Stability and persistence analysis of a microorganism flocculation model with infinite delay

Jiaxin Nan; Wanbiao Ma; Jiaxin Nan; Wanbiao Ma

doi:10.3934/mbe.2023480

Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering

2023, Volume 20, Issue 6: 10815-10827. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023480

Previous Article Next Article

Theory article Special Issues

Stability and persistence analysis of a microorganism flocculation model with infinite delay

Jiaxin Nan ,
Wanbiao Ma ^,

School of Mathematics and Physics, University of Science and Technology Beijing, Beijing 100083, China

Academic Editor: Xiang-Sheng Wang

Received: 31 December 2022 Revised: 27 March 2023 Accepted: 31 March 2023 Published: 19 April 2023

In this paper, we study the global stability and persistence of a microorganism flocculation model with infinite delay. First, we make a complete theoretical analysis on the local stability of the boundary equilibrium (microorganism-free equilibrium) and the positive equilibrium (microorganism co-existent equilibrium), and give a sufficient condition for the global stability of the boundary equilibrium (applicable to the forward bifurcation and the backward bifurcation). Then, for the persistence of the model, we present an explicit estimate of the eventual lower bound of any positive solution for which only the parameter threshold $R_0 > 1$ is required. The obtained results extend some of the conclusions of the existing literatures on the case of discrete time delay.

Keywords:

Citation: Jiaxin Nan, Wanbiao Ma. Stability and persistence analysis of a microorganism flocculation model with infinite delay[J]. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(6): 10815-10827. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023480

Related Papers:

[1]	Daniel Maxin, Fabio Augusto Milner . The effect of nonreproductive groups on persistent sexually transmitted diseases. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2007, 4(3): 505-522. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2007.4.505
[2]	Yansong Pei, Bing Liu, Haokun Qi . Extinction and stationary distribution of stochastic predator-prey model with group defense behavior. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(12): 13062-13078. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022610
[3]	Asma Alshehri, John Ford, Rachel Leander . The impact of maturation time distributions on the structure and growth of cellular populations. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(2): 1855-1888. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020098
[4]	Katarzyna Pichór, Ryszard Rudnicki . Stochastic models of population growth. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2025, 22(1): 1-22. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2025001
[5]	Brandy Rapatski, James Yorke . Modeling HIV outbreaks: The male to female prevalence ratio in the core population. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2009, 6(1): 135-143. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2009.6.135
[6]	Ping Yan, Gerardo Chowell . Modeling sub-exponential epidemic growth dynamics through unobserved individual heterogeneity: a frailty model approach. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2024, 21(10): 7278-7296. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2024321
[7]	Hao Wang, Yang Kuang . Alternative models for cyclic lemming dynamics. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2007, 4(1): 85-99. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2007.4.85
[8]	Hisashi Inaba . The Malthusian parameter and $R_0$ for heterogeneous populations in periodic environments. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2012, 9(2): 313-346. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2012.9.313
[9]	Jim M. Cushing . The evolutionarydynamics of a population model with a strong Allee effect. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2015, 12(4): 643-660. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2015.12.643
[10]	Jie Bai, Xiunan Wang, Jin Wang . An epidemic-economic model for COVID-19. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(9): 9658-9696. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022449

Abstract

1. Introduction

In this paper, we study the coupled chemotaxis-fluid models with the initial-bounary conditions

$\begin{align} \left\{\begin{aligned} &n_{t}+u \cdot \nabla n = \Delta n-\nabla \cdot(n\nabla c)+\gamma n-\mu n^{2}, &&\text {in } Q \equiv(0, T) \times \Omega , \\ &c_{t}+u \cdot \nabla c = \Delta c-c+n+f, &&\text{in } Q, \\ &u_{t}+u \cdot \nabla u = \Delta u-\nabla \pi+n \nabla \varphi, &&\text{in } Q, \\ &\nabla \cdot u = 0, &&\text{in } Q, \\ &\frac{\partial n}{\partial \nu} = \frac{\partial c}{\partial \nu} = 0,\quad u = 0, &&\text{on } (0, T) \times \partial\Omega, \\ &n(x,0) = n_0(x), c(x,0) = c_0(x), u(x,0) = u_0(x), &&\text{in }\Omega, \end{aligned} \right. \end{align}$

(1.1)

where $\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^2$ is a bounded domain with smooth boundary $\partial \Omega$ . $\nu$ is the outward normal vector to $\partial \Omega$ , and $\gamma$ , $\mu$ are positive constants. $n$ , $c$ denote the bacterial density, the oxygen concentration, respectively. $u$ , $\pi$ are the fluid velocity and the associated pressure. Here, the function $f$ denotes a control that acts on chemical concentration, which lies in a closed convex set $\mathcal{U}$ . We observe that in the subdomains where $f \geq 0$ we inject oxygen, and conversely where $f \leq 0$ we extract oxygen.

In order to understand the development of system (1.1), let us mention some previous contributions in this direction. Jin [11] dealed with the time periodic problem of (1.1) in spatial dimension $n = 2,3$ . Jin [12] also obtained the existence of large time periodic solution in $\Omega \subset R^3$ without the term $u\cdot\nabla u$ .

Espejo and Suzuki [6] discussed the chemotaxis-fluid model

$\begin{align} &n_{t}+u \cdot \nabla n = \Delta n-\nabla \cdot(n \nabla c)+n(\gamma-\mu n), \end{align}$

(1.2)

$\begin{align} &c_{t}+u \cdot \nabla c = \Delta c-c+n, \end{align}$

(1.3)

$\begin{align} &u_{t} = \Delta u-\nabla \pi+n \nabla \varphi, \end{align}$

(1.4)

$\begin{align} &\nabla \cdot u = 0 , \end{align}$

(1.5)

$\begin{align} &\frac{\partial n}{\partial \nu} = \frac{\partial c}{\partial \nu} = 0,\quad u = 0. \end{align}$

(1.6)

They proved the global existence of weak solution. Tao and Winkler [17] proved the existence of global classical solution and the uniform boundedness. Tao and Winkler [18] also obtained the global classical solution and uniform boundedness under the condition of $\mu > 23$ .

The optimal control problems governed by the coupled partial differential equations is important. Colli et al. [4] studied the distributed control problem for a phase-field system of conserved type with a possibly singular potential. Liu and Zhang [14] considered the optimal control of a new mechanochemical model with state constraint. Chen et al. [3] studied the distributed optimal control problem for the coupled Allen-Cahn/Cahn-Hilliard equations. Recently, Guillén-González et al. [9] studied a bilinear optimal control problem for the chemo-repulsion model with the linear production term. The existence, uniqueness and regularity of strong solutions of this model are deduced. They also derived the first-order optimality conditions by using a Lagrange multipliers theorem. Frigeri et al. [8] studied an optimal control problem for two-dimensional nonlocal Cahn-Hilliard-Navier-Stokes systems with degenerate mobility and singular potential. Some other results can be found in [2,5,13,15,19].

In this paper, we discuss the optimal control problem for (1.1). We adjust the external source $f$ , so that the bacterial density $n$ , oxygen concentration $c$ and fluid velocity $u$ are as close as possible to a desired state $n_d$ , $c_d$ and $u_d$ , and at the final moment $T$ is as close as possible to a desired state $n_{\Omega}$ , $c_{\Omega}$ and $u_{\Omega}$ . The main difficulties for treating the problem are caused by the nonlinearity of $u\cdot \nabla u$ . Our method is based on fixed point method and Simon's compactness results. We overcome the above difficulties and derive first-order optimality conditions by using a Lagrange multipliers theorem.

2. Basic estimates of linearized problem

In this section, we will construct the existence and some priori estimates of the linearized problem for the chemotaxis-Navier-Stokes system in a bounded domain $\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^2$ . The proofs in this section will be established for a detailed framework.

In the following lemmas we will state the Gagliardo-Nirenberg interpolation inequality [7].

Lemma 2.1. Let $l$ and $k$ be two integers satisfying $0 \leqslant l<k$ . Suppose that $1 \leqslant q$ , $r \leqslant \infty$ , $p>0$ and $\frac{l}{k} \leqslant a \leqslant 1$ such that

$\begin{align} \frac{1}{p}-\frac{l}{N} = a\left(\frac{1}{q}-\frac{k}{N}\right)+(1-a) \frac{1}{r}. \end{align}$

(2.1)

Then, for any $u \in W^{k, q}(\Omega) \cap L^{r}(\Omega)$ , there exist two positive constants $C_1$ and $C_2$ depending only on $\Omega$ , $q$ , $k$ , $r$ and $N$ such that the following inequality holds

$\begin{align*} \left\|D^{l} u\right\|_{L^{p}} \leqslant c_{1}\left\|D^{k} u\right\|_{L^{q}}^{a}\|u\|_{L^{r}}^{1-a}+c_{2}\|u\|_{L^{r}} \end{align*}$

with the following exception: If $1<q<\infty$ and $k-l-\frac{N}{q}$ is a non-negative integer, the (2.1) holds only for $a$ satisfying $\frac{l}{k} \leq a<1$ .

The following log-interpolation inequality has been proved by [1].

Lemma 2.2. Let $\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^{2}$ be a bounded domain with smooth boundary. Then for all non-negative $u\in H^1(\Omega)$ , there holds

$\begin{align*} \|u\|_{L^{3}(\Omega)}^{3} \leq \delta\|u\|_{H^{1}(\Omega)}^{2}\|(u+1) \log (u+1)\|_{L^{1}(\Omega)}+p\left(\delta^{-1}\right)\|u\|_{L^{1}(\Omega)}, \end{align*}$

where $\delta$ is any positive number, and $p(\cdot)$ is an increasing function.

We first consider the existence of solutions to the linear problem of system (1.1). Assume functions $u_0\in H^1(\Omega)$ , $\hat{u} \in L^{4}\left(0,T; L^{4}(\Omega)\right), \hat{n} \in L^{2}\left(0,T; L^{2}(\Omega)\right)$ , and consider

$\begin{align} \left\{\begin{aligned} &u_{t}-\Delta u+\hat{u} \cdot \nabla u = -\nabla \pi+\hat{n} \nabla \varphi, &&\text{in } Q, \\ &\nabla \cdot u = 0, &&\text{in } Q, \\ &u = 0, &&\text{on } \partial\Omega, \\ &u(x,0) = u_0(x), &&\text{in }\Omega. \end{aligned} \right. \end{align}$

(2.2)

By using fixed point method, the existence of solutions can be easily obtained. Therefore, we ignore the process of proof and just give the regularity estimate.

Lemma 2.3. Let $u_0\in H^1(\Omega)$ , $\hat{u} \in L^{4}\left(0,T; L^{4}(\Omega)\right)$ , $\hat{n} \in L^{2}\left(0,T; H^{1}(\Omega)\right), \nabla\varphi\in L^\infty(Q)$ , and $u$ be the solution of the problem (2.2), then $u \in L^{\infty}\left(0, T; H^{1}(\Omega)\right) \cap L^{2}\left(0, T; H^{2}(\Omega)\right)$ and $u_t\in L^2(0,T; L^2(\Omega))$ .

Proof. Multiplying the first equation of (2.2) by $u$ , and integrating it over $\Omega$ , we get

$\begin{align*} &\frac{1}{2} \frac{d}{d t} \int_{\Omega} u^{2} d x+\int_{\Omega}|\nabla u|^{2} d x+\int_{\Omega} u^{2} d x \\ = &\int_{\Omega} \hat{n} \nabla \varphi \cdot u d x+\int_{\Omega} u^{2} d x \\ \leq& \|\hat{n}\|_{L^{2}}\|u\|_{L^{2}}+\|u\|^2_{L^{2}} \\ \leq&C(\|\hat{n}\|^2_{L^{2}}+\|u\|^2_{L^{2}}). \end{align*}$

By Gronwall's inequality, we have

$\begin{align*} \|u\|^2_{L^2} +\int_0^T\| u\|_{H^1}^{2} d\tau \leq C \left(\int_{0}^T\|\hat{n}\|_{L^{2}}^{2} d \tau+\|u_0\|_{L^2}^{2}\right). \end{align*}$

Operating the Helmholtz projection operator $P$ to the first equation of (2.2), we know

$\begin{align*} u_{t}+A u+P(\hat{u} \cdot \nabla u) = P(\hat{n} \nabla \varphi), \end{align*}$

where $A: = -P \Delta$ is called Stokes operator, which is an unbounded self-adjoint positive operator in $L^2$ with compact inverse, for more properties of Stokes operator, we refer to [10]. Note that $\nabla\cdot u = 0$ , that is $P u = u$ , $P \Delta u = \Delta u$ , $P u_{t} = u_{t}$ . So, in following calculations, we ignore the projection operator $P$ . Multiplying this equation by $\Delta u$ , and integrating it over $\Omega$ , we get

$\begin{align*} &\frac{1}{2} \frac{d}{d t} \int_{\Omega}|\nabla u|^{2} d x+\int_{\Omega}|\Delta u|^{2} d x + \int_{\Omega}|\nabla u|^{2} d x \\ = &\int_{\Omega} P(\hat{u} \nabla u) \Delta u d x-\int_{\Omega} P(\hat{n} \nabla \varphi) \Delta u d x+ \int_{\Omega}|\nabla u|^{2} d x. \end{align*}$

For the terms on the right, we have

$\begin{align*} &\int_{\Omega} P(\hat{u} \nabla u) \Delta u d x- \int_{\Omega} P(\hat{n} \nabla \varphi) \Delta u d x+\int_{\Omega}|\nabla u|^{2} d x \\ \leq&\|\hat{u}\|_{L^{4}}\|\nabla u\|_{L^{4}}\|\Delta u\|_{L^{2}}+\|\hat{n}\|_{L^{2}}\|\Delta u\|_{L^{2}}+\|\nabla u\|^2_{L^2} \\ \leq&\|\hat{u}\|_{L^{4}}\|\nabla u\|_{L^{2}}^{1 / 2}\|\Delta u\|_{L^{2}}^{3 / 2}+\|\hat{u}\|_{L^{4}}\|\nabla u\|_{L^{2}}\|\Delta u\|_{L^{2}}+\|\hat{n}\|_{L^{2}}\|\Delta u\|_{L^{2}}+\|\nabla u\|^2_{L^2} \\ \leq &\frac{1}{2}\|\Delta u\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+C\left(\|\hat{u}\|_{L^{4}}^{4}+\|\hat{u}\|_{L^{4}}^{2}+1\right)\|\nabla u\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+\|\hat{n}\|_{L^{2}}^{2}. \end{align*}$

Therefore, we get

$\begin{align*} \frac{d}{d t} \|\nabla u\|_{L^2}^{2} +\| \nabla u\|_{H^1}^{2} \leq C\left(\|\hat{u}\|_{L^{4}}^{4}+\|\hat{u}\|_{L^{4}}^{2}+1\right)\|\nabla u\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+C\|\hat{n}\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+C. \end{align*}$

By Gronwall's inequality, we derive

$\begin{align*} \|\nabla u\|_{L^2}^{2} +\int_0^T\| \nabla u\|_{H^1}^{2}d\tau \leq C. \end{align*}$

Multiplying the first equation of (2.2) by $u_t$ , and combining with above inequality, we have

$\int_0^T\int_\Omega|u_t|^2dxdt\leq C.$

Summing up, we complete the proof.

For the above solution $u$ , we consider the following linear problem

$\begin{align} \left\{\begin{aligned} &c_{t}-\Delta c+u \cdot \nabla c+c = \hat{n}_++f, &&\text{in } Q, \\ &\frac{\partial c}{\partial \nu} = 0,&&\text{on } (0, T) \times \partial\Omega, \\&c(x,0) = c_0(x), &&\text{in }\Omega. \end{aligned} \right. \end{align}$

(2.3)

Along with fixed point method, the existence of solutions can be easily obtained. Thus we omit the proof and only give the regularity estimate.

Lemma 2.4. Let $c_0\in H^2(\Omega)$ , $\hat{n} \in L^{2}\left(0,T; H^{1}(\Omega)\right)$ , $f \in L^{2}\left(0,T; H^{1}(\Omega)\right)$ , $u$ be the solution of the problem (2.2), and $c$ be the solution of (2.3). Then $c \in L^{\infty}\left((0, T), H^{2}(\Omega)\right) \cap L^{2}\left((0, T), H^{3}(\Omega)\right)$ and $c_t\in L^2(0,T; L^2(\Omega))$ .

Proof. Multiplying the first equation of (2.3) by $c$ , and integrating it over $\Omega$ , we infer from $\int_{\Omega} c(u \cdot \nabla c) = -\frac{1}{2} \int_{\Omega} c^{2} \nabla \cdot u d x = 0$ that

$\begin{align*} \frac{1}{2} \frac{d}{d t} \int_{\Omega} c^{2} d x+\int_{\Omega}|\nabla c|^{2} d x+\int_{\Omega} c^{2} d x \leq \|\hat{n}\|_{L^{2}}\|c\|_{L^{2}}+\|f\|_{L^{2}}\|c\|_{L^{2}}. \end{align*}$

Therefore, we have

$\begin{align*} \|c\|^2_{L^2} +\| c\|^2_{H^1} \leq C(\|c_0\|^2_{L^2}+ \int_0^t(\|\hat{n}\|^2_{L^{2}}+\|f\|^2_{L^{2}})d\tau). \end{align*}$

Multiplying the first equation of (2.3) by $-\Delta c$ , and integrating it over $\Omega$ , we get

$\begin{align*} &\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{d t}\int_{\Omega} |\nabla c|^2 d x+\int_{\Omega} |\Delta c|^2 d x +\int_{\Omega} |\nabla c|^2 d x \\ = &\int_{\Omega}u\nabla c\Delta c d x- \int_{\Omega}\Delta c\hat{n} d x- \int_{\Omega}\Delta c f d x. \end{align*}$

Using the Young inequality and the Hölder inequality, we obtain

$\begin{align*} &\int_{\Omega}u\nabla c\Delta c d x- \int_{\Omega}\Delta c\hat{n} d x- \int_{\Omega}\Delta c f d x \\ \leq & \|u\|_{L^{4}}\|\nabla c\|_{L^{4}}\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}+\|\hat{n}\|_{L^{2}}\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}+\|f\|_{L^{2}}\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}} \\ \leq&C\|u\|_{H^{1}}(\|\nabla c\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}\|\Delta c\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^{2}}+\|\nabla c\|_{L^{2}})\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}+\|\hat{n}\|_{L^{2}}\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}+\|f\|_{L^{2}}\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}} \\ = &C\|u\|_{H^{1}}\|\nabla c\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}\|\Delta c\|^{\frac{3}{2}}_{L^{2}}+C\|\nabla c\|_{L^{2}}\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}+\|\hat{n}\|_{L^{2}}\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}+\|f\|_{L^{2}}\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}} \\ \leq&\frac{1}{2}\|\Delta c\|^{2}_{L^{2}}+C\|u\|^4_{H^{1}}\|\nabla c\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+C(\|\hat{n}\|^2_{L^2}+\|f\|^2_{L^2}). \end{align*}$

Combining this and above inequalities, we conclude

$\begin{align*} \frac{d}{d t}\|\nabla c\|^2_{L^2} +\|\nabla c\|^2_{H^1} \leq C\|u\|^4_{H^{1}}\|\nabla c\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+C(\|\hat{n}\|^2_{L^2}+\|f\|^2_{L^2}). \end{align*}$

We therefore verify that

$\begin{align*} \|\nabla c\|^2_{L^2}+\int_{0}^{t}\|\nabla c\|^2_{H^1}\leq C( \int_{0}^{t}\|\hat{n}\|^2_{L^2}d\tau+\int_{0}^{t}\|f\|^2_{L^2}d\tau). \end{align*}$

Applying $\nabla$ to the first equation of (2.3), multiplying it by $\nabla \Delta c$ , and integrating over $\Omega$ give

$\begin{align*} &\frac{1}{2} \frac{d}{d t} \int_{\Omega}|\Delta c|^{2} d x+\int_{\Omega}|\nabla \Delta c|^{2} d x+\int_{\Omega}|\Delta c|^{2} d x \nonumber \\ = &\int_{\Omega} \nabla(u \nabla c) \nabla \Delta c d x- \int_{\Omega} \nabla \hat{n}_{+} \nabla \Delta c d x- \int_{\Omega} \nabla f \nabla \Delta c d x. \end{align*}$

For the terms on the right, we obtain

$\begin{align*} &\int_{\Omega} \nabla(u \nabla c) \nabla \Delta c d x- \int_{\Omega} \nabla \hat{n}_{+} \nabla \Delta c d x- \int_{\Omega} \nabla f \nabla \Delta c d x\nonumber \\ \leq&\|\nabla \Delta c\|_{L^{2}}\left(\|u\|_{L^{4}}\|\Delta c\|_{L^{4}}+\|\nabla u\|_{L^{4}}\|\nabla c\|_{L^{4}}\right)+\|\nabla \hat{n}\|_{L^{2}}\|\nabla \Delta c\|_{L^{2}} \nonumber \\ &+\|\nabla f\|_{L^{2}}\|\nabla \Delta c\|_{L^{2}} \nonumber \\ \leq&\|\nabla \Delta c\|_{L^{2}}(\|u\|_{L^{4}}\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}\|\nabla \Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}+\|u\|_{L^{4}}\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}} \nonumber \\ &+\|\nabla u\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}\|\Delta u\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}\|\nabla c\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}+\|\nabla u\|_{L^{2}}\|\nabla c\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}} \nonumber \\ &+\|\nabla u\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}\|\Delta u\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}\|\nabla c\|_{L^2}+\|\nabla u\|_{L^2}\|\nabla c\|_{L^2}) +\|\nabla \hat{n}\|_{L^{2}}\|\nabla \Delta c\|_{L^{2}} \nonumber \\ &+\|\nabla f\|_{L^{2}}\|\nabla \Delta c\|_{L^{2}} \nonumber \\ \leq& \frac{1}{2}\|\nabla \Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+C(1+\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+\|\Delta u\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+\|\nabla \hat{n}\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+\|\nabla f\|_{L^{2}}^{2}). \end{align*}$

Straightforward calculations yield

$\begin{align*} \|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+\int_{0}^{t}\|\Delta c\|_{H^{1}}^{2} d \tau \leq C\left(1+\int_{0}^{t}\|\hat{n}\|_{H^{1}}^{2}d\tau+\int_{0}^{t}\|f\|_{H^{1}}^{2} d \tau\right). \end{align*}$

Multiplying the first equation of (2.3) by $c_t$ , and combining with above inequality, we have

$\int_0^T\int_\Omega|c_t|^2dxdt\leq C,$

and thereby precisely arrive at the conclusion.

With above solutions $u$ and $c$ in hand, we deal with the following linear problem.

$\begin{align} \left\{\begin{aligned} &n_{t}-\Delta n+u \cdot \nabla n+n = - \nabla \cdot(n \nabla c)+(1+\gamma) \hat{n}_{+} -\mu \hat{n}_{+} n, &&\text{in } Q, \\ &\left.\frac{\partial n}{\partial \nu}\right|_{\partial \Omega} = 0, \\&n(x,0) = n_0(x), &&\text{in }\Omega. \end{aligned} \right. \end{align}$

(2.4)

By a similar argument as the above two problems, the existence of solutions can be easily obtained. Therefore, we only give the regularity estimate.

Lemma 2.5. Suppose $0\leq n_0\in H^1(\Omega)$ , $\hat{n} \in L^{2}\left(0,T; H^{1}(\Omega)\right) \cap L^{4}\left(0,T; L^{4}(\Omega)\right)$ , and $u$ , $c$ , $n$ are the solutions of the problem (2.2), (2.3) and (2.4), respectively. Then $n \geq 0$ , $n\in L^{\infty}(0, T; H^1(\Omega)) \cap L^2(0, T; H^2(\Omega))$ and $n_t\in L^2(0,T; L^2(\Omega))$ .

Proof. Firstly, we verify the nonnegativity of $n$ . We examine the set $A(t) = \{x : n(x, t)<0\}$ . Along with (2.4), we get

$\begin{align*} \frac{d}{d t} \int_{A(t)} n d x-\int_{\partial A(t)} \frac{\partial n}{\partial \nu} d s+\int_{A(t)} n d x = (1+\gamma) \int_{A(t)} \hat{n}_{+} d x-\mu \int_{A(t)} \hat{n}_{+} n d x. \end{align*}$

Since $\frac{\partial n}{\partial \nu} \geq 0$ on $\partial\{n<0\}$ , from this we deduce that the right hand side is nonnegative. Integrating this equality on $[0,t]$ gives

$\begin{align*} \int_{A(t)} n d x d \tau+ \int_{0}^{t} \int_{A(t)} n d x d \tau = 0 . \end{align*}$

Then, we get $n \geq 0$ .

Next, multiplying the first equation of (2.4) by $n$ , and integrating it over $\Omega$ , we get

$\begin{align*} &\frac{1}{2} \frac{d}{d t} \int_{\Omega} n^{2} d x+\int_{\Omega}\left(n^{2}+|\nabla n|^{2}\right) d x+\mu \int_{\Omega} \hat{n}_{+} n^{2} d x \\ = & \int_{\Omega} n\nabla c \nabla n d x+\left(1+\gamma\right) \int_{\Omega} n \hat{n}_{+} d x \\ \leq& \|n\|_{L^{4}}\|\nabla c\|_{L^{4}}\|\nabla n\|_{L^2}+(1+\gamma) \|\hat{n}\|_{L^{2}}\|n\|_{L^{2}} \\ \leq& C(\|n\|_{L^2}^{\frac{1}{2}}\|\nabla n\|_{L^2}^{\frac{1}{2}}+\|n\|_{L^2})\| c\|_{H^{2}}\|\nabla n\|_{L^2}+(1+\gamma) \|\hat{n}\|_{L^{2}}\|n\|_{L^{2}} \\ \leq& C(\|n\|_{L^2}^{2}\| c\|_{H^{2}}^{4}+\|n\|_{L^2}^{2}\| c\|_{H^{2}}^{2}+\|\hat{n}\|_{L^{2}})+\frac{1}{2}\|n\|_{H^{1}}^{2}. \end{align*}$

So, we derive that

$\begin{align*} \|n\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+\int_{0}^{T}\|n\|_{H^{1}}^{2} d t \leq C \left(1+\int_{0}^{T}\|\hat{n}\|_{L^{2}}^{2} d t\right). \end{align*}$

Multiplying the first equation of (2.4) by $-\Delta n$ , and integrating it over $\Omega$ , we get

$\begin{align*} &\frac{1}{2} \frac{d}{d t} \int_{\Omega}|\nabla n|^{2} d x+\int_{\Omega}|\Delta n|^{2} d x+\int_{\Omega}|\nabla n|^{2} d x \nonumber \\ = &\int_{\Omega} u \nabla n \Delta n d x+\int_{\Omega}\left(\nabla \cdot(n \nabla c) \Delta n-(1+\gamma) \hat{n}_{+} \Delta n+\mu \hat{n}_{+} n \Delta n\right) d x \nonumber \\ \leq&\|u\|_{L^{4}}\|\nabla n\|_{L^{4}}\|\Delta n\|_{L^{2}}+\|n\|_{L^{4}}\|\Delta c\|_{L^{4}}\|\Delta n\|_{L^{2}}+\|\nabla n\|_{L^{4}}\|\nabla c\|_{L^{4}}\|\Delta n\|_{L^{2}} \nonumber \\ &+(1+\gamma)\|\hat{n}\|_{L^{2}}\|\Delta n\|_{L^{2}}+\mu\|n\|_{L^{4}}\|\hat{n}\|_{L^{4}}\|\Delta n\|_{L^{2}} \nonumber \\ \leq &C\|u\|_{H^1}(\|\nabla n\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}\|\Delta n\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}+\|\nabla n\|_{L^{2}})\|\Delta n\|_{L^{2}} \\ &+\|n\|_{L^{4}}\left(\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}\|\nabla \Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}+\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}\right)\|\Delta n\|_{L^{2}} +\mu\|n\|_{L^{4}}\|\hat{n}\|_{L^{4}}\|\Delta n\|_{L^{2}} \nonumber \\ &+(\|\nabla n\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}\|\Delta n\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}+\|\nabla n\|_{L^{2}})\|\nabla c\|_{H^{1}}\|\Delta n\|_{L^{2}}+(1+\gamma)\|\hat{n}\|_{L^{2}}\|\Delta n\|_{L^{2}} \nonumber \\ \leq& \frac{1}{2}\|\Delta n\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+C\left(\|\nabla n\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+\|n\|_{L^{4}}^{4}+\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{4}+\|\nabla \Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+\|\hat{n}\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+\|\hat{n}\|_{L^{4}}^{4}\right) \nonumber \\ \leq& \frac{1}{2}\|\Delta n\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+C(1+\|\nabla n\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+\|n\|_{L^{2}}^{4}+\|n\|_{L^{2}}^{2}\|\nabla n\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+\|\nabla \Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{2} \nonumber \\ &+\|\hat{n}\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+\|\hat{n}\|_{L^{4}}^{4}). \end{align*}$

Straightforward calculations yield

$\begin{align*} \|\nabla n\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+\int_{0}^{T} \int_{\Omega}\left(|\Delta n|^{2}+|\nabla n|^{2}+\hat{n}_{+}|\nabla n|^{2}\right) d x d t \leq C. \end{align*}$

Multiplying the first equation of (2.4) by $n_t$ , and combining with above inequality, we have

$\int_0^T\int_\Omega|n_t|^2dxdt\leq C.$

The proof is complete.

Introduce the spaces

$\begin{align*} &X_{u} = L^{4}\left(0,T; L^{4}(\Omega)\right), \quad X_{n} = L^{4}\left(0,T; L^{4}(\Omega)\right) \cap L^{2}\left(0,T; H^{1}(\Omega)\right), \\ &Y_{u} = L^{\infty}\left(0, T; H^{1}(\Omega)\right) \cap L^{2}\left(0, T; H^{2}(\Omega)\right), \\ &Y_{n} = L^{\infty}(0, T; H^1(\Omega)) \cap L^2(0, T; H^2(\Omega)). \end{align*}$

Define a map

$\begin{align*} &\mathcal{F}: X_{u} \times X_{n}\rightarrow X_{u} \times X_{n}, \\ &\mathcal{F}(\hat{u}, \hat{n}) = (u, n), \end{align*}$

where the $(u, n)$ is the solution of the decoupled linear problem

$\begin{align*} \left\{\begin{aligned} &n_{t}-\Delta n+u \cdot \nabla n+n = - \nabla \cdot(n \nabla c)+(1+\gamma) \hat{n}_{+} -\mu \hat{n}_{+} n, &&\text {in } (0, T) \times \Omega \equiv Q, \\ &c_{t}-\Delta c+u \cdot \nabla c+c = \hat{n}_++f, &&\text{in } (0, T) \times \Omega \equiv Q, \\ &u_{t}-\Delta u+\hat{u} \cdot \nabla u = -\nabla \pi+\hat{n} \nabla \varphi, &&\text{in } (0, T) \times \Omega \equiv Q, \\ &\nabla \cdot u = 0, &&\text{in } (0, T) \times \Omega \equiv Q, \\ &\frac{\partial n}{\partial \nu} = \frac{\partial c}{\partial \nu} = 0,\quad u = 0, &&\text{on } (0, T) \times \partial\Omega, \\ &n(x,0) = n_0(x), c(x,0) = c_0(x), u(x,0) = u_0(x), &&\text{in }\Omega. \end{aligned} \right. \end{align*}$

Next, we use fixed point method to prove the local existence of solutions of the problem (1.1).

Lemma 2.6. The map $\mathcal{F}: X_{u} \times X_{n}\rightarrow X_{u} \times X_{n}$ is well defined and compact.

Proof. Let $(\hat{n},\hat{u})\in X_{u} \times X_{n}$ , by Lemmas 2.3, 2.4, 2.5 we deduce that $(n,u) = \mathcal{F}(\hat{n},\hat{u})$ is bounded in $Y_u\times Y_n$ . Note that the embeddings $H^{2}(\Omega) \hookrightarrow H^{1}(\Omega)$ is compact and interpolating between $L^{\infty}(0, T; H^1(\Omega))$ and $L^2(0, T; H^2(\Omega))$ . It is easy to get that $u$ is bounded in $L^{4}\left(0,T; L^{4}(\Omega)\right)$ and $n$ is bounded in $L^{4}\left(0,T; L^{4}(\Omega)\right) \cap L^{2}\left(0,T; H^{1}(\Omega)\right)$ . Therefore, the operator $\mathcal{F}:X_{u} \times X_{n}\rightarrow X_{u} \times X_{n}$ is a compact operator.

3. Existence and uniqueness of strong solution of system

From Lemma 2.6, $(n,u)\in Y_n\times Y_u$ satisfies pointwisely a.e. in $Q$ the following problem

$\begin{array}{l} \left\{\begin{array}{l} n_{t}-\Delta n+u \cdot \nabla n+n = - \nabla \cdot(n \nabla c) \\ +\alpha(1+\gamma) n -\mu n^2, &&\text {in } Q, \\ c_{t}-\Delta c+u \cdot \nabla c+c = n+\alpha f, &&\text{in } Q, \\ u_{t}-\Delta u+u \cdot \nabla u = -\nabla \pi+\alpha n \nabla \varphi, &&\text{in } Q, \\ \nabla \cdot u = 0, &&\text{in } Q, \\ \frac{\partial n}{\partial \nu} = \frac{\partial c}{\partial \nu} = 0,\quad u = 0, &&\text{on } (0, T) \times \partial\Omega, \\ n(x,0) = n_0(x), c(x,0) = c_0(x), u(x,0) = u_0(x), &&\text{in }\Omega. \end{array} \right. \end{array}$

(3.1)

In order to prove the existence of solution, we first give some a priori estimates.

Lemma 3.1. Let $(n,c,u)$ be a local solution to (3.1). Then, it holds that

$\begin{align} &\|n\|_{L^1}+\int_0^t(\|n\|_{L^1}+\|n\|_{L^2})d\tau \leq C, \end{align}$

(3.2)

$\begin{align} &\|\nabla u\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+\int_{0}^{t}\|\nabla u\|_{H^{1}}^{2} d \tau \leq C, \end{align}$

(3.3)

$\begin{align} &\|\nabla c\|^2_{L^2}+\int_{0}^{t}\|\nabla c\|^2_{H^1}d\tau \leq C. \end{align}$

(3.4)

Proof. With Lemma 2.5 in hand, we get $n\geq 0$ . Integrating the first equation of (3.1) over $\Omega$ , we see that

$\begin{align*} \frac{d}{d t} \int_{\Omega} n d x+\int_{\Omega} n d x+\mu \int_{\Omega} n^{2} d x = \alpha(1+\gamma) \int_{\Omega} n d x \leq \frac{\mu}{2} \int_{\Omega} n^{2} d x+C. \end{align*}$

Solving this differential inequality, we obtain that

$\begin{align*} \|n\|_{L^1}+\int_0^t(\|n\|_{L^1}+\|n\|_{L^2})d\tau \leq C. \end{align*}$

Multiplying the third equation of (3.1) by $u$ , and integrating it over $\Omega$ , we get

$\begin{align*} \frac{1}{2} \frac{d}{d t} \int_{\Omega} u^{2} d x+\int_{\Omega}|\nabla u|^{2} d x+\int_{\Omega} u^{2} d x = &\alpha\int_{\Omega} n \nabla \varphi \cdot u d x+\int_{\Omega} u^{2} d x \\ \leq& \|n\|_{L^{2}}\|u\|_{L^{2}}+\|u\|^2_{L^{2}} \leq C(\|n\|^2_{L^{2}}+\|u\|^2_{L^{2}}). \end{align*}$

Therefore, we see that

$\begin{align*} \|u\|^2_{L^{2}}+\int_{0}^t\|u\|_{H^1} d\tau \leq C. \end{align*}$

By the Gagliardo-Nirenberg interpolation inequality, we deduce that

$\begin{align*} \int_{0}^{t}\|u\|_{L^{4}}^{4} d \tau \leq & C \int_{0}^{t}(\|u\|_{L^{2}}^{2}\|\nabla u\|_{L^{2}}^{2} d+\|u\|_{L^{2}}^{2}) \tau \\ \leq& \|u\|_{L^{2}}^{2} \int_{0}^{t}\|\nabla u\|_{L^{2}}^{2} d \tau+ \int_{0}^{t}\|u\|_{L^{2}}^{2}d \tau \\ \leq& C. \end{align*}$

Multiplying the third equation of (3.1) by $\Delta u$ , and integrating it over $\Omega$ , we get

$\begin{align*} \frac{d}{d t} \|\nabla u\|_{L^2}^{2} +\| \nabla u\|_{H^1}^{2} \leq C\left(\|u\|_{L^{4}}^{4}+\|u\|_{L^{4}}^{2}+1\right)\|\nabla u\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+C\|n\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+C. \end{align*}$

Thus, we know

$\begin{align*} \|\nabla u\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+\int_{0}^{t}\|\nabla u\|_{H^{1}}^{2} d \tau \leq C. \end{align*}$

Multiplying the second equation of (3.1) by $c$ , and integrating it over $\Omega$ , we have

$\begin{align*} \frac{1}{2} \frac{d}{d t} \int_{\Omega} c^{2} d x+\int_{\Omega}|\nabla c|^{2} d x+\int_{\Omega} c^{2} d x \leq \|n\|_{L^{2}}\|c\|_{L^{2}}+\alpha\|f\|_{L^{2}}\|c\|_{L^{2}}. \end{align*}$

Then, we have

$\begin{align*} \|c\|_{L^2}+\int_{0}^{t}\|c\|_{H^1}d\tau\leq C. \end{align*}$

Multiplying the second equation of (3.1) by $-\Delta c$ , and integrating it over $\Omega$ , we get

$\begin{align*} \frac{d}{d t}\|\nabla c\|^2_{L^2} +\|\nabla c\|^2_{H^1} \leq C\|u\|^4_{H^{1}}\|\nabla c\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+C(\|n\|^2_{L^2}+\|f\|^2_{L^2}). \end{align*}$

Further, we have

$\begin{align*} \|\nabla c\|^2_{L^2}+\int_{0}^{t}\|\nabla c\|^2_{H^1}d\tau \leq C. \end{align*}$

The proof is complete.

Lemma 3.2. Let $(n,c,u)$ be a local solution to (3.1). Then, it holds that

$\begin{align} \|(n+1)\ln(n+1)\|_{L^1}+\|\nabla c\|^2_{L^2}+\|\nabla c\|^2_{H^1}\leq C. \end{align}$

(3.5)

Proof. We rewrite the first equation of (3.1) as

$\begin{align*} &\frac{d}{d t}(n+1)+u \cdot \nabla(n+1)-\Delta(n+1) \\ = &-\nabla \cdot\left((n+1) \cdot \nabla c\right)+\Delta c +\alpha(1+\gamma) n -\mu n^2. \end{align*}$

Multiplying the above equation by $\ln(n + 1)$ and integrating the equation, we have

$\begin{align*} &\frac{d}{d t} \int_{\Omega}(n+1) \ln (n+1) d x+4 \int_{\Omega}|\nabla \sqrt{n+1}|^{2} d x \\ \leq &\int_{\Omega} \nabla(n+1) \cdot \nabla c d x+\int_{\Omega} \Delta c \ln (n+1) d x+\alpha(1+\gamma)\int_{\Omega}n\ln (n+1)d x \\ = &I_1+I_2+I_3. \end{align*}$

For $I_1$ , integrating by parts and using Young's inequality with small $\delta$ , we get

$\begin{align*} I_1 = -\int_{\Omega} n \Delta c d x \leq \|n\|_{L^2}\|\Delta c\|_{L^2} \leq \delta\|\Delta c\|^2_{L^2}+C\|n\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align*}$

For the term $I_2$ , we have

$\begin{align*} I_2 = &\int_{\Omega} \Delta c \ln (n+1) d x\leq \delta\|\Delta c\|^2_{L^2}+C\|\ln(n+1)\|^2_{L^2} \\ \leq& \delta\|\Delta c\|^2_{L^2}+C\int_{\Omega}(n+1)\ln(n+1) d x. \end{align*}$

For the rest term $I_3$ , straightforward calculations yield

$\begin{align*} I_3 = \alpha(1+\gamma)\int_{\Omega}n\ln (n+1)d x \leq (1+\gamma)\int_{\Omega}(n+1)\ln (n+1)d x. \end{align*}$

Combining $I_1$ , $I_2$ with $I_3$ , we conduct that

$\begin{align} &\frac{d}{d t} \int_{\Omega}(n+1) \ln (n+1) d x+4 \int_{\Omega}|\nabla \sqrt{n+1}|^{2} d x \\ \leq& \delta\|\Delta c\|^2_{L^2}+C\int_{\Omega}(n+1)\ln (n+1)d x+C\|n\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align}$

(3.6)

Multiplying the second equation of (3.1) by $\Delta c$ , and integrating it over $\Omega$ , we get

$\begin{align*} &\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{d t}\int_{\Omega} |\nabla c|^2 d x+\int_{\Omega} |\Delta c|^2 d x +\int_{\Omega} |\nabla c|^2 d x \\ = &\int_{\Omega}u\nabla c\Delta c d x- \int_{\Omega}\Delta c n d x- \alpha\int_{\Omega}\Delta c f d x. \end{align*}$

Straightforward calculations yield

$\begin{align} \frac{d}{d t}\|\nabla c\|^2_{L^2} +\|\nabla c\|^2_{H^1} \leq C\|\nabla c\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+C(\|n\|^2_{L^2}+\|f\|^2_{L^2}). \end{align}$

(3.7)

Combing (3.6) and (3.7), it follows that

$\begin{align*} &\frac{d}{d t} \int_{\Omega}(n+1) \ln (n+1) d x+\frac{d}{d t}\|\nabla c\|^2_{L^2}+(1-\delta)\|\nabla c\|^2_{H^1} +4 \int_{\Omega}|\nabla \sqrt{n+1}|^{2} d x \\ \leq&C\int_{\Omega}(n+1)\ln (n+1)d x+C(\|f\|^2_{L^2}+\|n\|^2_{L^2}). \end{align*}$

Taking $\delta$ small enough, and solving this differential inequality, we obtain that

$\begin{align*} \|(n+1)\ln(n+1)\|_{L^1}+\|\nabla c\|^2_{L^2}+\|\nabla c\|^2_{H^1}\leq C. \end{align*}$

The proof is complete.

Lemma 3.3. Assume $f\in L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega))$ , let $(n,c,u)$ be a local solution to (3.1). Then, it holds that

$\begin{align} \|n\|^2_{L^2}+\|\Delta c\|^2_{L^2}+\int_{0}^t\|n\|_{H^1}d\tau +\int_{0}^t\|\Delta c\|_{H^1}d\tau\leq C. \end{align}$

(3.8)

Proof. Taking the $L^2$ -inner product with $n$ for the first equation of (3.1) implies

$\begin{align*} &\frac{1}{2} \frac{d}{d t} \int_{\Omega} n^{2} d x+\int_{\Omega}\left(n^{2}+|\nabla n|^{2}\right) d x+\mu \int_{\Omega} n^{3} d x \\ = & \int_{\Omega} n\nabla c \nabla n d x+\alpha\left(1+\gamma\right) \int_{\Omega} n^2 d x \\ = & -\frac{1}{2}\int_{\Omega} n^2\Delta c d x +\alpha\left(1+\gamma\right) \int_{\Omega} n^2 d x. \end{align*}$

Here, we note that

$\begin{align*} \left|\int_{\Omega} n^{2} \Delta c d x\right| \leq& \|n\|_{L^{3}}^{2}\|\Delta c\|_{L^{3}} \nonumber \\ \leq&C\|n\|_{L^{3}}^{2}(\|\nabla\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{2}{3}}\|\nabla c\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{3}}+\|\nabla c\|_{L^{2}}) \nonumber \\ \leq&C\|n\|_{L^{3}}^{2}(\|\nabla \Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{2}{3}}+1). \end{align*}$

From Lemma 2.2 and (3.2), it follows that

$\begin{align*} &-\frac{\chi}{2}\int_{\Omega} n^{2} \Delta c d x \nonumber \\ \leq& C\left(\delta\|n\|_{H^{1}}^{2}\|(n+1) \log (n+1)\|_{L^{1}}+p\left(\delta^{-1}\right)\|n\|_{L^{1}}\right)^{\frac{2}{3}}(\|\nabla \Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{2}{3}}+1) \nonumber \\ \leq& C\left(\delta\|n\|_{H^{1}}^{2}+p\left(\delta^{-1}\right)\right)^{\frac{2}{3}}(\|\nabla \Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{2}{3}}+1) \nonumber \\ \leq&C(\delta \|n\|_{H^{1}}^{\frac{4}{3}} \|\nabla\Delta c \|_{L^2}^{\frac{2}{3}}+\delta \|n\|_{H^{1}}^{\frac{4}{3}}+p^{\frac{2}{3}}\left(\delta^{-1}\right)\|\nabla\Delta c\|_{L^2}^{\frac{2}{3}}+p^{\frac{2}{3}}\left(\delta^{-1}\right)) \nonumber \\ \leq&\delta\|\nabla\Delta c\|^2_{L^2}+C\delta^\frac{1}{2}\|n\|^2_{H^{1}}+C_\delta^{-1 / 2} p\left(\delta^{-1}\right). \end{align*}$

As an immediate consequence

$\begin{align} \frac{d}{d t}\|n\|^2_{L^2}+\| n\|^2_{H^1} \leq \delta\|\nabla\Delta c\|^2_{L^2}+C\delta^\frac{1}{2}\|n\|^2_{H^{1}}+C\|n\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align}$

(3.9)

Applying $\nabla$ to the first equation of (3.1), multiplying it by $\nabla \Delta c$ , and integrating over $\Omega$ give

$\begin{align*} &\frac{1}{2} \frac{d}{d t} \int_{\Omega}|\Delta c|^{2} d x+\int_{\Omega}|\nabla \Delta c|^{2} d x+\int_{\Omega}|\Delta c|^{2} d x \nonumber \\ = &\int_{\Omega} \nabla(u \nabla c) \nabla \Delta c d x- \int_{\Omega} \nabla n \nabla \Delta c d x- \int_{\Omega} \nabla f \nabla \Delta c d x = I_4+I_5. \end{align*}$

For $I_4$ , by using the Gagliardo-Nirenberg interpolation inequality, we get

$\begin{align*} I_4 = &\int_{\Omega} \nabla(u \nabla c) \nabla \Delta c d x \nonumber \\ \leq&\|\nabla \Delta c\|_{L^{2}}\left(\|u\|_{L^{4}}\|\Delta c\|_{L^{4}}+\|\nabla u\|_{L^{4}}\|\nabla c\|_{L^{4}}\right) \nonumber \\ \leq&\|\nabla \Delta c\|_{L^{2}}(\|u\|_{L^{4}}\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}\|\nabla \Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}+\|u\|_{L^{4}}\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}} \nonumber \\ &+\|\nabla u\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}\|\Delta u\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}\|\nabla c\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}+\|\nabla u\|_{L^{2}}\|\nabla c\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}} \nonumber \\ &+\|\nabla u\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}\|\Delta u\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{2}}\|\nabla c\|_{L^2}+\|\nabla u\|_{L^2}\|\nabla c\|_{L^2}) \nonumber \\ \leq& \frac{1}{4}\|\nabla \Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+C(1+\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+\|\Delta u\|_{L^{2}}^{2}). \end{align*}$

For the term $I_5$ , we have

$\begin{align*} I_5 = &- \int_{\Omega} \nabla n \nabla \Delta c d x- \int_{\Omega} \nabla f \nabla \Delta c d x \\ \leq&C(\|\nabla n\|^2_{L^2}+\|\nabla f\|^2_{L^2})+\frac{1}{4}\|\nabla \Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{2}. \end{align*}$

Along with $I_4$ and $I_5$ , we conclude

$\begin{align} &\frac{d}{d t}\|\Delta c\|^2_{L^2}+\|\nabla\Delta c\|^2_{L^2}+ \|\Delta c\|^2_{L^2} \\ \leq & C(1+\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+\|\Delta u\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+\|\nabla n\|^2_{L^2}+\|\nabla f\|^2_{L^2}) . \end{align}$

(3.10)

Combining (3.9) and (3.10), it follows that

$\begin{align*} &\frac{d}{d t}(\|n\|^2_{L^2}+\|\Delta c\|^2_{L^2})+ \|\Delta c\|^2_{L^2}+(1-C\delta^\frac{1}{2})\| n\|^2_{H^1}+(1-\delta)\|\nabla\Delta c\|^2_{L^2} \\ \leq&C(1+\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+\|\Delta u\|_{L^{2}}^{2}+\|\nabla n\|^2_{L^2}+\|\nabla f\|^2_{L^2}) . \end{align*}$

By choosing $\delta$ small enough and using (3.3) and (3.5), we have

$\begin{align*} \|n\|^2_{L^2}+\|\Delta c\|^2_{L^2}+\int_{0}^t\|n\|_{H^1}d\tau +\int_{0}^t\|\Delta c\|_{H^1}d\tau\leq C. \end{align*}$

The proof is complete.

Lemma 3.4. Assume $f\in L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega))$ , let $(n,c,u)$ be a local solution to (3.1). Then, it holds that

$\begin{align} \|\nabla n\|^2_{L^2} +\int_{0}^t\|n\|^2_{H^2} d\tau \leq C. \end{align}$

(3.11)

Proof. Taking the $L^2$ -inner product with $-\Delta n$ for the first equation of (3.1) implies

$\begin{align*} &\frac{1}{2} \frac{d}{d t} \int_{\Omega}|\nabla n|^{2} d x+\int_{\Omega}|\Delta n|^{2} d x+\int_{\Omega}|\nabla n|^{2} d x \\ = &\int_{\Omega}u\nabla n \Delta n d x+\int_{\Omega} \nabla \cdot(n\nabla c)\Delta n d x+(1+\gamma)\int_{\Omega}|\nabla n|^2 d x+\mu\int_{\Omega}n^2\Delta n d x \\ = &I_6+I_7+I_8. \end{align*}$

For the term $I_6$ , with the estimate (3.3), we have

$\begin{align*} I_6 = &\int_{\Omega}u\nabla n \Delta n d x = -\frac{1}{2}\int_{\Omega}\nabla u(\nabla n)^2 d x\leq \|\nabla u\|_{L^2}\|\nabla n\|^2_{L^4} \\ \leq& \|\nabla u\|_{L^2}(\|\nabla n\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\Delta n\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\nabla n\|_{L^2})^2 \\ \leq& \delta\|\Delta n\|^{2}_{L^2}+C\|\nabla n\|_{L^2}^2. \end{align*}$

For the term $I_7$ , taking (3.8) into considering, we conduct that

$\begin{align*} I_7 = &\int_{\Omega} \nabla \cdot(n\nabla c)\Delta n d x \\ = &\int_{\Omega}(\nabla n\nabla c+n\Delta c)\Delta n d x \\ \leq&\|\Delta n\|_{L^{2}}\left(\|\nabla n\|_{L^{3}}\|\nabla c\|_{L^{6}}+\|n\|_{\mathcal{C}}\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}\right) \nonumber \\ \leq& C\|\Delta n\|_{L^{2}}\left(\|\nabla n\|_{H^{\frac{1}{3}}}\|\nabla c\|_{H^{1}}+\|n\|_{H^{\frac{4}{3}}}\|\Delta c\|_{L^{2}}\right) \nonumber \\ \leq& C \|n\|_{H^{2}}\|n\|_{H^{\frac{4}{3}}}\|c\|_{H^{2}} \leq C\|n\|_{H^{2}}^{\frac{5}{3}}\|n\|_{L^{2}}^{\frac{1}{3}}\|c\|_{H^{2}} \nonumber \\ \leq& \delta\| n\|_{H^{2}}^{2}+C(\delta) \|n\|_{L^{2}}^{2}\|c\|_{H^{2}}^{6}\leq \delta\| n\|_{H^{2}}^{2}+C. \end{align*}$

For the term $I_8$ , thanks to the nonnegativity of $n$ , we see that

$\begin{align*} I_8 = &(1+\gamma)\int_{\Omega}|\nabla n|^2 d x+\mu\int_{\Omega}n^2\Delta n d x \\ = &(1+\gamma)\int_{\Omega}|\nabla n|^2 d x-2\mu\int_{\Omega}|\nabla n|^2 n d x \\ \leq&(1+\gamma)\|\nabla n\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align*}$

Combine the estimates about $I_6$ , $I_7$ and $I_8$ , it follows that

$\begin{align*} \frac{d}{d t}\|\nabla n\|^2_{L^2}+(1-4\delta)\|n\|^2_{H^2}\leq C\|\nabla n\|^2_{L^2}+C. \end{align*}$

By taking $\delta$ small enough, we get

$\begin{align*} \|\nabla n\|^2_{L^2} +\int_{0}^t\|n\|^2_{H^2} d\tau \leq C. \end{align*}$

Therefore, this proof is complete.

