Professional Documents
Culture Documents
118 Inequalities For Mathematics Competitions Look Inside
118 Inequalities For Mathematics Competitions Look Inside
Preface vii
In the first section, the readers will encounter the Muirhead Inequality, as well
as older and newer methods of proving inequalities. Among these we men-
tion the substitution method, where, by suggestive examples, some famous
inequalities are explored through homogenization, normalization, and typical
substitutions in practical problems. Some of these include substitutions that
transform a geometric inequality into an algebraic one and vice versa. An-
other method presented is the tangent line method, a powerful tool used to
ease computations in the case of polynomial or rational functions. Also, to
form a thorough intuition, we provide graphical representations for selected
examples. Undetermined coefficients and the contradiction method also guar-
antee the success of solving certain classes of inequalities as shown in examples.
In the following two sections we present a set of strong theorems, first for sym-
metrical inequalities in three variables and then in several variables, some of
which concur with other sources such as the pqr or uvw methods. Finally,
we introduce two more recent methods known as SOS (sum of squares), SOS-
Schur method, and a multitude of examples to illustrate as many aspects as
possible.
All of the material presented throughout the book is intended for a wide
audience: high school students, teachers, undergraduates, or and anyone with
a passion for mathematics.
The subsequent sections are dedicated to the proposed problems, which are
divided into introductory and advanced. The inequalities from each section are
ordered increasingly by the number of variables and and the degree of difficulty.
Each problem has at least one complete solution, and many problems have
viii
Note 2. We have
n
1X
[(1, 0, . . . , 0)] = ai ,
n
i=1
which is the arithmetic mean of a1 , a2 , . . . , an , and
✓ ◆
1 1 1 p
, ,..., = n a1 a2 . . . an
n n n
p = (p1 , p2 , . . . , pn ), q = (q1 , q2 , . . . , qn )
ap1(1) · · · apn(n) + aq1(1) · · · aqn(n) (p1 +q1 )/2 (pn +qn )/2.
a (1) · · · a (n)
2
Summing over 2 Sn and dividing by n!, we get the inequality.
Proof. We will prove this theorem for the case n = 3. Let us first notice that
for n = 2 the inequality follows easily. Indeed, it’s easy to check
because q1 p2 = p1 q2 q1 q2 0, q2 p2 = p1 q1 0.
Now, let us consider the case n = 3. We assume that p 6= q and not all the ai
are equal. Let p = (p1 , p2 , p3 ), q = (q1 , q2 , q3 ) and let us consider the following
cases:
1. q1 p2 . Since
and
(p1 + p2 q1 , p3 ) (q2 , q3 ),
using Muirhead’s Inequality twice for the case n = 2, proven before, it follows
that
X p p
6[p] = (a11 a22 + ap12 ap21 ) ap33
cyc
X⇣ ⌘
ap11 +p2 q 1 q1
a2 + aq11 ap21 +p2 q1
ap33
cyc
X ⇣ ⌘
= aq11 ap21 +p2 q1 p3
a3 + ap23 ap31 +p2 q1
cyc
X
aq11 (aq22 aq33 + aq23 aq32 )
cyc
= 6[q].
(p1 , p2 + p3 q1 ) (q2 , q3 ).
= 6[q].
a2 (b + c) b2 (c + a) c2 (a + b)
+ 2 + 2 a + b + c.
b2 + c 2 c + a2 a + b2
Solution. Clearing denominators, the inequality becomes
X
a2 (b + c)(c2 + a2 )(a2 + b2 ) (a + b + c)(a2 + b2 )(b2 + c2 )(c2 + a2 ).
cyc
or
[(6, 1, 0)] [(5, 2, 0)],
which follows by Muirhead’s Inequality.
Equality holds if and only if a = b = c.
a3 b3 c3 3(a3 + b3 + c3 )
+ + .
bc ca ab a 2 + b2 + c 2
Solution. The inequality can be rewritten as
or
or
[(6, 0, 0)] + 2[(4, 2, 0)] 3[(4, 1, 1)],
which follows from Muirhead’s Inequality,
a4 bc + b4 ca + c4 ab + a3 b3 + b3 c3 + c3 a3 + 2a2 b2 c2
a3 b2 c + a3 bc2 + b2 c2 a + b3 ca2 + c3 a2 b + c3 ab2 + 2a2 b2 c2 ,
a4 bc + b4 ca + c4 ab + a3 b3 + b3 c3 + c3 a3
a3 b2 c + a3 bc2 + b2 c2 a + b3 ca2 + c3 a2 b + c3 ab2 ,
x2 y2 z2
a= , b= , c= , x, y, z > 0,
yz zx xy
the inequality becomes
✓ ◆
x4 y4 z4 xy yz zx
+ + +3 2 + 2+ 2 ,
y 2 z 2 z 2 x2 x2 y 2 z2 x y
or
x6 + y 6 + z 6 + 3x2 y 2 z 2 2(x3 y 3 + y 3 z 3 + z 3 x3 ),
or
[(6, 0, 0)] + [(2, 2, 2)] 2[(3, 3, 0)].
But this follows from the following inequality
or
2[7, 3, 0)] + [(4, 3, 3)] 2[(8, 2, 0)] + [(6, 2, 2)].
However this inequality is true, since by Muirhead’s Inequality,
[7, 3, 0)] [(8, 2, 0)],
and
[(4, 3, 3)] [(6, 2, 2)].
Equality holds if and only if a = b = c.
8 Some Classical and Some New Inequalities
Example 9. Let a, b, c be positive real numbers such that a+b+c = a2 +b2 +c2 .
Prove that
ab + bc + ca abc + 2.
Solution. First, we homogenize the inequality and we get the following in-
equality
or X
2 (a6 + 2a4 b2 + 2a4 c2 + 2a2 b2 c2 )
cyc
X
(a5 b + a5 c + 4a4 bc + 2a3 b3 + 3a3 b2 c + 3a3 bc2 ),
cyc
that is
or
X X
(x + y)(y + z)(z + x)(x + y + z)(x3 + y 3 + z 3 ) 2xy(x + y) (x3 y + x3 z).
cyc cyc
[(6, 1, 0)] [(4, 3, 0)] + 2[(4, 2, 1)] [(3, 3, 1)] [(3, 2, 2)] 0
Example 11. Let x, y, z be positive real numbers such that xyz = 1. Prove
that
3 3 3
x+y+z + + .
x+2 y+2 z+2
Solution. Multiplying throughout by the product of the (clearly positive) de-
nominators and rearranging terms, the proposed inequality is equivalent to
X
2 (x2 y + x2 z) + 4(x2 + y 2 + z 2 ) + 5(xy + yz + zx) 3(x + y + z) 30 0.
cyc
X X X X
2 (a6 b3 + a6 c3 ) + 4 a7 bc + 5 a 4 b4 c 3 a 5 b2 c 2 30a3 b3 c3 0,
cyc cyc cyc cyc
5 3
2[(6, 3, 0)] + 2[(7, 1, 1)] + [(4, 4, 1)] [(5, 2, 2)] 5[(3, 3, 3)] 0.
2 2
Now according to Muirhead’s Inequality, we have
3 3
[(6, 3, 0)] [(5, 2, 2)],
2 2
1 1
[(6, 3, 0)] [(3, 3, 3)],
2 2
2[(7, 1, 1)] 2[(3, 3, 3)],
5 5
[(4, 4, 1)] [(3, 3, 3)].
2 2
If we add the last four inequalities we obtain the required result. Equality
occurs if and only if a = b = c = 1.
Example 12. (Pham Kim Hung) Let a, b, and c be nonnegative real numbers
such that a + b + c = 3. Prove that
a2 b b2 c c2 a
+ + 1.
4 bc 4 ca 4 ab
Solution. Since for nonnegative real numbers such that a + b + c = 3 we have
the well known inequality
a2 b + b2 c + c2 a + abc 4, (1)
then
✓ ◆
a2 b b2 c c2 a
4 + + 1
4 bc 4 ca 4 ab
✓ ◆ ✓ ◆ ✓ ◆
2 bc 2 ca 2 ab
=a b +1 +b c +1 +c a +1 4
4 bc 4 ca 4 ab
✓ ◆
ab bc ca
abc + + 1 .
4 bc 4 ca 4 ab
Muirhead’s Inequality 11