/ / Article
Special Issue

## Recent Progress in Differential and Difference Equations

View this Special Issue

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2011 |Article ID 326052 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/326052

A. Rontó, M. Rontó, "On Nonseparated Three-Point Boundary Value Problems for Linear Functional Differential Equations", Abstract and Applied Analysis, vol. 2011, Article ID 326052, 22 pages, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/326052

# On Nonseparated Three-Point Boundary Value Problems for Linear Functional Differential Equations

Accepted27 Apr 2011
Published07 Aug 2011

#### Abstract

For a system of linear functional differential equations, we consider a three-point problem with nonseparated boundary conditions determined by singular matrices. We show that, to investigate such a problem, it is often useful to reduce it to a parametric family of two-point boundary value problems for a suitably perturbed differential system. The auxiliary parametrised two-point problems are then studied by a method based upon a special kind of successive approximations constructed explicitly, whereas the values of the parameters that correspond to solutions of the original problem are found from certain numerical determining equations. We prove the uniform convergence of the approximations and establish some properties of the limit and determining functions.

#### 1. Introduction

The aim of this paper is to show how a suitable parametrisation can help when dealing with nonseparated three-point boundary conditions determined by singular matrices. We construct a suitable numerical-analytic scheme allowing one to approach a three-point boundary value problem through a certain iteration procedure. To explain the term, we recall that, formally, the methods used in the theory of boundary value problems can be characterised as analytic, functional-analytic, numerical, or numerical-analytic ones.

While the analytic methods are generally used for the investigation of qualitative properties of solutions such as the existence, multiplicity, branching, stability, or dichotomy and generally use techniques of calculus (see, e.g.,  and the references in ), the functional-analytic ones are based mainly on results of functional analysis and topological degree theory and essentially use various techniques related to operator equations in abstract spaces . The numerical methods, under the assumption on the existence of solutions, provide practical numerical algorithms for their approximation [27, 28]. The numerical construction of approximate solutions is usually based on an idea of the shooting method and may face certain difficulties because, as a rule, this technique requires some global regularity conditions, which, however, are quite often satisfied only locally.

Methods of the so-called numerical-analytic type, in a sense, combine, advantages of the mentioned approaches and are usually based upon certain iteration processes constructed explicitly. Such an approach belongs to the few of them that offer constructive possibilities both for the investigation of the existence of a solution and its approximate construction. In the theory of nonlinear oscillations, numerical-analytic methods of this kind had apparently been first developed in [20, 2931] for the investigation of periodic boundary value problems. Appropriate versions were later developed for handling more general types of nonlinear boundary value problems for ordinary and functional-differential equations. We refer, for example, to the books [12, 3234], the handbook , the papers , and the survey  for related references.

For a boundary value problem, the numerical-analytic approach usually replaces the problem by the Cauchy problem for a suitably perturbed system containing some artificially introduced vector parameter , which most often has the meaning of an initial value of the solution and the numerical value of which is to be determined later. The solution of Cauchy problem for the perturbed system is sought for in an analytic form by successive approximations. The functional “perturbation term,” by which the modified equation differs from the original one, depends explicitly on the parameter and generates a system of algebraic or transcendental “determining equations” from which the numerical values of should be found. The solvability of the determining system, in turn, may by checked by studying some of its approximations that are constructed explicitly.

For example, in the case of the two-point boundary value problem where , the corresponding Cauchy problem for the modified parametrised system of integrodifferential equations has the form  where is the unit matrix of dimension and the parameter has the meaning of initial value of the solution at the point . The expressionin (1.3) plays the role of a ”perturbation term” and its choice is, of course, not unique. The solution of problem (1.3) is sought for in an analytic form by the method of successive approximations similar to the Picard iterations. According to the formulas where for all and , one constructs the iterations , which depend upon the parameter and, for arbitrary its values, satisfy the given boundary conditions (1.2): . Under suitable assumptions, one proves that sequence (1.5) converges to a limit function for any value of .

The procedure of passing from the original differential system (1.1) to its ”perturbed” counterpart and the investigation of the latter by using successive approximations (1.5) leads one to the system of determining equationswhich gives those numerical values of the parameter that correspond to solutions of the given boundary value problem (1.1), (1.10). The form of system (1.6) is, of course, determined by the choice of the perturbation term (1.4); in some other related works, auxiliary equations are constructed in a different way (see, e.g., ). It is clear that the complexity of the given equations and boundary conditions has an essential influence both on the possibility of an efficient construction of approximate solutions and the subsequent solvability analysis.

The aim of this paper is to extend the techniques used in  for the system of linear functional differential equations of the form

subjected to the inhomogeneous three-point Cauchy-Nicoletti boundary conditions with is given and , to the case where the system of linear functional differential equations under consideration has the general form and the three-point boundary conditions are non-separated and have the form where , , and are singular matrices, . Here, is a bounded linear operator and is a given function.

It should be noted that, due to the singularity of the matrices that determine the boundary conditions (1.10), certain technical difficulties arise which complicate the construction of successive approximations.

The following notation is used in the sequel: is the Banach space of the continuous functions with the standard uniform norm; is the usual Banach space of the vector functions with Lebesgue integrable components; is the algebra of all the square matrices of dimension with real elements; is the maximal, in modulus, eigenvalue of a matrix ; is the unit matrix of dimension ; is the zero matrix of dimension ;.

#### 2. Problem Setting and Freezing Technique

We consider the system of linear functional differential equations (1.9) subjected to the nonseparated inhomogeneous three-point boundary conditions of form (1.10). In the boundary value problem (1.1), (1.10), we suppose that is a bounded linear operator, is an integrable function, is a given vector, , , and are singular square matrices of dimension , and has the form where is nonsingular square matrix of dimension and is an arbitrary matrix of dimension . The singularity of the matrices determining the boundary conditions (1.10) causes certain technical difficulties. To avoid dealing with singular matrices in the boundary conditions and simplify the construction of a solution in an analytic form, we use a two-stage parametrisation technique. Namely, we first replace the three-point boundary conditions by a suitable parametrised family of two-point inhomogeneous conditions, after which one more parametrisation is applied in order to construct an auxiliary perturbed differential system. The presence of unknown parameters leads one to a certain system of determining equations, from which one finds those numerical values of the parameters that correspond to the solutions of the given three-point boundary value problem.

We construct the auxiliary family of two-point problems by ”freezing” the values of certain components of at the points and as follows: where and are vector parameters. This leads us to the parametrised two-point boundary condition whereand the matrix is given by the formulawith a certain rectangular matrix of dimension . It is important to point out that the matrix appearing in the two-point condition (2.3) is non-singular.

It is easy to see that the solutions of the original three-point boundary value problem (1.1), (1.10) coincide with those solutions of the two-point boundary value problem (1.1), (2.3) for which the additional condition (2.2) is satisfied.

Remark 2.1. The matrices and in the boundary conditions (1.10) are arbitrary and, in particular, may be singular. If the number of the linearly independent boundary conditions in (1.10) is less than , that is, the rank of the -dimensional matrix is equal to , then the boundary value problem (1.1), (1.10) may have an -parametric family of solutions.

We assume that throughout the paper the operator determining the system of equations (1.9) is represented in the form where , are bounded linear operators positive in the sense that for a.e. and any , , and such that for all . We also put , , and

#### 3. Auxiliary Estimates

In the sequel, we will need several auxiliary statements.

Lemma 3.1. For an arbitrary essentially bounded function , the estimates are true for all , where

Proof. Inequality (3.1) is established similarly to [58, Lemma  3] (see also [12, Lemma  2.3]), whereas (3.2) follows directly from (3.1) if the relation is taken into account.

Let us introduce some notation. For any , we define the -dimensional row-vector by putting Using operators (2.7) and the unit vectors (3.5), we define the matrix-valued function by setting Note that, in (3.6), means the value of the operator on the constant vector function is equal identically to , where is the vector transpose to . It is easy to see that the components of are Lebesgue integrable functions.

Lemma 3.2. The componentwise estimate is true for any , where is the matrix-valued function given by formula (3.6).

Proof. Let be an arbitrary function from . Then, recalling the notation for the components of , we see that
On the other hand, due to (3.5), we have and, therefore, by virtue of (3.8) and (2.6),
On the other hand, the obvious estimate and the positivity of the operators , , imply for a.e. and any , . This, in view of (2.7) and (3.9), leads us immediately to estimate (3.7).

#### 4. Successive Approximations

To study the solution of the auxiliary two-point parametrised boundary value problem (1.9), (2.3) let us introduce the sequence of functions , by puttingfor all , , , and , where In the sequel, we consider as a function of and treat the vectors , , and as parameters.

Lemma 4.1. For any , , , , and , the equalities are true.

The proof of Lemma 4.1 is carried out by straightforward computation. We emphasize that the matrix appearing in the two-point condition (2.3) is non-singular. Let us also put for an arbitrary . It is clear that is a positive linear operator. Using the operator , we put where is given by formula (3.6). Finally, define a constant square matrix of dimension by the formula We point out that, as before, the maximum in (4.6) is taken componentwise (one should remember that, for , a point such that may not exist).

Theorem 4.2. If the spectral radius of the matrix satisfies the inequality then, for arbitrary fixed , , and : (1)the sequence of functions (4.1) converges uniformly in for any fixed to a limit function (2)the limit function possesses the properties (3)function (4.8) is a unique absolutely continuous solution of the integro-functional equation (4)the error estimate holds, where is given by the equality

In (3.6), (4.11) and similar relations, the signs , ≤, ≥, as well as the operators ””, ””, ””, and so forth, applied to vectors or matrices are understood componentwise.

Proof. The validity of assertion 1 is an immediate consequence of the formula (4.1). To obtain the other required properties, we will show, that under the conditions assumed, sequence (4.1) is a Cauchy sequence in the Banach space equipped with the standard uniform norm. Let us put for all , , , , and . Using Lemma 3.2 and taking equality (3.4) into account, we find that (4.1) yields for arbitrary fixed , , and , where is the function given by (3.3) and is defined by formula (4.12).
According to formulae (4.1), for all , arbitrary fixed , , and and we have
Equalities (4.13) and (4.15) imply that for all , arbitrary fixed ,, and ,
Applying inequality (3.7) of Lemma 3.2 and recalling formulae (4.5) and (4.6), we get
Using (4.17) recursively and taking (4.14) into account, we obtain for all , , , , and . Using (4.18) and (4.13), we easily obtain that, for an arbitrary ,
Therefore, by virtue of assumption (4.7), it follows that for all , , , , , and . We see from (4.20) that (4.1) is a Cauchy sequence in the Banach space and, therefore, converges uniformly in for all : that is, assertion 2 holds. Since all functions of the sequence (4.1) satisfy the boundary conditions (2.3), by passing to the limit in (2.3) as we show that the function satisfies these conditions.
Passing to the limit as in (4.1), we show that the limit function is a solution of the integro-functional equation (4.10). Passing to the limit as in (4.20) we obtain the estimate for a.e. and arbitrary fixed , , , and . This completes the proof of Theorem 4.2.
We have the following simple statement.

Proposition 4.3. If, under the assumptions of Theorem 4.2, one can specify some values of , , and , such that the limit function possesses the property then, for these ,it is also a solution of the boundary value problem (1.9), (2.3).

Proof. The proof is a straightforward application of the above theorem.

#### 5. Some Properties of the Limit Function

Let us first establish the relation of the limit function to the auxiliary two-point boundary value problem (1.9), (2.3). Along with system (1.9), we also consider the system with a constant forcing term in the right-hand side and the initial condition where is a control parameter.

We will show that for arbitrary fixed , , and , the parameter can be chosen so that the solution of the initial value problem (5.1), (5.2) is, at the same time, a solution of the two-point parametrised boundary value problem (5.1), (2.3).

Proposition 5.1. Let , , and be arbitrary given vectors. Assume that condition (4.7) is satisfied. Then a solution of the initial value problem (5.1), (5.2) satisfies the boundary conditions (2.3) if and only if coincides with and where and is the limit function of sequence (4.1).

Proof. The assertion of Proposition 5.1 is obtained by analogy to the proof of [50, Theorem  4.2]. Indeed, let , , and be arbitrary.
If is given by (5.3), then, due to Theorem 4.2, the function has properties (4.9) and satisfies equation (4.10), whence, by differentiation, equation (5.1) with the above-mentioned value of is obtained. Thus, is a solution of (5.1), (5.2) with of form (5.3) and, moreover, this function satisfies the two-point boundary conditions (2.3).
Let us fix an arbitrary and assume that the initial value problem (5.1), (5.2) has a solution satisfies the two-point boundary conditions (2.3). Then for all . By assumption, satisfies the two-point conditions (2.3) and, therefore, (5.5) yields whence we find that can be represented in the form
On the other hand, we already know that the function , satisfies the two-point conditions (2.3) and is a solution of the initial value problem (5.1), (5.2) with , where the value is defined by formula (5.4). Consequently,
Putting and taking (5.5), (5.8) into account, we obtain
Recalling the definition (5.4) of and using formula (5.7), we obtain and, therefore, equality (5.10) can be rewritten as
Applying Lemma 3.2 and recalling notation (4.6), we get for an arbitrary . By virtue of condition (4.7), inequality (5.13) implies that as . According to (5.9), this means that coincides with , and, therefore, by (5.11), , which brings us to the desired conclusion.

We show that one can choose certain values of parameters for which the function is the solution of the original three-point boundary value problem (1.9), (1.10). Let us consider the function given by formula with for all , , and , where is the limit function (4.8).

The following statement shows the relation of the limit function (4.8) to the solution of the original three-point boundary value problem (1.9), (1.10).

Theorem 5.2. Assume condition (4.7). Then the function is a solution of the three-point boundary value problem (1.9), (1.10) if and only if the triplet satisfies the system of algebraic equations

Proof. It is sufficient to apply Proposition 5.1 and notice that the differential equation in (5.1) coincides with (1.9) if and only if the triplet satisfies (5.17). On the other hand, (5.18) and (5.19) bring us from the auxiliary two-point parametrised conditions to the three-point conditions (1.10).

Proposition 5.3. Assume condition (4.7). Then, for any , , the estimate holds, where

Proof. Let us fix two arbitrary triplets , , and put Consider the sequence of vectors , , determined by the recurrence relation with
Let us show that for all . Indeed, estimate (5.25) is obvious for . Assume that
It follows immediately from (4.1) that whence, by virtue of (5.21), estimate (3.7) to Lemma 3.2, and assumption (5.26), which estimate, in view of (5.23) and (5.24), coincides with the required inequality (5.25). Thus, (5.25) is true for any . Using (5.23) and (5.25), we obtain
Due to assumption (4.7), . Therefore, passing to the limit in (5.29) as and recalling notation (5.22), we obtain the estimate which, in view of (5.24), coincides with (5.20).

Now we establish some properties of the “determining function” given by equality (5.15).

Proposition 5.4. Under condition (3.10), formula (5.15) determines a well-defined function , which, moreover, satisfies the estimate for all , , where the -matrices and are defined by the equalities

Proof. According to the definition (5.15) of , we have whence, due to Lemma 3.2,
Using Proposition 5.3, we find
On the other hand, recalling (4.2) and (5.21), we get
It follows immediately from (5.16) that
Therefore, (5.35) and (5.36) yield the estimate which, in view of (5.32), coincides with (5.31).

Properties stated by Propositions 5.3 and 5.4 can be used when analysing conditions guaranteeing the solvability of the determining equations.

#### 6. On the Numerical-Analytic Algorithm of Solving the Problem

Theorems 4.2 and 5.2 allow one to formulate the following numerical-analytic algorithm for the construction of a solution of the three-point boundary value problem (1.9), (1.10).(1)For any vector , according to (4.1), we analytically construct the sequence of functions depending on the parameters and satisfying the auxiliary two-point boundary condition (2.3).(2)We find the limit of the sequence satisfying (2.3).(3)We construct the algebraic determining system (5.17), (5.18), and (5.19) with respect scalar variables.(4)Using a suitable numerical method, we (approximately) find a root of the determining system (5.17), (5.18), and (5.19).(5)Substituting values (6.1) into , we obtain a solution of the original three-point boundary value problem (1.9), (1.10) in the form This solution (6.2) can also be obtained by solving the Cauchy problem for (1.9).

The fundamental difficulty in the realization of this approach arises at point (2) and is related to the analytic construction of the function . This problem can often be overcome by considering certain approximations of form (4.1), which, unlike the function , are known in the analytic form. In practice, this means that we fix a suitable , construct the corresponding function according to relation (4.1), and define the function by putting for arbitrary , , and . To investigate the solvability of the three-point boundary value problem (1.9), (1.10), along with the determining system (5.17), (5.18), and (5.19), one considers the th approximate determining systemwhere , , are the vectors given by (5.15).

It is natural to expect (and, in fact, can be proved) that, under suitable conditions, the systems (5.17), (5.18), (5.19), and (6.5) are “close enough” to one another for sufficiently large. Based on this circumstance, existence theorems for the three-point boundary value problem (1.9), (1.10) can be obtained by studying the solvability of the approximate determining system (6.5) (in the case of periodic boundary conditions, see, e.g., ).

#### Acknowledgments

This research was carried out as part of the TAMOP-4.2.1.B-10/2/KONV-2010-0001 project with support by the European Union, co-financed by the European Social Fund.

1. R. P. Agarwal and D. O'Regan, “A survey of recent results for initial and boundary value problems singular in the dependent variable,” in Handbook of Differential Equations, pp. 1–68, Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2004. View at: Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH
2. N. N. Bogoljubov, J. A. Mitropol'skiĭ, and A. M. Samoĭlenko, The Method of Accelerated Convergence in Nonlinear Mechanics, Naukova Dumka, Kiev, Ukraine, 1969.
3. M. Farkas, Periodic Motions, vol. 104 of Applied Mathematical Sciences, Springer, New York, NY, USA, 1994.
4. M. Fečkan, “Minimal periods of periodic solutions,” Miskolc Mathematical Notes, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 121–139, 2006. View at: Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH
5. I. Kiguradze and S. Mukhigulashvili, “On periodic solutions of two-dimensional nonautonomous differential systems,” Nonlinear Analysis, vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 241–256, 2005.
6. I. T. Kiguradze, Some Singular Boundary Value Problems for Ordinary Differential Equations, Izdat. Tbilis. Univ., Tbilisi, Georgia, 1975.
7. E. F. Mishchenko and N. K. Rozov, Differential Equations with Small Parameters and Relaxation Oscillations, vol. 13 of Mathematical Concepts and Methods in Science and Engineering, Plenum Press, New York, NY, USA, 1980, translated from the Russian by F. M. C. Goodspee.
8. J. Moser, “A rapidly convergent iteration method and non-linear differential equations. II,” Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa, vol. 20, pp. 499–535, 1966. View at: Google Scholar
9. J. Moser, “A rapidly convergent iteration method and non-linear partial differential equations. I,” Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa, vol. 20, pp. 265–315, 1966. View at: Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH
10. S. K. Ntouyas, “Nonlocal initial and boundary value problems: a survey,” in Handbook of Differential Equations: Ordinary Differential Equations. Vol. II, pp. 461–557, Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2005. View at: Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH
11. F. Sadyrbaev, “Multiplicity of solutions for second order two-point boundary value problems with asymptotically asymmetric nonlinearities at resonance,” Georgian Mathematical Journal, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 351–360, 2007. View at: Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH
12. M. Ronto and A. M. Samoilenko, Numerical-Analytic Methods in the Theory of Boundary-Value Problems, World Scientific, River Edge, NJ, USA, 2000, with a preface by Yu. A. Mitropolsky and an appendix by the authors and S. I. Trofimchu. View at: Publisher Site
13. R. P. Agarwal, D. O'Regan, and S. Staněk, “Positive and maximal positive solutions of singular mixed boundary value problem,” Central European Journal of Mathematics, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 694–716, 2009.
14. A. Cabada, A. Lomtatidze, and M. Tvrdý, “Periodic problem involving quasilinear differential operator and weak singularity,” Advanced Nonlinear Studies, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 629–649, 2007. View at: Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH
15. A. Capietto, J. Mawhin, and F. Zanolin, “A continuation approach to superlinear periodic boundary value problems,” Journal of Differential Equations, vol. 88, no. 2, pp. 347–395, 1990.
16. A. Capietto, J. Mawhin, and F. Zanolin, “Continuation theorems for periodic perturbations of autonomous systems,” Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 329, no. 1, pp. 41–72, 1992.
17. L. Cesari, “Functional analysis and periodic solutions of nonlinear differential equations,” Contributions to Differential Equations, vol. 1, pp. 149–187, 1963. View at: Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH
18. L. Cesari, Nonlinear Analysis and Alternative Methods, Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Rome, Italy, 1977, lecture series held in April 1974, contributi del centro linceo interdisciplinare di scienze matematiche e loro applicazioni, 39.
19. R. E. Gaines and J. L. Mawhin, Coincidence Degree, and Nonlinear Differential Equations, vol. 568 of Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 1977.
20. J. K. Hale, Oscillations in Nonlinear Systems, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, USA, 1963.
21. M. A. Krasnosel'skiĭ, G. M. Vaĭnikko, P. P. Zabreĭko, Ya. B. Rutitskii, and V. Y. Stetsenko, Approximate Solution of Operator Equations, Wolters-Noordhoff, Groningen, The Netherlands, 1972, translated from the Russian by D. Louvis.
22. M. A. Krasnosel'skiĭ and P. P. Zabreĭko, Geometrical Methods of Nonlinear Analysis, vol. 263 of Fundamental Principles of Mathematical Sciences, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 1984, translated from the Russian by C. C. Fenske.
23. J. Mawhin, Topological Degree Methods in Nonlinear Boundary Value Problems, vol. 40 of CBMS Regional Conference Series in Mathematics, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, USA, 1979, expository lectures from the CBMS Regional Conference held at Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, Calif., June, 1977.
24. I. Rachunková, “Strong singularities in mixed boundary value problems,” Mathematica Bohemica, vol. 131, no. 4, pp. 393–409, 2006. View at: Google Scholar
25. I. Rachunková, S. Staněk, and M. Tvrdý, Solvability of Nonlinear Singular Problems for Ordinary Differential Equations, vol. 5 of Contemporary Mathematics and Its Applications, Hindawi Publishing Corporation, New York, NY, USA, 2008.
26. S. Staněk, “Positive solutions of singular Dirichlet boundary value problems with time and space singularities,” Nonlinear Analysis, vol. 71, no. 10, pp. 4893–4905, 2009.
27. U. M. Ascher, R. M. M. Mattheij, and R. D. Russell, Numerical Solution of Boundary Value Problems for Ordinary Differential Equations, vol. 13 of Classics in Applied Mathematics, SIAM, Philadelphia, Pa, USA, 1995, corrected reprint of the 1988 original.
28. H. B. Keller, Numerical Methods for Two-Point Boundary Value Problems, Dover, New York, NY, USA, 1992, corrected reprint of the 1968 edition.
29. L. Cesari, Asymptotic Behavior and Stability Problems in Ordinary Differential Equations, Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete, Band 16, Springer, New York, NY, USA, 3rd edition, 1971.
30. A. M. Samoilenko, “A numerical-analytic method for investigation of periodic systems of ordinary differential equations. I,” Ukrainskiĭ Matematicheskiĭ Zhurnal, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 82–93, 1965. View at: Google Scholar
31. A. M. Samoilenko, “A numerical-analytic method for investigation of periodic systems of ordinary differential equations. II,” Ukrainskiĭ Matematicheskiĭ Zhurnal, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 50–59, 1966. View at: Google Scholar
32. A. M. Samoilenko and N. I. Ronto, Numerical-Analytic Methods of Investigating Periodic Solutions, Mir, Moscow, Russia, 1979, translated from the Russian by V. Shokurov, with a foreword by Yu. A. Mitropolskii.
33. A. M. Samoilenko and N. I. Ronto, Numerical-Analytic Methods of Investigation of Boundary-Value Problems, Naukova Dumka, Kiev, Ukraine, 1986, with an English summary, edited and with a preface by Yu. A. Mitropolskii.
34. A. M. Samoilenko and N. I. Ronto, Numerical-Analytic Methods in the Theory of Boundary-Value Problems for Ordinary Differential Equations, Naukova Dumka, Kiev, Ukraine, 1992, edited and with a preface by Yu. A. Mitropolskii.
35. A. Rontó and M. Rontó, “Successive approximation techniques in non-linear boundary value problems for ordinary differential equations,” in Handbook of Differential Equations: Ordinary Differential Equations. Vol. IV, Handbook of Differential Equations, pp. 441–592, Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
36. A. Augustynowicz and M. Kwapisz, “On a numerical-analytic method of solving of boundary value problem for functional-differential equation of neutral type,” Mathematische Nachrichten, vol. 145, pp. 255–269, 1990.
37. N. A. Evkhuta and P. P. Zabreiko, “A. M. Samoilenko's method for finding periodic solutions of quasilinear differential equations in a Banach space,” Ukrainian Mathematical Journal, vol. 37, no. 2, p. 162–168, 269, 1985. View at: Google Scholar
38. T. Jankowski, “Numerical-analytic method for implicit differential equations,” Miskolc Mathematical Notes, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 137–144, 2001. View at: Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH
39. T. Jankowski, “The application of numerical-analytic method for systems of differential equations with a parameter,” Ukrainian Mathematical Journal, vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 545–554, 2002. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
40. T. Jankowski, “Numerical-analytic methods for differential-algebraic systems,” Acta Mathematica Hungarica, vol. 95, no. 3, pp. 243–252, 2002.
41. T. Jankowski, “Monotone and numerical-analytic methods for differential equations,” Computers & Mathematics with Applications, vol. 45, no. 12, pp. 1823–1828, 2003.
42. M. Kwapisz, “On modifications of the integral equation of Samoĭlenko's numerical-analytic method of solving boundary value problems,” Mathematische Nachrichten, vol. 157, pp. 125–135, 1992. View at: Google Scholar
43. M. Kwapisz, “Some remarks on an integral equation arising in applications of numerical-analytic method of solving of boundary value problems,” Ukrainian Mathematical Journal, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 115–119, 1992.
44. A. Perov, L. Dikareva, S. Oleinikova, and M. Portnov, “On the convergence analysis of A. M. Samoilenko's method,” Vestnik Voronezhskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta. Seriya Fizika, Matematika, pp. 111–119, 2001. View at: Google Scholar
45. A. Ronto and M. Rontó, “A note on the numerical-analytic method for nonlinear two-point boundary-value problems,” Nonlinear Oscillations, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 112–128, 2001. View at: Google Scholar
46. A. Rontó and M. Rontó, “On a Cauchy-Nicoletti type three-point boundary value problem for linear differential equations with argument deviations,” Miskolc Mathematical Notes, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 173–205, 2009. View at: Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH
47. A. Rontó and M. Rontó, “Successive approximation method for some linear boundary value problems for differential equations with a special type of argument deviation,” Miskolc Mathematical Notes, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 69–95, 2009. View at: Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH
48. A. N. Ronto, “On some boundary value problems for Lipschitz differential equations,” Nelīnīĭnī Kolivannya, pp. 74–94, 1998. View at: Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH
49. A. N. Ronto, M. Rontó, A. M. Samoilenko, and S. I. Trofimchuk, “On periodic solutions of autonomous difference equations,” Georgian Mathematical Journal, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 135–164, 2001. View at: Google Scholar | Zentralblatt MATH
50. A. N. Ronto, M. Ronto, and N. M. Shchobak, “On the parametrization of three-point nonlinear boundary value problems,” Nonlinear Oscillations, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 384–402, 2004. View at: Google Scholar
51. N. I. Ronto, A. M. Samoilenko, and S. I. Trofimchuk, “The theory of the numerical-analytic method: achievements and new directions of development. I,” Ukrainian Mathematical Journal, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 116–135, 1998. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
52. N. I. Ronto, A. M. Samoilenko, and S. I. Trofimchuk, “The theory of the numerical-analytic method: achievements and new directions of development. II,” Ukrainian Mathematical Journal, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 255–277, 1998. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
53. N. I. Ronto, A. M. Samoilenko, and S. I. Trofimchuk, “The theory of the numerical-analytic method: achievements and new directions of development. III,” Ukrainian Mathematical Journal, vol. 50, no. 7, pp. 1091–1114, 1998. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
54. N. I. Ronto, A. M. Samoilenko, and S. I. Trofimchuk, “The theory of the numerical-analytic method: achievements and new directions of development. IV,” Ukrainian Mathematical Journal, vol. 50, no. 12, pp. 1888–1907, 1999. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
55. N. I. Ronto, A. M. Samoilenko, and S. I. Trofimchuk, “The theory of the numerical-analytic method: achievements and new directions of development. V,” Ukrainian Mathematical Journal, vol. 51, no. 5, pp. 735–747, 2000. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
56. N. I. Ronto, A. M. Samoilenko, and S. I. Trofimchuk, “The theory of the numerical-analytic method: achievements and new directions of development. VI,” Ukrainian Mathematical Journal, vol. 51, no. 7, pp. 1079–1094, 2000. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
57. N. I. Ronto, A. M. Samoilenko, and S. I. Trofimchuk, “The theory of the numerical-analytic method: achievements and new directions of development. VII,” Ukrainian Mathematical Journal, vol. 51, no. 9, pp. 1399–1418, 2000. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
58. M. Rontó and J. Mészáros, “Some remarks on the convergence of the numerical-analytical method of successive approximations,” Ukrainian Mathematical Journal, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 101–107, 1996. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar