Dynamic Systems and Applications, 28, No.

2 (2019), 217-242 ISSN: 1056-2176

EXPLICIT CRITERIA FOR THE OSCILLATION OF

DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS WITH SEVERAL ARGUMENTS

GEORGE E. CHATZARAKIS1 AND IRENA JADLOVSKÁ2

1
Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering Educators
School of Pedagogical and Technological Education (ASPETE)
14121, N. Heraklio, Athens, GREECE
2
Departmens of Mathematics and Theoretical Informatics
Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Informatics
Technical University of Košice
Letná 9, 042 00 Košice, SLOVAKIA

ABSTRACT: In this paper we are concerned with the oscillations of differential

equations with several non-monotone deviating arguments and nonnegative coeffi-
cients. We present new sufficient conditions, involving lim sup and lim inf, for the
oscillation of all solutions which essentially improve several known criteria existing
in the literature. We illustrate the results and the improvement over other known
oscillation criteria by examples, numerically solved in MATLAB.

AMS Subject Classification: 34K11, 34K06

Key Words: differential equation, non-monotone argument, oscillatory solution,
nonoscillatory solution

Received: October 3, 2018 ; Revised: January 28, 2019 ;

Published (online): February 18, 2019 doi: 10.12732/dsa.v28i2.1
Dynamic Publishers, Inc., Acad. Publishers, Ltd. https://acadsol.eu/dsa

1. INTRODUCTION

Consider the first-order linear differential equation with several variable deviating
arguments of either delay (DDE)
Xm
x′ (t) + pi (t)x (τi (t)) = 0, ∀t ≥ t0 , (E)
i=1
or advanced type (ADE)
Xm
x′ (t) − qi (t)x (σi (t)) = 0, t ≥ t0 , (E ′ )
i=1
218 G.E. CHATZARAKIS AND I. JADLOVSKÁ

where pi , qi , 1 ≤ i ≤ m, are nonnegative real functions, and τi , σi , 1 ≤ i ≤ m, are

positive real functions such that

τi (t) < t, t ≥ t0 and lim τi (t) = ∞, 1≤i≤m (1.1)

t→∞

and
σi (t) > t, t ≥ t0 , 1 ≤ i ≤ m, (1.2)
respectively.
A solution of (E) of (E ′ ) is an absolutely continuous on [t0 , ∞) function satisfying
(E) or (E ′ ) for almost all t ≥ t0 .
A solution of (E) or (E ′ ) is oscillatory, if it is neither eventually positive nor
eventually negative. If there exists an eventually positive or an eventually negative
solution, the equation is nonoscillatory. An equation is oscillatory if all its solutions
oscillate.
The problem of establishing sufficient conditions for the oscillation of all solutions
of equations (E) or (E ′ ) has been the subject of many investigations. The reader
is referred to [1−4, 6−18, 20−24] and the references cited therein. Most of these
papers concern the special case where the arguments are nondecreasing, while a small
number of these papers are dealing with the general case where the arguments are
not necessarily monotone. See, for example, [1−4, 8, 13] and the references cited
therein. Apart from the pure mathematical interest, the importance of considering
non-monotone arguments is justified by the fact that they approximate the natural
phenomena described by equations of the type (E) or (E ′ ). That is because there
are always natural disturbances (e.g. noise in communication systems) that affect all
the parameters of the equation and therefore the fair (from a mathematical point of
view) monotone arguments become non-monotone almost always.
Throughout this paper, we are going to use the following notation:
Z t X Z σ(t) X
m m
α := lim inf pi (s)ds, β := lim inf qi (s)ds
t→∞ τ (t) i=1 t→∞ t i=1

and 

 0, if ω > 1/e

D(ω) := √
 1−ω−
 1 − 2ω − ω 2
, if ω ∈ [0, 1/e] .

2

1.1. DDES

By Remark 2.7.3 in [19], it is clear that if τi (t), 1 ≤ i ≤ m are nondecreasing and

Z t X
m
lim sup pi (s)ds > 1, (1.3)
t→∞ τ (t) i=1
EXPLICIT CRITERIA FOR THE OSCILLATION 219

where τ (t) = max1≤i≤m {τi (t)}, then all solutions of (E) oscillate. This result is
similar to Theorem 2.1.3 [19] which is a special case of Ladas, Lakshmikantham and
Papadakis’s result [16].
In 1978 Ladde [18] and in 1982 Ladas and Stavroulakis [17] proved that if
t
1
Z Xm
lim inf pi (s)ds > , (1.4)
t→∞ τ (t) i=1 e

then all solutions of (E) oscillate.

In 1984, Hunt and Yorke [9] proved that if t − τi (t) ≤ τ0 , 1 ≤ i ≤ m, and
Xm 1
lim inf pi (t) (t − τi (t)) > , (1.5)
t→∞ i=1 e
then all solutions of (E) oscillate.
Assume that τi (t), 1 ≤ i ≤ m are not necessarily monotone. Set

hi (t) = sup τi (s), t ≥ t0 and h(t) = max hi (t), t ≥ t0 (1.6)

t0 ≤s≤t 1≤i≤m

and
Z t X 
m
a1 (t, s) := exp pi (ζ)dζ
s i=1
Z t X  (1.7)
m
ar+1 (t, s) := exp pi (ζ)ar (ζ, τi (ζ))dζ .
s i=1

Clearly, hi (t), h(t) are nondecreasing and τi (t) ≤ hi (t) ≤ h(t) < t for all t ≥ t0 .
In 2016, Braverman, Chatzarakis and Stavroulakis [1] proved that if for some
r∈N Z t X
m
lim sup pi (ζ)ar (h(t), τi (ζ))dζ > 1, (1.8)
t→∞ h(t) i=1

or Z t Xm
lim sup pi (ζ)ar (h(t), τi (ζ))dζ > 1 − D(α), (1.9)
t→∞ h(t) i=1

or
t
1
Z Xm
lim inf pi (ζ)ar (h(t), τi (ζ))dζ > , (1.10)
t→∞ h(t) i=1 e
then all solutions of (E) oscillate.
In 2017, Chatzarakis and Péics [3] proved that if
t
1 + ln λ0
Z Xm
lim sup pi (ζ)ar (h(ζ), τi (ζ))dζ > − D(α), (1.11)
t→∞ h(t) i=1 λ0

where λ0 is the smaller root of the transcendental equation eαλ = λ, then all solutions
of (E) oscillate.
220 G.E. CHATZARAKIS AND I. JADLOVSKÁ

In the same year, Chatzarakis [4] proved that if

" Z t Z t ! ! #
Z u
P j (t) = P (t) 1 + P (s) exp P (u) exp P j−1 (ξ)dξ du ds ,
τ (t) τ (s) τ (u)

Pm
with P 0 (t) = P (t) = i=1 pi (t), then for some j ∈ N either one of the conditions
!
Z t Z h(t)
lim sup P (s) exp P j (u)du ds > 1, (1.12)
t→∞ h(t) τ (s)

!
Z t Z h(t)
lim sup P (s) exp P j (u)du ds > 1 − D(α), (1.13)
t→∞ h(t) τ (s)
!
t h(s)
1 + ln λ0
Z Z
lim sup P (s) exp − D(α),
P j (u)du ds > (1.14)
t→∞ h(t) τ (s) λ0
Z t Z t !
1
lim sup P (s) exp P j (u)du ds > (1.15)
t→∞ h(t) τ (s) D(α)

and !
t h(s)
1
Z Z
lim inf P (s) exp P j (u)du ds > , (1.16)
t→∞ h(t) τ (s) e

implies that all solutions of (E) are oscillatory.

1.2. ADES

For Eq. (E ′ ), the dual condition of (1.3) is

Z σ(t) Xm
lim sup qi (s)ds > 1, (1.17)
t→∞ t i=1

where σi (t), 1 ≤ i ≤ m are nondecreasing and σ(t) = min1≤i≤m {σi (t)}, see [19],
paragraph 2.7.
In 1978 Ladde [18] and in 1982 Ladas and Stavroulakis [17] proved that if
σ(t)
1
Z Xm
lim inf qi (s)ds > , (1.18)
t→∞ t i=1 e

then all solutions of (E ′ ) oscillate.

In 1990, Zhou [24] proved that if σi (t) − t ≤ σ0 , 1 ≤ i ≤ m, and
Xm 1
lim inf qi (t) (σi (t) − t) > , (1.19)
t→∞ i=1 e
then all solutions of (E ′ ) oscillate. (See also [5, Corollary 2.6.12])
EXPLICIT CRITERIA FOR THE OSCILLATION 221

Assume that σi (t), 1 ≤ i ≤ m are not necessarily monotone. Set

ρi (t) = inf σi (s), t ≥ t0 and ρ(t) = min ρi (t), t ≥ t0 (1.20)

s≥t 1≤i≤m

and
Z s Xm 
b1 (t, s) := exp qi (ζ)dζ
i=1
Zt s X  (1.21)
m
br+1 (t, s) := exp qi (ζ)br (t, σi (ζ))dζ .
t i=1

Clearly, ρi (t), ρ(t) are nondecreasing and σi (t) ≥ ρi (t) ≥ ρ(t) > t for all t ≥ t0 .
In 2016, Braverman, Chatzarakis and Stavroulakis [1] proved that if for some
r∈N Z ρ(t) X
m
lim sup qi (ζ)br (ρ(t), σi (ζ)) dζ > 1, (1.22)
t→∞ t i=1

or Z ρ(t) Xm
lim sup qi (ζ)br (ρ(t), σi (ζ)) dζ > 1 − D(β), (1.23)
t→∞ t i=1

or
ρ(t)
1
Z Xm
lim inf qi (ζ)br (ρ(t), σi (ζ)) dζ > , (1.24)
t→∞ t i=1 e
then all solutions of (E ′ ) oscillate.
In 2017, Chatzarakis [4] proved that if
" Z σ(t) Z σ(s) ! ! #
Z σ(u)
Qj (t) = Q(t) 1 + Q(s) exp Q(u) exp Qj−1 (ξ)dξ du ds ,
t t u

Pm
with Q0 (t) = Q(t) = i=1 qi (t), then, for some j ∈ N either one of the conditions
!
Z ρ(t) Z σ(s)
lim sup Q(s) exp Qj (u)du ds > 1, (1.25)
t→∞ t ρ(t)

!
Z ρ(t) Z σ(s)
lim sup Q(s) exp Qj (u)du ds > 1 − D(β), (1.26)
t→∞ t ρ(t)
!
ρ(t) σ(s)
1
Z Z
lim sup Q(s) exp Qj (u)du ds > , (1.27)
t→∞ t t D(β)
!
ρ(t) σ(s)
1 + ln λ0
Z Z
lim sup Q(s) exp Qj (u)du ds > − D(β) (1.28)
t→∞ t ρ(s) λ0
and !
ρ(t) σ(s)
1
Z Z
lim inf Q(s) exp Qj (u)du ds > , (1.29)
t→∞ t ρ(s) e
222 G.E. CHATZARAKIS AND I. JADLOVSKÁ

implies that all solutions of (E ′ ) are oscillatory.

The purpose of this paper is to derive sufficient conditions for all solutions of (E)
and (E ′ ) to be oscillatory when the arguments are not necessarily monotone. Our
results essentially improve several known criteria existing in the literature.

2. MAIN RESULTS

2.1. DDES

Based on an iterative technique, we further study (E) and derive new sufficient os-
cillation conditions, involving lim sup and lim inf, which essentially improve several
results in the literature.
We now cite three lemmas which will be used in the proof of our next results.
The proofs of them are similar to the proofs of Lemmas 2.1.1, 2.1.3 and 2.1.2 in [5],
respectively.

Lemma 1. Assume that h(t) is defined by (1.6). Then

Z t Xm Z t Xm
lim inf pi (s)ds = lim inf pi (s)ds. (2.1)
t→∞ τ (t) i=1 t→∞ h(t) i=1

Lemma 2. Assume that x is an eventually positive solution of (E) and h(t) is

defined by (1.6). Then
x(t)
lim inf ≥ D(α). (2.2)
t→∞ x(h(t))

Lemma 3. Assume that x is an eventually positive solution of (E) and h(t) is

defined by (1.6). Then
x(h(t))
lim inf ≥ λ0 , (2.3)
t→∞ x(t)
where λ0 is the smaller root of the transcendental equation λ = eαλ .

Based on the above lemmas, we establish the following theorems.

Theorem 4. Assume that h(t) is defined by (1.6) and for some ℓ ∈ N

! !
Z t Z Z h(t) u
lim sup P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ)dξ du ds > 1, (2.4)
t→∞ h(t) τ (s) τ (u)

where
" ! ! #
Z t Z t Z u
Gℓ (t) = P (t) 1 + P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ−1 (ξ)dξ du ds , (2.5)
τ (t) τ (s) τ (u)
 EXPLICIT CRITERIA FOR THE OSCILLATION 223

h Rt  R  i
t Pm
with G0 (t) = P (t) 1 + τ (t) P (s) exp λ0 τ (s) P (u)du ds , P (t) = i=1 pi (t) and
λ0 is the smaller root of the transcendental equation λ = eαλ . Then all solutions of
(E) are oscillatory.

Proof. Assume, for the sake of contradiction, that there exists a nonoscillatory solu-
tion x(t) of (E). Since −x(t) is also a solution of (E), we can confine our discussion
only to the case where the solution x(t) is eventually positive. Then there exists a
t1 > t0 such that x(t) and x (τi (t)) > 0 for all t ≥ t1 . Thus, from (E) we have
Xm
x′ (t) = − pi (t)x (τi (t)) ≤ 0 for all t ≥ t1 ,
i=1

which means that x(t) is an eventually nonincreasing function of positive numbers.

Now we divide (E) by x (t) > 0 and integrate on [s, t], so
Z t ′ Z tX
x (u) m x (τi (u))
du = − pi (u) du,
s x(u) s i=1 x(u)
or
t Z t X
x′ (u)  x (τ (u))
Z
m
du ≤ − pi (u) du,
s x(u) s i=1 x(u)
or
t t
x′ (u) x (τ (u))
Z Z
du ≤ − P (u) du.
s x(u) s x(u)
Therefore
t
x(t) x (τ (u))
Z
ln ≤− P (u) du,
x(s) s x(u)
i.e., Z t 
x (τ (u))
x(s) ≥ x(t) exp P (u) du . (2.6)
s x(u)
Since τ (s) < s ≤ t, (2.6) gives
!
t
x (τ (u))
Z
x(τ (s)) ≥ x(t) exp P (u) du . (2.7)
τ (s) x(u)

Integrating (E) from τ (t) to t, we have

Z t X
m
x(t) − x(τ (t)) + pi (s)x (τi (s)) ds = 0
τ (t) i=1

or Z t
x(t) − x(τ (t)) + P (s)x (τ (s)) ds ≤ 0. (2.8)
τ (t)

Combining (2.7) and (2.8), we have

!
t t
x (τ (u))
Z Z
x(t) − x(τ (t)) + x(t) P (s) exp P (u) du ds ≤ 0.
τ (t) τ (s) x(u)
224 G.E. CHATZARAKIS AND I. JADLOVSKÁ

Multiplying the last inequality by P (t), we take

!
t t
x (τ (u))
Z Z
P (t)x(t) − P (t)x(τ (t)) + P (t)x(t) P (s) exp P (u) du ds ≤ 0.
τ (t) τ (s) x(u)
(2.9)
Furthermore,
Xm Xm
x′ (t) = − pi (t)x (τi (t)) ≤ −x (τ (t)) pi (t) = −P (t)x (τ (t)) . (2.10)
i=1 i=1

Combining the inequalities (2.9) and (2.10), we have

!
t t
x (τ (u))
Z Z
′
x (t) + P (t)x(t) + P (t)x(t) P (s) exp P (u) du ds ≤ 0.
τ (t) τ (s) x(u)

Since τ (u) ≤ h(u), clearly

!
t t
x (h(u))
Z Z
x′ (t) + P (t)x(t) + P (t)x(t) P (s) exp P (u) du ds ≤ 0.
τ (t) τ (s) x(u)

Taking into account the fact that (2.3) of Lemma 3 is satisfied, the last inequality
becomes
Z t Z t !
′
x (t) + P (t)x(t) + P (t)x(t) P (s) exp (λ0 − ǫ) P (u)du ds ≤ 0.
τ (t) τ (s)

Thus
" ! #
Z t Z t
′
x (t) + P (t) 1 + P (s) exp (λ0 − ǫ) P (u)du ds x(t) ≤ 0,
τ (t) τ (s)

or
x′ (t) + G0 (t, ǫ)x(t) ≤ 0, (2.11)
with " ! #
Z t Z t
G0 (t, ǫ) = P (t) 1 + P (s) exp (λ0 − ǫ) P (u)du ds .
τ (t) τ (s)

Applying the Grönwall inequality in (2.11), we obtain

Z t 
x(s) ≥ x(t) exp G0 (ξ, ǫ)dξ , t ≥ s.
s

Thus !
Z u
x(τ (u)) ≥ x(u) exp G0 (ξ, ǫ)dξ . (2.12)
τ (u)

Now we divide (E) by x (t) > 0 and integrate on [s, t], so

Z t ′ Z tX Z t
x (u) m x (τi (u)) x (τ (u))
− du = pi (u) du ≥ P (u) du,
s x(u) s i=1 x(u) s x(u)
EXPLICIT CRITERIA FOR THE OSCILLATION 225

or !
t t u
x(s) x (τ (u))
Z Z Z
ln ≥ P (u) du ≥ P (u) exp G0 (ξ, ǫ)dξ du.
x(t) s x(u) s τ (u)

or ! !
Z t Z u
x(s) ≥ x(t) exp P (u) exp G0 (ξ, ǫ)dξ du . (2.13)
s τ (u)

Setting s = τ (s) in (2.13) we take

! !
Z t Z u
x(τ (s)) ≥ x(t) exp P (u) exp G0 (ξ, ǫ)dξ du . (2.14)
τ (s) τ (u)

Combining (2.8) and (2.14) we obtain

! !
Z t Z t Z u
x(t) − x(τ (t)) + x(t) P (s) exp P (u) exp G0 (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds ≤ 0.
τ (t) τ (s) τ (u)

Multiplying the last inequality by P (t), we find

P (t)x(t) − P (t)x(τ (t))

Z t ! !
Z t Z u
+ P (t)x(t) P (s) exp P (u) exp G0 (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds ≤ 0,
τ (t) τ (s) τ (u)

which, in view of (2.10), becomes

! !
Z t Z t Z u
′
x (t)+P (t)x(t)+P (t)x(t) P (s) exp P (u) exp G0 (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds ≤ 0.
τ (t) τ (s) τ (u)

Hence, for sufficiently large t

" ! ! #
Z t Z t Z u
′
x (t) + P (t) 1 + P (s) exp P (u) exp G0 (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds x(t) ≤ 0,
τ (t) τ (s) τ (u)

or
x′ (t) + G1 (t, ǫ)x(t) ≤ 0, (2.15)

where
" ! ! #
Z t Z t Z u
G1 (t, ǫ) = P (t) 1 + P (s) exp P (u) exp G0 (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds .
τ (t) τ (s) τ (u)

It becomes apparent, now, that by repeating the above steps, we can build inequalities
on x′ (t) with progressively higher indices Gℓ (t), ℓ ∈ N. In general, for sufficiently large
t, the positive solution x(t) satisfies the inequality

x′ (t) + Gℓ (t, ǫ)x(t) ≤ 0, (ℓ ∈ N) ,

226 G.E. CHATZARAKIS AND I. JADLOVSKÁ

where
" " ! ! ##
Z t Z t Z u
Gℓ (t, ǫ) = P (t) 1 + 1 + P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ−1 (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds
τ (t) τ (s) τ (u)

and
! !
Z h(t) Z u
x(τ (s)) ≥ x(h(t)) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du . (2.16)
τ (s) τ (u)

Integrating (E) from h(t) to t, and using (2.16), we have

Z t X Z t
m
0 = x(t) − x(h(t)) + pi (s)x(τi (s))ds ≥ x(t) − x(h(t)) + P (s)x(τ (s))ds
h(t) i=1 h(t)

or
! !
Z t Z h(t) Z u
x(t) − x(h(t)) + x(h(t)) P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds ≤ 0.
h(t) τ (s) τ (u)
(2.17)
The inequality is valid if we omit x(t) > 0 in the left-hand side. Therefore
"Z ! ! #
t Z h(t) Z u
x(h(t)) P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds − 1 < 0,
h(t) τ (s) τ (u)

which means that

Z t ! !
Z h(t) Z u
lim sup P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds ≤ 1.
t→∞ h(t) τ (s) τ (u)

Since ǫ may be taken arbitrarily small, this inequality contradicts (2.4).

The proof of the theorem is complete.

Theorem 5. Assume that h(t) is defined by (1.6) and for some ℓ ∈ N

! !
Z tZ Z h(t) u
lim sup P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ)dξ du ds > 1 − D(α), (2.18)
t→∞ h(t) τ (s) τ (u)

where Gℓ is defined by (2.5). Then all solutions of (E) are oscillatory.

Proof. Let x be an eventually positive solution of (E). Then, as in the proof of

Theorem 1, (2.17) is satisfied, i.e.,
! !
Z Z t Z h(t) u
x(t) − x(h(t)) + x(h(t)) P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds ≤ 0.
h(t) τ (s) τ (u)

That is,
Z t ! !
h(t) u
x(t)
Z Z
P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds ≤ 1 − ,
h(t) τ (s) τ (u) x(h(t))
EXPLICIT CRITERIA FOR THE OSCILLATION 227

which gives
Z t ! !
h(t) u
x(t)
Z Z
lim sup P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ . du ds ≤ 1−lim inf
t→∞ h(t) τ (s) τ (u) x(h(t)) t→∞

(2.19)
By combining Lemmas 1 and 2, it becomes obvious that inequality (2.2) is fulfilled.
So, (2.19) leads to
! !
Z t Z Z h(t) u
lim sup P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds ≤ 1 − D(α).
t→∞ h(t) τ (s) τ (u)

Since ǫ may be taken arbitrarily small, this inequality contradicts (2.18).

The proof of the theorem is complete.

Theorem 6. Assume that h(t) is defined by (1.6) and for some ℓ ∈ N

Z t Z t Z u ! !
1
lim sup P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ)dξ du ds > − 1, (2.20)
t→∞ h(t) τ (s) τ (u) D(α)
where Gℓ is defined by (2.5). Then all solutions of (E) are oscillatory.

Proof. Assume, for the sake of contradiction, that there exists a nonoscillatory solu-
tion x of (E) and that x is eventually positive. Then, as in the proof of Theorem 1,
for sufficiently large t we have
Z t Z u ! !
x(τ (s)) ≥ x(t) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du . (2.21)
τ (s) τ (u)

Integrating (E) from h(t) to t and in view of (2.21), we have

Z t X
m
0 =x(t) − x(h(t)) + pi (s)x (τi (s)) ds ≥ x(t) − x(h(t))
h(t) i=1
Z t
+ P (s)x (τ (s)) ds
h(t)

≥x(t) − x(h(t))
Z t Z t Z u ! !
x(t)
+ x(h(t)) P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds.
h(t) x(h(t)) τ (s) τ (u)

That is, for all sufficiently large t it holds

Z t Z t Z u ! !
x(h(t))
P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds ≤ −1
h(t) τ (s) τ (u) x(t)
and therefore
Z t ! !
t u
x(h(t))
Z Z
lim sup P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds ≤ lim sup −1.
t→∞ h(t) τ (s) τ (u) t→∞ x(t)
(2.22)
228 G.E. CHATZARAKIS AND I. JADLOVSKÁ

By combining Lemmas 1 and 2, it becomes obvious that inequality (2.2) is fulfilled.

So, (2.22) leads to
Z t Z t Z u ! !
1
lim sup P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds ≤ − 1.
t→∞ h(t) τ (s) τ (u) D(α)

Since ǫ may be taken arbitrarily small, this inequality contradicts (2.20).

The proof of the theorem is complete.

Theorem 7. Assume that h(t) is defined by (1.6) and for some ℓ ∈ N

Z t Z h(s) Z u ! !
1 + ln λ0
lim sup P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ)dξ du ds > − D(α),
t→∞ h(t) τ (s) τ (u) λ0
(2.23)
where Gℓ is defined by (2.5) and λ0 is the smaller root of the transcendental equation
λ = eαλ . Then all solutions of (E) are oscillatory.

Proof. Assume, for the sake of contradiction, that there exists a nonoscillatory so-
lution x of (E) and that x is eventually positive. Then, as in the previous theorems,
(2.21) holds.
Observe that (2.3) implies that for each ǫ > 0 there exists a tǫ such that

x(h(t))
λ0 − ǫ < for all t ≥ tǫ . (2.24)
x(t)
x(h(t))
Noting that by nondecreasing nature of the function x(s) in s, it holds

x(h(t)) x(h(t)) x(h(t))

1= ≤ ≤ , tε ≤ h(t) ≤ s ≤ t,
x(h(t)) x(s) x(t)

in particular for ǫ ∈ (0, λ0 − 1), by continuity we see that there exists a t∗ ∈ (h(t), t]
such that
x(h(t))
1 < λ0 − ǫ = . (2.25)
x(t∗ )
By (2.21), it is obvious that
! !
Z h(s) Z u
x(τ (s)) ≥ x(h(s)) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du . (2.26)
τ (s) τ (u)

Integrating (E) from t∗ to t and using (2.26) we have

Z tX
m
0 = x(t) − x(t∗ ) + pi (s)x(τi (s))ds
t∗ i=1
Z t  Xm 
≥ x(t) − x(t∗ ) + pi (s) x(τ (s))ds
t∗ i=1
 EXPLICIT CRITERIA FOR THE OSCILLATION 229

Z t
∗
= x(t) − x(t ) + P (s)x(τ (s))ds
t∗
! !
Z t Z h(s) Z u
∗
≥ x(t) − x(t ) + x(h(t)) P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds
t∗ τ (s) τ (u)

or
! !
t h(s) u
x(t∗ ) x(t)
Z Z Z
P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds ≤ − .
t∗ τ (s) τ (u) x(h(t)) x(h(t))

In view of (2.25) and Lemma 2, for the ǫ considered, there exists t′ǫ ≥ tε such that
Z t Z h(s) Z u ! !
1
P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds < − D(α)+ ǫ, (2.27)
t∗ τ (s) τ (u) λ0−ǫ

for t ≥ t′ǫ .
Dividing (E) by x(t) and integrating from h(t) to t∗ we find
t∗
x′ (s)
Z
− ds
h(t) x(s)
t∗ Z t∗ X
x(τi (s))  x(τ (s))
Z Xm m
= pi (s)
ds ≥ pi (s) ds (2.28)
h(t) i=1 x(s) h(t) i=1 x(s)
Z t∗ Z h(s) Z u ! !
x(h(s))
≥ P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds.
h(t) x(s) τ (s) τ (u)

x(h(s))
By (2.25), for s ≥ h(t) ≥ t′ǫ , we have x(s) > λ0 − ǫ, so from (2.28) we get
! !
t∗ h(s) u t∗
x′ (s)
Z Z Z Z
(λ0 − ǫ) P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds < − ds .
h(t) τ (s) τ (u) h(t) x(s)

Hence, for all sufficiently large t we have

! !
Z t∗ Z h(s) Z u
P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds
h(t) τ (s) τ (u)
t∗
1 x′ (s) 1 x(h(t)) ln (λ0 − ǫ)
Z
<− ds = ln ∗
= ,
λ0 − ǫ h(t) x(s) λ0 − ǫ x(t ) λ0 − ǫ

i.e.,
! !
t∗ h(s) u
ln (λ0 − ǫ)
Z Z Z
P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds < . (2.29)
h(t) τ (s) τ (u) λ0 − ǫ

Adding (2.27) and (2.29), and then taking the limit as t → ∞, we have
230 G.E. CHATZARAKIS AND I. JADLOVSKÁ

! !
Z t Z h(s) Z u
lim sup P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds
t→∞ h(t) τ (s) τ (u)
√
1 + ln(λ0 − ǫ) 1 − α − 1 − 2α − α2
≤ − + ǫ.
λ0 − ǫ 2
Since ǫ may be taken arbitrarily small, this inequality contradicts (2.23).
The proof of the theorem is complete.

Theorem 8. Assume that h(t) is defined by (1.6) and for some ℓ ∈ N

Z t Z h(s) Z u ! !
1
lim inf P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ)dξ du ds > , (2.30)
t→∞ h(t) τ (s) τ (u) e

where Gℓ is defined by (2.5). Then all solutions of (E) are oscillatory.

Proof. Assume, for the sake of contradiction, that there exists a nonoscillatory solu-
tion x(t) of (E). Since −x(t) is also a solution of (E), we can confine our discussion
only to the case where the solution x(t) is eventually positive. Then there exists
t1 > t0 such that x(t), x (τi (t)) > 0, 1 ≤ i ≤ m for all t ≥ t1 . Thus, from (E) we have
Xm
x′ (t) = − pi (t)x (τi (t)) ≤ 0, for all t ≥ t1 ,
i=1

which means that x(t) is an eventually nonincreasing function of positive numbers.

Furthermore, as in previous theorem, (2.26) is satisfied.
Dividing (E) by x(t) and integrating from h(t) to t, for some t2 ≥ t1 , we have
  Z t X
x(h(t)) m x (τi (s))
ln = pi (s) ds
x(t) h(t) i=1 x (s)
Z t X  x (τ (s)) Z t (2.31)
m x (τ (s))
≥ pi (s) ds = P (s) ds.
h(t) i=1 x (s) h(t) x (s)

Combining the inequalities (2.26) and (2.31) we obtain

! !
  t h(s) u
x(h(t)) x(h(s))
Z Z Z
ln ≥ P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds.
x(t) h(t) x (s) τ (s) τ (u)

From (2.30), it follows that there exists a constant c > 0 such that for a sufficiently
large t holds
Z t Z h(s) Z u ! !
1
P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ)dξ du ds ≥ c > .
h(t) τ (s) τ (u) e

Choose c′ such that c > c′ > 1/e. For every ǫ > 0 such that c − ǫ > c′ we have
Z t Z h(s) Z u ! !
1
P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds ≥ c − ǫ > c′ > . (2.32)
h(t) τ (s) τ (u) e
EXPLICIT CRITERIA FOR THE OSCILLATION 231

Hence  
x(h(t))
ln ≥ c′ , t ≥ t3 .
x(t)
Thus
x(h(t)) ′
≥ ec ≥ ec′ > 1,
x(t)
which implies for some t ≥ t4 ≥ t3

x(h(t)) ≥ (ec′ )x(t).

Repeating the above procedure, it follows by induction that for any positive integer
k,
x(h(t))
≥ (ec′ )k , for sufficiently large t.
x(t)
Since ec′ > 1, there is k ∈ N satisfying k > 2(ln(2) − ln(c′ ))/(1 + ln(c′ )) such that for
t sufficiently large
 2
x(h(t)) 2
≥ (ec′ )k > . (2.33)
x(t) c′
Taking the integral on [h(t), t], which is not less than c′ , we split the interval into two
parts where integrals are not less than c′ /2, let tm ∈ (h(t), t) be the splitting point:
R tm R R  
h(s) u ′

h(t)
P (s) exp τ (s)
P (u) exp τ (u)
Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds ≥ c2 ,
(2.34)
Rt R R  
h(s) u c′
tm
P (s) exp τ (s)
P (u) exp τ (u)
Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds ≥ 2.

Integrating (E) from tm to t, gives

Z t X
m
x(t) − x(tm ) + pi (s)x(τi (s)) = 0,
tm i=1

or Z t Xm 
x(t) − x(tm ) + pi (s) x(τ (s)) ≤ 0.
tm i=1

Thus Z t
x(t) − x(tm ) + P (s)x(τ (s)) ≤ 0,
tm
or
! !
Z t Z h(s) Z u
x(t) − x(tm ) + x(h(t)) P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds ≤ 0.
tm τ (s) τ (u)

The strict inequality is valid if we omit x(t) > 0 in the left-hand side:
! !
Z t Z Z h(s) u
−x(tm ) + x(h(t)) P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds < 0.
tm τ (s) τ (u)
232 G.E. CHATZARAKIS AND I. JADLOVSKÁ

Together with the second inequality in (2.34), implies

c′
x(tm ) > x(h(t)). (2.35)
2
Similarly, integration of (E) from h(t) to tm with a later application of (2.26)
leads to
Z tm Z h(s) Z u ! !
x(tm )−x(h(t))+x(h(tm )) P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds ≤ 0.
h(t) τ (s) τ (u)

The strict inequality is valid if we omit x(tm ) > 0 in the left-hand side:
! !
Z tm Z Z h(s) u
−x(h(t)) + x(h(tm )) P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ, ǫ)dξ du ds < 0.
h(t) τ (s) τ (u)

Together with the first inequality in (2.34) implies

c′
x(h(t)) > x(h(tm )). (2.36)
2
Combining the inequalities (2.35) and (2.36) we obtain
 2
2 2
x(h(tm )) < ′ x(h(t)) < x(tm ),
c c′
which contradicts (2.33).
The proof of the theorem is complete.

2.2. ADVANCED DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS

Similar oscillation conditions for the (dual) advanced differential equation (E ′ ) can
be derived easily. The proofs are omitted, since they are quite similar to the delay
equation.

Theorem 9. Assume that ρ(t) is defined by (1.20) and for some ℓ ∈ N

! !
Z ρ(t)
Z Z σ(s) σ(u)
lim sup Q(s) exp Q(u) exp Rℓ (ξ)dξ du ds > 1, (2.37)
t→∞ t ρ(t) u

where
" ! ! #
Z ρ(t) Z σ(s) Z σ(u)
Rℓ (t) = Q(t) 1 + Q(s) exp Q(u) exp Rℓ−1 (ξ)dξ du ds ,
t t u

h  R  i (2.38)
R ρ(t) σ(s) Pm
with R0 (t) = Q(t) 1 + t Q(s) exp λ0 t Q(u)du ds , Q(t) = i=1 qi (t) and
λ0 is the smaller root of the transcendental equation λ = eβλ . Then all solutions of
(E ′ ) are oscillatory.
EXPLICIT CRITERIA FOR THE OSCILLATION 233

Theorem 10. Assume that ρ(t) is defined by (1.20) and for some ℓ ∈ N
Z ρ(t) Z σ(s) Z σ(u) ! !
lim sup Q(s) exp Q(u) exp Rℓ (ξ)dξ du ds > 1−D(β), (2.39)
t→∞ t ρ(t) u

where Rℓ is defined by (2.38) Then all solutions of (E ′ ) are oscillatory.

Theorem 11. Assume that ρ(t) is defined by (1.20) and for some ℓ ∈ N
Z ρ(t) Z σ(s) Z σ(u) ! !
1
lim sup Q(s) exp Q(u) exp Rℓ (ξ)dξ du ds > − 1,
t→∞ t t u D(β)
(2.40)
′
where Rℓ is defined by (2.38) Then all solutions of (E ) are oscillatory.

Theorem 12. Assume that ρ(t) is defined by (1.20) and for some ℓ ∈ N
Z ρ(t) Z σ(s) Z σ(u) ! !
1 + ln λ0
lim sup Q(s) exp Q(u) exp Rℓ (ξ)dξ du ds > −D(β),
t→∞ t ρ(s) u λ0
(2.41)
where Rℓ is defined by (2.38) and λ0 is the smaller root of the transcendental equation
λ = eβλ . Then all solutions of (E ′ ) are oscillatory.

Theorem 13. Assume that ρ(t) is defined by (1.20) and for some ℓ ∈ N
Z ρ(t) Z σ(s) Z σ(u) ! !
1
lim inf Q(s) exp Q(u) exp Rℓ (ξ)dξ du ds > , (2.42)
t→∞ t ρ(s) u e
where Rℓ is defined by (2.38) Then all solutions of (E ′ ) are oscillatory.

2.3. DIFFERENTIAL INEQUALITIES

A slight modification in the proofs of Theorems 1 [6]−5 [10] leads to the following
results about differential inequalities.

Theorem 14. Assume that all the conditions of Theorem 1 [6] or 2 [7] or 3 [8] or
4 [9] or 5 [10] hold. Then
(i) the delay [advanced] differential inequality
Xm h Xm i
x′ (t) + pi (t)x (τi (t)) ≤ 0 x′ (t) − qi (t)x (σi (t)) ≥ 0 , ∀t ≥ t0 ,
i=1 i=1

has no eventually positive solutions;

(ii) the delay [advanced] differential inequality
Xm h Xm i
x′ (t) + pi (t)x (τi (t)) ≥ 0 x′ (t) − qi (t)x (σi (t)) ≤ 0 , ∀t ≥ t0 ,
i=1 i=1

has no eventually negative solutions.

234 G.E. CHATZARAKIS AND I. JADLOVSKÁ

3. EXAMPLES

In this section, examples illustrate cases when the results of the present paper imply
oscillation while previously known results fail. The calculations were made by the use
of MATLAB software.

Example 15. Consider the DDE

177 59
x′ (t) + x(τ1 (t)) + x(τ2 (t)) = 0, t ≥ 0, (3.1)
2000 2000

with (see Fig. 1, (a))



 −3t + 24k − 2, if t ∈ [6k, 6k + 1]

5t − 24k − 10, if t ∈ [6k + 1, 6k + 2]





 6k, if t ∈ [6k + 2, 6k + 3]
τ1 (t) = and τ2 (t) = τ1 (t) − 0.5
 −2t + 18k + 6,
 if t ∈ [6k + 3, 6k + 4]

6t − 30k − 26, if t ∈ [6k + 4, 6k + 5]





6k + 4, if t ∈ [6k + 5, 6k + 6]


where k ∈ N0 and N0 is the set of non-negative integers.

Figure 1: The graphs of τ1 (t) and h1 (t)

EXPLICIT CRITERIA FOR THE OSCILLATION 235

By (1.6), we see (Fig. 1, (b)) that




 6k − 2, if t ∈ [6k, 6k + 8/5]
5t − 24k − 10, if t ∈ [6k + 8/5, 6k + 2]




h1 (t) = 6k, if t ∈ [6k + 2, 6k + 13/3] and h2 (t) = h1 (t) − 0.5

6t − 30k − 26, if t ∈ [6k + 13/3, 6k + 5]





 6k + 4, if t ∈ [6k + 5, 6k + 6]

and consequently

h(t) = max {hi (t)} = h1 (t) and τ (t) = max {τi (t)} = τ1 (t).
1≤i≤2 1≤i≤2

Observe that the function Fℓ : [0, ∞) → R+ defined as

! !
Z t Z h(t) Z u
Fℓ (t) = P (s) exp P (u) exp Gℓ (ξ)dξ du ds
h(t) τ (s) τ (u)

attains its maximum at t = 6k + 13/3, k ∈ N0 , for every ℓ ≥ 1. Specifically, by

using algorithms on MATLAB software and taking into account the fact that P (t) =
P2
i=1 pi (t) = 0.118, we obtain

! !
Z 6k+13/3 Z 6k Z u
F1 (t = 6k + 13/3) = P (s) exp P (u) exp G1 (ξ)dξ du ds
6k τ (s) τ (u)

≃ 1.0461.

Thus
lim sup F1 (t) ≃ 1.0461 > 1,
t→∞

that is, condition (2.4) of Theorem 1 is satisfied for ℓ = 1, and therefore all solutions
of (3.1) oscillate.
Observe, however, that
Z t X2 Z 6k+13/3 X2
lim sup pi (s)ds = lim sup pi (s)ds = 0.5113 < 1,
t→∞ h(t) i=1 k→∞ 6k i=1

t 6k+5
1
Z X2 Z X2
α = lim inf pi (s)ds = lim inf pi (s)ds = 0.118 < ,
t→∞ τ (t) i=1 k→∞ 6k+4 i=1 e

X2
lim inf pi (t) (t − τi (t))
t→∞ i=1
 
177 59
= lim inf (t − τ1 (t)) + (t − (τ1 (t) − 0.5))
t→∞ 2000 2000
= lim inf [0.118 (t − τ1 (t)) + 0.01475] = lim inf [0.118 (t − τ1 (t))] + 0.01475
t→∞ t→∞
236 G.E. CHATZARAKIS AND I. JADLOVSKÁ

1
= 0.118 · lim inf (t − τ1 (t)) + 0.01475 = 0.118 · 1 + 0.01475 = 0.13275 < .
t→∞ e
Also, observe that the function Φr : [0, ∞) → R+ defined as
Z t Xm
Φr (t) = pi (ζ)ar (h(t), τi (ζ))dζ
h(t) i=1

attains its maximum at t = 6k + 13/3 and its minimum at t = 6k + 5, k ∈ N0 , for

every r ∈ N. Specifically,
Z 6k+13/3
Φ1 (t = 6k + 13/3) = [p1 (ζ)a1 (6k, τ1 (ζ)) + p2 (ζ)a1 (6k, τ2 (ζ))] dζ
6k
Z 6k+1
= [p1 (ζ)a1 (6k, τ1 (ζ)) + p2 (ζ)a1 (6k, τ2 (ζ))] dζ
6k
Z 6k+2
+ [p1 (ζ)a1 (6k, τ1 (ζ)) + p2 (ζ)a1 (6k, τ2 (ζ))] dζ
6k+1
Z 6k+3
+ [p1 (ζ)a1 (6k, τ1 (ζ)) + p2 (ζ)a1 (6k, τ2 (ζ))] dζ
6k+2
Z 6k+4
+ [p1 (ζ)a1 (6k, τ1 (ζ)) + p2 (ζ)a1 (6k, τ2 (ζ))] dζ
6k+3
Z 6k+13/3
+ [p1 (ζ)a1 (6k, τ1 (ζ)) + p2 (ζ)a1 (6k, τ2 (ζ))] dζ
6k+4
≃ 0.6452

and
Z 6k+5
Φ1 (t = 6k + 5) = [p1 (ζ)a1 (6k + 4, τ1 (ζ)) + p2 (ζ)a1 (6k + 4, τ2 (ζ))] dζ
6k+4
≃ 0.1743.

Thus
lim supt→∞ Φ1 (t) ≃ 0.6452 < 1
lim inf t→∞ G1 (t) ≃ 0.1743 < 1/e
and
0.6452 < 1 − D(α) ≃ 0.9920.

Also, it is obvious that

Z t X2
lim sup pi (ζ)ar (h(ζ), τi (ζ))dζ ≤ lim sup Φ1 (t) ≃ 0.6452
t→∞ h(t) i=1 t→∞
1 + ln λ0
< − D(α) ≃ 0.9837,
λ0

where λ0 = 1.14461 is the smaller root of e0.118λ = λ.

EXPLICIT CRITERIA FOR THE OSCILLATION 237

Finally, by using algorithms on MATLAB software, we obtain

!
Z tZ h(t)
lim sup P (s) exp P j (u)du ds ≃ 0.7961 < 1,
t→∞ h(t) τ (s)

0.7961 < 1 − D(α) ≃ 0.9920,

!
t h(s)
1 + ln λ0
Z Z
lim sup P (s) exp P j (u)du ds ≃ 0.6384 < − D(α) ≃ 0.9837,
t→∞ h(t) τ (s) λ0

where λ0 = 1.29586 is the smaller root of eλβ = λ,

!
t t
1
Z Z
lim sup P (s) exp P j (u)du ds ≃ 2.5211 < ≃ 125.5436
t→∞ h(t) τ (s) D(α)

and !
t h(s)
1
Z Z
lim inf P (s) exp P j (u)du ds ≃ 0.1259 < .
t→∞ h(t) τ (s) e
That is, none of the conditions (1.3), (1.4), (1.6), (1.8) (for r = 1), (1.9) (for r = 1),
(1.10) (for r = 1), (1.11) (for r = 1), (1.12) (for j = 1), (1.13) (for j = 1), (1.14) (for
j = 1), (1.15) (for j = 1) and (1.16) (for j = 1) is satisfied.
Notation. It is worth noting that the improvement of condition (2.4) to the
corresponding condition (1.3) is significant, approximately 104.6%, if we compare
the values on the left-side of these conditions. Also, the improvement compared to
conditions (1.8) and (1.12) is very satisfactory, around 62.14% and 31.4%, respectively.
In addition, observe that conditions (1.8)−(1.9) and (1.10)−(1.16) do not lead to
oscillation for first iteration. On the contrary, condition (2.4) is satisfied from the first
iteration. This means that our condition is better and much faster than (1.8)−(1.9)
and (1.10)−(1.16).

Example 16. Consider the ADE

3 1
x′ (t) − x(σ1 (t)) − x(σ2 (t)) = 0, t ≥ 0, (3.2)
20 20
with (see Fig. 2, (a))



 4t − 21k + 1, if t ∈ [7k, 7k + 1]




 −t + 14k + 6, if t ∈ [7k + 1, 7k + 2]
 7k + 4, if t ∈ [7k + 2, 7k + 3]



σ1 (t) = 3t − 14k − 5, if t ∈ [7k + 3, 7k + 4] and σ2 (t) = σ1 (t) + 0.5

−t + 14k + 11, if t ∈ [7k + 4, 7k + 5]





 2t − 7k − 4,

 if t ∈ [7k + 5, 7k + 6]

7k + 8, if t ∈ [7k + 6, 7k + 7]

238 G.E. CHATZARAKIS AND I. JADLOVSKÁ

Figure 2: The graphs of σ1 (t) and ρ1 (t)

where k ∈ N0 and N0 is the set of non-negative integers.

By (1.20), we see (Fig. 2, (b)) that


 4t − 21k + 1, if t ∈ [7k, 7k + 3/4]

7k + 4, if t ∈ [7k + 3/4, 7k + 3]





 3t − 14k − 5, if t ∈ [7k + 3, 7k + 11/3]
ρ1 (t) = and ρ2 (t) = ρ1 (t) + 0.5


 7k + 6, if t ∈ [7k + 11/3, 7k + 5]
2t − 7k − 4, if t ∈ [7k + 5, 7k + 6]





7k + 8, if t ∈ [7k + 6, 7k + 7]


and consequently

ρ(t) = min {ρi (t)} = ρ1 (t) and σ(t) = min {σi (t)} = σ1 (t).
1≤i≤2 1≤i≤2

Observe, that the function Fℓ : R0 → R+ defined as

! !
Z ρ(t) Z σ(s) Z σ(u)
Fℓ (t) = Q(s) exp Q(u) exp Rℓ (ξ)dξ du ds,
t ρ(t) u

attains its minimum at t = 7k + 3/4, k ∈ N0 , for every ℓ ∈ N. Specifically, by using

an algorithm on MATLAB software and taking into account the fact that Q(t) =
P2
i=1 qi (t) = 0.2, we obtain

! !
Z 7k+4 Z σ(s) Z σ(u)
F1 (t = 7k + 3/4) = Q(s) exp Q(u) exp R1 (ξ)dξ du ds
7k+3/4 7k+4 u
EXPLICIT CRITERIA FOR THE OSCILLATION 239

≃ 1.01496

and therefore
lim sup F1 (t) ≃ 1.01496 > 1.
t→∞

That is, condition (2.37) of Theorem 6 is satisfied for ℓ = 1, and therefore all solutions
of (3.2) oscillate.
Observe, however, that
Z ρ(t) X Z 7k+4
2
lim sup qi (s)ds = lim sup 0.2ds = 0.65 < 1,
t→∞ t i=1 k→∞ 7k+3/4

σ(t) 7k+4
1
Z Xm Z
lim inf qi (s)ds = lim inf 0.2ds = 0.2 < ,
t→∞ t i=1 k→∞ 7k+3 e
 
X2 3 1
lim inf qi (t) (σi (t) − t) = lim inf (σ1 (t) − t) + (σ1 (t) + 0.5 − t)
t→∞ i=1 t→∞ 20 20
= lim inf [0.2 (σ1 (t) − t) + 0.025]
t→∞
= lim inf [0.2 (σ1 (t) − t)] + 0.025
t→∞
1
= 0.2 · 1 + 0.025 = 0.225 < .
e
Also, observe that the function Wr : [0, ∞) → R+ defined as
Z ρ(t) X2
Wr (t) = qi (ζ)br (ρ(t), σi (ζ)) dζ
t i=1

attains its maximum at t = 7k + 3/4 and its minimum at t = 7k + 3, k ∈ N0 , for every

r ∈ N. Specifically,
Z 7k+4
W1 (t = 7k + 3/4) = [q1 (ζ)b1 (7k + 4, σ1 (ζ)) + q2 (ζ)b1 (7k + 4, σ2 (ζ))] dζ
7k+3/4
Z 7k+1
= [q1 (ζ)b1 (7k + 4, σ1 (ζ)) + q2 (ζ)b1 (7k + 4, σ2 (ζ))] dζ
7k+3/4
Z 7k+2
+ [q1 (ζ)b1 (7k + 4, σ1 (ζ)) + q2 (ζ)b1 (7k + 4, σ2 (ζ))] dζ
7k+1
Z 7k+3
+ [q1 (ζ)b1 (7k + 4, σ1 (ζ)) + q2 (ζ)b1 (7k + 4, σ2 (ζ))] dζ
7k+2
Z 7k+4
+ [q1 (ζ)b1 (7k + 4, σ1 (ζ)) + q2 (ζ)b1 (7k + 4, σ2 (ζ))] dζ
7k+3
≃ 0.7705

Z 7k+4
W1 (t = 7k + 3) = [q1 (ζ)b1 (7k + 4, σ1 (ζ)) + q2 (ζ)b1 (7k + 4, σ2 (ζ))] dζ ≃ 0.28125
7k+3
240 G.E. CHATZARAKIS AND I. JADLOVSKÁ

Thus
lim supt→∞ W1 (t) ≃ 0.7705 < 1
lim inf t→∞ W1 (t) ≃ 0.28125 < 1/e
and
0.7705 < 1 − D(β) ≃ 0.9742.
Finally, by using an algorithm on MATLAB software, we obtain
Z ρ(t) Z σ(s) !
lim sup Q(s) exp Q1 (u)du ds ≃ 0.8687 < 1,
t→∞ t ρ(t)

0.8687 < 1 − D(β) ≃ 0.9742,

!
ρ(t) Z σ(s)
1
Z
lim sup Q(s) exp Q1 (u)du ds ≃ 3.7953 < ≃ 38.71,
t→∞ t t D(β)
where λ0 = 1.29586 is the smaller root of eλβ = λ.
Z ρ(t) Z σ(s) !
1 + ln λ0
lim sup Q(s) exp Q1 (u)du ds ≃ 0.7234 < − D(β) ≃ 0.9458
t→∞ t ρ(s) λ0

and !
ρ(t) σ(s)
1
Z Z
lim inf Q(s) exp Q1 (u)du ds ≃ 0.2144 < .
t→∞ t ρ(s) e
That is, none of the conditions (1.17), (1.18), (1.19), (1.22) (for r = 1), (1.23) (for
r = 1), (1.24) (for r = 1), (1.25) (for j = 1), (1.26) (for j = 1), (1.27) (for j = 1),
(1.28) (for j = 1) and (1.29) (for j = 1) is satisfied.
Notation. It is worth noting that the improvement of condition (2.37) to the
corresponding condition (1.17) is significant, approximately 56.14%, if we compare
the values on the left-side of these conditions. Also, the improvement compared to
conditions (1.22) and (1.25) is very satisfactory, around 31.73% and 16.84%, respec-
tively. In addition, observe that conditions (1.22)−(1.24) and (1.25)−(1.29) do not
lead to oscillation for first iteration. On the contrary, condition (2.37) is satisfied
from the first iteration. This means that our condition is better and much faster than
(1.22)−(1.24) and (1.25)−(1.29).

Remark 17. Similarly, one can construct examples to illustrate the other main
results.

REFERENCES

[1] E. Braverman, G. E. Chatzarakis and I. P. Stavroulakis, Iterative oscillation tests

for differential equations with several non-monotone arguments, Adv. Difference
Equ., 2016, Paper No. 87, 18pp.
EXPLICIT CRITERIA FOR THE OSCILLATION 241

[2] G.E. Chatzarakis, Differential equations with non-monotone arguments: Itera-

tive Oscillation results, J. Math. Comput. Sci., 6 (2016), No. 5, 953−964.
[3] G.E. Chatzarakis and H. Péics, Differential equations with several non-monotone
arguments: An oscillation result, Appl. Math. Lett., 68 (2017), 20−26.
[4] G. E. Chatzarakis, Oscillations caused by several non-monotone deviating argu-
ments, Differ. Equ. Appl., 9 (2017), no. 3, 285−310.
[5] L. H. Erbe, Qingkai Kong and B.G. Zhang, Oscillation Theory for Functional
Differential Equations, Marcel Dekker, New York, 1995.
[6] L. H. Erbe and B. G. Zhang, Oscillation of first order linear differential equations
with deviating arguments, Differential Integral Equations, 1 (1988), 305−314.
[7] N. Fukagai and T. Kusano, Oscillation theory of first order functional-differential
equations with deviating arguments, Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. 136 (1984), 95−117.
[8] M.K. Grammatikopoulos and M. R.S. Kulenovic, First Order Functional Differ-
ential Inequalities with Oscillating Coefficients, Nonlinear Analysis TMA 8 (9),
(1984), 1043−1054.
[9] B. R. Hunt and J. A. Yorke, When all solutions of x′ (t) = − qi (t)x(t − Ti (t))
P

oscillate, J. Differential Equations 53 (1984), 139−145.

[10] J. Jaroš and I. P. Stavroulakis, Oscillation tests for delay equations, Rocky Moun-
tain J. Math., 45 (2000), 2989−2997.
[11] M. Kon, Y. G. Sficas and I. P. Stavroulakis, Oscillation criteria for delay equa-
tions, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 128 (1994), 675−685.
[12] R. G. Koplatadze and T. A. Chanturija, Oscillating and monotone solutions
of first-order differential equations with deviating argument, (Russian), Differ-
entsial ′nyeUravneniya 18 (1982), 1463−1465, 1472.
[13] R.G. Koplatadze and G. Kvinikadze, On the oscillation of solutions of first or-
der delay differential inequalities and equations, Georgian Math. J., 3 (1994),
675−685.
[14] T. Kusano, On even-order functional-differential equations with advanced and
retarded arguments, J. Differential Equations 45 (1982), 75−84.
[15] M. K. Kwong, Oscillation of first-order delay equations, J. Math. Anal. Appl.
156 (1991), 274−286.
[16] G. Ladas, V. Lakshmikantham and L. S. Papadakis, Oscillations of higher-order
retarded differential equations generated by the retarded arguments, Delay and
Functional Differential Equations and their Applications, Academic Press, New
York, 1972, 219-231.
242 G.E. CHATZARAKIS AND I. JADLOVSKÁ

[17] G. Ladas and I. P. Stavroulakis, Oscillations caused by several retarded and

advanced arguments, J. Differential Equations 44 (1982), 134−152.
[18] G.S. Ladde, Oscillations caused by retarded perturbations of first order linear
ordinary differential equations, Atti Acad. Naz. Lincei Rendiconti 63 (1978),
351−359.
[19] G.S. Ladde, V. Lakshmikantham, B.G. Zhang, Oscillation Theory of Differential
Equations with Deviating Arguments, Monographs and Textbooks in Pure and
Applied Mathematics, vol. 110, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, 1987.
[20] X. Li and D. Zhu, Oscillation and nonoscillation of advanced differential equa-
tions with variable coefficients, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 269 (2002), 462−488.
[21] A. D. Myshkis, Linear homogeneous differential equations of first order with
deviating arguments, Uspekhi Mat. Nauk, 5 (1950), 160-162 (Russian).
[22] J. S. Yu, Z. C. Wang, B. G. Zhang and X. Z. Qian, Oscillations of differential
equations with deviating arguments, Panamer. Math. J. 2 (1992), no. 2, 59−78.
[23] B. G. Zhang, Oscillation of solutions of the first-order advanced type differential
equations, Science exploration 2 (1982), 79−82.
[24] D. Zhou, On some problems on oscillation of functional differential equations of
first order, J. Shandong University 25 (1990), 434–442.