A threshold strategy model is proposed to demonstrate the extinction of tumor load and the mobilization of immune cells. Using Filippov system theory, we consider global dynamics and sliding bifurcation analysis. It was found that an effective model of cell targeted therapy captures more complex kinetics and that the kinetic behavior of the Filippov system changes as the threshold is altered, including limit cycle and some of the previously described sliding bifurcations. The analysis showed that abnormal changes in patients' tumor cells could be detected in time by using tumor cell-directed therapy appropriately. Under certain initial conditions, exceeding a certain level of tumor load (depending on the patient) leads to different tumor cell changes, that is, different post-treatment effects. Therefore, the optimal control policy for tumor cell-directed therapy should be individualized by considering individual patient data.
Citation: Hengjie Peng, Changcheng Xiang. A Filippov tumor-immune system with antigenicity[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(8): 19699-19718. doi: 10.3934/math.20231004
Related Papers:
[1]
Hongguang Fan, Jihong Zhu, Hui Wen .
Comparison principle and synchronization analysis of fractional-order complex networks with parameter uncertainties and multiple time delays. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(7): 12981-12999.
doi: 10.3934/math.2022719
[2]
Chengbo Yi, Rui Guo, Jiayi Cai, Xiaohu Yan .
Pinning synchronization of dynamical neural networks with hybrid delays via event-triggered impulsive control. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(10): 25060-25078.
doi: 10.3934/math.20231279
[3]
Biwen Li, Qiaoping Huang .
Synchronization issue of uncertain time-delay systems based on flexible impulsive control. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 26538-26556.
doi: 10.3934/math.20241291
[4]
Yanshou Dong, Junfang Zhao, Xu Miao, Ming Kang .
Piecewise pseudo almost periodic solutions of interval general BAM neural networks with mixed time-varying delays and impulsive perturbations. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(9): 21828-21855.
doi: 10.3934/math.20231113
[5]
Shuo Ma, Jiangman Li, Qiang Li, Ruonan Liu .
Adaptive exponential synchronization of impulsive coupled neutral stochastic neural networks with Lévy noise and probabilistic delays under non-Lipschitz conditions. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(9): 24912-24933.
doi: 10.3934/math.20241214
[6]
Miao Zhang, Bole Li, Weiqiang Gong, Shuo Ma, Qiang Li .
Matrix measure-based exponential stability and synchronization of Markovian jumping QVNNs with time-varying delays and delayed impulses. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(12): 33930-33955.
doi: 10.3934/math.20241618
[7]
Tengda Wei, Xiang Xie, Xiaodi Li .
Input-to-state stability of delayed reaction-diffusion neural networks with multiple impulses. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(6): 5786-5800.
doi: 10.3934/math.2021342
[8]
Rakkiet Srisuntorn, Wajaree Weera, Thongchai Botmart .
Modified function projective synchronization of master-slave neural networks with mixed interval time-varying delays via intermittent feedback control. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(10): 18632-18661.
doi: 10.3934/math.20221025
Călin-Adrian Popa .
Synchronization of Clifford-valued neural networks with leakage, time-varying, and infinite distributed delays on time scales. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(7): 18796-18823.
doi: 10.3934/math.2024915
Abstract
A threshold strategy model is proposed to demonstrate the extinction of tumor load and the mobilization of immune cells. Using Filippov system theory, we consider global dynamics and sliding bifurcation analysis. It was found that an effective model of cell targeted therapy captures more complex kinetics and that the kinetic behavior of the Filippov system changes as the threshold is altered, including limit cycle and some of the previously described sliding bifurcations. The analysis showed that abnormal changes in patients' tumor cells could be detected in time by using tumor cell-directed therapy appropriately. Under certain initial conditions, exceeding a certain level of tumor load (depending on the patient) leads to different tumor cell changes, that is, different post-treatment effects. Therefore, the optimal control policy for tumor cell-directed therapy should be individualized by considering individual patient data.
1.
Introduction
Chaos is very interesting nonlinear phenomenon and has applications in many areas such as biology, economics, signal generator design, secure communication, many other engineering systems and so on. Because a nonlinear system in the chaotic state is very sensitive to its initial condition and chaos causes often irregular behavior in practical systems, chaos is sometimes undesirable [1,2,3,4,5,6,7]. The 3-dimensional Lorenz model (3DLM) was the first chaotic system proposed in the literature [3]. Celikovsky and Chen [2,8,9] introduced generalized Lorenz canonical forms, covering a large class of 3-dimensional autonomous systems. Further, Zhang et al. [10] by combining the advantages of both integer-order and fractional-order complex chaotic systems, proposed a hybrid-order complex Lorenz system. Chaotic systems have been widely addressed both from their mathematical properties [11,12] and practical applications [11,12,13,14,15].
The 3DLM reveals the dependence of the solutions on the initial conditions for chaotic situations. Higher order Lorenz models have been derived to further study the stability of solutions and paths to chaos. The 3DLM, was obtained from the Rayleigh-Benard convection equations, which combine dissipative, heating and nonlinear advection physical processes. An interesting topic is the investigation of modes in the 3DLM and its generalization to higher dimensional models by increasing the number of modes. Shen [16,17] generalized the 3DLM to the 5DLM by adding two additional Fourier modes. This led to a better understanding of the role of some variables in the stability of solutions. Therefore, the 5DLM allows the role of modes in the predictability of solutions to be investigated for further understanding of the variables that increase the stability of solutions, and to find analytical solutions for critical points. Although the role of the modes on the stability of solutions, as well as some dynamical properties of the 5DLM, have been studied, the calculation of bounds for the variables and the global dynamics of the 5DLM are still open and challenging problems. Shen also extended the 5DLM to a six-dimensional Lorenz model (6DLM) [18], seven-dimensional Lorenz model (7DLM) [19] and generalized Lorenz model (GLM) [20], in order to examine the impact of an additional mode and its accompanying heating term on solution stability.
Given a chaotic dynamical system, if its chaotic attractor is bounded in the phase space and the trajectories of the system remain in a bounded region of the phase space, then we say that "the chaotic dynamical system is bounded". Estimation of the ultimate bound set (UBS) and the positive invariant set (PIS) of a chaotic system plays a very important role in studying its dynamic behavior. Among the most important applications, one can mention their use in controlling and synchronizing chaotic systems [21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29]. In fact, the bounds are necessary for both theoretical studies of chaotic attractors and numerical search of attractors. If we can show that, under certain considerations, there exists a GEAS for a chaotic system, then we can conclude that the system cannot have periodic or quasi-periodic responses, equilibrium points, or hidden attractors, outside this set of attractors. This issue has a great application in controlling systems and preventing their possible problems. Leonov [21] derived the first results about global UBS for the Lorenz model. Subsequently, Swinnerton-Dyer [30] demonstrated that the bounds of the states of the Lorenz equations could be determined by using Lyapunov functions. Several researchers further developed the idea and computed the GEAS and PIS for different chaotic systems [31,32,33,34].
To the best of our knowledge, the GEAS and UBS for the 5DLM have not been investigated yet. In the present work, by changing system parameters and conditions, we create different attractive sets. Also, we calculate a small attractive set only dependent on the system parameters. The results obtained from the UBS have been used in the synchronization and control of dynamical systems [35,36,37]. Due to the importance of minimizing the synchronization time, by applying a finite time control scheme, an efficient synchronization method is given based on the obtained ultimate bound [38,39]. By developing these techniques, we can also estimate the ultimate bound of fractional chaotic systems [40,41,42].
This article is organized into 6 sections. The dynamical behavior of the 5DLM, including phase portraits, bifurcation diagrams and Hamilton energy are given in Section 2. In Section 3, we introduce some preliminary definitions and GEAS of the system. In Section 4, we present a method to compute small bound for the 5DLM. Section 5 presents the finite time synchronization problem using the results obtained in Section 4. The main conclusions are given in Section 6.
2.
Five-dimensional Lorenz model
The Rayleigh-Benard model for 2-dimensional (x,z), dissipative and forced convection is [3]:
∂∂t∇2ψ=−∂(ψ,∇2ψ)∂(x,z)+ν∇4ψ+gγ∂θ∂x,
(2.1)
∂∂tθ=−∂(ψ,θ)∂(x,z)+ΔTH∂ψ∂x+κ∇2θ.
(2.2)
According to the studies of Rayleigh [3] and Saltzman [4], the following equations were obtained
By making some changes and manipulations, the partial differential equations (2.1) and (2.2) are converted into ordinary differential equations. Thus, the 3DLM chaotic system is expressed as [3]:
˙x1=σ(x2−x1),˙x2=−x1x3+rx1−x2,˙x3=x1x2−bx3,
(2.5)
where, σ,r are the Prandtl number, normalized Rayleigh number or the heating parameter and b=41+a2. Shen et al. [16] extended the 3DLM to the five-dimensional LM (5DLM) by including two additional Fourier modes with two additional vertical wave numbers. They used the five Fourier modes and rewrote ψ and θ as the following:
An additional mode M4=√2sin(lx)sin(3mz) is included to derive the 6DLM. Here, l and m are defined as πaH and πH, representing the horizontal and vertical wave numbers, respectively, and H is the domain height and 2Ha represents the domain width.
By coordinate transformation, the original equation can be reduced to the following five-dimensional nonlinear dynamics:
Numerical analysis shows that the dynamical behavior of (2.8) changes from steady-state to chaotic, with the increase of r.
Figure 1 depicts the bifurcation diagram when the parameters values σ=10,b=83 and d=193 are fixed, and r varies on the interval [0,100]. In fact, one can see that chaos occurs after r>42.5. For the value of the parameters σ=10,b=83,d=193,r=43 and r=25, Lyapunov exponents are shown in Figure 2. The values of Lyapunov exponents at 500th second are L1=1.1281, L2=0.0073, L3=−1.3786, L4=−1.3774 and L5=−1.6688. It is easy to observe that if r=43, then system (2.8) has the positive largest Lyapunov exponent. Therefore, the system (2.8) can exhibit chaotic behaviors. When selecting parameters σ=10,b=83,r=25 and d=193, the values of Lyapunov exponents at 500th second are L1=−0.5246, L2=−0.5358, L3=−6.9952, L4=−2.0305 and L5=−4.1633. All negative Lyapunov exponents indicate that the behavior of the system is non-chaotic.
Figure 1.
Bifurcation diagram of (2.8) with σ=10,b=83, d=193 and varying r.
The time responses of the system for r=25 and r=43 are depicted in Figure 3. We verify that the system with r=25 produces a steady-state solution and when r=43 the system is in a chaotic state. Figure 4 depicts the phase portraits of system (2.8) when σ=10,b=83,r=25 and d=193. Figure 5 shows its chaotic behavior with σ=10,b=83,r=43 and d=193.
Figure 3.
State trajectories of (2.8) with σ=10,b=83,d=193,r=25 and r=43.
In this section, the Hamilton energy for the 5-dimensional Lorenz model (5DLM) is investigated. The Hamilton energy plays a crucial role in the stability of dynamical systems [43]. By continuously pumping or releasing energy in the system, we are able to stabilize chaos. Furthermore, the relation between the Hamilton energy and different chaotic attractors of system (2.8) and the energy dependence on attractors are discussed. Calculation of Hamilton energy for high-order Lorenz systems including six-dimensional Lorenz model (6DLM) [18], seven-dimensional Lorenz model (7DLM) [19] and generalized Lorenz model (GLM) [20], can be an interesting topic due to their special physical nature.
where ∇H stands for the gradient vector of a smooth energy function H(X), J(X) represents a skew-symmetric matrix, and R(X) denotes a symmetric matrix.
The Hamilton energy function can be expressed as:
dHdt=∇HTR(X)∇H,
(2.9)
∇HTJ(X)∇H=0.
(2.10)
Using the Helmholtz's theorem [43], it can be represented by:
∇HTFc(X)=0,
(2.11)
∇HTFd(X)=dHdt.
(2.12)
Thus, we have:
H=−12rσx21+12x22+12x23+12x24+12x25.
(2.13)
Furthermore, it rate of variation is:
dHdt=rx21−x22−bx23−dx24−4bx25.
(2.14)
Figure 6 illustrates that chaotic and steady-state require lower and higher Hamilton energy, respectively.
Figure 6.
The Hamilton energy function H, with σ=10,b=83,d=193,r=25 and r=43.
In this section, we pursue the goal of proving the existence of GEAS for the chaotic system (2.8). We will first mention a few prerequisites and definitions.
Let X=(x1,x2,x3,x4,x5)T, and consider that X(t,t0,X0) is the solution of system
dXdt=g(X),
(3.1)
that satisfies X0=X(t0,t0,X0), with t0≥0 representing the initial time. Also, g:R5→R5 and Ψ⊂R5 is a compact set. Let us define the distance between X(t,t0,X0) and Ψ as:
ρ(X(t,t0,X0),Ψ)=infZ∈Ψ∥X(t,t0,X0)−Z∥.
(3.2)
Denote Ψγ={X∣ρ(X,Ψ)<γ}. Thus, one gets Ψ⊂Ψγ.
Definition 3.1.[21]. Suppose that Ψ⊂R5 is a compact set. If for any X0∈R5/Ψ,
limt→∞ρ(X(t),Ψ)=0,
then Ψ is an UBS of (3.1). Moreover, if for any X0∈Ψ and all t≥t0, X(t,t0,X0)∈Ψ, then Ψ is the PIS for (3.1).
From the above, it is interpreted that having a GEAS for a system guarantees that the system is UBS.
Definition 3.2.[21]. Given a Lyapunov function Lγ(X), if there exist constants Kγ>0 and sγ>0, such that
∀X0∈R5,Lγ(X(t))−Kγ)≤(Lγ(X0)−Kγ)e−sγ(t−t0),
(3.3)
for Lγ(X0)>Kγ and Lγ(X)>Kγ, then Ψγ={X|Lγ(X(t))≤Kγ} is a GEAS of (2.8). Moreover, if for any X0∈Ψγ and all t>t0, X(t,t0,X0)∈Ψγ, then Ψγ is a PIS.
The next theorem introduces the GEAS for system (2.8).
Theorem 3.1.For any σ>0,b>0,r>0,d>0,β>0 and α>0, with
To confirm the theoretical results, we fix σ=10,b=83,r=25 and d=193.Figure 9, shows the estimated bounds for each state variable. Furthermore, Table 2 compares the bounds estimated by Theorems 3.1 and 4.1, showing the advantage of Theorem 4.1.
Figure 9.
The phase portraits and GEAS of (2.8) with σ=10,b=83,r=25 and d=193.
Remark 4.1.A noteworthy point in calculating the bound for system (2.8) based on Theorem 4.1 is that the estimated boundary, in addition to being smaller, is independent of parameters β and α.
5.
Finite-time synchronization of the 5DLM
This section addresses the finite time synchronization of the 5DLM. In order to achieve fast and reliable synchronization, we use the results obtained in the previous section for the ultimate bound of (2.8). Let us consider the 5DLM (2.8) as the master, and define the slave by:
where y1,y2,y3,y4,y5 are state vectors. The control law u1,u2,u3,u4,u5 is designed for the drive (2.8) and response (5.1) systems can reach synchronization in finite time.
Lemma 5.1.Suppose that a1,a2,⋯,an are real numbers and that 0<s<1. Then, we have:
(n∑i=1ai)s≤n∑i=1asi.
Lemma 5.2.Inequality 2ab≤ϵa2+1ϵb2 holds for all real numbers ϵ>0,a>0 and b>0.
Lemma 5.3.Let us assume that L(t) is a continuous and positive-definite function that satisfies:
˙L(t)≤−λL(t)−μLω(t),∀t≥0,L(0)>0.
(5.2)
Then, the system is exponentially finite-time stable, where λ,μ>0, and 0<ω<1 are constants.
Lemma 5.4.Let us suppose that L(t) is a Lyapunov function satisfying Eq. (5.2). Then, it holds
L1−ω(t)≤−(μλ)+eln[λL1−ω(0)+μ]−λ(1−ω)(t−0)λ,0≤t≤T
and L(t)=0,∀t≥T. The finite time T is
T∗=ln(λL1−ω(0)μ+1)λ(1−ω).
(5.3)
Definition 5.1.Let us consider δ(t)=[δ1(t)δ2(t)δ3(t)δ4(t)δ5(t)]T, and define δi(t)=yi(t)−xi(t) as the synchronization errors. If there exists a positive value T∗ such that
limt→T∗∥δ(t)∥=0,
(5.4)
and ∥δ(t)∥=0, for t≥T∗, then the systems (2.8) and (5.1), achieve finite-time synchronization.
The next theorem states the exponential finite-time synchronization condition of systems (2.8) and (5.1).
Theorem 5.1.The systems (2.8) and (5.1) can achieve finite-time synchronization by the control law:
where λ,μ>0, and s∈(0,1). Further, the systems are synchronized in the time
T∗=ln(λL2(1−ω)(0)μ+1)λ(1−ω),
(5.6)
where ω=s+12.
Proof. Theorem 4.1 provides an accurate estimate of the ultimate bound of variables of system (2.8). Let consider α=β=1, then η=σ+r. Therefore, we have
where λ,μ>0,ω=1+s2. Therefore, synchronization is achieved exponentially with the control law (5.10).
To show the effectiveness of the control proposed in theorem 5.1, we perform numerical simulations. Let us choose the initial conditions x1(0)=1,x2(0)=−1,x3(0)=2,x4(0)=1,x5(0)=1,y1(0)=0.1,y2(0)=0.1,y3(0)=0.2,y4(0)=−1,y5(0)=1, and other parameters as λ=1,μ=1 and s=13. Figure 10 depicts the time series of the drive system (2.8) and the response system (5.1) without input control, in which the goal of synchronization has not been achieved. Figure 11 shows the case of using the proposed control (5.5). We verify that system (5.1) exponentially synchronizes with the master system (2.8) within the guaranteed convergence time.
Figure 10.
State trajectories of the drive and response systems without control input.
The synchronization error for different modes with different controllers are depicted in Figure 12. The noteworthy point in these figures is that the goal of synchronization is achieved faster by increasing the number of controllers.
Figure 12.
Synchronization errors with different control inputs.
The global dynamics of the 5DLM, which was obtained by increasing two modes to the original Lorenz system, was analyzed. Phase portraits, bifurcation diagrams and GEAS were estimated. Due to the dependence of the GEAS on the free parameters, a new boundary for the variables was estimated, which is more accurate than the existing one. Also, by employing a finite time control scheme, a synchronization method was proposed based on the obtained ultimate bound sets. The corresponding boundedness was numerically verified to demonstrate the efficiency of the presented method.
Use of AI tools declaration
The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interests regarding the publication of this article.
References
[1]
P. Lagiou, A. Trichopoulou, D. Trichopoulos, Nutritional epidemiology of cancer: Accomplishments and prospects, Proc. Nutr. Soc., 61 (2002), 217–222. https://doi.org/10.1079/PNS2002145 doi: 10.1079/PNS2002145
[2]
R. P. Araujo, D. L. S. McElwain, A history of the study of solid tumour growth: The contribution of mathematical modelling, Bull. Math. Biol., 66 (2004), 1039–1091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bulm.2003.11.002 doi: 10.1016/j.bulm.2003.11.002
[3]
R. Eftimie, J. L. Bramson, D. J. D. Earn, Interactions between the immune system and cancer, Bull. Math. Biol., 73 (2011), 2–32. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-010-9526-3 doi: 10.1007/s11538-010-9526-3
[4]
R. Chignola, R. Foroni, Estimating the growth kinetics of experimental tumors from as few as two determinations of tumor size: Implications for clinical oncology, IEEE T. Biomed. Eng., 208 (2005), 808–815. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2005.845219 doi: 10.1109/TBME.2005.845219
[5]
R. Chignola, R. Foroni, Gompertzian growth pattern correlated with phenotypic organization of colon carcinoma, malignant glioma and non-small cell lung carcinoma cell lines, Cell Prolif., 36 (2003), 65–73. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2184.2003.00259.x doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2184.2003.00259.x
[6]
G. Parmiani, L. Rivoltini, G. Andreola, Cytokines in cancer therapy, Immunol. Lett., 74 (2000), 41–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-2478(00)00247-9 doi: 10.1016/S0165-2478(00)00247-9
[7]
A. D'Onofrio, Metamodeling tumour-immune system interaction, tumour evasion and immunotherapy, Math. Comput. Model., 47 (2008), 614–637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2007.02.032 doi: 10.1016/j.mcm.2007.02.032
[8]
B. Quesnel, Dormant tumor cells as a therapeutic target?, Cancer Lett., 267 (2008), 10–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canlet.2008.02.055 doi: 10.1016/j.canlet.2008.02.055
B. Quesnel, Tumor dormancy and immunoescape, APMIS, 116 (2008), 685–694. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0463.2008.01163.x doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0463.2008.01163.x
[11]
U. Fory, J. Waniewski, P. Zhivkov, Anti-tumor immunity and tumor anti-immunity in a mathematical model of tumor immunotherapy, J. Biol. Syst., 14 (2006), 13–30. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218339006001702 doi: 10.1142/S0218339006001702
[12]
S. Michelson, J. T. Leith, Growth factors and growth control of heterogeneous cell populations, Bull. Math. Biol., 55 (1993), 993–1011. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02460696 doi: 10.1007/BF02460696
[13]
S. Michelson, B. E. Miller, A. S. Glicksman, J. T. Leith, Tumor micro-ecology and competitive interactionsy, Math. Comput. Model., 55 (1993), 993–1011. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02460696 doi: 10.1007/BF02460696
S. Khajanchi, J. J. Nieto, Mathematical modeling of tumor-immune competitive system, considering the role of time delay, Appl. Math. Comput., 340 (2019), 180–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2018.08.018 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2018.08.018
[16]
D. Kirschner, J. Panetta, Modeling immunotherapy of the tumor-immune interaction, J. Math. Biol., 370 (1998), 235–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002850050127 doi: 10.1007/s002850050127
[17]
V. A. Kuznetsov, I. A. Taylor, M. A. Mark, A. S. Perelson, Nonlinear dynamics of immunogenic tumors: Parameter estimation and global bifurcation analysis, Bull. Math. Biol., 56 (1994), 295–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-8240(05)80260-5 doi: 10.1016/S0092-8240(05)80260-5
[18]
G. E. Mahlbacher, K. C. Reihmer, H. B. Frieboes, Mathematical modeling of tumor-immune cell interactions, J. Theor. Biol., 469 (2019), 47–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2019.03.002 doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2019.03.002
[19]
R. Yafia, A study of differential equation modeling malignant tumor cells in competition with immune system, Int. J. Biomath., 4 (2011), 185–206. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793524511001404 doi: 10.1142/S1793524511001404
[20]
J. Li, X. Xie, Y. Chen, D. Zhang, Complex dynamics of a tumor-immune system with antigenicity, Appl. Math. Comput., 400 (2021), 126052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2021.126052 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2021.126052
[21]
M. Waito, S. R. Walsh, A. Rasiuk, B. W. Bridle, A. R. Willms, A mathematical model of cytokine dynamics during a cytokine storm, In: Mathematical and Computational Approaches in Advancing Modern Science and Engineering, Cham: Springer, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30379-6_31
[22]
R. Yafia, A study of differential equation modeling malignant tumor cells in competition with immune system, Int. J. Biomath., 4 (2011), 185–206. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793524511001404 doi: 10.1142/S1793524511001404
[23]
R. Yafia, Hopf bifurcation in differential equations with delay for tumor-immune system competition model, SIAM J. Appl. Math., 67 (2007), 1693–1703. doilinkhttps://doi.org/10.1137/060657947 doi: 10.1137/060657947
[24]
B. Tang, Y. Xiao, S. Sivaloganathan, J. Wu, A piecewise model of virus-immune system with effector cell-guided therapy, Appl. Math. Model., 47 (2017), 227–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2017.03.023 doi: 10.1016/j.apm.2017.03.023
[25]
Y. Xiao, X. Xu, S. Tang, Sliding mode control of outbreaks of emerging infectious diseases, Bull. Math. Biol., 74 (2012), 2403–2422. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-012-9758-5 doi: 10.1007/s11538-012-9758-5
[26]
V. Utkin, J. Guldner, J. Shi, Sliding mode control in electro-mechanical systems, Boca Raton: CRC press, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420065619
[27]
W. Qin, X. Tan, M. Tosato, X. Liu, Threshold control strategy for a non-smooth Filippov ecosystem with group defense, Appl. Math. Comput., 362 (2019), 124532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2019.06.046 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2019.06.046
[28]
Y. Zhang, P. Song, Dynamics of the piecewise smooth epidemic model with nonlinear incidence, Chaos Soliton Fract., 146 (2021), 110903. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2021.110903 doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2021.110903
[29]
N. Kronik, Y. Kogan, V. Vainstein, Z. Agur, Improving alloreactive CTL immunotherapy for malignant gliomas using a simulation model of their interactive dynamics, Cancer Immunol. Immunother., 57 (2008), 425–439. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00262-007-0387-z doi: 10.1007/s00262-007-0387-z
[30]
R. Eftimie, J. L. Bramson, D. J. D. Earn, Interactions between the immune system and cancer: A brief review of non-spatial mathematical models, Bull. Math. Biol., 73 (2011), 2–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-010-9526-3 doi: 10.1007/s11538-010-9526-3
[31]
S. Zhang, D. Bernard, W. I. Khan, M. H. Kaplan, J. L. Bramson, Y. H. Wan, CD4+ T-cell-mediated anti-tumor immunity can be uncoupled from autoimmunity via the STAT4/STAT6 signaling axis, Eur. J. Immunol., 39 (2009), 1252–1259. https://doi.org/10.1002/eji.200839152 doi: 10.1002/eji.200839152
Ayub Khan, Shadab Ali, Arshad Khan,
Hamilton energy, competitive modes and ultimate bound estimation of a new 3D chaotic system, and its application in chaos synchronization,
2024,
99,
0031-8949,
115205,
10.1088/1402-4896/ad7c97
Figure 1. Trajectory plots of Tc for different thresholds. Tc=0.9 in (a), (b); Tc=0.4 in (c), (d); and Tc=0.27 in (e), (f). The parameters are chosen as c=3, β=1, r=5, α=0.3, and ε=2. s=0.5, q=2.5 in (a), (c), (e); and s=1, q=2 in (b), (d), (f). The two red lines are the nullclines of system S1, and the two green lines are the nullclines of system S2. The gray part indicates the sliding segment
Figure 2. Boundary focus bifurcation for Filippov system (2.2). Parameter value fixed as Figure 1. (a) Tc=0.9, (b) Tc=0.8468, (c) Tc=0.6, (d) Tc=0.4, (e) Tc=0.32954, (f) Tc=0.27, The gray part indicates the sliding segment. The two red lines are the nullclines of system S1, and the two green lines are the nullclines of system S2