Skip to main content

Gregus type fixed points for a tangential multi-valued mappings satisfying contractive conditions of integral type

Abstract

In this article, we define a tangential property which can be used not only for single-valued mappings but also for multi-valued mappings, and used it in the prove for the existence of a common fixed point theorems of Gregus type for four mappings satisfying a strict general contractive condition of integral type in metric spaces. Our theorems generalize and unify main results of Pathak and Shahzad (Bull. Belg. Math. Soc. Simon Stevin 16, 277-288, 2009) and several known fixed point results.

Introduction

The Banach Contraction Mapping Principle, appeared in explicit form in Banach's thesis in 1922 [1] (see also [2]) where it was used to establish the existence of a solution for an integral equation. Since then, because of its simplicity and usefulness, it has become a very popular tool in solving existence problems in many branches of mathematical analysis. Banach contraction principle has been extended in many different directions, see [35], etc. In 1969, the Banach's Contraction Mapping Principle extended nicely to set-valued or multivalued mappings, a fact first noticed by Nadler [6]. Afterward, the study of fixed points for multi-valued contractions using the Hausdorff metric was initiated by Markin [7]. Later, an interesting and rich fixed point theory for such mappings was developed (see [[813]]). The theory of multi-valued mappings has applications in optimization problems, control theory, differential equations, and economics.

In 1982, Sessa [14] introduced the notion of weakly commuting mappings. Jungck [15] defined the notion of compatible mappings to generalize the concept of weak commutativity and showed that weakly commuting mappings are compatible but the converse is not true [15]. In recent years, a number of fixed point theorems have been obtained by various authors utilizing this notion. Jungck further weakens the notion of compatibility by introducing the notion of weak compatibility and in [16] Jungck and Rhoades further extended weak compatibility to the setting of single-valued and multivalued maps. In 2002, Aamri and Moutawakil [17] defined property (E.A). This concept was frequently used to prove existence theorems in common fixed point theory. Three years later, Liu et al.[18] introduced common property (E.A). The class of (E.A) maps contains the class of noncompatible maps. Recently, Pathak and Shahzad [19] introduced the new concept of weak tangent point and tangential property for single-valued mappings and established common fixed point theorems.

The aim of this article is to develop a tangential property, which can be used only single-valued mappings, based on the work of Pathak and Shahzad [19]. We define a tangential property, which can be used for both single-valued mappings and multi-valued mappings, and prove common fixed point theorems of Gregus type for four mappings satisfying a strict general contractive condition of integral type.

Preliminaries

Throughout this study (X, d) denotes a metric space. We denote by CB(X), the class of all nonempty bounded closed subsets of X. The Hausdorff metric induced by d on CB(X) is given by

for every A, B CB(X), where d(a, B) = d(B, a) = inf{d(a, b): b B} is the distance from a to B X.

Definition 2.1. Let f : X X and T : XCB(X).

  1. 1.

    A point x X is a fixed point of f (respecively T ) iff fx = x (respecively x Tx).

The set of all fixed points of f (respecively T) is denoted by F (f) (respecively F (T)).

  1. 2.

    A point x X is a coincidence point of f and T iff fx Tx.

The set of all coincidence points of f and T is denoted by C(f, T).

  1. 3.

    A point x X is a common fixed point of f and T iff x = fx Tx.

The set of all common fixed points of f and T is denoted by F (f, T).

Definition 2.2. Let f : X X and g : XX. The pair (f, g) is said to be

  1. (i)

    commuting if fgx = gfx for all x X;

  2. (ii)

    weakly commuting [14] if d(fgx, gfx) ≤ d(fx, gx) for all x X;

  3. (iii)

    compatible [15] if limn→∞d(fgx n , gfx n ) = 0 whenever {x n } is a sequence in X such that

for some z X;

  1. (iv)

    weakly compatible [20] fgx = gfx for all x C(f, g).

Definition 2.3. [16] The mappings f : X X and A : X CB(X) are said to be weakly compatible fAx = Afx for all x C(f, A).

Definition 2.4. [17] Let f : X X and g : XX. The pair (f, g) satisfies property (E.A) if there exist the sequence {x n } in X such that

(1)

See example of property (E.A) in Kamran [21, 22] and Sintunavarat and Kumam [23].

Definition 2.5. [18] Let f, g, A, B : XX. The pair (f, g) and (A, B) satisfy a common property (E.A) if there exist sequences {x n } and {y n } in X such that

(2)

Remark 2.6. If A = f, B = g and {x n } = {y n } in (2), then we get the definition of property (E.A).

Definition 2.7. [19] Let f, g : XX. A point z X is said to be a weak tangent point to (f, g) if there exists sequences {x n } and {y n } in X such that

(3)

Remark 2.8. If {x n } = {y n } in (3), we get the definition of property (E.A).

Definition 2.9. [19] Let f, g, A, B : XX. The pair (f, g) is called tangential w.r.t. the pair (A, B) if there exists sequences {x n } and {y n } in X such that

(4)

Main results

We first introduce the definition of tangential property for two single-valued and two multi-valued mappings.

Definition 3.1. Let f, g : XX and A, B : XCB(X). The pair (f, g) is called tangential w.r.t. the pair (A, B) if there exists two sequences {x n } and {y n } in X such that

(5)

for some z X, then

(6)

Throughout this section, + denotes the set of nonnegative real numbers.

Example 3.2. Let (+, d) be a metric space with usual metric d, f, g : ++ and A, B : +CB(+) mappings defined by

Since there exists two sequences and such that

and

Thus the pair (f, g) is tangential w.r.t the pair (A, B).

Definition 3.3. Let f : XX and A : XCB(X). The mapping f is called tangential w.r.t. the mapping A if there exist two sequences {x n } and {y n } in X such that

(7)

for some z X, then

(8)

Example 3.4. Let (+, d) be a metric space with usual metric d, f : ++ and A : +CB(+) mappings defined by

Since there exists two sequences and such that

and

Therefore the mapping f is tangential w.r.t the mapping A.

Define Ω = {w : (+)4+| w is continuous and w(0, x, 0, x) = w(x, 0, x, 0) = x}. There are examples of w Ω:

  1. (1)

    w1(x1, x2, x3, x4) = max{x1, x2, x3, x4};

  2. (2)

    ;

  3. (3)

    .

Next, we prove our main results.

Theorem 3.5. Let f, g : XX and A, B : XCB(X) satisfy

(9)

for all x, y X for which the righthand side of (9) is positive, where 0 < a < 1, α ≥ 0, p ≥ 1, w Ω and ψ : ++ is a Lebesgue integrable mapping which is a summable nonnegative and such that

(10)

for each ε > 0. If the following conditions (a)-(d) holds:

  1. (a)

    there exists a point z f(X) ∩ g(X) which is a weak tangent point to (f, g),

  2. (b)

    (f, g) is tangential w.r.t (A, B),

  3. (c)

    ffa = fa, ggb = gb and Afa = Bgb for a C(f, A) and b C(g, B),

  4. (d)

    the pairs (f, A) and (g, B) are weakly compatible.

Then f, g, A, and B have a common fixed point in X.

Proof. It follows from z f(X) ∩ g(X) that z = fu = gv for some u, v X. Using that a point z is a weak tangent point to (f, g), there exist two sequences {x n } and {y n } in X such that

(11)

Since the pair (f, g) is tangential w.r.t the pair (A, B) and (11), we get

(12)

for some D CB(X). Using the fact z = fu = gv, (11) and (12), we get

(13)

We show that z Bv. If not, then condition (9) implies

(14)

Letting n → ∞, we get

(15)

Since

(16)

which is a contradiction. Therefore z Bv. Again, we claim that z Au. If not, then condition (9) implies

(17)

Letting n → ∞, we get

(18)

Since

(19)

which is a contradiction. Thus z Au.

Now we conclude z = gv Bv and z = fu Au. It follows from v C(g, B), u C(f, A) that ggv = gv, ffu = fu and Afu = Bgv. Hence gz = z, fz = z and Az = Bz.

Since the pair (g, B) is weakly compatible, gBv = Bgv. Thus gz gBv = Bgv = Bz. Similarly, we can prove that fz Az. Consequently, z = fz = gz Az = Bz. Therefore, the maps f, g, A and B have a common fixed point.    □

If we setting w in Theorem 3.5 by then we get the following corollary:

Corollary 3.6. Let f, g : XX and A, B : XCB(X) satisfy

(20)

for all x, y X for which the righthand side of (20) is positive, where 0 < a < 1, α ≥ 0, p ≥ 1 and ψ : ++ is a Lebesgue integrable mapping which is a summable nonnegative and such that

(21)

for each ε > 0. If the following conditions (a)-(d) holds:

  1. (a)

    there exists a point z f(X) ∩ g(X) which is a weak tangent point to (f, g),

  2. (b)

    (f, g) is tangential w.r.t (A, B),

  3. (c)

    f fa = fa, ggb = gb and Afa = Bgb for a C(f, A) and b C(g, B),

  4. (d)

    the pairs (f, A) and (g, B) are weakly compatible.

Then f, g, A, and B have a common fixed point in X.

If we setting w in Theorem 3.5 by and p = 1, then we get the following corollary:

Corollary 3.7. Let f, g : XX and A, B : XCB(X) satisfy

(22)

for all x, y X for which the righthand side of (22) is positive, where 0 < a < 1, α ≥ 0 and ψ : ++ is a Lebesgue integrable mapping which is a summable nonnegative and such that

(23)

for each ε > 0. If the following conditions (a)-(d) holds:

  1. (a)

    there exists a point z f(X) ∩ g(X) which is a weak tangent point to (f, g),

  2. (b)

    (f, g) is tangential w.r.t (A, B),

  3. (c)

    f fa = fa, ggb = gb and Afa = Bgb for a C(f, A) and b C(g, B),

  4. (d)

    the pairs (f, A) and (g, B) are weakly compatible.

Then f, g, A, and B have a common fixed point in X.

If α = 0 in Corollary 3.7, we get the following corollary:

Corollary 3.8. Let f, g : XX and A, B : XCB(X) satisfy

(24)

for all x, y X for which the righthand side of (24) is positive, where 0 < a < 1 and ψ : ++ is a Lebesgue integrable mapping which is a summable nonnegative and such that

(25)

for each ε > 0. If the following conditions (a)-(d) holds:

  1. (a)

    there exists a point z f(X) ∩ g(X) which is a weak tangent point to (f, g),

  2. (b)

    (f, g) is tangential w.r.t (A, B),

  3. (c)

    f fa = fa, ggb = gb and Afa = Bgb for a C(f, A) and b C(g, B),

  4. (d)

    the pairs (f, A) and (g, B) are weakly compatible.

Then f, g, A, and B have a common fixed point in X.

If α = 0, g = f and B = A in Corollary 3.7, we get the following corollary:

Corollary 3.9. Let f : XX and A : XCB(X) satisfy

(26)

for all x, y X for which the righthand side of (26) is positive, where 0 < a < 1 and ψ : ++ is a Lebesgue integrable mapping which is a summable nonnegative and such that

(27)

for each ε > 0. If the following conditions (a)-(d) holds:

  1. (a)

    there exists a sequence {x n } in X such that limn→∞fx n X,

  2. (b)

    f is tangential w.r.t A,

  3. (c)

    f fa = fa for a C(f, A),

  4. (d)

    the pair (f, A) is weakly compatible.

Then f and A have a common fixed point in X.

If ψ (t) = 1 in Corollary 3.7, we get the following corollary:

Corollary 3.10. Let f, g : XX and A, B : XCB(X) satisfy

(28)

for all x, y X for which the righthand side of (28) is positive, where 0 < a < 1 and α ≥ 0. If the following conditions (a)-(d) holds:

  1. (a)

    there exists a point z f(X) ∩ g(X) which is a weak tangent point to (f, g),

  2. (b)

    (f, g) is tangential w.r.t (A, B),

  3. (c)

    f fa = fa, ggb = gb and Afa = Bgb for a C(f, A) and b C(g, B),

  4. (d)

    the pairs (f, A) and (g, B) are weakly compatible.

Then f, g, A, and B have a common fixed point in X.

If ψ(t) = 1 and α = 0 in Corollary 3.7, we get the following corollary:

Corollary 3.11. Let f, g : XX and A, B : XCB(X) satisfy

(29)

for all x, y X for which the righthand side of (29) is positive, where 0 < a < 1. If the following conditions (a)-(d) holds:

  1. (a)

    there exists a point z f(X) ∩ g(X) which is a weak tangent point to (f, g),

  2. (b)

    (f, g) is tangential w.r.t (A, B),

  3. (c)

    f fa = fa, ggb = gb and Afa = Bgb for a C(f, A) and b C(g, B),

  4. (d)

    the pairs (f, A) and (g, B) are weakly compatible.

Then f, g, A, and B have a common fixed point in X.

If ψ(t) = 1, α = 0, g = f, and B = A in Corollary 3.7, we get the following corollary:

Corollary 3.12. Let f : XX and A : XCB(X) satisfy

(30)

for all x, y X for which the righthand side of (30) is positive, where 0 < a < 1. If the following conditions (a)-(d) holds:

  1. (a)

    there exists a sequence {x n } in X such that limn→∞fx n X,

  2. (b)

    f is tangential w.r.t A,

  3. (c)

    f fa = fa for a C(f, A),

  4. (d)

    the pair (f, A) is weakly compatible.

Then f and A have a common fixed point in X.

Define Λ = {λ : (+)5+| λ is continuous and λ(0, x, 0, x, 0) = λ(x, 0, x, 0, 0) = kx where 0 < k < 1}.

Theorem 3.13. Let f, g : XX and A, B : XCB(X) satisfy

(31)

for all x, y X for which the righthand side of (31) is positive, where α ≥ 0, p ≥ 1, λ Λ and ψ : ++ is a Lebesgue integrable mapping which is a summable nonnegative and such that

(32)

for each ε > 0. If the following conditions (a)-(d) holds:

  1. (a)

    there exists a point z f(X) ∩ g(X) which is a weak tangent point to (f, g),

  2. (b)

    (f, g) is tangential w.r.t (A, B),

  3. (c)

    f fa = fa, ggb = gb and Afa = Bgb for a C(f, A) and b C(g, B),

  4. (d)

    the pairs (f, A) and (g, B) are weakly compatible.

Then f, g, A, and B have a common fixed point in X.

Proof. Since z f(X) ∩ g(X), z is a weak tangent point to (f, g) and the pair (f, g) is tangential w.r.t the pair (A, B). It follows similarly Theorem 3.5 that there exist sequences {x n } and {y n } in X such that

(33)

for some D CB(X). We claim that z Bv. If not, then condition (31) implies

(34)

Letting n → ∞, we get

(35)

Since

(36)

which is a contradiction. Therefore z Bv. Again, we claim that z Au. If not, then condition (31) implies

(37)

Letting n →∞, we get

(38)

Since

(39)

which is a contradiction. Thus z Au.

Now we conclude z = gv Bv and z = fu Au. It follows from Theorem 3.5 that z = fz = gz Az = Bz. Therefore the maps f, g, A and B have a common fixed point.    □

References

  1. Banach S: Sur les opérations dans les ensembles abstraits et leurs applications aux équations intégrales. Fund Mathb 1922, 3: 133–181.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Caccioppoli R: Un teorema generale sull esistenza di elementi uniti in una trasformazione funzionale. Rend Accad Lincei 1930, 11: 794–799. (Italian)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Branciari A: A fixed point theorem for mappings satisfying a general contractive condition of integral type. Int J Math Math Sci 2002, 29: 531–536. 10.1155/S0161171202007524

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Shahzad N: Invariant approximation and R-subweakly commuting maps. J Math Anal Appl 2001, 257: 39–45. 10.1006/jmaa.2000.7274

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Vijayaraju P, Rhoades BE, Mohanraj R: A fixed point theorem for a pair of maps satisfying a general contractive condition of integral type. Int J Math Math Sci 2005, 15: 2359–2364.

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Nadler SB Jr: Multivalued contraction mappings. Pac J Math 1969, 30: 475–488.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Markin JT: Continuous dependence of fixed point sets. Proc Am Math Soc 1973, 38: 545–547. 10.1090/S0002-9939-1973-0313897-4

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Aubin JP, Siegel J: Fixed point and stationary points of dissipative multi-valued maps. Proc Am Math Soc 1980, 78: 391–3980. 10.1090/S0002-9939-1980-0553382-1

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Covitz H, Nadler SB Jr: Multi-valued contraction mappings in generalized metric space. Israel J Math 1970, 8: 5–11. 10.1007/BF02771543

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Sintunavart W, Kumam P: Weak condition for generalized multi-valued ( f , α , β )-weak contraction mappings. Appl Math Lett 2011, 24: 460–465. 10.1016/j.aml.2010.10.042

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Sintunavart W, Kumam P: Coincidence and common fixed points for generalized contraction multi-valued mappings. J Comput Anal Appl 2011,13(2):362–367.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Sintunavarat W, Kumam P, Patthanangkoor P: Common random fixed points for multivalued random operators without S - and T -weakly commuting random operators. Random Oper Stoc Eqs 2009, 17: 381–388. 10.1515/ROSE.2009.022

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Wang T: Fixed point theorems and fixed point stability for multivalued mappings on metric spaces. J Nanjing Univ Math Baq 1989, 6: 16–23.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Sessa S: On a weak commutativity condition of mappings in fixed point considerations. Publ Inst Math 1982,32(46):149–153.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Jungck G: Compatible mappings and common fixed points. Int J Math Math Sci 1986, 9: 771–779. 10.1155/S0161171286000935

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Jungck G, Rhoades BE: Fixed points for set valued functions without continuity. Indian J Pure Appl Math 1998, 29: 227–238.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Aamri M, ElMoutawakil D: Some new common fixed point theorems under strict contractive conditions. J Math Anal Appl 2002, 270: 181–188. 10.1016/S0022-247X(02)00059-8

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Liu Y, Wu J, Li Z: Common fixed points of single-valued and multi-valued maps. Int J Math Math Sci 2005, 19: 3045–3055.

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Pathak HK, Shahzad N: Gregus type fixed point results for tangential mappings satisfying contractive conditions of integral type. Bull Belg Math Soc Simon Stevin 2009, 16: 277–288.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Jungck G: Common fixed points for non-continuous non-self mappings on a non-numeric spaces. Far East J Math Sci 1996,4(2):199–212.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Kamran T: Coincidence and fixed points for hybrid strict contractions. J Math Anal Appl 2004, 299: 235–241. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2004.06.047

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kamran T: Multivalued f -weakly Picard mappings. Nonlinear Anal 2007, 67: 2289–2296. 10.1016/j.na.2006.09.010

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Sintunavart W, Kumam P: Coincidence and common fixed points for hybrid strict contractions without the weakly commuting condition. Appl Math Lett 2009, 22: 1877–1881. 10.1016/j.aml.2009.07.015

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The first author would like to thank the Research Professional Development Project Under the Science Achievement Scholarship of Thailand (SAST) and the Faculty of Science, KMUTT for financial support during the preparation of this manuscript for Ph.D. Program at KMUTT. Moreover, we also would like to thank the National Research University Project of Thailand's Office of the Higher Education Commission for financial support (under the CSEC project no.54000267). Finally, the authors would like to thank Professor Alberto Cabada for your help and encouragement. Special thanks are also due to the reviewer, who have made a number of valuable comments and suggestions which have improved the manuscript greatly.

The second author is partially supported by the Commission on Higher Education and the Thailand Research Fund under Grant MRG5380044.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Poom Kumam.

Additional information

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors' contributions

WS designed and performed all the steps of proof in this research and also wrote the paper. PK participated in the design of the study and suggest many good ideas that made this paper possible and helped to draft the first manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sintunavarat, W., Kumam, P. Gregus type fixed points for a tangential multi-valued mappings satisfying contractive conditions of integral type. J Inequal Appl 2011, 3 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2011-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2011-3

Keywords

  • Common fixed point
  • Weakly compatible mappings
  • Property (E.A)
  • Common property (E.A)
  • Weak tangle point
  • Pair-wise tangential property