Abstract
In the present paper, by using the mixed monotone operator method we prove the existence and uniqueness of positive solution to the following cantilever-type boundary value problem
Moreover, in order to illustrate the results we present an example.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction and preliminaries
The fourth order differential equations can be used to model the steady states of deflections of elastic beams as, for example,
under the boundary conditions
The boundary value problem (1)–(2) describes a bar of length 1 which is clamped on the left end and is free to move at the right end with vanishing bending moment and shearing force (see, for example [1,2,3]).
The main tool used in the proof to the results of [1,2,3] are the measure chains [2], the fixed point index theory in cones [2] and the monotonically iterative technique [3].
In this paper, we investigate the existence and uniqueness of positive solutions to the following cantilever-type boundary value problem
where \(f:[0,1]\times [0,\infty )\times [0,\infty )\rightarrow [0,\infty )\) and \(g:[0,1]\times [0,\infty )\rightarrow [0,\infty )\) are continuous functions.
The main tool used in the proof of the results of the paper is the mixed monotone operator method.
The technique of the mixed monotone operators was introduced by Guo and Lakshmikantham in [4] in order to obtain results about coupled fixed points and its applications to the theory of existence of solutions of nonlinear operators. Since then, a great number of papers using this technique has appeared in the literature (see [4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15]), among others).
Next, we present some basic facts and results about the mixed monotone operator method which will be the main tool used in the proof of the results of the paper.
Suppose that \((E,\Vert \cdot \Vert )\) is a real Banach space.
A cone in E is a nonempty closed convex set \(K\subset E\) satisfying the following two conditions:
- (a):
-
\(x\in K\) and \(\lambda >0\Rightarrow \lambda x\in K\).
- (b):
-
\(-x,x\in K\Rightarrow x=\theta _{E}\).
(Here \(\theta _{E}\) denotes the zero element of the Banach space E).
Let K be a cone in the Banach space \((E,\Vert \cdot \Vert )\) then K induces a partial order in E defined by, for any \(x,y\in E\),
By \(x<y\) we denote \(x\le y\) and \(x\ne y\).
If \(\mathring{K}\) denotes the interior of K and \(\mathring{K}\) is nonempty then we say that the cone K is solid. When there exists a constant \(C>0\) such that, for any \(x,y\in E\) with \(\theta _{E}\le x\le y\), we have \(\Vert x\Vert \le C\Vert y\Vert \), we say that the cone K is normal. In this case, the smallest constant C satisfying the above mentioned inequality is called the normality constant of K.
In this context, for any \(x,y\in E\), by \(x\sim y\) we denote the existence of constants \(\lambda ,\mu >0\) satisfying
It is easily seen that \(\sim \) is an equivalence relation.
Finally, for \(\theta _{E}<h\) with \(h\in E\), \(K_{h}\) denotes the following set
It is clear that \(K_{h}\subset K\).
Next, we need some definitions in order to present the mixed monotone operator method used in our study. This material appears in [10].
Definition 1
An operator \(T:E\rightarrow E\) is increasing (resp. decreasing) if, for any \(x,y\in E\) with \(x\le y\), then \(Tx\le Ty\) (resp. \(Tx\ge Ty\)).
Definition 2
An operator \(A:K\times K\rightarrow K\) is said to be mixed monotone when A(x, y) is increasing in x and decreasing in y, that is, for any \((x,y),(u,v)\in K\times K\),
Definition 3
A mapping \(B:K\longrightarrow K\) is called subhomogeneous if, for any \(t\in (0,1)\) and \(x\in K\), the inequality
holds.
Now, we are ready to present the mixed monotone operator method appearing in [10].
Theorem 1
Suppose that K is a normal cone in the Banach space \((E,\Vert \cdot \Vert )\), \(\gamma \in (0,1)\) and \(h\in E\) with \(\theta _{E}< h\).
Let \(A:K\times K\longrightarrow K\) be a mixed monotone operator satisfying
for any \(t\in (0,1)\) and \(x,y\in K\), and \(B:K\longrightarrow K\) an increasing subhomogeneous operator.
Under the following assumptions:
-
(i)
there exists \(h_{0}\in K_{h}\) such that \(A(h_{0},h_{0})\in K_{h}\) and \(Bh_{0}\in K_{h}\),
-
(ii)
there exists a constant \(\delta _{0}>0\) satisfying
$$\begin{aligned} A(x,y)\ge \delta _{0}Bx, \end{aligned}$$for any \(x,y\in K\),
we have that
-
(1)
\(A:K_{h}\times K_{h}\longrightarrow K_{h}\) and \(B:K_{h}\longrightarrow K_{h}\),
-
(2)
there exists \(u_{0},v_{0}\in K_{h}\) and \(r\in (0,1)\) such that \(rv_{0}\le u_{0}\le v_{0}\) and
$$\begin{aligned} u_{0}\le A(u_{0},v_{0})+Bu_{0}\le A(v_{0},u_{0})+Bv_{0}\le v_{0}, \end{aligned}$$ -
(3)
there exists a unique \(x^{*}\in K_{h}\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} x^{*}=A(x^{*},x^{*})+Bx^{*}, \end{aligned}$$ -
(4)
for any initial values \(x_{0},y_{0}\in K_{h}\), the sequences defined by
$$\begin{aligned} x_{n}= & {} A(x_{n-1},y_{n-1})+Bx_{n-1},\\ y_{n}= & {} A(y_{n-1},x_{n-1})+By_{n-1}, \end{aligned}$$for \(n=1,2,\ldots ,\) satisfy
$$\begin{aligned} \displaystyle \lim _{n\rightarrow \infty }\Vert x_{n}-x^{*}\Vert =\displaystyle \lim _{n\rightarrow \infty }\Vert y_{n}-x^{*}\Vert =0. \end{aligned}$$
2 Main result
We start this section presenting the space and the cone where the solutions to our Problem (3) live.
By \(E={\mathcal {C}}[0,1]\) we denote the classical space of the continuous functions \(x:[0,1]\longrightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) equipped with the supremum standard norm given by \(\Vert x\Vert =\max \{|x(t)|:t\in [0,1]\}\).
In \({\mathcal {C}}[0,1]\), we consider the cone K defined by
It is well known that K is a normal cone with normality constant \(C=1\). In this case, the partial order in \({\mathcal {C}}[0,1]\) induced by K is given by, for \(x,y\in {\mathcal {C}}[0,1]\),
Before to present our main result, we need some lemmas.
The following lemma appears in [2].
Lemma 1
Suppose that \(g\in {\mathcal {C}}[0,1]\). Then the following boundary value problem
has a unique solution
where
Remark 1
It is clear that G(t, s) is a continuous function on \([0,1]\times [0,1]\) and \(G(t,s)\ge 0\) for \(t,s\in [0,1]\).
The following lemma gives us upper and lower bounds of G(t, s).
Lemma 2
For any \(t,s\in [0,1]\), we have that
Proof
In order to prove the lower bound, we consider the following two cases i) and ii).
- (i):
-
Suppose that \(0\le s\le t\le 1\). In this case, we have
$$\begin{aligned} G(t,s)= & {} \frac{1}{6}(3s^{2}t-s^{3})\\\ge & {} \frac{1}{6}(3s^{2}t-s^{2}t)=\frac{1}{6}2s^{2}t=\frac{1}{3}s^{2}t\ge \frac{1}{3}s^{2}t^{2}. \end{aligned}$$ - (ii):
-
For \(0\le t\le s\le 1\) we infer that
$$\begin{aligned} G(t,s)= & {} \frac{1}{6}(3t^{2}s-t^{3})\\\ge & {} \frac{1}{6}(3t^{2}s-t^{2}s)=\frac{1}{6}2t^{2}s=\frac{1}{3}t^{2}s\ge \frac{1}{3}t^{2}s^{2}. \end{aligned}$$This proves the left inequality in (4).
For the upper bound, following a similar argument, we consider that \(0\le s\le t\le 1\) and we have
In the case \(0\le t\le s\le 1\), it follows that
and this proves the right inequality in (4).
This completes the proof. \(\square \)
In the sequel, we present the main result of the paper.
Theorem 2
Suppose the following assumptions:
-
(i)
\(f:[0,1]\times [0,\infty )\times [0,\infty )\rightarrow [0,\infty )\) and \(g:[0,1]\times [0,\infty )\rightarrow [0,\infty )\) are continuous functions. Moreover, there exists \(t_{0}\in (0,1]\) satisfying \(g(t_{0},0)>0\).
-
(ii)
f(t, x, y) is increasing in x and decreasing in y and g(t, x) is increasing in x.
-
(iii)
\(g(t,\lambda x)\ge \lambda g(t,x)\) for any \(\lambda \in (0,1)\), \(t\in [0,1]\) and \(x\in [0,\infty )\).
-
(iv)
There exists a constant \(\beta \in (0,1)\) satisfying
$$\begin{aligned} f(t,\lambda x,\lambda ^{-1}y)\ge \lambda ^{\beta }f(t,x,y), \end{aligned}$$for any \(\lambda \in (0,1)\), \(t\in [0,1]\) and \(x,y\in [0,\infty )\).
-
(v)
There exists a constant \(\delta _{0}>0\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} f(t,x,y)\ge \delta _{0}g(t,x), \end{aligned}$$for any \(t\in [0,1]\) and \(x,y\in [0,\infty )\).
Then we have the following facts.
-
(1)
There exist \(u_{0},v_{0}\in K_{h}\) and \(r\in (0,1)\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} r v_{0}\le u_{0}\le v_{0}, \end{aligned}$$and, moreover,
$$\begin{aligned} u_{0}(t)\le \int _{0}^{1}G(t,s)f(s,u_{0}(s),v_{0}(\alpha s))ds+\int _{0}^{1}G(t,s)g(s,u_{0}(s))ds \end{aligned}$$and
$$\begin{aligned} v_{0}(t)\ge \int _{0}^{1}G(t,s)f(s,v_{0}(s),u_{0}(\alpha s))ds+\int _{0}^{1}G(t,s)g(s,v_{0}(s))ds, \end{aligned}$$where \(h(t)=t^{2}\) for \(t\in [0,1]\).
-
(2)
Problem (3) has a unique positive solution \(x^{*}\in K_{h}\) (here by positive solution \(x^{*}\) we mean that \(x^{*}(t)>0\) for \(t\in (0,1)\)).
-
(3)
For any \(x_{0},y_{0}\in K_{h}\), the sequences inductively defined by
$$\begin{aligned} x_{n}(t)=\int _{0}^{1}G(t,s)f(s,x_{n-1}(s),y_{n-1}(\alpha s))ds+\int _{0}^{1}G(t,s)g(s,x_{n-1}(s))ds \end{aligned}$$and
$$\begin{aligned} y_{n}(t)=\int _{0}^{1}G(t,s)f(s,y_{n-1}(s),x_{n-1}(\alpha s))ds+\int _{0}^{1}G(t,s)g(s,y_{n-1}(s))ds \end{aligned}$$satisfy
$$\begin{aligned} \displaystyle \lim _{n\rightarrow \infty }\Vert x_{n}-x^{*}\Vert =\displaystyle \lim _{n\rightarrow \infty }\Vert y_{n}-x^{*}\Vert =0. \end{aligned}$$
Proof
Taking into account Lemma 1, our question about the existence of solutions to Problem (3) would be to find solutions to the following integral equation
for \(t\in [0,1]\).
Next, we consider the two following operators
and
for any \(t\in [0,1]\) and \(u,v\in K\).
By using assumption (i) and Remark 1 about the continuity and the nonnegative character of G(t, s), it follows that \(A:K\times K\rightarrow K\) and \(B:K\rightarrow K\).
It is clear that x satisfies Eq. (5) if and only if \(x=A(x,x)+Bx\).
In the sequel, we check that assumptions of Theorem 1 are satisfied.
Taking into account assumption (ii), we infer that A is a mixed monotone operator and B is increasing.
Moreover, by assumption (iv), we have that, for any \(\lambda \in (0,1)\) and \(x,y\in K\),
where \(\beta \in (0,1)\).
This proves that the operator A satisfies the condition appearing in Theorem 1 with \(\gamma =\beta \).
In order to prove that B is a subhomogeneous operator, we take \(\lambda \in (0,1)\) and \(x\in K\).
By using assumption (iii), we deduce that
this is, B is a subhomogeneous operator.
Next, we take the function given by \(h(t)=t^{2}\) for \(t\in [0,1]\). Note that \(0\le h(t)\le 1\) for \(t\in [0,1]\). It is clear that \(h\in P\) and \(\theta _{E}<h\). Moreover, Lemma 2 and assumption (ii) gives us that, for any \(t\in [0,1]\),
On the other hand, by Lemma 2 and assumption (ii), it follows that
If we put
and
then, from (6) and (7), we get
Now, we need to prove that \(\alpha _{i}>0\) for \(i=1,2\).
In order to do this, it is sufficient to prove that \(\alpha _{1}>0\) (because \(\alpha _{1}\le \alpha _{2}\)). In fact, by assumption (i), we have that \(g(t_{0},0)>0\) for certain \(t_{0}\in [0,1]\). By the continuity of g (assumption (i)), from \(g(t_{0},0)>0\) we find a subset \(E\subset [0,1]\) with \(t_{0}\in E\) such that \(\mu (E)>0\), (where \(\mu \) denotes the Lebesgue measure) and \(g(t,0)>0\) for \(t\in E\).
By using assumption (v), we deduce
and we get
where in the last inequality we have used the fact that
Therefore, \(\alpha _{1}\) and \(\alpha _{2}\) are positive numbers and, consequently, by (8), \(A(h,h)\in K_{h}\).
In the sequel, we prove that \(Bh\in K_{h}\).
Taking into account Lemma 2 and our assumption (ii), it follows that, for any \(t\in [0,1]\), we have
Similarly, by Lemma 2 and assumption (ii), we get
Putting
and
we have that
Next, we prove that \(Bh\in K_{h}\). Using a similar argument to the one used above, we need to prove that \(\rho _{1}>0\). In fact,
Therefore, \(Bh\in K_{h}\).
Finally, we need to prove that, for any \(u,v\in K\), there exists \(\varepsilon >0\) such that \(A(u,v)\ge \varepsilon Bu\).
In order to do this, we take \(u,v\in K\) and \(t\in [0,1]\) and, by using our assumption (v), it follows
This says us that \(A(u,v)\ge \delta _{0} Bu\) and, therefore, we can take \(\varepsilon =\delta _{0}\).
This proves that assumptions of Theorem 1 are satisfied and, thus, we obtain our result.
Notice that the solution \(x^{*}\) to our Problem (3) is positive since \(x^{*}\in K_{h}\) and \(0< h(t)=t^{2}\) for \(t\in (0,1)\).
This completes the proof. \(\square \)
Next, we present an example illustrating the result obtained.
Example 1
Consider the following nonlinear boundary value problem
Notice that Problem (9) is a particular case of Problem (3), where
It is easily seen that f applies \([0,1]\times [0,\infty )\times [0,\infty )\) into \([0,\infty )\) and g applies \([0,1]\times [0,\infty )\) into \([0,\infty )\).
Moreover, both functions f and g are clearly continuous functions, and, for example, \(g(\frac{1}{3},0)=1>0\).
This says us that assumption (i) of Theorem 2 is satisfied. It is clear that f and g satisfy assumption (ii) of Theorem 2. In order to check assumption (iii) of Theorem 2, we take \(t\in [0,1]\), \(x\in [0,\infty )\) and \(\lambda \in (0,1)\) and it follows
Assumption (iv) of Theorem 2 is satisfied because for \(t\in [0,1]\), \(x,y\in [0,\infty )\) and \(\lambda \in (0,1)\), we have
and this says us that assumption (iv) of Theorem 2 is satisfied with \(\beta =\frac{1}{3}\).
Finally, for \(t\in [0,1]\) and \(u,v\in [0,\infty )\), we deduce
and this proves that assumption (v) of Theorem 2 is satisfied with \(\delta _{0}=1\).
Now, by Theorem 2, we infer that Problem (9) has a unique positive solution \(u^{*}\in {\mathcal {C}}[0,1]\) with \(u^{*}\in K_{h}\), where \(h(t)=t^{2}\) for \(t\in [0,1]\).
Next, we compare our result with the one appearing in [2].
In [2], the author studied the following fourth order boundary value problem
He proved the existence of positive solutions to Problem (10) under certain growths of the nonlinearity f.
Particularly, if by \(f^{0}\) and \(f_{\infty }\) we denote the following quantities
and
then in Corollary 3.1 of [2] it is proved the following result.
Theorem 3
Let \(f:[0,1]\times [0,\infty )\times [0,\infty )\times [0,\infty ]\times (-\infty , 0]\rightarrow [0,\infty )\) be continuous. Suppose the following assumptions
-
(a)
For any \(M>0\) there exists a positive continuous function \(H_{M}(\rho )\) defined on \([0,\infty )\) satisfying
$$\begin{aligned} \displaystyle \int _{0}^{+\infty }\displaystyle \frac{\rho d\rho }{H_{M}(\rho )+1}=+\infty \end{aligned}$$such that
$$\begin{aligned} f(t,x_{0},x_{1},x_{2},x_{3})\le H_{M}(\max (|x_{2}|,|x_{3}|)), \end{aligned}$$for any \(t\in [0,1]\), \(x_{0},x_{1}\in [0,M]\), \(x_{2}\in [0,\infty )\) and \(x_{3}\in (-\infty , 0]\). (Nagumo type condition).
-
(b)
\(f^{0}<1\) and \(f_{\infty }>10'5.\)
Then Problem (10) has at least one positive solution.
Next, we present an example where condition (b) of Theorem 3 is not satisfied while to this example we can apply Theorem 2.
Example 2
Consider the following nonlinear bouondary value problem
Notice that Problem (11) is a particular case of Problem (3) with
and
It is clear that f applies \([0,1]\times [0,\infty )\times [0,\infty )\) into \([0,\infty )\), g applies \([0,1]\times [0,\infty )\) into \([0,\infty )\), both functions f and g are continuous and, particularly, \(g(\frac{1}{2},0)=1>0\). Moreover, f is increasing in u and decreasing in v and g is increasing in u.
On the other hand, for any \(\lambda \in (0,1)\), \(t\in [0,1]\) and \(u\in [0,\infty )\),
To check assumption (iv) of Theorem 2, we take \(t\in [0,1]\), \(u,v\in [0,\infty )\) and \(\lambda \in (0,1)\) and we deduce
and this proves that assumption (iv) of Theorem 2 is satisfied with \(\beta =\frac{1}{3}\).
Finally, for any \(t\in [0,1]\) and \(u,v\in [0,1]\), we have
Therefore, since assumptions of Theorem 2 are satisfied, it follows that Problem (11) has a unique positive solution \(u^{*}\in {\mathcal {C}}[0,1]\) such that, for any \(t\in [0,1]\),
where \(c_{1}\) and \(c_{2}\) are positive constants.
On the other hand,
and
Consequently, Problem (11) cannot be studied by Theorem 3 since assumption (b) of this theorem is not satisfied
Data availability
Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.
References
Anderson, D.R., Hoffacker, J.: Existence of solutions for a cantilever beam problem. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 323(2), 958–973 (2006)
Li, Y.: Existence of positive solutions for the cantilever beam equations with fully nonlinear terms. Nonlinear Anal. RWA 27, 221–237 (2016)
Yao, Q.: Monotonically iterative method of nonlinear cantilever beam equations. Appl. Math. Comput. 205(1), 432–437 (2008)
Guo, D., Lakshmikantham, V.: Coupled fixed points of nonlinear operators with applications. Nonlinear Anal. 11, 623–631 (1987)
Guo, D.: Fixed points of mixed monotone operators with application. Appl. Anal. 34, 215–224 (1988)
Chen, Y.: Thompson’s metric and mixed monotone operators. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 177, 31–37 (1993)
Zhang, Z.: New fixed point theorems of mixed monotone operators and applications. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 204, 307–319 (1996)
Liang, Z., Zhang, L., Li, S.: Fixed point theorems for a class of mixed monotone operators. Z. Anal. Anwend. 22, 529–542 (2003)
Li, K., Liang, J., Xiao, T.: New existence and uniqueness theorems of positive fixed points for mixed monotone operators with perturbation. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 328, 753–766 (2007)
Zhai, C., Hao, M.: Fixed point theorems for mixed monotone operators with perturbation and applications to fractional differential equation boundary value problems. Nonlinear Anal. 75, 2542–2551 (2012)
Jleli, M., Samet, B.: Existence of positive solutions to an arbitrary order fractional differential equation via a mixed monotone operator method. Nonlinear Anal. Model. Control 20, 367–376 (2015)
Liu, L., Zhang, X.Q., Jiang, J., Wu, Y.: The unique solution of a class of sum mixed monotone operator equations and its application to fractional boundary value problems. J. Nonlinear Sci. Appl. 9, 2943–2958 (2016)
Wardowski, D.: Mixed monotone operators and their application to integral equations. J. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 19, 1103–1117 (2017)
Wang, T., Hao, Z.: Existence and uniqueness of positive solutions for singular nonlinear fractional differential equation via mixed monotone operator method. J. Funct. Spaces 2020, 2354927 (2020)
Zhang, X., Liu, L., Wu, Y.: New fixed point theorems for the sum of two mixed monotone operators of Meir–Keeler type and their applications to nonlinear elastic bean equations. J. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 23, 1 (2021)
Funding
Open Access funding provided thanks to the CRUE-CSIC agreement with Springer Nature. This paper is partially supported by Grant PID2019-106093GB-I00 from the Spanish Government.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed equally to this work and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Harjani, J., López, B. & Sadarangani, K. On the solvability of a cantilever-type boundary value problem by using the mixed monotone operator. Positivity 27, 54 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11117-023-01007-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11117-023-01007-2