1. Introduction
It is well known that fractional calculus and fractional differential equations are an efficient tool for investigations in various fields of science. A good overview of the different areas of the fractional calculus theory and fractional differential equations can be found in the monographs of Kilbas et al. [
1], and Kiryakova [
2], Podlubny [
3]. The book of Diethelm [
4] is devoted to an application-oriented exposition, and some generalizations concerning distributed order fractional differential equations are considered in Jiao et al. [
5]. The fundamental theory of the impulsive fractional differential equations (with and without delay) is presented in the monograph of Stamova and Stamov [
6]; their applications are considered as well.
In comparison with the integer-order case, the main advantage of the delayed fractional differential equations is the possibility to describe the impact of history on the evolution of the processes, taking information from two sources (the memory source of the fractional derivative and the memory impact caused by the delay). It is well known that the problem to obtain an integral representation of the solution for linear fractional differential equations and/or systems (ordinary or with delay) plays a central role in the qualitative analysis of the studied objects. A mainstay tool for solving this problem is the existence of a fundamental matrix. That is why the road to the integral representations of the solutions crosses the problem of the existence of a fundamental matrix, an important evergreen theme for research. We think that this is an explanation for why a lot of papers are devoted to these problems. For the case of linear fractional ordinary differential equations and systems concerning this theme, we refer to [
7,
8,
9,
10,
11] and the references therein. Some results in the autonomous case using the Laplace transform method are obtained in [
12,
13,
14]. From the works devoted to the problem of establishing an integral representation for fractional differential equations and/or systems with delay, we point out [
15,
16,
17] for the case of singular systems. Both problems (the existence of a fundamental matrix and integral representation of the solutions) for fractional systems with a single-order Caputo-type derivative of retarded and/or neutral type with distributed delays are studied in [
18,
19,
20,
21,
22,
23,
24,
25,
26].
It is known that in the general case, the problem of the solvability of an initial problem for this system with discontinuous initial function is the basic result from which, as a corollary, we can prove the existence of a fundamental matrix for a homogeneous delayed (or neutral) fractional differential system. As far we know, in the last five years, published works related to the theme of the integral representation of the solutions for delayed and neutral fractional systems with Caputo-type derivatives are not so much. For articles considering delayed fractional systems with Caputo-type derivatives related to the theme, we refer to [
18,
22,
25,
27]. Concerning works devoted to this theme for autonomous neutral fractional systems case, we refer to [
28] for the case of one constant delay; the case of a system with several constant delays is studied in [
20]; and the general case of a system with distributed delays is considered in [
26]. For nonautonomous neutral fractional systems, the case of one constant delay is considered in [
17], and the case with an autonomous neutral part in [
21].
In the present work, we consider as the most general case a neutral linear delayed system of the incommensurate type with distributed delay (even in the neutral part) with derivatives in the Caputo sense.
The paper is organized as follows: In
Section 2, we recall some needed definitions of Riemann–Liouville and Caputo fractional derivatives, as well as the needed part of their properties. In the same section, the problem statement can be found, and some notations are introduced.
Section 3 is devoted to the existence and the uniqueness of the solutions of the Cauchy problem for the considered systems with a picewise continuous initial function having bounded variation in the initial interval. As a corollary of the proved results, we obtain that the corresponding homogeneous system has a continuous, in
, fundamental matrix, whose result extends the corresponding ones, even in the particular case of a fractional system with one constant delay and lower terminal at zero of the fractional derivatives. In
Section 4 on the base of the obtained results in
Section 3, we present integral representations of the solutions of the considered Cauchy problem. Some conclusions and comments are given in
Section 5.
2. Preliminaries and Problem Statement
For the readers’ convenience and to avoid possible misunderstandings, below we recall some definitions of Riemann–Liouville and Caputo fractional derivatives as well as some of their needed properties. For details and other properties, we refer to [
1,
3].
Let
be an arbitrary number, and let us denote by
the linear space of all locally Lebesgue integrable functions
. Then, for each
and
the left-sided fractional integral operator of order
and the corresponding left-side Riemann–Liouville derivative are defined for
by the following:
respectively. The Caputo fractional left-side derivative is defined by
We use the following relations (see Kilbas et al. [
1]; see Lemmas 2.21 and 2.22):
- (a)
- (b)
- (c)
Consider for
the inhomogeneous and homogeneous linear neutral systems with incommensurate-type differential orders and distributed delays in the following general form:
where
,
,
,
,
,
, where
denotes the left side Caputo fractional derivative
The system (
1) described with more details has the form
In addition, we use also the following notations:
Let Then, , denotes the linear space of matrix valued functions with bounded variation in on for every and Everywhere below , , and for , , we will use the notation where are the zero and identity matrices, respectively.
With , we denote the Banach space of all right continuous piecewise vector functions with norm . For the set of all jump points of each function , we assume that the number of jump points is finite. By , we assume the subspace of all continuous functions in
Consider the following standard initial conditions for the system (
1):
We say that for the kernels the conditions are fulfilled if the following conditions hold:
The functions are measurable in and normalized so that for for , for , . For each the kernels and are continuous from the left in on and , respectively, and .
For and , the Lebesgue decompositions of the kernels have the following form:
and , respectively, , , is the Heaviside function, are locally bounded, , for every , , and , for
The functions
and
are locally bounded in
, and the kernels
are uniformly nonatomic at zero [
29,
30], i.e., for every
, there exists
such that
For each
, the following relations hold:
and the sets
for every
and
do not have limit points [
31].
Remark 1. Note that from Condition , it follows that for all , and the sets and are finite.
Definition 1. The vector functionis a solution of the initial problem (IP) (1), (3) inif,satisfies system (1) for alland initial condition (3) for. Let us assume that the conditions
hold. Consider the following auxiliary system:
or in more detailed form for
Definition 2. The vector functionis a solution of the IP (4), (3) inifsatisfies system (4) for alland initial condition (3) for. Let
,
be an arbitrary initial point;
,
are arbitrary given functions with
. For the initial interval
, define the following initial function
as
,
and introduce the following initial condition:
Definition 3. The vector functionis a solution of IP (4) and (6) or of IP (1) and (6) in(),if,satisfies system (4) or system (1), respectively, for alland initial condition (6) for. Lemma 1 ([
23])
. Let the following conditions be fulfilled:- 1.
The conditions (S) hold.
- 2.
The function and is locally bounded.
Then, every solution of IP (1), (3) is a solution of IP (4) and (3) and vice versa. The next lemma treats the same problem for IP (
4) and (
6) and IP (
1) and (
6) in the case when the initial point does not coincide with the lower terminal of the fractional derivative.
Lemma 2. Let the following conditions be fulfilled:
- 1.
The conditions (S) hold.
- 2.
The function and is locally bounded.
- 3.
Let , be arbitrary and with be an arbitrary given function.
Then, every solutionof IP (1) and (6) is a solution of IP (4) and (6) and vice versa. Proof. The proof is standard and analogical of the proof of Lemma 4 in [
23] and, therefore, will be omitted. □
Let be arbitrary and introduce the sets for every and define when for . Obviously, from condition it follows that the sets are finite. Furthermore, it is not difficult to see that either , or . Note that it is possible that , no matter whether , or not. This case is considered in the next lemma.
3. Main Results
In our exposition below, we need the next two technical lemmas.
Lemma 3. Let the following conditions be fulfilled:
- 1.
The conditions (S) hold.
- 2.
.
Then, for every initial function , there exists a constant (eventually depending from Φ) such that is continuous in for all .
Proof. (a) Let . Then, the functions are continuous at a for and since and are finite. Then, there exists such that the set and therefore for Thus, the functions are continuous in (right continuous at a), .
(b) Let . Let us assume the contrary, that for every , the set Then, there exists a monotone decreasing sequence , such that for each and some , the sets . Since the numbers are finitely many, then for at least one number , there exists an infinite monotone decreasing subsequence such that the sets for each . Thus, the set has at least one limit point, which contradicts condition . Then, there exists such that for and is continuous in . □
Definition 4. For an initial function , the point a is called a critical jump point concerning the kernel if for this we have that and there exists a constant (eventually depending from ), such that for .
Remark 2. It is simple to see that for an initial function , the point can be a critical jump point concerning more than one kernels in partial for all of them.
The next lemma considers the important case in view of the applications (existence of fundamental matrix, integral representations, etc.) when , i.e., is a critical jump point concerning at least one kernel.
Lemma 4. Let the following conditions be fulfilled:
- 1.
The conditions (S) hold.
- 2.
Then for every initial function with , one of the following statements holds:
- (i)
There exists a constant (eventually depending from ) such that is continuous for .
- (ii)
The point is a critical jump point for Φ concerning a kernel , for some .
Proof. Condition 2 implies that and let be an arbitrary number for which . From condition (S4), it follows that there exists a constant (eventually depending from ) such that either and hence is continuous for , or for . Hence, is a critical jump point and statement (ii) holds. For the case when and as in case (b) of Lemma 3, it can be proved that (i) holds. □
Let us, for every
, consider the following set:
and for
define the set
and a metric function
,
. It is clear that the set
endowed with the metric
is a complete metric space concerning this metric.
Remark 3 (Lemma 1, [
25])
. Note that when the defined above metric is equivalent in with the metric . Following the approach introduced in [
21] and supposing that the conditions (S) hold, for arbitrary
,
and for each
define the operator
by the following:
for
and the additional relations
Theorem 1. Let the following conditions be fulfilled:
- 1.
The conditions (S) hold and the function is locally bounded.
- 2.
The initial function is without a critical jump point.
- 3.
Then there exists a constant such that the operator has a unique fixed point in the complete metric space , i.e., the IP (4), (3) has a unique local solution with interval of existence . Proof. Let
be arbitrary and
be not a critical jump point. Then, according to Lemmas 3 and 4, we can choose
such that for every
,
for
and
are continuous in
. For
and arbitrary
we have the following:
Let be arbitrary and since for each , we have that
and .
Then for every
and
integrating by parts, we obtain the following:
Since
and
are continuous functions for
,
, then
is a continuous function for
too. Furthermore, according to Lemma 1 in [
31], the integral in the right side of (
10) exists and is a continuous function for
. Thus, the integral in the left side of (
10) also exists and is a continuous function for
; since the first addend in the right side of (
9) is continuous in
, then
for each
is a continuous function for
too. Since for
, the right side of (
10) is right continuous at
a and a continuous function for
,
, then conditions (S5) and (S6) imply that for
and
the following relation holds:
and hence
is right continuous at
a. Taking into account that the right side of (
10) is left continuous at
and a continuous function for
, as stated above, we conclude that conditions (S3) and (S4) imply that for
and
the following relation holds:
Then the right side of (
7) is left continuous at
and hence
is a continuous function for
. Thus, we proved that
and hence,
for
.
Let
be arbitrary and since for
and
we have
, then
for
, where
Let
be arbitrary. From condition (S3) it follows that there exists
such that
for every
and
. For every
and
we have
and then for arbitrary
we have that the following equality holds:
Let
; then, we obtain that
for
. Then from (
9) and (
12) for
it follows that
Then for every for
and
from (
7) and (
12) we obtain the following estimation:
where
. For the integral in the right side of (
14), we have the following:
where
and
Let
and choice
Then from (
14) and (
15) it follows that
and hence, the operator
ℜ is contractive in
. □
Remark 4. Note that without loss of generality, we can renumber all kernels so that those for which is a critical jump point have the numbers , .
In the next theorem, for convenience we assume that this renumbering is made.
Remark 5. It is simple to see from the proof of Theorem 1 that the condition 3 of the Theorem 1 is necessary only for the proof that the Lebesgue–Stieltjes integral in the left side of (10) is a continuous function for . Obviously if the initial function , then condition 2 of Theorem 1 is ultimately fulfilled. According to Lemma 1 in [
31],
the mentioned integral is a continuous function for . Thus, in the case when the condition is unnecessary. Theorem 2. Let the following conditions be fulfilled:
- 1.
Condition 1 of Theorem 1 holds.
- 2.
The point is a critical jump point for the initial function concerning at least one kernel .
- 3.
Then, there exists a constant such that the operator has a unique fixed point in the complete metric space , i.e., the IP (4) and (3) have a unique local solution with an interval of existence . Proof. Let , be arbitrary and be a critical jump point for concerning the kernels , for . Then, there exists a constant (eventually depending from ), such that for . Since the kernels , are finitely many, the constant can be chosen to be the same for all kernels. Obviously, for all other kernels , according to Lemmas 3 and 4, there exists a constant (eventually depending from ) such that and are continuous for .
Let
,
be arbitrary and consider for
the operator
defined with (
7) and (
8) in the proof of Theorem 1. As in Theorem 1, we can prove that for arbitrary
, we have
and hence,
.
Let
be arbitrary. As shown above for
and
we have
, and then (
11) holds for
but only for
. From condition 2, it follows that there exists
such that
. Let
be arbitrary. From condition (S3) it follows that there exists
such that
for every
and
. For every
and
we have that
and then we have that the equality (
12) holds for arbitrary
G,
and
. Then for every
,
, taking into account (
12), we obtain the following:
Then for every
as in (
14) taking into account (
15) and (
16) we obtain the following:
Let
and choose
. Then from (
17) it follows that
and hence, the operator ℜ is contractive in . □
Remark 6. It is not difficult to see that the statement of Theorem 2 remains true if instead of condition 3, the following weakened condition holds, wherein in the left side, the matrices in take part only of these kernels for which is a critical jump point concerning them.
Remark 7. Let . Then, since the point , it cannot be a critical jump point for the initial function . Thus, conditions 2 and 3 of Theorem 2 are unnecessary, i.e., in this case, Theorems 1 and 2 coincide.
Let us assume that the initial function
is arbitrary and either the conditions of Theorem 1 or Theorem 2 hold. Then, according to Theorem 1 or Theorem 2, there exists a constant
and a function
such that
is a local solution of IP (
4) and (
3). Since
and
, then we can define the initial function
for initial condition (
6) as follows:
Let us consider IP (
4) and (
6) for
with the initial function
defined with (
18). Then, for both cases considered in Theorem 1 and 2, the following statement holds.
Theorem 3. Let the following conditions be fulfilled:
- 1.
Condition 1 of Theorem 1 holds.
- 2.
Either condition 2 of Theorem 1, or conditions 2 and 3 of Theorem 2 are fulfilled.
Then there exists a constant such that IP (4) and (6) have a unique local solution with interval of existence . Proof. Let us, for definiteness, assume that the conditions of Theorem 2 hold for an initial function
, and
is the corresponding local solution for IP (
4) and (
3), with
existing according to Theorem 2. Define the initial function
by (
18) and consider IP (
4) and (
6) for
with the initial function
(i.e., when (
6)
) and consider the IP.
Let us, for the defined
as above, introduce the following set:
For
define the set
with a metric function
,
are arbitrary and then the set
is a complete metric space concerning this metric. For each
using (
4), we define the point-wise operators
by the following:
for
with the following conditions:
It is clear that if
then the third addend is a continuous function for
for every
. Then,
is a continuous function in
too, and the relations (
18) hold. Thus
for every
.
Consider the case when and let be arbitrary. Since the point is not a jump point for , then according to Lemma 3 point (b), there exists a constant such that is continuous for . In addition, as was mentioned above, we can renumber all kernels so that for we have that and for the inequality holds. Then, there exists a constant such that for every , we have when , and for .
Then for each
and every
we have the following:
Note that the cases
or
are not excluded; it depends only on the values at
of the delays
). Thus, as shown above, we conclude that the third addend is a continuous function for
and hence,
is a continuous function in
. Hence,
. Since
and satisfy (
4) for
, we obtain the following:
and therefore
for each
.
Let
be arbitrary. Taking into account (
21), we have the following:
Let
be arbitrary. From condition (S3) it follows that there exists
such that
for every
and
. For every
and
we have that
. Then for arbitrary
and
we have that the following equality holds:
Let . Then, we obtain that for .
For every
, from (
23) it follows that
Thus from (
15), (
22) and (
24) for
we obtain the following:
Let, as shown above,
and choose
. Then from (
25), it follows that
and hence, the operator
ℜ is contractive in
□
Remark 8. We emphasize that the case when the right endpoint of the initial interval for some IP is a critical jump point concerning some kernel is possible only when the right endpoint coincides with the lower terminal of the fractional derivative. Thus, we can conclude that condition 3 of Theorem 2 is needed only for the existence of the local solution of the IP when the right endpoint is a jump point for the initial function and coincides with the lower terminal of the fractional derivative.
Let us assume that there exist two solutions
and
of the IP (
4), (
3), with intervals of existence
and
where
. Then obviously we have that
for
and hence,
is a continuation of
. A solution
with intervals of existence
is a maximal solution of the IP (
4) and (
3) if
is a continuation of each solution of IP (
4) and (
3).
Theorem 4. Let the conditions of Theorem 3 hold.
Then IP (4) and (3) have a unique global solution with the interval of existence . Proof. Let IP (
4) and (
3) have a maximal solution
and assume that the interval of existence
is closed from right. Then, using
instead
in (
18) and applying Theorem 3, we obtain a continuation of
which contradicts our assumption. Thus the interval of existence of the maximal solution
has the form
. Let us assume that
. Then since the right side of Equation (
4) is a continuous function in
and the limit when
exists, then we obtain that
satisfies Equation (
4) at
too, i.e., we obtain a continuation of
which contradicts our assumption that
is a maximal solution. Thus
. □
Remark 9. As shown above, we can establish that if , then condition 2 of Theorem 3 is unnecessary, and the statements of Theorems 3 and 4 are still true.
4. Applications
Introduce the matrix functions as follows: for each ,. For every we define the following: .
Let
be an arbitrary fixed number, and consider the following matrix system:
and the following two initial conditions
and
For each fixed
, the matrix valued function
,
is called a solution of matrix IP (
26) and (
27) if
is continuous in
t on
and satisfies the matrix Equation (
26) for
, as well as the initial condition (
27) too. As in the integer case, we call the matrix
a fundamental matrix of the system (
2).
Analogically for each fixed
, the matrix valued function
,
is called a solution of the IP (
26), (
28), if
is continuous in
t on
and satisfies the matrix Equation (
26) for
as well as the initial condition (
28).
Lemma 5. Let the conditions of Theorem 3 hold.
Then the following statements hold:
- 1.
For every fixed the IP (26), (27) has a unique solution in . - 2.
For every fixedthe IP (26), (28) has a unique solutionin.
Proof. The proof is evident but for completeness, we will sketch them. It is simple to see that for each the column vector function for every and for each fixed .
Let
be an arbitrary fixed number and for
consider the IP (
2), (
3) in
with initial point
and initial function
and hence, all conditions of Theorem 3 are fulfilled. Then it follows that for each
, IP (
2) and (
3) possess a unique solution
in
and thus, the matrix
,
is a unique solution of IP (
26) and (
7) in
. The proof of point 2 is fully analogical. □
Remark 10. Note that for every , the functionsandare locally bounded and locally Lebesgue integrable in s (it follows from Theorem 3 in [23]). Furthermore, the relationfor allholds, only when , i.e., . For arbitrary initial function with we introduce the following vector function:whereforand sinceare locally bounded and locally Lebesgue integrable in s. Then, the Lebesgue–Stieltjes integral in (29) exists. Furthermore, virtue of from Lemma 1 in [31], we can conclude that the vector function defined by equality (29) and the integral are continuous functions for . Theorem 5. Let the conditions of Theorem 3 hold.
Then the vector functiondefined with (29) is a unique solution of IP (2) and (3) for arbitrarywith. Proof. It is not difficult to check that for
,
i.e.,
satisfies the initial condition (
3).
Substituting in the first addend in the left side of (
2) the vector function
we obtain the following:
Let
be an arbitrary fixed number,
and
and
be the Lebesgue-Stiltjes measures constructed via
and
. Then for the product measure
we have that
and since
is locally bounded and locally Lebesgue integrable in
t and
s; hence
for every
. Then substituting
in the second addend of the left side of (
2) and applying the Fubini theorem (see Proposition 5.4 in [
32]) we have the following:
Analogically for arbitrary fixed
,
for the product measure
, we have that
, where
is the Lebesgue measure and since the expression
,
is locally bounded and locally Lebesgue integrable in
and
s, therefore
. Then using (
31) and applying again the Fubini theorem for the second addend in the left side of (
2), we have the following:
Note that we can differentiate under the integral sign in the right side of (
32) because the expression
is an absolutely continuous function in
. Then, from (
32) we have the following:
Let
be an arbitrary fixed number and substitute
in the right side of (
2). Then applying the Fubini theorem using the same reasons such as those for (
31), we obtain the following:
Thus from (
31), (
33) and (
34) it follows that
satisfies (
2) for
. □
For arbitrary locally bounded function
since
are locally bounded and locally Lebesgue integrable in
s, and hence we can introduce the following vector function:
Theorem 6. Let the conditions of Theorem 3 hold.
Then, the vector functiondefined by equality 35 is a unique solution of IP (1) and (3) with initial functionand interval of existence. Proof. It is not difficult to conclude that the vector function
defined by equality (
35) is a continuous function for
. Furthermore, for
, the following equalities hold:
Then denoting
, where
from the first equality in (
36) it follows that
where
. Since
for
we obtain the following:
and hence from (
37) it follows that
For the first addend in the right side of (
38) since
when
we have the following:
and for the second addend of (
38) in virtue of formula (2.1.40) and Lemma 3.2 in [
1], we have the following:
and hence we obtain the following:
Let for shortness denote
, where
Taking into account that for
and
we have that
. Then from the second relation in (
36) we obtain the following:
Furthermore for each fixed
we have the following:
Indeed for arbitrary and we have the following:
and for
(thus
) we have that
too. Taking into account (
41) we obtain the following:
On the other hand, for the first addend in the right side (
1) after applying the Fubini theorem (under the same reasons as above), we have the following:
Then taking into account that
is a fundamental matrix, from (
1), (
39), (
42) and (
43) it follows that the vector function defined by equality (
35) is a solution of the system (
1). □
Corollary 1. Let the conditions of Theorem 3 hold.
Then for arbitrary initial functionwith , the unique solution of the IP (1) and (3) forhas the following representation: Proof. Using the superposition principle, we define
where
and
are defined by (
35) and (
29), respectively. Then the statement of Corollary 1 follows from Theorems 5 and 6. □
5. Comments and Conclusions
As the first result in the present work, it is proved the existence and uniqueness of the solutions of an initial problem (IP) for the most general case of neutral linear differential systems with Caputo fractional derivatives of incommensurate order, for each piecewise continuous (PC) initial function with a bounded variation on the interval . Then, as a consequence, it is proved the existence and uniqueness of a fundamental matrix , which is continuous in and locally Lebesgue integrable concerning s, . Using the existence of the fundamental matrix, integral representations for a particular solution of the inhomogeneous system with zero initial conditions as well as for the general solution of the homogeneous system are obtained. As a corollary, from these representations it is obtained an integral representation for the general solution of the inhomogeneous system with nonzero initial conditions too.
Our results improve the corresponding results given in [
16,
20,
21,
26]. Note that our results are proved under weaker conditions, even in the case of one constant delay as considered in Theorem 5.3 in [
16]. First, for their result, the authors used the definition of the Caputo derivative that is applicable only for absolute continuous functions, an assumption which is essentially used in their proofs. Second, we point out that in [
16], as the space of initial functions, the space
is considered for which obviously the inclusion
holds.
We think that as in the case of delayed fractional systems, our obtained integral representation of the solutions for neutral linear fractional systems will play a central role in the qualitative analysis of such systems with nonlinear perturbation, especially in the case when the perturbation is unbounded. The same representation also can be an useful tool for establishing finite time stability results for neutral linear fractional systems.