2020 345 OnlinePDF

J. Pseudo-Differ. Oper. Appl.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11868-020-00345-z
On the lack of equivalence between differential and

integral forms of the Caputo-type fractional problems
Mieczysław Cichoń1 · Hussein A. H. Salem2
of
Received: 9 February 2020 / Revised: 14 May 2020 / Accepted: 5 June 2020
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020
1 Abstract
Pro
2 In this pages, we discuss the problem of equivalence between fractional differential
3 and integral problems. Although the said problem was studied for ordinary derivatives,
4 it makes some troubles in the case of fractional derivatives. This paper dealing with the
5 question revealing the equivalence between the boundary value problems for Caputo-
6 type fractional differential equations and the corresponding integral form. One of our
7 main part is to determine the scope of equivalence of such problems. However, with the
8 help of appropriate examples, we will show that even for the Hölderian functions, but
9 being off the space of absolutely continuous functions, the equivalence between the
10 Caputo-type fractional differential problems and the corresponding integral forms can
11 be lost. As a pursuit of this, we will show here that, the main results obtained by many
12 researchers contained a common mathematical error in the proof of the equivalence of
ised
13 the boundary value problems for Caputo-type fractional differential equations and the
14 corresponding integral forms. In this connection, we are going to slightly modify the
15 definition of the Caputo-type fractional differential operator into a more suitable one.
16 We will show that the modified definition is more convenient in studying the boundary
17 value problems for Caputo-type fractional differential equations. As an application,
18 after recalling some properties of the said (new) operator, we summarize our discussion
19 by presenting an equivalence result for differential and integral problems for Caputo-
20 type fractional derivatives and for the weak topology. In order to cover the full scope
21 of this paper, we investigate the equivalence problem in case of multivalued fractional
22 problems.
Rev
23 Keywords Fractional calculus · Pettis integral · Orlicz space · Pseudo solution
B Hussein A. H. Salem
HssDina@Alex-Sci.edu.eg; HssDina@Alexu.edu.eg
Mieczysław Cichoń
mcichon@amu.edu.pl
1 Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland
2 Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Faculty of Sciences, Alexandria University,
Alexandria, Egypt
Journal: 11868 Article No.: 0345 TYPESET DISK LE CP Disp.:2020/6/18 Pages: 27 Layout: Small-Ex
M. Cichoń, H. A. H. Salem
24 Mathematics Subject Classification 26A33 · 26B35 · 34A08
25 1 Introduction
26 When studying differential problems, equivalent to them integral problems are often
27 studied and it is one of the most effective tools. The key question is to find an equivalent
28 form of this equation. It depends on the definition of solutions, assumptions on the
of
29 functions in the studied problem, as well as, properly chosen type of integrals (cf. [13],
30 for instance). In the case of fractional differential problems, such a systematic study
31 is not known. However, due to the lack of detailed proofs, some inaccuracies can be
32 found in many papers. Presence of different types of fractional derivatives and integrals
33 make such a study highly complicated, but very interesting from mathematical point
34 of view. In this paper we will provide some steps towards a complete description of
Pro
35 this theory in the case of weak-type derivatives and integrals.
36 The study of fractional calculus and fractional differential equations in Banach
37 spaces relative to the weak topology was initiated in 2005 by Salem et al. (see [42]
38 for the case of Riemann–Louville-type fractional calculus and [39] for the case of
39 Hadamard-type fractional calculus). Following the appearance of [39,42], there has
40 been a significant interest in the study of this topic (see e.g. [1,6,14,19,34,35,40]).
41 A growing series of investigations on initial and boundary value problems for many
42 kinds of fractional differential equations with specific configurations confirms the need
43 for research on this topic. It is also stimulated by some applications of fractional
44 calculus in different areas of physics and engineering. In particular, fractional-
ised
45 type boundary value problems supplemented with classical, nonlocal, multi-point,
46 periodic/anti-periodic, and integral boundary conditions have recently conducted by
47 several researchers. As the problem of equivalence of differential and integral forms
48 is important even in the context of real-valued functions, let us recall some papers
49 related to the topic investigated in this paper (see [1,2,4,5,7,8,24,30,45,51,53,54] for
50 the real-valued functions and [1,14,35,40,43] within the framework of abstract func-
51 tions).
52 Unfortunately, some of the papers (such as [3,7–9,14,15,17,29,45,48–50,52–54] in
53 the case of real-valued functions and e.g. [1,10,11,15,19,26] in abstract spaces) contain
54 an error in the proof of the equivalent of the fractional-type differential problems and
55 the corresponding integral forms.
Rev
56 One of the aims of the present paper is to indicate and to correct this error. Indeed,
57 we will show below that the existence of continuous solutions of the fractional-type
58 integral problems is not sufficient to ensure the existence of solutions to the correspond-
59 ing either Caputo or Caputo–Hadamard-type fractional differential problems. Let us
60 remark that, within the framework of abstract functions, [37, Theorem 2] shows that
61 the equivalence could be verified only in a small class of continuous functions which
62 consists of those weakly absolutely continuous functions having integrable pseudo
63 derivatives. It corresponds to the case of ordinary derivative and so-called mild solu-
64 tions (cf. [31]), where the role of the Hölder class of functions is stressed, as in our
65 approach), i.e., uniform limits of a.e. differentiable solutions of certain approximate
66 problems. The last notion was adapted to the case of fractional calculus too. Unfor-
On the lack of equivalence between differential and…
67 tunately, not always in a proper way, i.e., many authors tried to avoid the problem
68 revealing the equivalence between the Caputo-type fractional differential problems
69 and the corresponding integral forms by replacing Carathéodory-type solutions by
70 mild solutions (cf. [22,50]), so the case of ordinary derivatives forms a prototype for
71 the research. Recall, that this kind of solutions is exactly defined to be a solution to
72 some integral form of a Caputo-type fractional differential problem. It is worthwhile to
73 note, that generalized solutions such as mild solutions form a natural class of solutions
74 for semi- or quasilinear evolution equations, but not for general form of differential
of
75 problems.
76 As it is showed in Lemma 3 below, the existence of this kind of mild solutions for
77 the integral forms of investigated problems gives no guarantee for the existence of
78 solutions to corresponding Caputo-type fractional differential problems in the sense
79 required by the authors. It should be claimed that some authors ([6,14,20,54]) simply
80 overcome such an equivalence problem by applying a know connection between the
Pro
81 Riemann–Louville and Caputo fractional differential operators (see for instance [23,
82 Formulas 2.4.1 and 2.7.35]).
83 In this paper, after recalling some necessary definitions of fractional differential
84 operators, we construct some examples proving that even for the relatively “smooth”
85 functions in the right-hand side of a given Caputo-type fractional differential problem,
86 the equivalence between differential and integral form of the problem can be lost.
87 However, in the following pages, in order to overcome the said equivalence problem,
88 we proceed in a different way by proposing a modified definition of the Caputo-type
89 fractional derivatives. As a consequence and in order to encompass the full scope of this
90 paper, we investigate the existence of pseudo or weak solutions to some Caputo-type
ised
91 fractional boundary value problem, which will illustrate our idea.
92 2 Preliminaries
93 It is important to recall the following notations. Let I be closed and bounded interval
94 of the real line, E be a Banach space and E ∗ denotes its dual space.
95 A function x : I → E is Pettis integrable if ϕx is Lebesgue
integrable
on I for
96 every ϕ ∈ E ∗ and there exists J x ds ∈ E such that ϕ J x ds = J ϕx ds holds
97 for every measurable J ⊂ I . By P[I , E] we will denote the normed space of all E-
98 valued Pettis integrable functions on the interval I . Let C[I , E w ] denote the Banach
Rev
99 space of continuous functions from I to E with its weak topology.

100 For fractional integrals, given a function x ∈ P[I , E] and a positive real number
101 α, we have the following
102 Definition 1 The Riemann–Louville -type fractional Pettis-integral (in short RFPI)
103 of x of order α > 0 applied to the function x ∈ P[[0, 1], E] is defined as
t
1
104 I α x(t) := (t − s)α−1 x(s) ds, t > 0. (1)
(α) 0
105 For complementation, we define I α x(0) := 0 and I := I 1 . Beside RFPI, we define

106 the Hadamard-type fractional Pettis-integral (in short HFPI) of x ∈ P[[1, e], E] of
107 order α > 0 as
t
1 t α−1 x(s)
108 Jα x(t) := log ds, t > 1. (2)
(α) 1 s s
109 We also define Jα x(1) := 0 and J := J1 .
of
110 Let us note that, as claimed in e.g. [14,36,37,39], that the operators I α and Jα are
111 well-defined when acting on Pettis space.
112 In the preceding definition the integral symbol “ ” denotes the Pettis integral (in
113 particular, it is the classical Lebesgue integral when E = R). For the convenience of
114 the reader, the material from fractional calculus in theory within the framework of real
Pro
115 and abstract functions can be seen in [6,14] and ([39–43]).
116 Our study will be applied for some differential problems, so we need to consider
117 different definitions of the derivative for vector-valued functions. The most interesting
118 is related to the weak topology:
119 Definition 2 ([12,27,32]) Let x : I → E be a function such that ϕx be a.e. differ-

120 entiable on I for every ϕ ∈ E ∗ . This x is said to be pseudo differentiable on I if
121 there exists a function y : I → E such that for every ϕ ∈ E ∗ there exists a null set
122 N (ϕ) ⊂ I such that
(ϕx(t)) = ϕ y(t) for every t ∈ I \N (ϕ).

ised
123
124 In this case y is called the pseudo derivative of x. If the null set does not depend on
125 ϕ ∈ E ∗ then x is said to be a.e. weakly differentiable on I (trivially called weakly
126 differentiable on I if the null sets are empty).
127 Clearly, the a.e. weakly differentiability implies the pseudo differentiability, but the
128 converse implication is not (in general) true. However, a function can be pseudo differ-
129 entiable and simultaneously be neither strongly nor weakly differentiable (cf. [12]).
130 Moreover, the weak (or: pseudo) derivative of an a.e. weakly (pseudo) differen-
131 tiable function is strongly (weakly) measurable (cf. [32,46,47]). The weak derivative
Rev
132 of a weakly differentiable function is uniquely determined (cf. [27]). It is no longer

133 necessarily true in the case of pseudo derivatives. The pseudo derivative of a pseudo
134 differentiable function (if exists) need not be necessary uniquely determined ([46]).
135 We also note that only in the Banach space having a countable determining set (total
136 dual space, i.e., when E ∗ contains a countable subset {xn∗ } which separates the points
137 of E), any two pseudo derivatives of this function must be a.e. equal. Indeed, in such
138 a case the pseudo derivative (if exists) is uniquely determined up to a set of measure
139 zero (see [12,46]).
140 The following lemma plays an important rule in our consideration
141 Lemma 1 ([32,46,47]) The indefinite integral of Pettis integrable (resp. weakly con-
142 tinuous) function is weakly absolutely continuous and it is pseudo (resp. weakly)
143 differentiable with respect to the right endpoint of the integration interval and its
144 pseudo (resp. weak) derivative equals the integrand at that point.
145 Let us point out the necessity of the weak absolute continuity condition in the above
146 lemma, because it will important play in our consideration. Exactly that the lack of this
147 property causes problems with the equivalence of differential and integral problems.
148 Let Dp (resp. Dω ) denote the pseudo (resp. weak) differential operator. Define the
149 operators δp (resp. δω ) related to Hadamard derivatives and applied to the function
150 x ∈ P[I , E] by
of
151 δp x(t) := tDp x(t), (resp. δω x(t) := tDω x(t)) .
152 We need to justify that it is well-defined and related to our integral operator. Indeed,
153 as a consequence of [32, Corollary 3.41], we know that for each x ∈ P[I , E] we have
x(·) x(·)
154
(·) ∈ P[I , E] ( (·) ∈ C[I , E w ] whenever x ∈ C[I , E w ], in particular). Thus Lemma
Pro
155 1 results in
⎧ t
⎪ x(s)
⎪
⎨ δω Jx(t) = tDω ds = x, holds for any x ∈ C[I , E w ], (),
s
156 1t
⎪
⎪ x(s)
⎩ δp Jx(t) = tDp ds = x, holds for any x ∈ P[I , E], (♦).
1 s
157 In this connection, let us remark that
158 Remark 1 1. The formula () does not necessarily hold for arbitrary x ∈ P[I , E].
159 This is follows from the fact that the indefinite Pettis integral of a function x ∈
160 P[I , E] does not enjoys the strong property of being a.e. weakly differentiable
ised
161 (see [16]).
162 2. The formula (♦) is not uniquely determined unless E has total dual E ∗ . Evidently,
163 according to (e.g. [46, page 2] and [12]), it may happen that δp Jx = y, where y is
164 weakly equivalent (but not necessarily a.e. equal ) to x.
165 Fractional derivatives of the Caputo-type are defined using fractional integrals.
166 Indeed, we have the following definitions of the Caputo and Caputo–Hadamard
167 fractional-pseudo (weak) derivatives
168 Definition 3 The Caputo fractional-pseudo (resp. weak) derivative, in short CFPD
169 (resp. CFWD) of order m + α, m ∈ N := {0, 1, 2, . . .}, α ∈ (0, 1) applied to the
function x ∈ P[I , E] is defined as
Rev
170

dpm+α dωm+α
171
m+α
x(t) := I 1−α Dpm+1 x(t), resp. x(t) := I D
1−α m+1
ω x(t) . (3)
dt dt m+α
172 By the same manner we can also define the Caputo–Hadamard fractional-pseudo (resp.
173 weak) derivative, in short CHFPD (resp. CHFWD) of order m + α, as

d m+α d m+α
174 t x(t) := J δp x(t),
1−α m+1
resp. t x(t) := J δω x(t) .
1−α m+1
dt p dt ω
175 (4)
176 For a particular sufficient conditions that ensures the existence of such an operators if
177 applied to functions x ∈ P[I , E], we refer to [6,14,36,39], for instance.
178 Now, consider the following (Caputo-type) fractional differential problem
dpα x(t)
179 = λ f (t), t ∈ [0, 1], λ ∈ R, α ∈ (m, m + 1], m = 0, 1, 2, . . . (5)
dt α
180 combined with an appropriate initial or boundary conditions.

Analogously as in the case of the real-valued functions, (see [23, Chapter 3]), we can
of
181
182 show (with the aid of the results obtained in [36,38]) that for any f ∈ C[[0, 1], E w ],
183 the integral form of the problem (5) reads as

m+1
184 x(t) = c j t m+1− j + λI α f (t), t ∈ [0, 1], λ ∈ R,
Pro
j=1
185 where c j , j = 1, 2, . . . , m + 1 are arbitrary constants depend only on the boundary or

186 initial conditions. Hence (cf. [35, Section3]) the weak continuity of I α−m f on [0, 1]
187 together with [38, Lemma 2], give us

m+1
188 x(t) = c j t m+1− j + λI m I α−m f (t), t ∈ [0, 1], λ ∈ R. (6)
j=1
189 In this situation, in view of Lemma 1, we conclude that

ised
α−m
190 Dm
p x(t) = m!c1 + λI f (t), t ∈ [0, 1], λ ∈ R. (7)
191 Next [39, Lemma 2.2] may be combined with [14, Lemma 2] in order to assure that
192 the integral form of (5) ( when we replace the operator CFPD by CHFPD ) takes the
193 form

m+1
194 x(t) = c j (ln t)m+1− j + λJm Jα−m f (t), t ∈ [1, e], λ ∈ R. (8)
j=1
Rev
195 Also, it can be easily seen (with the aid of the results obtained in [14,39]) that
α−m
196 Dm
p x(t) = m!c1 + λJ f (t), t ∈ [1, e], λ ∈ R. (9)
197 In this connection, let us discuss the problem of equivalence of (6) and (5). Even
198 in the context of real-valued functions f the following example provide us a reason
199 to believe that the converse implication from (6) to (5) is no longer necessarily true,
200 unless f is absolutely continuous on [0, 1], even if f is continuous. A similar result
201 holds true in the case of the Caputo–Hadamard fractional derivatives. However, within
202 the framework of abstract functions, [37, Theorem 2.] provide us a sufficient condition
203 under which the equivalence occurs.
204 Counter-Example 1 Consider the integral Eq. (6) with α ∈ (0, 1) and
∞

205 f (t) := it 1−α E1,2−α (i3n t),
n=0
206 where E1,2−α is the well-known Mittag-Leffler-type function.
207 It is well-known that the continuity of f on [0, 1] guarantees the existence of I α f on

[0, 1]. From which the generalized linearity of I α (cf. [44, Lemma 15.1]) along with
of
208
209 the formulas [44, Table 9.1 and Formula 23], enable us to ensure that
210 I α f (t) = W(t) − W(0), t ∈ [0, 1],
211 where W denote the classical Weierstrass-type function [33, Lemma 1].
Pro
α
212 As W is nowhere differentiable function on [0, 1], then ddt αx is “meaningless”.
213 Meaning that the equivalence between (5) and (6) is not true in this case. A similar
214 results revealing the equivalence problem in the case of CHFPD might be obtained
215 analogously by making use of [44, Theorem 18.1] together with ( [23, Formula 2.5.7]),
216 which asserts that Jα , α > 0 can be expressed via I α in such a way that Jα f =
217 GI α G −1 f , where G is the substitution operator G f (t) := f (ln t).
218 However, it is worth to mention here that f is not absolutely continuous on [0, 1],
219 for otherwise (see [44, Lemma 2.1]) g := W(·) − W(0) should be a.e. differentiable
220 on [0, 1] what we know is untrue.
221 In what follows we will discuss the lake of the above-mentioned equivalence in
ised
222 rather general settings. To do this, we firstly denote by C[a, b], 0 ≤ a < b < ∞ the
223 classical space of continuous real-valued functions on [a, b] and by Cμ [a, b], μ ∈
224 (0, 1]) the space of real-valued functions satisfying the Hölder condition of order μ.
μ
225 Define C0 [a, b] := { f ∈ Cμ [a, b] : f (a) = 0}. A function f : [a, b] → E is
μ
226 called weakly Hölderian of order μ on [a, b] if ϕ f ∈ C0 [a, b] holds for every ϕ ∈ E ∗ .
227 Now we are in the position to state and prove the following
dα
228 Lemma 2 For any α ∈ (m, m + 1), m ∈ N, the operator dtpα I α is well-defined for the
229 space of weakly absolutely continuous functions, but there exists a weakly Hölderian
230 function x of (any) positive order less than 1, such that it is not defined on x. Moreover,
dpα
Rev
α
231
dt α is not left-inverse of I .
232 In other words, Lemma 2 asserts that even for weakly Hölderian functions of any
233 positive order less than 1, outside of the space of weakly absolutely continuous func-
234 tions, the equivalence between the problem (5) and the corresponding integral form
235 (6) can be lost.
236 Proof The idea the proof is based on the fact that I γ with any γ ∈ (0, 1) is a continuous
237 mapping from Hölder spaces “onto” Hölder spaces (which, of course, contains also
238 continuous nowhere differentiable functions), cf. [44, Theorem 13.13].
dα
239 To see this, we first note that the proof of the existence of dtpα I α f for some weakly
240 absolutely continuous function f can be found in [37, Theorem 2].
241 Define g : [0, 1] → c0 , where c0 denote the separable space of all real-valued
242 sequences convergent to 0, by

243 g(t) := {c−n ϑ bn t }, n ∈ N, b, c
244 are arbitrary integer valued constants with b > c > 1,
245 where ϑ : R → R is arbitrary periodic function with period 1 and is Hölderian of

