4

let $f:[0,1]\to R^{+}$ real-valued continuous functions,and such $$\int_{0}^{1}f(x)dx=2019,~~\int_{0}^{1}f^2(x)dx=20181027$$ (1):show that:there exists unique sequence $x_{0},x_{1},\cdots,x_{n}\in [0,1]$,such $x_{0}<x_{1}<\cdots<x_{n}$ and for any postive integer $k=1,2,\cdots,n$.such $$\int_{x_{k-1}}^{x_{k}}f(t)dt=\dfrac{1}{n}\int_{0}^{1}f(t)dt$$

(2):and show that $$\lim_{n\to+\infty}\dfrac{1}{n}\sum_{k=0}^{n}f(x_{k})$$ is exists.and find this value.

I can do it $(1)$ exists.I think it is First mean value theorem for integration。but How to this sequence is unique. How to solve this (2),if this limt has exists.it seem use Stolz-Cesaro's Lemma:$$\lim_{n\to+\infty}\dfrac{1}{n}\sum_{k=0}^{n}f(x_{k})=\lim_{n\to\infty}f(x_{n})$$

this problem is my teacher gave me the exercise, these two problems I can not solve all , so I want to ask the teacher here,Thanks

math110
  • 93,304
  • Hint : Put $F(x)=\int_0^x f(t)dt$. As $f$ is continuous, $F$ is differentiable and as $f(t)>0$, for all $t$, $F$ is strictly increasing. – Kelenner Feb 09 '21 at 16:35
  • @Kelenner,can you solve the $(2)$? – math110 Feb 10 '21 at 00:15
  • Show that for all $n. x_n = 1$ and therefore $f(x_n) = f(1)$. – Paul Sinclair Feb 10 '21 at 00:32
  • @PaulSinclair,How to prove $x_{n}=1?$ – math110 Feb 10 '21 at 00:35
  • Calculate $\int_{x_0}^{x_n} f(t),dt$. – Paul Sinclair Feb 10 '21 at 00:36
  • @PaulSinclair,can you post your solution? Thanks – math110 Feb 10 '21 at 00:37
  • You accomplish the latter by staring at that formula right in front of you. – Paul Sinclair Feb 10 '21 at 00:39
  • This looks more like a Riemann sum and my guess is that the limit should equal $\int_0^1 f(x) , dx$. – Paramanand Singh Feb 10 '21 at 03:23
  • 1
    Btw you can't apply Cesaro-Stolz because the $x_k$ depend on both $n, k$. – Paramanand Singh Feb 10 '21 at 03:28
  • @MiloMoses - What do you mean? Nothing I've said in any way contradicts $x_k$ being increasing. There is a problem, but it is Paramanand Singh who noticed it. I just assumed that Cesaro-Stolz was being applied correctly without investigating enough. So while I am correct that $x_0 = 0$ and $x_n = 1$ always, it isn't sufficient to solve the problem. – Paul Sinclair Feb 10 '21 at 04:05
  • 2
    Note that \begin{align} \frac{1}{n}\sum_{k=0}^n f(x_k)&=\frac{\sum_\limits{k=0}^n f(x_k)\int_\limits{x_{k-1}}^{x_k}f(x)dx}{\int_\limits{0}^1f(x)dx}\ &\approx\frac{\sum_\limits{k=0}^n f(x_k)^2\big(x_k-x_{k-1}\big)}{\int_\limits{0}^1f(x)dx}\ . \end{align} So I'm guessing that the limit is $\ \frac{\int_\limits{0}^1f(x)^2dx}{\int_\limits{0}^1f(x)dx}\ $, which would explain why you're given numerical values for both the numerator and denominator of this frsction. – lonza leggiera Feb 12 '21 at 15:18
  • @lonzaleggiera: nice approach. However one needs to prove that the max of $(x_k-x_{k-1})$ tends to $0$ as $n\to\infty $ to treat it as Riemann sum. I am not able to think of a rigorous way to do it right now. – Paramanand Singh Feb 12 '21 at 16:06
  • @lonzaleggiera: on a second thought $f$ is positive and has a minimum value $m$, say, so this ensures $x_k-x_{k-1}\to 0$. You can furnish an answer now. – Paramanand Singh Feb 12 '21 at 16:11
  • @Paramanand Singh Yes, I'm fairly sure that the construction of a formal proof won't be all that difficult. However, dotting all the $i$s and crossing all the $t$s to my full satisfaction look to me like they're going to take quite a bit of work. – lonza leggiera Feb 12 '21 at 20:03
  • @lonzaleggiera: I have the details needed, but won't post an answer because the key idea is yours. – Paramanand Singh Feb 13 '21 at 02:59

1 Answers1

4
  • First note that if the stated conditions hold, then \begin{align} \int_{x_0}^{x_k}f(x)dx&=\sum_{i=1}^k\int_{x_{i-1}}^{x_i}f(x)dx\\ &=\frac{k}{n}\int_0^1f(x)dx\ , \end{align} and, in particular, $$ \int_{x_0}^{x_n}f(x)dx=\int_0^1f(x)dx\ . $$
  • Subtracting the left side of the final equation above from both sides gives \begin{align} 0&=\int_0^1f(x)dx-\int_{x_0}^{x_n}f(x)dx\\ &=\int_0^{x_0}f(x)dx+\int_{x_n}^1f(x)dx\ , \end{align} and since $\ 0\le x_0\le x_n\le1\ $, and $\ f\ $ is positive and continuous, it follows from this that $\ x_0=0\ $ and $\ x_n=1\ $ if the stated conditions hold
  • Now, following the suggestion of Kelenner in the first of the comments, put $$ F(x)=\int_0^xf(t)dt\ . $$ Then $\ F\ $ is strictly increasing and continuous on $\ [0,1]\ $, and if the stated conditions hold, then the first equation above tells us that $\ x_k\ $ must satisfy the equation $$ \ F\big(x_k\big)=\frac{k}{n}\int_0^1f(x)dx\ . $$ But since $$ F(0)=0<\frac{k}{n}\int_0^1f(x)dx<\int_0^1f(x)dx=F(1)\ , $$ for $\ k=1,2,\dots,n-1\ $ , then by the intermediate value theorem, therefore, there must exist $\ x_{nk}\in(0,1)\ $ with $$ F\big(x_{nk}\big)=\frac{k}{n}\int_\limits{0}^1f(x)dx\ ,$$ and since $\ F\ $ is strictly increasing, $\ x_{nk}\ $ is uniquely determined. Moreover, \begin{align} F\big(x_{nk}\big)-F\big(x_{n\,(k-1)}\big)&=\int_{x_{n\,(k-1)}}^{x_{nk}}f(x)dx\\ &=\frac{1}{n}\int_0^1f(x)dx\\ &\ge m\big(x_{nk}-x_{n\,(k-1)}\big)\ , \end{align} where $\ m=\min_\limits{x\in[0,1]}f(x)>0\ $. Therefore, $\ 0<x_{nk}-x_{n\,(k-1)}\le$$\frac{1}{mn}\int_\limits{0}^1f(x)dx\ $, and so $\ x_{nk}-x_{n\,(k-1)}\rightarrow0\ $ as $\ n\rightarrow\infty\ $, as Paramanand Singh has observed in the comments. For notational convenience, put $\ x_{n0}=x_0=0\ $ and $\ x_{nn}=x_n=1\ $.
  • We are now in a position to prove that $$ \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum_{k=0}^nf\big(x_{nk}\big)=\frac{\int_\limits{0}^1f(x)^2dx}{\int_\limits{0}^1f(x)dx}=\frac{20181027}{2019}\ . $$ Let $\ M=\max_{x\in[0,1]}f(x)\ $ and $\ \epsilon\ $ be any positive real number. Since $\ f\ $ must be uniformly continuous on $\ [0,1]\ $, there exists a positive real number $\ \delta\ $ such that $\ \left|f(x)-f(y)\right|\le\frac{\epsilon}{M}\ $ for all $\ x,y\in[0,1]\ $ with $\ |x-y|\le\delta\ $. Therefore, if $\ n>\frac{1}{m\delta}\int_\limits{x=0}^1f(x)dx\ $, then $\ \left|x-x_{nk}\right|\le\delta\ $, and hence $\ \left|f(x)-f\big(x_{nk}\big)\right|\le\frac{\epsilon}{M}\ $, for all $\ x\in\left[x_{nk}, x_{n\,(k+1)}\right]\ $. Hence, for all such $\ n\ $ we have \begin{align} \left|\,\int_\limits{0}^1f(x)^2dx-\right.&\left.\frac{1}{n}\int_\limits{0}^1f(x)dx \sum_{k=0}^{n-1}f\big(x_{nk}\big)\right|\\ &=\left|\,\int_\limits{0}^1f(x)^2dx- \sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\int_{x_{nk}}^{x_{n\,(k+1)}}f\big(x_{nk}\big)f(x)dx\right|\\ &=\left|\,\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\int_{x_{nk}}^{x_{n\,(k+1)}}\left(f(x)-f\big(x_{nk}\big)\right)f(x)dx\right|\\ &\le\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\epsilon\big(x_{n\,(k+1)}-x_{nk}\big)\\ &=\epsilon\ . \end{align} Thus, $$ \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\frac{1}{n}\int_\limits{0}^1f(x)dx \sum_{k=0}^{n-1}f\big(x_{nk}\big)=\int_\limits{0}^1f(x)^2dx\ , $$ from which, since $\ \int_\limits{0}^1f(x)dx\ne0\ $, and $\ \frac{f\left(x_{nn}\right)}{n}=\frac{f(1)}{n}\rightarrow0\ $ as $\ n\rightarrow\infty\ $, it follows that $$ \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\frac{1}{n} \sum_{k=0}^nf\big(x_{nk}\big)=\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\frac{1}{n}\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}f\big(x_{nk}\big)=\frac{\int_\limits{0}^1f(x)^2dx}{\int_\limits{0}^1f(x)dx}\ . $$
lonza leggiera
  • 28,646
  • 2
  • 12
  • 33
  • 1
    Great answer with all details. +1 – Paramanand Singh Feb 13 '21 at 13:23
  • I think you can use mean value theorem for integrals to write $\sum f(x_k) \int_{x_{k-1}}^{x_k}f(x),dx=\sum f(x_k) f(\xi_k) (x_k-x_{k-1})$. This is almost like Riemann sum for $f^2$ but the issue is that $x_k\neq \xi_k$ necessarily. That this is a non-issue follows from a rather not so famous result called Duhamel Principle : https://math.stackexchange.com/a/3081325/72031 – Paramanand Singh Feb 13 '21 at 13:29
  • But since $f$ is given continuous, your argument via uniform continuity is simpler and direct. – Paramanand Singh Feb 13 '21 at 13:29