Skip to main content

Bounds on some new weakly singular Wendroff-type integral inequalities and applications

Abstract

With a more concise condition for the ordered parameter groups, some nonlinear weakly singular integral inequalities of Wendroff type, which generalize some existing results, are established. Furthermore, application examples in the boundedness and uniqueness of the solution of a singular partial integral equation are given.

MSC:26A33, 34A08, 34A34, 45J05.

1 Introduction

The Gronwall-Bellman integral inequality and its various nonlinear versions have made great achievements in the qualitative analysis for the solutions of differential and integral equations, as shown in [1, 2] and [3]. However, qualitative properties and numerical analysis for the solutions of singular integral and differential equations depend on the study of corresponding integral inequalities, and the aforementioned inequalities are not directly applicable. In recent years, many researchers have devoted much effort to investigating weakly singular integral inequalities and their applications (see [412]). For example, the Volterra-type singular integro-differential equation

y ( t ) = f ( t , y ( t ) ) + c 0 t y ( s ) ( t s ) α d s + q ( t ) , y ( 0 ) = y 0 , t [ 0 , T ] , T > 0 ,
(1.1)

was discussed by McKee [8] when α= 1 2 for the diffusion of discrete particles in a turbulent fluid; Henry [13] proposed a linear integral inequality with singular kernel to investigate some qualitative properties for a parabolic differential equation; Sano and Kunimatsu [14] gave a modified version of the Henry-type inequality; Ye et al. [15] used a generalized inequality to study the dependence of the solution for a fractional differential equation. In particular, Medveď [16] presented a new method to discuss nonlinear singular integral inequalities of Henry type and generalized his results to analogue Wendroff inequalities for functions in two variables. A slightly improved de-singularity approach has been used by Ma and Yang [6] to study a more general singular integral inequality as follows:

u ( t ) a ( t ) + b ( t ) 0 t ( t σ s σ ) μ 1 s γ 1 g ( s ) u ( s ) d s + c ( t ) 0 t ( t σ s σ ) μ 1 s γ 1 g ( s ) w ( u ( s ) ) d s .
(1.2)

Later Ma and Pečarić [17] used this method to establish a priori bounds on solutions to the following nonlinear singular integral inequalities with power nonlinearity:

u p (t)a(t)+b(t) 0 t ( t α s α ) β 1 s γ 1 f(s) u q (s)ds,t R + .
(1.3)

Bounds on solutions to inequalities (1.2) and (1.3) are established for the cases when the ordered parameter groups [α,β,γ] and [σ,μ,τ] obey distribution I or II (for details, see [6]).

With the development of the theory of inequalities for a two-dimensional case, more attention has also been paid to weakly singular integral inequalities in two variables and their applications to the partial differential equation with singular kernel. Upon the results in [6] and [17], Cheung and Ma [18] investigated some new weakly singular integral inequalities of Wendroff type

u p ( x , y ) a ( x , y ) + b ( x , y ) 0 x 0 y ( x α s α ) β 1 s γ 1 ( y α t α ) β 1 t γ 1 × f ( s , t ) u q ( s , t ) d s d t ,
(1.4)

and their more general nonlinear version was presented by Wang and Zheng [19]. It is to be noted that the ordered parameter groups [α,β,γ] in [18] and [19] make the application of inequalities more inconvenient. To overcome the weakness, in this paper we avoid the above-mentioned conditions and use another concise assumption to discuss some more general integral inequalities of Wendroff type. Our estimates are quite simple and the resulting formulas are similar to the classical Gronwall-Bihari inequalities. Furthermore, to show the applications of these inequalities, some examples are presented.

2 Main result

In what follows, R denotes the set of real numbers and R + =(0,). C(X,Y) denotes the collection of continuous functions from the set X to the set Y. D 1 z(x,y) and D 2 z(x,y) denote the first-order partial derivatives of z(x,y) with respect to x and y, respectively.

Lemma 2.1 (Discrete Jensen inequality)

Let A 1 , A 2 ,, A n be nonnegative real numbers and r>1 be a real number. Then

( A 1 + A 2 + + A n ) r n r 1 ( A 1 r + A 2 r + + A n r ) .

Lemma 2.2 (see [6])

Let α, β, γ and p be positive constants. Then

0 t ( t α s α ) p ( β 1 ) s p ( γ 1 ) ds= t θ α B [ p ( γ 1 ) + 1 α , p ( β 1 ) + 1 ] ,t R + ,

where B[ξ,η]= 0 1 s ξ 1 ( 1 s ) η 1 ds (Reξ>0, Reη>0) is the well-known B-function and θ=p[α(β1)+γ1]+1.

Firstly, consider the following Wendroff-type integral inequality:

u ( x , y ) a ( x , y ) + 0 x 0 y ( x α 1 s α 1 ) β 1 1 s γ 1 1 ( y α 2 t α 2 ) β 2 1 t γ 2 1 × f ( x , y , s , t ) w ( u ( s , t ) ) d s d t .
(2.1)

The basic assumptions for inequality (2.1) are as follows:

(A1) α i (0,1], β i (0,1) and γ i >1 1 p such that 1 p + α i ( β i 1)+ γ i 10 (p>1, i=1,2);

(A2) a(x,y)C( R + 2 , R + ) and f(x,y,s,t)C( R + 4 , R + );

(A3) w(u)C( R + , R + ) is nondecreasing and w(0)=0.

Let a ˜ (x,y)= max 0 τ x , 0 η y a(τ,η) and f ˜ (x,y,s,t)= max 0 τ x , 0 η y f(τ,η,s,t).

Theorem 2.1 Under assumptions (A1), (A2) and (A3), if u(x,y)C( R + 2 ,R+) satisfies (2.1), then

u(x,y) [ W 1 1 ( W 1 ( A ( x , y ) ) + 2 q 1 ( M 1 x θ 1 M 2 y θ 2 ) q p 0 x 0 y f ˜ q ( x , y , s , t ) d s d t ) ] 1 q
(2.2)

for 0x X 1 and 0y Y 1 , where

(2.3)
1 p + 1 q =1

, W 1 1 is the inverse of W 1 ,

W 1 (u)= u 0 u d ξ w q ( ξ 1 q ) ,u u 0 >0,
(2.4)

and X 1 , Y 1 R + are chosen such that

W 1 ( A ( x , y ) ) + 2 q 1 ( M 1 x θ 1 M 2 y θ 2 ) q p 0 x 0 y f ˜ q (x,y,s,t)dsdtDom ( W 1 1 ) .
(2.5)

Proof By the definition of a ˜ (x,y) and f ˜ (x,y,s,t), it is easy to see that a ˜ (x,y) and f ˜ (x,y,s,t) are nonnegative and nondecreasing in x and y. Moreover, a ˜ (x,y)a(x,y) and f ˜ (x,y,s,t)f(x,y,s,t). From (2.1), it follows that

u ( x , y ) a ˜ ( x , y ) + 0 x 0 y ( x α 1 s α 1 ) β 1 1 s γ 1 1 ( y α 2 t α 2 ) β 2 1 t γ 2 1 × f ˜ ( x , y , s , t ) w ( u ( s , t ) ) d s d t .
(2.6)

According to the assumption (A1), we choose suitable indices p, q. Applying the Hölder inequality with indices p, q to (2.6), we get

u ( x , y ) a ˜ ( x , y ) + ( 0 x 0 y ( x α 1 s α 1 ) p ( β 1 1 ) s p ( γ 1 1 ) ( y α 2 t α 2 ) p ( β 2 1 ) t p ( γ 2 1 ) d s d t ) 1 p × ( 0 x 0 y f ˜ q ( x , y , s , t ) w q ( u ( s , t ) ) d s d t ) 1 q .
(2.7)

By Lemma 2.1, from (2.7), we have

(2.8)

where M i and θ i are given by (2.3) for i=1,2.

Since p,q>0 and θ i 0 (i=1,2), a ˜ ( x , y ) q and ( x θ 1 y θ 2 ) q p are also nondecreasing in x and y. Taking any arbitrary x ˜ and y ˜ with x ˜ X 1 , y ˜ Y 1 , we obtain

u q ( x , y ) 2 q 1 a ˜ q ( x ˜ , y ˜ ) + 2 q 1 ( M 1 x ˜ θ 1 M 2 y ˜ θ 2 ) q p × ( 0 x 0 y f ˜ q ( x ˜ , y ˜ , s , t ) w q ( u ( s , t ) ) d s d t )
(2.9)

for 0x x ˜ , 0y y ˜ . Let

A( x ˜ , y ˜ )= 2 q 1 a ˜ q ( x ˜ , y ˜ )

and

z(x,y)=A( x ˜ , y ˜ )+ 2 q 1 ( M 1 x ˜ θ 1 M 2 y ˜ θ 2 ) q p ( 0 x 0 y f ˜ q ( x ˜ , y ˜ , s , t ) w q ( u ( s , t ) ) d s d t ) .

Then u q (x,y)z(x,y), namely u(x,y) z 1 q (x,y). Meanwhile, z(0,y)=A( x ˜ , y ˜ ). Considering

D 1 z ( x , y ) = 2 q 1 ( M 1 x ˜ θ 1 M 2 y ˜ θ 2 ) q p ( 0 y f ˜ q ( x ˜ , y ˜ , x , t ) w q ( u ( x , t ) ) d t ) 2 q 1 ( M 1 x ˜ θ 1 M 2 y ˜ θ 2 ) q p ( 0 y f ˜ q ( x ˜ , y ˜ , x , t ) w q ( z 1 q ( x , t ) ) d t ) 2 q 1 ( M 1 x ˜ θ 1 M 2 y ˜ θ 2 ) q p w q ( z 1 q ( x , y ) ) ( 0 y f ˜ q ( x ˜ , y ˜ , x , t ) d t ) ,

where we apply the fact that w q ( z 1 q (x,y)) is nondecreasing in y, we have

D 1 z ( x , y ) w q ( z 1 q ( x , y ) ) 2 q 1 ( M 1 x ˜ θ 1 M 2 y ˜ θ 2 ) q p 0 y f ˜ q ( x ˜ , y ˜ ,x,t)dt.

Integrating both sides of the above inequality from 0 to x, we obtain

W 1 ( z ( x , y ) ) W 1 ( z ( 0 , y ) ) + 2 q 1 ( M 1 x ˜ θ 1 M 2 y ˜ θ 2 ) q p 0 x 0 y f ˜ q ( x ˜ , y ˜ , s , t ) d s d t = W 1 ( A ( x ˜ , y ˜ ) ) + 2 q 1 ( M 1 x ˜ θ 1 M 2 y ˜ θ 2 ) q p 0 x 0 y f ˜ q ( x ˜ , y ˜ , s , t ) d s d t
(2.10)

for 0x x ˜ , 0y y ˜ , where W 1 (u) is given by (2.4). By virtue of the assumption (A3), W 1 (u) is strictly increasing. So, its inverse W 1 1 is continuous and increasing in its corresponding domain. Replacing x and y by x ˜ and y ˜ , we have

W 1 ( z ( x ˜ , y ˜ ) ) W 1 ( A ( x ˜ , y ˜ ) ) + 2 q 1 ( M 1 x ˜ θ 1 M 2 y ˜ θ 2 ) q p 0 x ˜ 0 y ˜ f ˜ q ( x ˜ , y ˜ ,s,t)dsdt.

Since x ˜ and y ˜ are arbitrary, we replace x ˜ and y ˜ by x and y, respectively, and get

W 1 ( z ( x , y ) ) W 1 ( A ( x , y ) ) + 2 q 1 ( M 1 x θ 1 M 2 y θ 2 ) q p 0 x 0 y f ˜ q (x,y,s,t)dsdt

for 0x X 1 and 0y Y 1 . The above inequality can be rewritten as

z(x,y) W 1 1 ( W 1 ( A ( x , y ) ) + 2 q 1 ( M 1 x θ 1 M 2 y θ 2 ) q p 0 x 0 y f ˜ q ( x , y , s , t ) d s d t ) .
(2.11)

Therefore, by u(x,y) z 1 q (x,y), (2.2) holds for 0x X 1 and 0y Y 1 . □

Remark 2.1 If we take α 1 = α 2 =α, β 1 = β 2 =β and γ 1 = γ 2 =γ, respectively, weakly singular kernel in (2.1) reduces to the formula in (1.4). Especially, it should be pointed out that if α i (0,1], β i ( 1 2 ,1) and p>2, the ordered parameter group is just I type defined in [6], and if α i (0,1], β i (0, 1 2 ) and p>3, it is just II type defined in [6].

Remark 2.2 In [20], Medveď has investigated the Wendroff inequality with weakly singular kernel ( x s ) α 1 ( y t ) β 1 . However, his result holds under the condition ‘α> 1 2 , β> 1 2 ’ and the assumption that ‘w(u) satisfies the condition (q)’ (see Definition 2.1 in [20]). In our result, the condition (q) is eliminated, and the ordered parameter groups can be discussed in more cases.

Corollary 2.1 Under assumptions (A1), (A2) and (A3), let λ>0, μ>0 (λ>μ). If u(x,y)C( R + 2 ,R+) satisfies

u λ ( x , y ) a ( x , y ) + 0 x 0 y ( x α 1 s α 1 ) β 1 1 s γ 1 1 ( y α 2 t α 2 ) β 2 1 t γ 2 1 × f ( x , y , s , t ) u μ ( s , t ) d s d t ,
(2.12)

then

u ( x , y ) [ ( 2 q 1 a ˜ ( x , y ) ) λ μ λ + λ μ λ 2 q 1 ( M 1 x θ 1 M 2 y θ 2 ) q p × 0 x 0 y f ˜ q ( x , y , s , t ) d s d t ] 1 ( λ μ ) q
(2.13)

for x0 and y0, where p, q, M i and θ i (i=1,2) are defined as in Theorem  2.1.

Proof Let v(x,y)= u λ (x,y), then u(x,y)= v 1 λ (x,y), that is, u μ (x,y)= v μ λ (x,y). It follows from (2.12) that

v(x,y)a(x,y)+ 0 x 0 y ( x α 1 s α 1 ) β 1 1 s γ 1 1 ( y α 2 t α 2 ) β 2 1 t γ 2 1 f(x,y,s,t) v μ λ (s,t)dsdt.

Clearly, w(v)= v μ λ satisfies the assumption (A3). By the definition of W 1 (u) by (2.4), letting u 0 =0, we have

W 1 (u)= 0 u d ξ ξ μ λ = λ λ μ u λ μ λ ,
(2.14)

and

W 1 1 (u)= ( λ μ λ u ) λ λ μ ,Dom ( W 1 1 ) =[0,).
(2.15)

Substituting (2.14) and (2.15) into (2.2), we get

v(x,y) [ ( 2 q 1 a ˜ ( x , y ) ) λ μ λ + λ μ λ 2 q 1 ( M 1 x θ 1 M 2 y θ 2 ) q p 0 x 0 y f ˜ q ( x , y , s , t ) d s d t ] λ ( λ μ ) q .

In view of u(x,y)= v 1 λ (x,y), we can obtain (2.13). □

Remark 2.3 Let λ=2 and μ=1; we can get the interesting Henry-Ou-Iang type singular integral inequality in two variables. As for the concrete formula, we omit it here.

Now we turn to consider the case λ=μ. In fact, (2.12) can be reduced to the corresponding linear version. Hence we only need to prove the following result.

Corollary 2.2 Under assumptions (A1), (A2) and (A3), if u(x,y)C( R + 2 ,R+) satisfies

u ( x , y ) a ( x , y ) + 0 x 0 y ( x α 1 s α 1 ) β 1 1 s γ 1 1 ( y α 2 t α 2 ) β 2 1 t γ 2 1 × f ( x , y , s , t ) u ( s , t ) d s d t ,
(2.16)

then

u(x,y) 2 q 1 q a ˜ (x,y)exp ( 2 q 1 q ( M 1 x θ 1 M 2 y θ 2 ) q p 0 x 0 y f ˜ q ( x , y , s , t ) d s d t )
(2.17)

for x0 and y0, where p, q, M i and θ i (i=1,2) are defined as in Theorem  2.1.

Proof In (2.17), w(u)=u also satisfies the assumption (A3). Here, we have

W 1 (u)= u 0 u d ξ ξ =ln u u 0 , W 1 1 (u)= u 0 exp(u),Dom ( W 1 1 ) =[0,).
(2.18)

Similar to the computation in Corollary 2.1, the estimate (2.17) holds. □

Next, we consider the more complicated Wendroff-type integral inequality

u ( x , y ) a ( x , y ) + 0 x 0 y f 1 ( x , y , s , t ) w 1 ( u ( s , t ) ) d s d t + 0 x 0 y ( x α 1 s α 1 ) β 1 1 s γ 1 1 ( y α 2 t α 2 ) β 2 1 t γ 2 1 × f 2 ( x , y , s , t ) w 2 ( u ( s , t ) ) d s d t .
(2.19)

Note that the nonsingular case f 2 (x,y,s,t)=0 of the above integral inequality was studied by Pachpatte [21].

Theorem 2.2 Under the assumption (A1), suppose that w 1 and w 2 satisfy the assumption (A3). If a(x,y)C( R + 2 , R + ), f 1 (x,y,s,y), f 2 (x,y,s,t)C( R + 4 , R + ) and u(x,y)C( R + 2 ,R+) satisfies (2.19), then

u ( x , y ) [ W 2 1 ( W 2 ( 3 q 1 a ˜ q ( x , y ) ) + 3 q 1 ( x y ) q p 0 x 0 y f ˜ 1 q ( x , y , s , t ) d s d t + 3 q 1 ( M 1 x θ 1 M 2 y θ 2 ) q p 0 x 0 y f ˜ 2 q ( x , y , s , t ) d s d t ) ] 1 q
(2.20)

for 0x X 2 and 0y Y 2 , where p, q, M i and θ i (i=1,2) are defined as in Theorem  2.1, W 2 (u) is defined by

W 2 (u)= u 0 u d ξ w 1 q ( ξ 1 q ) + w 2 q ( ξ 1 q ) ,u u 0 >0,
(2.21)

and X 2 , Y 2 R + are chosen such that

(2.22)

Proof As in the proof of Theorem 2.1, it follows from (2.19) that

u ( x , y ) a ˜ ( x , y ) + 0 x 0 y f ˜ 1 ( x , y , s , t ) w 1 ( u ( s , t ) ) d s d t + 0 x 0 y ( x α 1 s α 1 ) β 1 1 s γ 1 1 ( y α 2 t α 2 ) β 2 1 t γ 2 1 × f ˜ 2 ( x , y , s , t ) w 2 ( u ( s , t ) ) d s d t .
(2.23)

Noticing that

from Lemma 2.1 and Lemma 2.2, we have

u q ( x , y ) 3 q 1 [ a ˜ q ( x , y ) + ( x y ) q p 0 x 0 y f ˜ 1 q ( x , y , s , t ) w 1 q ( u ( s , t ) ) d s d t + ( M 1 x θ 1 M 2 y θ 2 ) q p 0 x 0 y f ˜ 2 q ( x , y , s , t ) w 2 q ( u ( s , t ) ) d s d t ] .
(2.24)

We introduce x ˜ , y ˜ as in the proof of Theorem 2.1, the above inequality can be rewritten as

u q ( x , y ) 3 q 1 a ˜ q ( x ˜ , y ˜ ) + 3 q 1 ( x ˜ y ˜ ) q p 0 x 0 y f ˜ 1 q ( x ˜ , y ˜ , s , t ) w 1 q ( u ( s , t ) ) d s d t + 3 q 1 ( M 1 x ˜ θ 1 M 2 y ˜ θ 2 ) q p 0 x 0 y f ˜ 2 q ( x ˜ , y ˜ , s , t ) w 2 q ( u ( s , t ) ) d s d t .
(2.25)

Denoting the right-hand side of (2.25) by z(x,y), we have

u q (x,y)z(x,y),z(0,y)= 3 q 1 a ˜ q ( x ˜ , y ˜ )

and

D 1 z ( x , y ) 3 q 1 ( x ˜ y ˜ ) q p 0 y f ˜ 1 q ( x ˜ , y ˜ , x , t ) w 1 q ( z 1 q ( x , t ) ) d t + 3 q 1 ( M 1 x ˜ θ 1 M 2 y ˜ θ 2 ) q p 0 y f ˜ 2 q ( x ˜ , y ˜ , x , t ) w 2 q ( z 1 q ( x , t ) ) d t ,
(2.26)

which implies

D 1 z ( x , y ) w 1 q ( z 1 q ( x , y ) ) + w 2 q ( z 1 q ( x , y ) ) 3 q 1 ( x ˜ y ˜ ) q p 0 y f ˜ 1 q ( x ˜ , y ˜ , x , t ) d t + 3 q 1 ( M 1 x ˜ θ 1 M 2 y ˜ θ 2 ) q p 0 y f ˜ 2 q ( x ˜ , y ˜ , x , t ) d t .
(2.27)

Similar to the proof of Theorem 2.1, we obtain (2.20). The details are omitted here. □

3 Applications

In this section, we present some examples to show applications in the boundedness and uniqueness of a certain partial integral equation with weakly singular kernel.

Example 1 Suppose u(x,y)C( R + 2 ,R+) satisfies the inequality as follows:

u(x,y) 1 2 + 0 x 0 y ( x s ) 1 5 s 1 2 ( y t ) 1 3 t 1 3 e s 2 t u ( s , t ) dsdt
(3.1)

for x0, y0. Then (3.1) is the special case of inequality (2.1), that is,

From the condition γ 1 >1 1 p , we have 1<p<2. From γ 2 >1 1 p , we have 1<p<3. With the assumption (A1), let p= 4 3 , then q=4, q p =3. Hence

a ˜ ( x , y ) = 1 2 , f ˜ ( x , y , s , t ) = e s 2 t , A ( x , y ) = 2 3 ( 1 2 ) 4 = 1 2 ; M 1 = B [ 1 3 , 11 15 ] , θ 1 = 1 15 , M 2 = B [ 5 9 , 5 9 ] , θ 2 = 1 9 ; W 1 ( u ) = u 0 u d ξ ξ = 2 ( u u 0 ) , W 1 1 ( u ) = ( u 0 + u 2 ) 2 , Dom ( W 1 1 ) = [ 0 , + ) .
(3.2)

Using (2.2) in Theorem 2.1, we get for x0 and y0,

u ( x , y ) [ W 1 1 ( W 1 ( A ( x , y ) ) + 2 3 ( M 1 x θ 1 M 2 y θ 2 ) 3 0 x 0 y ( e s 2 t ) 4 d s d t ) ] 1 4 = [ W 1 1 ( W 1 ( 1 2 ) + 8 ( B [ 1 3 , 11 15 ] x 1 15 B [ 5 9 , 5 9 ] y 1 9 ) 3 0 x 0 y e 4 s e 8 t d s d t ) ] 1 4 = [ W 1 1 ( 2 2 u 0 + 1 4 ( B [ 1 3 , 11 15 ] x 1 15 B [ 5 9 , 5 9 ] y 1 9 ) 3 ( 1 e 4 x ) ( 1 e 8 y ) ) ] 1 4 = [ 2 2 + 1 8 ( B [ 1 3 , 11 15 ] x 1 15 B [ 5 9 , 5 9 ] y 1 9 ) 3 ( 1 e 4 x ) ( 1 e 8 y ) ] 1 2 ,
(3.3)

which implies that u(x,y) in (3.1) is bounded.

Example 2

Consider the following linear singular integral equations:

u(x,y)=a(x,y)+ 0 x 0 y ( x s ) β 1 1 s γ 1 1 ( y t ) β 2 1 t γ 2 1 f(s,t)u(s,t)dsdt
(3.4)

and

v(x,y)=b(x,y)+ 0 x 0 y ( x s ) β 1 1 s γ 1 1 ( y t ) β 2 1 t γ 2 1 f(s,t)v(s,t)dsdt,
(3.5)

where u,v,a,b,fC( R + 2 , R + ) with |a(x,y)b(x,y)|<ϵ. Here, ϵ is an arbitrary positive number, and β i and γ i (i=1,2) satisfy the assumption (A1). From (3.4) and (3.5), we get

(3.6)

which is the formula of inequality (2.16). Applying Corollary 2.2 to (3.6), we have

| u ( x , y ) v ( x , y ) | 2 q 1 q ϵexp ( 2 q 1 q ( M 1 x θ 1 M 2 y θ 2 ) q p 0 x 0 y f ( s , t ) q d s d t ) ,
(3.7)

where M i and θ i (i=1,2) are defined as in Theorem 2.1. If a(x,y)=b(x,y), letting ϵ0, we obtain the uniqueness of the global continuous solution of equation (3.4).

References

  1. Agarwal RP, Deng S, Zhang W: Generalization of a retarded Gronwall-like inequality and its applications. Appl. Math. Comput. 2005, 165: 599–612. 10.1016/j.amc.2004.04.067

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Choi SK, Deng S, Koo NJ, Zhang W: Nonlinear integral inequalities of Bihari-type without class H . Math. Inequal. Appl. 2005, 8: 643–654.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Pachpatte BG: Inequalities for Differential and Integral Equations. Academic Press, New York; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Deng S, Prather C: Generalization of an impulsive nonlinear singular Gronwall-Bihari inequality with delay. JIPAM. J. Inequal. Pure Appl. Math. 2008., 9: Article ID 34

    Google Scholar 

  5. Furati KM, Tatar NE: Power-type estimates for a nonlinear fractional differential equation. Nonlinear Anal. 2005, 62: 1025–1036. 10.1016/j.na.2005.04.010

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ma QH, Yang EH: Estimations on solutions of some weakly singular Volterra integral inequalities. Acta Math. Appl. Sin. 2002, 25: 505–515.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Ma QH, Yang EH: Bounds on solutions to some nonlinear Volterra integral inequalities with weakly singular kernels. Ann. Differ. Equ. 2011, 27(3):283–292.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. McKee S: The analysis of a variable step, variable coefficient linear multistep method for solving a singular integro-differential equation arising from the diffusion of discrete particles in a turbulent fluid. J. Inst. Math. Appl. 1979, 23: 373–388. 10.1093/imamat/23.3.373

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. McKee S, Tang T: Integral inequalities and their application in numerical analysis. Fasc. Math. 1991, 308(23):67–76.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. McKee S, Tang T, Diogo T: An Euler-type method for two-dimensional Volterra integral equations of the first kind. IMA J. Numer. Anal. 2000, 20(3):423–440. 10.1093/imanum/20.3.423

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Mazouzi S, Tatar NE: New bounds for solutions of a singular integro-differential inequality. Math. Inequal. Appl. 2010, 13: 427–435.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Medveď M: On singular versions of Bihari and Wendroff-Pachpatte type integral inequalities and their application. Tatra Mt. Math. Publ. 2007, 38: 163–174.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Henry D Lecture Notes in Math. 840. In Geometric Theory of Semilinear Parabolic Equations. Springer, New York/Berlin; 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Sano H, Kunimatsu N: Modified Gronwall’s inequality and its application to stabilization problem for semilinear parabolic systems. Syst. Control Lett. 1994, 22: 145–156. 10.1016/0167-6911(94)90109-0

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ye HP, Gao JM, Ding YS: A generalized Gronwall inequality and its application to a fractional differential equation. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2007, 328: 1075–1081. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2006.05.061

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Medveď M: A new approach to an analysis of Henry type integral inequalities and their Bihari type versions. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1997, 214: 349–366. 10.1006/jmaa.1997.5532

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ma QH, Pečarić J: Some new explicit bounds for weakly singular integral inequalities with applications to fractional differential and integral equations. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2008, 341: 894–905. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2007.10.036

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Cheung WS, Ma QH, Tseng S: Some new nonlinear weakly singular integral inequalities of Wendroff type with applications. J. Inequal. Appl. 2008., 2008: Article ID 909156

    Google Scholar 

  19. Wang H, Zheng K: Some nonlinear weakly singular integral inequalities with two variables and applications. J. Inequal. Appl. 2010., 2010: Article ID 345701

    Google Scholar 

  20. Medveď M: Nonlinear singular integral inequalities for functions in two and n independent variables. J. Inequal. Appl. 2000, 2000: 287–308.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Pachpatte BG: Integral inequalities of the Bihari type. Math. Inequal. Appl. 2002, 5: 649–657.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kelong Zheng.

Additional information

Competing interests

The author declares that they have no competing interests.

Authors’ contributions

This work is supported by the Doctoral Program Research Foundation of Southwest University of Science and Technology (No. 11zx7129). The author is very grateful to both reviewers for carefully reading this paper and for their comments.

Rights and permissions

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

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zheng, K. Bounds on some new weakly singular Wendroff-type integral inequalities and applications. J Inequal Appl 2013, 159 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2013-159

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2013-159

Keywords

  • integral inequalities
  • weakly singular
  • Wendroff type
  • boundedness