Interactive complex ontology matching with local and global similarity deviations

Xingsi Xue; Miao Ye; Xingsi Xue; Miao Ye

doi:10.3934/era.2023291

Electronic Research Archive

2023, Volume 31, Issue 9: 5732-5748. doi: 10.3934/era.2023291

Previous Article Next Article

Special Issues

Interactive complex ontology matching with local and global similarity deviations

Xingsi Xue ^{1,2
,
,},
Miao Ye ³

1.
Fujian Provincial Key Laboratory of Big Data Mining and Applications, Fujian University of Technology, Fuzhou 350118, China
2.
Guangxi Key Laboratory of Wireless Wideband Communication and Signal Processing, Guilin Universitiy of Electronic Technology, Guilin 541004, China
3.
School of Information and Communication, Guilin University of Electronic Technology, Guilin 540014, China

Academic Editor: Yiu-ming Cheung

Received: 12 July 2023 Revised: 05 August 2023 Accepted: 13 August 2023 Published: 21 August 2023

Ontology serves as a central technique in the semantic web to elucidate domain knowledge. The challenge of dealing with the heterogeneity introduced by diverse domain ontologies necessitates ontology matching, a process designed to identify semantically interconnected entities within these ontologies. This task is inherently complex due to the broad, diverse entities and the rich semantics inherent in vocabularies. To tackle this challenge, we bring forth a new interactive ontology matching method with local and global similarity deviations (IOM-LGSD) for ontology matching, which consists of three novel components. First, a local and global similarity deviation (LGSD) metrics are presented to measure the consistency of similarity measures (SMs) and single out the less consistent SMs for user validation. Second, we present a genetic algorithm (GA) based SM selector to evolve the SM subsets. Lastly, a problem-specific induced ordered weighting aggregating (IOWA) operator based SM aggregator is proposed to assess the quality of selected SMs. The experiment evaluates IOM-LGSD with the ontology alignment evaluation initiative (OAEI) Benchmark and three real-world sensor ontologies. The evaluation underscores the effectiveness of IOM-LGSD in efficiently identifying high-quality ontology alignments, which consistently outperforms comparative methods in terms of effectiveness and efficiency.

Keywords:

Citation: Xingsi Xue, Miao Ye. Interactive complex ontology matching with local and global similarity deviations[J]. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(9): 5732-5748. doi: 10.3934/era.2023291

Related Papers:

[1]	Juan H. Arredondo, Genaro Montaño, Francisco J. Mendoza . A new characterization of the dual space of the HK-integrable functions. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(4): 8250-8261. doi: 10.3934/math.2024401
[2]	Mukhamed Aleroev, Hedi Aleroeva, Temirkhan Aleroev . Proof of the completeness of the system of eigenfunctions for one boundary-value problem for the fractional differential equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2019, 4(3): 714-720. doi: 10.3934/math.2019.3.714
[3]	Imran Talib, Md. Nur Alam, Dumitru Baleanu, Danish Zaidi, Ammarah Marriyam . A new integral operational matrix with applications to multi-order fractional differential equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(8): 8742-8771. doi: 10.3934/math.2021508
[4]	Erdal Bas, Ramazan Ozarslan . Theory of discrete fractional Sturm–Liouville equations and visual results. AIMS Mathematics, 2019, 4(3): 593-612. doi: 10.3934/math.2019.3.593
[5]	Ahmed M.A. El-Sayed, Eman M.A. Hamdallah, Hameda M. A. Alama . Multiple solutions of a Sturm-Liouville boundary value problem of nonlinear differential inclusion with nonlocal integral conditions. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(6): 11150-11164. doi: 10.3934/math.2022624
[6]	Jiaye Lin . Evaluations of some Euler-type series via powers of the arcsin function. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(4): 8116-8130. doi: 10.3934/math.2025372
[7]	Tuba Gulsen, Sertac Goktas, Thabet Abdeljawad, Yusuf Gurefe . Sturm-Liouville problem in multiplicative fractional calculus. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(8): 22794-22812. doi: 10.3934/math.20241109
[8]	Anwar Ahmad, Dumitru Baleanu . On two backward problems with Dzherbashian-Nersesian operator. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(1): 887-904. doi: 10.3934/math.2023043
[9]	Juya Cui, Ben Gao . Symmetry analysis of an acid-mediated cancer invasion model. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(9): 16949-16961. doi: 10.3934/math.2022930
[10]	M. Mossa Al-Sawalha, Khalil Hadi Hakami, Mohammad Alqudah, Qasem M. Tawhari, Hussain Gissy . Novel Laplace-integrated least square methods for solving the fractional nonlinear damped Burgers' equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(3): 7099-7126. doi: 10.3934/math.2025324

Abstract

1. Introduction

When studying various applied problems related to the properties of media with a periodic structure, it is necessary to study differential equations with rapidly changing coefficients. Equations of this type are often found, for example, in electrical systems under the influence of high frequency external forces. The presence of such forces creates serious problems for the numerical integration of the corresponding differential equations. Therefore, asymptotic methods are usually applied to such equations, the most famous of which are the Feshchenko – Shkil – Nikolenko splitting method ^{[9,10,11,12,23]} and the Lomov's regularization method ^[18,20,21]. The splitting method is especially effective when applied to homogeneous equations, and in the case of inhomogeneous differential equations, the Lomov regularization method turned out to be the most effective. However, both of these methods were developed mainly for singularly perturbed equations that do not contain an integral operator. The transition from differential equations to integro-differential equations requires a significant restructuring of the algorithm of the regularization method. The integral term generates new types of singularities in solutions that differ from the previously known ones, which complicates the development of the algorithm for the regularization method. The splitting method, as far as we know, has not been applied to integro-differential equations. In this article, the Lomov's regularization method ^{[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,13,14,15,16,17,19,24]} is generalized to previously unexplored classes of integro-differential equations with rapidly oscillating coefficients and rapidly decreasing kernels of the form

$\begin{align} \begin{array}{l} {L_{\varepsilon}z(t, \varepsilon)\equiv \varepsilon \frac{dz}{dt} -A(t)z-\varepsilon g(t)\cos \frac{\beta (t)}{\varepsilon } B\left(t\right)z} \\ \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \\ {-\int _{t_{0} }^{t} e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{s}^{t} \mu \left(\theta \right)d\theta } K\left(t, s\right)z(s, \varepsilon )ds = h(t), \, \, \, \, z(t_{0} , \varepsilon ) = z^{0}, \, \, \, \, {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} t\in [t_{0} , T], } \end{array} \end{align}$

(1.1)

where $z = \left\{z_{1}, z_{2} \right\}, h\left(t\right) = \left\{h_{1} \left(t\right), h_{2} \left(t\right)\right\}, \mu \left(t\right) < 0\left(\forall t\in \left[t_{0}, T\right]\right),$ $g\left(t\right)$ is the scalar function, $A\left(t\right)$ and $B\left(t\right)$ are $\left(2\times 2\right)$ -matrices, moreover $A\left(t\right) = \left(\begin{array}{cc} {0} & {1} \\ {-\omega ^{2} \left(t\right)} & {0} \end{array}\right),$ $\, \omega \left(t\right) > 0, \beta '\left(t\right) > 0$ is the frequency of the rapidly oscillating cosine, $z^{0} = \left\{z_{1}^{0}, z_{2}^{0} \right\}, {\kern 1pt} \, \varepsilon > 0$ is a small parameter. It is precisely such a system in the case $\beta \left(t\right) = 2\gamma \left(t\right), B\left(t\right) = \left(\begin{array}{cc} {0} & {0} \\ {1} & {0} \end{array}\right)$ and in the absence of an integral term was considered in ^[18,20,21].

The functions $\lambda _{1} \left(t\right) = -i\omega \left(t\right), {\kern 1pt}$ $\lambda _{2} \left(t\right) = +i\omega \left(t\right)$ form the spectrum of the limit operator $A\left(t\right)$ , the function $\lambda _{5} \left(t\right) = \mu (t)$ characterizes the rapid change in the kernel of the integral operator, and the functions $\lambda _{3} \left(t\right) = -i\beta '\left(t\right)$ , $\lambda _{4} \left(t\right) = +i\beta '\left(t\right)$ are associated with the presence of a rapidly oscillating cosine in the system (1.1). The set $\left\{\Lambda\right\} = \left\{\lambda _{1}(t), ..., \lambda _{5}(t)\right\}$ is called the spectrum of problem (1.1). Such systems have not been considered earlier and in this paper we will try to generalize the Lomov's regularization method ^[18] to systems of type (1.1).

We introduce the following notations:

$\lambda \left(t\right) = \left(\lambda _{1} \left(t\right), ..., \lambda _{5} \left(t\right)\right),$

$\, m = \left(m_{1}, ..., m_{5} \right)$ is a multi-index with non-negative components $m_{j}, \, j = \overline{1, 5},$

$\left|m\right| = \sum_{j = 1}^{5}m_{j}$ is the height of multi-index $m,$

$\left(m, \lambda \left(t\right)\right) = \sum_{j = 1}^{5}m_{j} \lambda _{j} \left(t\right).$

The problem (1.1) will be considered under the following conditions:

$1)\, \, \, \, \omega \left(t\right), \mu \left(t\right), \beta \left(t\right)\in C^{\infty } \left(\left[t_{0}, T\right], {\mathbb R}\right), \omega \left(t\right)\neq \beta' \left(t\right) \forall t\in \left[{{t}_{0}}, T \right],$

$\, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, g\left(t\right)\in \left(\left[t_{0}, T\right], {\mathbb C}^{1} \right), h\left(t\right)\in C^{\infty } \left(\left[t_{0}, T\right], {\mathbb C}^{2} \right),$

$\, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, B\left(t\right)\in C^{\infty } \left(\left[t_{0}, T\right], {\rm {\mathbb C}}^{2\times 2} \right), K\left(t, s\right)\in C^{\infty } \left(\left\{t_{0} \le s\le t\le T\right\}, {\rm {\mathbb C}}^{2\times 2} \right);$

2) the relations $\left(m, \lambda \left(t\right)\right) = 0, \, \left(m, \lambda \left(t\right)\right) = \lambda _{j} \left(t\right), j\in \left\{1, ..., 5\right\}$ for all multi-indices $m$ with $\left|m\right|\ge 2$ or are not fulfilled for any $t\in \left[t_{0}, T\right],$ or are fulfilled identically on the whole segment $\left[t_{0}, T\right].$ In other words, resonant multi-indices are exhausted by the following sets:

$\begin{array}{l} {\Gamma _{0} = \left\{m:\, \left(m, \lambda \left(t\right)\right)\equiv 0, \, \left|m\right|\ge 2, \forall t\in \left[t_{0} , T\right]\right\}, } \\ {\Gamma _{j} = \left\{m:\, \left(m, \lambda \left(t\right)\right)\equiv \lambda _{j} \left(t\right), \, \left|m\right|\ge 2, \forall t\in \left[t_{0} , T\right]\right\}, \, \, j = \overline{1, 5}.} \end{array}$

Note that by virtue of the condition $\omega(t)\neq \beta'(t)$ , the spectrum $\left\{\Lambda\right\}$ of the problem (1.1) is simple.

2. Regularization of the problem (1.1)

Denote by $\sigma _{j} = \sigma _{j} \left(\varepsilon \right)$ independent on $t$ the quantities $\sigma _{1} = e^{-\frac{i}{\varepsilon } \beta \left(t_{0} \right)}$ , $\sigma _{2} = e^{+\frac{i}{\varepsilon } \beta \left(t_{0} \right)}$ and rewrite the system (1.1) in the form

$\begin{align} \begin{array}{l} {L_{\varepsilon}z(t, \varepsilon)\equiv\varepsilon \frac{dz}{dt} -A(t)z-\varepsilon \frac{g(t)}{2} \left(e^{-\frac{i}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t}\beta ' \left(\theta \right)d\theta } \sigma _{1} +e^{+\frac{i}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t}\beta ' \left(\theta \right)d\theta } \sigma _{2} \right)B\left(t\right)z} \\ \, \, \, \, \, \\ {-\int _{t_{0} }^{t}e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{s}^{t}\mu (\theta )d\theta } K\left(t, s\right)z(s, \varepsilon )ds = h(t), \, \, \, \, \, \, \, z(t_{0} , \varepsilon ) = z^{0}, \, \, \, t\in [t_{0} , T].} \end{array} \end{align}$

(2.1)

We introduce regularizing variables (see ^[18])

$\begin{align} \tau _{j} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{j} \left(\theta \right)d\theta \equiv \frac{\psi _{j} \left(t\right)}{\varepsilon } , j = \overline{1, 5}\; \end{align}$

(2.2)

and instead of the problem (2.1) we consider the problem

$L_{\varepsilon } \tilde{z}(t, \tau , \varepsilon )\equiv \varepsilon \frac{\partial \tilde{z}}{\partial t} +\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{5}\lambda _{j} \left(t\right)\frac{\partial \tilde{z}}{\partial \tau _{j} } -A(t)\tilde{z}-\varepsilon \frac{g(t)}{2} \left(e^{\tau _{3} } \sigma _{1} +e^{\tau _{4} } \sigma _{2} \right)B\left(t\right)\tilde{z}$

$\begin{align} -\int _{t_{0} }^{t}e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{s}^{t}\mu (\theta )d\theta } K\left(t, s\right)\tilde{z}(s, \frac{\psi \left(s\right)}{\varepsilon } , \varepsilon )ds = h(t), \, \tilde{z}(t, \tau , \varepsilon )|_{t = t_{0} , \tau = 0} = z^{0}, \, \, \, \, \, \, t\in [t_{0}, T] \end{align}$

(2.3)

for the function $\tilde{z} = \tilde{z}\left(t, \tau, \varepsilon \right),$ where it is indicated (according to (2.2)): $\tau = \left(\tau _{1}, ..., \tau _{5} \right), {\kern 1pt} \, \, \psi = \left(\psi _{1}, ..., \psi _{5} \right).$ It is clear that if $\tilde{z} = \tilde{z}\left(t, \tau, \varepsilon \right)$ is the solution of the problem (2.3), then the vector function $z = \tilde{z}\left(t, \frac{\psi \left(t\right)}{\varepsilon }, \varepsilon \right)$ is the exact solution of the problem (2.1), therefore, the problem (2.3) is expansion of the problem (2.1). However, it cannot be considered completely regularized, since the integral term

${J\tilde{z}}\equiv J\left( \tilde{z}\left( t, \tau , \varepsilon \right){{|}_{t = s, \tau = \psi \left( s \right)/\varepsilon }} \right) = \int _{t_{0} }^{t} e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{s}^{t} \mu (\theta )d\theta } K\left(t, s\right)\tilde{z}(s, \frac{\psi \left(s\right)}{\varepsilon } , \varepsilon )ds$

has not been regularized in (2.3).

To regularize the integral term, we introduce a class $M_{\varepsilon },$ asymptotically invariant with respect to the operator $J\tilde{z}$ (see ^[18], p. 62]). We first consider the space of vector functions $z\left(t, \tau \right),$ representable by sums

$\begin{align} \begin{array}{l} {z\left(t, \tau , \sigma \right) = z_{0} \left(t, \sigma \right)+\sum_{i = 1}^{5} z_{i} \left(t, \sigma \right)e^{\tau _{i} } +\sum_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{z} }^{*} z^{m} \left(t, \sigma \right)e^{\left(m, \tau \right)} , } \\ \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \\ {z_{0} \left(t, \sigma \right), z_{i} \left(t, \sigma \right), z^{m} \left(t, \sigma \right)\in C^{\infty } \left(\left[t_{0} , T\right], {\mathbb C}^{2} \right), i = \overline{1, 5}, \, \, \, 2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{z} , } \end{array} \end{align}$

(2.4)

where the asterisk $*$ above the sum sign indicates that in it the summation for $\left|m\right|\ge 2$ occurs only over nonresonant multi-indices $m = \left(m_{1}, ..., m_{5} \right),$ i.e. over $m\notin \bigcup _{i = 0}^{5}\Gamma _{i}.$ Note that in (2.4) the degree of the polynomial with respect to exponentials $e^{\tau _{j} }$ depends on the element $z$ . In addition, the elements of the space $U$ depend on bounded in $\varepsilon > 0$ constants $\sigma _{1} = \sigma _{1} \left(\varepsilon \right)$ and $\sigma _{2} = \sigma _{2} \left(\varepsilon \right),$ which do not affect the development of the algorithm described below, therefore, henceforth, in the notation of element (2.4) of this space $U$ , we omit the dependence on $\sigma = \left(\sigma _{1}, \sigma _{2} \right)$ for brevity. We show that the class $M_{\varepsilon } = U|_{\tau = \psi \left(t\right)/\varepsilon }$ is asymptotically invariant with respect to the operator $J.$

The image of the operator $J$ on the element (2.4) of the space $U$ has the form:

$Jz\left(t, \tau \right) = \int _{t_{0} }^{t} e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{s}^{t} \lambda _{5} (\theta )d\theta } K\left(t, s\right)z_{0} \left(s\right)ds+\sum\limits _{i = 1}^{5} \int _{t_{0} }^{t} e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{s}^{t} \lambda _{5} (\theta )d\theta } K\left(t, s\right)z_{i} \left(s\right)e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{s} \lambda _{i} \left(\theta \right)d\theta } ds$

$+\sum \limits_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{z} }^{*} \int _{t_{0} }^{t} e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{s}^{t} \lambda _{5} (\theta )d\theta } K\left(t, s\right)z^{m} \left(s\right)e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{s} \left(m, \lambda \left(\theta \right)\right)d\theta } ds{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt}$

$= \int _{t_{0} }^{t} e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{s}^{t} \lambda _{5} (\theta )d\theta } K(t, s)z_{0} (s)ds+e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{5} (\theta )d\theta } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} K(t, s)z_{5} (s)ds$

$+\sum\limits _{i = 1, i\ne 5}^{5} e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{5} (\theta )d\theta } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} K\left(t, s\right)z_{i} \left(s\right)e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{s} (\lambda _{i} \left(\theta \right)-\lambda _{5} \left(\theta \right))d\theta } ds{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt}$

$+\sum \limits_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{z} }^{*} e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{5} (\theta )d\theta } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} K\left(t, s\right)z^{m} \left(s\right)e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{s} \left(m-e_{5} , \lambda \left(\theta \right)\right)d\theta } ds.{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt}$

Integrating in parts, we have

${{J}_{0}}\left( t, \varepsilon \right) = \int_{{{t}_{0}}}^{t}{K}\left( t, s \right){{z}_{0}}\left( s \right){{e}^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\int_{s}^{t}{{{\lambda }_{5}}}(\theta )d\theta }}ds = \varepsilon \int_{{{t}_{0}}}^{t}{\frac{K\left( t, s \right){{z}_{0}}\left( s \right)}{-{{\lambda }_{5}}\left( s \right)}}d{{e}^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\int_{s}^{t}{{{\lambda }_{5}}}(\theta )d\theta }}$

$= \left. \varepsilon \frac{K\left( t, s \right){{z}_{0}}\left( s \right)}{-{{\lambda }_{5}}\left( s \right)}{{e}^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\int_{s}^{t}{{{\lambda }_{5}}}(\theta )d\theta }} \right|_{s = {{t}_{0}}}^{s = t}-\varepsilon \int_{{{t}_{0}}}^{t}{\left( \frac{\partial }{\partial s}\frac{K\left( t, s \right){{z}_{0}}\left( s \right)}{-{{\lambda }_{5}}\left( s \right)} \right)}{{e}^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\int_{s}^{t}{{{\lambda }_{5}}}(\theta )d\theta }}ds$

$= \varepsilon \left[ \frac{K\left( t, {{t}_{0}} \right){{z}_{0}}\left( {{t}_{0}} \right)}{{{\lambda }_{5}}\left( {{t}_{0}} \right)}{{e}^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\int_{{{t}_{0}}}^{t}{{{\lambda }_{5}}}(\theta )d\theta }}-\frac{K\left( t, t \right){{z}_{0}}\left( t \right)}{{{\lambda }_{5}}\left( t \right)} \right]+ \varepsilon \int_{{{t}_{0}}}^{t}{\left( \frac{\partial }{\partial s}\frac{K\left( t, s \right){{z}_{0}}\left( s \right)}{{{\lambda }_{5}}\left( s \right)} \right)}{{e}^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\int_{s}^{t}{{{\lambda }_{5}}}(\theta )d\theta }}ds.$

Continuing this process further, we obtain the decomposition

$\begin{array}{*{35}{l}} {{J}_{0}}\left( t, \varepsilon \right) = \sum\limits_{\nu = 0}^{\infty }{{{\varepsilon }^{\nu +1}}\left[ {{\left( I_{0}^{\nu }\left( K\left( t, s \right){{z}_{0}}\left( s \right) \right) \right)}_{s = {{t}_{0}}}}{{e}^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\int_{{{t}_{0}}}^{t}{{{\lambda }_{5}}}(\theta )d\theta }}-{{\left( I_{0}^{\nu }\left( K\left( t, s \right){{z}_{0}}\left( s \right) \right) \right)}_{s = t}} \right]}, \\ \qquad \quad \qquad \qquad I_{0}^{0} = \frac{1}{{{\lambda }_{5}}\left( s \right)}\cdot , I_{0}^{\nu } = \frac{1}{{{\lambda }_{5}}\left( s \right)}\frac{\partial }{\partial s}I_{0}^{\nu -1}(\nu \ge 1). \\ \end{array}$

Next, apply the same operation to the integrals:

$J_{5, i} \left(t, \varepsilon \right) = e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{5} (\theta )d\theta } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} K\left(t, s\right)z_{i} \left(s\right)e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{s} (\lambda _{i} \left(\theta \right)-\lambda _{5} \left(\theta \right))d\theta } ds{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt}$

$= \varepsilon e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{5} (\theta )d\theta } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \frac{K(t, s)z_{i} (s)}{\lambda _{i} (s)-\lambda _{5} (s)} de^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{s} \left(\lambda _{i} (\theta )-\lambda _{5} (\theta )\right)d\theta }$

${\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} = \varepsilon e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{5} (\theta )d\theta } \left[\left. \frac{K(t, s)z_{i} (s)}{\lambda _{i} (s)-\lambda _{5} (s)} e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{s} \left(\lambda _{i} (\theta )-\lambda _{5} (\theta )\right)d\theta } \right|_{s = t_{0} }^{s = t} -\right. \left. \varepsilon \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \left(\frac{\partial }{\partial s} \frac{K\left(t, s\right)z_{i} \left(s\right)}{\lambda _{i} \left(s\right)-\lambda _{5} \left(s\right)} \right)e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{s} \left(\lambda _{i} \left(\theta \right)-\lambda _{5} \left(\theta \right)\right)d\theta } ds\right]{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt}$

${\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} = \varepsilon \left[\frac{K\left(t, t\right)z_{i} \left(t\right)}{\lambda _{i} \left(t\right)-\lambda _{5} \left(t\right)} e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{i} \left(\theta \right)d\theta } -\frac{K\left(t, t_{0} \right)z_{i} \left(t_{0} \right)}{\lambda _{i} \left(t_{0} \right)-\lambda _{5} \left(t_{0} \right)} e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{5} \left(\theta \right)d\theta } \right]$

$-\varepsilon e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{5} \left(\theta \right)d\theta } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \left(\frac{\partial }{\partial s} \frac{K\left(t, s\right)z_{i} \left(s\right)}{\lambda _{i} \left(s\right)-\lambda _{5} \left(s\right)} \right)e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{s} \left(\lambda _{i} \left(\theta \right)-\lambda _{5} \left(\theta \right)\right)d\theta } ds$

$= \sum\limits_{\nu = 0}^{\infty } (-1)^{\nu } \varepsilon ^{\nu +1} \Bigg[\left(I_{i}^{\nu } \left(K\left(t, s\right)z_{i} \left(s\right)\right)\right)_{s = t} e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{i} (\theta ))d\theta } - \left(I_{i}^{\nu } \left(K\left(t, s\right)z_{i} \left(s\right)\right)\right)_{s = t_{0} } e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{5} \left(\theta \right)d\theta } \Bigg],$

$I_{i}^{0} = \frac{1}{{{\lambda }_{i}}\left( s \right)-{{\lambda }_{5}}\left( s \right)}, I_{i}^{\nu } = \frac{1}{{{\lambda }_{i}}\left( s \right)-{{\lambda }_{5}}\left( s \right)}\frac{\partial }{\partial s}I_{i}^{\nu -1}\, (\nu \ge 1), i = \overline{1, 4};$

$J_{m} \left(t, \varepsilon \right) = e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{5} \left(\theta \right)d\theta } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} K\left(t, s\right)z^{m} \left(s\right)e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{s} \left(m-e_{5} , \lambda \left(\theta \right)\right)d\theta } ds$

$= \varepsilon e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{5} \left(\theta \right)d\theta } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \frac{K\left(t, s\right)z^{m} \left(s\right)}{\left(m-e_{5} , \lambda \left(s\right)\right)} de^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{s} \left(m-e_{5} , \lambda \left(\theta \right)\right)d\theta } {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} = \varepsilon e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{5} (\theta )d\theta } \left[\left. \frac{K\left(t, s\right)z^{m} \left(s\right)}{\left(m-e_{5} , \lambda \left(s\right)\right)} e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{s} \left(m-e_{5} , \lambda \left(\theta \right)\right)d\theta } \right|_{s = t_{0} }^{s = t} \right.$

$-\left. \varepsilon \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \left(\frac{\partial }{\partial s} \frac{K\left(t, s\right)z^{m} \left(s\right)}{\left(m-e_{5} , \lambda \left(s\right)\right)} \right)e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{s} \left(m-e_{5} , \lambda \left(\theta \right)\right)d\theta } ds\right]{\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt}$

$= \varepsilon \left[\frac{K\left(t, t\right)z^{m} \left(t\right)}{\left(m-e_{5} , \lambda \left(t\right)\right)} e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \left(m, \lambda \left(\theta \right)\right)d\theta } -\frac{K\left(t, t_{0} \right)z^{m} \left(t_{0} \right)}{\left(m-e_{5} , \lambda \left(t_{0} \right)\right)} e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{5} \left(\theta \right)d\theta } \right]$

$-\varepsilon e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{5} \left(\theta \right)d\theta } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \left(\frac{\partial }{\partial s} \frac{K\left(t, s\right)z^{m} \left(s\right)}{\left(m-e_{5} , \lambda \left(s\right)\right)} \right)e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{s} \left(m-e_{5} , \lambda \left(\theta \right)\right)d\theta }$

$= \sum\limits_{\nu = 0}^{\infty } (-1)^{\nu } \varepsilon ^{\nu +1} \left[\left(I_{5, m}^{\nu } \left(K\left(t, s\right)z^{m} \left(s\right)\right)\right)_{s = t} e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \left(m, \lambda \left(\theta \right)\right)d\theta } \right. -\left. \left(I_{5, m}^{\nu } \left(K\left(t, s\right)z^{m} \left(s\right)\right)\right)_{s = t_{0} } e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{5} \left(\theta \right)d\theta } \right],$

$I_{5, m}^{0} = \frac{1}{\left( m-{{e}_{5}}, \lambda \left( s \right) \right)}, I_{5, m}^{\nu } = \frac{1}{\left( m-{{e}_{5}}, \lambda \left( s \right) \right)}\frac{\partial }{\partial s}I_{5, m}^{\nu -1}\, (\nu \ge 1), 2\le \left| m \right|\le {{N}_{z}}.$

Here it is taken into account that $\left(m-e_{5}, \lambda \left(s\right)\right)\ne 0,$ since by definition of the space $U$ , multi-indices $m\notin \Gamma _{5}.$ This means that the image of the operator $J$ on the element (2.4) of the space $U$ is represented as a series

$Jz\left(t, \tau \right) = e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{5} (\theta ))d\theta } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} K\left(t, s\right)z_{5} \left(s\right)ds+\sum\limits_{\nu = 0}^{\infty } (-1)^{\nu } \varepsilon ^{\nu +1} \left[\left(I_{0}^{\nu } \left(K\left(t, s\right)z_{0} \left(s\right)\right)\right)_{s = t_0} e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{5} (\theta ))d\theta } \right.$

$\left. -\left(I_{0}^{\nu } \left(K\left(t, s\right)z_{0} \left(s\right)\right)\right)_{s = t} \right]+\sum\limits_{i = 1, i\ne 5}^{5} \sum\limits_{\nu = 0}^{\infty } (-1)^{\nu } \varepsilon ^{\nu +1} \left[\left(I_{i}^{\nu } \left(K\left(t, s\right)z_{i} \left(s\right)\right)\right)_{s = t} e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{i} (\theta ))d\theta } \right.$

$\left. -\left(I_{i}^{\nu } \left(K\left(t, s\right)z_{i} \left(s\right)\right)\right)_{s = t_{0} } e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{5} \left(\theta \right)d\theta } \right]$

$+\sum\limits_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{z} }^{*} \sum\limits_{\nu = 0}^{\infty } (-1)^{\nu } \varepsilon ^{\nu +1} \left[\left(I_{5, m}^{\nu } \left(K\left(t, s\right)z^{m} \left(s\right)\right)\right)_{s = t} e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \left(m, \lambda \left(\theta \right)\right)d\theta } -\right. \left. \left(I_{5, m}^{\nu } \left(K\left(t, s\right)z^{m} \left(s\right)\right)\right)_{s = t_{0} } e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \lambda _{5} \left(\theta \right)d\theta } \right].$

It is easy to show (see, for example, ^[22], pages 291–294) that this series converges asymptotically as $\varepsilon \to +0$ (uniformly in $t\in [t_{0}, T]$ ). This means that the class $M_{\varepsilon }$ is asymptotically invariant (as $\varepsilon \to +0$ ) with respect to the operator $J.$

We introduce the operators $R_{\nu } :U\to U,$ acting on each element $z\left(t, \tau \right)\in U$ of the form (2.4) according to the law:

$\begin{align} R_{0} z\left(t, \tau \right) = e^{\tau_{5}} \int_{t_{0}}^{t}K\left(t, s\right)z_{5} \left(s\right)ds, \end{align}$

(

${{{ {2.5} }_0}}$ )

$R_{1} z\left(t, \tau \right) = [\left(I_{0}^{0} \left(K\left(t, s\right)z_{0} \left(s\right)\right)\right)_{s = t_0} e^{\tau _{5} } -\left(I_{0}^{0} \left(K\left(t, s\right)z_{0} \left(s\right)\right)\right)_{s = t} ]$

$\begin{align} +\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{4}[\left(I_{i}^{0} \left(K\left(t, s\right)z_{i} \left(s\right)\right)\right)_{s = t} e^{\tau _{i} } -\left(I_{i}^{0} \left(K\left(t, s\right)z_{i} \left(s\right)\right)\right)_{s = t_{0} } e^{\tau _{5} } ] \end{align}$

(

${{{ {2.5} }_1}}$ )

$+\sum\limits_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{z} }^{*}[\left(I_{5, m}^{0} \left(K\left(t, s\right)z^{m} \left(s\right)\right)\right)_{s = t} e^{\left(m, \tau \right)} -\left(I_{5, m}^{0} \left(K\left(t, s\right)z^{m} \left(s\right)\right)\right)_{s = t_{0} } e^{\tau _{5} } ],$

$R_{\nu +1} z\left(t, \tau \right) = \sum\limits_{\nu = 0}^{\infty}(-1)^{\nu}[\left(I_{0}^{\nu } \left(K\left(t, s\right)z_{0} \left(s\right)\right)\right)_{s = t_0} e^{\tau _{5} } -\left(I_{0}^{\nu } \left(K\left(t, s\right)z_{0} \left(s\right)\right)\right)_{s = t} ]$

$\begin{align} +\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{4}\sum\limits_{\nu = 0}^{\infty}(-1)^{\nu } [\left(I_{i}^{\nu } \left(K\left(t, s\right)z_{i} \left(s\right)\right)\right)_{s = t} e^{\tau _{i} } -\left(I_{i}^{\nu } \left(K\left(t, s\right)z_{i} \left(s\right)\right)\right)_{s = t_{0} } e^{\tau _{5} } ] \end{align}$

(

${{{ {2.5} }_{v+1}}}$ )

$+\sum\limits_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{z} }^{*}\sum\limits_{\nu = 0}^{\infty}(-1)^{\nu }[\left(I_{5, m}^{\nu } \left(K\left(t, s\right)z^{m} \left(s\right)\right)\right)_{s = t} e^{\left(m, \tau \right)} -\left(I_{5, m}^{\nu } \left(K\left(t, s\right)z^{m} \left(s\right)\right)\right)_{s = t_{0} } e^{\tau _{5} } ].$

Let now $\tilde{z}\left(t, \tau, \varepsilon \right)$ be an arbitrary continuous function in $\left(t, \tau \right)\in \left[t_{0}, T\right]\times \left\{\tau :{\rm Re}\tau _{j} \le 0, j = \overline{1, 5}\right\}$ with asymptotic expansion

$\begin{align} \tilde{z}\left(t, \tau , \varepsilon \right) = \sum\limits_{k = 0}^{\infty } \varepsilon ^{k} z_{k} \left(t, \tau \right), z_{k} \left(t, \tau \right)\in U \end{align}$

(2.6)

converging as $\varepsilon \to +0$ (uniformly in $\left(t, \tau \right)\in \left[t_{0}, T\right]\times \left\{\tau :{\rm{Re}}\tau _{j} \le 0, j = \overline{1, 5}\right\}$ ). Then the image $J\tilde{z}\left(t, \tau, \varepsilon \right)$ of this function is decomposed into an asymptotic series

$J\tilde{z}\left(t, \tau , \varepsilon \right) = \sum\limits_{k = 0}^{\infty } \varepsilon ^{k} Jz_{k} \left(t, \tau \right) = \sum\limits_{r = 0}^{\infty } \varepsilon ^{r} \sum\limits_{s = 0}^{r} R_{r-s} z_{s} \left(t, \tau \right)|_{\tau = \psi \left(t\right)/\varepsilon } .$

This equality is the basis for introducing an extension of the operator $J$ on series of the form (2.6):

$\begin{align} \tilde{J}\tilde{z}\left(t, \tau , \varepsilon \right)\equiv \tilde{J}\left(\sum\limits_{k = 0}^{\infty } \varepsilon ^{k} z_{k} \left(t, \tau \right)\right)\mathop{ = }\limits^{def} \sum\limits_{r = 0}^{\infty } \varepsilon ^{r} \sum\limits_{s = 0}^{r} R_{r-s} z_{s} \left(t, \tau \right). \end{align}$

(2.7)

Although the operator $\tilde{J}$ is formally defined, its usefulness is obvious, since in practice it is usual to construct the $N$ -th approximation of the asymptotic solution of the problem (2.1), in which only $N$ -th partial sums of the series (2.6) will take part, which have not formal, but true meaning. Now we can write down a problem that is completely regularized with respect to the original problem (2.1):

$\begin{align} \begin{array}{l} {L_{\varepsilon } \tilde{z}(t, \tau , \varepsilon )\equiv\varepsilon \frac{\partial \tilde{z}}{\partial t} +\sum_{j = 1}^{5} \lambda _{j} \left(t\right)\frac{\partial \tilde{z}}{\partial \tau _{j} } -A(t)\tilde{z}-\varepsilon \frac{g(t)}{2} \left(e^{\tau _{3} } \sigma _{1} +e^{\tau _{4} } \sigma _{2} \right)B\tilde{z}- }\\ \, \, \, \, \, \, \\ \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, {-\tilde{J}\tilde{z} = h(t), \, \, \, \, \, { \tilde{z}(t, \tau , \varepsilon )|_{t = t_{0} , \tau = 0} = z^{0}, \, \, \, \, \, \, t\in [t_{0} , T], }} \end{array} \end{align}$

(2.8)

were the operator $\tilde{J}$ has the form (2.7).

3. Iterative problems and their solvability in the space $U$

Substituting the series (2.6) into (2.8) and equating the coefficients for the same powers of $\varepsilon$ , we obtain the following iterative problems:

$\begin{align} Lz_{0} \left(t, \tau \right)\equiv \sum\limits_{j = 1}^{5} \lambda _{j} \left(t\right)\frac{\partial z_{0} }{\partial \tau _{j} } -A(t)z_{0} -R_{0} z_{0} = h\left(t\right), \, \, \, \, z_{0} \left(t_{0} , 0\right) = z^{0} ; \end{align}$

(

${3.1_0}$ )

$\begin{align} Lz_{1} \left(t, \tau \right) = -\frac{\partial z_{0} }{\partial t} +\frac{g(t)}{2} \left(e^{\tau _{3} } \sigma _{1} +e^{\tau _{4} } \sigma _{2} \right)B\left(t\right)z_{0} +R_{1} z_{0}, \, \, \, \, z_{1} \left(t_{0} , 0\right) = 0; \end{align}$

(

${3.1_1}$ )

$\begin{align} \begin{array}{l} {Lz_{2} \left(t, \tau \right) = -\frac{\partial z_{1} }{\partial t} +\frac{g(t)}{2} \left(e^{\tau _{3} } \sigma _{1} +e^{\tau _{4} } \sigma _{2} \right)B\left(t\right)z_{1} +R_{1} z_{1} +R_{2} z_{0}, } \, \, \, \, \, {z_{2} \left(t_{0} , 0\right) = 0;} \end{array} \end{align}$

(

${3.1_2}$ )

$\cdots$

$\begin{align} \begin{array}{l} {L z_{k} \left(t, \tau \right) = -\frac{\partial z_{k-1} }{\partial t} +\frac{g(t)}{2} \left(e^{\tau _{3} } \sigma _{1} +e^{\tau _{4} } \sigma _{2} \right)B\left(t\right)z_{k-1} +R_{k} z_{0} +...+R_{1} z_{k-1}, }\, \, \, \, \, \, {z_{k} \left(t_{0} , 0\right) = 0, \, \, \, k\ge 1.} \end{array} \end{align}$

(

${3.1_k}$ )

Each of the iterative problem $\left(3.1_{k} \right)$ can be written as

$\begin{align} Lz\left(t, \tau \right)\equiv \sum\limits_{j = 1}^{5} \lambda _{j} \left(t\right)\frac{\partial z}{\partial \tau _{j} } -A(t)z-R_{0} z = H\left(t, \tau \right), \, \, \, \, \, \, z\left(t_{0} , 0\right) = z^{*} , \end{align}$

(3.2)

where $H\left(t, \tau \right) = H_{0} \left(t\right)+\sum_{j = 1}^{5} H_{j} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{j} } +\sum_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{H} }^{*} H^{m} \left(t\right)e^{\left(m, \tau \right)}$ is a well-known vector-function of the space $U,$ $z^{*}$ is a well-known constant vector of a complex space ${\mathbb C}^{2},$ and the operator $R_{0}$ has the form (see $\left(2.5_{0} \right)$ )

$R_{0} z\equiv R_{0} \left(z_{0} \left(t\right)+\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{5} z_{j} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{j} } +\sum\limits_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{z} }^{*} z^{m} \left(t\right)e^{\left(m, \tau \right)} \right) = e^{\tau _{5} } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} K\left(t, s\right)z_{5} \left(s\right)ds.$

In the future we need the ${\lambda }_{j} \left(t\right)$ -eigenvectors of the matrix $A\left(t\right):$

$\varphi _{1} \left(t\right) = \left(\begin{array}{c} {1} \\ {-i\omega \left(t\right)} \end{array}\right), \varphi _{2} \left(t\right) = \left(\begin{array}{c} {1} \\ {+i\omega \left(t\right)} \end{array}\right),$

as well as $\bar{\lambda }_{j} \left(t\right)$ -eigenvectors of the matrix $A^{*} \left(t\right):$

$\chi _1 \left( t \right) = \frac{1}{2}\left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c} 1 \\ { - \frac{i}{{\omega \left( t \right)}}} \\ \end{array}} \right), \chi _2 \left( t \right) = \frac{1}{2} \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c} 1 \\ { + \frac{i}{{\omega \left( t \right)}}} \\ \end{array}} \right).$

These vectors form a biorthogonal system, i.e.

$\left(\varphi _{k} \left(t\right), \chi _{j} \left(t\right)\right) = \left\{\begin{array}{l} {1, k = j, } \\ {0, k\ne j} \end{array}\right. \left(k, j = 1, 2\right).$

We introduce the scalar product (for each $t\in \left[t_{0}, T\right]$ ) in the space $U:$

${ < z, w > \equiv < z_{0} \left(t\right)+\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{5}z_{j} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{j} } +\sum\limits_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{z} }^{*}z^{m} \left(t\right)e^{\left(m, \tau \right)}, }\, \, \, \, \, w_{0} \left(t\right)+\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{5}w_{j} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{j} }$

$+\sum\limits_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{w} }^{*}w^{m} \left(t\right)e^{\left(m, \tau \right)} > {\mathop{ = }\limits^{def} \left(z_{0} \left(t\right), w_{0} \left(t\right)\right)+\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{5}\left(z_{j} \left(t\right), w_{j} \left(t\right)\right)+ } {\sum\limits_{2\le \left|m\right|\le \min \left(N_{z} , N_{w} \right)}^{*}\left(z^{m} \left(t\right), w^{m} \left(t\right)\right), }$

where we denote by $\left(*, *\right)$ the ordinary scalar product in a complex space ${{\mathbb{ C}}}^{2}.$ We prove the following statement.

Theorem 1. Let conditions 1) and 2) are satisfied and the right-hand side $H\left(t, \tau \right) = H_{0} \left(t\right)+\sum_{j = 1}^{5} H_{j} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{j} } +\sum_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{H} }^{*} H^{m} \left(t\right)e^{\left(m, \tau \right)}$ of the system (3.2) belongs to the space $U.$ Then for the solvability of the system (3.2) in $U$ it is necessary and sufficient that the identities

$\begin{align} < H\left(t, \tau \right), \chi _{k} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{k} } > \equiv 0, k = 1, 2, \forall t\in \left[t_{0} , T\right], \end{align}$

(3.3)

are fulfilled.

Proof. We will determine the solution to the system (3.2) in the form of an element (2.4) of the space $U$ :

$\begin{align} z\left(t, \tau \right) = z_{0} \left(t\right)+\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{5}z_{j} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{j} } +\sum\limits_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{H} }^{*}z^{m} \left(t\right)e^{\left(m, \tau \right)} . \end{align}$

(3.4)

Substituting (3.4) into the system (3.2), we have

${\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{5}\left[\lambda _{j} \left(t\right)I-A\left(t\right)\right]z_{j} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{j} } +\sum\limits_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{H} }^{*}\left[\left(m, \lambda \left(t\right)\right)I-A\left(t\right)\right]z^{m} \left(t\right)e^{\left(m, \tau \right)} }$

${-A\left(t\right)z_{0}\left(t\right)-e^{\tau _{5} } \int _{t_{0} }^{t}K\left(t, s\right)z_{5} \left(s\right)ds = } {H_{0} \left(t\right)+\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{5}H_{j} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{j} } +\sum\limits_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{H} }^{*}H^{m} \left(t\right)e^{\left(m, \tau \right)} .}$

Equating here separately the free terms and coefficients at the same exponents, we obtain the following systems of equations:

$\begin{align} -A\left(t\right)z_{0} \left(t\right) = H_{0} \left(t\right), \end{align}$

(

${3.5_0}$ )

$\begin{align} \left[\lambda _{j} \left(t\right)I-A\left(t\right)\right]z_{j} \left(t\right) = H_{j} \left(t\right), j = \overline{1, 4}, \end{align}$

(

${3.5_j}$ )

$\begin{align} \left[\lambda _{5} \left(t\right)I-A\left(t\right)\right]z_{5} \left(t\right)-\int _{t_{0} }^{t} K\left(t, s\right)z_{5} \left(s\right)ds = H_{5} \left(t\right), \end{align}$

(

${3.5_5}$ )

$\begin{align} \left[\left(m, \lambda \left(t\right)\right)I-A\left(t\right)\right]z^{m} \left(t\right) = H^{m} \left(t\right), \, \, 2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{z} , \, \, m\notin \bigcup _{j = 0}^{5}\Gamma _{j} . \end{align}$

(

${3.5_m}$ )

Due to the invertibility of the matrix $A\left(t\right)$ , the system ( $3.5_{0}$ ) has the solution $-A^{-1} \left(t\right)H_{0} \left(t\right)$ . Since $\lambda _{5} \left(t\right) = \mu \left(t\right)$ is a real function, and the eigenvalues of the matrix $A\left(t\right)$ are purely imaginary, the matrix $\lambda _{5} \left(t\right)I-A\left(t\right)$ is invertible and therefore the system ( $3.5_{5}$ ) can be written as

$\begin{align} z_{5} \left(t\right) = \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \left(\left[\lambda _{5} \left(t\right)I-A\left(t\right)\right]^{-1} K\left(t, s\right)\right)z_{5} \left(s\right)ds+\left[\lambda _{5} \left(t\right)I-A\left(t\right)\right]^{-1} H_{5} \left(t\right). \end{align}$

(3.6)

Due to the smoothness of the kernel $\left(\left[\lambda _{5} \left(t\right)I-A\left(t\right)\right]^{-1} K\left(t, s\right)\right)$ and the heterogeneity $\left[\lambda _{5} \left(t\right)I-A\left(t\right)\right]^{-1} H_{5} \left(t\right)$ , this Volterra integral system has a unique solution $z_{5} \left(t\right)\in C^{\infty } \left(\left[t_{0}, T\right], {\rm {\mathbb C}}^{2} \right).$ Systems $(3.5_{3})$ and $(3.5_{4})$ also have unique solutions

$\begin{align} z_{j} \left(t\right) = \left[\lambda _{j} \left(t\right)I-A\left(t\right)\right]^{-1} H_{j} \left(t\right)\in C^{\infty } \left(\left[t_{0} , T\right], {\mathbb C}^{2} \right), j = 3, 4, \end{align}$

(3.7)

since $\lambda _{3} \left(t\right), \, \lambda _{4} \left(t\right)$ do not belong to the spectrum of the matrix $A\left(t\right).$ Systems $\left(3.5_{1} \right)$ and $\left(3.5_{2} \right)$ are solvable in the space $C^{\infty } \left(\left[t_{0}, T\right], {\rm { \mathbb{{C}}}}^{2} \right)$ if and only if the identities $\left(H_{j} \left(t\right), \chi _{j} \left(t\right)\right)\equiv 0\, \, \, \forall t\in \left[t_{0}, T\right], j = 1, 2$ hold.

It is easy to see that these identities coincide with the identities (3.3).

Further, since multi-indices $m\notin \bigcup _{j = 0}^{5}\Gamma _{j}$ in systems $(3.5_{m})$ , then these systems are uniquely solvable in the space $C^{\infty } \left(\left[t_{0}, T\right], {\rm {\mathbb C}}^{2} \right)$ in the form of functions

$\begin{align} z^{m} \left(t\right) = \left[\left(m, \lambda \left(t\right)\right)I-A\left(t\right)\right]^{-1} H^{m} \left(t\right), \, 0\le \left|m\right|\le N_{H} . \end{align}$

(3.8)

Thus, condition (3.3) is necessary and sufficient for the solvability of the system (3.2) in the space $U.$ The theorem 1 is proved.

Remark 1. If identity (3.3) holds, then under conditions 1) and 2) the system (3.2) has (see (3.6) – (3.8)) the following solution in the space $U:$

$z\left( t, \tau \right) = {{z}_{0}}\left( t \right)+\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{5}{{{z}_{j}}}\left( t \right){{e}^{{{\tau }_{j}}}}+\sum\limits_{2\le \left| m \right|\le {{N}_{H}}}^{*}{{{z}^{m}}}\left( t \right){{e}^{\left( m, \tau \right)}}\equiv {{z}_{0}}\left( t \right)+\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{2}{{{\alpha }_{k}}}\left( t \right){{\varphi }_{k}}\left( t \right){{e}^{{{\tau }_{k}}}}$

$\begin{align} +{{h}_{12}}\left( t \right){{\varphi }_{2}}\left( t \right){{e}^{{{\tau }_{1}}}}+ +{{h}_{21}}\left( t \right){{\varphi }_{1}}\left( t \right){{e}^{{{\tau }_{2}}}}+{{z}_{5}}\left( t \right){{e}^{{{\tau }_{5}}}}+\sum\limits_{j = 3}^{4}{{{P}_{j}}}\left( t \right){{e}^{{{\tau }_{j}}}}+\sum\limits_{2\le \left| m \right|\le {{N}_{H}}}^{*}{{{P}^{m}}}\left( t \right){{e}^{\left( m, \tau \right)}}, \end{align}$

(3.9)

where $\alpha _{k} \left(t\right)\in C^{\infty } \left(\left[t_{0}, T\right], {\mathbb C}^{1} \right)$ are arbitrary functions, $k = 1, 2, \, \, z_{0} \left(t\right) = -A^{-1} H_{0} (t), \, \, \, z_{5} \left(t\right)$ is the solution of the integral system (3.6) and the notations are introduced:

$h_{12} \left(t\right)\equiv \frac{\left(H_{1} \left(t\right), \chi _{2} \left(t\right)\right)}{\lambda _{1} \left(t\right)-\lambda _{2} \left(t\right)} , h_{21} \left(t\right)\equiv \frac{\left(H_{2} \left(t\right), \chi _{1} \left(t\right)\right)}{\lambda _{2} \left(t\right)-\lambda _{1} \left(t\right)} , P_{j} \left(t\right)\equiv \left[\lambda _{j} \left(t\right)I-A\left(t\right)\right]^{-1} H_{j} \left(t\right), \,$

$P^{m} \left(t\right)\equiv \left[\left(m, \lambda \left(t\right)\right)I-A\left(t\right)\right]^{-1} H^{m} \left(t\right).$

4. Unique solvability of the general iterative problem in the space $U$ . The remainder term theorem

We proceed to the description of the conditions for the unique solvability of the system (3.2) in the space $U.$ Along with the problem (3.2), we consider the system

$\begin{align} L w\left(t, \tau \right) = -\frac{\partial z}{\partial t} +\frac{g\left(t\right)}{2} \left(e^{\tau _{3} } \sigma _{1} +e^{\tau _{4} } \sigma _{2} \right)B\left(t\right)z+R_{1} z+Q\left(t, \tau \right), \end{align}$

(4.1)

where $z = z\left(t, \tau \right)$ is the solution (3.9) of the system (3.2), $Q\left(t, \tau \right)\in U$ is the known function of the space $U$ . The right-hand side of this system:

$G\left(t, \tau \right)\equiv -\frac{\partial z}{\partial t} +\frac{g\left(t\right)}{2} \left(e^{\tau _{3} } \sigma _{1} +e^{\tau _{4} } \sigma _{2} \right)B\left(t\right)z+R_{1} z+Q\left(t, \tau \right)$

$= -\frac{\partial }{\partial t} [z_{0} \left(t\right)+\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{5} z_{j} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{j} } +\sum\limits_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{H} }^{*} z^{m} \left(t\right)e^{\left(m, \tau \right)} ]$

${+\frac{g\left(t\right)}{2} \left(e^{\tau _{3} } \sigma _{1} +e^{\tau _{4} } \sigma _{2} \right)B\left(t\right)\left[z_{0} \left(t\right)+\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{5} z_{j} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{j} } +\sum\limits_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{H} }^{*} z^{m} \left(t\right)e^{\left(m, \tau \right)} \right]+}{R_{1} z+Q\left(t, \tau \right)},$

may not belong to the space $U,$ if $z = z\left(t, \tau \right)\in U.$ Since $-\frac{\partial z}{\partial t}, \, R_{1} z, Q\left(t, \tau \right)\in U,$ then this fact needs to be checked for the function

$Z\left(t, \tau \right)\equiv \frac{g\left(t\right)}{2} \left(e^{\tau _{3} } \sigma _{1} +e^{\tau _{4} } \sigma _{2} \right)B\left(t\right)[z_{0} \left(t\right)+\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{5} z_{j} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{j} }$

$+\sum\limits_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{H} }^{*} z^{m} \left(t\right)e^{\left(m, \tau \right)} ] = \frac{g\left(t\right)}{2} B\left(t\right)z_{0} \left(t\right)\left(e^{\tau _{3} } \sigma _{1} +e^{\tau _{4} } \sigma _{2} \right)$

$+\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{5} \frac{g\left(t\right)}{2} B\left(t\right)z_{j} \left(t\right)\left(e^{\tau _{j} +\tau _{3} } \sigma _{1} +e^{\tau _{j} +\tau _{4} } \sigma _{2} \right)+\frac{g\left(t\right)}{2} \left(e^{\tau _{3} } \sigma _{1} +e^{\tau _{4} } \sigma _{2} \right)B\left(t\right)\sum\limits_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{H} }^{*} z^{m} \left(t\right)e^{\left(m, \tau \right)} .$

Function $Z\left(t, \tau \right)\notin U,$ since it has resonant exponents

${e^{\tau _{3} +\tau _{4} } = e^{\left(m, \tau \right)} |_{m = \left(0, 0, 1, 1, 0\right)} , e^{\tau _{3} +\left(m, \tau \right)} \left( m_{3} +1 = m_{4} , m_{1} = m_{2} = m_{5} = 0\right), }$

${e^{\tau _{4} +\left(m, \tau \right)} \left( m_{4} +1 = m_{3} , m_{1} = m_{2} = m_{5} = 0\right), }$

therefore, the right-hand side $G\left(t, \tau \right) = Z\left(t, \tau \right)-\frac{\partial z}{\partial t} +R_{1} z+Q\left(t, \tau \right)$ of the system (19) also does not belong to the space $U.$ Then, according to the well-known theory (see ^[18], p. 234), it is necessary to embed $\wedge :\, G\left(t, \tau \right)\to \hat{G}\left(t, \tau \right)$ the right-hand side $G\left(t, \tau \right)$ of the system (4.1) in the space $U$ . This operation is defined as follows.

Let the function $G\left(t, \tau \right) = \sum_{\left|m\right| = 0}^{N}w^{m} \left(t\right)e^{\left(m, \tau \right)}$ contain resonant exponentials, i.e. $G\left(t, \tau \right)$ has the form

$G\left(t, \tau \right) = w_{0} \left(t\right)+\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{5}w_{j} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{j}}+\sum\limits_{j = 0}^{5}\sum\limits_{\left|m^{j} \right| = 2:\, m^{j} \in \Gamma _{j} }^{N}w^{m^{j} } \left(t\right)e^{\left(m^{j} , \tau \right)} +\sum\limits_{\left|m\right| = 2, m\ne m^{j} , j = \overline{0, 5}}^{N}w^{m} \left(t\right)e^{\left(m, \tau \right)}.$

Then

$\hat{G}\left(t, \tau \right) = w_{0} \left(t\right)+\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{5}w_{j} \left(t\right)e^{\tau_{j}}+\sum\limits_{j = 0}^{5}\sum\limits_{\left|m^{j} \right| = 2:\, m^{j} \in \Gamma _{j} }^{N}w^{m^{j} } \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{j} } +\sum\limits_{\left|m\right| = 2, m\ne m^{j} , j = \overline{0, 5}}^{N}w^{m} \left(t\right)e^{\left(m, \tau \right)}.$

Therefore, the embedding operation acts only on the resonant exponentials and replaces them with a unit or exponents $e^{\tau _{j} }$ of the first dimension according to the rule:

$\left(e^{\left(m, \tau \right)} |_{m\in \Gamma _{0} } \right)^{\wedge } = e^{0} = 1, \, \, \left(e^{\left(m, \tau \right)} |_{m\in \Gamma _{j} } \right)^{\wedge } = e^{\tau _{j} } , \, \, j = \overline{1, 5}.$

We now turn to the proof of the following statement.

Theorem 2. Suppose that conditions 1) and 2) are satisfied and the right-hand side $H\left(t, \tau \right) = H_{0} \left(t\right)+\sum_{j = 1}^{5} H_{j} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{j} } +\sum_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{H} }^{*} H^{m} \left(t\right)e^{\left(m, \tau \right)} \in U$ of the system (3.2) satisfies condition (3.3). Then the problem (3.2) under additional conditions

$\begin{align} < \widehat{G}\left(t, \tau \right), \chi _{k} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{k} } > \equiv 0 \forall t\in \left[t_{0} , T\right], k = 1, 2, \end{align}$

(4.2)

where $Q\left(t, \tau \right) = Q_{0} \left(t\right)+\sum_{k = 1}^{5} Q_{k} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{k} } +\sum_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{Q} }^{*} Q^{m} \left(t\right)e^{\left(m, \tau \right)}$ is the well-known vector function of the space $U,$ is uniquely solvable in $U.$

Proof. Since the right-hand side of the system (3.2) satisfies condition (3.3), this system has a solution in the space $U$ in the form (3.9), where $\alpha _{k} \left(t\right)\in C^{\infty } \left(\left[t_{0}, T\right], {\mathbb C} ^{1} \right),$ $k = 1, 2$ are arbitrary functions so far. Subordinate (3.9) to the initial condition $z\left(t_{0}, 0\right) = z^{*}.$ We obtain $\sum_{k = 1}^{2} \alpha _{k} \left(t_{0} \right)\varphi _{k} \left(t_{0} \right) = z_{*},$ where is indicated

$z_{*} = z^{*} +A^{-1} \left(t_{0} \right)H_{0} \left(t_{0} \right)-\left[\lambda _{5} \left(t_{0} \right)I-A\left(t_{0} \right)\right]^{-1} H_{5} \left(t_{0} \right)-\sum\limits_{j = 3}^{4} \left[\lambda _{j} \left(t_{0} \right)I-A\left(t_{0} \right)\right]^{-1} H_{j} \left(t_{0} \right)$

$-\frac{\left(H{_{1} } \left(t_{0} \right), \chi _{2} \left(t_{0} \right)\right)}{\lambda _{1} \left(t_{0} \right)-\lambda _{2} \left(t_{0} \right)} \varphi _{2} \left(t_{0} \right)-\frac{\left(H{_{2} } \left(t_{0} \right), \chi _{1} \left(t_{0} \right)\right)}{\lambda _{2} \left(t_{0} \right)-\lambda _{1} \left(t_{0} \right)} \varphi _{1} \left(t_{0} \right)-\sum\limits_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{H} }^{*} P^{m} \left(t_{0} \right).$

Multiplying scalarly the equality $\sum_{k = 1}^{2} \alpha _{k} \left(t_{0} \right)\varphi _{k} \left(t_{0} \right) = z_{*}$ by $\chi _{j} \left(t_{0} \right)$ and taking into account the biorthogonality of the systems $\left\{\varphi _{k} \left(t\right)\right\}$ and $\left\{\chi _{j} \left(t\right)\right\},$ we find the values $\alpha _{k} \left(t_{0} \right) = \left(z_{*}, \chi _{k} \left(t_{0} \right)\right), k = 1, 2.$ Now we subordinate the solution (3.9) to the orthogonality condition (4.2). We write in more detail the right-hand side $G\left(t, \tau \right)$ of the system (4.1):

$G\left(t, \tau \right)\equiv -\frac{\partial }{\partial t} [z_{0} \left(t\right)+\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{2} \alpha _{k} \left(t\right)\varphi _{k} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{k} } +h_{12} \left(t\right)\varphi _{2} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{1} }$

$+h_{21} \left(t\right)\varphi _{1} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{2} } +z_{5} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{5} } +\sum\limits_{j = 3}^{4} P_{j} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{j} } +\sum\limits_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{H} }^{*} P^{m} \left(t\right)e^{\left(m, \tau \right)} ]$

$+\frac{g\left(t\right)}{2} \left(e^{\tau _{3} } \sigma _{1} +e^{\tau _{4} } \sigma _{2} \right)B\left(t\right)[z_{0} \left(t\right)+\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{2} \alpha _{k} \left(t\right)\varphi _{k} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{k} } +h_{12} \left(t\right)\varphi _{2} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{1} }$

$+R_{1} [z_{0} \left(t\right)+\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{2} \alpha _{k} \left(t\right)\varphi _{k} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{k} } +h_{12} \left(t\right)\varphi _{2} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{1} } +h_{21} \left(t\right)\varphi _{1} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{2} }$

$+z_{5} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{5} } +\sum\limits_{j = 3}^{4} P_{j} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{j} } +\sum\limits_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{H} }^{*} P^{m} \left(t\right)e^{\left(m, \tau \right)} ]+Q\left(t, \tau \right).$

Putting this function into the space $U,$ we will have

${\hat{G}\left(t, \tau \right)\equiv -\frac{\partial }{\partial t} [z_{0} \left(t\right)+\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{2} \alpha _{k} \left(t\right)\varphi _{k} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{k} } +h_{12} \left(t\right)\varphi _{2} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{1} } }$

${+\{ \frac{g\left(t\right)}{2} \left(e^{\tau _{3} } \sigma _{1} +e^{\tau _{4} } \sigma _{2} \right)B\left(t\right)(z_{0} \left(t\right)+\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{2} \alpha _{k} \left(t\right)\varphi _{k} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{k} } +h_{12} \left(t\right)\varphi _{2} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{1} } }$

${+R_{1} [z_{0} \left(t\right)+\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{2} \alpha _{k} \left(t\right)\varphi _{k} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{k} } +h_{12} \left(t\right)\varphi _{2} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{1} } +h_{21} \left(t\right)\varphi _{1} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{2} } }$

$= -\frac{\partial }{\partial t}[{{z}_{0}}\left( t \right)+\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{2}{}{{\alpha }_{k}}\left( t \right){{\varphi }_{k}}\left( t \right){{e}^{{{\tau }_{k}}}}+{{h}_{12}}\left( t \right){{\varphi }_{2}}\left( t \right){{e}^{{{\tau }_{1}}}}+{{h}_{21}}\left( t \right){{\varphi }_{1}}\left( t \right){{e}^{{{\tau }_{2}}}}$

$+{{z}_{5}}\left( t \right){{e}^{{{\tau }_{5}}}}+\sum\limits_{j = 3}^{4}{}{{P}_{j}}\left( t \right){{e}^{{{\tau }_{j}}}}+\sum\limits_{2\le \left| m \right|\le {{N}_{H}}}^{*}{}{{P}^{m}}\left( t \right){{e}^{\left( m, \tau \right)}}] ~~~\left(** \right)$

$+\{\frac{1}{2}g\left( t \right)B\left( t \right)({{e}^{{{\tau }_{3}}}}{{\sigma }_{1}}{{z}_{0}}\left( t \right)+{{{e}^{{{\tau }_{3}}+{{\tau }_{1}}}}{{\sigma }_{1}}{{\alpha }_{1}}\left( t \right){{\varphi }_{1}}\left( t \right)}+{{{e}^{{{\tau }_{3}}+{{\tau }_{2}}}}{{\sigma }_{1}}{{\alpha }_{2}}\left( t \right){{\varphi }_{2}}\left( t \right)}$

$+{{e}^{{{\tau }_{3}}+{{\tau }_{1}}}}{{\sigma }_{1}}{{h}_{12}}\left( t \right){{\varphi }_{2}}\left( t \right)+{{e}^{{{\tau }_{3}}+{{\tau }_{2}}}}{{\sigma }_{1}}{{h}_{21}}\left( t \right){{\varphi }_{1}}\left( t \right)+{{e}^{{{\tau }_{3}}+{{\tau }_{5}}}}{{\sigma }_{1}}{{z}_{5}}\left( t \right)$

$+{{e}^{2{{\tau }_{3}}}}{{\sigma }_{1}}{{P}_{3}}\left( t \right)+{{e}^{{{\tau }_{3}}+{{\tau }_{4}}}}{{\sigma }_{1}}{{P}_{4}}\left( t \right)+{{e}^{{{\tau }_{4}}}}{{\sigma }_{2}}{{z}_{0}}\left( t \right)+{{{e}^{{{\tau }_{4}}+{{\tau }_{1}}}}{{\sigma }_{2}}{{\alpha }_{1}}\left( t \right){{\varphi }_{1}}\left( t \right)}$

$+{{{e}^{{{\tau }_{4}}+{{\tau }_{2}}}}{{\sigma }_{2}}{{\alpha }_{2}}\left( t \right){{\varphi }_{2}}\left( t \right)}+{{e}^{{{\tau }_{4}}+{{\tau }_{1}}}}{{\sigma }_{2}}{{h}_{12}}\left( t \right){{\varphi }_{2}}\left( t \right)+{{e}^{{{\tau }_{4}}+{{\tau }_{2}}}}{{\sigma }_{2}}{{h}_{21}}\left( t \right){{\varphi }_{1}}\left( t \right)$

$+{{e}^{{{\tau }_{4}}+{{\tau }_{5}}}}{{\sigma }_{2}}{{z}_{5}}\left( t \right)+{{e}^{{{\tau }_{3}}+{{\tau }_{4}}}}{{\sigma }_{2}}{{P}_{3}}\left( t \right)+{{e}^{2{{\tau }_{4}}}}{{\sigma }_{2}}{{P}_{4}}\left( t \right)$

$+\frac{1}{2}g\left( t \right)B\left( t \right)\sum\limits_{2\le \left| m \right|\le {{N}_{H}}}^{*}{P^{m}{{\left( t \right)}}\left( {{e}^{m\tau +{{\tau }_{3}}}}{{\sigma }_{1}}+{{e}^{m\tau +{{\tau }_{4}}}}{{\sigma }_{2}} \right)}{{\}}^{\wedge }}$

$+{{R}_{1}}[{{z}_{0}}\left( t \right)+\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{2}{}{{\alpha }_{k}}\left( t \right){{\varphi }_{k}}\left( t \right){{e}^{{{\tau }_{k}}}}+{{h}_{12}}\left( t \right){{\varphi }_{2}}\left( t \right){{e}^{{{\tau }_{1}}}}+{{h}_{21}}\left( t \right){{\varphi }_{1}}\left( t \right){{e}^{{{\tau }_{2}}}}$

$+{{z}_{5}}\left( t \right){{e}^{{{\tau }_{5}}}}+\sum\limits_{i = 3}^{4}{}{{P}_{i}}\left( t \right){{e}^{{{\tau }_{i}}}}+\sum\limits_{2\le \left| m \right|\le {{N}_{H}}}^{*}{}{{P}^{m}}\left( t \right){{e}^{\left( m, \tau \right)}}]+Q\left( t, \tau \right).$

Given that the expression ${{R}_{1}}\left({{z}_{0}}\left(t, \tau \right) \right)$ linearly depends on $\alpha _{1} \left(t\right)$ and $\alpha _{2} \left(t\right)$ (see the formula $({{2}.{5_1}})):$

${R_1\left(z_{0} \left(t, \tau \right)\right)\equiv R_{1} [z_{0} \left(t\right)+\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{2}\alpha _{k} \left(t\right)\varphi _{k} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{k} } +} {h_{12} \left(t\right)\varphi _{2} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{1} } +h_{21} \left(t\right)\varphi _{1} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{2} } }$

${+z_{5} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{5} } +\sum\limits_{j = 3}^{4}P_{j} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{j} } +\sum\limits_{2\le \left|m\right|\le N_{H} }^{*}P^{m} \left(t\right)e^{\left(m, \tau \right)} ]\equiv } {\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{2}F_{j} \left(\alpha _{1} \left(t\right), \alpha _{2} \left(t\right), t\right) e^{\tau _{j} } +\tilde{R}_{1} \left(z_{0} \left(t, \tau \right)\right)},$

(here ${{F}_{j}}\left({{\alpha }_{1}}\left(t \right), {{\alpha }_{2}}\left(t \right), t \right)$ are linear functions of ${{\alpha }_{1}}\left(t \right), {{\alpha }_{2}}\left(t \right),$ and the expression ${{\tilde{R}}_{1}}\left({{z}_{0}}\left(t, \tau \right) \right)$ does not contain linear terms of ${{\alpha }_{1}}\left(t \right), {{\alpha }_{2}}\left(t \right)$ ), we conclude that, after the embedding operation, the function $\hat{G}\left(t, \tau \right)$ will linearly depend on scalar functions $\alpha _{1} \left(t\right)$ and $\alpha _{2} \left(t\right).$

Taking into account that under conditions (4.2), scalar multiplication by vector functions $\chi _{k} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{k} },$ containing only exponentials $e^{\tau _{k} },$ $k = 1, 2,$ it is necessary to keep in the expression $\widehat{G}\left(t, \tau \right)$ only terms with exponents $e^{\tau _{1} }$ and $e^{\tau _{2} }.$ Then it follows from (**) that conditions (4.2) are written in the form

$< -\frac{\partial }{\partial t} \left(\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{2} \alpha _{k} \left(t\right)\varphi _{k} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{k} } +h_{12} \left(t\right)\varphi _{2} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{1} } +h_{21} \left(t\right)\varphi _{1} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{2} } \right)$

$\begin{array}{l} {+\left(F_{1} \left(\alpha _{1} \left(t\right), \alpha _{2} \left(t\right), t\right)+\sum_{\left|m^{1} \right| = 2:{\kern 1pt} m^{1} \in \Gamma _{1} }^{N}w^{m^{1} } \left(\alpha _{1} \left(t\right), \alpha _{2} \left(t\right), t\right)\right)e^{\tau _{1} } } \\ {+\left(F_{2} \left(\alpha _{1} \left(t\right), \alpha _{2} \left(t\right), t\right)\sum_{\left|m^{2} \right| = 2:{\kern 1pt} m^{2} \in \Gamma _{2} }^{N}w^{m^{2} } \left(\alpha _{1} \left(t\right), \alpha _{2} \left(t\right), t\right)\right)e^{\tau _{2} } } \end{array}$

$+Q_{1} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{1} } +Q_{2} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{2} } , \chi _{k} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{k} } > \equiv 0, \forall t\in \left[t_{0} , T\right], k = 1, 2,$

where the functions $w^{m^{j} } \left(\alpha _{1} \left(t\right), \alpha _{2} \left(t\right), t\right), j = 1, 2,$ depend on $\alpha _{1} \left(t\right)$ and $\alpha _{2} \left(t\right)$ in a linear way. Performing scalar multiplication here, we obtain linear ordinary differential equations with respect to the functions $\alpha _{k} \left(t\right), \, k = 1, 2,$ involved in the solution (3.9) of the system (3.2). Attaching the initial conditions $\alpha _{k} \left(t_{0} \right) = \left(z_{*}, \chi _{k} \left(t_{0} \right)\right),$ $k = 1, 2,$ calculated earlier to them, we find uniquely functions $\alpha _{k} \left(t\right),$ and, therefore, construct a solution (3.9) to the problem (3.2) in the space $U$ in a unique way. The theorem 2 is proved.

As mentioned above, the right-hand sides of iterative problems $\left(3.1_{k} \right)$ (if them solve sequentially) may not belong to the space $U.$ Then, according to ^[18] (p. 234), the right-hand sides of these problems must be embedded into the $U,$ according to the above rule. As a result, we obtain the following problems:

$\begin{align} Lz_{0} \left(t, \tau \right)\equiv \sum\limits_{j = 1}^{5} \lambda _{j} \left(t\right)\frac{\partial z_{0} }{\partial \tau _{j} } -A(t)z_{0} -R_{0} z_{0} = h\left(t\right), \, \, \, \, \, z_{0} \left(t_{0} , 0\right) = z^{0} ; \end{align}$

(

${{{\overline {3.1} }_0}}$ )

$\begin{align} Lz_{1} \left(t, \tau \right) = -\frac{\partial z_{0} }{\partial t} +\left[\frac{g(t)}{2} \left(e^{\tau _{3} } \sigma _{1} +e^{\tau _{4} } \sigma _{2} \right)B\left(t\right)z_{0} \right]^{\wedge } +R_{1} z_{0}, \, \, \, \, \, z_{1} \left(t_{0} , 0\right) = 0; \end{align}$

(

${{{\overline {3.1} }_1}}$ )

$\begin{align} \begin{array}{l} {Lz_{2} \left(t, \tau \right) = -\frac{\partial z_{1} }{\partial t} +\left[\frac{g(t)}{2} \left(e^{\tau _{3} } \sigma _{1} +e^{\tau _{4} } \sigma _{2} \right)B\left(t\right)z_{1} \right]^{\wedge } +R_{1} z_{1}+}{R_{2} z_{0} , z_{2} \left(t_{0} , 0\right) = 0;} \end{array} \end{align}$

(

${{{\overline {3.1} }_2}}$ )

$\cdots$

$\begin{align} \begin{array}{l} {L z_{k} \left(t, \tau \right) = -\frac{\partial z_{k-1} }{\partial t} +\left[\frac{g(t)}{2} \left(e^{\tau _{3} } \sigma _{1} +e^{\tau _{4} } \sigma _{2} \right)B\left(t\right)z_{k-1} \right]^{\wedge }+ } {R_{k} z_{0} +...+R_{1} z_{k-1}, \, z_{k} \left(t_{0} , 0\right) = 0, \, k\ge 1}, \end{array} \end{align}$

(

${{{\overline {3.1} }_k}}$ )

(images of linear operators $\frac{\partial }{\partial t}$ and $R_{\nu }$ do not need to be embedded in the space $U,$ since these operators act from $U$ to $U$ ). Such a replacement will not affect the construction of an asymptotic solution to the original problem (1.1) (or its equivalent problem (2.1)), so on the narrowing $\tau = \frac{\psi \left(t\right)}{\varepsilon }$ the series of problems $\left(3.1_{k} \right)$ will coincide with the series of problems $\left(\overline{3.1}_{k} \right)$ (see ^[18], pp. 234–235].

Applying Theorems 1 and 2 to iterative problems $\left(\overline{3.1}_{k} \right)$ , we find their solutions uniquely in the space $U$ and construct series (2.6). As in ^[18] (pp. 63-69), we prove the following statement.

Theorem 3. Let conditions 1)–2) be satisfied for the system (2.1). Then, for $\varepsilon \in (0, \varepsilon _{0}](\varepsilon _{0} > 0$ is sufficiently small) system (2.1) has a unique solution $z(t, \varepsilon)\in {\rm C}^{1} ([t_0, T], \mathbb{C}^{2})\, ;$ at the same time there is the estimate

$||z(t, \varepsilon )-z_{\varepsilon N} (t)||_{C[t_0, T]} \le c_{N} \varepsilon ^{N+1} , \, N = 0, 1, 2, ...,$

where $z_{\varepsilon N} (t)$ is the restriction on $\tau = \frac{\psi (t)}{\varepsilon }$ of the $N$ -th partial sum of the series (2.6) (with coefficients $z_{k} \left(t, \tau \right)\in U,$ satisfying the iterative problems $(\overline{3.1}_{k})$ ) and the constant $c_{N} > 0$ does not depend on $\varepsilon$ at $\varepsilon \in (0, \varepsilon _{0}]$ .

5. Construction of a solution of the first iterative problem

Using Theorem 1, we try to find a solution to the first iterative problem $\left(\overline{3.1}_{0} \right).$ Since the right-hand side $h\left(t\right)$ of the system $\left(\overline{3.1}_{0} \right)$ satisfies condition (3.3), this system (according to (3.9)) has a solution in the space $U$ in the form

$\begin{align} z_{0} \left(t, \tau \right) = z_{0}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)+\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{2} \alpha _{k}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)\varphi _{k} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{k} } , \end{align}$

(5.1)

where $\alpha _{k}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)\in C^{\infty } \left(\left[t_{0}, T\right], {\mathbb C}^{1} \right)$ are arbitrary functions, $k = 1, 2, \, \, z_{0}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right) = -A^{-1} \left(t\right)h\left(t\right).$ Subordinating (4.2) to the initial condition $z_{0} \left(t_{0}, 0\right) = z^{0},$ we have

$\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{2} \alpha _{k}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t_{0} \right)\varphi _{k} \left(t_{0} \right) = z^{0} +A^{-1} \left(t_{0} \right)h\left(t_{0} \right).$

Multiplying this equality scalarly $\chi _{j} \left(t_{0} \right)$ and taking into account biorthogonality property of the systems $\left\{\varphi _{k} \left(t\right)\right\}$ and $\left\{\chi _{j} \left(t\right)\right\},$ find the values

$\begin{align} \alpha _{k}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t_{0} \right) = \left(z^{0} +A^{-1} \left(t_{0} \right)h\left(t_{0} \right), \chi _{k} \left(t_{0} \right)\right), k = 1, 2. \end{align}$

(5.2)

For a complete calculation of the functions $\alpha _{k}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)$ , we proceed to the next iterative problem $\left(\overline{3.1}_{1} \right).$ Substituting the solution (5.1) of the system $\left(\overline{3.1}_{0} \right)$ into it, we arrive at the following system:

${L z_{1} \left(t, \tau \right) = -\frac{d}{dt} z_{0}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)-\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{2} \frac{d}{dt} (\alpha _{k}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)\varphi _{k} \left(t\right))e^{\tau _{k} } +}{\frac{K\left(t, t\right)z_{0}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)}{\lambda _{5} \left(t\right)} e^{\tau _{5} } -\frac{K\left(t, t_{0} \right)z_{0}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t_{0} \right)}{\lambda _{5} \left(t_{0} \right)} }$

$\begin{align} +\left[\frac{g(t)}{2} \left(e^{\tau _{3} } \sigma _{1} +e^{\tau _{4} } \sigma _{2} \right)B\left(t\right)\left(z_{0}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)+\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{2} \alpha _{k}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)\varphi _{k} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{k} } \right)\right]^{\wedge } \end{align}$

(5.3)

$+\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{2} \left[\frac{\left(K\left(t, t\right)\alpha _{j}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)\varphi _{j} \left(t\right)\right)}{\lambda _{j} \left(t\right)} e^{\tau _{j} } -\frac{\left(K\left(t, t_{0} \right)\alpha _{j}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t_{0} \right)\varphi _{j} \left(t_{0} \right)\right)}{\lambda _{j} \left(t_{0} \right)} \right],$

(here we used the expression $\left(2.5_{1} \right)$ for $R_{1} z\left(t, \tau \right)$ and took into account that when $z\left(t, \tau \right) = z_{0} \left(t, \tau \right)$ in the sum $\left(2.5_{1} \right)$ only terms with $e^{\tau _{1} },$ $e^{\tau _{2} }$ and $e^{\tau _{5} }$ remain). We calculate

$M = {{\left[ \frac{g(t)}{2}\left( {{e}^{{{\tau }_{3}}}}{{\sigma }_{1}}+{{e}^{{{\tau }_{4}}}}{{\sigma }_{2}} \right)B\left( t \right)\left( z_{0}^{\left( 0 \right)}\left( t \right)+\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{2}{}\alpha _{k}^{\left( 0 \right)}\left( t \right){{\varphi }_{k}}\left( t \right){{e}^{{{\tau }_{k}}}} \right) \right]}^{\wedge }}$

$= \frac{1}{2}g\left( t \right)B\left( t \right)[\alpha _{1}^{\left( 0 \right)}{{\sigma}_{1}}{\varphi_{1}}\left(t \right){{e}^{{{\tau }_{3}}+{{\tau }_{1}}}}+{{\sigma }_{2}}\alpha_{2}^{\left( 0 \right)}\left( t \right){{\varphi }_{1}}\left( t \right){{e}^{{{\tau }_{4}}+{{\tau }_{1}}}}$

$+{{\sigma }_{1}}\alpha _{2}^{\left( 0 \right)}\left( t \right){{\varphi }_{2}}\left( t \right){{e}^{{{\tau }_{3}}+{{\tau }_{2}}}}+{{\sigma }_{2}}\alpha _{2}^{\left( 0 \right)}\left( t \right){{\varphi }_{2}}\left( t \right){{e}^{{{\tau }_{4}}+{{\tau }_{2}}}}+{{e}^{{{\tau }_{3}}}}{{\sigma }_{1}}{{z}_{0}}\left( t \right)+{{e}^{{{\tau }_{4}}}}{{\sigma }_{2}}{{z}_{0}}\left( t \right)){{]}^{\wedge }}.$

Let us analyze the exponents of the second dimension included here for their resonance:

$\begin{array}{l} {e^{\tau _{3} +\tau _{1} } |_{\tau = \psi \left(t\right)/\varepsilon } = e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \left(-i\beta '-i\omega \right)d\theta } , {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} } \\ {-i\beta '-i\omega = \left[\begin{array}{c} {0, } \\ {-i\omega , } \\ {+i\omega , } \end{array}\right. \Leftrightarrow \emptyset , {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} -i\beta '-i\omega = \left[\begin{array}{c} {-i\beta ', } \\ {\begin{array}{l} {+i\beta ', } \\ {\mu } \end{array}} \end{array}\right. \Leftrightarrow \emptyset ;} \end{array}$

$\begin{array}{l} {\begin{array}{l} {e^{\tau _{4} +\tau _{1} } |_{\tau = \psi \left(t\right)/\varepsilon } = e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \left(+i\beta '-i\omega \right)d\theta } , {\kern 1pt} } \\ {+i\beta '-i\omega = \left[\begin{array}{c} {\left(0\right), } \\ {-i\omega , } \\ {(+i\omega), } \end{array}\right. \Leftrightarrow \left[\begin{array}{c} {\beta ' = \omega , } \\ {\beta ' = 2\omega , } \end{array}\right. {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} } \end{array}} \\ {+i\beta '-i\omega = \left[\begin{array}{c} {\left(-i\beta '\right), } \\ {\begin{array}{l} {+i\beta ', } \\ {\mu , } \end{array}} \end{array}\right. \Leftrightarrow 2\beta ' = \omega \Rightarrow } \\ {\Rightarrow \left[\begin{array}{c} {\widehat{e^{\tau _{4} +\tau _{1} } } = e^{0} = 1{\kern 1pt} \left(\beta ' = \omega \right), } \\ {\begin{array}{l} {\widehat{e^{\tau _{4} +\tau _{1} } } = e^{\tau _{2} } {\kern 1pt} \left(\beta ' = 2\omega \right), } \\ {\widehat{e^{\tau _{4} +\tau _{1} } } = e^{\tau _{3} } \left(2\beta ' = \omega \right);{\kern 1pt} } \end{array}} \end{array}\right. } \end{array}$

$\begin{array}{l} {e^{\tau _{3} +\tau _{2} } |_{\tau = \psi \left(t\right)/\varepsilon } = e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \left(-i\beta '+i\omega \right)d\theta } , {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} } \\ {\begin{array}{l} {-i\beta '+i\omega = \left[\begin{array}{c} {\left(0\right), } \\ {\left(-i\omega \right), } \\ {+i\omega , } \end{array}\right. \Leftrightarrow \left[\begin{array}{c} {\beta ' = \omega , } \\ {\beta ' = 2\omega {\kern 1pt} ;} \end{array}\right. {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} } \\ {-i\beta '+i\omega = \left[\begin{array}{l} {-i\beta ', } \\ {\left(+i\beta '\right), } \\ {\mu , } \end{array}\right. \Leftrightarrow 2\beta ' = \omega } \end{array}} \\ {\Rightarrow \left[\begin{array}{c} {\widehat{e^{\tau _{3} +\tau _{2} } } = e^{0} = 1{\kern 1pt} \left(\beta ' = \omega \right), } \\ {\begin{array}{l} {\widehat{e^{\tau _{3} +\tau _{2} } } = e^{\tau _{1} } {\kern 1pt} \left(\beta ' = 2\omega \right), } \\ {\widehat{e^{\tau _{3} +\tau _{2} } } = e^{\tau _{4} } {\kern 1pt} \left(2\beta ' = \omega \right);} \end{array}} \end{array}\right. } \end{array}$

$\begin{array}{l} {e^{\tau _{4} +\tau _{2} } |_{\tau = \psi \left(t\right)/\varepsilon } = e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t} \left(+i\beta '+i\omega \right)d\theta } , {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} } \\ {+i\beta '+i\omega = \left[\begin{array}{c} {0, } \\ {-i\omega , } \\ {+i\omega , } \end{array}\right. \Leftrightarrow \emptyset , {\kern 1pt} {\kern 1pt} +i\beta '+i\omega = \left[\begin{array}{c} {-i\beta ', } \\ {\begin{array}{l} {+i\beta ', } \\ {\mu , } \end{array}} \end{array}\right. \Leftrightarrow \emptyset }. \end{array}$

Thus, the exponents $e^{\tau _{3} +\tau _{1} }$ and $e^{\tau _{4} +\tau _{2} }$ are not resonant, and the exponents $e^{\tau _{4} +\tau _{1} }$ and $e^{\tau _{3} +\tau _{2} }$ are resonant at certain ratios between frequencies $\beta '\left(t\right)$ , and $\omega \left(t\right),$ moreover, their embeddings are carried out as follows:

$\left[\begin{array}{c} {\widehat{e^{\tau _{4} +\tau _{1} } } = e^{0} = 1\, \left(\beta ' = \omega \right), } \\ {\begin{array}{l} {\widehat{e^{\tau _{4} +\tau _{1} } } = e^{\tau _{2} } \, \left(\beta ' = 2\omega \right), } \\ {\widehat{e^{\tau _{4} +\tau _{1} } } = e^{\tau _{3} } \left(2\beta ' = \omega \right), \, } \end{array}} \end{array}\right. \, \, \left[\begin{array}{c} {\widehat{e^{\tau _{3} +\tau _{2} } } = e^{0} = 1\, \left(\beta ' = \omega \right), } \\ {\begin{array}{l} {\widehat{e^{\tau _{3} +\tau _{2} } } = e^{\tau _{1} } \, \left(\beta ' = 2\omega \right), } \\ {\widehat{e^{\tau _{3} +\tau _{2} } } = e^{\tau _{4} } \, \left(2\beta ' = \omega \right).} \end{array}} \end{array}\right.$

So, resonances are possible only in the following cases of relations between frequencies: a) $\beta ' = 2\omega,$ b) $\beta ' = \omega, \,$ c) $2\beta ' = \omega.$ Case b) is not considered (see condition (1)). We consider cases a) and c).

a) $\beta ' = 2\omega.$ In this case, the system (5.3) after embedding takes the form

$L z_{1} \left(t, \tau \right) = -\frac{d}{dt} z_{0}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)-\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{2} \frac{d}{dt} (\alpha _{k}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)\varphi _{k} \left(t\right))e^{\tau _{k} } +\frac{K\left(t, t\right)z_{0}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)}{\lambda _{5} \left(t\right)} e^{\tau _{5} }$

$-\frac{K\left(t, t_{0} \right)z_{0}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t_{0} \right)}{\lambda _{5} \left(t_{0} \right)} +\frac{1}{2} g\left(t\right)B\left(t\right)[\sigma_{1} \alpha_{1}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)\varphi_{1} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{3} +\tau _{1} } +\sigma _{2} \alpha_{1}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)\varphi _{1} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{2} }$

$+\sigma _{1} \alpha _{2}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)\varphi _{2} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{1} } +\sigma _{2} \alpha _{2}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)\varphi _{2} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{4} +\tau _{2} } +e^{\tau _{3} } \sigma _{1} z_{0} \left(t\right)+e^{\tau _{4} } \sigma _{2} z_{0} \left(t\right))]$

This system is solvable in the space $U$ if and only if the conditions of orthogonality are satisfied:

${\langle -\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{2} \frac{d}{dt} (\alpha _{k}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)\varphi _{k} \left(t\right))e^{\tau _{k} } +\frac{1}{2} g\left(t\right)B\left(t\right)[\sigma _{1} \alpha _{2}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)\varphi _{2} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{1} } }$

${+\sigma _{2} \alpha _{1}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)\varphi _{1} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{2} } ]+\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{2}\frac{\left(K\left(t, t\right)\alpha _{i}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)\varphi _{i} \left(t\right)\right)}{\lambda _{i} \left(t\right)} e^{\tau _{i} } , \chi _{j} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{j} } \rangle \equiv 0, \, j = 1, 2.}$

Performing scalar multiplication here, we obtain a system of ordinary differential equations:

$\begin{align} \begin{array}{l} {-\frac{d\alpha _{1}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)}{dt} -\left(\dot{\varphi }_{1} \left(t\right), \chi _{1} \left(t\right)\right)\alpha _{1}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)+} {\frac{1}{2} g\left(t\right)\sigma _{1} \left(B\left(t\right)\varphi _{2} \left(t\right), \chi _{1} \left(t\right)\right)\alpha _{2}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)+\frac{\left(K\left(t, t\right), \chi _{1} \left(t\right)\right)}{\lambda _{1} \left(t\right)} \alpha _{1}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)\equiv 0, } \\ \, \, \, \, \, \, \\ {-\frac{d\alpha _{2}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)}{dt} -\left(\dot{\varphi }_{2} \left(t\right), \chi _{2} \left(t\right)\right)\alpha _{2}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)+} {+\frac{1}{2} g\left(t\right)\sigma _{2} \left(B\left(t\right)\varphi _{1} \left(t\right), \chi _{2} \left(t\right)\right)\alpha _{1}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)+\frac{\left(K\left(t, t\right), \chi _{2} \left(t\right)\left(t\right)\right)}{\lambda _{2} \left(t\right)} \alpha _{2}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)\equiv 0.} \end{array} \end{align}$

(5.4)

Adding the initial conditions (5.2) to this system, we find uniquely functions $\alpha _{k}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right),$ $k = 1, 2,$ and, therefore, uniquely calculate the solution (5.1) of the problem $\left(\overline{3.1}_{0} \right)$ in the space $U.$ Moreover, the main term of the asymptotic solution of the problem (2.1) has the form

$\begin{align} z_{\varepsilon 0} \left(t\right) = z_{0}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)+\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{2} \alpha _{k}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)\varphi _{k} \left(t\right)e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon } \int _{t_{0} }^{t}\lambda _{k} \left(\theta \right)d\theta} , \end{align}$

(5.5)

where the functions $\alpha _{k}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t_{0} \right)$ satisfy the problem (5.2), (5.4), $z_{0}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right) = -A^{-1} (t) h(t).$ We draw attention to the fact that the system of equations (5.4) does not decompose into separate differential equations (as was the case in ordinary integro-differential equations). The presence of a rapidly oscillating coefficient in the problem (1.1) leads to more complex differential systems of type (5.4), the solution of which, although they exist on the interval $\left[t_{0}, T\right]$ , is not always possible to find them explicitly. However, in third case this it manages to be done.

c) $2\beta ' = \omega.$ In this case, the system (5.3) after embedding takes the form (take into account that $\widehat{{{e}^{{{\tau }_{4}}+{{\tau }_{1}}}}} = {{e}^{{{\tau }_{3}}}}\widehat{, \, {{e}^{{{\tau }_{3}}+{{\tau }_{2}}}}} = {{e}^{{{\tau }_{4}}}}$ )

${L z_{1} \left(t, \tau \right) = -\frac{d}{dt} z_{0}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)-\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{2} \frac{d}{dt} (\alpha _{k}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)\varphi _{k} \left(t\right))e^{\tau _{k} } +} {\frac{K\left(t, t\right)z_{0}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)}{\lambda _{5} \left(t\right)} e^{\tau _{5} } -\frac{K\left(t, t_{0} \right)z_{0}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t_{0} \right)}{\lambda _{5} \left(t_{0} \right)} }$

$+\frac{1}{2} g\left(t\right)B\left(t\right)[\sigma_{1} \alpha_{1}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)\varphi_{1} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{3} +\tau _{1} } +\sigma _{2} \alpha_{1}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)\varphi _{1} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{2} }$

This system is solvable in the space $U$ if and only if the conditions of orthogonality

$\langle -\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{2} \frac{d}{dt} (\alpha _{k}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)\varphi _{k} \left(t\right))e^{\tau _{k} } +\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{2}\frac{\left(K\left(t, t\right)\alpha _{i}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right)\varphi _{i} \left(t\right)\right)}{\lambda _{i} \left(t\right)} e^{\tau _{i} } , \chi _{j} \left(t\right)e^{\tau _{j} } \rangle \equiv 0,$

$\, j = 1, 2,$ are satisfied. Performing scalar multiplication here, we obtain a system of diverging ordinary differential equations

$\begin{array}{*{35}{l}} -\frac{d\alpha _{1}^{\left( 0 \right)}\left( t \right)}{dt}-\left( {{{\dot{\varphi }}}_{1}}\left( t \right), {{\chi }_{1}}\left( t \right) \right)\alpha _{1}^{\left( 0 \right)}\left( t \right)+\frac{\left( K\left( t, t \right), {{\chi }_{1}}\left( t \right) \right)}{{{\lambda }_{1}}\left( t \right)}\alpha _{1}^{\left( 0 \right)}\left( t \right)\equiv 0, \\ \, \, \, \, \, \, \\ -\frac{d\alpha _{2}^{\left( 0 \right)}\left( t \right)}{dt}-\left( {{{\dot{\varphi }}}_{2}}\left( t \right), {{\chi }_{2}}\left( t \right) \right)\alpha _{2}^{\left( 0 \right)}\left( t \right)+\frac{\left( K\left( t, t \right), {{\chi }_{2}}\left( t \right)\left( t \right) \right)}{{{\lambda }_{2}}\left( t \right)}\alpha _{2}^{\left( 0 \right)}\left( t \right)\equiv 0. \\ \end{array}$

Together with the initial conditions (5.2), it has a unique solution

$\alpha _{k}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right) = \left(z^{0} +A^{-1} \left(t_{0} \right)h\left(t_{0} \right), \chi _{k} \left(t_{0} \right)\right)exp \left\{\int _{t_{0} }^{t}\frac{\left(K\left(\theta , \theta \right)-\dot{\varphi }_{k} \left(\theta \right), \chi _{k} \left(\theta \right)\right)}{\lambda _{k} \left(\theta \right)} d\theta \right\},$

$\, k = 1, 2,$ and therefore, the solution (5.1) of the problem $\left(\overline{3.1}_{0} \right)$ will be found uniquely in the space $U$ . In this case the leading term of the asymptotics has the form (5.5), but with functions $\alpha _{k}^{\left(0\right)} \left(t\right),$ explicitly calculated. Its influence is revealed when constructing the asymptotics of the first and higher orders.

Conflict of interest

All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this paper.

References

[1]	T. Berners-Lee, J. Hendler, O. Lassila, The semantic web, Sci. Am., 284 (2001), 34–43.
[2]	N. Guarino, D. Oberle, S. Staab, What is an ontology?, in Handbook on Ontologies, Springer, Berlin, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92673-3_0
[3]	S. Das, P. Hussey, Hl7-fhir-based contsys formal ontology for enabling continuity of care data interoperability, J. Pers. Med., 13 (2023), 1024. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm13071024 doi: 10.3390/jpm13071024
[4]	A. Sharma, S. Kumar, Machine learning and ontology-based novel semantic document indexing for information retrieval, Comput. Ind. Eng., 176 (2023), 108940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2022.108940 doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2022.108940
[5]	M. A. Osman, S. A. M. Noah, S. Saad, Ontology-based knowledge management tools for knowledge sharing in organization—A review, IEEE Access, 10 (2022), 43267–43283. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3163758 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3163758
[6]	S. K. Narayanasamy, K. Srinivasan, Y. C. Hu, S. K. Masilamani, K. Y. Huang, A contemporary review on utilizing semantic web technologies in healthcare, virtual communities, and ontology-based information processing systems, Electronics, 11 (2022), 453. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11030453 doi: 10.3390/electronics11030453
[7]	X. Zhou, Q. Lv, A. Geng, Matching heterogeneous ontologies based on multi-strategy adaptive co-firefly algorithm, Knowl. Inf. Syst., 65 (2023), 2619–2644. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-023-01845-2 doi: 10.1007/s10115-023-01845-2
[8]	J. Portisch, M. Hladik, H. Paulheim, Background knowledge in ontology matching: A survey, Semant. Web, 1–55. https://doi.org/10.3233/SW-223085
[9]	M. A. Khoudja, M. Fareh, H. Bouarfa, Deep embedding learning with auto-encoder for large-scale ontology matching, Int. J. Semant. Web Inf. Syst., 18 (2022), 1–18.
[10]	Y. Djenouri, H. Belhadi, K. Akli-Astouati, A. Cano, J. C. W. Lin, An ontology matching approach for semantic modeling: A case study in smart cities, Comput. Intell., 38 (2022), 876–902. https://doi.org/10.1111/coin.12474 doi: 10.1111/coin.12474
[11]	X. Kou, J. Feng, Y. Wang, W. Cui, A multi-objective particle swarm optimization for matching domain ontologies, Int. Technol. Lett., e405. https://doi.org/10.1002/itl2.405
[12]	S. Ibrahim, S. Fathalla, J. Lehmann, H. Jabeen, Toward the multilingual semantic web: Multilingual ontology matching and assessment, IEEE Access, 11 (2023), 8581–8599. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3238871 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3238871
[13]	T. Y. Wu, A. Shao, J. S. Pan, Ctoa: Toward a chaotic-based tumbleweed optimization algorithm, Mathematics, 11 (2023), 2339. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11102339 doi: 10.3390/math11102339
[14]	S. Forrest, Genetic algorithms, ACM Comput. Surv., 28 (1996), 77–80.
[15]	N. Krishnan, G. Deepak, Easdisco: Toward a novel framework for web service discovery using ontology matching and genetic algorithm, in Advances in Data Computing, Communication and Security: Proceedings of I3CS2021, Springer, (2022), 283–291.
[16]	X. Xue, J. Chen, Matching biomedical ontologies through compact differential evolution algorithm with compact adaption schemes on control parameters, Neurocomputing, 458 (2021), 526–534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2020.03.122 doi: 10.1016/j.neucom.2020.03.122
[17]	H. Li, Z. Dragisic, D. Faria, V. Ivanova, E. Jiménez-Ruiz, P. Lambrix, et al., User validation in ontology alignment: functional assessment and impact, Knowl. Eng. Rev., 34 (2019), e15. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0269888919000080 doi: 10.1017/S0269888919000080
[18]	T. Y. Wu, H. Li, S. C. Chu, Cppe: An improved phasmatodea population evolution algorithm with chaotic maps, Mathematics, 11 (2023), 1977. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11091977 doi: 10.3390/math11091977
[19]	A. Dadgar, Y. Baleghi, M. Ezoji, Multi-view data fusion in multi-object tracking with probability density-based ordered weighted aggregation, Optik, 262 (2022), 169279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijleo.2022.169279 doi: 10.1016/j.ijleo.2022.169279
[20]	X. Xue, J. Guo, M. Ye, J. Lv, Similarity feature construction for matching ontologies through adaptively aggregating artificial neural networks, Mathematics, 11 (2023), 485. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11020485 doi: 10.3390/math11020485
[21]	B. Smith, Ontology, in The Furniture of the World, Brill, (2012), 47–68. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789401207799_005
[22]	P. Shvaiko, J. Euzenat, Ontology matching: state of the art and future challenges, IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng., 25 (2011), 158–176. https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2011.253 doi: 10.1109/TKDE.2011.253
[23]	V. M. Tayur, R. Suchithra, Multi-ontology mapping generative adversarial network in internet of things for ontology alignment, Int. Things, 20 (2022), 100616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iot.2022.100616 doi: 10.1016/j.iot.2022.100616
[24]	C. Trojahn, R. Vieira, D. Schmidt, A. Pease, G. Guizzardi, Foundational ontologies meet ontology matching: A survey, Semant. Web, 13 (2022), 685–704. https://doi.org/10.3233/SW-210447 doi: 10.3233/SW-210447
[25]	X. Xue, Q. Huang, Generative adversarial learning for optimizing ontology alignment, Expert Syst., 40 (2023), e12936. https://doi.org/10.1111/exsy.12936 doi: 10.1111/exsy.12936
[26]	J. Fürst, M. Fadel Argerich, B. Cheng, Versamatch: ontology matching with weak supervision, in 49th Conference on Very Large Data Bases (VLDB), 16 (2023), 1305–1318.
[27]	X. Xue, Y. Wang, W. Hao, Using moea/d for optimizing ontology alignments, Soft Comput., 18 (2014), 1589–1601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-013-1165-9 doi: 10.1007/s00500-013-1165-9
[28]	J. Berlin, A. Motro, Database schema matching using machine learning with feature selection, in Advanced Information Systems Engineering, Springer, (2002), 452–466. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-47961-9_32
[29]	C. C. Kiu, C. S. Lee, Ontodna: Ontology alignment results for oaei 2007, in Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Ontology Matching (OM-2007) Collocated with the 6th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC-2007) and the 2nd Asian Semantic Web Conference (ASWC-2007), (2007), 304.
[30]	E. Jiménez-Ruiz, B. C. Grau, Y. Zhou, Logmap 2.0: towards logic-based, scalable and interactive ontology matching, in Proceedings of the 4th international workshop on semantic web applications and tools for the life sciences, (2011), 45–46. https://doi.org/10.1145/2166896.2166911
[31]	U. Thayasivam, P. Doshi, Optima results for OAEI 2011, in Proc. of 6th OM Workshop, Citeseer, (2011), 204–211.
[32]	S. Hertling, Hertuda results for OEAI 2012, Ontology Matching, 141.
[33]	M. C. Silva, D. Faria, C. Pesquita, Extending agreementmakerlight to perform holistic ontology matching, in The Semantic Web: ESWC 2022 Satellite Events, Springer, (2022), 31–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11609-4_6
[34]	K. Janani, S. Mohanrasu, C. P. Lim, B. Manavalan, R. Rakkiyappan, Ensemble feature selection using Bonferroni, OWA and induced OWA aggregation operators, Appl. Soft Comput., 143 (2023), 110431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2023.110431 doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2023.110431
[35]	O. Moroz, V. Stepashko, New two-parametric mutation operator for inductive modelling using combinatorial-genetic algorithm, in 2022 12th International Conference on Advanced Computer Information Technologies, IEEE, (2022), 76–79. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACIT54803.2022.9913199
[36]	F. Giunchiglia, A. Autayeu, J. Pane, S-match: An open source framework for matching lightweight ontologies, Semant. Web, 3 (2012), 307–317. https://doi.org/10.3233/SW-2011-0036 doi: 10.3233/SW-2011-0036
[37]	J. R. Gomes, A. L. Gançarski, P. R. Henriques, Omt, a web-based tool for ontology matching, in 11th Symposium on Languages, Applications and Technologies (SLATE 2022), 2022. https://doi.org/10.4230/OASIcs.SLATE.2022.8
[38]	X. Liu, Q. Tong, X. Liu, Z. Qin, Ontology matching: State of the art, future challenges, and thinking based on utilized information, IEEE Access, 9 (2021), 91235–91243. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3057081 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3057081
[39]	N. Mahmoud, H. M. Abdlkader, Enhanced ontology matching for big data integration, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser., 1447 (2020), 012028. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1447/1/012028 doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1447/1/012028

This article has been cited by:

1.	Burkhan Kalimbetov, Valeriy Safonov, Dinara Zhaidakbayeva, Asymptotic Solution of a Singularly Perturbed Integro-Differential Equation with Exponential Inhomogeneity, 2023, 12, 2075-1680, 241, 10.3390/axioms12030241
2.	Musabek AKYLBAYEV, Burhan KALİMBETOV, Nilufar PARDAEVA, Influence of rapidly oscillating inhomogeneities in the formation of additional boundary layers for singularly perturbed integro-differential systems, 2023, 2587-2648, 10.31197/atnaa.1264072

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 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

Electronic Research Archive

1.1 1.7

Metrics

Article views(1627) PDF downloads(55) Cited by(2)

Preview PDF

Download XML

Export Citation

Article outline

Show full outline

Figures and Tables

Figures(1) / Tables(2)

Electronic Research Archive

Interactive complex ontology matching with local and global similarity deviations

Related Papers:

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Regularization of the problem (1.1)

3. Iterative problems and their solvability in the space $U$

4. Unique solvability of the general iterative problem in the space $U$ . The remainder term theorem

5. Construction of a solution of the first iterative problem

Conflict of interest

References

This article has been cited by:

Reader Comments

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

Metrics

Figures and Tables

Other Articles By Authors

Catalog

Electronic Research Archive

Interactive complex ontology matching with local and global similarity deviations

Related Papers:

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Regularization of the problem (1.1)

3. Iterative problems and their solvability in the space U U

4. Unique solvability of the general iterative problem in the space U U . The remainder term theorem

5. Construction of a solution of the first iterative problem

Conflict of interest

References

This article has been cited by:

Reader Comments

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

Metrics

Figures and Tables

Other Articles By Authors

Related pages

Tools

Export File

Citation

Format

Content

Catalog

3. Iterative problems and their solvability in the space $U$

4. Unique solvability of the general iterative problem in the space $U$ . The remainder term theorem