This manuscript is related to consider a general class of nth order sequential hybrid fractional differential equations (S-HFDEs) with boundary conditions. With the help of the coincidence degree theory of topology, some appropriate results for the existence theory of the aforementioned class are developed. The mentioned degree theory is a powerful tool to investigate nonlinear problems for qualitative theory. A result related to Ulam-Hyers (U-H) stability is also developed for the considered problem. It should be kept in mind that the considered degree theory relaxes the strong compact condition by some weaker one. Hence, it is used as a sophisticated tool in the investigation of the existence theory of solutions to nonlinear problems. Also, an example is given.
Citation: Shaista Gul, Rahmat Ali Khan, Kamal Shah, Thabet Abdeljawad. On a general class of nth order sequential hybrid fractional differential equations with boundary conditions[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(4): 9740-9760. doi: 10.3934/math.2023491
[1] | Abdulwasea Alkhazzan, Wadhah Al-Sadi, Varaporn Wattanakejorn, Hasib Khan, Thanin Sitthiwirattham, Sina Etemad, Shahram Rezapour . A new study on the existence and stability to a system of coupled higher-order nonlinear BVP of hybrid FDEs under the p-Laplacian operator. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(8): 14187-14207. doi: 10.3934/math.2022782 |
[2] | Muath Awadalla, Manigandan Murugesan, Manikandan Kannan, Jihan Alahmadi, Feryal AlAdsani . Utilizing Schaefer's fixed point theorem in nonlinear Caputo sequential fractional differential equation systems. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 14130-14157. doi: 10.3934/math.2024687 |
[3] | Muhammed Jamil, Rahmat Ali Khan, Kamal Shah, Bahaaeldin Abdalla, Thabet Abdeljawad . Application of a tripled fixed point theorem to investigate a nonlinear system of fractional order hybrid sequential integro-differential equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(10): 18708-18728. doi: 10.3934/math.20221029 |
[4] | Ugyen Samdrup Tshering, Ekkarath Thailert, Sotiris K. Ntouyas . Existence and stability results for a coupled system of Hilfer-Hadamard sequential fractional differential equations with multi-point fractional integral boundary conditions. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(9): 25849-25878. doi: 10.3934/math.20241263 |
[5] | Zaid Laadjal, Fahd Jarad . Existence, uniqueness and stability of solutions for generalized proportional fractional hybrid integro-differential equations with Dirichlet boundary conditions. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(1): 1172-1194. doi: 10.3934/math.2023059 |
[6] | Qun Dai, Shidong Liu . Stability of the mixed Caputo fractional integro-differential equation by means of weighted space method. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 2498-2511. doi: 10.3934/math.2022140 |
[7] | Abeer Al Elaiw, Murugesan Manigandan, Muath Awadalla, Kinda Abuasbeh . Existence results by Mönch's fixed point theorem for a tripled system of sequential fractional differential equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(2): 3969-3996. doi: 10.3934/math.2023199 |
[8] | Anumanthappa Ganesh, Swaminathan Deepa, Dumitru Baleanu, Shyam Sundar Santra, Osama Moaaz, Vediyappan Govindan, Rifaqat Ali . Hyers-Ulam-Mittag-Leffler stability of fractional differential equations with two caputo derivative using fractional fourier transform. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 1791-1810. doi: 10.3934/math.2022103 |
[9] | Jiqiang Zhang, Siraj Ul Haq, Akbar Zada, Ioan-Lucian Popa . Stieltjes integral boundary value problem involving a nonlinear multi-term Caputo-type sequential fractional integro-differential equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(12): 28413-28434. doi: 10.3934/math.20231454 |
[10] | Najla Alghamdi, Bashir Ahmad, Esraa Abed Alharbi, Wafa Shammakh . Investigation of multi-term delay fractional differential equations with integro-multipoint boundary conditions. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(5): 12964-12981. doi: 10.3934/math.2024632 |
This manuscript is related to consider a general class of nth order sequential hybrid fractional differential equations (S-HFDEs) with boundary conditions. With the help of the coincidence degree theory of topology, some appropriate results for the existence theory of the aforementioned class are developed. The mentioned degree theory is a powerful tool to investigate nonlinear problems for qualitative theory. A result related to Ulam-Hyers (U-H) stability is also developed for the considered problem. It should be kept in mind that the considered degree theory relaxes the strong compact condition by some weaker one. Hence, it is used as a sophisticated tool in the investigation of the existence theory of solutions to nonlinear problems. Also, an example is given.
Recently fractional calculus has gotten much attention from researchers like traditional calculus. The mentioned area has the ability to describe real-world phenomena in more excellent ways. Also, such derivatives have numerous applications in the description of those systems with memory effects. Due to various applications, the said calculus has been used to investigate various infectious disease models like in [1,2,3]. Also, in the field of physics, engineering, and cosmology, fractional calculus has very well been used. For instance, we refer [4,5,6]. It has been shown that in many applications, the use of fractional calculus provides more realistic models than those obtained via classical ordinary derivatives. Due to this reason, the study of fractional models has received great attention from many researchers in the last few years. As the fractional order derivatives have important characteristics known as the memory effect which ordinary derivatives do not involve. Also, fractional differential operators are nonlocal as compared to the local behavior of integer derivatives. Recently researchers have published some very important results in this regard like [7,8]. Also, authors [9] have published some new results on the numerical scheme for fractional order SEIR epidemic of measles. Here it is remarked that some authors have discussed the geometry of fractional order derivatives. For instance, authors [10] have suggested a geometric interpretation of the fractional derivatives which is based on modern differential geometry and the geometry of jet bundles. In fact, the fractional differential operators are definite integrals that create the complete accumulation or spectrum of the function on whose these applications include the corresponding integer-order counterpart of a special case. In the same way, authors [11] have given the definition of the geometric interpretation of gradient of order (0,1]. In this way, they have suggested some geometric interpretations of the differentiability of real order.
Different problems under the concept of fractional calculus have been studied for the existing theory and stability analysis. One of the important areas is devoted to investigating hybrid problems under the aforesaid concepts. In this regard, different problems under boundary and initial conditions have been studied by using nonlinear analysis and tools of advanced functional analysis. In the present time class of fractional differential equations devoted to the quadratic perturbation of nonlinear differential equations (called hybrid differential equations) has attracted much attention from researchers. This is due to the fact that they include several dynamical systems as special cases. For instance, Dhage and Lakshmikantham [12] discussed the existence theory of the following problem of hybrid differential equations
ddt[u(t)f(t,u(t))]=g(t,u(t)),a.e.t∈[t0,t0+a], |
where
f∈C([t0,t0+a]×R,R∖{0}), and g∈C([t0,t0+a]×R,R). |
They used hybrid fixed point theory to establish the existence of solutions to the proposed problems. In the same way, Dhage and Jadhav[13] studied the existence and uniqueness results for the ordinary first-order hybrid differential equation with perturbation of second type given by
ddt[u(t)−f(t,u(t))]=g(t,u(t)),a.e.t∈[t0,t0+a],u(t0)=u0, |
where f,g∈C([t0,t0+a]×R,R). Motivated from the mentioned mentioned work, Lu et al.[14] studied the following class of FHDEs by replacing the ordinary derivative by Caputo fractional type with 0<σ≤1 as
cDσ[u(t)−f(t,u(t))]=g(t,u(t)),a.e.t∈[t0,t0+a],u(t0)=u0. |
They used the hybrid fixed point theory of Dhage to study the existence and uniqueness of the solution to the mentioned problem.
In the last few years, hybrid fixed point theory has been used to study different problems of hybrid nature for the existence theory in [15,16,17,18]. Also, using the aforementioned tools, authors have established various results devoted to existence theory for different boundary value problems of HFDEs in [19,20,21,22,23]. Also, some authors have studied integral-type FHDEs in [24,25]. Authors [26] have studied a system of FHDEs of thermostats type by using a fixed point approach. Furthermore, authors [27] have investigated a class of FHDEs under mixed-type hybrid integral boundary conditions. In the same way authors in [28,29,30,31,32] have used the tools of nonlinear functional analysis for studying various problems and systems of HFDEs. Here, we remark that authors [33] established a review of the analytical solutions for some generalized classes. In the same line, a class of HFDEs has also been considered in [34]. Authors in [35,36,37] have studied different boundary value problems of fractional order using topological degree theory for the existence theory. Here it should be kept in mind that a hybrid system is a dynamic system that interacts with continuous and discrete dynamics. For, example, the novel multiplex engineering systems involve numerous kinds of process and abstract decision-making units that present the image of various systems simultaneously exhibiting continuous and discrete time dynamics (see details in [38]). Further, the applications of hybrid systems can be found in embedded control systems also (see [39]).
The existence theory of solutions to nonlinear problems is an important area of research in the current scenario. Because the said theory predicts the existence of a solution to a dynamic problem whether it has a solution or not. Usually, for the said theory fixed point theory has been used very well. But fixed point theory needs strong compact conditions which restricted its use in some situations. Also, to deal HFDEs, Dhage established some hybrid-type fixed point theorems to study the existence and uniqueness of the solution to the mentioned problems. However, it also needs the same strong compact conditions. To relax, the criteria and replace strong compact conditions with some weaker compactness, the degree theory has been introduced. It has a sophisticated tool to be used to investigate numerous nonlinear problems of integral, differential, and difference equations for their corresponding solution. The mentioned theory has been used very well for usual problems of fractional order equations. However, in the case of HFDEs, it has not been used properly. For some important contributions by using degree theory to study various problems in fractional calculus, we refer few papers as [40,41,42,43].
In this work, we study a more general class of nonlinear boundary value problems (BVPs) consisting of a more general class of nth order S-HFDEs) together subject to nonlinear boundary conditions. Also, we choose the general case in which the nonlinear functions involved depend on the non-integer order derivatives. Further, necessary conditions required for the uniqueness of a solution to the proposed problem, we implement Caratheódory conditions along with techniques of measure of non-compactness and degree theory. Some new and interesting results are developed. Also, a result devoted to U-H stability is derived for the considered problem. Our proposed problem is stated as
cDϑ[cDωu(t)−m∑1Iβihi(t,u(t),Dρu(t))f(t,u(t),Dρu(t))]=g(t,u(t),Iγu(t)),t∈I=[0,1]u(0)=ψ1(u(η)),u′(0)=0,u″(0)=0,....,u(n−1)(0)=0,u(1)=ψ2(u(η)), | (1.1) |
where 0<ϑ≤1,n−1<ω,βi, γ≤n,n−2<ρ≤n−1 with n≥2, 0<η<1, the functions f:I×R×R→R−{0},hi:I×R×R→R(i=1,2,....,m) and g:I×R×R→R satisfy the Caratheódory conditions. Moreover, ψ1,ψ2:R→R are nonlinear functions. Also, the notation cD denotes the Caputo fractional order derivative and I represents fractional integral. Here, we use the tools mentioned in [44,45,46] to establish a detailed analysis of the considered problem. Also, stability is an important aspect of qualitative theory. In this regard, U-H stability analysis has also considered for some problems of HFDEs. For instance, see [47,48].
The present article is organized as: Section 1 is devoted to the introduction. Section 2 is related to basic results from fractional calculus and degree theory. Section 3 is devoted to the first part of our main results. Section 4 is related to the second part of our main results. The section is consisted of applications to verify our results. Section 6 is devoted to a brief conclusion.
Here it should be kept in mind that we have used the following basic definitions from [1,2] of fractional order derivative and integration.
Definition 2.1. If ϑ>0, then the fractional order integration of a function u∈L1([0,1]) is given by
Iϑ0+u(t)=1Γ(ω)∫t0(t−s)ω−1u(s)ds. |
Definition 2.2. The fractional derivative in Caputo sense of a function u over the interval [0,1] is defined as
cDϑu(t)=1Γ(m−ϑ)∫t0(t−s)n−ϑ−1θ(n)(s)ds, |
where n−1=[ϑ].
Theorem 2.3. The solution of
Iϑ[cDϑu(t)]=y(t),n−1<ϑ≤n, |
is derived as
Iϑ[cDϑu(t)]=y(t)+Citn−1, |
for arbitrary Ci∈R, i=0,1,2,…,n−1=[ϑ].
Let E={u∈C(I):cDω−1u∈C(I)} is Banach space under the norm ‖u‖ρ=max0≤t≤1|u(t)|+max0≤t≤1|cDρu|.
Let P represents family of all bounded sub sets of E, then we define the following measure of non-compactness.
Definition 2.4. [44] The measure due to non-compactness μ:P→R+ is Kuratowski measure which is defined as
μ(S)=inf{ϱ>0 where S∈P such that diameterofS≤ϱ}. |
Definition 2.5. [25] If T1,T2:E→E are μ-Lipschtiz with constants C and C′ respectively, then T1+T2:E→E is μ-Lipschitz with constant C+C′.
Definition 2.6. [25] If T1:S→E is compact, then T1 is μ-Lipschitz with constant C=0.
Definition 2.7. [25] If T1:S→E is Lipschitz with constant C, then T1 is μ-Lipschitz with the same constant C.
We need the given theorem.
Theorem 2.8. [25] Let T:E→E be μ-condensing and
S={u∈E:withλ∈[0,1]asu=λTu}. |
If S is a bounded set in E, so we can find r>0, such that S⊂Dr(0), then the degree
deg(I−λT,Dr(0),0)=1, for all λ∈[0,1]. |
Thus T has at least one fixed point and the set of the fixed points of T lies in Dr(0).
Here, we derive first part of our main results.
Lemma 3.1. The solution of (1.1) can be described as
u(t)=IωΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+m∑1Iω−βihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+ψ1(u(η))+Iωf(t,u(t),cDρ−1u(t))Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))(ψ2(u(η))−ψ1(u(η))−IωΨ(1,u(1),cDρu(1))−Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))−m∑1Iω+βihi(1,u(1),cDρu(1)), | (3.1) |
such that
Ψ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))=f(t,u(t),cDρu(t))Iϑg(t,u(t),Iγu(t)), |
Iωψ(1,u(1),cDρu(1)),Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1)) |
represent value of integral
IωΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t)),Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1)) |
at t=1 and Iω+βihi(1,u(1),cDρu(1)) denotes the value of the integral Iω+βihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t)) at t=1, for i=1,2,3,...m.
Proof. On using Iϑ at both sides of (1.1), one has
cDωu(t)−m∑1Iβihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))=f(t,u(t),cDρu(t))Iϑg(t,u(t),Iγu(t))+C0f(t,u(t),cDρu(t))=Ψ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+C0f(t,u(t),cDρu(t)). |
Hence, we obtain
cDωu(t)=m∑1Iβihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+Ψ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+C0f(t,u(t),cDρu(t)). |
Using Iω and the semi group property of integrals, one has
u(t)=m∑1Iω+βihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+IωΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+C0Iωf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+C1+C2t+⋯+Cntn−1. |
Taking jth order ordinary derivative, one has
uj(t)=∑Iω+βi−jhi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+Iω−jΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+C0Iω−jf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+n∑1Cii!ti−j(i−j+1)!. |
Also, u′(0)=0,u″(0)=0,...,un−1(0)=0 yield C2=0,C3=0,....,Cn=0. Thus
u(t)=m∑1Iω+βihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+IωΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+C0Iωf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+C1. | (3.2) |
Further u(0)=ψ1(u(η)) yields C1=ψ1(u(η)) and using u(1)=ψ2(u(η)), one has
ψ2(u(η))=u(1)=IωΨ(1,u(1),cDρu(1))+m∑1Iω+βihi(1,u(1),cDρu(1))+C0Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))+ψ1(u(η)), |
which implies
[ψ2(u(η))−ψ1(u(η))−IωΨ(1,u(1),cDρu(1))−m∑1Iω+βihi(1,u(1),cDρu(1))]=C0Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1)). |
Hence, we get the given result
C0=[ψ2(u(η))−ψ1(u(η))−IωΨ(1,u(1),cDρu(1))−m∑1Iω+βih(1,u(1),cDρu(1))]Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1)). |
Hence, (3.2) becomes
u(t)=IωΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+m∑1Iω+βihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+Iωf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))×(ψ2(u(η))−IωΨ(1,u(1),cDρu(1))−Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))+ψ1(u(η))−m∑1Iω−βihi(1,u(1),cDρu(1)))=IωΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+m∑1Iω+βihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+ψ1(u(η))+Iωf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))(ψ2(u(η))−ψ1(u(η))−IωΨ(1,u(1),cDρu(1))−Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))−m∑1Iω+βihi(1,u(1),cDρu(1))), |
which can be rewritten as
u(t)=IωΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+m∑1Iω+βihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+ψ1(u(η))+Iωf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))(ψ2(u(η))−ψ1(u(η))−IωΨ(1,u(1),cDρu(1))−Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))−m∑1Iω+βihi(1,u(1),cDρu(1))). | (3.3) |
From (3.3), it follows that
cDρu(t)=Iω−ρΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+m∑1Iω+βi−ρhi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+Iω−ρf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))(ψ2(u(η))−ψ1(u(η)). | (3.4) |
Let define A,B,C:E→E by A=ˉA+ψ1(u(η)),C=(ψ2(u(η))−ψ1(u(η)))−ˉC, where
(ˉAu)(t)=IωΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+m∑1Iω+βihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t)),(Bu)(t)=Iωf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1)),(ˉCu)(t)=IωΨ(1,u(1),cDρu(1))+Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))+m∑1Iω+βihi(1,u(1),cDρu(1))), | (3.5) |
then (3.3) takes the form of the operator equation
u(t)=Au(t)+Bu(t)Cu(t)=Tu(t),t∈I, | (3.6) |
and fixed points of the operator Eq (3.6) are solutions of the BVP (1.1). Further, from (3.4), it follows that
cDρ(ˉAu)(t)=Iω−ρΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+m∑1Iω+βi−ρhi(t,u(t),cDρu(t)),cDρ(Bu)(t)=Iω−ρf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1)),cDρ(ˉCu)(t)=0. | (3.7) |
Using (3.5), and (3.7), we obtain
|(ˉAu)(t)|≤|IωΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|+m∑1|Iω+βihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|,|cDρ(ˉAu)|≤|Iω−ρΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|+m∑1|Iω+βi−ρhi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|,|(Bu)(t)|≤|Iωf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))||Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))|,|cDρ(Bu)(t)|≤|Iω−ρf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))||Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))|,|(ˉCu)(t)|=|IωΨ(1,u(1),cDρu(1))|+|Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))|+m∑1|Iω+βihi(1,u(1),cDω−1u(1)))|,|cDρ(ˉCu)(t)|=0. | (3.8) |
The following data depended results need to be hold to establish our main results.
(H1) f,hi,g fulfill the criteria of Caratheódory conditions.
(H2) For constants τ1,τ2,d1,d2,c1,c2, one has
|ψi(u1(t))−ψi(u2(t))|≤τi|u1−u2|,i=1,2|ψi(u)|≤ci|u|+di,i=1,2. |
(H3) Let we have continuous mappings θi,μ,δ:I→R, with 0<ξ,λ, such that for u∈E that
|hi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|≤|θi(t)|(‖u‖+‖cDρu‖)+ξ=|θi(t)|‖u‖ρ+ξ,|f(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|≤|μ(t)|(‖u‖+‖cDρu‖)+λ=|μ(t)|‖u‖ρ+λ,|g(t,u(t),Iγu(t))|≤δ(t). |
(H4) There exists τi>0, such that for u1,u2∈E,
|f(t,u1(t),cDρu1(t))−f(t,u2(t),cDρu2(t))|≤μ0‖u1−u2‖ρ,|hi(t,u1(t),cDρu1(t))−hi(t,u2(t),cDρu2(t))|≤θi‖u1−u2‖ρ,|g(t,u1(t),(t))−g(t,u2(t),Iγu2(t))|≤δ0‖u1−u2‖,|ψi(u1(t))−ψi(u2(t))|≤τi|u1−u2|,i=1,2, |
where
μ0=maxt∈Iμ(t),δ0=maxt∈Iδ(t),θi=maxt∈I|θi(t)|,i=1,2,3,⋯,m. |
Under the hypothesis (H3), we have the following relation
