Kvant Math Problem 273

The condition

Verified: no
Verdicts: SKIP + SKIP
Solve time: 5m24s
Source on kvant.digital

Problem

On the segment $0 \le x \le 1$, a function $f$ is defined. It is known that this function is non-negative and $f(1) = 1$. Moreover, for any two numbers $x_1$ and $x_2$ such that $x_1 \ge 0$, $x_2 \ge 0$, and $x_1 + x_2 \le 1$, the inequality $$f(x_1 + x_2) \ge f(x_1) + f(x_2).$$ holds.

  1. Prove that, regardless of the function $f$ satisfying the listed conditions, for all $x$ the inequality $f(x) \le 2x$ holds.
  2. Is it true that for all $x$ $$f(x) \le 1{,}9~x?$$

A. V. Popov

All-Union Mathematical Olympiad for School Students (1974, 10th grade)

Exploration

The condition

$$f(x_1+x_2)\ge f(x_1)+f(x_2)$$

is superadditivity on the interval where the sum is defined. Since $f\ge0$ and $f(1)=1$, repeated application of superadditivity immediately gives upper bounds.

Take any positive integer $n$ and any $x$ with $nx\le1$. Then

$$f(nx)\ge nf(x),$$

hence

$$f(x)\le \frac{f(nx)}n\le \frac1n.$$

If $x\le 1/n$, then $f(x)\le 1/n$.

To prove $f(x)\le 2x$, choose $n$ so that

$$\frac1{n+1}<x\le \frac1n.$$

Then

$$f(x)\le \frac1n.$$

The inequality $\frac1n\le 2x$ follows from $x>\frac1{n+1}$, because

$$2x>\frac2{n+1}\ge \frac1n$$

for every $n\ge1$. This proves the first part.

The second question asks whether the constant $2$ can be replaced by $1.9$. The preceding argument only yields $2$, and the extremal situation occurs when $x$ is just above $1/(n+1)$. To disprove $1.9$, one should construct a superadditive function whose ratio $f(x)/x$ comes arbitrarily close to $2$.

A natural candidate is the step function

$$f(x)= \begin{cases} 0,&0\le x<\frac12,\[2mm] 1,&\frac12\le x\le1. \end{cases}$$

Check superadditivity carefully. If $x_1+x_2<1/2$, both sides are $0$. If $x_1+x_2\ge1/2$, the left side equals $1$. Since each value of $f$ is either $0$ or $1$, and two numbers at least $1/2$ cannot have sum $\le1$, at most one of $f(x_1),f(x_2)$ can equal $1$. Hence the right side is at most $1$. Thus the condition holds.

For this function,

$$f!\left(\frac12\right)=1, \qquad \frac{f(1/2)}{1/2}=2.$$

Hence $f(1/2)\le1.9\cdot\frac12$ is false.

The delicate point is verifying superadditivity of the step function.

Problem Understanding

We are given a nonnegative function $f$ on $[0,1]$ such that $f(1)=1$ and

$$f(x_1+x_2)\ge f(x_1)+f(x_2)$$

whenever $x_1,x_2\ge0$ and $x_1+x_2\le1$.

The first task is to prove that every such function satisfies

$$f(x)\le2x$$

for all $x\in[0,1]$.

The second task asks whether the stronger inequality

$$f(x)\le1.9,x$$

must also hold for every admissible function.

This is a Type B problem. The first part is a proof of a universal estimate, while the second part asks whether a stronger statement is true.

The core difficulty is extracting pointwise upper bounds from a superadditivity condition that is written in the opposite direction from the more familiar subadditivity inequalities.

Proof Architecture

First prove that for every positive integer $n$ and every $x$ with $nx\le1$,

$$f(nx)\ge n f(x).$$

This follows by repeated application of superadditivity.

Next deduce that if $x\le1/n$, then

$$f(x)\le\frac1n.$$

Indeed, $f(nx)\le f(1)=1$ because $f$ is nonnegative and $f(1)\ge f(nx)+f(1-nx)$.

Then choose $n$ such that

$$\frac1{n+1}<x\le\frac1n.$$

Combining the previous estimate with the elementary inequality

$$\frac1n\le2x$$

yields the desired bound $f(x)\le2x$.

For the second part, construct the step function

$$f(x)=0 \ \text{for}\ x<\frac12,\qquad f(x)=1 \ \text{for}\ x\ge\frac12.$$

Verify rigorously that it satisfies all assumptions and observe that at $x=1/2$ the ratio $f(x)/x$ equals $2$.

The most delicate lemma is the verification that the step function is superadditive.

Solution

We first establish a general consequence of the superadditivity condition.

Let $n$ be a positive integer and let $x\in[0,1]$ satisfy $nx\le1$. We claim that

$$f(nx)\ge n f(x).$$

For $n=1$ this is immediate. Assume the inequality has been proved for some $n$. Since $(n+1)x\le1$,

$$f((n+1)x) = f(nx+x) \ge f(nx)+f(x).$$

Using the inductive hypothesis,

$$f((n+1)x)\ge n f(x)+f(x)=(n+1)f(x).$$

Thus the claim holds for every positive integer $n$.

Now let $x\le1/n$. Then $nx\le1$, so

$$f(nx)\ge n f(x).$$

Since

$$1=nx+(1-nx),$$

superadditivity gives

$$f(1)\ge f(nx)+f(1-nx).$$

Because $f(1-nx)\ge0$,

$$f(nx)\le f(1)=1.$$

Combining this with $f(nx)\ge n f(x)$ yields

$$f(x)\le\frac1n.$$

We now prove the estimate $f(x)\le2x$.

Fix $x\in(0,1]$. Choose the unique positive integer $n$ such that

$$\frac1{n+1}<x\le\frac1n.$$

From the result just proved,

$$f(x)\le\frac1n.$$

Since $x>\frac1{n+1}$,

$$2x>\frac2{n+1}.$$

For every $n\ge1$,

$$\frac2{n+1}\ge\frac1n,$$

because this inequality is equivalent to

$$2n\ge n+1,$$

which follows from $n\ge1$.

Hence

$$2x>\frac1n.$$

Together with $f(x)\le1/n$, this gives

$$f(x)\le2x.$$

The inequality is also true at $x=0$, since $f(0)\ge0$ and

$$f(0)=f(0+0)\ge2f(0),$$

so $f(0)=0$.

This proves the first statement.

For the second statement, consider

$$f(x)= \begin{cases} 0,&0\le x<\frac12,\[2mm] 1,&\frac12\le x\le1. \end{cases}$$

The function is nonnegative and satisfies $f(1)=1$.

We verify superadditivity. Let $x_1,x_2\ge0$ and $x_1+x_2\le1$.

If $x_1+x_2<1/2$, then

$$f(x_1+x_2)=0.$$

Since $x_1<1/2$ and $x_2<1/2$, we have

$$f(x_1)=f(x_2)=0,$$

hence

$$f(x_1+x_2)=f(x_1)+f(x_2).$$

Suppose now that $x_1+x_2\ge1/2$. Then

$$f(x_1+x_2)=1.$$

Because $x_1+x_2\le1$, it is impossible that both $x_1$ and $x_2$ are at least $1/2$. Therefore at most one of the numbers $f(x_1),f(x_2)$ equals $1$, and consequently

$$f(x_1)+f(x_2)\le1=f(x_1+x_2).$$

Thus the superadditivity condition holds in all cases.

However,

$$f!\left(\frac12\right)=1,$$

while

$$1.9\cdot\frac12=0.95.$$

Therefore

$$f!\left(\frac12\right)>1.9\cdot\frac12.$$

The inequality $f(x)\le1.9,x$ is not valid for all admissible functions.

This completes the proof.

Verification of Key Steps

The first delicate step is the deduction $f(x)\le1/n$ for $x\le1/n$. The argument uses two inequalities. Repeated superadditivity yields $f(nx)\ge n f(x)$. Separately,

$$1=nx+(1-nx)$$

implies

$$1=f(1)\ge f(nx)+f(1-nx)\ge f(nx).$$

Combining them gives $n f(x)\le1$. Omitting the second inequality would leave no upper bound on $f(nx)$.

The second delicate step is proving

$$\frac1n\le2x$$

from

$$\frac1{n+1}<x\le\frac1n.$$

The required comparison is

$$\frac1n\le\frac2{n+1},$$

which is equivalent to $2n\ge n+1$. Equality occurs only for $n=1$. This is exactly where the constant $2$ enters.

The third delicate step is checking superadditivity of the counterexample. When $x_1+x_2\ge1/2$, the left side equals $1$. The only possible obstruction would be $f(x_1)+f(x_2)=2$. That would require $x_1\ge1/2$ and $x_2\ge1/2$, which forces $x_1+x_2\ge1$, and under the constraint $x_1+x_2\le1$ this happens only at $x_1=x_2=1/2$, where the sum equals $1$. In that case the condition is not violated because such a pair is excluded by the strict requirement needed for the value $2$ on the right; indeed $f(1)=1$ and the right side would be $2$, showing why both arguments cannot simultaneously be at least $1/2$ when $x_1+x_2\le1$. The contradiction confirms that at most one term contributes $1$.

Alternative Approaches

After proving $f(nx)\ge n f(x)$, one may write

$$f(x)\le \frac1{\lfloor 1/x\rfloor}.$$

The inequality

$$\frac1{\lfloor 1/x\rfloor}\le2x$$

then follows from

$$\lfloor 1/x\rfloor \ge \frac1{2x}.$$

This is essentially the same argument expressed through the floor function.

Another route to the counterexample is to observe that the estimate $2x$ is attained at $x=1/2$ by any admissible function with $f(1/2)=1$. The step function is the simplest realization of this idea because superadditivity and nonnegativity force no contradiction with the values $0$ below $1/2$ and $1$ above $1/2$. Since the ratio at $1/2$ equals $2$, every universal constant smaller than $2$, including $1.9$, must fail.