Next Article in Journal
A Sustainable Supply Chain Model with Low Carbon Emissions for Deteriorating Imperfect-Quality Items under Learning Fuzzy Theory
Previous Article in Journal
The Stability of Solutions of the Variable-Order Fractional Optimal Control Model for the COVID-19 Epidemic in Discrete Time
Previous Article in Special Issue
On Semi-Infinite Optimization Problems with Vanishing Constraints Involving Interval-Valued Functions
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Hyers–Ulam Stability of 2D-Convex Mappings and Some Related New Hermite–Hadamard, Pachpatte, and Fejér Type Integral Inequalities Using Novel Fractional Integral Operators via Totally Interval-Order Relations with Open Problem

1
Department of Mathematics, University of Gujrat, Gujrat 50700, Pakistan
2
Department of Mathematics, Government College University, Katchery Road, Lahore 54000, Pakistan
3
Department of Mathematics, “1 Decembrie 1918” University of Alba Iulia, 510009 Alba Iulia, Romania
4
Department of Medical Research, China Medical University, Taichung 406040, Taiwan
5
Department of Mathematics and Applied Mathematics, University of Pretoria, Lynnwood Road, Pretoria 0002, South Africa
6
Department of Mathematics, Technical University of Cluj-Napoca, 400114 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
7
Department of Mathematical Sciences, College of Science, Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University, P.O. Box 84428, Riyadh 11671, Saudi Arabia
8
Department of Mathematics, “Mircea cel Batran” Naval Academy, 900218 Constanta, Romania
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Mathematics 2024, 12(8), 1238; https://doi.org/10.3390/math12081238
Submission received: 6 March 2024 / Revised: 1 April 2024 / Accepted: 17 April 2024 / Published: 19 April 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Variational Problems and Applications, 2nd Edition)

Abstract

:
The aim of this paper is to introduce a new type of two-dimensional convexity by using total-order relations. In the first part of this paper, we examine the Hyers–Ulam stability of two-dimensional convex mappings by using the sandwich theorem. Our next step involves the development of Hermite–Hadamard inequality, including its weighted and product forms, by using a novel type of fractional operator having non-singular kernels. Moreover, we develop several nontrivial examples and remarks to demonstrate the validity of our main results. Finally, we examine approximate convex mappings and have left an open problem regarding the best optimal constants for two-dimensional approximate convexity.

1. Introduction

Fractional calculus is a branch of mathematical analysis that generalizes the concept of differentiation and integration to non-integer orders. This theory originated from a correspondence exchange between Leibniz and L’Hopital, where a question was posed about the interpretation of an order 1 2 derivative. Many famous mathematicians dedicated themselves to the study of fractional calculus during this period, including Lagrange, Lacroix, Fourier, Laplace, Abel, Liouville, and Riemann. It was discovered at the end of the 20th century that fractional calculus was capable of expressing natural phenomena more precisely than ordinary calculus, making it useful for describing real-world systems. Several applications have been found in physics [1], chemistry [2], engineering [3], biology, [4] and economics [5,6].
Mathematical inequalities involving fractional integrals play a significant role in various fields of mathematics as well as their applications, including analysis, differential equations, and probability theory. These types of inequalities are important for understanding many mathematical models and systems. Integral inequalities in convex analysis typically refer to integrals of convex functions over certain intervals or domains. These inequalities relate the integral of a convex function to other values, and they commonly offer bounds or estimates that are useful in a number of mathematical applications.
The concept of convex mapping can be applied to many different mathematical structures, including topological spaces, function spaces, metric spaces, and many others. Generalized convexity adds certain modifications to conventional convex mappings, allowing them to support a wider range of sets and functions. Following are some recently introduced classes of generalized convex mappings: p -convex, harmonic convex, exponentially convex, Godunova–Levin, preinvexity, ( h 1 , h 2 ) -convex, coordinated convex, log-convex, and many more (see refs. [7,8,9]). The Hermite–Hadamard inequality has been interpreted in various ways by different authors by using these novel classes. The Inequality of Hermite and Hadamard was introduced by two French mathematicians, Charles Hermite (1822–1901) and Jacques Salomon Hadamard (1865–1963). C. Hermite and J. S. Hadamard contributed greatly to the field of mathematics in the areas of number theory, complex analysis, and much more. To learn more about their contributions, see [10,11]. The well known Hermite–Hadamard inequality for convex functions is formulated as follows. Let : Ω R R be a convex function defined on the interval Ω with ν 1 , ν 2 Ω . Then, the following inequality holds:
ν 1 + ν 2 2 1 ν 2 ν 1 ν 1 ν 2 ( θ ) d θ ( ν 1 ) + ( ν 2 ) 2 .
Thus, if a function is convex, its weighted average value at the endpoints will equal or exceed its value at the midpoint of any interval in a set of real numbers. A large number of different fields of mathematics and economics use the Hermite–Hadamard inequality, but convexity also plays an important role. In economics, for instance, the Hermite–Hadamard inequality is used to prove the existence and uniqueness of some economic models (such as general equilibrium models or firm behavior models). The Hermite–Hadamard inequality has many applications in information theory, such as the study of error-correcting codes. For more detailed applications of the Hermite–Hadamard inequality, see [12].
The main purpose of the bidimensional convex function is that every convex mapping is convex over its coordinates. Furthermore, there exists a bidimensional convex function that is not convex (see, for example, [13]). In [14], the following Hermite–Hadamard type inequality was proved for convex functions that are coordinated with the rectangle from the plane R 2 .
Suppose that a function : [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] × [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] R 2 R is convex on coordinates. Then, one has the following inequalities:
ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 1 2 1 ν 2 ν 1 ν 1 ν 2 x , ν 3 + ν 4 2 dx + 1 ν 4 ν 3 ν 3 ν 4 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , y dy 1 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 ( x , y ) dy dx 1 4 1 ν 2 ν 1 ν 1 ν 2 ( x , ν 3 ) + ( x , ν 4 ) dx + 1 ν 4 ν 3 ν 3 ν 4 ( ν 1 , y ) + ( ν 2 , y ) dy ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) 4 .
The Hermite–Hadamard inequality provides a powerful tool for computations involving interval values as well as a means to rigorously estimate a function’s range over intervals. It is particularly useful in applications that require consideration of uncertainty or variability in input values. Taking advantage of its wide range of applications in different disciplines, authors have recently developed mathematical inequalities in the setup of interval-valued ( I . V ) mappings, which make use of different types of operators and order relations. Zhao et al. [15], inspired by interval-valued functions, recently demonstrated inequality (2) in the setting of partial-order relations utilizing the classical integral operator. In their study, Alomari and Darus [16] used s-convex monotonic nondecreasing functions in the first sense and s-convex functions of two variables on coordinates and developed a few new bounds on the Hermite–Hadamard inequality. Ozdemir et al. [17] employed m-convex and ( α , m ) -convex functions of two variables on the coordinates to produce various innovative bounds for the well-known double inequality. Alomari and Darus [18] employed log-convex functions on coordinates to build Hermite–Hadamard inequality and its several new forms. Lai et al. [19] defined I . V preinvex mappings on the coordinates and developed the Hermite–Hadamard inequality and its different forms by using interval partial-order relations. Wannalookkhee et al. [20] employed quantum integrals and discovered the Hermite–Hadamard inequality on coordinates, with applications spanning numerous disciplines. As the result of applying quantum integrals, Kalsoom et al. [21] created a Hermite–Hadamard-type inequality associated with generalized pre- and quasi-invex mappings. Akurt et al. [22] introduced new Hermite–Hadamard inequalities by using fractional integral operators with singular kernels that produced two interesting identities for two-variable mappings. Shi et al. [23] employed two different forms of generalized convex mappings to build Hermite–Hadamard and its weighted variant utilizing interval-valued mappings. Afzal et al. [24] proposed the idea of Godunova–Levin functions in harmonic terms and derived some novel bounds of the Hermite–Hadamard inequality and its discrete Jensen version. In this paper, we mainly deal with the center-radius-order relations. Some recent advancements related to these concepts are presented in light of other generalized classes of convex mappings. In 2014, authors in [25] introduced the idea of total CR -order utilizing the interval’s midpoint and radius, which is a complete order relation. In 2020, Rahman [26] explored the nonlinear constrained optimization issue using CR -order and defined the CR -convex mapping. Inspired by these results, Liu et al. [27,28] originally used two distinct types of convex mappings, namely log-convex and harmonic convex, to establish a connection with the Hermite–Hadamard inequality. As part of their recent work, Afzal et al. [29,30,31,32] used first-center and radius-order to extend h -Godunova–Levin results to a more generalized class called ( h 1 , h 2 ) -Godunova–Levin functions and harmonic h -Godunova–Levin to harmonic ( h 1 , h 2 ) -Godunova–Levin functions. Sahoo et al. [33,34] employed classical and Riemann–Liouville fractional integral operators and used center- and radius-order relations to provide new bounds for Hermite–Hadamard and its several extended forms. We refer to these works for more recent developments about similar conclusions using various other kinds of convex mappings and integral operators (see Refs. [35,36,37,38,39,40]). The Ulam stability problem, first posed by Ulam [41] in 1940, presents an open problem relating to approximate homomorphisms of groups. Consider two metric groups H 1 and H 2 , and consider a non-negative mapping : H 1 H 2 with metric d ( · , · ) such that
d ( ( ν 1 ν 2 ) , ( ν 1 ) ( ν 2 ) ) ϵ , ν 1 , ν 2 H 1 .
Is there a group homomorphism h and δ ϵ > 0 such that d ( ( ν 1 ) , h ( ν 1 ) ) δ ϵ , ν 1 H 1 ? A first assertion, essentially due to Hyers [42], is the following one, which answers Ulam’s question.
Theorem 1. 
Let G be a additive semigroup, X be a Banach function space, ϵ 0 , and : G X satisfy the following inequality:
( ν 1 + ν 2 ) ( ν 1 ) ( ν 2 ) ϵ , f o r a l l ν 1 , ν 2 G ;
then, there exists a unique function : G X satisfying ( ν 1 + ν 2 ) = ( ν 1 ) + ( ν 2 ) and for which
( ν 1 ) ( ν 1 ) ϵ , f o r a l l ν 1 G .
Stability problems have been studied for numerous functional equations, including differential equations, approximation convexity, dynamical systems, variational problems, etc. This topic was probably introduced by Hyers and Ulam [43] in 1952, who introduced and investigated ϵ -convex functions. If is a convex subset of a real linear space Y and ϵ is a nonnegative number, then a mapping : Ω R is called ϵ -convex if
r 1 ν 1 + ( 1 r 1 ) ν 2 r 1 ( ν 1 ) + ( 1 r 1 ) ( ν 2 ) + ϵ , ( ν 1 , ν 2 ) Ω , r 1 [ 0 , 1 ] .
The topic of approximate convexity and its connection to other generalized convex mappings is rarely discussed, but a few recent advancements have been discussed by several authors. Using harmonically convex mappings, Bracamonte et al. [44] discussed the sandwich theorem and Hyers–Ulam stability results. Forti [45] discussed Hyers–Ulam stability of functional equations with applications spanning varied disciplines. Ernst and Théra [46] investigated the Ulam stability of a set of ϵ -approximate proper lower semicontinuous mappings. In regard to the infinite version of the Hyers–Ulam stability theorem, Emanuele Casini and Pierluigi Papinia [47] provided an interesting counterexample. Bracamonte et al. [48] defined an approximate convexity result for reciprocally strongly convex functions; specifically, they proved a Hyers–Ulam stability result for this class of functions. Flavia Corina [49] used set-valued mappings to explore convexity and its associated sandwich theorem, among other fascinating properties. Dilworth et al. [50] discussed the best optimal constants in a Hyers and Ulam theorem using extremal approximate convex functions. To view further comparable findings about Hyers–Ulam stability and optimum constants, please see Refs. [51,52,53,54,55,56].

Novelty and Significance

The key concepts in adjusting inequalities within interval mappings are “order relations“ and “convex functions“. However, authors have recently used the classical Riemann integral operator and a partial-order relation “ p “ that does not generalize the results for real-value function inequalities. In reference [57], the authors demonstrate with Example 3 that, when the interval mapping is warped, this order relation is not the famous settled Milne type inequality while setting up interval-valued functions. To address this issue, the authors introduce a new order relation called the total order relation, often known as the center-radius order “ CR ,“ which enables us to easily compare intervals and may be considered an extension of the standard order “≤“. Furthermore, this is the first time we are exploring the stability of 2 D -convex mappings using the Hyers–Ulam technique with the aid of the sandwich theorem. Furthermore, this type of order relation is first coupled with two-dimensional convex mappings. Using these new conceptions, we established three well-known inequalities: Hermite–Hadamard, Pachpatte’s, and Fejér-type integral inequalities. To demonstrate the beauty of this order relation and novel fractional operators, we show with remarks that, after different setups, we obtain various previous results, and all of the previously developed results using different operators and order relations are special cases of this type of new operator and order relationship. Inspiration from strong relevant literature concerning produced results, in particular publications [15,44,58], urges us to construct new and better versions of three well-known inequalities with applications. This article is structured as follows. In Section 2, we revisit some interval and fractional calculus concepts that are essential for proceeding with this article. In Section 3, we discuss the Hyers–Ulam stability of two-dimensional convex mappings. In Section 4, we construct a novel version of the Hermite–Hadamard inequality together with its newly weighted and product forms of inequalities. In Section 5, we discuss the findings and draw conclusions. Lastly, in Section 6, we provide a new definition for two-dimensional approximation convexity and leave an open problem about the best optimal constants.

2. Preliminaries

This section reviews the fundamentals of interval analysis, including definitions, notations, properties, and findings. Additionally, we start this section by fixing a few notations that are used throughout the paper:
  • R i + : a collection of positive intervals in R ;
  • R i : a collection of negative intervals in R ;
  • R i : a collection of both positive and negative intervals in R ;
  • ̲ = ¯ : interval mapping degenerated;
  • ⊆: partial-order relation;
  • ≤: standard-order relation;
  • CR : total-order relation.

2.1. Interval Calculus

The pack of all compact subsets of R in one-dimensional Euclidean space is denoted by R i + .
R i = { [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] : ν 1 , ν 2 R a n d ν 1 ν 2 }
The Hausdorff metric in R i is defined as follows:
H ( ν 1 , ν 2 ) = sup { d ( ν 1 , ν 2 ) , d ( ν 2 , ν 1 ) } ,
where d ( ν 1 , ν 2 ) = sup a ν 1 d ( a , ν 2 ) , and d ( a , ν 2 ) = min b ν 2 d ( a , b ) = min b ν 2 | a b | .
Remark 1. 
According to (3), the Hausdorff metric has a parallel representation as follows:
H ( [ ν 1 ̲ , ν 1 ¯ ] , [ ν 2 ̲ , ν 2 ¯ ] ) = sup { | ν 1 ̲ ν 2 ̲ | , | ν 1 ¯ ν 2 ¯ | } .
This is referred to as the Moore metric in interval space.
It is generally known that the metric space R i , H is complete. Next, we define the Minkowski sum and scalar multiplication on R i using
A + B = { ν 1 + ν 2 ν 1 A , ν 2 B } and γ A = { γ ν 1 ν 1 A } .
For instance, if A = [ ν 1 ̲ , ν 1 ¯ ] and B = [ ν 2 ̲ , ν 2 ¯ ] are two bounded intervals, the difference is defined as follows:
A B = [ ν 1 ̲ ν 2 ¯ , ν 1 ¯ ν 2 ̲ ] ,
with the product
A · B = [ min { ν 1 ν 2 ̲ , ν 1 ̲ ν 2 ¯ , ν 1 ¯ ν 2 ̲ , ν 1 ¯ ν 2 ¯ } , sup { ν 1 ν 2 ̲ , ν 1 ̲ ν 2 ¯ , ν 1 ¯ ν 2 ̲ , ν 1 ¯ ν 2 ¯ } ]
and the division
A B = min ν 1 ̲ ν 2 ̲ , ν 1 ν 2 ¯ , ν 1 ¯ ν 2 ̲ , ν 1 ¯ ν 2 ¯ , sup ν 1 ̲ ν 2 ¯ , ν 1 ̲ ν 2 ¯ , ν 1 ¯ ν 2 ̲ , ν 1 ¯ ν 2 ¯ ,
where 0 B . The order relation that is employed in this note is defined by Bhunia and Samanta in their work [59], wherein they define the total order relation “ CR “.
Definition 1 
(see [29]). The center-radius total-order relation for closed and bounded intervals ν 1 = [ d ̲ , d ¯ ] = d C , d R = d ¯ + d ̲ 2 , d ¯ d ̲ 2 , ν 2 = [ e ̲ , e ¯ ] = e C , e R = e ¯ + e ̲ 2 , e ¯ e ̲ 2 R i are represented as:
ν 1 CR ν 2 d c < e c , if d c e c ; d r e r , if d c = e c .
Definition 2 
(see [30]). Let : [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] R i be an interval-valued mapping defined by ( ν 2 ) = [ ̲ ( ν ) , ¯ ( ν ) ] . IR ( [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] ) iff ̲ ( ν ) , ¯ ( ν ) R ( [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] ) and
( IR ) ν 1 ν 2 ( ν ) d ν = ( R ) ν 1 ν 2 ̲ ( ν ) d ν , ( R ) ν 1 ν 2 ¯ ( ν ) d ν .
Theorem 2 
(see [29]). Let , ζ : [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] R i be an interval-valued mapping defined by ζ = [ ζ ̲ , ζ ¯ ] , = [ ̲ , ¯ ] . If ( ν ) CR ζ ( ν ) for all ν [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] ; then
ν 1 ν 2 ( ν ) d ν CR ν 1 ν 2 ζ ( ν ) d ν .

Interval-Valued Double Integral

A set of numbers { a i 1 , i , a i } i = 1 m is called a tagged partition P of [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] if P : ν 1 = η 0 < η 1 < < η m = ν 2 with a i 1 i a i i = 1 , 2 , 3 , , m . Further, if we consider Δ a i = a i a i 1 , then P is said to be δ -fine. Let P ( δ , [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] ) denote the set of all δ -fine partitions of [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] ; if { a i 1 , i , a i } i = 1 m is a δ -fine P of [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] and { b j 1 , η j , b j } j = 1 n is a δ -fine P of [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] , then the rectangles’
Δ i , j = [ a i 1 , a i ] × [ b j 1 , b j ]
partition rectangles of Δ = [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] × [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] with the points ( i , η j ) are inside the rectangles [ a i 1 , a i ] × [ b j 1 , b j ] . Moreover, if P ( δ , Δ ) , we denote the pack of all δ -fine partitions of Δ with P × P , where P P ( δ , [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] ) and P P ( δ , [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] ) . Let Δ A i , j be the area of the Δ i , j . In each segment of area of Δ i , j where 1 i m , 1 j n , consider any arbitrary point ( i , η j ) , and we obtain
S ( , P , δ , Δ ) = i = 1 m j = 1 n ( i , η j ) Δ A i , j .
We call S ( , P , δ , Δ ) an integral sum of related to P P ( δ , Δ ) . For further detail, we refer to [15].
Theorem 3. 
Let : Δ R i . Then, ℵ is known as ID -integrable on Δ with ID -integral U = ( ID ) Δ ( ν 1 , ν 2 ) dA if, for any ϵ > 0 , there exists δ > 0 such that
d S ( , P , δ , Δ ) , U < ϵ
for each P P ( δ , ) . The set of all ID -integrable mappings on Δ will be represented by ID ( Δ ) .
Theorem 4. 
Let Δ = [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] × [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] . If : Δ R i is ID -integrable on Δ , then we have
( ID ) Δ ( x , y ) dA = ( IR ) ν 1 ν 2 ( IR ) ν 3 ν 4 ( x , y ) dx dy .
Example 1. 
Let : Δ = [ 0 , 1 ] × [ 1 , 2 ] R i + be defined as
( ν 1 , ν 2 ) = [ ν 1 ν 2 , ν 1 + ν 2 ] ;
then, ( ν 1 , ν 2 ) is integrable on Δ, and ( ID ) Δ ( ν 1 , ν 2 ) dA = [ 3 4 , 2 ] .
Theorem 5 
(see [60]). Suppose that the two mappings , : [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] R I + are both interval-valued convex such that ( ν ) = [ ̲ ( ν ) , ¯ ( ν ) ] as well as ( ν ) = [ ̲ ( ν ) , ¯ ( ν ) ] . Then, one has the inclusion relation
α ν 2 ν 1 J ν 1 + α ( ν ) ( ν ) + J ν 2 α ( ν ) ( ν ) P ( ν 1 , ν 2 ) θ 1 2 2 θ 1 + 4 θ 1 2 + 2 θ 1 + 4 e θ 1 θ 1 3 +   Q ( ν 1 , ν 2 ) 2 θ 1 4 + 2 θ 1 + 4 e θ 1 θ 1 3 ,
where
P ( ν 1 , ν 2 ) = ( ν 1 ) ( ν 1 ) + ( ν 2 ) ( ν 2 ) , Q ( ν 1 , ν 2 ) = ( ν 1 ) ( ν 2 ) + ( ν 2 ) ( ν 1 ) .
Theorem 6 
(see [60]). Under the same hypotheses mentioned in Theorem 5, we have the successive inclusion relation:
2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 1 α 2 1 e θ 1 J ν 1 + α ( ν 2 ) ( ν 2 ) + J ν 2 α ( ν 1 ) ( ν 1 ) + P ( ν 1 , ν 2 ) θ 1 2 + θ 1 + 2 e θ 1 θ 1 2 1 e θ 1 + Q ( ν 1 , ν 2 ) θ 1 2 2 θ 1 + 4 θ 1 2 + 2 θ 1 + 4 e θ 1 2 θ 1 2 1 e θ 1 .
Inspired by the concept of classical integrals in the context of interval-valued mappings, here we propose the following fractional integrals with non-singular kernels.
Definition 3. 
Let : [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] × [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] R 2 R i be a bidimensional interval-valued mapping represented as ( η 1 , η 2 ) = [ ̲ ( η 1 , η 2 ) , ¯ ( η 1 , η 2 ) ] . The fractional operators having non-singular kernels are represented as J ν 1 + , ν 4 + θ 1 , θ 2 , J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 , J ν 2 , ν 4 + θ 1 , θ 2 and J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 of order θ 1 ( 0 , 1 ) , θ 2 ( 0 , 1 ) along with ν 1 , ν 4 0 , which are defined as follows:
J ν 1 + , ν 4 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( x , y ) = 1 θ 1 θ 2 ν 1 x ν 4 y e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x t ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( y s ) ( t , s ) ds dt , x > ν 1 , y > ν 4 , J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( x , y ) = 1 θ 1 θ 2 ν 1 x y ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x t ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( s y ) ( t , s ) ds dt , x > ν 1 , y < ν 4 , J ν 2 , ν 4 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( x , y ) = 1 θ 1 θ 2 x ν 2 ν 4 y e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( t x ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( y s ) ( t , s ) ds dt , x < ν 2 , y > ν 4 ,
as well as
J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( x , y ) = 1 θ 1 θ 2 x ν 2 y v e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( t x ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( s y ) ( t , s ) ds dt , x < ν 2 , y < ν 4 ,
respectively. We observe that
lim θ 1 1 θ 2 1 J ν 1 + , ν 4 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( x , y ) = 1 θ 1 θ 2 ν 1 x ν 4 y ( t , s ) ds dt .
It is straightforward to provide the consecutive I . V fractional integrals in accordance with Definition 3 as follows:
J ν 1 + θ 1 x , ν 4 + ν 3 2 = 1 θ 1 ν 1 x e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x t ) t , ν 4 + ν 3 2 dt , x > ν 1 , J ν 2 θ 1 x , ν 4 + ν 3 2 = 1 θ 1 x ν 2 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( t x ) t , ν 4 + ν 3 2 dt , x < ν 2 , J ν 4 + θ 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , y = 1 θ 2 ν 4 y e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( y s ) ν 1 + ν 2 2 , s ds , y > ν 4 ,
along with
J ν 4 θ 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , y = 1 θ 2 y ν 4 e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( s y ) ν 1 + ν 2 2 , s ds , y < ν 4 .
After that, we go over the definition of the bidimensional convexity under partial- and standard-order relations as given by the authors of [14,15].
Definition 4 
(see [14]). Let : Ω = [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] × [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] R 2 R i + be a bidimensional convex function under standard-order relation if
r 1 ν 1 + ( 1 r 1 ) ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + ( 1 s 1 ) ν 4 ν 1 ν 2 ( r 1 , ν 3 ) + ν 2 ( 1 ν 1 ) ( r 1 , ν 4 ) + ν 1 ( 1 ν 2 ) ( s 1 . ν 3 ) + ( 1 ν 1 ) ( 1 ν 2 ) ( s 1 , ν 4 )
holds true for every ( ν 1 , ν 2 ) , ( ν 3 , ν 4 ) Ω along with r 1 , s 1 [ 0 , 1 ] .
Definition 5 
(see [15]). Let : Ω = [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] × [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] R 2 R i + be a bidimensional interval-valued function defined as = [ ̲ ( a , b ) , ¯ ( a , b ) ] with 0 ν 1 < ν 2 , 0 ν 3 < ν 4 . Then, ℵ is bidimensional interval-valued convex under partial-order if
r 1 ν 1 + ( 1 r 1 ) ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + ( 1 s 1 ) ν 4 ν 1 ν 2 ( r 1 , ν 3 ) + ν 2 ( 1 ν 1 ) ( r 1 , ν 4 ) + ν 1 ( 1 ν 2 ) ( s 1 . ν 3 ) + ( 1 ν 1 ) ( 1 ν 2 ) ( s 1 , ν 4 )
holds true for every ( ν 1 , ν 2 ) , ( ν 3 , ν 4 ) Ω along with r 1 , s 1 [ 0 , 1 ] .
As the order relation “⊇” is not a generalization of standard order relation “≤” and has some flaws regarding setting inequality, the authors of [58] have recently introduced a total order relation that works smoothly with all kinds of inequalities.
Definition 6 
(see [34]). Let : Ω = [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] R i + be a interval-valued function defined as = [ ̲ ( a ) , ¯ ( a ) ] with 0 ν 1 < ν 2 . Then, ℵ is I . V CR -convex iff
r 1 ν 1 + ( 1 r 1 ) ν 2 CR r 1 ( ν 1 ) + ( 1 r 1 ) ( ν 2 )
holds true for every ( ν 1 , ν 2 ) Ω along with r 1 [ 0 , 1 ] .
Taking motivation from the above definitions, now we are in a good position to extend Definition 6 into two dimensions in the setup of a total-order relation.
Definition 7. 
Let : Ω = [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] × [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] R 2 R i + be a bidimensional interval-valued function defined as = [ ̲ ( a , b ) , ¯ ( a , b ) ] with 0 ν 1 < ν 2 , 0 ν 3 < ν 4 . Then, ℵ is bidimensional I . V CR -convex iff
r 1 ν 1 + ( 1 r 1 ) ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + ( 1 s 1 ) ν 4 CR ν 1 ν 2 ( r 1 , ν 3 ) + ν 2 ( 1 ν 1 ) ( r 1 , ν 4 ) + ν 1 ( 1 ν 2 ) ( s 1 . ν 3 ) + ( 1 ν 1 ) ( 1 ν 2 ) ( s 1 , ν 4 )
holds true for every ( ν 1 , ν 2 ) , ( ν 3 , ν 4 ) Ω along with r 1 , s 1 [ 0 , 1 ] .
Remark 2. 
  • Setting ̲ ¯ , we obtain Definition 2 given by by Zhao et al. in [15].
  • Setting ̲ = ¯ , we obtain Inequality (2.1) given by by Dragomir in [14].
Proposition 1. 
Let : [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] × [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] R 2 R i + be a bidimensional interval-valued function defined as = [ ̲ ( a , b ) , ¯ ( a , b ) ] with 0 ν 1 < ν 2 , 0 ν 3 < ν 4 . Then, ℵ is bidimensional interval-valued CR -convex if and only if C and R are bidimensional convex functions.
Proof. 
Since c and r are bidimensional convex mappings, then for each ( ν 1 , ν 2 ) , ( ν 3 , ν 4 ) [ 0 , 1 ] × [ 0 , 1 ] , we have
C r 1 ν 1 + ( 1 r 1 ) ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + ( 1 s 1 ) ν 4 ν 1 ν 2 C ( r 1 , ν 3 ) + ν 2 ( 1 ν 1 ) C ( r 1 , ν 4 ) + ν 1 ( 1 ν 2 ) C ( s 1 . ν 3 ) + ( 1 ν 1 ) ( 1 ν 2 ) C ( s 1 , ν 4 )
and
R r 1 ν 1 + ( 1 r 1 ) ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + ( 1 s 1 ) ν 4 ν 1 ν 2 R ( r 1 , ν 3 ) + ν 2 ( 1 ν 1 ) R ( r 1 , ν 4 ) + ν 1 ( 1 ν 2 ) R ( s 1 . ν 3 ) + ( 1 ν 1 ) ( 1 ν 2 ) R ( s 1 , ν 4 ) .
Now, if
C r 1 ν 1 + ( 1 r 1 ) ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + ( 1 s 1 ) ν 4 ν 1 ν 2 C ( r 1 , ν 3 ) + ν 2 ( 1 ν 1 ) C ( r 1 , ν 4 ) + ν 1 ( 1 ν 2 ) C ( s 1 . ν 3 ) + ( 1 ν 1 ) ( 1 ν 2 ) C ( s 1 , ν 4 ) ,
this implies
C r 1 ν 1 + ( 1 r 1 ) ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + ( 1 s 1 ) ν 4 CR ν 1 ν 2 C ( r 1 , ν 3 ) + ν 2 ( 1 ν 1 ) C ( r 1 , ν 4 ) + ν 1 ( 1 ν 2 ) C ( s 1 . ν 3 ) + ( 1 ν 1 ) ( 1 ν 2 ) C ( s 1 , ν 4 ) .
Otherwise, one has
R r 1 ν 1 + ( 1 r 1 ) ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + ( 1 s 1 ) ν 4 ν 1 ν 2 R ( r 1 , ν 3 ) + ν 2 ( 1 ν 1 ) R ( r 1 , ν 4 ) + ν 1 ( 1 ν 2 ) R ( s 1 . ν 3 ) + ( 1 ν 1 ) ( 1 ν 2 ) R ( s 1 , ν 4 ) .
This implies that
R r 1 ν 1 + ( 1 r 1 ) ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + ( 1 s 1 ) ν 4 CR ν 1 ν 2 R ( r 1 , ν 3 ) + ν 2 ( 1 ν 1 ) R ( r 1 , ν 4 ) + ν 1 ( 1 ν 2 ) R ( s 1 . ν 3 ) + ( 1 ν 1 ) ( 1 ν 2 ) R ( s 1 , ν 4 ) ,
By virtue of the aforementioned results and Definition 7, this may be lead as follows:
r 1 ν 1 + ( 1 r 1 ) ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + ( 1 s 1 ) ν 4 CR ν 1 ν 2 ( r 1 , ν 3 ) + ν 2 ( 1 ν 1 ) ( r 1 , ν 4 ) + ν 1 ( 1 ν 2 ) ( s 1 . ν 3 ) + ( 1 ν 1 ) ( 1 ν 2 ) ( s 1 , ν 4 ) .
This concludes the proof.
 □
Example 2. 
Let : [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] × [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] R 2 R i + be a bidimensional interval-valued function defined as
= [ 3 e 2 x + 1 2 e y + 5 + 5 , 4 e 2 x + 1 + 3 e y + 5 + 7 ] , ( x , y ) [ 0 , 4 ] × [ 0 , 4 ] .
Then,
C = e 2 x + 1 + e y + 5 + 12 2 and R = 7 e 2 x + 1 + 5 e y + 5 + 2 2 .
Remark 3. 
As shown below, Figure 1 contains interval-valued mappings with both concave and convex mappings at the left and right endpoints. However, when the center- and radius-order are applied, the newly developed mappings, as well as their views in Figure 2, clearly show that both mappings at the left and right endpoints are convex in nature.

3. Hyers–Ulam Stability of Two-Dimensional Convex Functions

This section presents two main discoveries. The first outcome is a sandwich theorem for 2 D -convex functions, which is related to the separation by convex mappings theorem in [61]. In our second contribution, we demonstrate Hyers–Ulam stability for two-dimensional convex functions, providing an approximate convexity result. The corollary stated below is a direct consequence of Theorem 3 presented in article [44].
Corollary 1. 
Let = [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] × [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] R 2 be an interval and let ℵ and ℷ both be two variables with real-valued mappings defined on Ω; then, the following results are equivalent:
  • (i) there exists a two-variable convex mapping h : ω R 2 such that h on Ω;
  • (ii) there exists a two-dimensional convex mapping h 1 : R 2 and a concave mapping h 2 : R 2 such that h 1 and h 2 on Ω;
  • (iii) the following result holds true for every ( ν 1 , ν 2 ) , ( ν 3 , ν 4 ) Ω along with r 1 , s 1 [ 0 , 1 ] .
    r 1 ν 1 + ( 1 r 1 ) ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + ( 1 s 1 ) ν 4 ν 1 ν 2 ( r 1 , ν 3 ) + ν 2 ( 1 ν 1 ) ( r 1 , ν 4 ) + ν 1 ( 1 ν 2 ) ( s 1 . ν 3 ) + ( 1 ν 1 ) ( 1 ν 2 ) ( s 1 , ν 4 ) , r 1 ν 1 + ( 1 r 1 ) ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + ( 1 s 1 ) ν 4 ν 1 ν 2 ( r 1 , ν 3 ) + ν 2 ( 1 ν 1 ) ( r 1 , ν 4 ) + ν 1 ( 1 ν 2 ) ( s 1 . ν 3 ) + ( 1 ν 1 ) ( 1 ν 2 ) ( s 1 , ν 4 )
Following Corollary 1, we obtain the following stability result for two-dimensional convex mappings of the Hyers–Ulam type.
Proposition 2. 
Let Ω R 2 be an interval and ϵ be a positive constant. A mapping : Ω = [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] × [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] R 2 satisfies the following inequality:
| r 1 ν 1 + ( 1 r 1 ) ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + ( 1 s 1 ) ν 4 ν 1 ν 2 ( r 1 , ν 3 ) + ν 2 ( 1 ν 1 ) ( r 1 , ν 4 ) ν 1 ( 1 ν 2 ) ( s 1 . ν 3 ) ( 1 ν 1 ) ( 1 ν 2 ) ( s 1 , ν 4 ) | ϵ
which holds true for every  ( ν 1 , ν 2 ) , ( ν 3 , ν 4 ) Ω  along with  r 1 , s 1 [ 0 , 1 ] , iff there exists another two-variable convex mapping  φ : Ω = [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] × [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] R 2  such that
| ( x , y ) φ ( x , y ) | ϵ 4 , x , y Ω .
Proof. 
If ℵ satisfies (7), then (4) holds with = + ϵ . Therefore, by virtue of Corollary 1, there exists a two-variable convex function h : Ω R 2 such that h + ϵ . Putting φ ( x , y ) : = h ( x , y ) ϵ 4 , x , y Ω , we get a convex mapping φ : Ω R 2 satisfying (6). Now suppose that (6) holds with a convex function φ . Then,
| r 1 ν 1 + ( 1 r 1 ) ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + ( 1 s 1 ) ν 4 ν 1 ν 2 ( r 1 , ν 3 ) + ν 2 ( 1 ν 1 ) ( r 1 , ν 4 ) ν 1 ( 1 ν 2 ) ( s 1 . ν 3 ) ( 1 ν 1 ) ( 1 ν 2 ) ( s 1 , ν 4 ) | = | r 1 ν 1 + ( 1 r 1 ) ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + ( 1 s 1 ) ν 4 φ r 1 ν 1 + ( 1 r 1 ) ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + ( 1 s 1 ) ν 4   ν 1 ν 2 ( r 1 , ν 3 ) + ν 2 ( 1 ν 1 ) ( r 1 , ν 4 )   ν 1 ( 1 ν 2 ) ( s 1 . ν 3 ) ( 1 ν 1 ) ( 1 ν 2 ) ( s 1 , ν 4 ) +   ν 1 ν 2 φ ( r 1 , ν 3 ) + ν 2 ( 1 ν 1 ) φ ( r 1 , ν 4 ) +   ν 1 ( 1 ν 2 ) φ ( s 1 . ν 3 ) + ( 1 ν 1 ) ( 1 ν 2 ) φ ( s 1 , ν 4 ) | | r 1 ν 1 + ( 1 r 1 ) ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + ( 1 s 1 ) ν 4 φ r 1 ν 1 + ( 1 r 1 ) ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + ( 1 s 1 ) ν 4 | +   ν 1 ν 2 | φ ( r 1 , ν 3 ) ( r 1 , ν 3 ) | + ν 2 ( 1 ν 1 ) | φ ( r 1 , ν 4 ) ( r 1 , ν 4 ) | +   ν 1 ( 1 ν 2 ) | φ ( s 1 . ν 3 ) ( s 1 . ν 3 ) | + ( 1 ν 1 ) ( 1 ν 2 ) | φ ( s 1 , ν 4 ) ( s 1 , ν 4 ) | ϵ 4 + ϵ 4 + ϵ 4 + ϵ 4 ϵ .
This finishes the proof. □

4. Novel Two-Dimensional Hermite–Hadamard-Type Inequalities via Fractional Integral Operators

The objective of this part is to use bidimensional convex mappings to build Hermite–Hadamard and its numerous novel variations under the center-radius-order relation.
Theorem 7. 
Let : [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] × [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] R 2 R i + be a bidimensional interval-valued function defined as = [ 1 ̲ ( a , b ) , 2 ¯ ( a , b ) ] with 0 ν 1 < ν 2 , 0 ν 3 < ν 4 . Then, one has the double CR -order relation:
ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR ( 1 θ 1 ) ( 1 θ 2 ) 4 ( 1 e ð 1 ) ( 1 e ð 2 ) J ν 1 + , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ] CR ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) 4 ,
where ð 1 = 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) and ð 2 = 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 ν 3 ) .
Proof. 
Taking into account bidimensional interval-valued mapping , and if we take x = r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , y = 1 r 1 ν 1 + r 1 ν 2 , u = s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 , and w = 1 s 1 ν 3 + s 1 ν 4 , then we have
x + y 2 , u + w 2 = ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR 1 4 r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 + r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , 1 s 1 ν 3 + s 1 ν 4 + 1 r 1 ν 1 + r 1 ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 + 1 r 1 ν 1 + r 1 ν 2 , 1 s 1 ν 3 + s 1 ν 4 .
Multiplying relation (9) by e ð 1 r 1 e ð 2 s 1 and integrating the resultant output with reference to r 1 , s 1 on [ 0 , 1 ] × [ 0 , 1 ] reveals that
ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 0 1 0 1 e ð 1 r 1 e ð 2 s 1 d s 1 d r 1 CR 1 4 { 0 1 0 1 e ð 1 r 1 e ð 2 s 1 [ ( r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 ) + ( r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , 1 s 1 ν 3 + s 1 ν 4 ) ] d s 1 d r 1 + 0 1 0 1 e ð 1 r 1 e ð 2 s 1 [ ( 1 r 1 ν 1 + r 1 ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 ) + ( 1 r 1 ν 1 + r 1 ν 2 , 1 s 1 ν 3 + s 1 ν 4 ) ] d s 1 d r 1 } .
Changing the variable and doing various computations may allow us to determine
1 e ð 1 1 e ð 2 ð 1 ð 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR 1 4 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 x ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 y ) ( x , y ) d y d x + ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 x ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( y ν 3 ) ( x , y ) d y d x + ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x ν 1 ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 y ) ( x , y ) d y d x + ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x ν 1 ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( y ν 3 ) ( x , y ) d y d x = θ 1 θ 2 4 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) J ν 1 + , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) .
This proves the first CR relation. As for the second relation, given Definition 7, we have
r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 CR r 1 s 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + s 1 1 r 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + r 1 1 s 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + s 1 1 r 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) , r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , 1 s 1 ν 3 + s 1 ν 4 CR r 1 1 s 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + 1 s 1 1 r 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + r 1 s 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + 1 r 1 s 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) , 1 r 1 ν 1 + r 1 ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 CR 1 r 1 s 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + r 1 s 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + 1 r 1 1 s 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + r 1 s 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ,
as well as
1 r 1 ν 1 + r 1 ν 2 , 1 s 1 ν 3 + s 1 ν 4 CR 1 r 1 1 s 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + r 1 1 s 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + s 1 1 r 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + r 1 s 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) .
Including the above-mentioned relations, it follows that
r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 + r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , 1 s 1 ν 3 + s 1 ν 4 + 1 r 1 ν 1 + r 1 ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 + 1 r 1 ν 1 + r 1 ν 2 , 1 s 1 ν 3 + s 1 ν 4 CR ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) .
Multiplying the CR relation above with e ð 1 r 1 e ð 2 s 1 , then integrating the resultant output about r 1 , s 1 , we obtain
0 1 0 1 e ð 1 r 1 e ð 2 s 1 r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 + r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , 1 s 1 ν 3 + s 1 ν 4 d s 1 d r 1 + 0 1 0 1 e ð 1 r 1 e ð 2 s 1 [ ( 1 r 1 ν 1 + r 1 ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 ) + ( 1 r 1 ν 1 + r 1 ν 2 , 1 s 1 ν 3 + s 1 ν 4 ) ] d s 1 d r 1 CR 0 1 0 1 e ð 1 r 1 e ð 2 s 1 [ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ] d s 1 d r 1 .
Changing the variables results in the following:
( 1 θ 1 ) ( 1 θ 2 ) 4 1 e ð 1 1 e ð 2 J ν 1 + , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) CR ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) 4 .
Consequently, Theorem 7 is proved. Following Theorem 7, we derive the following results that have been documented in the literature.
Remark 4. 
  • If θ 1 1 , θ 2 1 with ̲ ¯ , we obtain the following result by Zhao et al. [15]:
    ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 1 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 ( x , y ) d y d x ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) 4 .
  • If θ 1 1 , θ 2 1 with ̲ = ¯ , we obtain the following result by Dragomir [14]:
    ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 1 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 ( x , y ) d y d x ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) 4 .
  • If ̲ = ¯ , we obtain the following result, which is new as well:
    ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ( 1 θ 1 ) ( 1 θ 2 ) 4 ( 1 e ð 1 ) ( 1 e ð 2 ) J ν 1 + , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) 4 .
  • If θ 1 1 , θ 2 1 with ̲ ¯ , we obtain the following result by Khan et al. [62]:
    ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 p 1 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 ( x , y ) d y d x p ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) 4 .
Example 3. 
If one has ( x , y ) = 2 e 3 x e 3 y , 4 + e x 4 + e y , [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] = [ 0 , 1 ] , [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] = [ 0 , 1 ] , θ 1 = 1 , and θ 2 = 1 , then all the postulates in Theorem 3.2 are satisfied. Now we consider
ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 = 2 e 3 , ( 4 + e 1 2 ) 2 [ 40.17107 , 31.90805 ] , ( 1 θ 1 ) ( 1 θ 2 ) 4 1 e ð 1 1 e ð 2 J ν 1 + , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) [ 114.04725 , 64.60196 ] , ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) 4 [ 222.2993 , 93.8679 ] .
Thus,
[ 40.17107 , 31.90805 ] CR [ 114.04725 , 64.60196 ] CR [ 222.2993 , 93.8679 ] .
As a result, the conclusions described in Theorem 7 are true.
Weighted Hermite–Hadamard or Fejér-Type Inequality
By using the weight function of two variables, we can prove the following theorem relating to weighted Hermite–Hadamard or Fejér-type inequalities.
Theorem 8. 
Let : [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] × [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] R 2 R i + be a bidimensional interval-valued function defined as = [ 1 ̲ ( x , y ) , 2 ¯ ( x , y ) ] with 0 ν 1 < ν 2 , 0 ν 3 < ν 4 ] . If the function φ : [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] × [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] R 2 R is symmetric with respect to two variable forms, i.e.
φ ( x , y ) = φ ( ν 1 + ν 2 x , y ) , φ ( x , ν 3 + ν 4 y ) , φ ( ν 1 + ν 2 x , ν 3 + ν 4 y ) ,
then we have
ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 J ν 1 + , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) CR J ν 1 + , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) φ ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) φ ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) φ ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) φ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) CR ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) 4 J ν 1 + , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) .
Proof. 
Taking into account relation (9) of Theorem 7, multiply both sides by 4 e ð 1 r 1 e ð 2 s 1 φ r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 and integrate the resultant output with reference to r 1 , s 1 on [ 0 , 1 ] × [ 0 , 1 ] , which reveals that
4 ν 1 + ν 2 2 ν 3 + ν 4 2 0 1 0 1 e ð 1 r 1 e ð 2 s 1 φ r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 d s 1 d r 1 CR 0 1 0 1 e ð 1 r 1 e ð 2 s 1 φ r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 × r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 + r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , 1 s 1 ν 3 + s 1 ν 4 d s 1 d r 1 + 0 1 0 1 e ð 1 r 1 e ð 2 s 1 φ r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 × 1 r 1 ν 1 + r 1 ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 + 1 r 1 ν 1 + r 1 ν 2 , 1 s 1 ν 3 + s 1 ν 4 d s 1 d r 1 .
By altering the variable and performing different calculations, we may obtain
ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 4 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 ξ ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 δ ) ( ξ , δ ) φ ( ξ , δ ) d δ d ξ CR 1 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 ξ ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 δ ) ( ξ , δ ) φ ( ξ , δ ) d δ d ξ + ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 ξ ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( δ ν 3 ) ( ξ , δ ) φ ( ξ , ν 3 + ν 4 δ ) d δ d ξ + ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ξ ν 1 ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 δ ) ( ξ , δ ) φ ( ν 1 + ν 2 ξ , δ ) d δ d ξ + ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ξ ν 1 ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( δ ν 3 ) ( ξ , δ ) φ ( ν 1 + ν 2 ξ , ν 3 + ν 4 δ ) d δ d ξ = θ 1 θ 2 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) J ν 1 + , ν 3 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) φ ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) φ ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) φ ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) φ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) .
Since φ ( x , y ) has symmetry, it leads to
ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 4 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 ξ ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 δ ) ( ξ , δ ) φ ( ξ , δ ) d δ d ξ = θ 1 θ 2 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 J ν 1 + , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) .
This concludes the first CR relation. For the second relation, considering relation (10) of Theorem 7, and multiplying both sides by e ð 1 r 1 e ð 2 s 1 φ r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 and integrating, we have
0 1 0 1 e ð 1 r 1 e ð 2 s 1 φ r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 × r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 + r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , 1 s 1 ν 3 + s 1 ν 4 d s 1 d r 1 + 0 1 0 1 e ð 1 r 1 e ð 2 s 1 φ r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 × 1 r 1 ν 1 + r 1 ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 + 1 r 1 ν 1 + r 1 ν 2 , 1 s 1 ν 3 + s 1 ν 4 d s 1 d r 1 CR 0 1 0 1 e ð 1 r 1 e ð 2 s 1 φ r 1 ν 1 + 1 r 1 ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + 1 s 1 ν 4 × [ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ] ds 1 d r 1 .
Changing the variables results in
θ 1 θ 2 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) J ν 1 + , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) φ ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) φ ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) φ ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) φ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) CR ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) 4 × θ 1 θ 2 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) J ν 1 + , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) .
Consequently, Theorem 8 is proved. Following Theorem 8, we derive the following results that have been documented in the literature. □
Remark 5. 
  • If we take φ ( x , y ) = 1 , then Theorem 8 becomes Theorem 7.
  • If we set ̲ = ¯ , we obtain the following new result in the setting of standard-order relations, namely:
    ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 [ J ν 1 + , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ] [ J ν 1 + , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) φ ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) φ ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) φ ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) φ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ] ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) 4 [ J ν 1 + , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 φ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ] .
  • If we take φ ( x , y ) = 1 with θ 1 1 , θ 2 1 and ̲ = ¯ , we obtain Theorem 1 as reported in [14];
  • If we take θ 1 1 , θ 2 1 , we obtain Theorem 9 as reported in [62];
  • If we take θ 1 1 , θ 2 1 with ̲ ¯ , we obtain Theorem 7 as reported in [15].
Theorem 9. 
Using the same hypotheses as in Theorem 7, we obtain the following double CR -order relations:
ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR ( 1 θ 1 ) ( 1 θ 2 ) 4 1 e ð 1 2 1 e p 2 2 J ν 1 + ν 2 2 + , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + ν 2 2 + , ν 3 + ν 4 2 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) CR ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) 2 + ν 2 , ν 3 2 + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) 4 .
Proof. 
Taking into account bidimensional interval-valued function , for instance, if we consider x = r 1 2 ν 1 + 2 r 1 2 ν 2 , y = 2 r 1 2 ν 1 + r 1 2 ν 2 , u = s 1 2 ν 3 + 2 s 1 2 ν 4 , and w = 2 s 1 2 ν 3 + s 1 2 ν 4 , then we have
x + y 2 , u + w 2 = ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR 1 4 r 1 2 ν 1 + 2 r 1 2 ν 2 , s 1 2 ν 3 + 2 s 1 2 ν 4 + r 1 2 ν 1 + 2 r 1 2 ν 2 , 2 s 1 2 ν 3 + s 1 2 ν 4 + 2 r 1 2 ν 1 + r 1 2 ν 2 , s 1 2 ν 3 + 2 s 1 2 ν 4 + 2 r 1 2 ν 1 + r 1 2 ν 2 , 2 s 1 2 ν 3 + s 1 2 ν 4 .
Multiplying the above CR relation with e ð 1 2 r 1 e ð 2 2 s 1 and integrating, we have
ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 0 1 0 1 e ð 1 2 r 1 e ð 2 2 s 1 d s 1 d r 1 CR 1 4 [ 0 1 0 1 e ð 1 2 r 1 e ð 2 2 s 1 [ r 1 2 ν 1 + 2 r 1 2 ν 2 , s 1 2 ν 3 + 2 s 1 2 ν 4 + r 1 2 ν 1 + 2 r 1 2 ν 2 , 2 s 1 2 ν 3 + s 1 2 ν 4 ] d s 1 d r 1 + 0 1 0 1 e ð 1 2 r 1 e ð 2 2 s 1 [ 2 r 1 2 ν 1 + r 1 2 ν 2 , s 1 2 ν 3 + 2 s 1 2 ν 4 + 2 r 1 2 ν 1 + r 1 2 ν 2 , 2 s 1 2 ν 3 + s 1 2 ν 4 ] d s 1 d r 1 ] .
By changing the variable and performing different computations, we may determine that
4 1 e ð 1 2 1 e ð 2 2 ð 1 ð 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR 1 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) ν 1 + ν 2 2 ν 2 ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 x ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 y ) ( x , y ) d y d x + ν 1 + ν 2 2 ν 2 ν 3 ν 3 + ν 4 2 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 x ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( y ν 3 ) ( x , y ) d y d x + ν 1 ν 1 + ν 2 2 ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x ν 1 ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 y ) ( x , y ) d y d x + ν 1 ν 1 + ν 2 2 ν 3 ν 3 + ν 4 2 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x ν 1 ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( y ν 3 ) ( x , y ) d y d x = θ 1 θ 2 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) J ν 1 + ν 2 2 + , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + ν 2 2 + , ν 3 + ν 4 2 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) .
This proves the first CR relation. Regarding the second relation, taking into account Definition 7, we have
r 1 2 ν 1 + 2 r 1 2 ν 2 , s 1 2 ν 3 + 2 s 1 2 ν 4 CR 1 4 r 1 s 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + s 1 2 r 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + r 1 2 s 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + 2 s 1 2 r 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ] r 1 2 ν 1 + 2 r 1 2 ν 2 , 2 s 1 2 ν 3 + s 1 2 ν 4 CR 1 4 r 1 2 s 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + 2 s 1 2 r 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + r 1 s 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + 2 r 1 s 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) 2 r 1 2 ν 1 + r 1 2 ν 2 , s 1 2 ν 3 + 2 s 1 2 ν 4 CR 1 4 2 r 1 s 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + r 1 s 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + 2 r 1 2 s 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + r 1 2 s 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) 2 r 1 2 ν 1 + r 1 2 ν 2 , s 1 2 ν 3 + 2 s 1 2 ν 4 CR 1 4 2 r 1 s 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + r 1 s 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + 2 r 1 2 s 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + r 1 2 s 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 )
and
2 r 1 2 ν 1 + r 1 2 ν 2 , 2 s 1 2 ν 3 + s 1 2 ν 4 CR 1 4 2 r 1 2 s 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + r 1 2 s 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + s 1 2 r 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + r 1 s 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) .
Adding the above relations, we obtain
r 1 2 ν 1 + 2 r 1 2 ν 2 , s 1 2 ν 3 + 2 s 1 2 ν 4 + r 1 2 ν 1 + 2 r 1 2 ν 2 , 2 s 1 2 ν 3 + s 1 2 ν 4 + 2 r 1 2 ν 1 + r 1 2 ν 2 , s 1 2 ν 3 + 2 s 1 2 ν 4 + 2 r 1 2 ν 1 + r 1 2 ν 2 , 2 s 1 2 ν 3 + s 1 2 ν 4 CR ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) .
Multiplying the aforementioned CR relation by e ð 1 2 r 1 e ð 2 2 s 1 and then integrating the resultant output about r 1 , s 1 , we obtain
0 1 0 1 e ð 1 2 r 1 e ð 2 2 s 1 r 1 2 ν 1 + 2 r 1 2 ν 2 , s 1 2 ν 3 + 2 s 1 2 ν 4 + r 1 2 ν 1 + 2 r 1 2 ν 2 , 2 s 1 2 ν 3 + s 1 2 ν 4 ds 1 d r 1 + 0 1 0 1 e ð 1 2 r 1 e ð 2 2 s 1 2 r 1 2 ν 1 + r 1 2 ν 2 , s 1 2 ν 3 + 2 s 1 2 ν 4 + 2 r 1 2 ν 1 + r 1 2 ν 2 , 2 s 1 2 ν 3 + s 1 2 ν 4 d s 1 d r 1 CR 0 1 0 1 e ð 1 2 r 1 e ð 2 2 s 1 [ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ] d s 1 d r 1 .
Changing the variables results in
θ 1 θ 2 4 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) J ν 1 + ν 2 2 + , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + ν 2 2 + , ν 3 + ν 4 2 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) CR ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) 4 .
Consequently, Theorem 9 is proved. Following Theorem 9, we derive the following results that have been documented in the literature. □
Remark 6. 
  • If θ 1 1 , θ 2 1 , we obtain Theorem 7 as reported in [15].
  • If we take θ 1 1 , θ 2 1 with ̲ = ¯ , we obtain Theorem 1 as reported in [14].
Example 4. 
If ( x , y ) = ( x + 1 ) ( y + 1 ) 2 e 4 x e 4 y , 8 + 2 e x 4 + 2 e y , [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] = [ 0 , 1 ] , [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] = [ 0 , 1 ] , θ 1 = 1 , and θ 2 = 1 , then all the postulates in Theorem 9 are satisfied. Now, we consider
ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 = 9 e 4 2 , ( 8 + 2 e 1 2 ) ( 4 + 2 e 1 2 ) [ 245.69167 , 82.4457 ] , ( 1 θ 1 ) ( 1 θ 2 ) 4 1 e θ 1 2 1 e θ 2 2 J ν 1 + ν 2 2 + , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + J ν 1 + ν 2 2 θ 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + J ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) [ 290.5473 , 123.754 ] , ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) 4 [ 322.776 , 161.954 ] .
Thus,
[ 245.69167 , 82.4457 ] CR [ 290.5473 , 123.754 ] CR [ 322.776 , 161.954 ] .
As a result, the conclusions described in Theorem 9 are true.
Theorem 10. 
Let , : [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] × [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] R 2 R i + be two bidimensional convex interval-valued functions defined as = [ ̲ ( x , y ) , ¯ ( x , y ) ] and = [ η ̲ ( x , y ) , η ¯ ( x , y ) ] with 0 ν 1 < ν 2 , 0 ν 3 < ν 4 ] . Then, one has the double CR -order relations:
θ 1 θ 2 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) J ν 1 + , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) CR A 1 A 2 C ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) + A 1 B 2 D ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) + A 2 B 1 E ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) + B 1 B 2 ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) ,
where
A i = θ i 2 2 θ i + 4 θ i 2 + 2 θ i + 4 e θ i θ i 3 , B i = 2 θ i 4 + 2 θ i + 4 e θ i θ i 3 , i = 1 , 2 ,
C ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) = ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) , D ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) = ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) , E ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) = ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ,
and
( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) = ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) .
Proof. 
By virtue of bidimensional interval-valued functions , , we have that
x ( y ) : [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] R i + , x ( y ) = ( x , y ) , x ( y ) : [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] R i + , x ( y ) = ( x , y ) and
y ( x ) : [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] R i + , y ( x ) = ( x , y ) , y ( x ) : [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] R i + , y ( x ) = ( x , y ) are both bidimensional interval-valued mappings, analogously, for each x [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] accompanying y [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] . Now, by considering Theorem 2.4 within [60], we have
1 ν 4 ν 3 ν 3 ν 4 x ( y ) x ( y ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 y ) d y + ν 3 ν 4 y ( y ) x ( y ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( y ν 3 ) d y CR ð 2 2 2 ð 2 + 4 ð 2 2 + 2 ð 2 + 4 e ð 2 ð 2 3 x ( ν 3 ) x ( ν 3 ) + x ( ν 4 ) x ( ν 4 ) + 2 ð 2 4 + 2 ð 2 + 4 e ð 2 ð 2 3 x ( ν 3 ) x ( ν 4 ) + x ( ν 4 ) x ( ν 3 ) .
This can be written as
1 ν 4 ν 3 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 y ) ( x , y ) ( x , y ) d y + ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( y ν 3 ) ( x , y ) ( x , y ) d y CR ð 2 2 2 ð 2 + 4 ð 2 2 + 2 ð 2 + 4 e ð 2 ð 2 3 [ ( x , ν 3 ) ( x , ν 3 ) + ( x , ν 4 ) ( x , ν 4 ) ] + 2 ð 2 4 + 2 ð 2 + 4 e ð 2 ð 2 3 [ ( x , ν 3 ) ( x , ν 4 ) + ( x , ν 4 ) ( x , ν 3 ) ] .
Multiplying the above CR -order relation by 1 ν 2 ν 1 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 x ) and 1 ν 2 ν 1 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x ν 1 ) , separately, and by integrating the outcome with respect to x across [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] , we determine that
1 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 e θ 1 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 y ) e θ 2 1 θ 2 ( ν 4 y ) ( x , y ) ( x , y ) d y d x + ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 x ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( y ν 3 ) ( x , y ) ( x , y ) d y d x CR ð 2 2 2 ð 2 + 4 ð 2 2 + 2 ð 2 + 4 e ð 2 ð 2 3 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ν 1 ν 2 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 x ) [ ( x , ν 3 ) ( x , ν 3 ) + ( x , ν 4 ) ( x , ν 4 ) ] d x + 2 ð 2 4 + 2 ð 2 + 4 e ð 2 ð 2 3 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ν 1 ν 2 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 x ) [ ( x , ν 3 ) ( x , ν 4 ) + ( x , ν 4 ) ( x , ν 3 ) ] d x ,
and
1 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x ν 1 ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 y ) ( x , y ) ( x , y ) d y d x + ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x ν 1 ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( y ν 3 ) ( x , y ) ( x , y ) d y d x CR ð 2 2 2 ð 2 + 4 ð 2 2 + 2 ð 2 + 4 e ð 2 ð 2 3 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ν 1 ν 2 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x ν 1 ) [ ( x , ν 3 ) ( x , ν 3 ) + ( x , ν 4 ) ( x , ν 4 ) ] d x + 2 ð 2 4 + 2 ð 2 + 4 e ð 2 ð 2 3 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ν 1 ν 2 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x ν 1 ) [ ( x , ν 3 ) ( x , ν 4 ) + ( x , ν 4 ) ( x , ν 3 ) ] d x .
Summing the above two relations consecutively, we conclude that
θ 1 θ 2 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) J ν 1 + , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) CR ð 2 2 2 ð 2 + 4 ð 2 2 + 2 ð 2 + 4 e ð 2 ð 2 3 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) θ 1 J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + 2 ð 2 4 + 2 ð 2 + 4 e ð 2 ð 2 3 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) θ 1 J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) .
This also indicates that
θ 1 ν 2 ν 1 J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) CR ð 1 2 2 ð 1 + 4 ð 1 2 + 2 ð 1 + 4 e ð 1 ð 1 3 [ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ] + 2 ð 1 4 + 2 ð 1 + 4 e ð 1 ð 1 3 [ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ] ,
θ 1 ν 2 ν 1 J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) CR ð 1 2 2 ð 1 + 4 ð 1 2 + 2 ð 1 + 4 e ð 1 ð 1 3 [ ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ] + 2 ð 1 4 + 2 ð 1 + 4 e ð 1 ð 1 3 [ ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ] ,
θ 1 ν 2 ν 1 J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) CR ð 1 2 2 ð 1 + 4 ð 1 2 + 2 ð 1 + 4 e ð 1 ð 1 3 [ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ] + 2 ð 1 4 + 2 ð 1 + 4 e ð 1 ð 1 3 [ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ] ,
and
θ 1 ν 2 ν 1 J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) CR ð 1 2 2 ð 1 + 4 ð 1 2 + 2 ð 1 + 4 e ð 1 ð 1 3 [ ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ] + 2 ð 1 4 + 2 ð 1 + 4 e ð 1 ð 1 3 [ ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ] .
Substituting the relations (12)–(15) into the relation (11), we obtain the desired result. Thus, Theorem 10 is finished. □
Remark 7. 
  • If θ 1 1 , θ 2 1 with ̲ ¯ and ̲ ¯ , we obtain Theorem 8 as reported in [15]:
    1 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 ( x , y ) ( x , y ) d y d x 1 9 C ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) + 1 18 [ D ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) + E ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) ] + 1 36 Ψ ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) .
  • If θ 1 1 , θ 2 1 with ̲ = ¯ and ̲ = ¯ , we obtain Theorem 4 as reported in [63]:
    1 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 ( x , y ) ( x , y ) d y d x 1 9 C ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) + 1 18 [ D ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) + E ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) ] + 1 36 Ψ ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) .
  • If θ 1 1 , θ 2 1 , we obtain Theorem 10 as reported in [62].
Theorem 11. 
Using the same hypotheses as in Theorem 10, we obtain the following double CR -order relation:
4 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR ( 1 θ 2 ) ( 1 θ 1 ) 4 1 e ð 1 1 e ð 2 J ν 1 + , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + α 1 α 2 + α 1 β 2 + α 2 β 1 C ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) + α 1 α 2 + α 1 β 2 + β 1 β 2 D ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) + α 1 α 2 + α 2 β 1 + β 1 β 2 E ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) + α 1 β 2 + α 2 β 1 + β 1 β 2 ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) ,
where
α i = θ i 2 + θ i + 2 e θ i θ i 2 1 e θ i , β i = θ i 2 2 θ i + 4 θ i 2 + 2 θ i + 4 e θ i 2 θ i 2 1 e θ i , ( i = 1 , 2 ) .
Proof. 
By virtue of bidimensional interval-valued functions , and and taking into account Theorem 2.5 within reference [60], we have
2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR 1 θ 1 2 1 e ð 1 J ν 1 θ 1 ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + J ν 2 θ 1 ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + α 1 ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + β 1 ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2
and
2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR 1 θ 2 2 1 e ð 2 J ν 3 + θ 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 + J ν 4 θ 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + α 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 + β 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 + ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 .
Summing relations (16) and (17), then multiplying the result by constant 2, we find that
8 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR 1 θ 1 2 ( 1 e ð 1 ) 2 J ν 1 + θ 1 ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + 2 J ν 2 θ 1 ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + 1 θ 2 2 ( 1 e ð 2 ) 2 J ν 3 + θ 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 + 2 J ν 4 θ 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + α 1 2 ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + 2 ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + α 2 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 + β 1 2 ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + 2 ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + β 2 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 + 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 .
This further implies that
2 ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR 1 θ 2 2 1 e ð 2 J ν 3 + θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 4 θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + α 2 [ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ] + β 2 [ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ]
2 ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR 1 θ 2 2 1 e ð 2 J ν 3 + θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 4 θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + α 2 [ ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ] + β 2 [ ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ]
2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 CR 1 θ 1 2 ( 1 e ð 1 ) J ν 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + α 1 [ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ] + β 1 [ ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ]
2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 CR 1 θ 1 2 ( 1 e ð 1 ) J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 1 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + α 1 [ ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ] + β 1 [ ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ]
2 ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR 1 θ 2 2 ( 1 e ð 2 ) J ν 3 + θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 4 θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + α 2 [ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ] + β 2 [ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ]
2 ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR 1 θ 2 2 ( 1 e ð 2 ) J ν 3 + θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 4 θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + α 2 [ ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ] + β 2 [ ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ]
2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 CR 1 θ 1 2 ( 1 e ð 1 ) J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + α 1 [ ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ] + β 1 [ ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ]
2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 CR 1 θ 1 2 ( 1 e ð 1 ) J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + α 1 [ ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ] + β 1 [ ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ] .
Substituting relations (19)–(26) into relation (18), it follows that
8 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR 1 θ 1 2 ( 1 e ð 1 ) 2 J ν 1 + θ 1 ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + 2 J ν 2 θ 1 ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + 1 θ 2 2 ( 1 e ð 2 ) 2 J ν 3 + θ 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 + 2 J ν 4 θ 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ( 1 θ 2 ) α 1 2 ( 1 e ð 2 ) [ J ν 3 + θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 4 θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + J ν 3 + θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 4 θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ] + ( 1 θ 2 ) β 1 2 ( 1 e ð 2 ) [ J ν 3 + θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 4 θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 3 + θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 4 θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ] + ( 1 θ 1 ) α 2 2 ( 1 e ð 1 ) [ J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ] + ( 1 θ 1 ) β 2 2 ( 1 e ð 1 ) [ J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ] + 2 α 1 α 2 C ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) + 2 α 1 β 2 D ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) + 2 α 2 β 1 E ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) + 2 β 1 β 2 ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) .
It follows that
2 J ν 1 + θ 1 ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR 1 θ 2 2 1 e ð 2 J ν 1 + , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + α 2 J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + β 2 J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 )
2 J ν 2 θ 1 F ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR 1 θ 2 2 ( 1 e ð 2 ) J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + α 2 J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + β 2 J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 )
2 J ν 3 + θ 2 F ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 CR 1 θ 1 2 ( 1 e ð 1 ) J ν 1 + , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + α 1 J ν 3 + θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 3 + θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + β 1 J ν 3 + θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 3 + θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 )
2 J ν 4 θ 2 F ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 CR 1 θ 1 2 ( 1 e ð 1 ) J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + α 1 J ν 4 θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + J ν 4 θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + β 1 J ν 4 θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 4 θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) .
Substituting relations (28)–(31) into relation (27), it follows that
8 ( ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 ) ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR ( 1 θ 2 ) ( 1 θ 1 ) 2 ( 1 e ð 1 ) 1 e ð 2 [ J ν 1 + , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ] + ( 1 θ 2 ) α 1 1 e ð 2 [ J ν 3 + θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 4 θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + J ν 3 + θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 4 θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ] + ( 1 θ 2 ) β 1 1 e ð 2 [ J ν 3 + θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 4 θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 3 + θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 4 θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ] + ( 1 θ 1 ) α 2 1 e ð 1 [ J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ] + ( 1 θ 1 ) β 2 1 e ð 1 [ J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) ] + 2 α 1 α 2 C ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 ) + 2 α 1 β 2 D ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) + 2 α 2 β 1 E ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 ) + 2 β 1 β 2 Ψ ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 ) .
We may obtain the necessary result by applying relation (27) to each integral in (32). This leads to the completion of Theorem 11.
Remark 8. 
  • If θ 1 1 , θ 2 1 with ̲ ¯ and ̲ ¯ , we obtain Theorem 8 as reported in [15]:
    1 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 ( x , y ) ( x , y ) d y d x 1 9 C ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) + 1 18 [ D ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) + E ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) ] + 1 36 Ψ ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) .
  • If θ 1 1 , θ 2 1 with ̲ = ¯ and ̲ = ¯ , we obtain Theorem 4 as reported in [63]:
    1 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 ( x , y ) ( x , y ) d y d x 1 9 C ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) + 1 18 [ D ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) + E ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) ] + 1 36 Ψ ( ν 1 , ν 2 , ν 3 , ν 4 ) .
  • If θ 1 1 , θ 2 1 , we obtain Theorem 10 as reported in [62].
Theorem 12. 
Using the same hypotheses as in Theorem 7, we obtain the following double CR -order relation:
ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR 1 θ 1 4 ( 1 e ð 1 ) J ν 1 + θ 1 ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + J ν 2 θ 1 ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + 1 θ 2 4 ( 1 e ð 1 ) J ν 3 + θ 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 + J ν 4 θ 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 CR ( 1 θ 1 ) ( 1 θ 2 ) 4 ( 1 e ð 1 ) ( 1 e ð 2 ) [ J ν 1 + , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ] CR 1 θ 1 8 ( 1 e ð 1 ) J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + 1 θ 2 8 ( 1 e ð 2 ) J ν 3 + θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 3 + θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 4 θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + J ν 4 θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) CR ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) 4 .
Proof. 
By virtue of bidimensional interval-valued function , it results in the mappings x : [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] R , x ( y ) = ( x , y ) being convex in nature and defined over [ ν 3 , ν 4 ] for each x [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] ; we have
x ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR 1 θ 2 2 1 e ð 2 J ν 3 + θ 2 x ( ν 2 ) + J ν 4 θ 2 x ( ν 3 ) CR x ( ν 3 ) + x ( ν 4 ) 2 , x [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] .
This indicates that
x , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR 1 θ 2 2 1 e ð 2 1 θ 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 y ) ( x , y ) d y + 1 θ 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( y ν 3 ) ( x , y ) d y CR ( x , ν 3 ) + ( x , ν 4 ) 2 .
Multiplying the above CR relation by 1 θ 1 2 1 e ð 1 1 θ 1 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 x ) and 1 θ 1 2 1 e ð 1 1 θ 1 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x ν 1 ) , separately, and by integrating the outcome with respect to x across [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] , we determine that
1 θ 1 2 ( 1 e ð 1 ) 1 θ 1 ν 1 ν 2 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 x ) x , ν 3 + ν 4 2 d x CR ( 1 θ 1 ) ( 1 θ 2 ) 4 ( 1 e ð 1 ) ( 1 e ð 2 ) [ 2 θ 1 θ 2 ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 y ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 y ) ( x , y ) d y d x + 1 θ 1 θ 2 ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 x ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( y ν 3 ) ( x , y ) d y d x ] CR 1 θ 1 4 ( 1 e ð 1 ) 1 θ 1 ν 1 ν 2 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 x ) ( x , ν 3 ) d x + 1 θ 1 ν 1 ν 2 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 x ) ( x , ν 4 ) d x
and
1 θ 1 2 ( 1 e ð 1 ) 1 θ 1 ν 1 ν 2 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x ν 1 ) x , ν 3 + ν 4 2 d x CR ( 1 θ 1 ) ( 1 θ 2 ) 4 ( 1 e ð 1 ) ( 1 e ð 2 ) [ 1 θ 1 θ 2 ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x ν 1 ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 y ) ( x , y ) d y d x + 1 θ 1 θ 2 ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x ν 1 ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( y ν 3 ) ( x , y ) d y d x ] CR 1 θ 1 4 ( 1 e ð 1 ) 1 θ 1 ν 1 ν 2 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x ν 1 ) ( x , ν 3 ) d x + 1 θ 1 ν 1 ν 2 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x ν 1 ) ( x , ν 4 ) d x .
By using a similar logic to the mapping y : [ ν 1 , ν 2 ] R , y = ( x , y ) , one has
1 θ 2 2 ( 1 e ð 2 ) 1 θ 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 y ) ν 1 + ν 2 2 , y d y CR ( 1 θ 1 ) ( 1 θ 2 ) 4 1 e ð 1 1 e ð 2 [ 1 θ 1 θ 2 ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 x ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 y ) ( x , y ) d y d x + 1 θ 1 θ 2 ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x ν 1 ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 y ) ( x , y ) d y d x ] CR 1 θ 2 4 ( 1 e ð 2 ) 1 θ 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 y ) ( ν 1 , y ) d y + 1 θ 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 y ) ( ν 2 , y ) d y
and
1 θ 2 2 ( 1 e ð 2 ) 1 θ 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( y ν 3 ) ν 1 + ν 2 2 , y d y CR ( 1 θ 1 ) ( 1 θ 2 ) 4 ( 1 e ð 1 ) ( 1 e ð 2 ) [ 1 θ 1 θ 2 ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 x ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( y ν 3 ) ( x , y ) d y d x + 1 θ 1 θ 2 ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x ν 1 ) e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( y ν 3 ) ( x , y ) d y d x ] CR 1 θ 2 4 ( 1 e ð 2 ) 1 θ 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( y ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , y ) d y + 1 θ 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( y ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , y ) d y .
Adding relations (33)–(36), we obtain
1 θ 1 4 ( 1 e ð 1 ) J ν 1 + θ 1 ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + J ν 2 θ 1 ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + 1 θ 2 4 ( 1 e ð 2 ) J ν 3 + θ 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 + J ν 4 θ 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 CR ( 1 θ 2 ) ( 1 θ 1 ) 4 ( 1 e ð 1 ) ( 1 e ð 2 ) [ J ν 1 + , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 1 + , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 , ν 3 + θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 , ν 4 θ 1 , θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) ] CR 1 θ 1 8 ( 1 e ð 1 ) J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + J ν 1 + θ 1 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + J ν 2 θ 1 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + 1 θ 2 8 ( 1 e ð 2 ) J ν 3 + θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + J ν 3 + θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) + J ν 4 θ 2 ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + J ν 4 θ 2 ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) .
This yields the second and third relations in Theorem 12. Using the first relation from Theorem 9, we can determine that
ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR 1 θ 1 2 ( 1 e ð 1 ) [ 1 θ 1 ν 1 ν 2 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 x ) x , ν 3 + ν 4 2 d x + 1 θ 1 ν 1 ν 2 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x ν 1 ) x , ν 3 + ν 4 2 d x ]
and
ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR 1 θ 2 2 1 e ð 2 1 θ 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 y ) ν 1 + ν 2 2 , y d y + 1 θ 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( y ν 3 ) ν 1 + ν 2 2 , y d y .
By addition,
ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 CR 1 θ 1 4 ( 1 e ð 1 ) J ν 1 + θ 1 ν 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + J ν 2 θ 1 ν 1 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 + 1 θ 2 4 ( 1 e ð 2 ) J ν 3 + θ 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 4 + J ν 4 θ 2 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 .
This deduces the first relation in Theorem 12. Finally, again we have
1 θ 1 2 ( 1 e ð 1 ) [ 1 θ 1 ν 1 ν 2 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 x ) ( x , ν 3 ) d x + 1 θ 1 ν 1 ν 2 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x ν 1 ) ( x , ν 3 ) d x ] CR ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) 2 , 1 θ 1 2 ( 1 e ð 1 ) [ 1 θ 1 ν 1 ν 2 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( ν 2 x ) ( x , ν 4 ) d x + 1 θ 1 ν 1 ν 2 e 1 θ 1 θ 1 ( x ν 1 ) ( x , ν 4 ) d x ] CR ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) 2 , 1 θ 2 2 ( 1 e ð 2 ) [ 1 θ 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 y ) ( ν 1 , y ) d y + 1 θ 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( y ν 3 ) ( ν 1 , y ) d y ] CR ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) 2 and
1 θ 2 2 1 e ð 2 1 θ 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( ν 4 y ) ( ν 2 , y ) d y + 1 θ 2 ν 3 ν 4 e 1 θ 2 θ 2 ( y ν 3 ) ( ν 2 , y ) d y CR ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) 2 .
Summing the above four CR -order relations yields the final relation in Theorem 12. Therefore, the proof of Theorem 12 is complete.
Remark 9. 
  • If we take θ 1 1 , θ 2 1 , then we have
    lim θ 1 1 1 θ 1 4 1 e ð 1 = 1 4 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) , lim θ 2 1 1 θ 2 4 1 e ð 2 = 1 4 ( ν 4 ν 3 ) , and
    lim θ 1 1 θ 2 1 ( 1 θ 2 ) ( 1 θ 1 ) 4 1 e ð 1 1 e ð 2 = 1 4 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) ,
    and we obtain Theorem 9 as reported in [15] in the setting of partial-order relations.
  • If we take θ 1 1 , θ 2 1 with ̲ = ¯ , we obtain the following result as reported in [14] in the setting of standard-order relations, which is
    ν 1 + ν 2 2 , ν 3 + ν 4 2 1 2 1 ν 2 ν 1 ν 1 ν 2 x , ν 3 + ν 4 2 d x + 1 ν 4 ν 3 ν 3 ν 4 ν 1 + ν 2 2 , y d y 1 ( ν 2 ν 1 ) ( ν 4 ν 3 ) ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 ν 4 ( x , y ) d y d x 1 4 1 ν 2 ν 1 ν 1 ν 2 ( x , ν 3 ) d x + 1 ν 2 ν 1 ν 1 ν 2 ( x , ν 4 ) d x + 1 ν 4 ν 3 ν 3 ν 4 ( ν 1 , y ) d y + 1 ν 4 ν 3 ν 3 ν 4 ( v , y ) d y ( ν 1 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 3 ) + ( ν 1 , ν 4 ) + ( ν 2 , ν 4 ) 4 .

5. Discussion and Conclusions

Research on integral inequalities associated with fractional operators has served as a source of inspiration for many researchers. According to recent trends, researchers are increasingly incorporating fractional operators into the theory of inequalities. Mathematicians have used new methods to generalize well-known inequalities to offer new bounds and applications. In this paper, we use two-dimensional convexity to develop three important inequalities, including the famous Hermite–Hadamard inequality and its weighted and product forms along with various other interesting properties. Additionally, we investigate the Hyers–Ulam stability of two-dimensional convex mappings in the context of approximate convexity by using the sandwich theorem. We show that the recent results developed in [14,15,62,63] are generalized with different settings in our newly developed results. Furthermore, we show that the order relation we use covers the full spectrum of recent order relations under different configurations. Furthermore, this is the first time a total-order relation has been used with two-dimensional convex mappings. In the form of corollaries and remarks, some special cases of the presented results have been discussed. Moreover, we developed some interesting examples to demonstrate the validity of our findings. On the coordinates, this innovative concept can be used to represent various inequalities, including those of the Ostrowski, Jensen–Mercer, Bullen, and Simpson types. These inequalities can also be applied to interval-valued quantum calculus, fuzzy calculus, and stochastic calculus.

6. Open Problem and Future Recommendations

If Ω is a convex subset of a real linear space Y and ϵ is a nonnegative number, then a function : Ω R is called ϵ -convex if
r 1 ν 1 + ( 1 r 1 ) ν 2 r 1 ( ν 1 ) + ( 1 r 1 ) ( ν 2 ) + ϵ , ( ν 1 , ν 2 ) Ω , r 1 [ 0 , 1 ] .
It is likely that the study of approximate convexity began with the 1952 paper by Hyers and Ulam [43], who introduced and investigated ϵ -convex. The authors asked whether there exists another function : Ω R that meets the following criteria | ( ß ) ( ß ) | K ϵ ß Ω , with constant K only depending upon linear space Y . Despite the setting of any norm, Hyers and Ulam have provided a very nice and positive answer for the case of linear space Y = R n , and the best approximate they provided can be summarized as follows: K n = m i n ( P n , Q n ) where P n = n 2 + 3 n 4 n + 4 and Q n = m 2 for 2 m 1 n 2 m (see [64] for further information on these constants and related problems). From the outlined definitions in the Preliminaries section and these results, it is now possible to provide a two-dimensional approximate convexity as follows:
r 1 ν 1 + ( 1 r 1 ) ν 2 , s 1 ν 3 + ( 1 s 1 ) ν 4 ν 1 ν 2 ( r 1 , ν 3 ) + ν 2 ( 1 ν 1 ) ( r 1 , ν 4 ) + ν 1 ( 1 ν 2 ) ( s 1 . ν 3 ) + ( 1 ν 1 ) ( 1 ν 2 ) ( s 1 , ν 4 ) + ϵ
which holds true for every ( ν 1 , ν 2 ) , ( ν 3 , ν 4 ) Ω , along with r 1 , s 1 [ 0 , 1 ] . The question is, what are the best optimal constants P n and Q n for this two-dimensional approximate convexity? Additionally, we offer a novel approach to developing these results based on stochastic integration, as defined in [65].

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, W.A. and M.A.; investigation, D.B. and M.A.; methodology, Z.A.K., L.-I.C., and E.R.; validation, W.A. and M.A.; visualization, L.-I.C., M.A., and Z.A.K.; writing—original draft, W.A., Z.A.K., and D.B.; writing—review and editing, M.A. and D.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

Data used to support the findings are included within the article.

Acknowledgments

Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University Researchers Supporting Project number (PNURSP2024R8). Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Hilfer, R. Applications of Fractional Calculus in Physics; World Scientific: Singapore, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  2. Singh, J.; Kumar, D.; Baleanu, D. On the analysis of chemical kinetics system pertaining to a fractional derivative with Mittag– Leffler type kernel. Chaos 2017, 27, 103113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Machado, J.A.T.; Silva, M.F.; Barbosa, R.S.; Jesus, I.S.; Reis, C.M.; Marcos, M.G.; Galhano, A.F. Some Applications of Fractional Calculus in Engineering. Math. Probl. Eng. 2020, 2010, 639801. [Google Scholar]
  4. Ionescu, C.; Lopes, A.; Copot, D.; Machado, J.A.T.; Bates, J.H.T. The role of fractional calculus in modeling biological phenomena: A review. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 2017, 51, 141–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Traore, A.; Sene, N. Model of economic growth in the context of fractional derivative. Alex. Eng. J. 2020, 59, 4843–4850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Lin, Z.; Wang, H. Modeling and Application of Fractional-Order Economic Growth Model with Time Delay. Fractal Fract. 2021, 5, 74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Zhang, X.; Shabbir, K.; Afzal, W.; Xiao, H.; Lin, D. Hermite–Hadamard and Jensen-Type Inequalities via Riemann Integral Operator for a Generalized Class of Godunova–Levin Functions. J. Math. 2022, 2022, 3830324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Afzal, W.; Shabbir, K.; Arshad, M.; Asamoah, J.K.K.; Galal, A.M. Some Novel Estimates of Integral Inequalities for a Generalized Class of Harmonical Convex Mappings by Means of Center-Radius Order Relation. J. Math. 2023, 2023, 8865992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Pečarić, J.; Perić, I.; Roqia, G. Exponentially Convex Functions Generated by Wulbert’s Inequality and Stolarsky-Type Means. Math. Comput. Model. 2012, 55, 1849–1857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Hermite, C. Sur deux limites d’une integrale de finie. Mathesis 1883, 3, 82. [Google Scholar]
  11. Hadamard, J. Théorème sur les séries entières. Acta Math. 1899, 22, 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Wang, J.; Zhu, C.; Zhou, Y. New Generalized Hermite–Hadamard Type Inequalities and Applications to Special Means. J. Inequalities Appl. 2013, 2013, 325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Bakula, M.K.; Pečarić, J. On the Jensen’s Inequality for Convex Functions on the Co-Ordinates in a Rectangle from the Plane. Taiwan. J. Math. 2006, 10, 1271–1292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Dragomir, S.S. On the Hadamard’s inequality for convex functions on the co-ordinates in a rectangle from the plane. Taiwanese J. Math. 2001, 5, 775–788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Zhao, D.; Ali, M.A.; Murtaza, G.; Zhang, Z. On the Hermite–Hadamard Inequalities for Interval-Valued Coordinated Convex Functions. Adv. Differ. Equations 2020, 2020, 570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Alomari, M.; Darus, M. Co-ordinated s-Convex Function in the First Sense with Some Hadamard-Type Inequalities. Int. J. Contemp. Math. Sci. 2008, 3, 1557–1567. [Google Scholar]
  17. Özdemir, M.E.; Set, E.; Set, E.; Sarıkaya, M.Z. Some new Hadamard type inequalities for co-ordinated m-convex and (α,m)-convex functions. Hacet. J. Math. Stat. 2011, 40, 219–229. [Google Scholar]
  18. Alomari, M.; Darus, M. On The Hadamard’s Inequality for Log-Convex Functions on the Coordinates. J. Inequal. Appl. 2009, 2009, 283147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Lai, K.K.; Mishra, S.K.; Bisht, J.; Hassan, M. Hermite–Hadamard Type Inclusions for Interval-Valued Coordinated Preinvex Functions. Symmetry 2022, 14, 771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Wannalookkhee, F.; Nonlaopon, K.; Tariboon, J.; Ntouyas, S.K. On Hermite–Hadamard Type Inequalities for Coordinated Convex Functions via (p,q)-Calculus. Mathematics 2021, 9, 698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Kalsoom, H.; Rashid, S.; Idrees, M.; Safdar, F.; Akram, S.; Baleanu, D.; Chu, Y.-M. Post Quantum Integral Inequalities of Hermite–Hadamard-Type Associated with Coordinated Higher-Order Generalized Strongly Pre-Invex and Quasi-Pre-Invex Mappings. Symmetry 2020, 12, 443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Akkurt, A.; Sarıkaya, M.Z.; Budak, H.; Yıldırım, H. On the Hadamard’s Type Inequalities for Co-Ordinated Convex Functions via Fractional Integrals. J. King Saud Univ.-Sci. 2017, 29, 380–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Shi, F.; Ye, G.; Zhao, D.; Liu, W. Some Fractional Hermite–Hadamard Type Inequalities for Interval-Valued Functions. Mathematics 2020, 8, 534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Afzal, W.; Alb Lupaş, A.; Shabbir, K. Hermite–Hadamard and Jensen-Type Inequalities for Harmonical (h1,h2)-Godunova–Levin Interval-Valued Functions. Mathematics 2022, 10, 2970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Bhunia, A.; Samanta, S. A study of interval metric and its application in multi-objective optimization with interval objectives. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2014, 74, 169–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Rahman, M.; Shaikh, A.; Bhunia, A. Necessary and sufficient optimality conditions for non-linear unconstrained and constrained optimization problem with interval valued objective function. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2020, 147, 106634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Liu, W.; Shi, F.; Ye, G.; Zhao, D. Some Inequalities for Cr-Log-h-Convex Functions. J. Inequalities Appl. 2022, 2022, 160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Liu, W.; Shi, F.; Ye, G.; Zhao, D. The Properties of Harmonically Cr-h-Convex Function and Its Applications. Mathematics 2022, 10, 2089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Afzal, W.; Abbas, M.; Macías-Díaz, J.E.; Treanţă, S. Some H-Godunova–Levin Function Inequalities Using Center Radius (Cr) Order Relation. Fractal Fract. 2022, 6, 518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Afzal, W.; Shabbir, K.; Botmart, T.; Treanţă, S.; Afzal, W.; Shabbir, K.; Botmart, T.; Treanţă, S. Some New Estimates of Well Known Inequalities for (h1,h2)-Godunova-Levin Functions by Means of Center-Radius Order Relation. Aims Math 2023, 8, 3101–3119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Afzal, W.; Nazeer, W.; Botmart, T.; Treanţă, S.; Afzal, W.; Nazeer, W.; Botmart, T.; Treanţă, S. Some Properties and Inequalities for Generalized Class of Harmonical Godunova-Levin Function via Center Radius Order Relation. Aims Math 2023, 8, 1696–1712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Saeed, T.; Afzal, W.; Abbas, M.; Treanţă, S.; De la Sen, M. Some New Generalizations of Integral Inequalities for Harmonical Cr-(h1,h2)-Godunova–Levin Functions and Applications. Mathematics 2022, 10, 4540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Sahoo, S.K.; Al-Sarairah, E.; Mohammed, P.O.; Tariq, M.; Nonlaopon, K. Modified Inequalities on Center-Radius Order Interval-Valued Functions Pertaining to Riemann–Liouville Fractional Integrals. Axioms 2022, 11, 732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Sahoo, S.K.; Latif, M.A.; Alsalami, O.M.; Treanţă, S.; Sudsutad, W.; Kongson, J. Hermite–Hadamard, Fejér and Pachpatte-Type Integral Inequalities for Center-Radius Order Interval-Valued Preinvex Functions. Fractal Fract. 2022, 6, 506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Afzal, W.; Aloraini, N.M.; Abbas, M.; Ro, J.-S.; Zaagan, A.A. Some Novel Kulisch-Miranker Type Inclusions for a Generalized Class of Godunova-Levin Stochastic Processes. Aims Math 2024, 9, 5122–5146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Ahmadini, A.A.H.; Afzal, W.; Abbas, M.; Aly, E.S. Weighted Fejér, Hermite–Hadamard, and Trapezium-Type Inequalities for (h1,h2)–Godunova–Levin Preinvex Function with Applications and Two Open Problems. Mathematics 2024, 12, 382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Khan, M.B.; Zaini, H.G.; Macías-Díaz, J.E.; Soliman, M.S. Up and Down H-Pre-Invex Fuzzy-Number Valued Mappings and Some Certain Fuzzy Integral Inequalities. Axioms 2022, 12, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Almalki, Y.; Afzal, W. Some New Estimates of Hermite–Hadamard Inequalities for Harmonical cr-h-Convex Functions via Generalized Fractional Integral Operator on Set-Valued Mappings. Mathematics 2023, 11, 4041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Afzal, W.; Prosviryakov, E.Y.; El-Deeb, S.M.; Almalki, Y. Some New Estimates of Hermite–Hadamard, Ostrowski and Jensen-Type Inclusions for h-Convex Stochastic Process via Interval-Valued Functions. Symmetry 2023, 15, 831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Afzal, W.; Eldin, S.M.; Nazeer, W.; Galal, A.M. Some Integral Inequalities for Harmonical Cr-h-Godunova-Levin Stochastic Processes. Aims Math 2023, 8, 13473–13491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Ulam, S.M. A Collection of Mathematical Problems; Interscience: New York, NY, USA, 1960. [Google Scholar]
  42. Hyers, D.H. On the stability of the linear functional equation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1941, 27, 222–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Hyers, D.H.; Ulam, S.M. Approximately Convex Functions. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 1952, 3, 821–828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Bracamonte, M.; Giménez, J.; Medina, J.; Vivas-Cortez, M. A sandwich theorem and stability result of Hyers–Ulam type for harmonically convex functions. Lect. MatemáTicas 2017, 38, 5–18. [Google Scholar]
  45. Forti, G.L. Hyers–Ulam Stability of Functional Equations in Several Variables. Aeq. Math. 1995, 50, 143–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Ernst, E.; Théra, M.A. Minimizing Irregular Convex Functions: Ulam Stability for Approximate Minima. Set-Valued Anal. 2010, 18, 447–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Casini, E.; Papini, P.L. A Counterexample to the Infinity Version of the Hyers and Ulam Stability Theorem. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1993, 118, 885–890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Bracamonte, M.; Giménez, J.; Medina, J. Sandwich Theorem for Reciprocally Strongly Convex Functions. Rev. Colomb. MatemáTicas 2018, 52, 171–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Corina, F. Convexity and sandwich theorems. Eur. J. Res. Appl. Sci. 2015, 1, 9–11. [Google Scholar]
  50. Dilworth, S.J.; Howard, R.; Roberts, J.W. Extremal Approximately Convex Functions and the Best Constants in a Theorem of Hyers and Ulam. Adv. Math. 2002, 172, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Zhou, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Liu, C. Hyers–Ulam Stability of Bijective ε-Isometries between Hausdorff Metric Spaces of Compact Convex Subsets. Aequat. Math. 2021, 95, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Jian, W. Some Further Generalizations of the Hyers–Ulam–Rassias Stability of Functional Equations. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2001, 263, 406–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Jun, K.-W.; Kim, H.-M.; Rassias, J.M. Extended Hyers–Ulam Stability for Cauchy–Jensen Mappings. J. Differ. Equations Appl. 2007, 13, 1139–1153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Sun, Y.; Zhang, W. On Stability of Almost Surjective Functional Equations of Uniformly Convex Banach Spaces. J. Inequal. Appl 2023, 2023, 113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Marian, D.; Ciplea, S.A.; Lungu, N. Hyers–Ulam Stability of Euler’s Equation in the Calculus of Variations. Mathematics 2021, 9, 3320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Liu, K.; Fečkan, M.; Wang, J. Hyers–Ulam Stability and Existence of Solutions to the Generalized Liouville–Caputo Fractional Differential Equations. Symmetry 2020, 12, 955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Milne, E.A. Note on Rosseland’s Integral for the Stellar Absorption Coefficient. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 1925, 85, 979–984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Saeed, T.; Afzal, W.; Shabbir, K.; Treanţă, S.; De La Sen, M. Some Novel Estimates of Hermite–Hadamard and Jensen Type Inequalities for (h1,h2)-Convex Functions Pertaining to Total Order Relation. Mathematics 2022, 10, 4777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Afzal, W.; Aloraini, N.M.; Abbas, M.; Ro, J.-S.; Zaagan, A.A. Hermite-Hadamard, Fejér and Trapezoid Type Inequalities Using Godunova-Levin Preinvex Functions via Bhunia’s Order and with Applications to Quadrature Formula and Random Variable. Math. Biosci. Eng. 2024, 21, 3422–3447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Zhou, T.; Yuan, Z.; Du, T. On the Fractional Integral Inclusions Having Exponential Kernels for IntervalValued Convex Functions. Math. Sci. 2023, 17, 107–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Baron, k.; Matkowski, J.; Nikodem, k. A sandwich with convexity. Math. Pannica 1994, 1, 139–144. [Google Scholar]
  62. Khan, M.B.; Srivastava, H.M.; Mohammed, P.O.; Nonlaopon, K.; Hamed, Y.S. Some New Estimates on Coordinates of Left and Right Convex Interval-Valued Functions Based on Pseudo Order Relation. Symmetry 2022, 14, 473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Latif, M.A.; Alomari, M. Hadamard-Type Inequalities for Product Two Convex Functions on the Co-ordinates. Int. Math. Forum 2009, 47, 2327–2338. [Google Scholar]
  64. Ger, R. Almost approximately convex functions. Math. Slovaca 1988, 38, 61–78. [Google Scholar]
  65. Chen, L.H.Y. Poincaré-Type Inequalities via Stochastic Integrals. Z. Wahrscheinlichkeitstheorie Verw Geb. 1985, 69, 251–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Graphical behavior of the total CR interval-valued bidimensional mapping .
Figure 1. Graphical behavior of the total CR interval-valued bidimensional mapping .
Mathematics 12 01238 g001
Figure 2. Graphical behavior of total CR interval-valued bidimensional convex mappings C and R .
Figure 2. Graphical behavior of total CR interval-valued bidimensional convex mappings C and R .
Mathematics 12 01238 g002
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Afzal, W.; Breaz, D.; Abbas, M.; Cotîrlă, L.-I.; Khan, Z.A.; Rapeanu, E. Hyers–Ulam Stability of 2D-Convex Mappings and Some Related New Hermite–Hadamard, Pachpatte, and Fejér Type Integral Inequalities Using Novel Fractional Integral Operators via Totally Interval-Order Relations with Open Problem. Mathematics 2024, 12, 1238. https://doi.org/10.3390/math12081238

AMA Style

Afzal W, Breaz D, Abbas M, Cotîrlă L-I, Khan ZA, Rapeanu E. Hyers–Ulam Stability of 2D-Convex Mappings and Some Related New Hermite–Hadamard, Pachpatte, and Fejér Type Integral Inequalities Using Novel Fractional Integral Operators via Totally Interval-Order Relations with Open Problem. Mathematics. 2024; 12(8):1238. https://doi.org/10.3390/math12081238

Chicago/Turabian Style

Afzal, Waqar, Daniel Breaz, Mujahid Abbas, Luminiţa-Ioana Cotîrlă, Zareen A. Khan, and Eleonora Rapeanu. 2024. "Hyers–Ulam Stability of 2D-Convex Mappings and Some Related New Hermite–Hadamard, Pachpatte, and Fejér Type Integral Inequalities Using Novel Fractional Integral Operators via Totally Interval-Order Relations with Open Problem" Mathematics 12, no. 8: 1238. https://doi.org/10.3390/math12081238

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop