Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/SVG/jax.js
Research article

Two new generalized iteration methods for solving absolute value equations using M-matrix

  • In this paper, we present two new generalized Gauss-Seidel iteration methods for solving absolute value equations Ax|x|=b, where A is an M-matrix. Furthermore, we demonstrate their convergence under specific assumptions. Numerical tests indicate the efficiency of the suggested methods with suitable parameters.

    Citation: Rashid Ali, Ilyas Khan, Asad Ali, Abdullah Mohamed. Two new generalized iteration methods for solving absolute value equations using M-matrix[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(5): 8176-8187. doi: 10.3934/math.2022455

    Related Papers:

    [1] Shima Soleimani Manesh, Mansour Saraj, Mahmood Alizadeh, Maryam Momeni . On robust weakly ε-efficient solutions for multi-objective fractional programming problems under data uncertainty. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 2331-2347. doi: 10.3934/math.2022132
    [2] Habibe Sadeghi, Fatemeh Moslemi . A multiple objective programming approach to linear bilevel multi-follower programming. AIMS Mathematics, 2019, 4(3): 763-778. doi: 10.3934/math.2019.3.763
    [3] Yanfei Chai . Robust strong duality for nonconvex optimization problem under data uncertainty in constraint. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(11): 12321-12338. doi: 10.3934/math.2021713
    [4] Vishwas Deep Joshi, Medha Sharma, Huda Alsaud . Solving a multi-choice solid fractional multi objective transportation problem: involving the Newton divided difference interpolation approach. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 16031-16060. doi: 10.3934/math.2024777
    [5] Fei Yu . Multiperiod distributionally robust portfolio selection with regime-switching under CVaR risk measures. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(4): 9974-10001. doi: 10.3934/math.2025456
    [6] T. K. Buvaneshwari, D. Anuradha . Solving bi-objective bi-item solid transportation problem with fuzzy stochastic constraints involving normal distribution. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(9): 21700-21731. doi: 10.3934/math.20231107
    [7] Guangjian Li, Guangjun He, Mingfa Zheng, Aoyu Zheng . Uncertain multi-objective dynamic weapon-target allocation problem based on uncertainty theory. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(3): 5639-5669. doi: 10.3934/math.2023284
    [8] Sema Akin Bas, Beyza Ahlatcioglu Ozkok . An iterative approach for the solution of fully fuzzy linear fractional programming problems via fuzzy multi-objective optimization. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 15361-15384. doi: 10.3934/math.2024746
    [9] Veliappan Vijayaraj, Chokkalingam Ravichandran, Thongchai Botmart, Kottakkaran Sooppy Nisar, Kasthurisamy Jothimani . Existence and data dependence results for neutral fractional order integro-differential equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(1): 1055-1071. doi: 10.3934/math.2023052
    [10] Ya Qin, Rizk M. Rizk-Allah, Harish Garg, Aboul Ella Hassanien, Václav Snášel . Intuitionistic fuzzy-based TOPSIS method for multi-criterion optimization problem: a novel compromise methodology. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(7): 16825-16845. doi: 10.3934/math.2023860
  • In this paper, we present two new generalized Gauss-Seidel iteration methods for solving absolute value equations Ax|x|=b, where A is an M-matrix. Furthermore, we demonstrate their convergence under specific assumptions. Numerical tests indicate the efficiency of the suggested methods with suitable parameters.



    In recent years, a useful extension has been proposed from the classical calculus by permitting derivatives and integrals of arbitrary orders is known as fractional calculus. It emerged from a celebrated logical conversation between Leibniz and L'Hopital in 1695 and was enhanced by different scientists like Laplace, Abel, Euler, Riemann, and Liouville [1]. Approaches based on the fractional calculus and fractional differential equations has been widely applied in diffusion equation, polymer physics, medical sciences, bioengineering mathematics, turbulence, fluid flow through porous media and in the model problems of nanoscale flow [2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12]. The concept of this new calculus was applied in several distinguished areas previously with excellent developments in the frame of novel approaches and posted scholarly papers, see [13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26].

    Various notable generalized fractional integral operators such as the Riemann-Liouville, Hadamard, Caputo, Marichev-Saigo-Maeda, Riez, the Gaussian hypergeometric operators and so on, are helpful for researchers to recognize real world phenomena. Therefore, the Caputo, Riemann-Liouville and Hadamard were the most used fractional operators having singular kernels. It is remarkable that all the above mentioned operators are the particular cases of the operators investigated by Jarad et al. [27]. The utilities are currently working on weighted generalized fractional operators. Inspired by the consequences in the above mentioned papers, we introduce a new weighted framework of generalized proportional Hadamard fractional integral operator. Also, some new characteristics of the aforesaid operator are apprehended to explore new ideas, amplify the fractional operators and acquire fractional integral inequalities via generalized fractional operators (see Remark 2 below).

    Recently, by employing the fractional integral operators, several researchers have established a bulk of fractional integral inequalities and their variant forms with fertile applications (see [28,29,30,31,32,33,34]). These sorts of speculations have remarkable use in fractional differential/difference equations and fractional Schrödinger equations [35].

    Our intention is to establish a more general form for the most appealing and noteworthy Pólya-Szegö-Chebyshev type inequalities [36,37] and certain related variants via weighted generalized proportional Hadamard fractional integral that could be increasingly practicable and, also, more appropriate than the existing ones.

    In 1882, Chebyshev pondered the noted result [36]:

    P(˜f,˜g):=1η2η1η2η1˜f(x)˜g(x)dx(1η2η1η2η1˜f(x)dx)(1η2η1η2η1˜g(x)dx), (1.1)

    for integrable functions ˜f and ˜g on [η1,η2] and both the functions are simultaneously increasing or decreasing for the same values of x in [η1,η2], that is,

    (˜f(x)˜f(y))(˜g(x)˜g(y))0

    for any x,y[η1,η2].

    Butt et al. [38], Rashid et al. [39] and Set et al. [40] established the fractional integral inequalities via generalized fractional integral operator having Raina's function, generalized K-fractional integral and Katugampola fractional integral inequalities similar to the variant (1.1). For more recent literature, (see [41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51]).

    The intensively studied Grüss inequality [52] for two integrable functions ˜f and ˜g on [η1,η2] is presented as follows:

    P(˜f,˜g)(Qq)(Ss)r, (1.2)

    where the integrable functions ˜f and ˜g satisfy q˜fQ and s˜fS for all x[η1,η2] and for some q,s,Q,SR.

    The Pólya-Szegö type inequality [37] can be stated as follows:

    η2η1˜f2(x)dx1η2η1˜g2(x)dx(η2η1˜f(x)˜g(x)dx)214(QSqs+qsQS)2. (1.3)

    The constant 14 is best feasible in (1.3) make the experience it cannot get replaced by a smaller constant. With the aid of the Pólya-Szegö inequality, Dragomir and Diamond [53] derived the inequality

    |P(˜f,˜g)|(Qq)(Ss)4(η2η1)2qsQSη2η1˜f(x)dxη2η1˜g(x)dx

    holds for all x[η1,η2] if the mappings ˜f and ˜g defined on [η1,η2] satisfies q˜f(x)Q and s˜g(x)S. Here we should emphasize that, inequalities (1.1) and (1.3) are a remarkable instrument for reconnoitering plentiful scientific regions of investigation encompassing probability theory, statistical analysis, physics, meteorology, chaos and henceforth. Nisar et al. [54] proposed the weighted fractional integral inequalities of (1.1) and (1.3) within the weighted generalized fractional integral operator. Shen et al. [55] introduced the time scale version similar to (1.1) and (1.3), respectively. Ntouyas et al. [42] are the ones who contemplated the fractional version of (1.1) and (1.3) via Riemann-Liouville fractional integral operator. For more recent literature, we refer to the readers [56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63] and the references cited therein.

    The motivation for this paper is twofold. First, we introduce a novel framework named weighted generalized proportional Hadamard fractional integral operator, then current operator employed to on the Pólya-Szegö-Chebyshev and certain related inequalities for exploring the analogous versions of (1.1) and (1.3). The study is enriched by giving remarkable cases of our results which are not computed yet. Interestingly, particular cases are designed for Hadamard fractional integral, generalized proportional Hadamard fractional integral and weighted Hadamard fractional integral inequalities. It is worth mentioning that these operators have the ability to recapture several generalizations in the literature by considering suitable assumptions of ϖ and φ.

    This section demonstrates some essential preliminaries, definitions and fractional operators which will be utilized in this paper.

    Definition 2.1. ([27]) Let ϖ0 bea mapping defined on [η1,η2], ˜g is a differentiable strictly increasing function on [η1,η2]. The space χpϖ(η1,η2),1p< is the space of all Lebesgue measurable functions ˜f defined on [η1,η2] for which ˜fχpϖ, where

    ˜fχpϖ=(η2η1|ϖ(x)˜f(x)|p˜g(x)dx)1p,1<p< (2.1)

    and

    ˜fχpϖ=esssupη1xη2|ϖ(x)˜f(x)|<. (2.2)

    Remark 1. Clearly we see that ˜fχpϖ(η1,η2) ϖ(x)˜f(x)(˜g(x))1/pLp(η1,η2) for 1p< and ˜fχpϖ(η1,η2) ϖ(x)˜f(x)L(η1,η2).

    Now, we show a novel fractional integral operator which is known as the weighted generalized proportional Hadamard fractional integral operator as follows.

    Definition 2.2. ([29]) Let ˜fχpϖ[1,) and ϖ0 be a function on [1,). Then the left and right-sided weighted generalized proportional Hadamard fractional integral operator of order >0 are described as:

    HϖJφ;η1˜f(x)=ϖ1(x)φΓ()xη1exp[φ1φ(lnxϕ)](lnxϕ)1˜f(ϕ)ϖ(ϕ)ϕdϕ,η1<x (2.3)

    and

    HϖJφ;η2˜f(x)=ϖ1(x)φΓ()η2xexp[φ1φ(lnϕx)](lnϕx)1˜f(ϕ)ϖ(ϕ)ϕdϕ,x<η2, (2.4)

    where φ(0,1] is the proportionality index, C,()>0 and Γ(x)=0ϕx1eϕdϕ is the Gamma function.

    Remark 2. Some particular fractional operators are the special cases of (2.5) and (2.6).

    I. Setting ϖ(x)=1 in Definition 2.2, then we get the generalized proportional Hadamard fractional operator introduced by Rahman et al. [62] stated as follows:

    HJφ;η1˜f(x)=1φΓ()xη1exp[φ1φ(lnxϕ)](lnxϕ)1˜f(ϕ)ϕdϕ,η1<x (2.5)

    and

    HJφ;η2˜f(x)=1φΓ()η2xexp[φ1φ(lnϕx)](lnϕx)1˜f(ϕ)ϕdϕ,x<η2. (2.6)

    II. Setting φ=1 in Definition 2.2, then we get the weighted Hadamard fractional operators stated as follows:

    HϖJη1˜f(x)=ϖ1(x)Γ()xη1˜f(ϕ)ϖ(ϕ)dϕϕ(lnxϕ)1,η1<x (2.7)

    and

    HϖJη2˜f(x)=ϖ1(x)Γ()η2x˜f(ϕ)ϖ(ϕ)dϕϕ(lnϕx)1,x<η2. (2.8)

    II. Setting ϖ(x)=1 and φ=1 in Definition 2.2, then we get the Hadamard fractional operator proposed by Samko et al. [18] and Kilbas et al. [19], respectively, stated as follows:

    HJη1˜f(x)=1Γ()xη1˜f(ϕ)dϕϕ(lnxϕ)1,η1<x (2.9)

    and

    HJη2˜f(x)=1Γ()η2x˜f(ϕ)dϕϕ(lnϕx)1,x<η2. (2.10)

    Remark 3. (Semi-group property) For ,ψ>0,φ(0,1] with 1p< and let ˜fχpϖ(η1,η2). Then

    (HϖJφ;η1HϖJφ;ψη1)˜f=(HϖJφ;+ψη1)˜f. (2.11)

    This section consists of some novel Pólya-Szegö type inequalities regarding the generalized proportional Hadamard fractional operators which are also utilized to obtain Chebyshev type integral inequalities and related variants. Throughout the present investigation, for the consequences related to (1.1) and (1.3), it is assumed that all functions are integrable in the Riemann sense.

    Theorem 2.3. Let two positive integrable functions ˜f and ˜g defined on [η1,). Assume that there exist four integrable functions υ1,υ2,υ3 and υ4 defined on [η1,) such that

    (A)0<υ1()˜f()υ2()and0<υ3()˜g()υ4(), (2.12)

    for all [η1,x](x>η1),η1R+0. Then, the inequality

    HϖJφ;η1{υ3υ4˜f2}(x)HϖJφ;η1{υ1υ2˜g2}(x)(HϖJφ;η1{(υ1υ3+υ2υ4)˜f˜g}(x))214 (2.13)

    holds for all φ(0,1],C and ()>0 with ϖ>0.

    Proof. By means of given hypothesis, we obtain

    ˜f()˜g()υ2()υ3()andυ1()υ4()˜f()˜g()([η1,x](x>η1)). (2.14)

    Thus, we have

    (υ2()υ3()+υ1()υ4())˜f()˜g()˜f2()˜g2()+υ1()υ2()υ3()υ4(). (2.15)

    which imply that

    (υ1()υ3()+υ2()υ4())˜f()˜g()υ3()υ4()˜f2()+υ1()υ2()˜g2(). (2.16)

    Here, taking product each side of the above inequality by the following term 1φΓ()exp[φ1φ(lnx)](lnx)1ϖ()([η1,x])(x>η1) and integrating the resulting inequality with respect to on [η1,x], we have

    1φΓ()xη1exp[φ1φ(lnx)](lnx)1ϖ()(υ1()υ3()+υ2()υ4())˜f()˜g()d1φΓ()xη1exp[φ1φ(lnx)](lnx)1ϖ()υ3()υ4()˜f2()d+1φΓ()xη1exp[φ1φ(lnx)](lnx)1ϖ()υ1()υ2()˜g2()d. (2.17)

    Multiplying both sides of the above equation by ϖ1(x) and employing Definition 2.2, we have

    HϖJφ;η1{(υ1υ3+υ2υ4)˜f˜g}(x)HϖJφ;η1{υ3υ4˜f2}(x)HϖJφ;η1{υ1υ2˜g2}(x). (2.18)

    Taking into account the arithmetic-geometric mean inequality, we have

    HϖJφ;η1{(υ1υ3+υ2υ4)˜f˜g}(x)2HϖJφ;η1{υ3υ4˜f2}(x)HϖJφ;η1{υ1υ2˜g2}(x), (2.19)

    which leads to the inequality (2.13). This completes the proof.

    Corollary 1. Let two positive integrable functions ˜f and ˜g defined on [η1,) such that

    0<q˜f()Qand0<s˜g()S, (2.20)

    for all [η1,x](x>η1),η1R+0 with ϖ>0. Then, the inequality holds:

    HϖJφ;η1{˜f2}(x)HϖJφ;η1{˜g2}(x)(HϖJφ;η1{˜f˜g}(x))214(sqQS+QSsq)2. (2.21)

    Remark 4. Under all assumptions of Theorem 2.3 and Corollary 1:

    (1) If we take ϖ(x)=φ=1, then we get the result similar to Lemma 2.1 (by taking κ=1) of [64].

    (2) If we take ϖ(x)=φ=1, then we get the result similar to Corollary 1 (by taking κ=1) of [64].

    Theorem 2.4. Let two positive integrable functions ˜f and ˜g defined on [η1,) such that the assumption (A) satisfying (2.12). Then, for all ,ϕ[η1,x](x>η1),η1R+0, the inequality

    HϖJφ;ψη1{υ3υ4}HϖJφ;η1{˜f2}(x)+HϖJφ;η1{υ1υ2}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{˜g2}(x)(HϖJφ;η1{υ1˜f}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{υ3˜g}(x)+HϖJφ;η1{υ2˜f}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{υ4˜g}(x))214 (2.22)

    holds for all φ(0,1],,ψC and (),(ψ)>0 with ϖ>0.

    Proof. By means of assumption (2.12), we have

    (υ2()υ3(ϕ)˜f()˜g(ϕ))0and(˜f()˜g(ϕ)υ1()υ4(ϕ))0(,ϕ[η1,x](x>η1)), (2.23)

    which imply that

    (υ1()υ4(ϕ)+υ2()υ3(ϕ))˜f()˜g(ϕ)˜f2()˜g2(ϕ)+υ1()υ2()υ3(ϕ)υ4(ϕ). (2.24)

    Conducting product each side of the inequality (2.24) by υ1(ϕ)υ2(ϕ)˜g2(ϕ), we get

    υ1()˜f()υ3(ϕ)˜g(ϕ)+υ2()˜f()υ4(ϕ)˜g(ϕ)υ3(ϕ)υ4(ϕ)˜f2()+υ1()υ2()˜g2(ϕ). (2.25)

    Here, taking product each side of the above inequality by the following term

    1φ+ψΓ()Γ(ψ)exp[φ1φ(lnx)]exp[φ1φ(lnxϕ)](lnx)1(lnxϕ)1ψϖ()ϖ(ϕ)ϕ(,ϕ[η1,x],x>η1)

    and integrating the resulting inequality with respect to and ϕ on [η1,x]. Then, multiplying both sides of the inequality by ϖ2(x) and employing Definition 2.2, we obtain

    HϖJφ;η1{υ1˜f}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{υ3˜g}(x)+HϖJφ;η1{υ2˜f}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{υ4˜g}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{υ3υ4}HϖJφ;η1{˜f2}(x)+HϖJφ;η1{υ1υ2}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{˜g2}(x). (2.26)

    By employing the arithmetic-geometric mean inequality, we have

    HϖJφ;η1{υ1˜f}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{υ3˜g}(x)+HϖJφ;η1{υ2˜f}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{υ4˜g}(x)2HϖJφ;ψη1{υ3υ4}HϖJφ;η1{˜f2}(x)+HϖJφ;η1{υ1υ2}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{˜g2}(x), (2.27)

    which leads to the desired inequality (2.22). Hence the proof is complete.

    Corollary 2. Let two positive integrable functions ˜f and ˜g defined on [η1,) satisfying (2.20). Then for all ,ϕ[η1,x](x>η1),η1R+0, the inequality

    HϖJφ;η1{I}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{I}(x)HϖJφ;η1{˜f2}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{˜g2}(x)(HϖJφ;η1{˜f}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{˜g}(x))214(qsQS+QSqs)2 (2.28)

    holds for all φ(0,1],,ψC and (),(ψ)>0 and I(x) is the identity mapping.

    Remark 5. Under all assumptions of Theorem 2.4 and Corollary 2:

    (1) If we take ϖ(x)=φ=1, then we get the result similar to Lemma 2.2 (by taking κ=1) of [64].

    (2) If we take ϖ(x)=φ=1, then we get the result similar to Corollary 2 (by taking κ=1) of [64].

    Theorem 2.5. Under the assumption of Theorem 2.4, then for all x>η1 and ,ϕ[η1,x]. Then, the inequality

    HϖJφ;η1{˜f2}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{˜g2}(x)HϖJφ;η1{υ2˜f˜gυ3}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{υ4˜f˜gυ1}(x) (2.29)

    holds for all φ(0,1],,ψC and (),(ψ)>0.

    Proof. By means of assumption (2.12), we have

    1φΓ()xη1exp[φ1φ(lnx)](lnx)1ϖ()˜f2()d1φΓ()xη1exp[φ1φ(lnx)](lnx)1ϖ()υ2()˜f()˜g()υ3()d. (2.30)

    Multiplying both sides of the above equation by ϖ1(x) and employing of Definition 2.2, we have

    HϖJφ;η1{˜f2}(x)HϖJφ;η1{υ2˜f˜gυ3}(x). (2.31)

    By similar argument, we have

    1φψΓ(ψ)xη1exp[φ1φ(lnxϕ)](lnxϕ)1ψϖ(ϕ)˜g2(ϕ)dϕ1φψΓ(ψ)xη1exp[φ1φ(lnxϕ)](lnxϕ)1ψϖ(ϕ)υ4(ϕ)˜f(ϕ)˜g(ϕ)ϕυ1(ϕ)dϕ. (2.32)

    Multiplying both sides of the above equation by ϖ1(x) and employing Definition 2.2, we have

    HϖJφ;ψη1{˜g2}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{υ4˜f˜gυ1}(x). (2.33)

    Taking product of the inequalities (2.31) and (2.33) side by side, then we obtain the desired inequality (2.29).

    Corollary 3. Let two positive integrable functions ˜f and ˜g defined on [η1,) satisfying (2.20). Then for all ,ϕ[η1,x](x>η1),η1R+0, the inequality

    HϖJφ;η1{˜f2}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{˜g2}(x)(HϖJφ;η1{˜f˜g}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{˜f˜g}(x))2QSqs (2.34)

    holds for all φ(0,1],,ψC and (),(ψ)>0 with ϖ>0.

    Remark 6. Under all assumptions of Theorem 2.5 and Corollary 3:

    (1) If we take ϖ(x)=φ=1, then we get the result similar to Lemma 2.3 (by taking κ=1) of [64].

    (2) If we take ϖ(x)=φ=1, then we get the result similar to Corollary 3 (by taking κ=1) of [64].

    Our next result is the Chebyshev type integral inequality within the weighted generalized proportional Hadamard fractional integral operator defined in (2.3), with the aid of Pólya-Szegö type inequality established in Theorem 2.3.

