Skip to main content
Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection logoLink to Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection
. 2023 Jan 26;2023(1):8. doi: 10.1186/s13661-023-01695-5

Stability of some generalized fractional differential equations in the sense of Ulam–Hyers–Rassias

Abdellatif Ben Makhlouf 1,, El-sayed El-hady 1, Hassen Arfaoui 1, Salah Boulaaras 2, Lassaad Mchiri 3,4
PMCID: PMC9879255  PMID: 36718224

Abstract

In this paper, we investigate the existence and uniqueness of fractional differential equations (FDEs) by using the fixed-point theory (FPT). We discuss also the Ulam–Hyers–Rassias (UHR) stability of some generalized FDEs according to some classical mathematical techniques and the FPT. Finally, two illustrative examples are presented to show the validity of our results.

Keywords: Hyers–Ulam–Rassias stability, Generalized fractional differential equation, Fixed-point theory

Introduction

Fractional calculus (FC) has proved to be an efficient tool in the modeling and analysis of many diseases like, e.g., H1N1, COVID-19, and Ebola. This is due to the fact that fractional derivatives can describe the memory and heredity of many processes. Analytical solutions are mainly not reachable for such models (see [16]).

Ulam–Hyers stability (UHS) (also known as Ulam stability) for different kind of equations (see [710]) plays an essential role as it introduces analytical approximate solutions for many problems where the exact solutions are not reachable. It should be noted that stability is an important issue. This is because if a system is stable in the UHS or UHR sense, then essential properties hold around the exact solution. This can be seen in biology, optimization, and economics (e.g., in particular when an exact solution is quite difficult to obtain). UHS appeared after Ulam’s famous talk at a conference in 1940 (see [7]). Currently, it has become a research trend (see [11]) in many directions.

During the last sixty years, the stability subject has flourished (see [1221]). In particular, the stability of differential equations (DEs) has attracted the interest of many mathematicians. In 1993, Obloza seems to be the first person who investigated the Ulam stability of DEs (see [22]). In [16], the authors employed the FPT to study the stability of some DEs with delay.

Many authors have studied the UHS for several types of FDEs (see [2329]). In this sense, our paper presents the existence, uniqueness, and the UHR for a new class of FDEs and generalizes the work in [23].

The article is organized as following. Section 2 recalls some preliminaries, Sect. 3 presents the UHR stability. In Sect. 4, we present a couple of examples to illustrate our results, and Sect. 5 concludes our work.

Preliminaries

Here, we recall some basic notions and some useful results. Throughout the article, we denote real numbers by R, and the complex numbers by C. We also used the Mittag–Leffler function and generalized metric (see [3, 24, 30]). The theorem of Diaz and Margolis see [31] is the main tool in our analysis.

The objective of the current work is to investigate the stability of the solution of the following generalized FDE

dx(ϱ)=f1(ϱ,x)dϱ+i=2nfi(ϱ,x)(dϱ)θi,ϱ[a,a+b],θi[0,1], 2.1

with x(a)=x0, where aR, b>0 and x0R.

Definition 1

The function x:[a,a+b]R is named a mild solution of (2.1) if it is a solution of

x(ϱ)=x0+aϱf1(ζ,x(ζ))dζ+i=2nθiaϱ(ϱζ)θi1fi(ζ,x(ζ))dζ,ϱ[a,a+b]. 2.2

Definition 2

Equation (2.2) is UHR stable, if there is a constant C>0 such that for each function y satisfying

|y(ϱ)y(a)aϱf1(ζ,y(ζ))dζi=2nθiaϱ(ϱζ)θi1fi(ζ,y(ζ))dζ|ϵψ(ϱ), 2.3

ϱ[a,a+b], there is a solution y(ϱ) of (2.2):

|y(ϱ)y(ϱ)|Cϵψ(ϱ),ϱ[a,a+b].

Definition 3

([3])

The Mittag–Leffler function is defined by

Eκ(y)=m=0+ymΓ(mκ+1),

where κ>0, yC.

Stability results

Define E:=C([a,a+b],R). We start with the UHR stability of (2.2).

Theorem 1

Let Lfi>0, i{1,2,,n} be constants. Assume that fi:[a,a+b]×RR, satisfies

|fi(ϱ,σ1)fi(ϱ,σ2)|Lfi|σ1σ2|,ϱ[a,a+b],σ1,σ2R,i{1,2,,n}. 3.1

If a continuous function y:[a,a+b]R satisfies

|y(ϱ)y(a)aϱf1(η,y(η))dηi=2nθiaϱ(ϱη)θi1fi(η,y(η))dη|ϵψ(ϱ),ϱ[a,a+b], 3.2

where ψ:[a,a+b]R+ is a nondecreasing continuous function, then a unique solution y of (2.2) exists such that

|y(ϱ)y(ϱ)|e(Lf1+δ)Ti=2nEθi((Lfi+δ)Tθi)1cϵψ(ϱ),ϱ[a,a+b],

where c=(Lf1Lf1+δ+i=2nLfiLfi+δΓ(θi+1))<1, δ>0, and Γ() is the well-known Gamma function.

