
We present a novel direct integral pseudospectral (PS) method (a direct IPS method) for solving a class of continuous-time infinite-horizon optimal control problems (IHOCs). The method transforms the IHOCs into finite-horizon optimal control problems in their integral forms by means of certain parametric mappings, which are then approximated by finite-dimensional nonlinear programming problems (NLPs) through rational collocations based on Gegenbauer polynomials and Gegenbauer-Gauss-Radau (GGR) points. The paper also analyzes the interplay between the parametric maps, barycentric rational collocations based on Gegenbauer polynomials and GGR points and the convergence properties of the collocated solutions for IHOCs. Some novel formulas for the construction of the rational interpolation weights and the GGR-based integration and differentiation matrices in barycentric-trigonometric forms are derived. A rigorous study on the error and convergence of the proposed method is presented. A stability analysis based on the Lebesgue constant for GGR-based rational interpolation is investigated. Two easy-to-implement pseudocodes of computational algorithms for computing the barycentric-trigonometric rational weights are described. Three illustrative test examples are presented to support the theoretical results. We show that the proposed collocation method leveraged with a fast and accurate NLP solver converges exponentially to near-optimal approximations for a coarse collocation mesh grid size. The paper also shows that typical direct spectral/PS and IPS methods based on classical Jacobi polynomials and certain parametric maps usually diverge as the number of collocation points grow large if the computations are carried out using floating-point arithmetic and the discretizations use a single mesh grid, regardless of whether they are of Gauss/Gauss-Radau type or equally spaced.
Citation: Kareem T. Elgindy, Hareth M. Refat. A direct integral pseudospectral method for solving a class of infinite-horizon optimal control problems using Gegenbauer polynomials and certain parametric maps[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(2): 3561-3605. doi: 10.3934/math.2023181
[1] | Asma Hanif, Azhar Iqbal Kashif Butt, Tariq Ismaeel . Fractional optimal control analysis of Covid-19 and dengue fever co-infection model with Atangana-Baleanu derivative. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(3): 5171-5203. doi: 10.3934/math.2024251 |
[2] | Aqeel Ahmad, Cicik Alfiniyah, Ali Akgül, Aeshah A. Raezah . Analysis of COVID-19 outbreak in Democratic Republic of the Congo using fractional operators. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(11): 25654-25687. doi: 10.3934/math.20231309 |
[3] | Moh. Mashum Mujur Ihsanjaya, Nanang Susyanto . A mathematical model for policy of vaccinating recovered people in controlling the spread of COVID-19 outbreak. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(6): 14508-14521. doi: 10.3934/math.2023741 |
[4] | Sohail Ahmad, Ponam Basharat, Saleem Abdullah, Thongchai Botmart, Anuwat Jirawattanapanit . MABAC under non-linear diophantine fuzzy numbers: A new approach for emergency decision support systems. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(10): 17699-17736. doi: 10.3934/math.2022975 |
[5] | Shuyun Jiao, Mingzhan Huang . An SIHR epidemic model of the COVID-19 with general population-size dependent contact rate. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(6): 6714-6725. doi: 10.3934/math.2020431 |
[6] | Deniz UÇAR, Elçin ÇELİK . Analysis of Covid 19 disease with SIR model and Taylor matrix method. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(6): 11188-11200. doi: 10.3934/math.2022626 |
[7] | Yilihamujiang Yimamu, Zui-Cha Deng, Liu Yang . An inverse volatility problem in a degenerate parabolic equation in a bounded domain. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(10): 19237-19266. doi: 10.3934/math.20221056 |
[8] | Khalaf M. Alanazi . The asymptotic spreading speeds of COVID-19 with the effect of delay and quarantine. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(7): 19397-19413. doi: 10.3934/math.2024945 |
[9] | CW Chukwu, S. Y. Tchoumi, Z. Chazuka, M. L. Juga, G. Obaido . Assessing the impact of human behavior towards preventative measures on COVID-19 dynamics for Gauteng, South Africa: a simulation and forecasting approach. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(5): 10511-10535. doi: 10.3934/math.2024514 |
[10] | Qinyue Zheng, Xinwei Wang, Qiuwei Pan, Lei Wang . Optimal strategy for a dose-escalation vaccination against COVID-19 in refugee camps. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(5): 9288-9310. doi: 10.3934/math.2022515 |
We present a novel direct integral pseudospectral (PS) method (a direct IPS method) for solving a class of continuous-time infinite-horizon optimal control problems (IHOCs). The method transforms the IHOCs into finite-horizon optimal control problems in their integral forms by means of certain parametric mappings, which are then approximated by finite-dimensional nonlinear programming problems (NLPs) through rational collocations based on Gegenbauer polynomials and Gegenbauer-Gauss-Radau (GGR) points. The paper also analyzes the interplay between the parametric maps, barycentric rational collocations based on Gegenbauer polynomials and GGR points and the convergence properties of the collocated solutions for IHOCs. Some novel formulas for the construction of the rational interpolation weights and the GGR-based integration and differentiation matrices in barycentric-trigonometric forms are derived. A rigorous study on the error and convergence of the proposed method is presented. A stability analysis based on the Lebesgue constant for GGR-based rational interpolation is investigated. Two easy-to-implement pseudocodes of computational algorithms for computing the barycentric-trigonometric rational weights are described. Three illustrative test examples are presented to support the theoretical results. We show that the proposed collocation method leveraged with a fast and accurate NLP solver converges exponentially to near-optimal approximations for a coarse collocation mesh grid size. The paper also shows that typical direct spectral/PS and IPS methods based on classical Jacobi polynomials and certain parametric maps usually diverge as the number of collocation points grow large if the computations are carried out using floating-point arithmetic and the discretizations use a single mesh grid, regardless of whether they are of Gauss/Gauss-Radau type or equally spaced.
Nowadays, mathematical modeling has become an essential tool in the fight against infectious diseases and epidemics. A good model serves to describe the evolution of the epidemic, to provide possible solutions, to predict the asymptotic behavior, to succeed in computer simulations, etc. [1,2,3,4,5].
In the field of disease modeling, numerous approaches have been developed to understand and predict disease evolution. These models play a crucial role in understanding the dynamics of infectious diseases and in guiding decision-making processes (see [6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13]). By capturing the complex interplay between factors such as population dynamics, transmission mechanisms and intervention strategies, these models enable researchers to gain a comprehensive understanding of disease progression.
So scientists everywhere in the world, are always looking for a perfect mathematical model. Our contribution to this theme consists of adopting the SIR compartment model described by the following nonlinear differential equations:
{dSdt=Λ−αS(t)I(t)−mS(t),dIdt=αS(t)I(t)−mI(t)−rI(t)−gI(t),dRdt=gI(t)−mR(t),t∈[0,Tf], |
where S,Iand R are respectively the densities of susceptible individuals, infectious individuals and recovered individuals, [0,Tf] is the duration of time over which we study our system, Λ is the Susceptible individual recruitement, m is the natural mortality rate, r is the mortality rate due to the virus, g is the natural recovery rate and α is the disease transmision coefficient.
Of course, the coefficient α, which indicates the frequency at which susceptible people contract the infection, is the most important parameter of the model; therefore, faulty knowledge of the latter leads to a model that does not reflect the evolution of the disease at all. To justify this we give as an example the following simulations to show that a slight modification of the transmission rate α induces a large difference in the number of infected individuals. Indeed, in the following figure, we establish the curves representing the number of infected individuals for α1=0.3,α2=0.4 and α3=0.5.
As indicated in the abstract of this paper, our main objective is to identify the parameter α. Indeed, the third and the fourth sections of our work will be devoted to the following inverse problem : Knowing the number of infected individuals I(t), we are inspired by the works of [14,16] to reconstruct the parameter α.
The strategy we will adopt is as follows, for 0<T∗<Tfwe consider the model
{dSdt=Λ−α(t)S(t)I(t)−mS(t),dIdt=α(t)S(t)I(t)−mI(t)−rI(t)−gI(t),dRdt=gI(t)−mR(t),t∈[0,Tf], |
and, we use the output equation f(t)=I(t) (prevalence function) to determine the transmission rate function α(t). Once α(t) is found, we take the arithmetic mean αm=1T∗∫T∗0α(t)dt (this mean is calculated by using MATLAB). In the fourth section, and to take advantage of the previous results of this paper, we start from the valid module (with the identified α) and we are interested in the following control problem
J(u∗,v∗,Tf)=min{J(u(t),v(t))/(u,v)∈UadandT∈R∔}, |
with
{dSdt=Λ−αmS(t)I(t)−mS(t)−u(t)S(t),dIdt=αmS(t)I(t)−mI(t)−rI(t)−gI(t)−v(t)I(t),dRdt=gI(t)−mR(t)+u(t)S(t)+v(t)I(t),t∈[T∗,Tf], |
where the controls u and v mean respectively the vaccine and the treatment applied to the susceptible and infected persons. It is clear that the optimization of J implies that we are interested in the controls that achieve the following objectives:
1) The number of infected individuals I(t) must be minimal during the period [T∗,Tf].
2) The number of recoveries R(t) should be as high as possible during the period [T∗,Tf].
3) The costs ∥u∗∥ and ∥v∗∥ must be very minimal.
4) T∗ must be minimal, which means that the duration of identification must be as short as possible.
It should be noticed that the fundamental result of this work, namely, the identification of the infection rate α allows us to achieve the following goal:
To have a reliable mathematical model that can be used for decision support, such as determining a good control measure (subject of Section 5), predicting the peaks of the epidemic, determining the equilibrium points and studying their stability, etc.
When South Africa declared to the World Health Oraganization (WHO) the appearance of the new Omicron variant of COVID-19, the international community took many measures that seriously affected the economy of South Africa (air embargo, cessation of a product port from South Africa, etc.) [17]. Therefore, this will encourage many countries (especially countries with weak economies) to no longer declare their real health situation to the WHO.
Our work allows us then to bring a solution to such situations, and as we have seen during these four years during the COVID-19 pandemic, every country must declare the number of infected individuals "I(t)" to the WHO, to take advantage of the financial and logistic help. Thus, using the function of prevalence of I(t), the (WHO) can detect any new variants of COVID-19 (see the last figure of Section 3).
The structure of this paper is as follows: In Section 2, we prove the existence, the positivity and the boundedness for our system. In Section 3, we demonstrate the identification of the transmission rate and we apply it to real data concerning Morocco. The existence of an optimal solution and the neccesary optimality conditions are confirmed in Section 4. Regarding application, the numerical results related to our control problem are given in Section 5. In the end, we conclude the article in Section 6.
As indicated in the introduction of this paper, we consider the SIR compartment model defined by
{dSdt=Λ−α(t)S(t)I(t)−mS(t),dIdt=α(t)S(t)I(t)−mI(t)−rI(t)−gI(t),dRdt=gI(t)−mR(t),t∈[0,Tf], | (2.1) |
with
S(0)≥0,I(0)≥0andR(0)≥0. | (2.2) |
All of the system's parameters have the meanings presented in Table 1.
Parameter | Signification |
Λ | Susceptible person recruitement |
α(t) | Disease transmission coefficient |
g | Natural recovery rate |
m | Natural mortality rate |
r | Mortality rate due to the virus |
For biological reasons and inspired by [18,19,20,21], we establish the the following result.
Theorem 1. With a positive initial condition, the solution (S(t),I(t),R(t)) of (2.1) is positive and eventually uniformly bounded on [0,+∞).
Proof. Assume that the solution (S(t),I(t),R(t)) with a positive initial condition exists and is unique on [0,b), where 0<b<+∞
dSdt=Λ−α(t)S(t)I(t)−mS(t)≥−α(t)S(t)I(t)−mS(t); |
we have
S(t)≥S(0)exp(−∫t0(α(θ)I(θ)+m)dθ)>0. |
Similarly,
dIdt=α(t)S(t)I(t)−(m+g+r)I(t)>−(m+g+r)I(t). |
Integrating the above inequality from 0 to t yields
I(t)≥I(0)exp(−∫t0(m+g+r)dθ)>0; |
using the same approach, we can demonstrate that R(t)>0for all t∈[0,b). Therefore, we obtain that S(t)>0,I(t)>0 and R(t)>0 for all t∈[0,b); furthermore, N(t) the total population studied satisfies the following equation
dNdt=Λ−mN(t)−rI(t)<Λ−mN(t), |
which implies that
N(t)≤Λm+N(0)exp(−mt), | (2.3) |
thus (S(t),I(t),R(t)) is bounded on [0,b); therefore, we have that b=+∞, limt→+∞supN(t)≤Λm.
Hence (S(t),I(t),R(t)) are all identically bounded by a fixed upper bound Λm.
Theorem 2. For given initial conditions S(0)≥0,I(0)≥0 and R(0)≥0 the system (2.1) admits a unique solution.
Proof. Let ϕ(t)=(S(t)I(t)R(t)) and ϕt(t)=(dSdtdIdtdRdt);
so the system can be rewritten in the following form
ϕt(t)=Aϕ+N(ϕ), |
where
A=(−m000−(m+r+g)00g−m) and N(ϕ)=(Λ−αS(t)I(t)αS(t)I(t)0),
and ϕt denotes the derivative of ϕ with respect to time.
The second term on the right-hand side satisfies
∣N(ϕ1)−N(ϕ2)∣=∣N1(ϕ1)−N1(ϕ2)∣+∣N2(ϕ1)−N2(ϕ2)∣=∣α(t)(S1I1−S2I2)∣+∣α(t)(S1I1−S2I2)∣≤2kα(t)(∣S1−S2∣+∣I1−I2∣); |
by putting M=max(2ksupt∈[0,T]α(t))<∞
∣N(ϕ1)−N(ϕ2)∣≤M(∣S1−S2∣+∣I1−I2∣)≤M∥ϕ1−ϕ2∥, |
thus it follows that the function N is uniformly Lipshitz-continuous; therefore, the solution of the system exists.
In this section, we start with a database containing the number of infected people daily I(t1),I(t2),....,I(tn), where "ti" designates the day "i" (this database, which contains data pertaining to each country, was produced by JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) [22]. Then, we use a polynomial interpolation to obtain a function "I(t)", and the interpolation polynomial I(t) can be used to estimate the number of infected persons at each time t belonging to [0,T], where T is the duration of the epidemic in the country under consideration (for COVID-19, T = 4 years and I(t)is obtained by using Python).
This function I(t) reffered to as the prevalence function, is denoted as f(t) is at the origin of the following fundamental result.
Theorem 3. Given m,g,r>0,α0>0 and T>0, there exists K>0 such that if α0<K there is a solution α(t) with α(0)=α0 such that Iα(t)=f(t) for 0≤t≤T, where (Sα(.)Iα(.)Rα(.)) is the solution of system (2.1) corresponding to α(t) if f′(t)f(t)>−(m+r+g) for 0≤t≤T.
Proof. The second equation of system (2.1) implies that,
f′(t)+(m+r+g)f(t)=α(t)S(t)f(t), | (3.1) |
which must be positive for 0≤t≤T.
By rewriting (3.1) as
S(t)=f′(t)+(m+r+g)f(t)α(t)f(t), | (3.2) |
we can compute S′(t) and substitute it for the first equation of system (2.1) in order to find that
ddt(f′(t)+(m+r+g)f(t)α(t)f(t))=Λ−α(t)(f′(t)+(m+r+g)f(t)α(t)f(t))f(t)−m(f′(t)+(m+r+g)f(t)α(t)f(t)), | (3.3) |
which will provide for us later
[f"(t)f(t)−f′(t)2+mf(t)(f′(t)+(m+r+g)f(t))]α(t)−[f(t)(f′(t)+(m+r+g)f(t))]α′(t)+[f′(t)+(m+r+g)f(t)−Λ]f(t)2α(t)2=0. |
We set
w(t)=f"(t)f(t)−f′(t)2+mf(t)(f′(t)+(m+r+g)f(t))f(t)(f′(t)+(m+r+g)f(t)), |
and
z(t)=(f′(t)+(m+r+g)f(t)−Λ)f(t)2f(t)(f′(t)+(m+r+g)f(t)). |
Thus, our equation is
α′(t)−w(t)α(t)−z(t)α(t)2=0, | (3.4) |
which gives us the following
α′(t)α(t)2−w(t)α(t)−1−z(t)=0. | (3.5) |
The nonlinear ODE can be converted to linear by setting x(t)=1α(t), which means that x′(t)=−α′(t)α(t)2
x′(t)+w(t)x(t)+z(t)=0. | (3.6) |
We know that the explicit solution is provided by the approach of integrating factors
x(t)=1α(t)=x(0)e−w(t)−e−w(t)∫t0ew(s)z(s)ds, | (3.7) |
where z(t)=∫t0z(s)ds.
Then, α(0) needs to satisfy certain conditions in order for α(t) to be positive:
∫t0ew(s)z(s)ds<1α(0). |
So according to the mathematics, there is an infinite number of possible values for α(0), and as a result, an infinite number of transmission functions α(t).
The inverse problem is thus inadequately characterized
α(t)=1/[e−w(t)α(0)−e−w(t)∫t0ew(s)z(s)ds]. | (3.8) |
We will present a mathematical approach showing how to detect a change in the veracity of the virus (i.e., the appearance of a possible mutation) in any country based on official data. In our work, we will focus on the daily infection data of COVID-19 in Morocco.
Below is a representative figure of the daily infection of COVID-19 in Morocco since the appearance of the virus in early March 2020 and up to 700 days later [23].
In order to extract the transmission rate of COVID-19 in Morocco from the simulated data, we will use a polynomial interpolation. More precisely, we consider the data of 700 days from the first day of appearance of COVID-19 in Morocco and which appears in the previous table (Figure 2); we divide the data of 700 days into five periods P1,P2,P3,P4,P5 each comprising 140 days. Then, for the daily infections recorded for the 140 days of each period Pi, we take the arithmetic mean Ii. Thus and starting from the table of the averages I1,I2,I3,I4,I5, we construct the Lagrange interpolation polynomial P(t). In order to succeed in this task and in view of the complexity of the calculations, we chose to use Python code to establish the interpolation polynomial P(t). To activate Python, we developed the following appropriate code:
Algorithm 1 Algorithm for extracting the Lagrange interpolation polynomial |
import pandas as pd |
import json |
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt |
import matplotlib.dates as mdates |
import numpy as np |
from scipy.interpolate import lagrange |
from numpy.polynomial.polynomial import Polynomial |
# Opening JSON file |
f = open('country_newcases.json') |
# returns JSON object as # a dictionary |
data = json.load(f) |
df = pd.DataFrame(data) |
# print(df) |
fig, ax = plt.subplots(1, 1, figsize = (10, 7), constrained_layout = True) |
# common to all three: |
ax.plot('last_updated', 'new_infections', data = df) |
# Major ticks every half year, minor ticks every month, |
ax.xaxis.set_major_locator(mdates.MonthLocator(bymonth = (1, 8))) |
ax.xaxis.set_minor_locator(mdates.MonthLocator()) |
ax.grid(True) |
ax.set_ylabel(r'Cases number') |
for label in ax.get_xticklabels(which = 'major'): |
label.set(rotation = 30, horizontalalignment = 'right') |
ax.ticklabel_format(style = 'plain', useOffset = False, axis = 'y') |
ax.set_title('New infection', loc = 'left', y = 0.85, x = 0.02, fontsize = 'medium') |
plt.title('A Daily COVID-19 evolution in MOROCCO') |
x = np.array(df['new_infections'].to_numpy()) |
a = x[100 : 150] |
b = x[151 : 300] |
c = x[301 : 600] |
d = x[600 : 710] |
x_sample = np.array([a[0], b[0], c[0], d[0], x[x.size-1]]) |
print(x_sample) |
y = 1/(1+x_sample*x_sample) |
# print(x) |
poly = lagrange(x_sample, y) |
print(poly) |
Polynomial(poly.coef[::-1]).coef |
# df.plot(x = 'last_updated', y = 'new_infections') |
plt.show() |
x_new = np.arange(-100, 100) / 10 |
plt.scatter(x_sample, y, label = 'data') |
plt.plot(x_new, Polynomial(poly.coef[::-1])(x_new), label = 'Polynomial') |
plt.plot(x_sample, y, label = '1/(1+x*x)') |
plt.legend() |
plt.show() |
Therefore, using Python, we can construct the interpolation polynomial
P(t)=4,04.10−11t4−1,229.10−7t3+8,658.10−5t2−0,01938t+1. | (3.9) |
Thus, we have constructed a function I(t)=P(t) which allows us to estimate the number of infected individuas at any time point within the period [March3,2020,March3,2020+700day].
Consequently, we inject the function I(t) given by (3.9) (I(t)=P(t)) in Theorem 3 to obtain the function of transmission α(t) whose curve is generated via MATLAB, (see Figure 3).
Through the two previous figures, we show the validity of the results of Theorem 3, and particularly for the case of Morocco. Indeed, from these two figures, we notice that over the same period of time [t100,t220], the number of infected people I(t) also increased as the value of α(t) increased, and this period corresponds perfectly to the appearance of the Delta variant in Morroco. Similarly, over the period [t550,t700], another increase of infected people occurred as the transmission function increased, and this is exactly the date of the appearance of the Omicron variant in Morocco.
Therefore, to detect new variants of COVID-19 or any virus it is sufficient to monitor and analyze the infection rate of individuals within a region or country.
Remark 4. Having the database corresponding to the daily data of the infected in a given country for a period of N days, (or during the time horizon [0,T]), if we are interested in identifying α(t) only over a period of time [0,T∗]⊆[0,T] (i.e., T∗<T), we can easily adapt the previous code. To better explain the objective of this remark, we take the case of Morocco and expose the modification of the previous PYTHON code to α(t) only based on the interpolation polynomial corresponding to a period T∗=300 and n=4 (n is the chosen degree of the interpolator polynomial).
Algorithm 2 An algorithm for obtaining a Lagrange polynomial for any day length and degree |
import pandas as pd |
import json |
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt |
import matplotlib.dates as mdates |
import numpy as np |
from scipy.interpolate import lagrange |
from numpy.polynomial.polynomial import Polynomial |
periods = [300] |
# periods = range(500, 700) |
degrees = [5] |
minimal_degree = 4 |
maximal_degree = 5 |
def split(a, n): |
k, m = divmod(len(a), n) |
return (a[i*k+min(i, m):(i+1)*k+min(i+1, m)] for i in range(n)) |
# Opening JSON file |
f = open('country_newcases.json') |
# returns JSON object as a dictionary |
data = json.load(f) |
df = pd.DataFrame(data) |
# print(df) |
fig, ax = plt.subplots(1, 1, figsize = (10, 7), constrained_layout = True) |
# common to all three: |
ax.plot('last_updated', 'new_infections', data = df) |
# Major ticks every half year, minor ticks every month, |
ax.xaxis.set_major_locator(mdates.MonthLocator(bymonth = (1, 8))) |
ax.xaxis.set_minor_locator(mdates.MonthLocator()) ax.grid(True) |
ax.set_ylabel(r'Cases number') |
for label in ax.get_xticklabels(which = 'major'): |
label.set(rotation = 30, horizontalalignment = 'right') |
ax.ticklabel_format(style = 'plain', useOffset = False, axis = 'y') |
ax.set_title('New infection', loc = 'left', y = 0.85, x = 0.02, fontsize = 'medium') |
plt.title('A Daily COVID-19 evolution in MOROCCO') |
for p in periods: |
for d in degrees: |
x = np.array(df['new_infections'].to_numpy()) |
x_splitted = x[5 : p] |
a = split(x_splitted, d) |
x_sample_list = [] |
for item in list(a): |
x_sample_list.append(item[0]) |
x_sample = np.array(x_sample_list) |
print(x_sample) |
y = 1/(1+x_sample*x_sample) |
poly = lagrange(x_sample, y) |
print(poly) |
In this section, we are interested in the SIR uncontrolled model given by
{dSdt=Λ−αS(t)I(t)−mS(t),dIdt=αS(t)I(t)−mI(t)−rI(t)−gI(t),dRdt=gI(t)−mR(t),t∈[0,Tf], | (4.1) |
where S,I and R are the densities of susceptible, infected and removed people respectively, and the transmission coefficient α is assumed to be unknown. We assume to have access to I(t) (i.e the number of infected individuals) at each time t. Our objective is to determine the control laws u(t) and v(t) (u(t) is the vaccine applied to susceptible persons S(t) and v(t) is the treatment applied to infected persons I(t)) that will allow us to reach the following objectives:
{−minimizethenumberofinfectedpeople,−maximizethenumberofremovedpeople, |
and do this with minimal effort and cost. Mathematically, this can be interpreted by the optimization of the function
J(u,v)=∫Tf0[I(t)−R(t)+12ρ1u2(t)+12ρ2v2(t)]dt, | (4.2) |
under the following constraints
{dSdt=Λ−αS(t)I(t)−mS(t)−u(t)S(t),dIdt=αS(t)I(t)−mI(t)−rI(t)−gI(t)−v(t)I(t),dRdt=gI(t)−mR(t)+u(t)S(t)+v(t)I(t).t∈[0,Tf], | (4.3) |
But as mentioned at the beginning of this section the transmission coefficient α is not known; therefore, the model (4.3) is not reliable. To face this problem, we will segment our time interval in the following way.
![]() |
Here the durability [0,T∗] is devoted to the identifiability of the unknown parameter α (T∗ is as low as possible), and the horizon time [T∗,Tf] is devoted to the realization of previous objectives. Indeed, to do that we adapt the following strategy
First, we use the prevalence function I(t),t∈[0,T∗], which has been obtained by interpolation of the database corresponding to T∗ (see Remark 4, Section 3).
Second, we use Theorem 3 to identify the transmission function α(t) corresponding to the following model:
{dSdt=Λ−α(t)S(t)I(t)−mS(t),dIdt=α(t)S(t)I(t)−mI(t)−rI(t)−gI(t),dRdt=gI(t)−mR(t).t∈[0,T∗], | (4.4) |
Third, we assign to our unknown parameter α the mean value αm=1T∗∫T∗0α(t)dt, which is calculated by using MATLAB (for the Morrocan case, T∗=60days the Python code gives the prevalence function I(t) which is injected in Theorem 3 to obtain via Matlab the transmission function α(t) for the horizon time [0,T∗] and consequently αm=0.011).
Remark 5. We chose T∗=60, which led us to αm=0,011 and which coincides exactly with the transmission coefficient used in the COVID-19 model adopted by the Moroccan authorities [24], because we noticed that from the beginning of the third month of the epidemic the numbers of infected and recovered people stabilized. The following table shows that the value of αm=0.011 is indeed admissible.
T∗ | 40 | 50 | 60 | 70 | 90 | 100 | 110 |
αm | 0.009981 | 0.01504 | 0.0110 | 0.01014 | 0.00993 | 0.0108 | 0.015 |
Having the value of αm=0.011, we use the well identified model,
{dSdt=Λ−αmS(t)I(t)−mS(t)−u(t)S(t),dIdt=αmS(t)I(t)−mI(t)−rI(t)−gI(t)−v(t)I(t),dRdt=gI(t)−mR(t)+u(t)S(t)+v(t)I(t),t∈[T∗,Tf], | (4.5) |
with the initial given data given by
S(T∗)≥0I(T∗)≥0,andR(T∗)≥0, | (4.6) |
to reach our predefined objectives [25], i.e., to minimize the cost function:
J(u,v,Tf)=∫TfT∗[I(t)−R(t)+12ρ1u2(t)+12ρ2v2(t)]dt+ρ3(Tf)2, | (4.7) |
where ρi,i=1,2,3 are are weightings of the positive factor parameters associated with the controls u and v and the time, respectively. The presence of the term ρ3(Tf)2 in (4.3) of the cost function means that we introduce another objective in our project, namely: The search for the controls u and v that allow one to minimize the number of infected people, maximize the number of recovered, and to do this with a minimal cost and during a period Tf as short as possible.
