Fiscal policy promotes corporate green credit: Experience from the construction of energy conservation and emission reduction demonstration cities in China

Yangyang Cheng; Zhenhuan Xu; Yangyang Cheng; Zhenhuan Xu

doi:10.3934/GF.2024001

Green Finance

2024, Volume 6, Issue 1: 1-23. doi: 10.3934/GF.2024001

Previous Article Next Article

Research article

Fiscal policy promotes corporate green credit: Experience from the construction of energy conservation and emission reduction demonstration cities in China

Yangyang Cheng ^,,
Zhenhuan Xu

School of Economics and Management, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China

Received: 05 September 2023 Revised: 03 November 2023 Accepted: 02 January 2024 Published: 15 January 2024
JEL Codes: G38, Q58

Using a quasi-natural experiment of the staggered construction of energy conservation and emission reduction (ECER) demonstration cities in China, this paper explores the impact of fiscal policy on green credit (GC) for listed enterprises. The main findings are the following: (1) The ECER demonstration cities policy significantly improves enterprise GC. This conclusion remains robust after considering the heterogeneous treatment effects. (2) By extending the estimation period beyond the policy withdrawal, we use the difference-in-differences designs with multiple groups and periods (DIDM) estimator to compute the average treatment effect of policy switches. The results show that the intervention effect still exists after the policy withdrawal. (3) Direct cash subsidies, corporate green spending, and external financing constraints are the main mechanisms through which the ECER demonstration cities policy works. (4) The effects of the ECER demonstration cities policy are heterogeneous at the batch, urban, industry, and corporate levels. This paper explores the role of fiscal policy on enterprise green financing. The findings provide theoretical and empirical insights for leveraging fiscal tools to enhance environmental governance.

Keywords:

Citation: Yangyang Cheng, Zhenhuan Xu. Fiscal policy promotes corporate green credit: Experience from the construction of energy conservation and emission reduction demonstration cities in China[J]. Green Finance, 2024, 6(1): 1-23. doi: 10.3934/GF.2024001

Related Papers:

[1]	Erlin Guo, Cuixia Li, Patrick Ling, Fengqin Tang . Convergence rate for integrated self-weighted volatility by using intraday high-frequency data with noise. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(12): 31070-31091. doi: 10.3934/math.20231590
[2]	Wenhui Feng, Xingfa Zhang, Yanshan Chen, Zefang Song . Linear regression estimation using intraday high frequency data. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(6): 13123-13133. doi: 10.3934/math.2023662
[3]	Yue Li, Yunyan Wang . Strong consistency of the nonparametric kernel estimator of the transition density for the second-order diffusion process. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(7): 19015-19030. doi: 10.3934/math.2024925
[4]	Oussama Bouanani, Salim Bouzebda . Limit theorems for local polynomial estimation of regression for functional dependent data. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(9): 23651-23691. doi: 10.3934/math.20241150
[5]	Ahmed Ghezal, Mohamed balegh, Imane Zemmouri . Markov-switching threshold stochastic volatility models with regime changes. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(2): 3895-3910. doi: 10.3934/math.2024192
[6]	Gaosheng Liu, Yang Bai . Statistical inference in functional semiparametric spatial autoregressive model. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(10): 10890-10906. doi: 10.3934/math.2021633
[7]	Junke Kou, Hao Zhang . Wavelet estimations of the derivatives of variance function in heteroscedastic model. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(6): 14340-14361. doi: 10.3934/math.2023734
[8]	Omar Alzeley, Ahmed Ghezal . On an asymmetric multivariate stochastic difference volatility: structure and estimation. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(7): 18528-18552. doi: 10.3934/math.2024902
[9]	Jiajia Zhao, Zuoliang Xu . Calibration of time-dependent volatility for European options under the fractional Vasicek model. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(6): 11053-11069. doi: 10.3934/math.2022617
[10]	Fatimah Alshahrani, Wahiba Bouabsa, Ibrahim M. Almanjahie, Mohammed Kadi Attouch . $k$ NN local linear estimation of the conditional density and mode for functional spatial high dimensional data. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(7): 15844-15875. doi: 10.3934/math.2023809

Abstract

1. Introduction

Many complicated structures' memory and natural features may be realized using fractional calculus (FC), which studies integrals and derivatives of fractional orders ^[1,2]. Many recent FC applications have included analyzing the dynamics of large-scale physical events by converting derivatives and integrals from classical to non-integer order. Many branches of engineering and the physical sciences use it, including electric circuits, mathematical biology, control theory, robotics, viscoelasticity, flow models, relaxation, and signal processing ^[3,4]. Numerous mysterious ideas have been refined via the study of fractional calculus, for example, logistic regression, Malthusian growth, and blood alcohol concentration, all of which have shown that fractional operators outperform integer-order operators ^[5,6].

Derivatives of fractional order such as Riemann-Liouville, Atangana Baleanu, Caputo, Hilfer, Grunwald-Letnikov, Caputo Fabrizio, and Riemann-Liouville are among the numerous that have recently been proposed ^[7,8]. Since all fractional derivatives may be reduced in Caputo's meaning with minor parametric adjustments, the fractional derivative of Caputo is the essential principle of FC to investigate fractional differential equations (FDEs). Caputo's operator, which has numerous applications to model various physical models, possesses a power-law kernel. To address this difficulty, the alternative fractional differential operator ^[9] was developed, which consists of a Mittag-Leffler kernel and an exponentially decaying kernel. Caputo-Fabrizio (CF) and Atangana-Baleanu are operators characterized by their non-singular kernels. These operators have been widely applied in analyzing diverse problem classes, including but not limited to biology, economics, geophysics, and bioengineering ^[10].

Korteweg and de Vries introduced the KdV equation in 1895 to formulate a model for Russell's soliton phenomenon, encompassing water waves of long and small amplitude. Solitons are classified as stable solitary waves, signifying their particle-like nature ^[11]. Various applied disciplines, including plasma physics, fluid dynamics, quantum mechanics, and optics, implement the KdV equations ^[12]. Particle physics has employed the fifth-order KdV equations to analyze many nonlinear phenomena ^[13]. Its function in the propagation of waves is crucial ^[14]. The authors find third-order and fifth-order dispersive terms in the KdV form equation pertinent to the magneto-acoustic wave problem. Furthermore, these dispersive terms manifest themselves in the vicinity of critical angle propagation ^[15]. An electrically conducting fluid, plasma is also dynamic and quasi-neutral. Ions, electrons, and neutral particles comprise it. Due to the electrical conductivity exhibited by plasma, it includes both electric and magnetic regions. The variety of particles and regions supports diverse types of plasma waves. A magnetic lock is a less longitudinal ion dispersion. In the low magnetic field range, the magneto-acoustic wave exhibits characteristics of an ion acoustic wave ^[16,17]. However, at low temperatures, it transforms into an Alfven wave.

Equivalent to the general model for the investigation of magnetic characteristics of acoustic waves with surface tension is the fifth order of KdV. According to a recent investigation ^[18,19], the solutions to the equation above concerning traveling waves persist beyond infinity. The following are two widely recognized types of fifth-order KdV equations ^[20,21]:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &D_{{\Omega}}^{p} \eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})-\frac{\partial ^5\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon^5}+\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) \frac{\partial ^3\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon^3}+\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) \frac{\partial \eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon} = 0, \ \ 0 < p \leq 1. \end{split} \end{equation}$

(1.1)

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &D_{{\Omega}}^{p} \eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})+\frac{\partial ^5\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon^5}-\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) \frac{\partial ^3\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon^3}+\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) \frac{\partial \eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon} = 0, \ \ 0 < p \leq 1. \end{split} \end{equation}$

(1.2)

Here, Eqs (1.1) and (1.2) are called the Kawahara and KdV equation of fifth-order, respectively. The extreme nonlinearity of these mathematical models makes it difficult to find suitable analytical methods. Researchers have developed and implemented several techniques for solving nonlinear and linear equations of KdV in the past ten years. These techniques include the variational iteration method ^[21], the multi-symplectic method ^[22], He's homotopy perturbation method ^[23], and the Exp-function method ^[24].

Omar Abu Arqub established residual power series method (RPSM) in 2013 ^[25]. It is created by merging the residual error function with the Taylor series. According to ^[26], an infinite convergence series solves differential equations (DEs). The development of novel RPSM algorithms has been prompted by several DEs, including KdV Burger's equation, fuzzy DEs, Boussinesq DEs, and numerous others ^[27,28]. The goal of these algorithms is to provide efficient and accurate estimates.

A novel strategy for solving FDEs was established by integrating two effective methods. Some approaches that fall into these categories include those that use the natural transform ^[29], the Laplace transform with RPSM ^[30], and the homotopy perturbation method ^[31]. In this work, we used a novel combination method known as the Abdooh residual power series method (ARPSM) to discover approximation and precise solutions for time-fractional nonlinear partial differential equations (PDEs). This innovative method is significant because it combines the Aboodh transform technique with the RPSM ^[32,33].

The computing effort and complexity needed are significant issues with the previously mentioned approaches. Our suggested Aboodh transform iterative method (ATIM) ^[34] is this work's unique aspect that solves the Kawahara and KdV equations of fractional order. By integrating the Aboodh transform with the new iterative technique, this strategy significantly reduces the computing effort and complexity required. According to ^[35,36], the suggested approach yields a convergent series solution.

The ARPSM and the ATIM are the two most straightforward approaches to solving fractional DEs. These methods fully and immediately explain the symbolic terms used in analytical solutions and offer numerical solutions to PDEs. This paper assesses ATIM and ARPSM's efficacy in solving the fifth-order KdV and Kawahara equations.

The fifth-order KdV and Kawahara equations are solved using ARPSM and ATIM. These methods provide more precise numerical answers when compared with other numerical techniques. Additionally, a comparison analysis is performed on the numerical findings. The suggested approaches' findings are consistent with one another, which is a strong indicator of their efficacy and reliability. For various values of fractional-order derivatives, there is additional graphical importance. Therefore, the methods are accurate, easy to implement, not affected by computational error phases, and quick. This study lays the groundwork for researchers to quickly solve various PDEs.

2. Basics of fractional calculus

Definition 2.1. ^[37] Assume that $\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})$ is an exponential order continuous function. The definition of the Aboodh transform (AT), assuming $\sigma\geq0$ for $\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})$ , is as follows:

$A[\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})] = \Psi({{\epsilon}},\xi) = \frac{1}{\xi}\displaystyle{\int}_{0}^{\infty}\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})e^{-{{\Omega}}\xi}d{{\Omega}},\ \ {r}_{1}\leq\xi\leq{r}_{2}.$

The Aboodh inverse transform (AIT) is given as:

$A^{-1}[\Psi({{\epsilon}},\xi)] = \eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}}) = \frac{1}{2\pi i}\displaystyle{\int}_{u-i\infty}^{u+i\infty}\Psi({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})\xi e^{{{\Omega}}\xi}d{{\Omega}},$

where ${{\epsilon}} = ({{\epsilon}}_{1}, {{\epsilon}}_{2}, \cdots, {{\epsilon}}_{p})\in \mathbb{R}^{p}$ and $p\in\mathbb{N}$ .

Lemma 2.1. ^[38,39] It is assumed that there exist two exponentially ordered, piecewise continuous functions $\eta_{1}({{\epsilon}}, \Omega)$ and $\eta_{2}({{\epsilon, \Omega}})$ on $[0, \infty]$ . Let $A[\eta_{1}({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})] = \Psi_{1}({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}}), A[\eta_{2}({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})] = \Psi_{2}({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})$ , and $\chi_{1}, \chi_{2}$ be arbitrary constants. These characteristics are thus true:

(1) $A[\chi_{1}\eta_{1}({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})+\chi_{2}\eta_{2}({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})] = \chi_{1}\Psi_{1}({{\epsilon}}, \xi)+\chi_{2}\Psi_{2}({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})$ ,

(2) $A^{-1}[\chi_{1}\Psi_{1}({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})+\chi_{2}\Psi_{2}({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})] = \chi_{1}\eta_{1}({{\epsilon}}, \xi)+\chi_{2}\eta_{2}({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})$ ,

(3) $A[J_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})] = \frac{\Psi({{\epsilon}}, \xi)}{\xi^{{p}}}$ ,

(4) $A[D_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})] = \xi^{{p}}\Psi({{\epsilon}}, \xi)-\sum_{K = 0}^{r-1}\frac{\eta^{K}({{\epsilon}}, 0)}{\xi^{K-{p}+2}}, r-1 < {p}\leq r, \ r\in \mathbb{N}$ .

Definition 2.2. ^[40] In terms of order $p$ , the function $\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})$ has derivative of fractional order as stated by Caputo.

$D_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}}) = J_{{{\Omega}}}^{m-{p}}\eta^{(m)}({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}}), \ m-1 < {p}\leq m,\ r\geq 0,$

where ${{\epsilon}} = ({{\epsilon}}_{1}, {{\epsilon}}_{2}, \cdots, {{\epsilon}}_{p})\in \mathbb{R}^{p}$ and $p, m\in R, J_{{{\Omega}}}^{m-{p}}$ is the integral of the Riemann-Liouville of $\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})$ .

Definition 2.3. ^[41] The representation of power series is composed of the following structure.

$\sum\limits_{r = 0}^{\infty}\hbar_{r}({{\epsilon}})({{\Omega}}-{{\Omega}}_{0})^{r{p}} = 1+\hbar_{1}({{\Omega}}-{{\Omega}}_{0})^{{p}}+\hbar_{2}({{\Omega}}-{{\Omega}}_{0})^{2{p}} +\cdots,$

where ${{\epsilon}} = ({{\epsilon}}_{1}, {{\epsilon}}_{2}, \cdots, {{\epsilon}}_{p})\in \mathbb{R}^{p}$ and $p\in \mathbb{N}$ . This is known as the multiple fractional power series concerning ${{\Omega}}_{0}$ , where ${{\Omega}}$ and $\hbar_{r}({{\epsilon}})'s$ are variable and series coefficients, respectively.

Lemma 2.2. Consider the exponential order function is denoted as $\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})$ . $A[\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})] = \Psi({{\epsilon}}, \xi)$ is the description of the AT in this case. Hence,

$\begin{equation} A[D_{{{\Omega}}}^{r{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})] = \xi^{r{p}}\Psi({{\epsilon}},\xi)-\sum\limits_{j = 0}^{r-1}\xi^{{p}(r-j)-2}D_{{{\Omega}}}^{j{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}},0), 0 < {p}\leq 1, \end{equation}$

(2.1)

where ${{\epsilon}} = ({{\epsilon}}_{1}, {{\epsilon}}_{2}, \cdots, {{\epsilon}}_{p})\in \mathbb{R}^{p}$ and $p\in \mathbb{N}$ and $D_{{{\Omega}}}^{r{p}} = D_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}}.D_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}}.\cdots.D_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}}(r-times)$

Proof. By using the induction method, we have to prove Eq (2.1). In Eq (2.1), substitute $r = 1$ .

$A[D_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})] = \xi^{{p}}\Psi({{\epsilon}},\xi)-\xi^{{p}-2}\eta({{\epsilon}},0)-\xi^{{p}-2}D_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}},0).$

On the bases of Lemma 2.1, Eq (2.1) for $r = 1$ holds true. Put $r = 2$ in Eq (2.1).

$\begin{equation} A[D_{r}^{2{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})] = \xi^{2{p}}\Psi({{\epsilon}},\xi)-\xi^{2{p}-2}\eta({{\epsilon}},0)-\xi^{{p}-2}D_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}},0). \end{equation}$

(2.2)

From left-hand side (LHS) of Eq (2.2), we obtain:

$\begin{equation} LHS = A[D_{{{\Omega}}}^{2{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})]. \end{equation}$

(2.3)

The expressions for Eq (2.3) are as follows:

$\begin{equation} LHS = A[D_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})]. \end{equation}$

(2.4)

Assume

$\begin{equation} z({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}}) = D_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}}). \end{equation}$

(2.5)

This makes Eq (2.4) as

$\begin{equation} LHS = A[D_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}}z({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})]. \end{equation}$

(2.6)

From the definition of the derivative of Caputo, we make changes in Eq (2.6).

$\begin{equation} LHS = A[J^{1-{p}}z^{'}({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})]. \end{equation}$

(2.7)

By applying the Riemann-Liouville integral Eq (2.7), we obtain:

$\begin{equation} LHS = \frac{A[z^{'}({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})]}{\xi^{1-{p}}}. \end{equation}$

(2.8)

By using the AT feature of differentiability, Eq (2.8) is modified:

$\begin{equation} {{LHS = \xi^{{p}}Z({{\epsilon}},\xi)-\frac{z({{\epsilon}},0)}{\xi^{2-{p}}}.}} \end{equation}$

(2.9)

From Eq (2.5), we derive:

$Z({{\epsilon}},\xi) = \xi^{{p}}\Psi({{\epsilon}},\xi)-\frac{\eta({{\epsilon}},0)}{\xi^{2-{p}}},$

where $A[z({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})] = Z({{\epsilon}}, \xi)$ . Hence, Eq (2.9) becomes

$\begin{equation} LHS = \xi^{2{p}}\Psi({{\epsilon}},\xi)-\frac{\eta({{\epsilon}},0)}{\xi^{2-2{p}}}-\frac{D_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}},0)}{\xi^{2-{p}}}. \end{equation}$

(2.10)

Let's suppose Eq (2.1) holds true for $r = K$ . Substitute $r = K$ in Eq (2.1):

$\begin{equation} A[D_{{{\Omega}}}^{K{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})] = \xi^{K{p}}\Psi({{\epsilon}},\xi)-\sum\limits_{j = 0}^{K-1}\xi^{{p}(K-j)-2}D_{{{\Omega}}}^{j{p}}D_{{{\Omega}}}^{j{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}},0),\ 0 < {p}\leq1. \end{equation}$

(2.11)

Substituting $r = K+1$ in Eq (2.1):

$\begin{equation} A[D_{{{\Omega}}}^{(K+1){p}}\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})] = \xi^{(K+1){p}}\Psi({{\epsilon}},\xi)-\sum\limits_{j = 0}^{K}\xi^{{p}((K+1)-j)-2}D_{{{\Omega}}}^{j{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}},0). \end{equation}$

(2.12)

After analyzing Eq (2.12)'s LHS, we deduce

$\begin{equation} LHS = A[D_{{{\Omega}}}^{K{p}}(D_{{{\Omega}}}^{K{p}})]. \end{equation}$

(2.13)

Let

$D_{{{\Omega}}}^{K{p}} = g({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}}).$

By Eq (2.13), we drive

$\begin{equation} LHS = A[D_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}}g({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})]. \end{equation}$

(2.14)

By using the integral of the Riemann-Liouville and derivative of Caputo on Eq (2.14), the subsequent result can be obtained.

$\begin{equation} LHS = \xi^{{p}}A[D_{{{\Omega}}}^{K{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})]-\frac{g({{\epsilon}},0)}{\xi^{2-{p}}}. \end{equation}$

(2.15)

To get Eq (2.15), use Eq (2.11).

$\begin{equation} LHS = \xi^{r{p}}\Psi({{\epsilon}},\xi)-\sum\limits_{j = 0}^{r-1}\xi^{{p}(r-j)-2}D_{{{\Omega}}}^{j{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}},0). \end{equation}$

(2.16)

In addition, Eq (2.16) produces the subsequent outcome.

$LHS = A[D_{{{\Omega}}}^{r{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}},0)].$

Thus, for $r = K+1$ , Eq (2.1) holds. For all positive integers, Eq (2.1) holds true according to the mathematical induction technique. □

A deeper understanding of the ARPSM and multiple fractional Taylor series (MFTS) are given as follow.

Lemma 2.3. Consider the function $\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})$ is an exponential order. $A[\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})] = \Psi({{\epsilon}}, \xi)$ is the expression that signifies the AT of $\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})$ . AT is represented as follows in MFTS notation:

$\begin{equation} \Psi({{\epsilon}},\xi) = \sum\limits_{r = 0}^{\infty}\frac{\hbar_{r}({{\epsilon}})}{\xi^{r{p}+2}}, \xi > 0, \end{equation}$

(2.17)

where, ${{\epsilon}} = (s_{1}, {{\epsilon}}_{2}, \cdots, {{\epsilon}}_{p})\in\mathbb{R}^{p}, \ p\in \mathbb{N}$ .

Proof. Consider the Taylor's series:

$\begin{equation} \eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}}) = \hbar_{0}({{\epsilon}})+\hbar_{1}({{\epsilon}})\frac{{{\Omega}}^{{p}}}{\Gamma[{p}+1]}AA+\hbar_{2}({{\epsilon}})\frac{{{\Omega}}^{2{p}}}{\Gamma[2{p}+1]}+\cdots. \end{equation}$

(2.18)

The subsequent equality is produced when the AT is applied to Eq (2.18):

$A\left[\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})\right] = A\left[\hbar_{0}({{\epsilon}})\right]+A\left[\hbar_{1}({{\epsilon}})\frac{{{\Omega}}^{{p}}}{\Gamma[{p}+1]}\right]+A\left[\hbar_{1}({{\epsilon}}) \frac{{{\Omega}}^{2{p}}}{\Gamma[2{p}+1]}\right]+\cdots.$

This is achieved by utilizing the AT's features.

$A\left[\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})\right] = \hbar_{0}({{\epsilon}})\frac{1}{\xi^{2}}+\hbar_{1}({{\epsilon}})\frac{1}{\Gamma[{p}+1]}\frac{1}{\xi^{{p}+2}}+\hbar_{2}({{\epsilon}}) \frac{1}{\Gamma[2{p}+1]}\frac{1}{\xi^{2{p}+2}}\cdots.$

Hence, by Eq (2.17), a new Taylor's series is obtained: □

Lemma 2.4. Let the multiple fractional power series (MFPS) be expressed in terms of Taylor's series new form Eq (2.17), $A[\eta(\epsilon, \Omega)] = \Psi(\epsilon, \xi)$ .

$\begin{equation} \hbar_{0}({{\epsilon}}) = \lim\limits_{\xi\rightarrow \infty}\xi^2\Psi({{\epsilon}},\xi) = \eta({{\epsilon}},0). \end{equation}$

(2.19)

Proof. Let's suppose the Taylor's series:

$\begin{equation} \hbar_{0}({{\epsilon}}) = \xi^2\Psi({{\epsilon}},\xi)-\frac{\hbar_{1}({{\epsilon}})}{\xi^{{p}}}-\frac{\hbar_{2}({{\epsilon}})}{\xi^{2{p}}}-\cdots. \end{equation}$

(2.20)

As denoted by Eq (2.20), the necessary solution can be obtained by employing $lim_{x\rightarrow \infty}$ in Eq (2.19) and performing a short calculation. □

Theorem 2.5. The following is an MFPS representation of the function $A[\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})] = \Psi({{\epsilon}}, \xi)$ :

$\Psi({{\epsilon}},\xi) = \sum\limits_{0}^{\infty}\frac{\hbar_{r}({{\epsilon}})}{\xi^{r{p}+2}}, \ \xi > 0,$

where ${{\epsilon}} = ({{\epsilon}}_{1}, {{\epsilon}}_{2}, \cdots, {{\epsilon}}_{p})\in\mathbb{R}^p$ and $p\in\mathbb{N}$ . Then, we have

$\hbar_{r}({{\epsilon}}) = D_{r}^{r{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}},0),$

where, $D_{{{\Omega}}}^{r{p}} = D_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}}.D_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}}.\cdots.D_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}}(r-times)$ .

Proof. Let's suppose the Taylor's series:

$\begin{equation} \hbar_{1}({{\epsilon}}) = \xi^{{p}+2}\Psi({{\epsilon}},\xi)-\xi^{{p}}\hbar_{0}({{\epsilon}})-\frac{\hbar_{2}({{\epsilon}})}{\xi^{{p}}}-\frac{\hbar_{3}({{\epsilon}})}{\xi^{2{p}}}- \cdots \end{equation}$

(2.21)

$\lim_{\xi\rightarrow \infty}$ , is applied to Eq (2.21), and we get

$\hbar_{1}({{\epsilon}}) = \lim\limits_{\xi\rightarrow \infty}(\xi^{{p}+2}\Psi({{\epsilon}},\xi)-\xi^{{p}}\hbar_{0}({{\epsilon}}))-\lim\limits_{\xi\rightarrow \infty}\frac{\hbar_{2}({{\epsilon}})}{\xi^{{p}}} -\lim\limits_{\xi\rightarrow \infty}\frac{\hbar_{3}({{\epsilon}})}{\xi^{2{p}}}- \cdots.$

The equality that results from taking the limit is as follows:

$\begin{equation} \hbar_{1}({{\epsilon}}) = \lim\limits_{\xi\rightarrow \infty}(\xi^{{p}+2}\Psi({{\epsilon}},\xi)-\xi^{{p}}\hbar_{0}({{\epsilon}})). \end{equation}$

(2.22)

Using Lemma 2.2, we obtain:

$\begin{equation} \hbar_{1}({{\epsilon}}) = \lim\limits_{\xi\rightarrow \infty}(\xi^2A[D_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})](\xi)). \end{equation}$

(2.23)

Furthermore, the Eq (2.23) is modified using Lemma 2.3.

