3 a 3 + b 3 1 + 3 b 3 + c 3 1 + 3 c 3 + a 3 1
Given that a , b , c are positive reals satisfying a + b + c ≤ 2 3 . Determine the minimum value of the expression above to 3 decimal places.
A solution using Minkowski Inequality will be very much appreciated!
This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try
refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and,
finally, (c)
loading the
non-javascript version of this page
. We're sorry about the hassle.
∂ a ∂ f ( a , b , c ) , ∂ b ∂ f ( a , b , c ) , ∂ c ∂ f ( a , b , c ) = 0
How do you know you've found the global maximum point? And not a local minimum point, saddle point, etc?
Log in to reply
he can take the hessian then take the determinants of the principal minors
Log in to reply
If that's the case, he is missing out on a lot of steps. Plus, I'm sure it's not easy to find the partial derivatives for most of the expressions in the matrix.
Log in to reply
@Pi Han Goh – yeah,it'll take many steps,which he needs to show
The solution is not for the maxima, but for a minima. You can verify that this function is strictly a convex function which is asked to be maximized over a convex constraint set. Had the question asked for a minimization then the function would have a unique global minimizer in the interior of this convex constarint set, that is a + b + c ≤ 3 / 2 , a > 0 , b > 0 , c > 0 . You've got this point as your answer, which is a = b = c = 1 / 2 . On the other hand, a convex function is maximized over a compact convex constraint set at its extreme points. Since the constraint set here is convex, but not compact (since it is not closed due to the strict poisitivity requirement of a , b , c ), the function cannot be maximized, that is it can be made arbitrarily large by taking suitable a , b , c .To verify my point, you can just take a = 3 / 2 − 2 × 1 0 − 4 = 1 . 4 9 9 8 , b = c = 1 0 − 4 which are well within the constraint set, but gives the function a value ≈ 1 0 4 which is way larger than 6 . 0 3 1 . So the question is wrong and your answer finds, by mistake, the minimizer of the function (which the question should have asked).
Log in to reply
A modification has been made, sorry for all the inconvenience!
Can someone plz explain me this sum?
I am having a bit of difficulty understanding. Could someone explain
Nice proof......sharma ji
Relevant wiki: Lagrange Multipliers
It is easy to see with the Minkowski inequality that: f ( a , b , c ) = 3 a 3 + b 3 1 + 3 b 3 + c 3 1 + 3 c 3 + a 3 1 ≥ 3 ( a + b + c ) 3 + ( a 1 + b 1 + c 1 ) 3 = g ( a , b , c )
Taking the directional derivative of g ( a , b , c ) allong v = ⎣ ⎡ 3 − 1 / 2 3 − 1 / 2 3 − 1 / 2 ⎦ ⎤ , we get: i = 1 ∑ 3 3 1 3 ( g ( a , b , c ) ) 2 1 [ 3 ( a + b + c ) 2 − x i 2 3 ( a 1 + b 1 + c 1 ) 2 ]
Where x 1 = a , x 2 = b , x 3 = c . We want to show that this is negative for a + b + c ≤ 3 / 2 . Exploiting the fact that g ( a , b , c ) > 0 , for our condition to hold we get: i = 1 ∑ 3 x i < i = 1 ∑ 3 ( x i 1 j = 1 ∑ 3 x j 1 ) = ( j = 1 ∑ 3 x j 1 ) 2
Assuming ∑ i = 1 3 x i = y , we get that the maximum value of the smallest x i is y / 3 . This implies that ( ∑ j = 1 3 x j 1 ) 2 > x n 2 1 ≥ y 2 9 . Therefore our condition definitely holds for y < y 2 9 ⇒ y < 9 1 / 3 ≈ 2 . 0 8 .
From this we can conclude that the minimum of g ( a , b , c ) must lie on a + b + c = 3 / 2 We now create the lagrange multiplier of g ( a , b , c ) 3 , which has the same minimum as g ( a , b , c ) , with the constraint a + b + c = 3 / 2 . L ( a , b , c , λ ) = ( a + b + c ) 3 − ( a 1 + b 1 + c 1 ) 3 − λ ( a + b + c − 3 / 2 ) = 2 7 / 8 − ( a 1 + b 1 + c 1 ) 3 − λ ( a + b + c − 3 / 2 ) Taking the derivative with respect to x i : ∂ x i ( L ( x 1 , x 2 , x 3 , λ ) ) = 3 ( a 1 + b 1 + c 1 ) 2 x i 2 1 − λ
Since ∂ x i ( L ( x 1 , x 2 , x 3 , λ ) ) = 0 at the minimum: 3 ( a 1 + b 1 + c 1 ) 2 x i 2 1 − λ = 0 ( a 1 + b 1 + c 1 ) 3 / λ = x i a = b = c = 1 / 2 Therefore the minimum value of g ( a , b , c ) is 3 1 7 5 5 / 2 . If we evaluate f ( 1 / 2 , 1 / 2 , 1 / 2 ) , we get the same value.
Since g ( a , b , c ) ≤ f ( a , b , c ) , the minimum value of f ( a , b , c ) is 3 1 7 5 5 / 2 ≈ 6 . 0 3 1 .
Let
x = a + b + c , y = a 1 + b 1 + c 1 .
Using Minkowski inequality we get:
3 a 3 + b 3 1 + 3 b 3 + c 3 1 + 3 c 3 + a 3 1 ≥ 3 ( a + b + c ) 3 + ( a 1 + b 1 + c 1 ) 3 = 3 x 3 + y 3
From the statement x ≤ 3 / 2 .
From Arithmetic-Harmonic Mean Inequality we get:
y 3 ≤ 3 x ≤ 1 / 2
From here we can find out that x y ≥ 9 and y ≥ 6
Now let us use Cauchy inequality for 65 terms:
x 3 + 6 4 ⋅ 6 4 1 y 3 ≥ 6 5 6 5 x 3 ⋅ ( 4 y ) 6 4 ⋅ 3 = 6 5 6 5 ( 4 x y ) 3 ⋅ ( 4 y ) 6 3 ⋅ 3 ≥ 6 5 6 5 ( 4 9 ) 3 ( 4 6 ) 6 3 ⋅ 3 = 6 5 ⋅ ( 2 3 ) 3
(It may be unclear why do I take exactly these terms. We want equality to be achieved in Cauchy inequality so all terms should be equal and since intuitively a = b = c = 1 / 2 in minimum, then we should use inequality for the equal terms: x 3 , ( y / 4 ) 3 , ( y / 4 ) 3 , . . . . This is of course informal explanation.)
Now we finally get
3 a 3 + b 3 1 + 3 b 3 + c 3 1 + 3 c 3 + a 3 1 ≥ 3 x 3 + y 3 ≥ 2 3 3 6 5 ≈ 6 . 0 3 1
From the Minkowski inequality we get that equality holds if and only if a = b = c = 2 1 .
Set the polynomial is P By applying C-S consequence(Mincowski) inequality: P ≥ 3 ( x + y + z ) 3 + ( x 1 + y 1 + z 1 ) 3 ≥ 3 2 7 x y z + 2 7 x y z 1 Set x y z = t ; 0 < t ≤ 2 1 We see f ( t ) is decreasing in that interval. So m i n f ( t ) = f ( 8 1 ) = 8 1 7 5 5
So P ≥ 3 8 1 7 5 5 ≈ 6 . 0 3 1 .
Your solution is very good and short! You have a typo you may want to fix though. It should be 27/(xyz) instead of 1/(27xyz). (He used x, y, z instead of a, b, c by the way.) Is the condition for two left inequalities to hold the fact that the vectors [a, 1/b], [b, 1/c], [c, 1/a] are all in proportion?
By Minkowski's Inequality for p < 1 , we have
( 3 a 3 + b 3 1 + 3 b 3 + c 3 1 + 3 c 3 + a 3 1 ) 3 ≥ ( a + b + c ) 3 + ( a 1 + b 1 + c 1 ) 3
By the Cauchy–Schwarz Inequality or Arithmetic-Harmonic Mean Inequality, it is easy to show that:
( a 1 + b 1 + c 1 ) 3 ≥ 2 1 6
( 3 a 3 + b 3 1 + 3 b 3 + c 3 1 + 3 c 3 + a 3 1 ) 3 ≥ ( a + b + c ) 3 + 2 1 6
Note that this occurs only when a = b = c = 2 1
Also note that a + b + c is maximised at the same values
( 3 a 3 + b 3 1 + 3 b 3 + c 3 1 + 3 c 3 + a 3 1 ) 3 ≥ 8 2 7 + 2 1 6
Unfortunately, the above logic is not correct, and therefore, invalid, even though it is the true minimum of the expression. I presently do not see a viable means of justifying the above conclusion.
Discuss in the comments.
Since a lot of people have complained about this asking for minimum in stead of maximum, I went to check very carefully and realized my mistake. Therefore, a (not at all) slight modification has been made. Sorry for all the inconvenience!
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
I will be trying to post a Minkowski inequality solution, till then lets look at this.
f ( a , b , c ) = 3 a 3 + b 3 1 + 3 b 3 + c 3 1 + 3 c 3 + a 3 1 subject to a + b + c ≤ 2 3
Using partial differentiation i.e solving ∂ a ∂ f ( a , b , c ) , ∂ b ∂ f ( a , b , c ) , ∂ c ∂ f ( a , b , c ) = 0
We have the equations :
a 3 + ( a 2 c ) 3 − ( a b ) − 3 = b 3 + ( b 2 a ) 3 − ( b c ) − 3 = c 3 + ( c 2 b ) 3 − ( c a ) − 3 = 3 a 3 + ( a 2 c ) 3 − ( a b ) − 3 + b 3 + ( b 2 a ) 3 − ( b c ) − 3 + c 3 + ( c 2 b ) 3 − ( c a ) − 3
Since the combined equation is homogeneous in ( a , b , c ) by WLOG we have a ≤ b ≤ c & for minimum we must have a ≤ b ≤ c ≤ 3 a + b + c ≤ 2 1
Putting the minimum value of a , b , c in the expression we get maximum as 6 . 0 3 1