Functional equations and inequalities in paranormed spaces

Choonkil Park; Jung Rye Lee

doi:10.1186/1029-242X-2013-198

Research
Open Access
Published: 22 April 2013

Functional equations and inequalities in paranormed spaces

Choonkil Park¹ &
Jung Rye Lee²

Journal of Inequalities and Applications volume 2013, Article number: 198 (2013) Cite this article

1638 Accesses
3 Citations
Metrics details

Abstract

Using the fixed point method and the direct method, we prove the Hyers-Ulam stability of an additive functional equation, a quadratic functional equation, a cubic functional equation and a quartic functional equation in paranormed spaces.

Furthermore, we prove the Hyers-Ulam stability of functional inequalities in paranormed spaces by using the fixed point method and the direct method.

MSC:35A17, 47H10, 39B52, 39B72.

1 Introduction and preliminaries

The concept of statistical convergence for sequences of real numbers was introduced by Fast [1] and Steinhaus [2] independently, and since then several generalizations and applications of this notion have been investigated by various authors (see [3–7]). This notion was defined in normed spaces by Kolk [8].

We recall some basic facts concerning Fréchet spaces.

Definition 1.1 [9]

Let X be a vector space. A paranorm $P : X → [0, ∞)$ is a function on X such that

(1)
$P (0) = 0$ ;
(2)
$P (− x) = P (x)$ ;
(3)
$P (x + y) ≤ P (x) + P (y)$ (triangle inequality)
(4)
If ${t n}$ is a sequence of scalars with $t n → t$ and ${x n} ⊂ X$ with $P (x n − x) → 0$ , then $P (t n x n − t x) → 0$ (continuity of multiplication).

The pair $(X, P)$ is called a paranormed space if P is a paranorm on X.

The paranorm is called total if, in addition, we have

(5)
$P (x) = 0$ implies $x = 0$ .

A Fréchet space is a total and complete paranormed space.

The stability problem of functional equations originated from a question of Ulam [10] concerning the stability of group homomorphisms. Hyers [11] gave the first affirmative partial answer to the question of Ulam for Banach spaces. Hyers’ theorem was generalized by Aoki [12] for additive mappings and by Rassias [13] for linear mappings by considering an unbounded Cauchy difference. A generalization of the Rassias theorem was obtained by Găvruta [14] by replacing the unbounded Cauchy difference by a general control function in the spirit of Rassias’ approach.

In 1990, Rassias [15] during the 27th International Symposium on Functional Equations asked the question whether such a theorem can also be proved for $p ≥ 1$ . In 1991, Gajda [16], following the same approach as in Rassias [13], gave an affirmative solution to this question for $p > 1$ . It was shown by Gajda [16], as well as by Rassias and Šemrl [17], that one cannot prove a Rassias-type theorem when $p = 1$ (cf. the books of Czerwik [18], Hyers, Isac and Rassias [19]).

The functional equation

f (x + y) + f (x − y) = 2 f (x) + 2 f (y)

(1.1)

is called a quadratic functional equation. In particular, every solution of the quadratic functional equation is said to be a quadratic mapping. A Hyers-Ulam stability problem for the quadratic functional equation was proved by Skof [20] for mappings $f : X → Y$ , where X is a normed space and Y is a Banach space. Cholewa [21] noticed that the theorem of Skof is still true if the relevant domain X is replaced by an Abelian group. Czerwik [22] proved the Hyers-Ulam stability of the quadratic functional equation. The stability problems of several functional equations have been extensively investigated by a number of authors, and there are many interesting results concerning this problem (see [23–29]).

In [30], Jun and Kim considered the following cubic functional equation:

12 f (2 x + y) + 12 f (2 x − y) = f (x + y) + f (x − y) + 6 f (x) .

(1.2)

It is easy to show that the function $f (x) = x 3$ satisfies the functional equation (1.2), which is called a cubic functional equation, and every solution of the cubic functional equation is said to be a cubic mapping.

In [31], Lee et al. considered the following quartic functional equation:

12 f (2 x + y) + 12 f (2 x − y) = 2 f (x + y) + 2 f (x − y) + 12 f (x) − 3 f (y) .

(1.3)

It is easy to show that the function $f (x) = x 4$ satisfies the functional equation (1.3), which is called a quartic functional equation, and every solution of the quartic functional equation is said to be a quartic mapping.

In [32], Gilányi showed that if f satisfies the functional inequality

∥ 2 f (x) + 2 f (y) − f (x y − 1) ∥ ≤ ∥ f (x y) ∥,

(1.4)

then f satisfies the Jordan-von Neumann functional equation

2 f (x) + 2 f (y) = f (x y) + f (x y − 1) .

See also [33]. Fechner [34] and Gilányi [35] proved the Hyers-Ulam stability of the functional inequality (1.4).

Park, Cho and Han [36] proved the Hyers-Ulam stability of the following functional inequalities:

(1.5)

(1.6)

(1.7)

Throughout this paper, assume that $(X, P)$ is a Fréchet space and that $(Y, ∥ ⋅ ∥)$ is a Banach space.

In this paper, we prove the Hyers-Ulam stability of the Cauchy additive functional equation, the quadratic functional equation (1.2), the cubic functional equation (1.2) and the quartic functional equation (1.3) in paranormed spaces by using the fixed point method and the direct method.

Furthermore, we prove the Hyers-Ulam stability of the functional inequalities (1.5), (1.6) and (1.7) in paranormed spaces by using the fixed point method and the direct method.

2 Hyers-Ulam stability of the Cauchy additive functional equation

Using the fixed point method and the direct method, we prove the Hyers-Ulam stability of the Cauchy additive functional equation in paranormed spaces.

Let S be a set. A function $m : S × S → [0, ∞]$ is called a generalized metric on S if m satisfies

(1)
$m (x, y) = 0$ if and only if $x = y$ ;
(2)
$m (x, y) = m (y, x)$ for all $x, y ∈ S$ ;
(3)
$m (x, z) ≤ m (x, y) + m (y, z)$ for all $x, y, z ∈ S$ .

We recall a fundamental result in fixed point theory.

Theorem 2.1 [37, 38]

Let $(S, m)$ be a complete generalized metric space, and let $J : S → S$ be a strictly contractive mapping with a Lipschitz constant $α < 1$ . Then, for each given element $x ∈ S$ , either

m (J n x, J n + 1 x) = ∞

for all nonnegative integers n or there exists a positive integer $n 0$ such that

(1)
$m (J n x, J n + 1 x) < ∞$ , $∀ n ≥ n 0$ ;
(2)
the sequence ${J n x}$ converges to a fixed point $y ∗$ of J;
(3)
$y ∗$ is the unique fixed point of J in the set $W = {y ∈ S ∣ m (J n 0 x, y) < ∞}$ ;
(4)
$m (y, y ∗) ≤ 1 1 − α m (y, J y)$ for all $y ∈ W$ .

In 1996, Isac and Rassias [39] were the first to provide applications of stability theory of functional equations for the proof of new fixed point theorems with applications. By using fixed point methods, the stability problems of several functional equations have been extensively investigated by a number of authors (see [40–44]).

Note that $P (2 x) ≤ 2 P (x)$ for all $x ∈ Y$ .

Theorem 2.2 Let $φ : X 2 → [0, ∞)$ be a function such that there exists an $α < 1$ with

φ (x, y) ≤ 2 α φ (x 2, y 2)

(2.1)

for all $x, y ∈ X$ . Let $f : X → Y$ be a mapping such that

∥ f (x + y) − f (x) − f (y) ∥ ≤ φ (x, y)

(2.2)

for all $x, y ∈ X$ . Then there exists a unique Cauchy additive mapping $A : X → Y$ such that

∥ f (x) − A (x) ∥ ≤ 1 2 − 2 α φ (x, x)

(2.3)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Proof Letting $y = x$ in (2.2), we get

∥ f (2 x) − 2 f (x) ∥ ≤ φ (x, x),

and so

∥ f (x) − 12 f (2 x) ∥ ≤ 12 φ (x, x)

(2.4)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Consider the set

S : = {h : X → Y}

and introduce the generalized metric on S:

m (g, h) = inf {μ ∈ R + : ∥ g (x) − h (x) ∥ ≤ μ φ (x, x), ∀ x ∈ X},

where, as usual, $inf ϕ = + ∞$ . It is easy to show that $(S, m)$ is complete (see [[45], Lemma 2.1]).

Now we consider the linear mapping $J : S → S$ such that

J h (x) : = 12 h (2 x)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Let $g, h ∈ S$ be given such that $m (g, h) = ε$ . Since

∥ J g (x) − J h (x) ∥ = ∥ 12 g (2 x) − 12 h (2 x) ∥ ≤ α φ (x, x)

for all $x ∈ X$ , $m (g, h) = ε$ implies that $m (J g, J h) ≤ α ε$ . This means that

m (J g, J h) ≤ α m (g, h)

for all $g, h ∈ S$ .

It follows from (2.4) that $m (f, J f) ≤ 12$ .

By Theorem 2.1, there exists a mapping $A : X → Y$ satisfying the following:

(1)
A is a fixed point of J, i.e.,
$A (2 x) = 2 A (x)$
(2.5)

for all $x ∈ X$ . The mapping A is a unique fixed point of J in the set

M = {g ∈ S : m (f, g) < ∞} .

This implies that A is a unique mapping satisfying (2.5) such that there exists a $μ ∈ (0, ∞)$ satisfying

∥ f (x) − A (x) ∥ ≤ μ φ (x, x)

for all $x ∈ X$ ;

(2)
$m (J n f, A) → 0$ as $n → ∞$ . This implies the equality
$lim n → ∞ 1 2 n f (2 n x) = A (x)$

for all $x ∈ X$ ;

(3)
$m (f, A) ≤ 1 1 − α m (f, J f)$ , which implies the inequality
$m (f, A) ≤ 1 2 − 2 α .$

This implies that the inequality (2.3) holds true.

It follows from (2.1) and (2.2) that

∥ A (x + y) − A (x) − A (y) ∥ = lim n → ∞ 1 2 n ∥ f (2 n (x + y)) − f (2 n x) − f (2 n y) ∥ ≤ lim n → ∞ 2 n α n 2 n φ (x, y) = 0

for all $x, y ∈ X$ . So, $A (x + y) − A (x) − A (y) = 0$ for all $x, y ∈ X$ . Thus $A : X → Y$ is an additive mapping, as desired. □

Corollary 2.3 Let r be a positive real number with $r < 1$ , and let $f : X → Y$ be a mapping such that

∥ f (x + y) − f (x) − f (y) ∥ ≤ P (x) r + P (y) r

for all $x, y ∈ X$ . Then there exists a unique Cauchy additive mapping $A : X → Y$ such that

∥ f (x) − A (x) ∥ ≤ 2 2 − 2 r P (x) r

(2.6)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Proof Taking $φ (x, y) = P (x) r + P (y) r$ for all $x, y ∈ X$ and choosing $α = 2 r − 1$ in Theorem 2.2, we get the desired result. □

Theorem 2.4 Let $φ : X 2 → [0, ∞)$ be a function such that

Φ (x, y) : = ∑ j = 0 ∞ 1 2 j φ (2 j x, 2 j y) < ∞

for all $x, y ∈ X$ . Let $f : X → Y$ be a mapping satisfying (2.2). Then there exists a unique Cauchy additive mapping $A : X → Y$ such that

∥ f (x) − A (x) ∥ ≤ 12 Φ (x, x)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Proof The proof is similar to the proof of [[46], Theorem 2.2]. □

Remark 2.5 Let $r < 1$ . Letting $φ (x, y) = P (x) r + P (y) r$ for all $x, y ∈ X$ in Theorem 2.4, we obtain the inequality (2.6). The proof is given in [[46], Theorem 2.2].

Theorem 2.6 Let $φ : Y 2 → [0, ∞)$ be a function such that there exists an $α < 1$ with

φ (x, y) ≤ α 2 φ (2 x, 2 y)

(2.7)

for all $x, y ∈ Y$ . Let $f : Y → X$ be a mapping such that

P (f (x + y) − f (x) − f (y)) ≤ φ (x, y)

(2.8)

for all $x, y ∈ Y$ . Then there exists a unique additive mapping $A : Y → X$ such that

P (f (x) − A (x)) ≤ α 2 − 2 α φ (x, x)

(2.9)

for all $x ∈ Y$ .

Proof Letting $y = x$ in (2.8), we get

P (f (2 x) − 2 f (x)) ≤ φ (x, x),

and so

P (f (x) − 2 f (x 2)) ≤ α 2 φ (x, x)

(2.10)

for all $x ∈ Y$ .

Consider the set

S : = {h : Y → X}

and introduce the generalized metric on S:

m (g, h) = inf {μ ∈ R + : P (g (x) − h (x)) ≤ μ φ (x, x), ∀ x ∈ Y},

where, as usual, $inf ϕ = + ∞$ . It is easy to show that $(S, m)$ is complete (see [[45], Lemma 2.1]).

Now we consider the linear mapping $J : S → S$ such that

J h (x) : = 2 h (x 2)

for all $x ∈ Y$ .

Let $g, h ∈ S$ be given such that $m (g, h) = ε$ . Since

P (J g (x) − J h (x)) = P (2 g (x 2) − 2 h (x 2)) ≤ α φ (x, x)

for all $x ∈ Y$ , $m (g, h) = ε$ implies that $m (J g, J h) ≤ α ε$ . This means that

m (J g, J h) ≤ α m (g, h)

for all $g, h ∈ S$ .

It follows from (2.10) that $m (f, J f) ≤ α 2$ .

By Theorem 2.1, there exists a mapping $A : X → Y$ satisfying the following:

(1)
A is a fixed point of J, i.e.,
$A (x 2) = 12 A (x)$
(2.11)

for all $x ∈ X$ . The mapping A is a unique fixed point of J in the set

M = {g ∈ S : m (f, g) < ∞} .

This implies that A is a unique mapping satisfying (2.11) such that there exists a $μ ∈ (0, ∞)$ satisfying

P (f (x) − A (x)) ≤ μ φ (x, x)

for all $x ∈ Y$ ;

(2)
$m (J n f, A) → 0$ as $n → ∞$ . This implies the equality
$lim n → ∞ 2 n f (x 2 n) = A (x)$

for all $x ∈ Y$ ;

(3)
$m (f, A) ≤ 1 1 − α m (f, J f)$ , which implies the inequality
$m (f, A) ≤ α 2 − 2 α .$

This implies that the inequality (2.9) holds true.

It follows from (2.7) and (2.8) that

P (A (x + y) − A (x) − A (y)) = lim n → ∞ P (2 n (f (x + y 2 n) − f (x 2 n) − f (y 2 n))) ≤ lim n → ∞ 2 n P ((f (x + y 2 n) − f (x 2 n) − f (y 2 n))) ≤ lim n → ∞ 2 n α n 2 n φ (x, y) = 0

for all $x, y ∈ Y$ . So, $A (x + y) − A (x) − A (y) = 0$ for all $x, y ∈ Y$ . Thus $A : Y → X$ is an additive mapping, as desired. □

Corollary 2.7 Let r, θ be positive real numbers with $r > 1$ , and let $f : Y → X$ be a mapping such that

P (f (x + y) − f (x) − f (y)) ≤ θ (∥ x ∥ r + ∥ y ∥ r)

for all $x, y ∈ Y$ . Then there exists a unique Cauchy additive mapping $A : Y → X$ such that

P (f (x) − A (x)) ≤ 2 θ 2 r − 2 ∥ x ∥ r

(2.12)

for all $x ∈ Y$ .

Proof Taking $φ (x, y) = θ (∥ x ∥ r + ∥ y ∥ r)$ for all $x, y ∈ X$ and choosing $α = 2 1 − r$ in Theorem 2.6, we get the desired result. □

Theorem 2.8 Let $φ : Y 2 → [0, ∞)$ be a function such that

Φ (x, y) : = ∑ j = 1 ∞ 2 j φ (x 2 j, y 2 j) < ∞

for all $x, y ∈ Y$ . Let $f : Y → X$ be a mapping satisfying (2.8). Then there exists a unique Cauchy additive mapping $A : Y → X$ such that

P (f (x) − A (x)) ≤ 12 Φ (x, x)

for all $x ∈ Y$ .

Proof The proof is similar to the proof of [[46], Theorem 2.1]. □

Remark 2.9 Let $r > 1$ . Letting $φ (x, y) = θ (∥ x ∥ r + ∥ y ∥ r)$ for all $x, y ∈ X$ in Theorem 2.8, we obtain the inequality (2.12). The proof is given in [[46], Theorem 2.1].

3 Hyers-Ulam stability of the quadratic functional equation (1.1)

Using the fixed point method and the direct method, we prove the Hyers-Ulam stability of the quadratic functional equation (1.1) in paranormed spaces.

Theorem 3.1 Let $φ : X 2 → [0, ∞)$ be a function such that there exists an $α < 1$ with

φ (x, y) ≤ 4 α φ (x 2, y 2)

for all $x, y ∈ X$ . Let $f : X → Y$ be a mapping satisfying $f (0) = 0$ and

∥ f (x + y) + f (x − y) − 2 f (x) − 2 f (y) ∥ ≤ φ (x, y)

(3.1)

for all $x, y ∈ X$ . Then there exists a unique quadratic mapping $Q 2 : X → Y$ such that

∥ f (x) − Q 2 (x) ∥ ≤ 1 4 − 4 α φ (x, x)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Proof Letting $y = x$ in (3.1), we get

∥ f (2 x) − 4 f (x) ∥ ≤ φ (x, x),

and so

∥ f (x) − 14 f (2 x) ∥ ≤ 14 φ (x, x)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

The rest of the proof is similar to the proof of Theorem 2.2. □

Corollary 3.2 Let r be a positive real number with $r < 2$ , and let $f : X → Y$ be a mapping satisfying $f (0) = 0$ and

∥ f (x + y) + f (x − y) − 2 f (x) − 2 f (y) ∥ ≤ P (x) r + P (y) r

for all $x, y ∈ X$ . Then there exists a unique quadratic mapping $Q 2 : X → Y$ such that

∥ f (x) − Q 2 (x) ∥ ≤ 2 4 − 2 r P (x) r

(3.2)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Proof Taking $φ (x, y) = P (x) r + P (y) r$ for all $x, y ∈ X$ and choosing $α = 2 r − 2$ in Theorem 3.1, we get the desired result. □

Theorem 3.3 Let $φ : X 2 → [0, ∞)$ be a function such that

Φ (x, y) : = ∑ j = 0 ∞ 1 4 j φ (2 j x, 2 j y) < ∞

for all $x, y ∈ X$ . Let $f : X → Y$ be a mapping satisfying $f (0) = 0$ and (3.1). Then there exists a unique quadratic mapping $Q 2 : X → Y$ such that

∥ f (x) − Q 2 (x) ∥ ≤ 14 Φ (x, x)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Proof The proof is similar to the proof of [[46], Theorem 3.2]. □

Remark 3.4 Let $r < 2$ . Letting $φ (x, y) = P (x) r + P (y) r$ for all $x, y ∈ X$ in Theorem 3.3, we obtain the inequality (3.2). The proof is given in [[46], Theorem 3.2].

Theorem 3.5 Let $φ : Y 2 → [0, ∞)$ be a function such that there exists an $α < 1$ with

φ (x, y) ≤ α 4 φ (2 x, 2 y)

for all $x, y ∈ Y$ . Let $f : Y → X$ be a mapping satisfying $f (0) = 0$ and

P (f (x + y) + f (x − y) − 2 f (x) − 2 f (y)) ≤ φ (x, y)

(3.3)

for all $x, y ∈ Y$ . Then there exists a unique quadratic mapping $Q 2 : Y → X$ such that

P (f (x) − Q 2 (x)) ≤ α 4 − 4 α φ (x, x)

for all $x ∈ Y$ .

Proof Letting $y = x$ in (3.3), we get

P (f (2 x) − 4 f (x)) ≤ φ (x, x),

and so

P (f (x) − 4 f (x 2)) ≤ φ (x 2, x 2) ≤ α 4 φ (x, x)

for all $x ∈ Y$ .

The rest of the proof is similar to the proof of Theorem 2.6. □

Corollary 3.6 Let r, θ be positive real numbers with $r > 2$ , and let $f : Y → X$ be a mapping satisfying $f (0) = 0$ and

P (f (x + y) + f (x − y) − 2 f (x) − 2 f (y)) ≤ θ (∥ x ∥ r + ∥ y ∥ r)

for all $x, y ∈ Y$ . Then there exists a unique quadratic mapping $Q 2 : Y → X$ such that

P (f (x) − Q 2 (x)) ≤ 2 θ 2 r − 4 ∥ x ∥ r

(3.4)

for all $x ∈ Y$ .

Proof Taking $φ (x, y) = θ (∥ x ∥ r + ∥ y ∥ r)$ for all $x, y ∈ X$ and choosing $α = 2 2 − r$ in Theorem 3.5, we get the desired result. □

Theorem 3.7 Let $φ : Y 2 → [0, ∞)$ be a function such that

Φ (x, y) : = ∑ j = 1 ∞ 4 j φ (x 2 j, y 2 j) < ∞

for all $x, y ∈ Y$ . Let $f : Y → X$ be a mapping satisfying $f (0) = 0$ and (3.3). Then there exists a unique quadratic mapping $Q 2 : Y → X$ such that

P (f (x) − Q 2 (x)) ≤ 14 Φ (x, x)

for all $x ∈ Y$ .

Proof The proof is similar to the proof of [[46], Theorem 3.1]. □

Remark 3.8 Let $r > 2$ . Letting $φ (x, y) = θ (∥ x ∥ r + ∥ y ∥ r)$ for all $x, y ∈ X$ in Theorem 3.7, we obtain the inequality (3.4). The proof is given in [[46], Theorem 3.1].

4 Hyers-Ulam stability of the cubic functional equation (1.2)

Using the fixed point method and the direct method, we prove the Hyers-Ulam stability of the cubic functional equation (1.2) in paranormed spaces.

Theorem 4.1 Let $φ : X 2 → [0, ∞)$ be a function such that there exists an $α < 1$ with

φ (x, y) ≤ 8 α φ (x 2, y 2)

for all $x, y ∈ X$ . Let $f : X → Y$ be a mapping such that

∥ 12 f (2 x + y) + 12 f (2 x − y) − f (x + y) − f (x − y) − 6 f (x) ∥ ≤ φ (x, y)

(4.1)

for all $x, y ∈ X$ . Then there exists a unique cubic mapping $C : X → Y$ such that

∥ f (x) − C (x) ∥ ≤ 1 8 − 8 α φ (x, 0)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Proof Letting $y = 0$ in (4.1), we get

∥ f (2 x) − 8 f (x) ∥ ≤ φ (x, 0),

and so

∥ f (x) − 18 f (2 x) ∥ ≤ 18 φ (x, 0)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

The rest of the proof is similar to the proof of Theorem 2.2. □

Corollary 4.2 Let r be a positive real number with $r < 3$ , and let $f : Y → X$ be a mapping such that

∥ 12 f (2 x + y) + 12 f (2 x − y) − f (x + y) − f (x − y) − 6 f (x) ∥ ≤ P (x) r + P (y) r

for all $x, y ∈ X$ . Then there exists a unique cubic mapping $C : Y → X$ such that

P (f (x) − C (x)) ≤ 1 8 − 2 r P (x) r

(4.2)

for all $x ∈ Y$ .

Proof Taking $φ (x, y) = P (x) r + P (y) r$ for all $x, y ∈ X$ and choosing $α = 2 r − 3$ in Theorem 4.1, we get the desired result. □

Theorem 4.3 Let $φ : X 2 → [0, ∞)$ be a function such that

Φ (x, y) : = ∑ j = 0 ∞ 1 8 j φ (2 j x, 2 j y) < ∞

for all $x, y ∈ X$ . Let $f : X → Y$ be a mapping satisfying (4.1). Then there exists a unique cubic mapping $C : X → Y$ such that

∥ f (x) − C (x) ∥ ≤ 18 Φ (x, 0)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Proof The proof is similar to the proof of [[46], Theorem 4.2]. □

Remark 4.4 Let $r < 3$ . Letting $φ (x, y) = P (x) r + P (y) r$ for all $x, y ∈ X$ in Theorem 4.3, we obtain the inequality (4.2). The proof is given in [[46], Theorem 4.2].

Theorem 4.5 Let $φ : Y 2 → [0, ∞)$ be a function such that there exists an $α < 1$ with

φ (x, y) ≤ α 8 φ (2 x, 2 y)

for all $x, y ∈ Y$ . Let $f : Y → X$ be a mapping such that

P (12 f (2 x + y) + 12 f (2 x − y) − f (x + y) − f (x − y) − 6 f (x)) ≤ φ (x, y)

(4.3)

for all $x, y ∈ Y$ . Then there exists a unique cubic mapping $C : Y → X$ such that

P (f (x) − C (x)) ≤ α 8 − 8 α φ (x, 0)

for all $x ∈ Y$ .

Proof Letting $y = 0$ in (4.3), we get

P (f (2 x) − 8 f (x)) ≤ φ (x, 0),

and so

P (f (x) − 8 f (x 2)) ≤ φ (x 2, x 2) ≤ α 8 φ (x, 0)

for all $x ∈ Y$ .

The rest of the proof is similar to the proof of Theorem 2.6. □

Corollary 4.6 Let r, θ be positive real numbers with $r > 3$ , and let $f : Y → X$ be a mapping such that

P (12 f (2 x + y) + 12 f (2 x − y) − f (x + y) − f (x − y) − 6 f (x)) ≤ θ (∥ x ∥ r + ∥ y ∥ r)

for all $x, y ∈ Y$ . Then there exists a unique cubic mapping $C : Y → X$ such that

P (f (x) − C (x)) ≤ θ 2 r − 8 ∥ x ∥ r

(4.4)

for all $x ∈ Y$ .

Proof Taking $φ (x, y) = θ (∥ x ∥ r + ∥ y ∥ r)$ for all $x, y ∈ X$ and choosing $α = 2 3 − r$ in Theorem 4.5, we get the desired result. □

Theorem 4.7 Let $φ : Y 2 → [0, ∞)$ be a function such that

Φ (x, y) : = ∑ j = 1 ∞ 8 j φ (x 2 j, y 2 j) < ∞

for all $x, y ∈ Y$ . Let $f : Y → X$ be a mapping satisfying (4.3). Then there exists a unique cubic mapping $C : Y → X$ such that

P (f (x) − C (x)) ≤ 18 Φ (x, 0)

for all $x ∈ Y$ .

Proof The proof is similar to the proof of [[46], Theorem 4.1]. □

Remark 4.8 Let $r > 3$ . Letting $φ (x, y) = θ (∥ x ∥ r + ∥ y ∥ r)$ for all $x, y ∈ X$ in Theorem 4.7, we obtain the inequality (4.4). The proof is given in [[46], Theorem 4.1].

5 Hyers-Ulam stability of the quartic functional equation (1.3)

Using the fixed point method and the direct method, we prove the Hyers-Ulam stability of the quartic functional equation (1.3) in paranormed spaces.

Theorem 5.1 Let $φ : X 2 → [0, ∞)$ be a function such that there exists an $α < 1$ with

φ (x, y) ≤ 16 α φ (x 2, y 2)

for all $x, y ∈ X$ . Let $f : X → Y$ be a mapping satisfying $f (0) = 0$ and

∥ 12 f (2 x + y) + 12 f (2 x − y) − 2 f (x + y) − 2 f (x − y) − 12 f (x) + 3 f (y) ∥ ≤ φ (x, y)

(5.1)

for all $x, y ∈ X$ . Then there exists a unique quartic mapping $Q 4 : X → Y$ such that

∥ f (x) − Q 4 (x) ∥ ≤ 1 16 − 16 α φ (x, 0)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Proof Letting $y = 0$ in (5.1), we get

∥ f (2 x) − 16 f (x) ∥ ≤ φ (x, 0),

and so

∥ f (x) − 116 f (2 x) ∥ ≤ 116 φ (x, 0)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

The rest of the proof is similar to the proof of Theorem 2.2. □

Corollary 5.2 Let r be a positive real number with $r < 4$ , and let $f : Y → X$ be a mapping satisfying $f (0) = 0$ and

∥ 12 f (2 x + y) + 12 f (2 x − y) − 2 f (x + y) − 2 f (x − y) − 12 f (x) + 3 f (y) ∥ ≤ P (x) r + P (y) r

for all $x, y ∈ X$ . Then there exists a unique quartic mapping $Q 4 : Y → X$ such that

P (f (x) − Q 4 (x)) ≤ 1 16 − 2 r P (x) r

(5.2)

for all $x ∈ Y$ .

Proof Taking $φ (x, y) = P (x) r + P (y) r$ for all $x, y ∈ X$ and choosing $α = 2 r − 4$ in Theorem 5.1, we get the desired result. □

Theorem 5.3 Let $φ : X 2 → [0, ∞)$ be a function such that

Φ (x, y) : = ∑ j = 0 ∞ 1 16 j φ (2 j x, 2 j y) < ∞

for all $x, y ∈ X$ . Let $f : X → Y$ be a mapping satisfying $f (0) = 0$ and (5.1). Then there exists a unique quartic mapping $Q 4 : X → Y$ such that

∥ f (x) − Q 4 (x) ∥ ≤ 116 Φ (x, 0)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Proof The proof is similar to the proof of [[46], Theorem 5.2]. □

Remark 5.4 Let $r < 4$ . Letting $φ (x, y) = P (x) r + P (y) r$ for all $x, y ∈ X$ in Theorem 5.3, we obtain the inequality (5.2). The proof is given in [[46], Theorem 5.2].

Theorem 5.5 Let $φ : Y 2 → [0, ∞)$ be a function such that there exists an $α < 1$ with

φ (x, y) ≤ α 16 φ (2 x, 2 y)

for all $x, y ∈ Y$ . Let $f : Y → X$ be a mapping satisfying $f (0) = 0$ and

P (12 f (2 x + y) + 12 f (2 x − y) − 2 f (x + y) − 2 f (x − y) − 12 f (x) + 3 f (y)) ≤ φ (x, y)

(5.3)

for all $x, y ∈ Y$ . Then there exists a unique quartic mapping $Q 4 : Y → X$ such that

P (f (x) − Q 4 (x)) ≤ α 16 − 16 α φ (x, 0)

for all $x ∈ Y$ .

Proof Letting $y = 0$ in (5.3), we get

P (f (2 x) − 16 f (x)) ≤ φ (x, 0),

and so

P (f (x) − 16 f (x 2)) ≤ φ (x 2, x 2) ≤ α 16 φ (x, 0)

for all $x ∈ Y$ .

The rest of the proof is similar to the proof of Theorem 2.6. □

Corollary 5.6 Let r, θ be positive real numbers with $r > 4$ , and let $f : Y → X$ be a mapping satisfying $f (0) = 0$ and

P (12 f (2 x + y) + 12 f (2 x − y) − 2 f (x + y) − 2 f (x − y) − 12 f (x) + 3 f (y)) ≤ θ (∥ x ∥ r + ∥ y ∥ r)

for all $x, y ∈ Y$ . Then there exists a unique quartic mapping $Q 4 : Y → X$ such that

P (f (x) − Q 4 (x)) ≤ θ 2 r − 16 ∥ x ∥ r

(5.4)

for all $x ∈ Y$ .

Proof Taking $φ (x, y) = θ (∥ x ∥ r + ∥ y ∥ r)$ for all $x, y ∈ X$ and choosing $α = 2 4 − r$ in Theorem 5.5, we get the desired result. □

Theorem 5.7 Let $φ : Y 2 → [0, ∞)$ be a function such that

Φ (x, y) : = ∑ j = 1 ∞ 16 j φ (x 2 j, y 2 j) < ∞

for all $x, y ∈ Y$ . Let $f : Y → X$ be a mapping satisfying $f (0) = 0$ and (5.3). Then there exists a unique quartic mapping $Q 4 : Y → X$ such that

P (f (x) − Q 4 (x)) ≤ 116 Φ (x, 0)

for all $x ∈ Y$ .

Proof The proof is similar to the proof of [[46], Theorem 5.1]. □

Remark 5.8 Let $r > 4$ . Letting $φ (x, y) = θ (∥ x ∥ r + ∥ y ∥ r)$ for all $x, y ∈ X$ in Theorem 5.7, we obtain the inequality (5.4). The proof is given in [[46], Theorem 5.1].

6 Stability of a functional inequality associated with a three-variable Jensen additive functional equation

Using the fixed point method and the direct method, we prove the Hyers-Ulam stability of a functional inequality associated with a Jordan-von Neumann type three-variable Jensen additive functional equation in paranormed spaces.

Proposition 6.1 [[36], Proposition 2.1]

Let $f : X → Y$ be a mapping such that

∥ f (x) + f (y) + f (z) ∥ ≤ ∥ 2 f (x + y + z 2) ∥

for all $x, y, z ∈ X$ . Then f is Cauchy additive.

Theorem 6.2 Let $φ : X 3 → [0, ∞)$ be a function such that there exists an $α < 1$ with

φ (x, y, z) ≤ 2 α φ (x 2, y 2, z 2)

(6.1)

for all $x, y, z ∈ X$ . Let $f : X → Y$ be an odd mapping such that

∥ f (x) + f (y) + f (z) ∥ ≤ ∥ 2 f (x + y + z 2) ∥ + φ (x, y, z)

(6.2)

for all $x, y, z ∈ X$ . Then there exists a unique Cauchy additive mapping $A : X → Y$ such that

∥ f (x) − A (x) ∥ ≤ 1 2 − 2 α φ (x, x, − 2 x)

(6.3)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Proof Letting $y = x$ and $z = − 2 x$ in (6.2), we get

∥ 2 f (x) − f (2 x) ∥ = ∥ 2 f (x) + f (− 2 x) ∥ ≤ φ (x, x, − 2 x),

and so

∥ f (x) − 12 f (2 x) ∥ ≤ 12 φ (x, x, − 2 x)

(6.4)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Consider the set

S : = {h : X → Y}

and introduce the generalized metric on S

m (g, h) = inf {μ ∈ R + : ∥ g (x) − h (x) ∥ ≤ μ φ (x, x, − 2 x), ∀ x ∈ X},

where, as usual, $inf ϕ = + ∞$ . It is easy to show that $(S, m)$ is complete (see [[45], Lemma 2.1]).

Now we consider the linear mapping $J : S → S$ such that

J h (x) : = 12 h (2 x)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Let $g, h ∈ S$ be given such that $m (g, h) = ε$ . Since

∥ J g (x) − J h (x) ∥ = ∥ 12 g (2 x) − 12 h (2 x) ∥ ≤ α φ (x, x, − 2 x)

for all $x ∈ X$ , $m (g, h) = ε$ implies that $m (J g, J h) ≤ α ε$ . This means that

m (J g, J h) ≤ α m (g, h)

for all $g, h ∈ S$ .

It follows from (6.4) that $m (f, J f) ≤ 12$ .

By Theorem 2.1, there exists a mapping $A : X → Y$ satisfying the following:

(1)
A is a fixed point of J, i.e.,
$A (2 x) = 2 A (x)$
(6.5)

for all $x ∈ X$ . The mapping A is a unique fixed point of J in the set

M = {g ∈ S : m (f, g) < ∞} .

This implies that A is a unique mapping satisfying (6.5) such that there exists a $μ ∈ (0, ∞)$ satisfying

∥ f (x) − A (x) ∥ ≤ μ φ (x, x, − 2 x)

for all $x ∈ X$ ;

(2)
$m (J n f, A) → 0$ as $n → ∞$ . This implies the equality
$lim n → ∞ 1 2 n f (2 n x) = A (x)$

for all $x ∈ X$ ;

(3)
$m (f, A) ≤ 1 1 − α m (f, J f)$ , which implies the inequality
$m (f, A) ≤ 1 2 − 2 α .$

This implies that the inequality (6.3) holds true.

It follows from (6.1) and (6.2) that

1 2 n ∥ f (2 n x) + f (2 n y) + f (2 n z) ∥ ≤ 1 2 n ∥ 2 f (2 n (x + y + z) 2) ∥ + 1 2 n φ (2 n x, 2 n y, 2 n z) ≤ 1 2 n ∥ 2 f (2 n (x + y + z) 2) ∥ + 2 n α n 2 n φ (x, y, z)

(6.6)

for all $x, y, z ∈ X$ . Letting $n → ∞$ in (6.6), we get

∥ A (x) + A (y) + A (z) ∥ ≤ ∥ 2 A (x + y + z 2) ∥

for all $x, y, z ∈ X$ . By Proposition 6.1, $A : X → Y$ is Cauchy additive, as desired. □

Corollary 6.3 [[47], Theorem 2.2]

Let r be a positive real number with $r < 1$ , and let $f : X → Y$ be an odd mapping such that

∥ f (x) + f (y) + f (z) ∥ ≤ ∥ 2 f (x + y + z 2) ∥ + P (x) r + P (y) r + P (z) r

for all $x, y, z ∈ X$ . Then there exists a unique Cauchy additive mapping $A : X → Y$ such that

∥ f (x) − A (x) ∥ ≤ 2 + 2 r 2 − 2 r P (x) r

(6.7)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Proof Taking $φ (x, y, z) = P (x) r + P (y) r + P (z) r$ for all $x, y, z ∈ X$ and choosing $α = 2 r − 1$ in Theorem 6.2, we get the desired result. □

Theorem 6.4 Let $φ : X 3 → [0, ∞)$ be a function such that

Φ (x, y, z) : = ∑ j = 0 ∞ 1 2 j φ (2 j x, 2 j y, 2 j z) < ∞

for all $x, y, z ∈ X$ . Let $f : X → Y$ be an odd mapping satisfying (6.2). Then there exists a unique Cauchy additive mapping $A : X → Y$ such that

∥ f (x) − A (x) ∥ ≤ 12 Φ (x, x, − 2 x)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Proof The proof is similar to the proof of [[47], Theorem 2.2]. □

Remark 6.5 Let $r < 1$ . Letting $φ (x, y, z) = P (x) r + P (y) r + P (z) r$ for all $x, y ∈ X$ in Theorem 6.4, we obtain the inequality (6.7). The proof is given in [[47], Theorem 2.2].

7 Stability of a functional inequality associated with a three-variable Cauchy additive functional equation

Using the fixed point method and the direct method, we prove the Hyers-Ulam stability of a functional inequality associated with a Jordan-von Neumann type three-variable Cauchy additive functional equation in paranormed spaces.

Proposition 7.1 [[36], Proposition 2.2]

Let $f : X → Y$ be a mapping such that

∥ f (x) + f (y) + f (z) ∥ ≤ ∥ f (x + y + z) ∥

for all $x, y, z ∈ X$ . Then f is Cauchy additive.

Theorem 7.2 Let $φ : X 3 → [0, ∞)$ be a function such that there exists an $α < 1$ with

φ (x, y, z) ≤ 2 α φ (x 2, y 2, z 2)

for all $x, y, z ∈ X$ . Let $f : X → Y$ be an odd mapping such that

∥ f (x) + f (y) + f (z) ∥ ≤ ∥ f (x + y + z) ∥ + φ (x, y, z)

(7.1)

for all $x, y, z ∈ X$ . Then there exists a unique Cauchy additive mapping $A : X → Y$ such that

∥ f (x) − A (x) ∥ ≤ 1 2 − 2 α φ (x, x, − 2 x)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Proof Letting $y = x$ and $z = − 2 x$ in (7.1), we get

∥ 2 f (x) − f (2 x) ∥ = ∥ 2 f (x) + f (− 2 x) ∥ ≤ φ (x, x, − 2 x),

and so

∥ f (x) − 12 f (2 x) ∥ ≤ 12 φ (x, x, − 2 x)

(7.2)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

The rest of the proof is similar to the proof of Theorem 6.2. □

Corollary 7.3 [[47], Theorem 3.2]

Let r be a positive real number with $r < 1$ , and let $f : X → Y$ be an odd mapping such that

∥ f (x) + f (y) + f (z) ∥ ≤ ∥ f (x + y + z) ∥ + P (x) r + P (y) r + P (z) r

for all $x, y, z ∈ X$ . Then there exists a unique Cauchy additive mapping $A : X → Y$ such that

∥ f (x) − A (x) ∥ ≤ 2 + 2 r 2 − 2 r P (x) r

(7.3)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Proof Taking $φ (x, y, z) = P (x) r + P (y) r + P (z) r$ for all $x, y, z ∈ X$ and choosing $α = 2 r − 1$ in Theorem 7.2, we get the desired result. □

Theorem 7.4 Let $φ : X 3 → [0, ∞)$ be a function such that

Φ (x, y, z) : = ∑ j = 0 ∞ 1 2 j φ (2 j x, 2 j y, 2 j z) < ∞

for all $x, y, z ∈ X$ . Let $f : X → Y$ be an odd mapping satisfying (7.1). Then there exists a unique Cauchy additive mapping $A : X → Y$ such that

∥ f (x) − A (x) ∥ ≤ 12 Φ (x, x, − 2 x)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Proof The proof is similar to the proof of [[47], Theorem 3.2]. □

Remark 7.5 Let $r < 1$ . Letting $φ (x, y, z) = P (x) r + P (y) r + P (z) r$ for all $x, y ∈ X$ in Theorem 7.4, we obtain the inequality (7.3). The proof is given in [[47], Theorem 3.2].

8 Stability of a functional inequality associated with the Cauchy-Jensen functional equation

Using the fixed point method and the direct method, we prove the Hyers-Ulam stability of a functional inequality associated with a Jordan-von Neumann type Cauchy-Jensen additive functional equation in paranormed spaces.

Proposition 8.1 [[36], Proposition 2.3]

Let $f : X → Y$ be a mapping such that

∥ f (x) + f (y) + 2 f (z) ∥ ≤ ∥ 2 f (x + y 2 + z) ∥

for all $x, y, z ∈ X$ . Then f is Cauchy additive.

Theorem 8.2 Let $φ : X 3 → [0, ∞)$ be a function such that there exists an $α < 1$ with

φ (x, y, z) ≤ 2 α φ (x 2, y 2, z 2)

for all $x, y, z ∈ X$ . Let $f : X → Y$ be an odd mapping such that

∥ f (x) + f (y) + 2 f (z) ∥ ≤ ∥ 2 f (x + y 2 + z) ∥ + φ (x, y, z)

(8.1)

for all $x, y, z ∈ X$ . Then there exists a unique Cauchy additive mapping $A : X → Y$ such that

∥ f (x) − A (x) ∥ ≤ 1 2 − 2 α φ (2 x, 0, − x)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Proof Replacing x by 2x and letting $y = 0$ and $z = − x$ in (8.1), we get

∥ 2 f (x) − f (2 x) ∥ = ∥ 2 f (x) + f (− 2 x) ∥ ≤ φ (2 x, 0, − x)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

The rest of the proof is the same as in the proof of Theorem 6.2. □

Corollary 8.3 [[47], Theorem 4.2]

Let r be a positive real number with $r < 1$ , and let $f : X → Y$ be an odd mapping such that

∥ f (x) + f (y) + 2 f (z) ∥ ≤ ∥ 2 f (x + y 2 + z) ∥ + P (x) r + P (y) r + P (z) r

for all $x, y, z ∈ X$ . Then there exists a unique Cauchy additive mapping $A : X → Y$ such that

∥ f (x) − A (x) ∥ ≤ 1 + 2 r 2 − 2 r P (x) r

(8.2)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Proof Taking $φ (x, y, z) = P (x) r + P (y) r + P (z) r$ for all $x, y, z ∈ X$ and choosing $α = 2 r − 1$ in Theorem 8.2, we get the desired result. □

Theorem 8.4 Let $φ : X 3 → [0, ∞)$ be a function such that

Φ (x, y, z) : = ∑ j = 0 ∞ 1 2 j φ (2 j x, 2 j y, 2 j z) < ∞

for all $x, y, z ∈ X$ . Let $f : X → Y$ be an odd mapping satisfying (8.1). Then there exists a unique Cauchy additive mapping $A : X → Y$ such that

∥ f (x) − A (x) ∥ ≤ 12 Φ (2 x, 0, − x)

(8.3)

for all $x ∈ X$ .

Proof The proof is similar to the proof of [[47], Theorem 4.2]. □

Remark 8.5 Let $r < 1$ . Letting $φ (x, y, z) = P (x) r + P (y) r + P (z) r$ for all $x, y ∈ X$ in Theorem 8.4, we obtain the inequality (8.3). The proof is given in [[47], Theorem 4.2].

References

1.
Fast H: Sur la convergence statistique. Colloq. Math. 1951, 2: 241–244.
- MathSciNet
- Google Scholar
2.
Steinhaus H: Sur la convergence ordinaire et la convergence asymptotique. Colloq. Math. 1951, 2: 73–74.
- MathSciNet
- Google Scholar
3.
Fridy JA: On statistical convergence. Analysis 1985, 5: 301–313.
- MathSciNet
- Article
- Google Scholar
4.
Karakus S: Statistical convergence on probabilistic normed spaces. Math. Commun. 2007, 12: 11–23.
- MathSciNet
- Google Scholar
5.
Mursaleen M: λ -statistical convergence. Math. Slovaca 2000, 50: 111–115.
- MathSciNet
- Google Scholar
6.
Mursaleen M, Mohiuddine SA: On lacunary statistical convergence with respect to the intuitionistic fuzzy normed space. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2009, 233: 142–149. 10.1016/j.cam.2009.07.005
- MathSciNet
- Article
- Google Scholar
7.
Šalát T: On the statistically convergent sequences of real numbers. Math. Slovaca 1980, 30: 139–150.
- MathSciNet
- Google Scholar
8.
Kolk E: The statistical convergence in Banach spaces. Tartu ülik. Toim. 1991, 928: 41–52.
- MathSciNet
- Google Scholar
9.
Wilansky A: Modern Methods in Topological Vector Space. McGraw-Hill, New York; 1978.
- Google Scholar
10.
Ulam SM: A Collection of the Mathematical Problems. Interscience, New York; 1960.
- Google Scholar
11.
Hyers DH: On the stability of the linear functional equation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1941, 27: 222–224. 10.1073/pnas.27.4.222
- MathSciNet
- Article
- Google Scholar
12.
Aoki T: On the stability of the linear transformation in Banach spaces. J. Math. Soc. Jpn. 1950, 2: 64–66. 10.2969/jmsj/00210064
- Article
- Google Scholar
13.
Rassias TM: On the stability of the linear mapping in Banach spaces. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1978, 72: 297–300. 10.1090/S0002-9939-1978-0507327-1
- Article
- Google Scholar
14.
Gǎvruta P: A generalization of the Hyers-Ulam-Rassias stability of approximately additive mappings. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1994, 184: 431–436. 10.1006/jmaa.1994.1211
- MathSciNet
- Article
- Google Scholar
15.
Rassias, TM: Problem 16; 2. Report of the 27th International Symp. on Functional Equations, Aequationes Math. 39, 292–293; 309 (1990)
16.
Gajda Z: On stability of additive mappings. Int. J. Math. Math. Sci. 1991, 14: 431–434. 10.1155/S016117129100056X
- MathSciNet
- Article
- Google Scholar
17.
Rassias TM, Šemrl P: On the behaviour of mappings which do not satisfy Hyers-Ulam stability. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1992, 114: 989–993. 10.1090/S0002-9939-1992-1059634-1
- Article
- Google Scholar
18.
Czerwik P: Functional Equations and Inequalities in Several Variables. World Scientific, Singapore; 2002.
- Google Scholar
19.
Hyers DH, Isac G, Rassias TM: Stability of Functional Equations in Several Variables. Birkhäuser, Basel; 1998.
- Google Scholar
20.
Skof F: Proprietà locali e approssimazione di operatori. Rend. Semin. Mat. Fis. Milano 1983, 53: 113–129. 10.1007/BF02924890
- MathSciNet
- Article
- Google Scholar
21.
Cholewa PW: Remarks on the stability of functional equations. Aequ. Math. 1984, 27: 76–86. 10.1007/BF02192660
- MathSciNet
- Article
- Google Scholar
22.
Czerwik S: On the stability of the quadratic mapping in normed spaces. Abh. Math. Semin. Univ. Hamb. 1992, 62: 59–64. 10.1007/BF02941618
- MathSciNet
- Article
- Google Scholar
23.
Aczel J, Dhombres J: Functional Equations in Several Variables. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; 1989.
- Google Scholar
24.
Czerwik S: Stability of Functional Equations of Ulam-Hyers-Rassias Type. Hadronic Press, Palm Harbor; 2003.
- Google Scholar
25.
Eshaghi Gordji M, Savadkouhi MB: Stability of a mixed type cubic-quartic functional equation in non-Archimedean spaces. Appl. Math. Lett. 2010, 23: 1198–1202. 10.1016/j.aml.2010.05.011
- MathSciNet
- Article
- Google Scholar
26.
Isac G, Rassias TM: On the Hyers-Ulam stability of ψ -additive mappings. J. Approx. Theory 1993, 72: 131–137. 10.1006/jath.1993.1010
- MathSciNet
- Article
- Google Scholar
27.
Jun K, Lee Y: A generalization of the Hyers-Ulam-Rassias stability of the Pexiderized quadratic equations. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2004, 297: 70–86. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2004.04.009
- MathSciNet
- Article
- Google Scholar
28.
Jung S: Hyers-Ulam-Rassias Stability of Functional Equations in Mathematical Analysis. Hadronic Press, Palm Harbor; 2001.
- Google Scholar
29.
Park C:Homomorphisms between Poisson $J C ∗$ -algebras. Bull. Braz. Math. Soc. 2005, 36: 79–97. 10.1007/s00574-005-0029-z
- MathSciNet
- Article
- Google Scholar
30.
Jun K, Kim H: The generalized Hyers-Ulam-Rassias stability of a cubic functional equation. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2002, 274: 867–878. 10.1016/S0022-247X(02)00415-8
- MathSciNet
- Article
- Google Scholar
31.
Lee S, Im S, Hwang I: Quartic functional equations. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2005, 307: 387–394. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2004.12.062
- MathSciNet
- Article
- Google Scholar
32.
Gilányi A: Eine zur Parallelogrammgleichung äquivalente Ungleichung. Aequ. Math. 2001, 62: 303–309. 10.1007/PL00000156
- Article
- Google Scholar
33.
Rätz J: On inequalities associated with the Jordan-von Neumann functional equation. Aequ. Math. 2003, 66: 191–200. 10.1007/s00010-003-2684-8
- Article
- Google Scholar
34.
Fechner W: Stability of a functional inequalities associated with the Jordan-von Neumann functional equation. Aequ. Math. 2006, 71: 149–161. 10.1007/s00010-005-2775-9
- MathSciNet
- Article
- Google Scholar
35.
Gilányi A: On a problem by K. Nikodem. Math. Inequal. Appl. 2002, 5: 707–710.
- MathSciNet
- Google Scholar
36.
Park C, Cho Y, Han H: Functional inequalities associated with Jordan-von Neumann-type additive functional equations. J. Inequal. Appl. 2007., 2007: Article ID 41820
- Google Scholar
37.
Cădariu L, Radu V: Fixed points and the stability of Jensen’s functional equation. J. Inequal. Pure Appl. Math. 2003., 4(1): Article ID 4
38.
Diaz J, Margolis B: A fixed point theorem of the alternative for contractions on a generalized complete metric space. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 1968, 74: 305–309. 10.1090/S0002-9904-1968-11933-0
- MathSciNet
- Article
- Google Scholar
39.
Isac G, Rassias TM: Stability of ψ -additive mappings: applications to nonlinear analysis. Int. J. Math. Math. Sci. 1996, 19: 219–228. 10.1155/S0161171296000324
- MathSciNet
- Article
- Google Scholar
40.
Cădariu L, Radu V: On the stability of the Cauchy functional equation: a fixed point approach. Grazer Math. Ber. 2004, 346: 43–52.
- Google Scholar
41.
Cădariu L, Radu V: Fixed point methods for the generalized stability of functional equations in a single variable. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2008., 2008: Article ID 749392
- Google Scholar
42.
Park C: Fixed points and Hyers-Ulam-Rassias stability of Cauchy-Jensen functional equations in Banach algebras. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2007., 2007: Article ID 50175
- Google Scholar
43.
Park C: Generalized Hyers-Ulam-Rassias stability of quadratic functional equations: a fixed point approach. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2008., 2008: Article ID 493751
- Google Scholar
44.
Radu V: The fixed point alternative and the stability of functional equations. Fixed Point Theory 2003, 4: 91–96.
- MathSciNet
- Google Scholar
45.
Miheţ D, Radu V: On the stability of the additive Cauchy functional equation in random normed spaces. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2008, 343: 567–572. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2008.01.100
- MathSciNet
- Article
- Google Scholar
46.
Park C, Shin D: Functional equations in paranormed spaces. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2012., 2012: Article ID 123
- Google Scholar
47.
Lee S, Park C, Lee J: Functional inequalities in paranormed spaces. J. Chungcheong Math. Soc. 2013, 26: 287–296.
- Article
- Google Scholar

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Daejin University Research Grant in 2013.

Author information

Affiliations

Department of Mathematics, Research Institute for Natural Sciences, Hanyang University, Seoul, 133-791, Korea
- Choonkil Park
Department of Mathematics, Daejin University, Kyeonggi, 487-711, Korea
- Jung Rye Lee

Authors

Choonkil Park
View author publications
You can also search for this author in
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
Jung Rye Lee
View author publications
You can also search for this author in
- PubMed
- Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jung Rye Lee.

Additional information

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors’ contributions

Both authors conceived of the study, participated in its design and coordination, drafted the manuscript, participated in the sequence alignment, and 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

Park, C., Lee, J.R. Functional equations and inequalities in paranormed spaces. J Inequal Appl 2013, 198 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2013-198

Download citation

Received: 03 September 2012
Accepted: 08 March 2013
Published: 22 April 2013
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2013-198

Keywords

Jordan-von Neumann functional equation
Hyers-Ulam stability
paranormed space
fixed point
functional equation
functional inequality