Professional Documents
Culture Documents
: [f
[
2
= x, f
where
E
(R
+
),where L
(R
+
) is the Banach space of essen-
tially bounded function on R
+
equipped with essential supnorm
[x[
L
(R
+
)
= ess sup
tR
+
[x(t)[ (3)
In addition to the preliminaries in the previous section, consider following
denitions and notations:
x(t) = x(t, t
0
, x
0
, u) will be said to be the solution of equation (1) i.e. the
solution of (ICS) existing for t t
0
if the following conditions are satised:
(i) x(t) PC(D, R
n
) such that x(t) = f(t, x(t), u(t)) + B(t)u(t) for t ,= t
k
,
k = 0, 1, 2, 3, ....
(ii) For t = t
k
, k = 0, 1, 2, .., x(t) instantaneously jump from t
k
to new posi-
tions
x(t
k
) = x(t
k
+ 0) x(t
k
) = I
1
(x(t
k
))
u(t
k
) = I
2
(u(t
k
))
And satises the following equation.
dz(t)
dt
= f(t, z(t), u(t)) +B(t)u(t), t ,= t
k
, k = 0, 1, 2, ..
z(t = t
k
) = I
1
(z(t
k
))
u(t = t
k
) = I
2
(u(t
k
))
0 < t
0
< t
1
< t
2
< ... < t
k
, lim
k
t
k
= +
_
_
(4)
where
z = x(t) PC(R
+
, R
n
) for u(t) C.
176 O.B. Oyediran
Denition 5. Let x(t) be the solution of an impulsive control system (ICS)
passing through (t
0
, x(t
0
+0) = x
0
).(ICS) is said to be completely controllable
if there exists a control variable u(t) U which steers x
0
to x(t
1
) = x
1
in the
nite time interval (t
0
, t
1
) where U is the control space.
The question of -controllability of an impulsive control system (ICS) is that
of selecting a control function u(t) among admissible control in
U L
(R
+
) to steer the solution x(t) = x(t, u) of (ICS) to x(t
k
+ , u) = x
,
from the origin to x
= x(, u), y
= y(, u) and q K.
Remark 1.
if t : 0 < t < log(q(t )) and lim
t
q(t ) = 0
for every nite .
Then the concept of exponential equivalence is equivalent to the concept of
asymptotic stability.
The control system in equation (1) is equivalent to the following operator equa-
tion
/x = g (6)
/ :=
_
d
dt
,
1
,
_
, g
1
:= (f, I
1
, I
2
), g
2
:= (B(t)u(t), 0, 0)
-CONTROLLABILITY OF IMPULSIVE SYSTEMS... 177
and g : = g
1
+g
2
.
Then the solution of this operator equation can be determine as a typical
xed point problem.
Let
M =
_
t
(s)X
(t)X
(t, t
0
)M
1
[x
t
0
<t
k
<t
X(t
k
, s)(I
1
(x(t
k
))
+I
2
(u(t
k
))], k = 1, 2,
(8)
and
x(t) = X(t, t
0
)x
+
_
t
t
0
X(s, t)B(s)u(s)ds
+
s
k
t
k
<t
X(t
k
, s
k
)(I
1
(x(t
k
)) +I
2
(u(t
k
)).
(9)
Here X(t, t
0
) is the fundamental solution of equation (1) for the case when
B 0. It is in fact the BKZ function (see Lemma 1 below).
Now dene
A
). Clearly, if
x(t) is the xed point of operator / then it is also xed point of A
. Therefore,
controllability properties of equation (1) is equivalent to that of nding the
xed point of A
.
4. Auxiliaries Results
Consider the impulsive system
x(t) = A(t)x(t) +f(t, x(t), t ,= t
k
(11)
x(t
k
+ 0) = Q
k
x(t
k
0), k = 1, 2,
x(t
0
+ 0) = 0
A(t) M
n
(C(R
+
, R)), f(t, x(t) C(R
+
R
n
), x(t) R
n
178 O.B. Oyediran
Q
k
C
0
(R
+
, R), t
k
for k = 1, 2, are the xed moments for which
impulses take place such that the following conditions satised:
0 < t
0
< t
1
< t
2
< < t
k
, lim
k
t
k
= .
In order to start our studies on equation (11), rst all, consider the un-
perturbed situation of the equation (12) such that f 0 and assume that
x(t) = U(t)x
0
is a solution of the equation, then
x(t) = A(t)x(t), t ,= t
k
, k = 0, 1, 2,
x(t
k
+ 0) = Q
k
x(t
k
0)
(12)
for 0 < t
0
< t
1
< < t
k
, lim
k
t
k
= .
Let U(t, s) be the Cauchy matrix associated with the solution of equation
(12) when the impulses are absent.
Then the relationship that exists between U(t, s) and the Cauchy matrix
W(t, s) of equation (11) in the presence of impulses will be established. Before
embarking on this, some known standard results on semigroup properties of
U(t, s) that will be needed in obtaining subsequent results can be stated as:
a U(t, s) = U(t, )U(, s)
b U(t +s, ) = U(t, )U(s, );
c U(t, t) = I(t, 0) = I = identity operator
d
dU(t, )
dt
= AU(t, )
For all t, s, , t
0
R
+
.,
A natural candidate for U(t, ) when A(t) is autonomous is U(t, s) =
e
A(ta)
. Following lemma establishes the relationship that exists between U(t, s)
and W(t, s). It should be noted that the result had appeared in (see Bainov et
al [2]-[3]) though state therein without proof. The structure of the proof is in
fact not as trivial as one will think of.
Lemma 1. For t
k
< t < t
t+1
, (k = 0, 1, 2, ) then the following
relationship holds:
u(t) = U(t, t
k
)Q
k
U(t
k
, t
k1
)Q
k1
Q
1
U(t
1
, t
0
)
and
U(t, s), t
n
< s t t
n1
-CONTROLLABILITY OF IMPULSIVE SYSTEMS... 179
u(t, s) = U(t, t
n
)Q
n
U(t
n
, s), t
n
< s < t
n
< t < t
n+1
U(t, t
n
)
_
_
k+1
j=n
Q
j
U(t
j
, t
j1
)Q
k
U(t
k
, s)
_
_
, t
k1
< s t
k
< t t
n+1
Furthermore, W(t, s) satises similar semigroup properties as U(t, s).
Proof. The solution of equation (11) is
u(t) = U(t, t
0
+ 0)K, K = constant vector in R
n
hence
u(t
k
+ 0) = U(t
k
+ 0, t
0
+ 0)K = U(t
k
, t
0
)K = Q
k
U(t
k1
, t
0
)K.
Thus
u(t
k
+ 0) = Q
k
U(t
k1
, t
0
)
by prop (1) of U(s, t), it follows that
U(t, t
0
) = U(t, t
k
)U(t
k
, t
0
)
by induction on K, one obtain
U(t, t
0
) = U(t, t
k
)Q
k
U(t
k1
, t
k2
)Q
k1
U(t
k2
, t
k3
) Q
1
U(t
1
, t
2
).
This establishes the rst part of the proof. Now for t
n
< < t < t
n+1
; it is
trivial to show that
W(t, s) = U(t, s) (14)
next if
t
n1
< s t
n
< t < t
n+1
then by equation (14)
U(t
n1
, s) = U(t
k1
, t
n
)Q
n
U(t
n
, s) = W(t
n
, s)
but
U(t, s) = U(t, t
n
)Q
n
U(t
n
, t
n1
)Q
n1
U(t
n1
, t
n=1
)
= U(t, t
n
)
_
_
k+1
j=1
Q
j
U(t
,
t
j1
)
_
_
Q
k
U(t
k
, s)
Thus the second part of the proof also follows. On the proof of semigroup
properties of W(t, s) this is straight forward since they are inherited from the
180 O.B. Oyediran
of U(t, s)(see Oyelami & Ale[13]).
Lemma 2. (Morales Theorem ) If E is a Banach space and T : E E is
continuous and strongly accretive then T is surjective and the equation Tx = f
for a given f in E has a solution in E.
The impulsive control system in equation (1) has a solution in PC(R
+
, E)
C
(R
+
, E) which is given by
x(t) = X(t, t
0
)x
+
_
t
t
0
X(s, t)B(s)u(s)ds (15)
+
s
k
t
k
<t
X(t
k
, s
k
)(I
1
(x(t
k
)) +I
2
(u(t
k
)).
x(t
k
+) := x
(R
+
, R
n
)
and it even satises the impulsive system in equation (13).
5. Main Results
Theorem 1. Suppose that the following conditions are satised:
1. M is in equation (7) is invertible.
2. The control variable u(t) is dened in equation (8) and let
= (t
k
+, ),
= (, t
k
+).
Then
= I and
x
_
x
t
0
<t
k
<s
(t
k
s)(I
1
(x(t
k
))) +I
2
(u(t
k
))
_
for x(t) A and u(t) U.
B. (ICS) is completely controllable if and only if it is -controllable.
-CONTROLLABILITY OF IMPULSIVE SYSTEMS... 181
Proof. (A) is straight forward, it follows, therefore, that
x(t
k
+) =
_
_
x
s
k
t
k
<s
(t
k
s
i
)(I
1
(x(t
i
)) +I
2
(u(t
i
)))
_
_
=
(x
t
0
<t
i
<t
k
+
(s
i
, t
i
)(I
1
(x(t
i
)) +I
2
(u(t
i
)))
= x
.
Thus
(z x
+x
)e, j(z)
> (z x)e, j(z)
A contradiction, hence, if x
(R
+
) R
n
is continuous in R
n
and I
2
(0) = 0 such
that there exists a constant C
2
such that
[I
2
(u(t
k
)) I
2
(u
2
(t
k
))[ C
2
[u
1
(t
k
) u
2
(t
k
)[
u
1
u
2
/
(R
+
).
(15)
B2: There exists u(t) /
(R
+
) such that
u(t
k
+ 0) = u(t
k
) + u(t
k
)
u(t
k
0) = u(t
k
).
Theorem 2. Let the following conditions be satised:
1. Properties (A) and (B);
2. x(t), y(t) A are exponentially equivalent
Then (ICS) is completely controllable and A = R
n
.
Proof. Let x(t), y(t) A and j J(x(t) y(t)) then
A
x(t) A
y(t)[
2
= (1 )x(t) y(t), j Lx(t) Ly(t), j (16)
Now let
M
0
= sup
t,sR
+
[(t, s)[, B
0
= sup
sR
+
[B(s)[, = max
k
[t t
k
[, k = 1, 2, 3
Then the following estimates can be made:
[Lx(t) Ly(t)[ m
0
[x
[ +
_
t
t
0
[(t, s)[[B(s)[[u
1
(s) u
2
(s)[ds
+
t
0
<t
k
<t
M
0
[K
1
[x(t
k
) y(t
k
)[ +K
2
[u
1
(t
k
) u
2
(t
k
)[].
Hence,
[Lx(t) Ly(t)[ m
0
(1 +B
0
N)[x
+
_
t
t
0
M
0
K
1
[x(s) y(s)[ds
+2
t
0
<t
k
<t
M
0
[K
2
[x(t
k
) y(t
k
)[ +[u
1
(t
k
) u
2
(t
k
)[].
-CONTROLLABILITY OF IMPULSIVE SYSTEMS... 183
Hence,
[Lx(t) Ly(t)[ m
0
(1 +B
0
N)[x
+
_
t
t
0
M
0
K
1
[x(s) y(s)[ds
+2
t
0
<t
k
<t
M
0
[K
2
[x(t
k
) y(t
k
)[ +[u
1
(t
k
) u
2
(t
k
)[].
Hence, x(t), y(t) are xed points of L and by Lemma 1, hence, for z(t) =
x(t) y(t),
[z(t)[ C(1 +M
0
K
1
)
i(,t)
exp M
0
K
1
(t ) = exp K
(t ), (17)
where
C = M
0
(1 +
0
N)[Z
[ +
t
0
<t
k
<t
K
2
[u
1
(t
k
) u
2
(t
k
)[
K
= M
0
K
1
= C(1 +M
0
K
1
)
i(,t)
i(, t) is the counting number, that is, the number of impulses present in the
interval [, t]. Since x(t) is assumed to be exponential equivalent to y(t) in A.
Then
[A
X(t) A
y(t)[
2
(1 )[x y[
2
= exp(K
(t ))[x(t) y(t)[
(1 )[x(t) y(t)[
2
0
[x(t) y(t)[
2
=
_
1
0
_
[x(t) y(t)[
2
.
Choose
_
0,
_
1 +
0
_
1
_
then A
: R
n
R
n
is strongly accretive.
Next we show that is continuous. Suppose on the contrary that A
is not
continuous, then, for every > 0 there exists n
0
> n such that
[A
x
n
(t) A
x
n
(t) A
x(t)[
2
_
1
0
_
[x
n
(t) x(t)[
2
>
2
4
_
1
0
_
.
it follows that
_
3
_
1 +
1
0
_
1
, 0
_
which contradicts strong accretativity
of A
2
Q(t)
2
x
+
2
Q(t)
2
y
_
+G(Q, T)
186 O.B. Oyediran
And
dT
dx
=
Q
A
T
4
+h(T T
)
_
t
t
0
Q(s)u(s)ds
T(t = t
k
) = I(T(t
k
)), u(t
k
) = 0
0 < t
0
< t
1
< t
2
< ... < t
k
, lim
k
t
k
= +
Here:
=coecient of radiation
h =thermal conductivity
T =absolute temperature of the compartment B which is assumed to be
impulsive across section of the compartment B.
T
=
Q
Ah
and dene
U = u R
+
: [u[ =
_
t
0
sup[w(s)[[u(s)[ds < +,
Q
0
= max
tR
+ [Q(t)[ and let g(t, u(t), T
) =
Q
A
hT
_
t
0
Q(s)u(s)ds.
Then we investigate whether properties (A) and (B) are satised.
clearly,
f(t, 0, 0) = 0
[f(t, T
1
, u
1
) f(t, T
2
, u
2
)[ (
+[h[)[T
2
T
1
[ +Q
0
[u
2
u
1
[
for T
i
PC(R
+
, R), u
i
U, i = 1, 2.
and also
[I(T
2
) I(T
1
)[ [T
2
T
1
[
for = [
k
[, k = 0, 1, 2, ...
And
dT
dx
= T
4
hT g
T(t
k
) =
k
I(T(t
k
))
0 < t
0
< t
1
< t
2
< ... < t
k
, lim
k
t
k
= +
The above equation is an impulsive Bernoulli (hyperlogistic) equation of
order 4 and the fundamental solution g = 0 (see Oyelami & Ale[13] and Bainov
et. al.[1]).
(t, T
0
) =
_
T
0
0<t
k
<t
(
1
k
) exp 3t 3h
_
t
0
0<t
k
<t
(
1
k
) exp (t s)ds
_
1/3
-CONTROLLABILITY OF IMPULSIVE SYSTEMS... 187
Therefore the general solution using variation of constant parameter is
T(t) = T = (t, T
0
)T
0
+
_
t
t
0
(s, T
0
)g(T(s))ds
Therefore we have the following estimation
[T(x) T(y)[
T
1/3
0
_
0<t
k
<t
(
1
k
) exp 3x)
_
1/3
T
1/3
0
_
0<t
k
<t
(
1
k
) exp 3y)
_
1/3
+[
_
y
x
(s, T
0
)g(T(s))ds[
Hence
[T(x) T(y)[
_
T
0
0<t
k
<t
(
1
k
)
_
1/3
_
exp (x +y) +e
pt
[u[
[x y[
Let q(, x, y) = exp (x +y) and Q
0
= e
pt
then limx
y
q(, x, y) = 0.
Hence, by Theorem1, the system is controllable. The control that regu-
lates this is u(t) and it is dened in equation (7) when M = I =identity matrix
and X(t, T
0
) = (t, T
0
) in equation (8) and I(u(t
k
)) = 0.
Example 2. Consider an impulsive control hematopoiesis model(see Saker
and Alzebut[16])
p
/
(t) =
p(t)
1 +p
n
(t)
p(t) +
_
t
t
0
k(s, t)u
2
(s)ds
p(t
k
) = (1 +
k
)p(t
k
)
0 < t
0
< t
1
< t
2
< ... < t
k
, lim
k
t
k
= +
Where: p(t) is production of blood cells from the marrow. The rate of blood
lost from circulation being and we have introduced
_
t
t
0
k(s, t)u
2
(s)ds into
the hematopoiesis model in Saker and Alzebut model[16] to measure the re-
placement of the blood by new blood cells as a result of use of drug, or food
supplement, where k(s, t) is the production function of the blood cells and the
quadratic controller regulate the production level of the blood cells under the
inuence of the blood enhancing drugs or food supplements.
If
f(t, p(t)) =
p(t)
1 +p
n
(t)
p(t) +
_
t
t
0
K(s, t)u
2
(s)ds
188 O.B. Oyediran
Then for p, q (0, 1), r(t) = ke
t
, k and are positive constants. Take
t
k
= log r(t
k
), > 0 such that lim
t
_
t
t
0
[u
1
(s) u
2
(s)[ds = 0.
Here p
= p(, u
1
) and q
= q(, u
2
) such that = [p
0
q
0
[ and p and q are
solutions to the model.
Therefore
[f(t, p, u
1
(t)) f(t, q, u
2
(t))[
[(1 +q
n
)p (1 +p
n
)q[
(1 +p
n
)(1 +q
n
)
+[p q[
+
_
t
t
0
[K(s, t)[[u
2
1
(s) u
2
2
(s)[ds
(1 +)[p q[ + 2kk
_
t
t
0
[u
1
(s) u
2
(s)[ds
Since p
n
, q
n
0 as n where k
= max([u
1
(s)[, [u
2
(s)[)and k =
max
(t,s)R
+
R
+ [K(t, s)[.
Then by Theorem 2, the system is controllable which means that we can
nd a neighborhoods about the time t for which the blood production can be
enhanced through drugs or food supplements which serves as articial control
for blood production.
Example 3. Consider the impulsive control system
k
) exp a(t t
0
) bN(1 +
1
k
)
Hence by variation of constant parameter the solution to the problem is
x(t) = (t, t
0
)x
0
+
_
t
t
0
(t, s)g(x(s))ds
-CONTROLLABILITY OF IMPULSIVE SYSTEMS... 189
+
_
t
t
0
_
0
(t, s)e
ps
u
2
(s)dsdt
If g(x(t)) is lipschitz with respect to x(t) and
lim
t
_
t
t
0
_
0
(t, s)e
ps
[u
1
(s) u
2
(s)[dsdt = 0, u
i
(t) U, i = 1, 2.
We can show that the system is controllable in R
+
.
Acknowledgments
Visiting at the Kaduna State University, Kaduna, Nigeria.
References
[1] D.D. Bainov, V. Lakshimikantham, P.S. Simeonov, Theory of Impulsive
Dierential Equations, World Scientic Publication, Singapore-New Jer-
sey, London (1989).
[2] D.D. Bainov, S.I. Kostadinov, V.M. Nguyen, P.P. Zabreiko, Continuous
Dependence on a parameter of the solutions of impulsive dierential equa-
tions in a Banach space, Mathematical Models, Method and Applications
in Science, 3, No. 4 (1993), 477-483.
[3] D.D. Bainov, S.I. Kostadinov, V.M. Nguyen, P.P. Zabreiko, A topological
classication of dierential equations with impulse eect, Tamkang Journal
of Mathematics, 25, No. 1 (1994).
[4] E. Beltrami, Mathematics for Dynamic Modelling, Academic Press, Lon-
don.
[5] F.E. Browder, Nonlinear mapping of nonexpansive and accretive type in
Banach space, Bulletin American Mathematical Society, 73 (1967), 875-
882.
[6] F.E. Browder, Nonlinear operators and nonlinear equations of evolution
in Banach spaces, Bulletin American Mathematical Society Proceeding on
Symposium on Pure Mathematics, 18, No. 73 (1976).
190 O.B. Oyediran
[7] A.B. Kartsatos, Perturbation of M-accretive operator and quasillinear evo-
lution equations, Journal of Mathematical society of Japan, 30 (1978),
74-80.
[8] T. Kato, Nonlinear semigroup and evolution equation, Journal of Mathe-
matical Society of Japan, 18 (1967), 508-520.
[9] S. Leela, A.M. Farzana, Sivasundraham, Controllability of impulsive dier-
ential equation, Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 177
(1993), 24-30.
[10] B.O. Oyelami, S.O. Ale, Applications of B-transform to Fish-Hyacinth
model, Int. J. Math. Educ. Sci. Tech., 33, No. 4 (2002), 565-573.
[11] B.O. Oyelami, S.O. Ale, M.S. Sesay, On existence of solutions of impulsive
initial and boundary value problem using topological degree approach, J.
Nig. Math. Soc., 21 (2002), 13-25.
[12] B.O. Oyelami, S.O. Ale, On existence of solutions, oscillation and non-
oscillation properties of delay equations continuing maximum, Acta Ap-
plicandae Mathematical J., doi: 10.1007/S10440-008-9340, 1094 (2010),
683-701.
[13] B.O. Oyelami, S.O. Ale, Impulsive Dierential Equations and Applications
to Some Models: Theory and Applications, Lambert Academic Publisher
Germany, 24 March, ISBN: 978-3-8484-4740-4 (2012).
[14] C.Y. Wen, Z.G. Li, Y.C. Soh, Analysis and design of impulsive control
system, IEEE Transaction on Automatic Control, 46, No. 6 (2001).
[15] Zhi-Hong Guan, J. DavidHill, Xuemin (Sherman) Shen, IEEE Transaction
on Automatic Control, 50, No. 7 (2005).
[16] S.H. Saker, J.O. Alzabut, On the impulsive delay hematopoiesis model
with periodic coecients, Rocky Mountain J. Math., 39, No. 5 (2009),
1657-1688.
[17] Hong Shi, Guangming Xie, Controllability and observability criteria for
linear piecewise constant impulsive systems, J. Applied Maths. (2012).
[18] R. Sakthivel, J. JuanNieto, Mahmudov, Approximate controllability of
nonlinear dierential and stochastic with unbounded delay, Taiwanese J.
Math., 14, No. 5 (2010), 1777-1797.
-CONTROLLABILITY OF IMPULSIVE SYSTEMS... 191