Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2024 Feb 28;19(2):e0297478. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0297478

Optimal and total controllability approach of non-instantaneous Hilfer fractional derivative with integral boundary condition

Kottakkaran Sooppy Nisar 1,*,#, K Jothimani 2,#, C Ravichandran 3,#
Editor: António M Lopes4
PMCID: PMC10901338  PMID: 38416756

Abstract

The focus of this work is on the absolute controllability of Hilfer impulsive non-instantaneous neutral derivative (HINND) with integral boundary condition of any order. Total controllability refers to the system’s ability to be controlled during the impulse time. Kuratowski measure and semigroup theory in Banach space yield the results. Furthermore, we talked about optimal controllability in conjunction with appropriate limitations. Our established outcomes are described using an example.

1 Introduction

The concept of differential equations with non-instantaneous impulses(NII) involves many physical processes due to its tremendous applications. Impulse is an action, that starts at an arbitrary fixed point and remains active on a finite time interval is called as NI impulse that occurs in many physical processes like harvesting, vaccination, natural disasters, and shocks subjected to unexpected change in their state. The above situations have to be modeled by impulses [1, 2] if necessary that can not be solved using ordinary differential equations. For some processes, instantaneous impulsive dynamic systems do not support a perfect description, for example, endorsement of insulin of hyperglycemia patients. The change in the above system caused by this medication will remain until the total absorption for a finite time, thanks to the evolutionary process can be modeled with NII. This theory is originated by Hernández [3]. Recently, Vipin Kumar et al. [47] derived the controllability results of fractional systems with and without NII for various models. To seek more about NI impulse, track and surf the articles [816] and cited references.

On the other hand, the existence and controllability theory extended for both DEs of integer and non-integer order with NII. Fractional calculus is the most appropriate way to evaluate the exact solutions to the given model. The results on Caputo and R-L fractional derivatives were discussed in [1719]. Theory on HFD was introduced by Hilfer [20] and the results are discussed in [2124]. One can refer to the monographs [2529] to know more about fractional derivatives. In general, controllability enables directing the system from a random initial state to the desired ultimate state. The articles [3035] discuss the controllability results of Caputo and Hilfer fractional differential system in the nondense domain. Furthermore, the existence and controllability of the Hilfer fractional system with infinite delay were examined in [36, 37]. The exact controllability for Hilfer fractional differential inclusions including nonlocal initial conditions was examined by Du et al. [38]. The approximate controllability results for the Hilfer fractional system were derived by [39, 40]. Recently, a prospective field in control systems is optimal control studied in [4143]. Ultimately, is more appropriate to evaluate them using an optimization procedure involving fractional differential equations.

The outcome of the existence of HINND of arbitrary order was discussed in [44]. Moreover, results on total controllability fractional neutral non-instantaneous system discussed by [45]. In addition, optimization of the non-instantaneous neutral fractional system is investigated by in [46]. No article was found in the existing literature about the investigation of total controllability using semigroup theory.

We contribute this article to analyze the total controllability & optimal control results for HINND of arbitrary order as:

Dekp1,p2[z(t)-K(t,z(t))]=A[z(t)-K(t,z(t))]+Bu(t)+F(t,z(t)),tk=0N(ek,tk+1]z(t)=1Γ(p1)tkt(t-ω)p1-1Ik(ω,z(tk-))dω,tk=1N(tk,ek)I0+(1-η)z(0)=λ0Tz(ω)dω+c,cR. (1.1)

Here, Y be a Banach space and A:D(A)YY is closed together with D(A)Y. Dekp1,p2 represents Hilfer derivative of fractional order with 0 < p1 < 1, 0 ≤ p2 ≤ 1. Also, η = p1 + p2p1p2, tI=[0,T],T>0. Here K:I×YD(A)Y, F:I×YD(A)Y, Ik:[tk,ek]×YY are relevant functions. tk,ek fulfills 0=t0=e0<t1<e1<t2<.<eN<tN+1=T. Moreover, z(tk-)=limh0+z(tk-h). B:UY is a bounded linear operator and u(·)L2[I,U]. The integral boundary condition λ = + 1 or −1. We briefly orchestrated our objective of this work:

  • (i) By incorporating HFD with semigroup operator theory and LT, we have introduced the integral solution of (1.1).

  • (ii) Kuratowski’s measure with κ–set-contraction theory has been supported very much to the total controllability of HINND with C0 semigroup operator for the first time in the literature.

  • (iii) The results on optimal controllability of HINND had been discussed via Lipschitz continuity.

  • (iv) We have gone through with an illustration that enables our analytical outcomes existence.

2 Key notes

The space of continuous functions is defined by C(I,Y) be a provided ||z||=suptI||z(t)||.

C1-η(I,Y)={z:YYprovidedt1-ηz(t)C(I,Y)} , ||z||C1-η=sup0tT|t1-ηz(t)|.

Let PC1-η((tk,tk+1],Y) defines the space of piecewise functions as

PC1-η(I,Y)={(t-tk)1-ηz(t)C1-η((tk,tk+1],R)limttk(t-tk)1-ηz(t),k=1,2,,N,}

provided

||z||=max{suptI||t1-ηz(t+)||,suptI||t1-ηz(t-)||}.

L(Y), characterize the space of all bounded linear operators on Y. A, generates the semigroup {Sp1,p2(t)} where t0 with sup||Sp1,p2(t)||L(Y)=M. Define a convex, bounded and closed set ={zPC1-η(I,Y),||z(t)||<r,tI,r>0} in PC1-η(I,Y).

Definition 2.1 [20]. For n − 1 < p1 < n, nN and p2 ∈ (0, 1], HFD is defined by:

D0+p1,p2y(t)=I0+p1(n-p2)ddtI0+(1-p1)(n-p2)y(t)=I0+p1(n-p2)D0+p2+p1n-p2p1y(t),

where D0+p2+p1n-p2p1 and I0+p1(n-p2) are R-L derivative and integral respectively.

Definition 2.2 [8, 44, 47]. The Kuratowski noncompact measure ℓ(⋅) characterized as: ()inf{ρ>0:=i=1mwithdiam(i)ρ}, where ℏ is a bounded set on Y.

Lemma 2.3. (see [8, 44, 47]) For 1,2Y, the Kuratowski noncompact measure meets:

  1. ()=(¯)=(conv);

  2. (ℏ) = 0 iff ¯ is compact;

  3. for given λ ∈ R, (λℏ) ≤ |λ|(ℏ);

  4. 1 ⊂ ℏ2 implies (ℏ1) ≤ (ℏ2);

  5. (ℏ1∪ℏ2) = max{(ℏ1), (ℏ2)};

  6. (ℏ1 + ℏ2) ≤ (ℏ1) + (ℏ2), where 1+2={z|z=z1+z2;z11,z22};

  7. The Lipschitz function :D()YY and the subset WD() , (ℜ(W)) ≤ κ (W) is bounded.

Let DC1-η(I,Y) and tI, D(t)={z(t)|zD} and (D(t))C1-η(D).

Lemma 2.4. (see [8, 44, 47]) Let DC1-η([c1,c2],Y) be bounded and equicontinuous such that

C1-η(D)=maxt[c1,c2](D(t)),

and (D(t)) is continuous on [c1, c2].

Lemma 2.5. (see [8, 44, 47]) Assume that Y¯Y is bounded and for some D0D, the countable set meets (D)2(D0).

Lemma 2.6. (see [8, 44, 47]) Let D={zn}PC1-η([c1,c2],Y) where −∞ < c1 < c2 < ∞. Hence (D(t)) on [c1, c2] such that:

({c1c2zn(t)dt})2c1c2(D(t))dt,nN.

Lemma 2.7. (see [21, 22, 44]) The system (1.1) becomes:

z(t)=tη-1Γ(η)[λ0Tz(ω)dω+c-K(0,z(0))]+K(t,z(t))+1Γ(p1)0t(t-ω)p1-1[A[z(ω)-K(ω,z(ω))]+Bu(ω)+F(ω,z(ω))]dω,t(0,t1],z(t)=1Γ(p1)tkt(t-ω)p1-1Ik(ω,z(tk-))dω,t(tk,ek],z(t)=1Γ(p1)tkek(t-ω)p1-1Ik(ω,z(tk-))dω-K(ek,z(ek))+K(t,z(t))+1Γ(p1)ekt(t-ω)p1-1[A[z(ω)-K(ω,z(ω))]+Bu(ω)+F(ω,z(ω))]dω,t(ek,tk+1].

Definition 2.8. (see [21, 22, 44]) A function zPC1-η(I,Y) is a solution of (1.1), if

  • (i) z(t)=1Γ(p1)tkt(t-ω)p1-1Ik(ω,z(tk-))dω,t(tk,ek],k=1,2,...,N

  • (ii) I01-ηz(0)=λ0Tz(ω)dω+c ,

together with

z(t)=Sp1,p2(t)[λ0Tz(ω)dω+c-K(0,z(0))]+K(t,z(t))+0tKp1(t-ω)[Bu(ω)+F(ω,z(ω))]dω,t(0,t1], (2.1)
z(t)=Sp1,p2(t-ek)[1Γ(p1)tkek(ek-ω)p1-1Ik(ω,z(tk-))dω-K(ek,z(ek))]+K(t,z(t))+ektKp1(t-ω)[Bu(ω)+F(ω,z(ω))]dω,t(ek,tk+1],k=1,2,...,N. (2.2)
Tp1(t)=p10νψy(ν)(tp1ν)dν,Kp1(t)=tp1-1Tp1(t),Sp1,p2(t)=I0+p2(1-p1)Kp1(t).
Wy(ν)=1πm=1(-1)m-1ν-my-1Γ(my+1)m!sin(mπz),ν(0,),
ψy(ν)=1zν(-1-1z)Wy(ν-1z)0.

Lemma 2.9. (see [8, 44, 47]) If a family {Sp1(t),t0}B(Y) satisfies

  • (i) for all zD(A) , Sp1(t)z=z+I0+p1Sp1(t)Ay, t0;

  • (ii) Sp1(t) is strongly continuous on R+ , Sp1(0)=I;

  • (iii) ASp1(t)z=Sp1A(z) for each, zD(A),t0, DY.

Then, it is said to be p1times resolvent generator by A.

Definition 2.10. A system is defined as totally controllable on I, if for k = 1, 2, …, N, it is controllable on (0,t1], (ek,tk+1] such that z(0)=z0 and z(tk+1)=ztk+1.

For further discussions, we consider the subsequent assumptions as:

  • (H1) K:J0×YY,J0=k=0N(ek,tk+1] is continuous and for Lp,μp>0 as
    ||K(t,z2^)-K(t,z1^)||Lp||z2^-z1^||,z2^,z1^Y,tJ0,
    also ||K(t,z||μp,zY,tJ0;
  • (H2) for any bounded set D1Y, exist Lp*>0, such that
    (K(t,D1))Lp*(D1);
  • (H3) Function F:J0×YY is continuous with Lf>0, satisfies
    ||F(t,z1^)-F(t,z2^)||Lf||z1^-z2^||,z1^,z2^Y,tJ0.
    ||F(t,z)||Ψ(t)P(||z||)andlimlinfP(l)l=ν<;
    where ℘ : [0, ∞)→[0, ∞), a non decreasing continuous function, ψ:I[0,), a Lebesgue integrable function and ν > 0 such that for all zY, tI and meets ||z||C1-ηl.
  • (H4) For k=0,1,N,Lk,
    (F(t,z))Lk(D),tJ0withL=maxkLk,
    where the subset D of Y is a countable;
  • (H5) For Jk=[tk,ek],k=1,2,N, Ik:Jk×YY are continuous functions, for KIk>0,k=1,2,N, provided for every z1^,z2^Y,
    ||Ik(t,z1^)-Ik(t,z2^)||KIk||z1^-z2^||,foreacht(tk,ek],Kmaxk=0,1,NKIk.
    Moreover, MI, together with ||Ik(t,z)||MI;
  • (H6) W:L2(I,U)Y defined by:
    Wu=0aKp1(a-ω)Bu(ω)dω,
    is invertible. Also, for Mb,Mw0, and W-1Mw, BMb.
  • (H7) Given Lu*>0, for (u(z,μ))Lu*t1-ησ(z,μ)(z(μ)), a.e. μI and suptI0tσ(t,μ)dω=σ*<.

