1: \documentclass[fleqn,12pt,twoside]{article}
2: \usepackage{espcrc1}
3: \usepackage{a4wide}
4: \usepackage{graphicx,palatino,pifont,times}
5: \usepackage{oldgerm}
6: \usepackage{amsmath,amsthm}
7: \usepackage{amssymb}
8: \usepackage{amstext}
9: \usepackage{epsfig}
10: \usepackage{psfig}
11: \usepackage{cite}
12: \newcommand{\ttbs}{\char'134}
13:
14: \newtheorem{thm}{Theorem}[section]
15: \newtheorem{Def}{Definition}[section]
16: \newtheorem{Rem}{Remark}[section]
17: \newtheorem{prop}{Proposition}[section]
18: \newtheorem{corl}{Corollary}[section]
19: \newtheorem{example}{Example}[section]
20: \newtheorem{lm}{Lemma}[section]
21: %\newtheorem{tb}{Table}[section]
22: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.35}
23: %\newcommand{\qed} {\hfil \rule{1.6mm} {1.6mm}}
24: \renewcommand{\theenumi}{\Roman{enumi}}
25: \def\R{{I\!\!R}}
26: \def\H{{I\!\!H}}
27: \def\N{{I\!\!N}}
28: \def\CC{{\rm \kern.24em \vrule width.02em height1.4ex depth-.05ex \kern-.26emC}}
29: \def\TagOnRight
30: \def\AA{{it I} \hskip-3pt{\tt A}}
31: \def\FF{\rm I\hskip-1.8pt F}
32: \def\HH{\rm I\hskip-1.8pt H}
33: \def\MM{\rm I\hskip-1.8pt M}
34: \def\NN{\rm I\hskip-1.8pt N}
35: \def\PP{\rm I\hskip-1.8pt P}
36: \def\QQ{\rlap {\raise 0.4ex \hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle |$}} {\hskip -0.1em Q}}
37: \def\RR{\rm I\hskip-1.8pt R}
38: \def\ZZ{\mbox{{\rm Z\hskp-4pt \rm Z}}}
39: \catcode`\@=11
40: \def\theequation{\@arabic{\c@section}.\@arabic{\c@equation}}
41: \catcode`\@=12
42: \begin{document}
43: \begin{center}
44: {\Large \bf { Coalescence Hidden Variable Fractal Interpolation
45: Functions and its Smoothness Analysis}}
46: \end{center}
47: \begin{center}
48: {\sc{A.K.B.Chand\footnote{ The present research is partially supported by
49: CSIR Grant No: 9/92(160)/98-EMR-I, India.}and G.P.Kapoor}}\\
50: Department of Mathematics,\\
51: Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur,\\
52: Kanpur 208016,India \\
53: Email: chand@iitk.ac.in ; gp@iitk.ac.in\\
54: Phone: 91-512-2597609\\
55: Fax : 91-512-2597500\\
56: \end{center}
57: \begin{abstract}
58: {\bf ABSTRACT :} We construct a coalescence hidden variable fractal
59: interpolation function(CHFIF) through a non-diagonal iterated function
60: system(IFS). Such a FIF may be self-affine or non-self-affine depending
61: on the parameters of the defining non-diagonal IFS. The smoothness analysis of the CHFIF
62: has been carried out by using the operator approximation technique. The deterministic
63: construction of functions having order of modulus continuity
64: $O (|t|^{\delta} (\log|t|)^m)$ ($m$ a non-negative integer and
65: $ 0 < \delta \le 1$) is possible through our CHFIF. The bounds of fractal dimension
66: of CHFIFs are obtained first in certain critical cases
67: and then, using estimation of these bounds,
68: the bounds of fractal dimension of any FIF are found.
69: \end{abstract}\\\\
70: {\bf KEYWORDS :} FIF, IFS, Coalescence, Hidden Variable, Self-affine,
71: Non-self-affine, Operator approximation, Smoothness analysis, Fractal dimension.\\\\
72: {\bf AMS Classification :} 28A80,65D05,37C25,41A35,26A16,37L30.
73: \section{INTRODUCTION}
74: The fractal curves arise during several applications in various
75: disciplines such as Natural Science\cite{M,IK,MTA,SGV},
76: Engineering Applications\cite{VLT}, Economics\cite{K} etc.
77: To approximate these curves, Barnsley\cite{B,B1} constructed
78: a fractal interpolating function (FIF) arising from a suitable
79: iterated function system (IFS).
80: FIFs are generally self-affine in nature and the Hausdorff-Besicovitch
81: dimensions of their graphs are non-integers. To approximate non-self-affine
82: patterns, the hidden variable FIFs (HFIFs) are constructed in \cite{B1,B2,PR} by projection
83: of vector valued FIF from generalized interpolation data.
84: However, in practical applications of FIF, the interpolation data might be
85: generated simultaneously from self-affine and non-self-affine functions.
86: Thus, the question whether it is possible to construct an IFS that is capable of
87: generating both of the self-affine or non-self-affine FIFs simultaneously needs to be settled.
88: The hidden variable bivariate fractal interpolation surfaces
89: are studied in \cite{CK} by introducing the concept of {\it constrained free variables}.
90: In the present work a {\it Coalescence Hidden Variable FIF} (CHFIF) that
91: is self-affine or non-self-affine depending on the parameters of
92: defining IFS is constructed.
93: \par
94: Since FIFs are continuous but generally nowhere differentiable functions,
95: their analysis can not be done satisfactorily by restricting to classical analytic tools.
96: For the applications of FIF theory, in general, an expansion of the FIF
97: in terms of a suitable function system is usually considered.
98: Barnsley and Harrington~\cite{BH} used shifted
99: composition to express affine FIFs and computed their fractal
100: dimensions. However, this representation is somewhat difficult to use.
101: Zhen\cite{ZS} gave another series representation of self-affine FIF through
102: a new function $\psi_{\sigma} \kappa_{\omega}$ to study the
103: H\"{o}lder property of FIF. Since, the function $\psi_{\sigma} \kappa_{\omega}$
104: has too many points of discontinuity, it is slightly tedious to analyze it in applications.
105: Zhen and Gang\cite{SG} expanded equidistant FIF on $[0,1]$ by using
106: Haar-wavelet function system and obtained their global H\"{o}lder property,
107: when the number of interpolation points is $N = 2^p + 1$, $p$ being a definite
108: positive integer. Gang\cite{G} employed the technique of
109: operator approximation to characterize the H\"{o}lder
110: continuity of self-affine FIFs on a general set of nodes on $[0,1]$.
111: Bedford\cite{TB} obtained the H\"{o}lder exponent $h$ of a self-affine
112: fractal function that has non-linear scaling, using code space
113: of $n$ symbols associated with the IFS. He also showed the existence
114: of a larger H\"{o}lder exponent $h_{\lambda}$ defined at almost
115: every point with respect to Lebesgue measure. The distribution of points where the FIF has
116: strongest singularity is found by Maslyuk~\cite{MASLYUK}
117: that helps in calculating the parameters of an IFS with aid of
118: wavelet-based techniques, such as modulus maxima lines tracing.
119: The H\"{o}lder exponent needed in smoothness analysis of non-self-affine
120: FIF is not yet studied due to interdependence of the components
121: of vector valued FIF in the construction of HFIFs.
122: \par
123: It is seen in the present paper that, contrary to the observation of
124: Barnsley\cite{B1} that `the graph of HFIF is not self-similar or self-affine or self-anything',
125: CHFIF is indeed self-affine under certain conditions even though the class of CHFIFs is a
126: subclass of the class of HFIFs. Our approximation of CHFIF is obtained
127: through an operator found with integral averages on each subinterval of the FIF. Using this
128: approximation, the H\"{o}lder exponent of the non-self-affine functions
129: arising from IFS is found for the first time.
130: The bounds of Fractal dimension of the CHFIF in
131: critical cases obtained in the present paper help to calculate the bounds
132: of Fractal dimension of any FIF by converting the CHFIF to a self-affine FIF.
133: \par
134: The organization of the paper is as follows: In Section 2,
135: we construct a coalescence hidden variable FIF. For this
136: purpose, an IFS is constructed in $\mathbb{R}^3$ with the introduction
137: of constrained free variable. The projection of the attractor
138: of our IFS on $\mathbb{R}^2$ is a CHFIF or a self-affine FIF depending upon choices of hidden variables.
139: The H\"{o}lder continuity of CHFIFs (both self-affine and non-self-affine) is investigated in
140: Section 3 by using the operator approximation technique.
141: The bounds on fractal dimension of CHFIFs in
142: critical cases are obtained in Section 4. The results found in
143: the present work through Sections 2-4 are illustrated in Section 5 with
144: the help of suitably chosen examples.
145: \section{CONSTRUCTION OF CHFIF}
146: \setcounter{equation}{0}
147: \subsection{ Construction of IFS for CHFIF }
148: Let the interpolation data be $\{(x_i,y_i) \in \mathbb{R}^2 : i= 0,1,2,\dots,N \},$
149: where $-\infty < x_0 < x_1 < \dots <x_N < \infty$.
150: For constructing an interpolation function
151: $ f_1: [x_0, x_N] \rightarrow \mathbb{R} $ such that $f_1(x_i) = y_i \;\text{for all} \;
152: i=0,1,2,\dots N,$ consider a generalized
153: set of data $\{(x_i,y_i,z_i) \in \mathbb{R}^3 | i=0,1,2,\dots,N \} $,
154: where $ z_{i},\; i=0,1,2,\dots,N $ are real parameters.
155: The following notations are used throughout the sequel:
156: $I = [x_{0},x_{N}], \; I_i = [x_{i-1},x_i], \;
157: g_{1} =\underset{i}{Min} \;y_i, \; g_{2} =
158: \underset{i}{Max} \; y_{i}, \;
159: h_{1} =\underset{i}{Min} \; z_{i}, \; h_{2} =
160: \underset{i}{Max} \; z_{i}$ and
161: $K= I \times D,$ where $D = J_1 \times J_2,$ $J_1, J_2$ are suitable compact
162: sets in $\mathbb{R}$ such that $[g_1, g_2] \times [h_1, h_2] \subset D.$
163: Let $L_i : I \longrightarrow I_i$ be a contractive homeomorphism and $ F_i : K
164: \longrightarrow D $ be a continuous vector valued function such that
165: \begin{equation}\left.\label{chf1}
166: \begin{split}
167: L_i(x_0) = x_{i-1}, &L_i(x_N) = x_i \\
168: F_i(x_0,y_0,z_0) = & (y_{i-1} , z_{i-1}), \;
169: F_i(x_N,y_N,z_N) = (y_i , z_i)
170: \end{split}\right\}
171: \end{equation}
172: and
173: \begin{equation}\left.
174: \begin{split}
175: d(F_i(x,y,z), F_i(x^*,y,z))
176: &\le c \; |x -x^*| \\
177: d(F_i(x,y,z), F_i(x,y^*,z^*))
178: & \le s \; d_E((y,z), (y^*,z^*))
179: \end{split}\right\}
180: \end{equation}\label{chf2}
181: for all $ i = 1,2,\dots,N$ where, $c$ and $s$ are positive constants with $0\le\ s <1,$
182: $ (x,y,z), \; (x^*,y,z),$ $ (x,y^*,z^*) \in K $, $d$ is the sup. metric on $K$ and
183: $d_E$ is the Euclidean metric on $\mathbb{R}^2.$ For defining the required CHFIF,
184: the functions $L_i$ and $F_i$ are chosen to be of the form $L_i(x) = a_ix + b_i $ and
185: \begin{equation}\label{chf3}
186: F_{i}(x,y,z) = A_i (y,z)^T + (p_i(x), q_i(x))^T
187: \end{equation}
188: where, $A_i$ is an upper triangular matrix
189: $\begin{pmatrix} \alpha_i & \beta_i \\
190: 0 & \gamma_i \end{pmatrix}$ and $p_i(x)$, $q_i(x)$ are continuous functions having at least
191: two unknowns. We choose $\alpha_i$ as free variable with
192: $ |\alpha_i| < 1 $ and $\beta_i$ as {\it{constrained free variable}} with respect to
193: $\gamma_i$ such that $ |\beta_i| +| \gamma_i| < 1$.
194: The generalized IFS that is needed for construction of CHFIF corresponding to the data
195: $\{(x_i,y_i,z_i) | $ $ i=0,1,\dots,N \}$ is now defined as
196: \begin{equation}\label{chf4}
197: \{\mathbb{R}^3 ; \omega_{i}(x,y,z)= (L_{i}(x), F_{i}(x,y,z)),\; i=1,2,\dots,N \}.
198: \end{equation}
199: %For an affine CHFIF, let $L_i(x) = a_ix + b_i $, $p_i(x) = c_ix+d_i$ and $q_i(x) = e_ix+f_i$.
200: %Thus, using (\ref{chf1}),
201: %\begin{equation}\left.\label{chf5}
202: %\begin{split}
203: %&a_i = \frac{x_{i} - x_{i-1}}{x_{N} - x_{0}}, \;
204: %b_i = \frac{x_{i-1}x_{N}-x_{i}x_{0}}{x_{N} - x_{0}},\\
205: %& c_i=\frac {y_i-y_{i-1}-\alpha_i(y_N-y_0)-\beta_i(z_N-z_0)}{x_N-x_0}, \;
206: %d_i =y_i-\alpha_i y_N -\beta_i z_N-c_i x_N,\\
207: %& e_i=\frac {z_i-z_{i-1}-\gamma_i(z_N-z_0)}{x_N-x_0}, \;
208: %f_i=z_i-\gamma_i z_N- e_i x_N
209: %\end{split}\right\}
210: %\end{equation}
211: It is shown in the sequel that projection of the attractor of IFS (\ref{chf4}) on $\mathbb{R}^2$
212: is the desired CHFIF.
213: \subsection{ Existence and Uniqueness of CHFIF}
214: It is known\cite{B2} that the IFS defined in (\ref{chf4}) associated with the data $ \{(x_i,y_i,z_i),
215: \; i=0,1,\dots,N\}$ is hyperbolic with respect to a metric $d^*$ on $\mathbb{R}^3$
216: equivalent to the Euclidean metric. In particular, there exists a unique nonempty
217: compact set $G\subseteq \mathbb{R}^3$ such that
218: %\begin{center}
219: \begin{equation}\label{attractor}
220: G = \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}\bigcup} \omega_{i}(G)
221: \end{equation}
222: %\end{center}
223: The following proposition gives the existence of a unique vector valued function $f$ that interpolates
224: the generalized interpolation data and also establishes that the graph of $f$ equals the attractor $G$
225: of the generalized IFS:
226: \begin{prop}\label{prop2}
227: The attractor $G$ (c.f. (\ref{attractor})) of the IFS defined in (\ref{chf4})
228: is the graph of the continuous vector valued function
229: $ f : I \longrightarrow D $ such that $ f (x_i) =
230: ( y_i,z_i)$ for all $ i = 1,2,\dots,N$ i.e. $G = \{(x,y,z) : x \in I\; \text{and} \;
231: f(x) = (y(x), z(x))\}.$
232: \end{prop}
233: \begin{proof} Consider the family of functions,
234: $\mathcal{F} = \{ f :I \longrightarrow D |f\text{ is continuous},
235: \; f(x_0) = (y_0,z_0),$ $ f(x_N) = (y_N,z_N) \}. $
236: For $f \;\text{and} \; g \in \mathcal{F},$ define the metric $\rho ( f, g ) =
237: \underset{x \in I} \sup \| f(x) - g(x)\|$
238: where, $\| . \|$ denotes the Euclidean norm on $\mathbb{R}^2$.
239: Then, $(\mathcal{F} , \rho )$ is a complete metric space.
240: Now, for $x \in I_{i},$ define Read-Bajraktarevi\'{c} operator $T$
241: on $(\mathcal{F} , \rho )$ as
242: \begin{equation}\label{chf6}
243: (Tf) (x) = F_i (L_i^{-1}(x), y(L_i^{-1}(x)), z(L_i^{-1}(x)))
244: \end{equation}
245: For $f \in \mathcal{F},$ using (\ref{chf1}),
246: $(Tf) (x_0) = F_{1}(L_1^{-1}(x_0) , y(L_1^{-1}(x_0)) , z(L_1^{-1}(x_0)))
247: =F_{1} (x_0, y_0, z_0) = (y_0 , z_0).$
248: Similarly, $(Tf) (x_N) = (y_N , z_N).$ The function
249: $Tf$ is clearly continuous on each of the subinterval $(x_{i-1},x_i)$ for
250: $i = 1,2,\dots,N.$ Also, from (\ref{chf1}), it follows that
251: $Tf(x_i^-) = Tf(x_i^+)$ for each $i$. Consequently, $TF$ is continuous on $I.$ Thus,
252: $ Tf \in \mathcal{F}.$ This proves that $T$ maps $\mathcal{F}$ into itself .
253: \par
254: Next, we prove that $T$ is a contraction map on $\mathcal{F}.$ For $f \in \mathcal{F},$
255: define $y_f(x), z_f(x)$ as the $y$-value and $z$-value of the vector valued function
256: $Tf$ at $x$.
257: Let $ f, g \in \mathcal{F}\; \text{and} \;x \in I_i. $ Then,
258: \begin{equation*}
259: \begin{split}
260: \rho (Tf,Tg) = & \underset{x \in I} \sup \{ \| Tf(x) - Tg(x) \| \} \\
261: = & \underset{x \in I_i} \sup \{ \| \alpha_i (y_f(L_i^{-1}(x))
262: - y_g(L_i^{-1}(x))) + \beta_i (z_f(L_i^{-1}(x)) - z_g(L_i^{-1}(x))),\\
263: & \gamma_i (z_f(L_i^{-1}(x)) - z_g(L_i^{-1}(x))) \| \}\\
264: \le & s^* \; \underset{x \in I_i} \sup \{ \| y_f(L_i^{-1}(x)) - y_g(L_i^{-1}(x)) +
265: z_f(L_i^{-1}(x)) - z_g(L_i^{-1}(x)),\\
266: & z_f(L_i^{-1}(x)) - z_g(L_i^{-1}(x)) \| \}\\
267: \le & s^* \; \rho (f,g)
268: \end{split}
269: \end{equation*}
270: where, in view of the conditions on $ \alpha_i, \beta_i, \gamma_i$ in Section 2.1,
271: $ s^* = \underset{1\le i \le N} \max
272: \{ |\alpha_{i}|, |\beta_{i}|, |\gamma_{i}| \} < \; 1$. This shows that
273: $T$ is a contraction mapping. By fixed point theorem, $T$ has a unique fixed point i.e. there exists
274: a unique vector valued function $ f \in \mathcal{F}$ such that for all $ x \in I,$
275: $ (Tf)(x) = f(x).$ Now, for all $i = 1,2,\dots,N-1,$
276: \begin{equation*}
277: f(x_{i}) = (Tf)(x_{i})
278: = F_{i+1} (L_{i+1}^{-1}(x_{i}), y(L_{i+1}^{-1}(x_{i}), z(L_{i+1}^{-1}(x_{i}))
279: = F_{i+1} (x_0,y_0,z_0) = (y_i,z_i),
280: \end{equation*}
281: which establishes that $f$ is the function interpolating the data
282: $\{(x_i,y_i,z_i) \; | \; i = 0,1,\dots,N \}$.
283: \par
284: It remains to show that the graph $\tilde{G}$ of the vector valued function $f$ is the
285: attractor of the IFS defined in (\ref{chf4}). To this end, observe that for all $x \in I,
286: i=1,2,\dots,N, $ and $f \in \mathcal{F},$
287: \begin{equation*}
288: (Tf)(L_i(x)) = F_{i} (x,y,z) =(\alpha_i y+ \beta_i z+c_i x+d_i,\; \gamma_i z+e_i x+f_i)
289: \end{equation*}
290: and
291: \begin{equation*}
292: \omega_{i} ( x, y, z) = (L_i(x) , F_{i}(x,y,z)) = (L_i(x) , Tf(L_i(x)))
293: = (L_i(x) , f(L_i(x)))
294: \end{equation*}
295: which implies that $\tilde{G}$ satisfies the invariance property, i.e.
296: $ \tilde{G} = \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}\bigcup} \omega_{i}(\tilde{G}).$
297: Since the nonempty compact set that satisfies the invariance property
298: is unique, it follows that $ G = \tilde{G}.$ This proves
299: $G$ is the graph of the vector valued function $f$ such that
300: $ G = \{ (x,y,z) | x \in I \}.$
301: \end{proof}
302: Let the vector valued function $ f : I \rightarrow D $
303: in Proposition \ref{prop2} be written as $ f(x)=(f_1(x), f_2(x))$.
304: The required CHFIF is now defined as follows:
305: \begin{Def}
306: Let $\{(x,f_1(x)) : x \in I \}$ be the projection of the attractor $G$ (c.f. (\ref{attractor}))
307: on $\mathbb{R}^2$. Then, the function $f_1(x)$ is called
308: {\it { coalescence hidden variable FIF}} (CHFIF) for the given interpolation data
309: $\{ (x_i,y_i) \;| i=0,1,\dots,N \}.$ \end{Def}
310: \begin{Rem}
311: 1. Although, the attractor $G$ (c.f. (\ref{attractor})) of the
312: IFS defined in (\ref{chf4}) is a union of affine transformations of itself,
313: the projection of the attractor is not always union of affine
314: transformations of itself. Hence, CHFIFs are generally
315: non-self-affine in nature.\\
316: 2. By choosing $y_i = z_i$ and $\alpha_i+\beta_i =\gamma_i,$
317: CHFIF $f_1(x)$ obtained as the projection on
318: $\mathbb{R}^2$ of the attractor of the IFS (\ref{chf4})
319: coincides with a self-affine FIF $f_2(x)$ for the same interpolation data.
320: Hence, the CHFIF is self-affine in this
321: case, in contrast to the observation of Barnsley\cite{B1} that the graph
322: of a HFIF is not self-similar or self-affine or self-anything.\\
323: 3. For a given set of interpolation data, if an extra dimension is added to construct
324: the CHFIF, we have 1 free variable in the $3^{rd}$ co-ordinate
325: whereas, in the $2^{nd}$ co-ordinate, we have 1 free variable and 1 constrained variable.
326: In the case $y_i = z_i$, the resulting scaling factor of CHFIF is $\alpha_i+\beta_i$.
327: As $|\alpha_i| < 1$ and $|\beta_i| + |\gamma_i| < 1$, taking
328: $|\gamma_i| < \epsilon$ for sufficiently small $\epsilon$,
329: the scaling factor of the CHFIF is found to lie
330: between $-2^+$ and $2^-$.\\
331: 4. If extra $n$ dimensions are added to interpolation data to get the CHFIF,
332: $(n+2)^{th}$ co-ordinate has 1 free variable,
333: $(n+1)^{th}$ co-ordinate has 1 free variable and may have at most 1 constrained
334: free variable, $n^{th}$ co-ordinate has 1 free variable and may have at most 2 constrained
335: free variables, $\dots.$ Continuing, the $2^{nd}$ co-ordinate has 1 free variable
336: and may have at most $n$ constrained free variables.
337: So, in this extension, there are $n$ free variables and at most $(1+2+3+\dots+n)$ free
338: variables in the CHFIF. Due to the restrictions on free variables
339: and constrained free variables, the scaling factor of the CHFIF lies
340: between $-(n+1)^+$ and $(n+1)^-$. Thus, one can expect a wider range of
341: CHFIFs in higher dimension extensions.
342: \end{Rem}
343: \section{ SMOOTHNESS ANALYSIS OF CHFIF}
344: \setcounter{equation}{0}
345: In this section, the smoothness of CHFIFs are studied by using their operator
346: approximations. The H\"{o}lder exponent of CHFIFs are calculated
347: in the proof of our main Theorems \ref{th1}-\ref{th3}.\\
348: We take the interpolation data on X-axis as $0 = x_0 < x_1 < \dots < x_N = 1.$
349: Let the function $F_i$ of the IFS (\ref{chf4}) be of the form
350: \begin{equation}\label{chf7}
351: F_i(x,y,z) = (\alpha_iy+\beta_iz+p_i(x),\; \gamma_{i}z+q_i(x))
352: \end{equation}
353: where $|\alpha_i| < 1, \; |\beta_i| + |\gamma_i| < 1, p_i \in Lip\lambda_i
354: ( 0 < \lambda_i \le 1)$ and $ q_i \in Lip\mu_i (0 < \mu_i \le 1).$
355: From (\ref{chf6}) and (\ref{chf7}), for $ x \in I_i$, the fixed point f of T satisfies
356: \begin{equation*}
357: \begin{split}
358: & Tf(x) = F_i(L_i^{-1}(x), f_1(L_i^{-1}(x)), f_2(L_i^{-1}(x)))\\
359: \Rightarrow & f(x) = F_i(L_i^{-1}(x), f_1(L_i^{-1}(x)), f_2(L_i^{-1}(x)))\\
360: \Rightarrow & (f_1(x),f_2(x)) = ( \alpha_i f_1 (L_i^{-1}(x)) +
361: \beta_i f_2 (L_i^{-1}(x)) + p_i
362: (L_i^{-1}(x)), \gamma_i f_2 (L_i^{-1}(x)) + q_i (L_i^{-1}(x))
363: \end{split}
364: \end{equation*}
365: Consequently, for all $ x \in I,$
366: \begin{equation*}
367: (f_1(L_i(x)), f_2(L_i(x))) = (\alpha_{i}f_1(x)+\beta_{i}f_2(x)
368: +p_i(x),\; \gamma_{i}f_2(x) + q_i(x))
369: \end{equation*}
370: Following Proposition \ref{prop2}, the CHFIF in this
371: case can be written as
372: \begin{equation}\label{chf8}
373: f_1(L_i(x)) = \alpha_{i}f_1(x)+\beta_{i}f_2(x)+p_i(x)
374: \end{equation}
375: where, the self-affine fractal function $f_2(x)$ is given by
376: \begin{equation}\label{chf9}
377: f_2(L_i(x)) = \gamma_{i}f_2(x) + q_i(x)
378: \end{equation}
379: Let $I_{r_1} = [x_{{r_1}-1}, x_{r_1}] = L_{r_1}(I).$ Then,
380: $I_{r_1} = L_{r_1}(0) + |I_{r_1}| I,$ where $ |x_{r_1} - x_{{r_1}-1}|$
381: is the length of $ I_{r_1}, \; 1 \le r_1 \le N.$ Similarly,
382: $I_{{r_1}{r_2}} = L_{r_2}(0) + |I_{r_2}| L_{r_1}(I)= L_{r_2} \circ L_{r_1}(I)
383: = L_{{r_1}{r_2}}(I),$
384: where $ |I_{{r_1}{r_2}}| = |I_{r_1}| . |I_{r_2}|, \; 1 \le r_1,r_2 \le N.$
385: In general,
386: \begin{equation}\label{chf10}
387: I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}} = L_{r_m}(0) + |I_{r_m}|
388: I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_{m-1}}} =\\ L_{r_m} \circ L_{r_{m-1}} \circ \dots
389: \circ L_{r_1}(I) = L_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}}
390: \end{equation}
391: where, $ |I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}}| = |I_{r_1}| . |I_{r_2}| \dots |I_{r_m}| $ and
392: $ 1 \le r_1, r_2, \dots, r_m \le N.$\\
393: \par
394: We need the following lemmas for our main results:
395: \begin{lm}\label{lm1}
396: Let $f_1$ be defined as in (\ref{chf8}) and
397: $b_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}} = \int_{I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}}} f_1(x)dx.$
398: Then,
399: \begin{equation}\label{chf11}
400: b_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}}= \underset{k=1}{\overset{m}\sum} \underset{j=k+1}{\overset{m}\prod}
401: (|I_{r_j}|\alpha_{r_j})|I_{r_k}|(\int_{I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_{k-1}}}} p_{r_k}(\xi) d\xi +
402: \beta_{r_k} a_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}})+
403: \underset{j=1}{\overset{m}\prod} (|I_{r_j}|\alpha_{r_j})\int_0^{1} f_1(\xi) d\xi
404: \end{equation}
405: where, $ I_{r_0} = I \; \text{and} \; a_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}} = \int_{I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots
406: {r_m}}} f_2(x)dx.$
407: \end{lm}
408: \begin{proof} Since, $b_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}} = \int_{L_{r_m}(0)+I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_{m-1}}}}
409: f_1(x)dx$, a change of the variable $x$ by $ x = L_{r_m}(0) + |I_{r_m}| \xi$ gives
410: \begin{equation*}
411: \begin{split}
412: b_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}} &= \int_{I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_{m-1}}}}
413: f_1( L_{r_m}(0) + |I_{r_m}| \xi) |I_{r_m}| d\xi
414: =|I_{r_m}| \int_{I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_{m-1}}}} f_1( L_{r_m}(\xi))d\xi\\
415: &= |I_{r_m}| \int_{I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_{m-1}}}} (\alpha_{r_m}f_1(\xi) +
416: \beta_{r_m}f_2(\xi) + p_{r_m}(\xi)) d\xi \\
417: &= |I_{r_m}| [ \int_{I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_{m-1}}}} p_{r_m}(\xi) d\xi + \beta_{r_m}
418: \int_{I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_{m-1}}}} f_2(\xi) d\xi + \alpha_{r_m}
419: \int_{I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_{m-1}}}} f_1(\xi) d\xi ]\\
420: &=|I_{r_m}| [\int_{I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_{m-1}}}} p_{r_m}(\xi) d\xi + \beta_{r_m}
421: a_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_{m-1}}}] + |I_{r_m}| |I_{r_{m-1}}|\alpha_{r_m}
422: [\int_{I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_{m-2}}}} p_{r_{m-1}}(\xi) d\xi \\
423: &+ \beta_{r_{m-1}} a_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_{m-2}}} + \alpha_{r_{m-1}}
424: \int_{I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_{m-2}}}} f_1(\xi) d\xi] = \dots \\
425: &=\underset{k=1}{\overset{m}\sum} \underset{j=k+1}{\overset{m}\prod}
426: (|I_{r_j}|\alpha_{r_j})|I_{r_k}|(\int_{I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_{k-1}}}} p_{r_k}(\xi) d\xi +
427: \beta_{r_k} a_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}})+
428: \underset{j=1}{\overset{m}\prod} (|I_{r_j}|\alpha_{r_j})\int_0^{1} f_1(\xi) d\xi
429: \end{split}
430: \end{equation*}
431: \end{proof}
432: Since $f_1(x)$ is continuous, the integral average $b_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}}/
433: |I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}}|$ can be taken as a good approximation of $f_1(x)$ in the
434: subinterval $I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}}$, when m is very large, leading to the
435: following definition of the approximating operator $\mathcal{Q}_m$ on the interval $I$:
436: \begin{Def}\label{def32} Let
437: \begin{equation}\label{chf12}
438: \mathcal{Q}_m(f_1, x) = \underset{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}=1}{\overset{N}\sum}
439: \chi_{I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}}}(x) \frac{b_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}}}{|I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}}|}
440: \end{equation}
441: where, $I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}}$ is defined by (\ref{chf10}), $b_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}}$
442: is defined by (\ref{chf11}) and
443: \begin{equation*}
444: \chi_{I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}}}(x)= \left\{\begin{array}{rlll}
445: 1 &\quad x \in I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}}, \\
446: 0 &\quad x \in I \setminus I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}}.
447: \end{array}\right.
448: \end{equation*}
449: \end{Def}
450: \begin{lm}\label{lm2}
451: The operator $\mathcal{Q}_m (f_1,x) $, given by (\ref{chf12}), converges to $f_1(x)$
452: uniformly on I as \\ $m \rightarrow \infty.$\end{lm}
453: \begin{proof} The proof follows immediately by using Mean Value Theorem.\end{proof}
454: The following notations are needed throughout in the sequel:
455: $ \alpha = \max \{ |\alpha_i| : i = 1,2,\dots,N \},$
456: $\beta =\max \{ |\beta_i| : i = 1,2,\dots,N \}, \;
457: \gamma = \max \{ |\gamma_i| : i = 1,2,\dots,N \}, \;
458: \lambda = \min \{ \lambda_i : i = 1,2,\dots,N \},\;
459: \Omega_i = \frac{|\alpha_i|}{|I_i|^{\lambda}},\;
460: \Omega = \max \{ \Omega_i : i = 1,2,\dots,N \}, \;
461: \mu = \min \{ \mu_i : i = 1,2,\dots,N \}, \;
462: \Gamma_i = \frac{|\gamma_i|}{|I_i|^{\mu}}, \;
463: \Gamma = \max \{ \Gamma_i : i = 1,2,\dots,N \}, \;
464: \Theta_i = \frac{|\alpha_i|}{|I_i|^{\mu}}, \;
465: \Theta = \max \{ \Theta_i : i = 1,2,\dots,N \},\;
466: I_{\min} = \min \{ I_i : i = 1,2,\dots,N \}, \;
467: I_{\max} = \max \{ I_i : i = 1,2,\dots,N \} $ and
468: $\omega (f_1,t)$ = Modulus of continuity of $f_1(x).$
469: \par
470: Using the above lemmas and notations, we now prove our smoothness results
471: according to the magnitude of $\Theta.$
472: \begin{thm}\label{th1} Let $f_1(x)$ be the CHFIF defined by (\ref{chf8})
473: with $ \Theta < 1.$ Then, (a) for $\Omega \ne 1$ and $\Gamma \ne 1$, $f_1 \in Lip\delta$
474: (b) for $\Omega = 1$ or $\Gamma = 1,$ $\omega (f_1,t) = \bigcirc ( |t|^{\delta} \log|t|)$,
475: for suitable values of $\delta \in (0,1]$.
476: \end{thm}
477: \begin{proof}
478: In order to calculate the H\"{o}lder exponent of CHFIF
479: $f_1$, a suitable upper bound on the difference between $f_1(x)$ and
480: $f_1(\bar{x})$ for $ x, \bar{x} \in [0,1]$ is needed to be found.
481: In view of Lemma \ref{lm2}, it is sufficient
482: to find an upper bound on the difference between functional values of their operator
483: approximations $\mathcal{Q}_m (f_1, x) $ and $ \mathcal{Q}_m (f_1,\bar{x})$.
484: \par
485: For $0\le x < \bar{x} \le 1,$ there exists a least $m$
486: such that $ I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}}$ is the largest
487: interval contained in $[x, \bar{x} ].$
488: So, either $x$ or $\bar{x} \in I_{{r_2}{r_3}\dots {r_m}}.$ Assume that,
489: $ x \in I_{s{r_2}\dots {r_m}},\; s \le r_1-1, \bar{x} \in I_{t{r_2}\dots {r_m}},
490: \; t \ge r_1+1, \; \text{or} \; \bar{x} \in I_{t^{\prime}{r_2+1}\dots {r_m}}, \;
491: 1 \le t^{\prime} \le N.$ Let $n, m \in \N$ and $n > m$. Taking further
492: refinement of the above two intervals, we assume that
493: $ x \in I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots {r_m}}, \; \bar{x} \in
494: I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}}{r_3}\dots {r_m}}. $
495: It now follows that
496: \begin{equation*}
497: \begin{split}
498: \mathcal{Q}_n(f_1, x) &= \frac{1}{|I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots {r_m}}|}
499: \int_{I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots {r_m}}} f_1(\xi)d\xi \\
500: =& \frac{1}{{|I_{u_1}||I_{u_2}|\dots|I_{u_{n-m}}||I_s||I_{r_2}|\dots|I_{r_m}|}}
501: [\underset{k=3}{\overset{m}\sum} \underset{j=k+1}{\overset{m}\prod}
502: (|I_{r_j}|\alpha_{r_j})|I_{r_k}| \cdot \\
503: & (\int_{I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots {r_{k-1}}}} p_{r_k}(\xi) d\xi +
504: \beta_{r_k} a_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots {r_{k-1}}})+
505: \underset{j=3}{\overset{m}\prod} (|I_{r_j}|\alpha_{r_j})
506: \int_{I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}}} f_1(\xi) d\xi]
507: \end{split}
508: \end{equation*}
509: \begin{equation*}
510: \begin{split}
511: =&\underset{k=3}{\overset{m}\sum} (\underset{j=k+1}{\overset{m}\prod}
512: \alpha_{r_j}) \frac{1}{|I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots {r_{k-1}}}|}
513: (\int_{I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots {r_{k-1}}}} p_{r_k}(\xi) d\xi +
514: \beta_{r_k} a_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots {r_{k-1}}})\\
515: &+(\underset{j=3}{\overset{m}\prod} \alpha_{r_j}) \frac{1}
516: {|I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}}|}
517: \int_{I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}}} f_1(\xi) d\xi.
518: \end{split}
519: \end{equation*}
520: Similarly, the expression for $\mathcal {Q}_n (f_1,\bar{x})$ can be written as
521: \begin{equation*}
522: \begin{split}
523: \mathcal {Q}_n(f_1,\bar{x}) &= \underset{k=3}{\overset{m}\sum}
524: (\underset{j=k+1}{\overset{m}\prod} \alpha_{r_j})
525: \frac{1}{|I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}}\dots {r_{k-1}}}|}
526: (\int_{I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}}\dots {r_{k-1}}}} p_{r_k}(\xi) d\xi +
527: \beta_{r_k} a_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}}\dots {r_{k-1}}})\\
528: &+(\underset{j=3}{\overset{m}\prod} \alpha_{r_j}) \frac{1}
529: {|I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}}}|}
530: \int_{I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}}}} f_1(\xi) d\xi
531: \end{split}
532: \end{equation*}
533: To estimate $| \mathcal {Q}_n(f_1,x) - \mathcal {Q}_n(f_1,\bar{x})|,$ observe that
534: \begin{equation}\label{chf13}
535: \begin{split}
536: & \mathcal {Q}_n(f_1,x)-\mathcal {Q}_n(f_1,\bar{x}) \\
537: =& \underset{k=3}{\overset{m}\sum} (\underset{j=k+1}{\overset{m}\prod} \alpha_{r_j})
538: [\int_{I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots {r_{k-1}}}} \frac{p_{r_k}(\xi) d\xi}
539: {|I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots {r_{k-1}}}|} -
540: \int_{I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}}\dots {r_{k-1}}}}\frac{p_{r_k}(\xi) d\xi}
541: {|I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}} \dots {r_{k-1}}}|}] \\
542: &+(\underset{j=3}{\overset{m}\prod} \alpha_{r_j})
543: [\int_{I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}}} \frac{f_1(\xi) d\xi}
544: {|I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}}|} - \int_{I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}}}}
545: \frac{f_1(\xi) d\xi}{|I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}}}|}]\\
546: &+\underset{k=3}{\overset{m}\sum} (\underset{j=k+1}{\overset{m}\prod} \alpha_{r_j})
547: \beta_{r_k}[\frac {a_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots {r_{k-1}}}}
548: {|I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots {r_{k-1}}}|} - \frac
549: {a_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}}\dots {r_{k-1}}}}
550: {|I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}} \dots {r_{k-1}}}|}]
551: \end{split}
552: \end{equation}
553: Since \cite{G},
554: \begin{equation*}
555: %\label{chf14}
556: \begin{split}
557: a_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}} & = \int_{I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_m}}} f_2(\xi)d\xi \\
558: & = \underset{k=1}{\overset{m}\sum} \underset{j=k+1}{\overset{m}\prod}
559: (|I_{r_j}|\gamma_{r_j})|I_{r_k}|\int_{I_{{r_1}{r_2}\dots {r_{k-1}}}} q_{r_k}(\xi) d\xi +
560: \underset{j=1}{\overset{m}\prod} (|I_{r_j}|\gamma_{r_j})\int_0^{1} f_2(\xi) d\xi,
561: \end{split}
562: \end{equation*}
563: it follows that
564: \begin{equation*}
565: \begin{split}
566: & \frac{a_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots {r_{k-1}}}}
567: {|I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots {r_{k-1}}}|} =
568: \frac{1}{|I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots {r_{k-1}}}|}
569: \int_{I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}{s}{r_2}\dots{r_{k-1}}}} f_2(\xi)d\xi\\
570: =&\frac{1}{|I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}|}\dots|I_{r_3}|\dots|I_{r_{k-1}}|}
571: [\underset{l=3}{\overset{k-1}\sum} \underset{i=l+1}{\overset{k-1}\prod}
572: (|I_{r_i}|\gamma_{r_i})|I_{r_l}| \\
573: & \cdot \int_{I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}{s}{r_2}\dots{r_{l-1}}}} q_{r_l}(\xi)d\xi +
574: \underset{i=3}{\overset{k-1}\prod}(|I_{r_i}|\gamma_{r_i})
575: \int_{I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}{s}{r_2}}} f_2(\xi)d\xi] \\
576: =&\underset{l=3}{\overset{k-1}\sum} (\underset{i=l+1}{\overset{k-1}\prod}
577: \gamma_{r_i})\frac{1}{|I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}{s}{r_2}\dots{r_{l-1}}}|}
578: \int_{I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}{s}{r_2}\dots{r_{l-1}}}} q_{r_l}(\xi)d\xi \\
579: &+ (\underset{i=3}{\overset{k-1}\prod}\gamma_{r_i})
580: \frac{1}{|I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}}|}
581: \int_{I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}{s}{r_2}}} f_2(\xi)d\xi
582: \end{split}
583: \end{equation*}
584: Similarly,
585: \begin{equation*}
586: \begin{split}
587: \frac{a_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}}\dots {r_{k-1}}}}
588: {|I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}}\dots {r_{k-1}}}|} =&
589: \underset{l=3}{\overset{k-1}\sum} (\underset{i=l+1}{\overset{k-1}\prod}
590: \gamma_{r_i})\frac{1}{|I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}{t}{r_2^{\prime}}\dots{r_{l-1}}}|}
591: \int_{I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}{t}{r_2^{\prime}}\dots{r_{l-1}}}} q_{r_l}(\xi)d\xi \\
592: &+ (\underset{i=3}{\overset{k-1}\prod}\gamma_{r_i})
593: \frac{1}{|I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}}}|}
594: \int_{I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}{t}{r_2^{\prime}}}} f_2(\xi)d\xi
595: \end{split}
596: \end{equation*}
597: Consequently,
598: \begin{equation}\label{chf15}
599: \begin{split}
600: & |\frac{a_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots {r_{k-1}}}}
601: {|I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots {r_{k-1}}}|} -
602: \frac{a_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}}\dots {r_{k-1}}}}
603: {|I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}}\dots {r_{k-1}}}|} | \\
604: =&| \underset{l=3}{\overset{k-1}\sum} (\underset{i=l+1}{\overset{k-1}\prod} \gamma_{r_i})
605: [\int_{I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots {r_{l-1}}}} \frac{q_{r_l}(\xi) d\xi}
606: {|I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots {r_{l-1}}}|} -
607: \int_{I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}}\dots {r_{l-1}}}}\frac{q_{r_l}(\xi) d\xi}
608: {|I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}} \dots {r_{l-1}}}|}] \\
609: &+(\underset{i=3}{\overset{k-1}\prod} \gamma_{r_i})
610: [\int_{I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}}} \frac{f_2(\xi) d\xi}
611: {|I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}}|} - \int_{I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}}}}
612: \frac{f_2(\xi) d\xi}{|I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}}}|}]|\\
613: \le & \underset{l=3}{\overset{k-1}\sum} \underset{i=l+1}{\overset{k-1}\prod} |\gamma_{r_i}|
614: [|\int_{I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots{r_{l-1}}}}
615: \frac{q_{r_l}(\xi)- q_{r_l}(x_{{r_3}\dots{r_{l-1}}})}
616: {|I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots {r_{l-1}}}|} d\xi|\\
617: & + |\int_{I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}}\dots{r_{l-1}}}}
618: \frac{q_{r_l}(\xi)- q_{r_l}(x_{{r_3}\dots{r_{l-1}}})}
619: {|I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}} \dots {r_{l-1}}}|} d\xi|] +
620: (\underset{i=3}{\overset{k-1}\prod} \gamma_{r_i})\cdot 2||f_2||_{\infty}\\
621: %& (\text{For each l, insert the left end point} \; x_{{r_3}\dots{r_{l-1}}} \;
622: %\text{of the interval} \; I_{{r_3}\dots{r_{l-1}}})
623: %\end{split}
624: %\end{equation*}
625: %\begin{equation}\label{chf15}
626: & \le \underset{l=3}{\overset{k-1}\sum} (\underset{i=l+1}{\overset{k-1}\prod} |\gamma_{r_i}|)
627: \; M_1 \; |I_{{r_3}\dots{r_{l-1}}}|^{\mu_{r_l}} + M_2 \;
628: (\underset{i=3}{\overset{k-1}\prod} \gamma_{r_i})
629: \end{split}
630: \end{equation}
631: where, $M_1$ is Lipschitz bound and $M_2 = 2 \| f_2\|_{\infty}.$
632: Using (\ref{chf15}) in (\ref{chf13}),
633: \begin{equation*}
634: %\label{chf16}
635: \begin{split}
636: &|\mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,x) - \mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,\bar{x})|
637: \le \underset{k=3}{\overset{m}\sum} (\underset{j=k+1}{\overset{m}\prod} |\alpha_{r_j}|)
638: [|\int_{I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots {r_{k-1}}}} \frac{p_{r_k}(\xi)
639: -p_{r_k} (x_{{r_3}\dots{r_{k-1}}})}
640: {|I_{{u_1}\dots{u_{n-m}}s{r_2}\dots {r_{k-1}}}|} d\xi|\\
641: &+|\int_{I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}}\dots {r_{k-1}}}}\frac{p_{r_k}(\xi)
642: - p_{r_k} (x_{{r_3}\dots{r_{k-1}}})}
643: {|I_{{v_1}\dots{v_{n-m}}t{r_2^{\prime}} \dots {r_{k-1}}}|} d\xi|]
644: +(\underset{j=3}{\overset{m}\prod} |\alpha_{r_j}|) \cdot 2||f_1||_{\infty}\\ &+
645: \underset{k=3}{\overset{m}\sum} (\underset{j=k+1}{\overset{m}\prod} |\alpha_{r_j}|)
646: |\beta_{r_k}|[\underset{l=3}{\overset{k-1}\sum} (\underset{i=l+1}{\overset{k-1}\prod}
647: |\gamma_{r_i}|)\; M_1\; |I_{{r_3}\dots{r_{l-1}}}|^{\mu_{r_l}} + M_2 \;
648: (\underset{i=3}{\overset{k-1}\prod} |\gamma_{r_i}|)]
649: \end{split}
650: \end{equation*}
651: \begin{equation*}
652: \begin{split}
653: %& (\text{For each k, insert the left end point } x_{{r_3}\dots{r_{k-1}}}
654: %\text{of the interval} I_{{r_3}\dots{r_{k-1}}} ) \\
655: \le & \underset{k=3}{\overset{m}\sum} (\underset{j=k+1}{\overset{m}\prod} |\alpha_{r_j}|)
656: \; M_3 \; |I_{{r_3}\dots{r_{k-1}}}|^{\lambda_{r_k}} + M_4 \;
657: (\underset{j=3}{\overset{m}\prod} |\alpha_{r_j}|) +
658: \underset{k=3}{\overset{m}\sum} (\underset{j=k+1}{\overset{m}\prod} |\alpha_{r_j}|)
659: |\beta_{r_k}| \cdot \\
660: \quad & [\underset{l=3}{\overset{k-1}\sum} (\underset{i=l+1}{\overset{k-1}\prod}
661: |\gamma_{r_i}|)\; M_1\; |I_{{r_3}\dots{r_{l-1}}}|^{\mu_{r_l}} + M_2 \;
662: (\underset{i=3}{\overset{k-1}\prod} |\gamma_{r_i}|)]
663: \end{split}
664: \end{equation*}
665: where, $M_3$ is Lipschitz bound and $ M_4 = 2 \| f_1 \|_{\infty}$.
666: From the above inequality it follows that
667: \begin{equation*}
668: \begin{split}
669: &|\mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,x) - \mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,\bar{x})|
670: \le M_3 \;\underset{k=3}{\overset{m}\sum} (\underset{j=k+1}{\overset{m}\prod} |\alpha_{r_j}|)
671: \frac {\underset{i^{\prime}=3}{\overset{m}\prod} |I_{r_{i^{\prime}}}|^{\lambda_{r_k}}}
672: {\underset{j^{\prime}=k}{\overset{m}\prod} |I_{r_{j^{\prime}}}|^{\lambda_{r_k}}}
673: +M_4 \; (\underset{j=3}{\overset{m}\prod} |\alpha_{r_j}|) \\
674: & +\underset{k=3}{\overset{m}\sum} (\underset{j=k+1}{\overset{m}\prod} |\alpha_{r_j}|)
675: |\beta_{r_k}| \cdot
676: [ M_1 \; \underset{l=3}{\overset{k-1}\sum} (\underset{i=l+1}{\overset{k-1}\prod}
677: |\gamma_{r_i}|) \quad \frac
678: {\underset{i^{\prime}=3}{\overset{m}\prod} |I_{r_{i^{\prime}}}|^{\mu_{r_l}}}
679: {\underset{j^{\prime}=l}{\overset{m}\prod} |I_{r_{j^{\prime}}}|^{\mu_{r_l}}}
680: + M_2 \; (\underset{i=3}{\overset{k-1}\prod} |\gamma_{r_i}|)]\\
681: \le & \frac{M_3}{({|I_{\min}|^{\lambda}})^3} \;(\underset{i^{\prime}=1}{\overset{m}\prod}
682: |I_{r_{i^{\prime}}}|^{\lambda})
683: \underset{k=3}{\overset{m}\sum} \underset{j=k+1}{\overset{m}\prod} \frac
684: {|\alpha_{r_j}|}{|I_{r_j}|^{\lambda}} + \frac{M_4}{({|I_{\min}|^{\lambda}})^2}
685: \; (\underset{j=1}{\overset{m}\prod}|I_{r_j}|^{\lambda})
686: \underset{j=3}{\overset{m}\prod}\frac {|\alpha_{r_j}|}{|I_{r_j}|^{\lambda}} +
687: \underset{k=3}{\overset{m}\sum}|\beta_{r_k}|\underset{j=k+1}{\overset{m}\prod} |\alpha_{r_j}|
688: \cdot \\
689: &\left[\frac{M_1}{({|I_{\min}|^{\lambda}})^3} \; (\underset{i^{\prime}=1}{\overset{m}\prod}
690: |I_{r_{i^{\prime}}}|^{\mu})
691: \underset{l=3}{\overset{k-1}\sum} \underset{i=l+1}{\overset{k-1}\prod}
692: \frac {|\gamma_{r_i}|}{|I_{r_i}|^{\mu}} + \frac{M_2}{({|I_{\min}|^{\lambda}})^2} \;
693: (\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}\prod}|I_{r_i}|^{\mu})
694: \underset{i=3}{\overset{k-1}\prod}\frac {|\gamma_{r_i}|}{|I_{r_i}|^{\mu}}
695: \right] \cdot \underset{j=k}{\overset{m}\prod} \frac{1}{|I_{r_j}|^{\mu}}\\
696: \le & M_5 \; (\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}\prod} |I_{r_i}|^{\lambda})
697: [\underset{k=3}{\overset{m}\sum} \underset{j=k+1}{\overset{m}\prod} \Omega_{r_j} \; + \;
698: \underset{j=3}{\overset{m}\prod} \Omega_{r_j}] + M_6 \; \underset{k=3}
699: {\overset{m}\sum}|\beta_{r_k}|\underset{j=k+1}{\overset{m}\prod}
700: \frac{|\alpha_{r_j}|}{|I_{r_j}|^{\mu}} \cdot \\
701: \quad & (\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}\prod}|I_{r_i}|^{\mu})
702: \left[\underset{l=3}{\overset{k-1}\sum} \underset{i=l+1}{\overset{k-1}\prod} \Gamma_{r_i} \; + \;
703: \underset{i=3}{\overset{k-1}\prod} \Gamma_{r_i}\right]
704: \end{split}
705: \end{equation*}
706: where, $M_5 = Max \{\frac{M_3}{({|I_{\min}|^{\lambda}})^3} \frac{M_4}{({|I_{\min}|^{\lambda}})^2}\}$
707: and $M_6 = Max \{\frac{M_1} {({|I_{\min}|^{\lambda}})^4},
708: \frac{M_2}{({|I_{\min}|^{\lambda}})^3}\}.$ The above inequality gives
709: \begin{equation}\label{chf17}
710: %\begin{split}
711: |\mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,x) - \mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,\bar{x})|
712: %\le & M_5 \; |x-\bar{x}|^{\lambda}(\underset{k=2}{\overset{m}\sum} \Omega^{m-k}) +
713: %M_6 \; |x-\bar{x}|^{\mu} \underset{k=3}{\overset{m}\sum} |\beta_{r_k}|
714: %(\underset{j=k+1}{\overset{m}\prod} |\Theta_{r_j}|)
715: %(\underset{l=3}{\overset{k-1}\sum} \Gamma^{k-l})\\
716: \le M_5 \; |x-\bar{x}|^{\lambda}(\underset{k=2}{\overset{m}\sum} \Omega^{m-k}) +
717: M_6 \; \beta |x-\bar{x}|^{\mu} \underset{k=3}{\overset{m}\sum} \Theta^{m-k}
718: (\underset{l=3}{\overset{k-1}\sum} \Gamma^{k-l})
719: %= & M_5\; |x-\bar{x}|^{\lambda}(\underset{k=2}{\overset{m}\sum} \Omega^{m-k}) +
720: %M_6 \; \beta |x-\bar{x}|^{\mu}[\Gamma(1+\Theta+\dots+\Theta^{m-4})\\
721: %&+\Gamma^2(1+\Theta+\dots+\Theta^{m-5})+\dots + \Gamma^{m-3} \cdot 1]
722: %\end{split}
723: \end{equation}
724: Since $\Theta < 1,$ (\ref{chf17}) further reduces to
725: \begin{equation}\label{chf18}
726: |\mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,x) - \mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,\bar{x})|
727: \le M_5\; |x-\bar{x}|^{\lambda}(\underset{k=2}{\overset{m}\sum} \Omega^{m-k}) +
728: M_6 \; \frac{\beta}{1-\Theta}|x-\bar{x}|^{\mu}(\underset{k=1}{\overset{m-3}\sum} \Gamma^k)
729: \end{equation}
730: {\bf Case (a).} $\Omega \ne 1$ and $\Gamma \ne 1$: The desired H\"{o}lder exponents
731: are found individually for each of the following subcases\\
732: {\bf I.} $\Omega < 1$ and $\Gamma < 1 :$
733: $|\mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,x) - \mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,\bar{x})| \le
734: \frac{M_5}{1-\Omega}|x-\bar{x}|^{\lambda} + \frac{M_6\;\beta}{(1-\Theta)(1-\Gamma)}
735: |x-\bar{x}|^{\mu}$ $\le M_7 |x-\bar{x}|^{\delta_1}$
736: where, $M_7 = \max\{ \frac{M_5}{1-\Omega}, \frac{M_6\;\beta}{(1-\Theta)(1-\Gamma)}\}$ and
737: $\delta_1 = \min (\lambda, \mu) $. Thus, as $n\rightarrow \infty$,
738: the above inequality together with Lemma \ref{lm2} gives $f_1 \in Lip \delta$
739: with $\delta= \delta_1.$\\
740: {\bf II.} $\Omega > 1$ and $\Gamma > 1:$
741: \begin{equation}\label{chf19}
742: |\mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,x) - \mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,\bar{x})| \le
743: M_5 \;|x-\bar{x}|^{\lambda}\; m\; \Omega^m +\frac{M_6\; \beta}{1-\Theta}|x-\bar{x}|^{\mu}
744: \;m \;\Gamma^m
745: \end{equation}
746: Suppose $\tau_1 > 0$ such that $|x-\bar{x}|^{\lambda}\; m\; \Omega^m \; \le
747: \; |x-\bar{x}|^{\tau_1}$. Then,\\
748: \begin{equation}\label{chf20}
749: \tau_1 \le \lambda + \frac{m \; \log{\Omega}}{\log{|x-\bar{x}|}}
750: \end{equation}
751: Further, $|I_{{r_1}\dots{r_m}}| \le |x-\bar{x}| < 1 \; \Rightarrow
752: |I_{\min}|^m \le |x-\bar{x}| \; \Rightarrow \frac{1}{m\log|I_{\min}|}
753: \ge \frac{1}{\log|x-\bar{x}|}.$\\
754: Also, $ \Omega \le \frac{\alpha}{|I_{\min}|^{\lambda}} \;\Rightarrow
755: \log{\Omega} \le \log{\alpha} - \lambda \log|I_{\min}|.$ Therefore, by (\ref{chf20}),
756: $\tau_1 \le \frac{\log{\alpha}}{\log|I_{\min}|} $.\\
757: Similarly, if $\tau_2 > 0$ is such that $|x-\bar{x}|^{\mu}\; m\; \Gamma^m \; \le
758: \; |x-\bar{x}|^{\tau_2}$, then
759: $\tau_2 \le \frac{\log{\gamma}}{\log|I_{\min}|} $.\\
760: Let $ \tau_3 = \min \{ \frac{\log{\alpha}}{\log|I_{\min}|}, \; \;
761: \frac{\log{\gamma}}{\log|I_{\min}|} \}. $
762: From (\ref{chf19}), for any $\delta_2 \le \tau_3,$
763: $|\mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,x) - \mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,\bar{x})| \le
764: M_8 \; |x-\bar{x}|^{\delta_2},$ where $M_8 = \max \{ M_5, \frac{M_6\; \beta}{1-\Theta}\}.$
765: Now, the last inequality together with
766: Lemma \ref{lm2} gives $ f_1 \in Lip \delta$ with $\delta= \delta_2.$\\
767: {\bf III.} $\Omega > 1$ and $\Gamma < 1:$
768: $|\mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,x) - \mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,\bar{x})| \le
769: M_5 |x-\bar{x}|^{\tau_1} + \frac{M_6\; \beta}
770: {(1-\Theta)(1-\Gamma)}|x-\bar{x}|^{\mu} \le M_{9} \; |x-\bar{x}|^{\delta_3}$
771: where, $M_9 = \max \{ M_5, \frac{M_6\; \beta}{(1-\Theta)(1-\Gamma)}\}$
772: and $ \delta_3 = \min (\tau_1, \mu).$ Thus,
773: as $n\rightarrow \infty$, the last inequality together with Lemma \ref{lm2} gives
774: $ f_1 \in Lip \delta$ with $\delta= \delta_3.$\\
775: {\bf IV.} $\Omega < 1$ and $\Gamma > 1:$
776: $|\mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,x) - \mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,\bar{x})| \le
777: \frac{M_5}{1-\Omega} |x-\bar{x}|^{\lambda} + \frac{M_6\; \beta}
778: {1-\Theta}|x-\bar{x}|^{\tau_2}
779: \le M_{10} \; |x-\bar{x}|^{\delta_4} $
780: where, $ M_{10} = \max\{ \frac{M_5}{1-\Omega}, \frac{M_6\; \beta}
781: {1-\Theta} \}$ and $ \delta_4 = \min ( \lambda , \tau_2).$ So, as
782: $n\rightarrow \infty$, the above inequality together with Lemma \ref{lm2} gives
783: $ f_1 \in Lip\delta$ with $\delta= \delta_4$.\\
784: {\bf Case (b).} $\Omega = 1$ or $\Gamma = 1$: The desired H\"{o}lder exponents
785: are found individually for each of the following subcases\\
786: {\bf I.} $\Omega = 1$ and $\Gamma \le 1$ or $\Omega < 1$ and $\Gamma = 1:$
787: For $\Omega = 1$ and $\Gamma =1$,
788: \begin{equation*}
789: \begin{split}
790: |\mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,x) - \mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,\bar{x})| &\le
791: (M_5|x-\bar{x}|^{\lambda} + \frac{M_6\;\beta}{1-\Theta}|x-\bar{x}|^{\mu}) \cdot (m-1)\\
792: &\le (M_5|x-\bar{x}|^{\lambda} + \frac{M_6\;\beta}{1-\Theta}|x-\bar{x}|^{\mu})
793: \frac {\log|x-\bar{x}|}{\log|I_{\max}|}\\
794: &\le M_{11} \; (\log|x-\bar{x}|) |x-\bar{x}|^{\delta_1}
795: \end{split}
796: \end{equation*}
797: where, $M_{11} = \frac{M_8}{\log|I_{\max}|}$. As $n\rightarrow \infty$, the
798: last inequality together with Lemma \ref{lm2} gives
799: $\omega (f_1,t) =\bigcirc ( |t|^{\delta}\log|t|)$ with $\delta= \delta_1$.
800: For $\Omega = 1$ and $\Gamma < 1$, $|\mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,x) - \mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,\bar{x})| \le
801: \frac{M_5}{\log|I_{\max}|} |x-\bar{x}|^{\lambda} \log{|x-\bar{x}|} +
802: \frac{M_6\; \beta}{(1-\Theta)(1-\Gamma)}|x-\bar{x}|^{\mu}
803: \le M_{12} \; |x-\bar{x}|^{\delta_1} (1+ \log|x-\bar{x}|),$
804: where $M_{12} = \max \{ \frac{M_5}{\log|I_{\max}|}, \frac{M_6\; \beta}{(1-\Theta)(1-\Gamma)} \}.$
805: Hence, as $n\rightarrow \infty$, the above inequality together with Lemma \ref{lm2} gives
806: $\omega (f_1,t) = \bigcirc ( |t|^{\delta}(1+\log|t|))
807: \equiv \bigcirc ( |t|^{\delta}\log|t|)$ with $\delta= \delta_1$.
808: The estimate for $\Omega < 1$ and $\Gamma = 1$ follows using analogous arguments.\\
809: {\bf II.} $\Omega > 1$ and $\Gamma = 1:$
810: $|\mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,x) - \mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,\bar{x})| \le
811: M_5 \; |x-\bar{x}|^{\tau_1} +
812: \frac{M_6 \; \beta}{(1-\Theta)\log|I_{\max}|} |x-\bar{x}|^{\mu} \log|x-\bar{x}|
813: \le M_{13} |x-\bar{x}|^{\delta_3} (1+ \log|x-\bar{x}|),$ where $M_{13} = \max\{ M_5,
814: \frac{M_6 \; \beta}{(1-\Theta)\log|I_{\max}|} \}$.
815: Making $n\rightarrow \infty$, the above inequality together with Lemma \ref{lm2} gives
816: $\omega (f_1,t) = \bigcirc ( |t|^{\delta}(1+\log|t|))
817: \equiv \bigcirc ( |t|^{\delta}\log|t|)$ with $\delta= \delta_3$.\\
818: {\bf III.} $\Omega = 1$ and $\Gamma > 1:$
819: $|\mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,x) - \mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,\bar{x})| \le
820: \frac{M_5}{\log|I_{\max}|} |x-\bar{x}|^{\lambda} \log{|x-\bar{x}|} +
821: \frac{M_6 \; \beta}{1-\Theta} |x-\bar{x}|^{\tau_2}
822: \le M_{14} |x-\bar{x}|^{\delta_4} (1+ \log|x-\bar{x}|),$
823: where $M_{14} = \max \{ \frac{M_5}{\log|I_{\max}|}, \frac{M_6 \; \beta}{1-\Theta} \}$.
824: So, as $n\rightarrow \infty$, the above inequality together with Lemma \ref{lm2} gives
825: $\omega (f_1,t) = \bigcirc ( |t|^{\delta}(1+\log|t|))
826: \equiv \bigcirc ( |t|^{\delta}\log|t|)$ with $\delta= \delta_4$.\\
827: Theorem \ref{th1} now follows from the above cases with suitable $\delta$
828: as found in various subcases.\end{proof}
829: The smoothness results for the class of CHFIFs when
830: $\Theta =1$ are given by the following:
831: \begin{thm}\label{th2} Let $f_1(x)$ be the CHFIF defined by (3.2)
832: with $ \Theta = 1.$ Then, (a) for $\Omega \ne 1$ and $\Gamma \ne 1$,
833: $\omega (f_1,t) = \bigcirc ( |t|^{\delta}\log|t|)$ (b) for
834: $\Omega = 1$ or $\Gamma = 1$,
835: $\omega (f_1,t) = \bigcirc ( |t|^{\delta} (\log|t|)^2),$ for suitable values of $\delta \in (0,1]$.
836: \end{thm}
837: \begin{proof} Since $\Theta =1 $, (\ref{chf17}) gives,
838: \begin{equation}\label{chf21}
839: |\mathcal{Q}_n (f_1, x) - \mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,\bar{x})|
840: \le M_5\; |x-\bar{x}|^{\lambda}(\underset{k=2}{\overset{m}\sum} \Omega^{m-k}) +
841: \frac{M_6 \; \beta}{\log|I_{\max}|}|x-\bar{x}|^{\mu} \; \log|x-\bar{x}|
842: (\underset{k=1}{\overset{m-3}\sum} \Gamma^k)
843: \end{equation}
844: The rest of proof is similar to that of Theorem \ref{th1} with the respective values of
845: $\delta$ as in different cases of Theorem \ref{th1}.\end{proof}
846: Finally, the smoothness results for the class of CHFIFs for $\Theta > 1 $
847: are given by the following:
848: \begin{thm}\label{th3}
849: Let $f_1(x)$ be the CHFIF defined by (\ref{chf8}) with $ \Theta > 1.$
850: Then, (a) for $\Omega \ne 1$ and $\Gamma \ne 1$, $f_1 \in Lip\delta$
851: (b) for $\Omega = 1$ or $\Gamma = 1,$
852: $\omega (f_1,t) = \bigcirc ( |t|^{\delta} \log|t|),$ for suitable values of $\delta \in (0,1]$.
853: \end{thm}
854: \begin{proof} Inequality (\ref{chf17}) for $\Theta > 1 $ gives
855: \begin{equation}\label{chf22}
856: |\mathcal{Q}_n (f_1, x) - \mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,\bar{x})| \le
857: M_5\; |x-\bar{x}|^{\lambda}(\underset{k=2}{\overset{m}\sum} \Omega^{m-k}) +
858: M_6 \; \beta |x-\bar{x}|^{\mu} \cdot m \Theta^m \cdot
859: (\underset{k=1}{\overset{m-3}\sum} \Gamma^k)
860: \end{equation}
861: Let $\tau_4 > 0$ be such that $|x-\bar{x}|^{\mu}\; m\; \Theta^m \; \le
862: \; |x-\bar{x}|^{\tau_4}$. Then,
863: \begin{equation*}
864: \tau_4 \le \mu + \frac{m \; \log{\Theta}}{\log{|x-\bar{x}|}}
865: \le \frac{\log{\alpha}}{\log|I_{\min}|}.
866: \end{equation*}
867: Since $\tau_1$ in Theorem \ref{th1} satisfies $\tau_1 \le \frac{\log{\alpha}}{\log|I_{\min}|}$,
868: we can choose $ \tau_4 = \tau_1$ so that (\ref{chf22}) reduces to
869: \begin{equation}\label{chf23}
870: |\mathcal{Q}_n (f_1, x) - \mathcal{Q}_n (f_1,\bar{x})| \le
871: M_5\; |x-\bar{x}|^{\lambda}(\underset{k=2}{\overset{m}\sum} \Omega^{m-k}) +
872: M_6 \; \beta |x-\bar{x}|^{\tau_1} \; (\underset{k=1}{\overset{m-3}\sum} \Gamma^k)
873: \end{equation}
874: The rest of the proof is similar to that of Theorem \ref{th1}, by considering
875: (\ref{chf23}) in place of (\ref{chf18}). As in Theorem \ref{th1}, the value of $\delta$ in different cases
876: are given by Case (a): I. $\delta = \delta_5 = \min (\lambda, \tau_1)$,
877: II. $\delta = \delta_6$ where, $\delta_6 \le \frac{\log{\alpha}{\gamma}}
878: {\log|I_{\min}|} - \mu,$ III. $\delta = \delta_7$ where, $\delta_7 \le
879: \frac{\log{\alpha}}{\log|I_{\min}|}$, IV.
880: $\delta = \delta_8 = \min (\lambda, \delta_6),$ and Case (b):
881: I. $\delta = \delta_5$, II. $\delta = \delta_7$,
882: III. $\delta = \delta_8$.
883: \end{proof}
884: \begin{Rem}\label{re2}
885: 1. It follows from Theorems \ref{th1}-\ref{th3}, that the smoothness of the CHFIF depends
886: on the free variables $ \alpha_i, \gamma_i$ and the Lipschitz exponents
887: $\lambda_i$ and $\mu_i$.\\
888: 2. If $p_i(x)$ and $q_i(x)$ belong to the same function space, then
889: $\lambda_i = \mu_i \Rightarrow \lambda = \mu \Rightarrow \Omega_i = \Theta_i
890: \Rightarrow \Omega = \Theta.$
891: Thus, in this case, there are only
892: three subcases in each of Theorems \ref{th1}-\ref{th3}, depending on magnitude of $\Gamma.$
893: The CHFIF $f_1(x)$ is not self-affine
894: if either $y_i \neq z_i$ for $i=0,1,2,\dots,N$ or
895: $p_i(x) \neq q_i(x)$ or $\alpha_i + \beta_i \neq \gamma_i$ for
896: $ i = 1,2,\dots,N.$ Thus, we need to choose $\lambda \neq \mu,$
897: to obtain all the nine subcases of Theorems \ref{th1}-\ref{th3}.\\
898: 3. Let $\lambda = \mu$ and $\Theta < 1$. Then, $ \Omega < 1.$
899: Theorem \ref{th1} now gives the following smoothness results
900: depending on the magnitude of $\Gamma$ for CHFIF $f_1(x).$
901: (A) For $\Gamma < 1, $ $f_1(x) \in \text{Lip}\mu$, since $\delta_1 = \mu$ in this case.
902: (B) For $\Gamma = 1, $ $\omega(f_1, t) = \bigcirc (|t|^{\mu} \log|t|),$ since
903: $\delta_1 = \mu$ in this case.
904: (C) For $\Gamma > 1, $ $f_1 \in \text{Lip}\tau_2 \; \text{where}
905: \; \tau_2 \le \frac{\log \gamma}{log|I_{\min}|},$ since $ \delta_4 = \min (\lambda, \tau_2)
906: \le \tau_2$ in this case.\\
907: 4. Suppose $\lambda = \mu$ and $\Theta = 1$. Then, $\Omega=1.$ Theorem \ref{th2} in this case
908: gives the smoothness result as follows:
909: (A) For $\Gamma < 1, $ $\omega(f_1, t) = \bigcirc (|t|^{\mu} (\log|t|)^2),$
910: since $\delta_1 = \mu$ in this case.
911: (B) For $\Gamma = 1, $ $\omega(f_1, t) = \bigcirc (|t|^{\mu} (\log|t|)^2),$
912: since $\delta_1 = \mu$ in this case.
913: (C) For $\Gamma > 1, $ $\omega(f_1, t) = \bigcirc (|t|^{\delta_4} (\log|t|)^2),$
914: where $ \delta_4 = \min (\lambda, \tau_2) \le \tau_2.$\\
915: 5. Let $\lambda = \mu$ and $\Theta > 1$. Then, $ \Theta =
916: \frac{\max\{|\alpha_i| : i=1,2,\dots,N\}}{|I_{\min}|^{\mu}} > 1$ which in turn implies
917: $\frac{\log \alpha}{\log |I_{\min}|} < \mu.$
918: Since $\delta_6 \le \frac{\log \gamma}{\log |I_{\min}|} +
919: (\frac{\log \alpha}{\log |I_{\min}|} - \mu) < \frac{\log \gamma}{\log |I_{\min}|}$
920: and $\tau_2 \le \frac{\log \gamma}{\log |I_{\min}|},$ we may choose $\delta_6 \le \tau_2.$
921: Further, $\tau_1 \le \frac{\log \alpha}{\log |I_{\min}|}$ implies $\tau_1 < \mu.$
922: With these inequalities, the smoothness results as derived from Theorem \ref{th3}
923: in the case $\lambda = \mu$ and $\Theta= \Omega > 1$ are as follows:
924: (A) For $\Gamma < 1, $ $f_1 \in \text{Lip}\tau_1 \supseteq \text{Lip}\mu.$
925: (B) For $\Gamma = 1, $ $\omega(f_1, t) = \bigcirc (|t|^{\tau_1} \log|t|)$
926: which gives $\omega(f_1, t)= \bigcirc (|t|^{\mu} \log|t|).$
927: (C) For $\Gamma > 1, $ $f_1 \in \text{Lip}\delta_6 \supseteq \text{Lip}\tau_2.$\\
928: 6. If $f_1(x)= f_2(x),$ then $f_1(x)$ is also self-affine and in such case, $y_i = z_i, \;
929: \alpha_i + \beta_i = \gamma_i$ and $p_i(x) = q_i(x).$ Hence, $ \lambda_i = \mu_i \Rightarrow
930: \lambda = \mu \Rightarrow \delta_1 = \mu$ and $ \Omega = \Theta.$
931: For self-affine function $f_1(x) = f_2(x),$ $f_1$ belongs to the
932: intersection of the function spaces occurring for the same case((A), (B), or (C))
933: of Remarks 3-5 as above. We note that the intersection of these function spaces is independent
934: of $\Theta.$ Since, the class of CHFIFs for $\Theta < 1$ is
935: contained in the class of CHFIFs for $\Theta = 1$ and $\Theta > 1$,
936: the smoothness results in \cite{G} for self-affine function $f_2(x)$ follows as
937: special case of our smoothness results derived in the above Remarks 3-5.
938: \end{Rem}
939: \section{FRACTAL DIMENSION AND CHFIF }
940: \setcounter{equation}{0}
941: The following definitions are needed in the sequel:
942: The conditions $\Omega = 1$, $\Gamma = 1$ or $\Theta =1$ are called
943: {\it {critical conditions}}. The CHFIF $f_1(x)$ with any one of these condition
944: is called {\it {critical CHFIF.}} Let $\mathcal{N}(A,\epsilon)$ be the smallest
945: number of closed balls of radius $\epsilon > 0,$ needed to
946: cover A. Then, the Fractal dimension of A is defined by
947: $ D_B(A) = \underset{\epsilon \rightarrow 0}{\lim}
948: \frac{\log \mathcal{N}(A,\epsilon)}{- \log \epsilon}$,whenever the limit exists.
949: Our following theorems give bounds of the fractal dimension for the critical CHFIFs.
950: \begin{thm}\label{th4} Let CHFIF $f_1(x)$ be defined by
951: (\ref{chf8}). Then, for the critical condition $\Omega = 1 $,
952: \begin{equation}\label{fd}
953: 1- \frac{\log \underset{k=1}{\overset{N}\sum} |\alpha_k|}{\log |I_{\max}|}
954: \le D_B(graph(f_1)) \le 1 - \delta - \frac{\log N}{\log |I_{\max}|}
955: \end{equation}
956: and for the critical condition $\Gamma = 1,$
957: \begin{equation}\label{fd1}
958: 1- \frac{\log \underset{k=1}{\overset{N}\sum} |\gamma_k|}{\log |I_{\max}|}
959: \le D_B(graph(f_1)) \le 1 - \delta - \frac{\log N}{\log |I_{\max}|}
960: \end{equation}
961: where, $\delta$ takes suitable values as in the subcases in Theorems \ref{th1}-\ref{th3}.
962: \end{thm}
963: \begin{proof} Let $\Theta < 1$ and $\Omega = 1.$
964: Since $\omega (f_1,t) = \bigcirc ( |t|^{\delta_1}\log|t|),$ (c.f. Theorem \ref{th1}),
965: for all$ x \ne x^*$, $ x, x^* \in I,$ there exist constants
966: $C_1, C_2 $ such that
967: \begin{equation}\label{fd2}
968: C_1 |x-x^*|^{\delta_1} \le |f_1(x) - f_1(x^*)| \le C_2 |x-x^*|^{\delta_1}\log|x-x^*|
969: \end{equation}
970: Suppose, $ G_{r_1,r_2,\dots,r_m} = \{(x,f_1(x),f_2(x))\; |\; x \in I_{r_1,r_2,\dots,r_m} \}.$
971: Define, $|A|_X = \sup \{ |x-\bar{x}| \; | \; (x,y,z),$ $ (\bar{x},\bar{y},\bar{z}) \in A \},$
972: $|A|_Y = \sup \{ |y-\bar{y}| \; | \; (x,y,z), (\bar{x},\bar{y},\bar{z}) \in A \},$ for
973: any $ A \subset \mathbb{R}^3.$ Since, $|G_{r_1,r_2,\dots,r_m}|_X = |I_{r_1,r_2,\dots,r_m}|,$
974: (\ref{fd2}) reduces to
975: \begin{equation}\label{fd3}
976: C_1 |I_{r_1,r_2,\dots,r_m}|^{\delta_1} \le |G_{r_1,r_2,\dots,r_m}|_Y \le
977: C_2 |I_{r_1,r_2,\dots,r_m}|^{\delta_1} \log |I_{r_1,r_2,\dots,r_m}|
978: \end{equation}
979: Choose $m$ large such that $ |I_{\max}|^m < \frac{1}{2} \epsilon, \; \epsilon > 0.$
980: Since, $ \Omega_{r_j} \le \Omega = 1$ implies $ |\alpha_{r_j}| \le
981: |I_{r_j}|^{\lambda} \le |I_{r_j}|^{\delta_1}$ and $|I_{r_1,r_2,\dots,r_m}|
982: = |I_{r_1}| \cdot |I_{r_2}| \dots |I_{r_m}|,$ it follows by (\ref{fd3}) that
983: \begin{equation}\label{fd4}
984: C_1 |\alpha_{r_1}|\cdot|\alpha_{r_2}|\dots |\alpha_{r_m}| \le |G_{r_1,r_2,\dots,r_m}|_Y
985: \le C_2 |I_{\max}|^{m\delta_1} \cdot m\log|I_{\max}|
986: \end{equation}
987: Taking summation over $r_1,r_2,\dots,r_m$ from $1$ to $N$ in
988: (\ref{fd4}),
989: \begin{equation*}
990: \begin{split}
991: \underset{r_1,r_2,\dots,r_m}{\sum} C_1
992: |\alpha_{r_1}|\cdot|\alpha_{r_2}|\dots |\alpha_{r_m}| |I_{\max}|^{-m} & \le
993: \underset{r_1,r_2,\dots,r_m}{\sum}|G_{r_1,r_2,\dots,r_m}|_Y |I_{\max}|^{-m} \\
994: \le & \underset{r_1,r_2,\dots,r_m}{\sum} C_2 |I_{\max}|^{m(\delta_1-1)}
995: \cdot m\log|I_{\max}|
996: \end{split}
997: \end{equation*}
998: The above inequalities can be rewritten as
999: \begin{equation*}
1000: \bar{C_1} |I_{\max}|^{-m} (|\alpha_1| + \dots |\alpha_N|)^m
1001: \le \mathcal{N}(\text{graph}(f_1), \epsilon) \le
1002: \bar{C_2} |I_{\max}|^{m(\delta_1-1)} \cdot m\log|I_{\max}| \cdot N^m
1003: \end{equation*}
1004: The inequalities (\ref{fd}) follow from the
1005: last inequalities with $\delta = \delta_1.$ The proof of (\ref{fd1}) for
1006: $\Theta < 1$, $\Gamma =1$ is similar to the above case.
1007: \par
1008: Let $\Theta = 1$ and $\Omega= 1.$ Since $\omega (f_1,t) =
1009: \bigcirc ( |t|^{\delta_1}(\log|t|)^2)$ (c.f. Theorem \ref{th2}),
1010: for all $x \ne x^*$, $ x, x^* \in I,$ there exist constants
1011: $C_3, C_4 $ such that
1012: \begin{equation}\label{e1}
1013: C_3 |x-x^*|^{\delta_1} \le |f_1(x) - f_1(x^*)| \le C_4 |x-x^*|^{\delta_1}(\log|x-x^*|)^2
1014: \end{equation}
1015: Now, using (\ref{e1}) in place of (\ref{fd2})
1016: the above arguments give that there are constants $\bar{C_3}$ and $\bar{C_4}$ such that
1017: \begin{equation*}
1018: \bar{C_3} |I_{\max}|^{-m} (|\alpha_1| + \dots |\alpha_N|)^m
1019: \le \mathcal{N}(\text{graph}(f_1), \epsilon) \le
1020: \bar{C_4} |I_{\max}|^{m(\delta_1-1)} \cdot (m\log|I_{\max}|)^2 \cdot N^m
1021: \end{equation*}
1022: The proof of (\ref{fd}) for $\Theta = 1$ and $\Omega= 1$ follows
1023: from the above inequalities with $\delta= \delta_1$.
1024: \par
1025: The proof of (\ref{fd})-(\ref{fd1}) is analogous in other cases.\end{proof}
1026: \begin{thm}\label{th5}
1027: Let CHFIF $f_1(x)$ be defined in
1028: (\ref{chf8}) with $\Theta = 1$. Then, for $\Omega \ne 1 $ or $\Gamma \ne 1$,
1029: \begin{equation*}
1030: 1- \frac{\log \underset{k=1}{\overset{N}\sum} |\alpha_k|}{\log |I_{\max}|}
1031: \le D_B(graph(f_1)) \le 1 - \delta - \frac{\log N}{\log |I_{\max}|}
1032: \end{equation*}
1033: where, $\delta$ takes suitable values as in Theorem \ref{th2}.
1034: \end{thm}
1035: \begin{proof} The proof is similar to the case $\Theta < 1 $ of Theorem \ref{th4}.\end{proof}
1036: Theorems \ref{th4}-\ref{th5} lead to the following bounds on
1037: fractal dimension of equally spaced critical CHFIFs.
1038: \begin{corl}\label{cor1}
1039: Let CHFIF $f_1(x)$ be defined by (\ref{chf8}).
1040: Then, for $\Theta =1$ or $\Omega =1$,
1041: \begin{equation}\label{e2}
1042: 1+ \frac{\log \underset{k=1}{\overset{N}\sum} |\alpha_k|}{\log N}
1043: \le D_B(graph(f_1)) \le 2 - \delta.
1044: \end{equation}
1045: Further, for $\Gamma = 1,$
1046: \begin{equation}\label{e3}
1047: 1+ \frac{\log \underset{k=1}{\overset{N}\sum} |\gamma_k|}{\log N}
1048: \le D_B(graph(f_1)) \le 2 - \delta
1049: \end{equation}
1050: where, $\delta$ takes suitable values as in Theorems \ref{th1}-\ref{th3}.
1051: \end{corl}
1052: \begin{corl}\label{cor2}
1053: Let the equidistant CHFIF $f_1(x)$ be defined by (\ref{chf8}). Then,
1054: $ D_B(graph(f_1)) = 1$ in the following cases:\\
1055: 1. $\Theta \le 1$, either $\delta = \delta_1 = 1$ or $\delta = \delta_3 = 1$ and either
1056: $\underset{k=1}{\overset{N}\sum} \; |\alpha_k|
1057: \le \; 1 $ or $\underset{k=1}{\overset{N}\sum} \;|\gamma_k| \le 1$.\\
1058: 2. $\Theta \le 1$, $\delta = \delta_4 = 1,$ and $\underset{k=1}{\overset{N}\sum}
1059: |\alpha_k| \le 1.$\\
1060: 3. $\Theta = 1$, $\delta = \delta_2 = \tau_3 = 1,$
1061: and $\underset{k=1}{\overset{N}\sum} \; |\alpha_k| \le 1 $.\\
1062: 4. $\Theta > 1$, either $\delta = \delta_5 = 1$ or $\delta = \delta_8 = 1$ and
1063: $\underset{k=1}{\overset{N}\sum} \; |\alpha_k| \le \; 1 $.\\
1064: 5. $\Theta > 1$, $\delta = \delta_4 = 1$ and
1065: $\underset{k=1}{\overset{N}\sum} \;|\gamma_k| \le \; 1$.
1066: \end{corl}
1067: \begin{Rem}
1068: 1. In the critical case $\Gamma = 1,$ the fractal dimension bounds
1069: of CHFIF $f_1(x)$ found in (\ref{fd1}) coincide with
1070: the fractal dimension bounds of FIF $f_2(x)$ found in \cite{G}, if $f_1(x)$ is also self-affine.\\
1071: 2. Choosing $\alpha_i$ suitably, $ \Omega = \Theta = 1$
1072: for any self-affine CHFIF $f_1 = f_2$. In the resulting critical cases,
1073: the bounds on fractal dimension of any self-affine FIF $f_1$ can be found by (\ref{fd})
1074: with suitable choice of hidden variables even if $\Gamma \ne 1$. \\
1075: 3. In Corollary \ref{cor2}, critical CHFIF $f_1(x)$ is
1076: considered as fractal function, since $f_1(x)$ satisfies
1077: $\omega (f_1,x) = \bigcirc ( |x|^{\delta} \log|x|).$
1078: Consequently, fractal functions having $ D_B(graph(f_1)) = 1$ can be constructed
1079: by using this corollary.
1080: \end{Rem}
1081: \section{EXAMPLES}
1082: Consider the interpolation data \{(0,2),(0.35,7),(.75,4),(1,9)\}. Here,
1083: for simplicity, we construct affine CHFIFs.
1084: Since, in this case $ \lambda = \mu = 1,$ it follows that $\Theta = \Omega.$
1085: In Figs. 1-3, the generalized set of data is chosen such that $z_i = y_i$ and
1086: in Figs. 4-16, the generalized set of data chosen such that
1087: $z_i \ne y_i.$ The values of $ \alpha_i, \beta_i \; \text{and} \; \gamma_i $
1088: chosen for the computer generation of affine CHFIFs for all these
1089: figures are given in Table 1. Fig. 1 gives the self-affine CHFIF $f_1(x)$
1090: for the given interpolation data whenever $ \alpha_i + \beta_i = \gamma_i $.
1091: Fig. 2 and Fig. 3 show respectively the effect on the CHFIF for suitable choices of
1092: $ \alpha_i, \beta_i$ and $ \gamma_i$ when the effective scaling factor is
1093: close to $-2^+$ and $2^-$.
1094: \begin{center}
1095: {{\bf Table 1 :}{ \it Free variables and constrained free variables in the
1096: construction of affine CHFIFs}}
1097: \end{center}
1098: \begin{center}
1099: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
1100: \hline {\bf Figures} & $\mathbf {\alpha_1}$ & $\mathbf {\alpha_2}$ & $\mathbf {\alpha_3}$
1101: & $\mathbf {\beta_1}$ & $\mathbf {\beta_2}$ & $ \mathbf {\beta_3}$ &$ \mathbf {\gamma_1}$ &
1102: $\mathbf {\gamma_2}$ & $\mathbf {\gamma_3}$ \\ \hline
1103: 1 & 0.8 & 0.7 & 0.3 & -0.3 & -0.4 & -0.2 & 0.5 & 0.3 & 0.6 \\ \hline
1104: 2 & 0.99 & 0.99 & 0.99 & 0.99 & 0.99 & 0.99 & 0.005 & 0.005 & 0.005 \\ \hline
1105: 3 & -0.999 &-0.999 & -0.999 & -0.99 & -0.99 & -0.005 & -0.005 & -0.005 & -0.005 \\ \hline
1106: 4 & 0.2 & 0.38 & 0.2 & 0.4 & 0.35 & 0.5 & 0.3 & 0.3 & 0.24 \\ \hline
1107: 5 & 0.2 & 0.4 & 0.22 & 0.4 & 0.35 & 0.5 & 0.35 & 0.3 & 0.2 \\ \hline
1108: 6 & 0.4 & 0.3 & 0.5 & 0.4 & 0.35 & 0.5 & 0.3 & 0.5 & 0.4 \\ \hline
1109: 7 & 0.2 & 0.38 & 0.2 & 0.4 & 0.35 & 0.5 & 0.3 & 0.5 & 0.4 \\ \hline
1110: 8 & 0.4 & 0.3 & 0.5 & 0.4 & 0.35 & 0.5 & 0.3 & 0.3 & 0.24 \\ \hline
1111: 9 & 0.2 & 0.4 & 0.22 & 0.4 & 0.35 & 0.5 & 0.3 & 0.3 & 0.24 \\ \hline
1112: 10 & 0.2 & 0.38 & 0.2 & 0.4 & 0.35 & 0.5 & 0.35 & 0.3 & 0.2 \\ \hline
1113: 11 & 0.2 & 0.4 & 0.22 & 0.4 & 0.35 & 0.5 & 0.3 & 0.5 & 0.4 \\ \hline
1114: 12 & 0.4 & 0.3 & 0.5 & 0.4 & 0.35 & 0.5 & 0.35 & 0.3 & 0.2 \\ \hline
1115: 13 & 0.2 & 0.38 & 0.2 & -0.6 & -0.45 & -0.4 & 0.3 & 0.3 & 0.24 \\ \hline
1116: 14 & 0.4 & 0.3 & 0.5 & -0.6 & -0.45 & -0.4 & 0.3 & 0.5 & 0.4 \\ \hline
1117: 15 & 0.4 & 0.3 & 0.5 & -0.6 & -0.45 & -0.4 & 0.3 & 0.3 & 0.24 \\ \hline
1118: 16 & 0.4 & 0.3 & 0.5 & -0.6 & -0.45 & -0.4 & 0.3 & 0.5 & 0.4 \\ \hline
1119: \end{tabular}
1120: \end{center}
1121: \par
1122: Figs. 4-12 with the fixed values of $\beta_i$ ( as in Table 1 ) and $z_i$
1123: ( 3,1,8,5 respectively for interpolation data points ) illustrate the
1124: nature of non-self-affine CHFIF, depending upon
1125: various cases of smoothness analysis in Theorems \ref{th1}-\ref{th3}, when $\Theta = \Omega.$
1126: As expected, CHFIFs in these figures have the same type
1127: of shape since the underlying function spaces are independent of
1128: $\beta_i$ and $z_i.$ Figs. 13-15 give the effect of change in the
1129: values of $\beta_i$ ( as in Table 1) on the shape of non-self-affine
1130: CHFIF. Fig. 16 shows the effect of change in
1131: the value of $z_i$ ( 7,9,10,8 respectively for interpolation data points )
1132: on the shape of non-self-affine CHFIF.
1133: On comparing Fig. 4 with Fig. 13, Fig. 6 with Fig. 14 and Fig. 11 with
1134: Fig. 15, it is found that although CHFIFs
1135: are in the same function spaces, these are very much different
1136: in shape due to changes in the values of $\beta_i$ ( as given
1137: in Table 1 ). The underlying function spaces are the same
1138: because these spaces depend only on the values of $\alpha_i, \gamma_i,
1139: \lambda_i$ and $\mu_i.$ Further, comparing Fig. 14 with Fig. 16, it is
1140: observed that by keeping all the other values fixed and changing
1141: only the values of $z_i$ from 3,1,8,5 respectively to 7,9,10,8
1142: in generalized interpolation data, the shape of the CHFIF changes arbitrarily.
1143: \section{CONCLUSION}
1144: A generalized IFS is constructed in the present paper
1145: for generating coalescence hidden variable FIF.
1146: The existence and uniqueness of the CHFIF
1147: is proved by choosing suitable values of the variables $\alpha_i, \beta_i$ and $\gamma_i$
1148: and the parameter $z_i$. Our IFS gives CHFIFs that may be self-affine or
1149: non-self-affine depending on free variables, constraints free variable and the parameters $z_i$..
1150: When construction of the CHFIF is carried out by adding $n$ dimensions
1151: linearly in generalized interpolation data,
1152: {\it{ $(n+1)$ free variables}} and at most {\it {$(1+2+ \dots +n)$ constrained
1153: free variables}} can be chosen. If all of the extra $n$ dimensions take the same values of $ z_i,$
1154: the scaling factor of the CHFIF lies between $-(n+1)^+$ and $(n+1)^-.$
1155: Besides using the generalized IFS for construction of CHFIFs in the present work,
1156: it can also be used in other scientific
1157: applications to capture the self-affine and non-self-affine nature simultaneously for the
1158: relevant curves.
1159: \par
1160: It is seen that the smoothness of CHFIF $f_1(x)$
1161: depends on free variables $\alpha_i$ and $\gamma_i$ as well as on the smoothness of $p_i(x)$ and
1162: $q_i(x).$ Although, $z_i$ and $\beta_i$ are responsible for the
1163: shape of the CHFIF, these are found not to affect its smoothness.
1164: In general, the deterministic construction of functions having order of
1165: modulus of continuity $O(|t|^{\delta}(\log|t|)^m)$ ( $m$ a non-negative integer,
1166: and $ 0 < \delta \le 1$) is possible through the CHFIF.
1167: The fact that CHFIFs are different in shape although they are in the same
1168: function spaces may enable considering them in more general function
1169: spaces such as Besov and Triebel-Lizorkin spaces apart from Lipschitz
1170: spaces. These former spaces have additional indices that `fine-tune'
1171: a function. Our bounds of fractal dimension of CHFIFs are found
1172: in different critical conditions. Finally, it is proved that by
1173: suitable choices of the hidden variables, the fractal dimension bounds
1174: for any self-affine FIF can be found using the bounds obtained with
1175: the critical condition $\Omega = \Theta = 1 $.
1176: \input{bib}
1177: \newpage
1178: \clearpage
1179: \begin{figure}
1180: \begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
1181: \psfig{file=coa.ps,scale=0.25,angle=-90} \\
1182: \centering{\small Fig. 1 Self-affine CHFIF $f_1(x)$.}
1183: \end{minipage} \hfill
1184: \begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
1185: \psfig{file=n2.ps,scale=0.25,angle=-90}\\
1186: \centering{\small Fig. 2 CHFIF $f_1(x)$ with scaling factor $-2^+$}
1187: \end{minipage}\\
1188: \begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
1189: \psfig{file=p2.ps,scale=0.25,angle=-90}\\
1190: \centering{\small Fig. 3 CHFIF $f_1(x)$ with scaling factor $2^-$}
1191: \end{minipage} \hfill
1192: \begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
1193: \psfig{file=s1.ps,scale=0.25,angle=-90} \\
1194: \centering{\small Fig. 4 CHFIF with $\Theta = \Omega < 1 , \Gamma < 1 $.}
1195: \end{minipage}\\
1196: \begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
1197: \psfig{file=s2.ps,scale=0.25,angle=-90}\\
1198: \centering{\small Fig. 5 CHFIF with $\Theta = \Omega = 1 , \Gamma = 1 $}
1199: \end{minipage} \hfill
1200: \begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
1201: \psfig{file=s3.ps,scale=0.25,angle=-90}\\
1202: \centering{\small Fig. 6 CHFIF with $\Theta = \Omega > 1 , \Gamma > 1 $}
1203: \end{minipage} \\
1204: \begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
1205: \psfig{file=s4.ps,scale=0.25,angle=-90}\\
1206: \centering{\small Fig. 7 CHFIF with $ \Theta = \Omega < 1 , \Gamma > 1 $}
1207: \end{minipage}\hfill
1208: \begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
1209: \psfig{file=s5.ps,scale=0.25,angle=-90} \\
1210: \centering{\small Fig. 8 CHFIF with $\Theta = \Omega > 1 , \Gamma < 1 $.}
1211: \end{minipage}
1212: \end{figure}
1213:
1214: \newpage
1215: \clearpage
1216: \begin{figure}
1217: \begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
1218: \psfig{file=s6.ps,scale=0.25,angle=-90}\\
1219: \centering{\small Fig. 9 CHFIF with $ \Theta = \Omega = 1 , \Gamma < 1 $}
1220: \end{minipage} \hfill
1221: \begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
1222: \psfig{file=s7.ps,scale=0.25,angle=-90}\\
1223: \centering{\small Fig. 10 CHFIF with $ \Theta = \Omega < 1 , \Gamma = 1 $}
1224: \end{minipage}\\
1225: \begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
1226: \psfig{file=s8.ps,scale=0.25,angle=-90}\\
1227: \centering{\small Fig. 11 CHFIF with $ \Theta = \Omega = 1 , \Gamma > 1 $}
1228: \end{minipage} \hfill
1229: \begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
1230: \psfig{file=s9.ps,scale=0.25,angle=-90}\\
1231: \centering{\small Fig. 12 CHFIF with $ \Theta = \Omega > 1 , \Gamma = 1 $}
1232: \end{minipage}\\
1233: \begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
1234: \psfig{file=b1.ps,scale=0.25,angle=-90}\\
1235: \centering{\small Fig. 13 CHFIF with $ \Theta = \Omega < 1 , \Gamma < 1 $
1236: with a different set of $\beta_i.$}
1237: \end{minipage} \hfill
1238: \begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
1239: \psfig{file=b3.ps,scale=0.25,angle=-90}\\
1240: \centering{\small Fig. 14 CHFIF with $ \Theta = \Omega > 1 , \Gamma > 1 $
1241: with a different set of $\beta_i.$}
1242: \end{minipage}\\
1243: \begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
1244: \psfig{file=b5.ps,scale=0.25,angle=-90}\\
1245: \centering{\small Fig. 15 CHFIF with $ \Theta = \Omega > 1 , \Gamma < 1 $
1246: with a different set of $\beta_i.$}
1247: \end{minipage} \hfill
1248: \begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
1249: \psfig{file=zdiff.ps,scale=0.25,angle=-90}\\
1250: \centering{\small Fig. 16 CHFIF with $ \Theta = \Omega > 1 , \Gamma > 1 $
1251: with a different set of $z_i.$}
1252: \end{minipage}
1253: \end{figure}
1254: \end{document}
1255: