Acta Mathematica Scientia 2014,34B(6):1749–1760

http://actams.wipm.ac.cn

ON THE SUPERSTABILITY OF THE PEXIDER TYPE

GENERALIZED TRIGONOMETRIC FUNCTIONAL
EQUATIONS∗

Driss ZEGLAMI
Department of Mathematics, E.N.S.A.M, Moulay Ismail University, Meknes, Morocco
E-mail : zeglamidriss@yahoo.fr

Ahmed CHARIFI† Samir KABBAJ

Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Sciences, Ibn Tofail University, Kenitra, Morocco
E-mail : charifi2000@yahoo.fr; samkabbaj@yahoo.fr

Abstract The aim of this paper is to investigate the superstability problem for the pex-
iderized trigonometric functional equation
XZ  
f (xkϕ(y)k−1 )dwK (k) = Φg(x)h(y), x, y ∈ G,
ϕ∈Φ K

where G is any topological group, K is a compact subgroup of G, ωK is the normalized Haar

measure of K, Φ is a finite group of K-invariant morphisms of G and f, g, h are continuous
complex-valued functions.
Consequently, we have generalized the results of stability for d’Alembert’s and Wilson’s equa-
tions by R. Badora, J. Baker, B. Bouikhalene, P. Gavruta, S. Kabbaj, Pl. Kannappan, G. H.
Kim, J.M. Rassias, A. Roukbi, L. Székelyhidi, D. Zeglami, etc.
Key words superstability; generalized Pexider d’Alembert equation; Wilson’s functional
equation; group of morphisms
2010 MR Subject Classification 39B72

1 Introduction
There is a strong stability phenomenon which is known as a superstability. An equation
of homomorphism is called superstable if each approximate homomorphism is actually a true
homomorphism. This property was first observed by Baker, Lawrence, and Zorzitto [4] in the
following Theorem: Let V be a vector space. If a function f : V −→ R satisfies the inequality
 
f (x + y) − f (x)f (y) ≤ ε,

for some ε > 0 and for all x, y ∈ V. Then either f is a bounded function or
f (x + y) = f (x)f (y), x, y ∈ V.
∗ Received September 10, 2013; revised February 25, 2014.
† Corresponding author: Ahmed CHARIFI.
1750 ACTA MATHEMATICA SCIENTIA Vol.34 Ser.B

Later this result was extended by Badora [1], Baker [3], Kannappan et al. [19], Kim [20],
Tyrala [35] and Székelyhidi [33], to the equations

f (x + y) + f (x + σ(y)) = 2f (x)g(y), x, y ∈ G,

f (x + y) + f (x + σ(y)) = 2g(x)f (y), x, y ∈ G,

where (G, +) is an abelian group. Stability problems of many other functional equations have
been investigated ([1, 3–6, 8–12, 15, 16, 18–28, 33–39]). The interested reader should refer to
[18] for a thorough account on the subject of stability of functional equations.
In [28] Roukbi, Zeglami and Kabbaj proved the superstability of the eqaution

f (xy) + f (xσ(y)) = 2f (x)g(y), x, y ∈ G,

on any group G.
In 2004, Bouikhalene [6] studied the Hyers-Ulam stability of the equation
XZ   Φ,K
f (xkϕ(y)k −1 )dwK (k) = Φf (x)g(y), x, y ∈ G, (Ef,g )
ϕ∈Φ K

where G is a topological group, K is a compact subgroup of G, ωK is the normalized Haar

measure of K, Φ is a finite group of K -invariant morphisms of G and f, g : G −→ C are
continuous functions such that f satisfies the Kannappan type condition:
Z Z Z Z
f (xkyk −1 hzh−1 )dwK (k)dwK (h) = f (xkzk −1 hyh−1 )dwK (k)dwK (h) (*)
K K K K

for all x, y, z ∈ G. Recently Zeglami et al. [38] studied the Hyers-Ulam stability of the equation
Φ,K
(Ef,g ) on an arbitrary group, not necessarily abelian.
In the present paper, we shall extend the investigation given in [1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 11, 15, 16, 19,
20, 27, 28, 33–35, 38, 39] to the equation
XZ   Φ,K
f (xkϕ(y)k −1 )dwK (k) = Φg(x)h(y), x, y ∈ G, (Eg,h )
ϕ∈Φ K

on any topological group without imposing the Kannappan type condition (*) to the function
Φ,K
f and we give some applications. The equation (Eg,h ) provides a common generalization
of many functional equations (d’Alembert’s, Badora’s, Cauchy’s, Gajda’s, Stetkaer’s, Wilson’s
equations, the functional equation of a K-spherical function) on groups and it’s solutions formu-
las are expressed, generally, in the terms of the harmonic analysis on G : Complex characters,
representations, and additive and quadratic maps of G into C: (see [2, 5, 7, 13, 14, 17, 29–32]).
In this paper, let G is any one topological group, e denotes its neutral element, K be a
compact subgroup of G, ωK be the normalized Haar measure of K, C the field of complex
numbers. We may assume that f, g and h are nonzero complex valued functions on G, δ is a
nonnegative real constant and σ is an involution of G i.e., σ(xy) = σ(y)σ(x) and σ(σ(x)) = x.
A mapping ϕ : G −→ G is a morphism of the group G if it is a homeomorphism of G onto
itself which is either a group-homomorphism, i.e., (ϕ(xy) = ϕ(x)ϕ(y), x, y ∈ G), or a group
anti-homomorphism, i.e., (ϕ(xy) = ϕ(y)ϕ(x), x, y ∈ G). We denote by Mor(G) the group of
morphisms of G and Φ a finite subgroup of Mor(G) of a K-invariant morphisms of G (i.e.,
ϕ(K) ⊂ K). The number of elements of a finite group Φ will be designated by |Φ|.
No.6 D. Zeglami et al: STABILITY OF WILSON EQUATION 1751

2 Auxiliary Results
In this section, we note some results for later use. Let G, K and Φ given as above
Proposition 2.1 ([6]) (i) For an arbitrary fixed τ ∈ Φ , the mapping
Φ −→ Φ
ϕ −→ ϕoτ
is a bijection and for all x, y ∈ G, we have
XZ XZ
−1
f (xkϕ(τ (y))k )dwK (k) = f (xkψ(y)k −1 )dwK (k).
ϕ∈Φ K ψ∈Φ K

(ii) Let ϕ ∈ Φ and f : G −→ C is a continuous function. Then we have

Z Z
f (xkϕ(hy)k )dwK (k) = f (xkϕ(yh)k −1 )dwK (k), x, y ∈ G, h ∈ K.
−1

K K
Φ,K
Lemma 2.2 Assume that continuous functions f, g : G −→ C satisfy the equation (Ef,g )
such that f 6= 0. Then g(e) = 1 and g stisfies the generalized d’Alembert’s long equation
XZ XZ  
g(xkϕ(y)k −1 )dwK (k) + g(ϕ(y)kxk −1 )dwK (k) = 2Φg(x)g(y). (2.1)
ϕ∈Φ K ϕ∈Φ K

Φ,K
Proof Choose a ∈ G such that f (a) 6= 0, we get from the equation (Ef,g ) that
X Z
1
g(x) =   f (akϕ(x)k −1 )dwK (k), x ∈ G, (2.2)
Φ f (a) ϕ∈Φ K

which implies that g(e) = 1. Using (2.2) we obtain

 
  X Z XZ 
Φf (a) g(xkϕ(y)k −1 )dwK (k) + g(ϕ(y)kxk −1 )dwK (k)
 
ϕ∈Φ K ϕ∈Φ K
Z
X   Z
X  
= Φf (a)g(xkϕ(y)k −1 )dwK (k) + Φf (a)g(ϕ(y)kxk −1 )dwK (k)
ϕ∈Φ K ϕ∈Φ K
XX Z Z
= f (ahψ(xkϕ(y)k −1 )h−1 )dwK (h)dwK (k)
ϕ∈Φψ∈Φ K K
XX Z Z
+ f (ahψ(ϕ(y)kxk −1 )h−1 )dwK (h)dwK (k)
ϕ∈Φψ∈Φ K K
   
  X Z    X Z 
= Φg(y) f (ahψ(x)h−1 )dwK (h) + Φg(x) f (ahψ(y)h−1 )dwK (h)
   
ψ∈Φ K ψ∈Φ K
 2  2  2
= Φ f (a)g(x)g(y) + Φ f (a)g(y)g(x) = 2Φ f (a)g(x)g(y).
As f (a) 6= 0 we get that g satisfies the equation (2.1). 
Lemma 2.3 Let δ > 0 be given. Assume that continuous functions f, g : G −→ C satisfy
the inequality
 Z 
X   
 f (xkϕ(y)k )dwK (k) − Φ f (x)g(y) ≤ δ, x, y ∈ G,
−1   (2.3)

ϕ∈Φ K
1752 ACTA MATHEMATICA SCIENTIA Vol.34 Ser.B

such that f 6= 0. If g is unbounded then so is f .

Proof Assume that g is an unbounded function satisfying the inequality (2.3). If f 6= 0
 
is bounded, let M = sup f  and choose a ∈ G such that f (a) 6= 0 then we get from (2.3) that
X Z 
   
 f (akϕ(y)k )dwK (k) − Φ f (a)g(y) ≤ δ, y ∈ G,
−1  

ϕ∈Φ K

   
from which we obtain that g(y) ≤   1 (δ + ΦM ) for all y ∈ G. Then g is bounded which
Φ |f (a)|
contradicts our assumption. 
Φ,K
In Theorem 2.4 below, the Hyers-Ulam stability of the equation (Ef,g ) was investigated
without imposing to f the condition (*).
Theorem 2.4 ([38]) Let δ > 0 be given. Assume that continuous functions f, g : G −→ C
satisfy the inequality
X Z 
   
 f (xkϕ(y)k )dwK (k) − Φ f (x)g(y) ≤ δ, x, y ∈ G.
−1   (2.4)

ϕ∈Φ K

Then:
(i) f, g are bounded or
(ii) f is unbounded and g satisfies the generalized d’Alembert’s long equation (2.1) or
Φ,K
(iii) g is unbounded and the pair (f, g) satisfies the equation (Ef,g ). If f 6= 0, then g
satisfies the equation (2.1).
Proposition 2.5 Let ϕ ∈ Φ and f : G −→ C is a continuous function with f (τ (x)) = f (x)
for all τ ∈ Φ and x ∈ G. Then we have
Z
f (kϕ(y)k −1 )dwK (k) = f (y) for all y ∈ G.
K

Proof Since ϕ is a K-invariant homeomorphism of G onto itself then for all k ∈ K there
exists h ∈ K such that ϕ(h) = k. So we obtain that
Z Z
f (kϕ(y)k )dwK (k) = f (ϕ(h)ϕ(y)ϕ(h−1 ))dwK (h).
−1

K K

Or ϕ is a morphism of G then we get that

Z Z Z
−1 −1
f (kϕ(y)k )dwK (k) = f (ϕ(hyh ))dwK (h) or f (ϕ(h−1 yh))dwK (h).
K K K

Using Proposition 2.1 (ii) and the fact that f (τ (x)) = f (x) for all τ ∈ Φ and x ∈ G we find
that
Z
f (kϕ(y)k −1 )dwK (k) = f (y) for all y ∈ G.
K


No.6 D. Zeglami et al: STABILITY OF WILSON EQUATION 1753

Φ,K
3 Stability of the Equation (Eg,h )
Lemma 3.1 Let δ > 0 be given. Assume that continuous functions f, g, h : G −→ C
satisfy the inequality
 Z 
X   
 f (xkϕ(y)k −1
)dwK (k) − Φ  g(x)h(y)≤δ (3.1)
 
ϕ∈Φ K

for all x, y ∈ G. Then

(i) f is unbounded if and only if g is unbounded too.
(ii) If f (τ (x)) = f (x) for all τ ∈ Φ and x ∈ G. Then g is unbounded⇔ f is unbounded⇔ h
is unbounded.
 
Proof (i) If h(e) = 0. Putting y = e in (3.1) we get that f (x) ≤ |Φ| δ
for all x ∈ G i.e.,
 
f is bounded. Let M = sup f  and choose a, b ∈ G such that h(a) 6= 0 and g(b) 6= 0 then we
get from the inequality (3.1) that
      1  
g(x) ≤ 1 (ΦM + δ) and h(x) ≤ ( Φ M + δ)
2h(a) 2g(b)
for all x ∈ G, i.e., g and h are also bounded.
If h(e) 6= 0, substituting y by e in (3.1) we obtain
 
f (x) − h(e)g(x) ≤  δ 
 Φ
for all x ∈ G which shows that f is unbounded is equivalent to g is unbounded too.
(ii) Suppose that f (τ (x)) = f (x) for all τ ∈ Φ. If g(e) = 0, putting x = e in (3.1) we get
 Z 
X 
 f (kϕ(y)k )dwK (k) ≤ δ.
−1

ϕ∈Φ K
 
According to Proposition 2.5 we obtain that f (y) ≤ |Φ| δ
for all y ∈ G i.e., f is bounded and
thus g and h are also bounded.
If g(e) 6= 0, substituting y by e in (3.1) we obtain
 
f (x) − g(e)h(x) ≤  δ 
 Φ
for all x ∈ G which shows that f is unbounded is equivalent to h is unbounded too. By using
(i) we conclude that g is unbounded ⇔ f is unbounded ⇔ h is unbounded. 
Lemma 3.2 Let δ > 0 be given. Assume that continuous functions f, g, h : G −→ C with
h(e) = 1 satisfy the inequality
 Z 
X   
 f (xkϕ(y)k )dwK (k) − Φ g(x)h(y) ≤ δ
−1  

ϕ∈Φ K

for all x, y ∈ G. Then

 Z 
X   
 g(xkϕ(y)k −1
)dwK (k) − Φ  g(x)h(y) ≤ 2δ for all x, y ∈ G. (3.2)
 
ϕ∈Φ K

Proof Assume that h(e) = 1. Putting y = e in the inequality (3.1). It is easy to show
that
 
f (x) − g(x) ≤  δ  .
 Φ
1754 ACTA MATHEMATICA SCIENTIA Vol.34 Ser.B

For all x, y ∈ G. Let

F (x) = f (x) − g(x).
By the defnition of F , we have
  δ
g(x) = f (x) − F (x) and F (x) ≤   (3.3)
Φ
for all x ∈ G. By virtue of inequalities (3.3) and (3.1) we have
X Z 
   
 g(xkϕ(y)k )dwK (k) − Φ g(x)h(y)
−1  

ϕ∈Φ K
X Z XZ 
   
=  f (xkϕ(y)k −1 )dwK (k) − F (xkϕ(y)k −1 )dwK (k) − Φg(x)h(y)
ϕ∈Φ K ϕ∈Φ K
X Z  X Z 
     

≤ −1    
f (xkϕ(y)k )dwK (k) − Φ g(x)h(y) +  F (xkϕ(y)k )dwK (k)
−1

ϕ∈Φ K K
ϕ∈Φ
≤ 2δ.

Lemma 3.3 Let δ > 0 be given. Assume that continuous functions f, g, h : G −→ C,
with f (τ (x)) = f (x) for all τ ∈ Φ and x ∈ G, satisfy the inequality (3.1) with g(e) = 1. Then
 Z 
X   
 h(xkϕ(y)k )dwK (k) − Φ g(x)h(y) ≤ 2δ for all x, y ∈ G.
−1   (3.4)

ϕ∈Φ K

Proof Assume that g(e) = 1. Putting x = e in the inequality (3.1). It is easy to show
that  Z 
X   
 f (kϕ(y)k )dwK (k) − Φ h(y) ≤ δ.
−1  

ϕ∈Φ K

Using Proposition 2.5 we obtain that

 
f (y) − h(y) ≤  δ  for all y ∈ G.
 Φ
 
Let H(x) = f (x) − h(x).Then we have h(x) = f (x) − H(x) and H(x) ≤ δ
|Φ| for all x ∈ G. By
the definition of H and the use of (3.1) we have
 Z 
X   
 h(xkϕ(y)k )dwK (k) − Φ g(x)h(y)
−1  

ϕ∈Φ K
X Z XZ 
 
=  f (xkϕ(y)k −1 )dwK (k) − H(xkϕ(y)k −1 )dwK (k) − 2g(x)h(y)
ϕ∈Φ K ϕ∈Φ K
X Z  X Z 
     

≤ −1    
f (xkϕ(y)k )dwK (k) − Φ g(x)h(y) +  H(xkϕ(y)k )dwK (k)
−1

ϕ∈Φ K ϕ∈Φ K

≤ 2δ.


In Theorem 3.4 below, the stability of the equation (Eg,h ) will be investigated on an arbi-
trary group.
No.6 D. Zeglami et al: STABILITY OF WILSON EQUATION 1755

Theorem 3.4 Let δ > 0 be given. Assume that continuous functions f, g, h : G −→ C

satisfy the inequality
 Z 
X   
 f (xkϕ(y)k )dwK (k) − Φ g(x)h(y) ≤ δ
−1  

ϕ∈Φ K

for all x, y ∈ G. Then:

(i) f, g, h are bounded or
1
(ii) g (or f ) is unbounded and h̃ = h(e) h satisfies the equation
X Z XZ  
h̃(xkϕ(y)k −1 )dwK (k) + h̃(ϕ(y)kxk −1 )dwK (k) = 2Φh̃(x)h̃(y)
ϕ∈Φ K ϕ∈Φ K

or
(iii) h is unbounded and the pair (g, h) satisfies the equation
XZ  
g(xkϕ(y)k −1 )dwK (k) = Φg(x)h̃(y) for all x, y ∈ G,
ϕ∈Φ K

1
where h̃ = h(e) h.
Proof Assume that f, g, h satisfy the inequality (3.1). If h(e) = 0, we have in Proof of
Lemma 3.1 seen that f, g and h are bounded so we are in case (i).
If at least one of the functions f, g or h is unbounded we necessarily have h(e) 6= 0. Dividing
the two sides of the inequality (3.1) by α = h(e) we find that
X Z 
    δ
 ˜
f (xkϕ(y)k )dwK (k) − Φ g(x)h̃(y) ≤
−1   , for all x, y ∈ G
 |α|
ϕ∈Φ K

where f˜ = αf and h̃ = αh . We see that the triplet (f˜, g, h̃) satisfies the inequality (3.1) with
h̃(e) = 1. According to Lemma 3.2 we have
X Z 
    δ
 g(xkϕ(y)k )dwK (k) − Φ g(x)h̃(y) ≤ 2
−1   for all x, y ∈ G. (3.5)
 |α|
ϕ∈Φ K

Using Theorem 2.4, we conclude that each triplet of functions f, g, h satisfying (3.1) falls
into one of the categories (i)–(iii). 
Corollary 3.5 Let δ > 0 be given. Suppose that continuous functions f, h : G −→ C
satisfy the inequality
X Z 
   
 f (xkϕ(y)k )dwK (k) − Φ f (x)h(y) ≤ δ
−1   (3.6)

ϕ∈Φ K

for all x, y ∈ G. Then

(i) f and h are bounded, or
(ii) f is unbounded and h satisfies the functional equation (2.1).
P R  
(iii) h is unbounded and f (xkϕ(y)k −1 )dwK (k) = Φf (x)h(y).
ϕ∈Φ K

Proof ii) Suppose that f is unbounded. Substituting y by e in (3.6) we obtain f (x)(h(e)−

1) ≤ |Φ|
δ
for all x ∈ G which shows that h(e) = 1 because f is unbounded. On putting f = g
in Theorem 3.4 (ii) we get that h = h̃ is a solution of the equation (2.1).
1756 ACTA MATHEMATICA SCIENTIA Vol.34 Ser.B

iii) Suppose that h is unbounded. On putting f = g in Theorem 3.4 (iii) we obtain that
XZ  
f (xkϕ(y)k −1 )dwK (k) = Φf (x)h̃(y) for all x, y ∈ G. (3.7)
ϕ∈Φ K

If f is bounded. Let M = sup |f | and choose a ∈ G such that f (a) 6= 0 then we get from the
inequality (3.7) that
 
h̃(x) ≤ M ,
|f (a)|
then h is bounded which contradicts our assumption. So f is unbounded too implying h(e) = 1
i.e., h = h̃. Hence
XZ  
f (xkϕ(y)k −1 )dwK (k) = Φf (x)h(y) for all x, y ∈ G.
ϕ∈Φ K


As a another consequence, we have the following result on the superstability of the gener-
Φ,K
alized d’Alembert equation (Ef,f ).
Corollary 3.6 Let δ > 0 be given. Suppose that the continuous function f : G −→ C
satisfies the inequality
X Z 
   
 f (xkϕ(y)k )dwK (k) − Φ f (x)f (y) ≤ δ
−1  

ϕ∈Φ K

Φ,K
for all x, y ∈ G. Then either f is bounded or f satisfies (Ef,f ).
Proof The proof follows on putting f = h on Corollary 3.5 (iii). 
Corollary 3.7 Let δ > 0 be given. Suppose that continuous functions f, g : G −→ C
satisfy the inequality
 Z 
X   
 f (xkϕ(y)k −1
)dwK (k) − Φ  g(x)f (y)≤δ (3.8)
 
ϕ∈Φ K

for all x, y ∈ G. Then either f (or g) is bounded or the pair (g, f˜) satisfies
XZ  
g(xkϕ(y)k −1 )dwK (k) = Φg(x)f˜(y),
ϕ∈Φ K

where f˜ = 1
f (e) f . Further, in the latter case if the group G is abelian then g is a solution of
Φ,K Φ,K Φ,K
(Ef,f ) and the pair (f, g) satisfies equations (Ef,g ) and (Eg,f ).
Proof Suppose that f (or g) is unbounded. On putting f = h in Theorem 3.4 (iii) we
get that the pair (f, g) satisfies the equation
XZ  
g(xkϕ(y)k −1 )dwK (k) = Φg(x)f˜(y) for all x, y ∈ G,
ϕ∈Φ K

from which we deduce -using Lemma 2.2 that

XZ XZ  
˜ −1
f (xkϕ(y)k )dwK (k) + f˜(ϕ(y)kxk −1 )dwK (k) = 2Φf˜(x)f˜(y),
ϕ∈Φ K ϕ∈Φ K
No.6 D. Zeglami et al: STABILITY OF WILSON EQUATION 1757

for all x, y ∈ G. If G is abelian or at least f satisfies the condition (*) then we have
XZ  
f˜(xkϕ(y)k −1 )dwK (k) = Φf˜(x)f˜(y). (3.9)
ϕ∈Φ K

Dividing the two sides of the inequality (3.8) by α = f (e) we find that
X Z 
   
 f˜(xkϕ(y)k −1 )dwK (k) − Φg(x)f˜(y) ≤ δ . (3.10)
  |α|
ϕ∈Φ K

When we substitute (3.9) into (3.10) we get that

  δ
f˜(y)(f˜(x) − g(x)) ≤ . (3.11)
|α||Φ|

Since f is unbounded then so is f˜. Consequently (3.11) implies f˜ = g thus g is a solution of

Φ,K
(Ef,f ). Substituting f˜ by g on the second (resp. the last) factor of the right hand side of (3.9)
Φ,K Φ,K
the expression reduces to (Eg,f ) (resp. (Ef,g )). 

Theorem 3.8 Let δ > 0 be given. Assume that continuous functions f, g, h : G −→ C,

with f (τ (x)) = f (x) for all τ ∈ Φ and x ∈ G, satisfy the inequality
 Z 
X   
 f (xkϕ(y)k −1
)dwK (k) − Φ  g(x)h(y)≤δ
 
ϕ∈Φ K

for all x, y ∈ G. Then:

(i) f, g, h are bounded or
(ii) At least one of the functions g or f or h is unbounded and the pair (g, h) satisfies the
equation
XZ  
g(xkϕ(y)k −1 )dwK (k) = Φg(x)h̃(y) for all x, y ∈ G.
ϕ∈Φ K

1
Furthermore in this case h̃ = h(e) h satisfies the equation (2.1).
Proof Assume that f, g, h satisfy the inequality (3.1). If g(e) = 0, we have in Proof of
Lemma 3.1 (ii) seen that f, g and h are bounded.
If at least one of the functions f, g or h is unbounded we necessarily have g(e) 6= 0. Dividing
the two sides of the inequality (3.1) by β = g(e) we find that
X Z 
    δ
 ˜
f (xkϕ(y)k )dwK (k) − Φ g̃(x)h(y) ≤
−1   for all x, y ∈ G,
 |β|
ϕ∈Φ K

where f˜ = βf and g̃ = βg . We see that the triplet (f˜, g̃, h) satisfies the inequality (3.1) with
g̃(e) = 1 and f˜(τ (y)) = f˜(y) for all τ ∈ Φ and y ∈ G. According to Lemma 3.3 we have
X Z 
    δ
 h(xkϕ(y)k )dwK (k) − Φ g̃(x)h(y) ≤ 2
−1   for all x, y ∈ G, (3.12)
 |β|
ϕ∈Φ K

which shows, by virtue of Corollary 3.7, that each triplet of functions f, g, h falls into one of
the categories (i)–(ii). 
1758 ACTA MATHEMATICA SCIENTIA Vol.34 Ser.B

4 Application
The following results are particular cases of Theorem 3.4.
Corollary 4.1 Let δ > 0 be given. Assume that functions f, g, h : G −→ C satisfy the
inequality X 
   
 f (xϕ(y)) − Φg(x)h(y) ≤ δ
 
ϕ∈Φ

for all x, y ∈ G. Then:

(i) f, g, h are bounded or
1
(ii) g (or f ) is unbounded and h̃ = h(e) h satisfies the equation
X  
(h̃(xϕ(y)) + h̃(ϕ(y)x)) = 2Φh̃(x)h̃(y)
ϕ∈Φ
or
(iii) h is unbounded and the pair (g, h) satisfies the equation
X  
g(xϕ(y)) = Φg(x)h̃(y) for all x, y ∈ G.
ϕ∈Φ

Corollary 4.2 Let δ > 0 be given. Assume that continuous functions f, g, h : G −→ C

satisfy the inequality
Z Z 
 
 f (xkyk −1 )dk + f (xkσ(y)k −1 )dk − 2g(x)h(y) ≤ δ
 
K K

for all x, y ∈ G. Then:

(i) f, g, h are bounded or
1
(ii) g (or f ) is unbounded and h̃ = h(e) h satisfies the equation
Z Z Z Z
h̃(xkyk −1 )dk + h̃(xkσ(y)k −1 )dk + h̃(ykxk −1 )dk + h̃(σ(y)kxk −1 )dk = 4h̃(x)h̃(y)
K K K K
or
(iii) h is unbounded and the pair (g, h) satisfies the equation
Z Z
g(xkyk −1 )dk + g(xkσ(y)k −1 )dk = 2g(x)h̃(y) for all x, y ∈ G.
G G

Corollary 4.3 Let δ > 0 be given. Assume that functions f, g, h : G −→ C satisfy the
inequality
 
f (xy) + f (xσ(y)) − 2g(x)h(y) ≤ δ

for all x, y ∈ G. Then:

(i) f, g, h are bounded or
1
(ii) g (or f ) is unbounded and h̃ = h(e) h satisfies the equation

h̃(xy) + h̃(xσ(y)) + h̃(yx) + h̃(σ(y)x) = 4h̃(x)h̃(y),

or
(iii) h is unbounded and the pair (g, h) satisfies the equation

g(xy) + g(xσ(y)) = 2g(x)h̃(y) for all x, y ∈ G.

No.6 D. Zeglami et al: STABILITY OF WILSON EQUATION 1759

As consequences of Corollaries 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3, we have the following superstability results
which generalizes the Baker’s result on the classical d’Alembert functional equation on an
abelian group ([3], Theorem 5).
Corollary 4.4 ([28]) Let δ > 0 be given. Assume that the function f : G −→ C satisfies
the inequality
 
f (xy) + f (xσ(y)) − 2f (x)f (y) ≤ δ

for all x, y ∈ G. Then either

√
 
f (x) ≤ 1 + 1 + 2δ
, x ∈ G,
2
or
f (xy) + f (xσ(y)) = 2f (x)f (y), x, y ∈ G.
Corollary 4.5 Let δ > 0 be given. Assume that the continuous function f : G −→ C
satisfies the inequality
Z Z 
 
 f (xkyk −1 )dk + f (xkσ(y)k −1 )dk − 2f (x)f (y) ≤ δ, x, y ∈ G.
 
K K

Then either √
 
f (x) ≤ 1 + 1 + 2δ
, x ∈ G,
2
or Z Z
−1
f (xkyk )dk + f (xkσ(y)k −1 )dk = 2f (x)f (y), x, y ∈ G.
K K

Corollary 4.6 Let δ > 0 be given. Assume that the function f : G −→ C satisfies the
inequality  
X   
 f (xϕ(y)) − Φ f (x)f (y) ≤ δ, x, y ∈ G.
 

ϕ∈Φ
P  
Then either f is bounded or f (xϕ(y)) = Φf (x)f (y) for all x, y ∈ G.
ϕ∈Φ

References
[1] Badora R. On Hyers-Ulam stability of Wilson’s functional equation. Aequationes Math, 2000, 60: 211–218
[2] Badora R. On a generalized Wilson functional equation. Georgian Math J, 2005, 12(4): 595–606
[3] Baker J A. The stability of the cosine equation. Proc Amer Math Soc, 1980, 80: 411–416
[4] Baker J A, Lawrence J, Zorzitto F. The stability of the equation f (x + y) = f (x)f (y). Proc Amer Math
Soc, 1979, 74: 242–246
[5] Benson C, Jenkins J, Ratkliff G. Bounded K-spherical functions on Heisenberg groups. J Funct Anal, 1992,
105: 409–443
[6] Bouikhalene B. On Hyers-Ulam stability of generalised Wilson’s equations. J Inequal Pure Appl Math,
2004, 5(4): Article 100
[7] Bouikhalene B, Kabbaj S. Gelfand pairs and generalised d’Alembert’s and Cauchy’s functional equations.
Georgian Math J, 2005, 12(2): 207–216
[8] Bouikhalene B, Elqorachi E, Rassias J M. The superstability of d’Alembert’s functional equation on the
Heisenberg group. Appl Math Lett, 2010, 23(1): 105–109
[9] Brzdȩk J, Popa D, Xu B. The Hyers-Ulam stability of linear equations of higher orders. Acta Math Hungar,
2008, 120: 1–8
[10] Cao H X, Lv J R, Rassias J M. Superstability for generalized module left derivations and generalized
module derivations on a Banach module (II). J Pure & Appl Math, 2009, 10(2): 1–8
1760 ACTA MATHEMATICA SCIENTIA Vol.34 Ser.B

[11] Cao P, Xu B. Note on the superstability of d’Alembert type functional equations. Bull Korean Math Soc,
2009, 46(2): 235–243
[12] Cho Y J, Rassias Th M, Saadati R. Stability of Functional Equations in Random Normed Spaces. Springer
Optimization and Its Applications, Vol 86. Springer, 2013
[13] Corovei I. The functional equation f (xy) + f (yx) + f (xy −1 ) + f (y −1 x) = 4f (x)f (y) for nilpotent groups.
Buletinul Ştiinţific al Institutului Politehnic Cluj-Napoca, 1977, 20: 25–28
[14] Davison T M K. D’Alembert’s functional equation on topological monoids. Publ Math Debrecen, 2009,
75(1/2): 41–66
[15] Elqorachi E, Akkouchi M. On Hyers-Ulam stability of Cauchy and Wilson equations. Georgian Math J,
2004, 11(1): 69–82
[16] Gavruta P. A generalization of the Hyers-Ulam-Rassias stability of approximately additive mappings. J
Math Anal Appl, 1994, 184: 431–436
[17] Gajda Z. A Generalization of D’Alembert’s Functional Equation. Funkcial Ekvac, 1990, 33: 69–77
[18] Hyers D H, Isac G I, Rassias Th M. Stability of Functional Equations in Several Variables. Boston, Basel,
Berlin: Birkhäuser Verlag, 1998
[19] Kannappan Pl, Kim G H. On the stability of the generalized cosine functional equations. Ann Acad Pedagog
Crac Stud Math, 2001, 1: 49–58
[20] Kim G H. The Stability of pexiderized cosine functional equations. Korean J Math, 2008, 16(1): 103–114
[21] Rassias J M. On approximately of approximately linear mappings by linear mappings. J Funct Anal, 1982,
46: 126–130
[22] Rassias J M, Ravi K, Arunkumar M, Senthil Kumar B V. Ulam stability of mixed type cubic and additive
functional equation. Functional Ulam Notions (F.U.N) Nova Science Publishers, 2010, Chapter 13, 149–175
[23] Rassias J M, Son E, Kim H M. On the Hyers-Ulam stability of 3D and 4D mixed type mappings. Far East
J Math Sci, 2011, 48(1): 83–102
[24] Rassias J M, Rassias M J. Refined Ulam stability for Euler-Lagrange type mappings in Hilbert spaces.
Intern J Appl Math Stat, 2007, 7: 126–132
[25] Rassias Th M. On the stability of linear mapping in Banach spaces. Proc Amer Math Soc, 1978, 72:
297–300
[26] Ravi K, Rassias J M, Arunkumar M, Kodandan R. Stability of a generalized mixed type additive, quadratic,
cubic and quartic functional equation. J Ineq Pure Appl Math, 2009, 10(4): 1–29
[27] Redouani A, Elqorachi E, Rassias Th M. The superstability of d’Alembert’s functional equation on step 2
nilpotent groups. Aequationes Math, 2007, 74(3): 237–248
[28] Roukbi A, Zeglami D, Kabbaj S. Hyers-Ulam stability of Wilson’s functional equation. Math Sciences: Adv
Appl, 2013, 22: 19–26
[29] Stetkær H. d’Alembert’s equation and spherical functions. Aeq Math, 1994, 48: 220–227
[30] Stetkaer H. Wilson’s functional equations on groups. Aeq Maths, 1995, 49: 252–275
[31] Stetkær H. Functional equations on abelian groups with involution. Aeq Math, 1997, 54: 144–172
[32] Stetkaer H. Functional equations and matrix-valued spherial function. Aeq Maths, 2005, 69(3): 271–292
[33] Székelyhidi L. On a theorem of Baker, Lawrence and Zorzitto. Proc Amer Math Soc, 1982, 84: 95–96
[34] Székelyhidi L. On a stability theorem. C R Math Rep Acad Sci Canada, 1981, 3: 253–255
[35] Tyrala I. The stability of the second generalization of d’Alembert’s functional equation. Scientic Issues,
Mathematics XIII, Czȩ stochowa, 2008
[36] Ulam S M. A Collection of Mathematical Problems. New York: Interscience Publ, 1961; Problems in
Modern Mathematics. New York: Wiley, 1964
[37] Xu T Z, Rassias J M, Rassias M J, Xu W X. A fixed point approach to the stability of quintic and sextic
functional equations in quasi-β-normed spaces. J Inequal Appl 2010, Art ID 423231
[38] Zeglami D, Roukbi A, Kabbaj S. Hyers-Ulam Stability of Generalized Wilson’s and d’Alembert’s Functional
equations. Afr Mat, 2013, DOI: 10.1007/s13370-013-0199-6
[39] Zeglami D, Kabbaj S, Roukbi A. Superstability of a generalization of the cosine equation. Br J Math
Comput Sci, 2014, 4(5): 719–734