Home Energy decay of a coupled system involving a biharmonic Schrödinger equation with an internal fractional damping
Article Open Access

Energy decay of a coupled system involving a biharmonic Schrödinger equation with an internal fractional damping

  • Foued Mtiri , Amina Chaili , Ahmed Bchatnia EMAIL logo and Abderrahmane Beniani
Published/Copyright: March 13, 2025
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

In this work, we investigate the stabilization problem for coupled biharmonic Schrödinger equations with fractional internal damping. First, we establish that the system is well-posed using the semigroup theory of linear operators. Second, we demonstrate that the system is strongly stable. Finally, we prove a polynomial decay rate using multiplier techniques combined with the frequency domain method, and we show the lack of exponential decay of the energy in a specific case.

MSC 2010: 35B40; 35Q41; 93D20

1 Introduction

In this study, we explore the existence and decay characteristics of solutions to the biharmonic Schrödinger equation. The system under consideration is given by

(1) i u t ( x , t ) + Δ u ( x , t ) Δ 2 u ( x , t ) + ( 1 ) j i γ α , η Δ j u ( x , t ) + i l ( u ( x , t ) v ( x , t ) ) = 0 , in Ω × R + , i v t ( x , t ) + Δ v ( x , t ) Δ 2 v ( x , t ) + ( 1 ) j i γ α , η Δ j v ( x , t ) + i l ( v ( x , t ) u ( x , t ) ) = 0 , in Ω × R + ,

where Ω is an open bounded domain in R n , l and γ are positive constants, and j { 0 , 1 , 2 } . The term α , η represents the generalized Caputo fractional derivative of order α with respect to the time variable [1], and is defined by

(2) α , η w ( t ) = 1 Γ ( 1 α ) 0 t ( t s ) α e η ( t s ) w ( s ) d s , 0 < α < 1 , η 0 ,

where Γ denotes the Gamma function. The system is subject to the boundary conditions

(3) u ( x , t ) = v ( x , t ) = Δ u ( x , t ) = Δ v ( x , t ) = 0 , on Ω × R + * .

Finally, the initial conditions are given by

(4) u ( x , 0 ) = u 0 ( x ) , v ( x , 0 ) = v 0 ( x ) ,

where the initial data u 0 and v 0 belong to an appropriate function space. In this work, we delve into the stabilization and energy decay properties of a coupled system involving biharmonic Schrödinger equations with internal fractional damping. Through a mathematical analysis grounded in semigroup theory, we establish the well-posedness of our system, ensuring the existence and uniqueness of solutions under fractional damping conditions. Demonstrating strong stability, we show that solutions asymptotically approach zero, indicating robustness against perturbations for applications in quantum mechanics and wave propagation. Furthermore, employing advanced multiplier techniques and frequency domain methods, we unveil a polynomial decay rate in energy, highlighting the efficacy of fractional damping in swiftly dissipating energy. These findings not only deepen our theoretical understanding of coupled wave systems but also offer practical insights into enhancing stability and control in various physical and engineering contexts.

For the literature, we first quote the result obtained in [2], where Zhu et al. addressed the Cauchy problem for the biharmonic nonlinear Schrödinger equation with L 2 supercritical nonlinearity

i u t Δ 2 u + u p 1 u = 0 , t [ 0 , T ) , x R N , u ( 0 , x ) = u 0 .

They provided a sufficient condition for the global existence of the solution to the biharmonic nonlinear Schrödinger equation. Additionally, they focused on establishing the profile decomposition of bounded sequences in a specific functional space and derived the best constant of a Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality.

Li and Di [3] investigated the well-posedness and stability of the Cauchy problem for the fourth-order Schrödinger equation with a nonlinear derivative term

i u t + Δ 2 u u Δ u 2 + λ u p u = 0 , λ R , t R , and x R n .

The study established local well-posedness for initial data, along with a criterion for finite time blow-up, providing rough estimates for blow-up time and rate. Moreover, for small initial values, they demonstrated global well-posedness using two different methods. They finally examined the stability of the solutions using a priori estimates through short-term and long-term perturbation theories.

Recently, Capistrano-Filho et al. [4] investigated the stabilization of the linear biharmonic Schrödinger equation in an n -dimensional open bounded domain under Dirichlet-Neumann boundary conditions

i t y ( x , t ) + Δ y ( x , t ) Δ 2 y ( x , t ) + ( 1 ) j i 0 + f ( s ) Δ j y ( x , t s ) d s = 0 , ( x , t ) Ω × R + , y ( x , t ) = y ( x , t ) = 0 , ( x , t ) Γ × R + * , y ( x , t ) = y 0 ( x , t ) , ( x , t ) Ω × R + .

The study examined the effects of three infinite memory terms used as damping mechanisms. They demonstrated that the solution decays to zero at a polynomial rate, depending on the smoothness of the initial data and the growth properties of the kernel function associated with the infinite memory terms. Specifically, the decay rate follows the pattern t n , where n is influenced by the assumptions about the kernel function. Previous literature [59] present a comprehensive collection of published works that support the mathematical formulation of problems related to fractional differential equations and the decay rate of the associated energy.

This work is organized as follows: In Section 2, we present preliminary results and reformulate the system (1) into an augmented system (6) below. Section 3 demonstrates the well-posedness of the problem using semigroup theory. In Section 4, we analyze the asymptotic stability by proving strong stability through the Arendt-Batty Theorem. Section 5 establishes the polynomial stability. In Section 6, we prove the lack of exponential decay of the energy in a specific case.

2 Preliminary results

In this section, we reformulate (1), (3), and (4) into an augmented system. To achieve this, we require the following auxiliary results.

Theorem 1

[10] Let μ be the function:

μ ( ξ ) = ξ ( 2 α 1 ) 2 , ξ R , 0 < α < 1 .

Then, the relationship between theinputU and theoutputO of the system

t θ ( x , ξ , t ) + ξ 2 θ ( x , ξ , t ) + η θ ( x , ξ , t ) U ( t ) μ ( ξ ) = 0 , < ξ < + , η 0 , t > 0 ,

θ ( x , ξ , 0 ) = 0 ,

O ( t ) = ( π ) 1 sin ( α π ) + μ ( ξ ) θ ( x , ξ , t ) d ξ ,

is given by

(5) O ( t ) = I 1 α , η U ( t ) ,

where

[ I α , η f ] ( t ) = 1 Γ ( α ) 0 t ( t τ ) α 1 e η ( t τ ) f ( τ ) d τ .

Taking the input U ( x , t ) = y ( x , t ) and combining (2) with (5), we obtain

O ( t ) = I 1 α , η y ( x , t ) = 1 Γ ( 1 α ) 0 t ( t s ) α e η ( t s ) y ( x , s ) d s = α , η y ( x , t ) .