Lemma 3.5. The operator $\mathcal{F}:X_{u} \times X_{n}\rightarrow X_{u} \times X_{n}$ , is continuous.

Proof. Let $\{(\hat{n}_m,\hat{u}_{m})\}_{m\in \mathbb{N}}$ be a sequence of $X_{u} \times X_{n}$ , Then, with Lemmas 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 in hand, we conduct that $\{(n_m,u_m) = \mathcal{F}(\hat{n}_m,\hat{u}_{m})\}_{m\in \mathbb{N}}$ is bounded in $Y_u\times Y_n$ . Taking the compactness of $Y_u\times Y_n$ in $X_{u} \times X_{n}$ into consider, we see that $\mathcal{F}$ is a compact operator, which means there exists a subsequence of $\{\mathcal{F}(\hat{n}_m,\hat{u}_{m})\}_{m\in \mathbb{N}}$ , for convenience, still denoted as $\{\mathcal{F}(\hat{n}_m,\hat{u}_{m})\}_{m\in \mathbb{N}}$ , and exists an element $(\hat{n},\hat{u})$ in $Y_u\times Y_n$ such that

$\begin{align*} \mathcal{F}(\hat{n}_m,\hat{u}_{m})\rightarrow (\hat{n},\hat{u}) \text{ weakly in } Y_u\times Y_n \text{ and strongly in } X_{u} \times X_{n}. \end{align*}$

Let $m\rightarrow \infty$ and take the limit, it is clear that $(n,u) = \mathcal{F}(\hat{n}_m,\hat{u}_{m})$ and $(\hat{n}_m,\hat{u}_{m}) = (\hat{n},\hat{u})$ , this means that $\mathcal{F}(\hat{n}_m,\hat{u}_{m}) = (\hat{n}_m,\hat{u}_{m})$ . Since uniqueness of limit, the map $\mathcal{F}$ is continuous.

Theorem 3.1. Let $u_0\in H^1(\Omega)$ , $n_0\in H^1(\Omega)$ , $c_0\in H^2(\Omega)$ with $n_0\geq 0$ in $\Omega$ , and $f\in L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega))$ , then (1.1) exists unique strong solution $(n,c,u)$ . Moreover, there exists a positive $C$ constant such that

$\begin{align} \|n\|&_{L^{\infty}(0,T;H^1(\Omega))}+\|n\|_{L^2(0,T;H^2(\Omega))}+\|n_t\|_{L^2(0,T;L^2(\Omega))}+\|c\|_{L^{\infty}(0,T;H^2(\Omega))} \\ &+\|c\|_{L^{2}(0,T;H^3(\Omega))}+\|c_t\|_{L^2(0,T;L^2(\Omega))} +\|u\|_{L^{\infty}(0,T;H^1(\Omega))} \\ &+\|u\|_{L^2(0,T;H^2(\Omega))}+\|u_t\|_{L^2(0,T;L^2(\Omega))}\leq C. \end{align}$

(3.12)

Proof. From Lemmas 3.1, 3.3 and 3.4, it is easy to verify the existence of solution and (3.11). Therefore, we will prove the uniqueness of the solution in the following part. For convenience, we set $n = n_1-n_2$ , $c = c_1-c_2$ and $u = u_1-u_2$ , where $(n_i, c_i, u_i)$ is the strong solution of the system, where $i = 1, 2$ . Thus, we obtain the following system

$\begin{align} n_{t}-\Delta n+u_1 \cdot \nabla n+u\nabla n_2 = - \nabla \cdot(n_1 \nabla c) \\ -\nabla(n\nabla c_2)+\gamma n -\mu n(n_1+n_2), &&\text {in } (0, T) \times \Omega \equiv Q, \end{align}$

(3.13)

$\begin{align} &c_{t}-\Delta c+u_1 \cdot \nabla c+u\nabla c_2+c = n, &&\text{in } (0, T) \times \Omega \equiv Q, \end{align}$

(3.14)

$\begin{align} &u_{t}-\Delta u+u_1 \cdot \nabla u+u\cdot \nabla u_2 = n \nabla \varphi, &&\text{in } (0, T) \times \Omega \equiv Q, \end{align}$

(3.15)

$\begin{align} &\nabla \cdot u = 0, &&\text{in } (0, T) \times \Omega \equiv Q, \end{align}$

(3.16)

$\begin{align} &\frac{\partial n}{\partial \nu} = \frac{\partial c}{\partial \nu} = 0,\quad u = 0, &&\text{on } (0, T) \times \partial\Omega, \end{align}$

(3.17)

$\begin{align} &n_0(x) = c_0(x) = u_0(x) = 0, &&\text{in }\Omega. \end{align}$

(3.18)

Taking the $L^2$ -inner product with $n$ for the (3.13) implies

$\begin{align*} &\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{d t}\int_{\Omega}n^2 d x+\int_{\Omega}|\nabla n|^2 d x+\int_{\Omega} n^2 d x \\ \leq&-\int_{\Omega}u \nabla n_2 n d x+\int_{\Omega}n_1\nabla c \nabla n d x +\int_{\Omega} n\nabla c_2 \nabla n d x+(1+\gamma) \int_{\Omega} n^2 d x \\ = &I_9+I_{10}+I_{11}+I_{12}. \end{align*}$

For the term $I_9$ , due to the estimates (3.3) and (3.8), we have

$\begin{align*} I_9 = &-\int_{\Omega}u \nabla n_2 n d x \leq \|\nabla n_2\|_{L^2}\|u\|_{L^4}\|n\|_{L^4} \\ \leq &C\|\nabla n_2\|_{L^2}\|u\|_{H^1}(\|n\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\nabla n\|^\frac{1}{2}_{L^2}+\|n\|_{L^2}) \\ \leq &\frac{\delta}{3} \|\nabla n\|^2_{L^2}+C\|n\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align*}$

For the term $I_{10}$ , with the estimate (3.8) and (3.11), we get

$\begin{align*} I_{10} = &\int_{\Omega}n_1\nabla c \nabla n d x \leq \|\nabla n\|_{L^2}\|n_1\|_{L^4}\|\nabla c\|_{L^4} \\ \leq&C\|\nabla n\|_{L^2}\|n_1\|_{H^1}\|\nabla c\|_{H^1} \\ \leq&\frac{\delta}{3}\|\nabla n\|^2_{L^2}+C. \end{align*}$

For the term $I_{11}$ ,

$\begin{align*} I_{11} = &\int_{\Omega} n\nabla c_2 \nabla n d x \leq\|\nabla n\|_{L^2}\|\nabla c_2\|_{L^4}\|n\|_{L^4} \\ \leq& \|\nabla n\|_{L^2}\|\nabla c_2\|_{H^1}\|n\|_{H^1} \\ \leq&\frac{\delta}{3}\|\nabla n\|^2_{L^2}+C. \end{align*}$

With the use of estimates $I_i(i = 9,10, 11,12)$ , we have

$\begin{align} \frac{d}{d t}\|n\|^2_{L^2}+\|n\|_{H^1} \leq \delta\|\nabla n\|^2_{L^2}+ C\|n\|^2_{L^2}+C. \end{align}$

(3.19)

Taking the $L^2$ -inner product with $c$ for the (3.14) implies

$\begin{align*} &\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{ d t}\int_{\Omega}c^2 d x+\int_{\Omega}|\nabla c|^2 d x+ \int_{\Omega}c^2 d x \nonumber \\ = &-\int_{\Omega}u_1\nabla c c d x-\int_{\Omega}u\nabla c_2 c d x+ \int_{\Omega}n c d x \nonumber \\ \leq &\|c\|^2_{L^4}\|\nabla u_1\|_{L^2}+\|u\|_{L^2}\|\nabla c_2\|_{L^4}\|c\|_{L^4}+\|n\|_{L^2}\|c\|_{L^2} \nonumber \\ \leq& C(\|c\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\nabla c\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|c\|_{L^2})^2\|\nabla u_1\|_{L^2}+(\|c\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\nabla c\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|c\|_{L^2})\|u\|_{L^2}\|\nabla c_2\|_{H^1} \nonumber \\ &+\|n\|_{L^2}\|c\|_{L^2} \nonumber \\ \leq&\delta\|\nabla c\|^2_{L^2}+C\|c\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align*}$

Then, we get

$\begin{align} \frac{d}{d t}\|c\|^2_{L^2}+\|c\|_{H^1}\leq \delta \|\nabla c\|^2_{L^2}+C\|c\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align}$

(3.20)

Taking the $L^2$ -inner product with $c$ for the (3.15) implies

$\begin{align*} \frac{1}{2} \int_{\Omega}u^2 d x+ \int_{\Omega}|\nabla u|^2 d x = \int_{\Omega} n \nabla \varphi u d x . \end{align*}$

Straightforward calculations yield

$\begin{align} \frac{d}{d t}\|u\|^2_{L^2}+\|u\|_{H^1}\leq C (\|u\|^2_{L^2}+\|n\|^2_{L^2}). \end{align}$

(3.21)

Then, a combination of (3.19), (3.20) and (3.21) yields

$\begin{align*} &\frac{d}{d t}(\|n\|^2_{L^2}+\|c\|^2_{L^2}+\|u\|^2_{L^2})+(\|n\|_{H^1}+\|c\|_{H^1}+\|u\|_{H^1}) \\ \leq&\delta(\|\nabla n\|^2_{L^2}+\|\nabla c\|^2_{L^2}+\|\nabla u\|^2_{L^2})+(\|n\|^2_{L^2}+\|c\|^2_{L^2}+\|u\|^2_{L^2})+C. \end{align*}$

By choosing $\delta$ small enough, we get

$\begin{align*} \frac{d}{d t}(\|n\|^2_{L^2}+\|c\|^2_{L^2}+\|u\|^2_{L^2}) \leq C(\|n\|^2_{L^2}+\|c\|^2_{L^2}+\|u\|^2_{L^2})+C. \end{align*}$

Applying Gronwall's lemma to the resulting differential inequality, we finally obtain the uniqueness of the solution.

4. Existence of an optimal control

In this section, we will prove the existence of the optimal solution of control problem. The method we use for treating this problem was inspired by some ideas of Guillén-González et al [9]. Assume $\mathcal{U}\subset L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega_c))$ is a nonempty, closed and convex set, where control domain $\Omega_c\subset \Omega$ , and $\Omega_d\subset \Omega$ is the observability domain. We adjust the external source $f$ , so that the bacterial density $n$ , oxygen concentration $c$ and fluid velocity $u$ are as close as possible to a desired state $n_d$ , $c_d$ and $u_d$ , and at the final moment $T$ is as close as possible to a desired state $n_{\Omega}$ , $c_{\Omega}$ and $u_{\Omega}$ . We consider the optimal control problem as follows

Minimize the cost functional

$\begin{align} J(n,c,u,f) = &\frac{\beta_1}{2}\|n-n_d\|_{L^2(Q_d)}^2+\frac{\beta_2}{2}\|c-c_d\|_{L^2(Q_d)}^2 +\frac{\beta_3}{2}\|u-u_d\|_{L^2(Q_d)}^2 \\ &+\frac{\beta_4}{2}\|n(T)-n_{\Omega}\|_{L^2(\Omega_d)}^2+\frac{\beta_5}{2}\|c(T)-c_{\Omega}\|_{L^2(\Omega_d)}^2 \\ &+\frac{\beta_6}{2}\|u(T)-u_{\Omega}\|_{L^2(\Omega_d)}^2+\frac{\beta_7}{2}\|f(x,t)\|_{L^2(Q_c)}^2, \end{align}$

(4.1)

subject to the system (1.1). Moreover, the nonnegative constants $\beta_i,i = 1,2,\cdots,7$ are given but not all zero, the functions $n_d$ , $c_d$ , $u_d$ represents the desired states satisfying

$\begin{align*} &n_d\in L^2(Q_d), c_d\in L^2(Q_d), u_d\in L^2(Q_d), \\ &n_{\Omega}\in L^2(\Omega_c), c_{\Omega}\in L^2(\Omega_c), u_{\Omega}\in L^2(\Omega_c), \;f\in \mathcal{U}. \end{align*}$

The set of admissible solutions of optimal control problem (4.1) is defined by

$\begin{align*} \mathcal{S}_{a d} = \{s = (n,c,u,f) \in \mathcal{H}: s \text { is a strong solution of }(1.1)\}. \end{align*}$

The function space $\mathcal{H}$ is given by

$\begin{align*} \mathcal{H} = Y_n\times Y_c \times Y_u\times\mathcal{U}, \end{align*}$

where $Y_c = L^{\infty}\left(0, T; H^{2}(\Omega)\right) \cap L^{2}\left(0, T; H^{3}(\Omega)\right)$ .

Now, we prove the existence of a global optimal control for problem (1.1).

Theorem 4.1. Suppose $f\in \mathcal{U}$ is satisfied, and $n_0\geq 0$ , then the optimal control problem (4.1) admits a solution $(\bar{n},\bar{c},\bar{u},\bar{f})\in \mathcal{S}_{a d}$ .

Proof. Along with Theorem 3.1, we conduct that $\mathcal{S}_{a d} \neq \emptyset$ , then there exists the minimizing sequence $\{(n_m,c_m,u_m,f_m)\}_{m\in \mathbb{N}}\in \mathcal{S}_{ad}$ such that

$\begin{align} \lim\limits_{m\rightarrow +\infty}J(n_m,c_m,u_m,f_m) = \inf\limits_{(n,c,u,f)\in \mathcal{S}_{ad}}J(n,c,u,f). \end{align}$

(4.2)

According to the definition of $\mathcal{S}_{ad}$ , for each $m\in \mathbb{N}$ there exists $(n_m,c_m,u_m,f_m)$ satisfying

$\begin{align} \left\{\begin{aligned} &n_{mt}+u_{m} \cdot \nabla n_{m} = \Delta n_{m}-\nabla \cdot(n_{m} \cdot \nabla c_{m})+\gamma n_{m} -\mu n_{m}^{2}, &&\text {in } Q, \\ &c_{mt}+u_{m} \cdot \nabla c_{m} = \Delta c_{m}-c_{m}+n_{m}+f_{m}, &&\text{in } Q, \\ &u_{mt}+u_{m} \cdot \nabla u_{m} = \Delta u_{m}-\nabla \pi+n_{m} \nabla \varphi, &&\text{in } Q, \\ &\nabla \cdot u_{m} = 0, &&\text{in } Q, \\ &\frac{\partial n_{m}}{\partial \nu}\Big|_{\partial\Omega} = \frac{\partial c_{m}}{\partial \nu}\Big|_{\partial\Omega} = 0,\quad u_{m}|_{\partial\Omega} = 0, \\ &n_{m}(0) = n_0, c_{m}(0) = c_0, u_{m}(0) = u_0,&&\text{in }\Omega. \end{aligned} \right. \end{align}$

(4.3)

Observing that $\mathcal{U}$ is a closed convex subset of $L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega_c))$ . According to the definition of $\mathcal{S}_{ad}$ , we deduce that there exists $(\bar{n},\bar{c},\bar{u},\bar{f})$ bounded in $\mathcal{H}$ such that, for subsequence of $(n_m,c_m,u_m, f_m)_{m\in \mathbb{N}}$ , for convenience, still denoted by $(n_m,c_m,u_m,f_m)$ , as $m\rightarrow +\infty$

$\begin{align*} &n_{m} \rightarrow \bar{n}, \text { weakly in } L^{2}\left(0, T ; H^{2}(\Omega)\right) \text { and weakly* } \text { in } L^{\infty}\left(0, T ; H^{1}(\Omega)\right), \\ &c_{m} \rightarrow \bar{c}, \text { weakly in } L^{2}\left(0, T ; H^{3}(\Omega)\right) \text { and weakly* } \text { in } L^{\infty}\left(0, T ; H^{2}(\Omega)\right), \\ &u_{m} \rightarrow \bar{u}, \text { weakly in } L^{2}\left(0, T ; H^{2}(\Omega)\right) \text { and weakly* } \text { in } L^{\infty}\left(0, T ; H^{1}(\Omega)\right), \\ &f_{m} \rightarrow \bar{f}, \text { weakly in } L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega_c)), \text { and } \tilde{f} \in \mathcal{U}. \end{align*}$

According to the Aubin-Lions lemma [16] and the compact embedding theorems, we obtain

$\begin{align*} &n_{m} \rightarrow \bar{n}, \quad \text { strongly in } C\left([0, T] ; L^{2}(\Omega)\right) \cap L^{2}\left(0, T ; H^{1}(\Omega)\right), \\ &c_{m} \rightarrow \bar{c}, \quad \text{ strongly in } C\left([0, T] ; H^{1}(\Omega)\right) \cap L^{2}\left(0, T ; H^{2}(\Omega)\right), \\ &u_{m} \rightarrow \bar{u}, \quad \text { strongly in } C\left([0, T] ; L^{2}(\Omega)\right) \cap L^{2}\left(0, T ; H^{1}(\Omega)\right). \end{align*}$

Since $\nabla \cdot\left(n_{m} \nabla c_{m}\right) = \nabla n_{m} \cdot \nabla c_{m}+n_{m} \Delta c_{m}$ is bounded in $L^2(0,T;L^2(\Omega))$ , then

$\begin{align*} \nabla \cdot\left(n_{m} \nabla c_{m}\right)\rightarrow \chi, \text{ weakly in } L^2(0,T;L^2(\Omega)). \end{align*}$

Recalling that

$\begin{align*} n_{m} \nabla c_{m}\rightarrow \bar{n}\nabla\bar{c}, \text{ weakly in } L^{\infty}(0,T; L^2(\Omega)). \end{align*}$

Therefore, we get that $\chi = \nabla(\bar{n}\nabla\bar{c})$ . Owing to $(\bar{n},\bar{c},\bar{u},\bar{f})\in \mathcal{H}$ , we see that $(\bar{n},\bar{c},\bar{u},\bar{f})$ is solution of the system (1.1), along with (4.2) implies that

$\begin{align*} \lim\limits_{m\rightarrow +\infty}J(n_m,c_m,u_m,f_m) = \inf\limits_{(u,c,u,f)\in \mathcal{S}_{ad}}J(u,c,u,f)\leq J(\bar{n},\bar{c},\bar{u},\bar{f}). \end{align*}$

On the other hand, we deduce from the weak lower semicontinuity of the cost functional

$\begin{align*} J(\bar{n},\bar{c},\bar{u},\bar{f})\leq \liminf\limits_{m\rightarrow +\infty} J(n_m,c_m,u_m,f_m). \end{align*}$

Therefore, this implies that $(\bar{n},\bar{c},\bar{u},\bar{f})$ is an optimal pair for problem (1.1).

5. The first-order necessary optimality condition

In order to derive the first-order necessary optimality conditions for a local optimal solution of problem (4.1). To this end, we will use a result on existence of Lagrange multipliers in Banach spaces ([20]). First, we discuss the following problem

$\begin{align} \min J(s) \text{ subject to } s\in \mathcal{S} = \{s\in \mathcal{H}:G(s)\in \mathcal{N}\}, \end{align}$

(5.1)

where $J:X\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ is a functional, $G:X\rightarrow Y$ is an operator, $X$ and $Y$ are Banach spaces, and nonempty closed convex set $\mathcal{H}$ is subset of $X$ and nonempty closed convex cone $\mathcal{N}$ with vertex at the origin in $Y$ .

$A^+$ denotes its polar cone

$\begin{align*} A^+ = \{\rho\in X^{\prime}:\langle \rho,a\rangle_{X^{\prime}}\geq 0, \forall a \in A\}. \end{align*}$

We consider the following Banach spaces

$\begin{align*} &X = V_n\times V_c\times V_u\times L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega_c)), \\ &Y = L^2(Q)\times L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega))\times L^2(Q)\times H^1(\Omega)\times H^2(\Omega) \times H^1(\Omega), \end{align*}$

where

$\begin{align*} &V_n = \{n \in Y_n:\frac{\partial n}{\partial \nu}\text{ on } (0,T)\times \partial \Omega \}, \\ &V_c = \{n \in Y_c:\frac{\partial c}{\partial \nu}\text{ on } (0,T)\times \partial \Omega \}, \\ &V_u = \{n \in Y_u: u = 0 \text{ on } (0,T)\times \partial \Omega \text{ and } \nabla \cdot u = 0 \text{ in } (0,T)\times \Omega\} \end{align*}$

and the operator $G = (G_1,G_2,G_3,G_4,G_5,G_6):X\rightarrow Y$ , where

$\begin{align*} &G_1: X \rightarrow L^2(Q),&& G_2: X \rightarrow L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega)),&&&G_3: X \rightarrow L^2(Q), \\ &G_4: X \rightarrow H^1(\Omega),&&G_5: X \rightarrow H^2(\Omega),&&&G_6: X \rightarrow H^1(\Omega), \end{align*}$

which are defined at each point $s = (n,c,u,f)\in X$ by

$\begin{align} \left\{\begin{aligned} &G_1 = n_{t}+u \cdot \nabla n-\Delta n+\nabla \cdot(n \cdot \nabla c)-\gamma n+\mu n^{2}, \\ &G_2 = c_{t}+u \cdot \nabla c-\Delta c+c-n-f, \\ &G_3 = u_{t}+u \cdot \nabla u-\Delta u+\nabla \pi-n \nabla \varphi, \\ &G_4 = n(0)-n_0, \\ &G_5 = c(0)-c_0, \\ &G_6 = u(0)-u_0. \end{aligned} \right. \end{align}$

(5.2)

The function spaces are given as follows

$\begin{align*} \mathcal{H} = V_n\times V_c \times V_u \times \mathcal{U}. \end{align*}$

We see that $\mathcal{H}$ is a closed convex subset of $X$ and $\mathcal{N} = \{0\}$ , and rewrite the optimal control problem

$\begin{align} \min J(s) \text{ subject to } s\in \mathcal{S}_{ad} = \{s\in \mathcal{H}:G(s) = 0\}. \end{align}$

(5.3)

Taking the differentiability of $J$ and $G$ into consider, it follows that

Lemma 5.1. The functional $J:X\rightarrow R$ is Fréchet differentiable and the Fréchet derivative of $J$ in $\bar{s} = (\bar{n},\bar{c},\bar{u},\bar{f})\in X$ in the direction $r = (\tilde{n},\tilde{c},\tilde{u}, \tilde{f})$ is given by

$\begin{align} J^{\prime}(\bar{s})[r] = &\beta_1\int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega_d}(\bar{n}-n_d)\tilde{n}d x d t+\beta_2\int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega_d}(\bar{c}-c_d)\tilde{c}d x d t \\ &+\beta_3\int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega_d}(\bar{u}-u_d)\tilde{u}(T)d x d t +\beta_4\int_{\Omega_d} (\bar{n}(T)-n_{\Omega})\tilde{n}(T)d x \\ &+\beta_5\int_{\Omega_d} (\bar{c}(T)-c_{\Omega})\tilde{c}d x+\beta_6\int_{\Omega_d} (\bar{u}(T)-u_{\Omega})\tilde{u}(T)d x \\ &+\beta_7\int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega_d}\bar{f}\tilde{f} d x d t. \end{align}$

(5.4)

Lemma 5.2. The operator $G:X\rightarrow Y$ is continuous-Fréchet differentiable and the Fréchet derivative of $J$ in $\bar{s} = (\bar{n},\bar{c},\bar{u},\bar{f})\in X$ in the direction $r = (\tilde{n},\tilde{c},\tilde{u}, \tilde{f})$ , is the linear operator

$\begin{align*} G^{\prime}(\bar{s})[r] = (G_1^{\prime}(\bar{s})[r],G_2^{\prime}(\bar{s})[r],G_3^{\prime}(\bar{s})[r],G_4^{\prime}(\bar{s})[r],G_5^{\prime}(\bar{s})[r],G_6^{\prime}(\bar{s})[r]) \end{align*}$

defined by

$\begin{align*} \left\{\begin{aligned} &G_1^{\prime}(\bar{s})[r] = \tilde{n}_{t}-\Delta \tilde{n}+\bar{u} \cdot \nabla \tilde{n}+\tilde{u}\nabla \bar{n}+\nabla \cdot(\bar{n} \nabla \tilde{c}) \\ &+\nabla(\tilde{n}\nabla \bar{c})-\gamma \tilde{n} +2\mu \tilde{n}\bar{n}, &&\mathit{\text{in}}\;Q , \\ &G_2^{\prime}(\bar{s})[r] = \tilde{c}_{t}-\Delta \tilde{c}+\bar{u} \cdot \nabla \tilde{c}+\tilde{u}\cdot\nabla \bar{c}+\tilde{c}- \tilde{n}-\tilde{f},&&\mathit{\text{in}}\;Q , \\ &G_3^{\prime}(\bar{s})[r] = \tilde{u}_{t}-\Delta \tilde{u}+\bar{u} \cdot \nabla \tilde{u}+\tilde{u}\cdot \nabla \bar{u}-\tilde{n} \nabla \varphi,&&\mathit{\text{in}}\;Q , \\ &\nabla\cdot \tilde{u} = 0,&&\mathit{\text{in}}\;Q , \\ &\frac{\partial \tilde{n}}{\partial \nu} = \frac{\partial \tilde{c}}{\partial \nu} = 0, \tilde{u} = 0, &&\mathit{\text{on}}\;(0,T)\times\partial\Omega, \\ &\tilde{n}(0) = \tilde{n}_0, \tilde{c}(0) = \tilde{c}_0,\tilde{u}(0) = \tilde{u}_0, &&\mathit{\text{in}}\;\Omega. \end{aligned} \right. \end{align*}$

Lemma 5.3. Let $\bar{s} = (\bar{n},\bar{c},\bar{u},\bar{f})\in \mathcal{S}_{ad}$ , then $\bar{s}$ is a regular point.

Proof. For any fixed $(\bar{n},\bar{c},\bar{u},\bar{f})\in \mathcal{S}_{ad}$ , we set $(g_n,g_c,g_u,\tilde{n}_0, \tilde{c}_0, \tilde{u}_0)\in Y$ . Since $0\in \mathcal{C}(\bar{f})$ , it suffices to show the existence of $(\tilde{n}, \tilde{c}, \tilde{u})\in Y_n\times Y_c\times Y_u$ such that

$\begin{align} \left\{\begin{aligned} &\tilde{n}_{t}-\Delta \tilde{n}+\bar{u} \cdot \nabla \tilde{n}+\tilde{u}\nabla \bar{n}+\nabla \cdot(\bar{n} \nabla \tilde{c}) \\ &+\nabla(\tilde{n}\nabla \bar{c})-\gamma \tilde{n} +2\mu \tilde{n}\bar{n} = g_n, &&\text{in }Q , \\ &\tilde{c}_{t}-\Delta \tilde{c}+\bar{u} \cdot \nabla \tilde{c}+\tilde{u}\cdot\nabla \bar{c}+\tilde{c}- \tilde{n} = g_c,&&\text{in }Q , \\ &\tilde{u}_{t}-\Delta \tilde{u}+\bar{u} \cdot \nabla \tilde{u}+\tilde{u}\cdot \nabla \bar{u}-\tilde{n} \nabla \varphi = g_u,&&\text{in }Q , \\ &\nabla\cdot \tilde{u} = 0,&&\text{in }Q , \\ &\frac{\partial \tilde{n}}{\partial \nu} = \frac{\partial \tilde{c}}{\partial \nu} = 0, \tilde{u} = 0, &&\text{on }(0,T)\times\partial\Omega, \\ &\tilde{n}(0) = \tilde{n}_0, \tilde{c}(0) = \tilde{c}_0,\tilde{u}(0) = \tilde{u}_0, &&\text{in }\Omega. \end{aligned} \right. \end{align}$

(5.5)

Next, we use Leray-Schauder's fixed point method to prove the existence of solutions of the problem (5.5), the operator $T:(\dot{n},\dot{u})\in X_n\times X_u\rightarrow (\tilde{n},\tilde{u})\in Y_n\times Y_u$ with $(\tilde{n}, \tilde{c},\tilde{u})$ solving the decoupled problem:

(5.6)

The system (5.6) is complemented by the corresponding Neumann boundary and initial conditions. Similar to the proof of Lemmas 2.3, 2.4, 2.5 and 2.6, we conduct that operator $T:X_n\times X_u\rightarrow X_n\times X_u$ is well-defined and compact.

Similar to the proof of Theorem 3.1, $(\tilde{n},\tilde{u})$ solves the coupled problem $(\bar{n},\bar{c},\bar{u},\bar{f})$ $\in \mathcal{S}_{ad}$ , and we set $(g_n,g_c,g_u,\tilde{n}_0, \tilde{c}_0, \tilde{u}_0)\in Y$ . Since $0\in \mathcal{C}(\bar{f})$ , it suffices to show the existence of $(\tilde{n}, \tilde{c}, \tilde{u})\in Y_n\times Y_c\times Y_u$ such that

$\begin{align} \left\{\begin{aligned} &\tilde{n}_{t}-\Delta \tilde{n}+\tilde{n} = -\bar{u} \cdot \nabla \tilde{n}-\tilde{u}\cdot\nabla \bar{n}-\nabla \cdot(\bar{n} \nabla \tilde{c}) \\ &-\nabla(\tilde{n}\nabla \bar{c})+\alpha(\gamma+1) \tilde{n} -2\mu \tilde{n}\bar{n}+\alpha g_n, &&\text{in }Q , \\ &\tilde{c}_{t}-\Delta \tilde{c}+\tilde{c} = -\bar{u} \cdot \nabla \tilde{c}-\tilde{u}\cdot\nabla \bar{c}+ \alpha \tilde{n}+\alpha g_c,&&\text{in }Q , \\ &\tilde{u}_{t}-\Delta \tilde{u} = -\bar{u} \cdot \nabla \tilde{u}-\tilde{u}\cdot \nabla \bar{u}+\alpha\tilde{n} \nabla \varphi+\alpha g_u,&&\text{in }Q, \end{aligned} \right. \end{align}$

(5.7)

complemented by the corresponding Neumann boundary and initial conditions.

Taking the $L^2$ -inner product with $\tilde{u}$ for the third equation of (5.7) implies

$\begin{align*} \frac{1}{2}\int_{\Omega} \tilde{u}^2 d x+\int_{\Omega} |\nabla \tilde{u}|^2 d x = \alpha\int_{\Omega} \tilde{n}\nabla \varphi \tilde{u} d x +\alpha \int_{\Omega} \tilde{u} g_u d x. \end{align*}$

By the Poincaré inequality and Young's inequality, we have

$\begin{align} \frac{d}{d t}\|\tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2}+\|\tilde{u}\|^2_{H^1}\leq C(\|\tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+\|g_u\|^2_{L^2})+C\|\tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align}$

(5.8)

Taking the $L^2$ -inner product with $\tilde{c}$ for the second equation of (5.7) implies

$\begin{align*} &\frac{1}{2}\int_{\Omega} \tilde{c}^2 d x+\int_{\Omega} |\nabla \tilde{c}|^2 d x+\int_{\Omega} \tilde{c}^2 d x \\ = &\int_{\Omega} \tilde{u}\nabla \bar{c} \tilde{c} d x+ \alpha\int_{\Omega} \tilde{n} \tilde{c} d x +\alpha\int_{\Omega} g_c \tilde{c} d x. \end{align*}$

With the Poincaré inequality and Young's inequality in hand, we see that

$\begin{align} \frac{d}{d t}\|\tilde{c}\|^2_{L^2}+\|\tilde{c}\|^2_{H^1}\leq C(\|\tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+\|g_c\|^2_{L^2})+C\|\tilde{c}\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align}$

(5.9)

Taking the $L^2$ -inner product with $-\Delta \tilde{c}$ for the second equation of (5.7) implies

$\begin{align*} &\frac{1}{2}\int_{\Omega} |\nabla \tilde{c}|^2 d x+\int_{\Omega} |\Delta \tilde{c}|^2 d x+\int_{\Omega} |\nabla \tilde{c}|^2 d x \\ = &\int_{\Omega} \tilde{u}\nabla \bar{c} \Delta \tilde{c} d x+\int_{\Omega} \bar{u}\nabla \tilde{c} \Delta \tilde{c} d x- \alpha\int_{\Omega} \tilde{n} \Delta \tilde{c} d x -\alpha\int_{\Omega} g_c \Delta \tilde{c} d x \\ = &J_1+J_2+J_3. \end{align*}$

For the term $J_1$

$\begin{align*} J_1 = &\int_{\Omega} \tilde{u}\nabla \bar{c} \Delta \tilde{c} d x \leq \|\Delta \tilde{c}\|_{L^2}\|\nabla \bar{c}\|_{L^4}\|\tilde{u}\|_{L^4} \\ \leq &\frac{1}{6}\|\Delta \tilde{c}\|^2_{L^2}+C\|\nabla \bar{c}\|^2_{H^1}\|\tilde{u}\|^2_{H^1}. \end{align*}$

For the term $J_2$ , we see that

$\begin{align*} J_2 = & \int_{\Omega} \bar{u}\nabla \tilde{c} \Delta \tilde{c} d x = - \frac{1}{2} \int_{\Omega} \nabla \bar{u}|\nabla \tilde{c}|^2 d x \\ \leq&\|\nabla\bar{u}\|_{L^2}\|\nabla \tilde{c}\|^2_{L^4} \\ \leq& \|\nabla\bar{u}\|_{L^2}(\|\nabla \tilde{c}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\Delta \tilde{c}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\nabla \tilde{c}\|_{L^2}) \\ \leq&\frac{1}{6}\|\Delta \tilde{c}\|^2_{L^2}+C\|\nabla \tilde{c}\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align*}$

For the term $J_3$ , we get

$\begin{align*} J_3 = &- \alpha\int_{\Omega} \tilde{n} \Delta \tilde{c} d x -\alpha\int_{\Omega} g_c \Delta \tilde{c} d x \\ \leq&\frac{1}{6}\|\Delta \tilde{c}\|^2_{L^2}+C(\|\tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+\|g_c\|^2_{L^2}). \end{align*}$

Therefore, combining $J_1$ , $J_2$ and $J_3$ , we have

$\begin{align} \frac{d}{d t}\|\nabla \tilde{c}\|^2_{L^2}+\|\nabla \tilde{c}\|^2_{H^1} \leq C\|\nabla \tilde{c}\|^2_{L^2}+ C(\|\tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+\|g_c\|^2_{L^2}). \end{align}$

(5.10)

Taking the $L^2$ -inner product with $\tilde{n}$ for the first equation of (5.7) implies

$\begin{align*} &\frac{d}{d t}\int_{\Omega} \tilde{n}^2 d x+\int_{\Omega} |\nabla\tilde{n}|^2 d x+ \int_{\Omega} \tilde{n}^2 d x \\ = &-\int_{\Omega}\tilde{u}\nabla\bar{n}\tilde{n}d x+\int_{\Omega}\nabla \tilde{n}\bar{n}\nabla\tilde{c} d x+\int_{\Omega}\nabla \tilde{n}\tilde{n}\nabla\bar{c} d x+\alpha (\gamma +1)\int_{\Omega} \tilde{n}^2 d x \\ &+2\mu \int_{\Omega}\bar{n}\tilde{n}^2 d x+\alpha \int_{\Omega}\tilde{n} g_n d x \\ = &J_4+J_5+J_6+J_7. \end{align*}$

For the term $J_4$ , by Gagliardo-Nirenberg interpolation inequality, we have

$\begin{align*} J_4 = &-\int_{\Omega}\tilde{u}\nabla\bar{n}\tilde{n}d x\leq \|\tilde{u}\|_{L^4}\|\nabla\bar{n}\|_{L^2}\|\tilde{n}\|_{L^4} \\ \leq& C (\|\nabla\tilde{u}\|^{{\frac{1}{2}}}_{L^2}\|\tilde{u}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\tilde{u}\|_{L^2}) \|\nabla\bar{n}\|_{L^2}\|\tilde{n}\|_{H^1} \\ \leq &\delta \|\tilde{n}\|^2_{H^1}+C\|\nabla\tilde{u}\|_{L^2}\|\tilde{u}\|_{L^2}+C\|\tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2} \\ \leq &\delta \|\tilde{n}\|^2_{H^1}+\delta \|\nabla\tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2}+C\|\tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align*}$

For the term $J_5$ ,

$\begin{align*} J_5 = &\int_{\Omega}\nabla \tilde{n}\bar{n}\nabla\tilde{c} d x \leq \|\nabla\tilde{n}\|_{L^2} \|\bar{n}\|_{L^4}\|\nabla\tilde{c}\|_{L^4} \\ \leq &\|\nabla\tilde{n}\|_{L^2}\|\bar{n}\|_{H^1}(\|\nabla\tilde{c}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\Delta\tilde{c}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\nabla\tilde{c}\|_{L^2}) \\ \leq&\delta \|\nabla\tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+\|\nabla\tilde{c}\|_{L^2}\|\Delta\tilde{c}\|_{L^2}+C\|\nabla\tilde{c}\|^2_{L^2} \\ \leq& \delta \|\nabla\tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+\delta \|\Delta\tilde{c}\|_{L^2} +C\|\nabla\tilde{c}\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align*}$

For the term $J_6$ ,

$\begin{align*} J_6 = &\int_{\Omega}\nabla \tilde{n}\tilde{n}\nabla\bar{c} d x\leq \|\tilde{n}\|^2_{L^4}\|\Delta \bar{c}\|_{L^2} \\ \leq&(\|\tilde{n}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\nabla \tilde{n}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\| \tilde{n}\|_{L^2})\|\Delta \bar{c}\|_{L^2} \\ \leq&\delta \|\nabla \tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+C\|\tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+C. \end{align*}$

For the term $J_7$ ,

$\begin{align*} J_7 = &\alpha (\gamma +1)\int_{\Omega} \tilde{n}^2 d x+2\mu \int_{\Omega}\bar{n}\tilde{n}^2 d x+\alpha \int_{\Omega}\tilde{n} g_n d x \\ \leq &(\gamma +1)\|\tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+\|g_n\|_{L^2}\|\tilde{n}\|_{L^2}+\|\bar{n}\|_{L^2}\|\tilde{n}\|^2_{L^4} \\ \leq& (\gamma +1)\|\tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+\|g_n\|_{L^2}\|\tilde{n}\|_{L^2}+\|\bar{n}\|_{L^2}(\|\tilde{n}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\nabla\tilde{n}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\tilde{n}\|_{L^2} ) \\ \leq& \delta\|\nabla\tilde{n}\|_{L^2}+ C\|\tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+C\|g_n\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align*}$

Therefore, by choosing $\delta$ small enough, from $J_4$ , $J_5$ , $J_6$ and $J_7$ , it follows that

$\begin{align} &\frac{d}{d t}\|\tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+\|\tilde{n}\|^2_{H^1} \\ \leq& C(\|\tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+\|\nabla\tilde{c}\|^2_{L^2}+\|\tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2}) +\delta \|\Delta\tilde{c}\|_{L^2} +\delta \|\nabla\tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2}+C\|g_n\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align}$

(5.11)

By choosing $\delta$ small enough and combining (5.8)-(5.11), we get

$\begin{align*} &\frac{d}{d t}(\|\tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+\|\tilde{c}\|^2_{H^1}+\|\tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2})+\|\tilde{n}\|^2_{H^1}+\|\tilde{c}\|^2_{H^2}+\|\tilde{u}\|^2_{H^1} \\ \leq& C(\|g_n\|^2_{L^2}+\|g_c\|^2_{L^2}+\|g_u\|^2_{L^2})+C(\|\tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+\|\tilde{c}\|^2_{H^1}+\|\tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2}). \end{align*}$

Applying Gronwall's lemma to the resulting differential inequality, we obatin

$\begin{align} \|\tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+\|\tilde{c}\|^2_{H^1}+\|\tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2} +\int_0^t\|\tilde{n}\|^2_{H^1}d\tau+\int_0^t\|\tilde{c}\|^2_{H^2}d\tau+\int_0^t\|\tilde{u}\|^2_{H^1}d\tau\leq C. \end{align}$

(5.12)

Taking the $L^2$ -inner product with $-\Delta\tilde{u}$ for the third equation of (5.7) implies

$\begin{align*} &\frac{1}{2} \frac{d}{d t}\int_{\Omega} |\nabla\tilde{u}|^2 d x+ \int_{\Omega} |\Delta\tilde{u}|^2 d x \\ = &\int_{\Omega}\bar{u}\cdot\nabla \tilde{u} \Delta\tilde{u} d x+\int_{\Omega}\tilde{u}\cdot\nabla\bar{u}\Delta \tilde{u} d x-\alpha \int_{\Omega} \tilde{n} \nabla \varphi \Delta \tilde{u} d x-\alpha \int_{\Omega}g_u \Delta \tilde{u} d x \\ = &J_8+J_9+J_{10}. \end{align*}$

With the use of the Gagliardo-Nirenberg interpolation inequality, we derive

$\begin{align*} J_8 = &\int_{\Omega}\bar{u}\cdot\nabla \tilde{u} \Delta\tilde{u} d x \leq \|\bar{u}\|_{L^4} \|\nabla\tilde{u}\|_{L^4}\|\Delta\tilde{u}\|_{L^2} \\ \leq&\|\bar{u}\|_{H^1}(\|\nabla\tilde{u}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\Delta\tilde{u}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\nabla\tilde{u}\|_{L^2})\|\Delta\tilde{u}\|_{L^2} \\ \leq& \delta\|\Delta \tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2}+C\|\nabla\tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2} \end{align*}$

and

$\begin{align*} J_9 = &\int_{\Omega}\tilde{u}\cdot\nabla\bar{u}\Delta \tilde{u} d x\leq \|\Delta \tilde{u}\|_{L^2}\|\nabla\bar{u}\|_{L^4}\|\tilde{u}\|_{L^4} \\ \leq& C\|\Delta \tilde{u}\|_{L^2}\|\nabla\bar{u}\|_{H^1}(\|\nabla\tilde{u}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\tilde{u}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\tilde{u}\|_{L^2}) \\ \leq& \delta\|\Delta \tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2}+C\|\nabla\tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align*}$

For the term $J_{10}$ , we deduce

$\begin{align*} J_{10} = &\alpha \int_{\Omega} \tilde{n} \nabla \varphi \Delta \tilde{u} d x-\alpha \int_{\Omega}g_u \Delta \tilde{u} d x \\ \leq&\delta\|\Delta \tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2}+C(\|\tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+\|g_u\|^2_{L^2}) . \end{align*}$

By choosing $\delta$ small enough, with the estimates $J_8$ , $J_9$ and $J_{10}$ , we have

$\begin{align} \frac{d}{d t}\|\nabla\tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2}+\|\Delta \tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2}\leq C\|\nabla\tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2}+C\|g_u\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align}$

(5.13)

Applying $\nabla$ to the first equation of (5.7), multiplying it by $\nabla \Delta \tilde{c}$ , and integrating over $\Omega$ give

$\begin{align*} &\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{ d t}\int_{\Omega} |\Delta c|^2 d x + \int_{\Omega}|\nabla\Delta c|^2 d x+\int_{\Omega} |\Delta c|^2 d x \\ = &-\int_{\Omega}\nabla (\bar{u}\nabla\tilde{c})\nabla\Delta\tilde{c}d x-\int_{\Omega}\nabla(\tilde{u}\nabla\bar{c})\nabla\Delta\tilde{c} d x+\alpha\int_{\Omega}\nabla \tilde{n}\nabla\Delta\tilde{c} d x \\ &+\alpha \int_{\Omega}\nabla g_c\nabla\Delta\tilde{c} d x \\ = &J_{11}+J_{12}+J_{13}. \end{align*}$

For the first term $J_{11}$ , we have

$\begin{align*} J_{11} = &-\int_{\Omega}\nabla (\bar{u}\nabla\tilde{c})\nabla\Delta\tilde{c}d x = - \int_{\Omega}\nabla \bar{u}\nabla\tilde{c} \nabla\Delta\tilde{c}d x-\int_{\Omega}\bar{u}\Delta\tilde{c} \nabla\Delta\tilde{c}d x \\ \leq& \|\nabla\Delta\tilde{c}\|_{L^2}\|\nabla \bar{u}\|_{L^4}\|\nabla\tilde{c}\|_{L^4}+\|\nabla\Delta\tilde{c}\|_{L^2}\|\bar{u}\|_{L^4}\|\Delta\tilde{c}\|_{L^4} \\ \leq &\|\nabla\Delta\tilde{c}\|_{L^2} (\|\nabla \bar{u}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\Delta \bar{u}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\nabla \bar{u}\|_{L^2})(\|\nabla \bar{c}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\Delta \bar{c}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\nabla \bar{c}\|_{L^2}) \\ &+\|\nabla\Delta\tilde{c}\|_{L^2}\|\bar{u}\|_{H^1}(\|\nabla\Delta\tilde{c}\|^\frac{1}{2}_{L^2}\|\Delta\tilde{c}\|^\frac{1}{2}_{L^2}+\|\Delta\tilde{c}\|_{L^2}) \\ \leq&\delta\|\nabla\Delta\tilde{c}\|^2_{L^2}+C\|\Delta \bar{u}\|^2_{L^2}+C\|\Delta \tilde{c}\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align*}$

Similarly, for the term $J_{12}$ ,

$\begin{align*} J_{12} = &-\int_{\Omega}\nabla(\tilde{u}\nabla\bar{c})\nabla\Delta\tilde{c} d x = -\int_{\Omega}\nabla\tilde{u}\nabla\bar{c} \nabla\Delta\tilde{c} d x-\int_{\Omega}\tilde{u}\Delta\bar{c}\nabla\Delta\tilde{c} d x \\ \leq&\|\nabla\Delta\tilde{c}\|_{L^2}\|\nabla \tilde{u}\|_{L^4}\|\nabla \bar{c}\|_{L^4}+\|\tilde{u}\|_{L^4}\|\Delta\bar{c}\|_{L^4}\|\nabla\Delta\tilde{c}\|_{L^2} \\ \leq &C\|\nabla\Delta\tilde{c}\|_{L^2}(\|\nabla \tilde{u}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\Delta \tilde{u}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\nabla \tilde{u}\|_{L^2})\|\nabla \bar{c}\|_{H^1} \\ &+(\|\tilde{u}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\nabla\tilde{u}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\tilde{u}\|_{L^2})(\|\Delta\bar{c}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\nabla\Delta\bar{c}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\Delta\bar{c}\|_{L^2})\|\nabla\Delta\tilde{c}\|_{L^2} \\ \leq&\delta\|\nabla\Delta\tilde{c}\|^2_{L^2}+\delta \|\Delta \tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2}+C \|\nabla\Delta\bar{c}\|^2_{L^2}+C\|\nabla\tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align*}$

For the rest term $J_{13}$ , we see

$\begin{align*} J_{13} = &\alpha\int_{\Omega}\nabla \tilde{n}\nabla\Delta\tilde{c} d x +\alpha \int_{\Omega}\nabla g_c\nabla\Delta\tilde{c} d x \\ \leq &\delta\|\nabla\Delta\tilde{c}\|^2_{L^2}+C(\|\nabla \tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+\|\nabla g_c\|^2_{L^2}). \end{align*}$

By choosing $\delta$ small enough, we get

$\begin{align} &\frac{d}{d t}\|\Delta\tilde{c}\|^2_{L^2}+\|\Delta\tilde{c}\|^2_{H^1} \\ \leq& C(\|\nabla \tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+\|\Delta \tilde{c}\|^2_{L^2}+\|\nabla\tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2})+ C \|\Delta \bar{u}\|^2_{L^2}+\delta \|\Delta \tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2} \\ &+C \|\nabla\Delta\bar{c}\|^2_{L^2}+C\|\nabla g_c\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align}$

(5.14)

From (5.13) and (5.14), along with $\delta$ small enough, it follows that

$\begin{align*} &\frac{d}{d t}(\|\nabla\tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2}+\|\Delta\tilde{c}\|^2_{L^2})+\|\Delta \tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2}+\|\Delta\tilde{c}\|^2_{H^1} \\ \leq& C(\|\nabla\tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2}+\|\Delta\tilde{c}\|^2_{L^2})+(\|\nabla \tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+\|\Delta \bar{u}\|^2_{L^2}+ \|\nabla\Delta\bar{c}\|^2_{L^2}+\|\nabla g_c\|^2_{L^2}) +C\|g_u\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align*}$

Applying Gronwall's lemma to the resulting differential inequality, we know

$\begin{align*} \|\nabla\tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2}+\|\Delta\tilde{c}\|^2_{L^2}+\int_{0}^t \|\Delta \tilde{u}\|^2_{L^2} d\tau+\int_{0}^t \|\Delta\tilde{c}\|^2_{H^1} d\tau\leq C. \end{align*}$

Taking the $L^2$ -inner product with $-\Delta\tilde{n}$ for the first equation of (5.7) implies

$\begin{align*} &\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{d t}\int_{\Omega} |\nabla \tilde{n}|^2 d x +\int_{\Omega} |\Delta \tilde{n}|^2 d x+\int_{\Omega} |\nabla \tilde{n}|^2 d x \\ = &-\int_{\Omega}\bar{u}\cdot \nabla\tilde{n} \Delta \tilde{n}d x-\int_{\Omega}\tilde{u}\cdot \nabla\bar{n}\Delta \tilde{n}d x-\int_{\Omega} \nabla(\tilde{n}\nabla \bar{c})\Delta\tilde{n} d x-\int_{\Omega} \nabla(\bar{n}\nabla \tilde{c})\Delta\tilde{n} d x \\ &-\alpha(1+\gamma)\int_{\Omega}\tilde{n}\Delta\tilde{n} d x+2\mu\int_{\Omega}\tilde{n}\bar{n} \Delta\tilde{n}d x-\alpha \int_{\Omega}g_n\Delta\tilde{n} d x \\ = &J_{14}+J_{15}+J_{16}+J_{17}+J_{18}. \end{align*}$

With the Gagliardo-Nirenberg interpolation inequality in hand, we can estimate $J_{14}$ as follows

$\begin{align*} J_{14} = &-\int_{\Omega}\bar{u}\cdot \nabla\tilde{n} \Delta \tilde{n}d x\leq \|\bar{u}\|_{L^4}\|\nabla\tilde{n}\|_{L^4}\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|_{L^2} \\ \leq &C\|\bar{u}\|_{H^1}(\|\nabla\tilde{n}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\nabla\tilde{n}\|_{L^2})\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|_{L^2} \\ \leq &\delta\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+C\|\nabla\tilde{n}\|^{2}_{L^2}. \end{align*}$

Similar to above estimates, we see

$\begin{align*} J_{15} = &-\int_{\Omega}\tilde{u}\cdot \nabla\bar{n}\Delta \tilde{n}d x\leq \|\tilde{u}\|_{L^4}\|\nabla \bar{n}\|_{L^4}\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|_{L^2} \\ \leq&C\|\tilde{u}\|_{H^1}\|\nabla \bar{n}\|_{H^1}\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|_{L^2} \\ \leq& \delta \|\Delta\tilde{n}\|_{L^2}+C\|\nabla \bar{n}\|^2_{H^1}. \end{align*}$

Similarly, we derive

$\begin{align*} J_{16} = &-\int_{\Omega} \nabla(\tilde{n}\nabla \bar{c})\Delta\tilde{n} d x = -\int_{\Omega}\nabla\tilde{n}\nabla \bar{c}\Delta\tilde{n} d x-\int_{\Omega}\tilde{n}\Delta \bar{c}\Delta\tilde{n} d x \\ \leq &\|\nabla\tilde{n}\|_{L^4}\|\nabla\bar{c}\|_{L^4}\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|_{L^2}+\|\tilde{n}\|_{L^4}\|\Delta\bar{c}\|_{L^4}\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|_{L^2} \\ \leq&(\|\nabla\tilde{n}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2} +\|\nabla\tilde{n}\|_{L^2})\|\nabla\bar{c}\|_{H^1}\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|_{L^2} \\ &+(\|\tilde{n}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\nabla\tilde{n}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\tilde{n}\|_{L^2})(\|\Delta\bar{c}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\nabla\Delta\bar{c}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\Delta\bar{c}\|_{L^2})\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|_{L^2} \\ \leq&\delta\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+C\|\nabla\tilde{n}\|^{2}_{L^2}+C\|\nabla\Delta\bar{c}\|^{2}_{L^2}+C \end{align*}$

and

$\begin{align*} J_{17} = &-\int_{\Omega} \nabla(\bar{n}\nabla \tilde{c})\Delta\tilde{n} d x = -\int_{\Omega} \nabla\bar{n}\nabla \tilde{c}\Delta\tilde{n} d x-\int_{\Omega} \nabla\bar{n}\Delta \tilde{c}\Delta\tilde{n} d x \\ \leq&\|\nabla\bar{n}\|_{L^4}\|\nabla\tilde{c}\|_{L^4}\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|_{L^2}+\|\bar{n}\|_{L^4}\|\Delta\tilde{c}\|_{L^4}\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|_{L^2} \\ \leq &(\|\nabla\bar{n}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\Delta\bar{n}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\nabla\bar{n}\|_{L^2})\|\nabla \tilde{c}\|_{H^1}\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|_{L^2} \\ &+\|\bar{n}\|_{H^1}(\|\Delta\tilde{c}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\nabla\Delta\tilde{c}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\Delta\tilde{c}\|_{L^2})\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|_{L^2} \\ \leq &\delta\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+C\|\nabla\Delta\tilde{c}\|^{2}_{L^2}+C. \end{align*}$

For the rest terms, we know

$\begin{align*} J_{18} = &-\alpha(1+\gamma)\int_{\Omega}\tilde{n}\Delta\tilde{n} d x+2\mu\int_{\Omega}\tilde{n}\bar{n} \Delta\tilde{n}d x-\alpha \int_{\Omega}g_n\Delta\tilde{n} d x \\ \leq&(1+\gamma)\|\tilde{n}\|_{L^2}\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|_{L^2}+2\mu\|\tilde{n}\|_{L^4}\|\bar{n}\|_{L^4}\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|_{L^2}+\|g_n\|_{L^2}\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|_{L^2} \\ \leq& (1+\gamma)\|\tilde{n}\|_{L^2}\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|_{L^2}+C(\|\tilde{n}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\nabla\tilde{n}\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\tilde{n}\|_{L^2})\|\bar{n}\|_{H^1}\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|_{L^2} \\ &+\|g_n\|_{L^2}\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|_{L^2} \\ \leq &\delta\|\Delta\tilde{n}\|^2_{L^2}+C\|\nabla\tilde{n}\|^{2}_{L^2}+C\|g_n\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align*}$

Therefore, Taking $\delta$ small enough and together with $J_{14}-J_{18}$ , we see that

$\begin{align*} &\frac{d}{d t}\|\nabla\tilde{n}\|^{2}_{L^2}+ \|\nabla\tilde{n}\|^{2}_{H^1} \\ \leq& C(\|\nabla\tilde{n}\|^{2}_{L^2} +\|\nabla \bar{n}\|^2_{H^1}+ \|\nabla\Delta\bar{c}\|^{2}_{L^2}+\|\nabla\Delta\tilde{c}\|^{2}_{L^2}+\|g_n\|^2_{L^2})+C. \end{align*}$

Applying Gronwall's lemma to the resulting differential inequality, we know

$\begin{align*} \|\nabla\tilde{n}\|^{2}_{L^2}+\int_0^t \|\nabla\tilde{n}\|^{2}_{H^1}d\tau \leq C. \end{align*}$

Therefore, from Leray-Schauder theorem, we derive the existence of solution for (5.5). Along with the regularity of $(\tilde{n}, \tilde{c}, \tilde{u})$ , the uniqueness of solution can easily get, so we omit the process.

Theorem 5.1. Assume that $\bar{s} = (\bar{n},\bar{c},\bar{u},\bar{f})\in \mathcal{S}_{a d}$ be an optimal solution for the control problem (5.3). Then, there exist Lagrange multipliers $(\lambda, \eta,\rho,\xi,\varphi,\omega)\in L^2(Q)\times (L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega)))^{\prime}\times L^2(Q)\times (H^1(\Omega))^{\prime}\times(H^2(\Omega))^{\prime}\times(H^1(\Omega))^{\prime}$ such that for all $(\tilde{n}, \tilde{c}, \tilde{u},\tilde{f})\in V_n\times V_c\times V_u\times\mathcal{C}(\bar{f})$ has

$\begin{align} &\beta_1\int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega_d} (\bar{n}-n_d)\tilde{n}d x d t + \beta_2\int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega_d} (\bar{c}-c_d)\tilde{c}d x d t + \beta_3\int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega_d} (\bar{u}-u_d)\tilde{u}d x d t \\ &+\beta_4\int_{\Omega_d} (\bar{n}(T)-n_{\Omega})\tilde{n}(T)d x +\beta_5\int_{\Omega_d} (\bar{c}(T)-c_{\Omega})\tilde{c}(T)d x \\ &-\int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega}(\tilde{n}_{t}-\Delta \tilde{n}+\bar{u} \cdot \nabla \tilde{n}+\tilde{u}\cdot\nabla \bar{n}+\nabla \cdot(\bar{n} \nabla \tilde{c}) +\nabla(\tilde{n}\nabla \bar{c})-\gamma \tilde{n} +2\mu \tilde{n}\bar{n})\lambda d x d t \\ &-\int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega}\left(\tilde{c}_{t}-\Delta \tilde{c}+\bar{u} \cdot \nabla \tilde{c}+\tilde{u}\cdot\nabla \bar{c}+\tilde{c}- \tilde{n}\right)\eta d x d t+\beta_7\int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega_d} \tilde{f}\bar{f}d x d t \\ &-\int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega}\left(\tilde{u}_{t}-\Delta \tilde{u}+\bar{u} \cdot \nabla \tilde{u}+\tilde{u}\cdot \nabla \bar{u}-\tilde{n} \nabla \varphi \right) \rho d x d t +\int_{\Omega}\tilde{n}(0)\xi d x+\int_{\Omega}\tilde{c}(0)\varphi d x \\ &+\int_{\Omega}\tilde{u}(0)\omega d x+\beta_6\int_{\Omega_d} (\bar{u}(T)-u_{\Omega})\tilde{u}(T)d x+\int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega}\tilde{f}\eta d x d t \geq 0, \end{align}$

(5.15)

where $\mathcal{C}(\bar{f}) = \{\theta(f-\bar{f}):\theta\geq 0, f\in \mathcal{U}\}$ .

Proof. With the Lemma 5.3 in hand, we get that $\bar{s}\in\mathcal{S}_{ad}$ is a regular point. Then, togather with Theorem 3.1 in [20], it follows that there exist Lagrange multipliers $(\lambda, \eta,\rho,\xi,\varphi,\omega)\in L^2(Q)\times (L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega)))^{\prime}\times L^2(Q)\times (H^1(\Omega))^{\prime}\times(H^2(\Omega))^{\prime}\times(H^1(\Omega))^{\prime}$ such that

$\begin{align*} &J^{\prime}(\bar{s})[r]-\langle G_1^{\prime}(\bar{s})[r],\lambda \rangle-\langle G_2^{\prime}(\bar{s})[r],\eta \rangle-\langle G_3^{\prime}(\bar{s})[r],\rho \rangle-\langle G_4^{\prime}(\bar{s})[r],\xi \rangle \\ &-\langle G_5^{\prime}(\bar{s})[r],\varphi \rangle -\langle G_6^{\prime}(\bar{s})[r],\omega \rangle \geq 0, \end{align*}$

for all $r = (\tilde{n}, \tilde{c}, \tilde{u},\tilde{f})\in V_n\times V_c\times V_u\times\mathcal{C}(\bar{f})$ . Hence, the proof follows from Lemmas 5.1 and 5.2.

Corollary 5.1. Assume that $\bar{s} = (\bar{n},\bar{c},\bar{u},\bar{f})\in \mathcal{S}_{a d}$ be an optimal solution for the control problem (5.3). Then, there exist Lagrange multipliers $(\lambda, \eta,\rho)\in L^2(Q)\times (L^2(0,T;H^1(\Omega)))^{\prime}\times L^2(Q)$ , satisfying

$\begin{align} &\int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega}(\tilde{n}_{t}-\Delta \tilde{n}+\bar{u} \cdot \nabla \tilde{n} +\nabla(\tilde{n}\nabla \bar{c})-\gamma \tilde{n} +2\mu \tilde{n}\bar{n})\lambda d x d t -\int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega}\tilde{n}\eta d x d t \\ &-\int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega}\tilde{n} \nabla \varphi \rho d x d t = \beta_1\int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega_d}(\bar{n}-n_d)\tilde{n}d x d t, \end{align}$

(5.16)

$\begin{align} &\int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega}\left(\tilde{c}_{t}-\Delta \tilde{c}+\bar{u} \cdot \nabla \tilde{c}+\tilde{c}\right)\eta d x d t+\int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega} \nabla \cdot(\bar{n} \nabla \tilde{c})\lambda d x d t \\ = &\beta_2\int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega_d} (\bar{c}-c_d)\tilde{c}d x d t, \end{align}$

(5.17)

$\begin{align} &\int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega}\left(\tilde{u}_{t}-\Delta \tilde{u}+\bar{u} \cdot \nabla \tilde{u}+\tilde{u}\cdot \nabla \bar{u} \right) \rho d x d t + \int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega}\tilde{u}\nabla \bar{n} \lambda d x d t \\ &+\int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega} \tilde{u}\cdot\nabla \bar{c}\eta d x d t = \beta_3\int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega_d} (\bar{u}-u_d)\tilde{u}d x d t, \end{align}$

(5.18)

which corresponds to the linear system

$\begin{align} \left\{\begin{aligned} &-\lambda_t-\Delta \lambda +\bar{u}\cdot\nabla \lambda -\nabla \lambda\nabla \bar{c}-\gamma \lambda +2\mu\lambda\bar{n}-\eta - \nabla\varphi\rho \\ & = \beta_1(\bar{n}-n_d), \\ &-\eta_t-\Delta \eta+\bar{u}\cdot\nabla\eta+\eta+\nabla(\bar{n}\nabla\lambda) = \beta_2 (\bar{c}-c_d), \\ &-\rho_t-\Delta \rho+(\bar{u}\cdot\nabla)\rho+(\rho\cdot\nabla^{T})\bar{u}+\lambda \nabla \bar{n}+\eta \nabla \bar{c} = \beta_3(\bar{u}-u_d), \end{aligned} \right. \end{align}$

(5.19)

subject to the following boundary and final conditions

$\begin{align*} \left\{\begin{aligned} &\nabla\cdot \rho = 0, &&\mathit{\text{in}}\; Q, \\ &\frac{\partial \lambda }{\partial \nu} = \frac{\partial \eta }{\partial \nu}, \rho = 0,&& \mathit{\text{on}}\; (0,T)\times \partial\Omega, \\ &\lambda(T) = \beta_4(\bar{n}(T)-n_{\Omega}),\eta(T) = \beta_5 (\bar{c}(T)-c_{\Omega}), \\ &\rho(T) = \beta_5(\bar{c}(T)-c_{\Omega}),&& \mathit{\text{in}}\; \Omega, \end{aligned} \right. \end{align*}$

and the following identities hold

$\begin{align} \int_{0}^T\int_{\Omega_d}(\beta_7\bar{f}+\eta)(f-\bar{f}) d x d t \geq 0, \;\forall f \in\mathcal{U}. \end{align}$

(5.20)

Proof. By taking $(\tilde{c},\tilde{u},\tilde{f}) = (0,0,0)$ in (5.15), then it follows that the equation (5.16) holds. In light of an analogous argument, and in light of the (5.15), it guarantees that (5.17) and (5.18) hold. On the other hand, let $(\tilde{n},\tilde{c},\tilde{u}) = (0,0,0)$ , as an immediate consequence we obtain

$\begin{align*} \beta_7\int_{0}^{T}\tilde{f}\bar{f} d x d t+\int_{0}^{T}\tilde{f}\eta d x d t\geq 0, \quad \forall \tilde{f} \in \mathcal{C}(\bar{f}). \end{align*}$

By choosing $\tilde{f} = f-\bar{f}\in \mathcal{C}(\bar{f})$ for all $\bar{f}\in \mathcal{U}$ , thus we achieve (5.20).

Theorem 5.2. Under the assumptions of Theorem 5.1, system (5.19) has a unique weak solution such that

$\begin{align*} \|\lambda\|^2_{H^1}+\|\eta\|^2_{L^2}+\|\rho\|^2_{L^2}+\int_0^t\|\lambda\|^2_{H^2}d \tau +\int_0^t\|\eta\|^2_{H^1}d \tau+\int_0^t\|\rho\|^2_{H^1} d \tau \leq C. \end{align*}$

Proof. For convenience, we set $\tilde{\lambda} = \lambda(T-t)$ , $\tilde{\eta} = \eta(T-t)$ , $\tilde{\rho} = \rho(T-t)$ , in order to simplify notations, we still write $\lambda$ , $\eta$ , $\rho$ instead of $\tilde{\lambda}$ , $\tilde{\eta}$ , $\tilde{\rho}$ , then the adjoint system (5.19) can be written as follow

$\begin{align} \left\{\begin{aligned} &\lambda_t-\Delta \lambda +\bar{u}\cdot\nabla \lambda -\nabla \lambda\nabla \bar{c}-\gamma \lambda +2\mu\lambda\bar{n}-\eta - \nabla\varphi\rho \\ & = \beta_1(\bar{n}-n_d),&&\text{ in } Q, \\ &\eta_t-\Delta \eta+\bar{u}\cdot\nabla\eta+\eta+\nabla(\bar{n}\nabla\lambda) = \beta_2 (\bar{c}-c_d),&&\text{ in } Q, \\ &\rho_t-\Delta \rho+(\bar{u}\cdot\nabla)\rho+(\rho\cdot\nabla^{T})\bar{u}+\lambda \nabla \bar{n}+\eta \nabla \bar{c} = \beta_3(\bar{u}-u_d),&&\text{ in } Q, \end{aligned} \right. \end{align}$

(5.21)

subject to the following boundary and final conditions

$\begin{align*} \left\{\begin{aligned} &\nabla\cdot \rho = 0, &&\text{ in } Q, \\ &\frac{\partial \lambda }{\partial \nu} = \frac{\partial \eta }{\partial \nu}, \rho = 0,&& \text{ on } (0,T)\times\partial \Omega, \\ &\lambda(0) = \beta_4(\bar{n}(T)-n_{\Omega}),\eta(0) = \beta_5 (\bar{c}(T)-c_{\Omega}), \\ &\rho(0) = \beta_5(\bar{c}(T)-c_{\Omega}),&& \text{ in } \Omega. \end{aligned} \right. \end{align*}$

Following an analogous reasoning as in the proof of Lemma 5.3, we omit the process and just give a number of a priori estimates as follows.

Taking the $L^2$ -inner product with $\lambda$ for the first equation of (5.21) implies

$\begin{align*} &\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{d t}\int_{\Omega}\lambda^2 d x+ \int_{\Omega}|\nabla\lambda|^2 d x +2\mu\int_{\Omega}\lambda^2\bar{n} d x \\ = &\int_{\Omega} \nabla \lambda \nabla \bar{c}d x+\gamma\int_{\Omega}\lambda^2 d x +\int_{\Omega}\lambda \eta d x+\int_{\Omega}\lambda \nabla \varphi \rho d x+ \beta_1\int_{\Omega}(\bar{n}-n_d) \lambda d x \\ \leq &\|\nabla\lambda\|_{L^2}\|\nabla\bar{c}\|_{L^2}+\gamma\|\lambda\|^2_{L^2}+\|\lambda\|_{L^2}(\|\eta\|_{L^2}+\|\rho\|_{L^2})+\beta_1\|\bar{n}-n_d\|_{L^2}\|\lambda\|_{L^2} \\ \leq& \frac{1}{2}\|\nabla\lambda\|^2_{L^2}+C(\|\lambda\|^2_{L^2}+\|\eta\|^2_{L^2}+\|\rho\|^2_{L^2})+C\|\bar{n}-n_d\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align*}$

Then, we have

$\begin{align} \frac{d}{d t}\|\lambda\|^2_{L^2}+\|\lambda\|^2_{H^1}\leq C(\|\lambda\|^2_{L^2}+\|\eta\|^2_{L^2}+\|\rho\|^2_{L^2})+C\|\bar{n}-n_d\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align}$

(5.22)

Taking the $L^2$ -inner product with $-\Delta\eta$ for the first equation of (5.21) implies

$\begin{align*} &\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{d t}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla\lambda|^2 d x + \int_{\Omega}|\Delta\lambda|^2 d x \\ = &\int_{\Omega}\bar{u}\cdot \nabla \lambda \Delta\lambda d x -\int_{\Omega}\nabla \lambda \nabla \bar{c}\Delta \lambda d x-\gamma \int_{\Omega}\lambda \Delta \lambda d x +2\mu \int_{\Omega}\lambda \bar{n}\Delta \lambda d x \\ &- \int_{\Omega}\eta \Delta \lambda d x-\int_{\Omega}\nabla \varphi \rho\Delta \lambda d x +\beta_1\int_{\Omega}(\bar{n}-n_d)\Delta\lambda d x \\ \leq&\|\bar{u}\|_{L^4}\|\nabla \lambda\|_{L^4}\|\Delta \lambda \|_{L^2} +\|\nabla \lambda\|_{L^4}\|\nabla \bar{c}\|_{L^4}\|\Delta \lambda \|_{L^2} +\gamma\|\nabla \lambda\|^2_{L^2} \\ &+\| \lambda\|_{L^4}\|\bar{n}\|_{L^4}\|\Delta \lambda \|_{L^2}+\|\eta\|_{L^2}\|\Delta \lambda \|_{L^2}+ \| \rho\|_{L^2} \|\Delta \lambda \|_{L^2} \\ &+\beta_1\|\Delta \lambda \|_{L^2}\|\bar{n}-n_d\|^2_{L^2} \\ \leq& \|\bar{u}\|_{H^1}(\|\nabla \lambda\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\Delta \lambda\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\nabla \lambda\|_{L^2})\|\Delta \lambda\|_{L^2}+\gamma\|\nabla \lambda\|^2_{L^2} \\ &+(\|\nabla \lambda\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\Delta \lambda\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\nabla \lambda\|_{L^2})\|\nabla\bar{c}\|_{H^1}\|\Delta \lambda\|_{L^2}+\|\eta\|_{L^2}\|\Delta \lambda \|_{L^2} \\ &+\| \rho\|_{L^2} \|\Delta \lambda \|_{L^2}+\beta_1\|\Delta \lambda \|_{L^2}\|\bar{n}-n_d\|^2_{L^2} \\ \leq&\frac{1}{2}\|\Delta \lambda\|^{2}_{L^2}+C(\|\nabla \lambda\|^{2}_{L^2}+\|\eta\|^2_{L^2}+\| \rho\|^2_{L^2} ). \end{align*}$

Thus, we get

$\begin{align} \frac{d}{d t}\|\nabla\lambda\|^2_{L^2}+\|\nabla\lambda\|^2_{H^1}\leq C(\|\nabla\lambda\|^2_{L^2}+\|\eta\|^2_{L^2}+\|\rho\|^2_{L^2})+C\|\bar{n}-n_d\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align}$

(5.23)

Taking the $L^2$ -inner product with $\eta$ for the second equation of (5.21) implies

$\begin{align*} &\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{d t}\int_{\Omega}\eta^2 d x+ \int_{\Omega}|\nabla\eta|^2 d x+ \int_{\Omega}\eta^2 d x \\ = & \int_{\Omega}\bar{n}\nabla\lambda \nabla \eta d x+\beta_2 \int_{\Omega}\eta (\bar{c}-c_d) d x \\ \leq& \|\bar{n}\|_{L^{4}}\|\nabla \lambda\|_{L^4}\|\nabla \eta\|_{L^2}+\beta_2\|\eta \|_{L^2}\|\bar{c}-c_d\|_{L^2} \\ \leq&\|\bar{n}\|_{H^1}(\|\nabla \lambda\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\Delta \lambda\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\nabla \lambda\|_{L^2})\|\nabla \eta\|_{L^2}+\beta_2\|\eta \|_{L^2}\|\bar{c}-c_d\|_{L^2} \\ \leq &\frac{1}{2}\|\nabla \eta\|^2_{L^2}+\delta\|\Delta \lambda\|^2_{L^2}+C\|\nabla \lambda\|_{L^2}+C\|\eta \|^2_{L^2}+C\|\bar{c}-c_d\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align*}$

As an immediate consequence, we obtain

$\begin{align} \frac{d}{d t}\|\eta \|^2_{L^2}+\|\eta \|^2_{H^1} \leq \delta\|\Delta \lambda\|^2_{L^2}+C\|\nabla \lambda\|_{L^2}+C\|\eta \|^2_{L^2}+C\|\bar{c}-c_d\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align}$

(5.24)

Taking the $L^2$ -inner product with $\rho$ for the third equation of (5.21) implies

$\begin{align*} &\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{d t}\int_{\Omega}\rho^2 d x+ \int_{\Omega}|\nabla\rho|^2 d x \\ = &-\int_{\Omega} (\rho\cdot\nabla^{T})\bar{u} \rho d x-\lambda\int_{\Omega}\nabla \bar{n} \rho d x-\int_{\Omega}\eta \nabla \bar{c} \rho d x+\beta_3\int_{\Omega}(\bar{u}-u_d) \rho d x \\ \leq &\|\rho\|_{L^2}\|\nabla \bar{u}\|_{L^4}\|\rho\|_{L^4}+\lambda \|\nabla \bar{n}\|_{L^2}\|\rho\|_{L^2}+\|\eta \|_{L^2}\|\nabla \bar{c}\|_{L^4}\|\rho\|_{L^4} \\ &+\beta_3\|\rho\|_{L^2}\|\bar{u}-u_d\|_{L^2} \\ \leq& \|\rho\|_{L^2}\|\nabla \bar{u}\|_{H^1}(\|\rho\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\nabla\rho\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\rho\|_{L^2})+\lambda \|\nabla \bar{n}\|_{L^2}\|\rho\|_{L^2} \\ &+\|\eta \|_{L^2}\|\nabla \bar{c}\|_{H^1}(\|\rho\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}\|\nabla\rho\|^{\frac{1}{2}}_{L^2}+\|\rho\|_{L^2})+\beta_3\|\rho\|_{L^2}\|\bar{u}-u_d\|_{L^2} \\ \leq&\frac{1}{2}\|\nabla\rho\|^{2}_{L^2}+C\|\rho\|^2_{L^2}(\|\nabla \bar{u}\|^2_{H^1}+1)+C\|\eta \|^2_{L^2}+C\|\bar{u}-u_d\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align*}$

Therefore, we see that

$\begin{align} \frac{d}{d t}\|\rho\|^{2}_{L^2}+\|\rho\|^{2}_{H^1}\leq C\|\rho\|^2_{L^2}(\|\nabla \bar{u}\|^2_{H^1}+1)+C\|\eta \|^2_{L^2}+C\|\bar{u}-u_d\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align}$

(5.25)

Combining (5.22)-(5.25) and taking $\delta$ small enough, we have

$\begin{align*} &\frac{d}{ d t}(\|\lambda\|^2_{H^1}+\|\eta\|^2_{L^2}+\|\rho\|^2_{L^2})+ \|\lambda\|^2_{H^2}+ \|\eta\|^2_{H^1} +\|\rho\|^2_{H^1} \\ \leq& C(\|\nabla \bar{u}\|^2_{H^1}+1)( \|\lambda\|^2_{H^1}+\|\eta\|^2_{L^2}+\|\rho\|^2_{L^2})+C\|\bar{n}-n_d\|^2_{L^2} \\ &+C\|\bar{c}-c_d\|^2_{L^2}+C\|\bar{u}-u_d\|^2_{L^2}. \end{align*}$

Applying Gronwall's lemma to the resulting differential inequality, we know

$\begin{align*} \|\lambda\|^2_{H^1}+\|\eta\|^2_{L^2}+\|\rho\|^2_{L^2}+\int_0^t\|\lambda\|^2_{H^2}d \tau +\int_0^t\|\eta\|^2_{H^1}d \tau+\int_0^t\|\rho\|^2_{H^1} d \tau \leq C. \end{align*}$

The proof is complete.

Acknowledgment

The authors would like to express their deep thanks to the referee's valuable suggestions for the revision and improvement of the manuscript.

References

[1]	H. L. Smith, P. Waltman, The Theory of the Chemostat: Dynamics of Microbial Competition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511530043
[2]	X. Zhao, Dynamical Systems in Population Biology, 2 $^{nd}$ edition, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56433-3
[3]	L. Chen, J. Chen, Nonlinear Biological Dynamical Systems (in Chinese), Science Press, Beijing, 1993.
[4]	S. Ruan, The dynamics of chemostat models (in Chinese), J. Cent. China Norm. Univ., 31 (1997), 377–397.
[5]	X. Tai, W. Ma, S. Guo, H. Yan, C. Yin, A class of dynamic delayed model describing flocculation of micoorganism and its theoretical analysis (in Chinese), Math. Pract. Theory, 45 (2015), 198–209. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331590204.
[6]	S. Guo, W. Ma, Global dynamics of a microorganism flocculation model with time delay, Commun. Pur. Appl. Anal., 16 (2017), 1883–1891. https://doi.org/10.3934/cpaa.2017091 doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2017091
[7]	S. Guo, W. Ma, X. Zhao, Global dynamics of a time-delayed microorganism flocculation model with saturated functional responses, J. Dyn. Differ. Equations, 30 (2018), 1247–1271. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10884-017-9605-3 doi: 10.1007/s10884-017-9605-3
[8]	S. Guo, J. Cui, W. Ma, An analysis approach to permanence of a delay differential equations model of microorganism flocculation, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. -B, 27 (2022), 3831–3844. https://doi.org/10.3934/dcdsb.2021208 doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2021208
[9]	X. Mu, D. Jiang, A. Alsaedi, Dynamical behavior of a stochastic microorganism flocculation model with nonlinear perturbation, Qual. Theor. Dyn. Syst., 21 (2022), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12346-022-00566-1 doi: 10.1007/s12346-022-00566-1
[10]	E. Beretta, G. I. Bischi, F. Solimano, Stability in chemostat equations with delayed nutrient recycling, J. Math. Biol., 28 (1990), 99–111. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00171521 doi: 10.1007/BF00171521
[11]	E. Beretta, Y. Takeuchi, Qualitative properties of chemostat equations with time delays: boundedness, local and global asymptotic stability, Differ. Equations Dyn. Syst., 2 (1994), 19–40. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/256114891.
[12]	E. Beretta, Y. Takeuchi, Qualitative properties of chemostat equations with time delays Ⅱ, Differ. Equations Dyn. Syst., 2 (1994), 263–288. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/255989412.
[13]	S. Ruan, The effect of delays on stability and persistence in Plankton models, Nonlinear Anal. Theory Methods Appl., 24 (1995), 575–585. https://doi.org/10.1016/0362-546X(95)93092-I doi: 10.1016/0362-546X(95)93092-I
[14]	X. He, S. Ruan, H. Xia, Global stability in chemostat-type equations with distributed delays, SIAM J. Math. Anal., 29 (1998), 681–696. https://doi.org/10.1137/S0036141096311101 doi: 10.1137/S0036141096311101
[15]	X. He, S. Ruan, Global stability in chemostat-type plankton models with delayed nutrient recycling, J. Math. Biol., 37 (1998), 253–271. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002850050128 doi: 10.1007/s002850050128
[16]	S. Ruan, G. S. K. Wolkowicz, Bifurcation analysis of a chemostat model with a distributed delay, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 204 (1996), 786–812. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmaa.1996.0468 doi: 10.1006/jmaa.1996.0468
[17]	G. S. K. Wolkowicz, H. Xia, S. Ruan, Competition in the chemostat: a distributed delay model and its global asymptotic behavior, SIAM J. Appl. Math., 57 (1997), 1281–1310. https://doi.org/10.1137/S0036139995289842 doi: 10.1137/S0036139995289842
[18]	G. S. K. Wolkowicz, H. Xia, J. Wu, Global dynamics of a chemostat competition model with distributed delay, J. Math. Biol., 38 (1999), 285–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002850050150 doi: 10.1007/s002850050150
[19]	B. Li, G. S. K. Wolkowicz, Y. Kuang, Global asymptotic behavior of a chemostat model with two perfecity complementary resources and distributed delay, SIAM J. Appl. Math., 60 (2000), 2058–2086. https://doi.org/10.1137/S0036139999359756 doi: 10.1137/S0036139999359756
[20]	J. M. Cushing, Integrodifferential Equations and Delay Models in Population Dynamics, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1977. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-93073-7
[21]	N. MacDonald, Time Lags in Biological Models, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1978. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-93107-9
[22]	K. Gopalsamy, Stability and Oscillation in Delay Equation of Population Dynamics, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1992. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-7920-9
[23]	Y. Kuang, Delay Differential Equations with Applications in Population Dynamics, Academic Press, Boston, 1993. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/243764052.
[24]	L. Chen, Mathematical Ecological Models and Research Methods (in Chinese), 2 $^nd$ edition, Science Press, Beijing, 2017.
[25]	G. Röst, J. Wu, SEIR epidemiological model with varying infectivity and infinite delay, Math. Biosci. Eng., 5 (2008), 389–402. https://doi.org/10.3934/mbe.2008.5.389 doi: 10.3934/mbe.2008.5.389
[26]	C. C. McCluskey, Global stability for an SEIR epidemiological model with varying infectivity and infinite delay, Math. Biosci. Eng., 6 (2009), 603–610. https://doi.org/10.3934/mbe.2009.6.603 doi: 10.3934/mbe.2009.6.603
[27]	P. Nelson, A. Perelson, Mathematical analysis of delay differential equation models of HIV-1 infection, Math. Biosci., 179 (2002), 73–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-5564(02)00099-8 doi: 10.1016/S0025-5564(02)00099-8
[28]	X. Lai, X. Zou, Modeling HIV-1 virus dynamics with both virus-to-cell infection and cell-to-cell transmision, SIAM J. Appl. Math., 74 (2014), 898–917. https://doi.org/10.1137/130930145 doi: 10.1137/130930145
[29]	H. Shu, Y. Chen, L. Wang, Impacts of the cell-free and cell-to-cell infection modes on viral dynamics, J. Dyn. Diff. Equations, 30 (2018), 1817–1836. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10884-017-9622-2 doi: 10.1007/s10884-017-9622-2
[30]	K. Wang, M. Fan, Phase Space Theory of Functional Differential Equations and its Applications (in Chinese), Science Press, Beijing, 2009.
[31]	J. K. Hale, J. Kato, Phase space for retarded equations with infinite delay, Funkcial. Ekvac., 21 (1978), 11–41.
[32]	F. V. Atkinson, J. R. Haddock, On determining phase spaces for functional differential equations, Funkcial. Ekvac., 31 (1988), 331–347. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266003717.
[33]	Y. Hino, S. Murakami, T. Naito, Functional Differential Equations with Infinite Delay, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1991. https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0084432
[34]	J. K. Hale, S. V. Lunel, Introduction to Functional Differential Equations, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-4342-7
[35]	S. Zhang, Comparison theorems on boundedness, Funkcial. Ekvac., 31 (1988), 179–196.

This article has been cited by:

Shenxing Li, Wenhe Li, Dynamical Behaviors of a Stochastic Susceptible-Infected-Treated-Recovered-Susceptible Cholera Model with Ornstein-Uhlenbeck Process, 2024, 12, 2227-7390, 2163, 10.3390/math12142163

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2023 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

1.
沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院沈阳 110142

Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering

4.4

Metrics

Article views(1905) PDF downloads(89) Cited by(0)

Preview PDF

Download XML

Export Citation

Article outline

Show full outline

Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering

Stability and persistence analysis of a microorganism flocculation model with infinite delay

Related Papers:

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Basic estimates of linearized problem

3. Existence and uniqueness of strong solution of system

4. Existence of an optimal control

5. The first-order necessary optimality condition

Acknowledgment

References

This article has been cited by:

Reader Comments

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

Metrics

Other Articles By Authors

Catalog

Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering

Stability and persistence analysis of a microorganism flocculation model with infinite delay

Related Papers:

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Basic estimates of linearized problem

3. Existence and uniqueness of strong solution of system

4. Existence of an optimal control

5. The first-order necessary optimality condition

Acknowledgment

References

This article has been cited by:

Reader Comments

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

Metrics

Other Articles By Authors

Related pages

Tools

Export File

Citation

Format

Content

Catalog