8

This seems such a simple question that I fear I must have missed some elementary maths.

I am looking for a way to solve $x+x^a = y$ by reference to an already defined function, $a,x,y > 0$ are real.

Failing that a reasonable approximation for $a$ in $(0,1)$.

Many thanks!

YCor
  • 60,149
J.Ham
  • 83

3 Answers3

16

The answer is yes indeed. It is a special case of Fox-H function, a variation of the confluent Fox-Wright $_{1}\Psi_{1}$ function (a generalization of the confluent hypergeometric function $_{1}F_{1}$) providing the inverse function. See a previous answer here for details and references. For this particular case solution is

(Setting $\alpha = a$), for $\alpha>1$

$$x = y\cdot\,_{1}\Psi_{1}([1,\alpha];[2,\alpha-1];-y^{\alpha-1})$$ which can be set as $$x=y+\sum_{n=1}^\infty\binom{n\alpha}{n-1}\frac{(-1)^ny^{n(\alpha-1)+1}}{n}$$ whose convergence region is $|y^{\alpha-1}|<|(\alpha-1)^{\alpha-1}\alpha^{-\alpha}|$. For non integer $\alpha>1$ binomials must be set in terms of $\Gamma$ function.

Since Fox-Wright's generalized function can be expressed in terms of Fox-H function we have $$\,_{1}\Psi_{1}([1,\alpha];[2,\alpha-1];-y^{\alpha-1})=H_{1,2}^{1,1}([(0,\alpha)];[(0,1),(-1,\alpha-1)];y^{\alpha-1})$$ $$\,_{1}\Psi_{1}([1,\alpha];[2,\alpha-1];-y^{\alpha-1})=H_{2,1}^{1,1}([(1,1),(2,\alpha-1)];[(1,\alpha)];y^{1-\alpha})$$ for this particular case, Wolfram's Mathematica 12.3 provides an explicit inverse as

$x=y\cdot$FoxH[{{{0,$\alpha$}},{{}}},{{{0,1}},{{-1,$\alpha$-1}}},$y^{\alpha-1}$]

For $0<\alpha<1$ the solution is $$x = y\cdot(1-\,_{1}\Psi_{1}([1,\alpha^{-1}];[2,\alpha^{-1}-1];-y^{\alpha^{-1}-1}))$$

and the above relationships are turned in replacing $\alpha$ by $\alpha^{-1}$ and Fox-Wright function $\,_{1}\Psi_{1}$ by $1-\,_{1}\Psi_{1}$. In this case Mathematica's expression is

$x=y\cdot(1-$FoxH[{{{0,$\alpha^{-1}$}},{{}}},{{{0,1}},{{-1,$\alpha^{-1}$-1}}},$y^{\alpha^{-1}-1}$])

Finally, just to complement this answer, general trinomial equation solutions are developed in section 4 of the following

Reference

Miller A.R., Moskowitz I.S. Reduction of a Class of Fox-Wright Psi Functions for Certain Rational Parameters. Computers Math. Applic. Vol. 30, No. 11, pp. 73-82, (1995). Pergamon

A preprint can be found here. (Document has mis-embedded fonts, isolated commas must be replaced by $\Gamma$ symbol)

Jorge Zuniga
  • 2,210
  • This is very helpful. Now can one use the Fox-Wright to solve y=x^-x? I am finding it difficult to hit on a reference book here as Fox-Wright doesn't appear in the DLMF. – J.Ham Nov 10 '21 at 14:56
  • @j-ham, An introduction to (Extended) Generalized Hypergeometric Functions (MeijerG, Fox-Wright and Fox-H) can be found in the link Fox-H function above. Several reference books are found at the bottom of this document. Fox-Wright function, as a special case of Fox-H function, can be computed through Wolfram's Mathematica (version 12.3). – Jorge Zuniga Nov 12 '21 at 02:57
  • I tried to find solution to equation: $x^2+x=1$ in Mathematica code:N[y*FoxH[{{{0, \[Alpha]}}, {{}}}, {{{0, 1}}, {{-1, \[Alpha] - 1}}}, y^(\[Alpha] \[Minus] 1)] /. \[Alpha] -> 2 /. y -> 1] ,but I can't get numeric value? – Mariusz Iwaniuk Dec 31 '21 at 14:42
  • @Mariusz_Iwaniuk. Since FoxH is a new function, I think this is a question for Mathematica & Wolfram Language StackExchange Site. I will ask to check it. These expressions come from Fox-Wright function. There are slightly different formulae using FoxH function for all roots of trinomial equations in Wolfram's site https://reference.wolfram.com/language/ref/FoxH.html (Applications Section) – Jorge Zuniga Jan 02 '22 at 01:16
  • @JorgeZuniga The series expansion works for complex $a$ also, but Fox H cannot have complex $\alpha_j,\beta_j$. Do you know if one can extend Fox H like so or if the Fox Wright function can have complex $A_j, B_j$? The Fox Wright function is also not exactly clear if it is a standardized function, so it is hard to see if for complex $a$, either function gives a closed form for $x^a+x=t$. – Tyma Gaidash Nov 05 '23 at 15:11
  • @TymaGaidash Classic definitions of Fox Wright and Fox H need those parameters positive reals. You can extend them to the negative reals using the reflexion formula for Gammas. For complex values it is better to see what happens analyzing the Mellin Barnes Integral definition for both functions, but I have never seen if this case is possible. – Jorge Zuniga Nov 06 '23 at 16:19
  • @JorgeZuniga There does not seem to be a formula for $\Gamma(a+zn)\to\Gamma(b+xn),z\in\Bbb C,x\in\Bbb R$ for the integral. It would be ideal if one could write, for example: $u=-1-e^{(\sqrt3+i)\pi k}u^{(-1)^{-\frac13}}\implies u_k= -\sum\limits_{n=0}^\infty\frac{e^{\sqrt[6]{-1}(2k+1)\pi n}}{n!}\frac{\Gamma\big(1+(-1)^{-\frac13}n\big)}{\Gamma\big(2+(-1)^\frac43n\big)}= -,1\Psi_1\left({2,(-1)^\frac43}^{1,(-1)^{-\frac13}}; e^{\sqrt[6]{-1}(2k+1)\pi }\right)$. Are you sure sums, or integrals, like these do not have closed forms? – Tyma Gaidash Nov 06 '23 at 17:20
  • @TymaGaidash. I am afraid that sum has no a closed form. You should check if $|y^{\alpha-1}|<|(\alpha-1)^{\alpha-1}\alpha^{-\alpha}|$ holds in this case. – Jorge Zuniga Nov 07 '23 at 02:23
4

If $a$ is rational, then the root, say $x_*$, of your equation is algebraic, and (say) Mathematica will find for you with any degree of accuracy. Otherwise, one can approximate $a$ by rational numbers.


Another way to get bounds on $x_*$ is to use a combination of the Newton and secant methods to bracket the root, as follows. For $a\in(0,1)$, using the substitution $u=x^a$, rewrite your equation as \begin{equation} f(u):=u^{1/a}+u=y, \tag{1} \end{equation} so that the function $f$ is convex and increasing. Let $u_*$ be the positive root of equation (1), so that $x_*=u_*^{1/a}$ and $f(u_*)=y$.

Note that \begin{equation} u_*\vee u_*^{1/a}<y=f(u_*)<2(u_*\vee u_*^{1/a}), \end{equation} where $u\vee v:=\max(u,v)$ and $u\wedge v:=\min(u,v)$. So, letting \begin{equation} u_0:=u_0(y):=\frac y2\wedge\Big(\frac y2\Big)^a,\quad v_0:=v_0(y):=y\wedge y^a, \end{equation} we get the initial bracketing of $u_*$: \begin{equation} u_0<u_*<v_0. \end{equation} Use now the following combination of the secant and Newton methods for every natural $n$: \begin{equation} u_n:=u_n(y):=U(u_{n-1},v_{n-1}),\quad v_n:=v_n(y):=V(v_{n-1}), \end{equation} where \begin{equation} U(u,v):=u+\frac{y-f(u)}{f(v)-f(u)}\,(v-u), \end{equation} \begin{equation} V(v):=v-\frac{f(v)-y}{f'(v)}. \end{equation} Then $u_n$ and $v_n$ bracket the root $u_*$ and monotonically converge to it (very fast): \begin{equation} u_{n-1}<u_n<u_*<v_n<v_{n-1},\quad u_n\uparrow u_*,\quad v_n\downarrow u_*. \end{equation}

The bracketing $u_*\in[u_1,v_1]$ can be already pretty good, while providing almost digestible explicit lower and upper bounds on $u_*$.

As an illustration, here are the graphs $\{(y,\log_{10}(v_n(y)-u_n(y)))\colon0<y<3\}$ for $a=7/10$ with $n=1$ (blue), $n=2$ (orange), and $n=3$ (green):

enter image description here

Iosif Pinelis
  • 116,648
4

The answer is yes indeed. It is a special case of $\DeclareMathOperator{\brn}{brn}\brn$ function. $$ R=\frac{x^B-1}{x^N}=f_{B,N}(x) $$ $$ x=\operatorname{arc}f_{B,N}(R)=\brn_{B,N}(R) $$ $$ \brn_{B,N}(R)=\sum_{g=0}^\infty\left(\frac{R^g}{B^gg!}\prod_{r=1}^{g-1}(-Br+1+Ng)\right) $$ radius of convergence $$ \left|\frac{N^N(B-N)^{B-N}R^B}{B^B}\right|<1 $$ where $B, N, R \in C$.
The function $\brn$ is named after the mathematician Erland Samuel Bring.

Here there is an article about ultraexponentiation and ultraroot, while here there is a calculator with $\brn$ button.

Luke
  • 41
  • I believe they call the case of the exponent being 5 as the bring radical. I didn't know a theory had been built around it more generally – Sidharth Ghoshal Jun 22 '23 at 01:44