Using the previous theorem, systems (1), (3), and (4) can be written as the augmented model:

(6) u t ( x , t ) i Δ u ( x , t ) + i Δ 2 u ( x , t ) + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + μ ( ξ ) Δ j θ ( x , ξ , t ) d ξ + l ( u ( x , t ) v ( x , t ) ) = 0 , ( x , ξ , t ) Ω × R × R + , v t ( x , t ) i Δ v ( x , t ) + i Δ 2 v ( x , t ) + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + μ ( ξ ) Δ j ϑ ( x , ξ , t ) d ξ + ( v ( x , t ) u ( x , t ) ) = 0 , ( x , ξ , t ) Ω × R × R + , t θ ( x , ξ , t ) + ( ξ 2 + η ) θ ( x , ξ , t ) μ ( ξ ) u = 0 , ( x , ξ , t ) Ω × R × R + , t ϑ ( x , ξ , t ) + ( ξ 2 + η ) ϑ ( x , ξ , t ) μ ( ξ ) v = 0 , ( x , ξ , t ) Ω × R × R + ,

with the following initial conditions:

u ( x , t ) = v ( x , t ) = Δ u ( x , t ) = Δ v ( x , t ) = 0 , ( x , t ) Ω × ( 0 , + ) , u ( x , 0 ) = u 0 ( x ) , v ( x , 0 ) = v 0 ( x ) , x Ω , θ ( x , ξ , 0 ) = θ 0 ( x , ξ ) , ϑ ( x , ξ , 0 ) = ϑ 0 ( x , ξ ) , ( x , ξ ) Ω × R ,

where γ ˜ = γ π 1 sin ( α π ) .

We define the energy associated with the solution of problem (6) by

(7) E ( t ) = 1 2 u L 2 ( Ω ) 2 + v L 2 ( Ω ) 2 + γ ˜ 2 Δ j 2 θ L 2 ( Ω × R ) 2 + Δ j 2 ϑ L 2 ( Ω × R ) 2 .

Next we analyze the behavior of the energy functional E ( t ) associated with the solution of the augmented system (6). We establish that the energy E ( t ) is non-increasing over time, as stated in the following lemma.

Lemma 1

Let ( u , v , θ , ϑ ) be a regular solution of problem (6). Then, the functional energy defined in equation (7) satisfies

d d t E ( t ) = γ ˜ Ω + ( ξ 2 + η ) Δ j 2 θ ( x , ξ , t ) 2 + Δ j 2 ϑ ( x , ξ , t ) 2 d ξ d x l u v L 2 ( Ω ) 2 0 .

Proof

Multiplying equations (6)1 and (6)2 by u and v , respectively, integrating over Ω , and multiplying equations (6)3 and (6)4 by ( 1 ) j γ ˜ Δ j θ and ( 1 ) j γ ˜ Δ j ϑ , respectively, integrating over Ω × ( , + ) , and applying the Green formula, we obtain the desired result.□

The following lemmas will be necessary for the sequel.

Lemma 2

[11] If λ D η = C \ ] , η ] , then

+ μ 2 ( ξ ) λ + η + ξ 2 d ξ = π sin α π ( λ + η ) α 1 .

Lemma 3

If λ D η = C \ ] , η ] , then

(8) + ξ μ ( ξ ) ( i λ + ξ 2 + η ) 2 d ξ = 1 2 α 4 π sin ( 2 α + 3 ) 4 π ( i λ + η ) ( 2 α 5 ) 4 ,

+ 1 i λ + ξ 2 + η 2 d ξ π 2 i λ + η 3 2 a n d + ξ 2 i λ + ξ 2 + η 4 d ξ π 16 i λ + η 5 2 .

Proof

Using Lemma 2, it is easy to see that for 0 < ς < 1 ,

(9) + ξ 2 ς 1 ( ξ 2 + ω + λ ) 2 d ξ = ( 1 ς ) π sin ( ς π ) ( λ + ω ) ς 2 ,

then (8) is a consequence of (9) with ς = 2 α + 3 4 .

Now, coming back to (8) with ς = 1 2 , we obtain

+ 1 i λ + ξ 2 + η 2 d ξ = π 2 i λ + η 3 2 π 2 λ + η 3 2 .

Finally, for ς = 3 2 in (8), we obtain

+ ξ 2 i λ + ξ 2 + η 2 d ξ = π 2 i λ + η 1 2 .

We derive twice with respect to η , we obtain

+ ξ 2 i λ + ξ 2 + η 4 d ξ = π 16 i λ + η 5 2 π 16 λ + η 5 2 .

3 Well-posedness of the problem

In this section, our goal is to demonstrate that system (6) is well-posed in the context of semigroups. Introducing the vector function U = ( u , v , θ , ϑ ) T , then system (6) is equivalent to

(10) t U = A U , U ( 0 ) = U 0 = ( u 0 , v 0 , θ 0 , ϑ 0 ) T ,

where the operator A is defined by

A u v θ ϑ = i Δ u i Δ 2 u ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + μ ( ξ ) Δ j θ ( x , ξ ) d ξ l ( u ( x , t ) v ( x , t ) ) i Δ v i Δ 2 v ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + μ ( ξ ) Δ j ϑ ( x , ξ ) d ξ l ( v ( x , t ) u ( x , t ) ) ( ξ 2 + η ) θ ( x , ξ ) + μ ( ξ ) u ( ξ 2 + η ) ϑ ( x , ξ ) + μ ( ξ ) v

with domain

D ( A ) = ( u , v , θ , ϑ ) : u , v H 4 ( Ω ) H 0 j ( Ω ) , j = 0 , 2 ¯ , ξ θ , ξ ϑ L 2 ( Ω × R ) , i Δ u i Δ 2 u ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + μ ( ξ ) Δ j θ ( x , ξ ) d ξ l ( u ( x , t ) v ( x , t ) ) L 2 ( Ω ) i Δ v i Δ 2 v ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + μ ( ξ ) Δ j ϑ ( x , ξ ) d ξ l ( v ( x , t ) u ( x , t ) ) L 2 ( Ω ) ( ξ 2 + η ) θ + u ( x ) μ ( ξ ) L 2 ( Ω × R ) , ( ξ 2 + η ) ϑ + v ( x ) μ ( ξ ) L 2 ( Ω × R ) ,

where

= ( L 2 ( Ω ) ) 2 × ( H 0 j ( Ω × ( , + ) ) ) 2 , j = 0 , 2 ¯ ,

equipped with the inner product

U , U 1 = Ω ( u u 1 ¯ + v v 1 ¯ ) d x + γ ˜ Ω + Δ j 2 θ Δ j 2 θ 1 ¯ + Δ j 2 ϑ Δ j 2 ϑ 1 ¯ d ξ d x ,

where U = ( u , v , θ , ϑ ) , U 1 = ( u 1 , v 1 , θ 1 , ϑ 1 ) .

We establish the following result regarding existence and uniqueness.

Theorem 2

  1. If U 0 D ( A ) , then system (10) has a unique strong solution

    U C 0 ( R + , D ( A ) ) C 1 ( R + , ) .

  2. If U 0 , then system (10), has a unique weak solution

    U C 0 ( R + , ) .

Proof

First, verifying that for every U D ( A ) , we have

(11) A U , U = γ ˜ Ω + ( ξ 2 + η ) Δ j 2 θ ( x , ξ ) 2 + Δ j 2 ϑ ( x , ξ , t ) 2 d ξ d x l u v L 2 ( Ω ) 2 0 , j = 0 , 2 ¯ .

Therefore, A is dissipative.

Next we show that the operator I A is surjective. Given F = ( f 1 , f 2 , f 3 , f 4 ) T , we prove that there exists U D ( A ) satisfying

(12) U A U = F .

Equation (12) is equivalent to

(13) u i Δ u + i Δ 2 u + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + μ ( ξ ) Δ j θ ( x , ξ ) d ξ + l ( u ( x , t ) v ( x , t ) ) = f 1 , v i Δ v + i Δ 2 v + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + μ ( ξ ) Δ j ϑ ( x , ξ ) d ξ + l ( v ( x , t ) u ( x , t ) ) = f 2 , θ + ( ξ 2 + η ) θ ( x , ξ ) μ ( ξ ) u = f 3 , ϑ + ( ξ 2 + η ) ϑ ( x , ξ ) μ ( ξ ) u = f 4 .

Using (13)3 and (13)4, we obtain for j { 0 , 1 , 2 } :

(14) Δ j θ ( x , ξ ) = Δ j f 3 ( x , ξ ) + μ ( ξ ) Δ j u ξ 2 + η + 1 , Δ j ϑ ( x , ξ ) = Δ j f 4 ( x , ξ ) + μ ( ξ ) Δ j v ξ 2 + η + 1 .

By substituting (14)1 into (13)1 and (14)2 into (13)2, we obtain

(15) u i Δ u + i Δ 2 u + a 0 Δ j u + l ( u v ) = f 1 ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + Δ j f 3 ( x , ξ ) ξ 2 + η + 1 μ ( ξ ) d ξ , v i Δ v + i Δ 2 v + a 0 Δ j v + l ( v u ) = f 2 ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + Δ j f 4 ( x , ξ ) ξ 2 + η + 1 μ ( ξ ) d ξ .

with

a 0 = ( 1 ) j γ ˜ π sin ( α π ) ( 1 + η ) α 1 .

Solving system (15) is equivalent to finding u , v H 0 j ( Ω ) such that

Ω ( u i Δ u + i Δ 2 u + a 0 Δ j u + l ( u v ) ) χ ¯ d x = Ω f 1 χ ¯ d x ( 1 ) j γ ˜ Ω χ ¯ + Δ j f 3 ( x , ξ ) ξ 2 + η + 1 μ ( ξ ) d ξ , Ω ( v i Δ v + i Δ 2 v + a 0 Δ j v + l ( v u ) ) ζ ¯ d x = Ω f 2 ζ ¯ d x ( 1 ) j γ ˜ Ω ζ ¯ + Δ j f 4 ( x , ξ ) ξ 2 + η + 1 μ ( ξ ) d ξ ,

for all χ , ζ H 0 j ( Ω ) . Thus, we have

(16) Ω ( u i Δ u + i Δ 2 u + a 0 Δ j u ) χ ¯ d x + Ω ( v i Δ v + i Δ 2 v + a 0 Δ j v ) ζ ¯ d x + l Ω ( u v ) ( χ ¯ ζ ¯ ) d x = Ω ( f 1 χ ¯ + f 2 ζ ¯ ) d x ( 1 ) j γ ˜ Ω χ ¯ + Δ j f 3 ( x , ξ ) ξ 2 + η + 1 μ ( ξ ) d ξ ( 1 ) j γ ˜ Ω ζ ¯ + Δ j f 4 ( x , ξ ) ξ 2 + η + 1 μ ( ξ ) d ξ .

Consequently, problem (16) is equivalent to the problem

(17) a ( ( u , v ) , ( χ , ζ ) ) = ( χ , ζ ) ,

where the sesquilinear form a : ( H 0 j ( Ω ) × H 0 j ( Ω ) ) 2 C and the antilinear form : H 0 j ( Ω ) × H 0 j ( Ω ) C are defined by

a ( ( u , v ) , ( χ , ζ ) ) = Ω ( u i Δ u + i Δ 2 u + a 0 Δ j u ) χ ¯ d x + Ω ( v i Δ v + i Δ 2 v + a 0 Δ j v ) ζ ¯ d x + l Ω ( u v ) ( χ ¯ ζ ¯ ) d x

and

( χ , ζ ) = Ω ( f 1 χ ¯ + f 2 ζ ¯ ) d x ( 1 ) j γ ˜ Ω χ ¯ + Δ j f 3 ( x , ξ ) ξ 2 + η + 1 μ ( ξ ) d ξ ( 1 ) j γ ˜ Ω ζ ¯ + Δ j f 4 ( x , ξ ) ξ 2 + η + 1 μ ( ξ ) d ξ .

We can easily verify that a is both continuous and coercive, while is continuous. As a result, according to the Lax-Milgram Lemma, system (17) has a unique solution u , v H 0 j ( Ω ) . Furthermore, by applying the regularity theory for linear elliptic equations, we deduce that u , v H 4 ( Ω ) . Consequently, the operator I A is surjective.□

4 Strong stability

In this section, we will examine the strong stability of the solution associated with problem (10). To this end, we apply a version of the Arendt-Batty and Lyubich-Vu theorems for Hilbert spaces [12,13].

Theorem 3

[12,13] Let A be the generator of a uniformly bounded C 0 -semigroup { S ( t ) } t 0 on a Hilbert space . Assume that

  1. A does not have eigenvalues on i R ;

  2. the intersection of the spectrum σ ( A ) with i R is at most a countable set.

Then, the semigroup { S ( t ) } t 0 is asymptotically stable, i.e., S ( t ) z 0 as t for any z .

Our main result is the following theorem.

Theorem 4

The C 0 -semigroup { S ( t ) } t 0 is strongly stable in , i.e., for all U 0 , the solution of (10) satisfies

lim t S ( t ) U 0 = 0 .

To prove Theorem 4, we need the following two lemmas.

Lemma 4

For all λ R , the operator i λ I A is injective

ker ( i λ I A ) = { 0 } .

Proof

Given λ R where i λ is an eigenvalue of the operator A , let U = ( u , v , θ , ϑ ) D ( A ) be a corresponding eigenvector such that

(18) A U = i λ U .

Equivalently,

(19) i λ u i Δ u + i Δ 2 u + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + Δ j θ ( x , ξ ) μ ( ξ ) d ξ + l ( u v ) = 0 , i λ v i Δ v + i Δ 2 v + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + Δ j ϑ ( x , ξ ) μ ( ξ ) d ξ + l ( v u ) = 0 , i λ θ + ( ξ 2 + η ) θ ( x , ξ ) μ ( ξ ) u = 0 , i λ ϑ + ( ξ 2 + η ) ϑ ( x , ξ ) μ ( ξ ) v = 0 .

From (11) and (18), we obtain

0 = A U , U = γ ˜ Ω + ( ξ 2 + η ) ( Δ j 2 θ ( x , ξ , t ) 2 + Δ j 2 ϑ ( x , ξ , t ) 2 ) d ξ d x l u v L 2 ( Ω ) 2 .

It is obvious that

(20) θ ( x , ξ ) = ϑ ( x , ξ ) = 0 in Ω × ( , + ) .

Substituting (20) into (19)3 and (19)4, we obtain

u = 0 , v = 0 .

Consequently, U = 0 .□

Lemma 5

If η > 0 and λ R , or η = 0 and λ R * , then i λ I A is surjective.

Proof

We distinguish the following cases:

Case 1: λ 0 . Let F = ( f 1 , f 2 , f 3 , f 4 ) T be given. We seek for U = ( u , v , θ , ϑ ) T D ( A ) such that

( i λ I A ) U = F .

Equivalently, we have

(21) i λ u i Δ u + i Δ 2 u + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + Δ j θ ( x , ξ ) μ ( ξ ) d ξ + l ( u v ) = f 1 ( x ) , i λ v i Δ v + i Δ 2 v + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + Δ j ϑ ( x , ξ ) μ ( ξ ) d ξ + l ( v u ) = f 2 ( x ) , i λ θ + ( ξ 2 + η ) θ ( x , ξ ) μ ( ξ ) u = f 3 ( x , ξ ) , i λ ϑ + ( ξ 2 + η ) ϑ ( x , ξ ) μ ( ξ ) v = f 4 ( x , ξ ) .

Using (21)3 and (21)4, we can find Δ j θ and Δ j ϑ as

(22) Δ j θ ( x , ξ ) = Δ j f 3 ( x , ξ ) + μ ( ξ ) Δ j u ξ 2 + η + i λ , Δ j ϑ ( x , ξ ) = Δ j f 4 ( x , ξ ) + μ ( ξ ) Δ j v ξ 2 + η + i λ .

By substituting (22)1 in (21)1 and (22)2 in (21)2, we obtain

(23) i λ u i Δ u + i Δ 2 u + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + Δ j f 3 ( x , ξ ) + μ ( ξ ) Δ j u ξ 2 + η + i λ μ ( ξ ) d ξ + l ( u v ) = f 1 ( x ) i λ v i Δ v + i Δ 2 v + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + Δ j f 4 ( x , ξ ) + μ ( ξ ) Δ j v ξ 2 + η + i λ μ ( ξ ) d ξ + l ( v u ) = f 2 ( x ) .

Solving system (23) is equivalent to finding u , v H 4 ( Ω ) H 0 j ( Ω ) such that

Ω i λ u i Δ u + i Δ 2 u + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + μ 2 ( ξ ) Δ j u ξ 2 + η + i λ d ξ + l ( u v ) χ d x = Ω f 1 χ d x ( 1 ) j γ ˜ Ω + Δ j f 3 ( x , ξ ) ξ 2 + η + i λ μ ( ξ ) χ d ξ d x , Ω i λ v i Δ v + i Δ 2 v + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + μ 2 ( ξ ) Δ j v ξ 2 + η + i λ d ξ + l ( v u ) ζ d x = Ω f 2 ζ d x ( 1 ) j γ ˜ Ω + Δ j f 4 ( x , ξ ) ξ 2 + η + i λ μ ( ξ ) ζ d ξ d x ,

for all χ , ζ H 0 1 ( Ω ) . Then,

(24) Ω i λ u i Δ u + i Δ 2 u + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + μ 2 ( ξ ) Δ j u ξ 2 + η + i λ d ξ + l ( u v ) χ d x + Ω i λ v i Δ v + i Δ 2 v + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + μ 2 ( ξ ) Δ j v ξ 2 + η + i λ d ξ + l ( v u ) ζ d x = Ω f 1 χ + f 2 ζ d x ( 1 ) j γ ˜ Ω + Δ j f 3 ( x , ξ ) ξ 2 + η + i λ μ ( ξ ) χ d ξ d x ( 1 ) j γ ˜ Ω + Δ j f 4 ( x , ξ ) ξ 2 + η + i λ μ ( ξ ) ζ d ξ d x .

Thus, (24) is equivalent to the problem

(25) a ˜ ( ( u , v ) , ( χ , ζ ) ) = ˜ ( χ , ζ ) ,

where the sesquilinear form a ˜ : ( H 0 j ( Ω ) × H 0 j ( Ω ) ) 2 C and the antilinear form ˜ : H 0 j × : H 0 j ( Ω ) C are defined by

a ˜ ( ( u , v ) , ( χ , ζ ) ) = Ω i λ u i Δ u + i Δ 2 u + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + μ 2 ( ξ ) Δ j u ξ 2 + η + i λ d ξ + l ( u v ) χ d x + Ω i λ v i Δ v + i Δ 2 v + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + μ 2 ( ξ ) Δ j v ξ 2 + η + i λ d ξ + l ( v u ) ζ d x

and

˜ ( χ , ζ ) = Ω f 1 χ + f 2 ζ d x ( 1 ) j γ ˜ Ω + Δ j f 3 ( x , ξ ) ξ 2 + η + i λ μ ( ξ ) χ d ξ d x ( 1 ) j γ ˜ Ω + Δ j f 4 ( x , ξ ) ξ 2 + η + i λ μ ( ξ ) ζ d ξ d x .

It is easy to verify that a ˜ is both continuous and coercive, and ˜ is continuous. By the Lax-Milgram theorem, we can conclude that for any ( χ , ζ ) H 0 j ( Ω ) × H 0 j ( Ω ) , problem (25) has a unique solution ( u , v ) H 0 j ( Ω ) × H 0 j ( Ω ) . Through the application of classical elliptic regularity, it can be deduced that ( u , v ) H 4 ( Ω ) × H 4 ( Ω ) .

Hence, the operator i λ I A is surjective.

Case 2: λ = 0 and η 0 . In this case, system (21) simplifies to the following:

(26) i Δ u + i Δ 2 u + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + Δ j θ ( x , ξ ) μ ( ξ ) d ξ + l ( u v ) = f 1 ( x ) , i Δ v + i Δ 2 v + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + Δ j ϑ ( x , ξ ) μ ( ξ ) d ξ + l ( v u ) = f 2 ( x ) , ( ξ 2 + η ) θ ( x , ξ ) μ ( ξ ) u = f 3 ( x , ξ ) , ( ξ 2 + η ) ϑ ( x , ξ ) μ ( ξ ) v = f 4 ( x , ξ ) .

From (26)3 and (26)4, we have

(27) Δ j θ ( x , ξ ) = Δ j f 3 ( x , ξ ) + μ ( ξ ) Δ j u ξ 2 + η Δ j ϑ ( x , ξ ) = Δ j f 4 ( x , ξ ) + μ ( ξ ) Δ j v ξ 2 + η .

Using (27), we obtain

(28) i Δ u + i Δ 2 u + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + Δ j f 3 ( x , ξ ) + μ ( ξ ) Δ j u ξ 2 + η μ ( ξ ) d ξ + l ( u v ) = f 1 ( x ) i Δ v + i Δ 2 v + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + Δ j f 4 ( x , ξ ) + μ ( ξ ) Δ j v ξ 2 + η μ ( ξ ) d ξ + l ( v u ) = f 2 ( x ) .

Solving system (28) is equivalent to finding u , v H 4 ( Ω ) H 0 j ( Ω ) such that

Ω i Δ u + i Δ 2 u + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + μ 2 ( ξ ) Δ j u ξ 2 + η d ξ + l ( u v ) χ d x = Ω f 1 χ d x ( 1 ) j γ ˜ Ω + Δ j f 3 ( x , ξ ) ξ 2 + η μ ( ξ ) χ d ξ d x , Ω i Δ v + i Δ 2 v + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + μ 2 ( ξ ) Δ j v ξ 2 + η d ξ + l ( v u ) ζ d x = Ω f 2 ζ d x ( 1 ) j γ ˜ Ω + Δ j f 4 ( x , ξ ) ξ 2 + η μ ( ξ ) ζ d ξ d x ,

for all χ , ζ H 0 j ( Ω ) . Then,

(29) Ω i Δ u + i Δ 2 u + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + μ 2 ( ξ ) Δ j u ξ 2 + η d ξ + l ( u v ) χ d x + Ω i Δ v + i Δ 2 v + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + μ 2 ( ξ ) Δ j v ξ 2 + η d ξ + l ( v u ) ζ d x = Ω f 1 χ + f 2 ζ d x ( 1 ) j γ ˜ Ω + Δ j f 3 ( x , ξ ) ξ 2 + η μ ( ξ ) χ d ξ d x ( 1 ) j γ ˜ Ω + Δ j f 4 ( x , ξ ) ξ 2 + η μ ( ξ ) ζ d ξ d x .

Therefore, (29) is equivalent to the problem

(30) a ˜ ( ( u , v ) , ( χ , ζ ) ) = ˜ ( w ) ,

where the sesquilinear form a ˜ : ( H 0 j ( Ω ) × H 0 j ( Ω ) ) 2 C and the antilinear form ˜ : H 0 j ( Ω ) × H 0 j ( Ω ) C are defined by

a ˜ ( ( u , v ) , ( χ , ζ ) ) = Ω i Δ u + i Δ 2 u + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + μ 2 ( ξ ) Δ j u ξ 2 + η d ξ + l ( u v ) χ d x + Ω i Δ v + i Δ 2 v + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + μ 2 ( ξ ) Δ j v ξ 2 + η d ξ + l ( v u ) ζ d x

and

˜ ( χ , ζ ) = Ω f 1 χ + f 2 ζ d x ( 1 ) j γ ˜ Ω + Δ j f 3 ( x , ξ ) ξ 2 + η μ ( ξ ) χ d ξ d x ( 1 ) j γ ˜ Ω + Δ j f 4 ( x , ξ ) ξ 2 + η μ ( ξ ) ζ d ξ d x .

It is simple to verify that a ˜ is both continuous and coercive, and ˜ is continuous. Using the the Lax-Milgram theorem, we conclude that for all ( χ , ζ ) H 0 j ( Ω ) × H 0 j ( Ω ) , problem (30) has a unique solution ( u , v ) H 0 j ( Ω ) × H 0 j ( Ω ) . Consequently, by applying the classical elliptic regularity, ( u , v ) H 4 ( Ω ) × H 4 ( Ω ) . Hence, the operator A is surjective.□

Lemma 6

Assume that η = 0 . Then, the operator A is not invertible and consequently 0 σ ( A ) .

Proof

Let U = ( u , v , θ , ϑ ) D ( A ) such that u 0 and v 0 , and we define the vector F = ( f 1 , f 2 , f 3 , f 4 ) such that

A U = F .

We seek U = ( u , v , θ , ϑ ) D ( A ) such that

A U = G ,

where G = ( f 1 , f 2 , 0 , 0 ) . Then,

(31) ξ 2 θ + μ ( ξ ) u = 0 on Ω

and

(32) ξ 2 ϑ + μ ( ξ ) v = 0 on Ω .

From (31) and (32), we conclude that θ ( x , ξ ) = ξ 2 α 5 2 u L 2 ( Ω × ( , + ) ) and ϑ ( x , ξ ) = ξ 2 α 5 2 v L 2 ( Ω × ( , + ) ) . Therefore, given that the assumption of the existence of U is incorrect, it follows that the operator A is not invertible.□

Proof of Theorem 4

Applying a general criterion of Arendt-Batty [12], the C 0 semigroup of contractions { S ( t ) } t 0 is strongly stable if σ ( A ) i R is countable and if no eigenvalue of A lies on the imaginary axis. Initially, by utilizing Lemma 4, we infer that A possesses non-purely imaginary eigenvalues. Subsequently, employing Lemmas 5 and 6, and the Banach closed graph theorem, which implies that σ ( A ) i R = if η > 0 and σ ( A ) i R = { 0 } if η = 0 . The proof is complete.□

5 Polynomial stability

In this section, we will establish a polynomial decay rate. First, we recall the following lemma due to [14].

Lemma 7

[14] Assume that A is the generator of a strongly continuous semigroup of contractions { S ( t ) } t 0 on a Hilbert space . If

(33) i R ρ ( A ) ,

then for a fixed δ > 0 , the following conditions are equivalent:

(34) lim s R sup s 1 s δ ( i s I A ) 1 ( ) < ,

S ( t ) U 0 2 c t 2 δ U 0 D ( A ) 2 , U 0 D ( A ) , for s o m e c > 0 .

Our main result in the section is the following.

Theorem 5

The semigroup { S ( t ) } t 0 is polynomially stable and

E ( t ) = S ( t ) U 0 2 1 t 2 1 α U 0 D ( A ) 2 .

Furthermore, the energy decay rate of t 2 1 α is optimal for general initial data in D ( A ) .

Proof

Based on Lemma 7, the proof of Theorem 5 requires verifying the validity of (33) and (34), where δ = 1 α . Given that (33) has already been established in Theorem 4, our focus shifts solely to proving (34). Here we employ a contradiction argument. Suppose that (34) is invalid; consequently, there exists a sequence λ n R , n N such that λ n + as n + , and a sequence U n = ( u n , v n , θ n , ϑ n ) D ( A ) such that

(35) U n = 1

and

(36) lim n 1 λ n δ ( i λ n I A ) 1 ( H ) = 0 .

We have

F n = λ n δ ( i λ n I A ) U n = ( f 1 n , f 2 n , f 3 n , f 4 n ) .

From (36), we obtain

(37) i λ n u n i Δ u n + i Δ 2 u n + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + Δ j θ n ( x , ξ , t ) μ ( ξ ) d ξ l ( u n v n ) = f 1 n λ n δ 0 , i λ n v n i Δ v n + i Δ 2 v n + ( 1 ) j γ ˜ + Δ j ϑ n ( x , ξ , t ) μ ( ξ ) d ξ l ( v n u n ) = f 2 n λ n δ 0 , i λ n θ n + ( ξ 2 + η ) θ n μ ( ξ ) u n = f 3 n λ n δ 0 , i λ n ϑ n + ( ξ 2 + η ) ϑ n μ ( ξ ) v n = f 4 n λ n δ 0 .

To deduce from (36) that U n = o ( 1 ) , we require the following results.

Lemma 8

Under (37), we have

(38) Ω + ( ξ 2 + η ) Δ j 2 θ n ( x , ξ ) 2 + Δ j 2 ϑ n ( x , ξ ) 2 d ξ d x + l u n v n L 2 ( Ω ) 2 = o ( 1 ) λ n δ

and

(39) Ω + Δ j 2 θ n ( x , ξ ) 2 + Δ j 2 ϑ n ( x , ξ ) 2 d ξ d x = o ( 1 ) λ n δ .

Proof

From (11) and (36), we have

i λ n U n A U n , U n = γ ˜ Ω + ( ξ 2 + η ) Δ j 2 θ n ( x , ξ ) 2 + Δ j 2 ϑ n ( x , ξ ) 2 d ξ d x + l u n v n L 2 ( Ω ) 2 = o ( 1 ) λ n δ ,

which implies (38).

Estimation (39) is a consequence of

Ω + Δ j 2 θ n ( x , ξ ) 2 + Δ j 2 ϑ n ( x , ξ ) 2 d ξ d x 1 η Ω + ( ξ 2 + η ) Δ j 2 θ n ( x , ξ ) 2 + Δ j 2 ϑ n ( x , ξ ) 2 d ξ d x .

Lemma 9

We have Ω u n ( x ) 2 d x = o ( 1 ) λ n δ + α 1 and Ω v n ( x ) 2 d x = o ( 1 ) λ n δ + α 1 .

Proof

From (37) 3 , we have

( i λ n + ξ 2 + η ) θ n f 3 n λ n δ = u n ( x ) μ ( ξ ) , on Ω .

By multiplying it by ( i λ n + ξ 2 + η ) 2 ξ , we obtain

(40) ( i λ n + ξ 2 + η ) 2 ξ u n ( x ) μ ( ξ ) = ( i λ n + ξ 2 + η ) 1 ξ θ n ( i λ n + ξ 2 + η ) 2 ξ f 3 n λ n δ , x Ω .

Taking the absolute values of both left- and right sides of (40), integrating over ( , + ) with respect to the variable ξ , and applying Cauchy-Schwarz’s inequality, we obtain

(41) P u n ( x ) + ( ξ 2 + η ) θ n ( x , ξ ) 2 d ξ 1 2 + N + f 3 n λ n δ 2 d ξ 1 2 ,

where P , , and N are defined as

P + ( i λ n + ξ 2 + η ) 2 ξ μ ( ξ ) d ξ , + i λ n + ξ 2 + η 2 d ξ 1 2 , N + ( i λ n + ξ 2 + η ) 4 ξ 2 d ξ 1 2 .

Using Lemma 3, we obtain

P = 1 2 α 4 π sin ( 2 α + 3 ) 4 π i λ n + η ( 2 α 5 ) 4 , π λ n + η 3 4 ,

and

N 2 π 16 λ n + η 5 2 1 2 .

By applying Young’s inequality and integrating (41) over ( Ω ) , we obtain

Ω u n ( x ) 2 d x 2 2 P 2 Ω + ( ξ 2 + η ) θ n ( x , ξ ) 2 d ξ d x + 2 N 2 P 2 Ω + f 3 n λ n δ 2 d ξ d x .

It is simple to check that

P 2 = O λ n 2 α 5 2 , 2 = O λ n 3 2 , and N 2 = O λ n 5 2 .

Using (37) and (38), we obtain

Ω u n ( x ) 2 d x = o ( 1 ) λ n α 1 + δ + o ( 1 ) λ n α + 2 δ = o ( 1 ) λ n α 1 + δ .

Using the same argument, we can prove

Ω v n ( x ) 2 d x = o ( 1 ) λ n α 1 + δ .

Returning to the proof of Theorem 5, taking into account Lemmas 8 and 9, we conclude

U n 2 Ω u n ( x ) 2 d x + Ω v n ( x ) 2 d x + γ ˜ Ω + Δ j 2 θ n ( x , ξ ) 2 + Δ j 2 ϑ n ( x , ξ ) 2 d ξ d x = 2 o ( 1 ) λ n α 1 + δ + o ( 1 ) λ n δ .

By considering δ = 1 α , we establish that U n = o ( 1 ) , which contradicts (35). Furthermore, we establish the optimality of the decay rate, which corresponds closely to the asymptotic expansion of the eigenvalues. Specifically, it shows a behavior in the real part resembling k ( 1 α ) . This completes the proof.□

6 Lack of exponential stability

This section is dedicated to demonstrate the lack of exponential stability for j = 0 . We will employ the following theorem.

Theorem 6

[15] Assume that A is the generator of a strongly continuous semigroup of contractions { S ( t ) } t 0 on a Hilbert space X. Then, S ( t ) is exponentially stable if and only if

(42) ρ ( A ) { i β : β R } i R

and

(43) lim ¯ β ( i β I A ) 1 L ( X ) < .

Our main result is stated in the following theorem.

Theorem 7

The semigroup generated by the operator A is not exponentially stable for j = 0 .

Proof

Let β n 2 = ( i β n ) 2 be a sequence of eigenvalues corresponding to the sequence of normalized eigenfunctions u n of the operator Δ , such that

β n as n

and

(44) Δ u n = β n 2 u n , in Ω , u n = 0 , on Ω .

Our objective is to demonstrate that, under certain conditions, if i β n satisfies (42), then (43) is not satisfied. In essence, we aim to prove that an infinite number of eigenvalues of A converge to the imaginary axis, which prevents the Schördinger system (6) from achieving exponential stability. First, we calculate the characteristic equation that gives the eigenvalues of A . Let λ be an eigenvalue of A with associated eigenvector U = ( u , v , θ , ϑ ) T . Then, A U = λ U is equivalent to

(45) λ u i Δ u + i Δ 2 u + γ ˜ + μ ( ξ ) θ ( x , ξ ) d ξ + l ( u v ) = 0 , λ v i Δ v + i Δ 2 v + γ ˜ + μ ( ξ ) ϑ ( x , ξ ) d ξ + l ( v u ) = 0 , λ θ ( x , ξ ) + ( ξ 2 + η ) θ ( x , ξ ) μ ( ξ ) u = 0 , λ ϑ ( x , ξ ) + ( ξ 2 + η ) ϑ ( x , ξ ) μ ( ξ ) v = 0 .

Using (45)3 and (45)4, we can find θ and ϑ as

(46) θ ( x , ξ ) = μ ( ξ ) u ξ 2 + η + λ , ϑ ( x , ξ ) = μ ( ξ ) v ξ 2 + η + λ .

By substituting (46)1 in (45)1 and (46)2 in (45)2, we obtain

λ u i Δ u + i Δ 2 u + γ ˜ + μ 2 ( ξ ) u ξ 2 + η + λ d ξ + l ( u v ) = 0 , λ v i Δ v + i Δ 2 v + γ ˜ + μ 2 ( ξ ) v ξ 2 + η + λ d ξ + l ( v u ) = 0 .

Then,

λ ( u + v ) i Δ ( u + v ) + i Δ 2 ( u + v ) + γ ˜ + μ 2 ( ξ ) ξ 2 + η + λ ( u + v ) d ξ = 0 .

Let us use the decomposition of u and v in the Hilbert’s basis { u n , n N } , (44), and Lemma 2 we obtain for large eigenvalues λ n in the strip α 0 ( λ n ) 0 , for some α 0 > 0 large enough

λ n + i β n 2 + i β n 4 + γ ( λ n ) 1 α + o 1 λ n 1 α = 0 ,

using De Moivre’s formula and taking the real part, we obtain

( λ n ) + γ cos ( 1 α ) θ r 2 ( 1 α ) + o 1 r ( 1 α ) = 0 ,

then

( λ n ) = γ cos ( 1 α ) θ r 2 ( 1 α ) + o 1 r ( 1 α ) .

We conclude that

r 2 ( 1 α ) λ n ϱ

with

ϱ = γ cos ( 1 α ) θ .

Then, for 0 θ π 2 ( 1 α ) , the operator A has a branch of eigenvalues that do not decay exponentially. The proof is complete.□

7 Conclusion

In this study, we have investigated the stabilization and energy decay properties of a coupled system of biharmonic Schrödinger equations with fractional internal damping. Our analysis began with establishing the well-posedness of the system using semigroup theory for linear operators, ensuring the existence and uniqueness of solutions. Building upon this foundation, we then demonstrated the strong stability of the system, showing that solutions asymptotically approach zero as time tends to infinity. Moreover, leveraging multiplier techniques in conjunction with frequency domain methods, we established a polynomial decay rate for the energy of solutions. Specifically, we found that the L 2 norms of the solution components decay as 1 t 2 1 α , highlighting the effective damping effect introduced by the fractional internal damping. These results not only confirm the long-term stability of the coupled system but also quantify the rate at which energy dissipates over time. Our findings contribute to the understanding of how fractional damping mechanisms influence the dynamics of biharmonic Schrödinger equations, paving the way for further exploration in related fields of mathematical physics and applied analysis.

Acknowledgements

The authors extend their appreciation to the Deanship of Research and Graduate Studies at King Khaled University for funding this work through Large Research Project under Grant number RGP2/368/45.

  1. Funding information: Not applicable.

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

  3. Conflict of interest: The authors declare no competing interests.

  4. Ethical approval: This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

  5. Data availability statement: Data on the results of the study may be obtained from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

[1] J. U. Choi and R. C. Maccamy, Fractional order Volterra equations with applications to elasticity, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 139 (1989), 448–464. 10.1016/0022-247X(89)90120-0Search in Google Scholar

[2] S. Zhu, J. Zhang, and H. Yang, Biharmonic nonlinear Schrödinger equation and the profile decomposition, Nonlinear Anal. 74 (2011), 6244–6255. 10.1016/j.na.2011.06.004Search in Google Scholar

[3] K. Li and H. Di, On the well-posedness and stability for the fourth-order Schrödinger equation with nonlinear derivative term, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. Ser. S 14 (2021), no. 12, 4293–4320. 10.3934/dcdss.2021122Search in Google Scholar

[4] R. A. Capistrano-Filho, I. M. De Jesus, and V. H. Gonzalez Martinez, Infinite Memory effects on the stability of Biharmonic Schrödinger equation, arXiv:2301.10310. Search in Google Scholar

[5] K. Ammari and H. Bouzidi, Exact boundary controllability of the linear biharmonic Schrödinger equation with variable coefficients, J. Dyn. Control Syst. 29 (2023), 703–719. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10883-022-09609-x. 10.1007/s10883-022-09609-xSearch in Google Scholar

[6] A. Beniani, N. Bahri, R. Alharbi, K. Bouhali, and Kh. Zennir, Stability for weakly coupled wave equations with a general internal control of diffusive type, Axioms 12 (2023), 48, DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms12010048. 10.3390/axioms12010048Search in Google Scholar

[7] A. Chaili, A. Beniani, A. Bchatnia, and S. Alfalqi, Polynomial decay of the energy of solutions of coupled wave equations with locally boundary fractional dissipation, J. Inequal. Appl. 2024 (2024), 121, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13660-024-03200-7. 10.1186/s13660-024-03200-7Search in Google Scholar

[8] A. Borichev and Y. Tomilov, Optimal polynomial decay of functions and operator semigroups, Math. Ann. 347 (2010), no. 2, 455–478. 10.1007/s00208-009-0439-0Search in Google Scholar

[9] V. I. Karpman, Stabilization of soliton instabilities by higher-order dispersion: fourth order nonlinear Schrödinger-type equations, Phys. Rev. E 53 (1996), 1336–1339. 10.1103/PhysRevE.53.R1336Search in Google Scholar

[10] B. Mbodje, Wave energy decay under fractional derivative controls, IMA J. Math. Control Inform. 23 (2006), 237–257. 10.1093/imamci/dni056Search in Google Scholar

[11] A. Benaissa and A. Kasmi, Well-posedness and energy decay of solutions to a Bresse system with a boundary dissipation of fractional derivative type, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. Ser. B 23 (2018), no. 10, 4361–4395. 10.3934/dcdsb.2018168Search in Google Scholar

[12] W. Arendt and C. J. K. Batty, Tauberian theorems and stability of one-parameter semigroups, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 306 (1988), 837–852. 10.1090/S0002-9947-1988-0933321-3Search in Google Scholar

[13] I. Lyubich Yu and V. Q. Phóng, Asymptotic stability of linear differential equations in Banach spaces, Studia Math. 88 (1988), 1, 37–42. 10.4064/sm-88-1-37-42Search in Google Scholar

[14] C. J. K. Batty, R. Chill, and Y. Tomilov, Fine scales of decay of operator semigroups, J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 18 (2016), 853–929. 10.4171/jems/605Search in Google Scholar

[15] J. Prüss, On the spectrum of C0-semigroups, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 284 (1984), no. 2, 847–857. 10.1090/S0002-9947-1984-0743749-9Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2024-07-13
Accepted: 2024-10-30
Published Online: 2025-03-13

© 2025 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. A new perspective on generalized Laguerre polynomials
  2. Research Articles
  3. On approximation by Stancu variant of Bernstein-Durrmeyer-type operators in movable compact disks
  4. Circular n,m-rung orthopair fuzzy sets and their applications in multicriteria decision-making
  5. Grand Triebel-Lizorkin-Morrey spaces
  6. Coefficient estimates and Fekete-Szegö problem for some classes of univalent functions generalized to a complex order
  7. Proofs of two conjectures involving sums of normalized Narayana numbers
  8. On the Laguerre polynomial approximation errors and lower type of entire functions of irregular growth
  9. New convolutions for the Hartley integral transform imbedded in the Banach algebras and convolution-type integral equations
  10. Some inequalities for rational function with prescribed poles and restricted zeros
  11. Lucas difference sequence spaces defined by Orlicz function in 2-normed spaces
  12. Evaluating the efficacy of fuzzy Bayesian networks for financial risk assessment
  13. Fixed point results for contractions of polynomial type
  14. Estimation for spatial semi-functional partial linear regression model with missing response at random
  15. Investigating the controllability of differential systems with nonlinear fractional delays, characterized by the order 0 < η ≤ 1 < ζ ≤ 2
  16. New forms of bilateral inequalities for K-g-frames
  17. Rate of pole detection using Padé approximants to polynomial expansions
  18. Existence results for nonhomogeneous Choquard equation involving p-biharmonic operator and critical growth
  19. Note on the shape-preservation of a new class of Kantorovich-type operators via divided differences
  20. Geršhgorin-type theorems for Z1-eigenvalues of tensors with applications
  21. New topologies derived from the old one via operators
  22. Blow up solutions for two-dimensional semilinear elliptic problem of Liouville type with nonlinear gradient terms
  23. Infinitely many normalized solutions for Schrödinger equations with local sublinear nonlinearity
  24. Nonparametric expectile shortfall regression for functional data
  25. Advancing analytical solutions: Novel wave insights and methodologies for beta fractional Kuralay-II equations
  26. A generalized p-Laplacian problem with parameters
  27. A study of solutions for several classes of systems of complex nonlinear partial differential difference equations in ℂ2
  28. Towards finding equalities involving mixed products of the Moore-Penrose and group inverses by matrix rank methodology
  29. ω -biprojective and ω ¯ -contractible Banach algebras
  30. Coefficient functionals for Sakaguchi-type-Starlike functions subordinated to the three-leaf function
  31. Solutions of several general quadratic partial differential-difference equations in ℂ2
  32. Inequalities for the generalized trigonometric functions with respect to weighted power mean
  33. Optimization of Lagrange problem with higher-order differential inclusion and special boundary-value conditions
  34. Hankel determinants for q-starlike functions connected with q-sine function
  35. System of partial differential hemivariational inequalities involving nonlocal boundary conditions
  36. A new family of multivalent functions defined by certain forms of the quantum integral operator
  37. A matrix approach to compare BLUEs under a linear regression model and its two competing restricted models with applications
  38. Weighted composition operators on bicomplex Lorentz spaces with their characterization and properties
  39. Behavior of spatial curves under different transformations in Euclidean 4-space
  40. Commutators for the maximal and sharp functions with weighted Lipschitz functions on weighted Morrey spaces
  41. A new kind of Durrmeyer-Stancu-type operators
  42. A study of generalized Mittag-Leffler-type function of arbitrary order
  43. On the approximation of Kantorovich-type Szàsz-Charlier operators
  44. Split quaternion Fourier transforms for two-dimensional real invariant field
  45. Review Article
  46. Characterization generalized derivations of tensor products of nonassociative algebras
  47. Special Issue on Differential Equations and Numerical Analysis - Part II
  48. Existence and optimal control of Hilfer fractional evolution equations
  49. Persistence of a unique periodic wave train in convecting shallow water fluid
  50. Existence results for critical growth Kohn-Laplace equations with jumping nonlinearities
  51. Monotonicity and oscillation for fractional differential equations with Riemann-Liouville derivatives
  52. Nontrivial solutions for a generalized poly-Laplacian system on finite graphs
  53. Stability and bifurcation analysis of a modified chemostat model
  54. Special Issue on Nonlinear Evolution Equations and Their Applications - Part II
  55. Analytic solutions of a generalized complex multi-dimensional system with fractional order
  56. Extraction of soliton solutions and Painlevé test for fractional Peyrard-Bishop DNA model
  57. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Fixed-Point Theory and Applications - Part II
  58. Some fixed point results with the vector degree of nondensifiability in generalized Banach spaces and application on coupled Caputo fractional delay differential equations
  59. On the sum form functional equation related to diversity index
  60. Special Issue on International E-Conference on Mathematical and Statistical Sciences - Part II
  61. Simpson, midpoint, and trapezoid-type inequalities for multiplicatively s-convex functions
  62. Converses of nabla Pachpatte-type dynamic inequalities on arbitrary time scales
  63. Special Issue on Blow-up Phenomena in Nonlinear Equations of Mathematical Physics - Part II
  64. Energy decay of a coupled system involving a biharmonic Schrödinger equation with an internal fractional damping
  65. Special Issue on Some Integral Inequalities, Integral Equations, and Applications - Part II
  66. Nonlinear heat equation with viscoelastic term: Global existence and blowup in finite time
  67. New Jensen's bounds for HA-convex mappings with applications to Shannon entropy
  68. Special Issue on Approximation Theory and Special Functions 2024 conference
  69. Ulam-type stability for Caputo-type fractional delay differential equations
  70. Faster approximation to multivariate functions by combined Bernstein-Taylor operators
  71. (λ, ψ)-Bernstein-Kantorovich operators
  72. Some special functions and cylindrical diffusion equation on α-time scale
  73. (q, p)-Mixing Bloch maps
  74. Orthogonalizing q-Bernoulli polynomials
  75. On better approximation order for the max-product Meyer-König and Zeller operator
  76. Moment-based approximation for a renewal reward process with generalized gamma-distributed interference of chance
  77. A note on linear compositions of the Mellin convolution operators in the weighted Mellin-Lebesgue spaces
  78. Special Issue on Variational Methods and Nonlinear PDEs
  79. A note on mean field type equations
  80. Ground states for fractional Kirchhoff double-phase problem with logarithmic nonlinearity
  81. Solution of nonlinear Langevin equations involving Hilfer-Hadamard fractional order derivatives and variable coefficients
Downloaded on 20.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/dema-2024-0091/html?lang=en
Scroll to top button