In other words, we search for the optimal controls u∗ and v∗ and the optimal time Tf such that
J(u∗,v∗,Tf)=min{J(u(t),v(t),T)/(u,v)∈UadandT∈R∔}. | (4.8) |
Subject to system (4.5), we take Uad as the control set defined by
Uad={u,v/0<u(t)<umax<∞,0<v(t)<vmax<∞;t∈[T∗,Tf]}. | (4.9) |
In this section, we use the classical results of Fleming (1975) and Luckes (1982) [26,27] to prove the existence of an optimal control measure. Effectively, let f=[f1,f2,f3]⊺ be the right-hand side of the system (4.5) and X=[S,I,R]⊺.
Theorem 6. There exists control functions u∗ and v∗ so that
J(u∗,v∗,Tf)=min(u,v)∈UadJ(u(t),v(t),T). | (4.10) |
Proof. It is simple to confirm that an optimal control exists in order to demonstrate the following:
(A1) The set of controls and corresponding state variables is not empty.
(A2) The admissible set Uad is convex and closed.
(A3) A linear function comprising the state and control variables bounds the right side of the state system.
(A4) The integrand of the objective function is convex on Uad.
(A5) There exists constants ω1>0,ω2>0 and ψ>1 such that the integrand L(I,R,u,v) of the objective function satisfies
L(I,R,u,v)≥ω2+ω1(∣u∣2+∣v∣2)ψ2. |
(A6) The pay-off term at the optimal time in the objective function φ(X(Tf),Tf)=ρ3(Tf)2.
We use a simplified version of an existence result to prove that the set of controls and corresponding state variable is not empty for the first condition [28] (see Theorem 7.1.1).
The set Uad is convex and closed by definition; thus, the condition (A2) holds.
Our state system is bilinear in u and v. Moreover, the solutions of the system are bounded; hence, the condition (A3) holds.
Note that the integrand of our objective function is convex from where condition (A4) is verified.
To prove the condition (A5), we have that u+v≥∣u∣2+∣v∣2 since 0≤u,v≤1.
It is obvious that φ(X(Tf),Tf) is continuous; hence, the last condition is required.
The result follows directly from [26].
It is easy to establish that the corresponding Lagrangian L and Hamiltonian H are, respectively,
L(I,R,u,v,Tf)=I(t)−R(t)+12ρ1u2(t)+12ρ2v2(t)+ρ3T2f, | (4.11) |
H(S,I,R,u,v,λi,Tf)=L(I,R,u,v,Tf)+i=3∑i=1λifi, | (4.12) |
with
{f1=Λ−αmS(t)I(t)−mS(t)−u(t)S(t),f2=αmS(t)I(t)−mI(t)−rI(t)−gI(t)−v(t)I(t),f3=gI(t)−mR(t)+u(t)S(t)+v(t)I(t), |
and where λi,i=1,2,3 are the adjoint functions to be determined suitably.
Next, by applying the Pontryagin maximum principle [29] to the Hamiltonian H, we get the following theorem.
Theorem 7. Given the optimal control scheme (u∗,v∗), the optimal time T∗ and the solutions S∗,I∗andR∗ of the corresponding state system (4.5), there exists adjoint variables λ1,λ2 and λ3 satisfying
{˙λ′1=−(−αmI(t)−m−u)λ1−(αmI(t))λ2−uλ3,˙λ′2=−1+αmS(t)λ1−(αmS(t)−m−r−g−v)λ2−(g+v)λ3,λ′3=1+mλ3, | (4.13) |
with the transversality condition λi(Tf)=0 for i=1,2,3.
Furthermore, the optimal control scheme (u∗,v∗) is given by
{u∗(t)=max(min((λ1(t)−λ3(t))ρ1S(t),umax),0),v∗(t)=max(min((λ2(t)−λ3(t))ρ2I(t),vmax),0), | (4.14) |
and the optimal time is given by
T∗f=R(T∗f)−I(T∗f)−12ρ1u(T∗f)2−12ρ2v(T∗f)22ρ3. | (4.15) |
Proof. By applying Pontryagin's maximum principle to the state, we obtain the adjoint equations of the problem by direct computation
{λ′1=−∂H∂S,λ1(Tf)=0,λ′2=−∂H∂I,λ2(Tf)=0,λ′3=−∂H∂R,λ3(Tf)=0, | (4.16) |
and the controls are obtained by calculating the following equations
{∂H∂u=0,∂H∂v=0, | (4.17) |
with the transversality conditions
λi(Tf)=0,i=1,2,3. | (4.18) |
By the bounds in Uad of the controls [30], it is easy to obtain that u∗ and v∗ are given in the form (4.17) of system (4.5).
The transeversality condition for T∗f to be the optimal time can be stated as
H(T∗f,X(T∗f),λ(T∗f),u(T∗f),v(T∗f)=−∂φ(T∗f,X(T∗f)∂t, | (4.19) |
where
φ(T,X(T))=ρ3T2; |
then,
T∗f=R(T∗f)−I(T∗f)−12ρ1u(T∗f)2−12ρ2v(T∗f)22ρ3. | (4.20) |
In this section, we present numerical results that clearly illustrate the reliability of our approach. For this purpose, we have opted for the Runge Kutta method of order 4 and we have used the initial data conditions T∗=60, S(T∗), I(T∗) and R(T∗) from our database and a MATLAB program to obtain the following results.
In Table 3, we present the values of the initial conditions, parameters and constants, which have been used in our computations [31].
Parameter | Signification | Value |
Λ | Susceptible individual recruitement | 0.525 |
αm | Rate of interaction between susceptibles persons and infected ones | 0.011 |
m | Natural mortality rate | 0.5 |
r | Mortality rate due to the virus | 0.2 |
g | Recovery rate | 0.1 |
S0=S(T∗) | Initial susceptible people | 1000 |
I0=I(T∗) | Initial infected people | 50 |
R0=R(T∗) | Initial recovered people | 15 |
Figures 4 and 5 show that our obtained optimal controls allows us to clearly reduce the number of susceptibles and infected people.
In Figure 6, we see that the final optimal time corresponding to our problem is Tf=245 days, which was derived from the curve function G(t)=H(t)+∂φ(t)∂t.
Consequently, the advantages of our method stem from the combined use of real data, customized modeling and optimal control. Based on country-specific data, our simulations capture the unique characteristics of the local epidemic, enabling more accurate prediction and control strategies. The incorporation of optimal control techniques enables us to optimize interventions, taking into account various constraints and objectives.
In this work, we were interested in two fundamental aspects of systems theory, namely identification and regulation. Indeed, we considered a classical SIR model corresponding to the evolution of COVID-19 in a given country and where the transmission coefficient is supposed to be unknown. We were inspired by the work on inverse problems developed in [15,16] to determine the infection coefficient, using the starting point of the prevalence function I(t) = number of infected at time t. We made use of a country-specific database and the features of the programming languages MATLAB and Python to complete this work successfully. After identifying the mathematical model, we used an optimal control problem to address the difficulties given by the identification procedure. As an illustration, our study explicitly looked at the instance of Morocco. We made great progress in solving several COVID-19-related issues with this effort. To further increase the mathematical model's applicability and effectiveness, it is imperative to emphasize the importance of understanding all four parameters. We can offer more thorough answers and insights into how to handle the complexity of COVID-19 by accepting these developments;
{dSdt=Λ−αS(t)I(t)−mS(t),dIdt=αS(t)I(t)−mI(t)−rI(t)−gI(t),dRdt=gI(t)−mR(t).t∈[0,Tf], |
This will be the subject of future work.
The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.
Kamal Shah and Thabet Abdeljawad are thankful to Prince Sultan University for paying the APC and for the support through the TAS research lab.
The authors declare that they have no conficts of interest.
[1] |
S. A. Orszag, Accurate solution of the Orr–Sommerfeld stability equation, J. Fluid Mech., 50 (1971), 689–703. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112071002842 doi: 10.1017/S0022112071002842
![]() |
[2] |
G. S. Patterson, S. A. Orszag, Spectral calculations of isotropic turbulence: efficient removal of aliasing interactions, Phys. Fluids, 14 (1971), 2538–2541. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1693365 doi: 10.1063/1.1693365
![]() |
[3] | W. Kang, N. Bedrossian, Pseudospectral optimal control theory makes debut flight, saves NASA $ 1M in under three hours, SIAM News, 40 (2007), 1–3. |
[4] |
Z. Liu, S. Li, K. Zhao, Extended multi-interval Legendre-Gauss-Radau pseudospectral method for mixed-integer optimal control problem in engineering, Int. J. Syst. Sci., 52 (2021), 928–951. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207721.2020.1849862 doi: 10.1080/00207721.2020.1849862
![]() |
[5] |
K. T. Elgindy, A high-order embedded domain method combining a Predictor-Corrector-Fourier-Continuation-Gram method with an integral Fourier pseudospectral collocation method for solving linear partial differential equations in complex domains, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 361 (2019), 372–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cam.2019.03.032 doi: 10.1016/j.cam.2019.03.032
![]() |
[6] |
M. Nazari, M. Nazari, M. H. N. Skandari, Pseudo-spectral method for controlling the drug dosage in cancer, IET Syst. Biol., 14 (2020), 261–270. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-syb.2020.0054 doi: 10.1049/iet-syb.2020.0054
![]() |
[7] |
K. T. Elgindy, B. Karasözen, High-order integral nodal discontinuous Gegenbauer-Galerkin method for solving viscous Burgers' equation, Int. J. Comput. Math., 96 (2019), 2039–2078. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207160.2018.1554860 doi: 10.1080/00207160.2018.1554860
![]() |
[8] |
B. Fornberg, D. M. Sloan, A review of pseudospectral methods for solving partial differential equations, Acta Numer., 3 (1994), 203–267. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0962492900002440 doi: 10.1017/S0962492900002440
![]() |
[9] | B. Fornberg, A practical guide to pseudospectral methods, Cambridge University Press, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511626357 |
[10] | J. S. Hesthaven, S. Gottlieb, D. Gottlieb, Spectral methods for time-dependent problems, Cambridge University Press, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511618352 |
[11] | C. Canuto, M. Y. Hussaini, A. Quarteroni, T. A. Zang, Spectral methods: fundamentals in single domains, Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30726-6 |
[12] | D. Garg, Advances in global pseudospectral methods for optimal control, Ph.D. Thesis, Gainesville, FL: University of Florida, 2011. |
[13] | G. T. Huntington, Advancement and analysis of a Gauss pseudospectral transcription for optimal control problems, Ph.D. Thesis, Massachusetts: MIT, 2007. |
[14] | J. T. Betts, Practical methods for optimal control using nonlinear programming, Philadelphia, PA: SIAM, 2001. |
[15] | C. L. Darby, hp-Pseudospectral method for solving continuous-time nonlinear optimal control problems, Ph.D. Thesis, Florida: University of Florida, 2011. |
[16] |
O. von Stryk, R. Bulirsch, Direct and indirect methods for trajectory optimization, Ann. Oper. Res., 37 (1992), 357–373. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02071065 doi: 10.1007/BF02071065
![]() |
[17] | C. C. Francolin, Costate estimation for optimal control problems using orthogonal collocation at Gaussian quadrature points, Ph.D. Thesis, Florida: University of Florida, 2013. |
[18] |
K. T. Elgindy, K. A. Smith-Miles, Fast, accurate, and small-scale direct trajectory optimization using a Gegenbauer transcription method, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 251 (2013), 93–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cam.2013.03.032 doi: 10.1016/j.cam.2013.03.032
![]() |
[19] |
K. T. Elgindy, Gegenbauer collocation integration methods: advances in computational optimal control theory, Bull. Aust. Math. Soc., 89 (2014), 168–170. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0004972713001044 doi: 10.1017/S0004972713001044
![]() |
[20] |
K. T. Elgindy, K. A. Smith-Miles, Optimal Gegenbauer quadrature over arbitrary integration nodes, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 242 (2013), 82–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cam.2012.10.020 doi: 10.1016/j.cam.2012.10.020
![]() |
[21] |
K. T. Elgindy, B. Karasözen, Distributed optimal control of viscous Burgers' equation via a high-order, linearization, integral, nodal discontinuous Gegenbauer-Galerkin method, Optim. Control Appl. Methods, 41 (2020), 253–277. https://doi.org/10.1002/oca.2541 doi: 10.1002/oca.2541
![]() |
[22] |
C. J. Kim, S. Sung, A comparative study of transcription techniques for nonlinear optimal control problems using a pseudo-spectral method, Int. J. Aeronaut. Space Sci., 16 (2015), 264–277. https://doi.org/10.5139/IJASS.2015.16.2.264 doi: 10.5139/IJASS.2015.16.2.264
![]() |
[23] |
K. T. Elgindy, S. A. Dahy, High-order numerical solution of viscous Burgers' equation using a Cole-Hopf barycentric Gegenbauer integral pseudospectral method, Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 41 (2018), 6226–6251. https://doi.org/10.1002/mma.5135 doi: 10.1002/mma.5135
![]() |
[24] | K. T. Elgindy, H. M. Refat, High-order shifted Gegenbauer integral pseudo-spectral method for solving differential equations of Lane–Emden type, Appl. Numer. Math., 128, (2018), 98–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnum.2018.01.018 |
[25] |
C. W. Clenshaw, A. R. Curtis, A method for numerical integration on an automatic computer, Numer. Math., 2 (1960), 197–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01386223 doi: 10.1007/bf01386223
![]() |
[26] |
S. E. El-Gendi, Chebyshev solution of differential, integral and integro-differential equations, Comput. J., 12 (1969), 282–287. https://doi.org/10.1093/comjnl/12.3.282 doi: 10.1093/comjnl/12.3.282
![]() |
[27] | X. Gao, T. Li, Q. Shan, Y. Xiao, L. Yuan, Y. Liu, Online optimal control for dynamic positioning of vessels via time-based adaptive dynamic programming, J. Ambient Intell. Human. Comput., 2019, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-019-01522-9 |
[28] |
D. Wang, M. Ha, M. Zhao, The intelligent critic framework for advanced optimal control, Artif. Intell. Rev., 55 (2022), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-021-10118-9 doi: 10.1007/s10462-021-10118-9
![]() |
[29] |
B. Pang, L. Cui, Z. P. Jiang, Human motor learning is robust to control-dependent noise, Biol. Cybern., 116 (2022), 307–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00422-022-00922-z doi: 10.1007/s00422-022-00922-z
![]() |
[30] |
R. F. Baum, Existence theorems for Lagrange control problems with unbounded time domain, J. Optim. Theory Appl., 19 (1976), 89–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00934054 doi: 10.1007/BF00934054
![]() |
[31] |
G. R. Bates, Lower closure and existence theorems for optimal control problems with infinite horizon, J. Optim. Theory Appl., 24 (1978), 639–649. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00935304 doi: 10.1007/BF00935304
![]() |
[32] |
A. Haurie, Existence and global asymptotic stability of optimal trajectories for a class of infinite-horizon, nonconvex systems, J. Optim. Theory Appl., 31 (1980), 515–533. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00934475 doi: 10.1007/BF00934475
![]() |
[33] | D. A. Carlson, A. Haurie, Infinite horizon optimal control: theory and applications, Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, 1987. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-02529-1 |
[34] |
E. J. Balder, An existence result for optimal economic growth problems, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 95 (1983), 195–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-247x(83)90143-9 doi: 10.1016/0022-247x(83)90143-9
![]() |
[35] |
D. A. Carlson, Existence of finitely optimal solutions for infinite-horizon optimal control problems, J. Optim. Theory Appl., 51 (1986), 41–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00938602 doi: 10.1007/BF00938602
![]() |
[36] |
L. Wang, Existence and uniqueness of solutions for a class of infinite-horizon systems derived from optimal control, Int. J. Math. Math. Sci., 2005 (2005), 837–843. https://doi.org/10.1155/IJMMS.2005.837 doi: 10.1155/IJMMS.2005.837
![]() |
[37] |
S. Pickenhain, Infinite horizon optimal control problems in the light of convex analysis in hilbert spaces, Set-Valued Var. Anal., 23 (2015), 169–189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11228-014-0304-5 doi: 10.1007/s11228-014-0304-5
![]() |
[38] |
K. O. Besov, On Balder's existence theorem for infinite-horizon optimal control problems, Math. Notes, 103 (2018), 167–174. https://doi.org/10.1134/s0001434618010182 doi: 10.1134/s0001434618010182
![]() |
[39] |
A. V. Dmitruk, N. V. Kuz'kina, Existence theorem in the optimal control problem on an infinite time interval, Math. Notes, 78 (2005), 466–480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11006-005-0147-3 doi: 10.1007/s11006-005-0147-3
![]() |
[40] |
S. M. Aseev, An existence result for infinite-horizon optimal control problem with unbounded set of control constraints, IFAC-PapersOnLine, 51 (2018), 281–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.11.396 doi: 10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.11.396
![]() |
[41] |
V. Basco, H. Frankowska, Hamilton–Jacobi–Bellman equations with time-measurable data and infinite horizon, Nonlinear Differ. Equ. Appl., 26 (2019), 7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00030-019-0553-y doi: 10.1007/s00030-019-0553-y
![]() |
[42] |
H. Halkin, Necessary conditions for optimal control problems with infinite horizons, Econometrica, 42 (1974), 267–272. https://doi.org/10.2307/1911976 doi: 10.2307/1911976
![]() |
[43] | D. Garg, W. Hager, A. V. Rao, Gauss pseudospectral method for solving infinite-horizon optimal control problems, In: AIAA guidance, navigation, and control conference, Toronto, Ontario, Canada: AIAA, 2012, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2010-7890 |
[44] |
D. Garg, W. W. Hager, A. V. Rao, Pseudospectral methods for solving infinite-horizon optimal control problems, Automatica, 47 (2011), 829–837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.automatica.2011.01.085 doi: 10.1016/j.automatica.2011.01.085
![]() |
[45] |
D. Garg, M. A. Patterson, C. Francolin, C. L. Darby, G. T. Huntington, W. W. Hager, et al., Direct trajectory optimization and costate estimation of finite-horizon and infinite-horizon optimal control problems using a Radau pseudospectral method, Comput. Optim. Appl., 49 (2011), 335–358. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10589-009-9291-0 doi: 10.1007/s10589-009-9291-0
![]() |
[46] |
X. Tang, J. Chen, Direct trajectory optimization and costate estimation of infinite-horizon optimal control problems using collocation at the flipped Legendre-Gauss-Radau points, IEEE/CAA J. Autom. Sin., 3 (2016), 174–183. https://doi.org/10.1109/JAS.2016.7451105 doi: 10.1109/JAS.2016.7451105
![]() |
[47] |
M. Shahini, M. A. Mehrpouya, Transformed Legendre spectral method for solving infinite horizon optimal control problems, IMA J. Math. Control Inf., 35 (2018), 341–356. https://doi.org/10.1093/imamci/dnw051 doi: 10.1093/imamci/dnw051
![]() |
[48] |
D. Gottlieb, C. W. Shu, On the Gibbs phenomenon IV: recovering exponential accuracy in a subinterval from a Gegenbauer partial sum of a piecewise analytic function, Math. Comput., 64 (1995), 1081–1095. https://doi.org/10.2307/2153484 doi: 10.2307/2153484
![]() |
[49] |
D. Gottlieb, C. W. Shu, On the Gibbs phenomenon and its resolution, SIAM Rev., 39 (1997), 644–668. https://doi.org/10.1137/S0036144596301390 doi: 10.1137/S0036144596301390
![]() |
[50] |
J. R. Kamm, T. O. Williams, J. S. Brock, S. Li, Application of Gegenbauer polynomial expansions to mitigate Gibbs phenomenon in Fourier–Bessel series solutions of a dynamic sphere problem, Int. J. Numer. Methods Biomed. Eng., 26 (2010), 1276–1292. https://doi.org/10.1002/cnm.1207 doi: 10.1002/cnm.1207
![]() |
[51] |
K. T. Elgindy, Optimal control of a parabolic distributed parameter system using a fully exponentially convergent barycentric shifted Gegenbauer integral pseudospectral method, J. Ind. Manag. Optim., 14 (2018), 473–496. https://doi.org/10.3934/jimo.2017056 doi: 10.3934/jimo.2017056
![]() |
[52] |
W. A. Light, A comparison between Chebyshev and ultraspherical expansions, IMA J. Appl. Math., 21 (1978), 455–460. https://doi.org/10.1093/imamat/21.4.455 doi: 10.1093/imamat/21.4.455
![]() |
[53] |
J. P. Boyd, Orthogonal rational functions on a semi-infinite interval, J. Comput. Phys., 70 (1987), 63–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9991(87)90002-7 doi: 10.1016/0021-9991(87)90002-7
![]() |
[54] | C. Canuto, M. Y. Hussaini, A. Quarteroni, T. A. Zang, Spectral methods in fluid dynamics, Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, 1988. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-84108-8 |
[55] |
F. Fahroo, I. M. Ross, Pseudospectral methods for infinite-horizon nonlinear optimal control problems, J. Guid. Control Dynam., 31 (2008), 927–936. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.33117 doi: 10.2514/1.33117
![]() |
[56] | G. Szegö, Orthogonal polynomials, American Mathematical Society, 1939. |
[57] |
H. Wang, D. Huybrechs, S. Vandewalle, Explicit barycentric weights for polynomial interpolation in the roots or extrema of classical orthogonal polynomials, Math. Comput., 83 (2014), 2893–2914. https://doi.org/10.1090/S0025-5718-2014-02821-4 doi: 10.1090/S0025-5718-2014-02821-4
![]() |
[58] |
K. T. Elgindy, High-order adaptive Gegenbauer integral spectral element method for solving non-linear optimal control problems, Optimization, 66 (2017), 811–836. https://doi.org/10.1080/02331934.2017.1298597 doi: 10.1080/02331934.2017.1298597
![]() |
[59] | J. P. Berrut, Linear rational interpolation of continuous functions over an interval, In: W. Gautschi, Mathematics of computation 1943–1993: a half-century of computational mathematics, Proceedings of Symposia in Applied Mathematics, Vancouver, British Columbia: AMS, 1994,261–264. https://doi.org/10.1090/psapm/048/1314853 |
[60] |
J. P. Berrut, H. D. Mittelmann, Lebesgue constant minimizing linear rational interpolation of continuous functions over the interval, Comput. Math. Appl., 33 (1997), 77–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0898-1221(97)00034-5 doi: 10.1016/S0898-1221(97)00034-5
![]() |
[61] |
J. M. Carnicer, Weighted interpolation for equidistant nodes Carnicer, Numer. Algor., 55 (2010), 223–232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11075-010-9399-4 doi: 10.1007/s11075-010-9399-4
![]() |
[62] |
Q. Wang, P. Moin, G. Iaccarino, A rational interpolation scheme with superpolynomial rate of convergence, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 47 (2010), 4073–4097. https://doi.org/10.1137/080741574 doi: 10.1137/080741574
![]() |
[63] |
L. Bos, S. De Marchi, K. Hormann, J. Sidon, Bounding the Lebesgue constant for Berrut's rational interpolant at general nodes, J. Approx. Theory, 169 (2013), 7–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jat.2013.01.004 doi: 10.1016/j.jat.2013.01.004
![]() |
[64] |
J. P. Berrut, Rational functions for guaranteed and experimentally well-conditioned global interpolation, Comput. Math. Appl., 15 (1988), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/0898-1221(88)90067-3 doi: 10.1016/0898-1221(88)90067-3
![]() |
[65] |
L. Bos, S. De Marchi, K. Hormann, On the Lebesgue constant of Berrut's rational interpolant at equidistant nodes, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 236 (2011), 504–510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cam.2011.04.004 doi: 10.1016/j.cam.2011.04.004
![]() |
[66] |
K. T. Elgindy, High-order, stable, and efficient pseudospectral method using barycentric Gegenbauer quadratures, Appl. Numer. Math., 113 (2017), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnum.2016.10.014 doi: 10.1016/j.apnum.2016.10.014
![]() |
[67] |
M. R. Hestenes, Multiplier and gradient methods, J. Optim. Theory Appl., 4 (1969), 303–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00927673 doi: 10.1007/BF00927673
![]() |
[68] | M. J. D. Powell, A method for nonlinear constraints in minimization problems, Optimization, 1969,283–298. |
[69] |
K. T. Elgindy, Optimization via Chebyshev polynomials, J. Appl. Math. Comput., 56 (2018), 317–349. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12190-016-1076-x doi: 10.1007/s12190-016-1076-x
![]() |
[70] |
P. E. Murray, W. Murray, M. A. Saunders, SNOPT: an SQP algorithm for large-scale constrained optimization, SIAM J. Optim., 12 (2002), 979–1006. https://doi.org/10.1137/S1052623499350013 doi: 10.1137/S1052623499350013
![]() |
[71] |
P. E. Murray, W. Murray, M. A. Saunders, SNOPT: an SQP algorithm for large-scale constrained optimization, SIAM Rev., 47 (2005), 99–131. https://doi.org/10.1137/S0036144504446096 doi: 10.1137/S0036144504446096
![]() |
[72] | D. E. Kirk, Optimal control theory: an introduction, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1970. |
[73] |
K. Mamehrashi, A. Nemati, A new approach for solving infinite horizon optimal control problems using Laguerre functions and Ritz spectral method, Int. J. Comput. Math., 97 (2020), 1529–1544. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207160.2019.1628949 doi: 10.1080/00207160.2019.1628949
![]() |
[74] |
H. S. Nik, P. Rebelo, M. S. Zahedi, Solution of infinite horizon nonlinear optimal control problems by piecewise Adomian decomposition method, Math. Model. Anal., 18 (2013), 543–560. https://doi.org/10.3846/13926292.2013.841598 doi: 10.3846/13926292.2013.841598
![]() |
1. | Zhiliang Li, Lijun Pei, Guangcai Duan, Shuaiyin Chen, A non-autonomous time-delayed SIR model for COVID-19 epidemics prediction in China during the transmission of Omicron variant, 2024, 32, 2688-1594, 2203, 10.3934/era.2024100 | |
2. | Leyla Soudani, Abdelkader Amara, Khaled Zennir, Junaid Ahmad, Duality of fractional derivatives: On a hybrid and non-hybrid inclusion problem, 2024, 0928-0219, 10.1515/jiip-2023-0098 | |
3. | Imane Dehaj, Abdessamad Dehaj, M.A. Aziz-Alaoui, Mostafa Rachik, A new concept of controllability for a class of nonlinear continuous SIR systems, 2025, 192, 09600779, 116013, 10.1016/j.chaos.2025.116013 |
Parameter | Signification |
Λ | Susceptible person recruitement |
α(t) | Disease transmission coefficient |
g | Natural recovery rate |
m | Natural mortality rate |
r | Mortality rate due to the virus |
T∗ | 40 | 50 | 60 | 70 | 90 | 100 | 110 |
αm | 0.009981 | 0.01504 | 0.0110 | 0.01014 | 0.00993 | 0.0108 | 0.015 |
Parameter | Signification | Value |
Λ | Susceptible individual recruitement | 0.525 |
αm | Rate of interaction between susceptibles persons and infected ones | 0.011 |
m | Natural mortality rate | 0.5 |
r | Mortality rate due to the virus | 0.2 |
g | Recovery rate | 0.1 |
S0=S(T∗) | Initial susceptible people | 1000 |
I0=I(T∗) | Initial infected people | 50 |
R0=R(T∗) | Initial recovered people | 15 |
Parameter | Signification |
Λ | Susceptible person recruitement |
α(t) | Disease transmission coefficient |
g | Natural recovery rate |
m | Natural mortality rate |
r | Mortality rate due to the virus |
T∗ | 40 | 50 | 60 | 70 | 90 | 100 | 110 |
αm | 0.009981 | 0.01504 | 0.0110 | 0.01014 | 0.00993 | 0.0108 | 0.015 |
Parameter | Signification | Value |
Λ | Susceptible individual recruitement | 0.525 |
αm | Rate of interaction between susceptibles persons and infected ones | 0.011 |
m | Natural mortality rate | 0.5 |
r | Mortality rate due to the virus | 0.2 |
g | Recovery rate | 0.1 |
S0=S(T∗) | Initial susceptible people | 1000 |
I0=I(T∗) | Initial infected people | 50 |
R0=R(T∗) | Initial recovered people | 15 |