Research article Special Issues

On fuzzy numerical model dealing with the control of glucose in insulin therapies for diabetes via nonsingular kernel in the fuzzy sense

  • Very recently, several novel conceptions of fractional derivatives have been proposed and employed to develop numerical simulations for a wide range of real-world configurations with memory, background, or non-local effects via an uncertainty parameter [0,1] as a confidence degree of belief. Under the complexities of the uncertainty parameter, the major goal of this paper is to develop and examine the Atangana-Baleanu derivative in the Caputo sense for a convoluted glucose-insulin regulating mechanism that possesses a memory and enables one to recall all foreknowledge. However, as compared to other existing derivatives, this is a vitally important point, and the convenience of employing this derivative lessens the intricacy of numerical findings. The Atangana-Baleanu derivative in the Caputo sense of fuzzy valued functions (FVF) in parameterized interval representation is established initially in this study. Then, it is leveraged to demonstrate that the existence and uniqueness of solutions were verified using the theorem suggesting the Banach fixed point and Lipschitz conditions under generalized Hukuhara differentiability. In order to explore the regulation of plasma glucose in diabetic patients with impulsive insulin injections and by monitoring the glucose level that returns to normal in a finite amount of time, we propose an impulsive differential equation model. It is a deterministic mathematical framework that is connected to diabetes mellitus and fractional derivatives. The framework for this research and simulations was numerically solved using a numerical approach based on the Adams-Bashforth-Moulton technique. The findings of this case study indicate that the fractional-order model's plasma glucose management is a suitable choice.

    Citation: Shao-Wen Yao, Saima Rashid, Mustafa Inc, Ehab E. Elattar. On fuzzy numerical model dealing with the control of glucose in insulin therapies for diabetes via nonsingular kernel in the fuzzy sense[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(10): 17913-17941. doi: 10.3934/math.2022987

    Related Papers:

    [1] Mohammed A. Almalahi, Satish K. Panchal, Fahd Jarad, Mohammed S. Abdo, Kamal Shah, Thabet Abdeljawad . Qualitative analysis of a fuzzy Volterra-Fredholm integrodifferential equation with an Atangana-Baleanu fractional derivative. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(9): 15994-16016. doi: 10.3934/math.2022876
    [2] Saima Rashid, Fahd Jarad, Taghreed M. Jawa . A study of behaviour for fractional order diabetes model via the nonsingular kernel. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 5072-5092. doi: 10.3934/math.2022282
    [3] Rehana Ashraf, Saima Rashid, Fahd Jarad, Ali Althobaiti . Numerical solutions of fuzzy equal width models via generalized fuzzy fractional derivative operators. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 2695-2728. doi: 10.3934/math.2022152
    [4] Muhammad Farman, Ali Akgül, Kottakkaran Sooppy Nisar, Dilshad Ahmad, Aqeel Ahmad, Sarfaraz Kamangar, C Ahamed Saleel . Epidemiological analysis of fractional order COVID-19 model with Mittag-Leffler kernel. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(1): 756-783. doi: 10.3934/math.2022046
    [5] Weerawat Sudsutad, Chatthai Thaiprayoon, Jutarat Kongson, Weerapan Sae-dan . A mathematical model for fractal-fractional monkeypox disease and its application to real data. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(4): 8516-8563. doi: 10.3934/math.2024414
    [6] Ateq Alsaadi . Advancing water quality management: A synergistic approach using fractional differential equations and neural networks. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(3): 5332-5352. doi: 10.3934/math.2025246
    [7] Muhammad Altaf Khan, Muhammad Ismail, Saif Ullah, Muhammad Farhan . Fractional order SIR model with generalized incidence rate. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(3): 1856-1880. doi: 10.3934/math.2020124
    [8] Ranbir Kumar, Sunil Kumar, Jagdev Singh, Zeyad Al-Zhour . A comparative study for fractional chemical kinetics and carbon dioxide CO2 absorbed into phenyl glycidyl ether problems. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(4): 3201-3222. doi: 10.3934/math.2020206
    [9] Shabir Ahmad, Aman Ullah, Mohammad Partohaghighi, Sayed Saifullah, Ali Akgül, Fahd Jarad . Oscillatory and complex behaviour of Caputo-Fabrizio fractional order HIV-1 infection model. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(3): 4778-4792. doi: 10.3934/math.2022265
    [10] A. M. Sayed Ahmed, Hamdy M. Ahmed, Nesreen Sirelkhtam Elmki Abdalla, Assmaa Abd-Elmonem, E. M. Mohamed . Approximate controllability of Sobolev-type Atangana-Baleanu fractional differential inclusions with noise effect and Poisson jumps. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(10): 25288-25310. doi: 10.3934/math.20231290
  • Very recently, several novel conceptions of fractional derivatives have been proposed and employed to develop numerical simulations for a wide range of real-world configurations with memory, background, or non-local effects via an uncertainty parameter [0,1] as a confidence degree of belief. Under the complexities of the uncertainty parameter, the major goal of this paper is to develop and examine the Atangana-Baleanu derivative in the Caputo sense for a convoluted glucose-insulin regulating mechanism that possesses a memory and enables one to recall all foreknowledge. However, as compared to other existing derivatives, this is a vitally important point, and the convenience of employing this derivative lessens the intricacy of numerical findings. The Atangana-Baleanu derivative in the Caputo sense of fuzzy valued functions (FVF) in parameterized interval representation is established initially in this study. Then, it is leveraged to demonstrate that the existence and uniqueness of solutions were verified using the theorem suggesting the Banach fixed point and Lipschitz conditions under generalized Hukuhara differentiability. In order to explore the regulation of plasma glucose in diabetic patients with impulsive insulin injections and by monitoring the glucose level that returns to normal in a finite amount of time, we propose an impulsive differential equation model. It is a deterministic mathematical framework that is connected to diabetes mellitus and fractional derivatives. The framework for this research and simulations was numerically solved using a numerical approach based on the Adams-Bashforth-Moulton technique. The findings of this case study indicate that the fractional-order model's plasma glucose management is a suitable choice.



    Insulin and glucagon enzymes are produced by the pancreas and assist in glucose management. While blood sugar concentrations rise, glucagon is released into the bloodstream by the pancreas. Whenever plasma concentrations are inadequate, glycogen is generated by collapsing glucagon and producing fructose from intravascular components, which improves insulin sensitivity. Diabetes mellitus, often known as diabetes, is an illness that arises if the insulin-glucose connection requires replacement [1]. As a consequence of diverse underlying etiologies of diabetic complications involving persistent hyperglycemia, diabetes mellitus causes disruptions in nutrients, carb, and lipid consumption as a consequence of impaired glucose function, impaired insulin, or perhaps both. Type 1 (hyperglycemic) and type 2 (hypoglycemic) diabetes are the main types of diabetes that individuals can have [2]. Patients with hypoglycemia may be capable of incorporating a continuous glucose monitor (CGM) to optimize and maintain their glycemic concentration. The patient would be aseptically if any irregularities in plasma glucose were discovered. If insulin concentrations are excessively high, a mixture of CGM and insulin injections is applied to regulate glucagon.

    Treatments such as glucose fortification and diet modification are currently available for diabetics. A syringe or an insulin pen is typically used to inject medication subcutaneously [3,4]. As a result, scientists have recently collaborated to overcome an innovation challenge in order to produce a synthetic pancreas that can perform the same endocrine functions as a genuine and normal pancreas [5,6]. Scientists have recently [7] discovered an alternative pancreas, or automatic monitoring mechanism. The proliferation of CGMs is an attempt to put the paradigm of shuttered monitoring into practice. Considering the valuable information accessible, numerous strategies are being created. Closed loop systems, model predictive influence and shaky reasoning regulation are only a few of the applications because of its capability to handle a broad plethora of different restrictions on a traditional premise. Optimal tracking regulation is the more frequently implemented communication measure. It was extremely complicated to fix the challenge of diabetes modulation in artificial pancreas experiments. The primary objectives of an artificial pancreas system are to reduce hypoglycemic episodes and ensure safe recovery from them [8,9,10,11], as well as to accurately alter its settings for glycaemia control in type 1 and type 2 diabetics as well as healthy people [12,13].

    According to several academics and scientists exploring them fractional generalizations of integer-order frameworks constitute a fairly rigorous description of physical phenomena [14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22]. The implementation of fractional DEs has gained in popularity subsequently, and it is now widely employed in numerical simulations in scientific disciplines. Numerous major achievements, including articles and monographs, have been released in the associated domains [23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30]. For modeling purposes, the fractional derivative operators based on power law, exponential decay and Mittag-Leffler kernels can be used [31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38]. These are regarded as appropriate for understanding challenging real concerns, such as complications exhibiting anomalous tendencies, which may be duplicated by employing varying-order differential operators. These techniques have been productively employed in a variety of scientific domains, but biological models have received less consideration. The Atangana-Baleanu-Caputo (ABC)-fractional operator expressing the hereditary property is credited with this crucial breakthrough. The generalized Mittag-Leffler function outperforms the exponential decay and index law kernels due to resilient reminiscence linked in the Atangana-Baleanu fractional derivative. Moreover, the Atangana-Baleanu fractional order derivative is also Liouville-Caputo and Caputo-Fabrizio, indicating that it has both Markovian and non-Markovian features. Because the transmission of certain viral infections is aberrant, neither classical differentiation nor fractional with constant can be employed in these circumstances, although they might be highly valuable strategies for simulating epidemiological challenges [39,40,41].

    Very recently, fractional calculus and DEs have been expanded to fuzzy set theory and fuzzy fractional order DEs, respectively; see [42]. Agrawal et al. [43] explored the idea of finding fractional DEs with correlating fuzziness and expanded Riemann-Liouville differentiability to develop a formulation which is a unification of the Hukuhara difference and the Riemann-Liouville derivative. Several authors have devoted their interests to the notion of a Hukuhara difference, which was contemplated by Bede et al. [44,45]. Several researchers have investigated the existence and uniqueness of solutions via fuzzifications [46]. It is extremely time consuming to estimate increasingly efficient results for each fuzzy fractional DE when interacting with fuzzy fractional DEs. Researchers have invested a considerable amount of time into analyzing fuzzy fractional DEs, employing diverse strategies such as perturbation methods, integral transform methods, and spectral techniques [47,48]. As a consequence of this relevance, we will implement a fractional instance application of strongly generalized differentiability to the control of glucose in insulin treatments for the diabetes model. The main objective of this study is to construct and investigate the Atangana-Baleanu derivative in the Caputo perspective for a comprehensive glucose-insulin governing process that has a memory and is capable of retaining all preconceptions under the complexity of the uncertainty criterion. This is a key distinction from other current derivatives, and using this derivative is convenient, which reduces the complexity of the numerical results. This paper establishes the Atangana-Baleanu derivative in the parameterization interval formulation of fuzzy valued functions (FVFs) in the notion of Caputo. Furthermore, we extend this research by using Banach fixed point and Lipschitz conditions under generalized Hukuhara differentiability in order to verify the existence and uniqueness of solutions. We suggest using an impulsive differential equation model to examine plasma glucose control in diabetics receiving impulsive insulin doses. It is a deterministic mathematical system related to fractional derivatives and diabetes mellitus. The Adams-Bashforth-Moulton technique was used in a numerical method to address the structure for this research's simulations. The outcome of the present investigation suggests that managing plasma glucose using the fractional-order model is an appropriate option.

    Owing to the above propensity, we will suggest ABC fractional differentiability, also known as ABC gH-differentiability, that is predicated on the generalized Hukuhara difference. To develop this conceptualization, a straightforward technique is applied that is determined by a blending of strongly generalized differentiability and the fractional ABC derivative. Taking into account the uncertain ABC fractional derivative, we examined the model for diabetes. Furthermore, the uniqueness and existence conditions of the system alternatives are presented via the contraction mapping theorem and the Lipschitiz strategy. Numerical simulation via the varying fractional order and uncertainty parameters is analyzed in a different manner. It is expected that the projected approach will be helpful in new venues in epidemiological research.

    The remaining portion of the paper is organized as follows: Section 2 presents definitions and formulas for the fractional derivatives and fuzzy set theory. Section 3 illustrates the computational procedure for the suggested fuzzy fractional model for diabetes mellitus. Section 4 is devoted to the implementation of the fuzzy fractional diabetes model utilizing the ABC fractional derivative. Also, numerical simulations have been performed in consideration of an uncertainty parameter in Section 5. At the end, Section 6 describes the conclusions.

    Here, we recall certain fundamental ideas and definitions from fuzzy set theory and fractional calculus; see [14,23,42].

    Definition 2.1. [49,50] A fuzzy number μ of mapping μ:R[0,1] satisfies the subsequent assumptions:

    (a) μ is upper semi continuous.

    (b) μ[ηx1+(1η)y1]min{μ(x1),μ(y1)}.

    (c) μ is normal, that is, there exists x0R;μ(x0)=1.

    (d) cl{yR,μ(y)>0} is compact.

    Definition 2.2. [49] The parameterized version of a fuzzy number μ can be expressed as

    μ[r1]=[μ_(r1),ˉμ(r1)],r1[0,1]. (2.1)

    Th following characterizations hold:

    (a) μ_(r1) is a left continuous, bounded and increasing mapping over [0,1] and right continuous at 0;

    (b) ˉμ(r1) is a right continuous, bounded and decreasing mapping over [0,1] and right continuous at 0;

    (c) μ_(r1)ˉμ(r1).

    r1 is known to be a crisp number if μ_(r1)ˉμ(r1)=0.

    Definition 2.3. [51] For r1[0,1] and two fuzzy numbers μ and ν, the fuzzy algebraic operations are defined as follows:

    (μν)[r1]=[μ_(r1)+ν_(r1),ˉμ(r1)+ˉν(r1)], (2.2)
    (aμ)[r1]={[aμ_(r1),aˉμ(r1)],a0,[aˉμ(r1),aμ_(r1)],a<0. (2.3)

    Assume that FVF ω(t1)CF(J)LF(J) and its parametric form is described as follows:

    [ω(t1)]r1=[ω_(t1;r1),ˉω(t1,r1)],r1[0,1]. (2.4)

    Definition 2.4. [52] The Hausdorff distance ˜d:RF×RFR+{0} is described as follows:

    ˜d(μ,ν)=sup0r11max{|μ_(r1)ν_(r1)|,|ˉμ(r1)ˉν(r1)|}, (2.5)

    where RF represents the set of all fuzzy numbers, and (RF,˜d) is a complete metric space.

    A metric ˜d has the subsequent properties:

    (i) ˜d(μ1μ3,μ2μ3)=˜d(μ1,μ2),μ1,μ2,μ3RF;

    (ii) ˜d(μ1μ3,0)=˜d(μ1,0)+˜d(μ3,0),μ1,μ2,μ3RF;

    (iii) ˜d(μ1μ2,μ1μ3)=˜d(μ2,μ3),μ1,μ2,μ3RF;

    (iv) ˜d(μ1μ2,μ3μ4)=˜d(μ1,μ3)+˜d(μ2,μ4),μ1,μ2,μ3RF;

    (v) ˜d(μ1μ2,μ3μ4)=˜d(μ1,μ3)+˜d(μ2,μ4),μ1,μ2,μ3RF;

    (vi) ˜d(aμ1)=|a|˜d(μ1,μ2),μ1,μ2RF.

    Definition 2.5. [53] The generalized Hukuhara (gH) derivative of a mapping ω(t1) as a solution of model (3.1) can be described as

    gHω(τ)=lim0+ω(τ+)gHω(τ)=lim0+ω(τ)gHω(τ+), (2.6)

    where dω(τ)dt1|gHCF(J)LF(J), and

    ω(τ+)gHω(τ)=z1(τ){(i)ω(τ+)=ω(τ)z1(τ),(ii)ω(τ)=ω(τ+)(1)z1(τ).

    The condition (i) is identical to the Hukuhara difference of ω(τ+)ω(τ) definition. Assuming the definition of gH-difference and an r1-cut of both sides of the aforementioned derivative (2.6), the derivative in the accompanying interval yields the following:

    Case (i): (1-differentiability)

    ȷgH[ω]r1=[ω_(t1;r1),¯ω(t1;r1)],r1[0,1].

    Case (ii): (2-differentiability)

    ȷȷgH[ω]r1=[¯ω(t1;r1),ω_(t1;r1)],r1[0,1].

    To define the ABC derivative in a parameterized version, we must first establish the Lebesgue integral of ω(t1) in interval form, which is as follows:

    [t10ω(t1)dτ]r1=t10[ω(τ)]r1dτ={[t10ω_(t1;r1)dτ,t10ˉω(t1;r1)dτ],inCase(i),[t10ˉω(t1;r1)dτ,t10ω_(t1;r1)dτ],inCase(ii).

    Suppose a mathematical framework comprises glucose level G, glucose uptake activity X and insulin level I. Numerous variables have been examined, and a mathematical formulation has been created depending on the proportions of these components. The fundamental parameters, Gb and Ib, are also included in this approach [54]. Nonlinear fuzzy fractional order DEs are employed to explain the new diabetes mellitus model with fuzzy fractional ABC derivative, as follows:

    {ABC0Dαt1˜G(t1)=φ1˜G(t1)+φ2˜I(t1)+φ1˜Gb(t1),ABC0Dαt1˜X(t1)=φ2˜X(t1)+φ3˜I(t1)φ3˜Ib(t1)+φ6˜Ib(t1),ABC0Dαt1˜I(t1)=φ3˜I(t1)+φ4˜G(t1)+φ4φ5φ6˜I(t1)+φ6˜Ib(t1),G(0)=(r1)G0,X(0)=(r1)X0,I(0)=(r1)I0, (3.1)

    where (r1)=(_(r1),ˉ(r1))=(r11,1r1), and r1[0,1].

    For the sake of simplicity, we express the fuzzy ABC fractional diabetes model (3.1) as follows:

    {ABC0Dα0Ω(t1)=Λ(t1,Ω(t1)),Ω(0)=Ω00,0<t1<T<, (3.2)

    where Ω(t1)CF(J)LF(J), Ω(t1)=(Φ1,Φ2,Φ3) denotes the state of variables, and Λ is a continuous vector function such that

    Λ=[Φ1Φ2Φ3]=[φ1˜G+φ2˜I+φ1˜Gbφ2˜X+φ3˜Iφ3˜Ib+φ6˜Ibφ3˜I+φ4˜G+φ4φ5φ6˜I+φ6˜Ib], (3.3)

    where ˜G(t1) is the random blood glucose intensity, ˜X(t1) is the serum insulin variability for the secluded compartment, ˜I(t1) is the serum insulin intensity, ˜Gb is the normal pre-injection level of glucose concentrations, ˜Ib is the normal pre-injection level of insulin sensitivity, and φ1 is the insulin autonomous metabolic absorption in liver tissue and adipose cells. φ2 is the proportion of reduction in muscle glucose absorption capacity, φ3 is the insulin production growth in glycemic accumulation potential in ˜Ib, φ4 is the percentage of transfer of pancreatic islets upon glycemic inoculation and glycogen accumulation, φ5 is the glycemic target value, and φ6 is the insulin decomposition proportion in the bloodstream. Two glucose/insulin systems are used to explain the coupling of the mathematical model of glycemic behavior. These algorithms can forecast hyperglycemia since they are based on regularly modified evidence [54].

    In the system (3.2), let us assume the mapping Ω(t1) is the solution of the FV AB-fractional diabetes model in the view of Caputo, which is stated in interval parameterized form below.

    Definition 4.1. The FV AB-fractional derivative in the view of Caputo is described in parametric form as follows:

    [ABC0Dȷ,αt1Ω(t1)]=[ABC0Dȷ,αΩ_(t1;r1),ABC0Dȷ,αˉΩ(t1;r1)](Casei),[ABC0Dȷȷ,αt1Ω(t1)]=[ABC0Dȷȷ,αˉΩ(t1;r1),ABC0Dȷȷ,αΩ_(t1;r1)](Caseii), (4.1)

    where B(α) is the normalization function such that B(0)=B(1)=1. Also, Eα signifies the Mittag-Leffler function. Thus, we have

    ABC0Dȷ,αt1Ω(t1)=B(α)1αt10ȷgHΩ(τ)ˉEα(α1α(t1τ)α)dτ=B(α)1αt10ȷgHΩ(τ)ˉEα(α1α(t1τ)α)|ˉEα0dτ+B(α)1αt10ȷȷgHΩ(τ)ˉEα(α1α(t1τ)α)|ˉEα<0dτ,ABC0Dȷ,αt1Ω(t1)=B(α)1αt10ȷȷgHΩ(τ)ˉEα(α1α(t1τ)α)dτ=B(α)1αt10ȷȷgHΩ(τ)ˉEα(α1α(t1τ)α)|ˉEα0dτ+B(α)1αt10ȷgHΩ(τ)ˉEα(α1α(t1τ)α)|ˉEα<0dτ.

    Since the symbol of the generalized Mittag-Leffler ˉEα(t1) is determined by α and t1, and B(α)>0, α<1.

    [ABC0Dȷ,αt1Ω(t1)]r1=B(α)1αt10[ȷgHΩ(τ)]r1ˉEα(α1α(t1τ)α)dτ=B(α)1αt10[ȷgHΩ(τ)]r1ˉEα(α1α(t1τ)α)|ˉEα0dτ+B(α)1αt10[ȷȷgHΩ(τ)]r1ˉEα(α1α(t1τ)α)|ˉEα<0dτ,ABC0Dȷ,αt1Ω(t1)=B(α)1αt10[ȷȷgHΩ(τ)]r1ˉEα(α1α(t1τ)α)dτ=B(α)1αt10[ȷȷgHΩ(τ)]r1ˉEα(α1α(t1τ)α)|ˉEα0dτ+B(α)1αt10[ȷgHΩ(τ)]r1ˉEα(α1α(t1τ)α)|ˉEα<0dτ.

    The ABC fractional derivative's upper and lower limits are as follows:

    ABC0D,αt1Ω_(t1;r1)=B(α)1αt10Ω_(τ;r1)ˉEα(α1α(t1τ)α)|ˉEα0dτ+B(α)1αt10ˉΩ(τ;r1)ˉEα(α1α(t1τ)α)|ˉEα<0dτ,ABC0D,αt1ˉΩ(t1;r1)=B(α)1αt10ˉΩ(τ;r1)ˉEα(α1α(t1τ)α)|ˉEα0dτ+B(α)1αt10Ω_(τ;r1)ˉEα(α1α(t1τ)α)|ˉEα<0dτ,{ȷ,ȷȷ}, (4.2)
    ABC0D,αt1ˉΩ(t1)(t1)=B(α)1αt10dˉΩτ;r1)dτˉEα(α1α(t1τ)α)|ˉEαdτ=B(α)1αt10dˉΩτ;r1)dτˉEαdτ(α1α(t1τ)α)|ˉEα0dτ+B(α)1αt10dΩ_τ;r1)dτˉEα(α1α(t1τ)α)|ˉEα<0dτ,{ȷ,ȷȷ}. (4.3)

    Now, we will investigate the relationship between the solutions of our fuzzy fractional differential equation and the fuzzy integral equation that corresponds to it. Assume that

    ABC0Dαt1Ω(t1)=Φ1(t1),ABC0Dαt1Ω(t1)=Φ2(t1),ABC0Dαt1Ω(t1)=Φ3(t1).

    When two aspects are analyzed, the interval parameterized version is

    [ABC0Dαt1Ω(t1)]r1=[Φ1(t1)]r1=[Φ1_(t1;r1),¯Φ1(t1;r1)],[ABC0Dαt1Ω(t1)]r1=[Φ2(t1)]r1=[Φ2_(t1;r1),¯Φ2(t1;r1)],[ABC0Dαt1Ω(t1)]r1=[Φ3(t1)]r1=[Φ3_(t1;r1),¯Φ3(t1;r1)].

    Utilizing (4.1) yields the following:

    Case (i):

    ABC0Dȷ,αt1Ω_(t1;r1)=Φ1_(t1;r1),ABC0Dȷ,αt1ˉΩ(t1;r1)=¯Φ1(t1;r1),ABC0Dȷ,αt1Ω_(t1;r1)=Φ2_(t1;r1),ABC0Dȷ,αt1ˉΩ(t1;r1)=¯Φ2(t1;r1),ABC0Dȷ,αt1Ω_(t1;r1)=Φ3_(t1;r1),ABC0Dȷ,αt1ˉΩ(t1;r1)=¯Φ3(t1;r1).

    Case (ii):

    ABC0Dȷȷ,αt1Ω_(t1;r1)=¯Φ1(t1;r1),ABC0Dȷȷ,αt1ˉΩ(t1;r1)=Φ1_(t1;r1),ABC0Dȷ,αt1Ω_(t1;r1)=¯Φ2(t1;r1),ABC0Dȷȷ,αt1ˉΩ(t1;r1)=Φ2_(t1;r1),ABC0Dȷȷ,αt1Ω_(t1;r1)=¯Φ3(t1;r1),ABC0Dȷ,αt1ˉΩ(t1;r1)=Φ3_(t1;r1).

    For every case, in view of (4.2), the parameterized version of the ABC fractional derivative and the verification in each case vary. So, the solution can be established theoretically and numerically. The Case (ii) represents the ABC-fractional differential equations with parameterized forms utilizing the generalized Hukuhara differentiability. Now, taking these considerations into account, the results in each scenario are as follows:

    In Case (i):

    Ω(t1)=1αB(α)Φ1(t1)αΓ(α)t10Φ1(τ)(t1τ)α1dτ,Ω(t1)=1αB(α)Φ2(t1)αΓ(α)t10Φ2(τ)(t1τ)α1dτ,Ω(t1)=1αB(α)Φ3(t1)αΓ(α)t10Φ3(τ)(t1τ)α1dτ.

    In Case (ii):

    Ω(t1)=(1)1αB(α)Φ1(t1)(1)αΓ(α)t10Φ1(τ)(t1τ)α1dτ,Ω(t1)=(1)1αB(α)Φ2(t1)(1)αΓ(α)t10Φ2(τ)(t1τ)α1dτ,Ω(t1)=(1)1αB(α)Φ3(t1)(1)αΓ(α)t10Φ3(τ)(t1τ)α1dτ.

    The parameterized version of the above system can be given as

    [Ω_(t1;r1),ˉΩ(t1;r1)]=[1αB(α)Φ1_(t1;r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10Φ1_(τ;r1)(t1τ)α1dτ,1αB(α)¯Φ1(t1;r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10¯Φ1(τ;r1)(t1τ)α1dτ],
    [Ω_(t1;r1),ˉΩ(t1;r1)]=[1αB(α)Φ2_(t1;r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10Φ2_(τ;r1)(t1τ)α1dτ,1αB(α)¯Φ2(t1;r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10¯Φ2(τ;r1)(t1τ)α1dτ],[Ω_(t1;r1),ˉΩ(t1;r1)]=[1αB(α)Φ3_(t1;r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10Φ3_(τ;r1)(t1τ)α1dτ,1αB(α)¯Φ3(t1;r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10¯Φ3(τ;r1)(t1τ)α1dτ],Case (i),[Ω_(t1;r1),ˉΩ(t1;r1)]=[1αB(α)¯Φ1(t1;r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10¯Φ1(τ;r1)(t1τ)α1dτ,1αB(α)Φ1_(t1;r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10Φ1_(τ;r1)(t1τ)α1dτ],[Ω_(t1;r1),ˉΩ(t1;r1)]=[1αB(α)¯Φ2(t1;r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10¯Φ2(τ;r1)(t1τ)α1dτ,1αB(α)Φ2_(t1;r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10Φ2_(τ;r1)(t1τ)α1dτ],[Ω_(t1;r1),ˉΩ(t1;r1)]=[1αB(α)¯Φ3(t1;r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10¯Φ3(τ;r1)(t1τ)α1dτ,1αB(α)Φ3_(t1;r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10Φ3_(τ;r1)(t1τ)α1dτ],Case (ii).

    In view of the interval parameterized formulations, the integral operator correlated with the ABC fractional derivative operator on a FVF is represented as

    [AB0Iαt1(Φ1(t1))]r1=[AB0Iαt1(Φ1_(t1;r1)),AB0Iαt1(¯Φ1(t1;r1))],[AB0Iαt1(Φ2(t1))]r1=[AB0Iαt1(Φ2_(t1;r1)),AB0Iαt1(¯Φ2(t1;r1))],[AB0Iαt1(Φ3(t1))]r1=[AB0Iαt1(Φ3_(t1;r1)),AB0Iαt1(¯Φ3(t1;r1))].

    It is described this way:

    [AB0Iαt1(Φ1_(t1;r1)),AB0Iαt1(¯Φ1(t1;r1))]=[1αB(α)Φ1_(t1;r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Φ1_(τ;r1)dτ,1αB(α)¯Φ1(t1;r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1¯Φ1(τ;r1)dτ],[AB0Iαt1(Φ2_(t1;r1)),AB0Iαt1(¯Φ2(t1;r1))]=[1αB(α)Φ2_(t1;r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Φ2_(τ;r1)dτ,1αB(α)¯Φ2(t1;r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1¯Φ2(τ;r1)dτ],[AB0Iαt1(Φ3_(t1;r1)),AB0Iαt1(¯Φ3(t1;r1))]=[1αB(α)Φ3_(t1;r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Φ3_(τ;r1)dτ,1αB(α)¯Φ3(t1;r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1¯Φ3(τ;r1)dτ].

    The r1-cut of the fractional integral is the accumulation of r1-cuts because it is a composition. Relying on (4.2) and the consequence of this fractional integral on the ABC fractional derivative, the following can also be clarified:

    [AB0Iαt1(AB0Dαt1Φ1(t1))]r1=AB0Iαt1([AB0Dαt1Φ1(t1)]r1)={AB0Iαt1([AB0Dȷ,αt1Φ1_(t1;r1),AB0Iαt1([AB0Dȷ,αt1¯Φ1(t1;r1)]),Case(i),AB0Iαt1([AB0Dȷȷ,αt1¯Φ1(t1;r1),AB0Iαt1([AB0Dȷ,αt1Φ1_(t1;r1)]),Case(ii),[AB0Iαt1(AB0Dαt1Φ2(t1))]r1=AB0Iαt1([AB0Dαt1Φ2(t1)]r1)={AB0Iαt1([AB0Dȷ,αt1Φ2_(t1;r1),AB0Iαt1([AB0Dȷ,αt1¯Φ2(t1;r1)]),Case(i),AB0Iαt1([AB0Dȷȷ,αt1¯Φ2(t1;r1),AB0Iαt1([AB0Dȷ,αt1Φ2_(t1;r1)]),Case(ii),[AB0Iαt1(AB0Dαt1Φ3(t1))]r1=AB0Iαt1([AB0Dαt1Φ3(t1)]r1)={AB0Iαt1([AB0Dȷ,αt1Φ3_(t1;r1),AB0Iαt1([AB0Dȷ,αt1¯Φ3(t1;r1)]),Case(i),AB0Iαt1([AB0Dȷȷ,αt1¯Φ3(t1;r1),AB0Iαt1([AB0Dȷ,αt1Φ3_(t1;r1)]),Case(ii), (4.4)

    where

    AB0Iαt1(AB0D,αt1Φ1_(t1;r1))=AB0Iαt1(B(α)1αt10Φ1_(τ;r1)ˉEα(α1α(t1τ)α)|ˉEα0dτ+B(α)1αt10¯Φ1(τ;r1)ˉEα(α1α(t1τ)α)|ˉEα<0dτ)=AB0Iαt1(AB0D,αt1Φ1_(t1;r1))ˉEα0+AB0Iαt1(AB0D,αt1Φ1_(t1;r1))ˉEα<0=(Φ1_(t1;r1)Φ1_(0;r1))ˉEα0+(¯Φ1(t1;r1)¯Φ1(0;r1))ˉEα<0. (4.5)
    AB0Iαt1(AB0D,αt1¯Φ1(t1;r1))=(¯Φ1(t1;r1)¯Φ1(0;r1))ˉEα0+(Φ1_(t1;r1)Φ1_(0;r1))ˉEα<0,{ȷ,ȷȷ}.

    Therefore, for r1[0,1], we have

    [AB0Iαt1(AB0D,αt1Φ1(t1))]r1=[(Φ1_(t1;r1)Φ1_(0;r1))ˉEα0+(¯Φ1(t1;r1)¯Φ1(0;r1))ˉEα<0,(¯Φ1(t1;r1)¯Φ1(0;r1))E_α0+(Φ1_(t1;r1)Φ1_(0;r1))ˉEα<0],[AB0Iαt1(AB0D,αt1Φ2(t1))]r1=[(Φ2_(t1;r1)Φ2_(0;r1))ˉEα0+(¯Φ2(t1;r1)¯Φ2(0;r1))ˉEα<0,(¯Φ2(t1;r1)¯Φ2(0;r1))E_α0+(Φ2_(t1;r1)Φ2_(0;r1))ˉEα<0],[AB0Iαt1(AB0D,αt1Φ3(t1))]r1=[(Φ3_(t1;r1)Φ3_(0;r1))ˉEα0+(¯Φ3(t1;r1)¯Φ3(0;r1))ˉEα<0,(¯Φ3(t1;r1)¯Φ3(0;r1))E_α0+(Φ3_(t1;r1)Φ3_(0;r1))ˉEα<0], (4.6)

    and

    AB0Iαt1(AB0Dαt1Φ1(t1))=(Φ1(t1)Φ1(0))ˉEα0(1)(Φ1(t1)Φ1(0))ˉEα<0,AB0Iαt1(AB0Dαt1Φ2(t1))=(Φ2(t1)Φ2(0))ˉEα0(1)(Φ2(t1)Φ2(0))ˉEα<0,AB0Iαt1(AB0Dαt1Φ3(t1))=(Φ3(t1)Φ3(0))ˉEα0(1)(Φ3(t1)Φ3(0))ˉEα<0, (4.7)

    or, more generically,

    AB0Iαt1(AB0Dαt1Φ1(t1))=(Φ1(t1)gHΦ1(0))ˉEα0(Φ1(t1)gHΦ1(0))ˉEα<0,AB0Iαt1(AB0Dαt1Φ2(t1))=(Φ2(t1)gHΦ2(0))ˉEα0(Φ2(t1)gHΦ2(0))ˉEα<0,AB0Iαt1(AB0Dαt1Φ3(t1))=(Φ3(t1)gHΦ3(0))ˉEα0(Φ3(t1)gHΦ3(0))ˉEα<0. (4.8)

    Theorem 4.1. Suppose there is a continuous FVF Λ(t1,Ω(t1)) and a non-negative kernel ˉEα for every t1, α>0 with fuzzy initial condition has a solution in the following form:

    (Ω(t1)gHΩ(0))ˉEα0(Ω(t1)gHΩ(0))ˉEα<0=1αB(α)Λ(t1,Ω(t1))αB(α)Γ(α)t0(t1τ)α1Λ(t1,Ω(t1))dτ.

    Proof. The parameterized version of (3.2) is as follows:

    {[ABC0Dαt1Ω(t1)]r1=[Λ(t1,Ω(t1))]r1,0t1<t1<,α(0,1),[Ω(0)]r1=[Ω0]r1,r1[0,1].

    According to Case (i),

    ABC0Dȷ,αtΩ_(t1,r1)=Λ_(t1,Ω(t1;r1)=Λ1(t1,Ω_(t1;r1),ˉΩ(t1;r1)),ABC0Dȷ,αt1ˉΩ(t1,r1)=ˉΛ(t1,Ω(t1;r1)=Λ2(t1,Ω_(t1;r1),ˉΩ(t1;r1)).

    In Case (ii),

    ABC0Dȷȷ,αtΩ_(t1,r1)=ˉΛ(t1,Ω(t1;r1)=Λ2(t1,Ω_(t1;r1),ˉΩ(t1;r1)),ABC0Dȷȷ,αt1ˉΩ(t1,r1)=Λ_(t1,Ω(t1;r1)=Λ1(t1,Ω_(t1;r1),ˉΩ(t1;r1)).

    Invoking the AB fractional operator on both sides of the above equation, we have the following:

    In Case (i),

    (Ω_(t1;r1)Ω_(0;r1))ˉEα0+(ˉΩ(t1;r1)ˉΩ(0;r1))ˉEα<0=AB0Iαt1(Λ_(t1,Ω(t1);r1)),(ˉΩ(t1;r1)ˉΩ(0;r1))ˉEα0+(Ω_(t1;r1)Ω_(0;r1))ˉEα<0=AB0Iαt1(ˉΛ(t1,Ω(t1);r1)).

    In Case (ii),

    (ˉΩ(t1;r1)ˉΩ(0;r1))ˉEα0+(Ω_(t1;r1)Ω_(0;r1))ˉEα<0=AB0Iαt1(Λ_(t1,Ω(t1);r1)),(Ω_(t1;r1)Ω_(0;r1))ˉEα0+(ˉΩ(t1;r1)ˉΩ(0;r1))ˉEα<0=AB0Iαt1(ˉΛ(t1,Ω(t1);r1)),

    where

    AB0Iαt1(Υ_(t1,Ω(t1);r1))=1αB(α)Υ1(t1,Ω_(t1),ˉΩ(t1);r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Υ1(τ,Ω_(t1),ˉΩ(t1);r1)dτ,AB0Iαt1(ˉΥ(t1,Λ(t1);r1))=1αB(α)Υ2(t1,Ω_(t1),ˉΩ(t1);r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Υ2(τ,Ω_(t1),ˉΩ(t1);r1)dτ.

    Therefore, we have the following:

    In Case (i),

    (Ω_(t1;r1)Ω_(0;r1))ˉEα0+(ˉΩ(t1;r1)ˉΩ(0;r1))ˉEα<0=1αB(α)Λ1(t1,Ω_(t1),ˉΩ(t1);r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Λ1(τ,Ω_(t1),ˉΩ(t1);r1)dτ,(ˉΩ(t1;r1)ˉΩ(0;r1))ˉEα0+(Ω_(t1;r1)Ω_(0;r1))ˉEα<0=1αB(α)Λ2(t1,Ω_(t1),ˉΩ(t1);r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Λ2(τ,Ω_(t1),ˉΩ(t1);r1)dτ.

    In Case (ii),

    (ˉΩ(t1;r1)ˉΩ(0;r1))ˉEα0+(Ω_(t1;r1)Ω_(0;r1))ˉEα<0=1αB(α)Λ1(t1,Ω_(t1),ˉΩ(t1);r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Λ1(τ,Ω_(t1),ˉΩ(t1);r1)dτ,(Ω_(t1;r1)Ω_(0;r1))ˉEα0+(ˉΩ(t1;r1)ˉΩ(0;r1))ˉEα<0=1αB(α)Λ2(t1,Ω_(t1),ˉΩ(t1);r1)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Λ2(τ,Ω_(t1),ˉΩ(t1);r1)dτ.

    Taking into account the fuzzy formulation in Case (i),

    (Ω(t1)Ω(0))ˉEα0(1)(Ω(t1)Ω(0))ˉEα<0=1αB(α)Λ(t1,Ω(t1))αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Λ(t1,Ω(t1))dτ.

    In Case (ii),

    (1)(Ω(t1)Ω(0))ˉEα0(Ω(t1)Ω(0))ˉEα<0=1αB(α)Λ(t1,Ω(t1))αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Λ(t1,Ω(t1))dτ.

    Generally, we have

    (Ω(t1)gHΩ(0))ˉEα0(Ω(t1)gHΩ(0))ˉEα<0=1αB(α)Λ(t1,Ω(t1))αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Λ(t1,Ω(t1))dτ.

    Corollary 4.1. In case the kernel ˉEα for every t1 and α is negative the mentioned above relation are true conversely.

    In Case (i),

    Ω(t1)=Ω(0)1αB(α)Λ(t1,Ω(t1))αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Λ(t1,Ω(t1))dt1.

    In Case (ii),

    Ω(t1)=Ω(0)(1)1αB(α)Λ(t1,Ω(t1))(1)αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Λ(t1,Ω(t1))dt1.

    In order to illustrate the existence of the solution, we first propose and describe the lower and upper solutions of the model in parameterized form. Here, Ω_(t1;r1) and ˉΩ(t1;r1) are the optimal solutions of the subsequent minimization and maximization problems, respectively:

    min{Ω(0)1αB(α)Λ(t1,Ω(t1))αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Λ(τ,Ω(τ))dτ},

    such that

    Λ(0)[Ω_(0;r1),ˉΛ(0;r1)],Λ(t1,Ω(t1))[Λ_(t1,Ω_(t1),ˉΩ(t1);r1),ˉΛ(t1,Ω_(t1),ˉΩ(t1);r1)],

    and

    max{Ω(0)1αB(α)Λ(t1,Ω(t1))αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Λ(τ,Ω(τ))dτ},

    such that

    Ω(0)[Ω_(0;r1),ˉΛ(0;r1)],Λ(t1,Ω(t1))[Λ_(t1,Ω_(t1),ˉΩ(t1);r1),ˉΛ(t1,Ω_(t1),ˉΩ(t1);r1)],

    where

    Λ_(t1,Ω_(t1),ˉΩ(t1);r1)={min{Λ(t1,Φ1):Φ1[Ω_(t1;r1),ˉΩ(t1,r1)]},min{Λ(t1,Φ2):Φ2[Ω_(t1;r1),ˉΩ(t1,r1)]},min{Λ(t1,Φ3):Φ3[Ω_(t1;r1),ˉΩ(t1,r1)]},

    and

    ˉΛ(t1,Ω_(t1),ˉΩ(t1);r1)={max{Λ(t1,Φ1):Φ1[Ω_(t1;r1),ˉΩ(t1,r1)]},max{Λ(t1,Φ2):Φ2[Ω_(t1;r1),ˉΩ(t1,r1)]},max{Λ(t1,Φ3):Φ3[Ω_(t1;r1),ˉΩ(t1,r1)]}.

    Some remarkable cases of the above mentioned optimization problems are presented as follows:

    I. Suppose there is a linear mapping Λ, along with Λ_Ω0 and ˉΛΩ0, and then we have

    {Λ_(t1,Ω_(t1),ˉΩ(t1);r1)=Λ(t1,Ω_(t1);r1),ˉΛ(t1,Ω_(t1),ˉΩ(t1);r1)=Λ(t1,ˉΩ(t1);r1).

    II. Suppose there is a linear mapping Λ, along with Λ_Ω<0 and ˉΛΩ<0, and then we have

    {Λ_(t1,Ω_(t1),ˉΩ(t1);r1)=Λ(t1,ˉΩ(t1);r1),ˉΛ(t1,Ω_(t1),ˉΩ(t1);r1)=Λ(t1,Ω_(t1);r1).

    Theorem 4.2. Assume that there is a continuous FVF Λ(t1,Ω(t1)) on Δ of a plane (t1,Ω) holding the Lipchitz assumption in Δ with respect to Ω,

    ˜D(Λ(t1,Ω1(t1)),Λ(t1,Ω2(t1)))L˜D(Ω1(t1),Ω2(t1)),Ω1,Ω2ΔL>0,

    and then the model (3.1) has a unique fuzzy solution Ω(t1) when the subsequent assumption holds:

    1αB(α)L+αtα+11B(α)Γ(α)L<1.

    Proof. In order to prove the result, suppose the operator F:CF(J)LF(J)F:CF(J)LF(J) is the solution having both (non-negative and negative) kernels.

    In Case (i),

    F(Ω(t1))=Ω(0)1αB(α)Λ(t1,Ω(t1))αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Λ(t1,Ω(t1))dτ.

    In Case (ii),

    F(Ω(t1))=Ω(0)(1)1αB(α)Λ(t1,Ω(t1))(1)αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Λ(t1,Ω(t1))dτ.

    In Case (i),

    d(F(Ω1(t1)),F(Ω2(t1)))=d(Ω1(0)1αB(α)Λ(t1,Ω1(t1))αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Λ(t1,Ω1(t1))dτ,Λ2(0)1αB(α)Λ(t1,Ω2(t1))αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Λ(t1,Ω2(t1))dτ).

    Since Ω1(0)=Ω2(0), and by means of property (iii) of Definition 2.4, we have

    d(F(Ω1(t1)),F(Ω2(t1)))=d(1αB(α)Λ(t1,Ω1(t1))αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Λ(t1,Ω1(t1))dτ,1αB(α)Λ(t1,Ω2(t1))αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Λ(t1,Ω2(t1))dτ).

    Again, utilizing properties (iv) and (vi) of Definition 2.4,

    d(F(Ω1(t1)),F(Ω2(t1)))d(1αB(α)Λ(t1,Ω1(t1)),1αB(α)Λ(t1,Ω2(t1)))+d(αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Λ(t1,Ω1(t1))dτ,αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Λ(t1,Ω2(t1))dτ)1αB(α)d(Λ(t1,Ω1(t1)),Υ(t1,Ω2(t1)))+αB(α)Γ(α)d(t10(t1τ)α1Λ(t1,Ω1(t1))dτ,t10(t1τ)α1Λ(t1,Ω2(t1))dτ)1αB(α)Ld(Ω1(t1),Ω2(t1))+αB(α)Γ(α)t10|(t1τ)α1|d(Λ(t1,Ω1(t1)),Λ(t1,Ω2(t1)))dτ1αB(α)Ld(Ω1(t1),Λ2(t1))+αB(α)Γ(α)t10|(t1τ)α1|Ld(Ω1(t1),Ω2(t1))dτ=1αB(α)Ld(Ω1(t1),Ω2(t1))+αB(α)Γ(α)Ld(Λ1(t1),Λ2(t1))t10|(t1τ)α1dτ=1αB(α)Ld(Ω1(t1),Ω2(t1))+αB(α)Γ(α)Ld(Ω1(t1),Ω2(t1))tα1=(1αB(α)L+αB(α)Γ(α)Ltα1)d(Ω1(t1),Ω2(t1))=Ld(Ω1(t1),Ω2(t1)).

    Since (1αB(α)L+αB(α)Γ(α)Ltα1)=L<1 is a Lipchitz constant. Consequently, we have

    d(F(Ω1(t1)),F(Ω2(t1)))<Ld(Ω1(t1),Ω2(t1)). (4.9)

    This shows that the operator F is a contraction mapping on CF(J)LF(J). By the Banach fixed point theorem, (3.2) has a unique solution. By applying an analogous technique, we can deduce the same result for Case (ii).

    This section consists of a reliable and widely utilized numerical approach for finding and obtaining fractional order fuzzy initial value problems; see [55,56]. Let us assume the general fractional differential equations

    G_(t1)G_(0)=1αB(α)Φ1(t1,G_,X_,I_)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Φ1(t1,G_,X_,I_)dτ,ˉG(t1)ˉG(0)=1αB(α)Φ1(t1,ˉG,ˉX,ˉI)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Φ1(t1,ˉG,ˉX,ˉI)dτ,X_(t1)X_(0)=1αB(α)Φ2(t1,G_,X_,I_)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Φ2(t1,G_,X_,I_)dτ,ˉX(t1)ˉX(0)=1αB(α)Φ2(t1,ˉG,ˉX,ˉI)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Φ2(t1,ˉG,ˉX,ˉI)dτ,I_(t1)I_(0)=1αB(α)Φ3(t1,G_,X_,I_)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Φ3(t1,G_,X_,I_)dτ,ˉI(t1)ˉI(0)=1αB(α)Φ3(t1,ˉG,ˉX,ˉI)+αB(α)Γ(α)t10(t1τ)α1Φ3(t1,ˉG,ˉX,ˉI)dτ. (5.1)

    Choosing t0=0,=0.01,tn1+1=tn1+,G_(0)=(r11)G_0,X_(0)=(r11)X_0,I_(0)=(r11)I_0, ˉG(0)=(1r1)ˉG0,ˉX(0)=(1r1)ˉX0,ˉI(0)=(1r1)ˉI0 in (3.1), where denotes the step-size, the corrector values are

    G_(tn1+1)=(r11)G_(0)+α(1α)B(α)Γ(α+2)Φ1(tn1+1,G_ρn1+1,X_ρn1+1,I_ρn1+1)+ααB(α)Γ(α+2)n1κ=0A1,κ,n1+1Φ1(tκ,G_κ,X_κ,I_κ),ˉG(tn1+1)=(1r1)ˉG(0)+α(1α)B(α)Γ(α+2)Φ1(tn1+1,ˉGρn1+1,ˉXρn1+1,ˉIρn1+1)+ααB(α)Γ(α+2)n1κ=0A2,κ,n1+1Φ1(tκ,ˉGκ,ˉXκ,ˉIκ),X_(tn1+1)=(r11)X_(0)+α(1α)B(α)Γ(α+2)Φ2(tn1+1,G_ρn1+1,X_ρn1+1,I_ρn1+1)+ααB(α)Γ(α+2)n1κ=0A3,κ,n1+1Φ2(tκ,G_κ,X_κ,I_κ),ˉX(tn1+1)=(1r1)ˉX(0)+α(1α)B(α)Γ(α+2)Φ2(tn1+1,ˉGρn1+1,ˉXρn1+1,ˉIρn1+1)+ααB(α)Γ(α+2)n1κ=0A4,κ,n1+1Φ2(tκ,ˉGκ,ˉXκ,ˉIκ),I_(tn1+1)=(r11)I_(0)+α(1α)B(α)Γ(α+2)Φ3(tn1+1,G_ρn1+1,X_ρn1+1,I_ρn1+1)+ααB(α)Γ(α+2)n1κ=0A5,κ,n1+1Φ3(tκ,G_κ,X_κ,I_κ),ˉI(tn1+1)=(1r1)ˉI(0)+α(1α)B(α)Γ(α+2)Φ3(tn1+1,ˉGρn1+1,ˉXρn1+1,ˉIρn1+1)+ααB(α)Γ(α+2)n1κ=0A6,κ,n1+1Φ3(tκ,ˉGκ,ˉXκ,ˉIκ). (5.2)

    Moreover, the corresponding predictor terms are as follows:

    G_ρn1+1=(r11)G_(0)+1αB(α)Φ1(tn1,G_n1,X_n1,I_n1)+αB(α)Γ2(α)n1κ=0B1,κ,n1+1Φ1(tκ,G_κ,X_κ,I_κ),ˉGρn1+1=(1r1)ˉG(0)+1αB(α)Φ1(tn1,ˉGn1,ˉXn1,ˉIn1)+αB(α)Γ2(α)n1κ=0B2,κ,n1+1Φ1(tκ,ˉGκ,ˉXκ,ˉIκ),X_ρn1+1=(r11)X_(0)+1αB(α)Φ2(tn1,G_n1,X_n1,I_n1)+αB(α)Γ2(α)n1κ=0B3,κ,n1+1Φ2(tκ,G_κ,X_κ,I_κ),ˉXρn1+1=(1r1)ˉX(0)+1αB(α)Φ2(tn1,ˉGn1,ˉXn1,ˉIn1)+αB(α)Γ2(α)n1κ=0B4,κ,n1+1Φ2(tκ,ˉGκ,ˉXκ,ˉIκ),I_ρn1+1=(r11)I_(0)+1αB(α)Φ3(tn1,G_n1,X_n1,I_n1)+αB(α)Γ2(α)n1κ=0B5,κ,n1+1Φ3(tκ,G_κ,X_κ,I_κ),ˉIρn1+1=(1r1)ˉI(0)+1αB(α)Φ3(tn1,ˉGn1,ˉXn1,ˉIn1)+αB(α)Γ2(α)n1κ=0B6,κ,n1+1Φ3(tκ,ˉGκ,ˉXκ,ˉIκ), (5.3)

    where

    Aι,κ,n1+1={nρ+11(n1+ρ)(n1+1)ρ,ifȷ=0,(n1κ+2)ρ+1+(n1κ)ρ+12(n1κ+1)ρ+1,if0κn1,1,ifκ=1, (5.4)

    and

    Bι,κ,n1+1=αα((n1+1κ)ρ(n1κ)ρ),0κn1. (5.5)

    The glucose-insulin process can be modeled mathematically in a variety of ways. One of the most well-known models presented by [55,56] is a three-compartment model (3.1). The DEs are required to transform this system to a fuzzy fractional-order system in the fuzzy ABC derivative sense. The justification for this is that Saleem et al. [8] demonstrated that the fractional-order model identifies the glucose-insulin combination more effectively than the classical model.

    The numerical findings of the fuzzy fractional model (3.1) have been established for a system of nonlinear fuzzy fractional DEs via the fuzzy ABC derivative operator and the parameters are defined in Table 1. In view of (3.1), various numerical techniques utilizing the variation in parameters presented in Table 1 and restricted intervals can examine the impact of these variables on the dynamics of the fractional-order framework. This analysis demonstrates that changing the parameters has an impact on the model's behavior. Figures 1(a)3(a) depict the constrained approximation for a normal individual and hyperglycemia depending on normal glucose, insulin ambient concentration, and insulin in plasma glucose for solutions. Furthermore, Figures 1(b)3(b) depicts the constrained approximation for a normal individual and hyperglycemia individual depending on normal glucose, insulin ambient concentration and insulin in glucose for fuzzy solutions depending on an integer-order approach. Figures 4(a)6(a) illustrate the entire behavior of the glucose-insulin network in both a healthy individual and a patient with hyperglycemia individual with both lower and upper solutions with varying fractional order and constant uncertainty r1=0.4. The findings of the model depict the real and control scenario of consistent glucose system for mechanical pancreatic design. Also, Figures 4(b)6(b) show the complete structure of the glucose-insulin network in both a healthy individual and a patient with hyperglycemia, with both lower and upper solutions with integer order and varying uncertainty. The results of the model present the solution for the upper case and a biassed approach for the upper solution in the control case of a consistent glucose system for mechanical pancreatic design. The technique will generate fuzzy solutions that occur in pairs for non-integer values, which are highly reliable and precise in the specified space. We can notice in Figure 7 that the conventional approach α=1 is unable to stabilize the blood sugar insulin mechanism for both healthy and hyperglycemia individual, and thus it does not meet the requirement for the preservation of a closed-loop configuration for a synthetic pancreas. It is apparent from Figure 8 that uncertainty values ensure balance and allow for persistent glucose system analysis. In Figure 9, the representations of the glucose-insulin systems via fuzzy ABC for a healthy individual and hyperglycemia individual in each category are compared with the recovery after plasma insulin injection. Although the behaviors of the glucose-insulin systems are nearly identical, the fuzzy ABC derivative provides pertinent and viable results in a closed-loop proposed methodology that aids in the development of the synthetic pancreas.

    Table 1.  Table of parameterized settings considered in problem (3.1) for simulations.
    Parameters Healthy individual Hyperglycemia person Units
    φ1 0.0317 0 min1
    φ2 0.0123 0.017 min1
    φ3 4.92×106 5.3×106 min2(μU/ml)
    φ4 0.0039 0.0042 (μU/ml)min2(mg/dl)2
    φ5 79.053 80.25 mg/dl
    φ6 0.2659 0.264 min1
    ˜Gb 80 80 mg/dl
    ˜Ib 7 [715] μU/ml

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Figure 1.  (a) The effects of the lower and upper glucose levels are estimated for healthy individuals for model (3.1) for various fractional orders when r1=0.7. (b) The effects of the lower and upper glucose levels are estimated for healthy individuals for model (3.1) for various uncertainty level when α=1.
    Figure 2.  (a) The effects of the lower and upper insulin concentrations in blood are estimated for healthy individuals for model (3.1) for various fractional orders when r1=0.7. (b) The effects of the lower and upper insulin concentrations in blood are estimated for healthy individuals for model (3.1) for various uncertainty level when α=1.
    Figure 3.  (a) The illustrations of the lower and upper levels of monitoring insulin are estimated for healthy individuals for model (3.1) for various fractional orders when r1=0.7. (b) The illustrations of the lower and upper levels of monitoring insulin are estimated for healthy individuals for model (3.1) for various uncertainty level when α=1.
    Figure 4.  (a) The effects of the lower and upper glucose levels are estimated for hyperglycemia patients for model (3.1) for various fractional orders when r1=0.7. (b) The effects of the lower and upper glucose levels are estimated for hyperglycemia patients for model (3.1) for various uncertainty level when α=1.
    Figure 5.  (a) The effects of the lower and upper insulin concentrations in blood are estimated for hyperglycemia patients for model (3.1) for various fractional orders when r1=0.7. (b) The effects of the lower and upper insulin concentrations in blood are estimated for hyperglycemia patients for model (3.1) for various uncertainty levels when α=1.
    Figure 6.  (a) The effects of the lower and upper levels of monitoring insulin are estimated for hyperglycemia patients for model (3.1) for various fractional orders when r1=0.7. (b) The effects of the lower and upper levels of monitoring insulin are estimated for hyperglycemia patients for model (3.1) for various uncertainty levels when α=1.
    Figure 7.  (a) Lower solutions of the glucose levels for plasma insulin after injecting insulin are estimated for model (3.1) for a range of Ib values when r1=0.4. and α=1. (b) Upper solutions of the glucose levels for plasma insulin after injecting insulin are estimated for model (3.1) for a range of Ib values when r1=0.4. and α=1.
    Figure 8.  (a) Lower solutions for plasma insulin variables for remote in hyperglycemic patients are estimated for model (3.1) for a range of Ib values when r1=0.4 and α=1. (b) Upper solutions for plasma insulin variables for remote in hyperglycemic patients are estimated for model (3.1) for a range of Ib values when r1=0.4 and α=1.
    Figure 9.  (a) Lower solutions for plasma insulin after injecting insulin in hyperglycemic patients are estimated for model (3.1) for a range of Ib values when r1=0.4 and α=1. (b) Upper solution for plasma insulin after injecting insulin in hyperglycemic patients are estimated for model (3.1) for a range of Ib values when r1=0.4 and α=1.

    This paper describes the mathematical and contextual research of the bio-medical glycemic system using a nonlinear fuzzy fractional-order framework with an ABC derivative for the treatment of diabetes complications. It demonstrates the consistency, uniqueness, and applicability of glucose intensity regulation in healthy people and individuals with hypoglycemic disorders. The hypoglycemic model built with the fuzzy fractional ABC derivative demonstrates excellent correlation in terms of controlling the glucose-insulin mechanism. The approach focuses on continuous glucose monitoring for a restricted amount of time, and the results are confined to standard levels for both normal people and individuals with hypoglycemic disorders. An investigation of predictive findings is used to examine the effects of various configurations since the generated systems are considerably more complicated to handle as parameterized governing equations than conventional fuzzy DEs. In terms of the significance of these models, we must leverage the interpretation of the uncertain ABC derivative to identify the solutions to the uncertain models. The effects of variation on the proportion of diabetics with time-concerned problems and the severity of diabetes mellitus are depicted graphically. By simulation analysis, we can demonstrate that when α=1 the ABC non-integer order derivative exhibits significant absorption features. For future research, we will extend this model to the fuzzy fractal-fractional operator and simulate this research with real data that depends on the control mechanism.

    This research was supported by Taif University Researchers Supporting Project of Saudi Arabia (No. TURSP-2020/86), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 71601072), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Universities of Henan Province (No. NSFRF210314) and the Innovative Research Team of Henan Polytechnic University (No. T2022-7).

    The authors declare that they have no competing interests.



    [1] F. Chee, T. Fernando, Closed-loop control of blood glucose, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74031-5
    [2] S. Sakulrang, E. J. Moore, S. Sungnul, A. de Gaetano, A fractional differential equation model for continuous glucose monitoring data, Adv. Differ. Equ., 2017 (2017), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-017-1207-1 doi: 10.1186/s13662-017-1207-1
    [3] Y. Reznik, Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) using an external insulin pump for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, Diabetes Metab., 36 (2010), 415–421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diabet.2010.08.002 doi: 10.1016/j.diabet.2010.08.002
    [4] M. Z. Huang, J. X. Li, X. Y. Song, H. J. Guo, Modeling impulsive injections of insulin: towards artificial pancreas, SIAM J. Appl. Math., 72 (2012), 1524–1548. https://doi.org/10.1137/110860306 doi: 10.1137/110860306
    [5] X. Y. Song, M. Z. Huang, J. X. Li, Modeling impulsive insulin delivery in insulin pump with time delays, SIAM J. Appl. Math., 74 (2014), 1763–1785. https://doi.org/10.1137/130933137 doi: 10.1137/130933137
    [6] S. Z. Liu, M. Z. Huang, X. Y. Song, X. Y. Shi, Finite-time control of plasma glucose in insulin therapies for diabetes, Adv. Differ. Equ., 2018 (2018), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-018-1532-z doi: 10.1186/s13662-018-1532-z
    [7] M. Farman, M. U. Saleem, M. O. Ahmad, A. Ahmad, Stability analysis and control of glucose insulin glucagon system in humans, Chinese. J. Phys., 56 (2018), 1362–1369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjph.2018.03.037 doi: 10.1016/j.cjph.2018.03.037
    [8] M. U. Saleem, M. Farman, A. Ahmad, E. U. Haque, M. O. Ahmad, A Caputo Fabrizio fractional order model for control of glucose in insulin therapies for diabetes, Ain Shamas Eng. J., 11 (2020), 1309–1316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.03.006 doi: 10.1016/j.asej.2020.03.006
    [9] M. U. Saleem, M. Farman, M. Rizwan, M. O. Ahmad, A. Ahmad, Controllability and observability of glucose insulin glucagon systems in human, Chin. J. Phys., 56 (2018), 1909–1916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjph.2018.09.005 doi: 10.1016/j.cjph.2018.09.005
    [10] M. Farman, M. U. Saleem, A. Ahmad, S. Imtiaz, M. F. Tabassum, S. Akramd, et al., A control of glucose level in insulin therapies for the development of artificial pancreas by Atangana Baleanu derivative, Alex. Eng. J., 59 (2020), 2639–2648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2020.04.027 doi: 10.1016/j.aej.2020.04.027
    [11] M. U. Saleem, M. Aslam, A. Akgül, M. Farman, R. Bibi, Controllability of PDEs model for type 1 diabetes, Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 2021. https://doi.org/10.1002/mma.7279 doi: 10.1002/mma.7279
    [12] N. Debbouchea, A. O. Almatroud, A. Ouannas, I. M. Batiha, Chaos and coexisting attractors in glucose-insulin regulatory system with incommensurate fractional-order derivatives, Chaos Solitons Fract., 143 (2021), 110575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2020.110575 doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2020.110575
    [13] I. M. Batiha1, J. Oudetallah, A. Ouannas, A. A. Al-Nana, I. H. Jebril, Tuning the fractional-order PID-controller for blood glucose level of diabetic patients, Int. J. Advance Soft Compu. Appl., 13 (2021), 1–10.
    [14] M. Caputo, Elasticita e dissipazione, Bologna: ZaniChelli, 1969.
    [15] B. Shiri, D. Baleanu, A general fractional pollution model for lakes, Commun. Appl. Math. Comput., 4 (2022), 1105–1130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42967-021-00135-4 doi: 10.1007/s42967-021-00135-4
    [16] B. Shiri, I. Perfilieva, Z. Alijani, Classical approximation for fuzzy Fredholm integral equation, Fuzzy Sets. Syst., 404 (2021), 159–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fss.2020.03.023 doi: 10.1016/j.fss.2020.03.023
    [17] Z. Alijani, D. Baleanu, B. Shirid, G. C. Wu, Spline collocation methods for systems of fuzzy fractional differential equations, Chaos Solitons Fract., 131 (2020), 109510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2019.109510 doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2019.109510
    [18] K. Karthikeyan, P. Karthikeyan, H. M. Baskonus, K. Venkatachalam, Y. M. Chu, Almost sectorial operators on Ψ-Hilfer derivative fractional impulsive integro-differential equations, Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 2021. https://doi.org/10.1002/mma.7954 doi: 10.1002/mma.7954
    [19] S. Rashid, S. Sultana, Y. Karaca, A. Khalid, Y. M. Chu, Some further extensions considering discrete proportional fractional operators, Fractals, 30 (2022), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218348X22400266 doi: 10.1142/S0218348X22400266
    [20] S. N. Hajiseyedazizi, M. E. Samei, J. Alzabut, Y. M. Chu, On multi-step methods for singular fractional q-integro-differential equations, Open Math., 19 (2021), 1378–1405. https://doi.org/10.1515/math-2021-0093 doi: 10.1515/math-2021-0093
    [21] F. Jin, Z. S. Qian, Y. M. Chu, M. ur Rahman, On nonlinear evolution model for drinking behavior under Caputo-Fabrizio derivative, J. Appl. Anal. Comput., 12 (2022), 790–806. https://doi.org/10.11948/20210357 doi: 10.11948/20210357
    [22] S. Rashid, E. I. Abouelmagd, A. Khalid, F. B. Farooq, Y. M. Chu, Some recent developments on dynamical -discrete fractional type inequalities in the frame of nonsingular and nonlocal kernels, Fractals, 30 (2022), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218348X22401107 doi: 10.1142/S0218348X22401107
    [23] I. Podlubny, Fractional differential equations, New York: Academic Press, 1999.
    [24] M. Caputo, M. Fabrizio, A new definition of fractional derivative without singular kernel, Prog. Fract. Differ. Appl., 1 (2015), 73–85. https://doi.org/10.12785/pfda/010201 doi: 10.12785/pfda/010201
    [25] M. Bohner, O. Tunç, C. Tunç, Qualitative analysis of Caputo fractional integro-differential equations with constant delays, Comput. Appl. Math., 40 (2021), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40314-021-01595-3 doi: 10.1007/s40314-021-01595-3
    [26] J. R. Graef, C. Tunç, H. Şevli, Razumikhin qualitative analyses of Volterra integro-fractional delay differential equation with Caputo derivatives, Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul., 103 (2021), 106037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cnsns.2021.106037 doi: 10.1016/j.cnsns.2021.106037
    [27] Z. U. A. Zafar, S. Zaib, M. T. Hussainc, C. Tunç, S. Javeed, Analysis and numerical simulation of tuberculosis model using different fractional derivatives, Chaos Solitons Fract., 160 (2022), 112202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2022.112202 doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2022.112202
    [28] F. Z. Wang, M. N. Khan, I. Ahmad, H. Ahmad, H. Abu-Zinadah, Y. M. Chu, Numerical solution of traveling waves in chemical kinetics: Time-fractional fishers equations, Fractals, 30 (2022), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218348X22400515 doi: 10.1142/S0218348X22400515
    [29] S. Rashid, E. I. Abouelmagd, S. Sultana, Y. M. Chu, New developments in weighted n-fold type inequalities via discrete generalized ĥ-proportional fractional operators, Fractals, 30 (2022), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218348X22400564 doi: 10.1142/S0218348X22400564
    [30] S. A. Iqbal, M. G. Hafez, Y. M. Chu, C. Park, Dynamical analysis of nonautonomous RLC circuit with the absence and presence of Atangana-Baleanu fractional derivative, J. Appl. Anal. Comput., 12 (2022), 770–789. https://doi.org/10.11948/20210324 doi: 10.11948/20210324
    [31] A. Atangana, D. Baleanu, New fractional derivatives with nonlocal and non-singular kernel: Theory and application to heat transfer model, Therm. Sci., 20 (2016), 763–769. https://doi.org/10.2298/TSCI160111018A doi: 10.2298/TSCI160111018A
    [32] J. F. Goméz-Aguilar, A. Atangana, Retracted: Power and exponentials laws: theory and application, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 354 (2019), 52–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cam.2019.01.003 doi: 10.1016/j.cam.2019.01.003
    [33] J. Singh, B. Ganbari, D. Kumar, D. Baleanu, Analysis of fractional model of guava for biological pest control with memory effect, J. Adv. Res., 32 (2021), 99–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jare.2020.12.004 doi: 10.1016/j.jare.2020.12.004
    [34] V. P. Dubey, S. Dubey, D. Kumar, J. Singh, A computational study of fractional model of atmospheric dynamics of carbon dioxide gas, Chaos Solitons Fract., 142 (2021), 110375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2020.110375 doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2020.110375
    [35] V. P. Dubey, J. Singh, A. M. Alshehri, S. Dubey, D. Kumar, A comparative analysis of two computational schemes for solving local fractional Laplace equations, Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 44 (2021), 13540–13559. https://doi.org/10.1002/mma.7642 doi: 10.1002/mma.7642
    [36] D. Baleanu, B. Shiri, Nonlinear higher order fractional terminal value problems, AIMS Math., 7 (2022), 7489–7506. https://doi.org/10.3934/math.2022420 doi: 10.3934/math.2022420
    [37] B. Shiri, G. C. Wu, D. Baleanu, Terminal value problems for the nonlinear systems of fractional differential equations, Appl. Numer. Math., 170 (2021), 162–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnum.2021.06.015 doi: 10.1016/j.apnum.2021.06.015
    [38] G. Yang, B. Shiri, H. Kong, G. C. Wu, Intermediate value problems for fractional differential equations, Comput. Appl. Math., 40 (2021), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40314-021-01590-8 doi: 10.1007/s40314-021-01590-8
    [39] J. Singh, D. Kumar, Z. Hammouch, A. Atangana, A fractional epidemiological model for computer viruses pertaining to a new fractional derivative, Appl. Math. Comput., 316 (2018), 504–515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2017.08.048 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2017.08.048
    [40] J. Singh, D. Kumar, D. Baleanu, On the analysis of chemical kinetics system pertaining to a fractional derivative with Mittag-Leffler type kernel, Chaos, 27 (2017), 103113. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4995032 doi: 10.1063/1.4995032
    [41] J. Singh, D. Kumar, D. Baleanu, On the analysis of fractional diabetes model with exponential law, Adv. Differ. Equ., 2018 (2018), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-018-1680-1 doi: 10.1186/s13662-018-1680-1
    [42] S. Salahshour, T. Allahviranloo, S. Abbasbandy, Solving fuzzy fractional differential equations by fuzzy Laplace transforms, Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul., 17 (2012), 1372–1381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cnsns.2011.07.005 doi: 10.1016/j.cnsns.2011.07.005
    [43] R. P. Agrawal, V. Lakshmikantham, J. J. Nieto, On the concept of solution for fractional differential equations with uncertainty, Nonlinear Anal., 72 (2010), 2859–2862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.na.2009.11.029 doi: 10.1016/j.na.2009.11.029
    [44] B. Bede, S. G. Gal, Generalizations of the differentiability of fuzzy-number-valued functions with applications to fuzzy differential equations, Fuzzy Sets Syst., 151 (2005), 581–599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fss.2004.08.001 doi: 10.1016/j.fss.2004.08.001
    [45] B. Bede, I. J. Rudas, A. L. Bencsik, First order linear fuzzy differential equations under generalized differentiability, Inform. Sci., 177 (2007), 1648–1662. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2006.08.021 doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2006.08.021
    [46] T. H. Zhao, O. Castillo, H. Jahanshahi, A. Yusuf, M. O. Alassafi, F. E. Alsaadi, et al., A fuzzy-based strategy to suppress the novel coronavirus (2019-NCOV) massive outbreak, Appl. Comput. Math., 20 (2021), 160–176.
    [47] S. Ahmad, A. Ullah, K. Shah, S. Salahshour, A. Ahmadian, T. Ciano, Fuzzy fractional-order model of the novel coronavirus, Adv. Differ. Equ., 2020 (2020), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-020-02934-0 doi: 10.1186/s13662-020-02934-0
    [48] T. Allahviranloo, M. B. Ahmadi, Fuzzy Laplace transforms, Soft Comput., 14 (2010), 235–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-008-0397-6 doi: 10.1007/s00500-008-0397-6
    [49] H. J. Zimmermann, Fuzzy set theory–and its applications, Dordrecht: Springer, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0646-0
    [50] L. A. Zadeh, Fuzzy sets, Inform. Control, 8 (1965), 338–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X doi: 10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X
    [51] T. Allahviranloo, Fuzzy fractional differential operators and equations, Cham: Springer, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51272-9
    [52] S. Salahshour, T. Allahviranloo, S. Abbasbandy, Solving fuzzy fractional differential equations by fuzzy Laplace transforms, Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul., 17 (2012), 1372–1381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cnsns.2011.07.005 doi: 10.1016/j.cnsns.2011.07.005
    [53] B. Bede, L. Stefanini, Generalized differentiability of fuzzy-valued functions, Fuzzy Sets Syst., 230 (2013), 119–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fss.2012.10.003 doi: 10.1016/j.fss.2012.10.003
    [54] S. Rashid, F. Jarad, T. M. Jawa, A study of behaviour for fractional order diabetes model via the nonsingular kernel, AIMS Math., 7 (2022), 5072–5092. https://doi.org/10.3934/math.2022282 doi: 10.3934/math.2022282
    [55] K. Diethelm, N. J. Ford, A. D. Freed, Detailed error analysis for a fractional Adams method, Numer. Algorithms, 36 (2004), 31–52. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:NUMA.0000027736.85078.be doi: 10.1023/B:NUMA.0000027736.85078.be
    [56] K. Diethelm, N. J. Ford, Multi-order fractional differential equations and their numerical solution, Appl. Math. Comput., 154 (2004), 621–640. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0096-3003(03)00739-2 doi: 10.1016/S0096-3003(03)00739-2
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Saima Rashid, Ahmed A. El-Deeb, Mustafa Inc, Ali Akgül, Mohammed Zakarya, Wajaree Weera, Stochastic dynamical analysis of the co-infection of the fractional pneumonia and typhoid fever disease model with cost-effective techniques and crossover effects, 2023, 69, 11100168, 35, 10.1016/j.aej.2023.01.027
    2. Maysaa Al Qurashi, Saima Rashid, Ahmed M. Alshehri, Fahd Jarad, Farhat Safdar, New numerical dynamics of the fractional monkeypox virus model transmission pertaining to nonsingular kernels, 2022, 20, 1551-0018, 402, 10.3934/mbe.2023019
    3. Abdon Atangana, Saima Rashid, Analysis of a deterministic-stochastic oncolytic M1 model involving immune response via crossover behaviour: ergodic stationary distribution and extinction, 2023, 8, 2473-6988, 3236, 10.3934/math.2023167
    4. Saowaluck Chasreechai, Muhammad Aamir Ali, Surapol Naowarat, Thanin Sitthiwirattham, Kamsing Nonlaopon, On some Simpson's and Newton's type of inequalities in multiplicative calculus with applications, 2023, 8, 2473-6988, 3885, 10.3934/math.2023193
    5. Z. Avazzadeh, H. Hassani, M. J. Ebadi, Z. Zarei-Behjani, A. Bayati Eshkaftaki, S. Mehrabi, S. Haghighat, Generalized Lerch polynomials: application in fractional model of CAR-T cells for T-cell leukemia, 2023, 138, 2190-5444, 10.1140/epjp/s13360-023-04786-5
    6. Z. Avazzadeh, H. Hassani, P. Agarwal, S. Mehrabi, M. J. Ebadi, M. Sh. Dahaghin, An optimization method for studying fractional-order tuberculosis disease model via generalized Laguerre polynomials, 2023, 27, 1432-7643, 9519, 10.1007/s00500-023-08086-z
    7. Zakieh Avazzadeh, Hossein Hassani, Mohammad Javad Ebadi, Ali Bayati Eshkaftaki, Roghayeh Katani, Alireza Rezvani, Generalization of Bernoulli polynomials to find optimal solution of fractional hematopoietic stem cells model, 2024, 99, 0031-8949, 085015, 10.1088/1402-4896/ad5e44
  • 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(2017) PDF downloads(127) Cited by(7)

Figures and Tables

Figures(9)  /  Tables(1)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog