1. Introduction
Delay systems are common in various engineering applications, ranging from chemical processes to mechanical systems. The presence of time delays in these systems can cause instability and oscillatory behavior, which can be destructive to the performance and reliability of the system. Consequently, the investigation into the stability and controllability of time-delay systems has garnered substantial research attention over the years. In [
1], the concept of delayed matrix exponential was introduced by the authors. They utilized this concept to derive a representation of solutions for a linear delay problem, specifically when permutable matrices are taken into account. In a subsequent work by [
2], by using the concepts presented in [
1], the authors extended those ideas to a discrete matrix delayed exponential function and investigated the representation of solutions to linear discrete delay systems. Motivated by the works of [
1,
2], numerous scholars have focused on investigating a wide range of delay systems involving permutable matrices. For a comprehensive understanding of delay systems, we refer interested readers to the following papers: [
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9,
10,
11,
12,
13,
14,
15,
16,
17,
18,
19,
20]. These references delve into various aspects related to the aforementioned systems.
Exponential stability is a very important property of a control system. It is related to the behavior of the system under continuous parameter variations. As for exponential stability, it is crucial for linear control systems because it ensures that the output signals remain approximately constant in the presence of noise and parameter variations. Here, we present a new definition of exponential stability for the investigated systems [
4,
5,
7,
11,
13,
16,
18,
21,
22,
23,
24].
Control theory has attracted a lot of research interest for many years, with the aim of designing efficient and robust control strategies for various engineering applications. Relative controllability is an important concept in control theory, which measures the ability of a control input to guide the system from one state to another. Specifically, we examine the relative controllability of a conformable delay system by employing the concept of null controllability. Null controllability is a fundamental property of linear systems that has been widely studied in the literature and provides a powerful tool for analyzing the controllability of nonlinear systems [
3,
8,
13,
14,
15,
17,
25,
26,
27,
28,
29].
In this paper, we build upon the concepts introduced in [
1,
3,
5] to investigate the
-exponential stability and relative controllability of investigated systems. Initially, we focus on the
-exponential stability analysis of systems
and
and
here
represents the conformable derivative with lower index zero (see Definition 1 [
30]),
are constant permutable matrices and
B is a nonsingular matrix and
. Together with,
. Also we are going to discuss the relatively controllability of
where
,
,
and the control function
takes values from
.
We investigate sufficient conditions to ensure the
-exponential stability of solutions to Equations (
1)–(
3) using Gronwall inequality techniques. Additionally, we explore the application of a delay Grammian matrix in establishing both sufficient and necessary conditions for relative controllability in linear delayed systems. The discussion also extends to nonlinear problems, employing Krasnoselskii’s fixed point theorem.
The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. In
Section 2, we provide relevant notations, concepts, and lemmas, along with a representation of solutions to investigated systems.
Section 3 is dedicated to the study of
-exponential stability of solutions for Equations (
1)–(
3). The relative controllability of system (
4) is investigated in
Section 4. Finally, we present numerical examples in the
Section 5 to illustrate our main findings.
2. Preliminaries
Let represent the n-dimensional Euclidean space with the vector norm , and denote the matrix space with real-valued elements. For and , we define and , here, and . Let z lies in Banach space , . Furthermore, we define the norm . Let , be two Banach spaces, stands for the space of all bounded linear operators from to . Additionally, stands for the Banach space of functions that are Bochner integrable, with the norm (where ).
Consider the matrices
and
, where
represents the zero matrix and
represents the identity matrix. Similar to Lemma 2.1 (You and Wang 2019 [
21]), we introduce the following lemma without proof.
Lemma 1. Suppose Ω lie in a constant matrix. If , thenwhere(this is referred to as the delayed matrix exponential (see [1])). Remark 1. Clearly, (5) is reflated to α-time power function, which is different from 1-time power function in Lemma 2.1 (You and Wang 2019 [21]). From (
6), the uniform continuity of
on a compact interval can be observed easily. By employing the transformation
in Equation (
1), we obtain
Using Theorem 3.4 [
31], for (
7), we have
where
and
satisfying initial condition ([
31])
, where
Now substituting
into (
8), by solving it, we can observe that any solution of Equation (
1) takes the form
where
,
,
are employed.
Likewise, by utilizing the transformation
in
one has
(here
is continuous).
Using Theorem 3.5 [
31], for (
12), we have
Now substituting
into (
13), upon solving it, it becomes evident that the form of any solution to Equation (
11) is given by
Likewise, the solution to Equation (
2) is given by
and the form of any solution to Equation (
3) is given by
Based on the representation (
15) since
exists (i.e.,
), here is the presented definition.
Definition 1. The α-exponential stability is attributed to the trivial solution of (1) (or (2), (3)), provided that positive constants exist, depending on and , where , catering to for , here, z represents any solution to (1) (or (2), (3)). Definition 2 (see [
3])
. Equation (4) to be relatively controllable, suppose there exists an arbitrary initial vector function , and a final state of the vector at . If there is a control such that Equation (4) has a solution satisfying the boundary condition . 3. -Exponential Stability
This section focuses on examining the -exponential stability of solutions in conformable systems. We take into account the following hypotheses.
Set
be the eigenvalues of
with
i.e., for
, there exist
such that
Suppose for .
For and , there is a positive constant L such that the inequality holds.
For and , there is a positive constant Q such that the inequality holds.
Suppose .
Suppose .
Suppose .
Lemma 2. Under the hypotheses and , the inequalityholds. Proof. From
and
via Lemma 1, we have
Thus, the proof is concluded. □
At present, we are prepared to provide adequate conditions for the -exponential stability of solutions in investigated systems.
Theorem 1. Under the hypotheses and , the solution of Equation (1) exhibits α-exponential stability. Proof. It is worth noting that the solution of (
1) takes the form (
10). Now from (
10) we get
where
Now if we choose
small enough, then
by
. □
Theorem 2. Under the hypotheses and , the solution of Equation (2) exhibits α-exponential stability. Proof. It is important to note that the solution of Equation (
2) takes the form (
14). Let
. From (
14), using
via (
16), we get
so,
By employing the classical Gronwall inequality and Equation (
9), we obtain
this results in
Based on
, the desired outcome is valid. □
Theorem 3. Under the hypotheses and , the solution of Equation (3) exhibits α-exponential stability. Proof. It is known that the solution of Equation (
3) can be expressed in the form of (
15). Let
, from (
15), utilizing
and
via (
16), we get
This suggests that
Take note
. Applied Lemma 2.4 of [
21] to (
17), we can obtain
which yields (from (
9))
where
. It can be observed from
that Equation (
3) exhibits
-exponential stability. Therefore, the proof is concluded. □
4. Relative Controllability
We will examine the controllability relative to (
4) in this section. It should be noted that any solution to (
4) can be displayed in the pattern of
4.1. Linear Problem
Assuming
, we can turn (
4) into the system
The introduction of a delay Grammian matrix is taken the form:
where
represents the matrix’s transpose.
Theorem 4. The linear problem (19) exhibits relative controllability if and only if the matrix is nonsingular. Proof. Sufficiency. As the matrix is nonsingular, the existence of its inverse is guaranteed.
A control function can be chosen in the following manner:
where
Then
It is evident that the initial condition is satisfied as well. By applying Definition 2 and Equation (
21), we can conclude that (
19) exhibits relative controllability.
Necessity. We will present a proof by contradiction. Let us assume that
is a singular matrix, implying the existence of at least a non-zero state
meeting
Moreover, one can achieve
which implies that
Given that (
19) exhibits relative controllability, according to Definition 2, there is one control
that can steer the initial state to
at
, i.e.,
Likewise, there is one control
capable of directing the initial state to the state
at
, which can be represented as
From (
23) and (
24), one has
Multiply both sides of (
25) by
and via (
22) we have
This leads to the conclusion that
0, which contradicts the non-zero nature of
. Hence,
is nonsingular. Thus, the proof is concluded. □
4.2. Nonlinear Problem
Let us examine the following requirements:
The operator
defined as
The operator
M has an inverse, denoted as
, which operates on the space
.
Set
. According to the Remark in Wang et al. (2017) [
15], it can be inferred that
here,
is determined to (
20). According to Theorem 4,
will be well-defined if (
19) exhibits relative controllability.
The function
is continuous and there is one constant
and
meeting
Theorem 5. Assuming that , , and hold true, it can be concluded that system (4) exhibits relative controllability under the condition thatwhere , and . Proof. By exploiting hypothesis
for any
, defining one control function
as follows:
We demonstrate that by employing this control, the operator
defined as follows:
The operator
has one fixed point
z, which corresponds to a solution of (
4).
We must verify
and
, indicating that
guides the system (
4) from
to
within a finite time
. This confirmation implies that system (
4) exhibits relative controllability over
I.
For every positive number r, consider the set . Let . The proof will be divided into a couple of procedures.
Taking into account (
28), and using
,
,
and
, we can get
where
Based on the assumptions
and
, we can derive
where
Thus, we deduce that
is a subset of
for this particular value of
r.
Throughout the remaining proof, the aforementioned value of
r will be the one under consideration. Operators
and
are defined as follows:
for
.
Let
. In view of
and
, for every
, we obtain
Thus,
so we obtain
where
.
Since (
27) implies
, it follows that the operator
is a contraction mapping.
Consider
with
in
as
. By utilizing
, we obtain
in
as
and thus
This indicates that
is continuous on
.
To demonstrate the compactness of
on
, we need to establish that
is both equicontinuous and bounded. For any
,
, we proceed with the following proof:
Let
Based on the aforementioned analysis, we can conclude that
Now, it remains to verify that
as
for
. Note
and
where the uniformly continuity of
is used. Next
Note that
. So
from utilizing the dominated convergence theorem of Lebesgue.
Consequently, we receive
for all
, thus establishing the equicontinuity of
.
Continuing with the aforementioned calculations, we can further deduce that
Hence is bounded. From the Arzela-Ascoli theorem, is relatively compact in . Hence, is an operator that is both compact and continuous.
By invoking Krasnoselskii’s fixed point theorem, we can ensure the existence of one fixed point
z for the operator
on
. Obviously,
z is a solution to the system (
4) that satisfies
. Additionally, the boundary condition
, for
holds true based on Equation (
18). Thus, the proof is concluded. □
5. Examples
This section will take a few numerical examples to verify our theoretical results. For simulation purposes, we utilize the infinite-norm.
Example 1. Let us examine the subsequent linear conformable delay system, which is nonsingular:where and we setNoteClearly, for , with and . Next andand . At present, those requirements stipulated in Theorem 1 are fulfilled. Hence,Therefore, the solution to (29) exhibits α-exponential stability. Example 2. Let us contemplate the given linear conformable system:where and supposeNote Clearly, for , with and . with .
Subsequently and and . It is obvious those requirements stipulated in Theorem 3 are fulfilled. Hence,Hence, the solution of (30) exhibits α-exponential stability. Example 3. Let us contemplate the given conformable system:where and setting Clearly, for , where and . , here . Together with ,with . It is evident those requirements stipulated in Theorem 2 are fulfilled. Hence,Thus, the solution of (31) exhibits α-exponential stability. Example 4. Set . Let us contemplate the given conformable differential controlled system:where and let Clearly, for , where and . Together with and .
Subsequently, we will utilize Equation (26) to estimate . To achieve this, we first need to obtain , followed by the calculation of its inverse, . The delay Grammian matrix takes the form ofwhere and ,andand NoteTherefore, we obtainand Moreover, ,Now, setting with . Observing that ,andAs a result, all the requirements stipulated in Theorem 5 are satisfied, indicating that (32) exhibits relative controllability on the interval . 6. Conclusions
This article is a generalization of literature [
20]. Based on literature [
20], this paper introduces a class of nonsingular conformable delay systems with non-singular term
B. By giving an estimate of the delayed matrix exponential with non-singular term
B, which makes our analysis of systems (
1)–(
3) more refined. In the first part, we give the sufficient conditions for
-exponential stability of systems (
1)–(
3) through introducing the definition of
-exponential stability. In the second part, by constructing a Grammian matrix with non-singular terms
B, the relative controllability of the linear and nonlinear problems discussed is provided. Finally, we validate our theoretical results with several examples.
Further work will be able to discuss some issues such as periodic solutions and their stability of related systems.