4.5 Article

Solution of Modified Bergman Minimal Blood Glucose-Insulin Model Using Caputo-Fabrizio Fractional Derivative

期刊

出版社

TECH SCIENCE PRESS
DOI: 10.32604/cmes.2021.015224

关键词

Bergman minimal model; blood glucose; Caputo-Fabrizio fractional derivative; uniqueness and existence; fractional calculus

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, the Bergman minimal blood glucose-insulin model was generalized and modified by including the CF fractional derivative and a diet component D(t). The modified model was solved using the Sumudu transform and fixed-point iteration procedures, with the existence and uniqueness of results examined using the fixed point theorem. The comparison between parameter values obtained from different values of t with experimental data showed that the modified model outperformed Bergman's model.
Diabetes is a burning issue in the whole world. It is the imbalance between body glucose and insulin. The study of this imbalance is very much needed from a research point of view. For this reason, Bergman gave an important model named-Bergman minimal model. In the present work, using Caputo-Fabrizio (CF) fractional derivative, we generalize Bergman's minimal blood glucose-insulin model. Further, we modify the old model by including one more component known as diet D(t), which is also essential for the blood glucose model. We solve the modified model with the help of Sumudu transform and fixed-point iteration procedures. Also, using the fixed point theorem, we examine the existence and uniqueness of the results along with their numerical and graphical representation. Furthermore, the comparison between the values of parameters obtained by calculating different values of t with experimental data is also studied. Finally, we draw the graphs of G(t), X(t), I(t), and D(t) for different values of tau. It is also clear from the obtained results and their graphical representation that the obtained results of modified Bergman's minimal model are better than Bergman's model.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据