ScalingStacks

Proof. [0543]

Original official author HTML, exact retained edition. Historical TeX conversion verdicts remain unchanged. Cited-edition alignment and mathematical self-containment are not assessed.

Complete original source context · Original author HTML

Proof.

Our main strategy is to apply Laplace’s method. The basic idea is that the above exponential integrals are concentrated at the critical values t0t_{0} and u0u_{0}.

First, we prove the uniform estimate for Ψ♭⁡(β,α,y)\Tri(\fb,\fa,y). By (5.97),

(5.118) Ψ♭⁡(β,α,y)≤eyΓ⁡(α−β)​∫0∞eF⁡(t)​dt.\Tri(\fb,\fa,y)\leq\frac{e^{y}}{\Gamma(\fa-\fb)}\int_{0}^{\infty}e^{F(t)}dt.

Clearly, the upper bound of Ψ♭⁡(β,α,y)\Tri(\fb,\fa,y) follows from the upper bound estimate of ∫0∞eF⁡(t)​𝑑t\int_{0}^{\infty}e^{F(t)}dt. Write

(5.119) ∫0∞eF⁡(t)​𝑑t=∫02​t0eF⁡(t)​𝑑t+∫2​t0∞eF⁡(t)​𝑑t.\int_{0}^{\infty}e^{F(t)}dt=\int_{0}^{2t_{0}}e^{F(t)}dt+\int_{2t_{0}}^{\infty}e^{F(t)}dt.

We will estimate the two terms separately.

To estimate the first term in (5.119), we make a change of variable

(5.120) t=t0⋅(1+ξ),ξ∈(−1,1),t=t_{0}\cdot(1+\xi),\ \xi\in(-1,1),

then Taylor’s theorem gives that

(5.121) F⁡(t)−F⁡(t0)\displaystyle F(t)-F(t_{0}) =\displaystyle= F⁡(t0​(1+ξ))−F⁡(t0)\displaystyle F(t_{0}(1+\xi))-F(t_{0})
=\displaystyle= F′​(t0)⋅t0⋅ξ+F′′​(θ)2⋅t02⋅ξ2\displaystyle F^{\prime}(t_{0})\cdot t_{0}\cdot\xi+\frac{F^{\prime\prime}(\theta)}{2}\cdot t_{0}^{2}\cdot\xi^{2}
=\displaystyle= F′′​(θ)2⋅t02⋅ξ2,\displaystyle\frac{F^{\prime\prime}(\theta)}{2}\cdot t_{0}^{2}\cdot\xi^{2},

where θ\theta is between tt and t0t_{0}. Now we need to estimate the quadratic error term. It is straightforward calculation that

(5.122) F′′′​(t)\displaystyle F^{\prime\prime\prime}(t) =2​(Qt3−Q(t+1)3)>0,\displaystyle=2(\frac{Q}{t^{3}}-\frac{Q}{(t+1)^{3}})>0,

then F′′​(t)F^{\prime\prime}(t) is increasing in tt. Since θ\theta is between t0t_{0} and t∈[0,2​t0]t\in[0,2t_{0}], the above monotonicity of F′′F^{\prime\prime} implies F′′​(θ)≤F′′​(2​t0)<0F^{\prime\prime}(\theta)\leq F^{\prime\prime}(2t_{0})<0. So the first term of (5.119) becomes

(5.123) ∫02​t0eF⁡(t)​𝑑t\displaystyle\int_{0}^{2t_{0}}e^{F(t)}dt =\displaystyle= eF⁡(t0)​∫02​t0eF⁡(t)−F⁡(t0)​𝑑t\displaystyle e^{F(t_{0})}\int_{0}^{2t_{0}}e^{F(t)-F(t_{0})}dt
≤\displaystyle\leq eF⁡(t0)⋅t0⋅∫−11eF′′​(2​t0)2⋅t02⋅ξ2​𝑑ξ\displaystyle e^{F(t_{0})}\cdot t_{0}\cdot\int_{-1}^{1}e^{\frac{F^{\prime\prime}(2t_{0})}{2}\cdot t_{0}^{2}\cdot\xi^{2}}d\xi

By direct computations, F′′(2t0)=−(4​t0+1)4​t02​(2​t0+1)2⋅QF^{\prime\prime}(2t_{0})=-\frac{(4t_{0}+1)}{4t_{0}^{2}(2t_{0}+1)^{2}}\cdot Q. So we have,

(5.124) ∫02​t0eF⁡(t)​𝑑t\displaystyle\int_{0}^{2t_{0}}e^{F(t)}dt ≤\displaystyle\leq eF⁡(t0)⋅t0⋅∫−11e−4​t0+18​(2​t0+1)2⋅Q⋅ξ2dξ\displaystyle e^{F(t_{0})}\cdot t_{0}\cdot\int_{-1}^{1}e^{-\frac{4t_{0}+1}{8(2t_{0}+1)^{2}}\cdot Q\cdot\xi^{2}}d\xi
≤\displaystyle\leq Cn⋅t0​(2​t0+1)4​t0+1⋅Q⋅eF⁡(t0)\displaystyle C_{n}\cdot\frac{t_{0}(2t_{0}+1)}{\sqrt{4t_{0}+1}\cdot\sqrt{Q}}\cdot e^{F(t_{0})}
≤\displaystyle\leq Cn⋅Q14⋅eF⁡(t0),\displaystyle C_{n}\cdot Q^{\frac{1}{4}}\cdot e^{F(t_{0})},

where we used that t0≤Cn⋅Q1/2t_{0}\leq C_{n}\cdot Q^{1/2} (since y≤−1y\leq-1 and Q≥1Q\geq 1). Immediately, we have

(5.125) Ψ♭⁡(β,α,y)≤Cn⋅Q14⋅ey+F⁡(t0)Γ⁡(α−β).\Tri(\beta,\alpha,y)\leq C_{n}\cdot Q^{\frac{1}{4}}\cdot\frac{e^{y+F(t_{0})}}{\Gamma(\alpha-\beta)}.

Next, we estimate the second term in (5.119). Since we have proved F′′​(t)<0F^{\prime\prime}(t)<0, so this implies that F′​(t)F^{\prime}(t) is decreasing and hence F′​(t)≤F′​(2​t0)F^{\prime}(t)\leq F^{\prime}(2t_{0}) for any t≥2​t0t\geq 2t_{0}. Now Taylor’s theorem gives that

(5.126) F⁡(t)≤F⁡(2​t0)+F′​(2​t0)⋅(t−2​t0),F(t)\leq F(2t_{0})+F^{\prime}(2t_{0})\cdot(t-2t_{0}),

which implies that

(5.127) ∫2​t0∞eF⁡(t)​𝑑t≤eF⁡(2​t0)​∫2​t0∞eF′​(2​t0)⋅(t−2​t0)​𝑑t=eF⁡(2​t0)−F′​(2​t0).\int_{2t_{0}}^{\infty}e^{F(t)}dt\leq e^{F(2t_{0})}\int_{2t_{0}}^{\infty}e^{F^{\prime}(2t_{0})\cdot(t-2t_{0})}dt=\frac{e^{F(2t_{0})}}{-F^{\prime}(2t_{0})}.

One can check that F′​(2​t0)=y⁡(3​t0+1)2​(2​t0+1)<0F^{\prime}(2t_{0})=\frac{y(3t_{0}+1)}{2(2t_{0}+1)}<0 with 0<t0<+∞0<t_{0}<+\infty. Since F′​(t)<0F^{\prime}(t)<0 for all t>t0t>t_{0}, so F⁡(2​t0)≤F⁡(t0)F(2t_{0})\leq F(t_{0}) and hence for y≤−1y\leq-1 we have

(5.128) ∫2​t0∞eF⁡(t)​𝑑t≤Cn​eF⁡(t0).\int_{2t_{0}}^{\infty}e^{F(t)}dt\leq C_{n}e^{F(t_{0})}.

Combining the above, we have

(5.129) ∫0∞eF⁡(t)​𝑑t≤Cn⋅Q14⋅eF⁡(t0).\int_{0}^{\infty}e^{F(t)}dt\leq C_{n}\cdot Q^{\frac{1}{4}}\cdot e^{F(t_{0})}.

Therefore,

(5.130) Ψ♭⁡(β,α,y)\displaystyle\Tri(\beta,\alpha,y) ≤Cn⋅Q14⋅ey+F⁡(t0)Γ⁡(α−β).\displaystyle\leq C_{n}\cdot Q^{\frac{1}{4}}\cdot\frac{e^{y+F(t_{0})}}{\Gamma(\alpha-\beta)}.

The lower bound estimate for Ψ♭⁡(β,α,y)\Tri(\fb,\fa,y) also follows from Laplace’s method and we just sketch the computations.

Ψ♭⁡(β,α,y)\displaystyle\Tri(\fb,\fa,y) =eyΓ⁡(α−β)​∫0∞eF⁡(t)⋅1(t+1)1+1n​𝑑t\displaystyle=\frac{e^{y}}{\Gamma(\fa-\fb)}\int_{0}^{\infty}e^{F(t)}\cdot\frac{1}{(t+1)^{1+\frac{1}{n}}}dt
≥eyΓ⁡(α−β)​∫t0​(y)2​t0​(y)eF⁡(t)⋅1(t+1)1+1n​𝑑t\displaystyle\geq\frac{e^{y}}{\Gamma(\alpha-\beta)}\int_{t_{0}(y)}^{2t_{0}(y)}e^{F(t)}\cdot\frac{1}{(t+1)^{1+\frac{1}{n}}}dt
(5.131) ≥eyΓ⁡(α−β)⋅(1+2​t0)1+1n​∫t0​(y)2​t0​(y)eF⁡(t)​𝑑t.\displaystyle\geq\frac{e^{y}}{\Gamma(\alpha-\beta)\cdot(1+2t_{0})^{1+\frac{1}{n}}}\int_{t_{0}(y)}^{2t_{0}(y)}e^{F(t)}dt.

By the concavity of F⁡(t)F(t) and the monotonicity of F′′​(t)F^{\prime\prime}(t) in the domain t0≤t≤2​t0t_{0}\leq t\leq 2t_{0}, we have

(5.132) ∫t0​(y)2​t0​(y)eF⁡(t)​𝑑t≥eF⁡(t0)​∫t0​(y)2​t0​(y)eF′′​(t0)2​(t−t0)2​𝑑t≥Cn⋅eF⁡(t0)​t0​(t0+1)2​t0+1⋅Q\int_{t_{0}(y)}^{2t_{0}(y)}e^{F(t)}dt\geq e^{F(t_{0})}\int_{t_{0}(y)}^{2t_{0}(y)}e^{\frac{F^{\prime\prime}(t_{0})}{2}(t-t_{0})^{2}}dt\geq C_{n}\cdot e^{F(t_{0})}\frac{t_{0}(t_{0}+1)}{\sqrt{2t_{0}+1}\cdot\sqrt{Q}}

It is elementary to see that

(5.133) Cn​Q12​(−y)−1≤t0≤Cn⋅Q12C_{n}Q^{\frac{1}{2}}(-y)^{-1}\leq t_{0}\leq C_{n}\cdot{Q^{\frac{1}{2}}}

Therefore,

(5.134) Ψ♭⁡(β,α,y)≥Cn⋅Q−14−12​n⋅ey⋅(−y)−1Γ⁡(α−β)⋅eF⁡(t0).\Tri(\fb,\fa,y)\geq C_{n}\cdot Q^{-\frac{1}{4}-\frac{1}{2n}}\cdot\frac{e^{y}\cdot(-y)^{-1}}{\Gamma(\alpha-\beta)}\cdot e^{F(t_{0})}.

The uniform estimate for Φ♯⁡(β,α,y)\Ku(\fb,\fa,y) stated in (5.117) can be proved in the same way. One just needs to apply Laplace’s method to the integral estimate formula in Lemma 5.8. We can eventually obtain

(5.135) Cn−1⋅Q−14⋅eG⁡(u0)≤∫0∞eG⁡(u)​𝑑u≤Cn⋅eG⁡(u0).C_{n}^{-1}\cdot Q^{-\frac{1}{4}}\cdot e^{G(u_{0})}\leq\int_{0}^{\infty}e^{G(u)}du\leq C_{n}\cdot e^{G(u_{0})}.

We omit the computations here.

∎

Original mathematics by the credited authors. Source-backed reader collection; mathematical self-containment is not assessed.