Conveniently, we assign some notations as follows:

C2=M1MbMwmTp1p1;k1=max{MλT+Lp,M(KIktk+1p1Γ(p1+1)+Lp)+Lp,KIktk+1p1Γ(p1+1)};N1=M(MItk+1p1Γ(p1+1)+μp)+μp+M1tk+1p1p1P(l)||Ψ||L[0,tk+1];C1=M1MbMw1t1p1p1;M1=sup||Kp1(t)||L(Y);N=M(λ||z||+|c|+μp)+μp+M1t1p1p1P(l)||Ψ||L[0,t1].

3 Main sequels

Lemma 3.1. Let SY and :SY be called as κ-set-contractive for any bounded setin S such that and for κ ∈ [0, 1), as

(())κ().

Lemma 3.2. Letbe a convex, bounded and closed subset of Y. If ℜ : ℵ → ℵ is κ-set-contractive. Thenhas at least one fixed point in ℵ.

Lemma 3.3. If the assumptions (H1)–(H7) true, hence

u(t)=W-1[zt1-Sp1,p2(t1)[λ0Tz(ω)dω+c-K(0,z(0))]-K(t1,z(t1))-0t1Kp1(t1-ω)F(ω,z(ω))dω],t(0,t1], (3.1)
u(t)=W-1[ztk+1-Sp1,p2(tk+1-ek)(×)[1Γ(p1)tkek(ek-ω)p1-1Ik(ω,z(tk-))dω-K(ek,z(ek))]-K(tk+1,z(tk+1))-ektk+1Kp1(tk+1-ω)F(ω,z(ω))dω],t(ek,tk+1], (3.2)

drives to z(t) of (1.1) from z(t1)=zt1 and z(tk+1)=ztk+1, also ||u(t)||=Mu1, ||u(t)||=Muk with

Mu1=Mw1(||zt1||+N),Muk=Mwm(||ztk+1||+N1),k=1,2,,N.

Proof. For t=t1,

z(t1)=Sp1,p2(t1)[λ0Tz(ω)dω+c-K(0,z(0))]+K(t1,z(t1))+0t1Kp1(t1-ω)F(ω,z(ω))dω+0t1Kp1(t1-τ)W-1[zt1-Sp1,p2(t1)[λ0Tz(ω)dω+c-K(0,z(0))]-K(t1,z(t1))-0t1Kp1(t1-ω)F(ω,z(ω))dω]dτ=Sp1,p2(t1)[λ0Tz(ω)dω+c-K(0,z(0))]+K(t1,z(t1))+0t1Kp1(t1-ω)F(ω,z(ω))dω+zt1-Sp1,p2(t1)[λ0Tz(ω)dω+c-K(0,z(0))]-K(t1,z(t1))-0t1Kp1(t1-ω)F(ω,z(ω))dω=zt1,

with

||u(t)||||W-1[zt1-Sp1,p2(t1)[λ0Tz(ω)dω+c-K(0,z(0))]-K(t1,z(t1))-0t1Kp1(t1-ω)F(ω,z(ω))dω]||Mw1(||zt1||+M||λ0Tz(ω)dω+c-K(0,z(0))||+||K(t1,z(t1))||+M1||0t1ω1-ηΨ(ω)P(||z||C1-η)dω||)Mw1(||zt1||+M(λT||z(ω)||+|c|+μp)+μp+M1t1p1p1P(l)||Ψ||L[0,t1])Mw1(||zt1||+N)=Mu1.

Also, for t(ek,tk+1] and t=tk+1,

z(tk+1)=Sp1,p2(tk+1-ek)[1Γ(p1)tkek(ek-ω)p1-1Ik(ω,z(tk-))dω-K(ek,z(ek))]+K(tk+1,z(tk+1))+ektk+1Kp1(tk+1-ω)F(ω,z(ω))dω+ektk+1Kp1(tk+1-τ)W-1[ztk+1-Sp1,p2(tk+1-ek)(×)[1Γ(p1)tkek(ek-ω)p1-1Ik(ω,z(tk-))dω-K(ek,z(ek))]-K(tk+1,z(tk+1))-ektk+1Kp1(tk+1-ω)F(ω,z(ω))dω]dτ=ztk+1,

with

||u(t)||Mwm(||ztk+1||+M(MItk+1p1Γ(p1+1)+μp)+μp+M1tk+1p1p1P(l)||Ψ||L[0,tk+1])Mwm(||ztk+1||+N1)=Mum.

Theorem 3.4. The system (1.1) is totally controllable on I, if it meets the assumptions (H1)–(H7) together with the conditions

[Mλ+2Lp*+MI(M+1)+4Lu*σ*M1MbMw+4M1Lk]<1. (3.3)

Proof. Construct G:PC1-η(I,Y)PC1-η(I,Y) as

(Gz)(t)={Sp1,p2(t)[λ0Tz(ω)dω+c-K(0,z(0))]+K(t,z(t))+0tKp1(t-ω)[Bu(ω)+F(ω,z(ω))]dω,t(0,t1];1Γ(p1)tkt(t-ω)p1-1Ik(ω,z(tk-))dω,t(tk,ek];Sp1,p2(t-ek)[1Γ(p1)tkek(ek-ω)p1-1Ik(ω,z(tk-))dω-K(ek,z(ek))]+K(t,z(t))+ektKp1(t-ω)[Bu(ω)+F(ω,z(ω))]dω,t(ek,tk+1],

where u(t) is described in (3.1) and (3.2) for (0,t1] and (ek,tk+1], respectively. Moreover, by Lemma 3.1, z(t1)=zt1 and z(tk+1)=ztk+1,k=1,2,,N. Let γ={zPC1-η(I,Y):||z||PC1-ηγ}PC1-η(I,Y),γ>0, and

γ>max{N+C1(||zt1||+N),maxk=1,2,,N{N1+C2(||ztk+1||+N1)},MITp1Γ(p1+1)}.

Step 1: G:γγ .

For t(0,t1], let zγ

||(Gz)(t)||||Sp1,p2(t)[λ0Tz(ω)dω+c-K(0,z(0))]||+||K(t,z(t))||+||0tKp1(t-ω)F(ω,z(ω))dω||+||0tKp1(t-ω)Bu(ω)dω||M(λT||z||+|c|+μp)+μp+M1t1p1p1P(l)||Ψ||L[0,t1]+M1MbMu1tp1p1N+M1MbMw1tp1p1[||zt1||+N]γ. (3.4)

Also, for t(ek,tk+1],

||(Gz)(t)||||Sp1,p2(t-ek)[1Γ(p1)tkek(ek-ω)p1-1Ik(ω,z(tk-))dω-K(ek,z(ek))]||+||K(t,z(t))||+||ektKp1(t-ω)F(ω,z(ω))dω||+||ektKp1(t-ω)Bu(ω)dω||M(MItk+1p1Γ(p1+1)+μp)+μp+M1t1p1p1P(l)||Ψ||L[0,tk+1]+M1MbMu1Tp1p1N1+M1MbMwmTp1p1(||ztk+1||+N1)γ. (3.5)

Also, for t(tk,ek], and zγ,

||(Gz)(t)||MItk+1p1Γ(p1+1)γ. (3.6)

Hence, from (3.4)(3.6), for some tI, gives ||(Gz)(t)||PC1-ηγ. Then G:γγ.

Construct G1, G2 as:

(G1y)(t)={Sp1,p2(t)[λ0Tz(ω)dω+c-K(0,z(0))]+K(t,z(t)),t(0,t1],1Γ(p1)tkt(t-ω)p1-1Ik(ω,z(tk-))dω,t(tk,ek],k=1,2,,N,Sp1,p2(t-ek)[1Γ(p1)tkek(ek-ω)p1-1Ik(ω,z(tk-))dω-K(ek,z(ek))]+K(t,z(t)),t(ek,tk+1],k=1,2,,N,

and

(G2y)(t)={0tKp1(t-ω)[Bu(ω)+F(ω,z(ω))]dω,t(0,t1],0,t(tk,ek],ektKp1(t-ω)[Bu(ω)+F(ω,z(ω))]dω,t(ek,tk+1].

Clearly, G=G1+G2.

Step 2: G1 is contraction.

Let zγ, for any t(0,t1],

||[(G1z1)(t)-(G1z2)(t)]||=||Sp1,p2(t)(λ0Tz1(ω)dω-λ0Tz2(ω)dω)||+||K(t,z1(t))-K(t,z2(t))||MλT||z1(ω)-z2(ω)||PC1-η+Lp||z1(ω)-z2(ω)||PC1-η(MλT+Lp)||z1-z2||PC1-ηk1||z1-z2||PC1-η. (3.7)

Also, for zγ, t(ek,tk+1],

||(G1z1)(t)-(G1z2)(t)||(M(KIktk+1p1Γ(p1+1)+Lp)+Lp)||z1-z2||PC1-ηk1||z1-z2||PC1-η. (3.8)

Also, for t(tk,ek], and zγ,

||(G1z1)(t)-(G1z2)(t)||KIktk+1p1Γ(p1+1)||z1-z2||PC1-ηk1||z1-z2||PC1-η. (3.9)

For any tI, ||(G1z1)(t)-(G1z2)(t)||k1||z1-z2||PC1-η. Since k1<1,G1 is contracting operator.

Step 3: By step 1, it is clear that G2 is bounded. To prove continuity, consider a sequence {zn}n=1 in ℵγ such that znz in ℵγ. For t(0,t1],

||(G2zn)(t)-(G2z)(t)||||tη-10t(t-ω)p1-1[F(ω,zn(ω))-F(ω,z(ω))]dω||+||tη-10t(t-ω)p1-1[Buzn(ω)-Buz(ω)]dω||M1Lf0t||zn(ω)-z(ω)||dω+M1MbMw10t[||Sp1,p2(t)(λ0Tzn(ω)dω-λ0Tz(ω)dω)||+||K(t1,zn(t1))-K(t,z(t))||+0t1(t-ω)p1-1||F(ω,zn(ω))dω-F(ω,z(ω))||dω]dτM1Lft1p1p1||zn-z||PC1-η+C1[Lp+M1Lft1p1p1]||zn-z||PC1-η. (3.10)

Therefore, ||(G2zn)(t)-(G2z)(t)||0 as n → ∞. Also, for t(ek,tk+1],k=1,2,,N,

||(G2zn)(t)-(G2z)(t)||||t1-ηekt(t-ω)p1-1[F(ω,zn(ω))-F(ω,z(ω))]dω||+||t1-ηekt(t-ω)p1-1[Buzn(ω)-Buz(ω)]dω||M1Lfekt||zn(ω)-z(ω)||dω+M1MbMwmekt(||Sp1,p2(tk+1-ek)[1Γ(p1)tkek(ek-ω)p1-1×[Ik(ω,zn(tk-))-Ik(ω,z(tk-))]dω+[K(ek,zn(ek))-K(ek,z(ek))]]||+||K(t,zn(t))-K(t,z(t))||+ektk+1(tk+1-ω)p1-1||F(ω,zn(ω))dω-F(ω,z(ω))||dω)dτM1Lftk+1p1p1||zn-z||PC1-η+C2(M(KIktk+1p1Γ(p1+1)+Lp)+Lp+M1Lftk+1p1p1)||zn-z||PC1-η. (3.11)

Hence, ||(G2zn)(t)-(G2z)(t)|| approaches to 0 as n approaches to ∞. Hence from (3.10) and (3.11) and for each tI, ||(G2zn)(t)-(G2z)(t)||0 as n → ∞.

Step 4: G2 is equicontinuous.

Take τ1 < τ2 on ℵγ, and for τ1,τ2(0,t1],

||(G2z)(τ2)-(G2z)(τ1)||||τ2η-10τ2(τ2-ω)p1-1[F(ω,z(ω))+Bu(ω)]dω-τ1η-10τ1(τ1-ω)p1-1[F(ω,z(ω))+Bu(ω)]dω||M1Lf(0τ1[τ2η-1(τ2-ω)p1-1-τ1η-1(τ1-ω)p1-1]dω+τ1τ2τ2η-1(τ2-ω)p1-1dω)+M1MbMw1(||zt1||+N)(0τ1[τ2η-1(τ2-ω)p1-1-τ1η-1(τ1-ω)p1-1]dω+τ1τ2τ2η-1(τ2-ω)p1-1dω). (3.12)

Similarly, For τ1,τ2(ek,tk+1],

||(G2z)(τ2)-(G2z)(τ1)||||τ2η-1ekτ2(τ2-ω)p1-1[F(ω,z(ω))+Bu(ω)]dω-ekτ1(τ1-ω)p1-1[F(ω,z(ω))+Bu(ω)]dω||M1Lf(ekτ1[τ2η-1(τ2-ω)p1-1-τ1η-1(τ1-ω)p1-1]dω+τ1τ2τ2η-1(τ2-ω)p1-1dω)+M1MbMwm(||ztk+1||+N1)(ekτ1[τ2η-1(τ2-ω)p1-1-τ1η-1(τ1-ω)p1-1]dω+τ1τ2τ2η-1(τ2-ω)p1-1dω). (3.13)

By (H3), ||(G2z)(τ2)-(G2z)(τ1)||0 as τ2τ1. Then G2 is equicontinuous.

The countable subset D0={zn}n=1D, and by Lemma 2.4, we have

(G2(D))PC1-η2(G2(D0))PC1-η, (3.14)

where D is a bounded subset of ℵγ. Since G2(D0)G2(γ) is bounded and equicontinuous, by Lemma 2.6,

(G2(D0))PC1-ηmaxt(ek,tk+1],k=0,1,2,,N(G2(D0))PC1-η(t). (3.15)

Moreover, for t(ek,tk+1], (H4), (H7) and G2, with Lemma 2.5, we have

(G2(D0))(t)(M1ekt[Bu(ω,{zn(ω)}n=1)+F(ω,{zn(ω)}n=1)]dω)[2Lu*σ*M1MbMw+2M1Lk]ekt({zn(ω)}n=1)dω[2Lu*σ*M1MbMw+2M1Lk](D)PC1-η(tk+1-ek). (3.16)

Then, by (3.14)(3.16) and (H2),

(G2(D)(t))PC1-η[2Lu*σ*M1MbMw+2M1Lk](D)PC1-η(tk+1-ek)[4Lu*σ*M1MbMw+4M1Lk](D)PC1-η. (3.17)

Now, for any t(ek,tk+1], on D ∈ ℵγ,

(G1(D))[Mλ+2Lp*+MI(M+1)](D). (3.18)

Also,

(G(D))(G1(D))+(G2(D))[Mλ+2Lp*+MI(M+1)+4Lu*σ*M1MbMw+4M1Lk](D)PC1-η. (3.19)

Combining Lemma 3.1, and (3.3) and (3.19) it is clear that the mapping G from ℵγ to ℵγ is κ-set-contractive. Hence, the system G has a fixed point by Lemma 3.2. This completes the proof.

4 Optimal control

  • (H8) (i) The Lagrange function L:I×Y×UR{} is Borel measurable;

      (ii) For tI, and for every z1,z2Y, L(t,z,·) is convex on U;

      (iii) For almost all tI, L(t,·,·) is sequentially lower semi continuous on Y×U;

      (iv) For c10,c2>0, hLP(I,R),
    L(t,z,u)h(t)+c1||z||PC1-η+c2||u||P.

This part deals with the verification of existence of optimal pair for the system (1.1) by sequencing technique as discussed in [46, 48]. Let the cost function(L) as:

I(zu,u)=0TL(t,z(t),u(t))dt,uUad.

Define the admissible control function Uad as:

Uad={uLP(I,H);u(t)P(t),a.e.tI},P>1,

where u(t) takes its values in SU. A multivalued map P:IPC1-η, is measurable as P(·)S. It is clear that Uad is bounded, convex & closed with Uad=0. Define the solution set

T(u)={zuγ:zuuUad}.

Also, the set of all Aad={(zu,u);uUad;zuT(u)}.

Theorem 4.1. The system (1.1) is optimal controllable together with the assumptions (H1)-(H8) provided

I(z˜u0,u0)=0TL(t,z˜u0(t),u0(t))dtI(zu,u),(zu,u)Aad.

Proof. Define I(u)=infzuT(u)I(zu,u). Initially we prove I(z¯u,u)=I(u),zuT(u). If I(u)=+ or T(u) has finite elements, the proof is trivial. Using (H8)(iv), I(u)>-. Let I(u)<. By infimum properties, a sequence {znu}n=1T(u) satisfies I(znu,u)I(u) as n → ∞. Using reflexive property, {u0}T(u) provided u0Uad.

For n ≥ 1,

(znu)(t)={Sp1,p2(t)[λ0Tznu(ω)dω+c-K(0,z(0))]+K(t,znu(t))+0tKp1(t-ω)[Bu(ω)+F(ω,znu(ω))]dω,t(0,t1];Sp1,p2(t-ek)[1Γ(p1)tkek(ek-ω)p1-1Ik(ω,znu(tk-))dω-K(ek,znu(ek))]+K(t,znu(t))+ektKp1(t-ω)[Bu(ω)+F(ω,znu(ω))]dω,t(ek,tk+1],

where

(znu)(t)=(G1znu)(t)+(G2znu)(t)=(Gznu)(t).

To prove (Bznu)(t):{G2(t);znuγ} is relatively compact in PC1−η for each tI.

It is clear that B(0):{G2(0);znuγ} is relatively compact. For any uU,tI,znuγ,

(G2znu)(t)=0tKp1(t-ω)[Bu(ω)+F(ω,znu(ω))]dω.

By (H3), and the property of admissible of control functions the set Wϵ={Kp1(t-ω)[Bu(ω)+F(ω,znu(ω))];0ektk-ϵ} is relatively compact. Therefore, Wϵ¯, the convex hull of Wϵ is compact due to Lemma 2.3(ii). Using Lemma 2.5, we can conclude (G2ϵznu)(t)Wϵ¯ for all tI. Therefore Bϵ(t):{(G2ϵznu)(t);znuγ} is relatively compact in PC1−η. For t(0,t1],

||(G2znu)(t)-(G2ϵznu)(t)||||0tKp1(t-ω)[F(ω,znu(ω))+Bu(ω)]dω-0t-ϵ[F(ω,znu(ω))+Bu(ω)]dω||t-ϵtKp1(t-ω)[F(ω,znu(ω))+Bu(ω)]dωM1Lft-ϵt||znu(ω)||dω+M1Mb||u||LP.

Similarly, for t(ek,tk+1],

||(G2znu)(t)-(G2ϵznu)(t)||||ektKp1(t-ω)[F(ω,znu(ω))+Bu(ω)]dω-ekt-ϵ[F(ω,znu(ω))+Bu(ω)]dω||t-ϵtKp1(t-ω)[F(ω,znu(ω))+Bu(ω)]dωM1Lft-ϵt||znu(ω)||dω+M1Mb||u||LP,

implies that limϵ0||(G2znu)(t)-(G2ϵznu)(t)||=0. Hence Bϵ(t), is a family of relatively compact sets. Moreover, G1znu is bounded and equicontinuous in ℵγ. By (3.16) and (3.18) we have

(znu)[Mλ+2Lp*+MI(M+1)+4Lu*σ*M1MbMw+4M1Lk](znu),

leads to ({znu}n=0)=0 by using (3.3). Hence, {znu}n=1 is relatively compact in PC1−η. Assume z˜u, a subsequence in PC1−η of {znu}n=0 such that znuz˜u as lim n → ∞. Moreover, by Lebesgue theorem and (H1), (H3), (H5)

(z˜u)(t)={Sp1,p2(t)[λ0Tz˜u(ω)dω+c-K(0,z(0))]+K(t,z˜u(t))+0tKp1(t-ω)[Bu(ω)+F(ω,z˜u(ω))]dω,t(0,t1];Sp1,p2(t-ek)[1Γ(p1)tkek(ek-ω)p1-1Ik(ω,z˜u(tk-))dω-K(ek,z˜u(ek))]+K(t,z˜u(t))+ektKp1(t-ω)[Bu(ω)+F(ω,z˜u(ω))]dω,t(ek,tk+1].

Then, z˜uT(u) is continuously embedded in L1(I,U), by Balder’s theorem [49] and (H8),

I(u)=limn0TL(t,znu(t),u(t))dt0TL(t,z˜u(t),u(t))dt=I(z˜u,u)I(u),

which shows I(z˜u,u)I(u). Therefore, I(u) reaches its least value at z˜uT(u) for every uUad.

Also, consider u0Uad such that I(u)=infuUadI(u). By the infimum property, {un}n=0Uad provided limnI(un)=infuUadI(u). Since {un}n=0 in LP(I,U) is bounded for P > 1, u0LP(I,U) and by relative compactness of znu there is a subsequence z˜u0PC1-η as limnznuz˜u0. Using Balder’s theorem [49] and the property that PC1-ηL(I,U) is continuous, we conclude

infuUadI(u)=limn0TL(t,znun(t),un(t))dt0TL(t,z˜u0(t),u0(t))dt=I(z˜u0,u0)=I(u0)infuUadI(u).

Therefore, I(u)=infuUadI(u), leads that I attains its minimum at u0Uad. Subsequently, we have

I(z˜u0,u0)=infuUadI(u)=inf(zu,u)AadI(zu,u).

Hence, (z˜u0,u0)Aad. This completes the proof.

5 Application

Consider a nonlinear equation of the form given below to validate the outcome,

D12,23[z(ς,t)-exp(z(3ςt4))]=2t2[z(ς,t)-exp(z(3ςt4))]+01h(ς,t)u(ς,t)dt+sin[exp(ςt)+z(2ςt5)],ς(0,3]\(1,2],z(ς,0)=z(ς,π)=0,ς[1,2],z(ς,t)=1Γ(12)tkt1(ς-t)12(z(12-)20exp(t)+1)dt,ς,t[1,2],I056z(0,t)=03z(ω,t)dt+5,t[0,π], (4.1)

with Bu(ς)(t)=01h(ς,t)u(ς,t)dt, & p1=12,p2=23,η=56. Assume N=L2[0,π] and A:D(A)NN by Az=2t2(z),

D(A)={zN,zt,zttN,z(ς,0)=z(ς,π)=0}.

It is clear that A is a strongly continuous semigroup and (S(ς)z) in N,

(S(ς)z)(t)={0πM(ς,t-ω)z(ω)dω,ς>0,z(t),ς=0,

with

M(ς,t)=2πexp(-(t24ς)),ς>0,0<t<π,

with z(ς)(t)=z(ς,t). This leads to the conclusion ||S(ς)||M. Let Uad={uU|||u||L2[[0,3],U]1}. Hence

I(z,u)=tktk+10π|z(ς,t)|2dtdς+tktk+10π|u(ς,t)|2dtdς

related to the system (4.1) which correlates the system (1.1) with

I(z,u)=tktk+1(||z(ς)||2+||u(ς)||U2)dς.

Therefore, (H1)–(H8) satisfied. This completes the proof.

6 Conclusion

We examine the total controllability of non-instantaneous Hilfer fractional neutral system under integral boundary condition. By incorporating HFD with semigroup operator theory and Laplace transform technique, the integral solution is derived. Controllability outcomes were attained using Kuratowski’s measure with contraction theory. Furthermore, the sequencing technique has been used to discuss the existence of the optimal pair for the system. To confirm the derived consequences, an example is given. The concept can be extended to Hilfer stochastic differential equations.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the paper.

Funding Statement

The authors extend their appreciation to Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University for funding this research work through the project number (PSAU/2023/01/2189822).

References

  • 1. Kharade J P, Kucche K D, On the impulsive implicit Ψ–Hilfer fractional differential equations with delay, Math. Methods Appl. Sci., (2019);43(4):1938–1952. doi: 10.1002/mma.6017 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Kucche K D, Kharade J P, Sousa J V C, On the nonlinear impulsive Ψ–Hilfer fractional differential equations, Mathematical Modelling and Analysis, (2020);25(4):642–660. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1901.01814 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Hernández E, O’Regan Donal, On a new class of abstract impulsive differential equations, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., (2013);141(5):1641–1649. doi: 10.1090/S0002-9939-2012-11613-2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Kumar V, Stamov G, Stamova I, Controllability results for a class of piecewise nonlinear impulsive fractional dynamic systems, Appl. Math. Comput., (2023);439:127625. doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2022.127625 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Kumar V, Djemai M, Existence, stability and controllability of piecewise impulsive dynamic systems on arbitrary time domain, Appl. Math. Model., (2023);117:529–548. doi: 10.1016/j.apm.2022.12.027 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Kumar V, Kostić M, Tridane A, Debbouche A, Controllability of switched Hilfer neutral fractional dynamic systems with impulses, IMA Journal of Mathematical Control and Information, (2022);39(3):807–836. doi: 10.1093/imamci/dnac011 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Malik M, Sajid M, Kumar V, Controllability of singular dynamic systems on time scales, Asian Journal of Control, (2021);24(5):2771–2777. doi: 10.1002/asjc.2645 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Chen P, Zhang X, Li Y, Existence of mild solutions to partial differential equations with non-instantaneous impulses, Electron. J. Differ. Equ., (2016);241:1–11. [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Saravanakumar S, Balasubramaniam P, Non-instantaneous impulsive Hilfer fractional stochastic differential equations driven by fractional Brownian motion, Stoch. Anal. Appl., (2021);39(3):549–566. doi: 10.1080/07362994.2020.1815545 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Wang J R, Ibrahim G, O’Regan Donal, Zhou Y, A general class of non-instantaneous fractional differential inclusions in Banach spaces, Adv. Difference Equ., (2017);287(2017). doi: 10.1186/s13662-017-1342-8 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Wang J R, Ibrahim G, O’Regan Donal, Controllability of Hilfer fractional non-instantaneous impulsive semilinear differential inclusions with nonlocal conditions, Nonlinear Anal. Model. Control, (2019);24(6):958–984. doi: 10.15388/NA.2019.6.7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Liu S, Wang J R, O’Regan Donal, Trajectory approximately controllability and optimal control for noninstantaneous impulsive inclusions without compactness, Topol. Methods. Nonlinear. Anal., (2021);58(1):19–49. doi: 10.12775/TMNA.2020.069 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Alsheekhhussain Z, Gamal Ibrahim A, Controllability of Semilinear Multi-Valued Differential Inclusions with Non-Instantaneous Impulses of Orderα ∈ (1, 2) without Compactness, Symmetry, (2021);13(4):566. doi: 10.3390/sym13040566 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Ramkumar K, Ravikumar K, Baleanu D, Anguraj A, Hilfer fractional neutral stochastic differential equations with non-instantaneous impulses, AIMS Mathematics, (2021);6(5):4474–4491. doi: 10.3934/math.2021265 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Agarwal R, Almeida R, Hristova S, O’Regan Donal, Non-instantaneous impulsive fractional differential equations with state dependent delay and practical stability, Acta Mathematica Scientia, (2021);41:1699–1718. doi: 10.1007/s10473-021-0518-1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Borah J, Bora S N, Non-instantaneous impulsive fractional semilinear evolution equations with finite delay, J. Fractional Calc. & Appl., (2021);12(1):120–132. doi: 10.21608/jfca.2021.308746 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Zhou Y, Jiao F, Nonlocal Cauchy problem for fractional evolution equations, Nonlinear Anal. Real World Applications, (2010);11(5):4465–4475. doi: 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2010.05.029 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Wang X, Wang L, Zeng Q, Fractional differential equations with integral boundary conditions, J. Nonlinear Sci. Appl., (2015);8(4):309–314. doi: 10.22436/jnsa.008.04.03 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Wang J R, Zhang Y, Nonlocal initial value problems for differential equations with Hilfer fractional derivative, Appl. Math. Comput., (2015);266:850–859. doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2015.05.144 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Hilfer R, Applications of Fractional Calculus in Physics, World Scientific, Singapore, (2000). [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Furati K M, Kassim M D, Tatar N E, Existence and uniqueness for a problem involving Hilfer fractional derivative, Comput. Math. Appl., (2012);64(6):1616–1626. doi: 10.1016/j.camwa.2012.01.009 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Gu H, Trujillo J J, Existence of mild solution for evolution equation with Hilfer fractional derivative, Appl. Math.Comput., (2015);257:344–354. doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2014.10.083 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Hilfer R, Luchko Y, Tomovski Z, Operational method for the solution of fractional differential equations with generalized Riemann-Liouville fractional derivatives, Fract. Calc. Appl. Anal., (2009);12(3):299–318. doi: 10.1515/fca-2021-0023 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Subashini R, Jothimani K, Nisar K S, Ravichandran C, New results on nonlocal functional integro-differential equations via Hilfer fractional derivative, Alexandria Engineering Journal, (2020);59(5):2891–2899. doi: 10.1016/j.aej.2020.01.055 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Agarwal P, Baleanu D, Quan Y, Momani C S, Machado J A, Fractional Calculus- Models, Algorithms, Technology, Springer, Singapore: (2018). [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Kilbas A A, Srivastava H M, Trujillo J J, Theory and applications of fractional differential equations In: North-Holland Mathematics Studies, Elsevier Science, Amsterdam; (2006):204. [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Pazy A, Semigroups of Linear Operators and Applications to Partial Differential Equations, New York, Springer-verlag; (1983). [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Podlubny I, Fractional Differential Equations. An introduction to fractional derivatives, fractional differential equations, to methods of their solution and some of their applications, Academic Press, San Diego: (1999). [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Zhou Y, Basic Theory of Fractional Differential Equations, World Scientific, Singapore, (2014). [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Ravichandran C, Jothimani K, Nisar K S, Mahmoud Emad E, Yahia Ibrahim S, An interpretation on controllability of Hilfer fractional derivative with nondense domain, Alexandria Engineering Journal, (2022);61(12):9941–9948. doi: 10.1016/j.aej.2022.03.011 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Nisar K S, Jothimani K, Kaliraj K, Ravichandran C, An analysis of controllability results for nonlinear Hilfer neutral fractional derivatives with non-dense domain, Chaos Solitons & Fractals, (2021);146:110915. doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2021.110915 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Nisar K S, Jothimani K, Ravichandran C, Baleanu D, Kumar D, New approach on controllability of Hilfer fractional derivatives with nondense domain, AIMS Mathematics, (2022);7(6):10079–10095. doi: 10.3934/math.2022561 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Nisar K S, Jagatheeshwari R, Ravichandran C, Veeresha P, High performance computational method for fractional model of solid tumour invasion, Ain Shams Eng. J., doi: 10.1016/j.asej.2023.102226 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Jothimani K, Kaliraj K, Panda S K, Nisar K S, Ravichandran C, Results On controllability of non-densely characterized neutral fractional delay differential system, Evol. Equ. Control Theory, 2021;10(3):619–631. doi: 10.3934/eect.2020083 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Goufo E F D, Ravichandran C, Birajdar G A, Self-similarity techniques for chaotic attractors with many scrolls using step series switching, Math. Model. Anal., (2021);26(4):591–611. doi: 10.3846/mma.2021.13678 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Kavitha K, Vijayakumar V, Udhayakumar R, Results on controllability of Hilfer fractional neutral differential equations with infinite delay via measures of noncompactness, Chaos Solitons & Fractals, (2020);139:1–9. doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2020.110035 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Kavitha K, Vijayakumar V, Udhayakumar R, Ravichandran C, Results on controllability of Hilfer fractional differential equations with infinite delay via measures of noncompactness, Asian J. Control, (2022);24(3):1406–1415. doi: 10.1002/asjc.2549 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Du J, Jiang W, Pang D, Niazi A U K, Exact controllability for Hilfer fractional differential inclusions involving nonlocal initial conditions, Complexity, (2018);2018:1–13. doi: 10.1155/2018/9472847 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Lv J, Yang X, Approximate controllability of Hilfer fractional differential equations, Math. Methods Appl. Sci., (2020);43(1):242–254. doi: 10.1002/mma.5862 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Wang J R, Liu X, O’Regan Donal, On the approximate controllability for Hilfer fractional evolution hemivariational inequalities, Numer. Funct. Anal. Optim., (2019);40 (7):743–762. doi: 10.1080/01630563.2018.1499667 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Bahaa G M, Optimal control problem and maximum principle for fractional order cooperative systems, Kybernetika, (2019);55(2):337–358. doi: 10.14736/kyb-2019-2-0337 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Harrat A, Nieto J J, Debbouche A, Solvability and optimal controls of impulsive Hilfer fractional delay evolution inclusions with Clarke subdifferential, J. Comput. Appl. Math., (2018);344:725–737. doi: 10.1016/j.cam.2018.05.031 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. Pan X, Li X, Zhao J, Solvability and optimal controls of semi linear Riemann- Liouville fractional differential equations, Abstr. Appl. Anal., (2014);(2014):216919. doi: 10.1155/2014/216919 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Sousa J V C, Existence of mild solutions to Hilfer fractional evolution equations in Banach space, Classical Analysis and ODEs, 1812.02213v1 [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Kumar V, Malik M, Debbouche A, Total controllability of neutral fractional differential equation with non-instantaneous impulsive effects, J. Comput. Appl. Math., (2021);383:113158. doi: 10.1016/j.cam.2020.113158 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Yang H, Zhao Y, Existence and optimal controls of non-autonomous impulsive integro-differential evolution equation with nonlocal conditions, Chaos Solitons & Fractals, (2021);148:111027. doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2021.111027 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Banaś J, On measures of noncompactness in Banach spaces, Comment. Math. Univ. Carolin., (1980);21(1):131–143. [Google Scholar]
  • 48. Zhu S, Fan Z, Li G, Optimal controls for Riemann-Liouville fractional evolution systems without Lipschitz assumption, J. Optim. Theory. Appl., (2017);174(1):47–64. doi: 10.1007/s10957-017-1119-y [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 49. Balder E, Necessary and sufficient conditions for l1-strong-weak lower semi-continuity of integral functional, Nonlinear Anal., (1987);11(12):1399–1404. doi: 10.1016/0362-546X(87)90092-7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

All relevant data are within the paper.


Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

RESOURCES