Let Σ be a Laurent phenomenon (LP) seed of rank n, A(Σ), U(Σ), and L(Σ) be its corresponding Laurent phenomenon algebra, upper bound and lower bound respectively. We prove that each seed of A(Σ) is uniquely defined by its cluster and any two seeds of A(Σ) with n−1 common cluster variables are connected with each other by one step of mutation. The method in this paper also works for (totally sign-skew-symmetric) cluster algebras. Moreover, we show that U(Σ) is invariant under seed mutations when each exchange polynomials coincides with its exchange Laurent polynomials of Σ. Besides, we obtain the standard monomial bases of L(Σ). We also prove that U(Σ) coincides with L(Σ) under certain conditions.
Citation: Qiuning Du, Fang Li. Some elementary properties of Laurent phenomenon algebras[J]. Electronic Research Archive, 2022, 30(8): 3019-3041. doi: 10.3934/era.2022153
[1] | Oluwafolajimi Adesanya, Tolulope Oduselu, Oluwawapelumi Akin-Ajani, Olubusuyi M. Adewumi, Olusegun G. Ademowo . An exegesis of bacteriophage therapy: An emerging player in the fight against anti-microbial resistance. AIMS Microbiology, 2020, 6(3): 204-230. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2020014 |
[2] | Stephen T. Abedon . Phage “delay” towards enhancing bacterial escape from biofilms: a more comprehensive way of viewing resistance to bacteriophages. AIMS Microbiology, 2017, 3(2): 186-226. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2017.2.186 |
[3] | Philip Serwer . Restoring logic and data to phage-cures for infectious disease. AIMS Microbiology, 2017, 3(4): 706-712. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2017.4.706 |
[4] | Marzena Połaska, Barbara Sokołowska . Bacteriophages—a new hope or a huge problem in the food industry. AIMS Microbiology, 2019, 5(4): 324-346. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2019.4.324 |
[5] | Ariel J. Santiago, Maria L. Burgos-Garay, Leila Kartforosh, Mustafa Mazher, Rodney M. Donlan . Bacteriophage treatment of carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae in a multispecies biofilm: a potential biocontrol strategy for healthcare facilities. AIMS Microbiology, 2020, 6(1): 43-63. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2020003 |
[6] | Manjusha Lekshmi, Parvathi Ammini, Jones Adjei, Leslie M. Sanford, Ugina Shrestha, Sanath Kumar, Manuel F. Varela . Modulation of antimicrobial efflux pumps of the major facilitator superfamily in Staphylococcus aureus. AIMS Microbiology, 2018, 4(1): 1-18. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2018.1.1 |
[7] | Kerri Glassner, Eamonn MM Quigley, Lissa Franco, David W Victor III . Autoimmune liver disease and the enteric microbiome. AIMS Microbiology, 2018, 4(2): 334-346. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2018.2.334 |
[8] | Marina Santiago, Lindsay Eysenbach, Jessica Allegretti, Olga Aroniadis, Lawrence J. Brandt, Monika Fischer, Ari Grinspan, Colleen Kelly, Casey Morrow, Martin Rodriguez, Majdi Osman, Zain Kassam, Mark B. Smith, Sonia Timberlake . Microbiome predictors of dysbiosis and VRE decolonization in patients with recurrent C. difficile infections in a multi-center retrospective study. AIMS Microbiology, 2019, 5(1): 1-18. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2019.1.1 |
[9] | Ashrafus Safa, Jinath Sultana Jime, Farishta Shahel . Cholera toxin phage: structural and functional diversity between Vibrio cholerae biotypes. AIMS Microbiology, 2020, 6(2): 144-151. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2020009 |
[10] | Thomas Bintsis . Foodborne pathogens. AIMS Microbiology, 2017, 3(3): 529-563. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2017.3.529 |
Let Σ be a Laurent phenomenon (LP) seed of rank n, A(Σ), U(Σ), and L(Σ) be its corresponding Laurent phenomenon algebra, upper bound and lower bound respectively. We prove that each seed of A(Σ) is uniquely defined by its cluster and any two seeds of A(Σ) with n−1 common cluster variables are connected with each other by one step of mutation. The method in this paper also works for (totally sign-skew-symmetric) cluster algebras. Moreover, we show that U(Σ) is invariant under seed mutations when each exchange polynomials coincides with its exchange Laurent polynomials of Σ. Besides, we obtain the standard monomial bases of L(Σ). We also prove that U(Σ) coincides with L(Σ) under certain conditions.
Recently fractional calculus has gotten much attention from researchers like traditional calculus. The mentioned area has the ability to describe real-world phenomena in more excellent ways. Also, such derivatives have numerous applications in the description of those systems with memory effects. Due to various applications, the said calculus has been used to investigate various infectious disease models like in [1,2,3]. Also, in the field of physics, engineering, and cosmology, fractional calculus has very well been used. For instance, we refer [4,5,6]. It has been shown that in many applications, the use of fractional calculus provides more realistic models than those obtained via classical ordinary derivatives. Due to this reason, the study of fractional models has received great attention from many researchers in the last few years. As the fractional order derivatives have important characteristics known as the memory effect which ordinary derivatives do not involve. Also, fractional differential operators are nonlocal as compared to the local behavior of integer derivatives. Recently researchers have published some very important results in this regard like [7,8]. Also, authors [9] have published some new results on the numerical scheme for fractional order SEIR epidemic of measles. Here it is remarked that some authors have discussed the geometry of fractional order derivatives. For instance, authors [10] have suggested a geometric interpretation of the fractional derivatives which is based on modern differential geometry and the geometry of jet bundles. In fact, the fractional differential operators are definite integrals that create the complete accumulation or spectrum of the function on whose these applications include the corresponding integer-order counterpart of a special case. In the same way, authors [11] have given the definition of the geometric interpretation of gradient of order (0,1]. In this way, they have suggested some geometric interpretations of the differentiability of real order.
Different problems under the concept of fractional calculus have been studied for the existing theory and stability analysis. One of the important areas is devoted to investigating hybrid problems under the aforesaid concepts. In this regard, different problems under boundary and initial conditions have been studied by using nonlinear analysis and tools of advanced functional analysis. In the present time class of fractional differential equations devoted to the quadratic perturbation of nonlinear differential equations (called hybrid differential equations) has attracted much attention from researchers. This is due to the fact that they include several dynamical systems as special cases. For instance, Dhage and Lakshmikantham [12] discussed the existence theory of the following problem of hybrid differential equations
ddt[u(t)f(t,u(t))]=g(t,u(t)),a.e.t∈[t0,t0+a], |
where
f∈C([t0,t0+a]×R,R∖{0}), and g∈C([t0,t0+a]×R,R). |
They used hybrid fixed point theory to establish the existence of solutions to the proposed problems. In the same way, Dhage and Jadhav[13] studied the existence and uniqueness results for the ordinary first-order hybrid differential equation with perturbation of second type given by
ddt[u(t)−f(t,u(t))]=g(t,u(t)),a.e.t∈[t0,t0+a],u(t0)=u0, |
where f,g∈C([t0,t0+a]×R,R). Motivated from the mentioned mentioned work, Lu et al.[14] studied the following class of FHDEs by replacing the ordinary derivative by Caputo fractional type with 0<σ≤1 as
cDσ[u(t)−f(t,u(t))]=g(t,u(t)),a.e.t∈[t0,t0+a],u(t0)=u0. |
They used the hybrid fixed point theory of Dhage to study the existence and uniqueness of the solution to the mentioned problem.
In the last few years, hybrid fixed point theory has been used to study different problems of hybrid nature for the existence theory in [15,16,17,18]. Also, using the aforementioned tools, authors have established various results devoted to existence theory for different boundary value problems of HFDEs in [19,20,21,22,23]. Also, some authors have studied integral-type FHDEs in [24,25]. Authors [26] have studied a system of FHDEs of thermostats type by using a fixed point approach. Furthermore, authors [27] have investigated a class of FHDEs under mixed-type hybrid integral boundary conditions. In the same way authors in [28,29,30,31,32] have used the tools of nonlinear functional analysis for studying various problems and systems of HFDEs. Here, we remark that authors [33] established a review of the analytical solutions for some generalized classes. In the same line, a class of HFDEs has also been considered in [34]. Authors in [35,36,37] have studied different boundary value problems of fractional order using topological degree theory for the existence theory. Here it should be kept in mind that a hybrid system is a dynamic system that interacts with continuous and discrete dynamics. For, example, the novel multiplex engineering systems involve numerous kinds of process and abstract decision-making units that present the image of various systems simultaneously exhibiting continuous and discrete time dynamics (see details in [38]). Further, the applications of hybrid systems can be found in embedded control systems also (see [39]).
The existence theory of solutions to nonlinear problems is an important area of research in the current scenario. Because the said theory predicts the existence of a solution to a dynamic problem whether it has a solution or not. Usually, for the said theory fixed point theory has been used very well. But fixed point theory needs strong compact conditions which restricted its use in some situations. Also, to deal HFDEs, Dhage established some hybrid-type fixed point theorems to study the existence and uniqueness of the solution to the mentioned problems. However, it also needs the same strong compact conditions. To relax, the criteria and replace strong compact conditions with some weaker compactness, the degree theory has been introduced. It has a sophisticated tool to be used to investigate numerous nonlinear problems of integral, differential, and difference equations for their corresponding solution. The mentioned theory has been used very well for usual problems of fractional order equations. However, in the case of HFDEs, it has not been used properly. For some important contributions by using degree theory to study various problems in fractional calculus, we refer few papers as [40,41,42,43].
In this work, we study a more general class of nonlinear boundary value problems (BVPs) consisting of a more general class of nth order S-HFDEs) together subject to nonlinear boundary conditions. Also, we choose the general case in which the nonlinear functions involved depend on the non-integer order derivatives. Further, necessary conditions required for the uniqueness of a solution to the proposed problem, we implement Caratheódory conditions along with techniques of measure of non-compactness and degree theory. Some new and interesting results are developed. Also, a result devoted to U-H stability is derived for the considered problem. Our proposed problem is stated as
cDϑ[cDωu(t)−m∑1Iβihi(t,u(t),Dρu(t))f(t,u(t),Dρu(t))]=g(t,u(t),Iγu(t)),t∈I=[0,1]u(0)=ψ1(u(η)),u′(0)=0,u″(0)=0,....,u(n−1)(0)=0,u(1)=ψ2(u(η)), | (1.1) |
where 0<ϑ≤1,n−1<ω,βi, γ≤n,n−2<ρ≤n−1 with n≥2, 0<η<1, the functions f:I×R×R→R−{0},hi:I×R×R→R(i=1,2,....,m) and g:I×R×R→R satisfy the Caratheódory conditions. Moreover, ψ1,ψ2:R→R are nonlinear functions. Also, the notation cD denotes the Caputo fractional order derivative and I represents fractional integral. Here, we use the tools mentioned in [44,45,46] to establish a detailed analysis of the considered problem. Also, stability is an important aspect of qualitative theory. In this regard, U-H stability analysis has also considered for some problems of HFDEs. For instance, see [47,48].
The present article is organized as: Section 1 is devoted to the introduction. Section 2 is related to basic results from fractional calculus and degree theory. Section 3 is devoted to the first part of our main results. Section 4 is related to the second part of our main results. The section is consisted of applications to verify our results. Section 6 is devoted to a brief conclusion.
Here it should be kept in mind that we have used the following basic definitions from [1,2] of fractional order derivative and integration.
Definition 2.1. If ϑ>0, then the fractional order integration of a function u∈L1([0,1]) is given by
Iϑ0+u(t)=1Γ(ω)∫t0(t−s)ω−1u(s)ds. |
Definition 2.2. The fractional derivative in Caputo sense of a function u over the interval [0,1] is defined as
cDϑu(t)=1Γ(m−ϑ)∫t0(t−s)n−ϑ−1θ(n)(s)ds, |
where n−1=[ϑ].
Theorem 2.3. The solution of
Iϑ[cDϑu(t)]=y(t),n−1<ϑ≤n, |
is derived as
Iϑ[cDϑu(t)]=y(t)+Citn−1, |
for arbitrary Ci∈R, i=0,1,2,…,n−1=[ϑ].
Let E={u∈C(I):cDω−1u∈C(I)} is Banach space under the norm ‖u‖ρ=max0≤t≤1|u(t)|+max0≤t≤1|cDρu|.
Let P represents family of all bounded sub sets of E, then we define the following measure of non-compactness.
Definition 2.4. [44] The measure due to non-compactness μ:P→R+ is Kuratowski measure which is defined as
μ(S)=inf{ϱ>0 where S∈P such that diameterofS≤ϱ}. |
Definition 2.5. [25] If T1,T2:E→E are μ-Lipschtiz with constants C and C′ respectively, then T1+T2:E→E is μ-Lipschitz with constant C+C′.
Definition 2.6. [25] If T1:S→E is compact, then T1 is μ-Lipschitz with constant C=0.
Definition 2.7. [25] If T1:S→E is Lipschitz with constant C, then T1 is μ-Lipschitz with the same constant C.
We need the given theorem.
Theorem 2.8. [25] Let T:E→E be μ-condensing and
S={u∈E:withλ∈[0,1]asu=λTu}. |
If S is a bounded set in E, so we can find r>0, such that S⊂Dr(0), then the degree
deg(I−λT,Dr(0),0)=1, for all λ∈[0,1]. |
Thus T has at least one fixed point and the set of the fixed points of T lies in Dr(0).
Here, we derive first part of our main results.
Lemma 3.1. The solution of (1.1) can be described as
u(t)=IωΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+m∑1Iω−βihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+ψ1(u(η))+Iωf(t,u(t),cDρ−1u(t))Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))(ψ2(u(η))−ψ1(u(η))−IωΨ(1,u(1),cDρu(1))−Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))−m∑1Iω+βihi(1,u(1),cDρu(1)), | (3.1) |
such that
Ψ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))=f(t,u(t),cDρu(t))Iϑg(t,u(t),Iγu(t)), |
Iωψ(1,u(1),cDρu(1)),Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1)) |
represent value of integral
IωΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t)),Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1)) |
at t=1 and Iω+βihi(1,u(1),cDρu(1)) denotes the value of the integral Iω+βihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t)) at t=1, for i=1,2,3,...m.
Proof. On using Iϑ at both sides of (1.1), one has
cDωu(t)−m∑1Iβihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))=f(t,u(t),cDρu(t))Iϑg(t,u(t),Iγu(t))+C0f(t,u(t),cDρu(t))=Ψ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+C0f(t,u(t),cDρu(t)). |
Hence, we obtain
cDωu(t)=m∑1Iβihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+Ψ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+C0f(t,u(t),cDρu(t)). |
Using Iω and the semi group property of integrals, one has
u(t)=m∑1Iω+βihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+IωΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+C0Iωf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+C1+C2t+⋯+Cntn−1. |
Taking jth order ordinary derivative, one has
uj(t)=∑Iω+βi−jhi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+Iω−jΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+C0Iω−jf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+n∑1Cii!ti−j(i−j+1)!. |
Also, u′(0)=0,u″(0)=0,...,un−1(0)=0 yield C2=0,C3=0,....,Cn=0. Thus
u(t)=m∑1Iω+βihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+IωΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+C0Iωf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+C1. | (3.2) |
Further u(0)=ψ1(u(η)) yields C1=ψ1(u(η)) and using u(1)=ψ2(u(η)), one has
ψ2(u(η))=u(1)=IωΨ(1,u(1),cDρu(1))+m∑1Iω+βihi(1,u(1),cDρu(1))+C0Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))+ψ1(u(η)), |
which implies
[ψ2(u(η))−ψ1(u(η))−IωΨ(1,u(1),cDρu(1))−m∑1Iω+βihi(1,u(1),cDρu(1))]=C0Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1)). |
Hence, we get the given result
C0=[ψ2(u(η))−ψ1(u(η))−IωΨ(1,u(1),cDρu(1))−m∑1Iω+βih(1,u(1),cDρu(1))]Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1)). |
Hence, (3.2) becomes
u(t)=IωΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+m∑1Iω+βihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+Iωf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))×(ψ2(u(η))−IωΨ(1,u(1),cDρu(1))−Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))+ψ1(u(η))−m∑1Iω−βihi(1,u(1),cDρu(1)))=IωΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+m∑1Iω+βihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+ψ1(u(η))+Iωf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))(ψ2(u(η))−ψ1(u(η))−IωΨ(1,u(1),cDρu(1))−Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))−m∑1Iω+βihi(1,u(1),cDρu(1))), |
which can be rewritten as
u(t)=IωΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+m∑1Iω+βihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+ψ1(u(η))+Iωf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))(ψ2(u(η))−ψ1(u(η))−IωΨ(1,u(1),cDρu(1))−Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))−m∑1Iω+βihi(1,u(1),cDρu(1))). | (3.3) |
From (3.3), it follows that
cDρu(t)=Iω−ρΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+m∑1Iω+βi−ρhi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+Iω−ρf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))(ψ2(u(η))−ψ1(u(η)). | (3.4) |
Let define A,B,C:E→E by A=ˉA+ψ1(u(η)),C=(ψ2(u(η))−ψ1(u(η)))−ˉC, where
(ˉAu)(t)=IωΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+m∑1Iω+βihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t)),(Bu)(t)=Iωf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1)),(ˉCu)(t)=IωΨ(1,u(1),cDρu(1))+Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))+m∑1Iω+βihi(1,u(1),cDρu(1))), | (3.5) |
then (3.3) takes the form of the operator equation
u(t)=Au(t)+Bu(t)Cu(t)=Tu(t),t∈I, | (3.6) |
and fixed points of the operator Eq (3.6) are solutions of the BVP (1.1). Further, from (3.4), it follows that
cDρ(ˉAu)(t)=Iω−ρΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+m∑1Iω+βi−ρhi(t,u(t),cDρu(t)),cDρ(Bu)(t)=Iω−ρf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1)),cDρ(ˉCu)(t)=0. | (3.7) |
Using (3.5), and (3.7), we obtain
|(ˉAu)(t)|≤|IωΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|+m∑1|Iω+βihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|,|cDρ(ˉAu)|≤|Iω−ρΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|+m∑1|Iω+βi−ρhi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|,|(Bu)(t)|≤|Iωf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))||Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))|,|cDρ(Bu)(t)|≤|Iω−ρf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))||Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))|,|(ˉCu)(t)|=|IωΨ(1,u(1),cDρu(1))|+|Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))|+m∑1|Iω+βihi(1,u(1),cDω−1u(1)))|,|cDρ(ˉCu)(t)|=0. | (3.8) |
The following data depended results need to be hold to establish our main results.
(H1) f,hi,g fulfill the criteria of Caratheódory conditions.
(H2) For constants τ1,τ2,d1,d2,c1,c2, one has
|ψi(u1(t))−ψi(u2(t))|≤τi|u1−u2|,i=1,2|ψi(u)|≤ci|u|+di,i=1,2. |
(H3) Let we have continuous mappings θi,μ,δ:I→R, with 0<ξ,λ, such that for u∈E that
|hi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|≤|θi(t)|(‖u‖+‖cDρu‖)+ξ=|θi(t)|‖u‖ρ+ξ,|f(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|≤|μ(t)|(‖u‖+‖cDρu‖)+λ=|μ(t)|‖u‖ρ+λ,|g(t,u(t),Iγu(t))|≤δ(t). |
(H4) There exists τi>0, such that for u1,u2∈E,
|f(t,u1(t),cDρu1(t))−f(t,u2(t),cDρu2(t))|≤μ0‖u1−u2‖ρ,|hi(t,u1(t),cDρu1(t))−hi(t,u2(t),cDρu2(t))|≤θi‖u1−u2‖ρ,|g(t,u1(t),(t))−g(t,u2(t),Iγu2(t))|≤δ0‖u1−u2‖,|ψi(u1(t))−ψi(u2(t))|≤τi|u1−u2|,i=1,2, |
where
μ0=maxt∈Iμ(t),δ0=maxt∈Iδ(t),θi=maxt∈I|θi(t)|,i=1,2,3,⋯,m. |
Under the hypothesis (H3), we have the following relation
|Ψ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|≤δ0Γ(ϑ+1)(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ),|IωΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|≤δ0Γ(ω+1)Γ(ϑ+1)(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ),|Iω−ρΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|≤δ0Γ(ω−ρ+1)Γ(ϑ+1)(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ),|Iωf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|≤1Γ(ω+1)(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ),|Iω+βihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|≤1Γ(ω+βi+1)(θi‖u‖ρ+ξ),|Iω+βi−ρhi(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|≤1Γ(ω+βi−ρ+1)(θi‖u‖ρ+ξ). | (3.9) |
Using (3.8), and (3.9) together with the hypothesis H2,H3, we obtain the following relations
|(ˉAu)(t)|≤δ0(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ϑ+1)Γ(ω+1)+m∑1(θi‖u‖ρ+ξ)Γ(ω+βi+1),|cDρ(ˉAu)|≤δ0(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ϑ+1)Γ(ω−ρ+1)+m∑1(θi‖u‖ρ+ξ)Γ(ω+βi−ρ+1),|(Bu)(t)|≤(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)ΛΓ(ω+1),|cDρ(Bu)(t)|≤(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)ΛΓ(ω−ρ+1),|(ˉCu)(t)≤δ0(μ0||u||ρ+λ)Γ(ω+1)Γ(ϑ+1)+m∑1(θi‖u||ρ+ξ)Γ(ω+βi+1),|cDρ(ˉCu)(t)|=0, | (3.10) |
where Λ=|IωΨ(1,u(1),cDρu(1)). Thus, under the hypothesis H4, we have the following relation
|Iϑg(t,u1(t),Iγu1(t))−Iϑg(t,u2(t),Iγu2(t))|≤ρ0Γ(ϑ+1)‖u1−u2‖,|Ψ(t,u1(t),cDρu1(t))−Ψ(t,u2(t),cDρu2(t))|≤(δμ+ρ0(‖u‖ρ+λ))Γ(ϑ+1)‖u1−u2‖ρ. | (3.11) |
Further, we have
IωΨ(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1))−IωΨ(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2))=1Γ(ω)[∫t10(t1−s)ω−1Ψ(s,u(s),cDρu(s))ds−∫t20(t2−s)ω−1Ψ(s,u(s),cDρu(s))ds]=1Γ(ω)[∫t10((t1−s)ω−1−(t2−s)ω−1)Ψ(s,u(s),cDρu(s)ds+∫t2t1((t2−s)ω−1−(t2−s)ω−1)Ψ(s,u(s),cDρu(s))ds]. |
Thus, one has
|IωΨ(1t,u(t1),cDρu(t1))−IωΨ(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2))|≤‖Ψ(s,u(s),cDρu(s)‖Γ(ω+1)(2(t2−t1)ω+tω1−tω2), |
which in view of (3.9) implies that
|IωΨ(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1))−IωΨ(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2))|≤δ0(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ϑ+1)Γ(ω+1)(2(t2−t1)ω+tω1−tω2). | (3.12) |
Similarly, in view of (3.9), we obtain
|Iω−ρΨ(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1))−Iω−ρΨ(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2))|≤δ0(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ϑ+1)Γ(ω−ρ)(2(t2−t1)ω−ρ+tω−ρ1−tω−ρ2), | (3.13) |
|Iω+βihi(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1))−Iω+βihi(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2))|≤(θi‖u‖ρ+ξ)Γ(ω+βi+1)(2(t2−t1)ω+βi+tω+βi1−tω+βi2), | (3.14) |
|Iω+βi−ρhi(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1))−Iω+βi−ρhi(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2))|≤(θi‖u‖ρ+ξ)Γ(ω+βi−ρ+1)(2(t2−t1)ω+βi−ρ+tω+βi−ρ1−tω+βi−ρ2), | (3.15) |
|Iωf(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1))−Iωf(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2))|≤((μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω+1)(2(t2−t1)ω+tω1−tω2), | (3.16) |
|Iω−ρf(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1))−Iω−ρf(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2))|≤((μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω−ρ+1)(2(t2−t1)ω−ρ+tω−ρ1−tω−ρ2). | (3.17) |
Hence, it follows that
|Au1(t)−Au2(t)|≤1Γ(ω+1)|Ψ(t,u1(t),Dρu1(t))−Ψ(t,u2(t),Dρu2(t))|+m∑1|hi(t,u1(t),Dρu1(t))−hi(t,u2(t),Dρu2(t))|Γ(ω+βi+1)+|ψ1(u1)(η)−ψ1(u2)(η)|, |
which in view (3.11), and H4 implies that
|Au1(t)−Au2(t)|≤(δμ+ρ0(‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω+1)Γ(ϑ+1)‖u1−u2‖ρ+m∑1|θi|‖u1−u2‖ρΓ(ω+βi+1)+τ1‖u1−u2‖≤((δμ+ρ0(‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω+1)Γ(ϑ+1)+m∑1|θi|Γ(ω+βi+1)+τ1)‖u1−u2‖ρ. | (3.18) |
In addition, we have
|DρAu1(t)−DρAu2(t)|≤Iω−ρ|Ψ(t,u1(t),Dρu1(t))−Ψ(t,u2(t),Dρu2)(t)|+m∑1Iω+βi−ρ|(hi(t,u1(t),Dρu1(t))−hi(t,u2(t),Dρu2(t))|, |
which in view (3.11), and H4 implies that
|DρAu1(t)−DρAu2(t)|≤(δμ+ρ0(‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω−ρ+1)Γ(ϑ+1)‖u1−u2‖ρ+m∑1|θi|‖u1−u2‖ρΓ(ω+βi−ρ+1)=((δμ+ρ0(‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω−ρ+1)Γ(ϑ+1)+m∑1|θi|Γ(ω+βi−ρ+1))‖u1−u2‖ρ. | (3.19) |
From (3.23), and (3.19), it follows that
‖Au1(t)−Au2(t)‖ρ≤((δμ+ρ0(‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ϑ+1)(1Γ(ω+1)+1Γ(ω−ρ+1))+m∑1(|θi|Γ(ω+βi+1)+|θi|Γ(ω+βi−ρ+1))+τ1)‖u1−u2‖ρ=κ1‖u1−u2‖ρ, | (3.20) |
where κ1=(δμ+ρ0(‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ϑ+1)(1Γ(ω+1)+1Γ(ω−ρ+1))+∑m1(|θi|Γ(ω+βi+1)+|θi|Γ(ω+βi−ρ+1))+τ1. Now
|Bu1(t)−Bu2(t)|≤Iω|(f(t,u1(t),Dρu1(t))−f(t,u2(t),Dρu2(t))Λ,|DρBu1(t)−DρBu2(t)|≤Iω−ρ|(f(t,u1(t),Dρu1(t))−f(t,u2(t),Dρu2(t))|Λ, |
using H4 yields
|Bu1(t)−Bu2(t)|≤μ‖u1−u2‖ΛΓ(ω+1),|DρBu1(t)−DρBu2(t)|≤μ‖u1−u2‖ΛΓ(ω−ρ+1). |
Hence, it follows that
‖Bu1−Bu2‖ρ≤μΛ(1Γ(ω+1)+1Γ(ω−ρ+1))‖u1−u2‖ρ=κ2‖u1−u2‖ρ, | (3.21) |
whereκ2=μΛ(1Γ(ω+1)+1Γ(ω−ρ+1)).
|Cu1(t)−Cu2(t)|≤|ψ2(u1)−ψ2(u2)|+|ψ1(u1)−ψ1(u2)|+|IωΨ(1,u1(1),Dρu1(1))−IωΨ(1,u1(1),Dρu1(1))|+|Iωf(1,u1(1),Dρu1(1))−Iωf(1,u1(1),Dρu1(1))|+m∑1|Iω+βihi(1,u1(1),Dρu1(1))−Iω+βihi(1,u1(1),Dρu1(1))|. | (3.22) |
Using(3.11), and H4, we obtain
|Cu1(t)−Cu2(t)|≤(τ1+τ2)|u1−u2|+(δμ+ρ0(‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω+1)Γ(ϑ+1)‖u1−u2‖ρ+μ0Γ(w+1)‖u1−u2‖ρ+m∑1θi‖u1−u2‖ρΓ(ω+βi+1)≤((δμ+ρ0(‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω+1)Γ(ϑ+1)+μ0Γ(w+1)+m∑1|θi|Γ(ω+βi+1)+τ1+τ2)‖u1−u2‖ρ=κ3‖u1−u2‖ρ, | (3.23) |
where κ3=(δμ+ρ0(‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω+1)Γ(ϑ+1)+μ0Γ(w+1)+∑m1|θi|Γ(ω+βi+1)+τ1+τ2.
Theorem 3.2. Under the hypothesis H1–H3, the operator ˉA is compact and satisfies the following growth condition ‖ˉAu‖ρ≤Δ1‖u‖ρ+Δ2, where
Δ1=δ0μ0Γ(ϑ+1)(1Γ(ω+1)+1Γ(ω−ρ+1))+m∑1(θiΓ(ω+βi+1)+θiΓ(ω+βi−ρ+1)), | (3.24) |
and
Δ2=δ0λΓ(ϑ+1)(1Γ(ω+1)+1Γ(ω−ρ+1))+m∑1(ξΓ(ω+βi+1)+ξΓ(ω+β1−ρ+1)). | (3.25) |
Proof. Here (ˉAu)(t)=IωΨ(t,u(t),cDρu(t))+∑m1Iω+βihi(t,u(t),cDρu(t)), clearly, ˉA is continuous on E. Now, for u∈E, using (3.10), we have
‖ˉAu‖ρ=‖ˉAu‖+‖cDρˉAu‖≤δ0(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ϑ+1)(1Γ(ω+1)+1Γ(ω−ρ+1))+m∑1(θi‖u‖ρ+ξ))(1Γ(ω+βi+1)+1Γ(ω+βi−ρ+1))=(δ0μ0Γ(ϑ+1)(1Γ(ω+1)+1Γ(ω−ρ+1))+m∑1(θiΓ(ω+βi+1)+θiΓ(ω+βi−ρ+1)))‖u‖ρ+δ0λΓ(ϑ+1)(1Γ(ω+1)+1Γ(ω−ρ+1))+m∑1(ξΓ(ω+βi+1)+ξΓ(ω+β1−ρ+1)). |
Hence
‖Au‖ρ≤Δ1‖u‖ρ+Δ2. | (3.26) |
(3.26) yields that ˉA is uniformly bounded for bounded set on E. Let, t1<t2∈I, and consider
|ˉA(u)t2−ˉA(u)t1|+|(cDρˉAu)t2−(cDρˉAu)t1|≤|IωΨ(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1))−IωΨ(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2))|+m∑1|Iω+βihi(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1)−Iω+βihi(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2)|. |
In view of (3.12), and (3.14), we obtain
|ˉA(u)t2−ˉA(u)t1|≤δ0Γ(ϑ+1)(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω+1)(2(t2−t1)ω+tω1−tω2)+m∑1(θi‖u‖ρ+ξ)Γ(ω+βi+1)(2(t2−t1)ω+βi+tω+βi1−tω+βi2),, | (3.27) |
in view of (3.13), and (3.15), we obtain
|cDρˉA(u)t2−cDρˉA(u)t1|≤|Iω−ρΨ(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1))−Iω−ρΨ(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2))|+m∑1|Iω+βi−ρhi(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1)−Iω+βi−ρhi(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2)|≤δ0Γ(ϑ+1)(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω−ρ)(2(t2−t1)ω−ρ+tω−ρ1−tω−ρ2)+m∑1(θi‖u‖ρ+ξ)Γ(ω+βi−ρ+1)(2(t2−t1)ω+βi−ρ+tω+βi−ρ1−tω+βi−ρ2). | (3.28) |
From (3.27) and (3.28), it follows that
‖ˉA(u)t2−ˉA(u)t1‖ρ=‖ˉA(u)t2−ˉA(u)t1‖+‖(cDρˉAu)t2−(cDρˉAu)t1‖→0 as t1→t2. | (3.29) |
Thus ˉA is equi continuous, and by Arzelá- Ascoli theorem ˉA is relatively compact. Hence, ˉA is μ- Lipschtiz with constant 0.
Lemma 3.3. Under the hypothesis H1–H3, the operator A is μ-Lipschtiz with constant τ1 and satisfes the following growth condition
‖Au‖ρ≤(Δ1+c1)‖u‖ρ+(Δ2+d1). | (3.30) |
Proof. By H2, the operator ψ1(η) is μ-Lipschtiz with constant τ1 and by Lemma (3.2), the operator ˉA is μ-Lipschtiz with constant 0. Hence, the operator A=ˉA+ψ1(η) is μ-Lipschtiz with constant τ1. Since, ‖ˉAu‖ρ≤Δ1‖u‖ρ+Δ2 by Lemma (3.2), it follows that ‖Au‖ρ≤(Δ1+c1)‖u‖ρ+(Δ2+d1).
Lemma 3.4. Under the hypothesis H1–H3, the operator B is continuous and compact.
Proof. Here, (Bu)(t)=Iωf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1)). Clearly, B is continuous on E and bounded as
|(Bu)(t)|=||Iωf(t,u(t),cDρu(t))|Λ≤1. | (3.31) |
For equi-continuity, choose t1<t2∈I, and consider
|B(u)t2−B(u)t1|+|(cDρBu)t2−(cDρBu)t1|≤|Iωf(t2,u(t2),cDρu(t2))−Iωf(t1,u(t1),cDρu(t1))|Λ. |
In view of (3.16), we obtain
|B(u)t2−B(u)t1|≤((μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω+1)Λ(2(t2−t1)ω+tω1−tω2), | (3.32) |
in view of (3.17), we obtain
|cDρB(u)t2−cDρB(u)t1|≤((μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω−ρ+1)Λ(2(t2−t1)ω−ρ+tω−ρ1−tω−ρ2). | (3.33) |
From (3.32) and (3.33), it follows that
‖B(u)t2−B(u)t1‖ρ=‖B(u)t2−B(u)t1‖+‖(cDρBu)t2−(cDρBu)t1‖→0 as t1→t2. | (3.34) |
Therefore, B is equi continuous. Therefore, using Arzelá- Ascoli theorem, B is compact.
Lemma 3.5. Under the hypothesis H1–H3, the operator ˉC is compact and satisfies the following growth condition
‖ˉCu‖ρ≤Δ3‖u‖ρ+Δ4, | (3.35) |
where
Δ3=δ0μ0Γ(ω+1)Γ(ϑ+1)+μ0Γ(ω+1)+m∑1(θiΓω+βi+1), |
and
Δ4=λδ0Γ(ω+1)Γ(ϑ+1)+λΓ(ω+1)+m∑1ξΓ(ω+βi+1). |
Proof. The continuity of ˉC follows from the definition of ˉC. In addition, we have
|ˉCu(t)|≤|IωΨ(1,u(1),cDρu(1))|+|Iωf(1,u(1),cDρu(1))|+m∑1|Iω+βihi(1,u(1),cDρu(1)))| |
which is in view of (3.9) implies that
|ˉCu(t)|≤δ0(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω+1)Γ(ϑ+1)+1Γ(ω+1)(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)+m∑1(θi‖u‖ρ+ξ)Γ(ω+βi+1). |
Hence, it follows that
‖ˉC(u)‖ρ≤δ0(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)Γ(ω+1)Γ(ϑ+1)+1Γ(ω+1)(μ0‖u‖ρ+λ)+m∑1(θi‖u‖ρ+ξ)Γ(ω+βi+1). | (3.36) |
The equi-continuity of ˉC follows from the fact that
|ˉC(u)t2−ˉC(u)t1|=0, for all t1,t2∈I. |
Hence, ˉC is compact and it follows that ˉC is μ-Lipschtiz with constant 0.
Lemma 3.6. Under the hypothesis H1–H3, the operator C is μ-Lipschtiz with constant τ and satisfies the following growth condition
‖Cu‖ρ≤(Δ3+c1)‖u‖ρ+(Δ4+d1). | (3.37) |
Proof. Define F(u)=ψ2(u(η))−ψ1(u(η)), for u1,u2∈E, consider
|F(u2)t−F(u1)t|≤|ψ1(u2(η))−ψ1(u1(η))|+|ψ2(u2(η))−ψ2(u1(η))|, |
which in view of H2 implies that
|F(u2)t−F(u1)t|≤(τ1+τ2)‖u2−u1‖=τ‖u2−u1‖, |
τ=τ1+τ2. Since C=(ψ2(u(η))−ψ1(u(η)))−ˉC=F(u)−ˉC and by Lemma 3.5 ˉC is μ-Lipschtiz with constant 0. Hence, C is μ-Lipschtiz with constant τ. Further, ‖ˉCu‖ρ≤Δ3‖u‖ρ+Δ4 by Lemma 3.5, it follows that
‖Cu‖ρ≤(Δ3+c1)‖u‖ρ+(Δ4+d1). | (3.38) |
Choose the parameters such that Δ1+Δ3+2c1+c2<1. Choose R≥max{τ1+τ,Δ2+Δ4+2d1+d21−(Δ1+Δ3+2c1+c2)}. Define S={u∈E:‖u‖ρ≤R}, then S is closed, convex and bounded subset of E.
Theorem 3.7. Under the assumptions (H1)–(H3), the system (3.6) has at least one solution u∈E provided Δ1+Δ3+2c1+c2<1.
Proof. By Lemma 3.3, the operator A is μ-Lipschitz with constant τ1. Using Lemma 3.6, the operator C is μ-Lipschitz with constant τ. By Lemma 3.4, the operator B is compact. Now for v∈S and u∈E, consider the equation u=Au+BvCu, which implies that
‖u‖ρ≤‖Au||ρ+‖By‖ρ‖Cu‖ρ. |
Using (3.30), (3.31) and (3.37), we obtain
‖u‖ρ≤(Δ1+c1)‖u‖ρ+(Δ2+d1)+(Δ3+c1+c2)‖u‖ρ+(Δ4+d1+d2). |
That implies
(1−(Δ1+Δ3+2c1+c2))‖u‖ρ≤(Δ2+Δ4+2d1+d2). |
Hence, it follows that
‖u‖ρ≤Δ2+Δ4+2d1+d2(1−(Δ1+Δ3+2c1+c2)≤R |
which implies that u∈S. Further we have M=‖Bu‖ρ=1 and R≥τ1+τ. Finally from above, we conclude that (3.6) has at least one solution u∈E.
Theorem 3.8. Under the assumptions (H1)–(H4), the system (3.6) has a unique solution in S provided that
κ1+κ2((Δ3+c1)R+(Δ4+d1))+k3<1. | (3.39) |
Proof. For u1,u2∈S, Consider
‖T(u2)−T(u1)‖ρ=‖Au2+Bu2Cu2−(Au1+Bu1Cu1)‖ρ≤‖Au2−Au1‖ρ+‖Cu1‖ρ‖Bu2−Bu1‖ρ+‖Bu2‖ρ‖Cu2−Cu1‖ρ. | (3.40) |
By (3.20), (3.21), and (3.23), we have
‖Au2−A(u1)‖ρ≤κ1‖u1−u2‖ρ,‖Bu2−B(u1)‖ρ≤κ2‖u1−u2‖ρ,‖Cu2−C(u1)‖ρ≤κ3‖u1−u2‖ρ. | (3.41) |
Using (3.41) in (3.40), we obtain
‖Tu2−Tu1‖ρ≤κ1‖u1−u2‖ρ+‖Cu1‖ρκ2‖u1−u2‖ρ+κ3‖u1−u2‖ρ‖Bu2‖ρ |
which in view of (3.31), and (3.38) implies that
‖Tu2−Tu1‖ρ≤κ1‖u1−u2‖ρ+((Δ3+c1)‖u‖ρ+(Δ4+d1))κ2‖u1−u2‖ρ+κ3‖u1−u2‖ρ. |
Further, the above relation implies that
‖Tu1−Tu2‖ρ≤(κ1+κ2((Δ3+c1)‖u‖ρ+(Δ4+d1))+k3)‖u1−u2‖ρ≤(κ1+κ2((Δ3+c1)R+(Δ4+d1))+k3)‖u1−u2‖ρ, | (3.42) |
and uniqueness follows by the Banach contraction principle.
U-H stability result is developed for (1.1). For detail introduction and results of U-H stability, we refer [47,48].
Definition 4.1. The problem (3.6) is said to be U-H stable, if there exists a constant ζ>0, such that for a given φ>0, and for each solution u of the inequality
‖u−(Au+BuCu)‖ρ<φ, | (4.1) |
there exists a solution ˉu(t) of (3.6). Then one has
ˉu(t)=Aˉu(t)+Bˉu(t)Cˉu(t), |
such that
‖u−ˉu‖ρ<φζ. |
Theorem 4.2. Under the assumptions (H2) and (H4), the problem (1.1) is U-H stable provided k+k1<1.
Proof. Let u∈E satisfies the inequality (4.1), and ˉu∈E be a solution of (1.1) which satisfies the Eq (3.6). Consider
‖u−ˉu‖ρ=‖u−(Aˉu+BˉuCˉu)‖ρ≤‖u−(Au+BuCu)‖ρ+‖(Au+BuCu)−(Aˉu+BˉuCˉu)‖ρ<φ+‖Tu−Tˉu‖ρ. | (4.2) |
Now using (3.42) and (4.1), we obtain
‖u−ˉu‖ρ≤φ+(κ1+κ2((Δ3+c1)R+(Δ4+d1))+k3)‖u1−u2‖ρ=φ+K‖u1−u2‖ρ, | (4.3) |
where K=κ1+κ2((Δ3+c1)R+(Δ4+d1))+k3. Hence, it follows that
‖u−ˉu‖ρ<φζ, where ζ=11−K. |
Here, we present an application to demonstrate our results.
Example 5.1. Consider the following problem by taking n=2 as
cD0.5[cD1.5u(t)−m∑1I1.5hi(t,u(t),cD1.5u(t))f(t,u(t),cD1.5u(t))]=g(t,u(t),I1.5u(t)),t∈I=[0,1],u(0)=ψ1(u(0.5)),u′(0)=0,u(1)=ψ2(u(0.5)). | (5.1) |
Consider
hi(t,u(t),cD1.5u(t))=sin|u(t)|+sin|cD1.5u(t)|100+t2,f(t,u(t),cD1.5u(t))=sin|u(t)|+√|cD1.5u(t)|50+e−t2,g(t,u(t),I1.5u(t))=√|u(t)|+I1.5u(t)150+t,ψ1(u(0.5))=sin|u(0.5)|50, ψ2(u(0.5)=sin|u(0.5)|50. |
It is easy to show that the conditions of Theorem 3.2 and 3.8 are satisfied. Therefore, the given problem (5.1) has at least one solution. Further, the solution uniqueness condition also holds. Also, one can obviously verified the condition of U-H stability given in Theorem 4.2.
In this manuscript, a nonlinear problem of S-HFDEs has been investigated by using a sophisticated tool known as topological degree theory. We have used a degree of non-compactness along with Caratheódory condition to establish appropriate results for the qualitative theory. Usually, fixed point theory involves strong compact conditions which require more restrictions on the nonlinear operators. Therefore, to replace the strong compact condition with some weaker compact condition, the proposed degree theory is a powerful tool. The concerned tool has the ability to relax the criteria and hence can be applied to large numbers of nonlinear problems of differential and integral equations. On the other hand, stability is an important consequence of nonlinear analysis. Therefore, a result based on U-H concepts for stability has been established. Finally, to verify our obtained results, we have given an illustrative problem. In the future, the degree theory will be applied in hybrid problems of fractal-fractional differential equations which have the ability to describe complex and irregular geometry in more diligent ways. Also, the mentioned degree theory has not yet been used in dealing with non-singular type hybrid fractional differential equations. Therefore, the aforesaid area will be our next target.
All the authors are thankful to Prince Sultan University for paying the APC and support through TAS research lab.
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
[1] |
S. Fomin, A. Zelevinsky, Cluster algebras I. foundations, J. Amer. Math. Soc., 15 (2002), 497–529. https://doi.org/10.1090/S0894-0347-01-00385-X doi: 10.1090/S0894-0347-01-00385-X
![]() |
[2] |
P. Cao, F. Li, Some conjectures on generalized cluster algebras via the cluster formula and D-matrix pattern, J. Algebra, 493 (2018), 57–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalgebra.2017.08.034 doi: 10.1016/j.jalgebra.2017.08.034
![]() |
[3] |
M. Gekhtman, M. Shapiro, A. Vainshtein, On the properties of the exchange graph of a cluster algebra, Math. Res. Lett., 15 (2008), 321–330. https://doi.org/10.4310/MRL.2008.v15.n2.a10 doi: 10.4310/MRL.2008.v15.n2.a10
![]() |
[4] |
A. Berenstein, S. Fomin, A. Zelevinsky, Cluster algebras III. upper bounds and double Bruhat cells, Duke Math. J., 126 (2005), 1–52. https://doi.org/10.1215/S0012-7094-04-12611-9 doi: 10.1215/S0012-7094-04-12611-9
![]() |
[5] |
G. Muller, Locally acyclic cluster algebras, Adv. Math., 233 (2013), 207–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aim.2012.10.002 doi: 10.1016/j.aim.2012.10.002
![]() |
[6] |
L. Bai, X. Chen, M. Ding, F. Xu, On the generalized cluster algebras of geometric types, Symmetry Integr. Geom. Methods Appl., 16 (2020), 14. https://doi.org/10.3842/SIGMA.2020.092 doi: 10.3842/SIGMA.2020.092
![]() |
[7] | T. Lam, P. Pylyavskyy, Laurent phenomenon algebras, Camb. J. Math., 4 (2016), 121–162. https://doi.org/10.4310/CJM.2016.v4.n1.a2 |
[8] |
L. Chekhov, M. Shapiro, Teichmüller spaces of Riemann surfaces with orbifold points of arbitrary order and cluster variables, Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN, 2014 (2014), 2746–2772. https://doi.org/10.1093/imrn/rnt016 doi: 10.1093/imrn/rnt016
![]() |
[9] |
M. Gekhtman, M. Shapiro, A. Vainshtein, Drinfeld double of GLn and generalized cluster structures, Proc. Lond. Math. Soc., 116 (2018), 429–484. https://doi.org/10.1112/plms.12086 doi: 10.1112/plms.12086
![]() |
[10] |
T. Nakanishi, Structure of seeds in generalized cluster algebras, Pac. J. Math., 277 (2015), 201–218. https://doi.org/10.2140/pjm.2015.277.201 doi: 10.2140/pjm.2015.277.201
![]() |
[11] | J. Wilson, Laurent Phenomenon Algebras arising from surfaces, Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN, (2018), 3800–3833. https://doi.org/10.1093/imrn/rnw341 |
[12] |
M. Huang, F. Li, Unfolding of sign-skew-symmetric cluster algebras and its applications to positivity and F-polynomials, Adv. Math., 340 (2018), 221–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aim.2018.10.008 doi: 10.1016/j.aim.2018.10.008
![]() |
[13] | S. Fomin, A. Zelevinsky, Cluster algebras: Notes for the CDM-03 conference, Curr. Dev. Math., (2003), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.4310/CDM.2003.v2003.n1.a1 |
1. | Fabrizio Antolini, Evaluating public expenditures on tourism: the utility of the Italian public accounting reforms, 2021, 3, 2689-3010, 179, 10.3934/NAR.2021009 | |
2. | Cheng Shi, Mengyang Liu, Yu Ye, Measuring the Degree of Balance between Urban and Tourism Development: An Analytical Approach Using Cellular Data, 2021, 13, 2071-1050, 9598, 10.3390/su13179598 | |
3. | Xiao Hui Tai, Shikhar Mehra, Joshua E. Blumenstock, Mobile phone data reveal the effects of violence on internal displacement in Afghanistan, 2022, 6, 2397-3374, 624, 10.1038/s41562-022-01336-4 | |
4. | Tamás Kovalcsik, Ábel Elekes, Lajos Boros, László Könnyid, Zoltán Kovács, Capturing Unobserved Tourists: Challenges and Opportunities of Processing Mobile Positioning Data in Tourism Research, 2022, 14, 2071-1050, 13826, 10.3390/su142113826 | |
5. | Marta Crispino, Vincenzo Mariani, A Tool to Nowcast Tourist Overnight Stays with Payment Data and Complementary Indicators, 2024, 2199-322X, 10.1007/s40797-024-00266-6 | |
6. | A. Ye. Surinov, Big Data in Official Statistics: A View of the Problem, 2023, 30, 2658-5499, 5, 10.34023/2313-6383-2023-30-2-5-22 | |
7. | Umberto Minora, Stefano Maria Iacus, Filipe Batista e Silva, Francesco Sermi, Spyridon Spyratos, Dan-Cristian Dabija, Nowcasting tourist nights spent using innovative human mobility data, 2023, 18, 1932-6203, e0287063, 10.1371/journal.pone.0287063 | |
8. | Anna Serena Vergori, Giorgio Colacchio, Domenico Suppa, Accommodation Statistics and Unobserved Inbound Tourism: The Italian Case Study, 2025, 2199-322X, 10.1007/s40797-025-00328-3 |