A.2. The confluent hypergeometric functions
Now we summarize some results regarding the confluent hypergeometric functions which are used in Section 5. Given such that and is not a negative integer, we consider the following confluent hypergeometric equation
| (A.14) |
|
|
|
Let
| (A.15) |
|
|
|
where we define the notation and . So the power series is always well-defined for all , and .
Moreover, for any fixed , the function is entire in and meromorphic in with simple poles at negative integers.
It is by straightforward calculations that the function is a solution to (A.14). In the literature, is called Kummer’s (confluent hypergeometric) function. Moreover, when , one can directly check that the function
, which is linearly independent of , also solves (A.14). Therefore,
the
general solution of (A.14) for is
| (A.16) |
|
|
|
The power series definition of immediately gives the following integral representation formula which is well known in the literature. We include a short proof just for the convenience of the readers.
Lemma A.2.
For any , then for each ,
| (A.17) |
|
|
|
Proof.
Given , let be the beta function which is defined by
| (A.18) |
|
|
|
Then the beta function satisfies .
The above formulae imply that
| (A.19) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now we return to the definition of , combining the above summation,
| (A.20) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The proof is done.
Given and , we define the function
| (A.21) |
|
|
|
Quick computations show that for each , the function
is a solution to the confluent hypergeometric equation (A.14) on the positive real axis .
Now let and , thanks to (A.16), the function can be written in terms of Kummer’s function . Evaluating those functions and their derivatives at , one can easily obtain
| (A.22) |
|
|
|
Notice that, the above relation is well-defined for each and non-integral . Moreover, if , then the right hand side of (A.22) will tend to a definite limit.
The function is usually called Tricomi’s (confluent hypergeometric) function.
In our context, we are also interested in the case .
It can be directly verified that, if , the function
| (A.23) |
|
|
|
solves equation (A.14).
Moreover, it immediately follows from the integral representation of that for any ,
| (A.24) |
|
|
|
In summary,
if ,
the equation (A.14) has two linearly independent solutions
and .
The asymptotic behavior of , and
can be easily seen from the above integral formulae. In fact, we have the following
Lemma A.3.
The following asymptotics hold:
- (1)
Let and satisfy , then
| (A.25) |
|
|
|
- (2)
Let , then
| (A.26) |
|
|
|
- (3)
Let , then
| (A.27) |
|
|
|
Proof.
The proof is straightforward.
For example, we only prove
| (A.28) |
|
|
|
as . The calculations of the remaining cases are the same. We make change of variables and let
, then
|
|
|
|
| (A.29) |
|
|
|
|
Since and , it is obvious . Hence dominated convergence theorem implies
| (A.30) |
|
|
|
Therefore, as ,
| (A.31) |
|
|
|
Next we introduce some recurrence formulae for Kummer’s function.
Lemma A.4.
Let and , then for each ,
| (A.32) |
|
|
|
|
| (A.33) |
|
|
|
|
Proof.
The formula can be quickly verified by applying the power series definition of .
∎
With the above recurrence formula, we can extend the domain of indices in Lemma A.3 for Kummer’s function.
Lemma A.5.
For any and such that
, then
| (A.34) |
|
|
|
Proof.
We start with the initial step by assuming
and . Then Lemma A.3 in this case shows that the desired asymptotics hold in this case.
Applying the recurrence formula (A.33), we can extend the domain of indices to and . Then applying (A.32), one can obtain the desired asymptotics for all . The proof is done.
∎
Lemma A.6 (Kummer’s transformation law).
Let and , then
for any ,
| (A.35) |
|
|
|
Proof.
First, we temporarily assume . By Lemma A.2,
| (A.36) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now we prove the general case. Since both
and
are entire functions in , so the standard analytic continuation theorem implies that
holds for any arbitrary and .
∎
Next we give another integral representation for Kummer’s function in the case , which has a crucial role in Section 5.
Lemma A.7.
Assume that and , then it holds that
| (A.37) |
|
|
|
Proof.
By definition,
| (A.38) |
|
|
|
Integrating the above expansion, it follows that
| (A.39) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By the recursive formula of the Gamma function, , so it follows that
| (A.40) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Therefore,
| (A.41) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The last equality follows from Kummer’s transformation law.
Lemma A.8.
Let , then for all
| (A.42) |
|
|
|
|
| (A.43) |
|
|
|
|
Proof.
The relation (A.42) can be verified by the power series definition of and , so we just omit the computations.
To prove (A.43), first we assume is not an integer. Combining the definition
| (A.44) |
|
|
|
and the relation
| (A.45) |
|
|
|
which is given by (A.22).
If is an integer, the relation (A.43) can be obtained by the limiting definition of and the continuity argument for .
The following corollary shows the asymptotic behavior
of and as .
Corollary A.8.1.
Let , then we have
| (A.46) |
|
|
|
and
| (A.47) |
|
|
|
Proof.
The proof follows from Lemma A.3, Lemma A.5 and Lemma A.8.
∎