Abstract and Applied Analysis
Volume 2016 (2016), Article ID 4567092, 15 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/4567092

Research Article

Existence of Mild Solutions to Nonlocal Fractional Cauchy Problems via Compactness

Rodrigo Ponce

Instituto de Matemática y Física, Universidad de Talca, Casilla 747, Talca, Chile

Received 7 July 2016; Accepted 22 August 2016

Academic Editor: Khalil Ezzinbi

Copyright © 2016 Rodrigo Ponce. 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.

Abstract.

We obtain characterizations of compactness for resolvent families of operators and as applications we study the existence of mild solutions to nonlocal Cauchy problems for fractional derivatives in Banach spaces. We discuss here simultaneously the Caputo and Riemann-Liouville fractional derivatives in the cases and

1. Introduction

The nonlocal initial conditions were introduced to extend the classical theory of initial value problems. Nonlocal conditions describe more appropriately some natural phenomena because they consider additional information in the initial conditions.

The existence of mild solutions to semilinear Cauchy problems with nonlocal conditions has been studied by several authors in the last two decades. See, for instance, [1–4] and the references cited therein.

On the other hand, many authors have studied recently the existence of mild solutions to abstract fractional differential equations with nonlocal conditions by using the theory of resolvent families of operators as well as some fixed point results. See [5–18] and the references therein for more details.

Let be a closed and linear operator defined on a Banach space , , and and suppose that , , and are suitable continuous functions. In what follows, we will denote by and the Caputo and Riemann-Liouville fractional derivatives, respectively. Now, for , we consider the following nonlinear fractional differential equations with nonlocal conditions

in case ; and

in case

By using the Laplace transform, it is easy to see that the mild solutions to problems (1)–(4) are, respectively, given by

in case ; and

in case Here, for , is the resolvent family generated by (see definition below, Section 2).

The existence of mild solutions to problems (1)–(4) has been studied by many authors in the last years. For example, in case , we refer the reader to [8, 9, 17, 18] (for the Caputo fractional derivative) and to [10] (for the Riemann-Liouville fractional derivative), that is, problems (1) and (2), respectively. On the other hand, in case , the existence of mild solutions to the Caputo fractional Cauchy problems with nonlocal conditions (3) has been considered in [12, 19] and the references therein, and, to the best of our knowledge, nonlocal Riemann-Liouville fractional Cauchy problem (4) has not been addressed in the existing literature.

A common assumption in many of the above-mentioned papers to obtain the existence of mild solutions to problems (1)–(4) is that generates a compact analytic semigroup , or generates a compact fractional resolvent family (see the definition below) because the compactness of (or ) allows applying, for example, the Krasnoselskii fixed point theorem.

According to the variation of constants formulas (5)–(7), we observe that if we have compactness criteria of (for suitable and ), we will be able to apply some fixed point techniques to obtain the existence of mild solutions to problems (1)–(4). For example, to prove the existence of mild solutions to problem (3), the authors in [12, Theorem ] assume that the operators , , and generated by are compact for all However, there are not completely clear conditions on implying the compactness of , , and for all , because there are no compactness criteria for , when Therefore, we notice that the compactness of gives a powerful tool to obtain existence of mild solutions to problems (1)–(4).

The compactness of is well known in some special cases. For example, if , then is compact for all if and only if is norm continuos and is compact for all , because corresponds to a -semigroup. See [20, Theorem , Chapter ]. If , then is compact for all if and only if is compact , because is the sine family generated by ; see [21]. In case , the compactness of has been studied by using subordination methods; that is, the operator is supposed to be a generator of a compact semigroup; see [22]. On the other hand, if is an almost sectorial operator and the resolvent is compact for all , then is compact for all (see [23]), and, very recently, it was proved that if is norm continuous, then is compact for all if and only if is compact for all See [24, 25]. Finally, in case , the characterization of compactness asserts that is compact for all if and only if is compact for all ; see [25, Theorem ].

In this paper, we study the existence of mild solution to nonlocal fractional Cauchy problems (1)–(4). Our approach relies on the compactness of resolvent family for suitable , as well as some fixed point techniques. We remark that we study simultaneously the nonlocal fractional Cauchy problem for the Caputo and Riemann-Liouville fractional derivatives.

The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 gives the preliminaries. Section 3 is devoted to the norm continuity and compactness of for Here, we give characterizations of the compactness of for for suitable In Section 4 we study nonlocal fractional Cauchy problems for the Caputo fractional derivative. We give some results on the existence of mild solutions to problems (1) and (3). Section 5 treats nonlocal fractional Cauchy problems for the Riemann-Liouville fractional derivative. Here, we study the existence of mild solutions to problems (2) and (4). Finally, Section 6 is devoted to some applications.

2. Preliminaries

Let be a Banach space. We denote by the space of all bounded linear operators from into If is a closed linear operator on , we denote by the resolvent set of and the resolvent operator of defined for all

We recall that a strongly continuous family is said to be of type or is exponentially bounded, if there exist two constants and such that for all

Now, we review some results on fractional calculus. For , define

where is the Gamma function. We define , the Dirac delta. For , denotes the smallest integer greater than or equal to As usual, the finite convolution of and is defined by .

Definition 1. Let The -order Riemann-Liouville fractional integral of is defined by

Also, we define . Because of the convolution properties, the integral operators satisfy the semigroup law: for all

Definition 2. Let The -order Caputo fractional derivative is defined as

where .

Definition 3. Let The -order Riemann-Liouville fractional derivative of is defined as

where .

We notice that if , then

Throughout this paper we use the notation of and to the -fractional derivative of Caputo and Riemann-Liouville, respectively.

Example 4. If , then

(i),(ii)(iii)

We observe that the Riemann-Liouville derivative operator is a left inverse operator of but not a right inverse, that is,

. On the other hand, the Caputo derivative operator satisfies

If we denote by (or ) the Laplace transform of , we have the following properties for the fractional derivatives:

where and For and , the generalized Mittag-Leffler function is defined by

The Laplace transform of the Mittag-Leffler function satisfies

Definition 5. Let be closed linear operator with domain , defined on a Banach space , and We say that is the generator of an -resolvent family, if there exist and a strongly continuous function such that is exponentially bounded, , and, for all ,

In this case, is called the -resolvent family generated by

We notice that Definition 5 corresponds to the concept of -regularized families introduced in [26]. In fact, if and , then the function is a -regularized family. Moreover, the function satisfies the following functional equation (see [27, 28]):

for all On the other hand, if an operator with domain is the infinitesimal generator of the -resolvent family , then for all we have

For example, the case corresponds to a -semigroup and is a cosine family, whereas is a sine family. Finally, if , then is the -resolvent family (also called the -times resolvent family) for fractional differential equations. We notice that, in the scalar case, that is, when , where and denotes the identity operator, then by the uniqueness of the Laplace transform corresponds to the function . Finally, let and . Define by

where , , and the function is defined by

where () denotes the Wright function. Then, is an -resolvent family on the Banach space generated by See [29, Example ].

The proof of the next result follows as in [26, 27].

Proposition 6. Let and let be an -resolvent family generated by Then the following holds:

(1) and for all and .(2)If and , then

(3)If and , then , and

In particular,

Finally, we recall the following results.

Theorem 7 (Mazur theorem). If is a compact subset of a Banach space , then its convex closure is compact.

Theorem 8 (Krasnoselskii theorem). Let be a closed convex and nonempty subset of a Banach space Let and be two operators such that

(i)if , then ,(ii) is a mapping contraction,(iii) is compact and continuous.

Then, there exists such that

Theorem 9 (Schauder’s fixed point theorem). Let be a nonempty, closed, bounded, and convex subset of a Banach space . Suppose that is a compact operator. Then has at least a fixed point in .

Theorem 10 (Leray-Schauder alternative theorem). Let be a convex subset of a Banach space . Suppose that . If is a completely continuous map, then either has a fixed point or the set is unbounded.

3. Continuity and Compactness of

In this section we study, for all , the norm continuity (continuity in ) and the compactness of for given

Proposition 11. Let and . Suppose that is the -resolvent family of type generated by . Then the function is continuous in for all .

Proof. Let Observe that, for all ,

We conclude by the uniqueness of the Laplace transform that , for all . Take . Then

Since , we have and we obtain

and therefore as
On the other hand,

Since we obtain that the function is decreasing in and therefore , for all , obtaining

Therefore, as We conclude that is norm continuous, for .
On the other hand, if , then, by the uniqueness of the Laplace transform, we obtain that

for all . Take . Then

for all . Therefore as

Lemma 12. Suppose that generates an -resolvent family of type If , then generates an -resolvent family of type

Proof. By hypothesis we get, for all ,

Therefore is Laplace transformable and, for all , we have

We conclude that generates an -resolvent family of type .

Definition 13. We say that the resolvent family is compact if, for every , the operator is a compact operator.

In what follows, we will assume that is strongly continuous for all .

Theorem 14. Let , , and be an -resolvent family of type generated by . Then the following assertions are equivalent:

(i) is a compact operator for all .(ii) is a compact operator for all .

Proof. Suppose that the resolvent family is compact. Let be fixed. Then we have

where the integral in the right-hand side exists in the Bochner sense. Because is continuous in the uniform operator topology (by Proposition 11), we conclude that is a compact operator by [30, Corollary ].
Let be fixed. Assume that . Since , it follows that and therefore, by [31, Proposition ], we obtain

in . Therefore,

where is the path consisting of the vertical line By hypothesis and [30, Corollary ], we conclude that is compact for all and Now, we take Observe that in we have

by [31, Proposition ], and as in case we conclude that is compact for all .

By Theorem 14 we have the following Corollary.

Corollary 15. Let and be an -resolvent family of type generated by . Then the following assertions are equivalent:

(i) is a compact operator for all (ii) is a compact operator for all

Proposition 16. Let , and be the -resolvent family of type generated by . Suppose that is continuous in the uniform operator topology for all . Then the following assertions are equivalent:

(i) is a compact operator for all (ii) is a compact operator for all

Proof. Suppose that that the resolvent family is compact. Let be fixed. Then we have

where the integral in the right-hand side exists in the Bochner sense, because is continuous in the uniform operator topology, by hypothesis. Then, by [30, Corollary ], we conclude that is a compact operator.
Let be fixed. Since , it follows that and therefore, by [31, Proposition ], we obtain

in Therefore,

where is the path consisting of the vertical line By hypothesis and [30, Corollary ], we conclude that is compact.

Proposition 17. Let and be the -resolvent family of type generated by . Suppose that is continuous in the uniform operator topology for all . Then the following assertions are equivalent:

(i) is a compact operator for all (ii) is a compact operator for all

Proof. It follows as in the proof of Proposition 16.
Let be fixed. Since , it follows that and therefore, by [31, Proposition ], we obtain

in Therefore,

where is the path consisting of the vertical line By hypothesis and [30, Corollary ], we conclude that is compact.

The proof of the next result follows similarly to Proposition 16, because for we have

in and by [31, Proposition ].

Proposition 18. Let and be the -resolvent family of type generated by . Suppose that is continuous in the uniform operator topology for all . Then, the following assertions are equivalent:

(i) is a compact operator for all (ii) is a compact operator for all

Remark 19. Let be fixed. If , then by [31, Proposition ] we have

in Therefore, as is Proposition 18, if , where , generates the -resolvent family of type , and is norm continuous for all , then is a compact operator for all if and only if is a compact operator for all The same conclusion holds if , where is fixed and is the -resolvent family of type generated by , which is norm continuous for all .

4. Nonlocal Fractional Cauchy Problems: The Caputo Case

In this section we consider the nonlocal problem for the Caputo fractional derivative

, , , and is a closed linear operator defined on which generates the -resolvent family The nonlinear function is continuous and the nonlocal conditions are also continuous functions. We recall also that the derivative denotes the Caputo fractional derivative.

The mild solution to problem (45) is given by

By the uniqueness of the Laplace transform, it is easy to see that the mild solution to fractional nonlocal problem (45) can be written as

for all

We assume the following:

(H1)The function satisfies the Carathéodory condition; that is, is strongly measurable for each and is continuous for each (H2)There exists a continuous function such that

(H3)The functions are continuous and there exist such that

We have the following existence results.

Theorem 20. Let . Let be the generator of an -resolvent family of type . Suppose that is compact for all . If and , then, under assumptions (H1)–(H3), problem (45) has at least one mild solution.

Proof. Let , where

On we define the operators , by

and We shall prove that has at least one fixed point by the Krasnoselskii fixed point theorem. We will consider several steps in the proof.
Step 1. We will see that if , then . In fact, by Lemma 12 we have

Hence for all
Step 2. is a contraction on In fact, if , then

Since , we conclude that is a contraction.
Step 3. is completely continuous.
Firstly, we prove that is a continuous operator on Let such that in . By Lemma 12 we get

We notice that the function is integrable on By Lebesgue’s dominated convergence theorem, as Since we obtain that is continuous in
Now, we will prove that is relatively compact. By the Ascoli-Arzela theorem, we need to show that the family is uniformly bounded and equicontinuous, and the set is relatively compact in for each In fact, for each we have (as in Step ) that and therefore is uniformly bounded.
In order to prove the equicontinuity, let , and take Observe that

Observe that, for , by Lemma 12 we have

and therefore For , we have

Observe that

and, by Lemma 12, for all Moreover, by Proposition 11 we have that is norm continuous and therefore if , then in We obtain by Lebesgue’s dominated convergence theorem that Therefore, is an equicontinuous family.
Finally, we prove that is relatively compact in for each Obviously, is relatively compact in Now, we take For we define on the operator

The hypotheses implies the compactness of for all (by Lemma 12 and by Theorem 14) and therefore the set is compact for all Then is also a compact set by Theorem 7. By using the mean-value theorem for the Bochner integrals (see [32, Corollary , page ]), we obtain that

Therefore, the set is relatively compact in for all Now, observe that

Since the function belongs to , we conclude by the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem that

Therefore the set is relatively compact in for each By the Ascoli-Arzela theorem, the set is relatively compact. We conclude that is a completely continuous operator. Hence, by Krasnoselskii Theorem 8 we have that has a fixed point on , which means that nonlocal problem (45) has a mild solution and the proof of the theorem is finished.

The proof of the following result uses the Schauder fixed point theorem. We notice that here we will assume that is continuous in the uniform operator topology for all Moreover, we have a weaker condition on the parameters , , and

Theorem 21. Let Let be the generator of an -resolvent family of type Suppose that is compact for all , is continuous in the uniform operator topology for all , and Then, under assumptions (H1)–(H3), problem (45) has at least one mild solution.

Proof. We define the operator by

Choose

Let We shall prove that has at least one fixed point by the Schauder fixed point theorem. As in the proof of Theorem 20 it is easy to see that sends into , and is a continuous operator.
We claim that is relatively compact.
Indeed, as in the proof of Theorem 20, it is easy to see that is uniformly bounded. On the other hand, to see the equicontinuity, let , and take with . We have

Observe that for we have

By hypothesis, using the norm continuity of , we obtain that
Lemma 12 implies for all and by Proposition 11 we have that is continuous in , and hence

as On the other hand, as as in the proof of Step in Theorem 20. Therefore, the set is equicontinuous.
Finally, we will prove that is relatively compact for all Clearly, is relatively compact. Now, we take For each , we define the operator

The hypothesis and Proposition 16 show that is compact for all and therefore the set is relatively compact in for all Now, observe that

By Proposition 11, is norm continuous for all and therefore

On the other hand, since

and the function belongs to , we conclude by the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem that

As in the proof of [24, Theorem ], we get

and therefore the set is relatively compact for all The compactness of and (by Lemma 12 and Theorem 14) imply that is relatively compact in for each By the Ascoli-Arzela theorem, the set is relatively compact. We conclude that is a compact operator on Hence, by Schauder Theorem 9 we have that has a fixed point on and therefore nonlocal problem (45) has a mild solution.

Remark 22. We notice that the norm continuity of for and follows, for example, if is analytic (see [24, Lemma ]) or if is an almost sectorial operator (see [23, Theorem ]).

Now, we consider the nonlocal problem for the Caputo fractional derivative

, , , and is a closed linear operator defined on which generates the -resolvent family

The mild solution to problem (74) is given by

It is easy to see (by using the uniqueness of the Laplace transform) that the mild solution to problem (74) can be also written as

The proof of the following result follows similarly to Theorem 20 and therefore we omit it.

Theorem 23. Let Let be the generator of an -resolvent family of type Suppose that is compact for all , and is continuous in the uniform operator topology for all If and , then, under assumptions (H1)–(H3), problem (74) has at least one mild solution.

5. Nonlocal Fractional Cauchy Problems: The Riemann-Liouville Case

In this section we consider the nonlocal problem for the Riemann-Liouville fractional derivative

where , , and is a closed linear operator defined on . Assume that generates an -resolvent family given by . Taking Laplace transform in (77) we obtain by (14) that

The uniqueness of the Laplace transform implies that the mild solution to problem (77) is also given by

for all

Theorem 24. Let . Let be the generator of an -resolvent family of type . Assume that the resolvent is compact for all . If and , then, under assumptions (H1)–(H3), problem (77) has at least one mild solution.

Proof. Let , where

On we define the operators , by

and We shall prove that has at least one fixed point by the Krasnoselskii fixed point theorem. We will consider several steps in the proof.
Step 1. We will see that if , then In fact, by Lemma 12 we have

Hence for all
Step 2. is a contraction on . In fact, if , then

Since , we conclude that is a contraction.
Step 3. is completely continuous.
As in the proof of Theorem 20 it is easy to see that is a continuous operator and the set is uniformly bounded.
To prove the equicontinuity, let , and take Observe that

To estimate we notice that

and therefore For we have

Observe that

and, by Lemma 12, for all Moreover, by Proposition 11 we have that is norm continuous and therefore if , then in We obtain by Lebesgue’s dominated convergence theorem that Therefore, is an equicontinuous family.
Finally, the compactness of for all (by Lemma 12 and Theorem 14) implies that is relatively compact in for each (as in the proof of Theorem 20). We conclude that is a completely continuous operator and, by the Krasnoselskii theorem, the operator has a fixed point on , which means that nonlocal problem (77) has at least one mild solution.

In the next result, we consider a weaker condition on the parameters , , and However, we need to assume here the norm continuity of for

Theorem 25. Let Let be the generator of an -resolvent family of type Assume that is compact for all and is continuous in the uniform operator topology for all If , then, under assumptions (H1)–(H3), problem (77) has at least one mild solution.

Proof. On we define the operator

where and

The proof follows the same lines of Theorem 21. We give here only the details on the relative compactness of in for each Theorem 14 implies that is compact for all and therefore the set is relatively compact for all (as in the proof of Theorem 20). On the other hand, the hypothesis and Proposition 17 imply that is compact for all and thus the set is relatively compact for all The existence of a fixed point to , and therefore of a mild solution to problem (77), follows from the Schauder theorem.

Now we discuss the existence of mild solutions to the nonlocal fractional Cauchy problem for the Riemann-Liouville fractional derivative in case :

where and is a closed linear operator defined on We assume that generates an -resolvent family given by By using the Laplace transform in (90), it is easy to see that

Theorem 26. Let Let be the generator of an -resolvent family of type Assume that is compact for all , and is continuous in the uniform operator topology for all If and , then, under assumptions (H1)–(H3), problem (90) has at least one mild solution.

Proof. Let

If we define on the operators , by

for , then, as in the proof of the previous theorems, it is easy to see that if , then , and is a contraction on Moreover, is continuous on , is uniformly bounded, and is an equicontinuous family. Finally, by the compactness of (see Proposition 18) and by using a similar method as we did in the proof of Theorem 20 (Step ), we prove that is relatively compact in for each Thus, by the Ascoli-Arzela theorem, the set is relatively compact and hence is a completely continuous operator. By the Krasnoselskii theorem, we conclude that has a fixed point on , and therefore nonlocal problem (90) has at least one mild solution.

6. Applications

In this section, we give some applications. As consequence of the previous results, we have the following results.

Consider the semilinear problem

where , denotes the Riemann-Liouville fractional integral operator, , and are continuous.

Let be the generator of an -resolvent family Then it is well known that the mild solution of (94) is defined by means of the variation of constant formula

We remark that the case was recently studied in [25, Section ]. On the other hand, we notice that the case and has been recently studied in [33, Section ] by assuming the relative compactness of the set Proposition 16 shows that is compact for all and by using the Leray-Schauder alternative theorem (see Theorem 10) it is easy to prove (as in Theorem 21 and [33, Theorem ]) the following result. We omit the details.

Theorem 27. Let Let be the generator of an -resolvent family of type Suppose that is compact for all , and is continuous in the uniform operator topology for all Then, under assumptions (H1)–(H3), problem (94) has at least one mild solution.

Now, we consider the Riemann-Liouville fractional Cauchy problem

where , , and is a closed linear operator defined on Assume that generates an -resolvent family given by The mild solution to problem (96) is given by

which is equivalent (by the uniqueness of the Laplace transform) to

for all

Proposition 17 shows that is compact for all (and ) and by using the Leray-Schauder alternative theorem it is easy to prove (as in Theorem 25 and [33, Theorem ] and [25, Theorem ]) the following existence result. We omit the proof.

Theorem 28. Let Let be the generator of an -resolvent family of type Assume that the resolvent is compact for all and is continuous in the uniform operator topology for all Then, under assumptions (H1)–(H3), problem (96) has at least one mild solution.

We end this section with an example.

Example 29. Consider the following problem:

where , , and . Let and consider the operator defined by and, for ,
It is well known that generates a compact and analytic (and hence norm continuous for all ) -semigroup on such that for all Since generates a -semigroup, that is, an -resolvent family, we obtain by [29, Corollary and Theorem ] that generates the -resolvent family defined by

where is the stable Lévy process of order defined by (22). Since is norm continuous, it is easy to see that is norm continuous for all and the positivity of (see [29, Theorem ]) implies that is of type On the other hand, the compactness of implies that is compact.
We notice that problem (99) can be written in the abstract form of (74). Define the functions and by

Assume that We observe also that in this case we have , , and (see Theorem 23).
It is easy to check assumptions (H1)–(H3) and the hypotheses in Theorem 23 and therefore problem (99) has a mild solution.
Analogously, we can consider the Riemann-Liouville case

Under the same assumptions, we have by Theorem 26 that problem (102) has a mild solution.

6.1. Conclusions

In this paper, we obtain conditions implying the compactness of the family As a consequence, we obtain several results on the existence of mild solutions to nonlocal fractional Cauchy problems to the Caputo and Riemann-Liouville fractional derivatives.

Competing Interests

The author declares that there are no competing interests.

Acknowledgments

This research was partially supported by FONDECYT Grant no. 11130619.

References

S. Aizicovici and M. McKibben, “Existence results for a class of abstract nonlocal Cauchy problems,” Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications, vol. 39, no. 5, pp. 649–668, 2000.

L. Byszewski, “Theorems about the existence and uniqueness of solutions of a semilinear evolution nonlocal Cauchy problem,” Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, vol. 162, no. 2, pp. 494–505, 1991.

K. Deng, “Exponential decay of solutions of semilinear parabolic equations with nonlocal initial conditions,” Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, vol. 179, no. 2, pp. 630–637, 1993.

X. Fu and K. Ezzinbi, “Existence of solutions for neutral functional differential evolution equations with nonlocal conditions,” Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications, vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 215–227, 2003.

B. Ahmad, J. J. Nieto, A. Alsaedi, and H. Al-Hutami, “Existence of solutions for nonlinear fractional -difference integral equations with two fractional orders and nonlocal four-point boundary conditions,” Journal of the Franklin Institute, vol. 351, no. 5, pp. 2890–2909, 2014.

B. de Andrade, C. Cuevas, and H. Soto, “On fractional heat equations with non-local initial conditions,” Proceedings of the Edinburgh Mathematical Society Series II, vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 65–76, 2016.

A. Debbouche, D. Baleanu, and R. P. Agarwal, “Nonlocal nonlinear integrodifferential equations of fractional orders,” Boundary Value Problems, vol. 2012, no. 78, 10 pages, 2012.

G. M. N'Guérékata, “A Cauchy problem for some fractional abstract differential equation with non local conditions,” Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications, vol. 70, no. 5, pp. 1873–1876, 2009.

G. M. Mophou and G. M. N’Guérékata, “Existence of the mild solution for some fractional differential equations with nonlocal conditions,” Semigroup Forum, vol. 79, no. 2, pp. 315–322, 2009.

Z. Liu and X. Li, “Approximate controllability of fractional evolution systems with Riemann-Liouville fractional derivatives,” SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 1920–1933, 2015.

D. Nazari and S. Shahmorad, “Application of the fractional differential transform method to fractional-order integro-differential equations with nonlocal boundary conditions,” Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol. 234, no. 3, pp. 883–891, 2010.

X.-B. Shu and Q. Wang, “The existence and uniqueness of mild solutions for fractional differential equations with nonlocal conditions of order ,” Computers & Mathematics with Applications, vol. 64, no. 6, pp. 2100–2110, 2012.

J. Wang, Z. Fan, and Y. Zhou, “Nonlocal controllability of semilinear dynamic systems with fractional derivative in Banach spaces,” Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, vol. 154, no. 1, pp. 292–302, 2012.

J. Wang, A. G. Ibrahim, and M. Fečkan, “Nonlocal impulsive fractional differential inclusions with fractional sectorial operators on Banach spaces,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 257, pp. 103–118, 2015.

R.-N. Wang, T.-J. Xiao, and J. Liang, “A note on the fractional Cauchy problems with nonlocal initial conditions,” Applied Mathematics Letters, vol. 24, no. 8, pp. 1435–1442, 2011.

Z. Yan, “Existence of solutions for nonlocal impulsive partial functional integrodifferential equations via fractional operators,” Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol. 235, no. 8, pp. 2252–2262, 2011.

Y. Zhou and F. Jiao, “Nonlocal Cauchy problem for fractional evolution equations,” Nonlinear Analysis: Real World Applications, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 4465–4475, 2010.

Y. Zhou and F. Jiao, “Existence of mild solutions for fractional neutral evolution equations,” Computers & Mathematics with Applications, vol. 59, no. 3, pp. 1063–1077, 2010.

X. Liu, Z. Liu, and M. Bin, “The solvability and optimal controls for some fractional impulsive equations of order ,” Abstract and Applied Analysis, vol. 2014, Article ID 142067, 9 pages, 2014.

A. Pazy, Semigroups of Linear Operators and Applications to Partial Differential Equations, vol. 44 of Applied Mathematical Sciences, Springer, New York, NY, USA, 1983.

C. Travis and G. Webb, “Compactness, regularity, and uniform continuity properties of strongly continuous cosine families,” Houston Journal of Mathematics, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 555–567, 1977.

J. Prüss, “Positivity and regularity of hyperbolic Volterra equations in Banach spaces,” Mathematische Annalen, vol. 279, no. 2, pp. 317–344, 1987.

R.-N. Wang, D.-H. Chen, and T.-J. Xiao, “Abstract fractional Cauchy problems with almost sectorial operators,” Journal of Differential Equations, vol. 252, no. 1, pp. 202–235, 2012.

Z. Fan, “Characterization of compactness for resolvents and its applications,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 232, pp. 60–67, 2014.

C. Lizama, A. Pereira, and R. Ponce, “On the compactness of fractional resolvent operator functions,” Semigroup Forum, 2016.

C. Lizama, “Regularized solutions for abstract Volterra equations,” Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, vol. 243, no. 2, pp. 278–292, 2000.

K. Li, J. Peng, and J. Jia, “Cauchy problems for fractional differential equations with Riemann-Liouville fractional derivatives,” Journal of Functional Analysis, vol. 263, no. 2, pp. 476–510, 2012.

C. Lizama and F. Poblete, “On a functional equation associated with -regularized resolvent families,” Abstract and Applied Analysis, vol. 2012, Article ID 495487, 23 pages, 2012.

L. Abadias and P. J. Miana, “A subordination principle on Wright functions and regularized resolvent families,” Journal of Function Spaces, vol. 2015, Article ID 158145, 9 pages, 2015.

L. W. Weis, “A generalization of the Vidav-Jörgens perturbation theorem for semigroups and its application to transport theory,” Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, vol. 129, no. 1, pp. 6–23, 1988.

M. Haase, “The complex inversion formula revisited,” Journal of the Australian Mathematical Society, vol. 84, no. 1, pp. 73–83, 2008.

J. Diestel and J. Uhl, Vector Measures, Mathematical Surveys, No. 15, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, USA, 1977.

C. Lizama and G. M. N’Guérékata, “Mild solutions for abstract fractional differential equations,” Applicable Analysis, vol. 92, no. 8, pp. 1731–1754, 2013.