2011
DOI: 10.1216/jie-2011-23-3-421
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Observation of Volterra systems with scalar kernels

Abstract: Volterra observations systems with scalar kernels are studied. New sufficient conditions for admissibility of observation operators are developed. The obtained results are applied to time-fractional diffusion equations of distributed order.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As for the control operators, and due to the expression of ( T V (t)) t≥0 (see the proof of Proposition 4 for its definition), it is clear that one can obtain finite-time or infinitetime L p -admissibility of observation operator C for (S(t)) t≥0 from that of C (see (31) for its definition) for ( T V (t)) t≥0 . Recall, that for some classes of kernel functions a(•) and k(•), the authors in [45,34,16] related the L 2 -admissibility of the observation operators for sVIEs (5) and sVIDPs ( 4)) from the L 2 -admissibility of the observation operators for CP (20). In the same direction, the following proposition establish a links between the L padmissibility of observation operators for the nsVIDPs (16) for p ∈ (1, ∞), and for sVIDPs (4) with p = 1, and the CP (20).…”
Section: 1 (I)]) Now Let Us Definementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As for the control operators, and due to the expression of ( T V (t)) t≥0 (see the proof of Proposition 4 for its definition), it is clear that one can obtain finite-time or infinitetime L p -admissibility of observation operator C for (S(t)) t≥0 from that of C (see (31) for its definition) for ( T V (t)) t≥0 . Recall, that for some classes of kernel functions a(•) and k(•), the authors in [45,34,16] related the L 2 -admissibility of the observation operators for sVIEs (5) and sVIDPs ( 4)) from the L 2 -admissibility of the observation operators for CP (20). In the same direction, the following proposition establish a links between the L padmissibility of observation operators for the nsVIDPs (16) for p ∈ (1, ∞), and for sVIDPs (4) with p = 1, and the CP (20).…”
Section: 1 (I)]) Now Let Us Definementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The idea of treating finite-time L 2 -admissibility of control or observation operators for sVIPs (5) has been exploited past years by several authors (see e.g. [45], [46], [33], [34], [25], [10]). It is legitimate to ask if there is a relation between the L p -admissibility with respect to CPs and sVIPs, sVIDPs respectively.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As for the control operators, and due to the expression of ( T V (t)) t≥0 (see the proof of Proposition 4 for its definition), it is clear that one can obtain finite-time or infinitetime L p -admissibility of observation operator C for (S(t)) t≥0 from that of C (see (31) for its definition) for ( T V (t)) t≥0 . Recall, that for some classes of kernel functions a(•) and k(•), the authors in [45,34,16] related the L 2 -admissibility of the observation operators for sVIEs (5) and sVIDPs ( 4)) from the L 2 -admissibility of the observation operators for CP (20). In the same direction, the following proposition establish a links between the L padmissibility of observation operators for the nsVIDPs (16) for p ∈ (1, ∞), and for sVIDPs (4) with p = 1, and the CP (20).…”
Section: 1 (I)]) Now Let Us Definementioning
confidence: 99%