Arxiv:1706.10175V1 [Math.CV] 30 Jun 2017 Uscnomlslto Fteieult 11 Ihrsett H D the to Respect with (1.1) Inequality the Metric

Home , Lipschitz continuity

arXiv:1706.10175v1 [math.CV] 30 Jun 2017 uscnomlslto fteieult 11 ihrsett h d the to respect with (1.1) inequality the metric. of solution quasiconformal (1.1) inequality the of section. n[3,teatospoe hta that proved authors the [23], In half-plane upper a that the a proved that also disk and proved unit metric, authors the hyperbolic the from [20], mapping In harmonic discussed. been has mappings 4 For apnsin mappings ee∆ Here ih nti oi.I 6 1,teLpcizcaatrsi f( of characteristic Lipschitz the 21], [6, In topic. this on light othat so D and ac ai erc n isht continuity. Lipschitz and metric, ratio tance 30C20. 35J05, 33C05, 26A16, N FTESLTOST EODODRELPI PDE ELLIPTIC ORDER SECOND TO SOLUTIONS THE OF AND f ISHT OTNIYO USCNOMLMAPPINGS QUASICONFORMAL OF CONTINUITY LIPSCHITZ ′ z ie LSm321_aXveso.e,pitd 20-5-2 2010 printed: PLiSamy3_2016__arXivVersion.tex, File: n[5,Kljcniee h iLpcizcniut of continuity bi-Lipschitz the considered Kalaj [15], In h rtamo hsppri ocnie h isht otniyo ( of continuity Lipschitz the consider to is paper this of aim first The ato[2 a h rtwocniee h td nhroi quas harmonic on study the considered who first the was [22] Martio e od n phrases. and words Key z sb-isht ihrsett ushproi erc on metrics quasihyperbolic to respect with bi-Lipschitz is z D n h mapping the and = ′ IHRSETT H ITNERTOMETRIC RATIO DISTANCE THE TO RESPECT WITH n h isht otniyo h ouino uslna differentia metric. quasilinear ratio a distance of the solution to the respect of with continuity Lipschitz the and eti ( certain Abstract. ahmtc ujc Classification. Subject Mathematics f r rprdmisin domains proper are J x f ersnstetodmninlLpainof Laplacian two-dimensional the represents + = iy C | f ,K K, ntercn er h rils[,1,1,1,1,2]bogtm brought 26] 18, 17, 16, 14, [8, articles the years recent the In . z and | 2 | − h anamo hsppri osuyteLpcizcniut of continuity Lipschitz the study to is paper this of aim main The ′ -uscnomlmpig ihrsett h itnertomet ratio distance the to respect with mappings )-quasiconformal f EJNL N AIAHNPONNUSAMY SAMINATHAN AND LI PEIJIN f H 1. = z f | uscnomlmpig,hroi n oyamncmpig,dis mappings, polyharmonic and harmonic mappings, Quasiconformal noisl sb-isht ihrsett yeblcmetric. hyperbolic to respect with bi-Lipschitz is itself onto 2 u aifigteLpaeeuto ∆ equation Laplace the satisfying nrdcinadmi results main and Introduction steJcba of Jacobian the is + v Df iv, C motn entoswl eicue ae nthis in later included be will definitions Important . | ∆ K eoe h aoinmatrix Jacobian the denotes f qaiofra amncmpigfrom mapping harmonic -quasiconformal ≤ | u v rmr:3C2 01,3A0 13;Secondary: 31B30; 31A30, 30L10, 30C62, Primary: D x x K 1 B noisl sb-isht ihrsetto respect with bi-Lipschitz is itself onto u v qaiofra amncmpigfrom mapping harmonic -quasiconformal | f y y Df . | 1,7.59 018, 2 . f endb ∆ by defined K f qaiofra solution -quasiconformal scle harmonic. called is 0 = ,K K, D K and ′ )-quasiconformal -quasiconformal equation l f = D sac ratio istance ′ f iconformal where , ric, xx + ,K K, f D yy uch ′ to D = )- - 2 P. Li and S. Ponnusamy

Theorem 1.1. Let f be a (K,K′)-quasiconformal C2 mapping from the unit disk D = z : z < 1 onto itself, satisfying the inequality (1.1) and f(0) = 0. Then f is Lipschitz{ | | continuous} with respect to the distance ratio metric. The proof of Theorem 1.1 will be presented in Section 2. Before we proceed further, let us fix up further notation, preliminaries and remarks. The proof of Theorem 1.1 will be presented in Section 2. 1.1. (K,K′)-quasiconformal mappings. We say that a function u : D R is absolutely continuous on lines, ACL in brief, in the domain D if for every→ closed rectangle R D with sides parallel to the axes x and y, u is absolutely continuous on almost every⊂ horizontal line segment and almost every vertical line segment in R. Such a function has, of course, partial derivatives ux and uy a.e. in D (cf. [1]). Further, we say u ACL2 if u ACL and its partial derivatives are locally L2 integrable in D. ∈ ∈ A sense-preserving continuous mapping f : D Ω is said to be ′ 2 → (1) (K,K )-quasiregular if f is ACL in D, Jf = 0 a.e. in D and there are constants K 1 and K′ 0 such that Df 2 6 KJ + K′ a.e. in D, where ≥ ≥ | | ≤ f Df = fz + fz ; (2) K| -quasiregular| | | | if| K′ = 0. In particular, f is called (K,K′)-quasiconformal if f is a (K,K′)-quasiregular homeomorphism; and f is K-quasiconformal if f is a K-quasiregular homeomorphism. Here are some basic comments on these mappings. From [6, Example 2.1] and [21, Example 2.1] we know that there are (K,K′)-quasiregular mappings which are not K1-quasiregular for any K1 1. Moreover, it is known that (see [6, Example ′ ≥ ′ 4.1]) there are (K,K )-quasiconformal mappings whose inverses are not (K1,K1)- quasiconformal for any K 1 and K′ 0. 1 ≥ 1 ≥ Remark 1.1. If f is a (K,K′)-quasiregular mapping, g is a analytic function and g′ is bounded by a constant L, then f g is (K,K′L2)-quasiregular mapping. | | ◦ A mapping f : D Ω is proper if the preimage of every compact set in Ω is compact in D (cf. [19,→ p. 4051] or [30, p. 17]). 1.2. The distance ratio metric. For a subdomain G C and for all z, w G, ⊂ ∈ the distance ratio metric jG is defined as z w j (z,w) = log 1+ | − | , G min δ (z), δ (w) { G G } where δG(z) denotes the Euclidean distance from z to ∂G. The distance ratio metric was introduced by Gehring and Palka [12] and in the above simplified form by Vuorinen [31]. However, the distance ratio metric jG is not invariant under Möbius transformations. Therefore, it is natural to consider the Lipschitz continuity of conformal mappings or Möbius transformations with respect to the distance ratio metric. Gehring and Osgood [11] proved that the distance ratio metric is not altered by more than a factor of 2 under Möbius transformations. Lipschitz continuity of quasiconformal mappings 3

Theorem A. ([11, Proof of Theorem 4]) If G and G′ are proper subdomains of Rn ′ and if f is a Möbius transformation of G onto G , then jG′ (f(x), f(y)) 2jG(x, y) for all x, y G. ≤ ∈ Recall that a mapping f : D Ω is said to be Lipschitz continuous (resp. Lipschitz continuous with respect→ to the distance ratio metric) if there exists a positive constant L (resp. a positive constant L) such that for all z,w D, 1 ∈ f(z) f(w) L z w (resp. j (f(z), f(w)) Lj (z,w)). | − | ≤ 1| − | Ω ≤ D In 2011, Kalaj and Mateljević[17] proved that every quasiconformal C2 diffeo- morphism f from the domain Ω with C1,α compact boundary onto the domain G with C2,α compact boundary satisfying the Poisson differential inequality (1.2) ∆f B Df 2 + C | | ≤ | | for some constants B 0 and C 0, is Lipschitz continuous respect to Euclidean metric. Clearly if B =≥C = 0 in (1.2),≥ then f is harmonic. Recently, the authors in [6, Theorem 1.1] proved the following theorem:

Theorem B. Suppose f is a proper (K,K′)-quasiregular C2 mapping of a Jordan domain D with C1,α boundary onto a Jordan domain Ω with C2,α boundary. If f satisfies the partial differential inequality (1.2) for constants B > 0 and C 0, then f has bounded partial derivatives in D. In particular, f is Lipschitz continuous.≥ Remark 1.2. From Theorem B we infer that if f : D D satisfies the conditions of Theorem 1.1, then there exists a constant M such that→ Df M. Hence for all z,w D, we have f(z) f(w) M z w and f(z) M| z|. ≤ If M < 1, we get ∈ | − | ≤ | − | | | ≤ | | f(z) f(w) jD(f(z), f(w)) = log 1+ | − | min δD(f(z)), δD(f(w)) { } M z w log 1+ | − | ≤ M min δD(z), δD(w) { } jD(z,w), ≤ which clearly shows that f : D D is a Lipschitz continuous function with respect to the distance ratio metric. → In order to state our next result, we need to recall the definition of hypergeometric series. For a, b, c R with c =0, 1, 2,..., the hypergeometric function is defined by the power series∈ 6 − − ∞ n (a)n(b)n z F (a, b; c; z) := 2F1(a, b; c; z)= , z < 1, (c)n n! | | Xn=0 where (a) =1and(a) = a(a+1) (a+n 1) for n =1, 2,... are the Pochhammer 0 n ··· − symbols. Obviously, for n = 0, 1, 2,..., (a)n = Γ(a + n)/Γ(a). In particular, for a, b, c > 0 and a + b

Consider the operator equation

(1.3) Tα(f) = 0 in D, where f : D C, α R, and → ∈ α2 α ∂ ∂ ∂2 T = (1 z 2)−α−1 + (1 z 2)−α−1(z + z )+(1 z 2)−α α − 4 −| | 2 −| | ∂z ∂z −| | ∂z∂z is the second order elliptic partial differential operator defined on the unit disk D. In the case of α = 0, Tα(f) = 0 is equivalent to saying that f is harmonic in D. More generally, if f satisfies (1.3) with α = 2(n 1), then f is polyharmonic (or n-harmonic) in D, where n 1, 2,... (cf. [2,− 5, 9, 27]). Recently, several new properties of polyharmonic mappings∈ { are} discussed in [2]. The following result concerns the solutions to the equation (1.3).

Lemma C. [25, Theorem 2.2] Let α R and f C2(D). Then f satisﬁes (1.3) if and only if it has a series expansion for∈ z D of∈ the form ∈ ∞ α α ∞ α α (1.4) f(z)= c F ( ,k ; k + 1; z 2)zk + c F ( ,k ; k + 1; z 2)zk, k − 2 − 2 | | −k − 2 − 2 | | Xk=0 Xk=1 ∞ where ck k=−∞ is a sequence of complex numbers satisfying { } 1 k (1.5) lim sup ck | | 1. |k|→∞ | | ≤ In particular, the expansion (1.4), subject to (1.5), converges in C∞(D), and every solution f of (1.3) is C∞-smooth in D. In [10, 24], the authors gave some properties of solution to (1.3) whereas in [28, 29], the authors considered the Lipschitz continuity of the distance-ratio metric under some M¨obius automorphisms of the unit ball and conformal mappings from D to D. In [7], the authors discussed the Lipschitz continuity of polyharmonic mappings with respect to the distance ratio metric. Thus, it is natural to investigate Lipschitz continuity of the solution of (1.3) in D with respect to the distance ratio metric. We now state our next result. Theorem 1.2. For α> 1, let f : D D be a C2-solution to (1.3) with the series expansion of the form (1.4)− and f(0) =→ 0. If ∞ ∞ α α ( 2 )n(k 2 )n (1.6) ( ck + c−k ) − − 1, | | | | (k + 1)nn! ≤ Xk=1 Xn=0 then jD(f(z), f(w)) jD(z,w), ≤ and this inequality is sharp. That is, f is Lipschitz continuous with respect to the distance ratio metric. Remark 1.3. In Theorem 1.2, we restrict α> 1, see [25, proposition 1.4] for the reason for this constraint. − The proof of Theorem 1.2 will be presented in Section 2. Lipschitz continuity of quasiconformal mappings 5

2. Proof of Theorems 1.1 and 1.2 First we shall deal with the Lipschitz continuity of certain (K,K′)-quasiconformal mappings and then consider the Lipschitz continuity of the solution to the differential operator Tα with respect to the distance ratio metric. Lemma 2.1. Assume the hypotheses of Theorem 1.1. Then there exists a constant C(K,K′, B) such that for z D ∈ 1 z 2 (2.1) −| | C(B,K,K′). 1 f(z) 2 ≤ −| | Proof. By assumption f is a (K,K′)-quasiconformal C2 mapping from D onto itself, satisfying the inequality (1.1) and f(0) = 0. For convenience, we denote the class of all such functions f by (D,B,K,K′). Then there is a positive constant A not depending on f such thatQC the function ϕ , f (D,B,K,K′), defined by f ∈ QC 1 1 ϕ (z)= + eA(|f(z)|−1) f −A A is subharmonic in D. Now, let us prove the existence of such an A. Take 1 1 ψ(ρ)= + eA(ρ−1). −A A ′ A(ρ−1) ′′ A(ρ−1) Then ψ (ρ) = e and ψ (ρ) = Ae . On the other hand, using fz = (1/2)(f if ) and f = (1/2)(f + if ), we find that x − y z x y D f 2 = f 2 + f 2 =( f + f )2 + i2( f f )2 =4 f f , | | || | |x | |y | |z | |z | |z −| |z | |z| |z and thus, (2.2) ∆ϕ = ψ′′( f ) D f 2 + ψ′( f )∆ f . f | | | | || | | | | Furthermore, put s = f/ f . By elementary calculations we see that the following equalities hold: | |

Using (1.1), (2.2), (2.3) and (2.4), it follows ﬁnally that

A(ρ−1) 2 2 ∆ϕf =e A Dρ + ρ Ds +Re(s∆f) h | | | | i A A(ρ−1) √ ′ 2 2 e 2 ( Df K ) B Df ≥ hK | | − − | | i 2 ′ ′ A(ρ−1) A BK 2 2A√K AK =e − 2 Df 2 Df + 2 . K | | − K | | K We obtain from Theorem B that f is Lipschitz continuous, and then there exists a constant M such that Df M. Hence, if we choose an appropriate A, satisfying A = BK2 and | | ≤ 6 A√K′ √ABK′K2 − M, A BK2 ≥ − i.e. (2.5) (√K′ M)2A2 + [2BMK2(√K′ M) BK2K′]A + B2M 2K4 0, − − − ≥ we obtain the inequality ∆ϕ (z) 0 for z < 1. f ≥ | | If M = √K′, then there exists an appropriate value of A satisfying the inequality (2.5). If M = √K′ and K′ +4M 2 4M√K′ 0, then (2.5) holds for all A. If 6 − ≤ M = √K′ and K′ +4M 2 4M√K′ > 0, then (2.5) holds for all 6 − BK2K′ 2BMK2(√K′ M)+ BK2 K′(K′ +4M 2 4M√K′) A − − q − . ≥ 2(√K′ M)2 − In conclusion, there must exist an appropriate A such that ∆ϕf (z) 0 for z < 1. Deﬁne ≥ | | F (z) = sup ϕ (z): f (D,B,K,K′) . { f ∈ QC } We prove that F is subharmonic in D. By [13, Theorem 1.6.2], we only need to prove that F is continuous. Deﬁne h(z)= eA(|z|−1), z < 1. Elementary calculations show that | | A z A z h (z)= eA(|z|−1) and h (z)= eA(|z|−1). z 2 z z 2 z | | | | Then Dh = h + h = AeA(|z|−1) < A which implies that | | | z| | z| h(z) h(z′) A z z′ for z, z′ D. | − | ≤ | − | ∈ According to Theorem B, we know that f is Lipschitz continuous. Therefore

′ 1 A(|f(z)|−1) A(|f(z′)|−1) ′ ′ ϕf (z) ϕf (z ) = e e f(z) f(z ) M z z , | − | A − ≤| − | ≤ | − |

where M is a constant. Hence, F (z) F (z′) M z z′ so that F is continuous. Finally, from the similar proof of| [15,− Lemma| 2.3], ≤ we| − complete| the proof. Lipschitz continuity of quasiconformal mappings 7

2.1. Proof of Theorem 1.1. From the hypotheses of Theorem 1.1 and Lemma 2.1, we obtain that 1 z 2 −| | C(K,K′, B) 1 f(z) 2 ≤ −| | and thus, we obtain that

1 z 1+ f(z) −| | C(K,K′, B) | | 2C(K,K′, B). 1 f(z) ≤ 1+ z ≤ −| | | | Moreover, from Theorem B, we see that f is Lipschitz continuous and therefore, there exists a constant M1 such that Df M1. Now, we choose an appropriate constant | | ≤ ′ M satisfying M > max M1, 1/(2C(K,K , B)) so that Df M. Consequently, using the Bernoulli inequality,{ for any two points} z and w| in|D ≤, we have

f(z) f(w) jD(f(z), f(w)) = log 1+ | − | min δD(f(z)), δD(f(w)) { } z w log 1+2C(K,K′, B)M | − | ≤ min δD(z), δD(w) ′ { } 2C(K,K , B)MjD(z,w) ≤ and thus, the proof of the theorem is complete.

α α 2.2. Proof of Theorem 1.2. For convenience, let g(t) = F ( 2 ,k 2 ; k + 1; t). For z,w D, let us assume that f(z) f(w) . Then − − ∈ | |≥| | f(z) f(w) | − | ∞ ∞ 2 k 2 k 2 k 2 k = ck( g( z )z g( w )w )+ c−k( g( z )z g( w )w ) | | | − | | | | | − | | Xk=1 Xk=1 ∞ k k k k g( z 2)z g( z 2)w + g( z 2)w g( w 2)w z w | | | − | | | | − | | | c ≤| − | z w | k| Xk=1 | − | ∞ g( z 2)zk g( z 2)wk + g( z 2)wk g( w 2)wk + z w | | | − | | | | − | | | c | − | z w | −k| Xk=1 | − | ∞ ∞ α α ( 2 )n(k 2 )n 2n k−1 k−2 k−1 z w ( ck + c−k ) − − z ( z + z w + + w ) ≤| − | | | | | (k + 1)nn! | | | | | | | | ··· | | Xk=1 Xn=0 ∞ α α ( )n(k )n + − 2 − 2 w k( z 2n−1 + z 2n−2 w + + w 2n−1) (k + 1)nn! | | | | | | | | ··· | | Xn=0 ∞ ∞ α α 2n+k−1 ( 2 )n(k 2 )n s z w ( ck + c−k ) − − z , ≤| − | | | | | (k + 1)nn! | | Xk=1 Xn=0 Xs=0 8 P. Li and S. Ponnusamy

and ∞ ∞ α α ( 2 )n(k 2 )n 1 f(z) ( ck + c−k ) − − f(z) −| | ≥ | | | | (k + 1)nn! −| | Xk=1 Xn=0 ∞ ∞ α α ( 2 )n(k 2 )n 2 k ( ck + c−k ) − − g( z ) z ≥ | | | | (k + 1)nn! − | | | | Xk=1 Xn=0 ∞ ∞ α α ( 2 )n(k 2 )n 2n+k = ( ck + c−k ) − − (1 z ) | | | | (k + 1)nn! −| | Xk=1 Xn=0 ∞ ∞ α α 2n+k−1 ( 2 )n(k 2 )n s =(1 z ) ( ck + c−k ) − − z , −| | | | | | (k + 1)nn! | | Xk=1 Xn=0 Xs=0 so that, using the Bernoulli inequality, we have f(z) f(w) jD(f(z), f(w)) = log 1+ | − | 1 f(z) −| | z w log 1+ | − | ≤ 1 z −| | jD(z,w). ≤ As in [7, Theorem 7], the mapping f(z) = z 2(p−1)zm or f(z) = z 2(p−1)zm for p, m 1, shows the sharpness in the last inequality.| | The proof of| | the theorem is complete.≥

Acknowledgements. The authors thank the referee for his/her careful reading and many useful comments. The ﬁrst author was supported by Centre for International Co-operation in Science (CICS) through the award of “INSA JRD-TATA Fellowship” and was completed during her visit to the Indian Statistical Institute (ISI), Chennai Centre. The research was partly supported by NSF of China (No. 11571216 and No. 11671127). The second author is on leave from the IIT Madras.

References 1. L.V. Ahlfors, Lectures on quasiconformal mappings, Princeton (NJ), Van Nostrand Company, 1966. 2. K. F. Amozova, E. G. Ganenkova, and S. Ponnusamy, Criteria of univalence and fully α- accessibility for p-harmonic and p-analytic functions, Complex Var. Elliptic Equ., 62(8) (2017), 1165–1183. 3. G. Anderson, R. Barnard, K. Richards, M. Vamanamurthy and M. Vuorinen, Inequalities for zero-balanced hypergeometric functions, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 126 (1995), 1713–1723. 4. G. Anderson, S. Qiu, M. Vamanamurthy and M. Vuorinen, Generalized elliptic integrals and modular equations, Paciﬁc J. Math., 192 (2000), 1–37. 5. A. Borichev and H. Hedenmalm, Weighted integrability of polyharmonic functions, Adv. Math., 264 (2014), 464–505. 6. J. Chen, P. Li, S. K. Sahoo and X. Wang, On the Lipschitz continuity of certain quasiregular mappings between smooth Jordan domains, Israel J. Math. , (2017), 26 pages. DOI 10.1007/s11856-017-1522-y. Lipschitz continuity of quasiconformal mappings 9

7. J. Chen, A. Rasila and X. Wang, On lengths, areas and Lipschitz continuity of polyharmonic mappings, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 422 (2015), 1196–1212. 8. M. Chen and X. Chen, (K,K′)-quasiconformal harmonic mappings of the upper half plane onto itself, Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Math., 37 (2012), 265–276. 9. Sh. Chen, S. Ponnusamy and X. Wang, Bloch constant and Landau’s theorem for planar p-harmonic mappings, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 373 (2011), 102–110. 10. Sh. Chen and M. Vuorinen, Some properties of a class of elliptic partial differential operators, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 431 (2015), 1124–1137. 11. F. W. Gehring and B. G. Osgood, Uniform domains and the quasihyperbolic metric. J. Analyse Math. 36 (1979), 50–74. 12. F. W. Gehring and B. P. Palka, Quasiconformally homogeneous domains. J. Analyse Math. 30 (1976), 172–199. 13. L. Hörmander, An introduction to complex analysis in several variables, 3rd ed., xii+254 pp. North-Holland Mathematical Library 7. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Co., 1990. 14. D. Kalaj, Quasiconformal and harmonic mappings between Jordan domains, Math. Z., 260 (2008), 237–252. 15. D. Kalaj, On quasiconformal harmonic maps between surfaces, Int. Math. Res. Notices, 2 (2015), 355–380. 16. D. Kalaj and M. Mateljević, Inner estimate and quasiconformal harmonic maps between smooth domains, J. Anal. Math., 100 (2006), 117–132. 17. D. Kalaj and M. Mateljević, On certain nonlinear elliptic PDE and quasiconfomal maps between Euclidean surfaces, Potential Anal., 34 (2011), 13–22. 18. D. Kalaj and M. Pavlović, Boundary correspondence under harmonic quasiconformal diffeo- morphisms of a half-plane, Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Math., 30 (2005), 159–165. 19. D. Kalaj and M. Pavlović, On quasiconformal self-mappings of the unit disk satisfying Poisson equation, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 363 (2011), 4043–4061. 20. M.Kneˇzevićand M. Mateljević, On the quasi-isometries of harmonic quasiconformal mappings, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 334 (2007), 404–413. 21. P. Li, J. Chen and X. Wang, Quasiconformal solutions of Poisson equations, Bull. Aust. Math. Soc., 92 (2015), 420–428. 22. O. Martio, On harmonic quasiconformal mappings, Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Math., 425 (1968), 3–10. 23. M. Mateljevićand M. Vuorinen, On harmonic quasiconformal quasi-isometries, J. Inequal. Appl., (2010). Art. ID 178732. 24. J. Mu and X. Chen, Landau-type theorems for solutions of a quasilinear differential equation, J. Math. Study, 47(3) (2014), 295–304. 25. A. Olofsson, Differential operators for a scale of Poisson type kernels in the unit disc, J. Anal. Math., 27 (2002), 365–372. 26. M. Pavlović, Boundary correspondence under harmonic quasiconformal homeomorphisms of the unit disk, Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Math., 27(2) (2002), 365–372. 27. M. Pavlović, Decompositions of Lp and Hardy spaces of polyharmonic functions, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 216 (1997), 499–509. 28. S. Simić, Lipschitz continuity of the distace ratio metric on the unit disk. Filomat 27(8) (2013), 1505–1509. 29. S. Simić, M. Vuorinen, and G. Wang, Sharp Lipschitz constants for the distance ratio metric. Math. Scand. 116(1) (2015), 89–103. 30. M. Vuorinen, Exceptional sets and boundary behavior of quasiregular mappings in n-space. Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Ser. A I Math. Dissertationes 11 (1976), 1–44. 31. M. Vuorinen, Conformal invariants and quasiregular mappings. J. Analyse Math. 45 (1985), 69–115. 10 P. Li and S. Ponnusamy

Peijin Li, Department of Mathematics, Hunan First Normal University, Chang- sha, Hunan 410205, People’s Republic of China E-mail address: [email protected]

S. Ponnusamy, Stat-Math Unit,, Indian Statistical Institute (ISI), Chennai Cen- tre, 110, Nelson Manickam Road, Aminjikarai,, Chennai, 600 029, India. E-mail address: [email protected], [email protected]