Minima Domain Intervals and the S-convexity, as

well as the Convexity, Phenomenon

I.M.R. Pinheiro∗

April 29, 2009

Abstract
In this paper, we get to propose further change to the definition of S-
convexity, one branch of it extending Convexity, so that it is all found
analytically sounder.

AMS: 26A15
Keywords: Analysis, Convexity, Definition, S-convexity.

I. Introduction
We have been working on refining and improving, as well as fixing, the def-
initions for S-convexity for a while now. As at least one branch of it deals
with a proper extension of the concept of Convexity (made proper by our
paper on the definition), we end up refining the definition for Convexity as
well.
This piece of work regards our criticism to the absence of an explicit reference
to a minimum necessary interval of domain in order to both test S-convexity
accurately and define it, with analytical soundness, as a set of classes.
We follow this sequence of presentation:

• Definitions, both geometric and analytical;

• Criticisms to the present definition as to the absence of a minimum

domain length;
∗
RGMIA, e-mail: illmrpinheiro@gmail.com, Address: PO BOX 12396, A’BECKETT
ST, MELBOURNE, VICTORIA, AUSTRALIA, 8006

1
 • Proposed fixing;

• Conclusion;

• References.

II. Definitions & Symbols

Symbols ([1])

• Ks2 stands for the set of S-convex classes of type 2;

• 0 < s ≤ 1 is the index designating one of the classes for S-convexity;

• K11 ≡ K12 and both classes are the same as the convex class of functions;

• s2 stands for the s value designating a class in Ks2 .

Definitions ([1], [2], [3])

Definition 1. A function f : X− > <, where |f (x)| = f (x), is told to

belong to Ks2 if the inequality

f (λx + (1 − λ)y)

≤ λs f (x) + (1 − λ)s f (y) (2)

holds ∀λ/λ ∈ [0, 1]; ∀{x, y}/{x, y} ⊂ X; s = s2 /0 < s2 ≤ 1; X ⊆ <.

Definition 2. A function f : X− > <, where |f (x)| = −f (x), is told to

belong to Ks2 if the inequality

f (λx + (1 − λ)y)
1 1
≤ λ s f (x) + (1 − λ) s f (y) (3)
holds ∀λ/λ ∈ [0, 1]; ∀{x, y}/{x, y} ⊂ X; s = s2 /0 < s ≤ 1; X ⊆ <.

Remark 1. If1 the inequality is obeyed in the reverse situation by f , then f

is said to be s2 −concave.
1
This remark applies to both definitions preceding it.

2
III. Criticisms
The major criticism to both 1-convexity and S-convexity, in general, is that
clear inconsistency is found when putting the geometrical definition against
the analytical one: One must notice that there is mention to a limiting
geometrical line in each case, or a special limiting geometrical line for each
value of s between zero and one, Convexity bringing the shortest limiting
line of all, a straight line.
However, one needs more than one point to form a line; In fact, an infinite
number of points is needed, therefore an interval, a minimum interval. Once
we do not find mention to such an interval so far in the definitions, there is
a clear omission in the analytical definition of S-convexity, therefore in the
own Convexity definition.
The necessity of the minimum interval is delivered by the fact that x must be
different from y in all definitions (coherence with the geometric definition)
and the mention to a piece X, from the real numbers, does imply, usually, a
non-degenerated interval. Nothing could be more appropriate than adding
a ‘distance element’ to the current analytical definition in order to express
that idea, then, say this element is now called ’δ’, δ > 0, for well-posedness
sake.
Another interesting technical observation is that the current definition of S-
convexity deals with a vector in <2 . However, its current domain is in < and
so we want it to be in order to have the analytical definition matching the
geometrical one. If the left side of the inequality involves two place holders,
or variables, the equivocated implication of a domain in <2 should already
constitute enough reason to drop the second variable existence, that is, the
existence of y there.
The abundant literature sources disregarding such basic facts, even though
implying them, containing them as enthymemes, leads us to believe that this
is one of the most important improvements in the definitions regarding the
phenomenon of S-convexity achieved this far by us.
The geometric definition DOES imply that the right side of the inequality
forms a line, not mattering if curved or straight. As stated before, the only
way to generate this line, minimum condition of existence for it, is that
x 6= y, therefore X 6= {x}, ∀x ∈ <.

3
IV. Fixed Definitions for S-convexity
Definition 3. A function f : X− > <, where |f (x)| = f (x), is told to
belong to Ks2 if the inequality

f (λx + (1 − λ)(x + δ))

≤ λs f (x) + (1 − λ)s f (x + δ) (5)

V
holds ∀λ/λ ∈ [0, 1]; ∀x/x ∈ X; s = s2 /0 < s2 ≤ 1;X/X⊆ < X = [a, b];
∀δ/0 < δ ≤ (b − x).

Definition 4. A function f : X− > <, where |f (x)| = −f (x), is told to

belong to Ks2 if the inequality

f (λx + (1 − λ)(x + δ))

1 1
≤ λ s f (x) + (1 − λ) s f (x + δ) (6)
V
holds ∀λ/λ ∈ [0, 1]; ∀x/x ∈ X; s = s2 /0 < s2 ≤ 1;X/X⊆ < X = [a, b];
∀δ/0 < δ ≤ (b − x).

Remark 2. If2 the inequality is obeyed in the reverse situation by f , then f

is said to be s2 −concave.

V. Conclusion
In this one more short note, we have managed to improve the analytical
definition of S-convexity, finally starting to place the notion in the body of
the Real Analysis.

VI. References
[1] M. R. Pinheiro. Convexity Secrets. Trafford Publishing. 2008. ISBN:
1425138217.

[2] M. R. Pinheiro. Basic note on the definition of s2 −convexity. Submitted.

2009.
[3] M. R. Pinheiro. Short note on the definition of s2 −convexity. Submitted.
2009.

2
This remark applies to both definitions preceding it.