Theory and Applications of Mathematics & Computer Science 10 (2) (2020) 7 – 26

Properties of Linearly Independent Solutions of Second Order Linear Differential

Equations

Mohammed Amin Abdellaouia , Benharrat Belaı̈dib,∗

a
Department of Mathematics and Informatics, Faculty of Exact Sciences, University of Bechar-Algeria
b
Department of Mathematics, Laboratory of Pure and Applied Mathematics, University of Mostaganem (UMAB),
B. P. 227 Mostaganem-Algeria

Abstract
In this article, we shall be concerned with the growth and complex oscillation of wi = d1 f1(i) + d2 f2(i) (i = 0, 1, 2) , where
d1 , d2 are meromorphic functions of  iterated p-order not all vanishing identically and f1 , f2 are two linearly independent
 finite
meromorphic solutions satisfying δ ∞, f j > 0 ( j = 1, 2) of the linear differential equation

f 00 + A (z) f = 0,

where A (z) is a transcendental meromorphic function of finite iterated p-order ρ p (A) = ρ > 0 such that δ (∞, A) > 0. The theorems
of this paper improve the results given by (Latreuch & Belaı̈di, 2013) and (Latreuch & Belaı̈di, 2015).

Keywords: linear differential equations, Meromorphic solutions, iterated p-order, iterated exponent of convergence of the
sequence of distinct zeros, polynomial of solutions.
2010 MSC: 34M10, 30D35.

1. Introduction and statement of results

In this paper, we shall assume that the reader is familiar with the fundamental results and the standard
notations of the Nevanlinna value distribution theory of meromorphic functions, see (Hayman, 1964; Yang
& Yi, 2003). Throughout this paper, the term ”meromorphic” will mean meromorphic in the whole complex
plane. For the definition of the iterated order of a meromorphic function, we use the same definition as in
(Bernal, 1987; Kinnunen, 1998; Laine, 1993). For all r ∈ R, we define exp1 r := er and exp p+1 r :=
 
exp exp p r , p ∈ N. We also define for all r ∈ (0, +∞) sufficiently large log1 r := log r and log p+1 r :=
 
log log p r , p ∈ N. Moreover, we denote by exp0 r := r, log0 r := r, log−1 r := exp1 r and exp−1 r := log1 r.

∗
Corresponding author
Email addresses: abdellaouiamine13@yahoo.fr (Mohammed Amin Abdellaoui),
benharrat.belaidi@univ-mosta.dz (Benharrat Belaı̈di)
8 B. Belaı̈di et al. / Theory and Applications of Mathematics & Computer Science 10 (2) (2020) 7–26

Definition 1.1 ((Kinnunen, 1998)) Let f be a meromorphic function. Then the iterated p-order ρ p ( f ) of f
is defined by
log p T (r, f )
ρ p ( f ) = lim sup p ≥ 1 is an integer ,


r→+∞ log r
where T (r, f ) is the Nevanlinna characteristic function of f. For p = 1, this notation is called order and for
p = 2 hyper-order.

Definition 1.2 ((Kinnunen, 1998)) The finiteness degree of the order of a meromorphic function f is defined
by
0, o for f rational,


 n
 min p ∈ N : ρ p ( f ) < +∞ , for f transcendental for which



i(f) = 




 some p ∈ N with ρ p ( f ) < +∞ exists,
+∞, for f with ρ p ( f ) = +∞ for all p ∈ N.



Definition 1.3 ((Cao et al., 2010)) Let f be a meromorphic function. Then the iterated p−type of f with
iterated p−order 0 < ρ p ( f ) < +∞ is defined by
log p−1 T (r, f )
τ p ( f ) = lim sup p ≥ 1 is an integer .


r→+∞ rρ p ( f )

Definition 1.4 ((Kinnunen, 1998)) The iterated convergence exponent of the sequence of zeros of a mero-
morphic function f is defined by
log p N(r, 1/ f )
λ p ( f ) = lim sup p ≥ 1 is an integer ,


r→+∞ log r
 
where N r, 1f is the integrated counting function of zeros of f in {z : |z| ≤ r}. Similarly, the iterated conver-
gence exponent of the sequence of distinct zeros of f is defined by

log p N(r, 1/ f )
λ p ( f ) = lim sup p ≥ 1 is an integer ,


r→+∞ log r
 
1
where N r, f is the integrated counting function of distinct zeros of f in {z : |z| ≤ r}.

Definition 1.5 ((Kinnunen, 1998)) The finiteness degree of the iterated convergence exponent of the se-
quence of zeros of a meromorphic function f is defined by
ifo n(r, 1/ f ) = O log r ,




 n 0,
iλ ( f ) =  min p ∈ N : λ p ( f ) < +∞ , if λ p ( f ) < +∞ for some p ∈ N,



+∞, if λ p ( f ) = +∞ for all p ∈ N.




Remark 1.1 Similarly, we can define the finiteness degree iλ ( f ) of λ p ( f ).

Definition 1.6 ((Laine & Rieppo, 2004)) Let f be a meromorphic function. Then the iterated exponent of
convergence of the sequence of fixed points of f is defined by
 
log p N r, f 1−z
λ p ( f − z) = lim sup , p ≥ 1 is an integer .


r→+∞ log r
 B. Belaı̈di et al. / Theory and Applications of Mathematics & Computer Science 10 (2) (2020) 7–26 9

Similarly, the iterated exponent of convergence of the sequence of distinct fixed points of f is defined by
 
log p N r, f 1−z
λ p ( f − z) = lim sup , p ≥ 1 is an integer .


r→+∞ log r
For p = 1, this notation is called the exponent of convergence of the sequence of distinct fixed points and
for p = 2 the hyper-exponent of convergence of the sequence of distinct fixed points, see (Liu & Zhang,
2006). Thus λ p ( f − z) is an indication of oscillation of distinct fixed points of f.
We consider the second order linear complex differential equation
f 00 + A (z) f = 0 (1.1)
and the polynomial of solutions
wi = d1 f1(i) + d2 f2(i) (i = 0, 1, 2) , (1.2)
where A (z) and d j (z) ( j = 1, 2) are entire (or meromorphic) functions of finite iterated p-order in the com-
plex plane, f1 and f2 are two linearly independent meromorphic solutions of equation (1.1) . It is well-known
that the study of the properties of solutions of complex differential equations is an interesting topic. The
growth and oscillation theory of complex differential equations in the plane were firstly investigated by
Bank and Laine in 1982-1983, see (Bank & Laine, 1982) and (Bank & Laine, 1983). Historically, (Chen,
2000) began to consider the fixed points of solutions of equation (1.1) , where A (z) is a polynomial and
transcendental entire function with finite order.
It is natural to ask what can be said about the properties of wi (i = 0, 1, 2) and under what conditions
wi (i = 0, 1, 2) keeps the same properties of the solutions of (1.1)?
(Latreuch & Belaı̈di, 2013) have investigated the relations between the solutions of (1.1) and small
functions. They showed that w0 = d1 f1 + d2 f2 keeps the same properties of the growth and oscillation of
f j ( j = 1, 2) , where f1 and f2 are two linearly independent solutions of (1.1) , d j (z) ( j = 1, 2) are entire
functions of finite order. Before we state our results we define h0 , h1 , ψ0 , ψ1 and ψ2 by
 
 d1 0 d2 0 
 d10 d1 d20 d2 
h0 =  00 0 00 0  ,
 d1 − d1 A 2d1 d2 − d2 A 2d2 
 d000 − 3d0 A − d1 A0 d00 − d1 A + 2d00 d000 − 3d0 A − d2 A0 d00 − d2 A + 2d00 
1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2
 
 0 d1 0 d2 
−d1 A 0 0
d1  −d2 A d2
 
h1 =   0   ,
 − 2d1 A + d1 A 0 d1 − d1 A − 2d2 A + d2 A
00 0 0 00
d2 − d2 A 
α1 α2 α3 α4
 

 ϕ
 
0 d2 0 
 ϕ0 d1 d20 d2 
 ϕ
 00
2d10 d200 − d2 A 2d20


 ϕ000 d00 − d1 A + 2d00 d000 − 3d0 A − d2 A0 d00 − d2 A + 2d00 
1 1 2 2 2 2
ψ0 = ,
h0
 ϕ
 
d1 0 d2 
 ϕ0 0 0
d1  −d2 A d2 
  
 ϕ 00 d1 − d1 A − 2d2 A + d2 A
00 0 0 00
d2 − d2 A 
ϕ α2 α3 α4
 000 
ψ1 =
h1
10 B. Belaı̈di et al. / Theory and Applications of Mathematics & Computer Science 10 (2) (2020) 7–26

and  ϕ 
  −A 0 d2 0 
 ϕ 0 d1 0
d2 d2 
  −A00 
 ϕ 2d10 00
d2 − d2 A 2d20 
  −A
ϕ
000 
 −A d100 − d1 A + 2d100 d2000 − 3d20 A − d2 A0 d200 − d2 A + 2d200 
ψ2 = ,
h0
where ϕ . 0 is an entire (or meromorphic) function of finite iterated (p + 1)-order, and α1 , . . . , α4 are entire
(or meromorphic) functions of finite iterated p-order such that
 
α1 = d1 A2 − 3 d100 A + d10 A0 − d1 A00 , α2 = d1000 − 3d10 A − 2d1 A0 ,
  (1.3)
α3 = d2 A2 − 3 d200 A + d20 A0 − d2 A00 , α4 = d2000 − 3d20 A − 2d2 A0 .

Theorem A ((Latreuch & Belaı̈di, 2013)) Let A (z) be a transcendental entire function of finite order. Let
d j (z) ( j = 1, 2) be finite order entire functions that are not all vanishing identically such that

max{ρ (d1 ) , ρ (d2 )} < ρ (A) .

If f1 and f2 are two linearly independent solutions of (1.1) , then the polynomial of solutions (1.2) satisfies
 
ρ (w0 ) = ρ f j = +∞ ( j = 1, 2)

and  
ρ2 (w0 ) = ρ2 f j = ρ (A) ( j = 1, 2) .
Theorem B ((Latreuch & Belaı̈di, 2013)) Under the hypotheses of Theorem A, let ϕ (z) . 0 be an entire
function with finite order such that ψ0 (z) . 0. If f1 and f2 are two linearly independent solutions of (1.1) ,
then the polynomial of solutions (1.2) satisfies
 
λ (w0 − ϕ) = λ (w0 − ϕ) = ρ f j = +∞ ( j = 1, 2)

and  
λ2 (w0 − ϕ) = λ2 (w0 − ϕ) = ρ2 f j = ρ (A) ( j = 1, 2) .
Theorem C ((Latreuch & Belaı̈di, 2013)) Let A (z) be a polynomial of deg A = n. Let d j (z) ( j = 1, 2) be
finite order entire functions that are not all vanishing identically such that h0 . 0 and max {ρ (d1 ) , ρ (d2 )} <
2 . If f1 and f2 are two linearly independent solutions of (1.1) , then the polynomial of solutions (1.2)
n+2

satisfies
  n+2
ρ (w0 ) = ρ f j = ( j = 1, 2) .
2
Theorem D ((Latreuch & Belaı̈di, 2013)) Under the hypotheses of Theorem C, let ϕ (z) . 0 be an entire
function with ρ (ϕ) < n+22 such that ψ0 (z) . 0. If f1 and f2 are two linearly independent solutions of (1.1) ,
then the polynomial of solutions (1.2) satisfies
n+2
λ (w0 − ϕ) = λ (w0 − ϕ) = .
2
The main goal of this work is to study the controllability of solutions of the differential equation (1.1) .
In fact, we study the growth and oscillation of wi = d1 f1(i) +d2 f2(i) (i = 0, 1, 2) where f1 and f2 are two linearly
independent meromorphic solutions of (1.1), and d1 , d2 are meromorphic functions of finite iterated p-order
 B. Belaı̈di et al. / Theory and Applications of Mathematics & Computer Science 10 (2) (2020) 7–26 11

not all vanishing identically. We obtain some theorems which extend and improve the previous results given
by (Latreuch & Belaı̈di, 2013) from entire to meromorphic solutions and from usual order to iterated order
for the polynomials wi = d1 f1(i) + d2 f2(i) (i = 0, 1, 2) instead for the polynomial w0 = d1 f1 + d2 f2 .

Theorem 1.1 Let A (z) be a transcendental meromorphic function of finite iterated p-order ρ p (A) = ρ > 0
and 0 < τ p (A) < +∞ such that δ (∞, A) = lim inf m(r,A) = δ > 0. Suppose, moreover, that either:
r→+∞ T (r,A)
(i) all poles of f are of uniformly bounded multiplicity or that
(ii) δ (∞, f ) > 0.
Let d j (z) ( j = n1, 2) be finite iterated
o p-order meromorphic functions that are not all vanishing identically
such that max ρ p (d1 ) , ρ p (d2 ) < ρ p (A). If f1 and f2 are two linearly independent meromorphic solutions
 
of (1.1) , then the polynomial of solutions (1.2) satisfies for i = 0, 1, 2 and j = 1, 2, i (wi ) = i f j = p + 1,
 
ρ p (wi ) = ρ p f j = +∞

and  
ρ p+1 (wi ) = ρ p+1 f j = ρ.
Theorem 1.2 Under the hypotheses of Theorem 1.1, let ϕ (z) . 0 be a meromorphic function with ρ p+1 (ϕ) <
ρ p (A) = ρ such that ψi (z) . 0 (i = 0, 1, 2) . If f1 and f2 are two linearly independent meromorphic solu-
tions of (1.1) , then
 the polynomial of solutions (1.2) satisfies for i = 0, 1, 2 and j = 1, 2, iλ (wi − ϕ) =
iλ (wi − ϕ) = i f j = p + 1,
 
λ p (wi − ϕ) = λ p (wi − ϕ) = ρ p f j = +∞
and  
λ p+1 (wi − ϕ) = λ p+1 (wi − ϕ) = ρ p+1 f j = ρ.
Setting ϕ (z) = z in Theorem 1.2, we obtain the following corollary.

Corollary 1.1 Under the hypotheses of Theorem 1.2, if f1 and f2 are two linearly independent meromorphic
solutions of (1.1) , then the polynomial of solutions (1.2) satisfies for i = 0, 1, 2 and j = 1, 2,
 
λ p (wi − z) = λ p (wi − z) = ρ p (wi ) = ρ p f j = +∞

and  
λ p+1 (wi − z) = λ p+1 (wi − z) = ρ p+1 (wi ) = ρ p+1 f j = ρ.
When A, d1 and d2 are transcendental entire functions, we get the following results.

Corollary 1.2 Assume A (z) is a transcendental entire function of finite iterated p-order ρ p (A) = ρ > 0 and
0 < τ p (A) < +∞. Let d j (z)
n ( j = 1, 2) be ofinite iterated p-order entire functions that are not all vanishing
identically such that max ρ p (d1 ) , ρ p (d2 ) < ρ p (A). If f1 and f2 are two linearly independent solutions of
(1.1) , then the polynomial of solutions (1.2) satisfies
 
ρ p (wi ) = ρ p f j = +∞ (i = 0, 1, 2) , ( j = 1, 2)

and  
ρ p+1 (wi ) = ρ p+1 f j = ρ (i = 0, 1, 2) , ( j = 1, 2) .
12 B. Belaı̈di et al. / Theory and Applications of Mathematics & Computer Science 10 (2) (2020) 7–26

Corollary 1.3 Under the hypotheses of Corollary 1.2, let ϕ (z) . 0 be an entire function with ρ p+1 (ϕ) <
ρ p (A) = ρ such that ψi (z) . 0 (i = 0, 1, 2) . If f1 and f2 are two linearly independent solutions of (1.1)
 , then
the polynomial of solutions (1.2) satisfies for i = 0, 1, 2 and j = 1, 2, iλ (wi − ϕ) = iλ (wi − ϕ) = i f j = p+1,
 
λ p (wi − ϕ) = λ p (wi − ϕ) = ρ p f j = +∞

and  
λ p+1 (wi − ϕ) = λ p+1 (wi − ϕ) = ρ p+1 f j = ρ.
Remark 1.2 The results in Corollary 1.3 are different of the results in Theorem B. The difference is ρ p (ϕ) =
+∞ and ρ p+1 (ϕ) < ρ p (A) or (ρ (ϕ) = +∞ and ρ2 (ϕ) < ρ (A)), but in Theorem B, we have ρ (ϕ) < +∞.

Theorem 1.3 Let A (z) be a polynomial of deg A = n. Let d j (z) ( j = 1, 2) be finite order entire functions that
are not all vanishing identically such that hi . 0 (i = 0, 1, 2) and max {ρ (d1 ) , ρ (d2 )} < n+2
2 . If f1 and f2 are
two linearly independent solutions of (1.1) , then the polynomial of solutions (1.2) satisfies for i = 0, 1, 2
and j = 1, 2,
  n+2
ρ (wi ) = ρ f j = .
2
Theorem 1.4 Under the hypotheses of Theorem 1.3, let ϕ (z) . 0 be an entire function with ρ (ϕ) < n+2 2 such
that ψi (z) . 0 (i = 0, 1, 2) . If f1 and f2 are two linearly independent solutions of (1.1) , then the polynomial
of solutions (1.2) satisfies for (i = 0, 1, 2) , ( j = 1, 2) ,
n+2
λ (wi − ϕ) = λ (wi − ϕ) = .
2
Remark 1.3 Theorem 1.1 is the improvement of Theorem A and Theorem 1.2 is the improvement of The-
orem B. Furthermore, Theorem 1.3 is the improvement of Theorem C and Theorem 1.4 is the improvement
of Theorem D.

We consider now the complex linear differential equation

f 00 + A (z) f 0 + B (z) f = 0, (1.4)

where A (z) and B (z) are entire functions of finite iterated p-order.

(Latreuch & Belaı̈di, 2015) have obtained the following result when A (z) and B (z) are finite order
entire functions.

Theorem E ((Latreuch & Belaı̈di, 2015)) Let A (z) and B (z) be entire functions of finite order such that
ρ (A) < ρ (B). Let d j (z) , b j (z) ( j = 1, 2) be finite order entire functions such that d1 (z) b2 (z) − d2 (z) b1 (z) .
0. If f1 and f2 are two linearly independent solutions of (1.4) , then

d1 f1 + d2 f2
!
ρ = +∞
b1 f1 + b2 f2

and
d1 f1 + d2 f2
!
ρ2 = ρ (B) .
b1 f1 + b2 f2
 B. Belaı̈di et al. / Theory and Applications of Mathematics & Computer Science 10 (2) (2020) 7–26 13

It is a natural to ask ”Can we obtain the same results as in Theorem E for the second order linear
d1 f1(i) + d2 f2(i) d1 f1 + d2 f2
differential equation (1.4) and for wi = (i ∈ N) instead of w0 = ?”. In this part,
(i)
b 1 f1 + b 2 f2 (i) b1 f1 + b2 f2
we answer to this question.

Theorem 1.5 Let A (z) and B (z) be entire functions of finite iterated p-order such that ρ p (A) < ρ p (B). Let
d j (z) , b j (z) ( j = 1, 2) be finite iterated p-order entire functions such that d1 (z) b2 (z) − d2 (z) b1 (z) . 0. If
f1 and f2 are two linearly independent solutions of (1.4) , then

 d1 f1(i) + d2 f2(i) 

 
ρ p   = +∞, i ∈ N
b1 f1(i) + b2 f2(i)

and
 d1 f1(i) + d2 f2(i) 
 
ρ p+1   = ρ p (B) , i ∈ N.
b1 f1(i) + b2 f2(i)
Corollary 1.4 Assume A (z) is an entire function with i (A) = p. Let d j (z) , b j (z) ( j = 1, 2) be finite iterated
p-order entire functions such that d1 (z) b2 (z) − d2 (z) b1 (z) . 0. If f1 and f2 are two linearly independent
solutions of (1.1) , then
 d1 f1(i) + d2 f2(i) 
 
ρ p   = +∞, i ∈ N
b1 f1(i) + b2 f2(i)
and
 d1 f1(i) + d2 f2(i) 
 
ρ p+1   = ρ p (A) , i ∈ N.
b1 f1(i) + b2 f2(i)

2. Auxiliary lemmas

The following lemmas will be used in the proofs of our theorems.

Lemma 2.1 ((Belaı̈di, 2008)) Let p ≥ 1 be an integer and let A (z) be a transcendental meromorphic
function of finite iterated p-order ρ p (A) = ρ > 0 such that δ (∞, A) = δ > 0. Suppose, moreover, that
either:
(i) all poles of f are of uniformly bounded multiplicity or that
(ii) δ (∞, f ) > 0.
Then every meromorphic solution f (z) . 0 of (1.1) satisfies ρ p ( f ) = +∞ and ρ p+1 ( f ) = ρ p (A) = ρ.

Lemma 2.2 ((Belaı̈di, 2008)) Let p ≥ 1 be an integer and let A0 , A1 , · · · , Ak−1 , F . 0 be finite iterated
p-order meromorphic functions. If f is a meromorphic solution with ρ p ( f ) = +∞ and ρ p+1 ( f ) = ρ < +∞
of the differential equation

f (k) + Ak−1 (z) f (k−1) + · · · + A1 (z) f 0 + A0 (z) f = F, (2.1)

then iλ ( f ) = iλ ( f ) = i ( f ) = p + 1, λ p ( f ) = λ p ( f ) = ρ p ( f ) = +∞ and λ p+1 ( f ) = λ p+1 ( f ) = ρ p+1 ( f ) = ρ.

Here, we give a special case of the Lemma 3.10 due to (Tu & Chen, 2009).
14 B. Belaı̈di et al. / Theory and Applications of Mathematics & Computer Science 10 (2) (2020) 7–26

Lemma 2.3 Let A0 , A1 , · · · , Ak−1 , F . 0 be meromorphic functions. If f is a meromorphic solution of the

equation (2.1) such that
n   o
max ρ (F) , ρ A j ( j = 0, · · · , k − 1) < ρ ( f ) = ρ < +∞,

then we have λ ( f ) = λ ( f ) = ρ ( f ) = ρ.

The proofs of the following lemma is essentially the same as in the corresponding results for the usual
order. For details, see Chapter 2 of the book by (Goldberg & Ostrovskii, 2008). So, we omit the proofs.

Lemma 2.4 Let f and g be meromorphic functions with i ( f ) = i (g) = p ≥ 1. Then the following statements
hold: n o n o
(i) max ρ p ( f + g) , ρ p ( f g) ≤ max ρ p ( f ) , ρ p (g) .
(ii) If ρ p ( f ) < ρ p (g) , then
ρ p ( f + g) = ρ p ( f g) = ρ p (g.)
Lemma 2.5 ((Belaı̈di, 2011)) Let f, g be meromorphic functions with iterated p−order 0 < ρ p ( f ) , ρ p (g) <
+∞ and iterated p−type 0 < τ p ( f ) , τ p (g) < +∞ (1 ≤ p < +∞) . Then the following statements hold:
(i) If ρ p ( f ) < ρ p (g) , then
τ p ( f + g) = τ p ( f g) = τ p (g) .
(iii) If ρ p ( f ) = ρ p (g) and τ p ( f ) , τ p (g) , then

ρ p ( f + g) = ρ p ( f g) = ρ p ( f ) = ρ p (g) .

Lemma 2.6 (see Remark 1.3 of (Kinnunen, 1998)) If f is a meromorphic function with i ( f ) = p ≥ 1, then
ρ p ( f 0 ) = ρ p ( f ).

The following lemma is a corollary of Theorem 2.3 in (Kinnunen, 1998).

Lemma 2.7 Assume A (z) is an entire function with i (A) = p, and assume 1 ≤ p < +∞. Then, for all
non-trivial solutions f of (1.1) , we have

ρ p ( f ) = +∞ and ρ p+1 ( f ) = ρ p (A) .

Lemma 2.8 ((Chen, 2000)) For all non-trivial solutions f of (1.1) the following hold:
(i) If A is a polynomial with deg A = n ≥ 1, then we have
n+2
λ ( f − z) = ρ ( f ) = .
2
(ii) If A is transcendental and ρ (A) < +∞, then we have

λ ( f − z) = ρ ( f ) = +∞

and
λ2 ( f − z) = ρ2 ( f ) = ρ (A) .
 B. Belaı̈di et al. / Theory and Applications of Mathematics & Computer Science 10 (2) (2020) 7–26 15

Lemma 2.9 ((Kinnunen, 1998)) Let A0 (z) , · · · , Ak−1 (z) be entire functions of finite iterated p-order such
that n   o
max ρ p A j : j = 1, · · · , k − 1 < ρ p (A0 ) .
Then every solution f . 0 of the differential equation

f (k) + Ak−1 (z) f (k−1) + · · · + A1 (z) f 0 + A0 (z) f = 0

satisfies ρ p ( f ) = +∞ and ρ p+1 ( f ) = ρ p (A0 ).

Let A (z) and B (z) be entire functions. We define the following sequence of functions:
B0i−1 (z)
Ai (z) = Ai−1 (z) − Bi−1 (z) (i = 1, 2, · · · ) ,
B0i−1 (z) (2.2)
Bi (z) = A0i−1 (z) + Bi−1 (z) − Bi−1 (z) Ai−1 (z) (i = 1, 2, · · · ) ,

where A0 (z) = A (z) and B0 (z) = B (z) .

The following two lemmas are particular cases of Lemma 2.4 and Lemma 2.5 in (ElFarissi, 2013).

Lemma 2.10 Suppose that f . 0 is a solution of the equation

f 00 + A (z) f 0 + B (z) f = 0. (2.3)

Then gi = f (i) is a solution of the equation

g00 + Ai (z) g0 + Bi (z) g = 0, (2.4)

where Ai (z) and Bi (z) (i = 0, 1, · · · ) are given by (2.2) .

Proof. Assume that f . 0 is a solution of equation (2.3) and let gi = f (i) . We prove that gi is a solution of
the equation (2.4). Our proof is by induction. For i = 1, differentiating both sides of (2.3), we obtain

f 000 + A (z) f 00 + A0 (z) + B (z) f 0 + B0 (z) f = 0.

(2.5)

By (2.3) , we get
f 00 + A (z) f 0
f =− . (2.6)
B (z)
Substituting (2.6) into (2.5), we get

B0 (z) 00 B0 (z)
! !
f 000
+ A (z) − f + A (z) + B (z) −
0
A (z) f 0 = 0. (2.7)
B (z) B (z)

Using (2.2), (2.7) becomes

1 + A1 (z) g1 + B1 (z) g1 = 0.
g00 0

Suppose that the assertion is true for the values which are strictly smaller than a certain i. We suppose gi−1
is a solution of the equation
i−1 + Ai−1 (z) gi−1 + Bi−1 (z) gi−1 = 0.
g00 0
(2.8)
16 B. Belaı̈di et al. / Theory and Applications of Mathematics & Computer Science 10 (2) (2020) 7–26

Differentiating both sides of (2.8), we can write

 
i−1 + Ai−1 (z) gi−1 + Ai−1 (z) + Bi−1 (z) gi−1 + Bi−1 (z) gi−1 = 0.
g000 00 0 0 0
(2.9)

From (2.8) , we have

i−1 + Ai−1 (z) gi−1
g00 0
gi−1 = − . (2.10)
Bi−1 (z)
Substituting (2.10) into (2.9), we get

B0i−1 (z) 00
!
+ Ai−1 (z) −
g000
i−1 g
Bi−1 (z) i−1

B0i−1 (z)
!
+ Ai−1 (z) + Bi−1 (z) −
0
Ai−1 (z) g0i−1 = 0. (2.11)
Bi−1 (z)
By (2.11) and (2.2) , we have
i + Ai (z) gi + Bi (z) gi = 0.
g00 0

Thus, Lemma 2.10 is proved.

Lemma 2.11 Let A (z) and B (z) be entire functions of finite iterated p-order and assume that every solution
f . 0 of equation (2.3) has infinite iterated p-order and ρ p+1 ( f ) = ρ. Let Ai , Bi (i = 0, 1, 2, · · · ) be defined
as in (2.2). Then every nontrivial meromorphic solution g of the equation (2.4) satisfies ρ p (g) = +∞ and
ρ p+1 (g) = ρ.
n o
Proof. Let { f1 , f2 } be a fundamental system of solutions of (2.3). We show that f1(i) , f2(i) is a fundamental
system of solutions of (2.4). By Lemma 2.10, it follows that f1(i) , f2(i) are solutions of (2.4) . Let α1 , α2 be
constants such that
α1 f1(i) + α2 f2(i) = 0.
Then, we have
α1 f1 + α2 f2 = P (z) ,
where P (z) is a polynomial of degree less than i. Since α1 f1 + α2 f2 is a solution of (2.3), then P is a solution
of (2.3), and by the conditions of the Lemma 2.11, we conclude that P is an infinite p-order solution of
(2.3), this leads to a contradiction. Therefore, P is a trivial solution. We deduce that α1 f1 + α2 f2 = 0. Using
the fact that { f1 , f2 } is a fundamental solution
n of o(2.3), we get α1 = α2 = 0. Now, let g be a nontrivial
solution of (2.4). Then, using the fact that f1(i) , f2(i) is a fundamental solution of (2.4) , we claim that there
exist constants β1 , β2 not all equal to zero, such that g = β1 f1(i) + β2 f2(i) . Let h = β1 f1 + β2 f2 , h be a solution
of (2.3) and h(i) = g. Hence, by the conditions of the Lemma 2.11, we have ρ p (h) = ρ p (g) = +∞ and
ρ p+1 (h) = ρ p+1 (g) = ρ.

Lemma 2.12 Let A (z) and B (z) be entire functions of finite iterated p-order such that ρ p (A) < ρ p (B) = ρ
(0 < ρ < +∞) . If f1 and f2 are two linearly independent solutions of (2.3) . Then ff12 is of infinite iterated
p-order and !
f1
ρ p+1 = ρ p (B) .
f2
 B. Belaı̈di et al. / Theory and Applications of Mathematics & Computer Science 10 (2) (2020) 7–26 17

Proof. Suppose that f1 and f2 are two linearly independent solutions of (2.3). Then by Lemma 2.9 we have

ρ p ( f1 ) = ρ p ( f2 ) = +∞, ρ p+1 ( f1 ) = ρ p+1 ( f2 ) = ρ p (B) . (2.12)

On the other hand !0

f1 W( f1 , f2 )
=− , (2.13)
f2 f22
where W( f1 , f2 ) = f1 f20 − f2 f10 is the Wronskian of f1 and f2 . By using (2.3) we obtain that

W 0 ( f1 , f2 ) = f1 f200 − f2 f100
   
= − f1 A (z) f20 + B (z) f2 + f2 A (z) f10 + B (z) f1 = −A (z) W( f1 , f2 ), (2.14)
which implies that Z
W( f1 , f2 ) = K exp(− A(z)dz), (2.15)

A(z)dz is the primitive of A (z) and K ∈ C\ {0} . By (2.13) and (2.15) we have
R
where
!0 R
f1 exp(− A(z)dz)
= −K . (2.16)
f2 f22

Since ρ p ( f2 ) = +∞ and ρ p+1 ( f2 ) = ρ p (B) > ρ p (A) , then from (2.16) and Lemma 2.6, we obtain
! !
f1 f1
ρp = +∞, ρ p+1 = ρ p (B) .
f2 f2

3. Proof of the Theorems

Proof of Theorem 1.1 Suppose that f1 and f2 are two linearly independent solutions of (1.1) . By Lemma
2.1, we have
ρ p ( f1 ) = ρ p ( f2 ) = +∞
and
ρ p+1 ( f1 ) = ρ p+1 ( f2 ) = ρ p (A) = ρ.
   
First, we prove that ρ p (w0 ) = ρ p f j = +∞ and ρ p+1 (w0 ) = ρ p+1 f j = ρ ( j = 1, 2) . Suppose that d1 = cd2 ,
where c is a complex number. Then, by (1.2) we obtain

w0 = cd2 f1 + d2 f2 = (c f1 + f2 ) d2 .

Since f = c f1 + f2 is a solution of (1.1) and ρ p (d2 ) < ρ p (A) , then we have

ρ p (w0 ) = ρ p (c f1 + f2 ) = +∞

and
ρ p+1 (w0 ) = ρ p+1 (c f1 + f2 ) = ρ.
18 B. Belaı̈di et al. / Theory and Applications of Mathematics & Computer Science 10 (2) (2020) 7–26

Suppose that d1 . cd2 where c is a complex number. Differentiating both sides of w0 = d1 f1 + d2 f2 , we

obtain
w00 = d10 f1 + d1 f10 + d20 f2 + d2 f20 . (3.1)
Differentiating both sides of (3.1) , we have

0 = d1 f1 + 2d1 f1 + d1 f1 + d2 f2 + 2d2 f2 + d2 f2 .
w00 00 0 0 00 00 0 0 00
(3.2)

Substituting f j00 = −A f j ( j = 1, 2) into equation (3.2) , we obtain

   
0 = d1 − d1 A f1 + 2d1 f1 + d2 − d2 A f2 + 2d2 f2 .
w00 00 0 0 00 0 0
(3.3)

Differentiating both sides of (3.3) and by substituting f j00 = −A f j ( j = 1, 2) , we have

   
w000
0 = d1
000
− 3d 0
1 A − d 1 A0
f 1 + d 00
1 − d 1 A + 2d 00
1 f1
0

   
+ d2000 − 3d20 A − d2 A0 f2 + d200 − d2 A + 2d200 f20 . (3.4)
By (1.2) , (3.1) , (3.3) and (3.4) we obtain

w0 = d1 f1 + d2 f2 ,



0 = d0 f + d f 0 + d0 f + d f 0 ,





  w 0 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2
 w00 = d00 − d A f + 2d0 f 0 + d00 − d A f + 2d0 f 0 ,



 0 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2
2 2 (3.5)
000 = 000 0 0 + 00 + 00 f 0


 w 0  d 1 − 3d 1 A − d1 A f 1 d1 − d1 A 2d
1 1


  
 + d000 − 3d0 A − d2 A0 f2 + d00 − d2 A + 2d00 f 0 .


2 2 2 2 2

To solve this system of equations, we need first to prove that h0 . 0. By simple calculations we have
 
 d1 0 d2 0 
 d10 d1 d20 d2 
h0 =  00 0 00 0 
 d1 − d1 A 2d1 d2 − d2 A 2d2 
 d000 − 3d0 A − d1 A0 d00 − d1 A + 2d00 d000 − 3d0 A − d2 A0 d00 − d2 A + 2d00 
1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2
 
= 4d12 (d20 )2 + 4d22 (d10 )2 − 8d1 d2 d10 d20 A + 2d1 d2 d10 d2000 + 2d1 d2 d20 d1000 − 6d1 d2 d100 d200

−6d1 d10 d20 d200 − 6d2 d10 d20 d100 + 6d1 (d20 )2 d100 + 6d2 (d10 )2 d200 − 2d22 d10 d1000
−2d12 d20 d2000 + 3d12 (d200 )2 + 3d22 (d100 )2 . (3.6)
To show that 4d12 (d20 )2 + 4d22 (d10 )2 − 8d1 d2 d10 d20 . 0, we suppose that

d12 (d20 )2 + d22 (d10 )2 − 2d1 d2 d10 d20 = 0. (3.7)

Dividing both sides of (3.7) by (d1 d2 )2 , we obtain

!2 !2
d20 d0 d10 d20
+ 1 −2 =0
d2 d1 d1 d2
equivalent to
!2
d10 d20
− = 0,
d1 d2
 B. Belaı̈di et al. / Theory and Applications of Mathematics & Computer Science 10 (2) (2020) 7–26 19

which implies that d1 = cd2 , where c is a complex number and this is a contradiction. Since

max{ρ p (d1 ) , ρ p (d2 )} < ρ p (A)

and 4d12 (d20 )2 + 4d22 (d10 )2 − 8d1 d2 d10 d20 . 0, we can deduce from (3.6) and Lemma 2.4 that

ρ p (h0 ) = ρ p (A) > 0. (3.8)

Hence h0 . 0. By Cramer’s method we have

 
 w0 0 d2 0 
 w0 d 1 d 0 d 2

 000 2
2d10 d200 − d2 A 2d20

 w0 
 w000 d00 − d1 A + 2d00 d000 − 3d0 A − d2 A0 d00 − d2 A + 2d00 
0 1 1 2 2 2 2
f1 =
h0
 
2 d1 d2 d20 − d22 d10 (3)
= w0 + φ2 w00 0 + φ1 w0 + φ0 w0 ,
0
(3.9)
h0
where φ j ( j = 0, 1, 2) are meromorphic functions of finite iterated p-order defined by

3d22 d100 − 3d1 d2 d200

φ2 = , (3.10)
h0
2d1 d2 d20 A + 6d2 d10 d200 − 6d2 d20 d100 − 2d22 d10 A
φ1 = , (3.11)
h0
2d2 d10 d2000 − 2d1 d20 d2000 − 3d1 d2 d200 A − 3d2 d100 d200 + 2d1 d2 d20 A0
φ0 =
h0
 2  2
−4d2 d10 d20 A − 6d10 d20 d200 + 3d1 d200 + 4d1 d20 A + 3d22 d100 A
+
h0
 2
6 d20 d100 − 2d22 d10 A0
+ . (3.12)
h0
Suppose now ρ p (w0 ) < +∞, then by (3.9) we obtain ρ p ( f1 ) < +∞ which is a contradiction, hence ρ p (w0 ) =
+∞. By (1.2) we have ρ p+1 (w0 ) ≤ ρ p (A) . Suppose that ρ p+1 (w0 ) < ρ p (A) , then by (3.9) we obtain
ρ p+1 ( f1 ) < ρ p (A) which is a contradiction. Hence ρ p+1 (w0 ) = ρ p (A) .
   
Second, we prove that ρ p (w1 ) = ρ p f j = +∞ and ρ p+1 (w1 ) = ρ p+1 f j = ρ ( j = 1, 2) . Suppose that
d1 = cd2 , where c is a complex number. Then, by (1.2) we obtain

w1 = cd2 f10 + d2 f20 = (c f1 + f2 )0 d2 .

Since f = c f1 + f2 is a solution of (1.1) and ρ p (d2 ) < ρ p (A) , then by Lemma 2.1 we have

ρ p (w1 ) = ρ p ( f ) = +∞

and
ρ p+1 (w1 ) = ρ p+1 ( f ) = ρ.
20 B. Belaı̈di et al. / Theory and Applications of Mathematics & Computer Science 10 (2) (2020) 7–26

Suppose that d1 . cd2 , where c is a complex number. Differentiating both sides of w1 = d1 f10 + d2 f20 , we
obtain
w01 = d10 f10 + d1 f100 + d20 f2 + d2 f200 . (3.13)
Substituting f j00 = −A f j ( j = 1, 2) into equation (3.13) , we have

w01 = −d1 A f1 + d10 f10 − d2 A f2 + d20 f20 . (3.14)

Differentiating both sides of (3.14) , we obtain

 
1 = − d1 A + d1 A f1 − d1 A f1 + d1 f1 + d1 f1 .
w00 0 0 0 00 0 0 00
(3.15)

Substituting f j00 = −A f j ( j = 1, 2) into equation (3.15) , we have

       
1 = − 2d1 A + d1 A f1 + d1 − d1 A f1 − 2d2 A + d2 A f2 + d2 − d2 A f2 .
w00 0 0 00 0 0 0 00 0
(3.16)

Differentiating both sides of (3.16) and by substituting f j00 = −A f j ( j = 1, 2) , we obtain

     
w000
1 = d1 A 2
− 3 d1
00
A + d1
0 0
A − d1 A 00
f 1 + d 000
1 − 3d 0
1 A − 2d 1 A0
f10
     
+ d2 A2 − 3 d200 A + d20 A0 − d2 A00 f2 + d1000 − 3d20 A − 2d2 A0 f20 . (3.17)
By (1.2) , (3.14) , (3.16) and (3.17) we have

w1 = d1 f10 + d2 f20 ,



w1 = −d
 1 A f1 + d1 f1 − d2 A f2 + d2 f2,


 0 0 0 0 0



w001 = − 2d1 A + d1 A f1 + d1 − d1 A f1
0 0 00 0









 − 2d20 A + d2 A0 f2 + d200 − d2 A f20 ,
      

 w000 = d A2 − 3 d 00 A + d 0 A0 − d A00 f + d 000 − 3d 0 A − 2d A0 f 0
1 1 1 1

1  1 1 1 1 1


    
 + d2 A2 − 3 d00 A + d0 A0 − d2 A00 f2 + d000 − 3d0 A − 2d2 A0 f 0 .


2 2 2 2 2

To solve this system of equations, we need first to prove that h1 . 0. By simple calculations we obtain
 
 0 d1 0 d2 
 −d A d 0 −d A d 0 
1 2
h1 =   0  1   2 
 − 2d1 A + d1 A0 d100 − d1 A − 2d20 A + d2 A0 d200 − d2 A 
α1 α2 α3 α4
 

 
= 4 d12 (d20 )2 + d22 (d10 )2 − 2d1 d2 d10 d20 A3
   
+3 2d1 d2 d10 d20 − d12 (d20 )2 − d22 (d10 )2 (A0 )2 + 2 d12 (d20 )2 − 2d1 d2 d10 d20 + 2d22 (d10 )2 AA00

+ 2d1 d2 d10 d1000 + 2d1 d2 d20 d1000 − 6d1 d2 d100 d200 − 6d1 d10 d20 d200 − 6d2 d10 d20 d100 + 6d1 (d20 )2 d100

+ 6d2 (d10 )2 d200 − 2d12 d20 d1000 − 2d22 d10 d1000 + 3d12 (d200 )2 + 3d22 (d100 )2 A2 , (3.18)
 B. Belaı̈di et al. / Theory and Applications of Mathematics & Computer Science 10 (2) (2020) 7–26 21

where α1 , · · · , α4 are finite iterated p-order meromorphic functions defined in (1.3). By 4d12 (d20 )2 +4d22 (d10 )2 −
8d1 d2 d10 d20 . 0, 0 < τ p (A) < +∞ and Lemma 2.5, we obtain from (3.18) that ρ p (h1 ) = ρ p (A) > 0, thus
h1 . 0. By Cramer’s method we have
 
 w1 d1 0 d2 
 w0 d 0 −d A d 0 
 1 1  2  2 
 w00 d 00 − d A − 2d 0 A + d A0 d 00 − d A 
1 1 1 2 2 2 2 
α2 α3 α4
 000
w1 
f1 =
h1

= φ6 w(3)
1 + φ5 w1 + φ4 w1 + φ3 w1 ,
00 0
(3.19)
where φ j ( j = 3, 4, 5, 6) are meromorphic functions of finite iterated p-order defined by

A   A0  
φ6 = d1 d2 d200 − d22 d100 + 2d2 d10 d20 − 2d1 (d20 )2 − d1 d2 d20 − d22 d10 ,
h1 h1
1  2 
φ5 = Ad2 α2 − Ad1 d2 α4 − d1 α3 d20 + d2 α3 d10 ,
h1
1 0     
φ4 = A d1 d2 α4 − d22 α2 + 2A d1 α4 d20 − d2 α2 d20 + d1 α3 d200 − d2 α3 d100 ,
h1
1  2 2    
φ3 = (A d2 α2 − d1 d2 α4 + A0 d2 α2 d20 − d2 α4 d10 − α3 d10 d200 + α3 d20 d100
h1
A  
+ d2 α3 d10 − d1 α3 d20 − d2 α2 d200 + d2 α4 d100 + 2α2 (d20 )2 − 2α4 d10 d20 ).
h1
Suppose now ρ p (w1 ) < +∞, then by (3.19) we obtain ρ p ( f1 ) < +∞ which is a contradiction, hence
ρ p (w1 ) = +∞. By (1.2) we have ρ p+1 (w1 ) ≤ ρ p (A) . Suppose that ρ p+1 (w1 ) < ρ p (A) , then by (3.19) we
obtain ρ p+1 ( f1 ) < ρ p (A) which is a contradiction. Hence ρ p+1 (w1 ) = ρ p (A) .

Next, we prove that ρ p (w2 ) = +∞ and ρ p+1 (w2 ) = ρ p (A) = ρ ( j = 1, 2) . Suppose that d1 = cd2 , where
c is a complex number. Then, by (1.2) we obtain

w2 = cd2 f100 + d2 f200 . (3.20)

Substituting f j00 = −A f j ( j = 1, 2) into (3.20) , we get

w2 = −Ad2 (c f1 + f2 ) .

Since f = c f1 + f2 is a solution of (1.1) and ρ p (d2 ) < ρ p (A) , then we have

ρ p (w2 ) = ρ p (c f1 + f2 ) = +∞

and
ρ p+1 (w2 ) = ρ p+1 (c f1 + f2 ) = ρ.
Suppose now that d1 . cd2 where c is a complex number. We have by (1.2)

w2 = d1 f100 + d2 f200 . (3.21)

22 B. Belaı̈di et al. / Theory and Applications of Mathematics & Computer Science 10 (2) (2020) 7–26

Substituting f j00 = −A f j ( j = 1, 2) into (3.21) , we obtain

w2
= d1 f1 + d2 f2 . (3.22)
−A
Differentiating both sides of (3.22) , we have
 w 0
2
= d10 f1 + d1 f10 + d20 f2 + d2 f20 . (3.23)
−A
Differentiating both sides of (3.23) , we obtain
 w 00
2
= d100 f1 + 2d10 f10 + d1 f100 + d200 f2 + 2d20 f20 + d2 f200 . (3.24)
−A
Substituting f j00 = −A f j ( j = 1, 2) into equation (3.24) , we obtain
 w 00
2
   
= d100 − d1 A f1 + 2d10 f10 + d200 − d2 A f2 + 2d20 f20 . (3.25)
−A
Differentiating both sides of (3.25) and by substituting f j00 = −A f j ( j = 1, 2) , we have
 w 000
2
   
= d1000 − 3d10 A − d1 A0 f1 + d100 − d1 A + 2d100 f10
−A
   
+ d2000 − 3d20 A − d2 A0 f2 + d200 − d2 A + 2d200 f20 . (3.26)
By (3.22) , (3.23) , (3.25) and (3.26) we obtain

 w 0 −A = d1 f1 + d2 f2 ,

 w2


−A = d
0 f + d f 0 + d0 f + d f 0 ,


 2
1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2



  w2 00  00
 
= + 0 0 + 00 f2 + 2d20 f20 ,

d − d1 A f 1 2d f d − d 2 A

 −A  000  1 1 1 2 
w2
= 000 − 3d 0 A − d A0 f + d 00 − d A + 2d 00 f 0




−A  d 1 1 1 1 1 1


    1 1
+ d2000 − 3d20 A − d2 A0 f2 + d200 − d2 A + 2d200 f20 .




To solve this system of equations, we need to prove that h0 . 0, where h0 defined in (3.6) . By (3.8) we
know that h0 . 0. By Cramer’s method we have
 w2 
  −A 0 d2 0 
 w2 0 d1 d20 d2 
  −A00 
 w2 2d 0 d 00 − d A
2 2d 0 
  −A000 1 2 2 
 −Aw2
d100 − d1 A + 2d100 d2000 − 3d20 A − d2 A0 d200 − d2 A + 2d200 
f1 =
h0
 
−2 d1 d2 d20 − d22 d10  w2 000  w 00
2
 w 0
2
w 
2
= − φ2 − φ1 − φ0 .
h0 A A A A
By simple calculation, we obtain
    
−2 d1 d2 d20 − d22 d10  6 d1 d2 d20 − d22 d10 1 !0 φ2 

f1 = 000
w2 −   +  w002
Ah0 h A A
 B. Belaı̈di et al. / Theory and Applications of Mathematics & Computer Science 10 (2) (2020) 7–26 23
  
 6 d1 d2 d20 − d22 d10 1 !00 !0 
1 φ1

−  + 2φ2 +  w02
h0 A A A
  
 2 d1 d2 d20 − d22 d10 1 !000 !00 !0 
1 1 φ0

−  + φ2 + φ1 +  w2 , (3.27)
h0 A A A A
where φ j ( j = 0, 1, 2) are meromorphic functions of finite iterated p-order defined in (3.10)−(3.12). Suppose
now ρ p (w2 ) < +∞, then by (3.27) we obtain ρ p ( f1 ) < +∞ which is a contradiction, hence ρ p (w2 ) = +∞.
By (1.2) we have ρ p+1 (w2 ) ≤ ρ p (A) . Suppose that ρ p+1 (w2 ) < ρ p (A) , then by (3.27) we obtain ρ p+1 ( f1 ) <
ρ p (A) which is a contradiction. Hence ρ p+1 (w2 ) = ρ p (A) = ρ.

Proof of Theorem 1.2 By Theorem 1.1, we have ρ p (wi ) = +∞ and ρ p+1 (wi ) = ρ p (A) = ρ (i = 0, 1, 2) .
Set gi = d1 f1(i) + d2 f2(i) − ϕ (i = 0, 1, 2) . Since ρ p+1 (ϕ) < ρ, then by Lemma 2.4, we have i (gi ) = i (wi ) =
p + 1 and ρ p+1 (gi ) = ρ p+1 (wi ) = ρ (i = 0, 1, 2) . In order to prove iλ (wi − ϕ) = iλ (wi − ϕ) = p + 1 and
λ p+1 (wi − ϕ) = λ p+1 (wi − ϕ) = ρ (i = 0, 1, 2) we need to prove only iλ (gi ) = iλ (gi ) = p + 1 and λ p+1 (gi ) =
λ p+1 (gi ) = ρ. By identity w0 = g0 + ϕ we get from (3.9)
 
2 d1 d2 d20 − d22 d10 (3)
f1 = g0 + φ2 g00
0 + φ1 g0 + φ0 g0 + ψ0 ,
0
(3.28)
h0
where  
2 d1 d2 d20 − d22 d10
ψ0 = ϕ(3) + φ2 ϕ00 + φ1 ϕ0 + φ0 ϕ.
h0
Substituting (3.28) into equation (1.1), we obtain
 
2 d1 d2 d20 − d22 d10 (5) X 4
( j)
 
g0 + β0, j g0 = − ψ000 + Aψ0 = F 0 ,
h0 j=0

where β0, j ( j = 0, · · · , 4) are meromorphic functions of finite iterated p-order. Since ψ0 . 0 and ρ p+1 (ψ0 ) <
ρ, it follows by Lemma 2.1 that ψ0 is not a solution of (1.1), which implies that F0 . 0. Then, by applying

Lemma 2.2 we obtain iλ (w0 − ϕ) = iλ (w0 − ϕ) = i f j = p + 1, λ p (w0 − ϕ) = λ p (w0 − ϕ) = ρ p f j = +∞
 
and λ p+1 (w0 − ϕ) = λ p+1 (w0 − ϕ) = ρ p+1 f j = ρ ( j = 1, 2) .

By identity w1 = g1 + ϕ we get from (3.19)

f1 = φ6 g(3)
1 + φ5 g1 + φ4 g1 + φ3 g1 + ψ1 ,
00 0
(3.29)

where
ψ1 = φ6 ϕ(3) + φ5 ϕ00 + φ4 ϕ0 + φ3 ϕ.
Substituting (3.29) into equation (1.1), we obtain
4
X
( j)
 
φ6 g(5)
1 + β1, j g1 = − ψ00
1 + Aψ1 = F 1 ,
j=0

where β1, j ( j = 0, · · · , 4) are meromorphic functions of finite iterated p-order. Since ψ1 . 0 and ρ p+1 (ψ1 ) <
ρ, it follows by Lemma 2.1 that ψ1 is not a solution of (1.1), which implies that F1 . 0. Then, by applying
24 B. Belaı̈di et al. / Theory and Applications of Mathematics & Computer Science 10 (2) (2020) 7–26
   
Lemma 2.2 we obtain iλ (w1 − ϕ) = iλ (w1 − ϕ) = i f j = p + 1, λ p (w1 − ϕ) = λ p (w1 − ϕ) = ρ p f j = +∞
 
and λ p+1 (w1 − ϕ) = λ p+1 (w1 − ϕ) = ρ p+1 f j = ρ ( j = 1, 2) .

Now, by identity w2 = g2 + ϕ we get from (3.27)

    
−2 d1 d2 d20 − d22 d10  6 d1 d2 d20 − d22 d10 1 !0 φ2 

f1 = g000
2 −
 +  g00
Ah0  h0 A A 2
  
 6 d1 d2 d20 − d22 d10 1 !00 !0 
1 φ1

−  + 2φ2 +  g02
h0 A A A
  
 2 d1 d2 d20 − d22 d10 1 !000 !00 !0 
1 1 φ 0

−  + φ2 + φ1 +  g2 + ψ2 , (3.30)
h0 A A A A
where     
−2 d1 d2 d20 − d22 d10  6 d1 d2 d20 − d22 d10 1 !0 φ2 

ψ2 = ϕ − 
000
+  ϕ00
Ah0 h0 A A
  
 6 d1 d2 d20 − d22 d10 1 !00 !0 
1 φ1

−  + 2φ2 +  ϕ0
h0 A A A
 
 2 d1 d2 d20 − d22 d10 1 !000
 !00 !0 
1 1 φ0  0
−   + φ2 + φ1 +  ϕ .
h0 A A A A
Substituting (3.30) into equation (1.1), we obtain
 
2 d1 d2 d20 − d22 d10 (5) X 4
( j)
 
g2 + β2, j g2 = − ψ00
2 + Aψ2 = F 2 ,
Ah0 j=0

where β2, j ( j = 0, · · · , 4) are meromorphic functions of finite iterated p-order. Since ψ2 . 0 and ρ p (ψ2 ) <
+∞, it follows by Lemma 2.1 that ψ2 is not a solution  (1.1), which implies that F2 . 0. Then, by applying
 of 
Lemma 2.2 we obtain iλ (w2 − ϕ) = iλ (w2 − ϕ) = i f j = p + 1, λ p (w2 − ϕ) = λ p (w2 − ϕ) = ρ p f j = +∞
 
and λ p+1 (w2 − ϕ) = λ p+1 (w2 − ϕ) = ρ p+1 f j = ρ ( j = 1, 2) . This complete the proof of Theorem 1.2.

Proof of Corollary 1.2 Suppose that f1 and f2 are two linearly
 independent solutions of (1.1) . Then, by
Lemma 2.7 we get i f j = p + 1, ρ p f j = +∞ and ρ p+1 f j = ρ (A) = ρ ( j = 1, 2) . Applying Theorem 1.1
we can easily get the conclusions of Corollary 1.2.
   
Proof of Corollary 1.3 By Corollary 1.2, we get i (wi ) = i f j = p + 1, ρ p (wi ) = ρ p f j = +∞ and
 
ρ p+1 (wi ) = ρ p+1 f j = ρ (A) = ρ (i = 0, 1, 2) , ( j = 1, 2) . Applying Theorem 1.2, we can get the assertions
of Corollary 1.3.

Proof of Theorem 1.3 Suppose that f1 and f2 are two linearly independent solutions of (1.1) . We prove
2 (i = 0, 1, 2) . By Lemma 2.8, we have ρ ( f1 ) = ρ ( f2 ) = 2 . By the same argument as in
that ρ (wi ) = n+2 n+2
 B. Belaı̈di et al. / Theory and Applications of Mathematics & Computer Science 10 (2) (2020) 7–26 25
 
proof of Theorem 1.1 and using the fact that hi . 0 (i = 0, 1, 2) , we get ρ (wi ) = ρ f j = n+2
2 (i = 0, 1, 2) ,
( j = 1, 2) .

Proof of Theorem 1.4 By Theorem 1.3 we obtain ρ (wi ) = n+2 2 (i = 0, 1, 2) . We prove that λ (wi − ϕ) =
λ (wi − ϕ) = 2 (i = 0, 1, 2) . Since ψi . 0 (i = 0, 1, 2) are not solutions of (1.1) , then by using the same
n+2

method as in proof of Theorem 1.2 and Lemma 2.3, we get the conclusion of Theorem 1.4.

Proof of Theorem 1.5 Suppose that f1 and f2 are two linearly independent entire solutions of (1.4). Then
by Lemma 2.9, we have
ρ p ( f1 ) = ρ p ( f2 ) = +∞
and
ρ p+1 ( f1 ) = ρ p+1 ( f2 ) = ρ (B) .
By Lemma 2.11, we deduce that f1(i) and f2(i) are two linearly independent entire solutions of (2.4) . Applying
Lemma 2.12, we obtain  (i)   (i) 
 f1   f 
ρ p  (i)  = +∞, ρ p+1  1(i)  = ρ p (B) , i ∈ N.
 
f2 f2
f1(i)
Set g = . Then
f2(i)
d1 (z) f1(i) (z) + d2 (z) f2(i) (z) d1 (z) g (z) + d2 (z)
w (z) = = . (3.31)
b1 (z) f1(i) (z) + b1 (z) f2(i) (z) b1 (z) g (z) + b2 (z)
It follows that
ρ p (w)
 ≤ ρ p (g) = +∞,
ρ p+1 (w) ≤ max{ρ p+1 d j , ρ p+1 b j , ρ p+1 (g)} = ρ p+1 (g) . (3.32)
j=1,2

On the other hand, we have

b2 (z) w (z) − d2 (z)
g (z) = − ,
b1 (z) w (z) − d1 (z)
which implies that

+∞ = ρ p (g) ≤ ρp (w) ,

ρ p+1 (g) ≤ max{ρ p+1 d j , ρ p+1 b j , ρ p+1 (w)} = ρ p+1 (w) . (3.33)
j=1,2

By using (3.32) and (3.33), we obtain

ρ p (w) = ρ p (g) = +∞, ρ p+1 (w) = ρ p+1 (g) = ρ p (B) .

Acknowledgements. This paper is supported by University of Mostaganem (UMAB) (PRFU Project Code
C00L03UN270120180005).

References
Bank, S. and I. Laine (1982). On the oscillation theory of f 00 + a (z) f = 0, where a is entire. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 273(1), 351–
363.
Bank, S. and I. Laine (1983). On the zeros of meromorphic solutions and second-order linear differential equations. Comment.
Math. Helv. 58(4), 656–677.
26 B. Belaı̈di et al. / Theory and Applications of Mathematics & Computer Science 10 (2) (2020) 7–26

Belaı̈di, B. (2008). Oscillation of fixed points of solutions of some linear differential equations. Acta Math. Univ. Comenian.
77(2), 263–269.
Belaı̈di, B. (2011). Complex oscillation of differential polynomials generated by meromorphic solutions of linear differential equa-
tions. Publ. Inst. Math. (Beograd) (N.S.) 90(104), 125–133.
Bernal, L. G. (1987). On growth k-order of solutions of a complex homogeneous linear differential equation. Amer. Math. Soc.
101(2), 317–322.
Cao, T. B., J. F. Xu and Z. X. Chen (2010). On the meromorphic solutions of linear differential equations on the complex plane. J.
Math. Anal. Appl. 364(1), 130–142.
Chen, Z. X. (2000). The fixed points and hyper-order of solutions of second order complex differential equations. Acta Math. Sci.
Ser. A Chin. Ed. 20(3), 425–432.
ElFarissi, A. (2013). Value distribution of meromorphic solutions and their derivatives of complex differential equations. ISRN
Math. Anal., Art. ID 497921.
Goldberg, A. A. and I. V. Ostrovskii (2008). The distribution of values of meromorphic functions. Irdat Nauk, Moscow, 1970 in
Russian, Transl. Math. Monogr., vol. 236, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence RI.
Hayman, W. K. (1964). Meromorphic functions. Oxford Mathematical Monographs Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Kinnunen, L. (1998). Linear differential equations with solutions of finite iterated order. Southeast Asian Bull. Math. 22(4), 385–
405.
Laine, I. (1993). Nevanlinna theory and complex differential equations. de Gruyter Studies in Mathematics, 15. Walter de Gruyter
& Co., Berlin-New York.
Laine, I. and J. Rieppo (2004). Differential polynomials generated by linear differential equations. Complex Var. Theory Appl.
49(12), 897–911.
Latreuch, Z. and B. Belaı̈di (2013). Some properties of solutions of second order linear differential equations. J. Complex Anal.,
Art. ID 253168.
Latreuch, Z. and B. Belaı̈di (2015). Growth and oscillation of some polynomials generated by solutions of complex differential
equations. Opuscula Math. 35(1), 85–98.
Liu, M. S. and X. M. Zhang (2006). Fixed points of meromorphic solutions of higher order linear differential equations. Ann. Acad.
Sci.Fenn. Math. 31(1), 191–211.
Tu, J. and Z. X. Chen (2009). Growth of solutions of complex differential equations with meromorphic coefficients of finite iterated
order. Southeast Asian Bull. Math. 33(1), 153–164.
Yang, C. C. and H. X. Yi (2003). Uniqueness theory of meromorphic functions. Mathematics and its Applications, 557. Kluwer
Academic Publishers Group, Dordrecht.