Nonlinear Adaptive Boundary Control of the Modified Generalized Korteweg–de Vries–Burgers Equation

Chentouf, B.; Smaoui, N.; Alalabi, A.

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/4574257

Complexity

On this page

Abstract Introduction Data Availability Conflicts of Interest References Copyright Related Articles

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2020 | Article ID 4574257 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/4574257

Nonlinear Adaptive Boundary Control of the Modified Generalized Korteweg–de Vries–Burgers Equation

B. Chentouf,¹N. Smaoui,¹and A. Alalabi¹

Academic Editor: Dimitri Volchenkov

Received11 Sept 2019

Revised13 Nov 2019

Accepted04 Dec 2019

Published09 Jan 2020

Abstract

In this paper, we study the nonlinear adaptive boundary control problem of the modified generalized Korteweg–de Vries–Burgers equation (MGKdVB) when the spatial domain is . Four different nonlinear adaptive control laws are designed for the MGKdVB equation without assuming the nullity of the physical parameters , , , and and depending whether these parameters are known or unknown. Then, using Lyapunov theory, the -global exponential stability of the solution is proven in each case. Finally, numerical simulations are presented to illustrate the developed control schemes.

1. Introduction

In various problems of fluid dynamics and physics, the evolution of small amplitude long waves is described by the so-called dispersive equations which are governed by nonlinear partial differential equations (PDEs) [1–5]. This topic has attracted the efforts of many researchers from different disciplines to study the dynamics and the control problem of these dispersive equations. The analysis of such equations usually combines rigorous techniques of modern analysis and physics promoting numerous interdisciplinary research articles in the field.

In this paper, we will explore the nonlinear adaptive stabilization of the following form of the dispersive equation called the modified generalized Korteweg–de Vries–Burgers (MGKdVB) equation:subject to the boundary conditionsand the initial condition

Here, the variable is a real-valued function that may represent the displacement of the medium or the velocity and depends on two real variables x and t, where is the distance in the direction of propagation of the medium and is the elapsed time. Furthermore, α is assumed throughout this article as a positive integer and the physical parameters , , , and µ are positive real numbers which represent nonlinearity, dissipation (diffusion), and dispersion coefficients, respectively. Last, and are nonlinear boundary control functions to be designed so that the solutions of the whole system of equations are stable.

Recently, the derivation of the MGKdVB equation (1) when has been presented by means of the long-wave approximation and perturbation method [6]. Furthermore, the existence and uniqueness of solutions of the MGKdVB equation (1) have been investigated in [7] where linear boundary conditions are considered. Since our main concern in the current work is the adaptive stabilization of the MGKdVB equation (1), we shall assume the existence of a unique regular solution of the MGKdVB equation (1).

As several variants of equation (1) have been actively and continuously used, we are going to highlight some results obtained in the literature. For instance, setting , , , and reduces equation (1) to the well-known Burgers equation. During the last decades, many researchers devoted their time to study this equation including the adaptive and nonadaptive boundary control problem [1, 8–16]. In 1999, the boundary control of the Burgers equation was tackled by designing a nonlinear adaptive control law when the viscosity is unknown [9]. In 2001, an adaptation law for Burgers equation, where the viscosity is unknown was proposed, and the - and -global stability of the solution were proven [12]. In [14, 15], the generalized Burgers equation (, , , and ) is considered under the action of an adaptive control when all the parameters of the equation are unknown. Then, the -regulation of the solution to the steady state solution was achieved. Furthermore, the global control of the generalized Burgers equation was also studied both analytically and numerically. The distributed and boundary stabilization problems of the Burgers equation have been considered in [16].

The so-called Kuramoto–Sivashinsky (KS) is obtained by setting , , , and in equation (1). Such an equation was first derived in 1978 by Kuramoto [3] to model a chaotic state in a chemical reaction system. It was also derived in 1980 by Sivashinsky [4] to understand the dynamics of flame front propagation. Since then many researchers further explored the KS equation [17–32]. For instance, assuming a space variable , the Cauchy problem of the KS equation has been proven to admit a unique smooth and exponentially decaying solution that is continuously dependent on its initial data [17]. In turn, a distributed output feedback control has been put forward to obtain the global stabilization of the KS equation [22]. Such a stabilization result has been improved by proposing appropriate boundary controls [23]. In [24], an adaptive control law when the parameters of the KS equation are unknown has been designed and the global asymptotic stability and the convergence of solutions to zero have been established.

In addition, setting , , , and in equation (1), the MGKdVB equation reduces to the generalized Kuramoto–Sivashinsky (GKS) equation which was used to model turbulence. This equation has received considerable attention by many researchers [19, 20, 26, 27, 30]. For instance, Kudryashov [19] investigated several classes of analytical solutions of the GKS equation and Guo and Xiang [20] proved the existence and uniqueness of the global and smooth solution for the periodic initial value problem of the GKS equation. In 2002, Iosevich and Miller [26] analyzed the case where the dispersive effects cannot be neglected and obtained solutions to the KdV equation as the limit of the GKS equation when the dispersive and dissipative terms are large. Later on, Larkin [27] considered the GKS equation in a bounded domain as a model of long waves in a viscous fluid flow down on an inclined plane and proved that the solutions to a mixed problem for the KdV equation may be obtained as singular limits of solutions to a corresponding mixed problem for the KS equation.

In turn, when and in equation (1), the MGKdVB equation leads to the generalized Korteweg–de Vries–Burgers (GKdVB) equation. This equation is useful in modeling many physical phenomena such as the unidirectional propagation of planar waves [33], strain waves and longitudinal deformation in a nonlinear elastic rod [34], and pressure waves in a liquid-gas bubble mixture [5]. Note that there has been a growing interest in the analysis and control of the GKdVB equation [2, 33, 35–41]. Specifically, long-time behavior of periodic solutions of the GKdVB equation has been investigated [2]. Then, the global solutions of the periodic GKdVB equation when are obtained and the periodic initial value problem is shown to be well-posed for sufficiently large initial data in the case when [33]. In the context of control systems, nonadaptive boundary control laws have been proposed in [38, 40, 41, 42]. Smaoui and Al-Jamal [38] designed three nonadaptive boundary control laws to show that the dynamics of the GKdVB equation is globally exponentially stable in and globally asymptotically stable and semiglobally exponentially stable in when α is a positive integer. Then, the controllers developed in [38] have been improved when α is even and when α is odd [41]. Later on, Smaoui et al. [40] designed three different nonadaptive boundary control laws, when α is a positive real number, and showed numerically for certain values of α that the proposed controllers outperform those designed in [38]. On the other hand, the adaptive boundary control of the GKdVB equation was discussed in [39, 42] when either the kinematic viscosity ν or the dynamic viscosity µ is unknown or when both viscosities and µ are unknown.

Up to our knowledge, the adaptive boundary stabilization problem of the MGKdVB equation has not been examined in the literature. In fact, as previously discussed, the adaptive control stabilization of the MGKdVB equation (1) has been dealt with in the following specific cases: in [9, 12, 14, 15], in [39, 42], and in [24].

In contrast to [9, 12, 14, 15, 24, 39, 42], the novelty of this paper is to consider the adaptive boundary control of the MGKdVB equation (1) by designing four different nonlinear boundary control laws without assuming the nullity of the physical parameters and depending whether these parameters are known or unknown (i.e., when is unknown or is unknown or and are unknown or when , , µ, and are unknown). Furthermore, an exhaustive list of numerical simulations will be presented for each proposed control to support and validate the theoretical outcome.

This paper is arranged as follows. In Section 2, the first adaptive boundary nonlinear control law is proposed for the MGKdVB equation when the parameter ν is unknown. In Section 3, the second adaptive nonlinear boundary control law is designed for the MGKdVB equation when the parameter is unknown. In Section 4, the third adaptive nonlinear boundary control law is designed for the MGKdVB equation when the parameters and are unknown. In Section 5, the fourth adaptive nonlinear boundary control law is designed for the MGKdVB equation when the parameters , , , and are unknown. Also, the global exponential stability of the solutions in is presented analytically and numerically for each of the designed controller proposed in Sections 2–5. Section 6 compares the rates of convergence of the solutions of the four adaptive presented controllers provided in Sections 2–5. Finally, some concluding remarks are presented in Section 7.

2. Design of the First Nonlinear Adaptive Controller

In this section, we present the first nonlinear adaptive boundary control law for the MGKdVB equation. A control law for the MGKdVB equation is proposed when the parameter is unknown. The next theorem illustrates the first result of our nonlinear adaptive boundary control law.

Theorem 1. The MGKdVB equation given by equation (1), subject to the boundary conditions stated in equations (2)–(5) and the initial condition , is globally exponentially stable in , provided that the following nonlinear control law is proposed:where

Proof 1. Letbe a Lyapunov function candidate.
Differentiating with respect to time, we obtainReferring to equation (1), one can write equation (12) as follows:Integrating by parts and using the boundary conditions (2)–(5), we obtainUsing control laws (7) and (8), we obtainApplying Poincaré's inequality givesNow let be the following energy function:It is clear from this equation that . Differentiating with respect to time yields:By virtue of inequality (16) and equations (9) and (10), we deduce from equation (18) thatSince for all then equation (19) reduces toThereby, and hence both of and are bounded for all . This implies that . Invoking inequality (16), we obtainApplying Gronwall–Bellman’s inequality, we obtainwhere . Since , we conclude that approaches zero as . Therefore, exponentially tends to zero as .

In the next subsection, we give a numerical presentation of the dynamical behavior of the MGKdVB equation by applying the first nonlinear adaptive boundary control law presented in equations (7) and (8).

2.1. Numerical Solutions

Numerical solutions for the MGKdVB equation (i.e., equations (1)–(6)) under the presence of the controls and as presented by equations (7) and (8) were simulated using COMSOL Multiphysics software. The solutions are computed for , and 4.

From equations (7) and (8), one can observe that the first adaptive control law proposed in Theorem 1 does not require the preknowledge of the kinematic viscosity which is assumed to be unknown. Nevertheless, for simulation purposes, the value of is set to be 0.01 in the MGKdVB equation (i.e., equation (1)). The dynamic viscosity µ is chosen to be 0.001. The parameters and are set to be 1 and 0.0005, respectively. Moreover, and are chosen to equal 0.2. The initial values of and are set to be such as and . Moreover, let the initial datum . Figures 1(a)–1(d) show a 3D view of the solution of the MGKdVB equation utilizing the control law presented in Theorem 1 for several values of α. Figure 2 shows the -norm of the solutions. It can be noticed from these figures that as α increases, the decay rate of the solution to the steady state solution decreases. This is due to the effect of the nonlinear term which causes the instability in the behavior of the MGKdVB equation.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Figures 3 and 4 depict the behavior of the functions and that are utilized in the first control law. Figure 3 shows that, for , decreases as the value of α increases from 2 to 4 and increases after . Figure 4 indicates that behaves similar to as α increases. The choice of the feedback gains and will definitely affect the values of and and therefore the stability of the solution. Fixing the initial conditions, and , and increasing the values of and will increase the values of and which in turn speeds up the convergence of the solution to zero as can be deduced from inequality (21).

It should be noted that the parameters of the controllers and are , , , , µ, and α. For given values of , , µ, and α, the parameters and can be computed from the uncoupled system of ODE equations (9) and (10) once the value at the right boundary is known, the control gains and are chosen, and the initial conditions and are fixed. When these parameters are evaluated, the controllers and can be easily computed using equations (7) and (8).

3. Design of the Second Nonlinear Adaptive Controller

In this section, we present the second nonlinear adaptive boundary control law for the MGKdVB equation. A control scheme for the MGKdVB equation is proposed when the parameter is unknown. Furthermore, numerical results will be also discussed to reveal the effectiveness of this control law.

The following theorem illustrates the result of our second nonlinear adaptive boundary control.

Theorem 2. The MGKdVB equation given by equation (1) with the boundary conditions given by equations (2)–(5) and the initial condition is globally exponentially stable in the , by considering the following nonlinear control law:where

Proof 2. Considerand differentiate with respect to time and arguing as for estimate (14), we obtainUsing the control law given by equations (23) and (24), inequality (28) becomesBy using Poincaré’s inequality, we obtainThe last term of inequality (30) can be bounded as follows:(1)If , then , and in this case α is odd. Therefore, By using Young’s inequality, we obtain(2)If , thenThus, in both cases, we haveCombining (30) and (34) givesNow, let us define a nonnegative energy function as follows:where .
Differentiating , we obtainUsing inequality (35) and equations (25) and (26), we haveThe latter leads toNoting that for all , the estimate (39) givesthat is,Hence, . One can conclude that and are bounded functions for all and thus when α is a positive integer.
Using inequality (35), we haveExploiting the Gronwall–Bellman’s inequality, we obtainwhere .
Using the fact that , we conclude that exponentially as . Hence, exponentially tends to zero as .

In the next subsection, we give a numerical presentation of the dynamical behavior of the MGKdVB equation when using the second nonlinear adaptive boundary control law presented in equations (23) and (24).

3.1. Numerical Solutions

Numerical solutions for the MGKdVB equation (i.e., equations (1)–(8)) with the controls and as presented by equations (23) and (24) were simulated using COMSOL Multiphysics software. The solutions are computed for , and 4.

It follows from equations (23) and (24) that the preknowledge of the parameter is not required in the second adaptive control law proposed in Theorem 2. However, the value of is set to be 1 in the MGKdVB equation (i.e., equation (1)) for simulation purposes. The kinematic viscosity is chosen to be 0.01 and the dynamic viscosity µ is set to be 0.001. The parameter is chosen to be 0.0005. Moreover, and are chosen to equal 0.2. The initial values of and are set to be such as and . Figures 5(a)–5(d) show a 3D view of the solution of the MGKdVB equation under the action of the control law presented in Theorem 2 for different values of α. Moreover, the -norm of these solutions is presented in Figure 6. It can be concluded from the figures that as α increases, the convergence rate of the solution to the steady state solution becomes smaller. This is due to the presence of the nonlinear term which dominates over the other terms in the MGKdVB equation.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Figures 7 and 8 present the behavior of the functions and that act in the second control law. Indeed, Figure 7 shows that the function grows as the value of α increases from 1 to 4. Unlike Figure 7, Figure 8 shows that the function decreases as the value of α increases from 1 to 4. Also, it should be noted that the choice of the feedback gains and has an impact on the values of and and consequently on the stability of the solution. One can observe that fixing the initial conditions, and , and increasing the values of and will increase the values of and which in turn speeds up the convergence of the solution to zero, as shown in estimate (42).

4. Design of the Third Nonlinear Adaptive Controller

In this section, we present the third nonlinear adaptive boundary control law for the MGKdVB equation. A control scheme for the MGKdVB equation is proposed when the parameters and are unknown. The following theorem illustrates the result of our third nonlinear adaptive boundary control law.

Theorem 3. The MGKdVB equation given by equation (1) with the boundary conditions given by equations (2)–(5) and the initial condition is globally exponentially stable in the , by considering the following nonlinear control law:where

Proof 3. Letbe a Lyapunov function candidate. Differentiating and utilizing a similar reasoning as in Section 2, we have the following inequality:Using the control law given by equations (44) and (45), the above inequality yields:Thanks to Poincaré’s inequality, we obtainArguing as for inequality (34), the last term in (51) can be bounded as follows:Thus, inequality (51) givesthat is,Now, let us define a nonnegative energy function as follows:where .
Differentiating with respect to time, we obtainUsing inequality (54) and equations (46) and (47), we haveInequality (57) leads toNoting that , inequality (58) reduces toHence, . One can conclude that and are bounded functions for all and thus when α is a positive integer.
From inequality (54), we haveExploiting the Gronwall–Bellman’s inequality, we havewhere .
Using the fact that , we can show that tends to zero as . Hence, exponentially tends to zero as .

4.1. Numerical Solutions

Numerical solutions for the MGKdVB equation (i.e., equations (1)–(6)) in the presence of the control and as presented by equations (59) and (60) were simulated using COMSOL Multiphysics software. The solutions are computed for , and 4.

We deduce from equations (44) and (45) that the third adaptive control law presented in Theorem 3 is independent of the values of the kinematic viscosity and the parameter which are assumed to be unknown. For simulation purposes, the values of and are chosen to be 0.01 and 1, respectively. The dynamic viscosity µ is set to be 0.001 and the parameter is chosen to equal 0.0005. Moreover, and are chosen to be 0.2. The initial values of and are set to be such as , and . Figures 9(a)–9(d) show a 3D view of the solution of the MGKdVB equation utilizing the control law presented in Theorem 3 for different values of α. Figure 10 shows the -norm of these solutions. It demonstrates how the nonlinear term affects the dynamics of the MGKdVB equation. When the value of α increases, the solution takes a longer time to approach the steady state solution.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Figures 11 and 12 depict the behavior of the functions and that are utilized in the third control law. Figure 11 indicates that the function gets bigger as α increases from 1 to 4. Figure 12 indicates that decreases as α increases unlike the behavior of . Again similar to the previous two controllers, the choice of the feedback gains and will definitely affect the values of and and therefore the stability of the solution. Fixing the initial conditions, and , and increasing the values of and will increase the values of and which in turn speeds up the convergence of the solution to zero as can be deduced from inequality (54).

5. Design of the Fourth Nonlinear Adaptive Controller

In this section, we present the fourth nonlinear adaptive boundary control law for the MGKdVB equation. A control scheme for the MGKdVB equation is proposed when all the parameters are unknown. The following theorem presents the result of our fourth nonlinear adaptive boundary control law.

Theorem 4. The MGKdVB equation given by equation (1) with the boundary conditions given by equations (2)–(5) and the initial condition is globally exponentially stable in the -sense, under the presence of the following nonlinear control law:where

Proof 4. Lettingbe a Lyapunov function candidate and differentiating , we obtain as in the previous sections the following inequality:Using the control law given by equations (44) and (45), the above inequality yields:In light of (34), the last term of inequality (69) can be expanded as follows:Thus, inequality (69) can be written as follows:Applying Poincaré’s inequality in (71), we obtainNow, we define an energy function as follows:where .
Taking the derivative of , we obtainThanks to inequality (72) and equations (64)–(66), we haveThe above inequality givesNoting that , inequality (76) yields:One can conclude that . Hence, , , and are bounded functions for all . Thus, from (64)–(66), we obtainFrom inequality (72), we haveExploiting Gronwall–Bellman’s inequality, we obtainThus,whereHence, using the fact that , one can show that tends to zero as . Therefore, exponentially tends to zero as .

5.1. Numerical Solutions

Numerical solutions for the MGKdVB equation (i.e., equations (1)–(6)) in the presence of the control and as presented by equations (62) and (63) were simulated using COMSOL Multiphysics software. The solutions are computed for , and 4.

The fourth adaptive control law designed in equations (62) and (63) is independent of the values of the kinematic viscosity , the dynamic viscosity μ, , and . Although these parameters are assumed to be unknown, we set in our numerical simulations the values of , , , and as , , 1, and 0.0005, respectively. Moreover, , , and are chosen to equal , , and 0.5, respectively, while the initial values of , , and are set to be such as and . A 3D view of the solution of the MGKdVB equation coupled with the control law presented in Theorem 4 is shown in Figures 13(a)–13(d) for several values of α. Figure 14 shows the -norm of these solutions.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Figures 15–17 show the behavior of the functions , , and that are given in the fourth control law. For instance, it can be concluded from Figure 15 that the function increases as the value of α increases from 1 to 4. Furthermore, Figure 16 indicates that also increases as α increases from 2 to 4. Also, one can notice from Figure 17 that decreases as α increases. Again similar remarks to the previous controllers can be made here; the choice of the feedback gains , , and will definitely affect the values of , , and and therefore the stability of the solution. Fixing the initial conditions, , , and , and increasing the values of , , and , will definitely increase the values of , , and which in turn increase the convergence rate of the solution to zero, as can be shown from inequality (69).

Obviously, the parameters of the controller are , , , and α. Fixing α, the parameters , , and can be computed from the uncoupled system of ODE equations (64)–(66) once the value at the right boundary and are known, the control gains , , and are chosen, and the initial conditions , , and are fixed. Then, the controller can be simply computed using equation (63). This clearly shows that the computations in the fourth adaptive boundary controller are also reasonable.

Remark 1. The design of the four adaptive boundary controllers proposed in Sections 2–5 involves low-computational complexity since it is computationally bounded by the time it takes to solve the uncoupled system of first order differential equations.

6. Comparison of the Nonlinear Adaptive Controllers Proposed in Sections 2–5

In this section, we compare the performances of the nonlinear controllers presented in Sections 2–5 for several values of α. This comparison illustrates the efficiency of the adaptive control laws when either or is unknown, when both and are unknown, and when all the parameters are unknown.

The -norm of the solutions of the MGKdVB equation will be used for comparison. Figures 18(a)–18(d) show the -norm of over time for several values of α when . These figures show that, for all values of α, the solutions of the MGKdVB equation obtained utilizing the first control law given when is unknown takes a longer time to reach the steady state solution than the other control laws. A careful look at the figures also demonstrates that, for , and 3, solutions of the MGKdVB equation obtained utilizing the second, third, and fourth control laws seem to have a similar decay rate. Figure 18(d) indicates that, when , the second control law which is proposed when is unknown outperforms the other control laws.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

7. Concluding Remarks

The adaptive boundary stabilization problem of the MGKdVB equation (1) was tackled in this paper. Four different nonlinear adaptive control schemes were introduced for this equation when the physical parameters , , , and are unknown and positive and when α is a positive integer. The global exponential stability of the solution in has been established analytically and numerically. In addition, the rates of convergence of the four presented controllers were compared.

For future work, we should investigate the adaptive and nonadaptive stabilization of the MGKdVB equation (1) under the presence of a time-delay in the boundary control. It would be also interesting to investigate the same problem when equation (1) itself is subject to the effect of the time delay in one of the terms, especially the nonlinear one .

Data Availability

The numerical data used to support the findings of this study are included within the article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

J. M. Burgers, “A mathematical model illustrating the theory of turbulence,” Advances in Applied Mechanics, vol. 1, pp. 171–199, 1948.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Biler, “Large-time behaviour of periodic solutions to dissipative equations of Korteweg-de Vries-Burgers type,” Bulletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Mathematics, vol. 32, no. 7-8, pp. 401–405, 1984.
View at: Google Scholar
Y. Kuramoto, “Diffusion-induced chaos in reaction systems,” Progress of Theoretical Physics Supplement, vol. 64, pp. 346–367, 1978.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. I. Sivashinsky, “On flame propagation under conditions of stoichiometry,” SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 67–82, 1980.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. G. Drazin and R. S. Johnson, Solitions: An Introduction, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1989.
N. Smaoui, B. Chentouf, and A. Alalabi, “Modelling and nonlinear boundary stabilization of the modified generalized Korteweg-de Vries-Burgers equation,” Advances in Difference Equations, vol. 2019, p. 449, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Smaoui, B. Chentouf, and A. Alalabi, “Boundary linear stabilization of the modified generalized Korteweg-de Vries-Burgers equation,” Advances in Difference Equations, vol. 2019, p. 457, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Senouf, “Dynamics and condensation of complex singularities for Burgers’ equation I,” SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis, vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 1457–1489, 1997.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Krstic, “On global stabilization of Burgers’ equation by boundary control,” Systems & Control Letters, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 123–141, 1999.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Ö. Efe and H. Özbay, “Low dimensional modelling and Dirichlét boundary controller design for Burgers’ equation,” International Journal of Control, vol. 77, no. 10, pp. 895–906, 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Balogh, D. S. Gilliam, and V. I. Shubov, “Stationary solutions for a boundary controlled Burgers’ equation,” Mathematical and Computer Modelling, vol. 33, no. 1–3, pp. 21–37, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W.-J. Liu and M. Krstić, “Adaptive control of Burgers’ equation with unknown viscosity,” International Journal of Adaptive Control and Signal Processing, vol. 15, no. 7, pp. 745–766, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Balogh and M. Krstić, “Burgers’ equation with nonlinear boundary feedback: H¹ stability, well-posedness and simulation,” Mathematical Problems in Engineering, vol. 6, no. 2-3, pp. 189–200, 2000.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Smaoui, “Nonlinear boundary control of the generalized Burgers equation,” Nonlinear Dynamics, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 75–86, 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Smaoui, “Controlling the dynamics of Burgers equation with a high-order nonlinearity,” International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences, vol. 2004, no. 62, pp. 3321–3332, 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Smaoui, “Boundary and distributed control of the viscous Burgers equation,” Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol. 182, no. 1, pp. 91–104, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Tadmor, “The well-posedness of the Kuramoto-Sivashinsky equation,” SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 884–893, 1986.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Armbruster, J. Guckenheimer, and P. Holmes, “Kuramoto-Sivashinsky dynamics on the center-unstable manifold,” SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 676–691, 1989.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. A. Kudryashov, “Exact solutions of the generalized Kuramoto-Sivashinsky equation,” Physics Letters A, vol. 147, no. 5-6, pp. 287–291, 1990.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Guo and X. M. Xiang, “The large time convergence of spectral method for generalized Kuramoto-Sivashinsky Equations,” Journal of Computational Mathematics, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 1–13, 1997.
View at: Google Scholar
G. Sell and Y. You, Dynamics of Evolutionary Equations, vol. 143, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 2000.
P. D. Christofides and A. Armaou, “Global stabilization of the Kuramoto-Sivashinsky equation via distributed output feedback control,” Systems & Control Letters, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 283–294, 2000.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W.-J. Liu and M. Krstić, “Stability enhancement by boundary control in the Kuramoto-Sivashinsky equation,” Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 485–507, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Kobayashi, “Adaptive stabilization of the Kuramoto-Sivashinsky equation,” International Journal of Systems Science, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 175–180, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. T. Cousin and N. A. Larkin, “Kuramoto-Sivashisky equation in domains with moving boundaries,” Portugaliae Mathematica, vol. 59, pp. 336–349, 2002.
View at: Google Scholar
A. Iosevich and J. R. Miller, “Dispersive effects in a modified Kuramoto-Sivashinsky equation,” Communications in Partial Differential Equations, vol. 27, no. 11-12, pp. 2423–2448, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. A. Larkin, “Korteweg-de Vries and Kuramoto-Sivashinsky equations in bounded domains,” Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, vol. 297, no. 1, pp. 169–185, 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Sakthivel and H. Ito, “Non-linear robust boundary control of the Kuramoto-Sivashinsky equation,” IMA Journal of Mathematical Control and Information, (UK), vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 47–55, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Zhang, L. Song, and W. Axia, “Dynamical bifurcation for the Kuramoto-Sivashinsky equation,” Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications, vol. 74, no. 4, pp. 1155–1163, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Schmuck, M. Pradas, G. A. Pavliotis, and S. Kalliadasis, “A new mode reduction strategy for the generalized Kuramoto-Sivashinsky equation,” IMA Journal of Applied Mathematics, vol. 80, no. 2, pp. 273–301, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. F. Vasconcellos and P. N. Silva, “Exact controllability and stabilization for kuramoto-sivashinsky system,” in Proceedings Series of the Brazilian Society of Applied and Computational Mathematics, Trabalho apresentado no CNMAC, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–7, Gramado, Brazil, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. N. Gomes, D. T. Papageorgiou, and G. A. Pavliotis, “Stabilizing non-trivial solutions of the generalized Kuramoto-Sivashinsky equation using feedback and optimal control,” IMA Journal of Applied Mathematics, vol. 82, no. 1, pp. 158–194, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. J. Amick, J. L. Bona, and M. E. Schonbek, “Decay of solutions of some nonlinear wave equations,” Journal of Differential Equations, vol. 81, no. 1, pp. 1–49, 1989.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Liu and G. Duan, “Stationary wave solution for equations of longitudinal wave in a nonlinear elastic rod,” Journal of Henan Normal University (Natural Science), vol. 29, pp. 101–103, 2001.
View at: Google Scholar
J. L. Bona, V. A. Dougalis, O. A. Karakashian, and W. R. McKinney, “Computations of blow-up and decay for periodic solutions of the generalized Korteweg-de Vries-Burgers equation,” Applied Numerical Mathematics, vol. 10, no. 3-4, pp. 335–355, 1992.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Balogh and M. Krstic, “Boundary control of the Korteweg-de Vries-Burgers equation: further results on stabilization and well-posedness, with numerical demonstration,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 45, no. 9, pp. 1739–1745, 2000.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Antar, “The Korteweg-de Vries-Burgers hierarchy in fluid-filled elastic tubes,” International Journal of Engineering Science, vol. 40, no. 11, pp. 1179–1198, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Smaoui and R. H. Al-Jamal, “Boundary control of the generalized Korteweg-de Vries-Burgers equation,” Nonlinear Dynamics, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 439–446, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Smaoui, A. El-Kadri, and M. Zribi, “Adaptive boundary control of the forced generalized Korteweg-de Vries-Burgers equation,” European Journal of Control, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 72–84, 2010a.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Smaoui, A. El-Kadri, and M. Zribi, “Nonlinear boundary control of the unforced generalized Korteweg-de Vries-Burgers equation,” Nonlinear Dynamics, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 561–574, 2010b.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Smaoui and R. Al-Jamal, “A nonlinear boundary control for the dynamics of the generalized Korteweg-de Vries-Burgers equation,” Kuwait Journal of Science and Engineering, vol. 34, no. 2A, pp. 57–76, 2007.
View at: Google Scholar
N. Smaoui, A. El-Kadri, and M. Zribi, “Adaptive boundary control of the unforced generalized Korteweg-de Vries-Burgers equation,” Nonlinear Dynamics, vol. 69, no. 3, pp. 1237–1253, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2020 B. Chentouf et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

500

Downloads

1041

Citations