SpringerOpen Newsletter

Receive periodic news and updates relating to SpringerOpen.

This article is part of the series Jean Mawhin’s Achievements in Nonlinear Analysis.

Open Access Research

Eigenvalue criteria for existence of positive solutions of impulsive differential equations with non-separated boundary conditions

Ruixi Liang1* and Jianhua Shen2

Author affiliations

1 Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, 410075, P.R. China

2 Department of Mathematics, Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310036, P.R. China

For all author emails, please log on.

Citation and License

Boundary Value Problems 2013, 2013:3  doi:10.1186/1687-2770-2013-3


The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at: http://www.boundaryvalueproblems.com/content/2013/1/3


Received:29 August 2012
Accepted:28 December 2012
Published:14 January 2013

© 2013 Liang and Shen; licensee Springer

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

In this paper, we discuss the existence of positive solutions for second-order differential equations subject to nonlinear impulsive conditions and non-separated periodic boundary value conditions. Our criteria for the existence of positive solutions will be expressed in terms of the first eigenvalue of the corresponding nonimpulsive problem. The main tool of study is a fixed point theorem in a cone.

MSC: 34B37, 34B18.

Keywords:
impulsive differential equation; positive solution; fixed point theorem; non-separated periodic boundary value condition

1 Introduction

Let ω be a fixed positive number. In this paper, we are concerned with the existence of positive solutions for the following boundary value problem (BVP) with impulses:

(1.1a)

(1.1b)

(1.1c)

Here, u [ 1 ] ( t ) = p ( t ) u ( t ) denotes the quasi-derivative of u ( t ) . The condition (1.1c) is called a non-separated periodic boundary value condition for (1.1a).

We assume throughout, and with further mention, that the following conditions hold.

(H1) Let J = [ 0 , ω ] , and 0 < t 1 < t 2 < < t m < ω , f C ( J × R + , R + ) , I i C ( R + , R + ) , R + = [ 0 , + ) . Δ ( u [ 1 ] ( t i ) ) = u [ 1 ] ( t i + ) u [ 1 ] ( t i ) , where u [ 1 ] ( t i + ) (respectively u [ 1 ] ( t i ) ) denotes the right limit (respectively, the left limit) of u [ 1 ] ( t ) at t = t i .

(H)

0 ω 1 p ( t ) d t < , 0 ω q ( t ) d t < , p > 0 , q 0  and  q 0  a.e. on  [ 0 , ω ] .

A function u ( t ) defined on J = J { t 1 , t 2 , , t m } is called a solution of BVP (1.1) ((1.1a)-(1.1c)) if its first derivative u ( t ) exists for each t J , p ( t ) u ( t ) is absolutely continuous on each close subinterval of J , there exist finite values u [ 1 ] ( t i ± ) , the impulse conditions (1.1b) and the boundary conditions (1.1c) are satisfied, and the equation (1.1a) is satisfied almost everywhere on J .

For the case of I i = 0 ( i = 1 , 2 , , m ), the problem (1.1) is related to a non-separated periodic boundary value problem of ODE. Atici and Guseinov [1] have proved the existence of a positive and twin positive solutions to BVP (1.1) by applying a fixed point theorem for the completely continuous operators in cones. In [2], Graef and Kong studied the following periodic boundary value problem:

{ ( p ( t ) u ) + q ( t ) u = h ( t ) f ( t , u ) , t ( 0 , ω ) , u ( 0 ) = u ( ω ) , u [ 1 ] ( 0 ) = u [ 1 ] ( ω ) , (1.2)

where h ( t ) > 0 . Based upon the properties of Green’s function obtained in [1], the authors extended and improved the work of [1] by using topological degree theory. They derived new criteria for the existence of non-trivial solutions, positive solutions and negative solutions of the problem (1.2) when f is a sign-changing function and not necessarily bounded from below even over [ 0 , ω ] × R + . Very recently, He et al.[3] studied BVP (1.1) without impulses and generalized the results of [1,4] via the fixed point index theory. The problem (1.2) in the case of p 1 , the usual periodic boundary value problem, has been extensively investigated; see [4-7] for some results.

On the other hand, impulsive differential equations are a basic tool to study processes that are subjected to abrupt changes in their state. There has been a significant development in the last two decades. Boundary problems of second-order differential equations with impulse have received considerable attention and much literature has been published; see, for instance, [8-17] and their references. However, there are fewer results about positive solutions for second-order impulsive differential equations. To our best knowledge, there is no result about nonlinear impulsive differential equations with non-separated periodic boundary conditions.

Motivated by the work above, in this paper we study the existence of positive solutions for the boundary value problem (1.1). By using fixed point theorems in a cone, criteria are established under some conditions on f ( t , u ) concerning the first eigenvalue corresponding to the relevant linear operator. More important, the impulsive terms are different from those of papers [8,9].

2 Preliminaries

In this section, we collect some preliminary results that will be used in the subsequent section. We denote by φ ( t ) and ψ ( t ) the unique solutions of the corresponding homogeneous equation

( p ( t ) u ( t ) ) + q ( t ) u ( t ) = 0 , t J , (2.1)

under the initial boundary conditions

φ ( 0 ) = 1 , φ [ 1 ] ( 0 ) = 0 ; ψ ( 0 ) = 0 , ψ [ 1 ] ( 0 ) = 1 . (2.2)

Put D = φ ( ω ) + ψ [ 1 ] ( ω ) 2 , then by [[1], Lemma 2.3], D > 0 .

Definition 2.1 For two differential functions y and z, we define their Wronskian by

W t ( y , z ) = y ( t ) z [ 1 ] ( t ) y [ 1 ] ( t ) z ( t ) = p ( t ) [ y ( t ) z ( t ) y ( t ) z ( t ) ] .

Theorem 2.1The Wronskian of any two solutions for equations (2.1) is constant. Especially, W t ( φ , ψ ) 1 .

Proof Suppose that y and z are two solutions of (2.1), then

{ W t ( y , z ) } = { p ( t ) [ y ( t ) z ( t ) y ( t ) z ( t ) ] } = y ( t ) [ p ( t ) z ( t ) ] [ p ( t ) y ( t ) ] z ( t ) = 0 ;

therefore, the Wronskian is constant. Further, from the initial conditions (2.2), we have W t ( φ , ψ ) 1 . The proof is complete. □

Consider the following equation:

{ ( p ( t ) u ( t ) ) + q ( t ) u ( t ) = 0 , t J , u ( 0 ) = u ( ω ) , u [ 1 ] ( 0 ) = u [ 1 ] ( ω ) . (2.3)

From Theorem 2.5 in [1], equation (2.3) has a Green function G ( t , s ) > 0 for all s , t J , which has the following properties:

( G 1 ) G ( t , s ) is continuous in t and s for all t , s J .

( G 2 ) If A = min 0 t , s ω G ( t , s ) and B = max 0 t , s ω G ( t , s ) , then B > A > 0 .

( G 3 )

G ( t , s ) = ψ ( ω ) D φ ( t ) φ ( s ) φ [ 1 ] ( ω ) D ψ ( t ) ψ ( s ) + { ψ [ 1 ] ( ω ) 1 D φ ( t ) ψ ( s ) φ ( ω ) 1 D φ ( s ) ψ ( t ) , 0 s t ω , ψ [ 1 ] ( ω ) 1 D φ ( s ) ψ ( t ) φ ( ω ) 1 D φ ( t ) ψ ( s ) , 0 t s ω .

Combining with Theorem 2.1, we can also prove that

( G 4 )

G ( 0 , s ) = G ( ω , s ) , p ( t ) G t | ( 0 , s ) = p ( t ) G t | ( ω , s ) , 0 ω q ( t ) G ( t , s ) d s = 1 .

Remark 1 From paper [1], we can get G ( t , s ) when q ( t ) = c 2 p ( t ) ( c > 0 ) and p ( t ) > 0 ,

G ( t , s ) = 1 2 c ( e c 0 ω ( d x / p ( x ) ) 1 ) { e c s t ( d x / p ( x ) ) + e c [ 0 ω ( d x / p ( x ) ) + t s ( d x / p ( x ) ) ] , 0 s t ω , e c t s ( d x / p ( x ) ) + e c [ 0 ω ( d x / p ( x ) ) + s t ( d x / p ( x ) ) ] , 0 t s ω , A = e c / 2 0 ω ( d x / p ( x ) ) c [ e c 0 ω ( d x / p ( x ) ) 1 ] , B = 1 + e c 0 ω ( d x / p ( x ) ) 2 c [ e c 0 ω ( d x / p ( x ) ) 1 ] .

Especially, in the case of p ( t ) 1 , q ( t ) c 2 ( c > 0 ), Green’s function G ( t , s ) has the form

G ( t , s ) = 1 2 c ( e c ω 1 ) { e c ( t s ) + e c ( ω + s t ) , 0 s t ω , e c ( s t ) + e c ( ω + t s ) , 0 t s ω , A = e ( c ω / 2 ) c ( e c ω 1 ) , B = 1 + e c ω 2 c ( e c ω 1 ) .

Define an operator

( T u ) ( t ) = 0 ω G ( t , s ) u ( s ) d s ,

then it is easy to check that T : C ( J ) C ( J ) is a completely continuous operator. By virtue of the Krein-Rutman theorem, the authors in [3] got the following result.

Lemma 2.1The spectral radius r ( T ) > 0 andThas a positive eigenfunction corresponding to its first eigenvalue λ 1 = ( r ( T ) ) 1 .

In what follows, we denote the positive eigenfunction corresponding to λ 1 by ϕ and max t J ϕ ( t ) = 1 . Define a mapping Φ and a cone K in a Banach space C ( J ) by

( Φ u ) ( t ) = λ 0 ω G ( t , s ) f ( s , u ( s ) ) d s + i = 1 m G ( t , t i ) I i ( u ( t i ) ) , t J , K = { u C ( J ) , u ( t ) δ u } ,

where δ = A B , u = max t J | u ( t ) | .

Lemma 2.2The fixed point of the mapping Φ is a solution of (1.1).

Proof Clearly, Φu is continuous in t. For t t k ,

( Φ u ) ( t ) = λ 0 ω G t f ( s , u ( s ) ) d s + i = 1 m G t ( t , t i ) I i ( u ( t i ) ) .

Using ( G 3 ) and ( G 4 ), we have ( Φ u ) ( 0 ) = ( Φ u ) ( ω ) , ( Φ u ) [ 1 ] ( 0 ) = ( Φ u ) [ 1 ] ( ω ) and

which implies that the fixed point of Φ is the solution of (1.1). The proof is complete. □

The proofs of the main theorems of this paper are based on fixed point theory. The following two well-known lemmas in [18] are needed in our argument.

Lemma 2.3[18]

LetXbe a Banach space andKbe a cone inX. Suppose Ω 1 and Ω 2 are open subsets ofXsuch that 0 Ω 1 Ω ¯ 1 Ω 2 , and suppose that

Φ : K ( Ω ¯ 2 Ω 1 ) K

is a completely continuous operator such that

inf u K Ω 1 Φ u > 0 , u μ Φ u for u K Ω 1 and μ 1 , and u μ Φ u for u K Ω 2 and 0 < μ 1 , or

inf u K Ω 2 Φ u > 0 , u μ Φ u for u K Ω 2 and μ 1 , and u μ Φ u for u K Ω 1 and 0 < μ 1 .

Then Φ has a fixed point in K ( Ω ¯ 2 Ω 1 ) .

Lemma 2.4[18]

LetXbe a Banach space andKbe a cone inX. Suppose Ω 1 and Ω 2 are open subsets ofXsuch that 0 Ω 1 Ω ¯ 1 Ω 2 , and suppose that

Φ : K ( Ω ¯ 2 Ω 1 ) K

is a completely continuous operator such that

There exists u 0 K { 0 } such that u Φ u + μ u 0 for u K Ω 1 and μ > 0 , Φ u u for u K Ω 2 , or

There exists u 0 K { 0 } such that u Φ u + μ u 0 for u K Ω 2 and μ > 0 , Φ u u for u K Ω 1 .

Then Φ has a fixed point in Ω ¯ 2 Ω 1 .

3 Main results

Recalling that δ was defined after Lemma 2.1, for convenience, we introduce the following notations. Assume that the constant r > 0 and γ is some positive function on J,

f ¯ γ r = sup { f ( t , u ) γ ( t ) u , t J , u [ δ r , r ] } , f γ r = inf { f ( t , u ) γ ( t ) u , t J , u [ δ r , r ] } , f ¯ γ 0 = lim r 0 + f ¯ γ r , f γ 0 = lim r 0 + f γ r , f ¯ γ = lim r + f ¯ γ r , f γ = lim r + f γ r , I ¯ i r = sup { I i ( u ) u , u [ δ r , r ] } , I i r = inf { I i ( u ) u , u [ δ r , r ] } , I ¯ i 0 = lim r 0 + I ¯ i r , I i 0 = lim r 0 + I i r , I ¯ i = lim r + I ¯ i r , I i = lim r + I i r .

Theorem 3.1Assume that there exist positive constantsα, βsuch that f q α 0 , f ¯ q β 0 , I i α 0 , I i β 0 and

0 < λ ( 1 A i = 1 m I i α f q α , 1 B i = 1 m I ¯ i β f ¯ q β ) . (3.1)

Then (1.1) has at least one positive solutionusuch that min { α , β } u max { α , β } .

Proof Clearly, α β , let α = min { α , β } , β = max { α , β } . Define the open sets

Ω α = { u C ( J ) : u < α } , Ω β = { u C ( J ) : u < β } .

Then Φ : K ( Ω ¯ β Ω α ) is completely continuous. By (3.1) and the definition of f q α , I i α , f ¯ q β , I ¯ i β , there exists ε > 0 such that

(3.2)

(3.3)

and

f ( t , u ) ( 1 + ε ) f ¯ q β q ( t ) u , I i ( u ) ( 1 + ε ) I ¯ i β u , i = 1 , 2 , , m , δ β u β . (3.4)

Let u 0 1 . We show that

u Φ u + μ , u K Ω α  and  μ > 0 . (3.5)

If not, there exist u 1 K Ω α and μ 1 > 0 such that u 1 = Φ u 1 + μ 1 . Let u 1 ( ρ ) = min t J u 1 ( t ) . Noting that δ α u 1 α for any t J , we obtain that for t J ,

u 1 ( t ) = ( Φ u 1 ) ( t ) + μ 1 = λ 0 ω G ( t , s ) f ( s , u 1 ( s ) ) d s + i = 1 m G ( t , t i ) I i ( u 1 ( t i ) ) + μ 1 ( 1 ε ) λ f q α 0 ω G ( t , s ) q ( s ) u 1 ( s ) d s + A ( 1 ε ) i = 1 m I i α u 1 ( t i ) + μ 1 ( 1 ε ) λ f q α u 1 ( ρ ) 0 ω G ( t , s ) q ( s ) d s + A u 1 ( ρ ) ( 1 ε ) i = 1 m I i α + μ 1 ( 1 ε ) ( λ f q α + A i = 1 m I i α ) u 1 ( ρ ) + μ 1 u 1 ( ρ ) + μ 1 ,

which implies that u 1 ( ρ ) > u 1 ( ρ ) , a contradiction.

On the other hand, for u K Ω β , δ β u ( t ) β , we have

( Φ u ) ( t ) = λ 0 ω G ( t , s ) f ( s , u ( s ) ) d s + i = 0 m G ( t , t i ) I i ( u i ( t ) ) ( 1 + ε ) λ f ¯ q β 0 ω G ( t , s ) q ( s ) u ( s ) d s + B ( 1 + ε ) i = 1 m I ¯ i β u ( t i ) ( 1 + ε ) λ f ¯ q β u 0 ω G ( t , s ) q ( s ) d s + B ( 1 + ε ) u i = 1 m I ¯ i β ( 1 + ε ) ( λ f ¯ q β + B i = 1 m I ¯ i β ) u u .

From Lemma 2.4 it follows that Φ has a fixed point u K ( Ω ¯ β Ω α ) . Furthermore, α u β and u ( t ) δ α > 0 , which means that u ( t ) is a positive solution of Eq. (1.1). The proof is complete. □

In the next theorem, we make use of the eigenvalue λ 1 and the corresponding eigenfunction ϕ introduced in Lemma 2.1.

Theorem 3.2Assume that there exist positive constantsα, βsuch that f γ α 0 , f γ β 0 , I i α 0 , I i β 0 and

0 < λ ( λ 1 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s δ i = 1 m I i α ϕ ( t i ) δ f γ α 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s , δ λ 1 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s δ i = 1 m I ¯ i β ϕ ( t i ) δ f ¯ γ β 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s ) , (3.6)

here γ 1 onJ. Then (1.1) has at least one positive solutionusuch that min { α , β } u max { α , β } .

Proof Obviously, α β , put α = min { α , β } , β = max { α , β } . Define the open sets

Ω α = { u C ( J ) : u < α } , Ω β = { u C ( J ) : u < β } .

At first, we show that Φ : K ( Ω ¯ β Ω α ) K . For any u K ( Ω ¯ β Ω α ) , from ( G 2 ), we have

0 < ( Φ u ) ( t ) B ( λ 0 ω f ( s , u ( s ) ) d s + i = 1 m I i ( u ( t i ) ) ) < .

On the other hand,

( Φ u ) ( t ) A ( λ 0 ω f ( s , u ( s ) ) d s + i = 1 m I i ( u ( t i ) ) ) A B Φ u .

It is easy to check that Φ : K ( Ω ¯ β Ω α ) K is completely continuous.

Next, we show that

μ Φ u u , u K Ω β  and  0 < μ 1 . (3.7)

If not, there exist μ 0 ( 0 , 1 ] and u 0 K Ω β such that μ 0 Φ u 0 = u 0 . Hence,

{ ( p ( t ) u 0 ( t ) ) + q ( t ) u 0 ( t ) = μ 0 λ f ( t , u 0 ( t ) ) , t J , Δ ( u 0 [ 1 ] ( t k ) ) = μ 0 I k ( u 0 ( t k ) ) , k = 1 , , m , u 0 ( 0 ) = u 0 ( ω ) , u 0 [ 1 ] ( 0 ) = u 0 [ 1 ] ( ω ) . (3.8)

Multiplying the first equation of (3.8) by ϕ and integrating from 0 to ω, we obtain that

0 ω ( p ( t ) u 0 ( t ) ) ϕ ( t ) d t + 0 ω q ( t ) u 0 ( t ) ϕ ( t ) d t = μ 0 λ 0 ω f ( s , u 0 ( s ) ) ϕ ( s ) d s . (3.9)

One can find that

0 ω ( p ( t ) u 0 ( t ) ) ϕ ( t ) d t = μ 0 i = 1 m I i ( u 0 ( t i ) ) ϕ ( t i ) + 0 ω ( q ( t ) λ 1 ) ϕ ( t ) u 0 ( t ) d t . (3.10)

Substituting (3.10) into (3.9), we get

μ 0 i = 1 m I i ( u 0 ( t i ) ) ϕ ( t i ) + λ 1 0 ω ϕ ( t ) u 0 ( t ) d t = μ 0 λ 0 ω f ( t , u 0 ( t ) ) ϕ ( t ) d t .

Noting that δ u 0 u 0 u 0 , therefore,

u 0 i = 1 m I ¯ i β ϕ ( t i ) + λ 1 δ u 0 0 ω ϕ ( t ) d t λ f ¯ γ β 0 ω ϕ ( t ) d t u 0 ,

which implies that

λ δ λ 1 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s i = 1 m I ¯ i β ϕ ( t i ) f ¯ γ β 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s ,

a contradiction.

Finally, we show that

inf u K Ω α Φ u > 0 , μ Φ u u , u K Ω α  and  μ 1 .

Since f ( t , u ) and I i ( u ) are negative for u [ δ α , α ] and t J , the condition (3.6) implies that f γ α > 0 . Hence, 0 ω f ( s , u ( s ) ) d s > 0 for u K Ω α and for any u K Ω α ,

( Φ u ) ( t ) = λ 0 ω G ( t , s ) f ( s , u ( s ) ) d s + i = 1 m G ( t , t i ) I i ( u ( t i ) ) A λ 0 ω f ( s , u ( s ) ) d s > 0 .

Suppose that there exist μ 0 1 and u 0 K Ω α such that μ 0 Φ u 0 = u 0 , that is,

{ ( p ( t ) u 0 ( t ) ) + q ( t ) u 0 ( t ) = μ 0 λ f ( t , u 0 ( t ) ) , t J , Δ ( u 0 [ 1 ] ( t k ) ) = μ 0 I k ( u 0 ( t k ) ) , k = 1 , , m , u 0 ( 0 ) = u 0 ( ω ) , u 0 [ 1 ] ( 0 ) = u 0 [ 1 ] ( ω ) . (3.11)

Multiplying the first equation of (3.11) by ϕ and integrating from 0 to ω, we obtain that

0 ω ( p ( t ) u 0 ( t ) ) ϕ ( t ) d t + 0 ω q ( t ) u 0 ( t ) ϕ ( t ) d t = μ 0 λ 0 ω f ( s , u 0 ( s ) ) ϕ ( s ) d s . (3.12)

One can get that

0 ω ( p ( t ) u 0 ( t ) ) ϕ ( t ) d t = μ 0 i = 1 m I i ( u 0 ( t i ) ) ϕ ( t i ) + 0 ω ( p ( t ) ϕ ( t ) ) u 0 ( t ) d t = μ 0 i = 1 m I i ( u 0 ( t i ) ) ϕ ( t i ) + 0 ω ( q ( t ) λ 1 ) ϕ ( t ) u 0 ( t ) d t . (3.13)

Substituting (3.13) into (3.12), we get

μ 0 i = 1 m I i ( u 0 ( t i ) ) ϕ ( t i ) + λ 1 0 ω ϕ ( t ) u 0 ( t ) d t = μ 0 λ 0 ω f ( t , u 0 ( t ) ) ϕ ( t ) d t .

Noting that δ u 0 u 0 u 0 , therefore,

δ u 0 i = 1 m I i α ϕ ( t i ) + λ 1 u 0 0 ω ϕ ( t ) d t μ 0 λ 0 ω f ( s , u 0 ( s ) ) d s λ δ f γ α 0 ω u 0 ( s ) ϕ ( s ) d s λ δ f γ α 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s u 0 > 0 .

It is impossible for λ 1 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s δ i = 1 m I i α ϕ ( t i ) 0 . When λ 1 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s δ i = 1 m I i α ϕ ( t i ) > 0 ,

λ < λ 1 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s δ i = 1 m I i α ϕ ( t i ) δ f γ α 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s ,

a contradiction.

From Lemma 2.3 it follows that Φ has a fixed point u K ( Ω ¯ β Ω α ) . Furthermore, α u β and u δ α > 0 , which means that u ( t ) is a positive solution of Eq. (1.1). The proof is complete. □

Corollary 3.1Assume that f γ 0 > 0 , f γ > 0 , I i 0 > 0 , I i > 0 and

0 < λ ( λ 1 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s δ i = 1 m I i 0 ϕ ( t i ) δ f γ 0 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s , δ λ 1 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s i = 1 m I ¯ i ϕ ( t i ) f ¯ γ 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s )

or

0 < λ ( λ 1 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s δ i = 1 m I i ϕ ( t i ) δ f γ 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s , δ λ 1 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s i = 1 m I ¯ i 0 ϕ ( t i ) f ¯ γ 0 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s ) ,

here γ 1 onJ. Then (1.1) has at least one positive solution.

Corollary 3.2Assume that there exists a constantαsuch that f γ ρ > 0 , I i ρ > 0 ( ρ = 0 , αand ∞) and

f ¯ γ α 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s + i = 1 m I ¯ i α ϕ ( t i ) δ 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s < λ 1 < min { δ f γ 0 + δ i = 1 m I i 0 ϕ ( t i ) 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s , δ f γ + δ i = 1 m I i ϕ ( t i ) 0 ω ϕ ( s ) d s } ,

here γ 1 onJ. Then there exists one open interval Θ : 1 Θ such that (1.1) has at least two positive solutions for λ Θ .

Example 1 Consider the equation

{ u ( t ) + 3 u ( t ) = λ f ( t , u ) , t J , t t i , Δ u ( t ) = I i ( u ( t i ) ) , i = 1 , 2 , , m , u ( 0 ) = u ( 1 ) , u ( 0 ) = u ( 1 ) , (3.14)

where p ( t ) = 1 , q ( t ) = 3 and

f ( t , u ) = { u ρ , u 1 , 1 , u > 1 , I i ( u ) = { 3 , u 1 , 3 u , u > 1 ,

here ρ > 1 and i = 1 , 2 , , m . Since I i 0 = + , I ¯ i = 0 and f ¯ q = 0 , by Theorem 3.1, (3.14) has at least one positive solution for any λ > 0 .

Example 2 Consider the equation

{ u ( t ) + 20 u ( t ) = λ f ( t , u ) , t J , t t i , Δ u ( t i ) = I i ( u ( t i ) ) , i = 1 , 2 , , m , u ( 0 ) = u ( 1 ) , u ( 0 ) = u ( 1 ) , (3.15)

where f ( t , u ) = e u 10 , I i ( u ) = u 2 100 ( m + i ) .

It is well known that, for the problem consisting of the equation u = λ u , t ( 0 , 1 ) , and the boundary condition

u ( 0 ) = u ( 1 ) , u ( 0 ) = u ( 1 ) , (3.16)

the first eigenvalue is 0 (see, for example, [[19], p.428]). It follows that the first eigenvalue is λ 1 = 20 for the problem consisting of the equation

u + 20 u = λ u , t ( 0 , 1 ) ,

and the boundary condition (3.16). Meanwhile, we can obtain the positive eigenfunction ϕ ( t ) 1 corresponding to λ 1 . It is also easy to check that δ = 2 e 1 + e , f γ 0 = + , f γ = 0 and I i = + (here γ = 1 ). So, the right-hand side of the inequality in Corollary 3.2 is obviously satisfied. Considering the monotonicity of f ( t , u ) and I i , we can choose a sufficiently small positive constant α such that the left-hand side of the inequality is true. Therefore, by a direct application of Corollary 3.2, there exists one open interval Θ : 1 Θ such that (3.15) has at least two positive solutions for λ Θ .

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors’ contributions

All authors contributed equally to the manuscript and read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank anonymous referees very much for helpful comments and suggestions which led to the improvement of presentation and quality of work. This research was partially supported by the NNSF of China (No. 11001274, 11171085) and the Postdoctoral Science Foundation of Central South University and China (No. 2011M501280).

References

  1. Atici, FM, Guseinov, GS: On the existence of positive solutions for nonlinear differential equations with periodic boundary conditions. J. Comput. Appl. Math.. 132, 341–356 (2001). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  2. Graef, JR, Kong, L: Existence results for nonlinear periodic boundary value problems. Proc. Edinb. Math. Soc.. 52, 79–95 (2009). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  3. He, TS, Yang, F, Chen, C, Peng, S: Existence and multiplicity of positive solutions for nonlinear boundary value problems with a parameter. Comput. Math. Appl.. 61, 3355–3363 (2011). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  4. Hao, X, Liu, L, Wu, Y: Existence and multiplicity results for nonlinear periodic boundary value problems. Nonlinear Anal.. 72, 3635–3642 (2010). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  5. Torres, PJ: Existence of one-signed periodic solutions of some second-order differential equations via a Krasnosel’skii fixed point theorem. J. Differ. Equ.. 190, 643–662 (2003). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  6. Graef, GR, Kong, L, Wang, H: Existence, multiplicity and dependence on a parameter for a periodic boundary value problem. J. Differ. Equ.. 245, 1185–1197 (2008). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  7. Rachunkova, I: Existence of two positive solutions of a singular nonlinear periodic boundary value problem. J. Comput. Appl. Math.. 113, 24–34 (2000). PubMed Abstract OpenURL

  8. Huseynov, A: On the sign of Green’s function for an impulsive differential equation with periodic boundary conditions. Appl. Math. Comput.. 208, 197–205 (2009). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  9. Huseynov, A: Positive solutions of a nonlinear impulsive equation with periodic boundary conditions. Appl. Math. Comput.. 217, 247–259 (2010). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  10. Hristova, SG, Bainov, DD: Monotone-iterative techniques of V. Lakshmikantham for a boundary value problem for systems of impulsive differential-difference equation. J. Math. Anal. Appl.. 197, 1–13 (1996). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  11. Lin, X, Jiang, DQ: Multiple positive solutions of Dirichlet boundary value problems for second order impulsive differential equations. J. Math. Anal. Appl.. 321, 501–514 (2006). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  12. Ding, W, Han, M: Periodic boundary value problems for second order impulsive differential equations. Appl. Math. Comput.. 216, 284–302 (1997)

  13. Agarwal, RP, O’Regan, D: Multiple nonnegative solutions for second order impulsive differential equations. Appl. Math. Comput.. 114, 51–59 (2000). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  14. Lakshmikntham, V, Bainov, DD, Simeonov, PS: Theory of Impulsive Differential Equations, World Scientific, Singapore (1989)

  15. Feng, M, Xie, D: Multiple positive solutions of multi-point boundary value problem for second-order impulsive differential equations. J. Comput. Appl. Math.. 223, 438–448 (2009). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  16. Liu, LS, Hu, L, Wu, Y: Positive solutions of two-point boundary value problems for systems of nonlinear second-order singular and impulsive differential equations. Nonlinear Anal.. 69, 3774–3789 (2008). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  17. Li, JL, Shen, J: Periodic boundary value problems for second order differential equations with impulses. Nonlinear Stud.. 12, 391–400 (2005)

  18. Guo, DJ, Lakshmikantham, V: Nonlinear Problem in Abstract Cones, Academic Press, New York (1988)

  19. Stakgold, I: Green’s Functions and Boundary-Value Problems, Wiley, New York (1979).