Abstract
We present a canonical series expansion for generalized harmonic functions in the open unit disc in the complex plane that generalizes that recently obtained for the class of -harmonic functions.
AMS Subject Classifications:
1. Introduction
Denote by the open unit disc in the complex plane and by and the usual complex partial derivatives. We shall consider second order partial differential operators of the form (1) (1) where are complex parameters. Of particular concern are solutions to the homogeneous equation (2) (2) A function u is said to be -harmonic if u is twice continuously differentiable in and satisfies Equation (Equation2(2) (2) ). Recall the Pochhammer symbol defined by for and . Commonly referred to below is the familiar Gaussian or hypergeometric function (3) (3) where and . A recent publication together with Olofsson [Citation1] concerned a series expansion for -harmonic functions in , or -harmonic for short, as they have been called in the case r = pq. Footnote1,Footnote2,Footnote3
As was shown in Theorem 5.1 of that paper, a function u in is -harmonic if and only if it has the form (4) (4) for some sequence of complex numbers such that The sums appearing in (Equation4(4) (4) ) are absolutely convergent in the space of smooth functions, by which we mean , where is the space of n-times continuously differentiable functions in for . The space is complete in the topology induced by the semi-norms where are non-negative integers and is a compact subset of .
In this paper we extend these ideas and show that a similar such result holds for -harmonic functions. For this purpose, we follow earlier practice and introduce the m-th homogeneous part for a suitably smooth function u in and define it by the formula (5) (5) for .
We show that (see Theorem 4.3) the m-th homogeneous part of a -harmonic function u in has the form for some when is a non-negative integer. The parameters and of the hypergeometric function F in this expression are the zeros of the quadratic polynomial (6) (6) The discriminant of this polynomial can be written as (7) (7) Note that the zeros of the polynomial in (Equation6(6) (6) ) are and m−q in the case when r = pq.
A similar formula is given for the m-th homogeneous part of a -harmonic function when is a negative integer. These two results rely on the conclusion (Theorem 2.4) that for each of the homogeneous parts of a -harmonic function, there exist complex numbers , perhaps depending on , such that with equality in . As a consequence, we will have that the m-th homogeneous part of a -harmonic function is also harmonic in the former meaning of the word, or -harmonic, for some . This will allow us to apply many of the results achieved in [Citation1], and leads to the conclusion (Theorem 5.1) that a function u in is -harmonic if and only if it has the form (8) (8) for some sequence of complex numbers such that As for the particular case r = pq, the sums in (Equation8(8) (8) ) are shown to converge absolutely in the space . This series characterization depends on a result concerning the asymptotic behaviour of the m-th homogeneous parts of a -harmonic function. We show (see Theorem 4.6) that for all and compact. This result allows us to apply the root test for absolute convergence of the function series in .
Further modelling on previous cases also shows (see Theorem 3.4) that This result retrieves that obtained for the hypergeometric functions associated with the m-th homogeneous parts of -harmonic functions (see [Citation1], Theorem 2.6).
In this paper we have pursued the course of Olofsson with particular reference to [Citation1,Citation2]. We also refer to [Citation3] by Olofsson and Wittsten. Other related sources include those of Wittsten [Citation4] or Wittsten and Carlsson [Citation5]. We also refer to Li with collaborators [Citation6,Citation7]. The case r = pq has also been treated by Ahern, Bruna and Cascante [Citation8], who traced the corresponding class of operators for this particular case to Geller [Citation9]. Related studies are also found in connection with conductivity problems, including Calderón [Citation10] or Astala and Päivärinta [Citation11]. Borichev and Hedenmalm also established a connection to polyharmonic theory [Citation12]. Early traces also leads to Garabedian [Citation13]. Connections to Bose-Einstein condensates and harmonic traps are found in Kling [Citation14], as briefly mentioned in the concluding remarks.
2. Preliminaries and basic constructions
A function u in is said to be homogeneous of order with respect to rotations if it has the property for . In particular, we will consider such functions of the form (9) (9) for some and . Denote by (10) (10) the ordinary hypergeometric differential operator, where are complex parameters. This operator is associated with the familiar ordinary hypergeometric differential equation and takes the form in terms of the operator .
We will need the following result, and refer to [Citation1], Theorem 2.1, for details.
Theorem 2.1
Let be as in (Equation1(1) (1) ) for some . Let u be a function of the form (Equation9(9) (9) ) for some and . Then where c = m + 1 and (11) (11)
Equation (Equation11(11) (11) ) tells us that a and b are the zeros of the quadratic polynomial in (Equation6(6) (6) ). We denote these two zeros by and , and get the following construction of -harmonic functions.
Proposition 2.2
Let . Consider the function (12) (12) where and F is the hypergeometric function (Equation3(3) (3) ) with parameters being the zeros of the polynomial in (Equation6(6) (6) ). Then is a -harmonic function.
Proof.
It is clear that . It is also known that the hypergeometric function satisfies the hypergeometric equation . The result now follows by Theorem 2.1.
We compare the last result with Proposition 2.2 in [Citation1]. We also refer to [Citation15], Section 2.3, for more on the hypergeometric equation and its solutions.
Corollary 2.3
Let . Consider the function where and F is the hypergeometric function (Equation3(3) (3) ) with parameters being the zeros of the polynomial in (Equation6(6) (6) ). Then is a -harmonic function.
Proof.
Consider the conjugated expression By Proposition 2.2 we have that is a -harmonic function. It is then straightforward to check using the definition in (Equation1(1) (1) ) that is a -harmonic function.
For coming purposes, we introduce the quadratic polynomial (13) (13) Note that the polynomials and have the same discriminant (Equation7(7) (7) ).
We also state that a function is homogeneous of order with respect to rotations if and only if it has the form (Equation9(9) (9) ) for some , with care taken at the origin in the case that u is less smooth. We refer the reader to the fourth section of [Citation16] and Theorem 4.2 for a more elaborative discussion.
Theorem 2.4
Let and let . Let be homogeneous of order m with respect to rotations. Then there exist complex numbers such that (14) (14) Particularly, the complex numbers (15) (15) where μ is a zero of the polynomial in (Equation13(13) (13) ), are admissible for (Equation14(14) (14) ).
Proof.
By the comments preceding this statement we can write on the form for some . By Theorem 2.1 we have that (16) (16) where satisfy the system of equations in (Equation11(11) (11) ) and c = m + 1. This means that (17) (17) for satisfying (18) (18) In vector terms, we can express the general solution to this system of equations as (19) (19) This can be seen by noticing that the complex vector on the left of this expression is in the orthogonal complement of the set formed by the two vectors and . We can then let in (Equation19(19) (19) ) for a quadratic equation in μ that is satisfied by the zeros of the polynomial in (Equation13(13) (13) ). This gives the conclusion of the statement.
The relations in (Equation18(18) (18) ) can be retrieved from (Equation15(15) (15) ) and the polynomial in the form of by noticing that (20) (20) We also note that every triple of complex numbers of the form (Equation19(19) (19) ) is admissible for (Equation17(17) (17) ). However, the statement of Theorem (2.4) as it stands will do for our purposes, and we will proceed accordingly.
We will need the following result and refer to [Citation1], Theorem 2.4, for details. We also remind the reader that the naming convention -harmonic is an adaptation to our situation and stems from the terminology used in the particular case r = pq, in which case the -harmonic functions are simply called -harmonic.
Theorem 2.5
Let and . Let be homogeneous of order m with respect to rotations. Then u is -harmonic if and only if it has the form (21) (21) for some , where F is the hypergeometric function (Equation3(3) (3) ).
The last Theorem adapted to the general situation reads as follows.
Theorem 2.6
Let and . Let be homogeneous of order m with respect to rotations. Then u is -harmonic if and only if it has the form for some , where F is the hypergeometric function (Equation3(3) (3) ) with parameters being the zeros of the polynomial in (Equation6(6) (6) ).
Proof.
The ”if” part of this statement is a consequence of Proposition 2.2. For the converse, let be a -harmonic function homogeneous of order m with respect to rotations. Let be of the form (Equation15(15) (15) ) for some such that , with the latter defined as in (Equation13(13) (13) ). Then Theorem 2.4 tells us that From Theorem 2.5, we have that for some . Note that and are the zeros of the quadratic polynomial Recall the expression for in the form of (Equation20(20) (20) ). From this expression, we get that for as above. This shows that and define the same polynomial, where is the polynomial in (Equation6(6) (6) ). We conclude with the statement of this theorem.
The next result gives an indication of how we will proceed in view of the comments made in the introduction and was given in [Citation1], Theorem 3.2.
Theorem 2.7
Let be a sequence in such that for and 0<r<1. Set for . Then for all and compact.
3. Asymptotics
The space of analytic functions in is topologized in the usual manner using the semi-norms (22) (22) for compact. We refer to convergence in as normal convergence in , and say that a subset of is normal if every sequence of functions of has a subsequence which converges in . The limit function is not required to belong to .
Within our context, the Binomial series is suitably expressed in terms of the hypergeometric function (Equation3(3) (3) ) as (23) (23) for .
On a last note before we proceed, we also refer to Conway [Citation17], Theorem VII.2.9, for Montel's Theorem, characterizing normal families of analytic functions.
Lemma 3.1
Let . Consider the functions for , where F is the hypergeometric function (Equation3(3) (3) ) with parameters being the zeros of the polynomial in (Equation6(6) (6) ). Then is a normal family of analytic functions in .
Proof.
We will show that the functions in are uniformly bounded on compact subsets of . An application of Montel's Theorem then gives the conclusion of the lemma. Let be compact and let be such that . It is straightforward to check that (24) (24) where . This gives us for . Applying the triangle inequality to this expression grants for . Choose N>0 such that for m>N. Then for m>N and . Note that where . By the last inequality we get that (25) (25) for when m>N. This shows that the family is uniformly bounded on compact subsets . Indeed, by another application of the triangle inequality, we get from Equation (Equation25(25) (25) ) that for and m>N, where the last equality follows by the binomial series in (Equation23(23) (23) ).
In the particular case when are such that and r = 0, we obtain the following asymptotic bound for the sequence in Lemma 3.1.
Proposition 3.2
Let be such that and let r = 0. Let be the normal family in Lemma 3.1. Then there is N>0 such that for m>N.
Proof.
From (Equation24(24) (24) ) we see that for . We can choose N>0 such that for m>N. Following a similar line of argument to that in Lemma 3.1, we obtain for when m>N. Use of the triangle inequality then shows that for and m>N.
The last two results are modelled on Lemma 2.5 in [Citation1].
We mention here briefly that the restriction on the parameters appears naturally in the -harmonic Dirichlet boundary value problem: (26) (26) where φ is a given function continuous on the unit circle and with as in (Equation1(1) (1) ). It can be shown that this problem admits a solution in terms of a Poisson type integral that includes the classical case corresponding to p = q = 0, in which case the operator reduces to that of Laplace. For the statement of this result, we define the -harmonic Poisson kernel by (27) (27) Let be such that . Associated with this kernel is the -harmonic Poisson integral (28) (28) defined for integrable functions on , where
Theorem 3.3
Let be such that . Let . Then a function u in satisfies (Equation26(26) (26) ) if and only if it has the form
We refer to [Citation1–3] for proofs and more on the Dirichlet problem. We should also mention that our definition of the kernel in (Equation27(27) (27) ) differs slightly from that given in [Citation1], where this function is instead denoted and . We have chosen to do so for the underscoring of certain relations between the more familiar elements associated with -harmonics that we will give later on (Theorem 5.3).
To proceed, we give the following limit theorem for the family in Lemma 3.1, the proof details of which agrees in form to the proof of Theorem 2.6 in [Citation1].
Theorem 3.4
Let . Then (29) (29) with normal convergence, where F is the hypergeometric function (Equation3(3) (3) ) with parameters being the zeros of the polynomial in (Equation6(6) (6) ).
Proof.
Let the sequence of functions be as in Lemma 3.1. From Lemma 3.1 we have that the set is a normal family. From (Equation3(3) (3) ) we see that (30) (30) for . Recall that the Pochhammer symbol is a monic polynomial of degree n. In passing to the limit we obtain (31) (31) for . From (Equation23(23) (23) ) we have that for , where A standard argument invoking Lemma 3.1 now gives that in as . We refer the reader to [Citation1], Theorem 2.6, for details.
We end this section with the following result, related to the asymptotic behaviour of the m-th homogeneous parts of a -harmonic function, as further described in Theorem 4.6.
Proposition 3.5
Let . Then for and 0<r<1, where F is the hypergeometric function (Equation3(3) (3) ) with parameters being the zeros of the polynomial in (Equation6(6) (6) ).
Proof.
We note that the complex derivative is continuous in the topology of normal convergence of analytic functions. In view of this and Montel's Theorem, the proposition now follows from Theorem 3.4.
This last result should be compared with Proposition 3.3 in [Citation1].
4. Homogeneous parts of the generalized harmonic function
We will need the following result and refer to [Citation1], Proposition 4.1, for details.
Proposition 4.1
Let be the m-th homogeneous part of for some , where . Then and is homogeneous of order m with respect to rotations.
The next result shows that each of the homogeneous parts of a -harmonic function is also -harmonic.
Proposition 4.2
Let . Let u be a -harmonic function and denote by its m-th homogeneous part for some . Then is -harmonic.
Proof.
The proof is identical in form to Proposition 4.2, [Citation1]. We leave out the details.
The reader is asked to compare the following discussion to that of the fourth section in [Citation1].
Theorem 4.3
Let . Let u be a -harmonic function and denote by its m-th homogeneous part for some . Then (32) (32) for some , where F is the hypergeometric function (Equation3(3) (3) ) with parameters being the zeros of the polynomial in (Equation6(6) (6) ).
Proof.
By Proposition 4.1, the function is homogeneous of order m with respect to rotations. By Proposition 4.2 the function is -harmonic. An application of Theorem 2.6 now gives the conclusion of this statement.
Corollary 4.4
Let . Let u be a -harmonic function and denote by its m-th homogeneous part for some . Then (33) (33) for some , where F is the hypergeometric function (Equation3(3) (3) ) with parameters being the zeros of the polynomial in (Equation6(6) (6) ).
Proof.
The complex conjugate is the -th homogeneous part of the function . It is straightforward to check that is a -harmonic function from the definition in (Equation1(1) (1) ). From Theorem 4.3 we have that for some . A complex conjugation now yields (Equation33(33) (33) ) with .
It is also clear from Theorem 4.3 and Corollary 4.4 that for if u is -harmonic. We will now proceed with summation of the homogeneous parts of a -harmonic function. From the triangle inequality we have that (34) (34) for 0<r<1 and .
Lemma 4.5
Let . Let u be a -harmonic function and consider its m-th homogeneous part for . Let be as in (Equation32(32) (32) ) or (Equation33(33) (33) ) depending on whether or . Then .
Proof.
Let and let 0<r<1. From Theorem 4.3 and (Equation34(34) (34) ) we have that (35) (35) for . From Theorem 3.4 we have that Therefore, a passage to the limit in (Equation35(35) (35) ) gives that Since 0<r<1 was arbitrarily chosen we conclude that . The case follows by a similar argument to that above. We conclude with the statement of this lemma.
Theorem 4.6
Let . Let u be a -harmonic function and denote by its m-th homogeneous part for . Then for and for all and compact.
Proof.
Recall Theorem 4.3 and Corollary 4.4. In the case of , Proposition 3.5 and Lemma 4.5 applies for the fulfilment of the assumptions in Theorem 2.7. An application of Theorem 2.7 shows that for and compact.
This last argument can also be applied to the case of negative integer values by noting that is the -th homogeneous part of the -harmonic function .
Corollary 4.7
Let . Let u be a -harmonic function with m-th homogeneous part for . Then the function series is absolutely convergent in .
Proof.
Theorem 4.6 allows us to apply the root test to conclude that for and compact.
We will need the following lemma due to Fejér and refer the reader to [Citation1], Lemma 4.8, and Katznelson [Citation18], Section I.2, for proofs and a more elaborative description.
Lemma 4.8
Let for some and denote by its m-th homogeneous part for . Then in .
We now show that -harmonic functions are in fact smooth.
Corollary 4.9
Let . Let u be a -harmonic function. Then and in , where is the m-th homogeneous part of u for .
Proof.
From Lemma 4.8 we have that (36) (36) in . From Corollary 4.7 we know that the function series is absolutely convergent in . Following a standard argument we can do away with the convergence factors in (Equation36(36) (36) ) and deduce that in .
5. Series representations for generalized harmonic functions
We are now in a position to give the following function series representation for -harmonic functions.
Theorem 5.1
Let . Then u is a -harmonic function if and only if it has the form (37) (37) for some sequence of complex numbers such that (38) (38) where F is the hypergeometric function (Equation3(3) (3) ) with parameters being the zeros of the polynomial in (Equation6(6) (6) ). Moreover, the sums in (Equation37(37) (37) ) are absolutely convergent in when (Equation38(38) (38) ) holds.
Proof.
Let be a sequence of complex numbers satisfying (Equation38(38) (38) ). Set (39) (39) for and (40) (40) for . Consider the formal -harmonic series expression on of the form (41) (41) From Theorem 2.7 and Proposition 3.5 we have that for and compact. The root test now applies to show that the series in (Equation41(41) (41) ) is absolutely convergent in , and we can write (Equation41(41) (41) ) with equality. Since our series converges in , we have that . From Proposition 2.2 and Corollary 2.3 we have that each term is -harmonic. An evaluation of u in (Equation41(41) (41) ) with respect to the operator shows that u is a -harmonic function. This gives the first part of the statement.
For the converse, let u be a -harmonic function and denote by its m-th homogeneous part. From Theorem 4.3 and Corollary 4.4 we know the form of each of the functions for and as given in (Equation39(39) (39) ) and (Equation40(40) (40) ), respectively. From Corollary 4.9 we have (Equation37(37) (37) ) in the form in . By Corollary 4.7, this sum converges absolutely in . From Lemma 4.5 we have that (Equation38(38) (38) ) holds.
We note that Theorem 5.1 generalizes Theorem 5.1 in [Citation1], which in turn is an improvement of Ahern, Bruna and Cascante's Theorem 2.1 in [Citation8] when specialized to the current setting. Theorem 5.1 also includes Theorem 1.2 in Olofsson and Wittsten [Citation3], and Theorem 2.2 in Olofsson [Citation2].
We claim that it is possible to retrieve a formula for the expansion coefficients appearing in (Equation37(37) (37) ). We will not delve into the details of this topic however, and instead refer to the fifth section of [Citation1]. The form in which the series expansion appears below can be deduced from the results of this section following a slight change of wording. We will content ourselves with stating the result.
Theorem 5.2
Let . Let u be a -harmonic function. Then (42) (42) where F is the hypergeometric function (Equation3(3) (3) ) with parameters being the zeros of the polynomial in (Equation6(6) (6) ).
Note that the last result also settles the question on uniqueness of the series representation.
On a side note and before we conclude, we also wish to include an alternative form of the series representation in (Equation42(42) (42) ), valid in the restriction to -harmonic functions. In particular, we show that the hypergeometric function in (Equation21(21) (21) ) can be retrieved from the -harmonic Poisson kernel in (Equation27(27) (27) ) and the basic elements of -harmonic functions via integration of their product over . This peculiar integral representation is given by (43) (43) for and . Although we have found no natural fit for this formula, it can be applied to retrieve some of the earlier results, such as Theorem 6.6 in [Citation1]. We also note here that the hypergeometric function appearing under the integral sign in (Equation43(43) (43) ) regularly occurs in α-harmonic theory, for which we refer to [Citation3], where instances of this formula also appears. We have chosen the following form for this representation, where we consider as functions on .
Theorem 5.3
Let . Let u be a -harmonic function. Then for , where is the -harmonic Poisson kernel in (Equation27(27) (27) ) and F is the hypergeometric function in (Equation3(3) (3) ).
Proof.
We will give the formula in (Equation43(43) (43) ). The statement then follows from Theorem 5.4 in [Citation1]. By Euler's transformation formula for hypergeometric functions (see [Citation15], Theorem 2.2.5), we can write for and . The hypergeometric function on the right of this expression is given by for and . Note that for . We also recall that Following an application of Parseval's formula, we obtain for and . Another use of Euler's transformation formula gives that for . This gives the formula in (Equation43(43) (43) ).
6. Final remarks
Questions concerning the class of second order differential operators in (Equation1(1) (1) ) and the mapping of this class onto the subclass of hypergeometric operators as determined through in accordance with Theorem 2.1, has led us to Theorem 2.4. It was this identification of elements in the underlying parameter space of the operator class in (Equation1(1) (1) ), with elements in the underlying parameter realm of the subclass , that allowed us to recycle the developments in [Citation1] concerned with the latter. This made possible the short cut in the upgrade from two degrees of freedom to three, and the generalization of Theorem 5.1 in [Citation1] as presented in Theorem 5.1. We will maintain our interest for the operator class in (Equation1(1) (1) ) and its corresponding class of hypergeometric operators.
We also briefly discussed the associated Dirichlet boundary value problem for the case r = pq, and mentioned in section two that a solution to this problem has been obtained in terms of a Poisson type integral [Citation1–3,Citation8]. The case considered here in the addition of a third parameter is left open and we are unmindful of any such formulas.
As mentioned in the concluding remarks of [Citation1], earlier work also concerns pointwise boundary limits, Green functions and Lipschitz continuity of generalized harmonic functions [Citation16,Citation19,Citation20].
Before we finish, we also give a (formal) version of the operator class (Equation1(1) (1) ) in polar terms, and consider the expression The homogeneous equation associated with this class of operators for the particular choice of and corresponds to We compare the form of this equation to that associated with harmonic traps in connection with Bose-Einstein condensates, as laid out in the third chapter of Kling [Citation14].Footnote4
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1 It is the author's opinion that the results of this paper should be viewed as an application of the methods presented in [Citation1], and be attributed as such. For this very reason, the author has chosen to preserve the earlier format to any suitable extent, and the reader is advised to consult the former text for reference. The author has also tried to highlight the connection between the two whenever applicable, and where a comparison can be made between the special and the more general.
2 The author wishes to thank Anders Olofsson for his constructive criticism of the manuscript.
3 The author would like to thank the referee for a thorough reading of the text.
4 The author thanks Felix Tellander for drawing his attention to this source.
References
- Klintborg M, Olofsson A. A series expansion for generalized harmonic functions. Anal Math Phys. 2021;11:122.
- Olofsson A. Differential operators for a scale of poisson type kernels in the unit disc. J Anal Math. 2014;123:227–249.
- Olofsson A, Wittsten J. Poisson integrals for standard weighted Laplacians in the unit disc. J Math Soc Japan. 2013;65:447–486.
- Wittsten J. Generalized axially symmetric potentials with distributional boundary values. Bull Sci Math. 2015;139:892–922.
- Carlsson M, Wittsten J. The Dirichlet problem for standard weighted Laplacians in the upper half plane. J Math Anal Appl. 2016;436:868–889.
- Li P, Wang X. Lipschitz continuity of α-harmonic functions. Hokkaido Math J. 2019;48:85–97.
- Li P, Wang X, Xiao Q. Several properties of α-harmonic functions in the unit disk. Monatsh Math. 2017;184:627–640.
- Ahern P, Bruna J, Cascante C. Hp-theory for generalized M-harmonic functions in the unit ball. Indiana Univ Math J. 1996;45:103–135.
- Geller D. Some results in Hp theory for the Heisenberg group. Duke Math J. 1980;47:365–390.
- Calderón AP. On an inverse boundary value problem. Seminar on Numerical Analysis and its Applications to Continuum Physics (Rio de Janeiro, 1980), 65–73, Soc. Brasil. Mat., Rio de Janeiro; 1980. Reprinted in Comput. Appl. Math. 2006;25:133–138.
- Astala K, Päivärinta L. Calderón's inverse conductivity problem in the plane. Ann Math. 2006;163:265–299.
- Borichev A, Hedenmalm H. Weighted integrability of polyharmonic functions. Adv Math. 2014;264:464–505.
- Garabedian PR. A partial differential equation arising in conformal mapping. Pacific J Math. 1951;1:485–524.
- S. Kling. Diploma thesis. Berlin: Freie Universität; 2005.
- Andrews GE, Askey R, Roy R. Special functions. Encyclopedia Math. Appl. Vol. 71. Cambridge University Press; 1999.
- Olofsson A. On a weighted harmonic Green function and a theorem of littlewood. Bull Sci Math. 2020;158:102809.
- Conway JB. Functions of one complex variable. 2nd ed. Vol. 11. Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Berlin (NY): Springer-Verlag; 1978.
- Katznelson Y. An introduction to harmonic analysis. (3rd ed., Cambridge Mathematical Library). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2004.
- Behm G. Solving Poisson's equation for the standard weighted Laplacian in the unit disc; 2014. arXiv:1306.2199v2 [math.AP].
- Olofsson A. Lipschitz continuity for weighted harmonic functions in the unit disc. Complex Var Elliptic Equ. 2020;65:1630–1660.