1 Introduction

In recent years, the fractional differential equations have received more and more attention. The fractional derivative has been occurring in many physical applications such as a non-Markovian diffusion process with memory [1], charge transport in amorphous semiconductors [2], propagations of mechanical waves in viscoelastic media [3], etc. Phenomena in electromagnetics, acoustics, viscoelasticity, electrochemistry and material science are also described by differential equations of fractional order (see [49]).

Recently, boundary value problems for fractional differential equations have been studied in many papers (see [1025]). Moreover, the existence of solutions to a coupled systems of fractional differential equations have been studied by many authors (see [2633]). But the existence of solutions for a coupled system of fractional differential equations at resonance are seldom considered. Motivated by all the works above, in this paper, we consider the following boundary value problem (BVP for short) for a coupled system of fractional differential equations given by

{ D 0 + α u ( t ) = f ( t , v ( t ) , v ( t ) ) , t ( 0 , 1 ) , D 0 + β v ( t ) = g ( t , u ( t ) , u ( t ) ) , t ( 0 , 1 ) , u ( 0 ) = v ( 0 ) = 0 , u ( 0 ) = u ( 1 ) , v ( 0 ) = v ( 1 ) ,
(1.1)

where D 0 + α , D 0 + β are the standard Caputo fractional derivatives, 1<α2, 1<β2 and f,g:[0,1]× R 2 R is continuous.

The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 contains some necessary notations, definitions and lemmas. In Section 3, we establish a theorem on the existence of solutions for BVP (1.1) under nonlinear growth restriction of f and g, basing on the coincidence degree theory due to Mawhin (see [34]). Finally, in Section 4, an example is given to illustrate the main result.

2 Preliminaries

In this section, we will introduce some notations, definitions and preliminary facts which are used throughout this paper.

Let X and Y be real Banach spaces, and let L:domLXY be a Fredholm operator with index zero, and P:XX, Q:YY be projectors such that

Im P = Ker L , Ker Q = Im L , X = Ker L Ker P , Y = Im L Im Q .

It follows that

L | dom L Ker P :domLKerPImL

is invertible. We denote the inverse by K P .

If Ω is an open bounded subset of X, and domL Ω ¯ , the map N:XY will be called L-compact on Ω ¯ if QN( Ω ¯ ) is bounded and K P (IQ)N: Ω ¯ X is compact, where I is an identity operator.

Lemma 2.1 [27]

Let L:domLXY be a Fredholm operator of index zero and N:XY L-compact on Ω ¯ . Assume that the following conditions are satisfied:

  1. (1)

    LxλNx for every (x,λ)[(domLKerL)]Ω×(0,1);

  2. (2)

    NxImL for every xKerLΩ;

  3. (3)

    deg(QN | Ker L ,KerLΩ,0)0, where Q:YY is a projection such that ImL=KerQ.

Then the equation Lx=Nx has at least one solution in domL Ω ¯ .

Definition 2.1 The Riemann-Liouville fractional integral operator of order α>0 of a function x is given by

I 0 + α x(t)= 1 Γ ( α ) 0 t ( t s ) α 1 x(s)ds,

provided that the right-hand side integral is pointwise defined on (0,+).

Definition 2.2 The Riemann-Liouville fractional derivative of order α>0 of a function x is given by

D 0 + α R x(t)= d n d t n I 0 + n α x(t)= 1 Γ ( n α ) d n d t n 0 t ( t s ) n α 1 x(s)ds,

where n is the smallest integer greater than or equal to α, provided that the right-hand side integral is pointwise defined on (0,+).

Definition 2.3 The Caputo fractional derivative of order α>0 of a function x is given by

D 0 + α x(t) = R D 0 + α [ x ( t ) k = 0 n 1 x ( k ) ( 0 ) k ! t k ] ,

where n is the smallest integer greater than or equal to α, provided that the right-hand side integral is pointwise defined on (0,+).

Lemma 2.2 [35]

Assume that xC(0,1)L(0,1) with a Caputo fractional derivative of order α>0 that belongs to C(0,1)L(0,1). Then

I 0 + α D 0 + α x(t)=x(t)+ c 0 + c 1 t+ c 2 t 2 ++ c n 1 t n 1 ,

where c i R, i=0,1,2,,n1, here n is the smallest integer greater than or equal to α.

