1. Introduction
Fractional calculus has become an important topic thanks to its effective characterization of the ubiquitous power-law phenomena as well as its widespread applications in many areas of science and engineering such as porous media, turbulence, bioscience, geoscience, viscoelastic material, and so on. The most important mathematical equations among such models are fractional partial differential equations, which can be more relevant for describing the underlying anomalous features, non-local interactions, manifesting in memory effects, sharp peaks, power law distributions, and self-similar structures. For such kinds of equations, there is a large and rapidly growing number of publications. See the monographs of Herrmann [
1], Hilfer [
2], Jin [
3], Kilbas et al. [
4], and Zhou [
5], and the references therein.
In this paper we consider the following fractional wave equation in a bound domain 
 with smooth boundary 
:
      where 
 is a fractional derivative of order 
, which will be defined in the following contexts, and
      
 for 
 and 
 with 
, 
, and 
. What is more, we assume that 
 is uniformly elliptic, i.e., there exist positive constants 
 such that
      
      for a.a. 
.
Recall that the initial boundary value problem (
1) would resolve itself into fractional diffusion equations when 
. It has attracted a growing interest due to its widespread applications in sub-diffusive processes. The authors in [
6] constructed fundamental solutions to the problem using Fox’s H-functions and the Levi method, then the parametrix estimates were established. Zacher [
7] studied the well-posedness of weak solutions of abstract evolutionary integro-differential equations based on the Galerkin method and energy estimates. Later, Kubica and Yamamoto [
8] used the same method to obtain well-posedness of weak solutions of fractional diffusion equations with time-dependent coefficients. In [
9], the authors considered the problem with Caputo derivative on 
 in 
- framework and then the uniqueness, existence, and 
-estimates of solutions are obtained. In [
10], the authors investigated the well-posedness for this problem with time independent elliptic operators but general non-homogenous boundary conditions by mean of an eigenfunction representation involving the Mittag-Leffter functions. For other results for fractional diffusion equations, we refer to [
11,
12,
13,
14,
15] and the references therein.
Recently, problem (
1) has been the focus of many studies due to its significant application in super-diffusive models of anomalous diffusion such as diffusion in heterogeneous media and viscoelastic problems such as the propagation of stress waves in viscoelastic solids. More specifically, significant development has been made in well-posedness as well as regularity results of the weak solution to fractional wave equations. For example, in [
16], the authors used Laplace transform to define weak solutions and used the Strichartz estimate to derive its well-posedness. Later, Otárola and Salgado [
17] also gave a definition of weak solutions similar to that of inter-order cases and established the well-posedness together with regularity estimates. In [
18,
19], the authors obtained results on the existence and regularity of local and global weak solutions of semi-linear cases. In [
20] the authors used integrated cosine family to give the representation of solutions and then provided the existence and regularity results of mild solutions. For other results for fractional wave equations, we refer to [
21] for existence and regularity, [
22] for the subordination principle, [
23] for the global existence of small data solutions, [
24] for approximate controllability, [
25] for asymptotic behavior, [
26] for well-posedness and regularity, and the references therein.
In the literature mentioned on fractional wave equations, the main technique to construct solutions for deriving such existence and regularity results is based on Fourier series, cosine family, or resolvent operators, and solutions are expressed by the Mittag-Leffler functions. In fact, as it is well known, the smoothness of solutions is followed by the properties of Mittag-Leffler functions. The main novelties of the present paper lie in two aspects. Compared with the existing research on fractional wave equations, our analysis is rather general and relies on Galerkin methods and energy arguments, which can be applied to the general problem that Fourier expansive of solutions cannot be used and cannot be converted to ordinary differential equations. Very recently, Huang and Yamamoto [
27] discussed the well-posedness of initial-boundary value problems for time fractional diffusion-wave equations with time-dependent coefficients using the Galerkin method. On the other hand, in contrast to the classical integer-order case, the main technical difficulty in the rigorous analysis of the well-posedness and regularity of fractional wave equations stems from establishing the energy estimates of the problem. This is mainly due to the fact that integration by parts formula for integer-order derivatives cannot be generalized directly to a fractional-order case and properties of composition and conjugation of the fractional Caputo derivative 
 do not exist. Therefore, we found it more challenging in dealing with the well-posedness and regularity of fractional wave equations.
The paper is organized as follows. In 
Section 2 we recall some notations, definitions, and preliminary facts used throughout this work. In 
Section 3 we discuss approximation equations and show the existence of their solutions by means of mollification arguments and the Galerkin methods, which reduce the regularity of coefficients 
. The energy estimates of approximation solutions are established in 
Section 4. Finally, we derive the well-posedness and regularity results of fractional wave equations using the weak compactness arguments.
  2. Preliminaries
Here we recall some notations, definitions, and preliminary facts which are used throughout this paper.
Let 
X be a Banach space and 
. The left Riemann–Liouville fractional integral of order 
 for the function 
v is defined as
      
      where 
 and ∗ denotes the convolution.
Further, 
 and 
 represent the left Riemann–Liouville fractional derivative and Caputo fractional derivative of order 
 for the function 
v, respectively, which are defined by
      
      where 
, 
 denotes the integer part of 
.
Here we denote by 
 the space of functions 
v that 
 and 
. In particular, 
. It is worth mentioning that if 
, then the Caputo fractional derivative 
 exists almost everywhere on 
, which is represented by
      
For more insight into the topic, see Kilbas et al. [
4] and Zhou [
5].
Lemma 1. ([
4]). 
If  and , then  and . Lemma 2. Let . If , then we havefor a.e. .  Proof.  If 
, then 
 exists for a.e. 
. From the definition of 
 we know that
        
On the other hand, since , we see that . Thus, the proof is complete.    □
 Before proceeding further, we state an important lemma, which is a direct consequence of an estimate borrowed from [
7].
Lemma 3. Let  and H be a real Hilbert space with a scalar product . Assume . Then for any , there holdsfor any .  Next, a very significant example is provided which will play a crucial role in the proof of energy estimates.
Example 1. For , we choose . Then for any  and , there holds  The following property presents the lower bound of the uniformly elliptic operator if the function has enough regularity, which was proved by [
28] (see also [
8]).
Lemma 4. Assume that  is a bounded domain with the boundary of  class and (2) holds. If  and  and , thenwhere C depends continuously on  and the -norm of , and .  Next, we introduce the definition of the weak solution of Equation (
1).
Definition 1. Let  and . For given functions  and , we say a functionis a weak solution of Equation (1) providedfor each  and a.e. .  The vectors  and  can be regarded as initial data for  and  at least in a weak sense, respectively. If, for example,  , then the condition  implies  and .
Remark 1. In view of Definition 1, we know  for .
 Proof.  Indeed, for 
 with 
, it follows from Lemma 2 and Hölder’s inequality that
        
In view of the inequality 
 for 
 and 
, we calculate the integral
        
The second term is bounded by 
. This ensures
        
The proof is complete.    □
   3. Approximation Solution
In this section we provide the Galerkin approximate scheme and derive the corresponding existence results. We will suppose initially that
      
      for 
, where 
 and 
.
Let 
 be the standard mollifier satisfying
      
Then we introduce the mollification 
 of the function 
 as
      
We note first that  and if  for , then  in .
Moreover, we denote 
 by the mollification of 
, which are defined by
      
      where 
 is the continuation by even reflection to 
 and zero elsewhere, 
 and 
c are the continuation by zero for 
, and 
f is the continuation by odd reflection to 
 and zero elsewhere. Then 
 in 
 for 
 (due to (
2)).
Next, we seek approximate solutions 
 for Equation (
1) in the form:
      where 
 denotes the complete orthonormal system of eigenfunctions which forms an orthogonal basis of 
 such that
      
For the sake of selecting 
, one considers the following approximate equation:
      where
      
Let us introduce the time-dependent bilinear form
      
Taking the scalar product of (
5) with 
 for 
, we obtain
      
Then (
6) can be reduced to the following linear differential system for the functions 
:
Now we consider the nonlinear integral system for the functions
      
We shall show that system (
8) has a unique solution 
 which belongs to 
. By Lemma 1, then the solution 
 of Equation (
8) is also the solution of Equation (
7). To accomplish this, we introduce the space
      
      and define a metric on 
 as
      
It is easy to show that  is a complete metric space. We notice that .
Theorem 1. Let  and (3) hold. For every , Equation (8) has a unique solution in .  Proof.  Consider the operator 
 given by
        
Then it is well-defined. Indeed, let 
, then 
. Further, we immediately take the first and second derivatives of 
 with respect to 
t to obtain
        
        and
        
For convenience we let 
. Then 
 and 
. We can easily check that 
 and 
 are continuous on 
, which also ensures that 
. Therefore it remains to consider the continuity of 
. It is easy to verify the continuity of the first two components. To deal with the third one we estimate for 
On the other hand, from the definition of 
 and 
, it follows that
        
From the representation of 
 and 
, we know that 
 and 
 belong to the space 
, which yields that 
 and
        
Thus one can immediately calculate 
 and 
 as follows
        
        and
        
Finally, for 
, choosing a 
 sufficient small for 
, one can derive from the increasing property of 
 and (
9) that
        
It is clear that the second term tends to zero for some sufficient small . Then we choose one of such , it follows from the uniform continuity of  (due to the continuity of  on ) that for any , there exists  with  such that . Thus, this yields that the first term can be bounded by , which together with  shows that  as  for .
Therefore, we have  for .
Moreover, for 
, we have
        
        where we have used
        
Similarly, in view of
        
        we proceed to estimate 
 as follows:
        
        where it is easy to show that 
 due to 
 and (
11).
Finally, we will estimate 
. Taking account of the following inequality
        
        it holds that
        
        where we know from (
12) that 
.
For the sake of convenience, we let
        
Then one can choose a 
 small enough which ensures that 
. Therefore, combining (
10), (
13) with (
14), we deduce that
        
This also shows that the operator 
 is a strict contraction on 
. It follows that 
 has a fixed point, thus Equation (
8) has a unique solution in 
.
Now, we will deal with the continuation of the solution to the interval 
. Let us make the assumption that we have obtained the solution 
 of Equation (
8) on the interval 
 for 
. We shall define the solution for 
 with 
. To accomplish this, we introduce the complete space
        
        with the distance 
. Let 
, then 
. According to the previous proof, we know that 
, which implies that 
 and 
. It holds that 
 and then 
.
Next, we will show that the operator 
 is also a strict contraction on 
 when 
 is sufficiently small. We shall rewrite 
 in the following form:
        
For 
, we have 
 and 
 for 
. Then
        
This follows from (
11) that
        
Moreover, we can choose one 
 such that 
 is small enough. It also ensures that
        
Hence, the operator 
 is a strict contraction on 
, this also shows that Equation (
8) has a unique solution on the interval 
. We proceed to repeat the process on the intervals 
 until Equation (
8) has a unique solution on the interval 
. The claim then follows.    □