|Ψ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|≤δ0Γ(ϑ+1)(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ),|IωΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|≤δ0Γ(ω+1)Γ(ϑ+1)(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ),|Iω−ρΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|≤δ0Γ(ω−ρ+1)Γ(ϑ+1)(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ),|Iωf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|≤1Γ(ω+1)(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ),|Iω+βihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|≤1Γ(ω+βi+1)(θi‖u‖ρ+ξ),|Iω+βi−ρhi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|≤1Γ(ω+βi−ρ+1)(θi‖u‖ρ+ξ). | (3.9) |
Using (3.8), and (3.9) together with the hypothesis H2,H3, we obtain the following relations
|(ˉAu)(t)|≤δ0(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ϑ+1)Γ(ω+1)+m∑1(θi‖u‖ρ+ξ)Γ(ω+βi+1),|cDρ(ˉAu)|≤δ0(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ϑ+1)Γ(ω−ρ+1)+m∑1(θi‖u‖ρ+ξ)Γ(ω+βi−ρ+1),|(Bu)(t)|≤(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)ΛΓ(ω+1),|cDρ(Bu)(t)|≤(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)ΛΓ(ω−ρ+1),|(ˉCu)(t)≤δ0(μ0||u||ρ+λ)Γ(ω+1)Γ(ϑ+1)+m∑1(θi‖u||ρ+ξ)Γ(ω+βi+1),|cDρ(ˉCu)(t)|=0, | (3.10) |
where Λ=|IωΨ(1,u(1),cDρu(1)). Thus, under the hypothesis H4, we have the following relation
|Iϑg(t,u1(t),Iγu1(t))−Iϑg(t,u2(t),Iγu2(t))|≤ρ0Γ(ϑ+1)‖u1−u2‖,|Ψ(t,u1(t),cDρu1(t))−Ψ(t,u2(t),cDρu2(t))|≤(δμ+ρ0(‖u‖ρ+λ))Γ(ϑ+1)‖u1−u2‖ρ. | (3.11) |
Further, we have
IωΨ(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1))−IωΨ(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2))=1Γ(ω)[∫t10(t1−s)ω−1Ψ(s,u(s),cDρu(s))ds−∫t20(t2−s)ω−1Ψ(s,u(s),cDρu(s))ds]=1Γ(ω)[∫t10((t1−s)ω−1−(t2−s)ω−1)Ψ(s,u(s),cDρu(s)ds+∫t2t1((t2−s)ω−1−(t2−s)ω−1)Ψ(s,u(s),cDρu(s))ds]. |
Thus, one has
|IωΨ(1t,u(t1),cDρu(t1))−IωΨ(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2))|≤‖Ψ(s,u(s),cDρu(s)‖Γ(ω+1)(2(t2−t1)ω+tω1−tω2), |
which in view of (3.9) implies that
|IωΨ(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1))−IωΨ(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2))|≤δ0(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ϑ+1)Γ(ω+1)(2(t2−t1)ω+tω1−tω2). | (3.12) |
Similarly, in view of (3.9), we obtain
|Iω−ρΨ(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1))−Iω−ρΨ(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2))|≤δ0(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ϑ+1)Γ(ω−ρ)(2(t2−t1)ω−ρ+tω−ρ1−tω−ρ2), | (3.13) |
|Iω+βihi(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1))−Iω+βihi(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2))|≤(θi‖u‖ρ+ξ)Γ(ω+βi+1)(2(t2−t1)ω+βi+tω+βi1−tω+βi2), | (3.14) |
|Iω+βi−ρhi(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1))−Iω+βi−ρhi(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2))|≤(θi‖u‖ρ+ξ)Γ(ω+βi−ρ+1)(2(t2−t1)ω+βi−ρ+tω+βi−ρ1−tω+βi−ρ2), | (3.15) |
|Iωf(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1))−Iωf(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2))|≤((μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω+1)(2(t2−t1)ω+tω1−tω2), | (3.16) |
|Iω−ρf(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1))−Iω−ρf(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2))|≤((μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω−ρ+1)(2(t2−t1)ω−ρ+tω−ρ1−tω−ρ2). | (3.17) |
Hence, it follows that
|Au1(t)−Au2(t)|≤1Γ(ω+1)|Ψ(t,u1(t),Dρu1(t))−Ψ(t,u2(t),Dρu2(t))|+m∑1|hi(t,u1(t),Dρu1(t))−hi(t,u2(t),Dρu2(t))|Γ(ω+βi+1)+|ψ1(u1)(η)−ψ1(u2)(η)|, |
which in view (3.11), and H4 implies that
|Au1(t)−Au2(t)|≤(δμ+ρ0(‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω+1)Γ(ϑ+1)‖u1−u2‖ρ+m∑1|θi|‖u1−u2‖ρΓ(ω+βi+1)+τ1‖u1−u2‖≤((δμ+ρ0(‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω+1)Γ(ϑ+1)+m∑1|θi|Γ(ω+βi+1)+τ1)‖u1−u2‖ρ. | (3.18) |
In addition, we have
|DρAu1(t)−DρAu2(t)|≤Iω−ρ|Ψ(t,u1(t),Dρu1(t))−Ψ(t,u2(t),Dρu2)(t)|+m∑1Iω+βi−ρ|(hi(t,u1(t),Dρu1(t))−hi(t,u2(t),Dρu2(t))|, |
which in view (3.11), and H4 implies that
|DρAu1(t)−DρAu2(t)|≤(δμ+ρ0(‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω−ρ+1)Γ(ϑ+1)‖u1−u2‖ρ+m∑1|θi|‖u1−u2‖ρΓ(ω+βi−ρ+1)=((δμ+ρ0(‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω−ρ+1)Γ(ϑ+1)+m∑1|θi|Γ(ω+βi−ρ+1))‖u1−u2‖ρ. | (3.19) |
From (3.23), and (3.19), it follows that
‖Au1(t)−Au2(t)‖ρ≤((δμ+ρ0(‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ϑ+1)(1Γ(ω+1)+1Γ(ω−ρ+1))+m∑1(|θi|Γ(ω+βi+1)+|θi|Γ(ω+βi−ρ+1))+τ1)‖u1−u2‖ρ=κ1‖u1−u2‖ρ, | (3.20) |
where κ1=(δμ+ρ0(‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ϑ+1)(1Γ(ω+1)+1Γ(ω−ρ+1))+∑m1(|θi|Γ(ω+βi+1)+|θi|Γ(ω+βi−ρ+1))+τ1. Now
|Bu1(t)−Bu2(t)|≤Iω|(f(t,u1(t),Dρu1(t))−f(t,u2(t),Dρu2(t))Λ,|DρBu1(t)−DρBu2(t)|≤Iω−ρ|(f(t,u1(t),Dρu1(t))−f(t,u2(t),Dρu2(t))|Λ, |
using H4 yields
|Bu1(t)−Bu2(t)|≤μ‖u1−u2‖ΛΓ(ω+1),|DρBu1(t)−DρBu2(t)|≤μ‖u1−u2‖ΛΓ(ω−ρ+1). |
Hence, it follows that
‖Bu1−Bu2‖ρ≤μΛ(1Γ(ω+1)+1Γ(ω−ρ+1))‖u1−u2‖ρ=κ2‖u1−u2‖ρ, | (3.21) |
whereκ2=μΛ(1Γ(ω+1)+1Γ(ω−ρ+1)).
|Cu1(t)−Cu2(t)|≤|ψ2(u1)−ψ2(u2)|+|ψ1(u1)−ψ1(u2)|+|IωΨ(1,u1(1),Dρu1(1))−IωΨ(1,u1(1),Dρu1(1))|+|Iωf(1,u1(1),Dρu1(1))−Iωf(1,u1(1),Dρu1(1))|+m∑1|Iω+βihi(1,u1(1),Dρu1(1))−Iω+βihi(1,u1(1),Dρu1(1))|. | (3.22) |
Using(3.11), and H4, we obtain
|Cu1(t)−Cu2(t)|≤(τ1+τ2)|u1−u2|+(δμ+ρ0(‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω+1)Γ(ϑ+1)‖u1−u2‖ρ+μ0Γ(w+1)‖u1−u2‖ρ+m∑1θi‖u1−u2‖ρΓ(ω+βi+1)≤((δμ+ρ0(‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω+1)Γ(ϑ+1)+μ0Γ(w+1)+m∑1|θi|Γ(ω+βi+1)+τ1+τ2)‖u1−u2‖ρ=κ3‖u1−u2‖ρ, | (3.23) |
where κ3=(δμ+ρ0(‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω+1)Γ(ϑ+1)+μ0Γ(w+1)+∑m1|θi|Γ(ω+βi+1)+τ1+τ2.
Theorem 3.2. Under the hypothesis H1–H3, the operator ˉA is compact and satisfies the following growth condition ‖ˉAu‖ρ≤Δ1‖u‖ρ+Δ2, where
Δ1=δ0μ0Γ(ϑ+1)(1Γ(ω+1)+1Γ(ω−ρ+1))+m∑1(θiΓ(ω+βi+1)+θiΓ(ω+βi−ρ+1)), | (3.24) |
and
Δ2=δ0λΓ(ϑ+1)(1Γ(ω+1)+1Γ(ω−ρ+1))+m∑1(ξΓ(ω+βi+1)+ξΓ(ω+β1−ρ+1)). | (3.25) |
Proof. Here (ˉAu)(t)=IωΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+∑m1Iω+βihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t)), clearly, ˉA is continuous on E. Now, for u∈E, using (3.10), we have
‖ˉAu‖ρ=‖ˉAu‖+‖cDρˉAu‖≤δ0(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ϑ+1)(1Γ(ω+1)+1Γ(ω−ρ+1))+m∑1(θi‖u‖ρ+ξ))(1Γ(ω+βi+1)+1Γ(ω+βi−ρ+1))=(δ0μ0Γ(ϑ+1)(1Γ(ω+1)+1Γ(ω−ρ+1))+m∑1(θiΓ(ω+βi+1)+θiΓ(ω+βi−ρ+1)))‖u‖ρ+δ0λΓ(ϑ+1)(1Γ(ω+1)+1Γ(ω−ρ+1))+m∑1(ξΓ(ω+βi+1)+ξΓ(ω+β1−ρ+1)). |
Hence
‖Au‖ρ≤Δ1‖u‖ρ+Δ2. | (3.26) |
(3.26) yields that ˉA is uniformly bounded for bounded set on E. Let, t1<t2∈I, and consider
|ˉA(u)t2−ˉA(u)t1|+|(cDρˉAu)t2−(cDρˉAu)t1|≤|IωΨ(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1))−IωΨ(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2))|+m∑1|Iω+βihi(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1)−Iω+βihi(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2)|. |
In view of (3.12), and (3.14), we obtain
|ˉA(u)t2−ˉA(u)t1|≤δ0Γ(ϑ+1)(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω+1)(2(t2−t1)ω+tω1−tω2)+m∑1(θi‖u‖ρ+ξ)Γ(ω+βi+1)(2(t2−t1)ω+βi+tω+βi1−tω+βi2),, | (3.27) |
in view of (3.13), and (3.15), we obtain
|cDρˉA(u)t2−cDρˉA(u)t1|≤|Iω−ρΨ(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1))−Iω−ρΨ(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2))|+m∑1|Iω+βi−ρhi(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1)−Iω+βi−ρhi(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2)|≤δ0Γ(ϑ+1)(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω−ρ)(2(t2−t1)ω−ρ+tω−ρ1−tω−ρ2)+m∑1(θi‖u‖ρ+ξ)Γ(ω+βi−ρ+1)(2(t2−t1)ω+βi−ρ+tω+βi−ρ1−tω+βi−ρ2). | (3.28) |
From (3.27) and (3.28), it follows that
‖ˉA(u)t2−ˉA(u)t1‖ρ=‖ˉA(u)t2−ˉA(u)t1‖+‖(cDρˉAu)t2−(cDρˉAu)t1‖→0 as t1→t2. | (3.29) |
Thus ˉA is equi continuous, and by Arzelá- Ascoli theorem ˉA is relatively compact. Hence, ˉA is μ- Lipschtiz with constant 0.
Lemma 3.3. Under the hypothesis H1–H3, the operator A is μ-Lipschtiz with constant τ1 and satisfes the following growth condition
‖Au‖ρ≤(Δ1+c1)‖u‖ρ+(Δ2+d1). | (3.30) |
Proof. By H2, the operator ψ1(η) is μ-Lipschtiz with constant τ1 and by Lemma (3.2), the operator ˉA is μ-Lipschtiz with constant 0. Hence, the operator A=ˉA+ψ1(η) is μ-Lipschtiz with constant τ1. Since, ‖ˉAu‖ρ≤Δ1‖u‖ρ+Δ2 by Lemma (3.2), it follows that ‖Au‖ρ≤(Δ1+c1)‖u‖ρ+(Δ2+d1).
Lemma 3.4. Under the hypothesis H1–H3, the operator B is continuous and compact.
Proof. Here, (Bu)(t)=Iωf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1)). Clearly, B is continuous on E and bounded as
|(Bu)(t)|=||Iωf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|Λ≤1. | (3.31) |
For equi-continuity, choose t1<t2∈I, and consider
|B(u)t2−B(u)t1|+|(cDρBu)t2−(cDρBu)t1|≤|Iωf(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2))−Iωf(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1))|Λ. |
In view of (3.16), we obtain
|B(u)t2−B(u)t1|≤((μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω+1)Λ(2(t2−t1)ω+tω1−tω2), | (3.32) |
in view of (3.17), we obtain
|cDρB(u)t2−cDρB(u)t1|≤((μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω−ρ+1)Λ(2(t2−t1)ω−ρ+tω−ρ1−tω−ρ2). | (3.33) |
From (3.32) and (3.33), it follows that
‖B(u)t2−B(u)t1‖ρ=‖B(u)t2−B(u)t1‖+‖(cDρBu)t2−(cDρBu)t1‖→0 as t1→t2. | (3.34) |
Therefore, B is equi continuous. Therefore, using Arzelá- Ascoli theorem, B is compact.
Lemma 3.5. Under the hypothesis H1–H3, the operator ˉC is compact and satisfies the following growth condition
‖ˉCu‖ρ≤Δ3‖u‖ρ+Δ4, | (3.35) |
where
Δ3=δ0μ0Γ(ω+1)Γ(ϑ+1)+μ0Γ(ω+1)+m∑1(θiΓω+βi+1), |
and
Δ4=λδ0Γ(ω+1)Γ(ϑ+1)+λΓ(ω+1)+m∑1ξΓ(ω+βi+1). |
Proof. The continuity of ˉC follows from the definition of ˉC. In addition, we have
|ˉCu(t)|≤|IωΨ(1,u(1),cDρu(1))|+|Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))|+m∑1|Iω+βihi(1,u(1),cDρu(1)))| |
which is in view of (3.9) implies that
|ˉCu(t)|≤δ0(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω+1)Γ(ϑ+1)+1Γ(ω+1)(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)+m∑1(θi‖u‖ρ+ξ)Γ(ω+βi+1). |
Hence, it follows that
‖ˉC(u)‖ρ≤δ0(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω+1)Γ(ϑ+1)+1Γ(ω+1)(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)+m∑1(θi‖u‖ρ+ξ)Γ(ω+βi+1). | (3.36) |
The equi-continuity of ˉC follows from the fact that
|ˉC(u)t2−ˉC(u)t1|=0, for all t1,t2∈I. |
Hence, ˉC is compact and it follows that ˉC is μ-Lipschtiz with constant 0.
Lemma 3.6. Under the hypothesis H1–H3, the operator C is μ-Lipschtiz with constant τ and satisfies the following growth condition
‖Cu‖ρ≤(Δ3+c1)‖u‖ρ+(Δ4+d1). | (3.37) |
Proof. Define F(u)=ψ2(u(η))−ψ1(u(η)), for u1,u2∈E, consider
|F(u2)t−F(u1)t|≤|ψ1(u2(η))−ψ1(u1(η))|+|ψ2(u2(η))−ψ2(u1(η))|, |
which in view of H2 implies that
|F(u2)t−F(u1)t|≤(τ1+τ2)‖u2−u1‖=τ‖u2−u1‖, |
τ=τ1+τ2. Since C=(ψ2(u(η))−ψ1(u(η)))−ˉC=F(u)−ˉC and by Lemma 3.5 ˉC is μ-Lipschtiz with constant 0. Hence, C is μ-Lipschtiz with constant τ. Further, ‖ˉCu‖ρ≤Δ3‖u‖ρ+Δ4 by Lemma 3.5, it follows that
‖Cu‖ρ≤(Δ3+c1)‖u‖ρ+(Δ4+d1). | (3.38) |
Choose the parameters such that Δ1+Δ3+2c1+c2<1. Choose R≥max{τ1+τ,Δ2+Δ4+2d1+d21−(Δ1+Δ3+2c1+c2)}. Define S={u∈E:‖u‖ρ≤R}, then S is closed, convex and bounded subset of E.
Theorem 3.7. Under the assumptions (H1)–(H3), the system (3.6) has at least one solution u∈E provided Δ1+Δ3+2c1+c2<1.
Proof. By Lemma 3.3, the operator A is μ-Lipschitz with constant τ1. Using Lemma 3.6, the operator C is μ-Lipschitz with constant τ. By Lemma 3.4, the operator B is compact. Now for v∈S and u∈E, consider the equation u=Au+BvCu, which implies that
‖u‖ρ≤‖Au||ρ+‖By‖ρ‖Cu‖ρ. |
Using (3.30), (3.31) and (3.37), we obtain
‖u‖ρ≤(Δ1+c1)‖u‖ρ+(Δ2+d1)+(Δ3+c1+c2)‖u‖ρ+(Δ4+d1+d2). |
That implies
(1−(Δ1+Δ3+2c1+c2))‖u‖ρ≤(Δ2+Δ4+2d1+d2). |
Hence, it follows that
‖u‖ρ≤Δ2+Δ4+2d1+d2(1−(Δ1+Δ3+2c1+c2)≤R |
which implies that u∈S. Further we have M=‖Bu‖ρ=1 and R≥τ1+τ. Finally from above, we conclude that (3.6) has at least one solution u∈E.
Theorem 3.8. Under the assumptions (H1)–(H4), the system (3.6) has a unique solution in S provided that
κ1+κ2((Δ3+c1)R+(Δ4+d1))+k3<1. | (3.39) |
Proof. For u1,u2∈S, Consider
‖T(u2)−T(u1)‖ρ=‖Au2+Bu2Cu2−(Au1+Bu1Cu1)‖ρ≤‖Au2−Au1‖ρ+‖Cu1‖ρ‖Bu2−Bu1‖ρ+‖Bu2‖ρ‖Cu2−Cu1‖ρ. | (3.40) |
By (3.20), (3.21), and (3.23), we have
‖Au2−A(u1)‖ρ≤κ1‖u1−u2‖ρ,‖Bu2−B(u1)‖ρ≤κ2‖u1−u2‖ρ,‖Cu2−C(u1)‖ρ≤κ3‖u1−u2‖ρ. | (3.41) |
Using (3.41) in (3.40), we obtain
‖Tu2−Tu1‖ρ≤κ1‖u1−u2‖ρ+‖Cu1‖ρκ2‖u1−u2‖ρ+κ3‖u1−u2‖ρ‖Bu2‖ρ |
which in view of (3.31), and (3.38) implies that
‖Tu2−Tu1‖ρ≤κ1‖u1−u2‖ρ+((Δ3+c1)‖u‖ρ+(Δ4+d1))κ2‖u1−u2‖ρ+κ3‖u1−u2‖ρ. |
Further, the above relation implies that
\begin{equation} \begin{split} \|\mathbb{T}u_1-\mathbb{T}u_2\|_{\rho}&\leq (\kappa_1+\kappa_2((\Delta_3+c_1)\|u\|_{\rho}+(\Delta_4+d_1))+k_3)\|u_1-u_2\|_{\rho}\\& \leq (\kappa_1+\kappa_2((\Delta_3+c_1)R+(\Delta_4+d_1))+k_3)\|u_1-u_2\|_{\rho}, \end{split} \end{equation} | (3.42) |
and uniqueness follows by the Banach contraction principle.
U-H stability result is developed for (1.1). For detail introduction and results of U-H stability, we refer [47,48].
Definition 4.1. The problem (3.6) is said to be U-H stable, if there exists a constant \zeta > 0 , such that for a given \varphi > 0, and for each solution {u} of the inequality
\begin{equation} \begin{split} \|{u}-(\mathbb{A}{u}+\mathbb{B}{u}\mathbb{C}{u})\|_{\rho} < \varphi, \end{split} \end{equation} | (4.1) |
there exists a solution \bar{{u}}(t) of (3.6). Then one has
\begin{equation*} \bar{{u}}(t) = \mathbb{A}\bar{{u}}(t)+\mathbb{B}\bar{{u}}(t)\mathbb{C}\bar{{u}}(t), \end{equation*} |
such that
\begin{equation*} \|{u}-\bar{{u}}\|_{\rho} < \varphi \zeta. \end{equation*} |
Theorem 4.2. Under the assumptions (H_2) and (H_4) , the problem (1.1) is U-H stable provided k+k_1 < 1 .
Proof. Let {u}\in \mathbb{E} satisfies the inequality (4.1), and \bar{{u}}\in \mathbb{E} be a solution of (1.1) which satisfies the Eq (3.6). Consider
\begin{equation} \begin{split} &\|{u}-\bar{{u}}\|_{\rho} = \|{u}-(\mathbb{A}\bar{u}+\mathbb{B}\bar{{u}}\mathbb{C}\bar{{u}})\|_{\rho}\leq \|{u}-(\mathbb{A}u+\mathbb{B}u\mathbb{C}u)\|_{\rho}\\&+\|(\mathbb{A}u+\mathbb{B}u\mathbb{C}u)- (\mathbb{A}\bar{u}+\mathbb{B}\bar{u}\mathbb{C}\bar{u})\|_{\rho} < \varphi+\|\mathbb{T}{u}-\mathbb{T}\bar{{u}}\|_{\rho}. \end{split} \end{equation} | (4.2) |
Now using (3.42) and (4.1), we obtain
\begin{equation} \begin{split} \|{u}-\bar{{u}}\|_{\rho}\leq& \varphi+(\kappa_1+\kappa_2((\Delta_3+c_1)R+(\Delta_4+d_1))+k_3)\|u_1-u_2\|_{\rho}\\& = \varphi+K\|u_1-u_2\|_{\rho}, \end{split} \end{equation} | (4.3) |
where K = \kappa_1+\kappa_2((\Delta_3+c_1)R+(\Delta_4+d_1))+k_3 . Hence, it follows that
\begin{equation*} \begin{split} \|{u}-\bar{{u}}\|_{\rho} < \varphi \zeta, \text{ where }\zeta = \frac{1}{1-K}.\end{split} \end{equation*} |
Here, we present an application to demonstrate our results.
Example 5.1. Consider the following problem by taking n = 2 as
\begin{equation} \begin{split} & ^{c}{\bf D}^{0.5}\Big[\frac{ ^{c}{\bf D}^{1.5} {u}(t)-\sum\limits_{1}^{m} {\bf I}^{1.5} h_i (t, {u}(t), ^{c}{\bf D}^{1.5}{u}(t))} {f(t, {u}(t), ^{c}{\bf D}^{1.5}{u}(t))}\Big] = g(t, {u}(t), {\bf I}^{1.5}{u}(t)), \, t\in \mathrm{I} = [0, 1], \\& u(0) = \psi_1({u}(0.5)), \, u'(0) = 0, \, {u}(1) = \psi_2({u}(0.5)). \end{split} \end{equation} | (5.1) |
Consider
\begin{eqnarray*} h_i(t, {u}(t), ^{c}{\bf D}^{1.5}{u}(t))& = &\frac{\sin|u(t)|+\sin|^{c}{\bf D}^{1.5}u(t)|}{100+t^2}, \\ f(t, {u}(t), ^{c}{\bf D}^{1.5}{u}(t))& = &\frac{\sin|u(t)|+\sqrt{|^{c}{\bf D}^{1.5}u(t)|}}{50+e^{-t^2}}, \\ g(t, {u}(t), {\bf I}^{1.5}{u}(t))& = &\frac{\sqrt{|u(t)|}+{\bf I}^{1.5}u(t)}{150+t}, \\ \psi_1({u}(0.5))& = &\frac{\sin|u(0.5)|}{50}, \ \psi_2({u}(0.5) = \frac{\sin|u(0.5)|}{50}. \end{eqnarray*} |
It is easy to show that the conditions of Theorem 3.2 and 3.8 are satisfied. Therefore, the given problem (5.1) has at least one solution. Further, the solution uniqueness condition also holds. Also, one can obviously verified the condition of U-H stability given in Theorem 4.2.
In this manuscript, a nonlinear problem of S-HFDEs has been investigated by using a sophisticated tool known as topological degree theory. We have used a degree of non-compactness along with Caratheódory condition to establish appropriate results for the qualitative theory. Usually, fixed point theory involves strong compact conditions which require more restrictions on the nonlinear operators. Therefore, to replace the strong compact condition with some weaker compact condition, the proposed degree theory is a powerful tool. The concerned tool has the ability to relax the criteria and hence can be applied to large numbers of nonlinear problems of differential and integral equations. On the other hand, stability is an important consequence of nonlinear analysis. Therefore, a result based on U-H concepts for stability has been established. Finally, to verify our obtained results, we have given an illustrative problem. In the future, the degree theory will be applied in hybrid problems of fractal-fractional differential equations which have the ability to describe complex and irregular geometry in more diligent ways. Also, the mentioned degree theory has not yet been used in dealing with non-singular type hybrid fractional differential equations. Therefore, the aforesaid area will be our next target.
All the authors are thankful to Prince Sultan University for paying the APC and support through TAS research lab.
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
[1] |
S. Ahmad, A. Ullah, Q. M. Al-Mdallal, H. Khan, K. Shah, A. Khan, Fractional order mathematical modeling of COVID-19 transmission, Chaos Soliton. Fract., 139 (2020), 110256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2020.110256 doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2020.110256
![]() |
[2] |
J. Alzabut, S. Tyagi, S. Abbas, Discrete fractional-order BAM neural networks with leakage delay: Existence and stability results, Asian J. Control, 22 (2020), 143–155. https://doi.org/10.1002/asjc.1918 doi: 10.1002/asjc.1918
![]() |
[3] |
J. Alzabut, G. T. Stamov, E. Sermutlu, Positive almost periodic solutions for a delay logarithmic population model, Math. Comput. Model., 53 (2011), 161–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2010.07.029 doi: 10.1016/j.mcm.2010.07.029
![]() |
[4] | R. Hilfer, Applications of fractional calculus in Physics, World scientific, Singapore, 2000. |
[5] |
J. A. T. Machado, M. F. Silva, R. S. Barbosa, I. S. Jesus, C. M. Reis, M. G. Marcos, et al., Some applications of fractional calculus in engineering, Math. Probl. Eng., 2010 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/639801 doi: 10.1155/2010/639801
![]() |
[6] |
M. A. García-Aspeitia, G. Fernandez-Anaya, A. Hernández-Almada, G. Leon, J. Magana, Cosmology under the fractional calculus approach, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 517 (2022), 4813–4826. https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stac3006 doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3006
![]() |
[7] |
H. Mohammadi, S. Kumar, S. Rezapour, S. Etemad, A theoretical study of the Caputo-Fabrizio fractional modeling for hearing loss due to Mumps virus with optimal control, Chaos Soliton. Fract., 144 (2021), 110668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2021.110668 doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2021.110668
![]() |
[8] |
E. F. D. Goufo, S. Kumar, S. B. Mugisha, Similarities in a fifth-order evolution equation with and with no singular kernel, Chaos Soliton. Fract., 130 (2020), 109467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2019.109467 doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2019.109467
![]() |
[9] |
S. Kumar, R. Kumar, M. S. Osman, B. Samet, A wavelet based numerical scheme for fractional order SEIR epidemic of measles by using Genocchi polynomials, Numer. Meth. Part. Differ. Equ., 37 (2021), 1250–1268. https://doi.org/10.1002/num.22577 doi: 10.1002/num.22577
![]() |
[10] |
V. E. Tarasov, Geometric interpretation of fractional-order derivative, Fract. Calc. Appl. Anal., 19 (2016), 1200–1221. https://doi.org/10.1515/fca-2016-0062 doi: 10.1515/fca-2016-0062
![]() |
[11] |
F. B. Adda, Geometric interpretation of the differentiability and gradient of real order, C. R. Acad. Sci. I-Math., 8 (1998), 931–934. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0764-4442(98)80116-X doi: 10.1016/S0764-4442(98)80116-X
![]() |
[12] |
B. C. Dhage, V. Lakshmikantham, Basic results on hybrid differential equations, Nonlinear Anal.-Hybri., 4 (2010), 414–424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nahs.2009.10.005 doi: 10.1016/j.nahs.2009.10.005
![]() |
[13] |
B. C. Dhage, N. Jadhav, Basic results in the theory of hybrid differential equations with linear perturbations of second type, Tamkang J. Math., 44 (2013), 171–186. https://doi.org/10.5556/j.tkjm.44.2013.1086 doi: 10.5556/j.tkjm.44.2013.1086
![]() |
[14] | H. Lu, S. Sun, D. Yang, H. Teng, Theory of fractional hybrid differential equations with linear perturbations of second type, Bound. Value Probl., 2013 (2013), 23. |
[15] |
Y. Zhao, S. Sun, Z. Han, Q. Li, Theory of fractional hybrid differential equations, Comput. Math. Appl., 62 (2011), 1312–1324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.camwa.2011.03.041 doi: 10.1016/j.camwa.2011.03.041
![]() |
[16] | B. Ahmad, S. K. Ntouyas, An existence theorem for fractional hybrid differential inclusions of Hadamard type with Dirichlet boundary conditions, Abstr. Appl. Anal., 2014 (2014), 705809. |
[17] | B. C. Dhage, Quadratic perturbations of periodic boundary value problems of second order ordinary differential equations, Differ. Equat. Appl., 2 (2010), 465–486. |
[18] |
S. Sun, Y. Zhao, Z. Han, Y. Li, The existence of solutions for boundary value problem of fractional hybrid differential equations, Commun. Nonlinear Sci., 17 (2012), 4961–4967. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cnsns.2012.06.001 doi: 10.1016/j.cnsns.2012.06.001
![]() |
[19] | B. C. Dhage, Periodic boundary value problems of first order Caratheodory and discontinuous differential equations, Nonlinear Funct. Anal. Appl., 13 (2008), 323–352. |
[20] | B. C. Dhage, Basic results in the theory of hybrid differential equations with mixed perturbations of second type, Funct. Differ. Equ., 19 (2012), 1–20. |
[21] | S. Sitho, S. K. Ntouyas, J. Tariboon, Existence results for hybrid fractional integro-differential equations, Bound. Value Probl., 2015 (2015), 1–13. |
[22] | B. C. Dhage, S. K. Ntouyas, Existence results for boundary value problems for fractional hybrid differential inclusions, Topol. Method. Nonl. An., 44 (2014), 229–238. |
[23] | B. Ahmad, S. K. Ntouyas, A. Alsaedi, Existence results for a system of coupled hybrid fractional differential equations, The Scientific World J., 2014 (2014), 426438. |
[24] | M. Hannabou, K. Hilal, A. Kajouni, Existence results of hybrid fractional sequential integro-differntial equations, Eng. Math. Lett., 2 (2020), 1–19. |
[25] | F. Isaia, On a nonlinear integral equation without compactness, Acta Math. Univ. Comen., 75 (2006), 233–240. |
[26] | D. Baleanu, S. Etemad, S. Rezapour, A hybrid Caputo fractional modeling for thermostat with hybrid boundary value conditions, Bound. Value Probl., 2020 (2020), 1–6. |
[27] |
D. Baleanu, S. Etemad, S. Rezapour, On a fractional hybrid integro-differential equation with mixed hybrid integral boundary value conditions by using three operators, Alex. Eng. J., 59 (2020), 3019–3027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2020.04.053 doi: 10.1016/j.aej.2020.04.053
![]() |
[28] |
S. Rezapour, A. Imran, A. Hussain, F. Martinez, S. Etemad, M. K. Kaabar, Condensing functions and approximate endpoint criterion for the existence analysis of quantum integro-difference FBVPs, Symmetry, 13 (2021), 469. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym13030469 doi: 10.3390/sym13030469
![]() |
[29] |
S. Rezapour, S. B. Chikh, A. Amara, S. K. Ntouyas, J. Tariboon, S. Etemad, Existence results for Caputo-Hadamard nonlocal fractional multi-order boundary value problems, Mathematics, 9 (2021), 719. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9070719 doi: 10.3390/math9070719
![]() |
[30] |
D. Baleanu, A. Jajarmi, H. Mohammadi, S. Rezapour, A new study on the mathematical modelling of human liver with Caputo-Fabrizio fractional derivative, Chaos Soliton. Fract., 134 (2020), 109705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2020.109705 doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2020.109705
![]() |
[31] |
N. H. Tuan, H. Mohammadi, S. Rezapour, A mathematical model for COVID-19 transmission by using the Caputo fractional derivative, Chaos Soliton. Fract., 140 (2020), 110107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2020.110107 doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2020.110107
![]() |
[32] |
N. Laksaci, A. Boudaoui, K. Abodayeh, W. Shatanawi, T. A. Shatnawi, Existence and uniqueness results of coupled fractional-order differential systems involving Riemann-Liouville derivative in the space Wa+ \gamma_1, 1 (a, b)\times Wa+ \gamma_2, 1 (a, b) with Perov's fixed point theorem, Fractal Fract., 5 (2021), 217. https://doi.org/10.3390/fractalfract5040217 doi: 10.3390/fractalfract5040217
![]() |
[33] | S. Rezapour, S. K. Ntouyas, M. Q. Iqbal, A. Hussain, S. Etemad, J. Tariboon, An analytical survey on the solutions of the generalized double-order-integrodifferential equation, J. Funct. Space., 2021 (2021), 6667757. |
[34] |
S. S. Redhwan, S. L. Shaikh, M. S. Abdo, W. Shatanawi, K. Abodayeh, M. A. Almalahi, et al., Investigating a generalized Hilfer-type fractional differential equation with two-point and integral boundary conditions, AIMS Math., 7 (2022), 1856–1872. https://doi.org/10.3934/math.2022107 doi: 10.3934/math.2022107
![]() |
[35] |
A. Amara, S. Etemad, S. Rezapour, Topological degree theory and Caputo-Hadamard fractional boundary value problems, Adv. Differential Equ., 2020 (2020), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-020-02833-4 doi: 10.1186/s13662-020-02833-4
![]() |
[36] |
D. Baleanu, S. Etemad, S. Pourrazi, S. Rezapour, On the new fractional hybrid boundary value problems with three-point integral hybrid conditions, Adv. Differential Equ., 2019 (2019), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-019-2407-7 doi: 10.1186/s13662-019-2407-7
![]() |
[37] |
A. Boutiara, S. Etemad, A. Hussain, S. Rezapour, The generalized U-H and U-H stability and existence analysis of a coupled hybrid system of integro-differential IVPs involving f-Caputo fractional operators, Adv. Differential Equ., 2021 (2021), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-021-03253-8 doi: 10.1186/s13662-021-03253-8
![]() |
[38] | W. M. Haddad, V. S. Chellaboina, S. G. Nersesov, Impulsive and hybrid dynamical systems: Stability, dissipativity and control, Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2006. |
[39] |
G. Rajchakit, A. Pratap, R. Raja, J. Cao, J. Alzabut, C. Huang, Hybrid control scheme for projective lag synchronization of Riemann-Liouville sense fractional order memristive BAM neural networks with mixed delays, Mathematics, 7 (2019), 759. https://doi.org/10.3390/math7080759 doi: 10.3390/math7080759
![]() |
[40] |
M. Sher, K. Shah, M. Feckan, R. A. Khan, Qualitative analysis of multi-terms fractional order delay differential equations via the topological degree theory, Mathematics, 8 (2020), 218. https://doi.org/10.3390/math8020218 doi: 10.3390/math8020218
![]() |
[41] | M. Jamil, R. A. Khan, K. Shah, Existence theory to a class of boundary value problems of hybrid fractional sequential integro-differential equations, Bound. Value Probl., 2019 (2019), 1–12. |
[42] |
A. Salem, M. Alnegga, Measure of noncompactness for hybrid Langevin fractional differential equations, Axioms, 9 (2020), 59. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms9020059 doi: 10.3390/axioms9020059
![]() |
[43] | Y. J. Cho, Y. Q. Chen, Topological degree theory and applications, Chapman and Hall/CRC, New York, 2006. |
[44] | K. Kuratowski, Topology: Volume I, Elsevier, New York, 2014. |
[45] |
M. Ahmad, A. Zada, J. Alzabut, Stability analysis of a nonlinear coupled implicit switched singular fractional differential system with p-Laplacian, Adv. Differential Equ., 2019 (2019), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-019-2367-y doi: 10.1186/s13662-019-2367-y
![]() |
[46] | K. Deimling, Nonlinear Functional Analysis, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1985. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-00547-7 |
[47] |
I. Ahmad, K. Shah, G. Rahman, D. Baleanu, Stability analysis for a nonlinear coupled system of fractional hybrid delay differential equations, Math. Meth. Appl. Sci., 43 (2020), 8669–8682. https://doi.org/10.1002/mma.6526 doi: 10.1002/mma.6526
![]() |
[48] |
Samina, K. Shah, R. A. Khan, Stability theory to a coupled system of nonlinear fractional hybrid differential equations, Indian J. Pure Appl. Math., 51 (2020), 669–687. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13226-020-0423-7 doi: 10.1007/s13226-020-0423-7
![]() |
1. | Z. Bouazza, M. S. Souid, C. H. C. Hussin, A. Mandangan, S. Sabit, Variable-order Implicit Fractional Differential Equations based on the Kuratowski MNC Technique, 2023, 17, 1823-8343, 305, 10.47836/mjms.17.3.05 | |
2. | Asghar Ahmadkhanlu, Hojjat Afshari, Jehad Alzabut, A new fixed point approach for solutions of a p -Laplacian fractional q -difference boundary value problem with an integral boundary condition, 2024, 9, 2473-6988, 23770, 10.3934/math.20241155 | |
3. | Muslim Malik, Santosh Ruhil, Inverse problem for an abstract neutral differential equation of Sobolev-type, 2023, 11, 26667207, 100235, 10.1016/j.rico.2023.100235 |