Home Involvement of three successive fractional derivatives in a system of pantograph equations and studying the existence solution and MLU stability
Article Open Access

Involvement of three successive fractional derivatives in a system of pantograph equations and studying the existence solution and MLU stability

  • Hasanen A. Hammad , Hüseyin Işık EMAIL logo , Hassen Aydi and Manuel De la Sen
Published/Copyright: October 1, 2024
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

Developing a model of fractional differential systems and studying the existence and stability of a solution is considebly one of the most important topics in the field of analysis. Therefore, this manuscript was dedicated to deriving a new type of fractional system that arises from the combination of three sequential fractional derivatives with fractional pantograph equations. Also, the fixed-point technique was used to evaluate the existence and uniqueness of solutions to the supposed hybrid model. Furthermore, stability results for the intended system in the sense of the Mittag-Leffler-Ulam have been investigated. Ultimately, an illustrative example has been highlighted in order to reinforce the theoretical results and suggest applications for this article.

MSC 2010: 47H10; 26A33; 34A08; 34B15

Abbreviations

CFD

MLU-Caputo fractional derivative

DE

MLU-differential equation

FP

MLU-fixed point

FDE

fractional differential equation

MLUH

MLU-Hyers

MLUHR

MLU-Hyers-Rassias

MLU

Mittag-Leffler-Ulam

RL

MLU-Riemann-Liouville

SFPE

MLU-sequential fractional pantograph equation

1 Introduction

Research on the analysis of differential equations (DEs) of fractional order has recently gained prominence and interest. Fractional derivatives are an excellent tool for studying memory and the inherited properties of diverse materials and processes. Fractional derivatives are frequently used to replicate the dynamics of real-world processes and phenomena, where previous behavior impacts the current state. Significant efforts have been made to advance the theoretical and application aspects of fractional differential equations (FDEs) in a variety of disciplines, including physics, chemistry, biology, and engineering sciences. Many contributions have been made by researchers about the existence and uniqueness of solutions to many classes of DEs. We urge the reader refer to previous studies [113] for more details.

In recent years, there has been a surge of interest in the application of novel analysis techniques to a variety of mathematical models, including delay FDEs. These equations are critical to understanding dynamic systems with delays and memory effects. One important component is the investigation of mild solutions, which provide a powerful framework for understanding the long-term behavior of delay FDEs. These solutions take into consideration both the initial conditions and the influence of previous states. For instance, the fractional Langevin equation that appears in the classical Brownian motion theory is modeled as fractional integro-differential equations [14]. For more details, see [1517].

In 1960, Kalman proposed the fundamental concept of mathematical control theory, controllability. In general, controllability refers to the ability to employ a correct control function to steer the state of a control dynamical equation from an arbitrary initial state to the desirable terminal state. Many writers [1826] have explored the controllability results. Furthermore, the investigation of controllability results on temporal scales is a new topic with minimal evidence [27,28].

The existence and uniqueness problems of FDEs are studied using fixed point (FP) theory. Over the course of a century, FP theory began to take shape and quickly advanced. Because of its applications, FP theory is highly respected and is still being investigated. Furthermore, this theory applies to a broad variety of spaces, such as Sobolev spaces, metric spaces, and abstract spaces. Because of this quality, FP theory is extremely beneficial for comprehending a wide variety of practical science problems represented by fractional ordinary, partial, and DEs [2933].

On the other hand, stability theory is frequently applied to dynamical issues. Lyapunov and Mittag-Leffler stabilities have been established with great success for ordinary classical fractional calculus problems as well as exponential varieties of stabilities. The required attention has recently been given to the Hyer-Ulam [34] stability. Some stability and existence results from the FP approach were looked into in [35]. Furthermore, many writers discussed the stability analysis and existence theory for FDEs. For more details, see [3640] and references therein, as several authors have recently developed an interest in the Ulam and Mittag-Leffler-Ulam (MLU) stability concerns.

The pantograph equation is a form of functional DE with a proportional delay. It occurs in a variety of pure and applied mathematics domains, including electrodynamics, control systems, number theory, probability, and quantum mechanics. Because of its significance, several academics have recently concentrated on the fractional pantograph equation and produced valuable contributions in this area. Balachandran et al. [41] investigated the existence of solutions to nonlinear fractional pantograph equations. Vivek et al. [42] established the existence and uniqueness of results for nonlinear neutral pantograph equations with generalized fractional derivatives. Several noteworthy findings on this subject have been reached using various types of fractional operators [4349].

Now, the pantograph equation takes the following analogous form:

θ ( ) = P θ ( ) + Q θ ( υ ) , θ ( ) = θ 0 , [ 0 , T ] , T > 0 ,

where P , Q , and υ are the real constants such that Q 0 and υ ( 0 , 1 ) . Academics [48,49] have researched several variations of the aforementioned pantograph as well as the multi-pantograph equation in the following:

θ ( ) = P θ ( ) + j = 1 n δ j ( ) θ ( υ j ) + k ( ) , 0 ,

under the condition θ ( 0 ) = κ , where P , κ C ( C is the set of complex numbers ) , δ j ( ) , and k ( ) are the analytical functions, and υ j ( 0 , 1 ) .

The authors of [48] investigated the non-linear neutral pantograph equation as follows:

θ ( ) = ϕ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ ) , θ ( υ ) ) , θ ( ) = θ 0 , [ 0 , T ] , υ ( 0 , 1 ) .

The author recently assessed the following difficulty for the pantograph type in [41]:

D ϰ C θ ( ) = ϕ ( , θ ( ) , ϖ ( υ ) ) , θ ( ) = θ 0 , [ 0 , T ] , υ , ϰ ( 0 , 1 ) ,

where D ϰ C refers to the Caputo fractional derivative (CFD).

Continuing with the aforementioned contributions, in this manuscript, we suggest the following model, the so-called sequential fractional pantograph equations (SFPEs):

(1.1) D ω RL ( D ϰ C ( D ϱ C θ ( ) ) ) = P ϕ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 1 ) , ϖ ( ) ) + Q I ϑ [ ψ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 2 ) , ϖ ( ) ) ] , D ω RL ( D ϰ C ( D ϱ C ϖ ( ) ) ) = P ϕ ( , θ ( ) , ϖ ( ) , ϖ ( υ 1 ) ) + Q I ϑ [ ψ ( , θ ( ) , ϖ ( ) , ϖ ( υ 2 ) ) ] , U = [ 0 , 1 ] , ω , ϰ , ϱ ( 0 , 1 ] , P , Q R , ϑ 0 , υ 1 , υ 2 ( 0 , 1 ) , θ ( ) = 0 , ρ 1 θ ( 1 ) ρ 2 θ ( α ) = σ ( θ ) , D ϱ C θ ( 0 ) = β , ρ 1 , ρ 2 , β R , α ( 0 , 1 ) , ϖ ( ) = 0 , ρ 1 ϖ ( 1 ) ρ 2 ϖ ( α ) = σ ( ϖ ) , D ϱ C ϖ ( 0 ) = β , ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ,

where D ω RL , and D a C , a { ϰ , ϱ } represent the fractional derivatives of Riemann-Liouville (RL) and Caputo, respectively. Also, ϕ , ψ : U × R 3 R , σ : C ( U , R ) R are the continuous functions.

Due to its importance in many applied fields, it is interesting to study the fractional model of the pantograph equations. Such a model can be considered suitable to be applied when the corresponding process occurs through strongly anomalous media. In this article, we apply the FP technique to study the existence and uniqueness of solutions to the SFPEs (1.1). Furthermore, stability results for the considerable problem in the sense of the MLU have been investigated. Finally, an illustrative example has been highlighted in order to reinforce the theoretical results and suggest applications for this article.

2 Preliminary work

We need some basic definitions and properties of fractional calculus that are used in this article. So, this section is devoted to presenting some definitions and earlier works that will help the reader understand our text and will assist us in overcoming the challenges that we will experience in proofreading.

Definition 2.1

[5] The RL fractional integral operator of order ω is defined by

(2.1) I ω θ ( ) = 1 Γ ( ω ) 0 ( ) ω 1 θ ( ) d ,

while the CFD is defined by

D ω C θ ( ) = 1 Γ ( n r ) 0 ( ) n r 1 θ n ( ) d , n = [ ω ] + 1 ,

where τ > 0 , the function θ defined on L 1 ( U ) and Γ ( . ) is the Euler gamma function.

Definition 2.2

[5] Assume that θ : ( 0 , ) R is a continuous function, and the RL fractional derivative of order ω is described as

D ω RL θ ( ) = 1 Γ ( n ω ) d d n 0 ( ) n ω 1 θ ( ) d , n = [ ω ] + 1 .

Lemma 2.3

[5,50] Let s , t > 0 and θ L 1 ( U ) . Then, I s I t θ ( ) = I s + t θ ( ) and D s I s θ ( ) = θ ( ) .

Lemma 2.4

[5,50] Let s > t > 0 and θ L 1 ( U ) . Then, D t I s θ ( ) = I s t θ ( ) .

Lemma 2.5

[50] Assume that ω C ( 0 , 1 ) L 1 ( 0 , 1 ) and D ω RL θ C ( 0 , 1 ) L 1 ( 0 , 1 ) , we obtain

I ω ( D ω RL θ ( ) ) = θ ( ) + i = 1 n l i ω i ,

where l i R , i = 1 , 2 , , n , and n = [ ω ] + 1 .

Lemma 2.6

[50] Let s > 0 . Then,

I s ( D s C θ ( ) ) = θ ( ) + i = 0 n 1 l i i ,

for some l i R , i 0 , n = [ s ] + 1 .

We need a singular type for the following Gronwall inequality:

Lemma 2.7

[51] For 0 < 1 and the constants ς i > 0 , ( i = 1 , 2 , , n ) . Assume that D i ( i = 1 , 2 , , n ) are bounded and monotonic increasing on [ 0 , 1 ) and S and Z are non-negative and continuous functions. If

S ( ) Z ( ) + i = 0 n D i ( ) 0 ( ) ς i 1 S ( ) d ,

then

S ( ) Z ( ) + m = 1 1 , 2 , , m = 1 n i = 1 m D i ( ) Γ ( ς i ) Γ i = 1 m ς i 0 ( ) i = 1 m ς i 1 Z ( ) d .

Remark 2.8

If n = 2 , ς 1 , ς 2 > 0 , D 1 , D 2 0 , and Z ( ) , S ( ) are non-negative and locally integrable on [ 0 , 1 ) with

S ( ) Z ( ) + D 1 0 ( ) ς 1 1 S ( ) d + D 2 0 ( ) ς 2 1 S ( ) d ,

then

S ( ) Z ( ) + m = 1 ( D 1 Γ ( ς 1 ) ) m Γ ( m ς 1 ) 0 ( ) m ς 1 1 Z ( ) d + ( D 2 Γ ( ς 2 ) ) m Γ ( m ς 2 ) 0 ( ) m ς 2 1 Z ( ) d .

Remark 2.9

Via the assumptions of Remark 2.8, consider that Z ( ) is a non-decreasing function on [ 0 , 1 ) . Then, we obtain

S ( ) Z ( ) ( E ς 1 [ D 1 Γ ( ς 1 ) ς 1 ] + E ς 2 [ D 2 Γ ( ς 2 ) ς 2 ] ) ,

where E ς refers to the Mittag-Leffler function [52], which is defined by E ς ( ) = m = 1 ς Γ ( m ς + 1 ) , C .

The following auxiliary lemma is also necessary:

Lemma 2.10

Assume that Ξ θ , ϖ ( ) , Ξ ϖ , θ ( ) C ( [ 0 , 1 ] , R ) . The solution to the problem

(2.2) D ω RL ( D ϰ C ( D ϱ C θ ( ) ) ) = Ξ θ , ϖ ( ) , [ 0 , 1 ] , ω , ϰ , ϱ ( 0 , 1 ] , P , Q R , D ω RL ( D ϰ C ( D ϱ C θ ( ) ) ) = Ξ ϖ , θ ( ) , [ 0 , 1 ] , ω , ϰ , ϱ ( 0 , 1 ] , P , Q R , θ ( ) = 0 , ρ 1 θ ( 1 ) ρ 2 θ ( α ) = σ ( θ ) , D ϱ C θ ( 0 ) = 0 , ϖ ( ) = 0 , ρ 1 ϖ ( 1 ) ρ 2 ϖ ( α ) = σ ( ϖ ) , D ϱ C ϖ ( 0 ) = 0 ,

takes the form

(2.3) θ ( ) = 1 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) 0 ( ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 Ξ θ , ϖ ( ) d + ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 × ρ 2 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) 0 α ( α ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 Ξ θ , ϖ ( ) d ρ 1 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) 0 1 ( 1 ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 Ξ θ , ϖ ( ) d + ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 σ ( θ )

and

(2.4) ϖ ( ) = 1 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) 0 ( ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 Ξ ϖ , θ ( ) d + ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 × ρ 2 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) 0 α ( α ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 Ξ ϖ , θ ( ) d ρ 1 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) 0 1 ( 1 ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 Ξ ϖ , θ ( ) d + ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 σ ( ϖ ) .

Proof

Taking the RL fractional integral of order ω on both sides of the first equation of (2.2) and using Lemmas 2.3 and 2.5, we obtain

(2.5) D ϰ C ( D ϱ C ) θ ( ) = I ω Ξ θ , ϖ ( ) + a 1 ω 1 , a 1 R .

Again, taking the RL fractional integral of order ϰ on both sides of (2.5) and applying Lemma 2.6, one can write

(2.6) D ϱ C θ ( ) = I ω + ϰ Ξ θ , ϖ ( ) + Γ ( ω ) a 1 Γ ( ω + ϰ ) a 1 ω + ϰ 1 + a 2 , a 2 R .

On both sides of (2.5), taking the RL fractional integral of order ϱ , we obtain that

(2.7) θ ( ) = I ω + ϰ + ϱ Ξ θ , ϖ ( ) + Γ ( ω ) Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) a 1 ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 + a 2 Γ ( ϱ + 1 ) ϱ + a 3 , a 3 R .

Similarly, we have

(2.8) ϖ ( ) = I ω + ϰ + ϱ Ξ ϖ , θ ( ) + Γ ( ω ) Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) a 1 ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 + a 2 Γ ( ϱ + 1 ) ϱ + a 3 , a 3 R .

From the third and fourth conditions given in (2.2), we have

(2.9) a 1 = Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) ( ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ) Γ ( ω ) ( σ ( θ ) + ρ 2 I ω + ϰ + ϱ Ξ θ , ϖ ( α ) ρ 2 I ω + ϰ + ϱ Ξ θ , ϖ ( 1 ) ) , a 2 = a 3 = 0 ,

and

(2.10) a 1 = Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) ( ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ) Γ ( ω ) ( σ ( ϖ ) + ρ 2 I ω + ϰ + ϱ Ξ ϖ , θ ( α ) ρ 2 I ω + ϰ + ϱ Ξ ϖ , θ ( 1 ) ) , a 2 = a 3 = 0 .

Substituting (2.9) into (2.7) and substituting (2.10) into (2.8), we obtain (2.3) and (2.4), respectively. This completes the proof.□

3 Existence results

In this section, we use the FP approach to present the necessary and sufficient conditions for studying the existence and uniqueness of a solution to the SFPEs (1.1). Therefore, we need to define a space as follows: Assume that Θ = C ( U , R ) is the space of all continuous functions on the interval U . Obviously, this space is a Banach space under the norm θ = sup U { θ ( ) } . Moreover, the product space Θ = Θ 1 × Θ 1 is also a Banach space with the norm ( ϖ , θ ) Θ = ( ϖ ) Θ 1 + ( θ ) Θ 2 .

According to Lemma 2.10, define the operator : Θ Θ by

(3.1) ( θ , ϖ ) ( ) = P Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) 0 ( ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ϕ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 1 ) , ϖ ( ) ) d + Q Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ ) 0 ( ) ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ 1 ψ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 2 ) , ϖ ( ) ) d + ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ρ 2 P Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) 0 α ( α ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ϕ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 1 ) , ϖ ( ) ) d + ρ 2 Q Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ ) 0 α ( α ) ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ 1 ψ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 2 ) , ϖ ( ) ) d ρ 1 P Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) 0 1 ( 1 ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ϕ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 1 ) , ϖ ( ) ) d ρ 1 Q Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ ) 0 1 ( 1 ) ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ 1 ψ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 2 ) , ϖ ( ) ) d + ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 σ ( ϖ ) ,

where υ 1 , υ 2 ( 0 , 1 ) . For convenience, we consider the following assumptions:

  1. For the continuous functions ϕ , ψ : U × R 3 R , there exist constants G ϕ , G ψ > 0 such that for U , θ i , ϖ i R , i = 1 , 2 , 3 , we have

    ϕ ( , θ 1 , θ 2 , θ 3 ) ϕ ( , ϖ 1 , ϖ 2 , ϖ 3 ) G ϕ 2 ( θ 1 ϖ 1 + θ 2 ϖ 2 + θ 3 ϖ 3 ) , ψ ( , θ 1 , θ 2 , θ 3 ) ψ ( , ϖ 1 , ϖ 2 , ϖ 3 ) G ψ 2 ( θ 1 ϖ 1 + θ 2 ϖ 2 + θ 3 ϖ 3 ) .

  2. The function σ : C ( U , R ) R is continuous with σ ( 0 ) = 0 , and there exists a positive constant ξ such that

    σ ( θ ) σ ( ϖ ) ξ θ ϖ , θ , ϖ Θ .

Also, we consider

(3.2) Λ = P Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + 1 ) 1 + 1 ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 [ ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ + ρ 1 ] , Λ = Q Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ + 1 ) 1 + 1 ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 [ ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ + ρ 1 ] .

Now, we can present the first main result of this part as follows:

Theorem 3.1

Under assumptions ( A 1 ) and ( A 2 ) , problem (1.1) has a unique solution on U , provided that the following condition holds:

3 G ( Λ + Λ ) < 1 ξ ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ,

where G = max { G ϕ , G ψ } and Λ , Λ are described in (3.2).

Proof

Let us consider Δ = max { Δ i , i = 1 , 2 } , where Δ i are the finite numbers given by Δ 1 = sup U ϕ ( , 0 , 0 , 0 ) and Δ 2 = sup U ψ ( , 0 , 0 , 0 ) . Put

Δ ( Λ + Λ ) 1 3 G ( Λ + Λ ) + ξ ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 f , f > 0 .

Now, we claim that V S f S f , where S f = { θ Θ : θ f } . For θ , ϖ S f and using assumptions ( A 1 ) and ( A 2 ) for all U , we obtain

(3.3) ϕ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 1 ) , ϖ ( ) ) ϕ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 1 ) , ϖ ( ) ) ϕ ( , 0 , 0 , 0 ) + ϕ ( , 0 , 0 , 0 ) G ϕ ( 2 θ + ϖ ) + Δ 1 = 2 G ϕ θ + G ϕ ϖ + Δ 1 = 3 G ϕ f + Δ 1 .

Similarly,

(3.4) ϕ ( , θ ( ) , ϖ ( ) , ϖ ( υ 1 ) ) G ϕ ( θ + 2 ϖ ) + Δ 1 = 3 G ϕ f + Δ 1 .

Also,

(3.5) ψ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 2 ) , ϖ ( ) ) ψ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 1 ) , ϖ ( ) ) ψ ( , 0 , 0 , 0 ) + ψ ( , 0 , 0 , 0 ) G ψ ( 2 θ + ϖ ) + Δ 1 = 2 G ψ θ + G ψ ϖ + Δ 2 3 G ψ f + Δ 2 .

Analogously,

(3.6) ψ ( , θ ( ) , ϖ ( ) , ϖ ( υ 2 ) ) G ψ ( θ + 2 ϖ ) + Δ 1 3 G ψ f + Δ 2 .

Moreover,

(3.7) σ ( θ ) ξ θ ξ f and σ ( ϖ ) ξ ϖ ξ f .

Taking supremum on both sides of (3.1), for υ 1 , υ 2 ( 0 , 1 ) , we have

( θ , ϖ ) Θ 1 sup U P Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) 0 ( ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ϕ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 1 ) , ϖ ( ) ) d + Q Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ ) 0 ( ) ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ 1 ψ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 2 ) , ϖ ( ) ) d + ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ρ 2 P Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) 0 α ( α ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ϕ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 1 ) , ϖ ( ) ) d + ρ 2 Q Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ ) 0 α ( α ) ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ 1 ψ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 2 ) , ϖ ( ) ) d + ρ 1 P Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) 0 1 ( 1 ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ϕ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 1 ) , ϖ ( ) ) d + ρ 1 Q Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ ) 0 1 ( 1 ) ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ 1 ψ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 2 ) , ϖ ( ) ) d + ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 σ ( ϖ ) .

According to estimates (3.3), (3.5), and (3.7), for U , we obtain

( θ , ϖ ) Θ 1 P ω + ϰ + ϱ ( 3 G ϕ f + Δ 1 ) Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + 1 ) + Q ( 3 G ψ f + Δ 2 ) ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ + 1 ) + ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ρ 2 P ( 3 G ϕ f + Δ 1 ) α ω + ϰ + ϱ Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + 1 ) + ρ 2 Q ( 3 G ψ f + Δ 2 ) α ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ + 1 ) + ρ 1 P ( 3 G ϕ f + Δ 1 ) Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + 1 ) + ρ 1 Q ( 3 G ψ f + Δ 2 ) Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ + 1 ) + ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ξ f ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 P ( 3 G ϕ f + Δ 1 ) Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + 1 ) 1 + 1 ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ( ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ + ρ 1 ) + Q ( 3 G ψ f + Δ 2 ) Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ + 1 ) 1 + 1 ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ( ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ + ρ 1 ) + ξ f ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ,

which implies that

(3.8) ( θ , ϖ ) Θ 1 ( 3 G f + Δ ) Λ + ( 3 G f + Δ ) Λ + ξ f ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 = 3 G ( Λ + Λ ) + ξ ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 f + Δ ( Λ + Λ ) f .

Similarly, from estimates (3.4), (3.6), and (3.7), for U , we have ( ϖ , θ ) Θ 2 f . Hence, S f S f .

Now, for θ , ϖ , θ ˜ , ϖ ˜ S f , and for υ 1 , υ 2 ( 0 , 1 ) , one has

(3.9) ( θ , ϖ ) ( θ ˜ , ϖ ˜ ) Θ 1 sup U P Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) 0 ( ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ϕ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 1 ) , ϖ ( ) ) ϕ ( , θ ˜ ( ) , θ ˜ ( υ 1 ) , ϖ ˜ ( ) ) d + Q Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ ) 0 ( ) ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ 1 ψ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 2 ) , ϖ ( ) ) ψ ( , θ ˜ ( ) , θ ˜ ( υ 2 ) , ϖ ˜ ( ) ) d + ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ρ 2 P Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) × 0 α ( α ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ϕ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 1 ) , ϖ ( ) ) ϕ ( , θ ˜ ( ) , θ ˜ ( υ 1 ) , ϖ ˜ ( ) ) d + ρ 2 Q Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ ) 0 α ( α ) ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ 1 ψ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 2 ) , ϖ ( ) ) ψ ( , θ ˜ ( ) , θ ˜ ( υ 2 ) , ϖ ˜ ( ) ) d + ρ 1 P Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) 0 1 ( 1 ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ϕ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 1 ) , ϖ ( ) ) ϕ ( , θ ˜ ( ) , θ ˜ ( υ 1 ) , ϖ ˜ ( ) ) d + ρ 1 Q Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ ) 0 1 ( 1 ) ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ 1 ψ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 2 ) , ϖ ( ) ) ψ ( , θ ˜ ( ) , θ ˜ ( υ 2 ) , ϖ ˜ ( ) ) d + ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 σ ( θ ) σ ( θ ˜ ) .

Clearly, for υ 1 , υ 2 ( 0 , 1 ) , we obtain

(3.10) ϕ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 1 ) , ϖ ( ) ) ϕ ( , θ ˜ ( ) , θ ˜ ( υ 1 ) , ϖ ˜ ( ) ) G ϕ 2 ( 2 θ θ ˜ + ϖ ϖ ˜ ) G ϕ ( θ θ ˜ + ϖ ϖ ˜ ) , ψ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 2 ) , ϖ ( ) ) ψ ( , θ ˜ ( ) , θ ˜ ( υ 2 ) , ϖ ˜ ( ) ) G ϖ 2 ( 2 θ θ ˜ + ϖ ϖ ˜ ) G ϖ ( θ θ ˜ + ϖ ϖ ˜ ) .

Substituting (3.8) and (3.10) into (3.9), we have

( θ , ϖ ) ( θ ˜ , ϖ ˜ ) Θ 1 3 G ( Λ + Λ ) + ξ ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ( θ θ ˜ Θ 1 + ϖ ϖ ˜ Θ 2 ) .

Similarly,

( ϖ , θ ) ( ϖ ˜ , θ ˜ ) Θ 2 3 G ( Λ + Λ ) + ξ ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ( ϖ ϖ ˜ Θ 2 + θ θ ˜ Θ 1 ) .

Hence,

( θ , ϖ ) ( θ ˜ , ϖ ˜ ) Θ 3 G ( Λ + Λ ) + ξ ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ( θ , ϖ ) ( θ ˜ , ϖ ˜ ) Θ .

Since 3 G ( Λ + Λ ) + ξ ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 < 1 , is a contraction mapping. According to Banach’s FP theorem, the operator has a unique FP that corresponds to a unique solution to the SFPEs (1.1).□

The second main result came from the Leray-Schauder alternative.

Lemma 3.2

[41] (Leray-Schauder alternative) Assume that W is a non-empty set and the operator O : W W is completely continuous. Suppose that Ξ ( O ) = { e W : e = k O ( e ) for s o m e k ( 0 , 1 ) } . Then, either Ξ ( O ) is bounded or O admits at least one FP.

The following two hypotheses are required to achieve the next result:

  1. For the continuous functions ϕ , ψ : U × R 3 R , there exist positive constants b i , t i , i = 1 , 2 , 3 , and b 0 , t 0 > 0 such that for U , θ i R , i = 1 , 2 , 3 , we have

    ϕ ( , θ 1 , θ 2 , θ 3 ) b 0 + b 1 θ 1 + b 2 θ 2 + b 3 θ 3

    and

    ψ ( , θ 1 , θ 2 , θ 3 ) t 0 + t 1 θ 1 + t 2 θ 2 + t 3 θ 3 .

  2. The function σ : C ( U , R ) R is continuous with σ ( 0 ) = 0 , and there exists a positive constant ξ such that

    σ ( θ ) ξ θ and σ ( ϖ ) ξ ϖ , θ , ϖ Θ .

Theorem 3.3

According to hypotheses ( A 3 ) and ( A 4 ) , problem (1.1) has at least one solution on U, provided that following condition is true:

i = 1 3 b i Λ + i = 1 3 t i Λ + ξ ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 < 1 .

Proof

First, we show that the operator : Θ Θ is completely continuous. The continuity of ϕ , ψ , and σ leading to is continuous. Suppose that ϕ , ψ , and σ Θ are bounded. Then, there are constants D 1 , D 2 , M > 0 so that ϕ ( , θ 1 , θ 2 , θ 3 ) D 1 , ψ ( , θ 1 , θ 2 , θ 3 ) D 2 , σ ( θ ) M and σ ( ϖ ) M , for all θ , θ 1 , θ 2 , θ 3 , ϖ Θ .

Now, according to our assumptions ( A 3 ) and ( A 4 ) , for θ , ϖ Θ , one has

( θ , ϖ ) Θ 1 P D 1 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + 1 ) 1 + 1 ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ( ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ + ρ 1 ) + Q D 2 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ + 1 ) 1 + 1 ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ( ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ + ρ 1 ) + M ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ,

which implies that

( θ , ϖ ) Θ 1 Λ D 1 + Λ D 2 + M ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 .

Analogously,

( ϖ , θ ) Θ 2 Λ D 1 + Λ D 2 + M ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 .

Hence, is uniformly bounded on Θ . Next, we show that is equicontinuous on Θ . For this, assume that 1 , 2 U with 1 < 2 . Then, we have

( θ , ϖ ) ( 1 ) ( θ , ϖ ) ( 2 ) Θ 1 P D 1 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + 1 ) ( ( 2 1 ) ω + ϰ + ϱ + 2 ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ω + ϰ + ϱ ) + Q D 2 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ + 1 ) ( ( 2 1 ) ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ + 2 ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ 1 ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ ) + 2 ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 1 ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 P ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + 1 ) + Q ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ + 1 ) + P ρ 1 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + 1 ) + Q ρ 1 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ + 1 ) + M .

It follows that

( θ , ϖ ) ( 1 ) ( θ , ϖ ) ( 2 ) Θ 1 0 , as 1 2 .

Similarly,

( ϖ , θ ) ( 1 ) ( ϖ , θ ) ( 2 ) Θ 2 0 , as 1 2 .

Therefore, is equicontinuous on Θ . Using the Arzelá-Ascoli theorem, is completely continuous.

Ultimately, we prove that the set Ξ ( ) = { e Θ : e = k ( e ) for some k ( 0 , 1 ) } is bounded. Suppose that θ , ϖ Ξ , then for all U , we obtain that

θ ( ) [ b 0 + ( b 1 + b 2 + b 3 ) θ ] P Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + 1 ) 1 + 1 ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ( ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ + ρ 1 ) + [ t 0 + ( t 1 + t 2 + t 3 ) θ ] Q Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ + 1 ) 1 + 1 ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ( ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ + ρ 1 ) + ξ ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 θ ,

which implies that

θ Θ 1 [ b 0 + ( b 1 + b 2 + b 3 ) θ ] Λ + [ t 0 + ( t 1 + t 2 + t 3 ) θ ] Λ + ξ ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 θ Θ 1 = i = 1 3 b i Λ + i = 1 3 t i Λ + ξ ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 θ Θ 1 + b 0 Λ + t 0 Λ .

Consequently,

θ Θ 1 b 0 Λ + t 0 Λ 1 i = 1 3 b i Λ + i = 1 3 t i Λ + ξ ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 .

In the same manner, we conclude that

ϖ Θ 2 b 0 Λ + t 0 Λ 1 i = 1 3 b i Λ + i = 1 3 t i Λ + ξ ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 .

Hence,

( θ , ϖ ) Θ 2 ( b 0 Λ + t 0 Λ ) 1 i = 1 3 b i Λ + i = 1 3 t i Λ + ξ ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 .

Therefore, Ξ is bounded. Thanks to Lemma 3.2, the operator has at least one FP. Hence, problem (1.1) has at least one solution on U .

4 Stability results

The stability of the solution is critical in physical problems because the mathematical equations describing the problem will be unable to predict the future with any degree of accuracy if small deviations from the mathematical model caused by inevitable measurement errors do not also have a correspondingly small effect on the solution. The aforementioned factors are critical from a numerical and optimization standpoint. This is because most nonlinear problems in fractional calculus and applied analysis are extremely difficult to solve. In this case, approximate solutions that are close to the true solution of the relevant problem are required. Stability of solutions is required in the aforementioned situation. In such cases, one requires approximations that are close to the true solution of the relevant problem. The stability of the solutions is required in the given scenario. In this part, we study the MLU stability for our proposed system.

Now, for [ 0 , 1 ] , and for υ 1 , υ 2 ( 0 , 1 ) , consider the following inequalities:

(4.1) D ω RL ( D ϰ C ( D ϱ C z ( ) ) ) P ϕ ( , z ( ) , z ( υ 1 ) , y ( ) ) Q I ϑ [ ψ ( , z ( ) , z ( υ 2 ) , y ( ) ) ] μ 2 , D ω RL ( D ϰ C ( D ϱ C y ( ) ) ) P ϕ ( , z ( ) , y ( ) , y ( υ 1 ) ) Q I ϑ [ ψ ( , z ( ) , y ( ) , y ( υ 2 ) ) ] μ 2 ,

and

(4.2) D ω RL ( D ϰ C ( D ϱ C z ( ) ) ) P ϕ ( , z ( ) , z ( υ 1 ) , y ( ) ) Q I ϑ [ ψ ( , z ( ) , z ( υ 2 ) , y ( ) ) ] μ 2 λ ( ) , D ω RL ( D ϰ C ( D ϱ C y ( ) ) ) P ϕ ( , z ( ) , y ( ) , y ( υ 1 ) ) Q I ϑ [ ψ ( , z ( ) , y ( ) , y ( υ 2 ) ) ] μ 2 λ ( ) ,

where μ > 0 and λ : U R + is a continuous function.

Definition 4.1

We say that the solution of SFPEs (1.1) is MLU-Hyers (MLUH) stable with respect to H ω + ϰ + ϱ , if there exists a real number u , and for all μ > 0 , there exist a solution z , y Θ for inequalities (4.1) and a solution θ , ϖ Θ to system (1.1) such that

( z , y ) ( θ , ϖ ) Θ u μ E ω + ϰ + ϱ ( ) , U .

Definition 4.2

We say that the solution of SFPEs (1.1) is MLU-Hyers-Rassias (MLUHR) stable with respect to λ H ω + ϰ + ϱ , if there exists a real number u λ , and for all μ > 0 , there exist a solution z , y Θ for inequalities (4.2) and a solution θ , ϖ Θ to problem (1.1) such that

( z , y ) ( θ , ϖ ) Θ u λ μ λ ( ) E ω + ϰ + ϱ ( ) , U .

Remark 4.3

The functions z , y Θ are a solution of (4.1), if there exist j , j Θ (which depend on z and y ) such that

j ( ) μ , j ( ) μ ,

and

D ω RL ( D ϰ C ( D ϱ C z ( ) ) ) P ϕ ( , z ( ) , z ( υ 1 ) , y ( ) ) + Q I ϑ [ ψ ( , z ( ) , z ( υ 2 ) , y ( ) ) ] = j ( ) , D ω RL ( D ϰ C ( D ϱ C y ( ) ) ) P ϕ ( , z ( ) , y ( ) , y ( υ 1 ) ) + Q I ϑ [ ψ ( , z ( ) , y ( ) , y ( υ 2 ) ) ] = j ( ) ,

for all U , and all υ 1 , υ 2 ( 0 , 1 ) .

Theorem 4.4

The solution to SFPEs (1.1) is MLUH stable if the assumptions ( A 1 ) and ( A 2 ) are satisfied.

Proof

Let z , y Θ be a solution to (4.1) and θ , ϖ Θ be a solution to problem (1.1). Using Lemma 2.10, we obtain

θ ( ) = I ω + ϰ + ϱ Ξ θ , ϖ ( ) + Γ ( ω ) a 1 ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) + a 2 ϱ Γ ( ϱ + 1 ) + a 3 , a i R , i = 1 , 2 , 3 ,

and

ϖ ( ) = I ω + ϰ + ϱ Ξ ϖ , θ ( ) + Γ ( ω ) a 1 ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) + a 2 ϱ Γ ( ϱ + 1 ) + a 3 , a i R , i = 1 , 2 , 3 .

We obtain by integrating inequality (4.1) that

(4.3) z ( ) I ω + ϰ + ϱ Ξ z , y ( ) Γ ( ω ) c 1 ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) c 2 ϱ Γ ( ϱ + 1 ) c 3 μ ω + ϰ + ϱ 2 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + 1 ) μ 2 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + 1 ) , c i R , i = 1 , 2 , 3 ,

and

(4.4) y ( ) I ω + ϰ + ϱ Ξ y , z ( ) Γ ( ω ) c 1 ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) c 2 ϱ Γ ( ϱ + 1 ) c 3 μ ω + ϰ + ϱ 2 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + 1 ) μ 2 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + 1 ) , c i R , i = 1 , 2 , 3 ,

where

Ξ z , y ( ) = P ϕ ( , z ( ) , z ( υ 1 ) , y ( ) ) + Q I ϑ [ ψ ( , z ( ) , z ( υ 2 ) , y ( ) ) ]

and

Ξ y , z = P ϕ ( , z ( ) , y ( ) , y ( υ 1 ) ) + Q I ϑ [ ψ ( , z ( ) , y ( ) , y ( υ 2 ) ) ] .

From the conditions z ( 0 ) = θ ( 0 ) , z ( υ ) = θ ( υ ) , y ( 0 ) = ϖ ( 0 ) , y ( υ ) = ϖ ( υ ) , D ϱ C ( z ( 0 ) ) = D ϱ C ( θ ( 0 ) ) , and D ϱ C ( y ( 0 ) ) = D ϱ C ( ϖ ( 0 ) ) , we obtain a 1 = c 1 , a 2 = c 2 , and a 3 = c 3 .

Now, for all U , we have

(4.5) z ( ) θ ( ) z ( ) I ω + ϰ + ϱ Ξ ϖ , θ ( ) Γ ( ω ) a 1 ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) a 2 ϱ Γ ( ϱ + 1 ) a 3 + I ω + ϰ + ϱ [ Ξ ϖ , θ ( ) Ξ y , z ( ) ] z ( ) I ω + ϰ + ϱ Ξ ϖ , θ ( ) Γ ( ω ) a 1 ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) a 2 ϱ Γ ( ϱ + 1 ) a 3 + I ω + ϰ + ϱ [ Ξ y , z ( ) Ξ ϖ , θ ( ) ] .

Since, for υ 1 , υ 2 ( 0 , 1 ) ,

I ω + ϰ + ϱ [ Ξ y , z ( ) Ξ ϖ , θ ( ) ] P Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) 0 ( ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ϕ ( , y ( ) , y ( υ 1 ) , z ( ) ) ϕ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 1 ) , ϖ ( ) ) d + Q Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ ) 0 ( ) ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ 1 ψ ( , y ( ) , y ( υ 2 ) , z ( ) ) ψ ( , θ ( ) , θ ( υ 2 ) , ϖ ( ) ) d .

Then, by ( A 1 ) , one has

(4.6) I ω + ϰ + ϱ [ Ξ y , z ( ) Ξ ϖ , θ ( ) ] P G ϕ Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) 0 ( ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ( y ( ) θ ( ) + z ( ) ϖ ( ) ) d + Q G ψ Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ ) 0 ( ) ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ 1 ( y ( ) θ ( ) + z ( ) ϖ ( ) ) d .

Substituting (4.3) and (4.6) into (4.5), we have

z ( ) θ ( ) Θ 1 μ 2 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + 1 ) + P G ϕ 2 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) 0 ( ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ( y ( ) θ ( ) Θ 1 + z ( ) ϖ ( ) Θ 2 ) d + Q G ψ 2 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ ) 0 ( ) ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ 1 ( y ( ) θ ( ) Θ 1 + z ( ) ϖ ( ) Θ 2 ) d .

From Remarks 2.8 and 2.9, we obtain

(4.7) z ( ) θ ( ) Θ 1 μ 2 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + 1 ) ( E ω + ϰ + ϱ [ P G ϕ ω + ϰ + ϱ ] + E ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ [ Q G ϕ ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ ] ) .

Repeating the same steps in (4.4), we have

(4.8) y ( ) ϖ ( ) Θ 2 μ 2 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + 1 ) ( E ω + ϰ + ϱ [ P G ϕ ω + ϰ + ϱ ] + E ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ [ Q G ϕ ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ ] ) .

Combining (4.7) and (4.8), we obtain that

( z ( ) , y ( ) ) ( θ ( ) , ϖ ( ) ) Θ z ( ) θ ( ) Θ 1 + y ( ) ϖ ( ) Θ 2 μ Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + 1 ) ( E ω + ϰ + ϱ [ P G ϕ ω + ϰ + ϱ ] + E ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ [ Q G ϕ ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ ] ) = u μ ( E ω + ϰ + ϱ [ P G ϕ ω + ϰ + ϱ ] + E ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ [ Q G ϕ ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ ] ) ,

where u = 1 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ + 1 ) . Consequently, the solution of SFPEs (1.1) is MLUH stable.□

Theorem 4.5

Via the assumptions ( A 1 ) and ( A 2 ) , the solution of SFPEs (1.1) is MLUHR stable with respect to λ H ω + ϰ + ϱ , provided that there exists u λ > 0 such that

(4.9) 1 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) 0 ( ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 λ ( ) d u λ λ ( ) , U ,

where λ C ( U , R + ) is an increasing function.

Proof

Integrating inequalities (4.2), we obtain

z ( ) I ω + ϰ + ϱ Ξ z , y ( ) Γ ( ω ) c 1 ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) c 2 ϱ Γ ( ϱ + 1 ) c 3 μ 2 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + 1 ) 0 ( ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 λ ( ) d

and

y ( ) I ω + ϰ + ϱ Ξ y , z ( ) Γ ( ω ) c 1 ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) c 2 ϱ Γ ( ϱ + 1 ) c 3 μ 2 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + 1 ) 0 ( ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 λ ( ) d ,

where z , y Θ are a solution to (4.2). Assume that θ , ϖ Θ are a solution to proposed problem (1.1), and then, we have

θ ( ) = I ω + ϰ + ϱ Ξ θ , ϖ ( ) + Γ ( ω ) a 1 ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) + a 2 ϱ Γ ( ϱ + 1 ) + a 3

and

ϖ ( ) = I ω + ϰ + ϱ Ξ ϖ , θ ( ) + Γ ( ω ) a 1 ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) + a 2 ϱ Γ ( ϱ + 1 ) + a 3 .

Similar to the proof of Theorem 4.4, we have

z ( ) θ ( ) Θ 1 μ 2 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + 1 ) 0 ( ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 λ ( ) d + P G ϕ 2 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) 0 ( ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ( y ( ) θ ( ) Θ 1 + z ( ) ϖ ( ) Θ 2 ) d + Q G ψ 2 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ ) 0 ( ) ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ 1 ( y ( ) θ ( ) Θ 1 + z ( ) ϖ ( ) Θ 2 ) d .

Using (4.9), we obtain that

z ( ) θ ( ) Θ 1 μ 2 u λ λ ( ) + P G ϕ 2 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ ) 0 ( ) ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 ( y ( ) θ ( ) Θ 1 + z ( ) ϖ ( ) Θ 2 ) d + Q G ψ 2 Γ ( ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ ) 0 ( ) ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ 1 ( y ( ) θ ( ) Θ 1 + z ( ) ϖ ( ) Θ 2 ) d .

Applying Remarks 2.8 and 2.9, we obtain

(4.10) z θ Θ 1 μ 2 u λ λ ( ) ( E ω + ϰ + ϱ [ P G ϕ ω + ϰ + ϱ ] + E ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ [ Q G ϕ ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ ] ) .

Analogously, we have

(4.11) y ϖ Θ 2 μ 2 u λ λ ( ) ( E ω + ϰ + ϱ [ P G ϕ ω + ϰ + ϱ ] + E ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ [ Q G ϕ ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ ] ) .

It follows from (4.10) and (4.11) that

( z , y ) ( θ , ϖ ) Θ z θ Θ 1 + y ϖ Θ 2 μ u λ λ ( ) ( E ω + ϰ + ϱ [ P G ϕ ω + ϰ + ϱ ] + E ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ [ Q G ϕ ω + ϰ + ϱ + ϑ ] ) .

Hence, the solution to the considerable problem (1.1) is MLUHR stable.□

5 Application

There is no doubt that providing numerical examples as special cases of the subject under study strengthens the model and clarifies each parameter and its significance. It also enhances theoretical results and validates the validity of assumptions utilized to reach the intended goal. Therefore, in this section, we give the following example as a special model of problem (1.1):

Example 5.1

Consider the following fractional pantograph problem:

(5.1) D 5 6 RL D 1 3 C D 3 4 C θ ( ) = e 3 39 π 3 1 6 + e 3 55 π e 3 sin θ ( ) + e 3 55 π e 3 cos θ 11 12 + e 3 55 π e 3 sin ϖ ( ) + 1 49 e 3 I 5 2 11 13 + 1 ( 50 e 2 ) 2 + l 2 θ ( ) + e 50 e 2 + l 2 sin θ 13 12 + e 50 e 2 + l 2 cos ϖ ( ) , D 5 6 RL D 1 3 C D 3 4 C ϖ ( ) = e 3 39 π 3 1 6 + e 3 55 π e 3 sin θ ( ) + e 3 55 π e 3 sin ( ϖ ) + e 3 55 π e 3 cos ϖ 11 12 + 1 49 e 3 I 5 2 11 13 + 1 ( 50 e 2 ) 2 + l 2 θ ( ) + e 50 e 2 + l 2 sin ϖ ( ) + e 50 e 2 + l 2 cos ϖ 13 12 , θ ( ) = 0 , 5 4 θ ( 1 ) 4 3 θ 6 7 = 1 55 θ ( ) , D ϱ C θ ( 0 ) = 3 4 , ϖ ( ) = 0 , 5 4 ϖ ( 1 ) 4 3 ϖ 6 7 = 1 55 ϖ ( ) , D ϱ C ϖ ( 0 ) = 3 4 ,

and the following fractional inequalities:

D 5 6 RL D 1 3 C D 3 4 C z ( ) e 3 39 π 3 ϕ ( , z ( ) , z ( υ 1 ) , y ( ) ) 1 49 e 3 I 5 2 [ ψ ( , z ( ) , z ( υ 2 ) , y ( ) ) ] μ 2 , D 5 6 RL D 1 3 C D 3 4 C y ( ) e 3 39 π 3 ϕ ( , z ( ) , y ( ) , y ( υ 1 ) ) 1 49 e 3 I 5 2 [ ψ ( , z ( ) , y ( ) , y ( υ 2 ) ) ] μ 2 ,

and

D 5 6 RL D 1 3 C D 3 4 C z ( ) e 3 39 π 3 ϕ ( , z ( ) , z ( υ 1 ) , y ( ) ) 1 49 e 3 I 5 2 [ ψ ( , z ( ) , z ( υ 2 ) , y ( ) ) ] μ 2 λ ( ) , D 5 6 RL D 1 3 C D 3 4 C y ( ) e 3 39 π 3 ϕ ( , z ( ) , y ( ) , y ( υ 1 ) ) 1 49 e 3 I 5 2 [ ψ ( , z ( ) , y ( ) , y ( υ 2 ) ) ] μ 2 λ ( ) ,

where

ϕ ( , z ( ) , z ( υ 1 ) , y ( ) ) = 1 6 + e 3 55 π e 3 sin θ ( ) + e 3 55 π e 3 cos θ 11 12 + e 3 55 π e 3 sin ϖ ( ) , ϕ ( , z ( ) , y ( ) , y ( υ 1 ) ) = 1 6 + e 3 55 π e 3 sin θ ( ) + e 3 55 π e 3 sin ( ϖ ) + e 3 55 π e 3 cos ϖ 11 12 , ψ ( , z ( ) , z ( υ 2 ) , y ( ) ) = 11 13 + 1 ( 50 e 2 ) 2 + l 2 θ ( ) + e 50 e 2 + l 2 sin θ 13 12 + e 50 e 2 + l 2 cos ϖ ( ) , ψ ( , z ( ) , y ( ) , y ( υ 2 ) ) = 11 13 + 1 ( 50 e 2 ) 2 + l 2 θ ( ) + e 50 e 2 + l 2 sin ϖ ( ) + e 50 e 2 + l 2 cos ϖ 13 12 ,

ω = 5 6 , ϰ = 1 3 , ϱ = 3 4 , ϑ = 2.5 , P = e 3 39 π 3 , Q = 1 49 e 3 , σ ( θ ) = 1 55 θ ( ) , σ ( ϖ ) = 1 55 ϖ ( ) , ρ 1 = 5 4 , ρ 2 = 4 3 , υ 1 = 11 12 , υ 2 = 13 12 , α = 6 7 , β = 3 4 , and ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 .

For [ 0 , 1 ] , θ i , ϖ i R , i = 1 , 2 , 3 , we have

ϕ ( , θ 1 ( ) , θ 2 ( ) , θ 3 ( υ ) ) ϕ ( , ϖ 1 ( ) , ϖ 2 ( ) , ϖ 3 ( υ ) ) 1 110 π e 3 ( θ 1 ϖ 1 + θ 2 ϖ 2 + θ 3 ϖ 3 ) , ψ ( , θ 1 ( ) , θ 2 ( ) , θ 3 ( υ ) ) ψ ( , ϖ 1 ( ) , ϖ 2 ( ) , ϖ 3 ( υ ) ) 1 100 e 2 ( θ 1 ϖ 1 + θ 2 ϖ 2 + θ 3 ϖ 3 ) ,

and

σ ( θ 1 ) σ ( ϖ 1 ) 1 55 θ 1 ϖ 1 .

Therefore, assumptions ( A 1 ) and ( A 2 ) are satisfied with G ϕ = 1 55 π e 3 , G ψ = 1 50 e 2 , and ξ = 1 55 , respectively. Using the provided data, it is discoverable that

G = max { G ψ , G ϕ } = 1 50 e 2 and ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1 = 9.236713958 × 1 0 2 .

After routine calculations, we found that Λ = 7.128062804 × 1 0 4 and Λ = 7.0972085 × 1 0 4 . Hence, the hypothesis

3 G ( Λ + Λ ) = 9.54264412 × 1 0 3 < 0.7997420678 = 1 ξ ρ 1 ρ 2 α ω + ϰ + ϱ 1

is fulfilled. Therefore, the considerable problem (4.11) has a solution on U based on Theorem 3.1. Moreover, the solution to system (4.11) is MLUH stable with

z ( ) θ ( ) + y ( ) ϖ ( ) μ Γ 35 12 E 23 12 e 3 2,145 π 4 e 3 23 12 + E 53 12 1 2,695 e 6 π 53 12 , [ 0 , 1 ] .

Now, let λ ( ) = 2 , then by (2.1), one can write

I ω + ϰ + ϱ λ ( ) = I 5 6 + 1 3 + 3 4 ( 2 ) = 3 16 Γ 16 3 2 + 5 6 + 1 3 + 3 4 3 16 Γ 16 3 2 = u λ μ λ ( ) .

Hence, condition (4.9) is fulfilled with λ ( ) = 2 and u λ = 3 16 Γ 16 3 . According to Theorem 4.5, the solution to problem (4.11) is MLUHR stable with

z ( ) θ ( ) + y ( ) ϖ ( ) μ 2 Γ 47 12 E 23 12 e 3 2,145 π 4 e 3 23 12 + E 53 12 1 2,695 e 6 π 53 12 , [ 0 , 1 ] .

6 Conclusion and future work

A pantograph is a mechanical connection that is used to replicate and scale a drawing or image. It is made up of a sequence of interconnected parallelograms that can keep their shape even as they change size. The pantograph was invented in the seventeenth century and has since been utilized for a wide range of purposes. The pantograph can be mathematically represented by a set of equations known as the pantograph equations. These equations define the relationships between the various lengths and angles of the parallelograms that comprise the pantograph. The pantograph has several applications in engineering, including the design of machines and mechanisms that require exact scaling and copying of movements. So, in this manuscript, we used the FP tool to give necessary and sufficient conditions for the existence and uniqueness of the solution for a system of SFPEs intervening in three sequential fractional derivatives. Also, we studied the MLU stability of the considerable system via generalized singular Gronwall’s inequality. Finally, we provided an illustrative example to support the obtained results. As future work, our results can be reflected on DEs with arbitrary fractional order, linear and nonlinear fractional integro-differential systems, Hadamard fractional derivatives, and many fractional operators.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the Basque Government for Grant IT1555-22 and to MICIU/AEI/ 10.13039/501100011033 and ERDF/E for Grants PID2021- 123543OB-C21 and PID2021-123543OB-C22.

  1. Funding information: This work was supported in part by the Basque Government under Grant IT1555-22.

  2. Author contributions: All authors contributed equally to the writing of this article. All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of the manuscript and approved its submission.

  3. Conflict of interest: All authors confirm that they have no conflict of interest.

  4. Ethical approval: The conducted research is not related to either human or animal use.

  5. Informed consent: Not applicable.

  6. Data availability statement: Data sharing is not applicable to the article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

References

[1] S. N. Rao, A. H. Msmali, M. Singh, and A. A. H. Ahmadini, Existence and uniqueness for a system of Caputo-Hadamard fractional differential equations with multipoint boundary conditions, J. Funct. Spaces 2020 (2020), no. 1, 8821471.10.1155/2020/8821471Search in Google Scholar

[2] K. A. Lazopoulos, Non-local continuum mechanics and fractional calculus, Mech. Res. Commun. 33 (2006), no. 6, 753–757. 10.1016/j.mechrescom.2006.05.001Search in Google Scholar

[3] R. Zafar, M. U. Rehman, and M. Shams, On Caputo modification of Hadamard-type fractional derivative and fractional Taylor series, Adv. Differential Equations 2020 (2020), 219. 10.1186/s13662-020-02658-1Search in Google Scholar

[4] J. Sabatier, O. P. Agrawal, and J. A. T. Machado, Advances in Fractional Calculus: Theoretical Developments and Applications in Physics and Engineering, Springer, Netherlands, 2007. 10.1007/978-1-4020-6042-7Search in Google Scholar

[5] A. A. Kilbas, H. M. Srivastava, and J. J. Trujillo, Theory and applications of fractional differential equations, North-Holland Mathematics Studies, vol. 204, Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, 2006. Search in Google Scholar

[6] V. Lakshmikantham and A. S. Vatsala, Basic theory of fractional differential equations, Nonlinear. Anal. 69 (2008), 2677–2682. 10.1016/j.na.2007.08.042Search in Google Scholar

[7] G. Ali, K. Shah, and G. Rahman, Investigating a class of pantograph differential equations under multi-points boundary conditions with fractional order, Int. J. Appl. Comput. Math. 7 (2021), no. 1, 2.10.1007/s40819-020-00932-0Search in Google Scholar

[8] Y. Gouari, Z. Dahmani, and I. Jebri, Application of fractional calculus on a new differential problem of Duffing type, Adv. Math. Sci. J. 9, (2020), no. 12, 10989–11002. 10.37418/amsj.9.12.82Search in Google Scholar

[9] M. Houas and M. Bezziou, Existence of solutions for neutral Caputo-type fractional integro-differential equations with nonlocal boundary conditions, Commun. Optim. Theory 2021 (2021), no. 9.Search in Google Scholar

[10] Humaira, H. A. Hammad, M. Sarwar, and M. De la Sen, Existence theorem for a unique solution to a coupled system of impulsive fractional differential equations in complex-valued fuzzy metric spaces, Adv. Differential Equations 2021 (2021), 242. 10.1186/s13662-021-03401-0Search in Google Scholar

[11] H. A. Hammad and M. Zayed, Solving systems of coupled nonlinear Atangana-Baleanu-type fractional differential equations, Bound. Value Probl. 2022 (2022), 101. 10.1186/s13661-022-01684-0Search in Google Scholar

[12] E. T. Karimov, B. Lopez, and K. Sadarangani, About the existence of solutions for a hybrid nonlinear generalized fractional pantograph equation, Fractional Diff. Cal. 6 (2016), no. 1, 95–110. 10.7153/fdc-06-06Search in Google Scholar

[13] S. K. Ntouyas and D. Vivek, Existence and uniqueness results for sequential Hilfer fractional differential equations with multi-point boundary conditions, Acta Math. Univ. Comenianae. 90 (2021), no. 2, 171–185. Search in Google Scholar

[14] F. Mainradi and P. Pironi, The fractional Langevin equation: Brownian motion revisited, Extracta Math. 10 (1996), 140–154. Search in Google Scholar

[15] N. M. Dien, Existence and continuity results for a nonlinear fractional Langevin equation with a weakly singular source, J. Integral Equ. Appl. 33 (2021), no. 3, 349–369. 10.1216/jie.2021.33.349Search in Google Scholar

[16] N. M. Dien and D. D. Trong, On the nonlinear generalized Langevin equation involving ψ-Caputo fractional derivatives, Fractals 29 (2021), no. 6, 2150128. 10.1142/S0218348X21501280Search in Google Scholar

[17] N. M. Dien, Nonlinear Langevin time-delay differential equations with generalized Caputo fractional derivatives, Filomat. 37 (2023), no. 19, 6487–6495. 10.2298/FIL2319487DSearch in Google Scholar

[18] A. Kumar, M. Muslim, and R. Sakthivel, Controllability of second-order nonlinear differential equations with non-instantaneous impulses, J. Dyn. Control Syst. 24 (2018), 325–342. 10.1007/s10883-017-9376-5Search in Google Scholar

[19] A. Kumar, M. Muslim, and R. Sakthivel, Exact and trajectory controllability of second-order evolution systems with impulses and deviated arguments, Math. Methods Appl. Sci. 41 (2018), 4259–4272. 10.1002/mma.4888Search in Google Scholar

[20] H. A. Hammad and M. De la Sen, Stability and controllability study for mixed integral fractional delay dynamic systems endowed with impulsive effects on time scales, Fractal Fract. 7 (2023), 92. 10.3390/fractalfract7010092Search in Google Scholar

[21] H. A. Hammad, H. Aydi, H. Isik, and M. De la Sen, Existence and stability results for a coupled system of impulsive fractional differential equations with Hadamard fractional derivatives, AIMS Math. 8 (2023), no. 3, 6913–6941. 10.3934/math.2023350Search in Google Scholar

[22] H. A. Hammad and M. De la Sen, Analytical solution of Urysohn integral equations by fixed point technique in complex valued metric spaces, Mathematics 7 (2019), no. 9, 852. 10.3390/math7090852Search in Google Scholar

[23] M. M. Raja, V. Vijayakumar, A. Shukla, K. S. Nisar, and H. M. Baskonus, On the approximate controllability results for fractional integro-differential systems of order 1<r<2 with sectorial operators, J. Comput. App. Math. 415 (2022), 114492. 10.1016/j.cam.2022.114492Search in Google Scholar

[24] Y.-K. Ma, K. Kavitha, W. Albalawi, A. Shukla, K. S. Nisar, and V. Vijayakumar, An analysis on the approximate controllability of Hilfer fractional neutral differential systems in Hilbert spaces, Alex. Eng. J. 61 (2022), no. 9, 7291–7302. 10.1016/j.aej.2021.12.067Search in Google Scholar

[25] A. Shukla, N. Sukavanam, and D. N. Pandey, Controllability of semilinear stochastic system with multiple delays in control, IFAC Proc. 47 (2014), no. 1, 306–312. 10.3182/20140313-3-IN-3024.00107Search in Google Scholar

[26] A. Shukla, N. Sukavanam, and D. N. Pandey, Approximate controllability of semilinear stochastic control system with nonlocal conditions, Nonlinear Dynamics Sys. Theory 15 (2015), no. 3, 321–333. Search in Google Scholar

[27] M. Bohner and N. Wintz, Controllability and observability of time-invariant linear dynamic systems, Math. Bohem. 137 (2012), 149–163. 10.21136/MB.2012.142861Search in Google Scholar

[28] J. Davis, I. Gravangne, B. Jackson, and R. Marks, II. Controllability, observability, realizability, and stability of dynamic linear systems, Electron. J. Differential Equations 2009 (2009), 165. Search in Google Scholar

[29] B. Wongsaijai, P. Charoensawan, T. Suebcharoen, and W. Atiponrat, Common fixed point theorems for auxiliary functions with applications in fractional differential equation, Adv. Differential Equations 2021 (2021), 503. 10.1186/s13662-021-03660-xSearch in Google Scholar

[30] I. Uddin, C. Garodia, T. Abdeljawad, and N. Mlaiki, Convergence analysis of a novel iteration process with application to a fractional differential equation, Adv. Cont. Discr. Mod. 2022 (2022), 16. 10.1186/s13662-022-03690-zSearch in Google Scholar

[31] R. Dhayal and Z. Quanxin, Stability and controllability results of ψ-Hilfer fractional integrodifferential systems under the influence of impulses, Chaos Solitons Frac. 168 (2023), 113105. 10.1016/j.chaos.2023.113105Search in Google Scholar

[32] T. A. Aljaaidi, D. B. Pachpatte, W. Shatanawi, M. S. Abdo, and K. Abodayeh, Generalized proportional fractional integral functional bounds in Minkowski’s inequalities, Adv. Differential Equations 2021 (2021), 419. 10.1186/s13662-021-03582-8Search in Google Scholar

[33] S. S. Bluehwan, S. L. Shaikh, M. S. Abdo, W. Shatanawi, K. Abodayeh, M. A. Almalahi, et al. Investigating a generalized Hilfer-type fractional differential equation with two-point and integral boundary conditions, AIMS Math. 7 (2022), no. 2, 1856–1872. 10.3934/math.2022107Search in Google Scholar

[34] I. A. Rus, Ulam stabilities of ordinary differential equations in a Banach space, Carpath. J. Math. 26 (2010), 103–107. Search in Google Scholar

[35] A. Ali, K. Shah, and T. Abdeljawad, Study of implicit delay fractional differential equations under anti-periodic boundary conditions, Adv. Differential Equations 2020 (2020), 1–16. 10.1186/s13662-020-02597-xSearch in Google Scholar

[36] M. Houas and M. E. Samei, Existence and Mittag-Leffler-Ulam-stability results for Duffing type problem involving sequential fractional derivatives, Int. J. Appl. Comput. Math. 8 (2022), no. 4, 185. 10.1007/s40819-022-01398-ySearch in Google Scholar

[37] M. I. Abbas, Existence and uniqueness of Mittag-Leffler-Ulam stable solution for fractional integro-differential equations with nonlocal initial conditions, European J. Pure Appl. Math. 8 (2015), no. 4, 478–498. Search in Google Scholar

[38] M. Ahmad, J. Jiang, A. Zada, Z. Ali, Z. Fu, and J. Xu, Hyers-Ulam-Mittag-Leffler stability for a system of fractional neutral differential equations, Dis. Dyn. Nature Soc. 2020 (2020), no. 1, 2786041. 10.1155/2020/2786041Search in Google Scholar

[39] A. Mohanapriya, C. Park, A. Ganesh, and V. Govindan, Mittag-Leffler-Hyers-Ulam stability of differential equation using Fourier transform, Adv. Differential Equations, 2020 (2020), 389. 10.1186/s13662-020-02854-zSearch in Google Scholar

[40] J. Wang and Y. Zhang, Ulam-Hyers-Mittag-Leffler stability of fractional-order delay differential equations, Optimization. 63 (2014), no. 8, 1181–1190. 10.1080/02331934.2014.906597Search in Google Scholar

[41] K. Balachandran, S. Kiruthika, and J. J. Trujillo, Existence of solutions of nonlinear fractional pantograph equations, Acta Math. Sci. 33 (2013), 712–720. 10.1016/S0252-9602(13)60032-6Search in Google Scholar

[42] D. Vivek, K. Kanagarajan, and S. Harikrishnan, Existence and uniqueness results for nonlinear neutral pantograph equations with generalized fractional derivative, J. Nonlinear Anal. Appl. 2018 (2018), 151–157. 10.5899/2018/jnaa-00377Search in Google Scholar

[43] I. Ahmad, J. J. Nieto, G. U. Rahman, and K. Shah, Existence and stability for fractional order pantograph equations with nonlocal conditions, Electron. J. Differential Equations 132 (2020), 1–16. 10.58997/ejde.2020.132Search in Google Scholar

[44] M. Houas, Existence and stability of fractional pantograph differential equations with Caputo-Hadamard type derivative, Turkish J. Ineq. 4 (2020), no. 1, 1–10. Search in Google Scholar

[45] D. Vivek, K. Kanagarajan, and S. Sivasundaram, Dynamics and stability of pantograph equations via Hilfer fractional derivative, Nonlinear Studies. 23 (2016), no. 4, 685–698. Search in Google Scholar

[46] A. Iserles, Exact and discretized stability of the pantograph equation, Appl. Numer. Math. 24 (1997), 295–308. 10.1016/S0168-9274(97)00027-5Search in Google Scholar

[47] A. Iserles, On the generalized pantograph functional-differential equation, European J. Appl. Math. 4 (1993), no. 1, 1–38. 10.1017/S0956792500000966Search in Google Scholar

[48] M. Sezer, S. Yalcinbas, and N. Sahin, Approximate solution of multi-pantograph equation with variable, J. Comput. Appl. Math. 214 (2008), 406–416. 10.1016/j.cam.2007.03.024Search in Google Scholar

[49] Z. H. Yu, Variational iteration method for solving the multi-pantograph delay equation, Phys. Lett. A. 372 (2008), 6475–6479. 10.1016/j.physleta.2008.09.013Search in Google Scholar

[50] L. Podlubny, Fractional Differential Equations, Academic Press, New York, 1999. Search in Google Scholar

[51] S. Y. Lin, Generalized Gronwall inequalities and their applications to fractional differential equations, J. Ineq. Appl. 549 (2013), no. 1, 549.10.1186/1029-242X-2013-549Search in Google Scholar

[52] A. Granas and J. Dugundji, Fixed Point Theory, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2003. 10.1007/978-0-387-21593-8Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2023-02-25
Revised: 2023-12-27
Accepted: 2024-05-24
Published Online: 2024-10-01

© 2024 the author(s), published by De Gruyter

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Regular Articles
  2. On the p-fractional Schrödinger-Kirchhoff equations with electromagnetic fields and the Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev nonlinearity
  3. L-Fuzzy fixed point results in -metric spaces with applications
  4. Solutions of a coupled system of hybrid boundary value problems with Riesz-Caputo derivative
  5. Nonparametric methods of statistical inference for double-censored data with applications
  6. LADM procedure to find the analytical solutions of the nonlinear fractional dynamics of partial integro-differential equations
  7. Existence of projected solutions for quasi-variational hemivariational inequality
  8. Spectral collocation method for convection-diffusion equation
  9. New local fractional Hermite-Hadamard-type and Ostrowski-type inequalities with generalized Mittag-Leffler kernel for generalized h-preinvex functions
  10. On the asymptotics of eigenvalues for a Sturm-Liouville problem with symmetric single-well potential
  11. On exact rate of convergence of row sequences of multipoint Hermite-Padé approximants
  12. The essential norm of bounded diagonal infinite matrices acting on Banach sequence spaces
  13. Decay rate of the solutions to the Cauchy problem of the Lord Shulman thermoelastic Timoshenko model with distributed delay
  14. Enhancing the accuracy and efficiency of two uniformly convergent numerical solvers for singularly perturbed parabolic convection–diffusion–reaction problems with two small parameters
  15. An inertial shrinking projection self-adaptive algorithm for solving split variational inclusion problems and fixed point problems in Banach spaces
  16. An equation for complex fractional diffusion created by the Struve function with a T-symmetric univalent solution
  17. On the existence and Ulam-Hyers stability for implicit fractional differential equation via fractional integral-type boundary conditions
  18. Some properties of a class of holomorphic functions associated with tangent function
  19. The existence of multiple solutions for a class of upper critical Choquard equation in a bounded domain
  20. On the continuity in q of the family of the limit q-Durrmeyer operators
  21. Results on solutions of several systems of the product type complex partial differential difference equations
  22. On Berezin norm and Berezin number inequalities for sum of operators
  23. Geometric invariants properties of osculating curves under conformal transformation in Euclidean space ℝ3
  24. On a generalization of the Opial inequality
  25. A novel numerical approach to solutions of fractional Bagley-Torvik equation fitted with a fractional integral boundary condition
  26. Holomorphic curves into projective spaces with some special hypersurfaces
  27. On Periodic solutions for implicit nonlinear Caputo tempered fractional differential problems
  28. Approximation of complex q-Beta-Baskakov-Szász-Stancu operators in compact disk
  29. Existence and regularity of solutions for non-autonomous integrodifferential evolution equations involving nonlocal conditions
  30. Jordan left derivations in infinite matrix rings
  31. Nonlinear nonlocal elliptic problems in ℝ3: existence results and qualitative properties
  32. Invariant means and lacunary sequence spaces of order (α, β)
  33. Novel results for two families of multivalued dominated mappings satisfying generalized nonlinear contractive inequalities and applications
  34. Global in time well-posedness of a three-dimensional periodic regularized Boussinesq system
  35. Existence of solutions for nonlinear problems involving mixed fractional derivatives with p(x)-Laplacian operator
  36. Some applications and maximum principles for multi-term time-space fractional parabolic Monge-Ampère equation
  37. On three-dimensional q-Riordan arrays
  38. Some aspects of normal curve on smooth surface under isometry
  39. Mittag-Leffler-Hyers-Ulam stability for a first- and second-order nonlinear differential equations using Fourier transform
  40. Topological structure of the solution sets to non-autonomous evolution inclusions driven by measures on the half-line
  41. Remark on the Daugavet property for complex Banach spaces
  42. Decreasing and complete monotonicity of functions defined by derivatives of completely monotonic function involving trigamma function
  43. Uniqueness of meromorphic functions concerning small functions and derivatives-differences
  44. Asymptotic approximations of Apostol-Frobenius-Euler polynomials of order α in terms of hyperbolic functions
  45. Hyers-Ulam stability of Davison functional equation on restricted domains
  46. Involvement of three successive fractional derivatives in a system of pantograph equations and studying the existence solution and MLU stability
  47. Composition of some positive linear integral operators
  48. On bivariate fractal interpolation for countable data and associated nonlinear fractal operator
  49. Generalized result on the global existence of positive solutions for a parabolic reaction-diffusion model with an m × m diffusion matrix
  50. Online makespan minimization for MapReduce scheduling on multiple parallel machines
  51. The sequential Henstock-Kurzweil delta integral on time scales
  52. On a discrete version of Fejér inequality for α-convex sequences without symmetry condition
  53. Existence of three solutions for two quasilinear Laplacian systems on graphs
  54. Embeddings of anisotropic Sobolev spaces into spaces of anisotropic Hölder-continuous functions
  55. Nilpotent perturbations of m-isometric and m-symmetric tensor products of commuting d-tuples of operators
  56. Characterizations of transcendental entire solutions of trinomial partial differential-difference equations in ℂ2#
  57. Fractional Sturm-Liouville operators on compact star graphs
  58. Exact controllability for nonlinear thermoviscoelastic plate problem
  59. Improved modified gradient-based iterative algorithm and its relaxed version for the complex conjugate and transpose Sylvester matrix equations
  60. Superposition operator problems of Hölder-Lipschitz spaces
  61. A note on λ-analogue of Lah numbers and λ-analogue of r-Lah numbers
  62. Ground state solutions and multiple positive solutions for nonhomogeneous Kirchhoff equation with Berestycki-Lions type conditions
  63. A note on 1-semi-greedy bases in p-Banach spaces with 0 < p ≤ 1
  64. Fixed point results for generalized convex orbital Lipschitz operators
  65. Asymptotic model for the propagation of surface waves on a rotating magnetoelastic half-space
  66. Multiplicity of k-convex solutions for a singular k-Hessian system
  67. Poisson C*-algebra derivations in Poisson C*-algebras
  68. Signal recovery and polynomiographic visualization of modified Noor iteration of operators with property (E)
  69. Approximations to precisely localized supports of solutions for non-linear parabolic p-Laplacian problems
  70. Solving nonlinear fractional differential equations by common fixed point results for a pair of (α, Θ)-type contractions in metric spaces
  71. Pseudo compact almost automorphic solutions to a family of delay differential equations
  72. Periodic measures of fractional stochastic discrete wave equations with nonlinear noise
  73. Asymptotic study of a nonlinear elliptic boundary Steklov problem on a nanostructure
  74. Cramer's rule for a class of coupled Sylvester commutative quaternion matrix equations
  75. Quantitative estimates for perturbed sampling Kantorovich operators in Orlicz spaces
  76. Review Articles
  77. Penalty method for unilateral contact problem with Coulomb's friction in time-fractional derivatives
  78. Differential sandwich theorems for p-valent analytic functions associated with a generalization of the integral operator
  79. Special Issue on Development of Fuzzy Sets and Their Extensions - Part II
  80. Higher-order circular intuitionistic fuzzy time series forecasting methodology: Application of stock change index
  81. Binary relations applied to the fuzzy substructures of quantales under rough environment
  82. Algorithm selection model based on fuzzy multi-criteria decision in big data information mining
  83. A new machine learning approach based on spatial fuzzy data correlation for recognizing sports activities
  84. Benchmarking the efficiency of distribution warehouses using a four-phase integrated PCA-DEA-improved fuzzy SWARA-CoCoSo model for sustainable distribution
  85. Special Issue on Application of Fractional Calculus: Mathematical Modeling and Control - Part II
  86. A study on a type of degenerate poly-Dedekind sums
  87. Efficient scheme for a category of variable-order optimal control problems based on the sixth-kind Chebyshev polynomials
  88. Special Issue on Mathematics for Artificial intelligence and Artificial intelligence for Mathematics
  89. Toward automated hail disaster weather recognition based on spatio-temporal sequence of radar images
  90. The shortest-path and bee colony optimization algorithms for traffic control at single intersection with NetworkX application
  91. Neural network quaternion-based controller for port-Hamiltonian system
  92. Matching ontologies with kernel principle component analysis and evolutionary algorithm
  93. Survey on machine vision-based intelligent water quality monitoring techniques in water treatment plant: Fish activity behavior recognition-based schemes and applications
  94. Artificial intelligence-driven tone recognition of Guzheng: A linear prediction approach
  95. Transformer learning-based neural network algorithms for identification and detection of electronic bullying in social media
  96. Squirrel search algorithm-support vector machine: Assessing civil engineering budgeting course using an SSA-optimized SVM model
  97. Special Issue on International E-Conference on Mathematical and Statistical Sciences - Part I
  98. Some fixed point results on ultrametric spaces endowed with a graph
  99. On the generalized Mellin integral operators
  100. On existence and multiplicity of solutions for a biharmonic problem with weights via Ricceri's theorem
  101. Approximation process of a positive linear operator of hypergeometric type
  102. On Kantorovich variant of Brass-Stancu operators
  103. A higher-dimensional categorical perspective on 2-crossed modules
  104. Special Issue on Some Integral Inequalities, Integral Equations, and Applications - Part I
  105. On parameterized inequalities for fractional multiplicative integrals
  106. On inverse source term for heat equation with memory term
  107. On Fejér-type inequalities for generalized trigonometrically and hyperbolic k-convex functions
  108. New extensions related to Fejér-type inequalities for GA-convex functions
  109. Derivation of Hermite-Hadamard-Jensen-Mercer conticrete inequalities for Atangana-Baleanu fractional integrals by means of majorization
  110. Some Hardy's inequalities on conformable fractional calculus
  111. The novel quadratic phase Fourier S-transform and associated uncertainty principles in the quaternion setting
  112. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Fixed-Point Theory and Applications - Part I
  113. A novel iterative process for numerical reckoning of fixed points via generalized nonlinear mappings with qualitative study
  114. Some new fixed point theorems of α-partially nonexpansive mappings
  115. Generalized Yosida inclusion problem involving multi-valued operator with XOR operation
  116. Periodic and fixed points for mappings in extended b-gauge spaces equipped with a graph
  117. Convergence of Peaceman-Rachford splitting method with Bregman distance for three-block nonconvex nonseparable optimization
  118. Topological structure of the solution sets to neutral evolution inclusions driven by measures
  119. (α, F)-Geraghty-type generalized F-contractions on non-Archimedean fuzzy metric-unlike spaces
  120. Solvability of infinite system of integral equations of Hammerstein type in three variables in tempering sequence spaces c 0 β and 1 β
  121. Special Issue on Nonlinear Evolution Equations and Their Applications - Part I
  122. Fuzzy fractional delay integro-differential equation with the generalized Atangana-Baleanu fractional derivative
  123. Klein-Gordon potential in characteristic coordinates
  124. Asymptotic analysis of Leray solution for the incompressible NSE with damping
  125. Special Issue on Blow-up Phenomena in Nonlinear Equations of Mathematical Physics - Part I
  126. Long time decay of incompressible convective Brinkman-Forchheimer in L2(ℝ3)
  127. Numerical solution of general order Emden-Fowler-type Pantograph delay differential equations
  128. Global smooth solution to the n-dimensional liquid crystal equations with fractional dissipation
  129. Spectral properties for a system of Dirac equations with nonlinear dependence on the spectral parameter
  130. A memory-type thermoelastic laminated beam with structural damping and microtemperature effects: Well-posedness and general decay
  131. The asymptotic behavior for the Navier-Stokes-Voigt-Brinkman-Forchheimer equations with memory and Tresca friction in a thin domain
  132. Absence of global solutions to wave equations with structural damping and nonlinear memory
  133. Special Issue on Differential Equations and Numerical Analysis - Part I
  134. Vanishing viscosity limit for a one-dimensional viscous conservation law in the presence of two noninteracting shocks
  135. Limiting dynamics for stochastic complex Ginzburg-Landau systems with time-varying delays on unbounded thin domains
  136. A comparison of two nonconforming finite element methods for linear three-field poroelasticity
Downloaded on 15.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/dema-2024-0035/html
Scroll to top button