Event-triggered control of flexible manipulator constraint system modeled by PDE

Tongyu Wang; Yadong Chen; Tongyu Wang; Yadong Chen

doi:10.3934/mbe.2023441

Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering

2023, Volume 20, Issue 6: 10043-10062. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023441

Previous Article Next Article

Research article Special Issues

Event-triggered control of flexible manipulator constraint system modeled by PDE

Tongyu Wang ,
Yadong Chen ^,

College of Medicine and Biological Information Engineering, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110169, China

Academic Editor:Xiaodi Li

Received: 03 February 2023 Revised: 04 March 2023 Accepted: 20 March 2023 Published: 28 March 2023

The vibration suppression control of a flexible manipulator system modeled by partial differential equation (PDE) with state constraints is studied in this paper. On the basis of the backstepping recursive design framework, the problem of the constraint of joint angle and boundary vibration deflection is solved by using the Barrier Lyapunov function (BLF). Moreover, based on the relative threshold strategy, an event-triggered mechanism is proposed to save the communication workload between controller and actuator, which not only deals with the state constraints of the partial differential flexible manipulator system, but also effectively improves the system work efficiency. Good damping effect on vibration and the elevated system performance can be seen under the proposed control strategy. At the same time, the state can meet the constraints given in advance, and all system signals are bounded. The proposed scheme is effective, which is proven by simulation results.

Keywords:

Citation: Tongyu Wang, Yadong Chen. Event-triggered control of flexible manipulator constraint system modeled by PDE[J]. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(6): 10043-10062. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023441

Related Papers:

[1]	Huiyang Xu . Existence and blow-up of solutions for finitely degenerate semilinear parabolic equations with singular potentials. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2023, 15(2): 132-161. doi: 10.3934/cam.2023008
[2]	Tingfu Feng, Yan Dong, Kelei Zhang, Yan Zhu . Global existence and blow-up to coupled fourth-order parabolic systems arising from modeling epitaxial thin film growth. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2025, 17(1): 263-289. doi: 10.3934/cam.2025011
[3]	Yuxuan Chen . Global dynamical behavior of solutions for finite degenerate fourth-order parabolic equations with mean curvature nonlinearity. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2023, 15(4): 658-694. doi: 10.3934/cam.2023033
[4]	Yue Pang, Xiaotong Qiu, Runzhang Xu, Yanbing Yang . The Cauchy problem for general nonlinear wave equations with doubly dispersive. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2024, 16(2): 416-430. doi: 10.3934/cam.2024019
[5]	Reinhard Racke . Blow-up for hyperbolized compressible Navier-Stokes equations. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2025, 17(2): 550-581. doi: 10.3934/cam.2025022
[6]	Isaac Neal, Steve Shkoller, Vlad Vicol . A characteristics approach to shock formation in 2D Euler with azimuthal symmetry and entropy. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2025, 17(1): 188-236. doi: 10.3934/cam.2025009
[7]	Mustafa Avci . On an anisotropic $\overset{\rightarrow }{p}(\cdot)$ -Laplace equation with variable singular and sublinear nonlinearities. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2024, 16(3): 554-577. doi: 10.3934/cam.2024026
[8]	Fangyuan Dong . Multiple positive solutions for the logarithmic Schrödinger equation with a Coulomb potential. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2024, 16(3): 487-508. doi: 10.3934/cam.2024023
[9]	Ying Chu, Bo Wen, Libo Cheng . Existence and blow up for viscoelastic hyperbolic equations with variable exponents. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2024, 16(4): 717-737. doi: 10.3934/cam.2024032
[10]	Ho-Sik Lee, Youchan Kim . Boundary Riesz potential estimates for parabolic equations with measurable nonlinearities. Communications in Analysis and Mechanics, 2025, 17(1): 61-99. doi: 10.3934/cam.2025004

Abstract

1. Introduction

Fractional calculus has been concerned with integration and differentiation of fractional (non-integer) order of the function. Riemann and Liouville defined the concept of fractional order intgro-differential equations ^[1]. Fractional calculus has developed an extensive attraction in current years in applied mathematics such as physics, medical, biology and engineering ^{[2,3,4,5,6,7,8]}. Whenever dealing with the fractional integro-differential equation many authors consider the terms Caputo fractional derivative, Riemann-Liouville and Grunwald-Letnikvo ^{[9,10,11,12,13]}. The subject fractional calculus has many applications in widespread and diverse field of science and engineering such as fractional dynamics in the trajectory control of redundant manipulators, viscoelasticity, electrochemistry, fluid mechanics, optics and signals processing etc.

Fractional integro-differential equations having some uncertainties in the form of boundary conditions, initial conditions and so on ^[14,15,16]. To resolve these type of uncertainties mathematicians introduced some concepts fuzzy set theory is one of them.

Zadeh introduced the concept of fuzzy set theory ^{[17,18,19,20]}. Later on Prade and Dubois ^[21,22], Nahmias ^[23], Tanaka and Mizumoto ^[24]. All of them experienced that the fuzzy number as a location of r-cut $0 \leqslant r \leqslant 1$ .

Many authors investigated some numerical techniques related to these problem which include the existence of the solution for discontinuous ^[25], reproducing kernel algorithm ^[26], integro-differential under generalized Caputo differentiability ^[27], A domain decomposition method ^[28], fractional differential transform method ^[29], Jacobi polynomial operational matrix ^[30], global solutions for nonlinear fuzzy equations ^[31], radioactivity decay model ^[32], Caputo-Katugampola fractional derivative approach ^[33], two-dimensional legendre wavelet method ^[34], fuzzy Laplace transform ^[35], fuzzy sumudu transform ^[36]. Further we can see ^{[37,38,39,40]}

Optimal Homotopy Asymptotic Method (OHAM) is one of the powerful techniques introduced by Marinca at al. ^[41,42,43] for approximate solution of differential equations. OHAM attracted an enormous importance in solving various problems in different field of science. Iqbal et al. applied this technique to Klein-Gordon equations and singular Lane-Emden type equation ^[44]. Sheikholeslami et al. used the proposed method for investigation of the laminar viscous flow and magneto hydrodynamic flow in a permeable channel ^[45]. Hashmi et al. obtained the solution of nonlinear Fredholm integral equations using OHAM ^[46]. Nawaz at al. applied the proposed method for solution of fractional order integro-differential equations ^[47], fractional order partial differential equations ^[48] and three-dimensional integral equations ^[49].

Aim of our study is to extend OHAM for solution of system of fuzzy Volterra integro differential equation of fractional order of the following form

$D_x^\alpha u(x) = h(x) + \mathop \smallint \limits_a^x k(x, t)u(t)dt, \, \, \, \, \, 0 \leqslant \alpha \leqslant 1, \, \, x \in [0, 1],$

(1.1)

with the given initial condition

${u^k}(0), \, \, \, \, {u_0}^k(x), \, \, \, k = 1, 2, 3, ...., \eta - 1, \, \, \, \eta - 1 < \alpha < \eta , \, \, \, \, \eta \in N,$

Where $D_x^\alpha$ represents the fuzzy fractional derivative in Caputo sense for fractional order of $\alpha$ with respect to $x$ , $h:[a, b] \to {\mathbb{R}_{\cal{F}}}$ is fuzzy valued function, $k(x, t)$ is arbitrary kernel ${u_0}(x) \in {\mathbb{R}_{\cal{F}}}$ is an unknown solution. ${\mathbb{R}_{\cal{F}}}$ represent set of all fuzzy valued function on real line.

The remaining paper is structured as follows: A brief overview on some elementary concept, notations and definitions of fuzzy calculus and fuzzy fractional calculus are discussed in section 2. Analysis of the technique is presented in section 3. Proposed method is applied to solve fuzzy fractional order Volterra integro-differential equations in section 4. Result and discussion of the paper is given in section 5 and section 6 is the conclusion of the paper.

2. Preliminaries

In literature there exist various definitions of fuzzy calculus and fuzzy fractional calculus ^[50]. Some elementary concept, notations and definitions of fuzzy calculus and fuzzy fractional calculus related to this study are provided in this section.

Definition 2.1. The Riemann-Liouville fractional integral operator $I_x^\alpha$ of order $\alpha$ is ^[50]:

$I_x^\alpha u(x) = \, \left\{ \begin{array}{l} \frac{1}{{\Gamma (\alpha )}}\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {(x - t)^{\alpha - 1}}u(t)dt = 0, \, \, \, \, \alpha > 0, \, \, \, \hfill \\ u(x), \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \alpha = 0.\, \, \hfill \\ \end{array} \right. \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \,$

(2.1)

Definition 2.2. Caputo partial fractional Derivative operator $D_x^\alpha$ of order $\alpha$ with respect to $x$ is defined as follow ^[50]:

$D_x^\alpha u(x) = \, \left\{ \begin{array}{l} \frac{1}{{\Gamma (\eta - \alpha )}}\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {(x - t)^{\eta - \alpha - 1}}{u^{(n)}}(t)dt = 0, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \eta - 1 < \alpha \leqslant \eta , \, \, \, \hfill \\ \frac{{{d^\eta }\, u(x)}}{{d{x^\eta }}}, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \alpha = \eta \in N.\, \, \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(2.2)

which clearly shows that

$D_x^\alpha I_x^\alpha u(x) = u(x)$

(2.3)

Definition 2.3. A fuzzy number $\sigma$ is a mapping $\sigma :\mathbb{R} \to [0, 1]$ , satisfy the following property:

a. $\sigma$ is normal that is, $\exists \, \, {x_0} \in \mathbb{R}$ with $u({x_0}) = 1$ ^[51,52].

b. $\sigma$ is a convex fuzzy set that is, $u(\lambda x + (1 - \lambda )y) \geqslant \min \left\{ {u(x), u(y)} \right\}$ for all $x, y \in \mathbb{R}, {\text{ }}\lambda \in [0, 1].$

c. $\sigma$ is upper semi-continuous in $\mathbb{R}.$

d. $\overline {\left\{ {x \in \mathbb{R}:u(x) > 0} \right\}}$ is compact.

Definition 2.4. Parametric form of fuzzy number $\sigma$ represented by an order pair $(\underline \sigma , \bar \sigma )$ of the function $\left( {\underline \sigma (r), \bar \sigma (r)} \right)$ , satisfies the following conditions ^[52,53]:

a. $\underline \sigma (r)$ is bounded monotonic increasing left continuous $\forall \, \, r \in [0, 1].$

b. $\bar \sigma (r)$ is bounded monotonic decreasing left continuous $\forall \, \, r \in [0, 1].$

c. $\underline \sigma (r) \leqslant \bar \sigma (r)\, \, \forall \, \, r \in [0, 1].$

Definition 2.5. Addition and scalar multiplication of fuzzy number is given as:

a. $\left( {{\sigma _1} \oplus {\sigma _2}} \right) = \left( {{{\underline \sigma }_1}(r) + {{\underline \sigma }_2}(r), {{\bar \sigma }_1}(r) + {{\bar \sigma }_2}(r)} \right)$

b. $\left( {k \otimes \sigma } \right) = \left\{ \begin{array}{l} \left( {\underline \sigma (r), \bar \sigma (r)} \right), \, \, \, \, \, k \geqslant 0, \hfill \\ \left( {\underline \sigma (r), \bar \sigma (r)} \right), \, \, \, \, \, k < 0. \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

Definition 2.6. A fuzzy real valued function ${\sigma _1}, {\sigma _2}:[a, b] \to \mathbb{R},$ then in ^[54]:

${D_U}({\sigma _1}, {\sigma _2}) = \sup \left\{ {D({\sigma _1}(x), {\sigma _2}(x))|x \in [a, b]} \right\}.$

Definition 2.7. Assume $u:[a, b] \to {\mathbb{R}_{\cal{F}}}.$ For every partition ${\rm P} = \left\{ {{\sigma _0}, {\sigma _1}, {\sigma _2}, {\sigma _3}, ...., {\sigma _n}} \right\}$ and arbitrary ${\ell _i}:{\sigma _{i - 1}} \leqslant {\ell _i} \leqslant {\sigma _i}, {\text{ }}2 \leqslant i \leqslant n$ consider

${\mathbb{R}_p} = \mathop \Sigma \limits_{i = 2}^n u({\ell _j})({\sigma _i} - {\sigma _{i - 1}}).$ The definite integral of $u(x)$ over $[\alpha , \beta ]$ is

$\mathop \smallint \limits_\alpha ^\beta u(x)dx = \lim {\mathbb{R}_\rho },$

which show existence of limit in metric ^[55].

Definite integral exist if $u(x)$ is continuous in metric $D$ ^[51]:

$\begin{gathered} \left( {\underline {\mathop \smallint \limits_\alpha ^\beta u(x)dx} } \right) = \mathop \smallint \limits_\alpha ^\beta \underline u (x)dx, \hfill \\ \left( {\overline {\mathop \smallint \limits_\alpha ^\beta u(x)dx} } \right) = \mathop \smallint \limits_\alpha ^\beta \overline u (x)dxt. \hfill \\ \end{gathered}$

3. Application of OHAM

By considering definition 2.4. as discussed in section 2, Eq (1.1) becomes:

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} D_x^\alpha \underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} (x, r) - \underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{h} (x, r) - \mathop \smallint \limits_a^x k(x, t)\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} (t, r)dt = 0, \hfill \\ D_x^\alpha \bar u(x, r) - \underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{h} (x, r) - \mathop \smallint \limits_a^x k(x, t)\bar u(t, r)dt = 0, \hfill \\ \end{array} \right. \, \, \, \, \, 0 \leqslant \alpha \leqslant 1, \, 0 \leqslant r \leqslant 1, \, \, \, x \in [0, 1],$

(3.1)

with the given initial condition

${\left[ {{u^k}(0)} \right]^r}, \, \, \, \, \left( {{{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }_0}^k(x, r), {{\bar u}_0}^k(x, r)} \right), \, \, \, k = 1, 2, 3, ...., \eta - 1, \, \, \, \eta - 1 < \alpha < \eta , \, \, \, \, \eta \in N,$

(3.2)

The homotopy of OHAM ^[41,42,43], constructed as follow:

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} (1 - \rho )\left( {\frac{{{\partial ^\alpha }\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{\upsilon } (x, r;\rho )}}{{\partial {t^\alpha }}} - \underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{h} (x, r)} \right) = H(\rho )\left( {\frac{{{\partial ^\alpha }\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{\upsilon } (x, r;\rho )}}{{\partial {t^\alpha }}} - \underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{h} (x, r) - \underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{\delta } (\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{\upsilon } , r)} \right), \hfill \\ (1 - \rho )\left( {\frac{{{\partial ^\alpha }\bar \upsilon (x, r;\rho )}}{{\partial {t^\alpha }}} - \bar h(x, r)} \right) = H(\rho )\left( {\frac{{{\partial ^\alpha }\bar \upsilon (x, r;\rho )}}{{\partial {t^\alpha }}} - \bar h(x, r) - \bar \delta (\bar \upsilon , r)} \right). \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(3.3)

where $\rho \in [0, 1]$ , $H(\rho ) = \sum\limits_{m\, \, \geqslant 1} {{c_m}{\rho ^m}}$ for all $\rho \ne 0$ is an auxiliary function, if $\rho = 0$ then $H(0) = 0$ where

${\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{\upsilon } (x, r, 0) = {{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }_0}(x, r)\, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{\upsilon } (x, r;1) = \underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} (x, r), \hfill \\ \bar \upsilon (x, r, 0) = {{\bar u}_0}(x, r)\, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \bar \upsilon (x, r;1) = \bar u(x, r). \hfill \\ \end{array} \right. _{\, \, }}\,$

and ${c_m}$ represent auxiliary constants. Using Taylor's series to expand $\upsilon (x, r;\rho )$ about $\rho$ we get

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{\upsilon } (x, r;\rho ) = {{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }_0}(x, r) + \sum\limits_{m\, \, \geqslant 1} {{{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }_m}(x, r){\rho ^m}} , \hfill \\ \bar \upsilon (x, r;\rho ) = {{\bar u}_0}(x, r) + \sum\limits_{m\, \, \geqslant 1} {{{\bar u}_m}(x, r){\rho ^m}} . \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(3.4)

Inserting Eq (3.4) into Eq (3.3) we get series of the problems by comparing the like power of $\rho$ given as follow:

${\rho ^0}:\, \, \, \left\{ \begin{array}{l} \, {{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }_0}(x, r) - \underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{h} (x, r) = 0, \hfill \\ \, {{\bar u}_0}(x, r) - \bar h(x, r) = 0. \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(3.5)

${\rho ^1}:\, \, \, \, \left\{ \begin{array}{l} {{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }_1}(x, r) + {c_1}\delta ({{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }_0}) + (1 + {c_1}) + {{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }_0}(x, r) = 0, \hfill \\ {{\bar u}_1}(x, r) + {c_1}\delta ({{\bar u}_0}) + (1 + {c_1}) + {{\bar u}_0}(x, r) = 0. \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(3.6)

${\rho ^2}:\, \, \, \, \left\{ \begin{array}{l} {{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }_2}(x, r) + {c_1}\delta ({{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }_1}) + {c_2}\delta ({{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }_0}) + {c_2}(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{h} (x, r) - {{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }_0}(x, r)) \hfill \\ - (1 + {c_1}){{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }_1}(x, r) = 0, \hfill \\ {{\bar u}_2}(x, r) + {c_1}\delta ({{\bar u}_1}) + {c_2}\delta ({{\bar u}_0}) + {c_2}(\bar h(x, r) - {{\bar u}_0}(x, r)) \hfill \\ - (1 + {c_1}){{\bar u}_1}(x, r) = 0. \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(3.7)

${\rho ^n}:\, \, \, \, \left\{ \begin{array}{l} {{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }_n}(x, r) + {c_1}\delta ({{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }_n}) + {c_2}\delta ({{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }_{n - 1}}) + {c_3}(h + \delta ({{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }_0}))... - {c_2}{{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }_{n - 1}}(x, r) - (1 + {c_1}){{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }_n}(x, r) = 0, \hfill \\ {{\bar u}_n}(x, r) + {c_1}\delta ({{\bar u}_n}) + {c_2}\delta ({{\bar u}_{n - 1}}) + {c_3}(h + \delta ({{\bar u}_0}))... - {c_2}{{\bar u}_{n - 1}}(x, r) - (1 + {c_1}){{\bar u}_n}(x, r) = 0. \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(3.8)

For calculating the constants ${c_1}, {c_2}, {c_3}...$ , m^th order optimum solution becomes

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} {{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }^m}(x, r, {c_l}) = {{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }_0}(x, r) + \sum\limits_{k = 1}^m {{{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }_k}(x, r, {c_l}), } \, \, \, \, l = 1, 2, 3, ...m, \hfill \\ {{\bar u}^m}(x, r, {c_l}) = {{\bar u}_0}(x, r) + \sum\limits_{k = 1}^m {{{\bar u}_k}(x, r, {c_l}), } \, \, \, \, l = 1, 2, 3, ...m. \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(3.9)

Putting Eq (3.9) into Eq (3.1), we can found our residual given as follow:

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{R} \left( {x, r;{c_l}} \right) = {{\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} }^m}(x, r;{c_l}) - \underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{h} (x, r) - \delta (\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} ), \, \, l = 1, 2, ... \hfill \\ \bar R\left( {x, r;{c_l}} \right) = {{\bar u}^m}(x, r;{c_l}) - \bar h(x, r) - \delta (\bar u), \, \, l = 1, 2, ... \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(3.10)

If $R\left( {x, r;{c_l}} \right) = 0,$ then ${\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle-}$}}{u} ^m}(x, r;{c_l})\, \, \& \, \, {\bar u^m}(x, r;{c_l})$ will be the exact solutions.

Optimum solution contains some auxiliary constants; the optimal values of these constants are obtained through various techniques. In the present work, we have used the least square method ^[56,57]. The method of least squares is a powerful technique for obtaining the values of auxiliary constants. By putting the optimal values of these constants in Eq (8), we obtain the OHAM solution.

4. Application and accuracy

Problem 4.1. Consider system of fuzzy fractional order Volterra integro-differential equation as ^[58]:

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} D_x^\alpha \underline u (x, r) = \left( {r - 1} \right) + \int\limits_0^x {\underline u (t, r)dt} \hfill \\ D_x^\alpha \bar u(x, r) = \left( {1 - r} \right) + \int\limits_0^x {\bar u(t, r)dt} \hfill \\ \end{array} \right. , \, \, \, \, 0 < \alpha \leqslant 1, \, \, x \in [0, 1],$

(4.1)

subject to the fuzzy initial condition ${\left[ {u(0)} \right]^r} = \left[ {r - 1, 1 - r} \right],$ and for $\alpha = 1$ fuzzy fractional order Volterra integro-differential equations the exact solution is ${\left[ {u(x)} \right]^r} = \left[ {r - 1, 1 - r} \right]Sinh(x)$ and $0 \leqslant r \leqslant 1.$

By follow the technique as discussed in section 3, we get series of problems and their solutions as:

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} {D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _0}(x, r) + (1 - r) = 0, \hfill \\ {D_x}^\alpha {\overline u _0}(x, r) + (r - 1) = 0. \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(4.2)

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} {D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _1}(x, r) - 1 + r - {c_1} + r{c_1} + \left( {\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\underline u }_0}(t, r)dt} \right){c_1} - {D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _0}(x, r) - {c_1}{D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _0}(x, r) = 0, \hfill \\ {D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_1}(x, r) + 1 - r + {c_1} - r{c_1} + \left( {\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\bar u}_0}(t, r)dt} \right){c_1} - {D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_0}(x, r) - {c_1}{D_x}^\alpha \bar u(x, r) = 0. \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(4.3)

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} {D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _2}(x, r) + \left( {\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\underline u }_1}(t, r)dt} \right){c_1} - {c_2} + r{c_2} + \left( {\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\underline u }_0}(t, r)dt} \right){c_2} - {c_2}{D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _0}(x, r) - \hfill \\ {D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _1}(x, r) - {c_1}{D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _0}(x, r) = 0, \hfill \\ {D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_2}(x, r) + \left( {\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\bar u}_1}(t, r)dt} \right){c_1} + {c_2} - r{c_2} + \left( {\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\bar u}_0}(t, r)dt} \right){c_2} - {c_2}{D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_0}(x, r) - \hfill \\ {D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_1}(x, r) - {c_1}{D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_0}(x, r) = 0. \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(4.4)

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} {D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _3}(x, r) + \left( {\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\underline u }_2}(t, r)dt} \right){c_1} + \left( {\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\underline u }_1}(t, r)dt} \right){c_2} - {c_3} + r{c_3} + \left( {\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\underline u }_0}(t, r)dt} \right){c_3} - {c_3}{D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _0}(x, r) \hfill \\ - {c_2}{D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _1}(x, r) - {D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _2}(x, r) - {c_1}{D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _2}(x, r) = 0, \hfill \\ {D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_3}(x, r) + \left( {\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\bar u}_2}(t, r)dt} \right){c_1} + \left( {\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\bar u}_1}(t, r)dt} \right){c_2} + {c_3} - r{c_3} + \left( {\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\bar u}_0}(t, r)dt} \right){c_3} - {c_3}{D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_0}(x, r) \hfill \\ - {c_2}{D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_1}(x, r) - {D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_2}(x, r) - {c_1}{D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_2}(x, r) = 0. \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(4.5)

Their solutions are

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} {\underline u _0}(x, r) = \frac{{( - 1 + r){x^\alpha }}}{{\alpha \, \Gamma (\alpha )}} \hfill \\ {{\bar u}_0}(x, r) = - \frac{{( - 1 + r){x^\alpha }}}{{\alpha \, \Gamma (\alpha )}} \hfill \\ \end{array} \right. ,$

(4.6)

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} {\underline u _1}(x, r) = - \frac{{( - 1 + r){x^{1 + 2\alpha }}{c_1}}}{{\Gamma (2 + 2\alpha )}}, \hfill \\ {{\bar u}_1}(x, r) = \frac{{( - 1 + r){x^{1 + 2\alpha }}{c_1}}}{{\Gamma (2 + 2\alpha )}}. \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(4.7)

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} {\underline u _2}(x, r) = ( - 1 + r){x^{1 + 2\alpha }}\left( {\frac{{{x^{1 + \alpha }}c_1^2}}{{\Gamma (3 + 3\alpha )}} - \frac{{{c_1} + c_1^2 + {c_2}}}{{\Gamma (2 + 2\alpha )}}} \right), \hfill \\ {{\bar u}_2}(x, r) = ( - 1 + r){x^{1 + \alpha }}\left( { - \frac{{{x^{1 + \alpha }}c_1^2}}{{\Gamma (3 + 3\alpha )}} + \frac{{{c_1} + c_1^2 + {c_2}}}{{\Gamma (2 + 2\alpha )}}} \right). \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(4.8)

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} {\underline u _3}(x, r) = ( - 1 + r){x^{1 + 2\alpha }}\left( { - \frac{{{x^{2 + 2\alpha }}c_1^3}}{{\Gamma (4 + 4\alpha )}} + \frac{{2{x^{1 + \alpha }}{c_1}({c_1} + c_1^2 + {c_2})}}{{\Gamma (3 + 3\alpha )}} - \frac{{{c_1} + 2c_1^2 + c_1^3 + {c_2} + 2{c_1}{c_2} + {c_3}}}{{\Gamma (2 + 2\alpha )}}} \right), \hfill \\ {{\bar u}_3}(x, r) = ( - 1 + r){x^{1 + 2\alpha }}\left( {\frac{{{x^{2 + 2\alpha }}c_1^3}}{{\Gamma (4 + 4\alpha )}} - \frac{{2{x^{1 + \alpha }}{c_1}({c_1} + c_1^2 + {c_2})}}{{\Gamma (3 + 3\alpha )}} + \frac{{{c_1} + 2c_1^2 + c_1^3 + {c_2} + 2{c_1}{c_2} + {c_3}}}{{\Gamma (2 + 2\alpha )}}} \right). \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(4.9)

Adding (4.6), (4.7), (4.8) and (4.9), one can construct $\underline u (x, r)$ & $\bar u(x, r)$ :

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underline u (x, r) = ( - 1 + r){x^\alpha }\left( \begin{gathered} \frac{1}{{\Gamma (1 + \alpha )}} - \frac{{{x^{3 + 3\alpha }}c_1^3}}{{\Gamma (4 + 4\alpha )}} + \frac{{{x^{2 + 2\alpha }}{c_1}({c_1}(3 + 2{c_1}) + 2{c_2})}}{{\Gamma (3 + 3\alpha )}} - \hfill \\ \frac{{{x^{1 + \alpha }}(2{c_2} + {c_1}(3 + {c_1}(3 + {c_1}) + 2{c_2}) + {c_3})}}{{\Gamma (2 + 2\alpha )}} \hfill \\ \end{gathered} \right), \hfill \\ \bar u(x, r) = ( - 1 + r){x^\alpha }\left( \begin{gathered} - \frac{1}{{\Gamma (1 + \alpha )}} + \frac{{{x^{3 + 3\alpha }}c_1^3}}{{\Gamma (4 + 4\alpha )}} - \frac{{{x^{2 + 2\alpha }}{c_1}({c_1}(3 + 2{c_1}) + 2{c_2})}}{{\Gamma (3 + 3\alpha )}} + \hfill \\ \frac{{{x^{1 + \alpha }}(2{c_2} + {c_1}(3 + {c_1}(3 + {c_1}) + 2{c_2}) + {c_3})}}{{\Gamma (2 + 2\alpha )}} \hfill \\ \end{gathered} \right). \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(4.10)

Values of ${c_1}, \, \, {c_2}$ and ${c_3}$ contain is in Eq (4.10)

Substituting the values from into Eq (4.10), the approximate solutions for $\underline u (x, r)$ & $\bar u(x, r)$ at different values of $\alpha$ taking $r = 0.75$ respectively is as follow

$\alpha = 0.7$

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underset{\_}{u}(x, r)\approx -0.2751369{x}^{0.7}-0.08602097{x}^{2.4}-0.25{x}^{2.4}(-0.00904995+0.0376716{x}^{1.7})\\ -0.25{x}^{2.4}(0.000425859-0.00198165{x}^{1.7}+0.0021734872{x}^{3.4}), \\ \overline{u}(x, r)\approx 0.2751369{x}^{0.7}+0.08602097{x}^{2.4}-0.25{x}^{2.4}(0.00904995-0.0376716{x}^{1.7})-\\ 0.25{x}^{2.4}(-0.000425859+0.00198165{x}^{1.7}-0.0021734872{x}^{3.4}).\end{array} \right.$

(4.11)

$\alpha = 0.8$

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underset{\_}{u}(x, r)\approx -0.2684178{x}^{0.8}-0.0685589{x}^{2.6}-0.25{x}^{2.6}(-0.005391327+0.023297809{x}^{1.8})\\ -0.25{x}^{2.6}(0.000197513-0.0009160448{x}^{1.8}+0.001008410504{x}^{3.6}), \\ \overline{u}(x, r)\approx 0.2684178{x}^{0.8}+0.0685589{x}^{2.6}-0.25{x}^{2.6}(0.0053913-0.023297809{x}^{1.8})\\ -0.25{x}^{2.6}(-0.000197513+0.0009160448{x}^{1.8}-0.001008410504{x}^{3.6}).\end{array} \right.$

(4.12)

$\alpha = 0.9$

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underset{\_}{u}(x, r)\approx -0.2599385{x}^{0.9}-0.0540269{x}^{2.8}-0.25{x}^{2.8}(-0.0031639+0.01418901{x}^{1.9})\\ -0.25{x}^{2.8}(0.00008989-0.0004154745{x}^{1.9}+0.000458881{x}^{3.8}), \\ \overline{u}(x, r)\approx 0.2599385{x}^{0.9}+0.0540269{x}^{2.8}-0.25{x}^{2.8}(0.0031639-0.014189097{x}^{1.9})\\ -0.25{x}^{2.8}(-0.00008989+0.0004154745{x}^{1.9}-0.000458881{x}^{3.8}).\end{array} \right.$

(4.13)

$\alpha = 1$

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underset{\_}{u}(x, r)\approx -0.25x-0.042114377{x}^{3}-0.25{x}^{3}(-0.001829736+0.0085133796{x}^{2})\\ -0.25{x}^{3}(0.0000401535-0.0001849397{x}^{2}+0.00020487753{x}^{4}), \\ \overline{u}(x, r)\approx 0.25x+0.042114377{x}^{3}-0.25{x}^{3}(0.001829736-0.0085133796{x}^{2})\\ -0.25{x}^{3}(-0.0000401535+0.0001849397{x}^{2}-0.0002048775{x}^{4}).\end{array} \right.$

(4.14)

Table 1. at r = 0.75.

$\alpha$	${\underline c _1}$ & ${\overline c _1}$	${\underline c _2}$ & ${\overline c _2}$	${\underline c _3}$ & ${\overline c _3}$
0.7	−1.0257850714449026	5.298291106236844×10⁻⁴	−3.040859671410477×10⁻⁵
0.8	−1.0193406988378892	3.249294721058776×10⁻⁴	−1.5364294422415488×10⁻⁵
0.9	−1.014446487354385	1.9694362983845834×10⁻⁴	−7.63055570435551×10⁻⁶
1	−1.0107450504316333	1.1791102776455743×10⁻⁴	−3.779171763451589×10⁻⁶

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Substituting the values from into Eq (4.10), the approximate solutions for $\underline u (x, r)$ & $\bar u(x, r)$ at different values of $\alpha$ taking $r = 0.5$ respectively is as follow

$\alpha = 0.7$

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underline u (x, r) \approx - 0.5502737{x^{0.7}} - 0.172041940{x^{2.4}} - 0.5{x^{2.4}}( - 0.00904995 + 0.0376716{x^{1.7}}) \hfill \\ - 0.5{x^{2.4}}(0.0004258594 - 0.0019816476{x^{1.7}} + 0.0021734872{x^{3.4}}), \hfill \\ \bar u(x, r) \approx 0.5502737{x^{0.7}} + 0.172041940{x^{2.4}} - 0.5{x^{2.4}}(0.00904995 - 0.03767164{x^{1.7}}) \hfill \\ - 0.5{x^{2.4}}( - 0.0004258594 + 0.0019816476{x^{1.7}} - 0.0021734872{x^{3.4}}). \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(4.15)

$\alpha = 0.8$

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underset{\_}{u}(x, r)\approx -0.53683564{x}^{0.8}-0.137117858{x}^{2.6}-0.5{x}^{2.6}(-0.00539133+0.02329781{x}^{1.8})\\ -0.5{x}^{2.6}(0.00019751-0.0009160448{x}^{1.8}+0.0010084105{x}^{3.6}), \\ \overline{u}(x, r)\approx 0.53683564{x}^{0.8}+0.137117858{x}^{2.6}-0.5{x}^{2.6}(0.00539133-0.02329781{x}^{1.8})\\ -0.5{x}^{2.6}(-0.00019751+0.0009160448{x}^{1.8}-0.0010084105{x}^{3.6}).\end{array} \right.$

(4.16)

$\alpha = 0.9$

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underset{\_}{u}(x, r)\approx -0.5198771{x}^{0.9}-0.10805378{x}^{2.8}-0.5{x}^{2.8}(-0.0031640+0.0141891{x}^{1.9})\\ -0.5{x}^{2.8}(0.0000898945-0.0004154745{x}^{1.9}+0.000458881{x}^{3.8}), \\ \overline{u}(x, r)\approx 0.5198771{x}^{0.9}+0.10805378{x}^{2.8}-0.5{x}^{2.8}(0.0031640-0.0141891{x}^{1.9})\\ -0.5{x}^{2.8}(-0.0000898945+0.0004154745{x}^{1.9}-0.000458881{x}^{3.8}).\end{array} \right.$

(4.17)

$\alpha = 1$

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underset{\_}{u}(x, r)\approx -0.5x-0.0842288{x}^{3}-0.5{x}^{3}(-0.0018298+0.008513{x}^{2})-0.5{x}^{3}\\ (0.0000401612-0.00018494622{x}^{2}+0.0002048777{x}^{4}), \\ \overline{u}(x, r)\approx 0.5x+0.0842288{x}^{3}-0.5{x}^{3}(0.0018298-0.008513{x}^{2})-0.5{x}^{3}\\ (-0.000040162+0.00018494622{x}^{2}-0.0002048777{x}^{4}).\end{array} \right.$

(4.18)

Table 2. at r = 0.5.

$\alpha$	${\underline c _1}$ & ${\overline c _1}$	${\underline c _2}$ & ${\overline c _2}$	${\underline c _3}$ & ${\overline c _3}$
0.7	−1.0257850714449026	5.298291106236844×10⁻⁴	−3.040859671410477×10⁻⁵
0.8	−1.0193406988378892	3.249294721058776×10⁻⁴	−1.5364294422415488×10⁻⁵
0.9 1	−1.014446487354385 −1.0107453381292266	1.9694362983845834×10⁻⁴ 1.1800167363027721×10⁻⁴	−7.630555570435551×10⁻⁶ −3.726389827252244×10⁻⁶

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Problem 4.2. Consider system of fuzzy fractional order Volterra integro-differential equation as ^[59]:

$D_x^\alpha u(x, r) + \int\limits_0^t {u(t, r)dt = 0} , \, \, \, \, 0 < \alpha \leqslant 1, \, \, x \in [0, 1],$

(4.19)

subject to the fuzzy initial condition ${\left[ {u(0)} \right]^r} = \left[ {r - 1, 1 - r} \right],$ and the exact solution is $\underline u (x, r) = \left( {r - 1} \right){E_{\alpha + 1}}\left( { - {t^{\alpha + 1}}} \right), \bar u(x, r) = \left( {1 - r} \right){E_{\alpha + 1}}\left( { - {t^{\alpha + 1}}} \right),$

where ${E_{\alpha + 1}}$ is a Mittag-Leffler function and $0 \leqslant r \leqslant 1.$

By follow the technique as discussed in section 3, we get series of problems and their solutions as:

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} {D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _0}(x, r) = 0, \hfill \\ {D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_0}(x, r) = 0. \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(4.20)

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} {D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _1}(x, r) + \left( { - \mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\underline u }_0}(t, r)dt} \right){c_1} - {D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _0}(x, r) - {c_1}{D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _0}(x, r) = 0, \hfill \\ {D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_1}(x, r) + \left( { - \mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\bar u}_0}(t, r)dt} \right){c_1} - {D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_0}(x, r) - {c_1}{D_x}^\alpha \bar u(x, r) = 0. \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(4.21)

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} {D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _2}(x, r) + \left( {\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\underline u }_1}(t, r)dt} \right){c_1} - \left( {\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\underline u }_0}(t, r)dt} \right){c_2} - {c_2}{D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _0}(x, r) - {D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _1}(x, r) - {c_1}{D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _0}(x, r) = 0, \hfill \\ {D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_2}(x, r) + \left( { - \mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\bar u}_1}(t, r)dt} \right){c_1} - \left( {\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\bar u}_0}(t, r)dt} \right){c_2} - {c_2}{D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_0}(x, r) - {D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_1}(x, r) - {c_1}{D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_0}(x, r) = 0. \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(4.22)

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} {D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _3}(x, r) - \left( {\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\underline u }_2}(t, r)dt} \right){c_1} - \left( {\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\underline u }_1}(t, r)dt} \right){c_2} - \left( {\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\underline u }_0}(t, r)dt} \right){c_3} - {c_3}{D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _0}(x, r) \hfill \\ - {c_2}{D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _1}(x, r) - {D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _2}(x, r) - {c_1}{D_x}^\alpha {\underline u _2}(x, r) = 0, \hfill \\ {D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_3}(x, r) - \left( {\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\bar u}_2}(t, r)dt} \right){c_1} - \left( {\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\bar u}_1}(t, r)dt} \right){c_2} - \left( {\mathop \smallint \limits_0^x {{\bar u}_0}(t, r)dt} \right){c_3} - {c_3}{D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_0}(x, r) \hfill \\ - {c_2}{D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_1}(x, r) - {D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_2}(x, r) - {c_1}{D_x}^\alpha {{\bar u}_2}(x, r) = 0. \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(4.23)

And their solutions are

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} {\underline u _0}(x, r) = r - 1, \hfill \\ {{\bar u}_0}(x, r) = 1 - r. \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(4.24)

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} {\underline u _1}(x, \underline r ) = \frac{{( - 1 + r){x^{1 + \alpha }}{c_1}}}{{(\alpha + {\alpha ^2})\Gamma (\alpha )}}, \hfill \\ {\overline u _1}(x, \overline r ) = - \frac{{( - 1 + r){x^{1 + \alpha }}{c_1}}}{{\alpha (1 + \alpha )\Gamma (\alpha )}}, \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(4.25)

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} {\underline u _2}(x, r) = ( - 1 + r){x^{1 + \alpha }}\left( {\frac{{{x^{1 + \alpha }}c_1^2}}{{\Gamma (3 + 2\alpha )}} + \frac{{{c_1} + c_1^2 + {c_2}}}{{\Gamma (2 + \alpha )}}} \right), \hfill \\ {{\bar u}_2}(x, r) = ( - 1 + r){x^{1 + \alpha }}\left( { - \frac{{{x^{1 + \alpha }}c_1^2}}{{\Gamma (3 + 2\alpha )}} - \frac{{{c_1} + c_1^2 + {c_2}}}{{\Gamma (2 + \alpha )}}} \right). \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(4.26)

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} {\underline u _3}(x, r) = \frac{{( - 1 + r){x^{1 + \alpha }}\left( {{c_2} + {c_1}\left( {1 + \frac{{{x^{2 + 2\alpha }}c_1^2}}{{\Gamma (4 + 2\alpha )}} + {c_1}(2 + {c_1}) + 2{c_2} + \frac{{2{x^{1 + \alpha }}({c_1} + c_1^2 + {c_2})}}{{\Gamma (3 + 3\alpha )}}} \right) + {c_3}} \right)}}{{\Gamma (1 + \alpha )}}, \hfill \\ {{\bar u}_3}(x, r) = ( - 1 + r){x^{1 + \alpha }}\left( { - \frac{{{x^{2 + 2\alpha }}c_1^3}}{{\Gamma (4 + 3\alpha )}} - \frac{{2{x^{1 + \alpha }}{c_1}({c_1} + c_1^2 + {c_2})}}{{\Gamma (3 + 2\alpha )}} - \frac{{{c_2} + {c_1}({{(1 + {c_1})}^2} + 2{c_2}) + {c_3}}}{{\Gamma (2 + \alpha )}}} \right), \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(4.27)

Adding (4.24), (4.25), (4.26) and (4.27), one can construct $\underline u (x, r)$ & $\bar u(x, r)$ :

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underline u (x, r) = - 1 + r + ( - 1 + r){x^{1 + \alpha }}\left( \begin{gathered} \frac{{{x^{1 + \alpha }}c_1^2}}{{\Gamma (3 + 2\alpha )}} + \frac{{{x^{2 + 2\alpha }}c_1^3}}{{\Gamma (1 + \alpha )\Gamma (4 + 2\alpha )}} + \frac{{2{x^{1 + \alpha }}{c_1}({c_1} + c_1^2 + {c_2})}}{{\Gamma (1 + \alpha )\Gamma (3 + \alpha )}} \hfill \\ + \frac{{{c_1}(2 + {c_1}) + {c_2}}}{{\Gamma (2 + \alpha )}} + \frac{{{c_2} + {c_1}({{(1 + {c_1})}^2} + 2{c_2}) + {c_3}}}{{\Gamma (1 + \alpha )}} \hfill \\ \end{gathered} \right), \hfill \\ \bar u(x, r) = 1 - r + ( - 1 + r){x^{1 + \alpha }}\left( \begin{gathered} - \frac{{{x^{2 + 2\alpha }}c_1^3}}{{\Gamma (4 + 3\alpha )}} - \frac{{{x^{1 + \alpha }}{c_1}({c_1}(3 + 2{c_1}) + 2{c_2})}}{{\Gamma (3 + 2\alpha )}} - \hfill \\ \frac{{2{c_2} + {c_1}(3 + {c_1}(3 + {c_1}) + 2{c_2}) + {c_3}}}{{\Gamma (2 + \alpha )}} \hfill \\ \end{gathered} \right). \hfill \\ \end{array} \right.$

(4.28)

Values of ${c_1}, \, \, {c_2}$ and ${c_3}$ contain in Eq (4.28)

Substituting the values from and into Eq (4.28), the approximate solutions for $\underline u (x, r)$ & $\bar u(x, r)$ at different values of $\alpha$ taking $r = 0.5$ is as follow

$\alpha = 0.2$

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underset{\_}{u}(x, r)\approx -0.5-0.5{x}^{1.2}(-0.905948+0.325139{x}^{1.2}-0.055807{x}^{2.4}), \\ \overline{u}(x, r)\approx 0.5-0.5{x}^{1.2}(0.905948-0.325139{x}^{1.2}+0.055807{x}^{2.4}).\end{array} \right.$

(4.29)

$\alpha = 0.4$

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underset{\_}{u}(x, r)\approx -0.5-0.5{x}^{1.4}(-0.804545+0.210093{x}^{1.4}-0.025570{x}^{2.8}), \\ \overline{u}(x, r)\approx 0.5-0.5{x}^{1.4}(0.80454545-0.210093{x}^{1.4}+0.025570{x}^{2.8}).\end{array} \right.$

(4.30)

$\alpha = 0.6$

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underset{\_}{u}(x, r)\approx -0.5-0.5{x}^{1.6}(-0.699349+0.128177{x}^{1.6}-0.010450{x}^{3.2}), \\ \overline{u}(x, r)\approx 0.5-0.5{x}^{1.6}(0.699349-0.128177{x}^{1.6}+0.010450{x}^{3.2}).\end{array} \right.$

(4.31)

$\alpha = 0.8$

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underset{\_}{u}(x, r)\approx -0.5-0.5{x}^{1.8}(-0.596450+0.074561{x}^{1.8}-0.0038863{x}^{3.6}), \\ \overline{u}(x, r)\approx 0.5-0.5{x}^{1.8}(0.5964503-0.074561{x}^{1.8}+0.0038863{x}^{3.6}).\end{array} \right.$

(4.32)

$\alpha = 1$

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underset{\_}{u}(x, r)\approx -0.5-0.5{x}^{2}(-0.499992+0.04163089{x}^{2}-0.001336253{x}^{4}), \\ \overline{u}(x, r)\approx 0.5-0.5{x}^{2}(0.4999914-0.04163076{x}^{2}+0.001336247{x}^{4}).\end{array} \right.$

(4.33)

Table 3. at r = 0.5.

$\alpha$	${\underline c _1}$	${\underline c _2}$	${\underline c _3}$
0.2	−0.8038238618267683	7.6178003377104005×10⁻³	−1.334733828882206×10⁻³
0.4	−0.739676946061329	0.02530379950927192	−3.78307542584476×10⁻³
0.6	−0.6725325561865596	0.04771922184372877	−8.140310215705777×10⁻³
0.8	−0.6062340661192892	0.06889015391501904	−0.015746150088743013
1.0	−0.5432795308983783	0.08615024033359142	−0.026582381449582644

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Table 4. at r = 0.5.

$\alpha$	${\overline c _1}$	${\overline c _2}$	${\overline c _3}$
0.2	−0.9072542694138958	3.5727393445527333×10⁻³	3.637119200533134×10⁻⁴
0.4	−0.9409187563211361	1.9803045412863643×10⁻³	1.7807647588483674×10⁻⁴
0.6	−0.9636043521097131	9.808463578935658×10⁻⁴	7.369503633679291×10⁻⁵
0.8	−0.9781782948007163	4.4492367269725435×10⁻⁴	2.6729929232143615×10⁻⁵
1.0	−0.9872029432879605	1.896941835601795×10⁻⁴	1.021455544474314×10⁻⁵

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Substituting the values from and into Eq (4.28), the approximate solutions for $\underline u (x, r)$ & $\bar u(x, r)$ at different values of $r$ taking $\alpha = 0.5$ is as follow

$r = 0$

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underset{\_}{u}(x, r)\approx -1-{x}^{1.5}(-0.75199032254+0.165168588631{x}^{1.5}-0.016559344247{x}^{3.}), \\ \overline{u}(x, r)\approx 1-{x}^{1.5}(0.75199032256-0.165168588653{x}^{1.5}+0.016559344262{x}^{3.}).\end{array} \right.$

(4.34)

$r = 0.2$

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underset{\_}{u}(x, r)\approx -0.8-0.8{x}^{1.5}(-0.751990322550+0.165168588{x}^{1.5}-0.01655934425{x}^{3.}), \\ \overline{u}(x, r)\approx 0.8-0.8{x}^{1.5}(0.751990322554-0.165168588{x}^{1.5}+0.01655934426{x}^{3.}). \end{array} \right.$

(4.35)

$r = 0.4$

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underset{\_}{u}(x, r)\approx -0.6-0.6{x}^{1.5}(-0.7519903225+0.1651685886{x}^{1.5}-0.016559344250{x}^{3.}), \\ \overline{u}(x, r)\approx 0.6-0.6{x}^{1.5}(0.7519903225-0.1651685886{x}^{1.5}+0.0165593442496{x}^{3.}).\end{array} \right.$

(4.36)

$r = 0.6$

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underset{\_}{u}(x, r)\approx -0.4-0.4{x}^{1.5}(-0.751990322550+0.16516858863{x}^{1.5}-0.01655934425{x}^{3.}), \\ \overline{u}(x, r)\approx 0.4-0.4{x}^{1.5}(0.751990322554-0.16516858865{x}^{1.5}+0.01655934426{x}^{3.}).\end{array} \right.$

(4.37)

$r = 0.8$

$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \underset{\_}{u}(x, r)\approx -0.1999910-0.1999910{x}^{1.5}(-0.7519903+0.16516859{x}^{1.5}-0.0165593{x}^{3.}), \\ \overline{u}(x, r)\approx 0.19999910-0.19999910{x}^{1.5}(0.7519903-0.16516859{x}^{1.5}+0.0165593{x}^{3.}).\end{array} \right.$

(4.38)

Table 5. at

$\alpha$ = 0.5.

$r$	${\underline c _1}$	${\underline c _2}$	${\underline c _3}$
$0$	$- 0.7062087686601037$	$0.03638991875243272$	$- 5.6065011933001474 \times {10^{ - 3}}$
$0.2$	$- 0.7062087687083373$	$0.03638991875755982$	$- 5.606501189519195 \times {10^{ - 3}}$
$0.4$	$- 0.7062087686911187$	$0.03638991875566347$	$- 5.606501190876118 \times {10^{ - 3}}$
$0.6$	$- 0.7062087687083373$	$0.03638991875755982$	$- 5.606501189519195 \times {10^{ - 3}}$
$0.8$	$- 0.7062087686312865$	$0.036389918749298394$	$- 5.606501195566148 \times {10^{ - 3}}$

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Table 6. at

$\alpha$ = 0.5.

$r$	${\overline c _1}$	${\overline c _2}$	${\overline c _3}$
$0$	$- 0.9534544876637709$	$1.4110239362094313 \times {10^{ - 3}}$	$1.1669890178958486 \times {10^{ - 4}}$
$0.2$	$- 0.9534544876175205$	$1.4110239407705756 \times {10^{ - 3}}$	$1.1669890245071123 \times {10^{ - 4}}$
$0.4$	$- 0.9534544874104965$	$1.4110239614371703 \times {10^{ - 3}}$	$1.1669890547775563 \times {10^{ - 4}}$
$0.6$	$- 0.9534544876175205$	$1.4110239407705756 \times {10^{ - 3}}$	$1.1669890245071123 \times {10^{ - 4}}$
$0.8$	$- 0.9534544876289686$	$1.4110239398903034 \times {10^{ - 3}}$	$1.1669890235330204 \times {10^{ - 4}}$

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

5. Result and discussion

– show the values of auxiliary constant at different values of $r$ & $\alpha$ for both lower and upper solution of OHAM for the solved problems. and show the comparison of absolute error of 3^rd order OHAM with Fractional Residual Power Series (FRPS) Method for 5-approximated solution and $k = 5$ for both lower and upper solutions of OHAM at different value of $\alpha$ for problem 1. Comparison of absolute error of 3^rd orders OHAM for both lower and upper solution of OHAM are shown in and . Numerical result show that OHAM provide more accuracy as compared to the other method and as $\alpha \to 1$ the approximate solution become very close to the exact solution. Graphical representation confirmed the convergence of fractional order solution towards the integer order solution. In graphical representation of OHAM at $\alpha = 0.7, \, \, 0.8, \, \, 0.9\, , \, \, 1, \, \, r = 0.75$ and $\alpha = 0.7, \, \, 0.8, \, \, 0.9\, , \, \, 1, \, \, r = 0.50$ are discussed for both $\underline u (x, r)$ & $\bar u(x, r)$ for problem 1. Figures 2 and 3 show the comparison of OHAM with the exact solution at different values of and taking r = 0.75 & r = 0.5 respectively for problem 1. represent the comparison of OHAM at $\alpha = 0.2, \, 0.4, \, \, 0.6, \, \, 0.8, \, \, 1, \, \, r = 0.5$ and $r = 0, \, \, 0.2, \, 0.4, \, \, 0.6, \, \, 0.8, \, \, \alpha \, = 0.5$ for both $\underline u (x, r)$ and $\bar u(x, r)$ for problem 2. Figure 5 shows the comparison of OHAM with the exact solution at different values of and r = 0.5 while Figure 6 shows the comparison of OHAM with the exact solution at different values of r and = 0.5 for problem 2.

Table 7. Comparison of Absolute Error (Abs Err.) of 3^rd order OHAM for

$\underline u (x, r)$ and Fractional Residual Power Series (FRPS) ^[54] Method for 5-approximated solution and

$k = 5$ for problem 1.

$r$	$x$	FRPS ^[58] $\alpha = 0.7$	OHAM	FRPS ^[58] $\alpha = 0.8$	OHAM	FRPS ^[58] $\alpha = 0.9$	OHAM	FRPS ^[58] $\alpha = 1$	OHAM
0.75	0.2	0.042797	0.040621	0.025514	0.024764	0.011512	0.011321	6.35273×10⁻¹⁰	2.14676×10⁻⁹
	0.4	0.059664	0.051698	0.035840	0.032584	0.016392	0.015405	8.14507×10⁻⁸	1.00832×10⁻⁸
	0.6	0.075769	0.058997	0.045171	0.037635	0.020545	0.018031	1.39554×10⁻⁶	1.11336×10⁻⁸
	0.8	0.094364	0.066136	0.055863	0.04232	0.025182	0.020362	1.04955×10⁻⁵	6.21567×10⁻⁹
0.50	0.2	0.085595	0.081241	0.051027	0.049528	0.011321	0.022643	1.27055×10⁻⁹	4.25946×10⁻⁹
	0.4	0.119328	0.103396	0.071680	0.065167	0.015405	0.030811	1.62901×10⁻⁷	1.98877×10⁻⁸
	0.6	0.151537	0.117994	0.090342	0.075269	0.018031	0.036062	2.79107×10⁻⁶	2.12923×10⁻⁸
	0.8	0.188728	0.132271	0.111723	0.084640	0.020362	0.040725	2.09911×10⁻⁵	1.00120×10⁻⁸

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Table 8. Comparison of Absolute Error (Abs Err.) of 3rd order OHAM for

$\bar u(x, r)$ and Fractional Residual Power Series (FRPS) ^[58] Method for 5-approximated solution and

$k = 5$ for problem 1.

$r$	$x$	FRPS ^[58] $\alpha = 0.7$	OHAM	FRPS ^[58] $\alpha = 0.8$	OHAM	FRPS ^[58] $\alpha = 0.9$	OHAM	FRPS ^[58] $\alpha = 1$	OHAM
0.75	0.2	0.085595	0.081242	0.025514	0.024764	0.011512	0.011321	6.35273×10⁻¹⁰	2.14676×10⁻⁹
	0.4	0.119328	0.103396	0.035840	0.032584	0.016392	0.015405	8.14507×10⁻⁸	1.00832×10⁻⁸
	0.6	0.151537	0.117994	0.045171	0.037635	0.020545	0.018031	1.39554×10⁻⁶	1.11336×10⁻⁸
	0.8	0.188728	0.132271	0.055862	0.04232	0.025182	0.020362	1.04955×10⁻⁵	6.21567×10⁻⁹
0.50	0.2	0.042797	0.040621	0.051027	0.049528	0.023025	0.022643	1.27055×10⁻⁹	4.25946×10⁻⁹
	0.4	0.059664	0.051698	0.071680	0.065167	0.032784	0.030811	1.62901×10⁻⁷	1.98877×10⁻⁸
	0.6	0.075769	0.058997	0.090342	0.075269	0.041090	0.036062	2.79107×10⁻⁶	2.12923×10⁻⁸
	0.8	0.094364	0.066136	0.111723	0.084640	0.050364	0.040725	2.09911×10⁻⁵	1.0012×10⁻⁸

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Table 9. Comparison of Absolute Error (Abs Err.) of 3^rd order OHAM for

$\underline u (x, \underline r )$ &

$\bar u(x, r)$ at different values of

$\alpha$ taking

$r = 0.5$ for problem 2.

$x$	$\underline u (x, r)$ $\alpha = 0.4$	$\bar u(x, r)$	$\underline u (x, r)$ $\alpha = 0.6$	$\bar u(x, r)$	$\underline u (x, r)$ $\alpha = 0.8$	$\bar u(x, r)$	$\underline u (x, r)$ $\alpha = 1$	$\bar u(x, r)$
0.2	1.2736×10⁻⁵	1.2736×10⁻⁵	3.2527×10⁻⁶	3.2527×10⁻⁶	6.93075×10⁻⁷	6.93076×10⁻⁷	1.29476×10⁻⁷	1.44585×10⁻⁷
0.4	2.3337×10⁻⁶	2.3337×10⁻⁶	2.4426×10⁻⁶	2.4426×10⁻⁶	9.50573×10⁻⁷	9.50573×10⁻⁷	2.67538×10⁻⁷	3.26771×10⁻⁷
0.6	9.9993×10^-6	9.9993×10⁻⁶	1.8451×10⁻⁶	1.8451×10⁻⁶	3.8544×10⁻⁸	3.85438×10⁻⁸	1.10198×10⁻⁷	2.39031×10⁻⁷
0.8	4.1251×10⁻⁶	4.1251×10⁻⁶	1.3416×10⁻⁷	1.3416×10⁻⁷	6.55017×10⁻⁸	6.55017×10⁻⁸	9.64628×10⁻⁹	2.27883×10⁻⁷
1.0	1.312×10⁻⁵	1.312×10⁻⁵	1.8373×10⁻⁶	1.8373×10⁻⁶	5.49341×10⁻⁸	5.4934×10⁻⁸	7.7356×10⁻⁸	3.9735×10⁻⁷

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Table 10. Comparison of Absolute Error (Abs Err.) of 3^rd order OHAM for

$\underline u (x, r)$ &

$\bar u(x, r)$ at different values of

$r$ taking

$\alpha = 0.5$ for problem 2.

$x$	$\underline u (x, r)$ $r = 0.4$	$\bar u(x, r)$	$\underline u (x, r)$ $r = 0.6$	$\bar u(x, r)$	$\underline u (x, r)$ $r = 0.8$	$\bar u(x, r)$	$\underline u (x, r)$ $r = 1$	$\bar u(x, r)$
0.	0.	0.	0.	0.	0.	0.	0.	0.
0.2	1.0578×10⁻⁵	1.0578×10⁻⁵	7.9338×10⁻⁶	7.9338×10⁻⁶	5.28921×10⁻⁶	5.28921×10⁻⁶	2.64461×10⁻⁶	2.64461×10⁻⁶
0.4	4.8940×10⁻⁶	4.8940×10⁻⁶	3.6705×10⁻⁶	3.6705×10⁻⁶	2.44698×10⁻⁶	2.44698×10⁻⁶	1.22349×10⁻⁶	1.22349×10⁻⁶
0.6	7.4825×10⁻⁶	7.4825×10⁻⁶	5.6119×10⁻⁶	5.6119×10⁻⁶	3.74125×10⁻⁶	3.74125×10⁻⁶	1.87062×10⁻⁶	1.87062×10⁻⁶
1.8	1.8038×10⁻⁶	1.8038×10⁻⁶	1.35291×10⁻⁶	1.35291×10⁻⁶	9.01939×10⁻⁷	9.01939×10⁻⁷	4.5097×10⁻⁷	4.5097×10⁻⁷

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Figure 1. Solution plot of OHAM for

$\underline u (x, r)$ &

$\bar u(x, r)$ at different values of

$r$ &

$\alpha$ for problem 1.

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Figure 2. Solution plot of OHAM and Exact for

$\underline u (x, r)$ &

$\bar u(x, r)$ at different values of

$\alpha$ taking

$r = 0.75$ for problem 1.

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Figure 3. Solution plot of OHAM and Exact for

$\underline u (x, r)$ &

$\bar u(x, r)$ at different values of

$\alpha$ taking

$r = 0.50$ for problem 1.

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Figure 4. Solution plot of OHAM for

$\underline u (x, r)$ &

$\bar u(x, r)$ at different values of

$r$ &

$\alpha$ for problem 2.

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Figure 5. Solution plot of OHAM and Exact for

$\underline u (x, r)$ &

$\bar u(x, r)$ at different values of

$\alpha$ taking

$r = 0.5$ for problem 2.

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Figure 6. Solution plot of OHAM and Exact for

$\underline u (x, r)$ &

$\bar u(x, r)$ at different values of

$r$ taking

$\alpha = 0.5$ for problem 2.

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

6. Conclusions

In the research paper, a powerful technique known as Optimal Homotopy Asymptotic Method (OHAM) has been extended to the solution of system of fuzzy integro differential equations of fractional order. The obtained results are quite interesting and are in good agreement with the exact solution. Two numerical equations are taken as test examples which show the behavior and reliability of the proposed method. The extension of OHAM to system of fuzzy integro differential equations of fractional order is more accurate and as a result this technique will more appealing for the researchers for finding out optimum solutions of system of fuzzy integro differential equations of fractional order.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

[1]	W. Kim, F. Tendick, S. Ellis, L. Stark, A comparison of position and rate control for telemanipulations with consideration of manipulator system dynamics, IEEE J. Rob. Autom., 3 (1987), 426–436. https://doi.org/10.1109/JRA.1987.1087117 doi: 10.1109/JRA.1987.1087117
[2]	C. Fernandes, L. Gurvit, Z. X. Li, Attitude control of space platform/manipulator system using internal motion, Space Rob. Dyn. Control, 1993 (1993), 131–163. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-3588-1_6 doi: 10.1007/978-1-4615-3588-1_6
[3]	Yun, D. Moon, J. Ha, S. Kang, W. Lee, Modman: An advanced reconfigurable manipulator system with genderless connector and automatic kinematic modeling algorithm, IEEE Rob. Autom. Lett., 5 (2020), 4225–4232. https://doi.org/10.1109/LRA.2020.2994486 doi: 10.1109/LRA.2020.2994486
[4]	M. Tognon, H. A. T. Chávez, E. Gasparin, Q. Sablé, D. Bicego, A truly-redundant aerial manipulator system with application to push-and-slide inspection in industrial plants, IEEE Rob. Autom. Lett., 4 (2019), 1846–1851. https://doi.org/10.1109/LRA.2019.2895880 doi: 10.1109/LRA.2019.2895880
[5]	J. Zhang, L. Jin, C. Yang, Distributed cooperative kinematic control of multiple robotic manipulators with an improved communication efficiency, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron., 27 (2021), 149–158. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMECH.2021.3059441 doi: 10.1109/TMECH.2021.3059441
[6]	Y. Zhou, Y. Li, PLC control system of pneumatic manipulator automatic assembly line based on cloud computing platform, J. Phys. Conf. Ser., 1744 (2021), 022011. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1744/2/022011 doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1744/2/022011
[7]	Z. Xie, L. Jin, X. Luo, Z. Sun, M. Liu, RNN for repetitive motion generation of redundant robot manipulators: An orthogonal projection-based scheme, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks Learn. Syst., 33 (2020), 615–628. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNNLS.2020.3028304 doi: 10.1109/TNNLS.2020.3028304
[8]	S. K. Dwivedy, P. Eberhard, Dynamic analysis of flexible manipulators, a literature review, Mech. Mach. Theory, 41 (2006), 749–777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2006.01.014 doi: 10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2006.01.014
[9]	Z. Mohamed, J. M. Martins, M. O.Tokhi, J. Sá Da Costa, M. A. Botto, Vibration control of a very flexible manipulator system, Control Eng. Prac., 13 (2005), 267–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conengprac.2003.11.014 doi: 10.1016/j.conengprac.2003.11.014
[10]	L. Tian, C. Collins, A dynamic recurrent neural network-based controller for a rigid-flexible manipulator system, Mechatronics, 14 (2004), 471–490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechatronics.2003.10.002 doi: 10.1016/j.mechatronics.2003.10.002
[11]	Y. Liu, W. Zhan, M. Xing, Y. Wu, R. Xu, X. Wu, Boundary control of a rotating and length-varying flexible robotic manipulator system, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst., 52 (2020), 377–386. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.2020.2999485 doi: 10.1109/TSMC.2020.2999485
[12]	F. Cao, J. Liu, Three-dimensional modeling and input saturation control for a two-link flexible manipulator based on infinite dimensional model, J. Franklin Inst., 357 (2020), 1026–1042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfranklin.2019.10.018 doi: 10.1016/j.jfranklin.2019.10.018
[13]	Y. Song, X. He, Z. Liu, W. He, C. Sun, F. Y. Wang, Parallel control of distributed parameter systems, IEEE Trans. Cybern., 48 (2018), 3291–3301. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCYB.2018.2849569 doi: 10.1109/TCYB.2018.2849569
[14]	F. Cao, J. Liu, Boundary control for PDE flexible manipulators: Accommodation to both actuator faults and sensor faults, Asian J. Control, 24 (2022), 1700–1712. https://doi.org/10.1002/asjc.2560 doi: 10.1002/asjc.2560
[15]	T. Jiang, J. Liu, W. He, Boundary control for a flexible manipulator based on infinite dimensional disturbance observer, J. Sound Vib., 348 (2015), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2015.02.044 doi: 10.1016/j.jsv.2015.02.044
[16]	M. Dogan, Y. Istefanopulos, Optimal nonlinear controller design for flexible robot manipulators with adaptive internal model, IET Control Theory Appl., 1 (2007), 770–778. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-cta:20050272 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta:20050272
[17]	T. Wongratanaphisan, M. O. T. Cole, Robust impedance control of a flexible structure mounted manipulator performing contact tasks, IEEE Trans. Rob., 25 (2009), 445–451. https://doi.org/10.1109/TRO.2008.2012340 doi: 10.1109/TRO.2008.2012340
[18]	H. C. Shin, S. B. Choi, Position control of a two-link flexible manipulator featuring piezoelectric actuators and sensors, Mechatronics, 11 (2001), 707–729. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0957-4158(00)00045-3 doi: 10.1016/S0957-4158(00)00045-3
[19]	S. Tong, Y. Li, Observer-based adaptive fuzzy backstepping control of uncertain nonlinear pure-feedback systems, Sci. China Inf. Sci., 57 (2014), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-013-5043-y doi: 10.1007/s11432-013-5043-y
[20]	W. He, X. He, M. Zou, H. Li, PDE model-based boundary control design for a flexible robotic manipulator with input backlash, IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., 27 (2018), 790–797. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCST.2017.2780055 doi: 10.1109/TCST.2017.2780055
[21]	H. J. Yang, M. Tan, Sliding mode control for flexible-link manipulators based on adaptive neural networks, Int. J. Autom. Comput., 15 (2018), 239–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11633-018-1122-2 doi: 10.1007/s11633-018-1122-2
[22]	L. Li, J. Liu, Neural-network-based adaptive fault-tolerant vibration control of single-link flexible manipulator, Trans. Inst. Meas. Control, 42 (2020), 430–438. https://doi.org/10.1177/0142331219874157 doi: 10.1177/0142331219874157
[23]	M. B. Cheng, V. Radisavljevic, W. C. Su, Sliding mode boundary control of a parabolic PDE system with parameter variations and boundary uncertainties, Automatica, 47 (2011), 381–387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.automatica.2010.10.045 doi: 10.1016/j.automatica.2010.10.045
[24]	Y. Zhao, H. Gao, J. Qiu, Fuzzy observer based control for nonlinear coupled hyperbolic PDE-ODE systems, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., 27 (2018), 1332–1346. https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2018.2877635 doi: 10.1109/TFUZZ.2018.2877635
[25]	J. Qiu, S. X. Ding, H. Gao, S. Yin, Fuzzy-model-based reliable static output feedback control of nonlinear hyperbolic PDE systems, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., 24 (2015), 388–400. https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2015.2457934 doi: 10.1109/TFUZZ.2015.2457934
[26]	J. W. Wang, S. H. Tsai, H. X. Li, H. Lam, Spatially piecewise fuzzy control design for sampled-data exponential stabilization of semilinear parabolic PDE systems, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., 26 (2018), 2967–2980. https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2018.2809686 doi: 10.1109/TFUZZ.2018.2809686
[27]	X. Song, R. Zhang, C. K. Ahn, S. Song, Adaptive event-triggered control of networked fuzzy PDE systems under hybrid cyber-attacks, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., 30 (2022), 4211–4223. https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2022.3145816 doi: 10.1109/TFUZZ.2022.3145816
[28]	S. Tong, S. Sui, Y. Li, Fuzzy adaptive output feedback control of MIMO nonlinear systems with partial tracking errors constrained, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., 23 (2015), 729–742. https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2014.2327987 doi: 10.1109/TFUZZ.2014.2327987
[29]	S. C. Tong, X. Min, Y. X. Li, Observer-based adaptive fuzzy tracking control for strict-feedback nonlinear systems with unknown control gain functions, IEEE Trans. Cybern., 50 (2020), 3903–3913. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCYB.2020.2977175 doi: 10.1109/TCYB.2020.2977175
[30]	Y. J. Liu, L. Ma, L. Liu, S. Tong, C. L. P. Chen, Adaptive neural network learning controller design for a class of nonlinear systems with time-varying state constraints, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks Learn. Syst., 31 (2019), 66–75. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNNLS.2019.2899589 doi: 10.1109/TNNLS.2019.2899589
[31]	Y. J. Liu, M. Gong, L. Liu, S. Tong, C. L. P. Chen, Fuzzy observer constraint based on adaptive control for uncertain nonlinear MIMO systems with time-varying state constraints, IEEE Trans. Cybern., 51 (2019), 1380–1389. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCYB.2019.2933700 doi: 10.1109/TCYB.2019.2933700
[32]	W. Wu, Y. Li, S. Tong, Fuzzy adaptive tracking control for state constraint switched stochastic nonlinear systems with unstable inverse dynamics, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst., 51 (2019), 5522–5534. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.2019.2956263 doi: 10.1109/TSMC.2019.2956263
[33]	L. Tang, X. Y. Zhang, Y. J. Liu, S. Tong, PDE Based adaptive control of flexible riser system with input backlash and state constraints, IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I, 69 (2022), 2193–2202. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCSI.2022.3149290 doi: 10.1109/TCSI.2022.3149290
[34]	X. Xing, J. Liu, PDE model-based state-feedback control of constrained moving vehicle-mounted flexible manipulator with prescribed performance, J. Sound Vib., 441 (2019), 126–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2018.10.023 doi: 10.1016/j.jsv.2018.10.023
[35]	F. Xu, L. Tang, Y. J. Liu, S. Tong, Tangent barrier Lyapunov function‐based constrained control of flexible manipulator system with actuator failure, Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control, 31 (2021), 8523–8536. https://doi.org/10.1002/rnc.5735 doi: 10.1002/rnc.5735
[36]	L. Liu, X. Li, Y. J. Liu, S. Tong, Neural network based adaptive event trigger control for a class of electromagnetic suspension systems, Control Eng. Prac., 106 (2021), 104675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conengprac.2020.104675 doi: 10.1016/j.conengprac.2020.104675
[37]	Y. X. Li, G. H. Yang, S. Tong, Fuzzy adaptive distributed event-triggered consensus control of uncertain nonlinear multiagent systems, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst., 49 (2018), 1777–1786. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.2018.2812216 doi: 10.1109/TSMC.2018.2812216
[38]	X. Li, H. Wu, J. Cao, Prescribed-time synchronization in networks of piecewise smooth systems via a nonlinear dynamic event-triggered control strategy, Math. Comput. Simul., 203 (2023), 647–668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matcom.2022.07.010 doi: 10.1016/j.matcom.2022.07.010
[39]	Z. Liu, J. Wang, C. L. P. Chen, Y. Zhang, Event trigger fuzzy adaptive compensation control of uncertain stochastic nonlinear systems with actuator failures, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., 26 (2018), 3770–3781. https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2018.2848909 doi: 10.1109/TFUZZ.2018.2848909
[40]	J. Lian, C. Li, Event‐triggered adaptive tracking control of uncertain switched nonlinear systems, Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control, 31 (2021), 4154–4169. https://doi.org/10.1002/rnc.5470 doi: 10.1002/rnc.5470
[41]	L. Xing, C. Wen, Z. Liu, H. Su, J. Cai, Event-triggered adaptive control for a class of uncertain nonlinear systems, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 62 (2016), 2071–2076. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.2016.2594204 doi: 10.1109/TAC.2016.2594204
[42]	X. Zhang, W. Xu, S. S. Nair, V. Chellaboina, PDE modeling and control of a flexible two-link manipulator, IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., 13 (2005), 301–312. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCST.2004.842446 doi: 10.1109/TCST.2004.842446
[43]	F. Han, Y. Jia, Sliding mode boundary control for a planar two-link rigid-flexible manipulator with input disturbances, Int. J. Control Autom. Syst., 18 (2020), 351–362. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12555-019-0277-0 doi: 10.1007/s12555-019-0277-0
[44]	Z. Liu, J. Liu, Boundary control of a flexible robotic manipulator with output constraints, Asian J. Control, 19 (2017), 332–345. https://doi.org/10.1002/asjc.1342 doi: 10.1002/asjc.1342
[45]	L. Meirovitch, R. Parker, Fundamentals of Vibrations, Waveland Press, 2010.
[46]	T. Jiang, J. Liu, W. He, Adaptive boundary control for a flexible manipulator with state constraints using a barrier Lyapunov function, J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control, 140 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4039364 doi: 10.1115/1.4039364
[47]	J. Bai, H. Wu, J. Cao, Secure synchronization and identification for fractional complex networks with multiple weight couplings under DoS attacks, Comput. Appl. Math., 41 (2022), 187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40314-022-01895-2 doi: 10.1007/s40314-022-01895-2

This article has been cited by:

1.	Tareq Manzoor, S. Iqbal, Mohd Asif Shah, A note on the slip effects of an Oldroyd 6-constant fluid: Optimal homotopy asymptotic method, 2022, 10, 2296-424X, 10.3389/fphy.2022.1003000
2.	Laiq Zada, Rashid Nawaz, Wasim Jamshed, Rabha W. Ibrahim, El Sayed M. Tag El Din, Zehba Raizah, Ayesha Amjad, New optimum solutions of nonlinear fractional acoustic wave equations via optimal homotopy asymptotic method-2 (OHAM-2), 2022, 12, 2045-2322, 10.1038/s41598-022-23644-5
3.	HIMAYAT ULLAH JAN, HAKEEM ULLAH, MEHREEN FIZA, ILYAS KHAN, ABDULLAH MOHAMED, ABD ALLAH A. MOUSA, MODIFICATION OF OPTIMAL HOMOTOPY ASYMPTOTIC METHOD FOR MULTI-DIMENSIONAL TIME-FRACTIONAL MODEL OF NAVIER–STOKES EQUATION, 2023, 31, 0218-348X, 10.1142/S0218348X23400212
4.	RI ZHANG, NEHAD ALI SHAH, ESSAM R. EL-ZAHAR, ALI AKGÜL, JAE DONG CHUNG, NUMERICAL ANALYSIS OF FRACTIONAL-ORDER EMDEN–FOWLER EQUATIONS USING MODIFIED VARIATIONAL ITERATION METHOD, 2023, 31, 0218-348X, 10.1142/S0218348X23400285
5.	Nagwa Saeed, Deepak Pachpatte, Fuzzy Solutions of Fuzzy Fractional Parabolic Integro Differential Equations, 2025, 8, 2619-9653, 81, 10.32323/ujma.1631793

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)