IMA Journal of Mathematical Control and Information Advance Access published October 2, 2016

IMA Journal of Mathematical Control and Information (2016) 00, 1–18

doi: 10.1093/imamci/dnw049

Approximate controllability results for abstract neutral integro-differential

inclusions with infinite delay in Hilbert spaces
V. Vijayakumar∗
Department of Mathematics, Info Institute of Engineering, Kovilpalayam,
Coimbatore 641 107, Tamil Nadu, India
∗
Corresponding author: vijaysarovel@gmail.com

Downloaded from http://imamci.oxfordjournals.org/ at Cornell University Library on October 5, 2016

[Received on 18 May 2016; revised on 28 July 2016; accepted on 12 August 2016]

In this paper, we consider a class of abstract neutral integro-differential inclusions with infinite delay
in Hilbert spaces. We establishes a set of sufficient conditions for the approximate controllability for
a class of abstract neutral integro-differential inclusions with infinite delay in Hilbert spaces by using
Bohnenblust–Karlin’s fixed point theorem. An example is also given to illustrate our main results.

Keywords: approximate controllability; integro-differential equations; neutral equations; resolvent oper-

ator; multivalued map.

1. Introduction
Differential equations with delay have been commonly used for decades in control theory and recently
it has earned popularity in biological models, which involves population dynamics, epidemiology and
physiology. Delayed systems are based on a memory of past states and advanced systems which evidently
depend on their anticipatory future probable states. The laws of evolution considered at the present time
for any physical system, the past and future states need to be defined by the new variables taking into
account some veiled mechanisms for their existence. Due to the fact, the past states no more exist at
the current and the future states are not yet actualized. Neutral differential equations arise in several
domains of applied mathematics and so these types of equations have gained attention in recent years.
Generally, neutral integro-differential equations with or without delay serve as abstract formulation
of many partial neutral integro-differential equations which arise in problems connected with heat
flow in materials with memory, visco-elasticity, heat conduction, wave propagation and many physical
phenomena. For basic theory and recent developments of neutral differential equations with delay, we
can refer Balasubramaniam et al. (2010), Diagana et al. (2009), Dos Santos et al. (2011a,b, 2013),
Dos Santos & Henríquez (2015), Dos Santos (2010), Guendouzi & Bousmaha (2014), Hernández et
al. (2006, 2011), Hernández & Henríquez (1998, 2008), Hernández & McKibben (2007), Hernández
(2004), Zhou & Peng (2016) and the references cited therein.
Controllability is one of the elementary concepts in mathematical control theory. This is a qualita-
tive property of dynamical control systems and is of particular importance in control theory. Roughly
speaking, controllability generally means that it is possible to steer dynamical control system from an
arbitrary initial state to an arbitrary final state using the set of admissible controls. Most of the criteria,
which can be met in the literature, are formulated for finite dimensional systems. It should be pointed
out that many unsolved problems still exist as far as controllability of infinite dimensional systems are
concerned. In the case of infinite dimensional systems, two basic concepts of controllability can be
distinguished which are exact and approximate controllability. This is strongly related to the fact that
in infinite dimensional spaces, there exist linear subspaces, which are not closed. Exact controllability

© The author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Institute of Mathematics and its Applications. All rights reserved.
2 V. VIJAYAKUMAR

enables to steer the system to an arbitrary final state, while approximate controllability means that the
system can be steered to an arbitrary small neighbourhood of the final state. In other words, approxi-
mate controllability gives the possibility of steering the system to states which form a dense subspace
in the state space. For more details about the theory and developments of controllability results for
differential systems with or without delay, one can refer Balasubramaniam et al. (2010), Diagana et al.
(2009), Fu (2014), Kailasavalli et al. (2015, 2016), Kumar & Sukavanam (2012), Mahmudov & Denker
(2000), Mahmudov (2008, 2013a,b), Mahmudov & Zorlu (2014), Mahmudov et al. (2016), Radhakrish-
nan & Balachandran (2012), Rajivganthi et al. (2015), Ravichandran & Trujillo (2013), Ravichandran
& Baleanu (2013), Sakthivel et al. (2011, 2012, 2013), Sukavanam & Kumar (2011), Sukavanam &

Downloaded from http://imamci.oxfordjournals.org/ at Cornell University Library on October 5, 2016

Tafesse (2011), Vijayakumar et al. (2013a,b, 2014a,b), Yan (2013), Yan & Jia (2016) and Zhou et al.
(2015).
In this paper, we establishes a sufficient condition for the approximate controllability for a class of
abstract neutral integro-differential inclusions with infinite delay in Hilbert spaces of the form

 
d t  t
x(t) + N(t − s)x(s)ds ∈ Ax(t) + G(t − s)x(s)ds + (Bu)(t),
dt −∞ −∞

+ F(t, xt ), t ∈ I = [0, b], (1.1)

x(t) = φ(t), t ∈ (−∞, 0], (1.2)

A, G(t) for t ≥ 0 are closed linear operators defined on a common domain D(A) which is dense in a
Hilbert space X, N(t) (t ≥ 0) is bounded linear operators on X. The control function u(·) ∈ L 2 (I, U), a
Hilbert space of admissible control functions. Further, B is a bounded linear operator from U to X. The
function F : I × B → 2B \ {∅} is a non-empty, bounded, closed and convex multivalued map.
The fixed point method can be adjudged as a very powerful and important tool to study the con-
trollability of non-linear systems. The fixed point approach seems appropriate for the solution of many
problems in control theory, because it is constructive and provides an associated convergence theory.
The fixed point approach which has found wide applications in both the theory and numerical aspect
of differential equations has not yet been extensively applied to the field of stochastic impulsive con-
trol system. In this method, the controllability problem is transferred into a fixed point problem for an
appropriate non-linear operator in a function space. An essential part of this method is to guarantee the
existence of fixed point for the appropriate operator. The fixed point method is the most effective one to
study the existence and controllability of differential systems and fractional differential systems. Due to
its importance, several researchers have studied the problems represented by evolution equations using
different kinds of fixed point theorems (Martin, 1987; Grans & Dugundji, 2003). We mainly employ the
Bohnenblust–Karlin’s fixed point theorem to investigate the approximate controllability for a class of
second-order evolution differential inclusions. To the best of our knowledge, the study of the approxi-
mate controllability for a class of abstract neutral integro-differential inclusions in Hilbert spaces of the
form (1.1) and (1.2), is an untreated topic in the literature, this will be an additional motivation of our
paper.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we introduce some basic definitions, notations and
lemmas based on the resolvent operator, Phase space and multivalued maps. In Section 3, we establish
a set of sufficient conditions for the approximate controllability for a class of abstract neutral integro-
differential equations in Hilbert spaces. An example is presented in Section 4 to illustrate the theory of
the obtained results.
 APPROXIMATE CONTROLLABILITY RESULTS 3

2. Preliminaries
In what follows we recall some definitions, notations and results that we need in the sequel. Throughout
this paper, (X,  · ) is a Hilbert space and A, G(t), for t ≥ 0, are closed linear operators defined on
a common domain D = D(A) which is dense in X. The notation [D(A)] represents the domain of A
endowed with the graph norm. Let (Z,  · Z ) and (W ,  · W ) be Hilbert spaces. In this paper, the notation
L(Z, W ) stands for the Hilbert space of bounded linear operators from Z into W endowed with the
uniform operator topology and we abbreviate this notation to L(Z) when Z = W . Furthermore, for
appropriate functions K : [0, ∞) → Z the notation K  denotes the Laplace transform of K. The notation,
Br (x, Z) stands for the closed ball with centre at x and radius r > 0 in Z. On the other hand, for a

Downloaded from http://imamci.oxfordjournals.org/ at Cornell University Library on October 5, 2016

bounded function γ : [0, b] → Z and t ∈ [0, b], the notation γ Z,t is defined by

γ Z,t = sup{γ (s)Z : s ∈ [0, t]},

and we simplify this notation to γ t when no confusion about the space Z arises.
To obtain our results, we assume that the abstract integro-differential problem
 
d t  t
x(t) − N(t − s)x(s)ds = Ax(t) + G(t − s)x(s)ds, (2.1)
dt 0 0

x(0) = z ∈ X, (2.2)

has an associated resolvent operator of bounded linear operators (R(t))t≥0 on X.

Definition 2.1 A one-parameter family of bounded linear operators (R(t))t≥0 on X is called a resolvent
operator of (2.1) and (2.2) if the following conditions are verified.

(a) The function R(·) : [0, ∞) → L(X) is strongly continuous, exponentially bounded and R(0)x = x
for all x ∈ X.

(b) For x ∈ D(A), R(·)x ∈ C([0, ∞), [D(A)]) C 1 ([0, ∞), X) and
 t  t
d 
R(t)x − N(t − s)R(s)xds = ARx(t) + G(t − s)R(s)xds,
dt 0 0
 t  t
d 
R(t)x − R(t − s)N(s)xds = R(t)Ax + R(t − s)G(s)xds,
dt 0 0

for every t ≥ 0.

The existence of a resolvent operator for problem (2.1) and (2.2) was studied in Dos Santos et al.
(2011b) and Dos Santos (2010). In this work we have considered the following conditions.

(P1 ) The operator A : D(A) ⊆ X → X is the infinitesimal generator of an analytic semigroup (T (t))t≥0
on X, and there are constants M0 > 0 and ϑ ∈ (π/2, π ) such that
 
ρ(A) ⊇ Λϑ = λ ∈ C : \{0} : |arg(λ)| < ϑ ,

and R(λ, A) ≤ M0

|λ|
for all λ ∈ Λϑ .
4 V. VIJAYAKUMAR


(P2 ) The function N : [0, ∞) → L(X) is strongly continuous and N(λ)x is absolutely convergent for

x ∈ X and Re(λ) > 0. There exists β > 0 and an analytical extension of N(λ) (still denoted by
  
N(λ)) to Λϑ such that N(λ) ≤ |λ|β for every λ ∈ Λϑ and N(λ)x ≤ |λ| x1 for every λ ∈ Λϑ
N0 N1

and x ∈ D(A).
(P3 ) For all t ≥ 0, G(t) : D(G(t)) ⊆ X → X is a closed linear operator, D(A) ⊆ D(G(t)) and G(·)x
is strongly measurable on (0, ∞) for each x ∈ D(A). There exists b(·) ∈ Lloc
1
(R+ ) such that 
b(λ)
exists for Re(λ) > 0 and G(t)x ≤ b(t)x1 for all t > 0 and x ∈ D(A). Moreover, the operator
valued function G : Λ π2 → L([D(A)], X) has an analytical extension (still denoted by G) to Λϑ
such that G(λ)x ≤  G(λ)x1 for all x ∈ D(A), and 
G(λ) → 0, as |λ| → ∞.

Downloaded from http://imamci.oxfordjournals.org/ at Cornell University Library on October 5, 2016

(P4 ) There exists a subspace D ⊆ D(A) dense in [D(A)] and positive constants Ci , i = 1, 2, such that
A(D) ⊆ D(A),  
G(λ)(D) ⊆ D(A), N(λ)(D) ⊆ D(A), A 
G(λ)x ≤ C1 x and N(λ)x ≤ |λ|β x1
C2

for every x ∈ D and all λ ∈ Λϑ .

The following result has been established in Dos Santos et al. (2011b) and Dos Santos (2010,
Theorem 2.1).

Theorem 2.2 Assume that conditions (P1 )–(P4 ) are fulfilled. Then there exists a unique resolvent
operator for problem (2.1) and (2.2).

In what follows, we always assume that the conditions (P1 )–(P4 ) are verified.

We consider now the non-homogeneous problem

  t
d t 
x(t) − N(t − s)x(s)ds = Ax(t) + B(t − s)x(s)ds + f (t), t ∈ [0, b], (2.3)
dt 0 0

x(0) = z ∈ X, (2.4)

where f : [0, b] → X is a continuous function.

Definition 2.3 A function x : [0, b] →  X, 0 < a, is called a classical solution of problem (2.3) and
(2.4) on (0, b] if x ∈ C([0, b], [D(A)]) C 1 ([0, b], X),
the condition (2.4) holds and equation (2.3) is
verified on [0, b]. If, in further, x ∈ C([0, b], [D(A)]) C 1 ([0, b], X), the function x is said a classical
solution of problem (2.3) and (2.4) on [0, b].

It is clear from the preceding definition that R(·)z is a solution of problem (2.3) and (2.4) on (0, ∞)
for z ∈ D(A).
In Dos Santos et al. (2011b) and Dos Santos (2010, Theorem 2.4), the authors have established that
the solutions of problem (2.3) and (2.4) are given by the variation of constants formula.

Theorem 2.4 (Dos Santos 2010, Theorem 3.2; Dos Santos et al., 2011b). Let z ∈ D(A). Assume that
f ∈ C([0, b], X) and x(·) is a classical solution of (2.3) and (2.4) on [0, b]. Then
 t
x(t) = R(t)z + R(t − s)f (s)ds, t ∈ [0, b].
0
 APPROXIMATE CONTROLLABILITY RESULTS 5

Theorem 2.5 (Dos Santos et al., 2011a, Lemma 3.1.1). If R(λ0 , A) is compact for some λ0 ∈ ρ(A), then
R(t) is compact for all t > 0.

We will herein define the phase space B axiomatically, using ideas and notation developed in Hino
et al. (1991). More precisely, B will denote the vector space of functions defined from (−∞, 0] into X
endowed with a seminorm denoted as  · B and such that the following axioms hold:

(A) If x : (−∞, σ + b) → X, b > 0, σ ∈ R is continuous on [σ , σ + b) and xσ ∈ B, then for every

t ∈ [σ , σ + b) the following conditions hold:

Downloaded from http://imamci.oxfordjournals.org/ at Cornell University Library on October 5, 2016

(i) xt is in B.
(ii) x(t) ≤ Hxt B .
(iii) xt B ≤ K(t − σ ) sup{x(s) : σ ≤ s ≤ t} + M(t − σ )xσ B ,
where H > 0 is a constant; K, M : [0, ∞) → [1, ∞), K(·) is continuous, M(·) is locally
bounded and H, K, M are independent of x(·).
(A1) For the function x(·) in (A), the function t → xt is continuous from [σ , σ + b) into B.
(B) The space B is complete.

Example 2.6 The Phase Space Cr × L p (g, X).

Let r ≥ 0, 1 ≤ p < ∞ and g : (−∞, −r] → R be a non-negative, measurable function which
satisfies the conditions (g-5)–(g-6) in the terminology of Hino et al. (1991). Briefly, this means that g
is locally integrable and there exists a non-negative, locally bounded function η(·) on (−∞, 0] such
that g(ξ + θ ) ≤ η(ξ )g(θ ) for all ξ ≤ 0 and θ ∈ (−∞, −r) \ Nξ , where Nξ ⊆ (−∞, −r) is a set with
Lebesgue measure zero. The space Cr × L p (g, X) consists of all classes of functions ϕ : (−∞, 0] → X
such that ϕ is continuous on [−r, 0] and is Lebesgue measurable, and gϕp is Lebesgue integrable on
(−∞, −r). The seminorm in Cr × L p (g, X) defined by
 −r
1/p
ϕB := sup{ϕ(θ ) : −r ≤ θ ≤ 0]} + g(θ )ϕ(θ)p dθ .
−∞

The space B = Cr × L p (g, X) satisfies the axioms (A), (A1 ) and (B). Moreover, when r = 0 and p = 2,
 1/2
0
we can take H = 1, K(t) = 1 + −t g(θ )dθ and M(t) = η(−t)1/2 , for t ≥ 0 (see Hino et al., 1991,
Theorem 1.3.8 for details).

For additional details concerning phase space we refer the reader to Hino et al. (1991).
We also introduce some basic definitions and results of multivalued maps. For more details on
multivalued maps, see the books of Deimling (1992) and Hu & Papageorgiou (1997).
A multivalued map G : X → 2X \ {∅} is convex  (closed) valued if G(x) is convex (closed) for all
x ∈ X. G is bounded
 on bounded sets
 if G(C) = x∈C G(x) is bounded in X for any bounded set C of
X, i.e., supx∈C sup{y : y ∈ G(x)} < ∞.

Definition 2.7 G is called upper semicontinuous (u.s.c. for short) on X if for each x(0) ∈ X, the set
G(x(0)) is a non-empty closed subset of X, and if for each open set C of X containing G(x(0)), there
exists an open neighbourhood V of x(0) such that G(V ) ⊆ C.
6 V. VIJAYAKUMAR

Definition 2.8 G is called completely continuous if G(C) is relatively compact for every bounded
subset C of X.

If the multivalued map G is completely continuous with non-empty values, then G is u.s.c., if and
only if G has a closed graph, i.e., xn → x∗ , yn → y∗ , yn ∈ Gxn imply y∗ ∈ Gx∗ . G has a fixed point if
there is a x ∈ X such that x ∈ G(x).
 0 φ is a fixed function in B and
In the rest of this work,  0gi : [0, b] → X, i = 1, 2, will be the functions
defined by g1 (t) = − ∞ N(t − s)φ(s)ds and g2 (t) = − −∞ G(t − s)φ(s)ds. We adopt the notion of mild
solutions for (1.1) and (1.2) from the one given in Dos Santos et al. (2011b) and Dos Santos (2010).

Downloaded from http://imamci.oxfordjournals.org/ at Cornell University Library on October 5, 2016

Definition 2.9 A function x : (−∞, b] → X is said to be a mild solution of neutral system (1.1) and
(1.2) on [0, b] if x(0) = φ(0), g1 is differentiable on [0, b], g1 , g2 ∈ L 1 ([0, b], X), there exists f ∈ L 1 (I, X)
such that f (t) ∈ F(t, xt ) on t ∈ I and the integral equation
 
t   t
x(t) = R(t)x(0) + R(t − s) g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds + R(t − s)f (s)ds, (2.5)
0 0
 t
+ R(t − s)Bu(s)ds, t ∈ I, (2.6)
0

is satisfied.

In order to address the problem, it is convenient at this point to introduce two relevant operators and
basic assumptions on these operators:

 b
Υ0b = R(b − s)BB∗ R∗ (b − s)ds : X → X,
0

R(α, Υ0b ) = (αI + Υ0b )−1 : X → X,

where B∗ denotes the adjoint of B and R∗ (t) is the adjoint of R(t). It is straightforward that the operator
Υ0b is a linear bounded operator.
To investigate the approximate controllability of system (1.1) and (1.2), we impose the following
condition:

H0 αR(α, Υ0b ) → 0 as α → 0+ in the strong operator topology.

In view of Mahmudov & Denker (2000), Hypothesis H0 holds if and only if the linear system
 
d t  t
x(t) − N(t − s)x(s)ds = Ax(t) + B(t − s)x(s)ds + (Bu)(t), t ∈ [0, b], (2.7)
dt 0 0

x(0) = z ∈ X, (2.8)

is approximately controllable on [0, b].

 APPROXIMATE CONTROLLABILITY RESULTS 7

Lemma 2.10 (Lasota & Opial, 1965). Let I be a compact real interval, BCC(X) be the set of all non-
empty, bounded, closed and convex subset of X and F be a multivalued map satisfying F : I × X →
BCC(X) is measurable to t for each fixed x ∈ X, u.s.c. to x for each t ∈ I, and for each x ∈ C the set

SF,x = { f ∈ L 1 (I, X) : f (t) ∈ F(t, x(t)), t ∈ I}

is non-empty. Let F be a linear continuous from L 1 (I, X) to C, then the operator

F ◦ SF : C → BCC(C), x → (F ◦ SF )(x) = F (SF,x ),

Downloaded from http://imamci.oxfordjournals.org/ at Cornell University Library on October 5, 2016

is a closed graph operator in C × C.

Lemma 2.11 (Bohnenblust & Karlin, 1950). Let D be a non-empty subset of X, which is bounded,
closed and convex. Suppose G : D → 2X \ {∅} is u.s.c. with closed, convex values, and such that
G(D) ⊆ D and G(D) is compact. Then G has a fixed point.

3. Approximate controllability results

In this section, first we establish a set of sufficient conditions for the approximate controllability for
a class of abstract neutral integro-differential inclusions with infinite delay in Hilbert spaces by using
Bohnenblust–Karlin’s fixed point theorem.
In order to establish the result, we need the following hypothesis:

H1 The operator R(t), t ∈ I is compact, and there exists M > 0 such that R(t) ≤ M for every
t ∈ I.
H2 The multivalued map F : I × Bh → BCC(X) which satisfies the following condition

For each t ∈ I, the function F(t, ·) is u.s.c; and for each x ∈ B, the function F(·, x) is measurable.
And for each fixed x ∈ B, the set
 
SF,x = f ∈ L 1 (I, X) : f (t) ∈ F(t, xt ), for a.e. t ∈ I

is non-empty.
H3 For each positive number r > 0 there exists a positive function lr : I → R+ such that
 
sup f  : f (t) ∈ F(t, xt ) ≤ lr (t),

for a.e. t ∈ I.
H4 The function s → lr (s) ∈ L 1 (I, R+ ) and there exists a β > 0 such that
t
l (s)ds
0 r
lim = β < +∞.
r→∞ r
8 V. VIJAYAKUMAR

It will be shown that the system (1.1) and (1.2) is approximately controllable, if for all α > 0, there
exists a continuous function x(·) such that
 
t t  
x(t) = R(t)x(0) + R(t − s)f (s)ds + R(t − s) g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds
0 0
 t
+ R(t − s)Buα (s, x)ds, f ∈ SF,x , (3.1)
0

uα (t, x) = B∗ R∗ (b − t)R(α, Υ0b )p(x(·)), (3.2)

Downloaded from http://imamci.oxfordjournals.org/ at Cornell University Library on October 5, 2016

t t  
where p(x(·)) = xb − R(t)x(0) − 0
R(t − s)f (s)ds + 0
R(t − s) g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds.

Theorem 3.1 Suppose that the hypotheses H0 –H4 are satisfied. Assume also
 1 
Mβ 1 + M 2 MB2 b < 1, (3.3)
α
where MB = B. Then the system (1.1) and (1.2) has a mild solution on I.

Proof. In order to prove the existence of mild solutions for system (1.1) and (1.2) transform it into a
fixed point problem. Let Bb be the space of all functions x : (−∞, b] → X such that x(0) ∈ B and the
restriction x : [0, b] is continuous. Let  ·  be a seminorm in Bb defined by Γ : S(b) → 2S(b) by

xb = x(0)B + sup{x(s) : 0 ≤ s ≤ b}, x ∈ Bb .

Now we consider the operator Γ : Bb → 2Bb defined by βx, the set of z ∈ Bb such that that
⎧
⎪
⎪ φ(t), t ∈ (−∞, 0],
⎨
   
z(t) = R(t)ϕ(0) + t R(t − s)f (s)ds + t R(t − s) g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds,
⎪
⎪ t
0 0
⎩
+ 0 R(t − s)Buα (s, x)ds, t ∈ I,

where f ∈ SF,x .
For φ ∈ B, we define φ by

φ(t), t ∈ (−∞, 0],
φ(t) =
R(t)ϕ(0), t ∈ I,

then φ ∈ Bb . Let x(t) = y(t) + φ(t), −∞ < t ≤ b. It is easy to see that x satisfies (2.6) if and only if y
satisfies y0 = 0 and
 
t t  
y(t) = R(t − s)f (s)ds + R(t − s) g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds
0 0
 t
+ R(t − s)Buα (s, y + φ)ds.
0
 APPROXIMATE CONTROLLABILITY RESULTS 9

Let Bb0 = {y ∈ Bb : y0 = 0 ∈ B}. For any y ∈ B0b ,

yb = y0 B + sup{y(s) : 0 ≤ s ≤ b} = sup{y(s) : 0 ≤ s ≤ b}, (3.4)

thus (Bb0 ,  · b ) is a Hilbert space. Set Br = {y ∈ Bb0 : yb ≤ r} for some r > 0, then Br is clearly a
bounded closed convex set in Bb0 , and for y ∈ Br . Since

yt + φ t B ≤ yt B + φ t B

Downloaded from http://imamci.oxfordjournals.org/ at Cornell University Library on October 5, 2016

≤ Kb sup{y(s) : 0 ≤ s ≤ t} + KMb φ(0) + Mb φB
= Kb (r + Mφ(0)) + Mb φB ,

where Kb = sup{K(t) : 0 ≤ t ≤ b}, Mb = sup{M(t) : 0 ≤ t ≤ b}.

b
Define the multivalued map Φ : B0b → 2B0 defined by Φy the set of z ∈ B0b such that

⎧
⎪
⎨φ(t), t ∈ (−∞, 0],
t t  
z(t) = R(t − s)f (s)ds + 0 R(t − s) g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds,
⎪
⎩
0  t
+ 0 R(t − s)Buα (s, x)ds, t ∈ I.

Obviously, the operator Φ has a fixed point is equivalent to Φ has one. So, our aim is to show that
Φ has a fixed point. For the sake of convenience, we subdivide the proof into in several steps.
Step 1. Φ is convex for each y ∈ Br .
In fact, if z1 , z2 belong to Φy, then there exist f1 , f2 ∈ SF,y such that

 
t t  
zi (t) = R(t)x(0) + R(t − s)fi (s)ds + R(t − s) g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds
0 0
  
t b  
+ R(t − s)BB∗ R∗ (b − t)R(α, Υ0b ) xb − R(b)x(0) + R(b − s) g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds
0 0
 b 
− R(b − η)fi (η)dη (s)ds, i = 1, 2.
0

Let λ ∈ [0, 1]. Then for each t ∈ I, we get

 t
λz1 (t) + (1 − λ)z2 (t) =R(t)x(0) + R(t − s)[λf1 (s) + (1 − λ)f2 (s)]ds
0
 t  
+ R(t − s) g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds
0
 t 
+ R(t − s)BB∗ R∗ (b − t)R(α, Υ0b ) xb − R(b)x(0)
0
10 V. VIJAYAKUMAR

 b  
− R(b − s) g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds
0
 b 
− R(b − s)[λf1 (s) + (1 − λ)f2 (s)]ds (s)ds.
0

It is easy to see that SF,x is convex since F has convex values. So, λf1 + (1 − λ)f2 ∈ SF,x . Thus,
 
λz1 + (1 − λ)z2 ∈ Φy.

Step 2. We show that there exists some r > 0 such that Φ(Br ) ⊆ Br . If it is not true, then there exists

Downloaded from http://imamci.oxfordjournals.org/ at Cornell University Library on October 5, 2016

ε > 0 such that for every positive number r and t ∈ I, there exists a function y(·)r ∈ Br , but Φ(yr ) ∈
/ Br ,
that is, (Φyr )(t) = zr b : zr ∈ (Φyr )} ≥ r. For such ε > 0, an elementary inequality can show that

r < (Φyr )(t)

 t   t  
   r 
≤ R(t − s)f (s)ds + 
r
R(t − s)Buαr s, ysr + φ s ds
0 0
 t   
 
+ R(t − s) g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds
0
 t  b 
1 2 2
≤M Lf ,r (s)ds + M MB b Lf ,r (s)ds + g1 (s) + g2 (s)L1 ([0,b],X)
0 α 0

+ Mg1 (s)
+ g2 (s)L1 ([0,b],X)
  t 

≤ M g1 (s) + g2 (s)L1 ([0,b],X) + Lf ,r (s)ds
0
  b 
1
+ M 2 MB2 b g1 (s) + g2 (s)L1 ([0,b],X) + Lf ,r (s)ds .
α 0

Dividing both sides of the above inequality by r and taking the limit as r → ∞, using H4 , we get
 1 
Mβ 1 + M 2 MB2 b ≥ 1.
α
This contradicts with the condition (3.3). Hence, for some r > 0, Φ(Br ) ⊆ Br .
Step 3. Φ(Br ) is equicontinuous.
Indeed, let ε > 0 be small, 0 < t1 < t2 ≤ b. For each y ∈ Br and z belong to Φ1 y, there exists
f ∈ SF,x such that for each t ∈ I, we have
  t1 −ε 
 
z(t1 ) − z(t2 ) = [R(t1 − s) − R(t2 − s)]f (s)ds
0
 t1   t2 
   
+ [R(t1 − s) − R(t2 − s)]f (s)ds +  R(t2 − s)f (s)ds
t−ε t1
 t1 −ε 
 
+ [R(t1 − η) − R(t2 − η)]Buα (η, y + φ)dη
0
 APPROXIMATE CONTROLLABILITY RESULTS 11
 t1 
 
+ [R(t1 − η) − R(t2 − η)]Buα (η, y + φ)dη
t−ε
 t2 
 
+ R(t2 − η)Buα (η, y + φ)dη
t1
 t1 −ε   
 
+ [R(t1 − s) − R(t2 − s)] g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds
0
 t1   
 
+ [R(t1 − s) − R(t2 − s)] g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds

Downloaded from http://imamci.oxfordjournals.org/ at Cornell University Library on October 5, 2016

t−ε
 t2   
 
+ R(t2 − s) g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds
t1
 t1 −ε
≤ R(t1 − s) − R(t2 − s)Lf ,r (s)ds
0
 t1  t2
+ R(t1 − s) − R(t2 − s)Lf ,r (s)ds + M Lf ,r (s)ds
t−ε t1
 t1 −ε
+ MB R(t1 − η) − R(t2 − η)uα (η, y + φ)dη
0
 t1
+ MB R(t1 − η) − R(t2 − η)uα (η, y + φ)dη
t−ε
 t2
+ MMB uα (η, y + φ)dη
t1
 t1 −ε
+ R(t1 − s) − R(t2 − s)g1 (s) + g2 (s)L1 ([0,b],X) ds
0
 t1
+ R(t1 − s) − R(t2 − s)g1 (s) + g2 (s)L1 ([0,b],X) ds
t−ε
 t2
+M g1 (s) + g2 (s)L1 ([0,b],X) ds.
t1

Therefore, for ε > 0 sufficiently small, we can verify that the right-hand side of the above inequality
tends to zero as t2 → t1 . On the other hand, the compactness of R(t), implies the continuity in the
uniform operator topology. Thus Φ maps Br into an equicontinuous family of functions.
 
Step 4. The set V (t) = (Φ1 y)(t) : y ∈ Br is relatively compact in X. Obviously, V (t) is relatively
compact in Bb0 for t = 0. Let t ∈ (0, b] be fixed and ε a real number satisfying 0 < ε < t. For x ∈ Br ,
we define
 t−ε  t−ε
zε (t) = R(t − s)f (s)ds + R(t − η)Buα (η, y + φ)dη
0 0
 t−ε  
+ R(t − s) g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds.
0
12 V. VIJAYAKUMAR

Since R(t) is a compact operator, the set Vε (t) = {zε (t) : y ∈ Br } is relatively compact in X for each ε,
0 < ε < t. Moreover, for each 0 < ε < t, we have
 t  t
|z(t) − zε (t)| ≤M Lf ,r (s)ds + MMB uα (η, y + φ)dη
t−ε t−ε
 t  
+M g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds.
t−ε

 
Hence there exist relatively compact sets arbitrarily close to the set V (t) = (Φ1 y)(t) : y ∈ Br , and the

Downloaded from http://imamci.oxfordjournals.org/ at Cornell University Library on October 5, 2016

set V (t) is relatively compact in X for all t ∈ [0, b]. Since it is compact at t = 0, hence V (t) is relatively
compact in X for all t ∈ [0, b].
Step 5. Φ has a closed graph.
Let y(n) → y∗ as n → ∞, zn ∈ Φy(n) and zn → z∗ as n → ∞. We will show that z∗ ∈ Φy∗ . Since
zn ∈ Φy(n) , there exists a fn ∈ SF,xn such that
 t  t 
zn (t) = R(t − s)fn (s)ds + R(t − s)BB∗ R∗ (b − t)R(α, Υ0b ) xb − R(b)x(0)
0 0
 
b b   
− R(b − η)fn (η)dη − R(b − η) g1 (η) + g2 (η) dη (s)ds
0 0
 t  
+ R(b − s) g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds.
0

We must prove that there exists a f∗ ∈ SF,x∗ such that

 t  t 
z∗ (t) = R(t − s)f∗ (s)ds + R(t − s)BB∗ R∗ (b − t)R(α, Υ0b ) xb − R(b)x(0)
0 0
 
b b   
− R(b − η)f∗ (η)dη − R(b − η) g1 (η) + g2 (η) dη (s)ds
0 0
 t  
+ R(b − s) g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds.
0

Clearly, we have
  t  t 

 zn (t) − R(t − s)fn (s)ds + R(t − s)BB∗ R∗ (b − t)R(α, Υ0b ) xb − R(b)x(0)
0 0
 
b b   
− R(b − η)fn (η)dη − R(b − η) g1 (η) + g2 (η) dη (s)ds
0 0
 
t    t
+ R(b − s) g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds − ϕ∗ − R(t − s)f∗ (s)ds
0 0
 t 
+ R(t − s)BB∗ R∗ (b − t)R(α, Υ0b ) xb − R(b)x(0)
0
 APPROXIMATE CONTROLLABILITY RESULTS 13
 
b b   
− R(b − η)f∗ (η)dη − R(b − η) g1 (η) + g2 (η) dη (s)ds
0 0
 t   
+ R(b − s) g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds  → 0 as n → ∞.
0 b

Consider the linear continuous operator Ψ : L 1 (I, X) → C(I, X),

 t   b 
(Ψ f )(t) = R(t − s) BB∗ R∗ (b − t) R(b − η)f (η)dη (s) + f∗ (s) ds.

Downloaded from http://imamci.oxfordjournals.org/ at Cornell University Library on October 5, 2016

0 0

From Lemma 2.11 again, it follows that Ψ ◦ SF is a closed graph operator. Also, from the definition
of Ψ , we have that, for every t ∈ I. Moreover,
 t  t 
zn − R(t − s)fn (s)ds + R(t − s)BB∗ R∗ (b − t)R(α, Υ0b ) xb − R(b)x(0)
0 0
 
b t   
− R(b − η)fn (η)dη − R(b − η) g1 (η) + g2 (η) dη (s)ds
0 0
 t  
+ R(b − s) g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds ∈ F (SF,xn ).
0

In view of y(n) → y∗ as n → ∞, for some f∗ ∈ SF,y∗ it follows that, for every t ∈ I, we have
 t  t 
z∗ − R(t − s)f∗ (s)ds + R(t − s)BB∗ R∗ (b − t)R(α, Υ0b ) xb − R(b)x(0)
0 0
 
b t   
− R(b − η)f∗ (η)dη − R(b − η) g1 (η) + g2 (η) dη (s)ds
0 0
 t  
+ R(b − s) g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds
0
 t   b 
= R(t − s) BB∗ R∗ (b − t) R(b − η)f (η)dη (s) + f∗ (s) ds.
0 0

Therefore Φ has a closed graph.

As a consequence of Steps 1–5 together with the Arzela–Ascoli theorem, we conclude that Φ is a
compact multivalued map, u.s.c. with convex closed values. As a consequence of Lemma 2.11, we can
deduce that Φ has a fixed point y ∈ Bb0 which is a mild solution of system (1.1) and (1.2). 

Definition 3.2 The control system (1.1) and (1.2) is said to be approximately controllable on I if
R(b, x(0)) = X, where R(b, x(0)) = {x(b; u) : u ∈ L 2 (I, U), x(0; u) = x(0)} is a mild solution of the
system (1.1) and (1.2).

Roughly speaking, from any given starting point x(0) ∈ X we can go with the trajectory as close as
possible to any other final state xb ∈ X. In the following theorem, it will be shown that under certain
14 V. VIJAYAKUMAR

conditions the approximate controllability of linear differential inclusion (2.7) and (2.8) implies the
approximate controllability of the non-linear differential inclusion (1.1) and (1.2).

Theorem 3.3 Suppose that the assumptions H0 –H3 hold. Assume additionally that there exists N ∈
L 1 (I, [0, ∞)) such that supx∈B F(t, xt ) ≤ N(t) for a.e. t ∈ I, then the non-linear differential inclusion
(1.1) and (1.2) is approximately controllable on I.

Proof. Let x α (·) be a fixed point of Φ in Br . By Theorem 3.1, any fixed point of Φ is a mild solution of
(1.1) and (1.2) under the control

Downloaded from http://imamci.oxfordjournals.org/ at Cornell University Library on October 5, 2016

u α (t) = B∗ R∗ (b − t)R(α, Υ0b )p(
 x α)

and satisfies the following inequality

x α (b) = xb + αR(α, Υ0b )p(

 x α ). (3.5)

Moreover, by assumption on F and Dunford–Pettis Theorem, we have that the { f α (s)} is weakly compact
in L 1 (I, X), so there is a subsequence, still denoted by { f α (s)}, that converges weakly to say f (s) in
L 1 (I, X). Define
 b  b
 
w = xb − R(b)x(0) − R(b − s)f (s)ds − R(b − s) g1 (s) + g2 (s) ds.
0 0

Now, we have
 b 
 
x α ) − w =
p( x α (s)) − f (s)]ds
R(b − s)[f (s,
0
 t 
 
≤ sup  x α (s)) − f (s)]ds.
R(t − s)[f (s, (3.6)
t∈J 0

By using
 · infinite-dimensional version of the Ascoli–Arzela theorem, one can show thatα an operator
l(·) → 0 R(· − s)l(s)ds : L 1 (I, X) → C(I, X) is compact. Therefore, we obtain that p(
x ) − w → 0
as α → 0+ . Moreover, from (3.5) we get

x α (b) − xb  ≤αR(α, Υ0b )(w) + αR(α, Υ0b )p(

 x α ) − w
x α ) − w.
≤αR(α, Υ0b )(w) + p(

It follows from assumption H0 and the estimation (3.6) that  x α (b) − xb  → 0 as α → 0+ . This proves
the approximate controllability of differential inclusion (1.1) and (1.2). 

4. An example
To finish this section, we apply our results to study a partial neutral integro-differential equation.
Consider the system
 t  t
∂  ∂2 ∂ 2 z(s, ξ )
z(t, ξ ) + (t − s)δ e−w(t−s) z(s, ξ )ds = 2 z(t, ξ ) + e−γ (t−s) ds
∂t −∞ ∂ξ −∞ ∂ξ 2
 APPROXIMATE CONTROLLABILITY RESULTS 15
 t
+ μ(t, ξ ) + a(s − t)z(s, ξ )ds, t ∈ [0, b], ξ ∈ [0, π ], (4.1)
−∞

z(t, 0) = z(t, π ) = 0, t ∈ [0, b], (4.2)

z(θ , ξ ) = ϕ(θ , ξ ), θ ≤ 0, ξ ∈ [0, π]. (4.3)

In this system, δ ∈ (0, 1), w and γ are positive numbers, and a : [0, ∞) → R is an appropriate
function. Moreover, we have identified u(θ )(ξ ) = ϕ(θ , ξ ). Put x(t) = z(t, ξ ) and u(t) = μ(t, ξ ), where
μ : I × [0, π] → [0, π] is continuous.
To represent this system in the abstract form (1.1) and (1.2), we choose the spaces X = L 2 ([0, π ])

Downloaded from http://imamci.oxfordjournals.org/ at Cornell University Library on October 5, 2016

and B = C0 × L 2 (g, X); see Example 2.6 for details. In the sequel, A : D(A) ⊆ X → X, t ≥ 0 given by
Ax = x  , with domain D(A) = {x ∈ X : x  ∈ X, x(0) = x(π ) = 0} and N(t)x = t δ e−wt x for x ∈ X. It is
well known that Δx = x  is the infinitesimal generator of an analytic semigroup (T (t))t≥0 on X. Hence,
A is of sectorial type and (P1 ) is satisfied. We also consider the operator B(t) : D(A) ⊆ X → X, t ≥ 0,
B(t)x = e−γt Δx for x ∈ D(A) and for all ϑ ∈ ( π2 , π ) there exists Mϑ > 0 such that R(λ, A)Mϑ |λ|−1
for all λ ∈ 0,αϑ .

Moreover, it is easy to see that conditions (P2 )–(P4 ) in Section 2 are satisfied with N(λ) Γ (δ+1)
= (λ+w) δ+1 ,
−γ t ∞ ∞
b(t) = e and D = C0 ([0, π ]), where C0 ([0, π ]) is the space of infinitely differentiable functions
that vanish at ξ = 0 and ξ = π .
To this end, we introduce the following conditions.

 21
0 |a(−s)|2
(a) The function a(·) is continuous and Lf = −∞ g(s)
ds < ∞.
  21
0 (t−τ )2δ 2wτ
(b) The functions ϕ, Aϕ belong to B and the expressions supt∈[0,b] −∞ g(τ )
e dτ and
 21
0 e2γ τ
−∞ g(τ )
dτ are finite.

Under the conditions (a) and (b), the functions f : [0, b] × B → X, fi : [0, b] → X, i = 1, 2, B : U → X,
given by
 t
f (t, ϕ)(ξ ) = a(−s)ϕ(s, ξ )ds,
−∞
 t
g1 (t)(ξ ) = (t − s)δ e−w(t−s) ϕ(s, ξ )ds,
−∞
 t
g2 (t)(ξ ) = e−γ (t−s) Aϕ(s, ξ )ds,
−∞

Bu(t)(ξ ) = μ(t, ξ ).

Assume these functions satisfy the requirement of hypotheses. From the above choices of the func-
tions and evolution operator A(t) with B = I , the system (4.1)–(4.3) can be formulated as the system
(1.1) and (1.2). Since all hypotheses of Theorem 3.3 are satisfied, approximate controllability of system
(4.1)–(4.3) on I follows from Theorem 3.3.
16 V. VIJAYAKUMAR

Acknowledgements
The author is deeply grateful to the anonymous referees for the careful reading of this paper and helpful
comments, which have been very useful for improving the quality of this paper. This paper is dedicated to
Professor Dr R. Murugesu, Head of the Department of Mathematics, SRMV College of Arts & Science,
Coimbatore-641 020, Tamil Nadu, India on the occasion of his 55th birthday.

References
Balasubramaniam, P., Park J. Y. & Muthukumar, P. (2010) Approximate controllability of neutral stochastic

Downloaded from http://imamci.oxfordjournals.org/ at Cornell University Library on October 5, 2016

functional differential systems with infinite delay. Stoch. Anal. Appl., 28, 389–400.
Bohnenblust, H. F. & Karlin, S. (1950) On a theorem of Ville. In Kuhn, H. W. and Tucker, A. W. (eds.).
Contributions to the Theory of Games, vol. I. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 155–160.
Deimling, K. (1992) Multivalued Differential Equations. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Diagana, T., Hernández, E. & Dos Santos, J. P. C. (2009) Existence of asymptotically almost automorphic
solutions to some abstract partial neutral integro-differential equations. Nonlinear Anal. TMA, 71, 248–257.
Dos Santos, J. P. C. (2010) Existence results for a partial neutral integro-differential equation with state-dependent
delay. Electron. J. Qual. Theory Differ. Equ. 29, 1–12.
Dos Santos, J. P. C. (2015) & Henríquez, H.R. Existence of S-asymptotically w-periodic solutions to abstract
integro-differential equations. Appl. Math. Comput. 256, 109–118.
Dos Santos, J. P. C., Cuevas, C. & de Andrade, B. (2011a) Existence results for a fractional equation with
state-dependent delay. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2011, 1–15. Article ID 642013.
Dos Santos, J. P. C., Henrı́quez, H. & Hernández, E. (2011b) Existence results for neutral integro-differential
equations with unbounded delay. J. Integral Equ. Appl. 23, 289–330.
Dos Santos, J. P. C., Vijayakumar, V. & Murugesu, R. (2013) Existence of mild solutions for nonlocal Cauchy
problem for fractional neutral integro-differential equation with unbounded delay. Commun. Math. Anal. 14,
59–71.
Fu, X. (2014) Approximate controllability of semilinear neutral retarded systems. IMA J. Math. Control Inf. 31,
465–486.
Grans, A. & Dugundji, J. (2003) Fixed Point Theory. New York: Springer.
Guendouzi, T. & Bousmaha, L. (2014) Approximate controllability of fractional neutral stochastic functional
integro-differential inclusions with infinite delay. Qual. Theory Dyn. Syst. 13, 89–119.
Hernández, E. (2004) Existence results for partial neutral functional integrodifferential equations with unbounded
delay. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 292, 194–210.
Hernández, E. & Henríquez, H. R. (1998) Existence results for partial neutral functional differential equations
with unbounded delay. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 221, 452–475.
Hernández, E. & Henríquez, H. R. (2008) Existence of solutions for second order partial neutral functional
differential equations with infinite delay, Dyn. Contin. Discrete Impuls. Syst. 15, 645–670.
Hernández, E. & McKibben, M. (2007) On state-dependent delay partial neutral functional differential equations,
Appl. Math. Comput. 186, 294–301.
Hernández, E., Pierri, M. & Bená, M.A. (2011) Asymptotically almost periodic solutions for abstract neutral
integro-differential equations. Appl. Math. Comput. 217, 8963–8972.
Hernández, E., Pierri, M. & Goncalves, G. (2006) Existence results for an impulsive abstract partial differential
equations with state-dependent delay, Comput. Math. Appl. 52, 411–420.
Hino, Y., Murakami, S. & Naito, T. (1991) Functional-Differential Equations with Infinite Delay. Lecture Notes
in Mathematics, vol. 1473. Berlin: Springer.
Hu, S. & Papageorgiou, N.S. (1997) Handbook of Multivalued Analysis (Theory). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic
Publishers.
Kailasavalli, S., Suganya, S. & Mallika Arjunan, M. (2015) Exact controllability of fractional neutral integro-
differential systems with state-dependent delay, Nonlinear Stud. 21, 687–704.
 APPROXIMATE CONTROLLABILITY RESULTS 17

Kailasavalli, S., Suganya, S. & Mallika Arjunan, M. (2016) Existence and controllability of fractional neutral
integro-differential systems with state-dependent delay in Banach spaces. J. Korean Soc. Ind. Appl. Math., 20,
51–82.
Kumar, S. & Sukavanam, N. (2012) Approximate controllability of fractional order semilinear systems with
bounded delay. J. Differ. Equ. 252, 6163–6174.
Lasota, A. & Opial, Z. (1965) An application of the Kakutani-Ky-Fan theorem in the theory of ordinary differential
equations or noncompact acyclic-valued map. Bull. Acad. Pol. Sci. Ser. Sci. Math. Astron. Phys. 13, 781–786.
Mahmudov, N.I. (2008) Approximate controllability of evolution systems with nonlocal conditions. Nonlinear
Anal. 68, 536–546.
Mahmudov, N.I. (2013a) Approximate controllability of fractional sobolev-type evolution equations in Banach

Downloaded from http://imamci.oxfordjournals.org/ at Cornell University Library on October 5, 2016

spaces. Abstract Appl. Anal. 2013, Article ID 502839, 9 pp.
Mahmudov, N.I. (2013b) Approximate controllability of some nonlinear systems in Banach spaces. Bound. Value
Probl. 2013, 1–13.
Mahmudov, N.I. & Denker, A. (2000) On controllability of linear stochastic systems. Int. J. Control 73, 144–151.
Mahmudov, N.I. & Zorlu, S. (2014) On the approximate controllability of fractional evolution equations with
compact analytic semigroup. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 259, 194–204.
Mahmudov, N.I., Vijayakumar, V. & Murugesu, R. Approximate controllability of second-order evolution
differential inclusions in Hilbert spaces. Mediterr. J. Math.; doi: 10.1007/s00009-016-0695-7.
Martin, R.H. (1987) Nonlinear Operators and Differential Equations in Banach Spaces. Florida: Robert E. Krieger
Publishing Co.
Radhakrishnan, B. & Balachandran, K. (2012) Controllability of neutral evolution integrodifferential systems
with state dependent delay. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 153, 85–97.
Rajivganthi, C., Muthukumar, P. & Ganesh Priya, B. (2015) Approximate controllability of fractional stochastic
integro-differential equations with infinite delay of order 1 < α < 2. IMA J. Math. Control Inf., 1–15;
doi:10.1093/imamci/dnv005.
Ravichandran, C. & Baleanu, D. (2013) On the Controllability of fractional functional integro-differential systems
with infinite delay in a Banach spaces. Adv. Diff. Equ. 2013 (1), 1–13.
Ravichandran, C. & Trujillo, J. J. (2013) Controllability of impulsive fractional functional integro-differential
equations in Banach spaces. J. Funct. Space. Appl. 2013, 1-8, Article ID-812501.
Sakthivel, R., Ganesh, R. & Anthoni, S. M. (2013) Approximate controllability of fractional nonlinear differential
inclusions, Appl. Math. Comput. 225, 708–717.
Sakthivel, R., Ganesh, R. & Suganya, S. (2012) Approximate controllability of fractional neutral stochastic
system with infinite delay, Report. Math. Phys. 70, 291–311.
Sakthivel, R., Ren, Y. & Mahmudov, N.I. (2011) On the approximate controllability of semilinear fractional
differential systems. Comput. Math. Appl. 62, 1451–1459.
Sukavanam, N. & Kumar, S. (2011) Approximate controllability of fractional order semilinear delay systems.
J. Optim. Theory Appl. 151, 373–384.
Sukavanam, N. & Tafesse, S. (2011) Approximate controllability of a delayed semilinear control system with
growing nonlinear term. Nonlinear Anal. 74, 6868–6875.
Vijayakumar, V., Ravichandran, C. & Murugesu, R. (2013a) Approximate controllability for a class of fractional
neutral integro-differential inclusions with state-dependent delay. Nonlinear Stud. 20, 511–530.
Vijayakumar, V., Ravichandran, C. & Murugesu, R. (2013b) Nonlocal controllability of mixed Volterra-
Fredholm type fractional semilinear integro-differential inclusions in Banach spaces. Dyn. Contin. Discrete
Impuls. Syst. 20, 485–502.
Vijayakumar, V., Ravichandran, C., Murugesu, R. & Trujillo, J.J. (2014a) Controllability results for a class of
fractional semilinear integro-differential inclusions via resolvent operators. Appl. Math. Comput. 247, 152–161.
Vijayakumar, V., Selvakumar, A. & Murugesu, R. (2014b) Controllability for a class of fractional neutral
integro-differential equations with unbounded delay. Appl. Math. Comput. 232, 303–312.
Yan, Z. (2013) Approximate controllability of fractional neutral integro-differential inclusions with state-dependent
delay in Hilbert spaces. IMA J. Math. Control Inf. 30, 443–462.
18 V. VIJAYAKUMAR

Yan, Z. & Jia, X. (2016) Approximate controllability of impulsive fractional stochastic partial neutral integrodif-
ferential inclusions with infinite delay. IMA J. Math. Control Inf., 1–42; doi:10.1093/imamci/dnv062.
Zhou, Y. & Peng, L. (2016) On the time-fractional Navier-Stokes equations. Comput. Math. Appl.;
doi:10.1016/j.camwa.2016.03.026.
Zhou, Y., Vijayakumar, V. & Murugesu, R. (2015) Controllability for fractional evolution inclusions without
compactness. Evol. Equ. Control Theory 4, 507–524.

Downloaded from http://imamci.oxfordjournals.org/ at Cornell University Library on October 5, 2016