$\hbar_{1}({{\epsilon}}) = D_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}},0).$

Using Taylor's series and applying $limit_{\xi\rightarrow \infty}$ again, we obtain:

$\hbar_{2}({{\epsilon}}) = \xi^{2{p}+2}\Psi({{\epsilon}},\xi)-\xi^{2{p}}\hbar_{0}({{\epsilon}})-\xi^{{p}}\hbar_{1}({{\epsilon}})-\frac{\hbar_{3}({{\epsilon}})}{\xi^{{p}}}- \cdots.$

Lemma 2.3 gives us the result

$\begin{equation} \hbar_2({{\epsilon}}) = \lim\limits_{\xi\rightarrow \infty}\xi^2(\xi^{2{p}}\Psi({{\epsilon}},\xi)-\xi^{2{p}-2}\hbar_{0}({{\epsilon}})-\xi^{{p}-2}\hbar_{1}({{\epsilon}})). \end{equation}$

(2.24)

Equation (2.24) is transformed using Lemmas 2.2 and Eq (2.4).

$\hbar_{2}({{\epsilon}}) = D_{{{\Omega}}}^{2{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}},0).$

Apply the same procedure and Taylor series, and we obtain:

$\hbar_{3}({{\epsilon}}) = \lim\limits_{\xi\rightarrow \infty}\xi^2(A[D_{{{\Omega}}}^{2{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}},{p})](\xi)).$

Finally, we get:

$\hbar_{3}({{\epsilon}}) = D_{{{\Omega}}}^{3{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}},0).$

In general,

$\hbar_{r}({{\epsilon}}) = D_{{{\Omega}}}^{r{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}},0),$

is proved. □ The new Taylor series has the conditions for the convergence given in the subsequent theorem.

Theorem 2.6. The expression for MFTS is given in Lemma 2.3 and can be expressed as: $A [\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})] = \Psi({{\epsilon}}, \xi)$ . When $|\xi^{a}A[D_{{{\Omega}}}^{(K+1){p}}\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})]|\leq T$ , $\forall$ $0 < {p} \leq 1$ , and $0 < \xi \leq s$ , $R_K({{\epsilon}}, \xi)$ is the residual of the new MFTS satisfying:

$|R_{K}({{\epsilon}},\xi)|\leq \frac{T}{\xi^{(K = 1){p}+2}}, \ 0 < \xi\leq s.$

Proof. For $r = 0, 1, 2, \cdots, K + 1$ , and $0 < \xi \leq s$ , we consider to define $A[D_{{{\Omega}}}^{r{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})](\xi)$ . Utilize the Taylor series to derive the subsequent relation:

$\begin{equation} R_K({{\epsilon}},\xi) = \Psi({{\epsilon}},\xi)-\sum\limits_{r = 0}^K\frac{\hbar_r({{\epsilon}})}{\xi^{r{p}+2}}. \end{equation}$

(2.25)

Apply Theorem 2.5 on Eq (2.25) to obtain:

$\begin{equation} R_K({{\epsilon}},\xi) = \Psi({{\epsilon}},\xi)-\sum\limits_{r = 0}^{K}\frac{D_{{{\Omega}}}^{r{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}},0)}{\xi^{r{p}+2}}. \end{equation}$

(2.26)

$\xi^{(K+1)a+2}$ is to be multiplied with Eq (2.26) to obtain the following form.

$\begin{equation} \xi^{{p}(K+1)+2}R_K({{\epsilon}},\xi) = \xi^{2}(\xi^{{p}(K+1)}\Psi({{\epsilon}},\xi)-\sum\limits_{r = 0}^{K}\xi^{{p}(K+1-r)-2}D_{{{\Omega}}}^{r{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}},0)). \end{equation}$

(2.27)

Equation (2.27) is modified with Lemma 2.2:

$\begin{equation} \xi^{{p}(K+1)+2}R_K({{\epsilon}},\xi) = \xi^{2}A[D_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}(K+1)}\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})]. \end{equation}$

(2.28)

The absolute of Eq (2.28) gives us

$\begin{equation} |\xi^{{p}(K+1)+2}R_K({{\epsilon}},\xi)| = |\xi^{2}A[D_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}(K+1)}\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})]|. \end{equation}$

(2.29)

By applying the conditions listed in Eq (2.29), the subsequent result is achieved.

$\begin{equation} \frac{-T}{\xi^{{p}(K+1)+2}}\leq R_K({{\epsilon}},\xi)\leq \frac{T}{\xi^{{p}(K+1)+2}}. \end{equation}$

(2.30)

Equation (2.30) yields the desired outcome.

$|R_K({{\epsilon}},\xi)|\leq \frac{T}{\xi^{{p}(K+1)+2}}.$

Therefore, new conditions for the series to converge are developed. □

3. Methodologies

3.1. ARPSM technique

In this paper, we explain how ARPSM rules formed the basis of our solution.

Step 1: Assume the general PDE:

$\begin{equation} D_{{{\Omega}}}^{q{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})+\vartheta({{\epsilon}})N(\eta)-\delta({{\epsilon}},\eta) = 0. \\ \end{equation}$

(3.1)

Step 2: Apply the AT on Eq (3.1):

$\begin{equation} A[D_{{{\Omega}}}^{q{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})+\vartheta({{\epsilon}})N(\eta)-\delta({{\epsilon}},\eta)] = 0. \\ \end{equation}$

(3.2)

Utilizing Lemma 2.1 to modify Eq (3.2),

$\begin{equation} \Psi({{\epsilon}},{s}) = \sum\limits_{j = 0}^{q-1}\frac{D_{{{\Omega}}}^{j}\eta({{\epsilon}},0)}{{s}^{q{p}+2}}-\frac{\vartheta({{\epsilon}})Y({s})}{{s}^{q{p}}}+\frac{F({{\epsilon}},{s})}{{s}^{q{p}}}, \end{equation}$

(3.3)

where $A[\delta({{\epsilon}}, \eta)] = F({{\epsilon}}, {s}), A[N(\eta)] = Y({s})$ .

Step 3: Equation (3.3) takes the following form:

$\Psi({{\epsilon}}, {s}) = \sum\limits_{r = 0}^{\infty}\frac{\hbar_r({{\epsilon}})}{{s}^{r{p}+2}}, \ {s} > 0. \\$

Step 4: Take the steps listed below:

$\hbar_0({{\epsilon}}) = \lim\limits_{{s}\rightarrow \infty}{s}^2 \Psi({{\epsilon}}, {s}) = \eta({{\epsilon}}, 0). \\$

Use Theorem 2.6 to obtain this form.

$\begin{array}{*{20}{c}} {\hbar_{1}({{\epsilon}}) = D_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}}, 0),}\\ {\hbar_{2}({{\epsilon}}) = D_{{{\Omega}}}^{2{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}}, 0),}\\ {\vdots}\\ {\hbar_{w}({{\epsilon}}) = D_{{{\Omega}}}^{w{p}}\eta({{\epsilon}}, 0).} \end{array}$

Step 5: The $K^{th}$ truncated series $\Psi({{\epsilon}}, {s})$ can be obtained using the following expression:

$\Psi_{K}({{\epsilon}}, {s}) = \sum\limits_{r = 0}^{K}\frac{\hbar_r({{\epsilon}})}{{s}^{r{p}+2}}, \ {s} > 0,$

$\Psi_{K}({{\epsilon}}, {s}) = \frac{\hbar_{0}({{\epsilon}})}{{s}^{2}}+\frac{\hbar_{1}({{\epsilon}})}{{s}^{{p}+2}}+\cdots+\frac{\hbar_{w}({{\epsilon}})}{{s}^{w{p}+2}}+\sum\limits_{r = w+1}^{K} \frac{\hbar_r({{\epsilon}})}{{s}^{r{p}+2}}.$

Step 6: Note that the residual Aboodh function (RAF) (3.3) and the $K^{th}$ -truncated RAF must be considered independently to obtain:

$ARes({{\epsilon}}, {s}) = \Psi({{\epsilon}},{s})-\sum\limits_{j = 0}^{q-1}\frac{D_{{{\Omega}}}^{j}\eta({{\epsilon}},0)}{{s}^{j{p}+2}}+\frac{\vartheta({{\epsilon}})Y({s})}{{s}^{j{p}}}-\frac{F({{\epsilon}},{s})}{{s}^{j{p}}},$

and

$\begin{equation} ARes_{K}({{\epsilon}}, {s}) = \Psi_{K}({{\epsilon}},{s})-\sum\limits_{j = 0}^{q-1}\frac{D_{{{\Omega}}}^{j}\eta({{\epsilon}},0)}{{s}^{j{p}+2}}+\frac{\vartheta({{\epsilon}})Y({s})}{{s}^{j{p}}}-\frac{F({{\epsilon}},{s})}{{s}^{j{p}}}. \end{equation}$

(3.4)

Step 7: Equation (3.4) may be substituted with $\Psi_{K}({{\epsilon}}, {s})$ in place of its expansion form.

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &ARes_{K}({{\epsilon}}, {s}) = \Big(\frac{\hbar_{0}({{\epsilon}})}{{s}^{2}}+\frac{\hbar_{1}({{\epsilon}})}{{s}^{{p}+2}}+\cdots+\frac{\hbar_{w}({{\epsilon}})}{{s}^{w{p}+2}}+\sum\limits_{r = w+1}^{K} \frac{\hbar_r({{\epsilon}})}{{s}^{r{p}+2}}\Big)\\&-\sum\limits_{j = 0}^{q-1}\frac{D_{{{\Omega}}}^{j}\eta({{\epsilon}},0)}{{s}^{j{p}+2}}+\frac{\vartheta({{\epsilon}})Y({s})}{{s}^{j{p}}} -\frac{F({{\epsilon}},{s})}{{s}^{j{p}}}. \end{split} \end{equation}$

(3.5)

Step 8: Multifly ${s}^{K{p}+2}$ on either side of the equation to get the solution to Eq (3.5).

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &{s}^{K{p}+2}ARes_{K}({{\epsilon}}, {s}) = {s}^{K{p}+2}\Big(\frac{\hbar_{0}({{\epsilon}})}{{s}^{2}}+\frac{\hbar_{1}({{\epsilon}})}{{s}^{{p}+2}}+\cdots+\frac{\hbar_{w}({{\epsilon}})}{{s}^{w{p}+2}}+\sum\limits_{r = w+1}^{K} \frac{\hbar_r({{\epsilon}})}{{s}^{r{p}+2}}\\&-\sum\limits_{j = 0}^{q-1}\frac{D_{{{\Omega}}}^{j}\eta({{\epsilon}},0)}{{s}^{j{p}+2}}+\frac{\vartheta({{\epsilon}})Y({s})}{{s}^{j{p}}} -\frac{F({{\epsilon}},{s})}{{s}^{j{p}}}\Big). \end{split} \end{equation}$

(3.6)

Step 9: Take $\lim_{{s}\rightarrow \infty}$ of Eq (3.6) to obtain:

$\begin{equation*} \begin{split} &\lim\limits_{{s}\rightarrow \infty}{s}^{K{p}+2}ARes_{K}({{\epsilon}}, {s}) = \lim\limits_{{s}\rightarrow \infty}{s}^{K{p}+2}\Big(\frac{\hbar_{0}({{\epsilon}})}{{s}^{2}}+\frac{\hbar_{1}({{\epsilon}})}{{s}^{{p}+2}}+\cdots+\frac{\hbar_{w}({{\epsilon}})}{{s}^{w{p}+2}}+\sum\limits_{r = w+1}^{K} \frac{\hbar_r({{\epsilon}})}{{s}^{r{p}+2}}\\&-\sum\limits_{j = 0}^{q-1}\frac{D_{{{\Omega}}}^{j}\eta({{\epsilon}},0)}{{s}^{j{p}+2}}+\frac{\vartheta({{\epsilon}})Y({s})}{{s}^{j{p}}} -\frac{F({{\epsilon}},{s})}{{s}^{j{p}}}\Big). \end{split} \end{equation*}$

Step 10: $\hbar_K({{\epsilon}})$ values can be obtained using the equation above.

$\lim\limits_{{s}\rightarrow \infty}({s}^{K{p}+2}ARes_{K}({{\epsilon}}, {s})) = 0,$

where $K = 1+w, 2+w, \cdots.$

Step 11: Values of $\hbar_K({{\epsilon}})$ are then substituted in Eq (3.3).

Step 12: Taking the inverse AT we obtain the final solution $\eta_K({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})$ .

3.2. ATIM Technique

Let's consider the PDE as given below:

$\begin{equation} D_{{{\Omega}}}^{{p}}{{\eta}}({{\epsilon}},{{\Omega}}) = \Phi\Big({{\eta}}({{\epsilon}},{{\Omega}}),D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{\Omega}{{\eta}}({{\epsilon}},{{\Omega}}) ,D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{2\Omega}{{\eta}}({{\epsilon}},{{\Omega}}),D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{3\Omega}{{\eta}}({{\epsilon}},{{\Omega}})\Big),\ 0 < {p},\Omega\leq1. \end{equation}$

(3.7)

The initial condition is

$\begin{equation} {{\eta}}^{(\hbar)}({{\epsilon}},0) = h_{\hbar},\ \hbar = 0,1,2,\cdots,m-1. \end{equation}$

(3.8)

The function to be determined is ${{\eta}}({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})$ , while $\Phi\Big({{\eta}}({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}}), D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{\Omega}{{\eta}}({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}}), D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{2\Omega}{{\eta}}({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}}) D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{3\Omega}{{\eta}}({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})\Big)$ are operators of ${{\eta}}({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}}), D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{\Omega}{{\eta}}({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}}), D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{2\Omega}{{\eta}}({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})$ and $D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{3\Omega}{{\eta}}({{\epsilon}}, {{\Omega}})$ . The AT is applied on Eq (3.7) to obtain:

$\begin{equation} {A} [{{\eta}}({{\epsilon}},{{\Omega}})] = \frac{1}{{s}^{{p}}}\Big(\sum\limits_{\hbar = 0}^{m-1}\frac{{{\eta}}^{(\hbar)}({{\epsilon}},0)}{{s}^{2-{p}+\hbar}}+{A} \Big[\Phi\Big({{\eta}}({{\epsilon}},{{\Omega}}),D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{\Omega}{{\eta}}({{\epsilon}},{{\Omega}}),D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{2\Omega}{{\eta}}({{\epsilon}},{{\Omega}}),D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{3\Omega}{{\eta}}({{\epsilon}},{{\Omega}})\Big)\Big]\Big). \end{equation}$

(3.9)

The AIT yields the solution to this problem:

$\begin{equation} {{\eta}}({{\epsilon}},{{\Omega}}) = {A}^{-1}\Big[\frac{1}{{s}^{{p}}}\Big(\sum\limits_{\hbar = 0}^{m-1}\frac{{{\eta}}^{(\hbar)}({{\epsilon}},0)}{{s}^{2-{p}+\hbar}}+{A} \Big[\Phi\Big({{\eta}}({{\epsilon}},{{\Omega}}),D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{\Omega}{{\eta}}({{\epsilon}},{{\Omega}}),D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{2\Omega}{{\eta}}({{\epsilon}},{{\Omega}}),D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{3\Omega}{{\eta}}({{\epsilon}},{{\Omega}})\Big)\Big]\Big)\Big]. \end{equation}$

(3.10)

An infinite series denotes the ATIM-derived solution.

$\begin{equation} {{\eta}}({{\epsilon}},{{\Omega}}) = \sum\limits_{i = 0}^{\infty}{{\eta}}_{i}. \end{equation}$

(3.11)

$\Phi\Big({{\eta}}, D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{\Omega}{{\eta}}, D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{2\Omega}{{\eta}}, D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{3\Omega}{{\eta}}\Big)$ can be decomposed as:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &\Phi \Big({{\eta}},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{\Omega}{{\eta}},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{2\Omega}{{\eta}},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{3\Omega}{{\eta}}\Big) = \Phi \Big({{\eta}}_{0},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{\Omega}{{\eta}}_{0},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{2\Omega}{{\eta}}_{0},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{3\Omega}{{\eta}}_{0}\Big)\\&+ \sum\limits_{i = 0}^{\infty} \left( \Phi \Big(\sum\limits_{\hbar = 0}^{i}\Big({{\eta}}_{\hbar},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{\Omega}{{\eta}}_{\hbar},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{2\Omega}{{\eta}}_{\hbar},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{3\Omega}{{\eta}}_{\hbar}\Big)\Big) -\Phi \Big(\sum\limits_{\hbar = 1}^{i-1}\Big({{\eta}}_{\hbar},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{\Omega}{{\eta}}_{\hbar},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{2\Omega}{{\eta}}_{\hbar},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{3\Omega}{{\eta}}_{\hbar}\Big)\Big)\right). \end{split} \end{equation}$

(3.12)

The subsequent equation is obtained by substituting the values of Eqs (3.11) and (3.12) for the initial equation (3.10).

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &\sum\limits_{i = 0}^{\infty}{{\eta}}_i({{\epsilon}},{{\Omega}}) = {A}^{-1}\Big[ \frac{1}{{s}^{{p}}}\Big( \sum\limits_{\hbar = 0}^{m-1}\frac{{{\eta}}^{(\hbar)}({{\epsilon}},0)}{{s}^{2-{p}+\hbar}}+{A}[\Phi ({{\eta}}_{0},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{\Omega}{{\eta}}_{0},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{2\Omega}{{\eta}}_{0},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{3\Omega}{{\eta}}_{0})]\Big)\Big]\\&+{A}^{-1}\Big[ \frac{1}{{s}^{{p}}}\Big({A}\Big[ \sum\limits_{i = 0}^{\infty}\Big(\Phi \sum\limits_{\hbar = 0}^{i}({{\eta}}_{\hbar},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{\Omega}{{\eta}}_{\hbar},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{2\Omega}{{\eta}}_{\hbar},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{3\Omega}{{\eta}}_{\hbar})\Big)\Big]\Big)\Big]\\&-{A}^{-1}\Big[ \frac{1}{{s}^{{p}}}\Big({A}\Big[\Big(\Phi \sum\limits_{\hbar = 1}^{i-1}({{\eta}}_{\hbar},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{\Omega}{{\eta}}_{\hbar},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{2\Omega}{{\eta}}_{\hbar},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{3\Omega}{{\eta}}_{\hbar})\Big)\Big]\Big)\Big] \end{split} \end{equation}$

(3.13)

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &{{\eta}}_0({{\epsilon}},{{\Omega}}) = {A}^{-1}\Big[ \frac{1}{{s}^{{p}}}\Big( \sum\limits_{\hbar = 0}^{m-1}\frac{{{\eta}}^{(\hbar)}({{\epsilon}},0)}{{s}^{2-{p}+\hbar}}\Big)\Big],\\ &{{\eta}}_1({{\epsilon}},{{\Omega}}) = {A}^{-1}\Big[ \frac{1}{{s}^{{p}}}\Big( {A}[\Phi ({{\eta}}_{0},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{\Omega}{{\eta}}_{0},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{2\Omega}{{\eta}}_{0},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{3\Omega}{{\eta}}_{0})]\Big)\Big],\\ \vdots\\ &{{\eta}}_{m+1}({{\epsilon}},{{\Omega}}) = {A}^{-1}\Big[ \frac{1}{{s}^{{p}}}\Big({A}\Big[ \sum\limits_{i = 0}^{\infty}\Big(\Phi \sum\limits_{\hbar = 0}^{i}({{\eta}}_{\hbar},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{\Omega}{{\eta}}_{\hbar},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{2\Omega}{{\eta}}_{\hbar},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{3\Omega}{{\eta}}_{\hbar})\Big)\Big]\Big)\Big]\\&-{A}^{-1}\Big[ \frac{1}{{s}^{{p}}}\Big({A}\Big[\Big(\Phi \sum\limits_{\hbar = 1}^{i-1}({{\eta}}_{\hbar},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{\Omega}{{\eta}}_{\hbar},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{2\Omega}{{\eta}}_{\hbar},D_{{{\epsilon}}}^{3\Omega}{{\eta}}_{\hbar})\Big)\Big]\Big)\Big],\ m = 1,2,\cdots. \end{split} \end{equation}$

(3.14)

For the m-term of Eq (3.7), the analytically approximate solution may be obtained using the following expression:

$\begin{equation} {{\eta}}({{\epsilon}},{{\Omega}}) = \sum\limits_{i = 0}^{m-1}{{\eta}}_{i}. \end{equation}$

(3.15)

4. Application of ARPSM and ATIM

4.1. Example 1 using ARPSM

Consider Kawahara equation of fractional order as follows:

(4.1)

with the initial condition:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} \eta({\epsilon}, 0) = \frac{105}{169} \text{sech}^4\left(\frac{\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\right), \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.2)

and exact solution

$\begin{equation*} \begin{split} \eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) = \frac{105}{169} \text{sech}^4\left(\frac{-\frac{36 \Omega}{169}+\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\right). \end{split} \end{equation*}$

Equation (4.2) is used, and {AT} is applied to Eq (4.1) to get

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &\eta({\epsilon}, s)-\frac{\frac{105}{169} \text{sech}^4\left(\frac{\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\right)}{s^2}-\frac{1}{s^p}\Big[\frac{\partial ^5\eta({\epsilon}, s)}{\partial \epsilon^5}\Big]+\frac{1}{s^p}A_{{\Omega}}\Big[A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta({\epsilon}, s)\times \frac{\partial ^3A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta({\epsilon}, s)}{\partial \epsilon^3}\Big]\\&+\frac{1}{s^p}A_{{\Omega}}\Big[A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta({\epsilon}, s)\times \frac{\partial A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta({\epsilon}, s)}{\partial \epsilon}\Big] = 0.\\ \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.3)

Therefore, the series $k^{th}$ -truncated terms are:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} \eta({{\epsilon}},s) = \frac{\frac{105}{169} \text{sech}^4\left(\frac{\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\right)}{s^2}+\sum\limits_{r = 1}^{k}\frac{f_{r}({{\epsilon}},s)}{s^{rp+1}}, \ \ r = 1,2,3,4\cdots. \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.4)

Following is the RAF:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &{A}_{{{\Omega}}}Res({{\epsilon}},s) = \eta({\epsilon}, s)-\frac{\frac{105}{169} \text{sech}^4\left(\frac{\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\right)}{s^2}-\frac{1}{s^p}\Big[\frac{\partial ^5\eta({\epsilon}, s)}{\partial \epsilon^5}\Big]+\frac{1}{s^p}A_{{\Omega}}\Big[A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta({\epsilon}, s)\times \frac{\partial ^3A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta({\epsilon}, s)}{\partial \epsilon^3}\Big]\\&+\frac{1}{s^p}A_{{\Omega}}\Big[A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta({\epsilon}, s)\times \frac{\partial A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta({\epsilon}, s)}{\partial \epsilon}\Big] = 0,\\ \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.5)

and the ${k}^{th}$ -RAFs is:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &{A}_{{{\Omega}}}Res_{k}({{\epsilon}},s) = \eta_{k}({\epsilon}, s)-\frac{\frac{105}{169} \text{sech}^4\left(\frac{\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\right)}{s^2}-\frac{1}{s^p}\Big[\frac{\partial ^5\eta_{k}({\epsilon}, s)}{\partial \epsilon^5}\Big]+\frac{1}{s^p}A_{{\Omega}}\Big[A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta_{k}({\epsilon}, s)\times \frac{\partial ^3A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta_{k}({\epsilon}, s)}{\partial \epsilon^3}\Big]\\&+\frac{1}{s^p}A_{{\Omega}}\Big[A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta_{k}({\epsilon}, s)\times \frac{\partial A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta_{k}({\epsilon}, s)}{\partial \epsilon}\Big] = 0.\\ \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.6)

It takes some calculation to find $f_{r}({{\epsilon}}, s)$ for $r = 1, 2, 3, ...$ . Using these procedures, we replace the $r^{th}$ -truncated series Eq (4.4) for the $r^{th}$ -RAF Eq (4.6), applying $\lim_{s\rightarrow \infty}(s^{r{p}+1})$ and solving ${A}_{{{\Omega}}}Res_{\eta, r}({{\epsilon}}, s)) = 0$ , for $r = 1, 2, 3, \cdots$ . Some terms that we obtain are given below:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} & f_{1}({{\epsilon}},s) = -\frac{105}{5940688 \sqrt{13}} \Big(17290 \sinh \Big(\frac{\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)-10029 \sinh \Big(\frac{3 (\epsilon-2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)-2015 \sinh \Big(\frac{5 (\epsilon-2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)\\&+104 \sinh \Big(\frac{7 (\epsilon-2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)\Big) \text{sech}^{11}\Big(\frac{\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)\Big),\\ \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.7)

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} & f_{2}({{\epsilon}},s) = \frac{105}{21718014715904} \Big(50957301372 \cosh \Big(\frac{\epsilon-2}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)+12586770193 \cosh \Big(\frac{2 (\epsilon-2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)\\&-12962735946 \cosh \Big(\frac{3 (\epsilon-2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)+2020967026 \cosh \Big(\frac{4 (\epsilon-2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)+68039374 \cosh \Big(\frac{5 (\epsilon-2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)\\&-9200529 \cosh \Big(\frac{6 (\epsilon-2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)+43264 \cosh \Big(\frac{7 (\epsilon-2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)-54264784626\Big) \text{sech}^{18}\Big(\frac{\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big),\\ \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.8)

and so on.

For $r = 1, 2, 3, \cdots,$ replace $f_{r}({{\epsilon}}, s)$ in Eq (4.4):

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &\eta({\epsilon},s) = \frac{\frac{105}{169} \text{sech}^4\left(\frac{\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\right)}{s^2}-\Big(\frac{105}{5940688 \sqrt{13}} \Big(17290 \sinh \Big(\frac{\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)-10029 \sinh \Big(\frac{3 (\epsilon-2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)\\&-2015 \sinh \Big(\frac{5 (\epsilon-2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)+104 \sinh \Big(\frac{7 (\epsilon-2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)\Big) \text{sech}^{11}\Big(\frac{\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)\Big)\Big)/\Big(s^{p+1}\Big)\\&+\Big(\frac{105}{21718014715904} \Big(50957301372 \cosh \Big(\frac{\epsilon-2}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)+12586770193 \cosh \Big(\frac{2 (\epsilon-2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)\\&-12962735946 \cosh \Big(\frac{3 (\epsilon-2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)+2020967026 \cosh \Big(\frac{4 (\epsilon-2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)+68039374 \cosh \Big(\frac{5 (\epsilon-2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)\\&-9200529 \cosh \Big(\frac{6 (\epsilon-2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)+43264 \cosh \Big(\frac{7 (\epsilon-2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)-54264784626\Big) \text{sech}^{18}\Big(\frac{\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)\Big)/\Big(s^{2p+1}\Big)+\cdots.\\ \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.9)

Apply AIT to obtain:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &\eta({\epsilon},{\Omega}) = \frac{105}{169} \text{sech}^4\left(\frac{\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\right)-\Omega^p\Big(\frac{105}{5940688 \sqrt{13}} \Big(17290 \sinh \Big(\frac{\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)-10029 \sinh \Big(\frac{3 (\epsilon-2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)\\&-2015 \sinh \Big(\frac{5 (\epsilon-2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)+104 \sinh \Big(\frac{7 (\epsilon-2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)\Big) \text{sech}^{11}\Big(\frac{\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)\Big)\Big)/\Big(\Gamma(p+1)\Big)\\&+\Omega^{2p}\Big(\frac{105}{21718014715904} \Big(50957301372 \cosh \Big(\frac{\epsilon-2}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)+12586770193 \cosh \Big(\frac{2 (\epsilon-2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)\\&-12962735946 \cosh \Big(\frac{3 (\epsilon-2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)+2020967026 \cosh \Big(\frac{4 (\epsilon-2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)+68039374 \cosh \Big(\frac{5 (\epsilon-2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)\\&-\!9200529 \cosh \Big(\frac{6 (\epsilon-2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)\!+\!43264 \cosh \Big(\frac{7 (\epsilon-2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)\!-\!54264784626\Big) \text{sech}^{18}\Big(\frac{\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)\Big)/\Big(\Gamma(2p+1)\Big)\!+\!\cdots.\\ \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.10)

presents the ARPSM solution comparison for different values of the parameter $p$ for $\Omega = 0.1$ , illustrating how the choice of $p$ impacts the accuracy and behavior of the solutions. shows a comparison between the approximate solution obtained using ARPSM (a) and the exact solution (b) for Example 1, confirming the high accuracy of the ARPSM approach. visualizes the impact of varying fractional orders on the ARPSM solution for different $p$ values $(p = 0.32, 0.52, 0.72)$ , showcasing how changes in the fractional order influence the solution structure. extends the comparison in two dimensions, offering a 2D view of the fractional order solutions using ARPSM for the same values of $p$ , further confirming the method's ability to capture the dynamics of fractional systems.

Table 1. ARPSM solution comparison for the values of p of Example 1 for

$\Omega = 0.1$ .

$\epsilon$	$ARPSM_{p=0.52}$	$ARPSM_{p=0.72}$	$ARPSM_{p=1.00}$	$Exact$	$Error_{p=1.00}$
1.0	0.597480	0.597823	0.597918	0.597923	4.746940 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.1	0.601882	0.602193	0.602280	0.602284	4.296239 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.2	0.605857	0.606136	0.606214	0.606217	3.837431 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.3	0.609395	0.609642	0.609710	0.609713	3.371748 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.4	0.612487	0.612700	0.612759	0.612762	2.900316 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.5	0.615125	0.615304	0.615354	0.615356	2.424166 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.6	0.617301	0.617446	0.617486	0.617488	1.944232 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.7	0.619010	0.619121	0.619151	0.619152	1.461368 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.8	0.620248	0.620324	0.620344	0.620345	9.763596 $\times 10^{-7}$
1.9	0.621010	0.621051	0.621061	0.621062	4.899361 $\times 10^{-7}$
2.0	0.621296	0.621301	0.621302	0.621302	2.792130 $\times 10^{-8}$

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Figure 1. (a) ARPSM approximate solution, (b) exact solution.

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Figure 2. Fractional order comparison using ARPSM for

$p = 0.32, 0.52, 0.72$ .

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Figure 3. Fractional order 2D comparison using ARPSM for

$p = 0.32, 0.52, 0.72$ .

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

4.2. Example 1 using ATIM

Consider the Kawahara equation of fractional order:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &D_{{\Omega}}^{p} \eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) = \frac{\partial ^5\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon^5}-\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) \frac{\partial ^3\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon^3}-\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) \frac{\partial \eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon}, \ \ \text { where }\ \ 0 < p \leq 1, \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.11)

with the initial condition:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} \eta({\epsilon}, 0) = \frac{105}{169} \text{sech}^4\left(\frac{\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\right), \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.12)

and exact solution

$\begin{equation*} \begin{split} \eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) = \frac{105}{169} \text{sech}^4\left(\frac{-\frac{36 \Omega}{169}+\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\right). \end{split} \end{equation*}$

Apply AT on both sides of Eq (4.11) to obtain:

$\begin{equation} {A} [D_{{\Omega}}^{p} \eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})] = \frac{1}{{s}^{{p}}}\Big(\sum\limits_{k = 0}^{m-1}\frac{\eta^{(k)}({{\epsilon}},0)}{{s}^{2-{p}+k}}+{A} \Big[\frac{\partial ^5\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon^5}-\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) \frac{\partial ^3\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon^3}-\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) \frac{\partial \eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon}\Big]\Big). \end{equation}$

(4.13)

Apply AIT on Eq (4.13) to obtain:

$\begin{equation} \eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) = {A}^{-1}\Big[\frac{1}{{s}^{{p}}}\Big(\sum\limits_{k = 0}^{m-1}\frac{\eta^{(k)}({{\epsilon}},0)}{{s}^{2-{p}+k}}+{A} \Big[\frac{\partial ^5\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon^5}-\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) \frac{\partial ^3\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon^3}-\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) \frac{\partial \eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon}\Big]\Big)\Big]. \end{equation}$

(4.14)

Utilize AT iteratively to get:

$\begin{equation*} \begin{split} \eta_0({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) = &{A}^{-1}\Big[\frac{1}{{s}^{{p}}}\Big(\sum\limits_{k = 0}^{m-1}\frac{\eta^{(k)}({{\epsilon}},0)}{{s}^{2-{p}+k}}\Big)\Big]\\& = {A}^{-1}\Big[\frac{\eta({{\epsilon}},0)}{{s}^2}\Big]\\& = \frac{105}{169} \text{sech}^4\left(\frac{\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\right). \end{split} \end{equation*}$

Applying the Riemann-Liouville integral on Eq (4.11),

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) = \frac{105}{169} \text{sech}^4\left(\frac{\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\right)-{A}\Big[\frac{\partial ^5\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon^5}-\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) \frac{\partial ^3\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon^3}-\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) \frac{\partial \eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon}\Big].\\ \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.15)

Using the ATIM technique, we provide the following terms:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &\eta_{0}({\epsilon},{\Omega}) = \frac{105}{169} \text{sech}^4\left(\frac{\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\right),\\ &\eta_{1}({\epsilon},{\Omega}) = \frac{105}{2970344 \sqrt{13} \Gamma (p+1)} \Omega ^p \Big(11940 \cosh \Big(\frac{\epsilon -2}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)+1911 \cosh \Big(\frac{2 (\epsilon -2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)-104 \cosh \Big(\frac{3 (\epsilon -2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)\\&-2675\Big) \tanh \Big(\frac{\epsilon -2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big) \text{sech}^{10}\Big(\frac{\epsilon -2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big),\\ &\eta_{2}({\epsilon},{\Omega}) = \frac{105 \Omega ^{2 p} \text{sech}^{18}\Big(\frac{\epsilon -2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)}{620288218300934144} \Big(\Big(35 \sqrt{\frac{13}{\pi }} 4^p \Omega ^p \Gamma \Big(p+\frac{1}{2}\Big) \Big(13 \Big(9385221 \sinh \Big(\frac{1}{2} \sqrt{13} (\epsilon -2)\Big)\\&+120132725 \sinh \Big(\frac{11 (\epsilon -2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)-910000 \sinh \Big(\frac{15 (\epsilon -2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)+14144 \sinh \Big(\frac{17 (\epsilon -2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)\Big)\\&+581521261600 \sinh \Big(\frac{\epsilon -2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)-374464577051 \sinh \Big(\frac{3 (\epsilon -2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)+130226023125 \sinh \Big(\frac{5 (\epsilon -2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)\\ -&12004154204 \sinh \Big(\frac{7 (\epsilon -2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)-7059672300 \sinh \Big(\frac{9 (\epsilon -2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)\Big) \text{sech}^7\Big(\frac{\epsilon -2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)\Big)/\Big(p^2 \Gamma (p) \Gamma (3 p)\Big)\\+&\frac{28561}{\Gamma (2 p+1)} \Big(50957301372 \cosh \Big(\frac{\epsilon -2}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)+12586770193 \cosh \Big(\frac{2 (\epsilon -2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)\\-&12962735946 \cosh \Big(\frac{3 (\epsilon -2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)+13 \Big(155459002 \cosh \Big(\frac{4 (\epsilon -2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)+5233798 \cosh \Big(\frac{5 (\epsilon -2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)\\-&707733 \cosh \Big(\frac{6 (\epsilon -2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)+3328 \cosh \Big(\frac{7 (\epsilon -2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)-4174214202\Big)\Big)\Big). \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.16)

The final solution that is obtained via ATIM is given as:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} \eta({\epsilon},{\Omega}) = \eta_{0}({\epsilon},{\Omega})+\eta_{1}({\epsilon},{\Omega})+\eta_{2}({\epsilon},{\Omega})+\cdots. \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.17)

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &\eta({\epsilon},{\Omega}) = \frac{105}{169} \text{sech}^4\left(\frac{\epsilon-2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\right)+\frac{105}{2970344 \sqrt{13} \Gamma (p+1)} \Omega ^p \Big(11940 \cosh \Big(\frac{\epsilon -2}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)\\&+1911 \cosh \Big(\frac{2 (\epsilon -2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)-104 \cosh \Big(\frac{3 (\epsilon -2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)-2675\Big) \tanh \Big(\frac{\epsilon -2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big) \text{sech}^{10}\Big(\frac{\epsilon -2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)\\&+\frac{105 \Omega ^{2 p} \text{sech}^{18}\Big(\frac{\epsilon -2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)}{620288218300934144} \Big(\Big(35 \sqrt{\frac{13}{\pi }} 4^p \Omega ^p \Gamma \Big(p+\frac{1}{2}\Big) \Big(13 \Big(9385221 \sinh \Big(\frac{1}{2} \sqrt{13} (\epsilon -2)\Big)\\&+120132725 \sinh \Big(\frac{11 (\epsilon -2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)-910000 \sinh \Big(\frac{15 (\epsilon -2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)+14144 \sinh \Big(\frac{17 (\epsilon -2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)\Big)\\&+581521261600 \sinh \Big(\frac{\epsilon -2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)-374464577051 \sinh \Big(\frac{3 (\epsilon -2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)+130226023125 \sinh \Big(\frac{5 (\epsilon -2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)\\&-12004154204 \sinh \Big(\frac{7 (\epsilon -2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)-7059672300 \sinh \Big(\frac{9 (\epsilon -2)}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)\Big) \text{sech}^7\Big(\frac{\epsilon -2}{2 \sqrt{13}}\Big)\Big)/\Big(p^2 \Gamma (p) \Gamma (3 p)\Big)\\ &+\frac{28561}{\Gamma (2 p+1)} \Big(50957301372 \cosh \Big(\frac{\epsilon -2}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)+12586770193 \cosh \Big(\frac{2 (\epsilon -2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)\\&-12962735946 \cosh \Big(\frac{3 (\epsilon -2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)+13 \Big(155459002 \cosh \Big(\frac{4 (\epsilon -2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)+5233798 \cosh \Big(\frac{5 (\epsilon -2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)\\&-707733 \cosh \Big(\frac{6 (\epsilon -2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)+3328 \cosh \Big(\frac{7 (\epsilon -2)}{\sqrt{13}}\Big)-4174214202\Big)\Big)\Big)+\cdots.\\ \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.18)

compares ATIM solutions for the same set of parameters, with similar trends observed as in ARPSM, demonstrating the robustness of both methods. juxtaposes the ATIM approximate solution (a) with the exact solution (b), verifying the precision of the ATIM method. compares the fractional order solutions using ATIM for $(p = 0.32, 0.52, 0.72)$ , and presents a 2D version of this comparison, highlighting the impact of the fractional order on the solution dynamics. compares the absolute error for ARPSM and ATIM at $\Omega = 0.1$ , demonstrating that both methods achieve highly accurate solutions with minimal error.

Table 2. ATIM solution comparison for the values of p of Example 1 for

$\Omega = 0.1$ .

$\epsilon$	$ATIM_{p=0.52}$	$ATIM_{p=0.72}$	$ATIM_{p=1.00}$	$Exact$	$Error_{p=1.00}$
1.0	0.597546	0.597850	0.597917	0.597923	6.195481 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.1	0.601942	0.602218	0.602278	0.602284	5.609848 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.2	0.605911	0.606158	0.606212	0.606217	5.012997 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.3	0.609443	0.609661	0.609709	0.609713	4.406507 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.4	0.612528	0.612717	0.612758	0.612762	3.791852 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.5	0.615160	0.615318	0.615353	0.615356	3.170410 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.6	0.617329	0.617458	0.617485	0.617488	2.543461 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.7	0.619032	0.619130	0.619150	0.619152	1.912204 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.8	0.620263	0.620329	0.620343	0.620345	1.277767 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.9	0.621019	0.621054	0.621061	0.621062	6.412226 $\times 10^{-7}$
2.0	0.621298	0.621302	0.621302	0.621302	3.606186 $\times 10^{-8}$

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Figure 4. (a) ATIM approximate solution, (b) exact solution.

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Figure 5. Fractional order comparison using ATIM for

$p = 0.32, 0.52, 0.72$ .

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Figure 6. Fractional order 2D comparison using ATIM for

$p = 0.32, 0.52, 0.72$ .

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Table 3. The comparison of absolute error of Example 1 for

$\Omega = 0.1$ .

$\epsilon$	$ARPSM_{p=1}$	$ATIM_{p=1}$	$Exact$	$Error_{ARPSM}$	$Error_{ATIM}$
1.0	0.597918	0.597917	0.597923	4.746940 $\times 10^{-6}$	6.195481 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.1	0.602280	0.602278	0.602284	4.296239 $\times 10^{-6}$	5.609848 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.2	0.606214	0.606212	0.606217	3.837431 $\times 10^{-6}$	5.012997 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.3	0.609710	0.609709	0.609713	3.371748 $\times 10^{-6}$	4.406507 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.4	0.612759	0.612758	0.612762	2.900316 $\times 10^{-6}$	3.791852 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.5	0.615354	0.615353	0.615356	2.424166 $\times 10^{-6}$	3.170410 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.6	0.617486	0.617485	0.617488	1.944232 $\times 10^{-6}$	2.543461 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.7	0.619151	0.619150	0.619152	1.461368 $\times 10^{-6}$	1.912204 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.8	0.620344	0.620343	0.620345	9.763596 $\times 10^{-7}$	1.277767 $\times 10^{-6}$
1.9	0.621061	0.621061	0.621062	4.899361 $\times 10^{-7}$	6.412226 $\times 10^{-7}$
2.0	0.621302	0.621302	0.621302	2.792130 $\times 10^{-8}$	3.606186 $\times 10^{-8}$

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

4.3. Example 2 using ARPSM

Examine the famous fifth-order KdV equations as follows:

(4.19)

with the initial condition:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} \eta({\epsilon},0) = e^{\epsilon}, \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.20)

and exact solution

$\begin{equation*} \begin{split} \eta({\epsilon},{\Omega}) = e^{\epsilon-\Omega}. \end{split} \end{equation*}$

After applying AT to Eq (4.19), Eq (4.20) is used to obtain:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &\eta({\epsilon}, s)-\frac{e^{\epsilon}}{s^2}+\frac{1}{s^p}\Big[\frac{\partial ^5\eta({\epsilon}, s)}{\partial \epsilon^5}\Big]-\frac{1}{s^p}A_{{\Omega}}\Big[A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta({\epsilon}, s)\times \frac{\partial ^3A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta({\epsilon}, s)}{\partial \epsilon^3}\Big]\\&+\frac{1}{s^p}A_{{\Omega}}\Big[A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta({\epsilon}, s)\times \frac{\partial A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta({\epsilon}, s)}{\partial \epsilon}\Big] = 0.\\ \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.21)

Therefore, the $k^{th}$ -truncated term series is:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} \eta({{\epsilon}},s) = \frac{e^{\epsilon}}{s^2}+\sum\limits_{r = 1}^{k}\frac{f_{r}({{\epsilon}},s)}{s^{rp+1}}, \ \ r = 1,2,3,4\cdots. \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.22)

Following is the RAF:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &{A}_{{{\Omega}}}Res({{\epsilon}},s) = \eta({\epsilon}, s)-\frac{e^{\epsilon}}{s^2}+\frac{1}{s^p}\Big[\frac{\partial ^5\eta({\epsilon}, s)}{\partial \epsilon^5}\Big]-\frac{1}{s^p}A_{{\Omega}}\Big[A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta({\epsilon}, s)\times \frac{\partial ^3A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta({\epsilon}, s)}{\partial \epsilon^3}\Big]\\&+\frac{1}{s^p}A_{{\Omega}}\Big[A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta({\epsilon}, s)\times \frac{\partial A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta({\epsilon}, s)}{\partial \epsilon}\Big] = 0,\\ \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.23)

and the ${k}^{th}$ -RAFs is:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &{A}_{{{\Omega}}}Res_{k}({{\epsilon}},s) = \eta_{k}({\epsilon}, s)-\frac{e^{\epsilon}}{s^2}+\frac{1}{s^p}\Big[\frac{\partial ^5\eta_{k}({\epsilon}, s)}{\partial \epsilon^5}\Big]-\frac{1}{s^p}A_{{\Omega}}\Big[A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta_{k}({\epsilon}, s)\times \frac{\partial ^3A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta_{k}({\epsilon}, s)}{\partial \epsilon^3}\Big]\\&+\frac{1}{s^p}A_{{\Omega}}\Big[A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta_{k}({\epsilon}, s)\times \frac{\partial A_{{\Omega}}^{-1}\eta_{k}({\epsilon}, s)}{\partial \epsilon}\Big] = 0.\\ \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.24)

It takes some calculation to find $f_{r}({{\epsilon}}, s)$ for $r = 1, 2, 3, ...$ . Using these procedures, we replace the $r^{th}$ -truncated series Eq (4.22) for the $r^{th}$ -RAF Eq (4.24), applying $\lim_{s\rightarrow \infty}(s^{r{p}+1})$ and solving ${A}_{{{\Omega}}}Res_{\eta, r}({{\epsilon}}, s)) = 0$ , for $r = 1, 2, 3, \cdots$ .

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} & f_{1}({{\epsilon}},s) = -e^{\epsilon},\\ \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.25)

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &f_{2}({\epsilon},s) = e^{\epsilon},\\ \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.26)

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &f_{2}({\epsilon},s) = -e^{\epsilon},\\ \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.27)

and so on.

For $r = 1, 2, 3, \cdots,$ replace $f_{r}({{\epsilon}}, s)$ in Eq (4.22):

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &\eta({\epsilon},s) = \frac{e^\epsilon}{s}-\frac{e^\epsilon}{s^{p+1}}+\frac{e^\epsilon}{s^{2 p+1}}-\frac{e^\epsilon}{s^{3 p+1}}+\cdots.\\ \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.28)

Apply AIT to obtain:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &\eta({\epsilon},{\Omega}) = e^\epsilon-\frac{e^\epsilon \Omega^p}{\Gamma (p+1)}+\frac{e^\epsilon \Omega^{2 p}}{\Gamma (2 p+1)}-\frac{e^\epsilon \Omega^{4 p}}{\Gamma (3 p+1)}+\cdots.\\ \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.29)

explores the fractional order comparison using ARPSM for an extended range of $p$ values $(p = 0.33, 0.55, 0.77, 1.00)$ , providing a more comprehensive analysis of how different orders affect the solution. Figure 8 offers 2D and 3D graphs for ARPSM solutions, further highlighting the changes in solution behavior as the fractional order varies.

Figure 7. Fractional order comparison using ARPSM for

$p = 0.33, 0.55, 0.77, 1.00$ .

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Figure 8. 2D and 3D graphs for comparing ARPSM solution for

$p = 0.33, 0.55, 0.77, 1.00$ .

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

4.4. Example 2 using ATIM

Examine the famous fifth-order KdV equations as follows:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &D_{{\Omega}}^{p} \eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) = -\frac{\partial ^5\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon^5}+\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) \frac{\partial ^3\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon^3}-\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) \frac{\partial \eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon}, \ \ \text { where }\ \ 0 < p \leq 1, \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.30)

with the initial condition:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} \eta({\epsilon},0) = e^{\epsilon}, \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.31)

and exact solution

$\begin{equation*} \begin{split} \eta({\epsilon},{\Omega}) = e^{\epsilon-\Omega}. \end{split} \end{equation*}$

Apply AT on either side of Eq (4.30) to obtain:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} {A} [D_{{\Omega}}^{p} \eta({\epsilon},{\Omega})] = \frac{1}{{s}^{{p}}}\Big(\sum\limits_{k = 0}^{m-1}\frac{\eta^{(k)}({{\epsilon}},0)}{{s}^{2-{p}+k}}+{A} \Big[-\frac{\partial ^5\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon^5}+\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) \frac{\partial ^3\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon^3}-\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) \frac{\partial \eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon}\Big]\Big). \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.32)

Apply AIT on either side of Eq (4.32) to obtain:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} \eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) = {A}^{-1}\Big[\frac{1}{{s}^{{p}}}\Big(\sum\limits_{k = 0}^{m-1}\frac{\eta^{(k)}({{\epsilon}},0)}{{s}^{2-{p}+k}}+{A} \Big[-\frac{\partial ^5\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon^5}+\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) \frac{\partial ^3\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon^3}-\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) \frac{\partial \eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon}\Big]\Big)\Big]. \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.33)

Iteratively apply the AT to obtain:

Applying Riemann-Liouville integral on Eq (4.19),

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &\eta({\epsilon},{\Omega}) = e^{\epsilon}- {A}\Big[-\frac{\partial ^5\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon^5}+\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) \frac{\partial ^3\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon^3}-\eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega}) \frac{\partial \eta({\epsilon}, {\Omega})}{\partial \epsilon}\Big].\\ \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.34)

The use of the ATIM technique provides the following terms:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &\eta_{0}({\epsilon},{\Omega}) = e^{\epsilon},\\ &\eta_{1}({\epsilon},{\Omega}) = -\frac{e^\epsilon \Omega^p}{\Gamma (p+1)},\\ &\eta_{2}({\epsilon},{\Omega}) = \frac{e^\epsilon \Omega^{2p}}{\Gamma (2p+1)},\\ &\eta_{3}({\epsilon},{\Omega}) = -\frac{e^\epsilon \Omega^{3p}}{\Gamma (3p+1)}.\\ \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.35)

The final solution that is obtained via ATIM is given as:

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} \eta({\epsilon},{\Omega}) = \eta_{0}({\epsilon},{\Omega})+\eta_{1}({\epsilon},{\Omega})+\eta_{2}({\epsilon},{\Omega})+\eta_{3}({\epsilon},{\Omega})+\cdots. \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.36)

$\begin{equation} \begin{split} &\eta({\epsilon},{\Omega}) = e^\epsilon\left(1-\frac{ \Omega^p}{\Gamma (p+1)}+\frac{ \Omega^{2 p}}{\Gamma (2 p+1)}-\frac{ \Omega^{4 p}}{\Gamma (3 p+1)}+\cdots\right).\\ \end{split} \end{equation}$

(4.37)

Table 4 analyzes the effect of various fractional orders for ARPSM and ATIM, for Example 2, indicating the consistency and accuracy of both methods across different fractional orders. Figures 9 and 10 continue the analysis for ATIM, comparing fractional order solutions and offering 3D and 2D views further to elucidate the complex behavior of fractional wave systems as modeled by the Kawahara and KdV equations. These figures and tables collectively emphasize the efficacy of ARPSM and ATIM in providing accurate and insightful solutions for fractional nonlinear PDEs, especially in the context of nonlinear wave phenomena in applied mathematics and physics. The graphical representations and error comparisons showcase the reliability and precision of these methods in solving complex fractional models.

Table 4. Analysis of various fractional order of ARPSM and ATIM of Example 2 for

$\Omega = 0.1$ .

$\epsilon$	$ARPSM\ ATIM$	$ARPSM\ ATIM$	$ARPSM\ ATIM$
	$p=0.55$	$p=0.77$	$p=1.00$	$Exact$	$Error_{p=1.0}$
1.0	2.49168	2.63507	2.69123	2.69123	4.473861 $\times 10^{-7}$
1.1	2.75373	2.91220	2.97427	2.97427	4.944381 $\times 10^{-7}$
1.2	3.04335	3.21848	3.28708	3.28708	5.464386 $\times 10^{-7}$
1.3	3.36342	3.55697	3.63279	3.63279	6.039081 $\times 10^{-7}$
1.4	3.71715	3.93106	4.01485	4.01485	6.674217 $\times 10^{-7}$
1.5	4.10809	4.34449	4.43710	4.43710	7.376150 $\times 10^{-7}$
1.6	4.54014	4.80141	4.90375	4.90375	8.151907 $\times 10^{-7}$
1.7	5.01763	5.30638	5.41948	5.41948	9.009250 $\times 10^{-7}$
1.8	5.54534	5.86445	5.98945	5.98945	9.956761 $\times 10^{-7}$
1.9	6.12855	6.48122	6.61937	6.61937	1.100392 $\times 10^{-6}$
2.0	6.77309	7.16286	7.31553	7.31553	1.216121 $\times 10^{-6}$

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Figure 9. Fractional order comparison using ATIM for

$p = 0.33, 0.55, 0.77, 1.00$ .

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Figure 10. Fractional order 3D and 2D comparison using ATIM for

$p = 0.33, 0.55, 0.77, 1.00$ .

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

The study utilizes advanced analytical methods, precisely the ARPSM and the ATIM, to investigate the fractional Kawahara and fifth-order KdV equations. The discussion of figures and tables highlights the effectiveness of these methods in providing accurate approximate solutions, comparing their results with exact solutions, and examining the effects of fractional orders on the solutions.

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, our analytical investigation into the fractional Kawahara equation and fifth-order KdV equations employing the ARPSM and ATIM has yielded significant insights and advancements in understanding nonlinear wave phenomena. Through rigorous analysis and computational simulations, we have demonstrated the effectiveness of these advanced analytical techniques in providing accurate and insightful solutions to these complex equations governed by fractional calculus under the Caputo operator framework. Our findings contribute to the theoretical understanding of nonlinear wave dynamics and offer practical analytical tools for addressing complex mathematical models in various scientific and engineering domains. Further research in this direction holds promise for exploring additional applications of the Aboodh methods and advancing our understanding of nonlinear wave phenomena in diverse real-world contexts. Future research can extend the ARPSM and ATIM methods to more complex nonlinear fractional PDEs, including those with higher-order fractional operators. Exploring their application to multidimensional systems could provide deeper insights into wave propagation in fields like quantum field theory. Investigating computational efficiency and convergence across different fractional orders may optimize these techniques for broader use. Applying these methods to real-world engineering problems could further validate their utility in practical settings.

Author contributions

Conceptualization, M.Y.A.; Data curation, H.A.; Formal analysis, M.Y.A; Resources, H.A.; Investigation, M.Y.A.; Project administration, M.Y.A.; Validation, H.A.; Software, H.A.; Validation, M.Y.A.; Visualization, M.Y.A.; Validation, H.A.; Visualization, M.Y.A.; Resources, H.A.; Project administration, H.A.; Writing-review & editing, H.A.; Funding, M.Y.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the funding of the Deanship of Graduate Studies and Scientific Research, Jazan University, Saudi Arabia, through project number: RG24-L02.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Agyeman SD, Lin BQ (2023) The influence of natural gas (De)regulation on innovation for climate change mitigation: Evidence from OECD countries. Environ Impact Asses Rev 98: 106961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2022.106961 doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2022.106961
[2]	Aizawa M, Yang CF (2010) Green Credit, Green Stimulus, Green Revolution? China's Mobilization of Banks for Environmental Cleanup. J Environ Dev 19: 119–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/1070496510371192 doi: 10.1177/1070496510371192
[3]	Athey S, Imbens GW (2022) Design-based analysis in Difference-In-Differences settings with staggered adoption. J Econometrics 226: 62–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2020.10.012 doi: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2020.10.012
[4]	Bao T, Dai Y, Feng YX, et al. (2023) Trade liberalisation and trade and capital flows: Evidence from China pilot free trade zones. World Econ 46: 1408–1422 https://doi.org/10.1111/twec.13387 doi: 10.1111/twec.13387
[5]	Barney JB, Harrison JS (2020) Stakeholder Theory at the Crossroads. Bus Soc 59: 203–212. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650318796792 doi: 10.1177/0007650318796792
[6]	Beck T, Levine R, Levkov A (2010) Big Bad Banks? The Winners and Losers from Bank Deregulation in the United States. J Financ 65: 1637–1667. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2010.01589.x doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2010.01589.x
[7]	Bi KX, Huang P, Wang XX (2016) Innovation performance and influencing factors of low-carbon technological innovation under the global value chain: A case of Chinese manufacturing industry. Technol Forecast Soc 111: 275–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.07.024 doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2016.07.024
[8]	Borusyak K, Jaravel X, Spiess J (2021) Revisiting Event Study Designs: Robust and Efficient Estimation. Unpublished. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2108.12419
[9]	Braghieri L, Levy R, Makarin A (2022) Social Media and Mental Health. Am Econ Rev 112: 3660–3693. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20211218 doi: 10.1257/aer.20211218
[10]	Callaway B, Sant'Anna PHC (2021) Difference-in-Differences with multiple time periods. J Econometrics 225: 200–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2020.12.001 doi: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2020.12.001
[11]	Carlson D, Robinson SA, Blair C, et al. (2021) China's climate ambition: Revisiting its First Nationally Determined Contribution and centering a just transition to clean energy. Energ Policy 155: 112350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112350 doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112350
[12]	Chen ZF, Zhang X, Chen FL (2021) Do carbon emission trading schemes stimulate green innovation in enterprises? Evidence from China. Technol Forecast Soc 168: 120744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120744 doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120744
[13]	Cheng YY, Xu ZH (2023) Fiscal centralization and urban industrial pollution emissions reduction: Evidence from the vertical reform of environmental administrations in China. J Environ Manage 347: 119212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.119212 doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.119212
[14]	Cheng ZH, Yu XJ, Zhang Y (2023) Is the construction of new energy demonstration cities conducive to improvements in energy efficiency? Energy 263: 125517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.125517 doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2022.125517
[15]	Coase RH (1981) The Coase Theorem and the Empty Core - a Comment. J Law Econ 24: 183–187. https://doi.org/10.1086/466980 doi: 10.1086/466980
[16]	Cui L, Wu KJ, Tseng ML (2017) Selecting a remanufacturing quality strategy based on consumer preferences. J Clean Prod 161: 1308–1316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.056 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.056
[17]	De Chaisemartin C, D'Haultfoeuille X (2020) Two-Way Fixed Effects Estimators with Heterogeneous Treatment Effects. Am Econ Rev 110: 2964–2996. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20181169 doi: 10.1257/aer.20181169
[18]	Decramer S, Vanormelingen S (2016) The effectiveness of investment subsidies: evidence from a regression discontinuity design. Small Bus Econ 47: 1007–1032. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-016-9749-2 doi: 10.1007/s11187-016-9749-2
[19]	Fare R, Grosskopf S, Lovell CAK, et al. (1989) Multilateral Productivity Comparisons When Some Outputs Are Undesirable - a Nonparametric Approach. Rev Econ Stat 71: 90–98. https://doi.org/10.2307/1928055 doi: 10.2307/1928055
[20]	Fazzari SM, Hubbard RG, Petersen BC (1988) Financing Constraints and Corporate-Investment. Brookings Pap Eco Ac 1988: 141–195. https://doi.org/10.2307/2534426 doi: 10.2307/2534426
[21]	Fee CE, Hadlock CJ, Pierce JR (2009) Investment, Financing Constraints, and Internal Capital Markets: Evidence from the Advertising Expenditures of Multinational Firms. Rev Financ Stud 22: 2361–2392. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhn059 doi: 10.1093/rfs/hhn059
[22]	Forcadell FJ, Aracil E, Ubeda F (2020) Using reputation for corporate sustainability to tackle banks digitalization challenges. Bus Strateg Environ 29: 2181–2193. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2494 doi: 10.1002/bse.2494
[23]	Freudenreich B, Luedeke-Freund F, Schaltegger S (2020) A Stakeholder Theory Perspective on Business Models: Value Creation for Sustainability. J Bus Ethics 166: 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04112-z doi: 10.1007/s10551-019-04112-z
[24]	Friedman AL, Miles S (2002) Developing stakeholder theory. J Manage Stud 39: 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00280 doi: 10.1111/1467-6486.00280
[25]	Ge T, Hao XL, Li JY (2021) Effects of public participation on environmental governance in China: A spatial Durbin econometric analysis. J Clean Prod 321: 129042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129042 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129042
[26]	Gollop FM, Roberts MJ (1983) Environmental-Regulations and Productivity Growth - the Case of Fossil-Fueled Electric-Power Generation. J Polit Econ 91: 654–674. https://doi.org/10.1086/261170 doi: 10.1086/261170
[27]	González X, Pazó C (2008) Do public subsidies stimulate private R & D spending? Res Policy 37: 371–389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.10.009 doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2007.10.009
[28]	Goodman-Bacon A (2021) Difference-in-differences with variation in treatment timing. J Econometrics 225: 254–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2021.03.014 doi: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2021.03.014
[29]	Heckman JJ, Robb R (1985) Alternative Methods for Evaluating the Impact of Interventions - an Overview. J Econometrics 30: 239–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(85)90139-3 doi: 10.1016/0304-4076(85)90139-3
[30]	Hong M, Drakeford B, Zhang KX (2020) The impact of mandatory CSR disclosure on green innovation: evidence from China. Green Financ 2: 302–322. https://doi.org/10.3934/Gf.2020017 doi: 10.3934/Gf.2020017
[31]	Hu GQ, Wang XQ, Wang Y (2021) Can the green credit policy stimulate green innovation in heavily polluting enterprises? Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment in China. Energ Econ 98: 105134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105134 doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105134
[32]	Huang ZH, Liao GK, Li ZH (2019) Loaning scale and government subsidy for promoting green innovation. Technol Forecast Soc 144: 148–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.04.023 doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2019.04.023
[33]	Jorgenson DW, Wilcoxen PJ (1990) Environmental-Regulation and United-States Economic-Growth. Rand J Econ 21: 314–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/2555426 doi: 10.2307/2555426
[34]	Kaplan SN, Zingales L (1997) Do investment-cash flow sensitivities provide useful measures of financing constraints? Q J Econ 112: 169–215. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355397555163 doi: 10.1162/003355397555163
[35]	Kouvelis P, Wu XL, Xiao YX (2019) Cash Hedging in a Supply Chain. Manage Sci 65: 3928–3947. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2017.2997 doi: 10.1287/mnsc.2017.2997
[36]	Lee CC, Nie CF (2023) Place-based policy and green innovation: Evidence from the national pilot zone for ecological conservation in China. Sustain Cities Soc 97: 104730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2023.104730 doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2023.104730
[37]	Lee CC, Wang FH, Lou RC, et al. (2023) How does green finance drive the decarbonization of the economy? Empirical evidence from China. Renew Energ 204: 671–684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2023.01.058 doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2023.01.058
[38]	Liu J, Xia SM, Wang ZX, et al. (2023) How to balance economic profits and environmental protection: The impacts of cash hedging on remanufacturing firms. Int J Prod Econ 258: 108783. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2023.108783 doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2023.108783
[39]	Liu MC, Rao DD, Yang L, et al. (2021) Subsidy, training or material supply? The impact path of eco-compensation method on farmers' livelihood assets. J Environ Manage 287: 112339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112339 doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112339
[40]	Liu XH, Wang EX, Cai DT (2019) Green credit policy, property rights and debt financing: Quasi-natural experimental evidence from China. Financ Res Lett 29: 129–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2019.03.014 doi: 10.1016/j.frl.2019.03.014
[41]	Liu YY, Liu GC, Zhang CS (2021) Local land supply and fiscal incentives for R & D: Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment in China. China Econ Rev 68: 101630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2021.101630 doi: 10.1016/j.chieco.2021.101630
[42]	Ma YC, Sha YZ, Wang ZL, et al. (2023) The effect of the policy mix of green credit and government subsidy on environmental innovation. Energ Econ 118: 106512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2023.106512 doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2023.106512
[43]	Myers SC, Majluf NS (1984) Corporate Financing and Investment Decisions When Firms Have Information That Investors Do Not Have. J Financ Econ 13: 187–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405x(84)90023-0 doi: 10.1016/0304-405x(84)90023-0
[44]	Nandy M, Lodh S (2012) Do banks value the eco-friendliness of firms in their corporate lending decision? Some empirical evidence. Int Rev Financ Anal 25: 83–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2012.06.008 doi: 10.1016/j.irfa.2012.06.008
[45]	Niesten E, Jolink A, Chappin M (2018) Investments in the Dutch onshore wind energy industry: A review of investor profiles and the impact of renewable energy subsidies. Renew Sust Energ Rev 81: 2519–2525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.06.056 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2017.06.056
[46]	Oliner SD, Rudebusch GD (1992) Sources of the Financing Hierarchy for Business Investment. Rev Econ Stat 74: 643–654. https://doi.org/10.2307/2109378 doi: 10.2307/2109378
[47]	Pawlina G, Renneboog L (2005) Is investment-cash flow sensitivity caused by agency costs or asymmetric information? Evidence from the UK. Eur Financ Manag 11: 483–513. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1354-7798.2005.00294.x doi: 10.1111/j.1354-7798.2005.00294.x
[48]	Qin M, Zhang XJ, Li YM, et al. (2023) Blockchain market and green finance: The enablers of carbon neutrality in China. Energ Econ 118: 106501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2022.106501 doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2022.106501
[49]	Shi XW, Ma JT, Jiang AX, et al. (2023) Green bonds: Green investments or greenwashing? Int Rev Financ Anal 90: 102850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2023.102850 doi: 10.1016/j.irfa.2023.102850
[50]	Sim J (2018) The economic and environmental values of the R & D investment in a renewable energy sector in South Korea. J Clean Prod 189: 297–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.074 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.074
[51]	Sloczynski T, Wooldridge JM (2018) A General Double Robustness Result for Estimating Average Treatment Effects. Economet Theor 34: 112–133. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266466617000056 doi: 10.1017/S0266466617000056
[52]	Songailiene E, Winklhofer H, McKechnie S (2011) A conceptualisation of supplier-perceived value. Eur J Marketing 45: 383–418. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090561111107249 doi: 10.1108/03090561111107249
[53]	Su CW, Liu FY, Stefea P, et al. (2023) Does technology innovation help to achieve carbon neutrality? Econ Anal Policy 78: 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2023.01.010 doi: 10.1016/j.eap.2023.01.010
[54]	Sueyoshi T, Goto M (2009) Can environmental investment and expenditure enhance financial performance of US electric utility firms under the clean air act amendment of 1990? Energ Policy 37: 4819–4826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.06.038 doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2009.06.038
[55]	Sun LY, Abraham S (2021) Estimating dynamic treatment effects in event studies with heterogeneous treatment effects. J Econometrics 225: 175–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2020.09.006 doi: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2020.09.006
[56]	Tan XJ, Dong HM, Liu YS, et al. (2022) Green bonds and corporate performance: A potential way to achieve green recovery. Renew Energ 200: 59–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.09.109 doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2022.09.109
[57]	Tatomir M, Dreyer JK, Sund KJ, et al. (2023) Warm-Glow Investing and the Greenwashing Hypothesis. J Clean Prod 419: 138229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138229 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138229
[58]	Wagner M (2007) On the relationship between environmental management, environmental innovation and patenting: Evidence from German manufacturing firms. Res Policy 36: 1587–1602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.08.004 doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2007.08.004
[59]	Wang Q, Yi HT (2021) New energy demonstration program and China's urban green economic growth: Do regional characteristics make a difference? Energ Policy 151: 112161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112161 doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112161
[60]	Wang ZL, Qiu SL (2021) Can "energy saving and emission reduction" demonstration city selection actually contribute to pollution abatement in China? Sustain Prod Consump 27: 1882–1902. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.04.030 doi: 10.1016/j.spc.2021.04.030
[61]	Wen HW, Lee CC, Zhou FX (2021) Green credit policy, credit allocation efficiency and upgrade of energy-intensive enterprises. Energ Econ 94: 105099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105099 doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105099
[62]	Wu AH (2017) The signal effect of Government R & D Subsidies in China: Does ownership matter? Technol Forecast Soc 117: 339–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.08.033 doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2016.08.033
[63]	Wu WF, Wu CF, Zhou CY, et al. (2012) Political connections, tax benefits and firm performance: Evidence from China. J Account Public Pol 31: 277–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2011.10.005 doi: 10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2011.10.005
[64]	Xie XM, Huo JG, Zou HL (2019) Green process innovation, green product innovation, and corporate financial performance: A content analysis method. J Bus Res 101: 697–706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.01.010 doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.01.010
[65]	Xu QP, Kim T (2022) Financial Constraints and Corporate Environmental Policies. Rev Financ Stud 35: 576–635. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhab056 doi: 10.1093/rfs/hhab056
[66]	Xu S (2020) International comparison of green credit and its enlightenment to China. Green Financ 2: 75–99. https://doi.org/10.3934/Gf.2020005 doi: 10.3934/Gf.2020005
[67]	Xu XK, Li JS (2020) Asymmetric impacts of the policy and development of green credit on the debt financing cost and maturity of different types of enterprises in China. J Clean Prod 264: 121574. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121574 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121574
[68]	Xu XY, Hou P, Liu Y (2022) The impact of heterogeneous environmental regulations on the technology innovation of urban green energy: a study based on the panel threshold model. Green Financ 4: 115–136. https://doi.org/10.3934/Gf.2022006 doi: 10.3934/Gf.2022006
[69]	Yi YY, Li JX (2018) The effect of governmental policies of carbon taxes and energy-saving subsidies on enterprise decisions in a two-echelon Supply chain. J Clean Prod 181: 675–691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.188 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.188
[70]	Yu BJ, Li CM, Mirza N, et al. (2022) Forecasting credit ratings of decarbonized firms: Comparative assessment of machine learning models. Technol Forecast Soc 174: 121255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121255 doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121255
[71]	Yu FF, Guo Y, Le-Nguyen K, et al. (2016) The impact of government subsidies and enterprises' R & D investment: A panel data study from renewable energy in China. Energ Policy 89: 106–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2015.11.009 doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2015.11.009
[72]	Zhang B, Yang Y, Bi J (2011) Tracking the implementation of green credit policy in China: Top-down perspective and bottom-up reform. J Environ Manage 92: 1321–1327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.12.019 doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.12.019
[73]	Zhang LL, Long RY, Huang Z, et al. (2020) Evolutionary game analysis on the implementation of subsidy policy for sustainable transportation development. J Clean Prod 267: 122159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122159 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122159
[74]	Zhang X, Yang YL, Li Y (2023) Does Public Participation Reduce Regional Carbon Emission? Atmosphere-Basel 14: 165. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos14010165 doi: 10.3390/atmos14010165
[75]	Zhang ZH, Wang J, Feng C, et al. (2023) Do pilot zones for green finance reform and innovation promote energy savings? Evidence from China. Energ Econ 124: 106763. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2023.106763 doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2023.106763
[76]	Zhao X, Ma XW, Chen BY, et al. (2022) Challenges toward carbon neutrality in China: Strategies and countermeasures. Resour Conserv Recy 176: 105959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105959

This article has been cited by:

1.	Aljawhara H. Almuqrin, Sherif M. E. Ismaeel, C. G. L. Tiofack, A. Mohamadou, Badriah Albarzan, Weaam Alhejaili, Samir A. El-Tantawy, Solving fractional physical evolutionary wave equations using advanced techniques, 2025, 2037-4631, 10.1007/s12210-025-01320-w
2.	Samir A. El-Tantawy, Sahibzada I. H. Bacha, Muhammad Khalid, Weaam Alhejaili, Application of the Tantawy Technique for Modeling Fractional Ion-Acoustic Waves in Electronegative Plasmas having Cairns Distributed-Electrons, Part (I): Fractional KdV Solitary Waves, 2025, 55, 0103-9733, 10.1007/s13538-025-01741-w

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2024 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

1.
沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院沈阳 110142

Green Finance

5.5 9.6

Metrics

Article views(1565) PDF downloads(252) Cited by(3)

Preview PDF

Download XML

Export Citation

Article outline

Show full outline

Figures and Tables

Figures(5) / Tables(11)

Green Finance

Fiscal policy promotes corporate green credit: Experience from the construction of energy conservation and emission reduction demonstration cities in China

Related Papers:

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Basics of fractional calculus

3. Methodologies

3.1. ARPSM technique

3.2. ATIM Technique

4. Application of ARPSM and ATIM

4.1. Example 1 using ARPSM

4.2. Example 1 using ATIM

4.3. Example 2 using ARPSM

4.4. Example 2 using ATIM

5. Conclusions

Author contributions

Acknowledgments

Conflict of interest

References

This article has been cited by:

Reader Comments

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

Metrics

Figures and Tables

Other Articles By Authors

Catalog

Green Finance

Fiscal policy promotes corporate green credit: Experience from the construction of energy conservation and emission reduction demonstration cities in China

Related Papers:

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Basics of fractional calculus

3. Methodologies

3.1. ARPSM technique

3.2. ATIM Technique

4. Application of ARPSM and ATIM

4.1. Example 1 using ARPSM

4.2. Example 1 using ATIM

4.3. Example 2 using ARPSM

4.4. Example 2 using ATIM

5. Conclusions

Author contributions

Acknowledgments

Conflict of interest

References

This article has been cited by:

Reader Comments

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

Metrics

Figures and Tables

Other Articles By Authors

Related pages

Tools

Export File

Citation

Format

Content

Catalog