The Tantawy technique for modeling low-frequency ion-acoustic cnoidal waves in a magnetized degenerate astrophysical quantum plasma

Abstract

This study investigates the propagation of both fractional and non-fractional ion-acoustic cnoidal waves (IACWs) in a magnetized degenerate Thomas-Fermi electron-positron-ion (e − p − i) plasma, incorporating the effects of magnetic fields on wave dynamics. Using the reductive perturbation method (RPM), the planar integer Korteweg-de Vries (KdV) equation is derived, accounting for the influence of the magnetic field on nonlinear wave structures. The analysis reveals the existence of positive potential (compressive) cnoidal waves, which, in the limiting case, reduce to solitary waves. The characteristics of these waves, which demonstrate how the electron-to-positron Fermi temperature ratio, positron concentration, and obliqueness affect their profile. The study’s findings are relevant to astrophysical environments and dense plasmas generated in laser-produced plasmas. For the second objective of this investigation, the integer planar KdV equation is converted to the planar fractional KdV equation (FKdV) using a suitable transformation to study the impact of the fractional order parameter on the fractional IACW profile. To this end, the planar FKdV equation is solved using the Tantawy technique and the Laplace residual power series method (LRPSM). Some approximate analytical solutions to the planar FKdV equation are derived using the two proposed approaches. The generated approximations are numerically examined and compared with the exact solution for the integer case to assess the accuracy of the derived approximations. Numerical results are constructed based on parameters relevant to dense astrophysical environments, such as white dwarfs, highlighting the significant role of the magnetic field in modifying wave behavior.

Keywords

fractional solitary and cnoidal waves low-frequency ion-acoustic waves degenerate electron-positron-ion plasma magnetized quantum plasma Tantawy technique Laplace residual power series method

Introduction

The study of dense quantum plasmas^1–3 has gained significant momentum recently, driven by its applicability to various relevant technological and astrophysical domains. Examples include nanoscale electromechanical systems,^4,5 laser-atom interactions,⁶ and the physics of dense astrophysical objects⁷ like neutron stars and white dwarfs.^8,9 Quantum plasmas differ substantially from classical plasmas due to their high particle density and low temperature, contrasting with the lower density and higher temperature characteristics of classical plasmas. When particles in a plasma are packed close together, to the point where the space between them is similar to or smaller than their de Broglie wavelength $(λ_{B} = {(h / 2 π m_{e} k_{B} T)}^{1 / 2}$ , or when the heat energy (k_BT) available is less than the Fermi energy (ɛ_f = (h²/2m) (3n/8π)^2/3) quantum mechanics starts to play a noticeable role in the plasma behavior.¹⁰ These conditions are crucial for modeling astrophysical phenomena in dense compact objects, where extreme densities lead to non-thermal pressure dominated by degenerate fermions and inter-particle interactions, thus requiring a quantum plasma framework. In compact astrophysical objects, Chandrasekhar^11–13 formulated equations describing the state of degenerate electrons. For non-relativistic scenarios, the electron pressure (P_e) is proportional to electron density (n_e) increased to the power of $5 / 3 (P_{e} \sim n_{e}^{5 / 3})$ in ultra-relativistic cases, this relationship changes to the electron pressure being proportional to the electron density increased to the power of $4 / 3 (P_{e} \sim n_{e}^{4 / 3}) .$ Here, P_e represents the pressure exerted by the electrons and n_e signifies their number density. In highly compressed plasmas, the uncertainty of the momentum increases dramatically, forcing even cold particles to move rapidly, resulting in significant “degenerate pressure.” Degenerate pressure, a purely density-dependent phenomenon, is independent of temperature. In quantum hydrodynamic (QHD) models, the quantum analog of classical fluid models,¹⁴ introducing the Fermi pressure and the Bohm potential, as described by D. Bohm,¹⁵ modifies the standard momentum equation. Within this modified framework, Haas¹⁶ and colleagues explored quantum ion-acoustic (IA) waves, specifically examining how quantum diffraction phenomena affect these waves.

Conventional plasmas consist of electrons, ions, and neutral particles. However, high-energy plasmas can generate positrons, the electron antiparticles, through pair production. The presence of positrons considerably changes the behavior of typical electron-ion (e − i) plasmas. As a result, electron-positron-ion (e − p − i)^17–21 plasmas have become a hot topic in research, mainly because they’re commonly found in active galactic nuclei²² and various astrophysical settings. These include neutron star atmospheres,²³ the early universe,²⁴ solar atmospheres,²⁵ and pulsar magnetospheres.²⁶ Laboratory experiments have demonstrated the production of the electron-positron (e − p) pair through relativistic superthermal electron interactions with high Z − materials,²⁷ and the existence of positrons has also been confirmed in laboratory plasmas.^28–30 Recent experiments using intense lasers interacting with solid targets have successfully generated pairs of e − p, creating high-density plasmas that exhibit quantum effects.^31,32 This widespread existence of e − p − i plasmas in several cosmic settings has motivated substantial research efforts focused on understanding how plasma waves, both linear and nonlinear, propagate through these environments, as demonstrated by a significant number of investigations.^33–36

Differential equations play a crucial role in modeling both linear and nonlinear phenomena found in various natural systems, such as oceans, shallow waters, nonlinear optics, plasmas, and Bose–Einstein condensates.^37–39 One fascinating area of study in plasma physics focuses on how linear and nonlinear acoustic waves propagate through e − p − i plasmas. In these plasmas, one can observe a range of nonlinear wave patterns, including envelope structures, solitons, and cnoidal waves (CWs). A soliton, specifically, is a localized self-sustaining wave pulse formed by the equilibrium between nonlinear steepening and dispersive broadening.⁴⁰ Localized wave packets with both slow and rapid oscillations, known as envelope structures, form because nonlinear effects balance the spreading of waves. These structures are mathematically described by nonlinear Schrödinger equation (NLSE).^41,42 Solitary waves (SWs), also known as solitons, are explained by the Korteweg-de Vries (KdV) equation,⁴³ which was first introduced by Korteweg and Vries in 1895.^44,45 When the right boundary conditions are applied, the periodic solution of the KdV equation gives rise to CWs. The profiles of these CWs are represented using Jacobian elliptic functions, which is why we refer to them as “cnoidal.” These waves are characterized by their periodic nature, featuring sharp peaks that are separated by wide flat troughs.⁴⁶ These waves can occur in plasma regimes, with applications in areas like nonlinear transport processes.^47,48

The nonlinear CWs in different plasma systems have been thoroughly explored, both in theory and through experiments.^49–51 For instance, Schamel⁵² looked into small-amplitude Langmuir waves in e − i plasmas, taking into account the influence of trapped electrons by utilizing CW solutions. Meanwhile,⁵³ investigated various nonlinear wave structures, such as ion-cyclotron and IA periodic waves, in warm plasmas under an oblique magnetic field, assuming a Maxwellian electron distribution. Ichikawa and Konno et al.⁵⁴ explored compressive IACWs, which they modeled using the KdV equation, specifically in single-electron plasma environments. Wang et al.⁵⁵ not only built on previous research but also took a closer look at how IACWs propagate at an angle in magnetized plasmas that have kappa-distributed electrons and Maxwellian positrons. Additionally, Jovanovic and Shukla⁵⁶ applied CW techniques to analyze coherent electric field patterns within Earth’s magnetosphere. Meanwhile, El-Shamy⁵⁷ explored IACWs in dense magnetized plasmas with degenerate electrons, using the pseudopotential approach. Additionally, Rehman and his team⁵⁸ delved into the linear and nonlinear dynamics of fast magnetohydrodynamic CWs in warm, collisionless, magnetized e − p plasmas through a two-fluid MHD model. Khalid and colleagues⁵⁹ conducted a theoretical analysis of nonlinear electrostatic IA waves (IAWs) in magnetized e − p − i plasmas, which include nonextensive electrons and thermalized positrons. Alrowaily et al.,⁶⁰ studying IACWs in e − p − i magnetoplasmas found that their model supported only compressive nonlinear CWs and SWs. Khan et al.⁶¹ explored how electrostatic CWs and solitons move through a magnetized electron-proton-ion plasma, taking into account factors like ion pressure anisotropy and superthermality.

Our motivation for this study is inspired by the seminal work of Rahman et al.⁶² They explored how electrostatic IACWs and solitons behave in a degenerate Thomas-Fermi plasma made up of cold inertial ions, along with degenerate electrons and positrons. Although their work provided significant insights into the nonlinear wave structures in unmagnetized quantum plasmas, it did not account for the influence of magnetic fields, which are prevalent in many astrophysical and laboratory plasma environments. Recognizing the importance of magnetic effects in shaping wave dynamics, particularly in contexts such as magnetized white dwarfs,⁹ neutron stars, and laser-produced plasmas,⁶ we aim to extend their model by incorporating magnetic field effects. This extension will allow us to explore the interplay between magnetic fields and quantum degeneracy on the propagation characteristics of IACWs and solitons, thereby providing a more comprehensive understanding of nonlinear phenomena in magnetized quantum plasmas.

The growing interest in fractional-order differential equations over the last few decades is quite remarkable. These equations have proven to be incredibly useful for understanding various aspects of nonlocality and spatial heterogeneity. The careful development of fractional calculus theory has greatly helped its use in many scientific fields, such as control theory, electrical circuits, image processing, biology, viscoelasticity, and plasma waves, among others.^63–72 Integrating fractional calculus into our model gives us a more comprehensive and accurate understanding of how waves move through complex plasma systems, especially those that show non-local interactions and memory effects.⁷³ Unlike the traditional integer-order differential equations that suggest the rate of change of a variable depends solely on its current state, many real-world phenomena—particularly in dispersive and dissipative media like plasmas—are shaped by their past states and spatial history. Fractional derivatives, with their non-local characteristics, are perfect for capturing these memory effects and non-local interactions. For example, the long-range forces or the cumulative impact of particle collisions over time can create a sort of “memory” in the system, where the current state is influenced not just by the immediate past but by the entire history of the system.⁷⁴ When it comes to plasma waves, using fractional derivatives allows us to represent dispersion and damping mechanisms in a more detailed way than integer-order models can. This method has been effectively applied to various nonlinear wave structures across different plasma configurations, providing deeper insights into phenomena like anomalous diffusion, non-ideal fluid behavior, and complex transport processes.^75–77 By taking the integer planar KdV equation and extending it to its fractional form, we’re looking to understand how the fractional order parameter influences the dynamics and features of IACWs, ultimately improving the predictive power and physical accuracy of our model in degenerate astrophysical quantum plasmas. Thus, fractional derivatives can be employed to formulate various phenomena in different scientific fields, to try to understand their dynamics, and to reveal some of the mysterious behaviors surrounding them. Therefore, fractional differential equations (FDEs) can be used to formulate many physical and engineering problems, and the pursuit of their solutions has been the subject of numerous intriguing investigations. There are plenty of effective methods out there for analyzing different types of FDEs. Some of the most popular ones include the homotopy perturbation method (HPM) family,^78–80 the Adomian decomposition method (ADM),^81,82 the variational iteration method (VIM),^83–85 the new iterative method (NIM),^86,87 the residual power series method (RPSM),^88–90 etc. Moreover, one of the most prominent of these methods, the recently discovered Tantawy technique (TT),^91–96 has successfully overcome many challenges facing many researchers, especially physics researchers, in analyzing various complicated nonlinear fractional evolutionary wave equations (EWEs). Recently, this technique has been used to analyze Burgers-type equations,⁹¹ derive some highly accurate analytical approximations, and compare their results with the approximations derived by both NIM and RPSM. Comparative analysis revealed that the approximations obtained by the TT surpassed those generated by NIM and RPSM.⁹¹ In addition, the TT was employed to examine the fractional family of Fokker–Planck equations (FP),⁹² and its results were juxtaposed with the approximations produced by the optimal auxiliary function method (OAFM). The approximations generated by the TT were found to surpass those derived by the OAFM.⁹² Additionally, the TT was applied to analyze various nonlinear wave structures emerging and propagating in diverse plasma configurations,^94–96 such as studying the fractional KdV-soliton in non-Maxwellian electronegative plasmas⁹⁴ and studying electron-acoustic waves described by the KdV equation, which arises in a special kind of nonthermal plasma composed of two types of electrons: cold ones that have inertia and nonthermal ones that are inertialess.⁹⁶ Additionally, as an extension to the work studied in Ref. 94, the El-Tantawy team took a closer look at fractional IA solitons concerning the fractional modified KdV (FmKdV) equation, particularly focusing on the critical value of the nonthermal parameter as noted in Ref. 95. More recently, El-Tantawy and colleagues explored IASWs influenced by an electron beam with a nonthermal distribution in Ref. 97 alongside the TT. Their findings showed that the TT is a simple and effective approach for analyzing various fractional EWEs, making it easier for researchers to navigate potential challenges. A standout feature of this straightforward technique eliminates the need for linearization, decomposition, perturbation, or any other limitations that are often found in similar methods. Consequently, the present work employs the TT to model fractional-order periodic wave phenomena propagating in the considered a plasma system.

Another objective of this study involves an analytical examination of the planar FKdV equation utilizing the RPSM with the Laplace transform to produce analytical approximations for modeling and simulating periodic waves that arise in the current plasma model and to compare the results with those derived by the TT. This method was also used in the analysis of several FDEs,^88–90 providing highly precise analytical approximations, and all researchers recognize its superiority over numerous other methods in the examination of differential equations. For example, this method successfully analyzed numerous fractional differential equations that are commonly employed in modeling nonlinear phenomena in fluid mechanics and plasma physics, including the FKdV equation,⁹⁸ fractional Burgers equation,⁹⁹ fractional Kawahara equation,^100,101 and Zakharov-Kuznetsov (ZK) equations,^102,103 among others.

Physical problem and fluid equations

In this study, we examine a collisionless magnetized plasma consisting of inertial cold ions and inertialess Thomas-Fermi-distributed positrons and electrons, immersed in a uniform external magnetic field $(B = B_{0} \hat{z})$ aligned along the z-axis. The reason we lean towards the degenerate Thomas-Fermi model for electrons and positrons really comes down to the unique physical conditions found in dense astrophysical settings, like the insides of white dwarfs, the crusts of neutron stars, and the thick regions of laser-produced plasmas. In these environments, the particle density is incredibly high, which means the distances between particles are on par with or even smaller than their de Broglie wavelengths. When we hit these extreme densities, quantum mechanical effects take center stage, and the thermal pressure from electrons and positrons becomes almost insignificant compared to their degeneracy pressure. Here, we use the Thomas–Fermi approximation, which holds true when electrons (and positrons) act as if they have no mass and follow a degenerate Fermi-Dirac distribution. This approximation does a great job of capturing how degenerate fermions behave, where their kinetic energy far exceeds their thermal energy, leading to a pressure that depends only on their number density and not on temperature. By applying the Thomas–Fermi distribution, we can factor in the quantum mechanical repulsion that occurs when particles are pushed close together, giving us a solid framework to discuss the collective dynamics of IAWs in these highly compressed plasma systems.^62,104–107 The behavior of the ion fluid is determined by this specific group of hydrodynamic equations

\partial_{t} n + \vec{\nabla} \cdot (n \vec{v}) = 0,

(1)

\partial_{t} \vec{v} + (\vec{v} \cdot \vec{\nabla}) \vec{v} = \frac{Z e}{m} \vec{E} + \frac{Z e}{m c} (\vec{v} \times B_{0} \hat{z}) .

(2)

The variables m, e, Z, and n denote the ion mass, electron charge magnitude, ion charge state (in units of e), and ion number density, respectively.

Poisson’s equation is defined by

\nabla^{2} ϕ = 4 π e (n_{e} - n_{p} - n) .

(3)

Here, n_e and n_p represent the number densities of electrons and positrons, respectively.

Now, by considering three-dimensional (3D) perturbations in a magnetized plasma, the normalized equations (1)–(3) describing the ion dynamics take the following form

\partial_{t} n + \partial_{x} (n v_{x}) + \partial_{y} (n v_{y}) + \partial_{z} (n v_{z}) = 0,

(4)

\partial_{t} v_{x} + (\vec{v} \cdot \vec{\nabla}) v_{x} = - \partial_{x} ϕ + Ω v_{y},

(5)

\partial_{t} v_{y} + (\vec{v} \cdot \vec{\nabla}) v_{y} = - \partial_{y} ϕ - Ω v_{x},

(6)

\partial_{t} v_{z} + (\vec{v} \cdot \vec{\nabla}) v_{z} = - \partial_{z} ϕ .

(7)

\nabla^{2} ϕ = μ n_{e} - α n_{p} - n .

(8)

While normalizing equations (1)–(3), we have adopted the following re-scaling

\begin{align} n & \to \frac{n}{n_{0}}, \nabla \to \frac{ω_{p i} \nabla}{C_{s}}, t \to ω_{p i} t, \\ Ω & \to \frac{Ω_{i}}{ω_{p i}}, v \to \frac{v}{C_{s}}, ϕ \to \frac{e ϕ}{T_{e}} . \end{align}

(9)

In (9), $C_{s} = (\sqrt{E_{F e} / m})$ is the IA speed with electron temperature T_e and $ω_{p i} (= \sqrt{4 π n_{0} e^{2} / m})$ is the ion plasma frequency with equilibrium value n₀ and α = n_p0/(∣Z_i∣n_i0) and μ = n_e0/(∣Z_i∣n_i0).

The Thomas-Fermi distributions that describe the number densities of inertialess electrons and positrons in their normalized forms are outlined by⁶²

n_{e} = {(1 + σ ϕ)}^{3 / 2} & n_{p} = {(1 - ϕ)}^{3 / 2} .

(10)

Here, σ = T_Fe/T_Fp indicates the ratio of the Fermi temperature of electrons (T_Fe) to that of positrons (T_Fp). According to the Taylor series, the equations in equations (8)–(10) can be simplified to the following form

\nabla^{2} ϕ + n = 1 + c_{1} ϕ + c_{2} ϕ^{2} + \dots,

(11)

with

(\begin{matrix} c_{1} \\ c_{2} \end{matrix}) = (\begin{matrix} \frac{3}{2} (α + μ σ) \\ - \frac{3}{8} (α - μ σ^{2}) \end{matrix}) .

(12)

Derivation of the planar integer KdV equation

In this scenario, we use the RPM to derive the planar integer KdV equation from the fluid equations that are relevant to the current plasma model. This model helps us explore the characteristics of planar CWs. To do this, we transform the independent variables (x, y, z, t) using a set of stretching coordinates

ς = ε^{1 / 2} (l_{x} x + l_{y} y + l_{z} z - λ t) & τ = ε^{3 / 2} t,

(13)

In this context, the direction cosines l_x, l_y, l_z correspond to the x, y, and z axes, respectively. This means that $l_{x}^{2} + l_{y}^{2} + l_{z}^{2} = 1$ , and specifically, l_z = cos θ. Here, λ represents the normalized wave phase velocity. We express the field quantities using a particular mathematical formulation

\{\begin{cases} n = 1 + ε n_{1} + ε^{2} n_{2} + ε^{3} n_{3} + \dots, \\ ϕ = ε ϕ_{1} + ε^{2} ϕ_{2} + ε^{3} ϕ_{3} + \dots, \\ v_{x} = ε^{3 / 2} v_{x 1} + ε^{2} v_{x 2} + ε^{5 / 2} v_{x 3} + \dots, \\ v_{y} = ε^{3 / 2} v_{y 1} + ε^{2} v_{y 2} + ε^{5 / 2} v_{y 3} + \dots, \\ v_{z} = ε v_{z 1} + ε^{2} v_{z 2} + ε^{3} v_{z 3} + \dots . \end{cases}

(14)

By plugging the expansion (14) into equations (4)–(8) and applying the stretching method (13), we can derive the first-order physical perturbation quantities for the lowest-order of ɛ.

\begin{align} n_{1} & = \frac{l_{z}}{λ} v_{z 1}, \end{align}

(15)

\begin{align} v_{z 1} & = \frac{l_{z}}{λ} ϕ_{1}, \end{align}

(16)

\begin{align} v_{y 1} & = \frac{l_{x}}{Ω} \partial_{ς} ϕ_{1}, \end{align}

(17)

\begin{align} v_{x 1} & = - \frac{l_{y}}{Ω} \partial_{ς} ϕ_{1}, \end{align}

(18)

and

n_{1} = c_{1} ϕ_{1} .

(19)

By solving equations (15) and (19), the expression for the phase velocity is obtained

λ = l_{z} \sqrt{\frac{1}{c_{1}}} .

(20)

Proceeding to the following order of the perturbation parameter ɛ and eliminating the second-order physical perturbation quantities from the resulting expressions, we ultimately arrive at the following planar integer KdV equation

\partial_{τ} ψ + A ψ \partial_{ς} ψ + B \partial_{ς}^{3} ψ = 0,

(21)

with the following coefficients of the nonlinear and dispersion terms

\{\begin{cases} A = \frac{1}{2 λ c_{1}} (3 λ^{2} c_{1}^{2} - 2 l_{z}^{2} (\frac{c_{2}}{c_{1}})), \\ B = \frac{λ}{2 Ω^{2} c_{1}} [(1 - l_{z}^{2}) + \frac{Ω^{2}}{λ^{2} c_{1}} l_{z}^{2}], \end{cases}

(22)

where ϕ₁ ≡ ψ.

The planar KdV-CW solution

To derive the CW solution for the planar integer KdV equation (21), we introduce the transformation ζ = (ς − uτ), where u is the nonlinear wave velocity. Accordingly, equation (21) reduces to the following the ordinary differential equation

- u d_{ζ} ψ + \frac{A}{2} d_{ζ} ψ^{2} + B d_{ζ}^{3} ψ = 0 .

(23)

Now, by integrating equation (23) over ζ twice and using suitable conditions (ψ → 0, d_ζψ → 0, and so on |ζ| → ∞), the following quasi-energy integral equation is obtained

\frac{1}{2} {(d_{ζ} ψ)}^{2} + W (ψ) = 0,

(24)

with the Sagdeev potential (SP) W(ψ)

W (ψ) = \frac{A}{6 B} ψ^{3} - \frac{u}{2 B} ψ^{2} + ρ_{0} ψ - \frac{1}{2} E_{0}^{2} .

(25)

In this context, “ρ₀” and “ $1 / 2 E_{0}^{2}$ ” represent the integration constants, which are referred to as charge density and electric field, respectively. By applying the boundary conditions ψ(ζ = 0) ≡ ψ₀ = γ₁ and d_ζψ → 0 at ζ = 0, then from equation (24), we get

E_{0} = \frac{A}{3 B} γ_{1}^{3} - \frac{u}{B} γ_{1}^{2} + 2 ρ_{0} γ_{1} .

(26)

Now, by putting equations (25) and (26) in equation (24), and by factoring the obtained results, we finally get

d_{ζ} ψ = \sqrt{\frac{A}{3 B} (γ_{1} - ψ) (ψ - γ_{2}) (ψ - γ_{3})},

(27)

with

\{\begin{cases} γ_{2} = \frac{3}{2} [\frac{u}{A} - \frac{γ_{1}}{3} + \sqrt{\frac{1}{3} (k_{1} - γ_{1}) (γ_{1} - k_{2})}], \\ γ_{3} = \frac{3}{2} [\frac{u}{A} - \frac{γ_{1}}{3} - \sqrt{\frac{1}{3} (k_{1} - γ_{1}) (γ_{1} - k_{2})}], \end{cases}

(28)

and

k_{1,2} = \frac{u}{A} \pm 2 \sqrt{\frac{u^{2}}{A^{2}} - \frac{2 B ρ_{0}}{A}} .

(29)

To find the nonlinear periodic wave solution, the following inequalities must be fulfilled, k₂ ≤ γ₁ ≤ k₁ or k₁ ≤ γ₁ ≤ k₂. Putting equations (25) and (27) in equation (24), the following CW velocity is obtained

u = \frac{A}{3} (γ_{1} + γ_{2} + γ_{3}) .

(30)

The nonlinear CW solution of equation (24) is followed by

\begin{align} Ψ (ζ) & = γ_{2} + A_{c n} {cn}^{2} [k ζ, m_{1}] \\ = γ_{2} + A_{c n} {cn}^{2} [k (ς - u τ), m_{1}], \end{align}

(31)

where cn indicates the Jacobi elliptic function (JEF) with modulus m₁, amplitude A_cn, and the inverse CW width k in terms γ₁, γ₂ , and γ₃ are defined as

m_{1} = \sqrt{\frac{γ_{2} - γ_{1}}{γ_{3} - γ_{1}}}, k = \sqrt{\frac{A}{12 B} (γ_{1} - γ_{3})}, A_{c n} = (γ_{1} - γ_{2}) .

(32)

Upon examining this aspect, we identify two scenarios:

Case 1: When m₁ → 0, the JEF turns into a triangular or trigonometric function, that is, cn(kζ, m₁ ) = cn(kζ, 0) = cos(kζ), and hence the CWs turn into sinusoidal waves having an unalterable shape, which was first observed by Stokes.¹⁰⁸

Case 2: When m₁ → 1, then cn(kζ, m₁) = cn(kζ, 1) = sech(kζ), and hence the CWs lose their periodicity, and the CW solution of KdV becomes the localized soliton solution.

Considering the current plasma scenario, for A > 0, the inequalities γ₁ > γ₂ ≥ γ₃ and for A < 0 the inequalities γ₁ < γ₂ ≤ γ₃ to hold.

The wavelength “λ₁” of CWs reads

λ_{1} = 4 \sqrt{\frac{3 B}{A (γ_{1} - γ_{3})} K (m_{1})},

(33)

where “K(m)” is the first kind of complete elliptical integral.

Now, for ρ₀ = E₀ = 0, then γ₂ = γ₃ = 0, then, m₁ → 1, and the CW solution reduces to the SW solution. Therefore, the solution in reference 31 simplifies to the following SW solution

ψ (ς) = ψ_{\max} {sech}^{2} (\frac{ζ}{w_{1}}) = ψ_{\max} {sech}^{2} (\frac{(ς - u τ)}{w_{1}}),

(34)

with the following IA peak amplitude and width,

γ_{1} = \frac{3 u}{A} = ψ_{\max} & w_{1} = \sqrt{\frac{4 B}{u}} .

(35)

Fractional planar KdV-CWs

In this section, we follow the same methodology as in Refs. 83–85 to convert the planar integer KdV equation (21) to its fractional counterpart to study how fractionality impacts the dynamics of periodic wave propagation in our considered plasma system. Accordingly, the following fractional planar KdV equation is obtained

D_{τ}^{p} ψ + A ψ \partial_{ς} ψ + B \partial_{ς}^{3} ψ = 0, \forall 0 < p \leq 1,

(36)

with

ψ (ς, 0) \equiv ψ_{0},

(37)

where

ψ_{0} \equiv ψ_{0} (ς)

denotes any initial solution/condition (IC) for the planar integer KdV equation (21), that is, ψ₀ can be considered the SW or CW solution of the planar KdV equation (21), depending on the phenomenon that will be studied. In our case, we consider the following IC for the CW

ψ (ς) \equiv ψ_{0} = a_{0} + a_{1} {cn}^{2} [a_{2} ς, m] .

(38)

Here, $D_{τ}^{p} ψ = \partial^{p} / \partial τ^{p} ψ$ indicates the fractional Caputo derivative (FCD) of order p to the function $ψ \equiv ψ (ς, τ)$ and $(a_{0}, a_{1}, a_{2}) = (γ_{2}, A_{c n}, k)$ .

First, let us briefly mention some definitions that we will use in our study.

Definition 1

The FCD of order p to the function $ψ \equiv ψ (ς, τ)$ and for τ > 0 reads^109,110

D_{τ}^{p} ψ (ς, τ) = \{\begin{cases} \frac{1}{Γ (n - p)} \int_{0}^{τ} {(τ - t)}^{n - p - 1} ψ^{(n)} (ς, t) d t, \forall n - 1 < p \leq n & n \in N, \\ \partial_{τ}^{n} ψ (ς, τ), \forall p = n & n \in N . \end{cases}

(39)

The subsequent relation is satisfied according to the definition (39)

D_{τ}^{p} τ^{δ} = D_{τ}^{p} τ^{δ} = \frac{Γ (δ + 1)}{Γ (δ + 1 - p)} τ^{δ - p} .

(40)

Definition 2

Laplace transform (LT) “L” to the function $ψ (τ)$ is defined as¹¹⁰

L [ψ (τ)] = Ψ (s) = \int_{0}^{\infty} ψ (τ) e^{- s τ} d τ, τ > 0 .

(41)

Definition 3

LT to the FCD of the function $ψ \equiv ψ (ς, τ)$ reads^109,110

L [D_{τ}^{p} ψ (ς, τ)] = s^{p} L [ψ (ς, τ)] - \sum_{k = 0}^{n - 1} \frac{1}{s^{k + 1 - p}} {\partial_{τ}^{k} ψ (ς, τ)|}_{τ = 0}, \forall n - 1 < p \leq n & n \in N,

(42)

where

L [ψ (ς, τ)] = Ψ (ς, s) \equiv Ψ

Tantawy technique (TT) for modeling planar FKdV-CWs

Here, the TT method is used to analyze the planar FKdV equation (36) and to create an approximate analytical solution that models the propagation of KdV-CW in the current plasma model.^91–94 This technique can be broken down into a few simple steps:

Step (1) Based on the TT, the solution for any fractional PDE is expressed as a convergent series solution, as follows

ψ (ς, τ) \equiv ψ_{0} + \sum_{i = 1}^{\infty} τ^{i p} ψ_{i} .

(43)

where

ψ_{j} \equiv ψ_{j} (ς)

are undetermined functions and

ψ_{0} \equiv ψ_{0} (ς)

refers to the IC as given in equation (38).

Step (2) Substituting Ansatz (43) into equation (36) yields

\begin{align} D_{τ}^{p} (ψ_{0} + \sum_{i = 1}^{\infty} τ^{i p} ψ_{i}) + A (ψ_{0} + \sum_{i = 1}^{\infty} τ^{i p} ψ_{i}) \partial_{ς} (ψ_{0} + \sum_{i = 1}^{\infty} τ^{i p} ψ_{i}) \\ + B \partial_{ς}^{3} (ψ_{0} + \sum_{i = 1}^{\infty} τ^{i p} ψ_{i}) = 0, \end{align}

(44)

and for N^th − order (say, N = 3), we get

\begin{align} \sum_{i = 1}^{3} ψ_{i} D_{τ}^{p} τ^{i p} + A (ψ_{0} + \sum_{i = 1}^{3} τ^{i p} ψ_{i}) \partial_{ς} (ψ_{0} + \sum_{i = 1}^{3} τ^{i p} ψ_{i}) \\ + B \partial_{ς}^{3} (ψ_{0} + \sum_{i = 1}^{3} τ^{i p} ψ_{i}) = 0 . \end{align}

(45)

Step (3) By using the definition for FCD given in equation (40)

D_{τ}^{p} τ^{i p} = \frac{Γ (i p + 1)}{Γ (i p + 1 - p)} τ^{i p - p} = T_{i} τ^{(i - 1) p},

in equation (45), we get

\begin{align} \sum_{i = 1}^{3} ψ_{i} T_{i} τ^{(i - 1) p} + A (ψ_{0} + \sum_{i = 1}^{3} τ^{i p} ψ_{i}) \partial_{ς} (ψ_{0} + \sum_{i = 1}^{3} τ^{i p} ψ_{i}) \\ + B \partial_{ς}^{3} (ψ_{0} + \sum_{i = 1}^{3} τ^{i p} ψ_{i}) = 0, \end{align}

(46)

with

T_{i} = \frac{Γ (i p + 1)}{Γ ((i - 1) p + 1)} \forall i = 1,2,3, \dots .

Step (4) By collecting various coefficients of τ^ip ∀ i = 0, 1, 2, ⋯ , we finally obtain:

S_{0} + S_{1} τ^{p} + S_{2} τ^{2 p} + S_{3} τ^{3 p} + \dots = 0,

(47)

with

\begin{array}{l} S_{0} & = T_{1} ψ_{1} + A ψ_{0} ψ_{0}^{'} + B ψ_{0}^{(3)}, \\ S_{1} & = T_{2} ψ_{2} + A ψ_{1} ψ_{0}^{'} + A ψ_{0} ψ_{1}^{'} + B ψ_{1}^{(3)}, \\ S_{2} & = T_{3} ψ_{3} + A ψ_{2} ψ_{0}^{'} + A ψ_{1} ψ_{1}^{'} + A ψ_{0} ψ_{2}^{'} + B ψ_{2}^{(3)}, \\ ⋮ . \end{array}

Step (5) Equating the coefficients W₀, W₁, W₂, …, to zero, the following system of ordinary differential equations is obtained

\begin{align} T_{1} ψ_{1} + A ψ_{0} ψ_{0}^{'} + B ψ_{0}^{(3)} & = 0, \\ T_{2} ψ_{2} + A ψ_{1} ψ_{0}^{'} + A ψ_{0} ψ_{1}^{'} + B ψ_{1}^{(3)} & = 0, \\ T_{3} ψ_{3} + A ψ_{2} ψ_{0}^{'} + A ψ_{1} ψ_{1}^{'} + A ψ_{0} ψ_{2}^{'} + B ψ_{2}^{(3)} & = 0, \\ ⋮ . \end{align}

(48)

Step (6) By solving system (48) in the functions $(ψ_{1}, ψ_{2}, ψ_{3})$ , we get

\begin{align} ψ_{1} & = \frac{- 1}{Γ (p + 1)} (A ψ_{0} ψ_{0}^{'} + B ψ_{0}^{(3)}), \\ ψ_{2} & = \frac{1}{Γ (2 p + 1)} (\begin{matrix} 2 A^{2} ψ_{0} {(ψ_{0}^{'})}^{2} + A^{2} ψ_{0}^{2} ψ_{0}^{''} + 3 A B {(ψ_{0}^{''})}^{2} \\ + 5 A B ψ_{0}^{'} ψ_{0}^{(3)} + 2 A B ψ_{0} ψ_{0}^{(4)} + B^{2} ψ_{0}^{(6)} \end{matrix}), \\ ψ_{3} & = extremely value. \end{align}

(49)

Step (7) Using the IC (38) for the planar CW solution in system (49), the following values of ψ₁ and ψ₂ are obtained

\begin{align} ψ_{1} & = 2 a_{1} a_{2} cn \times sn \times dn [a_{0} A + 4 a_{2}^{2} B (2 m - 1) + (a_{1} A - 12 a_{2}^{2} B m) {cn}^{2}] \frac{1}{Γ (p + 1)}, \\ ψ_{2} & = \frac{1}{Γ (2 p + 1)} \sum_{j = 1}^{9} L_{j}, \\ ⋮, \end{align}

(50)

with

cn \equiv cn [a_{2} ς, m_{1}], sn \equiv sn [a_{2} ς, m_{1}], and dn \equiv dn [a_{2} ς, m_{1}],

where the values of L_j ∀ j = 1, 2, 3, …, 9 are given in Appendix.

Step (8) By substituting the derived values of ψ₁, ψ₂ , ⋯ , into Ansatz (43), we ultimately get the analytical CW approximation to the planar FKdV equation (36) up to the 2^nd-approximation as follows

\begin{align} ψ (ς, τ) & = ψ_{0} + ψ_{1} τ^{p} + ψ_{2} τ^{2 p} + \dots \\ = a_{0} + a_{1} {cn}^{2} [a_{2} ς, m] + \frac{τ^{2 p}}{Γ (2 p + 1)} \sum_{j = 1}^{9} L_{j} \\ + 2 a_{1} a_{2} cn \times sn \times dn [a_{0} A + 4 a_{2}^{2} B (2 m - 1) + (a_{1} A - 12 a_{2}^{2} B m) {cn}^{2}] \frac{τ^{p}}{Γ (p + 1)} \\ ⋮ . \end{align}

(51)

LRPSM for modeling planar FKdV-CWs

Here, the following brief steps are presented to analyze equation(36) using LRPSM:

Step (1) Applying LT to equation (36) yields

L [D_{τ}^{p} ψ] + L [A ψ \partial_{ς} ψ + B \partial_{ς}^{3} ψ] = 0 .

(52)

Step (2) According to our problem (k = 0), thus, the definition (42) of Laplace FCD can be reduced to the following form

L [D_{τ}^{p} ψ (ς, τ)] = s^{p} L [ψ (ς, τ)] - \frac{ψ_{0}}{s^{1 - p}} = s^{p} Ψ (ς, s) - \frac{ψ_{0}}{s^{1 - p}} .

(53)

Step (3) Incorporating equation (53) into equation (52) yields

(Ψ (ς, s) - \frac{ψ_{0}}{s}) + \frac{B}{s^{p}} \partial_{ς}^{3} Ψ (ς, s) + \frac{A}{s^{p}} L [L^{- 1} [Ψ (ς, s)] L^{- 1} [\partial_{ς} Ψ (ς, s)]] = 0 .

(54)

Step (3) The truncated k^th series solution based on the results of LRPSM reads

Ψ_{k} (ς, s) = \frac{ψ_{0}}{s} + \sum_{r = 1}^{k} \frac{f_{r} (ς)}{s^{r p + 1}}, \forall r = 1,2,3, \dots .

(55)

Step (4) The residual Laplace functions (LRFs) corresponding to equation (54) are given by¹¹¹

L [Res (ς, s)] = (Ψ (ς, s) - \frac{ψ_{0}}{s}) + \frac{B}{s^{p}} \partial_{ς}^{3} Ψ (ς, s) + \frac{A}{s^{p}} L [L^{- 1} [Ψ (ς, s)] L^{- 1} [\partial_{ς} Ψ (ς, s)]],

(56)

and the truncated k^th-LRFs are donated by

R \equiv L [{Res}_{k} (ς, s)] = (Ψ_{k} (ς, s) - \frac{ψ_{0}}{s}) + \frac{B}{s^{p}} \partial_{ς}^{3} Ψ_{k} (ς, s) + \frac{A}{s^{p}} L [L^{- 1} [Ψ_{k} (ς, s)] L^{- 1} [\partial_{ς} Ψ_{k} (ς, s)]] .

(57)

Step (5) By substituting equation (55) into equation (57) and multiply both sides of the obtained results by s^rp+1, and for using $Ψ_{1} (ς, s)$ , we get

\begin{align} R_{1} & = s^{p + 1} \{(Ψ_{1} (ς, s) - \frac{ψ_{0}}{s}) + \frac{B}{s^{p}} \partial_{ς}^{3} Ψ_{1} (ς, s) + \frac{A}{s^{p}} L [L^{- 1} [Ψ_{1} (ς, s)] L^{- 1} [\partial_{ς} Ψ_{1} (ς, s)]]\} \\ = s^{p + 1} \{\begin{matrix} \frac{f_{1} (ς)}{s^{p + 1}} + \frac{B}{s^{p}} \partial_{ς}^{3} (\frac{f_{1} (ς)}{s^{p + 1}} + \frac{ψ_{0}}{s}) \\ + \frac{A}{s^{p}} L [L^{- 1} [(\frac{f_{1} (ς)}{s^{p + 1}} + \frac{ψ_{0}}{s})] L^{- 1} [\partial_{ς} (\frac{f_{1} (ς)}{s^{p + 1}} + \frac{ψ_{0}}{s})]] \end{matrix}\} . \end{align}

(58)

Step (6) Taking the limit s → ∞ for R₁, and solving the obtained result using the MATHEMATICA command “Solve[],”

\begin{array}{l} q_{1} & = {Limit [R}_{1},s \to \infty] //Normal; \\ {Solve [q}_{1} & = = 0, f_{1} [ς]] \end{array}

we can get the value of

f_{1} (ς)

as follows

f_{1} (ς) = 2 a_{1} a_{2} cn \times sn \times dn [a_{0} A + 4 a_{2}^{2} B (2 m - 1) + (a_{1} A - 12 a_{2}^{2} B m) {cn}^{2}] .

(59)

Step (7) By repeating Step (5) with using the value of $Ψ_{2} (ς, s)$ and using the obtained value of $f_{1} (ς)$ , the following value of LRF is obtained:

\begin{align} R_{2} & = s^{2 p + 1} \{(Ψ_{2} (ς, s) - \frac{ψ_{0}}{s}) + \frac{b}{s^{p}} \partial_{ς}^{3} Ψ_{2} (ς, s) + \frac{a}{s^{p}} L [L^{- 1} [Ψ_{2} (ς, s)] L^{- 1} [\partial_{ς} Ψ_{2} (ς, s)]]\} \\ = s^{2 p + 1} \{\begin{matrix} (\frac{f_{1} (ς)}{s^{p + 1}} + \frac{f_{2} (ς)}{s^{2 p + 1}}) + \frac{b}{s^{p}} \partial_{ς}^{3} (\frac{f_{1} (ς)}{s^{p + 1}} + \frac{f_{2} (ς)}{s^{2 p + 1}} + \frac{ψ_{0}}{s}) \\ + \frac{a}{s^{p}} L [L^{- 1} [(\frac{f_{1} (ς)}{s^{p + 1}} + \frac{f_{2} (ς)}{s^{2 p + 1}} + \frac{ψ_{0}}{s})] L^{- 1} [\partial_{ς} (\frac{f_{1} (ς)}{s^{p + 1}} + \frac{f_{2} (ς)}{s^{2 p + 1}} + \frac{ψ_{0}}{s})]] \end{matrix}\} . \end{align}

(60)

Step (8) By repeating Step (6) on R₂ given in equation (60), we can get the value of $f_{2} (ς)$ as follows

\begin{array}{l} q_{2} & = {Limit [R}_{2},s \to \infty] //Normal; \\ {Solve [q}_{2} = = 0, & f_{2} [ς]] \end{array}

which leads to

f_{2} (ς) = \sum_{j = 1}^{9} L_{j},

(61)

where L_j ∀ j = 1, 2, …, 9, are defined above.

Also, we can find higher-order values of $f_{i} (ς)$ but with extremely high computational value and high computational cost.

Step (9) Now, by collecting the obtained values of $f_{1} (ς)$ , $f_{2} (ς), \dots$ , in equation (55), we obtain

Ψ (ς, s) = \frac{ψ_{0}}{s} + \frac{f_{1} (ς)}{s^{p + 1}} + \frac{f_{2} (ς)}{s^{2 p + 1}} + \dots .

(62)

Step (10) By applying inverse LT to equation (62), the subsequent analytical approximate solution to equation (36) is derived

ψ (ς, τ) = a_{0} + a_{1} {cn}^{2} [a_{2} ς, m] + \frac{τ^{p}}{Γ (p + 1)} f_{1} (ς) + \frac{τ^{2 p}}{Γ (2 p + 1)} f_{2} (ς) + \dots .

(63)

Parametric analysis

Our numerical findings show that both the nonlinear coefficient A and the dispersion coefficient B in the current plasma model are consistently positive. This indicates that the model exclusively supports compressive (positive potential) nonlinear structures, like CWs and SWs. In this numerical analysis, we focus on how different plasma parameters—specifically, the positron concentration α, the ratio of electron to positron Fermi temperatures σ, and the cosine obliqueness direction l_z—affect the propagation characteristics of both integer and fractional IACWs. Additionally, we discuss the possibility of the existence of IASWs as a limiting case of the IACWs. In our present work, we recall that all relevant physical information is encapsulated within the coefficients A and B, as defined in equation (21). These coefficients, which depend on various plasma parameters, play a crucial role in shaping the structural characteristics of the nonlinear structures. It is crucial to note that the numerical simulations discussed here are performed using plasma parameters corresponding to mass densities between 10³ gm/cm³ to 10⁴ gm/cm³ which are typical of astrophysical environments such as red dwarf stars.⁸ These density ranges provide a realistic framework for analyzing IACW dynamics in extreme plasma conditions.

Figure 1 illustrates the SP W(ψ) (given in equation (25)) as a function of the electrostatic potential ψ as well as the SW and CW solutions, providing insights into the nonlinear dynamics of IACWs and IASWs in the considered plasma system. A key observation is that the SP does not vanish at ψ = 0 for IACWs, that is, W(ψ = 0) ≠ 0, under conditions ρ₀ = E₀ ≠ 0 indicating the presence of periodic wave structures governed by the balance between nonlinearity and dispersion. These CW solutions exist within a bounded potential well, which determines their periodic nature and stability. In contrast, for SWs, the SP satisfies W(ψ = 0) = 0 under conditions ρ₀ = E₀ = 0, as indicated by the dashed curve. This characteristic signifies the presence of a localized soliton-like structure, where the nonlinear steepening effect is precisely counterbalanced by dispersion, resulting in a stable SW that maintains its shape while propagating without spreading (see Figure 1(b)). The figure highlights the fundamental difference between IACWs and IASWs. The existence of a potential well in the IACW case ensures a periodic wave nature, whereas the separatrix profile in the SW case implies a transition to an isolated pulse structure.

Figure 1.

Both (a) the SP W(ψ) for the SWs and CWs, and (b) the SWs and CWs profiles are examined. Here, $(α, σ, l_{z}, Ω) = (0.1, 0.1, 0.9, 0.3)$ , and $(ρ_{0}, E_{0}, u) = (- 0.01, 0.05, 0.1)$ .

The inclusion of the magnetic field (MF) introduces significant changes in wave dynamics compared to the unmagnetized case studied by Rahman et al.⁶² Our findings specifically show that the magnetic field influences the wave’s phase velocity, changes the height and breadth of the solitons, and imposes new limitations on the parameter ranges where CWs can exist. For example, we observe that stronger MF leads to a reduction in the amplitude of the soliton. Furthermore, the orientation of the MF significantly impacts the wavelength of the CWs. These outcomes underscore the crucial role of magnetic fields in dense astrophysical plasmas, where their presence is familiar.

To analyze the characteristics of CW structures, the three real roots of the SP W(ψ), denoted as γ₁, γ₂, γ₃, are determined for non-zero values of ρ₀ and E₀. In the case of CWs, the SP W(ψ) restricts the pseudoparticle to oscillate between the real roots γ₁ and γ₂, while the potential barrier at γ prevents escape and ensures a periodic trajectory. This intrinsic behavior reinforces the stability of CW solutions in nonlinear plasma systems. In Ref. 62, only the effect of α on the amplitude, width, and phase shift of IACWs was discussed without including the impact of the MF. However, in this study, we extend the analysis by considering the impact of the MF on the behavior of nonlinear structures in the current plasma model. Figure 2 illustrates the influence of positron concentration α on both the SP W(ψ) and profile of the IACWs, showing variations in wave amplitude, width, and phase shift. The three curves represent different values of α, with all other plasma parameters kept constant. We observe that as α increases, both the amplitude and width of the IACWs diminish. This behavior arises due to the influence of positrons on the plasma environment, where a higher positron concentration reduces the ion density to maintain charge neutrality. Since the IAWs primarily depend on ion dynamics, weaker nonlinear interactions result in lower wave amplitudes. Furthermore, the phase shift is observed to be large with increasing α suggests that positrons modify the effective wave speed by altering dispersion properties. These effects are crucial in astrophysical and laboratory plasmas, where positron populations significantly impact wave dynamics and energy transport. Rahman et al.⁶² investigated how the ratio of electron to positron Fermi temperatures σ affects the profile of IACWs without the impact of the MF. Their study indicated that as σ increases, the CWs become taller and steeper, and SWs become more peaked (higher amplitude and smaller width). However, in the current investigation, which includes the influence of the MF, reveals a contrasting behavior. As depicted in Figure 3, we find that the increase of σ results in a reduction in both the amplitude and the width of the IACW structure. Physically, a higher value of temperature ratio σ corresponds to an increase in the positron population’s thermal energy relative to electrons, which reduces both nonlinearity and dispersion. The weakened nonlinear effects lead to lower wave amplitudes, while reduced dispersion causes the wave to contract spatially, leading to a narrower profile. This contrasting behavior highlights the significant influence of the MF on wave dynamics, as it alters the balance between nonlinearity and dispersion. This new analysis provides deeper insights into the role of σ in magnetized e − p − i plasmas, revealing their crucial influence on wave characteristics, energy transport, and wave stability in astrophysical and laboratory environments, which was not explored in previous work and represents a significant advancement in understanding wave propagation in such systems.

Figure 2.

Both (a) the SP W(ψ) for the CWs and (b) the CWs profile are examined against the positron concentration α. Here, $(σ, l_{z}, Ω) = (0.1, 0.9, 0.3)$ , and $(ρ_{0}, E_{0}, u) = (- 0.01, 0.05, 0.1)$ .

Figure 3.

Both (a) the SP W(ψ) for the CWs and (b) the CWs profile are examined against the ratio of electron to positron Fermi temperatures σ. Here, $(α, l_{z}, Ω) = (0.1, 0.9, 0.3)$ , and $(ρ_{0}, E_{0}, u) = (- 0.01, 0.05, 0.1)$ .

Figure 4 illustrates the influence of cosine obliqueness direction l_z on the SP W(ψ) of CWs and the profile of the IACWs. The figure shows the wave profile for three different values of l_z, with all other plasma parameters held constant. It’s interesting to note that as l_z increases, both the amplitude and width of the IACWs decrease. Figure 5 shows the effect of the strength of the MF Ω on both the SP W(ψ) of CWs and the profile of the IACWs. This graphic clearly illustrates the significant impact of the MF Ω on the amplitude and width of the IACWs, as well as their sensitivity to even the most minor variations in the magnetic field.

Figure 4.

Both (a) the SP W(ψ) for the CWs and (b) the CWs profile are examined against the cosine obliqueness direction l_z. Here, $(α, σ, Ω) = (0.1, 0.1, 0.3)$ , and $(ρ_{0}, E_{0}, u) = (- 0.01, 0.05, 0.1)$ .

Figure 5.

Both (a) the SP W(ψ) for the CWs and (b) the CWs profile are examined against Ω. Here, $(α, σ, l_{z}) = (0.2, 0.1, 0.9)$ , and $(ρ_{0}, E_{0}, u) = (- 0.01, 0.05, 0.1)$ .

Fractional calculus often reveals the behaviors associated with memory or temporal properties of the phenomenon under study. In many cases, studying the properties of fractional waves may reveal behaviors that have been observed in laboratory experiments or astronomical observations, and these results are inconsistent with theoretical studies based on the analysis of the integer evolutionary equations. Thus, the fractional parameter p (fractionality) is not an abstract mathematical construct but a physical parameter that measures: (I) The memory length of the plasma model, (II) The degree of non-locality in time, (III) The effective damping or retardation due to collective effects, the temporal evolution in complex, dense plasmas exhibits a fractal or anomalous character. From this starting point, the idea of studying the properties of fractional waves emerged, which may explain some of the deviations in observed phenomena that conventional integer evolutionary equations fail to account for. From this perspective, the effect of the fractional-order parameter p on the dynamics of the IACW propagation that arises and propagates in the current plasma model. Before examining the impact of fractionality p on the IACW profile, it is essential to recognize that all derived approximations (51) and (63) using the TT and LRPSM are completely congruent. Unlike the analysis presented in Ref. 95, a discrepancy exists between the estimates derived from the TT and the NIM. Figure 6 illustrates a graphical representation of the generated approximations (51) and shows the influence of fractionality p on the behavior of the IACWs. In addition, Figure 7 compares the derived approximations (51) with the exact solution (31) for the integer case (p = 1). It’s evident that there’s a strong agreement between the two solutions, even though our derivation is based on a second-order approximation. Furthermore, the absolute error $R_{\infty} = |Approx. (51) - Exact (31)|$ for the generated approximations (51) is estimated as detailed in Table 1. This demonstrates the high accuracy of the generated approximations and reinforces the effectiveness of the proposed methods.

Figure 6.

The profile of fractional ion-acoustic cnoidal wave ψ against fractional-order parameter p: (a) 3D plot for ψ in the $(ς, τ)$ -plane at p = 0.1, (b) 3D plot for ψ in the $(ς, τ)$ -plane at p = 0.85, (c) 3D plot for ψ in the $(ς, τ)$ -plane at p = 1, and (d) 2D plot for ψ in at τ = 7 and for different values to p. Here, $(α, σ, l_{z}, Ω) = (0.1, 0.1, 0.9, 0.3)$ , and $(ρ_{0}, u) = (- 0.01, 0.1)$ .

Figure 7.

A comparison between the generated approximations (51) and the exact solution (31) at p = 1. Here, $(α, σ, l_{z}, Ω) = (0.1, 0.1, 0.9, 0.3)$ , and $(ρ_{0}, u) = (- 0.01, 0.1)$ .

Table 1.

The absolute error R_∞ of the derived approximation (51) at p = 1 and τ = 0.1. Here, $(α, σ, l_{z}, Ω) = (0.1, 0.1, 0.9, 0.3)$ , and $(ρ_{0}, u) = (- 0.01, 0.1)$ .

ς	Approx._{p = 1} (51)	Exact (31)	R _∞
−30	0.151202	0.151999	7.96227 × 10⁻⁴
−25	0.619065	0.618606	4.58439 × 10⁻⁴
−20	0.501794	0.501886	0.92192 × 10⁻⁴
−15	0.084512	0.0838623	6.49726 × 10⁻⁴
−10	0.0245712	0.0248817	3.10581 × 10⁻⁴
−5	0.304617	0.305212	5.94989 × 10⁻⁴
0	0.699953	0.699997	0.44307 × 10⁻⁴
5	0.30775	0.307147	6.02208 × 10⁻⁴
10	0.0255626	0.0252519	3.10697 × 10⁻⁴
15	0.0823072	0.0829655	6.58267 × 10⁻⁴
20	0.499947	0.499799	1.48272 × 10⁻⁴
25	0.619765	0.620206	4.4114 × 10⁻⁴
30	0.1541	0.153317	7.82495 × 10⁻⁴

We can conclude that the TT is one of the most straightforward methods to apply, regardless of the complexity of the problem under study. However, the RPSM requires professionalism in dealing with complex problems to avoid making computational errors that would result in approximations derived by this method being incorrect. Moreover, the TT does not require any transforms to facilitate the calculations, unlike the RPSM, where several transforms, such as the Laplace transform, Elzaki transform, and Mohand transform, may be used to facilitate the integration and calculations while generating various order approximations. In addition, up to this point, Tantawy’s technique can be applied to analyze any fractional differential equation (homogeneous and non-homogeneous) without any challenge. Conversely, we may encounter difficulties when analyzing certain non-homogeneous FDEs that depend on a specific initial solution. Additionally, both the TT and the RPSM are not computationally expensive. However, the TT is faster than the RPSM when calculating higher-order approximations.

Conclusion

This investigation extends previous studies⁶² by providing a comprehensive understanding of the characteristics of nonlinear IACW propagation in degenerate magnetoplasmas, with potential applications in astrophysical and laboratory plasma systems.¹¹² Our study is split into two key sections. First, we tackled the basic fluid equations of the magnetized degenerate Thomas–Fermi e − p − i plasma, simplifying them down to the planar integer KdV equation using the RPM method. By examining the nonlinearity coefficient, we discovered that our current model only supports positive potential structures, particularly in dense astrophysical settings like white dwarfs. In the second part of our research, we transformed the planar integer KdV equation into the planar fractional KdV (FKdV) equation to explore how the fractionality p influences the dynamics of fractional IACWs. We solved the planar FKdV equation using two effective and precise methods: the Tantawy technique (TT) and the Laplace residual power series method (LRPSM). Based on our analysis, the key findings can be summarized as follows:

• It was observed that for vanishing the charge density ρ₀ and electric field E₀, that is, E₀ = ρ₀ = 0, the CW structures disappear, converting to solitary wave (SW) pulses.

• Boosting the positron concentration (α) results in a decrease in both the amplitude and width of the planar IACWs.

• The parameter σ significantly affects the IACW profile by reducing both amplitude and width as σ increases. This behavior results from a weak nonlinearity and dispersion due to higher positron thermal energy.

• The direction of cosine obliqueness (l_z) plays a crucial role in shaping the IACW profile by reducing both the amplitude and the width as l_z increases. This effect arises because of the weakening of nonlinearity and dispersion, leading to a more localized and steeper wave structure.

• It was found that the magnetic field (MF) Ω has a significant impact on the profile (amplitude, width, and phase shift) of the planar IACWs, and even slight changes in the MF value result in substantial changes to the properties of the IACWs.

• When it comes to the fractional part, it turns out that the approximations derived from both the TT and RPSM are exactly the same.

• The effect of fractionality (p) on the behavior of IACWs was examined to get a clearer picture of their propagation within the plasma.

• In order to verify the approximations, we compared them graphically to the exact solution for the integer case where p = 1. The high level of agreement and consistency between the two solutions confirms that our approximations are very accurate. We also calculated the absolute error and found it to be very small, which further proves the effectiveness of our methods.

Our results demonstrate significant differences from previous studies in unmagnetized plasmas,⁶² particularly in the behavior of wave structures under the influence of a magnetic field, highlighting the importance of magnetic effects in dense astrophysical environments. It is important to note that this research is particularly significant for extremely dense plasma environments, where the effects of degeneracy are substantial and must be considered. Additionally, the outcomes of this study could be relevant in regions surrounding compact stellar objects and in dense e − p − i plasmas created through the interaction of very intense, very short laser pulses with solid materials, resulting in high-density plasma conditions that exhibit quantum behavior.^32,113 Moreover, the theoretical results we have obtained contribute to a better understanding of acoustic-type modes¹¹² in physical scenarios where ultra-dense plasmas are present.

Future work: The analysis of various evolutionary wave equations (EWEs) in their fractional forms remains a significant challenge due to their ability to reveal some of the behaviors that accompany various nonlinear phenomena arising and propagating not only in plasma physics but also in many different scientific media. Given the promising results of the used techniques in the current study, these approaches can be used for analyzing multidimensional fractional damped/nonplanar EWEs to study the effect of transverse perturbations on the dynamical behavior of various fractional nonlinear phenomena that arise in various plasma systems, such as the analysis of the fractional damped/nonplanar KdV-type equations,^114–116 the fractional damped/nonplanar ZK/Kadomtsev–Petviashvili equation-type equations,^117,118 and the fractional damped/nonplanar Kawahara-type equations.^119–121 In addition, their ability to analyze the fractional damped/nonplanar Schrödinger-type equations for modeling the fractional rogue waves and breathers.^122–125

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The authors express their gratitude to Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University Researchers Supporting Project number (PNURSP2025R229), Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

ORCID iDs

Muhammad Khalid

Camus G. L. Tiofack

Samir A. El-Tantawy

Authors contributions

Each author made equal contributions and gave their approval for the final version of the manuscript.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

This study didn’t involve creating or analyzing any new datasets, so data sharing isn’t applicable for this article. El-Tantawy has handled all the fractional calculations, derived approximations, Mathematica codes, and figures.*

AI tools declaration

The authors confirm that no artificial intelligence tools were employed in the development of this article.

Appendix

The values of the coefficients L_j ∀ j = 1, 2, 3, …, 9 of approximation (50)

\begin{array}{l} L_{1} & = - 4 a_{0} a_{1}^{2} a_{2}^{2} A^{2} c n^{4} d n^{2} + 12 a_{0} a_{1}^{2} a_{2}^{2} A^{2} c n^{2} d n^{2} s n^{2} - 2 a_{0}^{2} a_{1} a_{2}^{2} A^{2} c n^{2} d n^{2} + 2 a_{0}^{2} a_{1} a_{2}^{2} A^{2} c n^{2} m s n^{2}, \\ L_{2} & = 2 a_{0}^{2} a_{1} a_{2}^{2} A^{2} d n^{2} s n^{2} - 4 a_{1}^{3} a_{2}^{2} A^{2} c n^{6} d n^{2} + 2 a_{1}^{3} a_{2}^{2} A^{2} c n^{6} + 10 a_{1}^{3} a_{2}^{2} A^{2} c n^{4} d n^{2} s n^{2} + 4 a_{0} a_{1}^{2} a_{2}^{2} A^{2} c n^{4} m s n^{2}, \\ L_{3} & = 16 a_{0} a_{1} a_{2}^{4} A B c n^{2} d n^{4} + 16 a_{0} a_{1} a_{2}^{4} A B c n^{4} d n^{2} m - 16 a_{0} a_{1} a_{2}^{4} A B c n^{4} m^{2} s n^{2} - 144 a_{0} a_{1} a_{2}^{4} A B c n^{2} d n^{2} m s n^{2}, \\ L_{4} & = - 16 a_{0} a_{1} a_{2}^{4} A B d n^{4} s n^{2} - 16 a_{1}^{2} a_{2}^{4} A B c n^{6} m + 28 a_{1}^{2} a_{2}^{4} A B c n^{4} d n^{4} + 16 a_{0} a_{1} a_{2}^{4} A B c n^{2} m^{2} s n^{4}, \\ L_{5} & = 16 a_{0} a_{1} a_{2}^{4} A B d n^{2} m s n^{4} + 32 a_{1}^{2} a_{2}^{4} A B c n^{6} d n^{2} m - 248 a_{1}^{2} a_{2}^{4} A B c n^{4} d n^{2} m s n^{2} - 120 a_{1}^{2} a_{2}^{4} A B c n^{2} d n^{4} s n^{2}, \\ L_{6} & = 12 a_{1}^{2} a_{2}^{4} A B d n^{4} s n^{4} + 28 a_{1}^{2} a_{2}^{4} A B c n^{4} m^{2} s n^{4} + 120 a_{1}^{2} a_{2}^{4} A B c n^{2} d n^{2} m s n^{4} - 208 a_{1} a_{2}^{6} B^{2} c n^{4} d n^{4} m, \\ L_{7} & = - 32 a_{1} a_{2}^{6} B^{2} c n^{2} d n^{6} - 64 a_{1} a_{2}^{6} B^{2} c n^{6} d n^{2} m^{2} + 32 a_{1} a_{2}^{6} B^{2} c n^{6} m^{2} + 1408 a_{1} a_{2}^{6} B^{2} c n^{2} d n^{4} m s n^{2}, \\ L_{8} & = 32 a_{1} a_{2}^{6} B^{2} d n^{6} s n^{2} + 1408 a_{1} a_{2}^{6} B^{2} c n^{4} d n^{2} m^{2} s n^{2} - 1408 a_{1} a_{2}^{6} B^{2} c n^{2} d n^{2} m^{2} s n^{4} - 208 a_{1} a_{2}^{6} B^{2} d n^{4} m s n^{4}, \\ L_{9} & = - 208 a_{1} a_{2}^{6} B^{2} c n^{4} m^{3} s n^{4} + 32 a_{1} a_{2}^{6} B^{2} c n^{2} m^{3} s n^{6} + 32 a_{1} a_{2}^{6} B^{2} d n^{2} m^{2} s n^{6} . \end{array}

References

Shukla

. A new spin on quantum plasmas. Nat Phys 2009; 5: 92–93.

Marklund

Brodin

. Dynamics of spin−1/2 quantum plasmas. Phys Rev Lett 2007; 98: 025001.

Shaikh

Shukla

. 3D electron fluid turbulence at nanoscales in dense plasmas. New J Phys 2008; 10: 083007.

Calvayrac

Reinhard

Suraud

, et al. Nonlinear electron dynamics in metal clusters. Phys Rep 2000; 337: 493–578.

Stenflo

Shukla

Marklund

. New low-frequency oscillations in quantum dusty plasmas. Europhys Lett 2006; 74: 844–846.

Salamin

Hatsagortsyan

, et al. Relativistic high-power laser–matter interactions. Phys Rep 2006; 427: 41–155.

Harding

Lai

. Physics of strongly magnetized neutron stars. Rep Prog Phys 2006; 69: 2631–2708.

Fortov

. Extreme states of matter on Earth and in space. Phys Usp 2009; 52: 615–647.

Shapiro

Teukolsky

. Black holes, white dwarfs and neutron stars: the physics of compact objects. Wiley, 1983.

10.

Bonitz

Semkat

Filinov

, et al. Theory and simulation of strong correlations in quantum Coulomb systems. J Phys A 2003; 36: 5921–5930.

11.

Chandrashekhar

. The maximum mass of ideal white dwarfs. Astrophys J 1931; 74: 81.

12.

Chandrashekhar

. The density of white dwarf stars. Philos Mag A 1931; 11: 592.

13.

Chandrashekhar

. The highly collapsed configurations of a stellar mass. Mon Not Roy Astron Soc 1935; 170: 405.

14.

Shukla

Eliasson

. Colloquium: nonlinear collective interactions in quantum plasmas with degenerate electron fluids. Rev Mod Phys 2011; 83: 885.

15.

Bohm

. A suggested interpretation of the quantum theory in terms of “hidden” variables. I. Phys Rev 1952; 85: 166–179.

16.

Haas

Garcia

Goedert

, et al. Quantum ion-acoustic waves. Phys Plasmas 2003; 10: 3858–3866.

17.

Maity

. Phase-mixing of Langmuir oscillations in cold electron-positron-ion plasmas. Phys Plasmas 2014; 21: 072317.

18.

Verma

. Nonlinear oscillations and waves in multi-species cold plasmas. Phys Plasmas 2016; 23: 122125.

19.

Pramanik

Maity

. Effects of magnetic field on phase-mixing of electrostatic oscillations in cold electron-positron-ion plasmas. Phys Plasmas 2017; 24: 084504.

20.

El-Tantawy

Wazwaz

Rahman

. Three-dimensional modulational instability of the electrostatic waves in e–p–i magnetoplasmas having superthermal particles. Phys Plasmas 2017; 24: 022126.

21.

Ali Shan

El-Tantawy

. The impact of positrons beam on the propagation of super freak waves in electron-positron-ion plasmas. Phys Plasmas 2016; 23: 072112.

22.

Miller

Witta

. Active galactic nuclei. Springer, 1987.

23.

Michel

. Theory of pulsar magnetospheres. Rev Mod Phys 1982; 54: 1–66.

24.

Misner

Throne

Wheeler

. Gravitation. Freeman, 1973, p. 763.

25.

Kozlovsky

Murphy

. Positron-emitter production in solar flares from 3He reactions. Astrophys J 2004; 604: 892–899.

26.

Goldreich

Julian

. Pulsar electrodynamics. Astrophys J 1969; 157: 869.

27.

Liang

Wilks

Tabak

. Pair production by ultraintense lasers. Phys Rev Lett 1998; 81: 4887–4890.

28.

Tinkle

Greaves

Surko

, et al. Low-order modes as diagnostics of spheroidal non-neutral plasmas. Phys Rev Lett 1994; 72: 352–355.

29.

Greaves

Surko

. An electron-positron beam-plasma experiment. Phys Rev Lett 1995; 75: 3846–3849.

30.

Gahn

Tsakiris

Pretzler

, et al. Generating positrons with femtosecond-laser pulses. Appl Phys Lett 2000; 77: 2662–2664.

31.

Chen

Wilks

Bonlie

, et al. Making relativistic positrons using ultraintense short pulse lasers. Phys Plasmas 2009; 16: 122702.

32.

Sarri

Poder

Cole

, et al. Generation of neutral and high-density electron–positron pair plasmas in the laboratory. Nat Commun 2015; 6: 6747.

33.

Nejoh

. Effects of positron density and temperature on large amplitude ion-acoustic waves in an electron–positron–ion plasma. Aust J Phys 1997; 50: 309.

34.

El-Awady

El-Tantawy

Moslem

, et al. Electron–positron–ion plasma with kappa distribution: ion acoustic soliton propagation. Phys Lett A 2010; 374: 3216–3219.

35.

Rahman

Khan

Qamar

. Propagation of ion solitary pulses in dense astrophysical electron-positron-ion magnetoplasmas. Plasma Sci Technol 2015; 17: 1000–1005.

36.

Rahman

. Electrostatic Rogue waves in a degenerate Thomas-Fermi plasma. Braz J Phys 2019; 49: 517–525.

37.

Yin

Liu

, et al. Diversity of exact solutions to a (3+1)-dimensional nonlinear evolution equation and its reduction. Comput Math Appl 2018; 76: 1275–1283.

38.

Gao

Yin

, et al. Bäcklund transformation, multiple wave solutions and lump solutions to a (3 + 1)-dimensional nonlinear evolution equation. Nonlinear Dyn 2017; 89: 2233–2240.

39.

Ruan

Zhang

, et al. Multi-exponential wave solutions to two extended Jimbo–Miwa equations and the resonance behavior. Appl Math Lett 2020; 99: 105976.

40.

Davidson

. Methods in nonlinear plasma theory. Academic Press, 1972, p. 15.

41.

Hasegawa

. Plasma instabilities and nonlinear effects. Springer, 1975, p. 190.

42.

Zhang

Tian

Lü

, et al. Soliton interaction in the coupled mixed derivative nonlinear Schrödinger equations. Phys Lett A 2009; 373: 4315.

43.

de Jager

. On the origin of the Korteweg-de Vries equation. arXiv:math/0602661; 2006.

44.

Wazwaz

. New (3+ 1)-dimensional nonlinear evolution equations with mKdV equation constituting its main part: multiple soliton solutions. Chaos Solitons Fractals 2015; 76: 93–97.

45.

Wazwaz

. Multiple soliton solutions and multiple singular soliton solutions for -dimensional shallow water wave equations. Phys Lett A 2009; 373: 2927–2930.

46.

D’Aguanno

Menyuk

. Nonlinear frequency combs generated by cnoidal waves in microring resonators. J Opt Soc Am B 2017; 34: 785–794.

47.

Ichikawa

. Topics on solitons in plasmas. Phys Scripta 1979; 20: 296–305.

48.

Gurevich

Stenflo

. Nonlinear defocusing of radio wave beams in the ionosphere. Phys Scripta 1988; 38: 855–856.

49.

Liu

Goree

Flanagan

, et al. Experimental observation of cnoidal waveform of nonlinear dust acoustic waves. Phys Plasmas 2018; 25: 113701.

50.

Kumar Samanta

Saha

Chatterjee

. Bifurcations of nonlinear ion acoustic travelling waves in the frame of a Zakharov-Kuznetsov equation in magnetized plasma with a kappa distributed electron. Phys Plasmas 2013; 20: 052111.

51.

Lashgarinezhad

Sari

Dorranian

. Effects of nonthermal electrons and positrons on the characteristics of ion-acoustic cnoidal wave in electron-positron-ion plasma. Chaos Solitons Fractals 2017; 103: 261–270.

52.

Schamel

. Analytic BGK modes and their modulational instability. J Plasma Phys 1975; 13: 139–145.

53.

Bhatnagar

YTN

Sharma

. Nonlinear ion-acoustic waves and solitons in warm-ion magnetized plasma. Plasma Phys Contr Fusion 1984; 26: 1303.

54.

Konno

Mitsuhashi

H Ichikawa

. Propagation of ion acoustic cnoidal wave. J Phys Soc Jpn 1979; 46: 1907–1914.

55.

Wang

Cheng

Tang

, et al. Oblique propagation of ion acoustic soliton-cnoidal waves in a magnetized electron-positron-ion plasma with superthermal electrons. Phys Plasmas 2014; 21: 032111.

56.

Jovanovic

Shukla

. Nonlinear model for coherent electric field structures in the magnetosphere. Phys Rev Lett 2000; 84: 4373–4376.

57.

El-Shamy

. Nonlinear ion-acoustic cnoidal waves in a dense relativistic degenerate magnetoplasma. Phys Rev E 2015; 91: 033105.

58.

Ur-Rehman

Mahmood

Kaladze

, et al. Fast magnetohydrodynamic cnoidal waves and solitons in electron-positron plasma. AIP Adv 2018; 8: 015311.

59.

Khalid

Ullah

Khan

, et al. Oblique propagation of nonlinear ion-acoustic cnoidal waves in magnetized electron–positron–ion plasmas with nonextensive electrons. Plasma Sci Technol 2021; 23: 035301.

60.

Alrowaily

Khalid

Kabir

, et al. Effect of ions anisotropy pressure on the ion-acoustic cnoidal waves in electron–positron–ion magnetoplasmas. AIP Adv 2024; 14: 095324.

61.

Khan

Adnan

Mahmood

, et al. Effect of pressure anisotropy on nonlinear periodic waves in a magnetized superthermal electron-positron-ion plasma. Braz J Phys 2019; 49: 379–390.

62.

Rahman

Khalid

Naeem

, et al. Periodic and localized structures in a degenerate Thomas-Fermi plasma. Phys Lett 2020; 384: 126257.

63.

Podlubny

. Fractional differential equations. Academic Press, 1999.

64.

Abu Arqub

Al-Smadi

Abu Gdairi

, et al. Implementation of reproducing kernel Hilbert algorithm for pointwise numerical solvability of fractional Burgers’ model in time-dependent variable domain regarding constraint boundary condition of Robin. Results Phys 2021; 24: 104210.

65.

Hilfer

. Applications of fractional calculus in physics. World Scientific Publishing, 2000.

66.

Kilbas

Srivastava

Trujillo

. Theory and applications of fractional differential equations. Elsevier Science B.V, 2006.

67.

Das

. Functional fractional calculus for system identification and controls. Springer, 2008.

68.

Kilbas

Srivastava

Trujillo

. Theory and applications of fractional differential equations. Elsevier, 2006.

69.

Yang

Ragulskis

Taha

. A new general fractional-order derivative with Rabotnov fractional-exponential kernel. Therm Sci 2019; 23(6 Part B): 3711–3718.

70.

Owolabi

Pindza

Karaagac

, et al. Laplace transform-homotopy perturbation method for fractional time diffusive predator–prey models in ecology. Partial Differ Equ Appl Math 2024; 9: 100607.

71.

Agarwal

Singh

. Modelling of transmission dynamics of Nipah virus (Niv): a fractional order approach. Phys A 2020; 547: 124243.

72.

Sharma

Singh

, et al. Modeling assumptions, optimal control strategies and mitigation through vaccination to Zika virus. Chaos Solitons Fractals 2021; 150: 111137.

73.

Tarasov

. Fractional dynamics: applications of fractional calculus to dynamics of particles, fields and media. Springer Science & Business Media, 2011.

74.

Khater

Alfalqi

. Nonlinearity and memory effects: the interplay between these two crucial factors in the Harry Dym model. Fractals 2024; 23: 32.

75.

Turski

Atamaniuk

Turska

. Application of fractional derivative operators to anomalous diffusion and propagation problems. arXiv preprint math-ph/0701068; 2007.

76.

Tegethoff

. Contribution to the development of numerical methods for the investigation of phase change processes of compressible non-ideal fluids. Doctoral dissertation, Ph.D thesis. University of Duisburg Essen, 2024.

77.

de Souza Matias

Lermen

Bissaro

, et al. Fractional calculus to control transport phenomena in food engineering: a systematic review of barriers and data agenda. J Food Process Eng 2022; 45: e14060.

78.

Ganjiani

. Solution of nonlinear fractional differential equations using homotopy analysis method. Appl Math Model 2010; 34: 1634–1641.

79.

Wang

. Homotopy perturbation method for fractional KdV equation. Appl Math Comput 2007; 190: 1795–1802.

80.

Farhood

Mohammed

. Homotopy perturbation method for solving time-fractional nonlinear variable-order delay partial differential equations. Partial Differ Equ Appl Math 2023; 7: 100513.

81.

Guo

. The adomian decomposition method for a type of fractional differential equations. J Appl Math Phys 2019; 07: 2459–2466.

82.

Mohammed

Machado

JAT

Guirao

JLG

, et al. Adomian decomposition and fractional power series solution of a class of nonlinear fractional differential equations. Mathematics 2021; 9(9): 1070.

83.

El-Wakil

Abulwafa

El-Shewy

, et al. Time-fractional KdV equation for plasma of two different temperature electrons and stationary ion. Phys Plasmas 2011; 18: 092116.

84.

El-Wakil

Abulwafa

Zahran

, et al. Time-fractional KdV equation: formulation and solution using variational methods. Nonlinear Dyn 2011; 65: 55–63.

85.

El-Wakil

Abulwafa

El-shewy

, et al. Time-fractional KdV equation for electron-acoustic waves in plasma of cold electron and two different temperature isothermal ions. Astrophys Space Sci 2011; 333: 269–276.

86.

Jajarmi

Baleanu

. A new iterative method for the numerical solution of high-order non-linear fractional boundary value problems. Front Physiol 2020; 8: 220.

87.

Bhalekar

Gejji

. Solving evolution equations using a new iterative method. Numer Methods Part Differ Equ 2010; 26: 906–916.

88.

El-Ajou

Arqub

Momani

. Approximate analytical solution of the nonlinear fractional KdV–Burgers equation: a new iterative algorithm. J Comput Phys 2015; 293: 81–95.

89.

Arqub

. Series solution of fuzzy differential equations under strongly generalized differentiability. J Adv Res Appl Math 2013; 5: 31–52.

90.

Arqub

El-Ajou

Bataineh

, et al. A representation of the exact solution of generalized lane-emden equations using a new analytical method. Abstr Appl Anal 2013; 2013: 378593.

91.

Almuqrin

Tiofack

CGL

Mohamadou

, et al. On the “Tantawy technique” and other methods for analyzing the family of fractional Burgers’ equations: applications to plasma physics. J Low Freq Noise Vib Act Control 2025; 44: 1323–1352.

92.

Almuqrin

Tiofack

CGL

Douanla

, et al. On the “Tantawy technique” and other methods for analyzing fractional Fokker Plank-type equations. J Low Freq Noise Vib Act Control 2025; 44: 1353–1373.

93.

El-Tantawy

Al-Johani

Almuqrin

, et al. Novel approximations to the fourth-order fractional Cahn–Hillard equations: application to the Tantawy technique and other two techniques with Yang transform. J Low Freq Noise Vib Act Control 2025; 44: 1374–1400.

94.

El-Tantawy

Bacha

SIH

Khalid

, et al. Application of the Tantawy technique for modeling fractional ion-acoustic waves in electronegative plasmas having Cairns distributed-electrons, part (I): fractional KdV solitary waves. Braz J Phys 2025; 55: 123.

95.

El-Tantawy

Alhejaili

Khalid

, et al. Application of the Tantawy technique for modeling fractional ion-acoustic waves in electronegative nonthermal plasmas, part (II): fractional modified KdV-Solitary waves. Braz J Phys 2025; 55: 176.

96.

El-Tantawy

Khan

, et al. A novel approximation to the fractional KdV equation using the Tantawy technique and modeling fractional electron-acoustic cnoidal waves in a nonthermal plasma. Braz J Phys 2025; 55: 163.

97.

El-Tantawy

Khalid

Bacha

SIH

, et al. On the Tantawy technique for modeling fractional ion-acoustic KdV solitary waves in a nonthermal plasma having electron beams. Braz J Phys 2025; 55: 191.

98.

Çulha Ünal

. Solutions of time fractional fKdV equation using the residual power series method. Cumhuriyet Sci J 2022; 43: 468–476.

99.

Kumar

. Residual power series method for fractional Burger types equations. Nonlinear Eng 2016; 5: 235–244.

100.

Ünal

. Approximate solutions of time fractional Kawahara equation by utilizing the residual power series method. Int J Appl Comput Math 2022; 8: 78.

101.

Hassan

Arafa

AAM

Rida

, et al. Least squares residual power series solutions for Kawahara and Rosenau-Hyman nonlinear wave interactions with applications in fluid dynamics. Sci Rep 2025; 15: 14929.

102.

Eriqat

Oqielat

El-Ajou

, et al. Approximate solutions of the fractional Zakharov-Kuznetsov equation using Laplace-residual power series method (2024). In: Burqan

Saadeh

Qazza

, et al. (eds). Mathematical Analysis and Numerical Methods. IACMC 2023. Springer Proceedings in Mathematics & Statistics 466. Springer, 2023.

103.

Sbenol

Alquran

Kasmaei

. On the comparison of perturbation-iteration algorithm and residual power series method to solve fractional Zakharov-Kuznetsov equation. Results Phys 2018; 9: 321–327.

104.

Behery

Haas

Kourakis

. Weakly nonlinear ion-acoustic excitations in a relativistic model for dense quantum plasma. Phys Rev E 2016; 93: 023206.

105.

Fromy

Deutsch

Maynard

. Thomas–Fermi-like and average atom models for dense and hot matter. Phys Plasmas 1996; 3: 714–730.

106.

Ferreirinho

Ruffini

Stella

. On the relativistic Thomas-Fermi model. Phys Lett B 1980; 91: 314–316.

107.

Chakrabarty

. Thomas-Fermi and Thomas-Fermi-Dirac models in two-dimension – effect of strong quantizing magnetic field. Eur Phys J D 2017; 71: 5.

108.

Stokes

. On the theory of oscillatory waves. Trans. Camb. Philos. Soc 1847; 8: 441.

109.

Alawad

Yousif

Arbab

. A new technique of laplace variational iteration method for solving space-time fractional telegraph equations. Int J Differ Equ 2013; 2013: 1–10.

110.

Jafari

Nazari

Baleanu

, et al. A new approach for solving a system of fractional partial differential equations. Comput Math Appl 2013; 66(5): 838–843.

111.

Alquran

Ali

Alsukhour

, et al. Promoted residual power series technique with Laplace transform to solve some time-fractional problems arising in physics. Results Phys 2020; 19: 103667.

112.

Silvotti

Fontaine

Pavlov

, et al. Search for p-mode oscillations in DA white dwarfs with VLT-ULTRACAM-I. Upper limits to the p-modes. Astron Astrophys 2010; 525: A64.

113.

Kuznetsova

Rafelski

. Electron-positron plasma drop formed by ultra-intense laser pulses. Phys Rev D 2012; 85: 085014.

114.

El-Tantawy

. Rogue waves in electronegative space plasmas: the link between the family of the KdV equations and the nonlinear Schrödinger equation. Astrophys Space Sci 2016; 361: 164.

115.

Albalawi

El-Tantawy

Alkhateeb

. The phase shift analysis of the colliding dissipative KdV solitons. J Ocean Eng Sci 2022; 7: 521–527.

116.

El-Tantawy

Wazwaz

A-M

. Anatomy of modified Korteweg–de Vries equation for studying the modulated envelope structures in non-Maxwellian dusty plasmas: freak waves and dark soliton collisions. Phys Plasmas 2018; 25: 092105.

117.

Saini

Chahal

Bains

, et al. Zakharov-Kuznetsov equation in a magnetized plasma with two temperature superthermal electrons. Phys Plasmas 2014; 21(2): 022114.

118.

Pakzad

. Kadomstev-Petviashvili (KP) equation in warm dusty plasma with variable dust charge, two-temperature ion and nonthermal electron. Pramana 2010; 74(4): 605–614.

119.

El-Tantawy

El-Sherif

Bakry

, et al. On the analytical approximations to the nonplanar damped Kawahara equation: cnoidal and solitary waves and their energy. Phys Fluids 2022; 34: 113103.

120.

El-Tantawy

Salas

Alyousef

, et al. Novel exact and approximate solutions to the family of the forced damped Kawahara equation and modeling strong nonlinear waves in a plasma. Chin J Phys 2022; 77: 2454–2471.

121.

Alharthi

Alharbey

El-Tantawy

. Novel analytical approximations to the nonplanar Kawahara equation and its plasma applications. Eur Phys J Plus 2022; 137: 1172.

122.

El-Tantawy

Wazwaz

Rahman

. Three-dimensional modulational instability of the electrostatic waves in e − p − i magnetoplasmas having superthermal particles. Phys Plasmas 2017; 24: 022126.

123.

El-Tantawy

Salas

Alharthi

. On the analytical and numerical solutions of the linear damped NLSE for modeling dissipative freak waves and breathers in nonlinear and dispersive mediums: an application to a pair-ion plasma. Front Physiol 2011; 9: 580224.

124.

El-Tantawy

Alharbey

Salas

. Novel approximate analytical and numerical cylindrical rogue wave and breathers solutions: an application to electronegative plasma. Chaos Solitons Fractals 2022; 155: 111776.

125.

El-Tantawy

Salas

Alyousef

, et al. Novel approximations to a nonplanar nonlinear Schrödinger equation and modeling nonplanar rogue waves/breathers in a complex plasma. Chaos Solitons Fractals 2022; 1635: 112612.