Shark bite survivors advocate for non-lethal shark mitigation measures in Australia

Michael J. Rosciszewski-Dodgson; Giuseppe T. Cirella; Michael J. Rosciszewski-Dodgson; Giuseppe T. Cirella

doi:10.3934/environsci.2021036

AIMS Environmental Science

2021, Volume 8, Issue 6: 567-579. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2021036

Previous Article Next Article

Case report

Shark bite survivors advocate for non-lethal shark mitigation measures in Australia

Michael J. Rosciszewski-Dodgson ^1,2,
Giuseppe T. Cirella ^{2
,
,}

1.
Marine Planning and Management, Faculty of Science and Engineering, L69 3BX Liverpool, United Kingdom
2.
Faculty of Economics, University of Gdansk, 81-824 Sopot, Poland

Received: 30 August 2021 Accepted: 17 November 2021 Published: 22 November 2021

As the annual number of shark-related human casualties in Australia increases, there is a need for policymakers to grasp how policy is created in the discourse of shark bite incidences. This is discussed in relation to individuals who have been most affected, i.e., shark bite survivors. The defined argument, being that, victims should feel the most animosity towards sharks, therefore if they show signs of discontent towards culling programs, the government should be compelled to change their strategy. The paper reinforces and challenges assumptions that contribute to the flow of commonly accepted knowledge of shark-human relations by illustrating how shark bite survivors are unlikely marine conservation advocates who support non-lethal shark mitigation methods. Shark bite victims were contacted via two Australian-based organizations and a total of six qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted. Government shark mitigation practices are perceived as heavy handed and further perception- and conservation-based research is needed.

Keywords:

Citation: Michael J. Rosciszewski-Dodgson, Giuseppe T. Cirella. Shark bite survivors advocate for non-lethal shark mitigation measures in Australia[J]. AIMS Environmental Science, 2021, 8(6): 567-579. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2021036

Related Papers:

[1]	Nader Al-Rashidi . Innovative approaches to fractional modeling: Aboodh transform for the Keller-Segel equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 14949-14981. doi: 10.3934/math.2024724
[2]	Humaira Yasmin, Aljawhara H. Almuqrin . Analytical study of time-fractional heat, diffusion, and Burger's equations using Aboodh residual power series and transform iterative methodologies. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 16721-16752. doi: 10.3934/math.2024811
[3]	Muhammad Imran Liaqat, Sina Etemad, Shahram Rezapour, Choonkil Park . A novel analytical Aboodh residual power series method for solving linear and nonlinear time-fractional partial differential equations with variable coefficients. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(9): 16917-16948. doi: 10.3934/math.2022929
[4]	Yousef Jawarneh, Humaira Yasmin, Abdul Hamid Ganie, M. Mossa Al-Sawalha, Amjid Ali . Unification of Adomian decomposition method and ZZ transformation for exploring the dynamics of fractional Kersten-Krasil'shchik coupled KdV-mKdV systems. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(1): 371-390. doi: 10.3934/math.2024021
[5]	Mariam Sultana, Muhammad Waqar, Ali Hasan Ali, Alina Alb Lupaş, F. Ghanim, Zaid Ameen Abduljabbar . Numerical investigation of systems of fractional partial differential equations by new transform iterative technique. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 26649-26670. doi: 10.3934/math.20241296
[6]	Humaira Yasmin, Aljawhara H. Almuqrin . Efficient solutions for time fractional Sawada-Kotera, Ito, and Kaup-Kupershmidt equations using an analytical technique. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(8): 20441-20466. doi: 10.3934/math.2024994
[7]	Aslı Alkan, Halil Anaç . The novel numerical solutions for time-fractional Fornberg-Whitham equation by using fractional natural transform decomposition method. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(9): 25333-25359. doi: 10.3934/math.20241237
[8]	M. Mossa Al-Sawalha, Khalil Hadi Hakami, Mohammad Alqudah, Qasem M. Tawhari, Hussain Gissy . Novel Laplace-integrated least square methods for solving the fractional nonlinear damped Burgers' equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(3): 7099-7126. doi: 10.3934/math.2025324
[9]	Asif Khan, Tayyaba Akram, Arshad Khan, Shabir Ahmad, Kamsing Nonlaopon . Investigation of time fractional nonlinear KdV-Burgers equation under fractional operators with nonsingular kernels. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(1): 1251-1268. doi: 10.3934/math.2023063
[10]	Hayman Thabet, Subhash Kendre, James Peters . Travelling wave solutions for fractional Korteweg-de Vries equations via an approximate-analytical method. AIMS Mathematics, 2019, 4(4): 1203-1222. doi: 10.3934/math.2019.4.1203

Abstract

1. Introduction

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

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

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

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

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

(1.1)

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

(1.2)

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

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

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

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

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

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

2. Basics of fractional calculus

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

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

The Aboodh inverse transform (AIT) is given as:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(2.1)

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

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

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

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

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

(2.2)

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

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

(2.3)

The expressions for Eq (2.3) are as follows:

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

(2.4)

Assume

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

(2.5)

This makes Eq (2.4) as

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

(2.6)

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

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

(2.7)

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

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

(2.8)

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

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

(2.9)

From Eq (2.5), we derive:

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

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

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

(2.10)

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

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

(2.11)

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

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

(2.12)

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

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

(2.13)

Let

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

By Eq (2.13), we drive

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

(2.14)

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

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

(2.15)

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

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

(2.16)

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

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

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

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

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

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

(2.17)

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

Proof. Consider the Taylor's series:

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

(2.18)

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

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

This is achieved by utilizing the AT's features.

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

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

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

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

(2.19)

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

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

(2.20)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(2.21)

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

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

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

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

(2.22)

Using Lemma 2.2, we obtain:

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

(2.23)

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

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

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

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

Lemma 2.3 gives us the result

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

(2.24)

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

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

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

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

Finally, we get:

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

In general,

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

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

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

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

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

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

(2.25)

Apply Theorem 2.5 on Eq (2.25) to obtain:

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

(2.26)

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

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

(2.27)

Equation (2.27) is modified with Lemma 2.2:

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

(2.28)

The absolute of Eq (2.28) gives us

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

(2.29)

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

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

(2.30)

Equation (2.30) yields the desired outcome.

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

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

3. Methodologies

3.1. ARPSM technique

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

Step 1: Assume the general PDE:

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

(3.1)

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

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

(3.2)

Utilizing Lemma 2.1 to modify Eq (3.2),

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

(3.3)

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

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

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

Step 4: Take the steps listed below:

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

Use Theorem 2.6 to obtain this form.

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

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

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

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

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

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

and

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

(3.4)

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

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

(3.5)

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

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

(3.6)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

3.2. ATIM Technique

Let's consider the PDE as given below:

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

(3.7)

The initial condition is

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

(3.8)

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

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

(3.9)

The AIT yields the solution to this problem:

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

(3.10)

An infinite series denotes the ATIM-derived solution.

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

(3.11)

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

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

(3.12)

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

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

(3.13)

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

(3.14)

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

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

(3.15)

4. Application of ARPSM and ATIM

4.1. Example 1 using ARPSM

Consider Kawahara equation of fractional order as follows:

(4.1)

with the initial condition:

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

(4.2)

and exact solution

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

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

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

(4.3)

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

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

(4.4)

Following is the RAF:

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

(4.5)

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

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

(4.6)

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

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

(4.7)

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

(4.8)

and so on.

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

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

(4.9)

Apply AIT to obtain:

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

(4.10)

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

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

$\Omega = 0.1$ .

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

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

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

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Figure 2. Fractional order comparison using ARPSM for

$p = 0.32, 0.52, 0.72$ .

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Figure 3. Fractional order 2D comparison using ARPSM for

$p = 0.32, 0.52, 0.72$ .

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

4.2. Example 1 using ATIM

Consider the Kawahara equation of fractional order:

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

(4.11)

with the initial condition:

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

(4.12)

and exact solution

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

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

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

(4.13)

Apply AIT on Eq (4.13) to obtain:

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

(4.14)

Utilize AT iteratively to get:

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

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

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

(4.15)

Using the ATIM technique, we provide the following terms:

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

(4.16)

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

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

(4.17)

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

(4.18)

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

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

$\Omega = 0.1$ .

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

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

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

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Figure 5. Fractional order comparison using ATIM for

$p = 0.32, 0.52, 0.72$ .

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Figure 6. Fractional order 2D comparison using ATIM for

$p = 0.32, 0.52, 0.72$ .

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

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

$\Omega = 0.1$ .

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

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

4.3. Example 2 using ARPSM

Examine the famous fifth-order KdV equations as follows:

(4.19)

with the initial condition:

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

(4.20)

and exact solution

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

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

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

(4.21)

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

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

(4.22)

Following is the RAF:

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

(4.23)

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

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

(4.24)

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

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

(4.25)

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

(4.26)

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

(4.27)

and so on.

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

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

(4.28)

Apply AIT to obtain:

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

(4.29)

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

Figure 7. Fractional order comparison using ARPSM for

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

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

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

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

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

4.4. Example 2 using ATIM

Examine the famous fifth-order KdV equations as follows:

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

(4.30)

with the initial condition:

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

(4.31)

and exact solution

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

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

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

(4.32)

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

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

(4.33)

Iteratively apply the AT to obtain:

Applying Riemann-Liouville integral on Eq (4.19),

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

(4.34)

The use of the ATIM technique provides the following terms:

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

(4.35)

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

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

(4.36)

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

(4.37)

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

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

$\Omega = 0.1$ .

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

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Figure 9. Fractional order comparison using ATIM for

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

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

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

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

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

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

5. Conclusions

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

Author contributions

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

Acknowledgments

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

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Boissonneault MF, Gladstone W, Scott P, et al. (2005) Grey nurse shark human interactions and portrayals: A study of newspaper portrayals of the grey nurse shark from 1969-2003. Electron Green J 1.
[2]	McCagh C, Sneddon J, Blache D (2015) Killing sharks: The media's role in public and political response to fatal human-shark interactions. Mar Policy 62: 271-278.
[3]	Neff C (2015) The Jaws Effect: How movie narratives are used to influence policy responses to shark bites in Western Australia. Aust J Polit Sci 50: 114-127.
[4]	Neff C, Yang JYH (2013) Shark bites and public attitudes: Policy implications from the first before and after shark bite survey. Mar Policy 38: 545-547.
[5]	Pepin-Neff CL, Wynter T (2018) Reducing fear to influence policy preferences: An experiment with sharks and beach safety policy options. Mar Policy 88: 222-229.
[6]	Neff C (2012) Australian Beach Safety and the Politics of Shark Attacks. Coast Manag 40: 88-106.
[7]	Friedrich LA, Jefferson R, Glegg G (2014) Public perceptions of sharks: Gathering support for shark conservation. Mar Policy 47: 1-7.
[8]	Heithaus MR, Frid A, Wirsing AJ, et al. (2008) Predicting ecological consequences of marine top predator declines. Trends Ecol Evol 23: 202-210.
[9]	MacNeil MA, Chapman DD, Heupel M, et al. (2020) Global status and conservation potential of reef sharks. Nature 583: 801-806.
[10]	Kraska J, Gaskins L (2015) Can Sharks be Saved? A Global Plan of Action for Shark Conservation in the Regime of the Convention on Migratory Species. Seattle J Environ Law 5.
[11]	Dulvy NK, Fowler SL, Musick JA, et al. (2014) Extinction risk and conservation of the world's sharks and rays. Elife 2014: 590.
[12]	Birkmanis CA, Partridge JC, Simmons LW, et al. (2020) Shark conservation hindered by lack of habitat protection. Glob Ecol Conserv 21: e00862.
[13]	Muter BA, Gore ML, Gledhill KS, et al. (2013) Australian and U.S. News Media Portrayal of Sharks and Their Conservation. Conserv Biol 27: 187-196.
[14]	Kobori H, Dickinson JL, Washitani I, et al. (2016) Citizen science: A new approach to advance ecology, education, and conservation. Ecol Res 31: 1-19.
[15]	Ferretti F, Worm B, Britten GL, et al. (2010) Patterns and ecosystem consequences of shark declines in the ocean. Ecol Lett 13: 1055-1071.
[16]	Ferretti F, Myers RA, Serena F, et al. (2008) Loss of large predatory sharks from the Mediterranean Sea. Conserv Biol 22: 952-964.
[17]	Bargnesi F, Lucrezi S, Ferretti F (2020) Opportunities from citizen science for shark conservation, with a focus on the Mediterranean Sea. Eur Zool J 87: 20-34.
[18]	Gallagher AJ, Hammerschlag N (2011) Global shark currency: The distribution frequency and economic value of shark ecotourism. Curr Issues Tour 14: 797-812.
[19]	Acuña-Marrero D, Cruz-Modino R de la, Smith ANH, et al. (2018) Understanding human attitudes towards sharks to promote sustainable coexistence. Mar Policy 91: 122-128.
[20]	Huveneers C, Meekan MG, Apps K, et al. (2017) The economic value of shark-diving tourism in Australia. Rev Fish Biol Fish 27: 665-680.
[21]	Connolly E (2008) The Guardian, Australian snorkeller snatched by shark, 2008. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/dec/28/australia-sharks-attacks.
[22]	Government of Western Australia (2019) SharkSmart—Shark Mitigation Strategy, 2019. Available from: https://www.sharksmart.com.au/strategy/.
[23]	Pearl H (2017) Reuters, Spate of Australia shark attacks could take a bite out of tourism, 2017. Available from: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-australia-sharkattack-tourism/spate-of-australia-shark-attacks-could-take-a-bite-out-of-tourism-idUSKBN15B0KJ.
[24]	Bradshaw CJA, Meagher P, Thiele MJ, et al. (2021) Predicting potential future reduction in shark bites on people. R Soc Open Sci 8.
[25]	Gouk C, Pasricha D, Lingathas S (2015) Shark attack: The emergency presentation and management. BMJ Case Rep 2015.
[26]	Taylor J, McLean L, Korner A, et al. (2019) Direct and indirect psychological impacts of shark-bite events. Aust N Z J Psychiatry 53: 27-36.
[27]	Huveneers C, Apps K, Becerril-García EE, et al. (2018) Future research directions on the 'elusive' white shark. Front Mar Sci 5: 455.
[28]	NSW Government (2019) Shark Management Strategy—Factsheet, 2019. Available from: moz-extension: //02805074-57cf-42f1-ad92-bcd9be2260bf/enhanced-reader.html?openApp & pdf = http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dpi.nsw.gov.au%2F__data%2Fassets%2Fpdf_file%2F0006%2F581694%2Fnsw-shark-management-strategy-factsheet.pdf.
[29]	Clua EEG, Linnell JDC (2019) Individual shark profiling: An innovative and environmentally responsible approach for selectively managing human fatalities. Conserv Lett 12: e12612.
[30]	Molina JM, Cooke SJ (2012) Trends in shark bycatch research: Current status and research needs. Rev Fish Biol Fish 22: 719-737.
[31]	Dudley SFJ (1997) A comparison of the shark control programs of New South Wales and Queensland (Australia) and KwaZulu-Natal (South Africa). Ocean Coast Manag 34: 1-27.
[32]	Guyomard D, Perry C, Tournoux PU, et al. (2019) An innovative fishing gear to enhance the release of non-target species in coastal shark-control programs: The SMART (shark management alert in real-time) drumline. Fish Res 216: 6-17.
[33]	Oliver S, Braccini M, Newman SJ, et al. (2015) Global patterns in the bycatch of sharks and rays. Mar Policy 54: 86-97.
[34]	Gray GME, Gray CA (2017) Human Dimensions of Wildlife An International Journal Beach—User Attitudes to Shark Bite Mitigation Strategies on Coastal Beaches; Sydney, Australia. Hum Dimens Wildl An Int J.
[35]	Bornatowski H, Hussey NE, Sampaio CLS, et al. (2019) Geographic bias in the media reporting of aquatic versus terrestrial human predator conflicts and its conservation implications. Perspect Ecol Conserv 17: 32-35.
[36]	Marowa I, Matanzima J (2021) Interactions between humans, crocodiles, and hippos at Lake Kariba, Zimbabwe. Human-Wildlife Interact 15: 212-227.
[37]	Songhurst A (2017) Measuring human-wildlife conflicts: Comparing insights from different monitoring approaches. Wildl Soc Bull 41: 351-361.
[38]	Acharya KP, Paudel PK, Neupane PR, et al. (2016) Human-wildlife conflicts in Nepal: Patterns of human fatalities and injuries caused by large mammals. PLoS One 11.
[39]	Saleem S, Jan S, Khan S (2020) Qualitative analysis of the perception of street dog bite victims and implication for the prevention of dog bites at a teaching hospital anti-rabies Clinic. J Fam Med Prim care 9: 4118.
[40]	Magaldi D, Berler M (2018) Semi-structured Interviews, Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences, Springer International Publishing, 1-6.
[41]	McIntosh MJ, Morse JM (2015) Situating and Constructing Diversity in Semi-Structured Interviews. Glob Qual Nurs Res 2: 2333393615597674.
[42]	DeJonckheere M, Vaughn LM (2019) Semistructured interviewing in primary care research: A balance of relationship and rigour. Fam Med Community Heal 7: 57.
[43]	Jamshed S (2014) Qualitative research method-interviewing and observation. J Basic Clin Pharm 5: 87.
[44]	Alshenqeeti H (2014) Interviewing as a data collection method: A critical review. English Linguist Res 3: 39.
[45]	Iacono V Lo, Symonds P, Brown DHK (2016) Skype as a tool for qualitative research interviews. Sociol Res Online 21: 12.
[46]	Salazar MK (2016) Interviewer bias: How it affects survey research. Workplace Health Saf 38: 567-572.
[47]	Naslund JA, Aschbrenner KA, Marsch LA, et al. (2016) The future of mental health care: Peer-to-peer support and social media. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci 25: 113-122.
[48]	Castleberry A, Nolen A (2018) Thematic analysis of qualitative research data: Is it as easy as it sounds? Curr Pharm Teach Learn 10: 807-815.
[49]	Walsh RS, McClean B, Doyle N, et al. (2019) A thematic analysis investigating the impact of positive behavioral support training on the lives of service providers: "It makes you think differently". Front Psychol 10: 2408.
[50]	Xu W, Zammit K (2020) Applying thematic analysis to education: A hybrid approach to interpreting data in practitioner research. Int J Qual Methods 19: 160940692091881.
[51]	Attride-Stirling J (2001) Thematic networks: An analytic tool for qualitative research. Qual Res 1: 385-405.
[52]	Nowell LS, Norris JM, White DE, et al. (2017) Thematic analysis. Int J Qual Methods 16: 160940691773384.
[53]	Kiger ME, Varpio L (2020) Thematic analysis of qualitative data: AMEE guide no. 131. Med Teach 42: 846-854.
[54]	Braun V, Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 3: 77-101.
[55]	Vining J (2003) The connection to other animals and caring for nature. Hum Ecol Rev 10: 87-99.
[56]	Thomas-Walters L, McNulty C, Veríssimo D (2019) A scoping review into the impact of animal imagery on pro-environmental outcomes. Ambio 49: 1135-1145.
[57]	Grajal A, Luebke J, Kelly L, et al. (2017) The complex relationship between personal sense of connection to animals and self-reported proenvironmental behaviors by zoo visitors. Conserv Biol 31: 322-330.
[58]	McKinley E, Fletcher S (2010) Individual responsibility for the oceans? An evaluation of marine citizenship by UK marine practitioners. Ocean Coast Manag 53: 379-384.
[59]	Schildkraut J, Sokolowski ES, Nicoletti J (2020) The survivor network: the role of shared experiences in mass shootings recovery. Victims & Offenders 16: 20-49.
[60]	Ali K, Farrer L, Gulliver A, et al. (2015) Online peer-to-peer support for young people with mental health problems: A systematic review. JMIR Ment Heal 2.
[61]	Smith-Frigerio S (2020) 'You are not alone': Linking peer support to information and resources for mental health concerns in advocacy groups' social media messaging. Health Commun 1: 1-10.
[62]	Hayes JP, VanElzakker MB, Shin LM (2012) Emotion and cognition interactions in PTSD: A review of neurocognitive and neuroimaging studies. Front Integr Neurosci 0: 89.
[63]	Gibbs L, Fetterplace L, Rees M, et al. (2020) Effects and effectiveness of lethal shark hazard management: The Shark Meshing (Bather Protection) Program, NSW, Australia. People Nat 2: 189-203.
[64]	Gibbs LM (2016) More shark nets for NSW: Why haven't we learned from WA' s cull?, Wollongong, University of Wollongong.
[65]	Brazier W, Nel R, Cliff G, et al. (2012) Impact of protective shark nets on sea turtles in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, 1981-2008. African J Mar Sci 34: 249-257.
[66]	Cosandey-Godin A, Morgan A (2011) Fisheries bycatch of sharks: Options for mitigation, Washington, D.C., Pew Research.
[67]	Sumpton WD, Taylor SM, Gribble NA, et al. (2011) Gear selectivity of large-mesh nets and drumlines used to catch sharks in the Queensland Shark Control Program. African J Mar Sci 33: 37-43.
[68]	Guyomard D, Lee KA, Perry C, et al. (2020) SMART drumlines at Réunion Island do not attract bull sharks Carcharhinus leucas into nearshore waters: Evidence from acoustic monitoring. Fish Res 225: 105480.
[69]	Tate RD, Cullis BR, Smith SDA, et al. (2019) The acute physiological status of white sharks (Carcharodon carcharias) exhibits minimal variation after capture on SMART drumlines. Conserv Physiol 7.
[70]	Pepin-Neff C, Wynter T (2018) Save the sharks: Reevaluating and (re)valuing feared predators. Hum Dimens Wildl 24: 87-94.
[71]	Sergio F, Blas J, Forero M, et al. (2005) Preservation of wide-ranging top predators by site-protection: Black and red kites in Doñana National Park. Biol Conserv 125: 11-21.
[72]	Villafaña JA, Hernandez S, Alvarado A, et al. (2020) First evidence of a palaeo-nursery area of the great white shark. Sci Rep 10: 1-8.

This article has been cited by:

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

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2021 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

AIMS Environmental Science

1.2 2.7

Metrics

Article views(3510) PDF downloads(129) Cited by(3)

Preview PDF

Download XML

Export Citation

Article outline

Show full outline

Figures and Tables

Tables(1)

AIMS Environmental Science

Shark bite survivors advocate for non-lethal shark mitigation measures in Australia

Related Papers:

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Basics of fractional calculus

3. Methodologies

3.1. ARPSM technique

3.2. ATIM Technique

4. Application of ARPSM and ATIM

4.1. Example 1 using ARPSM

4.2. Example 1 using ATIM

4.3. Example 2 using ARPSM

4.4. Example 2 using ATIM

5. Conclusions

Author contributions

Acknowledgments

Conflict of interest

References

This article has been cited by:

Reader Comments

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

Metrics

Figures and Tables

Other Articles By Authors

Catalog

AIMS Environmental Science

Shark bite survivors advocate for non-lethal shark mitigation measures in Australia

Related Papers:

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Basics of fractional calculus

3. Methodologies

3.1. ARPSM technique

3.2. ATIM Technique

4. Application of ARPSM and ATIM

4.1. Example 1 using ARPSM

4.2. Example 1 using ATIM

4.3. Example 2 using ARPSM

4.4. Example 2 using ATIM

5. Conclusions

Author contributions

Acknowledgments

Conflict of interest

References

This article has been cited by:

Reader Comments

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

Metrics

Figures and Tables

Other Articles By Authors

Related pages

Tools

Export File

Citation

Format

Content

Catalog