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

An error estimator for spectral method approximation of flow control with state constraint

  • Received: 07 March 2022 Revised: 17 May 2022 Accepted: 18 May 2022 Published: 20 June 2022
  • We consider the spectral approximation of flow optimal control problems with state constraint. The main contribution of this work is to derive an a posteriori error estimator, and show the upper and lower bounds for the approximation error. Numerical experiment shows the efficiency of the error indicator, which will be used to construct reliable adaptive hp spectral element approximation for flow control in the future work.

    Citation: Fenglin Huang, Yanping Chen, Tingting Lin. An error estimator for spectral method approximation of flow control with state constraint[J]. Electronic Research Archive, 2022, 30(9): 3193-3210. doi: 10.3934/era.2022162

    Related Papers:

    [1] A. El-Mesady, Y. S. Hamed, M. S. Mohamed, H. Shabana . Partially balanced network designs and graph codes generation. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 2393-2412. doi: 10.3934/math.2022135
    [2] Adel Alahmadi, Tamador Alihia, Patrick Solé . The build up construction for codes over a non-commutative non-unitary ring of order 9. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(7): 18278-18307. doi: 10.3934/math.2024892
    [3] Adel Alahmadi, Altaf Alshuhail, Patrick Solé . The mass formula for self-orthogonal and self-dual codes over a non-unitary commutative ring. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(10): 24367-24378. doi: 10.3934/math.20231242
    [4] Hao Song, Yuezhen Ren, Ruihu Li, Yang Liu . Optimal quaternary Hermitian self-orthogonal [n,5] codes of n492. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(4): 9324-9331. doi: 10.3934/math.2025430
    [5] Chaofeng Guan, Ruihu Li, Hao Song, Liangdong Lu, Husheng Li . Ternary quantum codes constructed from extremal self-dual codes and self-orthogonal codes. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 6516-6534. doi: 10.3934/math.2022363
    [6] Ganesh Gandal, R Mary Jeya Jothi, Narayan Phadatare . On very strongly perfect Cartesian product graphs. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 2634-2645. doi: 10.3934/math.2022148
    [7] Qiuyan Wang, Weixin Liu, Jianming Wang, Yang Yan . A class of nearly optimal codebooks and their applications in strongly regular Cayley graphs. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(7): 18236-18246. doi: 10.3934/math.2024890
    [8] Jalal-ud-Din, Ehtasham-ul-Haq, Ibrahim M. Almanjahie, Ishfaq Ahmad . Enhancing probabilistic based real-coded crossover genetic algorithms with authentication of VIKOR multi-criteria optimization method. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 29250-29268. doi: 10.3934/math.20241418
    [9] Mohamed R. Zeen El Deen, Ghada Elmahdy . New classes of graphs with edge δ graceful labeling. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(3): 3554-3589. doi: 10.3934/math.2022197
    [10] Xiying Zheng, Bo Kong, Yao Yu . Quantum codes from σ-dual-containing constacyclic codes over Rl,k. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(10): 24075-24086. doi: 10.3934/math.20231227
  • We consider the spectral approximation of flow optimal control problems with state constraint. The main contribution of this work is to derive an a posteriori error estimator, and show the upper and lower bounds for the approximation error. Numerical experiment shows the efficiency of the error indicator, which will be used to construct reliable adaptive hp spectral element approximation for flow control in the future work.



    First we give the definitions of generalized fractional integral operators which are special cases of the unified integral operators defined in (1.9), (1.10).

    Definition 1.1. [1] Let f:[a,b]R be an integrable function. Also let g be an increasing and positive function on (a,b], having a continuous derivative g on (a,b). The left-sided and right-sided fractional integrals of a function f with respect to another function g on [a,b] of order μ where (μ)>0 are defined by:

    μgIa+f(x)=1Γ(μ)xa(g(x)g(t))μ1g(t)f(t)dt,x>a, (1.1)
    μgIbf(x)=1Γ(μ)bx(g(t)g(x))μ1g(t)f(t)dt, x<b, (1.2)

    where Γ(.) is the gamma function.

    Definition 1.2. [2] Let f:[a,b]R be an integrable function. Also let g be an increasing and positive function on (a,b], having a continuous derivative g on (a,b). The left-sided and right-sided fractional integrals of a function f with respect to another function g on [a,b] of order μ where (μ),k>0 are defined by:

    μgIka+f(x)=1kΓk(μ)xa(g(x)g(t))μk1g(t)f(t)dt,x>a, (1.3)
    μgIkbf(x)=1kΓk(μ)bx(g(t)g(x))μk1g(t)f(t)dt, x<b, (1.4)

    where Γk(.) is defined as follows [3]:

    Γk(x)=0tx1etkkdt,(x)>0. (1.5)

    A fractional integral operator containing an extended generalized Mittag-Leffler function in its kernel is defined as follows:

    Definition 1.3. [4] Let ω,μ,α,l,γ,cC, (μ),(α),(l)>0, (c)>(γ)>0 with p0, δ>0 and 0<kδ+(μ). Let fL1[a,b] and x[a,b]. Then the generalized fractional integral operators ϵγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,ω,a+f and ϵγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,ω,bf are defined by:

    (ϵγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,ω,a+f)(x;p)=xa(xt)α1Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l(ω(xt)μ;p)f(t)dt, (1.6)
    (ϵγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,ω,bf)(x;p)=bx(tx)α1Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l(ω(tx)μ;p)f(t)dt, (1.7)

    where

    Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l(t;p)=n=0βp(γ+nk,cγ)β(γ,cγ)(c)nkΓ(μn+α)tn(l)nδ (1.8)

    is the extended generalized Mittag-Leffler function and (c)nk is the Pochhammer symbol defined by (c)nk=Γ(c+nk)Γ(c).

    Recently, a unified integral operator is defined as follows:

    Definition 1.4. [5] Let f,g:[a,b]R, 0<a<b, be the functions such that f be positive and fL1[a,b], and g be differentiable and strictly increasing. Also let ϕx be an increasing function on [a,) and α,l,γ,c C, p,μ,δ 0 and 0<kδ+μ. Then for x[a,b] the left and right integral operators are defined by

    (gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,a+f)(x,ω;p)=xaKyx(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)f(y)d(g(y)), (1.9)
    (gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,bf)(x,ω;p)=bxKxy(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,g;ϕ)f(y)d(g(y)), (1.10)

    where the involved kernel is defined by

    Kyx(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)=ϕ(g(x)g(y))g(x)g(y)Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l(ω(g(x)g(y))μ;p). (1.11)

    For suitable settings of functions ϕ, g and certain values of parameters included in Mittag-Leffler function, several recently defined known fractional and conformable fractional integrals studied in [6,7,8,9,10,1,11,12,13,14,15,16,17] can be reproduced, see [18,Remarks 6&7].

    The aim of this study is to derive the bounds of all aforementioned integral operators in a unified form for (s,m)-convex functions. These bounds will hold particularly for m-convex, s-convex and convex functions and for almost all fractional and conformable integrals defined in [6,7,8,9,10,1,11,12,13,14,15,16,17].

    Definition 1.5. [19] A function f:[0,b]R,b>0 is said to be (s,m)-convex, where (s,m)[0,1]2 if

    f(tx+m(1t)y)tsf(x)+m(1t)sf(y) (1.12)

    holds for all x,y[0,b]andt[0,1].

    Remark 1. 1. If we take (s,m) = (1,m), then (1.12) gives the definition of m-convex function.

    2. If we take (s,m) = (1,1), then (1.12) gives the definition of convex function.

    3. If we take (s,m) = (1,0), then (1.12) gives the definition of star-shaped function.

    P1: Let g and ϕx be increasing functions. Then for x<t<y, x,y[a,b] the kernel Kyx(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ) satisfies the following inequality:

    Kxt(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)g(t)Kxy(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)g(t). (2.1)

    This can be obtained from the following two straightforward inequalities:

    ϕ(g(t)g(x))g(t)g(x)g(t)ϕ(g(y)g(x))g(y)g(x)g(t), (2.2)
    Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l(ω(g(t)g(x))μ;p)Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l(ω(g(y)g(x))μ;p). (2.3)

    The reverse of inequality (1.9) holds when g and ϕx are decreasing.

    P2: Let g and ϕx be increasing functions. If ϕ(0)=ϕ(0)=0, then for x,y[a,b],x<y,

    Kxy(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)0.

    P3: For p,qR,

    Kxy(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;pϕ1+qϕ2)=pKxy(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ1)+qKxy(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ2).

    The upcoming section contains the results which deal with the bounds of several integral operators in a compact form by utilizing (s,m)-convex functions. A version of the Hadamard inequality in a compact form is presented, also a modulus inequality is given for differentiable function f such that |f| is (s,m)-convex function.

    In this section first we will state the main results. The following result provides upper bound of unified integral operators.

    Theorem 3.1. Let f:[a,b]R, 0a<b be a positive integrable (s,m)-convex function, m(0,1]. Let g:[a,b]R be differentiable and strictly increasing function, also let ϕx be an increasing function on [a,b]. If α,β,l,γ,cC, p,μ0,δ0 and 0<kδ+μ, then for x(a,b) the following inequality holds for unified integral operators:

    (gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,a+f)(x,ω;p)+(gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,bf)(x,ω;p)Kax(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)(mf(xm)g(x)f(a)g(a)Γ(s+1)(xa)s(mf(xm)sIxg(a)f(a)sIa+g(x)))+Kxb(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,g;ϕ)(f(b)g(b)mf(xm)g(x)Γ(s+1)(bx)s(f(b)sIbg(x)mf(xm)sIx+g(b))). (3.1)

    Lemma 3.2. [20] Let f:[0,]R, be an (s,m)-convex function, m(0,1]. If f(x)=f(a+bxm), then the following inequality holds:

    f(a+b2)12s(1+m)f(x)x[a,b]. (3.2)

    The following result provides generalized Hadamard inequality for (s,m)-convex functions.

    Theorem 3.3. Under the assumptions of Theorem 3.1, in addition if f(x)=f(a+bxm), m(0,1], then the following inequality holds:

    2s(1+m)f(a+b2)((gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,b1)(a,ω;p)+(gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,a+1)(b,ω;p))(gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,bf)(a,ω;p)+(gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,a+f)(b,ω;p)(Kab(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)+Kab(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ))(f(b)g(b)mf(am)g(a)Γ(s+1)(ba)s(f(b)sIbg(a)mf(am)sIa+g(b))). (3.3)

    Theorem 3.4. Let f:[a,b]R, 0a<b be a differentiable function. If |f| is (s,m)-convex, m(0,1] and g:[a,b]R be differentiable and strictly increasing function, also let ϕx be an increasing function on [a,b]. If α,β,l,γ,cC, p,μ0, δ0 and 0<kδ+μ, then for x(a,b) we have

    |(gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,a+fg)(x,ω;p)+(gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,bfg)(x,ω;p)|Kax(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)(m|f(xm)|g(x)|f(a)|g(a)Γ(s+1)(xa)s(m|f(xm)|sIxg(a)|f(a)|sIa+g(x)))+Kxb(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,g;ϕ)(|f(b)|g(b)m|f(xm)|g(x)Γ(s+1)(bx)s(|f(b)|sIbg(x)m|f(xm)|sIx+g(b))), (3.4)

    where

    (gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,a+fg)(x,ω;p):=xaKtx(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)f(t)d(g(t)),
    (gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,bfg)(x,ω;p):=bxKxt(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)f(t)d(g(t)).

    In this section we give the proves of the results stated in aforementioned section.

    Proof of Theorem 3.1. By (P1), the following inequalities hold:

    Ktx(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)g(t)Kax(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)g(t), a<t<x, (4.1)
    Kxt(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)g(t)Kxb(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,g;ϕ)g(t), x<t<b. (4.2)

    For (s,m)-convex function the following inequalities hold:

    f(t)(xtxa)sf(a)+m(taxa)sf(xm), a<t<x, (4.3)
    f(t)(txbx)sf(b)+m(btbx)sf(xm), x<t<b. (4.4)

    From (4.1) and (4.3), the following integral inequality holds true:

    xaKtx(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)f(t)d(g(t))f(a)Kax(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)×xa(xtxa)sd(g(t))+mf(xm)Kax(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)xa(taxa)sd(g(t)). (4.5)

    Further the aforementioned inequality takes the form which involves Riemann-Liouville fractional integrals in the right hand side, provides the upper bound of unified left sided integral operator (1.1) as follows:

    (gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,a+f)(x,ω;p)Kax(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)(mf(xm)g(x)f(a)g(a)Γ(s+1)(xa)s(mf(xm)sIxg(a)f(a)sIa+g(x))). (4.6)

    On the other hand from (4.2) and (4.4), the following integral inequality holds true:

    bxKxt(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)f(t)d(g(t))f(b)Kxb(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,g;ϕ)×bx(txbx)sd(g(t))+mf(xm)Kbx(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)bx(btbx)sd(g(t)). (4.7)

    Further the aforementioned inequality takes the form which involves Riemann-Liouville fractional integrals in the right hand side, provides the upper bound of unified right sided integral operator (1.2) as follows:

    (gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,bf)(x,ω;p)Kxb(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,g;ϕ)(f(b)g(b)mf(xm)g(x)Γ(s+1)(bx)s(f(b)sIbg(x)mf(xm)sIx+g(b))). (4.8)

    By adding (4.6) and (4.8), (3.1) can be obtained.

    Remark 2. (ⅰ) If we consider (s,m) = (1, 1) in (3.1), [18,Theorem 1] is obtained.

    (ⅱ) If we consider p=ω=0 in (3.1), [20,Theorem 1] is obtained.

    (ⅲ) If we consider ϕ(t)=Γ(α)tα, p=ω=0 and (s,m) = (1, 1) in (3.1), [21,Theorem 1] is obtained.

    (ⅳ) If we consider α=β in the result of (ⅲ), then [21,Corollary 1] is obtained.

    (ⅴ) If we consider ϕ(t)=tα, g(x)=x and m=1 in (3.1), then [22,Theorem 2.1] is obtained.

    (ⅵ) If we consider α=β in the result of (v), then [22,Corollary 2.1] is obtained.

    (ⅶ) If we consider ϕ(t)=Γ(α)tαkkΓk(α), (s,m) = (1, 1), g(x)=x and p=ω=0 in (3.1), then [23,Theorem 1] can be obtained.

    (ⅷ) If we consider α=β in the result of (ⅶ), then [23,Corollary 1] can be obtained.

    (ⅸ) If we consider ϕ(t)=Γ(α)tα, g(x)=x and p=ω=0 and (s,m) = (1, 1) in (3.1), then [24,Theorem 1] is obtained.

    (ⅹ) If we consider α=β in the result of (ⅸ), then [24,Corollary 1] can be obtained.

    (ⅹⅰ) If we consider α=β=1 and x=a or x=b in the result of (x), then [24,Corollary 2] can be obtained.

    (ⅹⅱ) If we consider α=β=1 and x=a+b2 in the result of (ⅹ), then [24,Corollary 3] can be obtained.

    Proof of Theorem 3.3. By (P1), the following inequalities hold:

    Kax(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)g(x)Kab(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)g(x), a<x<b, (4.9)
    Kxb(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,g;ϕ)g(x)Kab(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)g(x) a<x<b. (4.10)

    For (s,m)-convex function f, the following inequality holds:

    f(x)(xaba)sf(b)+m(bxba)sf(am), a<x<b. (4.11)

    From (4.9) and (4.11), the following integral inequality holds true:

    baKax(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)f(x)d(g(x))mf(am)Kab(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)ba(bxba)sd(g(x))+f(b)Kab(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)ba(xaba)sd(g(x)).

    Further the aforementioned inequality takes the form which involves Riemann-Liouville fractional integrals in the right hand side, provides the upper bound of unified right sided integral operator (1.1) as follows:

    (gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,bf)(a,ω;p)Kab(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)(f(b)g(b)mf(am)g(a)Γ(s+1)(ba)s(f(b)sIbg(a)mf(am)sIa+g(b))). (4.12)

    On the other hand from (4.9) and (4.11), the following inequality holds which involves Riemann-Liouville fractional integrals on the right hand side and estimates of the integral operator (1.2):

    (gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,a+f)(b,ω;p)Kab(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)(f(b)g(b)mf(am)g(a)Γ(s+1)(ba)s(f(b)sIbg(a)mf(am)sIa+g(b))). (4.13)

    By adding (4.12) and (4.13), following inequality can be obtained:

    (gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,bf)(a,ω;p)+(gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,a+f)(b,ω;p)(Kab(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)+Kab(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ))(f(b)g(b)mf(am)g(a)Γ(α+1)(ba)s(f(b)sIbg(b)mf(am)sIa+g(b))). (4.14)

    Multiplying both sides of (3.2) by Kax(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)g(x), and integrating over [a,b] we have

    f(a+b2)baKax(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)d(g(x))(12s)(1+m)baKab(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)f(x)d(g(x)).

    From Definition 1.4, the following inequality is obtained:

    f(a+b2)2s(1+m)(gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,b1)(a,ω;p)(gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,bf)(a,ω;p). (4.15)

    Similarly multiplying both sides of (3.2) by Kxb(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,g;ϕ)g(x), and integrating over [a,b] we have

    f(a+b2)2s(1+m)(gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,a+1)(b,ω;p)(gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,a+f)(b,ω;p). (4.16)

    By adding (4.15) and (4.16) the following inequality is obtained:

    f(a+b2)2s(1+m)((gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,a+1)(b,ω;p)+(gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,b1)(a,ω;p))(gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,a+f)(b,ω;p)+(gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,bf)(a,ω;p). (4.17)

    Using (4.14) and (4.17), inequality (3.3) can be obtained, this completes the proof.

    Remark 3. (ⅰ) If we consider (s,m) = (1, 1) in (3.3), [18,Theorem 2] is obtained.

    (ⅱ) If we consider p=ω=0 in (3.3), [20,Theorem 3] is obtained.

    (ⅲ) If we consider ϕ(t)=Γ(α)tα+1, p=ω=0 and (s,m) = (1, 1) in (3.3), [21,Theorem 3] is obtained.

    (ⅳ) If we consider α=β in the result of (iii), then [21,Corollary 3] is obtained.

    (ⅴ) If we consider ϕ(t)=tα+1, g(x)=x and m=1 in (3.3), then [22,Theorem 2.4] is obtained.

    (ⅵ) If we consider α=β in the result of (v), then [22,Corollary 2.6] is obtained.

    (ⅶ) If we consider ϕ(t)=Γ(α)tαk+1, (s,m) = (1, 1), g(x)=x and p=ω=0 in (3.3), then [23,Theorem 3] can be obtained.

    (ⅷ) If we consider α=β in the result of (ⅶ), then [23,Corollary 6] can be obtained.

    (ⅸ) If we consider ϕ(t)=Γ(α)tα+1, p=ω=0, (s,m)=1 and g(x)=x in (3.3), [24,Theorem 3] can be obtained.

    (ⅹ) If we consider α=β in the result of (ⅸ), [24,Corrolary 6] can be obtained.

    Proof of Theorem 3.4. For (s,m)-convex function the following inequalities hold:

    |f(t)|(xtxa)s|f(a)|+m(taxa)s|f(xm)|, a<t<x, (4.18)
    |f(t)|(txbx)s|f(b)|+m(btbx)s|f(xm)|, x<t<b. (4.19)

    From (4.1) and (4.18), the following inequality is obtained:

    |(gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,a+(fg))(x,ω;p)|Kax(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)(xa)s×((xa)s(m|f(xm)|g(x)|f(a)|g(a))Γ(s+1)(m|f(xm)|sIxg(a)|f(a)|sIa+g(x))). (4.20)

    Similarly, from (4.2) and (4.19), the following inequality is obtained:

    |(gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,b(fg))(x,ω;p)|Kxb(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,g;ϕ)(bx)s×((bx)s(|f(b)|g(b)mf|(xm)|g(x))Γ(s+1)(|f(b)|sIbg(x)mf|(xm)|sIx+g(b))). (4.21)

    By adding (4.20) and (4.21), inequality (3.4) can be achieved.

    Remark 4. (ⅰ) If we consider (s,m) = (1, 1) in (3.4), then [18,Theorem 3] is obtained.

    (ⅱ) If we consider p=ω=0 in (3.4), then [20,Theorem 2] is obtained.

    (ⅲ) If we consider ϕ(t)=Γ(α)tα+1, p=ω=0 and (s,m) = (1, 1) in (3.4), then [21,Theorem 2] is obtained.

    (ⅳ) If we consider α=β in the result of (iii), then [21,Corollary 2] is obtained.

    (ⅴ) If we consider ϕ(t)=tα, g(x)=x and m=1 in (3.4), then [22,Theorem 2.3] is obtained.

    (ⅵ) If we consider α=β in the result of (v), then [22,Corollary 2.5] is obtained.

    (ⅶ) If we consider ϕ(t)=Γ(α)tαk+1, (s,m) = (1, 1), g(x)=x and p=ω=0 in (3.4), then [23,Theorem 2] can be obtained.

    (ⅷ) If we consider α=β in the result of (ⅶ), then [23,Corollary 4] can be obtained.

    (ⅸ) If we consider α=β=k=1 and x=a+b2, in the result of (ⅷ), then [23,Corollary 5] can be obtained.

    (ⅹ) If we consider ϕ(t)=Γ(α)tα+1, g(x)=x and p=ω=0 and (s,m) = (1, 1) in (3.4), then [24,Theorem 2] is obtained.

    (ⅹⅰ) If we consider α=β in the result of (x), then [24,Corollary 5] can be obtained.

    In this section, we have established boundedness and continuity of unified integral operators for m-convex and convex functions.

    Theorem 5.1. Under the assumptions of Theorem 1, the following inequality holds for m-convex functions:

    (gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,a+f)(x,ω;p)+(gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,bf)(x,ω;p)Kax(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)(g(x)g(a))(mf(xm)+f(a))+Kxb(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,g;ϕ)(g(b)g(x))(mf(xm)+f(b)). (5.1)

    Proof. If we put s=1 in (4.5), we have

    xaKtx(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)f(t)d(g(t))f(a)Kax(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)×xa(xtxa)d(g(t))+mf(xm)Kax(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)xa(taxa)d(g(t)). (5.2)

    Further from simplification of (5.2), the following inequality holds:

    (gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,a+f)(x,ω;p)Kax(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)(g(x)g(a))(mf(xm)+f(a)). (5.3)

    Similarly from (4.8), the following inequality holds:

    (gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,bf)(x,ω;p)Kxb(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,g;ϕ)(g(b)g(x))(mf(xm)+f(b)). (5.4)

    From (5.3) and (5.4), (5.1) can be obtained.

    Theorem 5.2. With assumptions of Theorem 4, if fL[a,b], then unified integral operators for m-convex functions are bounded and continuous.

    Proof. From (5.3) we have

    |(gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,a+f)(x,ω;p)|Kab(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ)(g(b)g(a))(m+1)f,

    which further gives

    |(gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,a+f)(x,ω;p)|Kf,

    where K=(g(b)g(a))(m+1)Kab(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ).

    Similarly, from (5.4) the following inequality holds:

    |(gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,bf)(x,ω;p)|Kf.

    Hence the boundedness is followed, further from linearity the continuity of (1.9) and (1.10) is obtained.

    Corollary 1. If we take m=1 in Theorem 5, then unified integral operators for convex functions are bounded and continuous and following inequalities hold:

    |(gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,a+f)(x,ω;p)|Kf,
    |(gFϕ,γ,δ,k,cμ,β,l,bf)(x,ω;p)|Kf,

    where K=2(g(b)g(a))Kab(Eγ,δ,k,cμ,α,l,g;ϕ).

    This paper has explored bounds of a unified integral operator for (s,m)-convex functions. These bounds are obtained in a compact form which have further interesting consequences with respect to fractional and conformable integrals for convex, m-convex and s-convex functions. Furthermore by applying Theorems 3.1, 3.3 and 3.4 several associated results can be derived for different kinds of fractional integral operators of convex, m-convex and s-convex functions.

    This work was sponsored in part by Social Science Planning Fund of Liaoning Province of China(L15AJL001, L16BJY011, L18AJY001), Scientific Research Fund of The Educational Department of Liaoning Province(2017LNZD07, 2016FRZD03), Scientific Research Fund of University of science and technology Liaoning(2016RC01, 2016FR01)

    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.



    [1] E. Casas, Control of an elliptic problem with pointwise state constraints, SIAM J. Control Optim., 24 (1986), 1309–1318. https://doi.org/10.1137/0324078 doi: 10.1137/0324078
    [2] E. Casas, Boundary control of semilinear elliptic equations with pointwise state constraints, SIAM J. Control Optim., 31 (1993), 993–1006. https://doi.org/10.1137/0331044 doi: 10.1137/0331044
    [3] F. Tröltzsch, Optimal Control of Partial Differential Equations. Theory, Methods, and Applications, Grad. Stud. Math. 112, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2010.
    [4] O. Benedix, B. Vexler, A posteriori error estimation and adaptivity for elliptic optimal control problems with state constraints, Comput. Optim. Appl., 44 (2009), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10589-008-9200-y doi: 10.1007/s10589-008-9200-y
    [5] W. Liu, D. Yang, L. Yuan, C. Ma, Finite elemtnt approximations of an optimal control problem with integral state constraint, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 48 (2010), 1163–1185. https://doi.org/10.1137/080737095 doi: 10.1137/080737095
    [6] M. Bergounioux, K. Kunisch, Primal-dual strategy for state-constrained optimal control problems, Comput. Optim. Appl., 22 (2002), 193–224. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015489608037 doi: 10.1023/A:1015489608037
    [7] J. De los Reyes, K. Kunisch, A semi-smooth newton method for regularized state-constrained optimal control of the Navier-Stokes equations, Computing, 78 (2006), 287–309. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00607-006-0183-1 doi: 10.1007/s00607-006-0183-1
    [8] W. Gong, N. Yan, A mixed finite element scheme for optimal control problems with pointwise state constraints, J. Sci. Comput., 46 (2011), 182–203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10915-010-9392-z doi: 10.1007/s10915-010-9392-z
    [9] J. Zhou, D. Yang, Spectral mixed Galerkin method for state constrained optimal control problem governed by the first bi-harmonic equation, Int. J. Comput. Math., 88 (2011), 2988–3011. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207160.2011.563845 doi: 10.1080/00207160.2011.563845
    [10] Y. Chen, N. Yi, W.B. Liu, A Legendre Galerkin spectral method for optimal control problems governed by elliptic equations, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 46 (2008), 2254–2275. https://doi.org/10.1137/070679703 doi: 10.1137/070679703
    [11] Y. Chen, F. Huang, N. YI, W. B. Liu, A Legendre-Galerkin spectral method for optimal control problems governed by Stokes equations, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 49 (2011), 1625–1648. https://doi.org/10.1137/080726057 doi: 10.1137/080726057
    [12] C. Bernardi, Y. Maday, Uniform inf-sup conditions for the spectral discretization of the Stokes problem, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 9 (1999), 395–414. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218202599000208 doi: 10.1142/S0218202599000208
    [13] J. L. Lions, Optimal Control of Systems Governed by Partial Differential Equations, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1971.
    [14] J. Shen, Efficient Spectral-Galerkin Method I: Direct Solvers for the Second and Fourth Order Equations Using Legendre Polynomials, SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 15 (1994), 1489–1505. https://doi.org/10.1137/0915089 doi: 10.1137/0915089
    [15] C. Canuto, M. Hussaini, A. Quarteroni, T. Zang, Spectral Methods in Fluid Dynamics, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1988.
    [16] J. Melenk, B. Wohlmuth, On residual-based a posteriori error estimation in hp-FEM, Adv. Comput. Math., 15 (2001), 311–331. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014268310921 doi: 10.1023/A:1014268310921
    [17] R. Glowinski, J. Lions, R. Trˊemoliˊeres, Numerical analysis of variational inequalities, Amsterdam, North-Holland, 1981.
    [18] H. Niu and D. Yang, Finite element analysis of optimal control problem governed by Stokes equations with L2-norm state-constriants, J. Comput. Math., 29 (2011), 589–604. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43693666
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. A. El-Mesady, Omar Bazighifan, Mehar Ali Malik, Construction of Mutually Orthogonal Graph Squares Using Novel Product Techniques, 2022, 2022, 2314-4785, 1, 10.1155/2022/9722983
    2. A. El-Mesady, Omar Bazighifan, S. S. Askar, Serena Matucci, A Novel Approach for Cyclic Decompositions of Balanced Complete Bipartite Graphs into Infinite Graph Classes, 2022, 2022, 2314-8888, 1, 10.1155/2022/9308708
    3. A. El-Mesady, Omar Bazighifan, Qasem Al-Mdallal, On infinite circulant-balanced complete multipartite graphs decompositions based on generalized algorithmic approaches, 2022, 61, 11100168, 11267, 10.1016/j.aej.2022.04.022
    4. R. Praveen, P. Pabitha, A secure lightweight fuzzy embedder based user authentication scheme for internet of medical things applications, 2023, 10641246, 1, 10.3233/JIFS-223617
    5. A. El-Mesady, Omar Bazighifan, H. M. Shabana, Gohar Ali, On Graph-Transversal Designs and Graph-Authentication Codes Based on Mutually Orthogonal Graph Squares, 2022, 2022, 2314-4785, 1, 10.1155/2022/8992934
    6. A. El-Mesady, Omar Bazighifan, Miaochao Chen, Decompositions of Circulant-Balanced Complete Multipartite Graphs Based on a Novel Labelling Approach, 2022, 2022, 2314-8888, 1, 10.1155/2022/2017936
    7. C. Beaula, P. Venugopal, B. Praba, Xuanlong Ma, Block Encryption and Decryption of a Sentence Using Decomposition of the Turan Graph, 2023, 2023, 2314-4785, 1, 10.1155/2023/7588535
    8. Ahmed El-Mesady, Tasneem Farahat, Ramadan El-Shanawany, Aleksandr Y. Romanov, On Orthogonal Double Covers and Decompositions of Complete Bipartite Graphs by Caterpillar Graphs, 2023, 16, 1999-4893, 320, 10.3390/a16070320
    9. Muhammad Awais, Zulfiqar Ahmed, Waseem Khalid, Ebenezer Bonyah, Tareq Al-shami, Analysis of Zigzag and Rhombic Benzenoid Systems via Irregularity Indices, 2023, 2023, 2314-4785, 1, 10.1155/2023/4833683
    10. Yash M Dalal, Spandana N Raj, Supreeth S, Shruthi G, Yerriswamy T, Arun Biradar, 2023, Comparative Approach to Secure Data Over Cloud Computing Environment, 979-8-3503-4314-4, 1, 10.1109/CSITSS60515.2023.10334187
    11. Ce Shi, Tatsuhiro Tsuchiya, Chengmin Wang, Separable detecting arrays, 2024, 9, 2473-6988, 34806, 10.3934/math.20241657
    12. Anam Zahid, Faisal Kamiran, Samar Abbas, Bilal Qureshi, Asim Karim, Data-Driven Uplift Modeling, 2025, 13, 2169-3536, 62462, 10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3557468
    13. Chengmin Wang, Ce Shi, Tatsuhiro Tsuchiya, Quanrui Zhang, Detecting arrays on graphs, 2025, 33, 2688-1594, 3328, 10.3934/era.2025147
  • 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(2019) PDF downloads(82) Cited by(0)

Figures and Tables

Figures(1)  /  Tables(1)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog