- About this Journal ·
- Abstracting and Indexing ·
- Advance Access ·
- Aims and Scope ·
- Annual Issues ·
- Article Processing Charges ·
- Articles in Press ·
- Author Guidelines ·
- Bibliographic Information ·
- Citations to this Journal ·
- Contact Information ·
- Editorial Board ·
- Editorial Workflow ·
- Free eTOC Alerts ·
- Publication Ethics ·
- Reviewers Acknowledgment ·
- Submit a Manuscript ·
- Subscription Information ·
- Table of Contents

Abstract and Applied Analysis

Volume 2012 (2012), Article ID 819342, 17 pages

http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/819342

## Oscillation Theorems for Second-Order Quasilinear Neutral Functional Differential Equations

^{1}School of Mathematical Sciences, University of Jinan, Shandong Jinan 250022, China^{2}Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Missouri University of Science and Technology, Rolla, MO 65409-0020, USA^{3}School of Control Science and Engineering, Shandong University, Shandong Jinan 250061, China

Received 15 March 2012; Revised 14 May 2012; Accepted 14 May 2012

Academic Editor: Agacik Zafer

Copyright © 2012 Shurong Sun et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

#### Abstract

New oscillation criteria are established for the second-order nonlinear neutral functional differential equations of the form , , where , , and . Our results improve and extend some known results in the literature. Some examples are also provided to show the importance of these results.

#### 1. Introduction

This paper is concerned with the oscillation problem of the second-order nonlinear functional differential equation of the following form: where is a constant, .

Throughout this paper, we will assume the following hypotheses: for ,, , ,;, and there exists a function such that

By a solution of (1.1), we mean a function for some which has the property that and satisfies (1.1) on . As is customary, a solution of (1.1) is called oscillatory if it has arbitrarily large zeros on ; otherwise, it is called nonoscillatory. Equation (1.1) is said to be oscillatory if all of its nonconstant solutions are oscillatory.

We note that neutral delay differential equations find numerous applications in electric networks. For instance, they are frequently used for the study of distributed networks containing lossless transmission lines which rise in high-speed computers where the lossless transmission lines are used to interconnect switching circuits; see [1]. Therefore, there is constant interest in obtaining new sufficient conditions for the oscillation or nonoscillation of the solutions of varietal types of the second-order equations, see, e.g., papers [2–17].

Known oscillation criteria require various restrictions on the coefficients of the studied neutral differential equations.

Agarwal et al. [2], Chern et al. [3], Džurina and Stavroulakis [4], Kusano et al. [5, 6], Mirzov [7], and Sun and Meng [8] observed some similar properties between and the corresponding linear equation Liu and Bai [10], Xu and Meng [11, 12], and Dong [13] established some oscillation criteria for (1.3) with neutral term under the assumption that

Han et al. [14] examined the oscillation of second-order linear neutral differential equation where , and obtained some oscillation criteria for (1.6) when Han et al. [15] studied the oscillation of (1.6) under the case and

Tripathy [16] considered the nonlinear dynamic equation of the form where is a the ratios of two positive odd integers, and obtained some oscillation criteria under the following conditions:

Džurina [17] was concerned with the oscillation behavior of the solutions of the second-order neutral differential equations as follows where is a the ratios of two positive odd integers, and obtained some new results under the following conditions

Our purpose of this paper is to establish some new oscillation criteria for (1.1), and we will also consider the cases (1.5) and

To the best of my knowledge, there is no result for the oscillation of (1.1) under the conditions both and (1.13).

In this paper, we will use a new inequality to establish some oscillation criteria for (1.1) for the first time. Some examples will be given to show the importance of these results. In Sections 3 and 4, for the sake of convenience, we denote that

#### 2. Lemma

In this section, we give the following lemma, which we will use in the proofs of our main results.

Lemma 2.1. *Assume that . If , then one has
*

*Proof. * Suppose that or . Then we have (2.1). Suppose that . Define the function by . Then for . Thus, is a convex function. By the definition of convex function, for , we have
that is,
This completes the proof.

#### 3. Oscillation Criteria for the Case (1.5)

In this section, we will establish some oscillation criteria for (1.1) under the case (1.5).

Theorem 3.1. *Suppose that (1.5) holds, for . Furthermore, assume that there exists a function such that
**
Then (1.1) is oscillatory. *

*Proof. *Let be a nonoscillatory solution of (1.1). Without loss of generality, we assume that there exists such that and for all . By applying (1.1), for all sufficiently large , we obtain that
Using (2.1) and the definition of , we conclude that
In view of (1.1), we obtain that
Thus, is decreasing function. Now we have two possible cases for eventually and eventually.

(i) Suppose that for . Then, from (3.4), we get
which implies that
Letting , by (1.5), we find , which is a contradiction.

(ii) Suppose that for . We define a Riccati substitution
Then . From (3.4), we have
Differentiating (3.7), we find that
Therefore, by (3.7), (3.8), and (3.9), we see that
Similarly, we introduce a Riccati substitution
Then . From (3.4), we have
Differentiating (3.11), we find that
Therefore, by (3.11), (3.12), and (3.13), we see that
Thus, from (3.10) and (3.14), we have
It is follows from (3.3) that
Integrating the above inequality from to , we obtain that
Define
Using the following inequality:
we have
On the other hand, define
So we have
Thus, from (3.17), we get
which contradicts (3.1). This completes the proof.

When , where are constants, we obtain the following result.

Theorem 3.2. * Suppose that (1.5) holds, , for . Further, assume that there exists a function such that
**
Then (1.1) is oscillatory. *

*Proof. *Let be a nonoscillatory solution of (1.1). Without loss of generality, we assume that there exists such that and for all . Using (1.1), for all sufficiently large , we obtain that
By applying (2.1) and the definition of , we conclude that
The remainder of the proof is similar to that of Theorem 3.1 and hence is omitted.

Theorem 3.3. *Suppose that (1.5) holds, for . Furthermore, assume that there exists a function such that
**
Then (1.1) is oscillatory. *

*Proof. *Let be a nonoscillatory solution of (1.1). Without loss of generality, we assume that there exists such that and for all . Proceeding as in the proof of Theorem 3.1, we get (3.3) and (3.4). In view of (3.4), is decreasing function. Now we have two possible cases for eventually and eventually.

(i) Suppose that for . Then, similar to the proof of case of Theorem 3.1, we obtain a contradiction.

(ii) Suppose that for . We define a Riccati substitution
Then . From (3.4), we have
Differentiating (3.28), we find that
Therefore, by (3.28), (3.29), and (3.30), we see that

Similarly, we introduce a Riccati substitution
Then . Differentiating (3.32), we find that
Therefore, by (3.32) and (3.33), we see that
Thus, from (3.31) and (3.33), we have
It follows from (3.3) that
Integrating the above inequality from to , we obtain that
Define
Using (3.19), we have
On the other hand, define
So we have
Thus, from (3.37), we get
which contradicts (3.27). This completes the proof.

When , where are constants, we obtain the following result.

Theorem 3.4. * Suppose that (1.5) holds, for . Furthermore, assume that there exists a function such that
**
Then (1.1) is oscillatory. *

*Proof. *Let be a nonoscillatory solution of (1.1). Without loss of generality, we assume that there exists such that and for all . Using (1.1) and the definition of , we obtain (3.26) for all sufficiently large . The remainder of the proof is similar to that of Theorem 3.3 and hence is omitted.

#### 4. Oscillation Criteria for the Case (1.13)

In this section, we will establish some oscillation criteria for (1.1) under the case (1.13).

In the following, we assume that are constants.

Theorem 4.1. * Suppose that (1.13) holds, ,? ?for . Further, assume that there exists a function such that (3.24) holds. If there exists a function for such that
**
then (1.1) is oscillatory. *

*Proof. *Let be a nonoscillatory solution of (1.1). Without loss of generality, we assume that there exists such that and for all . Proceeding as in the proof of Theorem 3.2, we get (3.26). In view of (1.1), we have (3.4). Thus, is decreasing function. Now we have two possible cases for eventually and eventually.

(i) Suppose that for . Then, by Theorem 3.2, we obtain a contradiction with (3.24).

(ii) Suppose that for . We define the function by
Then . Noting that is increasing, we get
Dividing the above inequality by , and integrating it from to , we obtain that
Letting , we have
that is,
Hence, by (4.2), we get

Similarly, we define the function by
Then . Noting that is increasing, we get the following:
Thus . So by (4.7), we see that
Differentiating (4.2), we obtain that
by (3.4), and we have , so

Similarly, we see that
Therefore, by (4.12) and (4.13), we get the following:
Using (3.26) and (4.14), we obtain that
Multiplying (4.15) by , and integrating it from to , we have
Using (3.19), (4.7), and (4.10), we find that
Letting , we obtain a contradiction with (4.1). This completes the proof.

From Theorems 3.4 and 4.1, we have the following result.

Theorem 4.2. *Suppose that (1.13) holds, for . Further, assume that there exists a function such that (3.43) holds. If there exists a function for such that (4.1) holds, then (1.1) is oscillatory. *

#### 5. Examples

In this section, we will give some examples to illustrate the main results.

*Example 5.1. * Study the second-order neutral differential equation
where are constants.

Let . It is easy to see that all the conditions of Theorem 3.1 hold. Hence, (5.1) is oscillatory.

*Example 5.2. *Consider the second-order quasilinear neutral differential equation
where are constants, .

Let . Then, we have if . Hence, by Theorem 3.2, (5.2) is oscillatory if

*Example 5.3. *Investigate the second-order neutral differential equation

Let . It is easy to see that all the conditions of Theorem 3.3 hold. Hence, (5.5) is oscillatory, for example, is a solution of (5.5).

*Example 5.4. *Discuss the second-order quasilinear neutral differential equation
where are constants, .

Let . Then, we have if . Hence, by Theorem 3.4, (5.6) is oscillatory if

*Example 5.5. *Examine the second-order quasilinear neutral differential equation
where are constants, .

Let . Then, . It is easy to see that (3.24) holds. On the other hand, taking , then . Therefore, one has if . Thus, by Theorem 4.1, (5.9) oscillates if

#### 6. Conclusions

Inequality technique plays an important role in studying the oscillatory behavior of differential equations; in this paper, we establish a new inequality (2.1); by using (2.1) and Riccati substitution, we establish some new oscillation criteria for (1.1). Theorem 3.1 can be applied to the case . Specially, taking , our results include and improve the results in [15]; for example, and Theorem 4.1 includes [15, Theorem 3.1], Theorem 4.2 includes [15, Theorem 3.2]. The method can be applied on the second-order Emden-Fowler neutral differential equations where . It would be interesting to find another method to investigate (1.1) when .

#### Acknowledgment

The authors sincerely thank the reviewers for their valuable suggestions and useful comments that have led to the present improved version of the original manuscript. This paper is supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China (11071143, 60904024, 61174217), Natural Science Outstanding Youth Foundation of Shandong Province (JQ201119), Shandong Provincial Natural Science Foundation (ZR2010AL002, ZR2009AL003), and by Natural Science Foundation of Educational Department of Shandong Province (J11LA01).

#### References

- J. Hale,
*Theory of Functional Differential Equations*, Springer, New York, NY, USA, 1977. View at Zentralblatt MATH - R. P. Agarwal, S.-L. Shieh, and C.-C. Yeh, “Oscillation criteria for second-order retarded differential equations,”
*Mathematical and Computer Modelling*, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 1–11, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH - J.-L. Chern, W.-C. Lian, and C.-C. Yeh, “Oscillation criteria for second order half-linear differential equations with functional arguments,”
*Publicationes Mathematicae Debrecen*, vol. 48, no. 3-4, pp. 209–216, 1996. - J. Džurina and I. P. Stavroulakis, “Oscillation criteria for second-order delay differential equations,”
*Applied Mathematics and Computation*, vol. 140, no. 2-3, pp. 445–453, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH - T. Kusano and N. Yoshida, “Nonoscillation theorems for a class of quasilinear differential equations of second order,”
*Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications*, vol. 189, no. 1, pp. 115–127, 1995. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH - T. Kusano and Y. Naito, “Oscillation and nonoscillation criteria for second order quasilinear differential equations,”
*Acta Mathematica Hungarica*, vol. 76, no. 1-2, pp. 81–99, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH - D. D. Mirzov, “The oscillation of the solutions of a certain system of differential equations,”
*Matematicheskie Zametki*, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 401–404, 1978. - Y. G. Sun and F. W. Meng, “Note on the paper of Džurina and Stavroulakis,”
*Applied Mathematics and Computation*, vol. 174, no. 2, pp. 1634–1641, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar - M. T. Senel and T. Candan, “Oscillation of second order nonlinear neutral differential equation,”
*Journal of Computational Analysis and Applications*, vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 1112–1117, 2012. - L. Liu and Y. Bai, “New oscillation criteria for second-order nonlinear neutral delay differential equations,”
*Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics*, vol. 231, no. 2, pp. 657–663, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH - R. Xu and F. Meng, “Some new oscillation criteria for second order quasi-linear neutral delay differential equations,”
*Applied Mathematics and Computation*, vol. 182, no. 1, pp. 797–803, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH - R. Xu and F. Meng, “Oscillation criteria for second order quasi-linear neutral delay differential equations,”
*Applied Mathematics and Computation*, vol. 192, no. 1, pp. 216–222, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH - J.-G. Dong, “Oscillation behavior of second order nonlinear neutral differential equations with deviating arguments,”
*Computers and Mathematics with Applications*, vol. 59, no. 12, pp. 3710–3717, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH - Z. Han, T. Li, S. Sun, and W. Chen, “On the oscillation of second-order neutral delay differential equations,”
*Advances in Difference Equations*, Article ID 289340, 8 pages, 2010. View at Zentralblatt MATH - Z. Han, T. Li, S. Sun, and Y. Sun, “Remarks on the paper,”
*Applied Mathematics and Computation*, vol. 215, no. 11, pp. 3998–4007, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar - A. K. Tripathy, “Some oscillation results for second order nonlinear dynamic equations of neutral type,”
*Nonlinear Analysis. Theory, Methods and Applications A*, vol. 71, no. 12, pp. e1727–e1735, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar - J. Džurina, “Oscillation theorems for second-order nonlinear neutral differential equations,”
*Computers and Mathematics with Applications*, vol. 62, no. 12, pp. 4472–4478, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar