Fractional Optimal Control Problem of Parabolic Bilinear Systems with Bounded Controls

*Abella El Kabouss and El Hassan Zerrik*

#### **Abstract**

The purpose of this paper is to study a fractional distributed optimal control for a class of infinite-dimensional parabolic bilinear systems evolving on a spatial domain Ω by distributed controls depending on the control operator. Using the Fréchet differentiability, we prove the existence of an optimal control depending on both time and space, that minimizes a quadratic functional which leads into account, the deviation between the desired state and the reached one. Then, we show characterizations of an optimal distributed control for different admissible controls set. Moreover, we developed an algorithm and give simulations that successfully illustrate the theoretically obtained results.

**Keywords:** infinite-dimensional system, parabolic bilinear systems, fractional derivative, optimal control

#### **1. Introduction**

In engineering and mathematics, control theory deals with the behavior of dynamical systems. The desired output of a system is called the reference. When one or more output variables of a system need to follow a certain reference over time, a controller manipulates the inputs to a system to obtain the desired effect on the output of the system, As an example: the control of vibration which is becoming more and more important for many industries. This generally has to be achieved without additional cost, and thus, detailed knowledge of structural dynamics is required together with familiarity of standard vibration control techniques. We also cited the following works on what concerns the vibration control [1–3].

The bilinear system involves the product of state and control, linear in state and linear in control but not jointly linear in state and control. The interest of these systems lies in the fact that many natural and industrial processes have intrinsically bilinear structures, This is the case of furnaces for heating metal slabs or heat exchangers, aircraft and robot arms, or energy transmission lines.

Let Ω be an open bounded domain of ℛ*<sup>n</sup>*, *n* ≥1, with regular boundary ∂Ω, and consider a bilinear system described by the equation (see [4])

$$\begin{cases} \frac{\partial \mathbf{z}}{\partial t}(\mathbf{x},t) = A\mathbf{z}(\mathbf{x},t) + u(\mathbf{x},t)B\mathbf{z}(\mathbf{x},t) & \mathbf{Q} = \boldsymbol{\Omega} \times ]\mathbf{0}, T[,\\\mathbf{z}(\mathbf{x},t) = \mathbf{0} & \Gamma = \partial \boldsymbol{\Omega} \times ]\mathbf{0}, T[, \mathbf{z}(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{0}) = \mathbf{z}\_0(\mathbf{x})\boldsymbol{\Omega}, \end{cases} \tag{1}$$

where, *<sup>A</sup>* <sup>¼</sup> <sup>Δ</sup> of the domain <sup>D</sup>ð Þ¼ *<sup>A</sup> <sup>H</sup>*<sup>1</sup> <sup>0</sup>ð Þ <sup>Ω</sup> <sup>∩</sup> *<sup>H</sup>*<sup>2</sup> ð Þ Ω , *u* is a control assumed to belong to the set of controls

$$U = \left\{ u \in L^2(\mathbb{Q})/-\,\,\, m \le u \le M \right\} (with \quad M \ge m > 0). \tag{2}$$

*B* is a bounded control operator on *L*<sup>2</sup> ð Þ <sup>Ω</sup> . For *<sup>z</sup>*<sup>0</sup> <sup>∈</sup> *<sup>H</sup>*<sup>1</sup> <sup>0</sup>ð Þ Ω and *u*∈ *U*, system (2) has a unique solution *<sup>z</sup>*∈*<sup>W</sup>* <sup>¼</sup> *<sup>z</sup>*∈*L*<sup>2</sup> 0, *<sup>T</sup>*; *<sup>H</sup>*<sup>1</sup> <sup>0</sup>ð Þ <sup>Ω</sup> <sup>j</sup> *∂z <sup>∂</sup><sup>t</sup>* <sup>∈</sup>*L*<sup>2</sup> 0, *<sup>T</sup>*; *<sup>L</sup>*<sup>2</sup> ð Þ <sup>Ω</sup> .

Let us consider the fractional quadratic control problem:

$$J(\mathfrak{u}^\*) = \min\_{\mathfrak{u} \in U} J(\mathfrak{u}), \tag{3}$$

with

$$J(\boldsymbol{\mu}) = \frac{1}{2} \left\| \boldsymbol{D}\_{\boldsymbol{x}}^{\boldsymbol{a}} \mathbf{z} - \boldsymbol{z}\_{d} \right\|\_{L^{2}\left(0, T; L^{2}(\Omega)\right)}^{2} + \frac{\beta}{2} \left\| \boldsymbol{u} \right\|\_{L^{2}\left(0, T; L^{2}(\Omega)\right)}^{2},\tag{4}$$

where, *D<sup>α</sup> <sup>x</sup>* denotes the fractional spacial derivative of order *α* ∈�0, 1½, *z* is a solution of system (2), *zd* ∈*L*<sup>2</sup> ð Þ Ω is a desired derivative and *β* is a positive constant.

Ractional calculus has emerged as a powerful and efficient mathematical instrument during the past six decades, mainly due to its demonstrated applications in numerous, seemingly diverse, and widespread fields of science and engineering. As an example, The theory of fractional differential equations has received much attention, as they are important for describing the natural models as in diffusion processes, stochastic processes, economics, and hydrology. Moreover, the fractional optimal control has been studied in many works, such as Frederico et al. have studied a fractional optimal control problem in Caputo's sense. Agrawal [5] have presented an extended approach to a class of distributed system whose dynamics are defined in the sense of Caputo. In [6], they considered the fractional optimal control problem for variable inequalities. In [7], Bahaa studied the fractional optimal control problem for different systems. When *α* ¼ 0, problem (2) was considered in many works.: Bradley and Lenhart [8] have shown the existence of such an optimal control and given characterization of such control using necessary optimality conditions. Then, an optimal distributed control for a Kirchhoff plate equation acting on the state position. Also, they collaborated with Yong [9] on the same equation by temporal controls acting on the speed state and with special optimal control in Bradley and Lenhart [10]. For parabolic systems, we have mentioned the work in [11], which established an optimal control of a parabolic equation, modeling one-dimensional fluid through a soil-packed tube in which a contaminant is initially distributed, taking a functional criterion as a combination of the final amount of contaminant and the energy. In the same way, Addou and Benbrik [12] studied a fourth-order parabolic distributed parameter system and derived the existence and uniqueness of temporal bilinear optimal control. Then, Zerrik and El Kabouss [13] extended this problem to a more general class of systems governed by a fourth-order parabolic operator and excited by bounded and unbounded controls. A wide literature has also been considered for infinite hyperbolic systems, especially, by Liang [14] who analyzed an optimal control problem for a wave equation with internal bilinear control, and has given an optimal control that allows minimizing a functional cost which contains the difference between the solution's position and a desired one. In the case of boundary bilinear controls: Lenhart and Wilson [15] have studied the problem of controlling the solution of the heat equation with the convective boundary condition, such as, that the bilinear control

#### *Fractional Optimal Control Problem of Parabolic Bilinear Systems with Bounded Controls DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.102070*

represents a heat transfer coefficient. The used approach consists in finding a unique optimal control in terms of the solution of an optimality system.

For a system evolving on a spatial domain Ω, regional controllability concerns the extension of the classical notion of controllability (controllability on the whole domain Ω) to the controllability only on a subregion *ω* of Ω. This notion is interesting for many reasons: it is close to real applications. For instance, the physical problem that concerns a tunnel furnace where one has to maintain a prescribed temperature only in a subregion of the furnace and may be of great help for systems that are non-controllable on the whole domain but controllable on some subregions, and controlling a system on a subregion *ω*⊂ Ω is cheaper than controlling it in the whole domain. Zerrik and El Kabouss [16] have studied a regional optimal bilinear control of wave equation, taking a functional cost as the sum of the energy and the difference between the solution of the wave equation and the desired state for bounded and unbounded controls. Recently, Zerrik and El Kabouss [17] established an output optimal control problem with a bounded control set. In other words, they considered a problem of controlling only an output of the solution of a parabolic system. In [18], they have studied an optimal control problem for the heat equation in order to give control that leads to a state as the class as possible to the desired state, only on a subregion of the domain of evolution, under constrained controls sets.

In this paper, we consider 0 <*α* <1, which is very important for modeling many real processes. We study a fractional optimal control problem of parabolic bilinear systems. Using the Frechet differentiability, we prove the existence and give the expression of an optimal control solution of (2). Then we discuss particular cases of admissible controls set.

#### **2. Existence of an optimal control**

This section discusses the existence of a solution of the problem (2). First, let us recall the notion of the weak solution of the system (2). Definition 1.1.

Let *<sup>T</sup>* <sup>&</sup>gt;0, a continuous function *<sup>z</sup>*<sup>∈</sup> ½ �! 0, *<sup>T</sup> <sup>L</sup>*<sup>2</sup> ð Þ Ω is a weak solution of system (3) on 0, ½ � *T* , if it satisfies the following integral equation

$$\mathbf{z}\_{\mathfrak{u}}(t) = \mathbf{S}(t)\mathbf{z}\_{0} + \int\_{0}^{T} \mathbf{S}(t-s)\boldsymbol{u}(.,s)\mathbf{z}(s)ds, \quad \text{for all} \quad t \in [0, T] \tag{5}$$

where *S t*ð Þ denotes the *<sup>C</sup>*<sup>0</sup> semi-group generated by *<sup>A</sup>* in *<sup>L</sup>*<sup>2</sup> ð Þ Ω .

For fractional Riemann Louiville derivatives, we recall the following definition. Definition 1.2.

Let 0 <*α*< 1 and *T* >0, the fractional spatial Riemann Liouville derivatives of order *α* is defined by:

$$D^a\_\times : H^1\_0(\mathfrak{Q}) \to L^2(\mathfrak{Q}) \tag{6}$$

$$z \to D\_x^a z = \frac{d}{d\mathfrak{x}} I\_0^{1-a} z,\tag{7}$$

where *I* <sup>1</sup>�*<sup>α</sup>* <sup>0</sup> is the Riemann-Liouville integral of 1ð Þ � *<sup>α</sup>* order defined by:

$$I\_0^{1-a}z(\mathbf{x},t) = \frac{1}{\Gamma(1-a)} \int\_0^\infty (\boldsymbol{x}-\boldsymbol{\tau})^{-a} \boldsymbol{z}(\boldsymbol{\tau},t)d\boldsymbol{\tau} \tag{8}$$

with <sup>Γ</sup>ð Þ¼ <sup>1</sup> � *<sup>α</sup>* <sup>Ð</sup> <sup>þ</sup><sup>∞</sup> <sup>0</sup> *<sup>τ</sup>*�*<sup>α</sup>e*�*<sup>τ</sup> dτ:*

In the following, we show the existence of optimal control, solution of problem (3). Theorem 1.3.

Problem (3) has at least one solution.

**Proof:** For *u*∈ *U*, the associated solution of system (3) is one of the equation

$$\mathbf{z}\_{\mathfrak{u}}(\mathbf{x},t) = \mathbf{S}(t)\mathbf{z}\_{0}(\mathbf{x}) + \int\_{0}^{T} \mathbf{S}(t-s)\boldsymbol{u}(\mathbf{x},s)\mathbf{B}\mathbf{z}(\mathbf{x},s)ds.\tag{9}$$

Using the bound of the semi-group ð Þ *S t*ð Þ *<sup>t</sup>*≥<sup>0</sup> over 0, ½ � *T* , we have

$$\|\|x\_u(t)\|\|\_{L^2(\Omega)} \le C \|\|x\_0\|\|\_{L^2(\Omega)} + C \|\|B\|\|\_{L^2(\Omega)} \int\_0^T \|\|u(s)x(s)\|\|\_{L^2(\Omega)} ds.\tag{10}$$

It follows

$$\|\|z\_u(t)\|\|\_{L^2(\Omega)} \le C \|z\_0\|\_{L^2(\Omega)} + CM \|B\|\_{L^2(\Omega)} \int\_0^T \|z(s)\|\_{L^2(\Omega)} ds.$$

Using the Gronwal inequality, we get

$$\|\|z\_u(t)\|\|\_{L^2(\Omega)} \le \mathcal{C}\_1 \exp\left(\mathbf{CM} \|\|B\|\|\_{L^2(\Omega)} T\right). \tag{11}$$

with *C*<sup>1</sup> ¼ *C*∥*z*0∥*L*2ð Þ <sup>Ω</sup> .

On the other hand, the set f g *J u*ð Þj*u* ∈ *U* is non-empty and is bounded from below by 0.

Let ð Þ *uk <sup>k</sup>*<sup>∈</sup> be a minimizing sequence in *U* such that lim *k*!∞ *J u*ð Þ¼ *<sup>k</sup>* inf *h*∈ *U J h*ð Þ*:*.

Then ð Þ *J u*ð Þ*<sup>k</sup> <sup>k</sup>*<sup>∈</sup> is bounded. Since <sup>∥</sup>*uk*∥*L*<sup>2</sup> 0,*T*; *<sup>L</sup>*<sup>2</sup> ð Þ ð Þ <sup>Ω</sup> <sup>≤</sup> <sup>2</sup> *<sup>β</sup> J u*ð Þ*<sup>k</sup>* thus, ð Þ *uk <sup>k</sup>*<sup>∈</sup> is bounded.

Thus, there exists a subsequence still denoted ð Þ *uk <sup>k</sup>*<sup>∈</sup> that weakly converges to a limit *u*<sup>∗</sup> ∈*L*<sup>2</sup> 0, *T*; *L*<sup>2</sup> ð Þ <sup>Ω</sup> � �.

Since *U* is closed and convex, *u*<sup>∗</sup> ∈ *U*.

Let *zuk* , *zu*<sup>∗</sup> be the corresponding solutions of system (2) to *uk* and *u*<sup>∗</sup> , we have

$$\mathbf{z}\_{\mathfrak{u}\_{k}}(\mathfrak{t}) - \mathbf{z}\_{\mathfrak{u}^{\ast}}(\mathfrak{t}) = \int\_{0}^{T} \mathbf{S}(\mathfrak{t} - \mathfrak{s}) [\mathfrak{u}\_{k}(\mathfrak{s}) \mathbf{B} \mathbf{z}\_{\mathfrak{u}^{\ast}}(\mathfrak{s}) - \mathfrak{u}^{\ast}(\mathfrak{s}) \mathbf{B} \mathbf{z}\_{\mathfrak{u}^{\ast}}(\mathfrak{s})] d\mathfrak{s},\tag{12}$$

$$=\int\_{0}^{T} \mathbf{S}(t-s) \left[ (\boldsymbol{u}\_{k} - \boldsymbol{u}^{\*})(\boldsymbol{s}) \mathbf{B} \mathbf{z}\_{\boldsymbol{u}^{\*}}(\boldsymbol{s}) - \boldsymbol{u}\_{k}(\boldsymbol{s}) \left( \mathbf{B} \mathbf{z}\_{\boldsymbol{u}^{\*}} - \mathbf{B} \mathbf{z}\_{\boldsymbol{u}\_{k}} \right)(\boldsymbol{s}) \right] d\boldsymbol{s},\tag{13}$$

This implies,

$$|z\_{u\_k} - z\_{u^\*}| \le |\int\_0^T S(t - s)(u\_k - u^\*)(s)Bz\_{u^\*}(s)ds|e^{\int\_0^t \|S(t - s)\| \|u\_k\| \|B\| ds} \tag{14}$$

Using the boudness of semigroup we get

$$|z\_{u\_k} - z\_{u^\*}| \le C \left| \int\_0^T \mathcal{S}(t - s)(u\_k - u^\*) (s) B z\_{u^\*} (s) ds \right|. \tag{15}$$

*Fractional Optimal Control Problem of Parabolic Bilinear Systems with Bounded Controls DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.102070*

By theorem 3.9. in [4] the weak convergence *uk \* <sup>u</sup>*<sup>∗</sup> gives *ukBzu*<sup>∗</sup> ð Þ*: \* <sup>u</sup>*<sup>∗</sup> *Bzu*<sup>∗</sup> ð Þ*:* weakly in *<sup>L</sup>*<sup>2</sup> 0, *<sup>T</sup>*; *<sup>L</sup>*<sup>2</sup> ð Þ <sup>Ω</sup> � �*:*.

Since ð Þ *S t*ð Þ *<sup>t</sup>*≥<sup>0</sup> is compact, we have

$$\lim\_{n \to \infty} \sup\_{0 \le t \le T} |\mathbb{S}(t-s)(u\_k(s) - u^\*(s))Bz(s)ds| = 0\tag{16}$$

It follows that *zuk* ! *<sup>z</sup>* <sup>∗</sup> strongly in *<sup>L</sup>*<sup>2</sup> 0, *<sup>T</sup>*; *<sup>L</sup>*<sup>2</sup> ð Þ <sup>Ω</sup> � �*:*. Since for *<sup>α</sup>* <sup>∈</sup>�0, 1½, *<sup>D</sup><sup>α</sup> <sup>x</sup>* is continuous from *H*<sup>1</sup> <sup>0</sup>ð Þ! <sup>Ω</sup> *<sup>L</sup>*<sup>2</sup> ð Þ Ω , then

$$\lim\_{k \to \infty} \int\_0^T \|D\_{\mathbf{x}}^a \mathbf{z}\_{u\_k}(t) - \mathbf{z}\_d\|\_{L^2(\Omega)} dt = \int\_0^T \|D\_{\mathbf{x}}^a \mathbf{z}\_{u^\*}(t) - \mathbf{z}\_d\|\_{L^2(\Omega)} dt.$$

and as *J* is lower, semi-continuous with respect to weak convergence, we have

$$J(\boldsymbol{u}^\*) \le \lim\_{k \to \infty} \inf J(\boldsymbol{u}\_k),\tag{17}$$

leading to *J u*<sup>∗</sup> ð Þ¼ inf *u*∈ *U J u*ð Þ*<sup>k</sup> :*.

Remark 1.

If we consider the system (2) with a source *termf* ∈*L*<sup>2</sup> 0, *T*; *L*<sup>2</sup> ð Þ <sup>Ω</sup> � �

$$\frac{\partial \mathbf{z}}{\partial t} = A\mathbf{z} + \boldsymbol{\mu}(t)\mathbf{B}\mathbf{z} + \boldsymbol{f} \text{ on } \mathbf{Q} \tag{18}$$

the same well-posedness and regularity results as hold, but the constant *C*<sup>1</sup> in Eq. (7) takes the form as follows:

$$\mathbf{C}\_1 = \mathbf{C} \left( \|\mathbf{z}\_0\|\_{L^2(\mathfrak{\Omega})} + \|f\|\_{L^2\left(\mathbf{0}, T; L^2(\mathfrak{\Omega})\right)} \right) \cdot \mathbf{1}$$

#### **3. Characterization**

We now derive necessary conditions that an optimal control must satisfy. To derive these necessary conditions, we differentiate the cost functional. The differentiation result provides a characterization of the unique optimal control in terms of the optimality system.

In the next, we consider problem (2) and we discuses special cases of the set of admissible controls *U*.

Proposition 1.4.

Let consider the adjoint system given by:

$$\int \frac{\partial p}{\partial t}(\mathbf{x},t) = -A^\* \left[ p(\mathbf{x},t) + B^\* \left( \imath p \right)(\mathbf{x},t) + \left( D\_\mathbf{x}^a \right)^\* \mathbf{z}\_d(\mathbf{x}) - \left( D\_\mathbf{x}^a \right)^\* D\_\mathbf{x}^a \mathbf{z}(\mathbf{x},t) \right] \qquad \mathbf{Q}\_\mathbf{x}$$

$$\begin{cases} p(\mathbf{x},t) = \mathbf{0} & \Gamma, \\\\ p(\mathbf{x},T) = \mathbf{0} & \mathbf{0} \end{cases} \tag{2}$$

$$\chi(\mathbf{x},T) = \mathbf{0} \tag{2.1}$$

$$\bf{(19)}$$

where *zu* solution of system (2) and *D<sup>α</sup> x* � � <sup>∗</sup> is the adjoint operator of *D<sup>α</sup> x*. Then the Frechet derivative of *J* at *u* ∈ *U* is given by:

$$J'(u)(t) = p(t)Bz\_u(t) + \epsilon u(t). \tag{20}$$

Proof:

The system (12) has a weak solution *p* ∈*L*<sup>2</sup> *O*, *T*; *L*<sup>2</sup> ð Þ <sup>Ω</sup> � � see [8], that satisfies:

$$p(t) = \int\_{t}^{T} \mathcal{S}^\*(T - s) \left[ \mathcal{B}^\* \left( \iota p \right)(s) + \left( D\_x^a \right)^\* z\_d - \left( D\_x^a \right)^\* D\_x^a z\_u(s) \right] ds,\tag{21}$$

where *<sup>S</sup>* <sup>∗</sup> ð Þ ð Þ*<sup>t</sup> <sup>t</sup>*≥<sup>0</sup> denotes the C0 semi-group of generator �*A*<sup>∗</sup> , and *<sup>B</sup>*<sup>∗</sup> the adjoint operator of *B*.

Let consider the following system:

$$\begin{cases} \frac{\partial \mathbf{y}}{\partial t}(\mathbf{x},t) = A\mathbf{y}(\mathbf{x},t) + \mathbf{u}(\mathbf{x},t)B\mathbf{y}(\mathbf{x},t) + h(\mathbf{x},t)\mathbf{B}\mathbf{z}\_u(\mathbf{x},t) & \quad \mathbf{Q}, \\ \mathbf{y}(\mathbf{x},t) = \mathbf{0} & \quad \Gamma, \\ \mathbf{y}(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{0}) = \mathbf{0} & \quad \mathbf{Q}, \end{cases} \tag{22}$$

Let show that the mapping <sup>Ψ</sup> : *<sup>u</sup>* ! *<sup>z</sup>* from *<sup>U</sup>* ! *<sup>L</sup>*<sup>2</sup> 0, *<sup>T</sup>*; *<sup>L</sup>*<sup>2</sup> ð Þ <sup>Ω</sup> � � is Frechet differentiable, and *y* ¼ Ψ<sup>0</sup> ð Þ *u :h* is solution of system (15).

The operator *L* : *h* ! *y* from *U* to *W* is linear.

Using remark (1) we have

$$\|\|\mathcal{Y}\|\|\_{L^{2}\left(0,T;L^{2}(\mathfrak{Q})\right)} \leq C \|\|h\mathcal{B}\mathbf{z}\_{\mathfrak{u}}\|\|\_{L^{2}\left(0,T;L^{2}(\mathfrak{Q})\right)} \leq C\_{3} \|\|\mathbf{z}\_{\mathfrak{u}}\|\|\_{L^{2}\left(0,T;L^{2}(\mathfrak{Q})\right)}.$$

It follows that *L* is continuous.

Now to show that Ψ is Frechet differentiable, it suffices to prove that

$$\lim\_{\|h\|\_{U}\to 0} \frac{\|\Psi(u+h) - \Psi(u) - L(h)\|\_{L^2\left(0, T; L^2(\Omega)\right)}}{\|h\|\_{L^2\left(0, T; L^2(\Omega)\right)}} = \mathbf{0}.$$

Setting *zh* ¼ Θð Þ *u* þ *h* , *ψ* ¼ *zh* � *zu:* and Φ ¼ *ψ* � *y*, then *ψ* and Φ are solutions of the following systems

$$\begin{cases} \frac{\partial \boldsymbol{\nu}}{\partial t}(\mathbf{x}, t) = A\boldsymbol{\nu}(\mathbf{x}, t) + \boldsymbol{u}(\mathbf{x}, t)B\boldsymbol{\nu}(\mathbf{x}, t) + h(\mathbf{x}, t)B\mathbf{z}\_h(\mathbf{x}, t) & \quad \text{Q}, \\ \boldsymbol{\nu} = \mathbf{0} & \quad \Gamma, \\ \boldsymbol{\nu}(\mathbf{x}, 0) = \mathbf{0} & \quad \text{Q}, \end{cases} \tag{23}$$

and

$$\begin{cases} \frac{\partial \Phi}{\partial t}(\mathbf{x},t) = A \Phi(\mathbf{x},t)u(\mathbf{x},t)B\Phi(\mathbf{x},t) + h(\mathbf{x},t)B\eta(\mathbf{x},t) & \mathbf{Q}, \\ \Phi(\mathbf{x},t) = \mathbf{0} & \Gamma, \\ \Phi(\mathbf{x},0) = \mathbf{0} & \Omega, \end{cases} \tag{24}$$

It follows that

$$\|\|\varphi\|\|\_{L^{2}\left(0,T;H^{1}(\Omega)\right)} \leq C \|h\|\_{L^{2}\left(0,T;L^{2}(\Omega)\right)}.$$

and

$$\|\|\Phi\|\|\_{L^{2}\left(0,T;H^{1}(\mathfrak{Q})\right)} \le \|\|hB\psi\|\|\_{L^{2}\left(\Gamma\right)} \le C\|\|h\|\|\_{U} \|\|\psi\|\|\_{L^{2}\left(0,T;H^{1}(\mathfrak{Q})\right)}.$$

*Fractional Optimal Control Problem of Parabolic Bilinear Systems with Bounded Controls DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.102070*

Then <sup>∥</sup>Φ∥*L*<sup>2</sup> 0,*T*; *<sup>H</sup>*<sup>1</sup> ð Þ ð Þ <sup>Ω</sup> <sup>≤</sup>*C*∥*h*∥<sup>2</sup> *U:*

It means that

$$\|\Theta(u+h) - \Theta(u) - \Theta'(u).h\|\_{L^2\left(0,T;H^1(\Omega)\right)} \le C\|h\|\_{U}^2.$$

We conclude that Θ is Fréchet differentiable. Let consider *u*, *u* þ *h*∈ *U*, then

$$\frac{1}{2} \left\| D\_{\mathbf{x}}^{a} \mathbf{z}\_{u} - \mathbf{z}\_{d} \right\|\_{L^{2} \left( 0, T; L^{2} (\Omega) \right)}^{2} - \frac{1}{2} \left\| D\_{\mathbf{x}}^{a} \mathbf{z}\_{u+h} - \mathbf{z}\_{d} \right\|\_{L^{2} \left( 0, T; L^{2} (\Omega) \right)}^{2} \tag{25}$$

$$I = \int\_0^T \left< D\_x^a(z\_{u+h}(t) - z\_u(t)), D\_x^a(z\_{u+h}(t) - z\_u(t)) - 2z\_d >\_{L^2(\Omega)} dt \right> \tag{26}$$

$$=\int\_{0}^{T} \left< \mathbf{z}\_{\mathbf{u}+h}(\mathbf{t}) - \mathbf{z}\_{\mathbf{u}}(\mathbf{t}), \left(D\_{\mathbf{x}}^{a}\right)^{\*}D\_{\mathbf{x}}^{a}(\mathbf{z}\_{\mathbf{u}+h}(\mathbf{t}) - \mathbf{z}\_{\mathbf{u}}(\mathbf{t})) - \mathbf{2}\left(D\_{\mathbf{x}}^{a}\right)^{\*}\mathbf{z}\_{d} \rhd\_{L^{2}(\Omega)}d\mathbf{t}\tag{27}$$

$$\mathbf{x} = \int\_{0}^{T} \mathbf{<} \mathbf{y}\_{h}(\mathbf{t}), \left(\mathbf{D}\_{\mathbf{x}}^{a}\right)^{\*} \mathbf{D}\_{\mathbf{x}}^{a} (\mathbf{z}\_{u+h}(\mathbf{t}) - \mathbf{z}\_{u}(\mathbf{t})) - \left(\mathbf{D}\_{\mathbf{x}}^{a}\right)^{\*} \mathbf{z}\_{d} \succsim\_{L^{2}(\Omega)} dt + o \|h\|,\tag{28}$$

and

$$\left(\frac{\beta}{2}\left(\|u+h\|\_{L^2\left(0,T;L^2(\Omega)\right)}^2 - \|u\|\_{L^2\left(0,T;L^2(\Omega)\right)}^2\right)\right) = \beta < u, h >\_{L^2\left(0,T;L^2(\Omega)\right)} + o\|h\|.$$

Then *J* is Fréchet differentiable, and its derivative is given by:

$$\begin{aligned} f'(u).h &= \int\_0^T \left< \mathbf{y}\_h(t), \left( D\_x^a \right)^\* D\_x^a (\mathbf{z}\_{u+h}(t) - \mathbf{z}\_u(t)) - \left( D\_x^a \right)^\* \mathbf{z}\_d >\_{L^2(\Omega)} dt + \beta < u, \\ h &>\_{L^2\left(0, T; L^2(\Omega)\right)} + o||h|| \end{aligned}$$

Using the system (15), we have

$$\left\langle y\_h(t), \left(D\_x^a\right)^\* D\_x^a (\mathbf{z}\_{u+h}(t) - \mathbf{z}\_u(t)) - \left(D\_x^a\right)^\* \mathbf{z}\_d \right\rangle\_{L^2(\Omega)}\tag{29}$$

$$= \left\langle \int\_0^T \mathbf{S}(t-s) (u(s)\mathbf{B}\mathbf{y}(s) + h(s)\mathbf{B}\mathbf{z}(s)) ds, \left(D\_x^a\right)^\* D\_x^a (\mathbf{z}\_{u+h}(t) - \mathbf{z}\_u(t)) - \left(D\_x^a\right)^\* \mathbf{z}\_d \right\rangle\_{L^2(\Omega)}\tag{30}$$

Using the Gronwall lemma, we get

$$\begin{aligned} &\int\_0^T \left< y\_h(t) \left( D\_x^a \right)^\* D\_x^a (z\_{u+h}(t) - z\_u(t)) - \left( D\_x^a \right)^\* z\_d \right>\_{L^2(\Omega)} \\ &= \left< \int\_0^T \int\_s^T S(t-s)(u(s)By(s) + h(s)\mathbf{B}z(s))dt ds, \ \left( D\_x^a \right)^\* \\ &\quad \times D\_x^a (z\_{u+h}(t) - z\_u(t)) - \left( D\_x^a \right)^\* z\_d \right>\_{L^2(\Omega)} \\ &= \left< \int\_0^T (u(s)By(s) + h(s)\mathbf{B}z(s))dt, \int\_s^T S^\* \left(t-s\right) \left( D\_x^a \right)^\* D\_x^a (z\_{u+h}(t) - z\_u(t))dt \right>\_{L^2(\Omega)} \\ &\quad - \left( D\_x^a \right)^\* z\_d \operatorname{d}t \Bigg|\_{L^2(\Omega)} \end{aligned}$$

A variational formulation of system (12) leads to:

$$\int\_{s}^{T} \mathcal{S}^\*(t-s) \left[ \left( D\_{\mathbf{x}}^{a} \right)^\* \mathbf{z}\_d - \left( D\_{\mathbf{x}}^{a} \right)^\* D\_{\mathbf{x}}^{a} \mathbf{z}\_u(s) \right] ds = p(s) - \int\_{s}^{T} \mathcal{S}^\*(T-s) B^\*(up)(t) dt,\tag{31}$$

It means that

$$\begin{aligned} &\int\_0^T \left< \boldsymbol{y}\_h(t), \left( \boldsymbol{D}\_x^a \right)^\* \boldsymbol{D}\_x^a (\boldsymbol{z}\_{u+h}(t) - \boldsymbol{z}\_u(t)) - \left( \boldsymbol{D}\_x^a \right)^\* \boldsymbol{z}\_d \right>\_{L^2(\Omega)} \\ &= \int\_0^T \left< (\boldsymbol{u}(s)\mathcal{B}\boldsymbol{y}(s) + h(s)\mathcal{B}\boldsymbol{z}(s)), \boldsymbol{p}(s) - \int\_s^T \boldsymbol{S}^\*(t-s)\boldsymbol{B}^\*(\boldsymbol{u}\boldsymbol{p})(t)dt, \right>\_{L^2(\Omega)} ds \text{Nonunumber} \end{aligned}$$

Using the Gronwall lemma once more gives

$$\int\_{0}^{T} \left< (u(s)By(s) + h(s)B\mathbf{z}(s)), \int\_{s}^{T} S^\*(t-s)B^\*(up)(s)dt \right>\_{L^2(\Omega)}$$

$$= \int\_{0}^{T} \int\_{0}^{t} \left< (u(s)By(s) + h(s)B\mathbf{z}(s)), S^\*\left(t-s\right)B^\*\left(up\right)(s) \right>\_{L^2(\Omega)} ds dt$$

$$= \int\_{0}^{T} \int\_{0}^{t} \left< S(t-s)(u(s)By(s) + h(s)B\mathbf{z}(s)), B^\*\left(up\right)(s) \right>\_{L^2(\Omega)} ds dt$$

$$= \int\_{0}^{T} \left< \int\_{0}^{t} S(t-s)(u(s)By(s) + h(s)B\mathbf{z}(s))ds, B^\*\left(up\right)(t) \right>\_{L^2(\Omega)} dt$$

$$= \int\_{0}^{T} \left< y(t), B^\*\left(up\right)(t) \right>\_{L^2(\Omega)} dt = \int\_{0}^{T} \left< u(t)By(t), p(t) \right>\_{L^2(\Omega)} dt$$

Then inequality (3) becomes

$$\int\_0^T \langle \boldsymbol{\eta}\_h(t), \left( \boldsymbol{D}\_x^a \right)^\* \boldsymbol{D}\_x^a (\boldsymbol{z}\_{u+h}(t) - \boldsymbol{z}\_u(t)) - \left( \boldsymbol{D}\_x^a \right)^\* \boldsymbol{z}\_d \rangle\_{L^2(\Omega)} = \int\_0^T \langle h(t) \boldsymbol{B} \boldsymbol{z}(t), \boldsymbol{p}(t), \rangle\_{L^2(\Omega)} dt$$

Then the Frechet derivative of *J* is given by:

$$J'(u).h = \int\_0^T \langle h(t), Bz(t)p(t) \rangle\_{L^2(\Omega)} + \beta \langle u(t), h(t) \rangle\_{L^2(\Omega)} dt.$$

The following results characterize and give an expression of an optimal control solution of problem (2) in several cases of admissible controls sets.

Proposition 1.5.

An optimal control solution of problem (2) is given by

$$u^\*(\mathbf{x}, t) = \max\left(m, \min\left(-\frac{1}{\beta}Bx(\mathbf{x}, t)p(\mathbf{x}, t), M\right)\right) \tag{32}$$

Proof:

The Frechet differential of *J* is given by

$$J'(u).h = \int\_0^T \langle h(t)Bz(t), p(t)\rangle\_{L^2(\Omega)} + \beta \langle u(t), h(t)\rangle\_{L^2(\Omega)}dt.$$

*Fractional Optimal Control Problem of Parabolic Bilinear Systems with Bounded Controls DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.102070*

Since *J* achieves its minimum at *u*<sup>∗</sup> , we have

$$0 \le \int\_0^T \langle h(t)Bz(t), p(t)\rangle\_{L^2(\Omega)} + \beta \langle u(t), h(t)\rangle\_{L^2(\Omega)} dt.$$

Taking *<sup>h</sup>* <sup>¼</sup> max *<sup>m</sup>*, min � <sup>1</sup> *<sup>β</sup> Bz x*ð Þ , *t p x*ð , *t*Þ, *M* � � � � � *<sup>u</sup>*<sup>∗</sup> , we show that *h u*<sup>∗</sup> <sup>þ</sup> <sup>1</sup> *<sup>β</sup> Bzp* � � is negative and then

$$\int \max\left(m, \min\left(-\frac{1}{\beta}Bz(\mathbf{x},t)p(\mathbf{x},t), M\right)\right) - u^\*\left(\left(u^\* + \frac{1}{\beta}Bzp\right) = \mathbf{0}\right)$$

If *<sup>M</sup>* <sup>≤</sup> � <sup>1</sup> *<sup>β</sup> Bzp* we have *<sup>M</sup>* � *<sup>u</sup>*<sup>∗</sup> ð Þ *<sup>u</sup>*<sup>∗</sup> <sup>þ</sup> <sup>1</sup> *<sup>β</sup> Bzp* � � <sup>¼</sup> 0, thus *<sup>u</sup>*<sup>∗</sup> <sup>¼</sup> *<sup>M</sup>*. If *<sup>m</sup>* <sup>≤</sup> � <sup>1</sup> *<sup>β</sup> Bzp*<sup>≤</sup> *<sup>M</sup>* we have � <sup>1</sup> *<sup>β</sup> Bzp* � *<sup>u</sup>*<sup>∗</sup> � � *<sup>u</sup>*<sup>∗</sup> <sup>þ</sup> <sup>1</sup> *<sup>β</sup> Bzp* � � <sup>¼</sup> 0. Therefore *<sup>u</sup>*<sup>∗</sup> ¼ � <sup>1</sup> *<sup>β</sup> Bzp:*

Now, if *<sup>m</sup>* <sup>≥</sup> � <sup>1</sup> *<sup>β</sup> Bzp*, we have *<sup>m</sup>* � *<sup>u</sup>*<sup>∗</sup> ð Þ *<sup>u</sup>*<sup>∗</sup> <sup>þ</sup> <sup>1</sup> *<sup>β</sup> Bzp* � � <sup>¼</sup> 0 and then *<sup>u</sup>*<sup>∗</sup> <sup>¼</sup> *<sup>m</sup>*. We conclude that,

$$u^\*\left(\mathbf{x}, t\right) = \max\left(m, \min\left(-\frac{1}{\beta}B\mathbf{z}(\mathbf{x}, t)p(\mathbf{x}, t), \mathcal{M}\right)\right).$$

The next proposition shows a necessary optimality condition. Proposition 1.6.

Let *u*<sup>∗</sup> ∈ *U* be an optimal control, then:

∀*v*∈ *U*, < *J* 0 ð Þ *<sup>u</sup>* , *<sup>u</sup>*<sup>∗</sup> � *<sup>v</sup>*>*L*<sup>2</sup> *<sup>O</sup>*,*T*; *<sup>L</sup>*<sup>2</sup> ð Þ ð Þ <sup>Ω</sup> <sup>≥</sup> <sup>0</sup>*:*

Proof:

If *v* ¼ *u*, we get the condition. If *v* is different than *u*, and since *U* is convex we have

$$(u^\* + \lambda(v - u^\*) \in U, \quad \text{for any } \lambda \in ]0, 1[)$$

It follows

$$J(u^\*) \le J(u^\*) + \lambda(v - u^\*)$$

which gives

$$J(u^\*) \le J(u^\*) + \lambda < J'(u^\*), \\ v - u^\* > \, \_{L^2\left(O, T; L^2(\Omega)\right)} + o(\lambda(v - u^\*)) > 0$$

Then,

$$\_{L^2(\mathcal{O}, T; L^2(\mathfrak{A}))} \geq \frac{1}{\lambda} (\lambda(\boldsymbol{v} - \boldsymbol{\mu}^\*)).$$

Since *<sup>o</sup> <sup>λ</sup> <sup>v</sup>* � *<sup>u</sup>*<sup>∗</sup> ð Þ¼ ð Þ <sup>∥</sup>*<sup>λ</sup> <sup>v</sup>* � *<sup>u</sup>*<sup>∗</sup> ð Þ∥*φ λ <sup>v</sup>* � *<sup>u</sup>*<sup>∗</sup> ð Þ ð Þ , with lim ∥*z*∥!0 *φ*ð Þ¼ *z* 0. Then

$$\lim\_{\lambda \to 0} \frac{1}{\lambda} \rho(\lambda(\nu - u^\*)) = \lim\_{\|\pi\| \to 0} \|\lambda(\nu - u^\*)\| \rho(\lambda(\nu - u^\*)) = \|\cdot \nu - u^\*\| \lim\_{\lambda \to 0} \rho(\lambda(\nu - u^\*)) = 0.$$

we conclude that,

$$ \,\_{L^2\left(O, T; L^2(\Omega)\right)} \geq \lim\_{\lambda \to 0} \frac{1}{\lambda} o(\lambda(v - u^\*)) = \mathbf{0}.\,.$$

Corollary 1.

Let *g* ∈*L*<sup>2</sup> ð Þ <sup>Ω</sup> , such that <sup>∣</sup>*g*∣*eq*0 and assuming that *<sup>U</sup>* <sup>¼</sup> *<sup>L</sup>*<sup>2</sup> ð Þ 0, *T :*. Then an optimal control is given by

$$
\mu^\*\left(\mathbf{x}, t\right) = \nu^\*\left(t\middle|\mathbf{g}\left(\mathbf{x}\right)\right) \tag{33}
$$

with *<sup>v</sup>* <sup>∗</sup> ðÞ¼� *<sup>t</sup>* <sup>1</sup> *<sup>β</sup>*∥*g*∥*L*2ð Þ <sup>Ω</sup> Ð <sup>Ω</sup>*Bz x*ð Þ , *t p x*ð Þ , *t*

Particularly, if *g x*ð Þ¼ 1*D*ð Þ *x* , with *D* ⊂ Ω is the actuator location and 1*<sup>D</sup>* is the characteristic function such that its measure *μ*ð Þ *D* is non-zero, then an optimal control *<sup>v</sup>* <sup>∗</sup> ð Þ*<sup>t</sup>* is given by

$$v^\*(t) = \max\left(m, \min\left(-\frac{1}{\beta\mu(D)} \int\_{\Omega} B\mathbf{z}(\mathbf{x}, t) p(\mathbf{x}, t) d\mathbf{x}, M\right)\right). \tag{34}$$

Proof:

Let *v*∈*L*<sup>2</sup> ð Þ 0, *T* , such that *w x*ð Þ¼ , *t v t*ð Þ*g x*ð Þ it follows from (1.6) that *J* <sup>0</sup> *<sup>u</sup>*<sup>∗</sup> h i ð Þ, *<sup>w</sup> <sup>L</sup>*<sup>2</sup> 0,*T*; *<sup>L</sup>*<sup>2</sup> ð Þ ð Þ <sup>Ω</sup> <sup>Þ</sup> <sup>¼</sup> 0 which gives

$$\int\_0^T v(t) \int\_{\Omega} g(\varkappa) f'(u^\*)(\varkappa, t) d\varkappa dt = 0 \quad \forall v \in L^2(0, T)$$

Hence

$$\int\_{\Omega} \mathbf{g}(\boldsymbol{\varkappa}) f'(\boldsymbol{\mu}^\*) (\boldsymbol{\varkappa}, t) d\boldsymbol{\varkappa} = \mathbf{0} \quad \forall t \in ]0, T[.]$$

Then *J* <sup>0</sup> *<sup>u</sup>*<sup>∗</sup> h i ð Þð Þ*<sup>t</sup>* , *<sup>g</sup> <sup>L</sup>*2ð Þ <sup>Ω</sup> <sup>¼</sup> 0, it means

$$\langle \mathsf{B}z(t)p(t), \mathsf{g} \rangle\_{L^2(\mathfrak{Q})} + \beta \nu^\*(t) \langle \mathsf{g}, \mathsf{g} \rangle\_{L^2(\mathfrak{Q})}, \quad \forall t \in ]\mathsf{0}, T[$$

which leads to formula (25).

#### **4. Algorithm and simulations**

In this section, we give an example to illustrate the usefulness of our main results.

The optimality condition (25) shows that the optimal control *u*<sup>∗</sup> is a function of *z* and *p* which themselves are functions of *u*<sup>∗</sup> *:* Then the control cannot be directly computed. For this reason, we introduce the following algorithm.


*Fractional Optimal Control Problem of Parabolic Bilinear Systems with Bounded Controls DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.102070*

• Step 3: Compute

$$v\_{k+1} = \max\left(m, \min\left(-\frac{1}{\beta\mu(D)} \int\_{\Omega} B z\_k(\mathbf{x}, t) p\_k(\mathbf{x}, t) d\mathbf{x}, M\right)\right). \tag{35}$$

• Step 4: If k k *uk*þ<sup>1</sup> � *uk* <sup>&</sup>gt;*ε*, *<sup>k</sup>* <sup>¼</sup> *<sup>k</sup>* <sup>þ</sup> 1, go to step 2*:* Otherwise *<sup>u</sup>*<sup>∗</sup> <sup>¼</sup> *uk*

For simulations, we consider a bilinear system described by the equation:

$$\begin{cases} \frac{\partial z}{\partial t}(\mathbf{x},t) = \Delta z(\mathbf{x},t) + u(\mathbf{x},t)z(\mathbf{x},t) & \Omega \times ]0, \mathbf{1}[\\ z(\mathbf{0},t) = z(\mathbf{1},t) = \mathbf{0} & [\mathbf{0}, \mathbf{1}[\\ z(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{0}) = \mathbf{x}(\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{1}) & \Omega; \end{cases} \tag{36}$$

We consider problem (2) with *<sup>α</sup>* <sup>¼</sup> <sup>0</sup>*:*2 and *zd*ð Þ¼ *<sup>x</sup>* <sup>0</sup>*:*62*x*<sup>3</sup> <sup>þ</sup> <sup>1</sup>*:*7*x*<sup>2</sup> <sup>þ</sup> <sup>0</sup>*:*023. Applying the above algorithm, we obtain the following figures (**Figures 1** and **2**):

**Figure 2.** *The evolution of an optimal control.*

**Figure 1.** *Final state.*

The desired state is obtained with error ∥*D<sup>α</sup> xz x*ð Þ� , *<sup>T</sup> zd*ð Þ *<sup>x</sup>* <sup>∥</sup><sup>2</sup> *<sup>L</sup>*2ð Þ <sup>Ω</sup> <sup>¼</sup> <sup>5</sup>*:*27*:*10�<sup>4</sup> and a cost *J u*<sup>∗</sup> ð Þ¼ <sup>2</sup>*:*31*:*10�<sup>3</sup> .

#### **5. Conclusion**

In this work, we discuss the question of fractional optimal control problem of parabolic bilinear systems with bounded controls, we obtain a distributed control solution, that minimizes a quadratic functional. This work gives an opening to other questions; this is the case of the fractional optimal control problem of hyperbolic systems. This will be the purpose of a future research paper.

#### **Author details**

Abella El Kabouss\*† and El Hassan Zerrik† MACS Team, Department of Mathematics, Moulay Ismail University, Meknes, Morocco

\*Address all correspondence to: elkabouss.abella@gmail.com

† These authors contributed equally.

© 2022 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

*Fractional Optimal Control Problem of Parabolic Bilinear Systems with Bounded Controls DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.102070*

#### **References**

[1] Hamayoun Stanikzai M, Elias S, Matsagar VA, Jain AK. Seismic response control of base-isolated buildings using tuned mass damper. Australian Journal of Structural Engineering. 2020;**21**(1): 310-321

[2] Khanna A, Kaur N. Vibration of nonhomogeneous plate subject to thermal gradient. Journal of Low Frequency Noise, Vibration and Active Control. 2014;**33**(1):13-26

[3] Matin A, Elias S, Matsagar V. Distributed multiple tuned mass dampers for seismic response control in bridges. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Structures and Buildings. 2020;**173**(3):217-234

[4] Brezis H. Functional analysis, Sobolev spaces and partial differential equations. New York, Dordrecht, Heidelberg, London: Springer Science & Business Media; 2010

[5] Agrawal OP. Fractional optimal control of a distributed system using eigenfunctions. Journal of Computational and Nonlinear Dynamics. 2008;**3**:1-6

[6] Bahaa GM. Fractional optimal control problem for variational inequalities with control constraints. IMA Journal of Mathematical Control and Information. 2016;**6**:1-16

[7] Bahaa GM. Fractional optimal control problem for differential system with control constraints. Univerzitet u Nišu. 2016;**30**:2177-2189

[8] Bradley M, Lenhart S. Bilinear optimal control of a kirchhoff plate. Systems and Control Letters. 1994;**22**:27-38

[9] Bradley M, Lenhart S, Yong J. Bilinear optimal control of the velocity term in a kirchhoff plate equation. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications. 1999;**238**:451-467

[10] Bradley ME, Lenhart S. Bilinear spatial control of the velocity term in a kirchhoff plate equation. Electronic Journal of Differential Equations. 2001;**2001**:1-15

[11] Lenhart S. Optimal control of a convective-diffusive fluid problem. Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences. 1995;**5**:225-237

[12] Addou A, Benbrik A. Existence and uniqueness of optimal control for a distributed-parameter bilinear system. Journal of dynamical and control systems. 2002;**8**:141-152

[13] Zerrik E, El Kabouss A. Regional optimal control of a class of bilinear systems. IMA Journal of Mathematical Control and Information. 2016;**34**: 1157-1175

[14] Liang M. Bilinear optimal control for a wave equation. Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences. 1999;**9**:45-68

[15] Lenhart S, Wilson D. Optimal control of a heat transfer problem with convective boundary condition. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications. 1993;**79**:581-597

[16] Zerrik E, El Kabouss A. Regional optimal control of a bilinear wave equation. International Journal of Control. 2019;**92**:940-949

[17] Zerrik E, El Kabouss A. Bilinear boundary control problem of an output of parabolic systems. In: Recent Advances in Modeling, Analysis and Systems Control: Theoretical Aspects and Applications. Switzerland: Springer; 2020. pp. 93-203

[18] Zerrik E, El Kabouss A. Regional Optimal Control Problem of a Heat Equation with Bilinear Bounded Boundary Controls. In: Recent Advances in Intuitionistic Fuzzy Logic Systems and Mathematics. Cham: Springer; 2021. pp. 131-142.s

#### **Chapter 3**
