1. INTRODUCTION
In this paper, we discuss various retarded integral inequalities of Stieltjes type and apply the inequalities to the study of various qualitative behaviors of a certain retarded differential equation involving impulses.
Differential equations with impulses arise in various real world phenomena in mathematical physics, mechanics, engineering, biology and so on. We refer to the monograph of Samoilenko and Perestyuk [8]. Also integral inequalities are very useful tools in global existence, uniqueness, stability and other properties of the solutions of various nonlinear differential equations, see, e.g., [5], and for retarded integral inequalities and their applications, see [6].
2. PRELIMINARIES
In this section we state some materials that are needed in this paper.
Let R, R+, N be the set of all real numbers, the set of all nonnegative real numbers, and the set of all positive integers, respectively, and let
For convenience we define
Throughout this paper we use the Kurzweil-Stieltjes integrals and the Stieltjes derivatives. For the integrals and derivatives, and various notations that are used here, see, e.g., [3, 4, 10] and the references cited there.
We use the following results frequently.
Theorem 2.1 ([12, Theorem 2.15]). Assume that f ∈ G([a, b]) and g ∈ BV ([a, b]). Then both f dg and g df are K-integrable on [a, b].
Theorem 2.2 ([3, 4]). Assume that f ∈ G([a, b]) and a function m : [a, b] → R is nondecreasing, and is not locally constant at t ∈ [a, b]. If f is continuous at t or m is not continuous at t, then we have
Theorem 2.3 ([3, 4]). Assume that f ∈ G([a, b]) and a function m : [a, b] → R is nondecreasing, and that if m is constant on some neighborhood of t, then there exists a neighborhood of t such that both f and m are constant there. Suppose that exists at every t ∈ [a, b] − {c1, c2, ...}, where f is continuous at every t ∈ {c1, c2, ...}. Then we have
Theorem 2.4 ([11, p. 34, Corollary 4.13]). Assume that f ∈ G([a, b]) and m ∈ BV ([a, b]). Then for every t ∈ [a, b] we have
Remark 2.5. In Theorem 2.3, we define, for every i ∈ N, , and Theorem 2.4 implies that if m is continuous at t then is also continuous there.
Let 0 = t0 < t1 < t2 < · · · < tn < · · · . Then we define a function ϕ as
For the function ϕ we have the following result.
Lemma 2.6 ([4]). We have
We define Cm as the set of all points of continuity of a function m, and Dm as the set of all points of discontinuity of the function m, and we define
and
Throughout this paper, unless otherwise specified, we always assume the following conditions:
(H1) All functions in this paper are nonnegative regulated functions on R+.
(H2) A left-continuous function m is strictly increasing and differentiable, and m′ > 0, except for a countable set of R+. And a function w is nondecreasing, continuous and positive on (0,∞). We define
and E−1 represents the inverse of the function E, and Dom(E−1) represents the domain of the function E−1.
(H3) A left-continuous function α is nondecreasing, and 0 ≤ α(t) ≤ t for every t ∈ R+, and α′(t) exists whenever m′(t) exists, and α is continuous at t whenever m is continuous there.
3. SOME RETARDED INTEGRAL INEQUALITIES
In order to obtain some integral inequalities we need following results.
Lemma 3.1. Assume that a positive left-continuous function z is nondecreasing on R+. If z is continuous at t and exists, then we have
If t ∈ Dm, then we have
Proof. First assume that the function z is constant on some open neighborhood of t, then = 0, and
so in this case the lemma is true.
If z is not locally constant at t and continuous there, then by definition we have
Now assume that t ∈ Dm. Then, since both m and z are left-continuous, and both w and z are nondecreasing, we have
The proof is complete. □
From now on we define
Then we have the following result.
Lemma 3.2. If exists except for a countable subset of Cm, then there is a countable set D of Cm such that for every t ∈ Cm − D we have
and if t ∈ Dm, then we have
Proof. Since every function in G(R+) has at most a countable number of discontinuities([2, p.17, Corollary 3.2.]), by Theorem 2.2, there is a countable set D1 ⊂ Cm such that for every t ∈ Cm − D1, the first equality of (3.1) is true, and again by Theorem 2.2, the first equality of (3.2) is also true.
Let K = {t ∈ Cm : α is constant on some open neighborhood of t}. Then, since in this case = 0, we have
and so in this case the lemma is also true.
Note that since f ∈ G(R+) and α is nondecreasing on R+ there is a countable set D2 such that, for every t ∈ (Cm − K) − D2, α is not locally constant at t, and f is continuous at α(t). By (H3), t ∈ Cm implies t ∈ Cα. So by the definition of Stieltjes derivatives, for every t ∈ (Cm − K) − D2, we get
Now we put D = D1 ∪ D2. Then for every t ∈ Cm − D the lemma is true.
And if t ∈ Dm then we have
Thus the proof is complete. □
The following is a Gronwall-Bellman type integral inequality.
Theorem 3.3. Assume that functions n and m are nondecreasing on R+.
If a function u satisfies
then we have
Proof. Without loss of generality we may assume that n(t) is positive. If n(t) is nonnegative we use n(t) + ε(ε > 0) and let ε → 0 + .
From (3.3), since n(t) is positive, we have
By [3, Theorem 4.4.] we get
This inequality yields (3.4). The proof is complete. □
From now on we assume that L ≥ 0 is a constant.
Theorem 3.4. If a function u satisfies
then for some T ≥ 0 we have
where
and the number T is chosen so that
for every t ∈ [0, T].
Proof. We define
and
Then u(t) ≤ x(t) + y(t).
By Lemma 3.1 since x is continuous on R+ there is a countable set D1 ⊂ Cm such that for every t ∈ R+ − D1 we have
By Lemma 3.2 there is a countable set D2 ⊂ Cm such that for every t ∈ Cm −D2 we have
and for every t ∈ Dm we get
Now, let D = D1 ∪ D2, and considering Remark 2.5, for every t ∈ D, we define . Then for every t ∈ R+, by the previous inequalities and (3.6), for every t ∈ R+, we have
Thus we get
So by Theorem 2.3 and Lemma 3.1 we get
Since x(0) = L, y(0) = 0 we have
This implies that for every t ∈ [0, T],
The proof is complete. □
From now on we define α+(t) = α(t+). Then we have the following result.
Theorem 3.5. Assume that a function h is nondecreasing on R+ and for every u, v ≥ 0, w(uv) ≤ w(u)w(v). If a function u satisfies
then we have for some T ≥ 0
where
and , and the number T is chosen so that
for all t ∈ [0, T].
Proof. Define a function n(t) by
then (3.7) can be written as
Since n(t) is nondecreasing on R+, by applying Theorem 3.3, we have
By Lemma 3.2, there is a countable set D ⊂ Cm such that for every t ∈ Cm − D, we have
and for every t ∈ Dm we get similarly
Considering Remark 2.5, for every t ∈ D, we define . Then, by the previous inequalities, for every t ∈ R+, we have
This implies
By Theorem 2.3 and Lemma 3.1, integrating both sides of the above inequality gives
Since n(0) = L we have
Hence (3.9) and (3.10) gives (3.8). The proof is complete. □
4. SOME APPLICATIONS
There are many applications of the inequalities obtained in the previous section. Here we shall give some examples that are sufficient to show the usefulness of our results.
We consider the following retarded impulsive differential equation:
where 0 = t0 < t1 < · · · < tk < · · · < tm < · · · .
In this section, for every k ∈ N, we assume the following conditions:
(C1)A strictly increasing left-continuous function α ∈ G(R+) is continuous at every t ≠ tk, and differentiable at every t ∈ R+, where α′(tk) implies the left hand derivative at tk, and 0 ≤ α(t) ≤ t.
(C2)A left-continuous function x ∈ G(R+) is continuous at every t ≠ tk, and x′(t) exists for every t, where for t = tk or α(t) = tk we define x′(t) as the left hand derivative at t.
(C3)A continuous function Ik : R → R satisfies
(C4)A function G : R+×R → R is continuous, and a function F : R+×R → R is continuous at every (t, x), t ≠ tk, and for every tk, F(tk, x) = Ik(x) and,
for some nonnegative functions a, c ∈ G(R+), where a(tk) = ak, c(tk) = 0, and a function j that is continuous on R+.
Now to accomplish our purpose we need some preliminaries.
Let X be a linear space, recall that a semi-norm on X, is a mapping |·| : X → R+ having all the properties of a norm except that |x| = 0 does not allways imply that x = 0.
Suppose that we have a countable family of semi-norms on X, | · |n; we say that this family is sufficient if and only if for every x ∈ X, x ≠ 0 there exists a positive integer n such that |x|n ≠ 0.
Every space (X, | · |n), endowed with a countable and sufficient family of seminorms can be organized as a metric space by setting the metric
It is well-known fact that (X, d) forms a locally convex space (see, e.g.,[7]).
Recall that the convergence determined by the metric d can be characterized as follows:
xk → x if and only if for every positive integer n, limk→∞ |xk − x|n = 0.
To achieve our purpose we need the following result.
Theorem 4.1 ([9, Schaefer’s fixed point theorem]). Assume that X is a linear space with a countable and sufficient family of semi-norms | · |n, n ∈ N.
Let T : X → X be a completely continuous map. If the set
is bounded, then T has a fixed point.
A set 𝒜 ⊂ G([a, b]) has uniform one-sided limits at t0 ∈ [a, b] if for every ε > 0 there is δ > 0 such that for every x ∈ 𝒜 we have: if t0 < t < t0 + δ then |x(t) − x(t0+)| < ε; if t0 − δ < t < t0 then |x(t) − x(t0−)| < ε.
A set 𝒜 ⊂ G([a, b]) is called equi-regulated on [a, b] if it has uniform one-sided limits at every point t0 ∈ [a, b].
For compactness of a set 𝒜 ∈ G([a, b]), we have the following result.
Theorem 4.2. ([1, Corollary 2.4]) A set 𝒜 ∈ G([a, b]) is relatively compact if and only if it is equi-regulated on [a, b] and for every t ∈ [a, b] the set {x(t) : x ∈ 𝒜} is bounded in R.
Lemma 4.3. If a function x is a solution of
then the function x is a solution of the equation (4.1).
Proof. First assume that t ≠ tk and α(t) ≠ tk, ∀k ∈ N. Then, since both x and α are continuous at t, by the conditions (C1)-(C4) we have
This implies x satisfies (4.1) at t
Assume that t ≠ tk for every k and α(t) = tj for some j. Then by the conditions (C1) and (C2) x is continuous at t and left-continuous at tj , and α is left-continuous at t. So we have the left hand derivative of x at t. As in (4.2) we can show that
Finally assume that t = tk for some k. Then we can easily verify that
The proof is complete. □
From now on we let m = ϕ (see (2.1)). Then we have the following result.
Lemma 4.4. If a function x is a solution of
then the function x is a solution of the equation (4.1).
Proof. By Lemma 2.6 and the condition (C4), we have
By the above equality and Lemma 4.3 we see that the lemma is true. □
From now on we let for k ∈ N
Then we have the following result.
Lemma 4.5. Assume that the function b ∈ G(R+). Then for every
we have
Proof. We have, for every t ∈ [tk, tk+1), k ∈ N ∪ {0},
Here by change of variables we get
and
and similarly we have
So we get
The proof is complete. □
Theorem 4.6. If x satisfies the equation (4.3), then we have for some T ≥ 0
where
where the number T is chosen so that for all t ∈ [0, T].
Proof. Since c(tk) = 0, k ∈ N, by Lemma 2.6, we have
So by (4.3) and Lemma 4.5 we have
Thus by Theorem 3.4 we obtain (4.4). The proof is complete. □
Theorem 4.7. If, in Theorem 4.6, we have γ(t) ∈ Dom(E−1) for all t ∈ R+ and for some M ≥ 0, γ(t) ≤ M , and
then we have
Proof. By Theorem 4.6, |x(t)| ≤ E−1 (M) ≡ K for all t ∈ R+. So by (4.5) we have
This gives (4.6). □
Theorem 4.8. If γ(t) ∈ Dom(E−1) for all t ∈ R+, then the equation (4.1) has a solution in G(R+).
Proof. We define semi-norms for every positive integer n as follows:
We define an operator T : G(R+) → G(R+) as, for every t ∈ R+,
Then, by Lemma 4.4, if x satisfies x = T x, then x is a solution of the equation (4.1).
First, we will show that T is completely continuous on the semi-normed space (G(R+), | · |n).
Assume that xk → x in G(R+). Then for every positive integer n we have
and this implies that there is a nonnegative number Mn such that |xk|n, |x|n ≤ Mn.
By our assumption, for every s ∈ [0, n], we get
and
So by [10, 1.32 Corollary] we have
This implies that T is continuous.
Let 𝓜 be a bounded subset in G(R+). Then for every n ∈ N there is a nonnegative number Mn such that |x|n ≤ Mn for all x ∈ 𝓜. Then for every x ∈ 𝓜. and for every t ∈ [0, n], we have
This implies that {T x : x ∈ 𝓜} is equi-bounded on [0, n].
Let t0 ∈ [0, n) and assume that tj , tk → t0 + (tj < tk) as j, k → ∞. Then using Theorem 2.4 and the method in the proof of [3, Theorem 5.3.] we see that, uniformly for all x ∈ 𝓜,
Now let tj , tk → t0− as j, k → ∞. Then similarly we can show that
uniformly for all x ∈ 𝓜. So the set {T x : x ∈ 𝓜} is equi-regulated on [0, n].
Thus, by Theorem 4.2, we have shown that T is completely continuous for the semi-norm | · |n. This implies that T is completely continuous on the semi-normed space G(R+).
Finally we show that the set
is bounded. Here every x ∈ Λ has to satisfy |x(t)| = |Tx(t)|, ∀t ∈ [0, n]. Then by Theorem 4.6 we have |x|n ≤ E−1 [γ(n)].
Thus we conclude that Λ is a bounded set in the semi-normed space (G(R+), |·|n). Thus the operator T satisfies all conditions in Theorem 4.1. So there is an x ∈ G(R+) such that x = Tx. This completes the proof. □
References
- D. Frănková: Regulated functions. Math. Bohem. 116(1991), 20-59.
- C.S. Hönig: Volterra Stieltjes-integral equations. Mathematics Studies 16, North-Holand and American Elsevier, Amsterdam and New York, 1973.
- Y.J. Kim: Stieltjes derivatives and its applications to integral inequalities of Stieltjes type. J. Korean Soc. Math. Educ. Ser. B: Pure Appl. Math. 18 (2011), no. 1, 63-78.
- ______: Stieltjes derivative method for integral inequalities with impulses. J. Korean Soc. Math. Educ.Ser. B: Pure Appl. Math. 21 (2014), no. 1, 61-75.
- B. G. Pachpatte: Inequalities for differential and integral equations. Mathematics in Science and Engineering 197, Academic Press, Inc., 1998.
- ______: Integral and finite difference inequalities and applications. Mathematics Studies 205, North-Holand and American Elsevier, Amsterdam and New York, 2006.
- W. Rudin: Functional analysis. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1973.
- A.M. Samoilenko & N.A. Perestyuk: Impulsive differential equations. World Scientific, Singapore, 1995.
- H. Schaefer: Über die methode der a priori-Schranken. Math. Ann. 29 (1955), 415-416.
- Š. Schwabik: Generalized ordinary differential equations. World Scientific, Singapore, 1992.
- Š. Schwabik, M. Tvrdý & O. Vejvoda: Differntial and integral equations: boundary value problems and adjoints. Academia and D. Reidel, Praha and Dordrecht, 1979.
- M. Tvrdý: Regulated functions and the Perron-Stieltjes integral. Časopis pešt. mat. 114 (1989), no. 2, 187-209.