈I∪J
 ! 12 ! 12 PI
 1 X 1 1
X X 
2 2
≥ p i ai p i bi − p i ai b i

 PI PI i∈I PI 
i∈I i∈I
 ! 12 ! 12 PJ
 1 X 1 1
X X 
× pj a2j pj b2j − p j aj b j .

 PJ P J P J 
j∈J j∈J j∈J

Proof. Follows by Lemma 4.29 on taking into account that the functional
! 21 ! 12
X X X
G (I) := pi a2i pi b2i − p i ai b i


i∈I i∈I i∈I

is set-superadditive on Pf (N) . 

The following corollary is a natural application.

Corollary 4.33. If a, b ∈ S (R) and p ∈ S+ (R) , then for any n ≥ 1 one has the inequality


2n
! 12 2n
! 12 2n
P2n
 1 1 X 2
X 1 X
(4.71) pi a2i p i bi − p i ai b i 

P2n i=1 P2n i=1 P2n
i=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
70 S.S. D RAGOMIR

 ! 12 ! 12 #Pni=1 p2i
n n n
1 X 1 X P 1
X
≥  Pn p2i a22i p2i b22i − n p2i a2i b2i
Pn
i=1 p2i i=1 i=1 p2i i=1
i=1 p2i
i=1


n
! 12 n
! 12
1 X 1 X
×  Pn p2i−1 a22i−1 Pn p2i−1 b22i−1
i=1 p 2i−1 i=1 i=1 p 2i−1 i=1
#Pni=1 p2i−1
n
P 1
X
− n p2i−1 a2i−1 b2i−1 .

i=1 p2i−1
i=1

Finally, we may also state:


Theorem 4.34. If a, b ∈ S (R) , p ∈ S+ (R) and I, J ∈ Pf (N) \ {∅} so that I ∩ J 6= ∅, then
one has the inequality
 !2  PI∪J
2
1 X
2 1 X
2 1 X
(4.72)  p k ak · p k bk − p k ak b k 
PI∪J k∈I∪J PI∪J k∈I∪J PI∪J k∈I∪J
 !2  P2I
1 X 2 1 X 2 1 X
≥ p i ai · p i bi − p i ai b i 
PI i∈I PI i∈I PI i∈I
 !2  P2J
1 X 1 X 2 1 X
× pj a2j · p j bj − p j aj b j  .
PJ j∈J PJ j∈J PJ j∈J

Proof. Follows by Lemma 4.29 on taking into account that the functional
 !2  21
X X X
Q (I) :=  pi a2i pi b2i − p i ai b i 
i∈I i∈I i∈I

is set-superadditive on Pf (N) (see Section 4.7). 


The following corollary holds as well.
Corollary 4.35. If a, b ∈ S (R) and p ∈ S+ (R) , then for any n ≥ 1 one has the inequality

2n 2n 2n
!2  P2n
2
1 X
2 1 X 1 X
(4.73)  p i ai · pi b2i − p i ai b i 
P2n i=1 P2n i=1 P2n i=1
Pn
" n
! n
! n
!2  12 i=1 p2i
1 X 1 X 1 X
≥ Pn p2i a22i Pn p2i b22i − Pn p2i a2i b2i 
i=1 p2i i=1 i=1 p2i i=1 i=1 p2i i=1
" n
! n
!
1 X 1 X
× Pn p2i−1 a22i−1 Pn p2i−1 b22i−1
i=1 p2i−1 i=1 i=1 p2i−1 i=1
Pn
n
!2  21 i=1 p2i−1
1 X
− Pn p2i−1 a2i−1 b2i−1  .
i=1 p2i−1 i=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 71

R EFERENCES
[1] S.S. DRAGOMIR AND Š.Z. ARSLANAGIĆ, The improvement of Cauchy-Buniakowski-Schwartz’s
inequality, Mat. Bilten, 16 (1992), 77–80.
[2] S.S. DRAGOMIR AND B. MOND, On the superadditivity and monotonicity of Schwartz’s inequality
in inner product spaces, Contributions, Ser. Math. Sci. Macedonian Acad. Sci., 15(1) (1994), 5–22.
[3] R.P. AGARWAL AND S.S. DRAGOMIR, The property of supermultiplicity for some classical in-
equalities and applications, Computer Math. Applic., 35(6) (1998), 105–118.
[4] S.S. DRAGOMIR AND B. MOND, On the superadditivity and monotonicity of Gram’s inequality
and related results, Acta Math. Hungarica, 71(1-2) (1996), 75–90.
[5] D.S. MITRINOVIĆ, J.E. PEC̆ARIĆ AND A.M. FINK, Classical and New Inequalities in Analysis,
Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht/Boston/London, 1993.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
72 S.S. D RAGOMIR

5. R EVERSE I NEQUALITIES
5.1. The Cassels’ Inequality. The following result was proved by J.W.S. Cassels in 1951 (see
Appendix 1 of [2] or Appendix of [3]):
Theorem 5.1. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be sequences of positive real numbers
and w̄ = (w1 , . . . , wn ) a sequence of nonnegative real numbers. Suppose that
   
ai ai
(5.1) m = min and M = max .
i=1,n bi i=1,n bi
Then one has the inequality
Pn
wi a2i ni=1 wi b2i (m + M )2
P
i=1
(5.2) 2 ≤ .
( ni=1 wi ai bi ) 4mM
P

1 1 an
The equality holds in (5.2) when w1 = a1 b1
, wn = an bn
, w2 = · · · = wn−1 = 0, m = b1
and
M = ban1 .
Proof. 1. The original proof by Cassels (1951) is of interest. We shall follow the paper [5] in
sketching this proof.
We begin with the assertion that
(1 + kw) (1 + k −1 w) (1 + k) (1 + k −1 )
(5.3) ≤ , k > 0, w ≥ 0
(1 + w)2 4
which, being an equivalent form of (5.2) for n = 2, shows that it holds for n = 2.
To prove that the maximum of (5.2) is obtained when we have more than two wi ’s being
nonzero, Cassels then notes that if for example, w1 , w2 , w3 6= 0 lead to an extremum M of XY
22
,
then we would have the linear equations
a2n X + b2n Y − 2M an bn Z = 0, k = 1, 2, 3.
Nontrivial solutions exist if and only if the three vectors [a2n , b2n , an bn ] are linearly dependent.
But this will be so only if, for some i 6= j (i, j = 1, 2, 3) ai = γaj , bi = γbj . And if that were
true, we could, for example, drop the ai , bi terms and so deal with the same problem with one
less variable. If only one wi 6= 0, then M = 1, the lower bound. So we need only examine all
pairs wi 6= 0, wj 6= 0. The result (5.2) then quickly follows.
2. We will now use the barycentric method of Frucht [1] and Watson [4]. We will follow the
paper [5].
We substitute wi = ub2i in the left hand side of (5.2), which may then be expressed as the ratio
i

N
D2
where
n  2 n  
X ai X ai
N= ui and D = ui ,
i=1
bi i=1
bi
Pn
assuming without loss of generality, that ai =1. Butthe point with co-ordinates (D, N )
i=1
a2
must lie within the convex closure of the n points abii , b2i . The value of DN2 at points on the
n o ni o
parabola is one unit. If m = min bi and M = max abii , then the minimum must lie on
ai
i=1,n i=1,n
the chord joining the point (m, m2 ) and (M, M 2 ) . Some easy calculus then leads to (5.2). 
The following “unweighted” Cassels’ inequality holds.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 73

Corollary 5.2. If ā and b̄ satisfy the assumptions in Theorem 5.1, one has the inequality
Pn 2 Pn 2
i=1 ai i=1 bi (m + M )2
(5.4) 2 ≤ .
( ni=1 ai bi ) 4mM
P

The following two additive versions of Cassels inequality hold.


Corollary 5.3. With the assumptions of Theorem 5.1, one has
n n
! 21 n
X X X
2 2
(5.5) 0≤ wi ai wi bi − wi ai bi
i=1 i=1 i=1
√ √ 2
M− m X n
≤ √ wi ai bi .
2 mM i=1

and
n n n
!2
X X X
(5.6) 0≤ wi a2i wi b2i − wi ai bi
i=1 i=1 i=1
n
!2
(M − m)2 X
≤ wi ai bi .
4mM i=1

Proof. Taking the square root in (5.2) we get


1
( ni=1 wi a2i ni=1 wi b2i ) 2
P P
M +m
1≤ Pn ≤ √ .
i=1 wi ai bi 2 mM
Subtracting 1 on both sides, a simple calculation will lead to (5.5).
The second inequality follows by (5.2) on subtracting 1 and appropriate computation. 
The following additive version of unweighted Cassels inequality also holds.
Corollary 5.4. With the assumption of Theorem 5.1 for ā and b̄ one has the inequalities
! 21 √ √ 2
n
X X n Xn M− m X n
2 2
(5.7) 0≤ ai bi − ai b i ≤ √ ai bi
i=1 i=1 i=1
2 mM i=1

and
n n n
!2 n
!2
X X X (M − m)2 X
(5.8) 0≤ a2i b2i − ai b i ≤ ai b i .
i=1 i=1 i=1
4mM i=1

5.2. The Pólya-Szegö Inequality. The following inequality was proved in 1925 by Pólya and
Szegö [6, pp. 57, 213 – 214], [7, pp. 71– 72, 253 – 255].
Theorem 5.5. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) and b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be two sequences of positive real
numbers. If
(5.9) 0 < a ≤ ai ≤ A < ∞, 0 < b ≤ bi ≤ B < ∞ for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} ,
then one has the inequality
Pn Pn
i=1 a2i
i=1 bi
2
(ab + AB)2
(5.10) 2 ≤ .
( ni=1 ai bi ) 4abAB
P

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
74 S.S. D RAGOMIR

The equality holds in (5.10) if and only if


   
A A B B A B
p=n· + and q = n · +
a a b b a b
are integers and if p of the numbers a1 , . . . , an are equal to a and q of these numbers are equal
to A, and if the corresponding numbers bi are equal to B and b respectively.
Proof. Following [5], we shall present here the original proof of Pólya and Szegö.
We may, without loss of generality, suppose that a1 ≥ · · · ≥ an , then to maximise the left-
hand side of (5.10) we must have that the critical bi ’s be reversely ordered (for if bk > bm with
k < m, then we can interchange bk and bm such that b2k + b2m = b2m + b2k and ak bk + am bm ≥
ak bm + am bk ), i.e., that b1 ≤ · · · ≤ bn .
Pólya and Szegö then continue by defining nonnegative numbers ui and vi for i = 1, . . . , n−1
and n > 2 such that
(5.11) a2i = ui a21 + vi a2n and b2i = ui b21 + vi b2n .
Since ai bi > ui a1 b1 + vi an bn the left hand side of (5.10),
Pn 2 Pn 2
i=1 ai i=1 bi (U a21 + V a2n ) (U b21 + V b2n )
2 ≤ ,
( ni=1 ai bi ) (U a1 b1 + V an bn )2
P

where U = ni=1 ui and V = ni=1 vi .


P P
This reduces the problem to that with n = 2, which is solvable by elementary methods,
leading to
Pn 2 Pn 2
i=1 ai i=1 bi (a1 b1 + an bn )2
(5.12) 2 ≤ ,
( ni=1 ai bi ) 4a1 an b1 bn
P

where, since the ai ’s and bi ’s here are reversely ordered,


(5.13) a1 = max {ai } , an = min {ai } , b1 = min {bi } , bn = max {bi } .
i=1,n i=1,n i=1,n i=1,n

If we now assume, as in (5.9), that


0 < a ≤ ai ≤ A, 0 < b ≤ bi ≤ B, i = (1, . . . , n) ,
then
(a1 b1 + an bn )2 (ab + AB)2

4a1 an b1 bn 4abAB
(k+1)2 (α+1)2
(because 4k
≤ 4α
for k ≤ α), and the inequality (5.10) is proved. 
Remark 5.6. The inequality (5.10) may also be obtained from the “unweighted” Cassels’ in-
equality
Pn 2 Pn 2
i=1 ai i=1 bi (m + M )2
(5.14) 2 ≤ ,
( ni=1 ai bi ) 4mM
P
ai
where 0 < m ≤ bi
≤ M for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
The following additive versions of the Pólya-Szegö inequality also hold.
Corollary 5.7. With the assumptions in Theorem 5.5, one has the inequality
! 12 √ √ 2
Xn Xn Xn AB − ab X n
2 2
(5.15) 0≤ ai bi − ai bi ≤ √ ai b i
i=1 i=1 i=1
2 abAB i=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 75

and
n n n
!2 n
!2
X X X (AB − ab)2 X
(5.16) 0≤ a2i b2i − ai b i ≤ ai b i .
i=1 i=1 i=1
4abAB i=1

5.3. The Greub-Rheinboldt Inequality. The following weighted version of the Pólya-Szegö
inequality was obtained by Greub and Rheinboldt in 1959, [6].
Theorem 5.8. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) and b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be two sequences of positive real
numbers and w̄ = (w1 , . . . , wn ) a sequence of nonnegative real numbers. Suppose that
(5.17) 0 < a ≤ ai ≤ A < ∞, 0 < b ≤ bi ≤ B < ∞ (i = 1, . . . , n) .
Then one has the inequality
Pn
wi a2i ni=1 wi b2i (ab + AB)2
P
i=1
(5.18) 2 ≤ .
( ni=1 wi ai bi ) 4abAB
P

a1
Equality holds in (5.18) when wi = a11b1 , wn = 1
an bn
, w2 = · · · = wn−1 = 0, m = an
b1
, M = bn
with a1 = A, an = a, b1 = b and bn = b.
Remark 5.9. This inequality follows by Cassels’ result which states that
Pn Pn
2
i=1 wi ai
2
i=1 wi bi (m + M )2
(5.19) Pn 2 ≤ ,
( i=1 wi ai bi ) 4mM
ai
provided 0 < m ≤ bi
≤ M < ∞ for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
The following additive versions of Greub-Rheinboldt also hold.
Corollary 5.10. With the assumptions in Theorem 5.8, one has the inequalities
n n
! 12 n
X X X
2 2
(5.20) 0≤ wi ai wi bi − wi ai bi
i=1 i=1 i=1
√ √ 2
AB − ab X n
≤ √ wi ai bi
2 abAB i=1

and
n n n
!2
X X X
(5.21) 0≤ wi a2i wi b2i − wi ai bi
i=1 i=1 i=1
n
!2
2
(AB − ab) X
≤ wi ai bi .
4abAB i=1

5.4. A Cassels’ Type Inequality for Complex Numbers. The following reverse inequality for
the (CBS) −inequality holds [9].
Theorem 5.11. Let a, A ∈ K (K = C, R) such that Re (āA) > 0.
If x̄ = (x1 , . . . , xn ) , ȳ = (y1 , . . . , yn ) are sequences of complex numbers and w̄ = (w1 , . . . , wn )
is a sequence of nonnegative real numbers with the property that
X n
(5.22) wi Re [(Ayi − xi ) (x̄i − āȳi )] ≥ 0,
i=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
76 S.S. D RAGOMIR

then one has the inequality


" n n
# 12 Pn
X 2
X 2 1 wi Re [Ax̄i yi + āxi ȳi ]
(5.23) wi |xi | wi |yi | ≤ · i=1 1
i=1 i=1
2 [Re (āA)] 2
n
1 |A| + |a| X
≤ · wi xi ȳi .

1
2 [Re (āA)] 2
i=1
1
The constant 2
is sharp in the sense that it cannot be replaced by a smaller one.
Proof. We have, obviously, that
n
X
Γ := wi Re [(Ayi − xi ) (x̄i − āȳi )]
i=1
n
X n
X n
X
2
= wi Re [Ax̄i yi + āxi ȳi ] − wi |xi | − Re (āA) wi |yi |2
i=1 i=1 i=1

and then, by (5.22), one has


n
X n
X n
X
2 2
wi |xi | + Re (āA) wi |yi | ≤ wi Re [Ax̄i yi + āxi ȳi ]
i=1 i=1 i=1

giving
n n Pn
1 X 2 1 X 2 i=1 wi Re [Ax̄i yi + āxi ȳi ]
(5.24) 1 wi |xi | + [Re (āA)] 2 wi |yi | ≤ 1 .
[Re (āA)] 2
i=1 i=1 [Re (āA)] 2
On the other hand, by the elementary inequality
1
αp2 + q 2 ≥ 2pq
α
holding for any p, q ≥ 0 and α > 0, we deduce
n n
! 12 n n
X X 1 X 1 X
(5.25) 2 wi |xi |2 wi |yi |2 ≤ 1 wi |x i |2
+ [Re (āA)] 2 wi |yi |2 .
i=1 i=1 [Re (āA)] 2 i=1 i=1

Utilising (5.24) and (5.25), we deduce the first part of (5.23).


The second part is obvious by the fact that for z ∈ C, |Re (z)| ≤ |z| .
Now, assume that the first inequality in (5.23) holds with a constant c > 0, i.e.,
n n Pn
X 2
X 2 wi Re [Ax̄i yi + āxi ȳi ]
(5.26) wi |xi | wi |yi | ≤ c · i=1 1 ,
i=1 i=1 [Re (āA)] 2

where a, A, x̄, ȳ satisfy (5.22).


If we choose a = A = 1, y = x 6= 0, then obviously (5.23) holds and from (5.26) we may
get
n
X n
X
wi |xi |2 ≤ 2c wi |xi |2 ,
i=1 i=1
1
giving c ≥ 2
.
The theorem is completely proved. 
The following corollary is a natural consequence of the above theorem.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 77

Corollary 5.12. Let m, M > 0 and x̄, ȳ, w̄ be as in Theorem 5.11 and with the property that
n
X
(5.27) wi Re [(M yi − xi ) (x̄i − mȳi )] ≥ 0,
i=1

then one has the inequality


" n n
# 12 n
X 2
X 2 1 M +mX
(5.28) wi |xi | wi |yi | ≤ · √ wi Re (xi ȳi )
i=1 i=1
2 mM
i=1
n
1 M + m X
≤ · √ wi xi ȳi .

2

mM i=1

The following corollary also holds.


Corollary 5.13. With the assumptions in Corollary 5.12, then one has the following inequality:
" n n
# 12 n
X X X
(5.29) 0≤ wi |xi |2 wi |yi |2 − wi xi ȳi


i=1 i=1 i=1
" n n
# 12 n
X X X
≤ wi |xi |2 wi |yi |2 − wi Re (xi ȳi )
i=1 i=1 i=1
√ √ 2
M− m n
X
≤ √ wi Re (xi ȳi )
2 mM i=1
√ √ 2
M− m

Xn
≤ √ wi xi ȳi


2 mM
i=1

and
2
n
X Xn X n
(5.30) 0≤ wi |xi |2 wi |yi |2 − wi xi ȳi


i=1 i=1 i=1
n n
" n #2
X X X
≤ wi |xi |2 wi |yi |2 − wi Re (xi ȳi )
i=1 i=1 i=1
n
" #2
(M − m)2 X
≤ wi Re (xi ȳi )
4mM i=1
2
n
(M − m)2 X
≤ wi xi ȳi .

4mM


i=1

5.5. A Reverse Inequality for Real Numbers. The following result holds [10, Proposition
5.1].
Theorem 5.14. Let a, A ∈ R and x̄ = (x1 , . . . , xn ) , ȳ = (y1 , . . . , yn ) be two sequences with
the property that:
(5.31) ayi ≤ xi ≤ Ayi for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
78 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Then for any w̄ = (w1 , . . . , wn ) a sequence of positive real numbers, one has the inequality
n n n
!2
X X X
(5.32) 0≤ wi x2i wi yi2 − wi xi yi
i=1 i=1 i=1
n
!2
1 X
≤ (A − a)2 wi yi2 .
4 i=1
1
The constant 4
is sharp in (5.32).
Proof. Let us define
n n
! n n
!
X X X X
I1 := A wi yi2 − wi xi yi wi xi yi − a wi yi2
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1
and !
n
X n
X
I2 := wi yi2 (Ayi − xi ) (xi − ayi ) wi .
i=1 i=1
Then !2 !2
n
X n
X n
X n
X
I1 = (a + A) wi yi2 wi xi yi − wi xi yi − aA wi yi2
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1
and !2
n
X n
X n
X n
X n
X
I2 = (a + A) wi yi2 wi xi yi − wi x2i wi yi2 − aA wi yi2
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1
giving
n n n
!2
X X X
(5.33) I1 − I2 = wi x2i wi yi2 − wi yi2 .
i=1 i=1 i=1

If (5.31) holds, then (Ayi − xi ) (xi − ayi ) ≥ 0 for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} and thus I2 ≥ 0 giving
n n n
!2
X X X
(5.34) wi x2i wi yi2 − wi yi2
i=1 i=1 i=1
" n n
! n n
!#
X X X X
≤ A wi yi2 − wi xi yi wi xi yi − a wi yi2 .
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1
If we use the elementary inequality for real numbers u, v ∈ R
1
(5.35) uv ≤ (u + v)2 ,
4
then we have for
n
X X n Xn n
X
2
u := A wi yi − wi xi yi , v := wi xi yi − a wi yi2
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1
that
n n
! n n
! n
!2
X X X X 1 X
A wi yi2 − wi xi yi wi xi yi − a wi yi2 ≤ (A − a)2 wi yi2
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1
4 i=1
and the inequality (5.32) is proved.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 79

Now, assume that (5.32) holds with a constant c > 0, i.e.,


n n n
!2 n
!2
X X X X
(5.36) wi x2i wi yi2 − wi xi yi ≤ c (A − a)2 wi yi2 ,
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

where a, A, x̄, ȳ satisfy (5.31).


We choose n = 2, w1 = w2 = 1 and let a, A, y1 , y2 , x, α ∈ R such that
ay1 < x1 = Ay1 ,
ay2 = x2 < Ay2 .
With these choices, we get from (5.36) that
2 2
a2 y12 + a2 y22 y12 + y22 − A2 y12 + a2 y22 ≤ c (A − a)2 y12 + y22 ,
 

which is equivalent to
2
(A − a)2 y12 y22 ≤ c (A − a)2 y12 + y22 .
Since we may choose a 6= A, we deduce
2
y12 y22 ≤ c y12 + y22 ,

giving, for y1 = y2 = 1, c ≥ 41 . 

The following corollary is obvious.


Corollary 5.15. With the above assumptions for a, A, x̄ and ȳ, we have the inequality
n n n
!2 n
!2
X X X 1 2
X
(5.37) 0≤ x2i yi2 − xi yi ≤ (A − a) yi2 .
i=1 i=1 i=1
4 i=1

Remark 5.16. Condition (5.31) may be replaced by the weaker condition


n
X
(5.38) wi (Ayi − xi ) (xi − ayi ) ≥ 0
i=1

and the conclusion in Theorem 5.14 will still be valid, i.e., the inequality (5.32) holds.
For (5.37) to be true it suffices that
n
X
(5.39) (Ayi − xi ) (xi − ayi ) ≥ 0
i=1

holds true.
5.6. A Reverse Inequality for Complex Numbers. The following result holds [10, Proposi-
tion 5.1].
Theorem 5.17. Let a, A ∈ C and x̄ = (x1 , . . . , xn ) , ȳ = (y1 , . . . , yn ) ∈ Cn , w̄ = (w1 , . . . , wn ) ∈
Rn+ . If
n
X
(5.40) wi Re [(Ayi − xi ) (x̄i − āȳi )] ≥ 0,
i=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
80 S.S. D RAGOMIR

then one has the inequality


2
n
X Xn X n
2 2
(5.41) 0≤ wi |xi | wi |yi | − wi xi ȳi


i=1 i=1 i=1
n
!2
1 2
X 2
≤ |A − a| wi |yi | .
4 i=1
1
The constant 4
is sharp in (5.41).
Proof. Consider
" n n
! n n
!#
X X X X
A1 := Re A wi |yi |2 − wi xi ȳi wi x̄i yi − ā wi |yi |2
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

and " #
n
X n
X
A2 := wi |yi |2 − Re wi (Ayi − xi ) (x̄i − āȳi ) .
i=1 i=1
Then
n
" n n
#
X 2
X X
A1 = wi |yi | − Re A wi x̄i yi + ā wi xi ȳi
i=1 i=1 i=1
2 !2
Xn n
X
− wi xi ȳi − Re (āA) wi |yi |2


i=1 i=1

and
n
" n n
#
X 2
X X
A2 = wi |yi | − Re A wi x̄i yi + ā wi xi ȳi
i=1 i=1 i=1
n n n
!2
X 2
X 2
X
− wi |xi | wi |yi | − Re (āA) wi |yi |2
i=1 i=1 i=1

giving
2
n
X n
X Xn
2 2
(5.42) A1 − A2 = wi |xi | wi |yi | − wi xi ȳi .


i=1 i=1 i=1

If (5.40) holds, then A2 ≥ 0 and thus


2
X n Xn X n
2 2
(5.43) wi |xi | wi |yi | − wi xi ȳi


i=1 i=1 i=1
" n n
! n n
!#
X X X X
≤ Re A wi |yi |2 − wi xi ȳi wi x̄i yi − ā wi |yi |2 .
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

If we use the elementary inequality for complex numbers z, t ∈ C


1
(5.44) Re [z t̄] ≤ |z − t|2 ,
4

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 81

then we have for


n
X n
X
2
z := A wi |yi | − wi xi ȳi ,
i=1 i=1
n
X n
X
t := wi xi ȳi − a wi |yi |2
i=1 i=1
that
" n n
! n n
!#
X X X X
(5.45) Re A wi |yi |2 − wi xi ȳi wi x̄i yi − ā wi |yi |2
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1
n
!2
1 X
≤ |A − a|2 wi |yi |2
4 i=1

and the inequality (5.41) is proved.


Now, assume that (5.41) holds with a constant c > 0, i.e.,
2 !2
Xn n
X Xn n
X
(5.46) wi |xi |2 wi |yi |2 − wi xi ȳi ≤ c |A − a|2 wi |yi |2 ,


i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

where x̄, ȳ, a, A satisfy


Pn(5.40).2
Consider ȳ ∈ C , i=1 |yi | wi = 1, a 6= A, m̄ ∈ Cn , ni=1 wi |mi |2 = 1 with ni=1 wi yi mi =
n
P P
0. Define
A+a A+a
xi := yi + mi , i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
2 2
Then
n n
A − a 2 X

X
wi (Ayi − xi ) (x̄i − āyi ) =
wi (yi − mi ) (ȳi − m̄i ) = 0
i=1
2
i=1
and thus the condition (5.40) is fulfilled.
From (5.46) we deduce
2
n 2 n  
X A + a A − a X A + a A − a
2
y + m w − y + m ȳ i i ≤ c |A − a|
w

i i i i i

2 2

2 2
i=1 i=1

and since
n  2
A + a 2 A − a 2

X A+a A−a
wi
yi + mi =


i=1
2 2 2 2
and n  2
A + a 2

X A + a A−a
yi + mi ȳi wi =

2 2 2


i=1
then by (5.46) we get
|A − a|2
≤ c |A − a|2
4
1
giving c ≥ 4
and the theorem is completely proved. 
The following corollary holds.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
82 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Corollary 5.18. Let a, A ∈ C and x̄ = (x1 , . . . , xn ) , ȳ = (y1 , . . . , yn ) ∈ Cn be with the


property that
Xn
(5.47) Re [(Ayi − xi ) (x̄i − āȳi )] ≥ 0,
i=1
then one has the inequality
2 !2
n n n n
X 2
X 2
X 1 X
(5.48) 0≤ |xi | |yi | − xi ȳi ≤ |A − a|2 2
|yi | .

i=1 i=1

i=1
4 i=1
1
The constant 4
is best in (5.48).
Remark 5.19. A sufficient condition for both (5.40) and (5.47) to hold is
(5.49) Re [(Ayi − xi ) (x̄i − āȳi )] ≥ 0
for any i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
5.7. Shisha-Mond Type Inequalities. As some particular case for bounds on differences of
means, O. Shisha and B. Mond obtained in 1967 (see [23]) the following reverse of (CBS) −
inequality:
Theorem 5.20. Assume that ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) and b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) are such that there exists
a, A, b, B > 0 with the property that:
(5.50) a ≤ aj ≤ A and b ≤ bj ≤ B for any j ∈ {1, . . . , n}
then we have the inequality
n n n
!2 r r !2 n n
X X X A a X X
(5.51) a2j b2j − aj b j ≤ − aj b j b2j .
j=1 j=1 j=1
b B j=1 j=1

The equality holds in (5.51) if and only if there exists a subsequence (k1 , . . . , kp ) of (1, 2, . . . , n)
such that   12   32
n A B
=1+ ,
p a b
akµ = A, bkµ = b (µ = 1, . . . , p) and ak = a, bk = B for every k distinct from all kµ .
Using another result stated for weighted means in [23], we may prove the following reverse
of the (CBS) −inequality.
Theorem 5.21. Assume that ā, b̄ are positive sequences and there exists γ, Γ > 0 with the
property that
ai
(5.52) 0<γ≤ ≤ Γ < ∞ for any i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
bi
Then we have the inequality
n n
! 21 n n
X
2
X
2
X (Γ − γ)2 X 2
(5.53) 0≤ ai bi − ai b i ≤ b.
i=1 i=1 i=1
4 (γ + Γ) j=1 j
The equality holds in (5.53) if and only if there exists a subsequence (k1 , . . . , kp ) of (1, 2, . . . , n)
such that
p n
X
2 Γ + 3γ X 2 akm ak
b km = bj , = Γ (m = 1, . . . , p) and =γ
m=1
4 (γ + Γ) j=1 b km bk

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 83

for every k distinct from all km .


Proof. In [23, p. 301], Shisha and Mond have proved the following weighted inequality
n
! 12 n
X
2
X (C − c)2
(5.54) 0≤ qj x j − qj x j ≤ ,
j=1 j=1
4 (c + C)
Pn
provided qj ≥ 0 (j = 1, . . . , n) with j=1 qj = 1 and 0 < c ≤ xj < C < ∞ for any
j ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
Equality holds in (5.54) if and only if there exists a subsequence (k1 , . . . , kp ) of (1, 2, . . . , n)
such that
p
X C + 3c
(5.55) qk m = ,
m=1
4 (c + C)
xkm = C (m = 1, 2, . . . , p) and xk = c for every k distinct from all km .
If in (5.54) we choose
aj b2j
xj = , qj = Pn 2 , j ∈ {1, . . . , n} ;
bj k=1 bk
then we get
Pn ! 12 Pn
2
a j j=1 aj bj (Γ − γ)2
Pj=1
n 2
− P n 2
≤ ,
k=1 bk k=1 bk 4 (γ + Γ)
giving the desired inequality (5.53).
The case of equality follows by the similar case in (5.54) and we omit the details. 
5.8. Zagier Type Inequalities. The following result was obtained by D. Zagier in 1995, [24].
Lemma 5.22. Let f, g : [0, ∞) → R be monotone decreasing nonnegative functions on [0, ∞).
Then
Z ∞ R∞ R∞
0
f (x) F (x) dx 0 g (x) G (x) dx
(5.56) f (x) g (x) dx ≥ R ∞ R∞ ,
0 max 0 F (x) dx, 0 G (x) dx
for any integrable functions F, G : [0, ∞) → [0, 1] .
Proof. We will follow the proof in [24].
For all x ≥ 0 we have
Z ∞ Z ∞ Z ∞
f (t) F (t) dt = f (x) F (t) dt + [f (t) − f (x)] F (t) dt
0 0 0
Z ∞ Z x
≤ f (x) F (t) dt + [f (t) − f (x)] dt
0 0
Rx R∞
and hence, since 0
G (t) dt is bounded from above by both x and 0
G (t) dt,
Z ∞ Z x
f (t) F (t) dt · G (t) dt
0 0
Z ∞ Z ∞ Z x
≤ xf (x) F (t) dt + G (t) dt · [f (t) − f (x)] dt
0 0 0
Z ∞ Z ∞  Z x
≤ max F (t) dt, G (t) dt · f (t) dt.
0 0 0

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
84 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Now,
R ∞ we multiply by R ∞−dg (x) and integrate by parts from 0 to ∞. The left hand side gives
−∞
f (t) F (t) dt · −∞ g (t) G (t) dt, the right hand side gives
Z ∞ Z ∞  Z ∞
max F (t) dt, G (t) dt · f (t) g (t) dt,
0 0 0

and the inequality remains true because the measure −dg (x) is nonnegative. 
The following particular case is a reverse of the (CBS) −integral inequality obtained by D.
Zagier in 1977, [25].
Corollary 5.23. If f, g : [0, ∞) → [0, ∞) are decreasing function on [0, ∞), then
 Z ∞ Z ∞  Z ∞
(5.57) max f (0) g (t) dt, g (0) f (t) dt · f (t) g (t) dt
0 0 0
Z ∞ Z ∞
2
≥ f (t) dt g 2 (t) dt.
0 0

Remark 5.24. The following weighted version of (5.56) may be proved in a similar way, as
noted by D. Zagier in [25]
Z ∞ R∞ R∞
w (t) f (t) F (t) dt w (t) f (t) G (t) dt
(5.58) w (t) f (t) g (t) dt ≥ 0 R ∞ 0 R
∞ ,
0 max 0 w (t) F (t) dt, 0 w (t) G (t) dt
provided w (t) > 0 on [0, ∞), f, g : [0, ∞) → [0, ∞) are monotonic decreasing and F, G :
[0, ∞) → [0, 1] are integrable on [0, ∞).
We may state and prove the following discrete inequality.
Theorem 5.25. Consider the sequences of real numbers ā = (a1 , . . . , an ), b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) ,
p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn ), q̄ = (q1 , . . . , qn ) and w̄ = (w1 , . . . , wn ) .
If
(i) ā and b̄ are decreasing and nonnegative;
(ii) pi , qi ∈ [0, 1] and wi ≥ 0 for any i ∈ {1, . . . , n} ,
then we have the inequality
n Pn
wi pi ai ni=1 wi qi bi
X P
i=1
(5.59) wi ai bi ≥ Pn Pn .
i=1
max { i=1 w i p i , i=1 wi qi }

Proof. Consider the functions f, g, F, G, W : [0, ∞) → R given by


a1 , t ∈ [0, 1) b1 , t ∈ [0, 1)
 
 
 a2 , t ∈ [1, 2)  b2 , t ∈ [1, 2)

 

 
f (t) = .
.. , g (t) = .. ,
  .
 an , t ∈ [n − 1, n)  bn , t ∈ [n − 1, n)

 

 
0 t ∈ [n, ∞) 0 t ∈ [n, ∞)
p1 , t ∈ [0, 1) q1 , t ∈ [0, 1)
 
 
 p2 , t ∈ [1, 2)  q2 , t ∈ [1, 2)

 

 
F (t) = .
.. , G (t) = .. ,
  .
 pn , t ∈ [n − 1, n)  qn , t ∈ [n − 1, n)

 

 
0 t ∈ [n, ∞) 0 t ∈ [n, ∞)

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 85

and
t ∈ [0, 1)

 w1 ,
 w2 , t ∈ [1, 2)



W (t) = .. .
 .
 wn ,

 t ∈ [n − 1, n)
t ∈ [n, ∞)

0
We observe that, the above functions satisfy the hypothesis of Remark 5.24 and since, for ex-
ample,
Z ∞ n Z i
X Z ∞
w (t) f (t) g (t) dt = w (t) f (t) g (t) dt + w (t) f (t) g (t) dt
0 i=1 i−1 n

Xn
= wk ak bk ,
k=1

then by (5.58) we deduce the desired inequality (5.59). 

Remark 5.26. A similar inequality for sequences under some monotonicity assumptions for p̄
and q̄ was obtained in 1995 by J. Pečarić in [26].

The following reverse of the (CBS) −discrete inequality holds.

Theorem 5.27. Assume that ā, b̄ are decreasing nonnegative sequences with a1 , b1 6= 0 and w̄
a nonnegative sequence. Then
n n
( n n
) n
X X X X X
2 2
(5.60) wi ai wi bi ≤ max b1 wi ai , a1 wi bi wi ai bi .
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

ai bi
The proof follows by Theorem 5.25 on choosing pi = a1
∈ [0, 1] , qi = b1
∈ [0, 1] , i ∈
{1, . . . , n} . We omit the details.

Remark 5.28. When wi = 1, we recapture Alzer’s result from 1992, [27].

5.9. A Reverse Inequality in Terms of the sup −Norm. The following result has been proved
in [11].

Lemma 5.29. Let ᾱ = (α1 , . . . , αn ) and x̄ = (x1 , . . . , xn ) be sequences Pof complex numbers
n
and p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn ) a sequence of nonnegative real numbers such that i=1 pi = 1. Then one
has the inequality
n n n

X X X
(5.61) pi αi xi − pi αi pi xi



i=1 i=1 i=1
 !2 
Xn X n
≤ max |∆αi | max |∆xi |  i2 p i − ipi  ,
i=1,n−1 i=1,n−1
i=1 i=1

where ∆αi is the forward difference, i.e., ∆αi := αi+1 − αi .


Inequality (5.61) is sharp in the sense that the constant C = 1 in the right membership cannot
be replaced be a smaller one.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
86 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Proof. We shall follow the proof in [11]. We start with the following identity
n n n n
X X X 1X
pi αi xi − pi αi pi xi = pi pj (αi − αj ) (xi − xj )
i=1 i=1 i=1
2 i,j=1
X
= pi pj (αi − αj ) (xi − xj ) .
1≤i<j≤n

As i < j, we can write that


j−1
X
αj − αi = ∆αk
k=i
and
j−1
X
xj − xi = ∆xk .
k=i
Using the generalised triangle inequality, we have successively
j−1 j−1

X n Xn Xn X X X
pi αi xi − pi αi pi xi = pi pj ∆αk ∆xk



i=1 i=1 i=1 1≤i<j≤n k=i k=i
j−1 j−1
X X X
≤ pi pj ∆αk ∆xk


1≤i<j≤n k=i k=i
j−1 j−1
X X X
≤ pi pj |∆αk | |∆xk |
1≤i<j≤n k=i k=i
:= A.
Note that
|∆αk | ≤ max |∆αs |
1≤s≤n−1
and
|∆xk | ≤ max |∆xs |
1≤s≤n−1
for all k = i, . . . , j − 1 and then by summation
j−1
X
|∆αk | ≤ (j − i) max |∆αs |
1≤s≤n−1
k=i
and
j−1
X
|∆xk | ≤ (j − i) max |∆xs | .
1≤s≤n−1
k=i
Taking into account the above estimations, we can write
" #
X
A≤ pi pj (j − i)2 max |∆αs | max |∆xs | .
1≤s≤n−1 1≤s≤n−1
1≤i<j≤n

As a simple calculation shows that


n n
!2
X 2
X X
pi pj (j − i) = i2 p i − ipi ,
1≤i<j≤n i=1 i=1

inequality (5.61) is proved.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 87

To prove the sharpness of the constant, let us assume that (5.61) holds with a constant C > 0,
i.e.,

X n Xn Xn
(5.62) pi αi xi − pi αi pi xi



i=1 i=1 i=1
 !2 
Xn Xn
≤ C max |∆αi | max |∆xi |  i2 p i − ipi  .
i=1,n−1 i=1,n−1
i=1 i=1

Now, choose the sequences αk = α + kβ (β 6= 0) and xk = x + ky (y 6= 0) , k ∈ {1, . . . , n}


to get

X n Xn Xn 1 X n
pi αi xi − pi αi pi xi = pi pj (i − j) βy

2


i=1 i=1 i=1 i,j=1
 !2 
X n Xn
= |β| |y|  i2 p i − ipi 
i=1 i=1

and
 !2   !2 
Xn n
X Xn n
X
max |∆αi | max |∆xi |  i2 p i − ipi  = |β| |y|  i2 p i − ipi 
i=1,n−1 i=1,n−1
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

and then, by (5.62), we get C ≥ 1. 


The following reverse of the (CBS) −inequality holds [12].
Theorem 5.30. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) and b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be two sequences of real numbers
with ai 6= 0, (i = 1, . . . , n) . Then one has the inequality
n n n
!2
X X X
0≤ a2i b2i − ai b i
i=1 i=1 i=1
 !2 
  2 X n n n
bk 2
X X
≤ max ∆  ai i2 a2i − ia2i .
k=1,n−1 ak i=1 i=1 i=1

The constant C = 1 is sharp in the sense that it cannot be replaced by a smaller constant.
Proof. Follows by Lemma 5.29 on choosing
a2 bi bi
pi = Pn i 2
, αi = , xi = , i ∈ {1, . . . , n}
k=1 ak ai ai
and performing some elementary calculations.
We omit the details. 

5.10. A Reverse Inequality in Terms of the 1−Norm. The following result has been obtained
in [13].
Lemma 5.31. Let ᾱ = (α1 , . . . , αn ) and x̄ = (x1 , . . . , xn ) be sequences
Pof complex numbers
n
and p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn ) a sequence of nonnegative real numbers such that i=1 pi = 1. Then one

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
88 S.S. D RAGOMIR

has the inequality


n n n
n n−1 n−1
X X X 1X X X
(5.63) pi αi xi − pi αi pi xi ≤ pi (1 − pi ) |∆αi | |∆xi | ,

2


i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

where ∆αi := αi+1 − αi is the forward difference.


The constant 12 is sharp in the sense that it cannot be replaced by a smaller constant.

Proof. We shall follow the proof in [13].


As in the proof of Lemma 5.29 in Section 5.9, we have
n n n
j−1 j−1
X X X X X X
(5.64) pi αi xi − pi αi pi xi ≤ pi pj |∆αk | |∆xl | := A.



i=1 i=1 i=1 1≤i<j≤n k=i l=i

It is obvious that for all 1 ≤ i < j ≤ n − 1, we have that


j−1 n−1
X X
|∆αk | ≤ |∆αk |
k=i k=1

and
j−1 n−1
X X
|∆xl | ≤ |∆xl | .
l=i l=1

Utilising these and the definition of A, we conclude that


n−1
X n−1
X X
(5.65) A≤ |∆αk | |∆xl | pi pj .
k=1 l=1 1≤i<j≤n

Now, let us observe that


" n #
X 1 X X
(5.66) pi pj = pi pj − pi pj
1≤i<j≤n
2 i,j=1 i=j
" n n n
#
1 X X X
= pi pj − p2i
2 i=1 j=1 i=1
n
1X
= pi (1 − pi ) .
2 i=1

Making use of (5.64) – (5.66), we deduce the desired inequality (5.63).


To prove the sharpness of the constant 21 , let us assume that (5.63) holds with a constant
C > 0. That is
n n n
n n−1 n−1
X X X X X X
(5.67) p α x − p α p x ≤ C p (1 − p ) |∆α | |∆xi |

i i i i i i i i i i

i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

for all αi , xi , pi (i = 1, . . . , n) as above and n ≥ 1.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 89

Choose in (5.63) n = 2 and compute


2 2 2 2
X X X 1X
pi αi xi − pi αi pi xi = pi pj (αi − αj ) (xi − xj )
i=1 i=1 i=1
2 i,j=1
X
= pi pj (αi − αj ) (xi − xj )
1≤i<j≤2

= p1 p2 (α1 − α2 ) (x1 − x2 ) .

Also
2
X 2
X 2
X
pi (1 − pi ) |∆αi | |∆xi | = (p1 p2 + p1 p2 ) |α1 − α2 | |x1 − x2 | .
i=1 i=1 i=1

Substituting in (5.67), we obtain

p1 p2 |α1 − α2 | |x1 − x2 | ≤ 2Cp1 p2 |α1 − α2 | |x1 − x2 | .

If we assume that p1 , p2 > 0, α1 6= α2 , x1 6= x2 , then we obtain C ≥ 12 , which proves the


sharpness of the constant 21 . 

We are now able to state the following reverse of the (CBS) −inequality [12].

Theorem 5.32. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) and b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be two sequences of real numbers
with ai 6= 0 (i = 1, . . . , n) . Then one has the inequality
n n n
!2
X X X
(5.68) 0≤ a2i b2i − ai b i
i=1 i=1 i=1
" n−1   #2
∆ bk
X X
≤ a2i a2j .
ak
k=1 1≤i<j≤n

The constant C = 1 is sharp in (5.68), in the sense that it cannot be replaced by a smaller
constant.

Proof. We choose
a2i bi
pi = n
P 2
, αi = xi = , i ∈ {1, . . . , n}
k=1 ak ai
in (5.63) to get
Pn 2 2
( ni=1 ai bi )
P
i=1 bi
0 ≤ Pn 2
− 2
k=1 ak ( nk=1 a2k )
P
Pn 2  a2

 !2
1 a
i=1 i 1 − Pn i 2 n−1 
b
k=1 ak
X
∆ j

≤ · Pn 2
2 k=1 ak j=1
aj
Pn Pn n−1 
!2
2 2 2

1 i=1 ai ( k=1 ak − ai ) b
X j
= · 2

2 ( nk=1 a2k ) aj
P
j=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
90 S.S. D RAGOMIR

which is clearly equivalent to


n n n
!2
X X X
0≤ a2i b2i − ai b i
i=1 i=1 i=1
 !2 
n n n   !2
1 X X X b
∆ j .

≤  a2k − a4i 
2 k=1 i=1
aj
j=1

Since  
n
!2 n
1 X X X
a2k − a4i  = a2i a2j
2 k=1 i=1 1≤i<j≤n

the inequality (5.68) is thus proved. 


5.11. A Reverse Inequality in Terms of the p−Norm. The following result has been obtained
in [14].
Lemma 5.33. Let ᾱ = (α1 , . . . , αn ) and x̄ = (x1 , . . . , xn ) be sequencesPof complex numbers
and p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn ) a sequence of nonnegative real numbers such that ni=1 pi = 1. Then one
has the inequality

X n Xn Xn
(5.69) pi αi xi − pi αi pi xi



i=1 i=1 i=1

n−1
! p1 n−1 ! 1q
X X X
≤ (i − j) pi pj |∆αk |p |∆xk |q ,
1≤j<i≤n k=1 k=1

where p > 1, p1 + 1q = 1.
The constant C = 1 in the right hand side of (5.69) is sharp in the sense that it cannot be
replaced by a smaller constant.
Proof. We shall follow the proof in [14].
As in the proof of Lemma 5.29 in Section 5.9, we have

Xn n
X n
X X i−1
X i−1
X
(5.70) pi αi xi − pi αi pi xi ≤ pi pj |∆αk | |∆xl | := A.



i=1 i=1 i=1 1≤j<i≤n k=j l=j

Using Hölder’s discrete inequality, we can state that


i−1 i−1
! p1
X 1 X
|∆αk | ≤ (i − j) q |∆αk |p
k=j k=j

and
i−1 i−1
! 1q
X 1 X
|∆xl | ≤ (i − j) p |∆xl |q ,
l=j l=j
1 1
where p > 1, p
+ q
= 1, and then we get
i−1
! p1 i−1
! 1q
X X X
(5.71) A≤ pi pj (i − j) |∆αk |p |∆xk |q .
1≤j<i≤n k=j k=j

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 91

Since
i−1
X n−1
X
p
|∆αk | ≤ |∆αk |p
k=j k=1
and
i−1
X n−1
X
q
|∆xk | ≤ |∆xk |q ,
k=j k=1
for all 1 ≤ j < i ≤ n, then by (5.70) and (5.71) we deduce the desired inequality (5.69).
To prove the sharpness of the constant, let us assume that (5.69) holds with a constant C > 0.
That is,
n n n

X X X
(5.72) pi αi xi − pi αi pi xi



i=1 i=1 i=1

n−1
! p1 n−1 ! 1q
X X X
≤C (i − j) pi pj |∆αk |p |∆xk |q .
1≤j<i≤n k=1 k=1

Note that, for n = 2, we have



X2 2
X 2
X
pi αi xi − pi αi pi xi = p1 p2 |α1 − α2 | |x1 − x2 |



i=1 i=1 i=1
and
1
! p1 1
! 1q
X X X
(i − j) pi pj |∆αk |p |∆xk |q = p1 p2 |α1 − α2 | |x1 − x2 | .
1≤j<i≤2 k=1 k=1

Therefore, from (5.72), we obtain


p1 p2 |α1 − α2 | |x1 − x2 | ≤ Cp1 p2 |α1 − α2 | |x1 − x2 |
for all α1 6= α2 , x1 6= x2 , p1 p2 > 0, giving C ≥ 1. 
We are able now to state the following reverse of the (CBS) −inequality.
Theorem 5.34. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be two sequences of real numbers with
ai 6= 0, (i = 1, . . . , n) . Then one has the inequality
n n n
!2
X X X
0≤ a2i b2i − ai b i
i=1 i=1 i=1

n−1   p ! p1 n−1   q ! 1q
∆ bk b
X X k X
≤ ∆ (i − j) a2i a2j ,
k=1
ak k=1
ak 1≤j<i≤n
1 1
where p > 1, + = 1. p q
The constant C = 1 is sharp in the above sense.
Proof. Follows by Lemma 5.33 for
a2 bi
pi = Pn i 2
, αi = x i = , i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
k=1 ak ai

The following corollary is a natural consequence of Theorem 5.34 for p = q = 2.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
92 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Corollary 5.35. With the assumptions of Theorem 5.34 for ā and b̄, we have

n n n
!2
X X X
0≤ a2i b2i − ai b i
i=1 i=1 i=1
n−1   2 X
X b k
≤ ∆ (i − j) a2i a2j .

k=1
ak 1≤j<i≤n

5.12. A Reverse Inequality Via an Andrica-Badea Result. The following result is due to
Andrica and Badea [15, p. 16].

Lemma 5.36. Let x̄ = (x1 , . . . , xn ) ∈ I n = [m, M ]n be a sequence of real numbers and let S
be the subset of {1, . . . , n} that minimises the expression

X 1
(5.73) p i − Pn ,

2


i∈S

Pn
where Pn := i=1 pi > 0, p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn ) is a sequence of nonnegative real numbers. Then
 !2  !
n n
1 X 2 1 X X X (M − m)2
(5.74) maxn  pi xi − pi xi = p i Pn − pi .
x̄∈I Pn i=1 Pn i=1 i∈S i∈S
Pn2

Proof. We shall follow the proof in [15, p. 161].


Define
n n
!2
1 X 2 1 X
Dn (x̄, p̄) := pi xi − pi xi
Pn i=1 Pn i=1
1 X
= pi pj (xi − xj )2 .
Pn 1≤i<j≤n

Keeping in mind the convexity of the quadratic function, we have

Dn (αx̄ + (1 − α) ȳ, p̄)


1 X
= 2 pi pj [αxi + (1 − α) yi − αxj − (1 − α) yj ]2
Pn 1≤i<j≤n
1 X
= 2 pi pj [α (xi − xj ) + (1 − α) (yi − yj )]2
Pn 1≤i<j≤n
1 X
pi pj α (xi − xj )2 + (1 − α) (yi − yj )2
 
≤ 2
Pn 1≤i<j≤n
= αDn (x̄, p̄) + (1 − α) Dn (ȳ, p̄) ,

hence Dn (·, p̄) is a convex function on I n .


Using a well known theorem (see for instance [16, p. 124]), we get that the maximum of
Dn (·, p̄) is attained on the boundary of I n .

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 93


Let S, S̄ be the partition of {1, . . . , n} such that the maximum of Dn (·, p̄) is obtained for
x̄0 = (x01 , . . . , x0n ) , where x0i = m if i ∈ S̄ and x0i = M if i ∈ S. In this case we have

1 X
(5.75) Dn (x̄0 , p̄) = pi pj (xi − xj )2
Pn2 1≤i<j≤n
!
(M − m)2 X X
= p i Pn − pi .
Pn2 i∈S i∈S

The expression
!
X X
p i Pn − pi
i∈S i∈S

is a maximum when the set S minimises the expression



X 1
p i − Pn .

2


i∈S

From (5.75) it follows that Dn (x̄, p̄) is also a maximum and the proof of the above lemma is
complete. 

The following reverse result of the (CBS) −inequality holds.

Theorem 5.37. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) and b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be two sequences of real numbers
with ai 6= 0 (i = 1, . . . , n) and

bi
(5.76) −∞ < m ≤ ≤ M < ∞ for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
ai

Let S be the subset of {1, . . . , n} that minimizes the expression



n
X
2 1 X
2

(5.77) ai − ai ,

2


i∈S i=1

and denote S̄ := {1, . . . , n} \ S. Then we have the inequality

n n n
!2
X X X
(5.78) 0≤ a2i b2i − ai b i
i=1 i=1 i=1
X X
≤ (M − m)2 a2i a2i
i∈S i∈S̄
n
!2
1 X
≤ (M − m)2 a2i .
4 i=1

Proof. The proof of the second inequality in (5.78) follows by Lemma 5.36 on choosing pi =
a2i , xi = abii , i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
94 S.S. D RAGOMIR

The third inequality is obvious as


n
!
X X X X X
a2i a2i = a2i a2j − a2i
i∈S i∈S̄ i∈S j=1 i∈S
n
!2
1 X X X
≤ a2i + a2j − a2i
4 i∈S j=1 i∈S
n
!2
1 X
= a2j .
4 j=1

5.13. A Refinement of Cassels’ Inequality. In 1914, P. Schweitzer [18] proved the following
result.
Theorem 5.38. If ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) is a sequence of real numbers such that 0 < m ≤ ai ≤
M < ∞ (i ∈ {1, . . . , n}) , then
n
! n
!
1X 1X 1 (M + m)2
(5.79) ai ≤ .
n i=1 n i=1 ai 4mM

In 1972, A. Lupaş [17] proved the following refinement of Schweitzer’s result which gives
the best bound for n odd as well.
Theorem 5.39. With the assumptions in Theorem 5.38, one has
n n n
M + n+1
   n+1 
M + n2 m
   
X X 1 2 2
m 2
(5.80) ai ≤ ,
i=1 i=1
a i M m

where [·] is the integer part.


In 1988, Andrica and Badea [15] established a weighted version of Schweitzer and Lupaş
inequalities via the use of the following weighted version of the Grüss inequality [15, Theorem
2].
Theorem 5.40. If m1 ≤ ai ≤ M1 , m2 ≤ bi ≤ M2 (i ∈ {1, . . . , n}) and S is the subset of
{1, . . . , n} which minimises the expression

X 1
(5.81) p i − Pn ,

2


i∈S

where Pn := ni=1 pi > 0, then


P

X n Xn Xn
(5.82) Pn p i ai b i − p i ai · p i bi


i=1 i=1 i=1
!
X X
≤ (M1 − m1 ) (M2 − m2 ) p i Pn − pi .
i∈S i∈S
1
≤ Pn2 (M1 − m1 ) (M2 − m2 ) .
4

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 95

Proof. Using the result in Lemma 5.36, Section 5.12, we have


n n
!2 !
1 X 2 1 X (M1 − m1 )2 X X
(5.83) p i ai − p i ai ≤ p i Pn − pi
Pn i=1 Pn i=1 Pn2 i∈S i∈S

and
n n
!2 !
1 X 2 1 X (M2 − m2 )2 X X
(5.84) p i bi − p i bi ≤ p i P n − pi
Pn i=1 Pn i=1 Pn2 i∈S i∈S

and since
n n n
!2
1 X 1 X 1 X
(5.85) p i ai b i − p i ai · p i bi
Pn i=1 Pn i=1 Pn i=1
 !2   !2 
n n n n
1 X 2 1 X  1
X 1 X
≤ p i ai − p i ai pi b2i − p i bi ,
Pn i=1 Pn i=1 Pn i=1 Pn i=1

the first part of (5.82) holds true.


The second part follows by the elementary inequality
1
(a + b)2 , a, b ∈ R
ab ≤
4
P P
for the choices a := i∈S pi , b := Pn − i∈S pi . 

We are now able to state and prove the result of Andrica and Badea [15, Theorem 4], which
is related to Schweitzer’s inequality.
Theorem 5.41. If 0 < m ≤ ai ≤ M < ∞, i ∈ {1, . . . , n} and S is a subset of {1, . . . , n} that
minimises the expression

X Pn
pi − ,

2


i∈S

then we have the inequality


n
! n ! !
2 X
X X pi (M − m) X
(5.86) p i ai ≤ Pn2 + p i Pn − pi
i=1
a
i=1 i
Mm i∈S i∈S

(M + m)2 2
≤ Pn .
4M m
Proof. We shall follow the proof in [15]. We obtain from Theorem 5.39 with bi = a1i , m1 = m,
M1 = m, m2 = M1 , M2 = m1 , the following estimate
!
n n  

2 X X pi 1 1 X X
Pn − p i ai ≤ (M − m) − p i Pn − pi ,

i=1
a
i=1 i
m M i∈S i∈S

that leads, in a simple manner, to (5.86). 

We may now prove the following reverse result for the weighted (CBS) − inequality that
improves the additive version of Cassels’ inequality.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
96 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Theorem 5.42. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be two sequences of positive real num-
bers with the property that
bi
(5.87) 0<m≤ ≤ M < ∞ for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} ,
ai
Pn
and p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn ) a sequence of nonnegative real numbers such that Pn := i=1 pi > 0. If
S is a subset of {1, . . . , n} that minimises the expression

n
X 1 X
(5.88) p a b − p a b

i i i i i i
2


i∈S i=1

then one has the inequality


n n n
!2
X X X
(5.89) pi a2i pi b2i − p i ai b i
i=1 i=1 i=1
n
!
(M − m)2 X X X
≤ p i ai b i p i ai b i − p i ai b i
Mm i∈S i=1 i∈S
n
!2
(M − m)2 X
≤ pi ai bi .
4M m i=1

Proof. Applying Theorem 5.41 for ai = xi , pi = qi xi we may deduce the inequality


n n n
!2 n
!
2 X
X X X (M − m) X X
(5.90) qi x2i qi − qi x i ≤ qi x i qi x i − qi x i ,
i=1 i=1 i=1
M m i∈S i=1 i∈S

provided qi ≥ 0, ni=1 qi > 0, 0 < m ≤ xi ≤ M < ∞, for i ∈ {1, . . . , n} and S is a subset of


P
{1, . . . , n} that minimises the expression

n
X 1X
(5.91) qi x i − qi x i .

2


i∈S i=1

bi
Now, if in (5.90) we choose qi = pi a2i , xi = ai
∈ [m, M ] for i ∈ {1, . . . , n} , we deduce the
desired result (5.89). 

The following corollary provides a refinement of Cassels’ inequality.


Corollary 5.43. With the assumptions of Theorem 5.42, we have the inequality
Pn 2
Pn 2
i=1 pi ai i=1 pi bi
(5.92) 1≤ 2
( ni=1 pi ai bi )
P

(M − m)2
P  P 
i∈S pi ai bi i∈S pi ai bi
≤1+ · Pn 1 − Pn
Mm i=1 pi ai bi i=1 pi ai bi
(M + m)2
≤ .
4M m
The case of the “unweighted” Cassels’ inequality is embodied in the following corollary as
well.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 97

Corollary 5.44. Assume that ā and b̄ satisfy (5.88). If S is a subset of {1, . . . , n} that minimises
the expression

n
X 1 X
(5.93) ai b i − ai b i

2


i∈S i=1

then one has the inequality


Pn 2 Pn 2
ai i=1 bi
(5.94) 1 ≤ i=1Pn 2
( i=1 ai bi )
(M − m)2
P  P 
i∈S ai bi i∈S ai bi
≤1+ · Pn 1 − Pn
Mm i=1 ai bi i=1 ai bi
(M + m)2
≤ .
4M m
In particular, we may obtain the following refinement of the Pólya-Szegö’s inequality.

Corollary 5.45. Assume that

(5.95) 0 < a ≤ ai ≤ A < ∞, 0 < b ≤ bi ≤ B < ∞ for i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .

If S is a subset of {1, . . . , n} that minimises the expression (5.93), then one has the inequality
Pn 2 Pn 2
ai i=1 bi
(5.96) 1 ≤ i=1 Pn 2
( i=1 ai bi )
(AB − ab)2
P  P 
i∈S ai bi i∈S ai bi
≤1+ · Pn 1 − Pn
abAB i=1 ai bi i=1 ai bi
(AB + ab)2
≤ .
4abAB
5.14. Two Reverse Results Via Diaz-Metcalf Results. In [19], J.B. Diaz and F.T. Metcalf
proved the following inequality for sequences of complex numbers.

Lemma 5.46. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) and b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be sequences of complex numbers


such that ak 6= 0, k ∈ {1, . . . , n} and
       
bk bk bk bk
(5.97) m ≤ Re + Im ≤ M, m ≤ Re − Im ≤ M,
ak ak ak ak

where m, M ∈ R and k ∈ {1, . . . , n} . Then one has the inequality


n n
" n #
X X X
(5.98) |bk |2 + mM |ak |2 ≤ (m + M ) Re ak b̄k
k=1 k=1 k=1

Xn
≤ |M + m| ak b̄k .


k=1

Using the above result we may state and prove the following reverse inequality.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
98 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Theorem 5.47. If ā and b̄ are as in (5.97) and m, M > 0, then one has the inequality

n n n
!2
X 2
X (M + m)2 X
(5.99) |ak | |bk |2 ≤ Re ak b̄k
k=1 k=1
4mM k=1
n 2
2
(M + m) X
≤ ak b̄k .

4mM k=1

Proof. Using the elementary inequality

1 2
αp2 + q ≥ 2pq, α > 0, p, q ≥ 0
α

we have

n n n n
! 12
√ X 2 1 X 2
X 2
X
(5.100) mM |ak | + √ |bk | ≥ 2 |ak | |bk |2 .
k=1
mM k=1 k=1 k=1

On the other hand, by (5.98), we have

n n
" n #
1 X √ X (M + m) X
(5.101) √ |bk |2 + mM |ak |2 ≤ √ Re ak b̄k
mM k=1 k=1
mM k=1
n
M + m X
≤ √ ak b̄k .


mM k=1

Combining (5.100) and (5.101), we deduce the desired result (5.99). 

The following corollary is a natural consequence of the above lemma.

Corollary 5.48. If ā and b̄ and m, M satisfy the hypothesis of Theorem 5.47, then

n n
! 21
n

X X X
2 2
(5.102) 0≤ |ai | |bi | − ai b̄i


i=1 i=1 i=1
n n
! 12 n
!
X X X
2 2
≤ |ai | |bi | − Re ak b̄k


i=1 i=1 k=1
√ √ 2 
M − m n
!
X
≤ √ Re ak b̄k

2 mM
k=1

√ √ 2 
M − m X

n
≤ √ ak b̄k


2 mM
k=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 99

and
2
n
X Xn X n
2 2
(5.103) 0≤ |ai | |bi | − ai b̄i


i=1 i=1 i=1
n n

n
! 2
X X X
(5.104) ≤ |ai |2 |bi |2 − Re ai b̄i


i=1 i=1 i=1

n
! 2
(M − m)2 X
(5.105) ≤ Re ai b̄i

4mM i=1

n 2
(M − m)2 X
(5.106) ≤ a i i .


4mM


i=1

Another result obtained by Diaz and Metcalf in [19] is the following one.
Lemma 5.49. Let ā, b̄, m and M be complex numbers such that
   
bk bk
(5.107) Re (m) + Im (m) ≤ Re + Im ≤ Re (M ) + Im (M ) ;
ak ak
   
bk bk
Re (m) − Im (m) ≤ Re − Im ≤ Re (M ) − Im (M ) ;
ak ak
for each k ∈ {1, . . . , n} . Then
n n
" n
#
X 2 X 2
X
(5.108) |bk | + Re mM̄ |ak | ≤ Re (M + m) ak b̄k
k=1 k=1 k=1

Xn
≤ |M + m| ak b̄k .


k=1

The following reverse result for the (CBS) −inequality may be stated as well.

Theorem 5.50. With the assumptions in Lemma 5.49, and if Re mM̄ > 0, then we have the
inequality:
" n n
# 21
Re (M + m) nk=1 ak b̄k
 P 
X 2
X 2
(5.109) |ak | |bk | ≤   1
k=1 k=1 2 Re mM̄ 2
|M + m| nk=1 ak b̄k
P
≤   1 .
2 Re mM̄ 2
The proof is similar to the one in Theorem 5.47 and we omit the details.
Remark 5.51. Similar additive versions may be stated. They are left as an exercise for the
interested reader.
5.15. Some Reverse Results Via the Čebyšev Functional. For x̄= (x1 , . . . , xn ) , ȳ= (y1 , . . . , yn )
two sequences
Pn of real numbers and p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn ) a sequence of nonnegative real numbers
with i=1 pi = 1, define the Čebyšev functional
n
X n
X n
X
(5.110) Tn (p̄; x̄, ȳ) := pi xi yi − pi xi pi yi .
i=1 i=1 i=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
100 S.S. D RAGOMIR

For x̄ and p̄ as above consider the norms:

kx̄k∞ := max |xi |


i=1,n

n
! α1
X
kx̄kp̄,α := pi |xi |α , α ∈ [1, ∞).
i=1

The following result holds [20].

Theorem 5.52. Let x̄, ȳ, p̄ be as above and c̄= (c, . . . , c) a constant sequence with c ∈ R. Then
one has the inequalities

(5.111) 0 ≤ |Tn (p̄; x̄, ȳ)|


 kȳ − ȳµ,p kp̄,1 · inf kx̄ − c̄k∞ ;


 c∈R



≤ kȳ − ȳµ,p kp̄,β · inf kx̄ − c̄kp̄,α , α > 1, α1 + 1
β = 1;
 c∈R



 kȳ − ȳµ,p k∞ · inf kx̄ − c̄kp̄,1 ;


c∈R

 

 kȳ − ȳµ,p kp̄,1 min kx̄k∞ , kx̄ − x̄µ,p k∞ ;



 n o

≤ kȳ − ȳµ,p kp̄,β min kx̄kp̄,α , kx̄ − x̄µ,p kp̄,α ,
α > 1, α1 + β1 =o1;



 n

 kȳ − ȳµ,p k · min kx̄k , kx̄ − x̄µ,p k
p̄,1 ;

∞ p̄,1

where
n
X n
X
xµ,p := pi xi , yµ,p := pi yi
i=1 i=1

and x̄µ,p , ȳ µ,p are the sequences with all components equal to xµ,p , yµ,p .

Proof. Firstly, let us observe that for any c ∈ R, one has Sonin’s identity

(5.112) Tn (p̄; x̄, ȳ) = Tn (p̄; x̄ − c̄, ȳ − ȳµ,p )


n n
!
X X
= pi (xi − c) yi − p j yj .
i=1 j=1

Taking the modulus and using Hölder’s inequality, we have


n
X
(5.113) |Tn (p̄; x̄, ȳ)| ≤ pi |xi − c| |yi − yµ,p |
i=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 101

max |xi − c| ni=1 pi |yi − yµ,p |


 P


 i=1,n





1
P 1

Pn α α n β β
 ( i=1 pi |xi − c| ) i=1 pi |yi − yµ,p | ,
 1 1


 Pn α > 1, α + β = 1;
 i=1 pi |xi − c| max |yi − yµ,p |


i=1,n



 kx̄ − c̄k∞ kȳ − ȳµ,p kp̄,1 ;



= kx̄ − c̄kp̄,α kȳ − ȳµ,p kp̄,β , α > 1, α1 + 1
β = 1;




kx̄ − c̄kp̄,1 kȳ − ȳµ,p k∞ .

Taking the inf over c ∈ R in (5.113), we deduce the second inequality in (5.111).
Since 
 kx̄kp̄,α ,
inf kx̄ − c̄kp̄,α ≤ for any α ∈ [1, ∞]
c∈R  kx̄ − x̄ k
µ,p p̄,α

the last part of (5.110) is also proved. 


For p̄ and x̄ as above, define
n n
!2
X X
Tn (p̄; x̄) := pi x2i − pi xi .
i=1 i=1

The following corollary holds [20].


Corollary 5.53. With the above assumptions we have
(5.114) 0 ≤ |Tn (p̄; x̄)|


 kx̄ − x̄µ,p kp̄,1 · inf kx̄ − c̄k∞ ;


 c∈R



≤ kx̄ − x̄µ,p kp̄,β · inf kx̄ − c̄kp̄,α , α > 1, α1 + 1
β = 1;
 c∈R



 kx̄ − x̄µ,p k∞ · inf kx̄ − c̄kp̄,1 ;


c∈R

 

 kx̄ − x̄µ,p kp̄,1 min kx̄k∞ , kx̄ − x̄µ,p k∞ ;



 n o

≤ kx̄ − x̄ k
µ,p p̄,β min kx̄k p̄,α , kx̄ − x̄ k
µ,p p̄,α ,
α > 1, α1 + β1 =o1;



 n

kx̄ − x̄µ,p k∞ · min kx̄kp̄,1 , kx̄ − x̄µ,p kp̄,1 .

Remark 5.54. If pi := n1 , i = 1, . . . , n, then from Theorem 5.52 and Corollary 5.53 we recap-
ture the results in [22].
The following reverse of the (CBS) −inequality holds [20].

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
102 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Theorem 5.55. Let ā, b̄ be two sequences of real numbers with ai 6= 0, i ∈ {1, . . . , n} . Then
one has the inequality
n n n
!2
X X X
(5.115) 0≤ a2i b2i − ai b i
i=1 i=1 i=1
 n " #
 n
bi X X
a a
ak k i

≤ inf max − c |ai |

c∈R i=1,n ai bk bi
i=1 k=1

bi
max


n
"
n
# 
 i=1,n
ai
X X ak ai 
≤ |ai | ak ×

bk bi Pn
i=1

k=1

 bi k=1 ak b k
 max − Pn .


i=1,n ai a2 k=1 k

Proof. By Corollary 5.53, we may state that


(5.116) 0 ≤ Tn (p̄; x̄)
≤ kx̄ − x̄µ,p kp̄,1 · inf kx̄ − c̄k∞
c∈R

 kx̄k∞ ,
≤ kx̄ − x̄µ,p kp̄,1 ×
 kx̄ − x̄ k .
µ,p ∞

For the choices


a2 bi
pi = Pn i 2
, xi = , i = 1, . . . , n;
k=1 ak ai
we get Pn Pn Pn 2
i=1 a2i 2
i=1 bi − ( i=1 ai b i )
Tn (p̄; x̄) = Pn 2 2
,
( k=1 ak )

n
X Xn
kx̄ − x̄µ,p kp̄,1 = pi xi − pj xj


i=1 j=1

n n
1 X
2 bi
1 X
= Pn ai − Pn aj b j

2 2
k=1 ak i=1 ai k=1 ak j=1

n n n
1 X X
2 2
X
= Pn a b a − a a b

i i k i j j
2 2

( k=1 ak ) i=1
k=1 j=1


n n
1 X X
= Pn |ai | ak (ak bi − ai bk )

2 2
( k=1 ak ) i=1
k=1
n n
1 X X ak ai
= Pn |ai | ak ,

2 bk bi
( k=1 a2k ) i=1
k=1

bi bi
kx̄ − c̄k∞ = max − c , kx̄k∞ = max
i=1,n ai i=1,n ai
and Pn
j=1 aj bj
b
i
kx̄ − x̄µ,p k∞ = max − Pn 2
.
i=1,n ai k=1 ak

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 103

Utilising the inequality (5.116) we deduce the desired result (5.115). 


The following result also holds [20].
1 1
Theorem 5.56. With the assumption in Theorem 5.55 and if α > 1, α
+ β = 1, then we have
the inequality:
n n n
!2
X X X
2 2
(5.117) 0≤ ai bi − ai b i
i=1 i=1 i=1
   β1 ! α1
n
n β n
a a
X X X
|ai |2−β ak k i  inf |ai |2−α |bi − cai |α

≤
b k b i c∈R
i=1 k=1 i=1
   1
n
n
X β β
X
|ai |2−β a a
ak k i 

≤
bk bi
i=1 k=1
 
n
 α1
2−α α
 P
|ai | |bi |




 i=1
×
 1
ak ai α α
 

 1 P n 2−α
Pn
i=1 |ai | k=1 ak bk bi .

 Pn
2
k=1 ak

Proof. By Corollary 5.53, we may state that


(5.118) 0 ≤ Tn (p̄; x̄)
≤ kx̄ − x̄µ,p kp̄,β · inf kx̄ − c̄kp̄,α
c∈R

 kx̄kp̄,α ,
≤ kx̄ − x̄µ,p kp̄,β ×
 kx̄ − x̄ k ,
µ,p p̄,α

for α > 1, α1 + β1 = 1.
For the choices
a2 bi
pi = Pn i 2
, xi = , i = 1, . . . , n;
k=1 ak ai
we get
 β  β1
n
X n
X
kx̄ − x̄µ,p kp̄,β =  pi xi − pj xj 


i=1 j=1
 Pn Pn β  β1
n 2
X a2 bi k=1 ak − ai j=1 aj bj
= Pn i 2 Pn 2 
i=1
a
k=1 k a i a
k=1 k
 β  β1
n n
1 X
2−β
X a a
= P 1+ 1
 |ai | ak k i  ,
bk bi

( nk=1 a2k ) β i=1
k=1

n
! α1 n
! α1
X α 1 X 2−α α
kx̄ − c̄kp̄,α = pi |xi − c| = P 1 |ai | |bi − cai | ,
n
i=1 ( k=1 a2k ) α i=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
104 S.S. D RAGOMIR

n
! α1
1 X 2−α α
kx̄kp̄,α = P 1 |ai | |bi |
( nk=1 a2k ) α i=1
and
n
n
X α ! α1
1 X a a
|ai |2−α ak k i

kx̄ − x̄µ,p kp̄,α = P .

1+ 1 bk bi
( nk=1 a2k ) α i=1 k=1

Utilising the inequality (5.118), we deduce the desired result (5.117). 
Finally, the following result also holds [20].
Theorem 5.57. With the assumptions in Theorem 5.55 we have the following reverse of the
(CBS) −inequality:
n n n
!2
X X X
(5.119) 0≤ a2i b2i − ai b i
i=1
i=1n i=1
n
" n #
b X X X
i
≤ max a2k − aj bj inf |ai | |bi − cai |

i=1,n ai c∈R
k=1 j=1 i=1
n n

b X X
i
≤ max a2k − aj b j

i=1,n ai
k=1 j=1
 n
P



 |ai bi |
 i=1
×

 1 Pn P n ak ai

 Pn
 |ai | ak .
k=1 ka 2
i=1 k=1 b k b i

Proof. By Corollary 5.53, we may state that


(5.120) 0 ≤ Tn (p̄; x̄)
≤ kx̄ − x̄µ,p k∞ · inf kx̄ − c̄kp̄,1
c∈R

 kx̄kp̄,1 ,
≤ kx̄ − x̄µ,p k∞
 kx̄ − x̄ k .
µ,p p̄,1

For the choices


a2 bi
pi = Pn i 2
, xi = , i = 1, . . . , n;
k=1 ak ai
we get

Xn
kx̄ − x̄µ,p k∞ = max xi − pj xj

i=1,n
j=1
Pn
b
i j=1 a j b j

= max − Pn

2
i=1,n ai
k=1 ak

n n
1 bi
X
2
X
= n max ak − aj b j ,

2
P
k=1 ak i=1,n ai k=1 j=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 105

n
X
kx̄ − c̄kp̄,1 = pi |xi − c|
i=1
n
a2i

X bi
= Pn − c
2
k=1 ak ai

i=1
n
1 X
= Pn |ai | |bi − cai | ,
k=1 a2k i=1

n n n
a2i

X X bi 1 X
kx̄kp̄,1 = pi |xi | = Pn
2
= Pn 2
|ai bi |
i=1 i=1 k=1 ak ai k=1 ak i=1

and
n n
1 X X
a a
ak k i .

kx̄ − x̄µ,p kp̄,1 = Pn |ai |

2 bk bi
( k=1 a2k ) i=1

k=1

Utilising the inequality (5.120) we deduce (5.119). 

5.16. Another Reverse Result via a Grüss Type Result. The following Grüss type inequality
has been obtained in [21].
Lemma 5.58. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ), b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be two sequences of real numbers and
assume that there are γ, Γ ∈ R such that
(5.121) −∞ < γ ≤ ai ≤ Γ < ∞ for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
Then for any p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn ) a nonnegative sequence with the property that ni=1 pi = 1, one
P
has the inequality

X n X n Xn 1 Xn Xn
(5.122) p i ai b i − p i ai pi bi ≤ (Γ − γ) p i bi − p k bk .

2


i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 k=1
1
The constant 2
is sharp in the sense that it cannot be replaced by a smaller constant.
Proof. We will give here a simpler direct proof based on Sonin’s identity. A simple calculation
shows that:
n n n n   n
!
X X X X γ+Γ X
(5.123) p i ai b i − p i ai p i bi = p i ai − bi − p k bk .
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1
2 k=1

By (5.121) we have

γ + Γ Γ−γ
ai − ≤ for all i ∈ {1, . . . , n}
2 2
and thus, by (5.123), on taking the modulus, we get

n n n n n
X X X X γ + Γ X
p i ai b i − p i ai p i bi ≤ p i ai − bi − p k bk

2


i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 k=1

n n
1 X X
≤ (Γ − γ) p i bi − p k bk .

2
i=1

k=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
106 S.S. D RAGOMIR

To prove the sharpness of the constant 12 , let us assume that (5.122) holds with a constant c > 0,
i.e.,

Xn n
X n
X n
X n
X
(5.124) p i ai b i − p i ai pi bi ≤ c (Γ − γ) p i bi − p k bk .



i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 k=1

provided ai satisfies (5.121).


If we choose n = 2 in (5.124) and take into account that
2
X 2
X 2
X
p i ai b i − p i ai pi bi = p1 p2 (a1 − a2 ) (b1 − b2 )
i=1 i=1 i=1

provided p1 + p2 = 1, p1 , p2 ∈ [0, 1] , and since


2
2

X X
p i bi − pk bk = p1 |(p1 + p2 ) b1 − p1 b1 − p2 b2 | + p2 |(p1 + p2 ) b2 − p1 b1 − p2 b2 |


i=1 k=1
= 2p1 p2 |b1 − b2 |

we deduce by (5.124)

(5.125) p1 p2 |a1 − a2 | |b1 − b2 | ≤ 2c (Γ − γ) |b1 − b2 | p1 p2 .

If we assume that p1 , p2 6= 0, b1 6= b2 and a1 = Γ, a2 = γ, then by (5.125) we deduce c ≥ 21 ,


which proves the sharpness of the constant 21 . 

The following corollary is a natural consequence of the above lemma.

Corollary 5.59. Assume that ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) satisfies the assumption (5.121) and p̄ is a
probability sequence. Then
n n
!2 n

n

X X 1 X X
(5.126) 0≤ pi a2i − p i ai ≤ (Γ − γ) p i ai − p k ak .

i=1 i=1
2 i=1

k=1

1
The constant 2
is best possible in the sense mentioned above.

The following reverse of the (CBS) −inequality may be stated.

Theorem 5.60. Assume that x̄ = (x1 , . . . , xn ) and ȳ = (y1 , . . . , yn ) are sequences of real
numbers with yi 6= 0 (i = 1, . . . , n) . If there exists the real numbers m, M such that
xi
(5.127) m≤ ≤ M for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} ,
yi
then we have the inequality
n n n
!2
X X X
(5.128) 0≤ x2i yi2 − xi yi
i=1 i=1 i=1

n n
1 X X xi yi
≤ (M − m) |yi | yk · .

2 xk y k
i=1 k=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 107

y2 xi
Proof. If we choose pi = Pn i
yk2
, ai = yi
for i = 1, . . . , n and γ = m, Γ = M in (5.126), we
k=1
deduce
Pn 2 n
!2
x 1 X
Pni=1 i2 − Pn xi yi
k=1 yk k=1 yk2 i=1

n n
1 1 X
2
x
i 1 X
≤ (M − m) Pn yi − Pn xk yk

2 2
2 k=1 yk i=1 yi k=1 yk k=1

n n n
1 1 X X
2
X
= (M − m) Pn |y | x y − y x y

2 i i k i k k
2 2

( k=1 yk ) i=1
k=1 k=1

n
n
1 1 X X xi yi
= (M − m) Pn |yi | yk · .

2 2 2 x y
( k=1 yk ) i=1
k=1
k k

giving the desired inequality (5.128). 

R EFERENCES
[1] R. FRUCHT, Sobre algunas disigualdades: Observación relative a la solución del Problema No. 21,
indicada par el Ing. Ernesto M. Saleme (in Spanish), Math. Notae, 3 (1943), 41–46.
[2] G.S. WATSON, Serial Correlation in Regression Analysis, Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. of Experimental
Statistics, North Carolina State College, Raleigh; Univ. of North Carolina, Mimograph Ser., No.
49, 1951.
[3] G.S. WATSON, Serial correlation in regression analysis, I, Biometrika, 42 (1955), 327–341.
[4] G.S. WATSON, A method for discovering Kantorovich-type inequalities and a probabilistic inter-
pretation, Linear Algebra Appl., 97 (1987), 211–217.
[5] G.S. WATSON, G. ALPARGU and G.P.H. STYAN, Some comments on six inequalities associated
with the inefficiency of ordinary least squares with one regressor, Linear Algebra and its Appl., 264
(1997), 13–54.
[6] G. PÓLYA and G. SZEGÖ, Aufgaben und Lehrsütze ans der Analysis, Band I: Reihen, Integral-
rechnung, Funktiontheorie (in German), 4th Ed., Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1970 (Original version:
Julius Springer, Berlin, 1925).
[7] G. PÓLYA and G. SZEGÖ, Problems and Theorems in Analysis, Volume 1: Series, Integral Calcu-
lus, Theory of Functions (in English), translated from german by D. Aeppli, corrected printing of
the revised translation of the fourth German edition, Springer Verlag, New York, 1972.
[8] W. GREUB AND W. RHEINBOLDT, On a generalisation of an inequality of L.V. Kantorovich,
Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 10 (1959), 407–415.
[9] S.S. DRAGOMIR, A generalisation of Cassel’s and Greub-Reinboldt’s inequalities in inner product
spaces, RGMIA Res. Rep. Coll., 6 (2003), Supplement. [ONLINE: http://rgmia.vu.edu.
au/v6(E).html]
[10] S.S. DRAGOMIR, A counterpart of Schwartz’s inequality in inner product spaces, RGMIA Res.
Rep. Coll., 6 (2003), Supplement, Article 18. [ONLINE: http://rgmia.vu.edu.au/v6(E)
.html]
[11] S.S. DRAGOMIR AND G.L. BOOTH, Grüss-Lupaş type inequality and its applications for the
estimation of p-moments of guessing mappings, Math. Comm., 5 (2000), 117–126.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
108 S.S. D RAGOMIR

[12] S.S. DRAGOMIR, Some counterpart inequalities in terms of forward difference for
(CBS) −inequality, submitted.
[13] S.S. DRAGOMIR, A Grüss type inequality for sequences of vectors in normed linear spaces and
applications, submitted.
[14] S.S. DRAGOMIR, Another Grüss type inequality for sequences of vectors in normed linear spaces
and applications, J. Comp. Anal. & Applic., 4(2) (2002), 155–172.
[15] D. ANDRICA AND C. BADEA, Grüss’ inequality for positive linear functionals, Periodica Mat.
Hungarica, 19(2) (1988), 155–167.
[16] A.W. ROBERTS AND D.E. VARBERG, Convex Functions, Academic Press, New York, 1973.
[17] A. LUPAŞ, A remark on the Schweitzer and Kantorovich inequalities, Publ. Elek. Fak. Univ.
Beograde, Ser. Mat. i Fiz., 383 (1972), 13–14.
[18] P. SCHWEITZER, An inequality about the arithmetic mean (Hungarian), Math. Phys. Lapok (Bu-
dapest), 23 (1914), 257–261.
[19] J.B. DIAZ AND F.T. METCALF, Stronger forms of a class of inequalities of G. Pólya – G. Szegö
and L.V. Kantorovich, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., 69 (1963), 415–418.
[20] P. CERONE AND S.S. DRAGOMIR, New inequalities for the Čebyšev functional involving two
n−tuples of real numbers and applications, RGMIA Res. Rep. Coll., 5(3) (2002), Article 4. [ON-
LINE: http://rgmia.vu.edu.au/v5n3.html]
[21] P. CERONE AND S.S. DRAGOMIR, A refinement of the Grüss inequality and applications, RGMIA
Res. Rep. Coll., 5(2) (2002), Article 2. [ONLINE: http://rgmia.vu.edu.au/v5n2.html]
[22] S.S. DRAGOMIR, New inequalities for the weighted Čebyšev functionals and applications for the
(CBS) −inequality, in preparation.
[23] O. SHISHA AND B. MOND, Bounds on differences of means, Inequalities, Academic Press Inc.,
New York, 1967, 293–308.
[24] D. ZAGIER, A converse to Cauchy’s inequality, Amer. Math. Month., 102(10) (1995), 919–920.
[25] D. ZAGIER, An inequality converse to that of Cauchy (Dutch), Indag. Math., 39(4) (1997), 349–
351.
[26] J. PEČARIĆ, The inequalities of Zagier and Čebyšev, Arch. Math., (Basel), 64(5) (1995), 415–417.
[27] H. ALZER, On a converse Cauchy inequality of D. Zagier, Arch. Math., (Basel), 58(2) (1995),
157–159.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 109

6. R ELATED I NEQUALITIES
6.1. Ostrowski’s Inequality for Real Sequences. In 1951, A.M. Ostrowski [2, p. 289] gave
the following result related to the (CBS) −inequality for real sequences (see also [1, p. 92]).
Theorem 6.1. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) and b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be two non-proportional sequences
of real numbers. Let x̄ = (x1 , . . . , xn ) be a sequence of real numbers such that
n
X n
X
(6.1) ai xi = 0 and bi xi = 1.
i=1 i=1

Then
n Pn 2
i=1 ai
X
(6.2) x2i ≥ Pn 2
Pn 2
Pn 2
i=1 i=1 ai b
i=1 i − ( i=1 ai b i )
with equality if and only if
Pn Pn
bk i=1 a2i − ak
i=1 ai bi
(6.3) xk = Pn 2
Pn 2
P n 2
i=1 ai i=1 bi − ( i=1 ai bi )

for any k ∈ {1, . . . , n} .


Proof. We shall follow the proof in [1, p. 93 – p. 94].
Let
Xn X n n
X
2 2
(6.4) A= ai , B = bi , C = ai b i
i=1 i=1 i=1

and
Abi − Cai
(6.5) yi = for any i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
AB − C 2
It is easy to see that the sequence ȳ = (y1 , . . . , yn ) as defined by (6.5) satisfies (6.1).
Any sequence x̄ = (x1 , . . . , xn ) that satisfies (6.1) fulfills the equality
n n
X X (Abi − Cai ) A
xi yi = xi · 2
= ;
i=1 i=1
AB − C AB − C 2
so, in particular
n
X A
yi2 = .
i=1
AB − C 2
Any sequence x̄ = (x1 , . . . , xn ) that satisfies (6.1) therefore satisfies
n
X n
X n
X
(6.6) x2i − yi2 = (xi − yi )2 ≥ 0,
i=1 i=1 i=1

and thus
n n
X X A
x2i ≥ yi2 =
i=1 i=1
AB − C 2
and the inequality (6.2) is proved.
From (6.6) it follows that equality holds in (6.1) iff xi = yi for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n}, and the
theorem is completely proved. 

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
110 S.S. D RAGOMIR

6.2. Ostrowski’s Inequality for Complex Sequences. The following result that points out a
natural generalisation of Ostrowski’s inequality for complex numbers holds [3].
Theorem 6.2. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) and x̄ = (x1 , . . . , xn ) be sequences of

complex numbers. If ā and b̄, where b̄ = b̄1 , . . . , b̄n , are not proportional and
n
X
(6.7) xi āi = 0;
i=1
X n
(6.8) xi b̄i = 1,



i=1

then one has the inequality


n Pn
X |ai |2
(6.9) |xi |2 ≥ Pn i=1
2
|ai |2
Pn
|bi |2 − ni=1 ai b̄i
P
i=1 i=1 i=1
with equality iff
"Pn #
b ā
k k
(6.10) xi = µ bi − Pnk=1 2 · ai , i ∈ {1, . . . , n}
k=1 |a k |
and µ ∈ C with
Pn
k=1 |ak |2
(6.11) |µ| = Pn 2 .
|ak |2
Pn
|bk |2 − nk=1 ak b̄k
P
k=1 k=1

Proof. Recall the (CBS) −inequality for complex sequences


n n
n 2
X X X
(6.12) |uk |2 |vk |2 ≥ uk v̄k


k=1 k=1 k=1

with equality iff there is a complex number α ∈ C such that


(6.13) uk = αvk , k = 1, . . . , n.
If we apply (6.12) for
Pn
zi c̄i
uk = zk − Pni=1 2 · ck ,
|ci |
Pi=1
n
di c̄i
vk = dk − Pni=1 2 · ck , where c̄ 6= 0 and c̄, d̄, z̄ ∈ Cn ,
i=1 |ci |
we have
n
Pn 2 n Pn 2
X z c̄
i i
X d c̄
i i

(6.14) zk − Pni=1 2 · ck dk − Pni=1 2 · ck

i=1 |ci | i=1 |ci |

k=1 k=1

n Pn ! Pn ! 2
X
i=1 zi c̄ i i=1 d i c̄ i

≥ zk − Pn · ck dk − Pn · ck

2 2
i=1 |ci | i=1 |ci |

k=1

with equality iff there is a β ∈ C such that


Pn Pn !
zi c̄i d i c̄ i
(6.15) zk = Pni=1 2 · ck + β dk − Pni=1 2 · ck .
i=1 |ci | i=1 |ci |

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 111

Since a simple calculation shows that


2 P
n Pn n 2 Pn 2 Pn 2
z c̄ k=1 |zk | k=1 |ck | − | k=1 zk c̄k |

i=1 i i
X
zk − Pn · c = ,

2 k
2 2
Pn
k=1
i=1 |c i | |c
k=1 k |
2 P
n P n n 2 Pn 2 Pn 2
i=1 di c̄i k=1 |dk | k=1 |ck | − | k=1 dk c̄k |
X
dk − Pn 2 · ck =

Pn 2

k=1 i=1 |ci | |ck |2 k=1
and
n Pn ! Pn !
i=1 zi c̄i i=1 di c̄i
X
zk − Pn 2 · ck dk − Pn 2 · ck
k=1 i=1 |ci | i=1 |ci |
Pn ¯ Pn |ck |2 − Pn zk c̄k · Pn ck d¯k
k=1 zk dk · k=1 k=1 k=1
= Pn 2 2
i=1 |ci |
then by (6.12) we deduce
 n 2   n n 2 
X n Xn n
2 2 X  X 2
X 2 X
(6.16) |zk | |ck | − zk c̄k |dk | |ck | − dk c̄k 


k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1
n n n n
2
X X X X
≥ zk d¯k · |ck |2 − zk c̄k ck d¯k


k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

with equality iff there is a β ∈ C such that (6.15) holds.


If ā, x̄, b̄ satisfy (6.7) and (6.8), then by (6.16) and (6.15) for the choices z̄ = x̄, c̄ = ā and
d̄ = b̄, we deduce (6.9) with equality iff there is a µ ∈ C such that
Pn !
a b̄
i i
xk = µ bk − Pni=1 2 · ak ,
i=1 |ai |

and, by (6.8),
!
n Pn
X a b̄
i=1 i i

(6.17) µ b − · a · b̄ k = 1.

k Pn 2 k
i=1 |ai |

k=1

Since (6.17) is clearly equivalent to (6.15), the theorem is completely proved. 


6.3. Another Ostrowski’s Inequality. In his book from 1951, [2, p. 130], A.M. Ostrowski
proved the following inequality as well (see also [1, p. 94]).
Theorem 6.3. Let ā, b̄, x̄ be sequences of real numbers so that ā 6= 0 and
X n
(6.18) x2k = 1
k=1
n
X
(6.19) ak xk = 0.
k=1

Then
n
!2
Pn Pn 2
2
b2n − ( nk=1 ak bk )
P
k=1 ak
X
k=1
(6.20) Pn 2
≥ bk x k .
k=1 ak k=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
112 S.S. D RAGOMIR

If ā and b̄ are non-proportional, then equality holds in (6.20) iff


bk ni=1 a2i − ak ni=1 ai bi
P P
(6.21) xk = q · hP i1 ,
1
Pn 2 2 n 2
Pn 2 Pn 2 2
( k=1 ak ) i=1 ai i=1 bi − ( i=1 ai bi )

k ∈ {1, . . . , n} , q ∈ {−1, 1} .
We may extend this result for sequences of complex numbers as follows [4].
Theorem 6.4. Let ā, b̄, x̄ be sequences of complex numbers so that ā 6= 0, ā, b̄ are not propor-
tional, and
Xn
(6.22) |xk |2 = 1
k=1
n
X
(6.23) xk āk = 0.
k=1

Then
Pn 2 n 2
2 Pn 2
Pn
k=1 |ak | |b | − a b̄
k=1 k k=1 k k
X
(6.24) ≥ x k k .


Pn 2
k=1 |ak |

k=1

The equality holds in (6.24) iff


Pn !
b ā
i i
(6.25) xk = β bk − Pni=1 2 · ak , k ∈ {1, . . . , n} ;
i=1 |ai |

where β ∈ C is such that


Pn 2  21
k=1 |ak |
(6.26) |β| =  .
Pn 2 Pn 2
Pn 2  12
k=1 |ak | |b
k=1 k | − a b̄
k=1 k k

Proof. In Subsection 6.2, we proved the following inequality:


 n 2   n n 2 
Xn Xn X X Xn X
2 2 2 2
(6.27) |zk | |ck | − zk c̄k |dk | |ck | − dk c̄k 
 

k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1
n n n n
2
X X X X
≥ zk d¯k · |ck |2 − zk c̄k ck d¯k


k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

for any z̄, c̄, d̄ sequences of complex numbers, with equality iff there is a β ∈ C such that
Pn Pn !
z i c̄ i d i c̄ i
(6.28) zk = Pni=1 2 · ck + β dk − Pni=1 2 · ck
i=1 |ci | i=1 |ci |

for each k ∈ {1, . . . , n} .


If in (6.27) we choose z̄ = x̄, c̄ = ā and d̄ = b̄ and take into consideration that (6.22) and
(6.23) hold, then we get
 n 2  n 2 !2
Xn n
X Xn n
X X X Xn
|xk |2 |ak |2  |bk |2 |ak |2 − bk āk  ≥ xk b̄k |ak |2


k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 113

which is clearly equivalent to (6.24).


By (6.28) the equality holds in (6.24) iff
Pn !
b ā
i i
xk = β bk − Pni=1 2 · ak , k ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
i=1 |ai |

Since x̄ should satisfy (6.22), we get


n
X
1= |xk |2
k=1
2
n Pn
X 2 i=1 b i ā i

= |β| bk − Pn · ak

2
i=1 |ai |

k=1
" n #
Pn 2
X | b ā
k k |
= |β|2 |bk |2 − Pk=1n 2
k=1 k=1 |ak |

from where we deduce that β satisfies (6.26). 


6.4. Fan and Todd Inequalities. In 1955, K. Fan and J. Todd [5] proved the following in-
equality (see also [1, p. 94]).
Theorem 6.5. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) and b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be two sequences of real numbers
such that ai bj 6= aj bi for i 6= j. Then
 2
Pn 2  X n n
i=1 ai n X aj
(6.29) ≤  .

Pn 2 Pn 2 Pn 2 2 a b − a b

( i=1 ai ) ( i=1 bi ) − ( i=1 ai bi ) i=1 j=1 j i i j
j6=i

Proof. We shall follow the proof in [1, p. 94 – p. 95].


Define  −1 X
n aj
xi := (1 ≤ i ≤ n) .
2 aj b i − ai b j
j6=i
The terms in the sum on the right-hand side
 
n  n
−1 X n
X n X ai aj
x i ai =

2 
aj b i − ai b j

i=1 i=1 j=1
j6=i

can be grouped in pairs of the form


 −1  
n ai aj aj ai
+ (i 6= j)
2 aj b i − ai b j ai b j − aj b i
and the sum of each such pair vanishes.
Hence, we deduce
Xn n
X
ai xi = 0 and bi xi = 1.
i=1 i=1
Applying Ostrowski’s inequality (see Section 6.1) we deduce the desired result (6.29). 
A weighted version of the result is also due to K. Fan and J. Todd [5] (see also [1, p. 95]).
We may state the result as follows.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
114 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Theorem 6.6. Let pij (i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} , i 6= j) be real numbers such that
(6.30) pij = pji , for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} with i 6= j.
P
Denote P := 1≤i<j≤n pij and assume that P 6= 0. Then for any two sequences of real numbers
ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) and b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) satisfying ai bj 6= aj bi (i 6= j) , we have
 2
Pn 2 n n
i=1 ai 1 X X pij aj 
(6.31) Pn 2 Pn 2 Pn 2 ≤ 2  .
P a b − a b

a
i=1 i b
i=1 i − ( i=1 a i b i ) i=1 j=1 j i i j
j6=i

6.5. Some Results for Asynchronous Sequences. If S (R) is the linear space of real se-
quences, S+ (R) is the subset of nonnegative sequences and Pf (N) denotes the set of finite
parts of N, then for the functional T : Pf (N) × S+ (R) × S 2 (R) → R,
! 21
X X X
2 2

(6.32) T I, p̄, ā, b̄ := p i ai p i bi − p i ai b i


i∈I i∈I i∈I
we may state the following result [6, Theorem 3].

Theorem 6.7. If |ā| = (|ai |)i∈N and b̄ = (|bi |)i∈N are asynchronous, i.e.,
(|ai | − |aj |) (|bi | − |bj |) ≤ 0
for all i, j ∈ N, then
P P
 i∈I pi |ai | i∈I pi |bi | X
(6.33) T I, p̄, ā, b̄ ≥ P − pi |ai bi | ≥ 0.
i∈I pi i∈I

Proof. We shall follow the proof in [6].


Consider the inequalities
! 12
X X X
pi pi a2i ≥ pi |ai |
i∈I i∈I i∈I
and ! 12
X X X
pi pi b2i ≥ pi |bi |
i∈I i∈I i∈I
which by multiplication give
! 12 P P
X X
i∈I pi |ai | i∈I pi |bi |
pi a2i pi b2i ≥ P .
i∈I i∈I i∈I pi

Now, by the definition of T and by Čebyšev’s inequality for asynchronous sequences, we have
P P
p |a
i i | p |b
i∈I i i | X
T I, p̄, ā, b̄ ≥ i∈I P

− p i ai b i

p
i∈I i
i∈I

P P
pi |ai | i∈I pi |bi | X
≥ i∈I P − pi |ai | |bi |
i∈I pi i∈I
≥0
and the theorem is proved. 
The following result also holds [6, Theorem 4].

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 115


Theorem 6.8. If |ā| and b̄ are synchronous, i.e., (|ai | − |aj |) (|bi | − |bj |) ≥ 0 for all i, j ∈ N,
then one has the inequality
 
(6.34) 0 ≤ T I, p̄, ā, b̄ ≤ T I, p̄, āb̄, 1 ,
where 1 = (ei )i∈N , ei = 1, i ∈ N.

Proof. We have, by Čebyšev’s inequality for the synchronous sequences ā2 = (a2i )i∈N and
b̄2 = (b2i )i∈N , that
! 21
X X X
pi a2i pi b2i

T I, p̄, ā, b̄ = − p i ai b i


i∈I i∈I i∈I
! 12
X X X
2 2
≤ p i ai b i pi − p i ai b i


i∈I i∈I i∈I

= T I, p̄, āb̄, 1
and the theorem is proved. 

6.6. An Inequality via A − G − H Mean Inequality. The following result holds [6, Theorem
5].
Theorem 6.9. Let ā and b̄ be sequences of positive real numbers. Define

a2 b2i
i
(6.35) ∆i = P


2 2
P
i∈I ai i∈I bi

where i ∈ I and I is a finite part of N. Then one has the inequality
2 "   # P 21P 2
Y ai ∆i i∈I ai i∈I bi
P
a b
i∈I i i
(6.36) P 2
P 2

i∈I ai i∈I bi i∈I
bi
2
b2
P P
i∈I ai
≥ P a3 Pi∈I b3i .
i i
i∈I bi i∈I ai

The equality holds in all the inequalities from (6.36) iff there exists a positive number k > 0
such that ai = kbi for all i ∈ I.
Proof. We shall follow the proof in [6].
We will use the AGH−inequality
! P1
I
1 X Y PI
(6.37) pi xi ≥ xpi i ≥P pi ,
PI i∈I i∈I i∈I xi
P
where pi > 0, xi ≥ 0 for all i ∈ I, where PI := i∈I pi > 0.
We remark that the equality holds in (6.37) iff xi = xj for each i, j ∈ I.
Choosing pi = a2i and xi = abii (i ∈ I) in (6.37), then we get
P   P a2i 2 P 2
a b
i∈I i i
Y bi i∈I ai i∈I ai
(6.38) P 2
≥ ≥ P a3i
i∈I ai i∈I
ai
i∈I bi

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
116 S.S. D RAGOMIR

ai
and by pi = b2i and xi = bi
, we also have
P   P b2i 2 P 2
a b
i∈I i i
Y ai i∈I bi i∈I bi
(6.39) P 2
≥ ≥ P b3i .
i∈I bi i∈I
b i
i∈I ai
If we multiply (6.38) with (6.39) we easily deduce the desired inequality (6.36).
The case of equality follows by the same case in the arithmetic mean – geometric mean –
harmonic mean inequality. We omit the details. 
The following corollary holds [6, Corollary 5.1].
Corollary 6.10. With ā and b̄ as above, one has the inequality
P  12
a3i P b3i P 2
P 2
i∈I bi i∈I ai i∈I ai i∈I bi
(6.40)  P  2
 ≥ P  2 .
i∈I a i b i i∈I a i b i

The equality holds in (6.40) iff there is a k > 0 such that ai = kbi , i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
6.7. A Related Result via Jensen’s Inequality for Power Functions. The following result
also holds [6, Theorem 6].
Theorem 6.11. Let ā and b̄ be sequences of positive real numbers and p ≥ 1. If I is a finite
part of N, then one has the inequality
2 "P #1
P 2−p p P p 2−p p
a b
i i a
i∈I i b i a b
(6.41) P i∈I2 P 2
≤ P 2
Pi∈I 2i i .
a
i∈I i i∈I ib a
i∈I i i∈I bi

The equality holds in (6.41) if and only if there exists a k > 0 such that ai = kbi for all i ∈ I.
If p ∈ (0, 1) , the inequality in (6.41) reverses.
Proof. We shall follow the proof in [6].
By Jensen’s inequality for the convex mapping f : R+ → R,
f (x) = xp , p ≥ 1
one has
p
pi xpi
P P
i∈I pi xi i∈I
(6.42) ≤ ,
PI PI
P
where PI := i∈I pi , pi > 0, xi ≥ 0, i ∈ I. The equality holds in (6.42) iff xi = xj for all
i, j ∈ I.
Now, choosing in (6.42) pi = a2i , xi = abii , we get
! p1
P P 2−p p
a b
i i a
i∈I i b i
(6.43) Pi∈I 2 ≤ P 2
a
i∈I i a
i∈I i
ai
and for pi = b2i , xi = bi
, the inequality (6.42) also gives
! p1
P P p 2−p
ai b i a
i∈I i ib
(6.44) Pi∈I 2 ≤ P 2
.
i∈I bi i∈I bi

By multiplying the inequalities (6.43) and (6.44), we deduce the desired result from (6.42).
The case of equality follows by the fact that in (6.42) the equality holds iff (xi )i∈I is constant.
If p ∈ (0, 1) , then a reverse inequality holds in (6.42) giving the corresponding result in
(6.41). 

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 117

Remark 6.12. If p = 2, then (6.41) becomes the (CBS) −inequality.


6.8. Inequalities Derived from the Double Sums Case. Let A = (aij )i,j=1,n and B = (bij )i,j=1,n
be two matrices of real numbers. The following inequality is known as the (CBS) −inequality
for double sums
n
!2 n n
X X X
2
(6.45) aij bij ≤ aij b2ij
i,j=1 i,j=1 i,j=1

with equality iff there is a real number r such that aij = rbij for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
The following inequality holds [7, Theorem 5.2].
Theorem 6.13. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) and b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be sequences of real numbers. Then
!2 !2
n n n n n n
X X X X X X
a2k + b2k − 2

(6.46)
ak + bk − 2n ak bk ≤ n ak bk .
k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

Proof. We shall follow the proof from [7].


Applying (6.45) for aij = ai − bj , bij = bi − aj and taking into account that
n n n
!2 n
!2
X X X X
(ai − bj ) (bi − aj ) = 2n ak b k − ak − bk
i,j=1 k=1 k=1 k=1
n
X n
X n
X n
X
(ai − bj )2 = n a2k + b2k − 2

ak bk
i,j=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

and
n
X n
X n
X n
X
2
a2k b2k

(bi − aj ) = n + −2 ak bk ,
i,j=1 k=1 k=1 k=1

we may deduce the desired inequality (6.46). 


The following result also holds [7, Theorem 5.3].
Theorem 6.14. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ), b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) , c̄ = (c1 , . . . , cn ) and d̄ = (d1 , . . . , dn )
be sequences of real numbers. Then one has the inequality:
  Pn Pn 2
i=1 ai ci i=1 ai di
(6.47) det  P 
n Pn
i=1 bi ci i=1 bi di
 Pn 2 Pn   Pn 2 Pn 
i=1 ai i=1 ai bi i=1 ci i=1 ci di
≤ det  P  × det  .
n Pn 2 Pn Pn 2
i=1 ai bi i=1 bi i=1 ci di i=1 di

Proof. We shall follow the proof in [7].


Applying (6.45) for aij = ai bj − aj bi , bij = ci dj − cj di and using Cauchy-Binet’s identity [1,
p. 85]
n n n n
! n !
1 X X X X X
(6.48) (ai bj − aj bi ) (ci dj − cj di ) = ai c i bi di − ai di bi c i
2 i,j=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
118 S.S. D RAGOMIR

and Lagrange’s identity [1, p. 84]


n n n n
!2
1X 2
X
2
X X
(6.49) (ai bj − aj bi ) = ai b2i − ai b i ,
2 i,j=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

we deduce the desired result (6.47). 


6.9. A Functional Generalisation for Double Sums. The following result holds [7, Theorem
5.5].
Theorem 6.15. Let A be a subset of real numbers R, f : A → R and ā = (a1 , . . . , an ),
b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) sequences of real numbers with the property that
(i) ak bi , a2i , b2k ∈ A for any i, k ∈ {1, . . . , n} ;
(ii) f (a2k ) , f (b2k ) ≥ 0 for any k ∈ {1, . . . , n} ;
(iii) f 2 (ak bi ) ≤ f (a2k ) f (b2i ) for any i, k ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
Then one has the inequality
" n #2 n n
X X X
2 2
f b2k .

(6.50) f (ak bi ) ≤ n f ak
k,i=1 k=1 k=1

Proof. We will follow the proof in [7].


Using the assumption (iii) and the (CBS) −inequality for double sums, we have

Xn X n
(6.51) f (ak bi ) ≤ |f (ak bi )|



k,i=1 k,i=1
n
X  1
f a2k f b2i 2
 

k,i=1

n
!2 n
!2  12
1  1
 X X 
f a2k 2 f b2i 2
  

 
k,i=1 k,i=1
" n n
# 12
X X
2 2

= f ak f bi
k,i=1 k,i=1
" n
# 12 " n
# 12
X X
2 2
 
=n f ak f bk
k=1 k=1
which is clearly equivalent to (6.50). 
The following corollary is a natural consequence of the above theorem [7, Corollary 5.6].
Corollary 6.16. Let A, f and ā be as above. If
(i) ak ai ∈ A for any i, k ∈ {1, . . . , n} ;
(ii) f (a2k ) ≥ 0 for any k ∈ {1, . . . , n} ;
(iii) f 2 (ak ai ) ≤ f (a2k ) f (a2i ) for any i, k ∈ {1, . . . , n} ,
then one has the inequality

X n X n
f a2k .

(6.52) f (a a ) ≤ n

k i

k,i=1 k=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 119

The following particular inequalities also hold [7, p. 23].


(1) If ϕ : N → N is Euler’s indicator and s (n) denotes the sum of all relatively prime
numbers including and less than n, then for any ā = (a1 , . . . , an ), b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn )
sequences of natural numbers, one has the inequalities
" n
#2 n n
X X X
2
a2k ϕ b2k ;

(6.53) ϕ (ak bi ) ≤n ϕ
k,i=1 k=1 k=1
Xn n
X
ϕ a2k ;

(6.54) ϕ (ak ai ) ≤ n
k,i=1 k=1
" n
#2 n n
X X X
2
a2k s b2k ;

(6.55) s (ak bi ) ≤n s
k,i=1 k=1 k=1
Xn n
X
s a2k .

(6.56) s (ak ai ) ≤ n
k,i=1 k=1

(2) If a > 1 and ā = (a1 , . . . , an ), b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) are sequences of real numbers, then
" n
#2 n n
X X X
2
a2k expa b2k ;

(6.57) expa (ak bi ) ≤n expa
k,i=1 k=1 k=1
Xn n
X
expa a2k ;

(6.58) expa (ak ai ) ≤ n
k,i=1 k=1

(3) If ā and b̄ are sequences of real numbers such that ak , bk ∈ (−1, 1) (k ∈ {1, . . . , n}) ,
then one has the inequalities:
" n
#2 n n
X 1 X 1 X 1
(6.59) ≤ n2 m m,
k,i=1
(1 − ak bi )m k=1
(1 − a2k ) k=1 (1 − b2k )
n n
X 1 1
X
(6.60) m ≤ n m,
k,i=1
(1 − ak ai ) k=1
(1 − a2k )

where m > 0.

6.10. A (CBS) −Type Result for Lipschitzian Functions. The following result was obtained
in [8, Theorem].

Theorem 6.17. Let f : I ⊆ R → R be a Lipschitzian function with the constant M, i.e., it


satisfies the condition

(6.61) |f (x) − f (y)| ≤ M |x − y| for any x, y ∈ I.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
120 S.S. D RAGOMIR

If ā = (a1 , . . . , an ), b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) are sequences of real numbers with ai bj ∈ I for any


i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} , then

Xn n
X
(6.62) 0≤ f (ai bj ) |f (ai bj )| − |f (aj bi )| f (ai bj )


i,j=1 i,j=1
Xn n
X
≤ f 2 (aj bi ) − f (ai bj ) f (aj bi )
i,j=1 i,j=1
 !2 
Xn n
X n
X
2 2
≤M ai b2i − ai b i .
i=1 i=1 i=1

Proof. We shall follow the proof in [8].


Since f is Lipschitzian with the constant M, we have
(6.63) 0 ≤ ||f (ai bj )| − |f (aj bi )|| ≤ |f (ai bj ) − f (aj bi )| ≤ M |ai bj − aj bi |
for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} , giving
(6.64) 0 ≤ |(|f (ai bj )| − |f (aj bi )|) (f (ai bj ) − f (aj bi ))|
≤ (f (ai bj ) − f (aj bi ))2 ≤ M 2 (ai bj − aj bi )2
for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
The inequality (6.64) is obviously equivalent to

(6.65) |f (ai bj )| f (ai bj ) + |f (aj bi )| f (aj bi ) − |f (ai bj )| f (ai bj ) − |f (aj bi )| f (aj bi )
≤ f 2 (ai bj ) − 2f (ai bj ) f (aj bi ) + f 2 (aj bi )
≤ M 2 a2i b2j − 2ai bi aj bj + a2j b2i


for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} . Summing over i and j from 1 to n in (6.65) and taking into account
that:
Xn n
X
|f (ai bj )| f (ai bj ) = |f (aj bi )| f (ai bj ) ,
i,j=1 i,j=1
X n X n
|f (ai bj )| f (aj bi ) = |f (aj bi )| f (ai bj ) ,
i,j=1 i,j=1
n
X X n
f 2 (ai bj ) = f 2 (aj bi ) ,
i,j=1 i,j=1

we deduce the desired inequality. 


The following particular inequalities hold [8, p. 27 – p. 28].
(1) Let x̄ = (x1 , . . . , xn ) , ȳ = (y1 , . . . , yn ) be sequences of real numbers such that 0 ≤
|xi | ≤ M1 , 0 ≤ |yi | ≤ M2 , i ∈ {1, . . . , n} . Then for any r ≥ 1 one has
n n n
!2
X X X
(6.66) 0≤ x2r
i yi2r − |xi yi |r
i=1 i=1 i=1
 !2 
Xn n
X n
X
2 2(r−1)  2
≤ r (M1 M2 ) xi yi2 − |xi yi | .
i=1 i=1 i=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 121

(2) If 0 < m1 ≤ |xi | , 0 < m2 ≤ |yi | , i ∈ {1, . . . , n} and r ∈ (0, 1) , then


n n n
!2
X X X
(6.67) 0≤ x2r
i yi2r − |xi yi |r
i=1 i=1 i=1
 !2 
2 n n n
r X
2
X X
≤  xi yi2 − |xi yi | .
(m1 m2 )2(r−1) i=1 i=1 i=1

(3) If 0 ≤ |xi | ≤ M1 , 0 ≤ |yi | ≤ M2 , i ∈ {1, . . . , n} , then for any natural number k one
has

X n Xn
2k+1
(6.68) 0≤ x2k+1 |x | yi2k+1 |yi |2k+1

i i

i=1 i=1
n n

X X
2k+1 2k+1
− x2k+1
i |y i | y 2k+1
i |x i |

i=1 i=1
n n n
!2
X 2(2k+1)
X 2(2k+1)
X
≤ xi yi − x2k+1
i yi2k+1
i=1 i=1 i=1
 !2 
Xn n
X n
X
2 4k  2
≤ (2k + 1) (M1 M2 ) xi yi2 − |xi yi | .
i=1 i=1 i=1

(4) If 0 < m1 ≤ xi , 0 < m2 ≤ yi , for any i ∈ {1, . . . , n} , then one has the inequality
n   2 "X n  # 2
X xi xi
(6.69) 0≤n ln − ln
i=1
yi i=1
yi
 !2 
n n n
1 X X X
≤ 2
 x2i yi2 − xi yi  .
(m1 m2 ) i=1 i=1 i=1

6.11. An Inequality via Jensen’s Discrete Inequality. The following result holds [9].
Theorem 6.18. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ), b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be two sequences of real numbers with
ai 6= 0, i ∈ {1, . . . , n} . If f : I ⊆ R → R is a convex (concave) function on I and abii ∈ I for
each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} , and w̄ = (w1 , . . . , wn ) is a sequence of nonnegative real numbers, then
Pn  
2 bi
 Pn
wi ai bi
 w
i=1 i ia f ai
i=1
(6.70) f Pn 2
≤ (≥) Pn 2
.
i=1 wi ai i=1 wi ai

Proof. We shall use Jensen’s discrete inequality for convex (concave) functions
n
! n
1 X 1 X
(6.71) f pi xi ≤ (≥) pi f (xi ) ,
Pn i=1 Pn i=1

where pi ≥ 0 with Pn := ni=1 pi > 0 and xi ∈ I for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .


P
If in (6.71) we choose xi = abii and pi = wi a2i , then by (6.71) we deduce the desired result
(6.70). 
The following corollary holds [9].

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
122 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Corollary 6.19. Let ā and b̄ be sequences of positive real numbers and assume that w̄ is as
above. If p ∈ (−∞, 0) ∪ [1, ∞) (p ∈ (0, 1)) , then one has the inequality
n
!p n
!p−1 n
X X X
(6.72) wi ai bi ≤ (≥) wi a2i wi ai2−p bpi .
i=1 i=1 i=1

Proof. Follows by Theorem 6.18 applied for convex (concave) function f : [0, ∞) → R,
f (x) = xp , p ∈ (−∞, 0) ∪ [1, ∞) (p ∈ (0, 1)) . 
Remark 6.20. If p = 2, then by (6.72) we deduce the (CBS) −inequality.
6.12. An Inequality via Lah-Ribarić Inequality. The following reverse of Jensen’s discrete
inequality was obtained in 1973 by Lah and Ribarić [10].
Lemma 6.21. Let f : I → R be a convex function, xi ∈ [m, M ] ⊆ I for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n}
and p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn ) be a positive n−tuple. Then
M − P1n ni=1 pi xi
n P 1
Pn
1 X Pn i=1 pi xi − m
(6.73) pi f (xi ) ≤ f (m) + f (M ) .
Pn i=1 M −m M −m
Proof. We observe for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} , that
(M − xi ) m + (xi − m) M
(6.74) xi = .
M −m
If in the definition of convexity, i.e., α, β ≥ 0, α + β > 0
 
αa + βb αf (a) + βf (b)
(6.75) f ≤
α+β α+β
we choose α = M − xi , β = xi − m, a = m and b = M, we deduce, by (6.75), that
 
(M − xi ) m + (xi − m) M
(6.76) f (xi ) = f
M −m
(M − xi ) f (m) + (xi − m) f (M )

M −m
for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
If we multiply (6.76) by pi > 0 and sum over i from 1 to n, we deduce (6.73). 
The following result holds.
Theorem 6.22. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be two sequences of real numbers with
ai 6= 0, i ∈ {1, . . . , n} . If I ⊆ R → R is a convex (concave) function on I and abii ∈ [m, M ] ⊆ I
for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} and w̄ = (w1 , . . . , wn ) is a sequence of nonnegative real numbers, then

Pn   Pn Pn
2 bi wi ai bi wi ai bi
w a
i=1 i i f ai M − Pi=1
n 2
Pi=1
n 2 −m
i=1 wi ai i=1 wi ai
(6.77) Pn 2
≤ (≥) f (m) + f (M ) .
i=1 wi ai M −m M −m
bi
Proof. Follows by Lemma 6.21 for the choices pi = wi a2i , xi = ai
, i ∈ {1, . . . , n} . 
The following corollary holds.
Corollary 6.23. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be two sequences of positive real
numbers and such that
bi
(6.78) 0<m≤ ≤ M < ∞ for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
ai

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 123

If w̄ = (w1 , . . . , wn ) is a sequence of nonnegative real numbers and p ∈ (−∞, 0) ∪ [1, ∞)


(p ∈ (0, 1)) , then one has the inequality
n n n
X M m (M p−1 − mp−1 ) X M p − mp X
(6.79) wi a2−p
i bpi + 2
wi ai ≤ (≥) wi ai bi .
i=1
M −m i=1
M − m i=1

Proof. If we write the inequality (6.77) for the convex (concave) function f (x) = xp , p ∈
(−∞, 0) ∪ [1, ∞) (p ∈ (0, 1)) , we get
n P Pn
wi ai bi wi ai bi
Pn 2−p p
wi ai bi M − Pi=1
n 2
Pi=1
n 2 −m
i=1 wi ai i=1 wi ai
i=1
Pn 2
≤ (≥) · mp + · M p,
i=1 wi ai M −m M −m
which, after elementary calculations, is equivalent to (6.79). 
Remark 6.24. For p = 2, we get
n
X n
X n
X
(6.80) wi b2i + M m wi a2i ≤ (M + m) wi ai bi ,
i=1 i=1 i=1

which is the well known Diaz-Metcalf inequality [11].


6.13. An Inequality via Dragomir-Ionescu Inequality. The following reverse of Jensen’s
inequality was proved in 1994 by S.S. Dragomir and N.M. Ionescu [12].

Lemma 6.25. Let f : I ⊆ R → R be a differentiable Pn convex function on I̊, xi ∈I̊ (i ∈ {1, . . . , n})
and pi ≥ 0 (i ∈ {1, . . . , n}) such that Pn := i=1 pi > 0. Then one has the inequality
n n
!
1 X 1 X
(6.81) 0≤ pi f (xi ) − f pi xi
Pn i=1 Pn i=1
n n n
1 X 1 X 1 X
≤ pi xi f 0 (xi ) − pi xi · pi f 0 (xi ) .
Pn i=1 Pn i=1 Pn i=1

Proof. Since f is differentiable convex on I̊, one has


(6.82) f (x) − f (y) ≥ (x − y) f 0 (y) ,

for any x, y ∈I̊. Pn


1
If we choose x = Pn
pi xi and y = yk , k ∈ {1, . . . , n} , we get
i=1

n
! n
!
1 X 1 X
(6.83) f pi xi − f (yk ) ≥ pi xi − yk f 0 (yk ) .
Pn i=1 Pn i=1

Multiplying (6.83) by pk ≥ 0 and summing over k from 1 to n, we deduce the desired result
(6.81). 

The following result holds [9].


Theorem 6.26. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ), b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be two sequences of real numbers with
ai 6= 0, i ∈ {1, . . . , n} . If f : I ⊆ R → R is a differentiable convex (concave) function on I̊
and abii ∈I̊ for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} , and w̄ = (w1 , . . . , wn ) is a sequence of nonnegative real

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
124 S.S. D RAGOMIR

numbers, then

n n   n
!2  Pn 
X
2
X
2 b i
X
2 i=1 wi ai bi
(6.84) 0≤ wi ai wi ai f − wi ai · f Pn 2
i=1 i=1
a i i=1 i=1 wi ai
n n   X n n  
X
2
X
0 bi X
2 0 bi
≤ wi ai wi ai bi f − wi ai bi wi ai f .
i=1 i=1
ai i=1 i=1
ai

bi
Proof. Follows from Lemma 6.25 on choosing pi = wi a2i , xi = ai
, i ∈ {1, . . . , n} . 

The following corollary holds [9].

Corollary 6.27. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ), b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be two sequences of positive real


numbers with ai 6= 0, i ∈ {1, . . . , n} . If p ∈ [1, ∞), then one has the inequality

n n n
!2−p n
!p
X X X X
(6.85) 0≤ wi a2i wi a2−p
i bpi − wi a2i wi ai bi
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1
" n n n n
#
X X X X
≤p wi a2i wi a2−p
i bi − wi ai bi wi a3−p
i bp−1
i .
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

If p ∈ (0, 1) , then

n
!2−p n
! n n
X X X X
(6.86) 0≤ wi a2i wi ai bi − wi a2i wi a2−p
i bpi
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1
" n n n n
#
X X X X
≤p wi ai bi wi a3−p
i bpi − wi a2i wi a2−p
i bi .
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

6.14. An Inequality via a Refinement of Jensen’s Inequality. We will use the following
lemma which contains a refinement of Jensen’s inequality obtained in [13].

P Let f : I ⊆ R →R be a convex function on the interval I and xi ∈ I, pi ≥ 0


Lemma 6.28.
with Pn := ni=1 pi > 0. Then the following inequality holds:

n
! n
xi1 + · · · + xik+1
 
1 X 1 X
(6.87) f pi xi ≤ k+1 pi1 · · · pik f
Pn i=1 Pn i ,...,i =1 k+1
1 k+1
n  
1 X xi1 + · · · + xik
≤ k pi · · · pik f
Pn i ,...,i =1 1 k
1 k
n
1 X
≤ ··· ≤ pi f (xi ) ,
Pn i=1

where k ≥ 1, k ∈ N.

Proof. We shall follow the proof in [13].

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 125

The first inequality follows by Jensen’s inequality for multiple sums


 Pn  x +···+x 
i1 ik+1
i1 ,...,ik+1 =1 pi1 · · · pik+1 k+1
f Pn 
i1 ,...,ik+1 =1 p i1 · · · p ik+1

Pn  x +···+x 
i1 ik+1
i1 ,...,ik+1 =1 1 p i · · · p ik+1
f k+1
= Pn
i1 ,...,ik+1 =1 pi1 · · · pik+1

since x 
Pn i1 +···+xik+1
i1 ,...,ik+1 =1 pi1 · · · pik+1
n
k+1 X
Pn = Pnk pi xi
i1 ,...,ik+1 =1 pi1 · · · pik+1 i=1
and n
X
pi1 · · · pik+1 = Pnk+1 .
i1 ,...,ik+1 =1
Now, applying Jensen’s inequality for
xi1 + xi2 · · · + xik−1 + xik xi + xi3 · · · + xik + xik+1
y1 = , y2 = 2 ,
k k
xi + xi1 + xi2 + · · · + xik−1
· · · , yk+1 = k+1
k
we have
 
y1 + y2 + · · · + yk + yk+1 f (y1 ) + f (y2 ) + · · · + f (yk ) + f (yk+1 )
f ≤ ,
k+1 k+1
which is equivalent to
xi1 + · · · + xik+1
 
(6.88) f
k+1
 x +x ···+x +x   x +x +x +···+x 
i1 i2 ik−1 ik ik+1 i1 i2 ik−1
f k
+ · · · + f k
≤ .
k+1
Multiplying (6.88) with the nonnegative real numbers pi1 , . . . , pik+1 and summing over
i1 , . . . , ik+1 from 1 to n we deduce
n
xi1 + · · · + xik+1
X  
(6.89) pi1 · · · pik+1 f
i1 ,...,ik+1 =1
k+1

n  
1  X xi1 + · · · + xik
≤ pi · · · pik+1 f
k + 1 i ,...,i =1 1 k
1 k+1

n
xik+1 + xi1 + xi2 + · · · + xik−1
X  
+ ··· + pi1 · · · pik+1 f 
i1 ,...,ik+1 =1
k
n  
X xi1 + · · · + xik
= Pn pi1 · · · pik f
i ,...,i =1
k
1 k

which proves the second part of (6.87). 


The following result holds.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
126 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Theorem 6.29. Let f : I ⊆ R →R be a convex function on the interval I, ā = (a1 , . . . , an ),


b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) real numbers such that ai 6= 0, i ∈ {1, . . . , n} and abii ∈ I, i ∈ {1, . . . , n} . If
w̄ = (w1 , . . . , wn ) are positive real numbers, then
 Pn 
i=1 wi ai bi
(6.90) f Pn 2
i=1 wi ai
 bi bik+1 
1 X n
a
1
+ · · · + aik+1
≤ Pn w i · · · w i a 2
i · · · a 2
i f  i1 
k+1 1 k+1 1 k+1
k + 1
( i=1 wi a2i ) i1 ,...,ik+1 =1
bik
b 
i1
1 X n
ai
+ · · · + aik
≤ Pn k
wi1 · · · wik a2i1 · · · a2ik f  1 
( i=1 wi a2i ) i1 ,...,ik =1 k
n  
1 X
2 bi
≤ · · · ≤ Pn 2
wi ai f .
i=1 wi ai i=1 ai
bi
The proof is obvious by Lemma 6.28 applied for pi = wi a2i , xi = ai
, i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
The following corollary holds.
Corollary 6.30. Let ā, b̄ and w̄ be sequences of positive real numbers. If p ∈ (−∞, 0) ∪ [1, ∞)
(p ∈ (0, 1)) , then one has the inequalities
n
!p
X
wi ai bi
i=1
p−k−1 n
bik+1 p
Pn
≤ ( i=1 wi a2i )
 
X
2 2 bi1
wi1 · · · wik+1 ai1 · · · aik+1 + ··· +
(≥) (k + 1)p i1 ,...,ik+1 =1
ai1 aik+1
Pn p−k n p
≤ ( i=1 wi a2i )

X
2 2 bi1 bik
wi1 · · · wik ai1 · · · aik + ··· +
(≥) kp a i1 aik
i1 ,...,ik =1
n
!p−1 n
≤ ≤ X X
··· wi a2i wi a2−p
i bpi .
(≥) (≥)
i=1 i=1

Remark 6.31. If p = 2, then we deduce the following refinement of the (CBS) − inequality
 2
n
!2 1−k n k+1 k+1
( ni=1 wi a2i )
X P X X Y 
wi ai bi ≤ 2 wi1 · · · wik+1  bi` aij 
i=1
(k + 1) i1 ,...,ik+1 =1 `=1 j=1
j6=`
 2
2−k n k k
( ni=1 wi a2i )
P X X Y 
≤ wi1 · · · wik  bi` aij 
k2 i1 ,...,ik =1 `=1 j=1
j6=`
n
1X
≤ ··· ≤ wi wj (bi aj + ai bj )2
4 i,j=1
n
X n
X
≤ wi a2i wi b2i .
i=1 i=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 127

6.15. Another Refinement via Jensen’s Inequality. The following refinement of Jensen’s
inequality holds (see [15]).
Lemma 6.32. Let P f : [a, b] → R be a differentiable convex function on (a, b) and xi ∈ (a, b) ,
pi ≥ 0 with Pn := ni=1 pi > 0. Then one has the inequality
n n
! n

n
!
1 X 1 X 1 X 1 X
(6.91) pi f (xi ) − f pi xi ≥ pi f (xi ) − f pj xj

Pn i=1 Pn i=1 Pn
i=1
P n j=1
!
n n n
0 1 X
1 X 1 X
− f pj xj · pi xi − pj xj ≥ 0.

Pn Pn
j=1
Pn
i=1

j=1

Proof. Since f is differentiable convex on (a, b) , then for each x, y ∈ (a, b), one has the in-
equality
(6.92) f (x) − f (y) ≥ (x − y) f 0 (y) .
Using the properties of the modulus, we have
(6.93) f (x) − f (y) − (x − y) f 0 (y) = |f (x) − f (y) − (x − y) f 0 (y)|
≥ ||f (x) − f (y)| − |x − y| |f 0 (y)||
for each x, y ∈ (a, b) . P
If we choose y = P1n nj=1 pj xj and x = xi , i ∈ {1, . . . , n} , then we have
n
! n
! n
!
1 X 1 X 1 X
(6.94) f (xi ) − f pj xj − xi − pj xj f 0 pj xj
Pn j=1 Pn j=1 Pn j=1
! !
n n n
1 X 1 X 0 1 X

≥ f (xi ) − f pj xj − xi − pj xj f p j xj

Pn j=1 Pn j=1 Pn j=1

for any i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .


If we multiply (6.94) by pi ≥ 0, sum over i from 1 to n, and divide by Pn > 0, we deduce
n n
!
1 X 1 X
pi f (xi ) − f pj xj
Pn i=1 Pn j=1
n n
! n
!
1 X 1 X 1 X
− pi xi − pj xj f 0 pj xj
Pn i=1 Pn j=1 Pn j=1
!
n n
1 X 1 X
≥ pi f (xi ) − f pj xj

Pn i=1 Pn j=1
!
n n
1 X 0 1
X
− xi − pj x j f pj xj

Pn j=1 Pn j=1
!
1 X n n
1 X
≥ pi f (xi ) − f pj xj

Pn Pn j=1
i=1
!
n n n
1 X 1 X 0 1
X
− pi xi − pj xj · f pj xj .

Pn Pn
i=1 j=1
Pn j=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
128 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Since
n n
!
1 X 1 X
pi xi − pj xj = 0,
Pn i=1 Pn j=1

the inequality (6.91) is proved. 

In particular, we have the following result for unweighted means.

Corollary 6.33. With the above assumptions for f and xi , one has the inequality

 
f (x1 ) + · · · + f (xn ) x1 + · · · + xn
(6.95) −f
n n

n  
1 X x 1 + · · · + x n
≥ xi − f

n n
i=1

  n n
0 x1 + · · · + xn 1 X 1 X
− f · x − x j ≥ 0.

i
n n
i=1
n j=1

The following refinement of the (CBS) −inequality holds.

Theorem 6.34. If ai , bi ∈ R, i ∈ {1, . . . , n} , then one has the inequality;

n n n
!2
X X X
(6.96) a2i b2i − ai b i
i=1 i=1 i=1
a2i b2i

n
1 X
≥ Pn 2 2 P 2

Pn n 2
i=1 bi i=1 j=1 aj bj j=1 bj

n n n
a b
X X X
bj i i ≥ 0.

−2 ak bk · |bi |

aj b j
k=1 i=1 j=1

Proof. If we apply Lemma 6.32 for f (x) = x2 , we get

n n
!2
1 X 2 1 X
(6.97) pi xi − pi xi
Pn i=1 Pn i=1
!2
n n
1 X 2 1 X
≥ pi xi − pj xj
Pn i=1 Pn j=1

1 X n 1 X n n
1 X
− 2 pk xk · pi xi − pj xj ≥ 0.

Pn Pn Pn j=1
k=1 i=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 129

ai
If in (6.97), we choose pi = b2i , xi = bi
, i ∈ {1, . . . , n} , we get
Pn 2 2
( ni=1 ai bi )
P
i=1 ai
(6.98) Pn 2 − Pn 2 2
i=1 bi ( i=1 bi )
Pn !2
n
a b
2
1 X a j j
bi · 2i − Pj=1
2

≥ Pn 2 n 2

i=1 bi i=1 bi b
j=1 j

Pn 2 ai Pn .P
n 2
i=1 bi bi − j=1 aj bj j=1 bj
Pn
k=1 ak bk
−2 Pn 2 ·
Pn 2 ,
bi=1 i b
i=1 i


which is clearly equivalent to (6.96). 

6.16. An Inequality via Slater’s Result. Suppose that I is an interval of real numbers with
◦ ◦
interior I and f : I → R is a convex function on I. Then f is continuous on I and has finite
◦ ◦
left and right derivatives at each point of I . Moreover, if x, y ∈I and x < y, then D− f (x) ≤
D+ f (x) ≤ D− f (y) ≤ D+ f (y) which shows that both D− f and D+ f are nondecreasing

functions on I . It is also known that a convex function must be differentiable except for at most
countably many points.
For a convex function f : I → R, the  ◦ subdifferential
 of f denoted by ∂f is the set of all
functions ϕ : I → [−∞, ∞] such that ϕ I ⊂ R and

(6.99) f (x) ≥ f (a) + (x − a) ϕ (a) for any x, a ∈ I.


It is also well known that if f is convex on I, then ∂f is nonempty, D+ f, D− f ∈ ∂f and if
ϕ ∈ ∂f, then
(6.100) D− f (x) ≤ ϕ (x) ≤ D+ f (x)

for every x ∈I . In particular, ϕ is a nondecreasing function.

If f is differentiable convex on I , then ∂f = {f 0 } .
The following inequality is well known in the literature as Slater’s inequality [16].
: I → R be a nondecreasing
Lemma 6.35. Let f P (nonincreasing) convex function, xi ∈ I,
n Pn
pi ≥ 0 with Pn := p
i=1 i > 0 and p
i=1 i ϕ (x i ) 6= 0 where ϕ ∈ ∂f. Then one has the
inequality:
n  Pn 
1 X i=1 pi xi ϕ (xi )
(6.101) pi f (xi ) ≤ f Pn .
Pn i=1 i=1 pi ϕ (xi )

Proof. Firstly, observe that since, for example, f is nondecreasing, then ϕ (x) ≥ 0 for any x ∈ I
and thus
Pn
pi xi ϕ (xi )
(6.102) Pi=1
n ∈ I,
i=1 pi ϕ (xi )
since it is a convex combination of xi with the positive weights
x ϕ (xi )
Pn i , i = 1, . . . , n.
i=1 pi ϕ (xi )

A similar argument applies if f is nonincreasing.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
130 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Now, if we use the inequality (6.99), we deduce


(6.103) f (x) − f (xi ) ≥ (x − xi ) ϕ (xi ) for any x, xi ∈ I, i = 1, . . . , n.
Multiplying (6.103) by pi ≥ 0 and summing over i from 1 to n, we deduce
n n n
1 X 1 X 1 X
(6.104) f (x) − pi f (xi ) ≥ x · pi ϕ (xi ) − pi xi ϕ (xi )
Pn i=1 Pn i=1 Pn i=1

for any x ∈ I.
If in (6.104) we choose
Pn
pi xi ϕ (xi )
x = Pi=1
n ,
i=1 pi ϕ (xi )
which, we have proved that it belongs to I, we deduce the desired inequality (6.101). 

If one would like to drop the assumption of monotonicity for the function f, then one can
state and prove in a similar way the following result.
Lemma
Pn 6.36. Let f : I → R be a convex function, xi ∈ I, pi ≥ 0 with Pn > 0 and
i=1 pi ϕ (xi ) 6= 0, where ϕ ∈ ∂f. If
Pn
pi xi ϕ (xi )
(6.105) Pi=1
n ∈ I,
i=1 pi ϕ (xi )

then the inequality (6.101) holds.


The following result in connection to the (CBS) −inequality holds.
Theorem 6.37. Assume that f : R+ → R is a convex function on R+ := [0, ∞), ai , bi ≥ 0 with
Pn 2  bi 
ai 6= 0, i ∈ {1, . . . , n} and i=1 ai ϕ ai 6= 0 where ϕ ∈ ∂f.
(i) If f is monotonic nondecreasing (nonincreasing) in [0, ∞) then
 Pn  
bi
i=1 ai bi ϕ ai
n   n
X
2 bi X
2
(6.106) ai ϕ ≤ ai · f  P   .
i=1
a i i=1
n
a ϕ bi
2
i=1 i ai

(ii) If
Pn  
bi
i=1 a i b i ϕ ai
(6.107) Pn 2  bi  ≥ 0,
i=1 ai ϕ ai

then (6.106) also holds.


Remark 6.38. Consider the function f : [0, ∞) → R, f (x) = xp , p ≥ 1. Then f is convex and
monotonic nondecreasing and ϕ (x) = pxp−1 . Applying (6.106), we may deduce the following
inequality:
n
!p+1 n n
!p
X 3−p p−1
X X 2−p p
(6.108) p ai b i ≤ a2i ai b i
i=1 i=1 i=1

for p ≥ 1, ai , bi ≥ 0, i = 1, . . . , n.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 131

6.17. An Inequality via an Andrica-Raşa Result. The following Jensen type inequality has
been obtained in [17] by Andrica and Raşa.
Lemma 6.39. Let f : [a, b] → R be a twice differentiable function and assume that
m = inf f 00 (t) > −∞ and M = sup f 00 (t) < ∞.
t∈(a,b) t∈(a,b)
Pn
If xi ∈ [a, b] and pi ≥ 0 (i = 1, . . . , n) with i=1 pi = 1, then one has the inequalities:
 !2  !
n n n n
1  X X X X
(6.109) m pi x2i − pi xi  ≤ pi f (xi ) − f pi xi
2 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1
 !2 
n n
1 X X
≤ M pi x2i − pi xi  .
2 i=1 i=1

Proof. Consider the auxiliary function fm (t) := f (t) − 12 mt2 . This function is twice differen-
00
tiable and fm (t) ≥ 0, t ∈ (a, b) , showing that fm is convex.
Applying Jensen’s inequality for fm , i.e.,
n n
!
X X
pi fm (xi ) ≥ fm pi xi ,
i=1 i=1

we deduce, by a simple calculation, the first inequality in (6.109).


The second inequality follows in a similar way for the auxiliary function fM (t) = 21 M t2 −
f (t) . We omit the details. 

The above result may be naturally used to obtain the following inequality related to the
(CBS) −inequality.
Theorem 6.40. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) be two sequences of real numbers with
the property that there exists γ, Γ ∈ R such that
ai
(6.110) −∞ ≤ γ ≤ ≤ Γ ≤ ∞, for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} ,
bi
and bi 6= 0, i = 1, . . . , n. If f : (γ, Γ) → R is twice differentiable and
m = inf f 00 (t) and M = sup f 00 (t) ,
t∈(γ,Γ) t∈(γ,Γ)

then we have the inequality


 !2 
n n n
1 X 2 X 2 X
(6.111) m ai bi − ai b i 
2 i=1 i=1 i=1

n n n
!2  P
  n 
X X ai X ai bi
≤ b2i 2
bi f − 2
bi i=1
f Pn 2
i=1 i=1
bi i=1 i=1 bi
 !2 
n n n
1 X 2 X 2 X
≤ M ai bi − ai b i .
2 i=1 i=1 i=1

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
132 S.S. D RAGOMIR

b2 ai
Proof. We may apply Lemma 6.39 for the choices pi = Pn i b2 and xi = bi
to get
k=1 k
"P 2 #
n 2
 Pn
1 a ai b i
m Pni=1 i2 − Pi=1 n 2
2 k=1 bk k=1 bk
Pn 2  ai 
i=1 bi f
 Pn 
bi i=1 ai b i
≤ Pn 2 − f Pn 2
k=1 bk k=1 bk
"P 2 #
n 2
 P n
1 a a i b i
≤ M Pni=1 i2 − Pi=1 n 2
2 k=1 bk k=1 bk

giving the desired result (6.111). 


The following corollary is a natural consequence of the above theorem.
Corollary 6.41. Assume that ā, b̄ are sequences of nonnegative real numbers and
ai
(6.112) 0<ϕ≤ ≤ Φ < ∞ for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
bi
Then for any p ∈ [1, ∞) one has the inequalities
 !2 
n n n
1 X X X
(6.113) p (p − 1) ϕp−2  a2i b2i − ai b i 
2 i=1 i=1 i=1

n n
! p n
!2−p n
!p
X X X X
≤ b2i api b2−p
i − b2i ai b i
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1
 !2 
n n n
1 p−2 
X
2
X X
≤ p (p − 1) Φ ai b2i − ai b i 
2 i=1 i=1 i=1

if p ∈ [2, ∞) and
 !2 
n n n
1 X X X
(6.114) p (p − 1) Φp−2  a2i b2i − ai bi 
2 i=1 i=1 i=1

n n
! p n
!2−p n
!p
X X X X
≤ b2i api b2−p
i − b2i ai b i
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1
 !2 
n n n
1 X X X
≤ p (p − 1) ϕp−2  a2i b2i − ai b i 
2 i=1 i=1 i=1

if p ∈ [1, 2] .
6.18. An Inequality via Jensen’s Result for Double Sums. The following result for convex
functions via Jensen’s inequality also holds [18].
Lemma 6.42. Let f : R → R be a convex (concave) function and x̄ = (x P1n, . . . , xn ) , p̄ =
(p1 , . . . , pn ) real sequences with the property that pi ≥ 0 (i = 1, . . . , n) and i=1 pi = 1. Then
one has the inequality:
hP i
P j−1
·
"P #
n 2
Pn
pi xi − ( i=1 pi xi )
2
1≤i<j≤n p i p j k,l=i f (∆x k ∆x l )
(6.115) f Pi=1 n P n 2 ≤ (≥) P n Pn 2 ,
2 2
i=1 i pi − ( i=1 ipi ) i=1 i pi − ( i=1 ipi )

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 133

where ∆xk := xk+1 − xk (k = 1, . . . , n − 1) is the forward difference.


Proof. We have, by Jensen’s inequality for multiple sums that
2
"P # "P #
n Pn 2
p x
i i
2
− ( p x
i i ) 1≤i<j≤n p i p j (x i − x j )
(6.116) f Pi=1 n Pi=1
n 2 =f P 2
1≤i<j≤n pi pj (j − i)
2
i=1 i pi − ( i=1 ipi )
2 (xj −xi )2
P 
1≤i<j≤n p i p j (j − i) (j−i) 2
=f P 2

1≤i<j≤n p i p j (j − i)

(xj −xi )2

P 2
1≤i<j≤n pi pj (j − i) f (j−i)2
≤ P 2 =: I.
1≤i<j≤n pi pj (j − i)

On the other hand, for j > i, one has


j−1 j−1
X X
(6.117) xj − xi = (xk+1 − xk ) = ∆xk
k=i k=i

and thus
j−1
!2 j−1
2
X X
(xj − xi ) = ∆xk = ∆xk · ∆xl .
k=i k,l=i

Applying once more the Jensen inequality for multiple sums, we deduce
" # " Pj−1 # Pj−1
(xj − xi )2 k,l=i ∆x k · ∆x l k,l=i f (∆xk · ∆xl )
(6.118) f 2 =f 2 ≤ (≥)
(j − i) (j − i) (j − i)2
and thus, by (6.118), we deduce
Pj−1
P 2 k,l=i f (∆xk ·∆xl )
1≤i<j≤n pi pj (j − i) (j−i)2
(6.119) I ≤ (≥) P 2
1≤i<j≤n pi pj (j − i)
hP i
P j−1
1≤i<j≤n pi pj k,l=i f (∆xk · ∆xl )
= Pn 2 Pn 2 ,
i=1 i pi − ( i=1 ipi )
and then, by (6.116) and (6.119), we deduce the desired inequality (6.115). 
The following inequality connected with the (CBS) −inequality may be stated.
Theorem 6.43. Let f : R → R be a convex (concave) function and ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ =
(b1 , . . . , bn ) , w̄ = (w1 , . . . , wn ) sequences of real numbers such that bi 6= 0, wi ≥ 0 (i = 1, . . . , n)
and not all wi are zero. Then one has the inequality
"P #
n 2
Pn 2
Pn 2
w i a i w i b i − ( w i a i b i )
(6.120) f Pni=1 2
Pni=1 2 2 Pi=1
n 2
w b
i=1 i i i=1 i w b
i i − ( i=1 iwi bi )
hP     i
P 2 2 j−1 ak al
1≤i<j≤n w i wj b b
i j k,l=i f ∆ bk
· ∆ bl
≤ (≥) Pn 2
P n 2
Pn 2 .
2
i=1 wi bi i=1 i wi bi − ( i=1 iwi bi )
ai
Proof. Follows by Lemma 6.42 on choosing pi = wi b2i and xi = bi
, i = 1, . . . , n. We omit the
details. 

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
134 S.S. D RAGOMIR

6.19. Some Inequalities for the Čebyšev Functional. For two sequences of real numbers
ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) and p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn ) with pi ≥ 0 (i ∈ {1, . . . , n}) and
P n
i=1 pi = 1, consider the Čebyšev functional
n
X n
X n
X

(6.121) T p̄, ā, b̄ := p i ai b i − p i ai p i bi .
i=1 i=1 i=1

By Korkine’s identity [1, p. 242] one has the representation


n
 1X
(6.122) T p̄, ā, b̄ = pi pj (ai − aj ) (bi − bj )
2 i,j=1
X
= pi pj (aj − ai ) (bj − bi ) .
1≤i<j≤n

Using the (CBS) −inequality for double sums one may state the following result
 2 
(6.123) T p̄, ā, b̄ ≤ T (p̄, ā, ā) T p̄, b̄, b̄ ,
where, obviously
n
1X
(6.124) T (p̄, ā, ā) = pi pj (ai − aj )2
2 i,j=1
X
= pi pj (aj − ai )2 .
1≤i<j≤n

The following result holds [14].


Lemma 6.44. Assume that ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) are real numbers such that for
each i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} , i < j, one has
(6.125) m (bj − bi ) ≤ aj − ai ≤ M (bj − bi ) ,
where m, M are given real numbers.
If p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn ) is a nonnegative sequence with ni=1 pi = 1, then one has the inequality
P
 
(6.126) (m + M ) T p̄, ā, b̄ ≥ T (p̄, ā, ā) + mM T p̄, b̄, b̄ .
Proof. If we use the condition (6.125), we get
(6.127) [M (bi − bj ) − (ai − aj )] [(ai − aj ) − m (bi − bj )] ≥ 0
for i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} , i < j.
If we multiply in (6.127), then, obviously, for any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} , i < j we have
(6.128) (aj − ai )2 + mM (bj − bi )2 ≤ (m + M ) (aj − ai ) (bj − bi ) .
Multiplying (6.128) by pi pj ≥ 0, i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} , i < j, summing over i and j, i < j from 1
to n and using the identities (6.122) and (6.124), we deduce the required inequality (6.125). 
The following result holds [14].
Theorem 6.45. If ā, b̄, p̄ are as in Lemma 6.44 and M ≥ m > 0, then one has the inequality
providing a reverse for (6.123)
 2 4mM 
(6.129) T p̄, ā, b̄ ≥ T (p̄, ā, ā) T p̄, b̄, b̄ .
(m + M )2

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 135

Proof. We use the following elementary inequality


1
(6.130) αx2 + y 2 ≥ 2xy, x, y ≥ 0, α > 0
α
to get, for the choices
√   1 1
α = mM > 0, x = T p̄, b̄, b̄ 2 ≥ 0, y = [T (p̄, ā, ā)] 2 ≥ 0
the following inequality:
√  1   1 1
(6.131) mM T p̄, b̄, b̄ + √ T (p̄, ā, ā) ≥ 2 T p̄, b̄, b̄ 2 [T (p̄, ā, ā)] 2 .
mM
Using (6.130) and (6.131), we deduce
(m + M )    1 1
√ T p̄, ā, b̄ ≥ T p̄, b̄, b̄ 2 [T (p̄, ā, ā)] 2
2 mM
which is clearly equivalent to (6.129). 
The following corollary also holds [14].
Corollary 6.46. With the assumptions of Theorem 6.45, we have:
  1 1 
(6.132) 0 ≤ T p̄, b̄, b̄ 2 [T (p̄, ā, ā)] 2 − T p̄, ā, b̄
√ √ 2
M− m 
≤ √ T p̄, ā, b̄
2 mM
and
  2
(6.133) 0 ≤ T (p̄, ā, ā) T p̄, b̄, b̄ − T p̄, ā, b̄
(M − m)2  2
≤ T p̄, ā, b̄ .
4mM
The following result is useful in practical applications [14].
Theorem 6.47. Let f, g : [α, β] → R be continuous on [α, β] and differentiable on (α, β) with
g 0 (x) 6= 0 for x ∈ (α, β) . Assume
f 0 (x) f 0 (x)
(6.134) −∞ < γ = inf , sup = Γ < ∞.
x∈(α,β) g 0 (x) 0
x∈(α,β) g (x)

If x̄ is a real sequence with xi ∈ [α, β] and xi 6= xj for i 6= j and if we denote by f (x̄) :=


(f (x1 ) , . . . , f (xn )) , then we have the inequality:
(6.135) (γ + Γ) T (p̄, f (x̄) , g (x̄)) ≥ T (p̄, f (x̄) , f (x̄)) + γΓT (p̄, g (x̄) , g (x̄))
for any p̄ with pi ≥ 0 (i ∈ {1, . . . , n}) , ni=1 pi = 1.
P

Proof. Applying the Cauchy Mean-Value Theorem, there exists ξij ∈ (α, β) (i < j) such that
f (xj ) − f (xi ) f 0 (ξij )
(6.136) = 0 ∈ [γ, Γ]
g (xj ) − g (xi ) g (ξij )
for i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} , i < j. Then
  
f (xj ) − f (xi ) f (xj ) − f (xi )
(6.137) Γ− − γ ≥ 0, 1 ≤ i < j ≤ n,
g (xj ) − g (xi ) g (xj ) − g (xi )
which, by a similar argument to the one in Lemma 6.44 will give the desired result (6.135). 
The following corollary is natural [14].

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
136 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Corollary 6.48. With the assumptions in Theorem 6.47 and if Γ ≥ γ > 0, then one has the
inequalities:
4γΓ
(6.138) [T (p̄, f (x̄) , g (x̄))]2 ≥ T (p̄, f (x̄) , f (x̄)) T (p̄, g (x̄) , g (x̄)) ,
(γ + Γ)2
1 1
(6.139) 0 ≤ [T (p̄, f (x̄) , f (x̄))] 2 [T (p̄, g (x̄) , g (x̄))] 2 − T (p̄, f (x̄) , g (x̄))
√ √ 2
Γ− γ
≤ √ T (p̄, f (x̄) , g (x̄))
2 γΓ
and
(6.140) 0 ≤ T (p̄, f (x̄) , f (x̄)) T (p̄, g (x̄) , g (x̄)) − T 2 (p̄, f (x̄) , g (x̄))
(Γ − γ)2 2
≤ T (p̄, f (x̄) , g (x̄)) .
4γΓ
6.20. Other Inequalities for the Čebyšev Functional. For two sequences of real numbers
ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) and p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn ) with pi ≥ 0 (i ∈ {1, . . . , n}) and
P n
i=1 pi = 1, consider the Čebyšev functional
n
X n
X n
X

(6.141) T p̄, ā, b̄ = p i ai b i − p i ai p i bi .
i=1 i=1 i=1

By Sonin’s identity [1, p. 246] one has the representation


n
 X 
(6.142) T p̄, ā, b̄ = pi (ai − An (p̄, ā)) bi − An p̄, b̄ ,
i=1

where
n
X n
X

An (p̄, ā) := p j aj , An p̄, b̄ := p j bj .
j=1 j=1

Using the (CBS) −inequality for weighted sums, we may state the following result
 2 
(6.143) T p̄, ā, b̄ ≤ T (p̄, ā, ā) T p̄, b̄, b̄ ,
where, obviously
n
X
(6.144) T (p̄, ā, ā) = pi (ai − An (p̄, ā))2 .
i=1

The following result holds [14].


Lemma 6.49. Assume that ā =P
(a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) are real numbers, p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn )
are nonnegative numbers with ni=1 pi = 1 and bi 6= An p̄, b̄ for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} . If
ai − An (p̄, ā)
(6.145) −∞ < l ≤  ≤ L < ∞ for all i ∈ {1, . . . , n} ,
bi − An p̄, b̄
where l, L are given real numbers, then one has the inequality
 
(6.146) (l + L) T p̄, ā, b̄ ≥ T (p̄, ā, ā) + LlT p̄, b̄, b̄ .

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 137

Proof. Using (6.145) we have


! !
ai − An (p̄, ā) ai − An (p̄, ā)
(6.147) L−   −l ≥0
bi − An p̄, b̄ bi − An p̄, b̄

for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .


2
If we multiply (6.147) by bi − An p̄, b̄ ≥ 0, we get
2
(6.148) (ai − An (p̄, ā))2 + Ll bi − An p̄, b̄

≤ (L + l) (ai − An (p̄, ā)) bi − An p̄, b̄
for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
Finally, if we multiply (6.148) by pi ≥ 0, sum over i from 1 to n and use the identity (6.142)
and (6.144), we obtain (6.146). 

Using Lemma 6.49 and a similar argument to that in the previous section, we may state the
following theorem [14].
Theorem 6.50. With the assumption of Lemma 6.49 and if L ≥ l > 0, then one has the
inequality
 2 4lL 
(6.149) T p̄, ā, b̄ ≥ T (p̄, ā, ā) T p̄, b̄, b̄ .
(L + l)2
The following corollary is natural [14].
Corollary 6.51. With the assumptions in Theorem 6.50 one has
1   1 
(6.150) 0 ≤ [T (p̄, ā, ā)] 2 T p̄, b̄, b̄ 2 − T p̄, ā, b̄
√ √ 2
L− l 
≤ √ T p̄, ā, b̄ ,
2 lL
and
  2
(6.151) 0 ≤ T (p̄, ā, ā) T p̄, b̄, b̄ − T p̄, ā, b̄
(L − l)2  2
≤ T p̄, ā, b̄ .
4lL
6.21. Bounds for the Čebyšev Functional. The following result holds.
Theorem 6.52. Let ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) (with bi 6= bj for i 6= j) be two
sequences of real numbers with the property that there exists the real constants m, M such that
for any 1 ≤ i < j ≤ n one has
aj − ai
(6.152) m≤ ≤ M.
bj − bi
Then we have the inequality
  
(6.153) mT p̄, b̄, b̄ ≤ T p̄, ā, b̄ ≤ M T p̄, b̄, b̄ ,
for any nonnegative sequence p̄ = (p1 , . . . , pn ) with ni=1 pi = 1.
P

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
138 S.S. D RAGOMIR

Proof. From (6.152), by multiplying with (bj − bi )2 > 0, one has


m (bj − bi )2 ≤ (aj − ai ) (bj − bi ) ≤ M (bj − bi )2
for any 1 ≤ i < j ≤ n, giving by multiplication with pi pj ≥ 0, that
X X
m pi pj (bi − bj )2 ≤ pi pj (aj − ai ) (bj − bi )
1≤i<j≤n 1≤i<j≤n
X
≤M pi pj (bi − bj )2 .
1≤i<j≤n

Using Korkine’s identity (see for example Subsection 6.19), we deduce the desired result (6.153).

The following corollary is natural.
Corollary 6.53. Assume that the sequence b̄ in Theorem 6.52 is strictly increasing and there
exists m, M such that
∆ak
(6.154) m≤ ≤ M, k = 1, . . . , n − 1;
∆bk
where ∆ak := ak+1 − ak is the forward difference, then (6.153) holds true.
Proof. Follows from Theorem 6.52 on taking into account that for j > i and from (6.154) one
has
j−1 j−1 j−1
X X X
m ∆bk ≤ ∆ak ≤ M ∆bk ,
k=i k=i k=i
giving m (bj − bi ) ≤ aj − ai ≤ M (bj − bi ) . 
Another possibility is to use functions that generate similar inequalities.
Theorem 6.54. Let f, g : [α, β] → R be continuous on [α, β] and differentiable on (α, β) with
g 0 (x) 6= 0 for x ∈ (α, β) . Assume that
f 0 (x) f 0 (x)
−∞ < m = inf , sup = M < ∞.
x∈(α,β) g 0 (x) 0
x∈(α,β) g (x)

If x̄ = (x1 , . . . , xn ) is a real sequence with xi ∈ [α, β] and xi 6= xj for i 6= j and if we denote


f (x̄) := (f (x1 ) , . . . , f (xn )) , then we have the inequality
(6.155) mT (p̄, g (x̄) , g (x̄)) ≤ T (p̄, f (x̄) , g (x̄)) ≤ M T (p̄, g (x̄) , g (x̄)) .
Proof. Applying the Cauchy Mean-Value Theorem, for any j > i there exists ξij ∈ (α, β) such
that
f (xj ) − f (xi ) f 0 (ξij )
= 0 ∈ [m, M ] .
g (xj ) − g (xi ) g (ξij )
Then, by Theorem 6.52 applied for ai = f (xi ) , bi = g (xi ) , we deduce the desired inequality
(6.155). 
The following inequality related to the (CBS) −inequality holds.
yi yj
Theorem 6.55. Let ā, x̄, ȳ be sequences of real numbers such that xi 6= 0 and xi
6= xj
for
i 6= j, (i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n}) . If there exist the real numbers γ, Γ such that
aj − ai
(6.156) γ ≤ yj ≤ Γ for 1 ≤ i < j ≤ n,
xj
− xyii

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
A S URVEY ON C AUCHY-B UNYAKOVSKY-S CHWARZ T YPE D ISCRETE I NEQUALITIES 139

then we have the inequality


 !2 
Xn Xn n
X n
X n
X n
X n
X
2
(6.157) γ  xi yi2 − xi yi ≤ x2i ai x i y i − ai x2i xi yi
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1
 !2 
Xn n
X n
X
≤ Γ x2i yi2 − xi yi .
i=1 i=1 i=1

x2 yi
Proof. Follows by Theorem 6.52 on choosing pi = Pn i
x2k
, bi = xi
, m = γ and M = Γ. We
k=1
omit the details. 
The following different approach may be considered as well.
Theorem 6.56. Assume that ā = (a1 , . . . , an ) , b̄ = (b1 , . . . , bn ) are sequences
Pn of real numbers,
pn ) is a sequence of nonnegative real numbers with i=1 pi = 1 and bi 6=
p̄ = (p1, . . . ,P
An p̄, b̄ := ni=1 pi bi . If
ai − An (p̄, ā)
(6.158) −∞ < l ≤  ≤ L < ∞ for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} ,
bi − An p̄, b̄
where l, L are given real numbers, then one has the inequality
  
(6.159) lT p̄, b̄, b̄ ≤ T p̄, ā, b̄ ≤ LT p̄, b̄, b̄ .
2
Proof. From (6.158), by multiplying with bi − An p̄, b̄ > 0, we deduce
2 
l bi − An p̄, b̄ ≤ (ai − An (p̄, ā)) bi − An p̄, b̄
2
≤ L bi − An p̄, b̄ ,
for any i ∈ {1, . . . , n} .
By multiplying with pi ≥ 0, and summing over i from 1 to n, we deduce
n n
X 2 X 
l pi bi − An p̄, b̄ ≤ pi (ai − An (p̄, ā)) bi − An p̄, b̄
i=1 i=1
n
X 2
≤L pi bi − An p̄, b̄ .
i=1

Using Sonin’s identity (see for example Section 6.20), we deduce the desired result (6.159). 
The following result in connection with the (CBS) −inequality may be stated.
Theorem 6.57. Let ā, x̄, b̄ be sequences of real numbers such that xi 6= 0 and
 
yi 1 y
6= Pn 2 An x2 ,
xi i=1 xi x
for i ∈ {1, . . . , n} . If there exists the real numbers φ, Φ such that
 
ai − Pn1 x2 An x2 , a
i=1 i
(6.160) φ≤   ≤ Φ,
yi 1 2 y
xi
− n x2 An x , x
P
i=1 i
 
2 2 2 y y1 yn
where x = (x1 , . . . , xn ) and x = x1 , . . . , xn , then one has the inequality (6.157).

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
140 S.S. D RAGOMIR

x2 yi
Proof. Follows by Theorem 6.56 on choosing pi = Pn i
x2i
, bi = xi
, l = φ and L = Φ. We omit
i=1
the details. 
R EFERENCES
[1] D.S. MITRINOVIĆ, J.E. PEČARIĆ AND A.M. FINK, Classical and New Inequalities in Analysis,
Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993.
[2] A.M. OSTROWSKI, Vorlesungen über Differential und Integralrechnung II, Birkhäuser, Basel,
1951.
[3] S.S. DRAGOMIR, Ostrowski’s inequality in complex inner product spaces, submitted.
[4] S.S. DRAGOMIR, Another Ostrowski type inequality, submitted.
[5] K. FAN AND J. TODD, A determinantal inequality, J. London Math. Soc., 30 (1955), 58–64.
[6] S.S. DRAGOMIR AND V.M. BOLDEA, Some new remarks on Cauchy-Buniakowski-Schwartz’s
inequality, Coll. Sci. Pap. Faculty of Science Kragujevac, 21 (1999), 33–40.
[7] S.S. DRAGOMIR, On Cauchy-Buniakowski-Schwartz’s Inequality for Real Numbers (Romanian),
“Caiete Metodico-Ştiintifice”, No. 57, 1989, pp. 24, Faculty of Mathematics, University of Tim-
işoara, Romania.
[8] S.S. DRAGOMIR, D.M. MILOŠEVIĆ AND Š.Z. ARSLANAGIĆ, A Cauchy-Buniakowski-
Schwartz inequality for Lipschitzian functions, Coll. Sci. Pap. of the Faculty of Science, Kragu-
jevac, 14 (1991), 25–28.
[9] S.S. DRAGOMIR, Generalisation of the (CBS) −inequality via Jensen type inequalities, submit-
ted.
[10] P. LAH AND M. RIBARIĆ, Converse of Jensen’s inequality for convex functions, Univ. Beograd
Publ. Elek. Fak. Ser. Math, Fiz., No. 412-460, (1973), 201–205.
[11] J.B. DIAZ AND F.T. METCALF, Stronger forms of a class of inequalities of G. Pólya-G. Szegö
and L.V. Kantorovich, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., 69 (1963), 415–419.
[12] S.S. DRAGOMIR AND N.M. IONESCU, Some converse of Jensen’s inequaliy and applications,
Anal. Num. Theor. Approx., 23 (1994), 71–78.
[13] J.E. PEČARIĆ AND S.S. DRAGOMIR, A refinement of Jensen’s inequality and applications, Stu-
dia Univ. Babeş-Bolyai, Mathematica, 34(1) (1989), 15–19.
[14] S.S. DRAGOMIR, Some inequalities for the Čebyšev functional, The Australian Math. Soc.
Gazette., 29(3) (2002), 164–168.
[15] S.S. DRAGOMIR AND F.P. SCARMOZZINO, A refinement of Jensen’s discrete inequality for dif-
ferentiable convex functions, Preprint, RGMIA Res. Rep. Coll., 5(4) (2002), Article 12. [ONLINE:
http://rgmia.vu.edu.au/v5n4.html]
[16] M.S. SLATER, A companion inequality to Jensen’s inequality, J. Approx. Theory, 32 (1981), 160–
166.
[17] D. ANDRICA AND I. RAŞA, The Jensen inequality: refinements and applications, Anal. Num.
Theor. Approx., (Romania), 14 (1985), 155–167.
[18] S.S. DRAGOMIR, On an inequality for convex functions, submitted.

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/
I NDEX
J−convex function, 16, 17 Euler’s indicator, 18, 119
Čebyšev functional, 99, 134, 136
Čebyšev’s inequality, 10, 114, 115 Fan and Todd inequalities, 113
1-norm, 87 forward difference, 85, 88

additive, 10, 63, 64, 73–75 geometric mean, 36, 63, 67, 116
Alzer, 45, 85 Grüss inequality, 94
Andrica-Badea inequality, 92, 94, 95 Greub-Rheinboldt inequality, 75
arithmetic mean, 36, 63, 67, 116
harmonic mean, 36, 37, 116
Arithmetic-Geometric inequality, 11
asynchronous, 10, 114 identity, 6, 41, 42, 44, 59, 61, 86, 100, 137
sequence, 114 Binet-Cauchy, 6
Cauchy-Binet, 117
barycentric method, 72
Korkine’s, 134
Binet-Cauchy’s identity, 6
Lagrange, 5, 7, 44, 59, 61, 118
Callebaut’s inequality, 21, 43 Sonin, 136
Cassels’ inequality, 72, 75 index set mapping, 54, 57, 61, 62, 67
additive version, 73 inner product spaces, 5, 43, 60
refinement, 94, 96
Jensen’s inequality, 116, 125
unweighted, 72–74, 96
discrete, 121
Cauchy, 5
reverse, 122
Cauchy-Bunyakovsky-Schwarz, 5
refinement, 124, 127
Cauchy-Schwarz, 45
reverse, 123
Cauchy Mean-Value Theorem, 135
Cauchy-Bunyakovsky-Schwarz, 5 Korkine’s identity, 134
Cauchy-Schwarz, 45
CBS-inequality, 5, 12–19, 26, 35, 44, 117, 122 Lagrange’s identity, 5, 7, 44, 59, 61, 118
complex numbers, 6 Lah-Ribarić inequality, 122
complex sequences, 110 Lipschitzian functions, 119
double sums, 117, 118 Lupaş inequality, 94
for Lipschitzian functions, 119
for weights, 33, 51 matrices, 117
functionals associated to, 68 maximum, 72, 92, 93
generalisation, 7, 12, 14–17, 22 McLaughlin’s inequality, 41
generalisation via Young’s inequality, 13 Milne’s inequality, 43
inequality related to, 64 minimum, 72
real numbers, 5, 7, 24, 41, 52 monotonicity, 49, 51, 53, 54, 56, 58, 85
real sequence, 109 multiple sums, 125
refinement, 11, 32, 37, 40, 41, 57, 58, 61, 63–65,
n-tuple, 122
126, 128
non-proportional, 109, 110, 112
discrete, 42
reverse, 75, 82, 84, 85, 87, 89, 91, 93, 95, 99, 101, Ostrowski’s inequality, 109–111
104
type, 20 p-norm, 90
weights, 10 Pólya-Szegö, 74
concave function, 121–123 Pólya-Szegö’s inequality, 73–75, 97
convex mapping, 116 parameter, 10
Popoviciu’s inequality, 18
Daykin-Eliezer-Carlitz, 42, 43 positive real numbers, 9, 11, 12, 31, 36, 37, 72, 73,
De Bruijn’s inequality, 40 75, 78, 96, 115, 116, 122, 124, 126
Diaz-Metcalf inequality, 97, 99, 123 Power functions, 116
discriminant, 5, 24, 26 power series, 19
double sums, 117, 118, 134 proportional, 5, 7, 12
Dragomir-Ionescu inequality, 123
Dunkl-Williams’ inequality, 43 quadratic polynomial, 5, 23

141
142 S.S. D RAGOMIR

refinement, 35 superadditivity, 52, 54–57, 59, 61, 62


Cassels’ inequality, 94, 96 supermultiplicative, 63
CBS inequality, 11, 32, 37, 40, 41, 44, 57, 58, 61, supermultiplicity, 63, 67
63–65, 126, 128 synchronous, 115
due to Alzer and Zheng, 45 sequence, 115
due to Daykin-Eliezer-Carlitz, 42
in terms of moduli, 28, 31 triangle inequality, 7, 86
Jensen’s inequality, 124, 127 Wagner’s inequality, 22, 24
non-constant sequences, 37 weights, 10, 33, 51, 52, 55, 56, 63
Pólya-Szegö inequality, 97
Schwitzer’s result, 94 Young’s Inequality, 11–13
sequence less than the weights, 33
sequence whose norm is 1, 29 Zagier inequalities, 83, 84
via Dunkl-Williams’ Inequality, 43 Zheng, 45
reverse inequality, 75, 82, 84, 85, 87, 89–91, 93, 97,
99, 101, 104
complex numbers, 79
Jensen, 122, 123
real numbers, 77
via Čebyšev Functional, 99
via Andrica-Badea, 92
via Diaz-Metcalf, 97
rotation, 41

Schweitzer inequality, 94
sequence, 36, 42, 50, 55, 77, 85, 87, 100, 109
asynchronous, 114
complex, 110
complex numbers, 6, 12, 24, 44, 75, 85, 87, 90,
97, 110, 112
decreasing nonnegative, 85
natural numbers, 119
nonnegative, 9, 10, 63, 85, 114, 134
nonnegative numbers, 11
nonnegative real numbers, 12, 21, 22, 33, 51, 52,
72, 75, 85, 87, 90, 92, 96, 121–124
nonzero complex numbers, 44
nonzero real numbers, 17
positive, 82
positive and real numbers, 8
positive numbers, 7, 42
positive real numbers, 9, 11, 12, 31, 37, 72, 73, 75,
78, 96, 115, 116, 122, 124, 126
real, 109, 114, 135
real numbers, 7, 8, 10, 18–20, 22, 28, 29, 31–37,
40, 41, 51, 52, 59, 84, 87, 89, 91–94, 99, 102,
105, 109, 111, 113, 114, 117–123, 134, 136
synchronous, 115
set-additive, 67, 68
set-superadditive, 67–70
set-superadditivity, 68
set-supermultiplicative, 67
Shisha-Mond inequalities, 82
Sonin’s identity, 136
strong monotonicity, 56, 58
strong superadditivity, 55–57
sup-norm, 85

J. Inequal. Pure and Appl. Math., 4(3) Art. 63, 2003 http://jipam.vu.edu.au/

You might also like