arxiv: v1 [math.ca] 2 Nov 2012

Transcription

1 Completely monotone functions - a digest Milan Merkle arxiv:2.9v [math.ca] 2 Nov 22 Abstract. This work has a purpose to collect selected facts about the completely monotone CMfunctions thatcan befound in books andpapers devoted to different areas of mathematics. We opted for lesser known ones, and for those which may help determining whether or not a given function is completely monotone. In particular, we emphasize the role of representation of a CM function as the Laplace transform of a measure, and we present and discuss a little known connection with log-conveity. Some of presented methods are illustrated by several eamples involving Gamma and related functions. MSC2: 26A48, 44A, 6E7, 26A5, 33B5 Key words and phrases: Laplace transform, Measure, Infinitely divisible, Gamma function, Logarithmic conveity. Introduction Apositive function defined on,+ ofthe classc, such that the sequence of its derivatives alternates signs at every point, is called completely monotone CM. A brief search in MathSciNet reveals total of 286 items that mention this class of functions in the title from 932 till the end of the year 2; 98 of them have been published since the beginning of 26. This vintage topic was developed in 92 s/3 s by S. Bernstein, F. Hausdorff and V. Widder, originally with relation to so called moment problem, cf. [3, 3, 4, 26, 27]. The much cited but perhaps not that much read Widder s book [28] contains a detailed account on properties of CM functions and their characterizations. The second volume of Feller s probability book [8] discusses CM functions through their relationship with infinitely divisible measures, which are fundamental in defining Lévy processes. In past several decades, Lévy processes have gained popularity in financial models, as well as in biology and physics; this is probably a reason for increased interest in CM functions, too. There are also other interesting topics in Probability and Statistics where CM functions play a role, see [6] for one such topic. Aside from probability and measure theory, CM and related functions appear in the field of approimations of functions, as documented in the book [6] of 27. Finally, they are naturally linked to various inequalities; several general inequalities for CM functions can be found in [7], for a quite recent contribution in this area see [2]. This tet has a purpose to collect well known facts about the CM functions, together with some less known ones, which may help determining whether or not a given function is completely monotone. In that sense, this work can be thought of as being an etension and supplement to another paper in the same spirit [24] by Miller and Samko. In particular, we emphasize the role of representation of a CM function as a Laplace transform of a measure, and we present and discuss a little known and even less being used connection between CM function and log-conveity. Some of methods discussed in sections 2 5 are illustrated by several eamples involving Gamma and related functions in Section 6. References and eamples reflect author s preferences, and are by no means complete; the same can be said for the selection of topics that are discussed in this work.

2 2 2. Representations of completely monotone functions We start with a classical definition of CM functions, and we present two possible representations in terms of integral transforms of measures and alternative representations for Steltjes transforms and CM probability densities. 2. Definition. A function f defined on, + is completely monotone if it has derivatives of all orders and k f k t >, t,+,k =,,2,... In particular, this implies that each CM on, + is positive, decreasing and conve, with concave first derivative. 2.2 Limit properties. By, there eist limits of f k as for any k ; if those limits are finite, then f can be etended to [,+ and will also hold for = with strict inequality for all k. Limits at zero need not be finite, as in f =, for eample. Clearly, lim + f k = for all k. The limit of f at + must be finite, andifit isnon-zero,thenit hastobepositiveforeample, f = +e. 2.3 Lemma. The function f is CM if and only if [28] 2 f = e t dµt, [,+ where µt is a positive measure on Borel sets of [,+ that is, µb for every Borel set B R + and the integral converges for < < +. In other words, completely monotone functions are real one-side Laplace transforms of a positive measure on [,+. If the measure µ has an atom at t =, then lim + f >. The measure µ is a probability measure if and only if lim + f = by monotone convergence theorem. The Lebesgue integral in 2 can be epressed as a Lebesgue-Stieltjes integral 3 f = e t dgt, [,+ where gt = µ[,t] is the distribution function of µ, with g =. For a positive measure µ, the function g is non-decreasing, and by change of variables t = logs we get 2.4 Lemma. The function f is completely monotone on,+ if and only if 4 f = s dhs, [,] where hs = g logs is a non-decreasing function. If f is a CM which is the Laplace transform of a measure µ, as in 2, we write f = Ldµ or f = Ldµt. Similarly, the relation 3 between f and a distribution function g, can be denoted as f = Ldg. If µ has a density h with respect to Lebesgue measure, we write f = Lhtdt or only f = Lh. It follows from inversion formulae that each CM f determines one positive measure

3 3 µ via relation f = Ldµ and it is of interest in many applications to find that measure. 2.5 Remark. Since measures are determined by their Laplace transforms, if f = Ldµ, then f is CM if and only if µ is a positive measure. If there eists a continuous density h of µ, then f is CM if and only if ht for all t. Let us now observe a subclass of CM functions which contains all functions f that can be represented as Stieltjes transform of some positive measure µ, that is, dµs 5 f = +s [,+ It is easy to verify that each function of the form 5 with a positive measure µ is CM, hence f = Lν, where ν is a positive measure. To find ν, we start with +s = e +su du, [,+ and, after a change of order of integration we arrive at the following result. 2.6 Lemma. The Stieltjes transform of a positive measure µ as defined by 5 can be represented as a Laplace transform f = e su dµs du. [,+ e u [,+ That is, f = Lν, where the measure ν is absolutely continuous with respect to Lebesgue measure, with a density L dµ. Stieltjes transforms f have the property that f is reciprocally conve in terminology introduced in [2], a function g is reciprocally conve if it is defined for > and concave there, whereas g/ is conve. As proved in [2], each reciprocally conve function generates an increasing sequence of quasi-arithmetic means, and hence CM functions that are also Stieltjes transforms are interesting as a tool for generating means. 2.7 Completely monotone probability densities. Let f be a probability density with respect to Lebesgue measure on [, +, that is, fd = and f for all. Then f is a CM function if and only if 2 holds, which, after integration with respect to,+ gives via Fubini theorem for f = t dµt. Defining a new probability measure ν by νb = B 6 f = te t dνt = [,+ [,+ t dµt, we have that te t dgt, where G is the distribution function for ν. The function te t is the density of eponential distribution Ept. Therefore, a density f of a probability measure on,+ is a CM function if and only if it is a miture of eponential densities.

4 4 Note that 6 can be written as f = ETe T, where T is a random variable with distribution function G; by letting S = /T we find that 7 f = E S e S = s e /s dhs, [,+ where H is the distribution function of S. The latter form is taken as a definition of what is meant by a CM density in [7, 8.B.5]; this is more natural than 6 because the miing measure H is defined on values of epectationss of eponential distributions in the miture, rather then on their reciprocal values as in Further properties and connection with infinitely divisible measures Starting from the mentioned representations of CM functions, an interesting criterion for equality of two CM functions is derived in [7]: 3. Lemma. If f and g are CM functions and if f n = g n for a positive sequence { n } such that the series n / n diverges, then f = g for all. As a corollary to Lemma 3., we can see that if CM functions f and g agree in any subinterval of,+, then f = g for all. A converse result, which is also proved in [7] is more surprising: If f is CM and if the series n / n converges, then there eists another CM function g f, such that f n g n for all n. 3.2 Convolution and infinitely divisible measures. Given measures µ and ν on [,+ and their distribution functions g µ and g ν, we define the convolution µ ν as a measure with the distribution function defined by 8 g µ ν t = g µ t udg ν u = g ν t vdg µ v [,t] To show equality of integrals above, we use the formula for integration by parts in Lebesgue-Stieltjes integral see [5] or [4] and note that the function u g µ t u is continuous from the left, while u g ν u is continuous from the right, hence the additional term due to discontinuities in the integration by parts formula equals zero, that is, g µ t udg ν u = g ν udg µ t u [,t] [,t] and then we apply change of variables in the last integral, u = t v. Repeated convolution is defined by induction, using associativity. In particular, the nth convolution power of a measure µ, denoted by µ n is defined by n repeated convolutions µ µ µ. A measure µ is called infinitely divisible ID if for every natural number n there eists a measure µ n such that µ = µ n n. In the net two lemmas we collect some basic properties of CM functions. For a collection of other properties we refer to [24]. 3.3 Lemma. If f and g are CM functions with f = Ldµ and g = Ldν, then for a >, [,t] af = Ldaµ, f +g = Ldµ+ν, fg = Ldµ ν.

5 5 Therefore, if f,g are CM then af +bg a,b > and fg are also CM. Proof. First two properties follow from the definition of Laplace transform. The third property for arbitrary positive measures is proved in [8, p. 434]. 3.4 Lemma. i If g is CM, then the function f = e g is CM. ii If logf is CM, then f is CM the converse is not true. iii If f is CM and g is a positive function with a CM derivative, then fg is CM. Proof. To prove i, let h = e g and note that h > and h = g h <. Then by induction, using Leibniz chain rule, it follows that n h n >. In particular, if logf is CM, then logf is also CM, and ii follows from i with g = logf. The function e is a CM function but its logarithm is not the one, so the converse does not hold. For iii, we note that f = Ldµ for some positive measure µ, hence 9 d d fg = g e gt tdµt By part i, the function e gt is CM for every t >, and so the function g e gt isalsocm asaproductoftwocmfunctions. Then fromrepresentation 9 it follows that the first derivative of fg is CM, which together with positivity of f yields the desired assertion. Note that if we can find measures ν and ν t in representations g = Ldν and e gt = Ldν t, then from 9 we find that d d fg = t e u dν ν t udµt. It turns out that CM functions f of the form as in i of Lemma 3.4 are Laplace transforms of ID measures. If f =, the associated measure is a probability measure, which is the case that is of interest in applications. Proofs of statements of the net lemma can be found in [8]. 3.5 Lemma. i A function f is the Laplace transform of an ID probability measure if and only if f = e g, where g is a positive function with a CM derivative and g =. Equivalently, f is the Laplace transform of an id positive measure if and only if f > for all >, and the function logf has a CM derivative. This measure is a probability measure if and only if f + =. ii A function f is the the Laplace transform of an ID probability measure if and only if 2 logf = where µ is a positive measure such that 3 e t t dµt < +. t dµt,

6 6 3.6 Remarks. Iflogf iscm, then logf hasacmderivativeandbylemma 3.5i, f = Ldµ, where µ is an ID positive measure. By CM property of logf, we have that logf = Ldν, where ν is some other positive measure. Note that positivity of ν implies that logf >, that is, µ[,+ = f > and so, µ can not be a probability measure. 2. Non-negative functions with a CM first derivative have a special name - Bernstein functions; Lemmas 3.4 and 3.5 eplain their role in probability theory; more about this class of functions can be found in [25]. 4. Majorization, conveity and logarithmic conveity A good source for studying all three topics that are very much interlaced, is the book [7]. In this short digest we include only necessary definitions and results that one can need for understanding a connection with CM functions. 4. Majorization and Schur-conveity. For a vector R n define [i] to be the ith largest coordinate of, so that [] [2] [n]. We say that is majorized by y in notation y if k k [i] for k =,2,...,n and i= i= y [i] n [i] = For eample,,, 2,,. Clearly, majorization is invariant to permutations of coordinates of vectors. A function f which is defined on a symmetric set S R n S is symmetric if S implies that y S where y is any vector obtained by permuting the coordinates of is called Schur-conve if for any,y S, 4 y = f fy. The following result, due to A. M. Fink[9] reveals an interesting relationship between concepts of Schur-conveity and complete monotonicity. 4.2 Lemma. For a CM function f and a non-negative integer vector m = m,m 2,...,m d of a dimension d >. let u m = m f m m2 f m2 m d f m d. Then u m is a Schur-conve function on m for every > and d >. An important corollary of 4.2 is with d = 2, taking m =, and n = 2,. Clearly, m n and from the above definition of Schur-conveity we get that u, u,2, that is, f 2 ff, which is, knowing that f >, equivalent to logf. We formulate this result as a separate lemma. 4.3 Lemma. Any CM function f is log-conve, i.e., the function log f is conve. A conversedoes not hold, for eample the Gamma function restricted to,+ is log-conve, but it is not CM. However, the fact that each CM function is also log-conve, helps us to search for possible candidates for complete monotonicity only among functions that are log-conve. In addition, there is a very rich theory that produces inequalities using conveity or Schur-conveity, and we can use it for CM functions. i= n i= y [i]

7 7 Log-conveityofCMfunctionsisequivalenttodecreasingoftheratiof /f, and arguing that f 2k and f 2k+ are CM this implies 4.4 Corollary. If f is a CM function, then the ratio is decreasing for every integers k, j. f k+j f k In the net lemma we give two consequences of conveity and log-conveity of CM functions. Similar inequalities for CM functions can be found in [6], but with more involved proofs. 4.5 Lemma. If f is completely monotone, then 5 6 f+fy f ε+fy +ε f+f+y, ffy f εfy +ε ff+y where ε < < y, assuming that f is defined as f + as in 2.2, finite or not. Proof. If ϕ is a conve function, then the divided difference ϕ,ε = ϕ ϕ ε ε isincreasingwith,henceinthepresentsetup, f,ε f,ε y+εand f, ε ε f, ε + y, which proves 5. The same proof holds for 6, but with logf in place of f. Let us note that under assumptions of Lemma 4.5,,y ε,y + ε,+y, and so we have just proved that the functions,y f+fy and,y ffy are Schur-conve on R + R +. More generally, for any f being CM, the functions of n variables n n 7 f i and f i i= are Schur-conve on R n +. For a proof of this statement see [7]. Finally, the fact that f is concave i.e, f < is equivalent to each of three inequalities in the net lemma[9, 2]. 4.6 Lemma. For a CM function f, it holds 8 f +f y 2 < fy f y i= < f +y 2, for all,y > 9 fy f y < fy ε f+ε, for < < y and < ε < y y 2ε 2 5. Inversion formulae It is sometimes easier to find a measure µ that corresponds to function f via Laplace transform in 3 then to show that f is CM by verifying the definition; in view of applications, it is definitely useful and desirable to know the associated measure. In many cases we can use properties of Laplace transform and the tables that can be found in tetbooks. In many applications the Laplace transform is not limited to real argument, and it is more common to define fz by 3, where

8 8 comple argument z belongs to some half space Rz a, for some positive a. We may use the power of comple Laplace transform calculus applied to real function of real argument, due to well known properties of regular functions. Due to similarity between Fourier transform, comple Laplace transform and real Laplace transform, we may use inversion formulae for all three mentioned classes, whenever it is appropriate. In probability theory, for a random variable Z, the function Ee iz which corresponds to Fourier transform, ecept the sign in the eponent is called the characteristic function, whereas the real Laplace transform mind the sign! Ee Z is called the moment generating function. Thereare severalformulas that can be found in tetbooks, but we will mention here only a not widely known inversion theorem that enables finding a finite measure µ defined on Borel sets of R, provided that we know its characteristic function 2 ϕ = e it dft, where Ft = µ{,t]}. The following result given here in a slightly generalized version is due to Gil-Pelaez [2]. 5. Lemma. For ϕ and F as in 2, with ϕ being finite, we have that, for all t R, e it ϕ 2 Ft+Ft 2 = ϕ 2 π Note that the underlying measure here need not necessarily be restricted to the positive part of the real ais. As an eample of how 2 can be used to determine a measureµsuch that f = Lµ, considerasimple case f = e, where we already know that the measure is Dirac at t =. Supposing that we wish to use 2 to derive this, note that if f is the Laplace transform of µ, then its characteristic function is ϕ = f i = e i, and 2 yields assuming that t is a point of continuity of F 22 Ft = 2 π R sin t Knowing that sina d = π 2 sgna, we find that Ft = for t < and Ft = for t >, hence by right-continuity and non-decreasing of F, the corresponding measure µ is indeed a Dirac measure at t =. For other formulas and methods, including numerical evaluation of inverse, see [5]. In the net lemma we complement some eamples from [24] by effectively finding the corresponding measure. 5.2 Lemma. We have the following representations: 23 e a = Ldδ a t, where δ a is the probability measure with unit mass Dirac measure at a ; i d. d. 24 e a+b c = L bt/a tc a c, a,b,c,a 2 +b 2 > ; Γc

9 9 25 log a+ b = Ldµt a,b >, where the measure µ is determined by its distribution function 26 µ[,t] = loga+ log+ where see [, p.56] E is eponential integral E t = e bs/a s = LE t, tu du e u ; 27 e a/ = L dδ t+ ai 2 at dt, at where I is a modified Bessel function as defined in []. Proof. The relation 23 is obvious, and 24 is a consequence of standard rules for comple Laplace transform: L bt/a tc e a c Γc = a c Γc Ltc b/a = a c Γc Γc b/a c = a+b c To prove 25, denote its left side by f, and observe that, by 24, f = a a+b = L e bt/a. Now we use the rule to conclude that f = loga gt L = t ds; Lgt[y]dy e f bt/a ydy = Llogadδ L, t which yields 25. To prove 27, we note that a k a k k! k = L t k, k!k! which tells us that Now we observe that and 27 follows. e a = +L + + k= k= a k t k. k!k! a k t k k!k! = ai 2 at, at

10 The simplest way to prove 26 would be to perform an integration on the right hand side and show that it yields the left side. However, in order to show the derivation, we start with the observation that f := log+ = F,,2;, where Fa,b,c; = 2 F a,b,c; is Gauss hypergeometric function; hence there is the following integral representation []: Now we use 25 to find that f = +s = s ds +s. e t e t/s dt, and, echanging the order of integration, we find that f = e t t/s ds e dt. s Finally, a change of variables /s = u in the inner integral shows that it is equal to E t, and the formula is proved. 6. Some eamples related to the Gamma function Functions related to the Gamma function are good candidates to be CM, and there is a plenty of such results in literature. The function g = logγ is a unique conve solution of the Krull s functional equation 28 g+ g = f, >, with f = log and with g =. The same equation, but with f = log n+, n =,,2,... has for its solutions functions Ψ n = logγ n+. Although log is not CM, all its derivatives are monotone functions, which automatically implies the same property for Ψ n,n 2 and alike functions via the following result see [22]. 6. Lemma. Suppose that f is a function of the class C,+ with all derivatives being monotone functions, with f as +. Then there is a unique up to an additive constant solution g of 28 in the class C, with 29 g = lim n + and f+n n f +k k= + 3 g j = f j +k j 2. k= From 29 and 3 it follows that, if ±f is CM or if only ±f is such, then g is a CM, while ±g and ±g need not be CM. Our first eample is formulated

11 in the form of a lemma, and its proof provides a pattern that can be used in many similar cases. 6.2 Lemma. The function W = logγ log = + 2 Ψ has the following integral representation t 3 W = +t e t e t dt and it is a CM function. Proof. The integral representation follows from 32 L n+ t n e t = Ψ n, n =,2,..., and 33 Lt a = Γa+ a+, a >. The CM property follows from positivity of the function under integral sign, which is equivalent to the inequality e t > +t for t >. Remark. The function g = logγ log satisfies the functional ; equation 28 with f = log + it can be easily checked that f is CM, hence from Lemma 6. we can conclude without any additional work that W as defined above is CM. 6.3 Eample. For a and >, let G a = logγ log 2 2 Ψ +a+ 2 log2π. The following representation holds: 34 G a = t 2+2+te t t 3 /6e at 2t 2 e t e t dt. The function G a is CM if and only if a /2 and the function G a is CM if and only if a =. Proof. Starting with G a = Ψ 2 Ψ +a 2 + /2 2, it easy to show in a similar way as in Lemma 6.2 that 35 G a = Further, we have that and t 2+2+te t t 3 /6e at 2 e t e t dt. lim G a = lim + + G a =, G a = v G a ududv,

12 2 hence 34 holds. The complete monotonicity is related to the sign of the function 36 h a t = t 2+2+te t t3 6 e at. The function G a is CM if and only if h a t for all t. From 36 we see that this is equivalent to 37 a log6+log2+te t +t 2 3logt := ut t Using standard methods, we can find that u is a decreasing function, hence ut lim t + ut = 2, and so, 37 holds if and only if a /2. Further, G a is CM if and only if h a t for all t, which is equivalent to 38 a ut, where ut is defined in 37. Since u is decreasing, we have that ut lim ut =, t + and so, 38 holds if and only if a, that is, a =. Remark. Let F a = logγ log 2 2 Ψ +a, a, > This function is studied in [8, Theorem ], where it is shown that F is concave on > and that F a is conve on > for a 2. Since F a = G a where G a is defined as above, this eample gives much stronger statement. 6.4 Eample. For b and c, let 39 f b,c = e Γ+b +c, >. The function 4 ϕ b,c = logf b,c = +logγ+b +clog is CM if and only if b and c = b 2 te bt 4 ϕ b,b 2 = [,+ t 2 +t e t and then it has the representation dt. >. b 2 Proof. By epanding logγ + b in 4 by means of Stirling s formula [, p.258], it follows that, for δ = b c 2, lim ϕ b,c = δ +, + 2 so ϕ b,c is not a CM function see 2.2. Let δ = /2 and let G b := ϕ b,b +b = +logγ+b log. 2 2 Further, we find without difficulties that 42 lim + G b = lim + G b =

13 3 and that G b = Ψ +b + b 2 2. In the same way as shown in Lemma 6.2, we find that G 43 h b t = te bt +t e t b 2. By standard methods we find that b 2 44 ht = 2 b 2 + t 2 +ot 2 t, 2 v b = Lh btdt, where so the Laplace transform G b of the function t gt/t 2 eists for all > and applying Fubini theorem as in Eample 6.3 and using 42 we find that G b = G a ududv = ht t 2 e t dt, [,+ which is the representation 4. Then G b will be CM if and only if if ht for each t see Remark 2.5. By 44 we have that h < for b b,b 2, where b,2 = 2 ± 2 ; further, c = b /2 > gives b > /2, so only b b 2 remains as a possibility. It is straightforward to check that h bt b > for all t, so it suffices to show that h b2 t for t, which can be done along the lines of []. Remark. Complete monotonicity of functions f b,c and ϕ b,c for various values of parameters was discussed in [] and []. Let us remark that, by Lemma 3.4, the function f b,c is CM whenever ϕ b,c is the one. Let us mention that the Barnes function G satisfies the relation logg+ logg = logγ, >, whichis28with g = logγ. Herealsothe function logg = 2Ψ + Ψ is CM. More details about the properties of the G-function as a solution of Krull s equation can be found in [23]. References [] M. Abramowitz, I.A. Stegun, A Handbook of Mathematical Functions, National Bureau of Standards, New York, 964. Electronic version available at cbm/aands/. [2] K. M. R. Audenaert, Trace inequalities for completely monotone functions and Bernstein functions, Linear Algebra Appl , 6-6. [3] S. Bernstein, Sur les fonctions absolument monotones. Acta Math , 66. [4] M. Carter, B. van Brunt, The Lebesgue-Stieltjes Integral: A Practical Introduction, Springer 2. [5] A. M. Cohen, Numerical methods for Laplace transform inversion, Springer 27. [6] Gregory Fasshauer, Meshfree approimation methods with MATLAB, World Scientific Publishing, Hackensack, 27. [7] W. Feller, On Müntz theorem and completely monotone functions, Amer. Math. Monthly, , [8] W. Feller, An Introduction to Probability Theory and Its Applications, vol. II, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 97. [9] A. M. Fink, Kolmogorov-Landau inequalities for monotone functions, J. Math. Anal. Appl , [] S. Guo, H. M. Srivastava, A class of logarithmically completely monotonic functions, Appl. Math. Letters 2 28, 34 4.

14 4 [] S. Guo, Feng Qi, H. M. Srivastava, Necessary and sufficient conditions for two classes of functions to be logarithmically completely monotonic, Integral Transforms Spec. Funct. 8 27, [2] J. Gil-Pelaez, Note on the inversion theorem, Biometrika 38 95, [3] F. Hausdorff, Summationsmethoden und Momentfolgen I, Math. Z. 9 92, [4] F. Hausdorff, Momentprobleme fu r ein endliches Intervall, Math. Z , [5] E. Hewitt, Integration by parts for Stieltjes integrals, Amer. Math. Monthly 67 96, [6] Clark H. Kimberling, A probabilistic interpretation of complete monotonicity, Aequationes Math. 974, [7] A. W. Marshall, I. Olkin, B. C.Arnold, Inequalities: theory of majorization and its applications, second edition, Springer Series in Statistics, Springer, New York, 29. [8] M. Merkle, Conveity, Schur-conveity and bounds for the Gamma function involving the Digamma function, Rocky Mountain J. Math., 28, No 3 998, [9] M. Merkle, Conditions for conveity of a derivative and some applications to the Gamma function, Aequ. Math., , [2] M. Merkle, Representation of the error term in Jensen s and some related inequalities with applications, J. Math. Analysis Appl., , 76 9 [2] M. Merkle, Reciprocally conve functions,j. Math. Analysis Appl., , [22] M. Merkle, Conveity in the theory of the Gamma function, Int. J. Appl. Math. Stat [23] M. Merkle, M. M. R. Merkle, Krull s theory for the double gamma function, Appl. Math. Comput., 28 2, [24] K. S. Miller, S. G. Samko, Completely monotonic functions, Integral Transforms Spec. Funct. 2 2, [25] R. Schilling, R. Song, Z. Vondraček, Bernstein functions. Theory and applications. De Gruyter Studies in Mathematics, 37, Walter de Gruyter & Co., Berlin, 2. [26] D. V. Widder, Necessary and sufficient conditions for the representation of a function as a Laplace integral. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc , [27] D. V. Widder, The inversion of the Laplace integral and the related moment problem. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc , 7-2. [28] D. V. Widder, The Laplace Transform, Princeton University Press, Princeton 94. University of Belgrade Faculty of Electrical Engineering P.O. Bo 35-54, Belgrade, Serbia emerkle@etf.rs and Union University Računarski fakultet Kneza Mihaila 6, Belgrade, Serbia