246 some order μ + α − m < 1 (i.e., μ ∈ (0, m + 1 − α) satisfying ϑ(0) = 0. A classical
of
247 example of such a functions is: ϑ(t) := the distance from t to the nearest integer
248 number.
249 According to [37, Proposition 5] g is weakly (but not weakly absolutely) continuous
250 function having no pseudo derivatives on [0, 1]. We claim that there is a weakly
251 Hölderian f : [0, 1] → c0 such that I α−m f = g. Once our claim is established, we
Pro
252 can conclude from (7) that Dm p x(t) = m!c1 + λg(t). From which, we deduce that the
253 (Caputo-type) fractional derivative of order α of x is “meaningless”, which is what
254 we expect to show.
255 Of course, such a function f cannot be weakly absolutely continuous [0, 1], for
256 otherwise reasoning as in the proof of [39, Lemma 2.4]), g should be weakly absolutely
257 continuous on [0, 1] what we know is not true.
258 It remains to prove our claim by showing that such a weakly Hölderian function f
259 exists, so that I α−m f = g. Since ϑ is periodic and Hölderian of order μ+α−m, μ ∈
260 (0, m + 1 − α), the results [44, Theorem 3.1 and Lemma 13.2] guarantee the existence
μ
261 of f n ∈ C0 [0, 1], for any n ∈ N, such that

ised
262 ϑ bn t = I α−m f n (t), holds true for every n ∈ N.
263 Now, define f : [0, 1] → c0 by f (t) := {c−n f n (t)}. Obviously, since { f n } ⊂

μ
264 C0 [0, 1], there is h n > 0 so that

f n (t) f n (t) − f n (0) h n t μ hn
= ≤ ≤ n → 0 as n → ∞,
265
cn cn cn c
266 where c > 1 is chosen to be sufficiently large in a sense to be made precise. It gives
267 a reason to believe that f is well-defined form [0, 1] into c0 . Note that f is weakly
Rev
268 Hölderian of order μ. Evidently, it is well-known that for every ϕ ∈ c0∗ ∼

=
1 , there is
269 λ = {λn } ∈
1 such that

270 (ϕ f )(t) = c−n λn f n (t), t ∈ [0, 1].
n=0
271 From which, in view f n (0) = 0 for every n ∈ N (hence (ϕ f )(0) = 0, for any ϕ ∈ c0∗ ),
272 we can conclude that
h n |λn |
273 |(ϕ f )(t2 ) − (ϕ f )(t1 )| ≤ |t2 − t1 |μ
cn
n=0

274 ≤ |λn | |t2 − t1 |μ ≤ λ
1 |t2 − t1 |μ ,
n=0
275 holds true for every ϕ ∈ c0∗ and any t1 , t2 ∈ [0, 1]. Hence (cf. [14, Corollary 1])
276 f ∈ P[[0, 1], c0 ]. Also, in view of [38, Lemma 1], it follows the existence of I α−m f .
277 Moreover, for any ϕ ∈ c0∗ we have

t λn
of
1 α−m−1 α−m α−m
278 ϕ (t − s) f ds = I ϕf =I fn .
(α − m) 0 cn
n=0
279 In view of the generalized linearity of I α (again by [44, Lemma 15.1]), it implies that
λn
Pro
1 t
280 ϕ (t − s)α−m−1 f ds = I α−m f n = ϕ {c−n ϑ bn t } = ϕ(g).
(α − m) 0 c n
n=0
281 From which, we conclude that I α−m f = g as required, which completes the proof.
282

283 For completeness, in what follows, we will show that also the converse implication
284 for solutions of (5) and (6) is not true also in the case of Caputo–Hadamard fractional
285 operators.
Lemma 3 The statement of Lemma 2 remains true in case of CHFPD and CHFWD.
ised
286
287 Proof First, we should note, that an analogous result revealing the equivalence prob-
288 lem in the case of the Caputo–Hadamard-type fractional operators might be obtained
289 similarly as in the proof of Lemma 2 by making use of [44, Theorem 18.1].
290 But, we proceed here in different Banach spaces. We need to show that the statement
291 of Lemma 2 is still valid in separable, weakly complete Banach spaces. Our proof is
292 based on the fact that (cf. [39, Example 2.6]) there is a weak absolutely continuous
293 Banach-valued mapping having no pseudo derivatives.
294 Indeed, we will consider the problem (8) with the weakly continuous function
295 f : [1, e] → L 1 [1, e] defined by
Rev
1
296 f (t) := (ln(t/·))m−α χ(1,t] (·), t ∈ [1, e].
(m + 1 − α)
297 Obviously, if φ ∈ L ∞ [1, e] ∼= L ∗1 [1, e] is corresponding to ϕ ∈ L ∗1 [1, e], then

298 ϕ( f (t)) = Jm+1−α tφ(t). From which we conclude that f is weakly continuous on
299 [1, e] (and weakly Hölderian by [39, Inequality (6)]). Since L 1 [1, e] is separable and
300 weakly complete, in view of [39, Lemma 2.1], it follows that Jα−m f exists on [1, e].
301 In this connection, we can show that
302 Jα−m f (t) = χ(0,t] . (10)
303 It can be verified by letting φ ∈ L ∞ [1, e] corresponding to ϕ ∈ L ∗1 [1, e] and carrying

304 out necessary calculations
t
1 α−m−1 f (s)
305 ϕ [ln(t/s)] ds
(α − m) 1 s
t
1 ϕ( f (s))
306 = [ln(t/s)]α−m−1 ds
(α − m) 1 s
t
[ln(t/s)]α−m−1 s φ(ξ )[ln(s/ξ )]m−α
of
307 = dξ ds
1 s(α − m) 1 (m + 1 − α)
t t
[ln(t/s)]α−m−1 [ln(s/ξ )]m−α ds
308 = φ(ξ ) dξ
1 ξ (α − m) (m + 1 − α) s
t e

= φ(ξ )dξ = φ(ξ )χ(1,t] (ξ )dξ = ϕ χ(1,t] ,
Pro
309
1 1
310 as needed for (10). Here we have used the substitution s = ξ (t/ξ )u . Consequently,
311 from (9) we arrive at
312 Dm
p x(t) = m!c1 + λχ(0,t] (·), t ∈ [1, e].
313 Hence, since we consider the function χ(1,t] (·), t ∈ [1, e] being weakly absolutely
314 continuous and having no pseudo (so trivially no weak) derivatives on [1, e] (see
315 [39, Example 2.6.]), we conclude that CHFPD (trivially CHFWD) is “meaningless”,
which was expected by us.

ised
316
317 A deeper result revealing the equivalence problem in case of CFWD or CHFWD
318 in arbitrary infinite dimension Banach spaces is contained in the following
319 Lemma 4 For a fixed of α ∈ (m, m + 1), m ∈ N, the assertions of Lemmas 2 and 3
320 hold true in arbitrary infinite dimensional Banach spaces. Moreover, it holds true for
321 (nearly) all α ∈ (m, m + 1) if the infinite dimensional Banach space fails cotype (in
322 particular, reflexive).
323 Proof We consider the case of CFWD (as the case of CHFWD is very similar). Our
proof is based on the fact that (as claimed in [16]), the indefinite integrals of Pet-
Rev
324
325 tis integrable functions does not enjoys the stronger property that being a.e. weakly
326 differentiable.
327 Indeed, according to [38, Theorem 1] for an arbitrary infinite-dimensional Banach
328 space E, there is a strongly-measurable, Pettis integrable g : [0, 1] → E whose
329 indefinite Pettis integral is nowhere weakly differentiable such that

1
330 f := I 1+m−α g, α ∈ m, m + , m ∈ N,
4
331 exists and is weakly continuous on [0, 1]. This function f is even weakly Hölderian.
332 Evidently, for any ϕ ∈ E ∗ , we have ϕ f = I 1+m−α ϕg. Reasoning as in the proof of
333 [38, Theorem 1], we ensure that ϕg ∈ L p [0, 1], with some p > 1+m−α
1
and for every
334
∗
ϕ ∈ E . Hence, in view of ( [43, Lemma 3.1.] or [44, Theorem 3.6]) we obtain that
335 ϕ f is Hölderian on [0, 1] as claimed. So f is weakly Hölderian. Consequently, by the
336 aid of [35, Lemma 3.5], the integral form (6) reads as follows

m+1
337 x(t) = c j t m+1− j + λI α I 1+m−α g(t)
j=1

of

m+1 t
338 = c j t m+1− j + λI m g(s) ds , t ∈ [0, 1].
j=1 0
339 By Lemma 1 we get
Pro
t
340 Dm
ω x(t) = m!c1 + λ g(s) ds, t ∈ [0, 1].
0
341 Since the indefinite integral of g is nowhere weakly differentiable on [0, 1], we con-
342 clude that CFWD is “meaningless”. Also, from [38, Theorem 2.], we can deduce that
343 the above result is allowed for (nearly) any α ∈ (m, m + 1) whenever E fails cotype.
344 It completes the proof.

345 3 Hadamard-type fractional operators in abstract spaces

ised
346 This section is devoted in order to investigate the question revealing the equivalence
347 problem between the Caputo-type fractional differential and the corresponding inte-
348 gral form. In our investigation, we restrict our attention to the Caputo–Hadamard-type
349 fractional operators. However, one could arrive at similar results as obtained through-
350 out this section, if we insert the Caputo-type differential operators into all occurrences
351 of the Caputo–Hadamard-type operators. In this case, the proofs will be similar and
352 they are left to the readers.
353 In order to do this, we are going to slightly modify the definition CHFPD and
354 CHFWD into a more suitable form. This new definition will be more convenient
when studying the boundary value problems for Caputo–Hadamard-type fractional
Rev
355
356 differential equations, as we will prove later. Let us note, that our observation indicates
357 a new look onto the domain of weak-type fractional derivatives and does not allow for
358 simple analogies with the case of strong derivatives.
359 For convenience, we first need to recall some necessary notions. Let ψ : R+ → R+
360 be a Young-type function, (i.e., ψ is increasing, even, convex and continuous with
361 ψ(0) = 0 and limu→∞ ψ(u) = ∞). The Orlicz space L ψ = L ψ ([a, b], R) consists
362 of all (classes of) measurable real-valued functions x : [a, b] → R for which there
363 exists a number k > 0 such that

b |x(s)|
364 ψ ds < 1. (11)
a k
365 This space is a Banach space if endowed with the (Luxemburg) norm xψ which
366 defined as the infimum of such k (cf. [25]). The particular choice ψ(u) = ψ p (u) :=
p |u| , p ∈ [1, ∞) leads, of course, to Lebesgue spaces L p = L p ([a, b], R), p∈
1 p
367
368 [1, ∞). In this case, it can be easily seen that p xψ p = x p . In this connection,
1/ p
369 we define the Young complementary function ψ̃ of ψ by ψ̃(u) := supv≥0 {|u|v−ψ(v)}.

370 For instance, ψ̃ p = ψ p̃ with 1p + 1p̃ = 1 for p > 1.
371 Definition 4 For any Young function ψ, we define the class P ψ [I , E] as a collection
of
372 of all Pettis integrable functions x : I → E such that ϕx ∈ L ψ holds true for every
373 ϕ ∈ E ∗ . In other words:
374 P ψ [I , E] := {x ∈ P[I , E] : ϕx ∈ L ψ , holds for every ϕ ∈ E ∗ }.
Pro
375 Arguing similarly as in [14, proof of Proposition 1], it can be shown that
376
Proposition 1 Let β > 0. If ψ is a Young function with its complementary function ψ
377 satisfying
t
378 (s −β ) ds < ∞,
ψ t > 0, (12)
0
379 then
t
380 (s −α ) ds < ∞,
ψ t > 0, holds true for any α ∈ (0, β]. (13)
0
ised
381 The following result complements similar results proved in [32,41], dealing with the
382 Pettis integrability of a product of Pettis integrable functions and real-valued functions.
383 Proposition 2 [14, Proposition 5] If x ∈ P ψ [I , E], then x(·)y(·) ∈ P[I , E] for every
384 y ∈ L ψ̃ .
385 A particular case of Proposition 2 is the following
386 Proposition 3 [32, Corollary 3.41] If x ∈ P[I , E], then x(·)y(·) ∈ P[I , E] for every
387 y ∈ L ∞.
388 Now, we need to present a direct consequence of [14, Theorem 2].
Rev
389 Lemma 5 Let α ∈ (0, 1) and β = m + η with m ≥ 0 and η ∈ (0, 1). If x ∈ P ψ [I , E],
390 where ψ is a Young function with its complement ψ̃ satisfying
t
391 ψ̃(s −ν ) ds < ∞, t > 0, where ν := max{1 − α, 1 − η}, (14)
0
392 then
393 Jβ Jα x = Jα Jβ x = Jβ+α x ∈ C[I , E w ]. (15)
394 In particular, the property (15) holds true for every x ∈ C[I , E w ].
395 Remark 2 Let us note here that if the condition (14) is satisfied for some ν > 0 then,
396 in view of Proposition 1, it is satisfied for any ν ∗ ∈ (0, ν]. We also remark, that such
397 a kind of results is not true for all ν simultaneously, so the fractional problems should
398 be investigated for arbitrary, but fixed α ∈ (0, 1) (results are not uniform with respect
399 to α).
400 Proof of Lemma 5. Reasoning as in [14, Lemma 2] we ensure that (15) holds true for
401 m = 0 , i.e., it holds for any β ∈ (0, 1). Consider now the case m ≥ 1 and define a
402 function y : I → R+ by
of

[log(t/s)]β+α−1
403 y(s) := s , s ∈ [1, t] , t > 1 (16)
0, otherwise.
404 Since y ∈ L ∞ (I ), immediately by Proposition 3 we obtain that Jβ+α makes sense
Pro
405 on P ψ [I , E]. By [14, Theorem 2.] we can conclude that Jα x ∈ C[I , E w ] holds true
406 for any x ∈ P ψ [I , E]. Again, by [14, Theorem 2], the composition Jβ Jα applied to
407 x ∈ P ψ [I , E] is well-defined on I with Jβ Jα x ∈ C[I , E w ].
408 If x ∈ P[I , E], then ϕx ∈ L 1 (I ) for any ϕ ∈ E ∗ . Consequently, by [23, Property
409 2.26], for any ϕ ∈ E ∗ we get
410 ϕ(Jβ+α x(t)) = Jβ+α ϕ(x(t)) = Jβ Jα ϕ(x(t)) = ϕ(Jβ Jα x(t)).
411 It means that
ϕ(Jβ+α x(t) − Jβ Jα x(t)) = 0, for every ϕ ∈ E ∗ .

ised
412
413 Hence
414 Jβ+α x(t) = Jβ Jα x(t) t ∈ I . (17)
415 On the other hand, as β ≥ 1, it can be easily seen that Jβ exists for any x ∈
416 P ψ [I ,
E]. Let us define u : I → R+ by

[log(t/s)]β−1
417 u(s) := s , s ∈ [1, t] , t > 1, (18)
0, otherwise.
Rev
418 Since u ∈ L ∞ (I ), it follows immediately by Proposition 3 that Jβ is well-defined

419 on P ψ [I , E]. Moreover, from [14, Theorem 2.] along with (14) we conclude Jη x ∈
420 C[I , E w ]. Hence ( [39, Lemma 2.2]) Jm Jη x ∈ C[I , E w ]. Arguing now in the same
421 manner as in the proof of (17) there is no difficulty to prove that Jβ x = Jm Jη x is also
422 well-defined for any x ∈ P ψ [I , E]. As we know that Jη x is weakly continuous on I ,
423 we get

424 Jα Jβ x = Jα Jm Jη x = Jm+α Jη x = Jm+α+η x.
425 Thus Jβ+α x = Jα Jβ x, which completes the proof.

426 Now we are ready to introduce the following announced new definition, which
427 will be useful in the equivalence results. We should stress, that despite in the case of
428 strong topology we can use a usual derivative, the case of weak topology requires new
429 derivatives, namely the pseudo-derivative which explains the change in the definition
430 derivatives.
431 Definition 5 We define the Riemann–Louville Hadamard type fractional-pseudo

432 derivative of order m + α, m ∈ N := {0, 1, 2, . . .}, α ∈ (0, 1) (or simply: RHFPD)
defined on the set of functions x ∈ P[I , E] by
of
433
434 Dpm+α x(t) := Dpm+1 J1−α

p x(t) (19)
435 Additionally, define the Caputo–Hadamard fractional-pseudo derivative of order

436 m + α, m ∈ N := {0, 1, 2, . . .}, α ∈ (0, 1) (or simply: NCHFPD) defined for
Pro
437 functions x ∈ P[I , E] as

d m+α
438 t x(t) := Dm
p Je
1−α
mphpx(t) (20)
dt p
439 Analogously we can define Caputo–Hadamard fractional-weak derivative ( or simply:

440 NCHFWD).
441 Obviously, unless the space E has total dual E ∗ (cf. [12]), NCHFPD is not necessary
442 uniquely determined. For m = 0 Definition 5 coincide with Definition 3. But for
m ≥ 1, Lemma 6 below describe some particular sufficient conditions that ensure
ised
443
444 the equivalence between the well familiar definition (4) and the newly introduced
445 definition (20) of the Caputo–Hadamard fractional derivatives.
446 Lemma 6 If x ∈ P[I , E] is a function having an integrable pseudo derivatives

j j
447 δp x, j = 1, 2, . . . , m +1, m ≥ 1 such that δp x(1) = 0, j = 1, 2, . . . , m +1, then
448 Definitions (5) and (3) of CHFPD coincide. It is also true in the case of NCHFWD if
449 x ∈ C[I , E w ].
450 Proof Our assumptions allow to apply [28, Theorem 5.1] and consequently we obtain

Rev
451 Jm+1 δpm+1 x(t) = Jm Jδp δpm x(t) = Jm δpm x(t) − δpm x(1) = Jm δpm x(t)

452 = Jm−1 Jδp δ m−1 x(t) = · · · = Jδp x(t) = x(t) − x(1).
453 It implies that

454 J1−α δp Jm+1 δpm+1 x = J1−α δp x.
455 Then

456 J1−α δp J Jm δpm+1 x = J1−α δp x
457 and in view of [39, Lemma 2.3] we conclude that
458 J1−α Jm δpm+1 x = J1−α δp x ⇒ Jm J1−α δpm+1 x = J1−α δp x.
459 If we operate by δpm on both sides of the above equation, then by applying Lemma 1
460 we get
461 J1−α δpm+1 x = δpm J1−α δp x,
of
462 what we wanted to prove. The case of NCHFWD is very similar.

463 Now, we are in the position to show that, for any β ≥ 1 there is an appropriate
464 Young function ψ (depending only on β), such that the operator NCHFPD of order
β is defined on P ψ [I , E] and it is the left-inverse of Jβ . In fact, the following lemma
Pro
465
466 provides sufficient conditions that ensure the equivalence result for differential and
467 integral problems for fractional derivatives (but in the sense of Definition 5) and for
468 weak-type of solutions).
469 Lemma 7 Assume that β = m + η, where m ≥ 1 with some η ∈ (0, 1). If ψ be a

470 Young function with its complementary function ψ̃ satisfying
t
471 ψ̃(s −ν ) ds < ∞, t > 0, ν := max{η, 1 − η}, (21)
0
d β β
ised
472 then t dt p
J is well-defined on P ψ [I , E]. If additionally the space E has total dual,
d β
473 then t dt p is the left-inverse of Jβ , where the fractional differential operator is taken
474 in the sense of Definition 5.
475 Proof Let x ∈ P ψ [I , E]. According to Lemma 5 and using formula (♦) we obtain

d β β
476 t J x = δpm J1−η δp Jβ x = δpm J1−η δp Jm Jη x = δpm J1−η Jm−1 Jη x.
dt p
Thus [14, Theorem 2.] along with (21) implies that Jη x ∈ C[I , E w ]. Consequently,
Rev
477
478 in view of Lemma 5, the weak continuity of Jη x result in

d β β
479 t J x = δpm Jm−η Jη x.
dt p
480 In view of Lemma 1 the above equality together with the aid of the weak continuity
481 of Jη x implies that

d β β
482 t J x = δpm−1 Jm−1−η Jη x = δpm−2 Jm−2−η Jη x = · · · = δp J1−η Jη x = δp J1−η+η x.
dt p
483 In the case when E has total dual, by formula (♦) and in view of Remark 1 we
484 obtain that

d β β
485 t J x = δp Jx = x. (22)
dt p
486

of
487 In what follows, we will show that the assertion of Lemma 7 does not work for
488 NCHFWD. In fact, in an arbitrary infinite-dimensional Banach space E, by the aid
489 of a counterexample we will prove that the result obtained in Lemma 7 is no longer
490 necessarily true for NCHFWD outside of the space C[I , E w ].
491 Counter-Example 2 Let E be an infinite-dimensional Banach space. Define the func-
Pro
492 tion g : [1, 2] → E by g(t) := f (t − 1) where the function f : [0, 1] → E is defined
493 as in [16, Theorem 1]. Reasoning as in the proof of this theorem we obtain that g(·) is
494 strongly measurable and Pettis integrable function on [1, 2], whose indefinite integral
495 is nowhere weakly differentiable on [1, 2].
With this in mind and since (21) holds true with the function ψ p (u) = |u|p , p > 45
p
496
497 if β = 1.2, a minor variations of the proof of the aforementioned theorem [38, proof
498 of Theorem 1] allows us to conclude that g(·) ∈ P ψ p [[1, 2], E].
499 Define now a new function x ∈ P ψ p [[1, 2], E] by x(t) := tg(t). Note that x ∈ /
500 C[[1, 2], E w ]. For otherwise, in view of Lemma 1, g would be weakly differentiable
501 in [1, 2].
ised
502 Thus, [14, Theorem 2] and Lemma 5, along with Lemma 1, result in
t
d 1.2 1.2
503 t J x = δω J (δω J) J x = δω J J x = tDω
0.8 0.2 0.8 0.2
g(s) ds.
dt ω 1
d 1.2 1.2
504 From which, it follows t dt ω
J x is not defined on [1, 2].
505 4 Application: equivalence of problems

Rev
506 Unless otherwise

d α stated, in the remaining part of this paper, the fractional differential
507 operator t dt p
is taken in the sense of Definition 5.
508 Consider the following Caputo–Hadamard fractional differential problem

d α
509 t x(t) = λ f (t), α ∈ (m, m + 1), m ≥ 1, t ∈ I , λ ∈ R, (23)
dt p
510 combined with an appropriate initial or boundary conditions.

511 Now we are in the position to prove that, there is an appropriate Young function ψ
512 for which the equivalence between (25) and (23) holds true whenever f ∈ P ψ [I , E].
513 Theorem 1 Let α ∈ (m, m + 1) with some m ≥ 1 and let ψ be a Young function with
514 satisfying
its complementary function ψ
t
515 (s −ν ) ds < ∞, t > 0, ν := max{m + 1 − α, α − m}.
ψ (24)
0
516 Assume, that E has total dual and that f ∈ P ψ [I , E]. Then a weakly continuous
517 function x : I → E is a solution of (23) if and only if x takes the integral form
of

m
cj
518 x(t) = x0 + (ln t)α− j
(α − j + 1)
j=1
519 +λJα f (t), α ∈ (m, m + 1), m ≥ 1, t ∈ I , λ ∈ R, (25)
Pro
520 with some constants x0 , c j , j = 1, 2, . . . , m depending only on a given boundary or
521 initial conditions.
522 Remark 3 Let us recall that the problem (25) is equivalent to the problem (23) in the
523 following sense: x ∈ C[I , E w ] is a solution of (25) if and only if x is a pseudo-
524 solution of (23). More precisely, x ∈ C[I , E w ] is called pseudo (resp. weak) solution
525 to the problem (23) if x admits a Caputo–Hadamard fractional pseudo ( resp. weak)
526 derivative such that

d α d α
527 t x = f, resp. t x= f on I .
ised
dt p dt ω
528 Proof Necessity. Let x ∈ C[I , E w ] satisfy (23). Since f ∈ P ψ [I , E], in view of [14,
529 Theorem 2.], we infer that the integral form (25) is well-defined. Also, we need to
530 note that the problem (23) reads as
531 Dα−1
p δp x(t) = λ f (t), t ∈ I .
532 Thus, reasoning as in a classical case E = R, [14, Theorem 2], Proposition 1 can be
533 combined with Lemma 5 in order to assure that
Rev

m
cj
534 δx(t) = (ln t)α−1− j + Jα−1 f (t).
(α − j)
j=1
535 Hence, in fact, the problem (25) appears.

536 On the other hand, in view of the above considerations, the assertion about suffi-
537 ciency is obvious: Indeed, in view of
⎡ ⎤

d α⎣
m
cj
538 t x0 + (ln t)α− j ⎦ = 0,
dt p (α − j + 1)
j=1
539 the assertion about sufficiency is a direct consequence of Lemma 7. This completes
540 the proof.

541 Let us remark that, our the assumption that E has total dual is really essential in
542 Theorem 1 and can not be omitted. Evidently, the following example points out the
543 fact that if E has no total dual, then the equivalence between (25) and (23) might fail
544 even if f is weakly absolutely continuous.
545 Example 4.1 Let E = B[1, 2] be the Banach space of all bounded functions on [1, 2]
of
546 which is known to have no total dual. The topological dual B ∗ [1, 2] consists of all
547 countable additive measures defined on the σ −algebra on [1, 2]. Precisely, every
2
548 bounded linear functional on B[1, 2] is of the form x −→ 1 x(t)dζ for some count-
549 able additive measure ζ.
550 Let θ denote the zero element of E and choose an arbitrary measurable J ⊂ [1, 2]
Pro
551 of positive measure. Define a weakly measurable function y : [1, 2] → E by

χ{t} , t ∈ J ,
552 y(t) :=
θ, t∈
/ J,
553 As mentioned above, any ϕ ∈ B ∗ [1, 2] may be identified with countable additive
554 measure ζ. Thus
2
555 ϕ y(t) = χ{t} dζ = 0, t ∈ [1, 2].
1
556 Obviously by the definition of the Pettis integral, we have y ∈ P[[1, 2], B[1, 2]]. In
ised
557 this connection, if we define f : [1, 2] → E by f (t) := t y(t), t ∈ [1, 2] it follows,
558 in view of Proposition 3, that f ∈ P[[1, 2], B[1, 2]] with ϕ f = 0 holds for every
559 ϕ ∈ E ∗ . In other words, f ∈ P ψ [[1, 2], B[1, 2]] for any Young function ψ. Hence
560 [14, Theorem 2] yields the existence of Jα f on [1, 2].
561 Now, we consider the problem (23) with α ∈ (1, 2) and f (t) = t y(t), t ∈
562 [1, 2]. Accordingly to Theorem 1, we know that any weakly continuous solution to
563 the problem (23) should take the integral form
c1
564 x(t) = x0 + (ln t)α−1 + λJα f , t ∈ [1, 2]. (26)
(α)
Rev
565 Consequently, putting in mind Lemma 5 and arguing similarly as in the proof of
566 Lemma 7 there is no difficulty to prove that
t
d α
567 t x(t) = 0 + δp J2−α δp JJα−1 f (t, x(t)) = δp J f (t, x(t)) = tDp y(s) ds.
dt p 1
568 (27)
569 According to [32, Example 9.1], we know that the indefinite Pettis integral of y on
570 [1, 2] has two pseudo derivatives y and θ which differ on a set of positive measure.
571 Consequently, we deduce that on a set of positive measure x in (26) fails to solve (23)
572 what one would expect.
573 Before embarking on the next example, we recall ( [25, page 14]) that the Young
574 function ψ defined by ψ(s) := e|s| − |s| − 1, has the Young complementary function
575 ψ̃ = (1 + |u|) log(1 + |u|) − |u| satisfying (24) for every ν ∈ (0, 1) (cf. [14, Example
576 1]). In this case, in view of [14, Theorem 2]), we conclude that Jν f ∈ C[I , E w ] holds
577 true for any f ∈ P ψ [I , E] and any order ν ∈ (0, 1).
578 Example 4.2 For the sake of simplicity, let α ∈ (1, 2). Put E :=
2 ([1, e]) which is
579 non-separable Hilbert space and consists of 2of all real functions x on [1, e] vanishing
off a countable set such that t∈[1,e] |x(t)| < ∞, equipped with the inner product
of
580

581 < x, y >:= t∈[1,e] x(t)y(t).
582 Define a function f : [1, e] →
2 ([1, e]) by f (t) := et , where et : [1, e] →
583
([1, e]) is the countably nonzero functions on [1, e] defined by
2

1 if s = t,
Pro
584 et (s) :=
0 if s = t.
585 This function et is Pettis, but not Bochner integrable on [1,

e] (andit is not even
∗
586 strongly measurable on [1, e], cf. [18,46]) and for any ϕ ∈
2 ([1, e]) ∼=
2 (I ) we
587 have

0 if τ = t,
588 ϕet = ϕ(τ )et (τ ) =
ϕ(t) if τ = t.
τ ∈[1,e]
∗
589 That is, ϕet is only countably nonzero for each ϕ ∈
2 ([1, e]) . Hence ϕet ≡ 0 a.e.
ised
590 (with respect to the Lebesgue measure). Obviously, f ∈ P ψ [[1, e],
2 ([1, e]] with
591 ψ(s) := e|s| − |s| − 1. Also, in view of [39, Lemma 2.1], f has a HFPI of all order
592 α ∈ (1, 2) on [1, e] with Jα f = 0. According to Theorem 1, the problem (23) withα ∈
593 (1, 2) and f (t) = et , admits weakly continuous solution x ∈ C [1, e],
2 ([1, e]) w ,
594 where x takes the integral form (25). Thus
c1
595 x(t) = x0 + (ln t)α−1 + 0, t ∈ [1, e]. (28)
(α)
∗
596 For any ϕ ∈
2 ([1, e]) , we have
Rev
dϕx(t) c1
597 δϕx(t) = t = (ln t)α−2 ,
dt (α − 1)
598 for any t ∈ [1, e]. Consequently, by [23, Property 2.24] we get
599 J2−α δϕx(t) = 0 ⇒ δJ2−α δϕx(t) = 0, t ∈ [1, e].
600 Whence

601 δϕ J2−α δp x(t) = δJ2−α ϕ (δx(t)) = δJ2−α δϕx(t) = 0, t ∈ [1, e].
602 It gives
∗
d α
603 t ϕx(t) = 0, for all t ∈ [1, e] and all ϕ ∈
2 ([1, e]) .
dt
604 Meanwhile, we have ϕet = 0 a.e. on [1, e]. Combining all the estimates, we obtain
∗
d α
605 t ϕx(t) = λϕet a.e. on [1, e], holds for all ϕ ∈
2 ([1, e]) .
of
dt
606 Therefore x in (28) is a pseudo- (but not a weak or strong) solution to the problem
607 (23).
608 Analogously, as in [37, Theorem 2] it can be shown a similar result as stated in
Pro
609 Theorem 1, but for CHFWD and under more restrictive conditions imposed on f .
610 However, in view of Counter-Example 2, the result obtained in Theorem 1 has no
611 analogue for the NCHFWD. For this reason, in order to cover the full scope of this
612 paper, it remains to cover the case of NCHFWD. To do this we first introduce the
613 following
614 Lemma 8 Let β = m + η with some m ≥ 0 and η ∈ (0, 1). Suppose that a function
615 x : I → E has Pettis integrable weak derivative on I such that Dω x ∈ P ψ [I , E],
616 where ψ is a Young function with its complementary function ψ̃ and the latter satisfies
t
ψ̃(s −ν ) ds < ∞, t > 0, ν := max{η, 2 − η}.
ised
617 (29)
0
618 Then

d β
619 t x(t) = Dβω (x(t) − x(1)) . (30)
dt ω
620 Proof First, we observe that under the assumption on x together with [28, Theorem
621 5.1] and Proposition 3 we get
t
Rev
622 x(t) = x(1) + Dω x(s) ds = x(1) + Jδω x(t), t ∈ I .

1
623 Moreover, by [14, Theorem 2] we deduce that J1−η δω x ∈ C[I , E w ]. In view of [14,
624 Lemma 4] and by Lemma 5, we obtain that

d m+η
625 t x = δωm (Dηω Jη )J1−η δω x = (δωm Dηω )(Jη J1−η )δω x
dt ω
626 = (δωm+1 J1−η )Jη+1−η δω x = Dωm+η (Jδω x) = Dωm+η (x − x1 ).
627

628 Remark 4 It is well-known that for finite-dimensional spaces E the weak absolute
629 continuity of x already implies that x has Pettis integrable pseudo derivative. But
630 in general, as mentioned before, there are E-valued weakly absolutely continuous
631 functions with no pseudo (trivially no weak) derivatives. The question of whether
632 weak absolute continuity of a E -valued function implies the existence of integrable
633 weak derivative is related to the geometry of E. However, let us recall that (cf. [28,
634 Theorem 5.1]) a function y : I → E is weakly absolutely continuous on I and
635 has weak-derivative on I if and only if y is indefinite Pettis integral of some weakly
of
636 continuous function.
637 Occasionally, it is worth to remark that the new Definition (5) of the NCHFWD has
638 the disadvantage that it completely loses its meaning if x fails to have Pettis integrable
639 weak derivative. For this reason, we use the property given in Lemma 8 to define the
640 NCHFWD of order β > 0 in general, i.e., we put
641
642
643
644

t
d
dt
β
Pro
x(t) := Dβω (x(t) − x(1)) .
Theorem 2 If f ∈ C[I , E w ], then the problem (23) (with the definition of NCHFWD
taken in the sense of Definition 31) admits a weak solution x ∈ C[I , E w ].
(31)
645 Proof Let f ∈ C[I , E w ] and assume that x ∈ C[I , E w ] be given by (25). Note that
646 the continuity of f on I , in view of (25), yields that
ised

m
cj
647 x(t) − x(1) = (ln t)α− j + λJα f (t), t > 1.
(α − j + 1)
j=1
648 If we apply Definition NCHFWD to the problem (23) we arrive at

⎛ ⎞

d α
m
c
x(t) = Dαω (x(t) − x(1)) = Dαω ⎝ (ln t)α− j + λJα f (t)⎠
j
649 t
dt ω (α − j + 1)
j=1
=0 + λDαω Jα f (t) = λ f (t).
Rev
650
651 Here we have used [14, Lemma 4]. It is precisely what we wish to show.

652 5 Multivalued problems
653 In order to complete the subject of equivalence differential and integral forms let us
654 present some comments about multivalued fractional problems. In such a case we
655 require multivalued integrals, here we restrict our attention to the Hadamard-type
656 multivalued Pettis integral. All basic auxiliary notions and results such integrals can
657 be found in [14].
658 A general case of differential inclusions x (t) ∈ F(t, x(t)) a.e on I leads us to
659 integral inclusions of the form (cf. [21, Section 4]):
t+h
660 x(t + h) − x(t) ∈ (M) F(τ, x(τ )) dτ , for all t, t + h ∈ I = [a, b],
t
t+h
661 so x(t + h) − x(t) = (M) t h(τ ) dτ for some (M)-integrable h ∈ F(·, x(·)) or,
662 under some additional assumptions, in the case of the weak topology
of
t+h
663 ϕx(t + h) − ϕx(t) = s(ϕ, F(τ, x(τ ))) dτ , for all t, t + h ∈ I = [a, b],
t
664 where (M) stands for any multivalued integral associated with the considered problem
Pro
665 (possibly fractional, cf. [14]) and s(·, F) is a support function defined below. Let
666 us briefly note, that such an integral form follows from the fact, that we expect a.e.
667 differentiable solutions x.
668 From previous sections, we infer, that in the case of weak fractional derivatives
669 and integrals we should be very careful even it the single-valued case, i.e., F(t, x) =
670 { f (t, x)}. This multivalued form is even better to notice all the problems with a lack
671 of differentiability of solutions.
672 Moreover, let us observe, that the above-presented form does not allow to use of the
673 methods discussed in this paper and is usually avoided in existence results. To the best
674 of our knowledge, an integral representation in the above form for some multivalued
675 differential problems was proved for the first time in [21, Theorem 6].
ised
676 Under suitable set of assumptions (integrability of all selections of superpositions
677 F(·, x(·)), for instance) we can expect, that solutions should satisfy multivalued inte-
678 gral equation of the form:
t
679 x(t) ∈ x0 + g(t) + (M) F(τ, x(τ )) dτ , for all t ∈ I = [a, b].
s
t
680 It means, that x(t) = x0 + g(t) + (M) a h(τ ) dτ for some integrable h ∈ F(·, x(·)).
681 To ensure the equivalence of differential and integral problems we should expect, that
682 this indefinite integral is differentiable in a required sense. For multivalued mappings
Rev
683 with values in infinite-dimensional spaces we should be very careful. If we use the
684 standard approach via Aumann-type integrals, even one selection with the property
685 described in previous sections could be sufficient to have a lack of equivalence for
686 differential and integral inclusions.
687 In this paper, we study fractional differential inclusions with Hadamard derivatives,
688 so let us restrict our attention to the Hadamard type multi-valued problems.
689 Remark 5 The key point is to fully investigate the set of all integrals of selections
690 for multivalued superposition operators F(·, x(·)) with x properly chosen from the
691 space of solutions. Our consideration for the case of single-valued problems implies,
692 in particular, that the presence of even one selection being as in our counterexamples
693 means that we are able to find a solution for the multivalued integral problem, but
694 not for differential inclusions. Thus we need to concentrate on the situation when it is
695 possible to get the equivalence for both kinds of problems.
696 Let us recall some known facts (see [14]). By cwk(E) we denote the family of all
697 nonempty convex weakly compact, subsets of E. For every C ∈ cwk(E) the support
698 function of C is denoted by s(·, C) and defined on X ∗ by s(ϕ, C) = supx∈C ϕx, for
699 each ϕ ∈ X ∗ . We say that F is scalarly integrable (Dunford integrable) if for any
700 ϕ ∈ E ∗ s(ϕ, F(·)) is an integrable function.
Definition 6 ( [14]) Let F : I → cwk(E). The Hadamard-type fractional Aumann-
of
701
702 Pettis integral (shortly (HAP) integral) of F of order α > 0 is defined by

t $
1 t α−1 f (s)
703 (H A P) F(s) ds := log ds : f ∈ S FH A P , (32)
I (α) 1 s s
704
705
706
707
708
α > 0 provided that this set is not empty.
1
t
Pro
where S FH A P denotes the set of all Hadamard-Pettis integrable selections of F of order
Lemma 9 ( [14, Lemma 5]) Let α ∈ (0, 1]. Assume, that ψ is a Young function
satisfying limu→∞ ψ(u)
u = ∞ and its complementary Young function ψ satisfies
(s −ν ) ds < ∞, t ∈ [1, e], ν = max{1 − α, α}.

ψ
709 Let F : I → cwk(E) be measurable and scalarly integrable multifunction. Then the
ised
710 following statements are equivalent:
711 (a1) every measurable selection of F is Hadamard-Pettis integrable of order α > 0,
712 (a2) for every measurable subset A of I the (HAP) integral I A belongs to cwk(E)
713 and, for every ϕ ∈ E ∗ , one has
α−1 s(ϕ,F(s))
714 s(ϕ, I A ) = A log st s ds.
715 This lemma gives us a sufficient condition for the equivalence of problems. Namely,
716 the thesis (a1) ensures us, that we can simultaneously control single-valued integral
717 problems and then we can apply our Theorem 1 for any measurable selection:
718 Corollary 1 Let α ∈ (m, m + 1) with some m ≥ 1 and let ψ be a Young function with
satisfying
its complementary function ψ
Rev
719
t
720 (s −ν ) ds < ∞, t > 0, ν := max{m + 1 − α, α − m}.
ψ
0
721 Assume, that E has total dual and that for every weakly continuous function x : I → E
722 one has F(·, x(·)) : I → cwk(E) be measurable and scalarly integrable multifunction
723 such that for every measurable subset A of I the (H A P) A F(s, x(s)) ds ∈ cwk(E)
724 and, for every ϕ ∈ E ∗ , one has

t α−1 s(ϕ, F(s, x(s))
725 s(ϕ, (H A P) F(s, x(s)) ds) = log ds.
A A s s
726 If S FH A P ⊂ P ψ [I , E], then a weakly continuous function x : I → E is a solution

727 of (23) if and only if x satisfies the integral inclusion

m t
cj
728 x(t) ∈ x0 + (ln t)α− j + λ · (H A P) F(s, x(s)) ds
(α − j + 1) 0
j=1
729 or simply in the language of selections
of

m
cj
730 x(t) = x0 + (ln t)α− j + λJα f (t), (33)
(α − j + 1)
j=1
731 for α ∈ (m, m + 1), m ≥ 1, t ∈ I , λ ∈ R, and for some f ∈ S FH A P and with

some constants x0 , c j , j = 1, 2, . . . , m depending only on a given boundary or initial
Pro
732
733 conditions.
734 To facilitate the reading of Corollary 1 let us present some sufficient conditions
735 for F. The assumption S FH A P ⊂ P ψ [I , E] holds true, in particular, when we have a
736 multivalued dominant from cwk(P ψ [I , E]). Some sufficient conditions for the sec-
737 ond important assumption about the values of (HAP) integrals are presented in the
738 following proposition:
739 Proposition 4 ([14, Proposition 9]) Let α ∈ (0, 1]. Assume, that ψ is a Young function
740 satisfying limu→∞ ψ(u)
u = ∞ and its complementary Young function ψ satisfies

ised
t
741 (s −ν ) ds < ∞, t ∈ [1, e], ν = max{1 − α, α}.
ψ
1
742 Then for any (HAP) multifunction F : I → cwk(E) with s(ϕ, F(·)) ∈ P ψ (I , E),
743 for every ϕ ∈ E ∗ and any measurable subset A of I we get (H A P) A F(s) ds ⊂
744 cwk(C[I , E ω ]).
745 Let us note that the set S FH A P of all Hadamard-Pettis integrable selections of F
746 is nonempty and sequentially compact for the topology of pointwise convergence
on
747 L∞ ⊗ E ∗ and that, as in a classical case, the multivalued integral (H A P) I F(s) ds
748 is convex. A detailed result about non-emptiness and properties of f ∈ S FH A P can be
Rev
749 found in [14, Lemma 6].
750 6 Conclusion
751 As it was claimed above, all the results obtained in Sects. 3 and 4 are still valid
d α
752 if we replace the Caputo–Hadamard fractional differential operators t dt by the
dα
753 standard Caputo one dt α . Since the weak absolute continuity of a function x already
754 yields the existence of the Henstock–Kurzweil–Pettis integrability of x (cf. [13]), the
755 equivalence in view of [37, Theorem 2] holds true in the case of the classical definition
756 of the Caputo-type fractional derivative.
757 References
758 1. Abbas, S., Benchohra, M., Henderson, J.: Weak solutions for implicit fractional differential equations
759 of Hadamard type. Adv. Dyn. Syst. Appl. 11, 1–13 (2016)
760 2. Abdalla, A.M., Cichoń, K., Salem, H.A.H.: On positive solutions of a system of equations generated by
761 Hadamard fractional operators. Adv. Differ. Equ. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-020-02702-
762 0
763 3. Asawasamrit, S., Ntouyas, S., Tariboon, J., Nithiarayaphaks, W.W.: Coupled systems of sequential
764 Caputo and Hadamard fractional differential equations with coupled separated boundary conditions.
765 Symmetry 10, 701 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3390/sym10120701
of
766 4. Agarwal, P., Choi, J.: Fractional calculus operators and their image formulas. J. Korean Math. Soc.
767 53(5), 1183–1210 (2016)
768 5. Agarwal, P., Choi, J., Paris, R.B.: Extended Riemann–Liouville fractional derivative operator and its
769 applications. J. Nonlinear Sci. Appl. 8, 451–466 (2015)
770 6. Agarwal, R.P., Lupulescu, V., O’Regan, D., Rahman, G.: Weak solutions for fractional differential
771 equations in nonreflexive Banach spaces via Riemann–Pettis integrals. Math. Nachr. 289, 395–409
772 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1002/mana.201400010
Pro
773 7. Ahmad, B., Ntouyas, S.K.: Some fractional-order one-dimensional semi-linear problems under non-
774 local integral boundary conditions. RACSAM Rev. R. Acad. Cienc. Exactas F’s. Nat. Ser. A Mat. 110,
775 159–172 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-015-0228-4
776 8. Ahmad, B., Ntouyas, S.K.: An existence theorem for fractional hybrid differential inclusions of
777 Hadamard type with Dirichlet boundary conditions. Abstr. Appl. Anal. (2014), Art. ID 705809
778 9. Ahmad, B., Ntouyas, S.K., Alsaedi, A.: On nonlinear neutral Liouville–Caputo-type fractional differ-
779 ential equations with Riemann–Louville integral boundary conditions. J. Appl. Anal. (2019). https://
780 doi.org/10.1515/jaa-2019-0013
781 10. Benchohra, M., Hamania, S., Ntouyas, S.K.: Boundary value problems for differential equations with
782 fractional order and nonlocal conditions. Nonlinear Anal. 71, 2391–2396 (2009)
783 11. Benchohran, M., Graef, J., Mostefai, F.: Weak solutions for nonlinear fractional differential equations
784 on reflexive Banach spaces. Electron. J. Qual. Theory Differ. Equ. 54, 1–10 (2010)
785 12. Cichoń, M.: Weak solutions of differential equations in Banach spaces. Discuss. Math. Differ. Incl.
ised
786 Control Optim. 15, 5–14 (1995)
787 13. Cichoń, M.: On solutions of differential equations in Banach spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 60, 651–667
788 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.na.2004.09.041
789 14. Cichoń, M., Salem, H.A.H.: On the solutions of Caputo–Hadamard Pettis-type fractional differential
790 equations. RACSAM Rev. R. Acad. Cienc. Exactas F’s. Nat. Ser. A Mat. 113, 3031–3053 (2019).
791 https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-015-0228-4
792 15. Derbazi, C., Hammochi, H., Benchohra, M.: Weak solutions for some nonlinear fractional differential
793 equations with fractional integral boundary conditions. J. Nonlinear Funct. Anal. (2019), Art. ID 7
794 16. Dilworth, J., Girardi, M.: Nowhere weak differentiability of the Pettis integral. Quaest. Math. 18,
795 365–380 (1995)
796 17. Egea, S.M., Topala, F.S.: Existence of multiple positive solutions for semipositone fractional boundary
797 value problems. Filomat 33(3), 749–759 (2019)
798 18. Geitz, R.F.: Pettis integration. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 82, 81–86 (1981)
Rev
799 19. Gou, H., Li, Y.: Weak solutions for fractional differential equations via Henstock–Kurzweil–Pettis
800 integrals. IJNSNS (2019). https://doi.org/10.1515/ijnsns-2018-0174
801 20. Jarad, F., Abdeljawad, T., Baleanu, D.: Caputo-type modification of the Hadamard fractional deriva-
802 tives. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2012, 142 (2012)
803 21. Jarnik, J., Kurzweil, J.: Integral of multivalued mappings and its connection with differential relations.
804 Časopis pro Pěst. Matematiky 108, 8–28 (1983)
805 22. Katatbeha, Q., Al-Omar, A.: Existence and uniqueness of mild and classical solutions to fractional
806 order Hadamard-type Cauchy problem. J. Nonlinear Sci. Appl. 9, 827–835 (2016)
807 23. Kilbas, A., Srivastava, H.M., Trujillo, J.J.: Theory and Applications of Fractional Differential Equa-
808 tions. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2006)
809 24. Kiymaz, I.O., Çetinkaya, A., Agarwal, P.: An extension of Caputo fractional derivative operator and
810 its applications. J. Nonlinear Sci. Appl. 9, 3611–3621 (2016)
811 25. Krasnosel’skii, M.A., Rutitskii, Yu.: Convex Functions and Orlicz Spaces. Noordhoff, Gröningen
812 (1961)
813 26. Li, B., Gou, H.: Weak solutions nonlinear fractional integrodifferential equations in nonreflexive
814 Banach spaces. Bound. Value Prob. (2016), Art. No. 209
815 27. Musiał, K.: Topics in the theory of Pettis integration. Rend. Istit. Mat. Univ. Trieste 23, 177–262 (1991)
816 28. Naralenkov, K.: On Denjoy type extension of the Pettis integral. Czechoslov. Math. J. 60(135), 737–750
817 (2010)
818 29. Ntouyas, S.K., Tariboon, J.: Boundary value problems for fractional differential equations and inclu-
819 sions with nonlocal and Riemann–Louville integral boundary conditions. Commun. Appl. Anal. 19,
820 605–622 (2015)
821 30. O’Regan, D., Stanek, S.: Fractional boundary value problems with singularities in space variables.
822 Nonlinear Dyn. 71, 641–652 (2013)
of
823 31. Pazy, A.: A class of semi-linear equations of evolution. Isr. J. Math. 20, 23–36 (1975)
824 32. Pettis, B.J.: On integration in vector spaces. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 44, 277–304 (1938)
825 33. Ross, B., Samko, S.G., Love, E.R.: Functions that have no first order derivative might have fractional
826 derivatives of any order less than one. Real Anal. Exch. 20, 140–157 (1994)
827 34. Salem, H.A.H.: On the fractional order m-point boundary value problem in reflexive Banach spaces
828 and weak topologies. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 224, 565–572 (2009)
829 35. Salem, H.A.H.: On the fractional calculus in abstract spaces and their applications to the Dirichlet-type
Pro
830 problem of fractional order. Comput. Math. Appl. 59, 1278–1293 (2010)
831 36. Salem, H.A.H.: On the theory of fractional calculus in the Pettis-function spaces. J. Funct. Spaces
832 (2018), Art. ID 8746148
833 37. Salem, H.A.H.: On functions without pseudo derivatives having fractional pseudo derivatives. Quaest.
834 Math. 42, 1237–1252 (2019). https://doi.org/10.2989/16073606.2018.1523247
835 38. Salem, H.A.H.: Weakly absolutely continuous functions without weak, but fractional weak derivatives.
836 J. Pseudo Diff. Oper. Appl. 10, 941–954 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11868-019-00274-6
837 39. Salem, H.A.H.: Hadamard-type fractional calculus in Banach spaces. RACSAM Rev. R. Acad. Cienc.
838 Exactas Fís. Nat. Ser. A Mat. 113, 987–1006 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-018-0531-y
839 40. Salem, H.A.H., Cichoń, M.: On solutions of fractional order boundary value problems with integral
840 boundary conditions in Banach spaces. J. Funct. Spaces Appl. 1, 2 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1155/
841 2013/428094
842 41. Salem, H.A.H., Cichoń, M.: Second order three-point boundary value problems in abstract spaces.
ised
843 Acta Math. Appl. Sin. Engl. Ser. 30, 1131–1152 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10255-014-0429-1
844 42. Salem, H.A.H., El-Sayed, A.M.A., Moustafa, O.L.: A note on the fractional calculus in Banach spaces.
845 Stud. Sci. Math. Hungar. 42, 115–130 (2005)
846 43. Salem, H.A.H., Väth, M.: An abstract Gronwall lemma and application to global existence results for
847 functional differential and integral equations of fractional order. J. Integral Equ. Appl. 16, 411–429
848 (2004)
849 44. Samko, S., Kilbas, A., Marichev, O.L.: Fractional Integrals and Derivatives. Gordon and Breach Science
850 Publisher, Washington (1993)
851 45. Shammakh, W.: A study of Caputo-Hadamard-type fractional differential equations with nonlocal
852 boundary conditions. J. Funct. Spaces (2016), Art. ID 7057910
853 46. Solomon, D.: On differentiability of vector-valued functions of a real variables. Stud. Math. 29, 1–4
854 (1967)
855 47. Solomon, D.W.: Denjoy Integration in Abstract Spaces. Memoirs of the American Mathematical Soci-
Rev
856 ety (1969)

857 48. Tariboon, J., Cuntavepanit, A., Ntouyas, S.K., Nithiarayaphaks, W.: Separated boundary value prob-
858 lems of sequential Caputo and Hadamard fractional differential equations. J. Funct. Spaces 1, 2 (2018).
859 https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/6974046
860 49. Thiramanus, P., Ntouyas, S.K., Tariboon, J.: Positive solutions for Hadamard fractional differential
861 equations on infinite domain. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2016, 83 (2016)
862 50. Vivek, D., Kanagarajan, K., Sivasundaram, S.: On the behavior of solutions of Hilfer-Hadamard-type
863 fractional neutral pantograph equations with nonlocal boundary conditions. Commun. Appl. Anal. 22,
864 211–232 (2018)
865 51. Wang, G., Liu, S., Zhang, L.: Eigenvalue problem for nonlinear fractional differential equations with
866 integral boundary conditions. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2014, Art. ID 916260, (2014)
867 52. Yukunthorn, W., Suantai, S., Ntouyas, S.K., Tariboon, J.: Boundary value problems for impulsive
868 multi-order Hadamard fractional differential equations. Bound. Value Probl. 2015, 148 (2015)
869 53. Zhai, C., Wang, W., Hongyu, L.: A uniqueness method to a new Hadamard fractional differential system
870 with four-point boundary conditions. J. Inequal. Appl. (2018). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13660-018-
871 1801-0
872 54. Zhang, X., Liu, Z., Peng, H., Zhang, X., Yang, S.: The general solution of differential equations with
873 Caputo–Hadamard fractional derivatives and noninstantaneous impulses. Adv. Math. Phys. (2017).
874 https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/3094173
875 Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps
876 and institutional affiliations.
of
Pro
ised
Rev

2020 345 OnlinePDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2020 345 OnlinePDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

J. Pseudo-Differ. Oper. Appl.

On the lack of equivalence between differential and

Mieczysław Cichoń1 · Hussein A. H. Salem2

23 Keywords Fractional calculus · Pettis integral · Orlicz space · Pseudo solution

24 Mathematics Subject Classification 26A33 · 26B35 · 34A08

99 space of continuous functions from I to E with its weak topology.

105 For complementation, we define I α x(0) := 0 and I := I 1 . Beside RFPI, we define

109 We also define Jα x(1) := 0 and J := J1 .

119 Definition 2 ([12,27,32]) Let x : I → E be a function such that ϕx be a.e. differ-

(ϕx(t)) = ϕ y(t) for every t ∈ I \N (ϕ).

132 of a weakly differentiable function is uniquely determined (cf. [27]). It is no longer

180 combined with an appropriate initial or boundary conditions.

185 where c j , j = 1, 2, . . . , m + 1 are arbitrary constants depend only on the boundary or

189 In this situation, in view of Lemma 1, we conclude that

207 It is well-known that the continuity of f on [0, 1] guarantees the existence of I α f on

210 I α f (t) = W(t) − W(0), t ∈ [0, 1],

245 where ϑ : R → R is arbitrary periodic function with period 1 and is Hölderian of

263 Now, define f : [0, 1] → c0 by f (t) := {c−n f n (t)}. Obviously, since { f n } ⊂

268 Hölderian of order μ. Evidently, it is well-known that for every ϕ ∈ c0∗ ∼

297 Obviously, if φ ∈ L ∞ [1, e] ∼= L ∗1 [1, e] is corresponding to ϕ ∈ L ∗1 [1, e], then

302 Jα−m f (t) = χ(0,t] . (10)

303 It can be verified by letting φ ∈ L ∞ [1, e] corresponding to ϕ ∈ L ∗1 [1, e] and carrying

339 By Lemma 1 we get

345 3 Hadamard-type fractional operators in abstract spaces

369 we define the Young complementary function ψ̃ of ψ by ψ̃(u) := supv≥0 {|u|v−ψ(v)}.

374 P ψ [I , E] := {x ∈ P[I , E] : ϕx ∈ L ψ , holds for every ϕ ∈ E ∗ }.

393 Jβ Jα x = Jα Jβ x = Jβ+α x ∈ C[I , E w ]. (15)

404 Since y ∈ L ∞ (I ), immediately by Proposition 3 we obtain that Jβ+α makes sense

410 ϕ(Jβ+α x(t)) = Jβ+α ϕ(x(t)) = Jβ Jα ϕ(x(t)) = ϕ(Jβ Jα x(t)).

411 It means that

ϕ(Jβ+α x(t) − Jβ Jα x(t)) = 0, for every ϕ ∈ E ∗ .

414 Jβ+α x(t) = Jβ Jα x(t) t ∈ I . (17)

418 Since u ∈ L ∞ (I ), it follows immediately by Proposition 3 that Jβ is well-defined

425 Thus Jβ+α x = Jα Jβ x, which completes the proof.

431 Definition 5 We define the Riemann–Louville Hadamard type fractional-pseudo

434 Dpm+α x(t) := Dpm+1 J1−α

435 Additionally, define the Caputo–Hadamard fractional-pseudo derivative of order

439 Analogously we can define Caputo–Hadamard fractional-weak derivative ( or simply:

446 Lemma 6 If x ∈ P[I , E] is a function having an integrable pseudo derivatives

453 It implies that

457 and in view of [39, Lemma 2.3] we conclude that

458 J1−α Jm δpm+1 x = J1−α δp x ⇒ Jm J1−α δpm+1 x = J1−α δp x.

461 J1−α δpm+1 x = δpm J1−α δp x,

469 Lemma 7 Assume that β = m + η, where m ≥ 1 with some η ∈ (0, 1). If ψ be a

478 in view of Lemma 5, the weak continuity of Jη x result in

491 Counter-Example 2 Let E be an infinite-dimensional Banach space. Define the func-

505 4 Application: equivalence of problems

506 Unless otherwise

510 combined with an appropriate initial or boundary conditions.

535 Hence, in fact, the problem (25) appears.

585 This function et is Pettis, but not Bochner integrable on [1,

599 J2−α δϕx(t) = 0 ⇒ δJ2−α δϕx(t) = 0, t ∈ [1, e].

608 Analogously, as in [37, Theorem 2] it can be shown a similar result as stated in

622 x(t) = x(1) + Dω x(s) ds = x(1) + Jδω x(t), t ∈ I .

648 If we apply Definition NCHFWD to the problem (23) we arrive at

652 5 Multivalued problems

702 Pettis integral (shortly (HAP) integral) of F of order α > 0 is defined by

(s −ν ) ds < ∞, t ∈ [1, e], ν = max{1 − α, α}.

726 If S FH A P ⊂ P ψ [I , E], then a weakly continuous function x : I → E is a solution

729 or simply in the language of selections

731 for α ∈ (m, m + 1), m ≥ 1, t ∈ I , λ ∈ R, and for some f ∈ S FH A P and with

749 found in [14, Lemma 6].

856 ety (1969)

(ϕx(t)) = ϕ y(t) for every t ∈ I \N (ϕ).

(s −ν ) ds < ∞, t ∈ [1, e], ν = max{1 − α, α}.