ISSN: 1072-6691. URL: http://ejde.math.txstate.edu or http://ejde.math.unt.edu ftp ejde.math.txstate.edu (login: ftp)

A NONLINEAR WAVE EQUATION WITH A NONLINEAR INTEGRAL EQUATION INVOLVING THE BOUNDARY VALUE

THANH LONG NGUYEN, TIEN DUNG BUI

Abstract. We consider the initial-boundary value problem for the nonlinear wave equation

utt−uxx+f(u, ut) = 0, x∈Ω = (0,1),0< t < T, ux(0, t) =P(t), u(1, t) = 0,

u(x,0) =u0(x), ut(x,0) =u1(x),

whereu0, u1, f are given functions, the unknown functionu(x, t) and the un- known boundary valueP(t) satisfy the nonlinear integral equation

P(t) =g(t) +H(u(0, t))− Z t

0

K(t−s, u(0, s))ds,

whereg,K,H are given functions. We prove the existence and uniqueness of weak solutions to this problem, and discuss the stability of the solution with respect to the functionsg,H andK. For the proof, we use the Galerkin method.

1. Introduction

In this paper we consider the problem of finding a pair of functions (u, P) that satisfy

u_{tt}−u_{xx}+f(u, u_{t}) = 0, x∈Ω = (0,1), 0< t < T, (1.1)

ux(0, t) =P(t) (1.2)

u(1, t) = 0, (1.3)

u(x,0) =u_{0}(x), u_{t}(x,0) =u_{1}(x), (1.4)
where u0, u1, f are given functions satisfying conditions to be specified later and
the unknown function u(x, t) and the unknown boundary value P(t) satisfy the
nonlinear integral equation

P(t) =g(t) +H(u(0, t))− Z t

0

K(t−s, u(0, s))ds, (1.5) where g, H, K are given functions. Ang and Dinh [2] established the existence of a unique global solution for the initial and boundary value problem (1.1)-(1.4)

2000Mathematics Subject Classification. 35B30, 35L70, 35Q72.

Key words and phrases. Galerkin method; system of integrodifferential equations;

Schauder fixed point theorem; weak solutions; stability of the solutions.

c

2004 Texas State University - San Marcos.

Submitted January 14, 2004. Published September 3, 2004.

1

with u0, u1, P given functions and f(u, ut) = |ut|^{α}sign(ut), (0 < α < 1). As
a generalization of the results in [2], Long and Dinh [7, 9, 10] have considered
problem (1.1), (1.3), (1.4) associated with the following nonhomogeneous boundary
condition atx= 0,

u_{x}(0, t) =g(t) +H(u(0, t))−
Z t

0

K(t−s, u(0, s))ds. (1.6)
We have considered it with K ≡ 0, H(s) = hs, where h > 0 [9]; K ≡ 0 [7],
H(s) = hs, K(t, u) = k(t)u, where h > 0, k ∈ H^{1}(0, T), for all T > 0 [10]. In
the case of H(s) = hs, K(t, u) = hω(sinωt)u, where h > 0, ω > 0 are given
constants, the problem (1.1)-(1.5) is formed from the problem (1.1)-(1.4) wherein,
the unknown function u(x, t) and the unknown boundary value P(t) satisfy the
following Cauchy problem

P^{00}(t) +ω^{2}P(t) =hutt(0, t), 0< t < T, (1.7)
P(0) =P0, P^{0}(0) =P1, (1.8)
where ω > 0, h ≥ 0, P0, P1 are given constants [10]. An and Trieu [1], studied
a special case of problem (1.1)-(1.4), (1.7), (1.8) with u0 = u1 = P0 = 0 and
with f(u, ut) linear, i.e., f(u, ut) = Ku+λut whereK, λare given constants. In
the later case the problem (1.1)-(1.4), (1.7), and (1.8) is a mathematical model
describing the shock of a rigid body and a linear visoelastic bar resting on a rigid
base [1]. Our problem is thus a nonlinear analogue of the problem considered in
[1]. In the case wheref(u, ut) =|ut|^{α}sign(ut) the problem (1.1)-(1.4), (1.7), and
(1.8) describes the shock between a solid body and a linear viscoelastic bar with
nonlinear elastic constraints at the side, and constraints associated with a viscous
frictional resistance. From (1.7), (1.8) we represent P(t) in terms of P_{0}, P_{1}, ω,h,
u_{tt}(0, t) and then by integrating by parts, we have

P(t) =g(t) +hu(0, t)− Z t

0

k(t−s)u(0, s)ds, (1.9) where

g(t) = (P0−hu0(0)) cosωt+ (P1−hu1(0))sinωt

ω , (1.10)

k(t) =hω(sinωt). (1.11)

By eliminating an unknown functionP(t), we replace the boundary condition (1.2) by

u_{x}(0, t) =g(t) +hu(0, t)−
Z t

0

k(t−s)u(0, s)ds. (1.12) Then, we reduce problem (1.1)-(1.4), (1.7), (1.8) to (1.1)-(1.4), (1.9)-(1.11) or to (1.1), (1.3), (1.4), (1.10)-(1.12).

In this paper, we consider two main parts. In Part 1, we prove a theorem of global existence and uniqueness of a weak solution of problem (1.1)-(1.5). The proof is based on a Galerkin method associated to a priori estimates, weak-convergence and compactness techniques. We remark that the linearization method in [6, 11, 13]

cannot be used for the problems in [2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10]. In Part 2 we prove that the solution (u, P) of this problem is stable with respect to the functions g, H andK.

The results obtained here generalize the ones in [1, 2, 4, 7, 9, 10].

2. The existence and uniqueness theorem

We first set notations Ω = (0,1), QT = Ω×(0, T), T >0,L^{p} =L^{p}(Ω), H^{1} =
H^{1}(Ω),H^{2}=H^{2}(Ω), whereH^{1},H^{2} are the usual Sobolev spaces on Ω.

The norm inL^{2} is denoted by k · k. We also denote byh·,·ithe scalar product
inL^{2}or pair of dual scalar product of continuous linear functional with an element
of a function space. We denote byk · k_{X} the norm of a Banach spaceX and byX^{0}
the dual space ofX. We denote by L^{p}(0, T;X), 1≤p≤ ∞ for the Banach space
of the real functionsu: (0, T)→X measurable, such that

kuk_{L}p(0,T;X)=Z T
0

ku(t)k^{p}_{X}dt1/p

for 1≤p <∞, and

kukL^{∞}(0,T;X)= esssup

0<t<T

ku(t)kX forp=∞.

We put

V ={v∈H^{1}:v(1) = 0}, a(u, v) =h∂u

∂x,∂v

∂xi= Z 1

0

∂u

∂x

∂v

∂xdx.

Here V is a closed subspace ofH^{1}and on V,kvk_{H}1 andkvk_{V} =p

a(v, v) are two equivalent norms.

Lemma 2.1. The imbeddingV ,→C^{0}(Ω)is compact and

kvk_{C}0(Ω)≤ kvkV (2.1)

for allv∈V.

The proof is straightforward and we omit it. We make the following assumptions:

(A) u0∈H^{1} andu1∈L^{2}
(G) g∈H^{1}(0, T) for allT >0

(H) H ∈C^{1}(R),H(0) = 0 and there exists a constanth0>0 such that
Hb(y) =

Z y

0

H(s)ds≥ −h0

(K1) K and ^{∂K}_{∂t} are in C^{0}(R^{+}×R;R)

(K2) There exist the nonnegative functionsk1 ∈L^{2}(0, T), k2 ∈ L^{1}(0, T), k3 ∈
L^{2}(0, T), andk4∈L^{1}(0, T), such that

(i)|K(t, u)| ≤k1(t)|u|+k2(t),
(ii)|^{∂K}_{∂t}(t, u)| ≤k_{3}(t)|u|+k_{4}(t).

The functionf :R^{2}→Rsatisfiesf(0,0) = 0 and the following conditions:

(F1)

(f(u, v)−f(u,ev))(v−v)e ≥0 for allu, v,ev∈R

(F2) There is a constant αin (0,1] and a function B1 :R+ → R+ continuous and satisfying

|f(u, v)−f(u,ev)| ≤B_{1}(|u|)|v−v|e^{α} for allu, v,ev∈R

(F3) There is a constant β in (0,1] and a function B2 : R+ → R+ continuous and satisfying

|f(u, v)−f(u, v)| ≤e B2(|v|)|u−eu|^{β} for allu,u, ve ∈R

We will use the notation u^{0} =ut=∂u/∂t, u^{00}=utt =∂^{2}u/∂t^{2}. Then we have
the following theorem.

Theorem 2.2. Let (A),(G),(H),(K1),(K2), (F1), (F3) hold. Then, for everyT >

0, there exists a weak solution (u, P)to problem (1.1)-(1.5)such that

u∈L^{∞}(0, T;V), u_{t}∈L^{∞}(0, T;L^{2}), u(0,·)∈H^{1}(0, T), (2.2)

P∈H^{1}(0, T). (2.3)

Furthermore, ifβ = 1in (F3) and the functionsH,K,f satisfying, in addition
(H1) H ∈C^{2}(R),H^{0}(s)>−1 for alls∈R

(K3) For all M positive and all T positive, there existspM,T,qM,T in L^{2}(0, T),
pM,T(t)≥0,qM,T(t)≥0 such that

(i) |K(t, u)−K(t, v)| ≤pM,T(t)|u−v| for allu, v in R,|u|,|v| ≤M,
(ii) |^{∂K}_{∂t}(t, u)−^{∂K}_{∂t}(t, v)| ≤qM,T(t)|u−v|for allu, v inR,|u|,|v| ≤M.
(F4) B2(|v|)∈L^{2}(QT)for allv∈L^{2}(QT)for all T >0.

Then the solution is unique

Remark 2.3. This result is stronger than that in [9]. Indeed, corresponding to
the same problem (1.1)-(1.5) withK(t, u)≡0 andH(s) =hs, h >0 the following
assumptions made in [9] are not needed here: 0< α <1,B_{1}(|u|)∈L^{2/(1−α)}(Q_{T})
for allu∈L^{∞}(0, T;V) and allT >0;B_{1},B_{2} are nondecreasing functions.

Proof of Theorem 2.2. It is done in several steps.

Step 1. The Galerkin approximation. Consider the orthonormal basis on V con-
sisting of eigenvectors of the Laplacian,−∂^{2}/∂x^{2},

w_{j}(x) =q

2/(1 +λ^{2}_{j}) cos(λ_{j}x), λ_{j} = (2j−1)π

2, j = 1,2, . . . . Put

u_{m}(t) =

m

X

j=1

c_{mj}(t)w_{j},

wherecmj(t) satisfy the system of nonlinear differential equations

hu^{00}_{m}(t), w_{j}i+a(u_{m}(t), w_{j}) +P_{m}(t)w_{j}(0) +hf(u_{m}(t), u^{0}_{m}(t)), w_{j}i= 0, (2.4)
P_{m}(t) =g(t) +H(u_{m}(0, t))−

Z t

0

K(t−s, u_{m}(0, s))ds, (2.5)
with

um(0) =u0m=

m

X

j=1

αmjwj →u0 strongly inH^{1},

u^{0}_{m}(0) =u1m=

m

X

j=1

βmjwj→u1 strongly in L^{2},

(2.6)

This system of equations is rewritten in form
c^{00}_{mj}(t) +λ^{2}_{j}cmj(t) = −1

kwjk^{2}(Pm(t)wj(0) +hf(um(t), u^{0}_{m}(t)), wji),
Pm(t) =g(t) +H(um(0, t))−

Z t

0

K(t−s, um(0, s))ds,
c_{mj}(0) =α_{mj}, c^{0}_{mj}(0) =β_{mj}, 1≤j ≤m.

This system is equivalent to the system of integrodifferential equations cmj(t)

=Gmj(t)− 1
kwjk^{2}

Z t

0

Nj(t−τ)(H(um(0, τ))wj(0) +hf(um(τ), u^{0}_{m}(τ)), wji)dτ
+ w_{j}(0)

kwjk^{2}
Z t

0

N_{j}(t−τ)dτ
Z τ

0

K(τ−s, u_{m}(0, s))ds, 1≤j≤m,

(2.7) whereNj(t) = sin(λjt)/λj and

Gmj(t) =αmjN_{j}^{0}(t) +βmjNj(t)− wj(0)
kwjk^{2}

Z t

0

Nj(t−τ)g(τ)dτ. (2.8) We then have the following lemma.

Lemma 2.4. Let (A), (G), (H), (K1), (K2), (F1),(F3) hold. For fixedT >0, the system(1.10)-(1.11)has solutioncm= (cm1, cm2, . . . , cmm)on an interval[0, Tm]⊂ [0, T).

Proof. Omitting the indexm, system (2.7), (2.8) is rewritten in the form c=U c,

wherec= (c1, c2, . . . , cm),U c= ((U c)1,(U c)2, . . . ,(U c)m), (U c)j(t) =Gj(t) +

Z t

0

Nj(t−τ)(V c)j(τ)dτ, (2.9)
(V c)_{j}(t) =f_{1j}(c(t), c^{0}(t)) +

Z t

0

f_{2j}(t−s, c(s))ds, (2.10)
Gj(t) =αmjN_{j}^{0}(t) +βmjNj(t)− wj(0)

kw_{j}k^{2}
Z t

0

Nj(t−τ)g(τ)dτ, (2.11)
the functionsf_{1j} :R^{2m}→Rf_{2j}: [0, T_{m}]×R^{m}→Rsatisfy

f_{1j}(c, d) = −1
kwjk^{2}

H(

m

X

i=1

c_{i}w_{i}(0))w_{j}(0) +hf(

m

X

i=1

c_{i}w_{i},

m

X

i=1

d_{i}w_{i}), w_{j}i

, (2.12)

f2j(t, c) = wj(0)
kw_{j}k^{2}K(t,

m

X

i=1

ciwi(0)), 1≤j≤m. (2.13)
For everyT_{m}>0,M >0 we put

S={c∈C^{1}([0, T_{m}];R^{m}) :kck1≤M}, kck1=kck0+kc^{0}k0,
kck_{0}= sup

0≤t≤T_{m}

|c(t)|_{1}, |c(t)|_{1}=

m

X

i=1

|c_{i}(t)|.

ClearlySis a closed convex and bounded subset ofY =C^{1}([0, T_{m}];R^{m}). Using the
Schauder fixed point theorem we shall show that the operatorU :S→Y defined
by (2.9)-(2.13) has a fixed point. This fixed point is the solution of (2.7).

(a) First we show that U mapsS into itself. Note that (V c)_{j} ∈C^{0}([0, T_{m}];R) for
allc∈C^{1}([0, Tm];R^{m}), hence it follows from (2.9), and the equality

(U c)^{0}_{j}(t) =G^{0}_{j}(t) +
Z t

0

N_{j}^{0}(t−τ)(V c)j(τ)dτ, (2.14)

thatU :Y →Y. Letc∈S, we deduce from (2.8), (2.13) that

|(U c)(t)|_{1}≤ |G(t)|_{1}+ 1

λ_{1}T_{m}kV ck_{0}, (2.15)

|(U c)^{0}(t)|1≤ |G^{0}(t)|1+TmkV ck0. (2.16)
On the other hand, it follows from (H), (K1), (K2),(F2),(F3), (2.10), (2.12), (2.13)
that

kV ck0≤

m

X

j=1

[N1(f1j, M) +T N2(f2j, M, T)]≡β(M, T) for allc∈S, (2.17) where

N1(f1j, M) = sup{|f1j(y, z)|:kyk_{R}^{m} ≤M, kzk_{R}^{m} ≤M},

N_{2}(f_{2j}, M, T) = sup{|f_{2j}(t, y)|: 0≤t≤T, kyk_{R}m ≤M}. (2.18)
Hence, from (2.15)-(2.18) we obtain

kU ck_{1}≤ kGk_{1T} + (1 + 1
λ1

)T_{m}β(M, T),
where

kGk1T =kGk0T +kG^{0}k0T = sup

0≤t≤T

|G(t)|1+ sup

0≤t≤T

|G^{0}(t)|1.
ChoosingM andTm>0 such that

M >2kGk1T and (1 + 1 λ1

)Tmβ(M, T)≤M/2.

Hence,kU ck1≤M for all c∈S, that is, the operatorU mapsS the set into itself.

(b) Now we show that the operatorU is continuous onS. Letc, d∈S, we have
(U c)_{j}(t)−(U d)_{j}(t) =

Z t

0

N_{j}(t−τ)[(V c)_{j}(τ)−(V d)_{j}(τ)]dτ.

Hence

kU c−U dk0≤ 1

λ_{1}TmkV c−V dk0. (2.19)
Similarly, we obtain from the equality

(U c)^{0}_{j}(t)−(U d)^{0}_{j}(t) =
Z t

0

N_{j}^{0}(t−τ)((V c)j(τ)−(V d)j(τ))dτ,
which implies

k(U c)^{0}−(U d)^{0}k_{0}≤T_{m}kV c−V dk_{0}. (2.20)
By estimates (2.19), (2.20), we only have to prove that the operator V : Y →
C^{0}([0, Tm];R^{m}) is continuous onS. We have

(V c)_{j}(t)−(V d)_{j}(t) =f_{1j}(c(t), c^{0}(t))−f_{1j}(d(t), d^{0}(t))
+

Z t

0

(f2j(t−s, c(s))−f2j(t−s, d(s)))ds. (2.21) From the assumptions (H),(F2) and (F3), it follows that there exists a constant KM >0 such that

sup

0≤t≤Tm

m

X

j=1

|f1j(c(t), c^{0}(t))−f1j(d(t), d^{0}(t))| ≤KM(kc−dk0+kc−dk^{β}_{0}+kc^{0}−d^{0}k^{α}_{0}),
(2.22)

for allc, d∈S. Then we have the following lemma.

Lemma 2.5. Let f2j : [0, Tm]×R^{m}→R be continuous, and let
(Wjc)(t) =

Z t

0

f2j(t−s, c(s))ds, c∈C^{0}([0, Tm];R^{m}). (2.23)
Then, the operatorW_{j} :C^{0}([0, T_{m}];R^{m})→C^{0}([0, T_{m}];R)is continuous on S.

The proof of this lemma follows easily fromf_{2j} being uniformly continuous on
[0, T_{m}]×[−M, M]^{m}. We omit the proof.

From (2.21), (2.22), (2.23), we deduce that
kV c−V dk_{0}= sup

0≤τ≤T_{m}
m

X

j=1

|(V c)_{j}(τ)−(V d)_{j}(τ)|

≤KM kc−dk0+kc−dk^{β}_{0}+kc^{0}−d^{0}k^{α}_{0}
+ sup

0≤t≤Tm

m

X

j=1

|(Wjc)(t)−(Wjd)(t)|, ∀c, d∈S .

(2.24)

Thus, Lemma 2.5 and inequality (2.24) show that V : S → C^{0}([0, Tm];R^{m}) is
continuous.

(c) Now, we shall show that the setU S is a compact subset ofY. Letc∈S, t, t^{0}∈
[0, Tm]. From (2.9), we rewrite

(U c)j(t)−(U c)j(t^{0})

=G_{j}(t)−G_{j}(t^{0}) +
Z t

0

N_{j}(t−τ)(V c)_{j}(τ)dτ −
Z t^{0}

0

N_{j}(t^{0}−τ)(V c)_{j}(τ)dτ

=Gj(t)−Gj(t^{0}) +
Z t

0

(Nj(t−τ)−Nj(t^{0}−τ))(V c)j(τ)dτ

−
Z t^{0}

t

Nj(t^{0}−τ)(V c)j(τ)dτ .

(2.25)

From the inequality |Nj(t)−Nj(s)| ≤ |t−s| for all t, s ∈ [0, Tm] and (2.17), we obtain

|(U c)(t)−(U c)(t^{0})|1=

m

X

j=1

|(U c)j(t)−(U c)j(t^{0})|

≤ |G(t)−G(t^{0})|1+ (Tm+ 1
λ1

)|t−t^{0}|kV ck0

≤ |G(t)−G(t^{0})|1+β(M, T)(Tm+ 1

λ_{1})|t−t^{0}|.

(2.26)

Similarly, from (2.14) and (2.17), we also obtain

|(U c)^{0}(t)−(U c)^{0}(t^{0})|1≤ |G^{0}(t)−G^{0}(t^{0})|1+β(M, T)(λmTm+ 1)|t−t^{0}|. (2.27)
SinceU S⊂S, from estimates (2.26), (2.27) we deduce that the family of functions
U S={U c, c∈S}, are bounded and equicontinuous with respect to the normk · k1

of the space Y.Applying Arzela-Ascoli’s theorem to the space Y, we deduce that U S is compact in Y. By the Schauder fixed-point theorem, U has a fixed point c∈S, which satisfies (2.7). The proof of Lemma 2.4 is complete.

Using Lemma 2.4, forT >0, fixed, system (2.4) - (2.6) has solution (um(t), Pm(t)) on an interval [0, Tm]. The following estimates allow one to takeTm=T for allm.

Step 2. A priori estimates. Substituting (2.5) into (2.4), then multiplying the j^{th}
equation of (2.4) byc^{0}_{mj}(t) and summing up with respect toj, integrating by parts
with respect to the time variable from 0 tot, by (G) and (F1), we have

S_{m}(t)≤ −2H(ub _{m}(0, t)) + 2H(ub _{0m}(0)) +S_{m}(0) + 2g(0)u_{0m}(0)

−2g(t)um(0, t) + 2 Z t

0

g^{0}(s)um(0, s)ds−2
Z t

0

hf(um(s),0), u^{0}_{m}(s)ids
+ 2

Z t

0

u^{0}_{m}(0, s)ds
Z s

0

K(s−τ, u_{m}(0, τ))dτ,

(2.28) where

Sm(t) =ku^{0}_{m}(t)k^{2}+kum(t)k^{2}_{V}. (2.29)
Then, using (2.6), (2.29), (H), and Lemma 2.1, we have

−2Hb(u_{m}(0, t)) + 2Hb(u_{0m}(0)) +S_{m}(0) + 2|g(0)u0m(0)|

≤2h0+ 2Hb(u0m(0)) +Sm(0) + 2|g(0)u0m(0)|

≤1

4C1, for allmand allt,

(2.30)

whereC1 is a constant depending only onu0,u1,h0,H, andg.

Again using Lemma 2.1 and the inequality 2ab≤4a^{2}+^{1}_{4}b^{2}, we obtain

| −2g(t)um(0, t) + 2 Z t

0

g^{0}(s)um(0, s)ds|

≤4g^{2}(t) + 4
Z t

0

|g^{0}(s)|^{2}ds+1

4S_{m}(t) +1
4

Z t

0

S_{m}(s)ds.

(2.31)

Using Lemma 2.1, from (F3) it follows that

−2 Z t

0

hf(um(s),0), u^{0}_{m}(s)ids

≤2B2(0) Z t

0

Sm(s)^{(1+β)/2}ds

≤(1 +β)B2(0) Z t

0

Sm(s)ds+ (1−β)B2(0)t.

Note that the last integral in (2.28), after integrating by parts, gives I= 2

Z t

0

u^{0}_{m}(0, s)ds
Z s

0

K(s−τ, u_{m}(0, τ))dτ

= 2um(0, t) Z t

0

K(t−τ, um(0, τ))dτ

−2 Z t

0

um(0, s)ds

K(0, um(0, s)) + Z s

0

∂K

∂t (s−τ, um(0, τ))dτ .

Hence

|I| ≤2p
S_{m}(t)

Z t

0

(k_{1}(t−τ)p

S_{m}(τ) +k_{2}(t−τ))dτ
+ 2

Z t

0

pSm(s)ds k1(0)p

Sm(s) +k2(0) +

Z s

0

(k3(s−τ)p

Sm(τ) +k4(s−τ))dτ

= 2p
S_{m}(t)

Z t

0

k_{1}(t−τ)p

S_{m}(τ)dτ + 2p
S_{m}(t)

Z t

0

k_{2}(τ)dτ
+ 2k1(0)

Z t

0

Sm(s)ds+ 2k2(0) Z t

0

pSm(s)ds + 2

Z t

0

pSm(s)ds Z s

0

k3(s−τ)p

Sm(τ)dτ+ 2 Z t

0

pSm(s)ds Z s

0

k4(τ)dτ

≡I_{1}+I_{2}+ 2k_{1}(0)
Z t

0

S_{m}(s)ds+I_{4}+I_{5}+I_{6}.

(2.32)
By the inequality 2ab ≤ 4a^{2}+ ^{1}_{4}b^{2} and the Cauchy- Schwarz inequality we esti-
mate without difficulty the following integrals in the right-hand side of the above
expression as follows

I_{1}= 2p
S_{m}(t)

Z t

0

k_{1}(t−τ)p

S_{m}(τ)dτ ≤1

4S_{m}(t) + 4
Z t

0

k^{2}_{1}(τ)dτ.

Z t

0

S_{m}(τ)dτ,
I2= 2p

Sm(t) Z t

0

k2(τ)≤ 1

4Sm(t) + 4Z t 0

k2(τ)dτ^{2}
,

I4= 2k2(0) Z t

0

pSm(s)ds≤4k^{2}_{2}(0) +1
4t

Z t

0

Sm(s)ds,
I_{5}= 2

Z t

0

pS_{m}(s)ds
Z s

0

k_{3}(s−τ)p

S_{m}(τ)dτ ≤2√
tZ t

0

k^{2}_{3}(τ)dτ1/2Z t
0

S_{m}(s)ds,
I6= 2

Z t

0

pSm(s)ds Z s

0

k4(τ)dτ ≤ 1 4

Z t

0

Sm(s)ds+ 4tZ t 0

k4(τ)dτ^{2}
.
It follows from the estimates forI_{1}, I_{2}, I_{4}, I_{5}, I_{6} that

|I| ≤4Z t 0

k2(τ)dτ2

+ 4k^{2}_{2}(0) + 4tZ t
0

k4(τ)dτ2

+1 2Sm(t) +1

4 h

1 +t+ 16 Z t

0

k_{1}^{2}(τ)dτ+ 8k1(0) + 8√
tZ t

0

k^{2}_{3}(τ)dτ^{1/2}iZ t
0

Sm(s)ds.

(2.33) It follows from (2.28)-(2.30), (2.31)-(2.32), and (2.33) that

S_{m}(t)≤D_{1}(t) +D_{2}(t)
Z t

0

S_{m}(τ)dτ, (2.34)

where

D1(t) =C1+ 16k^{2}_{2}(0) + 4(1−β)B2(0)t+ 16g^{2}(t)
+ 16

Z t

0

|g^{0}(s)|^{2}ds+ 16Z t
0

k2(τ)dτ^{2}

+ 16tZ t 0

k4(τ)dτ^{2}
,

(2.35)

D2(t) = 2 + 4(1 +β)B2(0) + 8k1(0) +t+ Z t

0

k^{2}_{1}(τ)dτ+ 8√
tZ t

0

k_{3}^{2}(τ)dτ^{1/2}

≤2 + 4(1 +β)B2(0) + 8k1(0) +T+kk1k^{2}_{L}2(0,T)+ 8√

Tkk3k_{L}2(0,T)≡C_{T}^{(2)}.
SinceH^{1}(0, T),→C^{0}([0, T]), from the assumptions (G), (K2), we deduce that

|D1(t)| ≤C_{T}^{(1)}, a.e. in [0, T], (2.36)
whereC_{T}^{(1)}, is a constant depending only onT. By Gronwall’s lemma, from (2.34)-
(2.36) we obtain that

Sm(t)≤C_{T}^{(1)}exp(tC_{T}^{(2)})≤CT ∀t∈[0, T], ∀T >0. (2.37)
Now we need an estimate on the integralRt

0|u^{0}_{m}(0, s)|^{2}ds. Put
K_{m}(t) =

m

X

j=1

sin(λ_{j}t)
λj

, (2.38)

γm(t) =

m

X

j=1

wj(0)[αmjcos(λjt) +βmj

sin(λjt) λj

]

−√ 2

m

X

j=1

Z t

0

sin[λ_{j}(t−τ)]

λj

hf(um(τ), u^{0}_{m}(τ)), w_{j}
kwjkidτ.

Thenum(0, t) can be rewritten as
u_{m}(0, t) =γ_{m}(t)−2

Z t

0

K_{m}(t−τ)P_{m}(τ)dτ. (2.39)
We shall require the following lemma which proof can be found in [2].

Lemma 2.6. There exist a constant C_{2} > 0 and a positive continuous function
D(t)independent of msuch that

Z t

0

|γ_{m}^{0} (τ)|^{2}dτ ≤C2+D(t)
Z t

0

kf(um(τ), u^{0}_{m}(τ))k^{2}dτ ∀t∈[0, T],∀T >0.

Lemma 2.7. There exist two positive constants C_{T}^{(3)} and C_{T}^{(4)} depending only on
T such that

Z t

0

ds|

Z s

0

K_{m}^{0} (s−τ)Pm(τ)dτ|^{2}≤C_{T}^{(3)}+C_{T}^{(4)}
Z t

0

ds Z s

0

|u^{0}_{m}(0, τ)|^{2}dτ, (2.40)
for allt∈[0, T]and all T >0.

Proof. Integrating by parts, we have Z s

0

K_{m}^{0} (s−τ)Pm(τ)dτ =Km(s)Pm(0) +
Z t

0

Km(s−τ)P_{m}^{0} (τ)dτ,

then Z t

0

ds|

Z s

0

K_{m}^{0} (s−τ)Pm(τ)dτ|^{2}

≤2P_{m}^{2}(0)
Z t

0

K_{m}^{2}(s)ds+ 2
Z t

0

ds Z s

0

K_{m}^{2}(r)dr
Z s

0

|P_{m}^{0} (τ)|^{2}dτ

≤2 Z t

0

K_{m}^{2}(s)ds

P_{m}^{2}(0) +
Z t

0

ds Z s

0

|P_{m}^{0} (τ)|^{2}dτ
.

(2.41)

From (2.5), we have

Pm(0) =g(0) +H(u0m(0)), (2.42)

P_{m}^{0} (τ) =g^{0}(τ) +H^{0}(u_{m}(0, τ))u^{0}_{m}(0, τ)−K(0, u_{m}(0, τ))−

Z τ

0

∂K

∂t (τ−s, u_{m}(0, s))ds.

(2.43)
Using the inequality (a+b+c+d)^{2}≤4(a^{2}+b^{2}+c^{2}+d^{2}), for alla, b, c, d∈R, we
deduce from (2.37), (2.43), and (G),(H),(K2) that

Z s

0

|P_{m}^{0} (τ)|^{2}dτ

≤4 Z s

0

|g^{0}(τ)|^{2}dτ+ 4 max

|s|≤√
C_{T}

|H^{0}(s)|^{2}
Z s

0

|u^{0}_{m}(0, τ)|^{2}dτ
+ 4

Z s

0

|K(0, u_{m}(0, τ))|^{2}dτ+ 4
Z s

0

dτ| Z τ

0

∂K

∂t (τ−s, u_{m}(0, s))ds|^{2}

≤4 Z s

0

|g^{0}(τ)|^{2}dτ+ 4 max

|s|≤√ CT

|H^{0}(s)|^{2}
Z s

0

|u^{0}_{m}(0, τ)|^{2}dτ
+ 8k_{1}^{2}(0)

Z s

0

|um(0, τ)|^{2}dτ+ 8k^{2}_{2}(0)s
+ 8

Z s

0

dτ Z τ

0

k^{2}_{3}(s)ds
Z τ

0

u^{2}_{m}(0, s)ds+ 8
Z s

0

dτ( Z τ

0

k4(s)ds)^{2}

≤4 Z s

0

|g^{0}(τ)|^{2}dτ+ 8[k^{2}_{1}(0)C_{T}+k_{2}^{2}(0)]s+ 4C_{T}s^{2}
Z s

0

k_{3}^{2}(τ)dτ
+ 8s(

Z s

0

k4(τ)dτ)^{2}+ 4 max

|s|≤√ CT

|H^{0}(s)|^{2}
Z s

0

|u^{0}_{m}(0, τ)|^{2}dτ.

(2.44)

Hence Z t

0

ds Z s

0

|P_{m}^{0} (τ)|^{2}dτ ≤4t
Z t

0

|g^{0}(τ)|^{2}dτ+ 4[k^{2}_{1}(0)C_{T}+k_{2}^{2}(0)]t^{2}
+4

3CTt^{3}
Z t

0

k^{2}_{3}(τ)dτ+ 4t^{2}Z t
0

k4(τ)dτ2

+ 4 max

|s|≤√
C_{T}

|H^{0}(s)|^{2}
Z t

0

ds Z s

0

|u^{0}_{m}(0, τ)|^{2}dτ.

From this inequality, (2.41), and (2.42), it follows that Z t

0

ds|

Z s

0

K_{m}^{0} (s−τ)Pm(τ)dτ|^{2}

≤2 Z t

0

K_{m}^{2}(s)dsh

(g(0) +H(u_{0m}(0)))^{2}+ 4t
Z t

0

|g^{0}(τ)|^{2}dτ+ 4[k_{1}^{2}(0)C_{T} +k^{2}_{2}(0)]t^{2}
+4

3CTt^{3}
Z t

0

k^{2}_{3}(τ)dτ+ 4t^{2}Z t
0

k4(τ)dτ2

+ 4 max

|s|≤√ CT

|H^{0}(s)|^{2}
Z t

0

ds Z s

0

|u^{0}_{m}(0, τ)|^{2}dτi
.

(2.45)
Note that for everyT >0,Km→K, strongly ine L^{2}(0, T) asm→+∞. Using the
assumptions (G), (H),(K2) and the results (2.6) and (2.45), we obtain (2.40). The

proof of Lemma 2.7 is complete.

Lemma 2.8. There exist two positive constants C_{T}^{(5)} and C_{T}^{(6)} depending only on
T such that

Z t

0

|u^{0}_{m}(0, τ)|^{2}dτ ≤C_{T}^{(5)} ∀t∈[0, T],∀T >0. (2.46)
Z t

0

|P_{m}^{0} (τ)|^{2}dτ ≤C_{T}^{(6)} ∀t∈[0, T],∀T >0. (2.47)
Proof. Since (2.47) is a consequence of (2.44) and (2.46), we only have to prove
(2.46). From (2.39), using Lemmas 2.6 and 2.7, we obtain

Z t

0

|u^{0}_{m}(0, s)|^{2}ds≤2
Z t

0

|γ^{0}_{m}(s)|^{2}ds+ 8
Z t

0

ds|

Z s

0

K_{m}^{0} (s−τ)P_{m}(τ)dτ|^{2}

≤2C2+ 2D(t) Z t

0

kf(um(τ), u^{0}_{m}(τ))kdτ
+ 8C_{T}^{(3)}+ 8C_{T}^{(4)}

Z t

0

ds Z s

0

|u^{0}_{m}(0, τ)|^{2}dτ.

(2.48)

On the other hand, from the assumptions (F2),(F3), we obtain
kf(u_{m}(t), u^{0}_{m}(t))k^{2}≤2( max

|s|≤√
C_{T}

B_{1}^{2}(s))ku^{0}_{m}(t)k^{2α}+ 2B_{2}^{2}(0)ku_{m}(t)k^{2β}_{V} , (2.49)
since 0< α≤1 we havek · k ≤ k · kL^{2α}. Hence, using (2.37) and (2.49) we have

kf(um(t), u^{0}_{m}(t))k ≤C_{T}^{(7)}. (2.50)
At last from this inequality and (2.48) we obtain the inequality

Z t

0

|u^{0}_{m}(0, s)|^{2}ds≤C_{T}^{(8)}+ 8C_{T}^{(4)}
Z t

0

ds Z s

0

|u^{0}_{m}(0, τ)|^{2}dτ,

which implies (2.46), by Gronwall’s lemma. Therefore, Lemma 2.8 is proved.

Step 3. Passing to limit. From (2.5), (2.29), (2.37), (2.46), (2.47), and (2.50), we
deduce that, there exists a subsequence of sequence {(um, P_{m})}, still denoted by

{(um, Pm)}, such that

u_{m}→u in L^{∞}(0, T;V) weak∗, (2.51)
u^{0}_{m}→u^{0} inL^{∞}(0, T;L^{2}) weak∗, (2.52)
um(0, t)→u(0, t) inL^{∞}(0, T) weak∗, (2.53)
u^{0}_{m}(0, t)→u^{0}(0, t) in L^{2}(0, T) weak, (2.54)
f(um, u^{0}_{m})→χ inL^{∞}(0, T;L^{2}) weak∗, (2.55)
P_{m}→Pb in H^{1}(0, T) weak, (2.56)
By the compactness lemma of Lions (see [9]), we can deduce from (2.51)-(2.54) that
there exists a subsequence still denoted by{um} such that

u_{m}(0, t)→u(0, t) strongly inC^{0}([0, T]), (2.57)
u_{m}→u strongly inL^{2}(Q_{T}) and a.e. (x.t)∈Q_{T}. (2.58)
By (H),(K) and using (2.5), (2.57) we obtain

Pm(t)→g(t) +H(u(0, t))− Z t

0

K(t−s, u(0, s))ds≡P(t) strongly inC^{0}([0, T]).

(2.59) From (2.56) and (2.59) we have

P ≡Pb a.e. inQ_{T}. (2.60)

Passing to the limit in (2.4) by (2.51), (2.52), (2.59), and (2.60) we have d

dthu^{0}(t), vi+a(u(t), v) +P(t)v(0) +hχ, vi= 0 ∀v∈V.

As in [9], we can prove that

u(0) =u_{0}, u^{0}(0) =u_{1}.

To prove the existence of solutionu, we have to show thatχ=f(u, u^{0}). We need
the following lemma which proof can be found in [2].

Lemma 2.9. Let ube the solution of the problem

utt−uxx+χ= 0, 0< x <1, 0< t < T,
u_{x}(0, t) =P(t), u(1, t) = 0,
u(x,0) =u0(x), ut(x,0) =u1(x),
u∈L^{∞}(0, T;V), u^{0}∈L^{∞}(0, T;L^{2})

u(0,·)∈H^{1}(0, T).

Then 1

2ku^{0}(t)k^{2}+1

2ku(t)k^{2}_{V} +
Z t

0

P(s)u^{0}(0, s)ds+

Z t

0

hχ(s), u^{0}(s)ids≥1

2ku1k^{2}+1
2ku0k^{2}_{V} ,
a.e. t∈[0, T]. Furthermore, ifu_{0}=u_{1}= 0there is equality in the above expression.

Now, from (2.4)-(2.6) we have Z t

0

hf(um(s), u^{0}_{m}(s)), u^{0}_{m}(s)ids

= 1

2ku_{1m}k^{2}+1

2ku_{0m}k^{2}_{V} −1

2ku^{0}_{m}(t)k^{2}−1

2ku_{m}(t)k^{2}_{V} −
Z t

0

P_{m}(s)u^{0}_{m}(0, s))ds.

(2.61) By Lemma 2.9, it follows from (2.6), (2.51), (2.52), (2.54), (2.59) and (2.61), that

lim sup

m→+∞

Z t

0

hf(u_{m}(s), u^{0}_{m}(s)), u^{0}_{m}(s)ids

≤ 1

2ku1k^{2}+1

2ku0k^{2}_{V} −1

2ku^{0}(t)k^{2}−1

2ku(t)k^{2}_{V} −
Z t

0

P(s)u^{0}(0, s))ds

≤ Z t

0

hχ(s), u^{0}(s)ids, a.e. t∈[0, T].

Using the same arguments as in [9], we can show thatχ=f(u, u^{0}) a.e. inQT. The
existence of the solution is proved.

Step 4. Uniqueness of the solution. Assume now that β = 1 in (F3), and thatH,
K, f satisfy (H1),(K3), and (F4). Let (u_{1}, P_{1}), (u_{2}, P_{2}) be two weak solutions of
the problem (1.1)-(1.5). Thenu=u_{1}−u_{2}, P=P_{1}−P_{2} satisfy the problem

u^{00}−uxx+χ= 0, 0< x <1, 0< t < T,
u_{x}(0, t) =P(t), u(1, t) = 0,

u(x,0) =u^{0}(x,0) = 0,
χ=f(u_{1}, u^{0}_{1})−f(u_{2}, u^{0}_{2}),
P(t) =P1(t)−P2(t)

=H(u1(0, t))−H(u2(0, t))

− Z t

0

(K(t−s, u_{1}(0, s))−K(t−s, u_{2}(0, s)))ds,
ui∈L^{∞}(0, T;V), u^{0}_{i}∈L^{∞}(0, T;L^{2}), ui(0,·)∈H^{1}(0, T),

Pi∈H^{1}(0, T), i= 1,2.

Using Lemma 2.9 withu_{0}=u_{1}= 0, we obtain
1

2ku^{0}(t)k^{2}+1

2ku(t)k^{2}_{V} +
Z t

0

P(s)u^{0}(0, s)ds+
Z t

0

hχ(s), u^{0}(s)ids= 0, (2.62)
a.e. t∈[0, T]. Put

σ(t) =ku^{0}(t)k^{2}+1

2ku(t)k^{2}_{V},
He1(t) =H(u1(0, t))−H(u2(0, t)),
Ke_{1}(t, s) =K(t−s, u_{1}(0, s))−K(t−s, u_{2}(0, s)).

SubstitutingP(t),χinto (2.62) and using thatf is nondecreasing with respect to the second variable, we have

σ(t) + 2 Z t

0

He1(s)u^{0}(0, s)ds

≤2 Z t

0

kf(u1(s), u^{0}_{2}(s))−f(u2(s), u^{0}_{2}(s))k ku^{0}(s)kds
+ 2

Z t

0

u^{0}(0, s)ds
Z s

0

Ke_{1}(s, r)dr.

(2.63)

Using assumption (F3),

kf(u1(s), u^{0}_{2}(s))−f(u2(s), u^{0}_{2}(s))k ≤ kB2(|u^{0}_{2}(s)|)kku(s)kV .
Using integration by parts in the last integral of (2.63), we get

J = 2 Z t

0

u^{0}(0, s)ds
Z s

0

Ke1(s, r)dr

= 2u(0, t) Z t

0

Ke_{1}(t, r)dr−2
Z t

0

u(0, s)ds

Ke_{1}(s, s) +
Z s

0

∂Ke_{1}

∂s (s, r)dr .

(2.64)

From assumption (K3), we have

|Ke_{1}(s, r)| ≤p_{M,T}(t−r)|u(0, r)| ≤p_{M,T}(t−r)p
σ(r),

|Ke1(s, s)| ≤pM,T(0)|u(0, s)| ≤pM,T(0)p σ(s),

|∂Ke1

∂s (s, r)| ≤qM,T(t−r)|u(0, r)| ≤qM,T(t−r)p σ(r),

(2.65)

whereM = maxi=1,2kuikL^{∞}(0,T;V). It follows from (2.64) and (2.65) that

|J| ≤2p σ(t)

Z t

0

p_{M,T}(t−r)p

σ(r)dr+ 2p_{M,T}(0)
Z σ

0

(s)ds + 2

Z t

0

pσ(s)ds Z s

0

qM,T(s−r)p σ(r)dr

≤β1σ(t) + 1 β1

Z t

0

p^{2}_{M,T}(r)dr
Z t

0

σ(r)dr

+ 2p_{M,T}(0)
Z t

0

σ(s)ds2√ tZ t

0

q_{M,T}^{2} (r)dr1/2Z t
0

σ(s)ds

=β1σ(t) +h

2pM,T(0) + 1
β_{1}

Z t

0

p^{2}_{M,T}(r)dr
+ 2√

tZ t 0

q^{2}_{M,T}(r)dr^{1/2}iZ t
0

σ(s)ds,

(2.66)

for allβ1>0. Put

m1= min

|s|≤MH^{0}(s), m2= max

|s|≤Mmax|H^{00}(s)|. (2.67)

From assumption (H1) we have

m_{1}>−1. (2.68)

On the other hand, using integration by parts and (2.67) it follows that 2

Z t

0

He1(s)u^{0}(0, s)ds

= 2 Z t

0

hZ 1

0

d

dθH(u2(0, s) +θu(0, s))dθi

u^{0}(0, s)ds

=u^{2}(0, t)
Z 1

0

H^{0}(u2(0, s) +θu(0, s))dθ

− Z t

0

u^{2}(0, s)ds
Z 1

0

H^{00}(u2(0, s) +θu(0, s))(u^{0}_{2}(0, s) +θu^{0}(0, s))dθ

≥m_{1}u^{2}(0, t)−m_{2}
Z t

0

u^{2}(0, s)(|u^{0}_{1}(0, s)|+|u^{0}_{2}(0, s)|)ds

≥m1u^{2}(0, t)−m2

Z t

0

σ(s)(|u^{0}_{1}(0, s)|+|u^{0}_{2}(0, s)|)ds.

From the above inequality, (2.63)-(2.64) and (2.66), we obtain
σ(t) +m1u^{2}(0, t)≤m2

Z t

0

σ(s)(|u^{0}_{1}(0, s)|+|u^{0}_{2}(0, s)|)ds
+

Z t

0

kB_{2}(|u^{0}_{2}(s)|)kσ(s)ds+|J| ≡η(t).

(2.69)

From (2.1), (2.68), and (2.69), we have

(1 +m_{1})u^{2}(0, t)≤σ(t) +m_{1}u^{2}(0, t)≤η(t). (2.70)
It follows from (2.69) and (2.70) that

σ(t) + [m_{1}+β_{2}(1 +m_{1})]u^{2}(0, t)

≤(1 +β2)η(t)

≤(1 +β2) Z t

0

[m2(|u^{0}_{1}(0, s)|+|u^{0}_{2}(0, s)|) +kB2(|u^{0}_{2}(s)|)k]σ(s)ds
+ (1 +β2)β1σ(t) + (1 +β2)h

2pM,T(0) + 1 β1

Z t

0

p^{2}_{M,T}(r)dr
+ 2√

tZ t 0

q^{2}_{M,T}(r)dr1/2iZ t
0

σ(s)ds,

(2.71)

for all β_{1} >0, β_{2} >0. Chooseβ_{1} >0,β_{2} >0 such thatm_{1}+β_{2}(1 +m_{1})≥1/2,
(1 +β_{2})β_{1}≤1/2 and denote

R_{1}(t) = 2(1 +β_{2})[m_{2}(|u^{0}_{1}(0, s)|+|u^{0}_{2}(0, s)|) +kB2(|u^{0}_{2}(s)|)k
+ 1

β1

kp_{M,T}k^{2}_{L}2(0,T)+ 2p_{M,T}(0) + 2√

Tkq_{M,T}k_{L}2(0,T)]. (2.72)
Then from (2.71) and (2.72) we have

σ(t) +u^{2}(0, t)≤
Z t

0

R_{1}(s)[σ(s) +u^{2}(0, s)]ds; (2.73)
i.e. σ(t) +u^{2}(0, t)≡0 by Gronwall’s lemma. Then Theorem 2.2 is proved.

In the special cases

H(s) =hs, h >0;

K(t, u) =k(t)u, k∈H^{1}(0, T), ∀T >0, k(0) = 0,
the following theorem is a consequence of Theorem 2.2.

Theorem 2.10. Let(A),(G)and(F1)−(F3)hold. Then, for everyT >0, problem (1.1)-(1.4)and (1.9)has at least a weak solution(u, P)satisfying (2.2),(2.3).

Furthermore, ifβ= 1in (F3) andB2satisfies (F4), then this solution is unique.

We remark that Theorem 2.10 gives the same result as in [10], but we do not
need the assumption “B_{1} is nondecreasing” used there.

In the special case withK(t, u) ≡0, the following result is the consequence of Theorem 2.2.

Theorem 2.11. Let (A), (G), (H), (F1)–(F3) hold. Then, for every T >0, the problem (1.1)-(1.4)corresponding toP =ghas at least a weak solutionusatisfying (2.2).

Furthermore, if β= 1 in (F3) and the functionsH,B2 satisfy the assumptions (H1), (F4), then this solution is unique.

We remark that Theorem gives same result in [7] but without using the assump-
tion “B_{1}is nondecreasing” used there.

3. Stability of the solutions

In this section, we assume that β = 1 in (F3) and that the functions H, B2

satisfying (H), (H1), (F4), respectively. By Theorem 2.2 problem (1.1)-(1.5) admits a unique solution (u, P) depending on g,H,K:

u=u(g, H, K), P=P(g, H, K),

whereg,H,K satisfy the assumptions (G), (H),(H1),(K1)-(K3), andu0,u1,f are fixed functions satisfying (A), (F1)-(F4).

Leth0>0 be a given constant andH0:R+→R+ be a given function. We put

=(h_{0}, H_{0}) =

H ∈C^{2}(R) :H(0) = 0,
Z x

0

H(s)ds≥ −h_{0}, ∀x∈R,
H^{0}(s)>−1, ∀s∈R, sup

|s|≤M

(|H(s)|+|H^{0}(s)|)≤H_{0}(M), ∀M >0 .
Givent≥0,M >0, andK∈C^{0}(R+×R;R), we put

Nh(M, K, t) = sup

|u|,|v|≤M, u6=v

|K(t, u)−K(t, v) u−v |.

Given the family {pM,T}, M >0, T >0 which consists of nonnegative functions
pM,T(t) =p(M, T, t),M >0,T >0 such thatpM,T ∈L^{2}(0, T), for allM, T >0.

Letk1∈L^{2}(0, T),k2∈L^{1}(0, T), for allT >0. We put
Γ(k1, k2,{pM,T})

=

K∈C^{0}(R+×R) :∂K/∂t∈C^{0}(R+×R),

N_{h}(M, K, t) +N_{h}(M, ∂K/∂t, t)≤p_{M,T}(t), ∀t∈[0, T], ∀M, T >0,

|K(t, u)|+|∂K/∂t(t, u)| ≤k_{1}(t)|u|+k_{2}(t), ∀u∈R, ∀t∈[0, T], ∀T >0 .
Then we have the following theorem.