Existence and dimension of the set of mild solutions to semilinear fractional differential inclusions

Ravi P Agarwal; Bashir Ahmad; Ahmad Alsaedi; Naseer Shahzad

doi:10.1186/1687-1847-2012-74

Research
Open Access

Existence and dimension of the set of mild solutions to semilinear fractional differential inclusions

Ravi P Agarwal^{1, 2},
Bashir Ahmad²,
Ahmad Alsaedi² and
Naseer Shahzad²Email author

Advances in Difference Equations20122012:74

https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1847-2012-74

Received: 31 January 2012
Accepted: 31 May 2012
Published: 31 May 2012

Abstract

This article studies the existence and dimension of the set for mild solutions of semilinear fractional differential inclusions. We recall and prove some new results on multivalued maps to establish our main results.

MSC 2010: 34A12; 34A40.

Keywords

nonlocal problem
fractional differential inclusions
topological dimension
mild solution
fixed point theorems

1 Introduction

The study of fractional calculus (differentiation and integration of arbitrary order) has emerged as an important and popular field of research. It is mainly due to the extensive application of fractional differential equations in many engineering and scientific disciplines such as physics, chemistry, biology, economics, control theory, signal and image processing, biophysics, blood flow phenomena, aerodynamics, fitting of experimental data, etc., [1–7]. Fractional derivatives are also regarded as an excellent tool for the description of memory and hereditary properties of various materials and processes [8]. Owing to these characteristics of fractional derivatives, fractional-order models are considered to be more realistic and practical than the classical integer-order models, in which such effects are not taken into account. A variety of results on initial and boundary value problems of fractional differential equations, ranging from the theoretical aspects of existence and uniqueness of solutions to the analytic and numerical methods for finding solutions, have appeared in the literature, for instance, see [9–20] and references therein.

Differential inclusions arise in the mathematical modeling of certain problems in economics, optimal control, etc., and are widely studied by many authors, see [21–23] and the references therein. For some recent development on differential inclusions of fractional order, we refer the reader to the references [24–29].

In this article, we discuss the existence and dimension of the set for the mild solutions of the following inclusion problem

\{\begin{gathered} ^{c} D^{q} x (t) \in A x (t) + F (t, x (t)), t \in [0, T], 0 < q \leq 1, T > 0, \\ x (0) + g (x) = x_{0}, x_{0} \in ℝ^{n}, \end{gathered}

(1)

where ^cD^qdenotes the Caputo fractional derivative of order q, A is a sectorial operator on ℝⁿ, g: C([0, T ], ℝⁿ) → ℝⁿ, and F: [0, T ] × ℝⁿ→ P (ℝⁿ), where P(ℝⁿ) is the family of all nonempty subsets of ℝⁿ.

2 Background material

Let us recall some basic definitions on multi-valued maps (for details, see [30, 31]).

Let (X, d) be a metric space. Define P(X) = {Y ⊆ X: Y ≠ Ø}, P_cl(X) = {Y ∈ P (X): Y is closed}, P_b(X) = {Y ∈ P (X): Y is bounded}, P_{b, cl}(X) = {Y ∈ P (X): Y is closed and bounded} and P_cp(X) = {Y ∈ P (X): Y is compact}:

Consider H: P(X) × P (X) → ℝ ∪ {∞} given by

H (A, B) = max \{sup_{a \in A} d (a, B), sup_{b \in B} d (b, A)\},

where d(a, B) = inf_b∈Bd(a, b). H is the (generalized) Pompeiu-Hausdorff functional. It is known that (P_{b, cl}(X), H) is a metric space and (P_cl(X), H) is a generalized metric space (see [30]).

A multivalued operator Ω: X → P_cl(X) is called a k-contraction if there exists 0 < k < 1 such that

H (Ω (x), Ω (y)) \leq k d (x, y) for each x, y \in X .

Let C be a subset of X. A multi-valued map Ω: C → P (X) is called upper semi-continuous (u.s.c.) if {x ∈ C: Ω(x) ⊂ V} is open in C whenever V ⊂ X is open. Ω is called lower semi-continuous (l.s.c.) if the set {y ∈ C: Ω(y) ∩ V ≠ Ø} is open for any open set V ⊂ X. Ω is called continuous if it is both l.s.c. and u.s.c. It is known that Ω: X → P_cp(X) is continuous on X if and only if Ω is continuous on X with respect to Hausdorff metric. Also, if Ω: X → P_cp(X) is a k-contraction, then Ω is continuous with respect to Hausdorff metric. Ω is said to be completely continuous if Ω(

B

) is relatively compact for every

B \in P_{b} (C)

. A mapping f: C → X is called a selection of Ω if f(x) ∈ Ω(x) for every x ∈ C. We say that the mapping Ω has a fixed point if there is x ∈ X such that x ∈ Ω(x). The fixed points set of the multivalued operator F will be denoted by Fix(Ω). A multivalued map Ω: [0, T ] → P_cl(ℝⁿ) is said to be measurable if for every y ∈ ℝⁿ, the function

t \mapsto d (y, Ω (t)) = inf {ǁ y - z ǁ : z \in Ω (t)}

is measurable.

Let ℭ([0, T], ℝⁿ]) denotes the Banach space of continuous functions from [0, T ] into ℝⁿwith the norm ǀǀx ǀǀ_∞ = sup_{t∈[0, T]}ǀǀx(t)ǀǀ. Let L¹([0, T ], ℝⁿ) be the Banach space of measurable functions x: [0, T ] → ℝⁿwhich are Lebesgue integrable and normed by $ǁ x ǀ ǀ_{L^{1}} = \int_{0}^{T} ǁ x (t) ǁ d t$ . Let C be a nonempty subset of a Banach space X: = (X, ǀǀ.ǀǀ). Define P_{c, cl}(C) = {Y ∈ P (C): Y is convex and closed}, and P_{c, cp}(C) = {Y ∈ P (C): Y is compact and convex}.

Let us recall some definitions on fractional calculus. For more details, we refer to [1, 4].

Definition 2.1. For at least n-times continuously differentiable function g: [0, ∞) → ℝ, the Caputo derivative of fractional order q is defined as

^{c} D^{q} g (t) = \frac{1}{Γ (n - q)} \int_{0}^{t} {(t - s)}^{n - q - 1} g^{(n)} (s) d s, n - 1 < q < n, n = [q] + 1, q > 0,

where [q] denotes the integer part of the real number q and Γ denotes the gamma function.

Definition 2.2. The Riemann-Liouville fractional integral of order q for a continuous function g is defined as

I^{q} g (t) = \frac{1}{Γ (q)} \int_{0}^{t} \frac{g (s)}{{(t - s)}^{1 - q}} d s, q > 0,

provided the right-hand side is pointwise defined on (0, ∞).

3 Main results

Definition 3.1. Let A: D ⊆ ℝⁿ→ ℝⁿbe a closed linear operator. A is said to be a sectorial operator of type (M, θ, μ) if there exist 0 < θ < π/2, M > 0, μ ∈ ℝ such that the resolvent of A exists outside the sector

μ + S_{θ} = {μ + λ : λ \in ℂ, ǀ Arg (- λ) ǀ < θ}

with

ǁ {(λ I - A)}^{- 1} ǁ \leq \frac{M}{ǀ λ - μ ǀ}, λ \notin μ + S_{θ} .

To define mild solutions for (1), we consider the Cauchy problem

\{\begin{gathered} ^{c} D^{q} x (t) = A x (t) + σ (t), t \in [0, T], 0 < q \leq 1, T > 0, \\ x (0) + g (x) = x_{0}, x_{0} \in ℝ^{n}, \end{gathered}

(2)

where σ: [0, T ] → ℝⁿ.

The following lemma is discussed in [32]. However, for the sake of completeness, we outline its proof here.

Lemma 3.2. Let A be a sectorial operator of type (M, θ, μ). If σ satisfies a uniform Hölder condition with exponent β ∈ (0, 1], then the unique solution of the Cauchy problem (2) is given by

x (t) = S_{q} (t) (x_{0} - g (x)) + \int_{0}^{t} T_{q} (t - s) σ (s) d s,

(3)

where

S_{q} (t) = \frac{1}{2 π i} \int_{P} e^{λ t} λ^{q - 1} R (λ^{q}, A) d λ, T_{q} (t) = \frac{1}{2 π i} \int_{P} e^{λ t} R (λ^{q}, A) d λ,

where $P$ is a suitable path such that λ^q∉ μ + S_θfor λ ∈ $P$ and R(λ^q, A) = (λ^qI - A)^-1.

Proof. Taking inverse Laplace transform of (2), we get

λ^{q} (L x) (λ) - λ^{q - 1} (x_{0} - g (x)) = A (L x) (λ) + (L σ) (λ),

which implies that

(L x) (λ) = λ^{q - 1} {(λ^{q} I - A)}^{- 1} (x_{0} - g (x)) + {(λ^{q} I - A)}^{- 1} (L σ) (λ) .

(4)

By taking inverse Laplace transform of (4), we obtain (3). This completes the proof.

It has been shown in [32] that

sup_{t \in [0, T]} ǁ S_{q} (t) ǁ = \tilde{M_{S}}, ǁ T_{q} ǁ \leq t^{q - 1} \tilde{M_{T}},

(5)

with $\tilde{M_{S}} = {sup}_{t \in [0, T]} ǁ S_{q} (t) ǁ_{L (ℝ^{n})}$ , and $\tilde{M_{T}} = {sup}_{t \in [0, T]} C e^{μ t} (1 + t^{1 - q})$ , where L(ℝⁿ) is the Banach space of bounded linear operators from ℝⁿinto ℝⁿequipped with natural topology and C, μ are appropriate constants (for more details see Equation (3.1) in [32]).

Remark 3.3. The definition of the mild solution used in [33] is not appropriate as it does not correspond to the classical case due to the failure of the Leibniz product rule for the Caputo fractional derivative. For more details, see [32].

Definition 3.4. A function x ∈ ℭ([0, T], ℝⁿ]) is a mild solution of the problem (1) if there exists a function f ∈ L,¹([0, T], ℝⁿ) such that f(t) ∈ F (t, x(t)) a.e. on [0, T ] and

x (t) = S_{q} (t) (x_{0} - g (x)) + \int_{0}^{t} T_{q} (t - s) f (s) d s .

Let $S_{x_{0}} ([0, α])$ denotes the set of all solutions of (1) on the interval [0, α], where 0 < α ≤ T.

To prove the existence of solutions for (1), we need the following lemma due to Nadler and Covitz [34].

Lemma 3.5. Let (X, d) be a complete metric space. If Ω: X → P_cl(X) is a k-contraction, then Fix(Ω) ≠ ∅.

Theorem 3.6. Assume that

(A₁) F: [0, T] × ℝⁿ→ P_cp(ℝⁿ) is such that F (., x): [0, T ] → P_{c, cp}(ℝⁿ) is measurable for each x ∈ ℝⁿ;

(A₂) H(F(t, x), $F (t, \bar{x})) \leq κ_{1} (t) ǁ x - \bar{x} ǁ$ for almost all t ∈ [0, T ] and $x, \bar{x} \in ℝ^{n}$ with κ₁ ∈ ℭ([0,T],ℝ₊) and ǀǀF (t, x)ǀǀ = sup{ǀǀvǀǀ: v ∈ F (t, x)} ≤ κ₁(t) for almost all t ∈ [0, T ] and x ∈ ℝⁿ;

(A₃) g: ℭ([0, T], ℝⁿ)→ℝⁿis continuous and ǀǀg(x) - g(y)ǀǀ ≤ κ₂ǀǀx - y ǀǀ_∞ for all x, y∈ℭ([0, T], ℝⁿ) with some κ₂ > 0.

Then the Cauchy problem (1) has at least one solution on [0, T ] if

(\tilde{M_{S}} κ_{2} + \tilde{M_{T}} (T^{q} / q) ǁ κ_{1} ǁ_{\infty}) < 1

( $\tilde{M_{S}}$ and $\tilde{M_{T}}$ are given by (5)).

Proof. For each y ∈ ℭ([0, T], ℝⁿ), define the set of selections of F by

S_{F, y} : = {v \in L^{1} ([0, T], ℝ^{n}) : v (t) \in F (t, y (t)) for a .e . t \in [0, T]} .

Observe that by the assumptions (A₁) and (A₂), F(t, x(t)) is measurable and has a measurable selection v(t) (see [[35], Theorem III.6]). Also κ₁∈ ℭ([0, T], ℝ₊) and

ǁ v (t) ǁ \leq ǁ F (t, x (t)) ǁ \leq κ_{1} (t) .

Thus the set S_{F, x} is nonempty for each x ∈ ℭ([0, T], ℝⁿ). Let us define an operator Ω by

Ω (x) = \{h \in ℭ ([0, T], ℝ^{n}) : h (t) = S_{q} (t) (x_{0} - g (x)) + \int_{0}^{t} T_{q} (t - s) f (s) d s, f \in S_{F, x}\},

and show that it satisfies the conditions of Lemma 3.5. As a first step, we show that Ω(x)∈P_cl (ℭ([0, T], ℝⁿ)) for each x ∈ ℭ([0, T], ℝⁿ). Let {u_n}_n≥0∈ Ω(x) be such that u_n → u (n → ∞) in ℭ([0, T], ℝⁿ). Then u ∈ ℭ([0, T], ℝⁿ) and there exists v_n ∈ S_{F, x}such that, for each t ∈ [0, T],

u_{n} (t) = S_{q} (t) (x_{0} - g (x)) + \int_{0}^{t} T_{q} (t - s) v_{n} (s) d s

As F has compact values, we pass to a subsequence to obtain that v_n converges to v in ℭ([0, T], ℝⁿ). Thus, v ∈ S_{F, x}and for each t ∈ [0, T],

u_{n} (t) \to u (t) = v (t) .

Hence u ∈ Ω(x).

Next we show that there exists a γ ∈ (0, 1) such that

H (Ω (x), Ω (\bar{x})) \leq γ {∥x - \bar{x}∥}_{\infty} for each x, \bar{x} \in ℭ ([0, T], ℝ^{n}) .

Let

x, \bar{x} \in ℭ ([0, T], ℝ^{n})

and h₁ ∈ Ω(x). Then there exists v₁(t) ∈ S_F,xsuch that, for each t ∈ [0, T],

h_{1} (t) = S_{q} (t) (x_{0} - g (x)) + \int_{0}^{t} T_{q} (t - s) v_{1} (s) d s .

By (A₂), we have

H (F (t, x), F (t, \bar{x})) \leq κ_{1} (t) ǁ x (t) - \bar{x} (t) ǁ .

So, there exists

w \in F (t, \bar{x} (t))

such that

ǁ v_{1} (t) - w ǁ \leq κ_{1} (t) ǁ x (t) - \bar{x} (t) ǁ, t \in [0, T] .

Define V: [0, T ] → P (ℝⁿ) by

V (t) = {w \in ℝ^{n} : ǁ v_{1} (t) - w ǁ \leq κ_{1} (t) ǁ x (t) - \bar{x} (t) ǁ)}

Since the nonempty closed valued operator

V (t) \cap F (t, \bar{x} (t))

is measurable [[35], Proposition III.4], there exists a function v₂(t) which is a measurable selection for

V (t) \cap F (t, \bar{x} (t))

. So

v_{2} (t) \in F (t, \bar{x} (t))

and for each t ∈ [0, T ], we have

∥v_{1} (t) - v_{2} (t)∥ \leq κ_{1} (t) ∥x (t) - \bar{x} (t)∥

. For each t ∈ [0, T ], let us define

h_{2} (t) = S_{q} (t) (x_{0} - g (x)) + \int_{0}^{t} T_{q} (t - s) v_{2} (s) d s .

Thus

ǁ h_{1} (t) - h_{2} (t) ǁ \leq ǁ S_{q} (t) ǁ ǁ g (x) - g (\bar{x})) ǁ + \int_{0}^{t} ǁT_{q} (s - t)ǁ ǁv_{1} (s) - v_{2} (s)ǁ d s .

In view of (5), it follows that

\begin{aligned} ǁ h_{1} - h_{2} ǀ ǀ_{\infty} & \leq \tilde{M_{S}} κ_{2} ǁ x - \bar{x} ǀ ǀ_{\infty} + \tilde{M_{T}} (T^{q} / q) ǁ κ_{1} ǀ ǀ_{\infty} ǁ x - \bar{x} ǀ ǀ_{\infty} \\ = (\tilde{M_{S}} κ_{2} + \tilde{M_{T}} (T^{q} / q) ǁ κ_{1} ǀ ǀ_{\infty}) ǁ x - \bar{x} ǀ ǀ_{\infty} . \end{aligned}

Analogously, interchanging the roles of x and

\bar{x}

, we obtain

H (Ω (x), Ω (\bar{x})) \leq γ ǁ x - \bar{x} ǀ ǀ_{\infty} for each x, \bar{x} \in ℭ ([0, T], ℝ^{n}),

where $γ = (\tilde{M_{S}} κ_{2} + \tilde{M_{T}} (T^{q} / q) ǁ κ_{1} ǀ ǀ_{\infty}) < 1$ . Since Ω is a contraction, it follows by Lemma 3.5 that Ω has a fixed point x which is a solution of (1). This completes the proof.

Lemma 3.7. Let F: [0, T ] × ℝⁿ→ P_{c, cp}(ℝⁿ) satisfy (A₁), (A₂), and (A₃) and suppose that Ω: ℭ([0, T ], ℝⁿ) → P (ℭ([0, T ], ℝⁿ)) is defined by

Ω (x) = \{h \in ℭ ([0, T], ℝ^{n}) : h (t) = x_{0} - g (x) + \int_{0}^{t} \frac{{(t - s)}^{q - 1}}{Γ (q)} f (s) d s, f \in S_{F, x}\} .

Then Ω(x)∈P_{c, cp} (ℭ([0, T], ℝⁿ)) for each x ∈ ℭ([0, T], ℝⁿ).

Proof. First we show that Ω(x) is convex for each x ∈ ([0, T ], ℝⁿ). For that, let h₁, h₂ ∈ Ω(x). Then there exist f₁, f₂ ∈ S_{F, x}such that for each t ∈ [0, T ], we have

h_{i} (t) = S_{q} (t) (x_{0} - g (x)) + \int_{0}^{t} T_{q} (t - s) f_{i} (s) d s, i = 1, 2 .

Let 0 ≤ λ ≤1. Then, for each t ∈ [0, T ], we have

\begin{aligned} [λ h_{1} + (1 - λ) h_{2}] (t) \\ = S_{q} (t) (x_{0} - g (x)) + \int_{0}^{t} T_{q} (t - s) [λ f_{1} (s) + (1 - λ) f_{2} (s)] d s . \end{aligned}

Since S_{F, x}is convex (F has convex values), therefore it follows that λh₁+(1-λ)h₂ ∈ Ω(x). Next, we show that Ω maps bounded sets into bounded sets in ℭ([0, T], ℝⁿ). For a positive number r, let B_r = {x ∈ ℭ([0, T], ℝⁿ):ǀǀx ǀǀ_∞≤r} be a bounded set in ℭ([0, T], ℝⁿ). Then, for each h ∈ Ω(x), x ∈B_r, there exists f ∈ S_{F, x}such that

h (t) = S_{q} (t) (x_{0} - g (x)) + \int_{0}^{t} T_{q} (t - s) f (s) d s

and in view of (H₁), we have

\begin{aligned} ǁ h (t) ǁ & \leq ǀ S_{q} (t) ǀ (ǁ x_{0} ǁ + sup_{x \in B_{r}} ǁ g (x) ǁ) + \int_{0}^{t} ǀ T_{q} (t - s) ǁ ǀ f (s) ǁ d s \\ \leq ǀ S_{q} (t) ǀ (ǁ x_{0} ǁ + sup_{x \in B_{r}} ǁ g (x) ǁ) + \int_{0}^{T} ǀ T_{q} (t - s) ǀ κ_{1} (s) d s . \end{aligned}

Thus,

ǁ h ǀ ǀ_{\infty} \leq ǀ S_{q} (t) ǀ (ǁ x_{0} ǁ + sup_{x \in B_{r}} ǁ g (x) ǁ) + \int_{0}^{T} ǀ T_{q} (t - s) ǀ κ_{1} (s) d s .

Now we show that Ω maps bounded sets into equicontinuous sets in ℭ([0, T], ℝⁿ). Let t', t'' ∈ [0, T] with t' < t'' and x ∈ B_r, where B_r is a bounded set in ℭ([0, T], ℝⁿ). For each h ∈ Ω(x), we obtain

\begin{aligned} ǁ h (t ″) - h (t ′) ǁ \\ \leq ǁ (S_{q} (t ″) - S_{q} (t ′)) (x_{0} - g (x)) ǁ + ǁ \int_{0}^{t ″} T_{q} (t ″ - s) f (s) d s - \int_{0}^{t ′} T_{q} (t ′ - s) f (s) d s ǁ \\ \leq ǁ (S_{q} (t ″) - S_{q} (t ′)) (x_{0} - g (x)) ǁ + ǁ \int_{0}^{t ′} [T_{q} (t ″ - s) - T_{q} (t ′ - s)] κ_{1} (s) d s ǁ \\ + ǁ \int_{t ′}^{t ″} T_{q} (t ″ - s) κ_{1} (s) d s ǁ . \end{aligned}

Obviously the right-hand side of the above inequality tends to zero independently of $x \in B_{r^{'}}$ as t'' - t' → 0. By the Arzela-Ascoli Theorem, Ω:ℭ([0, T], ℝⁿ)→P(ℭ([0, T], ℝⁿ)) is completely continuous. As in Theorem 3.6, Ω is closed-valued. Consequently, Ω(x)∈P_c,cp(ℭ([0, T], ℝⁿ)) for each x ∈ ℭ([0, T], ℝⁿ).

For 0 < α ·≤ T, let us consider the operator

Ω (x) = \{h \in ℭ ([0, α], ℝ^{n}) : h (t) = S_{q} (t) (x_{0} - g (x)) + \int_{0}^{t} T_{q} (t - s) f (s) d s, f \in S_{F, x}\} .

It is well-known that $Fix (Ω) = S_{x_{0}} ([0, α])$ and, in view of Theorem 3.6, it is nonempty for each 0 < α ≤ T.

The following results are useful in the sequel.

Lemma 3.8 (Dzedzej and Gelman [36]) Let F: [0, α] → P_{c, cp}(ℝⁿ) be a measurable map such that the Lebesgue measure μ of the set {t: dim F(t) < 1} is zero. Then there are arbitrarily many linearly independent measurable selections x₁(·), x₂(·), . . . , x_m(·) of F .

Lemma 3.9. (Dzedzej and Gelman [36]) (see also, [29, 37] for general versions) Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a Banach space X. Suppose that Ω: C → P_{c, cp}(C) is a k-contraction. If f: C → C is a continuous selection of Ω, then Fix(f) is nonempty.

Lemma 3.10. (Michael's selection theorem) [38] Let C be a metric space, X be a Banach space and Ω: C → P_{c, cl}(C) a lower semicontinuous map. Then there exists a continuous selection f: C → X of Ω.

Lemma 3.11. (Saint Raymond [39]) Let K be a compact metric space with dim K < n, X a Banach space and Ω: K → P_{c, cp}(X) a lower semicontinuous map such that 0 ∈ Ω(x) and dim Ω(x) ≥ n for every x ∈ K. Then there exists a continuous selection f of Ω such that f(x) ≠ 0 for each x ∈ K.

Theorem 3.12. Let F: [0, α] × ℝⁿ→ P_{c, cp}(ℝⁿ) satisfy (A₁), (A₂), and (A₃) and suppose that the Lebesgue measure μ of the set {t: dim F (t, x) < 1 for some x ∈ ℝⁿ} is zero. Then for each α, $0 < α < min \{{(\frac{(1 - {\tilde{M}}_{S} κ_{2}) q}{{\tilde{M}}_{T {ǁκ_{1}ǁ}_{\infty}}})}^{\frac{1}{q}}, T\}$ , the set $S_{x_{0}} ([0, α])$ of solutions of (1) has an infinite dimension for any x₀.

Proof. Define the operator Ω by

Ω (x) = \{h \in ℭ ([0, α], ℝ^{n}) : h (t) = S_{q} (t) (x_{0} - g (x)) + \int_{0}^{t} T_{q} (t - s) f (s) d s, f \in S_{F, x}\} .

Then by Lemma 3.7, Ω(x)∈P_{c, cp}(ℭ([0,α]), ℝⁿ)) for each x ∈ ℭ([0, α], ℝⁿ) and as in the proof of Theorem 3.6, it is a contraction if

(\tilde{M_{S}} κ_{2} + \tilde{M_{T}} (α^{q} / q) ǁ κ_{1} ǀ ǀ_{\infty}) < 1

or

α < {(\frac{(1 - {\tilde{M}}_{S} κ_{2}) q}{{\tilde{M}}_{T {ǁκ_{1}ǁ}_{\infty}}})}^{\frac{1}{q}}

. We shall show that dim Ω(x) ≥ m for any x ∈ ℭ([0,α], ℝⁿ) and arbitrary m ∈ ℕ. Consider G(t) = F (t, x(t)). By Lemma 3.8, there exist linearly independent measurable selections x₁(.), x₂(.), . . . , x_m(.) of G. Set

y_{i} (t) = S_{q} (t) (x_{0} - g (x)) + \int_{0}^{t} T_{q} (t - s) x_{i} (s) d s \in Ω (x)

. Assume that

\sum_{i = 1}^{m} a_{i} y_{i} (t) = 0

a.e. in [0, α]. Taking Caputo derivatives a.e. in [0, α], we have

\sum_{i = 1}^{m} a_{i} x_{i} (t) = 0

a.e. in [0, α] and hence a_i = 0 for all i. As a result, y_i(.) are linearly independent. Thus Ω(x) contains an m-dimensional simplex. So dim Ω(x) ≥ m. As in Theorem 3.6, Fix(Ω) is nonempty. Since Ω is condensing with respect to the Hausdorff measure of noncompactness χ [40] and Fix(Ω) ⊂ Ω(Fix(Ω)), we have

X (Fix (Ω)) \leq X (Ω (Fix (Ω))) .

This implies that Fix(Ω) is compact. Consider the map I - Ω: Fix(Ω) → P_{c, cp}(ℝⁿ), where I is the identity operator. Assume that dim Fix(Ω) < n. Then, by Lemma 3.11, there is a continuous selection g of I - Ω such that g(x) ≠ 0 for each x ∈ Fix(Ω). This implies that there exists a continuous selection h of F: Fix(F) → P_{c, cp}(ℝⁿ) without fixed points. Define T: ℝⁿ→ P_{c, cp}(ℝⁿ) by

T (x) = \{\begin{matrix} Ω (x), x \in ℝ^{n} \ Fix (Ω) \\ h (x), x \in Fix (Ω) . \end{matrix}

Since T is lower semicontinuous, Michael's selection result (Lemma 3.10) guarantees that T admits a continuous selection f: ℝⁿ→ ℝⁿ. Thus f: ℝⁿ→ ℝⁿis a continuous selection of Ω with no fixed points and f = h on Fix(Ω), which contradicts Lemma 3.9. Consequently, $F i x (Ω) = S_{x_{0}} ([0, α])$ is infinite dimensional.

Recall that a metric space X is an AR-space if, whenever it is nonempty closed subset of another metric space Y , then there exists a continuous retraction r: Y → X, r(x) = x for x ∈ X. In particular, it is contractible (and hence connected).

Lemma 3.13. [41] Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a Banach space X and Ω: C → P_{c, cp}(C) a contraction. Then Fix(Ω) is a nonempty AR-space.

Theorem 3.12 together with Lemma 4.13 yields the following result.

Corollary 3.14. Let F: [0, α] × ℝⁿ→ P_{c, cp}(ℝⁿ) satisfy (A₁), (A₂), and (A₃) and suppose that the Lebesgue measure μ of the set {t: dim F (t, x) < 1 for some x ∈ ℝⁿ} is zero. Then for each $α, 0 < α < min \{{(\frac{(1 - {\tilde{M}}_{S} κ_{2}) q}{{\tilde{M}}_{T {ǁκ_{1}ǁ}_{\infty}}})}^{\frac{1}{q}}, T\}$ , the set $S_{x_{0}} ([0, α])$ of solutions of (1) is an infinite dimensional AR-space.

Declarations

Acknowledgements

This project was funded by the Deanship of Scientific Research (DSR), King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, under grant no. 08/31/Gr. The authors, therefore, acknowledge with thanks DSR technical and financial support. The authors are grateful to the reviewers for their useful comments.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)

Department of Mathematics, Texas A&M University-Kingsville, 700 University Blvd, Kingsville, TX 78363-8202, USA

(2)

Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, King Abdulaziz University, P.O. Box 80203, Jeddah, 21589, Saudi Arabia

References

Podlubny I: Fractional Differential Equations. Academic Press, San Diego; 1999.Google Scholar
Zaslavsky GM: Hamiltonian Chaos and Fractional Dynamics. Oxford University Press, Oxford; 2005.Google Scholar
Magin RL: Fractional Calculus in Bioengineering. Begell House Publisher, Inc., Connecticut; 2006.Google Scholar
Kilbas AA, Srivastava HM, Trujillo JJ: Theory and Applications of Fractional Differential Equations, North-Holland Mathematics Studies, 204. Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam; 2006.Google Scholar
Sabatier J, Agrawal OP, Machado JAT (Eds): Advances in Fractional Calculus: Theoretical Developments and Applications in Physics and Engineering Springer, Dordrecht; 2007.Google Scholar
Lakshmikantham V, Leela S, Vasundhara Devi J: Theory of Fractional Dynamic Systems. Cambridge Academic Publishers, Cambridge; 2009.Google Scholar
Baleanu D, Diethelm K, Scalas E, Trujillo JJ: Fractional calculus models and numerical methods. Series on Complexity, Nonlinearity and Chaos, World Scientific, Boston; 2012.Google Scholar
Lazarevic MP, Spasic AM: Finite-time stability analysis of fractional order time delay systems: Gronwall's approach. Math Comput Model 2009, 49: 475-481. 10.1016/j.mcm.2008.09.011MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
El-Sayed AMA: Fractional order evolution equations. J Fract Calc 1995, 7: 89-100.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Ahn VV, Mcvinish R: Fractional differential equations driven by Levy noise. J Appl Math Stochastic Anal 2003, 16: 97-119. 10.1155/S1048953303000078MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Lakshmikantham V: Theory of fractional differential equations. Nonlinear Anal 2008, 60(10):3337-3343.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Agarwal RP, Belmekki M, Benchohra M: A survey on semi-linear differential equations and inclusions involving Riemann-Liouville fractional derivative. Adv Difference Equ 2009, 2009: 47. Art. ID 981728MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Ahmad B, Nieto JJ: Existence of solutions for nonlocal boundary value problems of higher order nonlinear fractional differential equations. Abstr Appl Anal 2009, 9. Art. ID 494720Google Scholar
Ahmad B, Graef JR: Coupled systems of nonlinear fractional differential equations with nonlocal boundary conditions. Panamer Math J 2009, 19: 29-39.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Ahmad B, Nieto JJ: Existence results for a coupled system of nonlinear fractional differential equations with three-point boundary conditions. Comput Math Appl 2009, 58: 1838-1843. 10.1016/j.camwa.2009.07.091MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
N'Guerekata GM: A Cauchy problem for some fractional abstract differential equation with non local conditions. Nonlinear Anal 2009, 70: 1873-1876. 10.1016/j.na.2008.02.087MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Agarwal RP, de Andrade B, Cuevas C: On type of periodicity and ergodicity to a class of fractional order differential equations. Adv Diff Equ 2010, 2010: 25. Art. ID 179750MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
dos Santos JPC, Cuevas C, Arjunan M: Existence results for a fractional neutral integro-differential equations with state-dependent delay. Comput Math Appl 2011, 62: 1275-1283. 10.1016/j.camwa.2011.03.048MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Agarwal RP, Ahmad B: Existence of solutions for impulsive anti-periodic boundary value problems of fractional semilinear evolution equations. Dyn Contin Discrete Impuls Syst Ser A Math Anal 2011, 18: 457-470.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Ahmad B, Agarwal RP: On nonlocal fractional boundary value problems. Dyn Contin Discrete Impuls Syst Ser A Math Anal 2011, 18: 535-544.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Smirnov GV: Introduction to the Theory of Differential Inclusions. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI; 2002.Google Scholar
Li WS, Chang YK, Nieto JJ: Solvability of impulsive neutral evolution differential inclusions with state-dependent delay. Math Comput Model 2009, 49: 1920-1927. 10.1016/j.mcm.2008.12.010MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Henderson J, Ouahab A: Fractional functional differential inclusions with finite delay. Nonlinear Anal 2009, 70: 2091-2105. 10.1016/j.na.2008.02.111MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Ouahab A: Some results for fractional boundary value problem of differential inclusions. Nonlinear Anal 2008, 69: 3877-3896. 10.1016/j.na.2007.10.021MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Ahmad B, Otero-Espinar V: Existence of solutions for fractional differential inclusions with anti-periodic boundary conditions. Bound Value Probl 2009, 2009: 11. Art. ID 625347MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Ahmad B, Shahzad N: A nonlocal boundary value problem for fractional differential inclusions of arbitrary order involving convex and non-convex valued maps. Veitnam J Math 2010, 38: 435-451.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Ahmad B, Ntouyas SK: Some existence results for boundary value problems of fractional differential inclusions with non-separated boundary conditions. Electron J Qual Theory Diff Equ 2010, 71: 1-17.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Ahmad B, Ntouyas SK: Existence of solutions for fractional differential inclusions with nonlocal strip conditions. Arab J Math Sci 2012. doi:10.1016/j.ajmsc.2012.01.005Google Scholar
Agarwal RP, Ahmad B, Alsaedi A, Shahzad N: Dimension of the solution set for fractional differential inclusions. J Nonlinear Convex Anal 2012, in press. 13Google Scholar
Hu S, Papageorgiou N: Handbook of Multivalued Analysis, Theory I. Kluwer, Dordrecht. 1997.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
Dugundji J, Granas A: Fixed Point Theory. Springer-Verlag, New York; 2005.Google Scholar
Shu XB, Lai YZ, Chen Y: The existence of mild solutions for impulsive fractional partial differential equations. Nonlinear Anal 2011, 74: 2003-2011. 10.1016/j.na.2010.11.007MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Jaradat OK, Al-Omari A, Momani S: Existence of the mild solution for fractional semilinear initial value problems. Nonlinear Anal 2008, 69: 3153-3159. 10.1016/j.na.2007.09.008MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Covitz H, Nadler SB Jr: Multi-valued contraction mappings in generalized metric spaces. Israel J Math 1970, 8: 5-11. 10.1007/BF02771543MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Castaing C, Valadier M: Convex Analysis and Measurable Multifunctions, Lecture Notes in Mathematics 580. Springer-Verlag, Berlin; 1977.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
Dzedzej Z, Gelman BD: Dimension of the solution set for differential inclusions. Demonstratio Math 1993, 26(1):149-158.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Petrusel A: Multivalued operators and continuous selections. The fixed points set. Pure Math Appl 1998, 9(1-2):165-170.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Michael E: Continuous selections. I Ann Math 1956, 63(2):361-382. 10.2307/1969615MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Saint-Raymond J: Points fixes des multiapplications á valeurs convexes. (French) [Fixed points of multivalued maps with convex values] C. R. Acad Sci Paris Sér I Math 1984, 298: 71-74.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Akhmerov RR, Kamenskii MI, Potapov AS, Rodkina AE, Sadovskii BN: Measures of noncompactness and condensing operators. Translated from the 1986 Russian original by A. Iacob. Operator Theory: advances and applications, 55. Birkhauser Verlag, Basel; 1992.Google Scholar
Ricceri B: Une propriété topologique de l'ensemble des points fixes d'une contraction multivoque valeurs convexes. (French) [A topological property of the set of fixed points of a multivalued contraction with convex values]. Atti Accad Naz Lincei Rend Cl Sci Fis Mat Natur 1987, 81(3):283-286. (8)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.