Next Article in Journal
Knowledge Transfer Based on Particle Filters for Multi-Objective Optimization
Next Article in Special Issue
Numerical Computation of Ag/Al2O3 Nanofluid over a Riga Plate with Heat Sink/Source and Non-Fourier Heat Flux Model
Previous Article in Journal
COVID-19 Data Analysis with a Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithm for Causal Association Rule Mining
Previous Article in Special Issue
A SARS-CoV-2 Fractional-Order Mathematical Model via the Modified Euler Method
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Controllability Criteria for Nonlinear Impulsive Fractional Differential Systems with Distributed Delays in Controls

1
Department of Mathematics, Guelma University, Guelma 24000, Algeria
2
Department of Mathematics, Alagappa University, Karaikudi 630 004, India
3
Department of Mathematical Analysis, Chelyabinsk State University, 129 Kashirin Brothers St., 454001 Chelyabinsk, Russia
4
Department of Mathematics, Peter the Great Saint Petersburg Polytechnic University, 195251 Saint Petersburg, Russia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Math. Comput. Appl. 2023, 28(1), 13; https://doi.org/10.3390/mca28010013
Submission received: 6 December 2022 / Revised: 9 January 2023 / Accepted: 12 January 2023 / Published: 15 January 2023

Abstract

:
We establish a class of nonlinear fractional differential systems with distributed time delays in the controls and impulse effects. We discuss the controllability criteria for both linear and nonlinear systems. The main results required a suitable Gramian matrix defined by the Mittag–Leffler function, using the standard Laplace transform and Schauder fixed-point techniques. Further, we provide an illustrative example supported by graphical representations to show the validity of the obtained abstract results.

1. Introduction

Fractional calculus has become a topic of growing interest in Applied Mathematics because of its potential to model many physical phenomena; in fact, it has become a subject of significant interest to many researchers, scientists and engineers, since it applies to a wide range of applications in physics, mathematics and engineering; see, for instance [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11]. Concerning different applications and mathematical models, the literature contains, among many others, reaction–diffusion problems [12], neural networks [13], a COVID-19 model [14] and an anomalous transport model [15].
A delay differential equation is a differential equation where the time derivatives at the current time depend on the solution and possibly its derivatives at previous times. Instead of a simple initial condition, an initial history function needs to be specified. Fractional differential equations with delays have recently played a significant role in modelling in many areas of science. Appropriately, fractional differential equations are further considered to be alternative models to nonlinear differential equations. For more details, see the monographs of Kilbas et al. [16], Miller and Ross [17], and Podlubny [18]. Mathematical models for systems with distributed delays in the controls occur in the study of agricultural economics and population dynamics [19,20].
On the other hand, it is noted that controllability is one of the most important qualitative behaviours of a dynamical structure. Based on this fact, we can infer that it is possible to steer any initial state of the system to any final state in some finite time using an admissible control. Moreover, controllability outcomes can be acquired by using non-identical techniques, for which the fixed point theory is the most powerful tool [21]. Therefore, the fusion of fractional-order derivatives and integrals in control theory lead to better results than integer order approaches. Recently, Balachandran et al. [22] proved the relative controllability of fractional dynamical systems with distributed delays in the controls. In [23], the authors established some analysis for the stability and controllability of a fractional damped differential system with non-instantaneous impulses supported by numerical treatments. Furthermore, the dynamics of developing processes is frequently subjected to immediate changes such as shocks, harvesting or natural disasters, and so on. These types of short-term performances are regularly treated as having acted instantaneously or in the form of impulses. Zhang et al. [24] proved the controllability of an impulsive fractional differential equation with a state delay. Very recently, in [25], the authors proved in a relative controllability analysis fractional order differential equations with multiple time delays. For further works, the readers may refer to [26,27,28,29]. Motivated by the above statements and extending the results of [22,25], in this work, we are concerned with the problem of controllability of impulsive fractional differential systems with distributed delays in controls.
C D α x ( t ) = A x ( t ) + K x ( t τ ) + h 0 d τ B ( t , τ ) u ( t + τ ) + f ( t , x ( t ) , x ( t h ) , u ( t τ ) ) , t [ 0 , T ] { t 1 , t 2 , , t k } , Δ x ( t i ) = x ( t i + ) x ( t i ) = I i ( x ( t i ) ) , i = 1 , 2 , , k , x ( t ) = φ ( t ) , t [ τ , 0 ] ,
where C D α represents the Caputo fractional derivative of order α , 0 < α < 1 and A R n × n denotes a constant matrix, x R n is the state variable and the third integral term is in the Lebesgue–Stieltjes sense with respect to τ . Let f , k and h > 0 be given. The control input u : [ h , T ] R m for all t J , and u t denotes the function on [ h , 0 ] , defined by u t ( s ) = u ( t + s ) for s [ h , 0 ) . B ( t , τ ) is an n × m dimensional matrix continuous in t for fixed τ and is of bounded variation in τ on [ h , 0 ) for each t J and continuous from left in τ on the interval. ( h , 0 ) , ϕ C ( [ τ , 0 ] , R n ) is the initial state function, where C ( [ τ , 0 ] , R n ) denotes the space of all continuous functions mapping the interval [ τ , 0 ] into R n ; I i : R n R n is continuous for i = 1 , 2 , , k , and
x ( t i + ) = lim ε 0 + x ( t i + ε ) , x ( t i ) = lim ε 0 x ( t i + ε ) ,
represent the right and left limits of x ( t ) at t = t i and the discontinuous points
t 1 < t 2 < < t i < < t k ,
where 0 = t 0 < τ < t 1 , t k < t k + 1 = T < + , and x ( t i ) = x ( t i ) , which implies that the solution of the system (1) is left continuous at t i .
The notable contributions of our work is as follows:
  • Nonlinear impulsive fractional differential systems with distributed delays in controls are considered.
  • The solution representation is formulated via an unsymmetric Fubini’s theorem.
  • The controllability of the linear system is proved by using the controllability Gramian operator.
  • The controllability of the nonlinear system is investigated by employing the Schauder fixed-point theorem.
  • Numerical treatments are given using MATLAB.
Our paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we present some basic definitions and preliminary facts, which will be used in order to obtain our desired results. In Section 3, we state and prove the main results of this work. In Section 4, an example is given to illustrate the effectiveness and validity of our controllability results. Finally, we conclude our results and suggest new directions in Section 5.

2. Preliminaries

Throughout the paper, C P ( [ 0 , T ] , R n ) denotes the space of all piecewise left-continuous functions mapping the interval [ 0 , T ] into R n .
Definition 1 ([18]).
The Caputo fractional derivative of order α > 0 , n 1 < α < n is defined as
( C D 0 + α f ) ( t ) = 1 Γ ( n α ) 0 t ( t s ) n α 1 f ( n ) ( s ) d s ,
where the function f ( t ) has absolutely continuous derivatives up to order ( n 1 ) . If 0 < α < 1 , then
( C D 0 + α f ) ( t ) = 1 Γ ( 1 α ) 0 t f ( s ) ( t s ) α d s .
Definition 2 ([18]).
The Mittag–Leffler function in two parameters is defined as
E α , β ( z ) = k = 0 z k Γ ( k α + β ) , f o r α , β > 0 ,
so that z C , C denotes the complex plane. The general Mittag–Leffler function satisfies
0 e t t β 1 E α , β ( t α z ) d t = 1 1 z , f o r | z | < 1 .
The linear fractional delay differential system without impulses is considered as follows.
C D α x ( t ) = A x ( t ) + K x ( t τ ) + h 0 d τ B ( t , τ ) u ( t + τ ) , t [ 0 , T ] , x ( t ) = φ ( t ) , t [ τ , 0 ] .
The nonlinear fractional delay differential system without impulses is considered as follows.
C D α x ( t ) = A x ( t ) + K x ( t τ ) + h 0 d τ B ( t , τ ) u ( t + τ ) + f ( t , x ( t ) , x ( t τ ) , u ( t ) ) , t [ 0 , T ] , x ( t ) = φ ( t ) , t [ τ , 0 ] .
Lemma 1.
For 0 < α < 1 , if f : [ 0 , T ] R n is continuous and exponentially bounded, then the solution of the system (3) can be represented as
x ( t ) = ϕ ( 0 ) + 0 t ( t s ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( t s ) α ) [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ) B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 t [ h 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ) d τ B t ( s τ , τ ) u ( s ) d s , t [ 0 , T ] ,
w h e r e B t ( s , τ ) = B ( s , τ ) , s t , 0 , s > t ,
a n d x ( t ) = φ ( t ) , t [ τ , 0 ] .
Proof. 
Let t [ 0 , T ] , employing the Laplace transform with respect to t on both sides of system (3), the result is
s α L [ x ( t ) ] s α 1 ϕ ( 0 ) = A L [ x ( t ) ] + L [ K x ( t τ ) + h 0 d τ B ( t , τ ) u ( t + τ ) ] , L [ x ( t ) ] = ( s α I A ) 1 s α 1 ϕ ( 0 ) + ( s α I A ) 1 L [ K x ( t τ ) + h 0 d τ B ( t , τ ) u ( t + τ ) ] , L [ x ( t ) ] = L [ ϕ ( 0 ) ] + ( s α I A ) 1 L [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( t τ ) + h 0 d τ B ( t , τ ) u ( t + τ ) ] , = L [ ϕ ( 0 ) ] + L [ t α 1 E α , α ( A t α ) ] L [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( t τ ) + h 0 d τ B ( t , τ ) u ( t + τ ) ] .
Applying the convolution theorem of the Laplace transform to (5), we get
L [ x ( t ) ] = L [ ϕ ( 0 ) ] + L [ t α 1 E α , α ( A t α ) ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( t τ ) + h 0 d τ B ( t , τ ) u ( t + τ ) ] .
Employing the inverse Laplace transform, then we have
x ( t ) = ϕ ( 0 ) + 0 t ( t s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t s ) α ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s + 0 t ( t s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t s ) α ] [ h 0 d τ B ( s , τ ) u ( s + τ ) ] d s .
Using the well-known result of the unsymmetric Fubini theorem [30] and the change of order of the integration to the last term, we have
x ( t ) = ϕ ( 0 ) + 0 t ( t s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t s ) α ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ 0 t ( t s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t s ) α ] u ( s + τ ) B ( s , τ ) d s ] = ϕ ( 0 ) + 0 t ( t s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t s ) α ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + h 0 d B τ [ 0 t + τ ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] B ( s τ , τ ) u ( s ) d s ] = ϕ ( 0 ) + 0 t ( t s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t s ) α ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 t [ h 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] d τ B t ( s τ , τ ) ) u ( s ) d s ,
where
B t ( s , τ ) = B ( s , τ ) , s t , 0 , s > t ,
and d B τ denotes the integration of the Lebesgue–Stieltjes sense with respect to the variable τ in the function B ( t , τ ) , hence the proof. □
Lemma 2.
For 0 < α < 1 , the solution representation of the nonlinear structure (4) is
x ( t ) = ϕ ( 0 ) + 0 t ( t s ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( t s ) α ) [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) + f ( s , x ( s ) , x ( s h ) , u ( s ) ) ] d s , + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ) B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] , + 0 t [ h 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ) d τ B t ( s τ , τ ) ] u ( s ) d s , t [ 0 , T ] ,
where
B t ( s , τ ) = B ( s , τ ) , s t , 0 , s > t ,
a n d x ( t ) = φ ( t ) , t [ τ , 0 ] .
Proof. 
The proof is similar to Lemma 1. Hence, it is eliminated. □
Lemma 3.
Let 0 < α < 1 and u C p ( [ 0 , T ] , R m ) then the solution of structure (1) is as follows.
For t [ τ , 0 ] ,   x ( t ) = φ ( t ) ,
For t [ 0 , t 1 ) ,
x ( t ) = ϕ ( 0 ) + 0 t ( t s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t s ) α ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ) ] d s , + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] , + 0 t [ h 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] d τ B t ( s τ , τ ) ) u ( s ) d s .
For t ( t 1 , t 2 ) ,
x ( t ) = ϕ ( 0 ) + I 1 ( x ( t 1 ) ) + 0 t ( t s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t s ) α ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s , + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] , + 0 t [ h 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] d τ B t ( s τ , τ ) ) u ( s ) d s .
For t ( t i , T ] , i = 1 , 2 , , k ,
x ( t ) = ϕ ( 0 ) + j = 1 i I j ( x ( t j ) + 0 t ( t s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t s ) α ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s ,
+ h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] , + 0 t [ h 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] d τ B t ( s τ , τ ) ) u ( s ) d s .
Proof. 
For t [ τ , 0 ] , the proof is obvious. For t [ 0 , t 1 ) , by Lemma 2,
x ( t ) = ϕ ( 0 ) + 0 t ( t s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t s ) α ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 t [ h 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] d τ B t ( s τ , τ ) ) u ( s ) d s . x ( t 1 ) = ϕ ( 0 ) + 0 t 1 ( t 1 s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t 1 s ) α ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( t 1 ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t 1 ( s τ ) ) α ] B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 t 1 [ h 0 ( t 1 ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t 1 ( s τ ) ) α ] d τ B t 1 ( s τ , τ ) ) u ( s ) d s .
If t ( t 1 , t 2 ) , using (7), we have
x ( t ) = x ( t 1 + ) 0 t 1 ( t 1 s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t 1 s ) α ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( t 1 ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t 1 ( s τ ) ) α ] B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 t 1 [ h 0 ( t 1 ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t 1 ( s τ ) ) α ] d τ B t 1 ( s τ , τ ) ) u ( s ) d s + 0 t ( t s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t s ) α ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 × E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 t [ h 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] × d τ B t ( s τ , τ ) ) u ( s ) d s . x ( t ) = x ( t 1 ) + I 1 ( x ( t 1 ) ) 0 t 1 ( t 1 s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t 1 s ) α ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( t 1 ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t 1 ( s τ ) ) α ] B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 t 1 [ h 0 ( t 1 ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t 1 ( s τ ) ) α ] d τ B t 1 ( s τ , τ ) ) u ( s ) d s + 0 t ( t s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t s ) α ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 × E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 t [ h 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] × d τ B t ( s τ , τ ) ) u ( s ) d s x ( t ) = ϕ ( 0 ) + I 1 ( x ( t 1 ) ) + 0 t ( t s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t s ) α ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s
+ h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 t [ h 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] d τ B t ( s τ , τ ) ) u ( s ) d s .
If t ( t 2 , t 3 ) , then
x ( t ) = x ( t 2 + ) 0 t 2 ( t 2 s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t 2 s ) α ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( t 2 ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t 2 ( s τ ) ) α ] B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 t 2 [ h 0 ( t 2 ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t 2 ( s τ ) ) α ] d τ B t 2 ( s τ , τ ) ) u ( s ) d s + 0 t ( t s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t s ) α ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 t [ h 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] d τ B t ( s τ , τ ) ) u ( s ) d s . x ( t ) = ϕ ( 0 ) + j = 1 2 I j ( x ( t j ) ) + 0 t ( t s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t s ) α ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 t [ h 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] d τ B t ( s τ , τ ) ) u ( s ) d s .
If t ( t i , T ] ( i = 1 , 2 , , k ) , using similar reasoning, we get
x ( t ) = ϕ ( 0 ) + j = 1 i I j ( x ( t j ) ) + 0 t ( t s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t s ) α ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 t [ h 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] d τ B t ( s τ , τ ) ) u ( s ) d s .
The proof is complete. □

3. Controllability Results

In this section, we prove the controllability result of the labelled system.
Definition 3.
System (1) is called controllable on [ 0 , w ] ( w ( 0 , T ] ) ; for any initial function, φ C ( [ τ , 0 ] , R n ) , and any state, x w R n , there exists a control input u ( t ) C p ( [ 0 , w ] , R m ) , so that the corresponding solution of (1) satisfies x ( w ) = x w .
Theorem 1.
Structure (1) is controllable on [ 0 , w ] if and only if the Gramian matrix
W C [ 0 , w ] = 0 w G ( w s ) G ( w , s ) d s ,
is nonsingular for some w [ 0 , T ] , where
G ( w , s ) = h 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] d τ B w ( s τ , τ )
and ∗ denotes the matrix transpose.
Proof. 
Assume that W [ 0 , w ] is nonsingular, then W 1 [ 0 , w ] is well defined. If φ C ( [ τ , 0 ] , R n ) , let w [ 0 , t 1 ] the control function is
u ( t ) = G ( w , t ) W 1 [ 0 , w ] [ x w ϕ ( 0 ) 0 w ( w s ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( w s ) α ) [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s , h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α A ( w ( s τ ) ) α B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] ] .
By substituting t = w in (7) and inserting (11), we get
x ( w ) = ϕ ( 0 ) + 0 w ( w s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( w s ) α ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( w ( s τ ) ) α ] B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 w G ( w , s ) G ( w , s ) W 1 [ 0 , w ] [ x w ϕ ( 0 ) 0 w ( w s ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( w s ) α ) × [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α A ( w ( s τ ) ) α × B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] ] d τ . x ( w ) = x w .
Thus, system (1) is controllable on [ 0 , w ] , w [ 0 , t 1 ] . For w ( t 1 , t 2 ] , we take the control function as
u ( t ) = G ( w , t ) W 1 [ 0 , w ] [ x w ϕ ( 0 ) I 1 ( x ( t 1 ) ) 0 w ( w s ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( w s ) α ) × [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α A ( w ( s τ ) ) α B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] ] .
By substituting t = w in (8) and inserting (12), we get
x ( w ) = ϕ ( 0 ) + I 1 ( x ( t 1 ) ) + 0 w ( w s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( w s ) α ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( w ( s τ ) ) α ] B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 w G ( w , s ) G ( w , s ) W 1 [ 0 , w ] [ x w ϕ ( 0 ) 0 w ( w s ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( w s ) α ) [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α A ( w ( s τ ) ) α × B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] ] d τ . x ( w ) = x w .
Hence, system (1) is controllable on [ 0 , w ] , w [ t 1 , t 2 ] . For w ( t i , t i + 1 ] , i = 1 , 2 , , k , the control function, u, is defined by
u ( t ) = G ( w , t ) W 1 [ 0 , w ] [ x w ϕ ( 0 ) j = 1 i I j ( x ( t j ) ) 0 w ( w s ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( w s ) α ) × [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α × A ( w ( s τ ) ) α B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] ] .
By substituting t = w in (9) and installing the result in (13), similar reasoning gives x ( w ) = x w . Hence, structure (1) is controllable on [ 0 , w ] .
Conversely, assume that W [ 0 , w ] is singular, If w ( t i , t i + 1 ] , i = 1 , 2 , , k , there is a vector z 0 0 , such that z 0 W [ 0 , w ] z 0 = 0 . That is,
z 0 0 w G ( w , s ) G ( W , s ) z 0 d s = 0 , z 0 G ( w , s ) = 0 , o n [ 0 , w ] .
Because structure (1) is controllable, there exist control inputs, u 1 ( t )   and   u 2 ( t ) , so that
x ( w ) = ϕ ( 0 ) + j = 1 i I j ( x ( t j ) ) + 0 w ( w s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( w s ) α ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( w ( s τ ) ) α ] B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 w [ h 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( w ( s τ ) ) α ] d τ B w ( s τ , τ ) ) u 1 ( s ) d s .
z 0 = ϕ ( 0 ) + j = 1 i I j ( x ( t j ) ) + 0 w ( w s ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( w s ) α ] [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( w ( s τ ) ) α ] B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 w [ h 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( w ( s τ ) ) α ] d τ B w ( s τ , τ ) ) u 2 ( s ) d s .
By combining (14) and (15), we get
z 0 0 w [ h 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( w ( s τ ) ) α ] d τ B w ( s τ , τ ) ) ( u 2 ( s ) u 1 ( s ) ) d s = 0 .
By multiplying z 0 on both sides of (16), we get
z 0 z 0 0 w z 0 G ( w , s ) [ u 2 ( s ) u 1 ( s ) ] d s = 0 .
According to z 0 G ( w , s ) = 0 , we have z 0 z 0 = 0 . Thus, z 0 = 0 . This is a contradiction to z 0 0 , hence the proof. □
Definition 4.
Systems (3) or (4) are said to be completely controllable on [ 0 , w ] ( w [ 0 , T ] ) ; for any initial function, φ C ( [ τ , 0 ] , R n ) , and any state, x w R n , there exists a control input u ( t ) , so that the corresponding solutions of (3) or (4) satisfy x ( w ) = x w .
Theorem 2.
System (3) is completely controllable on [ 0 , w ] if and only if W is nonsingular for some w [ 0 , T ] .
Proof. 
Assume that W is nonsingular. Let ϕ ( t ) be continuous on [ τ , 0 ] , and let x w R n . The control function u can be taken as
u ( t ) = G ( w , t ) W 1 [ 0 , w ] [ x w ϕ ( 0 ) 0 w ( w s ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( w s ) α ) [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α A ( w ( s τ ) ) α B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] ] ,
where
G ( w , s ) = h 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α [ A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ] d τ B w ( s τ , τ ) .
By substituting t = w in the solution of (7), we get
x ( w ) = ϕ ( 0 ) + 0 w ( w s ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( w s ) α ) [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( w ( s τ ) ) α ) B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 w [ h 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( w ( s τ ) ) α ) d τ B w ( s τ , τ ) ] u ( s ) d s .
and, using (17) in (18), we have
x ( w ) = ϕ ( 0 ) + 0 w ( w s ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( w s ) α ) [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( w ( s τ ) ) α ) B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 w G ( w , s ) G ( w , s ) W 1 [ 0 , w ] [ x w ϕ ( 0 ) 0 w ( w s ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( w s ) α ) × [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α × A ( w ( s τ ) ) α B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] ] d τ . x ( w ) = x w .
Now, we assume that W is singular. There exists a non-zero, z, so that z W z = 0 . That is, Z 0 w G ( w , s ) G ( w , s ) z d s = 0 . z G ( w , s ) = 0 o n [ 0 , w ] , w [ 0 , T ] . Take ϕ = 0 and the terminal point, x w = z . Since the system is controllable, there exists a control, u ( t ) , on J that steers the response to x w = z at t = w , that is, x ( w ) = z . From ϕ = 0 , x ( w , ϕ ) = 0 , and z z 0 for z 0 . On the other hand,
z = x ( w ) = ϕ ( 0 ) + 0 w ( w s ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( w s ) α ) [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( w ( s τ ) ) α ) B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 w [ h 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( w ( s τ ) ) α ) d τ B w ( s τ , τ ) ] u ( s ) d s ,
hence
z z = 0 w z G ( w , s ) u ( s ) d s + z h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 × E α , α ( A ( w ( s τ ) ) α ) B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] .
Therefore, z z = 0 , which yields a contradiction that z 0 . Hence, W is nonsingular, hence the proof. □
Theorem 3.
Let the continuous function, f, satisfy the condition lim | p | | f ( t , p ) | | p | = 0 uniformly in t J , and suppose that the system, (3), is completely controllable on J. Then, the system (4) is completely controllable on J. Here p = ( x , z , u ) R n × R n × R m , and let | p | = | x | + | z | + | u | .
Proof. 
Let ϕ ( t ) be continuous on [ τ , 0 ] , and let x w R n . Let Q be the Banach space of all the continuous functions ( x , u ) : [ τ , w ] × [ τ , w ] R n × R m , with the norm ( x , u ) = x + u , where x ( t ) = { sup | x ( t ) | f o r t [ τ , w ] } and u = { s u p | u ( t ) | f o r t [ 0 , w ] } . The operator Ψ : Q Q is defined by Ψ ( x , u ) = ( z , v ) , where
v ( t ) = G ( w , t ) W 1 [ 0 , w ] [ x w ϕ ( 0 ) 0 w ( w s ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( w s ) α ) [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α A ( w ( s τ ) ) α B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] ] . z ( t ) = ϕ ( 0 ) + 0 w ( w s ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( w s ) α ) [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( w ( s τ ) ) α ) B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 w [ h 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( w ( s τ ) ) α ) d τ B w ( s τ , τ ) ] u ( s ) d s ,
for t J and z ( t ) = ϕ ( t ) , t [ τ , 0 ] . Let
a 1 = sup ϕ ( 0 ) , a 2 = sup K x ( s τ ) , a 3 = sup E α , α ( A ( w s ) α ) , a 4 = sup E α , α ( A ( w ( s τ ) ) α ) , a 5 = τ 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α A ( w ( s τ ) ) α B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s , a 6 = sup G ( w , t ) , a 7 = W 1 [ 0 , w ] , a = m a x { a 4 w G ( w , s ) , 1 } , d 1 = a 6 a 7 [ | x w + a 1 + a 5 | ] , d 2 = 8 ( a 1 + a 5 ) , c 1 = 8 a 3 a 6 a 7 w α α 1 ( a 1 + a 2 ) , c 2 = 8 a 3 ( a 1 + a 2 ) w α α 1
e 1 = 8 a 3 a 6 a 7 w α α 1 , e 2 = 8 a 3 w α α 1 , c = m a x { c 1 , c 2 } , d = m a x { d 1 , d 2 } , e = m a x { e 1 , e 2 } , sup | f | = sup s J { | f ( s , x ( s ) , x ( s τ ) , u ( s ) ) | } .
Then,
| v ( t ) | G ( w , t ) | W 1 [ 0 , w ] | [ x w + a 1 + a 5 ] + G ( w , t ) | W 1 [ 0 , w ] | a 3 w α α 1 [ a 1 + a 2 ] + G ( w , t ) | W 1 [ 0 , w ] | a 3 w α α 1 sup | f | . | u ( t ) | d 1 8 a + c 1 8 a + e 1 8 a sup | f | 1 8 a ( d + c + e sup | f | ) . | z ( t ) | ( a 1 + a 5 ) + a 4 0 t G ( t , s ) u ( s ) d s + a 3 0 t ( t s ) α 1 sup | f | d s + a 3 0 t ( t s ) α 1 ( a 1 + a 2 ) d s d 8 + 1 8 [ d + c + e sup | f | ] + e 8 sup | f | d 4 + c 8 + e 4 sup | f | .
We make the following assumption about the function f, as in [31]. Letting c and d be each pair of the positive constants, there exists a positive constant, r, so that, if | ( x , u ) | r , then
c | f ( t , p ) | + d r , for all t J ,
then, any r 1 , as long as r < r 1 , will also satisfy (19). Let r be chosen so that (19) is satisfied and sup 1 t 0 | ϕ ( t ) | r 4 . Therefore, if x r 4 and u r 4 , then | x ( s ) | + | x ( s h ) | + | u ( s ) | r , s J . It follows that d + c + e sup | f | r , f o r s J . Therefore, | v ( t ) | r 8 a f o r a l l t J and, hence, v ( t ) r 8 a , we have z r 4 . Thus, if Q ( r ) = { ( x , v ) Q : x r 4 and u r 4 } , then Ψ maps Q ( r ) into itself. The operator Ψ is continuous since f is continuous. Let M 0 be a bounded subset of Q. Consider a sequence, ( z j , v j ) , contained in Ψ ( M ) ; let ( z j , v j ) = Ψ ( x j , u j ) , f o r s o m e ( x j , u j ) M 0 , f o r j = 1 , 2 , . Hence, v j ( t ) is an equicontinuous and uniformly bounded sequence on [ 0 , w ] . Ψ ( M 0 ) is sequentially compact; hence, the closure is sequentially compact. Thus, Ψ is completely continuous. Since Q ( r ) is closed, bounded and convex, using the Schauder fixed-point theorem, Ψ has a fixed point ( x , u ) Q ( r ) , so that ( z , v ) = Ψ ( x , u ) = ( x , u ) .
Therefore,
x ( t ) = ϕ ( 0 ) + 0 t ( t s ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( t s ) α ) [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) + f ( s , x ( s ) , x ( s h ) , u ( s ) ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ) B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 t [ h 0 ( t ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( t ( s τ ) ) α ) d τ B t ( s τ , τ ) u ( s ) d s , t [ 0 , T ] = J ,
where
B t ( s , τ ) = B ( s , τ ) , s t , 0 , s > t ,
x ( t ) = φ ( t ) , t [ τ , 0 ] .
Therefore, x ( t ) is the solution to the system, and
x ( w ) = ϕ ( 0 ) + 0 w ( w s ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( w s ) α ) [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s + h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 E α , α ( A ( w ( s τ ) ) α ) B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] + 0 w G ( w , s ) G ( w , s ) W 1 [ 0 , w ] [ x w ϕ ( 0 ) 0 w ( w s ) α 1 × E α , α ( A ( w s ) α ) [ A ϕ ( 0 ) + K x ( s τ ) ] d s h 0 d B τ [ τ 0 ( w ( s τ ) ) α 1 × E α , α A ( w ( s τ ) ) α B ( s τ , τ ) u 0 ( s ) d s ] ] d τ . x ( w ) = x w .
Hence, the system (4) is completely controllable. □

4. Example

Consider the following linear fractional dynamical system:
C D 1 2 x 1 ( t ) = x 2 ( t ) + 1 0 e τ [ sin t u 1 ( t + τ ) + cos t u 2 ( t + τ ) ] d τ , C D 1 2 x 2 ( t ) = x 1 ( t ) + 1 0 e τ [ cos t u 1 ( t + τ ) + sin t u 2 ( t + τ ) ] d τ , x ( t ) = 1 , 1 t 0 ,
for t [ 0 , 3 ] and α = 1 2 . Here,
A = 0 1 1 0 , B ( t , τ ) = e τ sin t e τ cos t e τ cos t e τ sin t , x ( t ) = x 1 ( t ) x 2 ( t )
and
E 1 2 ( A t 1 2 ) = j = 0 ( 1 ) j t j Γ ( 1 + j ) j = 0 ( 1 ) j t ( 2 j + 1 ) / 2 Γ ( 1 + ( 2 j + 1 ) / 2 ) j = 0 ( 1 ) j t ( 2 j + 1 ) / 2 Γ ( 1 + ( 2 j + 1 ) / 2 ) j = 0 ( 1 ) j t j Γ ( 1 + j ) .
Further,
E 1 2 , 1 2 ( A ( 3 ( s τ ) ) 1 2 ) = j = 0 ( 1 ) j ( 3 ( s τ ) ) j Γ ( 1 + j ) j = 0 ( 1 ) j ( 3 ( s τ ) ) ( 2 j + 1 ) / 2 Γ [ 1 + ( 2 j + 1 ) / 2 ] j = 0 ( 1 ) j ( 3 ( s τ ) ) ( 2 j + 1 ) / 2 Γ [ 1 + ( 2 j + 1 ) / 2 ] j = 0 ( 1 ) j ( 3 ( s τ ) ) j Γ ( 1 + j )
and
( 3 ( s τ ) 1 2 ) E 1 2 , 1 2 ( A ( 3 ( s τ ) ) 1 2 ) = sin 1 2 ( t ) cos 1 2 ( t ) cos 1 2 ( t ) sin 1 2 ( t ) ,
where
cos 1 2 ( t ) = j = 0 ( 1 ) j ( 3 ( s τ ) ) ( 2 j + 1 ) / 2 Γ [ ( 2 j + 1 ) / 2 ] , sin 1 2 ( t ) = j = 0 ( 1 ) j ( 3 ( s τ ) ) ( j + 1 ) 1 Γ ( j + 1 ) .
Also,
G ( 3 , s ) = 1 0 ( 3 ( s τ ) ) 1 2 E 1 2 , 1 2 ( A ( 3 ( s τ ) ) 1 2 ) d τ B 3 ( s τ , τ ) = p ( s ) q ( s ) q ( s ) p ( s ) ,
such that,
p ( s ) = 1 0 e τ [ sin α ( 3 ( s τ ) ) sin ( s τ ) cos 1 2 ( 3 ( s τ ) ) cos ( s τ ) ] d τ , q ( s ) = 1 0 e τ [ cos 1 2 ( 3 ( s τ ) ) sin ( s τ ) sin 1 2 ( 3 ( s τ ) ) cos ( s τ ) ] d τ .
Using matrix calculation,
W ( 0 , 3 ) = 0 3 G ( 3 , s ) G ( 3 , s ) d s = 0 3 [ p 2 ( s ) + q 2 ( s ) ] 1 0 0 1 d s = 84.6306 40.9686 200.6702 84.6306 , W 1 ( 0 , 3 ) = 0.0799 0.0387 0.1895 0.0799 .
Hence, by Theorem 2, the fractional system (20) is completely controllable on [ 0 , 3 ] . Based on our chosen values, we have drawn diagrams for the state function with control Figure 1, the state function without control Figure 2 and the steering control function Figure 3 respectively.
Remark 1.
Consider the following nonlinear impulsive fractional dynamical system
C D 2 3 x 1 ( t ) = x 2 ( t ) + 1 0 e τ [ sin t u 1 ( t + τ ) + cos t u 2 ( t + τ ) ] d τ + 10 x 1 ( t ) 1 + x 1 2 ( t ) + x 2 2 ( t ) , C D 2 3 x 2 ( t ) = x 1 ( t ) + 1 0 e τ [ cos t u 1 ( t + τ ) + sin t u 2 ( t + τ ) ] d τ + x 2 ( t ) 1 + x 1 2 ( t ) + t , Δ x | t = 1 2 = | x ( 1 2 ) | 8 + | x ( 1 2 | ) , x ( t ) = 1 , 1 t 0 .
Under appropriate choices and by following the previous techniques, Theorem 3 can be applied to guarantee the controllability result of the fractional system (21), and hence the diagrams can be also associated.

5. Conclusions

We investigated the concept of controllability criteria for nonlinear fractional differential systems with state delays and distributed delays in the controls with impulsive perturbations. We used the unsymmetric Fubini’s theorem with the change of order of integration, and also, by effecting the notion of Mittag–Leffler’s matrix function, we find the solution representation for the considered system. Further, by applying the controllability Gramian matrix, we studied the controllability results for the system addressed in the preliminary section. Moreover, we have given a numerical example that justifies the exactness of the obtained theoretical results in our main results. As further directions to be considered in our future projects, we intend to combine the above analysis with the topics of differential inclusion, fractional discreet calculus and variable order derivatives.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, B.S.V.; methodology, B.S.V.; validation, A.D. and V.E.F.; formal analysis, V.A.; investigation, A.D. and V.E.F.; writing–original draft preparation, B.S.V.; writing–review and editing, A.D. and V.A.; supervision, A.D.; project administration, V.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The second author was supported by RUSA-Phase 2.0 grant sanctioned vide letter No.F 24-51/2014-U, Policy (TN Multi-Gen), Dept. of Edn. Govt. of India, Dt.09.10.2018; and the third author was supported by the Russian Science Foundation, project number 22-21-20095.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Jahanshahi, H.; Munoz-Pacheco, J.M.; Bekiros, S.; Alotaibi, N.D. A fractional-order SIRD model with time-dependent memory indexes for encompassing the multi-fractional characteristics of the COVID-19. Chaos Solitons Fractals 2021, 143, 110632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Hendy, A.S.; Taha, T.R.; Suragan, D.; Zaky, M.A. An energy-preserving computational approach for the semilinear space fractional damped Klein–Gordon equation with a generalized scalar potential. Appl. Math. Model. 2022, 108, 512–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Jumarie, J. An approach via fractional analysis to non-linearity induced by coarse-graining in space. Nonlinear Anal. Real World Appl. 2010, 11, 535–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Rehman, A.U.; Riaz, M.B.; Rehman, W.; Awrejcewicz, J.; Baleanu, D. Fractional Modeling of Viscous Fluid over a Moveable Inclined Plate Subject to Exponential Heating with Singular and Non-Singular Kernels. Math. Comput. Appl. 2022, 27, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Luchko, Y.F.; Rivero, M.; Trujillo, J.J.; Velasco, M.P. Fractional models, non-locality, and complex systems. Comput. Math. Appl. 2010, 59, 1048–1056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Manimaran, J.; Shangerganesh, L.; Debbouche, A.; Cortés, J.C. A time-fractional HIV infection model with nonlinear diffusion. Results Phys. 2021, 25, 104293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Guo, T.L.; Jiang, W. Impulsive fractional functional differential equations. Comput. Math. Appl. 2012, 64, 3414–3424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Sivasankar, S.; Udhayakumar, R.; Subramanian, V.; AlNemer, G.; Elshenhab, A.M. Existence of Hilfer Fractional Stochastic Differential Equations with Nonlocal Conditions and Delay via Almost Sectorial Operators. Mathematics 2022, 10, 4392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Fang, H.; Song, M. Existence results for fractional order impulsive functional differential equations with multiple delays. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2018, 2018, 139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Al-Sawalha, M.M.; Ababneh, O.Y.; Shah, R.; Khan, A.; Nonlaopon, K. Numerical analysis of fractional-order Whitham–Broer–Kaup equations with non-singular kernel operators. AIMS Math. 2023, 8, 2308–2336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Al-Sawalha, M.M.; Shah, R.; Nonlaopon, K.; Khan, I.; Ababneh, O.Y. Fractional evaluation of Kaup–Kupershmidt equation with the exponential-decay kernel. AIMS Math. 2023, 8, 3730–3746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Gafiychuk, V.; Datsun, B.; Meleshko, V. Mathematical modelling of time fractional reaction-diffusion systems. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2008, 220, 215–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Udhayakumar, K.; Rihan, F.A.; Rakkiyappan, R.; Cao, J. Fractional-order discontinuous systems with indefinite LKFs: An application to fractional-order neural networks with time delays. Neural Netw. 2022, 145, 319–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Kumar, P.; Erturk, V.S.; Murillo-Arcila, M. A new fractional mathematical modelling of COVID-19 with the availability of vaccine. Results Phys. 2021, 24, 104213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Metzler, R.; Klafter, J. The restaurant at the end of the random walk: Recent developments in the description of anomalous transport by fractional dynamics. J. Phys. A Math. Gen. 2004, 37, 161–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Kilbas, A.A.; Srivastava, H.M.; Trujillo, J.J. Theory and Applications of Fractional Differential Equations; North-Holland Mathematics Studies 204; Elsevier Science B.V.: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  17. Miller, K.S.; Ross, B. An Introduction to the Fractional Calculus and Fractional Differential Equations; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1993. [Google Scholar]
  18. Podlubny, I. Fractional Differential Equations, Volume 198 of Mathematics in Science and Engineering; Technical University of Kosice: Kosice, Slovak Republic, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  19. Artstein, Z. Linear systems with delayed controls: A reduction. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control. 1982, 27, 869–879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Artstein, Z.; Tadmor, G. Linear systems with indirect controls: The underlying measures. SIAM J. Control. Optim. 1982, 20, 96–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Balachandran, K.; Dauer, J.P. Controllability of nonlinear systems via fixed point theorems. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 1987, 53, 345–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Balachandran, K.; Zhou, Y.; Kokila, J. Relative controllability of fractional dynamical systems with distributed delays in control. Comput. Math. Appl. 2012, 64, 3201–3209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Kumar, V.; Malik, M.; Debbouche, A. Stability and controllability analysis of fractional damped differential system with non-instantaneous impulses. Appl. Math. Comput. 2021, 391, 125633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Zhang, H.; Cao, J.; Jiang, W. Controllability criteria for linear fractional differential systems with state delay and impulses. J. Appl. Math. 2013, 2013, 146010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Vadivoo, B.S.; Jothilakshmi, G.; Almalki, Y.; Debbouche, A.; Lavanya, M. Relative controllability analysis of fractional order differential equations with multiple time delays. Appl. Math. Comput. 2022, 28, 127192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. He, B.B.; Zhou, H.C.; Kou, C.H. The controllability of fractional damped dynamical systems with control delay. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 2016, 32, 190–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Guo, T.L. Controllability and observability of impulsive fractional linear time-invariant system. Comput. Math. Appl. 2012, 64, 3171–3182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Jiang, W.; Song, W.Z. Controllability of singular systems with control delay. Automatica 2001, 37, 1873–1877. [Google Scholar]
  29. Wei, J. The controllability of fractional control systems with control delay. Comput. Math. Appl. 2012, 64, 3153–3159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Cameron, R.H.; Martin, W.T. An unsymmetric Fubini theorem. Bull. Am. Math. Lett. 2011, 24, 2019–2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Dauer, J.P. Nonlinear perturbations of quasi-linear control systems. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1976, 54, 717–725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. State with control function steers initial state x ( 0 ) = ( 0 , 2 ) T to final state x ( 2 ) = ( 2 , 4 ) T .
Figure 1. State with control function steers initial state x ( 0 ) = ( 0 , 2 ) T to final state x ( 2 ) = ( 2 , 4 ) T .
Mca 28 00013 g001
Figure 2. State vectors without control function.
Figure 2. State vectors without control function.
Mca 28 00013 g002
Figure 3. The steering control function.
Figure 3. The steering control function.
Mca 28 00013 g003
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Debbouche, A.; Vadivoo, B.S.; Fedorov, V.E.; Antonov, V. Controllability Criteria for Nonlinear Impulsive Fractional Differential Systems with Distributed Delays in Controls. Math. Comput. Appl. 2023, 28, 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/mca28010013

AMA Style

Debbouche A, Vadivoo BS, Fedorov VE, Antonov V. Controllability Criteria for Nonlinear Impulsive Fractional Differential Systems with Distributed Delays in Controls. Mathematical and Computational Applications. 2023; 28(1):13. https://doi.org/10.3390/mca28010013

Chicago/Turabian Style

Debbouche, Amar, Bhaskar Sundara Vadivoo, Vladimir E. Fedorov, and Valery Antonov. 2023. "Controllability Criteria for Nonlinear Impulsive Fractional Differential Systems with Distributed Delays in Controls" Mathematical and Computational Applications 28, no. 1: 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/mca28010013

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop