Fuzzy Differential Equations With Riemann-Liouville Generalized Fractional Integrable Impulses

JID:FSS AID:8020 /FLA [m3SC+; v1.341] P.
1 (1-27)
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
Fuzzy Sets and Systems ••• (••••) •••–•••
www.elsevier.com/locate/fss
Fuzzy differential equations with Riemann-Liouville generalized

fractional integrable impulses
Truong Vinh An a , Ngo Van Hoa b,c,∗
a Faculty of Applied Sciences, Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology and Education, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
b Division of Computational Mathematics and Engineering, Institute for Computational Science, Ton Duc Thang University, Ho Chi Minh City,
Vietnam
c Faculty of Mathematics and Statistics, Ton Duc Thang University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
Received 29 May 2019; received in revised form 26 November 2020; accepted 7 January 2021
Abstract
We introduce a new class of fuzzy differential equations with noninstantaneous impulses represented by the Riemann-Liouville
generalized fractional integral. We investigate the existence of the solution and two types of Hyers-Ulam-Rassias stability of the
aforementioned problem via the Banach fixed-point theorem. Some illustrate examples are also presented.
© 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Fuzzy-type Riemann-Liouville generalized fractional integral; Impulsive fuzzy differential equations; Hyers-Ulam-Rassias stability
1. Introduction
The theory of impulsive differential equations (IDEs) is an important tool for describing many practical processes
in dynamic systems in which abrupt, interrupted jumps happen. Formally, two main types of impulses are proposed in
our survey of differential equations: instantaneous and noninstantaneous impulses. The first type is used to illustrate
processes in dynamic systems related to short-term disturbances, the duration of is negligible compared with the total
time of the entire process. Some recent contributions include the monographs of Benchohra and Berhoun [9], Fan
[13], Feckan et al. [14], and Guo and Jiang [16]. The second type is proposed to represent the dynamics of processes
in a system involving long-term perturbations that begin at a determined time and are maintained over a limited
time interval. This theory has been developed very recently, and many applications of this subject have also been
introduced; see, for example, Hernández and O’Regan [17], Pierri et al. [32], Wang and Zhang [48], Sousa et al. [42],
and Zada et al. [49].
* Corresponding author at: Division of Computational Mathematics and Engineering, Institute for Computational Science, Ton Duc Thang
University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
E-mail address: ngovanhoa@tdtu.edu.vn (N.V. Hoa).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fss.2021.01.001
0165-0114/© 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
JID:FSS AID:8020 /FLA [m3SC+; v1.341] P.2 (1-27)
T.V. An and N.V. Hoa Fuzzy Sets and Systems ••• (••••) •••–•••
Recently, the field of fuzzy analysis and fuzzy differential equations (FDEs) has attempted to deal with many com-
puter and mathematical models affected by uncertain or vagueness pervade factors. Generally, investigation of the
theory of FDEs has been based on two popular approaches: the generalized Hukuhara (gH) difference [44] and the
granular difference [25,31] between fuzzy sets. In the first one, there has been significant theoretical work, and a large
number of applications of these theories have been considered by, for example, Bede et al. [6,7], Chalco-Cano et al.
[10], Costa et al. [11], Gasilov et al. [15], Stefanini and Bede [43], Ahmad et al. [1], Allahviranloo et al. [4], Lupulescu
[23], Malinowski [24], Nieto and Rodríguez-López, [30], Salahshour et al. [35–38], and Ahmadian et al. [3]. Specifi-
cally, the fundamental results in the theory of fuzzy analysis via the gH difference were developed in [6,7,10,11,43],
and play essential roles in the progression of FDEs. On the basis of this concept, real-world problems described by
various FDEs were introduced in [2,15,23,24,30]. Besides, methods for finding the exact and approximate solutions
of FDEs were presented in [1,3,4,35]. In the second approach, based on the concept of the horizontal membership
function of fuzzy sets [31], Mazandarani et al. [25] introduced a new definition of a fuzzy derivative according to the
granular difference, and this concept is more advantagous and more trustworthy than the previous approach because it
has overcome three main drawbacks of a fuzzy derivative based on the gH difference; namely, the monotony of the di-
ameter of the r-level sets of the fuzzy solution need not be assumed to solve FDEs; the existence of multiple solutions
of FDEs; and the existence of unnatural behavior in the modeling phenomenon represented by FDEs. According to
these advantages, the theory of FDEs has been further developed, and many practical models arising from real-world
problems were considered by, for example, Najariyan and Zhao [28,29], Mazandarani et al. [26,27], Priyadharsini
and Balasubramaniam [33], Son et al. [41], and Vu and Hoa [46]. More specifically, Son et al. [41] introduced some
logistic equations with respect to delay variables in the fuzzy sense with the concept of a granular fuzzy derivative
such as the time-delay Malthusian growth model, Ehrlich ascites tumor model, and Mackey-Glass chaotic time series
model. Mazandarani and Pariz [26] and Najariyan and Zhao [28] investigated the RLC circuit model and the problem
describing the movement of aircraft via the suboptimal control of a fuzzy linear dynamic system. Meanwhile, a prac-
tical model in medicine describing the flow of cerebrospinal fluid was proposed in [27] via Z-differential equations,
which have performed better than FDEs in giving a decision under uncertainty. Priyadharsini and Balasubramaniam
[33] used the concept of a granular fractional derivative to introduce a new class of FDEs with instantaneous impulses,
and by use of the Banach contraction principle, the existence and uniqueness of solutions were also presented.
Along with the development of IDEs and FDEs, there have been significant results in impulsive FDEs (IFDEs).
Some recent contributions include those of Nieto and Rodríguez-López [30,34] investigating methods for solving
boundary value problems for the linear form of IFDEs. In addition, the existence of the solution to some classes of
IFDEs via the classical Hukuhara derivative and the gH derivative by use of the principle of contraction mappings has
been presented (see, for instance, [5,8,21,45]). However, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, the subject of IFDEs
with the concept of noninstantaneous impulses has not been investigated until now. This provided inspiration for the
present study. Therefore, in this article, we consider a new class of IFDEs with the approach of noninstantaneous
impulses given as follows:
⎧
⎨ u (t) = fα,ρ
⎪ (t, u(t)), t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ], k ∈ 0, 1, 2, . . . , l,
u(t) = t + gk (t, u(t)), t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ 1, 2, . . . , l, (1.1)
⎪
⎩ k
u(a) = u0 ,
where ρ > 0, α ∈ (0, 1); f : [sk , tk+1 ] × Ec → Ec is jointly continuous, where Ec is the space of fuzzy sets; gk :
α,ρ
[tk , sk ] × Ec → Ec , and tk satisfy a = t0 = s0 < t1 ≤ s1 ≤ t2 < · · · < tl ≤ sl ≤ tl+1 = b; and t + gk is the Riemann-
k
Liouville generalized fractional integral (RLGFI) (see Definition 2.4). From the definition of the RLGFI and the
problem (1.1), we notice the following: (i) When f and g are crisp functions, u0 ∈ R, α = 1, and ρ tends to 1, the
problem (1.1) becomes IDEs with the concept of noninstantaneous impulses studied by Hernández and O’Regan [17]
and Pierri et al. [32]. (ii) With the same assumptions as in (i) except that α ∈ (0, 1) and ρ goes to 1, the problem
(1.1) becomes IDEs with the concept of noninstantaneous impulses investigated by Wang and Zhang [48]. (iii) When
α ∈ (0, 1) and ρ goes to 1 (or ρ goes to 0+ ), the problem (1.1) becomes IFDEs with the concept of Riemann-Liouville-
type (or Hadamard-type) fractional integrable impulses. So far, these problems have not been investigated. We realize
that instead of investigating the problems in (i)–(iii), in this article the main results of (1.1) in the general case allow
us to interpolate all specific cases consisting of the crisp cases. Our main contributions are as follows: (1) A new
class of IFDEs with the concept of RLGFI impulses is first introduced and a reasonable formula for the solution for
2
the aforementioned problem is proposed. (2) The existence of a solution and the Hyers-Ulam-Rassias stability in the
space of the piecewise continuous with the Bielecki metric for the problem (1.1) are investigated by our using the
fixed-point theorem in a generalized complete metric space.
The remainder of this article is organized as follows. In Section 2, we provide some necessary preliminaries.
Section 3 is devoted to studying the Hyers-Ulam-Rassias stability of the problem (1.1). Finally, some illustrative
examples are presented.
2. Preliminaries
In this section, we present some necessary concepts and definitions of fuzzy calculus introduced in [6]. We denote
by RF the family of fuzzy sets defined over the real line R, which is a mapping z : R → [0, 1] that is normal, fuzzy
convex, upper semicontinuous, and compactly supported. The r-level sets of z ∈ RF are defined by

{x0 ∈ R | z(x0 ) ≥ r} if r ∈ (0, 1],
[z] =
r
(2.2)
cl{x0 ∈ R | z(x0 ) > 0} if r = 0.
It is well known that the r-level sets of z ∈ RF are compact intervals of the form [z]r = [z(r), z(r)] ⊂ R. Let Ec = {z ∈
RF | z1 (r) = min[z]r , z2 (r) = max[z]r be continuous on [0, 1]}. It is clear that if z ∈ Ec , then the following properties
hold: (i) z1 (r) and z2 (r) are continuous on [0, 1]; (ii) z1 (r) is monotone increasing and z2 (r) is monotone decreasing;
(iii) z1 (1) ≤ z2 (1). The length of the r-level sets of u ∈ Ec is measured in the following form: d[z]r = z(r) − z(r). It
is well known that (Ec , D0 ) is a complete metric space with the following Hausdorff distance on Ec :
D0 [z, w] = sup {|z(r) − w(r)|, |z(r) − w(r)|}, (2.3)
0≤r≤1
where [z]r = [z(r), z(r)], [w]r = [w(r), w(r)].
Definition 2.1. [20] Let z1 , z2 ∈ Ec . If there exists z3 ∈ Ec such that z1 = z2 + z3 , then we call z3 = z1
z2 the
Hukuhara difference of z1 and z2 (see [20]). An improvement in the existence of the Hukuhara difference between z1
and z2 is proposed in [7] by the following definition:
⎧
⎨ (i) z1 = z2 + z3
z1
gH z2 = z3 ⇔ or
⎩
(ii) z2 = z1 + (−1)z3 ,
where z1
gH z2 is called the gH difference of z1 and z2 in Ec .
Definition 2.2. [18] A fuzzy mapping z : [a, b] → Ec is called d-decreasing (or d-increasing) on [a, b] if d[z(·)]r :
[a, b] → R+ is nonincreasing (nondecreasing) on [a, b] for r ∈ [0, 1]. In addition, z is called d-monotone on [a, b] if
z is d-increasing or d-decreasing on [a, b].
Definition 2.3. [7] Assume a mapping z : (a, b) → Ec . We say that z is gH-differentiable with respect to t if there
exists an element z (t) ∈ Ec such that
z(t + h)
gH z(t)
z (t) = lim . (2.4)
h→0 h
Let J = [a, b]. We denote by C(J, Ec ) the family of continuous fuzzy functions. We say that a fuzzy mapping
h : J × C(J, Ec ) → Ec is jointly continuous with respect to (t0 , z) ∈ J × C(J, Ec ) if for all > 0 there is σ > 0 such
that |t − t0 | + D0 [z, w] < σ implies D0 [h(t, z), h(t0 , w)] < for all (t, w) ∈ J × C(J, Ec ). If h is jointly continuous
at all points (t, z) ∈ J × C(J, Ec ), then we say that h is jointly continuous on J × C(J, Ec ). We denote by CJ (J, Ec )
the space of all jointly continuous fuzzy functions.
Definition 2.4. [19] Assume a mapping z : J → Ec . The RLGFI of order α ∈ (0, 1) of z is defined by
t
α,ρ ρ 1−α
zα,ρ (t) := (a + z)(t) = s ρ−1 (t ρ − s ρ )α−1 z(s)ds, t ≥ a. (2.5)
(α)
a
3
Remark 2.1. The equation (2.5) is a generalized type of the fuzzy fractional integral. Specifically, when ρ = 1, the
equation (2.5) turns into the fuzzy fractional integral of Riemann-Liouville type given by
t
1
(RL αa+ z)(t) = (t − s)α−1 z(s)ds, t ≥ a.
(α)
a
On the other hand, when ρ goes to 0+ , the equation (2.5) turns into the fuzzy fractional integral of Hadamard type
defined as follows:
t α−1
1 t ds
(H
αa+ z)(t) = ln z(s) , t ≥ a.
(α) s s
a
Remark 2.2. [7] Assume that h ∈ CJ (J, Ec ). Then the problem z (t) = h(t, z(t)), z(a) = z0 ∈ Ec is equivalent to the
following equation:
t
z(t)
gH z0 = h(s, z(s))ds, t ∈ [a, b]. (2.6)
a
The following theorem is used to investigate the existence and stability of the solution of the problem (1.1).
Theorem 2.1. [12] Let (S, D) be a generalized complete metric space. We assume the operator O : S → S is strictly
contractive. If there is n0 ∈ N such that D(O n0 +1 x, O n0 x) < ∞ for any x ∈ S, the following hold:
(1) {O n x}n≥1 converges to x ∗ , where x ∗ is a fixed point of O.

(2) x ∗ is unique in S ∗ = {y ∈ S|D(O n x, y) < ∞}.
1
(3) If y ∈ S ∗ , then D(y, x ∗ ) ≤ D(Oy, y), where L ∈ (0, 1) is a contraction coefficient of O.
1−L
3. Main results
Throughout this article, we denote by P C(J, Ec ) the family of piecewise continuous fuzzy functions; that is,
v(t) is continuous on Jk , k = 0, 1, 2, . . . , l, where Jk = (tk , tk+1 ] and t0 = a, tl+1 = b. We reconsider the following
IFDEs:
⎧
⎨ u (t) = fα,ρ
⎪ (t, u(t)), t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ], k ∈ {0, 1, 2, . . . , l}
u(t) = t + gk (t, u(t)), t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ {1, 2, . . . , l}, (3.1)
⎪
⎩ k
u(a) = u0 ,
where α ∈ (0, 1); f ∈ CJ ([sk , tk+1 ], Ec ) for all k ∈ M0 := {0, 1, 2, ..., l}; gk ∈ CJ ([tk , sk ], Ec ) for all k ∈ M :=
{1, 2, ..., l}; and tk satisfy a = t0 = s0 < t1 ≤ s1 ≤ t2 < · · · < tl ≤ sl ≤ tl+1 = b. The following lemma shows the
formula for the solution of the problem (3.1).
Lemma 3.1. We set Fv (t) = f (t, v(t)). A d-monotone fuzzy function v ∈ P C(J, Ec ) is a solution of the problem (3.1)
if and only if v ∈ P C(J, Ec ) is a solution of the impulsive fuzzy integral equation
4
⎧
⎪
⎪ t
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ v(t)
gH u0 = Fv (s)ds, t ∈ (a, t1 ],
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
a
⎪
⎪ t
⎨ ρ 1−α
v(t) = s ρ−1 (t ρ − s ρ )α−1 gk (s, v(s))ds, t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ M, (3.2)
⎪
⎪ (α)
⎪
⎪ tk
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ t
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ v(t)
gH v(sk ) = Fv (s)ds, t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ],
⎩
a
where, for k ∈ M,
sk
ρ 1−α ρ
v(sk ) = s ρ−1 (sk − s ρ )α−1 gk (s, v(s))ds.
(α)
tk
Proof. If v is a solution of the problem (3.1), then v satisfies

⎧
⎨ v (t) = Fα,ρ
⎪ v (t), t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ], k ∈ M0
v(t) = t + gk (t, v(t)), t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ M, (3.3)
⎪
⎩ k
v(a) = u0 .
We now verify that v satisfies the equation (3.2). Let t ∈ [a, t1 ]. Then by Remark 2.2 the problem

v (t) = Fv (t), t ∈ (a, t1 ],
v(a) = u0
is equivalent to the equation
t
v(t)
gH u0 = Fv (s)ds, t ∈ (a, t1 ]. (3.4)
a
It follows from the second equation in (3.1) that when t ∈ (t1 , s1 ],

t
ρ 1−α
v(t) = s ρ−1 (t ρ − s ρ )α−1 g1 (s, v(s))ds.
(α)
t1
This yields
s1
ρ 1−α ρ
v(s1 ) = s ρ−1 (s1 − s ρ )α−1 g1 (s, v(s))ds. (3.5)
(α)
t1
Let t ∈ (s1 , t2 ]. We consider the problem

v (t) = Fv (t), t ∈ (s1 , t2 ],
(3.6)
v(s1 ) = v1 , s1 > a.
Taking the integral on [s1 , t2 ] of (3.6) yields
t
v(t)
gH v(s1 ) = Fv (s)ds, t ∈ (s1 , t2 ]. (3.7)
s1
By (3.5) one has the formula for the solution of the subproblem (3.6):
5
s1 t
ρ 1−α ρ
v(t)
gH s ρ−1
(s1 −s )
ρ α−1
g1 (s, v(s))ds = Fv (s)ds, t ∈ (s1 , t2 ].
(α)
t1 s1
Similarly, it follows from the second equation in (3.1) that when t ∈ (t2 , s2 ],
t
ρ 1−α
v(t) = s ρ−1 (t ρ − s ρ )α−1 g2 (s, v(s))ds.
(α)
t2
This yields
s2
ρ 1−α ρ
v(s2 ) = s ρ−1 (s2 − s ρ )α−1 g2 (s, v(s))ds. (3.8)
(α)
t2
Let t ∈ (s2 , t3 ]. We also consider the problem

v (t) = Fv (t), t ∈ (s2 , t3 ],
(3.9)
v(s2 ) = v2 , s2 > a.
Similarly, we also take the integral on [s2 , t3 ] of (3.9) and get
t
v(t)
gH v(s2 ) = Fv (s)ds, t ∈ (s2 , t3 ]. (3.10)
s2
From (3.8) one gets the formula for the solution of (3.9) as follows:
s2 t
ρ 1−α ρ
v(t)
gH s ρ−1
(s2 −s )
ρ α−1
g2 (s, v(s))ds = Fv (s)ds, t ∈ (s2 , t3 ].
(α)
t2 s2
ρ 1−α
t ρ−1 ρ
Proceeding as above, when t ∈ (tk , sk ], k = 3, 4, ..., l, v(t) = s (t − s ρ )α−1 gk (s, v(s))ds. It follows that
(α) tk
sk
ρ 1−α ρ
v(sk ) = s ρ−1 (sk − s ρ )α−1 gk (s, v(s))ds. (3.11)
(α)
tk
We also consider the problem

v (t) = Fv (t), t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ],
(3.12)
v(sk ) = vk , sk > a.
Similarly, taking the integral on [sk , tk+1 ] of (3.12) yields
t
v(t)
gH v(sk ) = Fv (s)ds, t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ]. (3.13)
sk
From (3.11) one obtains the formula for the solution of (3.12) as follows:
sk t
ρ 1−α ρ
v(t)
gH s ρ−1
(sk −s )
ρ α−1
gk (s, v(s))ds = Fv (s)ds, t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ]. (3.14)
(α)
tk sk
Therefore, from (3.4) and (3.14), we obtain the formula (3.2).
6
Remark 3.1. According to Remark 2.1 the problem (3.1) will turn into IFDEs with a Riemann-Liouville-type impulse
if ρ goes to 1, and the formula for the solution of (3.1) in this case is given by
⎧
⎪ t
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ u(t)
gH u0 = Fu (s)ds, t ∈ (a, t1 ],
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ a
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ t
1
u(t) = (t − s)α−1 gk (s, u(s))ds, t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ M, (3.15)
⎪
⎪ (α)
⎪
⎪ tk
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ sk t
⎪
⎪ 1
⎪
⎪ u(t)
gH (sk − s) gk (s, u(s))ds = Fu (s)ds, t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ].
α−1
⎪
⎪
⎩ (α)
tk sk
On the other hand, the problem (3.1) will turn into IFDEs with a Hadamard-type impulse if ρ goes to 0+ , and the
formula for the solution of (3.1) in this case is given by
⎧
⎪ t
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ u(t)
gH u0 = Fu (s)ds, t ∈ (a, t1 ],
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ a
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ t
1 ds
u(t) = (ln t − ln s)α−1 gk (s, u(s)) , t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ M, (3.16)
⎪
⎪ (α) s
⎪
⎪ tk
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ sk t
⎪
⎪ 1
⎪
⎪ u(t)
gH
ds
(ln sk − ln s) gk (s, u(s)) = Fu (s)ds, t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ].
α−1
⎪
⎪
⎩ (α) s
tk sk
Example 3.1. Consider the following IFDEs:

⎧
⎪ u (t) = (a1 t β1 , a2 t β1 , a3 t β1 ), t ∈ (0, 1] ∪ (2, 3],
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ ρ 1−α
t s ρ − 1ρ β2
u(t) = s ρ−1 ρ
(t − s ) ρ α−1
b1 , b 2 , b 3 ds, t ∈ (1, 2], (3.17)
⎪
⎪ (α) ρ
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎩
1
u(0) = u0 ,
where β1 , β2 > 0, a1 < a2 < a3 and b1 < b2 < b3 are constants, and f (t, u) := (a1 t β1 , a2 t β1 , a3 t β1 ). The noninstan-
taneous impulse condition is given by
ρ 1−α
t s ρ − 1ρ β2
α,ρ
1+ g(t, u) := s ρ−1 (t ρ − s ρ )α−1 b1 , b2 , b3 ds, t ∈ (1, 2].
(α) ρ
1
According to Lemma 3.1, one gets the following formula for the solution of the problem (3.17):
⎧
⎪
⎪ t β1 +1
⎪
⎪ u(t)
gH u0 = (a1 , a2 , a3 ), t ∈ (0, 1],
⎪
⎪ β1 + 1
⎪
⎨ (β2 + 1) t ρ − 1 α+β2
u(t) = (b1 , b2 , b3 ), t ∈ (1, 2],
⎪
⎪ (α + β2 + 1) ρ
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ (t − 2)β1 +1
⎪
⎩ u(t)
gH u(2) = (a1 , a2 , a3 ), t ∈ (2, 3],
β1 + 1
where
7
Fig. 1. The graph of (3.19) in case (i).
(β2 + 1) 2ρ − 1 α+β2
u(2) = (b1 , b2 , b3 ). (3.18)
(α + β2 + 1) ρ
Then, if the solution of (3.17) is d-increasing on (0, 1] ∪ (2, 3], we get
⎧
⎪
⎪ t β1 +1
⎪
⎪ u(t) = u 0 + (a1 , a2 , a3 ), t ∈ (0, 1],
⎪
⎪ β1 + 1
⎪
⎨ (β2 + 1) t ρ − 1 α+β2
u(t) = (b1 , b2 , b3 ), t ∈ (1, 2], (3.19)
⎪
⎪ (α + β2 + 1) ρ
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ (t − 2)β1 +1
⎪
⎩ u(t) = u(2) + (a1 , a2 , a3 ), t ∈ (2, 3].
β1 + 1
If the solution of (3.17) is d-decreasing on (0, 1] ∪ (2, 3], we obtain
⎧
⎪
⎪ t β1 +1
⎪
⎪ u(t) = u0
(−1) (a1 , a2 , a3 ), t ∈ (0, 1],
⎪
⎪ β1 + 1
⎪
⎨ (β2 + 1) t ρ − 1 α+β2
u(t) = (b1 , b2 , b3 ), t ∈ (1, 2], (3.20)
⎪
⎪ (α + β2 + 1) ρ
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ (t − 2)β1 +1
⎪
⎩ u(t) = u(2)
(−1) (a1 , a2 , a3 ), t ∈ (2, 3],
β1 + 1
where u(2) is given by (3.18). According to the formulas (3.19) and (3.20), we notice the following:
(i) If the value of ρ goes to 1, then (3.17) turns into the Riemann-Liouville type noninstantaneous impulse problem.
With the parameters α = 3/4, u0 = (1, 2, 3), (a1 , a2 , a3 ) = (0.4, 0.6, 0.8), (b1 , b2 , b3 ) = (4, 6, 8), β1 = 1.75, and
β2 = 0.75, the graphs of the solutions of (3.17) given by the formulas (3.19) and (3.20) are as shown in Figs. 1
and 2, respectively.
(ii) If ρ tends to 0+ , then (3.17) becomes the Hadamard-type noninstantaneous impulse problem. With the pa-
rameters α = 3/4, u0 = (1, 2, 3), (a1 , a2 , a3 ) = (0.4, 0.6, 0.8), (b1 , b2 , b3 ) = (4, 6, 8), and β1 = β2 = 0.75, the
graphs of the solutions of (3.17) given by the formulas (3.19) and (3.20) are as shown in Figs. 3 and 4, respec-
tively.
In the sequel, we will introduce some concepts of the Hyers-Ulam stability of the problem (3.1), which are con-
sidered as an extension of the previous concepts in the Hyers-Ulam stability sense in the crisp cases [42,47,48] and
fuzzy cases [22,39,40]. Let ε > 0, η > 0, and ϕ ∈ C(J, R+ ). We consider the inequality as follows:
8
Fig. 2. The graph of (3.20) in case (i).
Fig. 3. The graph of (3.19) in case (ii).

D0 [w (t), Fw (t)] ≤ εϕ(t), t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ], k ∈ M0 ,
α,ρ
D0 [w(t), t + gk (t, w(t))] ≤ εη, t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ M, (3.21)
k
where Fw (t) := f (t, w(t)).
Remark 3.2. It follows from the inequality (3.21) that a fuzzy function w ∈ P C(J, Ec ) is a solution of (3.21) if and
only if there are δ(t) ∈ P C(J, Ec ) and a sequence of fuzzy functions λk (t), k ∈ M satisfying D0 [δ(t), 0̂] ≤ εϕ(t) and
D0 [λk (t), 0̂] ≤ εη for all t ∈ J , w (t) = Fw (t) + δ(t) for t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ], k ∈ M0 , and w(t) = t + gk (t, w(t)) + λk (t)
α,ρ
k
for t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ M.
Definition 3.1. Let θ > 0. The problem (3.1) is
(i) Hyers-Ulam-Rassias stable with respect to (ϕ, η) if there is a positive constant Cf,ϕ such that for every ε > 0 and
for every solution w ∈ P C(J, Ec ) of (3.21) there exists a solution u ∈ P C(J, Ec ) of (3.1) satisfying
D0 [u(t), w(t)] ≤ εCf,ϕ (ϕ(t) + η), t ∈ J.
9
Fig. 4. The graph of (3.20) in case (ii).
(ii) Hyers-Ulam-Rassias stable via the Bielecki metric with respect to (ϕ, η) if there is a positive constant Cf,ϕ,θ > 0
such that for every ε > 0 and for every solution w ∈ P C(J, Ec ) of (3.21) there exists a solution u ∈ P C(J, Ec )
of (3.1) satisfying

tρ
D0 [u(t), w(t)] exp −θ ≤ εCf,ϕ,θ (ϕ(t) + η), t ∈ J.
ρ
Theorem 3.2. We assume that f ∈ CJ ([sk , tk+1 ], Ec ) for all k ∈ M0 and gk ∈ CJ ([tk , sk ], Ec ) for all k ∈ M satisfy the
following hypotheses, respectively:
(i) The function f satisfies the Lipschitz condition with respect to the second variable with the coefficient Lf :
D0 [f (t, w1 ), f (t, w2 )] ≤ Lf D0 [w1 , w2 ], t ∈ J, w1 , w2 ∈ Ec .

(ii) There exist positive constants Lgk for k ∈ M such that
D0 [gk (t, w1 ), gk (t, w2 )] ≤ Lgk D0 [w1 , w2 ]

for every t ∈ [tk , sk ] and for all w1 , w2 ∈ Ec .
(iii) We assume that ϕ ∈ C(J, R+ ) is nondecreasing. There exists Cϕ > 0 such that
t
ϕ(s)ds ≤ Cϕ ϕ(t).
a
Then, for each ε > 0, if a fuzzy function w ∈ P C(J, Ec ) satisfies (3.21), there exists a unique solution u : J → Ec of
(3.1) with the initial condition u(a) = w(a) such that
ε(1 + Cϕ )
D0 [u(t), w(t)] ≤ (η + ϕ(t)) (3.22)
1−M
provided that M ∈ (0, 1), where
G(θ α)
M = max Lgk + Lf C ϕ | k ∈ M , (3.23)
(α + 1)
where G(θ α) < 1 when θ is large enough and it is defined as in Theorem A in the Appendix. In addition, it follows
from the estimate (3.22) that the problem (3.1) is Hyers-Ulam-Rassias stable.
10
Proof. First, we consider the following set:
X = {w : J → Ec | w ∈ P C(J, Ec ) and w is d-monotone},
with the metric DX on X defined as

tρ
DX [w, ŵ] = inf C1 + C2 ∈ [0, ∞]|D0 [w(t), ŵ(t)] exp −θ ≤ (C1 + C2 )(ϕ(t) + η), ∀t ∈ J , (3.24)
ρ
where θ > 0 is chosen suitably later and

tρ
C1 ∈ C ∈ [0, ∞]|D0 [w, ŵ] exp −θ ≤ Cϕ(t), ∀t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ], k ∈ M0 ,
ρ

tρ
C2 ∈ C ∈ [0, ∞]|D0 [w, ŵ] exp −θ ≤ Cη(t), ∀t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ M .
ρ
We notice that (X, DX ) is a complete metric space. Indeed, it is easy to see that DX satisfies DX [w, ŵ] = 0 if and
only if w = ŵ; DX [w, ŵ] = DX [ŵ, w] for all w, ŵ ∈ X. Next we prove that
DX [w, ŵ] ≤ DX [w, v] + DX [v, ŵ] for all v, w, ŵ ∈ X. (3.25)
If (3.25) is not true, then we have v, w, ŵ ∈ X such that DX [w, ŵ] > DX [w, v] + DX [v, ŵ]. Hence, there exists t0 ∈ J
such that
ρ

t
D0 [w(t0 ), ŵ(t0 )] exp −θ 0 > DX [w, v] + DX [v, ŵ].
ρ
From the definition of DX , one gets

ρ
ρ
ρ

t t t
D0 [w(t0 ), ŵ(t0 )] exp −θ 0 > D0 [w(t0 ), v(t0 )] exp −θ 0 + D0 [v(t0 ), ŵ(t0 )] exp −θ 0 ,
ρ ρ ρ
which leads to a contradiction since D0 is a metric on Ec . Next, let {wn } be a Cauchy sequence in (X, DX ) provided
that {wn (t)} is d-monotone on J , and hence according to the definition of DX , we notice that for each ε > 0, there
exists Nε ∈ N for all m, n ≥ Nε for all t ∈ J such that DX [wn , wm ] < ε. So, for any m, n ≥ Nε and t ∈ J ,

tρ
D0 [wn (t), wm (t)] exp −θ < ε. (3.26)
ρ
On the other hand, let t ∈ J be fixed. Then {wn (t)} is a Cauchy sequence in the complete metric space (Ec , D0 ). So,
there exists ad-monotone
fuzzy function w ∈ P C(J, Ec ) such that D0 [wn (t), w(t)] → 0 as n → ∞. Because the
ρ
function exp −θ tρ is bounded on J for any θ > 0, taking the limit m → ∞ in (3.26) yields for each n > Nε and
t ∈ J,

tρ
D0 [wn (t), w(t)] exp −θ < ε, (3.27)
ρ
which shows that {wn (t)} converges uniformly to w ∈ P C(J, Ec ), and hence w ∈ X. It follows from (3.27) that for
each ε > 0, there exists Nε ∈ N with n ≥ Nε , DX [wn , w] ≤ ε, and so (X, DX ) is complete.
11
Next, we consider the operator P : X → X defined as follows:

⎧
⎪ t
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ P w(t)
gH u0 = f (s, w(s))ds, t ∈ (a, t1 ],
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ a
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ t
ρ 1−α
P w(t) = s ρ−1 (t ρ − s ρ )α−1 gk (s, w(s))ds, t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ M, (3.28)
⎪
⎪ (α)
⎪
⎪ tk
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ t
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ P w(t)
gH w(sk ) = f (s, w(s))ds, t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ], k ∈ M
⎪
⎪
⎩
sk
for all w ∈ X, where w(sk ) is defined as in Lemma 3.1. We now verify P satisfies the assumptions of Theorem 2.1 in
the space X with the metric DX . Clearly, P is a well-defined operator because f ∈ CJ ([sk , tk+1 ], Ec ) for all k ∈ M0
and gk ∈ CJ ([tk , sk ], Ec ) for all k ∈ M. To use Theorem 2.1, we verify P is strictly contractive on X. It follows from
the definition of (X, DX ) that for any w, ŵ ∈ X, we can find C1 , C2 ∈ [0, ∞] such that

tρ C1 ϕ(t), t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ], k ∈ M0 ,
D0 [w(t), ŵ(t)] exp −θ ≤ (3.29)
ρ C2 η, t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ M.
Then, from hypotheses (i)–(iii), the inequality (3.29), and the definition of P , we have the following cases:
+ Case 1: For t ∈ (a, t1 ], we obtain
t ρ ρ
s t
D0 [P w(t), P ŵ(t)] ≤ Lf C1 ϕ(s) exp θ ds ≤ Lf C1 Cϕ ϕ(t) exp θ .
ρ ρ
a
+ Case 2: For t ∈ (tk , sk ], where k ∈ M, by Theorem A in the Appendix, one obtains
t
ρ 1−α sρ
D0 [P w(t), P ŵ(t)] ≤ Lgk C2 η s ρ−1
(t − s )
ρ ρ α−1
exp θ ds
(α) ρ
tk
ρ
G(θ α) t
≤ Lgk C2 η exp θ ,
(α + 1) ρ
where G(θ α) < 1 when θ is large enough.
+ Case 3: For t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ], we have
t
D0 [P w(t), P ŵ(t)] ≤ D0 [w(sk ), ŵ(sk )] + D0 [f (s, w(s)), f (s, ŵ(s))]ds
sk
sk t
ρ 1−α ρ
≤ Lg k s ρ−1
(sk −s ) ρ α−1
D0 [w(s), ŵ(s)]ds + Lf D0 [w(s), ŵ(s)]ds
(α)
tk sk
ρ
G(θ α) t
≤ Lgk + Lf Cϕ (C1 + C2 )(ϕ(t) + η) exp θ .
(α + 1) ρ
G(θ α)
By setting M = max Lgk + Lf Cϕ | k ∈ M and by the above three cases, we deduce that
(α + 1)

tρ
D0 [P w(t), P ŵ(t)] exp −θ ≤ M(C1 + C2 )(ϕ(t) + η) for all t ∈ J.
ρ
Hence, according to the definition of DX on X we get DX [P w, P ŵ] ≤ MDX [w, ŵ] for any w, ŵ ∈ X. Because
M ∈ (0, 1), this implies that P is strictly contractive. Now, because f and gk are bounded on J , by our taking w0 ∈ X
and from the piecewise continuous property of w0 and P w0 , there exist constants B1 , B2 , B3 ∈ (0, ∞) such that
12
⎧
⎪ tρ tρ
⎪
⎪ D [P w (t), w (t)] exp −θ ≤ B ϕ(t) exp −θ , t ∈ [a, t1 ],
⎪
⎪
0 0 0
ρ
1
ρ
⎪
⎪
⎨ tρ tρ
D0 [P w0 (t), w0 (t)] exp −θ ≤ B2 η exp −θ , t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ M,
⎪
⎪ ρ ρ
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ tρ tρ
⎪
⎩ D0 [P w0 (t), w0 (t)] exp −θ ≤ B3 (ϕ(t) + η) exp −θ , t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ], k ∈ M.
ρ ρ
This yields DX [P w0 , w0 ] < ∞ for all w0 ∈ X. In the same manner, we can easily verify that DX [P w, v] < ∞ for
any v ∈ X. So X = {v ∈ X | DX [P w, v] < ∞}. According to Theorem 2.1, we deduce that there exists a fixed point
u ∈ P C(J, Ec ) such that P n w converges to the unique fixed point u; that is, P n w → u in X as n → ∞, and P u = u,
where u satisfies (3.2) for every t ∈ J .
Next, we show that the estimate (3.22) holds, where w ∈ P C(J, Ec ) is a solution of (3.21) on J . It follows from
Remark 3.2 that
⎧
⎪ t
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ w(t)
gH w(a) = [f (s, w(s)) + δ(s)]ds, t ∈ (a, t1 ],
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ a
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ t
ρ 1−α
w(t) = s ρ−1 (t ρ − s ρ )α−1 gk (s, w(s))ds + λk (t), t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ M, (3.30)
⎪
⎪ (α)
⎪
⎪ t
⎪
⎪
k
⎪
⎪ t
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ w(t)
gH w(sk ) = [f (s, w(s)) + δ(s)]ds, t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ], k ∈ M,
⎪
⎪
⎩
sk
where
sk
ρ 1−α ρ
w(sk ) = s ρ−1 (sk − s ρ )α−1 gk (s, w(s))ds + λk (sk ).
(α)
tk
From hypotheses (i)–(iii), Remark 3.2, and (3.30), we have the following cases:
+ Case 1: For t ∈ [a, t1 ], we get
⎡ ⎤
t t
D0 ⎣w(t)
gH w(a), f (s, w(s))ds ⎦ ≤ D0 [δ(s), 0̂]ds ≤ εCϕ ϕ(t). (3.31)
a a
+ Case 2: For t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ M, one obtains

α,ρ α,ρ α,ρ
D0 [w(t), t + gk (t, w(t))] = D0 [t + gk (t, w(t)) + λk (t), t + gk (t, w(t))] ≤ D0 [λk (t), 0̂] ≤ εη. (3.32)
k k k
+ Case 3: For t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ], k ∈ M, and from (3.30), one derives

⎡ ⎤ ⎡ t ⎤
t t
D0 ⎣w(t)
gH v(sk ), f (s, w(s))ds ⎦= D0 ⎣ [f (s, w(s)) + δ(s)]ds, f (s, w(s))ds ⎦
sk sk sk
t
≤ D0 [δ(s), 0̂]≤ εCϕ ϕ(t) ≤ ε(1 + Cϕ )(η + ϕ(t)). (3.33)
sk
Hence, from (3.31)–(3.33), we deduce

tρ
DX [w, P w] ≤ ε(1 + Cϕ ) exp −θ for all t ∈ J.
ρ
13
Thus, it follows from Theorem 2.1(iii) that

DX [P w, w] ε(1 + Cϕ ) tρ
DX [w, u] ≤ ≤ exp −θ ,
1−M 1−M ρ
and by the definition of DX this implies
ε(1 + Cϕ )
D0 [u(t), w(t)] ≤ (η + ϕ(t)).
1−M
1+Cϕ
This yields the estimate (3.22) holds. On the basis of Definition 3.1(i), if we take Cf,ϕ := 1−M , then we can conclude
that the problem (3.1) is Hyers-Ulam-Rassias stable.
In the following result, we will investigate the Hyers-Ulam-Rassias stability of the problem (3.1) without using the
Banach fixed-point theorem on the generalized complete metric space given in Theorem 2.1. To do this, we will treat
the problem directly via the Bielecki metric in the space of the piecewise continuous fuzzy functions given by

tρ
DP Cθ [u, v] = sup D0 [u(t), v(t)] exp −θ |t ∈ J , (3.34)
ρ
where u, v ∈ P C(J, Ec ).
Theorem 3.3. We assume that f ∈ CJ ([sk , tk+1 ], Ec ) for all k ∈ M0 and gk ∈ CJ ([tk , sk ], Ec ) for all k ∈ M satisfy
hypotheses (i)–(iii) of Theorem 3.2. Then, for each ε > 0, if a fuzzy function w ∈ P C(J, Ec ) satisfies (3.21), there
exists a unique solution u : J → Ec of (3.1) with the initial condition u(a) = w(a) such that

tρ (1 + Cϕ )
D0 [u(t), w(t)] exp −θ ≤ε (ϕ(t) + η) for all t ∈ J (3.35)
ρ 1−O
provided that O ∈ (0, 1), where

Lgk G(θ α)
O := max + Lf (tk+1 − sk ) | k ∈ M , (3.36)
(α + 1)
where G(θ α) < 1 when θ is large enough and is defined as in Theorem A in the Appendix. In addition, it follows from
the estimate (3.35) that the problem (3.1) is Hyers-Ulam-Rassias stable via the Bielecki metric.
Proof. We consider the operator Q : P C(J, Ec ) → P C(J, Ec ) defined by

⎧
⎪ t
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ Qu(t)
gH u0 = f (s, u(s))ds, t ∈ (a, t1 ],
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ a
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ t
ρ 1−α
Qu(t) = s ρ−1 (t ρ − s ρ )α−1 gk (s, u(s))ds, t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ M, (3.37)
⎪
⎪ (α)
⎪
⎪ tk
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ t
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ Qu(t)
gH u(sk ) = f (s, u(s))ds, t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ], k ∈ M
⎪
⎪
⎩
sk
for all u ∈ P C(J, Ec ), where u(sk ) is defined in Lemma 3.1. We observe that the operator Q is well defined with the
hypotheses of the joint continuity of the fuzzy functions f and gk . Using hypotheses (i) and (ii), we have the following
cases:
+ Case 1: For t ∈ (a, t1 ]
ρ
t
D0 [Qu(t), Qû(t)] = D0 [Qu(t)
gH u0 , Qû(t)
gH u0 ] ≤ Lf (t1 − a) exp θ DP Cθ [u, û].
ρ
This yields DP Cθ [Qu, Qû] ≤ Lf (t1 − a)DP Cθ [u, û].
14
+ Case 2: For t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ M, similarly to the above cases, one gets

t
ρ 1−α
D0 [Qu(t), Qû(t)] ≤ Lgk s ρ−1 (t ρ − s ρ )α−1 D0 [u(s), û(s)]ds
(α)
tk
t ρ
ρ 1−α s
≤ Lgk DP Cθ [u, û] s ρ−1
(t − s )
ρ ρ α−1
exp θ ds
(α) ρ
tk
ρ
Lgk G(θ α) t
≤ DP Cθ [u, û] exp θ .
(α + 1) ρ
Lgk G(θ α)
This implies that DP Cθ [Qu, Qû] ≤ DP Cθ [u, û].
(α + 1)
+ Case 3: For t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ], k ∈ M, and by Theorem A in the Appendix, one obtains
sk t
ρ 1−α
D0 [Qu(t), Qû(t)] ≤ Lgk s ρ−1
(t − s )
ρ ρ α−1
D0 [u(s), û(s)]ds + Lf D0 [u(s), û(s)]ds
(α)
tk sk
ρ

Lgk G(θ α) sk tρ
≤ DP Cθ [u, û] exp θ + Lf (t − sk ) exp θ DP Cθ [u, û]
(α + 1) ρ ρ
ρ ρ
Lgk G(θ α) sk t
= exp θ + Lf (tk+1 − sk ) exp θ DP Cθ [u, û].
(α + 1) ρ ρ
This reduces to

Lgk G(θ α)
DP Cθ [Qu, Qû] ≤ + Lf (tk+1 − sk ) DP Cθ [u, û].
(α + 1)
Obviously, we can choose a sufficiently large θ such that for t ∈ J, α ∈ (0, 1)

Lgk G(θ α)
O := max + Lf (tk+1 − sk ) | k ∈ M < 1.
(α + 1)
From the above, we have DP Cθ [Qu, Qû] ≤ ODP Cθ [u, û]. Therefore, the operator Q is a contraction mapping. We
deduce that Q has a unique fixed point u, which is a solution of the problem (3.1). Finally, we will prove that the
problem (3.1) is Hyers-Ulam-Rassias stable via the Bielecki metric. We now assume that if w ∈ P C(J, Ec ) satisfies
the inequality (3.21), then similarly to the proof of Theorem 3.2, we notice that the solution v is given by (3.30). With
the same argument as in (3.31) and (3.32), one gets the following estimates:
+ Case 1: For t ∈ (a, t1 ]
⎡ ⎤
t
D0 ⎣w(t)
gH w(a), f (s, w(s))ds ⎦ ≤ εCϕ ϕ(t).
a
Then, since u(a) = w(a), we have

tρ tρ
D0 [u(t), w(t)] exp −θ = D0 [w(t)
gH u(a), u(t)
gH u(a)] exp −θ
ρ ρ
ρ
t tρ
≤ εCϕ ϕ(t) + Lf (t1 − a)DP Cθ [u, w] exp θ exp −θ .
ρ ρ
This yields for t ∈ (a, t1 ]

εCϕ tρ
DP Cθ [u, w] ≤ ϕ(t) exp −θ ,
1 − Lf (t1 − a) ρ
15
which implies that

tρ εCϕ tρ
D0 [u(t), w(t)] exp −θ ≤ DP Cθ [u, w] ≤ ϕ(t) exp −θ , t ∈ (a, t1 ]. (3.38)
ρ 1 − Lf (t1 − a) ρ
+ Case 2: For t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ M, one obtains
α,ρ
D0 [w(t), t + gk (t, w(t))] ≤ εη.
k
Then we get

tρ α,ρ tρ
D0 [w(t), u(t)] exp −θ = D0 [w(t), t + gk (t, u(t))] exp −θ
ρ k ρ

α,ρ α,ρ α,ρ tρ
= D0 w(t)
gH t + gk (t, w(t)), t + gk (t, u(t))
gH t + gk (t, w(t)) exp −θ
k k k ρ
ρ ρ
Lg G(θ α) t t
≤ εη + k DP Cθ [u, w] exp θ exp −θ .
(α + 1) ρ ρ
This yields for t ∈ (tk , sk ]
ρ

ε t
DP Cθ [u, w] ≤ η exp −θ k ,
Lgk G(θ α) ρ
1−
(α + 1)
which implies that
ρ

tρ t ε
D0 [u(t), w(t)] exp −θ ≤ DP Cθ [u, w] ≤ η exp −θ k . (3.39)
ρ Lgk G(θ α) ρ
1−
(α + 1)
+ Case 3: For t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ], k ∈ M, and similarly to the estimate (3.33), one obtains
⎡ ⎤
t
D0 ⎣w(t)
gH w(sk ), f (s, w(s))ds ⎦ ≤ ε(1 + Cϕ )(η + ϕ(t)).
sk
Then we obtain
⎡ ⎤
t t
D0 [w(t), u(t)]= D0 ⎣w(t)
gH w(sk )
gH f (s, w(s))ds, u(t)
gH w(sk )
gH f (s, w(s))ds ⎦
sk sk
⎡ ⎤
t
≤ ε(1 + Cϕ )(η + ϕ(t)) + D0 ⎣u(t)
gH w(sk ), f (s, w(s))ds ⎦
sk
⎡ ⎤
t
= ε(1 + Cϕ )(η + ϕ(t)) + D0 ⎣u(t)
gH w(sk ) + u(sk )
gH u(sk ), f (s, w(s))ds ⎦
sk

α,ρ α,ρ
≤ ε(1 + Cϕ )(η + ϕ(t)) + D0 t + gk (sk , w(sk )), t + gk (sk , u(sk ))
k k
⎡ t ⎤
t
+D0 ⎣ f (s, u(s))ds, f (s, w(s))ds ⎦
sk sk
ρ ρ
Lgk G(θ α) sk t
≤ ε(1 + Cϕ )(η + ϕ(t)) + exp θ + Lf (t − sk ) exp θ DP Cθ [u, w]. (3.40)
(α + 1) ρ ρ
16
Hence, for all t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ], k ∈ M, one gets

ρ

(ε + εCϕ ) sk
DP Cθ [u, w] ≤ (η + ϕ(t)) exp −θ ,
Lgk G(θ α) ρ
1− + Lf (tk+1 − sk )
(α + 1)
which yields
ρ

tρ ε(1 + Cϕ ) sk
D0 [u(t), w(t)] exp −θ ≤ (η + ϕ(t)) exp −θ . (3.41)
ρ Lgk G(θ α) ρ
1− + Lf (tk+1 − sk )
(α + 1)
Therefore, by (3.38)–(3.41) we deduce that

tρ
D0 [u(t), w(t)] exp −θ ≤ εCf,ϕ,θ (ϕ(t) + η) for all t ∈ J,
ρ
(1+C )
where Cf,ϕ,θ := 1−Oϕ , and O is defined as in (3.36). On the basis of Definition 3.1(ii), the problem (3.1) is Hyers-
Ulam-Rassias stable via the Bielecki metric with respect to (ϕ, η).
In the sequel, we will present an example that points out how our theorems can be used for concrete problems.
Example 3.4. We assume that a d-monotone and piecewise continuous fuzzy function v satisfies the inequality as
follows:

D0 [v (t), λv(t)] ≤ ϕ(t), t ∈ (0, 1] ∪ (2, 3],
α,ρ (3.42)
D0 [v(t), 1+ ((a1 , a2 , a3 )g(t))] ≤ η, t ∈ (1, 2],
ρ
where g(t) := Eα,1 ξ t ρ−1
α
, λ, ξ ∈ [−1, 1]\{0}, and a1 < a2 < a3 are constants. In this example, we assume that
ϕ(t) = exp(5t) and η = 0.5. The hypotheses of Theorem 3.2 will now be verified. First, one can see that 0 = s0 <
t ρ −1 α
t1 = 1 < s1 = 2 < t2 = 3 and m = 1. By putting f (t, u) = λu and gk (t, u) = Eα,1 ξ ρ , we get Lf = |λ| and
Lgk = 1/10. Next, one also has
t t
ϕ(s)ds = exp(5s)ds = (1/5) exp(5t).
0 0
Then, by taking Cϕ = 1/5, Lf = |λ|, and Lgk = 1/10, we notice hypotheses (i)–(iii) of Theorem 3.2 hold. By using
the condition (3.23), we obtain the value of M as follows:
G(θ α) |λ|
M= + ,
10(α + 1) 5
where G(θ α) := 2(1/θ)α/2 + (1/θ α+1 ), where θ is large enough so that G(θ α) < 1. By using the assertion of Theo-
rem 3.2, we deduce that there is a d-monotone unique solution u that satisfies the following IFDE:
⎧
⎪ u (t) = λu(t), t ∈ (0, 1] ∪ (2, 3],
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ t
⎨ ρ 1−α
u(t) = s ρ−1 (t ρ − s ρ )α−1 (a1 , a2 , a3 )g(s)ds, t ∈ (1, 2], (3.43)
⎪
⎪ (α)
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎩
1
u(0) = u0 .
If M ∈ (0, 1), then (3.43) has a unique solution u, and this solution satisfies
17
⎧
⎪ t
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ u(t)
gH u0 = λu(s)ds, t ∈ (0, 1],
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 0
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ 1−α t sρ − 1
ρ α
u(t) = s ρ−1 (t ρ − s ρ )α−1 (a1 , a2 , a3 )Eα,1 ξ ds, t ∈ (1, 2], (3.44)
⎪
⎪ (α) ρ
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
1
⎪
⎪ t
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
= λu(s)ds, t ∈ (2, 3],
⎪
⎪ u(t) gH u(2)
⎩
2
and we get the following estimate:

(1 + 0.2)
D0 [u(t), v(t)] ≤ (0.5 + exp(5t)),
1−M
where
2 sρ − 1
ρ 1−α α
u(2) = s ρ−1 (2ρ − s ρ )α−1 Eα,1 ξ ds.
(α) ρ
1
According to (3.44), we will obtain the exact solution via the following assumptions:
+ If λ ∈ (0, 1] and the solution of (3.17) is d-increasing on (0, 1] ∪ (2, 3], we get
⎧
⎪
⎪ u(t) = u0 exp(λt), t ∈ (0, 1],
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ t ρ − 1 α
⎪
⎨ u(t) = 1
Eα,1 ξ − 1 (a1 , a2 , a3 ), t ∈ (1, 2],
ξ ρ (3.45)
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 2ρ − 1 α
⎪
⎪ exp(λ(t − 2))
⎪
⎩ u(t) = Eα,1 ξ − 1 (a1 , a2 , a3 ), t ∈ (2, 3].
ξ ρ
+ If λ ∈ [−1, 0) and the solution of (3.43) is d-decreasing on (0, 1] ∪ (2, 3], we obtain
⎧
⎪
⎪ u(t) = u0 exp(λt), t ∈ (0, 1],
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ t ρ − 1 α
⎪
⎨ u(t) = 1
Eα,1 ξ − 1 (a1 , a2 , a3 ), t ∈ (1, 2],
ξ ρ (3.46)
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 2ρ − 1 α
⎪
⎪ exp(λ(t − 2))
⎪
⎩ u(t) = Eα,1 ξ − 1 (a1 , a2 , a3 ), t ∈ (2, 3].
ξ ρ
The graphs of the solutions given by the formulas (3.45) and (3.46) are shown in Figs. 5–8 with different values of
the parameter ρ. In our numerical simulations, we use the following parameters: α = 3/4, (a1 , a2 , a3 ) = (1, 2, 3),
ξ = 1/2, and u(0) = (1, 2, 3).
In the example below, we study a model of the fish population size (FPS) over time that relates to the problem
of IFDEs under the concept of noninstantaneous impulses to verify the efficiency of the approach. We recall the
well-known FPS model in the situation where the size of fish is precisely described by
⎧
⎨ dp(t) = (β − m)p(t) − h(t), t ∈ [a, b],
dt (3.47)
⎩
p(a) = p0 ,
where β and m are positive proportionality constants that denote the birth rate and the death rate, respectively, h(t)
denotes the harvest rate, which depends on t, and p0 is the initial population size.
18
Fig. 5. The graph of (3.45) when ρ → 1 with λ = 1/2.
Fig. 6. The graph of (3.45) when ρ → 0+ with λ = 1/2.
Remark 3.3. In the model (3.47), we assume that it is influenced by disturbances and external influences, which begin
at a determined time and are maintained over a limited time interval. Then the concept of noninstantaneous impulses
is proposed to handle this problem, and the problem (3.47) in this case is represented as follows:
⎧
⎪ dp(t)
⎪
⎪ = (β − m)p(t) − h(t), t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ], k ∈ M0 ,
⎪
⎪ dt
⎪
⎪
⎨ t
ρ 1−α (3.48)
⎪ p(t) = s ρ (t ρ − s ρ )α−1 qk (s, p(s)), t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ M,
⎪
⎪ (α)
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
tk
⎩
p(a) = p0 ,
where a = s0 < t1 ≤ s1 ≤ t2 < · · · < tl ≤ sl < tl+1 = b. We have some comments about the model (3.48) as follows:
+ The first equation represents the rate of change of the FPS on intervals (sk , tk+1 ], k ∈ M0 ;
+ The second equation represents the fact that people provide strategies to adjust the size of the fish population on
intervals (tk , sk ], k ∈ M;
+ The functions h and qk (t, p) are nonnegative on [a, b].
19
Fig. 7. The graph of (3.46) when ρ → 1 with λ = −1/2.
Fig. 8. The graph of (3.46) when ρ → 0+ with λ = −1/2.
Remark 3.4. In the model (3.48), we assume that the data of (3.48) can be imperfect because of a lack of measurement
precision or the parameters and functions given in the above model may be uncertain. Then, with the advantage of the
fuzzy concept in describing the model (3.48) in the uncertain sense, the problem (3.48) in this case is represented as
follows:
⎧
⎨ u (t) + Hα,ρ
⎪ (t) = (β − m)u(t), t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ], k ∈ M0 ,
u(t) = t + gk (t, u(t)), t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ M, (3.49)
⎪
⎩ k
u(a) = u0 ,
where a = s0 < t1 ≤ s1 ≤ t2 < · · · < tl ≤ sl < tl+1 = b, p0 ∈ [u0 ]r , h(t) ∈ [H (t)]r for all t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ] for all k ∈ M0 ,
qk (t, p) ∈ [gk (t, u(t))]r for all t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ M, and r ∈ [0, 1]. To solve the model (3.49), we use the following
algorithm:
1. On the basis of the hypotheses of the model (3.48), we choose suitable forms for the problem (3.49). In particular,
if the instantaneous birth rate is greater than the instantaneous death rate, then we will consider u(t) as the
derivative of a d-increasing function; that is, [u (t)]r = [u (r, t), u (r, t)]. In contrast, we will consider u (t) as the
derivative of a d-decreasing function; that is, [u (t)]r = [u (r, t), u (r, t)].
20
2. On the basis of the concept of the r-level set, we solve the chosen fuzzy model in step 1 to find candidates for the
fuzzy solution.
3. We examine whether candidates, [u(t)]r = [u(r, t), u(r, t)], in step 2 satisfy the following conditions: u(r, t) ≤
u(r, t) and p(t) ∈ [u(t)]r for all t ∈ [a, b] and r ∈ [0, 1], where p is a solution of the model (3.48).
The following example illustrates the Hyers-Ulam-Rassias stability of the model (3.49). This yields the model
(3.48) is also Hyers-Ulam-Rassias stable.
Example 3.5. In the crisp model (3.48), we consider h(t) ∈ [H (t)]r for all t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ] for all k ∈ M0 , qk (t, p) ∈
[gk (t, v(t))]r for all t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ M, and r ∈ [0, 1]. Assume that a d-monotone and piecewise continuous fuzzy
function v holds for the inequality as follows:

D0 [v (t) + H (t), λv(t)] ≤ exp(10t), t ∈ (0, 1] ∪ (2, 3],
ρ −α (3.50)
D0 [v(t), 1+ ((a1 , a2 , a3 ) t ρ−1
α,ρ
+ ξ v(t))] ≤ 1, t ∈ (1, 2],
where s0 = 0, t1 = 1, s1 = 2, t2 = 3, λ := (β − m) ∈ R\{0}, ξ > 0, H : (0, 1] ∪ (2, 3] → Ec , and v(0) = v0 ∈ Ec
is given such that p0 ∈ [v0 ]r . On the basis of the determined error boundaries ϕ(t) := exp(10t) and η := 1, we
will verify that there exists an analytical solution that satisfies the model (3.49) and this solution is Hyers-Ulam-
Rassias stable. To do this, the hypotheses of Theorem 3.2 are verified. First, by putting f (t, u) = λu
H (t) and
ρ −α
g1 (t, u) = (a1 , a2 , a3 ) t ρ−1 + ξ u(t), we get Lf = |β − m| and Lg1 = |ξ |. Next, one also has
t t
ϕ(s)ds = exp(10s)ds = 0.1 exp(10t).
0 0
So, if we take Cϕ = 0.1, Lf = |β − m|, and Lg1 = |ξ |, then the hypotheses of Theorem 3.2 are satisfied. According
to (3.23), we get
G(θ α) |β − m|
M= |ξ | + ,
(α + 1) 10
where G(θ α) := 2(1/θ)α/2 + (1/θ α+1 ), where θ is large enough so that G(θ α) < 1. By using the assertion of Theo-
rem 3.2, we deduce there is a d-monotone unique solution u that satisfies the following IFDEs:
⎧
⎪ u (t) + H (t) = (β − m)u(t), t ∈ (0, 1] ∪ (2, 3],
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ t
⎨ ρ 1−α s ρ − 1 −α
u(t) = s ρ−1 (t ρ − s ρ )α−1 [(a1 , a2 , a3 ) + ξ u(s)]ds, t ∈ (1, 2], (3.51)
⎪
⎪ (α) ρ
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎩
1
u(0) = v0 .
If M ∈ (0, 1), then (3.51) has a unique solution u, and this solution satisfies
⎧
⎪ t
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ u(t)
gH v0 = [λu(s)
H (s)]ds, t ∈ (0, 1],
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 0
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ t
ρ 1−α s ρ − 1 −α
u(t) = s ρ−1 (t ρ − s ρ )α−1 [(a1 , a2 , a3 ) + ξ u(s)]ds, t ∈ (1, 2], (3.52)
⎪
⎪ (α) ρ
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
1
⎪
⎪ t
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ u(t)
gH u(2) = [λu(s)
H (s)]ds, t ∈ (2, 3],
⎪
⎪
⎩
2
and we get the estimate
21
1.1
D0 [v(t), u(t)] ≤ (1 + exp(10t)),
1−M
which implies the Hyers-Ulam-Rassias stability of the model (3.49), where
2
ρ 1−α s ρ − 1 −α
u(2) = s ρ−1
(2 − s )
ρ ρ α−1
(a1 , a2 , a3 ) + ξ u(s) ds.
(α) ρ
1
According to (3.52), we will obtain the exact solution via the following assumptions:
+ If we assume that λ := (β − m) > 0, then on the basis of the algorithm in Remark 3.4 we get a d-increasing
solution of the problem (3.51) on (0, 1] ∪ (2, 3], and this solution has the following form:
⎧
⎪
⎪ t
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ u(t) = v0 exp(λt)
exp(λ(t − s))H (s)ds, t ∈ (0, 1],
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
0

⎪
⎨ t ρ − 1 α
u(t) = (1 − α)Eα,1 ξ (a1 , a2 , a3 ), t ∈ (1, 2], (3.53)
⎪
⎪ ρ
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ t
⎪
⎪
⎪ u(t) = C exp(λ(t − 2))
exp(λ(t − s))H (s)ds, t ∈ (2, 3],
⎪
⎪
⎩
2
where

2ρ − 1 α
C := (1 − α)Eα,1 ξ (a1 , a2 , a3 ). (3.54)
ρ
+ If we assume that λ := (β − m) < 0, then on the basis of the algorithm in Remark 3.4 we get a d-decreasing
solution of the problem (3.51) on (0, 1] ∪ (2, 3], and this solution has the following form:
⎧
⎪
⎪ t
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ u(t) = v0 exp(λt) + (−1) exp(λ(t − s))H (s)ds, t ∈ (0, 1],
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
0

⎪
⎨ t ρ − 1 α
u(t) = (1 − α)Eα,1 ξ (a1 , a2 , a3 ), t ∈ (1, 2], (3.55)
⎪
⎪ ρ
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ t
⎪
⎪
⎪ u(t) = C exp(λ(t − 2)) + (−1) exp(λ(t − s))H (s)ds, t ∈ (2, 3],
⎪
⎪
⎩
2
where C is given by (3.54). The graphs of the solutions given by the formulas (3.53) and (3.55) and the crisp solutions
of the model (3.48) are shown in Figs. 9–12 with different values of the parameter ρ. In our numerical simulations,
we use the parameters ξ = 1/2, α = 3/4, (a1 , a2 , a3 ) = (1, 2, 3), v(0) = (1, 2, 3), and H (t) = (t, 2t, 3t), and the crisp
ρ −α
functions in the model (3.48) are p0 = 2, h(t) = 2t , and q1 (t, p(t)) = 2 s ρ−1 + 0.5p(t).
4. Conclusion
We propose a new concept of piecewise continuous solutions of IFDEs via the concept of noninstantaneous
impulses, introduce two types of Hyers-Ulam-Rassias stability of IFDEs via the Bielecki metric, and analyze the
existence of solutions, which fits into recently developed theory of IFDEs. The novelty of this work is that the issue
investigated here has not been studied previously, so the results in this article will be useful for further development
of the theory of IFDEs. However, use of the concept of gH-differentiability in recent studies of IFDEs leads to some
disadvantages as discussed in Section 1, such as the existence of the gH derivative cannot be guaranteed, and the
existence of multiple solutions with different geometric presentations. In recent years, the approach of the granular
22
Fig. 9. The graphs of the solution u(t) of (3.51) (solid line) and the crisp solution p(t) of the model (3.48) (dash-dotted line) in the case λ = 1/2
when ρ → 1.
Fig. 10. The graphs of the solution u(t) of (3.51) (solid line) and the crisp solution p(t) of the model (3.48) (dash-dotted line) in the case λ = 1/2
when ρ → 0+ .
differentiability of fuzzy functions introduced by Mazandarani et al. [25] has been found to be more advantageous
and more reliable than the previous approaches. This concept helps us deal with the previous disadvantages of the gH
derivative. In the future we will use this approach to investigate the issue of IFDEs.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
The authors are very grateful to the referees for their valuable suggestions, which helped to improve the article
significantly. This work was supported by project grant no. T2020-90TD funded by Ho Chi Minh City University of
Technology and Education, Vietnam.
23
Fig. 11. The graphs of the solution u(t) of (3.51) (solid line) and the crisp solution p(t) of the model (3.48) (dash-dotted line) in the case λ = −1/2
when ρ → 1.
Fig. 12. The graphs of the solution u(t) of (3.51) (solid line) and the crisp solution p(t) of the model (3.48) (dash-dotted line) in the case λ = −1/2
when ρ → 0+ .
Appendix A
On the basis of the results of Lemma 2.3 in [22], we get the following theorem, and the proof of this theorem is
similar to the proof of Lemma 2.3.
Theorem A. Let α ∈ (0, 1), t ∈ [a, b], and θ, ρ > 0. Then we have the following estimate:
t ρ ρ
s G(θ α) t
s ρ−1 (t ρ − s ρ )α−1 exp θ ds ≤ exp θ , (A.56)
ρ α ρ
a
where G(θ α) < 1 when θ is large enough.
Proof. Because the proof is quite similar to that of Lemma 2.3 in [22], the above assertion is presented briefly. First,
from Lemma 2.2 in [22] the equation t = exp(−θ t), where θ > 0, has a unique solution t0 ∈ (0, 1) that satisfies the
estimate as follows: t0 ≤ θ 1/(1+ε)
C
, where C and ε are arbitrary positive constants. If we denote
24
t ρ
s
LS := s ρ−1
(t − s )
ρ ρ α−1
exp θ ds
ρ
a
tρ − sρ
and put x = , it follows that
ρ
t ρ −a ρ
ρ
LS := exp(θ t /ρ) ρ
x α−1 exp(−θ x)dx. (A.57)
0
On the other hand, since t0 ∈ (0, 1) is a unique solution of the equation x = exp(−θ x), t0 is also a unique solution
of the equation x α−1 = exp(−(α − 1)θ x). With the same arguments as in Lemma 2.3 in [22], we get the following
assertion:

x α−1 ≤ exp((1 − α)θx) for all x ≥ t0 ≥ 0,
exp(−θ ) < x −α/2 , 0 ≤ x < t0 ≤ 1.
Therefore, by (A.57) and exp(−αθ t −a

ρ ρ
ρ ) > 0, we have
⎡ t ρ −a ρ
⎤
t0 ρ
⎢ ⎥
LS = exp(θ t ρ /ρ) ⎢
⎣ x
α−1
exp(−θ x)dx + x α−1 exp(−θ x)dx ⎥
⎦ (A.58)
0 t0
⎡ t ρ −a ρ
⎤
t0 ρ
⎢ ⎥
= exp(t ρ /ρ) ⎢
⎣ x α/2−1 dx + exp(−αθx)dx ⎥
⎦ (A.59)
0 t0

exp(θ t ρ /ρ) α/2 1
≤ 2t0 + exp(−αθt0 ) . (A.60)
α θ
Since t0α = exp(−αθt0 ) and t0 ≤ C
θ 1/(1+ε)
, this yields
G(αθ )
LS ≤ exp(θ t ρ /ρ),
α
where
α/2 α
C 1 C
G(θ α) := 2 + .
θ 1/(1+ε) θ θ 1/(1+ε)
In addition, we observe that if C > 0 and ε > 0 are arbitrarily fixed constants, then G(θ α) < 1 when θ > 0 is large
enough. The proof is complete.
References
[1] M.Z. Ahmad, M.K. Hasan, B. De, Baets, analytical and numerical solutions of fuzzy differential equations, Inf. Sci. 236 (2013) 156–167.
[2] A. Ahmadian, F. Ismail, S. Salahshour, D. Baleanu, F. Ghaemi, Uncertain viscoelastic models with fractional order: a new spectral tau method
to study the numerical simulations of the solution, Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 53 (2017) 44–64.
[3] A. Ahmadian, S. Salahshour, C.S. Chan, D. Baleanu, Numerical solutions of fuzzy differential equations by an efficient Runge–Kutta method
with generalized differentiability, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 331 (2018) 47–67.
[4] T. Allahviranloo, S. Abbasbandy, O. Sedaghatfar, P. Darabi, A new method for solving fuzzy integro-differential equation under generalized
differentiability, Neural Comput. Appl. 21 (2012) 191–196.
[5] T.V. An, N.V. Hoa, N.A. Tuan, Impulsive hybrid interval-valued functional integro-differential equations, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 32 (2017)
529–541.
[6] B. Bede, S.G. Gal, Generalizations of the differentiability of fuzzy-number-valued functions with applications to fuzzy differential equations,
Fuzzy Sets Syst. 151 (2005) 581–599.
25
[7] B. Bede, L. Stefanini, Generalized differentiability of fuzzy-valued functions, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 230 (2013) 119–141.
[8] M. Benchohra, J.J. Nieto, A. Ouahab, Fuzzy solutions for impulsive differential equations, Commun. Appl. Anal. 11 (2007) 379–394.
[9] M. Benchohra, F. Berhoun, Impulsive fractional differential equations with variable times, Comput. Math. Appl. 59 (2010) 1245–1252.
[10] Y. Chalco-Cano, A. Rufián-Lizana, H. Román-Flores, M.D. Jiménez-Gamero, Calculus for interval-valued functions using generalized
Hukuhara derivative and applications, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 219 (2013) 49–67.
[11] T.M. da Costa, Y. Chalco-Cano, W.A. Lodwick, G.N. Silva, A new approach to linear interval differential equations as a first step toward
solving fuzzy differential, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 347 (2018) 129–141.
[12] J.B. Diaz, B. Margolis, A fixed point theorem of the alternative, for contractions on a generalized complete metric space, Bull. Am. Math.
Soc. 74 (1968) 305–309.
[13] Z.A. Fan, A short note on the solvability of impulsive fractional differential equations with Caputo derivatives, Appl. Math. Lett. 38 (2014)
14–19.
[14] M. Feckan, Y. Zhou, J. Wang, On the concept and existence of solution for impulsive fractional differential equations, Commun. Nonlinear
Sci. Numer. Simul. 17 (2012) 3050–3060.
[15] N.A. Gasilov, Ş.E. Amrahov, A.G. Fatullayev, On a solution of the fuzzy Dirichlet problem for the heat equation, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 103 (2016)
67–76.
[16] T.L. Guo, W. Jiang, Impulsive fractional functional differential equations, Comput. Math. Appl. 64 (2012) 3414–3424.
[17] E. Hernández, D. O’Regan, On a new class of abstract impulsive differential equations, Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 141 (2013) 1641–1649.
[18] N.V. Hoa, V. Lupulescu, D. O’Regan, A note on initial value problems for fractional fuzzy differential equations, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 347 (2018)
54–69.
[19] N.V. Hoa, H. Vu, T.M. Duc, Fuzzy fractional differential equations under Caputo-Katugampola fractional derivative approach, Fuzzy Sets
Syst. 375 (2019) 70–99.
[20] V. Lakshmikantham, R.N. Mohapatra, Theory of Fuzzy Differential Equations and Applications, Taylor & Francis, London, 2003.
[21] H.Y. Lan, W. Xie, X.J. Zhang, First-order mixed type implicit impulsive fuzzy differential equation systems, in: 2009 WRI Global Congress
on Intelligent Systems, IEEE, 2009, pp. 460–464.
[22] H.V. Long, N.T.K. Son, H.T.T. Tam, J.C. Yao, Ulam stability for fractional partial integro-differential equation with uncertainty, Acta Math.
Vietnam. 42 (2017) 675–700.
[23] V. Lupulescu, On a class of fuzzy functional differential equations, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 160 (2009) 1547–1562.
[24] M.T. Malinowski, Random fuzzy differential equations under generalized Lipschitz condition, Nonlinear Anal., Real World Appl. 13 (2012)
860–881.
[25] M. Mazandarani, N. Pariz, A.V. Kamyad, Granular differentiability of fuzzy-number-valued functions, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 26 (2018)
310–323.
[26] M. Mazandarani, N. Pariz, Sub-optimal control of fuzzy linear dynamical systems under granular differentiability concept, ISA Trans. 76
(2018) 1–17.
[27] M. Mazandarani, Y. Zhao, Z-differential equations, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 28 (2020) 462–473.
[28] M. Najariyan, Y. Zhao, Fuzzy fractional quadratic regulator problem under granular fuzzy fractional derivatives, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 26
(2017) 2273–2288.
[29] M. Najariyan, Y. Zhao, On the stability of fuzzy linear dynamical systems, J. Franklin Inst. 357 (2020) 5502–5522.
[30] J.J. Nieto, R. Rodríguez-López, Some results on boundary value problems for fuzzy differential equations with functional dependence, Fuzzy
Sets Syst. 230 (2013) 92–118.
[31] A. Piegat, M. Landowski, Horizontal membership function and examples of its applications, Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 17 (2015) 22–30.
[32] M. Pierri, D. O’Regan, V. Rolnik, Existence of solutions for semi-linear abstract differential equations with not instantaneous impulses, Appl.
Math. Comput. 219 (2013) 6743–6749.
[33] J. Priyadharsini, P. Balasubramaniam, Existence of fuzzy fractional stochastic differential system with impulses, Comput. Appl. Math. 39
(2020) 1–21.
[34] R. Rodríguez-López, Periodic boundary value problems for impulsive fuzzy differential equations, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 159 (2008) 1384–1409.
[35] S. Salahshour, T. Allahviranloo, Applications of fuzzy Laplace transforms, Soft Comput. 17 (2013) 145–158.
[36] S. Salahshour, A. Ahmadian, S. Abbasbandy, D. Baleanu, M-fractional derivative under interval uncertainty: theory, properties and applica-
tions, Chaos Solitons Fractals 117 (2018) 84–93.
[37] S. Salahshour, A. Ahmadian, A.A. Mahdi, N. Senu, D. Baleanu, Uncertain fractional operator with application arising in the steady heat flow,
Therm. Sci. 23 (2019) 1289–1296.
[38] S. Salahshour, A. Ahmadian, M. Salimi, M. Ferrara, D. Baleanu, Asymptotic solutions of fractional interval differential equations with non-
singular kernel derivative, Chaos 29 (2019) 083110.
[39] Y. Shen, On the Ulam stability of first order linear fuzzy differential equations under generalized differentiability, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 280 (2015)
27–57.
[40] Y. Shen, F. Wang, A fixed point approach to the Ulam stability of fuzzy differential equations under generalized differentiability, J. Intell.
Fuzzy Syst. 30 (2016) 3253–3260.
[41] N.T.K. Son, H.V. Long, N.P. Dong, Fuzzy delay differential equations under granular differentiability with applications, Comput. Appl. Math.
38 (2019) 107.
[42] J.V.D.C. Sousa, D.D.S. Oliveira, E.C. de Oliveira, On the existence and stability for noninstantaneous impulsive fractional integrodifferential
equation, Math. Methods Appl. Sci. 42 (2019) 1249–1261.
[43] L. Stefanini, B. Bede, Generalized Hukuhara differentiability of interval-valued functions and interval differential equations, Nonlinear Anal.
71 (2009) 1311–1328.
26
[44] L. Stefanini, A generalization of Hukuhara difference and division for interval and fuzzy arithmetic, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 161 (2010) 1564–1584.
[45] H. Vu, N.V. Hoa, On impulsive fuzzy functional differential equations, Iran. J. Fuzzy Syst. 13 (2016) 79–94.
[46] H. Vu, N.V. Hoa, Uncertain fractional differential equations on a time scale under granular differentiability concept, Comput. Appl. Math. 38
(2019) 110.
[47] J. Wang, Y. Zhou, Z. Lin, On a new class of impulsive fractional differential equations, Appl. Math. Comput. 242 (2014) 649–657.
[48] J. Wang, Y. Zhang, A class of nonlinear differential equations with fractional integrable impulses, Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 19
(2014) 3001–3010.
[49] A. Zada, W. Ali, S. Farina, Hyers-Ulam stability of nonlinear differential equations with fractional integrable impulses, Math. Methods Appl.
Sci. 40 (2017) 5502–5514.
27

Fuzzy Differential Equations With Riemann-Liouville Generalized Fractional Integrable Impulses

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

Fuzzy Differential Equations With Riemann-Liouville Generalized Fractional Integrable Impulses

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

JID:FSS AID:8020 /FLA [m3SC+; v1.341] P.

Fuzzy differential equations with Riemann-Liouville generalized

(1) {O n x}n≥1 converges to x ∗ , where x ∗ is a fixed point of O.

Proof. If v is a solution of the problem (3.1), then v satisfies

It follows from the second equation in (3.1) that when t ∈ (t1 , s1 ],

Let t ∈ (s1 , t2 ]. We consider the problem

Let t ∈ (s2 , t3 ]. We also consider the problem

We also consider the problem

Therefore, from (3.4) and (3.14), we obtain the formula (3.2).

Example 3.1. Consider the following IFDEs:

Fig. 1. The graph of (3.19) in case (i).

Fig. 2. The graph of (3.20) in case (i).

Fig. 3. The graph of (3.19) in case (ii).

where Fw (t) := f (t, w(t)).

Definition 3.1. Let θ > 0. The problem (3.1) is

D0 [u(t), w(t)] ≤ εCf,ϕ (ϕ(t) + η), t ∈ J.

Fig. 4. The graph of (3.20) in case (ii).

D0 [f (t, w1 ), f (t, w2 )] ≤ Lf D0 [w1 , w2 ], t ∈ J, w1 , w2 ∈ Ec .

D0 [gk (t, w1 ), gk (t, w2 )] ≤ Lgk D0 [w1 , w2 ]

Proof. First, we consider the following set:

X = {w : J → Ec | w ∈ P C(J, Ec ) and w is d-monotone},

with the metric DX on X defined as

where θ > 0 is chosen suitably later and

DX [w, ŵ] ≤ DX [w, v] + DX [v, ŵ] for all v, w, ŵ ∈ X. (3.25)

From the definition of DX , one gets

Next, we consider the operator P : X → X defined as follows:

+ Case 2: For t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ M, one obtains

+ Case 3: For t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ], k ∈ M, and from (3.30), one derives

Hence, from (3.31)–(3.33), we deduce

Thus, it follows from Theorem 2.1(iii) that

Proof. We consider the operator Q : P C(J, Ec ) → P C(J, Ec ) defined by

+ Case 2: For t ∈ (tk , sk ], k ∈ M, similarly to the above cases, one gets

which implies that

Hence, for all t ∈ (sk , tk+1 ], k ∈ M, one gets

and we get the following estimate:

Fig. 5. The graph of (3.45) when ρ → 1 with λ = 1/2.

Fig. 6. The graph of (3.45) when ρ → 0+ with λ = 1/2.

Fig. 7. The graph of (3.46) when ρ → 1 with λ = −1/2.

Fig. 8. The graph of (3.46) when ρ → 0+ with λ = −1/2.

and we get the estimate

Declaration of competing interest

Therefore, by (A.57) and exp(−αθ t −a

You might also like