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

Platoon-based collision-free control for connected and automated vehicles at non-signalized intersections

  • Received: 02 December 2022 Revised: 15 January 2023 Accepted: 14 February 2023 Published: 21 February 2023
  • This paper proposes a distributed collision-free control scheme for connected and automated vehicles (CAVs) at a non-signalized intersection. We first divide an intersection area into three sections, i.e., the free zone, the platoon zone, and the control zone. In order to enable the following vehicles to track the trajectory of their leading vehicle in the platoon zone and the control zone, as well as to guarantee the desired distance between any two adjacent vehicles, the distributed platoon controllers are designed. In the control zone, each vehicular platoon is taken as a whole to be coordinated via an intersection coordination unit (ICU). To avoid collision between each pair of the conflicting platoons approaching from different directions, a platoon-based coordination strategy is designed by scheduling the arrival time of each leading vehicle of different platoons. Specially, considering traffic efficiency and fuel economy, the optimal control problem of the leading vehicle is formulated subject to the constraint of allowable minimum arrival time, which is derived from coordination with other approaching platoons. The Pontryagin Minimum Principle (PMP) and phase-plane method are applied to find the optimal control sequences. Numerical simulations show the effectiveness of this scheme.

    Citation: Jian Gong, Yuan Zhao, Jinde Cao, Wei Huang. Platoon-based collision-free control for connected and automated vehicles at non-signalized intersections[J]. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(4): 2149-2174. doi: 10.3934/era.2023111

    Related Papers:

    [1] Jagdev Singh, Jitendra Kumar, Devendra kumar, Dumitru Baleanu . A reliable numerical algorithm based on an operational matrix method for treatment of a fractional order computer virus model. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(2): 3195-3210. doi: 10.3934/math.2024155
    [2] Fawaz K. Alalhareth, Seham M. Al-Mekhlafi, Ahmed Boudaoui, Noura Laksaci, Mohammed H. Alharbi . Numerical treatment for a novel crossover mathematical model of the COVID-19 epidemic. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(3): 5376-5393. doi: 10.3934/math.2024259
    [3] Mehmet Kocabiyik, Mevlüde Yakit Ongun . Construction a distributed order smoking model and its nonstandard finite difference discretization. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(3): 4636-4654. doi: 10.3934/math.2022258
    [4] Muhammad Asim Khan, Majid Khan Majahar Ali, and Saratha Sathasivam . High-order finite difference method for the two-dimensional variable-order fractional cable equation in complex systems and neuronal dynamics. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(4): 8647-8672. doi: 10.3934/math.2025396
    [5] Yasir Nawaz, Muhammad Shoaib Arif, Wasfi Shatanawi, Muhammad Usman Ashraf . A new unconditionally stable implicit numerical scheme for fractional diffusive epidemic model. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(8): 14299-14322. doi: 10.3934/math.2022788
    [6] Maryam Amin, Muhammad Farman, Ali Akgül, Mohammad Partohaghighi, Fahd Jarad . Computational analysis of COVID-19 model outbreak with singular and nonlocal operator. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(9): 16741-16759. doi: 10.3934/math.2022919
    [7] Shao-Wen Yao, Muhammad Farman, Maryam Amin, Mustafa Inc, Ali Akgül, Aqeel Ahmad . Fractional order COVID-19 model with transmission rout infected through environment. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 5156-5174. doi: 10.3934/math.2022288
    [8] Rohul Amin, Kamal Shah, Hijaz Ahmad, Abdul Hamid Ganie, Abdel-Haleem Abdel-Aty, Thongchai Botmart . Haar wavelet method for solution of variable order linear fractional integro-differential equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 5431-5443. doi: 10.3934/math.2022301
    [9] Omar Kahouli, Imane Zouak, Ma'mon Abu Hammad, Adel Ouannas . Chaos, control and synchronization in discrete time computer virus system with fractional orders. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(6): 13594-13621. doi: 10.3934/math.2025612
    [10] Agus Suryanto, Isnani Darti . On the nonstandard numerical discretization of SIR epidemic model with a saturated incidence rate and vaccination. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(1): 141-155. doi: 10.3934/math.2021010
  • This paper proposes a distributed collision-free control scheme for connected and automated vehicles (CAVs) at a non-signalized intersection. We first divide an intersection area into three sections, i.e., the free zone, the platoon zone, and the control zone. In order to enable the following vehicles to track the trajectory of their leading vehicle in the platoon zone and the control zone, as well as to guarantee the desired distance between any two adjacent vehicles, the distributed platoon controllers are designed. In the control zone, each vehicular platoon is taken as a whole to be coordinated via an intersection coordination unit (ICU). To avoid collision between each pair of the conflicting platoons approaching from different directions, a platoon-based coordination strategy is designed by scheduling the arrival time of each leading vehicle of different platoons. Specially, considering traffic efficiency and fuel economy, the optimal control problem of the leading vehicle is formulated subject to the constraint of allowable minimum arrival time, which is derived from coordination with other approaching platoons. The Pontryagin Minimum Principle (PMP) and phase-plane method are applied to find the optimal control sequences. Numerical simulations show the effectiveness of this scheme.



    The only difference between a computer virus and other programs on a computer is that viruses are not helpful. It is a dangerous program that was created to carry out destructive deeds like wiping data or harming other software in the computer system [1].

    The earliest viruses to be introduced were for technological purposes alone. Instead of harming or attacking, the purpose of these algorithms was to determine the propagation time. These viruses were created for research and useful purposes. Creeper's goal was to create a malicious mobile application. Ross and Hamer introduced the mathematical models of communicable illnesses in the 20th century. Bernoulli first proposed the idea of disease dynamics and its mathematical modeling in the year 1766, which opened the door to modern epidemiology. To examine the dynamics of the sickness, they took into account the law of mass action. Following the same path, Frost and Reed Frost created the infectious illness model, which explains how susceptible, infected, and recovered people are related. The smoking model has recently drawn the attention of researchers among other models.

    Smoking poses a serious risk to one's health because it directly or indirectly affects every organ of the body. Scientists face a difficult problem when it comes to mathematical modeling of biological sciences [2,3,4,5]. The relationship between mathematical modeling of the physical problem is that, whereas biological systems discuss changes in structure, nonlinear terms, and multi-scale issues in the mathematical modeling for the interrelationship of the parameters, complex systems discuss change in structure in the systems [6]. Using traditional integer order derivatives, numerous biological models were thoroughly examined in the final decades of the 20th century. See for more information [7]. The dynamical features of numerous physical systems can be better understood via fractional derivative. These differential operators are noteworthy because, in contrast to traditional differential operators, they exhibit non-local behavior. The memory effect is one of the fundamental characteristics of fractional differential equations. In fact, the physical model can be developed using a realistic and useful technique using fractional order derivatives. Higher degrees of freedom in physical models are provided via the fractional order derivative's property. Powerful tools for determining the dynamical properties of diverse biomaterials and systems include arbitrary real or complex order derivatives. These models' global (nonlocal) features are their most well-known characteristic. Magin looked on the relationship between stress and strain in biomaterials using fractional order derivatives in the model [8].

    For a clear understanding of the phenomenon, fractional-order derivatives are used in the modeling of the intricate biological system patterns. The memory effect of fractional models enables more information to be gleaned from the past, improving the accuracy of the dynamics forecasts. Depending on the virus's characteristics, many researchers created numerous compartmental models to explain the dynamics of the virus. For instance, SEIAR stands for Susceptible, Exposed, Infected, Asymptomatic, and Recovered. Other acronyms for this condition include SI (Susceptible-Infected), SIS (Susceptible, Infected, and Susceptible), SIR (Susceptible, Infected and Recovered), SEIR (Susceptible, Exposed, Infected, and Recovered), SEIQR (Susceptible, Exposed, Infected, Quarantine and Recovered).

    SLB (Susceptible, Latent and Breakout), SLBS (Susceptible, Latent, Breakout and Susceptible), SLBRS (Susceptible, Latent, Breakout, Recovered and Susceptible), and SEIS are among the models of computer viruses that are often employed (Susceptible, Exposed, Infected and Susceptible) Since the state variables in these models indicate the number of individuals (whether they be humans or computers), their values must not be negative. As a result, non negative is a key characteristic of these state variables. Additionally, the total population of the model's subpopulations must not exceed the model's overall population.

    Computer viruses include worms, Trojan horses, ransomware, spyware, adware, and scareware, to name a few. In 1949, John von Neumann is credited as being the first scientist to propose the idea of a self-replicating computer program. The Theory of Self-Reproducing Automata is the name given to his published work. As the theoretical founder of computer virology, von Neumann is credited with creating the first computer virus, a self-replicating computer program [9]. Kraus [10] postulated that computer instructions could behave like biological viruses in 1980. The first virus discovered on ARPANET, the initial internet, was called Creeper Malware [11]. Before the advent of computer networks, information and programs were exchanged using portable devices such floppies, discs, magnetic tapes, and magnetic drums. In the 1980s, conventional computer viruses first arose. The dynamics of the first computer virus model for malware programs were created in 1991. This style was influenced by the work of Kermack and Mc Kendrick [12]. Later, many computer virus models that took into account the dynamics of the virus's control parameters were created. Antivirus software is being accumulated in computer libraries using the traditional methods. On the other hand, researchers are drawn to the macroscopic approach to viral dynamics. The first researchers to examine computer virus models based on biological infections were Kepler and White [13]. Many dynamical models of internet viruses have been constructed along the same lines. According to the connectivity of the computers, these models can be divided into two primary types, namely heterogeneous models and homogeneous models. More academics are currently researching heterogeneous computer virus models. By taking into account real data, Kjaergaard and his co-authors examined the SI, or susceptible-infected, model for the computer virus dynamics with regard to time [14]. In order to elaborate the model, Castellano and Pastor-Satorras established the power law and described the fundamental models in saturated net works using SIS, susceptible-infected and susceptible models. A brand-new computer virus SIS model with a nonlinear rate of infectivity was created by Zhu and his co-authors. They thought about the edges and nodes' inclusion and expiration [16]. By taking into account the power law degree distribution of the internet, Yang and his colleagues created a new epidemic system for computer viruses and looked into the critical value for the dynamics of the virus. On the basis of decreased scale-free networking, a computer virus model was created [17].

    There are many viruses that can communicate without topology, including Conficker (2004), Witty (2004), Blaster (2003), Slammer (2003), and Code Red (2001). These programs have the potential to harm the expensive machine by exploring the entire IPv4 space or local IP addresses. The network-spreading virus in this instance can be regarded as fully connected. Furthermore, according to references [34,35], virtual clusters are a form of interconnected network. Another recent development in the field of dynamical models of computer viruses is the study of homogeneous systems. A subset of compromised computer nodes may end up on the internet and on portable devices that contain viruses. Gan et al. [20] created a collection of physical viral systems. Amador and Astalejo investigated how computer malware spread by taking into consideration the stochastic SIRS system, in which immune modes send out alerts to slow the spread of viruses across computers [21]. Liu and Zhong looked at a compartment model known as the SDIRS model representing malware communication under the homogeneity restriction [22]. For the purpose of analyzing the various physical behaviors of network virus propagation, Yuan et al. [23] described the SEIR model with a function of non-linear infection. This article offers a new computer malware communication method for researching the variables that affect the dynamics of computer viruses on networking. There are several globally asymptotically stable sites of equilibria of the continuous model, according to a thorough analysis of this system. In addition, various computer simulation tests are run to examine the results of this system. Finally, certain crucial steps to manage the dynamics of the infection are recommended. Non-linear integer order models can be solved using a variety of techniques, including the Adomian decomposition approach and the Homotopy perturbation method. It is an analytical approach that has been suggested for solving nonlinear problems with numerical analytic series. He developed this technology [24]. There are no set universal principles for higher order systems, though. Computer malware programs are extremely risky for consumers. Once a node in a network is infected, it is difficult to keep the virus under control. Cohan described computer viruses and looked at how they might destroy computer systems on a large scale [25].

    Kephart et al. [26,27] used a human infection model to study the spread of computer viruses. A computer infection model with homogenous mixing properties was created by Mishra et al. [28,29]. In order to anticipate whether a virus would exist, they first gave the threshold value for the dynamics of computer viruses in the population of computers. See [31,32] for more information.

    Now that studies have shown that traditional models do not accurately capture occurrences in the real world. They do not completely address the model's dynamics. These models also yield significant error since they do not accurately reflect the actual data [35]. As a result, for a variety of reasons, it becomes necessary to build fractional order models for nonlinear dynamical systems. These models have the system's historical memory as well as the inheritance property, and they fit real data more closely. The models' use of fractional order derivatives to establish a class of differential operators. Because the order of the fractional derivatives can take on infinite values across an interval, the fractional order models represent a class of systems.

    Finding the necessary approximations using a fresh numerical design is a difficult undertaking. Because one of the fundamental prerequisites for population dynamics is numerical solutions with great precision. The population of the various categories is characterized by the state variables used in these models. Therefore, at any point in time, these variables cannot have negative values [33,37]. Masood and colleagues looked into the fractional dynamics of the spread of the stuxnet virus in industrial control systems. They demonstrated that the primary cause of worm spread in isolated networks is removable storage devices [38].

    Muhkdasai and coauthors used supervised neural networks to take into account the impact of stochastic processes as they worked on numerical simulations for the fractional order Leptospirosis epidemic model. The fractional order model is studied using the Levenberg-Marquardt backward technique [39]. In a similar vein, Sabir et al. [40] looked at the stochastic variables and artificial neuron networks in the nonlinear fractional order prey predator model. The mean square error is reduced by combining the scaled conjugate gradient with the artificial neural network strategy. The fractional food supply model was mathematically explored by Souayeh [41] by incorporating the stochastic factor. The underlying model takes into account the three groups of populations: common prey, top predators, and specific categories of predators. The SCGNN was created to produce more accurate and superior results. On the basis of a mathematical model of the disease with a fractional order, Sabir and coauthors investigated the dynamics of the breast cancer disease. During the chemotherapy process, the tumor concentration was taken into account. For the fractional order model, four different compartment types are taken into consideration. Normal cell population, malignant cell population, immunological reaction class, and estrogen compartment are the compartments covered in the model. The numerical efficiency of the numerical design has become very attractive by the inclusion of the stochastic Levenberg-Marquardt back propagation neural networks [42].

    In order to obtain the approximate solutions of the fractional order model, Sabir et al. [43] used the LMB numerical scheme. By taking into account the generalized Caputo type fractional derivatives, Kumar and co-authors investigated the new numerical template to solve the fractional differential equations [44]. The existence analysis for these kinds of differential equations was also presented. The existence analysis for these kinds of differential equations was also presented. They also used the technique on some pertinent examples to demonstrate its importance. Following the same path, Kumer et al. investigated the spread of the maize streak virus by taking the fractional order epidemic model into consideration. To arrive at the numerical solutions of the model under consideration, they used the predictor-corrector method. They have demonstrated certain crucial characteristics of the state variables, such as stability, boundedness, and non-negativity [45]. Additionally, Kumer and his co-authors researched the dynamics of dental decay in the general population. They took into account both the epidemic model for integer and fractional orders. For the stability study, the Lypounov and LaSalle's invariance criterion is utilized [46].

    The following are this article's significant contributions:

    ● Stability of the model.

    ● Construction of robust numerical scheme.

    ● Positivity of the numerical method.

    ● Boundedness of the scheme.

    ● Numerical experiment and simulations.

    Some basic concepts, definitions, and notations are covered in this section.

    Definition 1. The Riemann-Liouville (RL) integral operator is defined as:

    Jαf(x)=1Γαb0(st)α1f(t)dt,

    where Γ() is the famous Euler Gamma function.

    Definition 2. The RL differential operator of order α, where m1<α<m, mZ+ is presented as:

    DαRLf(x)=dmdxmJmαf(x)=1Γ(mα)dmdxmb0(st)mα1f(t)dt

    where fL1[0,b]. Note that the space Lp(X,μ), or Lp(X) or simply Lp consists of all complex valued measurable functions on [0,b] that satisfy:

    b0|f(x)|pdμ(x)<,1p<,p2

    when p=1 the space L1[0,b] consists of all integrable functions on [0,b]. The most common and initial concept of fractional derivation is the RL fraction. When initial circumstances are taken as RL derivatives, the operator has a few drawbacks.

    Definition 3. The Caputo differential operator of any arbitrary order α is defined as:

    Dαcf(x)=Jmαf(x)=1Γ(mα)a0(xt)mα1dmdxmf(t)dt,

    where α>0, m1<α<m and mZ+.

    From the above definition, it is obvious that the fractional order derivative with order α, at time t is a non local operator. It depends upon the overall outcomes of the classically applied mth order derivatives, with mZ+ in the interval [0,t]. Therefore, this operator is useful in describing the change of a system in which the past state of the system imparts a critical role. In this article, we focus on the systems (2.1)–(2.3) by taking into account the growth rates of each state variables. The rates not only depend instantly upon the present state but also depend upon the past situation, known as memory effect.

    The classical SLBS model [1] for computer virus is given as:

    dS(t)dt=δβS(L+B)+γBδS (2.1)
    dL(t)dt=βS(L+B)αLδL (2.2)
    dB(t)dt=αLγBδS. (2.3)

    Its fractional order version is presented as:

    c0DθtS(t)=δθβθS(t)(L(t)+B(t))+γθB(t)δθS(t) (2.4)
    c0DθtL(t)=βθS(t)(L(t)+B(t))αθL(t)δθL(t) (2.5)
    c0DθtB(t)=αθL(t)γθB(t)δθB(t) (2.6)

    where S(t)+L(t)+B(t)=1.

    In this section, we discuss the stability of the models (2.4)–(2.6) at equilibrium points. This model has two equilibrium points, virus free state (VFS) ζ0(1,0,0) and virus existence state (VES) ζ(S,L,B) and these points are obtained by substituting c0DθtS(t)=0, c0DθtL(t)=0, c0DθtB(t)=0. The reproductive number of the epidemic systems (2.4)–(2.6) are R0=βθ(αθ+γθ+δθ)(αθ+δθ)(γθ+δθ).

    Theorem 1. The underlying computer virus epidemic models (2.4)–(2.6) are locally asymptotically stable at ζ0 under the condition R0<1.

    Proof. Let

    P=δθβθS(t)(L(t)+B(t))+γθB(t)δθS(t)Q=βθS(t)(L(t)+B(t))αθL(t)δθL(t)R=αθL(t)γθB(t)δθB(t).

    In order to linearize the system we will use Jacobian matrix, for Jacobian matrix,

    J(S,L,B)=|PSPLPBQSQLQBRSRLRB|
    J(S,L,B)=|βθS(t)(L(t)+B(t))βθS(t)βθS(t)+γθβθ(L(t)+B(t))βθS(t)αθδθβθS(t)0αθγθδθ|.

    At ζ0, Jacobian is obtained as:

    J(1,0,0)=|δθβθβθ+γθ0βθαθδθβθ0αθγθδθ|.

    By evaluating,

    |JλI|=0|JλI|=|δθλβθβθ+γθ0βθαθδθλβθ0αθγθδθλ|.

    We have the eigen values λ=δθ and (βθαθδθλ)(γθδθλ)αθβθ=0. Now let T=βθαθδθ, V= γθδθ, W=αθβθ

    (λT)(λV)+W=0λ2+λ(VT)+TV+W=0.

    This equation can be written as λ2+aλ+b=0, where a,b>0 if RO<1. So, the given system is locally asymptotically stable at ζ0.

    Theorem 2. The underlying computer virus epidemic models (2.4)–(2.6) are locally asymptotically stable at ζ under the condition R0>1.

    Proof. The Jacobian matrix at ζ is given as,

    |J(S,L,B)λ|=|βθS(L+B)λβθSβθS+γθβθ(L+B)βθSαθδθλβθS0αθγθδθλ|.

    Let G=βθS(L+B),  H=βθS I=βθS+γθ K=βθ(L+B), L=βθSαθδθ, M=βθS,  and N=αθ, U=γθδθ. Now Jacobians will be,

    |J(S,L,B)λ|=|GλHIKLλM0NUλ|.

    By evaluating,

    |J(S,L,B)λ|=0
    (Gλ)((Lλ)(Uλ)NM)H(K(Uλ))+I(KN)=0
    λ3+λ2(GLU)+λ(GL+GU+LUUN)+GUN+HKUIKUGLU=0.

    Which is written as λ3+aλ2+bλ+d=0, where a>0, b>0, d>0 if RO>1. By using Routh Hurwitz of order 3 we will conclude that the given system is locally asymptotically stable at ζ if R0>1.

    In order to prove the global stability of the fractional systems (2.4)–(2.6), we present an important lemma which is as follows.

    Lemma 3. [36] Let U(t)R+ be a continuous function. Then, for any time tt0 c0Dθt[U(t)UUlnU(t)U](1UU(t))c0DθtU(t). UR+, for all θ(0,1).

    Next, in the following theorems, the globally asymptotically stabilities (GAS) of the systems (2.4)–(2.6) at DFE and EE are carried out.

    Theorem 4. The underlying computer virus epidemic models (2.4)–(2.6) are globally asymptotically stable (GAS) at ζ0 under the condition R0<1.

    Proof. Define a Voltera Lyaponov function as,

    V:HR

    and

    V=S+L+B, (S,L,B)H.

    By using ζ0, we have

    V=(SS0S0LogSS0)+L+B.

    By using Lemma 3

    c0DθtV(SS0S) c0DθtS+c0DθtL+c0DθtBc0DθtV(SS0S)(δθβθS(L+B)+γθBδθS)+βθS(L+B)αθLδθL+αθLγθBδθBc0DθtVδθ(SS0)2SS0γθB(SS0)2SS0δθ(L+γθδθ)δθ(Bβθ(S+L)δθ)

    c0DθtV<0   if RO<1 and c0DθtV=0 if S=1, L=0, B=0. It concludes that the given system is GAS at ζ0.

    Theorem 5. The underlying computer virus epidemic models (2.4)–(2.6) are globally asymptotically stable (GAS) at ζ under the condition R0>1.

    Proof.

    V=(SSSlogSS)+(LLLogLL)+(BBLogBB).

    By using Lemma 3

    c0DθtV(SSS) c0DθtS+(LLL) c0DθtL+(BBB) c0DθtBc0DθtV(SSS)(δθβθS(L+B)+γθBδθS)+(LLL)(βθS(L+B)αθLδθL)+(BBB)(αθLγθBδθB)c0DθtVδθ(SS)2SSγθB(SS)2SSβθSB(LL)2LLαθL(BB)2BB

    c0DθtV<0 if RO>1 and c0DθtV=0 if S=S, L=L, B=B. Hence the given system is GAS at ζ.

    In this section, numerical method is presented for the underlying fractional computer virus model. Again, the system of fractional order is given as,

    c0DθtS(t)|t=tn=δθβθSn+1(t)(Ln(t)+Bn(t))+γθBn(t)δθSn+1(t) (4.1)
    c0DθtL(t)|t=tn=βθSn+1(t)(Ln(t)+Bn(t))αθLn+1(t)δθLn+1(t) (4.2)
    c0DθtB(t)|t=tn=αθLn+1(t)γθBn+1(t)δθBn+1(t). (4.3)

    Firstly, Grunwald-Letnikove approach (G. L. Approach) is discussed, for detail see [34].

    c0Dθtx(t)|t=tn=1(ψ(Δt))θ(xn+1Σn+1i=1cixn+1iqn+1x0) (4.4)

    where ci=(1)i1(θi),c1=θ

    qi=iθΓ(1θ),i=1,2,3,...,n+1.

    Now, the following result is helpful in proving some other results.

    Lemma 6. The detailed discussion of this lemma can be seen in [34]. Let 0<θ<1 then all the coefficients defined as cθi=(1)θ1(θi),qθn+1=hθqθ0(tn+1)=qθ0,1(n+1)θ are positive and unveil the property cθi=O(1v1+θ) as i. Moreover, the coefficients cθi and qθi hold the following two relations for i1 0<cθi+1<cθi<.....<cθ1=θ<1 0<qθi+1<qθi<......<qθ1=1Γ(1θ).

    By incorporating NSFD rules in the G. L. Approach, the discrete model for susceptible computers becomes as,

    1(ψ(h))θ(Sn+1Σn+1i=1ciSn+1iqn+1S0)=δθβθ(Ln+Bn)Sn+1+γθBnδθSn+1 (4.5)
    Sn+1=Σn+1i=1ciSn+1i+qn+1S0+(ψ(h))θδθ+γθ(ψ(h))θBn1+(ψ(h))θ(βθLn+βθBn+δθ). (4.6)

    Similarly GL-NSFD scheme for latent and breaking out computers as,

    Ln+1=Σn+1i=1ciLn+1i+qn+1L0+(ψ(h))θβθ(Ln+Bn)Sn+11+(ψ(h))θ(αθ+δθ) (4.7)
    Bn+1=Σn+1i=1ciBn+1i+qn+1B0+(ψ(h))θαθLn+11+(ψ(h))θ(γθ+δθ). (4.8)

    Pseudocodes of proposed numerical technique (4.6)–(4.8) are given in Algorithm 1.

    Algorithm 1 Pseudocodes of the proposed scheme (4.6)–(4.8).
    procedure Function(S,L,B)
      Get(θ)
      INIT β,δ,η,γ
      SET t
      Initial values S,L,B
      for each n until length(t)+1 do
        qnhθ,Γ
      end for
      repeat
      n length(t)-1
      for SLB do
        for each i until n do
        c1θ
        if i>1 then
          cθi
        end if
        ci×(S,L,B)n+1i
        Update S,L,B
        end for
        [S,I,R]n+1= right hand side of (4.6)–(4.8)
      end for
    end procedure

    The following theorem validates the positivity of the solution of the systems (2.4)–(2.6).

    Theorem 7. Suppose that S00,L00,B00,αθ0,γθ0,δθ0,βθ0 then Sn0,Ln0,Bn0 for all n=1,2,3,.....

    Proof.

    S1=c1S0+q1S0+(ψ(h))θδθ+γθ(ψ(h))θBo1+(ψ(h))θ(βθL0+βθB0+δθ)0
    L1=c1L0+q1L0+ψ(h)θβθ(L0+B0)S11+ψ(h)θ(αθ+δθ)0
    B1=c1B0+q1B0+(ψ(h))θαθL11+(ψ(h))θ(γθ+δθ)0

    for n=1

    S2=c1S1+c2S0+q2S0+(ψ(h))θδθ+γθ(ψ(h))θB11+(ψ(h))θ(βθL1+βθB1+δθ)0
    L2=c1L1+c2L0+q2L0+(ψ(h))θβθ(L1+B1)S21+(ψ(h))θ(αθ+δθ)0
    B2=c1B1+c2B0+q2B0+(ψ(h))θαθL21+(ψ(h))θ(γθ+δθ)0

    for n=2

    S3=c1S2+c2S1+c3S0+q3S0+(ψ(h))θδθ+γθ(ψ(h))θB21+(ψ(h))θ(βθL2+βθB2+δθ)0
    L3=c1L2+c2L1+c3L0+q3L0+(ψ(h))θβθ(L2+B2)S31+(ψ(h))θ(αθ+δθ)0
    B3=c1B2+c2B1+c3B0+q3B0+(ψ(h))θαθL31+(ψ(h))θ(γθ+δθ)0.

    Suppose that for n=1,2,3,......,n1,Sn0,Ln0, and Bn0.

    Thus for n=n

    Sn+1=Σn+1i=1ciSn+1i+qn+1S0+(ψ(h))θδθ+γθ(ψ(h))θBn1+(ψ(h))θ(βθLn+βθBn+δθ)0
    Ln+1=Σn+1i=1ciLn+1i+qn+1L0+(ψ(h))θβθ(Ln+Bn)Sn+11+(ψ(h))θ(αθ+δθ)0
    Bn+1=Σn+1i=1ciBn+1i+qn+1B0+(ψ(h))θαθLn+11+(ψ(h))θ(γθ+δθ)0.

    In this section, the following theorem is given which proves that the proposed technique preserves the boundedness of the continuous system.

    Theorem 8. Suppose that S0+L0+B0=1,αθ0,βθ0,γθ0,δθ0 and (ψ(h))θ0 for θ[0,1] then Sn,Ln, and Bn are bounded for all n=1,2,3,......n.

    Proof.

    Sn+1+(ψ(h))θβθLnSn+1+(ψ(h))θβθBnSn+1(ψ(h))θδθSn+1+Ln+1+(ψ(h))θαθLn+1+(ψ(h))θδθLn+1+Bn+1+(ψ(h))θγθBn+1(ψ(h))θδθBn+1=Σn+1i=1ciSn+1i+qn+1S0+(ψ(h))θδθ+(ψ(h))θγθBn+Σn+1i=1ciLn+1i+qn+1L0+(ψ(h))θβθLnSn+1+(ψ(h))θβθBnSn+1+Σn+1i=1ciBn+1i+qn+1B0+(ψ(h))θαθLn+1
    (1+(ψ(h))θδθ)Sn+1+(1+(ψ(h))θδθ)Ln+1+(1+(ψ(h))θ(γθ+δθ))Bn+1=Σn+1i=1ci(Sn+1i+Ln+1i+Bn+1i)+qn+1(S0+L0+B0)+(1+(ψ(h))θδθ)+(1+(ψ(h))θγθ)Bn
    =Σn+1i=1ci(Sn+1i+Ln+1i+Bn+1i)+qn+1+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθBn).

    For n=0

    (1+(ψ(h))θδθ)S1+(1+(ψ(h))θδθ)L1+(1+(ψ(h))θ(γθ+δθ))B1=c1(S0+L0+B0)+q1+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθB0)=θ+1Γ(1θ)+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθB0)=M1
    (1+(ψ(h))θδθ)S1θ+1Γ(1θ)+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθB0)(1+(ψ(h))θδθ)L1θ+1Γ(1θ)+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθB0)(1+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθ)B1θ+1Γ(1θ)+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθB0)
    S1M1(1+(ψ(h))θδθ),L1M1(1+(ψ(h))θδθ),B1M1(1+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθ)
    S1M1 ,L1M1 ,B1M1.

    For n=1

    (1+(ψ(h))θδθ)S2+(1+(ψ(h))θδθ)L2+(1+(ψ(h))θ(γθ+δθ))B2=c1(S1+L1+B1)+c2(S0+L0+B0)+q2+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθB1)θ(1)+θ(M1+M1+M1)+1Γ(1θ)+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθM1)=θ+1Γ(1θ)+3θM1+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθM1)=M2
    (1+(ψ(h))θδθ)S2θ+1Γ(1θ)+3θM1+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθM1)(1+(ψ(h))θδθ)L2θ+1Γ(1θ)+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθM1)(1+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθ)B2θ+1Γ(1θ)+3θM1+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθM1)
    S2M2(1+(ψ(h))θδθ),L2M2(1+(ψ(h))θδθ),B2M2(1+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθ)
    S2M2 ,L2M2 ,B2M2.

    For n=2

    (1+(ψ(h))θδθ)S3+(1+(ψ(h))θδθ)L3+(1+(ψ(h))θ(γθ+δθ))B3=c1(S2+L2+B2)+c2(S1+L1+B1)+c3(S0+L0+B0)+q3+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθB2)θ(1)+θ(3M2)+θ(3M1)+1Γ(1θ)+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθM2)=θ+1Γ(1θ)+3θ(M2+M1)+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθM2)=M3
    (1+(ψ(h))θδθ)S3θ+1Γ(1θ)+3θ(M2+M1)+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθM2)(1+(ψ(h))θδθ)L3θ+1Γ(1θ)+3θ(M2+M1)+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθM2)(1+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθ)B3θ+1Γ(1θ)+3θ(M2+M1)+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθM2)
    S3M3(1+(ψ(h))θδθ),L3M3(1+(ψ(h))θδθ),B3M3(1+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθ)
    S3M3 ,L3M3 ,B3M3.

    For n=3

    (1+(ψ(h))θδθ)S4+(1+(ψ(h))θδθ)L4+(1+(ψ(h))θ(γθ+δθ))B4=c1(S3+L3+B3)+c2(S2+L2+B2)+c3(S1+L1+B1)+c4(S0+L0+B0)+q4+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθB3)θ(1)+θ(3M3)+θ(3M2)+θ(3M1)+1Γ(1θ)+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθM3)=θ+1Γ(1θ)+3θ(M3+M2+M1)+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθM3)=M4
    (1+(ψ(h))θδθ)S4θ+1Γ(1θ)+3θ(M3+M2+M1)+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθM3)(1+(ψ(h))θδθ)L4θ+1Γ(1θ)+3θ(M3+M2+M1)+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθM3)(1+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθ)B4θ+1Γ(1θ)+3θ(M3+M2+M1)+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθM3)
    S4M4(1+(ψ(h))θδθ),L4M4(1+(ψ(h))θδθ),B4M4(1+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθ)
    S4M4 ,L4M4 ,B4M4.

    Now suppose that

    SnMn ,LnMn ,BnMn.

    Where

    Mn=θ+1Γ(1θ)+3θ(Mn1+Mn2+........+M2+M1)+ψ(h)θ(δθ+γθMn1).

    For n=n

    (1+(ψ(h))θδθ)Sn+1+(1+(ψ(h))θδθ)Ln+1+(1+(ψ(h))θ(γθ+δθ))Bn+1=Σn+1i=1ci(Sn+1i+Ln+1i+Bn+1i)+qn+1+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθBn)=c1(Sn+Ln+Bn)+c2(Sn1+Ln1+Bn1)+......+cn(S1+L1+B1)+cn+1(S0+L0+B0)+qn+1+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθBn)θ(3Mn)+θ(3Mn1)+.....+θ(3M2)+θ(3M1)+θ(1)+1Γ(1θ)+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθMn)=θ+1Γ(1θ)+3θ(Mn+Mn1+......+M1)+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθMn)=Mn+1
    (1+(ψ(h))θδθ)Sn+1θ+1Γ(1θ)+3θ(Mn+Mn1+......+M1)+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθMn)(1+(ψ(h))θδθ)Ln+1θ+1Γ(1θ)+3θ(Mn+Mn1+......+M1)+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθMn)(1+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθ)Bn+1θ+1Γ(1θ)+3θ(Mn+Mn1+......+M1)+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθMn)
    Sn+1Mn+11+(ψ(h))θδθ,Ln+1Mn+11+(ψ(h))θδθ,Bn+1Mn+11+(ψ(h))θ(δθ+γθ)
    Sn+1Mn+1 ,Ln+1Mn+1 ,Bn+1Mn+1.

    In this section, we used proposed technique to present the simulations of the underlying computer virus epidemic models (2.4)–(2.6).

    In this section, the simulation behavior of the systems (2.4)–(2.6) was presented at VFS. The values of the parameters involved in the underlying model are δθ=0.1, βθ=0.1, γθ=0.2, αθ=0.3 [1].

    The graph in Figure 1 shows that they all converges to the virus free equilibrium state, by using the proposed scheme. Each graph in the Figure 1 is plotted against a suitable selected value of θ i.e., the order of the fractional order derivative, even then the graph converges towards the true equilibrium point E0(1,0,0). More over, the rate of convergence to reach at the VFS is different, which shows the dynamics of the system to reach at the mean position.

    Figure 1.  Graphical solution of susceptible populace at infection free state with different values of θ.

    All the curved sketches in Figure 2 reflect the graphical solution of L(t), the latent nodes at VFS with four different values of θ (the order of fractional differential order). It may be observed that all the curved lines converge to the virus free state which is zero in this case. Also, the state of convergence of these trajectories is different against each value of θ. This situation implies that the rate of convergence strictly depends upon the value of θ. The rate of convergence of the trajectory is directly proportional to the value of θ i.e., the rate of convergence against the smaller value of θ is slower and vise versa.

    Figure 2.  Graphical solution of populace L(t) at infection free state with different values of θ.

    The curved graph in Figure 3 provides the strong evidence that the approximate solutions obtained by our proposed scheme are strongly in line with the analytical solution. Moreover, the drawn graphs touch the equilibrium point, which is zero in this case, with the different rates depending upon the order of fractional order derivatives. Also, the graph against θ=0.99 attains the zero (virus free state) earlier than the other three graph with θ=0.89,0.79,0.70.

    Figure 3.  Graphical solution of populace B(t) at infection free state with different values of θ.

    In this section, the simulation behavior of the system (2.4)–(2.6) is presented at VES. The values of the parameters involved in the underlying model are δθ=0.1, βθ=0.6, γθ=0.2, αθ=0.1 [1].

    The sketches in Figure 4 are the approximate solution of the state variable S(t) which describes the susceptible nodes in the computer population at virus existence state. The curves validate the fact that the proposed scheme converges to the true steady state, which is zero in the present case. All the graphs in the Figure 4 have the specific rate of convergence to reach at the virus existence position.

    Figure 4.  Graphical solution of S(t) at infection existence state with different values of θ.

    The graphs in the Figure 5 show that all the lines converges to the virus free equilibrium for the latent computers. All the curves converge to the true steady state with different rate of convergence according to the value of θ, selected for each curve. The rate of convergence is directly proportional to the value of fractional order θ.

    Figure 5.  Graphical solution of L(t) at infection existence state with different values of θ.

    The graphs in Figure 6 indicate that all the curved trajectories drawn with the help of our proposed scheme converge to the exact steady state. The rate of each curved trajectory is different from each other depends upon the selection of θ (the order of fractional differential operator). For smaller value o θ, the rate of convergence is also slower as compared to the lager value of θ.

    Figure 6.  Graphical solution of B(t) at infection existence state with different values of θ.

    For a clear understanding of the dynamics of the virus, a traditional compartmental SLBS model for a computer virus was transformed into a non-integer order model in this study. It was demonstrated that the fractional order computer virus model is stable both locally and globally. For the derivatives of fractional order, the GL scheme was used. The fractional order derivative was numerically approximated using the GL technique. The Micken's defined rule was the primary design consideration for the NSFD scheme. In order to solve the non linear dynamical system that represents the dynamics of computer viruses, a hybrid GL NSFD algorithm was created. The model's viral equilibrium and virus free equilibrium stable states were determined. At the viral free equilibrium point, a Jacobian matrix was generated to represent the stability of the numerical method. The scheme's positivity and boundlessness were also determined. Additionally, computer simulations were run to ensure the effectiveness of the numerical design. All of the aforementioned information suggests that the suggested scheme is a solid method that can be used to resolve the nonlinear physical system. In order for the fractional order computer virus model to reach its exact stable state, the projected numerical scheme converges toward it. Additionally, the numerical design ensures a positive and constrained solution, which are crucial aspects of the compartmental model. A kind of drawback of this work is that we were unable to incorporate isolation or quarantine into the model, nor were we able to determine the ideal value of the fractional order parameters θ. The system with delay, diffusion, and advection factors may be solved using this unique numerical design in the future. Additionally, by using the projected numerical method, the fractional order stochastic epidemic and predator-prey models can also be resolved.

    The authors wish to thank the anonymous reviewers for their invaluable comments and suggestions, all of which led to a substantial improvement of the final work.

    The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.



    [1] B. Jeremy, T. Pete, K. Alan, B. Laurie, Y. George, E. Petros, et al., Traffic safety basic facts 2012: junctions, 2013. Available from: https://roderic.uv.es/handle/10550/30218.
    [2] NHTSA, Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS). Available from: http://www.nhtsa.gov/FARS.
    [3] P. B. Hunt, D. I. Robertson, R. D. Bretherton, R. I. Winton, SCOOT-a traffic responsive method of coordinating signals, 1981. Available from: https://trid.trb.org/view/179439.
    [4] A. G. Sims, K. W. Dobinson, The Sydney coordinated adaptive traffic (SCAT) system philosophy and benefits, IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., 29 (1980), 130–137. https://doi.org/10.1109/T-VT.1980.23833 doi: 10.1109/T-VT.1980.23833
    [5] S. C. Wong, W. T. Wong, C. M. Leung, C. O. Tong, Group-based optimization of a time-dependent TRANSYT traffic model for area traffic control, Abbreviation Title Transp. Res. Part B Methodol., 36 (2002), 291–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-2615(01)00004-2 doi: 10.1016/S0191-2615(01)00004-2
    [6] L. Chen, C. Englund, Cooperative intersection management: a survey, IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., 17 (2015), 570–586. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2015.2471812 doi: 10.1109/TITS.2015.2471812
    [7] S. El-Tantawy, B. Abdulhai, H. Abdelgawad, Multiagent reinforcement learning for integrated network of adaptive traffic signal controllers (MARLIN-ATSC): methodology and large-scale application on downtown Toronto, IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., 14 (2013), 1140–1150. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2013.2255286 doi: 10.1109/TITS.2013.2255286
    [8] A. Zaidi, B. Kulcsár, H. Wymeersch, Back-pressure traffic signal control with fixed and adaptive routing for urban vehicular networks, IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., 17 (2016), 2134–2143. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2016.2521424 doi: 10.1109/TITS.2016.2521424
    [9] K. Dresner, P. Stone, Multiagent traffic management: a reservation-based intersection control mechanism, in Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, (2005), 471–477. https://doi.org/10.1145/1082473.1082545
    [10] K. Dresner, P. Stone, A multiagent approach to autonomous intersection management, J. Artif. Intell. Res., 31 (2008), 591–656. https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.2502 doi: 10.1613/jair.2502
    [11] M. Ahmane, A. Abbas-Turki, F. Perronnet, J. Wu, A. E. Moudni, J. Buisson, et al., Modeling and controlling an isolated urban intersection based on cooperative vehicles, Transp. Res. Part C Emerging Technol., 28 (2013), 44–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2012.11.004 doi: 10.1016/j.trc.2012.11.004
    [12] L. Li, F. Wang, Cooperative driving at blind crossings using intervehicle communication, IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., 55 (2006), 1712–1724. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2006.878730 doi: 10.1109/TVT.2006.878730
    [13] J. Lee, B. Park, Development and evaluation of a cooperative vehicle intersection control algorithm under the connected vehicles environment, IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., 13 (2012), 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2011.2178836 doi: 10.1109/TITS.2011.2178836
    [14] M. A. S. Kamal, J. Imura, T. Hayakawa, A. Ohata, K. Aihara, A vehicle-intersection coordination scheme for smooth flows of traffic without using traffic lights, IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., 16 (2014), 1136–1147. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2014.2354380 doi: 10.1109/TITS.2014.2354380
    [15] P. Dai, K. Liu, Q. Zhuge, E. H. Sha, V. C. S. Lee, S. H. Son, Quality-of-experience-oriented autonomous intersection control in vehicular networks, IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., 17 (2016), 1956–1967. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2016.2514271 doi: 10.1109/TITS.2016.2514271
    [16] S. E. Li, Y. Zheng, K. Li, J. Wang, An overview of vehicular platoon control under the four-component framework, in 2015 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), (2015), 286–291. https://doi.org/10.1109/IVS.2015.7225700
    [17] L. Xiao, F. Gao, Practical string stability of platoon of adaptive cruise control vehicles, IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., 12 (2011), 1184–1194. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2011.2143407 doi: 10.1109/TITS.2011.2143407
    [18] S. Darbha, S. Konduri, P. Pagilla, Benefits of V2V communication for autonomous and connected vehicles, IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., 20 (2018), 1954–1963. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2018.2859765 doi: 10.1109/TITS.2018.2859765
    [19] Y. Zheng, S. E. Li, J. Wang, D. Cao, K. Li, Stability and scalability of homogeneous vehicular platoon: study on the influence of information flow topologies, IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., 17 (2015), 14–26. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2015.2402153 doi: 10.1109/TITS.2015.2402153
    [20] S. E. Li, Y. Zheng, K. Li, Y. Wu, J. K. Hedrick, F. Gao, et al., Dynamical modeling and distributed control of connected and automated vehicles: challenges and opportunities, IEEE Intell. Transp. Syst. Mag., 9 (2017), 46–58. https://doi.org/10.1109/MITS.2017.2709781 doi: 10.1109/MITS.2017.2709781
    [21] M. Bernardo, P. Falcone, A. Salvi, S. Santini, Design, analysis, and experimental validation of a distributed protocol for platooning in the presence of time-varying heterogeneous delays, IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., 24 (2015), 413–427. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCST.2015.2437336 doi: 10.1109/TCST.2015.2437336
    [22] S. Stüdli, M. Seron, R. H. Middleton, Vehicular platoons in cyclic interconnections, Automatica, 94 (2018), 283–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.automatica.2018.04.033 doi: 10.1016/j.automatica.2018.04.033
    [23] F. Gao, X. Hu, S. E. Li, K. Li, Q. Sun, Distributed adaptive sliding mode control of vehicular platoon with uncertain interaction topology, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 65 (2018), 6352–6361. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2017.2787574 doi: 10.1109/TIE.2017.2787574
    [24] F. Gao, S. E. Li, Y. Zheng, D. Kum, Robust control of heterogeneous vehicular platoon with uncertain dynamics and communication delay, IET Intell. Transp. Syst., 10 (2016), 503–513. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-its.2015.0205 doi: 10.1049/iet-its.2015.0205
    [25] P. Liu, A. Kurt, U. Ozguner, Distributed model predictive control for cooperative and flexible vehicle platooning, IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., 27 (2018), 1115–1128. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCST.2018.2808911 doi: 10.1109/TCST.2018.2808911
    [26] A. I. M. Medina, N. V. D. Wouw, H. Nijmeijer, Cooperative intersection control based on virtual platooning, IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., 19 (2017), 1727–1740. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2017.2735628 doi: 10.1109/TITS.2017.2735628
    [27] B. Xu, S. E. Li, Y. Bian, S. Li, X. J. Ban, J. Wang, et al., Distributed conflict-free cooperation for multiple connected vehicles at unsignalized intersections, Transp. Res. Part C Emerging Technol., 93 (2018), 322–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2018.06.004 doi: 10.1016/j.trc.2018.06.004
    [28] Y. Zhou, M. E. Cholette, A. Bhaskar, E. Chung, Optimal vehicle trajectory planning with control constraints and recursive implementation for automated on-ramp merging, IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., 20 (2018), 3409–3420. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2018.2874234 doi: 10.1109/TITS.2018.2874234
    [29] I. Flugge-Lotz, H. Marbach, The optimal control of some attitude control systems for different performance criteria, J. Fluids Eng., 85 (1963), 165–175. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3656552 doi: 10.1115/1.3656552
    [30] P. Wang, Y. Jiang, L. Xiao, Y. Zhao, Y. Li, A joint control model for connected vehicle platoon and arterial signal coordination, J. Intell. Transp. Syst., 24 (2020), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/15472450.2019.1579093 doi: 10.1080/15472450.2019.1579093
    [31] J. Gong, J. Cao, Y. Zhao, Y. Wei, J. Guo, W. Huang, Sampling-based cooperative adaptive cruise control subject to communication delays and actuator lags, Math. Comput. Simul., 171 (2020), 13–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matcom.2019.10.012 doi: 10.1016/j.matcom.2019.10.012
    [32] Y. Zhao, G. Guo, Distributed tracking control of mobile sensor networks with intermittent communications, J. Franklin Inst., 354 (2017), 3634–3647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfranklin.2017.03.003 doi: 10.1016/j.jfranklin.2017.03.003
    [33] M. A. S. Kamal, M. Mukai, J. Murata, T. Kawabe, Ecological vehicle control on roads with up-down slopes, IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., 12 (2011), 783–794. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2011.2112648 doi: 10.1109/TITS.2011.2112648
    [34] B. Paden, S. Sastry, A calculus for computing Filippov's differential inclusion with application to the variable structure control of robot manipulators, IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst., 34 (1987), 73–82. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCS.1987.1086038 doi: 10.1109/TCS.1987.1086038
    [35] S. Li, X. Qin, Y. Zheng, J. Wang, K. Li, H. Zhang, Distributed platoon control under topologies with complex eigenvalues: stability analysis and controller synthesis, IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., 27 (2017), 206–220. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCST.2017.2768041 doi: 10.1109/TCST.2017.2768041
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. H R Marasi, M H Derakhshan, A Soltani Joujehi, Pushpendra Kumar, Higher-order fractional linear multi-step methods, 2023, 98, 0031-8949, 024004, 10.1088/1402-4896/acad42
    2. Ghazaleh Aliasghari, Hamid Mesgarani, Omid Nikan, Zakieh Avazzadeh, On Fractional Order Model of Tumor Growth with Cancer Stem Cell, 2022, 7, 2504-3110, 27, 10.3390/fractalfract7010027
    3. Savas Takan, Gokmen Katipoglu, Novel Metrics for Mutation Analysis, 2023, 46, 0267-6192, 2075, 10.32604/csse.2023.036791
    4. Eman Rezk, May Haggag, Mohamed Eltorki, Wael El-Dakhakhni, A comprehensive review of artificial intelligence methods and applications in skin cancer diagnosis and treatment: Emerging trends and challenges, 2023, 4, 27724425, 100259, 10.1016/j.health.2023.100259
    5. M.H. Heydari, D. Baleanu, A numerical approach based on the Chebyshev polynomials for tempered time fractional coupled Burger’s equations, 2024, 104, 11100168, 349, 10.1016/j.aej.2024.06.051
    6. K. Haritha, S. Shailesh, M. V. Judy, K. S. Ravichandran, Raghunathan Krishankumar, Amir H. Gandomi, A novel neural network model with distributed evolutionary approach for big data classification, 2023, 13, 2045-2322, 10.1038/s41598-023-37540-z
    7. M.H. Heydari, M. Razzaghi, Jacobi polynomials method for a coupled system of Hadamard fractional Klein–Gordon–Schrödinger equations, 2024, 107, 11100168, 73, 10.1016/j.aej.2024.07.016
    8. Ebrahem A. Algehyne, Musaad S. Aldhabani, Mounirah Areshi, Essam R. El-Zahar, Abdelhalim Ebaid, Hind K. Al-Jeaid, A Proposed Application of Fractional Calculus on Time Dilation in Special Theory of Relativity, 2023, 11, 2227-7390, 3343, 10.3390/math11153343
    9. Pshtiwan Othman Mohammed, Hari Mohan Srivastava, Dumitru Baleanu, Eman Al-Sarairah, Soubhagya Kumar Sahoo, Nejmeddine Chorfi, Monotonicity and positivity analyses for two discrete fractional-order operator types with exponential and Mittag–Leffler kernels, 2023, 35, 10183647, 102794, 10.1016/j.jksus.2023.102794
    10. Kumbinarasaiah Srinivasa, Harishchandra Sona Ramane, Ravikiran Ashok Mundewadi, Raju Basavaraj Jummannaver, Solutions of differential equations using linearly independent Hosoya polynomials of trees, 2024, 2, 2956-7068, 13, 10.2478/ijmce-2024-0002
    11. Muhammad Asif Zahoor Raja, Kottakkaran Sooppy Nisar, Muhammad Shoaib, Marwan Abukhaled, Aqsa Riaz, Intelligent computing for MHD radiative Von Kármán Casson nanofluid along Darcy-Fochheimer medium with activation energy, 2023, 9, 24058440, e20911, 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20911
    12. Kottakkaran Sooppy Nisar, Fizza Sahar, Muhammad Asif Zahoor Raja, Muhammad Shoaib, Intelligent neuro-computing to analyze the awareness programs of fractional epidemic system outbreaks, 2023, 35, 10183647, 102691, 10.1016/j.jksus.2023.102691
    13. H. Alaeiyan, M.R. Mosavi, A. Ayatollahi, Hybrid noise removal to improve the accuracy of inertial sensors using lifting wavelet transform optimized by genetic algorithm, 2023, 80, 11100168, 326, 10.1016/j.aej.2023.08.069
    14. M.H. Heydari, D. Baleanu, A new strategy based on the logarithmic Chebyshev cardinal functions for Hadamard time fractional coupled nonlinear Schrödinger–Hirota equations, 2024, 135, 10075704, 108018, 10.1016/j.cnsns.2024.108018
    15. Fazal Dayan, Nauman Ahmed, Muhammad Rafiq, Ali Raza, Ilyas Khan, Elsayed Mohamed Tag eldin, A reliable numerical investigation of an SEIR model of measles disease dynamics with fuzzy criteria, 2023, 13, 2045-2322, 10.1038/s41598-023-42953-x
    16. Khalid I.A. Ahmed, Haroon D.S. Adam, M.Y. Youssif, Sayed Saber, Different strategies for diabetes by mathematical modeling: Modified Minimal Model, 2023, 80, 11100168, 74, 10.1016/j.aej.2023.07.050
    17. Linji Yang, Qiankun Song, Yurong Liu, Dynamics analysis of a new fractional-order SVEIR-KS model for computer virus propagation: Stability and Hopf bifurcation, 2024, 598, 09252312, 128075, 10.1016/j.neucom.2024.128075
    18. Zhixiang Liu, Yunhao Zhao, Shaohua Shi, Yang Wang, A regularized lattice Boltzmann method based on the multi-layer grid using a buffer scheme, 2024, 35, 0129-1831, 10.1142/S0129183124501171
    19. Mohammad Hossein Heydari, Dumitru Baleanu, An efficient discrete Chebyshev polynomials strategy for tempered time fractional nonlinear Schrödinger problems, 2024, 20901232, 10.1016/j.jare.2024.11.014
    20. IMTIAZ AHMAD, ASMIDAR ABU BAKAR, HIJAZ AHMAD, AZIZ KHAN, THABET ABDELJAWAD, INVESTIGATING VIRUS SPREAD ANALYSIS IN COMPUTER NETWORKS WITH ATANGANA–BALEANU FRACTIONAL DERIVATIVE MODELS, 2024, 32, 0218-348X, 10.1142/S0218348X24400437
    21. Imtiaz Ahmad, Asmidar Abu Bakar, Rashid Jan, Salman Yussof, Dynamic behaviors of a modified computer virus model: Insights into parameters and network attributes, 2024, 103, 11100168, 266, 10.1016/j.aej.2024.06.009
    22. Ali Akgül, Nauman Ahmed, Sadiya Ali Rano, Qasem Al-Mdallal, A hybrid fractional model for cervical cancer due to human papillomavirus infection, 2025, 26662027, 101098, 10.1016/j.ijft.2025.101098
    23. M.H. Heydari, D. Baleanu, M. Bayram, Discrete Legendre polynomials method to solve the coupled nonlinear Caputo–Hadamard fractional Ginzburg–Landau equations, 2025, 22113797, 108147, 10.1016/j.rinp.2025.108147
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2023 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(2353) PDF downloads(142) Cited by(1)

Figures and Tables

Figures(13)  /  Tables(3)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog