Banded Reduction of Integrals for Hyperexponential and Algebraic Functions

Piotr Krasoń and Jan Milewski Address: Department of Mathematics, Ariel University, Ariel 40700, Israel Email address: piotrkras26@gmail.com Address: Institute of Mathematics
Poznań University of Technology
60-965 Poznań
Poland Email address: jsmilew@wp.pl

Date: September 27, 2026

Abstract.

We develop a finite-band method for the reduction of families of indefinite integrals. The starting point is the case in which the logarithmic derivative $K^{\prime}(x)/K(x)$ is a rational function. This leads to adapted polynomial and Laurent-type bases and to upper triangular band matrices. The framework includes generalized real Schwarz–Christoffel integrals and more general hyperexponential weights. We then extend the construction to the case in which the logarithmic derivative $K^{\prime}(x)/K(x)$ is algebraic over the field of real rational functions. The associated finite-dimensional differential module gives rise naturally to block-band systems. Finally, we show that functions satisfying linear differential equations with real polynomial coefficients give rise to finite recurrences for their moments. The resulting reduction is effective: for a prescribed target integral it is enough to solve a finite triangular band system, and only the reduction data associated with the target are required. We also discuss arithmetic complexity and give explicit examples illustrating the scalar and block reductions. The algorithms are implemented in the accompanying Mathematica package BandedReduction.

Key words and phrases:

finite-band reduction, symbolic integration, hyperexponential functions, algebraic functions, recurrence relations, Schwarz–Christoffel integrals, holonomic functions

2020 Mathematics Subject Classification

Primary 68W30; Secondary 33F10, 12H05, 65Q30

1. Introduction

Reduction of integrals by differential relations is a classical theme in symbolic integration and in the algorithmic study of special functions. Classical approaches include Hermite-type reduction for algebraic functions and the symbolic integration of hyperexponential terms; see [3, 4, 19]. A closely related algorithmic viewpoint is provided by holonomic functions and creative telescoping, where differential equations and recurrences are used to control families of functions and definite or parameter-dependent integrals; see [1, 21, 6].

The purpose of this paper is to develop a finite-band approach to the reduction of families of indefinite integrals. Our basic objects are the moments

I_{n}(x)=\int x^{n}K(x)\,dx,\qquad n\geq 0,

or, more generally, the shifted moments

I_{n,p}(x)=\int(x-p)^{n}K(x)\,dx.

When the factor $K$ satisfies an appropriate differential relation, differentiation of suitable multiples of $K$ produces linear relations involving only finitely many neighbouring moments. Ordering these relations by the moment index leads to a banded triangular system. A prescribed high-order moment can therefore be reduced to a finite family of basic integrals together with explicit boundary terms.

The reduction mechanism is related to the classical Christoffel-type approach to the reduction of moments. Our purpose is not to replace this underlying principle, but to identify and exploit the finite-band structure that arises for hyperexponential and algebraic integrands. This structure makes it possible to determine explicitly the finite range of indices involved in the reduction and leads to an effective finite-dimensional reduction procedure.

Our first setting is the case in which the logarithmic derivative

\frac{K^{\prime}(x)}{K(x)}

is a rational function. This is a standard class in symbolic integration and includes, in particular, functions of the form

K(x)=e^{q(x)}\prod_{j=1}^{s}p_{j}(x)^{\alpha_{j}},

where $q$ and the $p_{j}$ are real polynomials and $\alpha_{j}\in\mathbb{R}$ . We work on intervals on which the chosen real branches of the factors $p_{j}(x)^{\alpha_{j}}$ are defined and $K$ is nonzero. Such functions are closely related to the hyperexponential framework of symbolic integration [3, 4]. Relations between hypergeometric functions and integral representations have also been extensively studied; see, for example, [5, 8, 10, 11, 20].

A principal family of examples comes from the Schwarz–Christoffel setting. Schwarz–Christoffel transformations provide a classical and computationally useful method for conformal mapping of polygonal domains; see, for example, [7, 18]. The associated integral representations are closely related to multivariable hypergeometric functions of Lauricella type [14]. The generalized real Schwarz–Christoffel integrals considered in this paper also belong to a broader class of problems related to hyperelliptic integrals; see [12].

The present paper should be viewed as a continuation and substantial generalization of the reduction approach developed in [12]. The earlier work treats a particular class of real hyperelliptic integrals and derives recurrence relations adapted to that setting. Here we identify the differential mechanism underlying those recurrences and formulate it in a more general finite-band framework. The change of viewpoint is structural rather than merely notational: starting from differential relations satisfied by the integrand factor $K$ , we obtain a unified reduction procedure that applies to rational logarithmic derivatives, algebraic logarithmic derivatives, and, more generally, linear differential equations with polynomial coefficients. The generalized real Schwarz–Christoffel integrals are retained as an important concrete specialization of this broader construction.

The first main part of the paper establishes a finite-band reduction scheme for rational logarithmic derivatives. We construct adapted polynomial and Laurent-type bases, identify the corresponding upper triangular band matrices, and isolate the possible resonant indices. In the nonresonant case this yields a finite family of basic integrals to which the whole family can be reduced.

We next consider the case in which

\frac{K^{\prime}}{K}

is algebraic over $\mathbb{R}(x)$ . Classical symbolic integration of algebraic functions is based on algebraic reduction procedures, including Hermite-type methods; see [19, 15]. Our construction has a different emphasis: the moments are organized into a finite-dimensional differential module, and the scalar band matrices are replaced by block-band matrices.

Finally, we consider arbitrary linear differential equations with real polynomial coefficients,

a_{r}(x)K^{(r)}+\cdots+a_{0}(x)K=0.

This places the preceding constructions in a broader holonomic framework [1, 6, 21]. The essential point is not merely the existence of a recurrence, but its finite-band structure and the resulting effective reduction of a prescribed moment.

The computational aspect of the method is equally important. For a fixed target index one does not need an inverse of an infinite matrix; only a finite triangular truncation is involved, and in particular only the data required for the target reduction need to be computed. Standard backward substitution for triangular linear systems is used at this stage [16, 17]. Explicit formulas for inverses of triangular matrices are also closely related to the computations appearing here [2].

The algorithms developed in the paper are implemented in the accompanying Mathematica package BandedReduction: Banded Reduction of Integrals for Hyperexponential and Algebraic Functions [13], referred to below simply as BandedReduction. The package provides a user-level implementation of the scalar, Schwarz–Christoffel, algebraic block-band, and polynomial-ODE reductions discussed below, together with validation tests and readable reduction reports. The package is archived on Zenodo under DOI 10.5281/zenodo.22980629.

The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 develops the scalar first-order construction. Section 3 applies it to generalized real Schwarz–Christoffel integrals. Section 4 treats algebraic logarithmic derivatives and the resulting block-band systems. Section 5 derives finite moment recurrences from polynomial-coefficient differential equations. Section 6 describes the reduction algorithm, discusses its arithmetic complexity, and presents explicit examples.

Throughout the paper, $\mathbb{R}[x]$ denotes the ring of real polynomials in the variable $x$ , and $\mathbb{R}(x)$ denotes its field of rational functions. For $A,B\in\mathbb{R}[x]$ , the condition $\gcd(A,B)=1$ means that $A$ and $B$ are relatively prime. We write $M_{d}(F)$ for the ring of $d\times d$ matrices over a field $F$ .

2. A first-order differential reduction scheme

Let $J\subset\mathbb{R}$ be an interval and let $K:J\to\mathbb{R}\setminus\{0\}$ be a differentiable function. We assume throughout this section that

(2.1)

\frac{K^{\prime}(x)}{K(x)}=\frac{A(x)}{B(x)},\qquad A,B\in\mathbb{R}[x],\qquad\gcd(A,B)=1.

Thus the logarithmic derivative of $K$ is rational. This class includes, in particular, functions of the form

K(x)=e^{q(x)}\prod_{j=1}^{s}p_{j}(x)^{\alpha_{j}},\qquad q,p_{j}\in\mathbb{R}[x],\quad\alpha_{j}\in\mathbb{R},

on any interval on which the chosen real branches of the factors $p_{j}(x)^{\alpha_{j}}$ are defined and $K$ is nonzero. Such functions belong to the standard hyperexponential framework of symbolic integration; see [3, 4].

Fix $p\in\mathbb{R}$ such that

B(p)\neq 0

and put

u=x-p.

For $n\in\mathbb{Z}$ define

I_{n,p}(x)=\int u^{n}K(x)\,dx.

Set

W(x)=B^{\prime}(x)+A(x).

Lemma 2.1.

For every $n\in\mathbb{Z}$ ,

(2.2)

\frac{d}{dx}\left(u^{n}B(x)K(x)\right)=\left[nu^{n-1}B(x)+u^{n}W(x)\right]K(x).

Proof.

Since $u^{\prime}=1$ and $K^{\prime}/K=A/B$ ,

	$\displaystyle\frac{d}{dx}\left(u^{n}BK\right)$	$\displaystyle=nu^{n-1}BK+u^{n}(B^{\prime}K+BK^{\prime})$
		$\displaystyle=\left[nu^{n-1}B+u^{n}(B^{\prime}+A)\right]K.$

∎

Write

(2.3)

B(x)=\sum_{j=0}^{b}c_{j}u^{j},\qquad W(x)=\sum_{j=0}^{w}d_{j}u^{j},

and put

(2.4)

h=\max\{b,w+1\}.

Proposition 2.2.

For every $n\in\mathbb{Z}$ ,

(2.5)

\sum_{j=0}^{b}nc_{j}I_{n+j-1,p}+\sum_{j=0}^{w}d_{j}I_{n+j,p}=u^{n}B(x)K(x)+C.

Consequently, the family $\{I_{n,p}\}_{n\in\mathbb{Z}}$ satisfies a finite recurrence in the index $n$ , with coefficients affine in $n$ .

Proof.

Substituting (2.3) into (2.2) and integrating gives (2.5). ∎

2.1. The associated band matrix

Set

m=n+h-1.

Then (2.5) becomes

(2.6)

\sum_{l=m-h}^{m}D_{l,m}I_{l,p}=u^{m-h+1}B(x)K(x)+C,

where

(2.7)

D_{l,m}=(m-h+1)c_{l-m+h}+d_{l-m+h-1}.

We understand $c_{j}=d_{j}=0$ whenever the index is outside the ranges specified in (2.3). next consider

Proposition 2.3.

The matrix

D=(D_{l,m})_{l,m\geq 0}

is upper triangular and has finite bandwidth. More precisely,

D_{l,m}=0\qquad\text{if}\qquad l<m-h\quad\text{or}\quad l>m.

Its diagonal entries are

(2.8)

D_{m,m}=(m-h+1)c_{h}+d_{h-1}.

Proof.

The asserted vanishing follows immediately from (2.7). Putting $l=m$ gives (2.8). ∎

Definition 2.1.

For $m\geq h-1$ , we call $m$ admissible. An admissible index is called nonresonant if

D_{m,m}\neq 0,

and resonant otherwise.

Remark 2.2.

The diagonal coefficient

D_{m,m}=(m-h+1)c_{h}+d_{h-1}

is an affine function of $m$ . Hence, unless it is identically zero, there is at most one resonant admissible index.

2.2. Adapted polynomial basis

For the initial indices

0\leq m\leq h-1,

put

\phi_{m}(u)=u^{m}.

For every $m\geq h$ , define

(2.9)

\phi_{m}(u)=\sum_{l=m-h}^{m}D_{l,m}u^{l}.

Since $m\geq h$ , all powers occurring in (2.9) are nonnegative. Thus $\phi_{m}$ is a polynomial.

By (2.6),

(2.10)

\int\phi_{m}(u)K(x)\,dx=u^{m-h+1}B(x)K(x)+C,\qquad m\geq h.

Lemma 2.4.

Let $m\geq h$ . If $m$ is nonresonant, then

\operatorname{deg}\phi_{m}=m.

Proof.

All terms in (2.9) have degree at most $m$ , and the coefficient of $u^{m}$ is $D_{m,m}$ . If $m$ is nonresonant, this coefficient is nonzero, and therefore $\operatorname{deg}\phi_{m}=m$ . ∎

Proposition 2.5.

Suppose that

D_{m,m}\neq 0\qquad\text{for all }m\geq h.

Then the family

\{\phi_{m}\}_{m\geq 0}

is a basis of $\mathbb{R}[u]$ .

Proof.

For $0\leq m\leq h-1$ the functions $\phi_{m}$ are the monomials. For $m\geq h$ , the preceding lemma gives $\operatorname{deg}\phi_{m}=m$ . Hence the transition matrix from the monomial basis

\{1,u,u^{2},\ldots\}

to $\{\phi_{m}\}_{m\geq 0}$ is triangular with nonzero diagonal on every finite principal truncation. Therefore it is invertible on every finite degree subspace, and the family is a basis of $\mathbb{R}[u]$ . ∎

Remark 2.3.

If a resonant index occurs, the corresponding adapted polynomial may have degree smaller than its index. The reduction at that index requires a separate treatment; in particular, one should not divide by the vanishing diagonal coefficient.

2.3. Negative powers

For $n\leq-2$ , differentiate

u^{n+1}B(x)K(x).

We obtain

\frac{d}{dx}\left(u^{n+1}BK\right)=\left[(n+1)u^{n}B+u^{n+1}W\right]K.

Define

(2.11)

\psi_{n}(u)=\sum_{l=n}^{n+h}\left[(n+1)c_{l-n}+d_{l-n-1}\right]u^{l},\qquad n\leq-2.

Then

(2.12)

\int\psi_{n}(u)K(x)\,dx=u^{n+1}B(x)K(x)+C.

Proposition 2.6.

Assume $B(p)\neq 0$ . The transition matrix from the standard Laurent monomials to the family $\{\psi_{n}\}_{n\leq-2}$ is triangular and banded. Its diagonal entry corresponding to $n$ is

(n+1)B(p),

and therefore is nonzero for every $n\leq-2.$

Proof.

The coefficient of the lowest power $u^{n}$ in (2.11) is

(n+1)c_{0}=(n+1)B(p).

Since $n\leq-2$ and $B(p)\neq 0$ , this coefficient is nonzero. ∎

2.4. Finite-band reduction theorem

Theorem 2.7 (Finite-band reduction).

Let $K$ satisfy (2.1), and let $p\in\mathbb{R}$ satisfy $B(p)\neq 0$ . Suppose that

D_{m,m}\neq 0\qquad\text{for all }m\geq h.

Then every integral

I_{n,p}=\int(x-p)^{n}K(x)\,dx,\qquad n\in\mathbb{Z},

can be reduced to the finite family

(2.13)

\mathcal{B}_{p}=\left\{I_{-1,p},I_{0},\ldots,I_{h-1,p}\right\}

and explicit boundary terms.

Proof.

For $n\leq-2$ , the triangular band system associated with (2.12) has nonzero diagonal and reduces every negative-index integral to $I_{-1,p}$ and finitely many nonnegative-index integrals.

For $n\geq 0$ , the adapted polynomial basis above gives a triangular band system whose diagonal entries are nonzero by assumption. Hence every $I_{n,p}$ with $n\geq h$ reduces recursively to

I_{0},\ldots,I_{h-1}

and the boundary terms in (2.10). Combining the two sectors gives the stated reduction. ∎

2.5. Finite computation of reduction coefficients

For a fixed target index $M$ , let

\mathcal{D}^{[M]}=(D_{l,m})_{0\leq l,m\leq M}

be the finite principal truncation of $D$ . Since $\mathcal{D}^{[M]}$ is upper triangular,

\det\mathcal{D}^{[M]}=\prod_{m=0}^{M}D_{m,m}.

Consequently, $\mathcal{D}^{[M]}$ is nonsingular if and only if all its diagonal entries are nonzero.

Only the column corresponding to the target integral is required. If $v^{(M)}$ denotes the corresponding column of

\left(\mathcal{D}^{[M]}\right)^{-1},

then

\mathcal{D}^{[M]}v^{(M)}=e_{M}.

The triangular and banded structure gives

(2.14)

v^{(M)}_{M}=\frac{1}{D_{M,M}},

and, proceeding backwards,

(2.15)

v^{(M)}_{i}=-\frac{1}{D_{i,i}}\sum_{j=i+1}^{\min(i+h,M)}D_{i,j}v^{(M)}_{j}.

Thus no inverse of an infinite matrix is required. For fixed bandwidth, the number of arithmetic operations required for one reduction column is linear in the size of the truncation, apart from the cost of arithmetic in the coefficient field.

2.6. Example 1: a hyperexponential weight

Consider

(2.16)

K(x)=e^{x}(x^{2}+1)^{\alpha},\qquad\alpha\in\mathbb{R}.

Then

\frac{K^{\prime}(x)}{K(x)}=1+\frac{2\alpha x}{x^{2}+1}=\frac{x^{2}+2\alpha x+1}{x^{2}+1}.

Thus

A(x)=x^{2}+2\alpha x+1,\qquad B(x)=x^{2}+1,

and

W(x)=B^{\prime}(x)+A(x)=x^{2}+2(\alpha+1)x+1.

For $p=0$ the fundamental identity gives

\frac{d}{dx}\left(x^{n}(x^{2}+1)K(x)\right)=\left[nx^{n-1}+x^{n}+(n+2\alpha+2)x^{n+1}+x^{n+2}\right]K(x).

Hence

(2.17)

nI_{n-1}+I_{n}+(n+2\alpha+2)I_{n+1}+I_{n+2}=x^{n}(x^{2}+1)K(x)+C.

Here $h=3$ and the diagonal coefficient is

D_{m,m}=1.

Thus the positive-index sector is nonresonant and every moment reduces to the basic family

I_{-1},\ I_{0},\ I_{1},\ I_{2}.

Remark 2.4.

This example illustrates an important feature of the reduction procedure. The recurrence expresses an infinite family of integrals in terms of a finite set of basic integrals and explicit boundary terms. The basic integrals need not themselves be elementary. If they are elementary, then the recurrence produces elementary antiderivatives for the whole family. If some of them are non-elementary, the same recurrence still reduces every integral in the family to a fixed finite collection of non-elementary basic integrals. Thus finite-dimensional reduction and elementary integrability are separate issues: the former may hold even when the latter fails.

2.7. Example 2: a shorter recurrence

Consider

(2.18)

K(x)=e^{-x^{2}}(x^{2}+1)^{\alpha},\qquad\alpha\in\mathbb{R}.

Then

\frac{K^{\prime}(x)}{K(x)}=\frac{-2x^{3}+2(\alpha-1)x}{x^{2}+1},

so that

A(x)=-2x^{3}+2(\alpha-1)x,\qquad B(x)=x^{2}+1,

and

W(x)=-2x^{3}+2\alpha x.

Consequently,

(2.19)

nI_{n-1}+(n+2\alpha)I_{n+1}-2I_{n+3}=x^{n}(x^{2}+1)K(x)+C.

Only one parity class occurs in each recurrence. This illustrates that the actual recurrence may possess additional structure beyond the formal band bound of the general construction.

3. Generalized real Schwarz–Christoffel integrals

We now apply the first-order reduction scheme of Section 2 to a class of generalized real Schwarz–Christoffel integrals. This provides an explicit and important specialization of the general construction.

Let

(3.1)

K(x)=\prod_{i=1}^{N_{1}}(x-x_{i})^{\alpha_{i}}\prod_{i=N_{1}+1}^{N}(1-x_{i}x)^{\beta_{i}},\qquad\alpha_{i},\beta_{i}\in\mathbb{R},\qquad|\alpha_{i}|<1,\quad|\beta_{i}|<1,

and let the interval under consideration be chosen so that $K$ is real and nonzero. We consider integrals

(3.2)

\int R(x)K(x)\,dx,

where $R(x)$ is rational. By polynomial division and partial fraction decomposition, it is enough to consider the positive-index family

(3.3)

I_{n}(x)=\int x^{n}K(x)\,dx,\qquad n\geq 0,

and the negative-index families

(3.4)

I_{n,p}(x)=\int(x-p)^{n}K(x)\,dx,\qquad n<0,

where $p$ is chosen away from the zeros of the polynomial factor introduced below.

The connection with the classical Schwarz–Christoffel and Lauricella settings is described in [7, 18, 14].

3.1. The polynomial factor

Set

(3.5)

P(x)=\prod_{i=1}^{N_{1}}(x-x_{i})\prod_{i=N_{1}+1}^{N}(1-x_{i}x).

Then

K_{1}(x)=P(x)K(x)

and, provided

\lambda:=(-1)^{N-N_{1}}\prod_{i=N_{1}+1}^{N}x_{i}\neq 0,

we have

\operatorname{deg}P=N.

Moreover,

(3.6)

\frac{K^{\prime}(x)}{K(x)}=\sum_{i=1}^{N_{1}}\frac{\alpha_{i}}{x-x_{i}}-\sum_{i=N_{1}+1}^{N}\frac{\beta_{i}x_{i}}{1-x_{i}x}.

Thus, in the notation of Section 2, we may take

(3.7)

B(x)=P(x),\qquad A(x)=P(x)\frac{K^{\prime}(x)}{K(x)}.

Explicitly,

(3.8)

A(x)=\sum_{i=1}^{N_{1}}\alpha_{i}\frac{P(x)}{x-x_{i}}-\sum_{i=N_{1}+1}^{N}\beta_{i}x_{i}\frac{P(x)}{1-x_{i}x}.

Hence $A(x)$ is a polynomial.

The polynomial occurring in the differential identity is

(3.9)

W(x)=B^{\prime}(x)+A(x)=P^{\prime}(x)+P(x)\frac{K^{\prime}(x)}{K(x)}.

Equivalently,

(3.10)

W(x)=\left[\sum_{i=1}^{N_{1}}\frac{\alpha_{i}+1}{x-x_{i}}-\sum_{i=N_{1}+1}^{N}\frac{x_{i}(\beta_{i}+1)}{1-x_{i}x}\right]P(x),

and therefore $W(x)$ is a polynomial of degree at most $N-1$ .

Put

\lambda=(-1)^{N-N_{1}}\prod_{i=N_{1}+1}^{N}x_{i},

which is the leading coefficient $\operatorname{lc}(P)$ of $P$ . Then

(3.11)

\operatorname{lc}(W)=\lambda\left(N+\sum_{i=1}^{N_{1}}\alpha_{i}+\sum_{i=N_{1}+1}^{N}\beta_{i}\right).

3.2. The fundamental identity

Fix $p\in\mathbb{R}$ such that

P(p)\neq 0

and put

u=x-p.

The fundamental identity of Section 2 becomes

(3.12)

\frac{d}{dx}\left(u^{n}P(x)K(x)\right)=\left[nu^{n-1}P(x)+u^{n}W(x)\right]K(x).

Write

P(x)=\sum_{j=0}^{N}a_{j}u^{j},\qquad W(x)=\sum_{j=0}^{N-1}b_{j}u^{j}.

Then

a_{N}=\lambda,\qquad b_{N-1}=\lambda\left(N+\sum_{i=1}^{N_{1}}\alpha_{i}+\sum_{i=N_{1}+1}^{N}\beta_{i}\right).

Consequently, in the notation of Section 2,

h=N.

3.3. Positive powers

For the positive-index sector we put $p=0$ , so that $u=x$ , and write

I_{n}=\int x^{n}K(x)\,dx.

For every $m\geq N$ , define

(3.13)

\phi_{m}(x)=\sum_{l=m-N}^{m}\left[(m-N+1)a_{l-m+N}+b_{l-m+N-1}\right]x^{l}.

For the initial indices

0\leq m\leq N-1,

put

\phi_{m}(x)=x^{m}.

By the differential identity,

(3.14)

\int\phi_{m}(x)K(x)\,dx=x^{m-N+1}P(x)K(x)+C,\qquad m\geq N.

The coefficient of $x^{m}$ in $\phi_{m}$ is

(3.15)

\delta_{m}=(m-N+1)a_{N}+b_{N-1}.

Using (3.2), this becomes

(3.16)

\delta_{m}=\lambda\left[m+1+\sum_{i=1}^{N_{1}}\alpha_{i}+\sum_{i=N_{1}+1}^{N}\beta_{i}\right].

Thus an index $m\geq N$ is nonresonant whenever

(3.17)

m+1+\sum_{i=1}^{N_{1}}\alpha_{i}+\sum_{i=N_{1}+1}^{N}\beta_{i}\neq 0.

Since the left-hand side is affine in $m$ , there is at most one resonant index.

Proposition 3.1.

Assume that (3.17) holds for every $m\geq N$ . Then

\{\phi_{m}\}_{m\geq 0}

is a basis of $\mathbb{R}[x]$ , and every positive-index integral $I_{m}$ , $m\geq N$ , is reducible to

I_{0},\ldots,I_{N-1}

and explicit boundary terms.

Proof.

For $0\leq m\leq N-1$ , the functions $\phi_{m}$ are the monomials. For $m\geq N$ , condition (3.17) gives

\operatorname{deg}\phi_{m}=m.

Hence the transition matrix from the monomial basis to the adapted basis is triangular with nonzero diagonal on every finite principal truncation. The reduction follows from (3.14). ∎

3.4. The transition matrix

Let

\mathcal{A}=(\mathcal{A}_{l,m})_{l,m\geq 0}

denote the infinite transition matrix from the monomial basis

\gamma_{m}(x)=x^{m}

to the adapted basis

\{\phi_{m}(x)\}_{m\geq 0}.

Then

(3.18)

\mathcal{A}_{l,m}=\begin{cases}\delta_{l,m},&0\leq m\leq N-1,\\[2.84526pt] 0,&l>m\ \text{or}\ l<m-N,\\[2.84526pt] (m-N+1)a_{l-m+N}+b_{l-m+N-1},&m\geq N.\end{cases}

Thus $\mathcal{A}$ is upper triangular and banded.

For a fixed $M\geq 0$ , let

\mathcal{A}^{[M]}=(\mathcal{A}_{l,m})_{0\leq l,m\leq M}

be its finite principal truncation. Since $\mathcal{A}^{[M]}$ is upper triangular,

\det\mathcal{A}^{[M]}=\prod_{m=0}^{M}\mathcal{A}_{m,m}.

Consequently,

\mathcal{A}^{[M]}\text{ is nonsingular}\iff\mathcal{A}_{m,m}\neq 0\quad\text{for all }0\leq m\leq M.

For $M\geq N$ , the finite truncation has the block form

\mathcal{A}^{[M]}=\left(\begin{array}[]{cc}I&E^{[M]}\\[5.69054pt] 0&D^{[M]}\end{array}\right),

where $D^{[M]}$ is upper triangular and banded. Hence

(3.19)

\left(\mathcal{A}^{[M]}\right)^{-1}=\left(\begin{array}[]{cc}I&-\,E^{[M]}\left(D^{[M]}\right)^{-1}\\[5.69054pt] 0&\left(D^{[M]}\right)^{-1}\end{array}\right).

For the reduction of a fixed target integral, only the corresponding column of $\left(\mathcal{A}^{[M]}\right)^{-1}$ is required.

3.5. Negative powers

Let $p\in\mathbb{R}$ satisfy

P(p)\neq 0.

For $n\leq-2$ , define

(3.20)

\psi_{n}(u)=\sum_{l=n}^{n+N}\left[(n+1)a_{l-n}+b_{l-n-1}\right]u^{l}.

Then

(3.21)

\int\psi_{n}(u)K(x)\,dx=u^{n+1}P(x)K(x)+C.

The coefficient of the lowest power $u^{n}$ is

(n+1)a_{0}=(n+1)P(p),

and is therefore nonzero for every $n\leq-2$ . Hence the corresponding transition matrix is triangular and banded with nonzero diagonal.

Consequently, all negative-index integrals reduce to

I_{-1,p}

and finitely many nonnegative-index integrals. In the nonresonant case, the natural basic family is

(3.22)

\mathcal{B}_{p}=\left\{I_{-1,p},I_{0},\ldots,I_{N-1,p}\right\}.

3.6. Explicit example

Consider

(3.23)

K(x)=(x-1)^{-1/3}(x+1)^{-2/3}(x-2)^{-2/5}(x+3)^{-3/4}(x-4)^{-1/3}.

Then $N=5$ and

K_{1}(x)=(x-1)^{2/3}(x+1)^{1/3}(x-2)^{3/5}(x+3)^{1/4}(x-4)^{2/3}.

For $n=4$ the construction gives

	$\displaystyle\int x^{4}K(x)\,dx={}$	$\displaystyle-\frac{1032}{151}\int K(x)\,dx-\frac{1326}{151}\int xK(x)\,dx+\frac{1303}{151}\int x^{2}K(x)\,dx$
(3.24)			$\displaystyle+\frac{246}{151}\int x^{3}K(x)\,dx+\frac{60}{151}K_{1}(x)+C.$

For $n=5$ ,

	$\displaystyle\int x^{5}K(x)\,dx={}$	$\displaystyle-\frac{222192}{31861}\int K(x)\,dx-\frac{811308}{31861}\int xK(x)\,dx+\frac{110232}{31861}\int x^{2}K(x)\,dx$
(3.25)			$\displaystyle+\frac{401209}{31861}\int x^{3}K(x)\,dx+\frac{25560}{31861}K_{1}(x)+\frac{60}{211}xK_{1}(x)+C.$

For the negative-index sector, choose $p=-2$ . Then

	$\displaystyle\int(x+2)^{-2}K(x)\,dx={}$	$\displaystyle\frac{91}{4320}\int(x+2)^{3}K(x)\,dx-\frac{337}{2160}\int(x+2)^{2}K(x)\,dx$
		$\displaystyle+\frac{617}{4320}\int(x+2)K(x)\,dx+\frac{1147}{2160}\int K(x)\,dx$
(3.26)			$\displaystyle+\frac{11}{60}\int(x+2)^{-1}K(x)\,dx-\frac{1}{72}(x+2)^{-2}K_{1}(x)+C.$

After expanding

(x+2)^{3}=x^{3}+6x^{2}+12x+8,\qquad(x+2)^{2}=x^{2}+4x+4,

and collecting terms, we obtain

	$\displaystyle\int(x+2)^{-2}K(x)\,dx={}$	$\displaystyle\frac{91}{4320}\int x^{3}K(x)\,dx-\frac{4}{135}\int x^{2}K(x)\,dx-\frac{329}{1440}\int xK(x)\,dx$
(3.27)			$\displaystyle+\frac{13}{36}\int K(x)\,dx+\frac{11}{60}\int(x+2)^{-1}K(x)\,dx-\frac{1}{72}(x+2)^{-2}K_{1}(x)+C.$

4. Algebraic logarithmic derivatives

We now extend the scalar reduction scheme of Section 2 to the case in which the logarithmic derivative of the function $K$ is algebraic over $\mathbb{R}(x)$ . The point of passing to an algebraic extension is that an algebraic logarithmic derivative can be represented in a finite-dimensional vector space over $\mathbb{R}(x)$ . The scalar moment relations are then replaced naturally by vector relations and block-band matrices.

Let

L/\mathbb{R}(x)

be a finite algebraic extension of degree

d=[L:\mathbb{R}(x)]<\infty,

and assume that $K$ is a nonzero differentiable function on an interval $J\subset\mathbb{R}$ such that

(4.1)

\rho(x):=\frac{K^{\prime}(x)}{K(x)}\in L.

Choose a basis

v_{1},\ldots,v_{d}

of $L$ over $\mathbb{R}(x)$ and put

\mathbf{v}(x)=\left(\begin{array}[]{c}v_{1}(x)\\ \vdots\\ v_{d}(x)\end{array}\right).

Since the derivation $d/dx$ on $\mathbb{R}(x)$ extends uniquely to the finite algebraic extension $L$ , we have

\frac{d}{dx}L\subseteq L.

Consequently, for the chosen basis $v_{1},\ldots,v_{d}$ of $L$ over $\mathbb{R}(x)$ , there exists a matrix

M(x)\in M_{d}(\mathbb{R}(x))

such that

(4.2)

\mathbf{v}^{\prime}(x)=M(x)\mathbf{v}(x).

Multiplication by $\rho$ is an $\mathbb{R}(x)$ -linear endomorphism of $L$ . Hence there exists a matrix

R(x)\in M_{d}(\mathbb{R}(x))

such that

(4.3)

\rho(x)\mathbf{v}(x)=R(x)\mathbf{v}(x).

Therefore

(4.4)

\frac{d}{dx}\bigl(\mathbf{v}(x)K(x)\bigr)=H(x)\mathbf{v}(x)K(x),\qquad H(x)=M(x)+R(x).

Choose a nonzero polynomial

q(x)\in\mathbb{R}[x]

which clears the denominators of the entries of $H(x)$ , and set

G(x)=q(x)H(x)\in M_{d}(\mathbb{R}[x]),\qquad Q(x)=q^{\prime}(x)I_{d}+G(x).

Proposition 4.1.

For every $n\geq 0$ ,

(4.5)

\frac{d}{dx}\left(x^{n}q(x)\mathbf{v}(x)K(x)\right)=\left[nx^{n-1}q(x)I_{d}+x^{n}Q(x)\right]\mathbf{v}(x)K(x).

Proof.

The identity follows immediately from the product rule and (4.4). ∎

Write

q(x)=\sum_{j=0}^{b}q_{j}x^{j},\qquad Q(x)=\sum_{j=0}^{w}Q_{j}x^{j},

where $Q_{j}\in M_{d}(\mathbb{R})$ , and define

\mathbf{I}_{n}(x)=\int x^{n}\mathbf{v}(x)K(x)\,dx.

Theorem 4.2 (Block-band reduction).

Under the assumptions above, the vector moments satisfy the finite block recurrence

(4.6)

\sum_{j=0}^{b}nq_{j}\mathbf{I}_{n+j-1}+\sum_{j=0}^{w}Q_{j}\mathbf{I}_{n+j}=x^{n}q(x)\mathbf{v}(x)K(x)+\mathbf{C}.

Consequently, after ordering the relations according to their largest moment index, one obtains a finite block-band system with blocks of size $d\times d$ .

Proof.

Expanding (4.5) and integrating with respect to $x$ gives (4.6). Only finitely many shifts occur, so the resulting system is block-banded. The dependence on $n$ is affine. ∎

Let $\mathcal{D}_{m}$ denote the diagonal block corresponding to the highest-index vector $\mathbf{I}_{m}$ in the triangularly ordered system.

Proposition 4.3.

Suppose that

\det\mathcal{D}_{m}

is not identically zero as a polynomial in $m$ . Then only finitely many indices are resonant, and for every nonresonant index the corresponding relation can be solved for $\mathbf{I}_{m}$ .

Proof.

The determinant $\det\mathcal{D}_{m}$ is a nonzero polynomial in $m$ and therefore has only finitely many zeros. At every nonresonant index the diagonal block is invertible, which allows the recurrence to be solved for the highest-index vector moment. ∎

4.1. Resonant blocks and partial elimination

At a resonant index the diagonal block need not be invertible, but this does not mean that the whole vector moment has to be added to the basic family. After the lower-index moments have already been reduced, the block row at index $m$ can be written in the form

(4.7)

\mathcal{D}_{m}\mathbf{I}_{m}=\mathbf{R}_{m},

where $\mathbf{R}_{m}$ contains only lower-index vector moments and explicit boundary terms.

Assume that

\operatorname{rank}\mathcal{D}_{m}=r<d.

Row reduction of $\mathcal{D}_{m}$ separates the columns into a set of pivot columns $P_{m}$ and a set of free columns $F_{m}$ . The components of $\mathbf{I}_{m}$ corresponding to $P_{m}$ can then be expressed in terms of $\mathbf{R}_{m}$ and the components corresponding to $F_{m}$ . Thus a singular diagonal block leaves only the free components unresolved at that stage.

Proposition 4.4.

Let $\mathcal{D}_{m}$ be a singular diagonal block of rank $r$ . The block row (4.7) leaves at most $d-r$ independent components of $\mathbf{I}_{m}$ undetermined. Equivalently, after row reduction, all pivot components can be eliminated in favour of lower-index moments, explicit boundary terms, and the free components.

Proof.

Apply elementary row operations to (4.7). Since row operations preserve the solution set, the reduced system has $r$ pivot columns and $d-r$ free columns. Each pivot variable is determined by one pivot equation in terms of the right-hand side and the free variables. Hence only the components indexed by the free columns may remain undetermined. ∎

The block-band structure provides additional information that is not visible in the single row (4.7). A free component may occur with nonzero coefficient in one of the neighbouring block rows. We therefore use the following elimination rule at a resonant index: first determine the pivot and free columns of $\mathcal{D}_{m}$ ; next eliminate all pivot components; then inspect the finitely many neighbouring block relations and use them, whenever possible, to eliminate the remaining free components. Only those independent free components which cannot be removed by this neighbouring elimination are retained as additional basic integrals.

This procedure is the block analogue of retaining a resonant scalar moment in the basic family, but it can be strictly more economical: a singular $d\times d$ block need not contribute all $d$ components, and neighbouring relations may reduce the number of additional basic integrals below $d-r$ .

4.2. The algebraic family $y^{d}=q(x)$

We now consider the particularly transparent family

(4.8)

y^{d}=q(x),\qquad\frac{K^{\prime}(x)}{K(x)}=y,

where $q(x)\in\mathbb{R}[x]$ and the extension generated by $y$ has degree $d$ over $\mathbb{R}(x)$ . Symbolic integration of algebraic functions is classically based on Hermite-type and related reduction procedures; see [19, 4, 15]. Our approach differs in that we organize the corresponding moments into a finite block-band system.

Differentiating $y^{d}=q(x)$ gives

(4.9)

y^{\prime}=\frac{q^{\prime}(x)}{d\,q(x)}\,y.

Hence

V=\operatorname{span}_{\mathbb{R}(x)}\{1,y,\ldots,y^{d-1}\}

is stable under differentiation.

Define

I_{n}^{(j)}=\int x^{n}y^{j}K(x)\,dx,\qquad 0\leq j\leq d-1.

For $0\leq j\leq d-2$ ,

(4.10)

\frac{d}{dx}\left(x^{n}y^{j}K(x)\right)=\left(nx^{n-1}y^{j}+\frac{j}{d}x^{n}y^{j}\frac{q^{\prime}(x)}{q(x)}+x^{n}y^{j+1}\right)K(x).

After multiplication by $q(x)$ , all coefficients are polynomial. For $j=d-1$ , the relation closes using

y^{d}=q(x).

Thus the families

\{I_{n}^{(j)}\}_{n\geq 0},\qquad 0\leq j\leq d-1,

satisfy a finite block-band recurrence.

4.3. The model case $y^{d}=x$

Consider

(4.11)

y^{d}=x,\qquad\frac{K^{\prime}(x)}{K(x)}=y.

Then

y^{\prime}=\frac{1}{dx}y.

For

I_{n}^{(j)}=\int x^{n}y^{j}K(x)\,dx

we obtain, for $0\leq j\leq d-2$ ,

(4.12)

\left(n+\frac{j}{d}\right)I_{n-1}^{(j)}+I_{n}^{(j+1)}=x^{n}y^{j}K(x)+C,

while

(4.13)

\left(n+\frac{d-1}{d}\right)I_{n-1}^{(d-1)}+I_{n+1}^{(0)}=x^{n}y^{d-1}K(x)+C.

These relations form a finite cyclic block system.

Example 4.1.

Consider the quadratic extension

y^{2}=x

and choose

\frac{K^{\prime}(x)}{K(x)}=y=\sqrt{x}.

On $x>0$ we may take

K(x)=\exp\left(\frac{2}{3}x^{3/2}\right).

Define

I_{n}=\int x^{n}K(x)\,dx,\qquad J_{n}=\int x^{n}yK(x)\,dx.

Then

(4.14)		$\displaystyle nI_{n-1}+J_{n}$	$\displaystyle=x^{n}K(x)+C,$
(4.15)		$\displaystyle\left(n+\frac{1}{2}\right)J_{n-1}+I_{n+1}$	$\displaystyle=x^{n}yK(x)+C.$

Using (4.14) with $n$ replaced by $n-1$ , we obtain

J_{n-1}=x^{n-1}K(x)-(n-1)I_{n-2}.

Substitution into (4.15) gives

(4.16)

I_{n+1}=\left(n+\frac{1}{2}\right)(n-1)I_{n-2}+x^{n}yK(x)-\left(n+\frac{1}{2}\right)x^{n-1}K(x)+C.

Thus the auxiliary family $\{J_{n}\}$ can be eliminated and the scalar moments satisfy a finite-band recurrence. This is an explicit instance of the neighbouring elimination described above: although the natural block formulation is singular, a component not determined by one block row is eliminated using the adjacent relation. In particular, the moments are recursively determined by the initial integrals

I_{0},\qquad I_{1},\qquad I_{2}.

5. Reduction from polynomial-coefficient differential equations

The first-order construction of Section 2 admits a broader formulation which does not require the logarithmic derivative of $K$ to be rational. We now assume that $K$ satisfies a linear differential equation with polynomial coefficients. This places the reduction procedure in the standard holonomic framework; see, for example, [1, 6, 21].

Suppose that

(5.1)

a_{r}(x)K^{(r)}(x)+a_{r-1}(x)K^{(r-1)}(x)+\cdots+a_{1}(x)K^{\prime}(x)+a_{0}(x)K(x)=0,

where

a_{j}(x)\in\mathbb{R}[x],\qquad a_{r}(x)\not\equiv 0.

Write

(5.2)

a_{j}(x)=\sum_{s=0}^{d_{j}}a_{j,s}x^{s},\qquad d_{j}=\operatorname{deg}a_{j}.

For $n\geq 0$ , define

I_{n}(x)=\int x^{n}K(x)\,dx.

We first record the repeated integration-by-parts identity used below.

Lemma 5.1.

For $j\geq 1$ and $s\geq 0$ ,

	$\displaystyle\int x^{n+s}K^{(j)}(x)\,dx={}$	$\displaystyle\sum_{t=0}^{j-1}(-1)^{t}(n+s)_{\underline{t}}x^{n+s-t}K^{(j-1-t)}(x)$
(5.3)			$\displaystyle+(-1)^{j}(n+s)_{\underline{j}}I_{n+s-j}(x),$

where

(t)_{\underline{j}}=t(t-1)\cdots(t-j+1),\qquad(t)_{\underline{0}}=1.

Proof.

The identity follows by repeated integration by parts. For $j=1$ ,

\int x^{n+s}K^{\prime}(x)\,dx=x^{n+s}K(x)-(n+s)I_{n+s-1}(x).

The general case follows by induction on $j$ . ∎

5.1. Moment recurrence

The passage from linear differential equations to recurrences for integral families is related to the holonomic approach to symbolic summation and integration; see, for example, [6]. Our construction emphasizes the resulting finite-band structure and its use for the reduction of moments to a finite basic family.

Theorem 5.1 (Moment recurrence).

Under the assumptions (5.1), the moments $I_{n}$ satisfy a finite recurrence

(5.4)

\sum_{k}C_{k}(n)I_{n+k}(x)=E_{n}(x),

where $C_{k}(n)\in\mathbb{R}[n]$ and $E_{n}(x)$ is an explicit linear combination of

x^{m}K(x),\,x^{m}K^{\prime}(x),\,\ldots,\,x^{m}K^{(r-1)}(x).

More precisely,

(5.5)

C_{k}(n)=\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}0\leq j\leq r\\ 0\leq s\leq d_{j}\\ s-j=k\end{subarray}}(-1)^{j}a_{j,s}(n+s)_{\underline{j}}.

Only finitely many coefficients $C_{k}$ are nonzero. Their possible shifts satisfy

(5.6)

-r\leq k\leq\max_{0\leq j\leq r}(d_{j}-j).

Proof.

Multiply (5.1) by $x^{n}$ and integrate. For each term $a_{j,s}x^{n+s}K^{(j)}(x)$ with $j\geq 1$ , apply Lemma 5.1. The terms containing derivatives of $K$ of order at most $r-1$ form the explicit boundary expression $E_{n}(x)$ . The remaining integral term is

(-1)^{j}a_{j,s}(n+s)_{\underline{j}}I_{n+s-j}(x).

Grouping terms with the same shift

k=s-j

gives (5.4) and (5.5). Since

0\leq j\leq r,\qquad 0\leq s\leq d_{j},

the possible shifts satisfy (5.6). ∎

5.2. Recurrence width

The interval in (5.6) gives only an a priori bound, since different contributions to the same coefficient may cancel. We therefore distinguish the actual recurrence from this formal bound.

Definition 5.2.

Let

\ell=\min\{k:C_{k}\not\equiv 0\},\qquad u=\max\{k:C_{k}\not\equiv 0\}.

The number

\omega=u-\ell

is called the recurrence width. We also define the a priori recurrence width by

\omega_{\mathrm{ap}}=r+\max_{0\leq j\leq r}(d_{j}-j).

Proposition 5.2.

The recurrence width satisfies

(5.7)

\omega\leq\omega_{\mathrm{ap}}.

The inequality may be strict because of cancellations between different contributions to the coefficients $C_{k}(n)$ .

Proof.

By (5.6),

\ell\geq-r,\qquad u\leq\max_{0\leq j\leq r}(d_{j}-j).

Hence

\omega=u-\ell\leq r+\max_{0\leq j\leq r}(d_{j}-j).

∎

5.3. Finite reduction

The finite recurrence leads to an effective reduction whenever its highest-shift coefficient does not vanish.

Theorem 5.3 (Finite reduction).

Assume that

C_{u}(n)\not\equiv 0.

Let

\mathcal{E}=\{n\in\mathbb{Z}_{\geq 0}:C_{u}(n)=0\}.

Then $\mathcal{E}$ is finite. For every $n\notin\mathcal{E}$ ,

(5.8)

I_{n+u}(x)=-\frac{1}{C_{u}(n)}\sum_{k=\ell}^{u-1}C_{k}(n)I_{n+k}(x)+\frac{E_{n}(x)}{C_{u}(n)}.

Consequently, after excluding the finitely many resonant indices, all sufficiently large moments can be reduced recursively to a finite set of initial moments and explicit boundary terms.

Proof.

Since $C_{u}(n)$ is a nonzero polynomial in $n$ , it has only finitely many integer zeros. For $n\notin\mathcal{E}$ , equation (5.4) can be solved for $I_{n+u}$ , which gives (5.8). All moments on the right-hand side have smaller index than $n+u$ . Repeated application therefore gives the asserted finite reduction. ∎

Remark 5.3.

The elements of $\mathcal{E}$ will be called resonant indices. The recurrence itself remains valid at such indices, but the displayed form (5.8) cannot be used there. A resonant moment may be retained as an additional basic integral.

5.4. A matrix formulation

The recurrence (5.4) can be represented by a triangular band system after the moments are ordered by increasing index. For a fixed target index $M$ , only finitely many rows and columns are required. Let

\mathcal{M}^{[M]}

denote the corresponding finite truncation.

The resulting finite linear systems are triangular band systems for which backward substitution is standard; see, for example, [16, 17].

If all diagonal entries of $\mathcal{M}^{[M]}$ are nonzero, then

\det\mathcal{M}^{[M]}=\prod_{i}\mathcal{M}^{[M]}_{i,i}\neq 0.

Hence the truncation is nonsingular. The reduction coefficients for the target moment are obtained from the corresponding column by backward substitution. Thus, as in Section 2, no inverse of an infinite matrix is required.

5.5. Relation with the first-order case

The first-order construction of Section 2 is recovered by taking $r=1$ and

B(x)K^{\prime}(x)-A(x)K(x)=0.

Thus

a_{1}(x)=B(x),\qquad a_{0}(x)=-A(x).

The resulting recurrence is equivalent to

\frac{d}{dx}\left(x^{n}B(x)K(x)\right)=\left[nx^{n-1}B(x)+x^{n}(B^{\prime}(x)+A(x))\right]K(x).

Hence the finite-band construction of Section 2 is the first-order case of the present differential-equation formulation.

5.6. A Bessel-function example

Consider

K(x)=J_{2}(x),

where $J_{2}$ is the Bessel function of the first kind. It satisfies the second-order differential equation

x^{2}K^{\prime\prime}(x)+xK^{\prime}(x)+(x^{2}-4)K(x)=0.

Thus, in the notation of (5.1),

a_{2}(x)=x^{2},\qquad a_{1}(x)=x,\qquad a_{0}(x)=x^{2}-4.

For

I_{n}(x)=\int x^{n}J_{2}(x)\,dx,

the general construction gives a finite recurrence. Indeed,

\int x^{n+2}K^{\prime\prime}(x)\,dx=x^{n+2}K^{\prime}(x)-(n+2)x^{n+1}K(x)+(n+2)(n+1)I_{n}(x),

while

\int x^{n+1}K^{\prime}(x)\,dx=x^{n+1}K(x)-(n+1)I_{n}(x).

Substitution into the differential equation yields

I_{n+2}(x)+\bigl((n+1)^{2}-4\bigr)I_{n}(x)=(n+1)x^{n+1}K(x)-x^{n+2}K^{\prime}(x)+C.

Equivalently,

(5.9)

I_{n+2}(x)=(n+1)x^{n+1}J_{2}(x)-x^{n+2}J_{2}^{\prime}(x)+\bigl(4-(n+1)^{2}\bigr)I_{n}(x)+C.

Thus the moments split into two finite reduction chains according to parity. For example, repeated application of (5.9) gives

	$\displaystyle I_{6}(x)={}$	$\displaystyle\left(5x^{5}-63x^{3}+105x\right)J_{2}(x)$
		$\displaystyle+\left(-x^{6}+21x^{4}-105x^{2}\right)J_{2}^{\prime}(x)+315I_{0}(x)+C.$

Hence

	$\displaystyle\int x^{6}J_{2}(x)\,dx={}$	$\displaystyle\left(5x^{5}-63x^{3}+105x\right)J_{2}(x)$
		$\displaystyle+\left(-x^{6}+21x^{4}-105x^{2}\right)J_{2}^{\prime}(x)+315\int J_{2}(x)\,dx+C.$

Using

J_{2}^{\prime}(x)=\frac{J_{1}(x)-J_{3}(x)}{2},

the same reduction may also be written as

	$\displaystyle\int x^{6}J_{2}(x)\,dx={}$	$\displaystyle 315\int J_{2}(x)\,dx$
		$\displaystyle-\frac{1}{2}x^{2}\left(x^{4}-21x^{2}+105\right)\left(J_{1}(x)-J_{3}(x)\right)$
		$\displaystyle+x\left(5x^{4}-63x^{2}+105\right)J_{2}(x)+C.$

This example illustrates that the finite-band reduction is not confined to first-order hyperexponential factors. A second-order polynomial-coefficient differential equation for a classical special function produces an explicit finite recurrence and reduces a high-order moment to a finite basic family.

6. Algorithmic reduction and complexity

The finite-band structure developed above leads to an effective algorithm for reducing a prescribed moment. The computation can be performed directly from the recurrence relation. Equivalently, it can be interpreted as backward substitution in a finite triangular band system.

6.1. Scalar reduction algorithm

Consider a recurrence

(6.1)

\sum_{k=\ell}^{u}C_{k}(n)I_{n+k}(x)=E_{n}(x),

where

C_{u}(n)\not\equiv 0,

and let

\mathcal{B}=\{I_{m_{1}},\ldots,I_{m_{s}}\}

be a chosen finite set of basic moments.

For a fixed target index $M$ , we assume that

C_{u}(n)\neq 0

for all indices used in the reduction. The reduction is given by the following algorithm.

Algorithm 1 Direct scalar finite-band reduction

1: Recurrence coefficients

C_{k}(n)

, boundary terms

E_{n}(x)

, target index

M

, and a basic family

\mathcal{B}=\{I_{m_{1}},\ldots,I_{m_{s}}\}

2: A representation

I_{M}=\sum_{j=1}^{s}r_{M,j}I_{m_{j}}+F_{M}(x).

3: Initialize the representation of each basic moment

I_{m_{j}}

by the corresponding unit vector in

\mathbb{R}^{s}

4: for each non-basic index

m

required to reach

M

, in increasing order do

5: Set

n=m-u

6: if

C_{u}(n)=0

then

7: Declare

m

resonant and retain

I_{m}

as an additional basic moment.

8: else

9: Compute

I_{m}=-\frac{1}{C_{u}(n)}\sum_{k=\ell}^{u-1}C_{k}(n)I_{n+k}+\frac{E_{n}(x)}{C_{u}(n)}.

10: Replace the moments on the right-hand side by their previously computed representations.

11: Collect the coefficients of the basic moments and the explicit boundary terms.

Proposition 6.1.

Assume that no resonance is encountered in Algorithm 1. Then the algorithm terminates after finitely many steps and produces the unique representation of $I_{M}$ obtained from the recurrence (6.1) and the prescribed basic family.

Proof.

At every nonresonant step, equation (6.1) can be solved for the highest-index moment:

I_{m}=-\frac{1}{C_{u}(n)}\sum_{k=\ell}^{u-1}C_{k}(n)I_{n+k}+\frac{E_{n}(x)}{C_{u}(n)},\qquad n=m-u.

All moments on the right-hand side have index strictly smaller than $m$ . Hence, when the moments are processed in increasing order, their representations have already been computed or belong to the prescribed basic family. Since the target index $M$ is finite, only finitely many steps are required. The representation is uniquely determined at each step because $C_{u}(n)\neq 0$ . ∎

6.2. Finite matrix realization

The direct recurrence algorithm has an equivalent matrix interpretation. For a fixed target index $M$ , let

\mathcal{M}^{[M]}

denote the finite triangular band matrix obtained from the recurrence by ordering the relations according to their largest moment index. The resulting finite linear systems are triangular band systems for which backward substitution is standard; see, for example, [16, 17].

If all diagonal entries of $\mathcal{M}^{[M]}$ are nonzero, then

\det\mathcal{M}^{[M]}=\prod_{i}\mathcal{M}^{[M]}_{i,i}\neq 0.

Consequently, $\mathcal{M}^{[M]}$ is nonsingular. If $v^{(M)}$ denotes the reduction column, then

\mathcal{M}^{[M]}v^{(M)}=e_{M}.

The entries of this column are computed by backward substitution:

(6.2)

v^{(M)}_{M}=\frac{1}{\mathcal{M}^{[M]}_{M,M}},

and

(6.3)

v^{(M)}_{i}=-\frac{1}{\mathcal{M}^{[M]}_{i,i}}\sum_{j=i+1}^{\min(i+h,M)}\mathcal{M}^{[M]}_{i,j}v^{(M)}_{j}.

Thus the algorithm requires only a finite truncation. In particular, the inverse of the infinite recurrence matrix is never needed.

A vanishing diagonal entry of $\mathcal{M}^{[M]}$ is precisely the matrix manifestation of a resonant index. In this case the corresponding moment has to be retained as an additional basic moment.

6.3. Computational reduction example

We illustrate the two equivalent implementations of the reduction procedure on a simple case for which the result can also be checked by hand. Let

K^{\prime}(x)-K(x)=0,\qquad\text{so that}\qquad K(x)=ce^{x},

and define

I_{n}(x)=\int x^{n}K(x)\,dx.

Multiplication of the differential equation by $x^{n}$ and one integration by parts give

(6.4)

I_{n}=x^{n}K(x)-nI_{n-1}.

There are no resonant indices, and taking $I_{0}$ as the basic moment, successive reduction gives

I_{1}=xK-I_{0},

I_{2}=(x^{2}-2x)K+2I_{0},

I_{3}=(x^{3}-3x^{2}+6x)K-6I_{0},

and hence, for the target index $M=4$ ,

(6.5)

I_{4}=\left(x^{4}-4x^{3}+12x^{2}-24x\right)K(x)+24I_{0}.

The accompanying implementation computes this reduction in two ways: by direct recurrence substitution and by solving the corresponding finite triangular band system. For the target $I_{4}$ both procedures return exactly the expression in (6.5); their symbolic difference simplifies to zero. This provides a small reproducible check that the direct and finite-matrix realizations of the algorithm agree on the same reduction problem.

6.4. Arithmetic complexity

We use the arithmetic operation model in which one addition, subtraction, multiplication, or division in the coefficient field has unit cost.

Theorem 6.2 (Scalar complexity).

Let $M$ be the target index and let

\omega=u-\ell

be the recurrence width. Assume that the required recurrence coefficients and diagonal inverses are available at unit cost. Then one reduction column can be computed in

O(\omega M)

arithmetic operations and

O(M)

storage.

In particular, for fixed recurrence width, the arithmetic complexity is linear in the target index $M$ .

Proof.

There are $O(M)$ backward-substitution steps, and at each step at most $\omega$ terms contribute to the sum in (6.3). Hence the total number of arithmetic operations is $O(\omega M)$ . Storing one reduction column requires $O(M)$ coefficients. ∎

The estimate concerns a single target moment. Computing an entire inverse matrix is a different problem and is not required by the reduction procedure.

6.5. Block-band complexity

In the algebraic setting of Section 4, scalar recurrence coefficients are replaced by $d\times d$ blocks. Let $h$ denote the block bandwidth. If ordinary matrix multiplication is used, multiplication of two $d\times d$ matrices requires $O(d^{3})$ arithmetic operations.

Theorem 6.3 (Block complexity).

Assume that the diagonal blocks are invertible. Then one reduction column of a block-band triangular system with target index $M$ can be computed in

O(hMd^{3})

arithmetic operations and

O(Md^{2})

storage.

Proof.

There are $O(M)$ block rows and at most $h$ relevant blocks per row. Each block operation has cost $O(d^{3})$ in the standard matrix multiplication model. Hence the total cost is $O(hMd^{3})$ . The reduction column contains $O(M)$ blocks of size $d\times d$ , requiring $O(Md^{2})$ storage. ∎

6.6. Computational experiment

To complement the arithmetic complexity estimate, we performed a simple timing experiment for the scalar finite-band reduction with fixed bandwidth $\omega=4$ . The benchmark measures the arithmetic recurrence/back-substitution core of the reduction; symbolic simplification routines such as FullSimplify are not included, so that the experiment reflects the arithmetic-operation model used in the preceding complexity theorem.

We considered target indices

M=1000,\ 2000,\ 4000,\ 8000,\ 16000.

For each value of $M$ , the reported running time is the median of five repetitions. The results are shown in Table 1.

$M$	$\omega M$	Median time (s)	Time/ $M$ (s)
1000	4000	0.006129	$6.129\times 10^{-6}$
2000	8000	0.009194	$4.597\times 10^{-6}$
4000	16000	$0.018627$	$4.65675\times 10^{-6}$
8000	32000	$0.040527$	$5.065875\times 10^{-6}$
16000	64000	$0.084455$	$5.2784375\times 10^{-6}$

Table 1. Scalar finite-band benchmark for fixed bandwidth

\omega=4

. Each reported time is the median of five repetitions.

The quotient $T(M)/M$ remains approximately constant over this range. Moreover, a least-squares power-law fit of the form

T(M)\sim cM^{\gamma}

gives

\gamma\approx 0.97.

Thus, within the tested range, the observed running time is essentially linear in the target index $M$ . This numerical behaviour is consistent with the theoretical arithmetic complexity $O(\omega M)$ for fixed bandwidth. The experiment is intended as a validation of the scaling predicted by the arithmetic model, rather than as a machine-independent performance estimate.

Figure 1. Measured median running time for the scalar finite-band benchmark with fixed bandwidth

\omega=4

, together with a power-law fit

T(M)\sim cM^{0.97}

6.7. Bit complexity and coefficient growth

The arithmetic estimates above treat operations in the coefficient field as unit-cost operations. In symbolic applications, however, the degrees and heights of the coefficients may grow with the target index. A complete bit-complexity analysis would therefore require independent bounds on coefficient growth.

We do not pursue such bounds here. The complexity results above describe the structural cost of the finite-band reduction itself.

6.8. Comparison of reduction representations

The aim of the proposed method is reduction rather than the construction of an elementary antiderivative. In particular, the basic integrals need not be elementary. A meaningful computational comparison should therefore be made at the level of the resulting reduction representation.

For a target $I_{M}$ , we record the profile

\mathcal{C}_{K}(M)=\bigl(\omega,\,N_{\mathrm{basic}},\,N_{\mathrm{nz}},\,T,\,S\bigr),

where $\omega$ is the recurrence width, $N_{\mathrm{basic}}$ is the number of basic integrals, $N_{\mathrm{nz}}$ is the number of nonzero reduction coefficients, $T$ is the running time, and $S$ measures the size of the symbolic representation.

This comparison does not require the basic integrals to be elementary. The resulting representation

I_{M}=\sum_{j}r_{M,j}I_{m_{j}}+F_{M}(x)

is useful precisely because it separates the explicitly computable part from the finite set of basic integrals.

6.9. Structured acceleration

The entries of the finite-band matrices are generated by polynomial coefficient sequences and have a prescribed dependence on the moment index. This suggests investigating whether additional Toeplitz-like, displacement-rank, or related structure can be exploited for faster reduction of families of target integrals. We leave this question for future work.

7. Conclusion

We have developed a finite-band framework for the reduction of families of integrals arising from differential relations. The construction covers rational logarithmic derivatives, generalized real Schwarz–Christoffel integrals, algebraic logarithmic derivatives, and more general linear differential equations with polynomial coefficients. For a prescribed target integral, the reduction requires only finite data and does not depend on an explicit evaluation of the basic integrals, which may be non-elementary.

Software availability

The reduction algorithms described in this paper are implemented in the Mathematica package BandedReduction: Banded Reduction of Integrals for Hyperexponential and Algebraic Functions [13], referred to as BandedReduction. The package includes routines for the scalar first-order reduction, the generalized Schwarz–Christoffel specialization, algebraic block-band reduction, and reduction derived from linear differential equations with polynomial coefficients. It also contains regression tests and a compact user-facing report for the resulting reductions. The software is archived on Zenodo under DOI 10.5281/zenodo.22980629.

References

[1] G. Almkvist, D. Zeilberger The method of differentiating under the integral sign, Journal of Symbolic Computation 10, (1990), 571–591.
[2] P. Baliarsingh, S. Dutta On an explicit formula for inverse of triangular matrices, Journal of Egyptian Mathematical Society 23, no. 2, (2015), 297–302.
[3] M. Bronstein Integration of elementary functions, Journal of Symbolic Computation 9, (1990), 117–173.
[4] M. Bronstein Symbolic Integration I: Transcendental Functions, Springer, Berlin, (1997).
[5] Y. A. Brychkov Handbook of Special Functions: Derivatives, Integrals, Series and Other Formulas, CRC Press, Boca Raton, (2008).
[6] F. Chyzak An extension of Zeilberger’s fast algorithm to general holonomic functions, Discrete Mathematics 217, (2000), 115–134.
[7] T. A. Driscoll, L. N. Trefethen Schwarz–Christoffel Mapping, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, (2002).
[8] H. Exton $q$ -Hypergeometric Functions and Applications, Ellis Horwood Ltd., Chichester, (1983).
[9] G. A. Korn, M. T. Korn Mathematical Handbook for Scientists and Engineers, Dover Publications, Mineola, (2010).
[10] B. A. Kniehl, O. V. Tarasov Finding new relationships between hypergeometric functions by evaluating Feynman integrals, Nuclear Physics B 854, (2012), 841–852.
[11] C. Krattenthaler, R. K. Srinivasa Automatic generation of hypergeometric identities by the beta integral method, Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics 160, (2003), 159–173.
[12] P. Krasoń, J. Milewski New approach to certain real hyper-elliptic integrals, Integral Transforms and Special Functions, (2020), doi:10.1080/10652469.2019.1703703.
[13] P. Krasoń, J. Milewski BandedReduction: Banded Reduction of Integrals for Hyperexponential and Algebraic Functions, Mathematica software, version 1.0.0, Zenodo (2026), doi:10.5281/zenodo.22980629.
[14] G. Lauricella Sulle funzioni ipergeometriche a più variabili, Rendiconti del Circolo Matematico di Palermo 7, (1893), 111–158.
[15] M. D. Malykh, L. A. Sevastianov, Y. Yu On symbolic integration of algebraic functions, Journal of Symbolic Computation 104, (2021), 563–579.
[16] A. Quarteroni, R. Sacco, F. Saleri Numerical Mathematics, Texts in Applied Mathematics 37, Springer, New York, (2000).
[17] J. Stoer, R. Bulirsch Introduction to Numerical Analysis, Texts in Applied Mathematics 12, Springer, New York, (1993).
[18] L. N. Trefethen Numerical computation of the Schwarz–Christoffel transformation, SIAM Journal on Scientific and Statistical Computing 1, (1980), 82–102.
[19] B. M. Trager Integration of Algebraic Functions, Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, (1984).
[20] R. Vidunas Contiguous relations of hypergeometric series, Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics 153, (2003), 507–519.
[21] D. Zeilberger The method of creative telescoping, Journal of Symbolic Computation 11, (1991), 195–204.

Banded Reduction of Integrals for Hyperexponential and Algebraic Functions

Abstract.

Key words and phrases:

2020 Mathematics Subject Classification

1. Introduction

2. A first-order differential reduction scheme

Lemma 2.1.

Proof.

Proposition 2.2.

Proof.

2.1. The associated band matrix

Proposition 2.3.

Proof.

Definition 2.1.

Remark 2.2.

2.2. Adapted polynomial basis

Lemma 2.4.

Proof.

Proposition 2.5.

Proof.

Remark 2.3.

2.3. Negative powers

Proposition 2.6.

Proof.

2.4. Finite-band reduction theorem

Theorem 2.7 (Finite-band reduction).

Proof.

2.5. Finite computation of reduction coefficients

2.6. Example 1: a hyperexponential weight

Remark 2.4.

2.7. Example 2: a shorter recurrence

3. Generalized real Schwarz–Christoffel integrals

3.1. The polynomial factor

3.2. The fundamental identity

3.3. Positive powers

Proposition 3.1.

Proof.

3.4. The transition matrix

3.5. Negative powers

3.6. Explicit example

4. Algebraic logarithmic derivatives

Proposition 4.1.

Proof.

Theorem 4.2 (Block-band reduction).

Proof.

Proposition 4.3.

Proof.

4.1. Resonant blocks and partial elimination

Proposition 4.4.

Proof.

4.2. The algebraic family yd=q⁡(x)y^{d}=q(x)

4.3. The model case yd=xy^{d}=x

Example 4.1.

5. Reduction from polynomial-coefficient differential equations

Lemma 5.1.

Proof.

5.1. Moment recurrence

Theorem 5.1 (Moment recurrence).

Proof.

5.2. Recurrence width

Definition 5.2.

Proposition 5.2.

Proof.

5.3. Finite reduction

Theorem 5.3 (Finite reduction).

Proof.

Remark 5.3.

5.4. A matrix formulation

5.5. Relation with the first-order case

5.6. A Bessel-function example

6. Algorithmic reduction and complexity

6.1. Scalar reduction algorithm

Proposition 6.1.

Proof.

6.2. Finite matrix realization

6.3. Computational reduction example

6.4. Arithmetic complexity

Theorem 6.2 (Scalar complexity).

Proof.

6.5. Block-band complexity

4.2. The algebraic family $y^{d}=q(x)$

4.3. The model case $y^{d}=x$