Lemma 2.3 [35]

Assume that α>0 and xC[0,1]. Then

D 0 + α I 0 + α x(t)=x(t).

In this paper, we denote X= C 1 [0,1] with the norm x X =max{ x , x } and Y=C[0,1] with the norm y Y = y , where x = max t [ 0 , 1 ] |x(t)|. Then we denote X ¯ =X×X with the norm ( u , v ) X ¯ =max{ u X , v X } and Y ¯ =Y×Y with the norm ( x , y ) Y ¯ =max{ x Y , y Y }. Obviously, both X ¯ and Y ¯ are Banach spaces.

Define the operator L 1 :domLXY by

L 1 u= D 0 + α u,

where

dom L 1 = { u X | D 0 + α u ( t ) Y , u ( 0 ) = 0 , u ( 0 ) = u ( 1 ) } .

Define the operator L 2 :dom L 2 XY by

L 2 v= D 0 + β v,

where

dom L 2 = { v X | D 0 + β v ( t ) Y , v ( 0 ) = 0 , v ( 0 ) = v ( 1 ) } .

Define the operator L:domL X ¯ Y ¯ by

L(u,v)=( L 1 u, L 2 v),
(2.1)

where

domL= { ( u , v ) X ¯ | u dom L 1 , v dom L 2 } .

Let N: X ¯ Y ¯ be the Nemytski operator

N(u,v)=( N 1 v, N 2 u),

where N 1 :YX

N 1 v(t)=f ( t , v ( t ) , v ( t ) )

and N 2 :YX

N 2 u(t)=g ( t , u ( t ) , u ( t ) ) .

Then BVP (1.1) is equivalent to the operator equation

L(u,v)=N(u,v),(u,v)domL.

3 Main result

In this section, a theorem on the existence of solutions for BVP (1.1) will be given.

Theorem 3.1 Let f,g:[0,1]× R 2 R be continuous. Assume that

( H 1 ) there exist nonnegative functions p i , q i , r i C[0,1] (i=1,2) with

Γ ( α ) Γ ( β ) 4 ( Q 1 + R 1 ) ( Q 2 + R 2 ) Γ ( α ) Γ ( β ) >0

such that for all (u,v) R 2 , t[0,1]

| f ( t , u , v ) | p 1 (t)+ q 1 (t)|u|+ r 1 (t)|v|,

and

| g ( t , u , v ) | p 2 (t)+ q 2 (t)|u|+ r 2 (t)|v|,

where P i = p i , Q i = q i , R i = r i (i=1,2);

( H 2 ) there exists a constant B>0 such that for t[0,1], |u|>B, vR either

uf(t,u,v)>0,ug(t,u,v)>0,

or

uf(t,u,v)<0,ug(t,u,v)<0;

( H 3 ) there exists a constant D>0 such that for every c 1 , c 2 R satisfying min{ c 1 , c 2 }>D either

c 1 N 1 ( c 2 t)>0, c 2 N 2 ( c 1 t)>0,

or

c 1 N 1 ( c 2 t)<0, c 2 N 2 ( c 1 t)<0.

Then BVP (1.1) has at least one solution.

Now, we begin with some lemmas below.

Lemma 3.1 Let L be defined by (2.1), then

(3.1)
(3.2)

Proof By Lemma 2.2, L 1 u= D 0 + α u(t)=0 has the solution

u(t)= c 0 + c 1 t, c 0 , c 1 R.

Combining it with the boundary value conditions of BVP (1.1), one has

Ker L 1 ={uX|u= c 1 t, c 1 R}.

For xIm L 1 , there exists udom L 1 such that x= L 1 uY. By Lemma 2.2, we have

u(t)= 1 Γ ( α ) 0 t ( t s ) α 1 x(s)ds+ c 0 + c 1 t.

Then, we have

u (t)= 1 Γ ( α 1 ) 0 t ( t s ) α 2 x(s)ds+ c 1 .

By the conditions of BVP (1.1), we can get that x satisfies

0 1 ( 1 s ) α 2 x(s)ds=0.

On the other hand, suppose xY and satisfies 0 1 ( 1 s ) α 2 x(s)ds=0. Let u(t)= I 0 + α x(t), then udom L 1 . By Lemma 2.3, we have D 0 + α u(t)=x(t) so that xIm L 1 . Then we have

Im L 1 = { x Y | 0 1 ( 1 s ) α 2 x ( s ) d s = 0 } .

Similarly, we can get

Ker L 2 = { v X | v = c 2 t , c 2 t R } , Im L 2 = { y Y | 0 1 ( 1 s ) β 2 y ( s ) d s = 0 } .

Then, the proof is complete. □

Lemma 3.2 Let L be defined by (2.1), then L is a Fredholm operator of index zero, and the linear continuous projector operators P: X ¯ X ¯ and Q: Y ¯ Y ¯ can be defined as

P ( u , v ) = ( P 1 u , P 2 v ) = ( u ( 0 ) t , v ( 0 ) t ) , Q ( x , y ) = ( Q 1 x , Q 2 y ) = ( ( α 1 ) 0 1 ( 1 s ) α 2 x ( s ) d s , ( β 1 ) 0 1 ( 1 s ) β 2 y ( s ) d s ) .

Furthermore, the operator K P :ImLdomLKerP can be written by

K P (x,y)= ( I 0 + α x ( t ) , I 0 + β y ( t ) ) .

Proof Obviously, ImP=KerL and P 2 (u,v)=P(u,v). It follows from (u,v)=((u,v)P(u,v))+P(u,v) that X ¯ =KerP+KerL. By simple calculation, we can get that KerLKerP={(0,0)}. Then we get

X ¯ =KerLKerP.

For (x,y) Y ¯ , we have

Q 2 (x,y)=Q( Q 1 x, Q 2 y)= ( Q 1 2 x , Q 2 2 y ) .

By the definition of Q 1 , we can get

Q 1 2 x= Q 1 x(α1) 0 1 ( 1 s ) α 2 ds= Q 1 x.

Similar proof can show that Q 2 2 y= Q 2 y. Thus, we have Q 2 (x,y)=Q(x,y).

Let (x,y)=((x,y)Q(x,y))+Q(x,y), where (x,y)Q(x,y)KerQ=ImL,Q(x,y)ImQ. It follows from KerQ=ImL and Q 2 (x,y)=Q(x,y) that ImQImL={(0,0)}. Then, we have

Y ¯ =ImLImQ.

Thus

dimKerL=dimImQ=codimImL.

This means that L is a Fredholm operator of index zero.

Now, we will prove that K P is the inverse of L | dom L Ker P . By Lemma 2.3, for (x,y)ImL, we have

L K P (x,y)= ( D 0 + α ( I 0 + α x ) , D 0 + β ( I 0 + β y ) ) =(x,y).
(3.3)

Moreover, for (u,v)domLKerP, we have u (0)= v (0)=0 and

K P L ( u , v ) = ( I 0 + α D 0 + α u ( t ) , I 0 + β D 0 + β v ( t ) ) = ( u ( t ) + c 0 + c 1 t , v ( t ) + d 0 + d 1 t ) , c 0 , c 1 , d 0 , d 1 R ,

which, together with u(0)=v(0)=0, yields that

K P L(u,v)=(u,v).
(3.4)

Combining (3.3) with (3.4), we know that K P = ( L | dom L Ker P ) 1 . The proof is complete. □

Lemma 3.3 Assume Ω X ¯ is an open bounded subset such that domL Ω ¯ , then N is L-compact on Ω ¯ .

Proof By the continuity of f and g, we can get that QN( Ω ¯ ) and K P (IQ)N( Ω ¯ ) are bounded. So, in view of the Arzelá-Ascoli theorem, we need only prove that K P (IQ)N( Ω ¯ ) X ¯ is equicontinuous.

From the continuity of f and g, there exists a constant A i >0, i=1,2, such that (u,v) Ω ¯

| ( I Q 1 ) N 1 v | A 1 , | ( I Q 2 ) N 2 u | A 2 .