Proof

First, we define the following metric on E

d(x1,x2):=inf{c0:|x1(ϱ)x2(ϱ)|φ(ϱ)cψ(ϱ),ϱ[a,a+b]}, 3.3

where φ(ϱ):=e(Lf1+δ)(ϱa)×i=2nEθi((Lfi+δ)(ϱa)θi). The space (E,d) is a complete generalized metric space.

Let us consider the operator A:EE:

(Au)(ϱ):=y(a)+aϱf1(ζ,u(ζ))dζ+i=2nθiaϱ(ϱζ)θi1fi(ζ,u(ζ))dζ,t[a,a+b].

Since AuE, for every uE and

|(Au0)(ϱ)u0(ϱ)|φ(ϱ)<+,u0E,ϱ[a,a+b],

it is clear that d(Au0,u0)<. Moreover, since d(u0,u)<, uE, then {uE:d(u0,u)<}=E.

In addition, for any x1,x2E we obtain

|(Ax1)(ϱ)(Ax2)(ϱ)||aϱ[f1(ζ,x1(ζ))f1(ζ,x2(ζ)]dζ|+|i=2nθiaϱ(ϱζ)θi1[fi(ζ,x1(ζ))fi(ζ,x2(ζ)]dζ|. 3.4

Then, we derive that

|(Ax1)(ϱ)(Ax2)(ϱ)|aϱ|f1(ζ,x1(ζ))f1(ζ,x2(ζ))|dζ+i=2nθiaϱ(ϱζ)θi1|fi(ζ,x1(ζ))fi(ζ,x2(ζ))|dζLf1aϱ|x1(ζ)x2(ζ)|dζ+i=2nθiLfiaϱ(ϱζ)θi1|x1(ζ)x2(ζ)|dζLf1aϱ|x1(ζ)x2(ζ)|e(Lf1+δ)(ζa)i=2nEθi((Lfi+δ)(ζa)θi)dζe(Lf1+δ)(ζa)i=2nEθi((Lfi+δ)(ζa)θi)+i=2nθiLfiaϱ(ϱζ)θi1|x1(ζ)x2(ζ)|e(Lf1+δ)(ζa)i=2nEθi((Lfi+δ)(ζa)θi)e(Lf1+δ)(ζa)i=2nEθi((Lfi+δ)(ζa)θi)dζd(x1,x2)[Lf1aϱψ(ζ)e(Lf1+δ)(ζa)dζi=2nEθi((Lfi+δ)(ϱa)θi)+e(Lf1+δ)(ϱa)i=2nθiLfiaϱψ(ζ)(ϱζ)θi1i=2nEθi((Lfi+δ)(ζa)θi)dζ], 3.5

which can easily be rewritten as

|(Ax1)(ϱ)(Ax2)(ϱ)|d(x1,x2)[Lf1ψ(ϱ)φ(ϱ)Lf1+δ+i=2nθiLfiΓ(θi)Lfi+δψ(ϱ)φ(ϱ)](Lf1Lf1+δ+i=2nLfiΓ(θi+1)Lfi+δ)d(x1,x2)φ(ϱ)ψ(ϱ). 3.6

Therefore,

d(Ax1,Ax2)cd(x1,x2),

which proves that A is strictly contractive. From (3.6) it follows that

d(y,Ay)ϵ.

Now, as a consequence of the Diaz and Margolis Theorem (see [31]), there exists a solution y:

d(y,y)11cϵ

and then

|y(ϱ)y(ϱ)|ϵ1cφ(ϱ)ψ(ϱ),

for all t[a,a+b], which implies that

|y(ϱ)y(ϱ)|e(Lf1+δ)(ϱa)i=2nEθi((Lfi+δ)(ϱa)θi)1cϵψ(ϱ),

for all ϱ[a,a+b]. □

Remark 1

It should be noted that when f1=0, fi=0,i3 we easily obtain the results in [23] and when fi=0, i2 we obtain the results in [32].

The next theorem is a direct consequence of Theorem 1 (Ulam stability of (2.2)).

Theorem 2

Let Lfi>0, i{1,2,,n} be constants. Assume that fi:[a,a+b]×RR, satisfies

|fi(ϱ,σ1)fi(ϱ,σ2)|Lfi|σ1σ2|,ϱ[a,a+b],σ1,σ2R,i{1,2,,n}. 3.7

If a continuous function y:[a,a+b]R satisfies

|y(ϱ)y(a)aϱf1(ζ,y(ζ))dζi=2nθiaϱ(ϱζ)θi1fi(ζ,y(ζ))dζ|ϵ,ϱ[a,a+b], 3.8

then a unique solution y of (2.2) exists satisfying

|y(ϱ)y(ϱ)|e(Lf1+δ)Ti=2nEθi((Lfi+δ)Tθi)1cϵ,ϱ[a,a+b],

where c=(Lf1Lf1+δ+i=2nLfiLfi+δΓ(θi+1))<1, δ>0, and Γ() is the well-known Gamma function.

Examples

A couple of examples are used to show the validity of Theorem 1 and Theorem 2.

Example 1

Let (2.1) for θ=0.5, a=0, b=2, f1(α,β)=α2sin(β), f2(α,β)=αcos(β) and fi=0,i{3,4,,n}.

We have

|α2sin(β1)α2sin(β2)|4|β1β2|,α[0,2],β1,β2R,

and

|αcos(β1)αcos(β2)|2|β1β2|,α[0,2],β1,β2R.

Then, Lf1=4 and Lf2=2.

Suppose that y satisfies

|y(ϱ)y(0)0ϱs2sin(y(s))ds0.50ϱ(ϱs)0.5scos(y(s))ds|ϱ, 4.1

for all ϱ[0,2].

Here, ϵ=1 and ψ(ϱ)=ϱ. In view of Theorem 1 there is a continuous function y,

y(ϱ)=y(0)+0ϱs2sin(y(s))ds+0.50ϱ(ϱs)0.5scos(y(s))ds,

such that

|y(ϱ)y(ϱ)|e16E0.5(62)1(12+13Γ(1.5))ϱ,ϱ[0,2].

Example 2

Let equation (2.1) for θ=0.6, a=0, b=5, f1(α,β)=αcos(β), f2(α,β)=sin(β) and fi=0,i{3,4,,n}.

We have

|αcos(β1)αcos(β2)|5|β1β2|,α[0,5],β1,β2R,

and

|sin(β1)sin(β2)||β1β2|,α[0,5],β1,β2R.

Then, Lf1=5 and Lf2=1.

Suppose that y satisfies

|y(ϱ)y(0)0ϱscos(y(s))ds0.60ϱ(ϱs)0.4sin(y(s))ds|0.1, 4.2

for all ϱ[0,5].

Here, ϵ=0.1. Employing Theorem 2 there is a continuous function y,

y(ϱ)=y(0)+0ϱscos(y(s))ds+0.60ϱ(ϱs)0.4sin(y(s))ds,

such that

|y(ϱ)y(ϱ)|e50E0.6(6×50.6)1(12+16Γ(1.6))0.1,ϱ[0,5].

Conclusion

In this paper, we utilized some results of Banach FPT to study the existence, uniqueness, and the UHR stability of some generalized FDEs. Finally, we have presented two examples to illustrate our results. In future work, we intend to extend our results to the stochastic case.

Acknowledgements

This work was funded by the Deanship of Scientific Research at Jouf University under Grant Number (DSR2022-RG-0120).

Author contributions

“1. wrote the main manuscript text 2-3,5: supervisor, 4. reviewed the manuscript.”

Funding

This work was funded by the Deanship of Scientific Research at Jouf University under Grant Number (DSR2022-RG-0120).

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

References

  • 1.Rezapour S., Mohammadi H. A study on the AH1N1/09 influenza transmission model with the fractional Caputo–Fabrizio derivative. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2020;2020(1):1. doi: 10.1186/s13662-020-02945-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Tuan N.H., Mohammadi H., Rezapour S. A mathematical model for Covid-19 transmission by using the Caputo fractional derivative. Chaos Solitons Fractals. 2020;140:110107. doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2020.110107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Kilbas A.A., Srivastava H.M., Trujillo J.J. Theory and Applications of Fractional Differential Equations. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2006. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Baleanu D., Mohammadi H., Rezapour S. Analysis of the model of HIV-1 infection of CD4+CD4 T-cell with a new approach of fractional derivative. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2020;2020:71. doi: 10.1186/s13662-020-02544-w. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Bohner M., Tunç O., Tunç C. Qualitative analysis of Caputo fractional integro-differential equations with constant delays. Comput. Appl. Math. 2021;40:214. doi: 10.1007/s40314-021-01595-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Tunç O., Atan Ö., Tunç C., Yao J.C. Qualitative analyses of integro-fractional differential equations with Caputo derivatives and retardations via the Lyapunov–Razumikhin method. Axioms. 2021;10:1–19. doi: 10.3390/axioms10020058. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Hyers D.H. On the stability of the linear functional equation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 1941;27:222–224. doi: 10.1073/pnas.27.4.222. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Rassias T.M. On the stability of the linear mapping in Banach spaces. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1978;72:297–300. doi: 10.1090/S0002-9939-1978-0507327-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Rassias T.M. On a modified Hyers–Ulam sequence. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1991;158:106–113. doi: 10.1016/0022-247X(91)90270-A. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Gajda Z. On stability of additive mappings. Int. J. Math. Math. Sci. 1991;14:431–434. doi: 10.1155/S016117129100056X. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Hyers D.H., Isac G., Rassias T. Stability of Functional Equations in Several Variables. Berlin: Springer; 2012. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Alsina C., Ger R. On some inequalities and stability results related to the exponential function. J. Inequal. Appl. 1998;2:373–380. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Forti G.L. Hyers–Ulam stability of functional equations in several variables. Aequ. Math. 1995;50(1–2):143–190. doi: 10.1007/BF01831117. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Miura T., Miyajima S., Takahasi S.H. A characterization of Hyers–Ulam stability of first order linear differential operators. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2003;286:136–146. doi: 10.1016/S0022-247X(03)00458-X. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Obloza M. Connections between Hyers and Lyapunov stability of the ordinary differential equations. Rocznik Nauk.-Dydakt. Prace Mat. 1997;14:141–146. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Shah R., Zada A. A fixed point approach to the stability of a nonlinear Volterra integrodifferential equation with delay. Hacet. J. Math. Stat. 2018;47(3):615–623. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Shen Y. The Ulam stability of first order linear dynamic equations on time scales. Results Math. 2017;72(4):1881–1895. doi: 10.1007/s00025-017-0725-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Tunç C., Biçer E. Hyers–Ulam–Rassias stability for a first order functional differential equation. J. Math. Fundam. Sci. 2015;47:143–153. doi: 10.5614/j.math.fund.sci.2015.47.2.3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Inoan D., Marian D. Semi–Hyers–Ulam–Rassias stability of a Volterra integro-differential equation of order I with a convolution type kernel via Laplace transform. Symmetry. 2021;13:1–11. doi: 10.3390/sym13112181. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Inoan D., Marian D. Semi-Hyers–Ulam–Rassias stability via Laplace transform, for an integro-differential equation of the second order. Mathematics. 2022;10:1–11. doi: 10.3390/math10111893. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Babolian E., Shamloo A.S. Numerical solution of Volterra integral and integro-differential equations of convolution type by using operational matrices of piecewise constant orthogonal functions. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2008;214:498–508. doi: 10.1016/j.cam.2007.03.007. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Obloza M. Hyers–Ulam stability of the linear differential equations. Rocznik Nauk.-Dydakt. Prace Mat. 1993;13:259–270. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.El-hady E., Ben Makhlouf A. Novel stability results for Caputo fractional differential equations. Math. Probl. Eng. 2021;2021:9817668. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Ben Makhlouf A., El-hady E., Boulaaras S., Mchiri L. Stability results of some fractional neutral integrodifferential equations with delay. J. Funct. Spaces. 2022;2022:8211420. [Google Scholar]
  • 25.El-hady E., Ben Makhlouf A., Boulaaras S., Mchiri L. Ulam–Hyers–Rassias stability of nonlinear differential equations with Riemann–Liouville fractional derivative. J. Funct. Spaces. 2022;2022:7827579. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Ameen R., Jarad F., Abdeljawad T. Ulam stability for delay fractional differential equations with a generalized Caputo derivative. Filomat. 2018;32:5265–5274. doi: 10.2298/FIL1815265A. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Başcı Y., Öğrekçi S., Mısır A. On Hyers–Ulam stability for fractional differential equations including the new Caputo–Fabrizio fractional derivative. Mediterr. J. Math. 2019;16:131. doi: 10.1007/s00009-019-1407-x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Öğrekçi S., Başcı Y., Mısır A. Ulam type stability for conformable fractional differential equations. Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo. 2019;70:807–817. doi: 10.1007/s12215-020-00532-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Khan H., Tunç C., Chen W., Khan A. Existence theorems and Hyers–Ulam stability for a class of hybrid fractional differential equations with p-Laplacian operator. J. Appl. Anal. Comput. 2018;8:1211–1226. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Shah R., Zada A. Hyers–Ulam–Rassias stability of impulsive Volterra integral equation via a fixed point approach. J. Linear Topol. Algebra. 2019;8:219–227. [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Diaz J.B., Margolis B. A fixed point theorem of the alternative, for contractions on a generalized complete metric space. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 1968;74:305–309. doi: 10.1090/S0002-9904-1968-11933-0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Başci Y., Misir A., Öğrekçi S. On the stability problem of differential equations in the sense of Ulam. Results Math. 2020;75(1):6. doi: 10.1007/s00025-019-1132-6. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

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

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.


Articles from Boundary Value Problems are provided here courtesy of Nature Publishing Group

RESOURCES