Abstract
In this paper, we consider the nonlocal problems for nonlinear firstorder evolution inclusions in an evolution triple of spaces. Using techniques from multivalued analysis and fixed point theorems, we prove existence theorems of solutions for the cases of a convex and of a nonconvex valued perturbation term with nonlocal conditions. Also, we prove the existence of extremal solutions and a strong relaxation theorem. Some examples are presented to illustrate the results.
MSC:34B15, 34B16, 37J40.
Similar content being viewed by others
1 Introduction
In this paper, we examine the following nonlinear nonlocal problem:
where A:I\times V\to {V}^{\ast} is a nonlinear map, B:V\to {V}^{\ast} is a bounded linear map, \phi :H\to H is a continuous map and F:I\times H\to {2}^{{V}^{\ast}} is a multifunction to be given later. Concerning the function φ, appearing in the nonlocal condition, we mention here four remarkable cases covered by our general framework, i.e.:

\phi (x)=x(T);

\phi (x)=x(T);

\phi (x)=\frac{1}{2\pi}{\int}_{0}^{2\pi}x(s)\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}ds;

\phi (x)={\sum}_{i=1}^{n}{\beta}_{i}x({t}_{i}), where 0<{t}_{1}<{t}_{2}<\cdot \cdot \cdot <{t}_{n} are arbitrary, but fixed and {\sum}_{i=1}^{n}{\beta}_{i}\le 1.
Many authors have studied the nonlocal Cauchy problem because it has a better effect in the applications than the classical initial condition. We begin by mentioning some of the previous work done in the literature. As far as we know, this study was first considered by Byszewski. Byszewski and Lakshmikantham [1, 2] proved the existence and uniqueness of mild solutions for nonlocal semilinear differential equations when F is a singlevalued function satisfying Lipschitztype conditions. The fully nonlinear case was considered by Aizicovici and Lee [3], Aizicovici and McKibben [4], Aizicovici and Staicu [5], GarcíaFalset [6], GarcíaFalset and Reich [7], and Paicu and Vrabie [8]. All these studies were motivated by the practical interests of such nonlocal Cauchy problems. For example, the diffusion of a gas through a thin transparent tube is described by a parabolic equation subjected to a nonlocal initial condition very close to the one mentioned above, see [9]. For the nonlocal problems of evolution equations, in [10], Ntouyas and Tsamatos studied the case with compactness conditions. Subsequently, Byszewski and Akca [11] established the existence of a solution to functionaldifferential equations when the semigroup is compact and φ is convex and compact on a given ball. In [12], Fu and Ezzinbi studied neutral functionaldifferential equations with nonlocal conditions. Benchohra and Ntouyas [13] discussed secondorder differential equations under compact conditions. For more details on the nonlocal problem, we refer to the papers of [14–18] and the references therein.
It is worth mentioning that many of these documents assume that a nonlocal function meets certain conditions of compactness and A is a strongly continuous semigroup of operators or accretive operators in studying the evolution equations or inclusions with nonlocal conditions. However, one may ask whether there are similar results without the assumption on the compactness or equicontinuity of the semigroup. This article will give a positive answer to this question. The works mentioned above mainly establish the existence of mild solutions for evolution equations or inclusions with nonlocal conditions. However, in the present paper, we consider the cases of a convex and of a nonconvex valued perturbation term in the evolution triple of spaces (V\subset H\subset {V}^{\ast}). We assume the nonlinear time invariant operator A to be monotone and the perturbation term to be multivalued, defined on I\times H with values in {V}^{\ast} (not in H). We will establish existence theorems of solutions for the cases of a convex and of a nonconvex valued perturbation term, which is new for nonlocal problems. Our approach will be based on the techniques and results of the theory of monotone operators, setvalued analysis and the LeraySchauder fixed point theorem.
We pay attention to the existence of extreme solutions [19] that are not only the solutions of a system with a convexified righthand side, but also they are solutions of the original system. We prove that, under appropriate hypotheses, such a solution set is dense and codense in the solution set of a system with a convexified righthand side (‘bangbang’ principle). Our results extend those of [20] and are similar to those of [21] in an infinite dimensional space. Furthermore, the process of our proofs is much shorter, and our conditions are more general. Finally, some examples are also given to illustrate the effectiveness of our results.
The paper is divided into five parts. In Section 2, we introduce some notations, definitions and needed results. In Section 3, we present some basic assumptions and main results, the proofs of the main results are given based on the LeraySchauder alternative theorem. In Section 4, the existence of extremal solutions and a relaxation theorem are established. Finally, two examples are presented for our results in Section 5.
2 Preliminaries
In this section we recall some basic definitions and facts from multivalued analysis which we will need in what follows. For details, we refer to the books of Hu and Papageorgiou [22] and Zeidler [23]. Let I=[0,T], (I,\mathrm{\Sigma}) be the Lebesgue measurable space and X be a separable Banach space. Denote
Let A\subset {P}_{f}(X), x\in X, then the distance from x to A is given by d(x,A)=inf\{xa:a\in A\}. A multifunction F:I\to {P}_{f}(X) is said to be measurable if and only if, for every z\in X, the function t\to d(z,F(t))=inf\{\parallel zx\parallel :x\in F(t)\} is measurable. A multifunction F:I\to {2}^{X}\setminus \{\mathrm{\varnothing}\} is said to be graph measurable if GrF=\{(t,x):x\in F(t)\}\in \mathrm{\Sigma}\times B(X) with B(X) being the Borel σfield of X. On {P}_{f}(X) we can define a generalized metric, known in the literature as the ‘Hausdorff metric’, by setting
for all A,B\in {P}_{f}(X).
It is well known that ({P}_{f}(X),h) is a complete metric space and {P}_{fc}(X) is a closed subset of it. When Z is a Hausdorff topological space, a multifunction G:Z\to {P}_{f}(X) is said to be hcontinuous if it is continuous as a function from Z into ({P}_{f}(X),h).
Let Y, Z be Hausdorff topological spaces and G:Y\to {2}^{Z}\setminus \{\varphi \}. We say that G(\cdot ) is ‘upper semicontinuous (USC)’ (resp., ‘lower semicontinuous (LSC)’) if for all C\subseteq Z nonempty closed, {G}^{}(C)=\{y\in Y:G(y)\cap C\ne \varphi \} (resp., {G}^{+}(C)=\{y\in Y:G(y)\subseteq C\}) is closed in Y. A USC multifunction has a closed graph in Y\times Z, while the converse is true if G is locally compact (i.e., for every y\in Y, there exists a neighborhood U of y such that \overline{F(U)} is compact in Z). A multifunction which is both USC and LSC is said to be ‘continuous’. If Y, Z are both metric spaces, then the above definition of LSC is equivalent to saying that for all z\in Z, y\to {d}_{Z}(z,G(y))=inf\{{d}_{Z}(z,v):v\in G(y)\} is upper semicontinuous as {R}_{+}valued function. Also, lower semicontinuity is equivalent to saying that if {y}_{n}\to y in Y as n\to \mathrm{\infty}, then
Let I=[0,T]. By {L}_{1}{(I,X)}_{w}, we denote the LebesgueBochner space {L}_{1}(I,X) equipped with the norm {\parallel g\parallel}_{w}=sup\{\parallel {\int}_{t}^{{t}^{\prime}}g(s)\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}ds\parallel :0\le t\le {t}^{\prime}\le T\}, g\in {L}_{1}(I,X). A set D\subseteq {L}_{p}(I,X) is said to be ‘decomposable’ if for every {g}_{1},{g}_{2}\in D and for every J\subseteq I measurable, we have {\chi}_{J}{g}_{1}+{\chi}_{{J}^{c}}{g}_{2}\in D.
Let H be a real separable Hilbert space, V be a dense subspace of H having structure of a reflexive Banach space, with the continuous embedding V\to H\to {V}^{\ast}, where {V}^{\ast} is the topological dual space of V. The system model considered here is based on this evolution triple. Let the embedding be compact. Let \u3008\cdot ,\cdot \u3009 denote the pairing of an element x\in {V}^{\ast} and an element y\in V. If x,y\in H, then \u3008\cdot ,\cdot \u3009=(\cdot ,\cdot ), where (\cdot ,\cdot ) is the inner product on H. The norm in any Banach space X will be denoted by {\parallel \cdot \parallel}_{X}. Let 1<q\le p<\mathrm{\infty} be such that \frac{1}{p}+\frac{1}{q}=1. We denote {L}_{p}(I,V) by X. Then the dual space of X is {L}_{q}(I,{V}^{\ast}) and is denoted by {X}^{\ast}. For p, q satisfying the above conditions, from reflexivity of V that both X and {X}^{\ast} are reflexive Banach spaces (see Zeidler [23], p.411]).
Define {W}_{pq}(I)=\{x:x\in X,\dot{x}\in {X}^{\ast}\}, where the derivative in this definition should be understood in the sense of distribution. Furnished with the norm {\parallel x\parallel}_{{W}_{pq}}={\parallel x\parallel}_{X}+{\parallel \dot{x}\parallel}_{{X}^{\ast}}, the space ({W}_{pq}(I),{\parallel x\parallel}_{{W}_{pq}}) becomes a Banach space which is clearly reflexive and separable. Moreover, {W}_{pq}(I) embeds into C(I,H) continuously (see Proposition 23.23 of [23]). So, every element in {W}_{pq}(I) has a representative in C(I,H). Since the embedding V\to H is compact, the embedding {W}_{pq}(I)\to {L}_{p}(I,H) is also compact (see Problem 23.13 of [23]). The pairing between X and {X}^{\ast} is denoted by \u300a\cdot ,\cdot \u300b. By ‘⇀’ we denote the weakly convergence. The following lemmas are still needed in the proof of our main theorems.
Lemma 2.1 (see [24])
If X is a Banach space, C\subset X is nonempty, closed and convex with 0\in C and G:C\to {P}_{kc}(C) is an upper semicontinuous multifunction which maps bounded sets into relatively compact sets, then one of the following statements are true:

(i)
the set \mathrm{\Gamma}=\{x\in C:x\in \lambda G(x),\lambda \in (0,1)\} is unbounded;

(ii)
the G(\cdot ) has a fixed point, i.e., there exists x\in C such that x\in G(x).
Let X be a Banach space and let {L}^{2}(I,X) be the Banach space of all functions u:I\to X which are Bochner integrable. D({L}^{2}(I,X)) denotes the collection of nonempty decomposable subsets of {L}^{2}(I,X). Now, let us state the BressanColombo continuous selection theorem.
Lemma 2.2 (see [25])
Let X be a separable metric space and let F:X\to D({L}^{2}(I,X)) be a lower semicontinuous multifunction with closed decomposable values. Then F has a continuous selection.
Let X be a separable Banach space and C(I,X) be the Banach space of all continuous functions. A multifunction F:I\times X\to {P}_{wkc}(X) is said to be Carathéodory type if for every x\in X, F(\cdot ,x) is measurable, and for almost all t\in I, F(t,\cdot ) is hcontinuous (i.e., it is continuous from X to the metric space ({P}_{f}(X),h), where h is a Hausdorff metric).
Let M\subset C(I,X), a multifunction F:I\times X\to {P}_{wkc}(X) is called integrably bounded on M if there exists a function \lambda :I\to {R}_{+} such that for almost all t\in I, sup\{\parallel y\parallel :y\in F(t,x(t)),x(\cdot )\in M\}\le \lambda (t). A nonempty subset {M}_{0}\subset C(I,X) is called σcompact if there is a sequence {\{{M}_{k}\}}_{k\ge 1} of compact subsets {M}_{k} such that {M}_{0}={\bigcup}_{k\ge 1}{M}_{k}. Let {M}_{0}\subset M be such that {M}_{0} is dense in M and σcompact. The following continuous selection theorem in the extreme point case is due to Tolstonogov [26].
Lemma 2.3 (see [26])
Let the multifunction F:I\times X\to {P}_{wkc}(X) be Carathéodory type and integrably bounded. Then there exists a continuous function g:M\to {L}_{p}(I,X) such that for almost all t\in I, if x(\cdot )\in {M}_{0} , then g(x)(t)\in extF(t,x(t)), and if x(\cdot )\in M\setminus {M}_{0}, then g(x)(t)\in \overline{ext}\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}F(t,x(t)).
3 Main results
Let I=[0,T], consider the following evolution inclusions:
where A:I\times V\to {V}^{\ast} is a nonlinear map, B:V\to {V}^{\ast} is a bounded linear map, \phi :H\to H is a continuous map and F:I\times H\to {2}^{{V}^{\ast}} is a multifunction satisfying some conditions mentioned later.
Definition 3.1 A function x\in {W}_{pq}(I) is called a solution to the problem (3.1) iff
where x(0)=\phi (x), f(t)\in F(t,x(t)) for all v\in V and almost all t\in I.
We will need the following hypotheses on the data problem (3.1).
(H1) A:I\times V\to {V}^{\ast} is an operator such that

(i)
t\to A(t,x) is measurable;

(ii)
for each t\in I, the operator A(t,\cdot ):V\to {V}^{\ast} is uniformly monotone and hemicontinuous, that is, there exists a constant {C}_{1}>0 (independent of t) such that
\u3008A(t,{x}_{1})A(t,{x}_{2}),{x}_{1}{x}_{2}\u3009\ge {C}_{1}{\parallel {x}_{1}{x}_{2}\parallel}_{H}^{p}
for all {x}_{1},{x}_{2}\in V, and the map s\mapsto \u3008A(t,x+sz),y\u3009 is continuous on [0,1] for all x,y,z\in V;

(iii)
there exist a constant {C}_{2}>0, a nonnegative function a(\cdot )\in {L}_{q}(I) and a nondecreasing continuous function \eta (\cdot )\in {L}_{q}(I) such that {\parallel A(t,x)\parallel}_{{V}^{\ast}}\le a(t)+{C}_{2}\eta ({\parallel x\parallel}_{V}) for all x\in V, a.e. on I;

(iv)
there exist {C}_{3}>0, {C}_{4}>0, b(\cdot )\in {L}_{1}(I) such that
\u3008A(t,x),x\u3009\ge {C}_{3}{\parallel x\parallel}_{V}^{p}{C}_{4}{\parallel x\parallel}_{V}^{p1}+\frac{1}{2T}{\parallel x(0)\parallel}^{2}b(t)\phantom{\rule{1em}{0ex}}\text{a.e.}I,\mathrm{\forall}x\in V,
or
(H2) F:I\times H\to {P}_{k}({V}^{\ast}) is a multifunction such that

(i)
(t,x)\to F(t,x) is graph measurable;

(ii)
for almost all t\in I, x\to F(t,x) is LSC;

(iii)
there exist a nonnegative function {b}_{1}(\cdot )\in {L}_{q}(I) and a constant {C}_{5}>0 such that
F(t,x)=sup\{{\parallel f\parallel}_{{V}^{\ast}}:f\in F(t,x)\}\le {b}_{1}(t)+{C}_{5}{\parallel x\parallel}_{H}^{k1}\phantom{\rule{1em}{0ex}}\mathrm{\forall}x\in V\text{a.e.}I,
where 1\le k<p.
(H3)

(i)
B:V\to {V}^{\ast} is a bounded linear selfadjoint operator such that (Bx,x)\ge 0 for all x\in V, a.e. on I;

(ii)
there exists a continuous function \phi :{L}_{p}(I,H)\to H such that
\parallel \phi (u)\phi (v)\parallel \le {\parallel uv\parallel}_{C(I,H)}\phantom{\rule{1em}{0ex}}\mathrm{\forall}u,v\in C(I,H),
and \phi (0)=0.
It is convenient to rewrite the system (3.1) as an operator equation in {W}_{pq}(I). For x\in X, we get
It follows from Theorem 30.A of Zeidler [23] that the operator A:X\to {X}^{\ast} is bounded, monotone, hemicontinuous and coercive. By using the same technique, one can show that the operator F:{L}_{p}(I,H)\to {X}^{\ast} is bounded and satisfies
for some constants \stackrel{\u02c6}{{M}_{1}},\stackrel{\u02c6}{{M}_{2}}>0 and all x\in {L}_{p}(I,H).
We define
where \dot{u} stands for the generalized derivative of u, i.e.,
For the proofs of main results, we need the following lemma.
Lemma 3.1 Let V\subseteq H\subseteq {V}^{\ast} be an evolution triple and let X={L}_{p}(I,V), where 1<p<\mathrm{\infty} and 0<T<\mathrm{\infty}. Then the linear operator L:D(L)\subseteq X\to {X}^{\ast} defined by (3.2) is maximal monotone.
Proof In the sequel we will show that L is maximal monotone. To prove this, suppose that (v,w)\in X\times {X}^{\ast} and
We have to show that v\in D(L) and w=Lv, i.e., w=\dot{v}. Due to the arbitrariness of u, we choose u=\varphi z+\xi, where \varphi \in {C}_{0}^{\mathrm{\infty}}(I), \xi ={u}_{0} and z\in V. Then \dot{u}=\dot{\varphi}z, so \u300aLu,u\u300b=0. From \u3008wLu,vu\u3009\ge 0, we obtain that
By the arbitrariness of z, one has that
Hence, w=\dot{v}. Since v\in {W}_{pq}(I), then w\in {X}^{\ast}. It remains to show that v\in D(L). Using the integration by parts formula for functions in {W}_{pq}(I) (see Zeidler [23], Proposition 23.23), we obtain from (3.2) that
Choose a set of functions {({a}_{n})}_{n\ge 1} in H such that T{a}_{n}\to v(T)\xi as n\to \mathrm{\infty}. For \xi \in H, let u(t)=t{a}_{n}+\xi, then u\in D(L). By (3.3), we have v(0)=u(0)=\xi as n\to \mathrm{\infty}. Hence, v\in D(L). This completes the proof. □
Theorem 3.1 If hypotheses (H1), (H2) and (H3) hold, the problem (3.1) has at least one solution.
Proof The process of proof is divided into four parts.
Step 1. We claim that the equation
has only one solution.
Firstly, for every \u03f5\in (0,1], y\in X and f\in {X}^{\ast}, we claim that the equation
has only one solution. By (H1) and (H3), it is easy to check that (A+B) is bounded, monotone, hemicontinuous and coercive. Moreover, by Lemma 3.1, L is a linear maximal monotone operator. Therefore, R(L+A+B)={V}^{\ast}, i.e., L+(A+B) is surjective (see [23], p.868]). The uniqueness is clear. Hence, for the Cauchy problem (3.5) has a unique {x}_{y}(t)\in {W}_{pq}(I). By {W}_{pq}(I)\subset C(I,H), then the operator P:{W}_{pq}(I)\to {W}_{pq}(I) is defined as follows:
By (3.5), we have
for all {y}_{1},{y}_{2}\in {W}_{pq}(I). Take an inner product over (3.5) with {x}_{1}{x}_{2}, then
By (H1)(ii), we have
Hence,
Invoking the Banach fixed point theorem, the operator P has only one fixed point {x}_{\u03f5}=P({x}_{\u03f5}), i.e., {x}_{\u03f5} is the uniform solution of (3.4).
Therefore, we define {L}_{\u03f5}:{W}_{pq}(I)\to {X}^{\ast} as {L}_{\u03f5}x=\dot{x}+A(t,x)+Bx and x(0)=(1\u03f5)\phi (x). By Step 1, we have {L}_{\u03f5}:{W}_{pq}(I)\to {X}^{\ast} is onetoone and surjective, and so {L}_{\u03f5}^{1}:{X}^{\ast}\to {W}_{pq}(I) is well defined.
Step 2. {L}_{\u03f5}^{1}:{X}^{\ast}\to {L}_{p}(I,H) is completely continuous.
We only need to show that {L}_{\u03f5}^{1} is continuous and maps a bounded set into a relatively compact set. We claim that {L}_{\u03f5}:{W}_{pq}(I)\to {X}^{\ast} is continuous. In fact, let {\{{x}_{n}\}}_{n\ge 1}\subset {W}_{pq}(I) such that {x}_{n}\to x as n\to \mathrm{\infty}. From (H1)(ii) and (H3), we infer that {x}_{n}\to x, A({x}_{n})\to A(x), B{x}_{n}\to Bx, a.e. I as n\to \mathrm{\infty}. Obviously, \phi ({x}_{n})\to \phi (x). Therefore, {L}_{\u03f5}:{W}_{pq}(I)\to {X}^{\ast} is continuous and {L}_{\u03f5}^{1} is continuous.
Let K\subset {X}^{\ast} be a bound set, for any f\in K, there is a priori bound in {W}_{pq}(I) for the possible solution x(t)={L}_{\u03f5}^{1}f of (3.4). Then
It follows that
By (H1)(iv),
or
with p>2. But
Therefore,
or
with p>2. So, there exists an {M}_{1}>0 such that {\parallel x\parallel}_{X}\le {M}_{1}. Because of the boundedness of operators A, B, we obtain that there exists an {M}_{2}>0 such that {\parallel \dot{x}\parallel}_{{X}^{\ast}}\le {M}_{2}. Hence, {\parallel x\parallel}_{{W}_{pq}}\le M for some constant M>0. Therefore, we have {L}_{\u03f5}^{1}(K) is bounded in {W}_{pq}(I). But {W}_{pq}(I) is compactly embedded in {L}_{p}(I,H). Therefore, {L}_{\u03f5}^{1}(K) is relatively compact in {L}_{p}(I,H).
Let \stackrel{\u02c6}{N}:{L}_{p}(I,H)\to {2}^{{X}^{\ast}} be a multivalued Nemitsky operator corresponding to F and \stackrel{\u02c6}{N} was defined by \stackrel{\u02c6}{N}(x)=\{v\in {X}^{\ast}:v(t)\in F(t,x(t))\} a.e. on I.
Step 3. \stackrel{\u02c6}{N}(\cdot ) has nonempty, closed, decomposable values and is LSC.
The closedness and decomposability of the values of \stackrel{\u02c6}{N}(\cdot ) are easy to check. For the nonemptiness, note that if x\in {L}_{p}(I,H), by the hypothesis (H2)(i), (t,x)\to F(t,x) is graph measurable, so we apply Aumann’s selection theorem and obtain a measurable map v:I\to {V}^{\ast} such that v(t)\in F(t,x(t)) a.e. on I. By the hypothesis (H2)(iii), v\in {X}^{\ast}. Thus, for every x\in {L}_{p}(I,H), \stackrel{\u02c6}{N}(x)\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}. To prove the lower semicontinuity of \stackrel{\u02c6}{N}(\cdot ), we only need to show that every u\in {X}^{\ast}, x\to d(u,\stackrel{\u02c6}{N}(x)) is a USC {R}_{+}valued function. Note that
(see Hiai and Umegaki [27] Theorem 2.2). We will show that for every \lambda \ge 0, the superlevel set {U}_{\lambda}=\{x\in {L}_{p}(I,H):d(u,\stackrel{\u02c6}{N}(x))\ge \lambda \} is closed in {L}_{p}(I,H). Let {\{{x}_{n}\}}_{n\ge 1}\subseteq {U}_{\lambda} and assume that {x}_{n}\to x in {L}_{p}(I,H). By passing to a subsequence if necessary, we may assume that {x}_{n}(t)\to x(t) a.e. on I as n\to \mathrm{\infty}. By (H2)(ii), x\to d(u(t),F(t,x)) is an upper semicontinuous {R}_{+}valued function. So, via Fatou’s lemma, we have
Therefore, x\in {U}_{\lambda} and this proves the LSC of \stackrel{\u02c6}{N}(\cdot ). By Lemma 2.2, we obtain a continuous map f:{L}_{p}(I,H)\to {X}^{\ast} such that f(x)\in \stackrel{\u02c6}{N}(x). To finish our proof, we need to solve the fixed point problem: x={L}_{\u03f5}^{1}\circ f(x).
Since the embedding V\to H is compact, the embedding {W}_{pq}(I)\to {L}_{p}(I,H) is compact. That is, {x}_{n}\to x in {L}_{p}(I,H) whenever {x}_{n}\rightharpoonup x in {W}_{pq}(I). By using the above relation and the continuity of f, we have f({x}_{n})\to f(x) in {X}^{\ast} whenever {x}_{n}\rightharpoonup x in {W}_{pq}(I). So, {L}_{\u03f5}^{1}\circ f:{L}_{p}(I,H)\to {L}_{p}(I,H) is compact.
Step 4. We claim that the set \mathrm{\Gamma}=\{x\in {L}_{p}(I,H):x=\sigma {L}_{\u03f5}^{1}\circ f(x),\sigma \in (0,1)\} is bounded.
Let x\in \mathrm{\Gamma}, then we have {L}_{\u03f5}(\frac{x}{\sigma})=f(x). Note that
By (H1)(iv) and (H3)(i), one has that
or
with p>2. By using the integration by parts formula, we have
where {\gamma}_{1},{\gamma}_{2}>0. By (3.9), (3.10) and (3.11), if 1\le k<p, then we have
If 1\le k<p, p>2, then we have
Thus, by virtue of the inequalities (3.12) and (3.13), we can find a constant {M}_{1}>0 such that {\parallel x\parallel}_{X}\le {M}_{1} for all x\in \mathrm{\Gamma}. From the boundedness of operators A, B and f, and the continuous embedding X\to {L}_{p}(I,H), we obtain {\parallel A(x)\parallel}_{{X}^{\ast}}\le {M}_{2}, {\parallel Bx\parallel}_{{X}^{\ast}}\le {M}_{3} and {\parallel f(x)\parallel}_{{X}^{\ast}}\le {M}_{4} for some constants {M}_{2}>0, {M}_{3}>0, {M}_{4}>0 and all x\in \mathrm{\Gamma}. Therefore,
for all x\in \mathrm{\Gamma}.
It follows from (3.14) that {\parallel x\parallel}_{{W}_{pq}}\le {\parallel x\parallel}_{X}+{\parallel \dot{x}\parallel}_{{X}^{\ast}}\le \stackrel{\u02c6}{M} for some constant \stackrel{\u02c6}{M}>0. Hence, Γ is a bounded subset of {W}_{pq}(I). So, Γ is a bounded subset of {L}_{p}(I,H) since the embedding {W}_{pq}(I)\to {L}_{p}(I,H) is compact.
Invoking the LeraySchauder theorem, one has that there exists an {x}_{\u03f5}\in {W}_{pq}(I) such that {x}_{\u03f5}={L}_{\u03f5}^{1}f({x}_{\u03f5}), i.e., {x}_{\u03f5} is a solution of the following problem:
Let {({\u03f5}_{n})}_{n\ge 1}\subset (0,1) and {\u03f5}_{n}\to 0. For every n\in N, there exists an {x}_{n}\in {W}_{pq}(I) which is a solution of the following equations:
By Step 3, we have that {\{{x}_{n}\}}_{n\ge 1} is uniformly bounded. By the boundedness of the sequence {\{{x}_{n}\}}_{n\ge 1}\subset {W}_{pq}(I), it follows that the sequence {\{{\dot{x}}_{n}\}}_{n\ge 1}\subset {X}^{\ast} is uniformly bounded and passing to subsequence if necessary, we may assume that {\dot{x}}_{n}\rightharpoonup u in {X}^{\ast}. Evidently, u=\dot{x} and {x}_{n}\rightharpoonup x in {W}_{pq}(I). Since the embedding {W}_{pq}(I)\hookrightarrow {L}_{p}(I,H) is compact, then {x}_{n}\to x in {L}_{p}(I,H). Hence, from the hypothesis (H2)(ii), we obtain f({x}_{n})\to f(x) and f(x)\in F(t,x). Since the operator A is hemicontinuous and monotone and B is a continuous linear operator, thus A({x}_{n})\rightharpoonup A(x), B{x}_{n}\rightharpoonup Bx in {X}^{\ast} as n\to \mathrm{\infty}. Therefore, we obtain \dot{x}+A(x)+Bx=f, f\in F(t,x) a.e. on I. Since {x}_{n}(t)\to x(t) in {L}_{p}(I,H) and \phi :{L}_{p}(I,H)\to H is continuous, then we have
Hence, x is a solution of (3.1). The proof is completed. □
Next, we consider the convex case, the assumption on F is as follows:
(H4) F:I\times H\to {P}_{kc}({V}^{\ast}) is a multifunction such that

(i)
(t,x)\to F(t,x) is graph measurable;

(ii)
for almost all t\in I, x\to F(t,x) has a closed graph; and (H2)(iii) hold.
Theorem 3.2 If hypotheses (H1), (H3) and (H4) hold, the problem (3.1) has at least one solution; moreover, the solution set is weakly compact in {W}_{pq}(I).
Proof The proof is as that of Theorem 3.1. So, we only present those particular points where the two proofs differ.
In this case, the multivalued Nemistsky operator \stackrel{\u02c6}{N}:{L}_{p}(I,H)\to {2}^{{X}_{w}^{\ast}} has nonempty closed, convex values in {X}^{\ast} and is USC from {L}_{p}(I,H) into {X}^{\ast} furnished with the weak topology (denoted by {X}_{w}^{\ast}). The closedness and convexity of the values of \stackrel{\u02c6}{N}(\cdot ) are clear. To prove the nonemptiness, let x\in {L}_{p}(I,H) and {\{{s}_{n}\}}_{n\ge 1} be a sequence of step functions such that {s}_{n}(t)\to x(t) in H and {\parallel {s}_{n}(t)\parallel}_{H}\le {\parallel x(t)\parallel}_{H} a.e. on I. Then by virtue of the hypothesis (H4)(i), for every n\ge 1, t\to F(t,{s}_{n}(t)) admits a measurable selector {v}_{n}(t). From the hypothesis (H4)(iii), we have that {\parallel {v}_{n}\parallel}_{{X}^{\ast}}\le \stackrel{\u02c6}{{M}_{1}}+\stackrel{\u02c6}{{M}_{2}}{\parallel x\parallel}_{{L}_{p}(I,H)}^{k1}, so {\{{v}_{n}(t)\}}_{n\ge 1}\subseteq {X}^{\ast} is uniformly integrable. So, by the DunfordPettis theorem, and by passing to a subsequence if necessary, we may assume that {v}_{n}\to v weakly in {X}^{\ast}. Then from Theorem 3.1 in [28], we have
the last inclusion being a consequence of the hypothesis (H4)(ii). So, v\in \stackrel{\u02c6}{N}(x), which means that \stackrel{\u02c6}{N}(\cdot ) is nonempty.
Next, we show that \stackrel{\u02c6}{N}(\cdot ) is USC from {L}_{p}(I,H) into {X}_{w}^{\ast}. Let Ξ be a nonempty and weakly closed subset of {X}^{\ast}. Obviously, it is sufficient to show that the set
is closed. Let {\{{x}_{n}\}}_{n\ge 1}\subseteq {\stackrel{\u02c6}{N}}^{1}(\mathrm{\Xi}) and assume {x}_{n}\to x in {L}_{p}(I,H). Passing to a subsequence, we can get that {x}_{n}(t)\to x(t) a.e. on I. Let {f}_{n}\in \stackrel{\u02c6}{N}({x}_{n})\cap \mathrm{\Xi}, n\ge 1. Then by virtue of the hypothesis (H4)(iii), we have
So, by the DunfordPettis theorem, we may assume that {f}_{n}\to f\in \mathrm{\Xi} in {X}_{w}^{\ast}. As before, we have
then f\in \stackrel{\u02c6}{N}(x)\cap \mathrm{\Xi}, i.e., {\stackrel{\u02c6}{N}}^{1}(\mathrm{\Xi}) is closed in {L}_{p}(I,H). This proves the upper semicontinuity of \stackrel{\u02c6}{N}(\cdot ) from {L}_{p}(I,H) into {X}_{w}^{\ast}.
We consider the following fixed point problem:
Recalling that {L}_{\u03f5}^{1}:{X}^{\ast}\to {L}_{p}(I,H) is completely continuous, we see that {L}_{\u03f5}^{1}\circ \stackrel{\u02c6}{N}:{L}_{p}(I,H)\to {P}_{kc}({L}_{p}(I,H)) is USC and maps bounded sets into relatively compact sets. We easily check that
is bounded, as a proof of Theorem 3.1. Invoking the LeraySchauder fixed point theorem, one has that there exists an {x}_{\u03f5}\in {W}_{pq}(I) such that {x}_{\u03f5}\in {L}_{\u03f5}^{1}\circ \stackrel{\u02c6}{N}({x}_{\u03f5}), i.e., {x}_{\u03f5} is a solution of the following problem:
Let {({\u03f5}_{n})}_{n\ge 1}\subset (0,1) and {\u03f5}_{n}\to 0. For every n\in N, there exists an {x}_{n}\in {W}_{pq}(I) which is a solution of the following problem:
By Step 3, {\{{x}_{n}\}}_{n\ge 1} is uniformly bounded. By the boundedness of the sequence {\{{x}_{n}\}}_{n\ge 1}\subset {W}_{pq}(I), it follows that the sequence {\{{\dot{x}}_{n}\}}_{n\ge 1}\subset {X}^{\ast} is uniformly bounded and, passing to subsequence if necessary, we may assume that {\dot{x}}_{n}\rightharpoonup \dot{x} in {X}^{\ast}. Thus, A({x}_{n})\rightharpoonup A(x), B{x}_{n}\rightharpoonup Bx in {X}^{\ast} as n\to \mathrm{\infty}. Evidently, there exists {f}_{n}\in N({x}_{n}), by virtue of the hypothesis (H4)(iv), we have that {\parallel {f}_{n}\parallel}_{{X}^{\ast}}\le \stackrel{\u02c6}{{M}_{1}}+\stackrel{\u02c6}{{M}_{2}}{\parallel x\parallel}_{{L}_{p}(I,H)}^{k1}, so {\{{f}_{n}(t)\}}_{n\ge 1}\subseteq {X}^{\ast} is uniformly integrable. So, by the DunfordPettis theorem and by passing to a subsequence if necessary, we may assume that {f}_{n}\to f weakly in {X}^{\ast}. Therefore, we obtain \dot{x}+A(x)+Bx=f, f\in F(t,x) a.e. on I. Since {x}_{n}(t)\to x(t) in {L}_{p}(I,H) and \phi :{L}_{p}(I,H)\to H is continuous, then we have
Hence, evidently x is a solution of (3.1). As in the proof of Theorem 3.1, we have that S=sup\{{\parallel x\parallel}_{{W}_{pq}}:x\in S\}\le \stackrel{\u02c6}{M}, for some \stackrel{\u02c6}{M}>0. So, S\subseteq {W}_{pq}(I) is uniformly bounded. So, by the DunfordPettis theorem and by passing to a subsequence if necessary, we may assume that {x}_{n}\to x weakly in {W}_{pq}(I). As before, we have
Clearly, x(0)=\phi (x), then x\in S. Thus, S is weakly compact in {W}_{pq}(I). □
4 Relaxation theorem
Now, we prove the existence of extremal solutions and a strong relaxation theorem. Consider the extremal problem of the following evolution inclusion:
where extF(t,x) denotes the extremal point set of F(t,x). We need the following hypothesis:
(H5) F:I\times H\to {P}_{wkc}(H) is a multifunction such that

(i)
(t,x)\to F(t,x) is graph measurable;

(ii)
for almost all t\in I, x\to F(t,x) is hcontinuous; and (H2)(iii) holds.
Theorem 4.1 If hypotheses (H1), (H3) and (H5) hold, then the problem (4.1) has at least one solution.
Proof Since {S}_{e}\subset S, as in the proof of Theorem 3.1, we obtain a priori bound for {S}_{e}. We know that there exists {M}_{i}>0, i=1,2 such that {\parallel x\parallel}_{{W}_{pq}}<{M}_{1} and {\parallel x\parallel}_{C(I,H)}<{M}_{2} for all x\in {S}_{e}. Let \psi (t)={b}_{2}(t)+{C}_{5}{M}_{2}, \psi (t)\in {L}_{q}^{+}(I). We may assume that F(t,x)\le \psi (t) a.e. on I for all x\in H. By Theorem 3.1, let {L}_{0}=\dot{x}+A(x)+Bx, x(0)=\phi (x), then {L}_{0}^{1}:{W}_{pq}(I)\to {X}^{\ast} is well defined. So, let
then \stackrel{\u02c6}{K}={L}_{0}^{1}(W)\subseteq {W}_{pq}(I) is a compact convex subset in C(I,H). Obviously, \stackrel{\u02c6}{K} is convex. We only need to show the compactness. Let {\{{x}_{n}\}}_{n\ge 1}\subset \stackrel{\u02c6}{K}, then there exists {h}_{n}\in W such that {L}_{0}({x}_{n})={h}_{n}, i.e., {\dot{x}}_{n}={h}_{n}A({x}_{n})B{x}_{n}. By the definition of W, W is uniformly bounded in {L}_{q}(I,H). By the DunfordPettis theorem, passing to a subsequence if necessary, we may assume that {h}_{n}\rightharpoonup h in {L}_{q}(I,H) for some h\in W. From the definition of W, we have
Therefore, the sequence {\{{x}_{n}\}}_{n\ge 1}\subset {W}_{pq}(I) is bounded. Because of the compactness of the embedding {W}_{pq}(I)\subset {L}_{p}(I,H), we have that the sequence {\{{x}_{n}\}}_{n\ge 1}\subset {L}_{p}(I,H) is relatively compact. So, by passing to a subsequence if necessary, we may assume that {x}_{n}\to x in {L}_{p}(I,H). Moreover, by the boundedness of the sequence {\{{x}_{n}\}}_{n\ge 1}\subset {W}_{pq}(I), it follows that the sequence {\{{\dot{x}}_{n}\}}_{n\ge 1}\subset {X}^{\ast} is uniformly bounded and, passing to subsequence if necessary, we may assume that {\dot{x}}_{n}\rightharpoonup \dot{x} in {X}^{\ast}. Since the embedding {W}_{pq}(I)\subset C(I,H) is continuous and {W}_{pq}(I)\subset {L}_{p}(I,H) is compact, it follows that {x}_{n}\rightharpoonup x in C(I,H) and {x}_{n}\to x in {L}_{p}(I,H). Hence, {x}_{n}\to x in H for all t\in I\setminus \mathrm{\Lambda}, m(\mathrm{\Lambda})=0 (m being the Lebesgue measure on R). Since A is hemicontinuous and monotone and B is a continuous linear operator, thus A({x}_{n})\rightharpoonup A(x), B{x}_{n}\rightharpoonup Bx in {X}^{\ast} and as n\to \mathrm{\infty}, we obtain \dot{x}+A(x)+Bx=h a.e. on I and x(0)=\phi (x). Note that
Taking the inner product above with {x}_{n}x and integrating from 0 to T, one can see that
By the hypothesis (H1)(iii), it follows that
So, we can find \tau \in I\setminus \mathrm{\Lambda} such that
Using the integration by parts formula for functions in {W}_{pq}(I) (see Zeidler [26], Proposition 23.23), for any t\in I, we have
By (4.5), we see that
So, {x}_{n}(t)\to x(t) in C(I,H). Since x={L}_{0}^{1}(h) with h\in W, we conclude that {L}_{0}^{1}(W)\subseteq C(I,H) is compact. From Lemma 2.3, we can find a continuous map f:\stackrel{\u02c6}{K}\to {L}_{q}(I,H) such that f(x)(t)\in extF(t,x(t)) a.e. on I for all x\in \stackrel{\u02c6}{K}. Then {L}_{0}^{1}\circ f is a compact operator. On applying the Schauder fixed point theorem, there exists an x\in \stackrel{\u02c6}{K} such that x={L}_{0}^{1}\circ f(x). This is a solution of (4.1), and so {S}_{e}\ne \mathrm{\varnothing} in {W}_{pq}(I). □
For the relation theorem of the problem (4.1), we need the following definition and hypotheses.
Definition 4.1 A Carathéodory function \mu :I\times {R}^{+}\to {R}^{+} is said to be a Kamke function if it is integrally bounded on the bounded sets, \mu (t,0)\equiv 0 and the unique solution of the differential equation \dot{s}(t)=\mu (t,s(t)), s(0)=0 is s(t)\equiv 0.
(H6) For each t\in I, there exists a Kamke function \mu :I\times {R}^{+}\to {R}^{+} such that
and (H5) hold.
Theorem 4.2 If hypotheses (H1), (H3) and (H6) hold, then \overline{{S}_{e}}=S, where the closure is taken in C(I,H).
Proof Let x\in S, then there exist f\in {L}_{q}(I,H) and f(x)(t)\in F(t,x(t)) a.e. on I such that
As before, let W=\{v\in {L}_{q}(I,H):{\parallel v\parallel}_{H}\le \psi (t)\text{a.e. on}I\}, then \stackrel{\u02c6}{K}={L}_{0}^{1}(W)\subseteq {W}_{pq}(I) is a compact convex subset in C(I,H). For every y\in \stackrel{\u02c6}{K}, we define the multifunction
Clearly, for every t\in I, {Q}_{\u03f5}(t)\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}, and it is graph measurable. On applying Aumann’s selection theorem, we get a measurable function v:I\to H such that v(t)\in {Q}_{\u03f5}(t) almost everywhere on I. So, we define the multifunction
We see that {R}_{\u03f5}:\stackrel{\u02c6}{K}\to {2}^{{L}_{q}(I,H)} has nonempty and decomposable values. It follows from Theorem 3 of [29] that \overline{{R}_{\u03f5}(\cdot )} is LSC. Therefore, y\to \overline{{R}_{\u03f5}(y)} is LSC and has closed and decomposable values. So, we apply Lemma 2.2 to get a continuous map {f}_{\u03f5}:\stackrel{\u02c6}{K}\to {L}_{q}(I,H) such that {f}_{\u03f5}(y)\in \overline{{R}_{\u03f5}(y)} for all y\in \stackrel{\u02c6}{K}. Invoking IITheorem 8.31 of [22] (in [22], p.260]), we can find a continuous map {g}_{\u03f5}:\stackrel{\u02c6}{K}\to {L}_{q}(I,H) such that {g}_{\u03f5}(y)(t)\in extF(t,y) almost everywhere on I, and {\parallel {f}_{\u03f5}(y){g}_{\u03f5}(y)\parallel}_{w}\le \u03f5 for all y\in \stackrel{\u02c6}{K}. Now, let \u03f5\to 0 and set {f}_{{\u03f5}_{n}}={f}_{\u03f5}, {g}_{{\u03f5}_{n}}={g}_{\u03f5}. Note that {\parallel {g}_{{\u03f5}_{n}}(y)\parallel}_{H}\le \psi (t) a.e. on I with \psi \in {L}_{q}(I), so we have {g}_{{\u03f5}_{n}}\rightharpoonup {f}_{{\u03f5}_{n}} in {L}_{q}(I,H). We consider the following problem:
where {g}_{{\u03f5}_{n}}(x)\in ext{R}_{\u03f5}(x). We see that {L}_{0}^{1}{g}_{{\u03f5}_{n}}:\stackrel{\u02c6}{K}\to \stackrel{\u02c6}{K} is a compact operator and by the Schauder fixed point theorem, we obtain a solution {x}_{{\u03f5}_{n}}\in {S}_{e}\subset {W}_{pq}(I) of (4.1). We see that the sequence {\{{x}_{{\u03f5}_{n}}\}}_{n\ge 1}\subset \stackrel{\u02c6}{K} is uniformly bounded. So, by passing to a subsequence if necessary, we may assume that {x}_{{\u03f5}_{n}}\rightharpoonup \stackrel{\u02c6}{x} in {W}_{pq}(I). From the proof of Theorem 4.1, we know that {x}_{{\u03f5}_{n}}\to \stackrel{\u02c6}{x} in C(I,H) and \stackrel{\u02c6}{x}(0)=\phi (\stackrel{\u02c6}{x}). Note that {L}_{0}{x}_{{\u03f5}_{n}}{L}_{0}x={g}_{{\u03f5}_{n}}({x}_{{\u03f5}_{n}})f(x). So, we have that
However,
Then
By {g}_{{\u03f5}_{n}}\rightharpoonup {f}_{{\u03f5}_{n}} in {L}_{q}(I,H) and {x}_{{\u03f5}_{n}}\to \stackrel{\u02c6}{x} in {L}_{p}(I,H), we have that
Hence, there exists a constant {N}_{0}>0, one has that
as n>{N}_{0}. It follows that
Hence, {\parallel {x}_{\u03f5}(t)x(t)\parallel}_{H}^{2}\le Q(t), where Q(0)={\parallel {x}_{\u03f5}(0)x(0)\parallel}_{H}^{2} and \dot{Q}(t)=\mu (t,Q(t))+4\u03f5. By (4.7), then Q(0)=0. Let \u03f5\to 0, we have {\parallel {x}_{\u03f5}(t)x(t)\parallel}_{H}\to 0. Therefore, x=\stackrel{\u02c6}{x}, i.e., {x}_{\u03f5}\to x and {x}_{\u03f5}\in {S}_{e}, and so S\subseteq \overline{{S}_{e}}. Also, S is closed in C(I,H) (see the proof of Theorem 3.2), thus S=\overline{{S}_{e}}. □
5 Examples
As an application of the previous results, we introduce two examples. Let Ω be a bounded domain in {R}^{N} with smooth boundary ∂ Ω, T=[0,b], 0<b<\mathrm{\infty}. Firstly, consider the following nonlinear evolution equation with a discontinuous righthand side:
The pLaplacian div({\mathrm{\nabla}u}^{p2}\mathrm{\nabla}u) arises in many applications such as Finsler geometry and nonNewtonian fluids. In [30], Liu showed the existence of antiperiodic solutions to the problem (5.1) where f(t,x,\cdot ) is continuous.
Since f(t,x,\cdot ) is not continuous, the problem (5.1) need not have solutions. To obtain an existence theorem for (5.1), we pass to a multivalued problem by, roughly speaking, filling in the gaps at the discontinuity points of f(t,x,\cdot ). So, we introduce the functions {f}_{1}(t,x,u) and {f}_{2}(t,x,u) defined by
and
Set
Then, instead of (5.1), we study the following multivalued nonlinear evolution inclusion:
The hypotheses on the data of this problem (5.1) are the following:
(H7)

(i)
{f}_{i}(t,x,u) (i=1,2) are Nemitskymeasurable, i.e., u:T\times \mathrm{\Omega}\to R for all measurable, u\to {f}_{i}(t,x,u) (i=1,2) is measurable;

(ii)
there exists {a}_{2}(t)\in {L}^{q}{(t)}_{+}, C>0, such that
{f}_{i}(t,x,u)\le {a}_{2}(t)+C{\parallel u\parallel}^{k1},
where 1\le k<p.
In this case, the evolution triple is V={W}_{0}^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega}), H={L}^{2}(\mathrm{\Omega}) and {V}^{\ast}={W}^{1,q}(\mathrm{\Omega}). From the Sobolev embedding theorem, we see that all embeddings are compact. Let us define the following operator on V:
By the monotone property of pLaplacian, it is easy to verify that A satisfies our hypothesis (H1). Let F:T\times H\to {P}_{kc}(H) be defined by
The hypothesis (H7) implies that (H4) is satisfied. Note that {f}_{1}(t,x,\cdot ) is lower semicontinuous, {f}_{2}(t,x,\cdot ) is upper semicontinuous, and so \stackrel{\u02c6}{f}(t,x,\cdot ) is USC (see [22], Example 2.8, p.371]). Let \phi (u)=\frac{1}{2b}{\int}_{0}^{b}u(s,x)\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}ds+\frac{1}{2}u(b,x), it is easy to check that φ satisfies our hypothesis (H3)(ii). Then, we rewrite equivalently (5.1) as (3.1) , with A and F as above. Finally, we can apply Theorem 3.2 to the problem (5.1) and obtain the following.
Theorem 5.1 If the hypothesis (H7) holds, then the problem (5.1) has a nonempty set of solutions u\in {L}_{p}(T,{W}_{0}^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega})) such that \frac{\partial u}{\partial t}\in {L}_{q}(T,{W}^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega})).
Secondly, we present an example of a quasilinear distributed parameter control system, with a priori feedback (i.e., state dependent control constraint set). So, let T=[0,b] and Z\subseteq {R}^{N} be a bounded domain with {C}^{1}boundary Γ. Let {D}_{k}=\frac{\partial}{\partial {z}_{k}}, k\in \{1,2,\dots ,N\}, \mathrm{\u25b3}={\sum}_{k=1}^{N}\frac{{\partial}^{2}}{\partial {z}_{k}^{2}}. We consider the following control system:
The hypotheses on the data (5.3) are the following:
(H8) {A}_{k} (k=1,2,\dots ,N):T\times Z\times R\times {R}^{N}\to R are functions such that

(i)
(t,z)\to {A}_{k}(t,z,u,\eta ) is measurable on T\times Z for every (u,\eta )\in R\times {R}^{N}, (u,\eta )\to {A}_{k}(t,z,u,\eta ) is continuous on R\times {R}^{N} for all almost all (t,z)\in T\times Z;

(ii)
{A}_{k}(t,z,u,\eta )\le {\stackrel{\u02c6}{\alpha}}_{1}(t,z)+{\stackrel{\u02c6}{c}}_{1}(z)(u+\eta ) with a nonnegative function {\stackrel{\u02c6}{\alpha}}_{1}\in {L}^{2}(I\times Z) and {\stackrel{\u02c6}{c}}_{1}(z)\in {L}^{\mathrm{\infty}}(Z) for almost all t\in T;

(iii)
{\sum}_{k=1}^{N}({A}_{k}(t,z,u,\eta ){A}_{k}(t,z,u,{\eta}^{\prime}))({\eta}_{k}{\eta}_{k}^{\prime})\ge {\eta {\eta}^{\prime}}^{2} for almost all t\in T;

(iv)
{A}_{k}(t,z,0,0)=0 for all (t,z)\in T\times Z.
(H9) The function g:T\times Z\times R\to R satisfies the following:

(i)
for all x\in R, (t,z)\to g(t,z,x) is measurable;

(ii)
for all (t,z)\in T\times Z, x\to g(t,z,x) is continuous;

(iii)
for almost all (t,z)\in T\times Z and all x\in R, we have
g(t,z,x)\le {\eta}_{1}(t,z)+{\eta}_{2}(t)x
with {\eta}_{1}\in {L}_{2}(T,{L}^{2}(Z)), {\eta}_{2}\in {L}^{\mathrm{\infty}}(T).
(H10) U:T\times Z\times R\to {P}_{kc}(R) is a multifunction such that

(i)
for all x\in R, (t,z)\to U(t,z,x) is measurable;

(ii)
for all (t,z)\in T\times Z, x\to U(t,z,x) is hcontinuous;

(iii)
for almost all (t,z)\in T\times Z and all x\in R, U(t,z,x)\le \gamma, with \gamma >0.
Let V={H}_{0}^{1}(Z), H={L}^{2}(Z), {V}^{\ast}={H}^{1}(Z). Then (V,H,{V}^{\ast}) is an evolution triple with compact embeddings. Let A:T\times V\to {V}^{\ast}, B:V\to {V}^{\ast} be the operators defined by
for all v\in {H}_{0}^{1}(Z). Let \phi (u)=\frac{1}{b}{\int}_{0}^{b}u(s,z)\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}ds.
Evidently, using the hypothesis (H8) , it is straightforward to check that A, B, φ satisfy hypotheses (H1), (H3). Also, let F:T\times {L}^{2}(Z)\to {P}_{kc}({L}^{2}(Z)) be defined by
Using hypotheses (H9) and (H10), it is straightforward to check that F satisfies the hypothesis (H5).
Rewrite the problem (5.3) in the following equivalent evolution inclusion form:
It is easy to get the following theorem by applying Theorem 4.1 to the problem (5.3).
Theorem 5.2 If hypotheses (H8)(H10) hold, then the problem (5.3) has one solution x\in {L}_{2}(T,{H}_{0}^{1}(Z))\cap C(T,{L}^{2}(Z)) with \frac{\partial x}{\partial t}\in {L}_{2}(T,{H}^{1}(Z)).
References
Byszewski L, Lakshmikantham V: Theorem about the existence and uniqueness of a solution of a nonlocal abstract Cauchy problem in a Banach space. Appl. Anal. 1990, 40: 1119.
Byszewski L: Theorems about the existence and uniqueness of solutions of semilinear evolution nonlocal Cauchy problems. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1991, 162: 494505. 10.1016/0022247X(91)90164U
Aizicovici S, Lee H: Nonlinear nonlocal Cauchy problems in Banach spaces. Appl. Math. Lett. 2005, 18: 401407. 10.1016/j.aml.2004.01.010
Aizicovici S, McKibben M: Existence results for a class of abstract nonlocal Cauchy problems. Nonlinear Anal. 2000, 39: 649668. 10.1016/S0362546X(98)002272
Aizicovici S, Staicu V: Multivalued evolution equations with nonlocal initial conditions in Banach spaces. Nonlinear Differ. Equ. Appl. 2007, 14: 361376. 10.1007/s0003000750495
GarcíaFalset J: Existence results and asymptotic behaviour for nonlocal abstract Cauchy problems. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2008, 338: 639652. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2007.05.045
GarcíaFalset J, Reich S: Integral solutions to a class of nonlocal evolution equations. Commun. Contemp. Math. 2010, 12: 10311054. 10.1142/S021919971000410X
Paicu A, Vrabie II: A class of nonlinear evolution equations subjected to nonlocal initial conditions. Nonlinear Anal. 2010, 72: 40914100. 10.1016/j.na.2010.01.041
Deng K: Exponential decay of solutions of semilinear parabolic equations with initial boundary conditions. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1993, 179: 630637. 10.1006/jmaa.1993.1373
Ntouyas S, Tsamatos P: Global existence for semilinear evolution equations with nonlocal conditions. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1997, 210: 679687. 10.1006/jmaa.1997.5425
Byszewski L, Akca H: Existence of solutions of a semilinear functionaldifferential evolution nonlocal problem. Nonlinear Anal. 1998, 34: 6572. 10.1016/S0362546X(97)006937
Fu X, Ezzinbi K: Existence of solutions for neutral functional differential evolution equations with nonlocal conditions. Nonlinear Anal. 2003, 54: 215227. 10.1016/S0362546X(03)000476
Benchohra M, Ntouyas S: Nonlocal Cauchy problems for neutral functional differential and integrodifferential inclusions in Banach spaces. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2001, 258: 573590. 10.1006/jmaa.2000.7394
Kamenskii M, Obukhovskii V, Zecca P de Gruyter Series in Nonlinear Anal. Appl. 7. In Condensing Multivalued Maps and Semilinear Differential Inclusions in Banach Spaces. de Gruyter, Berlin; 2001.
Liang J, Liu J, Xiao T: Nonlocal Cauchy problems governed by compact operator families. Nonlinear Anal. 2004, 57: 183189. 10.1016/j.na.2004.02.007
Liang J, Liu J, Xiao T: Nonlocal impulsive problems for nonlinear differential equations in Banach spaces. Math. Comput. Model. 2009, 49: 798804. 10.1016/j.mcm.2008.05.046
Xue X: Semilinear nonlocal problems without the assumptions of compactness in Banach spaces. Anal. Appl. 2010, 8: 211225. 10.1142/S021953051000159X
Xue X: Nonlocal nonlinear differential equations with a measure of noncompactness in Banach spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2009, 70: 25932601. 10.1016/j.na.2008.03.046
Tolstonogov A: Extremal selections of multivalued mappings and the “bangbang” principle for evolutions inclusions. Sov. Math. Dokl. 1991, 43(2):481485.
Xue X, Cheng Y: Existence of periodic solutions of nonlinear evolution inclusions in Banach spaces. Nonlinear Anal., Real World Appl. 2010, 11: 459471. 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2008.11.020
Xue X, Yu J: Periodic solutions for semilinear evolution inclusions. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2007, 331: 12461262. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2006.09.056
Hu S, Papageorgiou NS: Handbook of Multivalued Analysis: Vol. I Theory. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht; 1997.
Zeidler E II. In Nonlinear Functional Analysis and Its Applications. Springer, Berlin; 1990.
Dugundji J, Granas A Monogr. Matematyczne 123. In Fixed Point Theory. PWN, Warsaw; 1986:931.
Bressan A, Colombo G: Extensions and selection of maps with decomposable values. Stud. Math. 1988, 90: 6986.
Tolstonogov A: Continuous selectors of multivalued maps with closed, nonconvex, decomposable values. Russ. Acad. Sci. Sb. Math. 1996, 185: 121142.
Hiai F, Umegaki H: Integrals, conditional expectations and martingales of multivalued functions. J. Multivar. Anal. 1977, 7: 149182. 10.1016/0047259X(77)900379
Papageorgiou NS: Convergence theorems for Banach space valued integrable multifunctions. Int. J. Math. Sci. 1987, 10: 433442. 10.1155/S0161171287000516
Donchev T: Qualitative properties of a class differential inclusions. Glas. Mat. 1996, 31(51):269276.
Liu ZH: Antiperiodic solutions to nonlinear evolution equations. J. Funct. Anal. 2010, 258: 20262033. 10.1016/j.jfa.2009.11.018
Acknowledgements
The authors are in debt to the anonymous referees whose comments helped them to improve the final version of this paper. This work is partially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 11172036, 11171350, 10902125) and the Natural Science Foundation of Jilin Province Grants 201115133.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Authors’ contributions
JZ and YC carried out the main part of this manuscript. CY participated in the discussion and corrected the main theorem. FC provided all examples for our results. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
About this article
Cite this article
Zhang, J., Cheng, Y., Yuan, C. et al. Properties of the solutions set for a class of nonlinear evolution inclusions with nonlocal conditions. Bound Value Probl 2013, 15 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/16872770201315
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/16872770201315