Olympiad Inequalities II: The Full Ladder

Study Sheet

Olympiad Inequalities II: The Full Ladder

AM–GM with constraints, Engel form, Cauchy as geometry, QM–AM, SOS and Schur

Every Standard Inequality, Placed

Tip
AM–GM under a product or sum constraint

With abc=1abc = 1: a+b+c+1a+1b+1c6a + b + c + \tfrac1a + \tfrac1b + \tfrac1c \ge 6 (six terms with product 11). With a+b+c=3a + b + c = 3: ab+bc+ca3ab + bc + ca \le 3 (from a2+b2+c2ab+bc+caa^2 + b^2 + c^2 \ge ab + bc + ca).

The constraint tells you how to group: a product constraint suggests AM–GM across terms whose product is a power of it; a sum constraint suggests QM–AM or the identity (a+b+c)2=a2+2ab(a + b + c)^2 = \sum a^2 + 2\sum ab. Homogenize first when degrees differ — replace a constant by the appropriate power of (a+b+c)(a + b + c) or (abc)1/3(abc)^{1/3} — so that the inequality becomes scale-free and the standard tools apply.

Tip
Cauchy–Schwarz: Engel form and the geometric form

Engel (Titu): ai2bi(ai)2bi\sum\tfrac{a_i^2}{b_i} \ge \tfrac{(\sum a_i)^2}{\sum b_i}. Geometric: uvuv|\mathbf u\cdot\mathbf v| \le |\mathbf u||\mathbf v| — so 3a+4b53a + 4b \le 5 on the unit circle and 1x+4y+9z36\tfrac1x + \tfrac4y + \tfrac9z \ge 36 when x+y+z=1x + y + z = 1.

Engel form is Cauchy–Schwarz with ui=aibiu_i = \tfrac{a_i}{\sqrt{b_i}}, vi=biv_i = \sqrt{b_i}; it is the fastest route to bounds on sums of fractions. Equality in Engel: aibi\tfrac{a_i}{b_i} all equal — so the minimizer of 1x+4y+9z\tfrac1x + \tfrac4y + \tfrac9z has x:y:z=1:2:3x : y : z = 1 : 2 : 3. Write the equality case down before computing; it often IS the answer.

Tip
Schur, SOS, and smoothing

Schur (t=1t = 1): a3+b3+c3+abcsyma2ba^3 + b^3 + c^3 + abc \ge \sum_{\text{sym}}a^2b... precisely a(ab)(ac)0\sum a(a - b)(a - c) \ge 0. SOS: write the difference as Sc(ab)2\sum S_c(a - b)^2 with nonnegative coefficients. Smoothing: replace two variables by their mean and show the expression moves the right way.

Schur handles the inequalities AM–GM cannot (it is the one with equality at a=b=ca = b = c AND at (a,a,0)(a, a, 0)). SOS is a systematic finishing move for symmetric three-variable inequalities: expand, group into squares. Smoothing (or "mixing variables") proves that the extremum occurs when variables are equal or when one hits the boundary — reducing a three-variable problem to one variable. These three are the difference between AIME-level and USAMO-level inequality work.

Side note
Equality cases are the map

Before any manipulation, guess where equality holds: all variables equal (AM–GM, Jensen, QM–AM), proportional (Cauchy–Schwarz), one variable zero (Schur, boundary cases). A candidate inequality with the wrong equality case cannot be the right tool — this single check saves more time than any technique.

Try it
Try it: homogenize, then AM–GM

For positive a,b,ca, b, c with a+b+c=1a + b + c = 1, prove (1+1a)(1+1b)(1+1c)64\left(1 + \tfrac1a\right)\left(1 + \tfrac1b\right)\left(1 + \tfrac1c\right) \ge 64.

Homogenize: 1+1a=a+b+c+aa1 + \tfrac1a = \tfrac{a + b + c + a}{a}... simpler: 1+1a=1+a+b+ca=2a+b+ca1 + \tfrac1a = 1 + \tfrac{a + b + c}{a} = \tfrac{2a + b + c}{a}. By AM–GM 2a+b+c=a+a+b+c4a2bc42a + b + c = a + a + b + c \ge 4\sqrt[4]{a^2bc}; multiply the three: numerator 64a4b4c44=64abc\ge 64\sqrt[4]{a^4b^4c^4} = 64abc, denominator abcabc. Equality at a=b=c=13a = b = c = \tfrac13 ✓.

Proofs & Why It Matters

Tip
Proof: Schur's inequality

For nonnegative a,b,ca, b, c: a(ab)(ac)+b(ba)(bc)+c(ca)(cb)0a(a - b)(a - c) + b(b - a)(b - c) + c(c - a)(c - b) \ge 0.

By symmetry assume abca \ge b \ge c. Group the first two terms: (ab)[a(ac)b(bc)]0(a - b)\left[a(a - c) - b(b - c)\right] \ge 0 because ab0a - b \ge 0 and a(ac)b(bc)a(a - c) \ge b(b - c) (both factors on the left dominate). The third term c(ca)(cb)=c(ac)(bc)0c(c - a)(c - b) = c(a - c)(b - c) \ge 0 is a product of nonnegatives. \blacksquare Equality iff a=b=ca = b = c or two are equal and the third is 00 — the two-equality-case signature that makes Schur indispensable when AM–GM's single equality case is too restrictive.

Tip
Proof: the rearrangement inequality

For a1ana_1 \le \cdots \le a_n and b1bnb_1 \le \cdots \le b_n, the sum aibσ(i)\sum a_ib_{\sigma(i)} is maximized by σ=id\sigma = \text{id} and minimized by the reversing permutation.

If σ\sigma is not the identity, some i<ji < j has σ(i)>σ(j)\sigma(i) > \sigma(j); swapping the two assignments changes the sum by (ajai)(bσ(i)bσ(j))0(a_j - a_i)(b_{\sigma(i)} - b_{\sigma(j)}) \ge 0. Repeated swaps reach the identity without ever decreasing the sum. \blacksquare Significance: Chebyshev's inequality (similarly ordered sequences have 1naibiaˉbˉ\tfrac1n\sum a_ib_i \ge \bar a\bar b) is rearrangement averaged over all cyclic shifts, and both are the tool when AM–GM's symmetry is broken by an ordering assumption.

Going Deeper: Worked Problems

Example
Worked: an SOS finish

Prove a2+b2+c2ab+bc+caa^2 + b^2 + c^2 \ge ab + bc + ca and use it to show a2+b2+c2ab+bc+ca1\dfrac{a^2 + b^2 + c^2}{ab + bc + ca} \ge 1 with equality iff a=b=ca = b = c.

Step 1 — 2(a2+b2+c2)2(ab+bc+ca)=(ab)2+(bc)2+(ca)202(a^2 + b^2 + c^2) - 2(ab + bc + ca) = (a - b)^2 + (b - c)^2 + (c - a)^2 \ge 0: a sum of squares.

Step 2 — equality iff every square vanishes iff a=b=ca = b = c.

Step 3 — divide by the positive ab+bc+caab + bc + ca.

Step 4 — the same SOS identity gives (a+b+c)23(ab+bc+ca)(a + b + c)^2 \ge 3(ab + bc + ca) and 3(a2+b2+c2)(a+b+c)23(a^2 + b^2 + c^2) \ge (a + b + c)^2 — three inequalities from one line of algebra, all sharing the equality case a=b=ca = b = c.

Example
Worked: a smoothing argument

Among nonnegative a,b,ca, b, c with a+b+c=3a + b + c = 3, find the maximum of ab+bc+caabcab + bc + ca - abc.

Step 1 — test the symmetric point a=b=c=1a = b = c = 1: value 31=23 - 1 = 2. Test a boundary point (1.5,1.5,0)(1.5, 1.5, 0): 2.252.25. So the maximum is NOT at the symmetric point — smoothing must be done carefully.

Step 2 — fix cc and set a+b=3c=sa + b = 3 - c = s; the expression is ab(1c)+csab(1 - c) + cs. For c<1c < 1 it increases with abab, maximized at a=ba = b; for c>1c > 1 it is maximized at ab=0ab = 0.

Step 3 — case a=b=s2a = b = \tfrac s2: f(c)=(3c)24(1c)+c(3c)f(c) = \tfrac{(3-c)^2}{4}(1 - c) + c(3 - c) on [0,1][0, 1]; f(0)=2.25f(0) = 2.25, f(1)=2f(1) = 2, and f<0f' < 0 on the interval — max 2.252.25 at c=0c = 0. Case ab=0ab = 0 with c1c \ge 1: value c(3c)2.25c(3 - c) \le 2.25.

Step 4 — maximum 94\tfrac94 at (32,32,0)(\tfrac32, \tfrac32, 0) and permutations. Boundary cases are where symmetric-point intuition fails; smoothing finds them systematically.