Open Access

On the strong and Δ-convergence of new multi-step and S-iteration processes in a CAT ( 0 ) space

Journal of Inequalities and Applications20132013:482

https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2013-482

Received: 1 August 2013

Accepted: 19 September 2013

Published: 7 November 2013

Abstract

In this paper, we introduce a new class of mappings and prove the demiclosedness principle for mappings of this type in a CAT ( 0 ) space. Also, we obtain the strong and Δ-convergence theorems of new multi-step and S-iteration processes in a CAT ( 0 ) space. Our results extend and improve the corresponding recent results announced by many authors in the literature.

MSC:47H09, 47H10, 54E40, 58C30.

Keywords

CAT ( 0 ) space contractive-like mapping strong convergence Δ-convergence new multi-step iteration S-iteration fixed point

1 Introduction

Contractive mappings and iteration processes are some of the main tools in the study of fixed point theory. There are many contractive mappings and iteration processes that have been introduced and developed by several authors to serve various purposes in the literature (see [16]).

Imoru and Olantiwo [7] gave the following contractive definition.

Definition 1 Let T be a self-mapping on a metric space X. The mapping T is called a contractive-like mapping if there exist a constant δ [ 0 , 1 ) and a strictly increasing and continuous function φ : [ 0 , ) [ 0 , ) with φ ( 0 ) = 0 such that, for all x , y X ,
d ( T x , T y ) δ d ( x , y ) + φ ( d ( x , T x ) ) .
(1.1)

This mapping is more general than those considered by Berinde [8, 9], Harder and Hicks [10], Zamfirescu [11], Osilike and Udomene [12].

By taking δ = 1 in (1.1), we define a new class of mappings as follows.

Definition 2 The mapping T is called a generalized nonexpansive mapping if there exists a non-decreasing and continuous function φ : [ 0 , ) [ 0 , ) with φ ( 0 ) = 0 such that, for all x , y X ,
d ( T x , T y ) d ( x , y ) + φ ( d ( x , T x ) ) .
(1.2)
Remark 1 For x F ( T ) in (1.2), we have
d ( x , T y ) = d ( T x , T y ) d ( x , y ) + φ ( d ( x , T x ) ) = d ( x , y ) .

If X is an interval of , then F ( T ) is convex. The same is also true in each space with unique geodesic for each pair of points (e.g., metric trees or CAT ( 0 ) spaces).

In the case φ ( t ) = 0 for all t [ 0 , ) , it is easy to show that every nonexpansive mapping satisfies (1.2), but the inverse is not necessarily true.

Example 1 Let X = [ 0 , 2 ] , d ( x , y ) = | x y | , φ ( t ) = t and define T by
T ( x ) = { 0 if  x 2 , 1 if  x = 2 .
By taking x = 2 and y = 1.5 , we have
d ( T ( 2 ) , T ( 1.5 ) ) = 1 < 1.5 = d ( 2 , 1.5 ) + φ ( d ( 2 , T ( 2 ) ) )
but
d ( T ( 2 ) , T ( 1.5 ) ) = 1 0.5 = d ( 2 , 1.5 ) .

Therefore T is a generalized nonexpansive mapping, but T is not nonexpansive mapping.

Both a contractive-like mapping and a generalized nonexpansive mapping need not have a fixed point, even if X is complete. For example, let X = [ 0 , ) , d ( x , y ) = | x y | and define T by
T x = { 1 if  0 x 0.8 , 0.6 if  0.8 < x < + .

It is proved in Gürsoy et al. [13] that T is a contractive-like mapping. Similarly, one can prove that T is a generalized nonexpansive mapping. But the mapping T has no fixed point.

By using (1.1), it is obvious that if a contractive-like mapping has a fixed point, then it is unique. However, if a generalized nonexpansive mapping has a fixed point, then it need not be unique. For example, let be the real line with the usual norm | | , and let K = [ 1 , 1 ] . Define a mapping T : K K by
T x = { x if  x [ 0 , 1 ] , x if  x [ 1 , 0 ) .
Now, we show that T is a nonexpansive mapping. In fact, if x , y [ 0 , 1 ] or x , y [ 1 , 0 ) , then we have
| T x T y | = | x y | .
If x [ 0 , 1 ] and y [ 1 , 0 ) or x [ 1 , 0 ) and y [ 0 , 1 ] , then we have
| T x T y | = | x + y | | x y | .

This implies that T is a nonexpansive mapping and so T is a generalized nonexpansive mapping with φ ( t ) = 0 for all t [ 0 , ) . But F ( T ) = { x K ; 0 x 1 } .

Agarwal et al. [1] introduced the S-iteration process which is independent of those of Mann [3] and Ishikawa [2] and converges faster than both of these. We apply this iteration process in a CAT ( 0 ) space as
{ x 0 K , x n + 1 = ( 1 α n ) T x n α n T y n , y n = ( 1 β n ) x n β n T x n , n 0 .
(1.3)

Gürsoy et al. [13] introduced a new multi-step iteration process in a Banach space. We modify this iteration process in a CAT ( 0 ) space as follows.

For an arbitrary fixed order k 2 ,
{ x 0 K , x n + 1 = ( 1 α n ) y n 1 α n T y n 1 , y n 1 = ( 1 β n 1 ) y n 2 β n 1 T y n 2 , y n 2 = ( 1 β n 2 ) y n 3 β n 2 T y n 3 , y n k 2 = ( 1 β n k 2 ) y n k 1 β n k 2 T y n k 1 , y n k 1 = ( 1 β n k 1 ) x n β n k 1 T x n , n 0 ,
or, in short,
{ x 0 K , x n + 1 = ( 1 α n ) y n 1 α n T y n 1 , y n i = ( 1 β n i ) y n i + 1 β n i T y n i + 1 , i = 1 , 2 , , k 2 , y n k 1 = ( 1 β n k 1 ) x n β n k 1 T x n , n 0 .
(1.4)

By taking k = 3 and k = 2 in (1.4), we obtain the SP-iteration process of Phuengrattana and Suantai [4] and the two-step iteration process of Thianwan [6], respectively.

In this paper, motivated by the above results, we prove demiclosedness principle for a new class of mappings and the Δ-convergence theorems of the new multi-step iteration and the S-iteration processes for mappings of this type in a CAT ( 0 ) space. Also, we present the strong convergence theorems of these iteration processes for contractive-like mappings in a CAT ( 0 ) space.

2 Preliminaries on a CAT ( 0 ) space

A metric space X is a CAT ( 0 ) space if it is geodesically connected and if every geodesic triangle in X is at least as ‘thin’ as its comparison triangle in the Euclidean plane. Fixed point theory in a CAT ( 0 ) space was first studied by Kirk (see [14, 15]). He showed that every nonexpansive mapping defined on a bounded closed convex subset of a complete CAT ( 0 ) space always has a fixed point. Since then the fixed point theory in a CAT ( 0 ) space has been rapidly developed and many papers have appeared (see [1420]). It is worth mentioning that the results in a CAT ( 0 ) space can be applied to any CAT ( k ) space with k 0 since any CAT ( k ) space is a CAT ( k ) space for every k k (see [[21], p.165]).

Let ( X , d ) be a metric space. A geodesic path joining x X to y X (or more briefly, a geodesic from x to y) is a map c from a closed interval [ 0 , l ] R to X such that c ( 0 ) = x , c ( l ) = y and d ( c ( t ) , c ( t ) ) = | t t | for all t , t [ 0 , l ] . In particular, c is an isometry and d ( x , y ) = l . The image of c is called a geodesic (or metric) segment joining x and y. When it is unique, this geodesic is denoted by [ x , y ] . The space ( X , d ) is said to be a geodesic space if every two points of X are joined by a geodesic and X is said to be a uniquely geodesic if there is exactly one geodesic joining x to y for each x , y X .

A geodesic triangle ( x 1 , x 2 , x 3 ) in a geodesic metric space ( X , d ) consists of three points in X (the vertices of ) and a geodesic segment between each pair of vertices (the edges of ). A comparison triangle for the geodesic triangle ( x 1 , x 2 , x 3 ) in ( X , d ) is a triangle ¯ ( x 1 , x 2 , x 3 ) = ( x ¯ 1 , x ¯ 2 , x ¯ 3 ) in the Euclidean plane R 2 such that
d R 2 ( x ¯ i , x ¯ j ) = d ( x i , x j )

for i , j { 1 , 2 , 3 } . Such a triangle always exists (see [21]).

A geodesic metric space is said to be a CAT ( 0 ) space [21] if all geodesic triangles of appropriate size satisfy the following comparison axiom.

CAT ( 0 ) Let be a geodesic triangle in X, and let ¯ be a comparison triangle for . Then is said to satisfy the CAT ( 0 ) inequality if for all x , y and all comparison points x ¯ , y ¯ ¯ ,
d ( x , y ) d R 2 ( x ¯ , y ¯ ) .
We observe that if x, y 1 , y 2 are points of a CAT ( 0 ) space and if y 0 is the midpoint of the segment [ y 1 , y 2 ] , then the CAT ( 0 ) inequality implies that
d ( x , y 0 ) 2 1 2 d ( x , y 1 ) 2 + 1 2 d ( x , y 2 ) 2 1 4 d ( y 1 , y 2 ) 2 .
(2.1)

The equality holds for the Euclidean metric. In fact (see [[21], p.163]), a geodesic metric space is a CAT ( 0 ) space if and only if it satisfies the inequality (2.1) (which is known as the CN inequality of Bruhat and Tits [22]).

Let x , y X , by [[18], Lemma 2.1(iv)] for each t [ 0 , 1 ] , there exists a unique point z [ x , y ] such that
d ( x , z ) = t d ( x , y ) , d ( y , z ) = ( 1 t ) d ( x , y ) .
(2.2)

From now on, we will use the notation ( 1 t ) x t y for the unique point z satisfying (2.2). By using this notation, Dhompongsa and Panyanak [18] obtained the following lemmas which will be used frequently in the proof of our main results.

Lemma 1 Let X be a CAT ( 0 ) space. Then
d ( ( 1 t ) x t y , z ) ( 1 t ) d ( x , z ) + t d ( y , z )

for all t [ 0 , 1 ] and x , y , z X .

Lemma 2 Let X be a CAT ( 0 ) space. Then
d ( ( 1 t ) x t y , z ) 2 ( 1 t ) d ( x , z ) 2 + t d ( y , z ) 2 t ( 1 t ) d ( x , y ) 2

for all t [ 0 , 1 ] and x , y , z X .

3 Demiclosedness principle for a new class of mappings

In 1976 Lim [23] introduced the concept of convergence in a general metric space setting which is called -convergence. Later, Kirk and Panyanak [24] used the concept of -convergence introduced by Lim [23] to prove on a CAT ( 0 ) space analogs of some Banach space results which involve weak convergence. Also, Dhompongsa and Panyanak [18] obtained the -convergence theorems for the Picard, Mann and Ishikawa iterations in a CAT ( 0 ) space for nonexpansive mappings under some appropriate conditions.

Now, we recall some definitions.

Let { x n } be a bounded sequence in a CAT ( 0 ) space X. For x X , we set
r ( x , { x n } ) = lim sup n d ( x , x n ) .
The asymptotic radius r ( { x n } ) of { x n } is given by
r ( { x n } ) = inf { r ( x , { x n } ) : x X } ,
and the asymptotic radius r K ( { x n } ) of { x n } with respect to K X is given by
r K ( { x n } ) = inf { r ( x , { x n } ) : x K } .
The asymptotic center A ( { x n } ) of { x n } is the set
A ( { x n } ) = { x X : r ( x , { x n } ) = r ( { x n } ) } ,
and the asymptotic center A K ( { x n } ) of { x n } with respect to K X is the set
A K ( { x n } ) = { x K : r ( x , { x n } ) = r K ( { x n } ) } .

Proposition 1 ([[25], Proposition 3.2])

Let { x n } be a bounded sequence in a complete CAT ( 0 ) space X, and let K be a closed convex subset of X, then A ( { x n } ) and A K ( { x n } ) are singletons.

Definition 3 ([[24], Definition 3.1])

A sequence { x n } in a CAT ( 0 ) space X is said to be -convergent to x X if x is the unique asymptotic center of { u n } for every subsequence { u n } of { x n } . In this case, we write - lim n x n = x and x is called the -limit of { x n } .

Lemma 3
  1. (i)

    Every bounded sequence in a complete CAT ( 0 ) space always has a -convergent subsequence (see [[24], p.3690]).

     
  2. (ii)

    Let K be a nonempty closed convex subset of a complete CAT ( 0 ) space, and let { x n } be a bounded sequence in K. Then the asymptotic center of { x n } is in K (see [[17], Proposition 2.1]).

     

Lemma 4 ([[18], Lemma 2.8])

If { x n } is a bounded sequence in a complete CAT ( 0 ) space with A ( { x n } ) = { x } , { u n } is a subsequence of { x n } with A ( { u n } ) = { u } and the sequence { d ( x n , u ) } converges, then x = u .

Let { x n } be a bounded sequence in a CAT ( 0 ) space X, and let K be a closed convex subset of X which contains { x n } . We denote the notation
{ x n } w Φ ( w ) = inf x K Φ ( x ) ,
(3.1)

where Φ ( x ) = lim sup n d ( x n , x ) .

We note that { x n } w if and only if A K ( { x n } ) = { w } (see [25]).

Nanjaras and Panyanak [25] gave a connection between the ‘’ convergence and Δ-convergence.

Proposition 2 ([[25], Proposition 3.12])

Let { x n } be a bounded sequence in a CAT ( 0 ) space X, and let K be a closed convex subset of X which contains { x n } . Then Δ - lim n x n = p implies that { x n } p .

By using the convergence defined in (3.1), we obtain the demiclosedness principle for the new class of mappings in a CAT ( 0 ) space.

Theorem 1 Let K be a nonempty closed convex subset of a complete CAT ( 0 ) space X, and let T : K K be a generalized nonexpansive mapping with F ( T ) . Let { x n } be a bounded sequence in K such that { x n } w and lim n d ( x n , T x n ) = 0 . Then T w = w .

Proof By the hypothesis, { x n } w . Then we have A K ( { x n } ) = { w } . By Lemma 3(ii), we obtain A ( { x n } ) = { w } . Since lim n d ( x n , T x n ) = 0 , then we have
Φ ( x ) = lim sup n d ( x n , x ) = lim sup n d ( T x n , x )
(3.2)
for all x K . By taking x = T w in (3.2), we have
Φ ( T w ) = lim sup n d ( T x n , T w ) lim sup n { d ( x n , w ) + φ ( d ( x n , T x n ) ) } lim sup n d ( x n , w ) + φ ( lim sup n d ( x n , T x n ) ) = lim sup n d ( x n , w ) = Φ ( w ) .

The rest of the proof closely follows the pattern of Proposition 3.14 in Nanjaras and Panyanak [25]. Hence T w = w as desired. □

Now, we prove the Δ-convergence of the new multi-step iteration process for the new class of mappings in a CAT ( 0 ) space.

Theorem 2 Let K be a nonempty closed convex subset of a complete CAT ( 0 ) space X, let T : K K be a generalized nonexpansive mapping with F ( T ) , and let { x n } be a sequence defined by (1.4) such that { α n } , { β n i } [ 0 , 1 ] , i = 1 , 2 , , k 2 and { β n k 1 } [ a , b ] for some a , b ( 0 , 1 ) . Then the sequence { x n } Δ-converges to the fixed point of T.

Proof Let p F ( T ) . From (1.2), (1.4) and Lemma 1, we have
d ( x n + 1 , p ) = d ( ( 1 α n ) y n 1 α n T y n 1 , p ) ( 1 α n ) d ( y n 1 , p ) + α n d ( T y n 1 , p ) ( 1 α n ) d ( y n 1 , p ) + α n { d ( y n 1 , p ) + φ ( d ( p , T p ) ) } = d ( y n 1 , p ) .
Also, we obtain
d ( y n 1 , p ) = d ( ( 1 β n 1 ) y n 2 β n 1 T y n 2 , p ) ( 1 β n 1 ) d ( y n 2 , p ) + β n 1 d ( T y n 2 , p ) ( 1 β n 1 ) d ( y n 2 , p ) + β n 1 { d ( y n 2 , p ) + φ ( d ( p , T p ) ) } = d ( y n 2 , p ) .
Continuing the above process, we have
d ( x n + 1 , p ) d ( y n 1 , p ) d ( y n 2 , p ) d ( y n k 1 , p ) d ( x n , p ) .
(3.3)
This inequality guarantees that the sequence { d ( x n , p ) } is non-increasing and bounded below, and so lim n d ( x n , p ) exists for all p F ( T ) . Let lim n d ( x n , p ) = r . By using (3.3), we get
lim n d ( y n k 1 , p ) = r .
By Lemma 2, we also have
d ( y n k 1 , p ) 2 = d ( ( 1 β n k 1 ) x n β n k 1 T x n , p ) 2 ( 1 β n k 1 ) d ( x n , p ) 2 + β n k 1 d ( T x n , p ) 2 β n k 1 ( 1 β n k 1 ) d ( x n , T x n ) 2 ( 1 β n k 1 ) d ( x n , p ) 2 + β n k 1 { d ( x n , p ) + φ ( d ( p , T p ) ) } 2 β n k 1 ( 1 β n k 1 ) d ( x n , T x n ) 2 = d ( x n , p ) 2 β n k 1 ( 1 β n k 1 ) d ( x n , T x n ) 2 ,
which implies that
d ( x n , T x n ) 2 1 a ( 1 b ) [ d ( x n , p ) 2 d ( y n k 1 , p ) 2 ] .
Thus lim n d ( x n , T x n ) = 0 . To show that the sequence { x n } -converges to a fixed point of T, we prove that
W ( x n ) = { u n } { x n } A ( { u n } ) F ( T )

and W ( x n ) consists of exactly one point. Let u W ( x n ) . Then there exists a subsequence { u n } of { x n } such that A ( { u n } ) = { u } . By Lemma 3, there exists a subsequence { v n } of { u n } such that - lim n v n = v K . By Proposition 2 and Theorem 1, v F ( T ) . By Lemma 4, we have u = v F ( T ) . This shows that W ( x n ) F ( T ) . Now, we prove that W ( x n ) consists of exactly one point. Let { u n } be a subsequence of { x n } with A ( { u n } ) = { u } , and let A ( { x n } ) = { x } . We have already seen that u = v and v F ( T ) . Finally, since { d ( x n , v ) } converges, by Lemma 4, x = v F ( T ) . This shows that W ( x n ) = { x } . This completes the proof. □

We give the following theorem related to the Δ-convergence of the S-iteration process for the new class of mappings in a CAT ( 0 ) space.

Theorem 3 Let K be a nonempty closed convex subset of a complete CAT ( 0 ) space X, let T : K K be a generalized nonexpansive mapping with F ( T ) , and let { x n } be a sequence defined by (1.3) such that { α n } , { β n } [ a , b ] for some a , b ( 0 , 1 ) . Then the sequence { x n } Δ-converges to the fixed point of T.

Proof Let p F ( T ) . Using (1.2), (1.3) and Lemma 1, we have
d ( x n + 1 , p ) = d ( ( 1 α n ) T x n α n T y n , p ) ( 1 α n ) d ( T x n , p ) + α n d ( T y n , p ) ( 1 α n ) { d ( x n , p ) + φ ( d ( p , T p ) ) } + α n { d ( y n , p ) + φ ( d ( p , T p ) ) } = ( 1 α n ) d ( x n , p ) + α n d ( y n , p ) .
(3.4)
Also, we obtain
d ( y n , p ) = d ( ( 1 β n ) x n β n T x n , p ) ( 1 β n ) d ( x n , p ) + β n d ( T x n , p ) ( 1 β n ) d ( x n , p ) + β n { d ( x n , p ) + φ ( d ( p , T p ) ) } = d ( x n , p ) .
(3.5)
From (3.4) and (3.5), we have
d ( x n + 1 , p ) d ( x n , p ) .
This inequality guarantees that the sequence { d ( x n , p ) } is non-increasing and bounded below, and so lim n d ( x n , p ) exists for all p F ( T ) . Let
lim n d ( x n , p ) = r .
(3.6)
Now, we prove that lim n d ( y n , p ) = r . By (3.4), we have
d ( x n + 1 , p ) ( 1 α n ) d ( x n , p ) + α n d ( y n , p ) .
This gives that
α n d ( x n , p ) d ( x n , p ) + α n d ( y n , p ) d ( x n + 1 , p )
or
d ( x n , p ) d ( y n , p ) + 1 α n [ d ( x n , p ) d ( x n + 1 , p ) ] d ( y n , p ) + 1 a [ d ( x n , p ) d ( x n + 1 , p ) ] .
This gives
r lim inf n d ( y n , p ) .
By (3.5) and (3.6), we obtain
lim sup n d ( y n , p ) r .
Then we get
lim n d ( y n , p ) = r .
By Lemma 2, we also have
d ( y n , p ) 2 = d ( ( 1 β n ) x n β n T x n , p ) 2 ( 1 β n ) d ( x n , p ) 2 + β n d ( T x n , p ) 2 β n ( 1 β n ) d ( x n , T x n ) 2 ( 1 β n ) d ( x n , p ) 2 + β n { d ( x n , p ) + φ ( d ( p , T p ) ) } 2 β n ( 1 β n ) d ( x n , T x n ) 2 = d ( x n , p ) 2 β n ( 1 β n ) d ( x n , T x n ) 2 ,
which implies that
d ( x n , T x n ) 2 1 a ( 1 b ) [ d ( x n , p ) 2 d ( y n , p ) 2 ] .

Thus lim n d ( x n , T x n ) = 0 . The rest of the proof follows the pattern of the above theorem and is therefore omitted. □

4 Strong convergence theorems for a contractive-like mapping

Now, we prove the strong convergence of the new multi-step iteration process for a contractive-like mapping in a CAT ( 0 ) space.

Theorem 4 Let K be a nonempty closed convex subset of a complete CAT ( 0 ) space X, let T : K K be a contractive-like mapping with F ( T ) , and let { x n } be a sequence defined by (1.4) such that { α n } [ 0 , 1 ) , n = 0 α n = and { β n i } [ 0 , 1 ) , i = 1 , 2 , , k 1 . Then the sequence { x n } converges strongly to the unique fixed point of T.

Proof Let p be the unique fixed point of T. From (1.1), (1.4) and Lemma 1, we have
d ( x n + 1 , p ) = d ( ( 1 α n ) y n 1 α n T y n 1 , p ) ( 1 α n ) d ( y n 1 , p ) + α n d ( T y n 1 , p ) ( 1 α n ) d ( y n 1 , p ) + α n { δ d ( y n 1 , p ) + φ ( d ( p , T p ) ) } = ( 1 α n ) d ( y n 1 , p ) + α n δ d ( y n 1 , p ) = [ 1 α n ( 1 δ ) ] d ( y n 1 , p ) .
Also, we obtain
d ( y n 1 , p ) = d ( ( 1 β n 1 ) y n 2 β n 1 T y n 2 , p ) ( 1 β n 1 ) d ( y n 2 , p ) + β n 1 d ( T y n 2 , p ) ( 1 β n 1 ) d ( y n 2 , p ) + β n 1 { δ d ( y n 2 , p ) + φ ( d ( p , T p ) ) } = ( 1 β n 1 ) d ( y n 2 , p ) + β n 1 δ d ( y n 2 , p ) = [ 1 β n 1 ( 1 δ ) ] d ( y n 2 , p ) .
In a similar fashion, we can get
d ( y n 2 , p ) [ 1 β n 2 ( 1 δ ) ] d ( y n 3 , p ) .
Continuing the above process, we have
d ( x n + 1 , p ) [ 1 α n ( 1 δ ) ] [ 1 β n 1 ( 1 δ ) ] [ 1 β n 2 ( 1 δ ) ] [ 1 β n k 2 ( 1 δ ) ] d ( y n k 1 , p ) .
(4.1)
In addition, we obtain
d ( y n k 1 , p ) = d ( ( 1 β n k 1 ) x n β n k 1 T x n , p ) ( 1 β n k 1 ) d ( x n , p ) + β n k 1 d ( T x n , p ) ( 1 β n k 1 ) d ( x n , p ) + β n k 1 { δ d ( x n , p ) + φ ( d ( p , T p ) ) } = ( 1 β n k 1 ) d ( x n , p ) + β n k 1 δ d ( x n , p ) = [ 1 β n k 1 ( 1 δ ) ] d ( x n , p ) .
(4.2)
From (4.1) and (4.2), we have
d ( x n + 1 , p ) [ 1 α n ( 1 δ ) ] [ 1 β n 1 ( 1 δ ) ] [ 1 β n 2 ( 1 δ ) ] [ 1 β n k 2 ( 1 δ ) ] [ 1 β n k 1 ( 1 δ ) ] d ( x n , p ) [ 1 α n ( 1 δ ) ] d ( x n , p ) j = 0 n [ 1 α j ( 1 δ ) ] d ( x 0 , p ) e ( 1 δ ) j = 0 n α j d ( x 0 , p ) .
(4.3)
Using the fact that 0 δ < 1 , α j [ 0 , 1 ] and n = 0 α n = , we get that
lim n e ( 1 δ ) j = 0 n α j = 0 .
This together with (4.3) implies that
lim n d ( x n + 1 , p ) = 0 .

Consequently, x n p F ( T ) and this completes the proof. □

Remark 2 In Theorem 4 the condition n = 0 α n = may be replaced with n = 0 β n i = for a fixed i = 1 , 2 , , k 1 .

Finally, we give the strong convergence theorem of the S-iteration process for a contractive-like mapping in a CAT ( 0 ) space as follows.

Theorem 5 Let K be a nonempty closed convex subset of a complete CAT ( 0 ) space X, let T : K K be a contractive-like mapping with F ( T ) , and let { x n } be a sequence defined by (1.3) such that { α n } , { β n } [ 0 , 1 ] . Then the sequence { x n } converges strongly to the unique fixed point of T.

Proof Let p be the unique fixed point of T. From (1.1), (1.3) and Lemma 1, we have
d ( x n + 1 , p ) = d ( ( 1 α n ) T x n α n T y n , p ) ( 1 α n ) d ( T x n , p ) + α n d ( T y n , p ) ( 1 α n ) { δ d ( x n , p ) + φ ( d ( p , T p ) ) } + α n { δ d ( y n , p ) + φ ( d ( p , T p ) ) } = ( 1 α n ) δ d ( x n , p ) + α n δ d ( y n , p ) .
(4.4)
Similarly, we obtain
d ( y n , p ) = d ( ( 1 β n ) x n β n T x n , p ) ( 1 β n ) d ( x n , p ) + β n d ( T x n , p ) ( 1 β n ) d ( x n , p ) + β n { δ d ( x n , p ) + φ ( d ( p , T p ) ) } = ( 1 β n ) d ( x n , p ) + β n δ d ( x n , p ) = ( 1 β n ( 1 δ ) ) d ( x n , p ) d ( x n , p ) .
(4.5)
Then, from (4.4) and (4.5), we get that
d ( x n + 1 , p ) ( 1 α n ) δ d ( x n , p ) + α n δ d ( y n , p ) ( 1 α n ) δ d ( x n , p ) + α n δ d ( x n , p ) δ d ( x n , p ) δ n + 1 d ( x 0 , p ) .
If δ ( 0 , 1 ) , we obtain
lim n d ( x n + 1 , p ) = 0 .

Thus we have x n p F ( T ) . If δ = 0 , the result is clear. This completes the proof. □

5 Conclusions

The new multi-step iteration reduces to the two-step iteration and the SP-iteration processes. Also, the class of generalized nonexpansive mappings includes nonexpansive mappings. Then these results presented in this paper extend and generalize some works for a CAT ( 0 ) space in the literature.

Declarations

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the referee for his/her careful reading and valuable comments and suggestions which led to the present form of the paper. This paper has been presented in International Conference ‘Anatolian Communications in Nonlinear Analysis (ANCNA 2013)’ in Abant Izzet Baysal University, Bolu, Turkey, July 03-06, 2013. This paper was supported by Sakarya University Scientific Research Foundation (Project number: 2013-02-00-003).

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Sciences and Arts, Sakarya University

References

  1. Agarwal RP, O’Regan D, Sahu DR: Iterative construction of fixed points of nearly asymptotically nonexpansive mappings. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 2007, 8(1):61–79.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Ishikawa S: Fixed points by a new iteration method. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1974, 44: 147–150. 10.1090/S0002-9939-1974-0336469-5MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Mann WR: Mean value methods in iterations. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1953, 4: 506–510. 10.1090/S0002-9939-1953-0054846-3View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Phuengrattana W, Suantai S: On the rate of convergence of Mann, Ishikawa, Noor and SP iterations for continuous functions on an arbitrary interval. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2011, 235(9):3006–3014. 10.1016/j.cam.2010.12.022MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Rhoades BE: A comparison of various definitions of contractive mappings. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 1977, 226: 257–290.MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Thianwan S: Common fixed points of new iterations for two asymptotically nonexpansive nonself-mappings in a Banach space. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2009, 224: 688–695. 10.1016/j.cam.2008.05.051MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Imoru CO, Olantiwo MO: On the stability of Picard and Mann iteration processes. Carpath. J. Math. 2003, 19(2):155–160.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Berinde V: On the stability of some fixed point procedures. Bul. ştiinţ. - Univ. Baia Mare, Ser. B Fasc. Mat.-Inform. 2002, 18(1):7–14.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Berinde V: On the convergence of the Ishikawa iteration in the class of quasi contractive operators. Acta Math. Univ. Comen. 2004, 73(1):119–126.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Harder AM, Hicks TL: Stability results for fixed point iteration procedures. Math. Jpn. 1988, 33(5):693–706.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Zamfirescu T: Fix point theorems in metric spaces. Arch. Math. 1972, 23(1):292–298. 10.1007/BF01304884MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Osilike MO, Udomene A: Short proofs of stability results for fixed point iteration procedures for a class of contractive-type mappings. Indian J. Pure Appl. Math. 1999, 30(12):1229–1234.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Gürsoy F, Karakaya V, Rhoades BE: Data dependence results of new multi-step and S -iterative schemes for contractive-like operators. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013., 2013: Article ID 76 10.1186/1687-1812-2013-76Google Scholar
  14. Kirk WA: Geodesic geometry and fixed point theory. Colecc. Abierta 64. In Seminar of Mathematical Analysis. Universidad de Sevilla Secr. Publ., Sevilla; 2003:195–225.Google Scholar
  15. Kirk WA: Geodesic geometry and fixed point theory II. In International Conference on Fixed Point Theory and Applications. Yokohama Publ., Yokohama; 2004:113–142.Google Scholar
  16. Dhompongsa S, Kirk WA, Sims B: Fixed points of uniformly Lipschitzian mappings. Nonlinear Anal., Theory Methods Appl. 2006, 65(4):762–772. 10.1016/j.na.2005.09.044MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Dhompongsa S, Kirk WA, Panyanak B: Nonexpansive set-valued mappings in metric and Banach spaces. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 2007, 8(1):35–45.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Dhompongsa S, Panyanak B:On -convergence theorems in CAT ( 0 ) spaces. Comput. Math. Appl. 2008, 56(10):2572–2579. 10.1016/j.camwa.2008.05.036MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. Şahin A, Başarır M: On the strong convergence of a modified S -iteration process for asymptotically quasi-nonexpansive mappings in a CAT(0) space. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013., 2013: Article ID 12 10.1186/1687-1812-2013-12Google Scholar
  20. Şahin A, Başarır M: On the strong and -convergence of SP -iteration on a CAT ( 0 ) space. J. Inequal. Appl. 2013., 2013: Article ID 311 10.1186/1029-242X-2013-311Google Scholar
  21. Bridson M, Haefliger A Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften 319. In Metric Spaces of Non-Positive Curvature. Springer, Berlin; 1999.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Bruhat F, Tits J: Groupes réductifs sur un corps local. Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. 1972, 41: 5–251. 10.1007/BF02715544MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. Lim TC: Remarks on some fixed point theorems. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1976, 60: 179–182. 10.1090/S0002-9939-1976-0423139-XView ArticleMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. Kirk WA, Panyanak B: A concept of convergence in geodesic spaces. Nonlinear Anal., Theory Methods Appl. 2008, 68(12):3689–3696. 10.1016/j.na.2007.04.011MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. Nanjaras B, Panyanak B:Demiclosed principle for asymptotically nonexpansive mappings in CAT ( 0 ) spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2010., 2010: Article ID 268780 10.1155/2010/268780Google Scholar

Copyright

© Başarır and Şahin; 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.