Abstract
In this article, we study the controllability for impulsive fractional integro-differential evolution equation in a Banach space. The discussions are based on the Mönch fixed point theorem as well as the theory of fractional calculus and the \((\alpha ,\beta )\)-resolvent operator, we concern with the term \(u'(\cdot )\) and finding a control v such that the mild solution satisfies \(u(b)=u_{b}\) and \(u'(b)=u'_{b}\). Finally, we present an application to support the validity study.
Similar content being viewed by others
1 Introduction
Fractional differential equations have been applied to various fields successfully, for example, physics, engineering, and finance. Consequently, more and more researchers paid much attention to this subject and have obtained substantial achievements, we refer the reader to [3, 9, 16, 25] and the references therein.
Controllability plays a significant role in the evolution of modern mathematical control theory. This is a qualitative property of dynamical control systems and is of appropriate significance in control theory. Many fundamental problems of control theory such as pole-assignment, stabilizability and optimal control may be solved under the presumption that the system is controllable. The concept of controllability, when it was first introduced by Kalman [15] in 1963, has become an active area of investigation due to its great applications in the field of physics. Controllability problems for different kinds of dynamical systems have been considered in many papers [1, 2, 4–6, 8, 22, 23].
Controllability is possible to steer a dynamical control system from an arbitrary initial state to an arbitrary final state using the set of admissible controls. It has many significant applications, not only in control theory and systems theory, but also in such fields as industrial and chemical process control, reactor control, control of electric bulk power systems, aerospace engineering and recently in quantum system theory.
Controllability is also strongly related to the theory of realization and so-called minimal realization and canonical forms for linear time-invariant control systems such as the Kalman canonical form, the Jordan canonical form and the Luenberger canonical form. Moreover, it is strongly connected with the minimum energy control problem for many classes of linear finite dimensional, infinite dimensional dynamical systems, and delayed systems both deterministic and stochastic.
In recent years, the controllability problems for various linear and nonlinear deterministic and stochastic dynamic systems have been studied in many publications using different method, we refer the reader to [2, 6, 24]. In addition, Kailasavalli et al. [14] acknowledged the existence and controllability of fractional neutral integro-differential systems with SDD with Banach contraction and resolvent operator technique as the main reference. Dabas et al. [10] studied the existence, uniqueness and continuous dependence of a mild solution for an impulsive neutral fractional order differential equation with infinite delay. Recently, Heping Ma and Biu Liu [20] interpreted the exact controllability and continuous dependence of fractional neutral integro-differential equations with state-dependent delay in Banach spaces. Also Yan [27] discussed the approximate controllability of neutral integro-differential delay systems with inclusion type in Hilbert space by using the fixed point theorem of discontinuous multi-valued operators supported by the Dhage fixed point technique with the resolvent operator. Additionally, Yan and Jia [28] explained the approximate controllability of partial fractional neutral stochastic functional integro-differential inclusions with state-delay.
Especially, the controllability of fractional evolution equations is also studied. In 2015, Liang and Yang [19] investigated the exact controllability for the fractional integro-differential evolution equations in Banach spaces E involving noncompact semigroups and nonlocal functions without Lipschitz continuity,
where \(D^{\alpha }\) denotes the Caputo fractional derivative of order \(\alpha \in (0,1)\), \(-A:D(A)\subset E\rightarrow E\) is the infinitesimal generator of a \(C_{0}\)-semigroup \(T(t)\) (\(t\geq 0\)) of uniformly bounded linear operator, the control function v is given in \(L^{2}(J,U)\); U is a Banach space, B is a linear bounded operator from U to E; f is a given function and
is a Volterra integral operator.
In 2011, Debbouche and Baleanu [11] studied the controllability for the fractional nonlocal impulsive integro-differential control system of the form
the discussions are based on the theory of fractional calculus as well as on the fixed point technique and the \((\alpha , u)\)-resolvent family.
In 2017, Lian, Fan and Li [18] investigated the approximate controllability for a class of semilinear fractional differential systems of order \(1<\alpha <2\) of the form
via the resolvent operator.
In 2019, Singh and Pandey [26] studied some controllability results for the abstract second order Sobolev type impulsive delay differential system of the form
On the other hand, in recent years, much attention has been paid to establishing sufficient conditions for the controllability of linear fractional dynamical systems of order \(0<\alpha <1\) by several authors; see a recent monograph [1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 22, 23] and various papers [2, 6]. However, there is no work that reported on the problem of controllability of nonlinear fractional dynamical system of order \(1<\alpha <2\), to the best of our knowledge, up until now the controllability for a class of impulsive fractional integro-differential evolution equation with fractional derivative of order \(\alpha \in (1,2]\) has not been investigated in the literature. Motivated by the above mentioned aspects, in this paper, we discuss the controllability for a class of impulsive fractional integro-differential evolution equation of the form
where \({}^{c}D^{\alpha }_{0^{+}}\) is the Caputo fractional derivative of order \(\alpha \in (1,2]\) with the lower limit zero, \(A:D(A)\subset E\rightarrow E\) a closed linear operator and A generates a strongly continuous \((\alpha ,\beta )\)-resolvent family \(S_{\alpha ,\beta }(t)\) (\(t\geq 0\)) of uniformly bounded linear operator on a Banach space E. The state \(u(\cdot )\) takes values in E, \(J=[0,b]\) (\(b>0\)), \(J'=J\setminus \{t_{1},t_{2},\ldots ,t_{m}\} \), \(J_{0}=[0,t_{1}]\), \(J_{k}=(t_{k},t_{k+1}]\), the \(\{t_{k}\}\) satisfy \(0=t_{0}< t_{1}< t_{2}<\cdots <t_{m}<t_{m+1}=b\), \(m\in N\); the functions \(f: J\times E \times E\times E\rightarrow E\) and \(I_{k},J_{k}: \operatorname{PC}(J,E)\rightarrow E\), \(k=1,2,\dots ,m\), \(g,h:\operatorname{PC}(J,E)\rightarrow E\) are appropriate functions satisfying certain assumptions that will be specified later. \(\Delta u(t_{k})=u(t_{k}^{+})-u(t_{k}^{-})\), \(\Delta u'(t_{k})=u'(t_{k}^{+})-u'(t_{k}^{-})\), \(u(t_{k}^{+})\) and \(u(t_{k}^{-})\) represent the right and left limits of \(u(t)\) at \(t=t_{k}\), respectively, the control function v is given in \(L^{2}(J,U)\), U is a Banach space, B is a linear bounded operator from U to E, and the operators G and F are given by
where \(K\in C(\Delta ,\mathbb{R}^{+})\), \(\Delta =\{(t,s):0\leq s\leq t\leq b\}\), \(H\in C(\Delta_{0} ,\mathbb{R}^{+})\), \(\Delta_{0} =\{(t,s):0\leq s, t\leq b\}\). Throughout this work, we always assume that
In this paper, we introduce a suitable concept of a mild solution of the system (1.1). Moreover, we investigate the controllability for the system (1.1), by using the Mönch fixed point theorem combined with \((\alpha ,\beta )\)-resolvent operators.
The paper is organized as follows: The second part of the paper some notations and recall some basic known results. The third part we present a controllability result for the problem (1.1) of our concern. And the last section is provided an example to illustrate applications of the obtained results. Concluding part close this article.
2 Preliminaries
Let E and \(E_{1}\) be two Banach space. For any Banach space E, the norm of E is defined by \(\Vert \cdot \Vert _{E}\). The space of all bounded linear operator from E to \(E_{1}\) is denoted by \(\mathcal{L}(E,E_{1})\) and \(\mathcal{L}(E,E)\) is written as \(\mathcal{L}(E)\). We denote by \(C(J,E) \) the Banach space of all continuous E-value function on interval J the norm \(\Vert u \Vert _{C}=\max_{t\in J} \Vert u(t) \Vert \). We use \(\Vert f \Vert _{L^{p}}\) to denote the \(L^{p}(J,E)\) norm of f whenever \(f\in L^{p}(J,E)\) for some p with \(1\leq p<\infty \). We consider the following spaces:
Let \(\operatorname{PC}(J,E)=\{u:J\to E , u(t)\text{ is continuous at }t\neq t_{k}\text{, and left continuous at }t=t_{k}\text{, and\ } u(t_{k}^{+})\text{ exists, } k=1,2,\dots ,m\}\). Evidently, \(\operatorname{PC}(J,E)\) is a Banach space with the norm \(\Vert u \Vert _{\operatorname{PC}}=\sup_{t\in J}\{ \Vert u(t) \Vert :u\in \operatorname{PC}(J,E)\}\).
Let \(\operatorname{PC}^{1}(J,E)\) be the spaces of all functions \(u\in \operatorname{PC}(J,E)\), which are continuously differentiable on \(J'\), and the lateral derivatives
are continuous on \([0,b)\) and \((0,b]\), respectively. Furthermore, for \(u\in \operatorname{PC}^{1}(J,E)\), we denote by \(u'(t)\) the left derivative at \(t\in (0,b]\), and by \(u'(0)\), the right derivative at zero. It is easy to see that the space \(\operatorname{PC}^{1}(J,E) \) is a Banach space with the norm
In the following, let us recall some well-known definitions. For more details, see [16].
Definition 2.1
The fractional integral of order γ with the lower limit zero for a function \(f:[0,\infty )\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) is defined as
provided the right side is point-wise defined on \([0,\infty )\), where \(\Gamma (\cdot )\) is the gamma function.
Definition 2.2
The Riemann–Liouville derivative of order γ with the lower limit zero for a function \(f:[0,\infty )\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) can be written as
Definition 2.3
The Caputo fractional derivative of order γ for a function \(f:[0,\infty )\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) can be written as
where \(n = [\gamma ] + 1\) and \([\gamma ]\) denotes the integer part of γ.
Lemma 2.1
([3])
For \(q>0\), the general solution of the fractional differential equation \({}^{c}D^{q}_{t}u(t)=0\) is given by
where \(c_{i}\in \mathbb{R}\), \(i=0,1,\ldots ,n-1,n=[q]+1\) and \([q]\) denotes the integer part of the real number q.
Now, we review some definitions and lemmas on fractional calculus. For \(\beta \geq 0\), let
where \(\Gamma (\cdot )\) is the Gamma function . The finite convolution of f and g is denoted by \((f*g)(t)=\int _{0}^{t}f(t-s)g(s)\,ds\).
A strongly continuous family \(\{T(t)\}_{t\geq 0}\subseteq B(E)\) is said to be exponentially bounded if there are constants \(M\geq 0\) and \(\omega \in \mathbb{R}\), such that
Definition 2.4
([9])
Let \(A:D(A)\subseteq E\rightarrow E\) be closed linear operators defined on a Banach space E and \(\alpha , \beta >0\). Let \(\rho (A)\) be the resolvent set of A, we say that the A is the generator of an \((\alpha ,\beta )\)-resolvent family, if there exist \(\omega \geq 0\) and a strongly continuous function \(S_{\alpha ,\beta }:[0,\infty )\rightarrow \mathcal{L}(E)\) such that \(S_{\alpha ,\beta }(t)\) is exponentially bounded, \(\{\lambda ^{\alpha }: \operatorname{Re}\lambda > \omega \}\subset \rho (A)\), and for all \(u\in E\),
In this case, \(\{S_{\alpha ,\beta }(t)\}_{t\geq 0}\) is called the \((\alpha ,\beta )\)-resolvent family (also called the \((\alpha ,\beta )\)-resolvent operator function) generated by A.
Lemma 2.2
(i) The operator \(S_{\alpha ,2}(t): \mathbb{R}_{+}\rightarrow \mathcal{L}(E)\) associated with \(S_{\alpha ,1}\) is defined by
(ii) The resolvent family \(S_{\alpha ,\alpha }(t): \mathbb{R}_{+}\rightarrow \mathcal{L}(E)\) associated with the solution operator \(S_{\alpha ,1}\) is defined by
Proof
(i). By (2.1), we have
Thus, by (2.5), (2.6), we obtain
(ii). By (2.1), we have
Thus, by (2.7), we obtain
(iii). By (2.1), we have
Thus, by (2.8), we obtain
□
Lemma 2.3
Let A be the infinitesimal generator of the strongly continuous \((\alpha ,\beta )\)-resolvent family \(\{S_{\alpha ,\beta }(t)\}_{t\geq 0}\) in E. Then
Proof
Since A is the infinitesimal generator of the strongly continuous \((\alpha ,\beta )\)-resolvent family \(\{S_{\alpha ,\beta }(t)\}_{t\geq 0}\). So, for all \(b>0\), the series \(t^{\alpha -1}\sum_{k=0}^{\infty }\frac{(At^{\alpha })^{k}}{\Gamma (\alpha +\alpha k)}\), \(\sum_{k=0}^{\infty }\frac{(At^{\alpha })^{k}}{\Gamma (1+\alpha k)}\), \(t\sum_{k=0}^{\infty }\frac{(At^{\alpha })^{k}}{\Gamma (2+\alpha k)}\) are uniformly convergent on \([0,b]\). Thus, for \(t\in [0,b]\), we have
and
□
Lemma 2.4
([9])
The operators \(S_{\alpha ,1}(t)\), \(S_{\alpha ,2}(t)\), \(S_{\alpha ,\alpha }(t)\) and \(S_{\alpha ,\alpha -1}(t)\) have the following properties.
(i)The operators \(S_{\alpha ,1}(t)\), \(S_{\alpha ,2}(t)\), \(S_{\alpha ,\alpha }(t)\) and \(S_{\alpha ,\alpha -1}(t)\) are strongly continuous for all \(t\geq 0\).
(ii) If \(S_{\alpha ,\beta }(t)\) (\(t\geq 0\)) is an equicontinuous \((\alpha ,\beta )\)-resolvent family, then \(S_{\alpha ,1}(t)\), \(S_{\alpha ,2}(t)\), \(S_{\alpha ,\alpha }(t)\) and \(S_{\alpha ,\alpha -1}(t)\) are also equicontinuous in E for \(t>0\).
Now, we can formulate some basic properties of operators \(S_{\alpha ,1}(t)\), \(S_{\alpha ,2}(t)\), \(S_{\alpha ,\alpha -1}(t)\), and \(S_{\alpha ,\alpha }(t)\).
Lemma 2.5
For fixed \(t\geq 0\), \(S_{\alpha ,2}(t)\), \(S_{\alpha ,\alpha }(t)\) and \(S_{\alpha ,\alpha -1}(t)\) are linear and bounded operators on E.
Proof
For any fixed \(t\geq 0\), it is easy to check that \(S_{\alpha ,2}(t)\), \(S_{\alpha ,\alpha }(t)\), \(S_{\alpha ,\alpha -1}(t)\) are also linear operators since \(S_{\alpha ,1}(t)\) is a linear operator. For any \(u\in E\), by Lemma 2.2, we have
and
□
Now, we recall some properties of Hausdorff measure of noncompactness that will be used later.
Definition 2.5
([7])
The Hausdorff measure of noncompactness α on a bounded subset D of the Banach space E is defined as
Let \(\alpha (\cdot )\), \(\alpha (\cdot )_{\operatorname{PC}}\) and \(\alpha (\cdot )_{\operatorname{PC}^{1}}\) denote the Hausdorff measure of noncompactness on \(C(J,E)\), \(\operatorname{PC}(J,E)\) and \(\operatorname{PC}^{1}(J,E)\), respectively. For any \(B\subset C(J,E)\) and \(t\in J\), set \(B(t)=\{u(t) : u\in B\}\subset E\). If B is bounded in \(C(J,E)\), then \(B(t)\) is bounded in E, and \(\alpha (B(t))\leq \alpha (B)\).
Lemma 2.6
([17])
Let E be a Banach space, and let \(B\subset E\) be bounded. Then there exists a countable set \(B_{0} \subset B\), such that \(\alpha (B) \leq 2\alpha (B_{0})\).
Lemma 2.7
([13])
Let E be a Banach space, and let \(B\subset C(J,E)\) be equicontinuous and bounded, then \(\alpha (B(t))\) is continuous on J, and \(\alpha (B)=\max_{t\in J} \alpha (B(t))\).
Lemma 2.8
([7])
Let \(D\subset \operatorname{PC}([a,b],E)\) be bounded and piecewise equicontinuous, then \(\alpha _{\operatorname{PC}}(D(t))\) is piecewise continuous for \(t\in [a,b]\), and \(\alpha _{\operatorname{PC}}(D)=\sup \{\alpha (D):t\in [a,b]\}\), where \(D(t)=\{u(t):u\in D\}\).
Lemma 2.9
([7])
Let \(\{w_{n}\}_{n=1}^{\infty }\) be a sequence of Bochner integrable functions from \([a,b]\) into E such that \(\Vert w_{n}(t) \Vert \leq g(t)\) for every \(n\geq 1\) and almost all \(t\in [a,b]\), where \(g\in L^{1}([a,b],\mathbb{R}^{+})\), then the function \(h(t)=\alpha \{w_{n}(t):n\geq 1\}\) contained in \(L^{1}(J,\mathbb{R}^{+})\) satisfies
Lemma 2.10
([7])
Let \(D\subset \operatorname{PC}^{1}([a,b],E)\) be bounded and let the elements of \(D'\) be piecewise equicontinuous, then
Next, we are ready to construct a mild solution for the impulsive system (1.1).
Lemma 2.11
Assume \(A:D(A)\subset E\rightarrow E\) is a closed linear operator, A is known as the infinitesimal generator of the \((\alpha ,\beta )\)-resolvent family \(\{S_{\alpha ,\beta }(t)\}_{t\geq 0}\) on a Banach space E. Then the problem (1.1) has a unique solution \(u\in \operatorname{PC}^{1}(J,E)\) and satisfies the following integral equation:
Proof
The proof is similar to the proof in paper [12], here we omit it. □
Based on Lemma 2.11, we will give the definition of mild solutions for the problem (1.1).
Definition 2.6
A function \(u: J\rightarrow E \) is called a mild solution of the problem (1.1) if \(u(0)=(u_{0}-g(u))\), \(u'(0)=(u_{1}-h(u))\), \(\Delta u (t_{k})=I_{k}(u(t_{k}))\), \(\Delta u' (t_{k})=J_{k}(u'(t_{k}))\), \(u(\cdot )| _{J}\in \operatorname{PC}^{1}(J,E)\) and the following equation is satisfied:
Theorem 2.1
([21])
Let Ω be a closed convex subset of a Banach space E and \(0\in \Omega \). Assume that \(Q:\Omega \rightarrow \Omega \) is a continuous map, which satisfies Mönch’s condition, i.e., \(D\subset \Omega \) is countable and \(D\subset \operatorname{\overline{conv}}(\{0\}\cup Q(D))\Rightarrow \overline{D}\) is compact. Then Q has at least one fixed point in Ω.
3 Main results
In this section, we will establish the sufficient conditions for the controllability of the system (1.1). For arbitrary \(u\in \operatorname{PC}^{1}(J,E)\), we denote the final stages of u by \(u_{b}=u(b)\) and \(u'_{b}=u'(b)\) at time b in the space E.
Definition 3.1
The system (1.1) is said to be controllable on J if for initial conditions \(u_{0}\in E \), \(u_{1}\in E\) and final stages \(u_{b}\) and \(u'_{b}\) in E, there exists a control \(v\in L^{2}(J,U)\) such that the mild solution \(u(t)\) of the system (1.1) corresponding to v satisfies \(u(0)=(u_{0}-g(u))\), \(u'(0)=(u_{1}-h(u))\), \(\Delta u (t_{k})=I_{k}(u(t_{k}))\), \(\Delta u' (t_{k})=J_{k}(u'(t_{k}))\), \(k=1,2,\dots ,m\), and \(u(b)=u_{b}\), \(u'(b)=u'_{b}\).
Let \(B_{r_{0}}:=\{u\in \operatorname{PC}^{1}(J,E): \Vert u \Vert _{\operatorname{PC}^{1}}\leq r_{0}\text{, where }r_{0}=\max \{r_{1},r_{2}\}\text{ such that } \Vert u \Vert _{\operatorname{PC}} \leq r_{1}, \Vert u' \Vert _{\operatorname{PC}}\leq r_{2}\}\). However, to achieve such a result, we assume certain conditions:
-
(H0)
A generates a strongly continuous \((\alpha ,\beta )\)-resolvent family \(S_{\alpha ,\beta }(t)\) (\(t\geq 0\)) of the uniformly bounded linear operator on a Banach space E. That is, there exists a constants \(M\geq 1\) such that \(\Vert S_{\alpha ,\beta }(t) \Vert \leq M\) for all \(t\geq 0\) and there exists a positive constant \(M_{0}\) such that \(\Vert AS_{\alpha ,\alpha }(t) \Vert _{\mathcal{L}}\leq M_{0}\) for all \(t\geq 0\).
-
(H1)
The function \(f:J\times E\times E\times E\rightarrow E\) satisfies:
(i) for a.e. \(t\in J\), the function \(f(t,\cdot ,\cdot,\cdot):E\times E\times E\rightarrow E\) is continuous, and for each \((x,y)\in E\times E\), the function \(f(\cdot ,x,y,z):J\rightarrow E\) is strongly measurable;
(ii) for any \(r_{0}>0\), there exist a constant \(q_{2}\in (0,\alpha )\) and functions \(m_{r_{0}}\in L^{\frac{1}{q_{2}}}(J,\mathbb{R}^{+})\) such that
$$ \sup \bigl\{ \bigl\Vert f(t,x,y,z) \bigr\Vert : \Vert x \Vert \leq r, \Vert y \Vert \leq K^{*}r,\Vert z \Vert \leq H^{*}r \bigr\} \leq m_{r_{0}}(t),\quad t \in J, $$where \(m_{r_{0}}\) satisfies \(\lim_{r_{0}\rightarrow +\infty }\inf \frac{1}{r_{0}} \Vert m_{r_{0}} \Vert _{L^{\frac{1}{q_{2}}}}\triangleq \gamma <\infty \);
(iii) there exist a constant \(q_{3}\in (0,\alpha )\) and functions \(J_{f}\in L^{\frac{1}{q_{3}}}(J,\mathbb{R}^{+})\) such that
$$ \alpha \bigl(f(t,D_{1},D_{2},D_{3}) \bigr)\leq J_{f}(t) \bigl(\alpha (D_{1})+\alpha (D_{2}+\alpha (D_{3}) \bigr),\quad t \in J, $$for any countable subsets \(D_{1},D_{2},D_{3}\in \operatorname{PC}(J,E)\).
-
(H2)
The function \(I_{k},J_{k} : \operatorname{PC}(J,E)\rightarrow E \), for \(k=1,2,\ldots ,m\), satisfies:
(i) There exists a nondecreasing function \(L_{k}^{j}: \mathbb{R}^{+}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{+}\) (\(j=1,2\)) such that
$$ \begin{gathered} \bigl\Vert I_{k}(u) \bigr\Vert \leq L_{k}^{1} \bigl( \Vert u \Vert _{\operatorname{PC}^{1}} \bigr), \quad\quad \bigl\Vert J_{k}(u) \bigr\Vert \leq L_{k}^{2} \bigl( \Vert u \Vert _{\operatorname{PC}^{1}} \bigr)\quad \text{and}\\\lim _{r_{0}\rightarrow \infty } \frac{L_{k}^{j}(r_{0})}{r_{0}}=\delta _{k}^{j}< \infty\end{gathered} $$for all \(u\in E\) and \(k=1,2,\ldots ,m\).
(ii) There exist constants \(M_{j}>0\) such that, for any countable subsets \(D_{j}\subset E\), and
$$ \alpha \bigl( \bigl\{ I_{k}(D_{1}) \bigr\} \bigr)\leq M_{k}^{1}\alpha (D_{1}),\quad\quad \alpha \bigl( \bigl\{ J_{k}(D_{2}) \bigr\} \bigr)\leq M_{k}^{2} \alpha (D_{2}) $$for all \(j=1,2\) and \(i=1,2,\ldots ,m\).
-
(H3)
(i) The function \(g,h:\operatorname{PC}\rightarrow E\) is Lipschitz continuous and bounded in E, that is, there exists aconstants \(c_{1},c_{2}\geq0\) and \(c_{3},c_{4}\geq0\) such that
$$ \begin{gathered} \bigl\Vert g(u) \bigr\Vert \leq c_{1},~~~ \bigl\Vert g(u)-g(v) \bigr\Vert \leq c_{2} \max_{t\in J} \Vert u-v \Vert _{\operatorname{PC}}, \\ \bigl\Vert h(u) \bigr\Vert \leq c_{3},~~~ \bigl\Vert h(u)-h(v) \bigr\Vert \leq c_{4} \max_{t\in J} \Vert u-v \Vert _{\operatorname{PC}}, \end{gathered} $$for all \(u,v\in\operatorname{PC}(J, E)\).
(ii) There exist constants \(l_{1},l_{2}>0\) such that, for any countable subsets \(D_{1},D_{2}\subset E\), and
$$ \alpha \bigl( g(D_{1}) \bigr)\leq l_{1}\alpha (D_{1}),\quad\quad \alpha \bigl(h(D_{2}) \bigr)\leq l_{2} \alpha (D_{2}). $$ -
(H4)
Linear operator \(W:L^{2}(J,U)\rightarrow E\) defined by
$$ Wu= \textstyle\begin{cases} \int _{0}^{t}S_{\alpha ,\alpha }(t-s) Bv(s)\,ds,&v=v_{1}^{u}; \\ \int _{0}^{t}S_{\alpha ,\alpha -1}(t-s) Bv(s)\,ds,&v=v_{2}^{u'}, \end{cases} $$(3.1)where \(v_{1}^{u}\) and \(v_{2}^{u'}\) are defined in (3.6).
(i) W has an inverse operator \(W^{-1}\) which takes values in \(L^{2}(J,U)\backslash \ker W\), and there exist two constants \(M_{1}>0\), \(M_{2}>0\) such that \(\Vert B \Vert \leq M_{1}\), \(\Vert W^{-1} \Vert \leq M_{2}\).
(ii) There exist a constant \(q_{1}\in (0,\alpha )\) and a function \(K_{w}\in L^{\frac{1}{q_{1}}}(J,\mathbb{R}^{+})\) such that
$$ \alpha \bigl(W^{-1}(D_{4}) (t) \bigr)\leq K_{w}(t)\alpha (D_{4}),\quad t\in J, $$for any bounded subset \(D_{4}\subset E\).
For the sake of brevity, we introduce the notations
Theorem 3.1
Assume that the assumptions (H0)–(H4) are satisfied, then the system (1.1) is controllable on J provided that \(\max (\lambda _{1},\lambda _{2})<1 \), where
Proof
Consider the operator \(Q:\operatorname{PC}^{1}(J,E)\rightarrow \operatorname{PC}^{1}(J,E)\) defined by
Furthermore, by Lemma 2.3, we get \((Qu)':\operatorname{PC}(J,E)\rightarrow \operatorname{PC}(J,E)\) such that
where the control v is defined by
and \(v_{1}^{u}(t)\) and \(v_{2}^{u'}(t)\) are given by
Taking the control (3.7) and (3.8) in (3.4) and (3.5), respectively, we obtain \((Qu)(b)=u_{b}\) and \((Qu)'(b)=u'_{b}\), which means that the control \(v(t)\) steers the system (1.1) from the initial conditions \(u_{0}\) and \(u_{1}\) to the final states \(u_{b}\) and \(u'_{b}\) in the time b, provided we can obtain a fixed point of the nonlinear operator Q.
Now, the objective is to prove that the operator Q has a fixed point. The proof will be carried out in three steps.
Step 1: \(\exists r_{0}>0; Q(B_{r_{0}})\subset B_{r_{0}} \).
For this step, it will be carried out by contradiction. Suppose this is not true. Then, for each \(r_{0}>0\), there exists \(u_{r_{0}}(\cdot )\in B_{r_{0}}\) and, for some \(t\in J\) such that \(\Vert (Qu_{r_{0}})(t) \Vert >r_{0}\), we have
where
Now, from (3.9) and (3.10), we have
Similarly, we get
Hence, we have
Dividing both sides of (3.12) by \(r_{0}\), and taking \(r_{0}\rightarrow \infty \), we get
This contradicts (3.2). Therefore for some \(r_{0}>0\), \(Q(B_{r_{0}})\subset B_{r_{0}}\), which means that \(Q(B_{r_{0}})\subset B_{r_{0}}\).
Step 2: We show that Q is continuous on \(B_{r_{0}}\). To show this, let \(\{u_{n}\}_{n=1}^{\infty }, \{u'_{n}\}_{n=1}^{\infty }\subset B_{r_{0}}\) be a sequence such that \(u_{n}\rightarrow u\), \(u'_{n}\rightarrow u'\) in \(B_{r_{0}}\). Then there exists a number \(r_{0}>0\) such that \(\Vert u^{n} \Vert _{\operatorname{PC}}\leq r_{0}\), \(\Vert u^{\prime n} \Vert _{\operatorname{PC}}\leq r_{0}\) and \(\Vert u \Vert _{\operatorname{PC}}\leq r_{0}\) and \(\Vert u' \Vert _{\operatorname{PC}}\leq r_{0}\) for all \(n\geq 1\), and we define
Then we obtain
where
By continuity of f, \(I_{k}\), \(J_{k}\), and the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem combined with (3.13), (3.14), we get \(\Vert Qu^{n}-Qu \Vert _{\operatorname{PC}}\rightarrow 0\), as \(n\rightarrow \infty \).
Then, in a similar manner to above, we get
where
By continuity of f, \(I_{k}\), \(J_{k}\), and the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem combined with (3.15), (3.16), we get \(\Vert (Qu^{n})'-(Qu)' \Vert _{\operatorname{PC}}\rightarrow 0\), as \(n\rightarrow \infty \).
Hence, we have
Step 3: We will prove that Q satisfies Mönch’s condition. To this end, let us assume that D and \(D'\) are countable subsets of \(B_{r_{0}}\) and \(D\subset \operatorname{\overline{conv}}(\{0\}\cup Q(D))\) and \(D'\subset \operatorname{\overline{conv}}(\{0\}\cup (Q(D))')\). Then we show that \(\alpha _{\operatorname{PC}^{1}}(D)=0\).
First, without loss of generality, we consider that \(D=\{u^{n}\}_{n=1}^{\infty }\) and \(D'=\{u^{\prime n}\}_{n=1}^{\infty }\). If we are able to show that \(\{(Qz^{n})'\}_{n=1}^{\infty }\) is equicontinuous on \(J_{k}\), \(k=0,1,2,\ldots ,m\), then \(D\subset \operatorname{\overline{conv}}(\{0\}\cup Q(D))\) and \(D'\subset \operatorname{\overline{conv}}(\{0\}\cup (Q(D))')\) are also equicontinuous on \(J_{k}\), \(k=0,1,2,\ldots ,m\). For this fact, let \(l_{1},l_{2}\in J_{p}\) be such that \(t_{p}\leq l_{1}\leq l_{2}\leq t_{p+1}\) for some \(p\in \{0,1,2,\ldots ,m\}\), and we get
By equicontinuity of \(S_{\alpha ,\beta }(t)\) and absolute continuity of the Lebesgue integral, we conclude that the right side of the above inequality tends to zero as \(l_{2}\rightarrow l_{1}\) independently of u. Thus, \(Q(D)\) shows equicontinuity on \(J_{k}\) for all \(k=0,1,2,\ldots ,m\).
Now, by Lemma 2.9 and (H1)(iii), (H2)(iii) and (H3)(ii), we have
Similarly, we obtain
Furthermore, by Lemma 2.9, we get
Similarly, by Lemma 2.9, we have
By (3.17) and (3.19), we obtain
Similarly, by (3.18) and (3.20), we get
Now, by Lemma 2.10, we have
This implies that \(\alpha _{\operatorname{PC}^{1}}(QD)\leq \lambda _{2} \alpha _{\operatorname{PC}^{1}}(D)\). Therefore, we get
Since \(\lambda _{2}<1\), we obtain \(\alpha _{\operatorname{PC}^{1}}(D)=0\). That is, D is relatively compact. Hence by Lemma 2.11, Q has at least one fixed point \(u\in B_{r_{0}}\), which is a mild solution of the system (1.1) and it satisfies \(u(b)=u_{b}\) and \(u'(b)=u'_{b}\). Therefore, the system (1.1) is controllable on J. This completes the proof. □
4 Application
In this section, we give an example to demonstrate the feasibility of our results.
Example 4.1
We consider the impulsive fractional parabolic partial differential equation
where \(\frac{\partial ^{\frac{3}{2}}}{\partial t^{\frac{3}{2}}}\) is the Caputo fractional partial derivative of order \(1<\alpha <2\), \(J=[0,1]\), \(0=t_{0}< t_{1}< t_{2}<\cdots <t_{m}<t_{m+1}=1\), \(\Delta u(t,x)| _{t=t_{k}}=u(t^{+},x)-u(t^{-},x)\), \(\Delta \frac{\partial u(t,x)}{\partial t}| _{t=t_{k}}=\Delta \frac{\partial u(t,x)}{\partial t}| _{t=t_{k}^{+}}-\Delta \frac{\partial u(t,x)}{\partial t}| _{t=t_{k}^{-}}\). \(a_{k},\widetilde{a}_{k}\in C(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R})\). We choose \(E=U=L^{2}([0,\pi ])\) to be endowed with the norm \(\Vert \cdot \Vert _{L^{2}}\). The function \(v:J\times [0,\pi ]\rightarrow [0,\pi ]\) is a control function and \(B:U\rightarrow E\) is a bounded linear operator.
Define \(u(t)(x)=u(t,x)\), \(v(t)(x)=v(t,x)\), and \({}^{c}D_{0+}^{\frac{3}{2}}u(t)(x)= \frac{\partial ^{\frac{3}{2}}}{\partial t^{\frac{3}{2}}}u(x,t)\), and
We define \(A:D(A)\subset E\rightarrow E\) by \(Au=\frac{\partial ^{2}}{\partial x^{2}}u\) with each domain \(D(A)\) given by
Then the operator A is given by
where \(u_{n}(t)=\sqrt{\frac{2}{\pi }}\sin nt\), \(n=1,2,\ldots \) , is the orthogonal set of eigenfunctions corresponding to the eigenvalues \(\lambda _{n}=-n^{2}\) of A. Then A will be a generator of the \((\alpha ,\beta )\)-resolvent family such that
Moreover, we have \(\Vert S_{\alpha ,\beta }(t) \Vert _{\mathcal{L}}\leq M=1\). Then the system (4.1) is the abstract form of the system (1.1). Obviously, f satisfies (H1)(i) and (ii). Thus, for \((t,u)\in J\times \operatorname{PC}(J,E)\), we have
where \(k^{0}=\sup_{t\in J}\int _{0}^{t} \Vert \sin (t-s) \Vert \,ds\leq 1\), \(h^{0}=\sup_{t\in J}\int _{0}^{1} \Vert \cos (t-s) \Vert \,ds\leq 1\). Furthermore, for \(D_{1},D_{2},D_{3}\subset \operatorname{PC}(J,E)\), we have
where \(J_{f}(t)=\frac{e^{-2t}}{1+e^{t}}\sqrt{\pi }\). Similarly, we can show that the condition (H2) is satisfied with \(L^{1}_{k}=M^{1}_{k}=(\int _{0}^{t_{k}} \vert a_{k}(t_{k}-s) \vert ^{2}\,ds)^{ \frac{1}{2}}\) and \(L^{2}_{k}=M^{2}_{k}=(\int _{0}^{t_{k}} \vert \widetilde{a}_{k}(t_{k}-s) \vert ^{2}\,ds)^{ \frac{1}{2}}\).
When \(B=I\), and using the above defined linear operator, we conclude that the operator \(W:L^{2}(J,U)\rightarrow E\), defined as in [26, (4.6)],
has a bounded inverse operator and satisfies the condition (H3). Thus the conditions (H0)–(H3) are satisfied, and, by Theorem 3.1, the system (4.1) is controllable on J.
Availability of data and materials
Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.
References
Abada, N., Benchohra, M., Hammouche, H.: Existence and controllability results for nondensely defined impulsive semilinear functional differential inclusions. J. Differ. Equ. 246, 3834–3863 (2009)
Aimene, D., Baleanu, D., Seba, D.: Controllability of semilinear impulsive Atangana–Baleanu fractional differential equations with delay. Chaos Solitons Fractals 128, 51–57 (2019)
Bai, Z., Lü, H.: Positive solutions for boundary value problem of nonlinear fractional differential equation. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 311, 495–505 (2005)
Balachandran, K., Park, J.Y.: Controllability of fractional integrodifferential systems in Banach spaces. Nonlinear Anal. Hybrid Syst. 3, 363–367 (2009)
Balachandran, K., Sakthivel, R.: Controllability of integrodifferential systems in Banach spaces. Appl. Math. Comput. 118, 63–71 (2001)
Baleanu, D., Fedorov, V.E., Gordievskikh, D.M., Tas, K.: Approximate controllability of infinite-dimensional degenerate fractional order systems in the sectorial case. Mathematics 7(8), 735 (2019)
Banas, J., Goebel, K.: Measure of Noncompactness in Banach Spaces. Lecture Notes in Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 60, 97 pp. Dekker, New York (1980)
Benchohra, M., Gorniewicz, L., Ntouyas, S.K., Ouahab, A.: Controllability results for impulsive functional differential inclusions. Rep. Math. Phys. 54, 211–228 (2004)
Chang, Y.K., Pereira, A., Ponce, R.: Approximate controllability for fractional differential equations of Sobolev type via properties on resolvent operators. Fract. Calc. Appl. Anal. 20(4), 963–987 (2017)
Dabas, J., Chauhan, A.: Existence and uniqueness of mild solution for an impulsive neutral fractional integro-differential equation with infinite delay. Math. Comput. Model. 57(3–4), 754–763 (2013)
Debbouchea, A., Baleanu, D.: Controllability of fractional evolution nonlocal impulsive quasilinear delay integro-differential systems. Comput. Math. Appl. 62, 1442–1450 (2011)
Gou, H., Li, Y.: The method of lower and upper solutions for impulsive fractioanl evolution equations. Annals. Functional. Analysis. 11, 250–369 (2020)
Guo, D.J., Sun, J.X.: Ordinary Differential Equations in Abstract Spaces. Shandong Science and Technology, Jinan (1989) (in Chinese)
Kailasavalli, S., Suganya, S., Mallika Arjunan, M.: Existence and controllability of fractional neutral integro-differential systems with state-dependent delay in Banach spaces. J. Korean Soc. Ind. Appl. Math. 1(20), 51–82 (2016)
Kalman, R.E.: Controllability of linear dynamical systems. Contrib. Differ. Equ. 1(1), 189–213 (1963)
Kilbas, A.A., Srivastava, H.M., Trujillo, J.J.: Theory and Applications of Fractional Differential Equations. North-Holland Mathematics Studies, vol. 204. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2006)
Li, Y.: The positive solutions of abstract semilinear evolution equations and their applications. Acta Math. Sin. 39(5), 666–672 (1996) (in Chinese)
Lian, T., Fan, Z., Li, G.: Approximate controllability of semilinear fractional differential systems of order \(1 < \alpha < 2\) via resolvent operators. Filomat 31(18), 5769–5781 (2017)
Liang, J., Yang, H.: Controllability of fractional integro-differential evolution equations with nonlocal conditions. Appl. Math. Comput. 254, 20–29 (2015)
Ma, H., Liu, B.: Exact controllability and continuous dependence of fractional neutral integro-differential equations with state dependent delay. Acta Math. Sci. Ser. B Engl. Ed. 37(1), 235–258 (2017)
Mönch, H.: Boundary value problems for linear ordinary differential equations of second order in Banach spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 4, 985–999 (1980)
Sakthivel, R., Anthoni, S.M., Kim, J.H.: Existence and controllability result for semilinear evolution integrodifferential systems. Math. Comput. Model. 41, 1005–1011 (2005)
Sakthivel, R., Choi, Q.H., Anthoni, S.M.: Controllability result for nonlinear evolution integrodifferential systems. Appl. Math. Lett. 17, 1015–1023 (2004)
Sakthivel, R., Mahmudov, N.I., Nieto, J.J.: Controllability for a class of fractional-order neutral evolution control systems. Appl. Math. Comput. 218, 10334–10340 (2012)
Shu, X.B., Xu, F.: Upper and lower solution method for fractional evolution equations with order \(1<\alpha <2\). J. Korean Math. Soc. 51(6), 1123–1139 (2014)
Singh, V., Pandey, D.N.: Controllability of second-order Sobolev-type impulsive delay differential systems. Math. Methods Appl. Sci. 42(5), 1377–1388 (2019)
Yan, Z.M.: Approximate controllability of partial neutral functional differential systems of fractional order with state-dependent delay. Int. J. Control 85(8), 1051–1062 (2012)
Yan, Z.M.: Approximate controllability of fractional neutral integro-differential inclusions with state-dependent delay in Hilbert spaces. IMA J. Math. Control Inf. 30(4), 443–462 (2013)
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the referees for their useful suggestions which have significantly improved the paper.
Funding
The authors are supported financially by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (12061062, 11661071).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed equally and significantly in writing this article. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Gou, H., Li, Y. A study on controllability of impulsive fractional evolution equations via resolvent operators. Bound Value Probl 2021, 25 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13661-021-01499-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13661-021-01499-5