Titu's Lemma
Titu's lemma (also known as T2 Lemma, Engel's form, or Sedrakyan's inequality) states that for positive reals and , we have
It is a direct consequence of Cauchy-Schwarz inequality. This form is especially helpful when the inequality involves fractions where the numerator is a perfect square.
It is obtained by applying the substitution and into the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality. Equality holds if and only if for a non-zero real constant .
It then becomes
Statement
For positive reals and , we have
It is obtained by applying the substitution and into the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality.
It then becomes
Direct Applications
Prove that for positive reals summing up to , we have
The hypothesis implies . We have square terms in the numerator, so
which is exactly what we wanted.
Note that the equality condition cannot be satisfied.
In fact, we have the stronger statement:
Can you prove this using Titu's lemma?
Over all triplets of positive reals satisfying , find the minimum value of
Dividing out simplifies into . Now we have square terms on the numerator. We get
Equality holds when
and solving for using the constraint , we have equality at , , . We check that equality indeed occurs.
Therefore, the minimum value is 12.
Let . Prove that
Observe that
Then,
Let . Prove that
We have
For , prove that
Write the left side of the given inequality as
which is so we are done.
Now you can try to prove the Nesbitt's inequality.
Let . Show that
The numerator currently isn't a perfect square. Let's make it a perfect square:
We can then apply Titu's lemma to obtain
Now,
Note that if we tried to apply Titu's lemma directly, we end up with
Then, the right-hand side actually has a maximum value of , so we cannot proceed any further.
Another approach is to apply Titu's lemma to show that:
Hence,
Hence,
Generalized Form
Here is the generalized form:
For any positive integer , we have
To learn how we reached this generalized form, follow the process below.
Let which is true by Hölder's inequality.
Then by simplifying, we get
Thus we conclude that for
When we put in the above inequality, we get
Problem Solving
We start with some examples followed by several problems to try.
[IMO/1995] Given , prove that
We write the left side of the given inequality as .
This is .
Since , it follows that .
Hence, the left-hand side of the given inequality is .
For , prove that
Let's modify the inequality that we have to prove as follows:
Then we have
For the positive real numbers and where prove that
What we should actually prove is that . Thus by applying the above inequality on the LHS, we get
Hence proved.
Try the following examples.
If are positive real numbers such that , then find the minimum value of
Let and be positive reals such that . Find the minimum value of the expression
Find the minimum value of
subject to and .
If are positive real numbers which satisfy
find the minimum value of
There exists a smallest possible positive integer such that
for all real sequences .
Find the sum of digits of .
and are three positive real numbers such that .
What is the smallest possible value of such that
for all possible ordered triplets
and are real numbers such that and always satisfy
Find when the value of the LHS of the above inequality is the least.
Details and Assumptions:
- and are positive integers.
- denotes the greatest integer function.