Open Access

Approximate controllability of some nonlinear systems in Banach spaces

Boundary Value Problems20132013:50

DOI: 10.1186/1687-2770-2013-50

Received: 8 January 2013

Accepted: 25 February 2013

Published: 13 March 2013

Abstract

In this paper, abstract results concerning the approximate controllability of semilinear evolution systems in a separable reflexive Banach space are obtained. An approximate controllability result for semilinear systems is obtained by means of Schauder’s fixed-point theorem under the compactness assumption of the linear operator involved. It is also proven that the controllability of the linear system implies the controllability of the associated semilinear system. Then the obtained results are applied to derive sufficient conditions for the approximate controllability of the semilinear fractional integrodifferential equations in Banach spaces and heat equations.

1 Introduction

The problems of controllability of infinite dimensional nonlinear (fractional) systems were studied widely by many authors; see [16] and the references therein. The approximate controllability of nonlinear systems when the semigroup S ( t ) , t > 0 , generated by A is compact has been studied by many authors. The results of Zhou [6] and Naito [7] give sufficient conditions on B with finite dimensional range or necessary and sufficient conditions based on more strict assumptions on B. Li and Yong in [8] studied the same problem assuming the approximate controllability of the associated linear system under arbitrary perturbation in L ( I , L ( X ) ) . Bian [9] investigated the approximate controllability for a class of semilinear systems. For abstract nonlinear systems, Carmichael and Quinn [10] used the Banach fixed-point theorem to obtain a local exact controllability in the case of nonlinearities with small Lipschitz constants. Zhang [11] studied the local exact controllability of semilinear evolution systems. Naito [7] and Seidman [12] used Schauder’s fixed-point theorem to prove invariance of the reachable set under nonlinear perturbations. Other related abstract results were given by Lasiecka and Triggiani [13].

In recent years, controllability problems for various types of nonlinear fractional dynamical systems in infinite dimensional spaces have been considered in many publications. An extensive list of these publications focused on the complete and approximate controllability of the fractional dynamical systems can be found (see [15, 7, 947]). A pioneering work has been reported by Bashirov and Mahmudov [17], Dauer and Mahmudov [28] and Mahmudov [31]. Sakthivel et al. [40] studied the approximate controllability of nonlinear deterministic and stochastic evolution systems with unbounded delay in abstract spaces. Klamka [2326] derived a set of sufficient conditions for constrained local controllability near the origin for semilinear dynamical control systems. Wang and Zhou [3] investigated the complete controllability of fractional evolution systems without assuming the compactness of characteristic solution operators. Sukavanam and Kumar [47] obtained a new set of sufficient conditions for the approximate controllability of a class of semilinear delay control systems of fractional order by using the contraction principle and Schauder’s fixed-point theorem.

Consider an abstract semilinear equation
y = y 0 + L B v + L F ( y , v ) ,
(1)
and define the following sets:
https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1687-2770-2013-50/MediaObjects/13661_2013_Article_306_Equa_HTML.gif
Here Y, X are separable reflexive Banach spaces and V is a Hilbert space, B L ( V , Y ) , L L ( Y , Y ) , Q L ( Y , X ) , F : Y × V Y × V is a nonlinear operator, y 0 Y , v V . Q R ( L , F ) is the set of points Qy, where y is a solution of (1), attainable from the point y 0 . The set Q R ( L , 0 ) is the set of points Qz, where z is a solution of
z = y 0 + L B v ,
(2)
reachable from y 0 . One can see that for each h X , ε > 0 the control
v ε = ( Q L B ) J ( ( ε I + Γ J ) 1 ( h Q y 0 ) )
(3)
transfers equation (2) from y 0 to
Q z ε = Q y 0 + Q L B v ε = Q y 0 + Γ J ( ( ε I + Γ J ) 1 ( h Q y 0 ) ) = h ε ( ε I + Γ J ) 1 ( h Q y 0 ) ,
where z ε = y 0 + L B v ε . It is known that Q R ( L , 0 ) ¯ = X if and only if
ε ( ε I + Γ J ) 1 ( h ) 0

in the strong operator topology as ε 0 + , see [30]. Thus, the control (3) transfers system (2) from y 0 Y to a small neighborhood of an arbitrary point h X if and only if Q R ( L , 0 ) ¯ = X .

The same idea is now used to investigate the controllability of semilinear system (1). To do so, for each ε > 0 and h X , consider a nonlinear operator T ε from Y × V to Y × V defined by
T ε ( y , v ) = ( z , w ) ,
(4)
where
{ z = y 0 + L B w + L F ( y , v ) , w = ( Q L B ) J ( ( ε I + Γ J ) 1 ( h Q y 0 Q L F ( y , v ) ) ) .
One can see that if the operator T ε has a fixed point ( y ε , v ε ) , then the control v ε steers control system (1) from y 0 to
Q y ε = h J ( ( ε I + Γ J ) 1 ( h Q y 0 Q L F ( y ε , v ε ) ) )
if ε > 0 . We prove that Q y ε is close to h provided that ε ( ε I + Q L B ( Q L B ) ) 1 ( h ) 0 converges strongly to zero as ε 0 + . Therefore, to prove the approximate controllability of (1), for each ε > 0 and h X , we have to seek for a solution of the following equation:
{ y ε = y 0 + L B v ε + L F ( y ε , v ε ) , v ε = ( Q L B ) J ( ( ε I + Γ J ) 1 ( h Q y 0 Q L F ( y ε , v ε ) ) ) .
(5)

It is clear that the fixed points of the nonlinear operator T ε are the solutions of nonlinear control system (5) and vice versa.

To the best of our knowledge, the approximate controllability problem for semilinear abstract systems in Banach spaces has not been investigated yet. Motivated by this consideration, in this paper we study the approximate controllability of semilinear abstract systems in Banach spaces. The approximate controllability of (1) is derived under the compactness assumption of the linear operator involved. We prove that the approximate controllability of linear system (2) implies the approximate controllability of semilinear system (1) under some assumptions. On the other hand, it is known that if the operator L is compact, then Im Q L B X , that is, linear system (2) is not exactly controllable. Thus the analogue of this result is not true for exact controllability, that is why we investigate just the approximate controllability. Notice that a similar result for semilinear equations in Hilbert spaces was obtained by Dauer and Mahmudov [27].

In Section 2 an abstract result concerning the approximate controllability of semilinear system (1) is obtained. It is proven that the controllability of (2) implies the controllability of (1). Finally, these abstract results are applied to the approximate controllability of semilinear fractional integrodifferential equations. These equations serve as an abstract formulation of a fractional partial integrodifferential equation arising in various applications such as viscoelasticity, heat equations and many other physical phenomena.

2 Approximate controllability of semilinear systems

Let X be a separable reflexive Banach space and let X stand for its dual space with respect to the continuous pairing , . We may assume, without loss of generality, that X and X are smooth and strictly convex by virtue of the renorming theorem (see, for example, [8, 48]). In particular, this implies that the duality mapping J of X into X given by the following relations:
J ( z ) = z , J ( z ) , z = z 2 for all  z X

is bijective, demicontinuous, i.e., continuous from X with a strong topology into X with weak topology and strictly monotonic. Moreover, J 1 : X X is also a duality mapping.

An operator Γ : X X is symmetric if
z 1 , Γ z 2 = z 2 , Γ z 1

for all z 1 , z 2 X . It is easy to see that Γ is linear and continuous. Γ is nonnegative if z , Γ z 0 for all z X .

Lemma 1 [31]

For every h X and ε > 0 , the equation
ε z ε + Γ J ( z ε ) = ε h
(6)
has a unique solution z ε = z ε ( h ) = ε ( ε I + Γ J ) 1 ( h ) and
z ε ( h ) = J ( z ε ( h ) ) h .
(7)

Theorem 2 [31]

Let Γ be a symmetric operator. Then the following three conditions are equivalent:
  1. (i)

    Γ is positive, that is, z , Γ z > 0 for all nonzero z X .

     
  2. (ii)

    For all h X , J ( z ε ( h ) ) converges to zero as ε 0 + in the weak topology, where z ε ( h ) = ε ( ε I + Γ J ) 1 ( h ) is a solution of equation (6).

     
  3. (iii)

    For all h X , z ε ( h ) = ε ( ε I + Γ J ) 1 ( h ) strongly converges to zero as ε 0 + .

     

We impose the following assumptions:

(A1) F : Y × V Y is continuous and there exists C > 0 such that F ( y , v ) C for all ( y , v ) Y × V .

(A2) L : Y Y is compact.

(A3) For all h X , z ε ( h ) = ε ( ε I + Γ J ) 1 ( h ) strongly converges to zero as ε 0 + .

Note that the condition (A3) holds if and only if Im ( Q L B ) ¯ = Q R ( L , 0 ) ¯ = X , i.e., system (2) is approximately controllable.

Definition 3 System (1) is approximately controllable if
Q R ( L , F ) ¯ = X .

Theorem 4 Assume (A1)-(A3) hold. Then semilinear system (1) is approximate controllability.

Proof Step 1. Show that the operator T ε has a fixed point in Y × V for all ε > 0 . For our convenience, let us introduce the following notation:
https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1687-2770-2013-50/MediaObjects/13661_2013_Article_306_Equi_HTML.gif
Assume that r ( ε ) d ( ε ) + C c ( ε ) . Then by (7) we have
w Q L B ( ε I + Γ J ) 1 ( h Q y 0 Q L F ( y , v ) ) 1 ε Q L B ( h + Q y 0 + C Q L ) = d 1 ( ε ) 4 + γ ( ε ) 4 a 1 C d 1 ( ε ) 4 a + γ ( ε ) 4 a C 1 4 a ( d ( ε ) + C c ( ε ) ) ,
and
z y 0 + L B w + L F ( y , v ) a 2 + L B 1 4 a ( d ( ε ) + C c ( ε ) ) + L C d ( ε ) 4 + 1 4 ( d ( ε ) + c ( ε ) C ) + c ( ε ) 4 C 1 2 ( d ( ε ) + c ( ε ) C ) .

Thus we proved that T ε maps B ε = { ( z , w ) Y × V : ( z , w ) r ( ε ) } into itself. On the other hand, the operator T ε is continuous and T ε ( B ε ) is relatively compact. By Schauder’s fixed-point theorem, for all ε > 0 , T ε has a fixed point in the ball B ε .

Step 2. Assume Q R ( L , 0 ) ¯ = X . By Step 1, the operator (4) has a fixed point ( y ε , v ε ) . So, ( y ε , v ε ) satisfies (5) and, moreover, it follows that for all h X
Q y ε h = ε ( ε I + Γ J ) 1 ( h Q y 0 Q L F ( y ε , v ε ) ) .
(8)
So, z ε : = Q y ε h is a solution of the equation
ε z ε + Γ J ( z ε ) = ε ( Q L F ( y ε , v ε ) + Q y 0 h ) .
(9)
By the assumptions (A1) and (A2), the operator F is continuous bounded and L is compact. So, there exists a subsequence, still denoted by { F ( y ε , v ε ) } , which weakly converges to say z Y and L F ( y ε , v ε ) L z strongly in Y as ε 0 + . From (7) and strong convergence of the sequence { h ( z ε ) = h Q y 0 Q L F ( y ε , v ε ) } , it is easy to see that there exists C 1 > 0 such that for all ε > 0
z ε = J ( z ε ) Q L F ( y ε , v ε ) + Q y 0 h C 1 .
Then we can extract a subsequence, still denoted by z ε , such that
J ( z ε ) J ( z ¯ 0 ) as  ε 0 +
for some z ¯ 0 Z . Applying J ( z ¯ 0 ) to equation (9) and taking the limit, we obtain
https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1687-2770-2013-50/MediaObjects/13661_2013_Article_306_Equn_HTML.gif
since Γ is positive. So, J ( z ε ) 0 as ε 0 + . Now, applying J ( z ε ) to equation (9), dividing through by ε and taking the limit, we obtain
https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1687-2770-2013-50/MediaObjects/13661_2013_Article_306_Equo_HTML.gif

Thus lim ε 0 + Q y ε h = 0 , consequently Q R ( L , F ) ¯ = X . The theorem is proved. □

3 Fractional integrodifferential equations

The purpose of this section is to establish sufficient conditions for the approximate controllability of certain classes of abstract fractional integrodifferential equations of the form
{ D t α c x ( t ) = A x ( t ) + B u ( t ) + f ( t , x ( t ) , 0 t g ( t , s , x ( s ) ) d s ) , t [ 0 , b ] , x ( 0 ) = x 0 ,
(10)

where the state variable x takes values in a separable reflexive Banach space X; D α c is the Caputo fractional derivative of order 1 2 < α < 1 ; A is the infinitesimal generator of a C 0 semigroup S ( t ) of bounded operators on X; the control function u is given in L 2 ( [ 0 , b ] , U ) , U is a Hilbert space; B is a bounded linear operator from U into X, Δ = { ( t , s ) : 0 s t T } and g : Δ × X X , f : I × X × X X are continuous bounded functions and x 0 X .

Definition 5 The fractional integral of order α with the lower limit 0 for a function f is defined as
I α f ( t ) = 1 γ ( α ) 0 t f ( s ) ( t s ) 1 α d s , t > 0 , α > 0 ,

provided the right-hand side is pointwise defined on [ 0 , ) , where γ is the gamma function.

Definition 6 Riemann-Liouville derivative of order α with the lower limit 0 for a function f : [ 0 , ) R can be written as
D α L f ( t ) = 1 γ ( n α ) d n d t n 0 t f ( s ) ( t s ) α + 1 d s , t > 0 , n 1 < α < n .
Definition 7 The Caputo derivative of order α for a function f : [ 0 , ) R can be written as
D α c f ( t ) = L D α ( f ( t ) k = 0 n 1 t k k ! f ( k ) ( 0 ) ) , t > 0 , n 1 < α < n .
Remark 8
  1. (1)
    If f ( t ) C n [ 0 , ) , then
    D α c f ( t ) = 1 γ ( n α ) 0 t f ( n ) ( s ) ( t s ) α + 1 n d s = I n α f ( n ) ( t ) , t > 0 , n 1 < α < n .
     
  2. (2)

    The Caputo derivative of a constant is equal to zero.

     
  3. (3)

    If f is an abstract function with values in X, then the integrals which appear in the above definitions are taken in Bochner’s sense.

     

For basic facts about fractional integrals and fractional derivatives, one can refer to [49].

In order to define the concept of a mild solution for problem (10), we associate problem (10) to the integral equation
x ( t ) = S ˆ α ( t ) x 0 + 0 t ( t s ) q 1 S α ( t s ) f ( s , x ( s ) , 0 s g ( s , r , x ( r ) ) d r ) d s + 0 t ( t s ) q 1 S α ( t s ) B u ( s ) d s ,
(11)
where
https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1687-2770-2013-50/MediaObjects/13661_2013_Article_306_Equt_HTML.gif

and η α is a probability density function defined on ( 0 , ) , that is, η α ( θ ) 0 , θ ( 0 , ) and 0 η α ( θ ) d θ = 1 .

Lemma 9 [34]

For any fixed t 0 , the operators S ˆ α ( t ) and S α ( t ) are linear compact and bounded operators, i.e., for any x X , S ˆ α ( t ) x M x and S α ( t ) x M Γ ( α ) x .

Definition 10 A solution x ( ; x 0 , u ) C ( [ 0 , b ] , X ) is said to be a mild solution of (10) if for any u L 2 ( [ 0 , b ] , U ) and the integral equation (11) is satisfied.

Let x b ( x 0 ; u ) be the state value of (10) at terminal time b corresponding to the control u and the initial value x 0 . Introduce the set ( b , x 0 ) = { x b ( x 0 ; u ) ( 0 ) : u L 2 ( [ 0 , b ] , U ) } , which is called the reachable set of system (10) at terminal time b, its closure in X is denoted by ( b , x 0 ) ¯ = X .

Definition 11 System (10) is said to be approximately controllable on J if ( b , x 0 ) ¯ = X , that is, given an arbitrary ϵ > 0 , it is possible to steer from the point x 0 to within a distance ϵ from all points in the state space X at time b.

Consider the following linear fractional differential system:
D t α x ( t ) = A x ( t ) + B u ( t ) , t [ 0 , b ] , x ( 0 ) = x 0 .
(12)
The approximate controllability for linear fractional system (12) is a natural generalization of the approximate controllability of a linear first-order control system. It is convenient at this point to introduce the controllability operator associated with (12) as
Γ 0 b = 0 b ( b s ) 2 ( α 1 ) S α ( b s ) B B S α ( b s ) d s : X X ,

where B denotes the adjoint of B and S α is the adjoint of S α . It is straightforward that the operator Γ 0 b is a linear bounded operator. By Theorem 2, linear fractional control system (12) is approximately controllable on [ 0 , b ] if and only if for any h X , z ε ( h ) = ε ( ε I + Γ 0 b J ) 1 ( h ) converges strongly to zero as ε 0 + .

Proposition 12 If S ( t ) , t > 0 , are compact operators and 0 < 1 p < α 1 , then the operator
L α f ( t ) = 0 t ( t s ) α 1 S α ( t s ) f ( s ) d s , f L p ( [ 0 , b ] , X ) , t [ 0 , b ] ,

is compact from L p ( [ 0 , b ] , X ) into C ( [ 0 , b ] , X ) .

Proof According to the infinite dimensional version of the Ascoli-Arzela theorem, we need to show that
  1. (i)

    for arbitrary t [ 0 , b ] , the set { L α f ( t ) : f L p 1 } is relatively compact in C ( [ 0 , b ] , X ) ;

     
  2. (ii)
    for arbitrary η > 0 , there exists δ > 0 such that
    L α f ( t ) L α f ( s ) < η if  f L p 1 , | t s | δ , t , s [ 0 , b ] .
     
To prove (i), fix 0 < t < b and define for 0 < η < t and δ > 0 operators L α η , δ from L p ( [ 0 , b ] , X ) into X
( L α η , δ f ) ( t ) = α 0 t λ δ θ ( t s ) α 1 η α ( θ ) S ( ( t s ) α θ ) f ( s ) d s = α S ( λ α δ ) 0 t λ δ θ ( t s ) α 1 η α ( θ ) S ( ( t s ) α θ λ α δ ) f ( s ) d s , f L p ( [ 0 , b ] , X ) .
Since S ( t ) , t > 0 , is a compact operator, the operators L α η , δ are compact. Moreover, we have
( L α f ) ( t ) ( L α η , δ f ) ( t ) α 0 t 0 δ θ ( t s ) α 1 η α ( θ ) S ( ( t s ) α θ ) f ( s ) d θ d s + α t λ t δ θ ( t s ) α 1 η α ( θ ) S ( ( t s ) α θ ) f ( s ) d θ d s = : J 1 + J 2 .
One can estimate J 1 and J 2 as follows:
J 1 α M 0 t ( t s ) α 1 f ( s ) d s ( 0 δ θ η α ( θ ) d θ ) α M ( 0 t ( t s ) ( α 1 ) q d s ) 1 / q f L p ( 0 δ θ η α ( θ ) d θ ) ,
and
J 2 α M t λ t ( t s ) α 1 f ( s ) d s ( δ θ η α ( θ ) d θ ) α M γ ( 1 + α ) ( 0 t ( t s ) ( α 1 ) q d s ) 1 / q ( 0 t f ( s ) p d s ) 1 / p = α M γ ( 1 + α ) ( η ( α 1 ) q + 1 ( α 1 ) q + 1 ) 1 / q f L p ,
where we have used the equality
0 θ β η α ( θ ) d θ = γ ( 1 + β ) γ ( 1 + α β ) .

Consequently, L α η , δ L α in the operator norm so that L α is compact and (i) follows immediately.

To prove (ii), note that, for 0 t t + h b and f L p 1 , we have
https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1687-2770-2013-50/MediaObjects/13661_2013_Article_306_Equac_HTML.gif
Applying the Hölder inequality, we obtain
https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1687-2770-2013-50/MediaObjects/13661_2013_Article_306_Equad_HTML.gif

It is clear that I 1 , I 2 0 as h 0 . On the other hand, the compactness of S ( t ) , t > 0 (and consequently S α ( t ) ), implies the continuity of S α ( t ) , t > 0 , in the uniform operator topology. Then, by the Lebesque dominated convergence theorem, I 3 0 as h 0 . Thus the proof of (ii), and therefore the proof of the proposition, is complete. □

Theorem 13 Suppose S ( t ) , t > 0 , is compact and 1 2 < α 1 . Then system (10) is approximately controllable on [ 0 , b ] if the corresponding linear system is approximately controllable on [ 0 , b ] .

Proof Let Y = L 2 ( [ 0 , b ] , X ) , V = L 2 ( [ 0 , b ] , U ) , and y 0 = S α ( ) x 0 Y . Define the linear operators Q, L, L 1 and the nonlinear operator F by
https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1687-2770-2013-50/MediaObjects/13661_2013_Article_306_Equae_HTML.gif

for y Y , v V . It is easy to see that by Proposition 12 all the conditions of Theorem 4 are satisfied and (10) is approximately controllable. This completes the proof. □

4 Application

Consider the partial differential system of the form
{ D t α x ( t , θ ) = x θ θ ( t , θ ) + b ( θ ) u ( t ) + f ( t , x ( t , θ ) , 0 t g ( t , s , x ( s , θ ) ) d s ) , x ( t , 0 ) = x ( t , π ) = 0 , t > 0 , x ( 0 ) = x 0 , 0 < θ < π , 0 t b ,
(13)
where u L 2 [ 0 , b ] , X = L 2 [ 0 , π ] , h X , 1 2 < α < 1 , and f : R × R R , g : R × R × R R are continuous and uniformly bounded. Let B L ( R , X ) be defined as
( B u ) ( θ ) = b ( θ ) u , B h = 0 π h ( θ ) b ( θ ) d θ ,
where 0 θ π , u R , b ( θ ) L 2 [ 0 , π ] , and let A : X X be an operator defined by A z = z with the domain
D ( A ) = { z X z , z  are absolutely continuous,  z X , z ( 0 ) = z ( π ) = 0 } .
Then
A z = n = 1 ( n 2 ) ( z , e n ) e n , z D ( A ) ,
where e n ( θ ) = 2 / π sin n θ , 0 x π , n = 1 , 2 ,  . It is known that A generates a compact semigroup S ( t ) , t > 0 , in X and is given by
https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1687-2770-2013-50/MediaObjects/13661_2013_Article_306_Equai_HTML.gif
Then B S α ( t ) z = 0 for 0 t < b implies
( z , e n ) ( b , e n ) = 0 for all  n = 1 , 2 , .

Now if ( b , e n ) 0 for all n, then ( z , e n ) = 0 for all n and z = 0 . Therefore, the associated linear system is approximately controllable provided that 0 π b ( θ ) e n ( θ ) d θ 0 for n = 1 , 2 , 3 ,  . Because of the compactness of the semigroup S ( t ) (and consequently S ˆ α ( t ) , S α ( t ) ) generated by A, the associated linear system of (13) is not completely controllable but it is approximately controllable. Hence, according to Theorem 13, system (13) will be approximately controllable on [ 0 , b ] .

5 Conclusion

In this paper, abstract results concerning the approximate controllability of semilinear evolution systems in a separable reflexive Banach space are obtained. An approximate controllability result for semilinear systems is obtained by means of Schauder’s fixed-point theorem under the compactness assumption. It is also proven that the controllability of the linear system implies the controllability of the associated semilinear system. Then the obtained results are applied to derive sufficient conditions for the approximate controllability of the semilinear fractional integrodifferential equations in Banach spaces. Upon making some appropriate assumptions, by employing the ideas and techniques as in this paper, one can establish the approximate controllability results for a wide class of fractional deterministic and stochastic differential equations.

Declarations

Acknowledgements

Dedicated to Professor Hari M Srivastava.

The author would like to thank the reviewers for their valuable comments and helpful suggestions that improved the note’s quality.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Eastern Mediterranean University

References

  1. Wang J, Zhou Y: Existence and controllability results for fractional semilinear differential inclusions. Nonlinear Anal., Real World Appl. 2011, 12: 3642-3653. 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2011.06.021MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Tai Z: Controllability of fractional impulsive neutral integrodifferential systems with a nonlocal Cauchy condition in Banach spaces. Appl. Math. Lett. 2011, 24(12):2158-2161. 10.1016/j.aml.2011.06.018MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Wang JR, Zhou Y: Complete controllability of fractional evolution systems. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 2012, 17(11):4346-4355. 10.1016/j.cnsns.2012.02.029MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Wang JR, Fan Z, Zhou Y: Nonlocal controllability of semilinear dynamic systems with fractional derivative in Banach spaces. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 2012, 154(1):292-302. 10.1007/s10957-012-9999-3MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Wang J, Zhou Y, Wei W: A class of fractional delay nonlinear integrodifferential controlled systems in Banach spaces. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 2011, 16(10):4049-4059. 10.1016/j.cnsns.2011.02.003MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Zhou H: Approximate controllability for a class of semilinear abstract equations. SIAM J. Control Optim. 1983, 21: 551-555. 10.1137/0321033MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Naito K: Approximate controllability for trajectories of semilinear control systems. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 1989, 60: 57-65. 10.1007/BF00938799MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Li X, Yong J: Optimal Control Theory for Infinite Dimensional Systems. Birkhäuser, Boston; 1995.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Bian WM: Constrained controllability of some nonlinear systems. Appl. Anal. 1999, 72: 57-73. 10.1080/00036819908840730MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Carmichel N, Quinn MD Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences 75. In Fixed Point Methods in Nonlinear Control. Springer, Berlin; 1984:24-51.Google Scholar
  11. Zhang X: Exact controllability of semilinear evolution systems and its application. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 2000, 107: 415-432. 10.1023/A:1026460831701MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Seidmann TI: Invariance of the reachable set under nonlinear perturbations. SIAM J. Control Optim. 1985, 25: 1173-1191.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Laziecka I, Triggiani R: Exact controllability of semilinear abstract systems with applications to waves and plates boundary control problems. Appl. Math. Optim. 1991, 23: 109-154. 10.1007/BF01442394MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Balachandran K, Sakthivel R: Controllability of functional semilinear integrodifferential systems in Banach spaces. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2001, 255(2):447-457. 10.1006/jmaa.2000.7234MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  15. Balachandran K, Anandhi ER: Controllability of neutral functional integrodifferential infinite delay systems in Banach spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2005, 61: 405-423. 10.1016/j.na.2004.12.002MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Balachandran K, Sakthivel R: Controllability of integrodifferential systems in Banach spaces. Appl. Math. Comput. 2001, 118: 63-71. 10.1016/S0096-3003(00)00040-0MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  17. Bashirov AE, Mahmudov NI: On concepts of controllability for deterministic and stochastic systems. SIAM J. Control Optim. 1999, 37(6):1808-1821. 10.1137/S036301299732184XMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Chang Y-K, Chalishajar DN: Controllability of mixed Volterra-Fredholm-type integro-differential inclusions in Banach spaces. J. Franklin Inst. 2008, 345(5):499-507. 10.1016/j.jfranklin.2008.02.002MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Fu X: Controllability of neutral functional differential systems in abstract space. Appl. Math. Comput. 2003, 141(2-3):281-296. 10.1016/S0096-3003(02)00253-9MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. Hernandez M E, O’Regan D: Controllability of Volterra-Fredholm type systems in Banach spaces. J. Franklin Inst. 2009, 346(2):95-101. 10.1016/j.jfranklin.2008.08.001MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. Ji S, Li G, Wang M: Controllability of impulsive differential systems with nonlocal conditions. Appl. Math. Comput. 2011, 217(16):6981-6989. 10.1016/j.amc.2011.01.107MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Klamka J: Schauder’s fixed-point theorem in nonlinear controllability problems. Control Cybern. 2000, 29(1):153-165.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. Klamka J: Constrained approximate controllability. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 2000, 45(9):1745-1749. 10.1109/9.880640MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  24. Klamka J: Constrained controllability of semilinear delayed systems. Bull. Pol. Acad. Sci., Tech. Sci. 2001, 49(3):505-515.Google Scholar
  25. Klamka J: Constrained controllability of semilinear systems. Nonlinear Anal. 2001, 47: 2939-2949. 10.1016/S0362-546X(01)00415-1MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  26. Klamka J: Constrained exact controllability of semilinear systems. Syst. Control Lett. 2002, 4(2):139-147.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  27. Dauer JP, Mahmudov NI: Controllability of some nonlinear systems in Hilbert spaces. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 2004, 123(2):319-329. 10.1007/s10957-004-5151-3MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  28. Dauer JP, Mahmudov NI: Approximate controllability of semilinear functional equations in Hilbert spaces. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2002, 273(2):310-327. 10.1016/S0022-247X(02)00225-1MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  29. Debbouche A, Baleanu D: Controllability of fractional evolution nonlocal impulsive quasilinear delay integro-differential systems. Comput. Math. Appl. 2011, 62: 1442-1450. 10.1016/j.camwa.2011.03.075MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  30. Mahmudov NI: On controllability of linear stochastic systems. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 2001, 46: 724-732. 10.1109/9.920790MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  31. Mahmudov NI: Approximate controllability of semilinear deterministic and stochastic evolution equations in abstract spaces. SIAM J. Control Optim. 2003, 42: 1604-1622. 10.1137/S0363012901391688MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  32. Mahmudov NI: Approximate controllability of evolution systems with nonlocal conditions. Nonlinear Anal., Theory Methods Appl. 2008, 68: 536-546. 10.1016/j.na.2006.11.018MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  33. Curtain RF, Zwart HJ: An Introduction to Infinite Dimensional Linear Systems Theory. Springer, New York; 1995.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  34. Zhou Y, Jiao F: Nonlocal Cauchy problem for fractional evolution equations. Nonlinear Anal., Real World Appl. 2010, 11: 4465-4475. 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2010.05.029MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  35. Abada N, Benchohra M, Hammouche H: Existence and controllability results for nondensely defined impulsive semilinear functional differential inclusions. J. Differ. Equ. 2009, 246: 3834-3863. 10.1016/j.jde.2009.03.004MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  36. Górniewicz L, Ntouyas SK, O’Regan D: Controllability of semilinear differential equations and inclusions via semigroup theory in Banach spaces. Rep. Math. Phys. 2005, 56: 437-470. 10.1016/S0034-4877(05)80096-5MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  37. Fu X: Controllability of non-densely defined functional differential systems in abstract space. Appl. Math. Lett. 2006, 19: 369-377. 10.1016/j.aml.2005.04.016MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  38. Sakthivel R, Ren Y, Mahmudov NI: Approximate controllability of second-order stochastic differential equations with impulsive effects. Mod. Phys. Lett. B 2010, 24: 1559-1572. 10.1142/S0217984910023359MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  39. Sakthivel R, Ren Y: Approximate controllability of fractional differential equations with state-dependent delay. Results Math. 2012. doi:10.1007/s00025-012-0245-yGoogle Scholar
  40. Sakthivel R, Nieto JJ, Mahmudov NI: Approximate controllability of nonlinear deterministic and stochastic systems with unbounded delay. Taiwan. J. Math. 2010, 14: 1777-1797.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  41. Sakthivel R, Mahmudov NI, Nieto JJ: Controllability for a class of fractional-order neutral evolution control systems. Appl. Math. Comput. 2012, 218(20):10334-10340. 10.1016/j.amc.2012.03.093MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  42. Rykaczewski K: Approximate controllability of differential inclusions in Hilbert spaces. Nonlinear Anal., Theory Methods Appl. 2012, 75(5):2701-2712. 10.1016/j.na.2011.10.049MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  43. Ren Y, Hu L, Sakthivel R: Controllability of impulsive neutral stochastic functional differential inclusions with infinite delay. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2011, 235(8):2603-2614. 10.1016/j.cam.2010.10.051MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  44. Sakthivel R, Ren Y, Mahmudov NI: On the approximate controllability of semilinear fractional differential systems. Comput. Math. Appl. 2011, 62(3):1451-1459. 10.1016/j.camwa.2011.04.040MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  45. Sakthivel R, Suganya S, Anthoni SM: Approximate controllability of fractional stochastic evolution equations. Comput. Math. Appl. 2012, 63(3):660-668. 10.1016/j.camwa.2011.11.024MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  46. Sakthivel R, Ren Y: Complete controllability of stochastic evolution equations with jumps. Rep. Math. Phys. 2011, 68(2):163-174. 10.1016/S0034-4877(12)60003-2MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  47. Sukavanam N, Kumar S: Approximate controllability of fractional order semilinear delay systems. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 2011, 151: 373-384. doi:10.1007/s10957-011-9905-4 10.1007/s10957-011-9905-4MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  48. Barbu V, Precupanu T Mathematics and Its Applications (East European Series) 10. In Convexity and Optimization in Banach Spaces. 2nd edition. Reidel, Dordrecht; 1986.Google Scholar
  49. Samko SG, Kilbas AA, Marichev OI: Fractional Integrals and Derivatives. Theory and Applications. Gordon & Breach, London; 1993.Google Scholar

Copyright

© Mahmudov; licensee Springer. 2013

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