Suggestions(2)
Exact(7)
Proof of Remark 2.8.
Proof of Remark A.1 Rewrite equation (2.1) in form (6.6).
Alternative proof of Remark 15 Let x 3 = d 3 = 1.
From the proof of Remark 1 for (alpha=1 ) we immediately have the following.
The proof of Remark 3.3 reproduces that of Theorem 3.1 and Theorem 3.2.
In 2008, Dhompongsa and Panyanak [11] gave the following result, and the proof is similar to the proof of remark in [[12], p. 374].
Similar(51)
The proofs of Remarks 1 and Theorem 2 are based on the following two lemmas.
In 2008, Dhompongsa and Panyanak [11] gave the following result, and the proof is similar to the proof of the remark in [[12], p. 374].
For the proof of this remark and further information about Gronwall's type inequality for fractional order differential equations, one can see [23].
We think the contrary is true; and we might cite in proof of this remark not only the present play, but the conclusion of Lear, of Romeo and Juliet, of Macbeth, of Othello, even of Hamlet, and of other plays of less moment, in which the last act is crowded with decisive events brought about by natural means".
Obviously, by the proof of (2.11) in Remark 2.2, (2.7) also holds under the conditions of Theorem 2.3.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com