
In the present paper we describe Jordan matrix algebras over a field by generators and relations. We prove that the minimun number of generators of some special Jordan matrix algebras over a field is 2.
Citation: Yingyu Luo, Yu Wang, Junjie Gu, Huihui Wang. Jordan matrix algebras defined by generators and relations[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 3047-3055. doi: 10.3934/math.2022168
[1] | Ahmed Alshehri, Saif Ullah . Optimal control analysis of Monkeypox disease with the impact of environmental transmission. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(7): 16926-16960. doi: 10.3934/math.2023865 |
[2] | Suprawee Lertnaweephorn, Usa Wannasigha Humphries, Amir Khan . Stability analysis and optimal control for leaf brown spot disease of rice. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(4): 9602-9623. doi: 10.3934/math.2023485 |
[3] | Shinta A. Rahmayani, Dipo Aldila, Bevina D. Handari . Cost-effectiveness analysis on measles transmission with vaccination and treatment intervention. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(11): 12491-12527. doi: 10.3934/math.2021721 |
[4] | Meroua Medjoudja, Mohammed El hadi Mezabia, Muhammad Bilal Riaz, Ahmed Boudaoui, Saif Ullah, Fuad A. Awwad . A novel computational fractional modeling approach for the global dynamics and optimal control strategies in mitigating Marburg infection. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(5): 13159-13194. doi: 10.3934/math.2024642 |
[5] | Mingzhan Huang, Shouzong Liu, Ying Zhang . Mathematical modeling and analysis of biological control strategy of aphid population. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 6876-6897. doi: 10.3934/math.2022382 |
[6] | Youming Guo, Tingting Li . Dynamics and optimal control of an online game addiction model with considering family education. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(3): 3745-3770. doi: 10.3934/math.2022208 |
[7] | Huihui Zhong, Weijian Wen, Jianjun Fan, Weijun Yang . Reinforcement learning-based adaptive tracking control for flexible-joint robotic manipulators. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 27330-27360. doi: 10.3934/math.20241328 |
[8] | Sayed Saber, Azza M. Alghamdi, Ghada A. Ahmed, Khulud M. Alshehri . Mathematical Modelling and optimal control of pneumonia disease in sheep and goats in Al-Baha region with cost-effective strategies. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(7): 12011-12049. doi: 10.3934/math.2022669 |
[9] | Houssine Zine, Abderrahim El Adraoui, Delfim F. M. Torres . Mathematical analysis, forecasting and optimal control of HIV/AIDS spatiotemporal transmission with a reaction diffusion SICA model. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(9): 16519-16535. doi: 10.3934/math.2022904 |
[10] | Kai Zhang, Yunpeng Ji, Qiuwei Pan, Yumei Wei, Yong Ye, Hua Liu . Sensitivity analysis and optimal treatment control for a mathematical model of Human Papillomavirus infection. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(3): 2646-2670. doi: 10.3934/math.2020172 |
In the present paper we describe Jordan matrix algebras over a field by generators and relations. We prove that the minimun number of generators of some special Jordan matrix algebras over a field is 2.
In this paper, we consider only undirected, connected, and simple graphs. We use V(G) and E(G) to denote the vertex set and the edge set of a graph G, respectively.
An edge-coloring of a graph G is an assignment of colors to its edges so that no two edges incident to the same vertex receive the same color. An edge-coloring σ of G using k colors (k edge-coloring) is then a partition of the edge set E(G) into k disjoint matchings and it can be written as σ=(M1,M2,…,Mk), where every Mi is a matching of G. The chromatic index of G, denoted by χ′(G), is the least k for which G has a k edge-coloring. The Vizing Theorem states that χ′(G)=Δ(G) or χ′(G)=Δ(G)+1. Graphs with χ′(G)=Δ(G) are said to be Class 1; graphs with χ′(G)=Δ(G)+1 are said to be Class 2. It is NP-complete to determine whether a graph is Class 1 [3]. The classification problem is extremely difficult even for regular graphs. For this problem, Chetwynd and Hilton [1] proposed the following conjecture:
Conjecture 1.1 (1-Factorization Conjecture). Let G be a k-regular graph with n vertices, n even. If k≥n2 then χ′(G)=k.
In this paper, we consider the generalized lexicographic product of graphs, which is defined as follows [10]: Let G be a graph with V(G)={t1,t2,…,tn}, n≥2, and hn=(Hi)i∈{1,2,…,n} be a sequence of vertex-disjoint graphs with V(Hi)={(ti,y1),(ti,y2),…,(ti,ymi)}, mi≥1. The generalized lexicographic product G[hn] of G and hn=(Hi)i∈{1,2,…,n} is a simple graph with vertex set ⋃ni=1V(Hi), in which (ti,yp) is adjacent to (tj,yq) if and only if either ti=tj and (ti,yp)(ti,yq)∈E(Hi) or titj∈E(G). A generalized lexicographic product is also called an expansion or composition (see[11]).
By Vi, i=1,2,…,n we will denote the vertex set of graph Hi in G[hn], and call the sets V1,V2,…,Vn the partition sets of G[hn]. If Hi≅H for i=1,2,…,n, then G[hn]=G[H], where G[H] is the lexicographic product of two graphs G and H. For example, the join H1+H2 of vertex-disjoint graphs H1 and H2 is K2[h2], where h2=(Hi)i∈{1,2}. In addition, Turán graphs Tr−1(n) (see[2]) are complete (r−1)-partite graphs with n≥r−1 vertices whose partition sets differ in size by at most 1, that is, Tr−1(n) are Kr−1[hr−1], where hr−1=(Hi)i∈{1,2,…,r−1} is a sequence of vertex-disjoint empty graphs with ⌊nr−1⌋ vertices or ⌈nr−1⌉ vertices.
De Simone and Picinin de Mello [9] gave the following sufficient conditions for a join graph to be Class 1:
Theorem 1.1. Let G=H1+H2 be a join graph with |V(H1)|≤|V(H2)|. If Δ(H1)>Δ(H2), then G is Class 1.
Theorem 1.2. Let G=H1+H2 be a join graph with Δ(H1)=Δ(H2). If both H1 and H2 are Class 1, or if H1 is a subgraph of H2, or if both H1 and H2 are disjoint unions of cliques, then G is Class 1.
Theorem 1.3. Every regular join graph G=H1+H2 with Δ(H1)=Δ(H2) is Class 1.
De Simone and Galluccio [8] showed that 1-Factorization Conjecture is true for graphs that are join of two graphs:
Theorem 1.4. Every regular join graph with even order is Class1.
De Simone and Galluccio [6,7] extended the above result, and proved the following conclusions:
Theorem 1.5. Every even graph that is the join of two regular graphs is Class 1.
Mohar [5] and Jaradat [4] gave the following sufficient conditions for a lexicographic product of graphs to be Class 1:
Theorem 1.6. Let G and H be two graphs. If G is Class 1, then G[H] is Class 1.
Theorem 1.7. Let G and H be two graphs. If χ′(H)=Δ(H) and H is of even order, then χ′(G[H])=Δ(G[H]).
By Theorems 1.6 and 1.7, it is easy to see that for any two regular graphs G and H, if 1-Factorization Conjecture is true for the graph G, or 1-Factorization Conjecture is true for the graph H and Δ(G)≥|V(G)|−12, then this conjecture is also true for graphs that are lexicographic product G[H] of G and H.
In this paper, our goal is to find sufficient conditions for a generalized lexicographic product G[hn] of G and hn=(Hi)i∈{1,2,…,n} to be Class 1, where G is a graph with n vertices and all graphs in hn have the same number of vertices.
The following lemma will be used later:
Lemma 1. (Jaradat[8])Let G and H be two graphs such that χ′(H)=Δ(H). Then χ′(G×H)=Δ(G×H), where G×H denotes the direct product of graphs G and H.
In Section 2, we shall present two decompositions of the edge set in the generalized lexicographic product of graphs.
Let G be a graph with V(G)={t1,t2,…,tn}, n≥2, and hn=(Hi)i∈{1,2,…,n} be a sequence of vertex-disjoint graphs with V(Hi)={(ti,y1),(ti,y2),…,(ti,ym)}, m≥1. Let G∗=G[hn], and let Uj={(t1,yj),(t2,yj),…,(tn,yj)}, where j=1,2,…,m. Then Gj=G∗[Uj]≅G for each j=1,2,…,m. We will provide two decompositions of the generalized lexicographic product G∗.
We first consider the case where G is a Class 1 graph and provide a decomposition of G∗ with respect to a matching of G. If there exists a matching M in G such that χ′(G−M)=Δ(G)−1 and any distinct vertices with the maximum degree of G are saturated by distinct edges of M, then G is said to be Subclass 1; otherwise, G is said to be Subclass 2. For example, every Class 1 graph in which no two vertices of maximum degree are adjacent is Subclass 1, and every regular Class 1 graph is Subclass 2.
For every matching M of G such that χ′(G−M)=Δ(G)−1, let GM denote the subgraph of G induced by M. Moreover, let
G∗M=GM[¯Km]∪(⋃ti∈VΔHi),G∗1=G1[¯Km]∪(⋃ti∈V(G)−VΔHi), |
where VΔ denotes the set of vertices with the maximum degree in G, ¯Km denotes an empty graph with m vertices, and G1=G−M. Then G∗ is the union of edge-disjoint graphs G∗M and G∗1, that is,
G∗=G∗M∪G∗1. | (2.1) |
Figure 1 shows a Subclass 1 graph G and the decomposition of G∗=G[h5] with respect to a matching M in G, where hn=(Hi)i∈{1,2,…,5} is a sequence of vertex-disjoint graphs, each with m vertices. Figure 2 shows a Subclass 2 graph G and the decomposition of G∗=G[h6] with respect to a matching M in G, where hn=(Hi)i∈{1,2,…,6} is a sequence of vertex-disjoint graphs, each with m vertices.
We now provide another decomposition of G∗. Let
G∗2=(m⋃j=1Gj)∪(n⋃i=1Hi),G∗3=G×Km. |
Then the graph G∗ is the union of edge-disjoint graphs G∗2 and G∗3, that is,
G∗=G∗2∪G∗3. | (2.2) |
In Section 3, we shall study sufficient conditions for G∗ to be Class 1 using the above two decompositions of G∗.
Through the decomposition of G∗ in formula 2.1, we can make the following observation:
Observation 3.1. Let G be a Class 1 graph. If there exists a matching M in G such that χ′(G−M)=Δ(G)−1 and the corresponding G∗M is Class 1, then G∗ is also Class 1.
Proof. Let M be a matching of G such that χ′(G−M)=Δ(G)−1 and the corresponding G∗M is Class 1. It is easy to see that Δ(G∗M)=max{Δ(Hi)|ti∈VΔ}+m and Δ(G∗1)=(Δ(G)−1)m. Note that Δ(G∗)=max{Δ(Hi)|ti∈VΔ}+Δ(G)m. Hence, Δ(G∗)=Δ(G∗M)+Δ(G∗1). It follows that if both G∗M and G∗1 are Class 1, then G∗ is Class 1. Thus, we only need to verify that χ′(G∗1)=(Δ(G)−1)m.
Since χ′(G1)=Δ(G)−1, it follows that we can color the edges of G1[¯Km] with (Δ(G)−1)m colors such that for each positive integer i, ti∈V(G)−VΔ, there are at least m colors are missing at all vertices in Vi. Note that G∗1=G1[¯Km]∪(⋃ti∈V(G)−VΔHi). Hence, we can extend the (Δ(G)−1)m edge-coloring of G1[¯Km] to all the edges of ⋃ti∈V(G)−VΔHi, so that χ′(G∗1)=(Δ(G)−1)m.
Theorem 3.1. If G is Subclass 1, then there exists a matching M in G such that χ′(G−M)=Δ(G)−1 and the corresponding G∗M is Class 1.
Proof. Let M be a matching of G such that χ′(G−M)=Δ(G)−1 and any distinct vertices with the maximum degree in G are saturated by distinct edges of M. Note that each connected component of G∗M is either a join of a graph on m vertices and an empty graph on m vertices, or a balanced complete bipartite graph on 2m vertices. It is easy to see that these connected components are all Class 1. Thus G∗M is Class 1.
An instant corollary of Theorem 3.1 and Observation 3.1 is:
Corollary 3.1. If G is Subclass 1, then G∗ is Class 1.
Theorem 3.2. Let G be a Subclass 2 graph, and let M be a matching of G such that χ′(G−M)=Δ(G)−1. For every pair of vertices tp and tq of maximum degree in G which are saturated by the same edge of M, if one of the following five conditions holds:
(i) both Hp and Hq are Class 1;
(ii) Hp is a subgraph of Hq;
(iii) both Hp and Hq are disjoint unions of cliques;
(iv) Δ(Hp)≠Δ(Hq);
(v) join graph Hp+Hq is regular;
then G∗M is Class 1.
Proof. Since G is Subclass 2, every connected component of G∗M can be denoted by Hp+Hq, or Hp+¯Km, or Hq+¯Km, or ¯Km+¯Km, where ¯Km denotes an empty graph on m vertices, and ¯Km+¯Km denotes the join of two vertex-disjoint empty graphs on m vertices. Note that Hp+¯Km, Hq+¯Km and ¯Km+¯Km are all Class 1. Hence, it is only necessary to prove that: if one of the conditions (ⅰ)–(ⅴ) holds, then Hp+Hq is Class 1.
Assume that one of the conditions (ⅰ)–(ⅳ) holds. Since |V(Hp)|=|V(Hq)|=m, it follows from Theorems 1.1 and 1.2 that Hp+Hq is Class 1.
Assume that (ⅴ) holds. Since Hp+Hq is regular and |V(Hp)|=|V(Hq)|, Hp+Hq is Class 1 by Theorem 1.3 or Theorem 1.4.
An instant corollary of Theorem 3.2 and Observation 3.1 is:
Corollary 3.2. Let G be a Subclass 2 graph, and let M be a matching of G such that χ′(G−M)=Δ(G)−1. For every pair of vertices tp and tq of maximum degree in G which are saturated by the same edge of M, if one of five conditions of Theorem 3.2 holds, then G∗ is Class 1.
Note that the join graph H1+H2 corresponds to P2[h2], where P2 is a Class 1 graph. By Corollaries 3.1 and 3.2, we can effortlessly generalize the results of Theorem 1.5 in the case where |V(H1)|=|V(H2)| to the generalized lexicographic product, yielding the following theorem:
Theorem 3.3. If G is Class 1 and all graphs in hn are regular, then G∗ is Class 1.
In addition, by Corollaries 3.1 and 3.2, we can directly obtain Theorem 1.6. Furthermore, one easy consequence of Corollary 3.2 is the following result, which is similar to Theorem 1.2.
Theorem 3.4. Let G=H1+H2 be a join graph with |V(H1)|=|V(H2)|. If G is regular, or if both H1 and H2 are Class 1, or if H1 is a subgraph of H2, or if both H1 and H2 are disjoint unions of cliques, then G is Class 1.
Through the decomposition of G∗ in formula 2.2, we can make the following observation:
Observation 3.2. Suppose that all graphs in hn have the same maximum degree. If both G∗2 and G∗3 are Class 1, then G∗ is Class 1.
Proof. Let Δ(Hi)=ΔH, where i=1,2,…,n. It is easy to see that Δ(G∗2)=Δ(G)+ΔH, Δ(G∗3)=Δ(G)(m−1) and Δ(G∗)=Δ(G)m+ΔH. Hence, Δ(G∗)=Δ(G∗2)+Δ(G∗3). Since χ′(G∗2)=Δ(G∗2), and since χ′(G∗3)=Δ(G∗3), it follows that χ′(G∗)=Δ(G∗), that is, G∗ is Class 1.
By Observation 3.2, we can obtain the following theorem:
Theorem 3.5. Suppose that all graphs in hn are Class 1 graphs with the same maximum degree. If m is even, then G∗ is Class 1.
Proof. Let Δ(Hi)=ΔH, where i=1,2,…,n. We can first color the edges of each subgraph Gj of G∗2 with Δ(G)+1 colors 1,2,…,Δ(G)+1 such that edges which are corresponding to the same edge of G receive the same color. Since we use Δ(G)+1 colors, it follows that each vertex (ti,yj) of Hi misses at least one color ci in {1,2,…,Δ(G)+1}, where i=1,2,…,n. Hence, we can color the edges of each subgraph Hi of G∗2 with the color ci and an additional ΔH−1 new colors. Thus, χ′(G∗2)≤Δ(G)+ΔH=Δ(G∗2), that is, G∗2 is Class 1. On the other hand, since G∗3=G×Km, and since m is even, G∗3 is Class 1 according to Lemma 1.1. Therefore, G∗ is also Class 1.
An instant corollary of Theorem 3.5 is:
Corollary 3.3. If all graphs in hn are regular Class 1 graphs with the same maximum degree, then G∗ is Class 1.
By applying Theorem 3.5, we can derive Theorem 1.7. Furthermore, by utilizing Theorem 3.3 and Corollary 3.3, we can formulate the following theorem:
Theorem 3.6. Suppose that G∗=G[hn] is regular. If G is Class 1, or each graph of hn is Class 1, then G∗ is Class 1.
Proof. Since G∗ is regular, and since all graphs in hn have the same number of vertices, it follows that all graphs in hn are regular graphs with the same maximum degree. If G is Class 1, then G∗ is Class 1 by Theorem 3.3. If each graph of hn is Class 1, then G∗ is Class 1 according to Corollary 3.3.
By applying Theorem 3.6, take G=P2, we can derive the result of theorem 1.4 in the case where |V(H1)|=|V(H2)|. In addition, the graph G∗ in Theorem 3.6 does not necessarily satisfy the condition "Δ(G∗)≥|V(G∗)|2" of 1-Factorization Conjecture. For instance, suppose that G is a k-regular bipartite graph with n vertices, and hn=(Hi)i∈{1,2,…,n} represents a sequence of vertex-disjoint cubic graphs, each with m vertices, where m≥4. Clearly, G∗ is Class 1 according to Theorem 3.6, however, we have Δ(G∗)=km+3<nm2=|V(G∗)|2 when k<n2−1.
It is easy to see that if G∗ is regular and all graphs in hn have the same number of vertices, then the inequality Δ(G∗)≥|V(G∗)|2 can be derived from the inequality Δ(G)≥|V(G)|2. By Theorem 3.6, if the 1-factorial conjecture holds for G, then the conjecture holds for G∗.
Finally, in a generalized lexicographic product Kp[hp], we consider the case where |V(Kp[hp])| is even and every graph in the sequence hp=(Hi)i∈{1,2,…,p} has ⌊|V(Kp[hp])|p⌋ vertices or ⌈|V(Kp[hp])|p⌉ vertices. Using Theorem 1.5, we can derive the following theorem:
Theorem 3.7. Let G=Kp[hp] and let hp=(Hi)i∈{1,2,…,p} be a sequence of vertex-disjoint k-regular graphs such that every graph in hp has ⌊|V(G)|p⌋ vertices or ⌈|V(G)|p⌉ vertices, where p≥2 and k≥0. If |V(G)| is even, then G is Class 1.
Proof. Let n=|V(G)|, and let V1,V2,…,Vp be the partition sets of G. If ⌊np⌋=⌈np⌉, it follows that G is an even graph that is the join of two regular graphs, then G is Class 1 according to Theorem 1.5. If ⌊np⌋≠⌈np⌉, then we may assume that |Vi|=⌊np⌋ for i=1,2,…,r and |Vi|=⌈np⌉ for i=r+1,r+2,…,p, where 1≤r≤p−1. Let
G1=G[r⋃i=1Vi],G2=G[p⋃i=r+1Vi]. |
Clearly, both G1 and G2 are regular graphs, and G=G1+G2. By Theorem 1.5, G is Class 1.
In Theorem 3, 7, by letting k=0 and p=r−1, then we can directly derive the following corollary:
Corollary 3.4. All Turán graphs on an even number of vertices are Class 1.
In this paper, for a generalized lexicographic product G[hn] of a graph G with n vertices and a sequence hn=(Hi)i∈{1,2,…,n} of vertex-disjoint graphs with m vertices, we obtain the following sufficient conditions for G[hn] to be Class 1: (ⅰ) G is Subclass 1; (ⅱ) G is Class 1 and all graphs in hn are regular; (ⅲ) all graphs in hn are Class 1 graphs with the same maximum degree, and m is even; (ⅳ) G[hn] is regular and either G or each graph in hn is Class 1.
In addition, for a generalized lexicographic product G=Kp[hp] of a complete graph Kp on p vertices and a sequence hp=(Hi)i∈{1,2,…,p} of vertex-disjoint k-regular graphs whose partition sets differ in size by at most 1, we prove that G is Class 1 if G has an even number of vertices.
The authors declare that they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.
Fund projects: Mathematics, Gansu Province Key Discipline (11080318). Applied Mathematics National Minority Committee Key Discipline (11080327), and Support for innovation team of operations research and Cybernetics in Northwest University for Nationalities.
All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this paper.
[1] | M. Brešar, Introduction to nocommutative algebras, Springer, 2014. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-08693-4. |
[2] |
L. Centrone, F. Martino, A note on cocharacter sequence of Jordan upper triangular matrix algebra, Commun. Algebra, 45 (2017), 1687–1695. doi: 10.1080/00927872.2016.1222408. doi: 10.1080/00927872.2016.1222408
![]() |
[3] |
L. Centrone, F. Martino, M. da Silva Souza, Specht property for some varieties of Jordan algebras of almost polynomial growth, J. Algebra, 521 (2019), 137–165. doi: 10.1016/j.jalgebra.2018.11.017. doi: 10.1016/j.jalgebra.2018.11.017
![]() |
[4] |
A. Cirrito, F. Martino, Ordinary and graded cocharacter of the Jordan algebra of 2×2 upper triangular matrices, Linear Algebra Appl., 451 (2004), 246–259. doi: 10.1016/j.laa.2014.03.011. doi: 10.1016/j.laa.2014.03.011
![]() |
[5] |
C. Costara, Nonlinear invertibility preserving maps on matrix algebras, Linear Algebra Appl., 602 (2020), 216–222. doi: 10.1016/j.laa.2020.05.010. doi: 10.1016/j.laa.2020.05.010
![]() |
[6] |
M. Grašič, Zero product determined Jordan algebra, Linear Multilinear Algebra, 59 (2011), 671–685. doi: 10.1080/03081087.2010.485199. doi: 10.1080/03081087.2010.485199
![]() |
[7] | N. Jacobson, Structure and representations of Jordan algebras, Colloquium Publications, Vol. 39, American Mathematical Society, 1968. |
[8] |
M. Kochetov, F. Y. Yasumura, Group grading on the Lie and Jordan algebras of block-triangular matrices, J. Algebra, 537 (2019), 147–172. doi: 10.1016/j.jalgebra.2019.07.020. doi: 10.1016/j.jalgebra.2019.07.020
![]() |
[9] |
X. B. Ma, G. H. Ding, L. Wang, Square-zero determined matrix algebras, Linear Multilinear Algebra, 59 (2011), 1311–1317. doi: 10.1080/03081087.2010.539606. doi: 10.1080/03081087.2010.539606
![]() |
[10] | K. McCrimmon, A taste of Jordan algebras, Springer, 2004. doi: 10.1007/b97489. |
[11] |
H. P. Pertersson, The isotopy problem for Jordan matrix algebras, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 244 (1978), 185–197. doi: 10.1090/S0002-9947-1978-0506615-7. doi: 10.1090/S0002-9947-1978-0506615-7
![]() |
[12] |
C. C. Xi, J. B. Zhang, Structure of centralizer matrix algebras, Linear Algebra Appl., 622 (2021), 215–249. doi: 10.1016/j.laa.2021.03.034. doi: 10.1016/j.laa.2021.03.034
![]() |
[13] |
D. Y. Wang, Q. Hu C. G. Xia, Jordan derivation of certain Jordan matrix algebras, Linear Multilinear Algebra, 56 (2008), 581–588. doi: 10.1080/03081080701492165. doi: 10.1080/03081080701492165
![]() |
1. | S. Olaniyi, M. Mukamuri, K.O. Okosun, O.A. Adepoju, Mathematical analysis of a social hierarchy-structured model for malaria transmission dynamics, 2022, 34, 22113797, 104991, 10.1016/j.rinp.2021.104991 | |
2. | S. Olaniyi, M. Mukamuri, Kazeem Okosun, O.A. Adepoju, Mathematical Analysis of a Social Hierarchy-Structured Model for Malaria Transmission Dynamics, 2021, 1556-5068, 10.2139/ssrn.3932213 | |
3. | Rubin Fandio, Hamadjam Abboubakar, Henri Paul Ekobena Fouda, Anoop Kumar, Kottakkaran Sooppy Nisar, Mathematical modelling and projection of Buruli ulcer transmission dynamics using classical and fractional derivatives: A case study of Cameroon, 2023, 8, 26668181, 100589, 10.1016/j.padiff.2023.100589 |