    Theorem 2.6. Let two positive integrable functions ˜f and ˜g defined on [η1,) such that the assumption (A) satisfying (2.12). Then, for all ,ϕ[η1,x](x>η1),η1R+0, the inequality

    |HϖJφ;η1{˜f˜g}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{I}(x)+HϖJφ;ψη1{˜f˜g}(x)HϖJφ;η1{I}(x)HϖJφ;η1{˜f}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{˜g}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{˜f}(x)HϖJφ;η1{˜g}(x)||Υ1(˜f,υ1,υ2)(x)+Υ2(˜f,υ1,υ2)(x)|12×|Υ1(˜g,υ3,υ4)(x)+Υ2(˜g,υ3,υ4)(x)|12, (2.35)

    where

    Υ1(˜f,υ1,υ2)(x):=(HϖJφ;η1{(υ1+υ2)˜f2}(x))24HϖJφ;η1{υ1υ2}(x)HϖJφ;η1{˜f}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{˜f}(x) (2.36)

    and

    Υ2(˜f,υ1,υ2)(x):=(HϖJφ;ψη1{(υ1+υ2)˜f2}(x))24HϖJφ;ψη1{υ1υ2}(x)HϖJφ;η1{˜f}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{˜f}(x) (2.37)

    holds for all φ(0,1],,ψC and (),(ψ)>0 with ϖ>0.

    Proof. For ,ϕ[η1,x] with x>η1, we define Δ(,ϕ) as

    Δ(,ϕ):=(˜f()˜f(ϕ))(˜g()˜g(ϕ)), (2.38)

    or, equivalently,

    Δ(,ϕ)=˜f()˜g()+˜f(ϕ)˜g(ϕ)˜f()˜g(ϕ)˜f(ϕ)˜g(). (2.39)

    Taking product each side of the above inequality by the following term

    1φ+ψΓ()Γ(ψ)exp[φ1φ(lnx)]exp[φ1φ(lnxϕ)](lnx)1(lnxϕ)1ψϖ()ϖ(ϕ)ϕ(,ϕ[η1,x],x>η1)

    and integrating the resulting inequality with respect to and ϕ on [η1,x], then we have

    1φ+ψΓ()Γ(ψ)xη1xη1exp[φ1φ(lnx)]exp[φ1φ(lnxϕ)](lnx)1(lnxϕ)1ψϖ()ϖ(ϕ)ϕΔ(,ϕ)ddϕ=1φ+ψΓ()Γ(ψ)xη1xη1exp[φ1φ(lnx)]exp[φ1φ(lnxϕ)](lnx)1(lnxϕ)1ψϖ()ϖ(ϕ)ϕ˜f()˜g()ddϕ+1φ+ψΓ()Γ(ψ)xη1xη1exp[φ1φ(lnx)]exp[φ1φ(lnxϕ)](lnx)1(lnxϕ)1ψϖ()ϖ(ϕ)ϕ˜f(ϕ)˜g(ϕ)ddϕ1φ+ψΓ()Γ(ψ)xη1xη1exp[φ1φ(lnx)]exp[φ1φ(lnxϕ)](lnx)1(lnxϕ)1ψϖ()ϖ(ϕ)ϕ˜f()˜g(ϕ)ddϕ1φ+ψΓ()Γ(ψ)xη1xη1exp[φ1φ(lnx)]exp[φ1φ(lnxϕ)](lnx)1(lnxϕ)1ψϖ()ϖ(ϕ)ϕ˜f(ϕ)˜g()ddϕ. (2.40)

    Multiplying both sides of the above equation by ϖ2(x) and employing Definition 2.2, we have

    ϖ2(x)φ+ψΓ()Γ(ψ)xη1xη1exp[φ1φ(lnx)]exp[φ1φ(lnxϕ)](lnx)1(lnxϕ)1ψϖ()ϖ(ϕ)ϕΔ(,ϕ)ddϕ=HϖJφ;η1{˜f˜g}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{I}(x)+HϖJφ;ψη1{˜f˜g}(x)HϖJφ;η1{I}(x)HϖJφ;η1{˜f}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{˜g}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{˜f}(x)HϖJφ;η1{˜g}(x). (2.41)

    Thanks to the weighted Cauchy-Schwartz integral inequality for double integrals in (2.41), we can write that

    |ϖ2(x)φ+ψΓ()Γ(ψ)xη1xη1exp[φ1φ(lnx)]exp[φ1φ(lnxϕ)](lnx)1(lnxϕ)1ψϖ()ϖ(ϕ)ϕΔ(,ϕ)ddϕ|[ϖ2(x)φ+ψΓ()Γ(ψ)xη1xη1exp[φ1φ(lnx)]exp[φ1φ(lnxϕ)](lnx)1(lnxϕ)1ψϖ()ϖ(ϕ)ϕ˜f2()ddϕ+ϖ2(x)φ+ψΓ()Γ(ψ)xη1xη1exp[φ1φ(lnx)]exp[φ1φ(lnxϕ)](lnx)1(lnxϕ)1ψϖ()ϖ(ϕ)ϕ˜f2(ϕ)ddϕ2ϖ2(x)φ+ψΓ()Γ(ψ)xη1xη1exp[φ1φ(lnx)]exp[φ1φ(lnxϕ)](lnx)1(lnxϕ)1ψϖ()ϖ(ϕ)ϕ˜f()˜f(ϕ)ddϕ]12×[ϖ2(x)φ+ψΓ()Γ(ψ)xη1xη1exp[φ1φ(lnx)]exp[φ1φ(lnxϕ)](lnx)1(lnxϕ)1ψϖ()ϖ(ϕ)ϕ˜g2()ddϕ+ϖ2(x)φ+ψΓ()Γ(ψ)xη1xη1exp[φ1φ(lnx)]exp[φ1φ(lnxϕ)](lnx)1(lnxϕ)1ψϖ()ϖ(ϕ)ϕ˜g2(ϕ)ddϕ2ϖ2(x)φ+ψΓ()Γ(ψ)xη1xη1exp[φ1φ(lnx)]exp[φ1φ(lnxϕ)](lnx)1(lnxϕ)1ψϖ()ϖ(ϕ)ϕ˜g()˜g(ϕ)ddϕ]12. (2.42)

    In view of Definition 2.2, we get

    |ϖ2(x)φ+ψΓ()Γ(ψ)xη1xη1exp[φ1φ(lnx)]exp[φ1φ(lnxϕ)](lnx)1(lnxϕ)1ψϖ()ϖ(ϕ)ϕΔ(,ϕ)ddϕ|[HϖJφ;η1{˜f2}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{I}(x)+HϖJφ;ψη1{˜f2}(x)HϖJφ;η1{I}2HϖJφ;η1{˜f}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{˜f}(x)]12×[HϖJφ;η1{˜g2}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{I}(x)+HϖJφ;ψη1{˜g2}(x)HϖJφ;η1{I}2HϖJφ;η1{˜g}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{˜g}(x)]12. (2.43)

    Applying Theorem 2.3 and setting υ3(x)=υ4(x)=˜g(x)=1, we find

    HϖJφ;η1{˜f2}(x)(HϖJφ;η1{(υ1+υ2)˜f2}(x))24HϖJφ;η1{υ1υ2}(x). (2.44)

    This implies that

    HϖJφ;η1{˜f2}(x)HϖJφ;η1{˜f}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{˜f}(x)(HϖJφ;η1{(υ1+υ2)˜f2}(x))24HϖJφ;η1{υ1υ2}(x)HϖJφ;η1{˜f}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{˜f}(x)=Υ1(˜f,υ1,υ2)(x) (2.45)

    and

    HϖJφ;ψη1{˜f2}(x)HϖJφ;η1{˜f}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{˜f}(x)(HϖJφ;ψη1{(υ1+υ2)˜f2}(x))24HϖJφ;ψη1{υ1υ2}(x)HϖJφ;η1{˜f}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{˜f}(x)=Υ2(˜f,υ1,υ2)(x). (2.46)

    Analogously, setting υ1(x)=υ2(x)=˜f(x)=1, we find

    HϖJφ;η1{˜g2}(x)HϖJφ;η1{˜g}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{˜g}(x)Υ1(˜g,υ3,υ4)(x) (2.47)

    and

    HϖJφ;ψη1{˜g2}(x)HϖJφ;η1{˜g}(x)HϖJφ;ψη1{˜g}(x)Υ2(˜g,υ3,υ4)(x). (2.48)

    A combination of (2.42)–(2.48), we get the immediate consequence (2.35). This completes the proof of (2.35).

    Remark 7. If we take ϖ(x)=φ=1 in Theorem 2.6, then we get the result similar to Theorem 1 (by taking κ=1) of [64].

    The following lemma play a vital role for generating new outcomes by employing weighted generalized proportional Hadamard fractional integral operator

    Lemma 2.7. ([65]) Let σ0,θ1θ20 and θ0. Then

    σθ2/θ1(θ2θ1κθ2θ1θ1σ+θ1θ2θ2κθ2/θ1),foranyκ>0.

    Theorem 2.8. For θ1θ20,θ10 and let an integrable function ˜f defined on [η1,). Moreover, assume that there exist two integrable functions υ1,υ2 defined on [η1,) such that

    υ1()˜f()υ2(),η1R+0. (2.49)

    Then, the inequality

    (c1)HϖJφ;η1{(υ2˜f)θ2θ1}(x)+θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1HϖJφ;η1{˜f}(x)θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1HϖJφ;η1{υ2}(x)+θ1θ2θ1κθ2θ1HϖJφ;η1{I}(x),(c2)HϖJφ;η1{(˜fυ1)θ2θ1}(x)+θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1HϖJφ;η1{υ1}(x)θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1HϖJφ;η1{˜f}(x)+θ1θ2θ1κθ2θ1HϖJφ;η1{I}(x) (2.50)

    holds for all φ(0,1],C and ()>0 with ϖ>0.

    Proof. By means of Lemma 2.7 and utilizing the assumption (2.49), for θ1θ20,θ10, for any κ>0, it follows that

    (υ2()˜f())θ2θ1θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1(υ2()˜f())+θ1θ2θ1κθ2θ1. (2.51)

    Taking product each side of the above inequality by the following non-negative term 1φΓ()exp[φ1φ(lnx)](lnx)1ϖ()([η1,x],x>η1) and integrating the resulting inequality with respect to on [η1,x], we have

    1φΓ()xη1exp[φ1φ(lnx)](lnx)1ϖ()(υ2()˜f())θ2θ1dθ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1φΓ()xη1exp[φ1φ(lnx)](lnx)1ϖ()(υ2()˜f())d+θ1θ2θ1κθ2θ1φΓ()xη1exp[φ1φ(lnx)](lnx)1ϖ()d, (2.52)

    Multiplying both sides of the above equation by ϖ1(x) and employing of Definition 2.2, we have

    HϖJφ;η1{(υ2˜f)θ2θ1}(x)θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1HϖJφ;η1{υ2}(x)θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1HϖJφ;η1{˜f}(x)+θ1θ2θ1κθ2θ1HϖJφ;η1{I}(x), (2.53)

    which leads to inequality (c1). Inequality (c2) can be proved by similar argument.

    Theorem 2.9. For θ1θ20,θ10 and under the assumptions of Theorem 2.3. Then, the inequalities

    (c3)ϖHJη1φ;{(υ2˜f)θ2θ1(υ4˜g)θ2θ1}(x)+θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1[ϖHJη1φ;{υ4˜f}(x)+ϖHJη1φ;{υ2˜g}(x)]θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1ϖH[Jη1φ;{υ2υ4}(x)+ϖHJη1φ;{˜f˜g}(x)]+θ1θ2θ1κθ2θ1ϖHJη1φ;{I}(x),(c4)ϖHJη1φ;{(υ2˜f)θ2θ1}(x)ϖHJη1φ;ψ{(υ4˜g)θ2θ1}(x)+θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1[ϖHJη1φ;{υ2}(x)ϖHJη1φ;ψ{˜g}(x)+ϖHJη1φ;ψ{υ4}(x)ϖHJη1φ;{˜f}(x)]θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1[ϖHJη1φ;{υ2}(x)ϖHJη1φ;ψ{υ4}(x)+ϖHJη1φ;{˜f}(x)ϖHJη1φ;ψ{˜g}(x)]+θ1θ2θ1κθ2θ1ϖHJη1φ;{I}(x)ϖHJη1φ;ψ{I}(x),(c5)ϖHJη1φ;{(˜fυ1)θ2θ1(˜gυ3)θ2θ1}(x)+θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1[ϖHJη1φ;{υ3˜f}(x)ϖHJη1φ;{υ1˜g}(x)]θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1[ϖHJη1φ;{˜f˜g}(x)ϖHJη1φ;ψ{υ1υ3}(x)]+θ1θ2θ1κθ2θ1ϖHJη1φ;{I}(x),(c6)ϖHJη1φ;{(˜fυ1)θ2θ1}(x)ϖHJη1φ;ψ{(˜gυ3)θ2θ1}(x)+θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1[ϖHJη1φ;ψ{υ3}(x)ϖHJη1φ;{˜f}(x)+ϖHJη1φ;{υ1}(x)ϖHJη1φ;ψ{˜g}(x)]θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1[ϖHJη1φ;{υ1}(x)ϖHJη1φ;ψ{υ3}(x)+ϖHJη1φ;{˜f}(x)ϖHJη1φ;ψ{˜g}(x)]+θ1θ2θ1κθ2θ1ϖHJη1φ;{I}(x)ϖHJη1φ;ψ{I}(x), (2.54)

    holds for all φ(0,1],,ψC and (),(ψ)>0 with ϖ>0.

    Proof. The inequalities (c3)(c6) can be deduced by utilizing Lemma 2.7 and the following assumptions:

    (c3)σ=(υ2()˜f())(υ4()˜g()),(c4)σ=(υ2()˜f())(υ4(ϕ)˜g(ϕ)),(c5)σ=(˜f()υ1())(˜g()υ3()),(c6)σ=(˜f()υ1())(˜g(ϕ)υ3(ϕ)). (2.55)

    Remark 8. Under all assumptions of Theorem 2.8 and Theorem 2.9:

    (1) If we take ϖ(x)=φ=1, then we get the result similar to Theorem 15 of [66].

    (2) If we take ϖ(x)=φ=1, then we get the result similar to Theorem 22 of [66].

    In the sequel, we derive the certain novel estimates via weighted generalized proportional Hadamard fractional and generalized Hadamard fractonal integral operator as follows.

    I. Setting =ψ and considering Theorem 2.6, then we get a new result for weighted generalized proportional Hadamard fractional integral operator.

    Corollary 4. Let two positive integrable functions ˜f and ˜g defined on [η1,) such that the assumption (A) satisfying (2.12). Then, for all [η1,x](x>η1),η1R+0, the inequality

    |HϖJφ;η1{˜f˜g}(x)HϖJφ;η1{I}(x)HϖJφ;η1{˜f}(x)HϖJφ;η1{˜g}(x)||Υ(˜f,υ1,υ2)(x).Υ(˜g,υ3,υ4)(x)|12,

    where

    Υ(˜f,υ1,υ2)(x):=(HϖJφ;η1{(υ1+υ2)˜f2}(x))24HϖJφ;η1{υ1υ2}(x)(HϖJφ;η1{˜f}(x))2

    holds for all φ(0,1],C and ()>0 with ϖ>0.

    II. Considering the assertion (2.20) and Theorem 2.6, then we get a new result for weighted generalized proportional Hadamard fractional integral operator.

    Corollary 5. Let two positive integrable functions ˜f and ˜g defined on [η1,). Then, the inequality

    |HϖJφ;η1{˜f˜g}(x)HϖJφ;η1{I}(x)HϖJφ;η1{˜f}(x)HϖJφ;η1{˜g}(x)|(Ss)(Qq)4sqSQHϖJφ;η1{˜f}(x)HϖJφ;η1{˜g}(x)|,

    holds for all φ(0,1],C and ()>0 with ϖ>0.

    II. Setting φ=1, then we get a new result for generalized proportional Hadamard fractional integral operator.

    Corollary 6. Suppose all assumptions of Theorem 2.8 be satisfied. Then, the inequality

    (d1)HϖJη1{(υ2˜f)θ2θ1}(x)+θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1HϖJη1{˜f}(x)θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1HϖJη1{υ2}(x)+θ1θ2θ1κθ2θ1HϖJη1{I}(x),(d2)HϖJη1{(˜fυ1)θ2θ1}(x)+θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1HϖJη1{υ1}(x)θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1HϖJη1{˜f}(x)+θ1θ2θ1κθ2θ1HϖJη1{I}(x), (3.1)

    holds for all C and ()>0.

    IV. Setting φ=1, then we get a new result for generalized proportional Hadamard fractional integral operator.

    Corollary 7. For θ1θ20,θ10 and under the assumptions of Theorem 2.3. Then, the inequalities

    (c3)HϖJη1{(υ2˜f)θ2θ1(υ4˜g)θ2θ1}(x)+θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1[HϖJη1{υ4˜f}(x)+HϖJη1{υ2˜g}(x)]θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1Hϖ[Jη1{υ2υ4}(x)+HϖJη1{˜f˜g}(x)]+θ1θ2θ1κθ2θ1HϖJη1{I}(x),(c4)HϖJη1{(υ2˜f)θ2θ1}(x)HϖJψη1{(υ4˜g)θ2θ1}(x)+θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1[HϖJη1{υ2}(x)HϖJψη1{˜g}(x)+HϖJψη1{υ4}(x)HϖJη1{˜f}(x)]θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1[HϖJη1{υ2}(x)HϖJψη1{υ4}(x)+HϖJη1{˜f}(x)HϖJψη1{˜g}(x)]+θ1θ2θ1κθ2θ1HϖJη1{I}(x)HϖJψη1{I}(x),(c5)HϖJη1{(˜fυ1)θ2θ1(˜gυ3)θ2θ1}(x)+θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1[HϖJη1{υ3˜f}(x)HϖJη1{υ1˜g}(x)]θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1[HϖJη1{˜f˜g}(x)HϖJψη1{υ1υ3}(x)]+θ1θ2θ1κθ2θ1HϖJη1{I}(x),(c6)HϖJη1{(˜fυ1)θ2θ1}(x)HϖJψη1{(˜gυ3)θ2θ1}(x)+θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1[HϖJψη1{υ3}(x)HϖJη1{˜f}(x)+HϖJη1{υ1}(x)HϖJψη1{˜g}(x)]θ2θ1κ(θ2θ1)/θ1[HϖJη1{υ1}(x)HϖJψη1{υ3}(x)+HϖJη1{˜f}(x)HϖJψη1{˜g}(x)]+θ1θ2θ1κθ2θ1HϖJη1{I}(x)HϖJψη1{I}(x), (3.2)

    holds for all φ(0,1],,ψC and (),(ψ)>0 with ϖ>0.

    Example 3.1. Let η1>1,φ,>0,p1,q1>1 having p11+q11=1, and ϖ0 be a function defined on [0,). Let ˜f be an integrable function defined on [1,) and HϖJφ;η1˜f be the weighted generalized proportional Hadamard fractional integral operator. Then we have

    |HϖJφ;η1˜f(x)|Ξ(˜fϖ)ϕL1(1,x),
    Ξ=ϖ1(x)φΓ()(φx1p1(φ+p1)2p1φ)1/p1×Υ1/p1((1)p1+1,(p1+φ2p1φ)lnx)(˜fϖ)ϕL1(1,x)

    and Υ(,x)=x0eyy1dy is the incomplete gamma function [68].

    Proof. In view of Definition 2.2 and applying modulus property that

    |HϖJφ;η1˜f(x)|ϖ1(x)φΓ()x1exp[φ1φ(lnxϕ)](lnxϕ)1|˜f(ϕ)ϖ(ϕ)|ϕdϕ,

    for ϕ>1.

    By the virtue of the noted Hölder inequality, we have

    |HϖJφ;η1˜f(x)|ϖ1(x)φΓ()(x1exp[p1(φ1φ(lnxϕ))]ϕp1(lnxϕ)p1(1)dϕ)1/p1(˜fϖ)ϕL1(1,x).

    Substituting ν=ln(xϕ). Then elaborated computations represents

    |HϖJφ;η1˜f(x)|ϖ1(x)φΓ()(φx1p1(φ+p1)2p1φ)1/p1×Υ1/p1((1)p1+1,(p1+φ2p1φ)lnx)(˜fϖ)ϕL1(1,x).

    In the sequel we demonstrate a new methodology for establishing the four bounded mappings and employ them to show certain bounds of Chebyshev type weighted generalized proportional Hadamard fractional integral inequalities of two unknown mappings.

    Consider a unit step function χ be defined as

    χ(x)={1,x>0,0,x0.

    and assuming a Heaviside unit step function χη1(x) defined by

    χη1(x)=χ(xη1)={1,xη1,0,x<η1.

    The main characteristic of the unit step function are its frequent use in the differential equations and piece-wise continuous functions when sum of pieces defined by the series of functions. Assume that a piece-wise continuous function υ1() defined on [η1,T] can be presented a follows:

    υ1(x)=h1(sx0(x)sx1(x))+h2(sx1(x)sx2(x))+h3(sx3(x)sx2(x))+...+hq+1sxq(x)=h1sx0+(h2h1)sx1(x)+(h3h2)sx2(x)+...+(hq+1hq)sxq(x)=qi=0(hi+1hi)sxi(x), (4.1)

    where h0,hjR(j=0,1,...,i+1) and η1=x0<x1<x2<...<xi<xi+1=T. Analogously, we define the mappings υ2,υ3 and υ4 as follows

    υ2(x)=qi=0(Hi+1Hi)sxi(x),υ3(x)=qi=0(ri+1ri)sxi(x),υ4(x)=qi=0(Ri+1Ri)sxi(x), (4.2)

    where r0=R0=H0=0 and rj,Rj,HjR(j=0,1,...,q).

    Suppose an integrable function ˜f defined on [η1,T] satisfying assumption (2.12), (4.1) and (4.2), respectively, then we have hl+1˜f(x)Hl+1 for every x(xl,xl+1)(l=0,1,...,q). Specifically, q=4, the time theory of ˜f presented in (4.1).

    The weighted generalized proportional Hadamard fractional integral of ˜f on [η1,T] can be described as follows:

    HϖJφ;η1{˜f}(T)=ql=0HϖJφ;xl,xl+1{˜f}(x), (4.3)

    where

    HϖJφ;xl,xl+1{˜f}(x):=ϖ1(x)φΓ()xl+1xlexp[φ1φln(xϕ)](ln(xϕ))1ϖ(ϕ)˜f(ϕ)dϕϕ(l=0,1,2,...,i) (4.4)

    Proposition 1. Let two integrable functions ˜f and ˜g defined on [η1,T] satisfying the assumptions (2.12), (4.1) and (4.2), respectively. Then, the inequality

    (ql=0rl+1Rl+1HϖJφ;xl,xl+1{˜f2}(T))(ql=0hl+1Hl+1HϖJφ;xl,xl+1{˜g2}(T))14ql=0(rl+1hl+1+Rl+1Hl+1)(HϖJφ;η1{˜f˜g}(T))2 (4.5)

    holds for all φ(0,1],C and ()>0 with ϖ>0.

    Proof. By employing Definition 2.2, we have

    HϖJφ;η1{υ3υ4˜f2}(T)=ql=0rl+1Rl+1HϖJφ;xl,xl+1{˜f2}(T)HϖJφ;η1{υ1υ2˜g2}(T)=ql=0hl+1Hl+1HϖJφ;xl,xl+1{˜g2}(T) (4.6)

    and

    HϖJφ;η1{(υ1υ3+υ2υ4)˜f˜g}(T)=ql=0(rl+1hl+1+Rl+1Hl+1)HϖJφ;xl,xl+1{˜f˜g}(T). (4.7)

    Using the fact of Lemma 2.3, inequalities (4.6) and (4.7), the desired inequality (4.5) is established.

    Proposition 2. Let two positive integrable functions ˜f and ˜g defined on [η1,T] such that the assumption (A) satisfying (2.12). Then, the inequality

    (4.8)

    holds for all φ(0,1],,ψC and (),(ψ)>0.

    Proof. The proof is simple by following (4.1), (4.2) and Theorem 2.4.

    Remark 9. The accuracy of the approximated estimates (4.5) and (4.8) depends on the value of qN.

    This paper proposes a new generalized fractional integral operator. The novel investigation is used to generate novel weighted fractional operators in the Hadamard and generalized proportional Hadamard fractional operator, which effectively alleviates the adverse effect of weight function ϖ and proportionality index φ. Utilizing the weighted generalized proportional Hadamard fractional operator technique, we derived the analogous versions of the weighted Pólya-Szegö-Chebyshev and certain associated type inequalities that improve the accuracy and efficiency of the proposed technique. Contemplating the Remark 2, several existing results can be identified in the literature. It is important to note that our generalizations are refinements of the results obtained by [69]. Some innovative particular cases constructed by this method are tested and analyzed for statistical theory, fractional Schrödinger equation [35]. The results show that the method proposed in this paper can stably and efficiently generate integral inequalities for convexity with better operators' performance, thus providing a reliable guarantee for its application in control theory [67].

    The authors would like to express their sincere thanks to referees for improving the article and also thanks to Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 61673169) for providing financial assistance to support this research. The authors would like to express their sincere thanks to the support of Taif University Researchers Supporting Project Number (TURSP-2020/155), Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia.

    The work was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 61673169, 11601140) and the Scientific Research Fund of Hunan Provincial Education Department (Grant No. 16B047).

    The authors declare that they have no competing interests.



    [1] J. Feng, S. Liu, An improved generalized Newton method for absolute value equations, SpringerPlus, 5 (2016), 1042. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-2720-5 doi: 10.1186/s40064-016-2720-5
    [2] J. Feng, S. Liu, A new two-step iterative method for solving absolute value equations, J. Inequal. Appl., 2019 (2019), 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13660-019-1969-y doi: 10.1186/s13660-019-1969-y
    [3] L. Abdallah, M. Haddou, T. Migot, Solving absolute value equation using complementarity and smoothing functions, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 327 (2018), 196–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cam.2017.06.019 doi: 10.1016/j.cam.2017.06.019
    [4] F. Mezzadri, On the solution of general absolute value equations, Appl. Math. Lett., 107 (2020), 106462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aml.2020.106462 doi: 10.1016/j.aml.2020.106462
    [5] I. Ullah, R. Ali, H. Nawab, Abdussatar, I. Uddin, T. Muhammad, et al., Theoretical analysis of activation energy effect on prandtl–eyring nanoliquid flow subject to melting condition, J. Non-Equil. Thermody., 47 (2022), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1515/jnet-2020-0092 doi: 10.1515/jnet-2020-0092
    [6] M. Amin, M. Erfanian, A dynamic model to solve the absolute value equations, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 333 (2018), 28–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cam.2017.09.032 doi: 10.1016/j.cam.2017.09.032
    [7] L. Caccetta, B. Qu, G. L. Zhou, A globally and quadratically convergent method for absolute value equations, Comput. Optim. Appl., 48 (2011), 45–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10589-009-9242-9 doi: 10.1007/s10589-009-9242-9
    [8] C. Chen, D. Yu, D. Han, Optimal parameter for the SOR-like iteration method for solving the system of absolute value equations, arXiv. Available from: https://arXiv.org/abs/2001.05781.
    [9] M. Dehghan, A. Shirilord, Matrix multisplitting Picard-iterative method for solving generalized absolute value matrix equation, Appl. Numer. Math., 158 (2020), 425–438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnum.2020.08.001 doi: 10.1016/j.apnum.2020.08.001
    [10] X. Dong, X. H. Shao, H. L. Shen, A new SOR-like method for solving absolute value equations, Appl. Numer. Math., 156 (2020), 410–421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnum.2020.05.013 doi: 10.1016/j.apnum.2020.05.013
    [11] V. Edalatpour, D. Hezari, D. K. Salkuyeh, A generalization of the Gauss-Seidel iteration method for solving absolute value equations, Appl. Math. Comput., 293 (2017), 156–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2016.08.020 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2016.08.020
    [12] A. J. Fakharzadeh, N. N. Shams, An efficient algorithm for solving absolute value equations, J. Math. Ext., 15 (2021), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.30495/JME.2021.1393 doi: 10.30495/JME.2021.1393
    [13] X. M. Gu, T. Z. Huang, H. B. Li, S. F. Wang, L. Li, Two-CSCS based iteration methods for solving absolute value equations, J. Appl. Math. Comput., 7 (2017), 1336–1356. https://doi.org/10.11948/2017082 doi: 10.11948/2017082
    [14] P. Guo, S. L. Wu, C. X. Li, On the SOR-like iteration method for solving absolute value equations, Appl. Math. Lett., 97 (2019), 107–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aml.2019.03.033 doi: 10.1016/j.aml.2019.03.033
    [15] F. Hashemi, S. Ketabchi, Numerical comparisons of smoothing functions for optimal correction of an infeasible system of absolute value equations, Numer. Algebra Control Optim., 10 (2020), 13–21. https://doi.org/10.3934/naco.2019029 doi: 10.3934/naco.2019029
    [16] I. Uddin, I. Ullah, R. Ali, I. Khan, K. S. Nisar, Numerical analysis of nonlinear mixed convective MHD chemically reacting flow of Prandtl-Eyring nanofluids in the presence of activation energy and Joule heating, J. Therm. Anal. Calorim., 145 (2021), 495–505. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-020-09574-2 doi: 10.1007/s10973-020-09574-2
    [17] S. L. Hu, Z. H. Huang, A note on absolute value equations, Optim. Lett., 4 (2010), 417–424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11590-009-0169-y doi: 10.1007/s11590-009-0169-y
    [18] S. Ketabchi, H. Moosaei, Minimum norm solution to the absolute value equation in the convex case, J. Optim. Theory Appl., 154 (2012), 1080–1087. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10957-012-0044-3 doi: 10.1007/s10957-012-0044-3
    [19] Y. F. Ke, C. F. Ma, SOR-like iteration method for solving absolute value equations, Appl. Math. Comput., 311 (2017), 195–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2017.05.035 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2017.05.035
    [20] Y. F. Ke, The new iteration algorithm for absolute value equation, Appl. Math. Lett., 99 (2020), 105990. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aml.2019.07.021 doi: 10.1016/j.aml.2019.07.021
    [21] C. X. Li, A preconditioned AOR iterative method for the absolute value equations, Int. J. Comput. Methods, 14 (2017), 1750016. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219876217500165 doi: 10.1142/S0219876217500165
    [22] H. Moosaei, S. Ketabchi, M. A. Noor, J. Iqbal, V. Hooshyarbakhsh, Some techniques for solving absolute value equations, Appl. Math. Comput., 268 (2015), 696–705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2015.06.072 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2015.06.072
    [23] O. L. Mangasarian, R. R. Meyer, Absolute value equation, Linear Algebra Appl., 419 (2006), 359–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.laa.2006.05.004 doi: 10.1016/j.laa.2006.05.004
    [24] O. L. Mangasarian, Absolute value programming, Comput. Optim. Applic., 36 (2007), 43–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10589-006-0395-5 doi: 10.1007/s10589-006-0395-5
    [25] O. L. Mangasarian, Absolute value equation solution via concave minimization, Optim. Lett., 1 (2007), 3–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11590-006-0005-6 doi: 10.1007/s11590-006-0005-6
    [26] O. L. Mangasarian, Linear complementarity as absolute value equation solution, Optim. Lett., 8 (2014), 1529–1534. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11590-013-0656-z doi: 10.1007/s11590-013-0656-z
    [27] X. H. Miao, J. T. Yang, B. Saheya, J. S. Chen, A smoothing Newton method for absolute value equation associated with second-order cone, Appl. Numer. Math., 120 (2017), 82–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnum.2017.04.012 doi: 10.1016/j.apnum.2017.04.012
    [28] C. T. Nguyen, B. Saheya, Y. L. Chang, J. S. Chen, Unified smoothing functions for absolute value equation associated with second-order cone, Appl. Numer. Math., 135 (2019), 206–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnum.2018.08.019 doi: 10.1016/j.apnum.2018.08.019
    [29] O. A. Prokopyev, On equivalent reformulations for absolute value equations, Comput. Optim. Appl., 44 (2009), 363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10589-007-9158-1 doi: 10.1007/s10589-007-9158-1
    [30] J. Rohn, A theorem of the alternatives for the equation Ax+B|x|=b, Linear Multilinear Algebra, 52 (2004), 421–426. https://doi.org/10.1080/0308108042000220686 doi: 10.1080/0308108042000220686
    [31] J. Rohn, V. Hooshyarbakhsh, R. Farhadsefat, An iterative method for solving absolute value equations and sufficient conditions for unique solvability, Optim. Lett., 8 (2014), 35–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11590-012-0560-y doi: 10.1007/s11590-012-0560-y
    [32] B. Saheya, C. H. Yu, J. S. Chen, Numerical comparisons based on four smoothing functions for absolute value equation, J. Appl. Math. Comput., 56 (2018), 131–149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12190-016-1065-0 doi: 10.1007/s12190-016-1065-0
    [33] R. S. Varga, Matrix iterative analysis, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1962.
    [34] S. L. Wu, C. X. Li, A special shift splitting iteration method for absolute value equation, AIMS Math., 5 (2020), 5171–5183. https://doi.org/10.3934/math.2020332 doi: 10.3934/math.2020332
    [35] S. L. Wu, The unique solution of a class of the new generalized absolute value equation, Appl. Math. Lett., 116 (2021), 107029. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aml.2021.107029 doi: 10.1016/j.aml.2021.107029
    [36] R. Ali, M. R. Khan, A. Abidi, S. Rasheed, A. M. Galal, Application of PEST and PEHF in magneto-Williamson nanofluid depending on the suction/injection, Case Stud. Therm. Eng., 27 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2021.101329 doi: 10.1016/j.csite.2021.101329
    [37] C. X. Li, S. L. Wu, Modified SOR-like iteration method for absolute value equations, Math. Probl. Eng., 2020 (2020), 9231639. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/9231639 doi: 10.1155/2020/9231639
    [38] M. R. Khan, M. X. Li, S. P. Mao, R. Ali, S. Khan, Comparative study on heat transfer and friction drag in the flow of various hybrid nanofluids efiected by aligned magnetic fleld and nonlinear radiation, Sci. Rep., 11 (2021), 3691.
    [39] J. Y. Bello Cruz, O. P. Ferreira, L. F. Prudente, On the global convergence of the inexact semi-smooth Newton method for absolute value equation, Comput. Optim. Appl., 65 (2016), 93–108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10589-016-9837-x doi: 10.1007/s10589-016-9837-x
    [40] G. Ning, Y. Zhou, An improved differential evolution algorithm for solving absolute value equations, In: J. Xie, Z. Chen, C. Douglas, W. Zhang, Y. Chen, High performance computing and applications, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer, 9576 (2016), 38–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32557-6
    [41] D. K. Salkuyeh, The Picard-HSS iteration method for absolute value equations, Optim. Lett., 8 (2014), 2191–2202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11590-014-0727-9 doi: 10.1007/s11590-014-0727-9
    [42] Z. Z. Bai, Modulus-based matrix splitting iteration methods for linear complementarity problems, Numer. Linear Algebra Appl., 17 (2010), 917–933. https://doi.org/10.1002/nla.680 doi: 10.1002/nla.680
    [43] R. Ali, A. Ali, S. Iqbal, Iterative methods for solving absolute value equations, J. Math. Comput. Sci., 26 (2022), 322–329. https://doi.org/10.22436/jmcs.026.04.01 doi: 10.22436/jmcs.026.04.01
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Suyan Tan, Yilin Guo, A study of the impact of scientific collaboration on the application of Large Language Model, 2024, 9, 2473-6988, 19737, 10.3934/math.2024963
    2. Serap Nur Ozata Canli, Murat Sercemeli, The impact of environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosures on corporate financial performance in the energy sector, 2025, 1750-6220, 10.1108/IJESM-09-2024-0039
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2022 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(2874) PDF downloads(239) Cited by(24)

Figures and Tables

Tables(4)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog