1

Is there any direct proof without using second derivative for convexity of $e^x$?

Najib Idrissi
  • 56,269
Ali
  • 2,340
  • 3
    Have you given this a try? Of course you need some definition of $e^x$ to work with, and if not characterizing it in terms of derivatives, then what will you use? – hardmath Jul 20 '15 at 14:56
  • 6
    Can you use the fact that a continuous function is convex if and only if it is midpoint-convex (i.e. $f\bigl(\frac{1}{2}(x+y)\bigr) \leqslant \frac{1}{2}\bigl(f(x) + f(y)\bigr)$ for all $x,y$)? – Daniel Fischer Jul 20 '15 at 15:00
  • @DanielFischer with the GM-AM inequality :D – user251257 Jul 20 '15 at 15:01
  • Dear hardmath $e^x$ has its standard definition. We want to prove its convexity only by definition that is$$e^{(\lambda x+(1-\lambda y))}\leq \lambda e^x+(1-\lambda)e^y$$ – Ali Jul 20 '15 at 15:01
  • Hint: Try factoring @DanielFischer 's suggestion. – Michael Burr Jul 20 '15 at 15:02
  • 4
    @Ali, there isn't a single standard definition. $f=\frac{df}{dx},f(0)=1$ is a very compact definition, for instance. – Jack D'Aurizio Jul 20 '15 at 15:02
  • I would try with it series expansion. –  Jul 20 '15 at 15:05
  • You are welcome dear 251257, would you please say your answer? – Ali Jul 20 '15 at 15:05

4 Answers4

7

Just expanding Daniel Fischer's comment, given that $f(x)=e^x$ is a positive and continuous function for which $f(x+y)=f(x)\,f(y)$, we have:

$$f\left(\frac{x+y}{2}\right) = \sqrt{f(x)\cdot f(y)}\color{red}{\leq} \frac{f(x)+f(y)}{2}\tag{1}$$ where $\color{red}{\leq}$ follows from the AM-GM inequality. But $(1)$ just gives the midpoint-convexity of $f(x)$, that together with continuity gives full convexity.

Jack D'Aurizio
  • 361,689
  • Thank you very much but using $$e^{\lambda x+(1-\lambda y)}\leq \lambda e^x+(1-\lambda )e^y$$ was our mean. – Ali Jul 20 '15 at 15:16
  • @Ali: so you have to use convexity to prove convexity? I don't understand. You just have to prove Jensen's inequality for $\lambda=\frac{1}{2}$, then use continuity. That is Daniel Fischer's point and mine. – Jack D'Aurizio Jul 20 '15 at 15:31
  • proving the inequality was our mean. pardon. – Ali Jul 20 '15 at 16:29
2

Hint Here is a first step. Direct definition of convexity between points $x,y$ is $$f(hx + (1-h)y) \le hf(x) + (1-h) f(y)$$

Let $y=0$ and use Taylor expansion $e^x = \sum_{k=0}^\infty x^n/n!$ to note that $$ e^{hx} = 1 + (hx) + h^2 x^2 + h^3 x^3 + \ldots $$ and $$ (1-h) + he^x = 1+h + (h + hx + hx^2 + hx^3 + \ldots) = 1 + hx + hx^2 + hx^3 + \ldots $$ so now the desired inequality follows assuming $h > 0, x > 0$.

We can generalize this argument for other $x,y$...

gt6989b
  • 54,930
2

Let's check condition $$ f\Big(\frac{x+y}{2}\Big) \le \frac12 (f(x) + f(y)) $$ for $f(x)=e^x$. So, $$ e^{(x+y)/2} = e^{x/2} e^{y/2} \le \frac12 (e^x + e^y). $$ Denote $a=e^{x/2}$, $b=e^{y/2}$; then, $$ ab \le \frac12 (a^2 + b^2) \Longrightarrow 2ab \le a^2 + b^2 \Longrightarrow (a-b)^2\ge 0 $$ And... it's true!

  • I don't think those arrows in the last sentence are good at all, if the proof is to work, shouldn't the arrows be $\iff$. Can anybody with experience confirm this? – Zain Patel Jul 20 '15 at 15:08
  • @ZainPatel Yes you are right, but you can just change them to arrows to the both side. However one should write a proof from ahat we know to what we don't. – wythagoras Jul 20 '15 at 15:11
  • @ZainPatel, you're right, I want to wrote '?' instead of '<', but I assummed that idea is more important than notation. Anyway, I think that OP would be able to revert arrows – Michael Galuza Jul 20 '15 at 15:11
2

We can use the definition of convexity itself.

A space S is convex if for any $u,v \in S$ $$\lambda u + (1- \lambda)v \in S \ \forall \ \lambda \in [0,1] $$

Intuitively this means if two points are in the space, then every point between them is in the space. (I can explain further if requested in comments). From here note that the space we want to consider is the set of points $(x,y)$ such that

$$ y \ge e^x $$

So let us consider any pair of points $ (x_1, y_1) $, $(x_2, y_2)$ satisfying $$ y_1 \ge e^{x_1} $$ and $$ y_2 \ge e^{x_2} $$

From we wish to establish that

$$ \lambda y_1 + (1- \lambda) y_2 \ge e^{\lambda x_1 + (1- \lambda) x_2 } $$

Where again $0 \le \lambda \le 1 $. Recall that by definition $$ \lambda y_1 + (1- \lambda) y_2 \ge \lambda e^{x_1} + (1- \lambda) e^{x_2} $$

We then wish to show that

$$\lambda e^{x_1} + (1- \lambda) e^{x_2} \ge e^{\lambda x_1 + (1- \lambda) x_2 } $$

Without loss of generality we assume $x_2 > x_1$ and divide through by $e^{x_1}$ to find

$$ \lambda + (1- \lambda)e^{x_2-x_1} \ge e^{(\lambda - 1)x_1 + (1 - \lambda )x_2 } $$

Focus on the right side, we can rewrite that as,

$$ \lambda + (1- \lambda)e^{x_2-x_1} \ge e^{ (1 - \lambda )(x_2- x_1) } $$

Let us denote $$ x_2 - x_1 = T$$ whereas $T \ge 0 $

$$ \lambda + (1- \lambda)e^{T} \ge e^{ (1 - \lambda )(T) } $$

I wish I knew how to finish this. But I will leave it as an exercise to the reader ;)

addendum

We can consider the taylor series of $e^x$ noting that

$$ \lambda + (1- \lambda)e^{t} = \lambda + (1 - \lambda)(1 + t + \frac{1}{2}t^2 ... ) = $$

$$ 1 + (1 - \lambda)t + (1 - \lambda) \frac{1}{2}t^2 ... $$

And

$$ e^{(1 - \lambda)t} = 1 + (1 - \lambda)t + \frac{1}{2}(1- \lambda)^2t^2 ... $$

Note that since $$ 0 \le 1 - \lambda \le 1$$

$$(1- \lambda)^n \le (1 - \lambda) \forall n \ge 0 $$

Therefore

$$ e^{(1 - \lambda)t} = 1 + (1 - \lambda)t + \frac{1}{2}(1- \lambda)^2t^2 ... \le 1 + (1 - \lambda)t + (1 - \lambda) \frac{1}{2}t^2 ...$$

Showing the desired result. Although, the use of taylor series, breaks your requirement of avoiding derivatives all together.

  • Your argument reduces the issue of convexity on an arbitrary interval $[a,b]$ to one on interval $[0,T]$. With a little further work this can be reduce to consideration of the interval $[0,1]$. – hardmath Jul 20 '15 at 16:26