Theorem | \left\| \mathtt{ζ}_{1} \right\| | \mathtt{γ} | \mathtt{τ}_{N} | r | \mathtt{δ} | \left\| \mathcal{y} \right\| | \mathtt{ϵ} | (FTS) |
3.1 | 0.1 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 2.35 | 2.36 | yes |
Citation: Xin Long. Novel stability criteria on a patch structure Nicholson's blowflies model with multiple pairs of time-varying delays[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(6): 7387-7401. doi: 10.3934/math.2020473
[1] | Qing Yang, Chuanzhi Bai, Dandan Yang . Finite-time stability of nonlinear stochastic ψ-Hilfer fractional systems with time delay. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(10): 18837-18852. doi: 10.3934/math.20221037 |
[2] | Jingfeng Wang, Chuanzhi Bai . Finite-time stability of q-fractional damped difference systems with time delay. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(11): 12011-12027. doi: 10.3934/math.2021696 |
[3] | Junsoo Lee, Wassim M. Haddad . On finite-time stability and stabilization of nonlinear hybrid dynamical systems. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(6): 5535-5562. doi: 10.3934/math.2021328 |
[4] | Zhengqi Zhang, Huaiqin Wu . Cluster synchronization in finite/fixed time for semi-Markovian switching T-S fuzzy complex dynamical networks with discontinuous dynamic nodes. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(7): 11942-11971. doi: 10.3934/math.2022666 |
[5] | Yanli Ma, Hamza Khalil, Akbar Zada, Ioan-Lucian Popa . Existence theory and stability analysis of neutral ψ–Hilfer fractional stochastic differential system with fractional noises and non-instantaneous impulses. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(4): 8148-8173. doi: 10.3934/math.2024396 |
[6] | Tiecheng Zhang, Liyan Wang, Yuan Zhang, Jiangtao Deng . Finite-time stability for fractional-order fuzzy neural network with mixed delays and inertial terms. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(7): 19176-19194. doi: 10.3934/math.2024935 |
[7] | Prabakaran Raghavendran, Tharmalingam Gunasekar, Irshad Ayoob, Nabil Mlaiki . AI-driven controllability analysis of fractional impulsive neutral Volterra-Fredholm integro-differential equations with state-dependent delay. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(4): 9342-9368. doi: 10.3934/math.2025432 |
[8] | Yong-Ki Ma, Marimuthu Mohan Raja, Kottakkaran Sooppy Nisar, Anurag Shukla, Velusamy Vijayakumar . Results on controllability for Sobolev type fractional differential equations of order 1<r<2 with finite delay. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(6): 10215-10233. doi: 10.3934/math.2022568 |
[9] | Jun Liu, Wenjing Deng, Shuqin Sun, Kaibo Shi . Novel fixed-time synchronization results of fractional-order fuzzy cellular neural networks with delays and interactions. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(5): 13245-13264. doi: 10.3934/math.2024646 |
[10] | Yidan Wang, Li Xiao, Yanfeng Guo . Finite-time stability of singular switched systems with a time-varying delay based on an event-triggered mechanism. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(1): 1901-1924. doi: 10.3934/math.2023098 |
The interconnection between the dynamical behavior of discrete and continuous systems is referred to as a hybrid class. The concept of hybrid systems can be utilized to study the discrete dynamics of a model whenever the continuous form of the system has a suppressed effect. In networking, hybrid systems maximize the impact of new technology by integrating newly developed techniques with existing ones, thereby enhancing the efficiency of the constructed model. This type of system has gained remarkable attention in various evolving fields, such as networking and communications, industries, and circuit models [1,2,3]. The study of continuous-time models with switches at discrete time instants is referred to as switched systems. By abstracting away the discrete behavior and focusing on the possible switching patterns within a class, it is possible to derive switched systems from hybrid models. In the control design of systems with sub-modules, the switching mechanism plays a crucial role. This mechanism is categorized based on two criteria: time-dependent and state-dependent switches. In the case of switches which are dependent on the state, the space Rn is divided into a set of operating regions by a family of switching sequence. Now each of these regions is interlinked with a sub-module which is continuous. When the trajectory of the system cuts through switching surface, the state response of the system suddenly undergoes a change and jumps to a new region by means of a reset map, whereas, if we consider a switching sequence which is time dependent the system consists of a piecewise constant switching signal δ:[0,∞]→P, where P is a finite positive set of integers. The discontinuities of a function δ at finite time instant is called switching time signals. Here, δ defines the active subsystem at each time instant. Existence of solution and its uniqueness for the uncertain class of the switched fractional model was presented in [4]. Positive solutions of switching models was established by [5]. Switching topologies of the multi-agent model was analyzed in [6].
The examination of system behavior in the presence of time delay is a crucial aspect while designing physiological and circuit systems. Moreover, analyzation of delay effect has gained even more attention while designing control models. Significant study time-delay control models can be found in [7,8,9]. Controllability is one of the most important and effective aspects of studying and manipulating the designed model according to specific requirements. This approach helps refine differential models. The impact of impulses on a system plays a vital role in designing the control input, as it requires formulating a piecewise control input for each interval. Few methods to study the impulsive control systems and their stability are found in [10,11,12,13]. When it comes to nonlinear controllability, the two vital techniques used are fixed point and differential geometry [14,15,16,17]. Switched system combined with impulsive effects is more efficient to model the discontinuous dynamics. Existing literature provides a great range of solution methods for hybrid systems. [18] et al. discussed the controllability of switch perturbed system with delays. The geometric method to analyze the reachability of the switched linear system was presented in [19]. Controllability of multi-delay switched models was presented in [20]. Some recent results on relative cotrollability of fractional order systems can be found in [21,22]. There are very few works pertaining to the analysis on stability and controllability of the switched fractional system. To mention a few, T. Kaczorek in [23] established the asymptotic behavior of the linear switched positive fractional system. Stability of impulsive switched fractional conformable system was discussed in [24]. Boundedness and stability of switched fractional models over finite time period was discussed in [25]. In [26], the authors discussed the controllability criteria for the Hilfer switched dynamical model. Relative controllability of the switched nonlinear fractional order system was established in [16]. Study on the control results of the nonlocal switching system can be found in [27]. Finite-time stability (FTS) refers to the study of whether a system's state remains within a predefined threshold over a fixed time interval. In other words, FTS ensures that the system's solution does not exceed a certain bound within a given time horizon, regardless of external disturbances or initial conditions. Unlike traditional asymptotic stability, which focuses on long-term behavior, FTS is particularly useful in scenarios where maintaining system constraints over a finite duration is critical, such as in control applications, robotics, and networked systems.
One of the key criteria for achieving FTS is ensuring that the system variables remain bounded within the specified time frame. This boundedness is essential in many real-world applications where transient behavior plays a crucial role, such as in aerospace systems, power grids, and biological models. Various techniques, including Lyapunov-based methods, comparison principles, and differential inequalities, are commonly employed to establish sufficient conditions for finite-time stability.
Due to its significance in practical applications, FTS has been a subject of extensive research in recent years. Numerous studies explore different approaches to analyze and enhance FTS, particularly in hybrid and switched systems, where impulsive effects and delays introduce additional complexities. Researchers continue to develop novel methodologies and theoretical frameworks to improve stability guarantees in such systems, making FTS an active and evolving area of study in control theory and applied mathematics. Work presented in [28] analyzes the FTS of neutral fractional system in-terms of fixed point results. Thresholds for impulsive singular systems to admit FTS was studied in [29]. Switching system stability was examined in [15,30]. A lot of informative results on FTS and how essentially it affects the analyzation of differential models are discussed in [2,14,28,29,31,32,33,34]. Comparative studies on stability and controllability of switching systems for various derivatives of fractional order are presented in [15,26,35,36,37,38,39].
A careful examination of the aforementioned research works reveals that the general form of the solution is not easily deduced when the switched system is subject to time delays that occur at different time instants, particularly when coupled with nonlinear perturbations. This complexity presents a significant challenge in the analysis and control of such systems. In this context, this work investigates the finite-time stability and relative-type control criteria for fractional-order switched impulsive systems with delays occurring at distinct time instants. The aim is to develop effective control strategies that account for the interplay between time delays, nonlinearity, and fractional dynamics.
(cDγy)(τ)=Hδ(τ)y(τ−d)+Pδ(τ)w(τ−ρ)+Qδ(τ)(τ,y(τ),∫τ0g(τ,η,y(η))dη),τ∈(τl−1,τl],Δy(τ)=Eδ(τ)y(τ),τ=τl,y(τ)=ζ1(τ),τ0−d≤τ≤τ0,ζ1(τ)∈C([τ0−d,τ0],Rn),w(τ)=ζ2(τ),τ0−ρ≤τ≤τ0,ζ2(τ)∈C([τ0−ρ,τ0],Rm), | (1.1) |
where the derivative order is γ∈(12,1), the state response vector is y(τ)∈Rn, and w(τ)∈Rm. Then, d>0,ρ>0 represents the time delay in the state and control input. δ(τ):[0,∞]→SK1=1,...,K represents the switching function which is left continuous. At the instant δ(τ)=j the jth subsystem (Hj,Pj,Qj) will be active. Jump at the instant τl is denoted by Δy(τl)+y(τ−l)=y(τ+l). The matrices are Hj∈Rn×n,Pj∈Rn×m and Qj∈C([τ0,τl]×Rn×Rn,Rn).Eδ(τ):Rn→Rn, represents the impulsive function. Let rl=τl−τl−1 represent the dwell time. At this point, it is important to note the switching signals and perturbations occur simultaneously and, therefore synchronize at τl. As a first step, we begin by deducing the solution of system (1.1) to analyze the stability and control results. Consider the following system
(cDγy)(τ)=Hy(τ−d)+Q(τ),τ≥τ0,y(τ)=ζ1(τ),τ0−d≤τ≤τ0,ζ1(τ)∈C([τ0−d,τ0],Rn). | (1.2) |
The authors in [40] proposed the solution of (1.2) as
˜y(τ)=ZH(τ−τ0)γdζ1(τ−d)+∫τ0τ0−dZH(τ−d−ν)γdζ′1(ν)dν+∫ττ0ZH(τ−ν)γd,γQ(ν)dν, | (1.3) |
where ZH.γd and ZH.γd,γ will be described later. It is more complicated to evaluate the solution of (1.1) as in the form of (1.3); hence, we first establish improvised form of (1.3) to deduce the state response of (1.1).
While there is significant research on linear models and stability criteria for fractional-order differential equations, the nonlinear analytical methods specific to FTS systems remain less explored. Furthermore, there is a lack of generalization in the thresholds for FTS across different models. The study of generalized models and their identifiability or invertibility in the context of fractional delays has not been thoroughly established in previous works, especially concerning systems with nonlinear dynamics. The paper addresses identifiability and invertibility of generalized fractional models, which is not commonly explored in the literature. This contributes to the practical application of these models, particularly in fields involving parameter estimation and system identification. This integrated approach offers a more robust validation of the theoretical findings, providing a clear pathway from mathematical derivations to practical implementation. This was largely missing from earlier research where either theoretical or numerical methods were treated separately. We try to propose a piecewise continuous solution in the form of the delayed matrix Mittag Leffler function. Then, we deduce the require bound for (1.1) to admit finite time period stability. Further, analytical and fixed point techniques will be used to analyze the relative control results of (1.1). The framework of the article is outlined as follows:
In Section 2, we discuss the basic results, integral inequalities, and definitions which are required for theoretical study. The thresholds required for FTS are deduced in Section 3. In Section 4, we provide a nonlinear analytical study using theorems, such as the fixed point for (1.1), to be relatively controllable. In Section 5, we substantiate our study with concrete numerical simulations.
Let us take into account the vector space Rn with ‖H‖=√λmax(HTH) as the matrix norm, where λmax(H) is the largest eigenvalue of the matrix H. Then, J=P.C.([τ0−d,τN],Rn) denoted the piecewise continuous Banach space function. Let ‖y‖=sup{‖y(τ)‖,τ∈J}. Moreover, let ‖y‖L2[τ0,τN]=(∫τNτ0‖y(ν)‖2dν)12 be the square functions which are integrable. The important assumption that we need to consider is rl>max{d,ρ}.
Definition 2.1. [16] Let {τl}N1 be a sequence of time periods. Then, δ:[τ0,τN]→SK1 is defined as an admissible switch if δ(τ)=δ(τ+l)=δ(τl+1),τ∈(τl−1,τl], and δ(τ0)=δ(τ+0).
Definition 2.2. [16] For any given initial functions ζ1(τ) and ζ2(τ), the relative type controllability of (1.1) with respect to the {τl}Nl=1 is guaranteed if for the admissible signal δ(τ) and the input w∈L2([τ0,τN−ρ],Rm) in such a way that y(τN)=yf.
Definition 2.3. [7] The differential operator in the sense of Riemann-Liouville with order γ∈(0,1) of a function y:[0,∞)→R is given as (RLDγy)(τ)=1Γ(1−γ)ddτ∫τ0y(ν)(τ−ν)γdν.
Definition 2.4. [30] The differential operator in the sense of Caputo with order γ∈(0,1) of a function y:[0,∞)→R is given as (CDγy)(τ)=(RLDγy)(τ)−y(0)Γ(1−γ)τ−γ.
Definition 2.5. [7] The Mittag-Leffler (ML) functions Eγ and Eγ,ν are given as
Eγ(τ)=∞∑l=0τlΓ(lγ+1),γ>0,Eγ,ν(τ)=∞∑l=0τlΓ(lγ+ν),(γ,ν)>0. |
Moreover, we have the integral identity
∫ba(τ−ν)γ−1Eγ,γ(λ(τ−ν)γ)dν=1λ[Eγ(λ(τ−a)γ)−Eγ(λ(τ−b)γ)]. |
Definition 2.6. [16] The classical form of delayed type ML matrix is defined as ZHτγd:R→Rn×n with
ZHτγd={Θ,−∞<τ<−d,I,−d≤τ≤0,I+HτγΓ(γ+1)+H2(τ−d)2γΓ(2γ+1)+...+Hm(τ−(m−1)d)mγΓ(γm+1),(m−1)d<τ≤md,m∈S∞1, |
where the notion Θ denoted the matrix with all entries zero and I is the identity matrix.
Definition 2.7. [16] The delayed type ML matrix of two parameters ZHτγd,ν:R→Rn×n is of the type
ZHτγd,ν={Θ,−∞<τ<−d,I(d+τ)γ−1Γ(ν),−d≤τ≤0,I(d+τ)γ−1Γ(ν)+Hτ2γ−1Γ(γ+ν)+H2(τ−d)3γ−1Γ(2γ+ν)+...+Hm(τ−(m−1)d)(m+1)γ−1Γ(mγ+ν),(m−1)d<τ≤md,m∈S∞1. |
Definition 2.8. [16] System (1.1) admits FTS with respect to {J,δ,ϵ,µ}, whenever max{‖ζ1‖,‖ζ2‖}<δ and ‖w‖<µ⟹‖y‖<ϵ, for all τ∈[τ0,τN]. Moreover δ,µ,ϵ, are positive constants.
Lemma 2.1. [16] For γ>12,ν>0, then
‖ZHτγd,ν‖≤τγ−1Ed,ν(‖H‖τγ),τ>0. |
Lemma 2.2. If ζ1∈C([τ0−d,τ0],Rn), then the solution of (1.2) is formulated as
y(τ)=ZH(τ−τ0−d)γdζ1(τ0)+∫τ0τ0−dHZH(τ−d−ν)γd,γζ1(ν)dν+∫ττ0ZH(τ−ν)γd,γQ(ν)dν. | (2.1) |
Proof. By following Theorem 3 [34], we get that
˜y(τ)=ZH(τ−τ0−d)γdζ1(τ0)+∫τ0τ0−dHZH(τ−τ0−d)γd,γζ1(ν)dν, |
is a solution of (cDγy)(τ)=Hy(τ−d), with y(τ)=ζ1(τ),τ0−d≤τ≤τ0 as initial value.
Moreover, if ζ(0)=0, then y(τ)=∫ττ0ZH(τ−ν)γd,γQ(ν)dν, as any solution of (1.2) has the form y(τ)+˜y(τ), and Eq (2.1) follows.
As a direct consequence of the above lemma we present Lemma 2.3 without proof.
Lemma 2.3. Whenever ζ1(τ)∈C([τ0−d,τ0],Rn) and ζ2(τ)∈C([τ0−ρ,τ0],Rn), for an admissible δ(τ), the state response of (1.1) can be formulated as
![]() |
(2.2) |
with χn,l=j+1∏l=nZHδ(τl)(rl−d)γd=ZHδ(τn)(rn−d)γd⋯ZHδ(τj+1)(rj+1−d)γd,n>j and χn,n=1.
H1: For the continuous function Qi(.), there exists Fi,Gi:R+→R+ so that
sup(‖y‖+‖z‖)≤ω‖Qi(τ,y(τ),z(τ))‖≤Fi‖y‖+Gi‖z‖,y,z∈Rn. |
Therefore we get
‖Qi(τ,y(τ),∫τ0g(τ,η,y(η))dη)‖≤Fi‖y‖+Gi‖∫τ0g(τ,η,y(η))dη)‖≤κi(ω), |
where κi=Fi+Gibi,bi>0.
In order to make the paper in an easily readable manner, we consider the below given notions
‖Hl‖=αHl,‖Pl‖=αPl,‖Ql‖=αQl,supτ∈[τ0−d,τ0]‖ζ1(τ)‖=‖ζ1‖,supτ∈[τ0−ρ,τ0]‖ζ2(τ)‖=‖ζ2‖, |
Uk=Ed(αHδ(τk)(rk−d)γ),Uk,l=Uk...Ul,Uk,k=1,Lk=Eγ(αHδ(τk)(rk)γ)−Eγ(αHδ(τk)(rk−d)γ), |
G0=αPδ(τ1)αHδ(τ1)[Eγ(αHδ(τ1)rγ1)−Eγ(αHδ(τ1)(r1−ρ)γ)], |
G1=αPδ(τ1)Eγ,γ(αHδ(τ1)(r1−ρ)γ)(r1−ρ)γ−12(2γ−1)12, |
Gm=αPδ(τm)Eγ,γ(αHδ(τm)rγm)rγ−12m(2γ−1)12, |
Vk=1αHδ(τk)(Eγ(αHδ(τk)rγk)−1), |
L1=αHδ(τ1)UN,1[∫τ1−ρτ0(EαHδ(τk)(τ1−ρ−ν)γd,γ)2dν]12, |
Lm=αHδ(τm)UN,l[∫τmτm−1(EαHδ(τm)(τm−ν)γd,γ)2dν]12, |
qk=Uk,0‖ζ1(τ0)‖+Uk,1(L1‖ζ1‖+G0‖ζ2‖),P0=1+UN,lGjRj‖M−1‖,P1=N∑l=2UN,lLl, |
~G1=µαPδ(τ1)Eγ,γ(αHδ(τ1)(r1−ν)γ)(r1−ρ)γγ−1), |
L1=αHδ(τ1)Eγ,γ(αHδ(τ1)τγ1)∫τ0τ0−ν(τ−ν)γ−1‖ζ1‖dν, |
where
k∈SN1,m∈SN2,i∈SM1,j<k. |
The primary focus of this section is to avoid the Lyapnouv method and to reduce the conservative criterias to establish the stability over the bounded interval. Let
λmax(H)=max{αHδ(τl)},l=1,2,... |
Then,
ϕ1=Eγ(λmax(H)(r1−d)γ),ϕk,l=ϕk,...,ϕl+1,k>l,ϕk,k=1. |
Theorem 3.1. FTS of system (1.1) is guarenteed if the following inequality holds:
Z1(1+Δ2λmax(E)Eγ(Z2Γγτγ))Eγ(Z2Γγτγ)<ϵ,τ∈[τ0,τN], |
where
Z1=ϕn+1,0δ+ϕn+1,1(L1+G0δ+~G1)+Δ2µλmax(P)Eγ,γ(λmax(H)rγ)rγγ−1,Z2=Δ2λmax(H)Eγ,γ(λmax(H)rγ)+Δ1κlEγ,γ(λmax(H)rγ). |
Proof. Taking norm of Eq (2.2) on the interval (τl−1,τl], we get
![]() |
where r=maxrl,l=1,2...,N. Now, let Δ1=∑n+1l=1ϕn+1,l and Δ2=∑n+1l=2ϕn+1,l, then we have
‖y(τ)‖≤ϕn+1,0δ+ϕn+1,1(L1+G0δ+~G1)+Δ2µλmax(P)Eγ,γ(λmax(H)rγ)rγγ−1+Δ2λmax(H)∫ττ0(τ−ν)γ−1Eγ,γ(λmax(H)rγ)‖y‖dν+Δ1κl∫ττ0(τ−ν)γ−1Eγ,γ(λmax(H)rγ)‖y‖dν+Δ2λmax(E)‖yl‖. |
Then, while comparing the above inequality with the GI theorem [41], we formulate
‖y(τ)‖≤Z1(1+Δ2λmax(E)Eγ(Z2Γγτγ))Eγ(Z2Γγτγ)<ϵ. |
As an initial step to analyze the relatively controllable criteria of (1.1), we begin by formulating the following Grammian matrix.
M1=∫τ1−ρτ0[χN,1ZHδ(τ1)(τ1−ρ−ν)γd,γPδ(τ1)][χN,1ZHδ(τ1)(τ1−ρ−ν)γd,γPδ(τ1)]Tdν,Mn=∫τn−ρτn−1−ρ[χN,nZHδ(τn)(τn−ρ−ν)γd,γPδ(τn)][χN,nZHδ(τn)(τn−ρ−ν)γd,γPδ(τn)]Tdν,n∈SN2,M=N∑n=1Mn, |
where δ(τ) is a switching signal.
wy(τ)={[χN,1ZHδ(τ1)(τ1−ρ−ν)γd,γPδ(τ1)]Tβy,τ∈[τ0,τ1−ρ],[χN,nZHδ(τn)(τn−ρ−ν)γd,γPδ(τn)]Tβy,τ∈[τn−1−ρ,τn−ρ],n∈SN2, |
where
βy=M−1{yf−χN,0ζ1(τ0)−χN,1(∫τ0τ0−dHδ(τ1)ZHδ(τ1)(τ1−d−ν)γd,γζ1(ν)dν−∫τ0τ0−ρZHδ(τ1)(τ1−ρ−ν)γd,γPδ(τ1)ζ2(ν)dν)−N∑l=2χN,l(∫τlτl−1−dZHδ(τl)(τl−d−ν)γd,γHδ(τl)y(ν)dν−∫τlτl−1−ρZHδ(τl)(τl−ρ−ν)γd,γPδ(τl)wy(ν)dν−Eδ(τl)y(τl))−N∑l=1χN,l∫τlτl−1ZHδ(τl)(τl−ν)γd,γQδ(τ1)(ν,y(ν),∫ν0g(ν,η,y(η))dη)dν}. |
As a next step, we construct the operator σ:J→J,
![]() |
The technique of the fixed point argument will be utilized for our theoretical analyzation.
Lemma 4.1. [42] If D is a closed convex subset of a banach space and if σ:D→D is an operator which is completely continuous, then there exists at least one fixed point for σ in D.
H2: Let δ(τ) be a switching signal which is admissible and satisfies the condition Rank (M)=n.
Theorem 4.1. If the condition
θ=limω→∞2P0(P1+∑Nl=1UN,lVlκδ(τl)(ω)+∑Nl=1UN,lλmax(E)(ω)ω)<1, | (4.1) |
holds then relative controllability of (1.1) is well-established.
Proof. We need to prove that σ has a fixed point
Γ(ω)={y∈J:‖y‖≤ω2,τ∈[τ0,τN]}. |
To show ˜ω∈R+ in such a way that σ(Γ(˜ω))⊂Γ(˜ω), we use the contradiction method to establish this result. Let there exist a possibility to find y∈Γ(˜ω) in such a way ‖σy‖>ω2, then we have the following estimations.
When τ∈(τ0,τ0+ρ],
‖(σy)(τ)‖≤‖ZHδ(τ1)(τ−τ0−d)γdζ1(τ0)‖+‖∫τ0τ0−dHδ(τ1)ZHδ(τ1)(τ−d−ν)γd,γζ1(ν)dν‖+‖∫τ−ρτ0−ρZHδ(τ1)(τ−ρ−ν)γd,γ‖‖Pδ(τ1)ζ2(ν)‖dν+‖∫ττ0ZHδ(τ1)(τ−ν)γd,γQδ(τ1)(ν,y(ν),∫ν0g(ν,η,y(η))dη)dν‖≤Eγ(αHδ(τ1)(r1−d)γ)‖ζ1(τ0)‖+αHδ(τ1)Eγ,γ(αHδ(τ1)(τ)γ)∫τ0τ0−d‖ζ1‖dν+αPδ(τ1)∫ττ0(τ−ν)γ−1Eγ,γ(αHδ(τ1)(τ−ν)γ)‖ζ2‖dν+∫ττ0(τ−ν)γ−1Eγ,γ(αHδ(τ1)(τ−ν)γ)κδ(τ1)(ω)dν≤Eγ(αHδ(τ1)(r1−d)γ)‖ζ1(τ0)‖+αHδ(τ1)Eγ,γ(αHδ(τ1)(τ)γ)∫τ0τ0−d‖ζ1‖dν+αPδ(τ1)∫τ0+ρτ0(τ0+ρ−ν)γ−1Eγ,γ(αHδ(τ1)(τ0+ρ−ν)γ)‖ζ2‖dν+∫τ0+ρτ0(τ0+ρ−ν)γ−1Eγ,γ(αHδ(τ1)(τ−ν)γ)κδ(τ1)(ω)dν≤U1‖ζ1(τ0)‖+L1+αPδ(τ1)αHδ(τ1)[Eγ(αHδ(τ1)ργ)−1]‖ζ2‖+1αHδ(τ1)[Eγ(αHδ(τ1)ργ)−1]κδ(τ1)(ω)≤U1‖ζ1(τ0)‖+L1+G0‖ζ2‖+V1κδ(τ1)(ω), |
for τ∈(τ0+ρ,τ1],
‖(σy)(τ)‖≤‖ZHδ(τ1)(τ−τ0−d)γdζ1(τ0)‖+‖∫τ0τ0−dHδ(τ1)ZHδ(τ1)(τ−d−ν)γd,γζ1(ν)dν‖+‖∫τ0τ0−ρZHδ(τ1)(τ−ρ−ν)γd,γ‖‖Pδ(τ1)ζ2(ν)‖dν+‖∫τ0τ0−ρZHδ(τ1)(τ−ρ−ν)γd,γ‖‖Pδ(τ1)‖‖wy‖dν+‖∫ττ0ZHδ(τ1)(τ−ν)γd,γQδ(τ1)(ν,y(ν),∫ν0g(ν,η,y(η))dη)dν‖≤Eγ(αHδ(τ1)(r1−d)γ)‖ζ1(τ0)‖+αHδ(τ1)Eγ,γ(αHδ(τ1)(τ)γ)∫τ0τ0−d‖ζ1‖dν+αPδ(τ1)×∫τ0+ρτ0(τ0+ρ−ν)γ−1Eγ,γ(αHδ(τ1)(τ0+ρ−ν)γ)‖ζ2‖dν+αPδ(τ1)∫τ1−ρτ0(τ0−ρ−ν)γ−1Eγ,γ(αHδ(τ1)(τ1−ρ−ν)γ)‖wy‖dν+∫τ1τ0(τ1−ν)γ−1Eγ,γ(αHδ(τ1)(τ1−ν)γ)κδ(τ1)(ω)dν≤U1‖ζ1(τ0)‖+L1+G0‖ζ2‖+αPδ(τ1)Eγ,γ(αHδ(τ1)(r1−ρ)γ)∫τ1−ρτ0((τ1−ρ−ν)2γ−2dν)12×‖wy‖L2[τ0,τ1−ρ]+V1κδ(τ1)(ω)≤q1+G1αPδ(τ1)[∫τ1−ρτ0(ZαHδ(τ1)(τ1−ρ−ν)γd,γ)2dν]12‖βy‖+V1κδ(τ1)(ω)≤q1+G1R1‖βy‖+V1κδ(τ1)(ω), |
for τ∈(τn,τn+1],
‖(σy)(τ)‖≤Un+1[Un,0‖ζ(τ0)‖+Un,1(L1+G0‖ζ1‖+G1‖wy‖L2[τ0,τ1−ρ])+n∑l=2Un,lLl‖y‖+n∑l=2Un,lGl‖wy‖+n∑l=2Un,l‖Eδ(τl)‖‖yl‖+n∑l=1Un,lVlκδ(τl)(ω)]+Ln+1‖y‖+Vn+1κδ(τn+1)(ω)+Gn+1‖wy‖L2[τl−1−ρ,τl−ρ]≤Un+1,0‖ζ(τ0)‖+Un+1,1(L1+G0‖ζ2‖)+n+1∑l=2Un+1,lLl‖y‖+n+1∑l=1Un+1,lGlRl‖βy‖+n+1∑l=1Un+1,lVlκδ(τl)(ω)+n+1∑l=2Un+1,lλmax(E)‖yl‖≤qn+1+n+1∑l=2Un+1,lLl(ω)+n+1∑l=1Un+1,lVlκδ(τl)(ω)+n+1∑l=1Un+1,lGlRl‖βy‖+n+1∑l=2Un+1,lλmax(E)(ω), |
where
‖βy‖≤‖M−1‖{‖yf‖+UN,0‖ζ1(τ0)‖+UN,1(L1+G0‖ζ2‖)+N∑l=2UN,lLl(ω)+N∑l=2UN,lλmax(E)(ω)+N∑l=1UN,lVlκδ(τl)(ω)}. |
As Uk≥1, we have
‖(σy)(τ)‖≤P2+N∑l=2UN,lLl(ω)+N∑l=1UN,lVlκδ(τl)(ω)+N∑l=2UN,lλmax(E)(ω)+N∑l=1UN,lGlRl‖M−1‖[N∑l=2UN,lLl(ω)+N∑l=1UN,lVlκδ(τl)(ω)+N∑l=2UN,lλmax(E)(ω)],‖(σy)(τ)‖≤P2+N∑l=2UN,lLl(ω)(1+N∑l=1UN,lGlRl‖M−1‖)+N∑l=1UN,lVlκδ(τl)(ω)(1+N∑l=1UN,lGlRl‖M−1‖)+UN,lλmax(E)(ω)(1+N∑l=1UN,lGlRl‖M−1‖)≤P2+P0P1ω+P0N∑l=1UN,lVlκδ(τl)(ω)+P0N∑l=2UN,lλmax(E)(ω), |
where
P2=maxn∈SN2{q1+G1R1‖W−1‖(qN+‖yf‖),qn+N∑l=1UN,lGlRl‖M−1‖(qN+‖yf‖)}. |
Therefore, we obtain
limω→∞P0P1+P0(∑Nl=1UN,lVlκδ(τl)(ω)+∑Nl=2UN,lλmax(E)(ω))ω≥12, |
which conflicts our assumed fact θ<1, hence
σ(Γ(˜ω))⊂Γ(˜ω),˜ω∈Rn. |
Now we proceed to prove that σ:Γ(˜ω)→Γ(˜ω) is completely continuous.
S1: The operator σ is continuous.
If yk converges to y in Γ(˜ω), then continuity of Ql follows from the fact
supτ∈[τl−1,τl]‖Qδ(τl)(ν,yk(ν),∫ν0g(ν,η,yk(η))dη)−Qδ(τl)(ν,y(ν),∫ν0g(ν,η,y(η))dη)‖→0,k→∞. |
Therefore
‖(σyk)(τ)−(σy)(τ)‖≤maxn∈SN−11≤{supτ∈[τ0,τ1]‖(σyk)(τ)−(σy)(τ)‖,supτ∈[τn,τn+1]‖(σyk)(τ)−(σy)(τ)‖}≤maxn∈SN−11{G1R1‖βyk−βy‖+V1supτ∈[τ0,τ1]‖Qδ(τ1)(ν,yk(ν),∫ν0g(ν,η,yk(η))dη)−Qδ(τ1)(ν,y(ν),∫ν0g(ν,η,y(η))dη)‖,n+1∑l=1Un+1,lLl‖yk−y‖+n+1∑l=1Un+1,lGlRl‖βyk−βy‖+Vlsupτ∈[τl−1,τl]‖Qδ(τl)(ν,yk(ν),∫ν0g(ν,η,yk(η))dη)−Qδ(τl)(ν,y(ν),∫ν0g(ν,η,y(η))dη)‖+N∑l=2UN,l‖Eδ(τl)‖‖yk(τl)−y(τl)‖}, |
where
‖βyk−βy‖≤‖M−1‖(N∑l=2UN,lLl‖yl−y‖+N∑l=1UN,lVlsupτ∈[τl−1,τl]‖Qδ(τl)(ν,yk(ν),∫ν0g(ν,η,yk(η))dη)−Qδ(τl)(ν,y(ν),∫ν0g(ν,η,y(η))dη)‖)+N∑l=2UN,l‖Eδ(τl)‖‖yk(τl)−y(τl)‖. |
Then, it is straightforward to view ‖βyk−βy‖→0 when ‖yk−y‖→0, from which we get \left\|\sigma \mathcal{y_{\, k}} -\sigma \mathcal{y}\right\| \rightarrow 0 as \left\|\mathcal{y_{\, k}} -\mathcal{y}\right\| \rightarrow 0 ; hence, \sigma is continuous.
\mathcal{S_{2}}:\, The operator \sigma is compact.
Consider \Gamma_{0} to be a subset of \Gamma(\tilde{\omega}) , which is bounded. Then, it is easy to view that \sigma(\Gamma_{0}) \subset\Gamma(\tilde{\omega}) is bounded uniformly on [\mathtt{τ}_{0}-d, \mathtt{τ}_{N}] .
Then, for \mathtt{τ}_{0} < \mathtt{τ} < \mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}\leq\mathtt{τ}_{1} and \mathcal{y} \in \Gamma_{0} , we get
\begin{align*} &\quad\left\|(\sigma \mathcal{y})(\mathtt{τ}+\epsilon)-(\sigma \mathcal{y}(\mathtt{τ}))\right\|\\ &\leq\| \mathcal{Z}_{d}^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})} (\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}-\mathtt{τ}_{0}-d)^{\mathtt{γ}}}-\mathcal{Z}_{d}^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})} (\mathtt{τ}-\mathtt{τ}_{0}-d)^{\mathtt{γ}}} \| \|\mathtt{ζ}_{1} (\mathtt{τ}_{0})\|\\ &\quad +\alpha_{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}}\left\| \mathtt{ζ}_{1}\right\| \int_{\mathtt{τ}_{0}}^{\mathtt{τ}_{0+d}} \| \mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}(\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}} -\mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}(\mathtt{τ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}}\|d\mathtt{ν}\\ & \quad +\alpha_{\mathcal{P}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}} \int_{\mathtt{τ}_{0}}^{\mathtt{τ}} \| \mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}(\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}}-\mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}(\mathtt{τ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}}\|\|\mathcal{w_{y}}(\mathtt{ν}-\mathtt{ρ})\|d\mathtt{ν}\\ &\quad +\alpha_{\mathcal{P}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}} \int_{\mathtt{ρ}}^{\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}} \| \mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}(\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}}\| \|\mathcal{w_{y}}(\mathtt{ν}-\mathtt{ρ})\| d\mathtt{ν} \\ &\quad +\bigg( \int_{\mathtt{τ}}^{\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}} \| \mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}(\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}}\|d\mathtt{ν} + \int_{\mathtt{τ}_{0}}^{\mathtt{τ}} \| \mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}(\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}}-\mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}(\mathtt{τ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}}\|d\mathtt{ν} \bigg)\\ &\quad \times \sup_{\mathtt{τ} \in [\mathtt{τ}_{0}, \mathtt{τ}_{1}]}\mathcal{Q}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}(\mathtt{ν},\mathcal{y}(\mathtt{ν}),\int_{0}^{\mathtt{ν}}\mathfrak{g}(\mathtt{ν}, \mathtt{η}, \mathcal{y_{k}}(\mathtt{η}))d\mathtt{η})\\ &\leq \|\mathcal{Z}_{d}^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})} (\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}-\mathtt{τ}_{0}-d)^{\mathtt{γ}}}-\mathcal{Z}_{d}^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})} (\mathtt{τ}-\mathtt{τ}_{0}-d)^{\mathtt{γ}}} \| \| \mathtt{ζ}_{1} (\mathtt{τ}_{0})\|\\ &\quad +\alpha_{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}}\left\| \mathtt{ζ}_{1}\right\| \int_{\mathtt{τ}_{0}}^{\mathtt{τ}_{0+d}} \| \mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}(\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}}-\mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}(\mathtt{τ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}}\|d\mathtt{ν} \\ & \quad +\alpha_{\mathcal{P}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}}\bigg[\bigg(\int_{\mathtt{τ}_{0}}^{\mathtt{τ}} \| \mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}(\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}} -\mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}(\mathtt{τ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}}\|^{2}d\mathtt{ν}\bigg)^{\frac{1}{2}}\\ &\quad +\bigg( \frac{\mathtt{ϵ}^{2\mathtt{γ}-1}}{2\mathtt{γ}-1}\bigg)^{\frac{1}{2}} \mathcal{E}_{\mathtt{γ},\mathtt{γ}}(\alpha_{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}}\mathtt{ϵ}^{\mathtt{γ}})\bigg]\iota +\bigg(\frac{1}{\alpha_{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}}} (\mathcal{E}_{\mathtt{γ}}(\alpha_{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}}\mathtt{ϵ}^{\mathtt{γ}})-1)\bigg)\\ & \quad +\bigg(\int_{\mathtt{τ}_{0}}^{\mathtt{τ}} \| \mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}(\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}} -\mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}(\mathtt{τ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}}\|d\mathtt{ν} \bigg)\\ &\quad \times \sup_{\mathtt{τ} \in [\mathtt{τ}_{0}, \mathtt{τ}_{1}]}\mathcal{Q}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}(\mathtt{ν},\mathcal{y_{k}}(\mathtt{ν}),\int_{0}^{\mathtt{ν}}\mathfrak{g}(\mathtt{ν}, \mathtt{η}, \mathcal{y}(\mathtt{η}))d\mathtt{η}), \end{align*} |
where \iota = \max\{\| \mathtt{ζ}_{1} \|, \|\mathcal{w_{y}}\|_{\mathtt{τ} \in [\mathtt{τ}_{0}, \mathtt{τ}_{1}-\mathtt{ρ}] }\}. As, we know that \mathcal{Z}_{d}^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})} (\cdot)^{\mathtt{γ}}} and \mathcal{Z}_{d, \mathtt{γ}}^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})} (\cdot)^{\mathtt{γ}}} are continuous functions and \left\|(\sigma \mathcal{y})(\mathtt{τ}+\epsilon)-(\sigma \mathcal{y}(\mathtt{τ}))\right\|\rightarrow 0 as \mathtt{ϵ} \rightarrow 0 .
Further, for \mathtt{τ}_{n-1} < \mathtt{τ} < \mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}\leq\mathtt{τ}_{n} and \mathcal{y} \in \Gamma_{0} , we get
\begin{align*} &\quad\left\|(\sigma \mathcal{y})(\mathtt{τ}+\epsilon)-(\sigma \mathcal{y})(\mathtt{τ})\right\|\\ & \leq\|\mathcal{Z}_{d}^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})} (\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}-\mathtt{τ}_{n-1}-d)^{\mathtt{γ}}}-\mathcal{Z}_{d}^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})} (\mathtt{τ}-\mathtt{τ}_{n-1}-d)^{\mathtt{γ}}} \| \| \mathcal{y}(\mathtt{τ}_{n-1})\|\\ &\quad +\alpha_{\mathcal{P}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})}} \int_{\mathtt{τ}_{n-1}}^{\mathtt{τ}} \| \mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})}(\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}} -\mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})}(\mathtt{τ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}}\|\left\| \mathcal{w_{y}}(\mathtt{ν}-\mathtt{ρ})\right\| d\mathtt{ν} \\ &\quad +\alpha_{\mathcal{P}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})}} \int_{\mathtt{τ}}^{\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}} \| \mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})}(\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}}\|\left\| \mathcal{w_{y}}(\mathtt{ν}-\mathtt{ρ})\right\| d\mathtt{ν} \\ &\quad +\bigg( \int_{\mathtt{τ}}^{\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}} \| \mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})}(\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}}\|d\mathtt{ν} + \int_{\mathtt{τ}_{n-1}}^{\mathtt{τ}} \| \mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})}(\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}}-\mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})}(\mathtt{τ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}}\|d\mathtt{ν} \bigg)\\ &\quad \times \sup_{\mathtt{τ} \in [\mathtt{τ}_{n-1}, \mathtt{τ}_{n}]}\mathcal{Q}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})}(\mathtt{ν},\mathcal{y}(\mathtt{ν}),\int_{0}^{\mathtt{ν}}\mathfrak{g}(\mathtt{ν}, \mathtt{η}, \mathcal{y}(\mathtt{η}))d\mathtt{η})\\ &\quad + \|\mathcal{Z}_{d}^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})} (\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}-\mathtt{τ}_{n-1}-d)^{\mathtt{γ}}} -\mathcal{Z}_{d}^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})} (\mathtt{τ}-\mathtt{τ}_{n-1}-d)^{\mathtt{γ}}} \| \left\|\mathcal{E}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{l})}\right\| \| \mathcal{y}_{\mathtt{τ}_{l}}\|\\ &\leq \| \mathcal{Z}_{d}^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})} (\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}-\mathtt{τ}_{n-1}-d)^{\mathtt{γ}}}-\mathcal{Z}_{d}^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})} (\mathtt{τ}-\mathtt{τ}_{n-1}-d)^{\mathtt{γ}}} \| \tilde{\omega}\\ &\quad +\alpha_{\mathcal{P}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})}} \bigg[\bigg(\int_{\mathtt{τ}_{n-1}}^{\mathtt{τ}} \| \mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})}(\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}} -\mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})}(\mathtt{τ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}}\|^{2}d\mathtt{ν}\bigg)^{\frac{1}{2}} \\ &\quad +\bigg( \frac{\mathtt{ϵ}^{2\mathtt{γ}-1}}{2\mathtt{γ}-1}\bigg)^{\frac{1}{2}} \mathcal{E}_{\mathtt{γ},\mathtt{γ}}(\alpha_{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{1})}}\mathtt{ϵ}^{\mathtt{γ}})\bigg]\|\mathcal{w_{y}}\|_{\mathcal{L}([\mathtt{τ}_{n-1}-\mathtt{ρ},\mathtt{τ}_{n}-\mathtt{ρ}])}+\bigg(\frac{1}{\alpha_{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})}}} (\mathcal{E}_{\mathtt{γ}}(\alpha_{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})}}\mathtt{ϵ}^{\mathtt{γ}})-1)\bigg)\\ &\quad +\bigg(\int_{\mathtt{τ}_{n-1}}^{\mathtt{τ}} \| \mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})}(\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}} -\mathcal{Z}_{d,\mathtt{γ} }^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})}(\mathtt{τ}-\mathtt{ν})^{\mathtt{γ}}}\|d\mathtt{ν} \bigg) \sup_{\mathtt{τ} \in [\mathtt{τ}_{n-1}, \mathtt{τ}_{n}]}\mathcal{Q}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})}(\mathtt{ν},\mathcal{y}(\mathtt{ν}),\int_{0}^{\mathtt{ν}}\mathfrak{g}(\mathtt{ν}, \mathtt{η}, \mathcal{y}(\mathtt{η}))d\mathtt{η})\\ &\quad + \|\mathcal{Z}_{d}^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})} (\mathtt{τ}+\mathtt{ϵ}-\mathtt{τ}_{n-1}-d)^{\mathtt{γ}}}-\mathcal{Z}_{d}^{\mathcal{H}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{n})} (\mathtt{τ}-\mathtt{τ}_{n-1}-d)^{\mathtt{γ}}} \|\left\|\mathcal{E}_{\mathtt{δ}(\mathtt{τ}_{l})}\right\| \| \mathcal{y}_{\mathtt{τ}_{l}}\|. \end{align*} |
Analogous to the previous method, we get \left\|(\sigma \mathcal{y})(\mathtt{τ}+\epsilon)-(\sigma \mathcal{y})(\mathtt{τ})\right\|\rightarrow 0, whenever \mathtt{τ} \in (\mathtt{τ}_{n-1}, \mathtt{τ}_{n}]. Moreover, we can conclude the equi-continuous of \sigma(\Gamma_{0}) on (\mathtt{τ}_{0}-d, \mathtt{τ}_{N}] . Then, \sigma(\Gamma_{0}) is relatively compact by the application Ascoli theorem. Then, from the above argument, we conclude that \sigma is compact. Hence, \tilde{\mathcal{y}} \in \sigma(\tilde{\omega}) is relatively controllable.
Example 5.1. Let us consider the system (1.1) with the below given choice of system parameters
\begin{align} & \mathcal{H}_{1} = \begin{pmatrix} 0.3 & 0\\ 0 & 0.3 \\ \end{pmatrix}, \quad \mathcal{H}_{2} = \begin{pmatrix} 0.4 & 0\\ 0 & 0.4 \\ \end{pmatrix}, \quad \mathcal{P}_{1} = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0.5 \\ \end{pmatrix}, \quad \mathcal{P}_{2} = \begin{pmatrix} 0.5 \\ 0 \\ \end{pmatrix}, \quad \\ &\mathcal{E}_{1} = \begin{pmatrix} 0.17&0\\ 0&0.17\\ \end{pmatrix}, \quad \mathcal{E}_{2} = \begin{pmatrix} 0.16&0\\ 0&0.16\\ \end{pmatrix}, \\ &\mathcal{Q}_{1}(\mathtt{ν},\mathcal{y}(\mathtt{ν}),\int_{0}^{\mathtt{ν}}\mathfrak{g}(\mathtt{ν}, \mathtt{η}, \mathcal{y}(\mathtt{η}))d\mathtt{η}) = \frac{1}{30} \begin{pmatrix} 13 \mathtt{τ}^{2} \mathcal{cos}(\mathcal{y_{1}}(\mathtt{τ}))+0.21 \exp(\mathtt{τ}) \mathcal{y}_{1}(\mathtt{τ}-d)+\int_{0}^{\mathtt{τ}} \mathcal{sin}\mathcal{y}_{1}(\mathtt{η})d\mathtt{η}\\ 0.02 \mathcal{y}_{2}(\mathtt{τ})+ 2 \mathcal{sin}\mathcal{y}_{2}(\mathtt{τ}-d)+\int_{0}^{\mathtt{τ}} \mathcal{cos}\mathcal{y}_{2}(\mathtt{η})d\mathtt{η} \end{pmatrix},\\ &\mathcal{Q}_{2}(\mathtt{ν},\mathcal{y}(\mathtt{ν}),\int_{0}^{\mathtt{ν}}\mathfrak{g}(\mathtt{ν}, \mathtt{η}, \mathcal{y}(\mathtt{η}))d\mathtt{η}) = \dfrac{1}{30} \begin{pmatrix} 0.03 \mathcal{y}_{1}(\mathtt{τ}) \mathcal{sin} t +8 \mathcal{cos}(\mathcal{y}_{1}(\mathtt{τ}-d)) +\int_{0}^{\mathtt{τ}} \mathcal{cos}\mathcal{y}_{1}(\mathtt{η})d\mathtt{η} \\ 4 \mathcal{sin}(\mathcal{y}_{2}(\mathtt{τ}))+0.02 \mathcal{y}_{2} (\mathtt{τ}-d) + \int_{0}^{\mathtt{τ}} \mathcal{sin}\mathcal{y}_{2}(\mathtt{η})d\mathtt{η} \end{pmatrix}. \end{align} |
Moreover, \mathtt{τ}_{0} = 0, \mathtt{τ}_{1} = 0.2, \mathtt{τ}_{2} = 0.4, d = 0.1, \iota = 0.1. Let
\begin{align*} \mathtt{κ}_{1}(\omega)& = 0.53 +\max_{\mathtt{τ}\in[0,0.4]}\{0.21 exp(\mathtt{τ}),0.02\} 0.03 (\omega), \\ \mathtt{κ}_{2}(\omega)& = 0.43 + \max_{\mathtt{τ}\in[0,0.4]}\{0.003 \mathcal{sin}\mathtt{τ},0.02\} 0.03 (\omega). \end{align*} |
It is straightforward to note that \|\mathcal{Q}_{l}(\cdot)\|\leq \kappa_{l}(\omega), l = 1, 2.
Now, let us fix
\begin{equation} {\mathtt{δ}}(\mathtt{τ}) = \begin{cases} 2, \quad \mathtt{τ} \in[0,0.2],\\ 1, \quad \mathtt{τ} \in(0.2,0.4]. \end{cases} \nonumber \end{equation} |
Then, on calculation we get \| \mathcal{M}^{-1}\| \leq 7.153.
Moreover, G_{0} \leq 0.10, \quad G_{1}\leq 0.61, \quad G_{2} \leq 0.83, \quad L_{1}\leq 0.06, \quad L_{2}\leq 0.07, \quad V_{1}\leq 0.46, \quad V_{2} \leq 0.47, P_{0}\leq 1.67, \quad R_{1} \leq 0.26, \quad R_{2} \leq 0.18, \quad \; P_{1} = 0.071.
Then, by substituting the above values in (4.1), we get \mathtt{θ} < 1. Thus, our considered form of switching system (1.1) is controllable relatively.
The FTS of (1.1) for the above choice of system parameters is shown in Table 1. Furthermore, the norm of the solution for the system in (1.1) is presented in Figure 1.
Theorem | \left\| \mathtt{ζ}_{1} \right\| | \mathtt{γ} | \mathtt{τ}_{N} | r | \mathtt{δ} | \left\| \mathcal{y} \right\| | \mathtt{ϵ} | (FTS) |
3.1 | 0.1 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 2.35 | 2.36 | yes |
In the presented work, we have considered a class of switching impulsive fractional control systems. An explicit form of the solution for (1.1) was derived using the delayed parameters ML function. Stability of the system was then analyzed by constructing appropriate thresholds with Gronwall's inequality. Furthermore, for an admissible switching signal we constructed an appropriate control input that is piecewise continuous over the given interval to determine the relatively controllable criteria of (1.1) with nonlinear arguments and impulses. Finally, a concrete numerical simulation is provided to substantiate the theoretical results. One of the challenging problems arising from this study is when the impulses are of the non-instantaneous type, which will be addressed in our future work. Moreover, the study of this problem will remain an interesting and active research field for future studies.
P. K. Lakshmi Priya, K. Kaliraj and Panumart Sawangtong: Conceptualization, methodology, formal analysis, software, writing – original draft and writing – review & editing. All authors of this article have been contributed equally. All authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript for publication.
The authors declare that they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.
This research was funded by National Science, Research and Innovation Fund (NSRF), and King Mongkut's University of Technology North Bangkok with Contract no. KMUTNB-FF-68-B-33.
All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this paper
[1] | W. Li, L. Huang, J. Ji, Globally exponentially stable periodic solution in a general delayed predator-prey model under discontinuous prey control strategy, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. Ser. B, 25 (2020), 2639-2664. |
[2] | T. Chen, L. Huang, P. Yu, et al. Bifurcation of limit cycles at infinity in piecewise polynomial systems, Nonlinear Anal. Real World Appl., 41 (2018), 82-106. |
[3] | C. Huang, S. Wen, M. Li, et al. An empirical evaluation of the influential nodes for stock market network: Chinese A shares case, Finance Research Letters, (2020), 101517. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2020.101517. |
[4] | F. Karim, S. Chauhan, J. Dhar, On the comparative analysis of linear and nonlinear business cycle model: Effect on system dynamics, economy and policy making in general, Quantit. Finance Econ., 4 (2020), 172-203. |
[5] | X. Yang, S. Wen, Z. Liu, et al. Dynamic properties of foreign exchange complex network, Mathematics, 7 (2019). Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/math7090832. |
[6] | F. Wen, Y. Yuan, W. Zhou, Cross-shareholding networks and stock price synchronicity: Evidence from China, Int. J. Fin. Econ., (2020). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/ijfe.1828. |
[7] | C. Huang, Y. Tan, Global behavior of a reaction-diffusion model with time delay and Dirichlet condition, J. Diff. Equations, (2020). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jde.2020.08.008. |
[8] | J. Cao, F. Wen, The impact of the Cross-Shareholding network on extreme price movements: Evidence from China, J. Risk, 22 (2019), 79-102. |
[9] | L. Huang, H. Ma, J. Wang, et al. Global dynamics of a Filippov plant disease model with an economic threshold of infected-susceptible ratio, J. Appl. Anal. Comput., 10 (2020), 1-15. |
[10] | Z. Ye, C. Hu, L. He, et al. The dynamic time-frequency relationship between international oil prices and investor sentiment in China: A wavelet coherence analysis, Energy J., 41 (2020). Available from: https://doi.org/10.5547/01956574.41.5.fwen. |
[11] | Y. Tan, Dynamics analysis of Mackey-Glass model with two variable delays, Math. Biosci. Eng., 17 (2020), 4513-4526. |
[12] | H. Hu, X. Yuan, L. Huang, et al. Global dynamics of an sirs model with demographics and transfer from infectious to susceptible on heterogeneous networks, Math. Biosci. Eng., 16 (2019), 5729-5749. |
[13] | C. Huang, X. Long, L. Huang, et al. Stability of almost periodic Nicholson's blowflies model involving patch structure and mortality terms, Canad. Math. Bull., 63 (2020), 405-422. |
[14] | Q. Cao, X. Guo, Anti-periodic dynamics on high-order inertial Hopfield neural networks involving time-varying delays, AIMS Mathematics, 5 (2020), 5402-5421. |
[15] | C. Huang, X. Zhao, J. Cao, et al. Global dynamics of neoclassical growth model with multiple pairs of variable delays, Nonlinearity, (2020). Available from: https: //doi.org/10.1088/1361-6544/abab4e. |
[16] | C. Huang, Y. Qiao, L. Huang, et al. Dynamical behaviors of a food-chain model with stage structure and time delays, Adv. Difference Equ., 2018 (2018), 1-26. |
[17] | C. Song, S. Fei, J. Cao, et al. Robust synchronization of fractional-order uncertain chaotic systems based on output feedback sliding mode control, Mathematics, 7 (2019). Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/math7070599. |
[18] | L. Berezansky, E. Braverman, A note on stability of Mackey-Glass equations with two delays, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 450 (2017), 1208-1228. |
[19] | C. Huang, X. Long, J. Cao, Stability of anti-periodic recurrent neural networks with multiproportional delays, Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 43 (2020), 6093-6102. |
[20] | C. Huang, H. Yang, J. Cao, Weighted pseudo almost periodicity of multi-proportional delayed shunting inhibitory cellular neural networks with D operator, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. Ser. S, (2020). Available from: https://doi.org/10.3934/dcdss.2020372. |
[21] | W. Tang, J. Zhang, Symmetric integrators based on continuous-stage Runge-Kutta-Nystrom methods for reversible systems, Appl. Math. Comput., 361 (2019), 1-12. |
[22] | V. Volttera, Variazioni e fluttuazioni del numerou d'individui in specie animali conviventi, R. Comitato Talassografico Italiano, Memoria, 131 (1927), 1-142. |
[23] | C. Huang, L. Yang, J. Cao, Asymptotic behavior for a class of population dynamics, AIMS Mathematics, 5 (2020), 3378-3390. |
[24] | X. Long, S. Gong, New results on stability of Nicholson's blowflies equation with multiple pairs of time-varying delays, Appl. Math. Lett., 100 (2020), 106027. |
[25] | L. Berezansky, E. Braverman, Nicholson's blowflies differential equations revisited: Main results and open problems, Appl. Math. Model., 34 (2010), 1405-1417. |
[26] | V. H. Le, Global asymptotic behaviour of positive solutions to a non-autonomous Nicholson's blowflies model with delays, J. Biol. Dyn., 8 (2014), 135-144. |
[27] | B. Liu, Global exponential stability of positive periodic solutions for a delayed Nicholson's blowflies model, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 412 (2014), 212-221. |
[28] | F. Liu, L. Feng, V. Anh, et al. Unstructured-mesh Galerkin finite element method for the twodimensional multi-term time-space fractional Bloch-Torrey equations on irregular convex domains, Comput. Math. Appl., 78 (2019), 1637-1650. |
[29] | X. Chen, C. Shi, Permanence of a Nicholson's blowflies model with feedback control and multiple time-varying delays, Chinese Quart. J. Math., 1 (2015), 153-158. |
[30] | B. Liu, New results on global exponential stability of almost periodic solutions for a delayed Nicholson blowflies model, Ann. Polon. Math., 113 (2015), 191-208. |
[31] | S. Zhou, Y. Jiang, Finite volume methods for N-dimensional time fractional Fokker-Planck equations, Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc., 42 (2019), 3167-3186. |
[32] | T. S. Doan, V. H. Le, T. A. Trinh, Global attractivity of positive periodic solution of a delayed Nicholson model with nonlinear density-dependent mortality term, Electron. J. Qual. Theory Differ. Equ., 8 (2019), 1-21. |
[33] | Z. Long, Exponential convergence of a non-autonomous Nicholson's blowflies model with an oscillating death rate, Electron. J. Qual. Theory Differ. Equ., 2016 (2016), 1-7. |
[34] | L. Berezansky, E. Braverman, On exponential stability of a linear delay differential equation with an oscillating coefficient, Appl. Math. Lett., 22 (2009), 1833-1837. |
[35] | J. Shao, Pseudo almost periodic solutions for a Lasota-Wazewska model with an oscillating death rate, Appl. Math. Lett., 43 (2015), 90-95. |
[36] | Q. Cao, X. Long, New convergence on inertial neural networks with time-varying delays and continuously distributed delays, AIMS Mathematics, 5 (2020), 5955-5968. |
[37] | B. Liu, Global stability of a class of Nicholson's blowflies model with patch structure and multiple time-varying delays, Nonlinear Anal. Real World Appl., 11 (2010), 2557-2562. |
[38] | G. Yang, Dynamical behaviors on a delay differential neoclassical growth model with patch structure, Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 41 (2018), 3856-3867. |
[39] | Y. Xu, Q. Cao, X. Guo, Stability on a patch structure Nicholson's blowflies system involving distinctive delays, Appl. Math. Lett., 105 (2020). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aml.2020.106340. |
[40] | Y. Xu, Q. Cao, Global asymptotic stability for a nonlinear density-dependent mortality Nicholson's blowflies system involving multiple pairs of time-varying delays, Adv. Difference Equ., 2020 (2020), 1-14. |
[41] | H. Zhang, Q. Cao, H. Yang, Asymptotically almost periodic dynamics on delayed Nicholson-type system involving patch structure, J. Inequal. Appl., 2020 (2020). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13660-020-02366-0. |
[42] | C. Qian, Y. Hu, Novel stability criteria on nonlinear density-dependent mortality Nicholson's blowflies systems in asymptotically almost periodic environments, J. Inequal. Appl., 2020 (2020), 1-18. |
[43] | Q. Cao, G. Wang, H. Zhang, et al. New results on global asymptotic stability for a nonlinear density-dependent mortality Nicholson's blowflies model with multiple pairs of time-varying delays, J. Inequal. Appl., 2020 (2020), 1-12. |
[44] | H. L. Smith, Monotone Dynamical Systems: An Introduction to the Theory of Competitive and Cooperative Systems, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, 1995. |
[45] | J. K. Hale, S. M. Verduyn Lunel, Introduction to Functional Differential Equations, SpringerVerlag, New York, 1993. |
[46] | W. Wang, W. Chen, Stochastic Nicholson-type delay system with regime switching, Systems Control Lett., 136 (2020), 104603. |
[47] | W. Wang, Positive periodic solutions of delayed Nicholson's blowflies models with a nonlinear density-dependent mortality term, Appl. Math. Model., 36 (2012), 4708-4713. |
[48] | C. Wang, R. P. Agarwal, S. Rathinasamy, Almost periodic oscillations for delay impulsive stochastic Nicholson's blowflies timescale model, Comput. Appl. Math., 37 (2018), 3005-3026. |
[49] | C. Wang, Existence and exponential stability of piecewise mean-square almost periodic solutions for impulsive stochastic Nicholson's blowflies model on time scales, Appl. Math. Comput., 248 (2014), 101-112. |
[50] | Z. Cai, J. Huang, L. Huang, Periodic orbit analysis for the delayed Filippov system, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 146 (2018), 4667-4682. |
[51] | C. Huang, H. Zhang, L. Huang, Almost periodicity analysis for a delayed Nicholson's blowflies model with nonlinear density-dependent mortality term, Pure Appl. Anal., 18 (2019), 3337-3349. |
[52] | H. Hu, T. Yi, X. Zou, On spatial-temporal dynamics of a Fisher-KPP equation with a shifting environment, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 148 (2020), 213-221. |
[53] | H. Hu, X. Zou, Existence of an extinction wave in the Fisher equation with a shifting habitat, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 145 (2017), 4763-4771. |
[54] | J. Wang, X. Chen, L. Huang, The number and stability of limit cycles for planar piecewise linear systems of node-saddle type, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 469 (2019), 405-427. |
[55] | J. Wang, C. Huang, L. Huang, Discontinuity-induced limit cycles in a general planar piecewise linear system of saddle-focus type, Nonlinear Anal. Hybrid Syst., 33 (2019), 162-178. |
[56] | R. Wei, J. Cao, C. Huang, Lagrange exponential stability of quaternion-valued memristive neural networks with time delays, Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 43 (2020), 7269-7291. |
[57] | C. Huang, H. Zhang, J. Cao, et al. Stability and hopf bifurcation of a delayed prey-predator model with disease in the predator, Internat. J. Bifur. Chaos Appl. Sci. Engrg., 29 (2019), 1950091. |
[58] | C. Huang, J. Wang, L. Huang, New results on asymptotically almost periodicity of delayed Nicholson-type system involving patch structure, Electron. J. Differential Equations, 2020 (2020), 1-17. |
[59] | C. Huang, J. Cao, F. Wen, et al. Stability analysis of SIR model with distributed delay on complex networks, Plos One, 11 (2016), 1-22. |
[60] | C. Huang, L. Liu, Boundedness of multilinear singular integral operator with non-smooth kernels and mean oscillation, Quaest. Math., 40 (2017), 295-312. |
[61] | X. Zhang, H. Hu, Convergence in a system of critical neutral functional differential equations, App. Math. Lett., 107 (2020). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aml.2020.106385. |
[62] | C. Huang, S. Wen, L. Huang, Dynamics of anti-periodic solutions on shunting inhibitory cellular neural networks with multi proportional delays, Neurocomputing, 357 (2019), 47-52. |
[63] | H. Hu, L. Liu, Weighted inequalities for a general commutator associated to a singular integral operator satisfying a variant of Hormander's condition, Math. Notes, 101 (2017), 830-840. |
[64] | J. Wang, S. He, L. Huang, Limit cycles induced by threshold nonlinearity in planar piecewise linear systems of node-focus or node-center type, Internat. J. Bifur. Chaos Appl. Sci. Engrg., (2020). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218127420501606. |
[65] | C. Huang, Z. Yang, T. Yi, et al. On the basins of attraction for a class of delay differential equations with non-monotone bistable nonlinearities, J. Differential Equations, 256 (2014), 2101-2114. |
[66] | J. Zhang, C. Huang, Dynamics analysis on a class of delayed neural networks involving inertial terms, Adv. Difference Equ., 2020 (2020), 1-12. |
Theorem | \left\| \mathtt{ζ}_{1} \right\| | \mathtt{γ} | \mathtt{τ}_{N} | r | \mathtt{δ} | \left\| \mathcal{y} \right\| | \mathtt{ϵ} | (FTS) |
3.1 | 0.1 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 2.35 | 2.36 | yes |