In this paper, the existence of solutions for impulsive mixed boundary value problems involving Caputo fractional derivatives is obtained. And then, our conclusions are based on Krasnoselskii's fixed point theorem and Arzela-Ascoli theorem. Finally, some examples are given to illustrate the main results.
Citation: Jie Yang, Guoping Chen. Existence of solutions for impulsive hybrid boundary value problems to fractional differential systems[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(8): 8895-8911. doi: 10.3934/math.2021516
[1] | Saowaluck Chasreechai, Sadhasivam Poornima, Panjaiyan Karthikeyann, Kulandhaivel Karthikeyan, Anoop Kumar, Kirti Kaushik, Thanin Sitthiwirattham . A study on the existence results of boundary value problems of fractional relaxation integro-differential equations with impulsive and delay conditions in Banach spaces. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(5): 11468-11485. doi: 10.3934/math.2024563 |
[2] | Yige Zhao, Yibing Sun, Zhi Liu, Yilin Wang . Solvability for boundary value problems of nonlinear fractional differential equations with mixed perturbations of the second type. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(1): 557-567. doi: 10.3934/math.2020037 |
[3] | Abdelkader Amara . Existence results for hybrid fractional differential equations with three-point boundary conditions. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(2): 1074-1088. doi: 10.3934/math.2020075 |
[4] | Yiyun Li, Jingli Xie, Luping Mao . Existence of solutions for the boundary value problem of non-instantaneous impulsive fractional differential equations with $ p $-Laplacian operator. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(9): 17592-17602. doi: 10.3934/math.2022968 |
[5] | Ravi Agarwal, Snezhana Hristova, Donal O'Regan . Integral presentations of the solution of a boundary value problem for impulsive fractional integro-differential equations with Riemann-Liouville derivatives. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 2973-2988. doi: 10.3934/math.2022164 |
[6] | Ala Eddine Taier, Ranchao Wu, Naveed Iqbal . Boundary value problems of hybrid fractional integro-differential systems involving the conformable fractional derivative. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(11): 26260-26274. doi: 10.3934/math.20231339 |
[7] | Xiulin Hu, Lei Wang . Positive solutions to integral boundary value problems for singular delay fractional differential equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(11): 25550-25563. doi: 10.3934/math.20231304 |
[8] | Naimi Abdellouahab, Keltum Bouhali, Loay Alkhalifa, Khaled Zennir . Existence and stability analysis of a problem of the Caputo fractional derivative with mixed conditions. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(3): 6805-6826. doi: 10.3934/math.2025312 |
[9] | Yujun Cui, Chunyu Liang, Yumei Zou . Existence and uniqueness of solutions for a class of fractional differential equation with lower-order derivative dependence. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(2): 3797-3818. doi: 10.3934/math.2025176 |
[10] | Thabet Abdeljawad, Pshtiwan Othman Mohammed, Hari Mohan Srivastava, Eman Al-Sarairah, Artion Kashuri, Kamsing Nonlaopon . Some novel existence and uniqueness results for the Hilfer fractional integro-differential equations with non-instantaneous impulsive multi-point boundary conditions and their application. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(2): 3469-3483. doi: 10.3934/math.2023177 |
In this paper, the existence of solutions for impulsive mixed boundary value problems involving Caputo fractional derivatives is obtained. And then, our conclusions are based on Krasnoselskii's fixed point theorem and Arzela-Ascoli theorem. Finally, some examples are given to illustrate the main results.
Fractional differential equations have used in many engineering and scientific disciplines, such as physics, chemistry, aerodynamics, electrodynamics of complex media, polymer rheology, and other fields [1,2,3]. Many authors obtained solutions for fractional differential equations boundary value problems (BVP) by a fixed point theorem [4,5,6,7,8]. Many established mathmatics methods were applied to the existence solutions of BVP. For example, the numerical method [9,10,11], the Mawhin continuation method [12,13,14], the upper and lower solution method[15,16,17], the critical point theory [18,19,20].
In the past, impulsive differential and partial differential equations have become more and more crucial in mathematical models of real phenomena, especially in the fields of control, biological and medical [21,22,23].
In 2016, Bai and Dong [4] studied the existence of solutions for a class of hybrid BVP for fractional impulsive differential equation:
{CDq0+u(t)=f(t,u(t)),1<q<2,t∈J∖{t1,t2,⋯,tp},Δu∣t=tk=Ik(u(tk)),Δu′∣t=tk=Jk(u(tk)),k=1,2,⋯,p,u(0)+u′(1)=0,u′(0)+u(1)=0, |
where CDq0+ is the Caputo fractional derivative of order q∈(1,2), J=[0,1], f:[0,1]×R→R is a given function, tk satisfy 0=t0<t1<t2<⋯<tp<tp+1=1, the right and left limits of u(t) at t=t+k are represented by u(t+k) and u(t−k).
In 2017, Mahmudov et al. [5] using the same way to investigate the existence and uniqueness of solutions for the following mixed impulsive BVP:
{CDq0+u(t)=f(t,u(t)),1<q<2,J=[0,1],t∈J∖{t1,t2,⋯,tp},Δu∣t=tk=Ik(u(tk)),Δu′∣t=tk=Jk(u(tk)),k=1,2,⋯,p,u(0)+μ1u′(1)=σ1,u′(0)+μ2u(1)=σ2, |
where CDq0+ is the Caputo fractional derivative of order q∈(1,2).
Motivated by the above works, in this paper, we will apply Arzela-Ascoli theorem, Krasnoselskii's fixed point theorem and contraction mapping principle to study the existence of solution for a class of hybrid boundary value problem under impulse conditions. Precisely, we consider the existence and uniqueness of solutions for an impulsive mixed BVP of fractional differential equation:
{CDα0+u(t)=f(t,u(t)),1<α≤2,t∈J′,Δu(tk)=Ik(u(tk)),ΔCDβ0+u(tk)=Jk(u(tk)),0<β≤1,u(0)+κ1CDβ0+u(1)=θ1,CDβ0+u(0)+κ2u(1)=θ2, | (1.1) |
where CDα0+ and CDβ0+ are Caputo fractional derivatives of order α(1<α≤2) and β(0<β≤1) respectively; f:J×R→R,Ik,Jk:R→R are continuous functions; J=[0,1],J′=J∖{t1,t2,⋯,tp} and tk satisfy 0=t0<t1<t2<⋯<tp<tp+1=1,Δu(tk)=u(t+k)−u(t−k),ΔCDβ0+u(tk)=CDβ0+u(t+k)−CDβ0+u(t−k). Here, respectively, the left and the right limits of u(t) at t=tk(k=1,2,⋯,p) are represented by u(t−k) and u(t+k); κ1,κ2,θ1,θ2 are constants and κ1,κ2 are different from zero.
When β=1, the results of (1.1) will be degenerate to Lemma 6 in [5], and κ1=κ2=1, the results degenerate to Lemma 2.4 in [4]. Therefore, this conclusion further expands the research results of [4] and [5].
The structure of this article is as follows. In Sect 2, The definitions and theorems related to Caputo's fractional integral and derivative are given. In Sect 3, the existence and uniqueness of solutions to mixed impulsive boundary value problems are proved by using Arzela-Ascoli theorem and Krasnoselskii's fixed point theorem. In Sect 4, some examples are provided to illustrate the main research results.
In this section, we mainly introduce related definitions, theorems, lemmas and necessary symbol descriptions.
Let PC(J)={u:[0,1]→R|u∈C(J′), u(t+k),u(t−k) exist, and u(t−k)=u(tk),1≤k≤p}. Thus, PC(J) is a Banach space with the norm ‖u‖PC=sup0≤t≤1|u(t)|.
Definition 2.1 ([5]) The fractional integral of order α of a function f:[0,+∞)→R is defined as
Iα0+f(t)=∫t0(t−s)α−1Γ(α)f(s)ds,t>0,α>0, | (2.1) |
provided that the right hand side of the integral is point-wise defined on (0,∞).
Definition 2.2 ([5]) The Caputo fractional-order derivative of order α>0 for a function f:[0,+∞)→R is defined by
CDα0+f(t)=∫t0(t−s)n−α−1Γ(n−α)f(n)(s)ds,t>0,n=[α]+1, | (2.2) |
where [α] denotes the integer part of real number α, and Γ(⋅) is the gamma function.
Lemma 2.3. ([3]) For α>0, the general solution of the fractional differential equation CDαu(t)=0 is given by
u(t)=k0+k1t+k2t2+⋯+kn−1tn−1,ki∈R, | (2.3) |
and
Iα0+(Dα0+u)(t)=u(t)+k0+k1t+k2t2+⋯+kn−1tn−1, | (2.4) |
where n=−[−α],[α] denotes the integer part of the real number α.
Now, we state two known results due to Krasnoselskii and Arzela-Ascoli which are used to prove the existence and uniqueness of solutions of (1.1), respectively.
Lemma 2.4. (Krasnoselskii's fixed point Theorem[24]) Assume C is a closed, convex and non-empty subset of a Banach space H, and the operators A and B be such that: Ax+By∈C, whenever x,y∈C; A is compact and continuous; and B is a contraction mapping. Therefore, there exists z∈C such that z=Az+Bz.
Lemma 2.5. (Arzela-Ascoli Theorem[3]) The set G⊂PC([0,1],Rn) is relatively compact set if and only if G is bounded, therefore, ‖x‖≤M for each x∈G and some M>0; the G is quasi-equicontinuous in [0,1], in other words, for any ε>0 there exists γ>0 such that if x∈G,k∈N, χ1,χ2∈(tk−1,tk] and |χ1−χ2|<γ, we have |x(χ1)−x(χ2)|<ε.
Lemma 2.6. Let α∈(1,2],β∈(0,1], and g:J→R be continuous. A functional u is a solution of the following impulsive hybrid BVP:
{CDα0+u(t)=g(t),1<α≤2,t∈J′,Δu(tk)=Ik(u(tk)),ΔCDβ0+u(tk)=Jk(u(tk)),0<β≤1,u(0)+κ1CDβ0+u(1)=θ1,CDβ0+u(0)+κ2u(1)=θ2, | (2.5) |
if u is a unique solution of the following impulsive fractional integral equation:
(P∗)u(t)={∫t0(t−s)α−1Γ(α)g(s)ds+ν1(t)θ1+ν2(t)θ2−κ2ν1(t)∫10(1−s)α−1Γ(α)g(s)ds−κ1ν1(t)∫10(1−s)α−β−1Γ(α−β)g(s)ds,t∈[0,t1);∫t0(t−s)α−1Γ(α)g(s)ds+ν1(t)θ1+ν2(t)θ2−κ2ν1(t)∫10(1−s)α−1Γ(α)g(s)ds−κ1ν1(t)∫10(1−s)α−β−1Γ(α−β)g(s)ds−Γ(2−β)ν1(t)p∑j=1tβjJj(u(tj))+ν1(t)p∑j=1Ij(u(tj))+Γ(2−β)ν2(t)p∑j=1tβ−1jJj(u(tj))+Γ(2−β)p∑j=k+1tβ−1j(tj−t)Jj(u(tj))−p∑j=k+1Ij(u(tj)),t∈[tk,tk+1],k=1,2,⋯,p−1;∫t0(t−s)α−1Γ(α)g(s)ds+ν1(t)θ1+ν2(t)θ2−κ2ν1(t)∫10(1−s)α−1Γ(α)g(s)ds−κ1ν1(t)∫10(1−s)α−β−1Γ(α−β)g(s)ds+ν1(t)p∑j=1Ij(u(tj))−Γ(2−β)ν1(t)p∑j=1tβjJj(u(tj))+Γ(2−β)ν2(t)p∑j=1tβ−1jJj(u(tj)),t∈(tp,tp+1], |
where κ2≠1+1κ1 and
ν1(t)=Γ(2−β)(1+κ2−κ2t)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2,ν2(t)=Γ(2−β)t−κ1Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2. |
Proof. With the Lemma 2.3, a general solution u of the equationCDα0+u(t)=g(t) on each interval (tk,tk+1](k=0,1,2,⋯,p) is given by
u(t)=Iα0+g(t)+dk+wkt=∫t0(t−s)α−1Γ(α)g(s)ds+dk+wkt,t∈[0,t1), | (2.6) |
for some dk,wk∈R, where t0=0 and tp+1=1.
If 0<β<1, we get
CDβ0+u(t)=∫t0(t−s)α−β−1Γ(α−β)g(s)ds+t1−βΓ(2−β)wk,t∈(tk,tk+1], | (2.7) |
if β=1, we obtain
CDβ0+u(t)=u′(t)=∫t0(t−s)α−2Γ(α−1)g(s)ds+wk,t∈(tk,tk+1], | (2.8) |
where CDβ0+dk=0(0<β≤1),CDβ0+t=t1−βΓ(2−β)(0<β<1). When β=1, (2.7) and (2.8) are equivalent, thus, 0<β≤1, get
CDβ0+u(t)=∫t0(t−s)α−β−1Γ(α−β)g(s)ds+t1−βΓ(2−β)wk,t∈(tk,tk+1]. | (2.9) |
By the (2.6) and (2.9), we obtain u(0)=d0,CDβ0+u(0)=w0, and
u(1)=∫10(1−s)α−1Γ(α)g(s)ds+dp+wp,CDβ0+u(1)=∫10(1−s)α−β−1Γ(α−β)g(s)ds+wpΓ(2−β). |
Using the boundary conditions in (2.5) to get
d0+κ1[∫10(1−s)α−β−1Γ(α−β)g(s)ds+wpΓ(2−β)]=θ1, | (2.10) |
and
w0+κ2[∫10(1−s)α−1Γ(α)g(s)ds+dp+wp]=θ2. | (2.11) |
Next, using the condition of ΔCDβ0+u(tk)=CDβ0+u(t+k)−CDβ0+u(t−k)=Jk(u(tk)), we get
t1−βkΓ(2−β)wk=t1−βkΓ(2−β)wk−1+Jk(u(tk)),wk=wk−1+Γ(2−β)tβ−1kJk(u(tk)),wk+1=wk+Γ(2−β)tβ−1k+1Jk+1(u(tk)),wk+2=wk+1+Γ(2−β)tβ−1k+2Jk+2(u(tk)),wp=wk−1+Γ(2−β)tβ−1pJp(u(tp)),wp=wk−1+Γ(2−β)p∑j=ktβ−1jJj(u(tj)),wk−1=wp−Γ(2−β)p∑j=ktβ−1jJj(u(tj)),wk=wp−Γ(2−β)p∑j=k+1tβ−1jJj(u(tj)). | (2.12) |
In the same way, using the condition of Δu∣t=tk=Ik(u(tk))=u(t+k)−u(t−k), we obtain
dk+wktk=dk−1+wk−1tk+Ik(u(tk)), |
which by (2.12) implies that
dk+(wk−1+Γ(2−β)tβ−1kJk(u(tk)))tk=dk−1+wk−1tk+Ik(u(tk)),dk+wk−1tk+Γ(2−β)tβ−1kJk(u(tk))tk=dk−1+wk−1tk+Ik(u(tk)),dk+Γ(2−β)tβkJk(u(tk))=dk−1+Ik(u(tk)),dk=dk−1−Γ(2−β)tβkJk(u(tk))+Ik(u(tk)),dk=dp+Γ(2−β)p∑j=k+1tβjJj(u(tj))−p∑j=k+1Ij(u(tj)). | (2.13) |
By combining (2.10), (2.11), (2.12) and (2.13), we have
dp+Γ(2−β)p∑j=1tβjJj(u(tj))−p∑j=1Ij(u(tj))+κ1wpΓ(2−β)+κ1∫10(1−s)α−β−1Γ(α−β)g(s)ds=θ1,wp−Γ(2−β)p∑j=1tβ−1jJj(u(tj))+κ2wp+κ2dp+κ2∫10(1−s)α−1Γ(α)g(s)ds=θ2. |
Then
dp=(Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)θ1−(κ1Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)θ2+(κ1κ2Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)∫10(1−s)α−1Γ(α)g(s)ds−(Γ(2−β)(κ1κ2+κ1)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)∫10(1−s)α−β−1Γ(α−β)g(s)ds+(Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)p∑j=1Ij(u(tj))−((Γ(2−β))2(κ2+1)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)p∑j=1tβjJj(u(tj))−(Γ(2−β)κ1Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)p∑j=1tβ−1jJj(u(tj)), | (2.14) |
and
wp=−(Γ(2−β)(κ2)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)θ1+(Γ(2−β)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)θ2−(κ2Γ(2−β)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)∫10(1−s)α−1Γ(α)g(s)ds+(Γ(2−β)(κ1κ2)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)∫10(1−s)α−β−1Γ(α−β)g(s)ds−(Γ(2−β)κ2Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)p∑j=1Ij(u(tj))+((Γ(2−β))2κ2Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)p∑j=1tβjJj(u(tj))+((Γ(2−β))2Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)p∑j=1tβ−1jJj(u(tj)). | (2.15) |
Combining (2.12), (2.13), (2.14) and (2.15), we obtain
dk=dp+Γ(2−β)p∑j=k+1tβjJj(u(tj))−p∑j=k+1Ij(u(tj))=(Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)θ1−(κ1Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)θ2+(κ1κ2Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)∫10(1−s)α−1Γ(α)g(s)ds−(Γ(2−β)(κ1κ2+κ1)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)∫10(1−s)α−β−1Γ(α−β)g(s)ds+(Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)p∑j=1Ij(u(tj))−((Γ(2−β))2(κ2+1)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)p∑j=1tβjJj(u(tj))−(Γ(2−β)κ1Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)p∑j=1tβ−1jJj(u(tj))+Γ(2−β)p∑j=k+1tβjJj(u(tj))−p∑j=k+1Ij(u(tj)), | (2.16) |
and
wk=wp−Γ(2−β)p∑j=k+1tβ−1jJj(u(tj))=−(Γ(2−β)(κ2)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)θ1+(Γ(2−β)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)θ2−(κ2Γ(2−β)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)∫10(1−s)α−1Γ(α)g(s)ds+(Γ(2−β)(κ1κ2)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)∫10(1−s)α−β−1Γ(α−β)g(s)ds−(Γ(2−β)κ2Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)p∑j=1Ij(u(tj))+((Γ(2−β))2κ2Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)p∑j=1tβjJj(u(tj))+((Γ(2−β))2Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)p∑j=1tβ−1jJj(u(tj))−Γ(2−β)p∑j=k+1tβ−1jJj(u(tj)), | (2.17) |
for k=0,1,⋯,p−1. By using (2.16) and (2.17), we get
dk+wkt=(Γ(2−β)(1+κ2−κ2t)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)θ1+(Γ(2−β)t−κ1Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)θ2+(−κ2(Γ(2−β)t−κ1)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)∫10(1−s)α−1Γ(α)g(s)ds+(−κ1Γ(2−β)(1+κ2−κ2t)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)∫10(1−s)α−β−1Γ(α−β)g(s)ds+(Γ(2−β)(1+κ2−κ2t)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)p∑j=1Ij(u(tj))+((Γ(2−β))2(κ2t−κ2−1)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)p∑j=1tβjJj(u(tj))+(Γ(2−β)(Γ(2−β)t−κ1)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2)p∑j=1tβ−1jJj(u(tj))+Γ(2−β)p∑j=k+1tβ−1j(tj−t)Jj(u(tj))−p∑j=k+1Ij(u(tj)). |
Therefore, by the (2.6), we get
u(t)=∫t0(t−s)α−1Γ(α)g(s)ds+ν1(t)θ1+ν2(t)θ2−κ2ν2(t)∫10(1−s)α−1Γ(α)g(s)ds−κ1ν1(t)∫10(1−s)α−β−1Γ(α−β)g(s)ds+ν1(t)p∑j=1Ij(u(tj))−Γ(2−β)ν1(t)p∑j=1tβjJj(u(tj))+Γ(2−β)ν2(t)p∑j=1tβ−1jJj(u(tj))+Γ(2−β)p∑j=k+1tβ−1j(tj−t)Jj(u(tj))−p∑j=k+1Ij(u(tj)), |
where
ν1(t)=Γ(2−β)(1+κ2−κ2t)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2,ν2(t)=Γ(2−β)t−κ1Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2. |
Thus, we obtain (P∗) for solution of (2.5). Conversely, assume that u is a solution of the impulsive fractional integral equation (2.5), then by a direct computation, it follows that the solution given by (P∗) satisfies (2.5). This completes the proof.
In this section, we state and prove the existence and uniqueness results of the fractional boundary value of (1.1) by using the fixed point theorem. We use the following notations throughout this paper:
ν1(t)=Γ(2−β)(1+κ2−κ2t)Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2≤ν1:=Γ(2−β)(1+2|κ2|)|Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2|, |
ν2(t)=Γ(2−β)t−κ1Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2≤ν2:=Γ(2−β)+|κ1||Γ(2−β)(κ2+1)−κ1κ2|. |
In this paper, we following conditions of (H1) and (H2), and then we state and prove our first result.
(H1) The function f:J×R→R is continuous.
(H2) There exist positive constants M1,M2,M3,L1,L2 such that
|f(t,u)−f(t,v)|≤M1|u−v|,t∈[0,1],u,v∈R, |
|Ik(u)−Ik(v)|≤M2|u−v|,|Jk(u)−Jk(v)|≤M3|u−v|, |
|Ik(u)|≤L1,|Jk(u)|≤L2. |
Also it is clear that
|f(t,u)|≤|f(t,u)−f(t,0)|+|f(t,0)|≤M1|u|+L, |
where supt∈[0,1]|f(t,0)|=L.
Theorem 3.1. Assume (H1) and (H2) holds. If
M1(1Γ(α+1)+|κ2|ν2Γ(α+1)+|κ1|ν1Γ(α−β+1))+Γ(2−β)p(ν1+ν2+2)M3+p(ν1+1)M2<1, | (3.1) |
then BVP of (1.1) has a unique solution on [0, 1].
Proof. By using (3.1), r can be chosen as follows :
r>{1−M1Γ(α+1)(1+ν2|κ2|)−M1Γ(α−β+1)ν1|κ1|}−1(LΓ(α+1)+ν1|θ1|+ν2|θ2|+ν1|κ2|LΓ(α+1)+ν2|κ1|LΓ(α−β+1)+Γ(2−β)p(ν1+ν2+2)L2+p(ν1+1)L1). |
Define an operator ϝ:PC([0,1],R)→PC([0,1],R) to transform (1.1) into the fixed point problem
(ϝu)(t)=∫t0(t−s)α−1Γ(α)f(s,u(s))ds+ν1(t)θ1+ν2(t)θ2−κ2ν2(t)∫10(1−s)α−1Γ(α)f(s,u(s))ds−κ1ν1(t)∫10(1−s)α−β−1Γ(α−β)f(s,u(s))ds+ν1(t)p∑j=1Ij(u(tj))−Γ(2−β)ν1(t)p∑j=1tβjJj(u(tj))+Γ(2−β)ν2(t)p∑j=1tβ−1jJj(u(tj))+Γ(2−β)p∑j=k+1tβ−1j(tj−t)Jj(u(tj))−p∑j=k+1Ij(u(tj)), |
where tk<t<tk+1,k=0,⋯,p. Then
|ϝu(t)|≤∫t0(t−s)α−1Γ(α)|f(s,u(s))|ds+|ν1(t)||θ1|+|ν2(t)||θ2|+|κ2||ν2(t)|∫10(1−s)α−1Γ(α)|f(s,u(s))|ds+|κ1||ν1(t)|∫10(1−s)α−β−1Γ(α−β)|f(s,u(s))|ds+|ν1(t)|p∑j=1|Ij(u(tj))|+Γ(2−β)|ν1(t)|p∑j=1|Jj(u(tj))|+Γ(2−β)|ν2(t)|p∑j=1|Jj(u(tj))|+2Γ(2−β)p∑j=k+1|Jj(u(tj))|+p∑j=k+1|Ij(u(tj))|, |
and then
|ϝu|(t)≤∫t0(t−s)α−1Γ(α)|f(s,u(s))−f(s,0)|ds+∫t0(t−s)α−1Γ(α)|f(s,0)|ds+|ν1(t)||θ1|+|ν2(t)||θ2|+|κ2||ν2(t)|[∫10(1−s)α−1Γ(α)|f(s,u(s))−f(s,0)|ds+∫10(1−s)α−1Γ(α)|f(s,0)|ds]+|κ1||ν1(t)|[∫10(1−s)α−β−1Γ(α−β)|f(s,u(s))−f(s,0)|ds+∫10(1−s)α−1Γ(α−β)|f(s,0)|ds]+|ν1(t)|p∑j=1|Ij(u(tj))|+Γ(2−β)|ν1(t)|p∑j=1|Jj(u(tj))|+Γ(2−β)|ν2(t)|p∑j=1|Jj(u(tj))|+2Γ(2−β)p∑j=k+1|Jj(u(tj))|+p∑j=k+1|Ij(u(tj))|. |
Using the upper bound Ik(u)≤L1, we have
p∑j=1|Ij(u(tj))|=|I1(u(t1))|+|I2(u(t2))|+⋯+|Ip−1(u(tp−1))|+|Ip(u(tp))|≤p⏞L1+L1+⋯+L1+L1=pL1, |
and
p∑j=1|Jj(u(tj))|=|J1(u(t1))|+|J2(u(t2))|+⋯+|Jp−1(u(tp−1))|+|Jp(u(tp))|≤p⏞L2+L2+⋯+L2+L2=pL2. |
By the same way, we get
p∑j=k+1|Ij(u(tj))|=|Ik+1(u(tk+1))|+|Ik+2(u(tk+2))|+⋯+|Ip−k−1(u(tp−k−1))|+|Ip−k(u(tp−k))|≤p−k⏞L1+L1+⋯+L1+L1=(p−k)L1≤pL1, |
and
p∑j=k+1|Jj(u(tj))|=|Jk+1(u(tk+1))|+|Jk+2(u(tk+2))|+⋯+|Jp−k−1(u(tp−k−1))|+|Jp−k(u(tp−k))|≤p−k⏞L2+L2+⋯+L2+L2=(p−k)L2≤pL2. |
Thus
|ϝu|(t)≤M1rΓ(α+1)+LΓ(α+1)+ν1|θ1|+ν2|θ2|+ν2|κ2|[M1rΓ(α+1)+LΓ(α+1)]+ν1|κ1|[M1rΓ(α−β+1)+LΓ(α−β+1)]+Γ(2−β)p(ν1+ν2+2)L2+p(ν1+1)L1<r. |
Therefore, for all t∈[0,1], the fixed point of the operator ϝ is the solution of our BVP (1.1). Next, the fixed point theorem is used and then it is shown that ϝ is a contraction mapping and we have
|(ϝu)(t)−(ϝv)(t)|≤∫t0(t−s)α−1Γ(α)|f(s,u(s))−f(s,v(s))|ds+|κ2||ν2(t)|∫10(1−s)α−1Γ(α)|f(s,u(s))−f(s,v(s))|ds+|κ1||ν1(t)|∫10(1−s)α−β−1Γ(α−β)|f(s,u(s))−f(s,v(s))|ds+|ν1(t)|p∑j=1|Ij(u(tj))−Ij(v(tj))|+Γ(2−β)|ν1(t)|p∑j=1|Jj(u(tj))−Jj(v(tj))|+Γ(2−β)|ν2(t)|p∑j=1|Jj(u(tj))−Jj(v(tj))|+2Γ(2−β)p∑j=k+1|Jj(u(tj))−Jj(v(tj))|+p∑j=k+1|Ij(u(tj))−Ij(v(tj))|, |
Thus
|(ϝu)(t)−(ϝv)(t)|≤[M1(1Γ(α+1)+|κ2||ν2(t)|Γ(α+1)+|κ1||ν1(t)|Γ(α−β+1))+Γ(2−β)p(|ν1(t)|+|ν2(t)|+2)M3+p(|ν1(t)|+1)M2]‖u−v‖, |
ϝ is contraction mapping. By condition (3.1), we have
|ϝu−ϝv|≤[M1(1Γ(α+1)+|κ2|ν2Γ(α+1)+|κ1|ν1Γ(α−β+1))+Γ(2−β)p(ν1+ν2+2)M3+p(ν1+1)M2]‖u−v‖ |
Therefore, ϝ is a contraction mapping. The conclusion follows the principle of contraction mapping, that is the unique solution of impulsive mixed BVP can be obtained by using the fixed point theorem.
Theorem 3.2. Assume that |f(t,u)|≤ζ(t) for all (t,u)∈J×R where ζ∈L1μ(J×R),μ∈(0,α−1) and the (H2) holds. If
Γ(2−β)p(ν1+ν2+2)M3+p(ν1+1)M2<1. | (3.2) |
Then problem (1.1) has at least one solution on J.
Proof. Let
r≥‖ζ‖L1μ(J)((1+|κ2|ν2)Γ(α)(α−μ1−μ)1−μ+|κ1|ν1Γ(α−β)(α−β−μ1−μ)1−μ)+Γ(2−β)p(ν1+ν2+2)L2+p(ν1+1)L1, |
and denote Sr={u∈PC(J,R)|‖u‖PC≤r}.
Define the operators B and N on Sr as
(Bu)(t)=∫t0(t−s)α−1Γ(α)f(s,u(s))ds−κ2ν2(t)∫10(1−s)α−1Γ(α)f(s,u(s))ds−κ1ν1(t)∫10(1−s)α−β−1Γ(α−β)f(s,u(s))ds,(Nu)(t)=ν1(t)p∑j=1Ij(u(tj))−Γ(2−β)ν1(t)p∑j=1tβjJj(u(tj))+Γ(2−β)ν2(t)p∑j=1tβ−1jJj(u(tj))+Γ(2−β)p∑j=k+1tβ−1j(tj−t)Jj(u(tj))−p∑j=k+1Ij(u(tj)). |
For any u,v∈Sr(t∈J), using the condition that |f(t,u)≤ζ(t)| and the Hölder inequality, we get
∫t0|(t−s)α−1Γ(α)f(s,u(s))|ds≤(∫t0(t−s)α−11−μds)1−μ(∫t0(ζ(s))1μds)μΓ(α)≤‖ζ‖L1μ(J)Γ(α)(α−μ1−μ)1−μ, |
∫10|(1−s)α−1Γ(α)f(s,u(s))|ds≤(∫10(1−s)α−11−μds)1−μ(∫10(ζ(s))1μds)μΓ(α)≤‖ζ‖L1μ(J)Γ(α)(α−μ1−μ)1−μ, |
and
∫10|(1−s)α−β−1Γ(α−β)f(t,u(s))|ds≤(∫10(1−s)α−β−11−μds)1−μ(∫10(ζ(s))1μds)μΓ(α−β)≤‖ζ‖L1μ(J)Γ(α−β)(α−β−μ1−μ)1−μ. |
Thus
‖(Bu)+(Nv)‖≤(1+|κ2|ν2)‖ζ‖L1μ(J)Γ(α)(α−μ1−μ)1−μ+(|κ1|ν1)‖ζ‖L1μ(J)Γ(α−β)(α−β−μ1−μ)1−μ+Γ(2−β)p(ν1+ν2+2)L2+p(ν1+1)L1=‖ζ‖L1μ(J)((1+|κ2|ν2)Γ(α)(α−μ1−μ)1−μ+|κ1|ν1Γ(α−β)(α−β−μ1−μ)1−μ)+Γ(2−β)p(ν1+ν2+2)L2+p(ν1+1)L1. |
Therefore, Bu+Nv∈Sr. By the (3.2), it is obvious that N is a contraction mapping. And the continuity of f implies that the operator B is continuous. Thus, B is uniformly bounded on Sr where
(Bu)‖≤‖ζ‖L1μ(J)((1+|κ2|ν2)Γ(α)(α−μ1−μ)1−μ+|κ1|ν1Γ(α−β)(α−β−μ1−μ)1−μ)≤r. |
Next the quasi-equicontinuity of the operator B is proved. Let Ω=J×Sr,fsup=sup(t,u)∈Ω|f(t,u)|. For any tk<χ2<χ1≤tk+1, we have
‖(Bu)(χ2)−(Bu)(χ1)‖=|∫χ20(χ2−s)α−1Γ(α)f(s,u(s))ds−∫10κ2ν2(χ2)(1−s)α−1Γ(α)f(s,u(s))ds−∫10κ1ν1(χ2)(1−s)α−β−1Γ(α−β)f(s,u(s))ds−∫χ10(χ1−s)α−1Γ(α)f(s,u(s))ds+∫10κ2ν2(χ1)(1−s)α−1Γ(α)f(s,u(s))ds+∫10κ1ν1(χ1)(1−s)α−β−1Γ(α−β)f(s,u(s))ds|≤fsupΓ(α)|∫χ20(χ2−s)α−1−(χ1−s)α−1ds+∫χ1χ2(χ1−s)α−1ds|+|κ2ν2(χ2−χ1)fsupΓ(α)∫10(1−s)α−1ds|+|κ1ν1(χ1−χ2)fsupΓ(α−β)∫10(1−s)α−β−1ds|≤fsup[(χ2−χ1)α+χα1−χα2Γ(α+1)+|κ2|(χα1−χα2)Γ(α+1)+|κ1|(χα2−χα1)Γ(α−β+1)], |
which tends to zero as χ1→χ2. This proves that B is quasi-equicontinuous on the (tk,tk+1]. So that B is compact by Lemma 2.5, and B is relatively compact on Sr.
Thus all the assumptions of Lemma 2.4 are satisfied and problem (1.1) has at least one solution on J.
In this section, two examples are given to verify the feasibility of the results.
Example 4.1. Let us consider the hybrid fractional BVP:
{CD320+u(t)=sin3u(t)(t+20)2(1+u(t)),t∈[0,1],t≠14,Δu(14)=|u(14|)100+|u(14)|,ΔCD120+u(14)=|u(14|)100+|u(14)|,t=14,u(0)+CD120+u(1)=0,CD120+u(0)+u(1)=0, | (4.1) |
where Ik(u(t))=Jk(u(t))=|u(14|)100+|u(14)|, and α=32,β=12,p=1,f(t,u(t))=sin3u(t)(t+20)2(1+u(t)). Let θ1=θ2=0,M1=M2=M3=L1=L2=1100.
By the f(t,u(t))=sin3u(t)(t+20)2(1+u(t)), (H1) is obviously established. Next, consider the (H2), we obtain
|f(t,u)−f(t,v)|=|sin3u(t)(t+20)2(1+u(t))−sin3v(t)(t+12)2(1+v(t))|≤1400|sin3u(t)(1+u(t))−sin3v(t)(1+v(t))|≤1400(|sin3u(t)−sin3v(t)|+|u(t)−v(t)|)≤1400(3|u(t)−v(t)|+|u(t)−v(t)|)=1100|u−v|. |
Therefore, the |f(t,u)−f(t,v)| is established. By the same way, we have |Ik(u)−Ik(v)|≤M2|u−v|,|Jk(u)−Jk(v)|≤M3|u−v|,|Ik(u)|≤L1 and |Jk(u)|≤L2 are established. Thus, (H2) is completed. Last, consider the condition of (3.1). Because the θ1=θ2=0,M1=M2=M3=1100, we have
ν1:=2Γ(2−β)1−Γ(2−β)≈15.5747,ν2:=1+Γ(2−β)1−Γ(2−β)≈16.5747, |
ν3:=2Γ(2−β)≈1.7724. |
Thus
M1Γ(α+1)+ν1(1Γ(α−β+1)+1Γ(α+1))M1+ν1pM2+Γ(2−β)ν1pM3+2pM2+2ν3pM3+ν1θ1+ν2θ2≈0.6292<1. |
Therefore, all assumptions in the Theorem 3.1 are satisfied. Hence, the fractional impulsive hybrid BVP of (4.1) has a unique solution on [0,1].
Example 4.2. We consider the hybrid fractional BVP of following:
{CD320+u(t)=sint|u(t)|(t+10)2(1+|u(t)|),t∈[0,1],t≠13,Δu(13)=|u(13|)100+|u(13)|,ΔCD120+u(15)=|u(13|)100+|u(13)|,t=13u(0)+CD120+u(1)=0,CD120+u(0)+u(1)=0, | (4.2) |
where Ik(u(t))=Jk(u(t))=|u(13|)100+|u(13)|, and p=1,α=32,β=12,f(t,u(t))=sint|u(t)|(t+10)2(1+|u(t)|). The
ν1:=2Γ(2−β)1−Γ(2−β)≈15.5747,ν2:=1+Γ(2−β)1−Γ(2−β)≈16.5747, |
and
f(t,u)=sint|u|(t+10)2(1+|u|),(t,u)∈[0,1]×[0,+∞). |
Clearly, we obtain
|f(t,u)|≤sint|u|(t+10)2,ζ(t)=sint(t+10)2∈L3([0,1],R), |
and
|f(t,u)−f(t,v)|=|sint|u|(t+10)2−sint|v|(t+10)2|=|sint(t+10)2(|u|−|v|)|≤sint(t+10)2|u−v|. |
Let M2=M3=1100, we get
Γ(2−β)p(ν1+ν2+2)M3+p(ν1+1)M2≈0.4683<1. |
Thus, all assumptions in the Theorem 3.2 are satisfied. Hence, the fractional impulsive mixed BVP of (4.2) has a least one solution on [0,1].
The authors declare there is no conflict of interest.
[1] | S. G. Samko, A. A. Kilbas, O. I. Maricev, Theory and applications: fractional integrals and derivatives, Yverdon: Gordon and Breach, 1993. |
[2] | I. Podlubny, Fractional differential equations, San Diego: Academic Press, 1999. |
[3] | D. D. Bainov, P. S. Simenonv, Impulsive differential equations: periodic solutions and applications, Longman: Harlow, 1993. |
[4] | Z. Bai, X. Dong, C. Yin, Existence results for impulsive nonlinear fractional differential equation with mixed boundary conditions, Bound. Value Probl., 1 (2016), 63–74. |
[5] | N. Mahmudov, S. Unul, On existence of BVP's for impulsive fractional differential equations, Adv. Differ. Equations, 1 (2017), 15–31. |
[6] | K. Eiman, M. Shah, D. S.Baleanu, Study on Krasnoselskii's fixed point theorem for Caputo-Fabrizio fractional differential equations, Adv. Differ. Equations, 9 (2020), 178–187. |
[7] | J. Borah, S. Bora, Existence of mild solution of a class of nonlocal fractional order differential equation with not instantaneous impulses, Fract. Calculus Appl. Anal., 22 (2019), 495–508. |
[8] | T. Suzuki, Generalizations of Edelstein’s fixed point theorem in compact metric spaces, Fixed Point Theory, 20 (2019), 703–714. |
[9] |
P. Pathmanathan, J. Whiteley, A numerical method for cardiac mechanoelectric simulations, Ann. Biomed. Eng., 37 (2009), 860–873. doi: 10.1007/s10439-009-9663-8
![]() |
[10] | R. Vulanoviˊc, T. Nhan, A numerical method for stationary shock problems with monotonic solutions, Numer. Algorithms, 77 (2017), 1117–1139. |
[11] |
I. Boglaev, A parameter uniform numerical method for a nonlinear elliptic reaction-diffusion problem, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 350 (2019), 178–194. doi: 10.1016/j.cam.2018.10.017
![]() |
[12] | J. Mawhin, Topological degree and boundary value problems for nonlinear differential equations, (1993), 74–141. |
[13] | L. Ren, X. Yi, Z. Q. Zhang, Global asymptotic stability of periodic solutions for discrete time delayed BAM neural networks by combining coincidence degree theory with LMI method, Neural Process. Lett., 50 (2018), 1321–1340. |
[14] | G. Herzog, P. Kunstmann, Boundary value problems with solutions in convex sets, Opuscula Mathematica, 39 (2018), 49–60. |
[15] |
Q. Zhang, D. Jiang, Upper and lower solutions method and a second order three-point singular boundary value problem, Comput. Math. Appl., 56 (2008), 1059–1070. doi: 10.1016/j.camwa.2008.01.033
![]() |
[16] |
X. Liu, M. Jia, W. Ge, The method of lower and upper solutions for mixed fractional four-point boundary value problem with p-Laplacian operator, Appl. Math. Lett., 65 (2017), 56–62. doi: 10.1016/j.aml.2016.10.001
![]() |
[17] |
Y. Li, G. Liu, An element-free smoothed radial point interpolation method (EFS-RPIM) for 2D and 3D solid mechanics problems, Comput. Math. Appl., 77 (2019), 441–465. doi: 10.1016/j.camwa.2018.09.047
![]() |
[18] |
J. Feng, Y. Zhou, Existence of solutions for a class of fractional boundary value problems via critical point theory, Comput. Math. Appl., 62 (2011), 1181–1199. doi: 10.1016/j.camwa.2011.03.086
![]() |
[19] |
N. Nyamoradi, Existence and multiplicity of solutions for impulsive fractional differential equations, Mediterr. J. Math., 14 (2017), 85–104. doi: 10.1007/s00009-016-0806-5
![]() |
[20] |
Y. Wang, Existence of periodic solutions for ordinary differential systems in Musielak-Orlicz-Sobolev spaces, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 488 (2020), 124070–12432. doi: 10.1016/j.jmaa.2020.124070
![]() |
[21] | V. Lakshmikantham, D. Bainov, P. Simeonov, Theory of impulsive differential equations, Singapore: World Scientific, 1989. |
[22] | A. Samoilenko, N. Perestyuk, Impulsive differential equations, Singapore: World Scientific, 1995. |
[23] |
M. Benchohra, E. P. Gatsori, J. Henderson, S. K. Ntouyas, Nondensely defined evolution implusive differential inclusions with nonlocal conditions, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 286 (2003), 307–325. doi: 10.1016/S0022-247X(03)00490-6
![]() |
[24] |
T. A. Burton, T. Furumochi, Krasnoselskii's fixed point theorem and stability, Nonlinear Anal., 49 (2002), 445–454. doi: 10.1016/S0362-546X(01)00111-0
![]() |
1. | Peng E, Tingting Xu, Linhua Deng, Yulin Shan, Miao Wan, Weihong Zhou, Solutions of a class of higher order variable coefficient homogeneous differential equations, 2025, 20, 1556-1801, 213, 10.3934/nhm.2025011 |