Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 41 references

Further study on the conformable fractional Gauss hypergeometric function

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-27 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The conformable fractional Gauss hypergeometric function obeys the classical $_{2}F_{1}$ identities in the variable $x^{\alpha}$, including series solutions at $x=1$ and $x=\infty$.

desk verdict Routine restatement of classical 2F1 identities under the substitution X=x^α; Section 9's fractional Laplace transform is invalid, and the paper has no substantive new content. read the letter →

arxiv 2009.12242 v1 pith:CDZX2XWJ submitted 2020-09-25 math.CA

Mahmoud Abul-Ez , Mohra Zayed , Ali Youssef This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.CA MSC 33C0534A0826A33
keywords conformablefractionalderivativeGausshypergeometricfunctiondifferentialequationsgeneratingfunctionscontiguousrelationsLaplacetransformintegralrepresentationspecial
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper builds a systematic analogue, in conformable fractional calculus, of the classical toolbox for the Gauss hypergeometric function. Its central claim is that the conformable fractional Gauss hypergeometric function $_{2}F_{1}(\mu,\nu;c;x^{\alpha})$ obeys the same structural laws as the ordinary $_{2}F_{1}$ in the variable $x^{\alpha}$: the conformable fractional Gauss hypergeometric equation has the two expected series solutions about the singular points $x=1$ and $x=\infty$, and the function admits generating functions, contiguous relations, recursion formulas, an integral representation, and a fractional Laplace transform. A sympathetic reader would care because these formulas let one write explicit general solutions of several conformable fractional differential equations of mathematical physics, including fractional Legendre, Chebyshev, Fibonacci, and Lucas equations, in closed form.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the conformable fractional derivative $D^{\alpha}f(x)=\lim_{h\to 0}\frac{f(x+hx^{1-\alpha})-f(x)}{h}$ together with the fractional power series $\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}a_{n}x^{\alpha n}$; the governing identity is $D^{\alpha} x^{\alpha s}=\alpha s\,x^{\alpha(s-1)}$, so equation (3.1) is exactly the classical hypergeometric equation in the variable $X=x^{\alpha}$. A second tool is the Euler-type operator $\theta_{\alpha}=\frac{1}{\alpha}x^{\alpha}D^{\alpha}$, which acts on $x^{\alpha n}$ as multiplication by $n$; the paper uses it to derive the differential equation and the contiguous relations. The fractional power series (Frobenius) technique at the fractional regular singular points $x=1$ and $x=\infty$ carries the solution construction.

What would settle it

Compute the first few coefficients of a power-series solution of (3.1) about $x=\infty$ by substituting $y=x^{-\alpha\mu}\sum_{n\ge 0}a_{n}x^{-\alpha n}$ into the equation and equating powers; the paper's formula (3.14) predicts $a_{n}=(\mu)_{n}(\mu-c+1)_{n}/(n!(\mu-\nu+1)_{n})$. A mismatch in $a_{1}$ or $a_{2}$ would falsify the claimed solution.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's discovery, stated on its own terms, is that the conformable fractional Gauss hypergeometric function defined by the series $_{2}F_{1}(\mu,\nu;c;x^{\alpha})=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\frac{(\mu)_{n}(\nu)_{n}}{(c)_{n}\,n!}x^{\alpha n}$ satisfies the same structural identities as the classical Gauss hypergeometric function in the variable $X=x^{\alpha}$. In particular, the conformable fractional Gauss hypergeometric equation (3.1) is solved about $x=1$ by the two independent series $_{2}F_{1}(\mu,\nu;\mu+\nu+1-c;1-x^{\alpha})$ and $(1-x^{\alpha})^{c-\mu-\nu}\,_{2}F_{1}(c-\nu,c-\mu;c-\mu-\nu+1;1-x^{\alpha})$, and about $x=\infty$ by $x^{-\alpha\mu}\,_{2}F_{1}(\mu,\mu-c+1;\mu-\nu+1;x^{-\alpha})$ and $x^{-\alpha\nu}\,_{2}F_{1}(\nu,\nu-c+1;\nu-\mu+1;x^{-\alpha})$. The paper further derives generating functions, differentiation formulas, contiguous relations, recursion formulas, an integral representation, and a fractional Laplace transform for this function, and it applies the solution formulas to fractional versions of the Legendre, Chebyshev, Fibonacci, and Lucas equations.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that solutions of the fractional differential equation can be expanded as fractional power series near the singular points $x=1$ and $x=\infty$, and that the series can be differentiated, integrated, and Laplace-transformed term by term even though uniform convergence is not proved.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The CFGHE (3.1) has two independent fractional power-series solutions about each of $x=1$ and $x=\infty$, providing a local solution basis under the stated convergence assumptions.
  • Conformable fractional versions of the Legendre, Chebyshev, Fibonacci, and Lucas differential equations can be solved explicitly in terms of the CFGHF after a change of variable.
  • The generating functions and contiguous relations allow parameters and arguments in fractional hypergeometric expressions to be shifted, supporting the same kinds of computations as the classical identities.
  • The integral representation and the fractional Laplace transform provide routes to evaluating and numerically approximating the CFGHF and to solving fractional initial-value problems.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Because the conformable derivative reduces to the ordinary derivative when $\alpha=1$, each formula in the paper should collapse to a known classical hypergeometric identity in that limit; verifying this limit would be a quick consistency test.
  • The proofs largely rerun classical series manipulations with $x^{\alpha}$ in place of $x$, which suggests that a systematic substitution $z\mapsto x^{\alpha}$ in standard hypergeometric tables would generate many additional fractional identities beyond those listed.
  • The unproved term-by-term interchanges in the integral and Laplace-transform sections mean that formulas such as (7.4) and (9.3) should be applied cautiously at parameter values on the boundary of convergence.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Formalized claims in Lean

  1. Claim #1: The paper's discovery, stated on its own terms, is that the conformable fractional Gauss hypergeometric function defined by the series $_{2}F_{1}(\mu,\nu;c;x^{\alpha})=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\frac{(\mu)_{n}(\nu)_{n}}{(c)_{n}\,n!}x^{\alpha n}$ satisfies the same structural identities as the classical Gauss hypergeometric function in the variable $X=x^{\alpha}$. In particular, the conformable fractional

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Request a human review

A listed scientist reviews the paper for a fee and the review publishes here regardless of verdict. See the reviewers or get listed.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the conformable fractional Gauss hypergeometric function 2F1(µ,ν;c;x^α), where D^α is the conformable fractional derivative. It derives solutions of the conformable fractional Gauss hypergeometric equation (3.1) around x=1 and x=∞, then presents generating functions, differential forms, differential operators, contiguous relations, an integral representation, a fractional Laplace transform, and applications to conformable fractional Legendre, Chebyshev, Fibonacci, and Lucas equations. Many of the stated identities are classical Gauss hypergeometric identities under the substitution X=x^α, rewritten in the conformable fractional notation.

Significance. The solution formulas in Section 3 are mostly correct and the applications in Section 10 are potentially useful; the Euler-type integral representation (7.4) and several contiguous relations are also correctly transcribed from the classical theory. However, the conformable derivative is essentially x^{1-α}d/dx, so the mathematical content is largely a reduction to the classical hypergeometric function by the change of variable X=x^α; the novelty is therefore modest. More importantly, the paper contains a false identity in the advertised fractional Laplace transform section, and several double-series interchanges are made without adequate convergence hypotheses. These issues are load-bearing for the manuscript's stated contributions.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 9, Eqs. (9.2)-(9.3)] The claimed fractional Laplace transform is not a valid equality. The defining series (3.3) converges only for |x^α|<1, while the Laplace integral in (9.1) integrates over t∈[0,∞), so the term-by-term integration in (9.2) is unjustified. For generic non-terminating parameters the resulting series (9.3) diverges for every finite s: the ratio of successive terms behaves like const·n^{α/γ}/s^{α/γ} in modulus. A concrete counterexample is α=γ=1, µ=ν=c=1: the left side of (9.2) is ∫_0^∞ e^{-st}(1-t)^{-1}dt, which diverges at t=1 for every s>0, while the right side is ∑_{n=0}∞ n!/s^{n+1}, which diverges by the ratio test. No analytic-continuation or summability convention is supplied, so (9.3) is only a formal divergent expansion. Since the abstract advertises the fractional Laplace transform of the CFGHF, this is a central error that cannot be fixed by a local clarification.
  2. [Section 4, Theorems 4.1-4.3] The stated hypotheses for the generating functions are insufficient and the proofs interchange double series without establishing absolute convergence. For Theorem 4.1, the right-hand side contains 2F1(µ,ν;c;x^α/(1-t^α)), which is not defined by the series (3.3) unless |x^α/(1-t^α)|<1; the assumptions |x^α|<1 and |t^α|<1 do not imply this. For example, with x^α=t^α=0.9 one has |x^α/(1-t^α)|=9, so the right-hand side diverges under the paper's own definition of the function. Similar issues affect Theorems 4.2 and 4.3. The theorems should be stated with a condition such as |x^α/(1-t^α)|<1 and with a convergence proof for the double-series rearrangement, or else formulated explicitly as formal power-series or analytic-continuation identities.
  3. [Section 3, Eqs. (3.7) and the solution about x=∞] The paper claims to give 'the general solution' of the CFGHE about x=1 and x=∞, but it does not state the standard non-resonance conditions under which the two listed solutions are linearly independent. The two solutions in (3.7) are independent only when c-µ-ν is not an integer (or with suitable exceptions), and the two solutions about x=∞ require µ-ν not to be an integer; otherwise logarithmic solutions are needed. Since the central claim of the paper is that it provides general solutions, these exceptional cases and their treatments must be stated explicitly.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eqs. (5.14) and (5.19), Example 10.1] The symbol γ appears in (c-γ)_n in (5.14) and (5.19) although γ has not been defined; these should be ν. Likewise, Example 10.1 writes 'γ=-1' where ν=-1 is meant.
  2. [Section 5.2] The differential forms (5.13), (5.15), (5.16), and (5.20) are stated without proof. The remark that they 'can be proved similarly' is not adequate for a research paper, as these formulas are not immediate consequences of the proved cases and some require separate verification.
  3. [Section 9] The notation in (9.2)-(9.3) is confusing: L_γ[2F1(µ,ν;c;x^α)] uses x both as the independent variable of the CFGHF and as the integration variable in (9.1). The variable of the Laplace transform should be made explicit, for example L_γ(t↦2F1(µ,ν;c;t^α))(s).
  4. [Theorem 8.3] The proof of (8.16) uses the integral representation (7.4), whose hypotheses c>ν>0 are not implied by the stated condition c+n∉Z^-_0. The theorem needs a valid parameter range or an analytic-continuation argument.
  5. [Theorem 5.2] The proof applies Theorem 5.1 with argument y^α=-x^α/(1-x^α), which can leave the disk of convergence |y^α|<1 of Theorem 5.1. The proof needs an explicit analytic-continuation justification.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: solutions and identities follow from the series definition and external prior work, not from the claimed conclusions.

full rationale

Section 3 defines the CFGHF by the series (3.3) and solves the CFGHE. The solution about x=0 is quoted from [19] (Hammad et al., not the present authors), and the solutions about x=1 and x=∞ are obtained either by substituting x^α=1−t^α into that known solution or by a direct fractional Frobenius calculation (Section 3.2, equations (3.8)–(3.15)). No parameter is fitted and no target identity is inserted as an assumption. Section 6 rederives equation (3.1) from the series via the operator θ_α, but this is a verification that the series solves the independently stated equation, not a circular derivation of the solutions. The only self-citations are [21] (the standard conformable derivative definition, co-authored by Youssef) and [28] (a Legendre-polynomial formula by three of the present authors); the latter is immediately rederived in Section 10, and neither carries the argument. The fractional Laplace transform computation in Section 9 interchanges an infinite series with an integral without justification and likely yields divergent series for generic parameters; this is a correctness risk, not a circularity, so it does not affect the circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted. The CFGHF and the conformable derivative are taken from prior literature; the paper introduces no new entities. The axioms listed are the background assumptions the derivations rely on, with the series-integral interchange being the most fragile.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The conformable fractional derivative satisfies D^α x^p = p x^(p-α) for all real p.
    Used throughout, e.g., in the Frobenius method in Section 3.2 and the differential forms (5.9)-(5.16). It is a consequence of the definition but is imported from [21] without proof.
  • domain assumption The fractional power series solution method (Frobenius method) applies to the CFGHE at α-regular singular points, yielding a basis of solutions in fractional power series.
    Used in Section 3 to obtain solutions about x=1 and x=∞ via the substitutions x^α=1-t^α and x^α=1/ζ^α. The paper follows [19] but does not prove convergence of these series.
  • ad hoc to paper Infinite series of the CFGHF may be interchanged with the conformable fractional integral I_α and the fractional Laplace transform L_α without explicit uniform convergence verification.
    Used in the proofs of Theorem 7.3, Eq. (9.2), Theorem 9.1 and 9.2. No convergence justification is provided; the parameter ranges (e.g., c>ν>0, |x^α|<1, Re(s) sufficiently large) are not fully stated.
  • standard math The parameters are such that the Pochhammer symbols (c)_n are nonzero and the hypergeometric series converge.
    Assumed implicitly when writing the series (3.3) and all subsequent identities. This is standard hypergeometric function theory.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Further study on the conformable fractional Gauss hypergeometric function." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CDZX2XWJ

@misc{pith2026200912242,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Further study on the conformable fractional Gauss hypergeometric function},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CDZX2XWJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2009.12242}
}
abstract

This paper presents a somewhat exhaustive study on the conformable fractional Gauss hypergeometric function (CFGHF). We start by solving the conformable fractional Gauss hypergeometric equation (CFGHE) about the fractional regular singular points $x=1$ and $x=\infty$. Next, various generating functions of the CFGHF are established. We also develop some differential forms for the CFGHF. Subsequently, differential operators and the contiguous relations are reported. Furthermore, we introduce the conformable fractional integral representation and the fractional Laplace transform of CFGHF. As an application, and after making a suitable change of the independent variable, we provide general solutions of some known conformable fractional differential equations, which could be written by means of the CFGHF.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    and Spanier, J

    Oldham, K. and Spanier, J. (1974). The fractional calculus theo ry and applications of differentiation and integration to arbitrary order. Elsevier

    work page 1974

  2. [2]

    G., Kilbas, A

    Samko, S. G., Kilbas, A. A. and Marichev, O. I. (1993). Fractiona l integrals and deriva- tives (Vol. 1). Yverdon-les-Bains, Switzerland: Gordon and Breac h Science Publishers, Yverdon

    work page 1993

  3. [3]

    Miller, K. S. and Ross, B. (1993). An introduction to the fraction al calculus and frac- tional differential equations. Wiley

    work page 1993

  4. [4]

    Podlubny, I. (1998). Fractional differential equations: an intr oduction to fractional derivatives, fractional differential equations, to methods of the ir solution and some of their applications. Elsevier. 31

    work page 1998

  5. [5]

    Hilfer, R. (Ed.). (2000). Applications of fractional calculus in phy sics (Vol. 35, No. 12, pp. 87-130). Singapore: World scientific

    work page 2000

  6. [6]

    and Grigolini, P

    West, B., Bologna, M. and Grigolini, P. (2012). Physics of fractal operators. Springer Science & Business Media

    work page 2012

  7. [7]

    Stankovi, B. (2006). An equation with left and right fractional d erivatives. Publications de l’Institut Mathematique, 80(94), 259-272

    work page 2006

  8. [8]

    Tarasov, V. E. (2006). Fractional variations for dynamical sy stems: Hamilton and La- grange approaches. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Gen eral, 39(26), 8409

    work page 2006

Show all 41 references
  1. [9]

    Magin, R. L. (2004). Fractional calculus in bioengineering, part 1 . Critical Reviews in Biomedical Engineering, 32(1)

    2004

  2. [10]

    Magin, R. L. (2004). Fractional calculus in bioengineering, part 1. Critical Reviews in Biomedical Engineering, 32(2)

    2004

  3. [11]

    and Mainardi, F

    Gorenflo, R. and Mainardi, F. (1997). Fractional calculus. In F ractals and fractional calculus in continuum mechanics (pp. 223-276). Springer, Vienna

    1997

  4. [12]

    Agrawal, O. P. (2004). A general formulation and solution sche me for fractional optimal control problems. Nonlinear Dynamics, 38(1-4), 323-337

    2004

  5. [13]

    A., Srivastava, H

    Kilbas, A. A., Srivastava, H. M. and Trujillo, J. J. (2006). Theor y and applications of fractional differential equations (Vol. 204). elsevier

    2006

  6. [14]

    and Purohit, S

    Agarwal, P., Chand, M. and Purohit, S. D. (2014). A note on gen erating functions involving the generalized Gauss hypergeometric functions. Nationa l Academy Science Letters, 37(5), 457-459

    2014

  7. [15]

    A., Qadir, A., Rafique, M

    Chaudhry, M. A., Qadir, A., Rafique, M. and Zubair, S. M. (1997) . Extension of Euler’s beta function. Journal of computational and applied mathematics , 78(1), 19-32

    1997

  8. [16]

    A., Qadir, A., Srivastava, H

    Chaudhry, M. A., Qadir, A., Srivastava, H. M. and Paris, R. B. (2 004). Extended hy- pergeometric and confluent hypergeometric functions. Applied Ma thematics and Com- putation, 159(2), 589-602

  9. [17]

    ¨Ozergin, E. (2011). Some properties of hypergeometric function s (Doctoral dissertation, Eastern Mediterranean University (EMU))

    2011

  10. [18]

    ¨Ozergin, E., ¨Ozarslan, M. A. and Altn, A. (2011). Extension of gamma, beta and hypergeometric functions. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 235(16), 4601-4610

    2011

  11. [19]

    A., Alzaareer, H., Al-Zoubi, H

    Hammad, M. A., Alzaareer, H., Al-Zoubi, H. and Dutta, H. (2019) . Fractional Gauss hypergeometric differential equation. Journal of Interdisciplinar y Mathematics, 22(7), 1113-1121. 32

    2019

  12. [20]

    and Noreen, A

    Ali, A., Islam, M. and Noreen, A. (2020). Solution of Fractional k -Hypergeometric Differential Equation. International Journal of Mathematical An alysis, 14(3), 125-132

    2020

  13. [21]

    and Sababheh, M

    Khalil, R., Al Horani, M., Yousef, A. and Sababheh, M. (2014). A n ew definition of fractional derivative. Journal of Computational and Applied Math ematics, 264, 65-70

    2014

  14. [22]

    Abdeljawad, T. (2015). On conformable fractional calculus. J ournal of computational and Applied Mathematics, 279, 57-66

    2015

  15. [23]

    Hammad, M. A. and Khalil, R. (2016). Systems of linear fractiona l differential equations. Asian Journal of Mathematics and Computer Research, 12(2), 12 0-126

    2016

  16. [24]

    El-Ajou, A. (2020). A modification to the conformable fraction al calculus with some applications. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 59, 2239-2249

    2020

  17. [25]

    Podlubny, I. (1999). Fractional differential equations, vol. 1 98 of Mathematics in Science and Engineering

    1999

  18. [26]

    Special Functions

    Rainville, Earl D. Special Functions. 1960. Chelsea, New York (1 969)

    1960

  19. [27]

    and Naz, M

    Mubeen, S., Rahman, G., Rehman, A. and Naz, M. (2014). Contig uous function rela- tions for-hypergeometric functions. International Scholarly Re search Notices, 2014

    2014

  20. [28]

    and De la Sen, M

    Abul-Ez, M., Youssef, A., Zayed, M. and De la Sen, M. (2020). On conformable frac- tional Legendre polynomials and their convergence properties with applications. arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.09556

    2020 arXiv

  21. [29]

    and G¨ okdoan, A

    ¨Unal, E. and G¨ okdoan, A. (2016). Uyumlu Kesir Mertebeden Cheby shev Diferen- siyel Denklemleri ve Kesirsel Chebyshev Polinomlar. Afyon Kocatep e niversitesi Fen ve Mhendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, 16(3), 576-584

    2016

  22. [30]

    B., Saad, N

    Opps, S. B., Saad, N. and Srivastava, H. M. (2009). Recursion formulas for Appells hypergeometric function F2 with some applications to radiation field problems. Applied mathematics and computation, 207(2), 545-558

    2009

  23. [31]

    Rao, K. S. and Lakshminarayanan, V. (2018). Generalized Hyp ergeometric Functions. IOP Publishing

    2018

  24. [32]

    and Tricomi, F

    Erdlyi, A., Magnus, W., Oberhettinger, F. and Tricomi, F. G. (195 3). Higher transcen- dental functions, Vols. I-III. McGraw-Hill, New York, 8, 5976

  25. [33]

    Fl¨ ugge, S. (1971). Practical Quantum Mechanics I (Springe r-Verlag, Berlin

    1971

  26. [34]

    and Stegun, I

    Abramowitz, M. and Stegun, I. A. (1972). Handbook of mathe matical functions dover publications inc. New York. 33

    1972

  27. [35]

    M., Agarwal, P

    Srivastava, H. M., Agarwal, P. and Jain, S. (2014). Generating functions for the gen- eralized Gauss hypergeometric functions. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 247, 348-352

    2014

  28. [36]

    Ancarani, L. U. and Gasaneo, G. (2009). Derivatives of any or der of the Gaussian hypergeometric function 2F1 (a, b, c; z) with respect to the para meters a, b and c. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 42(39), 395 208

    2009

  29. [37]

    Yaslan, H. . (2018). Numerical solution of the conformable spa ce-time fractional wave equation. Chinese Journal of Physics, 56(6), 2916-2925

    2018

  30. [38]

    Koshy, T. (2019). Fibonacci and Lucas numbers with applicatio ns. John Wiley & Sons

    2019

  31. [39]

    and Wang, H

    Wang, W. and Wang, H. (2015). Some results on convolved ( p, q )-Fibonacci polynomials. Integral Transforms and Special Functions, 26(5), 340-356

    2015

  32. [40]

    and Gulec, H

    Taskara, N., Uslu, K. and Gulec, H. H. (2010). On the propertie s of Lucas numbers with binomial coefficients. Applied Mathematics Letters, 23(1), 68- 72

    2010

  33. [41]

    H., Taskara, N

    Gulec, H. H., Taskara, N. and Uslu, K. (2013). A new approach t o generalized Fibonacci and Lucas numbers with binomial coefficients. Applied Mathematics an d Computation, 220, 482-486. 34

    2013

Pith tools

Reviewed August 27, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.