Open Access

Nonlinear integral inequalities with delay for discontinuous functions and their applications

Journal of Inequalities and Applications20132013:430

https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2013-430

Received: 16 May 2013

Accepted: 26 August 2013

Published: 11 September 2013

Abstract

This paper investigates integral inequalities with delay for discontinuous functions involving two nonlinear terms. We do not require the classes and ȷ in Gallo and Piccirillo’s paper (Bound. Value Probl. 2009:808124, 2009). Our main results can be applied to generalize Gallo and Piccirillo’s results and Iovane’s results (Nonlinear Anal., Theory Methods Appl. 66:498-508, 2007). Examples to show the bounds of solutions of an impulsive differential equation are also given, which can not be estimated by Gallo and Piccirillo’s results.

MSC:26D15, 26D20.

Keywords

integral inequalitiesdiscontinuous functionsnonlinearimpulsive differential equations

1 Introduction

The Gronwall-Bellman integral inequalities and their various linear and nonlinear generalizations, involving continuous or discontinuous functions, play very important roles in investigating different qualitative characteristics of solutions for differential equations and impulsive differential equations such as existence, uniqueness, continuation, boundedness, continuous dependence of parameters, stability, attraction, practical stability. The literature on inequalities for continuous functions and their applications is vast (see [18]). Recently, more attention has been paid to generalizations of Gronwall-Bellman’s results for discontinuous functions (see [917]) and their applications (see [11, 18, 19]). Among them, one of the important things is that Samoilenko and Perestyuk [17] studied the following inequality
u ( x ) c + x 0 x f ( s ) u ( s ) d s + x 0 < x i < x β i u ( x i 0 )
(1.1)
about the nonnegative piecewise continuous function u ( x ) , where c, β i are nonnegative constants, f ( s ) is a positive function, and x i are the first kind discontinuity points of the function u ( x ) . Then Borysenko [20] considered
u ( x ) c + x 0 x f ( s ) u m ( s ) d s + x 0 < x i < x β i u ( x i 0 ) , m > 0 , m 1 , u ( x ) c + x 0 x f ( s ) u m ( s ) d s + x 0 < x i < x β i u m ( x i 0 ) , m > 0 , m 1 .
(1.2)
He replaced the constant c by a positive monotonously nondecreasing function a ( x ) , and also estimated the inequalities
u ( x ) a ( x ) + x 0 x f ( s ) u ( s ) d s + x 0 < x i < x β i u m ( x i 0 ) , m > 0 , u ( x ) a ( x ) + x 0 x f ( s ) u m ( s ) d s + x 0 < x i < x β i u m ( x i 0 ) , m > 0 , m 1 .
(1.3)
In 2005, he [18] generalized the inequalities above from one integral to two integrals with a form
u ( x ) c + x 0 x q ( s ) u ( s ) d s + x 0 x q ( s ) x 0 s g ( τ ) u m ( τ ) d τ d s + x 0 < x i < x β i u m ( x i 0 ) , m > 0 .
(1.4)
In 2007, Iovane [21] investigated the inequalities with delay
u ( x ) a ( x ) + x 0 x f ( s ) u ( b ( s ) ) d s + x 0 < x i < x β i u m ( x i 0 ) , m > 0 , u ( x ) a ( x ) + x 0 x f ( s ) u m ( b ( s ) ) d s + x 0 < x i < x β i u m ( x i 0 ) , m > 0 , m 1 .
(1.5)
Later, Gallo and Piccirillo [22] further discussed
u ( x ) a ( x ) + h ( x ) x 0 x f ( s ) w ( u ( b ( s ) ) ) d s + x 0 < x i < x β i u m ( x i 0 )
(1.6)

with a general nonlinear term w ( u ) of u. They assumed that w or w ȷ , where the class consists of all nonnegative, nondecreasing and continuous functions w ( u ) on [ 0 , ) such that w ( 0 ) = 0 and w ( α u ) w ( α ) w ( u ) for all α > 0 and u 0 , and the class ȷ consists of all positive, nondecreasing and continuous functions w ( u ) on ( 0 , ) such that w ( 0 ) = 0 and w ( α 1 u ) > α 1 w ( u ) for all α 1 and u > 0 . The classes and ȷ allow a reduction of a ( t ) to the case of a constant a 0 by dividing a ( x ) if a ( x ) is a positive and nondecreasing function. Actually, when we study behaviors of solutions of impulsive differential equations, a ( x ) may not be a nondecreasing function, and w may not satisfy the condition w or w ȷ . For example, w ( u ) = e u does not belong to the class and ȷ for any α > 1 and large u > 0 . Thus, it is interesting to avoid such conditions.

Motivated by this observation, in this paper, we consider the following much more general inequality
u ( x ) a ( x ) + b 1 ( x 0 ) b 1 ( x ) f 1 ( x , s ) w 1 ( u ( s ) ) d s + b 2 ( x 0 ) b 2 ( x ) f 2 ( x , s ) w 2 ( u ( s ) ) d s + x 0 < x i < x β i u m ( x i 0 ) , m > 0
(1.7)

with two nonlinear terms w 1 ( u ) and w 2 ( u ) of u, where we do not restrict w 1 and w 2 to the class or the class ȷ. We also show that many integral inequalities for discontinuous functions such as (1.3), (1.4) and (1.6) can be reduced to the form of (1.7). Our main result is applied to estimate the bounds of solutions of an impulsive ordinary differential equation.

2 Main results

Consider (1.7), and assume that

(C1) w 1 ( x ) and w 2 ( x ) are continuous and nondecreasing functions on [ 0 , ) and are positive on ( 0 , ) such that w 2 ( x ) w 1 ( x ) is nondecreasing;

(C2) a ( x ) is defined on [ x 0 , ) and a ( x 0 ) 0 ; β i is a nonnegative constant for any positive integer i;

(C3) f 1 ( x , s ) and f 2 ( x , s ) are continuous and nonnegative functions on [ x 0 , ) × [ x 0 , ) ;

(C4) b 1 ( x ) and b 2 ( x ) are continuously differentiable and nondecreasing such that x 0 b 1 ( x ) x and x 0 b 2 ( x ) x on [ x 0 , ) ;

(C5) For x [ x 0 , ) , u ( x ) is nonnegative and piecewise-continuous with the first kind of discontinuities at the points x i : x 0 < x 1 <  , where i is a nonnegative integer and lim i x i = .

Let W j ( u ) = u ˜ j u d z w j ( z ) for u u ˜ j and j = 1 , 2 , where u ˜ j is a given positive constant. Clearly, W j is strictly increasing so its inverse W j 1 is well defined, continuous and increasing in its corresponding domain.

Theorem 2.1 Suppose that (C k ) ( k = 1 , , 5 ) hold, and u ( x ) satisfies (1.7) for a positive constant m. Let u i ( x ) = u ( x ) for x [ x i , x i + 1 ) . Then the estimate of u ( x ) is recursively given by for x [ x i , x i + 1 ) , i = 0 , 1 , 2 ,  ,
u i ( x ) W 2 1 [ W 2 W 1 1 ( W 1 ( r i + 1 ( x ) ) + b 1 ( x i ) b 1 ( x ) f ˜ 1 ( x , s ) d s ) + b 2 ( x i ) b 2 ( x ) f ˜ 2 ( x , s ) d s ] ,
(2.1)
where
f ˜ j ( x , s ) = max x 0 τ x f j ( τ , s ) , j = 1 , 2 , r 1 ( x ) = max x 0 τ x | a ( τ ) | , r i + 1 ( x ) = r 1 ( x ) + k = 1 i b 1 ( x k 1 ) b 1 ( x k ) f ˜ 1 ( x , s ) w 1 ( u k 1 ( s ) ) d s + k = 1 i b 2 ( x k 1 ) b 2 ( x k ) f ˜ 2 ( x , s ) w 2 ( u k 1 ( s ) ) d s + k = 1 i β k u k 1 m ( x k 0 ) ,
(2.2)
provided that
W 1 ( r i + 1 ( x ) ) + b 1 ( x i ) b 1 ( x ) f ˜ 1 ( x , s ) d s u ˜ 1 d z w 1 ( z ) , W 2 W 1 1 ( W 1 ( r i + 1 ( x ) ) + b 1 ( x i ) b 1 ( x ) f ˜ 1 ( x , s ) d s ) + b 2 ( x i ) b 2 ( x ) f ˜ 2 ( x , s ) d s u ˜ 2 d z w 2 ( z ) .
(2.3)

The proof is given in Section 3.

Remark 2.1 (1) If w j satisfies u ˜ j d z w j ( z ) = for j = 1 , 2 , then i in Theorem 2.1 can be any nonzero integer. [6] pointed out that different choices of u ˜ j in W j do not affect our results for j = 1 , 2 . If a ( x ) 0 , then define W 1 ( 0 ) = 0 , and (2.1) is still true.
  1. (2)
    Take b 1 ( x ) = x , a ( x ) = c , f 1 ( t , s ) = f ( s ) , f 2 ( t , s ) = 0 , w 1 ( u ) = u and m = 1 . Hence, (1.7) becomes (1.1). It is easy to check that W 1 ( u ) = ln u u ˜ 1 and W 1 1 ( u ) = u ˜ 1 e u . From Theorem 2.1, we know that for x [ x i , x i + 1 ) ,
    u i ( x ) r i + 1 ( x ) e x i x f ( s ) d s
     
with
r i + 1 ( x ) = c + k = 1 i x k 1 x k f ( s ) u k 1 ( s ) d s + k = 1 i β k u k 1 ( x k 0 ) .
Hence,
r 1 ( x ) = c , u 0 ( x ) c e x 0 x f ( s ) d s , r 2 ( x ) = c + x 0 x 1 f ( s ) u 0 ( s ) d s + β 1 u 0 ( x 1 0 ) r 2 ( x ) c + x 0 x 1 f ( s ) c e x 0 s f ( τ ) d τ d s + c β 1 e x 0 x 1 f ( s ) d s r 2 ( x ) = c + c e x 0 s f ( τ ) d τ | x 0 x 1 + c β 1 e x 0 x 1 f ( s ) d s = c ( 1 + β 1 ) e x 0 x 1 f ( s ) d s , u 1 ( x ) c ( 1 + β 1 ) e x 0 x f ( s ) d s .
After recursive calculations, we have for x x 0
u ( x ) c Π x 0 < x k < x ( 1 + β k ) e x 0 x f ( s ) d s ,
which is same as the one in [17].
  1. (3)
    Clearly, (1.2) and (1.3) are special cases of (1.7). If b ( x ) > 0 on [ x 0 , ) , then (1.6) can be rewritten as
    u ( x ) a ( x ) + h ( x ) b ( x 0 ) b ( x ) f ( b 1 ( s ) ) b ( b 1 ( s ) ) w ( u ( s ) ) d s + x 0 < x i < x β i u m ( x i 0 ) .
     

Let f 1 ( x , s ) = h ( x ) f ( b 1 ( s ) ) b ( b 1 ( s ) ) and f 2 ( x , s ) 0 , the inequality above is same as (1.7). Similarly, (1.5) can also be reduced to (1.7).

Consider the inequality
u ( x ) a ( x ) + x 0 x g 1 ( x , s ) x 0 s h 1 ( s , τ ) w 1 ( u ( τ ) ) d τ d s + x 0 x g 2 ( x , s ) x 0 s h 2 ( s , τ ) w 2 ( u ( τ ) ) d τ d s + x 0 < x i < x β i u m ( x i 0 ) ,
(2.4)

which looks more complicated than (1.7).

Corollary 2.1 Suppose that (C1)-(C3) and (C5) hold, and that the functions g j and h j ( j = 1 , 2 ) are both nonnegative and continuous on [ x 0 , ) × [ x 0 , ) . If (2.4) holds, then for x [ x i , x i + 1 ) , i = 0 , 1 , 2 ,  ,
u i ( x ) W 2 1 [ W 2 W 1 1 ( W 1 ( r i + 1 ( x ) ) + x i x s x max x 0 τ x g 1 ( τ , v ) h 1 ( v , s ) d v d s ) + x i x s x max x 0 τ x g 2 ( τ , v ) h 2 ( v , s ) d v d s ] ,
(2.5)

where r i + 1 and its related functions are defined as in Theorem 2.1 by replacing f j ( x , s ) with s x max x 0 τ x g j ( τ , v ) h j ( v , s ) d v , j = 1 , 2 .

Proof Because f j , h j and w j are continuous, we have
x 0 x g j ( x , s ) x 0 s h j ( s , τ ) w j ( u ( τ ) ) d τ d s = x 0 x w j ( u ( τ ) ) τ x g j ( x , s ) h j ( s , τ ) d s d τ = x 0 x w j ( u ( s ) ) s x g j ( x , τ ) h j ( τ , s ) d τ d s x 0 x f j ( x , s ) w j ( u ( s ) ) d s ,
where f j ( x , s ) : = s x max x 0 τ x g j ( τ , v ) h j ( v , s ) d v . Then (2.4) is reduced to
u ( x ) a ( x ) + x 0 x f 1 ( x , s ) w 1 ( u ( s ) ) d s + x 0 x f 2 ( x , s ) w 2 ( u ( s ) ) d s + x 0 < x i < x β i u m ( x i 0 ) ,
which is just the form of (1.7), if we take b j ( x ) = x for j = 1 , 2 . Note that for fixed s, the function f j ( x , s ) is increasing in x. So f ˜ j ( x , s ) : = max t 0 τ x f j ( τ , s ) = f j ( x , s ) . By Theorem 2.1, for x [ x i , x i + 1 ) , i = 0 , 1 , 2 ,  ,
u i ( x ) W 2 1 [ W 2 W 1 1 ( W 1 ( r i + 1 ( x ) ) + x i x s x max x 0 τ x g 1 ( τ , v ) h 1 ( v , s ) d v d s ) + x i x s x max x 0 τ x g 2 ( τ , v ) h 2 ( v , s ) d v d s ] .

 □

Remark 2.2 Using the same way, we can change inequality (1.4) into the form of (1.7) with a ( x ) = c , f 1 ( x , s ) = q ( s ) , f 2 ( x , s ) = g ( s ) s x q ( τ ) d τ , w 1 ( u ) = u and w 2 ( u ) = u m .

3 Proof of Theorem 2.1

Obviously, r 1 ( x ) is positive and nondecreasing in x, and f ˜ j ( x , s ) is nonnegative and nondecreasing in x for each fixed s and j = 1 , 2 . They satisfy r 1 ( x ) a ( x ) and f ˜ j ( x , s ) f j ( x , s ) .

We first consider x [ x 0 , x 1 ) , and we have from (1.7) and (2.2)
u ( x ) a ( x ) + b 1 ( x 0 ) b 1 ( x ) f 1 ( x , s ) w 1 ( u ( s ) ) d s + b 2 ( x 0 ) b 2 ( x ) f 2 ( x , s ) w 2 ( u ( s ) ) d s r 1 ( x ) + b 1 ( x 0 ) b 1 ( x ) f 1 ( x , s ) w 1 ( u ( s ) ) d s + b 2 ( x 0 ) b 2 ( x ) f 2 ( x , s ) w 2 ( u ( s ) ) d s .
(3.1)
Take any fixed T ( x 0 , x 1 ) , and we investigate the following inequality
u ( x ) r 1 ( T ) + b 1 ( x 0 ) b 1 ( x ) f ˜ 1 ( T , s ) w 1 ( u ( s ) ) d s + b 2 ( x 0 ) b 2 ( x ) f ˜ 2 ( T , s ) w 2 ( u ( s ) ) d s
(3.2)
for x [ x 0 , T ] , where f ˜ 1 and f ˜ 2 are defined in (2.2). Let
z ( x ) = b 1 ( x 0 ) b 1 ( x ) f ˜ 1 ( T , s ) w 1 ( u ( s ) ) d s + b 2 ( x 0 ) b 2 ( x ) f ˜ 2 ( T , s ) w 2 ( u ( s ) ) d s
and z ( x 0 ) = 0 . Hence, u ( x ) r 1 ( T ) + z ( x ) . Clearly, z ( x ) is a nonnegative, nondecreasing and differentiable function for x ( x 0 , T ] . Moreover, b j ( x ) is differentiable and nondecreasing in x [ x 0 , T ] for j = 1 , 2 . Thus, b j ( x ) 0 for x [ x 0 , T ] . Since w 1 and w 2 are nondecreasing, z ( x ) + r 1 ( T ) > 0 and b j ( x ) x for x [ x 0 , T ] , we have
z ( x ) w 1 ( z ( x ) + r 1 ( T ) ) b 1 ( x ) f ˜ 1 ( T , b 1 ( x ) ) w 1 ( u ( b 1 ( x ) ) ) w 1 ( z ( x ) + r 1 ( T ) ) + b 2 ( x ) f ˜ 2 ( T , b 2 ( x ) ) w 2 ( u ( b 2 ( x ) ) ) w 1 ( z ( x ) + r 1 ( T ) ) b 1 ( x ) f ˜ 1 ( T , b 1 ( x ) ) w 1 ( z ( b 1 ( x ) ) + r 1 ( T ) ) w 1 ( z ( x ) + r 1 ( T ) ) + b 2 ( x ) f ˜ 2 ( T , b 2 ( x ) ) w 2 ( z ( b 2 ( x ) ) + r 1 ( T ) ) w 1 ( z ( x ) + r 1 ( T ) ) b 1 ( x ) f ˜ 1 ( T , b 1 ( x ) ) w 1 ( z ( x ) + r 1 ( T ) ) w 1 ( z ( x ) + r 1 ( T ) ) + b 2 ( x ) f ˜ 2 ( T , b 2 ( x ) ) w 2 ( z ( b 2 ( x ) ) + r 1 ( T ) ) w 1 ( z ( x ) + r 1 ( T ) ) b 1 ( x ) f ˜ 1 ( T , b 1 ( x ) ) + b 2 ( x ) f ˜ 2 ( T , b 2 ( x ) ) w 2 ( z ( b 2 ( x ) ) + r 1 ( T ) ) w 1 ( z ( b 2 ( x ) ) + r 1 ( T ) ) .
Integrating both sides of the inequality above, from x 0 to x, we obtain
W 1 ( z ( x ) + r 1 ( T ) ) W 1 ( r 1 ( T ) ) + x 0 x b 1 ( s ) f ˜ 1 ( T , b 1 ( s ) ) d s + x 0 x b 2 ( s ) f ˜ 2 ( T , b 2 ( s ) ) ϕ ( z ( b 2 ( s ) ) + r 1 ( T ) ) d s W 1 ( r 1 ( T ) ) + b 1 ( x 0 ) b 1 ( x ) f ˜ 1 ( T , s ) d s + b 2 ( x 0 ) b 2 ( x ) f ˜ 2 ( T , s ) ϕ ( z ( s ) + r 1 ( T ) ) d s
for x 0 < x T , where ϕ ( x ) = w 2 ( x ) w 1 ( x ) , or equivalently,
ξ ( x ) W 1 ( r 1 ( T ) ) + b 1 ( x 0 ) b 1 ( x ) f ˜ 1 ( T , s ) d s + b 2 ( x 0 ) b 2 ( x ) f ˜ 2 ( T , s ) ϕ ( W 1 1 ( ξ ( s ) ) ) d s z 1 ( x ) ,
where
ξ ( x ) = W 1 ( z ( x ) + r 1 ( T ) ) .
It is easy to check that ξ ( x ) z 1 ( x ) , z 1 ( x 0 ) = W 1 ( r 1 ( T ) ) and z 1 ( x ) is differentiable, positive and nondecreasing on ( x 0 , T ] . Since ϕ ( W 1 1 ( u ) ) is nondecreasing from the assumption (C1), we have by (2.3)
z 1 ( x ) ϕ ( W 1 1 ( z 1 ( x ) ) ) f ˜ 1 ( T , b 1 ( x ) ) b 1 ( x ) ϕ ( W 1 1 ( z 1 ( x ) ) ) + f ˜ 2 ( T , b 2 ( x ) ) ϕ ( W 1 1 ( ξ ( b 2 ( x ) ) ) ) b 2 ( x ) ϕ ( W 1 1 ( z 1 ( x ) ) ) f ˜ 1 ( T , b 1 ( x ) ) b 1 ( x ) ϕ ( W 1 1 ( z 1 ( x ) ) ) + f ˜ 2 ( T , b 2 ( x ) ) ϕ ( W 1 1 ( z 1 ( b 2 ( x ) ) ) ) b 2 ( x ) ϕ ( W 1 1 ( z 1 ( x ) ) ) f ˜ 1 ( T , b 1 ( x ) ) b 1 ( x ) ϕ ( W 1 1 ( W 1 ( r 1 ( T ) ) + b 1 ( x 0 ) b 1 ( x ) f ˜ 1 ( T , s ) d s ) ) + f ˜ 2 ( T , b 2 ( x ) ) b 2 ( x ) .
(3.3)
Note that
x 0 x z 1 ( s ) ϕ ( W 1 1 ( z 1 ( s ) ) ) d s = x 0 x w 1 ( W 1 1 ( z 1 ( s ) ) ) z 1 ( s ) w 2 ( W 1 1 ( z 1 ( s ) ) ) d s = W 1 1 ( z 1 ( x 0 ) ) W 1 1 ( z 1 ( x ) ) d u w 2 ( u ) = W 2 W 1 1 ( z 1 ( x ) ) W 2 W 1 1 ( z 1 ( x 0 ) ) = W 2 W 1 1 ( z 1 ( x ) ) W 2 ( r 1 ( T ) ) .
Integrating both sides of inequality (3.3), from x 0 to x, we obtain
W 2 W 1 1 ( z 1 ( x ) ) W 2 ( r 1 ( T ) ) = x 0 x z 1 ( s ) ϕ ( W 1 1 ( z 1 ( s ) ) ) d s x 0 x f ˜ 1 ( T , b 1 ( s ) ) b 1 ( s ) ϕ ( W 1 1 ( W 1 ( r 1 ( T ) ) + b 1 ( x 0 ) b 1 ( s ) f ˜ 1 ( T , τ ) d τ ) ) d s + x 0 x f ˜ 2 ( T , b 2 ( s ) ) b 2 ( s ) d s W 2 W 1 1 ( W 1 ( r 1 ( T ) ) + b 1 ( x 0 ) b 1 ( x ) f ˜ 1 ( T , s ) d s ) W 2 ( r 1 ( T ) ) + b 2 ( x 0 ) b 2 ( x ) f ˜ 2 ( T , s ) d s .
Thus,
W 2 W 1 1 ( z 1 ( x ) ) W 2 W 1 1 ( W 1 ( r 1 ( T ) ) + b 1 ( x 0 ) b 1 ( x ) f ˜ 1 ( T , s ) d s ) + b 2 ( x 0 ) b 2 ( x ) f ˜ 2 ( T , s ) d s .
We have by (2.3)
u ( x ) z ( x ) + r 1 ( T ) W 1 1 ( ξ ( x ) ) W 1 1 ( z 1 ( x ) ) W 2 1 [ W 2 W 1 1 ( W 1 ( r 1 ( T ) ) + b 1 ( x 0 ) b 1 ( x ) f ˜ 1 ( T , s ) d s ) + b 2 ( x 0 ) b 2 ( x ) f ˜ 2 ( T , s ) d s ] .
Since the inequality above is true for any x [ x 0 , T ] , we obtain
u ( T ) W 2 1 [ W 2 W 1 1 ( W 1 ( r 1 ( T ) ) + b 1 ( x 0 ) b 1 ( T ) f ˜ 1 ( T , s ) d s ) + b 2 ( x 0 ) b 2 ( T ) f ˜ 2 ( T , s ) d s ] .
Replacing T by x yields
u ( x ) W 2 1 [ W 2 W 1 1 ( W 1 ( r 1 ( x ) ) + b 1 ( x 0 ) b 1 ( x ) f ˜ 1 ( x , s ) d s ) + b 2 ( x 0 ) b 2 ( x ) f ˜ 2 ( x , s ) d s ] .
(3.4)

This means that (2.1) is true for x [ x 0 , x 1 ) and i = 0 if replace u ( x ) with u 0 ( x ) .

For i = 1 and x [ x 1 , x 2 ) , (1.7) becomes
u ( x ) r 1 ( x ) + b 1 ( x 0 ) b 1 ( x 1 ) f 1 ( x , s ) w 1 ( u 0 ( s ) ) d s + b 2 ( x 0 ) b 2 ( x 1 ) f 2 ( x , s ) w 2 ( u 0 ( s ) ) d s + β 1 u 0 m ( x 1 0 ) + b 1 ( x 1 ) b 1 ( x ) f 1 ( x , s ) w 1 ( u ( s ) ) d s + b 2 ( x 1 ) b 2 ( x ) f 2 ( x , s ) w 2 ( u ( s ) ) d s r 2 ( x ) + b 1 ( x 1 ) b 1 ( x ) f 1 ( x , s ) w 1 ( u ( s ) ) d s + b 2 ( x 1 ) b 2 ( x ) f 2 ( x , s ) w 2 ( u ( s ) ) d s ,
(3.5)
where the definition of r 2 ( x ) is given in (2.2). Note that the estimate of u 0 ( x ) is known. Equation (3.5) is same as (3.1) if replace r 1 ( x ) and x 0 by r 2 ( x ) and x 1 . Thus, by (3.4), we have
u ( x ) W 2 1 [ W 2 W 1 1 ( W 1 ( r 2 ( x ) ) + b 1 ( x 1 ) b 1 ( x ) f ˜ 1 ( x , s ) d s ) + b 2 ( x 1 ) b 2 ( x ) f ˜ 2 ( x , s ) d s ] .
(3.6)

This implies that (2.1) is true for x [ x 1 , x 2 ) and i = 1 if replace u ( x ) by u 1 ( x ) .

Assume that (2.1) is true for x [ x i , x i + 1 ) , i.e.,
u i ( x ) W 2 1 [ W 2 W 1 1 ( W 1 ( r i + 1 ( x ) ) + b 1 ( x i ) b 1 ( x ) f ˜ 1 ( x , s ) d s ) + b 2 ( x i ) b 2 ( x ) f ˜ 2 ( x , s ) d s ]
(3.7)

for x [ x i , x i + 1 ) .

For x [ x i + 1 , x i + 2 ) , (1.7) becomes
u ( x ) a ( x ) + b 1 ( x 0 ) b 1 ( x ) f 1 ( x , s ) w 1 ( u ( s ) ) d s + b 2 ( x 0 ) b 2 ( x ) f 2 ( x , s ) w 2 ( u ( s ) ) d s + x 0 < x i + 1 < x β i + 1 u m ( x i + 1 0 ) r 1 ( x ) + k = 0 i b 1 ( x k ) b 1 ( x k + 1 ) f 1 ( x , s ) w 1 ( u k ( s ) ) d s + k = 0 i b 2 ( x k ) b 2 ( x k + 1 ) f 2 ( x , s ) w 2 ( u k ( s ) ) d s + k = 0 i β k + 1 u k m ( x k + 1 0 ) + b 1 ( x i + 1 ) b 1 ( x ) f 1 ( x , s ) w 1 ( u ( s ) ) d s + b 2 ( x i + 1 ) b 2 ( x ) f 2 ( x , s ) w 2 ( u ( s ) ) d s r i + 2 ( x ) + b 1 ( x i + 1 ) b 1 ( x ) f 1 ( x , s ) w 1 ( u ( s ) ) d s + b 2 ( x i + 1 ) b 2 ( x ) f 2 ( x , s ) w 2 ( u ( s ) ) d s ,
(3.8)
where we use the fact that the estimate of u ( x ) is already known for x [ x 0 , x i + 1 ) by the assumption (3.7). Again (3.8) is same as (3.1) if replace r 1 ( x ) and x 0 by r i + 2 ( x ) and x i + 1 . Thus, by (3.4), we have
u ( x ) W 2 1 [ W 2 W 1 1 ( W 1 ( r i + 2 ( x ) ) + b 1 ( x i + 1 ) b 1 ( x ) f ˜ 1 ( x , s ) d s ) + b 2 ( x i + 1 ) b 2 ( x ) f ˜ 2 ( x , s ) d s ] .

This yields that (2.1) is true for x [ x i + 1 , x i + 2 ) if replace u ( x ) by u i + 1 ( x ) . By induction, we know that (2.1) holds for x [ x i , x i + 1 ) for any nonnegative integer i. This completes the proof of Theorem 2.1.

4 Applications

Consider the following impulsive differential equation
d y d x = F ( x , y ) , x x i , Δ y | x = x i = I i ( y ) ,
(4.1)

where y R n , F : R n + 1 R n , I i : R n R n ( i = 1 , 2 , ), x x 0 0 , lim i x i = , x i 1 < x i for all i = 1 , 2 ,  .

Assume that
  1. (1)

    F ( x , y ) h 1 ( x ) y + h 2 ( x ) e y , where h 1 , h 2 are nonnegative and continuous on [ x 0 , ) ;

     
  2. (2)

    I i ( y ) β i y m , where β i and m are nonnegative constants.

     
The solution of (4.1) with an initial value y ( x 0 ) = y 0 is given by
y ( x ) = y 0 + x 0 x F ( s , y ) d s + x 0 < x i < x I i ( y ( x i 0 ) ) ,
(4.2)
which implies that
y ( x ) y 0 + x 0 x ( h 1 ( s ) y + h 2 ( s ) e y ) d s + x 0 < x i < x β i y ( x i 0 ) m .
(4.3)
Let
u ( x ) = y ( x ) , a ( x ) y 0 , b 1 ( x ) = x , b 2 ( x ) = x , f 1 ( x , s ) = h 1 ( s ) , f 2 ( x , s ) = h 2 ( s ) , w 1 ( u ) = u , w 2 ( u ) = e u ,
so (4.3) is same as (1.7). It is easy to obtain for any positive constants u ˜ 1 and u ˜ 2
r 1 ( x ) y 0 , f ˜ 1 ( x , s ) = h 1 ( s ) , f ˜ 2 ( x , s ) = h 2 ( s ) , W 1 ( u ) = u ˜ 1 u d z w 1 ( z ) = ln u u ˜ 1 , W 1 1 ( u ) = u ˜ 1 e u , W 2 ( u ) = u ˜ 2 u d z w 2 ( u ) = e u ˜ 2 e u , W 2 1 ( u ) = ln ( e u ˜ 2 u ) , r i + 1 ( x ) = y 0 + k = 1 i x k 1 x k h 1 ( s ) u k 1 ( s ) d s + k = 1 i x k 1 x k h 2 ( s ) e u k 1 ( s ) d s r i + 1 ( x ) = + k = 1 i β k u k 1 m ( x k 0 ) .
Thus, for any nonnegative integer i and x ( x i , x i + 1 )
u i ( x ) ln ( e r i + 1 ( x ) e x i x h 1 ( s ) d s x i x h 2 ( s ) d s ) ,
provided that
e r i + 1 ( x ) e x i x h 1 ( s ) d s x i x h 2 ( s ) d s > 0 .

Remark 4.1 From (4.3), we know that w 2 ( u ) = e u . Clearly, w 2 ( 2 u ) = e 2 u w 2 ( 2 ) w 2 ( u ) = e 2 e u does not hold for large u > 0 . Thus, w 2 ( u ) does not belong to the class . Again w 2 ( u 2 ) = e u 2 1 2 w 2 ( u ) = 1 2 e u does not hold for large u > 0 , so w 2 ( u ) does not belong to the class ȷ. Hence, the results in [22] can not be applied to inequality (4.3).

Declarations

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Project of Department of Education of Guangdong Province, China (No. 2012KJCX0074), the PhD Start-up Fund of the Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province, China (No. S2011040000464), the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation-Special Project (No. 201104077), the Scientific Research Foundation for the Returned Overseas Chinese Scholars, State Education Ministry (No. (2012)940), the Natural Fund of Zhanjiang Normal University (No. LZL1101), and the Doctoral Project of Zhanjiang Normal University (No. ZL1109).

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Mathematics, Zhanjiang Normal University

References

  1. Agarwal RP: On an integral inequality in n independent variables. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1982, 85: 192–196. 10.1016/0022-247X(82)90034-8MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. 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.2004.04.067MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Bihari I: A generalization of a lemma of Bellman and its application to uniqueness problems of differential equations. Acta Math. Hung. 1956, 7: 81–94. 10.1007/BF02022967MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Borysenko S, Matarazzo G, Pecoraro M: A generalization of Bihari’s lemma for discontinuous functions and its application to the stability problem of differential equations with impulse disturbance. Georgian Math. J. 2006, 13: 229–238.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. Cheung W: Some new nonlinear inequalities and applications to boundary value problems. Nonlinear Anal. 2006, 64: 2112–2128. 10.1016/j.na.2005.08.009MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Choi SK, Deng S, Koo NJ, Zhang W: Nonlinear integral inequalities of Bihari-type without class H . Math. Inequal. Appl. 2005, 8: 643–654.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. Pachpatte BG: Integral inequalities of the Bihari type. Math. Inequal. Appl. 2002, 5: 649–657.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. Pinto M: Integral inequalities of Bihari-type and applications. Funkc. Ekvacioj 1990, 33: 387–403.Google Scholar
  9. Banov D, Simeonov P Mathematics and Its Applications 57. In Integral Inequalities and Applications. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht; 1992.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Borysenko S, Iovane G: About some new integral inequalities of Wendroff type for discontinuous functions. Nonlinear Anal. 2007, 66: 2190–2203. 10.1016/j.na.2006.03.008MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Borysenko SD, Toscano S: Impulsive differential systems: The problem of stability and practical stability. Nonlinear Anal. 2009, 71: e1843-e1849. 10.1016/j.na.2009.02.084MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Hu SC, Lakshmikantham V, Leela S: Impulsive differential systems and the pulse phenomena. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1989, 137: 605–612. 10.1016/0022-247X(89)90266-7MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Iovane G: On Gronwall-Bellman-Bihari type integral inequalities in several variables with retardation for discontinuous functions. Math. Inequal. Appl. 2008, 11: 599–606.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. Lakshmikantham V, Bainov DD, Simeonov PS Series in Modern Applied Mathematics 6. In Theory of Impulsive Differential Equations. World Scientific, Teaneck; 1989.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  15. Mitropolskiy YuA, Samoilenko AM, Perestyuk N: On the problem of substantiation of overoging method for the second equations with impulse effect. Ukr. Mat. Zh. 1977, 29: 750–762.Google Scholar
  16. Mitropolskiy YuA, Iovane G, Borysenko SD: About a generalization of Bellman-Bihari type inequalities for discontinuous functions and their applications. Nonlinear Anal. 2007, 66: 2140–2165. 10.1016/j.na.2006.03.006MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  17. Samoilenko AM, Perestyuk N: Differential Equations with Impulse Effect. Visha Shkola, Kyiv; 1987.Google Scholar
  18. Borysenko SD, Ciarletta M, Iovane G: Integro-sum inequalities and motion stability of systems with impulse perturbations. Nonlinear Anal. 2005, 62: 417–428. 10.1016/j.na.2005.03.032MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Borysenko SD, Iovane G, Giordano P: Investigations of the properties motion for essential nonlinear systems perturbed by impulses on some hypersurfaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2005, 62: 345–363. 10.1016/j.na.2005.03.031MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. Borysenko, SD: About one integral inequality for piece-wise continuous functions, p. 323. In: Proc. Int. Kravchuk Conf. Kyiv (2004)Google Scholar
  21. Iovane G: Some new integral inequalities of Bellman-Bihari type with delay for discontinuous functions. Nonlinear Anal. 2007, 66: 498–508. 10.1016/j.na.2005.11.043MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Gallo A, Piccirillo AM: On some generalizations Bellman-Bihari result for integro-functional inequalities for discontinuous functions and their applications. Bound. Value Probl. 2009., 2009: Article ID 808124Google Scholar

Copyright

© Mi et al.; licensee Springer. 2013

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