Nonlinear Analysis 69 (2008) 1945–1952

www.elsevier.com/locate/na

Global asymptotic stability of solutions of

a functional integral equation
Józef Banaś a,∗ , Bapurao C. Dhage b
a Department of Mathematics, Rzeszów University of Technology, W. Pola 2, 35-959 Rzeszów, Poland
b Kasabai, Gurucul Colony, Ahmedpur - 413515, Distr. Latur, Maharashtra, India

Received 18 July 2007; accepted 23 July 2007

Abstract

Using the technique of measures of noncompactness we prove a theorem on the existence and global asymptotic stability of
solutions of a functional integral equation. The investigations are placed in the Banach space of real functions defined, continuous
and bounded on an unbounded interval. A few realizations of the result obtained are indicated.
c 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Functional integral equation; Measure of noncompactness; Fixed point theorem; Attractive solutions; Asymptotically stable solutions

1. Introduction

In this paper we are going to prove a theorem on the existence and global asymptotic stability of solutions of
a functional integral equation. Our investigations will be situated in the Banach space of real functions which are
defined, continuous and bounded on the real half-axis R+ . The mentioned equation has rather general form and
contains as particular cases a lot of functional equations and nonlinear integral equations of Volterra type. The main
tool used in our considerations is the technique of measures of noncompactness and the fixed point theorem of Darbo
type.
The measure of noncompactness used in the paper allows us not only to obtain the existence of solutions of the
mentioned functional integral equation but also to characterize those solutions in terms of global asymptotic stability.
This assertion means that all possible solutions of the functional integral equation in question are globally uniformly
attractive in the sense which will be defined later.
The assumptions imposed in our main existence theorem admit several natural realizations. Those realizations are
constructed with the help of a certain class of subadditive functions.
The results obtained in the paper generalize and extend several ones obtained earlier in a lot of papers concerning
asymptotic stability of solutions of some functional integral equations (cf. [3–5,8]). It is worthwhile mentioning that
the novelty of our approach consists mainly in the possibility of obtaining of the global asymptotic stability of solutions
of considered functional integral equations.

∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (J. Banaś).

c 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

0362-546X/$ - see front matter
doi:10.1016/j.na.2007.07.038
1946 J. Banaś, B.C. Dhage / Nonlinear Analysis 69 (2008) 1945–1952

2. Notation, definitions and auxiliary facts

This section is devoted to collecting some definitions and auxiliary results which will be needed in further
considerations.
At the beginning we present some basic facts concerning measures of noncompactness [1,2]. Assume that (E, k · k)
is an infinite dimensional Banach space with zero element θ. Denote by B(x, r ) the closed ball centered at x and with
radius r . We write Br to denote the ball B(θ, r ). If X is a subset of E then the symbols X , Conv X stand for the
closure and closed convex hull of X , respectively. Moreover, we denote by M E the family of all nonempty and
bounded subsets of E and by N E its subfamily consisting of all relatively compact sets.
We accept the following definition of the concept of a measure of noncompactness [1].

Definition 2.1. A mapping µ : M E → R+ = [0, ∞) is said to be a measure of noncompactness in E if it satisfies

the following conditions:
1◦ The family ker µ = {X ∈ M E : µ(X ) = 0} is nonempty and ker µ ⊂ N E .
2◦ X ⊂ Y ⇒ µ(X ) ≤ µ(Y ).
3◦ µ(X ) = µ(X ).
4◦ µ(Conv X ) = µ(X ).
5◦ µ(λX + (1 − λ)Y ) ≤ λµ(X ) + (1 − λ)µ(Y ) for λ ∈ [0, 1].
6◦ If (X n ) is a sequence of closed T
sets from M E such that X n+1 ⊂ X n (n = 1, 2, . . .) and if limn→∞ µ(X n ) = 0,
then the intersection set X ∞ = ∞ n=1 X n is nonempty.
The family ker µ described in 1◦ is said to be the kernel of the measure of noncompactness µ.
Observe that the intersection set X ∞ from 6◦ is a member of the family ker µ. In fact, since µ(X ∞ ) ≤ µ(X n ) for
any n, we infer that µ(X ∞ ) = 0. This yields that X ∞ ∈ ker µ. This simple observation will be essential in our further
investigations.
Now we formulate a fixed point theorem of Darbo type which will be used in the sequel [1].

Theorem 2.2. Let Ω be a nonempty, bounded, closed and convex subset of the Banach space E and let F : Ω → Ω
be a continuous mapping. Assume that there exists a constant k ∈ [0, 1) such that µ(F X ) ≤ kµ(X ) for any nonempty
subset X of Ω . Then F has a fixed point in the set Ω .

Remark 2.3. Let us denote by Fix F the set of all fixed points of the operator F which belong to Ω . It can be
shown [1] that the set Fix F belongs to the family ker µ.
Our further considerations will be placed in the Banach space BC(R+ ) consisting of all real functions x = x(t)
defined, continuous and bounded on R+ . This space is equipped with the standard supremum norm
kxk = sup{|x(t)| : t ∈ R+ }.
For our purposes we will use a measure of noncompactness introduced in [2]. To define this measure let us fix a
nonempty and bounded subset X of the space BC(R+ ) and a positive number T . For x ∈ X and ε ≥ 0 denote by
ω T (x, ε) the modulus of continuity of the function x on the interval [0, T ], i.e.
ω T (x, ε) = sup{|x(t) − x(s)| : t, s ∈ [0, T ], |t − s| ≤ ε}.
Next, let us put
ω T (X, ε) = sup{ω T (x, ε) : x ∈ X },
ω0T (X ) = lim ω T (X, ε),
ε→0
ω0 (X ) = lim ω0T (X ).
T →∞

Now, for a fixed number t ∈ R+ let us define

X (t) = {x(t) : x ∈ X }
 J. Banaś, B.C. Dhage / Nonlinear Analysis 69 (2008) 1945–1952 1947

and
diam X (t) = sup{|x(t) − y(t)| : x, y ∈ X }.
Finally, let us consider the function µ defined on the family M BC(R+ ) by the formula

µ(X ) = ω0 (X ) + lim sup diam X (t). (2.1)

t→∞

It can be shown [2] that the function µ is a measure of noncompactness in the space BC(R+ ). The kernel ker µ
of this measure consists of nonempty and bounded subsets X of BC(R+ ) such that functions from X are locally
equicontinuous on R+ and the thickness of the bundle formed by functions from X tends to zero at infinity.
The above expressed property of ker µ permits us to characterize solutions of the integral equation considered in
the sequel.
In order to introduce further concepts used in the paper let us assume that Ω is a nonempty subset of the space
BC(R+ ). Moreover, let Q be an operator defined on Ω with values in BC(R+ ).
Consider the operator equation of the form
x(t) = (Qx)(t), t ∈ R+ . (2.2)

Definition 2.4. We say that solutions of Eq. (2.2) are locally attractive if there exists a ball B(x0 , r ) in the space
BC(R+ ) such that for arbitrary solutions x = x(t) and y = y(t) of Eq. (2.2) belonging to B(x0 , r ) ∩ Ω we have that
lim (x(t) − y(t)) = 0. (2.3)
t→∞

In the case when the limit (2.3) is uniform with respect to the set B(x0 , r ) ∩ Ω , i.e. when for each ε > 0 there exists
T > 0 such that
|x(t) − y(t)| ≤ ε (2.4)
for all x, y ∈ B(x0 , r ) ∩ Ω being solutions of (2.2) and for t ≥ T , we will say that solutions of Eq. (2.2) are uniformly
locally attractive (or equivalently, that solutions of (2.2) are asymptotically stable).
Let us mention that the concept of attractivity of solutions was introduced in [8] while the concept of asymptotic
stability (in the above sense) was introduced in [3].
Now we recall the concept of global attractivity of solutions given in the paper [8] (cf. also [4]).

Definition 2.5. The solution x = x(t) of Eq. (2.2) is said to be globally attractive if (2.3) holds for each solution
y = y(t) of (2).
In other words we may say that solutions of Eq. (2.2) are globally attractive if for arbitrary solutions x(t) and y(t)
of (2.2) the condition (2.3) is satisfied.
In the case when the condition (2.3) is satisfied uniformly with respect to the set Ω , i.e. if for every ε > 0 there
exists T > 0 such that the inequality (2.4) is satisfied for all x, y ∈ Ω being solutions of (2.2) and for t ≥ T , we will
say that solutions of Eq. (2.2) are globally asymptotically stable (or uniformly globally attractive).

3. Main result and examples

In this section we will investigate the following functional integral equation:

Z β(t)
x(t) = f (t, x(α(t))) + g(t, s, x(γ (s)))ds, (3.1)
0
where t ∈ R+ .
Observe that the above equation includes several classes of functional, integral and functional integral equations
considered in the literature (cf. [3,5–10] and references therein). Let us also mention that the functional integral
equation considered in [3,5] is a special case of Eq. (3.1), where α(t) = β(t) = γ (t) = t.
Eq. (3.1) will be considered under the following assumptions:
1948 J. Banaś, B.C. Dhage / Nonlinear Analysis 69 (2008) 1945–1952

(i) The functions α, β, γ : R+ → R+ are continuous and α(t) → ∞ as t → ∞.

(ii) The function f : R+ × R → R is continuous and there exist positive constants L , M such that
M|x − y|
| f (t, x) − f (t, y)| ≤
L + |x − y|
for t ∈ R+ and for x, y ∈ R. Moreover, we assume that M < L.
(iii) The function t → f (t, 0) is bounded on R+ with F = sup{ f (t, 0) : t ∈ R+ }.
(iv) The function g : R+ × R+ × R → R is continuous and there exist functions a, b : R+ → R+ such that
|g(t, s, x)| ≤ a(t)b(s)
for t, s ∈ R+ . Moreover, we assume that
Z β(t)
lim a(t) b(s)ds = 0.
t→∞ 0
Then we can formulate our main result.
Theorem 3.1. Under the above assumptions the functional integral equation (3.1) has at least one solution in the
space BC(R+ ). Moreover, solutions of Eq. (3.1) are globally asymptotically stable.
Proof. Consider the operator H defined on the space BC(R+ ) by the formula
Z β(t)
(H x)(t) = f (t, x(α(t))) + g(t, s, x(γ (s)))ds.
0
Observe that in view of our assumptions, for any function x ∈ BC(R+ ) the function H x is continuous on R+ .
Moreover, for arbitrarily fixed t ∈ R+ we obtain
Z β(t)
|(H x)(t)| ≤ | f (t, x(α(t)))| + |g(t, s, x(γ (s)))|ds
0
Z β(t)
≤ | f (t, x(α(t))) − f (t, 0)| + | f (t, 0)| + a(t)b(s)ds
0
Z β(t)
M|x(α(t))|
≤ + | f (t, 0)| + a(t) b(s)ds
L + |x(α(t))| 0
Mkxk Mkxk
≤ + F + v(t) ≤ +F+V
L + kxk L + kxk
≤ M + F + V,
where we defined
Z β(t)
v(t) = a(t) b(s)ds, V = sup{v(t) : t ∈ R+ }.
0
Obviously in view of assumption (iv) we infer that V is finite.
From the above estimate we deduce that
kH xk ≤ M + F + V (3.2)
which means that the operator H transforms the space BC(R+ ) into itself. More precisely, from (3.2) we obtain that
the operator H transforms the space BC(R+ ) into the ball Br , where r = M + F + V .
In what follows we will consider the operator H as a mapping from Br into itself.
Now we show that the operator H is continuous on the ball Br . To do this let us fix arbitrarily ε > 0 and take
x, y ∈ Br such that kx − yk ≤ ε. Then we get
Z β(t)
|(H x)(t) − (H y)(t)| ≤ | f (t, x(α(t))) − f (t, y(α(t)))| + |g(t, s, x(γ (s))) − g(t, s, y(γ (s)))|ds
0
M|x(α(t)) − y(α(t))|
Z β(t)
≤ + [|g(t, s, x(γ (s)))| + |g(t, s, y(γ (s)))|]ds
L + |x(α(t)) − y(α(t))| 0
 J. Banaś, B.C. Dhage / Nonlinear Analysis 69 (2008) 1945–1952 1949

Mkx − yk
Z β(t)
≤ +2 a(t)b(s)ds ≤ ε + 2v(t). (3.3)
L + kx − yk 0
Hence, by virtue of assumption (iv) we infer that there exists T > 0 such that v(t) ≤ ε for t ≥ T . Thus, for t ≥ T
from the estimate (3.3) we derive that
|(H x)(t) − (H y)(t)| ≤ 3ε. (3.4)
Further, let us assume that t ∈ [0, T ]. Then, evaluating similarly to above we get
Z β(t)
|(H x)(t) − (H y)(t)| ≤ ε + |g(t, s, x(γ (s))) − g(t, s, y(γ (s)))|ds
0
Z β(t)
≤ ε+ ωrT (g, ε)ds ≤ ε + βT ωrT (g, ε), (3.5)
0
where we defined
βT = sup{β(t) : t ∈ [0, T ]},
ωrT (g, ε) = sup{|g(t, s, x) − g(t, s, y)| : t, s ∈ [0, T ], x, y ∈ [−r, r ], |x − y| ≤ ε}.
Obviously we have that βT < ∞. Moreover, from the uniform continuity of the function g(t, s, x) on the set
[0, T ] × [0, T ] × [−r, r ] we derive that ωrT (g, ε) → 0 as ε → 0.
Now, linking (3.4) and (3.5) and the above established facts we conclude that the operator H maps the ball Br
continuously into itself.
Now let us take a nonempty subset X of the ball Br . Next, fix arbitrarily T > 0 and ε > 0. Let us choose x ∈ X
and t1 , t2 ∈ [0, T ] with |t2 − t1 | ≤ ε. Without loss of generality we may assume that t1 < t2 . Then, taking into account
our assumptions, we get
|(H x)(t2 ) − (H x)(t1 )| ≤ | f (t2 , x(α(t2 ))) − f (t2 , x(α(t1 )))| + | f (t2 , x(α(t1 ))) − f (t1 , x(α(t1 )))|
Z 
 β(t2 ) Z β(t2 ) 
+ g(t2 , s, x(γ (s)))ds − g(t1 , s, x(γ (s)))ds 
 
 0 0 
Z 
 β(t2 ) Z β(t1 ) 
+ g(t1 , s, x(γ (s)))ds − g(t1 , s, x(γ (s)))ds 
 
 0 0 
M|x(α(t2 )) − x(α(t1 ))|
≤ + ωrT ( f, ε)
L + |x(α(t2 )) − x(α(t1 ))|
Z β(t2 ) Z 
 β(t2 ) 
+ |g(t2 , s, x(γ (s))) − g(t1 , s, x(γ (s)))|ds +  |g(t1 , s, x(γ (s)))|ds 
 
0  β(t1 ) 
Mω T (x, ω T (α, ε))
Z βT
≤ + ωrT ( f, ε) + ωrT (g, ε)ds + ω T (β, ε)G rT ,
L + ω (x, ω (α, ε))
T T
0
where we defined
ωrT ( f, ε) = sup{| f (t2 , x) − f (t1 , x)| : t1 , t2 ∈ [0, T ], |t2 − t1 | ≤ ε, x ∈ [−r, r ]},
ωrT (g, ε) = sup{|g(t2 , s, x) − g(t1 , s, x)| : t1 , t2 ∈ [0, T ], |t2 − t1 | ≤ ε, s ∈ [0, βT ], x ∈ [−r, r ]},
G rT = sup{|g(t, s, x)| : t ∈ [0, T ], s ∈ [0, βT ], x ∈ [−r, r ]}.
From the above estimate we derive the following one:

Mω T (X, ω T (α, ε))

Z βT
ω (H X, ε) ≤
T
+ ωrT ( f, ε) + ωrT (g, ε)ds + ω T (β, ε)G rT . (3.6)
L + ω T (X, ω T (α, ε)) 0

Observe that ωrT ( f, ε) → 0 and ωrT (g, ε) → 0 as ε → 0, which are simple consequences of the uniform continuity of
the functions f and g on the sets [0, T ] × [−r, r ] and [0, T ] × [0, βT ] × [−r, r ], respectively. Moreover, it is obvious
1950 J. Banaś, B.C. Dhage / Nonlinear Analysis 69 (2008) 1945–1952

that the constant G rT is finite and ω T (α, ε) → 0, ω T (β, ε) → 0 as ε → 0. Thus, linking the established facts with the
estimate (3.6) we get
Mω0T (X ) M T
ω0T (H X ) ≤ ≤ ω (X ).
L + ω0T (X ) L 0
Consequently, we obtain
M
ω0 (H X ) ≤ ω0 (X ). (3.7)
L
Now, taking into account our assumptions, for arbitrarily fixed t ∈ R+ and for x, y ∈ X we deduce the following
estimate (cf. the estimate (3.3)):
Z β(t)
M|x(α(t)) − y(α(t))|
|(H x)(t) − (H y)(t)| ≤ + [|g(t, s, x(γ (s)))| + |g(t, s, y(γ (s)))|]ds
L + |x(α(t)) − y(α(t))| 0
M|x(α(t)) − y(α(t))|
≤ + 2v(t)
L + |x(α(t)) − y(α(t))|
Mdiam X (α(t))
≤ + 2v(t).
L + diam X (α(t))
Hence we obtain
Mdiam X (α(t))
diam (H X )(t) ≤ + 2v(t).
L + diam X (α(t))
In view of assumptions (i) and (iv) this yields
M lim sup diam X (α(t))
t→∞
lim sup diam (H X )(t) ≤
t→∞ L + lim sup diam X (α(t))
t→∞
M lim sup diam X (t)
t→∞
= .
L + lim sup diam X (t)
t→∞
The above inequality implies
M
lim sup diam (H X )(t) ≤ lim sup diam X (t). (3.8)
t→∞ L t→∞
Further, using the measure of noncompactness µ defined by the formula (2.1) and keeping in mind the estimates (3.7)
and (3.8), we obtain
M
µ(H X ) ≤ µ(X ).
L
Since M/L < 1 in view of assumption (ii), from the above estimate and Theorem 2.2 we deduce that the operator H
has a fixed point x in the ball Br . Obviously x is a solution of the functional integral equation (3.1). Moreover, taking
into account that the image of the space BC(R+ ) under the operator H is contained in the ball Br we infer that the
set Fix H of all fixed points of H is contained in Br . Obviously, the set Fix H contains all solutions of Eq. (3.1).
On the other hand, from Remark 2.3 we conclude that the set Fix H belongs to the family ker µ.
Now, taking into account the description of sets belonging to ker µ (given in Section 2) we deduce that all solutions
of Eq. (3.1) are globally asymptotically stable.
This completes the proof. 
In what follows we show that the assumptions imposed in Theorem 3.1 admit some natural realizations.
Namely, let us assume that the function f = f (t, x) that appeared in Eq. (3.1) has the form
Φ(|x|)
f (t, x) = m(t) + n(t), (3.9)
L + Φ(|x|)
 J. Banaś, B.C. Dhage / Nonlinear Analysis 69 (2008) 1945–1952 1951

where the functions m, n : R+ → R are continuous and bounded on R+ i.e. m, n ∈ BC(R+ ). Moreover, we assume
that Φ : R+ → R+ is a continuous and nondecreasing function on R+ such that Φ(r ) ≤ r for r ∈ R+ . Apart from
this it is assumed that Φ is subadditive on R+ which means that Φ( p + q) ≤ Φ( p) + Φ(q) for p, q ∈ R+ .
Now, let us consider the function ϕ : R → R defined by the formula
Φ(|x|)
ϕ(x) = . (3.10)
L + Φ(|x|)
Observe that keeping in mind the above imposed assumptions concerning the function Φ (obviously L is assumed to
be positive), for arbitrary x, y ∈ R we get
Φ(|x + y|) Φ(|x| + |y|)
ϕ(x + y) = ≤
L + Φ(|x + y|) L + Φ(|x| + |y|)
Φ(|x|) + Φ(|y|) Φ(|x|) Φ(|y|)
≤ ≤ +
L + Φ(|x|) + Φ(|y|) L + Φ(|x|) L + Φ(|y|)
= ϕ(x) + ϕ(y).
This shows that the function ϕ is subadditive.
Further, using standard calculations we can see that for any function q : R → R which is subadditive on R, we
have
|q(x) − q(y)| ≤ q(|x − y|)
for x, y ∈ R. This implies that the function ϕ defined by (3.10) satisfies the following inequality:
|ϕ(x) − ϕ(y)| ≤ ϕ(|x − y|), (3.11)
for x, y ∈ R.
Now observe that the function f (t, x) defined by (3.9) may be written in the form
f (t, x) = m(t)ϕ(x) + n(t).
Thus, combining the above expression with (3.10) and (3.11) we get
Φ(|x − y|)
| f (t, x) − f (t, y)| ≤ |m(t)||ϕ(x) − ϕ(y)| ≤ kmkϕ(|x − y|) = kmk .
L + Φ(|x − y|)
Hence we obtain
|x − y|
| f (t, x) − f (t, y)| ≤ kmk .
L + |x − y|
This shows that the function f (t, x) defined by (3.9) satisfies assumption (ii) of Theorem 3.1 provided we assume
that kmk < L. Obviously this function satisfies also assumption (iii) since f (t, 0) = n(t) is assumed to be bounded
on R+ .
Now, let us notice that the functions given below are examples of the function Φ appearing in formula (3.9) which
satisfy the above imposed assumptions:
Φ(r ) = r,
Φ(r ) = ln(1 + r ),
Φ(r ) = arctg
√ r,
Φ(r ) = 2( 1 + r − 1).
Finally, we provide an example of a functional integral equation of the form (3.1) for which the assumptions of
Theorem 3.1 are satisfied.
Example 3.2. Consider the following functional integral equation:
Z t 3/2 √
−t t2 + 2 arctg x(2t) ln(1 + s|x( s)|)
x(t) = e + 2 · + √ ds, (3.12)
t + 1 π + arctg(2t) 0 (1 + t 4 )(1 + x 2 ( s))
where t ∈ R+ .
1952 J. Banaś, B.C. Dhage / Nonlinear Analysis 69 (2008) 1945–1952
√
Observe that Eq. (3.12) is a special case of Eq. (3.1), where α(t) = 2t, β(t) = t 3/2 , γ (t) = t and
t2
+2 arctg x
f (t, x) = · + e−t ,
+ 1 π + arctg x
t2
ln(1 + s|x|)
g(t, s, x) = .
(1 + t 4 )(1 + x 2 )
Obviously the functions α, β and γ satisfy assumption (i). Further, notice that the function f (t, x) has the form
(3.9) with n(t) = e−t and m(t) = (t 2 + 2)/(t 2 + 1). Moreover, Φ(r ) = acrtg r , L = π . Since kmk = 2 we have
that kmk/L = 2/π < 1. Additionally we have that the function Φ satisfies the above discussed requirements, so the
function f (t, x) satisfies assumption (ii). Taking into account that f (t, 0) = n(t) = e−t we see that assumption (iii)
is also satisfied.
Finally observe that the function g(t, s, x) is continuous on R+ × R+ × R and
s|x| s
|g(t, s, x)| ≤ ≤ .
(1 + t 4 )(1 + x 2 ) 1 + t4
Thus we can put a(t) = 1/(1 + t 4 ) and b(s) = s. Indeed, we have
Z β(t) Z t 3/2
1 t3
a(t) b(s)ds = sds = .
0 1 + t4 0 1 + t4
This yields that assumption (iv) is satisfied.
Now, on the basis of Theorem 3.1 we conclude that the functional integral equation (3.12) has solutions in the
space BC(R+ ) and all solutions of this equation are globally asymptotically stable.

Acknowledgement

The first author (J. Banaś) is supported by Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnologia, the project MTM 2007-65706
(Spain).

References

[1] J. Banaś, K. Goebel, Measures of Noncompactness in Banach Space, in: Lecture Notes in Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 60, Dekker,
New York, 1980.
[2] J. Banaś, Measures of noncompactness in the space of continuous tempered functions, Demonstratio Math. 14 (1981) 127–133.
[3] J. Banaś, B. Rzepka, An application of a measure of noncompactness in the study of asymptotic stability, Appl. Math. Lett. 16 (2003) 1–6.
[4] J. Banaś, D. O’Regan, On existence and local attractivity of solutions of a quadratic Volterra integral equation of fractional order, Preprint.
[5] T.A. Burton, B. Zhang, Fixed points and stability of an integral equation: Nonuniqueness, Appl. Math. Lett. 17 (2004) 839–846.
[6] K. Deimling, Nonlinear Functional Analysis, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1985.
[7] B.C. Dhage, S. Ntouyas, Existence results for nonlinear functional integral equations via a fixed point theorem of Krasnosel’skii–Schaefer
type, Nonlinear Stud. 9 (2002) 307–317.
[8] X. Hu, J. Yan, The global attractivity and asymptotic stability of solution of a nonlinear integral equation, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 321 (2006)
147–156.
[9] D. O’Regan, M. Meehan, Existence Theory for Nonlinear Integral and Integrodifferential Equations, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 1998.
[10] M. Väth, Volterra and Integral Equations of Vector Functions, in: Pure and Applied Mathematics, Marcel Dekker, New York, 2000.