 Research
 Open Access
 Published:
Synchronization of fractionalorder and integerorder chaotic (hyperchaotic) systems with different dimensions
Advances in Difference Equations volume 2017, Article number: 344 (2017)
Abstract
By constructing two scaling matrices, i.e., a function matrix \(\Lambda (t)\) and a constant matrix W which is not equal to the identity matrix, a kind of \(W\Lambda(t)\) synchronization between fractionalorder and integerorder chaotic (hyperchaotic) systems with different dimensions is investigated in this paper. Based on the fractionalorder Lyapunov direct method, a controller is designed to drive the synchronization error convergence to zero asymptotically. Finally, four numerical examples are presented to illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed method.
Introduction
The fractional calculus theory, which is a generalization of the traditional integerorder calculus, can date back to 300 years ago. However, until recent 10 years, it has attracted increasing attention due to its popular use in the scientific fields and the engineeringoriented fields. Compared with the integer calculus, the fractional one can explain and handle many challenging problems more adequately and effectively [1–5].
Chaos synchronization is the dynamical process which means making two or more oscillators keep the same rhythms under a weak interaction [6]. Since Pecora and Carroll [7] proposed a pioneering method to synchronize two identical chaotic systems, synchronization of fractionalorder chaotic dynamical systems has gained a lot of popularity for its potential applications in secure communication and cryptography, telecommunication, signal and control processing, chaos synchronization [8–14]. Several types of synchronization techniques and methods, such as adaptive control, sliding mode control [15, 16], complete synchronization, projective synchronization (PS), and function projective synchronization (FPS) [17–19], have been proposed for fractionalorder dynamical systems. Among those existing synchronization methods, FPS, which has been introduced by Chen and Li [20, 21], was widely employed for synchronizing chaotic systems. Some scaling function matrices, which can be given with one’s need, are used in FPS. In fact, the scaling function matrix usually exhibits flexibility and unpredictability. By using error feedback control scheme, FPS of complex dynamical networks with or without external disturbances was discussed in [22]. Ref. [23] investigated adaptive switched modified FPS between two complex nonlinear hyperchaotic systems with unknown parameters. Ref. [24] discussed modified function projective combination synchronization of hyperchaotic systems.
It should be pointed out that in the above mentioned literature, synchronization of fractionalorder or integerorder chaotic systems was mainly discussed. Synchronization between fractionalorder and integerorder chaotic systems is widely perceived as contributing to generating hybrid chaotic transient signals, which are quite difficult to be decrypted in communication. Up to now, only a few works have been given to investigate this problem, for instance, by using the stability theory of fractionalorder linear system, Ref. [25] investigated modified general functional projective synchronization between a class of integerorder and fractionalorder chaotic systems. Ref. [26] discussed the dual projective synchronization between integerorder and fractionalorder chaotic systems (one can refer to [27–29] for more details). Actually, some dynamical systems usually have nonidentical dimensions. However, papers which have discussed the synchronization between fractionalorder and integerorder chaotic (hyperchaotic) systems with different dimensions are not common. Ref. [30] investigated adaptive generalized function matrix projective lag synchronization between fractionalorder and integerorder complex networks with delayed coupling and different dimensions. However, the controller in [30] has a very complicated form. Note that two scaling matrices (a function matrix and a nonunit constant matrix), which are more general than other scaling factors in FPS, have not been used to discuss the synchronization between fractionalorder and integerorder chaotic (hyperchaotic) systems with different dimensions. Besides, it is well known that the quadratic Lyapunov functions provide an important tool for stability analysis in the integerorder nonlinear systems. Therefore, how to use quadratic Lyapunov functions in the stability analysis of fractionalorder systems is meaningful.
Motivated by the aforementioned interesting literature, based on the Lyapunov direct method, we consider employing two scaling matrices to synchronize fractionalorder and integerorder chaotic (hyperchaotic) systems with different dimensions. Our method is more general than FPS. With the help of two scaling matrices, we can optimize the design of the synchronization controller. Our main contributions of this paper can be roughly summarized as follows:

Based on the Lyapunov direct method, the synchronization of fractionalorder and integerorder chaotic (hyperchaotic) systems with different dimensions is discussed by using a constant matrix and a function matrix.

With respect to different systems with nonidentical dimensions, different controllers are constructed to achieve \(W\Lambda(t)\) synchronization.
The rest of this paper is arranged as follows. In Section 2, some necessary theories and the mathematical models of fractionalorder and integerorder systems are given. The problem of \(W\Lambda(t)\) synchronization of fractionalorder and integerorder chaotic (hyperchaotic) systems is investigated in Section 3. In Section 4, the corresponding numerical simulations are presented to demonstrate the effectiveness of the main results. Finally, the conclusions are given in Section 5.
Preliminaries
Some related theories
Among several kinds of definitions of fractionalorder derivatives, the Caputo definition is the most frequently used one. The initial conditions for fractional differential equations with Caputo derivatives take on the same form as for integerorder differential equations. The Caputo fractional derivative operator will be used in this paper, and the Caputo fractional derivative is defined as
where \(n1\leq\alpha< n\) is the fractional order, \(\Gamma(\cdot)\) denotes the gamma function.
Some necessary lemmas and properties of the Caputo fractional derivative operator are listed below. For convenience, we always assume that \(0 < \alpha<1\) in the rest of our paper.
Property 1
([31])
Let \(f(t) , g(t) \in C'[0,T] (T>0)\), then we have
where a, b are two arbitrary real constants.
Theorem 1
([32])
Let \(x=0\) be an equilibrium point for the following fractionalorder nonautonomous system:
where \(x(t)\in R^{n}\) is the system state vector, \(f : [t_{0}, \infty)\times\Omega\rightarrow R^{n}\) is a realvalued continuous function in t and locally Lipschitz in x on \([t_{0}, \infty)\times\Omega\), and \(\Omega\in R^{n}\) is the domain that contains the region \(x=0\). Suppose there exists a Lyapunov function \(V(t,x(t))\) and three positive constants \(h_{1}\), \(h_{2}\), \(h_{3}\) such that
then system (3) is asymptotically stable.
Lemma 1
([33])
Let \(x(t)\in R^{n}\) be a continuously differentiable function, then for arbitrary \(t>0 \), it holds
Lemma 2
([34])
Let \(V(t)=\frac{1}{2}x^{T}(t)x(t)+\frac{1}{2}y^{T}(t)y(t)\), where \(x(t), y(t)\in R^{n}\) are continuously differentiable functions. Assume that there exists a positive constant k satisfying
where \(0<\alpha\leq1\), then \(\Vert x(t)\Vert\) and \(\Vert y(t)\Vert\) remain bounded, and \(x(t)\) converges to zero asymptotically. The symbol \(\Vert\cdot\Vert\) denotes the Euclidean norm.
Problem description
In this section, two cases will be considered.
Case 1: Let an integerorder chaotic system be the drive system and a fractionalorder hyperchaotic system be the response system, which are respectively expressed as
where \(A\in R^{m\times m}\), \(B\in R^{n\times n}\) (\(m < n\)) are linear parts of the drive system and the response system, respectively. \(x(t) \in R^{m}\), \(y(t) \in R^{n}\) are the state vectors of the drive system and the response system, respectively. \(f: R^{m}\rightarrow R^{m}\), and \(g: R^{n}\rightarrow R^{n}\) are continuous nonlinear parts of the drive system and the response system, respectively, and \(U(t) \in R^{n}\) is a controller to be designed.
Case 2: Considering the drive system and the response system of the form:
where \(A\in R^{m\times m}\), \(B\in R^{n\times n}\) (\(m < n\)) are linear parts of the drive system and the response system, respectively. \(x(t) \in R^{m}\), \(y(t) \in R^{n}\) are the state vectors of the drive system and the response system, respectively. \(f: R^{m}\rightarrow R^{m}\), and \(g: R^{n}\rightarrow R^{n}\) are continuous nonlinear parts of the drive system and the response system, respectively, and \(U(t) \in R^{n}\) is a controller to be designed.
Remark 1
Generally speaking, dimension l is an integer satisfying \(0< l\leq\max (m, n)\). For the convenience of our discussions, we will consider the conditions that \(l=m\) or \(l=n\).
Definition 1
The driveresponse systems (8) and (9) are said to be synchronized in l dimension, respectively, if there exists a controller \(U(t) \in R^{n}\) such that
where \(W=(w_{ij}) \in R^{l\times n}\) is a constant matrix, \(\Lambda (t)=(\Lambda_{ks}(t)) \in R^{l\times m}\) is a function matrix, both \(w_{ij}\) (\(i=1, \ldots, l\); \(j=1, \ldots, n\)) and \(\Lambda_{ks}(t)\) (\(k=1, \ldots, l\); \(s=1, \ldots, m\)) cannot be equal to zero at the same time.
Assumption 1
Assume that the scaling matrices W and \(\Lambda(t)=(\Lambda_{ks}(t)) \in R^{l\times m}\) are bounded, \(\Lambda_{ks}(t)\) are continuously differentiable and bounded functions or constants, and the derivatives of \(\Lambda_{ks}(t)\) (\(k=1, \ldots, l\); \(s=1, \ldots, m\)) are bounded.
Remark 2
Let I represent the identity matrix. Several points about Definition 1 are given as follows:

(1)
When \(l=n\), \(W\neq I\).

(2)
When \(l=n\), \(W=I \in R^{n\times n}\), and \(\Lambda(t)=(\Lambda _{ks}(t)) \in R^{n\times m}\), our method is simplified to be FPS.

(3)
When \(l=n\), \(W=I \in R^{n\times n}\), and \(\Lambda(t)=C \in R^{n\times m}\) is a nonzero constant matrix, our method is simplified to be PS.

(4)
When \(m=n\), \(W=I \), \(\Lambda(t)=(\Lambda_{ks}(t)) \in R^{n\times n}\), our method is simplified to be FPS of chaotic systems with the same dimensions.

(5)
When \(m=n\), \(W=I \), \(\Lambda(t)=I \in R^{n\times n}\), our method is simplified to be complete synchronization.

(6)
When \(m=n\), \(W=I \), \(\Lambda(t)=\operatorname{diag}(d, \ldots, d) \in R^{n\times n}\) is a nonzero constant matrix, our method is simplified to be PS of chaotic systems with the same dimensions.

(7)
When \(m=n\), \(W=I \), \(\Lambda(t)=I \in R^{n\times n}\), our method is simplified to be antiphase synchronization.

(8)
Our method provides multiple selections. Both the drive system and the response system are related to the dimension of \(e(t)\), that is to say, \(e(t) \in R^{n} \) and \(e(t) \in R^{m} \) can be achieved simultaneously, and this will be shown in our simulation part. Therefore, for some complex dynamical systems, we can choose the smaller dimension to get better reduction results.
Remark 3
It follows from Remark 2 that the proposed synchronization method is more general than other kinds of scaling synchronization, and our results are also effective for synchronization between fractionalorder and integerorder chaotic or hyperchaotic systems with the same dimensions.
Synchronization controller design and stability analysis
In this section, we will construct the synchronization controllers with different dimensions.
Synchronization under case 1
\(l=n\)
Under the given conditions, the synchronization error can be written as
where \(W \in R^{n\times n}\) and \(\Lambda(t) \in R^{n\times m}\) are two scaling matrices. The synchronization error system can be derived as
where \(Q_{1}\in R^{n\times n}\) is a feedback gain matrix which is chosen such that \(P_{1}=Q_{1}B\) is a positive definite matrix, and \(K_{1}(t)=P_{1}e(t)+WBy(t)+Wg(y(t)) D_{t}^{\alpha}(\Lambda(t)x(t))\). Then we have the following theorem.
Theorem 2
The driveresponse system (8) is said to be synchronized in n dimension under the control matrix \(Q_{1}\) if we design the following controller:
where \(M_{1}=W^{1}\), and \(u_{1}(t)=M_{1} D_{t}^{\alpha}(\Lambda(t)x(t))\) is the compensation controller.
Proof
Substituting Eq. (13) into Eq. (12) yields
Let the Lyapunov function candidate be \(V(t)=\frac{1}{2}e^{T}(t)e(t)\), according to Lemma 1, we have
where \(k=\min\{p_{1},\ldots,p_{n} \} > 0\), and \(p_{i} >0\) (\(i=1, \ldots, n\)) is the eigenvalue of matrix \(P_{1}\). It follows from Lemma 2 that the synchronization error system is asymptotically stable. □
\(l=m\)
When \(l=m\), the synchronization error system can be expressed as
where \(W \in R^{m\times n}\), \(\Lambda(t) \in R^{m\times m}\). \(Q_{2} \in R^{m\times m}\) is a feedback gain matrix which is chosen such that \(P_{2}=Q_{2}A\) is a positive definite matrix, and \(K_{2}(t)=P_{2}e(t)+WBy(t)+Wg(y(t)) D_{t}^{\alpha}(\Lambda(t)x(t))\).
To proceed, the following assumption is needed.
Assumption 2
The controller component \(U_{i}(t)\) of controller \(U(t)\) is 0 for \(i=m+1, \ldots, n\).
By Assumption 2, it is obvious that \(WU(t)=\hat{W}\hat{U}(t)\), where \(\hat{W}=(W_{ij})_{m\times m}\), \(\hat{U}(t)=(U_{1}(t), U_{2}(t), \ldots, U_{m}(t))^{T}\). Let
where \(M_{2}=\hat{W}^{1}\), and \(u_{2}(t)=D_{t}^{\alpha}(\Lambda(t)x(t)) \) is the compensation controller. Substituting the control law (17) into (16) gives
Theorem 3
The driveresponse system (8) will be synchronized in m dimension under Assumption 2 and the control matrix \(Q_{2}\) if the control law is designed as (17).
Synchronization under case 2
\(l=n\)
Under the given conditions, the synchronization error system can be described as
where \(W \in R^{n\times n}\), \(\Lambda(t) \in R^{n\times m}\). \(L_{1}\in R^{n\times n}\) is a feedback gain matrix which is chosen such that \(T_{1}=L_{1}B\) is a positive definite matrix , and \(S_{1}(t)=T_{1}e(t)+WBy(t)+Wg(y(t))\dot{\Lambda}(t)x(t)\Lambda(t) \dot{x}(t)\).
Let
where \(N_{1}=W^{1}\), and \(u_{3}(t)=\dot{\Lambda}(t)x(t)+\Lambda(t) \dot{x}(t)\) is the compensation controller. Substituting (20) into (19) yields
Theorem 4
The driveresponse system (9) is said to be synchronized in n dimension under the control matrix \(L_{1}\) and controller (20).
\(l=m\)
When \(l=m\), the synchronization error system is
where \(W \in R ^{m\times n}\), \(\Lambda(t) \in R ^{m\times m}\).
Let
where \(H(t)=( H_{1}(t),\ldots, H_{n}(t))^{T}\), and (22) becomes
It indicates that the initial problem is transformed into the following problem: choose a control law \(H(t)\) such that the error system (24) is asymptotically stable. Firstly, we give an assumption.
Assumption 3
The control component \(H_{i}(t)\) of controller \(H(t)\) is 0 for \(i=m+1, \ldots, n\).
By Assumption 3, it is easy to see that \(WH(t)=\hat{W}\hat{H}(t)\), where \(\hat{H}(t)=( H_{1}(t), \ldots, H_{m}(t))^{T}\), \(\hat{W}=(W_{ij})_{m\times m}\). Let
where \(N_{2}=\hat{W}^{1}\), \(L_{2}\) is a feedback gain matrix which is chosen such that \(T_{2}=L_{2}A\) is a positive definite matrix, and \(u_{4}(t)=\dot{\Lambda}(t)x(t)+\Lambda(t) \dot{x}(t)\) is the compensation controller. Therefore, we obtain
Theorem 5
The driveresponse system (9) will be synchronized in m dimension under Assumption 3 and the control matrix \(L_{2}\) if we design the controller as (23) and (25).
Remark 4
Since the proofs of Theorem 3, Theorem 4, and Theorem 5 are similar to that of Theorem 2, the processes will be omitted here.
Remark 5
Specially, to simplify calculations, the above feedback gain matrices \(Q_{1}\), \(Q_{2}\), \(L_{1}\), and \(L_{2}\) can be chosen such that their corresponding matrices \(P_{1}\), \(P_{2}\), \(T_{1}\), and \(T_{2} \) are diagonally positive definite.
Remark 6
For the above cases, we know that the asymptotical stability of the synchronization error systems is mainly decided by the above feedback gain matrices \(Q_{1}\), \(Q_{2}\), \(L_{1}\), and \(L_{2}\). The scaling matrices W and \(\Lambda(t)\) have no effect on the selection of these feedback gain matrices; consequently, if Definition 1 and Assumption 1 are satisfied, the corresponding positive definite matrices \(P_{1}\), \(P_{2}\), \(T_{1}\), and \(T_{2}\) will not change with the scaling matrices W and \(\Lambda(t)\). Therefore, according to certain chaotic (hyperchaotic) systems, one can focus on optimizing the construction of the controller \(U(t)\) to build the scaling matrices W and \(\Lambda (t)\). It should be pointed out that the continuously bounded functions \(\sin(t)\) and \(\cos(t)\) will display more excellent properties than other functions in the process of control. Based on Definition 1 and Assumption 1, for the purpose of getting better control performance, we usually employ functions \(\sin(t)\) and \(\cos(t)\) to construct the scaling function matrix \(\Lambda(t)\).
Numerical simulation
In this section, four numerical examples are presented to verify the effectiveness of our results.
Synchronization between integerorder Chen system and fractionalorder hyperchaotic Chen system
Consider the following integerorder Chen system as the drive system:
where \(x=(x_{1}, x_{2}, x_{3}) \) is the system state vector, \(a, b, c\in R\) are parameters. When \((a, b, c)=(35, 3, 28) \), it exhibits chaotic attractor, which is shown in Figure 1.
Let the following fractionalorder hyperchaotic Chen system be the response system:
where \(y=(y_{1}, y_{2}, y_{3}, y_{4})\) is the system state vector, \(U_{i}(t)\) (\(i=1, \ldots, 4\)) is the controller, \(a_{1}, b_{1}, c_{1}, d_{1}, r_{1} \in R\) are parameters. When \(\alpha=0.96\), \((a_{1}, b_{1}, c_{1}, d_{1}, r_{1})=(35, 3, 12, 7, 0.5)\), it exhibits hyperchaotic behavior, and the projections of the attractor are shown in Figure 2.
According to Theorem 2, the synchronization error is defined as \(e(t)=W(y_{1}, y_{2}, y_{3}, y_{4})^{T}\Lambda(t)(x_{1}, x_{2}, x_{3})^{T} \). Let
Let \(\alpha=0.98\), the initial conditions of the drive system and the response system are \(x(0)=(1, 0.5, 0.1)\), \(y(0)=(0.1, 0.1, 0.14, 0.4)\). The numerical simulation of the synchronization error system is presented in Figure 3.
Synchronization between integerorder Rössler system and fractionalorder hyperchaotic Lorenz system
Consider the following integerorder Rössler system as the drive system:
where \(x=(x_{1}, x_{2}, x_{3})\) is the system state vector, \(a_{1}, b_{1}, c_{1} \in R\) are parameters. When \((a_{1}, b_{1}, c_{1})=(0.2, 0.2, 5.7)\), it exhibits chaotic attractor, which is shown in Figure 4.
Let the following fractionalorder hyperchaotic Lorenz system be the response system:
where \(y=(y_{1}, y_{2}, y_{3}, y_{4})\) is the system state vector, \(U_{i}(t)\) (\(i=1, \ldots,4\)) is the controller, and \(a, b, c, r \in R\) are parameters. When \(\alpha=0.98\), \((a, b, c, r)=(10, \frac{8}{3}, 28, 1)\), it exhibits hyperchaotic behavior, and the projections of the attractor are shown in Figure 5.
According to Theorem 3, the synchronization error is defined as \(e(t)=W(y_{1}, y_{2}, y_{3}, y_{4})^{T}\Lambda(t)(x_{1}, x_{2}, x_{3})^{T}\). Let
Let \(\alpha=0.98\), the initial conditions of the drive system and the response system are \(x(0)=(1, 1, 2)\), \(y(0)=(2, 2, 1, 1)\). The numerical simulation of the synchronization error system is presented in Figure 6.
Synchronization between fractionalorder Rössler system and integerorder hyperchaotic Chen system
The following fractionalorder Rössler system describes the drive system:
where \(x=(x_{1}, x_{2}, x_{3})\) is the system state vector, \(a, b, c\in R\) are parameters. When \(\alpha=0.9\), \((a, b, c)=(0.4, 0.2, 10)\), it exhibits chaotic attractor, which is shown in Figure 7.
Let the following integerorder hyperchaotic Chen system be the response system:
where \(y=(y_{1}, y_{2}, y_{3}, y_{4})\) is the system state vector, \(U_{i}(t)\) (\(i=1, \ldots, 4\)) is the controller, and \(a_{1}, b_{1}, c_{1}, d_{1}, r \in R \) are parameters. When \((a_{1}, b_{1}, c_{1}, d_{1}, r)=(35, 3, 12, 7, 0.5)\), it exhibits hyperchaotic behavior, and the projections of the attractor are shown in Figure 8.
According to Theorem 4, the synchronization error is defined as \(e(t)=W(y_{1}, y_{2}, y_{3}, y_{4})^{T}\Lambda(t)(x_{1}, x_{2}, x_{3})^{T} \). Let
Let the initial conditions of the drive system and the response system be \(x(0)=(0.5, 1.5, 0.1)\), \(y(0)=(0, 1, 2, 3)\). The numerical simulation of the synchronization error system is presented in Figure 9.
Synchronization between fractionalorder Lü system and integerorder hyperchaotic Lorenz system
The following fractionalorder Lü system describes the drive system:
where \(x=(x_{1}, x_{2}, x_{3})\) is the system state vector, \(a_{1}, b_{1}, c_{1}\in R\) are parameters. When \(\alpha=0.98\), \((a_{1}, b_{1}, c_{1})=(36, 3, 20)\), it exhibits chaotic behavior, and the projections of the attractor are shown in Figure 10.
Let the following integerorder hyperchaotic Lorenz system be the response system:
where \(y=(y_{1}, y_{2}, y_{3}, y_{4})\) is the system state vector, \(U_{i}(t)\) (\(i=1, \ldots, 4\)) is the controller, and \(a, b, c, r \in R \) are parameters. When \((a, b, c, r)=(10, \frac{8}{3}, 28, 1)\), it exhibits hyperchaotic behavior, and the projections of the attractor are shown in Figure 11.
According to Theorem 5, the synchronization error is defined as \(e(t)=W(y_{1}, y_{2}, y_{3}, y_{4})^{T}\Lambda(t)(x_{1}, x_{2}, x_{3})^{T}\). Let
Let the initial conditions of the drive system and the response system be \(x(0)=(0.2, 0.5, 0.3)\), \(y(0)=(1, 0.5, 0.1, 1)\). The numerical simulation of the synchronization error system is presented in Figure 12.
Conclusions
In this paper, a kind of control approach about the synchronization of fractionalorder and integerorder chaotic (hyperchaotic) systems with different dimensions is proposed. To get new results, more simplified control schemes were designed by using two scaling matrices, and a quadratic Lyapunov function is used in the stability analysis of the synchronization error system. Finally, numerical simulations about the stabilization and synchronization problems of chaotic and hyperchaotic dynamical systems are used to testify the validity and usefulness of the proposed method.
References
 1.
Gallegos, JA, DuarteMermoud, MA: On the Lyapunov theory for fractional order systems. Appl. Math. Comput. 287, 161170 (2016)
 2.
Liu, H, Li, S, Li, G, Wang, H: Adaptive controller design for a class of uncertain fractionalorder nonlinear systems: an adaptive fuzzy approach. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. (2017). doi:10.1007/s4081501703715
 3.
Liu, H, Li, S, Cao, J, Li, G, Alsaedi, A, Alsaadi, FE: Adaptive fuzzy prescribed performance controller design for a class of uncertain fractionalorder nonlinear systems with external disturbances. Neurocomputing 219, 422430 (2017)
 4.
Liu, H, Pan, Y, Li, S: Adaptive fuzzy backstepping control of fractionalorder nonlinear systems. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst. 47, 22092217 (2017)
 5.
Yang, Y, Wang, Y, Li, TZ: Outer synchronization of fractionalorder complex dynamical networks. Optik, Int. J. Light Electron Opt. 127, 73957407 (2016)
 6.
Kurths, J: Synchronization: A Universal Concept in Nonlinear Science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)
 7.
Pecora, LM, Carroll, TL: Synchronization in chaotic systems. Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 821824 (1990)
 8.
Muthukumar, P, Balasubramaniam, P: Feedback synchronization of the fractional order reverse butterflyshaped chaotic system and its application to digital cryptography. Nonlinear Dyn. 74, 11691181 (2013)
 9.
Muthukumar, P, Balasubramaniam, P, Ratnavelu, K: Fast projective synchronization of fractional order chaotic and reverse chaotic systems with its application to an affine cipher using date of birth (DOB). Nonlinear Dyn. 80, 18831897 (2015)
 10.
Muthukumar, P, Balasubramaniam, P, Ratnavelu, K: Synchronization of a novel fractional order stretchtwistfold (STF) flow chaotic system and its application to a new authenticated encryption scheme (AES). Nonlinear Dyn. 77, 15471559 (2014)
 11.
Balasubramaniam, P, Muthukumar, P, Ratnavelu, K: Theoretical and practical applications of fuzzy fractional integral sliding mode control for fractionalorder dynamical systems. Nonlinear Dyn. 80, 249267 (2015)
 12.
Razminia, A, Baleanu, D: Fractional hyperchaotic telecommunication systems: a new paradigm. J. Comput. Nonlinear Dyn. 8, 031012 (2013)
 13.
Muthukumar, P, Balasubramaniam, P, Ratnavelu, K: Synchronization and an application of a novel fractional order king cobra chaotic system. Chaos 24, 033105 (2014)
 14.
Muthukumar, P, Balasubramaniam, P, Ratnavelu, K: TS fuzzy projective control for fractional order dynamical systems and its applications. Nonlinear Dyn. 86, 751763 (2016)
 15.
Liu, H, Li, S, Li, G, Wang, H: Robust adaptive control for fractionalorder financial chaotic systems with system uncertainties and external disturbances. Inf. Technol. Control 46, 246259 (2017)
 16.
Muthukumar, P, Balasubramaniam, P, Ratnavelu, K: Sliding mode control design for synchronization of fractional order chaotic systems and its application to a new cryptosystem. Int. J. Dyn. Control 5, 115123 (2017)
 17.
Fu, S, Wei, H, Liu, Y: Complete synchronization of chaotic systems with bidirectional coupling. J. Polym. Sci., Polym. Chem. 54, 16691678 (2016)
 18.
Li, CL, Zhang, M, Zhou, F, Yang, XB: Projective synchronization for a fractionalorder chaotic system via single sinusoidal coupling. Optik, Int. J. Light Electron Opt. 127, 28302836 (2016)
 19.
Du, HY, Shi, P, Lü, N: Function projective synchronization in complex dynamical networks with time delay via hybrid feedback control. Nonlinear Anal., Real World Appl. 14, 11821190 (2013)
 20.
Chen, Y, Li, X: Function projective synchronization between two identical chaotic systems. Int. J. Mod. Phys. C 18, 883888 (2007)
 21.
Li, X, Chen, Y: Function projective synchronization of two identical new hyperchaotic systems. Commun. Theor. Phys. 48, 864870 (2007)
 22.
Du, HY: Function projective synchronization in complex dynamical networks with or without external disturbances via error feedback control. Neurocomputing 173, 11431149 (2016)
 23.
Zhou, X, Jiang, M, Huang, Y: Switched modified function projective synchronization between two complex nonlinear hyperchaotic systems based on adaptive control and parameter identification. Kybernetika 50, 632642 (2014)
 24.
Sudheer, KS, Sabir, M: Modified function projective combination synchronization of hyperchaotic systems. Pramana 88, 40 (2017)
 25.
Guan, JB: Adaptive modified generalized function projection synchronization between integerorder and fractionalorder chaotic systems. Optik, Int. J. Light Electron Opt. 127, 42114216 (2016)
 26.
Zhang, Q, Xiao, J, Zhang, XQ, Cao, DY: Dual projective synchronization between integerorder and fractionalorder chaotic systems. Optik, Int. J. Light Electron Opt. 141, 9098 (2017)
 27.
Wu, YP, Wang, GD: Synchronization of a class of fractionalorder and integerorder hyperchaotic systems. J. Vib. Control 20, 15841588 (2014)
 28.
Wu, YP, Wang, GD: Synchronization and antisynchronization between a class of fractionalorder and integerorder chaotic systems with only one controller term. J. Theor. Appl. Inf. Technol. 48, 145151 (2013)
 29.
Wu, YP, Wang, GD: Synchronization between fractionalorder and integerorder hyperchaotic systems via sliding mode controller. J. Appl. Math. 2013, 5763 (2013)
 30.
Dai, H, Si, GQ, Jia, LX, Zhang, YB: Adaptive generalized function matrix projective lag synchronization between fractionalorder and integerorder complex networks with delayed coupling and different dimensions. Phys. Scr. 88, 57625770 (2013)
 31.
Podlubny, I: Fractional Differential Equations. Academic Press, New York (1999)
 32.
Li, Y, Chen, YQ, Podlubny, I: Stability of fractionalorder nonlinear dynamic systems: Lyapunov direct method and generalized MittagLeffler stability. Comput. Math. Appl. 59, 18101821 (2010)
 33.
AguilaCamacho, N, DuarteMermoud, MA, Gallegos, JA: Lyapunov functions for fractional order systems. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 19, 29512957 (2014)
 34.
Pan, YP, Er, MJ: Enhanced adaptive fuzzy control with optimal approximation error convergence. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 21, 11231132 (2013)
Acknowledgements
The authors are very grateful to the editor(s) and reviewers for giving valuable comments and suggestions. This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 11771263) and the Natural Science Foundation of Anhui Province of China (Grant No. 1508085QA16).
Author information
Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed equally. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
About this article
Cite this article
Yang, X., Liu, H. & Li, S. Synchronization of fractionalorder and integerorder chaotic (hyperchaotic) systems with different dimensions. Adv Differ Equ 2017, 344 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1186/s1366201713994
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s1366201713994
Keywords
 \(W\Lambda(t)\) synchronization
 fractionalorder system
 scaling matrix
 chaotic (hyperchaotic) system