Furthermore, for 0 t 1 < t 2 1, (u,v) Ω ¯ , we have

| K P ( I Q ) N ( u ( t 2 ) , v ( t 2 ) ) ( K P ( I Q ) N ( u ( t 1 ) , v ( t 1 ) ) ) | = | ( I 0 + α ( I Q 1 ) N 1 v ( t 2 ) , I 0 + β ( I Q 2 ) N 2 u ( t 2 ) ) ( I 0 + α ( I Q 1 ) N 1 v ( t 1 ) , I 0 + β ( I Q 2 ) N 2 u ( t 1 ) ) | = | ( I 0 + α ( I Q 1 ) N 1 v ( t 2 ) I 0 + α ( I Q 1 ) N 1 v ( t 1 ) , I 0 + β ( I Q 2 ) N 2 u ( t 2 ) I 0 + β ( I Q 2 ) N 2 u ( t 1 ) ) | .

By

| I 0 + α ( I Q 1 ) N 1 v ( t 2 ) I 0 + α ( I Q 1 ) N 1 v ( t 1 ) | 1 Γ ( α ) | 0 t 2 ( t 2 s ) α 1 ( I Q 1 ) N 1 v ( s ) d s 0 t 1 ( t 1 s ) α 1 ( I Q 1 ) N 1 v ( s ) d s | A 1 Γ ( α ) [ 0 t 1 ( t 2 s ) α 1 ( t 1 s ) α 1 d s + t 1 t 2 ( t 2 s ) α 1 d s ] = A 1 Γ ( α + 1 ) ( t 2 α t 1 α )

and

| ( I 0 + α ( I Q 1 ) N 1 v ) ( t 2 ) ( I 0 + α ( I Q 1 ) N 1 v ) ( t 1 ) | = α 1 Γ ( α ) | 0 t 2 ( t 2 s ) α 2 ( I Q 1 ) N 1 v ( s ) d s 0 t 1 ( t 1 s ) α 2 ( I Q 1 ) N 1 v ( s ) d s | A 1 Γ ( α 1 ) [ 0 t 1 ( t 1 s ) α 2 ( t 2 s ) α 2 d s + t 1 t 2 ( t 2 s ) α 2 d s ] A 1 Γ ( α ) [ t 2 α 1 t 1 α 1 + 2 ( t 2 t 1 ) α 1 ] .

Similar proof can show that

| I 0 + β ( I Q 2 ) N 2 u ( t 2 ) I 0 + β ( I Q 2 ) N 2 u ( t 1 ) | A 2 Γ ( β + 1 ) ( t 2 β t 1 β ) , | ( I 0 + β ( I Q 2 ) N 2 u ) ( t 2 ) ( I 0 + β ( I Q 2 ) N 2 u ) ( t 1 ) | A 2 Γ ( β ) [ t 2 β 1 t 1 β 1 + 2 ( t 2 t 1 ) β 1 ] .

Since t α , t α 1 , t β and t β 1 are uniformly continuous on [0,1], we can get that K P (IQ)N( Ω ¯ ) X ¯ is equicontinuous.

Thus, we get that K P (IQ)N: Ω ¯ X ¯ is compact. The proof is complete. □

Lemma 3.4 Suppose ( H 1 ), ( H 2 ) hold, then the set

Ω 1 = { ( u , v ) dom L Ker L | L ( u , v ) = λ N ( u , v ) , λ ( 0 , 1 ) }

is bounded.

Proof Take (u,v) Ω 1 , then N(u,v)ImL. By (3.2), we have

0 1 ( 1 s ) α 2 f ( s , v ( s ) , v ( s ) ) d s = 0 , 0 1 ( 1 s ) β 2 g ( s , u ( s ) , u ( s ) ) d s = 0 .

Then, by the integral mean value theorem, there exist constants ξ,η(0,1) such that f(ξ,v(ξ), v (ξ))=0 and g(η,u(η), u (η))=0. So, from ( H 2 ), we get |v(ξ)|B and |u(η)|B.

From (u,v)domL, we get u(0)=v(0)=0, then

(3.5)
(3.6)

By L(u,v)=λN(u,v) and (u,v)domL, we have

u(t)= λ Γ ( α ) 0 t ( t s ) α 1 f ( s , v ( s ) , v ( s ) ) ds+ u (0)t

and

v(t)= λ Γ ( β ) 0 t ( t s ) β 1 g ( s , u ( s ) , u ( s ) ) ds+ v (0)t.

Then we get

u (t)= λ Γ ( α 1 ) 0 t ( t s ) α 2 f ( s , v ( s ) , v ( s ) ) ds+ u (0)

and

v (t)= λ Γ ( β 1 ) 0 t ( t s ) β 2 g ( s , u ( s ) , u ( s ) ) ds+ v (0).

Take t=η, we get

u (η)= λ Γ ( α 1 ) 0 η ( η s ) α 2 f ( s , v ( s ) , v ( s ) ) ds+ u (0).

Together with | u (η)|B, ( H 1 ) and (3.6), we have

| u ( 0 ) | | u ( η ) | + λ Γ ( α 1 ) 0 η ( η s ) α 2 | f ( s , v ( s ) , v ( s ) ) | d s B + 1 Γ ( α 1 ) 0 η ( η s ) α 2 [ p 1 ( s ) + q 1 ( s ) | v ( s ) | + r 1 ( s ) | v ( s ) | ] d s B + 1 Γ ( α 1 ) 0 η ( η s ) α 2 [ P 1 + Q 1 v + R 1 v ] d s B + 1 Γ ( α 1 ) 0 η ( η s ) α 2 [ P 1 + ( Q 1 + R 1 ) v ] d s B + 1 Γ ( α ) [ P 1 + ( Q 1 + R 1 ) v ] .

So, we have

u 1 Γ ( α 1 ) 0 t ( t s ) α 2 | f ( s , v ( s ) , v ( s ) ) | d s + | u ( 0 ) | 1 Γ ( α 1 ) 0 t ( t s ) α 2 [ p 1 ( s ) + q 1 ( s ) | v ( s ) | + r 1 ( s ) | v ( s ) | ] d s + | u ( 0 ) | 1 Γ ( α 1 ) [ P 1 + ( Q 1 + R 1 ) v ] 0 t ( t s ) α 2 d s + | u ( 0 ) | B + 2 Γ ( α ) [ P 1 + ( Q 1 + R 1 ) v ] .
(3.7)

Similarly, we can get

v B+ 2 Γ ( β ) [ P 2 + ( Q 2 + R 2 ) u ] .
(3.8)

Together with (3.7) and (3.8), we have

u B+ 2 Γ ( α ) { P 1 + ( Q 1 + R 1 ) [ B + 2 Γ ( β ) ( P 2 + ( Q 2 + R 2 ) u ) ] } .

Thus, from Γ ( α ) Γ ( β ) 4 ( Q 1 + R 1 ) ( Q 2 + R 2 ) Γ ( α ) Γ ( β ) >0, we obtain that

u Γ ( α ) Γ ( β ) B + 2 Γ ( β ) [ P 1 + ( Q 1 + R 1 ) B ] + 4 P 2 ( Q 1 + R 1 ) Γ ( α ) Γ ( β ) 4 ( Q 1 + R 1 ) ( Q 2 + R 2 ) := M 1

and

v 1 Γ ( β ) [ P 2 + Q 2 B + ( Q 2 + R 2 ) M 1 ] := M 2 .

Together with (3.5) and (3.6), we get

( u , v ) X ¯ max{ M 1 , M 2 }:=M.

So Ω 1 is bounded. The proof is complete. □

Lemma 3.5 Suppose ( H 3 ) holds, then the set

Ω 2 = { ( u , v ) | ( u , v ) Ker L , N ( u , v ) Im L }

is bounded.

Proof For (u,v) Ω 2 , we have (u,v)=( c 1 t, c 2 t), c 1 , c 2 R. Then from N(u,v)ImL, we get

0 1 ( 1 s ) α 2 f ( s , c 2 s , c 2 ) d s = 0 , 0 1 ( 1 s ) β 2 g ( s , c 1 s , c 1 ) d s = 0 ,

which, together with ( H 3 ), implies | c 1 |,| c 2 |D. Thus, we have

( u , v ) X ¯ D.

Hence, Ω 2 is bounded. The proof is complete. □

Lemma 3.6 Suppose the first part of ( H 3 ) holds, then the set

Ω 3 = { ( u , v ) Ker L | λ ( u , v ) + ( 1 λ ) Q N ( u , v ) = ( 0 , 0 ) , λ [ 0 , 1 ] }

is bounded.

Proof For (u,v) Ω 3 , we have (u,v)=( c 1 t, c 2 t), c 1 , c 2 R and

(3.9)
(3.10)

If λ=0, then | c 1 |,| c 2 |D because of the first part of ( H 3 ). If λ=1, then c 1 = c 2 =0. For λ(0,1], we can obtain | c 1 |,| c 2 |D. Otherwise, if | c 1 | or | c 2 |>D, in view of the first part of ( H 3 ), one has

λ c 1 2 t+(1λ)(α1) 0 1 ( 1 s ) α 2 c 1 f(s, c 2 s, c 2 )ds>0,

or

λ c 2 2 t+(1λ)(β1) 0 1 ( 1 s ) β 2 c 2 g(s, c 1 s, c 1 )ds>0,

which contradicts (3.9) or (3.10). Therefore, Ω 3 is bounded. The proof is complete. □

Remark 3.1 If the second part of ( H 3 ) holds, then the set

Ω 3 = { ( u , v ) Ker L | λ ( u , v ) + ( 1 λ ) Q N ( u , v ) = ( 0 , 0 ) , λ [ 0 , 1 ] }

is bounded.

Proof of Theorem 3.1 Set Ω={(u,v) X ¯ | ( u , v ) X ¯ <max{M,D}+1}. It follows from Lemma 3.2 and 3.3 that L is a Fredholm operator of index zero and N is L-compact on Ω ¯ . By Lemma 3.4 and 3.5, we get that the following two conditions are satisfied:

  1. (1)

    L(u,v)λN(u,v) for every ((u,v),λ)[(domLKerL)Ω]×(0,1);

  2. (2)

    NxImL for every (u,v)KerLΩ.

Take

H ( ( u , v ) , λ ) =±λ(u,v)+(1λ)QN(u,v).

According to Lemma 3.6 (or Remark 3.1), we know that H((u,v),λ)0 for (u,v)KerLΩ. Therefore,

deg ( Q N | Ker L , Ω Ker L , ( 0 , 0 ) ) = deg ( H ( , 0 ) , Ω Ker L , ( 0 , 0 ) ) = deg ( H ( , 1 ) , Ω Ker L , ( 0 , 0 ) ) = deg ( ± I , Ω Ker L , ( 0 , 0 ) ) 0 .

So, the condition (3) of Lemma 2.1 is satisfied. By Lemma 2.1, we can get that L(u,v)=N(u,v) has at least one solution in domL Ω ¯ . Therefore, BVP (1.1) has at least one solution. The proof is complete. □

4 Example

Example 4.1 Consider the following BVP:

{ D 0 + 3 2 u ( t ) = 1 16 [ v ( t ) 10 ] + t 2 16 e | v ( t ) | , t [ 0 , 1 ] , D 0 + 5 4 v ( t ) = 1 12 [ u ( t ) 8 ] + t 3 12 sin 2 ( u ( t ) ) , t [ 0 , 1 ] , u ( 0 ) = v ( 0 ) = 0 , u ( 0 ) = u ( 1 ) , v ( 0 ) = v ( 1 ) .
(4.1)

Choose p 1 (t)= 11 16 , p 2 (t)= 3 4 , q 1 (t)= 1 16 , q 2 (t)= 1 12 , r 1 (t)= r 2 (t)=0, B=D=10.

By simple calculation, we can get that ( H 1 ), ( H 2 ) and the first part of ( H 3 ) hold.

By Theorem 3.1, we obtain that BVP (4.1) has at least one solution.