Mediterr. J. Math.

DOI 10.1007/s00009-016-0695-7

c Springer International Publishing 2016

Approximate Controllability of Second-

Order Evolution Differential Inclusions
in Hilbert Spaces
N. I. Mahmudov, V. Vijayakumar and R. Murugesu

Abstract. In this paper, we consider a class of second-order evolution dif-

ferential inclusions in Hilbert spaces. This paper deals with the approxi-
mate controllability for a class of second-order control systems. First, we
establish a set of sufficient conditions for the approximate controllabil-
ity for a class of second-order evolution differential inclusions in Hilbert
spaces. We use Bohnenblust–Karlin’s fixed point theorem to prove our
main results. Further, we extend the result to study the approximate
controllability concept with nonlocal conditions and also extend the re-
sult to study the approximate controllability for impulsive control sys-
tems with nonlocal conditions. An example is also given to illustrate our
main results.
Mathematics Subject Classification. 26A33, 34B10, 34K09, 47H10.
Keywords. Approximate controllability, second-order differential inclu-
sions, cosine function of operators, impulsive systems, evolution equa-
tions, nonlocal conditions.

1. Introduction
Controllability is one of the elementary concepts in mathematical control
theory. This is a qualitative property of dynamical control systems and is
of particular importance in control theory. Roughly speaking, controllability
generally means that it is possible to steer dynamical control system from an
arbitrary initial state to an arbitrary final state using the set of admissible
controls. Most of the criteria, which can be met in the literature, are for-
mulated for finite dimensional systems. It should be pointed out that many
unsolved problems still exist as far as controllability of infinite dimensional
systems are concerned. In the case of infinite dimensional systems, two ba-
sic concepts of controllability can be distinguished which are exact and ap-
proximate controllability. This is strongly related to the fact that in infinite
dimensional spaces, there exist linear subspaces, which are not closed. Exact
 N. I. Mahmudov et al. MJOM

controllability enables to steer the system to an arbitrary final state, while

approximate controllability means that the system can be steered to an ar-
bitrary small neighborhood of the final state. In other words, approximate
controllability gives the possibility of steering the system to states which form
a dense subspace in the state space.
Recently, in [38], Mahmudov et al. studied the approximate control-
lability of second-order neutral stochastic evolution equations using semi-
group methods, together with the Banach fixed point theorem. In [46], Sak-
thivel et al. studied the approximate controllability of second-order systems
with state-dependent delay using Schauder’s fixed point theorem. In [21],
Henrı́quez studied the existence of solutions of non-autonomous second-order
functional differential equations with infinite delay using Leray–Schauder’s al-
ternative fixed point theorem. In [60], Yan studied the approximate controlla-
bility of fractional neutral integro-differential inclusions with state-dependent
delay in Hilbert spaces using Dhage’s fixed point theorem. In [57], Vijayaku-
mar et al. discussed the approximate controllability for a class of fractional
neutral integro-differential inclusions with state-dependent delay using
Dhage’s fixed point theorem. In [44], Sakthivel et al. studied the approx-
imate controllability of fractional nonlinear differential inclusions with ini-
tial and nonlocal conditions using Bohnenblust–Karlin’s fixed point theorem.
Very recently, in [4], Arthi et al. established the sufficient conditions for con-
trollability of second-order impulsive evolution systems with infinite delay
using Leray–Schauder’s fixed point theorem and in [5] proved the existence
and controllability results for second-order impulsive stochastic evolution sys-
tems with state-dependent delay using Leray–Schauder’s fixed point theorem.
In [20], Guendouzi investigated the approximate controllability for a class of
fractional neutral stochastic functional integro-differential inclusions using
Bohnenblust–Karlin’s fixed point theorem.
Converting a second-order system into a first-order system and study-
ing its controllability may not yield the desired results due to the behavior
of the semigroup generated by the linear part of the converted first-order
system. So, in many cases, it is advantageous to treat the second-order ab-
stract differential system directly rather than to convert that into a first-
order system. In the past decades, many papers have been published about
the controllability of nonlinear systems, in which the authors effectively used
the fixed point technique. In recent years, controllability problems for various
types of nonlinear dynamical systems in infinite dimensional spaces by us-
ing different kinds of approaches have been considered in many publications;
see [1,4,5,13,20,24,31,33–38,42,44–48,56–61] and the references therein. The
literature related to approximate controllability of second-order nonlocal ab-
stract Cauchy problems with impulses remains limited. Moreover, to the au-
thors’ knowledge, no results are available for the approximate controllability
for a class of second-order evolution differential systems in Hilbert spaces.
This fact is the main motivation of our work.
Motivated by the above consideration, in this paper, we establish suffi-
cient conditions for the approximate controllability for a class of second-order
evolution differential inclusions in Hilbert spaces of the form
 Approximate Controllability

x (t) ∈ A(t)x(t) + F (t, x(t)) + Bu(t), t ∈ I = [0, b], (1)

x(0) = x0 ∈ X, x (0) = y0 ∈ X (2)
In this equation, A(t) : D(A(t)) ⊆ X → X is a closed linear operator on a
Hilbert space X and the control function u(·) ∈ L2 (I, U ), a Hilbert space of
admissible control functions. Further, B is a bounded linear operator from U
to X, and F : I × X → 2X \{∅} is a nonempty, bounded, closed and convex
multivalued map.
The fixed point method can be adjudged as a very powerful and impor-
tant tool to study the controllability of nonlinear systems. The fixed point
approach seems appropriate for the solution of many problems in control
theory, because it is constructive and provides an associated convergence
theory. The fixed point approach which has found wide applications in both
the theory and numerical aspect of differential equations has not yet been
extensively applied to the field of stochastic impulsive control system. In this
method, the controllability problem is transferred into a fixed point problem
for an appropriate nonlinear operator in a function space. An essential part
of this method is to guarantee the existence of fixed point for the appro-
priate operator. The fixed point method is the most effective one to study
the existence and controllability of differential systems and fractional differ-
ential systems. Due to its importance, several researchers have studied the
problems represented by evolution equations using different kinds of fixed
point theorems [19,39]. We mainly employ the Bohnenblust–Karlin’s fixed
point theorem to investigate the approximate controllability for a class of
second-order evolution differential inclusions.
This paper is organized as follows. In Sect. 3, we establish a set of suffi-
cient conditions for the approximate controllability for a class of second-order
evolution differential inclusions in Hilbert spaces. In Sect. 4, we establish
a set of sufficient conditions for the approximate controllability for a class
of second-order evolution differential inclusions with nonlocal conditions in
Hilbert spaces. In Sect. 5, we establish a set of sufficient conditions for the
approximate controllability for a class of second-order impulsive evolution
differential inclusions with nonlocal conditions in Hilbert spaces. An example
is presented in Sect. 6 to illustrate the theory of the obtained results.

2. Preliminaries
In this section, we mention a few results, notations and lemmas needed to
establish our main results. We introduce certain notations which will be used
throughout the article without any further mention. Let (X,  · X ) and (Y,  ·
Y ) be Banach spaces, and L(Y, X) be the Banach space of bounded linear
operators from Y into X equipped with its natural topology; in particular, we
use the notation L(X) when Y = X. By ρ(A), we denote the resolvent set of a
linear operator A. Throughout this paper, Br (x, X) will denote the closed ball
with center at x and radius r > 0 in a Hilbert space X. We denote by C, the
Hilbert space C(J, X) endowed with supnorm given by xC ≡ supt∈I x(t),
for x ∈ C.
 N. I. Mahmudov et al. MJOM

In recent times, there has been an increasing interest in studying the

abstract non-autonomous second-order initial value problem
x (t) = A(t)x(t) + f (t), 0 ≤ s, t ≤ b, (3)
x(s) = x0 , x (s) = y0 , (4)
where A(t) : D(A(t)) ⊆ X → X, t ∈ I = [0, b] is a closed densely defined
operator and f : I → X is an appropriate function. Equations of this type
have been considered in many papers. The reader is referred to [7,16,30,40,
41] and the references mentioned in these works. In most of the works, the
existence of solutions to the problem (3) and (4) is related to the existence
of an evolution operator S(t, s) for the homogeneous equation
x (t) = A(t)x(t), 0 ≤ s, t ≤ b. (5)
Let us assume that the domain of A(t) is a subspace D dense in X and
independent of t, and for each x ∈ D the function t → A(t)x is continuous.
Following Kozak [26], in this work we will use the following concept of
evolution operator.
Definition 2.1. A family S of bounded linear operators S(t, s) : I × I → L(X)
is called an evolution operator for (5) if the following conditions are satisfied:
(Z1) For each x ∈ X, the mapping [0, b] × [0, b]
(t, s) → S(t, s)x ∈ X is of
class C 1 and
(i) for each t ∈ [0, b], S(t, t) = 0,
(ii) for all t, s ∈ [0, b], and for each x ∈ X,
 
∂  ∂ 
S(t, s)x = x, S(t, s)x = −x.
∂t t=s ∂t t=s

(Z2) For all t, s ∈ [0, b], if x ∈ D(A), then S(t, s)x ∈ D(A), the mapping
[0, b] × [0, b]
(t, s) → S(t, s)x ∈ X is of class C 2 and
∂2
(i) ∂t 2 S(t, x)x = A(t)S(t, s)x,

∂2
(ii) ∂s2 S(t, x)x= S(t, s)A(s)x,

∂ ∂ 
(iii) ∂s ∂t S(t, x)x = 0.
t=s
∂
(Z3) For all t, s ∈ [0, b], if x ∈ D(A), then ∂s S(t, s)x ∈ D(A), as well as
∂2 ∂ ∂2 ∂
∂t2 ∂s S(t, s)x, ∂s2 ∂t S(t, s)x and
∂2 ∂ ∂
(i) ∂t 2 ∂s S(t, s)x = A(t) ∂s S(t, s)x,

2
∂ ∂ ∂
(ii) ∂s 2 ∂t S(t, s)x = ∂t S(t, s)A(s)x,
∂
and the mapping [0, b] × [0, b]
(t, s) → A(t) ∂s S(t, s)x is continuous.
Throughout this work, we assume that there exists an evolution operator
S(t, s) associated with the operator A(t). To abbreviate the text, we introduce
the operator C(t, s) = − ∂S(t,s) 
∂s . In addition, we set N and N for positive
constants such that sup0≤t,s≤b S(t, s) ≤ N and sup0≤t,s≤b C(t, s) ≤ N .
Furthermore, we denote by N1 a positive constant such that
S(t + h, s) − S(t, s) ≤ N1 |h|,
 Approximate Controllability

for all s, t, t + h ∈ [0, b]. Assuming that f : I → X is an integrable function,

the mild solution x : [0, b] → X of the problem (3) and (4) is given by
 t
x(t) = C(t, s)x0 + S(t, s)y0 + S(t, τ )h(τ )dτ.
0

In the literature, several techniques have been discussed to establish

the existence of the evolution operator S(·, ·). In particular, a very studied
situation is that A(t) is the perturbation of an operator A that generates a
cosine operator function. For this reason, below we briefly review some essen-
tial properties of the theory of cosine functions. Let A : D(A) ⊆ X → X be
the infinitesimal generator of a strongly continuous cosine family of bounded
linear operators (C(t))t∈R on Hilbert space X. We denote by (S(t))t∈R the
sine function associated with (C(t))t∈R which is defined by
 t
S(t)x = C(s)xds, x ∈ X, t ∈ R.
0

We refer the reader to [17,52,53] for the necessary concepts about cosine
functions. Next, we only mention a few results and notations about this
matter needed to establish our results. It immediately follows that
 t
C(t)x − x = A S(s)xds,
0

for all X. The notation [D(A)] stands for the domain of the operator A
endowed with the graph norm xA = x + Ax, x ∈ D(A). Moreover, in
this paper the notation E stands for the space formed by the vectors x ∈ X
for which the function C(·)x is a class C 1 on R. It was proved by Kisyński
[25] that the space E endowed with the norm
xE = x + sup AS(t, 0)x, x ∈ E,
0≤t≤1

is a Hilbert space. The operator-valued function

 
C(t) S(t)
G(t) =
AS(t) C(t)
is a strongly continuous group of linear
 operators on the space E × X gen-
0 I
erated by the operator A = , defined on D(A) × E. It follows from
A 0
this that AS(t) : E → X is a bounded linear operator such that AS(t)x → 0
as t → 0, for each x ∈ E. Furthermore, if x : [0, ∞) → X is a locally inte-
t
grable function, then z(t) = 0 S(t, s)x(s)ds defines an E-valued continuous
function.
The existence of solutions for the second-order abstract Cauchy problem
x (t) = Ax(t) + h(t), 0 ≤ t ≤ b, (6)

x(0) = x0 , x (0) = y0 , (7)
where h : [0, b] → X is an integrable function, has been discussed in [52].
Similarly, the existence of solutions of the semilinear second-order Cauchy
 N. I. Mahmudov et al. MJOM

problem has been treated in [53]. We only mention here that the function
x(·) given by
 t
x(t) = C(t − s)x0 + S(t − s)y0 + S(t − τ )h(τ )dτ, 0 ≤ t ≤ b, (8)
s
is called the mild solution of (6) and (7) and that when x0 ∈ E, x(·) is
continuously differentiable and
 t
x (t) = AS(t − s)x0 + C(t − s)y0 + C(t − τ )h(τ )dτ, 0 ≤ t ≤ b.
s
In addition, if x0 ∈ D(A), y0 ∈ E and f is a continuously differentiable
function, then the function x(·) is a solution of the initial value problem (6)
and (7).
Assume now that A(t) = A + B(t)  
where B(·) : R → L(E, X) is a

map, such that the function t → B(t)x is continuously differentiable in X for
each x ∈ E. It has been established by Serizawa [49] that for each (x0 , y0 ) ∈
D(A) × E the nonautonomous abstract Cauchy problem

x (t) = (A + B(t))x(t), t ∈ R, (9)

x(0) = x0 , x (0) = y0 , (10)
has a unique solution x(·), such that the function t → x(t) is continuously
differentiable in E. It is clear that the same argument allows us to conclude
that equation (9) with the initial condition (7) has a unique solution x(·, s),
such that the function t → x(t, s) is continuously differentiable in E. It follows
from (8) that
 t
x(t, s) = C(t − s)x0 + S(t − s)y0 +  )x(τ, s)dτ.
S(t − τ )B(τ
s
In particular, for x0 = 0 we have
 t
x(t, s) = S(t − s)y0 +  )x(τ, s)dτ.
S(t − τ )B(τ
s
Consequently,
x(t, s)1 ≤ S(t − s)L(X,E) y0 
 t
+  )L(X,E) x(s, τ )1 dτ
S(t − s)L(X,E) B(τ
s
and, applying the Gronwall–Bellman lemma, we infer that
y0 ,
x(t, s)1 ≤ M s, t ∈ I.
We define the operator S(t, s)y0 = x(t, s). It follows from the previous esti-
mate that S(t, s) is a bounded linear map on E. Since E is dense in X, we
can extend S(t, s) to X. We keep the notation S(t, s) for this extension. It is
well known that, except in the case dim(X) < ∞, the cosine function C(t)
cannot be compact for all t ∈ R. In contrast, for the cosine functions that
arise in specific applications, the sine function S(t) is very often a compact
operator for all t ∈ R.
 Approximate Controllability

Theorem 2.2 [21, Theorem 1.2]. Under the preceding conditions, S(·, ·) is an
evolution operator for (9) and (10). Moreover, if S0 (t) is compact for all
t ∈ R, then S(t, s) is also compact for all s ≤ t.
We also introduce some basic definitions and results of multivalued
maps. For more details on multivalued maps, see the books of Deimling [14]
and Hu and Papageorgious [50].
A multivalued map G : X → 2X \{∅} is convex (closed) valued if
G(x) is convex
(closed) for all x ∈ X. G is bounded on bounded sets if
G(C) =
x∈C G(x) is bounded  in X for any bounded set C of X, i.e.,
supx∈C sup{y : y ∈ G(x)} < ∞.

Definition 2.3. G is called upper semicontinuous (u.s.c. for short) on X if for

each x0 ∈ X, the set G(x0 ) is a nonempty closed subset of X, and if for each
open set C of X containing G(x0 ), there exists an open neighborhood V of
x0 such that G(V ) ⊆ C.
Definition 2.4. G is called completely continuous if G(C) is relatively compact
for every bounded subset C of X.
If the multivalued map G is completely continuous with nonempty val-
ues, then G is u.s.c., if and only if G has a closed graph, i.e., xn → x∗ ,
yn → y∗ , and yn ∈ Gxn imply y∗ ∈ Gx∗ . G has a fixed point if there is a
x ∈ X such that x ∈ G(x).
Definition 2.5. A function x ∈ C is said to be a mild solution of system
(1)–(2) if x(0) = x0 , x (0) = y0 and there exists f ∈ L1 (I, X), such that
f (t) ∈ F (t, x(t)) on t ∈ I and the integral equation
 t  t
x(t) = C(t, 0)x0 + S(t, 0)y0 + S(t − s)f (s)ds + S(t − s)Bu(s)ds, t ∈ I
0 0
is satisfied.
To address the problem, it is convenient at this point to introduce two
relevant operators and basic assumptions on these operators:
 b
b
Υ0 = S(b − s)BB ∗ S ∗ (b − s)ds : X → X,
0
R(a, Υb0 ) = (aI + Υb0 )−1 : X → X,
where B ∗ denotes the adjoint of B, S ∗ (t) is the adjoint of S(t). It is straight-
forward that the operator Υb0 is a linear bounded operator.
To investigate the approximate controllability of the system (1) and (2),
we impose the following condition:
H0 aR(a, Υb0 ) → 0 as a → 0+ in the strong operator topology.
In view of [33], Hypothesis H0 holds if and only if the linear system
x (t) = Ax(t) + (Bu)(t), t ∈ [0, b], (11)
x(0) = x0 x (0) = y0 , (12)
is approximately controllable on [0, b].
 N. I. Mahmudov et al. MJOM

Some of our results are proved using the next well-known results.
Lemma 2.6 [28, Lasota and Opial]. Let I be a compact real interval, BCC(X)
be the set of all nonempty, bounded, closed and convex subset of X, and F be
a multivalued map satisfying F : I × X → BCC(X) measurable to t for each
fixed x ∈ X, u.s.c. to x for each t ∈ I, and for each x ∈ C the set
SF,x = {f ∈ L1 (I, X) : f (t) ∈ F (t, x(t)), t ∈ I}
is nonempty. Let F be linear continuous from L1 (I, X) to C, then the operator
F ◦ SF : C → BCC(C), x → (F ◦ SF )(x) = F (SF,x ),
is a closed graph operator in C × C.
Lemma 2.7 [9, Bohnenblust and Karlin]. Let D be a nonempty subset of X,
which is bounded, closed, and convex. Suppose G : D → 2X \{∅} is u.s.c. with
closed, convex values, such that G(D) ⊆ D and G(D) are compact. Then G
has a fixed point.

3. Approximate Controllability Results

In this section, first we establish a set of sufficient conditions for the approxi-
mate controllability for a class of second-order evolution differential inclusions
of the form (1)–(2) in Hilbert spaces using Bohnenblust–Karlin’s fixed point
theorem. To establish the result, we need the following hypotheses:
H1 S0 (t), t > 0 is compact.
H2 For each positive number r and x ∈ C with xC ≤ r, there exists
Lf,r (·) ∈ L1 (I, R+ ) such that
sup{f  : f (t) ∈ F (t, x(t))} ≤ Lf,r (t),
for a.e. t ∈ I.
H3 The function s → Lf,r (s) ∈ L1 ([0, t], R+ ) and there exists a γ > 0 such
that
t
Lf,r (s)ds
lim 0 = γ < +∞.
r→∞ r
It will be shown that the system (1)–(2) is approximately controllable,
if for all a > 0, there exists a continuous function x(·) such that
 t
x(t) = C(t, 0)x0 + S(t, 0)y0 + S(t, s)f (s)ds
0
 t
+ S(t, s)Bu(s, x)ds, f ∈ SF,x , (13)
0
u(t, x) = B ∗ S(b, t)R(a, Υb0 )p(x(·)), , (14)
where
 t
p(x(·)) = xb − C(b, 0)x0 − S(b, 0)y0 − S(b, s)f (s)ds.
0
 Approximate Controllability

Theorem 3.1. Suppose that the hypotheses H0 –H3 are satisfied. Assume also

Nγ 1 + 1 N  2 M 2 b < 1, (15)
B
α
where MB = B, Then the system (1) and (2) has a solution in I.

Proof. The main aim in this section is to find conditions for solvability of
system (1) and (2) for a > 0. We show that, using the control u(x, t), the
operator Γ : C → 2C , defined by

Γ(x) = ϕ ∈ C : ϕ(t) = C(t, 0)x0 + S(t, 0)y0

 t 
+ S(t, s)[f (s) + Bu(s, x)]ds, f ∈ SF,x ,
0

has a fixed point x, which is a mild solution of system (1) and (2). We observe
that xb ∈ (Γx)(b), which means that u(t, x) steers system (1) and (2) from
x0 to xb in finite time b.
We now show that Γ satisfies all the conditions of Lemma 2.7. For the
sake of convenience, we subdivide the proof into five steps.
Step 1 Γ is convex for each x ∈ C.
In fact, if ϕ1 , ϕ2 belong to Γ(x), then there exist f1 , f2 ∈ SF,x such that for
each t ∈ I, we have
 t
ϕi (t) = C(t, 0)x0 + S(t, 0)y0 + S(t, s)fi (s)ds
0
 
t
+ S(t, s)BB ∗ S ∗ (b, t)R(a, Υb0 ) xb − C(b, 0)x0
0
 
b
−S(b, 0)y0 − S(b, η)fi (η)dη (s)ds, i = 1, 2.
0

Let λ ∈ [0, 1]. Then for each t ∈ I, we get

 t
λϕ1 (t) + (1 − λ)ϕ2 (t) = C(t, 0)x0 + S(t, 0)y0 + S(t, s)[λf1 (s) + (1 − λ)f2 (s)]ds
0
 
t
+ S(t, s)BB ∗ S ∗ (b, t)R(a, Υb0 ) xb −C(b, 0)x0 −S(b, 0)y0
0
 
b
− S(b, s)[λf1 (s) + (1 − λ)f2 (s)]ds (s)ds.
0

It is easy to see that SF,x is convex, since F has convex values. So, λf1 + (1 −
λ)f2 ∈ SF,x . Thus,
λϕ1 + (1 − λ)ϕ2 ∈ Γ(x).
Step 2 For each positive number r > 0, let Br = {x ∈ C : xC ≤ r}.
Obviously, Br is a bounded, closed and convex set of C. We claim that there
exists a positive number r such that Γ(Br ) ⊆ Br .
 N. I. Mahmudov et al. MJOM

If this is not true, then for each positive number r, there exists a function
xr ∈ Br , but Γ(xr ) does not belong to Br , i.e.,


Γ(xr )C ≡ sup ϕr C : ϕr ∈ (Γxr ) > r

and
 t  t
ϕr (t) = C(t, 0)x0 + S(t, 0)y0 + S(t, s)f r (s)ds + S(t, s)Bur (s, x)ds,
0 0
for some f r ∈ SF,xr . Using H1 –H3 , we have
r < Γ(xr )(t)
 t  t
r
≤ C(t, 0)x0 +S(t, 0)y0 + S(t, s)f (s)ds + S(t, s)Bur (s, x)ds
0 0
  t

≤ N x0  + N y0  + N Lf,r (s)ds
0
  b 
1 2 2  y0  + N

+ N MB b xb  + N x0  + N Lf,r (s)ds .
α 0

Dividing both sides of the above inequality by r and taking the limit as
r → ∞, using H3 , we get

Nγ 1 + 1 N  2 MB2 b ≥ 1.
α
This contradicts with the condition (15). Hence, for some r > 0, Γ(Br ) ⊆ Br .
Step 3 Γ sends bounded sets into equicontinuous sets of C. For each x ∈ Br ,
ϕ ∈ Γ(x), there exists a f ∈ SF,x such that
 t  t
ϕ(t) = C(t, 0)x0 + S(t, 0)y0 + S(t, s)f (s)ds + S(t, s)Bu(s, x)ds.
0 0
Let 0 < ε < 0 and 0 < t1 < t2 ≤ b, then
|ϕ(t1 ) − ϕ(t2 )| = |C(t1 , 0) − C(t2 , 0)||x0 | + |S(t1 , 0) − S(t2 , 0)||η|
  t1 −ε    t1 
   
+ [S(t1 , s) − S(t2 , s)]f (s)ds +  [S(t1 , s) − S(t2 , s)]f (s)ds
0 t−ε
 t2   t1 −ε 
   
+ S(t2 , s)f (s)ds +  [S(t1 , η) − S(t2 , η)]Bu(η, x)dη 
t1 0
 t1   t2 
   
+ [S(t1 , η) − S(t2 , η)]Bu(η, x)dη  +  S(t2 , η)Bu(η, x)dη 
t−ε t1
 t1 −ε 
 
+ [S(t1 , η) − S(t2 , η)]Bu(η, x)dη 
0
≤ |C(t1 , 0) − C(t2 , 0)||x0 | + |S(t1 , 0) − S(t2 , 0)||η|
 t1 −ε
+ |S(t1 , s) − S(t2 , s)|Lf,r (s)ds
0
 t1  t2
+ 
|S(t1 , s) − S(t2 , s)|Lf,r (s)ds + N Lf,r (s)ds
t−ε t1
 Approximate Controllability
 t1 −ε
+MB |S(t1 , η) − S(t2 , η)|u(η, x)dη
0
 t1  t2
+MB  MB
|S(t1 , η) − S(t2 , η)u(η, x)dη + N u(η, x)dη.
t−ε t1
The right-hand side of the above inequality tends to zero independently
of x ∈ Br as (t1 −t2 ) → 0 and ε are sufficiently small, since the compactness of
the evolution operator S(t, s) implies the continuity in the uniform operator
topology. Thus, Γ(xr ) sends
 Br into an equicontinuous
 family of functions.
Step 4 The set Π(t) = ϕ(t) : ϕ ∈ Γ(Br ) is relatively compact in X.
Let t ∈ (0, b] be fixed and ε a real number satisfying 0 < ε < t. For
x ∈ Br , we define
 t−ε  t−ε
ϕε (t) = C(t, 0)x0 + S(t, 0)y0 + S(t, s)f (s)ds + S(t, η)Bu(η, x)dη.
0 0
Since S(t) is a compact operator, the set Πε (t) = {ϕε (t) : ϕε ∈ Γ(Br )} is
relatively compact in X for each ε, 0 < ε < t. Moreover, for each 0 < ε < t,
we have
 t  t

|ϕ(t) − ϕε (t)| ≤ N  MB
Lf,r (s)ds + N u(η, x)dη.
t−ε t−ε

Hence, there exist relatively compact sets arbitrarily close to the set Π(t) =
{ϕ(t) : ϕ ∈ Γ(Br )}, and the set Π(t)  is relatively compact in X for all
t ∈ [0, b]. Since it is compact at t = 0, Π(t) is relatively compact in X for all
t ∈ [0, b].
Step 5 Γ has a closed graph.
Let xn → x∗ as n → ∞, ϕn ∈ Γ(xn ), and ϕn → ϕ∗ as n → ∞. We will
show that ϕ∗ ∈ Γ(x∗ ). Since ϕn ∈ Γ(xn ), there exists a fn ∈ SF,xn such that
 t  t
ϕn (t) = C(t, 0)x0 + S(t, 0)y0 + S(t, s)fn (s)ds + S(t, s)BB ∗ S ∗ (b, t)R(a, Υb0 )
0 0
  b
× xb − S(b, 0)x0 − S(b, η)fn (η)dη (s)ds.
0

We must prove that there exists a f∗ ∈ SF,x∗ such that

 t  t
ϕ∗ (t) = C(t, 0)x0 + S(t, 0)y0 + S(t, s)f∗ (s)ds + S(t, s)BB ∗ S ∗ (b, t)
0 0
  
b
× y0 − S(b, 0)x0 − S(b, η)f∗ (η)ds (s)ds.
0

Set
ux (t) = B ∗ S ∗ (b, t)[xb − C(b, 0)x0 − S(b, 0)y0 ](t).
Then,
uxn (t) → ux∗ (t), for t ∈ I, as n → ∞.
Clearly, we have
  t 

 ϕn − C(t, 0)x0 + S(t, 0)y0 − S(t, s)BB ∗ S ∗ (b, t)R(a, Υb0 ) xb − S(b, 0)x0
0
 N. I. Mahmudov et al. MJOM
 b    t
− S(b, η)fn (η)dη (s)ds − ϕ∗ − C(t, 0)x0 + S(t, 0)y0 − S(t, s)BB ∗ S ∗ (b, t)
0 0
  b 

× y0 − C(b, 0)x0 − S(b, 0)y0 − S(b, η)f∗ (η)ds (s)ds  → 0 as n → ∞.
0 C

Consider the operator F  : L1 (I, X) → C,

 t   b 

(F f )(t) = ∗ ∗
S(t, s) f (s) − BB S (b, t) S(b, η)f (η)dη (s) ds.
0 0

We can see that the operator F  is linear and continuous. From Lemma
◦ SF is a closed graph operator. Moreover,
2.7 again, it follows that F
  t 
ϕn − C(t, 0)x0 − S(t, 0)y0 − S(t, s)BB ∗ S ∗ (b, t)R(a, Υb0 ) xb − S(b, 0)x0
0
 b 
− S(b, η)fn (η)dη (s)ds ∈ F (SF,xn ).
0
In view of xn → x∗ as n → ∞, it follows again from Lemma 2.7 that
  t 
ϕ∗ − C(t, 0)x0 + S(t, 0)y0 − S(t, s)BB ∗ S ∗ (b, t)R(a, Υb0 ) xb − S(b, 0)x0
0
 b 
− S(b, η)f∗ (η)dη (s)ds ∈ F (SF,x∗ ).
0
Therefore, Γ has a closed graph.
As a consequence of Steps 1–5 together with the Arzela–Ascoli theorem,
we conclude that Γ is a compact multivalued map, u.s.c. with convex closed
values. As a consequence of Lemma 2.7, we can deduce that Γ has a fixed
point x which is a mild solution of system (1) and (2). 
Definition 3.2. The control system (1) and (2) is said to be approximately
controllable on I if R(b) = X, where R(b) = {x(b; u) : u ∈ L2 (I, U )} and
x(·, u) is a mild solution of the system (1) and (2).
Theorem 3.3. Suppose that the assumptions H0 –H3 hold. Assume addition-
ally that there exists N ∈ L1 (I, [0, ∞)) such that supx∈X F (t, x) ≤ N (t)
for a.e. t ∈ I, then the system (1) and (2) is approximately controllable in I.
Proof. Let xa (·) be a fixed point of Γ in Br . By Theorem 3.1, any fixed point
of Γ is a mild solution of (1) and (2) under the control
a (t) = B ∗ S ∗ (b, t)R(a, Υb0 )p(
u xa )
and satisfies the following inequality
a (b) = xb + aR(a, Υb0 )p(
x xa ).
Moreover by assumption on F and Dunford–Pettis theorem, we have that the
{f a (s)} is weakly compact in L1 (I, X), so there is a sub-sequence, denoted
by {f a (s)}, that converges weakly to say f (s) in L1 (I, X). Define
 b
w = xb − C(b, 0)x0 − S(b, 0)y0 − S(b, s)f (s)ds.
0
 Approximate Controllability

Now, we have
 b 
a  
x ) − w = 
p( a (s)) − f (s)]ds
S(b, s)[f (s, x
0
 t 
 
≤ sup  S(t, s)[f (s, xa (s)) − f (s)]ds. (16)
t∈I 0

Using infinite-dimensional · version of the Ascoli–Arzela theorem, one can show

that an operator l(·) → 0 S(·, s)l(s)ds : L1 (I, X) → C is compact. Therefore,
we obtain that p(xa ) − w → 0 as a → 0+ . Moreover, from (16), we get
xa (b) − xb  ≤ aR(a, Υb0 )(w) + aR(a, Υb0 )p(
 xa ) − w
≤ aR(a, Υb0 )(w) + p(
xa ) − w.
xa (b) − xb  → 0
It follows from assumption H0 and the estimation (16) that 
+
as a → 0 . This proves the approximate controllability of system (1) and
(2). 

4. Second-Order Control Systems with Nonlocal Conditions

There exist an extensive literature of differential equations with nonlocal
conditions. Since it is demonstrated that the nonlocal problems have bet-
ter effects in applications than the classical ones, differential equations with
nonlocal problems have been studied extensively in the literature. The re-
sult concerning the existence and uniqueness of mild solutions to abstract
Cauchy problems with nonlocal initial conditions was first formulated and
proved by Byszewski; see [10–12]. Since the appearance of these papers, sev-
eral papers have addressed the issue of existence and uniqueness of nonlin-
ear differential equations. Existence and controllability results of nonlinear
differential equations and fractional differential equations with nonlocal con-
ditions have been studied by several authors for different kind of problems
[2,3,15,18,23,29,34,56].
Inspired by the above works, in this section, we discuss the approximate
controllability for a class of second-order evolution differential inclusions with
nonlocal conditions in Hilbert spaces of the form
x (t) ∈ A(t)x(t) + F (t, x(t)) + Bu(t), t ∈ I = [0, b], (17)

x(0) + g(x) = x0 ∈ X, x (0) + h(x) = y0 ∈ X, (18)
where g, h : C → X is a given function which satisfies the following condition:
H4 There exists a constant Lg > 0, Lh > 0 such that
|g(x) − g(y)| ≤ Lg x − y, for x, y ∈ C
|h(x) − h(y)| ≤ Lh x − y, for x, y ∈ C.
for all x, y ∈ C.
Definition 4.1. A function x ∈ C is said to be a mild solution of system (17)
and (18) if x(0) + g(x) = x0 , x (0) + h(x) = y0 and there exists f ∈ L1 (I, X)
such that f (t) ∈ F (t, x(t)) on t ∈ I and the integral equation
 N. I. Mahmudov et al. MJOM
 t
x(t) = C(t, 0)(x0 − g(x)) + S(t, 0)(y0 − h(x)) + S(t, s)f (s)ds
0
 t
+ S(t, s)Bu(s)ds, t ∈ I
0
is satisfied.
Theorem 4.2. Assume that the assumptions of Theorem 3.1 are satisfied.
Further, if the hypothesis H4 is satisfied, then the system (17) and (18) is
approximately controllable on I provided that

Nγ 1 + 1 N 2M 2 b < 1
B
α
where MB = B.
 a on X by
Proof. For each a > 0, we define the operator Γ
 a x) = z,
(Γ
where
 t
z(t) = C(t, 0)(x0 − g(x)) + S(t, 0)(y0 − h(x)) + S(t, s)f (s)ds
0
 t
+ S(t, s)Bu(s, x)ds,
0
v(t) = B S ∗ (b, t)R(a, Υb0 )p(x(·)),
∗
 t
p(x(·)) = xb − C(t, 0)(x0 − g(x)) − S(t, 0)(y0 − g(x)) − S(t, s)f (s)ds,
0
where f ∈ SF,x .
 a has a fixed
It can be easily proved that if for all a > 0, the operator Γ
point by implementing the technique used in Theorem 3.1. Then, we can
show that the second-order control system (17) and (18) is approximately
controllable. The proof of this theorem is similar to that of Theorems 3.1 and
3.3, and hence it is omitted. 

5. Second-Order Impulsive Nonlocal Control Systems

Impulsive dynamical systems are characterized by the occurrence of an abrupt
change in the state of the system, which occur at certain time instants over
a period of negligible duration. The dynamical behavior of such systems is
much more complex than the behavior of dynamical systems without im-
pulse effects. The presence of impulse means that the state trajectory does
not preserve the basic properties which are associated with non-impulsive
dynamical systems. In fact, the theory of impulsive differential equations has
found extensive applications in realistic mathematical modeling of a wide
variety of practical situations [32] and has emerged as an important area
of investigation in recent years. It is known that many biological phenom-
ena involving thresholds, bursting rhythm models in medicine and biology,
 Approximate Controllability

optimal control models in economics, pharmacokinetics and frequency mod-

ulation systems exhibit impulse effects; see the monographs of Samoilenko
and Perestyuk [43], Lakshmikantham et al. [27], Bainov et al. [6] and Ben-
chohra et al. [8] and the references cited therein. The literature on this type of
problem is vast, and different topics on the existence and qualitative proper-
ties of solutions are considered. Concerning the general motivations, relevant
developments and the current status of the theory, we refer the reader to
[1,4,5,22,23,26,41,45,46,51,54,55].
Inspired by the above works, in this section, we discuss the approximate
controllability for a class of second-order impulsive evolution differential in-
clusions with nonlocal conditions in Hilbert spaces of the form
x (t) ∈ A(t)x(t) + F (t, x(t)) + Bu(t), t ∈ I = [0, b], (19)
x(0) + g(x) = x0 ∈ X, x (0) + h(x) = y0 ∈ X, (20)
Δx(ti ) = Ii (x(ti )), (21)
Δx (ti ) = Ji (x(ti )), i = 1, 2, · · · , n, (22)
where 0 < t1 < t2 < · · · < tn < b are fixed numbers and Ii : X → X, Ji :
X → X, i = 1, ..., n are suitable functions and the symbol Δξ(t) represents
the jump of the function ξ at t, which is defined by Δξ(t) = ξ(t+ ) − ξ(t− ).
Consider the following assumption
H5 The maps Ii : X → X, Ji : X → X are completely continuous and
uniformly bounded. In the sequel, we set Mi = sup{Ii (x) : x ∈ X}
and Mi = sup{Ji (x) : x ∈ X}.

Definition 5.1. A function x ∈ C is said to be a mild solution of system (19)–

(22) if x(0) + g(x) = x0 , x (0) + h(x) = y0 and there exists f ∈ L1 (I, X) such
that f (t) ∈ F (t, x(t)) on t ∈ I and the integral equation
 t
x(t) = C(t, 0)(x0 − g(x)) + S(t, 0)(y0 − h(x)) + S(t, s)f (s)ds
0
 t 
+ S(t, s)Bu(s)ds + C(t, ti )Ii (u(ti ))
0 0<ti <t

+ S(t, ti )Ji (u(ti )), t∈I
0<ti <t

is satisfied.
Theorem 5.2. Assume that the assumptions of Theorems 3.1 and 4.2 are
satisfied. Further, if the hypothesis H5 is satisfied, then the system (19)–(22)
is approximately controllable on I provided that

Nγ 1 + 1 N 2 MB2 b < 1
α
where MB = B.
 a on X by
Proof. For each a > 0, we define the operator Γ
 a x) = z,
(Γ
 N. I. Mahmudov et al. MJOM

where
z(t) = C(t, 0)(x0 − g(x)) + S(t, 0)(y0 − h(x))
 t  t
+ S(t, s)f (s)ds + S(t, s)Bu(s, x)ds
0 0
 
+ C(t, ti )Ii (u(ti )) + S(t, ti )Ji (u(ti )),
0<ti <t 0<ti <t

v(t) = B ∗ S ∗ (b, t)R(a, Υb0 )p(x(·)),

 t
p(x(·)) = xb − C(t, 0)(x0 − g(x)) − S(t, 0)(y0 − g(x)) − S(t, s)f (s)ds
0
n
 n

+ C(t, ti )Ii (u(ti )) + S(t, ti )Ji (u(ti )),
i=1 i=1

in which f ∈ SF,x .
 a has a fixed
It can be easily proved that if for all a > 0, the operator Γ
point by implementing the technique used in Theorem 3.1. Then, we can show
that the second-order control system (19)–(22) is approximately controllable.
The proof of this theorem is similar to that of Theorems 3.1, 3.3 and 4.2, and
hence it is omitted. 

6. An Application
In this section, we apply our abstract results to a concrete partial differential
equation. To establish our results, we need to introduce the required technical
tools. Following the equations (9) and (10), here we consider A(t) = A +

B(t) where A is the infinitesimal generator of a cosine function C(t) with
associated sine function S(t), and B(t)  
: D(B(t)) → X is a closed linear
operator with D ⊆ D(B(t)) for all t ∈ I.
We model this problem in the space X = L2 (T, C), where the group
T is defined as the quotient R/2πZ. We will use the identification between
functions on T and 2π-periodic functions on R. Specifically, in what follows
we denote by L2 (T, C) the space of 2π-periodic 2-integrable functions from R
into C. Similarly, H 2 (T, C) denotes the Sobolev space of 2π-periodic functions
x : R → C such that x ∈ L2 (T, C).
We consider the operator Ax(ξ) = x (ξ) with domain D(A) = H 2 (T, C).
It is well known that A is the infinitesimal generator of a strongly continuous
cosine function C(t) on X. Moreover, A has discrete spectrum; the spectrum
of A consists of eigenvalues −n2 for n ∈ Z, with associated eigenvectors
1
wn (ξ) = √ einξ , n ∈ Z,
2π
the set {wn : n ∈ Z} is an orthonormal basis of X. In particular,
∞

Ax = − n2 x, wn wn
n=1
 Approximate Controllability

for x ∈ D(A). The cosine function C(t) is given by

∞

C(t)x = cos(nt)x, wn wn , t ∈ R,
n=1
with associated sine function
∞
sin(nt)
S(t)x = x, wn wn , t ∈ R.
n=1
n
It is clear that C(t) ≤ 1 for all t ∈ R. Thus, C(·) is uniformly bounded
on R.
Consider the second-order Cauchy problem with control
∂2 ∂2 ∂
2
z(t, τ ) ∈ 2
z(t, τ ) + b(t) z(t, τ ) + μ(t, τ ) + Q(t, z(t, τ )) (23)
∂t ∂τ ∂t
for t ∈ I, 0 ≤ τ ≤ π, subject to the initial conditions
z(t, 0) = z(t, π) = 0, t ∈ I, (24)
∂
z(0, τ ) = z0 (τ ), 0 ≤ τ ≤ π, z(0, τ ) = z1 (τ ), (25)
∂t
where b : R → Ris a continuous function. We fix a > 0 and set β =
sup0≤t≤a |b(t)|.

We take B(t)x(τ ) = b(t)x (τ ) defined on H 1 (T, C). It is easy to see

that A(t) = A + B(t) is a closed linear operator. Initially, we will show that

A + B(t) generates an evolution operator. It is well known that the solution
of the scalar initial value problem
q  (t) = −n2 q(t) + p(t),
q(s) = 0, q  (s) = q1
is given by
 t
q1 1
q(t) = sin n(t − s) + sin n(t − τ )p(τ )dτ.
n n s
Therefore, the solution of the scalar initial value problem
q  (t) = −n2 q(t) + inb(t)q(t), (26)
q(s) = 0, q  (s) = q1 , (27)
satisfies the integral equation
 t
q1
q(t) = sin n(t − s) + i sin n(t − τ )b(τ )q(τ )dτ.
n s
Applying the Gronwall–Bellman lemma, we can affirm that
|q1 | β(t−s)
|q(t)| ≤ e (28)
n
for s ≤ t. We denote by qn (t, s) the solution of (26) and (27). We define
∞

S(t, s)x = qn (t, s)x, wn wn .
n=1
 N. I. Mahmudov et al. MJOM

It follows from the estimate (28) that S(t, s) : X → X is well defined

and satisfies the conditions of Definition 2.1.
Put z(t) = z(t, ·), that is z(t)(τ ) = z(t, τ ), t ∈ I, τ ∈ [0, π] and u(t) =
μ(t, ·); here, μ : I × [0, π] → [0, π] is continuous. Let us define f : I × X → X
as
F (t, z)(τ ) = Q(t, z(τ )), z ∈ X, τ ∈ [0, π]
and the bounded linear operator B : U → X by
Bu(t)(τ ) = μ(t, τ ), t ∈ I, τ ∈ [0, π].
Assume that these functions satisfy the requirement of hypotheses. From
the above choices of the functions and evolution operator A(t) with B = I
, the system (23)–(25) can be formulated as the system (1)–(2) in X. Since
all hypotheses of Theorem 3.3 are satisfied, approximate controllability of
system (23)–(25) on I follows from Theorem 3.3.

7. Conclusion
Approximate controllability for a class of evolution differential inclusions in
Hilbert spaces is discussed in this paper. By using Bohnenblust–Karlin’s fixed
point theorem, we proved our main results. Further, we extended our result to
study the approximate controllability concept with nonlocal conditions and
also to study the approximate controllability for impulsive control systems
with nonlocal conditions. Finally, we have given an example for illustration
of the presented theory.
In future work, we will try to focus our study on the approximate con-
trollability for a class of second-order neutral impulsive evolution differential
inclusions with nonlocal conditions in Hilbert spaces by using Bohnenblust–
Karlin’s fixed point theorem.
Acknowledgments
The authors are deeply grateful to the anonymous referees for the careful
reading of this paper and helpful comments, which have been very useful for
improving the quality of this paper.

References
[1] Abada, N., Benchohra, M., Hammouche, H.: Existence and controllability re-
sults for nondensely defined impulsive semilinear functional differential inclu-
sions. J. Differ. Equ. 246(10), 3834–3863 (2009)
[2] Aizicovici, S., McKibben, M.: Existence results for a class of abstract nonlocal
Cauchy problems. Nonlinear Anal. 39, 649–668 (2000)
[3] Aizicovici, S., Lee, H.: Nonlinear nonlocal Cauchy problems in Banach
spaces. Appl. Math. Lett. 18, 401–407 (2005)
[4] Arthi, G., Balachandran, K.: Controllability of second-order impulsive evo-
lution systems with infinite delay. Nonlinear Anal. Hybrid Syst. 11, 139–
153 (2014)
 Approximate Controllability

[5] Arthi, G., Park, J.H., Jung, H.Y.: Existence and controllability results for
second-order impulsive stochastic evolution systems with state-dependent de-
lay. Appl. Math. Comput. 248, 328–341 (2014)
[6] Bainov, D.D., Simeonov, P.S.: Impulsive Differential Equations: Periodic So-
lutions and Applications. Longman Scientific and Technical Group, England
(1993)
[7] Batty, C.J.K., Chill, R., Srivastava, S.: Maximal regularity for second order
non-autonomous Cauchy problems. Studia Math. 189, 205–223 (2008)
[8] Benchohra, M., Henderson, J., Ntouyas, S.K.: Impulsive Differential Equa-
tions and Inclusions, Contemporary Mathematics and Its Applications. Hin-
dawi Publishing Corporation, New York (2006)
[9] Bohnenblust, H.F., Karlin, S.: On a Theorem of Ville. In: Contributions to the
Theory of Games, vol. I, pp. 155–160. Princeton University Press, Princeton
(1950)
[10] Byszewski, L.: Theorems about the existence and uniqueness of solutions of a
semilinear evolution nonlocal Cauchy problem. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 162, 494–
505 (1991)
[11] Byszewski, L., Akca, H.: On a mild solution of a semilinear functional-
differential evolution nonlocal problem. J. Appl. Math. Stoc. Anal. 10(3), 265–
271 (1997)
[12] Byszewski, L., Lakshmikantham, V.: Theorem about the existence and unique-
ness of solutions of a nonlocal Cauchy problem in a Banach space. Appl.
Anal. 40, 11–19 (1990)
[13] Dauer, J.P., Mahmudov, N.I., Matar, M.M.: Approximate controllability of
backward stochastic evolution equations in Hilbert spaces. J. Math. Anal.
Appl. 323(1), 42–56 (2006)
[14] Deimling, K.: Multivalued Differential Equations. De Gruyter, Berlin (1992)
[15] Ezzinbi, K., Fu, X., Hilal, K.: Existence and regularity in the a-norm for
some neutral partial differential equations with nonlocal conditions. Nonlin-
ear Anal. 67, 1613–1622 (2007)
[16] Faraci, F., Iannizzotto, A.: A multiplicity theorem for a perturbed second-order
non-autonomous system. Proc. Edinb. Math. Soc. 49, 267–275 (2006)
[17] Fattorini, H.O.: Second Order Linear Differential Equations in Banach Spaces,
vol. 108. North-Holland Math. Stud., Amsterdam (1985)
[18] Fu, X., Ezzinbi, K.: Existence of solutions for neutral functional differential evo-
lution equations with nonlocal conditions. Nonlinear Anal. 54, 215–227 (2003)
[19] Grans, A., Dugundji, J.: Fixed Point Theory. Springer, New York (2003)
[20] Guendouzi, T., Bousmaha, L.: Approximate controllability of fractional neutral
stochastic functional integro-differential inclusions with infinite delay. Qual.
Theory Dyn. Syst. 13, 89–119 (2014)
[21] Henrı́quez, H.R.: Existence of solutions of non-autonomous second or-
der functional differential equations with infinite delay. Nonlinear Anal.
TMA. 74, 3333–3352 (2011)
[22] Henrı́quez, H.R., Genaro, Castillo: The Kneser property for the second or-
der functional abstract Cauchy problem. Integ. Equ. Oper. Theory 52, 505–
525 (2005)
 N. I. Mahmudov et al. MJOM

[23] Henrı́quez, H.R., Hernández, E.: Existence of solutions of a second order

abstract functional Cauchy problem with nonlocal conditions. Ann. Polon.
Math. 88(2), 141–159 (2006)
[24] Henrı́quez, H.R.: Approximate controllability of linear distributed control sys-
tems. Appl. Math. Lett. 21(10), 1041–1045 (2008)
[25] Kisyński, J.: On cosine operator functions and one parameter group of opera-
tors. Studia. Math. 49, 93–105 (1972)
[26] Kozak, M.: A fundamental solution of a second order differential equation in a
Banach space. Univ. Iagellon. Acta Math. 32, 275–289 (1995)
[27] Laksmikantham, V., Bainov, D., Simenov, P.S.: Theory of Impulsive Differen-
tial Equations, Series in Modern Applied Mathematics, vol. 6. World Scientific
Publishing Co., Inc., Teaneck (1989)
[28] Lasota, A., Opial, Z.: An application of the Kakutani-Ky-Fan theorem in
the theory of ordinary differential equations or noncompact acyclic-valued
map. Bull. Acad. Pol. Sci. Ser. Sci. Math. Astronom. Phys. 13, 781–786 (1965)
[29] Liang, J., Liu, J.H., Xiao, T.J.: Nonlocal Cauchy problems governed by com-
pact operator families. Nonlinear Anal. 57, 183–189 (2004)
[30] Lin, Y.: Time-dependent perturbation theory for abstract evolution equations
of second order. Stud. Math. 130, 263–274 (1998)
[31] Liu, Z., Lv, J.: Approximate controllability of fractional functional evolution
inclusions with delay in Hilbert spaces. IMA J. Math. Cont. Inform. 31, 363–
383 (2013)
[32] Miller, B.M., Rubinovich, E.Y.: Impulsive Control in Continuous and Discrete-
Continuous Systems. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York (2003)
[33] Mahmudov, N.I., Denker, A.: On controllability of linear stochastic sys-
tems. Int. J. Cont. 73, 144–151 (2000)
[34] Mahmudov, N.I.: Approximate controllability of evolution systems with non-
local conditions. Nonlinear Anal. TMA. 68(3), 536–546 (2008)
[35] Mahmudov, N.I., Zorlu, S.: On the approximate controllability of fractional
evolution equations with compact analytic semigroup. J. Comput. Appl.
Math. 259, 194–204 (2014)
[36] Mahmudov, N.I.: Approximate controllability of some nonlinear systems in
Banach spaces. Bound. Val. Prob 2013(1), 1–13 (2013)
[37] Mahmudov, N.I., Denker, A.: On controllability of linear stochastic sys-
tems. Int. J. Control. 73, 144–151 (2000)
[38] Mahmudov, N.I., McKibben, M.A.: Approximate controllability of second-
order neutral stochastic evolution equations. Dyn. Contin. Discrete Impuls.
Syst. 13(5), 619–634 (2006)
[39] Martin, R.H.: Nonlinear Operators and Differential Equations in Banach
Spaces. Robert E Krieger Publishing Co, Florida (1987)
[40] Obrecht, E.: Evolution operators for higher order abstract parabolic equa-
tions. Czech. Math. J. 36, 210–222 (1986)
[41] Peng, Y., Xiang, X.: Second-order nonlinear impulsive time-variant systems
with unbounded perturbation and optimal controls. J. Ind. Manag. Op-
tim. 4, 17–32 (2008)
[42] Ren, Y., Dai, H., Sakthivel, R.: Approximate controllability of stochastic dif-
ferential systems driven by a Lévy process. Int. J. Cont. 86, 1158–1164 (2013)
 Approximate Controllability

[43] Samoilenko, A.M., Perestyuk, N.A.: Impulsive Differential Equations. World

Scientific, Singapore (1995)
[44] Sakthivel, R., Ganesh, R., Anthoni, S.M.: Approximate controllability of
fractional nonlinear differential inclusions. Appl. Math. Comput. 225, 708–
717 (2013)
[45] Sakthivel, R., Mahmudov, N.I., Kim, J.H.: Approximate controllability of non-
linear impulsive differential systems. Report. Math. Phy. 60(1), 85–96 (2007)
[46] Sakthivel, R., Anandhi, E.R., Mahmudov, N.I.: Approximate controllability of
second-order systems with state-dependent delay. Numer. Funct. Anal. Op-
tim. 29(11–12), 1347–1362 (2008)
[47] Sakthivel, R., Ren, Y.: Complete controllability of stochastic evolution equa-
tions with jumps. Rep. Math. Phy. 68, 163–174 (2011)
[48] Sakthivel, R., Ren, Y.: Approximate controllability of fractional differential
equations with state-dependent delay. Res. Math. 63, 949–963 (2013)
[49] Serizawa, H., Watanabe, M.: Time-dependent perturbation for cosine families
in Banach spaces. Hous. J. Math. 12, 579–586 (1986)
[50] Hu, S., Papageorgiou, N.S.: Handbook of Multivalued Analysis (Theory).
Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1997)
[51] Sivasankaran, S., Mallika Arjunan, M., Vijayakumar, V.: Existence of global
solutions for second order impulsive abstract partial differential equations. Non-
linear Anal. TMA. 74(17), 6747–6757 (2011)
[52] Travis, C.C., Webb, G.F.: Compactness, regularity, and uniform continuity
properties of strongly continuous cosine families. Houston J. Math. 3(4), 555–
567 (1977)
[53] Travis, C.C., Webb, G.F.: Cosine families and abstract nonlinear second order
differential equations. Acta. Math. Acad. Sci. Hungar. 32, 76–96 (1978)
[54] Vijayakumar, V., Sivasankaran, S., Mallika Arjunan, M.: Existence of solu-
tions for second order impulsive partial neutral functional integrodifferential
equations with infinite delay. Nonlinear Stud. 19(2), 327–343 (2012)
[55] Vijayakumar, V., Sivasankaran, S., Mallika Arjunan, M.: Existence of global so-
lutions for second order impulsive abstract functional integrodifferential equa-
tions. Dyn. Contin. Discrete Impuls. Syst. 18, 747–766 (2011)
[56] Vijayakumar, V., Ravichandran, C., Murugesu, R.: Nonlocal controllability
of mixed Volterra-Fredholm type fractional semilinear integro-differential in-
clusions in Banach spaces. Dyn. Contin. Discrete Impuls. Syst. 20(4), 485–
502 (2013)
[57] Vijayakumar, V., Ravichandran, C., Murugesu, R.: Approximate controllabil-
ity for a class of fractional neutral integro-differential inclusions with state-
dependent delay. Nonlinear Stud. 20(4), 511–530 (2013)
[58] Vijayakumar, V., Selvakumar, A., Murugesu, R.: Controllability for a class of
fractional neutral integro-differential equations with unbounded delay. Appl.
Math. Comput. 232, 303–312 (2014)
[59] Vijayakumar, V., Ravichandran, C., Murugesu, R., Trujillo, J.J.: Controllabil-
ity results for a class of fractional semilinear integro-differential inclusions via
resolvent operators. Appl. Math. Comput. 247, 152–161 (2014)
[60] Yan Z.: Approximate controllability of fractional neutral integro-differential
inclusions with state-dependent delay in Hilbert spaces. IMA J. Math. Cont.
Inform. (2012). doi:10.1093/imamci/dns033
 N. I. Mahmudov et al. MJOM

[61] Yan, Z.: Approximate controllability of partial neutral functional dif-

ferential systems of fractional order with state-dependent delay. Int. J.
Cont. 85(8), 1051–1062 (2012)

N. I. Mahmudov
Department of Mathematics
Eastern Mediterranean University
Gazimagusa, T. R. North Cyprus
Mersin 10, Turkey
e-mail: [email protected]

V. Vijayakumar
Department of Mathematics
Info Institute of Engineering
Kovilpalayam
Coimbatore 641 107
Tamil Nadu, India
e-mail: [email protected]

R. Murugesu
Department of Mathematics
SRMV College of Arts and Science
Coimbatore 641 020
Tamil Nadu, India
e-mail: [email protected]

Received: January 10, 2015.

Revised: January 28, 2016.
Accepted: February 11, 2016.