1: %\documentclass[10pt]{siamltex}
2: %\usepackage{times}
3: %\usepackage[round]{natbib}
4: %\usepackage[draft]{graphicx}
5:
6: %\usepackage{setspace}
7: %\usepackage[backref,bookmarks=true,dvips,hyperref,colorlinks]{hyperref}
8:
9:
10: \documentclass{siamltex}
11: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
12: \usepackage{graphicx}
13: \usepackage{amsmath}
14: \usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}
15: \usepackage{t1enc}
16: \usepackage{amsfonts}
17: \usepackage{setspace}
18: %TCIDATA{Created=Thu May 06 11:18:02 2004}
19: %TCIDATA{LastRevised=Tue May 11 13:22:45 2004}
20: %WUJH{lastrevised=Tuesday July 6, 2004}
21:
22: \newtheorem{thm}{Theorem}[section]
23: \newtheorem{cor}[thm]{Corollary}
24: \newtheorem{lem}[thm]{Lemma}
25: \newtheorem{prop}[thm]{Proposition}
26: \newtheorem{conj}[thm]{Conjecture}
27: \newtheorem{defn}[thm]{Definition}
28: \newtheorem{rem}[thm]{Remark}
29: \newcommand{\N}{\mathbb{N}}
30: \newcommand{\Z}{\mathbb{Z}}
31: \newcommand{\Q}{\mathbb{Q}}
32: \newcommand{\R}{\mathbb{R}}
33: \newcommand{\C}{\mathbb{C}}
34: \newcommand{\D}{\displaystyle}
35:
36:
37:
38:
39: \title{PERIODIC OSCILLATIONS OF BLOOD CELL POPULATIONS IN
40: CHRONIC MYELOGENOUS LEUKEMIA}
41: \author{Michael C. Mackey \thanks{Departments of Physiology, Centre for Nonlinear Dynamics, McGill
42: University, 3655 Drummond, Montr\'eal, Qu\'ebec H3G 1Y6 CANADA, \texttt{ mackey@cnd.mcgill.ca}} \and Chunhua Ou
43: \thanks{ Laboratory for Industrial and Applied Mathematics Department of Mathematics
44: and Statistics York University Toronto, Ontario M3J 1P3 CANADA, \texttt{ chqu@mathstat.yorku.ca }}\and
45: Laurent Pujo-Menjouet \thanks{
46: Vanderbilt University, Department of Mathematics, 1326 Stevenson
47: Center, Nashville, TN 37240-0001, USA,
48: \texttt{pujo@math.vanderbilt.edu}}
49: \and Jianhong Wu, \thanks{
50: Laboratory for Industrial and Applied Mathematics Department of Mathematics and Statistics York University
51: Toronto, Ontario M3J 1P3 CANADA, \texttt{ wujh@mathstat.yorku.ca }}}
52:
53: \begin{document}
54: \maketitle
55:
56:
57:
58: \begin{abstract}
59: We develop some techniques to prove analytically the existence and
60: stability of long period oscillations of stem cell populations in
61: the case of periodic chronic myelogenous leukemia. Such a periodic
62: oscillation $p_\infty $ can be analytically constructed when the
63: hill coefficient involved in the nonlinear feedback is infinite,
64: and we show it is possible to obtain a contractive returning map
65: (for the semiflow defined by the modeling functional differential
66: equation) in a closed and convex cone containing $p_\infty $ when
67: the hill coefficient is large, and the fixed point of such a
68: contractive map gives the long period oscillation previously
69: observed both numerically and experimentally.
70: \end{abstract}
71:
72: %\doublespace
73: \baselineskip=14pt
74: %%% ----------------------------------------------------------------------
75: %%% ----------------------------------------------------------------------
76:
77: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
78: % ABSTRACT
79: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
80:
81: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
82: % FIN DU RESUME
83:
84: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
85: % Keywords
86: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
87:
88: \begin{keywords}
89: cell proliferation, $G_{0}$ stem cell model, periodic chronic
90: myelogenous leukemia, long period oscillations, delay differential
91: equations, Hill function, Walther's method.
92: \end{keywords}
93:
94: -------------------------------------------------------------------------
95: % End of keywords
96:
97: \begin{AMS}
98: 34C25, 34K18, 37G15
99: \end{AMS}
100:
101: \pagestyle{myheadings} \thispagestyle{plain} \markboth{M. C.
102: MACKEY, C. OU, L. PUJO-MENJOUET and J. WU}{PERIODIC SOLUTIONS IN
103: CHRONIC MYELOGENOUS LEUKEMIA}
104:
105: %**********************************************************
106: % Introduction
107: %**********************************************************
108:
109: \section{Introduction}
110:
111: \label{sec:introduction} ``How do `short' cell cycles give rise to `long' period oscillations?'' This question
112: has arisen from the observation of blood cell population oscillations in the case of periodic myelogenous
113: leukemia (PCML) \cite{fortin}, a blood disease to be discussed in some details below. Indeed, it has long been
114: observed in the bone marrow that there is an enormous difference between the relatively short cell cycle
115: duration which ranges between $1$ to $4$ days \cite{AM2001}, \cite{mackey96} , \cite{MCM2001} and the long
116: period oscillations in PCML (between $40$ to $ 80$ days) \cite{fortin}. The link between these relatively short
117: cycle durations and the long periods of peripheral cell oscillations is unclear, to the best of our knowledge,
118: has neither been biologically explained nor understood. An attempt to answer this question has been made by
119: Pujo-Menjouet and Mackey in \cite{pujomackey2003} and Pujo-Menjouet et al. in \cite{pujobernardmackey2004},
120: where they investigated the role of each parameter of the mathematical model involved in the cell cycle and the
121: influence of each parameter on the long period and the amplitude of the peripheral cell oscillations. They
122: showed qualitatively that the cell cycle regulation parameters have major influence on the oscillation amplitude
123: while the oscillation period is correlated with the cell death and differentiation parameters, and they obtained
124: these results in the particular case where the hill coefficient involved in the model formulation is infinite.
125: Our objective here is to prove analytically that the similar conclusions and results remain true in the more
126: biologically realistic case where the hill coefficient is finite.
127:
128: More specifically, from the previous studies, it is known that the evolution of the cells in resting phase
129: involves the Hill function in both the term representing the instantaneous loss of proliferating cells to cell
130: division and to differentiation and the term representing the delayed production of proliferating stem cells. A
131: key parameter in the Hill function is the integer $n$ which is usually large, and this Hill function reduces to
132: the Heaviside step function when $n=\infty$. As will be shown, the underlying system with $n=\infty $ becomes a
133: piecewise linear scalar delay differential equation that, after non-trivial but straightforward calculations,
134: has a periodic solution of large periods and amplitudes with very strong stability and attractivity properties.
135: The main purpose of this paper is to construct a convex closed cone containing the aforementioned periodic
136: solution (when $n=\infty$) and a contractive returning map defined on this cone such that a fixed point of such
137: a returning map gives a stable periodic solution of the model equation for the cells in resting phase when $n$
138: is large. This method was first developed in Walther \cite{walther2001DCDS}, \cite{walther2001AMS} for a scalar
139: delay differential equation with constant linear instantaneous friction and a negative delayed feedback, and was
140: later extended to state-dependent delay differential equations \cite{walther2002},\cite {walther2003} and to
141: delay differential systems \cite{walther2003}, \cite {wu2003}. This method was further enhanced recently in
142: \cite{OuWU} by incorporating some ideas from classical asymptotic analysis and matching method. Applications of
143: this method to the model for cells in the resting phase seem to be highly non-trivial since both the
144: instantaneous loss of proliferating cells and the delayed production of proliferating stem cells involve the
145: nonlinearity and there is no analytic formula for the periodic solution in the limiting case ($n=\infty$).
146:
147: We should emphasize that periodic hematological diseases have attracted a significant amount of modelling
148: attention in various domain such as periodic auto-immune hemolytic anemia \cite {belair1995}, \cite{Mackey79_2}
149: and cyclical thrombocytopenia \cite {Santillan2000}, \cite{swinburne2000}. It has been observed that the
150: periodic hematological diseases of this type involve periodicity between two and four times the bone marrow
151: production delay. This observation has a clear explanation within a modelling context. Some other hematological
152: diseases such like cyclical neutropenia (\cite{BBM}, \cite{haurie98a}, \cite{HHM98}, \cite{Mackey78},
153: \cite{Mackey79}, \cite {mackey96}) and chronic myelogenous leukemia \cite{fortin} involve more than one blood
154: cell type (\textit{i.e.} white cells, red blood cells and platelets). It is believed that the oscillations in
155: these diseases originate in the pluripotential stem cell compartment and have very long period durations (of
156: order of weeks to months) in general. In the particular case of the periodic chronic myelogenous leukemia, the
157: period can range from $40$ to $80$ days and two lines of evidence appear to prove that the oscillations are due
158: to a destabilization of the stem cell population based in the bone marrow. The first evidence is due to the gene
159: mutation in the Philadelphia chromosome and responsible for the disease . The mutated cells have been observed
160: in all the blood cell lineages \cite {BMPLRMW2000}, \cite{EE1997}, \cite{haferlach97}, \cite{jiang97}, \cite
161: {takahashi98}. The second line of evidence is given in \cite{fortin} where the authors collected clinical data
162: from the literature, and proved that white blood cells, erythrocytes and platelets oscillate with the same
163: period.
164:
165: Periodic chronic myelogenous leukemia (or PCML) takes its name
166: from the clinical character and the type of leukemia it describes.
167: Leukemia is a malignant disease characterized by uncontrolled
168: proliferation of immature and abnormal white blood cells in the
169: bone marrow, the blood, the spleen and the liver. Its character
170: can be chronic (in the early stage of myelogenous leukemia) or
171: acute (in the late stage). The type of cells involved are myeloid,
172: lymphoid or monocytic depending on the damaged branch of blood
173: cell production. The stem cell model by Pujo-Menjouet and Mackey
174: in \cite{pujomackey2003} and Pujo-Menjouet et al. in \cite
175: {pujobernardmackey2004} (also called $G_{0}$ model due to the
176: consideration of the $G_{0}$ resting phase in the cell cycle) is
177: developed in order to describe the mechanism of the disease under
178: consideration \cite{burnstannock}, \cite {mackeydormer82},
179: \cite{smithmartin}.
180:
181: The remaining part of this paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{sec:model} we present the model in
182: detail. In Section \ref{sec:largen } we recall some previous results from Pujo-Menjouet et al. in
183: \cite{pujobernardmackey2004} in the case where the Hill coefficient $n$ is infinite. Then, we introduce a more
184: general result on the perturbed delay equation given in section \ref {sec:perturbed delay equation}, and we
185: present our main results in section \ref{sec:full asymptotic expansion} including the full asymptotic expansion
186: for the periodic solutions.
187:
188: \section{Description of the model}
189:
190: \label{sec:model}
191:
192: The $G_{0}$ model, whose early features are due to Lajtha \cite{lajtha1959} and Burns and Tannock
193: \cite{burnstannock}, is derived from an age structured coupled system of two partial differential equations,
194: coupled with some boundary and initial conditions \cite{rubinow75}, \cite{Mackey78}, \cite{Mackey79}, and
195: \cite{MR1}. Using the method of integration along characteristics \cite {webb85} these equations can be
196: transformed into a pair of non-linear first-order differential delay equations \cite{Mackey78}, \cite{Mackey79},
197: \cite{mackey96}. The model consists of a proliferating phase where the cell population is denoted by $P(t)$ at
198: time $t$, and a $G_{0}$ resting phase, with a population of cell $N(t)$. In the proliferating phase, cells are
199: committed to undergo cell division a constant time $\tau$ after their entry. Note that the choice of $\tau$ as a
200: constant is to simplify the problem, though some models with a non constant value of $\tau$ exist
201: \cite{adimypujo2003-2}, \cite{BBM}. The loss rate $\gamma$ in the proliferating phase is due to apoptosis
202: (programmed cell death). At the point of cytokinesis (cell division), a cell divides into two daughter cells
203: which enter the resting phase. In this phase, cells can not divide but they have the choice of between three
204: different fates. They may have one of three possible fates: differentiate at a constant rate $\delta $, reenter
205: the proliferating phase at a rate $\beta $, or simply remain in $G_0$. Note that the reentering rate $\beta $
206: will be a nonlinear term in our equation and the focus of our study (see Figure (\ref {cellcycle}) for an
207: schematic illustration of the cell cycle).
208:
209: \begin{figure}[tbp]
210: \centering
211: \includegraphics*[width=0.8\linewidth]{cellcyclecml.eps}
212: \caption{A schematic representation of the $G_{0}$ stem cell model.
213: Proliferating phase cells ($P$) include those cells in $G_{1}$, $S$ (DNA
214: synthesis), $G_{2}$, and $M$ (mitosis) while the resting phase ($N$) cells
215: are in the $G_{0}$ phase. $\delta $ is the rate of differentiation into all
216: the committed stem cell populations, and $\gamma $ represents a loss of
217: proliferating phase cells due to apoptosis. $\beta $ is the rate of cell
218: reentry from $G_{0}$ into the proliferative phase, and $\tau $ is the
219: duration of the proliferative phase. See \protect\cite{Mackey78},
220: \protect\cite{Mackey79}, \protect\cite{mackey96} for further details.}
221: \label{cellcycle}
222: \end{figure}
223:
224: %
225: %\begin{figure}
226: %\centering
227: %\includegraphics* [width=4in,viewport=144 431 432 575]{cellcycle.eps}
228: %\caption{A schematic representation of the $G_{0}$ stem cell
229: %model. Proliferating phase cells ($P$) include those cells in
230: %$G_{1}$, $S$ (DNA synthesis), $G_{2}$, and $M$ (mitosis) while the
231: %resting phase ($N$) cells are in the $G_{0}$ phase. $\delta $ is
232: %the rate of differentiation into all the committed stem cell
233: %populations, and $\gamma $ represents a loss of proliferating
234: %phase cells due to apoptosis. $\beta $ is the rate of cell reentry
235: %from $G_{0}$ into the proliferative phase, and $\tau $ is the
236: %duration of the proliferative phase. See \cite{Mackey78,
237: %Mackey79,mackey96} for further details.}\label{cellcycle}
238: %\end{figure}
239:
240: The model, described by a coupled non-linear first order delay
241: equations, takes the following form
242: \begin{equation}
243: \frac{dP(t)}{dt}=-\gamma P(t)+\beta (N)N-e^{-\gamma \tau }\beta (N_{\tau
244: })N_{\tau } , \label{w2.1}
245: \end{equation}
246: and
247: \begin{equation}
248: \frac{dN(t)}{dt}=-[\beta (N)+\delta ]N+2e^{-\gamma \tau }\beta (N_{\tau
249: })N_{\tau } , \label{w2.2}
250: \end{equation}
251: where $N_{\tau }=N(t-\tau )$. The resting to proliferative phase
252: feedback rate $\beta $ is taken to be a Hill function of the form
253: \[
254: \beta (N)=\frac{\beta _{0}\theta ^{n}}{\theta ^{n}+N^{n}}.
255: \]
256: In equation (\ref{w2.2}), the first term represents the loss of proliferating cells to cell division ($\beta
257: (N)N$) and to differentiation ($ \delta N$). The second term represents the production of proliferating stem
258: cells, with the factor $2$ accounting for the amplifying effect of cell division while $e^{-\gamma \tau }$
259: accounts for the attenuation due to apoptosis. Note that, we only need to understand the dynamics of the $G_{0}$
260: phase resting population (governed by equation (\ref{w2.2})) since the proliferating phase dynamics (governed by
261: equation (\ref{w2.1})) are driven by the dynamics of the resting cells.
262:
263: By introducing the dimensionless variable $x=N/\theta $, we can
264: rewrite equation (\ref{w2.2}) as
265: \begin{equation}
266: \frac{dx}{dt}=-[\beta (x)+\delta ]x+k\beta (x_{\tau} )x_{\tau}, \label{w2.3}
267: \end{equation}
268: where
269: \begin{equation}
270: \beta (x)=\beta _0\frac 1{1+x^n}, \label{w2.4}
271: \end{equation}
272: and $k=2e^{-\gamma \tau }$. The steady state $x_{*}$ of equation (\ref{w2.3} ) are given by the solution of
273: $dx/dt\equiv 0$. Then we have $x_{*}\equiv 0$ , or
274: \begin{equation}
275: x_{*}=\left( \beta _0\frac{k-1}\delta -1\right) ^{1/n}. \label{w2.5}
276: \end{equation}
277: Here we require
278: \[
279: \tau <-\frac 1\gamma \ln \dfrac{\delta +\beta _0}{2\beta _0},
280: \]
281: so that $\beta _0\dfrac{k-1}\delta >1$ in (\ref{w2.5}).
282:
283: Note that when $n\rightarrow \infty $, $x_{*}\rightarrow 1$ in
284: (\ref{w2.5}) and $\beta (x)$ tends to a piecewise constant
285: function (the Heaviside step function).
286:
287: A solution of Equation (\ref{w2.3}) is a continuous function $x:[-\tau ,+\infty )\rightarrow \mathbf{R}_{+}$
288: obeying (\ref{w2.3}) for all $t>0$. The continuous function $\varphi :[-\tau ,0)\rightarrow \mathbf{R}
289: _{+},\varphi (t)=x(t)$ for all $t\in [-\tau ,0],$ is called the initial condition for $x$. Using the method of
290: steps, it is easy to prove that for every $\varphi \in C([-\tau ,0]),$ where $C([-\tau ,0])$ is the space of
291: continuous functions on $[-\tau ,0]$, there is a unique solution of equation (\ref{w2.3}) subject to the initial
292: condition $\varphi $.
293:
294: \section{Periodic solutions: limiting nonlinearity}
295:
296: \label{sec:largen }
297:
298: In this section we study the dynamics of equation (\ref{w2.3}) when $\beta
299: (x)$ is reduced to the step function
300: \[
301: \beta (x)=\left\{
302: \begin{array}{c}
303: 0,\;\;x>1, \\
304: \beta _0,\;x<1.
305: \end{array}
306: \right .
307: \]
308: As in the paper by Pujo-Menjouet et al. \cite{pujobernardmackey2004}, we
309: introduce two constants by
310: \[
311: \alpha =\beta _0+\delta ,\;\;\Gamma =2\beta _0e^{-\gamma \tau }=k\beta _0.
312: \]
313: Inserting the above step function $\beta(x)$ into equation (\ref{w2.3}), we
314: have \medskip
315: \begin{equation} \label{w2.6}
316: \dfrac{dx}{dt}=\ \left\{
317: \begin{array}{ll}
318: -\delta x, & 1\leq x,x_\tau , \\
319: -\alpha x, & 0\leq x\leq 1\leq x_\tau, \\
320: -\alpha x+ \Gamma x_\tau, & 0\leq x,x_\tau\leq 1, \\
321: - \delta x+ \Gamma x_\tau, & 0\leq x_\tau\leq 1\leq x,
322: \end{array}
323: \right .
324: \end{equation}
325: where $x_\tau=x(t-\tau).$
326:
327: \medskip
328: For the equation (\ref{w2.6}), we choose the initial function $ \varphi (t)\geq 1+\eta $ for $t\in [-\tau ,0)$
329: and $\varphi (0)=1+\eta $ where $\eta $ is a small positive constant chosen later. We should remark that if we
330: choose $\varphi (t)\leq 1+\eta $ for $t\in [-\tau ,0)$, the results and the techniques to be obtained and
331: developed are similar. By the continuity of the solution $x$, we have from equation (\ref{w2.6}) the existence
332: of a $t_1$ such that $x(t)$ and $ x(t-\tau )$ are greater than $1$ for $t\in [0,t_1)$ and $x(t_1)=1$. The
333: solution $x(t)$ then satisfies
334: \begin{equation}
335: \dfrac{dx}{dt}=-\delta x,\;\;\text{for}\;\;t\in [0,t_1]. \label{w2.7}
336: \end{equation}
337: Thus solving the above equation, we can have $x(t)=\varphi
338: (0)e^{-\delta t}=(1+\eta )e^{-\delta t}$. It follows that
339: \begin{equation}
340: t_1=\dfrac{\ln \varphi (0)}\delta =\dfrac{\ln (1+\eta )}\delta .
341: \label{w2.8}
342: \end{equation}
343: In the next interval of time, defined by $[t_1,t_1+\tau ],$ the dynamics are
344: given by
345: \begin{equation}
346: \dfrac{dx}{dt}=-\alpha x. \label{w2.9}
347: \end{equation}
348: The solution is then given by $x(t)=e^{-\alpha (t-t_1)}$ for $t\in
349: [t_1,t_1+\tau ]$ and satisfies $x(t_1+\tau )=e^{-\alpha \tau }$
350: which is independent of the initial function $\varphi (t)$. In
351: other words, the solution destroys all memory of the initial data.
352:
353: The solution in the next interval will be such that $x,x_\tau <1$.
354: In order that equation (\ref{w2.6}) has periodic solutions, we
355: should impose an extra condition on $\Gamma $ and $\alpha $ so
356: that
357: \begin{equation}
358: -\alpha x+\Gamma x_\tau \geq 0. \label{xx}
359: \end{equation}
360: Otherwise, if $-\alpha x+\Gamma x_\tau \leq 0$, then the solution
361: may tend to zero as $t$ approaches infinity and thus we cannot
362: expect periodic solution. In particular, if
363: \[
364: -\alpha x+\Gamma x_\tau \approx 0,
365: \]
366: then the solution may stay below the line of $x=1$ so long that
367: the analysis becomes very complicated. This is also undesirable
368: biologically since the period will be extremely long. Note that
369: for $t\in [t_1+\tau ,t_1+2\tau ]$ , $x(t-\tau )=e^{-\alpha
370: (t-t_1-\tau )}$. Then, from (\ref{w2.6}), we have
371: $\dfrac{dx}{dt}=-\alpha x+\Gamma x_\tau =-\alpha x+\Gamma
372: e^{-\alpha \tau (t-t_1-\tau )}$ which gives
373: \begin{equation}
374: x(t)=e^{-\alpha (t-t_1-\tau )}(e^{-\alpha \tau }+\Gamma (t-t_1-\tau )).
375: \label{w2.10}
376: \end{equation}
377: For the sake of simplicity, we impose an extra condition on $ \Gamma $:
378: \begin{equation}
379: \Gamma >\max \{\dfrac 1\tau (e^{\alpha \tau }-e^{-\alpha \tau }),\alpha
380: e^{\alpha \tau }\}, \label{w2.11}
381: \end{equation}
382: so that (\ref{xx}) holds when $x\leq 1$ (due to $x(t-\tau )\geq
383: e^{-\alpha \tau }$), and also $x(t_1+2\tau )=e^{-\alpha \tau
384: }(e^{-\alpha \tau }+\Gamma \tau )>1$ by (\ref{w2.10}).
385: \footnote{Note that this condition allows us to get the shortest
386: period length for the solution. In order to get longer periods, we
387: should assume other conditions on $\Gamma $ such that $x(t_1+2\tau
388: )<1$, thus the slope of the increasing part of the solution would
389: be less steep.}
390:
391:
392: Since $x(t)$ is increasing in $t\in [t_1+\tau,t_1+2\tau]$, there exists a unique point $t_2\in
393: (t_1+\tau,t_1+2\tau)$ so that $x(t_2)=1.$ Assume $ t_2=t_1+\tau+u,$ $u\in (0,\tau).$ Then from (\ref{w2.10}) we
394: have
395: \begin{equation}
396: e^{\alpha u}=e^{-\alpha \tau }+\Gamma u. \label{w2.12}
397: \end{equation}
398: The above equation (\ref{w2.12}) is a transcendental equation and cannot be
399: solved explicitly. But we can expand $e^{\alpha u}$ by Taylor's series, that
400: is $1+\alpha u+\dfrac{(\alpha u)^2}2$ and solve $u$ by the approximated
401: equation
402: \[
403: 1+\alpha u+\dfrac{\alpha ^2}2u^2\approx e^{-\alpha \tau }+\Gamma u.
404: \]
405:
406: Next for $t\in [t_2,t_1+2\tau ]$, the dynamics are
407: \[
408: \dfrac{dx}{dt}=-\delta x+\Gamma x_\tau =-\delta x+\Gamma e^{-\alpha
409: (t-t_1-\tau )},
410: \]
411: which gives
412: \begin{equation}
413: x(t)=e^{-\delta \tau (t-t_2)}\{1-\dfrac \Gamma {\beta _0}e^{\alpha (t_1+\tau
414: )-\delta t_2}\left( e^{-\beta _0t}-e^{-\beta _0t_2}\right) \}. \label{w2.14}
415: \end{equation}
416: Finally for $t\in [t_1+2\tau ,t_2+\tau ],$
417: \begin{eqnarray*}
418: \dfrac{dx}{dt} &=&-\delta x+\Gamma x_\tau , \\
419: &=&-\delta x+\Gamma e^{-\alpha (t-t_1-2\tau )}(e^{-\alpha \tau }+\Gamma
420: (t-t_1-2\tau )),
421: \end{eqnarray*}
422: that is
423: \[
424: x(t)=e^{-\delta (t-t_1-2\tau )}\left[ x(t_1+2\tau )+\Gamma \left(
425: j(t)-j(t_1+2\tau )\right) \right] ,
426: \]
427: where
428: \[
429: j(t)=\dfrac 1{(\delta -\alpha )}\left( e^{-\alpha \tau }+\Gamma (t-t_1-2\tau
430: )-\dfrac \Gamma {\delta -\alpha }\right) e^{(\delta -\alpha )(t-t_1-2\tau
431: )}.
432: \]
433: We now claim that
434: \begin{equation}
435: x(t)>1,\,\;t\in (t_2,t_2+\tau ]. \label{w2.15}
436: \end{equation}
437: Indeed, at the point $t_2,$ $x(t_2)=1,$ $x(t_2-\tau )\geq e^{-\alpha \tau }.$
438: By (\ref{w2.11}) we have
439: \[
440: x^{\prime }(t_2)>-\delta x+\Gamma x_\tau >0.
441: \]
442: Suppose, y way of contradiction, that there exists a point $h\in (t_2,t_2+\tau )$ such that $x(h)=1,$ $x^{\prime
443: }(h)\leq 0$ and $x(t)>1$ for $t\in (t_2,h).$ Then using equation ( \ref{w2.6}) we have by (\ref{w2.11})
444: \[
445: x^{\prime }(h)=-\delta +\Gamma x(h-\tau )\geq -\delta +\Gamma e^{-\alpha
446: \tau }>0.
447: \]
448: This is a contradiction and our claim is true.
449:
450: After the time $t_2+\tau$, both $x_1$ and $x$ are greater than
451: $1,$ and the solution satisfies
452: \begin{equation}
453: x^{\prime }=-\delta x(t) \label{w2.16}
454: \end{equation}
455: and hence is decreasing. Therefore, there exists a point, say
456: $t=d$ so that $x(d)=1$. Now we can use (\ref{w2.15}) and
457: (\ref{w2.16}) to choose a small positive constant $\eta $ such
458: that at some point $T_x<d$
459: \begin{equation}
460: x(T_x)=1+\eta ,\;x(T_x+s)>1+\eta ,\;s\in [-\tau,0). \label{gh}
461: \end{equation}
462: Actually, this $T_x$ is exactly the period of the solution $x(t)$.
463: Summarizing the above analysis, we have the following result:
464:
465: \medskip
466:
467: \begin{thm}
468: \label{theorem1} Assume that $x$ is the solution of (\ref{w2.6}) subject to the initial condition $\phi \geq
469: 1+\eta $ where $\eta $ is a small positive constant defined in (\ref{gh}). Suppose that $\Gamma $ satisfies (
470: \ref{w2.11}). Then $x$ is a periodic solution.
471: \end{thm}
472:
473: \section{Periodic solutions: general nonlinearity}
474:
475: \label{sec:perturbed delay equation}
476:
477: \subsection{Perturbed delay equation}
478:
479: With the detailed analysis of the $G_0$ model when the Hill
480: function reduces to the Heaviside step function, we can now
481: consider the general nonlinearity from the viewpoint of regular
482: perturbation. More precisely, we consider the perturbed problem
483: \begin{equation}
484: \dfrac{dy}{dt}=-[\beta (y)+\delta ]y+k\beta (y_\tau )y_\tau , \label{w3.1}
485: \end{equation}
486: \textit{i.e.}, we return to the original problem with $\beta
487: =\beta _0\dfrac 1{1+y^n}$. Denote by $\varepsilon =1/n$, we can
488: rewrite the Hill function as
489: \[
490: \beta (y)=\beta _0\dfrac 1{1+y^{1/\varepsilon }}
491: \]
492: As a technical preparation, we now describe some elementary
493: properties of the above specific Hill function.
494:
495: \begin{lem}
496: \label{lemma1} Assume that $\varepsilon $ is sufficiently small. We have
497:
498: (a) If $y>\left( \dfrac 1\varepsilon \right) ^{\varepsilon /(1-\varepsilon
499: )},$ then
500: \[
501: \beta (y)<\beta _0\varepsilon ,\;\;\;\;y\beta (y)<\beta _0\varepsilon
502: \]
503:
504: and if $0<y<\varepsilon ^\varepsilon $, then
505:
506: \begin{equation}
507: \beta _0>\beta (y)>\beta _0(1-\varepsilon )\;,\;\;\mathrm{and}\;\;|y\beta
508: (y)-\beta _0y|<\beta _0\epsilon . \label{w3.2}
509: \end{equation}
510:
511: (b)Moreover,
512: \[
513: \left| \dfrac{d(y\beta (y))}{dy}\right| <\beta _0\varepsilon \;,\;\;\mathrm{ for}\;\;y>\left( \dfrac
514: 1\varepsilon \right) ^{2\varepsilon },
515: \]
516: and
517: \[
518: \left| \dfrac{d(y\beta (y)-\beta _0y)}{dy}\right| <\beta _0\varepsilon
519: \;,\;\;\mathrm{for}\;\;0<y<(\dfrac{\varepsilon ^2}{1+\varepsilon } )^\varepsilon .
520: \]
521: \end{lem}
522:
523: \textbf{Proof} (a). If $y>\left( \dfrac 1\varepsilon \right) ^{\varepsilon
524: /(1-\varepsilon )},$ then
525: \[
526: \beta (y)=\dfrac{\beta _0}{1+y^{1/\varepsilon }}<\dfrac{\beta _0}{ y^{1/\varepsilon }}<\dfrac{\beta _0}{\left(
527: \dfrac 1\varepsilon \right) ^{1/(1-\varepsilon )}}<\beta _0\varepsilon,
528: \]
529: and
530: \[
531: y\beta (y)=\dfrac{\beta _0y}{1+y^{1/\varepsilon }}<\dfrac{\beta _0}{y^{\frac
532: 1\varepsilon -1}}<\beta _0\varepsilon .
533: \]
534: If $0<y<\varepsilon ^\varepsilon ,$ then
535: \[
536: \beta _0>\beta (y)=\dfrac{\beta _0}{1+y^{1/\varepsilon }}>\beta
537: _0(1-y^{1/\varepsilon })\geq \beta _0(1-\varepsilon ),
538: \]
539: and
540: \[
541: |y\beta (y)-\beta _0y|=|\beta _0\dfrac{y^{1/\varepsilon +1}}{ 1+y^{1/\varepsilon }}|< \beta _0 y^{1/\varepsilon
542: +1}< \beta _0 \varepsilon.
543: \]
544:
545: (b) If $y>\left( 1/\varepsilon \right) ^{2\varepsilon },$ then
546: \[
547: \left| \left( y\beta (y)\right) ^{\prime }\right| =\beta _0\dfrac{\left|
548: (\dfrac 1\varepsilon -1)y^{1/\varepsilon }-1\right| }{(1+y^{1/\varepsilon
549: })^2}\leq \beta _0(\dfrac 1\varepsilon -1)y^{-1/\varepsilon }<\beta
550: _0\varepsilon .
551: \]
552: Since the function
553: \[
554: f(x)=\dfrac{(1+\dfrac 1\varepsilon )x+\dfrac 1\varepsilon x^2}{1+x}
555: \]
556: is increasing for $x\in (0,\dfrac{\varepsilon ^2}{1+\varepsilon })$ and $f( \dfrac{\varepsilon ^2}{1+\varepsilon
557: })<\varepsilon ,$ then
558: \[
559: \left| \left( y\beta (y)-\beta _0y\right) ^{\prime }\right| =\beta _0\dfrac{ (1+\dfrac 1\varepsilon
560: )y^{1/\varepsilon }+\dfrac 1\varepsilon y^{2/\varepsilon }}{1+y^{1/\varepsilon }}<\beta _0\varepsilon,
561: \]
562: if $0<y<(\dfrac{\varepsilon ^2}{1+\varepsilon })^\varepsilon .$ \endproof
563:
564: Returning to equation (\ref{w3.1}), we let the initial function $\varphi (t)$
565: be chosen in the following closed convex sets
566: \[
567: A(\eta )=\{\varphi (t)\in C([0,1]):1+\eta \leq \varphi (t)\text{ and } \varphi (0)=1+\eta \},
568: \]
569: where $\eta $ is a small positive constant defined in the previous section.
570: For given $\varphi (t)$ in $A(\eta ),$ we can have a unique solution to
571: equation (\ref{w3.1}). The relations
572: \[
573: F_\beta (t,\varphi )=y_t,\;y_t=y(t+s),\;-\tau \leq s\leq 0,\;t\geq 0
574: \]
575: define a continuous semiflow $F=F_\beta $ on $C([-\tau ,0]).$
576:
577: We find that for the simpler equation (\ref{w2.6}), if $\varphi (t)\in
578: A(\eta ),$ then the solution will return to $A(\eta )$ after finite time. We
579: like to know whether or not this situation still happens for equation (\ref
580: {w3.1}). The study of this point becomes necessary and also important in
581: order to build a returning map. Fortunately, we have
582:
583: \medskip
584:
585: \begin{lem}
586: Let $y(t)$ be the solution of equation (\ref{w3.1}) with any initial
587: function $\varphi \in A(\eta ).$ Then
588: \[
589: y(t)=x(t)+O(\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ),
590: \]
591: for $t\in [0,T_x]$ where $T_x$ is the period of periodic solution $x(t),$
592: defined in Theorem \ref{theorem1}, to equation (\ref{w2.6}). \label{lemma2}
593: \end{lem}
594:
595: \medskip
596:
597: \textbf{Proof} From (\ref{w3.1}) we know that the solution $y(t)$ is decreasing in $t$ in the right neighborhood
598: of the starting point $t=0.$ We can further claim that there exist three points $\eta _1,t_1^y,\eta _2,$ $ \eta
599: _1<t_1^y<\eta _2,$ so that
600: \begin{equation}
601: y(\eta _1)=\left( \dfrac 1\varepsilon \right) ^{2\varepsilon },\;\;y(t_1^y)=1,\;y(\eta _2)=\left(
602: \dfrac{\varepsilon ^2}{1+\varepsilon } \right) ^\varepsilon , \label{r1}
603: \end{equation}
604: and in the interval $(0,\eta _2),$ the solution $y(t)$ is decreasing.
605: Indeed, if $y(t)>\left( \dfrac 1\varepsilon \right) ^{2\varepsilon }>\left(
606: \frac 1\varepsilon \right) ^{\varepsilon /(1-\varepsilon )}$ , and $y(t-\tau
607: )>\left( \dfrac 1\varepsilon \right) ^{2\varepsilon }>\left( \frac
608: 1\varepsilon \right) ^{\varepsilon /(1-\varepsilon )},$ then by Lemma \ref
609: {lemma1} we have
610: \[
611: \beta (y)y<\beta _0\varepsilon ,\;\;\beta (y_\tau )y_\tau <\beta
612: _0\varepsilon
613: \]
614: and it follows from equation (\ref{w3.1}) that
615: \begin{eqnarray}
616: \dfrac{dy}{dt} &=&-(\delta +\beta (y))y+k\beta (y_\tau )y_\tau , \nonumber
617: \\
618: &<&-\dfrac \delta 2\;\;\text{as }\varepsilon \rightarrow 0, \label{r3}
619: \end{eqnarray}
620: which means that $y(t)$ is decreasing and there exists a point $\eta _1$ such that $y(\eta _1)=\left(
621: 1/\varepsilon \right) ^{2\varepsilon }$ and $ 1+\eta >y(t)>\left( 1/\varepsilon \right) ^{2\varepsilon }$, for
622: $t\in (0,\eta _1).$ Similarly at the right neighborhood of $\eta _1,$ say $(\eta _1,\eta _1+\tau /2),$we have
623: $\beta (y_\tau )y_\tau =O(\varepsilon )$ and ( \ref{r3}) still holds. This means the solution is still
624: decreasing in $t$ and there exist two points $t_1^y,\eta _2,\,\eta _1<t_1^y<\eta _2$ so that
625: \[
626: y(t_1^y)=1,\;\;y(\eta _2)=\left( \dfrac{\varepsilon ^2}{1+\varepsilon } \right) ^\varepsilon .
627: \]
628: By the Mean--Value Theorem, it is easy to know that
629: \[
630: \left| y(\eta _1)-y(\eta _2)\right| \geq \dfrac \delta 2\left| \eta _1-\eta
631: _2\right|
632: \]
633: or equivalently
634: \[
635: \eta _2-\eta _1\leq \dfrac 2\delta (y(\eta _1)-y(\eta _2))=O(-\varepsilon
636: \log \varepsilon ).
637: \]
638: Therefore,
639: \begin{equation}
640: t_1^y-\eta _1<\eta _2-\eta _1=O(-\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ). \label{x1}
641: \end{equation}
642: Now using again the equations (\ref{w3.1}) and (\ref{w2.6}) for $t\in
643: [0,\eta _1],$ we have from Lemma \ref{lemma1}
644: \[
645: (x-y)^{\prime }=-\delta (x-y)+O(\varepsilon ),
646: \]
647: which implies that
648: \[
649: |x(t)-y(t)|=O(\varepsilon )
650: \]
651: for $t\in [0,\eta _1].$ In particular at the point $t=\eta _1,$
652: \[
653: x(\eta _1)=y(\eta _1)+O(\varepsilon )=\left( \dfrac 1\varepsilon \right)
654: ^{\varepsilon /(1-\varepsilon )}+O(\varepsilon )=1+O(-\varepsilon \log
655: \varepsilon ).
656: \]
657: It follows from (\ref{w2.7}) and (\ref{w2.9}) that $t_1,$ defined in (\ref
658: {w2.8}) satisfies
659: \[
660: t_1=\eta _1+O(-\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ),\;
661: \]
662: and
663: \[
664: t_1=t_1^y+O(-\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ).
665: \]
666:
667: For $t\in [\eta _1,\eta _2],$ since both the derivative of $x(t)$ and $y(t)$
668: are of the order of $O(1)$ and the length of the interval $[\eta _1,\eta _2]$
669: is of the order of $O(-\varepsilon \log \varepsilon )$, we can conclude that
670: \begin{equation}
671: y(t)=x(t)+O(-\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ). \label{w3.7}
672: \end{equation}
673: For $t\in [\eta _2,\tau +\eta _1],$ $y(t-\tau )>\left( 1/\varepsilon \right)
674: ^{2\varepsilon }.$ By Lemma \ref{lemma1}, we still have
675: \[
676: y(t-\tau )\beta (y(t-\tau ))=O(\varepsilon ).
677: \]
678: By equation (\ref{w3.1}) we know that the solution $y(t)$ will still be
679: decreasing for $t\in [\eta _2,\tau +\eta _1].$ Note that $0<y(t)<y(\eta
680: _2)=\varepsilon ^\varepsilon $, so that (\ref{w3.2}) in Lemma \ref{lemma1}
681: holds. Thus we can derive from (\ref{w3.1}) that
682: \begin{equation}
683: y^{\prime }(t)=-\alpha y(t)+O(\varepsilon ), \label{w3.8}
684: \end{equation}
685: for $t\in [\eta _2,\tau +\eta _1].$ Coupling this equation with (\ref{w2.9})
686: and using (\ref{w3.7}) at the point $t=\eta _2$ gives
687: \[
688: y(t)=x(t)+O(\varepsilon \log \varepsilon )
689: \]
690: for $t\in [\eta _2,\tau +\eta _1].$
691:
692: For $t\in [\tau +\eta _1,\tau +\eta _2],$ using again the fact that both the
693: derivatives of $x(t)$ and $y(t)$ are bounded by $O(1)$ and the length of
694: this interval is of order $O(-\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ),$ we have
695: \[
696: y(t)=x(t)+O(\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ).
697: \]
698:
699: For $t\geq 1+\eta _2,$ the solution $y(t)$ begins to increase since $\Gamma $
700: satisfies (\ref{w2.11}). By the similar argument used above, it follows that
701: there exist three point $\eta _3,t_2^y,$ $\eta _4,\eta _3<t_2^y<$ $\eta _4$
702: such that
703: \[
704: y(\eta _3)=\left( \dfrac{\varepsilon ^2}{1+\varepsilon }\right) ^\varepsilon
705: , \; \; \; y(t_2^y)=1, \; \; \; y(\eta _4)=\left( \dfrac 1\varepsilon
706: \right) ^{2\varepsilon }\;,
707: \]
708: and
709: \begin{equation}
710: \eta _3=t_2^y+O(\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ),\; \; \; \eta
711: _4=t_2^y+O(\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ) , \label{x3}
712: \end{equation}
713: and
714: \begin{equation}
715: t_2^y=t_2+O(\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ). \label{x3a}
716: \end{equation}
717: We can continue the process above and it is not difficult to find that $y(t)$
718: will satisfy
719: \[
720: y(t)=x(t)+O(\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ),
721: \]
722: for $t\in [0,\eta _4].$
723:
724: By (\ref{w2.11}) and (\ref{w3.1}) we find that the solution $y(t)$ is
725: increasing at the point $t=\eta _4$ and in the interval $[\eta _4,\tau +\eta
726: _3],$ $y(t)$ and $x(t)$ satisfy
727: \[
728: (x-y)^{\prime }=-\delta (x-y)+O(\varepsilon ),
729: \]
730: and
731: \[
732: (x-y)|_{\eta _4}=O(\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ).
733: \]
734: So we have
735: \[
736: x-y=O(\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ),\text{ for }t\in [\eta _4,\tau +\eta
737: _3].
738: \]
739: For $t\in [\tau +\eta _3,\tau +\eta _4],$ using the same argument as in the
740: interval $[\tau +\eta _1,\tau +\eta _2],$ we have
741: \begin{equation}
742: y(t)=x(t)+O(\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ). \label{t1}
743: \end{equation}
744: Finally for $t\geq \tau +\eta _4,$ the solution is decreasing and attains
745: the value $1+\eta $ at some point $T_y.$ To be more specific, we have
746: \begin{equation}
747: y(t)^{\prime }=-\delta y(t)+O(\varepsilon ), \label{t2}
748: \end{equation}
749: and
750: \begin{equation}
751: x(t)=-\delta x(t). \label{t3}
752: \end{equation}
753: Using (\ref{t1}), (\ref{t2}) and (\ref{t3}) we can derive that
754: \begin{equation}
755: y(t)=x(t)+O(\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ),\; \label{t4}
756: \end{equation}
757: and
758: \begin{equation}
759: T_y=T_x+O(\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ). \label{t5}
760: \end{equation}
761: Furthermore, we also have $y(T_y)=1+\eta $ and
762: \begin{equation}
763: y(t)\geq 1+\eta \text{ for }[T_y-\tau ,T_y] \label{t6}
764: \end{equation}
765: provided that $\varepsilon $ is sufficiently small.\endproof
766:
767: \begin{rem}
768: By Lemma \ref{lemma2} and equation (\ref{w3.1}) we can have two positive
769: constants $M_1$ and $M_2$ which are independent of $\varepsilon ,$ so that
770: \begin{equation}
771: |y(t)|\leq M_1, \label{wm1}
772: \end{equation}
773: and
774: \begin{equation}
775: \left| \dfrac{dy}{dt}\right| \leq M_2. \label{wm2}
776: \end{equation}
777: \end{rem}
778:
779: Now we are ready to define a continuous returning map
780: \[
781: R:A(\eta )\ni \varphi \rightarrow y_{q(\varphi )}=F_\beta (q(\varphi
782: ),\varphi )\in A(\eta ),
783: \]
784: where $q(\varphi )=T_y.$ In order to verify that there exists a unique fixed
785: point in $A(\eta )$ for this map $R$, we need to derive its Lipschitz
786: constant estimation and show this map $R$ is contractive, i.e., its
787: Lipschitz constant is less than 1.
788:
789: \subsection{ Lipschitz constant for the map R}
790:
791: Lipschitz constants of maps $T:D_T\rightarrow Y,$ $D_T\subset X,$ $X$ and $Y$
792: normed linear space, are given by
793: \[
794: L(T)=\sup_{x\in D_T,y\in D_T,x\neq y}\dfrac{||T(x)-T(y)||}{||x-y||}.
795: \]
796: In the case when $D_T=X=\mathbf{R}$ and $\sigma =[x_1,x_2]\in \mathbf{R},$
797: and $f=T$ we set
798: \[
799: L_{[x_1,x_2]}(f)=L(f|[x_1,x_2]).
800: \]
801:
802: In the case when $f=y\beta (y),$ we define the following four Lipschitz
803: constants
804:
805: \[
806: \begin{array}{ll}
807: L_1= & L_{[1+\eta ,+\infty )}(y\beta (y)), \\
808: & \\
809: L_2= & L_{[(\dfrac 1\varepsilon )^{2\varepsilon },+\infty )}(y\beta (y)), \\
810: & \\
811: L_3= & L_{(0,+\infty )}(y\beta (y)) , \\
812: & \\
813: L_4= & L_{\left( 0,\left( \dfrac{\varepsilon ^2}{1+\varepsilon }\right)
814: ^\varepsilon \right) }(y\beta (y)).
815: \end{array}
816: \]
817:
818: Similarly for the function $f=y\beta (y)-\beta _0y,$ we also define the
819: following Lipschitz constant for later use,
820: \[
821: L_5=L_{\left( 0,\left( \dfrac{\varepsilon ^2}{1+\varepsilon }\right)
822: ^\varepsilon \right) }(y\beta (y)-\beta _0y).
823: \]
824:
825: \medskip
826:
827: \begin{thm}
828: \label{theorem2} When $\varepsilon $ is small, the Lipschitz constant for
829: the map $R$ satisfies
830: \[
831: \lim_{\varepsilon \rightarrow 0}L_R=0<1
832: \]
833: \end{thm}
834:
835: \textbf{Proof} Step 1. For $\phi ,\bar{\phi}$ in $A(\eta ).$ By a similar manner as in the proof of Lemma
836: \ref{lemma2}, we conclude that there exist $ \eta _1,\eta _2$ and $\bar{\eta}_1,\bar{\eta}_2$ such that,
837: respectively,
838: \[
839: y^\phi (\eta _1)=\left( \dfrac 1\varepsilon \right) ^{2\varepsilon
840: },\;y^\phi (\eta _2)=(\dfrac{\varepsilon ^2}{1+\varepsilon })^\varepsilon
841: ,\;\eta _1-\eta _2=O(-\varepsilon \log \varepsilon, )
842: \]
843: and
844: \[
845: y^{\bar{\phi}}(\bar{\eta}_1)=\left( \dfrac 1\varepsilon \right) ^{2\varepsilon
846: },\;y^{\bar{\phi}}(\bar{\eta}_2)=(\dfrac{\varepsilon ^2}{ 1+\varepsilon })^\varepsilon
847: ,\;\bar{\eta}_1-\bar{\eta}_2=O(-\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ).
848: \]
849: Let
850: \[
851: \eta _{\min }=\min \{\eta _1,\bar{\eta}_1\},
852: \]
853: and
854: \[
855: \eta _{\max }=\max \{\eta _2,\bar{\eta}_2\}.
856: \]
857: Then by (\ref{x1}) we have
858: \begin{equation}
859: \eta _{\max }-\eta _{\min }=O(\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ). \label{w3.9}
860: \end{equation}
861:
862: For $t\in [0,\eta _{\min }],$ using the equation (\ref{w3.1}) for $y^\phi
863: (t) $ and $y^{\bar{\phi}}(t)$ , respectively, gives
864: \begin{equation}
865: \dfrac{dy^\phi (t)}{dt}=-[\delta +\beta (y^\phi (t))]y^\phi (t)+k\beta
866: (y^\phi (t-\tau ))y^\phi (t-\tau ), \label{w3.10}
867: \end{equation}
868: and
869: \begin{equation}
870: \dfrac{dy^{\bar{\phi}}(t)}{dt}=-[\delta +\beta (y^{\bar{\phi}}(t))]y^{\bar{ \phi}}(t)+k\beta
871: (y^{\bar{\phi}}(t-\tau ))y^{\bar{\phi}}(t-\tau ). \label{w3.11}
872: \end{equation}
873: Now we begin to estimate the difference between $y^\phi (t)$ and $y^{\bar{ \phi}}(t).$ Coupling with
874: (\ref{w3.10}) and (\ref{w3.11}) yields
875: \begin{eqnarray}
876: (y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}})^{\prime } &=&-\delta (y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}})
877: \label{w3.12} \\
878: &&-[\beta (y^\phi )y^\phi -\beta (y^{\bar{\phi}})y^{\bar{\phi}}] \nonumber
879: \\
880: &&+k[\beta (y_\tau ^\phi )y_\tau ^\phi -\beta (y_\tau ^{\bar{\phi}})y_\tau ^{ \bar{\phi}}]. \nonumber
881: \end{eqnarray}
882: Substituting the following inequalities
883: \[
884: |\beta (y^\phi )y^\phi -\beta (y^{\bar{\phi}})y^{\bar{\phi}}|\leq L_2|y^\phi
885: -y^{\bar{\phi}}|,
886: \]
887: and
888: \[
889: |\beta (y_\tau ^\phi )y_\tau ^\phi -\beta (y_\tau ^{\bar{\phi}})y_\tau ^{ \bar{\phi}}|\leq L_1||\phi
890: -\bar{\phi}||
891: \]
892: into (\ref{w3.12}), we have
893: \begin{equation}
894: (y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}})^{\prime }\leq \left( \delta +L_2\right) |y^\phi -y^{ \bar{\phi}}|+kL_1||\phi
895: -\bar{\phi}||. \label{w3.14}
896: \end{equation}
897: Integrating (\ref{w3.14}) from $0$ to $t,$ gives
898: \[
899: (y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}})\leq \int_0^t\left( \left( \delta +L_2\right)
900: |y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|+kL_1||\phi -\bar{\phi}||\right) ds.
901: \]
902: Similarly we have
903: \[
904: -(y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}})\leq \int_0^t\left( \left( \delta +L_2\right)
905: |y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|+kL_1||\phi -\bar{\phi}||\right) ds.
906: \]
907: Thus,
908: \begin{equation}
909: |y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|\leq \int_0^t\left( \left( \delta +L_2\right)
910: |y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|+kL_1||\phi -\bar{\phi}||\right) ds. \label{gr}
911: \end{equation}
912: Solving (\ref{gr}) ( or by Gronwall inequality), we obtain
913: \begin{equation}
914: |y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|\leq C_1||\phi -\bar{\phi}||, \label{w3.15}
915: \end{equation}
916: where
917: \begin{equation}
918: C_1=\dfrac{e^{(\delta +L_2)\eta _{\min }}-1}{\delta +L_2}kL_1. \label{w3.16}
919: \end{equation}
920:
921: Step 2. Next for $t\in [\eta _{\min },\eta _{\max }],$ we have
922: \[
923: |\beta (y^\phi )y^\phi -\beta (y^{\bar{\phi}})y^{\bar{\phi}}|\leq L_3|y^\phi
924: -y^{\bar{\phi}}|,
925: \]
926: and
927: \[
928: |\beta (y_\tau ^\phi )y_\tau ^\phi -\beta (y_\tau ^{\bar{\phi}})y_\tau ^{ \bar{\phi}}|\leq L_1||\phi
929: -\bar{\phi}||.
930: \]
931: Thus from (\ref{w3.10}) and (\ref{w3.11}) we can obtain as before
932: \[
933: |y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|\leq \int_{\eta _{\min }}^t\left( \left( \delta
934: +L_3\right) |y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|+kL_1||\phi -\bar{\phi}||\right)
935: ds+C_1||\phi -\bar{\phi}||.
936: \]
937: Then by Gronwall inequality we have
938: \begin{equation}
939: |y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|\leq C_2||\phi -\bar{\phi}|| \label{w3.17}
940: \end{equation}
941: where
942: \begin{equation}
943: C_2=C_1e^{(\delta +L_3)(\eta _{\max }-\eta _{\min })}+\dfrac{e^{\delta
944: +L_3(\eta _{\max }-\eta _{\min })}-1}{\delta +L_3}kL_1>C_1. \label{w3.18}
945: \end{equation}
946:
947: Step 3. For $t\in [\eta _{\max },\tau +\eta _{\min }],$
948: \[
949: |\beta (y^\phi )y^\phi -\beta _0y^\phi -(\beta (y^{\bar{\phi}})y^{\bar{\phi} }-\beta _0y^{\bar{\phi}})|\leq
950: L_5|y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|
951: \]
952: and
953: \[
954: |\beta (y_\tau ^\phi )y_\tau ^\phi -\beta (y_\tau ^{\bar{\phi}})y_\tau ^{ \bar{\phi}}|\leq L_2||\phi
955: -\bar{\phi}||.
956: \]
957: It is thus easy to have
958: \[
959: |y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|\leq \int_{\eta _{\max }}^t\left( (\alpha
960: +L_5)|y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|+kL_2C_1||\phi -\bar{\phi}||\right)
961: ds+C_2||\phi -\bar{\phi}||,
962: \]
963: and to conclude that (due to $1+\eta _{\min }-\eta _{\max }<\tau $)
964: \begin{equation}
965: |y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|\leq C_3||\phi -\bar{\phi}||, \label{w3.19}
966: \end{equation}
967: where
968: \begin{equation}
969: C_3=C_2e^{\alpha \tau +\tau L_5}+\dfrac{e^{\alpha \tau +\tau L_5}-1}{\alpha
970: +L_5}kL_2C_1>C_2. \label{w3.20}
971: \end{equation}
972:
973: Step 4. When $t\geq 1+\eta _{\min },$ We note that from the proof of Lemma
974: \ref{lemma2}, there exist $\eta _3<\eta _4$, and $\bar{\eta}_3<\bar{\eta}_4$
975: so that
976: \[
977: y^\phi (\eta _3)=(\dfrac{\varepsilon ^2}{1+\varepsilon })^\varepsilon
978: ,\;y^\phi (\eta _4)=\left( \dfrac 1\varepsilon \right) ^{2\varepsilon
979: }\;,\;\eta _4-\eta _3=O(-\varepsilon \log \varepsilon )
980: \]
981: and
982: \[
983: y^{\bar{\phi}}(\bar{\eta}_3)=(\dfrac{\varepsilon ^2}{1+\varepsilon } )^\varepsilon
984: ,\;y^{\bar{\phi}}(\bar{\eta}_4)=\left( \dfrac 1\varepsilon \right) ^{2\varepsilon
985: },\;\;\bar{\eta}_4-\bar{\eta}_3=O(-\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ).
986: \]
987: Let
988: \[
989: \eta _{\min }^3=\min \{\eta _3,\bar{\eta}_3\},\;\eta _{\max }^4=\max \{\eta
990: _4,\bar{\eta}_4\}.
991: \]
992: Then by (\ref{x3}) we have
993: \begin{equation}
994: \eta _{\max }^4-\eta _{\min }^3=O(\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ).
995: \label{w3.23}
996: \end{equation}
997: For $t\in [\tau +\eta _{\min ,}\eta _{\min }^3],$ we similarly have
998: \[
999: |y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|\leq \int_{\tau +\eta _{\min }}^t\left( (\alpha
1000: +L_5)|y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|+kL_3C_3||\phi -\bar{\phi}||\right)
1001: ds+C_3||\phi -\bar{\phi}||,
1002: \]
1003: and
1004: \begin{equation}
1005: |y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|\leq C_4||\phi -\bar{\phi}||, \label{w3.21}
1006: \end{equation}
1007: where
1008: \begin{equation}
1009: C_4=C_3e^{(\alpha +L_5)(\eta _{\min }^3-\tau -\eta _{\min })}+\dfrac{ e^{(\alpha +L_5)(\eta _{\min }^3-\tau
1010: -\eta _{\min })}-1}{\alpha -L_5} kL_3C_3>C_3. \label{w3.22}
1011: \end{equation}
1012:
1013: Step 5. For $t\in [\eta _{\min }^3,\eta _{\max }^4],$
1014: \[
1015: |y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|\leq \int_{\eta _{\min }^3}^t\left( ( \delta +
1016: L_3)|y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|+ kL_4C_4||\phi -\bar{\phi}||\right)
1017: ds+C_4||\phi -\bar{\phi}||.
1018: \]
1019: Thus,
1020: \begin{equation}
1021: |y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|\leq C_5||\phi -\bar{\phi}|| \label{w3.26}
1022: \end{equation}
1023: where
1024: \begin{equation}
1025: C_5=C_4\left( e^{\delta + L_3(\eta _{\max }^4-\eta _{\min }^3)}+\dfrac{ e^{\delta + L_3(\eta _{\max }^4-\eta
1026: _{\min }^3)}-1}{\delta +L_3}kL_4\right) .. \label{w3.26a}
1027: \end{equation}
1028:
1029: Step 6. For $t\in [\eta _{\max }^4,\tau +\eta _{\max }^4],$ we have
1030: \[
1031: |y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|\leq \int_{\eta _{\max }}^t\left( (\delta
1032: +L_2)|y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|+kL_3C_5||\phi -\bar{\phi}||\right)
1033: ds+C_5||\phi -\bar{\phi}||
1034: \]
1035: and
1036: \begin{equation}
1037: |y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|\leq C_6||\phi -\bar{\phi}||, \label{w3.27}
1038: \end{equation}
1039: where
1040: \begin{equation}
1041: C_6=C_5(e^{(\delta +L_2)\tau }+\dfrac{e^{(\delta +L_2)\tau }-1}{\delta -L_2} kL_3). \label{w3.28}
1042: \end{equation}
1043:
1044: Step 7. When $t\geq \tau +\eta _{\max }^4,$ both $y$ and $\bar{y}$ are
1045: decreasing and will take the value $1+\eta $ after finite time. Suppose that
1046: $s$ and $\bar{s}$ satisfy
1047: \[
1048: y^\phi (s)=1+\eta ,\;y^{\bar{\phi}}(\bar{s})=1+\eta .
1049: \]
1050: For the later proof, we only consider the case $s<\bar{s},$ since the case
1051: when $s\geq \bar{s}$ can be similarly dealt with and the proof will be
1052: omitted. By Lemma \ref{lemma2} we know
1053: \[
1054: y^\phi (t)=x(t)+O(\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ),\;y^{\bar{\phi} }(t)=x(t)+O(\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ).
1055: \]
1056: By (\ref{x3}), (\ref{x3a}) and (\ref{t5}) we can also obtain
1057: \[
1058: s-(\tau +\eta _{\max }^4)=T_x-(\tau +t_2)+O(\varepsilon \log \varepsilon )
1059: \]
1060: and
1061: \[
1062: \bar{s}-(\tau +\eta _{\max }^4)=T_x-(\tau +t_2)+O(\varepsilon \log
1063: \varepsilon )
1064: \]
1065: where $T_x$ is the period of function $x(t).$ Because the distant between $ \tau +\eta _{\max }^4$ and $s$ may
1066: be greater than $\tau .$ Thus we need split the interval $[\tau +\eta _{\max }^4,s]$ as $[\tau +\eta _{\max
1067: }^4,2\tau +\eta _{\max }^4],$ $[2\tau +\eta _{\max }^4,3\tau +\eta _{\max }^4],\cdots ,[m\tau +\eta _{\max
1068: }^4,s]$ where the length of each interval is exactly $\tau $ except the last one. Here $m$ is the largest
1069: integer less than or equal to $(s-(\tau +\eta _{\max }^4))/\tau .$ We can estimate $ |y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|$
1070: interval by interval and finally to obtain
1071: \begin{equation}
1072: |y^\phi -y^{\bar{\phi}}|\leq C_7||\phi -\bar{\phi}||, \label{w3.29}
1073: \end{equation}
1074: with
1075: \begin{equation}
1076: C_7=C_6\left( e^{(\delta +L_2)\tau }+\dfrac{e^{(\delta +L_2)\tau }-1}{\delta
1077: -L_2}kL_2\right) ^{T_x}. \label{w3.30}
1078: \end{equation}
1079:
1080: For $t\in [s,\bar{s}],$ the function $y^{\bar{\phi}}(t)$ satisfies
1081: \[
1082: y^{\bar{\phi}}(t)=1+\eta +O(\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ),\;t\in [s,\bar{s}] \text{ and
1083: }y^{\bar{\phi}}(\bar{s})=1+\eta ,
1084: \]
1085: from which and the equation (\ref{w3.1}) we know that $y^{\bar{\phi}}(t)$ is
1086: decreasing and
1087: \begin{eqnarray*}
1088: |\dfrac{dy^{\bar{\phi}}(t)}{dt}| &=&\left| -(\delta +\beta (y^{\bar{\phi} }))y^{\bar{\phi}}+k\beta (y_\tau
1089: ^{\bar{\phi}})y_\tau ^{\bar{\phi}}\right| ,
1090: \\
1091: &=&\left| -\delta (1+\eta )+O(\varepsilon \log \varepsilon )\right| , \\
1092: &\geq &\dfrac{\delta (1+\eta )}2,
1093: \end{eqnarray*}
1094: when $\varepsilon $ is small. Applying the Mean-Value theorem to the
1095: function $y^{\bar{\phi}}(t)$ implies the existence of $\rho \in [s,\bar{s}]$
1096: such that
1097: \[
1098: |y^{\bar{\phi}}(\bar{s})-y^{\bar{\phi}}(s)|=|y^{\bar{\phi}}(\rho )^{\prime }( \bar{s}-s)|\geq \dfrac{\delta
1099: (1+\eta )}2\left| \bar{s}-s\right|
1100: \]
1101: or by (\ref{w3.29}),
1102: \begin{eqnarray}
1103: \left| \bar{s}-s\right| &\leq &\dfrac 2{\delta (1+\eta )}|y^{\bar{\phi}}( \bar{s})-y^{\bar{\phi}}(s)|=\dfrac
1104: 2{\delta (1+\eta )}|y^\phi (s)-y^{\bar{
1105: \phi}}(s)|, \label{idea} \\
1106: &\leq &\dfrac{2C_7}{\delta (1+\eta )}||\phi -\bar{\phi}||. \nonumber
1107: \end{eqnarray}
1108:
1109: Our ultimate goal is give the estimate of $|y_{\bar{s}}^{\bar{\phi}}(\theta
1110: )-y_s^\phi (\theta )|$ where $\theta \in [-\tau ,0].$ Indeed
1111: \begin{equation}
1112: |y_{\bar{s}}^{\bar{\phi}}(\theta )-y_s^\phi (\theta )|\leq |y_{\bar{s}}^{ \bar{\phi}}(\theta
1113: )-y_s^{\bar{\phi}}(\theta )|+|y_s^{\bar{\phi}}(\theta )-y_s^\phi (\theta )|. \label{wl}
1114: \end{equation}
1115: The first term of the right hand side is bounded by
1116: \[
1117: \int_{s+\theta }^{\bar{s}+\theta }\dfrac{dy^{\bar{\phi}}(t)}{dt}dt\leq
1118: M_2\left| \bar{s}-s\right| .
1119: \]
1120: where $M_2$ is the maximum value of derivative of the function $y^{\bar{\phi} }(t),$ see remark 4.3. The second
1121: term of (\ref{wl}) is bounded by $ C_7||\phi -\bar{\phi}||.$ Thus from (\ref{wl}), we have
1122: \begin{equation}
1123: |y_{\bar{s}}^{\bar{\phi}}(\theta )-y_s^\phi (\theta )|\leq C_7(1+\dfrac{2M_2 }{\delta (1+\eta )})||\phi
1124: -\bar{\phi}||. \label{w3.31}
1125: \end{equation}
1126: When $\varepsilon \rightarrow 0,$ we have
1127: \[
1128: L_1=O(\dfrac 1{\varepsilon (1+\eta )^{1/\varepsilon
1129: }}),\;\;L_2=O(\varepsilon ),\;\;L_3=O(1/\varepsilon
1130: ),\;\;L_4=O(1),\;\;L_5=O(\varepsilon ).
1131: \]
1132: Since $L_1$ is exponentially small as $\varepsilon \rightarrow 0,$ we conclude from (\ref{w3.16}),
1133: (\ref{w3.18}), (\ref{w3.20}), (\ref{w3.22}), ( \ref{w3.26a}), (\ref{w3.28}) and (\ref{w3.30}) that $L_R$ is
1134: exponentially small and satisfies
1135: \[
1136: \lim_{\varepsilon \rightarrow 0}L_R=\lim_{\varepsilon \rightarrow 0}C_7(1+ \dfrac{2M_2}{\delta (1+\eta )})=0.
1137: \]
1138: This completes our proof.\endproof
1139:
1140: Since $L_R<1,$ it means that the returning map $R$ is contractive and there
1141: exists a unique fixed-point $\phi $ in $A(\eta )$ so that $R(\phi )=\phi .$
1142: Thus we find a slowly oscillating periodic solution $y(t,\phi )$ for the
1143: equation (\ref{w3.1}). This periodic solution is also globally attractive
1144: for any initial function $\varphi $ in $A(\eta ).$
1145:
1146: \section{Full Asymptotic Expansion for the Periodic Solution}
1147:
1148: \label{sec:full asymptotic expansion}
1149:
1150: In the previous section we use fixed-point theory to prove that there exists
1151: a unique periodic solution in $A(\eta )$ for the equation (\ref{w3.1}) . Now
1152: we like to give a quantitative analysis to this solution. Since the map $R$
1153: is contractive with the Lipschitz constant $L_{R\text{ }}$being
1154: exponentially small, it is possible to give a full asymptotic expansion for
1155: this particular solution.
1156:
1157: If we take the initial function $\phi =1+\eta ,$ then we get a solution $ y(t,1+\eta )$ which may not be
1158: periodic. But by Lemma 4.2, $y(t,1+\eta )=x(t)+O(\varepsilon \log \varepsilon )$ when $t$ is finite and there
1159: exists a $T_{1+\eta }>0$ such that
1160: \[
1161: y(T_{1+\eta },1+\eta )=1+\eta ,\;y(T_{1+\eta }+\theta ,1+\eta )\geq 1+\eta
1162: ,\theta \in [-\tau ,0).
1163: \]
1164: Then $y(\theta +T_{1+\eta },1+\eta )\in A(\eta ).$
1165:
1166: Assume that $y(t)$ is the periodic solution to (\ref{w3.1}) which can be
1167: extended to $(-\infty ,+\infty )$ and satisfies $y(t)\in A(\eta )$ for $t\in
1168: [-\tau ,0].$ Suppose also that for $t\in [-\tau ,0],$ $y(t)$ has the
1169: following asymptotic formula
1170: \begin{equation}
1171: y(t)=\sum_{i=0}^\infty \phi _i(t) \label{w4.1}
1172: \end{equation}
1173: where $\phi _0(t)=$ $y(t+T_{1+\eta },1+\eta )$ and $\phi _i(t,\varepsilon
1174: ),i\geq 1$ will be determined later. Let $y_0(T_0+\theta )$ denote the image
1175: of the returning map of $R$ on $\phi _0,$ i.e.,
1176: \[
1177: y_0(T_0+\theta )=F_\beta (T_0,\phi _0),\text{\ }\theta \in [-\tau ,0]
1178: \]
1179: where $T_0$ $>0$ satisfies
1180: \[
1181: y_0(T_0)=1+\eta ,\;y_0(T_0+\theta )\geq 1+\eta ,\;\theta \in [-\tau ,0).
1182: \]
1183: similarly by induction set
1184: \[
1185: \phi _1(\theta )=y_0(T_0+\theta )-\phi _{0,}\;
1186: \]
1187: \[
1188: y_{i-1}(T_{i-1}+\theta )=F_\beta (T_{i-1},\sum_{j=0}^{i-1}\phi _j)=F_\beta
1189: (T_{i-1},y_{i-2}),\;i\geq 2,
1190: \]
1191: and
1192: \[
1193: \phi _i(\theta )=y_{i-1}(\theta +T_{i-1})-y_{i-2}(\theta
1194: +T_{i-2})_{,}\;i\geq 2,
1195: \]
1196: where for $i\geq 1,$ $T_i>0$ and also satisfies
1197: \[
1198: y_i(T_i)=1+\eta ,\;y_i(T_i+\theta )\geq 1+\eta ,\;\theta \in [-\tau ,0).
1199: \]
1200: Using the result in (\ref{idea}) we can also have
1201: \[
1202: |T_i-T_{i-1}|\leq (L_R)^{i-1}|T_1-T_0|,
1203: \]
1204: which means that the series
1205: \[
1206: T_0+\sum_{j=1}^\infty \left( T_j-T_{j-1}\right)
1207: \]
1208: is absolutely convergent to some constant, say $T_\varepsilon .$ Since by Theorem \ref{theorem2} we have for
1209: $\theta \in [-\tau ,0],$
1210: \begin{eqnarray}
1211: \left| y_i(\theta +T_i)-y_{i-1}(\theta +T_{i-1})\right| &=&\left|
1212: F(T_i,y_{i-1})-F(T_{i-1},y_{i-2})\right| \label{w4.333} \\
1213: &\leq &L_R\left| y_{i-1}(\theta +T_{i-1})-y_{i-2}(\theta +T_{i-2})\right|
1214: \nonumber \\
1215: &\leq &(L_R)^{i-1}\left| y_1(\theta +T_1)-y_0(\theta +T_0)\right| \nonumber
1216: \\
1217: &\leq &(L_R)^i|y_0(t,\phi _0)-\phi _0|. \nonumber
1218: \end{eqnarray}
1219: Then for $\;s\in [-\tau ,0]$, we conclude that
1220: \begin{equation}
1221: y_0(s+T_0)+\sum_{j=1}^\infty \left( y_j(s+T_j)-y_{j-1}(s+T_{j-1})\right)
1222: \label{w4.334}
1223: \end{equation}
1224: is absolutely convergent and have the same value as the initial function $ \sum_{i=0}^\infty \phi _i(s).$ Since
1225: $L_R$ is exponentially small, It is easy to prove that the value of $T_\varepsilon $ is dominated by $T_0$ and
1226: likewise the value of (\ref{w4.334}) is dominated by $y_0(s+T_0),$ each of which has the exponential error
1227: bound. For the leading term $y_0(t),$ obviously we have from Lemma \ref{lemma2} the rough estimates
1228: \[
1229: y_0(t)=x(t)+O(\varepsilon \log \varepsilon ),\;T_0=T_x+O(\varepsilon \log
1230: \varepsilon ).
1231: \]
1232: Next we would like to give the refined estimate for $y_0(t)$ and $T_0$ by
1233: using this information and developing the idea of Lemma \ref{lemma2}.
1234:
1235: Like in Lemma \ref{lemma2}, we shall split the interval $[0,T_0]$ and estimate $y_0(t)$ interval by interval.
1236: For illustration, we only need to show the first interval's estimate to the readers. Keep in mind that the
1237: initial data is taken as $y(t+T_{1+\eta },1+\eta )$ which is greater than $ 1+\eta $ when $t$ lies in the
1238: interval $[-\tau ,0).$ Let $\eta _1$ and $\eta _2$ be still the value in Lemma 4.2 and $t_1^{y_0}$ satisfy $
1239: y_0(t_1^{y_0})=1.$ We denote $y_0(t)=y_0(t).$ Integrating the equation (\ref {w3.1}) from $0$ to $t,\;t\in
1240: [0,t_1^{y_0}],$ gives
1241: \begin{eqnarray}
1242: y_0(t)-y_0(0) &=&-\delta \int_0^ty_0(t)dt-\int_0^t\beta (y_0)y_0(t)dt
1243: \label{w5.1} \\
1244: &&+k\int_0^t\beta (y_0(t-\tau ))y_0(t-\tau )dt. \nonumber
1245: \end{eqnarray}
1246: It is obvious that the last term of the right hand side of (\ref{w5.1}) is
1247: exponentially small and can be viewed as $O(\varepsilon ).$ Next we claim
1248: that
1249: \begin{equation}
1250: \int_0^t\beta (y_0)y_0(t)dt=O(\varepsilon ). \label{claim}
1251: \end{equation}
1252: To see this, we need to note that $y_0(t)$ is decreasing in $t\in
1253: [0,t_1^{y_0}]$ and $dy_0/dt$ is the order of $O(1)$ or more precisely
1254: \begin{equation}
1255: -\alpha (1+\eta )\leq \dfrac{dy_0}{dt}=-[\beta (y_0)+\delta
1256: ]y_0+O(\varepsilon )\leq -\delta +O(\varepsilon ). \label{w5.2}
1257: \end{equation}
1258: Thus from (\ref{w5.2}) and the fact
1259: \begin{eqnarray*}
1260: \int_0^t\beta (y_0)y_0(t)\dfrac{dy_0}{dt}dt &\leq &\int_0^{t_1^{y_0}}\beta
1261: (y_0)y_0(t)\dfrac{dy_0}{dt}dt, \\
1262: &=&\int_{1+\eta }^1\dfrac{\beta _0y}{1+y^{1/\varepsilon }}dy, \\
1263: &=&O(\varepsilon ),
1264: \end{eqnarray*}
1265: we know that $\int_0^t\beta (y_0)y_0(t)dt$ is also the order of $ O(\varepsilon )$ and the claim of
1266: (\ref{claim}) is true$.$ It follows then from (\ref{w5.1})
1267: \[
1268: y_0(t)\ =-\delta \int_0^ty_0(t)dt+1+\eta +O(\varepsilon ).
1269: \]
1270: Solving this integral equation, we get
1271: \[
1272: y_0(t)=(1+\eta +O(\varepsilon ))e^{-\delta t},
1273: \]
1274: which implies
1275: \begin{equation}
1276: y_0(t)=y_0(t,\varepsilon )=x(t)+O(\varepsilon ),\,t\in [0,t_1^y].
1277: \label{w5.5}
1278: \end{equation}
1279: Using the same approaches above we can prove that in the whole interval $ [0,T_0],$ (\ref{w5.5}) is still true.
1280: Furthermore, we can prove that
1281: \[
1282: T_0=T_x+O\left( \varepsilon \right) ,
1283: \]
1284: which completes our refined estimates.
1285:
1286: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
1287: %%% ---------------------------------------------------------------
1288: \bibliographystyle{siam}
1289: \bibliography{cmlbib}
1290: %%% ----------------------------------------------------------------------
1291:
1292: \end{document}
1293: