Skip to main content

Some oscillation theorems for nonlinear second-order differential equations with an advanced argument

Abstract

The objective in this work is to study oscillation criteria for second-order quasi-linear differential equations with an advanced argument. We establish new oscillation criteria using both the comparison technique with first-order advanced differential inequalities and the Riccati transformation. The established criteria improve, simplify and complement results that have been published recently in the literature. We illustrate the results by an example.

Introduction

In this work, we study sufficient conditions for the oscillation of the solutions of second-order nonlinear differential equations with an advanced argument of the form

$$ \bigl( r \bigl( u^{\prime } \bigr) ^{\alpha } \bigr) ^{\prime } ( t ) +p ( t ) f \bigl( u \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \bigr) =0, $$
(1.1)

where we assume that the following conditions hold:

\(( H_{1} ) \):

α and β are quotients of odd positive integers;

\(( H_{2} ) \):

\(r\in C^{1} ( [t_{0},\infty ), ( 0,\infty ) ) \), satisfies

$$ \mu ( t_{0} ) := \int _{t_{0}}^{\infty } \frac{1}{r^{1/\alpha } ( s ) }\, \mathrm{d}s< \infty ; $$
\(( H_{3} ) \):

\(g\in C^{1} ( [t_{0},\infty ),\mathbb{R} ) \), and we suppose that, for all \(t\geq t_{0}\), \(g ( t ) \geq t\), \(g^{\prime } ( t ) \geq 0\) and \(p\in C[t_{0},\infty ),[0,\infty )\) does not vanish identically.

\(( H_{4} ) \):

\(f\in ( \mathbb{R} ,\mathbb{R} ) \) is such that \(uf ( u ) >0\) for \(u\neq 0\) and satisfies the following condition:

$$ \text{There exists a constant }\kappa >0\text{ such that }f ( u ) >\kappa u^{\beta }\text{ for all }u \neq 0. $$
(1.2)

A solution of (1.1) is an \(x\in C ( [t_{0},\infty ),[0,\infty ) ) \) with \(t_{a}=\min \{\tau ( t_{b} ) ,g ( t_{b} ) \}\), for some \(t_{b}>t_{0}\), which satisfies the property \(r ( u^{\prime } ) ^{\alpha }\in C^{1} ( [t_{a}, \infty ),[0,\infty ) ) \) and moreover satisfies (1.1) on \([t_{b},\infty )\). We consider the nontrivial solutions of (1.1) existing on some half-line \([t_{b},\infty ) \) and satisfying the condition

$$ \sup \bigl\{ \bigl\vert x ( t ) \bigr\vert :t_{c}\leq t< \infty \bigr\} >0\quad \text{for any }t_{c}\geq t_{b}. $$

If x is neither positive nor negative eventually, then \(x ( t ) \) is called oscillatory. Otherwise, it is a non-oscillatory solution.

Differential equations with advanced arguments are used in many applied problems where the rate of development depends on the future, as well as on the present time. In a delay equation, delays represent the retrospective memory of the past. In differential equations with an advanced argument, advances represent the prospective memory of the future, accounting for the influence on the system of potential future actions, which are available at the present time. For instance, population dynamics, economics problems, or mechanical control engineering are typical fields where such phenomena are thought to occur, see [14, 20].

The many applications of functional differential equations have been the motive behind the active research movement in recent times, see [113, 22, 2433] and [34, 35, 37]. In recent decades, a great amount of work has been done on the oscillation theory of the different order differential equations with delay and advanced argument [413, 1521, 23] and [2433, 36].

This work aims at further developing the oscillation theory of second-order quasi-linear equations with advanced argument. We use an approach that combines the comparison with first-order advanced differential inequalities and the Riccati transformation. That enables us to get various conditions, ensuring the oscillation of (1.1). In this paper, we simplify and improve the results in [36, Theorem 1.7.8] and obtain a new criterion for ensuring the oscillation of the solutions of (1.1). We illustrate the improvement obtained by the results in this paper, through an example.

Lemma 1.1

([7])

Let\(\alpha \geq 1 \)be a ratio of two odd numbers. Then

$$ A^{ ( \alpha +1 ) /\alpha }- ( A-B ) ^{ ( \alpha +1 ) /\alpha }\leq \frac{1}{\alpha }B^{1/\alpha } \bigl[ ( 1+\alpha ) A-B \bigr] ,\quad AB\geq 0 $$
(1.3)

and

$$ DV-CV^{{ ( \alpha +1 ) /\alpha }}\leq \frac{\alpha ^{\alpha }}{ (\alpha +1)^{\alpha +1}}\frac{D^{\alpha +1}}{C^{\alpha }},\quad C>0. $$

Lemma 1.2

([33])

Let\(\alpha ,\beta >0\)and assume thatuis an eventually non-increasing positive solution of (1.1). Then, \(u^{\beta -\alpha } ( t ) \geq \eta ( t ) \)holds, where\(\eta ( t ) \)is defined by

$$ \eta ( t ) = \textstyle\begin{cases} 1 & \textit{for }\alpha =\beta ; \\ a_{1} & \textit{for }\alpha >\beta ; \\ a_{2}\mu ^{\beta -\alpha } ( t ) & \textit{for }\alpha < \beta ,\end{cases} $$

anda, \(a_{2}\)are positive constants.

Auxiliary lemmas

The proofs of our main results are essentially based on the following lemmas.

Lemma 2.1

Assume that (1.1) has an eventually positive solutionu. If

$$ \int _{t_{0}}^{\infty }p(s)\,\mathrm{d}s=\infty , $$
(2.1)

then

$$ ( \mathbf{P}_{1} ) \quad u\textit{ is decreasing and } \bigl( r \bigl( u^{\prime } \bigr) ^{\alpha } \bigr) ^{\prime } \textit{ is non-increasing, eventually.} $$

Proof

Assume that there exists a \(t_{1}\geq t_{0}\) such that equation (1.1) has a positive solution u on \([ t_{1},\infty ] \). Hence, from \(( H_{4} ) \), we obtain

$$ \bigl( r \bigl( u^{\prime } \bigr) ^{\alpha } \bigr) ^{\prime } ( t ) \leq -\kappa p ( t ) u^{\beta } \bigl( g(t) \bigr) . $$
(2.2)

Thus, we get that \(u^{\prime }\) is of fixed sign, eventually. Now, we will prove that \(u^{\prime }<0\). To the contrary, suppose there exists a \(t_{2}\geq t_{1}\) such that \(u^{\prime }>0\) for \(t\geq t_{2}\). Define a positive function w by

$$ w ( t ) = \frac{r ( t ) ( u^{\prime } ( t ) ) ^{\alpha }}{u^{\beta } ( t ) }. $$
(2.3)

Differentiating (2.3), we get

$$ w^{\prime } ( t ) = \frac{ ( r ( t ) ( u^{\prime } ( t ) ) ^{\alpha } ) ^{\prime }}{u^{\beta } ( t ) }-\beta \frac{r ( t ) ( u^{\prime } ( t ) ) ^{\alpha }u^{\prime } ( t ) }{u^{\beta +1} ( t ) }. $$

From (2.2) and \(g ( t ) \geq t\), it follows that

$$\begin{aligned} w^{\prime } ( t ) \leq &-\kappa p ( t ) \biggl( \frac{u ( g ( t ) ) }{u ( t ) } \biggr) ^{ \beta }-\beta \frac{r ( t ) ( u^{\prime } ( t ) ) ^{\alpha }}{u^{\beta } ( t ) } \frac{u^{\prime } ( t ) }{u ( t ) } \\ \leq &-\kappa p ( t ) -\beta w ( t ) \frac{u^{\prime } ( t ) }{u ( t ) }. \end{aligned}$$

Thus

$$ w^{\prime } ( t ) \leq -\kappa p(t). $$
(2.4)

Integrating (2.4) from \(t_{2}\) to t, we get

$$ w(t)\leq w(t_{2})-\kappa \int _{t_{2}}^{t}p(s)\,\mathrm{d}s, $$

which yields a contradiction to w being positive. Hence, \(u^{\prime } ( t ) <0\), therefore, the proof is complete. □

Lemma 2.2

If equation (1.1) has an eventually decreasing positive solutionu, then

$$ ( \mathbf{P}_{2} ) \quad \frac{u}{\mu } \textit{ is non-decreasing, eventually.} $$

Proof

Assume that there exists a \(t_{1}\geq t_{0}\) such that equation (1.1) has a positive solution u on \([ t_{1},\infty ] \) and \(u^{\prime }<0\). Hence, from \(( H_{4} ) \), we get that (2.2) holds and therefore

$$ r^{1/\alpha } ( s ) u^{\prime } ( s ) \leq r^{1/ \alpha } ( t ) u^{\prime } ( t ) , $$

for all \(s\geq t\). Integrating this inequality from t to v yields

$$ u ( v ) -u ( t ) \leq r^{1/\alpha } ( t ) u^{\prime } ( t ) \int _{t}^{v}r^{-1/\alpha } ( s ) \, \mathrm{d}s, \quad v\geq t. $$

Letting \(v\rightarrow \infty \) in the above inequality, we see that

$$ r^{-1/\alpha } ( t ) u ( t ) +u^{\prime } ( t ) \mu ( t ) \geq 0, $$
(2.5)

and consequently,

$$ \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t} \biggl( \frac{u}{\mu } \biggr) = \frac{u^{\prime }}{\mu }+\frac{r^{-1/\alpha }u}{\mu ^{2}}\geq 0. $$

Thus, the proof is complete. □

Lemma 2.3

Assume that equation (1.1) has an eventually positive solutionuand

$$ \int _{t_{0}}^{\infty } \biggl( \frac{1}{r ( v ) } \int _{t_{0}}^{v}p ( s ) \,\mathrm{d}s \biggr) ^{1/\alpha }\,\mathrm{d}v=\infty . $$
(2.6)

Thenusatisfies\(( \mathbf{P}_{1} ) \), and

$$ ( \mathbf{P}_{3} ) \quad \lim_{t\rightarrow \infty }u ( t ) =0. $$

Proof

Assume that there exists a \(t_{1}\geq t_{0}\) such that \(u ( t ) >0\) for all \(t\geq t_{1}\). From (2.6) and (\(H_{2}\)), we conclude that condition (2.1) holds. From Lemma 2.1, it follows that u satisfies \(( \mathbf{P}_{1} ) \).

Next, since u is a positive decreasing function, we get that \(\lim_{t\rightarrow \infty }u ( t ) =c\geq 0\). Suppose that \(c>0\). Then, there exists \(t_{2}\geq t_{1}\) such that \(u ( g ( t ) ) \leq c\), and so

$$ - \bigl( r \bigl( u^{\prime } \bigr) ^{\alpha } \bigr) ^{\prime }(t) \geq \kappa p(t)u^{\beta }\bigl(g(t)\bigr)\geq \kappa c^{\beta }p ( t ) , $$

for \(t\geq t_{2}\). We integrate this inequality twice from \(t_{2}\) to t. Then, after the first integration, we get

$$ r ( t_{2} ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t_{2} ) \bigr) ^{\alpha }-r ( t ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t ) \bigr) ^{\alpha } \geq \kappa c^{\beta } \int _{t_{2}}^{t}p ( s ) \,\mathrm{d}s. $$

Therefore,

$$ u^{\prime } ( t ) \leq \kappa c^{\beta } \biggl( \frac{1}{r(t)}\int _{t_{2}}^{t}p ( s ) \,\mathrm{d}s \biggr) ^{ \frac{1}{\alpha }}. $$
(2.7)

After the second integration, we obtain

$$ u(t)-u(t_{2})\leq -\kappa c^{\beta } \int _{t_{2}}^{t} \biggl( \frac{1}{r ( v ) } \int _{t_{2}}^{v}p ( s ) \,\mathrm{d}s \biggr) ^{ \frac{1}{\alpha }}\,\mathrm{d}v. $$

This implies that \(\lim_{t\rightarrow \infty }u(t)=-\infty \), which contradicts \(c>0\). The proof of the lemma is complete. □

Lemma 2.4

Assume that equation (1.1) has an eventually positive solutionuand (2.6) holds. Then, there exist positive constants\(\delta _{1}\)and\(\delta _{2}\)and\(t_{\delta }\geq t_{1}\)such that

$$\begin{aligned} \delta _{1}\mu ( t ) \leq &u ( t ) \\ \leq &\delta _{2}\exp \biggl( -\kappa ^{\frac{1}{\alpha }} \int _{t_{0}}^{t} \biggl( \frac{1}{r ( s ) \eta ( s ) } \biggr) ^{ \frac{1}{\alpha }} \biggl( \frac{\mu ( g ( s ) ) }{\mu ( s ) } \biggr) ^{\frac{\beta }{\alpha }} \biggl( \int _{t_{0}}^{s}p( \zeta )\,\mathrm{d} \xi \biggr) ^{\frac{1}{\alpha }} \biggr) , \end{aligned}$$
(2.8)

for\(t\geq t_{\delta }\).

Proof

As in the proof of Lemma 2.3, we get that \(( \mathbf{P}_{1} ) \), \(( \mathbf{P}_{2} ) \) and \(( \mathbf{P}_{3} ) \) hold. From \(( \mathbf{P}_{2} ) \), there exist \(t_{2}\geq t_{1}\) and \(\delta _{1}>0\) such that \(u ( t ) /\mu ( t ) \geq \delta _{1}\) for all \(t\geq t_{2}\). Next, by integrating (1.1) from \(t_{2}\) to t, we get

$$\begin{aligned} -r ( t ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t ) \bigr) ^{ \alpha } \geq &-r ( t_{2} ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t_{2} ) \bigr) ^{\alpha }+\kappa \int _{t_{2}}^{t}p(s)u^{\beta }\bigl(g(s) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s \\ \geq &-r ( t_{2} ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t_{2} ) \bigr) ^{\alpha }+\kappa u^{\beta }\bigl(g(t)\bigr) \int _{t_{2}}^{t}p(s) \,\mathrm{d}s. \end{aligned}$$

Therefore,

$$ -r ( t ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t ) \bigr) - \kappa u^{\beta } \bigl(g(t)\bigr) \int _{t_{0}}^{t}p(s)\,\mathrm{d}s\geq -r ( t_{2} ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t_{2} ) \bigr) ^{\alpha }- \kappa u^{\beta }\bigl(g(t)\bigr) \int _{t_{0}}^{t_{2}}p(s)\,\mathrm{d}s. $$

From \((\mathbf{P}_{3})\), there exists a \(t_{3}\geq t_{2}\) such that the left-hand side of this inequality is positive for \(t\geq t_{3}\), and thus

$$ -r ( t ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t ) \bigr) ^{ \alpha }\geq \kappa u^{\beta }\bigl(g(t)\bigr) \int _{t_{0}}^{t}p(s)\,\mathrm{d}s, $$

for \(t\geq t_{3}\). By Lemma 2.2, the last inequality gives

$$\begin{aligned} -r ( t ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t ) \bigr) ^{ \alpha } \geq &\kappa \frac{u^{\beta } ( g ( t ) ) }{\mu ^{\beta } ( g(t) ) } \bigl( \mu ^{\beta }\bigl(g(t)\bigr) \bigr) \int _{t_{0}}^{t}p(s)\,\mathrm{d}s \\ \geq &\kappa \frac{u^{\beta } ( t ) }{\mu ^{\beta } ( t ) }\mu ^{\beta } \bigl( g(t) \bigr) \int _{t_{0}}^{t}p(s)\,\mathrm{d}s. \end{aligned}$$

Hence,

$$ \frac{ ( u^{\prime } ( t ) ) ^{\alpha }}{u^{\beta } ( t ) }\leq \frac{-\kappa }{r ( t ) } \biggl( \frac{\mu ( g(t) ) }{\mu (t)} \biggr) ^{\beta } \int _{t_{0}}^{t}p(s) \,\mathrm{d}s. $$

From Lemma 1.2, we obtain

$$ \biggl( \frac{u^{\prime } ( t ) }{u ( t ) } \biggr) ^{\alpha }\eta ( t ) \leq \frac{-\kappa }{r ( t ) } \biggl( \frac{\mu ( g(t) ) }{\mu (t)} \biggr) ^{\beta } \int _{t_{0}}^{t}p(s)\,\mathrm{d}s. $$

Then

$$ \frac{u^{\prime } ( t ) }{u ( t ) }\leq - \biggl( \frac{\kappa }{\eta ( t ) r ( t ) } \biggr) ^{ \frac{1}{\alpha }} \biggl( \frac{\mu ( g(t) ) }{\mu (t)} \biggr) ^{ \frac{\beta }{\alpha }} \biggl( \int _{t_{0}}^{t}p(s)\,\mathrm{d}s \biggr) ^{ \frac{1}{\alpha }}. $$
(2.9)

Integrating (2.9) from \(t_{3}\) to t, we have

$$\begin{aligned} u ( t ) \leq &u ( t_{3} ) \exp \biggl( - \int _{t_{3}}^{t} \biggl( \frac{\mu ( g(v) ) }{\mu (v)} \biggr) ^{\frac{\beta }{\alpha }} \biggl( \frac{\kappa }{\eta ( v ) r ( v ) } \int _{t_{0}}^{v}p(s)\,\mathrm{d}s \biggr) ^{ \frac{1}{\alpha }}\,\mathrm{d}v \biggr) \\ \leq &\delta _{2}\exp \biggl( - \int _{t_{0}}^{t} \biggl( \frac{\mu ( g(v) ) }{\mu (v)} \biggr) ^{\frac{\beta }{\alpha }} \biggl( \frac{\kappa }{\eta ( v ) r ( v ) } \int _{t_{0}}^{v}p(s) \,\mathrm{d} s \biggr) ^{\frac{1}{\alpha }}\,\mathrm{d}v \biggr) , \end{aligned}$$

where

$$ \delta _{2}=u ( t_{3} ) \exp \biggl( - \int _{t_{0}}^{t_{3}} \biggl( \frac{\mu ( g(v) ) }{\mu (v)} \biggr) ^{ \frac{\beta }{\alpha }} \biggl( \frac{\kappa }{\eta ( v ) r ( v ) }\int _{t_{0}}^{v}p(s)\,\mathrm{d}s \biggr) ^{\frac{1}{\alpha }} \,\mathrm{d} v \biggr) >0. $$

The proof is complete. □

Lemma 2.5

Assume that (2.1) holds and (1.1) has a positive solutionuon\([ t_{1},\infty ) \). Let there exist constantsγandδsuch that\(\gamma +\delta \in [ 0,1 ) \),

$$ p ( t ) \mu ^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \mu ( t ) \eta \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) r^{ \frac{1}{\alpha }} ( t ) \geq \frac{\gamma }{\kappa } $$
(2.10)

and

$$ \eta ^{-1/\alpha } ( t ) \mu ^{1-\beta /\alpha }(t)\mu ^{ \beta /\alpha } \bigl( g(t) \bigr) \biggl( \int _{t_{0}}^{t}p(s) \,\mathrm{d}s \biggr) ^{1/\alpha }\geq \frac{\delta }{\kappa ^{1/\alpha }}. $$
(2.11)

Then, there exists a\(t_{2}\geq t_{1}\)such that

$$ \frac{u}{\mu ^{1-\gamma }}\textit{ and }\frac{u}{\mu ^{\delta }} \textit{ are non-decreasing and non-increasing, respectively,} $$

for\(t\geq t_{2}\).

Proof

From (2.1) and Lemma 2.1, we get that \(( \mathbf{P}_{1} ) \) holds, and hence

$$\begin{aligned} \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t} \bigl( -r ( t ) \bigl( u^{ \prime } ( t ) ^{\alpha } \bigr) \mu ^{\gamma } ( t ) \bigr) =& \bigl( -r ( t ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t ) \bigr) ^{\alpha } \bigr) ^{\prime }\mu ^{\gamma } ( t ) \\ &{}+\gamma \bigl( r ( t ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t ) \bigr) ^{\alpha } \bigr) \mu ^{\gamma -1} ( t ) r^{-1/\alpha } ( t ) . \end{aligned}$$

Using (2.10), we obtain

$$\begin{aligned} &\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t} \bigl( -r ( t ) \bigl( u^{ \prime } ( t ) \bigr) ^{\alpha }\mu ^{\gamma } ( t ) \bigr) \\ &\quad \geq -\kappa p ( t ) u^{ \alpha } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \eta \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \mu ^{\gamma } ( t ) +\gamma r \bigl( u^{ \prime } ( t ) \bigr) ^{\alpha } \frac{\mu ^{\gamma -1} ( t ) }{r^{1/\alpha } ( t ) } \\ & \quad \geq -\kappa p ( t ) r ( t ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t ) \bigr) ^{ \alpha }\eta \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \mu ^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \mu ^{\gamma } ( t ) +\gamma r \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t ) \bigr) ^{\alpha } \frac{\mu ^{\gamma -1} ( t ) }{r^{1/\alpha } ( t ) } \\ & \quad =-r ( t ) \bigl( u^{ \prime } ( t ) \bigr) ^{\alpha }\mu ^{\gamma } ( t ) \biggl( \kappa p ( t ) \mu ^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \eta \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) - \frac{\gamma }{\mu ( t ) r^{1/\alpha } ( t ) } \biggr) \geq 0. \end{aligned}$$

Hence, \(-r ( u^{\prime } ) ^{\alpha }\mu ^{\gamma }\) is non-decreasing, and thus there exists a \(t_{2}\geq t_{1}\) such that

$$\begin{aligned} u ( t ) \geq &-r^{1/\alpha } ( t ) u^{\prime } ( t ) \mu ^{\gamma } ( t ) \int _{t}^{\infty } \frac{\mu ^{-\gamma } ( s ) }{r^{1/\alpha } ( s ) } \, \mathrm{d}s \\ =&-\frac{1}{1-\gamma }r^{1/\alpha } ( t ) \mu ( t ) u^{\prime } ( t ) . \end{aligned}$$

Thus,

$$ \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t} \biggl( \frac{1}{\mu ^{1-\gamma } ( t ) }u ( t ) \biggr) = \frac{1}{ ( 1-\gamma ) r^{\frac{1}{\alpha }} ( t ) \mu ^{2-\gamma } ( t ) } \biggl( u+\frac{1}{1-\gamma }r^{1/\alpha } ( t ) \mu ( t ) u^{\prime } ( t ) \biggr) \geq 0. $$

Proceeding as in the proof of Lemma 2.4, we obtain that (2.9) holds, and so

$$ \frac{u ( t ) }{\mu ^{\delta +1} ( t ) r^{1/\alpha } ( t ) }\leq - \frac{u^{\prime } ( t ) }{\mu ^{\delta +1} ( t ) } \biggl( \frac{\eta ( t ) }{\kappa } \biggr) ^{1/ \alpha } \biggl( \frac{\mu (t)}{\mu ( g(t) ) } \biggr) ^{ \beta /\alpha } \biggl( \int _{t_{0}}^{t}p(s)\,\mathrm{d}s \biggr) ^{-1/ \alpha }. $$
(2.12)

Therefore, we arrive at

$$\begin{aligned} \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t} \biggl( \frac{u ( t ) }{\mu ^{\delta } ( t ) } \biggr) =& \frac{u^{\prime } ( t ) }{\mu ^{\delta } ( t ) }+ \frac{\delta u ( t ) }{\mu ^{\delta +1} ( t ) r^{1/\alpha } ( t ) } \\ \leq &\frac{u^{\prime } ( t ) }{\mu ^{\delta } ( t ) } \biggl( 1-\frac{\delta }{\mu ( t ) } \biggl( \frac{\eta ( t ) }{\kappa } \biggr) ^{1/\alpha } \biggl( \frac{\mu (t)}{\mu ( g(t) ) } \biggr) ^{\beta /\alpha } \biggl( \int _{t_{0}}^{t}p(s) \,\mathrm{d} s \biggr) ^{-1/\alpha } \biggr) \\ \leq &0. \end{aligned}$$

The proof is complete. □

Main results

In this section, we shall establish some oscillation criteria for (1.1). Let us define

$$ \widehat{\mu } ( t ) := \biggl( \mu ( t ) + \frac{\kappa }{\alpha } \int _{t}^{\infty }\mu ( s ) \mu ^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) p ( s ) \,\mathrm{d}s \biggr) . $$

We are now ready to state and prove the main theorems.

Theorem 3.1

If

$$ \int _{t_{0}}^{\infty } \biggl( \frac{1}{r ( t ) } \int _{t_{0}}^{s}p ( s ) \mu ^{\beta } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d} s \biggr) ^{1/\alpha }\, \mathrm{d}t=\infty , $$
(3.1)

then every solution of (1.1) is oscillatory.

Proof

Suppose, against the theorem’s statement, that equation (1.1) has a non-oscillatory solution u on \([ t_{0},\infty ) \). Without loss of generality, we may assume that \(u ( t ) >0\), \(u ( g ( t ) ) >0\) for \(t\geq t_{1}\geq t_{0}\). Now, a necessary result to satisfy Condition (3.1) is that \(\int _{t_{0}}^{\infty }p ( s ) \mu ^{\beta } ( g ( s ) ) \,\mathrm{d}s\) is unbounded. Thus, from \(( H_{2} ) \) and \(\mu ^{\prime }(t)<0\), it is easy to note that (2.1) is valid. So, by Lemmas 2.1 and 2.2, we get that \(( \mathbf{P}_{1} ) \) and \(( \mathbf{P}_{2} ) \) hold. Therefore, there exist \(a>0\) and \(t_{2}\geq t_{1}\) such that \(u ( t ) \geq a\mu ( t ) \) for \(t\geq t_{1}\), and then

$$\begin{aligned} - \bigl( r \bigl( u^{\prime } \bigr) ^{\alpha } \bigr) ^{\prime } ( t ) \geq &\kappa p ( t ) u^{\beta } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \\ \geq &\kappa a^{\beta }p ( t ) \mu ^{\beta } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) . \end{aligned}$$
(3.2)

Integrating (3.2) from \(t_{2}\) to t, we get

$$ -r ( t ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t ) \bigr) ^{ \alpha }\geq r ( t_{2} ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t_{2} ) \bigr) ^{\alpha }+\kappa a^{\beta } \int _{t_{2}}^{t}p ( s ) \mu ^{\beta } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s, $$

i.e.,

$$ -u^{\prime } ( t ) \geq \bigl( \kappa a^{\beta } \bigr) ^{ \frac{1}{\alpha }} \biggl( \frac{1}{r ( t ) } \int _{t_{2}}^{t}p ( s ) \mu ^{\beta } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s \biggr) ^{\frac{1}{\alpha }}. $$

Integrating this inequality from \(t_{2}\) to t, letting \(t\rightarrow \infty \), and using (3.1), we get a contradiction to u being positive. The proof is complete. □

Theorem 3.2

If

$$ \limsup_{t\rightarrow \infty }\varPhi ( t,t_{1} ) >1, $$
(3.3)

for any\(t_{1}\in [ t_{0},\infty ) \), where

$$ \varPhi ( t,s ) :=\kappa \eta \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \mu ^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \int _{s}^{t}p ( v ) \,\mathrm{d}v, $$

then (1.1) is oscillatory. Moreover, if (2.6) holds and

$$ \limsup_{t\rightarrow \infty }\varPhi ( t,t_{0} ) >1, $$
(3.4)

then (1.1) is oscillatory.

Proof

Suppose, against the theorem’s statement, that equation (1.1) has a non-oscillatory solution u on \([ t_{0},\infty ) \). Without loss of generality, we may assume that \(u ( t ) >0\), \(u ( g ( t ) ) >0\) for \(t\geq t_{1}\geq t_{0}\). We can see that (3.3) and \(( H_{2} ) \) imply (2.1). Thus, Lemma 2.1 is valid for \(t>t_{1}\). Integrating (1.1) from \(t_{1}\) to t, we obtain

$$\begin{aligned} -r ( t ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t ) \bigr) ^{ \alpha } \geq &-r ( t_{1} ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t_{1} ) \bigr) ^{\alpha }+\kappa \int _{t_{1}}^{t}p ( s ) u^{\beta } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s \\ \geq &-r ( t_{1} ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t_{1} ) \bigr) ^{\alpha }+\kappa u^{\beta } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \int _{t_{1}}^{t}p ( s ) \,\mathrm{d}s \\ \geq &-r ( t_{1} ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t_{1} ) \bigr) ^{\alpha }+\kappa u^{\beta -\alpha } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) u^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \int _{t_{1}}^{t}p ( s ) \,\mathrm{d}s \\ \geq &-r ( t_{1} ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t_{1} ) \bigr) ^{\alpha }+\kappa \eta \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) u^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \int _{t_{1}}^{t}p ( s ) \,\mathrm{d}s. \end{aligned}$$
(3.5)

The last inequality, together with (2.5), implies that

$$ -r ( t ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t ) \bigr) ^{ \alpha }\geq -\kappa \eta \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) r \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \mu ^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \bigl( u^{\prime } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \bigr) ^{\alpha } \int _{t_{1}}^{t}p ( s ) \,\mathrm{d}s. $$
(3.6)

Since \(r ( t ) ( u^{\prime } ( t ) ) ^{ \alpha }\) is non-increasing and \(g ( t ) \geq t\), we get

$$ \varPhi ( t,t_{1} ) =\kappa \eta \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \mu ^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \int _{t_{1}}^{t}p ( s ) \,\mathrm{d}s\leq \frac{r ( t ) ( u^{\prime } ( t ) ) ^{\alpha }}{r ( g ( t ) ) ( u^{\prime } ( g ( t ) ) ) ^{\alpha }} \leq 1, $$
(3.7)

which contradicts (3.3).

On the other hand, let (2.6) hold. From the definition of η, we note that \(\eta ( t ) \) is bounded. Thus, from Lemma 2.3, we get that \(\lim_{t\rightarrow \infty }u ( t ) =0\), and hence there exists a \(t_{2}\in [ t_{1},\infty ) \) large enough, such that

$$ \kappa \eta \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) u^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \int _{t_{0}}^{t_{1}}p ( s ) \,\mathrm{d}s< -r ( t_{1} ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t_{1} ) \bigr) ^{\alpha } $$

for all \(t\geq t_{2}\). Therefore, from (3.5), we obtain

$$\begin{aligned} -r ( t ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t ) \bigr) ^{ \alpha } \geq &-r ( t_{1} ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t_{1} ) \bigr) ^{\alpha }+\kappa \eta \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) u^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \int _{t_{0}}^{t}p ( s ) \,\mathrm{d}s \\ &{}-\kappa \eta \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) u^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \int _{t_{0}}^{t_{1}}p ( s ) \,\mathrm{d}s \\ \geq &\kappa \eta \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) u^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \int _{t_{0}}^{t}p ( s ) \,\mathrm{d}s. \end{aligned}$$

As in (3.6) and (3.7), we get a contradiction to (3.4). The proof of the theorem is complete. □

Theorem 3.3

Assume that

$$ \liminf_{t\rightarrow \infty } \int _{t}^{g ( t ) }p ( s ) \mu ^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s>\frac{1}{\kappa \mathrm{e}}\quad \textit{if } \alpha =\beta , $$
(3.8)

or

$$ \lim_{t\rightarrow \infty } \int _{t_{0}}^{t}p ( s ) \mu ^{ \alpha } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s=\infty \quad \textit{if } \alpha < \beta . $$
(3.9)

Then (1.1) is oscillatory.

Proof

Suppose, against the theorem’s statement, that equation (1.1) has a non-oscillatory solution u on \([ t_{0},\infty ) \). Without loss of generality, we may assume that \(u ( t ) >0\), \(u ( g ( t ) ) >0\) for \(t\geq t_{1}\geq t_{0}\). We note that the following condition is necessary for (3.8) to be valid:

$$ \int _{t_{0}}^{\infty }p ( s ) \mu ^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s=\infty . $$
(3.10)

Moreover, (3.10) with \(( H_{2} ) \) ensure (2.1). From Lemma 2.1 and 2.2, we have that \(( \mathbf{P}_{1} ) \) and (2.5) hold. It follows from (1.1) and (2.5) that

$$ - \bigl( r ( t ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t ) \bigr) ^{\alpha } \bigr) ^{\prime }+\kappa p ( t ) r^{ \beta /\alpha } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \mu ^{\beta } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \bigl( u^{\prime } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \bigr) ^{\beta }\geq 0. $$

This implies that \(\varphi :=-r ( u^{\prime } ) ^{\alpha }\) is a positive solution of the first-order advanced differential inequality

$$ \varphi ^{\prime } ( t ) -\kappa p ( t ) \mu ^{ \beta } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \varphi ^{\beta /\alpha } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \geq 0. $$
(3.11)

In view of [24, Theorem 2.4.1] and [23, Theorem 1], conditions (3.8) and (3.9) imply that the advanced inequality (3.11) has no positive solutions when \(\alpha =\beta \) and \(\alpha <\beta \), respectively. This contradiction completes the proof. □

Theorem 3.4

Assume that

$$ \liminf_{t\rightarrow \infty } \int _{t}^{g ( t ) }p ( s ) \widehat{\mu }^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s>\frac{1}{\kappa \mathrm{e}}\quad \textit{if } \alpha =\beta , $$
(3.12)

or

$$ \lim_{t\rightarrow \infty } \int _{t_{0}}^{t}p ( s ) \widehat{\mu }^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s=\infty \quad \textit{if } \alpha < \beta , $$
(3.13)

where

$$ \widehat{\mu } ( t ) :=\mu ( t ) + \frac{\kappa }{\alpha }\int _{t}^{\infty }\mu ( s ) \mu ^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) p ( s ) \eta \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s. $$

Then (1.1) is oscillatory.

Proof

Proceeding as in the proof of Theorem 3.3, we obtain that (3.10), together with \(( H_{2} ) \), implies (2.1). Then, from Lemma 2.1 and 2.2, we get that \(( \mathbf{P}_{1} ) \) and (2.5) hold. Now, let \(\varphi :=r ( u^{\prime } ) ^{\alpha }\) and

$$ w:=u+\mu \varphi ^{1/\alpha }>0. $$
(3.14)

Then,

$$\begin{aligned} w^{\prime }( t) =&u^{\prime }( t) -r^{-1/\alpha }( t) \varphi ^{1/\alpha }( t) +\frac{1}{\alpha }\mu ( t) \varphi ^{( 1/\alpha ) -1}( t) \varphi ^{\prime }( t) \\ =&\frac{1}{\alpha }\mu ( t) \varphi ^{( 1/\alpha ) -1}( t) \varphi ^{\prime }( t) \end{aligned}$$

which, together with (1.1), implies that

$$ w^{\prime } ( t ) \leq -\frac{\kappa }{\alpha }\mu ( t ) p ( t ) \varphi ^{ ( 1/\alpha ) -1} ( t ) u^{\beta } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) < 0. $$
(3.15)

Integrating (3.15) from t to ∞, we get

$$\begin{aligned} w ( t ) \geq &\frac{\kappa }{\alpha } \int _{t}^{\infty } \mu ( s ) p ( s ) \varphi ^{ ( 1/\alpha ) -1} ( s ) u^{\beta } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s \\ \geq &\frac{\kappa }{\alpha } \int _{t}^{\infty }\mu ( s ) p ( s ) \varphi ^{ ( 1/\alpha ) -1} ( s ) \eta \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) u^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s. \end{aligned}$$

Using (2.5) in last inequality, we have

$$\begin{aligned} w ( t ) \geq &-\frac{\kappa }{\alpha } \int _{t}^{\infty } \mu ( s ) \mu ^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) p ( s ) \varphi ^{ ( 1/\alpha ) -1} ( s ) \eta \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \varphi \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s \\ \geq &-\frac{\kappa }{\alpha } \int _{t}^{\infty }\mu ( s ) \mu ^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) p ( s ) \eta \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \varphi ^{1/\alpha } ( s ) \,\mathrm{d}s \\ \geq &-\frac{\kappa }{\alpha }\varphi ^{1/\alpha } ( t ) \int _{t}^{\infty }\mu ( s ) \mu ^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) p ( s ) \eta \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s. \end{aligned}$$

From (3.14), we arrive at

$$\begin{aligned} u ( t ) \geq &- \biggl( \mu ( t ) + \frac{\kappa }{\alpha }\int _{t}^{\infty }\mu ( s ) \mu ^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) p ( s ) \eta \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d} s \biggr) \varphi ^{1/\alpha } ( t ) \\ =&-\widehat{\mu } ( t ) \varphi ^{1/\alpha } ( t ) . \end{aligned}$$
(3.16)

Using (3.16) and (1.1) yields

$$ \widehat{\varphi }^{\prime } ( t ) -\kappa p ( t ) \widehat{\mu }^{\beta } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \widehat{\varphi }^{\beta /\alpha } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \geq 0, $$

where \(\widehat{\varphi }:=-\varphi \). The rest of proof is similar to that of Theorem 3.3, and therefore we omit it. □

Theorem 3.5

Assume that (2.1) holds. If there exists a\(\rho \in C^{1} ( [ t_{0},\infty ) , ( 0, \infty ) ) \)such that

$$ \limsup_{t\rightarrow \infty } \biggl\{ \frac{\mu ^{\alpha } ( t ) }{\rho ( t ) } \int _{T}^{t} \biggl( \kappa \rho ( s ) p ( s ) \biggl( \frac{\mu ( g(s) ) }{\mu (s)} \biggr) ^{\beta }\eta (s)- \frac{r ( s ) ( \rho ^{\prime } ( s ) ) ^{\alpha +1}}{ ( \alpha +1 ) ^{\alpha +1}\rho ^{\alpha } ( s ) } \biggr) \,\mathrm{d}s \biggr\} >1, $$

for any\(T\in [ t_{0},\infty ) \), then (1.1) is oscillatory.

Proof

Suppose to the contrary of the theorem’s statement that equation (1.1) has a non-oscillatory solution u on \([ t_{0},\infty ) \). Without loss of generality, we can assume that \(u ( t ) >0\), \(u ( g ( t ) ) >0\) for \(t\geq t_{1}\geq t_{0}\). By Lemma 2.1 and 2.2, we have \(( \mathbf{P}_{1} ) \) and \(( \mathbf{P}_{2} ) \) hold for \(t>t_{1}\). Equation (1.1), together with \(( \mathbf{P}_{2} ) \), leads to

$$\begin{aligned} \frac{ ( r ( t ) ( u^{\prime } ( t ) ) ^{\alpha } ) ^{\prime }}{u^{\alpha }(t)} \leq &-\kappa p ( t ) \frac{u^{\beta } ( g(t) ) }{u^{\alpha }(t)} \\ \leq &-\kappa p ( t ) \frac{u^{\beta } ( g(t) ) }{u^{\beta }(t)}u^{\beta -\alpha }(t) \\ \leq &-\kappa p ( t ) \biggl( \frac{\mu ( g(t) ) }{\mu (t)} \biggr) ^{\beta } \eta (t). \end{aligned}$$
(3.17)

Now, let us make the positive generalized Riccati substitution:

$$ \omega ( t ) =\rho ( t ) \biggl[ \frac{r ( t ) ( u^{\prime } ( t ) ) ^{\alpha }}{u^{\alpha } ( t ) }+\frac{1}{\mu ^{\alpha } ( t ) } \biggr], \quad \text{for all }t\geq t_{2}. $$
(3.18)

Differentiating (3.18), we get

$$\begin{aligned} \omega ^{{\prime }} ( t ) =&\frac{\rho ^{\prime } ( t ) }{\rho ( t ) }\omega ( t ) +\rho ( t ) \frac{ ( r ( t ) ( u^{\prime } ( t ) ) ^{\alpha } ) ^{\prime }}{u^{\alpha } ( t ) }- \alpha \rho ( t ) r ( t ) \biggl( \frac{u^{\prime } ( t ) }{u ( t ) } \biggr) ^{\alpha +1} \\ &{}+ \frac{\alpha \rho }{r^{\frac{1}{\alpha }} ( t ) \mu ^{\alpha +1} ( t ) } \\ =&\frac{\rho ^{\prime } ( t ) }{\rho ( t ) } \omega ( t ) +\rho ( t ) \frac{ ( r ( t ) ( u^{\prime } ( t ) ) ^{\alpha } ) ^{\prime }}{u^{\alpha } ( t ) }+ \frac{\alpha \rho }{r^{\frac{1}{\alpha }} ( t ) \mu ^{\alpha +1} ( t ) } \\ &{}-\alpha \rho ( t ) r ( t ) \biggl( \frac{\omega ( t ) }{\rho ( t ) r ( t ) }- \frac{1}{r ( t ) \mu ^{\alpha } ( t ) } \biggr) ^{\frac{\alpha +1}{\alpha }}. \end{aligned}$$
(3.19)

From (3.19) and (3.17), we have

$$\begin{aligned} \omega ^{{\prime }} ( t ) \leq &\frac{\rho ^{\prime } ( t ) }{\rho ( t ) }\omega ( t ) -\rho ( t ) \kappa p ( t ) \biggl( \frac{\mu ( g(t) ) }{\mu (t)} \biggr) ^{\beta }\eta (t)+ \frac{\alpha \rho }{r^{\frac{1}{\alpha }} ( t ) \mu ^{\alpha +1} ( t ) } \\ &{}- \frac{\alpha }{ ( \rho ( t ) r ( t ) ) ^{\frac{1}{\alpha }}} \biggl( \omega ( t ) - \frac{\rho ( t ) }{\mu ^{\alpha } ( t ) } \biggr) ^{ \frac{\alpha +1}{\alpha }}. \end{aligned}$$

Using Lemma 1.1, with

$$ C=\frac{\rho ^{\prime } ( t ) }{\rho ( t ) }, D= \frac{\alpha }{ ( \rho ( t ) r ( t ) ) ^{\frac{1}{\alpha }}}, \text{and} V= \frac{\rho ( t ) }{\mu ^{\alpha } ( t ) }, $$

we obtain

$$\begin{aligned} \omega ^{{\prime }} ( t ) \leq &-\kappa \rho ( t ) p ( t ) \biggl( \frac{\mu ( g(t) ) }{\mu (t)} \biggr) ^{\beta }\eta (t)+ \frac{\rho ^{\prime } ( t ) }{\mu ^{\alpha } ( t ) }+ \frac{r ( t ) ( \rho ^{\prime } ( t ) ) ^{\alpha +1}}{ ( \alpha +1 ) ^{\alpha +1}\rho ^{\alpha } ( t ) } \\ &{}+ \frac{\alpha \rho }{r^{\frac{1}{\alpha }} ( t ) \mu ^{\alpha +1} ( t ) } \\ \leq &-\kappa \rho ( t ) p ( t ) \biggl( \frac{\mu ( g(t) ) }{\mu (t)} \biggr) ^{\beta }\eta (t)+ \biggl( \frac{\rho ( t ) }{\mu ^{\alpha } ( t ) } \biggr) ^{\prime } \\ &{}+ \frac{r ( t ) ( \rho ^{\prime } ( t ) ) ^{\alpha +1}}{ ( \alpha +1 ) ^{\alpha +1}\rho ^{\alpha } ( t ) }. \end{aligned}$$
(3.20)

We can write inequality (2.5) in the form

$$ -\frac{\rho ( t ) }{\mu ^{\alpha } ( t ) } \leq \rho ( t ) \frac{r ( t ) ( u^{\prime } ( t ) ) ^{\alpha }}{u^{\alpha } ( t ) }\leq 0. $$
(3.21)

Integrating (3.20) from \(t_{2}\) to t, we get

$$\begin{aligned} & \int _{t_{2}}^{t} \biggl( \kappa \rho ( t ) p ( t ) \biggl( \frac{\mu ( g(t) ) }{\mu (t)} \biggr) ^{\beta }\eta (t)-\frac{r ( t ) ( \rho ^{\prime } ( t ) ) ^{\alpha +1}}{ ( \alpha +1 ) ^{\alpha +1}\rho ^{\alpha } ( t ) } \biggr) \,\mathrm{d}s \\ & \quad \leq \omega ( t_{2} ) -\omega ( t ) + \frac{\rho ( s ) }{\mu ^{\alpha } ( s ) }+ \frac{\rho ( t_{2} ) }{\mu ^{\alpha } ( t_{2} ) }. \end{aligned}$$

In view of the definition of \(\omega ( t ) \), we get

$$\begin{aligned} & \int _{t_{2}}^{t} \biggl( \kappa \rho ( t ) p ( t ) \biggl( \frac{\mu ( g(t) ) }{\mu (t)} \biggr) ^{\beta }\eta (t)-\frac{r ( t ) ( \rho ^{\prime } ( t ) ) ^{\alpha +1}}{ ( \alpha +1 ) ^{\alpha +1}\rho ^{\alpha } ( t ) } \biggr) \,\mathrm{d}s \\ & \quad \leq \rho ( t_{2} ) \frac{r ( t_{2} ) ( u^{\prime } ( t_{2} ) ) ^{\alpha }}{u^{\alpha } ( t_{2} ) }- \rho ( t ) \frac{r ( t ) ( u^{\prime } ( t ) ) ^{\alpha }}{u^{\alpha } ( t ) }. \end{aligned}$$
(3.22)

Using inequality (3.21) into (3.22), we are led to

$$ \frac{\mu ^{\alpha } ( t ) }{\rho ( t ) }\int _{t_{2}}^{t} \biggl( \kappa \rho ( t ) p ( t ) \biggl( \frac{\mu ( g(t) ) }{\mu (t)} \biggr) ^{ \beta }\eta (t)- \frac{r ( t ) ( \rho ^{\prime } ( t ) ) ^{\alpha +1}}{ ( \alpha +1 ) ^{\alpha +1}\rho ^{\alpha } ( t ) } \biggr) \,\mathrm{d}s\leq 1. $$

Taking the limit superior of both sides of the inequality, we get a contradiction. This completes the proof. □

Discussion and examples

By using Lemma 2.5, we further improve the established oscillation criteria in Theorems 3.2, 3.3, and 3.5.

Corollary 4.1

Assume that there exist constantsγandδsuch that\(\gamma +\delta \in [ 0,1 ) \)and (2.10) and (2.11) hold. If

$$ \limsup_{t\rightarrow \infty }\mu ^{\gamma } ( t ) \mu ^{1- \gamma -\delta } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) ^{\alpha } \int _{t_{1}}^{t} \mu ^{\delta \alpha } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) p ( s ) \eta \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s> \frac{ ( 1-\gamma ) ^{\alpha }}{\kappa }, $$

then (1.1) is oscillatory.

Proof

Suppose to the contrary of the corollary’s statement that equation (1.1) has a non-oscillatory solution u on \([ t_{0},\infty ) \). Without loss of generality, we may assume that \(u ( t ) >0\), \(u ( g ( t ) ) >0\) for \(t\geq t_{1}\geq t_{0}\). From \(( H_{2} ) \), as \(t\rightarrow \infty \), we get

$$ \mu ^{\gamma } ( t ) \mu ^{1-\gamma -\delta } \bigl( g ( t ) \bigr) \leq \mu ( t ) ^{1-\delta } \rightarrow 0. $$

Then, we see that \(\int _{t_{1}}^{t}\mu ^{\delta \alpha } ( g ( t ) ) p ( s ) \,\mathrm{d}s\) and \(\int _{t_{0}}^{t}p ( s ) \,\mathrm{d}s\) are unbounded. Hence, (2.1) is necessary for (3.1) to be valid. From Lemma 2.1, \(( \mathbf{P}_{1} ) \) is satisfied for \(t\geq t_{1}\). By (1.1), we obtain

$$ -r ( t ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t ) \bigr) ^{ \alpha }\geq -r ( t_{1} ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t_{1} ) \bigr) ^{\alpha }+ \int _{t_{1}}^{t}\kappa p ( s ) u^{\beta } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s. $$

Using Lemma 2.5, we get

$$\begin{aligned} -r ( t ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t ) \bigr) ^{ \alpha } \geq & \biggl( \frac{u ( g ( s ) ) }{\mu ^{\delta } ( g ( s ) ) } \biggr) ^{\alpha } \int _{t_{1}}^{t}k \mu ^{\delta \alpha } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) p ( s ) \eta \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s \\ =& \biggl( \frac{u ( t ) \mu ^{1-\gamma -\delta } ( g ( s ) ) }{\mu ^{1-\gamma } ( t ) } \biggr) ^{ \alpha } \int _{t_{1}}^{t}k\mu ^{\delta \alpha } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) p ( s ) \eta \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s \\ =& \biggl( \frac{u ( t ) \mu ^{1-\gamma -\delta } ( g ( s ) ) }{\mu ^{1-\gamma } ( t ) } \biggr) ^{ \alpha } \int _{t_{1}}^{t}k\mu ^{\delta \alpha } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) p ( s ) \eta \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s. \end{aligned}$$
(4.1)

Moreover,

$$\begin{aligned} \frac{u ( t ) }{\mu ^{1-\gamma } ( t ) } \geq &\frac{- ( r ( t ) ) ^{\frac{1}{\alpha }}u^{\prime } ( t ) \mu ( t ) }{ ( 1-\gamma ) \mu ^{ ( 1-\gamma ) } ( t ) } \\ \geq &\frac{-r^{\frac{1}{\alpha }} ( t ) u^{\prime } ( t ) \mu ( t ) }{ ( 1-\gamma ) }. \end{aligned}$$

Therefore, (4.1) becomes

$$\begin{aligned} -r ( t ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t ) \bigr) ^{ \alpha } \geq & \biggl( \frac{-r^{\frac{1}{\alpha }} ( t ) u^{\prime } ( t ) \mu ^{\gamma } ( t ) \mu ^{1-\gamma -\delta } ( g ( s ) ) }{ ( 1-\gamma ) } \biggr) ^{ \alpha } \int _{t_{1}}^{t}k\mu ^{\delta \alpha } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) p ( s ) \eta \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s \\ \geq &-r ( t ) \bigl( u^{\prime } ( t ) \bigr) ^{\alpha } \biggl( \frac{\mu ^{\gamma } ( t ) \mu ^{1-\gamma -\delta } ( g ( s ) ) }{ ( 1-\gamma ) } \biggr) ^{ \alpha } \int _{t_{1}}^{t}k\mu ^{\delta \alpha } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) p ( s ) \eta \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s. \end{aligned}$$

Then

$$ \biggl( \frac{\mu ^{\gamma } ( t ) \mu ^{1-\gamma -\delta } ( g ( s ) ) }{ ( 1-\gamma ) } \biggr) ^{ \alpha } \int _{t_{1}}^{t}k\mu ^{\delta \alpha } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) p ( s ) \eta \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s\leq 1. $$

This completes the proof. □

Corollary 4.2

Assume thatγis a constant satisfying (3.4) and\(0\leq \gamma <1\). If\(\alpha =\beta \)and

$$ \liminf_{t\rightarrow \infty } \int _{t}^{g ( t ) }p ( s ) \widehat{\mu }^{\alpha } \bigl( g ( s ) \bigr) \,\mathrm{d}s> \frac{ ( 1-\gamma ) ^{\beta }}{\kappa \mathrm{e}}, $$

then (1.1) is oscillatory.

Corollary 4.3

Assume that (2.1) holds. If there exists a function\(\rho \in C^{1} ( [ t_{0},\infty ) , ( 0, \infty ) ) \)such that

$$ \limsup_{t\rightarrow \infty } \biggl\{ \frac{\mu ^{\alpha } ( t ) }{\rho ( t ) } \int _{T}^{t} \biggl( \kappa \rho ( t ) \eta ( s ) p ( s ) - \frac{r ( s ) ( \rho ^{\prime } ( s ) ) ^{\alpha +1}}{ ( \alpha +1 ) ^{\alpha +1}\rho ^{\alpha } ( s ) } \biggr) \,\mathrm{d}s \biggr\} >1, $$

where

$$ p ( s ) =p ( t ) \biggl( \frac{\mu ( g(t) ) }{\mu (t)} \biggr) ^{\beta ( 1- \gamma ) }, $$
(4.2)

then (1.1) is oscillatory.

For an appropriate choice of the function ρ (1 or \(\mu ( t ) \), or \(\mu ^{\alpha } ( t ) \)), Theorem 3.5 and Corollary 4.1 can be used to study the oscillation of (1.1) in a wide range of applications. Hence, by choosing \(\rho (t) =\mu ^{\alpha } ( t ) \), we get the following results:

Corollary 4.4

Assume that (2.1) holds. If

$$ \limsup_{t\rightarrow \infty } \int _{T}^{t} \biggl( \kappa p ( s ) \eta (s) \frac{\mu ^{\beta } ( g(s) ) }{\mu ^{\beta -\alpha }(s)}- \frac{\alpha ^{\alpha +1}}{ ( \alpha +1 ) ^{\alpha +1}r^{1/\alpha } ( s ) \mu ( s ) } \biggr) \,\mathrm{d}s>1, $$

for any\(T\in [ t_{0},\infty ) \), then (1.1) is oscillatory.

Corollary 4.5

Assume that (2.1) holds andpis defined as in (4.2). If

$$ \limsup_{t\rightarrow \infty } \int _{T}^{t} \biggl( \kappa \eta ( s ) \mu ^{\alpha } ( t ) p ( s ) - \frac{\alpha ^{\alpha +1}}{ ( \alpha +1 ) ^{\alpha +1}r^{1/\alpha } ( s ) \mu ( s ) } \biggr) \,\mathrm{d}s>1, $$

then (1.1) is oscillatory.

Example 4.1

Consider the equation

$$ \bigl( t^{2\alpha } \bigl( u^{\prime } \bigr) ^{\alpha } \bigr) ^{ \prime }+p_{0}t^{\upsilon -1}u^{\beta } ( \lambda t ) =0, $$
(4.3)

where \(\lambda \geq 1\) and

$$ \upsilon = \textstyle\begin{cases} \alpha +1, & \text{for } \alpha >\beta ; \\ \beta , & \text{for } \alpha \leq \beta .\end{cases} $$

We note that \(\kappa =1\), \(r ( t ) :=t^{2\alpha }\), \(p ( t ) :=p_{0}t^{\upsilon -1}\), \(g ( t ) :=\lambda t\), and \(f ( v ) :=v^{\beta }\). Thus, we see that \(\mu ( t ) =1/t \) and

$$ \int _{t_{0}}^{\infty } \biggl( \frac{1}{v^{2\alpha }}\int _{t_{0}}^{v}s^{\upsilon -1}\,\mathrm{d}s \biggr) ^{1/\alpha } \,\mathrm{d} v=\infty \quad \text{(i.e., (2.6) holds).} $$

First, let \(\alpha <\beta \). We see that (3.1) is not satisfied and therefore, Theorem 3.1 does not apply. Also, since (3.4), namely \(\kappa a_{2}p_{0}>\beta \lambda ^{\beta }\), for any \(a_{2}\), Theorem 3.2 does not apply in this example. On the other hand, by Theorem 3.3, we see that

$$ \lim_{t\rightarrow \infty } \frac{p_{0}}{\lambda ^{\alpha }}\int _{t_{0}}^{t}s^{\beta -\alpha -1}\,\mathrm{d}s= \infty , $$

and thus (4.3) is oscillatory.

Assume that \(\alpha >\beta \). Using Theorem 3.2, we get that (4.3) is oscillatory.

Finally, let \(\alpha =\beta \). From Lemma 2.3 and 2.4, any positive solution u of (4.3) satisfies \(\lim_{t\rightarrow \infty }u ( t ) =\infty \) and there exist positive constants \(\delta _{1}\) and \(\delta _{2}\) and \(t_{\delta }\geq t_{1}\) such that

$$ \frac{\delta _{1}}{t}\leq u ( t ) \leq \frac{\delta _{2}}{t^{\eta }}, $$

where

$$ \eta = \biggl( \frac{1}{\lambda } \biggr) ^{\frac{\beta }{\alpha }} \biggl( \frac{p_{0}}{\alpha } \biggr) ^{1/\alpha }, $$

for \(t\geq t_{\delta }\). The following list shows the conditions that have resulted from our theorems:

$$\begin{aligned} \text{Theorem 3.1} :&\quad \text{cannot be applied;} \\ \text{Theorem 3.3} :&\quad ( \mathbf{c}_{1} ) \quad \frac{p_{0}}{\lambda ^{\alpha }}\ln \lambda >\frac{1}{\mathrm{e}}; \\ \text{Theorem 3.4} :&\quad ( \mathbf{c}_{2} ) \quad p_{0} \biggl( 1+\frac{p_{0}}{\alpha }\lambda ^{ ( 1-\alpha ) } \biggr) ^{\alpha }\ln \lambda > \frac{\lambda ^{\alpha }}{\mathrm{e}}; \\ \text{Corollary 4.1} :&\quad ( \mathbf{c}_{3} ) \quad p_{0} ( \lambda ) ^{\alpha ( \gamma -1 ) }> \alpha ( 1-\gamma ) ^{\alpha } ( 1-\delta ) ; \\ \text{Corollary 4.2} :&\quad ( \mathbf{c}_{4} ) \quad p_{0} \biggl( 1+\frac{p_{0}}{\alpha }\lambda ^{ ( 1-\alpha ) } \biggr) ^{\alpha } \ln \lambda > \frac{\lambda ^{\alpha } ( 1-\gamma ) ^{\alpha }}{\mathrm{e}}; \\ \text{Corollary 4.4} :&\quad ( \mathbf{c}_{5} ) \quad \frac{p_{0}}{\lambda ^{\alpha }}> \biggl( \frac{\alpha }{\alpha +1} \biggr) ^{\alpha +1}; \\ \text{Corollary 4.5} :&\quad ( \mathbf{c}_{6} ) \quad \frac{p_{0}}{\lambda ^{\alpha ( 1-\gamma ) }}> \biggl( \frac{\alpha }{\alpha +1} \biggr) ^{\alpha +1}, \end{aligned}$$

where \(\gamma :=p_{0}\lambda ^{-\alpha }\) and \(\delta :=p_{0}^{1/\alpha }/ ( \lambda \alpha ^{1/\alpha } ) \). We note that Theorem 3.4 improves Theorem 3.3, Corollary 4.2 improves Theorem 3.4, and Corollary 4.5 improves Corollary 4.4.

References

  1. Agarwal, A., Dragomir, S.S., Jleli, M., Samet, B.: Advances in Mathematical Inequalities and Applications. Birkhäuser, Basel (2018)

    MATH  Book  Google Scholar 

  2. Agarwal, P.: Further results on fractional calculus of Saigo operators. Appl. Math. 7, 585–594 (2012)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Agarwal, P.: Some inequalities involving Hadamard-type k-fractional integral operators. Math. Methods Appl. Sci. 40, 3882–3891 (2017)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Agarwal, R.P., Bohner, M., Li, T., Zhang, C.: Even-order half-linear advanced differential equations: improved criteria in oscillatory and asymptotic properties. Appl. Math. Comput. 266, 481–490 (2015)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Agarwal, R.P., Grace, S.R., O’Regan, D.: Oscillation Theory for Difference and Functional Differential Equations. Springer, Berlin (2013)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Agarwal, R.P., Zhang, C., Li, T.: New Kamenev-type oscillation criteria for second-order nonlinear advanced dynamic equations. Appl. Math. Comput. 225, 822–828 (2013)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Agarwal, R.P., Zhang, C., Li, T.: Some remarks on oscillation of second order neutral differential equations. Appl. Math. Comput. 274, 178–181 (2016)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Bazighifan, O., Elabbasy, E.M., Moaaz, O.: Oscillation of higher-order differential equations with distributed delay. J. Inequal. Appl. 2019, 55, 1–9 (2019)

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bohner, M., Grace, S.R., Sager, I., Tunc, E.: Oscillation of third order nonlinear damped delay differential equations. Appl. Math. Comput. 278, 21–32 (2016)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Chatzarakis, G.E., Dzurina, J., Jadlovska, I.: New oscillation criteria for second-order half-linear advanced differential equations. Appl. Math. Comput. 347, 404–416 (2019)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Chatzarakis, G.E., Dzurina, J., Jadlovska, I.: Oscillatory and asymptotic properties of third-order quasilinear delay differential equations. J. Inequal. Appl. 2019 23, 17 p. (2019)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chatzarakis, G.E., Dzurina, J., Jadlovska, I.: Oscillatory properties of third-order neutral delay differential equations with noncanonical operators. Mathematics 7(12), 1177 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chatzarakis, G.E., Grace, S.R., Jadlovska, I., Li, T., Tunc, E.: Oscillation criteria for third-order Emden–Fowler differential equations with unbounded neutral coefficients. Complexity 2019, Article ID 5691758 (2019)

    MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Driver, R.D.: Can the future influence the present? Phys. Rev. D, Part. Fields 19(4), 1098–1107 (1979)

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Dzurina, J.: Oscillation of second order differential equations with advanced argument. Math. Slovaca 45(3), 263–268 (1995)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. El-Nabulsi, R.A., Moaaz, O., Bazighifan, O.: New results for oscillatory behavior of fourth-order differential equations. Symmetry 12, 136 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/sym12010136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Elabbasy, E.M., Cesarano, C., Bazighifan, O., Moaaz, O.: Asymptotic and oscillatory behavior of solutions of a class of higher order differential equation. Symmetry 11, 1434 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Elabbasy, E.M., El-Nabulsi, R.A., Moaaz, O., Bazighifan, O.: Oscillatory properties of solutions of even-order differential equations. Symmetry 12, 212 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/sym12020212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Elabbasy, E.M., Hassan, T.S., Moaaz, O.: Oscillation behavior of second order nonlinear neutral differential equations with deviating arguments. Opusc. Math. 32, 719–730 (2012)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Elsgolts, L.E., Norkin, S.B.: Introduction to the Theory and Application of Differential Equations with Deviating Arguments. Academic Press, New York (1973)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Grace, S.R., Graef, J.R., Tunc, E.: Oscillatory behavior of second order damped neutral differential equations with distributed deviating arguments. Miskolc Math. Notes 18(2), 759–769 (2017)

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Khalid, A., Naeem, M.N., Agarwal, P., Ghaffar, A., Ullah, Z., Jain, S.: Numerical approximation for the solution of linear sixth order boundary value problems by cubic B-spline. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2019, 492 (2019)

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kitamura, Y., Kusano, T.: Oscillation of first-order nonlinear differential equations with deviating arguments. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 78, 64–68 (1980)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Ladde, G.S., Lakshmikantham, V., Zhang, B.G.: Oscillation Theory of Differential Equations with Deviating Arguments. Monographs and Textbooks in Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 110. Dekker, New York (1987)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Li, T., Rogovchenko, Yu.V.: Oscillation of second-order neutral differential equations. Math. Nachr. 288, 1150–1162 (2015)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Li, T., Rogovchenko, Yu.V.: Oscillation criteria for second-order superlinear Emden–Fowler neutral differential equations. Monatshefte Math. 184, 489–500 (2017)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Li, T., Rogovchenko, Yu.V.: On asymptotic behavior of solutions to higher-order sublinear Emden–Fowler delay differential equations. Appl. Math. Lett. 67, 53–59 (2017)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Li, T., Rogovchenko, Yu.V., Zhang, C.: Oscillation results for second-order nonlinear neutral differential equations. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2013, 336, 1–13 (2013)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Li, T., Thandapani, E., Graef, J.R., Tunc, E.: Oscillation of second-order Emden–Fowler neutral differential equations. Nonlinear Stud. 20(1), 1–8 (2013)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Moaaz, O.: New criteria for oscillation of nonlinear neutral differential equations. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2019, 484 (2019)

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Moaaz, O., Elabbasy, E.M., Bazighifan, O.: On the asymptotic behavior of fourth-order functional differential equations. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2017, 261 (2017)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Moaaz, O., Elabbasy, E.M., Muhib, A.: Oscillation criteria for even-order neutral differential equations with distributed deviating arguments. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2019, 297 (2019)

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Moaaz, O., Elabbasy, E.M., Qaraad, B.: An improved approach for studying oscillation of generalized Emden–Fowler neutral differential equation. J. Inequal. Appl. 2020, 69 (2020)

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Rekhviashvili, S., Pskhu, A., Agarwal, P., Jain, S.: Application of the fractional oscillator model to describe damped vibrations. Turk. J. Phys. 43, 236–242 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Ruzhansky, M., Cho, Y.J., Agarwal, P., Area, I.: Advances in Real and Complex Analysis with Applications. Springer, Singapore (2017)

    MATH  Book  Google Scholar 

  36. Saker, S.H.: Oscillation Theory of Delay Differential and Difference Equations. VDM Verlag Dr. Muller, Saarbrucken (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Tariboon, J., Ntouyas, S.K., Agarwal, P.: New concepts of fractional quantum calculus and applications to impulsive fractional q-difference equations. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2015, 18, 1–19 (2015)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors express their earnest thanks to the editors and two anonymous referees.

Availability of data and materials

Data sharing not appropriate to this article as no datasets were produced in the current investigation.

Funding

The authors received no direct funding for this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

The author contributed equally to the manuscript and read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to B. Qaraad.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chatzarakis, G.E., Moaaz, O., Li, T. et al. Some oscillation theorems for nonlinear second-order differential equations with an advanced argument. Adv Differ Equ 2020, 160 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-020-02626-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-020-02626-9

MSC

  • 34C10
  • 34K11

Keywords

  • Second-order differential equations
  • Oscillation theorems
  • Advanced argument