In this study, we investigate the qualitative properties of solutions to a general model of difference equations (DEs), which includes the flour beetle model as a particular case. We investigate local and global stability and boundedness, as well as the periodic behavior of the solutions to this model. Moreover, we present some general theorems that help study the periodicity of solutions to the DEs. The presented numerical examples support the finding and illustrate the behavior of the solutions for the studied model. A significant agricultural pest that is extremely resistant to insecticides is the flour beetle. Therefore, studying the qualitative characteristics of the solutions in this model greatly helps in understanding the behavior of this pest and how to resist it or benefit from it. By applying the general results to the flour beetle model, we clarify the conditions of global stability, boundedness, and periodicity.
Citation: Wedad Albalawi, Fatemah Mofarreh, Osama Moaaz. Dynamics of a general model of nonlinear difference equations and its applications to LPA model[J]. Electronic Research Archive, 2024, 32(11): 6072-6086. doi: 10.3934/era.2024281
[1] | Yudhveer Singh, Devendra Kumar, Kanak Modi, Vinod Gill . A new approach to solve Cattaneo-Hristov diffusion model and fractional diffusion equations with Hilfer-Prabhakar derivative. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(2): 843-855. doi: 10.3934/math.2020057 |
[2] | Anumanthappa Ganesh, Swaminathan Deepa, Dumitru Baleanu, Shyam Sundar Santra, Osama Moaaz, Vediyappan Govindan, Rifaqat Ali . Hyers-Ulam-Mittag-Leffler stability of fractional differential equations with two caputo derivative using fractional fourier transform. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 1791-1810. doi: 10.3934/math.2022103 |
[3] | Hadjer Belbali, Maamar Benbachir, Sina Etemad, Choonkil Park, Shahram Rezapour . Existence theory and generalized Mittag-Leffler stability for a nonlinear Caputo-Hadamard FIVP via the Lyapunov method. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(8): 14419-14433. doi: 10.3934/math.2022794 |
[4] | Nadiyah Hussain Alharthi, Abdon Atangana, Badr S. Alkahtani . Numerical analysis of some partial differential equations with fractal-fractional derivative. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(1): 2240-2256. doi: 10.3934/math.2023116 |
[5] | Yong Xian Ng, Chang Phang, Jian Rong Loh, Abdulnasir Isah . Analytical solutions of incommensurate fractional differential equation systems with fractional order 1<α,β<2 via bivariate Mittag-Leffler functions. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 2281-2317. doi: 10.3934/math.2022130 |
[6] | Antonio Di Crescenzo, Alessandra Meoli . On a fractional alternating Poisson process. AIMS Mathematics, 2016, 1(3): 212-224. doi: 10.3934/Math.2016.3.212 |
[7] | Wei Fan, Kangqun Zhang . Local well-posedness results for the nonlinear fractional diffusion equation involving a Erdélyi-Kober operator. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(9): 25494-25512. doi: 10.3934/math.20241245 |
[8] | Abdulkafi M. Saeed, Mohammed A. Almalahi, Mohammed S. Abdo . Explicit iteration and unique solution for ϕ-Hilfer type fractional Langevin equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(3): 3456-3476. doi: 10.3934/math.2022192 |
[9] | Gauhar Rahman, Iyad Suwan, Kottakkaran Sooppy Nisar, Thabet Abdeljawad, Muhammad Samraiz, Asad Ali . A basic study of a fractional integral operator with extended Mittag-Leffler kernel. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(11): 12757-12770. doi: 10.3934/math.2021736 |
[10] | Ismail Gad Ameen, Dumitru Baleanu, Hussien Shafei Hussien . Efficient method for solving nonlinear weakly singular kernel fractional integro-differential equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 15819-15836. doi: 10.3934/math.2024764 |
In this study, we investigate the qualitative properties of solutions to a general model of difference equations (DEs), which includes the flour beetle model as a particular case. We investigate local and global stability and boundedness, as well as the periodic behavior of the solutions to this model. Moreover, we present some general theorems that help study the periodicity of solutions to the DEs. The presented numerical examples support the finding and illustrate the behavior of the solutions for the studied model. A significant agricultural pest that is extremely resistant to insecticides is the flour beetle. Therefore, studying the qualitative characteristics of the solutions in this model greatly helps in understanding the behavior of this pest and how to resist it or benefit from it. By applying the general results to the flour beetle model, we clarify the conditions of global stability, boundedness, and periodicity.
Hermite [1] and Hadamard [2] derived the familiar inequality is known as Hermite-Hadamard inequality (HH-inequality) and this inequality states that
Q(u+ν2)≤1ν−u∫νuQ(z)dz≤Q(u)+Q(ν)2, | (1) |
where Q:I→R is a convex function defined on a closed bounded interval I⊆R and u,ν∈I with ν>u. If Q is a concave function, then both inequality symbols in (1) are reversed. Sine 𝐻𝐻-inequalities are a useful technique for developing the qualitative and quantitative properties of convexity and nonconvexity. Because of diverse applications of these inequalities in different fields, there has been continuous growth of interest in such an area of research. Therefore many inequalities have been introduced as applications of convex functions and generalized convex function, see [3,4,5,6]. It is very important to mention that, Fejér [7] considered the major generalization of HH-inequality which is known as 𝐻𝐻-Fejér inequality. It can be expressed as follows:
Let Q:T→R be a convex function on an interval T=[u,ν] and u,ν∈T with u≤ν. and let Ω:T=[u,ν]→R,Ω(z)≥0, be a integrable and symmetric with respect to u+ν2, and ∫νuΩ(z)dz>0. Then, we have the following inequality.
Q(u+ν2).∫νuΩ(z)dz≤∫νuQ(z)Ω(z)dz≤Q(u)+Q(ν)2.∫νuΩ(z)dz. | (2) |
If Q is a concave function, then inequality (2) is reversed. If Ω(z)=1, then we obtain (1) from (2).
It is also worthy to mention that Sarikaya et al. [8] provided the fractional version of inequality (1) and for convex function Q:T=[u,ν]→R, this inequality states that:
Q(u+ν2)≤Γ(α+1)2(ν−u)α[Iαu+Q(ν)˜+Iαν−Q(u)]≤Q(u)+Q(ν)2, | (3) |
where Qassumed to be a positive function on [u,ν], Q∈L1([u,ν]) with u≤ν, and Iαu+ and Iαν− are the left sided and right sided Riemann-Liouville fractional of order 0≤α, and respectively are defined as follows:
Iαu+Q(z)=1Γ(α)∫zu(z−τ)α−1Q(τ)d(τ)(z>u), | (4) |
Iαν−Q(z)=1Γ(α)∫νz(τ−z)α−1Q(τ)d(τ)(z<ν). | (5) |
If α=1, then from (3), we obtain (2). We can easily say that inequality (3) is generalization of inequality (2). Thereafter, many authors in the mathematical community have paid close attention in the view of inequality (3) and obtained several inequalities for different classes of convex and non-convex functions through various fractional integral; see [9,10,11,12,13,14,15].
On the other hand, it is well-known fact that interval-valued analysis was introduced as an attempt to overcome interval uncertainty that occurs in the computer or mathematical models of some deterministic real-word phenomena. A classic example of an interval closure is Archimedes' technique which is associated with the computation of the circumference of a circle. In 1966, Moore [16] given the concept of interval analysis in his book and discussed its applications in computational Mathematics. After that several authors have developed a strong relationship between inequalities and IVFs by means of inclusion relation via different integral operators, as one can see Costa [17], Costa and Roman-Flores [18], Roman-Flores et al. [19,20], and Chalco-Cano et al. [21,22], but also to more general set-valued maps by Nikodem et al. [23], and Matkowski and Nikodem [24]. In particular, Zhang et al. [25] derived the new version of Jensen's inequalities for set-valued and fuzzy set-valued functions by means of a pseudo order relation and proved that these Jensen's inequalities generalized form of Costa Jensen's inequalities [17]. After that, Budek [26] established fractional HH-inequality for convex-IVF through interval-valued fractional Riemann-Liouville fractional.
Our goal is to use the generalization of classical Riemann integral operator which is known as fuzzy Riemann-Liouville fractional integral operator. Recently, Allahviranloo et al. [27] introduced the following fuzzy-interval Riemann-Liouville fractional integral operator:
Let α>0 and L([u,ν],F0) be the collection of all Lebesgue measurable fuzzy-IVFs on[u,ν]. Then, the fuzzy-interval left and right Riemann-Liouville fractional integral of ˜Q∈ L([u,ν],F0) with order α>0 are defined by
Iαu+˜Q(z)=1Γ(α)∫zu(z−τ)α−1˜Q(τ)d(τ),(z>u), | (6) |
and
Iαν−˜Q(z)=1Γ(α)∫νz(τ−z)α−1˜Q(τ)d(τ),(z<ν), | (7) |
respectively, where Γ(z)=∫∞0τz−1u−τd(τ) is the Euler gamma function. The fuzzy-interval left and right Riemann-Liouville fractional integral z based on left and right endpoint functions can be defined, that is
[Iαu+˜Q(z)]γ=1Γ(α)∫zu(z−τ)α−1Qγ(τ)d(τ)=1Γ(α)∫zu(z−τ)α−1[Q∗(τ,γ),Q∗(τ,γ)]d(τ),(z>u), | (8) |
where
Iαu+Q∗(z,γ)=1Γ(α)∫zu(z−τ)α−1Q∗(τ,γ)d(τ),(z>u), | (9) |
and
Iαu+Q∗(z,γ)=1Γ(α)∫zu(z−τ)α−1Q∗(τ,γ)d(τ),(z>u). | (10) |
Similarly, we can define the right Riemann-Liouville fractional integral ˜Q of z based on left and right endpoint functions.
Moreover, recently, Khan et al. [28] introduced the new class of convex fuzzy mappings is known as (h1,h2)-convex fuzzy-IVFs by means fuzzy order relation and presented the following new version of 𝐻𝐻-type inequality for (h1,h2)-convex fuzzy-IVF involving fuzzy-interval Riemann integrals:
Theorem 1.1. Let ˜Q:[u,ν]→F0 be a (h1,h2)-convex fuzzy-IVF with h1,h2:[0,1]→R+ and h1(12)h2(12)≠0, whose γ-levels define the family of IVFs Qγ:[u,ν]⊂R→K+C are given by Qγ(z)=[Q∗(z,γ),Q∗(z,γ)] for all z∈[u,ν] and for all γ∈[0,1]. If ˜Q is fuzzy-interval Riemann integrable (in sort, FR-integrable), then
12h1(12)h2(12)˜Q(u+ν2)≼1ν−u(FR)∫νu˜Q(z)dz≼[˜Q(u)˜+˜Q(ν)]∫10h1(τ)h2(1−τ)dτ. | (11) |
If h1(τ)=τ and h2(τ)≡1, then from inequality (11), we obtain the following inequality:
˜Q(u+ν2)≼1ν−u(FR)∫νu˜Q(z)dz≼˜Q(u)˜+˜Q(ν)2. | (12) |
This inequality (12) is known as HH-inequality for convex fuzzy-IVF. We refer readers to [29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53] and the references therein for further review of literature on the applications and properties of fuzzy-interval, inequalities, and generalized convex fuzzy mappings.
Inspired by the ongoing research work, the new class of generalized convex fuzzy-IVFs is introduced which is known as h-convex fuzzy-IVF. With the help of h-convex fuzzy-IVF and fuzzy-interval Riemann fractional integral operator, we have introduced fuzzy fractional Hermite-Hadamard type inequalities by means of fuzzy order relation. Moreover, we have shown that our results include a wide class of new and known inequalities for h-convex fuzzy-IVFs and their variant forms as special cases. Some useful examples are also presented to verify the validity of our main results.
Let R be the set of real numbers and KC be the space of all closed and bounded intervals of R and η∈KC be defined by
η=[η∗,η∗]={z∈R|η∗≤z≤η∗}, (η∗,η∗∈R). | (13) |
If η∗=η∗, then η is said to be degenerate. In this article, all intervals will be non-degenerate intervals. If η∗≥0, then [η∗,η∗] is called positive interval. The set of all positive interval is denoted by K+C and defined as K+C={[η∗,η∗]:[η∗,η∗]∈KCandη∗≥0}.
Let τ∈R and τη be defined by
τη={[τη∗,τη∗]ifτ>0,{0}ifτ=0[τη∗,τη∗]ifτ<0. | (14) |
Then the Minkowski difference −η, addition η+ζ and η×ζ for η,ζ∈KC are defined by
[ζ∗,ζ∗]−[η∗,η∗]=[ζ∗−η∗,ζ∗−η∗],[ζ∗,ζ∗]+[η∗,η∗]=[ζ∗+η∗,ζ∗+η∗], | (15) |
and
[ζ∗,ζ∗]×[η∗,η∗]=[min{ζ∗η∗,ζ∗η∗,ζ∗η∗,ζ∗η∗},max{ζ∗η∗,ζ∗η∗,ζ∗η∗,ζ∗η∗}]. |
The inclusion "⊆" means that
ζ⊆η if and only if, [ζ∗,ζ∗]⊆[η∗,η∗],if and only if η∗≤ζ∗,ζ∗≤η∗. | (16) |
Remark 2.1. [29] The relation "≤I" defined on KC by
[ζ∗,ζ∗]≤I[η∗,η∗] if and only if ζ∗≤η∗,ζ∗≤η∗,(17)
for all [ζ∗,ζ∗],[η∗,η∗]∈KC, it is an order relation. For given [ζ∗,ζ∗],[η∗,η∗]∈KC, we say that [ζ∗,ζ∗]≤I[η∗,η∗] if and only if ζ∗≤η∗,ζ∗≤η∗.
For [ζ∗,ζ∗],[η∗,η∗]∈KC, the Hausdorff-Pompeiu distance between intervals [ζ∗,ζ∗] and [η∗,η∗] is defined by
d([ζ∗,ζ∗],[η∗,η∗])=max{|ζ∗−η∗|,|ζ∗−η∗|}. |
It is familiar fact that (KC,d) is a complete metric space.
A fuzzy subset A of R is characterize by a mapping ˜ζ:R→[0,1] called the membership function, for each fuzzy set and if γ∈(0,1], then γ-level sets of ˜ζ is denoted and defined as follows ζγ={u∈R|˜ζ(u)≥γ}. If γ=0, then supp(˜ζ)={z∈R|˜ζ(z)>0} is called support of ˜ζ. By [˜ζ]0 we define the closure of supp(˜ζ).
Let F(R) be the family of all fuzzy sets and ˜ζ∈F(R) be a fuzzy set. Then, we define the following:
(1)˜ζ is said to be normal if there exists z∈R and ˜ζ(z)=1;
(2)˜ζ is said to be upper semi continuous on R if for given z∈R, there exist ϵ>0 there exist δ>0 such that ˜ζ(z)−˜ζ(x)<ϵ for all x∈R with |z−x|<δ;
(3)˜ζ is said to be fuzzy convex if ζγ is convex for every γ∈[0,1];
(4)˜ζ is compactly supported if supp(˜ζ) is compact.
A fuzzy set is called a fuzzy number or fuzzy-interval if it has properties (1)–(4). We denote by F0 the family of all interval.
From these definitions, we have
[˜ζ]γ=[ζ∗(γ),ζ∗(γ)], |
where
ζ∗(γ)=inf{z∈R|˜ζ(z)≥γ},ζ∗(γ)=sup{z∈R|˜ζ(z)≥γ}. |
Proposition 2.2. [18] If ˜ζ,˜η∈F0, then relation "≼" defined on F0 by
˜ζ≼ ˜η if and only if, [ ˜ζ]γ≤I[ ˜η ]γ,for all γ∈[0, 1], | (18) |
this relation is known as partial order relation.
For ˜ζ,˜η∈F0 and τ∈R, the sum ˜ζ˜+˜η, product ˜ζ˜×˜η, scalar product τ.˜ζ and sum with scalar are defined by:
[˜ζ˜+˜η]γ=[˜ζ]γ+[˜η]γ, | (19) |
[˜ζ˜×˜η]γ=[˜ζ]γ×[˜η]γ, | (20) |
[τ.˜ζ]γ=τ.[˜ζ]γ, | (21) |
[τ˜+˜ζ]γ=τ+[˜ζ]γ. | (22) |
for all γ∈[0,1]. For ˜ψ∈F0 such that ˜ζ=˜η˜+˜ψ, then by this result we have existence of Hukuhara difference of ˜ζ and ˜η, and we say that ˜ψ is the H-difference of ˜ζ and ˜η, and denoted by ˜ζ˜−˜η. If H-difference exists, then
(ψ)∗(γ)=(ζ−η)∗(γ)=ζ∗(γ)−η∗(γ),(ψ)∗(γ)=(ζ−η)∗(γ)=ζ∗(γ)−η∗(γ). | (23) |
A partition of [u,ν] is any finite ordered subset P having the form
P={u=z1<z2<z3<z4<z5…⋯<zk=ν}. |
The mesh of a partition P is the maximum length of the subintervals containing P that is,
mesh(P)=max{zj−zj−1:j=1,2,3,……k}. |
Let P(δ,[u,ν]) be the set of all partitions P of [u,ν] such that mesh(P)<δ. For each interval [zj−1,zj], where 1≤j≤k, choose an arbitrary point ξj and taking the sum
S(Q,P,δ)=∑kj=1Q(ξj)(zj−zj−1), |
where Q:[u,ν]→KC. We call S(Q,P,δ) a Riemann sum of Q corresponding to P∈P(δ,[u,ν]).
Definition 2.3. [30] A function Q:[u,ν]→KC is called interval Riemann integrable (IR-integrable) on [u,ν] if there exists B∈KC such that, for each ϵ>0, there exists δ>0 such that
d(S(Q,P,δ),B)<ϵ, |
for every Riemann sum of Q corresponding to P∈P(δ,[u,ν]) and for arbitrary choice of ξj∈[zj−1,zj] for 1≤j≤k. Then, we say that B is the IR-integral of Q on [u,ν] and is denote by B=(IR)∫νuQ(z)dz.
Moore [9] firstly proposed the concept of Riemann integral for IVF and it is defined as follow:
Theorem 2.4. [16] If Q:[u,ν]⊂R→KC is an IVF on such that Q(z)=[Q∗,Q∗], then Q is Riemann integrable over [u,ν] if and only if, Q∗ and Q∗ both are Riemann integrable over [u,ν] such that
(IR)∫νuQ(z)dz=[(R)∫νuQ∗(z)dz,(R)∫νuQ∗(z)dz]. | (24) |
Definition 2.5. [31] A fuzzy map˜Q:[u,ν]→F0 is called fuzzy-IVF. For each γ∈[0,1], whose γ-levels define the family of IVFs Qγ:[u,ν]→KC are given by Qγ(z)=[Q∗(z,γ),Q∗(z,γ)] for all z∈[u,ν]. Here, for each γ∈[0,1], the left and right real valued functions Q∗(z,γ),Q∗(z,γ):[u,ν]→R are also called lower and upper functions of ˜Q.
Remark 2.6. If ˜Q:[u,ν]⊂R→F0 is a fuzzy-IVF, then ˜Q(z) is called continuous function at z∈[u,ν], if for each γ∈[0,1], both left and right real valued functions Q∗(z,γ) and Q∗(z,γ) are continuous at z∈K.
The following conclusion can be drawn from the above literature review, see [17,31].
Definition 2.7. Let ˜Q:[u,ν]⊂R→F0 is called fuzzy-IVF. The fuzzy Riemann integral of ˜Q over [u,ν], denoted by (FR)∫νu˜Q(z)dz, it is defined level by level
[(FR)∫νu˜Q(z)dz]γ=(IR)∫νuQγ(z)dz={∫νuQ(z,γ)dz:Q(z,γ)∈R[u,ν]}, | (25) |
for all γ∈[0,1], where R[u,ν] contains the family of left and right functions of IVFs. ˜Q is (FR)-integrable over [u,ν] if (FR)∫νu˜Q(z)dz∈F0. Note that, if left and right real valued functions are Lebesgue-integrable, then ˜Q is fuzzy Aumann-integrable over [u,ν], denoted by (FA)∫νu˜Q(z)dz, see [31].
Theorem 2.8. Let ˜Q:[u,ν]⊂R→F0 be a fuzzy-IVF, whose γ-levels obtain the collection of IVFs Qγ:[u,ν]⊂R→KC are defined by Qγ(z)=[Q∗(z,γ),Q∗(z,γ)] for all z∈[u,ν] and for all γ∈[0,1]. Then, ˜Q is (FR)-integrable over [u,ν] if and only if, Q∗(z,γ) and Q∗(z,γ) both are R-integrable over [u,ν]. Moreover, if ˜Q is (FR)-integrable over [u,ν], then
[(FR)∫νu˜Q(z)dz]γ=[(R)∫νuQ∗(z,γ)dz,(R)∫νuQ∗(z,γ)dz]=(IR)∫νuQγ(z)dz, | (26) |
for all γ∈[0,1].
Definition 2.9. A real valued function Q:[u,ν]→R+ is called convex function if
Q(τx+(1−τ)z)≤τQ(x)+(1−τ)Q(z), | (27) |
for all x,z∈[u,ν],τ∈[0,1]. If (27) is reversed, then Q is called concave.
Definition 2.10. [32] The fuzzy-IVF ˜Q:[u,ν]→F0 is called convex fuzzy-IVF on[u,ν] if
˜Q(τx+(1−τ)z)≼τ˜Q(x)˜+(1−τ)˜Q(z), | (28) |
for allx,z∈[u,ν],τ∈[0,1], where ˜Q(z)≽˜0 for all z∈[u,ν]. If (28) is reversed, then ˜Q is called concave fuzzy-IVF on [u,ν]. ˜Q is affine if and only if it is both convex and concave fuzzy-IVF.
Remark 2.11. If Q∗(z,γ)=Q∗(z,γ) and γ=1, then we obtain the inequality (1).
Definition 2.12. [28] Let h1,h2:[0,1]⊆[u,ν]→R+ such that h1,h2≢0. Then, fuzzy-IVF ˜Q:[u,ν]→F0 is said to be (h1,h2)-convex fuzzy-IVF on [u,ν] if
˜Q(τx+(1−τ)z)≼h1(τ)h2(1−τ)˜Q(x)˜+h1(1−τ)h2(τ)˜Q(z), | (29) |
for allx,z∈[u,ν],τ∈[0,1], where ˜Q(x)≽˜0. If ˜Q is (h1,h2)-concave on [u,ν], then inequality (29) is reversed.
Remark 2.13. [28] If h2(τ)≡1, then (h1,h2)-convex fuzzy-IVF becomes h-convex fuzzy-IVF, that is
˜Q(τx+(1−τ)z)≼h1(τ)˜Q(x)˜+h1(1−τ)˜Q(z),∀x,z∈[u,ν],τ∈[0,1]. | (30) |
If h1(τ)=τ,h2(τ)≡1, then (h1,h2)-convex fuzzy-IVF becomes convex fuzzy-IVF, that is
˜Q(τx+(1−τ)z)≼τ˜Q(x)˜+(1−τ)˜Q(z),∀x,z∈[u,ν],τ∈[0,1]. | (31) |
If h1(τ)=h2(τ)≡1, then (h1,h2)-convex fuzzy-IVF becomes P-convex fuzzy-IVF, that is
˜Q(τx+(1−τ)z)≼˜Q(x)˜+˜Q(z),∀x,z∈[u,ν],τ∈[0,1]. | (32) |
Theorem 2.14. Let h:[0,1]⊆[u,ν]→R be anon-negative real valued function such that h≢0 and let ˜Q:[u,ν]→F0 be a fuzzy-IVF, whose γ-levels define the family of IVFs Qγ:[u,ν]→KC+⊂KC are given by
Qγ(z)=[Q∗(z,γ),Q∗(z,γ)], | (33) |
for all z∈[u,ν] and for all γ∈[0,1]. Then, ˜Q is h-convex fuzzy-IVF on [u,ν], if and only if, for all γ∈[0,1], Q∗(z,γ) and Q∗(z,γ) are h-convex function.
Proof. The demonstration of proof of Theorem 2.14 is similar to the demonstration proof of Theorem 6 in [28].
Example 2.15. We consider h(τ)=τ, for τ∈[0,1] and the fuzzy-IVF ˜Q:[0,4]→F0 defined by
˜Q(z)(σ)={σ2ez2σ∈[0,2ez2]4ez2−σ2ez2σ∈(2ez2,4ez2]0otherwise, |
then, for each γ∈[0,1], we have Qγ(z)=[2γez2,2(2−γ)ez2]. Since end point functions Q∗(z,γ), Q∗(z,γ) are h-convex functions for each γ∈[0,1]. Hence ˜Q(z) is h-convex fuzzy-IVF.
In this section, we will prove some new Hermite-Hadamard type inequalities for h-convex fuzzy-IVFs by means of fuzzy order relation via Riemann Liouville fractional integral operator. In what follows, we denote by L([u,ν],F0) the family of Lebesgue measureable fuzzy-IVFs.
Theorem 3.1. Let ˜Q:[u,ν]→F0 be a h-convex fuzzy-IVF on [u,ν], whose γ-levels define the family of IVFs Qγ:[u,ν]⊂R→K+C are given by Qγ(z)=[Q∗(z,γ),Q∗(z,γ)] for all z∈[u,ν] and for all γ∈[0,1]. If ˜Q∈L([u,ν],F0), then
1αh(12)˜Q(u+ν2)≼Γ(α)(ν−u)α[Iαu+˜Q(ν)˜+Iαν−˜Q(u)]≼˜Q(u)˜+˜Q(ν)2∫10τα−1[h(τ)−h(1−τ)]dτ. | (34) |
If ˜Q(z) is concave fuzzy-IVF, then
1αh(12)˜Q(u+ν2)≽Γ(α)(ν−u)α[Iαu+˜Q(ν)˜+Iαν−˜Q(u)]≽˜Q(u)˜+˜Q(ν)2∫10τα−1[h(τ)−h(1−τ)]dτ. | (35) |
Proof. Let ˜Q:[u,ν]→F0 be a h-convex fuzzy-IVF. Then, by hypothesis, we have
1h(12)˜Q(u+ν2)≼˜Q(τu+(1−τ)ν)˜+˜Q((1−τ)u+τν). |
Therefore, for every γ∈[0,1], we have
1h(12)Q∗(u+ν2,γ)≤Q∗(τu+(1−τ)ν,γ)+Q∗((1−τ)u+τν,γ),1h(12)Q∗(u+ν2,γ)≤Q∗(τu+(1−τ)ν,γ)+Q∗((1−τ)u+τν,γ). |
Multiplying both sides by τα−1 and integrating the obtained result with respect to τ over (0,1), we have
1h(12)∫10τα−1Q∗(u+ν2,γ)dτ |
≤∫10τα−1Q∗(τu+(1−τ)ν,γ)dτ+∫10τα−1Q∗((1−τ)u+τν,γ)dτ, |
1h(12)∫10τα−1Q∗(u+ν2,γ)dτ |
≤∫10τα−1Q∗(τu+(1−τ)ν,γ)dτ+∫10τα−1Q∗((1−τ)u+τν,γ)dτ. |
Let x=τu+(1−τ)ν and z=(1−τ)u+τν. Then, we have
1αh(12)Q∗(u+ν2,γ)≤1(ν−u)αν∫u(ν−x)α−1Q∗(x,γ)dx+1(ν−u)αν∫u(z−u)α−1Q∗(z,γ)dz1αh(12)Q∗(u+ν2,γ)≤1(ν−u)αν∫u(ν−x)α−1Q∗(x,γ)dx+1(ν−u)αν∫u(z−u)α−1Q∗(z,γ)dz, |
≤Γ(α)(ν−u)α[Iαu+Q∗(ν,γ)+Iαν−Q∗(u,γ)]≤Γ(α)(ν−u)α[Iαu+Q∗(ν,γ)+Iαν−Q∗(u,γ)]. |
That is
1αh(12)[Q∗(u+ν2,γ),Q∗(u+ν2,γ)] |
≤IΓ(α)(ν−u)α[[Iαu+Q∗(ν,γ)+Iαν−Q∗(u,γ)],[Iαu+Q∗(ν,γ)+Iαν−Q∗(u,γ)]], |
thus,
1αh(12)Qγ(u+ν2)≤IΓ(α)(ν−u)α[Iαu+Qγ(ν)+Iαν−Qγ(u)]. | (36) |
In a similar way as above, we have
Γ(α)(ν−u)α[Iαu+Qγ(ν)+Iαν−Qγ(u)]≤I[Qγ(u)+Qγ(ν)]∫10τα−1[h(τ)−h(1−τ)]dτ. | (37) |
Combining (36) and (37), we have
1αh(12)Qγ(u+ν2)≤IΓ(α)(ν−u)α[Iαu+Qγ(ν)+Iαν−Qγ(u)] |
≤I[Qγ(u)+Qγ(ν)]∫10τα−1[h(τ)−h(1−τ)]dτ, |
that is
1αh(12)˜Q(u+ν2)≼Γ(α)(ν−u)α[Iαu+˜Q(ν)˜+Iαν−˜Q(u)]≼[˜Q(u)˜+˜Q(ν)]∫10τα−1[h(τ)−h(1−τ)]dτ. |
Hence, the required result.
Remark 3.2 From Theorem 3.1 we clearly see that:
If α=1, then Theorem 3.1 reduces to the result for h-convex fuzzy-IVF:
12h(12)˜Q(u+ν2)≼1ν−u(FR)∫νu˜Q(z)dz≼[˜Q(u)˜+˜Q(ν)]∫10h(τ)dτ. | (38) |
If h(τ)=τ, then Theorem 3.1 reduces to the result for convex fuzzy-IVF:
˜Q(u+ν2)≼Γ(α+1)2(ν−u)α[Iαu+˜Q(ν)˜+Iαν−˜Q(u)]≼˜Q(u)˜+˜Q(ν)2. | (39) |
Let α=1 and h(τ)=τ. Then, Theorem 3.1 reduces to the result for convex-IVF given in [28]:
˜Q(u+ν2)≼1ν−u(FR)∫νu˜Q(z)dz≼˜Q(u)˜+˜Q(ν)2. | (40) |
If Q∗(z,γ)=Q∗(z,γ) and γ=1, then, from Theorem 3.1 we get following inequality given in [12]:
1αh(12)Q(u+ν2)≤Γ(α)(ν−u)α[Iαu+Q(ν)+Iαν−Q(u)]≤[Q(u)+Q(ν)]∫10τα−1[h(τ)−h(1−τ)]dτ. | (41) |
Let α=1=γ and Q∗(z,γ)=Q∗(z,γ). Then, from Theorem 3.1 we obtain following inequality given in [2]:
12h(12)Q(u+ν2)≤1ν−u(R)∫νuQ(z)dz≤[Q(u)+Q(ν)]∫10h(τ)dτ. | (42) |
Example 3.3. Let =12, h(τ)=τ, for all τ∈[0,1]and the fuzzy-IVF ˜Q:[u,ν]=[2,3]→F0, defined by
˜Q(z)(θ)={θ2−z12,θ∈[0,2−z12]2(2−z12)−θ2−z12,θ∈(2−z12,2(2−z12)]0,otherwise. |
Then, for each γ∈[0,1], we have Qγ(z)=[γ(2−z12),(2−γ)(2−z12)]. Since left and right end point functions Q∗(z,γ)=γ(2−z12), Q∗(z,γ)=(2−γ)(2−z12), are h-convex functions for each γ∈[0,1], then ˜Q(z) is h-convex fuzzy-IVF. We clearly see that ˜Q∈L([u,ν],F0) and
1αh(12)Q∗(u+ν2,γ)=Q∗(52,γ)=γ4−√108 |
1αh(12)Q∗(u+ν2,γ)=Q∗(52,γ)=(2−γ)4−√108, |
Q∗(u,γ)+Q∗(ν,γ)2∫10τα−1[h(τ)−h(1−τ)]dτ=γ(4−√2−√3) |
Q∗(u,γ)+Q∗(ν,γ)2∫10τα−1[h(τ)−h(1−τ)]dτ=(2−γ)(4−√2−√3). |
Note that
Γ(α)(ν−u)α[Iαu+Q∗(ν,γ)+Iαν−Q∗(u,γ)] |
=Γ(12)21√π3∫2(3−z)−12.γ(2−z12)dz |
+Γ(12)21√π3∫2(z−2)−12.γ(2−z12)dz |
=12γ[739310,000+950110,000] |
=γ844720,000. |
Γ(α)(ν−u)α[Iαu+Q∗(ν,γ)+Iαν−Q∗(u,γ)] |
=Γ(12)21√π3∫2(3−z)−12.(2−γ)(2−z12)dz |
+Γ(12)21√π3∫2(z−2)−12.(2−γ)(2−z12)dz |
=12(2−γ)[739310,000+950110,000] |
=(2−γ)844720,000. |
Therefore
[γ4−√108,(2−γ)4−√108]≤I[γ844720,000,(2−γ)844720,000] |
≤I[γ(4−√2−√3),(2−γ)(4−√2−√3)], |
and Theorem 3.1 is verified.
From Theorem 3.4 and Theorem 3.5, we obtain some fuzzy-interval fractional integral inequalities related to fuzzy-interval fractionalHH-inequalities
Theorem 3.4. Let ˜Q,˜P:[u,ν]→F0 be h1-convex and h2-convex fuzzy-IVFs on [u,ν], respectively, whose γ-levels Qγ,Pγ:[u,ν]⊂R→K+C are defined by Qγ(z)=[Q∗(z,γ),Q∗(z,γ)] and Pγ(z)=[P∗(z,γ),P∗(z,γ)] for all z∈[u,ν] and for all γ∈[0,1]. If ˜Q˜×˜P∈L([u,ν],F0), then
Γ(α)(ν−u)α[Iαu+˜Q(ν)˜×˜P(ν)+Iαν−˜Q(u)˜×˜P(u)]≼˜Δ(u,ν)∫10τα−1[h1(τ)h2(τ)+h1(1−τ)h2(1−τ)]dτ+˜∇(u,ν)∫10τα−1[h1(τ)h2(1−τ)+h1(1−τ)h2(τ)]dτ. |
Where ˜Δ(u,ν)=˜Q(u)˜×˜P(u)˜+˜Q(ν)˜×˜P(ν), ˜∇(u,ν)=˜Q(u)˜×˜P(ν)˜+˜Q(ν)˜×˜P(u), and Δγ(u,ν)=[Δ∗((u,ν),γ),Δ∗((u,ν),γ)] and ∇γ(u,ν)=[∇∗((u,ν),γ),∇∗((u,ν),γ)].
Proof. Since ˜Q,˜P both are h1-convex and h2-convex fuzzy-IVFs then, for each γ∈[0,1] we have
Q∗(τu+(1−τ)ν,γ)≤h1(τ)Q∗(u,γ)+h1(1−τ)Q∗(ν,γ)Q∗(τu+(1−τ)ν,γ)≤h1(τ)Q∗(u,γ)+h1(1−τ)Q∗(ν,γ). |
and
P∗(τu+(1−τ)ν,γ)≤h2(τ)P∗(u,γ)+h2(1−τ)P∗(ν,γ)P∗(τu+(1−τ)ν,γ)≤h2(τ)P∗(u,γ)+h2(1−τ)P∗(ν,γ). |
From the definition of h-convex fuzzy-IVFs it follows that ˜0≼˜Q(z) and ˜0≼˜P(z), so
Q∗(τu+(1−τ)ν,γ)×P∗(τu+(1−τ)ν,γ)≤h1(τ)h2(τ)Q∗(u,γ)×P∗(u,γ)+h1(1−τ)h2(1−τ)Q∗(ν,γ)×P∗(ν,γ)+h1(τ)h2(1−τ)Q∗(u,γ)×P∗(ν,γ)+h1(1−τ)h2(τ)Q∗(ν,γ)×P∗(u,γ)Q∗(τu+(1−τ)ν,γ)×P∗(τu+(1−τ)ν,γ)≤h1(τ)h2(τ)Q∗(u,γ)×P∗(u,γ)+h1(1−τ)h2(1−τ)Q∗(ν,γ)×P∗(ν,γ)+h1(τ)h2(1−τ)Q∗(u,γ)×P∗(ν,γ)+h1(1−τ)h2(τ)Q∗(ν,γ)×P∗(u,γ). | (43) |
Analogously, we have
Q∗((1−τ)u+τν,γ)P∗((1−τ)u+τν,γ)≤h1(1−τ)h2(1−τ)Q∗(u,γ)×P∗(u,γ)+h1(τ)h2(τ)Q∗(ν,γ)×P∗(ν,γ)+h1(1−τ)h2(τ)Q∗(u,γ)×P∗(ν,γ)+h1(τ)h2(1−τ)Q∗(ν,γ)×P∗(u,γ)Q∗((1−τ)u+τν,γ)×P∗((1−τ)u+τν,γ)≤h1(1−τ)h2(1−τ)Q∗(u,γ)×P∗(u,γ)+h1(τ)h2(τ)Q∗(ν,γ)×P∗(ν,γ)+h1(1−τ)h2(τ)Q∗(u,γ)×P∗(ν,γ)+h1(τ)h2(1−τ)Q∗(ν,γ)×P∗(u,γ). | (44) |
Adding (43) and (44), we have
Q∗(τu+(1−τ)ν,γ)×P∗(τu+(1−τ)ν,γ)+Q∗((1−τ)u+τν,γ)×P∗((1−τ)u+τν,γ)≤[h1(τ)h2(τ)+h1(1−τ)h2(1−τ)][Q∗(u,γ)×P∗(u,γ)+Q∗(ν,γ)×P∗(ν,γ)]+[h1(τ)h2(1−τ)+h1(1−τ)h2(τ)][Q∗(ν,γ)×P∗(u,γ)+Q∗(u,γ)×P∗(ν,γ)]Q∗(τu+(1−τ)ν,γ)×P∗(τu+(1−τ)ν,γ)+Q∗((1−τ)u+τν,γ)×P∗((1−τ)u+τν,γ)≤[h1(τ)h2(τ)+h1(1−τ)h2(1−τ)][Q∗(u,γ)×P∗(u,γ)+Q∗(ν,γ)×P∗(ν,γ)]+[h1(τ)h2(1−τ)+h1(1−τ)h2(τ)][Q∗(ν,γ)×P∗(u,γ)+Q∗(u,γ)×P∗(ν,γ)]. | (45) |
Taking multiplication of (45) with τα−1 and integrating the obtained result with respect to τ over (0, 1), we have
∫10τα−1Q∗(τu+(1−τ)ν,γ)×P∗(τu+(1−τ)ν,γ)+τα−1Q∗((1−τ)u+τν,γ)×P∗((1−τ)u+τν,γ)dτ≤Δ∗((u,ν),γ)∫10τα−1[h1(τ)h2(τ)+h1(1−τ)h2(1−τ)]dτ+∇∗((u,ν),γ)∫10τα−1[h1(τ)h2(1−τ)+h1(1−τ)h2(τ)]dτ∫10τα−1Q∗(τu+(1−τ)ν,γ)×P∗(τu+(1−τ)ν,γ)+τα−1Q∗((1−τ)u+τν,γ)×P∗((1−τ)u+τν,γ)dτ≤Δ∗((u,ν),γ)∫10τα−1[h1(τ)h2(τ)+h1(1−τ)h2(1−τ)]dτ+∇∗((u,ν),γ)∫10τα−1[h1(τ)h2(1−τ)+h1(1−τ)h2(τ)]dτ. |
It follows that,
It follows that
that is
Thus,
and the theorem has been established.
Theorem 3.5. Let be two -convex and -convex fuzzy-IVFs, respectively, whose -levels define the family of IVFs are given by and for all and for all . If , then
Where and and
Proof. Consider are -convex and -convex fuzzy-IVFs. Then, by hypothesis, for each we have
(46) |
Taking multiplication of (46) with and integrating over we get
It follows that
that is
Hence, the required result.
The Theorem 3.6 and Theorem 3.7 are directly connected with right and left part of classical -Fejér inequality, respectively. Now firstly, we obtain the right part of classical -Fejér inequality through fuzzy Riemann Liouville fractional integral is known as second fuzzy fractional -Fejér inequality.
Theorem 3.6. (Second fuzzy fractional -Fejér inequality) Let be a -convex fuzzy-IVF with , whose -levels define the family of IVFs are given by for all and for all . If and symmetric with respect to then
(47) |
If is concave fuzzy-IVF, then inequality (47) is reversed.
Proof. Let be a h-convex fuzzy-IVF and . Then, for each we have
(48) |
And
(49) |
After adding (48) and (49), and integrating over we get
(50) |
Taking right hand side of inequality (50), we have
(51) |
From (51), we have
that is
hence
Now, we obtain the following result connected with left part of classical -Fejér inequality for h-convex fuzzy-IVF through fuzzy order relation which is known as first fuzzy fractional -Fejér inequality.
Theorem 3.7. (First fuzzy fractional -Fejér inequality) Let be a h-convex fuzzy-IVF with , whose -levels define the family of IVFs are given by for all and for all . If and symmetric with respect to then
(52) |
If is concave fuzzy-IVF, then inequality (52) is reversed.
Proof. Since is a h-convex fuzzy-IVF, then for we have
(53) |
Since , then by multiplying (53) by and integrate it with respect to over we obtain
(54) |
Let . Then, right hand side of inequality (54), we have
(55) |
Then from (55), we have
from which, we have
it follows that
that is
This completes the proof.
Remark 3.8. If , then from Theorem 3.6 and Theorem 3.7, we get Theorem 3.1.
If , then from Theorem 3.6 and Theorem 3.7, we get following factional -Fejér inequality:
Let and . Then, from Theorem 3.6 and Theorem 3.7, we obtain following -Fejér inequality for convex fuzzy-IVF which is also new one.
(57) |
Let and . Then, from Theorem 3.6 and Theorem 3.7, we obtain following -inequality for convex fuzzy-IVF given in [28]:
(58) |
If and and, then from Theorem 3.6 and Theorem 3.7, following -Fejér inequality for classical function following inequality given in [9]:
(59) |
If and and, then from Theorem 3.6 and Theorem 3.7, we obtain the classical -Fejér inequality (2).
If and and , then from Theorem 3.6 and Theorem 3.7, we get the classical -inequality (1).
Example 3.9. We consider the fuzzy-IVF defined by,
Then, for each we have . Since end point functions are -convex functions for each , then is -convex fuzzy-IVF. If
then , for all . Since and . If and , then we compute the following:
(60) |
(61) |
From (61) and (62), we have
Hence, Theorem 10 is verified.
For Theorem 11, we have
(62) |
(63) |
From (63) and (63), we have
In this study, we used fuzzy-interval Riemann-Liouville fractional integrals to prove some new Hermite-Hadamard inequalities for h-convex fuzzy IVFs. The results are consistent with those found in [1,2,7,16,26,28]. Furthermore, these results could be expanded in the future for different types of convexities and fractional integrals.
This work was supported by the Taif University Researchers Supporting Project Number (TURSP-2020/96), Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
[1] |
E. Ahmed, A. S. Hegazi, A. S. Elgazzar, On difference equations motivated by modelling the heart, Nonlinear Dyn., 46 (2006), 49–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11071-005-9006-8 doi: 10.1007/s11071-005-9006-8
![]() |
[2] |
S. A. Kuruklis, G. Ladas, Oscillations and global attractivity in a discrete delay logistic model, Q. Appl. Math., 50 (1992), 227–233. https://doi.org/10.1090/qam/1162273 doi: 10.1090/qam/1162273
![]() |
[3] |
X. Liu, A note on the existence of periodic solutions in discrete predator–prey models, Appl. Math. Modell., 34 (2010), 2477–2483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2009.11.012 doi: 10.1016/j.apm.2009.11.012
![]() |
[4] |
O. Moaaz, Comment on "New method to obtain periodic solutions of period two and three of a rational difference equation" [Nonlinear Dyn 79:241–250], Nonlinear Dyn., 88 (2017), 1043–1049. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11071-016-3293-0 doi: 10.1007/s11071-016-3293-0
![]() |
[5] | E. C. Pielou, An Introduction to Mathematical Ecology, New York: Wiley-Interscience, 1969. |
[6] |
M. L. Maheswari, K. S. K. Shri, E. M. Elsayed, Multipoint boundary value problem for a coupled system of psi-Hilfer nonlinear implicit fractional differential equation, Nonlinear Anal.-Model. Control, 28 (2023), 1138–1160. https://doi.org/10.15388/namc.2023.28.33474 doi: 10.15388/namc.2023.28.33474
![]() |
[7] |
E. M. Elsayed, Q. Din, Larch Budmoth Interaction: Stability, bifurcation and chaos control, Dyn. Syst. Appl., 32 (2023), 199–229. https://doi.org/10.46719/dsa2023.32.12 doi: 10.46719/dsa2023.32.12
![]() |
[8] |
E. M. Elsayed, B. S. Alofi, The periodic nature and expression on solutions of some rational systems of difference equations, Alexandria Eng. J., 74 (2023), 269–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2023.05.026 doi: 10.1016/j.aej.2023.05.026
![]() |
[9] |
I. M. Alsulami, E. M. Elsayed, On a class of nonlinear rational systems of difference equations, AIMS Math., 8 (2023), 15466–15485. https://doi.org/10.3934/math.2023789 doi: 10.3934/math.2023789
![]() |
[10] |
A. S. Kurbanli, On the behavior of solutions of the system of rational difference equations, Discrete Dyn. Nat. Soc., 2011 (2011), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/932362 doi: 10.1155/2011/932362
![]() |
[11] |
A. Khaliq, H. S. Alayachi, M. S. M. Noorani, A. Q. Khan, On stability analysis of higher-order rational difference equation, Discrete Dyn. Nat. Soc., 2020 (2020), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/3094185 doi: 10.1155/2020/3094185
![]() |
[12] |
W. Wang, H. Feng, On the dynamics of positive solutions for the difference equation in a new population model, J. Nonlinear Sci. Appl., 9 (2016), 1748–1754. http://dx.doi.org/10.22436/jnsa.009.04.30 doi: 10.22436/jnsa.009.04.30
![]() |
[13] |
T. Sun, H. Xi, Global behavior of the nonlinear difference equation , J. Math. Anal. Appl., 311 (2005), 760–765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmaa.2005.02.059 doi: 10.1016/j.jmaa.2005.02.059
![]() |
[14] | V. L. Kocic, G. Ladas, Global Behavior of Nonlinear Difference Equations of Higher Order with Applications, Springer Science & Business Media, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1703-8 |
[15] |
M. A. E. Abdelrahman, G. E. Chatzarakis, T. Li, O. Moaaz, On the difference equation , Adv. Differ. Equations, 2018 (2018), 431. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-018-1880-8 doi: 10.1186/s13662-018-1880-8
![]() |
[16] |
M. A. E. Abdelrahman, On the difference equation , J. Taibah Univ. Sci., 13 (2019), 1014–1021. https://doi.org/10.1080/16583655.2019.1678866 doi: 10.1080/16583655.2019.1678866
![]() |
[17] |
O. Moaaz, Dynamics of difference equation , Adv. Differ. Equations, 2018 (2018), 447. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-018-1896-0 doi: 10.1186/s13662-018-1896-0
![]() |
[18] |
O. Moaaz, D. Chalishajar, O. Bazighifan, Some qualitative behavior of solutions of general class of difference equations, Mathematics, 7 (2019), 585. https://doi.org/10.3390/math7070585 doi: 10.3390/math7070585
![]() |
[19] |
O. Moaaz, G. E. Chatzarakis, D. Chalishajar, O. Bazighifan, Dynamics of general class of difference equations and population model with two age classes, Mathematics, 8 (2020), 516. https://doi.org/10.3390/math8040516 doi: 10.3390/math8040516
![]() |
[20] | C. P. Simon, L. Blume, Mathematics for Economists, W. W. Norton & Company, 1994. |
[21] | M. R. S. Kulenovic, G. Ladas, Dynamics of Second Order Rational Difference Equations With Open Problems and Conjectures, Chapman & Hall/CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420035384 |
[22] |
A. S. Tuncbilek, A. Ayvaz, F. Ozturk, B. Kaplan, Gamma radiation sensitivity of larvae and adults of the red flour beetle, Tribolium castaneum Herbst, J. Pest Sci., 76 (2003), 129–132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340-003-0002-9 doi: 10.1007/s10340-003-0002-9
![]() |
[23] |
Y. Kuang, J. M. Cushing, Global stability in a nonlinear difference-delay equation model of flour beetle population growth, J. Differ. Equations Appl., 2 (1996), 31–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/10236199608808040 doi: 10.1080/10236199608808040
![]() |
[24] | S. Brozak, S. Peralta, T. Phan, J. Nagy, Y. Kuang, Dynamics of an LPAA model for Tribolium growth: Insights into population chaos, SIAM J. Appl. Math., in press, 2024. |
1. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Savin Treanțǎ, Mohamed S. Soliman, Kamsing Nonlaopon, Hatim Ghazi Zaini, Some New Versions of Integral Inequalities for Left and Right Preinvex Functions in the Interval-Valued Settings, 2022, 10, 2227-7390, 611, 10.3390/math10040611 | |
2. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Pshtiwan Othman Mohammed, Muhammad Aslam Noor, Khadijah M. Abualnaja, Fuzzy integral inequalities on coordinates of convex fuzzy interval-valued functions, 2021, 18, 1551-0018, 6552, 10.3934/mbe.2021325 | |
3. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Hari Mohan Srivastava, Pshtiwan Othman Mohammed, Juan L. G. Guirao, Fuzzy Mixed Variational-like and Integral Inequalities for Strongly Preinvex Fuzzy Mappings, 2021, 13, 2073-8994, 1816, 10.3390/sym13101816 | |
4. | Jorge E. Macías-Díaz, Muhammad Bilal Khan, Hleil Alrweili, Mohamed S. Soliman, Some Fuzzy Inequalities for Harmonically s-Convex Fuzzy Number Valued Functions in the Second Sense Integral, 2022, 14, 2073-8994, 1639, 10.3390/sym14081639 | |
5. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Hakeem A. Othman, Gustavo Santos-García, Muhammad Aslam Noor, Mohamed S. Soliman, Some new concepts in fuzzy calculus for up and down λ-convex fuzzy-number valued mappings and related inequalities, 2023, 8, 2473-6988, 6777, 10.3934/math.2023345 | |
6. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Muhammad Aslam Noor, Thabet Abdeljawad, Bahaaeldin Abdalla, Ali Althobaiti, Some fuzzy-interval integral inequalities for harmonically convex fuzzy-interval-valued functions, 2021, 7, 2473-6988, 349, 10.3934/math.2022024 | |
7. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Muhammad Aslam Noor, Pshtiwan Othman Mohammed, Juan L. G. Guirao, Khalida Inayat Noor, Some Integral Inequalities for Generalized Convex Fuzzy-Interval-Valued Functions via Fuzzy Riemann Integrals, 2021, 14, 1875-6883, 10.1007/s44196-021-00009-w | |
8. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Muhammad Aslam Noor, Nehad Ali Shah, Khadijah M. Abualnaja, Thongchai Botmart, Some New Versions of Hermite–Hadamard Integral Inequalities in Fuzzy Fractional Calculus for Generalized Pre-Invex Functions via Fuzzy-Interval-Valued Settings, 2022, 6, 2504-3110, 83, 10.3390/fractalfract6020083 | |
9. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Jorge E. Macías-Díaz, Mohamed S. Soliman, Muhammad Aslam Noor, Some New Integral Inequalities for Generalized Preinvex Functions in Interval-Valued Settings, 2022, 11, 2075-1680, 622, 10.3390/axioms11110622 | |
10. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Hari Mohan Srivastava, Pshtiwan Othman Mohammed, Juan L. G. Guirao, Taghreed M. Jawa, Fuzzy-interval inequalities for generalized preinvex fuzzy interval valued functions, 2021, 19, 1551-0018, 812, 10.3934/mbe.2022037 | |
11. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Muhammad Aslam Noor, Mohammed M. Al‐Shomrani, Lazim Abdullah, Some novel inequalities for LR‐h‐convex interval‐valued functions by means of pseudo‐order relation, 2022, 45, 0170-4214, 1310, 10.1002/mma.7855 | |
12. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Savin Treanțǎ, Hleil Alrweili, Tareq Saeed, Mohamed S. Soliman, Some new Riemann-Liouville fractional integral inequalities for interval-valued mappings, 2022, 7, 2473-6988, 15659, 10.3934/math.2022857 | |
13. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Hatim Ghazi Zaini, Jorge E. Macías-Díaz, Savin Treanțǎ, Mohamed S. Soliman, Some Fuzzy Riemann–Liouville Fractional Integral Inequalities for Preinvex Fuzzy Interval-Valued Functions, 2022, 14, 2073-8994, 313, 10.3390/sym14020313 | |
14. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Hatim Ghazi Zaini, Savin Treanțǎ, Gustavo Santos-García, Jorge E. Macías-Díaz, Mohamed S. Soliman, Fractional Calculus for Convex Functions in Interval-Valued Settings and Inequalities, 2022, 14, 2073-8994, 341, 10.3390/sym14020341 | |
15. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Hatim Ghazi Zaini, Gustavo Santos-García, Pshtiwan Othman Mohammed, Mohamed S. Soliman, Riemann–Liouville Fractional Integral Inequalities for Generalized Harmonically Convex Fuzzy-Interval-Valued Functions, 2022, 15, 1875-6883, 10.1007/s44196-022-00081-w | |
16. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Muhammad Aslam Noor, Khalida Inayat Noor, Kottakkaran Sooppy Nisar, Khadiga Ahmed Ismail, Ashraf Elfasakhany, Some Inequalities for LR--Convex Interval-Valued Functions by Means of Pseudo Order Relation, 2021, 14, 1875-6883, 10.1007/s44196-021-00032-x | |
17. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Hari Mohan Srivastava, Pshtiwan Othman Mohammed, Dumitru Baleanu, Taghreed M. Jawa, Fuzzy-interval inequalities for generalized convex fuzzy-interval-valued functions via fuzzy Riemann integrals, 2021, 7, 2473-6988, 1507, 10.3934/math.2022089 | |
18. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Hari Mohan Srivastava, Pshtiwan Othman Mohammed, Jorge E. Macías-Díaz, Y.S. Hamed, Some new versions of integral inequalities for log-preinvex fuzzy-interval-valued functions through fuzzy order relation, 2022, 61, 11100168, 7089, 10.1016/j.aej.2021.12.052 | |
19. | Hüseyin Irmak, An extensive note on various fractional-order type operators and some of their effects to certain holomorphic functions, 2022, 21, 2300-133X, 7, 10.2478/aupcsm-2022-0001 | |
20. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Hari Mohan Srivastava, Pshtiwan Othman Mohammed, Kamsing Nonlaopon, Y. S. Hamed, Some new Jensen, Schur and Hermite-Hadamard inequalities for log convex fuzzy interval-valued functions, 2022, 7, 2473-6988, 4338, 10.3934/math.2022241 | |
21. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Muhammad Aslam Noor, Hatim Ghazi Zaini, Gustavo Santos-García, Mohamed S. Soliman, The New Versions of Hermite–Hadamard Inequalities for Pre-invex Fuzzy-Interval-Valued Mappings via Fuzzy Riemann Integrals, 2022, 15, 1875-6883, 10.1007/s44196-022-00127-z | |
22. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Gustavo Santos-García, Savin Treanțǎ, Mohamed S. Soliman, New Class Up and Down Pre-Invex Fuzzy Number Valued Mappings and Related Inequalities via Fuzzy Riemann Integrals, 2022, 14, 2073-8994, 2322, 10.3390/sym14112322 | |
23. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Hatim Ghazi Zaini, Savin Treanțǎ, Mohamed S. Soliman, Kamsing Nonlaopon, Riemann–Liouville Fractional Integral Inequalities for Generalized Pre-Invex Functions of Interval-Valued Settings Based upon Pseudo Order Relation, 2022, 10, 2227-7390, 204, 10.3390/math10020204 | |
24. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Gustavo Santos-García, Hatim Ghazi Zaini, Savin Treanță, Mohamed S. Soliman, Some New Concepts Related to Integral Operators and Inequalities on Coordinates in Fuzzy Fractional Calculus, 2022, 10, 2227-7390, 534, 10.3390/math10040534 | |
25. | Muhammad Bilal Khan, Pshtiwan Othman Mohammed, José António Tenreiro Machado, Juan L. G. Guirao, Integral Inequalities for Generalized Harmonically Convex Functions in Fuzzy-Interval-Valued Settings, 2021, 13, 2073-8994, 2352, 10.3390/sym13122352 | |
26. | Conghui Xiong, Dan Fang, Xuebing Zou, Wei Yu, Fuzzy Mathematics-Based Evaluation Method for Comprehensive River Improvement Project Benefits, 2024, 12, 2169-3536, 126344, 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3455320 | |
27. | José Ramón Rabuñal, María Soto, Juan Ignacio Morales, Diego Lombao, Miguel Ángel Soares-Remiseiro, Juan Luis Fernández-Marchena, Josep Vallverdú, Las ocupaciones tardiglaciares de la Cova de Les Borres (La Febró, Tarragona), 2024, 81, 1988-3218, 992, 10.3989/tp.2024.992 |