Open Access

α-admissible mappings and related fixed point theorems

  • Nawab Hussain1,
  • Erdal Karapınar2,
  • Peyman Salimi3 and
  • Farhana Akbar4Email author
Journal of Inequalities and Applications20132013:114

https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2013-114

Received: 25 November 2012

Accepted: 26 February 2013

Published: 19 March 2013

Abstract

In this paper, we prove the existence and uniqueness of a fixed point for certain α-admissible contraction mappings. Our results generalize and extend some well-known results on the topic in the literature. We consider some examples to illustrate the usability of our results.

MSC:46N40, 47H10, 54H25, 46T99.

Keywords

α-admissible mappingscontractive mappingsfixed point

1 Introduction

Fixed point theory is one of the outstanding subfields of nonlinear functional analysis. It has been used in the research areas of mathematics and nonlinear sciences (see, e.g., [18]). In 1922 Banach [10] proved that in a complete metric space every contraction has a unique fixed point. In the proof of this theorem, he not only showed the existence and uniqueness of a fixed point, but also provided a method (generally, iterative) for constructing the fixed point. This property of the Banach theorem differentiates it from other fixed point theorems. Therefore, the Banach fixed point theorem has attracted great attention of authors since then (see, e.g., [1148]). On the other hand, the fixed point technique suggested by Banach attracted many researchers to solve various concrete problems.

2 Main results

In an attempt to generalize the Banach contraction principle, many researchers extended the following result in certain directions.

Theorem 1 (See, e.g., [9, 37, 38])

Let ( X , d ) be a complete metric space and f : X X be a mapping. Assume that there exists a function β : [ 0 , ) [ 0 , 1 ] such that, for any bounded sequence { t n } of positive reals, β ( t n ) 1 implies t n 0 and
d ( f x , f y ) β ( d ( x , y ) ) d ( x , y )

for all x , y X . Then f has a unique fixed point.

Definition 2 (See, e.g., [40]) Let f : X X and α : X × X R + . We say that f is an α-admissible mapping if
α ( x , y ) 1 implies α ( f x , f y ) 1 , x , y X .
Example 3 (cf. [40]) Let X = R . Define f : X X and α : X × X [ 0 , ) by
f x = { ln | x | if  x 0 , 3 otherwise and α ( x , y ) = { 3 if  x y , 0 otherwise .

Then f is α-admissible.

Our first result is the following.

Theorem 4 Let ( X , d ) be a complete metric space and f : X X be an α-admissible mapping. Assume that there exists a function β : [ 0 , ) [ 0 , 1 ] such that, for any bounded sequence { t n } of positive reals, β ( t n ) 1 implies t n 0 and
( d ( f x , f y ) + ) α ( x , f x ) α ( y , f y ) β ( d ( x , y ) ) d ( x , y ) +
(2.1)
for all x , y X where 1 . Suppose that either
  1. (a)

    f is continuous, or

     
  2. (b)

    if { x n } is a sequence in X such that x n x , α ( x n , x n + 1 ) 1 for all n, then α ( x , f x ) 1 .

     

If there exists x 0 X such that α ( x 0 , f x 0 ) 1 , then f has a fixed point.

Proof Let x 0 X such that α ( x 0 , f x 0 ) 1 . Define a sequence { x n } in X by x n = f n x 0 = f x n 1 for all n N . If x n + 1 = x n for some n N , then x = x n is a fixed point for f and the result is proved. Hence, we suppose that x n + 1 x n for all n N . Since f is an α-admissible mapping and α ( x 0 , f x 0 ) 1 , we deduce that α ( x 1 , x 2 ) = α ( f x 0 , f 2 x 0 ) 1 . By continuing this process, we get α ( x n , f x n ) 1 for all n N { 0 } . By the inequality (2.1), we have
d ( f x n 1 , f x n ) + ( d ( f x n 1 , f x n ) + ) α ( x n 1 , f x n 1 ) α ( x n , f x n ) β ( d ( x n 1 , x n ) ) d ( x n 1 , x n ) + ,
then
d ( x n , x n + 1 ) β ( d ( x n 1 , x n ) ) d ( x n 1 , x n ) ,
(2.2)
which implies d ( x n , x n + 1 ) d ( x n 1 , x n ) . It follows that the sequence { d ( x n , x n + 1 ) } is decreasing. Thus, there exists d R + such that lim n d ( x n , x n + 1 ) = d . We will prove that d = 0 . From (2.2) we have
d ( x n , x n + 1 ) d ( x n 1 , x n ) β ( d ( x n 1 , x n ) ) 1 ,
which implies lim n β ( d ( x n 1 , x n ) ) = 1 . Using the property of the function β, we conclude that
lim n d ( x n , x n + 1 ) = 0 .
(2.3)
Next, we will prove that { x n } is a Cauchy sequence. Suppose, to the contrary, that { x n } is not a Cauchy sequence. Then there is ε > 0 and sequences { m ( k ) } and { n ( k ) } such that, for all positive integers k, we have
n ( k ) > m ( k ) > k , d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) ε and d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) 1 ) < ε .
By the triangle inequality, we derive that
ε d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) 1 ) + d ( x m ( k ) 1 , x m ( k ) ) < ε + d ( x m ( k ) 1 , x m ( k ) ) ,
k N
. Taking the limit as k + in the above inequality and using (2.3), we get
lim k + d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) = ε .
(2.4)
Again, by the triangle inequality, we find that
d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) d ( x m ( k ) , x m ( k ) + 1 ) + d ( x m ( k ) + 1 , x n ( k ) + 1 ) + d ( x n ( k ) + 1 , x n ( k ) )
and
d ( x n ( k ) + 1 , x m ( k ) + 1 ) d ( x m ( k ) , x m ( k ) + 1 ) + d ( x m ( k ) , x n ( k ) ) + d ( x n ( k ) + 1 , x n ( k ) ) .
Taking the limit as k + , together with (2.3) and (2.4), we deduce that
lim k + d ( x n ( k ) + 1 , x m ( k ) + 1 ) = ε .
(2.5)
From (2.1), (2.4) and (2.5) we have
d ( x n ( k ) + 1 , x m ( k ) + 1 ) + ( d ( x n ( k ) + 1 , x m ( k ) + 1 ) + ) α ( x n ( k ) , f x n ( k ) ) α ( x m ( k ) , f x m ( k ) ) = ( d ( f x n ( k ) , f x m ( k ) ) + ) α ( x n ( k ) , f x n ( k ) ) α ( x m ( k ) , f x m ( k ) ) β ( d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) ) d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) + .
Hence,
d ( x n ( k ) + 1 , x m ( k ) + 1 ) d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) β ( d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) ) 1 .
Letting k in the above inequality, we get
lim n β ( d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) ) = 1 .
That is, lim k d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) = 0 < ε , which is a contradiction. Hence { x n } is a Cauchy sequence. Since X is complete, then there is z X such that x n z . First, we suppose that f is continuous. Since f is continuous, then we have
f z = lim n f x n = lim n x n + 1 = z .
So, z is a fixed point of f. Next, we suppose that (b) holds. Then α ( z , f z ) 1 . Now, by (2.1) we have
d ( f z , x n + 1 ) + ( d ( f z , f x n ) + ) α ( z , f z ) α ( x n , f x n ) β ( d ( z , x n ) ) d ( z , x n ) + .
That is, d ( f z , x n + 1 ) β ( d ( z , x n ) ) d ( z , x n ) , and so we get
d ( f z , z ) d ( f z , x n + 1 ) + d ( z , x n + 1 ) β ( d ( z , x n ) ) d ( z , x n ) + d ( z , x n + 1 ) .

Letting n in the above inequality, we get d ( f z , z ) = 0 , that is, z = f z . □

Example 5 Let X = [ 0 , ) be endowed with the usual metric d ( x , y ) = | x y | for all x , y X and f : X X be defined by
f x = { x x + 1 if  x [ 0 , 1 ] , 2 x if  x ( 1 , ) .
Define also α : X × X [ 0 , + ) and β : [ 0 , ) [ 0 , 1 ] by
α ( x , y ) = { 1 if  x , y [ 0 , 1 ] , 0 otherwise and β ( t ) = 1 1 + t .

We prove that Theorem 4 can be applied to f, but Theorem 1 cannot be applied to f.

Clearly, ( X , d ) is a complete metric space. We show that f is an α-admissible mapping. Let x , y X , if α ( x , y ) 1 , then x , y [ 0 , 1 ] . On the other hand, for all x [ 0 , 1 ] , we have f x 1 . It follows that α ( f x , f y ) 1 . Thus the assertion holds. In reason of the above arguments, α ( 0 , f 0 ) 1 .

Now, if { x n } is a sequence in X such that α ( x n , x n + 1 ) 1 for all n N { 0 } and x n x as n + , then { x n } [ 0 , 1 ] and hence x [ 0 , 1 ] . This implies that α ( x , f x ) 1 .

Let x , y [ 0 , 1 ] and y x . We get
( d ( f x , f y ) + ) α ( x , f x ) α ( y , f y ) = f y f x + = y y + 1 x x + 1 + = y x ( 1 + x ) ( 1 + y ) + y x 1 + y x + = β ( d ( x , y ) ) d ( x , y ) + .
Otherwise, α ( x , f x ) α ( y , f y ) = 0 and so
( d ( f x , f y ) + ) α ( x , f x ) α ( y , f y ) = 1 β ( d ( x , y ) ) d ( x , y ) + ,
then the condition of Theorem 4 holds. Hence, f has a fixed point. Let x = 2 and y = 3 . Then
d ( f 2 , f 3 ) = 2 > 1 2 = 1 1 + | 2 3 | | 2 3 | = β ( d ( 2 , 3 ) ) d ( 2 , 3 ) ,

that is, the contractive condition of Theorem 1 does not hold for this example.

Theorem 6 Let ( X , d ) be a complete metric space and f : X X be an α-admissible mapping. Assume that there exists a function β : [ 0 , ) [ 0 , 1 ] such that, for any bounded sequence { t n } of positive reals, β ( t n ) 1 implies t n 0 and
( α ( x , f x ) α ( y , f y ) + 1 ) d ( f x , f y ) 2 β ( d ( x , y ) ) d ( x , y )
(2.6)
for all x , y X . Suppose that either
  1. (a)

    f is continuous, or

     
  2. (b)

    if { x n } is a sequence in X such that x n x , α ( x n , x n + 1 ) 1 for all n, then α ( x , f x ) 1 .

     

If there exists x 0 X such that α ( x 0 , f x 0 ) 1 , then f has a fixed point.

Proof Let x 0 X such that α ( x 0 , f x 0 ) 1 . Define a sequence { x n } in X by x n = f n x 0 = f x n 1 for all n N . If x n + 1 = x n for some n N , then x = x n is a fixed point for f and the result is proved. Hence, we suppose that x n + 1 x n for all n N . As in Theorem 4, we conclude that α ( x n , f x n ) 1 for all n N { 0 } . Due to (2.6) we have
2 d ( f x n 1 , f x n ) ( α ( x n 1 , f x n 1 ) α ( x n , f x n ) + 1 ) d ( f x n 1 , f x n ) 2 β ( d ( x n 1 , x n ) ) d ( x n 1 , x n ) ,
which yields that
d ( x n , x n + 1 ) β ( d ( x n 1 , x n ) ) d ( x n 1 , x n ) .
(2.7)
So, we conclude that d ( x n , x n + 1 ) d ( x n 1 , x n ) . It follows that the sequence d n : = d ( x n , x n + 1 ) is decreasing. Thus, there exists d R + such that d n d as n . We claim that d = 0 . Suppose, to the contrary, that d > 0 . Considering (2.7), we obtain
d ( x n , x n + 1 ) d ( x n 1 , x n ) β ( d ( x n 1 , x n ) ) 1 ,
which implies lim n β ( d ( x n 1 , x n ) ) = 1 . Hence, d = lim n d n = lim n d ( x n 1 , x n ) = 0 , which is a contradiction. Hence, we derive that
lim n d ( x n , x n + 1 ) = 0 .
We prove that { x n } is a Cauchy sequence. Suppose, to the contrary, that { x n } is not a Cauchy sequence. Then there is ε > 0 and sequences { m ( k ) } and { n ( k ) } such that, for all positive integers k,
n ( k ) > m ( k ) > k , d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) ε and d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) 1 ) < ε .
Following the related lines in the proof of Theorem 4, we get
lim k + d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) = ε
(2.8)
and
lim k + d ( x n ( k ) + 1 , x m ( k ) + 1 ) = ε .
(2.9)
Now, from (2.6), (2.8) and (2.9), we have
2 d ( x n ( k ) + 1 , x m ( k ) + 1 ) ( α ( x n ( k ) , f x n ( k ) ) α ( x m ( k ) , f x m ( k ) ) + 1 ) d ( x n ( k ) + 1 , x m ( k ) + 1 ) = ( α ( x n ( k ) , f x n ( k ) ) α ( x m ( k ) , f x m ( k ) ) + 1 ) d ( f x n ( k ) , f x m ( k ) ) 2 β ( d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) ) d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) .
Hence,
d ( x n ( k ) + 1 , x m ( k ) + 1 ) d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) β ( d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) ) 1 .
By taking limit as k , we get
lim n β ( d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) ) = 1 .
That is, lim k d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) = 0 < ε , which is a contradiction. Hence { x n } is a Cauchy sequence. Since X is complete, then there is z X such that x n z . First of all, we suppose that f is continuous. We obtain that
f z = lim n f x n = lim n x n + 1 = z

due to the continuity of f. Thus, we derived that z is a fixed point of f.

Next, we suppose that (b) holds. Then, α ( z , f z ) 1 . Now, by (2.6) we have
2 d ( f z , x n + 1 ) ( α ( z , f z ) α ( x n , f x n ) + 1 ) d ( f z , f x n ) 2 β ( d ( z , x n ) ) d ( z , x n ) .
That is, d ( f z , x n + 1 ) β ( d ( z , x n ) ) d ( z , x n ) , and so we get
d ( f z , z ) d ( f z , x n + 1 ) + d ( z , x n + 1 ) β ( d ( z , x n ) ) d ( z , x n ) + d ( z , x n + 1 ) .

By taking the limit as n , we get d ( f z , z ) = 0 , i.e., z = f z . □

Example 7 Let X = [ 0 , ) be endowed with the usual metric d ( x , y ) = | x y | for all x , y X and f : X X be defined by
f x = { 1 8 x 2 if  x [ 0 , 1 ] , ln x if  x ( 1 , ) .
Define also α : X × X [ 0 , + ) and β : [ 0 , ) [ 0 , 1 ] by
α ( x , y ) = { 1 if  x , y [ 0 , 1 ] , 0 otherwise and β ( t ) = 1 4 .

We prove that Theorem 6 can be applied to f, but Theorem 1 cannot be applied to f.

By a similar method to that in the proof of Example 5, we can show that f is an α-admissible mapping and α ( x n , f x n ) 1 , x n x as n + implies that α ( x , f x ) 1 . Clearly, α ( 0 , f 0 ) 1 .

Let x , y [ 0 , 1 ] . Then
( α ( x , f x ) α ( y , f y ) + 1 ) d ( f x , f y ) = 2 | f x f y | = 2 1 8 | x y | | x + y | 2 1 4 | x y | = 2 β ( d ( x , y ) ) d ( x , y ) .
Otherwise, α ( x , f x ) α ( y , f y ) = 0 , and so
( α ( x , f x ) α ( y , f y ) + 1 ) d ( f x , f y ) ( α ( x , f x ) α ( y , f y ) + 1 ) d ( f x , f y ) = 1 d ( f x , f y ) = 2 0 2 β ( d ( x , y ) ) d ( x , y ) ,
then the contractive condition of Theorem 6 holds and f has a fixed point. Let x = 2 and y = 4 ; then
d ( f 2 , f 4 ) = ln 2 > 1 2 = 1 4 | 2 4 | = β ( d ( 2 , 4 ) ) d ( 2 , 4 ) .

That is, the contractive condition of Theorem 1 does not hold for this example.

Theorem 8 Let ( X , d ) be a complete metric space and f : X X be an α-admissible mapping. Assume that there exists a function β : [ 0 , ) [ 0 , 1 ] such that, for any bounded sequence { t n } of positive reals, β ( t n ) 1 implies t n 0 and
α ( x , f x ) α ( y , f y ) d ( f x , f y ) β ( d ( x , y ) ) d ( x , y )
(2.10)
for all x , y X . Suppose that either
  1. (a)

    f is continuous, or

     
  2. (b)

    if { x n } is a sequence in X such that x n x , α ( x n , x n + 1 ) 1 for all n, then α ( x , f x ) 1 .

     

If there exists x 0 X such that α ( x 0 , f x 0 ) 1 , then f has a fixed point.

Proof Let x 0 X such that α ( x 0 , f x 0 ) 1 . Define a sequence { x n } in X by x n = f n x 0 = f x n 1 for all n N . If x n + 1 = x n for some n N , then x = x n is a fixed point for f and the result is proved. Hence, we suppose that x n + 1 x n for all n N . As in Theorem 4, we conclude that α ( x n , f x n ) 1 for all n N { 0 } . Now, by (2.10) we have
α ( x n 1 , f x n 1 ) α ( x n , f x n ) d ( f x n 1 , f x n ) β ( d ( x n 1 , x n ) ) d ( x n 1 , x n ) ,
then
d ( x n , x n + 1 ) β ( d ( x n 1 , x n ) ) d ( x n 1 , x n ) .
(2.11)
It yields that d ( x n , x n + 1 ) d ( x n 1 , x n ) . It follows that the sequence { d ( x n , x n + 1 ) } is decreasing. Consequently, there exists d R + such that d ( x n , x n + 1 ) d as n . Regarding (2.11), we observe that
d ( x n , x n + 1 ) d ( x n 1 , x n ) β ( d ( x n 1 , x n ) ) 1 .
Thus, we find that lim n β ( d ( x n 1 , x n ) ) = 1 by the property of the function β. Hence,
lim n d ( x n , x n + 1 ) = 0 .
Next, we will show that the sequence { x n } is Cauchy. Suppose, to the contrary, that { x n } is not a Cauchy sequence. Then there is ε > 0 and sequences { m ( k ) } and { n ( k ) } such that, for all positive integers k,
n ( k ) > m ( k ) > k , d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) ε and d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) 1 ) < ε .
Again, by following the lines of the proof of Theorem 4, we derive that
lim k + d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) = ε
(2.12)
and
lim k + d ( x n ( k ) + 1 , x m ( k ) + 1 ) = ε .
(2.13)
Combining (2.10), (2.12) and (2.13), we have
d ( x n ( k ) + 1 , x m ( k ) + 1 ) α ( x n ( k ) , f x n ( k ) ) α ( x m ( k ) , f x m ( k ) ) d ( x n ( k ) + 1 , x m ( k ) + 1 ) = α ( x n ( k ) , f x n ( k ) ) α ( x m ( k ) , f x m ( k ) ) d ( f x n ( k ) , f x m ( k ) ) β ( d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) ) d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) .
Hence,
d ( x n ( k ) + 1 , x m ( k ) + 1 ) d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) β ( d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) ) 1 .
By taking limit as k , we get
lim n β ( d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) ) = 1 .

That is, lim k d ( x n ( k ) , x m ( k ) ) = 0 . Hence { x n } is a Cauchy sequence. Since X is complete, then there is z X such that x n z .

First, suppose that f is continuous. Since f is continuous, then we have
f z = lim n f x n = lim n x n + 1 = z .

So, z is a fixed point of f.

We suppose that (b) holds. Then α ( z , f z ) 1 . Now, by (2.10) we have
d ( f z , x n + 1 ) α ( z , f z ) α ( x n , f x n ) d ( f z , f x n ) β ( d ( z , x n ) ) d ( z , x n ) .
That is, d ( f z , x n + 1 ) β ( d ( z , x n ) ) d ( z , x n ) , and so we get
d ( f z , z ) d ( f z , x n + 1 ) + d ( z , x n + 1 ) β ( d ( z , x n ) ) d ( z , x n ) + d ( z , x n + 1 ) .

Letting n in the above inequality, we get d ( f z , z ) = 0 , i.e., z = f z . □

Example 9 Let X = [ 0 , ) be endowed with the usual metric d ( x , y ) = | x y | for all x , y X and f : X X be defined by
f x = { 1 4 ( 1 x 2 ) if  x [ 0 , 1 ] , 3 x if  x ( 1 , ) .
Define also α : X × X [ 0 , + ) and β : [ 0 , ) [ 0 , 1 ] by
α ( x , y ) = { 1 if  x , y [ 0 , 1 ] , 0 otherwise and β ( t ) = 1 2 .

We prove that Theorem 8 can be applied to f (here, a fixed point is u = 5 2 ), but Theorem 1 cannot be applied to f.

By a similar method to that in the proof of Example 5, we can show that f is an α-admissible mapping and α ( x n , f x n ) 1 , x n x as n + implies that α ( x , f x ) 1 . Clearly, α ( 0 , f 0 ) 1 .

Let x , y [ 0 , 1 ] . Then
α ( x , f x ) α ( y , f y ) d ( f x , f y ) = | f x f y | = 1 4 | x y | | x + y | 1 2 | x y | = β ( d ( x , y ) ) d ( x , y ) .
Otherwise, α ( x , f x ) α ( y , f y ) = 0 , and so
α ( x , f x ) α ( y , f y ) d ( f x , f y ) = 0 β ( d ( x , y ) ) d ( x , y ) ,
then the conditions of Theorem 8 hold and f has a fixed point. Let x = 3 and y = 4 ; then
d ( f 3 , f 4 ) = 3 > 1 2 = 1 2 | 3 4 | = β ( d ( 3 , 4 ) ) d ( 3 , 4 ) .

That is, the contractive condition of Theorem 1 does not hold for this example.

Theorem 10 Assume that all the hypotheses of Theorems 4, 6 and 8 hold. Adding the following condition:
  1. (c)

    if x = f x then α ( x , f x ) 1 ,

     

we obtain the uniqueness of the fixed point of f.

Proof Suppose that z and z are two fixed points of f such that z z . Then α ( z , f z ) 1 and α ( z , f z ) 1 .

For Theorem 4 we have
d ( f z , f z ) + ( d ( f z , f z ) + ) α ( z , f z ) α ( z , f z ) β ( d ( z , z ) ) d ( z , z ) + .
For Theorem 6 we have
( 2 ) d ( f z , f z ) ( α ( z , f z ) α ( z , f z ) + 1 ) d ( f z , f z ) ( 2 ) β ( d ( z , z ) ) d ( z , z ) .
For Theorem 8 we have
d ( f z , f z ) α ( z , f z ) α ( z , f z ) d ( f z , f z ) β ( d ( z , z ) ) d ( z , z ) .

Hence, all the three inequalities separately imply that β ( d ( z , z ) ) = 1 . Thus d ( z , z ) = 0 , i.e., z = z as required. □

Remark 11 By utilizing the technique of Samet et al. [40], we can obtain corresponding coupled fixed point results from our Theorems 4, 6 and 8.

Declarations

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by the Deanship of Scientific Research (DSR), King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah. The first author acknowledges with thanks DSR, KAU for financial support. The 3rd author is thankful for support of Astara Branch, Islamic Azad University, during this research.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Mathematics, King Abdulaziz University
(2)
Department of Mathematics, Atilim University
(3)
Department of Mathematics, Astara Branch, Islamic Azad University
(4)
Department of Mathematics, GDCW

References

  1. Akbar F, Khan AR: Common fixed point and approximation results for noncommuting maps on locally convex spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2009., 2009: Article ID 207503Google Scholar
  2. Border KC: Fixed Point Theorems with Applications to Economics and Game Theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; 1985.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Ok EA: Real Analysis with Economic Applications. Princeton University Press, Princeton; 2007.Google Scholar
  4. Lai X, Zhang Y: Fixed point and asymptotic analysis of cellular neural networks. J. Appl. Math. 2012., 2012: Article ID 689845Google Scholar
  5. Kramosil O, Michalek J: Fuzzy metric and statistical metric spaces. Kybernetika 1975, 11: 326–334.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. Menger K: Statistical metrics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1942, 28: 535–537. 10.1073/pnas.28.12.535MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Waszkiewicz P: Partial metrisability of continuous posets. Math. Struct. Comput. Sci. 2006, 16(2):359–372. 10.1017/S0960129506005196MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Dricia Z, McRaeb FA, Devi JV: Fixed-point theorems in partially ordered metric spaces for operators with PPF dependence. Nonlinear Anal. 2007, 67: 641–647. 10.1016/j.na.2006.06.022MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Amini-Harandi A, Emami H: A fixed point theorem for contraction type maps in partially ordered metric spaces and application to ordinary differential equations. Nonlinear Anal. 2010, 72: 2238–2242. 10.1016/j.na.2009.10.023MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Banach S: Sur les opérations dans les ensembles abstraits et leur application aux equations itegrales. Fundam. Math. 1922, 3: 133–181.Google Scholar
  11. Hussain N, Berinde V, Shafqat N: Common fixed point and approximation results for generalized ϕ -contractions. Fixed Point Theory 2009, 10: 111–124.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. Berinde V: Common fixed points of noncommuting almost contractions in cone metric spaces. Math. Commun. 2010, 15(1):229–241.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. Berinde V: Approximating common fixed points of noncommuting almost contractions in metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory 2010, 11(2):179–188.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. Berinde V: Common fixed points of noncommuting discontinuous weakly contractive mappings in cone metric spaces. Taiwan. J. Math. 2010, 14(5):1763–1776.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. Ciric LB: A generalization of Banach principle. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1974, 45: 727–730.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Ćirić L, Hussain N, Cakic N: Common fixed points for Ciric type f -weak contraction with applications. Publ. Math. (Debr.) 2010, 76(1–2):31–49.Google Scholar
  17. Ćirić L, Abbas M, Saadati R, Hussain N: Common fixed points of almost generalized contractive mappings in ordered metric spaces. Appl. Math. Comput. 2011, 217: 5784–5789. 10.1016/j.amc.2010.12.060MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Edelstein M: On fixed and periodic points under contractive mappings. J. Lond. Math. Soc. 1962, 37: 74–79. 10.1112/jlms/s1-37.1.74MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Hussain N, Khamsi MA, Latif A: Banach operator pairs and common fixed points in hyperconvex metric spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2011, 74: 5956–5961. 10.1016/j.na.2011.05.072MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. Hussain N, Pathak HK: Subweakly biased pairs and Jungck contractions with applications. Numer. Funct. Anal. Optim. 2011, 32(10):1067–1082. 10.1080/01630563.2011.587627MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. Hussain N, Khamsi MA: On asymptotic pointwise contractions in metric spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2009, 71: 4423–4429. 10.1016/j.na.2009.02.126MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Hussain N, Cho YJ: Weak contractions, common fixed points and invariant approximations. J. Inequal. Appl. 2009., 2009: Article ID 390634Google Scholar
  23. Hussain N, Jungck G:Common fixed point and invariant approximation results for noncommuting generalized ( f , g ) -nonexpansive maps. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2006, 321: 851–861. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2005.08.045MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  24. Kannan R: Some results on fixed points. Bull. Calcutta Math. Soc. 1968, 60: 71–76.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  25. Karapınar E: Weak ϕ -contraction on partial metric spaces. J. Comput. Anal. Appl. 2012, 14(2):206–210.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  26. Karapınar E: Best proximity points of cyclic mappings. Appl. Math. Lett. 2012, 25(11):1761–1766. 10.1016/j.aml.2012.02.008MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  27. Karapınar E, Erhan IM: Fixed point theorems for operators on partial metric spaces. Appl. Math. Lett. 2011, 24: 1900–1904. 10.1016/j.aml.2011.05.014MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  28. Karapınar E: Generalizations of Caristi Kirk’s theorem on partial metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2011., 2011: Article ID 4. doi:10.1186/1687–1812–2011–4Google Scholar
  29. Karapınar E, Yuksel U: Some common fixed point theorems in partial metric spaces. J. Appl. Math. 2011., 2011: Article ID 263621Google Scholar
  30. Karapınar E: A note on common fixed point theorems in partial metric spaces. Miskolc Math. Notes 2011, 12(2):185–191.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. Karapınar E: Generalizations of Caristi Kirk’s theorem on partial metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2011., 2011: Article ID 4Google Scholar
  32. Aydi H, Karapinar E, Shatanawi W: Tripled common fixed point results for generalized contractions in ordered generalized metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012., 2012: Article ID 101Google Scholar
  33. Aydi H, Karapinar E, Erhan I: Coupled coincidence point and coupled fixed point theorems via generalized Meir-Keeler type contractions. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2012., 2012: Article ID 781563Google Scholar
  34. Karapinar E, Yuce IS: Fixed point theory for cyclic generalized weak ϕ -contraction on partial metric spaces. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2012., 2012: Article ID 491542Google Scholar
  35. Aydi H, Vetro C, Karapinar E: Meir-Keeler type contractions for tripled fixed points. Acta Math. Sci. 2012, 32(6):2119–2130.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  36. Suzuki T: A generalized Banach contraction principle that characterizes metric completeness. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 2008, 136: 1861–1869.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  37. Harjani J, Sadarangani K: Fixed point theorems for weakly contractive mappings in partially ordered sets. Nonlinear Anal. 2009, 71: 3403–3410. 10.1016/j.na.2009.01.240MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  38. Jachymski J: Equivalent conditions for generalized contractions on (ordered) metric spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2011, 74: 768–774. 10.1016/j.na.2010.09.025MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  39. Karapinar E, Samet B:Generalized ( α ψ ) contractive type mappings and related fixed point theorems with applications. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2012., 2012: Article ID 793486Google Scholar
  40. Samet B, Vetro C, Vetro P:Fixed point theorem for α ψ contractive type mappings. Nonlinear Anal. 2012, 75: 2154–2165. 10.1016/j.na.2011.10.014MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  41. Sintunavarat 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.2010.10.042MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  42. Sintunavarat W, Kumam P: Gregus type fixed points for a tangential multi-valued mappings satisfying contractive conditions of integral type. J. Inequal. Appl. 2011., 2011: Article ID 3Google Scholar
  43. Sintunavarat W, Cho YJ, Kumam P: Common fixed point theorems for c -distance in ordered cone metric spaces. Comput. Math. Appl. 2011, 62: 1969–1978. 10.1016/j.camwa.2011.06.040MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  44. Sintunavarat W, Kumam P: Common fixed point theorems for generalized JH -operator classes and invariant approximations. J. Inequal. Appl. 2011., 2011: Article ID 67Google Scholar
  45. Aydi H, Vetro C, Sintunavarat W, Kumam P: Coincidence and fixed points for contractions and cyclical contractions in partial metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012., 2012: Article ID 124Google Scholar
  46. Nashine HK, Sintunavarat W, Kumam P: Cyclic generalized contractions and fixed point results with applications to an integral equation. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012., 2012: Article ID 217Google Scholar
  47. Sintunavarat W, Kumam P: Generalized common fixed point theorems in complex valued metric spaces and applications. J. Inequal. Appl. 2012., 2012: Article ID 84Google Scholar
  48. Sintunavarat W, Kim JK, Kumam P: Fixed point theorems for a generalized almost ( ϕ , φ ) -contraction with respect to S in ordered metric spaces. J. Inequal. Appl. 2012., 2012: Article ID 263Google Scholar

Copyright

© Hussain et al.; licensee Springer 2013

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