Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 186 (2024) 115318

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Chaos, Solitons and Fractals

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/chaos

Various traveling wave solutions for (2+1)-dimensional extended

Kadomtsev–Petviashvili equation using a newly created methodology
Fatma Nur Kaya Sağlam a , Sandeep Malik b ,∗
a Tekirdağ Namık Kemal University, Department of Mathematics Faculty of Arts and Science, 59030 Tekirdağ, Turkey
b
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Central University of Punjab, Bathinda 151401, Punjab, India

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: The Kadomtsev–Petviashvili (KP) equation is a crucial model in various physical systems, including hydrody-
Solitons namic wave disturbances, plasma physics, and nonlinear optics. Our study focuses on the analytical solutions of
Analytic solutions the (2+1)-dimensional extended KP equation, as these solutions can offer mathematical tools for understanding
Kadomtsev–Petviashvili equation
wave behavior and have practical applications. We found that incorporating two additional terms can restore
Kumar-Malik method
the integrability of the equation, leading to the generation of dark and bright soliton and traveling wave
solutions. In this work, we employ the Kumar-Malik method to find analytical solutions to the (2+1)-
dimensional extended KP equation. The Kumar-Malik method is an effective approach for solving nonlinear
partial differential equations (NLPDEs) based on a first-order differential equation. By applying this method,
we have derived various solutions to the (2+1)-dimensional extended KP equation, including Jacobi elliptic,
hyperbolic, trigonometric, and exponential function solutions. These solutions are then presented graphically to
illustrate the wave behavior under different parameters. Our results contribute to a deeper understanding of
the KP equation’s behavior under different physical conditions. Specifically, we have examined the effects
of parameters on the widths, velocities, and other essential properties of the waves. This information is
invaluable for studying hydrodynamic waves, plasma fluctuations, and optical solitons. In conclusion, this work
underscores the importance of obtaining analytical solutions to the (2+1)-dimensional extended KP equation
and presenting these solutions graphically. These solutions provide a valuable resource for understanding the
complex behavior of physical systems and can inspire future research.

1. Introduction

Nonlinear partial differential equations (NLPDEs) are powerful mathematical tools that are essential for modeling the complexity and uncertainty
of natural phenomena. In physics, engineering, biology, and other disciplines, many systems depend on nonlinear effects and variables that cannot
be expressed by linear differential equations [1–5]. NLPDEs are designed to handle this complexity and are widely used in many fields, such as
chaotic systems, wave propagation, fluid dynamics, reaction–diffusion equilibria, and many industrial and scientific fields, such as aeronautics,
astronautics, medicine, environmental sciences, and materials science and many others [6–8]. Since these equations are used to model complex
system’s behavior accurately, obtaining their exact solutions is essential. Therefore, developing and implementing adequate analytical and numerical
methods for NLPDEs is critical to the success of advanced system analysis, design, and optimization processes. Since NLPDEs often contain nonlinear
terms, they are challenging to solve using classical analytical methods. In some special cases and under certain conditions, we can obtain analytical
solutions for NLPDEs. Therefore, in recent years, researchers have developed many methods to solve them, such as inverse scattering method [9],
Lie symmetry approach [10], the Riccati equation method [11], the Bernoulli equation method [12–14], the Hirota bilinear method [15], the
(𝐺′ ∕𝐺)-expansion method [16], extended direct algebraic method [17], sine-Gordon method [18], and stability analysis [19], etc. In these methods,
first we reduce the given NLPDE, into ordinary differential equations. Then we assume a solution of this ODE in a finite series of some another
ODE of which we have already known the solutions. Then by using the balance principle, we derive some exact solutions for ordinary differential
equation and subsequently for NLPDE. For instant: Tang and Rezazadeh [20] derived some soliton solutions of nonlinear Schrödinger equation

∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: sndp796@gmail.com (S. Malik).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2024.115318
Received 20 May 2024; Received in revised form 9 July 2024; Accepted 20 July 2024
Available online 26 July 2024
0960-0779/© 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights are reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.
F.N.K. Sağlam and S. Malik Chaos, Solitons and Fractals: the interdisciplinary journal of Nonlinear Science, and Nonequilibrium and Complex Phenomena 186 (2024) 115318

involving dispersive and dispersion terms by logarithmic transformation-based approaches. By the same approach, Tang [21] solved the Kundu–
Mukherjee–Naskar equation and derive its optical solutions. Han and Jiang [22], explored some dynamical features and obtained multiple traveling
wave solutions for the fractional Bogoyavlenskii equation with planar dynamic systems method.
In this paper, we obtain exact solutions for the (2 + 1)-dimensional extended Kadomtsev–Petviashvili (KP) equation using the Kumar-Malik
method based on the first-order differential equation introduced by Kumar and Malik [23]. These solutions are in the form of Jacobian elliptic,
hyperbolic, trigonometric, and exponential solutions. In Section 2, the governing equation is given; in Section 3, the method is briefly explained;
and in Section 4, it is applied to the (2 + 1)-dimensional with a specific extension KP equation. Finally, Section 5 gives a conclusion for the solutions
obtained.

2. Governing model of (2 + 1)-dimensional extended Kadomtsev–Petviashvili (KP) equation

The KP equations have been widely used in the study of waves in dynamical systems [24], in the field of dusty plasma and in ocean
technology [25–29]. These equations have a variety of applications in solitary wave theories, for example, single solitons, multi solitons, periodic
solitons, bright solitons, kink wave solitons, and kink wave type solitons [30]. The KP equation is a powerful mathematical tool for understanding
and predicting the complexities of the behavior of the waves in these different areas. Due to the wide range of applications of the KP equation,
scientists interested in this equation have done a lot of work in studying derivatives and generalizations of the KP hierarchy to explain the
importance of new physical properties and their practical applications. The standard KP equation with 𝑢 = 𝑢(𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) [31] is as follows

(𝑢𝑥𝑥𝑥 + 𝑢𝑡 + 6𝑢𝑢𝑥 )𝑥 + 3𝜎 2 𝑢𝑦𝑦 = 0, (1)

where 𝑢𝑢𝑥 is quadritic nonlinearity and 𝑢𝑥𝑥𝑥 is weak dispersion term. This equation√ includes weakly dispersive waves. The KP-I equation, which is
used to replicate waves in nanostructures with high tension, is used for 𝜎 = 𝑖, 𝑖 = −1. The KP-II equation, which describes water waves with low
surface tension, is known to be valid for 𝜎 = 1 [32]. Recently, Karczewska and Rozmej developed the (2 + 1)-dimensional KdV equation and found
that when the base is flat, this equation can be transformed into the Kadomtsev–Petviashvili equation, which under certain conditions can be applied
to the ideal fluid model. In this case, the Kadomtsev–Petviashvili equation has a derivation from the fundamental laws of hydrodynamics [33].
This paper considers the (2 + 1)-dimensional extended KP equation defined by [34–36]

𝑎𝑢𝑡𝑡 + 𝑢𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥 + 𝑢𝑥𝑡 + 6𝑢2𝑥 + 6𝑢𝑢𝑥𝑥 + 𝜁 𝑢𝑦𝑡 − 𝑢𝑦𝑦 = 0, (2)

where 𝜁 ≠ 0, 𝑎, 𝜁 are real constants and 𝑢(𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) is a real differentiable function of the spatial variables 𝑥, 𝑦 and temporal variable 𝑡. By adding
new terms, more dispersion effects can be described than with a standard KP equation. For Eq. (2), Guo et al. [35] have obtained some high-
order breather and N-soliton solutions, while Manukure et al. [34] presented the lump solutions through Hirota bilinear method. Since the KP
equation has so many applications, researchers still work today to obtain new physical properties by studying different forms and generalizations
of the KP equation. Using the (𝐺′ ∕𝐺) expansion method, Alam and Tunç [37] obtained solitary wave solutions for the (2 + 1)-dimensional KP
equation. Chen et al. [38] used the Riccatti equation method, and Gai et al. [39] used Lie symmetry, the extended Tanh method, and the homotopy
perturbation method. Two new methods for obtaining multiple soliton solutions of the (2 + 1) dimensional KP equation were developed by Kuo
and Lee [40]. In addition, many other studies, such as Hirota bilinear form [41], inverse scattering transform [42], symmetry method [43], and
Painlevé analysis [44], are available in the literature for this type of equation.

3. General properties of the Kumar-Malik method

Let us consider a NLPDE of the form:

𝐹 (𝑢, 𝑢𝑥 , 𝑢𝑡 , 𝑢𝑥𝑥 , 𝑢𝑥𝑡 , 𝑢𝑡𝑡 , … ) = 0, (3)

where 𝑢 = 𝑢(𝑥, 𝑡) is a unknown function of 𝑥 and 𝑡 and including its partial derivatives.
Here are the key steps of this Kumar-Malik method:
Step 1: By applying the transformation

𝑢(𝑥, 𝑡) = 𝑈 (𝜉), 𝜉 = (𝑥 − 𝜈𝑡), (4)

where 𝜈 is the wave speed constant, into Eq. (3), converts it into an ordinary differential equation (ODE):

𝑃 (𝑈 , 𝑈 ′ , 𝑈 ′′ , 𝑈 ′′′ , … ) = 0. (5)

Step 2: Assume that Eq. (5) has a solution of the form

𝑈 (𝜉) = 𝐴0 + 𝐴1 𝛷(𝜉) + 𝐴2 𝛷(𝜉)2 + ⋯ + 𝐴𝑁 𝛷(𝜉)𝑁 , (6)

where the constants 𝐴𝑖 ’s (𝑖 = 1, 2, … , 𝑁) are yet to be determined and the function 𝛷(𝜉) satisfy the first-order ODE:
[ ′ ]2 [ ]
𝛷 (𝜉) = 𝛼1 𝛷(𝜉)4 + 𝛼2 𝛷(𝜉)3 + 𝛼3 𝛷(𝜉)2 + 𝛼4 𝛷(𝜉) + 𝛼5 , (7)

where 𝛼𝑖′ 𝑠, (𝑖 = 1, 2, … , 5) are arbitrary constants. The application of Eq. (7) is detailed in Section 3.1.
Step 3: The value of 𝑁 can be determined by applying the balance principle to Eq. (5).
Step 4: Inserting Eq. (6) and its derivatives according to Eq. (7) into Eq. (5) yields a polynomial in 𝛷(𝜉)𝛷′ (𝜉). By collecting all coefficients of
the different powers and setting them to zero, we obtain a system of equations involving the unknown parameters 𝜈, 𝐴𝑖 (𝑖 = 1, 2, … , 𝑁), and 𝛼𝑗
(𝑗 = 1, 2, … , 5). Solving this system provides the exact solutions to Eq. (5).
Step 5: : By using the solutions of Eq. (5) along with the transformation given in Eq. (4), we can derive numerous exact solutions for the NLPDE
(3).

2
F.N.K. Sağlam and S. Malik Chaos, Solitons and Fractals: the interdisciplinary journal of Nonlinear Science, and Nonequilibrium and Complex Phenomena 186 (2024) 115318

3.1. Solutions of Eq. (7)

In this subsection, we present

( the )exact solutions of Eq. (7) by examining the following four distinct cases.
𝛼2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22
Case 1: When 𝛼4 = , 𝛼5 = 0, then Eq. (7) have the following Jacobi elliptic solutions:
8𝛼12
( )
Sub-case 1.1: If 𝛼1 < 0, 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 > 0.
√ ( )
⎛ 2 ⎞
𝛼2 𝛼2 ⎜ −𝛼1 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼2 𝛼2 ⎟
𝛷01 (𝜉) = − ± cn ⎜ 𝜉, √( )⎟, (8)
4𝛼1 4𝛼1 ⎜ 2𝛼 1 2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼2 ⎟ 2
⎝ ⎠
√( )
⎛ ⎞
𝛼 𝛼 ⎜ 𝛼 2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 ⎟
𝛷02 (𝜉) = − 2 ± 2 dn ⎜ √ 2 𝜉, ⎟. (9)
4𝛼1 4𝛼1 ⎜ 4 −𝛼1 𝛼2 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
( 2
) ( 2
)
Sub-case 1.2: If 𝛼1 < 0, 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼2 < 0, 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼2 < 0.
√ ( ) √ ( ) √( )( )⎞
⎛
𝛼2 − 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 ⎜ 𝛼1 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼2
2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 ⎟
𝛷03 (𝜉) = − ± cn ⎜ 𝜉, ( ) ⎟, (10)
4𝛼1 4𝛼1 ⎜ 2𝛼1 2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
√ ( ) √ ( ) √ ( ) ( )⎞
⎛
𝛼2 − 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 ⎜ 𝛼1 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼2
2 2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 ⎟
𝛷04 (𝜉) = − ± dn ⎜ 𝜉, ( ) ⎟. (11)
4𝛼1 4𝛼1 ⎜ 4𝛼1 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
( 2
) ( 2
)
Sub-case 1.3: If 𝛼1 < 0, 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼2 > 0 and 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼2 < 0.
√ ( ) √ ( )
⎛ ⎞
𝛼2 − 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 ⎜ −𝛼1 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼2
2
𝛼2 ⎟
𝛷05 (𝜉) = − ± nc ⎜ 𝜉, √( ) ⎟, (12)
4𝛼1 4𝛼1 ⎜ 2𝛼 1 2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼2 ⎟
2
⎝ ⎠
√ ( ) √( )
⎛ ⎞
𝛼 − 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 ⎜ 𝛼 2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 ⎟
𝛷06 (𝜉) = − 2 ± nd ⎜ √ 2 𝜉, ⎟. (13)
4𝛼1 4𝛼1 ⎜ 4 −𝛼1 𝛼2 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
( ) ( ) ( )
Sub-case 1.4: If 𝛼1 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 > 0 and 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 > 0.
√ ( ) √( )( )⎞
⎛ 2
𝛼2 𝛼2 ⎜ 𝛼1 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 ⎟
𝛷07 (𝜉) = − ± nc ⎜ 𝜉, ( ) ⎟, (14)
4𝛼1 4𝛼1 ⎜ 2𝛼1 2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
√ ( ) √ ( ) ( )⎞
⎛ 2
𝛼2 𝛼2 ⎜ 𝛼1 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼2 2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 ⎟
𝛷08 (𝜉) = − ± nd ⎜ 𝜉, ( ) ⎟. (15)
4𝛼1 4𝛼1 ⎜ 4𝛼1 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
( )
Sub-case 1.5: If 𝛼1 > 0, 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 < 0.
√ ( )⎞
⎛
𝛼2 𝛼2 ⎜ 𝛼2 − 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 ⎟
𝛷09 (𝜉) = − ± ns ⎜ √ 𝜉, ⎟, (16)
4𝛼1 4𝛼1 ⎜ 4 𝛼1 𝛼2 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
√ ( ) √ ( )
2 ⎛ 2 ⎞
𝛼2 − 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼2 ⎜ −𝛼1 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼2 𝛼2 ⎟
𝛷10 (𝜉) = − ± ns ⎜ 𝜉, √ ( )⎟, (17)
4𝛼1 4𝛼1 ⎜ 4𝛼1
− 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼2 ⎟
2
⎝ ⎠
√ ( ) √ ( )⎞
2 ⎛ 2
𝛼 − 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼2 ⎜ 𝛼 − 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼2 ⎟
𝛷11 (𝜉) = − 2 ± sn ⎜ √2 𝜉, ⎟, (18)
4𝛼1 4𝛼1 ⎜ 4 𝛼1 𝛼2 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
√ ( )
⎛ 2 ⎞
𝛼 𝛼 ⎜ −𝛼1 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼2 𝛼2 ⎟
𝛷12 (𝜉) = − 2 ± 2 sn ⎜ 𝜉, √ ( )⎟. (19)
4𝛼1 4𝛼1 ⎜ 4𝛼 1 − 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼2 ⎟
2
⎝ ⎠
Here, the second argument of the Jacobi elliptic functions represents its elliptic modulus. For instant: in sn (𝜉, 𝑘), 𝑘 is the modulus of the elliptic
function. ( ) ( )2
𝛼2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22
Case 2: When 𝛼4 = , 𝛼5 = , then Eq. (7) have hyperbolic and trigonometric solutions:
8𝛼12 64𝛼13

3
F.N.K. Sağlam and S. Malik Chaos, Solitons and Fractals: the interdisciplinary journal of Nonlinear Science, and Nonequilibrium and Complex Phenomena 186 (2024) 115318

( )
Sub-case 2.1: If 𝛼1 > 0, 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 < 0.
√ ( ) √ ( )
⎛ ⎞
𝛼2 − 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎜ −𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼2
2
⎟
𝛷13 (𝜉) = − ± tanh ⎜ 𝜉⎟ , (20)
4𝛼1 4𝛼1 ⎜ 4𝛼1 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
√ ( ) √ ( )
⎛ ⎞
𝛼2 − 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎜ −𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼2
2
⎟
𝛷14 (𝜉) = − ± coth ⎜ 𝜉⎟ . (21)
4𝛼1 4𝛼1 ⎜ 4𝛼1 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
( )
Sub-case 2.2: If 𝛼1 > 0, 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 > 0.
√( ) √ ( ) ⎞
⎛
𝛼2 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 2
⎜ 𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼2 ⎟
𝛷15 (𝜉) = − ± tan ⎜ 𝜉⎟ , (22)
4𝛼1 4𝛼1 ⎜ 4𝛼1 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
√( ) √ ( ) ⎞
2 ⎛ 2
𝛼 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼2 ⎜ 𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼2 ⎟
𝛷16 (𝜉) = − 2 ± cot ⎜ 𝜉⎟ . (23)
4𝛼1 4𝛼1 ⎜ 4𝛼1 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
( ) ( )
𝛼2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 𝛼 2 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22
Case 3: When 𝛼4 = 𝛼5 = 2
, , then Eq. (7) have hyperbolic and trigonometric solutions:
8𝛼12 256𝛼13
( )
Sub-case 3.1: If 𝛼1 < 0, 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 < 0.
√ ( ) √ ( ) ⎞
⎛
𝛼2 −2 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎜ 2𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼2
2
⎟
𝛷17 (𝜉) = − ± sech ⎜ 𝜉⎟ . (24)
4𝛼1 4𝛼1 ⎜ 4𝛼 1 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
( )
Sub-case 3.2: If 𝛼1 > 0, 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 > 0.
√ ( ) √ ( ) ⎞
⎛
𝛼2 2 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎜ 2𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼2
2
⎟
𝛷18 (𝜉) = − ± csch ⎜ 𝜉⎟ . (25)
4𝛼1 4𝛼1 ⎜ 4𝛼 1 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
( 2
)
Sub-case 3.3: If 𝛼1 > 0, 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼2 < 0.
√ ( ) √ ( ) ⎞
⎛
𝛼2 −2 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎜ −2𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼2
2
⎟
𝛷19 (𝜉) = − ± sec ⎜ 𝜉⎟ , (26)
4𝛼1 4𝛼1 ⎜ 4𝛼 1 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
√ ( ) √ ( )
2 ⎛ 2 ⎞
𝛼 −2 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼2 ⎜ −2𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼2 ⎟
𝛷20 (𝜉) = − 2 ± csc ⎜ 𝜉⎟ . (27)
4𝛼1 4𝛼1 ⎜ 4𝛼1 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
Case 4: If we substitute 𝛼2 = 𝛼4 = 𝛼5 = 0, 𝛼3 > 0, then we get solution of Eq. (7) in the following form
4𝜌𝛼3
𝛷21 (𝜉) = ( √ √ ). (28)
4𝜌2 e 𝛼3 𝜉 − 𝛼1 𝛼3 e− 𝛼3 𝜉
2
By taking 𝛼1 = − 4𝜌
𝛼
, solution (28) reduces to
3
𝛼3 √
𝛷22 (𝜉) = sech(− 𝛼3 𝜉), (29)
2𝜌
4𝜌2
while by taking 𝛼1 = 𝛼3
, solution (28) reduces to
𝛼3 √
𝛷23 (𝜉) = csch(− 𝛼3 𝜉). (30)
2𝜌

4. Application of the method to (2 + 1)-dimensional extended KP equation

The governing equation (2) is reduced by using conversion

𝑢(𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = 𝑈 (𝜉), 𝜉 = 𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡, 𝜔 ≠ 0, 𝜎 ≠ 0, (31)

and integrating twice by taking integration constants equal to zero yields

𝑈 ′′ + 3𝑈 2 + (𝑎𝜎 2 + (−𝜁 𝜔 − 1)𝜎 − 𝜔2 )𝑈 = 0, (32)

where (′ ) represents the derivative with respect to 𝜉. Using the balance principle, we have 𝑁 = 2. Thus,

𝑈 (𝜉) = 𝐴0 + 𝐴1 𝛷(𝜉) + 𝐴2 𝛷(𝜉)2 , (33)

4
F.N.K. Sağlam and S. Malik Chaos, Solitons and Fractals: the interdisciplinary journal of Nonlinear Science, and Nonequilibrium and Complex Phenomena 186 (2024) 115318

is the solution of Eq. (32), where 𝐴0 , 𝐴1 , 𝐴2 are unknown parameters and 𝛷(𝜉) satisfies the auxiliary Eq. (7). After substituting the Eq. (33) into
the Eq. (32), the following algebraic system is obtained by applying the step-(4):
⎧𝛷(𝜉)4 ∶ 3𝐴22 + 6𝐴2 𝛼1 = 0,
⎪
⎪𝛷(𝜉)3 ∶ 6𝐴1 𝐴2 + 2𝐴1 𝛼1 + 5𝐴2 𝛼2 = 0,
⎪ 2
⎨𝛷(𝜉) ∶ 3𝐴1 𝛼2 + 8𝐴2 𝛼3 + 12𝐴0 𝐴2 + 6𝐴21 + 2(𝑎𝜎 2 + (−𝜁 𝜔 − 1)𝜎 − 𝜔2 )𝐴2 = 0, (34)
⎪ 1 2 2
⎪𝛷(𝜉) ∶ 𝐴1 𝛼3 + 3𝐴2 𝛼4 + 6𝐴0 𝐴1 + (𝑎𝜎 + (−𝜁 𝜔 − 1)𝜎 − 𝜔 )𝐴1 = 0,
⎪𝛷(𝜉)0 ∶ 𝐴1 𝛼4 + 4𝐴2 𝛼5 + 6𝐴20 + 2(𝑎𝜎 2 + (−𝜁 𝜔 − 1)𝜎 − 𝜔2 )𝐴0 = 0,
⎩
Now, using Eqs. (31) and (33) together with Eqs. (8)–(28), solutions to the (2 + 1) dimensional extended KP equation are obtained for each case
given in the previously section.
𝛼2 (4𝛼1 𝛼3 −𝛼22 )
Case 1: Under the parameters 𝛼4 = , 𝛼5 = 0, the solution of system (34) is
(8𝛼12 )
√
−16𝛼3 𝛼1 + 3𝛼22 − 256𝛼12 𝛼32 − 144𝛼1 𝛼22 𝛼3 + 21𝛼24
𝐴0 = , 𝐴1 = −𝛼2 , 𝐴2 = −2𝛼1 ,
24𝛼1
( √√ )
( ( ) ) (35)
𝜁 𝜔𝛼1 + 𝛼1 + 256𝛼12 𝛼32 − 144𝛼1 𝛼22 𝛼3 + 21𝛼24 𝑎𝛼1 + 1 + 𝜁 2 + 4𝑎 𝜔2 + 2𝜁 𝜔 𝛼12
𝜎= .
2𝑎𝛼1
By plugging these value into (33) and using (8)–(19), we get the following elliptic Jacobi solutions for the extended KP equation (2):
( )
Subcase 1.1: If 𝛼1 < 0, 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 > 0,
(√
1
𝑢01 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = − 256𝛼32 𝛼12 − 144𝛼3 𝛼22 𝛼1 + 21𝛼24 − 6𝛼22 + 16𝛼3 𝛼1
24𝛼1
√ ( ) 2
⎛ ⎞ ⎞ (36)
⎜ −𝛼1 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 𝛼 ⎟ ⎟
2
+3𝛼22 cn ⎜ (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡) , √( )⎟ ⎟,
⎜ 2𝛼 1 2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼2 ⎟ ⎟
2
⎝ ⎠ ⎠
The plots of the periodic wave solution of (36) are shown in Fig. 1.
(√
1
𝑢02 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = − 256𝛼32 𝛼12 − 144𝛼3 𝛼22 𝛼1 + 21𝛼24 − 6𝛼22 + 16𝛼3 𝛼1
24𝛼1
√( ) ⎞2 ⎞
⎛ (37)
( ) ⎜ 𝛼 2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 ⎟ ⎟
−12 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 dn ⎜ √ 2 (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡) , ⎟ ⎟,
⎜ 4 −𝛼1 𝛼2 ⎟ ⎟
⎝ ⎠ ⎠
( ) ( )
Subcase 1.2: If 𝛼1 < 0, 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 < 0, 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 < 0,
( √
1 ( )
𝑢03 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = − 256𝛼32 𝛼12 − 144𝛼3 𝛼22 𝛼1 + 21𝛼24 + 6𝛼22 − 16𝛼1 𝛼3 + 3 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22
24𝛼1
√ ( ) √( )( ) ⎞2 ⎞
⎛ 2 (38)
⎜ 𝛼1 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 ⎟ ⎟
× cn ⎜ (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡) , ( ) ⎟ ⎟,
⎜ 2𝛼1 2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 ⎟ ⎟
⎝ ⎠ ⎠
( √
1 ( )
𝑢04 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = − 256𝛼32 𝛼12 − 144𝛼3 𝛼22 𝛼1 + 21𝛼24 + 6𝛼22 − 16𝛼1 𝛼3 + 3 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22
24𝛼1
√ ( ) √( )( ) ⎞2 ⎞
⎛ 2 (39)
⎜ 𝛼1 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 ⎟ ⎟
× dn ⎜ (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡) , ( ) ⎟ ⎟,
⎜ 2𝛼1 2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 ⎟ ⎟
⎝ ⎠ ⎠
( ) ( )
Subcase 1.3: If 𝛼1 < 0, 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 > 0, 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 < 0,
( √
1 ( )
𝑢05 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = − 256𝛼12 𝛼32 − 144𝛼1 𝛼22 𝛼3 + 21𝛼24 − 16𝛼1 𝛼3 + 6𝛼22 + 3 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22
24𝛼1
√ ( ) 2
⎛ 2 ⎞ ⎞ (40)
⎜ −𝛼1 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼2 𝛼2 ⎟ ⎟
× cn ⎜ (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡) , √( )⎟ ⎟,
⎜ 2𝛼1
2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 ⎟ ⎟
⎝ ⎠ ⎠
( √
1 ( )
𝑢06 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = − 256𝛼12 𝛼32 − 144𝛼1 𝛼22 𝛼3 + 21𝛼24 − 16𝛼1 𝛼3 + 6𝛼22 + 3 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22
24𝛼1
√ ( ) 2
⎛ 2 ⎞ ⎞ (41)
⎜ −𝛼1 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼2 𝛼2 ⎟ ⎟
× nd ⎜ (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡) , √( )⎟ ⎟,
⎜ 2𝛼1
2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 ⎟ ⎟
⎝ ⎠ ⎠

5
F.N.K. Sağlam and S. Malik Chaos, Solitons and Fractals: the interdisciplinary journal of Nonlinear Science, and Nonequilibrium and Complex Phenomena 186 (2024) 115318

Fig. 1. 2D-3D plots of the elliptic Jacobi solutions of 𝑢01 as periodic wave form when 𝑎 = 0.3, 𝛼1 = −1.3, 𝛼2 = 1.1, 𝛼3 = −2.4, 𝜔 = −0.5, 𝑦 = 0, 𝜁 = 2.

( ) ( )( )
Subcase 1.4: If 𝛼1 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 > 0, 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 > 0,
( √
1
𝑢07 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = − 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 6𝛼22 + 256𝛼12 𝛼32 − 144𝛼1 𝛼22 𝛼3 + 21𝛼24 + 3𝛼22
24𝛼1
√ ( ) √( )( ) ⎞2 ⎞
⎛ 2 (42)
⎜ 𝛼1 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 ⎟ ⎟
× nc⎜ (𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡 + 𝑥) , ( ) ⎟ ⎟,
⎜ 2𝛼1 2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22 ⎟ ⎟
⎝ ⎠ ⎠
( √
1
𝑢08 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = − 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 6𝛼22 + 256𝛼12 𝛼32 − 144𝛼1 𝛼22 𝛼3 + 21𝛼24 + 3𝛼22
24𝛼1
√ ( ) √( )( ) 2
⎛ 2 2 16𝛼 𝛼 − 5𝛼 2 ⎞ ⎞ (43)
⎜ 𝛼 1 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼2
2 4𝛼 1 𝛼 3 − 𝛼2 1 3 2 ⎟ ⎟
× nd⎜ (𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡 + 𝑥) , ( ) ⎟ ⎟,
⎜ 4𝛼1 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 ⎟ ⎟
⎝ ⎠ ⎠

( )
Subcase 1.5: If 𝛼1 > 0, 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 < 0,

√ ( ) 2
⎛ ⎛ 2 ⎞
− 16𝛼 𝛼 − 5𝛼
1 ⎜ 2 ⎜ 2 𝛼 1 3 2 ⎟
3𝛼 ns √ (𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡 + 𝑥) ,
24𝛼1 ⎜⎜ 2 ⎜⎜ 4 𝛼1 ⎟
𝑢09 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = −
𝛼2 ⎟ (44)
⎝ ⎝ ⎠
√ )
2 2 2 2 4
+16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 6𝛼2 + 256𝛼1 𝛼3 − 144𝛼1 𝛼2 𝛼3 + 21𝛼2 ,

( √
1 ( )
𝑢10 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = −16𝛼1 𝛼3 + 6𝛼22 − 256𝛼12 𝛼32 − 144𝛼1 𝛼22 𝛼3 + 21𝛼24 + 3 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22
24𝛼1
√ ( ) 2
⎛ 2 ⎞ ⎞ (45)
⎜ −𝛼1 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼2 𝛼2 ⎟ ⎟
× ns⎜ (𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡 + 𝑥) , √ ( )⎟ ⎟,
⎜ 4𝛼1
− 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 ⎟ ⎟
⎝ ⎠ ⎠

√ ( ) ⎞2
⎛ ⎛
− 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 ⎟
1 ⎜ ( ) ⎜ 𝛼
𝑢11 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = ⎜ 3 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 sn⎜ √2 (𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡 + 𝑥) , ⎟
24𝛼1 ⎜ ⎜ 4 𝛼1 𝛼2 ⎟ (46)
⎝ ⎝ ⎠
√ )
2
−16𝛼1 𝛼3 + 6𝛼2 − 256𝛼1 𝛼3 − 144𝛼1 𝛼22 𝛼3 + 21𝛼24 ,
2 2

6
F.N.K. Sağlam and S. Malik Chaos, Solitons and Fractals: the interdisciplinary journal of Nonlinear Science, and Nonequilibrium and Complex Phenomena 186 (2024) 115318

Fig. 2. 2D-3D plots of the dark soliton solution (49) when 𝑎 = −0.6, 𝛼1 = −0.7, 𝛼2 = 1.5, 𝛼3 = −2.4, 𝜔 = 1.5, 𝑦 = 0, 𝜁 = 1.6.

( √
1
𝑢12 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = − 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 6𝛼22 + 256𝛼12 𝛼32 − 144𝛼1 𝛼22 𝛼3 + 21𝛼24
24𝛼1
√ ( ) 2
⎛ ⎞ ⎞ (47)
⎜ −𝛼1 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 ⎟ 𝛼2 ⎟
2
+3𝛼2 sn⎜ (𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡 + 𝑥) , √ ( ) ⎟ ⎟.
⎜ 4𝛼1
− 16𝛼1 𝛼3 − 5𝛼22 ⎟ ⎟
⎝ ⎠ ⎠
For solutions (36)–(47), the 𝜎 is given by (35).
( ) ( )2
𝛼2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 −𝛼22 4𝛼1 𝛼3 −𝛼22
Case 2: With the parameters 𝛼4 = , 𝛼5 = , the system (34) passes two sets of solutions as follow:
8𝛼12 64𝛼13

Set 1:
𝛼3
𝐴0 = − ,𝐴1 = −𝛼2 , 𝐴2 = −2𝛼1 ,
3
√
(48)
𝜁 𝜔𝛼1 + 𝜁 2 𝜔2 𝛼12 + 4𝑎𝜔2 𝛼12 + 2𝜁 𝜔𝛼12 − 8𝑎𝛼12 𝛼3 + 3𝑎𝛼1 𝛼22 + 𝛼12 + 𝛼1
𝜎= .
2𝑎𝛼1
By substituting these value into (33) and using (20)–(23), we get the following hyperbolic and trigonometric function solutions for the extended
KP equation (2):
( )
Sub-case 2.1: If 𝛼1 > 0 and 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 < 0,
√ ( ) 2
( )⎛ ⎛ ⎞ ⎞
8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎜ ⎜ −𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎟ ⎟
𝑢13 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = ⎜ 3 tanh ⎜ (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡)⎟ − 1⎟ , (49)
24𝛼1 ⎜ ⎜ 4𝛼1 ⎟ ⎟
⎝ ⎝ ⎠ ⎠
√ ( ) 2
( )⎛ ⎛ ⎞ ⎞
8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎜ ⎜ −𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎟ ⎟
𝑢14 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = ⎜ 3 coth ⎜ (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡)⎟ − 1⎟ , (50)
24𝛼1 ⎜ ⎜ 4𝛼1 ⎟ ⎟
⎝ ⎝ ⎠ ⎠
The profiles of the dark and singular soliton solutions (49) and (50) are illustrated in Figs. 2 and 3, respectively.
( )
Sub-case 2.2: If 𝛼1 > 0 and 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 > 0,
√ ( ) 2
( )⎛ ⎛ ⎞ ⎞
8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎜ ⎜ 𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎟ ⎟
𝑢15 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = − ⎜3 tan ⎜ (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡)⎟ + 1⎟ , (51)
24𝛼1 ⎜ ⎜ 4𝛼1 ⎟ ⎟
⎝ ⎝ ⎠ ⎠
√ ( ) 2
( )⎛ ⎛ ⎞ ⎞
8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎜ ⎜ 𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎟ ⎟
𝑢16 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = − ⎜3 cot ⎜ (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡)⎟ + 1⎟ . (52)
24𝛼1 ⎜ ⎜ 4𝛼1 ⎟ ⎟
⎝ ⎝ ⎠ ⎠

7
F.N.K. Sağlam and S. Malik Chaos, Solitons and Fractals: the interdisciplinary journal of Nonlinear Science, and Nonequilibrium and Complex Phenomena 186 (2024) 115318

Fig. 3. 3D-2D plots of the singular soliton solution (50) when 𝑎 = −0.6, 𝛼1 = −0.7, 𝛼2 = 1.5, 𝛼3 = −2.4, 𝜔 = 1.5, 𝑦 = 0, 𝜁 = 1.6.

For solutions (49)–(52), the value of 𝜎 is given by (48). The profiles of periodic solution (51) are illustrated in Fig. 4.

Set 2:
( )
4𝛼1 𝛼3 − 𝛼22
𝐴0 = − , 𝐴1 = −𝛼2 , 𝐴2 = −2𝛼1 ,
4𝛼1
√ (53)
𝜁 𝜔𝛼1 + 𝜁 2 𝜔2 𝛼12 + 4𝑎𝜔2 𝛼12 + 2𝜁 𝜔𝛼12 + 8𝑎𝛼12 𝛼3 − 3𝑎𝛼1 𝛼22 + 𝛼12 + 𝛼1
𝜎= .
2𝑎𝛼1

By substituting these values into (33) and using (20)–(23), we get the following hyperbolic and trigonometric function solutions for the extended
KP equation (2):

( )
Sub-case 2.1: If 𝛼1 > 0 and 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 < 0,

√ ( ) 2
( ) ⎛ ⎞
8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎜ −𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎟
𝑢17 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = − sech ⎜ (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡)⎟ , (54)
8𝛼1 ⎜ 4𝛼1 ⎟
⎝ ⎠

Fig. 5 plots the profiles of the bright soliton solution (54).

√ ( ) 2
( ) ⎛ ⎞
8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎜ −𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎟
𝑢18 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = csch ⎜ (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡)⎟ , (55)
8𝛼1 ⎜ 4𝛼1 ⎟
⎝ ⎠

( )
Sub-case 2.2: If 𝛼1 > 0 and 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 > 0,

√ ( ) 2
( ) ⎛ ⎞
8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎜ 𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎟
𝑢19 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = − sec ⎜ (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡)⎟ , (56)
8𝛼1 ⎜ 4𝛼1 ⎟
⎝ ⎠

√ ( ) 2
( ) ⎛ ⎞
8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎜ 𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎟
𝑢20 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = − csc ⎜ (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡)⎟ . (57)
8𝛼1 ⎜ 4𝛼1 ⎟
⎝ ⎠

8
F.N.K. Sağlam and S. Malik Chaos, Solitons and Fractals: the interdisciplinary journal of Nonlinear Science, and Nonequilibrium and Complex Phenomena 186 (2024) 115318

Fig. 4. 3D-2D plots of the singular soliton solution (51) when 𝑎 = −0.6, 𝛼1 = −0.7, 𝛼2 = 1.5, 𝛼3 = 2.4, 𝜔 = 1.5, 𝑦 = 0, 𝜁 = 1.6.

For solutions (54)–(57), the value of 𝜎 is given by (53).

( ) ( )
𝛼2 4𝛼1 𝛼3 −𝛼22 16𝛼1 𝛼3 −5𝛼22 𝛼2 2
Case 3: Assuming 𝛼4 = , 𝛼5 = , yields the following two sets as a solutions of system (34):
8𝛼12 256𝛼13

Set 1:

𝛼22
𝐴0 = − 𝐴1 = −𝛼2 , 𝐴2 = −2𝛼1 ,
,
8𝛼1
√ (58)
𝜁 𝜔𝛼1 + 𝜁 2 𝜔2 𝛼12 + 4𝑎𝜔2 𝛼12 + 2𝜁 𝜔𝛼12 − 16𝑎𝛼12 𝛼3 + 6𝑎𝛼1 𝛼22 + 𝛼12 + 𝛼1
𝜎= .
2𝑎𝛼1

By substituting these values into (33) and using (24)–(27), gives the hyperbolic and trigonometric function solutions for the extended KP equation
(2) as:
( )
Sub-case 3.1: If 𝛼1 < 0 and 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 < 0,

√ ( ) 2
( ) ⎛ ⎞
8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎜ 2𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎟
𝑢21 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = sech ⎜ (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡)⎟ . (59)
4𝛼1 ⎜ 4𝛼1 ⎟
⎝ ⎠

The 3D and 2D plots of 𝑢21 describing the bright solution (59) are shown in Fig. 6.
( )
Sub-case 3.2: If 𝛼1 > 0 and 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 > 0,

√ ( ) 2
( ) ⎛ ⎞
8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎜ 2𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎟
𝑢22 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = − csch ⎜ (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡)⎟ . (60)
4𝛼1 ⎜ 4𝛼1 ⎟
⎝ ⎠

( )
Sub-case 3.3: If 𝛼1 > 0 and 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 < 0,

√ ( ) 2
( ) ⎛ ⎞
8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎜ −2𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎟
𝑢23 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = sec ⎜ (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡)⎟ , (61)
4𝛼1 ⎜ 4𝛼1 ⎟
⎝ ⎠

√ ( ) 2
( ) ⎛ ⎞
8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎜ −2𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎟
𝑢24 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = csc ⎜ (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡)⎟ . (62)
4𝛼1 ⎜ 4𝛼1 ⎟
⎝ ⎠

9
F.N.K. Sağlam and S. Malik Chaos, Solitons and Fractals: the interdisciplinary journal of Nonlinear Science, and Nonequilibrium and Complex Phenomena 186 (2024) 115318

Fig. 5. The bright soliton solution of 𝑢17 from Eq. (54) when 𝑎 = 0.2, 𝛼1 = 2, 𝛼2 = 1.1, 𝛼3 = −3, 𝜔 = −0.7, 𝑦 = 0, 𝜁 = 10.

For solutions (59)–(62), the value of 𝜎 is given by (58).

Set 2:
32𝛼1 𝛼3 − 9𝛼22
𝐴0 = − , 𝐴1 = −𝛼2 , 𝐴2 = −2𝛼1 ,
24𝛼1
√ (63)
𝜁 𝜔𝛼1 + 𝜁 2 𝜔2 𝛼12 + 4𝑎𝜔2 𝛼12 + 2𝜁 𝜔𝛼12 + 16𝑎𝛼12 𝛼3 − 6𝑎𝛼1 𝛼22 + 𝛼12 + 𝛼1
𝜎= .
2𝑎𝛼1
By using these values into (33) and using (24)–(27), gives the hyperbolic and trigonometric function solutions for the extended KP equation (2) as:
( )
Sub-case 3.1: If 𝛼1 < 0 and 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 < 0,
√ ( ) 2
( )⎛ ⎛ ⎞ ⎞
8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎜ ⎜ 2𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎟ ⎟
𝑢25 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = ⎜ 3 sech ⎜ (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡)⎟ − 2⎟ . (64)
12𝛼1 ⎜ ⎜ 4𝛼1 ⎟ ⎟
⎝ ⎝ ⎠ ⎠

( )
Sub-case 3.2: If 𝛼1 > 0 and 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 > 0,
√ ( ) 2
( )⎛ ⎛ ⎞ ⎞
8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎜ ⎜ 2𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎟ ⎟
𝑢26 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = − ⎜3 csch ⎜ (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡)⎟ + 2⎟ . (65)
12𝛼1 ⎜ ⎜ 4𝛼1 ⎟ ⎟
⎝ ⎝ ⎠ ⎠

( )
Sub-case 3.3: If 𝛼1 > 0 and 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 < 0,
√ ( ) 2
( )⎛ ⎛ ⎞ ⎞
8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎜ ⎜ −2𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎟ ⎟
𝑢27 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = ⎜ 3 sec ⎜ (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡)⎟ − 2⎟ , (66)
12𝛼1 ⎜ ⎜ 4𝛼1 ⎟ ⎟
⎝ ⎝ ⎠ ⎠
√ ( ) 2
( )⎛ ⎛ ⎞ ⎞
8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎜ ⎜ −2𝛼1 8𝛼1 𝛼3 − 3𝛼22 ⎟ ⎟
𝑢28 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = ⎜ 3 csc ⎜ (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡)⎟ − 2⎟ . (67)
12𝛼1 ⎜ ⎜ 4𝛼1 ⎟ ⎟
⎝ ⎝ ⎠ ⎠
For solutions (64)–(67), the value of 𝜎 is presented by (63).

Case 4: By setting 𝛼2 = 0, 𝛼4 = 0, 𝛼5 = 0, we obtain the following two sets by solving the system (34):
Set 1:
√
𝜁𝜔 + 1 + 𝜁 2 𝜔2 + 4𝑎𝜔2 + 2𝜁 𝜔 − 16𝑎𝛼3 + 1 (68)
𝐴0 = 0, 𝐴1 = 0, 𝐴2 = −2𝛼1 , 𝜎= .
2𝑎

10
F.N.K. Sağlam and S. Malik Chaos, Solitons and Fractals: the interdisciplinary journal of Nonlinear Science, and Nonequilibrium and Complex Phenomena 186 (2024) 115318

Fig. 6. Bright soliton solution (59) with 𝑎 = 0.3, 𝛼1 = −1.1, 𝛼2 = 2.1, 𝛼3 = 0.4, 𝜔 = −0.4, 𝑦 = 0, 𝜁 = 10.

Fig. 7. Graph for 𝑢29 with 3D plotting or 2D plotting given by Eq. (69) with 𝑎 = 2, 𝛼1 = −0.5, 𝛼2 = 0, 𝛼3 = 0.7, 𝜔 = −2, 𝑦 = 0.1, 𝜁 = 0.3, 𝜌 = 0.7.

Hence, we get solution of governing equation (2) as follows:

32𝛼1 𝜌2 𝛼32
𝑢29 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = − ( √ √ )2 , (69)
4𝜌2 𝑒𝛼3 (𝑥+𝜔𝑦−𝜎𝑡)
− 𝛼1 𝛼3 𝑒− 𝛼3 (𝑥+𝜔𝑦−𝜎𝑡)

2
By taking 𝛼1 = − 4𝜌
𝛼
into (69), we get the following solution for governing equation (2):
3

√
𝑢30 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = 2𝛼3 sech( 𝛼3 (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡))2 , (70)
2
while taking 𝛼1 = − 4𝜌
𝛼
into (69), we have solution for governing equation (2) as follow:
3

√
𝑢31 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = 2𝛼3 csch( 𝛼3 (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡))2 . (71)

For solutions (69)–(71), 𝜎 is given by (68). The 3D and 2D representations of 𝑢29 that describe the bright solution (69) are shown in Fig. 7.

11
F.N.K. Sağlam and S. Malik Chaos, Solitons and Fractals: the interdisciplinary journal of Nonlinear Science, and Nonequilibrium and Complex Phenomena 186 (2024) 115318

Set 2:
√
4𝛼3 𝜁 𝜔 + 1 + 𝜁 2 𝜔2 + 4𝑎𝜔2 + 2𝜁 𝜔 + 16𝑎𝛼3 + 1 (72)
𝐴0 = − , 𝐴1 = 0, 𝐴2 = −2𝛼1 , 𝜎 = .
3 2𝑎
From the above set, we obtain the following solution for governing equation (2):
4𝛼3 32𝛼1 𝜌2 𝛼32
𝑢30 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = − −( √ √ )2 . (73)
3
4𝜌2 𝑒 𝛼3 (𝑥+𝜔𝑦−𝜎𝑡)
− 𝛼1 𝛼3 𝑒− 𝛼3 (𝑥+𝜔𝑦−𝜎𝑡)

2
By taking 𝛼1 = − 4𝜌
𝛼
into (73), we get the following solution for governing equation (2):
3

4𝛼3 √
𝑢33 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = − + 2𝛼3 sech( 𝛼3 (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡))2 , (74)
3
2
while taking 𝛼1 = − 4𝜌
𝛼
into (73), we have solution for governing equation (2) as follow:
3

4𝛼3 √
+ 2𝛼3 csch( 𝛼3 (𝑥 + 𝜔𝑦 − 𝜎𝑡))2 .
𝑢34 (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑡) = − (75)
3
For solutions (73)–(75), 𝜎 is given by (72).

5. Graphical representation and its behavior

This work aims to present the unique graphical patterns of the (2 + 1)-dimensional extended KP equation utilizing the powerful modern
mathematical calculation tool Maple. Our presentation includes various visual representations, including 3D and 2D graphs, covering a wide range
of parameters for the variables of interest. The main goal is to comprehensively study the graphical behavior of the equation and to illuminate
the details that arise in different parameter spaces. In this context, elliptic Jacobi functions, trigonometric functions and hyperbolic functions are
taken into account for the solution of the equation.
In this section, we have provided the behaviors and clarifications of some obtained solutions. These solutions are commonly classified as “dark”,
“bright”, “periodic”, and “singular” solutions. Jacobian solutions are a special class of solutions to certain mathematical equations and play an
important role in physics. Dark solutions refer to low-energy or low-amplitude states, typically arising when energy is insufficient or as a result
of interactions. These solutions are used in physics to analyze weak signals or low-energy states. Dark solitons, for instance, are characterized by
a localized drop in intensity or amplitude within a continuous wave background. They are particularly relevant in the study of nonlinear optics
and Bose–Einstein condensates, where they provide insight into the behavior of low-energy excitations. Bright solutions represent high-energy or
high-amplitude states. These solutions are often used to analyze strong signals or high-energy states. Bright solitons are characterized by a localized
increase in intensity or amplitude. In nonlinear optics, bright solitons can maintain their shape while traveling through a medium, making them
useful for understanding the propagation of intense light pulses. Similarly, in plasma physics, bright solitons can help explain the dynamics of
high-energy particle interactions. Periodic solutions refer to patterns or oscillations that repeat at regular intervals. These solutions are important
in studying phenomena that exhibit cyclical behavior. In hydrodynamics, periodic wave solutions can describe the regular rise and fall of ocean
waves. Singular solutions are those that contain singularities, points where the solution becomes infinite or undefined. Although some of these
solutions are unphysical, meaning they do not correspond to real-world phenomena, they can still provide valuable insights. Singular solutions can
highlight the limitations of certain mathematical models and indicate areas where additional physical effects or constraints need to be considered.
Whether analyzing weak signals, strong pulses, regular patterns, or the limits of mathematical models, these solutions offer powerful tools for
exploring the intricate dynamics of nonlinear phenomena.
Fig. 1 displays the graphs of the periodic wave solution of (36) for 𝑎 = 0.3, 𝛼1 = −1.3, 𝛼2 = 1.1, 𝛼3 = −2.4, 𝜔 = −0.5, 𝑦 = 0, 𝜁 = 2.
Fig. 2 illustrates the dark soliton solution profiles of (49) using the parameters 𝑎 = −0.6, 𝛼1 = −0.7, 𝛼2 = 1.5, 𝛼3 = −2.4, 𝜔 = 1.5, 𝑦 = 0, 𝜁 = 1.6.
Fig. 3 illustrates the singular soliton solution profiles of (50) using the parameters 𝑎 = −0.6, 𝛼1 = −0.7, 𝛼2 = 1.5, 𝛼3 = −2.4, 𝜔 = 1.5, 𝑦 = 0, 𝜁 = 1.6.
Fig. 4 illustrates the periodic wave behavior of (51) using the parameters 𝑎 = −0.6, 𝛼1 = −0.7, 𝛼2 = 1.5, 𝛼3 = 2.4, 𝜔 = 1.5, 𝑦 = 0, 𝜁 = 1.6.
Fig. 5 displays the bright soliton graph for the solution of (54) with 𝑎 = 0.2, 𝛼1 = 2, 𝛼2 = 1.1, 𝛼3 = −3, 𝜔 = −0.7, 𝑦 = 0, 𝜁 = 10.
The graphs of 𝑢21 defining the bright solution (59) are shown in Fig. 6 for 𝑎 = 0.3, 𝛼1 = −1.1, 𝛼2 = 2.1, 𝛼3 = 0.4, 𝜔 = −0.4, 𝑦 = 0, 𝜁 = 10.
Fig. 7 shows the bright solution of 𝑢29 giving (69) for 𝑎 = 2, 𝛼1 = −0.5, 𝛼2 = 0, 𝛼3 = 0.7, 𝜔 = −2, 𝑦 = 0.1, 𝜁 = 0.3, 𝜌 = 0.7.
Similarly, by assigning appropriate values to the parameters, other solutions can also be represented. However, we omit them here as they
exhibit the same behavior as those listed above.

6. Conclusion

In this paper, a Kumar-Malik method [23] is used to find exact solutions of the (2 + 1)-dimensional extended KP equation. Many exact solutions
have been obtained based on this method. If the appropriate parameter values are not selected in the solutions obtained, a physical solution cannot
be obtained because infinity will occur. By selecting different parameters, some 2D and 3D plots are presented to give a clearer view of the solution.
The graphs presented support the main results of the study and provide a detailed analysis. In addition, the effect of changing the sigma parameter,
which represents the soliton velocity value, on the solutions is clearly seen. The Kumar-Malik method was found to be effective in obtaining exact
solutions in various studies.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Fatma Nur Kaya Sağlam: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Validation, Software, Methodology, Formal analysis, Con-
ceptualization. Sandeep Malik: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Validation, Software, Methodology, Formal analysis,
Conceptualization.

12
F.N.K. Sağlam and S. Malik Chaos, Solitons and Fractals: the interdisciplinary journal of Nonlinear Science, and Nonequilibrium and Complex Phenomena 186 (2024) 115318

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the
work reported in this paper.

Data availability

No data was used for the research described in the article.

Acknowledgments

The authors are very grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their constructive and useful suggestions. They have helped to improve this paper.

Funding

No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript.

References

[1] Younis M, Yousaf U, Ahmed N, Rizvi STR, Iqbal MS, Baleanu D. Investigation of electromagnetic wave structures for a coupled model in anti-ferromagnetic spin ladder
medium. Front Phys 2020;8(372).
[2] Marin M, Ellahi R, Vlase S, Bhatti MM. On the decay of exponential type for the solutions in a dipolar elastic body. J Taibah Univ Sci 2020;14(1):534–40.
[3] Ali S, Younis M. Rogue wave solutions and modulation instability with variable coefficient and harmonic potential. Front Phys 2020;7(255).
[4] Seadawy AR, El-Rashidy K. Dispersive solitary wave solutions of Kadomtsev–Petviashvili and modified Kadomtsev–Petviashvili dynamical equations in unmagnetized dust
plasma. Results Phys 2018;8:1216–22.
[5] Chen SJ, Ma WX, Lü X. Bäcklund transformation, exact solutions and interaction behaviour of the (3+1)-dimensional Hirota-Satsuma-Ito-like equation. Commun Nonlinear
Sci Numer Simul 2020;83:105135.
[6] Hirota R. The direct method in soliton theory (no. 155). Cambridge University Press; 2004.
[7] Tang Y. Multi solitons, bifurcations, high order breathers and hybrid breather solitons for the extended modified Vakhnenko-Parkes equation. Results Phys 2023;107105.
[8] Han T, Jiang Y, Lyu J. Chaotic behavior and optical soliton for the concatenated model arising in optical communication. Results Phys 2024;107467.
[9] Ablowitz MJ, Clarkson PA. Solitons, nonlinear evolution equations and inverse scattering. Vol. 149, Cambridge University Press; 1991.
[10] Mandal UK, Malik S, Kumar S, Zhang Y, Das A. Integrability aspects, rational type solutions and invariant solutions of an extended (3+1)-dimensional B-type
Kadomtsev–Petviashvili equation. Chaos Solitons Fractals 2024;181:114689.
[11] Sirendaoreji. Unified riccati equation expansion method and its application to two new classes of Benjamin–Bona–Mahony equations. Nonlinear Dynam 2017;89:333–44.
[12] Mirzazadeh M, Eslami M, Zerrad E, Mahmood MF, Biswas A, Belic M. Optical solitons in nonlinear directional couplers by sine–cosine function method and Bernoulli’s
equation approach. Nonlinear Dynam 2015;81:1933–49.
[13] Pinar Izgi Z, Sahoo S, Rezazadeh H, Hosseinzadeh MA, Salahshour S. Studies on electromagnetic waves for ferromagnetic materials. Opt Quantum Electron 2024;56(6):1–9.
[14] Sağlam FNK, Ahmad S. Stability analysis and retrieval of new solitary waves of (2+ 1)-and (3+ 1)-dimensional potential Kadomtsev–Petviashvili and B-type
Kadomtsev–Petviashvili equations using auxiliary equation technique. Modern Phys Lett B 2024;2450413.
[15] Satsuma J. Hirota bilinear method for nonlinear evolution equations. In: Direct and inverse methods in nonlinear evolution equations: lectures given at the CIME summer
school held in cetraro, Italy. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2003, p. 171–222.
[16] Ebadi G, Yildirim A, Biswas A. Chiral solitons with bohm potential using (𝐺′ ∕𝐺) method and exp-function method. Rom Rep Phys 2012;64(2):357–66.
[17] Rezazadeh H. New solitons solutions of the complex Ginzburg–Landau equation with Kerr law nonlinearity. Optik 2018;167:218–27.
[18] Akbar MA, Akinyemi L, Yao SW, Jhangeer A, Rezazadeh H, Khater MM, Ahmad H, Inc M. Soliton solutions to the Boussinesq equation through sine-Gordon method and
Kudryashov method. Results Phys 2021;25:104228.
[19] Hussain E, Li Z, Shah SAA, Az-Zo’bi EA, Hussien M. Dynamics study of stability analysis, sensitivity insights and precise soliton solutions of the nonlinear (STO)-Burger
equation. Opt Quantum Electron 2023;55(14):1274.
[20] Tang Y, Rezazadeh H. On logarithmic transformation-based approaches for retrieving traveling wave solutions in nonlinear optics. Results Phys 2023;51:106672.
[21] Tang Y. Applying a transformation-based method to extract optical traveling waves from the Kundu–Mukherjee–Naskar equation. Results Phys 2023;53:106943.
[22] Han T, Jiang Y. Bifurcation, chaotic pattern and traveling wave solutions for the fractional Bogoyavlenskii equation with multiplicative noise. Phys Scr 2024;99(3):035207.
[23] Kumar S, Malik S. A new analytic approach and its application to new generalized Korteweg–de Vries and modified Korteweg–de Vries equations. Math Methods Appl Sci
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mma.10150.
[24] Groves MD, Sun SM. Fully localised solitary-wave solutions of the three-dimensional gravity-capillary water-wave problem. Arch Ration Mech Anal 2008;188:1–91.
[25] Seadawy AR, El-Rashidy K. Dispersive solitary wave solutions of Kadomtsev–Petviashvili and modified Kadomtsev–Petviashvili dynamical equations in unmagnetized dust
plasma. Results Phys 2018;8:1216–22.
[26] Kumar SU, Saha A, Chatterjee P. Bifurcations of dust ion acoustic travelling waves in a magnetized dusty plasma with a q-nonextensive electron velocity distribution. Phys
Plasmas 2013;20(2).
[27] Saha A, Pal N, Chatterjee P. Bifurcation and quasiperiodic behaviors of ion acoustic waves in magnetoplasmas with nonthermal electrons featuring tsallis distribution. Braz
J Phys 2015;45:325–33.
[28] Malik S, Almusawa H, Kumar S, Wazwaz AM, Osman MS. A (2+1)-dimensional Kadomtsev–Petviashvili equation with competing dispersion effect: Painlevé analysis, dynamical
behavior and invariant solutions. Results Phys 2021;23:104043.
[29] Gwinn AW. Two-dimensional long waves in turbulent flow over a sloping bottom. J Fluid Mech 1997;341:195–223.
[30] Mohanty SK, Kravchenko OV, Deka MK, Dev AN, Churikov DV. The exact solutions of the (2+1)-dimensional Kadomtsev–Petviashvili equation with variable coefficients by
extended generalized (𝐺′ ∕𝐺)-expansion method. J King Saud Univ - Sci 2023;35(1):102358.
[31] Lou SY, Hu XB. Infinitely many lax pairs and symmetry constraints of the KP equation. J Math Phys 1997;38(12):6401–27.
[32] Ahmad J, Akram S, Ali A. Analysis of new soliton type solutions to generalized extended (2+ 1)-dimensional Kadomtsev–Petviashvili equation via two techniques. Ain Shams
Eng J 2024;15(1):102302.
[33] Karczewska A, Rozmej P. (2+1)-dimensional KdV, fifth-order KdV, and gardner equations derived from the ideal fluid model. Soliton, cnoidal and superposition solutions.
Commun Nonlinear Sci Num Siumul 2023;125:107317.
[34] Manukure S, Zhou Y, Ma WX. Lump solutions to a (2+1)-dimensional extended KP equation. Comput Math Appl 2018;75(7):2414–9.
[35] Guo J, He J, Li M, Mihalache D. Exact solutions with elastic interactions for the (2+1)-dimensional extended Kadomtsev–Petviashvili equation. Nonlinear Dynam
2020;101(4):2413–22.
[36] Elbrolosy ME, Elmandouh AA, Elmandouh A. Construction of new traveling wave solutions for the (2+ 1) dimensional extended Kadomtsev–Petviashvili equation. J Appl
Anal Comput 2022;12:533–50.
[37] Alam MN, Tunc C. New solitary wave structures to the (2+1)-dimensional KD and KP equations with spatio-temporal dispersion. J King Saud Univ - Sci 2020;32(8):3400–9.
[38] Chen Y, Yan Z, Zhang H. New explicit solitary wave solutions for (2+1)-dimensional Boussinesq equation and (3+1)-dimensional KP equation. Phys Lett A
2003;307(2–3):107–13.

13
F.N.K. Sağlam and S. Malik Chaos, Solitons and Fractals: the interdisciplinary journal of Nonlinear Science, and Nonequilibrium and Complex Phenomena 186 (2024) 115318

[39] Gai L, Bilige S, Jie Y. The exact solutions and approximate analytic solutions of the (2+1)-dimensional KP equation based on symmetry method. Vol. 5, SpringerPlus; 2016,
p. 1267.
[40] Kuo CK, Lee SY. Novel methods for finding general forms of new multi-soliton solutions to (1+1)-dimensional KdV equation and (2+1)-dimensional Kadomtsev–Petviashvili
(KP) equation. Waves Random Complex Media 2019;29(3):569–79.
[41] Ma WX. Lump solutions to the Kadomtsev–Petviashvili equation. Phys Lett A 2015;379(36):1975–8.
[42] Ablowitz MJ, Yaacov DB, Fokas AS. On the inverse scattering transform for the Kadomtsev–Petviashvili equation. Stud Appl Math 1983;69(2):135–43.
[43] Lou SY. Symmetries of the Kadomtsev–Petviashvili equation. J Phys A: Math Gen 1993;26(17):4387.
[44] Ma YL, Wazwaz AM, Li BQ. A new (3+1)-dimensional Kadomtsev–Petviashvili equation and its integrability, multiple-solitons, breathers and lump waves. Math Comput
Simulation 2021;187:505–19.

14