- Research
- Open access
- Published:
Solvability of functional-integral equations (fractional order) using measure of noncompactness
Advances in Difference Equations volume 2020, Article number: 12 (2020)
Abstract
We investigate the solutions of functional-integral equation of fractional order in the setting of a measure of noncompactness on real-valued bounded and continuous Banach space. We introduce a new μ-set contraction operator and derive generalized Darbo fixed point results using an arbitrary measure of noncompactness in Banach spaces. An illustration is given in support of the solution of a functional-integral equation of fractional order.
1 Introduction
We will discuss the solutions \(u \in C ( I ,X ) \) of functional-integral equation of fractional order
in the setting of measure of noncompactness (MNC) on real-valued bounded and continuous Banach space. In particular, we also discuss
and its solution in \(C (I,\mathbb{R} ) \) (the space of all continuous mappings \(u:I= [ 0,1 ] \rightarrow\mathbb{R}\)).
Denote \(\mathbb{R}\) and \(\mathbb{N}\) as the set of real numbers, the set of natural numbers, respectively, and \(\mathbb{R}^{+}=[0,+\infty)\) and \(\mathbb{N}^{\ast}=\mathbb{N}\cup \{0\}\). Let \((E,\Vert\cdot\Vert)\) be a real Banach space with zero element θ. Let \(\mathcal{B}(x,r)\) denote the closed ball centered at x with radius r. The symbol \(\mathcal{B}_{r}\) stands for the ball \(\mathcal {B}(\theta,r)\). For X, a nonempty subset of E, we denote by X̅ and ConvX the closure and the convex closure of X, respectively. Moreover, let us denote by \(\mathfrak{M}_{E}\) the family of all nonempty bounded subsets of E and by \(\mathfrak{N}_{E}\) its subfamily consisting of all relatively compact sets.
Definition 1.1
([9])
A mapping \(\mu: \mathfrak{M}_{E} \to\mathbb{R}^{+}\) is said to be a MNC in E if
- (10):
the family \(\operatorname{ker} \mu= \{X \in\mathfrak {M}_{E} : \mu(X) = 0\}\) is nonempty and \(\operatorname{ker} \mu\subset\mathfrak{N}_{E}\),
- (20):
\(X \subset Y \Rightarrow\mu(X) \leq\mu(Y)\),
- (30):
\(\mu(\overline{X}) = \mu(X)\),
- (40):
\(\mu(\operatorname{Conv} X) = \mu(X)\),
- (50):
\(\mu( \lambda X + (1 - \lambda)Y ) \leq\lambda \mu(X) + (1 - \lambda) \mu(Y )\) for \(\lambda\in[0, 1]\),
- (60):
if \((X_{n})\) is a decreasing sequence of nonempty, closed sets in \(\mathfrak{M}_{E}\) such that \(X_{n+1}\subset X_{n}\) (\(n=1,2,\ldots\)) and if \(\lim_{n\rightarrow \infty}\mu(X_{n})=0\), then the set \(X_{\infty}=\bigcap_{n=1}^{\infty }X_{n}\) is nonempty and compact.
The family kerμ defined in axiom (10) is called the kernel of the MNC μ.
One of the properties of the MNC is \(X_{\infty} \in\operatorname {ker} \mu\). Indeed, from the inequality \(\mu(X_{\infty}) \leq\mu(X_{n})\) for \(n = 1, 2, 3,\dots\), we infer that \(\mu(X_{\infty}) = 0\).
The Kuratowski MNC is the map \(\alpha:\mathfrak{M}_{E}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{+}\) with
We denote \(\operatorname{fix}({T})\) as set of fixed points of T.
In 1955, Darbo [10] used the notion of Kuratowski MNC, α, to prove fixed point theorem (FPT) and generalized topological Schauder FPT [9] and classical Banach FPT [8].
Theorem 1.2
([9])
LetXbe a closed, convex subset of a Banach spaceE. Then every compact, continuous map \(T : X \to X\)has at least one fixed point.
We denote by Ω a nonempty, bounded, closed and convex subset of a Banach space E.
Theorem 1.3
([10])
Let \(T : \varOmega\to\varOmega\)be a continuous andμ-set contraction operator, that is, there exists a constant \(k \in[0,1)\)with
for any \(\phi\neq M \subset\varOmega\); letμbe the Kuratowski MNC onE, then \(\operatorname{fix}({T}) \neq\phi\).
Various Darbo-type FPT and coupled theorems by using different types of control functions arise (for instant, see [1–7, 10–12, 14–21, 23]). In this paper, we introduce a μ-set contraction operator using new control functions and establish some new fixed point result, a Krasnoselskii fixed point result, that generalizes the results in [1–3, 10, 12, 13].
2 Generalized Darbo-type fixed point theorems
We introduce the following notion as a generalization of a concept given in [22].
Definition 2.1
Let \(\varTheta_{F}\) be a family of all functions \(F:\mathbb{R}^{+} \times \mathbb{R}^{+} \to\mathbb{R}\) such that:
- \((\varTheta_{1})\):
F is continuous and strictly increasing;
- \((\varTheta_{2})\):
for each sequences \(\{t_{n}\} , \{s_{n}\} \subseteq \mathbb{R}^{+} \), \(\lim_{n \to\infty} t_{n} =\lim_{n \to\infty} s_{n} = 0 \Leftrightarrow\lim_{n \to\infty} F(t_{n},s_{n}) = -\infty\).
\(\varPi_{G,\beta}\) denotes the set of pairs \((G, \beta)\), where \(G : \mathbb{R}^{+} \to\mathbb{R}\) and \(\beta: \mathbb{R}^{+} \times \mathbb{R}^{+} \to[0, 1)\), such that:
- \((\varPi_{1})\):
for each sequence \(\{t_{n}\} \subseteq \mathbb{R}^{+} \), \(\limsup_{n \to\infty} G(t_{n}) \geq0 \Leftrightarrow\limsup_{n \to\infty} t_{n} \geq1\);
- \((\varPi_{2})\):
for the sequences \(\{t_{n}\} , \{s_{n}\} \subseteq\mathbb{R}^{+}\), \(\limsup_{n \to \infty} \beta(t_{n},s_{n})=1\Rightarrow\lim_{n \to\infty} t_{n} = \lim_{n \to\infty} s_{n}= 0\);
- \((\varPi_{3})\):
for the sequences \(\{t_{n}\} , \{s_{n}\} \subseteq \mathbb{R}^{+}\), \(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}G(\beta(t_{n},s_{n})) = - \infty\).
Theorem 2.2
Let \(T: \varOmega\rightarrow\varOmega\)is continuous operator. If there exist \(F \in\varTheta_{F}\), \((G, \beta) \in\varPi_{G,\beta}\)and a continuous and strictly increasing mapping \(\varphi:\mathbb{R}^{+}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}^{+}\)such that \(\mu({TM})>0\)implies
for all \(\emptyset\neq M \subset\varOmega\), whereμis an arbitrary MNC, then \(\operatorname{fix}({T}) \neq\emptyset\).
Proof
We start with the assumption \(\varOmega_{0}=\varOmega\) and define a sequence \(\{\varOmega_{n}\}\) by \(\varOmega_{n+1}=\operatorname{Conv}({T\varOmega}_{n})\), for \(n\in\mathbb{N}^{\ast}\). If \(\mu(\varOmega_{n_{0}})=0\) for some natural number \(n_{0}\in\mathbb{N}\), then \(\varOmega_{n_{0}}\) is compact. We have \(T(\varOmega_{n_{0}})\subseteq \operatorname{Conv}({T\varOmega }_{n_{0}})=\varOmega_{{n_{0}}+1}\subseteq\varOmega_{n_{0}}\). In Theorem 1.2 we have \(\mu(\varOmega_{n})>0\), for all \(n\in\mathbb{N}^{\ast}\). From (2.1) and (40) of Definition 1.1,
that is,
for all \(n\in\mathbb{N}\).
By the properties of \((G,\beta) \in\varPi_{G,\beta}\), \(F(\mu(\varOmega _{n+1}),\varphi(\mu(\varOmega_{n+1})))\rightarrow-\infty\) as \({n\rightarrow\infty}\) and by (\(\varTheta_{2}\)), we have
From (60) of Definition 1.1, \(\varOmega_{\infty }=\bigcap_{n=1}^{\infty}\varOmega_{n}\) is a nonempty, closed, convex set and \(\varOmega_{\infty}\subseteq\varOmega_{n}\) for all \(n\in\mathbb{N} \). Also \(T(\varOmega_{\infty})\subset\varOmega_{\infty}\) and \(\varOmega_{\infty}\in\operatorname{ker} \mu\). Therefore, by Theorem 1.2, \(\operatorname{fix}({T}) \neq\emptyset\). □
Corollary 2.3
Let \(T: \varOmega\rightarrow\varOmega\)is continuous operator. If there exist \(\tau>0\), \(F \in\varTheta_{F}\), and a continuous and strictly increasing mapping \(\varphi:\mathbb{R}^{+}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}^{+}\)such that
for all \(\emptyset\neq M \subset\varOmega\), whereμis an arbitrary MNC, then \(\operatorname{fix}({T}) \neq\emptyset\).
Proof
If we consider \(G(t)=\ln t \) (\(t >0\)), \(\beta(t,s)=\lambda\in(0,1)\) and \(\tau= -\ln\lambda>0\) in (2.1) of Theorems 2.2, we have (2.3), and the result follows from Theorem 2.2. □
Corollary 2.4
Let \(T: \varOmega\rightarrow\varOmega\)is continuous operator. If there exists a continuous and strictly increasing mapping \(\varphi:\mathbb{R}^{+}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}^{+}\)such that for \(\lambda\in(0,1)\)
for all \(\emptyset\neq M \subset\varOmega\), whereμis an arbitrary MNC. Then \(\operatorname{fix}({T}) \neq\emptyset\).
Proof
If we consider \(F(t,s)=\ln(t+s)\) (\(t,s>0\)) and \(\tau=\ln(\frac {1}{\lambda})\) (\(\lambda\in(0,1)\)) in (2.3) of Corollary 2.3, we have condition (2.4). □
Proposition 2.5
Let \(T: \varOmega\rightarrow\varOmega\)is continuous operator. If there exist \(F \in\varTheta_{F}\), \((G, \beta) \in\varPi_{G,\beta}\)and a continuous mapping \(\varphi:\mathbb{R}^{+}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{+}\)such that \(\operatorname{diam}(TM)>0\)implies
for all \(\emptyset\neq M \subset\varOmega\), then \(\operatorname {fix}({T}) \neq\emptyset\).
Proof
Following the argument of Proposition 3.2 [12], Theorem 2.2 guarantees the existence of a T-invariant nonempty closed convex subset M with \(\operatorname{diam}(M_{\infty}) = 0\), which means that \(M_{\infty}\) is a singleton and therefore \(\operatorname{fix}({T}) \neq\emptyset\).
Uniqueness. In order to get a contradiction we may suppose that there exist two different fixed points \(\zeta\neq\xi\in\varOmega \), then we may define the set \(M := \{\zeta,\xi\}\). In this case \(\operatorname{diam}(M) = \operatorname {diam}(T(M)) = \|\xi-\zeta\| > 0\). Then using (2.5)
Therefore, \(G(\beta(\operatorname{diam}(M),\varphi(\operatorname {diam}(M))))\geq0\) and hence \(\beta(\operatorname{diam}(M),\varphi (\operatorname{diam}(M)))\geq1\), which is a contradiction, and hence \(\xi= \zeta\). □
A generalized classical fixed point result derived from Proposition 2.5 follows.
Corollary 2.6
Let \(T: \varOmega\rightarrow\varOmega\)be an operator. It there exist \(F \in\varTheta_{F}\), \((G, \beta) \in\varPi_{G,\beta}\)and a continuous and strictly increasing mapping \(\varphi:\mathbb{R}^{+}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}^{+}\)such that \(\Vert Tu-Tv\Vert>0\)implies
for all \(u,v\in\varOmega\), then \(\operatorname{fix}({T}) \neq\emptyset\).
Proof
Let \(\mu:\mathfrak{M}_{E}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}^{+}\) be a set quantity defined by \(\mu(\varOmega)=\operatorname{diam}\varOmega\), where \(\operatorname{diam}\varOmega=\sup\{\Vert u-v\Vert:u,v\in\varOmega\}\), the diameter of Ω. Therefore μ is a MNC in a space E in the sense of Definition 1.1, and from (2.6)
that is, \(\operatorname{diam}(T(\varOmega))>0\), which implies
Thus following Proposition 2.5, \(\operatorname{fix}(T) \neq \emptyset\). □
Corollary 2.7
Let \((E,\Vert\cdot\Vert)\)be a Banach space and letΩbe a closed convex subset ofE. Let \(T_{1},T_{2}: \varOmega\rightarrow \varOmega\)be two operators satisfying the following conditions:
- (I)
\((T_{1} + T_{2})(X) \subseteq\varOmega\), for \(X \in\varOmega\);
- (II)
there exist \(F \in\varTheta_{F}\)and \((G, \beta) \in\varPi _{G,\beta}\)and a continuous and increasing mapping \(\varphi:\mathbb{R}^{+}\rightarrow\mathbb {R}^{+}\)such that \(\Vert T_{1}u-T_{1}v\Vert>0\)implies
$$ \begin{aligned}[b]&F\bigl(\Vert T_{1}u-T_{1}v \Vert , \varphi\bigl( \Vert T_{1}u-T_{1}v \Vert \bigr)\bigr)\\ &\quad\leq F\bigl( \Vert u-v \Vert ,\varphi\bigl( \Vert u-v \Vert \bigr) \bigr) + G\bigl(\beta\bigl( \Vert u-v \Vert ,\varphi\bigl( \Vert u-v \Vert \bigr)\bigr)\bigr);\end{aligned} $$(2.7) - (III)
\(T_{2}\)is a continuous and compact operator.
Then \(\mathcal{J} := T_{1} + T_{2}: \varOmega\rightarrow\varOmega\)has a fixed point \(u \in\varOmega\).
Proof
Suppose \(M \subset\varOmega\) with \(\alpha(M)>0\). Invoking the notion of a Kuratowski MNC, for each \(n\in\mathbb{N}\), there exist \(\mathcal{C}_{1},\ldots,\mathcal{C}_{m(n)}\) bounded subsets such that \(M\subseteq\bigcup_{i=1}^{m(n)}\mathcal{C}_{i}\) and \(\operatorname {diam}(\mathcal{C}_{i})\leq\alpha(M)+\frac{1}{n}\). Suppose that \(\alpha(T_{1}(M))>0\). Since \(T_{1}(M)\subseteq\bigcup_{i=1}^{m(n)}T_{1}(\mathcal{C}_{i})\), there exists \(i_{0}\in\{1,2,\ldots,m(n)\}\) such that \(\alpha(T_{1}(M))\leq\operatorname{diam}(T_{1}(\mathcal{C}_{i_{0}}))\). Using (2.7) the condition of \(T_{1}\) with the discussed arguments, we have
Passing to the limit in (2.8) as \(n\rightarrow\infty\), we get
Using hypothesis (III), we have, invoking the notion of α,
Thus by Theorem 2.2, \(\operatorname{fix}(\mathcal{J}) \neq \emptyset\). □
3 Application
Let \(( X, \Vert \cdot \Vert ) \) be a real Banach algebra and let the symbol \(C ( I ,X ) \) stand for the space consisting of all continuous mappings \(u:I= [ 0,1 ] \rightarrow X\) and \(C_{+}(I)\) for the space of positive real-valued continuous function defined on I and \(C_{+}^{1}(I)\) for the space of positive real-valued continuous differential function defined on I. We will consider the existence of a solution \(u\in C ( I, X ) \) to the integral equation
Assume:
- \((A_{1})\):
\(f:I \times X\rightarrow X\) is a continuous mapping such that there exist \(F \in\varTheta_{F}\), \((G, \beta) \in\varPi _{G,\beta}\) and a nondecreasing function \(\varphi:\mathbb{R} ^{+}\rightarrow\mathbb{R} ^{+}\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} \begin{aligned}[b] & \bigl\Vert f ( t,u ) -f ( t,v ) \bigr\Vert >0 \\ &\quad\Rightarrow\quad F \bigl( \bigl\Vert f ( t,u ) -f ( t,v ) \bigr\Vert ,\varphi \bigl( \bigl\Vert f ( t,u ) -f ( t,v ) \bigr\Vert \bigr) \bigr) \\ &\phantom{\quad\Rightarrow\quad}\quad\leq F \bigl( \Vert u-v \Vert ,\varphi \bigl( \Vert u-v \Vert \bigr) \bigr)+G\bigl(\beta\bigl( \bigl( \Vert u-v \Vert ,\varphi \bigl( \Vert u-v \Vert \bigr) \bigr)\bigr)\bigr). \end{aligned} \end{aligned}$$(3.2)Also, there exist a function \(\phi_{1}:\mathbb{R} ^{+}\rightarrow\mathbb{R} ^{+}\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} \bigl\Vert f (t, u ) \bigr\Vert \leq\phi_{1} \bigl( \Vert u \Vert \bigr) \end{aligned}$$and
$$M_{0}=\sup\bigl\{ \bigl\vert \phi_{1}(t) \bigr\vert :t \in\mathbb{R} ^{+}\bigr\} < \infty. $$- \((A_{2})\):
H is some operator acting continuously from the space \(C ( I ,X ) \) into itself and there is an increasing function \(\psi_{1} :\mathbb{R} ^{+}\rightarrow \mathbb{R} ^{+}\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} \bigl\Vert H ( u ) \bigr\Vert \leq&\psi_{1} \bigl( \Vert u \Vert \bigr). \end{aligned}$$- \((A_{3})\):
The function \(k:I\times I\times\mathbb{R}\to \mathbb{R}\) is continuous such that \(k(I\times I\times\mathbb {R_{+}}) \subseteq\mathbb{R_{+}}\) and
$$K_{0}=\sup\bigl\{ \bigl\vert k\bigl(t,s,u(s)\bigr) \bigr\vert :t,s\in I, u\in C_{+}(I)\bigr\} < \infty. $$- \((A_{4})\):
The function \(g:I\to\mathbb{R_{+}}\) is \(C_{+}^{1}\) and nondecreasing.
- \((A_{5})\):
\(\liminf_{\zeta\rightarrow\infty}\frac{\psi_{1} (\zeta ) K_{0}(g(1)-g(0))^{\gamma}}{\zeta\varGamma(\gamma+1)}<1\).
Theorem 3.1
Under assumptions \((A_{1})\)–\((A_{6})\), Eq. (3.1) has at least one solution in the space \(u \in C (I ,X ) \).
Proof
Define an integral operator T: \(C ( I, X ) \rightarrow C ( I ,X ) \) by
where
We prove \(\operatorname{fix}({T}) \neq \emptyset\).
Consider the two mappings \(T_{1},T_{2}:C ( I ,X ) \rightarrow C ( I,X ) \),
where \(T=T_{1}+T_{2}\). It is easy to see that \(T_{1}\) is well defined. Now we show that \(T_{2}\) is well defined. Let \(\varepsilon>0\) be arbitrary and let \(u\in C ( I ,X ) \) be given and fixed and let \(\eta_{1},\eta_{2}\in I\) (without loss of generality assume that \(\eta_{2}\geq\eta_{1}\)) and \(|\eta_{2}-\eta_{1}|\leq\epsilon\) and \(r_{0}=\|u\|\). Then we get
Denote
Then
that is,
Using the notion of uniform continuity of the function k on the set \(I^{2} \times[-r_{0},r_{0}]\) and g on the set I, we have \(\omega (k,\epsilon)\rightarrow0\) and \(\omega(g,\epsilon )\rightarrow0\) as \(\epsilon\rightarrow0\), consequently \(\mathcal{F}u\in C(I,X)\), and thus \(T_{2}u\in C(I,X)\).
We prove that \(T_{2}\) is a continuous operator. Fix \(v \in C ( I,X ) \) and let \(\varepsilon>0\) be given. Since H is some operator acting continuously from the space \(C ( I, X ) \) into itself, there exists \(\delta _{1}>0 \), such that
for each \(t\in I\), we have
where
Thus
Also, we have
for all \(t\in I\). Now if we put \(\delta=\min \{ \delta_{1},\delta_{2} \}\), then for any \(u\in C ( I ,X ) \) such that \(\Vert u-v \Vert <\delta\), by the triangle inequality we obtain
where
To prove \(T_{2}\) is a compact operator. If \(B= \{ u \in C ( I, X ) : \Vert u \Vert <1 \} \) is the open unit ball of \(C ( I ,X ) \), then we claim that \(\overline{T_{2} ( B ) }\) is a compact subset of \(C ( I, X ) \). To see this, by the Arzelà–Ascoli theorem, we need only to show that \(T_{2} ( B ) \) is an uniformly bounded and equi-continuous subset of \(C ( I, X )\). First we show that \(T _{2} ( B ) = \{ T_{2}u:u\in B \} \) is uniformly bounded. By the conditions \((A_{2})\) for any \(u\in B\),
Hence, putting \(M:= \psi_{1}(1)\frac{K_{0}(g(1)-g(0))^{\gamma }}{\varGamma(\gamma+1)}\), we conclude that \(T_{2} ( B ) \) is uniformly bounded. Now we show that \(T_{2} ( B ) \) is an uniformly equi-continuous subset of \(C ( I, X )\). To see this, let \(u\in B\) be arbitrary, and let \(\varepsilon>0\). Since Hu and \(\mathcal{F}u\) are uniformly continuous, there exist some \(\delta_{1} ( \varepsilon ), \delta_{2} ( \varepsilon ) >0\) such that
Let \(\delta ( \varepsilon ) =\min \{ \delta _{1} ( \varepsilon ) , \delta_{2} ( \varepsilon ), \varepsilon_{1}, \varepsilon_{2} \}\), where the given \(\varepsilon_{1}\) and \(\varepsilon_{2}\) depend on ε. Therefore, if \(\eta_{1},\eta_{2}\in I \) satisfies \(0<\eta_{2}-\eta_{1}<\delta ( \varepsilon ) \) and \(x\in B\),
where
Therefore \(T_{2}\) is a compact operator. Next, we show that \(T_{1}\) satisfies (3.2). Let \(u,v\in C ( I,X )\), and \(\Vert T_{1}u-T_{1}y \Vert >0\). By applying the fact that every continuous function attains its maximum on a compact set, there exists \(t\in I\) such that \(0< \Vert T_{1}u-T_{1}v \Vert = \Vert f ( t,u ( t ) ) -f ( t,v ( t ) ) \Vert \). By \((A_{1})\) and using the fact that F and φ are strictly increasing functions we obtain
Hence \(T_{1}\) satisfies (3.2). Now we show that there exists some \(M_{1}>0\) such that \(\Vert T_{1}u \Vert \leq M_{1}\) holds for each \(u\in C ( I ,X ) \). By \((A_{1})\)
Therefore
Finally, we claim that there exists some \(r>0\), such that \(T ( B_{r} ( \theta ) ) \subseteq B_{r} ( \theta ) \) with \(B_{r} ( \theta ) = \{ {u \in C ( I,X )}: \Vert u \Vert \leq r \}\). On the contrary, for any \(\zeta>0\) there exists some \(u_{\zeta}\in B_{r} ( \theta ) \) such that \(\Vert T ( u_{\zeta} ) \Vert >\zeta\). This implies that \(\liminf_{\zeta\rightarrow\infty}\frac{1}{\zeta} \Vert T ( u_{\zeta} ) \Vert \geq1\). On the other hand, we have
Hence, by the above estimate and condition \((A_{5})\) we get
which is a contradiction. Thus in view of the above discussions and Corollary 2.7 we conclude that Eq. (3.1) has at least one solution in \(B_{r} ( \theta ) \subseteq C ( I ,X ) \). □
Example
Consider the functional-integral equation of fractional order
Define the continuous operator \(H :C ( I, \mathbb{R} ) \rightarrow C ( I ,\mathbb{R} ) \) given by
Define the functions \(f: [ 0,1 ] \times\mathbb{R} \rightarrow\mathbb{R}\) given by \(f ( t,u(t) ) =\frac {2t^{2}e^{-\lambda(t+2)}}{t^{4}+1}\cos(u(t))\), f is continuous and
Also, \(\phi_{1}:\mathbb{R} ^{+}\rightarrow\mathbb{R} ^{+}\) by \(\phi_{1}(t)=\cos(t)\) with \(M_{0}=1\) such that
Now, by choosing the function \(F:\mathbb{R}^{+} \times\mathbb{R}^{+} \to \mathbb{R}\) given by \(F ( t,s ) =\ln ( t+s )\), \(G: \mathbb{R}^{+} \to\mathbb{R}\) by \(G(t)=\ln ( t )\), \(\beta: \mathbb{R}^{+} \times\mathbb{R}^{+} \to[0,1)\) by \(\beta (t,s)=e^{-2\lambda}\) and the function \(\varphi:\mathbb{R}^{+}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}^{+}\) given by \(\varphi ( t ) =t^{2}\), it is easy to see that the inequality (3.5) implies that the condition (3.2) holds.
Indeed if \(\vert f ( t,u(t) ) -f ( t,v(t) ) \vert >0\), then we have
Here \(g(t)=t^{2}\), \(k(t,s,u)=\frac{t}{4(1+s^{2})(1+u^{2})}\), with \(K_{0}=\frac{1}{4}\). By choosing the strictly continuous function \(\psi_{1} :\mathbb {R}^{+}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}^{+}\) given by \(\psi_{1} ( t ) =\frac{\sqrt[3]{t}}{2}\), we have
and this satisfies assumption \((A_{5})\). Thus from all above results, it is clear that Eq. (3.4) satisfies all the requirements of Theorem 3.1 and, hence, the functional-integral equation (3.1) has a solution in \(C(I,\mathbb{R})\).
4 Conclusions
In this work, some new generalized Darbo-type fixed point results have been discussed for the notion of a μ-set contraction operator using some control functions, on an arbitrary measure of noncompactness in Banach spaces. The obtained results include related existing results mentioned in the references. Finally, to justify our work, we have given an application for the solution of a functional-integral equations of fractional order, followed by a suitable example.
References
Aghajani, A., Allahyari, R., Mursaleen, M.: A generalization of Darbo’s theorem with application to the solvability of systems of integral equations. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 260, 68–77 (2014)
Aghajani, A., Haghighi, A.S.: Existence of solution for a system of integral equations via measure of noncompactness. Novi Sad J. Math. 44(1), 59–73 (2014)
Aghajani, A., Sabzali, N.: Existence of coupled fixed points via measure of noncompact and applications. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 15(5), 941–952 (2014)
Arab, R.: The existence of fixed points via the measure of noncompactness and its application to functional-integral equations. Mediterr. J. Math. 13(2), 759–773 (2016)
Arab, R.: Some generalizations of Darbo fixed point theorem and its application. Miskolc Math. Notes 18(2), 595–610 (2017)
Arab, R., Allahyari, R., Shole Haghighi, A.: Construction of a measure of non-compactness on \(BC(\varOmega)\) and its application to Volterra integral equations. Mediterr. J. Math. 13(3), 1197–1210 (2016)
Arab, R., Mursaleen, M., Rizvi, S.M.H.: Positive solution of a quadratic integral equation using generalization of Darbo’s fixed point theorem. Numer. Funct. Anal. Optim. 40(10), 1150–1168 (2019)
Banach, S.: Sur les opérations dans les ensembles abstraits et leur application aux équations intégrales. Fundam. Math. 3, 133–181 (1922)
Banas, J., Goebel, K.: Measures of Noncompactness in Banach Spaces. Lecture Notes in Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 60. Dekker, New York (1980)
Darbo, G.: Punti uniti i transformazion a condominio non compatto. Rend. Semin. Mat. Univ. Padova 4, 84–92 (1995)
Das, A., Hazarika, B., Mursaleen, M.M.: Application of measure of noncompactness for solvability of the infinite system of integral equations in two variables in \(\ell_{p}\) (\(1 \leq p < \infty\)). Rev. R. Acad. Cienc. Exactas Fís. Nat., Ser. A Mat. 113(1), 31–40 (2019)
Falset, J.G., Latrach, K.: On Darbo–Sadovskii’s fixed point theorems type for abstract measures of (weak) noncompactness. Bull. Belg. Math. Soc. Simon Stevin 22, 797–812 (2015)
Geraghty, M.: On contractive mappings. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 40, 604–608 (1973)
Mursaleen, M., Alotaibi, A.: Infinite system of differential equations in some spaces. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2012, Article ID 863483 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/863483
Mursaleen, M., Bilalov, B., Rizvi, S.M.H.: Applications of measures of noncompactness to infinite system of fractional differential equations. Filomat 31(11), 3421–3432 (2017)
Mursaleen, M., Mohiuddine, S.A.: Applications of measures of noncompactness to the infinite system of differential equations in \(l_{p}\) spaces. Nonlinear Anal. TMA 75, 2111–2115 (2012)
Mursaleen, M., Rizvi, S.M.H.: Solvability of infinite system of second order differential equations in \(c_{0}\) and \(\ell_{1}\) by Meir–Keeler condensing operator. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 144(10), 4279–4289 (2016)
Nashine, H.K., Arab, R.: Existence of solutions to nonlinear functional-integral equations via the measure of noncompactness. J. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 20, Article ID 66 (2018)
Nashine, H.K., Arab, R., Agarwal, R.P., De la Sen, M.: Positive solutions of fractional integral equations by the technique of measure of noncompactness. J. Inequal. Appl. 2017, Article ID 225 (2017)
Nashine, H.K., Arab, R., Agarwal, R.P., Shole Haghighi, A.: Darbo type fixed and coupled fixed point results and its application to integral equation. Period. Math. Hung. 77, 94–107 (2018)
Nashine, H.K., Ibrahim, R.W.: Monotone solutions of iterative fractional equations found by modified Darbo type fixed point theorems. J. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 19, 3217–3229 (2017)
Parvaneh, V., Hussain, N., Kadelburg, Z.: Generalized Wardowski type fixed point theorems via α-admissible FG-contractions in b-metric spaces. Acta Math. Sci. 36B(5), 1445–1456 (2016)
Vetro, C., Vetro, F.: On the existence of at least a solution for functional integral equations via measure of noncompactness. Banach J. Math. Anal. 11(3), 497–512 (2017)
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to express their sincere appreciation to the editor and the anonymous referees for their valuable comments and suggestions.
Availability of data and materials
Not applicable.
Funding
Not applicable.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed equally. All the authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare to have no conflict of interest.
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 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/.
About this article
Cite this article
Arab, R., Nashine, H.K., Can, N.H. et al. Solvability of functional-integral equations (fractional order) using measure of noncompactness. Adv Differ Equ 2020, 12 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-019-2487-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-019-2487-4