129

$x,y,z >0$, prove $$\frac{x^4}{8x^3+5y^3}+\frac{y^4}{8y^3+5z^3}+\frac{z^4}{8z^3+5x^3} \geqslant \frac{x+y+z}{13}$$

Note: Often Stack Exchange asked to show some work before answering the question. This inequality was used as a proposal problem for National TST of an Asian country a few years back. However, upon receiving the official solution, the committee decided to drop this problem immediately. They don't believe that any students can solve this problem in 3 hour time frame.

Update 1: In this forum, somebody said that BW is the only solution for this problem, which to the best of my knowledge is wrong. This problem is listed as "coffin problems" in my country. The official solution is very elementary and elegant.

Update 2: Although there are some solutions (or partial solution) based on numerical method, I am more interested in the approach with "pencil and papers." I think the approach by Peter Scholze in here may help.

Update 3: Michael has tried to apply Peter Scholze's method but not found the solution yet.

Update 4: Symbolic expanding with computer is employed and verify the inequality. However, detail solution that not involved computer has not been found. Whoever can solve this inequality using high school math knowledge will be considered as the "King of Inequality".

HN_NH
  • 4,361
  • I'm quite interested in the solution do you have the link to the official solution. – Archis Welankar May 07 '16 at 16:35
  • 8
    I have no idea about the official solution. I try this problem for the past 3 years but not yet success. Even with brute force, I still cannot solve it. This shows level of insanity this problem has. – HN_NH May 07 '16 at 16:37
  • 9
    A simple observation is that the inequality is homogeneous, so it suffices to prove the case $ x + y + z = 1 $. Wolfram helped me solve the mess of an equation system that arises out of Lagrange multipliers, so I am convinced that the inequality is true now. (I have no idea how to solve the system myself, so this doesn't really count as a solution.) – Ege Erdil May 07 '16 at 23:01
  • Do you have the solution? Or do you know which country it is? Maybe we can find the solution on AoPS. – Yuxiao Xie May 22 '16 at 05:50
  • Nobody in AoPS can solve this problem. They all give up three years ago – HN_NH May 22 '16 at 05:51
  • So this is an unsolved problem?! By the way, if all methods turn out to be useless, then just multiply it all out, which will yield a (yet ugly) solution. However, this is unlikely to be the official solution... – Yuxiao Xie May 22 '16 at 05:55
  • Even if you multiply everything out, it is still very difficult (or even impossible) to solve. – HN_NH May 22 '16 at 06:03
  • 2
    I believe that $\sum_{\mathrm{cyc}}\frac{x^4}{ay^3+bz^3}\geq\frac{x+y+z}{a+b}$, and why not $\sum_{\mathrm{cyc}}\frac{x_n^4}{a_1x_1^3+\ldots a_{n-1}x_{n-1}^3}\geq\frac{x_1+\ldots+x_{n-1}+x_n}{a_1+\ldots+a_{n-1}+a_n}$ for $n\geq3$. Maybe the general case could be somehow helpful... – Nicolas May 22 '16 at 09:13
  • @YuxiaoXie I do not see why we should ask $a>b$. But you're right, we should ask for some restrictions, maybe $a,b>0$ is a good one ? – Nicolas May 22 '16 at 15:03
  • @Nicolas Oh wait, you must be mistaken: it should be $\sum_{cyc} \frac {x^4}{ax^3+by^3} \ge \frac {x+y+z}{a+b}$, so it's reasonable to add that $a, b \gt 0$ and $a \gt b$. – Yuxiao Xie May 23 '16 at 04:36
  • I posted it on a site in my country, and someone said that for $\sum_{cyc}\frac{x^4}{kx^3+y^3}\ge\frac{\sum_{cyc}x}{k+1}$ to hold, $k$ has a maximum of about $1.64199$ (it is a root of some polynomial). The $k$ in this question is $1.6$, so it is an extremely strong inequality. – Yuxiao Xie May 23 '16 at 04:48
  • Now it seems that we can only multiply all things out... But that's still not easy. Maybe increment substitution will be employed (i.e. set $x$ to be the smallest of the three and let $y = x + p$ and $z = x + q$). I'm not familiar with these techniques, though. – Yuxiao Xie May 23 '16 at 04:55
  • @YuxiaoXie There was a typo in my post, thank you for the correction. I am not sure to understand you when you say "$k$ has a maximum of about $1.64199$": is the inequality wrong if with $a=k>1.64199$ and $b=1$ ? That could mean that we should ask for $a>b>0$ and $a\leq1.64199b$. – Nicolas May 23 '16 at 08:05
  • @Nicolas Well, this number is not exact. It is a zero of some polynomial of degree $40$. But in view of that, I don't think it a good idea to generalize this problem, which makes it even harder to solve. Even if $k = 1$ this inequality hardly has any beautiful solution, not to mention when $k = 1.6$ or closer to the maximum. I guess the only way is to multiply all things out. Maybe the committee thought that the calculations involved is not something that can be done within 3 hours by just "pencil and paper". I'm just curious how s/he got the $k$, but s/he didn't say it... – Yuxiao Xie May 23 '16 at 14:49
  • @YuxiaoXie Thank you for your precisions. The Lagrange multipliers theorem (that is useful to deal with this kind of problem) yields a system of algebraic equations, so it seems that ugly calculations are unavoidable here... – Nicolas May 23 '16 at 14:59
  • In your profile you wrote you want a solution to this problem before your 25th birthday. @MichaelRozenberg added a solution about 2 month ago. Happy birthday and don't forget to accept the solution. – miracle173 Jul 03 '16 at 12:18
  • Dear @HN_NH The Peter Scholze's method does not help here, because he works with a linear function and it's impossible for your inequality. I think your problem might not appear on mathematical competition because it can not be solved with "pencil and paper". It's my opinion, of course. – Michael Rozenberg Jul 29 '16 at 03:28
  • I wonder if it is by chance that 5, 8 and 13 are successive Fibonacchi numbers. – aventurin Aug 11 '16 at 10:55
  • I see that you have offered a bounty but you still would like to see a different answer. Maybe you might be interested in my effort to collect somewhere unresolved bounties. For details see meta and this chat room. Feel free to ping me here or in chat after you see this message. (Since it is unrelated to the question, I prefer removing it after it served its purpose.) – Martin Sleziak Dec 05 '16 at 11:40
  • @YuxiaoXie would you be willing to disclose what was the solution that achieve the optimal such $k$? I mean just the brief outline. – dezdichado Jan 13 '17 at 20:23
  • @dezdichado I'm sorry, but honestly I don't know. I've already said all the information I knew. Maybe it has something to do with Lagrange multipliers, but I can't really handle that kind of things. You might consider posting another question concerning how to get such $k$? – Yuxiao Xie Jan 18 '17 at 06:41
  • @Colescu Sorry I do not know inequalities; how can we get a solution (in general) if we multiply everything out? If we multiply and get a polynomial $P(x, y, z) \ge 0$, are you saying that we are guaranteed to be able to factor $P(x, y, z)$ as a sum of squares (or something like that) and thereby prove the inequality? – Ovi Feb 12 '18 at 14:16
  • 1
    @Ovi For olympiad-style inequalities, sometimes you just multiply everything out and then try using some techniques or well-known inequalities. For example, Schur's inquality and Muirhead's inequality are used extensively. There are also techniques like "uvw method" or "SOS method", which are specially designed to solve olympiad problems. If you are interested, you can learn more on the AoPS forum: https://artofproblemsolving.com/community/c6_high_school_olympiads – Yuxiao Xie Feb 13 '18 at 08:36
  • 3
    Any further ideas for changes of the tags here must be first proposed to me. – quid Oct 13 '18 at 23:22
  • 1
    @max8128 I solved this problem three years ago and posted it here. See my solution. – Michael Rozenberg Feb 18 '19 at 21:49
  • 1
    According to Colescu's comment, here is stronger one: Let $k = \frac{133}{81} \approx 1.641975.$ Let $x, y, z > 0$. Prove that $$\frac{x^4}{kx^3+y^3} + \frac{y^4}{ky^3+z^3} + \frac{z^4}{kz^3+x^3} \ge \frac{x+y+z}{k+1}.$$ Can it be proved by BW? I can prove the case $k=8/5$ by BW, but not for $k=133/81.$ – River Li Jun 09 '19 at 15:43
  • I have obtained a fine new proof "with pencil and paper." Who will start a bounty? – Yuri Negometyanov Nov 20 '19 at 20:47
  • @RiverLi The case $k=133/81$ can be proved by my new approach. – Yuri Negometyanov Nov 22 '19 at 21:12
  • @Yuri Negometyanov Your solution need to be reviewed. – River Li Nov 23 '19 at 01:03
  • @RiverLi My new solution exists only as a draft. I will publish it when a bounty will start, to provide more views. – Yuri Negometyanov Nov 23 '19 at 01:52
  • @Yuri Negometyanov You are waiting for someone to post a new question with a bounty about the inequality for $k=133/81$. It is a surprising event. – River Li Nov 23 '19 at 05:54
  • @RiverLi I am waiting that someone will start a bounty in this question and then use my solution as a template for the case $k=133/81.$ Because my new technology allows suitable tuning. – Yuri Negometyanov Nov 23 '19 at 09:49
  • @quid I have a draft with a fine new proof "with pencil and paper." And I am waiting while anybody start a bounty, because this leads to additional views. Can you help me? – Yuri Negometyanov Dec 29 '19 at 00:36
  • 2
    @YuriNegometyanov I added a bounty. I usually would not follow such requests, but due to a combination of circumstances I did. Don't disappoint me! :-) – quid Dec 29 '19 at 12:59
  • 8
    @YuriNegometyanov: If you have a solution then why don't you just post it? – I find this request for a bounty a bit strange, and to be honest, I wonder that a moderator complied with it. (It isn't just for the hat, or is it?) – Martin R Dec 29 '19 at 13:23
  • @quid I am grateful for you. Announced answer is marked "Version of 29.12.19." My highest goal is to return the OP author to the site. Happy 2020! – Yuri Negometyanov Dec 29 '19 at 14:15
  • 1
    @YuriNegometyanv I will leave the bounty up basically until the end to get the visibility. Happy New Year to you as well. – quid Dec 29 '19 at 14:25
  • @MartinR I respect and fear you as my best critic. I hope for your comments. And secretly I hope that my new work will dispel all misunderstandings.Happy 2020! – Yuri Negometyanov Dec 29 '19 at 14:27
  • Yes, the case $k=\frac{133}{81}$ is extremely hard! It's not for a contest as the case $k=\frac{13}{8}.$ By the way, the inequality with $k=1$ has a nice proof and it for a contest of course. – Michael Rozenberg Dec 31 '19 at 03:25
  • 1
    @Michael Rozenberg For $k=\frac{13}{8}$, currently, the only complete solution I saw is the BW solution, except for the methods to find all real solutions of the system of equations for stationary points. – River Li Jan 02 '20 at 02:56
  • 2
    It is not nice to refer to somebody (namely @MichaelRozenberg) as "evil low class" because you disagree with their choice of tags. – Maximilian Janisch Jan 11 '20 at 17:52
  • @MartinR New "Light version" is ready and looks correct, and I am grateful to RiverLi for the discussion. Now I hope to yours comments. – Yuri Negometyanov Jan 25 '20 at 16:20
  • @RiverLi I have a new method to solve this kind of inequality can you find (for me) a point $(a,b,c)$ where the inequality is very sharp because I have not the tools for ? Thanks a lot .I mean the case $k=\frac{133}{81}$ – Miss and Mister cassoulet char Feb 10 '20 at 19:15
  • @The.old.boy For example, $k=\frac{133}{81}$, $x = \frac{121}{84}$, $y = \frac{43}{66}$ and $z = 1$, $\frac{x^4}{kx^3+y^3} + \frac{y^4}{ky^3+z^3} + \frac{z^4}{kz^3+x^3} - \frac{x+y+z}{k+1} = \frac{12277729945349882276542173}{6088244041996413295332246528616} \approx 0.0000020166$. – River Li Feb 11 '20 at 02:07
  • I think I have found an elementary and sort solution. Please take a look. – Nikos Bagis Dec 24 '20 at 15:23
  • @HN_NH, why are your problems are so difficult ?? –  Mar 05 '21 at 09:49

14 Answers14

31

A big problem we get around $(x,y,z)=(0.822,1.265,1.855)$.

The Buffalo Way helps:

Let $x=\min\{x,y,z\}$, $y=x+u$,$z=x+v$ and $x=t\sqrt{uv}$.

Hence, $\frac{13}{5}\prod\limits_{cyc}(8x^3+5y^3)\left(\sum\limits_{cyc}\frac{x^4}{8x^3+5y^3}-\frac{x+y+z}{13}\right)=$

$$=156(u^2-uv+v^2)x^8+6(65u^3+189u^2v-176uv^2+65v^3)x^7+$$ $$+2(377u^4+1206u^3v+585u^2v^2-1349uv^3+377v^4)x^6+$$ $$+3(247u^5+999u^4v+1168u^3v^2-472u^2v^3-726uv^4+247)x^5+$$ $$+3(117u^6+696u^5v+1479u^4v^2+182u^3v^3-686u^2v^4-163uv^5+117v^6)x^4+$$ $$+(65u^7+768u^6v+2808u^5v^2+2079u^4v^3-1286u^3v^4-585u^2v^5+181uv^6+65v^7)x^3+$$$$+3uv(40u^6+296u^5v+472u^4v^2-225u^2v^4+55uv^5+25v^6)x^2+ $$ $$+u^2v^2(120u^5+376u^4v+240u^3v^2-240u^2v^3-25uv^4+75v^5)x+$$ $$+5u^3v^3(8u^4+8u^3v-8uv^3+5v^4)\geq$$ $$\geq u^5v^5(156t^8+531t^7+2t^6-632t^5-152t^4+867t^3+834t^2+299t+40)\geq0$$

Done!

For example, we'll prove that $$6(65u^3+189u^2v-176uv^2+65v^3)\geq531\sqrt{u^3v^3},$$ which gives a coefficient $531$ before $t^7$ in the polynomial $156t^8+531t^7+2t^6-632t^5-152t^4+867t^3+834t^2+299t+40.$

Indeed, let $u=k^2v$, where $k>0$.

Thus, we need to prove that: $$130k^6+378k^4-177k^3-352k^2+130\geq0$$ and by AM-GM we obtain: $$130k^6+378k^4-177k^3-352k^2+130=$$ $$=130\left(k^3+\frac{10}{13}k-1\right)^2+\frac{k}{13}(2314k^3+1079k^2-5576k+2600)\geq$$ $$\geq\frac{k}{13}\left(8\cdot\frac{1157}{4}k^3+5\cdot\frac{1079}{5}k^2+21\cdot\frac{2600}{21}-5576k\right)\geq$$ $$\geq\frac{k^2}{13}\left(34\sqrt[34]{\left(\frac{1157}{4}\right)^8\left(\frac{1079}{5}\right)^5\left(\frac{2600}{21}\right)^{21}}-5576\right)>0.$$ We'll prove that $$ 2(377u^4+1206u^3v+585u^2v^2-1349uv^3+377v^4)\geq2u^2v^2,$$ for which it's enough to prove that: $$377t^4+1206t^3+584t^2-1349t+377\geq0$$ or $$t^4+\frac{1206}{377}t^3+\frac{584}{377}t^2-\frac{1349}{377}t+1\geq0$$ or $$\left(t^2+\frac{603}{377}t-\frac{28}{29}\right)^2+\frac{131015t^2-69589t+9633}{142129}\geq0,$$ which is true because $$69589^2-4\cdot131015\cdot9633<0.$$

  • 4
    It seems that everybody overlooked that this is the solutions of this problem. I changed the last step of the proof so hat it is simpler. I hope thi is ok. I also added an answer that is an extenede comment to this proof the shows how to confirm these calculations with the cas Maxima. – miracle173 Jul 03 '16 at 12:16
  • 1
    there is an error in my edit. One cannot assume $z\le y$. I try do undo the change. – miracle173 Jul 03 '16 at 13:06
  • 1
    @MichaelRozenberg: can you elaborate how you get the the polynomial in t and the estimates? – miracle173 Jul 03 '16 at 13:22
  • 2
    @miracle173 for example, $156(u^2-uv+v^2)x^8\geq156uvx^8=156u^5v^5t^8$. – Michael Rozenberg Jul 03 '16 at 13:31
  • 1
    Here is a link to an answer that contains a Maxima script with some details to this answer. – miracle173 Jul 03 '16 at 18:30
  • 1
    How did you find a lower bound on the 7th degree polynomial in front of the $x^3$ term (apparently it is $867(uv)^{7/2}$) without computer assistance? What is the strategy in bounding these polynomials? – Ivan Jul 28 '16 at 22:20
  • 1
    @Ivan 4 $\left(\frac{p_7(x)}{x^{\frac{7}{2}}}\right)'=\frac{455x^7+3835x^6+8424x^5+2079x^4+1286x^3+1755x^2-905-455}{2x^{\frac{9}{2}}}$ and it's obvious has an unique positive root $0.474...$. Easy to see that it gets a minimum point. All this you can get without computer (with calculator, of course). – Michael Rozenberg Jul 29 '16 at 02:38
  • 1
    I forgot $x$ after $905$ – Michael Rozenberg Jul 29 '16 at 03:06
  • 1
    Thanks, Michael, I agree it has a single root. But is knowing the value of the root supposed to be a joke? Or are you getting it from a calculator? In which case, have you accounted for numerical rounding? I am genuinely curious since I'd really like to see a purely analytical solution to this problem. – Ivan Jul 29 '16 at 06:57
  • 1
    @Ivan I used a calculator, of course! The hint: you can type $.474$ instead of $0.474$ – Michael Rozenberg Jul 29 '16 at 09:59
  • 1
    @MichaelRozenberg However, I have just developed a new solution that does not require a calculator to understand. The draft will be published as soon as the bounty starts. – Yuri Negometyanov Nov 24 '19 at 01:55
  • 1
    Is it $\frac{13}{5} \left[ \prod\limits_{cyc}(8x^3+5y^3) \right] \left(\sum\limits_{cyc}\frac{x^4}{8x^3+5y^3}-\frac{x+y+z}{13}\right)$ what you mean, or $\frac{13}{5}\prod\limits_{cyc} \left[ (8x^3+5y^3) \left(\sum\limits_{cyc}\frac{x^4}{8x^3+5y^3}-\frac{x+y+z}{13}\right) \right]$ ? – Redsbefall Jan 14 '20 at 11:34
  • 1
    @Arief Anbiya It's the first. – Michael Rozenberg Jan 14 '20 at 11:36
  • How do you get the last inequality? – Redsbefall Jan 15 '20 at 02:28
  • I know the 1st and last term: $156(u^{2} -uv + v^{2})(x^{8}) \ge 156(uv)(uv)^{4}t^{8}$, and if WLOG $u \ge v$ then $5(uv)^{3} (8u^{4} + 8u^{3}v - 8uv^{3} + 5v^{4}) \ge 5(uv)^{3}8 u^{2}v^{2} + 8uv(u-v)(u+v) \ge 5 (uv)^{5}$ – Redsbefall Jan 15 '20 at 03:14
  • @Arief Anbiya We can-not assume that $u\geq v$. I am ready to explain, how I got one of coefficients of the polynomial in the last line of my proof. Choose please this coefficient. – Michael Rozenberg Jan 15 '20 at 07:23
  • Yes I made mistake. Coefficients of $t^{7}$ and the last term.. – Redsbefall Jan 15 '20 at 11:19
  • 1
    @Arief Anbiya I added something. See now. – Michael Rozenberg Jan 15 '20 at 13:05
  • Does Local Symmetric Method help here, Mr. @MichaelRozenberg ? –  May 21 '20 at 06:00
  • @bamboo_jjvy271 This method works sometimes if the equality occurs for equality case of two variables. But in our case there is a point with different coordinates, for which the L-S is closed to $\frac{x+y+z}{13},$ Id est, it's probably that this method does not help here. In any case, I tried also to use this method. We obtain something which is very very ugly. – Michael Rozenberg May 21 '20 at 06:21
  • 1
    Wow thanks a lot –  May 21 '20 at 08:02
  • I downvoted due to the false statement "I am sure that it's impossible to prove it during a competition without calculator" – mathworker21 Jun 07 '20 at 13:30
  • @mathworker21 Does it now seem better for you? – Michael Rozenberg Jun 07 '20 at 14:43
25

enter image description here

This is a question of the symmetric type, such as listed in:

With a constraint $\;x+y+z=1\;$ and $\;x,y,z > 0$ . Sort of a general method to transform such a constraint into the inside of a triangle in 2-D has been explained at length in:

Our function $f$ in this case is: $$ f(x,y,z) = \frac{x^4}{8x^3+5y^3}+\frac{y^4}{8y^3+5z^3}+\frac{z^4}{8z^3+5x^3} - \frac{1}{13} $$ And the minimum of that function inside the abovementioned triangle must shown to be greater or equal to zero. Due to symmetry - why oh why can it not be proved with Group Theory - an absolute minimum of the function is expected at $(x,y,z) = (1/3,1/3,1/3)$. Another proof without words is attempted by plotting a contour map of the function, as depicted. Levels (nivo) of these isolines are defined (in Delphi Pascal) as:

nivo := min + sqr(g/grens)*(max-min); { sqr = square ; grens = 20 ; g = 0..grens }
The whiteness of the isolines is proportional to the (positive) function values; they are almost black near the minimum and almost white near the maximum values. Maximum and minimum values of the function are observed to be:

 0.00000000000000E+0000 < f < 4.80709198767699E-0002
The little $\color{blue}{\mbox{blue}}$ spot in the middle is where $\,0 \le f(x,y,z) < 0.00002$ .
Han de Bruijn
  • 17,070
16

Too long for a comment.


The Engel form of Cauchy-Schwarz is not the right way:

$$\frac{(x^2)^2}{8x^3+5y^3}+\frac{(y^2)^2}{8y^3+5z^3}+\frac{(z^2)^2}{8z^3+5x^3} \geq \frac{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^2}{13(x^3+y^3+z^3)}$$

So we should prove that $$\frac{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^2}{13(x^3+y^3+z^3)}\geq\frac{x+y+z}{13}$$

which is equivalent to $$\frac{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^2}{(x^3+y^3+z^3)}\geq x+y+z$$ but by Cauchy-Schwarz again we have $$x+y+z=\frac{(x^2)^2}{x^3} +\frac{(y^2)^2}{y^3}+\frac{(z^2)^2}{z^3} \geq \frac{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^2}{(x^3+y^3+z^3)}$$

and the inequalities are in the wrong way.

user126154
  • 7,551
  • 2
    So directly using CS is too weak. Any other stronger inequalities that we can try? – Yuxiao Xie May 22 '16 at 05:56
  • 9
    I've been asked to delete my answer, and I want to explain why I posted it. I know that this is not an answer to the original problem. I posted it because there where another anwer claiming that the problem could have been solved by directly applying the Cauchy Schwarz inequality. So I though that was a good idea to show that this way is not the right way. Now the other answer has been deleted, but I still think that it can be useful to note that a direct application of CS does not work. – user126154 Jun 23 '16 at 09:03
  • This is very interesting... instead of an answer showing what works, we have an answer showing what doesn't work, which could prove to be equally useful! Love it! $(+1)$ :D – Mr Pie Feb 02 '19 at 13:58
8

This is more an extended comment to the answer of @MichaelRozenberg than an answer by its own. I used a short Maxima to confirm the equation derived by @MichaelRozenberg. I used Maxima because it is open source.

Here is the Maxima script (statements are terminated by $ or by ;):


"I use string to comment this file"$

"the flag `display2d`  controls 
the display of the output. You can unset it (display2d:false), that makes it easy to copy 
the maxima output to math.stackexchange"$

"to make it easier to input the problem data 
we define to function g and f:"$

g(r,s):=(8*r^3+5*s^3);

f(r,s):=r^4/g(r,s);

"
the initial problem has the form 
L(x,y,t)>=R(x,y,z) 
but we subtract R(x,y,z) from this equation and 
we state the problem in the form 
term0>=0 
where term0 is L(x,y,z)-R(x,y,z) 
this is term0:
"$

term0:f(x,y)+f(y,z)+f(z,x)-(x+y+z)/13;

"
Now we multiply the term0 by a positive fraction of the (positive) common denominator 
and get term1 that satisfies 
term1>=0 
`ratsimp` does some simplification like cancelling 
"$

term1:13/5*g(x,y)*g(y,z)*g(z,x)*term0,ratsimp;

"
now we assume x=0 and v>=0
`,y=x+u` and `,z=x+v` do these substitutions
"$

term2:term1,y=x+u,z=x+v;

"
ratsimp(.,x) does some simplification and displays the term as polynomial of x
"$

term3:ratsimp(term2,x);

for p:0 thru hipow(term3,x) do print (coeff(term3,x,p)*x^p);

"the lowerbound polynomial is given by @Michael Rozenberg";

lowerbound:u^5*v^5*(156*t^8+531*t^7+2*t^6-632*t^5-152*t^4+867*t^3+834*t^2+299*t+40);

"we use the expanded version of the lowerbound polynomial";

lb:lowerbound,expand;

"we want to avoid squareroots and therefore substitute u bei `q^2` and v by `w^2`. 
The expression `sqrt(u*v)` (see thhe proof of Michael Rozenberg) then can be replaced by q*w";

"We want to avoid squareroots and therefore substitute u bei `q^2` and v by `w^2`. 
The expression `sqrt(u*v)` (see thhe proof of Michael Rozenberg) then can be replaced by q*w.
The following loop checks for each exponent k, that the coefficient of the original polynomial 
in x (adjusted by sqrt(u*v)^k) is larger than the coeffiecient of the lowerbound polynomial.
This value is called wdiff in the following.
We already mentioned that we do not use the original variable u and v but first transform 
to q and w as described above and therefor the adjustment is (q*w)^k  instead of sqrt(u*v)^k.
`wdiff` is a homogenous polynom of degree 20. We devide by `w`and replace `q/w` by `s`
and get the polynomial `poly` with vrailbe `s`. For these polynomials we calculate the number
of roots greater than 0. This can be done bei the `nroot` function that uses  'sturm's theorem' 
Then we  calculate the value of poly at 2. If this value is greate 0 and there are 
no zeros greater 0 then wdiff is greater or equal 0 for all nonnegative q and w and therefore 
for all nonegative u and v. This was what we wanted to proof.
We see that all polynomails are positive at 2 and also for all except for k=8 there are no zeros
greater than 0. For k=8 we have a zero with even multiplicity.
";

for k:0 thru 8 do (
    coff_x:coeff(term3,x,k),
    coeff_t:coeff(lb,t,k),
    wdiff:ev(coff_x*(q*w)^k-coeff_t,u=q^2,v=w^2),
    poly:ratsubst(s,q/w,expand(wdiff/w^20)),
    nr:nroots(poly,0,inf),
    print("==="),
    print("k=",k),
    print("coeff(term3, x,",k,")=",coff_x),
    print("coeff(lb, t,",k,")=",coeff_t),
    print("wdiff=",wdiff),
    print("polynomial:",poly),
    print("factors=",factor(poly)),
    print("number of roots >0:",nr),
    print("poly(2)=",ev(poly,s=2))
    );

"finally we proof that the lowerbbound polynomial has no positive root and that 
it is greater than 0 for t=1. Therefor it is greater or equal than 0 for all admissible values";

poly:ratcoeff(lowerbound,u^5*v^5);

poly,t=1;

nroots(poly,0,inf);




I ran the scrip on the Xmaxima console and get the following output. I use this console with this rather ugly kind of output because it can be simply copied and pasted to math.stackecchange. A prettier output can be found here at an online version of Maxima

(%i1) display2d:false;
(%o1) false
(%i2) 
read and interpret file: #pD:/maxima/ineq1775572.mac
(%i3) "I use string to comment this file"
(%i4) "the flag `display2d`  controls 

the display of the output. You can unset it (display2d:false), that makes it easy to copy 

the maxima output to math.stackexchange"
(%i5) "to make it easier to input the problem data 

we define to function g and f:"
(%i6) g(r,s):=8*r^3+5*s^3
(%o6) g(r,s):=8*r^3+5*s^3
(%i7) f(r,s):=r^4/g(r,s)
(%o7) f(r,s):=r^4/g(r,s)
(%i8) "

the initial problem has the form 

L(x,y,t)>=R(x,y,z) 

but we subtract R(x,y,z) from this equation and 

we state the problem in the form 

term0>=0 

where term0 is L(x,y,z)-R(x,y,z) 

this is term0:

"
(%i9) term0:f(x,y)+f(y,z)+f(z,x)+(-(x+y+z))/13
(%o9) z^4/(8*z^3+5*x^3)+y^4/(5*z^3+8*y^3)+((-z)-y-x)/13+x^4/(5*y^3+8*x^3)
(%i10) "

Now we multiply the term0 by a positive fraction of the (positive) common denominator 

and get term1 that satisfies 

term1>=0 

`ratsimp` does some simplification like cancelling 

"
(%i11) ev(term1:(13*g(x,y)*g(y,z)*g(z,x)*term0)/5,ratsimp)
(%o11) (25*y^3+40*x^3)*z^7+((-40*y^4)-40*x*y^3-64*x^3*y+40*x^4)*z^6
                          +(40*y^6+39*x^3*y^3-40*x^6)*z^4
                          +(40*y^7-64*x*y^6+39*x^3*y^4+39*x^4*y^3-40*x^6*y
                                  +25*x^7)
                           *z^3+((-40*x^3*y^6)-64*x^6*y^3)*z+25*x^3*y^7
                          -40*x^4*y^6+40*x^6*y^4+40*x^7*y^3
(%i12) "

now we assume x=0 and v>=0

`,y=x+u` and `,z=x+v` do these substitutions

"
(%i13) ev(term2:term1,y = x+u,z = x+v)
(%o13) (x+v)^3*(40*(x+u)^7-64*x*(x+u)^6+39*x^3*(x+u)^4+39*x^4*(x+u)^3+25*x^7
                          -40*x^6*(x+u))
 +25*x^3*(x+u)^7+(x+v)*((-40*x^3*(x+u)^6)-64*x^6*(x+u)^3)
 +(x+v)^4*(40*(x+u)^6+39*x^3*(x+u)^3-40*x^6)-40*x^4*(x+u)^6+40*x^6*(x+u)^4
 +(x+v)^6*((-40*(x+u)^4)-40*x*(x+u)^3+40*x^4-64*x^3*(x+u))
 +(x+v)^7*(25*(x+u)^3+40*x^3)+40*x^7*(x+u)^3
(%i14) "

ratsimp(.,x) does some simplification and displays the term as polynomial of x

"
(%i15) term3:ratsimp(term2,x)
(%o15) (156*v^2-156*u*v+156*u^2)*x^8+(390*v^3-1056*u*v^2+1134*u^2*v+390*u^3)
                                     *x^7
                                    +(754*v^4-2698*u*v^3+1170*u^2*v^2
                                             +2412*u^3*v+754*u^4)
                                     *x^6
                                    +(741*v^5-2178*u*v^4-1476*u^2*v^3
                                             +3504*u^3*v^2+2997*u^4*v+741*u^5)
                                     *x^5
                                    +(351*v^6-489*u*v^5-2058*u^2*v^4
                                             +546*u^3*v^3+4437*u^4*v^2
                                             +2088*u^5*v+351*u^6)
                                     *x^4
                                    +(65*v^7+181*u*v^6-585*u^2*v^5
                                            -1286*u^3*v^4+2079*u^4*v^3
                                            +2808*u^5*v^2+768*u^6*v+65*u^7)
                                     *x^3
                                    +(75*u*v^7+165*u^2*v^6-675*u^3*v^5
                                              +1416*u^5*v^3+888*u^6*v^2
                                              +120*u^7*v)
                                     *x^2
                                    +(75*u^2*v^7-25*u^3*v^6-240*u^4*v^5
                                                +240*u^5*v^4+376*u^6*v^3
                                                +120*u^7*v^2)
                                     *x+25*u^3*v^7-40*u^4*v^6+40*u^6*v^4
                                    +40*u^7*v^3
(%i16) for p from 0 thru hipow(term3,x) do print(coeff(term3,x,p)*x^p)
25*u^3*v^7-40*u^4*v^6+40*u^6*v^4+40*u^7*v^3 
(75*u^2*v^7-25*u^3*v^6-240*u^4*v^5+240*u^5*v^4+376*u^6*v^3+120*u^7*v^2)*x 
(75*u*v^7+165*u^2*v^6-675*u^3*v^5+1416*u^5*v^3+888*u^6*v^2+120*u^7*v)*x^2 
(65*v^7+181*u*v^6-585*u^2*v^5-1286*u^3*v^4+2079*u^4*v^3+2808*u^5*v^2+768*u^6*v
       +65*u^7)
 *x^3

(351*v^6-489*u*v^5-2058*u^2*v^4+546*u^3*v^3+4437*u^4*v^2+2088*u^5*v+351*u^6)
 *x^4

(741*v^5-2178*u*v^4-1476*u^2*v^3+3504*u^3*v^2+2997*u^4*v+741*u^5)*x^5 
(754*v^4-2698*u*v^3+1170*u^2*v^2+2412*u^3*v+754*u^4)*x^6 
(390*v^3-1056*u*v^2+1134*u^2*v+390*u^3)*x^7 
(156*v^2-156*u*v+156*u^2)*x^8 
(%o16) done
(%i17) "the lowerbound polynomial is given by @Michael Rozenberg"
(%o17) "the lowerbound polynomial is given by @Michael Rozenberg"
(%i18) lowerbound:u^5*v^5
                     *(156*t^8+531*t^7+2*t^6-632*t^5-152*t^4+867*t^3+834*t^2
                              +299*t+40)
(%o18) (156*t^8+531*t^7+2*t^6-632*t^5-152*t^4+867*t^3+834*t^2+299*t+40)*u^5*v
                                                                            ^5
(%i19) "we use the expanded version of the lowerbound polynomial"
(%o19) "we use the expanded version of the lowerbound polynomial"
(%i20) ev(lb:lowerbound,expand)
(%o20) 156*t^8*u^5*v^5+531*t^7*u^5*v^5+2*t^6*u^5*v^5-632*t^5*u^5*v^5
                      -152*t^4*u^5*v^5+867*t^3*u^5*v^5+834*t^2*u^5*v^5
                      +299*t*u^5*v^5+40*u^5*v^5
(%i21) "we want to avoid suareroots and therefore substitute u bei `q^2` and v by `w^2`. 

The expression `sqrt(u*v)` (see thhe proof of Michael Rozenberg) then can be replaced by q*w"
(%o21) "we want to avoid suareroots and therefore substitute u bei `q^2` and v by `w^2`. 

The expression `sqrt(u*v)` (see thhe proof of Michael Rozenberg) then can be replaced by q*w"
(%i22) "We want to avoid suareroots and therefore substitute u bei `q^2` and v by `w^2`. 

The expression `sqrt(u*v)` (see thhe proof of Michael Rozenberg) then can be replaced by q*w.

The following loop checks for each exponent k, that the coefficient of the original polynomial 

in x (adjusted by sqrt(u*v)^k) is larger than the coeffiecient of the lowerbound polynomial.

This value is called wdiff in the following.

We already mentioned that we do not use the original variable u and v but first transform 

to q and w as described above and therefor the adjustment is (q*w)^k  instead of sqrt(u*v)^k.

`wdiff` is a homogenous polynom of degree 20. We devide by `w`and replace `q/w` by `s`

and get the polynomial `poly` with vrailbe `s`. For these polynomials we calculate the number

of roots greater than 0. This can be done bei the `nroot` function that uses  'sturm's theorem' 

Then we  calculate the value of poly at 2. If this value is greate 0 and there are 

no zeros greater 0 then wdiff is greater or equal 0 for all nonnegative q and w and therefore 

for all nonegative u and v. This was what we wanted to proof.

We see that all polynomails are positive at 2 and also for all except for k=8 there are no zeros

greater than 0. For k=8 we have a zero with even multiplicity.

"
(%o22) "We want to avoid suareroots and therefore substitute u bei `q^2` and v by `w^2`. 

The expression `sqrt(u*v)` (see thhe proof of Michael Rozenberg) then can be replaced by q*w.

The following loop checks for each exponent k, that the coefficient of the original polynomial 

in x (adjusted by sqrt(u*v)^k) is larger than the coeffiecient of the lowerbound polynomial.

This value is called wdiff in the following.

We already mentioned that we do not use the original variable u and v but first transform 

to q and w as described above and therefor the adjustment is (q*w)^k  instead of sqrt(u*v)^k.

`wdiff` is a homogenous polynom of degree 20. We devide by `w`and replace `q/w` by `s`

and get the polynomial `poly` with vrailbe `s`. For these polynomials we calculate the number

of roots greater than 0. This can be done bei the `nroot` function that uses  'sturm's theorem' 

Then we  calculate the value of poly at 2. If this value is greate 0 and there are 

no zeros greater 0 then wdiff is greater or equal 0 for all nonnegative q and w and therefore 

for all nonegative u and v. This was what we wanted to proof.

We see that all polynomails are positive at 2 and also for all except for k=8 there are no zeros

greater than 0. For k=8 we have a zero with even multiplicity.

"
(%i23) for k from 0 thru 8 do
           (coff_x:coeff(term3,x,k),coeff_t:coeff(lb,t,k),
            wdiff:ev(coff_x*(q*w)^k-coeff_t,u = q^2,v = w^2),
            poly:ratsubst(s,q/w,expand(wdiff/w^20)),nr:nroots(poly,0,inf),
            print("==="),print("k=",k),print("coeff(term3, x,",k,")=",coff_x),
            print("coeff(lb, t,",k,")=",coeff_t),print("wdiff=",wdiff),
            print("polynomial:",poly),print("factors=",factor(poly)),
            print("number of roots >0:",nr),print("poly(2)=",ev(poly,s = 2)))
=== 
k= 0 
coeff(term3, x, 0 )= 25*u^3*v^7-40*u^4*v^6+40*u^6*v^4+40*u^7*v^3 
coeff(lb, t, 0 )= 40*u^5*v^5 
wdiff= 25*q^6*w^14-40*q^8*w^12-40*q^10*w^10+40*q^12*w^8+40*q^14*w^6 
polynomial: 40*s^14+40*s^12-40*s^10-40*s^8+25*s^6 
factors= 5*s^6*(8*s^8+8*s^6-8*s^4-8*s^2+5) 
number of roots >0: 0 
poly(2)= 769600 
=== 
k= 1 
coeff(term3, x, 1 )= 
               75*u^2*v^7-25*u^3*v^6-240*u^4*v^5+240*u^5*v^4+376*u^6*v^3
                         +120*u^7*v^2 
coeff(lb, t, 1 )= 299*u^5*v^5 
wdiff= 
      q*w
       *(75*q^4*w^14-25*q^6*w^12-240*q^8*w^10+240*q^10*w^8+376*q^12*w^6
                    +120*q^14*w^4)
       -299*q^10*w^10 
polynomial: 120*s^15+376*s^13+240*s^11-299*s^10-240*s^9-25*s^7+75*s^5 
factors= s^5*(120*s^10+376*s^8+240*s^6-299*s^5-240*s^4-25*s^2+75) 
number of roots >0: 0 
poly(2)= 7074016 
=== 
k= 2 
coeff(term3, x, 2 )= 
               75*u*v^7+165*u^2*v^6-675*u^3*v^5+1416*u^5*v^3+888*u^6*v^2
                       +120*u^7*v 
coeff(lb, t, 2 )= 834*u^5*v^5 
wdiff= 
      q^2*w^2
         *(75*q^2*w^14+165*q^4*w^12-675*q^6*w^10+1416*q^10*w^6+888*q^12*w^4
                      +120*q^14*w^2)
       -834*q^10*w^10 
polynomial: 120*s^16+888*s^14+1416*s^12-834*s^10-675*s^8+165*s^6+75*s^4 
factors= 3*s^4*(40*s^12+296*s^10+472*s^8-278*s^6-225*s^4+55*s^2+25) 
number of roots >0: 0 
poly(2)= 27198192 
=== 
k= 3 
coeff(term3, x, 3 )= 
               65*v^7+181*u*v^6-585*u^2*v^5-1286*u^3*v^4+2079*u^4*v^3
                     +2808*u^5*v^2+768*u^6*v+65*u^7 
coeff(lb, t, 3 )= 867*u^5*v^5 
wdiff= 
      q^3*w^3
         *(65*w^14+181*q^2*w^12-585*q^4*w^10-1286*q^6*w^8+2079*q^8*w^6
                  +2808*q^10*w^4+768*q^12*w^2+65*q^14)
       -867*q^10*w^10 
polynomial: 
           65*s^17+768*s^15+2808*s^13+2079*s^11-867*s^10-1286*s^9-585*s^7
                  +181*s^5+65*s^3 
factors= 
        s^3*(65*s^14+768*s^12+2808*s^10+2079*s^8-867*s^7-1286*s^6-585*s^4
                    +181*s^2+65) 
number of roots >0: 0 
poly(2)= 59331624 
=== 
k= 4 
coeff(term3, x, 4 )= 
               351*v^6-489*u*v^5-2058*u^2*v^4+546*u^3*v^3+4437*u^4*v^2
                      +2088*u^5*v+351*u^6 
coeff(lb, t, 4 )= -152*u^5*v^5 
wdiff= 
      q^4*w^4
         *(351*w^12-489*q^2*w^10-2058*q^4*w^8+546*q^6*w^6+4437*q^8*w^4
                   +2088*q^10*w^2+351*q^12)
       +152*q^10*w^10 
polynomial: 351*s^16+2088*s^14+4437*s^12+698*s^10-2058*s^8-489*s^6+351*s^4 
factors= s^4*(351*s^12+2088*s^10+4437*s^8+698*s^6-2058*s^4-489*s^2+351) 
number of roots >0: 0 
poly(2)= 75549104 
=== 
k= 5 
coeff(term3, x, 5 )= 
               741*v^5-2178*u*v^4-1476*u^2*v^3+3504*u^3*v^2+2997*u^4*v+741*u^5

coeff(lb, t, 5 )= -632*u^5*v^5 
wdiff= 
      q^5*w^5
         *(741*w^10-2178*q^2*w^8-1476*q^4*w^6+3504*q^6*w^4+2997*q^8*w^2
                   +741*q^10)
       +632*q^10*w^10 
polynomial: 741*s^15+2997*s^13+3504*s^11+632*s^10-1476*s^9-2178*s^7+741*s^5 
factors= s^5*(741*s^10+2997*s^8+3504*s^6+632*s^5-1476*s^4-2178*s^2+741) 
number of roots >0: 0 
poly(2)= 55645088 
=== 
k= 6 
coeff(term3, x, 6 )= 754*v^4-2698*u*v^3+1170*u^2*v^2+2412*u^3*v+754*u^4 
coeff(lb, t, 6 )= 2*u^5*v^5 
wdiff= 
      q^6*w^6*(754*w^8-2698*q^2*w^6+1170*q^4*w^4+2412*q^6*w^2+754*q^8)
       -2*q^10*w^10 
polynomial: 754*s^14+2412*s^12+1168*s^10-2698*s^8+754*s^6 
factors= 2*s^6*(377*s^8+1206*s^6+584*s^4-1349*s^2+377) 
number of roots >0: 0 
poly(2)= 22786688 
=== 
k= 7 
coeff(term3, x, 7 )= 390*v^3-1056*u*v^2+1134*u^2*v+390*u^3 
coeff(lb, t, 7 )= 531*u^5*v^5 
wdiff= q^7*w^7*(390*w^6-1056*q^2*w^4+1134*q^4*w^2+390*q^6)-531*q^10*w^10 
polynomial: 390*s^13+1134*s^11-531*s^10-1056*s^9+390*s^7 
factors= 3*s^7*(130*s^6+378*s^4-177*s^3-352*s^2+130) 
number of roots >0: 0 
poly(2)= 4482816 
=== 
k= 8 
coeff(term3, x, 8 )= 156*v^2-156*u*v+156*u^2 
coeff(lb, t, 8 )= 156*u^5*v^5 
wdiff= q^8*w^8*(156*w^4-156*q^2*w^2+156*q^4)-156*q^10*w^10 
polynomial: 156*s^12-312*s^10+156*s^8 
factors= 156*(s-1)^2*s^8*(s+1)^2 
number of roots >0: 2 
poly(2)= 359424 
(%o23) done
(%i24) "finally we proof that the lowerbbound polynomial has no positive root and that 

it is greater than 0 for t=1. Therefor it is greater or equal than 0 for all admissible values"
(%o24) "finally we proof that the lowerbbound polynomial has no positive root and that 

it is greater than 0 for t=1. Therefor it is greater or equal than 0 for all admissible values"
(%i25) poly:ratcoef(lowerbound,u^5*v^5)
(%o25) 156*t^8+531*t^7+2*t^6-632*t^5-152*t^4+867*t^3+834*t^2+299*t+40
(%i26) ev(poly,t = 1)
(%o26) 1945
(%i27) nroots(poly,0,inf)
(%o27) 0
(%i28) 

Here we list the coefficient functions so we can compare them to @MichaelRozenbergs function to see they are the same.

$$\begin{array}{r} \tag{1} \left(25\,u^3\,v^7-40\,u^4\,v^6+40\,u^6\,v^4+40\,u^7\,v^3\right)\,x^0 \\ \left(75\,u^2\,v^7-25\,u^3\,v^6-240\,u^4\,v^5+240\,u^5\,v^4+376\,u^ 6\,v^3+120\,u^7\,v^2\right)\,x^1 \\ \left(75\,u\,v^7+165\,u^2\,v^6-675\,u^3\,v^5+1416\,u^5\,v^3+888\,u^ 6\,v^2+120\,u^7\,v\right)\,x^2 \\ \left(65\,v^7+181\,u\,v^6-585\,u^2\,v^5-1286\,u^3\,v^4+2079\,u^4\,v ^3+2808\,u^5\,v^2+768\,u^6\,v+65\,u^7\right)\,x^3 \\ \left(351\,v^6-489\,u\,v^5-2058\,u^2\,v^4+546\,u^3\,v^3+4437\,u^4\, v^2+2088\,u^5\,v+351\,u^6\right)\,x^4 \\ \left(741\,v^5-2178\,u\,v^4-1476\,u^2\,v^3+3504\,u^3\,v^2+2997\,u^4 \,v+741\,u^5\right)\,x^5 \\ \left(754\,v^4-2698\,u\,v^3+1170\,u^2\,v^2+2412\,u^3\,v+754\,u^4 \right)\,x^6 \\ \left(390\,v^3-1056\,u\,v^2+1134\,u^2\,v+390\,u^3\right)\,x^7 \\ \left(156\,v^2-156\,u\,v+156\,u^2\right)\,x^8 \end{array}$$

To proof that this function is larger than $$\left(156\,t^8+531\,t^7+2\,t^6-632\,t^5-152\,t^4+867\,t^3+834\,t^2+ 299\,t+40\right)\,u^5\,v^5 \tag{2}$$ Rozenbergs's lower bound when we substitute $x$ by $t\sqrt(uv)$ we show that each coefficient of the polynomial $(1)$ is larger than the corresponding coefficient of the lower bound polynomial $(2)$. Then we show that the polynomial $(2)$ is larger than $0$ for all nonnegative $u$, $v$ and $t$. Details can be found in the Maxima script.

Instead of the Maxima nroots function, which is based on Sturm sequences, one could solve the equations by some numeric functions to see if there are zeros greater than zeros, e.g. calculating the roots of poly for k=7 gives the following:

(%i29) allroots(390*s^13+1134*s^11-531*s^10-1056*s^9+390*s^7 ,s);
(%o29) [s = 0.0,s = 0.0,s = 0.0,s = 0.0,s = 0.0,s = 0.0,s = 0.0,
        s = 0.007444635413686057*%i+0.7516683014652126,
        s = 0.7516683014652126-0.007444635413686057*%i,
        s = 0.3202741285237583*%i-0.6047586795035632,
        s = (-0.3202741285237583*%i)-0.6047586795035632,
        s = 1.93839678615644*%i-0.1469096219616494,
        s = (-1.93839678615644*%i)-0.1469096219616494]

So we can also conclude are no real roots greater than 0. But this method is not really acceptable if one does not analyze the impact of the rounding errors. And this can be very complicated. The nroots function works with integers (for integer polynomials) and so there are no rounding errors.

miracle173
  • 11,049
6

I write a start for a full answer (this is an idea that @Starfall first proposed in comment). If someone wants to use it to end the proof, she/he is welcome!

Let $$f(x,y,z):=\frac{x^4}{ax^3+by^3}+\frac{y^4}{ay^3+bz^3}+\frac{z^4}{az^3+bx^3}.$$ Since $f$ is homogeneous of degree 1, it is sufficient to consider $x,y,z$ on the plane $P:=\{x+y+z=1\}$. Let $$g(x,y,z):=x+y+z-1$$ be the constraint function. We compute : $$\mathrm{d}f(x,y,z)=\left(\frac{ax^6+4bx^3y^3}{(ax^3+by^3)^2}-\frac{3bx^2z^4}{(az^3+bx^3)^2}\right)\mathrm{d}x+\left(\frac{ay^6+4by^3z^3}{(ay^3+bz^3)^2}-\frac{3bx^4y^2}{(ax^3+by^3)^2}\right)\mathrm{d}y$$ $$+\left(\frac{az^6+4bx^3z^3}{(az^3+bx^3)^2}-\frac{3by^4z^2}{(ay^3+bz^3)^2}\right)\mathrm{d}z,$$ $$\mathrm{d}g(x,y,z)=\mathrm{d}x+\mathrm{d}y+\mathrm{d}z.$$ Define the $2\times 3$ matrix $$M:=\begin{pmatrix} \frac{\partial f}{\partial x}(x,y,z) & \frac{\partial f}{\partial y}(x,y,z) & \frac{\partial f}{\partial z}(x,y,z)\\ \frac{\partial g}{\partial x}(x,y,z) & \frac{\partial g}{\partial y}(x,y,z) & \frac{\partial g}{\partial z}(x,y,z) \end{pmatrix}.$$ By Lagrange multipliers theorem, all the 3 sub-determinants of $M$ must vanish at a local minimum $(x,y,z)$ of $f$ on $P$.

Setting $$A:=ax^3+by^3,\quad B:=az^3+bx^3,\quad ay^3+bz^3,$$ cancelling the 3 sub-determinants of $M$ yields : \begin{align} \begin{cases} B^2C^2(ax^6+4bx^3y^3+3bx^4y^2)-3A^2C^2bx^2z^4-A^2B^2(ay^6+4by^3z^3)&=0\\ B^2C^2(ax^6+4bx^3y^3)-A^2C^2(3bx^2z^4+az^6+4bx^3z^3)+3A^2B^2by^4z^2&=0\\ A^2B^2(ay^6+4by^3z^3+3by^4z^2)-3B^2C^2bx^4y^2-A^2C^2(az^6+4bx^3z^3)&=0\\ x+y+z=1,\ x,y,z>0 \end{cases}. \end{align} Labelling the lines $(1)$, $(2)$, $(3)$ and $(4)$, we can see that $(1)-(2)=-(3)$, so that we can forget one of the three first lines.

Here we need to do some (boring) algebra, using the constraints of the fourth line above and maybe some tricks like writing $ax^3=A-by^3$ and $bx^4=(1-y-z)(B-az^3)$. But I am too busy now to try this, and I don't know if I would try later...

Nicolas
  • 3,326
  • Thank you very much for using Lagrange Multiplier ! One up vote from me :) – HN_NH May 24 '16 at 06:06
  • 1
    @HN_NH Thank you! Unfortunately, using the Lagrange multipliers theorem just yields a horrible system of algebraic equations. You should be able to solve it with a quite powerful program. – Nicolas May 24 '16 at 09:07
6

Another way.

By C-S $$\sum_{cyc}\frac{x^4}{8x^3+5y^3}=\sum_{cyc}\frac{x^4(3x-y+2z)^2}{(8x^3+5y^3)(3x-y+2z)^2}\geq\frac{\left(\sum\limits_{cyc}(3x^3-x^2y+2x^2z)\right)^2}{\sum\limits_{cyc}(8x^3+5y^3)(3x-y+2z)^2}.$$ Thus, it's enough to prove that: $$13\left(\sum\limits_{cyc}(3x^3-x^2y+2x^2z)\right)^2\geq(x+y+z)\sum\limits_{cyc}(8x^3+5y^3)(3x-y+2z)^2.$$ Since the last inequality is cyclic, we can assume that $x=\min\{x,y,z\}$.

  1. Let $x\leq z\leq y$, $z=x+u$ and $y=x+u+v$.

Thus, $u$ and $v$ are non-negatives and we need to prove that: $$166(u^2+uv+v^2)x^4+(555u^3+1791u^2v+1454uv^2+109v^3)x^3+$$ $$+(861u^4+3639u^3v+4284u^2v^2+1506uv^3+192v^4)x^2+$$ $$+(555u^5+2474u^4v+3833u^3v^2+2317u^2v^3+153uv^4+166v^5)x+$$ $$+123u^6+547u^5v+1046u^4v^2+843u^3v^3+374u^2v^4+153uv^5+40v^6\geq0,$$ which is obvious;

  1. Let $x\leq y\leq z,$ $y=x+u$ and $z=x+u+v$.

Thus, we need to prove that: $$166(u^2+uv+v^2)x^4+(555u^3-126u^2v-463uv^2+109v^3)x^3+$$ $$+(861u^4-195u^3v-1467u^2v^2-411uv^3+192v^4)x^2+$$ $$+(555u^5+301u^4v-513u^3v^2-112u^2v^3+479uv^4+166v^5)x+$$ $$+123u^6+191u^5v+156u^4v^2+331u^3v^3+496u^2v^4+253uv^5+40v^6\geq0.$$ Easy to show that: $$166(u^2+uv+v^2)\geq498uv,$$ $$555u^3-126u^2v-463uv^2+109v^3\geq-249\sqrt{u^3v^3},$$ $$861u^4-195u^3v-1467u^2v^2-411uv^3+192v^4\geq-1494u^2v^2,$$ $$555u^5+301u^4v-513u^3v^2-112u^2v^3+479uv^4+166v^5\geq747\sqrt{u^5v^5}$$ and $$123u^6+191u^5v+156u^4v^2+331u^3v^3+496u^2v^4+253uv^5+40v^6\geq1494u^3v^3.$$ Thus, after substitution $x=t\sqrt{uv}$ it's enough to prove that $$498t^4-249t^3-1494t^2+747t+1494\geq0,$$ which is true because $$498t^4-249t^3-1494t^2+747t+1494=$$ $$=249(t+1)(2t^3-3t^2-3t+6)=249(t+1)(t^3+2-3t+t^3+4-3t^2)\geq$$ $$\geq249(t+1)\left(3\sqrt[3]{t^3\cdot1^2}-3t+3\sqrt[3]{\left(\frac{t^3}{2}\right)^2\cdot4}-3t^2\right)=0.$$ Done!

3

Not sure, if I missed out anything here. Take a look.

For non negative, $X,Y,Z$, We can perhaps use Titu's inequality (a mix of Holder and CS), sometimes called Titu's screw lemma (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nesbitt%27s_inequality). \begin{equation} \sum_{k=1}^{n}{\frac{x_{k}^{2}}{a_{k}}} \ge \frac{\left(\sum_{k=1}^{n}{x_{k}}\right)^{2}}{\sum_{k=1}^{n}{a_{k}}} \end{equation}

With $n\to3$ terms, $x_{1}\to X^{2},x_{2} \to Y^{2}, x_{3} \to Z^{2}$ and $a_{1} \to A, a_{2}\to B, a_{3} \to C$, we will have

\begin{eqnarray*} \frac{\left(X^2\right)^{2}}{A}+\frac{\left(Y^2\right)^{2}}{B}+\frac{\left(Z^2\right)^{2}}{C} &\ge& \frac{\left(X^{2}+Y^{2}+Z^{2}\right)^{2}}{A+B+C} \\ \end{eqnarray*}

With \begin{eqnarray*} A &=& \alpha X^{3} +\beta Y^{3} \\ B &=& \alpha Y^{3} +\beta Z^{3} \\ C &=& \alpha Z^{3} +\beta X^{3} \end{eqnarray*}

where, \begin{eqnarray*} A+B+C &=& (\alpha+\beta) \left(X^{3} + Y^3+Z^3 \right) \end{eqnarray*}

\begin{eqnarray} \frac{X^4}{A}+\frac{Y^4}{B}+\frac{Z^4}{C} &=&\frac{\left(X^2\right)^{2}}{A}+\frac{\left(Y^2\right)^{2}}{B}+\frac{\left(Z^2\right)^{2}}{C}\\ &\ge& \frac{\left(X^{2}+Y^{2}+Z^{2}\right)^{2}}{A+B+C} \\ &=& \frac{\left(X^{2}+Y^{2}+Z^{2}\right)^{2}}{(\alpha+\beta) \left(X^{3} + Y^3+Z^3 \right)} \\ &\overset{(p)}{\ge}& \frac{\left(X^{3}+Y^{3}+Z^{3}\right)\left(X+Y+Z\right)}{(\alpha+\beta) \left(X^{3} + Y^3+Z^3 \right)} \\ &=& \frac{\left(X+Y+Z\right)}{(\alpha+\beta)} \end{eqnarray}

QED.

Here $(p)$ is from the fact that,

\begin{eqnarray*} (X^2+Y^2+Z^2)^{2} -\left(X^{3}+Y^{3}+Z^{3} \right) (X+Y+Z) &=& XY(X-Y)^{2}+YZ(Y-Z)^{2}+ZX(Z-X)^{2} \\ &\ge& 0 \end{eqnarray*}

Here $\alpha=8$ and $\beta=5$.

Nivedita Rethnakar
  • 1,370
  • 7
  • 11
  • By the way, I just used the name Titu (as it is known in the US IMO circle). I also hear names such as T2 Lemma, Engel's form, or Sedrakyan's inequality. It is indeed a special case of Cauchy-Schwarz. – Nivedita Rethnakar Aug 22 '18 at 16:22
  • Yes, it is also known by the name Bergstrom’s inequality. There is also a slightly tighter generalization as well. – Rethna Pulikkoonattu Aug 22 '18 at 16:35
  • 1
    I think the identity for (p) is wrong: $(1^2+1^2+2^2)^2-(1^3+1^3+2^3)(1+1+2)=36-40=-4$. When you expand, you should get $2X^2Y^2-X^3Y-XY^3=-XY(X-Y)^2.$ – Jose Brox Aug 22 '18 at 16:37
  • Thanks @Jose Brox. Yes, then there is a hole in my argument. We still have it open then:-) – Nivedita Rethnakar Aug 22 '18 at 17:04
  • @ Michael Rozenberg, I didn't mean so:-) I only meant to say, using this method:-). I still have feel that, there is a way to prove using T2 (Mostly, we may have to include the additional term involving max and then show that it stays positive). Will take a look over the weekend. – Nivedita Rethnakar Aug 22 '18 at 17:20
  • There was already another (failed) attempt to use CS/Titus lemma: https://math.stackexchange.com/a/1787631/42969 from user126154. I doubt that this approach can be fixed easily. – Martin R Aug 26 '18 at 17:26
3

For checking purposes.

Making $y = \lambda, \ z = \mu x$ and substituting into

$$ f(x,y,z) = \frac{x^4}{8x^3+5y^3}+\frac{y^4}{8y^3+5z^3}+\frac{z^4}{8z^3+5x^3} - \frac{x+y+z}{13} $$

giving

$$ g(x,\lambda,\mu) =x\left( \frac{1}{5 \lambda ^3+8}+\frac{\lambda ^4}{8 \lambda ^3+5 \mu ^3}+\frac{\mu ^4}{8 \mu ^3+5}-\frac{1}{13} (\lambda +\mu +1)\right) $$

and discarding $x > 0$ we get

$$ \mathcal{G}(\lambda,\mu) = \frac{1}{5 \lambda ^3+8}+\frac{\lambda ^4}{8 \lambda ^3+5 \mu ^3}+\frac{\mu ^4}{8 \mu ^3+5}-\frac{1}{13} (\lambda +\mu +1) $$

Now solving the stationary conditions

$$ \nabla\mathcal{G}(\lambda,\mu) = 0 $$

we have the feasible stationary points with qualification.

$$ \left[ \begin{array}{cccl} \lambda & \mu & \mathcal{G}(\lambda,\mu) & \mbox{kind} \\ 1. & 1. & 0. & \mbox{min} \\ 0.485435 & 0.715221 & 0.000622453 & \mbox{min}\\ 0.646265 & 0.811309 & 0.000758688 & \mbox{saddle} \\ 1.37554 & 0.688678 & 0.000863479 & \mbox{min} \\ 1.25 & 0.77611 & 0.000941355 & \mbox{saddle} \\ 1.38778 & 1.85522 & 0.00123052 & \mbox{min} \\ 1.34211 & 1.74761 & 0.00123288 & \mbox{saddle} \\ \end{array} \right] $$

so the best solution is at $x = y = z = 1$

Attached the level contours for $\mathcal{G}(\lambda,\mu)$ with the stationary points in red.

enter image description here

Cesareo
  • 33,252
  • 4
    It's not a solution, of course. How you solved this system? How you got a minimal point? If you used computer, so it's just nothing because WA says that the starting inequality is true, but it also is not a proof. @quid♦ Explain us please, why did you accept this answer? – Michael Rozenberg Jan 05 '20 at 03:21
2

$\color{green}{\textbf{Light version (24.01.20).}}$

$\color{brown}{\textbf{Inequalities for cubic root.}}$

Searching of the polynomials in the forms of \begin{cases} P_4(s)=s(1+as^3) - (1+a)s^3 = as^4 -(a+1)s^3+s\\[4pt] P_7(s)=(5+8s^3)(1-b+bs^3) - s(13-c+cs^3)\\ \qquad = 8bs^6-cs^4+(8-3b)s^3+(c-13)s+5-5b \end{cases} under the conditions $$P'_4(1)=P'_7(1)=P''_7(1) = 0,$$ allows to obtain the coefficients $a,b,c:$ $$ \begin{cases} 4a-3(1+a)+1=0\\ 48b-4c+3(8-3b)+c-13=0\\ 240b-12c+6(8-3b)=0 \end{cases} \Rightarrow \begin{cases} a = 2\\ 39b-3c = -11\\ 222b-12c = -48, \end{cases} $$ $$a=2,\quad b=-\dfrac2{33},\quad c=\dfrac{95}{33},$$

then \begin{cases} P_4(s) = s(1+2s^3) - 3s^3 = s(1-s)^2(2s+1)\\ 33P_7(b)=(35-2s^3)(5+8s^3) - s(334+95s^3) = (1-s)^3(16s^3+48s^2+191s+175). \end{cases} If $s\in[0,1]\ $ then $P_4(s)\ge0,\ P_7(s)\ge0.$

Applying of the substitution $s=\sqrt[\large 3]{1-t\large\mathstrut}\ $ leads to the inequalities

$$\dfrac{(13-8t)(33+2t)}{429-95t} \ge \sqrt[\large3]{1-t\mathstrut} \ge \dfrac{3(1-t)}{3-2t}\quad\text{if} \quad t\in[0,1]\tag1$$

(see also Wolfram Alpha plot).

Inequalities for cubic root

On the other hand, the function $$S(t)=\sqrt[\Large3]{\dfrac{5t\mathstrut}{13-8t}},\quad t\in[0,1]$$

has the inverse one in the form of $$T(s)=\dfrac{13s^3}{8s^3+5},\quad s\in[0,1].$$

If $s=S(t),$ then \begin{align} &\dfrac{15+11t-11t^2}{3(13-8t)}-S(t) = \dfrac{15+11T(s)-11T^2(s)}{3(13-8T(s))}-s\\[8pt] & = \dfrac{49s^6-312s^4+383s^3-195s+75}{312s^2+195} = \dfrac{(s+1)^2(7s+5)(7s^3+9s^2-30s+15)}{39(8s^2+5)},\\[8pt] &7s^3+9s^2-30s+15 = 7(1-s)(1-s^2)+8(1-s)(2-s)+s, \end{align}

$$S(t) = \sqrt[\Large3]{\dfrac{5t\mathstrut}{13-8t}} \le \dfrac{15+11t-11t^2}{3(13-8t)},\quad t\in[0,1].\tag2$$

(see also Wolfram Alpha plot).

Cubic root approximation, plot2

$\color{brown}{\textbf{Primary transformations.}}$

The given inequality WLOG can be presented in the forms of $$x\ge y,\quad x\ge z,\quad \dfrac{x^4}{8x^3+5y^3}+\dfrac{y^4}{8y^3+5z^3}+\dfrac{z^4}{8z^3+5x^3} \ge \dfrac1{13}(x+y+z),\tag3$$

or $$\dfrac{13x^4}{8x^3+5y^3}-x + \dfrac{13y^4}{8y^3+5z^3}-y + \dfrac{13z^4}{8z^3+5x^3}-z \ge 0,$$

$$\dfrac{x^3-y^3}{8x^3+5y^3} + \dfrac yx\,\dfrac{y^3-z^3}{8y^3+5z^3} - \dfrac zx\,\dfrac{x^3-z^3}{5x^3+8z^3} \ge 0.\tag4$$

$\color{brown}{\mathbf{Case\ \ z < y \le x.}}$

Taking in account $(1),$ inequality $(4)$ in the notation $$\dfrac{z^3}{x^3} = 1-u,\quad \dfrac{y^3}{x^3} = 1-uv,\quad (u,v)\in[0,1]^2, \tag5$$ \begin{align} &\dfrac{x^3-y^3}{8x^3+5y^3} = \dfrac{uv}{8+5(1-uv)},\quad \dfrac yx = \sqrt[\large3]{1-uv\mathstrut},\\[8pt] &\dfrac{y^3-z^3}{8y^3+5z^3} = \dfrac{u-uv}{8(1-uv)+5(1-u)},\\[8pt] &\dfrac{x^3-z^3}{5x^3+8z^3} = \dfrac{u}{5+8(1-u)},\quad \dfrac zx = \sqrt[\large3]{1-u\mathstrut}, \end{align}

takes the form of $f_1(u,v) \ge 0,$ where \begin{align} &f_1(u,v) = u\left(\dfrac{v}{13-5uv} + \dfrac{3(1-uv)}{3-2uv}\,\dfrac{1-v}{13-5u-8uv} - \dfrac{33+2u}{429-95u}\right)\\[8pt] & = \dfrac{u^2(A(u)+vB(u)+v^2C(u)+v^3D(u))}{(3-2uv)(13-5u-8uv)(13-5uv)(429-95u)}, \end{align} \begin{align} & A(u) = 1716+390u,\\ & B(u) = -1716+1480u-410u^2,\\ & C(u) = 1716-4769u-1641u^2+100u^3,\\ & D(u) = 429u + 2545u^2+160u^3,\\ & A(u)+vB(u)+v^2C(u)+v^3D(u) = (1-v)(1-v^2)A(u)+v(1-v)^2(A(u)+B(u))\\ & +v^2(1-v)(3A(u)+2B(u)+C(u))+v^3(A(u)+B(u)+C(u)+D(u))\\ & = (1-v)(1-v^2)(1716+390u)+v(1-v)^2(1870u-410u^2)\\ & +v^2(1-v)(3432-639u-2461u^2+100u^3)+26v^3(1-u)(66-29u-10u^2) \ge 0 \end{align} (see also Wolfram Alpha checking and matrix calculations).

Input $\!\mathstrut^{\phantom{\dfrac\mathstrut\mathstrut}^{\LARGE=}}$ Result

Therefore, $f_1(u,v)\ge0.$

The case is proved.

$\color{brown}{\mathbf{Case\ \ y \le z \le x.\ Additional\ transformations.}}$

Using the notation $$\dfrac{5(x^3-z^3)}{5x^3+8z^3} = 1-u,\quad \dfrac{5(z^3-y^3)}{5z^3+8y^3} = 1-v,\quad (u,v)\in[0,1]^2, \tag6$$

one can get $$\dfrac{z^3}{x^3} = \dfrac{5u}{13-8u},\quad\dfrac{y^3}{z^3} = \dfrac{5v}{13-8v},\quad \dfrac{y^3}{x^3} = \dfrac{25uv}{(13-8u)(13-8v)},$$ $$\dfrac{x^3-y^3}{8x^3+5y^3} = \dfrac{(13-8u)(13-8v)-25uv}{8(13-8u)(13-8v)+125uv} = \dfrac{13-8(u+v)+3uv}{104-64(u+v)+49uv}.\tag7$$

$\color{brown}{\mathbf{Case\ \ y \le z \le x,\ u+v \ge \dfrac{13}8.}}$

Taking in account $(2),$ the inequality $(4)$ takes the stronger form of $f_2(u,v)\ge0,$ where \begin{align} &f_2(u,v) = 5\dfrac{13-8(u+v)+3uv}{104-64(u+v)+49uv}- (1-v)S(u)S(v) - (1-u)S(u)\\[8pt] & \ge 5\dfrac{13-8(u+v)+3uv}{104-64(u+v)+49uv} - \dfrac{15+11u-11u^2}{3(13-8u)} \left((1-v)\dfrac{15+11v-11v^2}{3(13-8v)}+1-u\right)\\ & = \dfrac{g_2(u,v)}{9(104-64(u+v)+49uv)(13-8u)(13-8v)},\\[8pt] &g_2(u,v)=5(13-8(u+v)+3uv)(39-24u)(39-24v)\\[4pt] &-((1-v)(15+11(1-v)v)+(39-24v)(1-u))\\[4pt] &\times(15+11(1-u)u)(104-64(u+v)+49uv). \end{align}

Let $p=1-u,\ \ q=1-v,$ then $p+q \in \left[0,\dfrac58\right],$

\begin{align} &g^\,_2(p,q) = 5(5(p+q)+3pq)(15+24p)(15+24q)\\[4pt] &-(q(15+11(1-q)q)+(15+24q)p)(15+11(1-p)p)(25+15(p+q)+49pq)\\[4pt] &= 1500p^2+1500pq+1500q^2\\[4pt] &+1650p^3-4050p^2q-4600pq^2+1650q^3\\[4pt] &+2475p^4-495p^3q-17360p^2q^2-4400pq^3+2475q^4\\[4pt] &+12045p^4q+924p^3q^2-5324p^2q^3+9900pq^4\\[4pt] &+12936p^4q^2+4114p^3q^3+4114p^2q^4-5929p^3q^4\\[4pt] \end{align} (see also Wolfram Alpha checking).

Since $$pq \le \dfrac14(p+q)^2,\quad p^3-p^2q-pq^2+q^3 = (p-q)(p^2-q^2) \ge 0,$$

then \begin{align} &g^\,_2(p,q) \ge 375(4(p+q)^2-4pq)\\[4pt] & + 1650(p-q)(p^2-q^2) - 3000pq(p+q)\\[4pt] &+2475(p^2-q^2)^2 -pq(495p^2+12410pq+4400q^2)\\[4pt] &+9900pq(p-q)(p^2-q^2)\\[4pt] &+4114p^2q^3(p(1-p)+ q(1-q)+p^2+q^2-2pq)\\[4pt] &\ge 1125(p+q)^2-3000pq(p+q)-6208pq(p+q)^2 + 0 + 0\\[4pt] &\ge 1125(p+q)^2-750(p+q)^3-1552(p+q)^4\\[4pt] &\ge \left(1125 - 750\cdot\dfrac58-1552\cdot\dfrac{25}{64}\right)(p+q)^2 \ge 0. \end{align}

The case is proved.

$\color{brown}{\mathbf{Case\ \ y \le z \le x,\ u+v \le \dfrac{13}8.}}$

From $(7)$ should \begin{align} &\dfrac{(49\, \dfrac{x^3-y^3}{8x^3+5y^3}-3)}{100} = \dfrac{13-8(u+v)}{416-256(u+v)+49(2\sqrt{uv})^2} \ge \dfrac{13-8(u+v)}{416-256(u+v)+49(u+v)^2}. \end{align}

Since $$\dfrac1{49}\left(100\dfrac{13-8t}{416-256t+49t^2}+3\right) = \dfrac{(2-t)(26-3t)}{416-256t+49t^2}$$

and $$\dfrac{26-3t}{416-256t+49t^2} - \dfrac1{800}(50+21t+17t^2) = \dfrac{t(2-t)(833t^2-1657t+832)}{800(49t^2-256t+416)}$$ (see also Wolfram Alpha plot),

Ratio plot

then $$\dfrac{x^3-y^3}{8x^3+5y^3}\ge R(u+v),$$ where

$$R(t) = \dfrac1{800}(2-t)(50+21t+17t^2),\quad t\in[0,2].\tag8$$

Therefore, the inequality $(3)$ takes the stronger form of $f_3(u,v)\ge0,$ where \begin{align} &f_3(u,v) = 5R(u+v)- (1-v)S(u)S(v) - (1-u)S(u)\\[8pt] & \ge \dfrac{2-u-v}{160}(50+21(u+v)+17(u+v)^2)\\[8pt] & - \dfrac{15+11u-11u^2}{3(13-8u)} \left((1-v)\dfrac{15+11v-11v^2}{3(13-8v)}+1-u\right)\\ & = \dfrac{g_3(u,v)}{1440(13-8u)(13-8v)},\\[8pt] \end{align}

where \begin{align} &g^\,_3(u,v) = (50+21(u+v)+17(u+v)^2)(2-u-v)(39-24u)(39-24v)\\[4pt] &-160((1-v)(15+11(1-v)v)+(39-24v)(1-u))(15+11(1-u)u),\\[4pt] &g^\,_3(1-u,1-v) = (160-89(u+v)+17(u+v)^2)(u+v)(15+24u)(15+24v)\\[4pt] & - 160(15+11(1-u)u)((15+11(1-v)v)v+u(15+24v))\\[4pt] &= 11175u^2-1815u^3+6120u^4-8850uv-8325u^2v+15456u^3v+9792u^4v\\[4pt] &+11175v^2-11845uv^2-46448u^2v^2+29376u^3v^2\\[4pt] &-1815v^3-7424uv^3+10016u^2v^3+6120v^4+9792uv^4 \end{align} (see also Wolfram Alpha checking).

In the matrix form, $$ g^\,_3(1-u,1-v) = \mu(u,v,G_3) = \begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ v \\ v^2 \\ v^3 \\ v^4 \end{pmatrix}^T G_3 \begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ u \\ u^2 \\ u^3 \\ u^4 \end{pmatrix},\tag9 $$

where $$G_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 & 11175 & -1815 & 6120 \\ 0 & -8850 & -8325 & 15456 & 9792 \\ 11175 & -11845 & -46448 & 29376 & 0 \\ -1815 & -7424 & 10016 & 0 & 0 \\ 6120 & 9792 & 0 & 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix}.\tag{10} $$

At the same time:

  • $$ (u-v)^2(1-u-v)^2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ v \\ v^2 \\ v^3 \\ v^4 \end{pmatrix}^T \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 & 1 & -2 & 1 \\ 0 &-2 & 2 & 0 & 0 \\ 1 & 2 & -2 & 0 & 0 \\ -2 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ u \\ u^2 \\ u^3 \\ u^4 \end{pmatrix}, $$

  • $$g_3(u,v) = 6120(u-v)^2(1-u-v)^2 + uv(9792(u-v)(u^2-v^2)+15456(u-v)^2)\\ + g^\,_{32}(u,v) = g^\,_{30}(u,v) + g^\,_{31}(u,v) + g^\,_{32}(u,v) = \mu(u,v,G_{30}+G_{31}+G_{32}),$$ where $$G_{30} = \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 & 6120 & -12240 & 6120 \\ 0 & -12240 & 12240 & 0 & 0 \\ 6120 & 12240 & -12240 & 0 & 0 \\ -12240 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 6120 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix}, $$ $$G_{31} = \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 15456 & 9792 \\ 0 & 0 & -30912 & -9792 & 0 \\ 0 & -15456 & -9792 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 9792 & 0 & 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix}, $$ $$G_{32} = \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 & 5055 & 10425 & 0 \\ 0 & 3390 & -3915 & 0 & 0 \\ 5055 & -24085 & -3296 & 39168 & 0 \\ 10425 & -22880 & 19808 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix}, $$$$ g^\,_{30}(u,v) \ge 0,\quad g^\,_{31}(u,v) \ge 0. $$

Since

Input $\!\mathstrut^{\phantom{\dfrac\mathstrut\mathstrut}^{\LARGE=}}$ Result $\!\mathstrut^{\phantom{\dfrac\mathstrut\mathstrut}^{\LARGE,}}$

then, similarly to the first case, $$g^\,_{32}(u,v)= \begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ v \\ v^2 \\ v^3 \end{pmatrix}^T \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 & 5055 & 10425 \\ 0 & 3390 & -3915 & 0 \\ 5055 & -24085 & -3296 & 39168 \\ 10425 & -22880 & 19808 & 0 \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ u \\ u^2 \\ u^3 \end{pmatrix}\\ =\begin{pmatrix} (1-v)(1-v^2) \\ v(1-v)^2 \\ v^2(1-v) \\ v^3 \end{pmatrix}^T \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 & 5055 & 10425 \\ 0 & 3390 & 1140 & 10425 \\ 5055 & -17305 & 40039 & 70443 \\ 15480 & -43575 & 17652 & 49593 \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ u \\ u^2 \\ u^3 \end{pmatrix}, $$ wherein

$$5055 - 17305u + 4039u^2 + 70443u^3 = 5055(1-2u)^2 + u(2915-16181u+70443) \ge 0,$$ $$15480 - 43575u + 17652u^2 + 49593u^3 = 15480(1-2u)^2 +3u(6115 -14756u + 16531u^2) \\ \ge0,$$ because the quadratic polynomials have negative discriminants (see also Wolfram Alpha plot).

Cubic polynomials plot

Thus, $g^\,_{32}(u,v)\ge 0$ and $g_3(u,v) \ge 0.$

PROVED.

2

Let's reform this inequality in a way such that we can comprehend it better. Define $a=\dfrac{y}{x}$ and $b=\dfrac{z}{y}$, therefore $\dfrac{x}{z}={1\over ab}$. We can suume without lose of generality that $a,b\le1$ We need to prove that $$\dfrac{x}{8+5\left(\dfrac{y}{x}\right)^3}+\dfrac{y}{8+5\left(\dfrac{z}{y}\right)^3}+\dfrac{z}{8+5\left(\dfrac{x}{z}\right)^3}\ge\dfrac{x+y+z}{13}$$by dividing the two sides of the inequality by $x$ and substituting $a,b,c$ we have that$$\dfrac{1}{8+5\left(\dfrac{y}{x}\right)^3}+\dfrac{\dfrac{y}{x}}{8+5\left(\dfrac{z}{y}\right)^3}+\dfrac{\dfrac{z}{y}}{8+5\left(\dfrac{x}{z}\right)^3}\ge\dfrac{1+\dfrac{y}{x}+\dfrac{z}{x}}{13}$$and $$\dfrac{1}{8+5a^3}+\dfrac{a}{8+5b^3}+\dfrac{a^4b^4}{5+8a^3b^3}\ge \dfrac{1}{13}+\dfrac{a}{13}+\dfrac{ab}{13}$$which is equivalent to $$\left(\dfrac{1}{8+5a^3}-\dfrac{1}{13}\right)+\left(\dfrac{a}{8+5b^3}-\dfrac{a}{13}\right)+\left(\dfrac{a^4b^4}{5+8a^3b^3}-\dfrac{ab}{13}\right)\ge 0$$by simplifying each of the components and multiplying both sides in $\dfrac{13}{5}$ we obtain$$\dfrac{1-a^3}{8+5a^3}+\dfrac{a(1-b^3)}{8+5b^3}+\dfrac{a^4b^4-ab}{5+8a^3b^3}\ge0$$below is a depiction of $f(a,b)=\dfrac{1-a^3}{8+5a^3}+\dfrac{a(1-b^3)}{8+5b^3}+\dfrac{a^4b^4-ab}{5+8a^3b^3}$ for $0\le a,b\le 1$

enter image description here

which proves the inequality graphically (I believe that Lagrange multipliers or any other method based on 1st order derivations may help but i hadn't much time to think on it hope you find an analytic way) but neither such a time i spent on the problem nor a computer is given us in the exam :) also i appreciate if any one updates his/her comment with such an analytical method. I'm really curious about that.....

Mostafa Ayaz
  • 31,924
2

I have finally found a solution . In fact we start to study the 2 variables version of this inequality we have :

$$\frac{a^4}{8a^3+5b^3}+\frac{b^4}{8b^3+5a^3}\geq \frac{a+b}{13}$$

Proof:

We have with $x=\frac{a}{b}$ : $$\frac{x^4}{8x^3+5}+\frac{1}{8+5x^3}\geq \frac{1+x}{13}$$ Or $$\frac{5}{13}(x - 1)^2 (x + 1) (x^2 + x + 1) (5 x^2 - 8 x + 5)\geq 0$$

So we have (if we permute the variables $a,b,c$ and add the three inequalities ) :

$$\sum_{cyc}\frac{a^4}{8a^3+5b^3}+\sum_{cyc}\frac{a^4}{8a^3+5c^3}\geq \frac{a+b+c}{6.5}$$

If we have $\sum_{cyc}\frac{a^4}{8a^3+5b^3}\geq\sum_{cyc}\frac{a^4}{8a^3+5c^3}$

We have : $$\sum_{cyc}\frac{a^4}{8a^3+5b^3}\geq \frac{a+b+c}{13}$$ But also $$\frac{(a-\epsilon)^4}{8(a-\epsilon)^3+5b^3}+\frac{(b)^4}{8(b)^3+5(c+\epsilon)^3}+\frac{(c+\epsilon)^4}{8(c+\epsilon)^3+5(a-\epsilon)^3}\geq \frac{a+b+c}{13}$$ If we put $a\geq c $ and $\epsilon=a-c$

We finally obtain : $$\sum_{cyc}\frac{a^4}{8a^3+5c^3}\geq \frac{a+b+c}{13}$$

If we have $\sum_{cyc}\frac{a^4}{8a^3+5b^3}\leq\sum_{cyc}\frac{a^4}{8a^3+5c^3}$

The proof is the same as above .

So all the cases are present so it's proved !

max8128
  • 652
1

This is too long to fit into a comment. I wanted to ask a question about my proof on this problem. (It might help discover another proof)


This proof has a flaw -- From $AB \ge C$ and $A \ge D$, I wrongly implied that $DB \ge C$.

Is there a way to slightly modify it such that it can prove the statement or is it completely wrong?


Seeing that the inequality is homogeneous (meaning that the transformation $(x, y, z) \mapsto (kx, ky, kz)$ does not change anything), it is natural to impose a constraint on it. So let us assume without the loss of generality that $xyz=1$.

From Cauchy-Schwarz Inequality,

$$([8x^3+5y^3]+[8y^3+5z^3]+[8z^3+5x^3])(\frac{x^4}{8x^3+5y^3}+\frac{y^4}{8y^3+5z^3}+\frac{z^4}{8z^3+5x^3})\geqslant (x^2+y^2+z^2)^2$$

Since (By AM-GM) $$[8x^3+5y^3]+[8y^3+5z^3]+[8z^3+5x^3] = 13(x^3+y^3+z^3) \geqslant 13(3 \sqrt[3]{(xyz)^3}) = 13(3)$$

Therefore

$([8x^3+5y^3]+[8y^3+5z^3]+[8z^3+5x^3])(\frac{x^4}{8x^3+5y^3}+\frac{y^4}{8y^3+5z^3}+\frac{z^4}{8z^3+5x^3}) \geqslant (13)(3)(\frac{x^4}{8x^3+5y^3}+\frac{y^4}{8y^3+5z^3}+\frac{z^4}{8z^3+5x^3}) \geqslant (x^2+y^2+z^2)^2$

Therefore

$$\frac{x^4}{8x^3+5y^3}+\frac{y^4}{8y^3+5z^3}+\frac{z^4}{8z^3+5x^3} \geqslant \frac{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^2}{(13)(3)}$$

Now it reamins to prove that $\frac{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^2}{(13)(3)} \geqslant \frac{x+y+z}{13}$, i.e.

$$(x^2+y^2+z^2)(x^2+y^2+z^2)\geqslant 3(x+y+z)$$

which is straightforward by AM-GM:

Notice that for all $xyz=1$

$$(x - 1)^2 + (y-1)^2 + (z - 1)^2 \ge 0$$ $$x^2 + y^2 + z^2 - 2a - 2b - 2c + 3 \ge 0$$ $$x^2 + y^2 + z^2 \ge -3 + (x + y + z) + (x + y + z)$$

But by AM-GM, $x + y + z \ge 3\sqrt[3]{xyz} = 3$. So, $$x^2 + y^2 + z^2 \ge -3 + 3 + (x + y + z)$$ $$x^2 + y^2 + z^2 \ge x + y + z \ge 3$$

  • 1
    Your inequality $\sum\limits_{cyc}\frac{x^4}{8x^3+5y^3}\geq\frac{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^2}{(13)(3)}$ it's $\sum\limits_{cyc}\frac{x^4}{8x^3+5y^3}\geq\frac{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^2}{39xyz}$. I think the last inequality is wrong. Try $x=y=1$ and $z=\frac{1}{2}.$ – Michael Rozenberg Aug 26 '18 at 01:28
  • quoting from the first paragraph: Seeing that the inequality is homogeneous (meaning that the transformation $(x, y, z) \mapsto (kx, ky, kz)$ does not change anything), it is natural to impose a constraint on it. So let us assume without the loss of generality that $xyz=1$. – Vee Hua Zhi Aug 26 '18 at 02:04
  • If you understood it try to check my counterexample. I'll write again: The inequality $\sum\limits_{cyc}\frac{x^4}{8x^3+5y^3}\geq\frac{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^2}{(13)(3)}$ is wrong. Try $x=4$ and $y=z=0.5$. – Michael Rozenberg Aug 26 '18 at 06:35
  • OK I get it @MichaelRozenberg – Vee Hua Zhi Aug 28 '18 at 12:47
0

We want to prove the inequality $$ \sum_{cyc}\frac{x^4}{8x^3+5y^3}\geq \frac{\sum_{cyc}x}{13}\tag 1 $$ where $x,y,z>0$.

Set $$ \Pi(x,y,z):=\sum_{cyc}\frac{x^4}{8x^3+5y^3}-\frac{x+y+z}{13} $$ Then easily $$ \Pi(x,y,z)= \sum_{cyc}\left(x\frac{x^3}{8x^3+5y^3}-\frac{x}{13}\right)=\sum_{cyc}x\frac{13x^3-8x^3-5y^3}{13(8x^3+5y^3)}= $$ $$ =\frac{5}{13}\sum_{cyc}x\frac{x^3-y^3}{8x^3+5y^3}. $$ Also (ecxept from the symetry) $\Pi(x,y,z)$ is homogeneous of degree 1. Hence $\Pi(\lambda x,\lambda y,\lambda z)=\lambda \Pi(x,y,z)$.

The case $x\geq y\geq z$

If $x\geq y\geq z$, we can set $\lambda=1/z$, then $$ \Pi(x,y,z)=\lambda^{-1}\Pi(\lambda x,\lambda y,\lambda z)=z^{-1}\Pi\left(\frac{x}{z},\frac{y}{z},1\right). $$ Set $a=\frac{x}{z}$, $b=\frac{y}{z}$, then also $a\geq b\geq 1$ and $$ \Pi(x,y,z)=z\Pi(a,b,1)= $$ $$ =z\left(\frac{1-a^3}{8+5a^3}+\frac{b(-1+b^3)}{5+8b^3}+\frac{a^4-ab^3}{8a^3+5b^3}\right)\textrm{, }a\geq b\geq 1\tag 2 $$ Set now $$ f(x,y)=\frac{x}{8x^3+5 y^3}. $$ Then (2) becomes $$ a^3\left(\frac{a}{8a^3+5b^3}-\frac{1}{8+5a^3}\right)+b^3\left(\frac{b}{5+8b^3}-\frac{a}{8a^3+5b^3}\right)- $$ $$ -\left(\frac{b}{8b^3+5}-\frac{1}{8+5a^3}\right)\geq 0 $$ Hence equivalent we must show that $$ a^3(f(a,b)-f(1,a))+b^3(f(b,1)-f(a,b))-(f(b,1)-f(1,a))\geq 0\Leftrightarrow $$ $$ a^3f(a,b)+f(1,a)(1-a^3)\geq b^3f(a,b)+f(b,1)(1-b^3)\Leftrightarrow $$ $$ f(1,a)(a^3-1)-f(b,1)(b^3-1)\leq (a^3-b^3)f(a,b)\tag 3 $$ But when $a\geq b\geq 1$, setting $k=a^3-1$ and $l=b^3-1$, we have $k\geq l\geq 0$. Then (3) becomes $$ k\frac{1}{5a^3+8}-l\frac{b}{8b^3+5}\leq (k-l)\frac{a}{8a^3+5b^3}\Leftrightarrow $$ $$ \frac{k}{5k+13}-\frac{lb}{8l+13}\leq (k-l)\frac{a}{8k+5l+13}\Leftrightarrow $$ $$ \frac{k}{k-l}\frac{1}{x_1}-\frac{l}{k-l}\frac{b}{y_1}\leq \frac{a}{8(x_1-13)/5+5(y_1-13)/8+13} $$ Or equivalent (we set $x_1=5k+13$, $y_1=8l+13$) if: $$ \small f_0(x_1,y_1):=5ky_1^2/8-8blx_1^2/5+x_1y_1(al-ak+8k/5-5bl/8)-637ky_1/40+637bl x_1/40\leq 0.\normalsize $$ This last inequality is true, as one can see using $1\leq b\leq a$ and $k\geq l\geq 0$, $k=a^3-1$, $l=b^3-1$, $x_1\geq 13$, $y_1\geq 13$. Actualy it holds $$ f_0(x_1,y_1)<f_0(x_0,y_0)\textrm{, }\forall (x_1,y_1)\in D=(x_0,+\infty)\times(y_0,+\infty) $$ where $$\small x_0=-\frac{637 k (8 (5 a-8) k-5 l (8 a+5 b))}{-80 k l (8 a (5 a-8)-5 (5 a+8) b)+25 l^2 (8 a-5 b)^2+64 (8-5 a)^2 k^2}\normalsize $$ $$\small y_0=\frac{637 b l (5 l (5 b-8 a)+8 (5 a+8) k)}{-80 k l (8 a (5 a-8)-5 (5 a+8) b)+25 l^2 (8 a-5 b)^2+64 (8-5 a)^2 k^2}\normalsize $$ are the points such that $\partial_xf_0(x_0,y_0)=\partial_yf_0(x_0,y_0)=0$ and $$\small f_0(x_0,y_0)=-\frac{405769 a b k l (k-l)}{-80 k l (8 a (5 a-8)-5 (5 a+8) b)+25 l^2 (8 a-5 b)^2+64 (8-5 a)^2 k^2}\leq 0\normalsize $$ and $64 (8 - 5 a)^2 k^2 - 80 (8 a (-8 + 5 a) - 5 (8 + 5 a) b) k l + 25 (8 a - 5 b)^2 l^2>0$, $a>1$, $a\geq b\geq 1$. But when $x_1\geq 13$ and $y_1\geq 13$, we have $f_0(x_1,y_1)\leq 0$.

About the case $z\geq y\geq x$

If $z\geq y\geq x$, then we have $\Pi(\lambda x,\lambda y,\lambda z)=\lambda \Pi(x,y,z)$. Set $\lambda=1/x$ and $a=z/x$, $b=y/x$, $a\geq b\geq 1$. Then $$ \Pi(x,y,z)=x^{-1}\Pi(1,b,a)= $$
$$ b^3\left(\frac{b}{8b^3+5a^3}-\frac{1}{8+5b^3}\right)+a^3\left(\frac{a}{5+8a^3}-\frac{b}{8b^3+5a^3}\right)- $$ $$ -\left(\frac{a}{8a^3+5}-\frac{1}{8+5b^3}\right)\geq 0\tag 5 $$ Set $$ f(x,y)=\frac{x}{8x^3+5y^3}, $$ then (5) becomes $$ b^3(f(b,a)-f(1,b))+a^3(f(a,1)-f(b,a))-f(a,1)+f(1,b)\geq 0\Leftrightarrow $$ $$ (a^3-1)f(a,1)-(b^3-1)f(1,b)\geq (a^3-b^3)f(b,a). $$ Set now $k=a^3-1$ and $l=b^3-1$. Then $k\geq l\geq 0$. Then $$ k\frac{a}{8 a^3+5}-l\frac{1}{8+5 b^3}\geq (k-l)\frac{b}{8b^3+5a^3}\Leftrightarrow $$ $$ \frac{ka}{8k+13}-\frac{l}{5 l+13}\geq (k-l)\frac{b}{8k+5l+13}\Leftrightarrow $$ $$ \frac{ka}{k-l}\frac{1}{x_1}-\frac{l}{k-l}\frac{1}{y_1}\geq \frac{b}{x_1+y_1-13} $$ Or equivalent ($x_1=8k+13$, $y_1=5l+13$): $$ f_0(x_1,y_1):=aky_1^2-lx_1^2+x_1y_1(bl-l-bk+ak)-13aky_1+13l x_1\geq 0. $$ This last inequality is true and as one can see using $1\leq b\leq a$ and $k\geq l\geq 0$, $k=a^3-1$, $l=b^3-1$, $x_1\geq 13$, $y_1\geq 13$. Actualy holds $$ f_0(x_1,y_1)>f_0(x_0,y_0)\textrm{, }\forall (x_1,y_1)\in D=(x_0,+\infty)\times(y_0,+\infty) $$ where $$ x_0=\frac{13ak(ak+l+b(l-k))}{a^2k^2+(b(k-l)+l)^2+2ak(l+b(l-k))} $$ $$ y_0=\frac{13l((a+b)k+l-lb)}{a^2k^2+(b(k-l)+l)^2+2ak(l+b(l-k))} $$ are the points such that $\partial_xf(x_0,y_0)=\partial_yf_0(x_0,y_0)=0$ and $$ f_0(x_0,y_0)=\frac{169abkl(l-k)}{a^2k^2+(b(k-l)+l)^2+2ak(l+b(l-k))}\leq 0 $$ and $a^2k^2+(b(k-l)+l)^2+2ak(l+b(l-k))>0$, $a>1$, $a\geq b\geq 1$. But when $x_1\geq 13$ and $y_1\geq 13$, we have $f_0(x_1,y_1)\geq 0$. QED

  • In (2), is should be
  • $\Pi(x,y,z)=z\Pi(a,b,1)= \frac{5}{13}z (\frac{1-a^3}{8+5a^3}+\frac{b(-1+b^3)}{5+8b^3}+\frac{a^4-ab^3}{8a^3+5b^3})$

    – River Li Dec 27 '20 at 04:26
  • In (3), $f(1,a)(1-a^3)\geq f(b,1)(1-b^3)$ is not true (check $a = 2$, $b = 1$).
  • – River Li Dec 27 '20 at 04:40