See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/314407207

Summability characterizations of positive sequences

Article · March 2017

CITATIONS READS

0 30

1 author:

Douglas Azevedo
Federal University of Technology - Paraná/Brazil (UTFPR)
9 PUBLICATIONS   14 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Kummer's test generalization View project

Continuous nowhere differentiable kernels View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Douglas Azevedo on 09 March 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Summability characterizations of positive sequences
Douglas Azevedoa,∗
a
DAMAT-UTFPR-CP. Av. Alberto Carazzai 1640, centro, caixa postal 238, 86300000, Cornelio Procopio,
PR, Brasil.

Abstract
In this paper we present necessary and sufficient conditions for the convergence and diver-
gence of series of positive terms. Our is approach based on extensions of the Kummer’s test,
from which we extract such characterizations. Some interesting consequences and examples
of this extensions are presented. In particular, we present necessary and sufficient condi-
tions for the summability of subsequences of a given sequence and extensions to the well
known tests of convergence of series: Raabe’s test, Gauss’s test and Bertrand’s test. We
also present a version of the Olivier’s theorem without the usual monotonicity requirement.
A “weak-version” of the Ermakoff’s test is presented as well.
Keywords: Summability of subsequences, Kummer’s test, convergence of series,
divergence of series, Raabe’s test, Bertrand’s test, Gauss’s test, Olivier’s Theorem.
2010 MSC: 40A05 , 40A30.

1. Introduction
Let {an } be a sequence of positive real numbers. An infinite series generated by {an }
is the sequence {sn } defined as sn = a1 +P... + anP, for all positive integer n. In order to
simplify notations it is common to write an := ∞ n=1 an to represent the infinite series,
even though this notation also represents P
limn→∞ sn .
In what follows a series of the form cn an will be called by series of positive terms
whenever {cn } and {an } are both sequences of positive real numbers.
The Kummer’s test is an advanced theoretical test which provides necessary and sufficient
conditions that ensures convergence and divergence of series of positive terms. Below we
present the statement of this result. Its proof and some additional historical background
may be found in [2, 9, 15].

Theorem 1.1 (Kummer’s test). Consider the series ∞

P
n=1 an where {an } is a sequence of
positive real numbers.

∗
I am corresponding author
Email address: dgs.nvn@gmail.com (Douglas Azevedo)

Preprint submitted to —- March 8, 2017

 (i) The series ∞
P
n=1 an converges if and only if that there exist a sequence {pn }, a real
number c > 0 and an integer N ≥ 1 for which
an
pn − pn+1 ≥ c, n ≥ N.
an+1

(ii) The seriesP ∞

P
n=1 an diverges if, and only if there exist a sequence {pn } and an integer
∞
N ≥ 1 for which n=1 p1n is a divergent series and
an
pn − pn+1 ≤ 0, n ≥ N.
an+1
P
In particular, one may observe that the theorem indicates that in order to an converges,
it is necessary and sufficient that there exist a real number c > 0 and a sequence {pP n } of
positive terms for which an pn ≥ an+1 (pn+1 + c) for all n ≥ N . Roughly speaking, when an
converges, the sequence {an pn } must decreases with a certain velocity given by the constant
c > 0, however, it is not demanded any decreaseness on the sequence {an }.
Besides providing an extremely general characterization of convergence and divergence
of series with positive terms, the importance of the Kummer’s test it is also ratified by its
consequences. For instance, Bertrand’s test, Gauss’s test, Raabe’s test ([15]) are all special
cases of Theorem 1.1. Kummer’s test is also applied to characterize convergence in normed
vector spaces ([11, p.7]) and applications of this test can be found in other branches of
Analysis, such as difference equations ([6]), as well.
In this paper we propose two extensions of the Theorem 1.1 by presenting sufficient P and
necessary
P∞ conditions that ensure convergence and divergence of series of the form aφ(n)
and n=1 cn an , when {an } and {cn } are both sequences of positive real numbers and φ(x)
is a positive function.
The summability of subsequences of a given sequence is a widely studied subject. The
mainly approach usually given to this topic is via the general theory of matrix summability
methods (see [1, 4, 5, 8, 12] and references therein). In this context, summability is an
extremely fruitful area for application of functional analysis. However, for a given sequence
{an } of positive numbers and a given functionP φ that assigns to each positive integer a
larger positive integer, series of the form aφ(n) are investigated in this paper through a
characterization of a relation between the sequence {an } and the subsequence {aφ(n) }. From
this relation we are P able to present necessary and sufficient conditions to ensure convergence
and divergece of aφ(n) (Theorem 2.1 and Theorem 2.2). P
On the the other hand, turning our focus to series of the form cn an , there are few results
dealing with type of series. The Abel’s test and test of Dedekind and Du-Bois Reymond ([9,
p.315], [7]) are probably the most famous, since they deal with general series of real numbers.
These tests provide conditions that ensure convergence by means of independent assumptions
on {cn } and {an }. In this context, the main feature of our results (Theorem 3.1 and Theorem
3.2 ) is that they characterizes the relation between the sequences {an } and {cn } in order to
ensure
P necessary and sufficient conditions for the convergence and divergence of the series
cn an , respectively. Moreover, we present some examples and interesting consequences of
2
this characterization. In particular, generalized versions of Raabe’s,
P Bertrand’s and Gauss’s
test for convergence and divergence of series of the form cn an are obtained. Another
important consequence of Theorem 3.1 is that it is possible to show that Olivier’s theorem
([9, p.124] or [3, 14]) still holds when the monotonicity assumption on the sequence of
positive terms {an } is replaced by an additional assumption on a auxiliary sequence. We
also present consequences of Theorem 3.1 when it is combined to the to the well-know Abel
summation formula (see [9, p.313] ) and the Cauchy condensation theorem ([9, p.120]).
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we present necessary and
sufficient conditions for convergence/divergence of series generated by subsequences by ex-
tending Theorem 1.1. In Section P 3 we present the results dealing with convergence and
divergence of series of the form cn an . The main ideia is to obtain necessary and sufficient
conditions by means of an extension of Theorems 2.1 and Theorem 2.2. As we show, we
characterize the relation between the sequences {cn } and {an } that ensures convergence and
divergence of the series. In Section 4 we present several consequences of the results obtained
in the previous sections. We close the paper with Section 5, by presenting our concluding
remarks.

2. Summability of subsequences
We start this section by presenting our first main result. As the reader will see, it is
an extension of Theorem 1.1 however, its main feature is that it characterizes summable
subsequences of a given sequence of positive numbers.

Theorem 2.1. Let {an } be a sequence of positive real numbers and φ : [1, ∞[→]0, ∞[ a
function such that φ(x) > x, for all x ≥ 1 with φ(n) being a positive integer for all n ≥ 1.
Suppose that there exists a positive sequence {pn } such that
an
pn − pφ(n) ≥ c,
aφ(n)
P∞
for some c > 0, for all n sufficiently large and lim pn an = 0. Then n=1 aφ(n) converges.
The converse holds, as well.

Proof. From the assumption we get that

pn an − aφ(n) pφ(n) ≥ caφ(n) ,

for all n sufficiently large.

This last inequality may be writen as

pn an −pn+1 an+1 +pn+1 an+1 −pn+2 an+2 +...−aφ(n−1) pφ(n−1) +aφ(n−1) pφ(n−1) −aφ(n) pφ(n) ≥ caφ(n) ,

for all n sufficiently large.

For a fixed N large, we obtain that

3
 N
X +k N
X +k N
X +k
pn an − pn+1 an+1 + ... + aφ(n−1) pφ(n−1) − aφ(n) pφ(n) ≥ c aφ(n) > 0,
n=N n=N n=N

for all k ≥ 1. That is,

N
X +k
pN aN − pN +k+1 aN +k+1 + ... + aφ(N −1) pφ(N −1) − aφ(N +k) pφ(N +k) ≥ c aφ(n) > 0,
n=N

for all k ≥ 1. Applying the limit on k, due to lim pn an = 0, we conclude that

φ(N −1) ∞
X X
p n an ≥ c aφ(n) > 0.
n=N n=N
P
Therefore, aφ(n) converges.
Conversely, define Pn
S− i=1 aφ(i)
pn = , n = 1, 2, 3... ,
an
P
where S = aφ(n) . Thus, for this pn we have that
 
φ(n)
n
!
X X
pn an − aφ(n) pφ(n) = S− aφ(i) − S − aφ(i) 
i=1 i=1
φ(n)
X
= aφ(i)
i=n+1
≥ aφ(n) , for all n ≥ 1.

From the definition of sequence {pn } it is clear that lim pn an = 0. The proof is concluded.

Next we present a characterization of subsequences that are not summable.

Theorem 2.2. Let {an } be a sequence of positive real numbers and φ : [1, ∞[→]0, ∞[ a
function such that φ(x) > x, for all x ≥ 1, with φ(n) being an positive integer for all positive
integer n. P 1
Suppose that there exists a positive sequence {pn } such that pφ(n)
diverges, pn an ≥ p1 a1 ,
and
an
pn − pφ(n) ≤ 0,
aφ(n)
for all n sufficiently . Then ∞
P
n=1 aφ(n) diverges. The converse holds, as well.
4
 P P 1
Proof. From the assumptions we obtain that aφ(n) ≥ p1 a1 pφ(n)
. By the comparsion
P
test, the divergence of the series
P on the right implies the divergence of aφ(n) .
Conversely, suppose that aφ(n) diverges. Define for each n ≥ 1
Pn
ai
pn = i=1 .
an

Note that the definition implies p1 = 1, hence an pn = ni=1 ai ≥ a1 , for all n ≥ 1, that is,
P
an pn ≥ a1 p1 for all n ≥
P1. 1 P
Let us show that pφ(n)
diverges. From the divergence of aφ(n) , given any positive
integer m there exists a positive integer n ≥ m such that

aφ(m) + ... + aφ(n) ≥ a1 + ... + aφ(m−1) . (1)

Due to (1),
n
X 1 aφ(m) aφ(n)
= + ... +
p
j=m φ(j)
a1 + ... + aφ(m) a1 + ... + aφ(n)
1
= a1 +...+aφ(m−1)
aφ(m) +...+aφ(n)
+1
1
> 2
.
Pn 1
P 1
That is, j=1 pφ(j) is not a Cauchy sequence. Therefore the series pφ(n)
diverges.

One interesting consequence of the Theorems 2.1 e 2.2 is a weak version of the Er-
makoff’s test (see [9, p. 296 and p.298]). The reader will note that there is no monotonicity
requirement on the sequence, however the summability is obtained only for a subsequence.

Corollary 2.2.1 (weak-Ermakoff’s test). Let {an } be a sequence of positive terms, φ(x) >
x be any monotone increasing positive differentiable function for which φ(n) is a positive
integer for all n ≥ 1. If
(i)
0
φ (n) aφ(n)
≤ v < 1,
an
1
P
for all n large and lim sup φ0 (φ(n)) = u ≤ 1, then aφ(n) converges.
(ii)
0
φ (n) aφ(n)
≥ 1,
an
P 0 1
P
for all n large, with φ (n) divergent and lim inf φ0 (φ(n)) = u ≥ 1, then aφ(n) diverges

5
Proof. (i) The assumption implies that
1 an 1
0 ≥ > 1,
φ (n) aφ(n) v
for all n sufficiently large. That is
1 an 1 1 1
0 − 0 ≥ − 0 > 0,
φ (n) aφ(n) φ (φ(n)) v φ (φ(n))
for all n sufficiently large. The conclusion of the proof follows from an application of Theorem
1
2.1 with pn = φ(n) .
(ii) In this case we have that
1 an 1 1
0 − 0 ≤1− 0 ≤ 0,
φ (n) aφ(n) φ (φ(n)) φ (φ(n))
for all n sufficiently large.

P
3. Series of the form cn an
Let us now turn our atention to series of the form ∞
P
n=1 cn an with positive terms. The
central idea in the following result is that it characterizes the relation between the sequences
{cn } and {an } in order to ensure the convergence of the series. The proof follows the same
lines of the proof of Theorem 2.1.
P∞
Theorem 3.1. Consider the series n=1 cn an with {an } {cn } sequences of positive real
numbers.
The series ∞
P
n=1 cn an converges if and only if that there exist a sequence {pn } of positive
real numbers and a positive integer N ≥ 1 for which
an
pn − pn+1 ≥ cn+1 , n ≥ N.
an+1
Proof. Let us show that ∞
P
n=1 cn an converges. For this, note that the condition
an
pn − pn+1 ≥ cn+1 , n ≥ N
an+1
implies that
an pn ≥ an+1 (pn+1 + cn+1 ), n ≥ N. (2)
That is,
k+1
X
aN p N ≥ r ci ai + aN +k+1 pN +k+1
i=1
k+1
X
≥ r ci ai > 0,
i=1
6
 P∞
for all integer k ≥ 0. This implies the convergence
P∞ of n=1 cn an .
For the converse, suppose that S := n=1 cn an and let us define

S − ni=1 ci ai
P
pn = , n ≥ N. (3)
an
For this {pn }, clearly pn > 0 for all n ≥ 1 and it is easy to check that
an
pn − pn+1 = cn+1 , n ≥ N.
an+1

Some remarks:
(i) One can observe that it is, of course, possible to reduce any series to this form , as
any number can be expressed as the product of two other numbers. Success in applying the
above theorem will depend on the skill with which the terms are so split up.
(ii) Note that in the first part of Theorem 3.1, the assumption of positivity of the
sequences {an } and
P{c n } can be replaced by the following assumptions: {an } is positive and
k
{cn } is such that i=1 ci ai > 0 for all k sufficiently large.
P∞Next, we presente a version of the Kummer’s test for divergent series of the form
n=1 cn an . The reader will note that it is more restrictive when it is compared to The-
orem 1.1-(ii) however it may be suitable in some cases.
P∞
Theorem 3.2. Consider the series n=1 cn an with {an } {cn } sequences of positive real
numbers.
(i) Suppose that there exist a sequence {pn } and a positive integer N for which
an
pn − pn+1 ≤ −cn+1 , n ≥ N
an+1
P∞ 1 P∞ P∞ 1 P∞
with
P∞ n=1 p n
being a divergent series. Then n=1
P∞
an , n=1 cn , n=1 (pn − cn )an and
cn
n=1 pn an diverge. If, in addition, lim 6= 0 then n=1 cn an diverges.
P∞ p n P∞
(ii) Suppose that both series n=1 cn an and n=1 an diverge. Also, suppose that for
every m ∈ N there exists r ∈ N such that

am + ... + ar ≥ cm am + ... + cr ar .
P∞ 1
Then there exist a sequence {pn } and a positive integer N ≥ 1 such that n=1 pn diverges
an
pn − pn+1 ≤ −cn+1 , n ≥ N.
an+1

Proof. To prove (i) note that {pn } satisfies

p n an
an+1 ≥ , n≥N
pn+1 − cn+1
7
and also we have that
0 < pn+1 − cn+1 < pn+1 , n ≥ N. (4)
P∞ 1
In particular 0 < cn+1 < pn+1 , for n ≥ N and from the comparsion test we see that n=1 cn
diverges.
Since,
p N aN
aN +1 ≥ ,
pN +1 − cN +1
pN +1 aN +1 aN pN pN +1
aN +2 ≥ ≥ ,
pN +2 − cN +2 (pN +2 − cN +2 )(pN +1 − cN +1 )
and in general,
aN pN pN +1 ...pN +k
aN +k+1 ≥ , k ≥ 0, (5)
(pN +1 − cN +1 )...(pN +k+1 − cN +k+1 )

from (4) this last inequality reads as

aN
aN +k+1 > , k ≥ 0. (6)
pN +k+1
That is,
∞ ∞
X X 1
aN +k+1 > aN ,
k=0 k=0
pN +k+1
P∞
and therefore n=1 an diverges. From (5)
aN pN pN +1 ...pN +k
(pN +k+1 − cN +k+1 )aN +k+1 ≥ , k≥0
(pN +1 − cN +1 )...(pN +k − cN +k )

and applying once again (4) we achieve

pN +k+1 aN +k+1 > (pN +k+1 − cN +k+1 )aN +k+1 ≥ aN pN > 0, k ≥ 0.

+k+1 aN +k+1 6= 0 and limk→∞ (pN +k+1 −

This last set of inequalities impliesPthat limn→∞ pNP
cN +k+1 )aN +k+1 6= 0, so both series n=1 pn an and ∞
∞
n=1 (pn − cn )an diverge.
Note that from (6) we obtain that
cN +k+1
cN +k+1 aN +k+1 > aN , k ≥ 0. (7)
pN +k+1

Therefore, if lim pcnn 6= 0, then it is clear that

P
cn an diverges.
For (ii) define Pn
c i ai
pn = i=1 , n ≥ 1.
an
This sequence satisfies
an
pn − pn+1 ≤ −cn+1 , n ≥ 1.
an+1
8
Let us show that ∞ 1
P
n=1 pn diverges by concluding that the sequence {sk }, defined as sk =
Pk 1 P∞
i=1 pi , for each k ≥ 1, is not a Cauchy sequence. Since n=1 cn an is divergent, given
m ∈ N there exists n ∈ N such that

cm am + ... + cn an > c1 a1 + ... + cm−1 am−1 . (8)

Also, from the hypothesis, there exists r > m such that

am + ... + ar ≥ cm am + ... + cr ar . (9)

If we take s = max{n, r} then both (8) and (9) holds, that is,

cm am + ... + cs as > c1 a1 + ... + cm−1 am−1

am + ... + as ≥ cm am + ... + cs as .

From this previous conclusions, by the definition of {pn } we have that for each m ∈ N there
exists s ∈ N, s > m, such that,
s
X 1 am as
= + ... +
p
n=m n
c1 a1 + ... + cm am c1 a1 + ... + cs as
am + ... + as
≥
c1 a1 + ... + cs as
cm am + ... + cs as
≥
c1 a1 + ... + cs as
1 1
≥ c1 a1 +...+cm−1 am−1 > ,
cm am +...+cs as
+1 2

this concludes the proof.

4. Some examples and consequences

The main goal in this section is to present some of the implications of the main results
of this paper.In particular, generalized
P versions of Raabe’s, Bertrand’s and Gauss’s test for
convergence of series of the form cn an are presented. We also show that Theorem 3.1 is
that Olivier’s theorem ([9, p.124] or [3, 14]) still holds when the monotonicity assumption
on the sequence of positive terms {an } is replaced by additional assumption on the {pn }
. In this section we also present consequences of Theorem 3.1 when it is combined to the
well-know Abel summation formula (see [9, p.313] ).
Let us start by showing that the sequences {pn } in Theorem 3.1 and Theorem 3.2
have some linearity inherent. For this, let us introduce the subsets R+ [{cn }, {an }] and
R− [{cn }, {an }] of the real vector space NR of all sequences of real numbers, defined as
 
+ an
R [{cn }, {an }] = {pn }, pn − pn+1 ≥ cn+1 , for all n ∈ N sufficiently large ,
an+1
9
and

 
− an
R [{cn }, {an }] = {pn }, pn − pn+1 ≤ −cn+1 , for all n ∈ N sufficiently large .
an+1

Recall that a subset C of a real vector space V is called a linear convex cone if, for each
c1 , c2 ∈ C and α, β > 0, αc1 + βc2 ∈ C.

Theorem 4.1. The sets R+ [{cn }, {an }] and R− [{cn }, {an }] are linear convex cones of NR .

Proof. We will present the proof for R+ [{cn }, {an }]. The proof for R− [{cn }, {an }] follows
the same lines.
Given any {pn } and {qn } in R+ [{cn }, {an }] we have that
an
pn − pn+1 ≥ cn+1
an+1
and
an
qn − qn+1 ≥ cn+1 ,
an+1
for all n sufficiently large.
For any α, β > 0, it is clear that αpn + βqn ∈ R[{cn }, {an }], since
   
αpn + βqn an αpn+1 + βqn+1
− ≥ cn+1 ,
α+β an+1 α+β

for all n sufficiently large. The proof is concluded.

We proceed this section by presenting some examples and interesting consequences of

Theorems 3.1 and 3.2 .

Example 4.2. For any fixed r > 0, there is no sequence {pn } of positive numbers that
satisfies
n+1
pn − pn+1 ≥ r,
n
for all n large.
To show this, suppose the existence of such sequence. Now note that this last inequality
may be rewritten as
1/n
pn − pn+1 ≥ r,
1/(n + 1)
for
P∞some r > 0. From Theorem 3.1 with an = 1/n and cn = r this last would imply that
1
n=1 n is convergent, which is false.
This example illustrates the connection of Kummer’s test with the theory of solutions of
difference equation. For instance, we may use Theorem 3.1 to ensure solution for certain
10
classes of difference equations: Given sequences {an } and {cn } of positive numbers, there
exists a positive sequence {pn } that satisfies the inequality

pn an − pn+1 an+1 = cn+1 an+1 ,

P
for all n, if and only if, cn an converges.
Note that from Theorem 3.2 it is possible to obtain a similar connection with difference
equations.

The next three theorems are extensions of the Raabe, Bertrand and Gauss test derived
from Theorem 3.1 and Theorem 3.2. For more information about these tests we refer to
[2, 9] and references therein.
Consider the sequences
an
Rn− = n − (n + 1) − cn+1 ,
an+1
an
Rn+ = n − (n + 1) + cn+1 ,
an+1
for all positive integer n.
P
Theorem 4.3 (Raabe’s test). Let cn an be a series of positive terms and suppose that
− −
lim inf Rn = R1 and lim sup Rn = R2 . If
(i) R1 ≥ 0, then the series converges;
(ii) R2 ≤ 0 and lim cn /n 6= 0 then the series diverges.

Proof. (i) If R1 ≥ 0, then for all n sufficiently large we have that

an
n − (n + 1) − cn+1 ≥ R1 ≥ 0,
an+1
P
hence Theorem 3.1 implies that the series cn an converges.
(ii) If R2 ≤ 0 and , then for all n sufficiently large
an
n − (n + 1) + cn+1 ≤ R2 ≤ 0,
an+1
P
then Theorem 3.2 implies that the series cn an diverges.

P
Theorem 4.4 (Bertrand’s test). Let cn an be a series of positive terms.
(i) If
an 1 θn + cn+1
≥1+ + ,
an+1 n n ln(n)
P
for some sequence {θn }, such that lim inf θn ≥ 1, all n sufficiently large, then cn an con-
verges.
11
 (ii) If
an 1 θn − cn+1
≤1+ + ,
an+1 n n ln(n)

Psequence {θn }, such that lim sup θn ≤ 1 all n sufficiently large and lim cn /(n ln(n)) 6=
for some
0 then cn an diverges.
Proof. (i) From the assumption we get
an
n ln(n) ≥ n ln(n) + ln(n) + cn+1 + θn ,
an+1
for all n sufficiently large. That is,
 
an n
n ln(n) − (n + 1) ln(n + 1) ≥ (n + 1) ln + θn + cn+1 ,
an+1 n+1
n


for all n sufficiently large. Since lim inf(n + 1) ln n+1 θn ≥ 0 we conclude that
an
n ln(n) − (n + 1) ln(n + 1) ≥ cn+1 ,
an+1
for all n sufficiently large. Therefore the conclusion follows from Theorem 3.1.
(ii) It suffices to note that
 
an n
n ln(n) − (n + 1) ln(n + 1) ≤ (n + 1) ln + θn − cn+1 ,
an+1 n+1
n


for all n sufficiently large. Hence, due to, lim sup(n + 1) ln n+1 θn ≤ 0, it follows that
an
n ln(n) − (n + 1) ln(n + 1) ≤ −cn+1 ,
an+1
for all n sufficiently large. The conclusion follows from Theorem 3.2 since lim cn /(n ln(n)) 6=
0.

P
Theorem 4.5 (Gauss’s test). Let cn an be a series of positive, γ ≥ 1, {θn } a bounded
sequence terms.
(i) If, for some µ ≥ 1
an cn+1 µ θn
≥1+ + + γ,
an+1 n n n
P
for all n sufficiently large, then cn an converges.
(ii) If lim cn /n 6= 0 and , for some µ < 1,
an cn+1 µ θn
≤1− + + γ,
an+1 n n n
P
for all n sufficiently large, then cn an diverges.
12
Proof. (i) From the assumption we obtain that
an θn
n − (n + 1) ≥ cn+1 + (µ − 1) + γ−1 ,
an+1 n
θn
for all n sufficiently large. Take N > 0 such that µ − 1 + nγ−1 ≥ 0 for all n > N , we concude
that
an
n − (n + 1) ≥ cn+1 ,
an+1
P
for all n > N . Therefore, Theorem 3.1 applies and implies that cn an converges.
(ii) Due to the assumptions on (ii), we have that µ − 1 < 0 and
an θn
n − (n + 1) ≤ −cn+1 + (µ − 1) + γ−1 ≤ −cn+1 ,
an+1 n
for all n sufficiently large. The conclusion follows from an applications of Theorem 3.2.

Example 4.6. Let us illustrate the use of Theorem 3.1 with a simple example. To see that
∞
X 1
n=1
n2

converges by using Theorem 3.1 we may take cn = 1/n, an = n1 , r = 1 and consider pn = 1.

For this choices it is easy see that
n+1 1 1
1 −1= ≥
n n n+1
for all n ≥ 1.
Note, however, that Theorem 2.1 is more suitable to handle this example. Let an = 1/n
and φ(n) = n2 . Hence, with pn = 1, we have that
an
pn = n − 1 ≥ 1,
aφ(n)
for all n ≥ 2.
From the comparsion test and using the ceiling function to produce φ it is easy to obtain
1/ns , whenever s > 1 and divergence (via Theorem 2.2 when s ≤ 1).
P
the convergence of
Example 4.7. Consider
∞
X en n!
.
n=1
nn
The divergence of this series may be concluded from a simple application of Theorem 3.2.
For this, let cn = 1/nn , an = en n! and consider pn = n. Since
n 1
− (n + 1) < −
e(n + 1) (n + 1)n+1
13
 diverges and lim nn 6= 0, Theorem 3.2 implies that ∞
P1 n P en n!
for all n ≥ 1, n n=1 nn
diverges.
In particular, note that for
∞
X nn
,
n=1
en n!
also diverges. In this case, it is more simple to apply Theorem 1.1 with pn = e−1 . One can
also apply Theorem 3.2-(i) with an = nn /nn , cn = e−n and pn = e.
Example 4.8. For another example of an application of Theorem 3.1, consider
∞  
X 1 1
− sin .
n=1
n n

To see that this series converges, we may take an = 1/n2 , cn = n − n2 sin n1 and consider

pn = 1 for all n. The inequality

 2  
n+1 2 1
− 1 ≥ (n + 1) − (n + 1) sin .
n n+1
holds for all n, since   
2n + 1 1
≥ (n + 1) 1 − sin .
n2 n+1
For an illustration of the use of Theorem 2.1 consider the following example.
Example 4.9.
∞  
X
2 1
1 − n sin .
n=1
n2
an
Let an = 1 − n2 sin n12 and φ(n) = n2 for all n. Since lim aφ(n)


= ∞, we may take pn = 1,
for all n ≥ 1 and conclude that
an
pn − pφ(n) ≥ 1,
aφ(n)
for all n sufficiently large. Therefore Theorem 2.1 implies that the series converges.
P
The following well-know result deals with the case when an is generated by a decreasing
sequence {an }.
Lemma 4.10. [9, p. 120](Cauchy’s condensation test ) ∞
P
n=1 an converges if, and only if,
P ∞ n n
n=1 2 a2 converges whenever {an } is a decreasing sequence of positive terms.

For a sequence {an } of decreasing positive terms, combining Lemma 4.10 with Theorem
3.1, we obtain a test for convergence.
Theorem 4.11. ∞
P
n=1 an converges if, and only if, there exists a sequence {pn } of positive
numbers such that
pn − 2pn+1 ≥ 2a2n+1 ,
for all n sufficiently large, for some r > 0.
14
Proof. By Lemma 4.10 an coverges if, and only if, 2n a2n converges. If we define an = 2n
P P
and cn = a2n+1 then, by Theorem 3.1, this last series converges if, and only if, there exists a
positive sequence {pn } such that

pn − 2pn+1 ≥ 2a2n+1 ,

for all n sufficiently large. The proof is concluded.

Example 4.12. Let {an } be summable decreasing sequence of positive real numbers. It is
well know that lim n an = 0. This result is often called Olivier’s Theorem (see page 124 of
[9, p.124] or [3]). We will show that we can obtain this asymptotic behaviour of {an } if
we omit the monotoniticy of this sequence when we consider additional assumptions on the
sequence {pn } (that on in Theorem 3.1). P
For this,
P1 consider a sequence {an } of positive real numbers. If an converges then it is
clear that n
nan also converges. From Theorem 3.1, with an = 1/n and cn = nan , we can
conclude that this last series converges if, and only if, there exists a sequence {pn } such that
n+1
pn − pn+1 ≥ (n + 1)an+1 > 0,
n
for all n sufficiently large. As so, lim nan = 0 certainly occurs when the sequence {pn } above
is such that
n+1 pn
lim pn − pn+1 = lim pn − pn+1 + = 0.
n n
For instance, we see that lim nan = 0, whenever the sequence {pn } above converges .
For more information on this asymptotic behavior we refer to [3, 10, 14] and references
therein.

Example 4.13. Recalling to the definition of `2 :

n X o
`2 = {an } ⊂ R, a2n , converges .

An immediate consequence of Theorem 3.1 is {an } ∈ `2 if, and only if, there exists a sequence
{pn } of positive numbers such that

pn an − pn+1 an+1 ≥ a2n+1 ,

for all n sufficiently large.

P
Example 4.14. Let cn an be a series of positive terms with lim cn an = 0 and α ∈ R. If

cn aα+1
n − cn+1 aα+1
n+1 ≥ cn+1 an+1 ,
P
for all n sufficiently large, then cn an converges.
Note that this is a application of Theorem 3.1, in which pn = cn aαn .
15
 The following result is known as Abel’s partial summation formula.

Lemma 4.15. [9, p. 313] If {an } and {cn } are sequences of real numbers and Ai :=
a1 + ... + ai , for all i ≥ 1 then
n+k
X n+k
X
c i ai = Ai (ci − ci+1 ) − An cn+1 + An+k cn+k+1 ,
i=n+1 i=n+1

for every n ≥ 1 and k ≥ 1.

We close the section combining Theorem 3.1 and Lemma 4.15 in order to obtain another
test for convergence of series.

Theorem 4.16. Let {an } and {cn } be sequences of positive real numbers with {cn } decreas-
ing. Suppose that
(i) lim An cn+1 exists,
(ii) There exists a sequence of positive numbers {pn } such that
An
pn − pn+1 ≥ cn+1 − cn+2 ,
An+1
P
for all n sufficiently large. Then cn an converges .

Proof. From Lemma 4.15 we know that

n+k
X n+k
X
c i ai = Ai (ci − ci−1 ) − An cn+1 + An+k cn+k+1 ,
i=n+1 i=n+1

for every n ≥ 1 and k ≥ 1.

An application of Theorem
P 3.1 will lead us to condition (ii) and this one implies the
convergence of the series Ai (ci − ci−1 ). It is now clear that an application of condition (i)
concludes the proof.

5. Concluding remarks
In this paper, we proposed and investigated extension for the Kummer’s characterization
of convergence and divergence of series. Our main focus was the study of Psummability of
subsequences of a given sequence and summability of series of the form cn an , in which
{cn } and {an } are sequences of positive real numbers.
As we have pointed out previously, the main feature of our results is that they present
(i) how a subsequence relates to the sequence (via an auxiliary sequence {pn }) in order Pto be
summable or not; (ii) how {cn } and {an } relates to each other in order to the series c n an
converges or diverges. From this relations we derived several theoretical consequences. How-
ever, we believe that more important consequences may be obtained from our results.
16
 References
[1] R.P. Agnew, Summability of subsequences, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. Volume 50, Number 8 (1944), 596-
598. 2
[2] L. Bourchtein; A. Bourchtein; G. Nornberg and C. Venzke, A Hierarchy of the Convergence Tests Related
to Cauchy’s Test. Int. Journal of Math. Analysis, Vol. 6, 2012, no. 38, 1847 - 1869. 1, 11
[3] C. P. Niculescu; F. Popovici, A note on the behavior of integrable functions at infinity. J. Math. Anal.
Appl. 381 (2011) 742-747 . 3, 9, 15
[4] R. G Cooke, Infinite matrices and sequence spaces, Macmillan, 1950. 2
[5] D. F. Dawson, Summability of subsequences and stretchings of sequences, Pacific J. Math. Volume 44,
Number 2 (1973), 455-460. 2
[6] I. Gyori,; L. Horvath, lp -solutions and stability analysis of difference equations using the Kummer’s test,
Applied Mathematics and Computation, 217 (2011) 10129–10145. 2
[7] J. Hadamard, Deux theoremes d’Abel sur la convergence des series, Acta. Math., 27 (1903), 177-183. 2
[8] F. R. Keogh, G. M. Petersen Riez summability of subsequences, Q. J. Math (1961) 12 (1): 33-44. 2
[9] K. Knopp, Theory and application of infinite series, Blackie & Son Limited, London and Glascow, 1954.
1, 2, 3, 5, 9, 11, 14, 15, 16
[10] E. Liflyanda, S. Tikhonovb, M. Zeltserc, Extending tests for convergence of number series. J. Math.
Anal. Appl., 377 (2011) 194-206. 15
[11] J. Muscat, Functional Analysis An Introduction to Metric Spaces, Hilbert Spaces, and Banach Algebras,
Springer, 2014. 2
[12] Zbigniew Nitecki Cantorvals and Subsum Sets of Null Sequences 2
[13] C. P. Niculescu, F. Popovici, A note on the behavior of integrable functions at infinity, J. Math. Anal.
Appl. 381 (2011) 742-747.
[14] T. Sálat, V. Tomma, A Classical Olivier’s Theorem and Statistical Convergence, Annales
mathématiques Blaise Pascal, Vol. 10, (2003) 305-313 3, 9, 15
[15] J. Tong, Kummer’sTest Gives Characterizations for Convergence or Divergence of all Positive Series,
The American Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 101, No. 5 (1994), 450-452. 1, 2

17

View publication stats