Across the globe, the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has altered the delivery of healthcare services as patients must maintain their distance from caregivers, and still receive medical treatment. This has triggered a necessity for exploring means which minimizes the physical gap between patients and healthcare givers while offering health care and ensuring high medical protection at a reduced risk of exposure. Even though telehealth services are no replacement for conventional healthcare, its' usefulness in the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic is immense.
This research reviews the ardent utilization, barriers and recommendations with telehealth services for healthcare delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic.
An assessment of literature in five large digital databases; PubMed, Science Direct, Sage Pub, ProQuest, and Google Scholar was conducted. Inclusion criteria included studies defining telehealth/telemedicine, utilization, barriers and recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic from January 2020 to July 2021, written in English and published in peer-reviewed journals. Two reviewers independently assessed search results, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the included studies. Narrative synthesis was undertaken to summarize and report the findings.
Overall, the study discoveries which are most commonly stated as impediments for telehealth services' full utilization between patients and physicians beyond the scope of typical medical confinement are: infrastructure and internet access (20.00%), data privacy and security (13.33%), digital literacy (13.33%), reimbursement and liability (10.00%), and clinician and patient's unwillingness (6.67%).
The intrusion of coronavirus has accelerated the transition to telehealth services in healthcare delivery, but it has also provided a unique chance to demonstrate the critical role that telehealth can play in ensuring that people of all races, ethnicities, and communities receive high-quality treatment (justice). Healthcare professionals should emphasize the effectiveness of telehealth services as an alternate healthcare delivery method in promoting healthcare to all populace.
Citation: Jonathan Kissi, Daniel Kwame Kwansah Quansah, Jonathan Aseye Nutakor, Alex Boadi Dankyi, Yvette Adu-Gyamfi. Telehealth during COVID-19 pandemic era: a systematic review[J]. AIMS Medical Science, 2022, 9(1): 81-97. doi: 10.3934/medsci.2022008
[1] | Subramanian Muthaiah, Manigandan Murugesan, Muath Awadalla, Bundit Unyong, Ria H. Egami . Ulam-Hyers stability and existence results for a coupled sequential Hilfer-Hadamard-type integrodifferential system. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 16203-16233. doi: 10.3934/math.2024784 |
[2] | Ugyen Samdrup Tshering, Ekkarath Thailert, Sotiris K. Ntouyas . Existence and stability results for a coupled system of Hilfer-Hadamard sequential fractional differential equations with multi-point fractional integral boundary conditions. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(9): 25849-25878. doi: 10.3934/math.20241263 |
[3] | Kaihong Zhao, Shuang Ma . Ulam-Hyers-Rassias stability for a class of nonlinear implicit Hadamard fractional integral boundary value problem with impulses. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 3169-3185. doi: 10.3934/math.2022175 |
[4] | Hui Huang, Kaihong Zhao, Xiuduo Liu . On solvability of BVP for a coupled Hadamard fractional systems involving fractional derivative impulses. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(10): 19221-19236. doi: 10.3934/math.20221055 |
[5] | Subramanian Muthaiah, Dumitru Baleanu, Nandha Gopal Thangaraj . Existence and Hyers-Ulam type stability results for nonlinear coupled system of Caputo-Hadamard type fractional differential equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(1): 168-194. doi: 10.3934/math.2021012 |
[6] | Murugesan Manigandan, R. Meganathan, R. Sathiya Shanthi, Mohamed Rhaima . Existence and analysis of Hilfer-Hadamard fractional differential equations in RLC circuit models. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 28741-28764. doi: 10.3934/math.20241394 |
[7] | Xiaoming Wang, Rizwan Rizwan, Jung Rey Lee, Akbar Zada, Syed Omar Shah . Existence, uniqueness and Ulam's stabilities for a class of implicit impulsive Langevin equation with Hilfer fractional derivatives. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(5): 4915-4929. doi: 10.3934/math.2021288 |
[8] | Thanin Sitthiwirattham, Rozi Gul, Kamal Shah, Ibrahim Mahariq, Jarunee Soontharanon, Khursheed J. Ansari . Study of implicit-impulsive differential equations involving Caputo-Fabrizio fractional derivative. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(3): 4017-4037. doi: 10.3934/math.2022222 |
[9] | J. Vanterler da C. Sousa, E. Capelas de Oliveira, F. G. Rodrigues . Ulam-Hyers stabilities of fractional functional differential equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(2): 1346-1358. doi: 10.3934/math.2020092 |
[10] | Songkran Pleumpreedaporn, Chanidaporn Pleumpreedaporn, Weerawat Sudsutad, Jutarat Kongson, Chatthai Thaiprayoon, Jehad Alzabut . On a novel impulsive boundary value pantograph problem under Caputo proportional fractional derivative operator with respect to another function. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(5): 7817-7846. doi: 10.3934/math.2022438 |
Across the globe, the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has altered the delivery of healthcare services as patients must maintain their distance from caregivers, and still receive medical treatment. This has triggered a necessity for exploring means which minimizes the physical gap between patients and healthcare givers while offering health care and ensuring high medical protection at a reduced risk of exposure. Even though telehealth services are no replacement for conventional healthcare, its' usefulness in the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic is immense.
This research reviews the ardent utilization, barriers and recommendations with telehealth services for healthcare delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic.
An assessment of literature in five large digital databases; PubMed, Science Direct, Sage Pub, ProQuest, and Google Scholar was conducted. Inclusion criteria included studies defining telehealth/telemedicine, utilization, barriers and recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic from January 2020 to July 2021, written in English and published in peer-reviewed journals. Two reviewers independently assessed search results, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the included studies. Narrative synthesis was undertaken to summarize and report the findings.
Overall, the study discoveries which are most commonly stated as impediments for telehealth services' full utilization between patients and physicians beyond the scope of typical medical confinement are: infrastructure and internet access (20.00%), data privacy and security (13.33%), digital literacy (13.33%), reimbursement and liability (10.00%), and clinician and patient's unwillingness (6.67%).
The intrusion of coronavirus has accelerated the transition to telehealth services in healthcare delivery, but it has also provided a unique chance to demonstrate the critical role that telehealth can play in ensuring that people of all races, ethnicities, and communities receive high-quality treatment (justice). Healthcare professionals should emphasize the effectiveness of telehealth services as an alternate healthcare delivery method in promoting healthcare to all populace.
In last years, it was noted that several real-world phenomena cannot be modeled by partial or ordinary differential equations or classical difference equations defined using the standard integrals and derivatives. These problems required the concept of fractional calculus (fractional integrals and derivatives), where the classical calculus was insufficient. Differential equations of fractional order are considered to be interesting tools in the modeling of several problems in different fields of engineering and science, as electrochemistry, control, electromagnetic, porous media, viscoelasticity. See for example [1,2,3,4,5,6,7]. On the other hand, in the recent years impulsive differential equations have become essential as mathematical models of problems in social and physical sciences. There was a great development in impulsive theory in particular in the field of impulsive differential equations with fixed moments. For instance, see the works of Samoilenko and Perestyuk [8], Benchohra et al. [9], Lakshmikantham et al. [10], etc. Further works for differential equations at variable moments of impulse have been appeared. For example, we cite the papers of Frigon and O'Regan [11,12], Graef and Ouahab [13], Bajo and Liz [14], etc.
It is also observed that fixed point theory is an important mathematical tool to ensure the existence and uniqueness of many problems intervening nonlinear relations. As a consequence, existence and uniqueness problems of fractional differential equations have been resolved using fixed point techniques. This theory has been developed in many directions and has several applications. Moreover, we could apply it in different types of spaces, like metric spaces, abstract spaces, and Sobolev spaces. This use of fixed point theory makes very easier the resolution of many problems modeled by fractional ordinary, partial differential and difference equations. For instance, see [15,16,17,18,19,20].
The theory for impulsive fractional differential equations in Banach spaces have been sufficiently developed by Feckan et al. [21] by using fixed point techniques. In the real world, many phenomena are subject to transient external effects as they develop. In comparison to the entire duration of the phenomenon being observed, the durations of these external effects are incredibly brief. The logical conclusion is that these external forces are real impulses. Impulsive differential equations are now a major component of the modeling of physical real-world issues in order to study these abrupt shifts. Biological systems including heartbeat, blood flow, and impulse rate have been discussed in relation to many applications of this kind of impulsive differential equations. For more details, see, [22,23,24,25,26,27].
On the other hand, in last years the study of Hyers-Ulam (HU) stability analysis for nonlinear fractional differential equations has attracted the attention of several researchers. Note that HU stability is considered as an exact solution near the approximate solution for these equations with minimal error. The following works [28,29,30,31,32] deal with such a stability analysis. For Hyers-Ulam (HU) stabilities, there are generalized Hyers-Ulam (GHU), Hyers-Ulam-Rassias (HUR), and generalized Hyers-Ulam-Rassias (GHUR) stabilities.
Much of the work on the topic of fractional differential equations deals with the governing equations involving Riemann-Liouville and Caputo-type fractional derivatives. Another kind of fractional derivative is the Hadamard type [33], which was introduced in 1892. This derivative differs significantly from both the Riemann-Liouville type and the Caputo type in the sense that the kernel of the integral in the definition of the Hadamard derivative contains a logarithmic function of arbitrary exponent. It seems that the abstract fractional differential equations involving Hadamard fractional derivatives and Hilfer-Hadamard fractional derivatives have not been fully explored so far. Several applications of where the Hadamard derivative and the Hadamard integral arise can be found in the papers by Butzer, Kilbas and Trujillo [34,35,36]. Other important results dealing with Hadamard fractional calculus and Hadamard differential equations can be found in [37,38]. The presence of the δ-differential operator (δ=xddx) in the definition of Hadamard fractional derivatives could make their study uninteresting and less applicable than Riemann-Liouville and Caputo fractional derivatives. Moreover, this operator appears outside the integral in the definition of the Hadamard derivatives just like the usual derivative D=ddx is located outside the integral in the case of Riemann-Liouville, which makes the fractional derivative of a constant of these two types not equal to zero in general. Hadamard [33] proposed a fractional power of the form (xddx)α. This fractional derivative is invariant with respect to dilation on the whole axis.
The existence and HU stability of the following implicit FDEs involving Hadamard derivatives were investigated in [39] as follows:
{HDϖz(υ)=ϕ(υ,z(υ),HDϖz(υ)), ϖ∈(0,1), z(1)=z1, z1∈R, |
where υ∈[1,G], G>1, HDϖ refers to the Hadamard fractional (HF) derivative of order ϖ.
The following coupled system containing the Caputo derivative was examined in [40] for its existence, uniqueness, and several types of Hyers-Ulam stability:
{CDϖz(υ)=ϕ(υ,s(υ),CDϖz(υ)), υ∈U,CDθs(υ)=ψ(υ,z(υ),CDθs(υ)), υ∈U,z′(G)=z′′(0)=0, z(1)=ϱz(η) ϱ,η∈(0,1),s′(G)=s′′(0)=0, s(1)=ϱs(η) ϱ,η∈(0,1), |
where υ∈U=[0,1], ϖ,θ∈(2,3] and ϕ,ψ:U×R2→R are continuous functions.
For the following coupled system containing the Riemann-Liouville derivative, the authors of [41] demonstrated the existence, uniqueness, and several types of Hyers-Ulam stability:
{Dϖz(υ)=ϕ(υ,s(υ),Dϖz(υ)), υ∈U, Dθs(υ)=ψ(υ,z(υ),Dθs(υ)), υ∈U, Dϖ−2z(0+)=π1Dϖ−2z(G−), Dϖ−2z(0+)=ℓ1Dϖ−1z(G−),Dϖ−2s(0+)=π2Dϖ−2s(G−), Dϖ−2s(0+)=ℓ2Dϖ−1s(G−), |
where υ∈U=[0,G], G>0, ϖ,θ∈(1,2] and π1,π2,ℓ1,ℓ2≠1, Dϖ,Dθ are Riemann-Liouville derivatives of fractional orders ϖ, θ respectively and ϕ,ψ:U×R2→R are continuous functions.
Inspired by the previous work, we investigate the coupled impulsive implicit FDEs (CII-FDEs) incorporating Hadamard derivatives as follows:
{HDϖz(υ)=ϕ(υ,HDϖz(υ),HDθs(υ)), υ∈U, υ≠υi, i=1,2,...k,HDθs(υ)=ψ(υ,HDθs(υ),HDϖz(υ)), υ∈U, υ≠υj, j=1,2,...m,Δz(υi)=Iiz(υi), Δz′(υi)=˜Iiz(υi), i=1,2,...k, Δs(υj)=Ijs(υj), Δs′(υj)=˜Ijs(υj), j=1,2,...m, z(G)=1Γ(ϖ)∫G1ln(Gη)ϖ−1B(η,z(η))dηη, z′(G)=B∗(z), s(G)=1Γ(θ)∫G1ln(Gη)θ−1B(η,s(η))dηη, s′(G)=B∗(s), | (1.1) |
where ϖ,θ∈(1,2], ϕ,ψ:U×R2→R, B:U×C(U,R)→R and B∗:U→R are continuous functions and
Δz(υi)=z(υ+i)−z(υ−i), Δz′(υi)=z′(υ+i)−z′(υ−i),Δs(υi)=s(υ+i)−s(υ−i), Δs′(υi)=s′(υ+i)−s′(υ−i). |
The derivatives HDϖ,HDθ are the Hadamard derivative operators of order ϖ and θ, respectively; z(υ+i),s(υ+i) are right limits and z(υ−i),s(υ−i) are left limits; Ii,Ij,˜Ii,˜Ij:R→R are continuous functions. The system (1.1) is used to describe certain features of applied mathematics and physics such as blood flow problems, chemical engineering, thermoelasticity, underground water flow, and population dynamics. For more details, we refer the readers to see the monograph [42].
Using the Banach contraction and Kransnoselskii FP theorems, we establish necessary and sufficient criteria for the existence and uniqueness of a positive solution for the problem (1.1). Additionally, we analyze other Hyers-Ulam (HU) stabilities such as generalized Hyers-Ulam (GHU), Hyers-Ulam-Rassias (HUR), and generalized Hyers-Ulam-Rassias (GHUR) stabilities.
In this part, we present certain key terms and lemmas that are utilized throughout the rest of this paper, for more information, see [42,43].
Assume that PC(U,R+) equipped with the norms ‖z‖=max{|z(υ)|:υ∈U}, ‖s‖=max{|s(υ)|:υ∈U} is a Banach space (shortly, BS), then the products of these norms are also a BS under the norm ‖(z+s)‖=‖z‖+‖s‖. Assume that ℑ1 and ℑ2 represent the piecewise continuous function spaces described as
ℑ1=PC2−ϖ,ln(U,R+)={z:U→R+ so that z(υ+i),z′(υ+i) and z(υ−i),z′(υ−i) exist ,i=1,2,...k},ℑ2=PC2−θ,ln(U,R+)={s:U→R+ so that s(υ+j),s′(υ+j) and s(υ−j),s′(υ−j) exist ,j=1,2,...m}, |
with norms
‖z‖ℑ1=sup{|z(υ)ln(υ)2−ϖ|, υ∈U} and ‖s‖ℑ2=sup{|s(υ)ln(υ)2−θ|, υ∈U}, |
respectively. Clearly, the product ℑ=ℑ1×ℑ2 is a BS endowed with ‖(z+s)‖ℑ=‖z‖ℑ1+‖s‖ℑ2.
The following definitions are recalled from [44].
Definition 2.1. For the function z(υ), the Hadamard fractional (HF) integral of order ϖ is described as
HIϖz(υ)=1Γ(ϖ)∫υ1ln(υη)ϖ−1z(η)dηη, υ∈(1,G] |
where Γ(.) is the Gamma function.
Definition 2.2. For the function z(υ), the HF derivative of order ϖ∈[a−1,a), a∈Z+ is described as
HDϖz(υ)=1Γ(a−ϖ)(υddυ)a∫υxln(υη)a−ϖ+1z(η)dηη, υ∈(x,G]. |
Lemma 2.3. [45] Assume that ϖ>0 and z is any function, then the derivative equation HDϖz(υ)=0 has solutions below:
z(υ)=r1(lnυ)ϖ−1+r2(lnυ)ϖ−2+r3(lnυ)ϖ−3+...+ra(lnυ)ϖ−a, |
and the formula
HIϖHDϖz(υ)=z(υ)+r1(lnυ)ϖ−1+r2(lnυ)ϖ−2+r3(lnυ)ϖ−3+...+ra(lnυ)ϖ−a, |
is satisfied, where ri∈R, i=1,2,...,a and ϖ∈(a−1,a).
Theorem 2.4. [46] Assume that Ξ is a non-empty, convex and closed subset of a BS ℑ. Let E and ˜E be operators so that
(1) for z,s∈Ξ, E(z,s)+˜E(z,s)∈Ξ;
(2) the operator ˜E is completely continuous;
(3) the operator Ξ is contractive.
Then there is a solution (z,s)∈Ξ for the operator equation E(z,s)+˜E(z,s)=(z,s).
The definitions and observations below are taken from [47,48].
Definition 3.1. The coupled problem (1.1) is called HU stable if there are Λϖ,θ=max{Λϖ,Λθ}>0 so that, for φ=max{φϖ,φθ} and for each solution (z,s)∈ℑ to inequalities
{|HDϖz(υ)−ϕ(υ,HDϖz(υ),HDθs(υ))|≤φϖ, υ∈U, |Δz(υi)−Iiz(υi)|≤φϖ, |Δz′(υi)−˜Iiz(υi)|≤φϖ, i=1,2,...k,|HDθs(υ)−ϕ(υ,HDθs(υ),HDϖz(υ))|≤φθ, υ∈U, |Δs(υj)−Ijs(υj)|≤φθ, |Δs′(υj)−˜Ijs(υj)|≤φθ, j=1,2,...m, | (3.1) |
there is a unique solution (˜z,˜s)∈ℑ with
‖(z,s)−(˜z,˜s)‖ℑ≤Λϖ,θφ, υ∈U. |
Definition 3.2. The coupled problem (1.1) is called GHU stable if there is Φ∈C(R+,R+) with ξ(0)=0, so that, for any solution (z,s)∈ℑ of (3.1), there is a unique solution (˜z,˜s)∈ℑ of with of (1.1) fulfilling
‖(z,s)−(˜z,˜s)‖ℑ≤Φ(φ), υ∈U. |
Set ℧ϖ,θ=max{℧ϖ,℧θ}∈C(U,R) and Λ℧ϖ,℧θ=max{Λ℧ϖ,Λ℧θ}>0.
Definition 3.3. The coupled problem (1.1) is called HUR stable with respect to ℧ϖ,θ if there is a constant Λ℧ϖ,℧θ so that, for any solution (z,s)∈ℑ for the inequalities below
{|HDϖz(υ)−ϕ(υ,HDϖz(υ),HDθs(υ))|≤℧ϖ(υ)φϖ, υ∈U,|HDθs(υ)−ϕ(υ,HDθs(υ),HDϖz(υ))|≤℧θ(υ)φθ, υ∈U, | (3.2) |
there is a unique solution (˜z,˜s)∈ℑ with
‖(z,s)−(˜z,˜s)‖ℑ≤Λ℧ϖ,℧θ℧ϖ,θφ, υ∈U. | (3.3) |
Definition 3.4. The coupled problem (1.1) is called GHUR stable with respect to ℧ϖ,θ if there is a constant Λ℧ϖ,℧θ so that, for any a proximate solution (z,s)∈ℑ of (3.2), there is a unique solution (˜z,˜s)∈ℑ of with of (1.1) fulfilling
‖(z,s)−(˜z,˜s)‖ℑ≤Λ℧ϖ,℧θ℧ϖ,θ(υ), υ∈U. |
Remark 3.5. If there are functions ℜϕ,ℜψ∈C(U,R) depending upon z, s, respectively, so that
(R1) |ℜϕ(υ)|≤φϖ, |ℜψ(υ)|≤φθ, υ∈U;
(R2)
{HDϖz(υ)=ϕ(υ,HDϖz(υ),HDθs(υ))+ℜϕ(υ), Δz(υi)=Ii(z(υi))+ℜϕi, Δz′(υi)=˜Ii(z(υi))+ℜϕi,HDθs(υ)=ϕ(υ,HDθs(υ),HDϖz(υ))+ℜψ(υ), Δs(υj)=Ij(s(υj))+ℜψj, Δs′(υj)=˜Ij(s(υj))+ℜψj. |
Then, (z,s)∈ℑ is a solution of the system of inequalities (3.1).
In the following part, we establish requirements for the existence and uniqueness of solutions to the suggested system (1.1)
Theorem 4.1. For the function w, the solutions of the following subsequent linear impulsive BVP
{HDϖz(υ)=w(υ), υ∈U, υ≠υi, i=1,2,...k,Δz(υi)=Ii(z(υi)), Δz′(υi)=˜Ii(z(υi)), υ≠υi, i=1,2,...k,z(G)=1Γ(ϖ)∫G1ln(Gη)ϖ−1B(η,z(η))dηη, z′(G)=B∗(z), |
takes the form
z(υ)=GD0(ϖ)B∗(z)(lnυ)ϖ−2+u∑i=1D1i(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Iiz(υi)+u∑i=1D2i(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2˜Iiz(υi)+D3(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ)∫G1ln(Gη)ϖ−1B(η,z(η))dηη+D0(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ−1)∫Gυuln(Gη)ϖ−2w(η)dηη+D4(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ)∫Gυuln(Gη)ϖ−1w(η)dηη+u∑i=1D5i(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ)∫υiυi−1ln(υiη)ϖ−1w(η)dηη+u∑i=1lnυ3−ϖ(logυiυ)ϖ−2D5i(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ−1)∫υiυi−1ln(υiη)ϖ−2w(η)dηη+1Γ(ϖ)∫υυuln(υη)ϖ−1w(η)dηη, | (4.1) |
where u=1,2,...,k and
D0(ϖ)=ln(υG)ln(G)2−ϖ,D1i(ϖ)=(ϖ−1)(lnυ−ϖ+2)(lnυi)3−ϖ−(ϖ−2)(lnυ2−ϖ+1)(lnυi)2−ϖlnυi,D2i(ϖ)=lnυυi(3−ϖ)(lnυi)2−ϖ,D3(ϖ)=(ϖ−1−logGυϖ−2)(lnυ)2−ϖ,D4(ϖ)=logGυGϖ−1(lnG)2−ϖ,D5i(ϖ)=(lnυϖ−1Gϖ−2+logυi(Gυiυ2)ϖ−2)(lnυi)2−ϖ. |
Proof. Assume that
HDϖz(υ)=w(υ), ϖ∈(1,2], υ∈U. | (4.2) |
Using Lemma 2.3, for υ∈(1,υ1], we have
z(υ)=r1(lnυ)ϖ−1+r2(lnυ)ϖ−2+1Γ(ϖ)∫υ1ln(υη)ϖ−1w(η)dηη,z′(υ)=r1(ϖ−1)υ(lnυ)ϖ−2+r2(ϖ−2)υ(lnυ)ϖ−3+1Γ(ϖ−1)∫υ11υln(υη)ϖ−2w(η)dηη. | (4.3) |
Again, applying Lemma 2.3, for υ∈(υ1,υ2], we get
z(υ)=l1(lnυ)ϖ−1+l2(lnυ)ϖ−2+1Γ(ϖ)∫υυ1ln(υη)ϖ−1w(η)dηη,z′(υ)=l1(ϖ−1)υ(lnυ)ϖ−2+l2(ϖ−2)υ(lnυ)ϖ−3+1Γ(ϖ−1)∫υυ11υln(υη)ϖ−2w(η)dηη. | (4.4) |
Using initial impulses
l1=r1−(ϖ−2)(lnυ1)1−ϖI1(z(υ1))+υ1(lnυ1)2−ϖ˜I1(z(υ1))+(lnυ1)2−ϖΓ(ϖ−1)∫υ11ln(υ1η)ϖ−2w(η)dηη−(ϖ−2)(lnυ1)1−ϖΓ(ϖ)∫υ11ln(υ1η)ϖ−1w(η)dηη,l2=r2+(ϖ−1)(lnυ1)2−ϖI1(z(υ1))−υ1(lnυ1)3−ϖ˜I1(z(υ1))−(lnυ1)3−ϖΓ(ϖ−1)∫υ11ln(υ1η)ϖ−2w(η)dηη+(ϖ−1)(lnυ1)2−ϖΓ(ϖ)∫υ11ln(υ1η)ϖ−1w(η)dηη. |
From l1 and l2 on (4.4), one has
z(υ)=r1(lnυ)ϖ−1−r2(lnυ)ϖ−2+((ϖ−1)−(ϖ−2)(logυ1υ))(logυ1υ)ϖ−2I1(z(υ1))+υ1(lnυ−lnυ1)(logυ1υ)ϖ−2˜I1(z(υ1))+(lnυ−lnυ1)(logυ1υ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ−1)∫υ11ln(υ1η)ϖ−2w(η)dηη+((ϖ−1)−(ϖ−2)(logυ1υ))(logυ1υ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ)∫υ11ln(υ1η)ϖ−2w(η)dηη+1Γ(ϖ)∫υυ1ln(υη)ϖ−1w(η)dηη. |
Analogously for υ∈(υu,G), we have
z(υ)=r1(lnυ)ϖ−1+r2(lnυ)ϖ−2+u∑i=1((ϖ−1)−(ϖ−2)(logυiυ))(logυiυ)ϖ−2Ii(z(υi))+u∑i=1υi(lnυ−lnυi)(logυiυ)ϖ−2˜Ii(z(υi))+u∑i=1(lnυ−lnυi)(logυiυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ−1)∫υiυi−1ln(υiη)ϖ−2w(η)dηη+u∑i=1((ϖ−1)−(ϖ−2)(logυiυ))(logυiυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ)∫υiυi−1ln(υiη)ϖ−2w(η)dηη+1Γ(ϖ)∫υυuln(υη)ϖ−1w(η)dηη, | (4.5) |
and
z′(υ)=(ϖ−1)r1υ(lnυ)ϖ−2+(ϖ−1)r2υ(lnυ)ϖ−3+u∑i=1(ϖ−1)(ϖ−2)υ(logυe−logeυi)(logυiυ)ϖ−2Ii(z(υi))+u∑i=1υiυ[(ϖ−1)−(ϖ−2)logυυi](logυiυ)ϖ−2˜Ii(z(υi))+1υΓ(ϖ−1)∫υυuln(υη)ϖ−2w(η)dηη,+u∑i=1((ϖ−1)−(ϖ−2)logυυi)(logυiυ)ϖ−2υΓ(ϖ−1)∫υiυi−1ln(υiη)ϖ−2w(η)dηη+u∑i=1(ϖ−1)(ϖ−2)(logυe−logeυi)(logυiυ)ϖ−2υΓ(ϖ)∫υiυi−1ln(υiη)ϖ−2w(η)dηη. | (4.6) |
Applying the boundary stipulations z(G)=1Γ(ϖ)∫G1ln(Gη)ϖ−1B(η,z(η))dηη and z′(G)=B∗(z), we obtain that
r1=GB∗(z)ln(G)2−ϖ−(lnG)1−ϖ(ϖ−2)Γ(ϖ)∫G1ln(Gη)ϖ−1B(η,z(η))dηη+(lnG)1−ϖΓ(ϖ)∫Gυuln(Gη)ϖ−1w(η)dηη+u∑i=1(lnυϖ−1i−ϖ−2lnυi)(lnυi)2−ϖIi(z(υi))−(ϖ−2)u∑i=1υi(lnυi)ϖ−1˜Ii(z(υi))−(ϖ−2)Γ(ϖ−1)u∑i=1(lnυi)2−ϖ∫υiυi−1ln(υiη)ϖ−2w(η)dηη−(lnG)2−ϖΓ(ϖ−1)∫Gυuln(Gη)ϖ−2w(η)dηη+1Γ(ϖ)u∑i=1(lnυϖ−1i−ϖ−2lnυi)(lnυi)2−ϖ∫υiυi−1ln(υiη)ϖ−1w(η)dηη, |
and
r2=(lnG)2−ϖΓ(ϖ−1)∫G1ln(Gη)ϖ−1B(η,z(η))dηη−GB∗(z)ln(G)3−ϖ+u∑i=1υi(lnυi)3−ϖ˜Ii(z(υi))+(ϖ−1)u∑i=1(lnG(ϖ−2)(logυie−logeυi)−1)(lnυi)2−ϖIi(z(υi))+(lnG)3−ϖΓ(ϖ−1)∫υυuln(Gη)ϖ−2w(η)dηη+1Γ(ϖ−1)u∑i=1(lnG(ϖ−2)(logυie−logeυi)−1)(lnυi)2−ϖ∫υiυi−1ln(υiη)ϖ−1w(η)dηη+1Γ(ϖ−1)u∑i=1(lnυi)3−ϖ∫υiυi−1ln(υiη)ϖ−2w(η)dηη−(lnG)2−ϖΓ(ϖ−1)∫Gυiln(Gη)ϖ−1w(η)dηη, |
for u=1,2,...,k. Substituting r1 and r2 in (4.5), we have (4.1).
Corollary 4.2. Theorem 2.4 provides the following solution for our coupled problem (1.1):
z(υ)=GD0(ϖ)B∗(z)(lnυ)ϖ−2+u∑i=1D1i(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Ii(zi)+u∑i=1D2i(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2˜Ii(zi)+D3(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ)∫G1ln(Gη)ϖ−1B(η,z(η))dηη+D0(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ−1)∫Gυuln(Gη)ϖ−2ϕ(η,HDϖz(η),HDθs(η))dηη+D4(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ)∫Gυuln(Gη)ϖ−1ϕ(η,HDϖz(η),HDθs(η))dηη+u∑i=1D5i(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ)∫υiυi−1ln(υiη)ϖ−1ϕ(η,HDϖz(η),HDθs(η))dηη+u∑i=1lnυ3−ϖ(logυiυ)ϖ−2D5i(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ−1)∫υiυi−1ln(υiη)ϖ−2ϕ(η,HDϖz(η),HDθs(η))dηη+1Γ(ϖ)∫υυuln(υη)ϖ−1ϕ(η,HDϖz(η),HDθs(η))dηη, | (4.7) |
where u=1,2,...,k and
s(υ)=GD0(θ)B∗(s)(lnυ)θ−2+u∑j=1D1j(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Ij(sj)+u∑j=1D2j(θ)(lnυ)θ−2˜Ij(sj)+D3(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Γ(θ)∫G1ln(Gη)θ−1B(η,s(η))dηη+D0(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Γ(θ−1)∫Gυuln(Gη)θ−2ψ(η,HDθs(η),HDϖz(η))dηη+D4(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Γ(θ)∫Gυuln(Gη)θ−1ψ(η,HDθs(η),HDϖz(η))dηη+u∑j=1D5i(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Γ(θ)∫υjυj−1ln(υjη)θ−1ψ(η,HDθs(η),HDϖz(η))dηη+u∑j=1lnυ3−θ(logυjυ)θ−2D5j(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Γ(θ−1)∫υjυj−1ln(υiη)θ−2ψ(η,HDθs(η),HDϖz(η))dηη,+1Γ(θ)∫υυuln(υη)θ−1ψ(η,HDθs(η),HDϖz(η))dηη, | (4.8) |
where u=1,2,...,m.
For convenience, we use the notations below:
p(υ)=ϕ(υ,a1(υ),a2(υ))≤ϕ(υ,z(υ),a(υ)) and a(υ)=ψ(υ,p1(υ),p2(υ))≤ψ(υ,s(υ),p(υ)). |
Hence, for υ∈U, Eqs (4.7) and (4.8) can be written as
z(υ)=GD0(ϖ)B∗(z)(lnυ)ϖ−2+u∑i=1D1i(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Ii(zi)+u∑i=1D2i(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2˜Ii(zi)+D3(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ)∫G1ln(Gη)ϖ−1B(η,z(η))dηη+D0(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ−1)∫Gυuln(Gη)ϖ−2p(η)dηη+D4(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ)∫Gυuln(Gη)ϖ−1p(η)dηη+u∑i=1D5i(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ)∫υiυi−1ln(υiη)ϖ−1p(η)dηη+u∑i=1lnυ3−ϖ(logυiυ)ϖ−2D5i(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ−1)∫υiυi−1ln(υiη)ϖ−2p(η)dηη+1Γ(ϖ)∫υυuln(υη)ϖ−1p(η)dηη, |
for u=1,2,...,k and
s(υ)=GD0(θ)B∗(s)(lnυ)θ−2+u∑j=1D1j(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Ij(sj)+u∑j=1D2j(θ)(lnυ)θ−2˜Ij(sj)+D3(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Γ(θ)∫G1ln(Gη)θ−1B(η,s(η))dηη+D0(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Γ(θ−1)∫Gυuln(Gη)θ−2a(η)dηη+D4(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Γ(θ)∫Gυuln(Gη)θ−1a(η)dηη+u∑j=1D5i(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Γ(θ)∫υjυj−1ln(υjη)θ−1a(η)dηη+u∑j=1lnυ3−θ(logυjυ)θ−2D5j(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Γ(θ−1) intυjυj−1ln(υiη)θ−2a(η)dηη+1Γ(θ)∫υυuln(υη)θ−1a(η)dηη, |
for u=1,2,...,m.
If z and s are solutions to the CII-FDEs (1.1), then for υ∈U, we can write
z(υ)=GD0(ϖ)B∗(z)(lnυ)ϖ−2+u∑i=1D1i(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Ii(zi)+u∑i=1D2i(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2˜Ii(zi)+D3(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ)∫G1ln(Gη)ϖ−1B(η,z(η))dηη+D0(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ−1)∫Gυuln(Gη)ϖ−2ϕ(η,a1(η),a2(η))dηη+D4(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ)∫Gυuln(Gη)ϖ−1ϕ(η,a1(η),a2(η))dηη+u∑i=1D5i(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ)∫υiυi−1ln(υiη)ϖ−1ϕ(η,a1(η),a2(η))dηη+u∑i=1lnυ3−ϖ(logυiυ)ϖ−2D5i(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ−1)∫υiυi−1ln(υiη)ϖ−2ϕ(η,a1(η),a2(η))dηη+1Γ(ϖ)∫υυuln(υη)ϖ−1ϕ(η,a1(η),a2(η))dηη, |
for u=1,2,...,k and
s(υ)=GD0(θ)B∗(s)(lnυ)θ−2+u∑j=1D1j(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Ij(sj)+u∑j=1D2j(θ)(lnυ)θ−2˜Ij(sj)+D3(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Γ(θ)∫G1ln(Gη)θ−1B(η,s(η))dηη+D0(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Γ(θ−1)∫Gυuln(Gη)θ−2ψ(η,p1(η),p2(η))dηη+D4(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Γ(θ)∫Gυuln(Gη)θ−1ψ(η,p1(η),p2(η))dηη+u∑j=1D5i(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Γ(θ)∫υjυj−1ln(υjη)θ−1ψ(η,p1(η),p2(η))dηη+u∑j=1lnυ3−θ(logυjυ)θ−2D5j(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Γ(θ−1)∫υjυj−1ln(υiη)θ−2ψ(η,p1(η),p2(η))dηη+1Γ(θ)∫υυuln(υη)θ−1ψ(η,p1(η),p2(η))dηη, |
for u=1,2,...,m.
Our next step is to convert the considered system (1.1) into a FP problem. Give the definition of the operators E,˜E:ℑ→ℑ as
E(z,s)(υ)=(E1z(υ),E2z(υ)) and ˜E(z,s)(υ)=(E1(z,s)(υ),E2(s,z)(υ)), |
where
{E1(z(υ))=GD0(ϖ)B∗(z)(lnυ)ϖ−2+∑ui=1D1i(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Ii(zi)+∑ui=1D2i(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2˜Ii(zi)+D3(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ)∫G1ln(Gη)ϖ−1B(η,z(η))dηη, u=1,2,...,k,E2(s(υ))=GD0(θ)B∗(s)(lnυ)θ−2+∑uj=1D1j(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Ij(sj)+∑uj=1D2j(θ)(lnυ)θ−2˜Ij(sj)+D3(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Γ(θ)∫G1ln(Gη)θ−1B(η,s(η))dηη, u=1,2,...,m, | (4.9) |
and
{E1(z,s)(υ)=D0(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ−1)∫Gυuln(Gη)ϖ−2ϕ(η,HDϖz(η),HDθs(η))dηη+D4(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ)∫Gυuln(Gη)ϖ−1ϕ(η,HDϖz(η),HDθs(η))dηη+∑ui=1D5i(ϖ)(lnυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ)∫υiυi−1ln(υiη)ϖ−1ϕ(η,HDϖz(η),HDθs(η))dηη+∑ui=1lnυ3−ϖ(logυiυ)ϖ−2Γ(ϖ−1)∫υiυi−1ln(υiη)ϖ−2ϕ(η,HDϖz(η),HDθs(η))dηη+1Γ(ϖ)∫υυuln(υη)ϖ−1ϕ(η,a1(η),a2(η))dηη, u=1,2,...,k,E2(s,z)(υ)=D0(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Γ(θ−1)∫Gυuln(Gη)θ−2ψ(η,HDθs(η),HDϖz(η))dηη+D4(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Γ(θ)∫Gυuln(Gη)θ−1ψ(η,HDθs(η),HDϖz(η))dηη+∑uj=1D5i(θ)(lnυ)θ−2Γ(θ)∫υjυj−1ln(υjη)θ−1ψ(η,HDθs(η),HDϖz(η))dηη+∑uj=1lnυ3−θ(logυjυ)θ−2Γ(θ−1)∫υjυj−1ln(υiη)θ−2ψ(η,HDθs(η),HDϖz(η))dηη+1Γ(θ)∫υυuln(υη)θ−1ψ(η,HDθs(η),HDϖz(η))dηη, u=1,2,...,m. | (4.10) |
The preceding assertions must be true in order to conduct further analysis:
(A1) For υ∈U and a1,a2,p1,p2∈R, there exist ℓ0,ℓ1,ℓ2,ρ0,ρ1,ρ2∈C(U,R+), so that
|ϕ(υ,a1(υ),a2(υ))|≤ℓ0(υ)+ℓ1(υ)|a1(υ)|+ℓ2(υ)|a2(υ)|,|ψ(υ,p1(υ),p2(υ))|≤ρ0(υ)+ρ1(υ)|p1(υ)|+ρ2(υ)|p2(υ)|, |
with ˜ℓ0=supυ∈Uℓ0(υ), ˜ℓ1=supυ∈Uℓ1(υ), ˜ℓ2=supυ∈Uℓ2(υ), ˜ρ0=supυ∈Uρ0(υ), ˜ρ1=supυ∈Uρ1(υ), and ˜ρ2=supυ∈Uρ2(υ)<1.
(A2) For the continuous functions B∗,Iu,˜Iu:R→R there are positive constants
OB,OI,O˜I,O′′I,O′′˜I,˜OB,˜OI,˜O˜I,˜O′′I,˜O′′˜I so that for any (z,s)∈ℑ
|B∗(z)|≤OB∗, |Iu(z(υ))|≤OI|z|+O′′I, |˜Iu(z(υ))|≤O˜I|z|+O′′˜I,|B∗(s)|≤˜OB∗, |Iu(s(υ))|≤˜OI|s|+˜O′′I, |˜Iu(s(υ))|≤˜O˜I|s|+˜O′′˜I, |
where u={0,1,2,...,k}.
(A3) For all υ∈U and s,z∈R, there are ϱ1,δ1,ϱ2,δ2∈C(U,R+), so that
|B(υ,z(υ))|≤ϱ1(υ)+δ1|z(υ)| and |B(υ,s(υ))|≤ϱ2(υ)+δ1|s(υ)|, |
with ϱ∗1=supυ∈Uϱ1(υ), δ∗1=supυ∈Uδ1(υ), ϱ∗2=supυ∈Uϱ2(υ), δ∗2=supυ∈Uδ2(υ)<1.
(A4) For each a1,a2,˜a1,˜a2,p1,p2,˜p1,˜p2∈R, and for all υ∈U, there are constants Lϕ,Lψ>0, and ˜Lϕ,˜Lψ∈(0,1) so that
|ϕ(υ,a1(υ),a2(υ))−ϕ(υ,˜a1(υ),˜a2(υ))|≤Lϕ|a1−˜a1|+˜Lϕ|a2−˜a2|,|ψ(υ,p1(υ),p2(υ))−ψ(υ,˜p1(υ),˜p2(υ))|≤Lψ|p1−˜p1|+˜Lψ|p2−˜p2|. |
(A5) For the continuous functions Iu,˜Iu:R→R, there are positive constants LI,L˜I,˜LI,˜L˜I so for any (z,s),(˜z,˜s)∈ℑ
|Iu(z(υ))−Iu(˜z(υ))|≤LI|z−˜z|, |Iu(s(υ))−Iu(˜s(υ))|≤˜LI|s−˜s|, |˜Iu(z(υ))−˜Iu(˜z(υ))|≤L˜I|z−˜z||˜Iu(s(υ))−˜Iu(˜s(υ))|≤˜L˜I|s−˜s|. |
(A6) For each s,z,˜s,˜z∈R and for all υ∈U, there are LB,LB∗,˜LB,˜LB∗>0, so that
|B(υ,z(υ))−B(υ,˜z(υ))|≤LB|z−˜z|, |B∗(z)−B∗(˜z)|≤LB∗|z−˜z|,|B(υ,s(υ))−B(υ,˜s(υ))|≤˜LB|s−˜s|, |B∗(s)−B∗(˜s)|≤˜LB∗|z−˜z|. |
Here, we demonstrate that the operator E+˜E has at least one FP using Kransnoselskii's FP theorem. For this, we choose a closed ball
ℑx={(z,s)∈ℑ:‖(z,s)‖≤y, ‖z‖≤y2 and ‖s‖≤y2}⊂ℑ, |
where
x≥M∗1+M∗∗1+(˜ℓ0+˜ℓ2˜ρ0)M∗3+(˜ρ0+˜ρ2˜ℓ0)M∗∗3˜ℓ2˜ρ2−11−M∗2−M∗∗2−Y∗1M∗2+Y∗2M∗∗2˜ℓ2˜ρ2−1. |
Theorem 4.3. There exists at least one solution to the CII-FDEs (1.1) provided that the assertions (A1) and (A2) are true.
Proof. For any (z,s)∈ℑy, we get
‖E(z,s)(υ)+˜E(z,s)‖ℑ≤‖E1(z)‖ℑ1+‖E2(s)‖ℑ2+‖˜E1(z,s)‖ℑ1+‖˜E1(z,s)‖ℑ2. | (4.11) |
From (4.9), we have
|E1z(υ)(lnυ)2−ϖ|≤G|D0(ϖ)||B∗(z)|+u∑i=1|D1i(ϖ)||Ii(z(υi))|+u∑i=1|D2i(ϖ)||˜Ii(z(υi))|+|D3(ϖ)|Γ(ϖ)∫G1|ln(Gη)ϖ−1||B(η,z(η))|dηη, |
for u=1,2,...,k. This leads to
‖E1(z)‖ℑ1≤GOB∗|D0(ϖ)|+u|D1(ϖ)|(OI‖z‖+O′′I)+u|D2(ϖ)|(O˜I‖z‖+O′′˜I)−|D3(ϖ)|(ϱ∗1(υ)+δ∗1‖z‖))ϖΓ(ϖ)|ln(G)ϖ|=GOB∗|D0(ϖ)|+uO′′I|D1(ϖ)|+uO′′˜I|D2(ϖ)|+uOI|D1(ϖ)|‖z‖+uO˜I|D2(ϖ)|‖z‖−|D3(ϖ)|(ϱ∗1(υ)+δ∗1‖z‖))Γ(ϖ+1)|ln(G)ϖ|≤M∗1+M∗2‖z‖. | (4.12) |
Analogously, one can write
‖E2(z)‖ℑ2≤M∗∗1+M∗∗2‖s‖, | (4.13) |
where
M∗1=GOB∗|D0(ϖ)|+uO′′I|D1(ϖ)|+uO′′˜I|D2(ϖ)|−|D3(ϖ)|ϱ∗1(υ)Γ(ϖ+1)|ln(G)ϖ|, u=1,2,...,k,M∗2=uOI|D1(ϖ)|+uO˜I|D2(ϖ)|−δ∗1|D3(ϖ)|Γ(ϖ+1)|ln(G)ϖ|, u=1,2,...,k,M∗∗1=G˜OB∗|D0(θ)|+u˜O′′I|D1(θ)|+u˜O′′˜I|D2(θ)|−|D3(θ)|ϱ∗2(υ)Γ(θ+1)|ln(G)θ|, u=1,2,...,m,M∗∗2=u˜OI|D1(θ)|+u˜O˜I|D2(θ)|−δ∗2|D3(θ)|Γ(θ+1)|ln(G)θ|, u=1,2,...,m. |
Further, we obtain for u=1,2,...,k, that
|˜E1(z,s)(υ)(lnυ)2−ϖ|≤|D0(ϖ)|Γ(ϖ−1)∫Gυu|ln(Gη)ϖ−2||p(η)|dηη+|D4(ϖ)|Γ(ϖ)∫Gυu|ln(Gη)ϖ−1||p(η)|dηη+u∑i=1|D5i(ϖ)|Γ(ϖ)∫υiυi−1|ln(υiη)ϖ−1||p(η)|dηη+|(lnυ)2−ϖ|Γ(ϖ)∫υυu|ln(υη)ϖ−1||p(η)|dηη+u∑i=1|lnυ3−ϖ(lnυi)2−ϖ|Γ(ϖ−1)∫υiυi−1ln(υiη)ϖ−2|p(η)|dηη. | (4.14) |
From assertion (A1), we can write
|p(υ)|=|ϕ(υ,a1(υ),a2(υ))|≤ϕ(υ,z(υ),a(υ))≤ℓ0(υ)+ℓ1(υ)|z(υ)|+ℓ2(υ)|a(υ)|=ℓ0(υ)+ℓ1(υ)|z(υ)|+ℓ2(υ)|ψ(υ,p1(υ),p2(υ))|≤ℓ0(υ)+ℓ1(υ)|z(υ)|+ℓ2(υ)|ψ(υ,s(υ),p(υ))|≤ℓ0(υ)+ℓ1(υ)|z(υ)|+ℓ2(υ)[ρ0(υ)+ρ1(υ)|s(υ)|+ρ2(υ)|p(υ)|]≤ℓ0(υ)+ℓ2(υ)ρ0(υ)1−ℓ2(υ)ρ2(υ)+ℓ1(υ)|z(υ)|+ℓ2(υ)ρ1(υ)|s(υ)|1−ℓ2(υ)ρ2(υ), |
which implies that
‖p‖≤˜ℓ0+˜ℓ2˜ρ01−˜ℓ2˜ρ2+˜ℓ1‖z‖+˜ℓ2˜ρ1‖s‖1−˜ℓ2˜ρ2. | (4.15) |
Taking supυ∈U on (4.14) and using (4.15), one has
‖˜E1(z,s)‖ℑ1≤(˜ℓ0+˜ℓ2˜ρ0˜ℓ2˜ρ2−1+˜ℓ1‖z‖+˜ℓ2˜ρ1‖s‖˜ℓ2˜ρ2−1)×(|D0(ϖ)||ln(Gυu)ϖ−1|Γ(ϖ)+|D4(ϖ)||ln(Gυu)ϖ|Γ(ϖ+1)+u|D5(ϖ)||(lnυiυi−1)ϖ|Γ(ϖ+1)+|(lnυ)2−ϖ||(lnυυu)ϖ|Γ(ϖ+1)+u|lnυ3−ϖ(lnυi)2−ϖ||(lnυiυi−1)ϖ−1|Γ(ϖ))≤(˜ℓ0+˜ℓ2˜ρ0)M∗3˜ℓ2˜ρ2−1+(˜ℓ1‖z‖+˜ℓ2˜ρ1‖s‖)M∗3˜ℓ2˜ρ2−1≤(˜ℓ0+˜ℓ2˜ρ0)M∗3˜ℓ2˜ρ2−1+Y∗1M∗3˜ℓ2˜ρ2−1‖(z,s)‖. | (4.16) |
In the same scenario, we get
‖˜E2(z,s)‖ℑ2≤(˜ρ0+˜ρ2˜ℓ0)M∗∗3˜ℓ2˜ρ2−1+Y∗2M∗∗3˜ℓ2˜ρ2−1‖(z,s)‖, | (4.17) |
where
M∗3=(|D0(ϖ)||ln(Gυu)ϖ−1|Γ(ϖ)+|D4(ϖ)||ln(Gυu)ϖ|Γ(ϖ+1)+u|D5(ϖ)||(lnυiυi−1)ϖ|Γ(ϖ+1)+|(lnυ)2−ϖ||(lnυυu)ϖ|Γ(ϖ+1)+u|lnυ3−ϖ(lnυi)2−ϖ||(lnυiυi−1)ϖ−1|Γ(ϖ)), u=1,2,...,k,M∗∗3=(|D0(θ)||ln(Gυu)θ−1|Γ(θ)+|D4(θ)||ln(Gυu)θ|Γ(θ+1)+u|D5(θ)||(lnυiυi−1)θ|Γ(θ+1)+|(lnυ)2−θ||(lnυυu)θ|Γ(θ+1)+u|lnυ3−θ(lnυi)2−θ||(lnυiυi−1)θ−1|Γ(θ)), u=1,2,...,m,Y∗1=max{˜ℓ1,˜ℓ2˜ρ1}, Y∗2=max{˜ρ2˜ℓ1,˜ρ1}. |
Applying (4.12), (4.13), (4.16) and (4.17) in (4.11), we have
‖E(z,s)+˜E(z,s)‖ℑ≤M∗1+M∗∗1+(˜ℓ0+˜ℓ2˜ρ0)M∗3+(˜ρ0+˜ρ2˜ℓ0)M∗∗3˜ℓ2˜ρ2−1+Y∗1M∗3+Y∗2M∗∗3˜ℓ2˜ρ2−1‖(z,s)‖+M∗2‖z‖+M∗∗2‖s‖≤M∗1+M∗∗1+(˜ℓ0+˜ℓ2˜ρ0)M∗3+(˜ρ0+˜ρ2˜ℓ0)M∗∗3˜ℓ2˜ρ2−1+(M∗2+M∗∗2+Y∗1M∗3+Y∗2M∗∗3˜ℓ2˜ρ2−1)‖(z,s)‖≤x, |
which implies that E(z,s)(υ)+˜E(z,s)∈ℑx. After that, for any υ∈U and s,z,˜s,˜z∈ℑ, one writes
‖E(z,s)−E(˜z,˜s)‖ℑ≤‖E1(z)−E1(˜z)‖ℑ1+‖E2(s)−E2(˜s)‖ℑ2≤G|D0(ϖ)||B∗(z)−B∗(˜z)|+u∑i=1|D1i(ϖ)||Ii(zi)−Ii(˜zi)|+u∑i=1|D2i(ϖ)||˜Ii(zi)−˜Ii(˜zi)|+|D3(ϖ)|Γ(ϖ)∫G1|ln(Gη)ϖ−1||B(η,z(η))−B(η,˜z(η))|dηη+G|D0(θ)||B∗(s)−B∗(˜s)|+u∑j=1D1j(θ)|Ij(sj)−Ij(˜sj)|+u∑j=1D2j(θ)|˜Ij(sj)−˜Ij(˜sj)|+|D3(θ)|Γ(θ)∫G1|ln(Gη)θ−1||B(η,s(η))−B(η,˜s(η))|dηη. |
Applying (A5) and (A6), one has
‖E(z,s)−E(˜z,˜s)‖ℑ≤[GLB∗|D0(ϖ)|+uLI|D1(ϖ)|+uL˜I|D2(ϖ)|−LB|D3(ϖ)||(lnG)ϖ|Γ(ϖ+1)]‖z−˜z‖+[G˜LB∗|D0(θ)|+u˜LI|D1(θ)|+u˜L˜I|D2(θ)|−˜LB|D3(θ)||(lnG)θ|Γ(θ+1)]‖s−˜s‖≤L(Δ1+Δ2)‖(z−˜z,s−˜s)‖, |
where
L=max{LB∗,LI,L˜I,˜LB∗,˜LI,˜L˜I,LB,˜LB}, |
and
Δ1=G|D0(ϖ)|+u|D1(ϖ)|+u|D2(ϖ)|−|D3(ϖ)||(lnG)ϖ|Γ(ϖ+1), u=1,2,...,k,Δ2=G|D0(θ)|+u|D1(θ)|+u|D2(θ)|−|D3(θ)||(lnG)θ|Γ(θ+1), u=1,2,...,m. |
Hence, E is a contraction mapping. Now, we claim that ˜E is continuous and compact. For this, we build a sequence Gn=(zn,sn) in ℑ so that limn→∞(zn,sn)=(z,s)∈ℑx. Hence, we obtain
‖˜E(z,s)−˜E(zn,sn)‖ℑ≤‖˜E1(zn,sn)−˜E1(z,s)‖ℑ1+‖˜E2(zn,sn)−˜E2(z,s)‖ℑ2. | (4.18) |
Since
‖˜E1(zn,sn)−˜E1(z,s)‖ℑ1≤(|D0(ϖ)||ln(Gυu)ϖ−1|Γ(ϖ)+|D4(ϖ)||ln(Gυu)ϖ|Γ(ϖ+1)+u|D5(ϖ)||(lnυuυu−1)ϖ|Γ(ϖ+1)+|(lnυ)2−ϖ||(lnυυu)ϖ|Γ(ϖ+1)+u|lnυ3−ϖ(lnυu)2−ϖ||(lnυuυu−1)ϖ−1|Γ(ϖ))(Lϕ‖zn−z‖+˜LϕLψ‖sn−s‖˜Lϕ˜Lψ−1)≤M∗3(Lϕ‖zn−z‖+˜LϕLψ‖sn−s‖˜Lϕ˜Lψ−1), | (4.19) |
and
‖˜E2(zn,sn)−˜E2(z,s)‖ℑ2≤(|D0(θ)||ln(Gυu)θ−1|Γ(θ)+|D4(θ)||ln(Gυu)θ|Γ(θ+1)+u|D5(θ)||(lnυuυu−1)θ|Γ(θ+1)+|(lnυ)2−θ||(lnυυu)θ|Γ(θ+1)+u|lnυ3−θ(lnυu)2−θ||(lnυuυi−1)θ−1|Γ(θ))(Lϕ˜Lψ‖zn−z‖+Lψ‖sn−s‖˜Lϕ˜Lψ−1)≤M∗∗3(Lϕ˜Lψ‖zn−z‖+Lψ‖sn−s‖˜Lϕ˜Lψ−1). | (4.20) |
Applying (4.19) and (4.20) in (4.18), we conclude that
‖˜E(z,s)−˜E(zn,sn)‖ℑ≤M∗3(Lϕ‖zn−z‖+˜LϕLψ‖sn−s‖˜Lϕ˜Lψ−1)+M∗∗3(Lϕ˜Lψ‖zn−z‖+Lψ‖sn−s‖˜Lϕ˜Lψ−1), |
which yields ‖˜E(z,s)−˜E(zn,sn)‖ℑ→0 as n→∞, this proves the continuity of ˜E. Next, using (4.16) and (4.17), we get
‖˜E(z,s)(υ)‖ℑ≤‖~E1(z,s)(υ)‖ℑ1+‖˜E2(z,s)‖ℑ2≤(˜ℓ0+˜ℓ2˜ρ0)M∗3˜ℓ2˜ρ2−1+(˜ρ0+˜ρ2˜ℓ0)M∗∗3˜ℓ2˜ρ2−1+(Y∗1M∗3˜ℓ2˜ρ2−1+Y∗2M∗∗3˜ℓ2˜ρ2−1)‖(z,s)‖≤x. |
Therefore, ˜E is uniformly bounded on ℑx. Finally, we show that ˜E is equicontinuous. To get this result, take υ1,υ2∈U with υ1<υ2 and for any (z,s)∈ℑx⊂ℑ (clearly ℑx is bounded), we obtain
‖˜E1(z,s)(υ1)−˜E1(z,s)(υ2)‖ℑ1=max{|[˜E1(z,s)(υ1)−˜E1(z,s)(υ2)](lnυ)2−ϖ|}≤[(|D0(ϖ)||ln(Gυu)ϖ−1|Γ(ϖ)+|D4(ϖ)||ln(Gυu)ϖ|Γ(ϖ+1)+u|D5(ϖ)||(lnυuυu−1)ϖ|Γ(ϖ+1))×|(lnυ)2−ϖ||(lnυ1)ϖ−2−(lnυ2)ϖ−2|+u|(lnυ)2−ϖ||(lnυυu)ϖ||lnυ3−ϖ1(logυuυ1)ϖ−2−lnυ3−ϖ2(logυuυ2)ϖ−2|Γ(ϖ)]×(˜ℓ0+˜ℓ2˜ρ01−˜ℓ2˜ρ2+˜ℓ1‖z‖+˜ℓ2˜ρ1‖s‖1−˜ℓ2˜ρ2)+|(lnυ)2−ϖ|Γ(ϖ)|∫υ1υuln(υ1η)ϖ−1ϕ(υ,HDϖz(υ),HDθs(υ))dηη−∫υ2υuln(υ2η)ϖ−1ϕ(υ,HDϖz(υ),HDθs(υ))dηη|, |
which yields that
‖˜E1(z,s)(υ1)−˜E1(z,s)(υ2)‖ℑ1→0, as υ1→υ2. |
Similarly, we get
‖˜E2(z,s)(υ1)−˜E2(z,s)(υ2)‖ℑ2→0, as υ1→υ2. |
Hence
‖˜E(z,s)(υ1)−˜E(z,s)(υ2)‖ℑ→0, as υ1→υ2. |
Therefore ˜E is a relatively compact on ℑx. Thanks to the theorem of Arzelà-Ascoli, ˜E is compact. Thus, it is completely continuous. So, the CII-FDEs (1.1) admits at least one solution. This finishes the proof.
Theorem 4.4. Assume that (A4)–(A6) are fulfilled with
℧1+℧3+℧2(Lϕ+˜LϕLψ)+℧4(Lϕ˜Lψ+Lψ)˜Lϕ˜Lψ−1<1, | (4.21) |
then the CII-FDEs (1.1) possesses a unique solution.
Proof. Let ℵ=(ℵ1,ℵ1):ℑ→ℑ be an operator defined by ℵ(z,s)(υ)=(ℵ1(z,s),ℵ2(z,s))(υ), where
for and
for In light of Theorem 4.3, one can obtain
for Passing we have
where
Analogously,
where
Hence
This suggests that is a contraction. Consequently, the CII-FDEs (1.1) has a unique solution.
In this section, we examine various stability types for the suggested system, including the HU, GHU, HUR, and GHUR stability.
Theorem 5.1. If the assertions – and the condition (4.21) are true and
then the unique solution of CII-FDEs (1.1) is HU stable and as a result, GHU stable.
Proof. Take into account that is an approximate solution of (3.1) and consider is a solution of the coupled problem shown below
(5.1) |
From Remark 3.5, we get
(5.2) |
It follows from Corollary 4.2 that the solution of system (5.2) is
(5.3) |
for and
(5.4) |
for Consider
As in Theorem 4.4, one has
(5.5) |
for and
(5.6) |
Arranging (5.5) and (5.6), we get
(5.7) |
and
(5.8) |
respectively. Assume that and Then (5.7) and (5.8) can be written as
Hence
(5.9) |
where
From system (5.9), we observe that
which yields that
Let us consider and
Then, we can write
which leads to the supposed coupled problem (1.1) is HU stable. Further, if
Then the suggested coupled problem (1.1) is GHU stable.
For the final result, we suppose the following assertion:
There are nondecreasing functions so that
Theorem 5.2. If the assertions – and and the condition (4.21) are fulfilled and
then the unique solution of CII-FDEs (1.1) is HUR stable and consequently GHUR stable.
Proof. According to Definitions 3.3 and 3.4, we can get our conclusion by following the same procedures as in Theorem 5.1.
Example 6.1. Consider
(6.1) |
where for In view of problem (6.1), we observe that and Further, it's simple to locate and Based on Theorem 4.4, we find that
Therefore problem (6.1) has a unique solution. Further
Therefore, according to Theorem 5.1, the coupled system (6.1) is HU stable and consequently GHU stable. Similarly, we can confirm that Theorems 4.3 and 5.2 are true.
In this manuscript, we used fixed point results of Banach and Kransnoselskii to give necessary and sufficient conditions for the existence of a unique positive solution for a system of impulsive fractional differential equations intervening a fractional derivative of the Hadamard type. We also studied some Hyers-Ulam (HU) stabilities such as generalized Hyers-Ulam (GHU), Hyers-Ulam-Rassias (HUR), and generalized Hyers-Ulam-Rassias (GHUR) stabilities. At the end, we provided a concrete example making effective the obtained results.
The authors thank the Basque Government for Grant IT1555-22. This work was supported in part by the Basque Government under Grant IT1555-22.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
[1] |
Blandford A, Wesson J, Amalberti R, et al. (2020) Opportunities and challenges for telehealth within, and beyond, a pandemic. Lancet Glob Health 8: e1364-e1365. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(20)30362-4 ![]() |
[2] |
Hoffman DA (2020) Increasing access to care: telehealth during COVID-19. J Law Biosci 7: lsaa043. https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsaa043 ![]() |
[3] |
Abdel-Wahab M, Rosenblatt E, Prajogi B, et al. (2020) Opportunities in telemedicine, lessons learned after COVID-19 and the way into the future. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 108: 438-443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.07.006 ![]() |
[4] |
Barney A, Buckelew S, Mesheriakova V, et al. (2020) The COVID-19 pandemic and rapid implementation of adolescent and young adult telemedicine: challenges and opportunities for innovation. J Adolesc Health 67: 164-171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2020.05.006 ![]() |
[5] |
Gajarawala SN, Pelkowski JN (2020) Telehealth benefits and barriers. J Nurse Pract 17: 218-221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nurpra.2020.09.013 ![]() |
[6] | Zhai Y (2020) A call for addressing barriers to telemedicine: health disparities during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychother Psychosom 4: 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1159/000509000 |
[7] |
Al-Samarraie H, Ghazal S, Alzahrani AI, et al. (2020) Telemedicine in Middle Eastern countries: Progress, barriers, and policy recommendations. Int J Med Inform 141: 104232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2020.104232 ![]() |
[8] |
Bakshi S, Tandon U (2021) Understanding barriers of telemedicine adoption : a study in North India. Syst Res Behav Sci 39: 128-142. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2774 ![]() |
[9] |
Jalali MS, Landman A, Gordon WJ (2021) Telemedicine, privacy, and information security in the age of COVID-19. J Am Med Inform Assoc 28: 671-672. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocaa310 ![]() |
[10] |
Chowdhury SR, Sunna TC, Ahmed S (2021) Telemedicine is an important aspect of healthcare services amid COVID-19 outbreak: Its barriers in Bangladesh and strategies to overcome. Int J Health Plann Manage 36: 4-12. https://doi.org/10.1002/hpm.3064 ![]() |
[11] |
Triana AJ, Gusdorf RE, Shah KP, et al. (2020) Technology literacy as a barrier to telehealth during COVID-19. Telemed J E Health 26: 1118-1119. https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2020.0155 ![]() |
[12] |
Smith AC, Thomas E, Snoswell CL, et al. (2020) Telehealth for global emergencies: Implications for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). J Telemed Telecare 26: 309-313. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X20916567 ![]() |
[13] |
Dubin JM, Wyant WA, Balaji NC, et al. (2020) Telemedicine usage among urologists during the COVID-19 pandemic: cross-sectional study. J Med Internet Res 22: e21875. https://doi.org/10.2196/21875 ![]() |
[14] |
Ahmed S, Sanghvi K, Yeo D (2020) Telemedicine takes centre stage during COVID-19 pandemic. BMJ Innov 6: 252-254. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjinnov-2020-000440 ![]() |
[15] |
Monaghesh E, Hajizadeh A (2020) The role of telehealth during COVID-19 outbreak: a systematic review based on current evidence. BMC Public Health 20: 1193. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-09301-4 ![]() |
[16] | Okereafor K, Adebola O, Djehaiche R (2020) Exploring the potentials of telemedicine and other non-contact electronic health technologies in controlling the spread of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). IJMR 8: 1-13. |
[17] |
Bokolo AJ (2021) Exploring the adoption of telemedicine and virtual software for care of outpatients during and after COVID-19 pandemic. Ir J Med Sci 190: 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-020-02299-z ![]() |
[18] | Burroughs M, Urits I, Viswanath O, et al. (2020) Benefits and shortcomings of utilizing telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic. Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent) 33: 699-700. https://doi.org/10.1080/08998280.2020.1792728 |
[19] | Nouri S, Khoong EC, Lyles CR, et al. (2020) Addressing equity in telemedicine for chronic disease management during the COVID-19 pandemic. NEJM Catalyst 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1056/CAT.20.0123 |
[20] |
Ortega G, Rodriguez JA, Maurer LR, et al. (2020) Telemedicine, COVID-19, and disparities: Policy implications. Health Policy Technol 9: 368-371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlpt.2020.08.001 ![]() |
[21] |
Vidal-Alaball J, Acosta-Roja R, Pastor Hernández N, et al. (2020) Telemedicine in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic. Aten Primaria 52: 418-422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aprim.2020.04.003 ![]() |
[22] | Oyediran KA, Makinde OA, Adelakin O (2020) The role of telemedicine in addressing access to sexual and reproductive health services in sub-Saharan Africa during the COVID-19 pandemic. Afr J Reprod Health 24: 49-55. https://doi.org/10.29063/ajrh2020/v24i2s.8 |
[23] |
Wosik J, Fudim M, Cameron B, et al. (2020) Telehealth transformation: COVID-19 and the rise of virtual care. J Am Med Inform Assoc 27: 957-962. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocaa067 ![]() |
[24] |
Ohannessian R, Duong TA, Odone A (2020) Global telemedicine implementation and integration within health systems to fight the COVID-19 pandemic: a call to action. JMIR Public Health Surveill 6: e18810. https://doi.org/10.2196/18810 ![]() |
[25] | Nittas V, Von Wyl V (2020) COVID-19 and telehealth: a window of opportunity and its challenges. Swiss Med Wkly 150: w20284. https://doi.org/10.4414/smw.2020.20284 |
[26] |
Gifford AH, Ong T, Dowd C, et al. (2020) Evaluating barriers to and promoters of telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic at U.S. cystic fibrosis programs. J Cyst Fibros 20: 9-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcf.2021.08.034 ![]() |
[27] |
Garfan S, Alamoodi AH, Zaidan BB, et al. (2021) Telehealth utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review. Comput Biol Med 138: 104878. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2021.104878 ![]() |
[28] |
Akintunde TY, Akintunde OD, Musa TH, et al. (2021) Expanding telemedicine to reduce the burden on the healthcare systems and poverty in Africa for a post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic reformation. Glob Health J 5: 128-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.glohj.2021.07.006 ![]() |
[29] |
Rozga M, Handu D, Kelley K, et al. (2021) Telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional survey of registered dietitian nutritionists. J Acad Nutr Diet 121: 2524-2535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2021.01.009 ![]() |
[30] |
Cunningham NR, Ely SL, Garcia BNB, et al. (2021) Addressing pediatric mental health using telehealth during coronavirus disease-2019 and beyond: a narrative review. Acad Pediatr 21: 1108-1117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acap.2021.06.002 ![]() |
1. | Hasanen A. Hammad, Hassen Aydi, Manuel De la Sen, The existence and stability results of multi-order boundary value problems involving Riemann-Liouville fractional operators, 2023, 8, 2473-6988, 11325, 10.3934/math.2023574 | |
2. | Hasanen A Hammad, Hassen Aydi, Doha A Kattan, Integro-differential equations implicated with Caputo-Hadamard derivatives under nonlocal boundary constraints, 2024, 99, 0031-8949, 025207, 10.1088/1402-4896/ad185b | |
3. | Hasanen A. Hammad, Manuel De la Sen, Existence of a mild solution and approximate controllability for fractional random integro-differential inclusions with non-instantaneous impulses, 2025, 111, 11100168, 306, 10.1016/j.aej.2024.10.017 | |
4. | Feryal Aladsani, Ahmed Gamal Ibrahim, Existence and Stability of Solutions for p-Proportional ω-Weighted κ-Hilfer Fractional Differential Inclusions in the Presence of Non-Instantaneous Impulses in Banach Spaces, 2024, 8, 2504-3110, 475, 10.3390/fractalfract8080475 | |
5. | Kaihong Zhao, Juqing Liu, Xiaojun Lv, A Unified Approach to Solvability and Stability of Multipoint BVPs for Langevin and Sturm–Liouville Equations with CH–Fractional Derivatives and Impulses via Coincidence Theory, 2024, 8, 2504-3110, 111, 10.3390/fractalfract8020111 | |
6. | Hasanen A. Hammad, Najla M. Aloraini, Mahmoud Abdel-Aty, Existence and stability results for delay fractional deferential equations with applications, 2024, 92, 11100168, 185, 10.1016/j.aej.2024.02.060 | |
7. | Hasanen A. Hammad, Maryam G. Alshehri, Application of the Mittag-Leffler kernel in stochastic differential systems for approximating the controllability of nonlocal fractional derivatives, 2024, 182, 09600779, 114775, 10.1016/j.chaos.2024.114775 | |
8. | Doha A. Kattan, Hasanen A. Hammad, Solving fractional integro-differential equations with delay and relaxation impulsive terms by fixed point techniques, 2024, 2024, 1687-2770, 10.1186/s13661-024-01957-w | |
9. | Hasanen A. Hammad, Saleh Fahad Aljurbua, Solving Fractional Random Differential Equations by Using Fixed Point Methodologies under Mild Boundary Conditions, 2024, 8, 2504-3110, 384, 10.3390/fractalfract8070384 | |
10. | Murugesan Manigandan, Kannan Manikandan, Hasanen A. Hammad, Manuel De la Sen, Applying fixed point techniques to solve fractional differential inclusions under new boundary conditions, 2024, 9, 2473-6988, 15505, 10.3934/math.2024750 | |
11. | Hasanen A. Hammad, Hassen Aydi, Mohra Zayed, On the qualitative evaluation of the variable-order coupled boundary value problems with a fractional delay, 2023, 2023, 1029-242X, 10.1186/s13660-023-03018-9 | |
12. | Maryam G. Alshehri, Hassen Aydi, Hasanen A. Hammad, Solving delay integro-differential inclusions with applications, 2024, 9, 2473-6988, 16313, 10.3934/math.2024790 | |
13. | Hasanen A. Hammad, Hüseyin Işık, Hassen Aydi, Manuel De la Sen, Involvement of three successive fractional derivatives in a system of pantograph equations and studying the existence solution and MLU stability, 2024, 57, 2391-4661, 10.1515/dema-2024-0035 | |
14. | Hasanen A. Hammad, Hassen Aydi, Manuel De la Sen, Refined stability of the additive, quartic and sextic functional equations with counter-examples, 2023, 8, 2473-6988, 14399, 10.3934/math.2023736 | |
15. | Hasanen A. Hammad, Montasir Qasymeh, Mahmoud Abdel-Aty, Existence and stability results for a Langevin system with Caputo–Hadamard fractional operators, 2024, 21, 0219-8878, 10.1142/S0219887824502189 | |
16. | Muath Awadalla, Manigandan Murugesan, Manikandan Kannan, Jihan Alahmadi, Feryal AlAdsani, Utilizing Schaefer's fixed point theorem in nonlinear Caputo sequential fractional differential equation systems, 2024, 9, 2473-6988, 14130, 10.3934/math.2024687 | |
17. | Hamza Khalil, Akbar Zada, Mohamed Rhaima, Ioan-Lucian Popa, Analysis of Neutral Implicit Stochastic Hilfer Fractional Differential Equation Involving Lévy Noise with Retarded and Advanced Arguments, 2024, 12, 2227-7390, 3406, 10.3390/math12213406 | |
18. | Hasanen A. Hammad, Mohammed E. Dafaalla, Kottakkaran Sooppy Nisar, A Grammian matrix and controllability study of fractional delay integro-differential Langevin systems, 2024, 9, 2473-6988, 15469, 10.3934/math.2024748 | |
19. | Hasanen A. Hammad, Hassen Aydi, Doha A. Kattan, Hybrid interpolative mappings for solving fractional Navier–Stokes and functional differential equations, 2023, 2023, 1687-2770, 10.1186/s13661-023-01807-1 | |
20. | Hasanen A. Hammad, Hassen Aydi, Maryam G. Alshehri, Solving hybrid functional-fractional equations originating in biological population dynamics with an effect on infectious diseases, 2024, 9, 2473-6988, 14574, 10.3934/math.2024709 | |
21. | Doha A. Kattan, Hasanen A. Hammad, Existence and Stability Results for Piecewise Caputo–Fabrizio Fractional Differential Equations with Mixed Delays, 2023, 7, 2504-3110, 644, 10.3390/fractalfract7090644 | |
22. | Doha A. Kattan, Hasanen A. Hammad, Advanced fixed point techniques for solving fractional p−Laplacian boundary value problems with impulsive effects, 2025, 16, 20904479, 103254, 10.1016/j.asej.2024.103254 | |
23. | Wedad Albalawi, Muhammad Imran Liaqat, Kottakkaran Sooppy Nisar, Abdel-Haleem Abdel-Aty, Qualitative study of Caputo Erdélyi-Kober stochastic fractional delay differential equations, 2025, 10, 2473-6988, 8277, 10.3934/math.2025381 | |
24. | Gunaseelan Mani, Vasu Lakshmanan, Abdul Razak Kachu Mohideen, Homan Emadifar, Patricia J. Y. Wong, Existence and Uniqueness Results for the Coupled Pantograph System With Caputo Fractional Operator and Hadamard Integral, 2025, 2025, 1687-9643, 10.1155/ijde/1202608 |