Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/SVG/jax.js
Research article

pth moment exponential stability and convergence analysis of semilinear stochastic evolution equations driven by Riemann-Liouville fractional Brownian motion

  • Received: 24 February 2022 Revised: 23 April 2022 Accepted: 05 May 2022 Published: 08 June 2022
  • MSC : 60H15, 60G15

  • Many works have been done on Brownian motion or fractional Brownian motion, but few of them have considered the simpler type, Riemann-Liouville fractional Brownian motion. In this paper, we investigate the semilinear stochastic evolution equations driven by Riemann-Liouville fractional Brownian motion with Hurst parameter H<1/2. First, we prove the pth moment exponential stability of mild solution. Then, based on the maximal inequality from Lemma 10 in [1], the uniform boundedness of pth moment of both exact and numerical solutions are studied, and the strong convergence of the exponential Euler method is established as well as the convergence rate. Finally, two multi-dimensional examples are carried out to demonstrate the consistency with theoretical results.

    Citation: Xueqi Wen, Zhi Li. pth moment exponential stability and convergence analysis of semilinear stochastic evolution equations driven by Riemann-Liouville fractional Brownian motion[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(8): 14652-14671. doi: 10.3934/math.2022806

    Related Papers:

    [1] Patarawadee Prasertsang, Thongchai Botmart . Improvement of finite-time stability for delayed neural networks via a new Lyapunov-Krasovskii functional. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(1): 998-1023. doi: 10.3934/math.2021060
    [2] Sheng Dong, Qingwen Wang, Lei Hou . Determinantal inequalities for block Hadamard product and Khatri-Rao product of positive definite matrices. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(6): 9648-9655. doi: 10.3934/math.2022536
    [3] Ali Algefary . Diagonal solutions for a class of linear matrix inequality. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 26435-26445. doi: 10.3934/math.20241286
    [4] Wentao Le, Yucai Ding, Wenqing Wu, Hui Liu . New stability criteria for semi-Markov jump linear systems with time-varying delays. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(5): 4447-4462. doi: 10.3934/math.2021263
    [5] Yanmei Xue, Jinke Han, Ziqiang Tu, Xiangyong Chen . Stability analysis and design of cooperative control for linear delta operator system. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(6): 12671-12693. doi: 10.3934/math.2023637
    [6] Rupak Datta, Ramasamy Saravanakumar, Rajeeb Dey, Baby Bhattacharya . Further results on stability analysis of Takagi–Sugeno fuzzy time-delay systems via improved Lyapunov–Krasovskii functional. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(9): 16464-16481. doi: 10.3934/math.2022901
    [7] Huahai Qiu, Li Wan, Zhigang Zhou, Qunjiao Zhang, Qinghua Zhou . Global exponential periodicity of nonlinear neural networks with multiple time-varying delays. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(5): 12472-12485. doi: 10.3934/math.2023626
    [8] Erfeng Xu, Wenxing Xiao, Yonggang Chen . Local stabilization for a hyperchaotic finance system via time-delayed feedback based on discrete-time observations. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(9): 20510-20529. doi: 10.3934/math.20231045
    [9] Zahra Eidinejad, Reza Saadati, Donal O'Regan, Fehaid Salem Alshammari . Measure of quality and certainty approximation of functional inequalities. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(1): 2022-2031. doi: 10.3934/math.2024100
    [10] Ahmad Y. Al-Dweik, Ryad Ghanam, Gerard Thompson, M. T. Mustafa . Algorithms for simultaneous block triangularization and block diagonalization of sets of matrices. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(8): 19757-19772. doi: 10.3934/math.20231007
  • Many works have been done on Brownian motion or fractional Brownian motion, but few of them have considered the simpler type, Riemann-Liouville fractional Brownian motion. In this paper, we investigate the semilinear stochastic evolution equations driven by Riemann-Liouville fractional Brownian motion with Hurst parameter H<1/2. First, we prove the pth moment exponential stability of mild solution. Then, based on the maximal inequality from Lemma 10 in [1], the uniform boundedness of pth moment of both exact and numerical solutions are studied, and the strong convergence of the exponential Euler method is established as well as the convergence rate. Finally, two multi-dimensional examples are carried out to demonstrate the consistency with theoretical results.



    A matrix ARn×n is said to be stable if all its eigenvalues lie in the open left half plane, i.e., all the eigenvalues of A have negative real parts. It is well-known that a matrix A is stable if and only if there is a positive definite matrix P such that ATP+PA is negative definite. This implies that V(x)=xTPx serves as a quadratic Lyapunov function for the asymptotically stable linear system

    ˙x=Ax.

    In this paper, we consider only real square matrices. Let A be a real n×n matrix. A0 (A0, resp.) means A is a symmetric positive definite (semidefinite, resp.) matrix.

    For the sake of convenience, we will adopt the concept of positive stability. A matrix ARn×n is defined as positive stable if all its eigenvalues possess positive real parts. Clearly, if A is positive stable, then A is stable. Therefore, results in positive stability can be translated into terms of stability.

    It is well-established that a matrix ARn×n is positive stable if and only if there exists P0 in Rn×nsuch that

    ATP+PA0. (1.1)

    In this case, P is known as a Lyapunov solution for A or to the Lyapunov inequality (1.1). Several numerical methods have been developed to address the problem of finding such matrices P [1,2,3].

    A particular case emerges from (1.1) when a positive diagonal matrix D satisfies the Lyapunov inequality. If so, D is called a Lyapunov diagonal solution for A. Furthermore, we say that A is a Lyapunov diagonally stable matrix. The problem of Lyapunov diagonal stability is well investigated in the literature ([4,5,6,7,8,9] and the references therein). The importance of this problem is due to its applications in, most significantly, population dynamics [10], communication networks [11], and systems theory [12].

    Another case of (1.1), known as Lyapunov α-scalar stability, appeard in [13]. For a partition α={α1,,αs} of the set {1,,n}, the diagonal solution D has an α-scalar structure, i.e. D[αi]=ciI, ciR, i=1,,s, where D[αi] is the principal submatrix of D on row and column indices αi. A set α={α1,,αs}, 1sn, is said to be a partition of {1,,n} if for all i,j{1,,s}, αi, αiαj=, and αiαs={1,,n}. We assume, without loss of generality, that these αi's are taken to have contiguous indices because our results are applicable with simultaneous row and column permutations.

    For brevity, if ARk×k is a Lyapunov diagonally stable matrix, we will write ALDSk. Similarly, we write ALDSαk if A is Lyapunov α-scalar stable.

    A recent generalization of Lyapunov diagonal stability to a family of real matrices of the same size, A={A(i)}ri=1, has drawn significant interest [14,15,16,17,18]. This extension studies the existence of a diagonal matrix D0 satisfying

    (A(i))TD+DA(i)0, (1.2)

    i=1,,r. If such matrix D exists, it is known as a common Lyapunov diagonal solution for A or to (1.2). Consequently, we say A has common Lyapunov diagonal stability. From this definition, it is clear that common Lyapunov diaognal stability can be interpreted as simultaneous Laypunov diagonal stability for the matrices in A. The existence of a common Lyapunov diagonal solution D for A implies that V(x)=xTDx acts as a common Lyapunov diagonal function for the collection of asymptotically stable linear systems

    ˙x=A(i)x,i=1,,r.

    An immediate observation here is that when A=A, i.e., A is a singleton, ACLDS is equivalent to ALDS, and ACLDSα is equivalent to ALDSα. Additionally, it is worth mentioning that the cardinality of A is not relevant. For convenience, we shall fix it to be r throughout the rest of this note.

    Applications of common Lyapunov diagonal stability have been found in the fields of large-scale dynamics [19,20,21,22], as well as in the study of interconnected time-varying and switched systems [18]. Beyond these practical applications, common Lyapunov diagonal stability is also a significant research topic in itself, as evidenced by works such as [14,16,17,23].

    Let ARn×n be a nonsingular matrix. In [24], Redheffer proved that ALDSn if and only if the (n1)×(n1) leading principal submatrices of A and A1 have a common Lyapunov diagonal solution. This result has been restated in [16,23] using the notion of Schur complements. The new statement is free of the nonsingularity condition. Specifically, it was shown that a matrix ALDSn if and only if ann>0 and the (n1)×(n1) leading principal submatrix of A and its Schur complement have a common Lyapunov diagonal solution.

    For any vectors u,vRn, when we write uv, it means ui>vi for all i{1,,n}. For a matrix ARn×n, the vector uRn with ui=aii, for i=1,,n, is denoted by diag(A). We denote the identity matrix IRk×k by Ik and the matrix of all ones in Rk×k by Jk.

    Let A=[aij],B=[bij]Rn×n and CRm×m. The Hadamard product of A and B is denoted by AB=[aijbij]Rn×n. The Kronecker product of A and C is denoted by AC=[aijC]Rnm×nm.

    Let n,mN and for i=1,,n, let miN such that m=m1++mn, where nm. Then, a matrix SRm×m is an n by n block matrix if it is partitioned into blocks that conform with mi, i=1,,n. Moreover, we denote each mj by mk block of S as Sjk. Similarly, a vector uRm is called an n-block vector if it is partitioned into n subvectors, i.e., uT=[uTm1uTmn], where umiRmi, i=1,,n. Throughout this note, it is assumed that n,m and all mi, i=1,,n, are natural number with nm and m=m1++mn.

    The Khatri-Rao product of a matrix A=[aij]Rn×n and an n by n block matrix B=[Bij]Rm×m is defined as AB=[aijBij]Rm×m. Similarly, let v=[vi]Rn and u=[umi]Rm be n-block vector, then vu=[viumi]Rm.

    Suppose that α{1,,k}, |α| is the cardinality of α and αc={1,,n}α. We denote the principal submatrix of A obtained by selecting rows and columns indexed by α as A[α]. Similarly, for a vector uRk, u[α] represents the subvector of u containing only the elements indexed by α.

    Lemma 1.1. ([25,Corollary 4.2.13]) Let ARn×n and BRm×m. If A and B are both positive semidefinite matrices then ABRnm×nm is also a positive semidefinite matrix.

    Lemma 1.2. ([26,Theorem 3.1]) Let ARn×n be a positive definite matrix. If BRm×m is a positive semidefinite n by n block matrix with Bii0, i=1,,m, then AB0.

    For the remainder of this note, Q=[qij]Rm×m denotes the nonzero n by n block matrix defined as

    (Qij)kl={1if k=l0if kl. (1.3)

    Additionally, for an n by n block matrix BRm×m, we define the matrix T(B)Rn×n such that (T(B))ij=(Bij)11.

    Now, let us recall the definition of a P-matrix. A matrix whose principal minors are all positive is known as a P-matrix. A well-known characterization for P-matrices in the context of real matrices is given next.

    Lemma 1.3. ([27,Theorem 3.3]) A matrix ARn×n is a P-matrix if and only if ui(Au)i>0 for all nonzero uRn.

    Motivated by Lemma 1.3, a generalization of the concept of P-matrices to Pα-matrices has been developed in [13].

    Definition 1.1. Let ARn×n and α={α1,,αs} be a partition of {1,,n}. Then, A is a Pα-matrix if there is some k{1,,s} such that u[αk]T(Au)[αk]>0 for all nonzero uRn.

    For ARk×k, APk indicates that A is a P-matrix, while APαk means that A is Pα-matrix.

    Using the characterization in Lemma 1.3 and Definition 1.1, the P-matrix and Pα-matrix properties were extended in [17,28], respectively, to consider a family of real matrices.

    Definition 1.2. Let A={A(i)}ri=1 be a family of real n×n matrices. Then, A is called a P-set and write APn if for any family of vectors {u(i)}ri=1 in Rn, not all being zero, there is some k{1,,n} such that

    ri=1u(i)k(A(i)u(i))k>0.

    Definition 1.3. Let A={A(i)}ri=1 be a family of real n×n matrices and α={α1,,αs} be a partition of {1,,n}. Then, A is called a Pα-set and write APαn if for any family of vectors {u(i)}ri=1 in Rn, not all being zero, there is some k{1,,s} such that

    ri=1u(i)[αk]T(A(i)u(i))[αk]>0.

    Theorem 1.4. ([14,Theorem 2]) Let A={A(i)}ri=1 be a family of matrices such that A(i)Rn×n, i=1,,r. Then, ACLDSn if and only if the matrix

    ri=1A(i)H(i)

    has a positive diagonal entry for any H(i)0 in Rn×n, i=1,,r, not all being zero.

    Theorem 1.5. ([17,Theorem 2.5]) Let A={A(i)}ri=1 be a family of matrices such that A(i)Rn×n, i=1,,r. Then, the following are equivalent:

    (i) ACLDSn.

    (ii) {A(i)S(i)}ri=1CLDSn for all S(i)0, with diag(S(i))0 for i=1,,r.

    (iii) {A(i)S(i)}ri=1CLDSn for all S(i)0, with diag(S(i))=e for i=1,,r.

    (iv) {A(i)S(i)}ri=1Pn for all S(i)0, with diag(S(i))0 for i=1,,r.

    (v) {A(i)S(i)}ri=1Pn for all S(i)0, with diag(S(i))=e for i=1,,r.

    The above two theorems provide characterizations for common Lyapunov diagonal stability. Theorem 1.4 extends Theorem 1 from [4], while Theorem 1.5 is inspired by the work of Kraaijevanger [8]. The primary objective of our work is to offer additional characterizations that enhance and unify the existing results in the literature.

    We begin this section with a lemma that gives a necessary condition for the common Lyapunov diagonal stability.

    Lemma 2.1. ([17,Theorem 2.3]) Let A={A(i)}ri=1 be a family of real n×n matrices. If ACLDSn, then APn.

    Next, we demonstrate that if a family of matrices A of the same size forms a P-set, then any family of principal submatrices of A obtained by deleting the same rows and columns also forms a P-set.

    Lemma 2.2. Let A={A(i)}ri=1 be a family of real n×n matrices and α{1,,n}. If APn, then B={A[α]}ri=1P|α|.

    Proof. For i=1,,r, let v(i)R|α|, not all being zero. Then, for each i, construct u(i)Rn to be such that u(i)[α]=v(i) and u(i)[αc]=0. Clearly, not all these u(i)'s are zero vectors since not all v(i)'s are zero. Hence, since APn, there is some k{1,,n} such that

    ri=1u(i)k(A(i)u(i))k>0.

    Observe that for each i, u(i)k=v(i)l and (A(i)u(i))k=(A[α](i)v(i))l for some lα. Otherwise, the above summation equals zero. From this observation, we obtain that

    ri=1v(i)l(A(i)[α]v(i))l>0.

    Therefore, by Definition 1.2, BP|α|.

    We are now ready to present our main theorem.

    Theorem 2.3. Let A={A(i)}ri=1 be a family of matrices such that A(i)Rn×n for i=1,,r. Then, the following are equivalent:

    (i) ACLDSn.

    (ii) {A(i)S(i)}ri=1CLDSm for all n by n block matrices S(i)0 in Rm×m with S(i)jj0 for all i=1,,r and j=1,,n.

    (iii) {A(i)S(i)}ri=1CLDSm for all n by n block matrices S(i)0 in Rm×m with S(i)jj=Imj for all i=1,,r and j=1,,n.

    (iv) {A(i)S(i)}ri=1Pm for all n by n block matrices S(i)0 in Rm×m with S(i)jj0 for all i=1,,r and j=1,,n.

    (v) {A(i)S(i)}ri=1Pm for all n by n block matrices S(i)0 in Rm×m with S(i)jj=Imj for all i=1,,r and j=1,,n.

    Proof. It is trivial to see that (ii) implies (iii) and (iv) implies (v). Moreover, from Lemma 2.1, it is clear that (ii) implies (iv) and (iii) implies (v). Hence, to finish the proof, we show that (i) implies (ii) and (v) implies (i).

    (i)(ii): Suppose that D0 in Rn×n is a common Lyapunov diagonal solution for A. Then, for i=1,,r, we have (A(i))TD+DA(i)0. Let {S(i)}ri=1 be any family of positive semidefinite n by n block matrices in Rm×m with S(i)jj0 for j=1,,n and i=1,,r. Hence, according to Lemma 1.2, we have

    ((A(i))TD+DA(i))S(i)0, (2.1)

    for i=1,,r. Since we have

    ((A(i))TD+DA(i))S(i)=((A(i))TD)S(i)+(DA(i))S(i),

    it follows from (2.1) that

    ((A(i))TD)S(i)+(DA(i))S(i)0. (2.2)

    Now, observe that

    (DA(i))S(i)=(DIm)(A(i)S(i)),

    and

    ((A(i))TD)S(i)=(A(i)S(i))T(DIm)

    for each i, where ImRm×m is the identity matrix partitioned into n by n blocks. Using these observations, it follows from (2.2) that

    (A(i)S(i))T(DIm)+(DIm)(A(i)S(i))0,

    for i=1,,r. Clearly, the diagonal matrix DImRm×m is positive definite. Hence, (ii) follows.

    (v)(i): For i=1,,r, let X(i)=[x(i)kl]0 in Rn×n, not all being zero. Now, set D(i) to be the diagonal matrices whose diagonal elements d(i)kk=x(i)kk for all i=1,,r and k=1,,n. Thus, for each i, we can write X(i)=D(i)S(i)D(i) for some S(i)=[s(i)kl]0 in Rn×n with skk=1, k=1,,n. Next, let us fix p=max{m1,,mn}. Then, by Lemma 1.1, S(i)Ip0 in Rnp×np, i=1,r. Observe that for each i, S(i)QRm×m is a principal submatrix of S(i)Ip, where Q is a matrix defined as in (1.3). Therefore, we conclude that S(i)Q0, with (S(i)Q)jj=Imj, i=1,,r, j=1,,n. By (v), {A(i)(S(i))Q)}ri=1Pm. So, we obtain from Lemma 2.2 that {T(A(i)(S(i)Q))}ri=1Pn. Now, let u(i)Rn×n, i=1,,r, be such that u(i)k=d(i)kk, k=1,,n. It is clear that not all u(i) are zero vectors. Thus, from the definition of P-sets, we must have

    ri=1u(i)q[(T(A(i)(S(i)Q)))u(i)]q>0

    for some q{1,,n}. Hence, it follows that

    ri=1u(i)q[(T(A(i)S(i)Q))u(i)]q=ri=1d(i)qqnk=1(T(A(i)S(i)Q))qkd(i)kk=ri=1d(i)qqnk=1(T((A(i)S(i))Q))qkd(i)kk=ri=1d(i)qqnk=1(a(i)qks(i)qkQqk)11d(i)kk=ri=1d(i)qqnk=1a(i)qks(i)qkd(i)kk=ri=1nk=1a(i)qkd(i)qqs(i)qkd(i)kk=ri=1nk=1a(i)qkx(i)qk=ri=1nk=1a(i)qkx(i)kq=(ri=1A(i)X(i))qq>0.

    From this last inequality and by Theorem 1.4, (i) holds.

    The proof is complete now.

    To demonstrate the validity of Theorem 2.3, consider the following example.

    Example 2.1. Let n=2, m=3, m1=2, and m2=1. Then, consider the family A={A(i)}2i=1, where

    A(1)=[2103]andA(2)=[1104].

    According to Theorem 2.3, to show that ACLDS2 it suffices to show that {A(i)S(i)}2i=1P3 for any 2 by 2 block matrices S(i)0 in R3×3 with S(i)jj=Imj for all i=1,2 and j=1,2. Now, consider the matrices

    S(1)=[10s(1)1301s(1)23s(1)13s(1)231]andS(2)=[10s(2)1301s(2)23s(2)13s(2)231].

    Hence, we have

    A(1)S(1)=[20s(1)1302s(1)23003]andA(2)S(2)=[10s(2)1301s(2)23004].

    Next, for i=1,2, let u(i) be any vectors in R3. Thus, a simple calculation shows that

    (A(1)S(1))u(1)=[2u(1)1s(1)13u(1)32u(1)2s(1)23u(1)33u(1)3]and(A(2)S(2))u(2)=[u(2)1s(2)13u(2)3u(2)2s(2)23u(2)34u(2)3].

    If at least one of u(1)3 and u(2)3 is nonzero, then 2i=1u(i)3(A(i)u(i))3>0. Otherwise, we must have

    (A(1)S(1))u(1)=[2u(1)12u(1)20]and(A(2)S(2))u(2)=[u(2)1u(2)20].

    Since u(1) and u(2) are not both zero vectors, then we must have k{1,2} such that 2i=1u(i)k(A(i)u(i))k>0. That means {A(i)S(i)}2i=1P3. Therefore, from Theorem 2.3, this implies that ACLDS2. In fact, we found that

    D=[21]

    is a common Lyapunov diagonal solution for A.

    We emphasize here that Theorem 2.6 is equivalent to Theorem 1.5 when m=n. Before we proceed with the presentation of further results, we cite the following two lemmas from [28].

    Lemma 2.4. ([28,Lemma 3.2]) Let A={A(i)}ri=1 be a family of real n×n matrices and α be any partition of {1,,n}. If ACLDSαn, then APαn.

    Lemma 2.5. ([28,Proposition 4.1]) Let A={A(i)}ri=1 be a family of real n×n matrices and α be any partition of {1,,n}. If APαn, then APn.

    For the remainder of this paper, let α={α1,,αn} is a partition of {1,,m} such that α1={1,,m1},α2={m1+1,,m1+m2},,αn={mmn+1,,m}. With this notation established, we now provide another characterization of common Lyapunov diagonal stability.

    Theorem 2.6. Let A={A(i)}ri=1 be a family of matrices such that A(i)Rn×n for i=1,,r. Then, the following are equivalent:

    (i) ACLDSn.

    (ii) {A(i)S(i)}ri=1CLDSαm for all n by n block matrices S(i)0 in Rm×m with S(i)jj0 for all i=1,,r and j=1,,n.

    (iii) {A(i)S(i)}ri=1CLDSαm for all n by n block matrices S(i)0 in Rm×m with S(i)jj=Imj for all i=1,,r and j=1,,n.

    (iv) {A(i)S(i)}ri=1Pαm for all n by n block matrices S(i)0 in Rm×m with S(i)jj0 for all i=1,,r and j=1,,n.

    (v) {A(i)S(i)}ri=1Pαm for all n by n block matrices S(i)0 in Rm×m with S(i)jj=Imj for all i=1,,r and j=1,,n.

    Proof. It is clear that (ii)(iii) and (iv)(v). In addition, according to Lemma 2.4, (ii)(iv) and (iii)(v).

    (i)(ii): Let {S(i)}ri=1 be a family of positive semidefinite matrices given as in (ii) and D be a common Lyapunov diagonal solution for A. Then, DIm is a positive α-scalar matrix, where ImRm×m is the identity matrix partitioned into n by n blocks. Thus, as we have seen in the proof of Theorem 2.3, we have

    (A(i)S(i))T(DIm)+(DIm)(A(i)S(i))0,

    for i=1,,r.

    (v)(i): Using Lemma 2.5, we can see that (v) here implies (v) in Theorem 2.3. Therefore, (i) holds.

    Now, we extend Theorem 2.6 by considering different partitions of {1,,m}. Before presenting our next result, let us set the stage first.

    Let us define a bijective function τ:αiβi that maps each element jαi to some βi for i{1,,n}. Hence, τ is a permutation of {1,,m}, and β is a partition of {1,,m}. Clearly, for every i, the cardinality of αi is the same as the cardinality of βi. For the remainder of this section, β denotes such partitions. In addition, construct the permutation matrix P such that Pjτ(j)=1 for all j=1,,m and zero everywhere else. For any permutation matrix P, we write CP=PCPT, where CRm×m. Then, the following observation can be easily verified.

    Observation 2.1. Let P be a permutation matrix associated with some partition β. Then, we have

    (1) S0 (S0, resp.) if and only if SP0 (SP0, resp.), SRm×m.

    (2) D is β-scalar matrix if and only if DP is α-scalar matrix, DRm×m.

    (3) {A(i)}ri=1Pβm if and only if {A(i)P}ri=1Pαm, where A(i)Rm×m, i=1,,r.

    Lemma 2.7. Let A={A(i)}ri=1 be a family of matrices such that A(i)Rn×n for i=1,,r and P be a permutation matrix associated with some partition β. Then, {A(i)}ri=1CLDSβn if and only if {A(i)P}ri=1CLDSαn.

    Proof. The conclusion follows directly from observation 1 and noting that

    ((A(i))TD+DA(i))P=(A(i))TPDP+DPA(i)P,

    for all i.

    Theorem 2.8. Let A={A(i)}ri=1 be a family of matrices such that A(i)Rn×n for i=1,,r and P be a permutation matrix associated with some partition β. Then, the following are equivalent:

    (i) ACLDSn.

    (ii) {(PT(A(i)Jm)P)S(i)}ri=1CLDSβm for all matrices S(i)0 in Rm×m with S(i)[βj]0 for all i=1,,r and j=1,,n.

    (iii) {(PT(A(i)Jm)P)S(i)}ri=1CLDSβm for all matrices S(i)0 in Rm×m with S(i)[βj]=Imj for all i=1,,r and j=1,,n.

    (iv) {(PT(A(i)Jm)P)S(i)}ri=1Pβm for all matrices S(i)0 in Rm×m with S(i)[βj]0 for all i=1,,r and j=1,,n.

    (v) {(PT(A(i)Jm)P)S(i)}ri=1Pβm for all matrices S(i)0 in Rm×m with S(i)[βj]=Imj for all i=1,,r and j=1,,n.

    Proof. Clearly, the condition (ii) gives (iii) and (iv) gives (v). Moreover, (ii) leads to (iv) and (iii) to (v) by Lemma 2.4.

    (i)(ii): For i=1,,r, let S(i)0 in Rm×m be given as in (ii). Then, for each i, S(i)P0 n by n block matrix with (S(i)P)jj0, j=1,,n. Hence, it follows from Theorem 2.6 that {A(i)S(i)P}ri=1CLDSαm. Now, by observing that

    A(i)S(i)P=(A(i)Jm)S(i)P=((PT(A(i)Jm)P)S(i))P (2.3)

    for each i, we conclude that {((PT(A(i)Jm)P)S(i))P}ri=1CLDSαm. Hence, by Lemma 2.7, (ii) follows.

    (v)(i): From observation 1, {((PT(A(i)Jm)P)S(i))P}ri=1Pαm. This, by (2.3), means {A(i)S(i)P}ri=1Pαm. Finally, using Theorem 2.6, we obtain (i). This completes the proof.

    A final remark before moving to the next section is that Theorems 2.3, 2.6, and 2.8 are equivalent to Theorems 4, 9, and 10 in [29] when A is a singleton.

    In this section, we generalize the main results of Section 2 to provide more characterizations for common Lyapunov α-scalar stability. In this section, let γ={γ1,,γs} be any partition of {1,,n}. Then, δ={δ1,,δs}, where

    δ1=|γ1|i=1αi,δ2=|γ1|+|γ2|i=|γ1|+1αi,,δs=ni=n|γs|+1αi

    is a partition of {1,,m}, where α={α1,,αn} is the partition of {1,,m} defined in Section 2.

    Lemma 3.1. Let A={A(i)}ri=1 be a family of matrices such that A(i)Rn×n for i=1,,r and γ={γ1,,γs} be any partition of {1,,n}. If {A(i)Q}ri=1Pδm, then {T(A(i)Q)}ri=1Pγn.

    Proof. Let u(i)Rn, i=1,,r, not all being zero. Then, let v=[vmj]Rm be the nonzero n-block vector defined as follows

    (vmj)k={1if k=10if k1.

    Then, for each i, choose z(i)=u(i)v. Clearly, z(i)Rm, i=1,,r, and not all being zero vectors since not all u(i) are zero. Furthermore, we have T(z(i))=u(i) and T(z(i)[δl])=u(i)[γl] for l{1,,s}. Now, because {A(i)Q}ri=1Pδm, there is some l{1,s} such that

    ri=1z(i)[δl]T((A(i)Q)z(i))[δl]>0 (3.1)

    Now, observe that

    ri=1z(i)[δl]T((A(i)Q)z(i))[δl]=ri=1T(z(i)[δl]T)T(((A(i)Q)z(i))[δl]).

    Consequently, it follows from (3.1) that

    0<ri=1z(i)[δl]T((A(i)Q)z(i))[δl]=ri=1T(z(i)[δl]T)T(((A(i)Q)z(i))[δl])=ri=1u(i)[γl]T(T(A(i)Q)T(z(i)))[γl]=ri=1u(i)[γl]T(T(A(i)Q)u(i))[γl].

    Therefore, by Definition 1.3, the result follows.

    Lemma 3.2. ([28,Corollary 2.1]) Let A={A(i)}ri=1 be a family of matrices such that A(i)Rn×n for i=1,,r and γ={γ1,,γs} be a partition of {1,,n}. Then, ACLDSγn if and only if there is l{1,,s} such that

    trri=1(A(i)X(i))[γl]>0

    for any X(i)0, X(i)Rn×n, i=1,,r, not all being zero matrices.

    Theorem 3.3. Let A={A(i)}ri=1 be a family of matrices such that A(i)Rn×n for i=1,,r and γ={γ1,,γs} be any partition of {1,,n}. Then, the following are equivalent:

    (i) ACLDSγn.

    (ii) {A(i)S(i)}ri=1CLDSδm for all n by n block matrices S(i)0 in Rm×m with S(i)jj0 for all i=1,,r and j=1,,n.

    (iii) {A(i)S(i)}ri=1CLDSδm for all n by n block matrices S(i)0 in Rm×m with S(i)jj=Imj for all i=1,,r and j=1,,n.

    (iv) {A(i)S(i)}ri=1Pδm for all n by n block matrices S(i)0 in Rm×m with S(i)jj0 for all i=1,,r and j=1,,n.

    (v) {A(i)S(i)}ri=1Pδm for all n by n block matrices S(i)0 in Rm×m with S(i)jj=Imj for all i=1,,r and j=1,,n.

    Proof. It is clear that (ii) implies (iii) and (iv) implies (v). Besides, from Lemma 2.4, it is clear that (ii) implies (iv) and (iii) implies (v).

    (i)(ii): Clearly, if D is a positive γ-scalar matrix, then DIm is a positive δ-scalar matrix. Moreover, if D is a common Lyapunov γ-scalar solution for A, then, by Lemma 1.2, for any S(i)'s given as in (ii), we have

    ((A(i))TD+DA(i))S(i)=(A(i)S(i))T(DIm)+(DIm)(A(i)S(i))0,

    for i=1,,r. This last inequality means that {A(i)S(i)}ri=1 has (DIm) as a common Lyapunov δ-scalar solution.

    (v)(i): Let X(i)=[xkl]0, X(i)Rn×n i=1,,r, not all being zero. Next, let D(i)Rn×n, i=1,,r, be a diagonal matrix such that d(i)kk=x(i)kk for j=1,,n. Thus, for each i, there is S(i)=[skl]0, S(i)Rn×n with s(i)kk=1, k=1,,n, such that X(i)=D(i)S(i)D(i). By setting p=max{m1,,mn}, we conclude, using to Lemma 1.1, that S(i)Ip0 in Rnp×np, i=1,,r. Since, for each i, S(i)Q is a principal submatrix of S(i)Ip, then S(i)Q0, Q here is the matrix in (1.3). Furthermore, each diagonal block (S(i)Q)jj=Imj, i=1,,r. So, {A(i)(S(i)Q)}ri=1={(A(i)S(i))Q}ri=1Pδm, by (v). Consequently, according to Lemma 3.1, {T((A(i)S(i))Q)}ri=1Pγn. Set u(i)=D(i)e, i=1,,r, where e is the vector of all ones in Rn. By the construction of these u(i)'s, it is easy to see that not all of them are zero vectors. Therefore, there is some index q{1,,s} such that

    ri=1u(i)[γq]T((T((A(i)S(i))Q))u(i))[γq]=ri=1(D(i)e)[γq]T((T((A(i)S(i))Q))(D(i)e))[γq]=ri=1e[γq]TD(i)[γq]((T((A(i)(S(i)D(i)))Q))e)[γq]=ri=1e[γq]T((T((A(i)(D(i)S(i)D(i)))Q))e)[γq]=ri=1e[γq]T((T((A(i)X(i))Q))e)[γq]=ri=1e[γq]T((A(i)X(i))e)[γq]=trri=1(A(i)X(i))[γq]>0.

    Therefore, (i) follows by Lemma 3.2. This finishes the proof.

    This last Theorem can be generalized to provide more characterizations for common Lyapunov α-scalar stability. Recall that in Section 2, we defined β to be a partition of {1,,m} obtained from α through a permutation function τ. Using this notation and the definition of δ above, for any partition γ={γ1,,γs} of {1,,n}, we define another partition of {1,,m} called ϵ={ϵ1.,ϵs}, where

    ϵ1=|γ1|i=1βi,ϵ2=|γ1|+|γ2|i=|γ1|+1βi,,ϵs=ni=n|γs|+1βi.

    Clearly, if we replace α with δ and β with ϵ, Observation 1 will hold true for a permutation matrix P associated with β. Now, we have the following theorem, whose proof follows the lines of the proof of Theorem 2.8 and is therefore omitted.

    Theorem 3.4. Let A={A(i)}ri=1 be a family of matrices such that A(i)Rn×n for i=1,,r and γ={γ1,,γs} be any partition of {1,,n}. In addition, let P be a permutation matrix associated with some partition β. Then, the following are equivalent:

    (i) ACLDSγn.

    (ii) {(PT(A(i)Jm)P)S(i)}ri=1CLDSϵm for all matrices S(i)0 in Rm×m with S(i)[ϵj]0 for all i=1,,r and j=1,,n.

    (iii) {(PT(A(i)Jm)P)S(i)}ri=1CLDSϵm for all matrices S(i)0 in Rm×m with S(i)[ϵj]=Imj for all i=1,,r and j=1,,n.

    (iv) {(PT(A(i)Jm)P)S(i)}ri=1Pϵm for all matrices S(i)0 in Rm×m with S(i)[ϵj]0 for all i=1,,r and j=1,,n.

    (v) {(PT(A(i)Jm)P)S(i)}ri=1Pϵm for all matrices S(i)0 in Rm×m with S(i)[ϵj]=Imj for all i=1,,r and j=1,,n.

    We remark here that Theorems 3.3 and 3.4 are the same as Theorems 2.6 and 2.8, respectively, when γ={{1},{2},,{n}}. Additionally, when r=1, i.e., A is a singleton, these last two theorems reduce to the following corollaries, whose proofs shall be omitted.

    Corollary 3.5. Let ARn×n and γ={γ1,,γs} be any partition of {1,,n}. Then, the following are equivalent:

    (i) ALDSγn.

    (ii) ASLDSδm for all n by n block matrices S0 in Rm×m with Sjj0, j=1,,n.

    (iii) ASLDSδm for all n by n block matrices S0 in Rm×m with Sjj=Imj, j=1,,n.

    (iv) ASPδm for all n by n block matrices S0 in Rm×m with Sjj0, j=1,,n.

    (v) ASPδm for all n by n block matrices S0 in Rm×m with Sjj=Imj, j=1,,n.

    Corollary 3.6. Let ARn×n and γ={γ1,,γs} be any partition of {1,,n}. In addition, let P be a permutation matrix associated with some partition β. Then, the following are equivalent:

    (i) ALDSγn.

    (ii) (PT(AJm)P)SLDSϵm for all matrices S0 in Rm×m with S[ϵj]0, j=1,,n.

    (iii) (PT(AJm)P)SLDSϵm for all matrices S0 in Rm×m with S[ϵj]=Imj, j=1,,n.

    (iv) (PT(AJm)P)SPϵm for all matrices S0 in Rm×m with S[ϵj]0, j=1,,n.

    (v) (PT(AJm)P)SPϵm for all matrices S0 in Rm×m with S[ϵj]=Imj, j=1,,n.

    Motivated by the work in [29], we have presented new characterizations for common Lyapunov diagonal stability using the Khatri-Rao product. The notions of P-sets and Pα-sets have been used to formulate these results. Moreover, these characterizations have been extended to the notion of common Lyapunov α-scalar stability. Our work here extends and broadens the scope of results in [17,28].

    The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.

    The Researchers would like to thank the Deanship of Graduate Studies and Scientific Research at Qassim University for financial support (QU-APC-2024-9/1). We would like to extend my sincere gratitude to the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions, which have significantly contributed to improving the quality of this paper.

    The author does not have any conflict of interest.



    [1] E. Alòs, O. Mazet, D. Nualart, Stochastic calculus with respect to fractional Brownian motion with Hurst parameter lesser than 1/2, Stoch. Proc. Appl., 86 (2000), 121–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4149(99)00089-7 doi: 10.1016/S0304-4149(99)00089-7
    [2] A. N. Kolmogorov, The Wiener spiral and some other interesting curves in Hilbert space, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR, 26 (1940), 115–118.
    [3] B. B. Mandelbrot, J. W. Van Ness, Fractional Brownian motions, fractional noises and applications, SIAM Rev., 10 (1968), 422–437. https://doi.org/10.1137/1010093 doi: 10.1137/1010093
    [4] S. Rostek, R. Schöbel, A note on the use of fractional Brownian motion for financial modeling, Econ. Model., 30 (2013), 30–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2012.09.003 doi: 10.1016/j.econmod.2012.09.003
    [5] A. Gupta, S. D. Joshi, P. Singh, On the approximate discrete KLT of fractional Brownian motion and applications, J. Franklin I., 355 (2018), 8989–9016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfranklin.2018.09.023 doi: 10.1016/j.jfranklin.2018.09.023
    [6] P. Guasoni, Z. Nika, M. Rásonyi, Trading fractional Brownian motion, SIAM J. Financ. Math., 10 (2019), 769–789. https://doi.org/10.1137/17M113592X doi: 10.1137/17M113592X
    [7] S. N. I. Ibrahim, M. Misiran, M. F. Laham, Geometric fractional Brownian motion model for commodity market simulation, Alex. Eng. J., 60 (2021), 955–962. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2020.10.023 doi: 10.1016/j.aej.2020.10.023
    [8] P. Allegrini, M. Buiatti, P. Grigolini, B. J. West, Fractional Brownian motion as a nonstationary process: An alternative paradigm for DNA sequences, Phys. Rev. E, 57 (1998), 4558. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.57.4558 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.57.4558
    [9] K. Burnecki, E. Kepten, J. Janczura, I. Bronshtein, Y. Garini, A. Weron, Universal algorithm for identification of fractional Brownian motion. A case of telomere subdiffusion, Biophys. J., 103 (2012), 1839–1847. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpj.2012.09.040 doi: 10.1016/j.bpj.2012.09.040
    [10] A. Pashko, Simulation of telecommunication traffic using statistical models of fractional Brownian motion, IEEE 2017 4th Int. Sci.-Pract. Conf. Prob. Infocommun., 2017,414–418. https://doi.org/10.1109/INFOCOMMST.2017.8246429
    [11] A. O. Pashko, I. V. Rozora, Accuracy of simulation for the network traffic in the form of fractional Brownian motion, IEEE 2018 14th Int. Conf. Adv. Trends Radioelecrtron. Telecommun. Comput. Eng., 2018,840–845. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCSET.2018.8336328
    [12] X. Song, X. Li, S. Song, Y. Zhang, Z. Ning, Quasi-synchronization of coupled neural networks with reaction-diffusion terms driven by fractional Brownian motion, J. Franklin I., 358 (2021), 2482–2499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfranklin.2021.01.023 doi: 10.1016/j.jfranklin.2021.01.023
    [13] S. Kumar, A. Kumar, Z. M. Odibat, A nonlinear fractional model to describe the population dynamics of two interacting species, Math. Method. Appl. Sci., 40 (2017), 4134–4148. https://doi.org/10.1002/mma.4293 doi: 10.1002/mma.4293
    [14] Q. M. Zhang, X. N. Li, Existence and uniqueness for stochastic age-dependent population with fractional Brownian motion, Math. Prob. Eng., 2012 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/813535
    [15] J. H. Jeon, A. V. Chechkin, R. Metzler, Scaled Brownian motion: A paradoxical process with a time dependent diffusivity for the description of anomalous diffusion, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 16 (2014), 15811–15817. https://doi.org/10.1039/C4CP02019G doi: 10.1039/C4CP02019G
    [16] D. Blömker, W. W. Mohammed, C. Nolde, F. Wöhrl, Numerical study of amplitude equations for spdes with degenerate forcing, Int. J. Comput. Math., 89 (2012), 2499–2516. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207160.2012.662591 doi: 10.1080/00207160.2012.662591
    [17] J. Beran, N. Terrin, Testing for a change of the long-memory parameter, Biometrika, 83 (1996), 627–638. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/83.3.627 doi: 10.1093/biomet/83.3.627
    [18] S. Lin, Stochastic analysis of fractional Brownian motions, Stochastics, 55 (1995), 121–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/17442509508834021 doi: 10.1080/17442509508834021
    [19] W. Dai, C. Heyde, Itô's formula with respect to fractional Brownian motion and its application, Int. J. Stoch. Anal., 9 (1996), 439–448. https://doi.org/10.1155/S104895339600038X doi: 10.1155/S104895339600038X
    [20] T. E. Duncan, Y. Hu, B. Pasik-Duncan, Stochastic calculus for fractional Brownian motion I. Theory, SIAM J. Control Optim., 38 (2000), 582–612. https://doi.org/10.1137/S036301299834171X doi: 10.1137/S036301299834171X
    [21] M. Zähle, Integration with respect to fractal functions and stochastic calculus I, Probab. Theory Rel., 111 (1998), 333–374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004400050171 doi: 10.1007/s004400050171
    [22] E. Alos, J. A. León, D. Nualart, Stochastic Stratonovich calculus fbm for fractional Brownian motion with Hurst parameter less than 1/2, Taiwanese J. Math., 5 (2001), 609–632. https://doi.org/10.11650/twjm/1500574954 doi: 10.11650/twjm/1500574954
    [23] E. Alòs, D. Nualart, Stochastic integration with respect to the fractional Brownian motion, Stoch. Stoch. Rep., 75 (2003), 129–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045112031000078917 doi: 10.1080/1045112031000078917
    [24] P. Cheridito, D. Nualart, Stochastic integral of divergence type with respect to fractional Brownian motion with Hurst parameter h(0,1), Ann. I. H. Poincare, 41 (2005), 1049–1081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anihpb.2004.09.004 doi: 10.1016/j.anihpb.2004.09.004
    [25] S. Lim, V. Sithi, Asymptotic properties of the fractional Brownian motion of Riemann-Liouville type, Phys. Lett. A, 206 (1995), 311–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/0375-9601(95)00627-F doi: 10.1016/0375-9601(95)00627-F
    [26] F. Biagini, Y. Hu, B. Øksendal, T. Zhang, Stochastic calculus for fractional Brownian motion and applications, Springer Science and Business Media, London, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-797-8
    [27] W. W. Mohammed, D. Blömker, Fast-diffusion limit with large noise for systems of stochastic reaction-diffusion equations, Stoch. Anal. Appl., 34 (2016), 961–978. https://doi.org/10.1080/07362994.2016.1197131 doi: 10.1080/07362994.2016.1197131
    [28] M. Hochbruck, A. Ostermann, Explicit exponential Runge-Kutta methods for semilinear parabolic problems, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 43 (2005), 1069–1090. https://doi.org/10.1137/040611434 doi: 10.1137/040611434
    [29] M. Narayanamurthi, A. Sandu, Efficient implementation of partitioned stiff exponential Runge-Kutta methods, Appl. Numer. Math., 152 (2020), 141–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnum.2020.01.010 doi: 10.1016/j.apnum.2020.01.010
    [30] A. Koskela, A. Ostermann, Exponential Taylor methods: Analysis and implementation, Comput. Math. Appl., 65 (2013), 487–499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.camwa.2012.06.004 doi: 10.1016/j.camwa.2012.06.004
    [31] A. Ostermann, M. Thalhammer, W. Wright, A class of explicit exponential general linear methods, BIT Numer. Math., 46 (2006), 409–431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10543-006-0054-3 doi: 10.1007/s10543-006-0054-3
    [32] M. Hochbruck, A. Ostermann, Exponential multistep methods of Adams-type, BIT Numer. Math., 51 (2011), 889–908. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10543-011-0332-6 doi: 10.1007/s10543-011-0332-6
    [33] C. Shi, Y. Xiao, C. Zhang, The convergence and MS stability of exponential Euler method for semilinear stochastic differential equations, Abstr. Appl. Anal., 2012 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/350407
    [34] Y. Komori, K. Burrage, A stochastic exponential Euler scheme for simulation of stiff biochemical reaction systems, BIT Numer. Math., 54 (2014), 1067–1085. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10543-014-0485-1 doi: 10.1007/s10543-014-0485-1
    [35] L. Li, Y. Zhang, Stability of exponential Euler method for stochastic systems under Poisson white noise excitations, Int. J. Theor. Phys., 53 (2014), 4267–4274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10773-014-2177-7 doi: 10.1007/s10773-014-2177-7
    [36] P. Hu, C. Huang, Delay dependent asymptotic mean square stability analysis of the stochastic exponential Euler method, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 382 (2021), 113068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cam.2020.113068 doi: 10.1016/j.cam.2020.113068
    [37] F. Mahmoudi, M. Tahmasebi, The Convergence of exponential Euler method for weighted fractional stochastic equations, Comput. Methods Differ. Equ., 10 (2022), 538–548. https://doi.org/10.22034/CMDE.2021.41430.1795 doi: 10.22034/CMDE.2021.41430.1795
    [38] S. G. Samko, A. A. Kilbas, O. I. Marichev, Fractional integrals and derivatives: Theory and applications, Gordon and Breach, Yverdon, 1993.
    [39] M. Zähle, On the link between fractional and stochastic calculus, Stoch. Dynam., 1999,305–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-22655-9_13
    [40] W. W. Mohammed, D. Blömker, Fast-diffusion limit for reaction-diffusion equations with multiplicative noise, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 496 (2021), 124808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmaa.2020.124808 doi: 10.1016/j.jmaa.2020.124808
    [41] T. Caraballo, M. Garrido-Atienza, T. Taniguchi, The existence and exponential behavior of solutions to stochastic delay evolution equations with a fractional brownian motion, Nonlinear Anal.-Theor., 74 (2011), 3671–3684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.na.2011.02.047 doi: 10.1016/j.na.2011.02.047
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Ali Algefary, Diagonal solutions for a class of linear matrix inequality, 2024, 9, 2473-6988, 26435, 10.3934/math.20241286
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2022 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

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(1934) PDF downloads(103) Cited by(0)

Figures and Tables

Figures(6)  /  Tables(2)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog