Research article Special Issues

A novel fractional approach to finding the upper bounds of Simpson and Hermite-Hadamard-type inequalities in tensorial Hilbert spaces by using differentiable convex mappings

  • Function spaces are significant in the study and application of mathematical inequalities. The objective of this article is to develop several new bounds and refinements for well-known inequalities that involve Hilbert spaces within a tensorial framework. Using self-adjoint operators in tensor Hilbert spaces, we developed Simpson type inequalities by using different types of generalized convex mappings. Our next step involved developing a variety of new variations of the Hermite and Hadamard inequalities using convex mappings with some special means, specifically arithmetic and geometric means. Furthermore, we developed a number of new fractional identities, which are used in our main findings, by using Riemann-Liouville integrals. In addition, we discuss some examples involving log convex functions and their consequences.

    Citation: Zareen A. Khan, Waqar Afzal, Mujahid Abbas, Jongsuk Ro, Najla M. Aloraini. A novel fractional approach to finding the upper bounds of Simpson and Hermite-Hadamard-type inequalities in tensorial Hilbert spaces by using differentiable convex mappings[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(12): 35151-35180. doi: 10.3934/math.20241671

    Related Papers:

    [1] Aftab Hussain . Fractional convex type contraction with solution of fractional differential equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(5): 5364-5380. doi: 10.3934/math.2020344
    [2] Hanadi Zahed, Ahmed Al-Rawashdeh, Jamshaid Ahmad . Common fixed point results in F-metric spaces with application to nonlinear neutral differential equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(2): 4786-4805. doi: 10.3934/math.2023237
    [3] Hanadi Zahed, Zhenhua Ma, Jamshaid Ahmad . On fixed point results in F-metric spaces with applications. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(7): 16887-16905. doi: 10.3934/math.2023863
    [4] Fatima M. Azmi . New fixed point results in double controlled metric type spaces with applications. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(1): 1592-1609. doi: 10.3934/math.2023080
    [5] Amer Hassan Albargi, Jamshaid Ahmad . Fixed point results of fuzzy mappings with applications. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(5): 11572-11588. doi: 10.3934/math.2023586
    [6] Abdullah Eqal Al-Mazrooei, Jamshaid Ahmad . Fixed point approach to solve nonlinear fractional differential equations in orthogonal F-metric spaces. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(3): 5080-5098. doi: 10.3934/math.2023255
    [7] Budi Nurwahyu, Naimah Aris, Firman . Some results in function weighted b-metric spaces. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(4): 8274-8293. doi: 10.3934/math.2023417
    [8] Nehad Abduallah Alhajaji, Afrah Ahmad Noman Abdou, Jamshaid Ahmad . Application of fixed point theory to synaptic delay differential equations in neural networks. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(11): 30989-31009. doi: 10.3934/math.20241495
    [9] Mi Zhou, Naeem Saleem, Xiao-lan Liu, Nihal Özgür . On two new contractions and discontinuity on fixed points. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 1628-1663. doi: 10.3934/math.2022095
    [10] Gunaseelan Mani, Rajagopalan Ramaswamy, Arul Joseph Gnanaprakasam, Vuk Stojiljković, Zaid. M. Fadail, Stojan Radenović . Application of fixed point results in the setting of F-contraction and simulation function in the setting of bipolar metric space. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(2): 3269-3285. doi: 10.3934/math.2023168
  • Function spaces are significant in the study and application of mathematical inequalities. The objective of this article is to develop several new bounds and refinements for well-known inequalities that involve Hilbert spaces within a tensorial framework. Using self-adjoint operators in tensor Hilbert spaces, we developed Simpson type inequalities by using different types of generalized convex mappings. Our next step involved developing a variety of new variations of the Hermite and Hadamard inequalities using convex mappings with some special means, specifically arithmetic and geometric means. Furthermore, we developed a number of new fractional identities, which are used in our main findings, by using Riemann-Liouville integrals. In addition, we discuss some examples involving log convex functions and their consequences.



    In science, wind speed is a fundamental quantity that results from the movement of air from high-pressure areas to low-pressure areas, primarily caused by temperature changes. Wind speed has a diverse impact on life and the economy and is important, such as in renewable energy production, aviation operations, and crop production. Additionally, monitoring and predicting wind speed contributes to preparedness and disaster prevention. Mohammadi, Alavi, and McGowan [1] studied the estimation of wind speed distributions and demonstrated that the Birnbaum-Saunders distribution is the most suitable. However, on days or times with no wind, where the wind speed is zero, the Birnbaum-Saunders distribution cannot be used for analysis since it is positively skewed. Therefore, the delta-Birnbaum-Saunders distribution is a more suitable option. The delta-Birnbaum-Saunders distribution combines both zero and positive values. The zero observations follow the binomial distribution with binomial proportion δ, whereas the positive observations with the probability 1δ follow the Birnbaum-Saunders (BS) distribution. It is well known that the BS distribution is widely applied across various fields such as environmental research, agriculture, business, industry, and medical sciences [2,3,4,5]. Since the Birnbaum-Saunders distribution is positively skewed and cannot be applied when zero values are present, it is not suitable for datasets containing zeros. However, real-world data may include zeros, making the delta-Birnbaum-Saunders distribution a more appropriate choice. The concept of the delta-Birnbaum-Saunders distribution originates from Aitchison's research [6]. Subsequently, several researchers have applied the concept of incorporating zero values into various positive distributions, providing more diverse and accurate approaches for statistical analysis, such as the delta-lognormal distribution. Hasan and Krishnamoorthy [7] used the delta-lognormal distribution to construct confidence intervals for the mean, employing both the fiducial approach and the method of variance estimate recovery (MOVER). Maneerat, Niwitpong, and Niwitpon [8] constructed confidence intervals for the difference between variances using the delta-lognormal distribution. They compared the highest posterior density (HPD) method with the normal approximation (NA), parametric bootstrap (PB), and fiducial generalized confidence interval (FGCI) methods. Singhasomboon, Panichkitkosolkul, and Volodin [9] proposed methods for constructing confidence intervals for the ratio of medians in lognormal distributions. The methods they introduced include the NA, the MOVER, and the generalized confidence interval (GCI). Their findings indicate that GCI performs well in terms of coverage probabilities, and they recommend using the NA method for moderate to large sample sizes when the mean and variance are small. For the delta-Birnbaum-Saunders distribution, Ratasukharom, Niwitpong, and Niwitpong [10] used the GCI, bootstrap confidence interval, generalized fiducial confidence interval (GFCI), and NA to estimate the proportion of zeros using the variance-stabilized transformation (VST), Wilson, and Hannig methods. These approaches were applied to construct confidence intervals for the variance of the delta-Birnbaum-Saunders distribution. They found that the GFCI based on the Wilson method is most suitable for small sample sizes, the GFCI based on the Hannig method is optimal for medium sample sizes, and the GFCI based on the VST method performs best for large sample sizes. For the delta-gamma distribution, Guo et al. [11] proposed GCIs based on fiducial inference, Box-Cox transformation, PB, and MOVER to construct confidence intervals for the difference between coefficients of variation in delta-gamma distributions. They found that all four GCI methods provided satisfactory results in terms of coverage probabilities. For the delta-two-parameter exponential distribution, Khooriphan, Niwitpong, and Niwitpong [12] proposed methods for constructing confidence intervals for the mean of the delta-two-parameter exponential distribution using PB, standard bootstrapping, the GCI, and the MOVER. They found that GCI is recommended for small to moderate sample sizes, while PB is more suitable for large sample sizes.

    The coefficient of variation is a statistical measure of relative dispersion used to compare the variability of distinct datasets. The coefficient of variation is defined as the ratio of the standard deviation to the mean. The coefficient of variation value is typically expressed as a percentage. A higher coefficient of variation indicates greater relative variability, while a lower coefficient of variation suggests less relative variability. Moreover, the coefficient of variation is a useful tool and is applied in various real-world scenarios, for example, investment analysis, healthcare, education, and economics. Importantly, environmental scientists use coefficients of variation to study the variability in environmental data, such as rainfall patterns, temperature fluctuations, or pollutant levels [13,14,15]. Furthermore, numerous researchers have conducted studies on confidence intervals for the coefficient of variation in various distributions. In the normal distribution, Vangel [16] created the confidence intervals for the coefficient of variation. Buntao and Niwitpong [17] used delta-lognormal and lognormal distributions to create the confidence intervals for the coefficient of variation. D'Cunha and Rao [14] described a method for calculating the coefficient of variation of the lognormal distribution using Bayesian inference. Sangnawakij and Niwitpong [18] examined the Gamma distribution's ratio coefficient of variation. Yosboonruang, Niwitpong, and Niwitpong [19] suggested confidence intervals for the difference between two independent coefficients of variation of the two delta-lognormal distributions. Puggard, Niwitpong, and Niwitpong [20] proposed confidence intervals for the coefficient of variation in the Birnbaum-Saunders distribution. La-ongkaew, Niwitpong, and Niwitpong [21] presented the confidence intervals for the ratio of the coefficients of variation between the two Weibull distributions.

    Many researchers have studied and developed confidence intervals for parameters in various probability distributions. From the study on constructing confidence intervals for parameters in various positive distributions that include zero values, it was found that the generalized confidence interval and normal approximation methods are effective. Additionally, the bootstrap confidence interval is recognized as a fundamental technique for constructing confidence intervals. Many researchers recommend these methods after comparing them with other methods. However, to date, there has been no research conducted on confidence intervals for parameters of the delta-Birnbaum-Saunders distribution. As a result, the purpose of this study is to construct confidence intervals for the coefficients of variation in the delta-Birnbaum-Saunders distribution. This study proposes three methods for constructing confidence intervals: the normal approximation, the generalized confidence interval that estimates the proportion of zero using variance-stabilizing transformation, as proposed by Wu and Hsieh [22], and the generalized confidence interval that estimates the proportion of zero using the Wilson score method, as proposed by Li, Zhou, and Tian [23]. These three methods are then compared with the bootstrap confidence interval. Furthermore, to validate the accuracy of these methods, all four of them will be applied to real-world data, specifically wind speed data collected in Ubon Ratchathani and Si Sa Kat, Thailand.

    Let Y=(Y1,Y2,,Yn) be a random sample from the delta-Birnbaum-Saunders (DBS) distribution with the proportion of zero δ, shape parameter α, and scale parameter β, denoted by YDBS(δ,α,β), the probability density function for the delta-Birnbaum-Saunders population is expressed as

    f(y;δ,α,β)=δI0[y]+(1δ)12αβ2π[(βy)1/2+(βy)3/2]exp[12(yβ+βy2)]I(0,)[y],

    where I is an indicator function, with I0[y]={1;y=0,0;otherwise, and I(0,)[y]={0;y=0,1;y>0. Then the distribution function of Y is given by

    G(y;δ,α,β)={δ;y=0,δ+(1δ)F(y;α,β);y>0, (1)

    where F(y;α,β) is the Birnbaum-Saunders distribution function. For Y=0, the number of zero observations is distributed according to the binomial distribution denoted by n(0)Binomial(n,δ). Given n=n(1)+n(0), where n(1) and n(0) represent the numbers of positive and zero values, respectively, the maximum likelihood estimate of δ is ˆδ=n(0)n. According to the Aitchison [6] concept, the population mean, variance, and coefficient of variation can be calculated as follows:

    E(Y)=(1δ)β(1+α22),V(Y)=(1δ)(αβ)2(1+5α24)+δ(1δ)β2(1α22)2,

    and

    θ=E(Y)V(Y)=12+α2α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)21δ. (2)

    The method for constructing confidence intervals for the coefficient of variation of the delta-Birnbaum-Saunders distribution will be presented in the next section.

    The normal approximation (NA) method is a technique that depends on the sample size, becoming more accurate as the sample size increases. A statistical approach used to derive an estimator with an asymptotically normal distribution is the delta method. Let

    θ=g(α,δ)=12+α2α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)21δ.

    Using the delta method, the asymptotic distribution of the estimator based on the Taylor series of g(ˆα,ˆδ) at α and δ is calculated as follows:

    g(ˆα,ˆδ)=g(α,δ)+g(α,δ)α(ˆαα)+g(α,δ)δ(ˆδδ)+Remainder. (3)

    Consider that it is possible to demonstrate that the probability of nRemainder converges to 0 as the sample size n approaches infinity. Since ˆαN(α,α22n(1)) and ˆδN(δ,δ(1δ)n), following computations, we can obtain

    g(ˆα,ˆδ)12+α2α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)21δ+8α(1α2)(2+α2)2(1δ)[α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2](ˆαα)+2+α2(43α2)(2+α2)(1δ)3[α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2](ˆδδ).

    Subsequently, we can calculate the asymptotic mean and variance of the estimator as follows:

    E[g(ˆα,ˆδ)]12+α2α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)21δ

    and

    V[g(ˆα,ˆδ)]1O(1δ)[α2(4+5α2)+Oδ]{32α4(1+2α2)2n(1)O+δ[2+α2(4+3α2)]2n(1δ)},

    where O=(2+α2)2. Detailed procedures for deriving the asymptotic mean and variance are provided in the appendix. Assume that ˆα and ˆδ are independent; then the maximum likelihood estimator of θ can be determined as

    ˆθ=12+ˆα2ˆα2(4+5ˆα2)+ˆδ(2+ˆα2)21ˆδ. (4)

    where ˆα={2[(n(1)i=1yin(1)(n(1)i=1y1in(1)))1/21]}1/2 is the modified moment estimator of α proposed by Ng, Kundu, and Balakrishnan [24]. Then, the estimated variance of ˆθ can be written as

    ˆV[ˆθ]1H(1ˆδ)[ˆα2(4+5ˆα2)+Hˆδ]{32ˆα4(1+2ˆα2)2n(1)H+ˆδ[2+ˆα2(4+3ˆα2)]2n(1ˆδ)}, (5)

    where H=(2+ˆα2)2. A random variable Z=ˆθθˆV(ˆθ)N(0,1) according to the central limit theorem. Therefore, the (1υ)100% CI for θ based on NA is given by

    [LNA,UNA]=[ˆθzυ/2ˆV(ˆθ),ˆθ+zυ/2ˆV(ˆθ)], (6)

    where zυ/2 is the (υ/2)th quantile value from the standard normal distribution.

    The concept of the generalized confidence interval (GCI) method proposed by Weerahandi [25] provides a general framework for constructing confidence intervals by considering the generalized pivotal quantity (GPQ). In constructing confidence intervals for θ based on GCI, the GPQs of β and α are taken into consideration. Let Tt(n(1)1). Sun [26] recommended that the GPQ of the β should be provided by

    Rβ(y;T)={max(β1,β2);T0,min(β1,β2);T>0, (7)

    β1and β2 are the two solutions of the quadratic equation,

    [(n(1)1)A21n(1)BT2]β22[(n(1)1)AC(1AC)T2]β+(n(1)1)C21n(1)DT2=0, (8)

    where A=1n(1)n(1)i=11Yi, B=n(1)i=1(1YiA)2, C=1n(1)n(1)i=1Yi, and D=n(1)i=1(YiC)2, while the GPQ of α should be provided by

    Rα(y;U,T)=E1+E2R2β2n(1)RβRβU, (9)

    where E1=n(1)i=1Yi, E2=n(1)i=11Yi, and Uχ2n(1).

    For the GPQ of δ, we use two concepts: the variance-stabilized transformation (VST) and the Wilson score method (WS). The details are explained in the following subsections.

    According to Wu and Hsieh [22], the GPQ of δ is defined as

    RVSTδ=sin2[arcsinˆδV2n], (10)

    where V=2n(arcsinˆδarcsinδ)N(0,1). Hence, the GPQ for θ is

    RVSTθ=12+R2αR2α(4+5R2α)+RVSTδ(2+R2α)21RVSTδ. (11)

    Consequently, the (1υ)100% CI for θ is based on G.VST is given by

    [LG.VST,UG.VST]=[RVSTθ(υ/2),RVSTθ(1υ/2)], (12)

    where RVSTθ(υ) is the (υ/2)th percentile of RVSTθ.

    In accordance with Li, Zhou, and Tian [23], the GPQ of δ is described as

    RWSδ=n(0)+(W2υ/2/2)n+W2υ/2W2υ/2n+W2υ/2n(0)(1n(0)n)+W2υ/24, (13)

    where W=n(0)nδnδ(1δ). Thus, the GPQ for θ is

    RWSθ=12+R2αR2α(4+5R2α)+RWSδ(2+R2α)21RWSδ. (14)

    Therefore, the (1υ)100% CI for θ is based on G.WS is given by

    [LG.WS,UG.WS]=[RWSθ(υ/2),RWSθ(1υ/2)], (15)

    where RWSθ(υ) is the (υ/2)th percentile of RWSθ.

    The bootstrap method is a resampling technique used to estimate the sampling distribution of a statistic by repeatedly resampling from the observed data with replacement, as proposed by Efron [27]. Let ˆα/ and ˆδ/ be observed values of ˆα and ˆδ based on bootstrap samples. Suppose that K bootstrap samples are available. The bootstrap expectation E(ˆα) can be approximated by using the mean ˆα/(.)=1KKj=1ˆα/j, where ˆα/j is sequence of the bootstrap MLEs of α, for j=1,2,,K. The bootstrap bias estimate based on K replications of ˆα is given by

    ˆK(ˆα,α)=ˆα/(.)ˆα.

    Then, the constant-bias-correcting estimates, as defined by Mackinnon and Smith [28], are used for creating the bias-corrected estimator, which is

    ˆα#=ˆα/2ˆK(ˆα,α). (16)

    According to Brown, Cai, and DasGupta [29], they proposed the Jeffreys interval for the binomial proportion, which employs the Jeffreys prior and is represented by Beta(0.5,0.5). Therefore, it results in

    ˆδBeta(n(0)+0.5,n(1)+0.5), (17)

    where n(0)=nˆδ/and n(1)=n(1ˆδ/). The bootstrap estimator of θ can be written as

    ˆθ(Boot)=12+(ˆα#)2(ˆα#)2(4+5(ˆα#)2)+ˆδ(2+(ˆα#)2)21ˆδ. (18)

    Consequently, the (1υ)100% CI for θ is based on BCI is given by

    [LBCI,UBCI]=[ˆθ(Boot)(υ/2),ˆθ(Boot)(1υ/2)], (19)

    where ˆθ(Boot)(υ) is the (υ/2)th percentile of ˆθ(Boot).

    In this simulation study, we have compared the performance of the proposed methods by considering the coverage probabilities greater than or equal to the nominal confidence level of 0.95, along with the expected lengths of the shortest confidence interval. This comparison was conducted using Monte Carlo simulations and the statistical software R. The overall number of replications was set to generate a simulation with 5,000 replications in total, 1,000 replications for the GCI, and 500 replications for the BCI. In addition, the sample size has been set to n = 30, 50,100,150, and 200, and the following parameters have been specified: δ = 0.1, 0.5, and 0.7; α = 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1.00, and 1.50; and β = 1. The algorithm presents the steps for estimating the coverage probability and expected length to compare the efficiency of the proposed methods.

    The results from Table 1 are as follows: it is evident that the NA and BCI methods have values that are close, both in terms of coverage probabilities and expected lengths. Similarly, the G.VST and G.WS methods also exhibit close values to each other in almost all the cases studied, with coverage probabilities remaining stable and close to 0.95, and they have the shortest expected lengths. This results in the G.VST and G.WS methods being more efficient than the NA and BCI methods. Figure 1 shows a comparison of various methods in terms of shape parameters relative to coverage probability and expected length. It is evident that the coverage probabilities for the G.VST and G.WS methods are consistently greater than and close to the nominal confidence level of 0.95 in almost all cases. The BCI method achieves a coverage probability close to the specified criterion when the shape parameters are 0.25 and 1.00. Meanwhile, for the NA method, the coverage probability meets the required criterion when the shape parameter is small. As the shape parameter increases, the NA method's coverage probability shows a tendency to decrease. When considering the expected lengths, a consistent trend is observed for all methods. As the shape parameter value increases, expected lengths also increase progressively. Figure 2 shows a comparison of various methods in terms of sample sizes relative to coverage probability and expected length. It was found that the coverage probabilities of the G.VST and G.WS methods meet the specified criteria. For the NA method, the coverage probability increases as the sample size increases. The BCI method provides coverage probability close to the specified level only when the sample size is 50. Regarding the expected length, it reveals that as the sample size increases, the expected length for all methods decreases, resulting in improved efficiency. Figure 3 shows a comparison of various methods in terms of the proportion of zero relative to coverage probability and expected length. It demonstrates that the coverage probabilities for the G.VST and G.WS methods consistently align closely with the specified confidence level. However, the NA and BCI methods provide coverage probabilities that fall below the specified confidence level. When examining expected length, a similar trend is observed across all methods: as the proportion of zero increases, the expected length also increases. Nonetheless, the G.VST and G.WS methods yield a shorter expected length compared to the NA and BCI methods.

    Algorithm: The coverage probability and expected length
      Ⅰ.  For a givenα, n, δ, andβ.
     Ⅱ.   For m=1 to M. Generate sample from the DBS distribution and calculate ˆα and ˆδ.
    Ⅲ.    Construct CIs for θ based on the NA, GCI, and BCI:
            For the NA; Calculate ˆV(ˆθ) and calculate LNA and UNA using Equations (6) and (7).
            For the GCI;
            1. Calculate A,B,C,D,E1 and E2, respectively.
            2. At the gth step
                a) Generate Tt(n(1)1), and then calculate Rβ(y;T) using Equation (7).
                b) If Rβ(y;T)<0, regenerate Tt(n(1)1).
                c) Generate Uχ2n(1), and then calculate Rα(y;T) using Equation (9)
                d) For G.VST method, calculate RVSTδ and RVSTθ using Equations (10) and (11).
                e) For G.WS method, calculate RWSδ and RWSθ using Equations (13) and (14).
            3. Repeat step 2. a number of times, with G = 1,000 times.
            4. Calculate LG.VST, UG.VST, LG.WS, and UG.WS using Equations (12) and (15).
            For BCI;
            1. At the bth step
                a) Generate y1,y2,,yn with replacement from y1,y2,,yn.
                b) Calculate ˆα/ and ˆK(ˆα,α).
                c) Calculate ˆα#, ˆδ and ˆθ(Boot) using Equations (16), (17) and (18).
            2. Repeat step 1. a number of times, with B = 500 times.
            3. Calculate LBCIand UBCI using Equation (19).
    Ⅳ.    If L[θU], set H=1; else set H=0. The coverage probability and expected length for each method are obtained by CP=1MMi=1Hm and EL=ULM, where U and L are the upper and lower confidence limits, respectively. (End m loop)

    Table 1.  The coverage probabilities and expected lengths for the 95% CIs for θ.
    α n δ Coverage probabilities Expected lengths
    NA G.VST G.WS BCI NA G.VST G.WS BCI
    0.25 30 0.1 0.9176 0.9508 0.9498 0.9318 0.3337 0.1001 0.1002 0.3308
    0.3 0.9492 0.9515 0.9589 0.9444 0.5126 0.0934 0.0928 0.5075
    0.5 0.9502 0.9489 0.9522 0.9505 0.7606 0.1195 0.1187 0.7635
    50 0.1 0.9256 0.9526 0.9450 0.9417 0.2646 0.0740 0.0739 0.2590
    0.3 0.9508 0.9520 0.9574 0.9422 0.3963 0.0671 0.0667 0.3919
    0.5 0.9564 0.9552 0.9520 0.9488 0.5818 0.0795 0.0802 0.5791
    100 0.1 0.9522 0.9513 0.9525 0.9597 0.1898 0.0506 0.0506 0.1861
    0.3 0.9561 0.9540 0.9604 0.9549 0.2770 0.0446 0.0442 0.2724
    0.5 0.9532 0.9537 0.9520 0.9502 0.4064 0.0515 0.0513 0.4013
    150 0.1 0.9406 0.9501 0.9484 0.9478 0.1547 0.0408 0.0408 0.1516
    0.3 0.9518 0.9542 0.9552 0.9510 0.2278 0.0356 0.0356 0.2268
    0.5 0.9522 0.9518 0.9532 0.9541 0.3298 0.0410 0.0409 0.3066
    200 0.1 0.9500 0.9520 0.9502 0.9530 0.1341 0.0350 0.0351 0.1337
    0.3 0.9506 0.9512 0.9546 0.9528 0.1968 0.0307 0.0307 0.1824
    0.5 0.9546 0.9548 0.9532 0.9502 0.2856 0.0348 0.0348 0.2589
    0.50 30 0.1 0.9341 0.9533 0.9555 0.9523 0.3683 0.2688 0.2678 0.3641
    0.3 0.9512 0.9514 0.9549 0.9487 0.5689 0.2919 0.2932 0.5545
    0.5 0.9524 0.9519 0.9516 0.9422 0.8574 0.3832 0.3848 0.8439
    50 0.1 0.9465 0.9465 0.9516 0.9347 0.2875 0.2005 0.2004 0.2818
    0.3 0.9554 0.9517 0.9484 0.9479 0.4339 0.2142 0.2134 0.4194
    0.5 0.9547 0.9493 0.9497 0.9405 0.6514 0.2696 0.2689 0.6311
    100 0.1 0.9556 0.9484 0.9466 0.9492 0.2035 0.1385 0.1384 0.1981
    0.3 0.9562 0.9525 0.9476 0.9637 0.3078 0.1449 0.1439 0.2945
    0.5 0.9628 0.9504 0.9491 0.9465 0.4615 0.1785 0.1780 0.4433
    150 0.1 0.9506 0.9505 0.9515 0.9042 0.1663 0.1122 0.1122 0.1686
    0.3 0.9566 0.9537 0.9529 0.9174 0.2511 0.1168 0.1167 0.2570
    0.5 0.9544 0.9536 0.9552 0.9294 0.3739 0.1426 0.1425 0.3694
    200 0.1 0.9526 0.9526 0.9543 0.9256 0.1442 0.0968 0.0968 0.1404
    0.3 0.9562 0.9524 0.9560 0.9376 0.2174 0.1005 0.1004 0.2126
    0.5 0.9620 0.9518 0.9520 0.9498 0.3235 0.1220 0.1222 0.1200
    0.75 30 0.1 0.9352 0.9511 0.9416 0.9538 0.4527 0.4075 0.4038 0.4480
    0.3 0.9310 0.9509 0.9450 0.9412 0.6593 0.4705 0.4708 0.6473
    0.5 0.9306 0.9530 0.9409 0.9405 0.9800 0.6242 0.6206 0.9646
    50 0.1 0.9475 0.9651 0.9448 0.9547 0.3545 0.3070 0.3081 0.3503
    0.3 0.9526 0.9563 0.9602 0.9510 0.5122 0.3538 0.3533 0.4972
    0.5 0.9459 0.9456 0.9564 0.9395 0.7601 0.4572 0.4583 0.7385
    100 0.1 0.9523 0.9460 0.9615 0.9482 0.2518 0.2144 0.2135 0.2475
    0.3 0.9622 0.9459 0.9536 0.9513 0.3627 0.2436 0.2453 0.3515
    0.5 0.9567 0.9431 0.9487 0.9500 0.5386 0.3132 0.3101 0.5203
    150 0.1 0.9538 0.9510 0.9524 0.8598 0.2061 0.1743 0.1741 0.2027
    0.3 0.9530 0.9504 0.9512 0.8790 0.2967 0.1986 0.1986 0.2670
    0.5 0.9558 0.9546 0.9519 0.9306 0.4399 0.2522 0.2525 0.4332
    200 0.1 0.9518 0.9502 0.9528 0.8724 0.1793 0.1510 0.1509 0.1709
    0.3 0.9518 0.9516 0.9532 0.9012 0.2567 0.1711 0.1709 0.2207
    0.5 0.9530 0.9546 0.9552 0.9386 0.3810 0.2178 0.2177 0.3418
    1.00 30 0.1 0.9190 0.9482 0.9506 0.9352 0.5233 0.4901 0.4904 0.5209
    0.3 0.9247 0.9471 0.9505 0.9407 0.7447 0.5875 0.5879 0.7419
    0.5 0.9321 0.9460 0.9500 0.9413 1.1191 0.7878 0.7901 1.1260
    50 0.1 0.9342 0.9478 0.9528 0.9387 0.4100 0.3755 0.3749 0.4065
    0.3 0.9333 0.9506 0.9625 0.9471 0.5742 0.4467 0.4455 0.5743
    0.5 0.9411 0.9576 0.9610 0.9410 0.8602 0.5933 0.5933 0.8628
    100 0.1 0.9472 0.9511 0.9504 0.9548 0.2901 0.2625 0.2616 0.2892
    0.3 0.9490 0.9521 0.9582 0.9522 0.4090 0.3111 0.3127 0.4080
    0.5 0.9489 0.9545 0.9597 0.9514 0.6065 0.4093 0.4101 0.6084
    150 0.1 0.9468 0.9514 0.9516 0.9556 0.2375 0.2142 0.2141 0.2318
    0.3 0.9446 0.9526 0.9508 0.9536 0.3335 0.2538 0.2538 0.3035
    0.5 0.9504 0.9530 0.9502 0.9526 0.4945 0.3328 0.3329 0.4903
    200 0.1 0.9482 0.9540 0.9588 0.9524 0.2061 0.1854 0.1853 0.2059
    0.3 0.9524 0.9510 0.9532 0.9508 0.2892 0.2196 0.2195 0.2768
    0.5 0.9522 0.9524 0.9546 0.9510 0.4279 0.2872 0.2875 0.4209
    1.50 30 0.1 0.9209 0.9490 0.9542 0.9433 0.5521 0.5213 0.5235 0.5702
    0.3 0.9072 0.9540 0.9528 0.9570 0.7735 0.6436 0.6442 0.8364
    0.5 0.8931 0.9505 0.9449 0.9308 1.1629 0.8781 0.8739 1.2941
    50 0.1 0.9246 0.9529 0.9548 0.9418 0.4281 0.4016 0.4012 0.4409
    0.3 0.9162 0.9580 0.9522 0.9409 0.5987 0.4948 0.4947 0.6473
    0.5 0.9097 0.9498 0.9560 0.9494 0.8909 0.6693 0.6685 0.9837
    100 0.1 0.9453 0.9571 0.9535 0.9530 0.3028 0.2822 0.2823 0.3135
    0.3 0.9349 0.9498 0.9526 0.9591 0.4231 0.3465 0.3468 0.4583
    0.5 0.9164 0.9520 0.9484 0.9438 0.6292 0.4660 0.4664 0.6997
    150 0.1 0.9338 0.9522 0.9514 0.9006 0.2475 0.2298 0.2301 0.2580
    0.3 0.9272 0.9542 0.9522 0.9086 0.3439 0.2822 0.2822 0.3483
    0.5 0.9188 0.9504 0.9500 0.9230 0.5113 0.3794 0.3795 0.5248
    200 0.1 0.9522 0.9506 0.9510 0.9218 0.2144 0.1991 0.1992 0.2232
    0.3 0.9364 0.9554 0.9542 0.9226 0.2977 0.2441 0.2440 0.3085
    0.5 0.9276 0.9532 0.9500 0.9430 0.4417 0.3277 0.3279 0.3317

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Figure 1.  Graphs comparing the performance of the shape parameter with respect to the (A) coverage probability and (B) expected length.
    Figure 2.  Graphs comparing the performance of the sample sizes with respect to the (C) coverage probability and (D) expected length (a = 30, b = 50, c = 100, d = 150, e = 200).
    Figure 3.  Graphs comparing the performance of the proportion of zero with respect to the (E) coverage probability and (F) expected length.

    Wind speed plays multiple important roles and has various impacts, particularly in agriculture. It affects plant growth rates, leading to faster growth and increased crop yields. Because Thailand is known as an agricultural country, a large portion of its population has always been engaged in farming or related occupations. Therefore, wind speed is an important factor that affects agriculture in Thailand. In this research, wind speed data from Ubon Ratchathani province for the hourly periods on March 9–10, 2023, and wind speed data from Si Sa Kat province for the hourly periods on April 3–7, 2023, have been applied for analysis, as presented in Tables 2 and 3. The wind speed data for both provinces was obtained from the Automatic Weather System in Thailand (http://www.aws-observation.tmd.go.th/main/main). We have plotted histograms of the wind speed data for Ubon Ratchathani and Si Sa Kat provinces to visualize the data distribution, shown in Figures 4 and 5. Since the wind speed data include both zero values (no wind) and positive values, we examined the suitability of the data distribution for positive values by comparing it to other distributions, including the normal, exponential, Cauchy, logistic, and Birnbaum-Saunders distributions. To assess the suitability of these distributions for the data, we have used the Akaike information criterion (AIC) and the Bayesian information criterion (BIC), calculated as

    AIC=2ln(L)+2p,

    and

    AIC=2ln(L)+2pln(o),

    respectively, where p represents the number of parameters estimated, o represents the number of observations, and L represents the likelihood function. From Table 4, it is evident that the AIC and BIC values for the Birnbaum-Saunders distribution are the lowest compared to other distributions. This suggests that the Birnbaum-Saunders distribution is the most suitable for the positive value of the wind speed data. As a result, the wind speed data, which contains both positive and zero values, is modeled as the delta-Birnbaum-Saunders distribution. Consequently, we have used this distribution to calculate confidence intervals for the coefficients of variation of the wind speed data. In addition, we have presented summary statistics for the wind speed data in Table 5. In the wind speed data, the parameter α represents the shape or skewness of the distribution, reflecting the tendency toward lower or higher-than-normal wind speeds. The parameter β indicates the scale of the wind speed distribution in the area; if β changes, the distribution of the data will also shift. The parameter δ represents the proportion of zero values in the dataset. Point estimates or coefficients of variation for Ubon Ratchathani and Si Sa Kat provinces were found to be 1.2183 and 1.3085, respectively. Table 6 presents the calculated 95% confidence intervals for the coefficient of variation for the wind speed data from Ubon Ratchathani and Si Sa Kat provinces. We compared the wind speed data from Ubon Ratchathani with the parameters from the data simulation, using the sample size of n = 50, parameter α = 0.75, and parameter δ = 0.3, from Table 1. The simulation results indicate that the NA, G.VST, G.WS, and BCI methods achieve coverage probabilities greater than the specified confidence level of 0.95. Additionally, it was found that the G.WS method provides the shortest confidence interval compared to other methods. The confidence interval for the wind speed data from Ubon Ratchathani using the G.WS method is (1.0797, 1.4925), with the confidence interval length of 0.4128, the shortest among the methods. This indicates that the study results are consistent. Subsequently, we compared the wind speed data from Si Sa Ket with the parameters from the data simulation using the sample size of n = 100, parameter α = 1.00, and parameter δ = 0.3, from Table 1. The simulation results show that the G.VST, G.WS, and BCI methods achieve coverage probabilities greater than the specified confidence level, while the NA method has a coverage probability lower than the specified confidence level. Therefore, we considered only the G.VST, G.WS, and BCI methods. It was found that the G.VST method provides the shortest confidence interval. The confidence interval for the wind speed data from Si Sa Ket using the G.VST method is (1.2002, 1.4655), with the confidence interval length of 0.2653, the shortest among all methods. This indicates that the study results are consistent. Consequently, to construct confidence intervals for the coefficient of variation of wind speed data in Thailand, we recommend using the G.WS method for Ubon Ratchathani province and the G.VST method for Si Sa Ket province.

    Table 2.  Data on the wind speed of Ubon Ratchathani, Thailand.
    Data on the wind speed of Ubon Ratchathani (Knots)
    4.9 2.9 2.3 1.0 3.9 0.0 0.6 5.8
    0.8 1.6 3.3 2.3 2.1 0.0 0.0 4.7
    6.2 3.9 0.8 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 1.6
    3.3 5.2 1.9 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.6 0.0
    3.3 0.6 3.3 0.0 1.6 1.6 0.0 0.6
    0.4 3.1 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 3.  Data on the wind speed of Si Sa Kat, Thailand.
    Data on the wind speed of Si Sa Kat (Knots)
    0.2 0.2 1.2 0.4 1.6 2.5 4.3 2.1 3.3 0.0 1.2 0.0
    2.3 0.0 3.3 0.4 1.9 9.9 8.7 0.0 2.9 1.0 0.0 1.6
    0.4 0.0 5.8 0.8 1.0 5.2 6.2 1.2 1.2 0.6 0.0 0.8
    2.3 0.0 7.6 0.6 0.6 7.2 5.8 0.0 3.9 0.4 0.0 0.0
    8.7 0.6 5.8 0.0 1.2 5.6 8.9 0.6 2.1 0.0 1.6 1.2
    3.3 2.5 5.2 0.6 0.6 0.8 2.5 0.8 3.5 1.6 0.6 1.0
    3.9 1.2 0.8 0.0 0.6 8.4 2.1 0.8 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0
    2.9 0.0 2.9 1.2 0.0 2.5 0.2 0.2 3.9 1.2 0.0 0.0
    2.5 0.8 1.2 2.9 0.8 4.3 3.3 0.8 0.4 0.0 1.6 0.6
    3.1 0.2 2.3 1.2 1.6 1.6 3.1 0.0 0.6 1.0 0.6 0.0

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Figure 4.  Histogram of wind speed data for Ubon Ratchathani.
    Figure 5.  Histogram of wind speed data for Si Sa Kat.
    Table 4.  The AIC and BIC values of each model for the wind speed data.
    Data Model Normal Exponential Birnbaum-Saunders Cauchy Logistic
    Ubon Ratchathani AIC 125.404 125.910 121.308 139.931 127.085
    BIC 128.335 127.378 125.705 142.863 130.016
    Si Sa Kat AIC 321.226 294.814 288.638 345.058 316.721
    BIC 326.135 297.268 296.001 349.967 321.630

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 5.  Summary statistics for the wind speed data.
    Data n ˆα ˆβ ˆδ ˆθ
    Ubon Ratchathani 48 0.7968 1.9355 0.3333 1.2183
    Si Sa Kat 120 0.9682 1.3744 0.2833 1.3085

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 6.  The 95% confidence intervals for the coefficients of variation of the wind speed data.
    Data Methods Interval Length
    Ubon Ratchathani NA (0.9314, 1.5052) 0.5738
    G.VST (1.0736, 1.4905) 0.4169
    G.WS (1.0797, 1.4925) 0.4128
    BCI (0.9795, 1.5470) 0.5675
    Si Sa Kat NA (1.1290, 1.4881) 0.3591
    G.VST (1.2002, 1.4655) 0.2653
    G.WS (1.1992, 1.4783) 0.2791
    BCI (1.1382, 1.4969) 0.3587

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    In this study, we constructed confidence intervals for the coefficient of variation of the delta-Birnbaum-Saunders distribution. We proposed three methods: NA, G.VST, and G.WS, and compared them with BCI. Then, we compared the performance of the proposed method based on the coverage probabilities greater than or equal to the 0.95 confidence level, along with the expected lengths of the shortest confidence interval. The simulation results indicate that the coverage probabilities of the G.VST and G.WS methods are greater than or close to the nominal confidence level. Meanwhile, the NA method shows coverage probability greater than the nominal confidence level when the shape parameter is small. Additionally, the coverage probability of the BCI method becomes closer to the nominal confidence level as the sample size increases. Considering the expected lengths, the BCI method provides shorter confidence intervals than the NA method, except when the shape parameter is large. However, the G.VST and G.WS methods yield the shortest and most similar confidence intervals, making these two methods the most efficient overall. Moreover, all the proposed methods were applied to wind speed data in Thailand and yielded results consistent with the simulation outcomes. Therefore, the G.VST and G.WS methods are recommended for constructing confidence intervals for the coefficient of variation of the delta-Birnbaum-Saunders distribution. In future research, we will investigate new methods and expand the parameters of interest in the delta-Birnbaum-Saunders distribution to enhance the effectiveness of constructing confidence intervals.

    Usanee Janthasuwan analyzed the data, drafted, and wrote the manuscript. Suparat Niwitpong conceptualized and designed the experiment and revised the manuscript. Sa-Aat Niwitpong proposed analytical tools, approved the final draft, and secured funding.

    The authors would like to thank the editor and reviewers, whose valuable comments and suggestions enhanced the quality of the paper. This research was funded by the King Mongkut's University of Technology North Bangkok. Contract no: KMUTNB-68-KNOW-17.

    The authors declare no conflict of interest.

    The asymptotic mean and variance

    We have used the Delta method to obtain an estimator with an asymptotically normal distribution based on the Taylor series, as follows:

    g(ˆα,ˆδ)=g(α,δ)+g(α,δ)α(ˆαα)+g(α,δ)δ(ˆδδ)+Remainder, (A.1)

    where g(α,δ)=12+α2α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)21δ. Now, we will calculate the partial derivatives of g(α,δ) with respect to α as follows:

    g(α,δ)α=α[12+α2α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)21δ]{12+α212[α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)21δ]1211δ(8α+20α3+8αδ+4α3δ)}+{[α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)21δ]12[2α(2+α2)2]}{4α+10α3+4αδ+2α3δ(2+α2)1δ[α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2]}2α(2+α2)2α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)21δ2α(2+α2)1δ[2+5α2+2δ+α2δα2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2(2+α2)]2α(2+α2)1δ{[(2+α2)(2+5α2+2δ+α2δ)][α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2](2+α2)α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2}2α{[(2+α2)(2+5α2+2δ+α2δ)]α2(4+5α2)δ(2+α2)2}(2+α2)2(1δ)α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)28α(1+2α2)(2+α2)2(1δ)α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2.

    Next, we have calculated the partial derivatives of g(α,δ)with respect to δ, and we obtain that

    g(α,δ)δ=δ[12+α2α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)21δ]12+α2{12[α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)21δ]12[(1δ)(2+α2)2+[α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2](1δ)2]}α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)22(2+α2)(1δ)3/2α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2(2+α2)(1δ)3[α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2].

    After that, by using the equation above to substitute into Eq A.1, we get that

    g(ˆα,ˆδ)=g(α,δ)+g(α,δ)α(ˆαα)+g(α,δ)δ(ˆδδ)+Remainder12+α2α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)21δ+8α(1+2α2)(2+α2)2(1δ)α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2(ˆαα)+α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2(2+α2)(1δ)3[α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2](ˆδδ),

    as n. It is well known that the asymptotic distribution of α and δ is given by

    n(1)(ˆαα)DN(0,α22)andn(ˆδδ)DN(0,δ(1δ)),

    respectively. We have calculated the asymptotic mean of the coefficient of variation of the Delta-Birnbaum-Saunders distribution as follows:

    E(g(ˆα,ˆδ))E[12+α2α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)21δ+8α(1+2α2)(2+α2)2(1δ)α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2(ˆαα)+α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2(2+α2)(1δ)3[α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2](ˆδδ)]12+α2α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)21δ+8α(1+2α2)(2+α2)2(1δ)α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2E(ˆαα)+α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2(2+α2)(1δ)3[α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2]E(ˆδδ)12+α2α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)21δ.

    In addition, the asymptotic variance of the coefficient of variation of the Delta-Birnbaum-Saunders distribution is given by

    V(g(ˆα,ˆδ))V[12+α2α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)21δ+8α(1+2α2)(2+α2)2(1δ)α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2(ˆαα)+α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2(2+α2)(1δ)3[α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2](ˆδδ)][8α(1+2α2)(2+α2)2(1δ)α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2]2V(ˆαα)+[α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2(2+α2)(1δ)3[α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2]]2V(ˆδδ)1(2+α2)2(1δ)[α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2]{64α2(1+2α2)2(2+α2)2(α22n(1))+[2+α2(4+3α2)]2(1δ)2(δ(1δ)n)}1(2+α2)2(1δ)[α2(4+5α2)+δ(2+α2)2]{32α4(1+2α2)2n(1)(2+α2)2+δ[2+α2(4+3α2)]2n(1δ)}.

    Note that ˆαN(α,α22n(1)) and ˆδN(δ,δ(1δ)n).



    [1] C. Wang, L. Yang, M. Hu, Y. Wang, Z. Zhao, On-demand airport slot management: Tree-structured capacity profile and coadapted fire-break setting and slot allocation, Transp. Sci., 2024 (2024), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/23249935.2024.2393224 doi: 10.1080/23249935.2024.2393224
    [2] J. Zhao, P. K. Wong, Z. Xie, X. Ma, X. Hua, Design and control of an automotive variable hydraulic damper using cuckoo search optimized PID method, Int. J. Auto. Tech., 20 (2019), 51–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12239-019-0005-z doi: 10.1007/s12239-019-0005-z
    [3] W. Li, Z. Xie, J. Zhao, P. K. Wong, Velocity-based robust fault tolerant automatic steering control of autonomous ground vehicles via adaptive event triggered network communication, Mech. Syst. Signal Pr., 143 (2020), 106798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2020.106798 doi: 10.1016/j.ymssp.2020.106798
    [4] Y. Hu, Y. Sugiyama, Well-posedness of the initial-boundary value problem for 1D degenerate quasilinear wave equations, Adv. Differential Equ., 30 (2024), 177–206. https://doi.org/10.57262/ade030-0304-177 doi: 10.57262/ade030-0304-177
    [5] Y. Cao, Z. Xie, W. Li, X. Wang, P. K. Wong, J. Zhao, Combined path following and direct yaw-moment control for unmanned electric vehicles based on event-triggered T-S fuzzy method, Int. J. Fuzzy Syst., 26 (2024), 2433–2448. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-024-01717-z doi: 10.1007/s40815-024-01717-z
    [6] J. Liu, Z. Xie, J. Zhao, P. K. Wong, Probabilistic adaptive dynamic programming for optimal reliability-critical control with fault interruption estimation, IEEE T. Ind. Inform., 20 (2024), 10472105. https://doi.org/10.1109/TII.2024.3369714 doi: 10.1109/TII.2024.3369714
    [7] Z. Xie, S. Li, P. K. Wong, W. Li, J. Zhao, An improved gain-scheduling robust MPC for path following of autonomous independent-drive electric vehicles with time-varying and uncertainties, Vehicle Syst. Dyn., 2024 (2024), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/00423114.2024.2351574 doi: 10.1080/00423114.2024.2351574
    [8] S. Chu, Z. Xie, P. K Wong, P. Li, W. Li, J Zhao, An improved gain-scheduling robust MPC for path following of autonomous independent-drive electric vehicles with time-varying and uncertainties, Vehicle Syst. Dyn., 60 (2022), 1602–1626. https://doi.org/10.1080/00423114.2020.1864419 doi: 10.1080/00423114.2020.1864419
    [9] J. Liu, Z. Xie, J. Gao, Y. Hu, J. Zhao, Failure characteristics of the active-passive damping in the functionally graded piezoelectric layers-magnetorheological elastomer sandwich structure, Int. J. Mech. Sci., 215 (2022), 106944. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2021.106944 doi: 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2021.106944
    [10] K. Ma, Z. Xie, P. K. Wong, W. Li, S. Chu, J. Zhao, Robust Takagi-Sugeno fuzzy fault tolerant control for vehicle lateral dynamics stabilization with integrated actuator fault and time delay, J. Dyn. Syst., Meas. Control, 144 (2022), 021002. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4052273 doi: 10.1115/1.4052273
    [11] Y. Xu, Z. Xie, J. Zhao, W. Li, P. Li, P. K. Wong, Robust non-fragile finite frequency H control for uncertain active suspension systems with time-delay using TS fuzzy approach, J. Frank. Inst., 358 (2021), 4209–4238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfranklin.2021.03.019 doi: 10.1016/j.jfranklin.2021.03.019
    [12] T. Zhang, X. L. Shi, Q. Hu, H. Gong, K. Shi, Z. Li, Ultrahigh-performance Fiber-supported iron-based ionic liquid for synthesizing 3, 4-dihydropyrimidin-2-(1H)-ones in a cleaner manner, Langmuir, 18 (2024), 9579–9591. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.4c00332 doi: 10.1021/acs.langmuir.4c00332
    [13] H. Kara, H. Budak, M. A. Ali, M. Z. Sarikaya, Y. M. Chu, Weighted Hermite-Hadamard type inclusions for products of co-ordinated convex interval-valued functions, Adv. Differential Equ., 2021 (2021), 104. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-021-03261-8 doi: 10.1186/s13662-021-03261-8
    [14] W. Afzal, M. Abbas, D. Breaz, L. I. Cotîrlă, Fractional Hermite-Hadamard, Newton-Milne, and convexity involving arithmetic-geometric mean-type inequalities in Hilbert and mixed-norm Morrey spaces q()(Mp()v()) with variable exponents, Fractal Fract., 8 (2024), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.3390/fractalfract8090518 doi: 10.3390/fractalfract8090518
    [15] T. S. Du, Y. J. Li, Z. Q. Yang, A generalization of Simpson's inequality via differentiable mapping using extended (s,m)-convex functions, Appl. Math. Comput., 293 (2017), 358–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2016.08.045 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2016.08.045
    [16] Z. A. Khan, W. Afzal, M. Abbas, J. S. Ro, A. A. Zaagan, Some well known inequalities on two dimensional convex mappings by means of pseudo LR interval order relations via fractional integral operators having non-singular kernel, AIMS Math., 9 (2024), 16061–16092. https://doi.org/10.3934/math.2024778 doi: 10.3934/math.2024778
    [17] D. F. Zhao, M. A. Ali, G. Murtaza, Z. Y. Zhang, On the Hermite-Hadamard inequalities for interval-valued coordinated convex functions, Adv. Differential Equ., 2020 (2020), 570. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13662-020-03028-7 doi: 10.1186/s13662-020-03028-7
    [18] S. Q. Hasan, Holders inequality ρ-mean continuity for existence and uniqueness solution of fractional multi-integrodifferential delay system, J. Math., 2020 (2020), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/1819752 doi: 10.1155/2020/1819752
    [19] M. Alomari, M. Darus, Co-ordinated s-convex function in the first sense with some Hadamard-type inequalities, Int. J. Contemp. Math. Sci., 3 (2008), 1557–1567.
    [20] S. Sitho, M. A. Ali, H. Budak, S. K. Ntouyas, J. Tariboon, Trapezoid and Midpoint type inequalities for preinvex functions via quantum calculus, Mathematics, 9 (2021), 1666. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9141666 doi: 10.3390/math9141666
    [21] V. Stojiljković, R. Ramaswamy, O. A. A. Abdelnaby, S. Radenović, Some refinements of the tensorial inequalities in Hilbert spaces, Mathematics, 15 (2023), 925. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym15040925 doi: 10.3390/sym15040925
    [22] Z. A. Khan, W. Afzal, W. Nazeer, J. K. K. Asamoah, Some new variants of Hermite-Hadamard and Fejér-type inequalities for Godunova-Levin preinvex class of interval-valued functions, J. Math., 2024 (2024), 8814585. https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/8814585 doi: 10.1155/2024/8814585
    [23] P. O. Mohammed, I. Brevik, A new version of the Hermite-Hadamard inequality for Riemann-Liouville fractional integrals, Symmetry, 12 (2020), 610. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym12040610 doi: 10.3390/sym12040610
    [24] W. Afzal, D. Breaz, M. Abbas, L. I. Cotîrlă, Z. A. Khan, E. Rapeanu, Hyers-Ulam stability of 2D-convex mappings and some related new Hermite-Hadamard, Pachpatte, and Fejér type integral inequalities using novel fractional integral operators via totally interval-order relations with open problem, Mathematics, 12 (2024), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.3390/math12081238 doi: 10.3390/math12081238
    [25] D. Khan, S. I. Butt, Superquadraticity and its fractional perspective via center-radius cr-order relation, Chaos Soliton. Fract., 182 (2024), 114821. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2024.114821 doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2024.114821
    [26] A. Fahad, Y. H. Wang, Z. Ali, R. Hussain, S. Furuichi, Exploring properties and inequalities for geometrically arithmetically-Cr-convex functions with Cr-order relative entropy, Inform. Sci., 662 (2024), 120219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2024.120219 doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2024.120219
    [27] W. Afzal, W. Nazeer, T. Botmart, S. Treanţă, Some properties and inequalities for generalized class of harmonical Godunova-Levin function via center radius order relation, AIMS Math., 8 (2023), 1696–1712. http://dx.doi.org/10.3934/math.2023087 doi: 10.3934/math.2023087
    [28] W. Liu, F. F. Shi, G. J. Ye, D. F. Zhao, Some inequalities for cr-log-h-convex functions, J. Inequal. Appl., 2022 (2022), 160. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13660-022-02900-2 doi: 10.1186/s13660-022-02900-2
    [29] W. Afzal, M. Abbas, J. E. Macías-Díaz, S. Treanţă, Some H-Godunova-Levin function inequalities using center radius (Cr) order relation, Fractal Fract., 6 (2022), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/fractalfract6090518 doi: 10.3390/fractalfract6090518
    [30] H. M. Srivastava, S. K. Sahoo, P. O. Mohammed, D. Baleanu, B. Kodamasingh, Hermite-Hadamard type inequalities for interval-valued preinvex functions via fractional integral operators, Int. J. Comput. Intell. Syst., 15 (2022), 8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44196-021-00061-6 doi: 10.1007/s44196-021-00061-6
    [31] Y. Zhang, Multi-slicing strategy for the three-dimensional discontinuity layout optimization (3D DLO), Int. J. Numer. Anal. Met., 41 (2017), 488–507. https://doi.org/10.1002/nag.2566 doi: 10.1002/nag.2566
    [32] H. Kara, H. Budak, M. A. Ali, F. Hezenci, On inequalities of Simpsons type for convex functions via generalized fractional integrals, Commun. Fac. Sci. Univ., 71 (2022), 806–825. https://doi.org/10.31801/cfsuasmas.1004300 doi: 10.31801/cfsuasmas.1004300
    [33] M. A. Ali, H. Budak, Z. Zhang, H. Yildirim, Some new Simpson's type inequalities for coordinated convex functions in quantum calculus, Math. Method. App. Sci., 44 (2021), 4515–4540. https://doi.org/10.1002/mma.7048 doi: 10.1002/mma.7048
    [34] A. A. H. Ahmadini, W. Afzal, M. Abbas, E. S. Aly, Weighted Fejér, Hermite-Hadamard, and Trapezium-type inequalities for (h1,h2)-Godunova-Levin preinvex function with applications and two open problems, Mathematics, 12 (2024), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.3390/math12030382 doi: 10.3390/math12030382
    [35] A. A. Almoneef, A. A. Hyder, F. Hezenci, H. Budak, Simpson-type inequalities by means of tempered fractional integrals, AIMS Math., 8 (2023), 29411–29423. http://doi.org/10.3934/math.20231505 doi: 10.3934/math.20231505
    [36] M. A. Ali, M. Abbas, H. Budak, P. Agarwal, G. Murtaza, Y. M. Chu, New quantum boundaries for quantum Simpson's and quantum Newton's type inequalities for preinvex functions, Adv. Differential Equ., 2021 (2021), 64. http://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-021-03226-x doi: 10.1186/s13662-021-03226-x
    [37] T. Saeed, W. Afzal, M. Abbas, S. Treanţă, M. D. la Sen, Some new generalizations of integral inequalities for Harmonical cr-(h1,h2)-Godunova-Levin functions and applications, Mathematics, 10 (2022), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10234540 doi: 10.3390/math10234540
    [38] M. A. Khan, S. Z. Ullah, Y. M. Chu, The concept of coordinate strongly convex functions and related inequalities, RACSAM Rev. R. Acad. A, 113 (2019), 2235–2251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-018-0615-8 doi: 10.1007/s13398-018-0615-8
    [39] H. Budak, H. Kara, M. A. Ali, S. Khan, Y. M. Chu, Fractional Hermite-Hadamard-type inequalities for interval-valued co-ordinated convex functions, Open Math., 19 (2021), 1081–1097. https://doi.org/10.1515/math-2021-0067 doi: 10.1515/math-2021-0067
    [40] A. Almutairi, A. Kılıçman, New refinements of the Hadamard inequality on coordinated convex function, J. Inequal. Appl., 2019 (2019), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13660-019-2143-2 doi: 10.1186/s13660-019-2143-2
    [41] W. Afzal, N. M. Aloraini, M. Abbas, J. S. Ro, A. A. Zaagan, Hermite-Hadamard, Fejér and trapezoid type inequalities using Godunova-Levin Preinvex functions via Bhunia's order and with applications to quadrature formula and random variable, Math. Biosci. Eng., 21 (2024), 3422–3447. https://doi.org/10.3934/mbe.2024151 doi: 10.3934/mbe.2024151
    [42] K. Shebrawi, Numerical radius inequalities for certain 2 × 2 operator matrices II, Linear Algebra App., 523 (2017), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.laa.2017.02.019 doi: 10.1016/j.laa.2017.02.019
    [43] J. Liang, G. Shi, Some means inequalities for positive operators in Hilbert spaces, J. Inequal. Appl., 2017 (2017), 14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13660-016-1283-x doi: 10.1186/s13660-016-1283-x
    [44] N. Altwaijry, S. S. Dragomir, K. Feki, Hölder-Type inequalities for power series of operators in Hilbert spaces, Axioms, 13 (2024), 172. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms13030172 doi: 10.3390/axioms13030172
    [45] X. Zhang, M. Usman, A. R. Irshad, M. Rashid, Investigating spatial effects through machine learning and leveraging explainable AI for child malnutrition in Pakistan, ISPRS Int. J. Geo.-Inf., 13 (2024), 330. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi13090330 doi: 10.3390/ijgi13090330
    [46] Y. Wang, Z. H. Huang, L. Qi, Global uniqueness and solvability of tensor variational inequalities, J. Optimiz. Theory App., 177 (2018), 137–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10957-018-1233-5 doi: 10.1007/s10957-018-1233-5
    [47] Y. Zhang, R. Lackner, M. Zeiml, H. A. Mang, Strong discontinuity embedded approach with standard SOS formulation: Element formulation, energy-based crack-tracking strategy, and validations, Comput. Method. Appl. M., 287 (2015), 335–366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2015.02.001 doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2015.02.001
    [48] W. Afzal, M. Abbas, O. M. Alsalami, Bounds of different integral operators in tensorial Hilbert and variable exponent function spaces, Mathematics, 12 (2024), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.3390/math12162464 doi: 10.3390/math12162464
    [49] J. Liu, Z. Xie, J. Zhao, P. K Wong, Probabilistic adaptive dynamic programming for optimal reliability-critical control with fault interruption estimation, IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf., 20 (2024), 8524–8535. https://doi.org/10.1109/TII.2024.3369714 doi: 10.1109/TII.2024.3369714
    [50] S. Dragomır, Refinements and reverses of tensorial and Hadamard product inequalities for self-adjoint operators in Hilbert spaces related to Young's result, Commun. Adv. Math. Sci., 7 (2024), 56–70. https://doi.org/10.33434/cams.1362711 doi: 10.33434/cams.1362711
    [51] V. Stojiljkovic, Twice differentiable Ostrowski type tensorial norm inequality for continuous functions of self-adjoint operators in Hilbert spaces, Eur. J. Pure Appl. Math., 16 (2023), 1421–1433. https://doi.org/10.29020/nybg.ejpam.v16i3.4843 doi: 10.29020/nybg.ejpam.v16i3.4843
    [52] V. Stojiljkovic, N. Mirkov, S. Radenovic, Variations in the tensorial trapezoid type inequalities for convex functions of self-adjoint operators in Hilbert spaces, Symmetry, 16 (2024), 121. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym16010121 doi: 10.3390/sym16010121
    [53] S. Wada, On some refinement of the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, Linear Algebra Appl., 420 (2007), 433–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.laa.2006.07.019 doi: 10.1016/j.laa.2006.07.019
    [54] A. Koranyi, On some classes of analytic functions of several variables, T. Am. Math. Soc., 101 (1961), 520. https://doi.org/10.1090/S0002-9947-1961-0136765-6 doi: 10.1090/S0002-9947-1961-0136765-6
    [55] F. Hezenci, H. Budak, Fractional Newton-type integral inequalities by means of various function classes, Math. Method. Appl. Sci., 11 (2024), 10378. https://doi.org/10.1002/mma.10378 doi: 10.1002/mma.10378
    [56] M. U. Awan, M. A. Noor, T. Du, K. I. Noor, On M-convex functions, AIMS Math., 5 (2020), 2376–2387. http://dx.doi.org/10.3934/math.2020157
    [57] T. Sitthiwirattham, K. Nonlaopon, M. A. Ali, H. Budak, Riemann-Liouville fractional Newton's type inequalities for differentiable convex functions, Fractal Fract., 6 (2022), 175. https://doi.org/10.3390/fractalfract6030175 doi: 10.3390/fractalfract6030175
    [58] R. A. Ryan, Introduction to tensor products of Banach spaces, Springer Monographs in Mathematics, London: Springer, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-3903-4
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Xiu-Liang Qiu, Selim Çetin, Ömer Kişi, Mehmet Gürdal, Qing-Bo Cai, Octonion-valued b-metric spaces and results on its application, 2025, 10, 2473-6988, 10504, 10.3934/math.2025478
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2024 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(842) PDF downloads(65) Cited by(4)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog