See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/342248694

New results on controllability of fractional evolution systems with order

\begin{document}$ \alpha\in (1,2) $\end{document}

Article  in  Evolution Equations and Control Theory · January 2019

DOI: 10.3934/eect.2020077

CITATIONS READS

54 188

2 authors, including:

J. W. He
Guangxi University
25 PUBLICATIONS   254 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by J. W. He on 08 December 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

EVOLUTION EQUATIONS AND doi:10.3934/eect.2020077
CONTROL THEORY

NEW RESULTS ON CONTROLLABILITY OF FRACTIONAL

EVOLUTION SYSTEMS WITH ORDER α ∈ (1, 2)

Yong Zhou∗
Faculty of Mathematics and Computational Science, Xiangtan University
Hunan 411105, China
Faculty of Information Technology, Macau University of Science and Technology
Macau 999078, China

Jia Wei He
Faculty of Mathematics and Computational Science, Xiangtan University
Hunan 411105, China

(Communicated by Irena Lasiecka)

Abstract. This paper addresses some interesting results of mild solutions to

fractional evolution systems with order α ∈ (1, 2) in Banach spaces as well as
the controllability problem. Firstly, we deduce a new representation of solution
operators and give a new concept of mild solutions for the objective equations
by the Laplace transform and Mainardi’s Wright-type function, and then we
proceed to establish a new compact result of the solution operators when the
sine family is compact. Secondly, the controllability results of mild solutions
are obtained. Finally, an example is presented to illustrate the main results.

1. Introduction. We observe that the dependent relation of the mean square dis-
placement of particles with respect to the time in diffusion phenomena behaves like
hx2 (t)i ∼ const · tα , α > 0. It’s worth noting that when α = 1, it is a normal
diffusion, such as the heat equation. When α 6= 1, it is an anomalous diffusion,
where 0 < α < 1 and 1 < α < 2 stand for sub-diffusive phenomenon and super-
diffusive phenomenon, respectively. Diffusion equations with fractional derivatives
can provide a nice instrument to describe the memory and hereditary properties
of anomalous diffusion processes. Meanwhile, the space variable does not scale like
the Brownian motion in anomalous diffusion (Lévy processes) as well, a typical ex-
ample is the fractional Laplacian (−∆)s , 0 < s < 1, which are the generators of
Lévy processes that contain jumps and long-distance interactions. It is readily seen
that fractional elliptic operators emerge from nonlinear elasticity, probability and
mathematical biology, some excellent papers point out the importance of fractional
modeling in the contexts of free boundaries and minimal surfaces, thin obstacle
problems and heat equations etc., we refer the reader to Caffarelli and Stinga [5],
Caffarelli and Sire [6], Bonforte and Sire [4] and the references therein.

2020 Mathematics Subject Classification. 26A33, 34A08, 34K35, 35R11.

Key words and phrases. Fractional derivative, controllability, mild solutions, Mainardi’s
Wright-type function.
∗ Corresponding author: Yong Zhou.

1
2 YONG ZHOU AND JIA WEI HE

Let Ω ⊂ Rn be an open set with Dirichlet boundary conditions. We consider the

following fractional wave equation
∂tα x(t, z) = ∆x(t, z) + f (t, z), z ∈ Ω, t > 0, (1)
where ∂tα is the Caputo fractional partial derivative of order α ∈ (1, 2), ∆ stands for
the Laplacian operator. Such equation (1) is also called super-diffusive equation,
when it applies to a viscoelastic model, such as a signalling problem closely related to
seismology, there is an intermediate process between diffusion and wave propagation
in an evolution process of the propagation of waves in a viscoelastic medium with
a creep compliance of power-law type, see Mainardi [24]. Particularly, if we set
α → 2 in (1), it becomes the standard wave equation that plays an important role
in physical fields.
Let us consider the usual Hilbert spaces L2 (Ω) and H01 (Ω), and let A = ∆ on
2
L (Ω) in equation (1), one can find from Arendt et al. [2] that operator A will
generate a bounded strongly continuous cosine family on domain
D(A) = {x ∈ H01 (Ω), Ax ∈ L2 (Ω)}.
According to the above arguments, the fractional wave equation can be rewritten
as an abstract fractional evolution equation
C α
D0+ x(t) = Ax(t) + f (t), t > 0.
From the view point of physics, we can consider some more special problems on
fractional evolution equations which are abstracted from fractional wave equations.
On the other hand, fractional differential equations have gained considerable im-
portance due to their application in various sciences, such as physics, mechanics,
chemistry, enguneering, etc. In recent years, there has been a significant develop-
ment in ordinary and partial differential equations involving fractional derivatives,
see the monographs of Podlubny [25], Kilbas et al. [14], Zhou [31, 32] and papers
[7, 15, 10, 21, 22] and the references therein.
The existence of mild solutions for fractional differential and integro-differential
equations of order α ∈ (1, 2) has attracted much attention in recent years. Li et
al. [17] considered two fractional evolution problems with Riemann-Liouville deriv-
ative by using the concept of resolvent family. Shu [27] studied the existence and
uniqueness of mild solutions for nonlocal fractional differential equations based on
the concept of sectorial operator. Li [19] studied the regularity of mild solutions
for fractional abstract Cauchy problems by analytic solution operators. Moreover,
Kian and Yamamoto [13] studied the existence and Strichartz estimates of solutions
for semilinear fractional wave equations by the method of eigenvalue expansion in
bounded domain. Li et al.[20] discussed the existence and uniqueness of fractional
abstract Cauchy problems with order α ∈ (1, 2). In addition, there are some in-
teresting and important controllability results on the fractional differential systems
introduced in [1] with order α ∈ (0, 1) and in [18] with order α ∈ (1, 2).
Inspired by above-mentioned arguments and some works, in this paper, we study
the controllability of the following fractional evolution systems
(C α
D0+ x(t) = Ax(t) + f (t, x(t)) + Bu(t), t ∈ J = [0, b],
(2)
x(0) = x0 , x0 (0) = x1 ,
where CD0+ α
is the Caputo fractional derivative of order 1 < α < 2, A is the
infinitesimal generator of a strongly continuous cosine family {C(t)}t≥0 of uniformly
bounded linear operators in Banach space X, f : J × X → X is a given appropriate
 CONTROLLABILITY FOR FRACTIONAL EVOLUTION SYSTEMS 3

function satisfying some assumptions. b is a finite positive number, the state x(·)
takes values in X and the control function u(·) is given in a Banach space L2 (J, U )
of admissible control functions, where U is also a Banach space. B is a bounded
linear operator from U into X and x0 , x1 are elements of space X.
For the case of α → 2 and A = ∂ 2 /∂x2 or A = ∆ in (2), the study of control-
lability of wave equation seems to be complete. Extensive related papers can be
found in [16, 23, 9, 33] and the references therein. The semigroup theory has been
applied to establish the controllability results of wave equation in some literatures,
while it is not valid for the case of α ∈ (1, 2). Therefore, the fractional case is
not a direct generalization of integer case. Additionally, compared to integer order
controllers, the fractional order controllers of fractional order control models are
more flexible [26]. If A is the matrix in finite dimensional space, Balachandran et
al. [3] established a set of sufficient conditions for the controllability of nonlinear
fractional dynamical system, from their results, one can see that controls of frac-
tional dynamical systems are generalizations that include the normal integer order
systems as special cases.
Our main purpose is to obtain a controllability result of a new mild solution
to fractional evolution systems of order α ∈ (1, 2), the innovation in which mainly
concentrates on two aspects. Since the Mainardi’s Wright-type function is well-
defined for α ∈ (0, 1), how to define mild solutions by using this function becomes
very difficult. However, by carrying out a careful analysis, we show that a new
representation of solution operator is deduced by the proposed function and then
a new concept of mild solution is given. On the other hand, we establish a new
compact result of the solution operators when the sine family is compact. Our
research method for system (2) is totally different from the previous studies on the
problem.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we introduce some notations
and useful concepts for fractional calculus and cosine family. In Section 3, we give
a new and specific definition on the mild solution for system (2) by the Laplace
transform, cosine family and Mainardi’s Wright-type function. Furthermore, we
establish a compact result and other properties of solution operators. Section 4 is
concerned with the study of the exact controllability for system (2). Finally, an
example is provided to illustrate the theory of the obtained results.

2. Preliminaries. In this section, we introduce notations, definitions, and prelim-

inary facts from fractional calculus, and cosine family.
Throughout this paper, let X be a Banach space with the norm | · |. We denote
that Lb (X, Y ) are the spaces of all bounded linear operators from X to Y equipped
with the norm k · kLb (X,Y ) and let Lb (X) : X → X, for short k · kLb . Let C(J, X) be
the spaces of all continuous functions from J into X equipped with the sup-norm
kxk = supt∈J |x(t)|. The domain and range of an operator A are defined by D(A)
and R(A) respectively, if A : X → X is a linear operator, we denote the resolvent
set of A by ρ(A) and the resolvent of A by R(λ, A) = (λI − A)−1 ∈ Lb (X).
Let us recall the following fractional calculus definitions. For more details, see
[14, 25, 31, 32] and the references therein.
The fractional integral of order γ ∈ R+ with the lower limit zero for a function
u is defined as
Z t
γ 1
I0+ u(t) = (gγ ∗ u)(t) = (t − s)γ−1 u(s)ds, t > 0,
Γ(γ) 0
4 YONG ZHOU AND JIA WEI HE

provided the right side is point-wise defined on [0, ∞), where ∗ denotes convolution,
tγ−1
gγ (t) = ,
Γ(γ)
and Γ is the usual gamma function. In case γ = 0, we denote g0 (t) = δ(t), the Dirac
measure is concentrated at the origin.
The Riemann-Liouville fractional derivative of order γ ∈ R+ with the lower limit
zero for a function u : [0, ∞) → R is defined by
L γ dn
D0+ u(t) = (gn−γ ∗ u)(t), t > 0, n − 1 < γ < n,
dtn
and the corresponding Caputo derivative of order γ ∈ R+ with the lower limit zero
for a function u : [0, ∞) → R is defined by
 n−1
X u(k) (0) 
C γ γ
D0+ u(t) = LD0+ u(t) − tk , t > 0, n − 1 < γ < n.
k!
k=0

We briefly review the definition and some properties of a cosine family. For more
details on strongly continuous cosine and sine families, we refer the reader to the
books of [2, 11] and the papers [8, 28, 29].
Definition 2.1. (See [28, p. 76]) A one parameter family {C(t)}t∈R of bounded lin-
ear operators mapping the Banach space X into itself is called a strongly continuous
cosine family if and only if
(i) C(0) = I;
(ii) C(s + t) + C(s − t) = 2C(s)C(t) for all s, t ∈ R;
(iii) C(t)x is continuous in t on R for each fixed point x ∈ X.
{S(t)}t∈R is the sine family associated with the strongly continuous cosine family
{C(t)}t∈R which is defined by:
Z t
S(t)x = C(s)xds, x ∈ X, t ∈ R. (3)
0

The infinitesimal generator of cosine family {C(t)}t∈R of the operator A is defined

by
d2
Ax = C(0)x, for all x ∈ D(A),
dt2
where D(A) = {x ∈ X : C(t)x ∈ C 2 (R, X)}. Denote a set E = {x ∈ X :
C(t)x ∈ C 1 (R, X)}. It is known that the infinitesimal generator A is a closed,
densely-defined operator in X.
Lemma 2.1. (See [28, Proposition 2.1]) Let {C(t)}t∈R be a strongly continuous
cosine family in X. The following are true
(i) there exist constants M ≥ 1 and ω ≥ 0 such that kC(t)kLb ≤ M eω|t| for all
t ∈ R; Rt
(ii) kS(t2 ) − S(t1 )kLb ≤ M | t12 eω|s| ds| for all t1 , t2 ∈ R.
d
(iii) if x ∈ E, then S(t)x ∈ D(A) and dt C(t)x = AS(t)x.
Lemma 2.2. (See [29, p. 1075]) Let {C(t)}t∈R be a strongly continuous cosine
family in X. Then limt→0 t−1 S(t)x = x for any x ∈ X.
 CONTROLLABILITY FOR FRACTIONAL EVOLUTION SYSTEMS 5

Lemma 2.3. (See [28, Proposition 2.5]) Let {C(t)}t∈R be a strongly continuous co-
sine family in X satisfying kC(t)kLb ≤ M eω|t| , t ∈ R, and let A be the infinitesimal
generator of {C(t)}t∈R . Then for Reλ > ω, λ2 ∈ ρ(A) and
Z ∞ Z ∞
λR(λ2 ; A)x = e−λt C(t)xdt, R(λ2 ; A)x = e−λt S(t)xdt, f or x ∈ X.
0 0

Lemma 2.4. (Schauder’s fixed point therem) Let Ω be a closed convex subset of
Banach space X. Let F : Ω → Ω is continuous such that FΩ is relatively compact.
Then the operator equation Fx = x has a solution on Ω.

3. A new definition of mild solutions. We first introduce the Mittag-Leffler

function Eµ,ν (z) and the Mainardi’s Wright-type function M% (z), respectively, for
more details, we refer to [24, 25, 30].
∞
X zn
Eµ,ν (z) = , µ, ν > 0, z ∈ C.
n=0
Γ(µn + ν)
and
∞
X (−z)n
M% (z) = , % ∈ (0, 1), z ∈ C.
n=0
n!Γ(1 − %(n + 1))
Integrating term-by-term into Mittag-Leffler function, it follows that
Z t
Eµ,ν (atµ )tν−1 dt = tν Eµ,ν+1 (atµ ), µ, ν > 0, a ∈ R. (4)
0

Lemma 3.1. For any t > 0, the Mainardi’s Wright-type function has the properties
Z ∞
Γ(1 + δ)
M% (t) ≥ 0, θδ M% (θ)dθ = , f or − 1 < δ < ∞, (5)
0 Γ(1 + %δ)
and for z ∈ C, µ ∈ (0, 1)
Z ∞ Z ∞
Eµ,1 (−z) = Mµ (θ)e−zθ dθ, Eµ,µ (−z) = µθMµ (θ)e−zθ dθ.
0 0

Throughout this paper, we suppose that A is the infinitesimal generator of a

strongly continuous cosine family of uniformly bounded linear operators {C(t)}t≥0
in Banach space X, that is, there exists M ≥ 1 such that kC(t)kLb ≤ M , t ≥ 0.
For the sake of convenience in writing, we always set q = α2 for α ∈ (1, 2).
We firstly consider the following linear nonhomogeneous fractional evolution sys-
tems (C α
Dt x(t) = Ax(t) + f (t), t ∈ [0, ∞),
(6)
x(0) = x0 , x0 (0) = x1 .
The system (6) is equivalent to the following integral equation
Z t
1
x(t) = x0 + x1 t + (t − s)α−1 [Ax(s) + f (s)]ds, t ∈ [0, ∞), (7)
Γ(α) 0
provided that the integral in (7) exists.
Theorem 3.1. If (7) holds, then
Z t
x(t) = Cq (t)x0 + Kq (t)x1 + (t − s)q−1 Pq (t − s)f (s)ds, f or t ∈ [0, ∞), (8)
0
6 YONG ZHOU AND JIA WEI HE

where
Z ∞ Z t
q
Cq (t) = Mq (θ)C(t θ)dθ, Kq (t) = Cq (s)ds,
Z0 ∞ 0

Pq (t) = qθMq (θ)S(tq θ)dθ.

0

Proof. Let Reλ > 0 and let L denotes the Laplace transform by
Z ∞ Z ∞
ν(λ) = L[x(t)](λ) = e−λs x(s)ds, µ(λ) = L[f (t)](λ) = e−λs f (s)ds.
0 0

Let λα ∈ ρ(A). Now applying the Laplace transform to (7), we have

1 1 1 1
ν(λ) = x0 + 2 x1 + α Aν(λ) + α µ(λ)
λ λ λ λ
=λα−1 (λα − A)−1 x0 + λα−2 (λα − A)−1 x1 + (λα − A)−1 µ(λ). (9)

By Lemma 2.3, it follows that for t ≥ 0,

Z ∞ α
Z ∞ α
α
−1 −λ 2 t −1 α −1
ν(λ) =λ 2 e C(t)x0 dt + λ λ 2 e−λ 2 t C(t)x1 dt (10)
Z ∞0 α 0

−λ 2 t
+ e S(t)µ(λ)dt. (11)
0

Let
q
Φq (θ) = Mq (θ−q ), θ ∈ (0, ∞),
θq+1
and its Laplace transform is given by
Z ∞ 1 
q
e−λθ Φq (θ)dθ = e−λ , for q ∈ ,1 . (12)
0 2

Firstly, using (12), we have

Z ∞ Z ∞
q q
λq−1 e−λ t C(t)x0 dt = q(λt)q−1 e−(λt) C(tq )x0 dt
0
Z0 ∞
1 d  ∞ −λtθ
Z 
= − e Φq (θ)dθ C(tq )x0 dt
λ dt 0
Z0 ∞ Z ∞
= θΦq (θ)e−λtθ C(tq )x0 dθdt (13)
0 0
Z ∞ hZ ∞  tq  i
= e−λt Φq (θ)C q x0 dθ dt
0 0 θ
hZ ∞ i h i
=L Mq (θ)C(tq θ)x0 dθ (λ) = L Cq (t)x0 (λ).
0

Furthermore, since L[g1 (t)](λ) = λ−1 , by Laplace convolution theorem, we obtain

Z ∞
q
λ−1 λq−1 e−λ t C(t)x1 dt = L[(g1 ∗ Cq )(t)x1 ](λ). (14)
0
 CONTROLLABILITY FOR FRACTIONAL EVOLUTION SYSTEMS 7

Similarly, we obtain that

Z ∞ Z ∞
−λq t q
e S(t)µ(λ)dt = qtq−1 e−(λt) S(tq )µ(λ)dt
0
Z0 ∞ Z ∞
= qtq−1 Φq (θ)e−λtθ S(tq )µ(λ)dθdt
0 0
Z ∞ h Z ∞ tq−1  tq  i
−λt
= e q q Φq (θ)S q µ(λ)dθ dt (15)
0 0 θ θ
hZ ∞ i
=L qtq−1 Mq (θ)S(tq θ)dθ (λ) · L[f (t)](λ)
0
hZ t i
=L (t − s)q−1 Pq (t − s)f (s)ds (λ).
0
Now, by using the uniqueness theorem of Laplace transform, combining (13),
(14) and (15), we have the following identity
Z t Z t
x(t) = Cq (t)x0 + Cq (s)x1 ds + (t − s)q−1 Pq (t − s)f (s)ds,
0 0
for t ≥ 0. The proof is completed.
Property 3.1. If (7) holds. Then for t > 0,
2q−1 d
tq−1 Pq (t)x = I0+ Cq (t)x, f or x ∈ X, and Cq (t)x = tq−1 APq (t)x, f or x ∈ E.
dt
Proof. From the proof of Theorem 3.1, for any x ∈ X, we know that for Reλ > 0
λ2q−1 (λ2q − A)−1 x = L[Cq (t)x](λ), and (λ2q − A)−1 x = L[tq−1 Pq (t)x](λ),
and moreover by L[g2q−1 (t)](λ) = λ1−2q , we have
L[g2q−1 (t)](λ) · L[C2q (t)x](λ) = L[tq−1 Pq (t)x](λ),
2q−1
which can deduce that tq−1 Pq (t)x = I0+ Cq (t)x for x ∈ X by the uniqueness
theorem of Laplace transform.
Furthermore, from Lemma 2.1 (iii), we have for x ∈ E
Z ∞
d q−1
Cq (t)x = t qθMq (θ)AS(tq θ)xdθ = tq−1 APq (t)x.
dt 0
The proof is completed.
Example 3.1. √ Let X = R, a > 0, and A : R → R is defined by Ax = −ax, then
C(t) = cos(t a) is a strongly continuous
√ √ cosine function and the corresponding sine
function is given by S(t) = sin(t a)/ a. Hence, we get that Cq (t) = E2q,1 (−at2q ),
Kq (t) = tE2q,2 (−at2q ) and Pq (t) = tq E2q,2q (−at2q ) for t ≥ 0.
Indeed, the Euler’s formula eiθ = cos(θ) + i sin(θ), here i is the imaginary unit
and θ ∈ R, implies that cos(θ) = (eiθ + e−iθ )/2, from Lemma 3.1, we have
Z ∞
√
Cq (t) = Mq (θ) cos(tq θ a)dθ
0
Z ∞ √
Z ∞ √

1 itq θ a −itq θ a
= Mq (θ)e dθ + Mq (θ)e dθ
2 0 0
1 √ √

= Eq,1 (itq a) + Eq,1 (−itq a)
2
=E2q,1 (−at2q ).
8 YONG ZHOU AND JIA WEI HE

According to (4), we get that Kq (t) = tE2q,2 (−at2q ). Similarly, using sin(θ) =
1 iθ −iθ
2i (e − e ), we also have
Z ∞
1 √
Pq (t) = √ qθMq (θ) sin(tq θ a)dθ
a 0
Z ∞ Z ∞ 
1 q √ q √
= √ qθMq (θ)eit θ a dθ − qθMq (θ)e−it θ a dθ
2i a 0 0
1 √ √
= √ Eq,q (itq a) − Eq,q (−itq a) = tq E2q,2q (−at2q ).


2i a
Remark 3.1. If X = R, a > 0, and A : R → R is defined by Ax = −ax, then we
can reduce system (6) to
C
Dtα x(t) = −ax(t) + f (t), f or t ≥ 0, (16)
with initial value conditions x(0) = x0 and x0 (0) = x1 . From [14, Chapter 3], it
follows that (16) associated with initial value conditions has the unique solution
Z t
α α
x(t) = Eα,1 (−at )x0 + tEα,2 (−at )x1 + (t − s)α−1 Eα,α (−a(t − s)α )f (s)ds,
0
which is in coincidence with (8) and Example 3.1.
In view of Theorem 3.1, we give a new appropriate definition of the mild solutions
for the system (2).
Definition 3.1. For each u ∈ L2 (J, U ), a mild solution of the system (2), we mean
that the function x ∈ C(J, X) satisfies the following integral equation
Z t
x(t) =Cq (t)x0 + Kq (t)x1 + (t − s)q−1 Pq (t − s)f (s, x(s))ds
0
Z t
+ (t − s)q−1 Pq (t − s)Bu(s)ds,
0
for each t ∈ J.
Remark 3.2. For any t ≥ 0, since C(t) and S(t) are linear operators, it is easy to
see that Cq (t), Kq (t) and Pq (t) are also linear operators.
Lemma 3.2. For any fixed t ≥ 0 and for any x ∈ X, the following estimates are
true
M
|Cq (t)x| ≤ M |x|, |Kq (t)x| ≤ M |x|t, |Pq (t)x| ≤ |x|tq .
Γ(2q)
Proof. For any x ∈ X and fixed t ≥ 0, according to (5), we have
Z ∞
|Cq (t)x| ≤ Mq (θ)|C(tq θ)x|dθ ≤ M |x|,
0
which deduces immediately that |Kq (t)x| ≤ M |x|t. In addition, by (3), we have
Z ∞ Z ∞ Z tq θ
q
|Pq (t)x| ≤ qθMq (θ)|S(t θ)x|dθ ≤ qθMq (θ) |C(τ )x|dτ dθ
0 0 0
Z ∞
M
≤M q|x|tq θ2 Mq (θ)dθ = |x|tq .
0 Γ(2q)
The proof is completed.
 CONTROLLABILITY FOR FRACTIONAL EVOLUTION SYSTEMS 9

Lemma 3.3. The operator Cq (t) is strongly continuous, i.e., for every x ∈ X and
for any t0 , t00 ≥ 0, we have
|Cq (t00 )x − Cq (t0 )x| → 0, as t00 → t0 .
Proof. For every x ∈ X, since {C(t)}t∈R is strongly continuous, i.e., for any ε > 0
and t, s ∈ R, it follows that |C(t)x − C(s)x| → 0 as t − s → 0. Therefore, for any
t0 , t00 ≥ 0, we have
Z ξ
|Cq (t00 )x − Cq (t0 )x| ≤ Mq (θ)|(C((t00 )q θ) − C((t0 )q θ))x|dθ
0
Z ∞
+ Mq (θ)|(C((t00 )q θ) − C((t0 )q θ))x|dθ.
ξ

Form (5), for any ε > 0 let us choose ξ sufficiently large such that
Z ∞ Z ∞
00 q 0 q
Mq (θ)|(C((t ) θ) − C((t ) θ))x|dθ ≤ 2M |x| Mq (θ)dθ < ε.
ξ ξ

Additionally, we have
Z ξ
Mq (θ)|(C((t00 )q θ) − C((t0 )q θ))x|dθ ≤ 2M |x|,
0
which implies that
Z ξ
Mq (θ)|(C((t00 )q θ) − C((t0 )q θ))x|dθ → 0, as t00 → t0 .
0
Consequently, by the arbitrariness of ε and let t00 → t0 , one has |Cq (t00 )x−Cq (t0 )x| →
0. The proof is completed.
Lemma 3.4. The operators Kq (t) and Pq (t) are uniformly continuous, i.e., for any
t0 , t00 ≥ 0, we have
kKq (t00 ) − Kq (t0 )kLb → 0, kPq (t00 ) − Pq (t0 )kLb → 0, as t00 → t0 .
Proof. For every x ∈ X, since {C(t)}t∈R is uniformly bounded linear operators, we
have
Z t00
00 0
kKq (t ) − Kq (t )kLb = Cq (s)ds ≤ M |t00 − t0 | → 0, as t00 → t0 .

t0 Lb

In addition, according to Lemma 2.1 (ii), we get that

Z ∞
kPq (t00 ) − Pq (t0 )kLb ≤ qθMq (θ)k(S((t00 )q θ) − S((t0 )q θ))kLb dθ
0
M
≤ |(t00 )q − (t0 )q | → 0, as t00 → t0 .
Γ(2q)
The proof is completed.
Remark 3.3. Noting that, from Lemma 3.2 and Lemma 3.4, it is easy to see that
for any t, s ≥ 0, x ∈ X
lim tq−1 Pq (t)x = 0, and ktq−1 Pq (t) − sq−1 Pq (s)kLb → 0, as t → s.
t→0

Theorem 3.2. Assume that S(t) is compact for every t > 0. Then Pq (t) is a
compact operator for every t > 0.
10 YONG ZHOU AND JIA WEI HE

Proof. For each positive constant r, set Vr = {x ∈ X : |x| ≤ r}. Obviously, Vr is a

bounded subset in X. We only need to verify that for any positive constant r and
t > 0, the set
nZ ∞ o
U (t) = qθMq (θ)S(tq θ)xdθ, x ∈ Vr ,
0
are relatively compact in X.
Let t > 0 be fixed. For any δ > 0 and 0 < ε ≤ t, define the subset in X by
n S(εq δ) Z ∞ o
q q
Uε,δ (t) = qθMq (θ)S(t θ − ε δ)xdθ, x ∈ V r .
εq δ δ
Clearly, for each fixed t > 0, Uε,δ (t) is well-defined. In fact, by the uniformly
boundedness of cosine family and the uniformly convergence of Mainardi’s Wright-
type function for θ ∈ (δ, ∞), we obtain that for any x ∈ Vr
 S(εq δ) ∞
 Z  Z ∞
q q 2
qθMq (θ)(tq θ + εq δ)dθ


 εq δ qθMq (θ)S(t θ − ε δ)xdθ ≤M |x|

δ δ
Z ∞
2 q 2M 2
≤2M |x|t qθ2 Mq (θ)dθ ≤ |x|tq .
δ Γ(2q)
Hence, the set Uε,δ (t) is relatively compact since S(εq δ) is compact for εq δ > 0.
Furthermore, we have
 S(εq δ) ∞
 Z Z ∞ 
q q q


 εq δ qθMq (θ)S(t θ − ε δ)xdθ − qθMq (θ)S(t θ)xdθ
δ 0
 S(εq δ) ∞
 Z Z ∞ 
q q q

≤ q
 qθMq (θ)S(t θ − ε δ)xdθ − qθMq (θ)S(t θ)xdθ
ε δ
Z ∞ δ Z ∞
δ

q q
 
+  qθMq (θ)S(t θ)xdθ − qθMq (θ)S(t θ)xdθ
δ 0
Z ∞  S(εq δ)
  Z δ
qθMq (θ)  q S(tq θ − εq δ)x − S(tq θ)x dθ + qθMq (θ)|S(tq θ)x|dθ

≤
δ ε δ 0
:=l1 + l2 .
Since
 S(εq δ)
 
qθMq (θ)  q S(t θ − ε δ)x − S(t θ)x ≤ 2M 2 tq qθ2 Mq (θ)|x|,
q q q


ε δ
R∞ 2
and 0
qθ2 Mq (θ)dθ = Γ(1+2q) , we can see that
Z ∞
 S(εq δ)
 
qθMq (θ)  q S(tq θ − εq δ)x − S(tq θ)x dθ

0 ε δ
is uniformly convergence. In addition, due to the strongly continuous of the sine
family, for θ ∈ (δ, ∞), using Lemma 2.2, we have
 S(εq δ)
 
q q q

 εq δ S(t θ − ε δ)x − S(t θ)x
 

 S(εq δ)
 
≤  q S(t θ − ε δ)x − S(t θ − ε δ)x + S(tq θ − εq δ)x − S(tq θ)x → 0,
q q q q
  

ε δ
as δ → 0. Therefore, we have
Z ∞
 S(εq δ)
 
q q q

l1 ≤ qθMq (θ)  q S(t θ − ε δ)x − S(t θ)x dθ → 0,
 as δ → 0.
0 ε δ
 CONTROLLABILITY FOR FRACTIONAL EVOLUTION SYSTEMS 11

Rδ
On the other hand, by qθ2 Mq (θ)dθ → 0 as δ → 0, we have
0
Z δ
q
l2 ≤ M |x|t qθ2 Mq (θ)dθ → 0, as δ → 0.
0
Hence, there are relatively compact sets arbitrarily close to the set U (t) for every
t > 0. Thus the set U (t) is relatively compact in X for every t > 0. The proof is
completed.

4. Controllability results.
Definition 4.1. The system (2) is said to be controllable on the interval [0, b] if for
every x0 , x1 , y ∈ X, there exists a control u ∈ L2 ([0, b], U ) such that a mild solution
x(·) of system (2) satisfies x(b) = y.
We assume the following hypotheses:
(H1) The function f : J × X → X is continuous and there exists a constant lf > 0
such that
|f (t, x) − f (t, y)| ≤ lf |x − y|, for each t ∈ J and for all x, y ∈ X,
and Mf = supt∈J |f (t, 0)|.
(H2) The linear operator B : U → X is bounded, and let W : L2 (J, U ) → X be
the linear operator defined by
Z b
Wu = (b − s)q−1 Pq (b − s)Bu(s)ds,
0
has a invertible operator W −1 which takes values in L2 (J, U )/kerW and there
exist two positive constants M1 and M2 such that
kBkLb (U,X) ≤ M1 , kW −1 kLb (X,L2 (J,U )/kerW ) ≤ M2 .
For each r > 0, denote a bounded convex and closed set of C(J, X) as follows
Br = {x ∈ C(J, X) : kxk ≤ r}.
Theorem 4.1. Assume that (H1)-(H2) are satisfied. Furthermore, we suppose that
the following inequality holds
M lf b2q M M1 M2 b2q
 
+ 1 < 1. (17)
Γ(2q + 1) Γ(2q + 1)
Then the evolution system (2) is controllable on J.
Proof. Let φ(t) = Cq (t)x0 + Kq (t)x1 for t ∈ J. Using hypothesis (H2) for an
arbitrary function x(·), we define the control ux (t) by
h Z b i
ux (t) = W −1 y − φ(b) − (b − s)q−1 Pq (b − s)f (s, x(s))ds (t). (18)
0
We will show that, the operator P : C(J, X) → C(J, X) defined by
Z t
(Px)(t) =φ(t) + (t − s)q−1 Pq (t − s)Bux (s)ds
0
Z t
+ (t − s)q−1 Pq (t − s)f (s, x(s))ds,
0
has a fixed point x(·) for the control ux . Then x is a mild solution of evolution
system (2). Clearly, (Px)(b) = y, which means that the control ux steers the
12 YONG ZHOU AND JIA WEI HE

system from the initial state x0 and x1 to y in time b. Hence, we need to prove that
the operator P has a fixed point.
From the assumptions, we have,
" Z b #
q−1
|Bux (t)| ≤M1 M2 |y| + |φ(b)| + (b − s) |Pq (b − s)f (s, x(s))|ds
0

≤M1 M2 |y| + M |x0 | + M b|x1 |
Z b
M
+ (b − s)2q−1 |f (s, x(s)) − f (s, 0)|ds
Γ(2q) 0
Z b 
M
+ (b − s)2q−1 |f (s, 0)|ds
Γ(2q) 0
M b2q
 
≤M1 M2 |y| + M |x0 | + M b|x1 | + (lf r + Mf ) =: G(r).
Γ(2q + 1)
We first show that P maps Br into itself. From the definition of the operator P
and the hypotheses, for x ∈ Br , we obtain
Z t
|(Px)(t)| ≤|φ(t)| + (t − s)q−1 |Pq (t − s)Bux (s)|ds
0
Z t
+ (t − s)q−1 |Pq (t − s)f (s, 0)|ds
0
Z t
+ (t − s)q−1 |Pq (t − s)(f (s, x(s)) − f (s, 0))|ds
0
M b2q M Mf b2q M lf b2q r
≤M |x0 | + M b|x1 | + G(r) + + .
Γ(2q + 1) Γ(2q + 1) Γ(2q + 1)
Hence, from inequality (17) it follows that kPxk ≤ r and then P(Br ) ⊆ Br .
Now for any v, w ∈ Br , we have
Z t
|(Pv)(t) − (Pw)(t)| ≤ (t − s)q−1 |Pq (t − s)(f (s, v(s)) − f (s, w(s)))|ds
0
Z t  hZ b
(t − s)q−1 Pq (t − s)BW −1 (b − τ )q−1

+
0 0
i 
× Pq (b − τ )(f (τ, v(τ )) − f (τ, w(τ )))dτ (s)ds

M lf t2q M M1 M2 lf t2q b2q

≤ kv − wk + kv − wk,
Γ(2q + 1) (Γ(2q + 1))2
which implies from (17) that kPv − Pwk < kv − wk. Consequently, we deduce that
P is a contraction on Br . Hence by the Banach fixed point theorem, P has a unique
fixed point x in C(J, X). We thus obtain that x(·) is a mild solution of the problem
(2) and the proof is completed.

We use the below condition instead of (H1) to avoid the Lipschitz continuity of
f used in Theorem 4.1.
(H3) The function f : J × X → X satisfies:
 CONTROLLABILITY FOR FRACTIONAL EVOLUTION SYSTEMS 13

(i) f (t, ·) : X → X is continuous for a.e. t ∈ J, and f (·, x) : J → X is

strongly measurable for all x ∈ X;
(ii) there exists a function kf (·) ∈ L1 (J, R+ ) such that
|f (t, x)| ≤ kf (t)ϕ(|x|), for each t ∈ J and for all x ∈ X,
where ϕ : R+ → R+ is a nondecreasing continuous function satisfying
ϕ(r)
lim inf = 0.
r→∞ r
Theorem 4.2. Assume that (H2)-(H3) are satisfied, and the following condition
holds:
(H4) For every t ∈ J and for each r > 0, the set {Pq (t−s)f (s, x), s ∈ [0, t], x ∈ Br }
is relatively compact in X.
Then the evolution system (2) is controllable on J.
Proof. We define the operator P on the space C(J, X) as in Theorem 4.1. Clearly,
in order to prove the controllability of the problem (2), we must show that the
operator P has a fixed point by Lemma 2.4.
Noting that, from hypotheses (H2)-(H3), we have
Z b !
q−1
|Bux (t)| ≤M1 M2 |y| + |φ(b)| + (b − s) |Pq (b − s)f (s, x(s))|ds
0
!
Z b
M
≤M1 M2 |y| + M |x0 | + M b|x1 | + (b − s)2q−1 kf (s)ϕ(|x(s)|)ds ,
Γ(2q) 0

which implies that

1
M M2 b2q− 2
kBux kL2 (J,X) ≤M3 + ϕ(r)kkf kL1 (J,R+ ) , (19)
Γ(2q)
√
where M3 = bM1 M2 (|y| + M |x0 | + M b|x1 |) .
Step I. Px ∈ Br for every x ∈ Br . To the contrary, if this not true, then for
each r > 0, there exists a function xr ∈ Br , but Pxr does not belong to Br , i.e.,
r < |(Pxr )(t)|, for some t ∈ J.
In view of Hölder inequality, we obtain that
|(Px)(t)|
Z t Z t
M M
≤|φ(t)| + (t − s)2q−1 |Bux (s)|ds + (t − s)2q−1 |f (s, x(s))|ds
Γ(2q) 0 Γ(2q) 0
1 Z t
M t2q− 2 Mt 2q−1
≤M |x0 | + M b|x1 | + kBux kL2 (J,X) + kf (s)ϕ(|x(s)|)ds
Γ(2q) Γ(2q) 0
1 1
!2
M M3 b2q− 2 M b2q− 2  √ 
≤M |x0 | + M b|x1 | + + M2 + b ϕ(r)kkf kL1 (J,R+ ) .
Γ(2q) Γ(2q)
Therefore, it follows that
1 1
!2
M M3 b2q− 2 M b2q− 2  √ 
r < M |x0 | + M b|x1 | + + M2 + b ϕ(r)kkf kL1 (J,R+ ) .
Γ(2q) Γ(2q)
14 YONG ZHOU AND JIA WEI HE

Dividing both sides of the above inequality by r and taking the limit as r → ∞,
from (H3), we thus deduce the contraction. Consequently, for each positive number
r, P(Br ) ⊆ Br .
Step II. We shall show that P is completely continuous. Firstly, we show is P
continuous. Let {xn }∞
n=1 be a sequence of Br such that xn → x in Br as n → ∞.
By (H3), due to the continuity of f , we have

f (s, xn (s)) → f (s, x(s)), as n → ∞.

and

(t − s)2q−1 |f (s, xn (s)) − f (s, x(s))| ≤ 2ϕ(r)(t − s)2q−1 kf (s), for s ∈ [0, t].

Since s 7→ 2ϕ(r)(t − s)2q−1 kf (s) is integral for s ∈ [0, t] and t ∈ J, it follows the
Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem that

|(Pxn )(t) − (Px)(t)|

Z t  Z b
q−1  −1
(b − τ )q−1 Pq (b − τ )

≤ (t − s) Pq (t − s)BW
0 0
 

× (f (τ, xn (τ )) − f (τ, x(τ )))dτ (s)ds
Z t
+ (t − s)q−1 |Pq (t − s)(f (s, xn (s)) − f (s, x(s)))|ds
0
Z b
M M1 M2 t2q
2
≤ (b − τ )2q−1 |f (τ, xn (τ )) − f (τ, x(τ ))| dτ
Γ(2q + 1)Γ(2q) 0
Z t
M
+ (t − s)2q−1 |f (s, xn (s)) − f (s, x(s))|ds → 0, as n → ∞.
Γ(2q) 0

Thus, kPxn − Pxk → 0 as n → ∞. This means that P is continuous.

Next, we will verify that P maps bounded sets into equicontinuous sets.
Let 0 ≤ t1 < t2 ≤ b, for any x ∈ Br , we get

|(P2 x)(t2 ) − (P2 x)(t1 )|

Z t2
≤|φ(t2 ) − φ(t1 )| + |(t2 − s)q−1 Pq (t2 − s)[f (s, x(s)) + Bux (s)]|ds
t1
Z t1
+ |((t2 − s)q−1 Pq (t2 − s) − (t1 − s)q−1 Pq (t2 − s))[f (s, x(s)) + Bux (s)]|ds
0
=|φ(t2 ) − φ(t1 )| + I1 + I2 .

According to Lemma 3.2 and (19), we have

Z t2 Z t2
M 2q−1 M
I1 ≤ (t2 − s) kf (s)ϕ(|x(s)|)ds + (t2 − s)2q−1 |Bux (s)|ds
Γ(2q) t1 Γ(2q) t1
Z t2
M M 1
≤ ϕ(r)(t2 − t1 )2q−1 kf (s)ds + (t2 − t1 )2q− 2 kBux kL2 (J,X)
Γ(2q) t1 Γ(2q)
→0, as t2 → t1 .
 CONTROLLABILITY FOR FRACTIONAL EVOLUTION SYSTEMS 15

Let Tq (t) = tq−1 Pq (t) for t ∈ J, then we know from Remark 3.3 that Tq (t) is a
uniformly continuous operator. For I2 , taking ε > 0 small enough, we have
Z t1 −ε
I2 ≤ |(Tq (t2 − s) − Tq (t1 − s))[f (s, x(s)) + Bux (s)]|ds
0
Z t1
+ |(Tq (t2 − s) − Tq (t1 − s))[f (s, x(s)) + Bux (s)]|ds
t1 −ε
Z t1
≤ kf (s)ϕ(|x(s)|)ds sup kTq (t2 − s) − Tq (t1 − s)kLb
0 s∈[0,t1 −ε]
Z t1
+ |Bux (s)|ds sup kTq (t2 − s) − Tq (t1 − s)kLb
0 s∈[0,t1 −ε]
Z t1
2M
+ kf (s)ϕ(|x(s)|)ds(t2 − t1 + ε)2q−1
Γ(2q) t1 −ε
Z t1
2M
+ |Bux (s)|ds(t2 − t1 + ε)2q−1
Γ(2q) t1 −ε
≤ϕ(r)kkf kL1 (J,R+ ) sup kTq (t2 − s) − Tq (t1 − s)kLb
s∈[0,t1 −ε]
√
+ t1 kBux kL2 (J,X) sup kTq (t2 − s) − Tq (t1 − s)kLb
s∈[0,t1 −ε]
Z t1
2M
+ ϕ(r) kf (s)ds(t2 − t1 + ε)2q−1
Γ(2q) t1 −ε
2M √
+ kBux kL2 (J,X) ε(t2 − t1 + ε)2q−1 → 0, as t2 → t1 , ε → 0.
Γ(2q)
Thus, I2 tends to zero independently of x ∈ Br as t2 → t1 , ε → 0.
As a consequent, since the strongly continuity of operators Cq (t) and Kq (t) from
Lemmas 3.3 and 3.4, we obtain immediately that |(Px)(t2 )−(Px)(t1 )| tends to zero
as t2 → t1 independently of x ∈ Br . Thus, P(Br ) is equicontinuous.
By the Arzelà-Ascoli theorem, it suffices to verify that P maps Br into a relatively
compact set in X, that is, we shall show that the set {(Px)(t), x ∈ Br } is relatively
compact for t ∈ J. Indeed, it follows from Remark 3.3 and the hypotheses (H2)-(H4)
that the set
Θ = {(t − s)q−1 Pq (t − s)f (s, x(s)), x ∈ Br , s ∈ [0, t]}
is relatively compact for each t ∈ J. Furthermore, in view of (19), for x ∈ Br , by
using the mean value theorem for the Bochner integral, we obtain
Z t
(t − s)q−1 Pq (t − s)[Bux (s) + f (s, x(s))]ds ∈ t convΘ, for all t ∈ J.
0
Therefore the set {(Px)(t), x ∈ Br } is relatively compact in X for every t ∈ J.
In addition, in view of Step II and {(Px)(t), x ∈ Br } is relatively compact in
X, we get that P is a completely continuous operator by Arzelà-Ascoli theorem.
Hence, by Step I and using Lemma 2.4, it follows that P has a fixed point x on
Br , which is a mild solution of the system (2). Thus the evolution system (2) is
controllable on [0, b]. The proof is completed.
Remark 4.1. Let us mention that i) if the Banach space X is finite dimensional,
the hypothesis (H4) can be reduced to that of the compactness of sine function S(t)
16 YONG ZHOU AND JIA WEI HE

for each t > 0, moreover it is a generalization of paper [3] that we does not apply
the Mittag-Leffler matrix function. ii) if function f is completely continuous, then
hypothsis (H4) holds obviously. iii) in Theorem 4.2, if modifying hypothesis (H4)
by the following hypothesis
(H5) there exists a suitable positive constant L > 0 such that
σ(f (t, D)) ≤ Lσ(D), for any bounded set D ⊂ X and a.e. t ∈ J,
where σ stands for the Hausdorff measure of noncompactness,
and using the same method as in [32, Theorem 4.9.], we can still establish the
controllability of evolution system (2).

5. Example.
Example 5.1. Let Ω ⊂ RN be a bounded domain with sufficiently smooth bound-
ary and X = U = L2 (Ω). As an application of our main results, we consider the
following fractional partial differential systems
 3
∂t2 u(t, z) = ∆u(t, z) + %e−t sin(u(t, z)) + Bu(t, z), t ∈ [0, 1], z ∈ Ω,


u(t, z) = 0, t ∈ [0, 1], z ∈ ∂Ω (20)

u(0, z) = u (z), u0 (0, z) = u (z), z ∈ Ω,

0 1
3
where ∂t is the Caputo fractional partial derivative, % is a positive number.
2

Let J = [0, 1] and let A be the Laplace operator with Dirichlet boundary condi-
tions given by A = ∆ and
D(A) = {f ∈ H01 (Ω), Af ∈ L2 (Ω)}.
Obviously, we have D(A) = H01 (Ω) ∩ H 2 (Ω). It is known that the operator A
generates a uniformly bounded strongly continuous cosine
2 2
pfamily {C(t), t ≥ 0},
see [2, Section 7.2.]. In fact, let λn = n π and φn (z) = 2/π sin(nπz) for every
n ∈ N. It is clear that {−λn , φn }∞ n=1 is the eigensystem of the operator A, then
0 < λ1 ≤ λ2 ≤ · · · , λn → ∞ as n → ∞, and {φn }∞ n=1 form an orthonormal basis of
X. Then
X∞
Ax = − λn (x, φn )φn , x ∈ D(A),
n=1
where (·, ·) is the inner product in X. It follows that the cosine function given by
∞
X p
C(t)x = cos( λn t)(x, φn )φn , x ∈ X,
n=1

and the sine function is associated with cosine function given by

∞
X 1 p
S(t)x = √ sin( λn t)(x, φn )φn , x ∈ X.
n=1
λn
It is easy to check that S(t) is compact for t ≥ 0 and kC(t)kLb ≤ 1 for all t ≥ 0.
Since α = 32 , we know that q = 34 , and then kCq (t)kLb ≤ 1 for all t ≥ 0.
The control operator B : U → X is defined by
∞
X
Bu = cλn (u, φn )φn , c > 0,
n=1
 CONTROLLABILITY FOR FRACTIONAL EVOLUTION SYSTEMS 17

where
un , n = 1, 2, . . . , N,

u=
0, n = N + 1, N + 2, · · · ,
for N ∈ N and W : L2 (J, U ) → X as follows:
Z 1
1
Wu = (1 − s)− 4 P 34 (1 − s)Bu(s)ds.
0
P  21
∞ 2
Since |u| = n=1 (u, φn ) for u ∈ U , we obtain
∞
X  21
|Bu| = c2 λ2n (u, φn )2 ≤ cN λN |u|,
n=1

which implies that there exists a positive constant M1 such that kBkLb (U,X) ≤ M1 .
Let u(s, z) = x(z) ∈ U and let x stands for xn if n = 1, 2...N or 0 if n = N + 1, ....
Therefore, we have
Z 1 Z ∞
1 3 3
Wu = (1 − s)− 4 θM 34 (θ)S((1 − s) 4 θ)Bxdθds
0 4 0
Z 1 Z ∞ N p
− 14 3 3
X p
=c (1 − s) θM 43 (θ) λn sin( λn (1 − s) 4 θ)(x, φn )φn dθds
0 4 0 n=1
N
X ∞ Z p
=c M 43 (θ)(1 − cos( λn θ))dθ(x, φn )φn
n=1 0
X∞  
=c 1 − E 32 ,1 (−λn ) (x, φn )φn .
n=1
1
According to [12], let d = E 23 ,1 (− 10 ), then for every n ∈ N, we have −1 <
E 32 ,1 (−λn ) ≤ d < 1, which implies
0 < 1 − d ≤ 1 − E 32 ,1 (−λn ) < 2.
P∞
Hence we know that W is surjective. Thus, for any x = n=1 (x, φn )φn ∈ X, we
define an inverse W −1 : X → L2 (J, U )/kerW by
∞
1 X (x, φn )φn
(W −1 x)(t, y) = ,
c n=1 1 − E 32 ,1 (−λn )
Thus, for x ∈ X, it follows that
∞
! 21
−1 1 X (x, φn )2 1
|(W x)(t, ·)| = ≤ |x|.
c n=1
(1 − E 23 ,1 (−λn ))2 c(1 − d)

Note that W −1 x is independent of t ∈ J. Consequently, we have

1
kW −1 kLb (X,L2 (J,U )/kerW ) ≤ .
c(1 − d)
Hence, the condition (H2) holds.
Let f (t, x) = %e−t sin(x(t)) satisfies
|f (t, x) − f (t, y)| ≤ %e−t | sin(x(t)) − sin(y(t))| ≤ %|x(t) − y(t)|,
18 YONG ZHOU AND JIA WEI HE

for any x, y ∈ X, t ∈ [0, 1]. Then, the system (20) can be rewritten as the system
(2) in X. Hence the condition (H1) is satisfied. Thus, all conditions of Theorem
4.1 are satisfied provided with
9πc(1 − d)
%< √ .
16M1 + 12 πc(1 − d))
Then the system (20) is controllable on J.

Acknowledgments. This research was supported by National Natural Science

Foundation of China (11671339) and the Macau Science and Technology Devel-
opment Fund (Grant No. 0074/2019/A2) from the Macau Special Administrative
Region of the People’s Republic of China. The authors also thank the editor and
reviewers for their very professional and constructive comments and suggestions
that led to the improvement of the original manuscript.

REFERENCES

[1] R. P. Agarwal, D. Baleanu, J. J. Nieto, D. F. M. Torres and Y. Zhou, A survey on fuzzy

fractional differential and optimal control nonlocal evolution equations, J. Comput. Applied
Math., 339 (2018), 3–29.
[2] W. Arendt, C. J. K. Batty, M. Hieber and F. Neubrander, Vector-valued Laplace Transforms
and Cauchy Problems (Second Edition), Birkhauser Verlag, 2011.
[3] K. Balachandran, V. Govindaraj, L. Rodrı́guez-Germa and J. J. Trujillo, Controllability re-
sults for nonlinear fractional-order dynamical systems, J. Optimization Theory, Appl., 156
(2013), 33–44.
[4] M. Bonforte, Y. Sire and J. L. Vázquez, Optimal existence and uniqueness theory for the
fractional heat equation, Nonlinear Anal., 153 (2017), 142–168.
[5] L. A. Caffarelli and P. R. Stinga, Fractional elliptic equations, Caccioppoli estimates and
regularity, Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré Anal. Non Linéaire, 33 (2016), 767–807.
[6] L. A. Caffarelli and Y. Sire, Minimal surfaces and free boundaries: Recent developments,
Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., 57 (2020), 91–106.
[7] H. Dong and D. Kim, Lp -estimates for time fractional parabolic equations with coefficients
measurable in time, Adv. Math., 345 (2019), 289–345.
[8] H. O. Fattorini, Second Order Linear Differential Equations in Banach Spaces, North Hol-
land, Elsevier, 1985.
[9] E. Fernández-Cara, Q. Lü and E. Zuazua, Null controllability of linear heat and wave equa-
tions with nonlocal spatial terms, SIAM J. Control Optim., 54 (2016), 2009–2019.
[10] Y. Giga and T. Namba, Well-posedness of Hamilton-Jacobi equations with Caputo’s time
fractional derivative, Comm. Part. Diff. Eq., 42 (2017), 1088–1120.
[11] J. A. Goldstein, Semigroups of Linear Operators and Applications, Oxford Univ. Press, New
York, 1985.
[12] J. W. Hanneken, D. M. Vaught and B. N. Narahari Achar, Enumeration of the Real Zeros of
the Mittag-Leffler Function Eα (z), 1 < α < 2, in Advances in Fractional Calculus, Springer,
Dordrecht, 2007, 15–26.
[13] Y. Kian and M. Yamamoto, On existence and uniqueness of solutions for semilinear fractional
wave equations, Fract. Calc. Appl. Anal., 20 (2017), 117–138.
[14] A. A. Kilbas, H. M. Srivastava and J. J. Trujillo, Theory and Applications of Fractional
Differential Equations, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2006.
[15] I. Kim, K. H. Kim and S. Lim, Lq (Lp )-theory for the time fractional evolution equations with
variable coefficients, Adv. Math., 306 (2017), 123–176.
[16] V. Komornik, Exact controllability in short time for the wave equation, Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré
Anal. Non Linéaire, 6 (1989), 153–164.
[17] K. Li, J. Peng and J. Jia, Cauchy problems for fractional differential equations with Riemann-
Liouville fractional derivatives, J. Funct. Anal., 263 (2012), 476–510.
[18] K. Li, J. Peng and J. Gao, Controllability of nonlocal fractional differential systems of order
α ∈ (1, 2] in Banach spaces, Rep. Math. Phys., 71 (2013), 33–43.
 CONTROLLABILITY FOR FRACTIONAL EVOLUTION SYSTEMS 19

[19] Y. Li, Regularity of mild Solutions for fractional abstract Cauchy problem with order α ∈
(1, 2), Z. Angew. Math. Phys., 66 (2015), 3283–3298.
[20] Y. Li, H. Sun and Z. Feng, Fractional abstract Cauchy problem with order α ∈ (1, 2), Dyn.
Partial Differ. Equ., 13 (2016), 155–177.
[21] L. Li, J. G. Liu and L. Wang, Cauchy problems for Keller-Segel type time-space fractional
diffusion equation, J. Diff. Equa., 265 (2018), 1044–1096.
[22] C. Lin and G. Nakamura, Unique continuation property for multi-terms time fractional dif-
fusion equations, Math. Ann., 373 (2019), 929–952.
[23] J.-L. Lions, Exact controllability, stabilization and perturbations for distributed systems,
SIAM Rev., 30 (1988), 1–68.
[24] F. Mainardi, Fractional Calculus and Waves in Linear Viscoelasticity: An Introduction to
Mathematical Models, Imperial College Press, 2010.
[25] I. Podlubny, Fractional Differential Equations, Academic Press, San Diego, 1999.
[26] I. Podlubny, Fractional-order systems and P I λ Dµ controller, IEEE Trans. Auto. Control, 44
(1999), 208–214.
[27] X. B. Shu and Q. Q. Wang, The existence and uniqueness of mild solutions for fractional
differential equations with nonlocal conditions of order 1 < α < 2, Comput. Math. Appl., 64
(2012), 2100–2110.
[28] C. C. Travis and G. F. Webb, Cosine families and abstractnonlinear second order differential
equations, Acta Math. Hungar., 32 (1978), 75–96.
[29] V. V. Vasil’ev, S. G. Krein and S. I. Piskarev, Semigroups of operators, cosine operator
functions, and linear differential equations, J. Soviet Math., 54 (1991), 1042–1129.
[30] R. N. Wang, D. H. Chen and T. J. Xiao, Abstract fractional Cauchy problems with almost
sectorial operators, J. Differ. Equ., 252 (2012), 202–235.
[31] Y. Zhou, Basic Theory of Fractional Differential Equations, World Scientific, Singapore,
2014.
[32] Y. Zhou, Fractional Evolution Equations and Inclusions: Analysis and Control, Academic
Press, Elsevier, 2016.
[33] E. Zuazua, Exact controllability for semilinear wave equations in one space dimension, Ann.
Inst. H. Poincaré Anal. Non Linéaire, 10 (1993), 109–129.

Received April 2020; revised April 2020.

E-mail address: yzhou@xtu.edu.cn; yozhou@must.edu.mo
E-mail address: hjw.haoye@163.com

View publication stats