Results in Physics 54 (2023) 107030

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Results in Physics
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rinp

Existence, uniqueness and synchronization of a fractional tumor growth

model in discrete time with numerical results
Jehad Alzabut a,b , R. Dhineshbabu c ,∗, A. George M. Selvam d , J.F. Gómez-Aguilar e ,∗, Hasib Khan a,f
a
Department of Mathematics and Sciences, Prince Sultan University, 11586 Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
b
Department of Industrial Engineering, OSTİM Technical University, 06374, Ankara, Turkey
c
Department of Science and Humanities, R.M.K. College of Engineering and Technology (Autonomous), Thiruvallur, 601 206, Tamil Nadu, India
d
Department of Mathematics, Sacred Heart College (Autonomous), Tirupattur, 635 601, Tamil Nadu, India
e
CONACyT-Tecnológico Nacional de México/CENIDET. Interior Internado Palmira S/N, Col. Palmira, C.P. 62490, Cuernavaca, Morelos, Mexico
f
Department of Mathematics, Shaheed Benazir Bhutto University, Sheringal, PO Box 18000, Dir Upper, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

MSC: A mathematical model of discrete fractional equations with initial condition is constructed to study the tumor-
34A12 immune interactions in this research. The model is a system of two nonlinear difference equations in the sense
34D06 of Caputo fractional operator. The applications of Banach’s and Leray–Schauder’s fixed point theorems are used
39A12
to analyze the existence results for the proposed model. Additionally, we developed several kinds of Ulam’s
47H10
stability results for the suggested model. The tumor-immune fractional map’s dynamic behavior is numerical
Keywords: analyzed for some special cases. Further, adaptive control law is proposed to stabilize the fractional map and
Discrete fractional operators
a control scheme is introduced to enhance the synchronization of the fractional model.
Tumor-immune map
Stabilization
Synchronization

Introduction methodologies applicable to domains such as speech recognition, image

Fractional calculus expands upon the notions to encompass non-
integer orders, typically represented by fractional or real values for the
integral and differential operators. In recent years, there has been a
notable increase in the attention given to this particular topic, mostly
due to its extensive applications across a multitude of scientific and
engineering disciplines. One of the primary utilizations of fractional
calculus lies in the modeling of complex physical systems. Numer-
ous empirical observations in various domains, including the charac-
teristics of viscoelastic materials, anomalous diffusion processes, and
non-Newtonian fluids, exhibit intricate behaviors that resist precise
depiction by conventional integer-order calculus. FC offers a robust
framework for comprehending the complexities inherent in such sys-
tems, enabling more precise prognostications and enhanced compre-
hension of their dynamics. The use of FC has been observed in the
domain of signal processing, namely in the examination and manip-
ulation of non-stationary data. Fractional differential equations are
capable of characterizing the dynamics of signals that possess memory,
hence facilitating the advancement of sophisticated signal processing
processing, and medical signal analysis [1–3].
Fractional calculus is used to build mathematical models for chal-
lenges encountered in daily life. In order to better explain their find-
ings, scientists across a range of disciplines are urged to incorporate
more precise information into their problems. They are using a number
of mathematical techniques in their models and fractional derivatives
are a highly useful technique. In the mathematical modeling of several
scientific circumstances, fractional order differential equations yield
more precise data than ordinary differential equations. Fractional or-
der modeling is an advantageous method that has been applied to
research the nature of diseases because the fractional derivative is a
generalization of the integer-order derivative. The fractional derivative
is global in nature, whereas the integer derivative is local in nature.
It is highly helpful to model epidemic problems using this behavior.
Additionally, the fractional derivative improves the system’s stability
zone. An additional parameter is provided by the fractional order
system, which is helpful for more accurate numerical simulations.
In the recent years, more realistic mathematical models of popula-
tion interaction in discrete sense have been extensively investigated by

∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: jalzabut@psu.edu.sa, jehad.alzabut@ostimteknik.edu.tr (J. Alzabut), vrdhineshbabu10@gmail.com (R. Dhineshbabu), agmshc@gmail.com
(A.G.M. Selvam), jgomez@cenidet.edu.mx (J.F. Gómez-Aguilar), hkhan@psu.edu.sa (H. Khan).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.2023.107030
Received 18 April 2023; Received in revised form 12 September 2023; Accepted 26 September 2023
Available online 5 October 2023
2211-3797/© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
J. Alzabut et al. Results in Physics 54 (2023) 107030

many researchers [4–10]. Further, researchers examined the dynamical Definition 2 ([26]). Let 𝜗 > 0 and (𝜍) ∈ N𝑎 . The Caputo-like delta
behavior of different types of discrete tumor-immune systems. The fractional difference is
control of chaos and its synchronization are exclusively remarkable and ∑
𝜍−(𝑚−𝜗)
1
important fields of research which influence the dynamics of chaotic 𝐶 𝜗
𝛥𝑎 (𝜍) = 𝛥−(𝑚−𝜗)
𝑎 𝛥𝑚 (𝜍) = (𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝑚−𝜗−1) 𝛥𝑚
𝜚 (𝜚),
𝛤 (𝑚 − 𝜗) 𝜚=𝑎
models such that they can be used for various types of applications
in chemistry, communication, computer sciences, economics, electri- for all 𝜍 ∈ N𝑎+𝑚−𝜗 and 𝑚 = ⌈𝜗⌉ + 1.
cal engineering, biology, mechanics, medicine, neural networks and
geology [11–13]. Recently, both from scientific and industrial point Lemma 3 ([27]). The delta DFE
of view, fractional order models and fractional control have gained
⎧𝐶 𝜗
intense fascination along with their improved versatility (compared to ⎪ 𝛥𝑎 𝑤(𝜍) = (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗, 𝑤(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)),
classical differential systems) enabling construction of comprehensive ⎨ 𝑖 (1)
⎪𝛥 𝑤(𝑎) = 𝑤𝑖 , 𝑚 = ⌈𝜗⌉ + 1, 𝑖 = 0, 1, … , 𝑚 − 1,
models of complex systems and realization of control strategies [5]. The ⎩
analysis and implementation of fractional differential equations (FDEs) has an equivalent integral difference equation
were mainly limited to continuous time [14]. The local and global
stability analyzes of fractional-order systems are investigated in [15]. 1 ∑
𝜍−𝜗

They present the positivity and boundedness of all solutions, the nu- 𝑤(𝜍) = 𝑤0 (𝜍)+ (𝜍−σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) (𝜚−1+𝜗, 𝑤(𝜚−1+𝜗)), 𝜍 ∈ N𝑎+𝑚 ,
𝛤 (𝜗) 𝜚=𝑎+𝑚−𝜗
merical simulation, global stability. Besides, the stability analysis of
the FDEs is examined in many studies [16–18]. The study of fractional (2)
order systems with discrete time has gained interest of academicians
where
and industrialists due to the range of applications. Numerous scientists
have focused their attention recently on the in-depth analysis of the ∑
𝑚−1
(𝜍 − 𝑎)(𝑖) 𝑖
𝑤0 (𝜍) = 𝛥 𝑤(𝑎). (3)
qualitative theory for discrete fractional equations (DFEs). It is a theory 𝑖=0
𝛤 (𝑖 + 1)
of existence, uniqueness and stability [19,20].
The Ulam’s stability technique is one of the most popular ap- Lemma 4 ([28]). The zero equilibrium of the system of DFE
proaches to studying the stability analysis of FDEs and DFEs [21–23].
𝐶 𝜗
Given how challenging it is to solve FDEs and DFEs with exact so- 𝛥𝑎 𝑤(𝜍) = 𝑤(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗), (4)
lutions, it is advantageous in the area of quantitative analysis and where 𝑤(𝜍) = (𝑤1 (𝜍), … , 𝑤𝑚 (𝜍))𝑇 , 0 < 𝜗 ≤ 1,  ∈ R𝑚×𝑚 and ∀
optimization. As a result, it is essential to establish the notions of 𝜍 ∈ N𝑎+1−𝜗 , is asymptotically stable (AS) if
Ulam’s stability for such challenges since, when studying the qualities { ( ) }
of Ulam’s stability, we do not necessarily need to obtain the accurate |arg 𝑦| − 𝜋 𝜗 𝜗𝜋
𝜂 ∈ 𝑦 ∈  ∶ |𝑦| < 2 cos & |arg 𝑦| > , (5)
solutions to the difficulties at hand. Since there is a nearly exact 2−𝜗 2
result when the target solution is Ulam’s stable, the qualitative concept
for 𝜂 of  is a eigenvalues.
motivates us to develop a method that is effective and dependable for
essentially discovering FDEs and DFEs. The findings of the solutions
Lemma 5 ([22]). If 𝜗 > 0 and  is defined on N𝑎 . Then
to nonlinear FDEs and difference equations with and without ini-
tial conditions have recently attracted mathematicians, who carefully 𝛥−𝜗 𝛥 𝑤(𝜍) = 𝑤(𝜍) + 0 + 1 𝜍 (1) + 2 𝜍 (2) + ⋯ + 𝑚−1 𝜍 (𝑚−1) ,
𝐶 𝜗

launched and investigated various sorts of outcomes. Only few works

on fractional order chaotic maps are available in the literature [24,25].
This research, which was inspired by the aforementioned contributions,
focuses on the existence results, analysis of stability conditions and
control and synchronization of these criteria for discrete fractional
order tumor-immune map (FTIM).
The article is structured with some mathematical preliminaries
on DFEs in Section ‘‘Preliminaries’’. The description of the presumed
system (10) is discussed in Section ‘‘Dynamics of discrete fractional
tumor-immune model’’. Existence results of the system (11) is ad-
dressed in Section ‘‘Existence Results’’, while Section ‘‘Hyers–Ulam
Stability’’ is focused to exploring the various types of Ulam stability. In
Section ‘‘Control strategies’’, stabilization and synchronization control
schemes are presented for the proposed fractional map. Numerical
findings are summarized in Section ‘‘Numerical Simulations’’ as the
applications of our main results follow with conclusion.
Preliminaries
This section provides the definitions and lemmas needed for the
important results discussions.
Definition 1 ([26]). Let  ∶ N𝑎 → R and 𝜗 > 0 be given. The 𝜗th order
fractional sum of  is defined as
1 ∑
𝜍−𝜗
𝛥−𝜗 (𝜍) = (𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) (𝜚),
𝛤 (𝜗) 𝜚=𝑎
𝛤 (𝜍 + 1)
for all 𝜍 ∈ N𝑎+𝜗 , σ(𝜚) = 𝜚 + 1 and 𝜍 (𝜗) ∶= . plaining the development of tumors and the interactions among tumors
𝛤 (𝜍 + 1 − 𝜗)
for 𝑖 ∈ R, with 𝑖 ∈ [0, 𝑚 − 1].
∑𝜍−𝜗
Lemma 6 ([29]). Let 𝜍 and 𝜗 be positive. Then (𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) =
𝜚=1−𝜗
1
(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)(𝜗) .
𝜗
Dynamics of discrete fractional tumor-immune model
One of the cells in our body might develop and spread a tumor,
which results from unchecked cell growth. Based on whether it is be-
nign or malignant, the tumor may expand in an unanticipated manner
surrounding the area where it is discovered. The medication utilized
here must grow quickly than the tumor’s growth in order to kill the
unhealthy cells. A malignant tumor can be cured using a variety of ther-
apies, such as immunotherapy, chemotherapy, surgery and etc. [30].
However, in order to be effective, treatment plans must take into
account a variety of elements, such as the patient’s immunological
reaction as well as the type, quantity and intensity of the cancer cells.
Mathematical modeling offers a theoretical framework that enables us
to predict long-term treatment results for cancer, which are far more
difficult to ascertain through clinical study. Numerous mathematical
models of tumor growth, including treatments, have recently been
explored in cancer diseases and medical treatment variables, but they
are insufficient to comprehend their behavior [31–33]. Chemotherapy
is used to treat tumor diseases using mathematical models, which is a
crucial tool for understanding and managing the impacts of tumor cells.
When compared to integer order differential equations, the math-
ematical models using FDEs appear to be much more useful for ex-

2
J. Alzabut et al. Results in Physics 54 (2023) 107030

( )𝑇
and host cells. There have been a lot of publications produced recently with the initial conditions (𝑢(0), 𝑣(0))𝑇 = 𝑢0 , 𝑣0 .
about the mathematical modeling of cancer tumors [34–36]. The im- The initial value problem (IVP) can be stated using the model (10)
portance of various immune system elements in the therapy of cancer as follows:
has been outlined by numerous mathematical models. The modeling
⎧𝐶 𝜗
of a malignant tumor uses nonlinear FDEs. The literature [37–39] ⎪ 𝛥 𝑤(𝜍) = (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗, 𝑤(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)), 𝜍 ∈ N1−𝜗 ,
provides a variety of analytical and numerical approaches for solving ⎨ (11)
⎪𝑤(0) = 𝑤0 ,
the aforementioned equations. ⎩
The model described by Kuznetsov et al. [40] was the foundation
where  ∶ [0, +∞) × R → R is continuous and N1−𝜗 = {1 − 𝜗, 2 − 𝜗, …}.
for the tumor-immune interaction model (TIM) examined in this work ( )𝑇
Here 𝑤(𝜍) = (𝑢(𝜍), 𝑣(𝜍))𝑇 along with 𝑤0 = 𝑢0 , 𝑣0 and (𝜍 − 1 +
⎧ ′ 𝜗
( )𝑇
𝜗, 𝑤(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)) = 𝛷𝑤 (𝜍) = 𝑔𝑖 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗, 𝑢, 𝑣) for 𝑖 = 1, 2.
⎪𝐸 (𝜍) = 𝑐 + 𝐹 (𝐸,  ) − 𝑑𝐸 − 𝑘𝐸,
⎨ ′ (6)
⎪ (𝜍) = 𝑟 (1 − ℎ ) − 𝑔𝐸 ,
⎩ Existence results
where 𝑐 is the constant source rate of effector cells (ECs), 𝐹 (𝐸,  )
describes the accumulation of ECs in the tumor site, 𝑘 is the natural As a first step, we investigate a non linear problem and provide a
death rate of ECs, 𝑟 is the coefficient of the maximal growth of tumor solution that may be used to dealing with existence findings.
and ℎ is the environment capacity, 𝑔 and 𝑑 are positive constants. Let B∗ ∶ C ([0, +∞), R) be a Banach space with the norm defined by
𝑞𝐸
Moreover the function 𝐹 should be in the form 𝐹 (𝐸,  ) = such
 +𝑝 ‖𝑤‖ = max {|𝑤(𝜍)| ∶ 𝜍 ∈ N} ,
that 𝑞 and 𝑝 are positive constants.
In research [41], Galach makes the assumption that 𝐹 (𝐸,  ) = 𝜃𝐸 , where |𝑤(𝜍)| = |𝑢(𝜍)| + |𝑣(𝜍)| and 𝑢, 𝑣 ∈ B∗ . Set N𝓁 = {0, 1, … , 𝓁}, for
𝜃 is positive constant, which causes model (6) to adopt this form: 𝓁 ∈ N.
⎧ ′
⎪𝐸 (𝜍) = 𝑐 + 𝛼1 𝐸 − 𝑘𝐸, 𝜗 (𝜍) is defined on N
Theorem 7 ([29]). Assume 𝛷𝑤 1−𝜗 and 𝜗 ∈ (0, 1]. Then,
⎨ ′ (7)
⎪ (𝜍) = 𝑟 (1 − ℎ ) − 𝑔𝐸 , the solution to the IVP
⎩
⎧𝐶 𝜗 𝜗
where 𝛼1 = 𝜃 − 𝑑 is the immune response to the tumor cells (TCs). ⎪ 𝛥 𝑤(𝜍) = 𝛷𝑤 (𝜍), 𝜍 ∈ N1−𝜗 ,
⎨ (12)
As a result, the model (7) is dimensionless counterpart can also be ⎪𝑤(0) = 𝑤0 ,
expressed as ⎩

⎧ ′ is given by
⎪𝑢 (𝜍) = 𝜇 + 𝛼𝑢𝑣 − 𝑏𝑢,
⎨ ′ (8) 1 ∑
𝜍−𝜗
⎪𝑣 (𝜍) = 𝛿𝑣(1 − 𝛽𝑣) − 𝑢𝑣. 𝑤(𝜍) =𝑤0 + (𝜍 − 𝜎(𝜚))(𝜗−1) 𝛷𝑤
𝜗
(𝜚). (13)
⎩ 𝛤 (𝜗) 𝜚=1−𝜗
Here the density of ECs and TCs are represented by 𝑢 and 𝑣 at time 𝜍.
Moreover the parameters 𝑢 = 𝐸𝐸 , 𝑣 =  , 𝛿 = 𝑞𝑟 , 𝛽 = ℎ0 , 𝑏 = 𝑔𝑘 , Proof. Let 𝑤 be a solution to (12). Lemma 5 provide us with
0 0 0 0
𝛼
𝜇 = 𝑔𝐸𝑐  , 𝛼 = 𝑔1 are positive.
0 0 𝑤(𝜍) = 𝛥−𝜗 𝛷𝑤
𝜗
(𝜍) + 0 .
The TIM (8) can be written in delta type first order equation of the
form Employing the fractional sum operator of 𝜗 ∈ (0, 1], we obtain
⎧
⎪𝛥𝑢𝜍 = 𝜇 − (1 + 𝑏) 𝑢𝜍 + 𝛼𝑢𝜍 𝑣𝜍 , 1 ∑
𝜍−𝜗

⎨ ( ) ( ) (9) 𝑤(𝜍) = (𝜍 − 𝜎(𝜚))(𝜗−1) 𝛷𝑤

𝜗
(𝜚) + 0 . (14)
𝛤 (𝜗) 𝜚=1−𝜗
⎪𝛥𝑣𝜍 = 𝛿𝑣𝜍 1 − 𝛽𝑣𝜍 − 𝑣𝜍 1 + 𝑢𝜍 .
⎩
Considering the initial condition 𝑤(0) = 𝑤0 in (14), we get 0 = 𝑤0 . By
Using Definition 2, we can formulate the Caputo discrete fractional
substituting 0 ∈ R in 𝑤(𝜍), it follows that
tumor-immune map (FTIM)
1 ∑
𝜍−𝜗
⎧(𝐶 𝜗 ) 𝑤(𝜍) = 𝑤0 + (𝜍 − 𝜎(𝜚))(𝜗−1) 𝛷𝑤
𝜗
(𝜚),
⎪ 𝛥𝑎 𝑢 (𝜍) = 𝜇 − (1 + 𝑏) 𝑢(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) + 𝛼𝑢(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)𝑣(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗), 𝛤 (𝜗) 𝜚=1−𝜗
⎪(𝐶 𝜗 )
⎨ 𝛥𝑎 𝑣 (𝜍) = 𝛿𝑣(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) (1 − 𝛽𝑣(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)) − 𝑣(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) for 𝜍 ∈ N1−𝜗 . The proof is completed. □
⎪
⎪ × (1 + 𝑢(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)) ,
⎩ To convert the aforementioned IVP (11) into a fixed point (FP)
(10) theorem, we construct the operator  ∶ B∗ → B∗ as follows:

where 𝜗 ∈ (0, 1] is a fractional order and 𝑎 is the initial point of N𝑎+1−𝜗 . 1 ∑

𝜍−𝜗
(𝑤)(𝜍) =𝑤0 + (𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) 𝛷𝑤
𝜗
(𝜚), (15)
We reduce the model (10) for straightforward description in the 𝛤 (𝜗) 𝜚=1−𝜗
following scenario:
for 𝜍 ∈ N𝓁 . Then,  is a solution to (11), which is equivalent to the
⎧(𝐶 𝜗 ) model (10).
⎪ 𝛥𝑎 𝑢 (𝜍) = 𝑔1 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗, 𝑢, 𝑣) ,
⎨(𝐶 𝜗 ) We discuss the following premises before expressing and demon-
⎪ 𝛥𝑎 𝑣 (𝜍) = 𝑔2 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗, 𝑢, 𝑣) , strating the main findings in this section:
⎩
where 𝑔1 − 𝑔2 are the nonlinear functions provided by (1 ) If  > 0 such that for all 𝑤, 𝑤̂ ∈ B∗ and each 𝜍 ∈ N𝓁 , we have
⎧ |(𝜍, 𝑤) − (𝜍, 𝑤)|
̂ ≤  |𝑤 − 𝑤|.̂
⎪𝑔1 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗, 𝑢, 𝑣) = 𝜇 − (1 + 𝑏) 𝑢(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) + 𝛼𝑢(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)𝑣(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗), (2 ) There exist 1 > 0 and 2 > 0, which implies |(𝜍, 𝑤)| ≤
⎪ 1 ‖𝑤‖ + 2 for 𝑤 ∈ B∗ .
⎨𝑔2 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗, 𝑢, 𝑣) = 𝛿𝑣(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) (1 − 𝛽𝑣(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)) − 𝑣(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) {
⎪ (3 ) Define the set  = (𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) 𝛷𝑤𝜗 (𝜚) ∶ 𝑤 ∈ B , 𝜚 ∈ {1 − 𝜗, … ,
⎪ × (1 + 𝑢(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)) , } ∗
⎩ 𝜍 − 𝜗} . Clearly,  is relatively compact for every 𝜍 ∈ N𝓁 .

3
J. Alzabut et al. Results in Physics 54 (2023) 107030

( )
(4 ) If 𝜙 ∈ C N𝓁 , R+ is non decreasing function and 𝜆𝜙 > 0, for By combining the inequality (21) and (22), we arrive at the following
𝜍 ∈ N𝓁 such that conclusion:
𝜖 ∑𝜍−𝜗 (𝜗) [
(𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) 𝜙(𝜚 − 1 + 𝜗) ≤ 𝜆𝜙 𝜖𝜙(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗). ]
𝛤 (𝜗) 𝜚=0 ‖𝑤‖ ≤ ‖ ‖ (𝓁 − 1 + 𝜗) 1 ‖𝑤‖ + 2 ,
‖𝑤0 ‖ + 𝛤 (𝜗 + 1)

Theorem 8. If (1 ) and the inequality that is,

[ ]
 (𝓁 − 1 + 𝜗)(𝜗)  (𝓁 − 1 + 𝜗)(𝜗)
 <
𝛤 (𝜗 + 1)
, (16) ‖𝑤‖ 1 − 1 ≤‖
‖𝑤0 ‖
‖ + 2 . (23)
(𝓁 + 𝜗 − 1)(𝜗) 𝛤 (𝜗 + 1) 𝛤 (𝜗 + 1)

hold. Then the IVP (11) has the uniqueness of solution on B∗ . As a result, From (23) can be written as ‖𝑤‖ ≤ M, which implies that ‖𝑤‖ ≠ M+1.
Let us prove that  is completely continuous in 𝑤 . Let 𝜍1 , 𝜍2 ∈
the model (10) has a unique solution on B∗ .
N𝓁 , 𝜍1 > 𝜍2 and 𝜖 > 0 such that
| (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)(𝜗) |
Proof. For 𝑤, 𝑤̂ ∈ B∗ and each 𝜍 ∈ N𝓁 , it follows that | 1 | 𝛤 (𝜗 + 1)
| − 1| < 𝜖,
| (𝜍2 − 1 + 𝜗)(𝜗) |  M +  (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)(𝜗)
| | 1 2 2
1 ∑
𝜍−𝜗
| 𝜗 |
|(𝑤)(𝜍) − (𝑤)(𝜍)|
̂ ≤ (𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) |𝛷𝑤 𝜗
(𝜚) − 𝛷𝑤 (𝜚)| . then we have
𝛤 (𝜗) 𝜚=1−𝜗 | ̂ | | 𝜍1 −𝜗
| ∑
|(𝑤)(𝜍1 ) − (𝑤)(𝜍2 )| = | 1 (𝜍1 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) 𝛷𝑤 𝜗
(𝜚)
(17) | | | 𝛤 (𝜗)
|
| 𝜚=1−𝜗
𝜍2 −𝜗
∑ |
According to premise (1 ), we obtain 1 |
− (𝜍2 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) 𝛷𝑤𝜗
(𝜚)||
| 𝜗 | 𝛤 (𝜗) 𝜚=1−𝜗 |
𝜗
|𝛷𝑤 (𝜍) − 𝛷𝑤 (𝜍)| = |(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗, 𝑤(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)) |
| ̂ | 𝜍2 −𝜗
− (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗, 𝑤(𝜍
̂ − 1 + 𝜗))| 1 ∑ [ (24)
≤ (𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1)
≤  |𝑤(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) − 𝑤(𝜍
̂ − 1 + 𝜗)| 𝛤 (𝜗) 𝜚=1−𝜗 1
| 𝜗 | ]| 𝜗 |
|𝛷𝑤 (𝜍) − 𝛷𝑤̂ (𝜍)| ≤  ‖𝑤 − 𝑤‖ .
𝜗
̂ (18) −(𝜍2 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) |𝛷𝑤 (𝜚)|
| | | |
𝜍1 −𝜗
The inequalities (17) and (18) imply that 1 ∑ | 𝜗 |
+ (𝜍1 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) |𝛷𝑤 (𝜚)| .
𝛤 (𝜗) | |
𝜚=𝜍2 −𝜗+1
̂ ∑
𝜍−𝜗
 ‖𝑤 − 𝑤‖
‖𝑤 − 𝑤‖
̂ ≤ (𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) . Applying the condition (2 ) along with Lemma 6 in (24), we obtain
𝛤 (𝜗) 𝜚=1−𝜗
that
Lemma 6 provides the following result [ 𝜍 −𝜗
∑
‖𝑤(𝜍1 ) − 𝑤(𝜍2 )‖ ≤ 1 M + 2
1

‖ ‖ (𝜍1 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1)
 𝛤 (𝜗)
‖𝑤 − 𝑤‖
̂ ≤ (𝓁 − 1 + 𝜗)(𝜗) ‖𝑤 − 𝑤‖
̂ . 𝜚=1−𝜗
𝛤 (𝜗 + 1) 𝜍2 −𝜗
]
∑
(𝜗−1)
As a result,  is a contraction with a unique FP theorem [29] that − (𝜍2 − σ(𝜚))
represents the solution of (11) and model (10). □ 𝜚=1−𝜗
 M + 2 [ ]
≤ 1 (𝜍1 − 1 + 𝜗)(𝜗) − (𝜍2 − 1 + 𝜗)(𝜗)
Theorem 9. Assume (2 ) and (3 ) hold. Then, if 𝛤 (𝜗 + 1)
[ ]
 M + 2 (𝜍1 − 1 + 𝜗)(𝜗)
(𝓁 − 1 + 𝜗)(𝜗) 1 ≤ 1 (𝜍2 − 1 + 𝜗)(𝜗) −1
< , (19) 𝛤 (𝜗 + 1) (𝜍2 − 1 + 𝜗)(𝜗)
𝛤 (𝜗 + 1) 1
‖𝑤(𝜍1 ) − 𝑤(𝜍2 )‖ < 𝜖,
‖ ‖
the IVP (11) which is equivalent with the model (10) has at least one
solution on B∗ . which implies that  is an equi-continuous.
From Mazur Lemma [42] and the condition 𝑤 is relatively com-
Proof. Assuming that  is the operator specified in (15), the set 𝑤 1
pact. Let 𝜍 ∗ ∈ N𝓁 . Then (𝑤𝑛 )(𝜍 ∗ ) = 𝑤0 + 𝑄 , where 𝑄𝑛 =
{ 𝛤 (𝜗)} 𝑛
is defined as follows: ∑𝜍 ∗ −𝜗 ∗
(𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) 𝛷𝑤
𝜗 (𝜚). Therefore, (𝑤𝑛 )𝜍 ∗ (𝑛 = 1, 2, …) is
{ } 𝜚=1−𝜗 𝑛
𝑤 = 𝑤(𝜍) ∶ ‖𝑤‖ ≤ M + 1, 𝜍 ∈ N𝓁 , relatively compact.
In view of Ascoli–Arzela theorem [43], we deduce that, { for every
}
{ }
where (𝑢𝑛 )𝜍 ∗ contains a uniformly convergent sub sequence (𝑤𝑛𝑘 )𝜍 ∗
𝛤 (𝜗 + 1) ||𝑤0 || + 2 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)(𝜗) (𝑘 = 1, 2, …) on N𝓁 which conclude that the set  is relatively compact
M= . and continuous.
𝛤 (𝜗 + 1) − 1 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)(𝜗)
The Leray–Schauder theorem [44] lead us to the conclusion that 
Now, we claim that ‖𝑤‖ ≠ M + 1 for 𝑤 ∈ 𝑤 . Let 𝑤 ∈ 𝑤 and 𝜆 ∈ (0, 1) has a FP, which is solution of the IVP (11) and model (10).
such that 𝑤 = 𝜆𝑤. In fact,
Remark 10. By using Theorem 9, we may directly arrive at the
𝜆 ∑
𝜍−𝜗
𝑤(𝜍) = 𝜆𝑤0 + (𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) 𝛷𝑤
𝜗
(𝜚), (20) conclusion if 1 = 0 and 2 = M.
𝛤 (𝜗) 𝜚=1−𝜗

then Hyers–Ulam stability

1 ∑
𝜍−𝜗
| 𝜗 |
|𝑤(𝜍)| ≤ ||𝑤0 || + (𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) |𝛷𝑤 (𝜚)| . (21) We are constructing the necessary criteria for the model (10) to
𝛤 (𝜗) | | meet the assumptions of the various types of Ulam’s stability in this
𝜚=1−𝜗
part.
Using (2 ), we obtain that Now, let us examine about an IVP (11) and these inequality
| 𝜗 | |𝐶 𝜗 ̂ |
|𝛷𝑤 (𝜍)| = |(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗, 𝑤(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗))| ≤ 1 ‖𝑤‖ + 2 . (22) 𝜗
| 𝛥 𝑤(𝜍) − 𝛷𝑤 (𝜍)| ≤ 𝜖 (25)
| | | ̂ |

4
J. Alzabut et al. Results in Physics 54 (2023) 107030

and Theorem 16. In the inequality (16) and (1 ) hold, the IVP (11) which
|𝐶 𝜗 ̂ 𝜗 | is equivalent to the model (10) is HU stable.
| 𝛥 𝑤(𝜍) − 𝛷𝑤 (𝜍)| ≤ 𝜖𝜙(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗), (26)
| ̂ |
( )𝑇 Proof. From solution (13), for 𝜍 ∈ N𝓁 , it follows that
where 𝜍 ∈ N𝓁 and 𝜖 = max 𝜖𝑗 for 𝑗 = 1, 2.
| ∑
𝜍−𝜗 |
| 1 |
|𝑤(𝜍)
̂ − 𝑤(𝜍)| ≤ ||𝑤(𝜍)
̂ − 𝑤̂ 0 − (𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) 𝛷𝑤𝜗
̂
(𝜚)||
Definition 11 ([20,45]). The IVP (11) is Hyers–Ulam (HU) stable if | 𝛤 (𝜗) 𝜚=1−𝜗 |
| |
1 > 0, 𝜖 > 0 and for every solution 𝑤(𝜍)
̂ ∈ B∗ of (25), there is a
1 ∑
𝜍−𝜗
| 𝜗 |
solution 𝑤(𝜍) ∈ B∗ of (11) with + (𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) |𝛷𝑤 (𝜚) − 𝛷𝑤 𝜗
(𝜚)| .
𝛤 (𝜗) | ̂ |
𝜚=1−𝜗
|𝑤(𝜍)
̂ − 𝑤(𝜍)| ≤ 1 𝜖, 𝜍 ∈ N𝓁 , (27)
From Lemma 14 and Lemma 6 along with hypothesis (1 ), we have
( )𝑇
where 1 = max 1𝑗 for 𝑗 = 1, 2. By taking 𝛩(𝜖) = 1 𝜖 in inequality that
( + +) ( )𝑇 𝜖  ‖𝑤̂ − 𝑤‖
(27), where 𝛩(𝜖) ∈ C R , R and 𝛩(0) = 0, where 𝛩 = max 𝛩𝑗 for ‖𝑤̂ − 𝑤‖ ≤ (𝜗 + 𝓁 − 1)(𝜗) + (𝜗 + 𝓁 − 1)(𝜗) . (29)
𝛤 (𝜗 + 1) 𝛤 (𝜗 + 1)
𝑗 = 1, 2, then IVP (11) is generalized HU stable.
Inequality (29) yields ‖𝑤̂ − 𝑤‖ ≤ 1 𝜖, where 1 =
(𝜗 + 𝓁 − 1)(𝜗)
Definition 12 ([20,45]). The IVP (11) is Hyers–Ulam–Rassias (HUR) .
𝛤 (𝜗 + 1) −  (𝜗 + 𝓁 − 1)(𝜗)
stable if 2 > 0, 𝜖 > 0 and for each 𝑤(𝜍)
̂ ∈ B∗ of (26), there is a Thus, the IVP (11) and model (10) are HU stable. □
solution 𝑤(𝜍) ∈ B∗ of (11) with
Remark 17. By taking 𝛩(𝜖) = 1 𝜖 with 𝛩(0) = 0, we have
|𝑤(𝜍)
̂ − 𝑤(𝜍)| ≤ 2 𝜖𝜙(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗), 𝜍 ∈ N𝓁 , (28)
( )𝑇 ‖𝑤̂ − 𝑤‖ ≤ 𝛩(𝜖).
where 2 = max 2𝑗 for 𝑗 = 1, 2. Let us consider 𝜙(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) =
Hence, the IVP (11) and model (10) becomes generalized HU stable.
𝜖𝜙(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) in inequalities (26) and (28), then IVP (11) is generalized
HUR stable.
Theorem 18. In the inequality (16) and (4 ) hold, the IVP (11) which
is equivalent to the model (10) is HUR stable.
Remark 13. A function 𝑤(𝜍)̂ ∈ ∗ is a solution of (25) and (26) if ∃ a
( )𝑇
function 𝑓 ∶ N𝓁 → R satisfying, for 𝜍 ∈ N𝓁 and 𝑓 = max 𝑓𝑗 , 𝑗 = 1, 2 Proof. From the solution (13), for 𝜍 ∈ N𝓁 , we obtain
(i) |𝑓 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)| ≤ 𝜖, | ∑
𝜍−𝜗 |
| 1 |
(ii) |𝑓 (𝜍 + 𝛽 − 1)| ≤ 𝜖𝜙(𝜍 + 𝛽 − 1), |𝑤(𝜍)
̂ − 𝑤(𝜍)| ≤ ||𝑤(𝜍)
̂ − 𝑤0 − (𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) 𝛷𝑤
𝜗
(𝜚)|| .
| 𝛤 (𝜗) 𝜚=1−𝜗 |
(iii) 𝐶 𝛥𝜗 𝑤(𝜍)
̂ = 𝛷𝑤 𝜗 (𝜍) + 𝑓 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗). | |
̂
In view of Lemmas 15 and 6 with the help of Theorem 16, we arrive at
In the following findings, we describe the HUR stable and general-
 ‖𝑤̂ − 𝑤‖
ized HUR stable. ‖𝑤̂ − 𝑤‖ ≤ 𝜆𝜙 𝜖𝜙(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) + (𝜗 + 𝓁 − 1)(𝜗) .
𝛤 (𝜗 + 1)
Lemma 14. Let 𝜗 ∈ (0, 1], if 𝑤(𝜍)
̂ is a solution of the inequality (25) for From above it follows
𝜍 ∈ N𝓁 , then ‖𝑤̂ − 𝑤‖ ≤ 2 𝜖𝜙(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗),
| ∑
𝜍−𝜗 | 𝜆𝜙 𝛤 (𝜗 + 1)
| 1 | 𝜖
|𝑤(𝜍) (𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) 𝛷𝑤
𝜗
(𝜚)|| ≤ (𝜗 + 𝓁 − 1)(𝜗) . where 2 = .
|̂ − 𝑤̂ 0 − ̂ 𝛤 (𝜗 + 1) −  (𝜗 + 𝓁 − 1)(𝜗)
| 𝛤 (𝜗) 𝜚=1−𝜗 | 𝛤 (𝜗 + 1)
| | Hence, the IVP (11) and model (10) are HUR stable. □

Proof. According to Remark 13 and Lemma 5, we obtain the solution Remark 19. Also by setting 𝜙(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) = 𝜖𝜙(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗), then we have
̂
𝑤(𝜍) is given by
‖𝑤̂ − 𝑤‖ ≤ 2 𝜙(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗).
1 ∑
𝜍−𝜗
1 ∑
𝜍−𝜗
̂
𝑤(𝜍) = 𝑤̂ 0 + (𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) 𝛷𝑤
𝜗
(𝜚) + (𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) Therefore, the IVP (11) and model (10) are generalized HUR stable. □
𝛤 (𝜗) ̂ 𝛤 (𝜗)
𝜚=1−𝜗 𝜚=1−𝜗

× 𝑓 (𝜚 − 1 + 𝜗). Control strategies

From this it follows that
Stabilization and synchronization of the dynamical systems intro-
| ∑
𝜍−𝜗 |
| 1 | ducing control strategies are significant aspect of studying instability
|𝑤(𝜍) (𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) 𝛷𝑤𝜗
(𝜚)||
|̂ − 𝑤̂ 0 − ̂ maps. This section aims at the implementation of control laws for
| 𝛤 (𝜗) 𝜚=1−𝜗 |
| | stabilization and synchronization of considered discrete fractional map.
1 ∑
𝜍−𝜗
≤ (𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) |𝑓 (𝜚 − 1 + 𝜗)| Stabilization
𝛤 (𝜗) 𝜚=1−𝜗
𝜖
≤ (𝜗 + 𝓁 − 1)(𝜗) . The method of stabilizing the proposed fractional map using adap-
𝛤 (𝜗 + 1)
tive control is presented in the proceeding theorem. The adaptive
This completes the proof. □ control requires the convergence of all states of map to 0.

Lemma 15. Let 𝜗 ∈ (0, 1], if 𝑤(𝜍)

̂ is a solution of the inequality (26) for Theorem 20. The discrete FTIM (10) is stabilized subject to the 2D control
𝜍 ∈ N𝓁 , then law
| ∑
𝜍−𝜗 | ⎧
| 1 |
|𝑤(𝜍) (𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) 𝛷𝑤
𝜗 | ≤ 𝜆𝜙 𝜖𝜙(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗). ⎪𝑈𝑢 (𝜍) = 𝑢(𝜍) (𝑏 − 𝛼𝑣(𝜍)) − 𝜇,
|̂ − 𝑤̂ 0 − ̂
(𝜚)| ⎨ (30)
| 𝛤 (𝜗) |
| 𝜚=1−𝜗 | ⎪𝑈𝑣 (𝜍) = 𝑢(𝜍)𝑣(𝜍) − 𝛿𝑣(𝜍) (1 − 𝛽𝑣(𝜍)) ,
⎩
Proof. The proof of Lemma 14 leads to Lemma 15. □ where 𝑈𝑢 (𝜍) and 𝑈𝑣 (𝜍) are two adaptive control terms.

5
J. Alzabut et al. Results in Physics 54 (2023) 107030

Proof. The controlled discrete FTIM (10) can be defined as the pair is called as completely synchronized. Our finding is presented
⎧𝐶 𝜗 with the following theorem.
⎪ 𝛥𝑎 𝑢(𝜍) = 𝜇 − (1 + 𝑏) 𝑢(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) + 𝛼𝑢(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)𝑣(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)
⎪ Theorem 21. Subject to
⎪ + 𝑈𝑢 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗),
⎪𝐶 𝜗
⎨ 𝛥𝑎 𝑣(𝜍) = 𝛿𝑣(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) (1 − 𝛽𝑣(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)) − 𝑣(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) (31) ⎧
⎪ ⎪𝑈1 (𝜍) = 𝑒1 (𝜍) [𝑏 − 𝛼] ,
⎪ × (1 + 𝑢(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)) ⎨ [ ]
⎪ ⎪𝑈2 (𝜍) = 𝛽𝛿 𝑣𝑠 (𝜍) + 𝑣𝑚 (𝜍) 𝑒2 (𝜍) − 𝛿𝑒2 (𝜍) + 𝑢𝑠 (𝜍)𝑣𝑠 (𝜍) + 𝑢𝑚 (𝜍)𝑣𝑚 (𝜍),
⎪ + 𝑈𝑣 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗). ⎩
⎩
(39)
Substituting control law (30) into (31), we obtain the new simplified
dynamics of the form the master–slave pair (36) and (37) are completely synchronized.
⎧𝐶 𝜗
⎪ 𝛥𝑎 𝑢(𝜍) = −𝑢(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗), Proof. The Caputo discrete fractional order of the error system (38) is
⎨𝐶 𝜗 (32) defined by
⎪ 𝛥𝑎 𝑣(𝜍) = −𝑣(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗).
⎩ ⎧𝐶 𝛥𝜗 𝑒 (𝜍) = 𝑒 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) [𝛼 − 𝑏 − 1] + 𝑈 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗),
The system (32) can be defined as ⎪ 𝑎 1 1 1
⎪𝐶 𝜗 [ ]
𝛥
⎪ 𝑎 2 𝑒 (𝜍) = 𝛿𝑒 2 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) − 𝛽𝛿 𝑣 𝑠 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) + 𝑣𝑚 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)
𝐶 𝜗
𝛥𝑎 (𝑢(𝜍), 𝑣(𝜍))𝑇 =  × (𝑢(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗), 𝑣(𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗))𝑇 , (33) ⎪
⎪ × 𝑒2 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)
where ⎨ (40)
[ ] ⎪ − 𝑢𝑠 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)𝑣𝑠 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) − 𝑢𝑚 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)
−1 0 ⎪
= . (34)
0 −1 ⎪ × 𝑣𝑚 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)
⎪
Our goal is to demonstrate that the zero solution of (33) is AS. Lemma 4 ⎪ − 𝑒2 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) + 𝑈2 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗).
⎩
defines the AS results of the process of linearization. The eigenvalues
of  are 𝜂1,2 = −1 and it is obvious that all the eigenvalues 𝜂1,2 of  Substituting the control terms (39) into (40) yields the error system
satisfy ⎧𝐶 𝜗
( |arg 𝜂𝑖 | − 𝜋 )𝜗 ⎪ 𝛥𝑎 𝑒1 (𝜍) = −𝑒1 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗),
|arg 𝜂𝑖 | = 𝜋 > 𝜗𝜋 & |𝜂𝑖 | = 1 < 2 cos | | , 𝑖 = 1, 2. (35) ⎨𝐶 𝜗 (41)
| | 2 | | 2−𝜗 ⎪ 𝛥𝑎 𝑒2 (𝜍) = −𝑒2 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗).
⎩
By means of Lemma 4, the zero solution of (33) is globally AS and hence
The error system (41) can be defined as
the fractional map (31) is completely stabilized. □
𝐶 𝜗
( )𝑇 ( )𝑇
𝛥𝑎 𝑒1 (𝜍), 𝑒2 (𝜍) =  × 𝑒1 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗), 𝑒2 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) , (42)
Synchronization
where  is defined in (34). The linear part of the system (42) has
Let us consider the complete synchronization with distinct param- its eigenvalues which satisfy the stability conditions of (35). We con-
eters of a pair of discrete FTIM (10). It defines the master and slave clude that the zero solution of (42) is globally AS and the master–
maps as slave pairs (36) and (37) are completely synchronized by using
Lemma 4. □
⎧𝐶 𝜗
⎪ 𝛥𝑎 𝑢𝑚 (𝜍) = 𝜇 − (1 + 𝑏) 𝑢𝑚 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) + 𝛼𝑢𝑚 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)𝑣𝑚 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗),
⎪𝐶 𝜗 ( ) Numerical simulations
⎨ 𝛥𝑎 𝑣𝑚 (𝜍) = 𝛿𝑣𝑚 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) 1 − 𝛽𝑣𝑚 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) − 𝑣𝑚 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)
⎪ ( )
⎪ × 1 + 𝑢𝑚 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) It is simpler to perform a qualitative methodology on the non-
⎩
dimensional form of the system (7) in order to examine the influence of
(36) the simulation results on its dynamics. Because of this, we were able to
and create a non-dimensionalized system on which to base our qualitative
study. Numerical examples are demonstrated to analyze the stability
⎧𝐶 𝜗 of the proposed discrete FTIM (10) in this section. Also we present
⎪ 𝛥𝑎 𝑢𝑠 (𝜍) = 𝜇 − (1 + 𝑏) 𝑢𝑠 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) + 𝛼𝑢𝑠 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)𝑣𝑠 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)
⎪ instability control by applying the two adaptive control laws to verify
⎪ + 𝑈1 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗), the above theoretical results.
⎪𝐶 𝜗 ( )
⎨ 𝑎 𝑠
𝛥 𝑣 (𝜍) = 𝛿𝑣 𝑠 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) 1 − 𝛽𝑣𝑠 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) − 𝑣𝑠 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗)
In view of Lemma 3, we obtain the solution of (10) is
⎪ ( )
⎪ × 1 + 𝑢𝑠 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗) ⎧
⎪𝑢(𝜍) = 𝑢(𝑎) + 1 ∑
𝜍−𝜗
⎪ (𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1)
⎪ + 𝑈2 (𝜍 − 1 + 𝜗), ⎪ 𝛤 (𝜗) 𝜚=𝑎+1−𝜗
⎩ ⎪
⎪
(37) ⎪ × (𝜇 − (1 + 𝑏) 𝑢(𝜚 − 1 + 𝜗) + 𝛼𝑢(𝜚 − 1 + 𝜗)𝑣(𝜚 − 1 + 𝜗)) ,
( )𝑇 ( )𝑇 ⎪
where 𝑢𝑚 (𝜍), 𝑣𝑚 (𝜍) and 𝑢𝑠 (𝜍), 𝑣𝑠 (𝜍) represent the states of master ⎨ 1 ∑
𝜍−𝜗
(43)
⎪𝑣(𝜍) = 𝑣(𝑎) + 𝛤 (𝜗) (𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1)
and slave and 𝑈1 (𝜍) and 𝑈2 (𝜍) are adaptive synchronization control pa- ⎪ 𝜚=𝑎+1−𝜗
rameters. The errors between the master and slave maps are presented ⎪
as ⎪ × (𝛿𝑣(𝜚 − 1 + 𝜗) (1 − 𝛽𝑣(𝜚 − 1 + 𝜗)) − 𝑣(𝜚 − 1 + 𝜗)
⎪
⎧ ⎪ × (1 + 𝑢(𝜚 − 1 + 𝜗))) ,
⎪𝑒1 (𝜍) = 𝑢𝑠 (𝜍) − 𝑢𝑚 (𝜍), ⎩
⎨ (38)
(𝜍−σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1)
⎪𝑒2 (𝜍) = 𝑣𝑠 (𝜍) − 𝑣𝑚 (𝜍). where is the discrete kernel function.
⎩ 𝛤 (𝜗)
(𝜍 − σ(𝜚))(𝜗−1) 𝛤 (𝜍 − 𝜚)
If the solution of the error system (38) converge toward zero asymptoti- Suppose that 𝑎 = 0, = , 𝑚 = 𝜍 −𝜗
𝛤 (𝜗) 𝛤 (𝜗)𝛤 (𝜍 − 𝜚 + 1 − 𝜗)
cally as 𝜍 goes to +∞, then the states of master and slave converges and and 𝑠 = 𝜚 + 𝜗 in Eq. (43) yields the numerical formulas explicitly in the

6
J. Alzabut et al. Results in Physics 54 (2023) 107030

Table 1
Parameter values utilized for numerical simulation.
Dimensional Description Dimensional Dimensionless Dimensionless
parameters values parameters values
𝑐 Source rate of constant 𝑢 1.3 × 104 cells day−1 𝜇 0.1181
𝛼1 Immune reaction to 𝑣 10−9 , 10−7 (daycells)−1 𝛼 0.04
𝑘 Rate of 𝑢 natural death 0.0412 day−1 𝑏 0.3743
𝑟 Innate tumor growth rate 0.18 day−1 𝛿 1.636
ℎ ℎ−1 Ability of 𝑣 to carry 2 × 10−9 cells−1 𝛽 −1 0.002

Fig. 1. Model (10) exhibits stable dynamic characteristics for the values shown in Table 1 with (0.3, 0.35) and different fractional orders.

[ ( )]
form 3.1416 − 𝜋 0.85
= 1 < 2 cos = 1.8025
2 − 0.85
1 ∑ 𝛤 (𝑚 − 𝑠 + 𝜗)
𝑚
⎧ and
⎪𝑢(𝑚) = 𝑢(0) + 𝛤 (𝜗) 𝛤 (𝑚 − 𝑠 + 1)
(𝜇 − (1 + 𝑏) 𝑢(𝑠 − 1) + 𝛼𝑢(𝑠 − 1)
⎪ 𝑠=1 |arg 𝜂1,2 | = 3.1416 > 0.9𝜋 = 1.4137 and |𝜂1,2 |
⎪ | | 2 | |
⎪ × 𝑣(𝑠 − 1)) , [ ( )]
⎨ 3.1416 − 𝜋 0.9
= 1 < 2 cos = 1.8661.
1 ∑ 𝛤 (𝑚 − 𝑠 + 𝜗)
𝑚
⎪ 2 − 0.9
⎪ 𝑢(𝑚) = 𝑣(0) + (𝛿𝑣(𝑠 − 1) (1 − 𝛽𝑣(𝑠 − 1))
𝛤 (𝜗) 𝑠=1 𝛤 (𝑚 − 𝑠 + 1) According to Theorems 20 and 21, we conclude that the zero solutions
⎪
⎪ of the systems (33) and (42) are globally asymptotically stable, see
⎩ −𝑣(𝑠 − 1) (1 + 𝑢(𝑠 − 1))) ,
Figs. 2 and 3. Hence the system (31) is stabilized and the master–slave
(44) systems (36) and (37) are completely-synchronized by means of control
laws (30) and (39).
where 𝑢0 and 𝑣0 are the initial values. We will take into consideration
the model (10) for the parameter values, which are provided in Table 1,
in accordance with biological research literature [40,41]. Conclusion

Example 22. In this instance, the parameter values are chosen in
Table 1 and the initial conditions are (0.3, 0.35) with different fractional
order 𝜗 = 0.68, 0.75, 0.8 in system (10). In Fig. 1, we get the discrete
FTIM (10) is asymptotically stable for various values of 𝜗. Both 𝑢𝜍
and 𝑣𝜍 displayed oscillatory behavior in Fig. 1, for lowest values of
𝜗. Additionally, we also noticed that lower fractional order dampen
the oscillation behavior and for 𝜗 = 0.68, both ECs and TCs near the
equilibrium position more quickly.
Example 23. Let us fix the same parameter values and initial con-
ditions are taken in Example 22 along with 𝜗 = 0.85, 0.9. Numerical
simulations are presented using the numerical formulas described in
(44) with arbitrary stabilized and master–slave systems. In order to
verify the theoretical results of the systems (32) and (41), Theorems 20
and 21 are applied. The eigenvalues of  are 𝜂1 = 𝜂2 = −1 and it
satisfies the following stability conditions:
|arg 𝜂1,2 | = 3.1416 > 0.85𝜋 = 1.3352 and |𝜂1,2 |
| | 2 | |
Discrete fractional calculus can be used to simulate a variety of
challenges that arise in everyday life. The proposed discrete FTIM with
the use of Caputo fractional difference operator is examined in this
research. We looked at the necessary conditions for the existence results
and various kind of Ulam stability of the model using FP techniques.
The general dynamical behaviors are discussed by means of time plots
along with varying the fractional order 𝜗. We also presented two
control schemes for the proposed map. The first controller introduces
an additive term to the first component of the map with the aim of
driving the states to zero asymptotically stable. The convergence of
the states is established by means of the stability theory of linear
fractional discrete systems and verified numerically (see Fig. 2). The
second control law leads to synchronization of a master–slave pair
of a discrete fractional tumor-immune maps by means of an adaptive
additive term. Again, the stability theory of linear fractional discrete
systems is employed to confirm the convergence of synchronization
errors to zero and the result is confirmed numerically (see Fig. 3).
The main advantage of the two proposed control laws is that they
both fall within the feedback linearization type, which is very simple

7
J. Alzabut et al. Results in Physics 54 (2023) 107030

Fig. 2. The stabilized states of the discrete FTIM (31) after control.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-

cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.

Data availability

No data was used for the research described in the article.

Acknowledgments

J. Alzabut and H. Khan express their sincere thanks to Prince

Sultan University for their support. J. Alzabut is also thankful to the
OSTİM Technical University for supporting this research. José Fran-
cisco Gómez Aguilar acknowledges the support provided by CONACyT:
Cátedras CONACyT para jóvenes investigadores 2014, Mexico and
SNI-CONACyT, Mexico.

Funding

The authors have not disclosed any funding.

References

[1] Machado JT, Kiryakova V, Mainardi F. Recent history of fractional calculus.

Fig. 3. Time evolution of the synchronization errors of the discrete FTIP (40) after
control.
to implement in realistic applications. The findings of the research
are innovative and elaborate on the initial value problem for Caputo
discrete fractional equations.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Jehad Alzabut: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Inves-
tigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review. R. Dhineshbabu:
Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Writing – original draft,
Writing – review. A. George M. Selvam: Methodology, Validation,
Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review. J.F. Gómez-
Aguilar: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Writing – re-
view & editing. Hasib Khan: Methodology, Validation, Investigation,
Writing – original draft, Writing – review.
Commun Nonlinear Sci Numer Simul 2011;16(3):1140–53.
[2] Hilfer R, editor. Applications of fractional calculus in physics. World scientific;
2000.
[3] Sabatier JA, Agrawal OP, Machado JT. Advances in fractional calculus.
Dordrecht: Springer; 2007.
[4] Alzabut J, Abdeljawad T, Baleanu D. Nonlinear delay fractional difference
equations with applications on discrete fractional Lotka–Volterra competition
model. J Comput Anal Appl 2021;25(05):889–98.
[5] Azar AT, Vaidyanathan S, Ouannas A. Fractional order control and
synchronization of chaotic systems. Cham: Springer; 2017.
[6] Khan H, Alzabut J, Baleanu D, Alobaidi G, Rehman MU. Existence of so-
lutions and a numerical scheme for a generalized hybrid class of n-coupled
modified ABC-fractional differential equations with an application. AIMS Math
2023;8(3):6609–25.
[7] Elsadany AA, Matouk AE. Dynamical behaviors of fractional-order Lotka–
Volterra predator–prey model and its discretization. J Appl Math Comput
2015;49(1):269–83.
[8] Khan A, Ain QT, Abdeljawad T, Nisar KS. Exact controllability of Hilfer fractional
differential system with non-instantaneous impulses and state dependent delay.
Qual Theory Dyn Syst 2023;22(2):1–16.
[9] Ansari KJ, Asma F, Ilyas F, Shah K, Khan A, Abdeljawad T. On new updated
concept for delay differential equations with piecewise Caputo fractional-order
derivative. Waves Random Complex Media 2023;8:1–20.

8
J. Alzabut et al.
[10] Farman M, Shehzad A, Akgül A, Baleanu D, Sen MDl. Modelling and analysis
of a measles epidemic model with the constant proportional Caputo operator.
Symmetry 2023;15:468.
[11] Kilbas AA, Srivastava HM, Trujillo JJ. Theory and applications of fractional
differential equations. New York: Elsevier; 2006.
[12] Podlubny I. Fractional differential equations. New York: Academic Press; 1999.
[13] Nisar KS, Farman M, Abdel-Aty M, Cao J. A review on epidemic models in sight
of fractional calculus. Alex Eng J 2023;75:81–113.
[14] Kojabad EA, Rezapour S. Approximate solutions of a sum-type fractional
integro-differential equation by using Chebyshev and Legendre polynomials. Adv
Difference Equ 2017;2017(351):1–18.
[15] Cardoso LC, Camargo RF, Santos FLP, Santos JPC. Global stability analy-
sis of a fractional differential system in hepatitis B. Chaos Solitons Fractals
2021;143:110619.
[16] Karaman B. The global stability investigation of the mathematical design of a
fractional-order HBV infection. J Appl Math Comput 2022;68:4759–75.
[17] Kaushik K, Kumar K, Khan A, Abdeljawad T. Existence of solutions by fixed
point theorem of general delay fractional differential equation with 𝑝-Laplacian
operator. AIMS Math 2023;8(5):60–76.
[18] Farman M, Sarwar R, Akgul A. Modeling and analysis of sustainable approach
for dynamics of infections in plant virus with fractal fractional operator. Chaos
Solitons Fractals 2023;170:113373.
[19] Abdeljawad T. On Riemann and Caputo fractional differences. Comput Math Appl
2011;62(3):602–1611.
[20] Alzabut J, Selvam AGM, Dhineshbabu R, Kaabar MKA. The existence, uniqueness,
and stability analysis of the discrete fractional three-point boundary value
problem for the elastic beam equation. Symmetry 2021;2021(13):1–18.
[21] Zada A, Alzabut J, Waheed H, loan Lucian P. Ulam-Hyers stability of impulsive
integer-differential equations with Riemann–Liouville boundary conditions. Adv
Difference Equ 2020;2020(1):1–50.
[22] Alzabut J, Selvam AGM, Dhineshbabu R, Tyagi S, Ghaderi M, Rezapour S. A
Caputo discrete fractional-order thermostat model with one and two sensors
fractional boundary conditions depending on positive parameters by using the
Lipschitz-type inequality. J Inequal Appl 2022;2022(56):1–24.
[23] Farman M, Sarwar R, Askar S, Ahmad H, Sultan M, Akram MM. Fractional
order model to study the impact of planting genetically modified trees on the
regulation of atmospheric carbon dioxide with analysis and modeling. Results
Phys 2023;48:106409.
[24] Ouannas A, Khennaoui AA, Grassi G, Pham VT, Volos C. A new fractional-order
map and its control. In: 8th International conference on modern circuits and
systems technologies, vol. 2019. 2019, p. 1–4.
[25] Wu GC, Baleanu D. Discrete fractional logistic map and its chaos. Nonlinear
Dynam 2014;75(2):283–7.
[26] Atici FM, Eloe PW. Discrete fractional calculus with the nabla operator. Electron
J Qual Theory Differ Equ Spec Ed I 2009;3:1–12.
Results in Physics 54 (2023) 107030
[27] Anastassiou GA. Principles of delta fractional calculus on time scales and
inequalities. Math Comput Modelling 2010;52(3):556–66.
[28] Cermak J, Gyori I, Nechvatal LE. On explicit stability condition for a linear
fractional difference system. Fract Calc Appl Anal 2015;18(3):651–72.
[29] Chen F, Luo X, Zhou Y. Existence results for nonlinear fractional difference
equation. Adv Difference Equ 2011;2011:1–12.
[30] Farman M, Batool M, Nisar KS, Ghaffari AS, Ahmad A. Controllability and
analysis of sustainable approach for cancer treatment with chemotherapy by
using the fractional operator. Res Phys 2023;51:106630.
[31] Sarkar S, Sahoo PK, Mahata S, Pal R, Ghosh D, Mistry T, et al. Mitotic
checkpoint defects: en route to cancer and drug resistance. Chromosome Res
2021;29:131–44.
[32] Li L, Tian T, Zhang X. Stochastic modelling of multistage carcinogenesis and
progression of human lung cancer. J Theor Biol 2019;479:81–9.
[33] Roesch K, Hasenclever D, Scholz M. Modelling lymphoma therapy and outcome.
Bull Math Biol 2014;76:401–30.
[34] Kuznetsov VA, Knott GD. Modeling tumor regrowth and immunotherapy. Math
Comput Modelling 2001;33:1275–87.
[35] Rehman M, Ahmad J, Hassan A, Awrejcewicz J, Pawlowski W, Karamti H,
Alharbi FM. The dynamics of a fractional-order mathematical model of cancer
tumor disease. Symmetry 2022;14:1–28.
[36] Arfan M, Shah K, Ullah A, Shutaywi M, Kumam P, Shah Z. On fractional order
model of tumor dynamics with drug interventions under nonlocal fractional
derivative. Results Phys 2021;2021(21):1–19.
[37] Maddalena L, Ragni S. Existence of solutions and numerical approximation of a
non-local tumor growth model. Math Med Biol A J IMA 2020;2020(37):58–82.
[38] Rehman MFU, Gu Y, Yuan W. Exact analytical solutions of nonlinear frac-
tional Liouville equation by extended complex method. Adv Math Phys
2020;2020:8815363.
[39] Ameen I, Novati P. The solution of fractional order epidemic model by implicit
Adams methods. Appl Math Model 2017;43:78–84.
[40] Kuznetsov VA, Makalkin IA, Taylor MA, Perelson S. Nonlinear dynamics of
immunogenic tumors: parameter estimation and global bifurcation analysis. Bull
Math Biol 1994;56(2):295–321.
[41] Galach M. Dynamics of the tumor-immune system competition-the effect of the
time delay. Int J Math Comput Sci 2003;13(3):395–406.
[42] Rudin W. Functional analysis. McGraw-Hill series in higher mathematics, New
York, USA: McGraw-Hill; 1973.
[43] Lakshmikantham V, Leela S. Nonlinear differential equations in abstract spaces
2 of international series in nonlinear mathematics: Theory, methods and
applications. Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press; 1981.
[44] Hale J. Theory of functional differential equations. Applied mathematical
sciences, vol. 3, New York: Springer; 1997.
[45] Chen F, Zhou Y. Existence and Ulam stability of solutions for discrete fractional
boundary value problem. Discrete Dyn Nat Soc 2013;2013:1–7.