Open Access

Triple fixed point theorems via α-series in partially ordered metric spaces

  • Ramesh Kumar Vats1,
  • Kenan Tas2Email author,
  • Vizender Sihag1 and
  • Amit Kumar1
Journal of Inequalities and Applications20142014:176

https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2014-176

Received: 29 November 2013

Accepted: 23 April 2014

Published: 12 May 2014

Abstract

This manuscript has two aims: first we extend the definitions of compatibility and weakly reciprocally continuity, for a trivariate mapping F and a self-mapping g akin to a compatible mapping as introduced by Choudhary and Kundu (Nonlinear Anal. 73:2524-2531, 2010) for a bivariate mapping F and a self-mapping g. Further, using these definitions we establish tripled coincidence and fixed point results by applying the new concept of an α-series for sequence of mappings, introduced by Sihag et al. (Quaest. Math. 37:1-6, 2014), in the setting of partially ordered metric spaces.

MSC:54H25, 47H10, 54E50.

Keywords

α-seriescompatible mappingstripled coincidence pointtripled fixed pointpartially ordered metric space

1 Introduction and preliminaries

The notion of metric space is fundamental in mathematical analysis and the Banach contraction principle is the root of fruitful tree of fixed point theory [1]. In fact, many studies have been done on contractive mappings, e.g., Rhoades [2] presented a comparison of various definitions (more than 100 types varied from 25 basic types) of contractive mappings on complete metric spaces in 1977. See also [37]. Up to now, such a study is still going on; proceeding in the same tradition, very recently Sihag et al. [8] introduced the new concept of an α-series to give a common fixed point theorem for a sequence of self-mappings. On the other hand, the concept of a coupled fixed point was introduced in 1991 by Chang and Ma [9]. This concept has been of interest to many researchers in metrical fixed point theory (see for example [3, 1015]). Recently, Bhaskar and Lakshmikantham [16] established coupled fixed point theorems for a mixed monotone operator in partially ordered metric spaces. Afterward, Lakshmikantham and Ćirić [17] extended the results of [16] by furnishing coupled coincidence and coupled fixed point theorems for two commuting mappings.

Starting from the background of coupled fixed points, recently Berinde and Borcut [18] introduced the notion of tripled fixed points in partially ordered metric spaces, which refer to the operator as F : X × X × X X , motivated by the fact that through the coupled fixed point technique we cannot solve a system with the following form:
{ x 2 + 2 y z 6 x + 3 = 0 , y 2 + 2 x z 6 y + 3 = 0 , z 2 + 2 y x 6 z + 3 = 0 .

In a subsequent series, Berinde and Borcut [18], introduced the concept of tripled coincidence point and obtained the tripled coincidence point theorems; for more on the tripled fixed point (see [1927]). Further, Borcut and Berinde [28, 29] established the tripled fixed point theorems by introducing the concept of commuting mappings and also discussed the existence and uniqueness of solution of periodic boundary value problem.

Thus, the purpose of this paper is to prove tripled coincidence and fixed point results in partially ordered metric spaces for a self-mapping g and a sequence { T i } n N of trivariate self-mapping that have some useful properties.

The tripled fixed point theorems we deduce are motivated by the possibilities of solving simultaneous nonlinear equations of the above type.

Now, we collect basic definitions and results regarding coupled and tripled point theory.

Definition 1.1 (see [16])

An element ( x , y ) X × X is called a coupled fixed point of the mapping F : X × X X if F ( x , y ) = x and F ( y , x ) = y .

Definition 1.2 (see [17])

An element ( x , y ) X × X is called a coupled coincidence point of the mappings F : X × X X and g : X X if F ( x , y ) = g ( x ) and F ( y , x ) = g ( y ) . In this case, ( g ( x ) , g ( y ) ) is called a coupled point of coincidence.

Let ( X , ) be a partially ordered set and d be a metric on X such that ( X , d ) is a complete metric space. Consider the product X × X × X with the following partial order: for ( x , y , z ) , ( u , v , w ) X × X × X ,
( u , v , w ) ( x , y , z ) x u , y v , z w .

Definition 1.3 (see [18])

Let ( X , ) be a partially ordered set and F : X × X × X X . We say that F has the mixed monotone property if F ( x , y , z ) is monotone non-decreasing in x and z and is monotone non-increasing in y, that is, for any x , y , z X
x 1 , x 2 X , x 1 x 2 F ( x 1 , y , z ) F ( x 2 , y , z ) , y 1 , y 2 X , y 1 y 2 F ( x , y 1 , z ) F ( x , y 2 , z ) and z 1 , z 2 X , z 1 z 2 F ( x , y , z 1 ) F ( x , y , z 2 ) .

Definition 1.4 (see [18])

We call an element ( x , y , z ) X × X × X a tripled fixed point of mapping F : X × X × X X if
F ( x , y , z ) = x , F ( y , x , y ) = y and F ( z , y , x ) = z .

Definition 1.5 (see [18])

Let ( X , d ) be a complete metric space. It is called metric on X × X × X , the mapping d : X × X × X X with
d [ ( x , y , z ) , ( u , v , w ) ] = d ( x , u ) + d ( y , v ) + d ( z , w ) .

Akin to the concept of g-mixed monotone property [17] for a bivariate mapping, F : X × X X and a self-mapping, g : X X , Borcut and Berinde [28] introduced the concept of g-mixed monotone property for a trivariate mapping F : X × X × X X and a self-mapping, g : X X in the following way.

Definition 1.6 (see [28])

Let ( X , ) be a partially ordered set and F : X × X × X X and g : X X . We say that F has the g-mixed monotone property if F ( x , y , z ) is monotone non-decreasing in x and z, and if it is monotone non-increasing in y, that is, for any x , y , z X ,
x 1 , x 2 X , g ( x 1 ) g ( x 2 ) F ( x 1 , y , z ) F ( x 2 , y , z ) , y 1 , y 2 X , g ( y 1 ) g ( y 2 ) F ( x , y 1 , z ) F ( x , y 2 , z ) and z 1 , z 2 X , g ( z 1 ) g ( z 2 ) F ( x , y , z 1 ) F ( x , y , z 2 ) .

Now, we introduce the concept of compatible mapping for a trivariate mapping F and a self-mapping g akin to compatible mapping as introduced by Choudhary and Kundu [11] for a bivariate mapping F and a self-mapping g.

Definition 1.7 Let mapping F and g where F : X × X × X X and g : X X are said to be compatible if
lim n + d ( g ( F ( x n , y n , z n ) ) , F ( g ( x n ) , g ( y n ) , g ( z n ) ) ) = 0 , lim n + d ( g ( F ( y n , x n , y n ) ) , F ( g ( y n ) , g ( x n ) , g ( y n ) ) ) = 0 and lim n + d ( g ( F ( z n , y n , x n ) ) , F ( g ( z n ) , g ( y n ) , g ( x n ) ) ) = 0 ,
whenever { x n } , { y n } , and { z n } are sequences in X, such that
lim n + F ( x n , y n , z n ) = lim n + g ( x n ) = x , lim n + F ( y n , x n , y n ) = lim n + g ( y n ) = y
and
lim n + F ( z n , y n , x n ) = lim n + g ( z n ) = z

for all x , y , z X .

Definition 1.8 The mappings F : X × X × X X and g : X X are called:
  1. (i)
    Reciprocally continuous if
    lim n + g ( F ( x n , y n , z n ) ) = g ( x ) and lim n + F ( g ( x n ) , g ( y n ) , g ( z n ) ) = F ( x , y , z ) , lim n + g ( F ( y n , x n , y n ) ) = g ( y ) and lim n + F ( g ( y n ) , g ( x n ) , g ( y n ) ) = F ( y , x , y )
     
and
lim n + g ( F ( z n , y n , x n ) ) = g ( z ) and lim n + F ( g ( z n ) , g ( y n ) , g ( x n ) ) = F ( z , y , x ) ,
whenever { x n } , { y n } and { z n } are sequences in X, such that
lim n + F ( x n , y n , z n ) = lim n + g ( x n ) = x , lim n + F ( y n , x n , y n ) = lim n + g ( y n ) = y
and
lim n + F ( z n , y n , x n ) = lim n + g ( z n ) = z
for some x , y , z X .
  1. (ii)
    Weakly reciprocally continuous if
    lim n + g ( F ( x n , y n , z n ) ) = g ( x ) or lim n + F ( g ( x n ) , g ( y n ) , g ( z n ) ) = F ( x , y , z ) , lim n + g ( F ( y n , x n , y n ) ) = g ( y ) or lim n + F ( g ( y n ) , g ( x n ) , g ( y n ) ) = F ( y , x , y )
     
and
lim n + g ( F ( z n , y n , x n ) ) = g ( z ) or lim n + F ( g ( z n ) , g ( y n ) , g ( x n ) ) = F ( z , y , x ) ,
whenever { x n } , { y n } and { z n } are sequences in X, such that
lim n + F ( x n , y n , z n ) = lim n + g ( x n ) = x , lim n + F ( y n , x n , y n ) = lim n + g ( y n ) = y
and
lim n + F ( z n , y n , x n ) = lim n + g ( z n ) = z

for some x , y , z X .

Definition 1.9 Let ( X , d , ) be a partially ordered metric space. We say that X is regular if the following conditions hold:
  1. (i)

    if a non-decreasing sequence { x n } is such that x n x , then x n x for all n 0 ,

     
  2. (ii)

    if a non-increasing sequence { y n } is such that y n y , then y y n for all n 0 .

     

Definition 1.10 (see [8])

Let { a n } be a sequence of non-negative real numbers. We say that a series n = 1 + a n is an α-series, if there exist 0 < α < 1 and n α N such that i = 1 k a i α k for each k n α .

Remark 1.1 (see [8])

Each convergent series of non-negative real terms is an α-series. However, there are also divergent series that are α-series. For example, n = 1 + 1 n is an α-series.

2 Main results

Let ( X , ) be a partially ordered set, g be a self-mapping on X and { T i } i N be a sequence of mappings from X × X × X into X such that T i ( X × X × X ) g ( X ) and
T i ( x , y , z ) T i + 1 ( u , v , w ) , T i + 1 ( v , u , v ) T i ( y , x , y ) and T i + 1 ( z , y , x ) T i ( w , v , u )
(1)

for x , y , z , u , v , w X with g ( x ) g ( u ) , g ( v ) g ( y ) and g ( z ) g ( w ) .

In the proof of our main theorem, we consider sequences that are constructed in the following way.

Let x 0 , y 0 , z 0 X be such that g ( x 0 ) T 0 ( x 0 , y 0 , z 0 ) , g ( y 0 ) T 0 ( y 0 , x 0 , y 0 ) and g ( z 0 ) T 0 ( z 0 , y 0 , x 0 ) . Since T 0 ( X × X × X ) g ( X ) , we can choose x 1 , y 1 , z 1 X such that g ( x 1 ) = T 0 ( x 0 , y 0 , z 0 ) , g ( y 2 ) = T 0 ( y 0 , x 0 , y 0 ) and g ( z 2 ) = T 0 ( z 0 , y 0 , x 0 ) . Again we can choose x 2 , y 2 , z 2 X such that g ( x 2 ) = T 1 ( x 1 , y 1 , z 1 ) , g ( y 2 ) = T 1 ( y 1 , x 1 , y 1 ) and g ( z 2 ) = T 1 ( z 1 , y 1 , x 1 ) . Continuing like this, we can construct three sequences { x n } , { y n } , and { x n } such that
g ( x n + 1 ) = T n ( x n , y n , z n ) , g ( y n + 1 ) = T n ( y n , x n , y n ) and g ( z n + 1 ) = T n ( z n , y n , x n )
(2)

for all n 0 .

Now, by using mathematical induction, we prove that
g ( x n ) g ( x n + 1 ) , g ( y n ) g ( y n + 1 ) and g ( z n ) g ( z n + 1 )
(3)
for all n 0 . Since g ( x 0 ) T 0 ( x 0 , y 0 , z 0 ) , g ( y 0 ) T 0 ( y 0 , x 0 , y 0 ) and g ( z 0 ) T 0 ( z 0 , y 0 , x 0 ) , in view of g ( x 1 ) = T 0 ( x 0 , y 0 , z 0 ) , g ( y 1 ) = T 0 ( y 0 , x 0 , z 0 ) and g ( z 1 ) = T 0 ( z 0 , y 0 , x 0 ) , we have g ( x 0 ) g ( x 1 ) , g ( y 0 ) g ( y 1 ) , g ( z 0 ) g ( z 1 ) , that is, (3) holds for n = 0 . We presume that (3) holds for some n > 0 . Now, by (2) and (3), one deduces that
g ( x n + 1 ) = T n ( x n , y n , z n ) T n + 1 ( x n + 1 , y n + 1 , z n + 1 ) = g ( x n + 2 ) , g ( y n + 2 ) = T n + 1 ( y n + 1 , x n + 1 , y n + 1 ) T n ( y n , x n , y n ) = g ( y n + 1 )
and
g ( z n + 1 ) = T n ( z n , y n , x n ) T n + 1 ( z n + 1 , y n + 1 , x n + 1 ) = g ( z n + 2 ) .
Thus by mathematical induction, we conclude that (3) holds for all n 0 . Therefore, we have
g ( x 0 ) g ( x 1 ) g ( x 2 ) g ( x n + 1 ) , g ( y 0 ) g ( y 1 ) g ( y 2 ) g ( y n + 1 )
and
g ( z 0 ) g ( z 1 ) g ( z 2 ) g ( z n + 1 ) .

In view of the above considerations, we revise Definitions 1.7 and 1.8 as follows.

Definition 2.1 Let ( X , d ) be a metric space. { T i } i N and g are compatible if
lim n + d ( g ( T n ( x n , y n , z n ) ) , T n ( g ( x n ) , g ( y n ) , g ( z n ) ) ) = 0 , lim n + d ( g ( T n ( y n , x n , y n ) ) , T n ( g ( y n ) , g ( x n ) , g ( y n ) ) ) = 0
and
lim n + d ( g ( T n ( z n , y n , x n ) ) , T n ( g ( z n ) , g ( y n ) , g ( x n ) ) ) = 0 ,
whenever { x n } , { y n } and { z n } are sequences in X, such that
lim n + T n ( x n , y n , z n ) = lim n + g ( x n + 1 ) = x , lim n + T n ( y n , x n , y n ) = lim n + g ( y n + 1 ) = y
and
lim n + T n ( z n , y n , x n ) = lim n + g ( z n + 1 ) = z

for some x , y , z X .

Definition 2.2 { T i } i N and g are called weakly reciprocally continuous if
lim n + g ( T n ( x n , y n , z n ) ) = g ( x ) , lim n + g ( T n ( y n , x n , y n ) ) = g ( y )
and
lim n + g ( T n ( z n , y n , x n ) ) = g ( z ) ,
whenever { x n } , { y n } , and { z n } are sequences in X, such that
lim n + T n ( x n , y n , z n ) = lim n + g ( x n + 1 ) = x , lim n + T n ( y n , x n , y n ) = lim n + g ( y n + 1 ) = y
and
lim n + T n ( z n , y n , x n ) = lim n + g ( z n + 1 ) = z

for some x , y , z X .

Now, we establish the main result of this manuscript as follows.

Theorem 2.1 Let ( X , d , ) be a partially ordered metric space. Let g be a self-mapping on X and { T i } i N be a sequence of mappings from X × X × X into X such that T i ( X × X × X ) g ( X ) , g ( X ) is a complete subset of X, { T i } i N and g are compatible, weakly reciprocally continuous, g is monotonic non-decreasing, continuous, satisfying condition (1) and the following condition:
d ( T i ( x , y , z ) , T j ( u , v , w ) ) β i , j [ d ( g ( x ) , T i ( x , y , z ) ) + d ( g ( u ) , T j ( u , v , w ) ) ] + γ i , j d ( g ( u ) , g ( x ) )
(4)

for x , y , z , u , v , w X with g ( x ) g ( u ) , g ( v ) g ( y ) , g ( z ) g ( w ) or g ( x ) g ( u ) , g ( v ) g ( y ) , g ( z ) g ( w ) ; 0 β i , j , γ i , j < 1 for i , j N ; lim n + sup β i , n < 1 . Suppose also that there exists ( x 0 , y 0 , z 0 ) X × X × X such that g ( x 0 ) T 0 ( x 0 , y 0 , z 0 ) , g ( y 0 ) T 0 ( y 0 , x 0 , y 0 ) and g ( z 0 ) T 0 ( z 0 , y 0 , x 0 ) . If i = 1 + ( β i , i + 1 + γ i , i + 1 1 β i , i + 1 ) is an α-series and g ( X ) is regular, then { T i } i N and g have a tripled coincidence point, that is, there exists ( x , y , z ) X × X × X such that g ( x ) = T i ( x , y , z ) , g ( y ) = T i ( y , x , y ) , and g ( z ) = T i ( z , y , x ) for i N .

Proof We consider the sequences { x n } , { y n } , and { z n } constructed above and denote δ n = d ( g ( x n ) , g ( x n + 1 ) ) + d ( g ( y n ) , g ( y n + 1 ) ) + d ( g ( z n ) , g ( z n + 1 ) ) . Then, by (4), we get
d ( g ( x 1 ) , g ( x 2 ) ) = d ( T 0 ( x 0 , y 0 , z 0 ) , T 1 ( x 1 , y 1 , z 1 ) ) β 0 , 1 [ d ( g ( x 0 ) , T 0 ( x 0 , y 0 . z 0 ) ) + d ( g ( x 1 ) , T 1 ( x 1 , y 1 , z 1 ) ) ] + γ 0 , 1 d ( g ( x 0 ) , g ( x 1 ) ) = β 0 , 1 [ d ( g ( x 0 ) , g ( x 1 ) ) + d ( g ( x 1 ) , g ( x 2 ) ) ] + γ 0 , 1 d ( g ( x 0 ) , g ( x 1 ) ) .
It follows that
( 1 β 0 , 1 ) d ( g ( x 1 ) , g ( x 2 ) ) ( β 0 , 1 + γ 0 , 1 ) d ( g ( x 0 ) , g ( x 1 ) )
or, equivalently,
d ( g ( x 1 ) , g ( x 2 ) ) ( β 0 , 1 + γ 0 , 1 1 β 0 , 1 ) d ( g ( x 0 ) , g ( x 1 ) ) .
Also, one obtains
d ( g ( x 2 ) , g ( x 3 ) ) = d ( T 1 ( x 1 , y 1 , z 1 ) , T 2 ( x 2 , y 2 , z 2 ) ) ( β 1 , 2 + γ 1 , 2 1 β 1 , 2 ) d ( g ( x 1 ) , g ( x 2 ) ) ( β 1 , 2 + γ 1 , 2 1 β 1 , 2 ) ( β 0 , 1 + γ 0 , 1 1 β 0 , 1 ) d ( g ( x 0 ) , g ( x 1 ) ) .
Repeating the above procedure, we have
d ( g ( x n ) , g ( x n + 1 ) ) i = 0 n 1 ( β i , i + 1 + γ i , i + 1 1 β i , i + 1 ) d ( g ( x 0 ) , g ( x 1 ) ) .
(5)
Using similar arguments as above, one can also show that
d ( g ( y n ) , g ( y n + 1 ) ) i = 0 n 1 ( β i , i + 1 + γ i , i + 1 1 β i , i + 1 ) d ( g ( y 0 ) , g ( y 1 ) )
(6)
and
d ( g ( z n ) , g ( z n + 1 ) ) i = 0 n 1 ( β i , i + 1 + γ i , i + 1 1 β i , i + 1 ) d ( g ( z 0 ) , g ( z 1 ) ) .
(7)
Adding (5), (6), and (7), we have
δ n = d ( g ( x n ) , g ( x n + 1 ) ) + d ( g ( y n ) , g ( y n + 1 ) ) + d ( g ( z n ) , g ( z n + 1 ) ) i = 0 n 1 ( β i , i + 1 + γ i , i + 1 1 β i , i + 1 ) [ d ( g ( x 0 ) , g ( x 1 ) ) + d ( g ( y 0 ) , g ( y 1 ) ) + d ( g ( z 0 ) , g ( z 1 ) ) ] = i = 0 n 1 ( β i , i + 1 + γ i , i + 1 1 β i , i + 1 ) δ 0 .
Moreover, for p > 0 and by repeated use of the triangle inequality, one obtains
d ( g ( x n ) , g ( x n + p ) ) + d ( g ( y n ) , g ( y n + p ) ) + d ( g ( z n ) , g ( z n + p ) ) d ( g ( x n ) , g ( x n + 1 ) ) + d ( g ( y n ) , g ( y n + 1 ) ) + d ( g ( z n ) , g ( z n + 1 ) ) + d ( g ( x n + 1 ) , g ( x n + 2 ) ) + d ( g ( y n + 1 ) , g ( y n + 2 ) ) + d ( g ( z n + 1 ) , g ( z n + 2 ) ) + + d ( g ( x n + p 1 ) , g ( x n + p ) ) + d ( g ( y n + p 1 ) , g ( y n + p ) ) + d ( g ( z n + p 1 ) , g ( z n + p ) ) i = 0 n 1 ( β i , i + 1 + γ i , i + 1 1 β i , i + 1 ) δ 0 + i = 0 n ( β i , i + 1 + γ i , i + 1 1 β i , i + 1 ) δ 0 + + i = 0 n + p 2 ( β i , i + 1 + γ i , i + 1 1 β i , i + 1 ) δ 0 = k = 0 p 1 i = 0 n + k 1 ( β i , i + 1 + γ i , i + 1 1 β i , i + 1 ) δ 0 = k = n n + p 1 i = 0 k 1 ( β i , i + 1 + γ i , i + 1 1 β i , i + 1 ) δ 0 .
Let α and n α be as in Definition 1.10, then, for n n α , and using the fact that the geometric mean of non-negative numbers is less than or equal to the arithmetic mean, it follows that
d ( g ( x n ) , g ( x n + p ) ) + d ( g ( y n ) , g ( y n + p ) ) + d ( g ( z n ) , g ( z n + p ) ) k = n n + p 1 [ 1 k i = 0 k 1 ( β i , i + 1 + γ i , i + 1 1 β i , i + 1 ) ] k δ 0 ( k = n n + p 1 α k ) δ 0 α n 1 α δ 0 .
Now, taking the limit as n + , one deduces that
lim n + [ d ( g ( x n ) , g ( x n + p ) ) + d ( g ( y n ) , g ( y n + p ) ) + d ( g ( z n ) , g ( z n + p ) ) ] = 0 ,
which further implies that
lim n + d ( g ( x n ) , g ( x n + p ) ) = lim n + d ( g ( y n ) , g ( y n + p ) ) = lim n + d ( g ( z n ) , g ( z n + p ) ) = 0 .
Thus { g ( x n ) } , { g ( y n ) } and { g ( z n ) } are Cauchy sequences in X. Since g ( X ) is complete, then there exists ( r , s , t ) X × X × X , with g ( r ) = x , g ( s ) = y and g ( t ) = z , such that
lim n + g ( x n + 1 ) = lim n + T n ( x n , y n , z n ) = x , lim n + g ( y n + 1 ) = lim n + T n ( y n , x n , y n ) = y
and
lim n + g ( z n + 1 ) = lim n + T n ( z n , y n , x n ) = z .
Now, as { T i } i N and g are weakly reciprocally continuous, we have
lim n + g ( T n ( x n , y n , z n ) ) = g ( x ) , lim n + g ( T n ( y n , x n , y n ) ) = g ( y )
and
lim n + g ( T n ( z n , y n , x n ) ) = g ( z ) .
On the other hand, the compatibility of { T i } i N and g yields
lim n + d ( g ( T n ( x n , y n , z n ) ) , T n ( g ( x n ) , g ( y n ) , g ( z n ) ) ) = 0 , lim n + d ( g ( T n ( y n , x n , y n ) ) , T n ( g ( y n ) , g ( x n ) , g ( y n ) ) ) = 0
and
lim n + d ( g ( T n ( z n , y n , x n ) ) , T n ( g ( z n ) , g ( y n ) , g ( x n ) ) ) = 0 .
Then we have
lim n + T n ( g ( x n ) , g ( y n ) , g ( z n ) ) = g ( x ) ,
(8)
lim n + T n ( g ( y n ) , g ( x n ) , g ( y n ) ) = g ( y )
(9)
and
lim n + T n ( g ( z n ) , g ( y n ) , g ( x n ) ) = g ( z ) .
(10)
Since { g ( x n ) } and { g ( z n ) } are non-decreasing and { g ( y n ) } is non-increasing, using the regularity of X, we have g ( x n ) x , y g ( y n ) and g ( z n ) z for all n 0 . Then by (4), one obtains
d ( T i ( x , y , z ) , T n ( g ( x n ) , g ( y n ) , g ( z n ) ) ) β i , n [ d ( g ( x ) , T i ( x , y , z ) ) + d ( g ( g ( x n ) ) , T n ( g ( x n ) , g ( y n ) , g ( z n ) ) ) ] + γ i , n d ( g ( g ( x n ) ) , g ( x ) ) .

 □

Taking the limit as n + , we obtain T i ( x , y , z ) = g ( x ) as β i , n < 1 . Similarly, it can be proved that g ( y ) = T i ( y , x , y ) and g ( z ) = T i ( z , y , x ) . Thus, ( x , y , z ) is a tripled coincidence point of { T i } i N and g.

Now, we give useful conditions for the existence and uniqueness of a tripled common fixed point.

Theorem 2.2 In addition to the hypotheses of Theorem  2.1, suppose that the set of coincidence points is comparable with respect to g, then { T i } i N and g have a unique tripled common fixed point, that is, there exists ( x , y , z ) X × X × X such that x = g ( x ) = T i ( x , y , z ) , y = g ( y ) = T i ( y , x , y ) , and z = g ( z ) = T i ( z , y , x ) for i N .

Proof From Theorem 2.1, the set of tripled coincidence points is non-empty. Now, we show that if ( x , y , z ) and ( r , s , t ) are tripled coincidence points, that is, if g ( x ) = T i ( x , y , z ) , g ( y ) = T i ( y , x , y ) , g ( z ) = T i ( z , y , x ) , g ( r ) = T i ( r , s , t ) , g ( s ) = T i ( s , r , s ) , and g ( t ) = T i ( t , s , r ) , then g ( x ) = g ( r ) , g ( y ) = g ( s ) and g ( z ) = g ( t ) . Since the set of coincidence points is comparable, applying condition (4) to these points, we get
d ( g ( x ) , g ( r ) ) = d ( T i ( x , y , z ) , T j ( r , s , t ) ) β i , j [ d ( g ( x ) , T i ( x , y , z ) ) + d ( g ( r ) , T j ( r , s , t ) ) ] + γ i , j d ( g ( r ) , g ( x ) ) ,

and so as γ i , j < 1 , it follows that d ( g ( x ) , g ( r ) ) = 0 , that is, g ( x ) = g ( r ) . Similarly, it can be proved that g ( y ) = g ( s ) and g ( z ) = g ( t ) . Hence, { T i } i N and g have a unique tripled point of coincidence. It is well known that two compatible mappings are also weakly compatible, that is, they commute at their coincidence points. Thus, it is clear that { T i } i N and g have a unique tripled common fixed point whenever { T i } i N and g are weakly compatible. This finishes the proof. □

If g is the identity mapping, as a consequence of Theorem 2.1, we state the following corollary.

Corollary 2.3 Let ( X , d , ) be a complete partially ordered metric space. Let { T i } i N be a sequence of mappings from X × X × X into X such that { T i } i N satisfies, for x , y , z , u , v , w X , with x u , v y , z w or u x , y v , and w z , the following conditions:
  1. (i)

    T n ( x , y , z ) T n + 1 ( u , v , w ) ,

     
  2. (ii)

    d ( T i ( x , y , z ) , T j ( u , v , w ) ) β i , j [ d ( x , T i ( x , y , z ) ) + d ( u , T j ( u , v , w ) ) ] + γ i , j d ( u , x ) , with 0 β i , j , γ i , j < 1 and i , j N .

     

Suppose also that there exists ( x 0 , y 0 , z 0 ) X × X × X such that x 0 T 0 ( x 0 , y 0 , z 0 ) , y 0 T 0 ( y 0 , x 0 , y 0 ) and z 0 T 0 ( z 0 , y 0 , z 0 ) . If i = 1 + ( β i , i + 1 + γ i , i + 1 1 β i , i + 1 ) is an α-series and X is regular, then { T i } i N has a tripled fixed point, that is, there exists ( x , y , z ) X × X × X such that x = T i ( x , y , z ) , y = T i ( y , x , y ) and z = T i ( z , y , x ) , for i N .

Example 2.3 Take X = [ 0 , 1 ] endowed with usual metric d = | x y | for all x , y X and be defined as ‘greater than/equal to’ the ( X , d , ) be partial order metric space. Let T i : X 3 X be mapping defined as T i ( x , y , z ) = x + y + z 3 i ; i N and g is self-mapping defined as g ( x ) = x .

Clearly, T i ( x , y , z ) g ( X ) , g ( X ) is a complete subset of X.

By choosing the sequences { x n } = 1 n , { y n } = 1 n + 1 and { z n } = 1 n + 2 , one can easily observe that { T i } i N and g are compatible, weakly reciprocally continuous; g is monotonic non-decreasing, continuous, as well as satisfying condition (1).

Again by taking 0 < β i , j < 1 and 0 γ i , j < 1 , it is easy to check inequality (4) holds, thus all the hypotheses of Theorem 2.1 are satisfied and ( 0 , 0 , 0 ) , ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) are the tripled coincident points of g and T i . Moreover, using the same T i and g in Theorem 2.2, ( 0 , 0 , 0 ) is the unique fixed point of g and T i .

Remark 2.1 Open problem: In this paper, we prove tripled fixed point results. The idea can be extended to multidimensional cases. But the technicalities in the proofs therein will be different. We consider this as an open problem.

Declarations

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the learned referees for providing a suggestion to improve the manuscript. The first author also acknowledges the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, Government of India, for providing financial assistance under research project no. 25(0197)/11/EMR-II.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Mathematics, National Institute of Technology
(2)
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Cankaya University

References

  1. Agarwal RP, Meehan M, O’Regan D: Fixed Point Theory and Application. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; 2001.View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Rhoades BE: A comparison of various definitions of contractive mappings. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 1977,226(2):257–290.MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Luong NV, Thuan NX: Coupled fixed point theorems in partially ordered metric spaces. Bull. Math. Anal. Appl. 2010, 2: 16–24.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Nieto JJ, Rodriguez-Lopez R: Contractive mapping theorems in partially ordered sets and applications to ordinary differential equation. Order 2005, 22: 223–239. 10.1007/s11083-005-9018-5MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Nieto JJ, Rodriguez-Lopez R: Existence and uniqueness of fixed point in partially ordered sets and applications to ordinary differential equations. Acta Math. Sin. Engl. Ser. 2007,23(12):2205–2212. 10.1007/s10114-005-0769-0MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Paesano D, Vetro P: Suzuki’s type characterizations of completeness for partial metric spaces and fixed points for partially ordered metric spaces. Topol. Appl. 2012,159(3):911–920. 10.1016/j.topol.2011.12.008MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Ran ACM, Reurings MCB: A fixed point theorem in partially ordered sets and some applications to matrix equations. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 2004, 132: 1435–1443. 10.1090/S0002-9939-03-07220-4MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Sihag V, Vetro C, Vats RK: A fixed point theorem in G -metric spaces via α -series. Quaest. Math. 2014, 37: 1–6. 10.2989/16073606.2013.779961MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Chang SS, Ma YH: Coupled fixed point for mixed monotone condensing operators and an existence theorem of the solutions for a class of functional equations arising in dynamic programming. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1991, 160: 468–479. 10.1016/0022-247X(91)90319-UMathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Agarwal RP, Kadelburg Z, Radenovic S: On coupled fixed point results in asymmetric G -metric spaces. J. Inequal. Appl. 2013., 2013: Article ID 528Google Scholar
  11. Choudhary BS, Kundu A: A coupled coincidence point result in partially ordered metric spaces for compatible mappings. Nonlinear Anal. 2010, 73: 2524–2531. 10.1016/j.na.2010.06.025MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Berinde V: Generalized coupled fixed point theorems for mixed monotone mappings in partially ordered metric spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2010, 74: 7347–7355.MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Samet B: Coupled fixed point theorems for a generalized Meir-Keeler contraction in partially ordered metric spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2010, 72: 4508–4517. 10.1016/j.na.2010.02.026MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. Karapinar E, Agarwal RP: Further fixed point results on G -metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013., 2013: Article ID 154Google Scholar
  15. Agarwal RP, Karapinar E: Remarks on some coupled fixed point theorems in G -metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013., 2013: Article ID 2Google Scholar
  16. Bhaskar TG, Lakshmikantham V: Fixed point theorems in partially ordered metric space and applications. Nonlinear Anal. 2006, 65: 1379–1393. 10.1016/j.na.2005.10.017MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Lakshmikantham V, Ćirić L: Coupled fixed point theorems for nonlinear contractions in partially ordered metric spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2009, 70: 4341–4349. 10.1016/j.na.2008.09.020MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Berinde V, Borcut M: Tripled fixed point theorems for contractive type mappings in partially ordered metric spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2011,74(15):4889–4897. 10.1016/j.na.2011.03.032MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 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
  20. Aydi H, Karapinar E, Vetroc C: Meir-Keeler type contractions for tripled fixed points. Acta Math. Sci. 2012,32(6):2119–2130. 10.1016/S0252-9602(12)60164-7MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Aydi H, Karapinar E, Shatanawi W: Tripled fixed point results in generalized metric spaces. J. Appl. Math. 2012., 2012: Article ID 314279Google Scholar
  22. Aydi H, Karapinar E, Postolache M: Tripled coincidence point theorems for weak φ -contractions in partially ordered metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012., 2012: Article ID 44Google Scholar
  23. Aydi H, Karapinar E, Radenovic S: Tripled coincidence fixed point results for Boyd-Wong and Matkowski type contractions. Rev. R. Acad. Cienc. Exactas Fís. Nat., Ser. a Mat. 2013,107(2):339–353. 10.1007/s13398-012-0077-3MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. Aydi H, Abbas M, Sintunavarat W, Kumam P: Tripled fixed point of W -compatible mappings in abstract metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012., 2012: Article ID 134Google Scholar
  25. Abbas M, Ali B, Sintunavarat W, Kumam P: Tripled fixed point and tripled coincidence point theorems in intuitionistic fuzzy normed spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012., 2012: Article ID 187Google Scholar
  26. Abbas M, Aydi H, Karapinar E: Tripled fixed points of multi-valued nonlinear contraction mappings in partially ordered metric spaces. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2011., 2011: Article ID 812690Google Scholar
  27. Karapinar E, Aydi H, Mustafa Z: Some tripled coincidence point theorems for almost generalized contractions in ordered metric spaces. Tamkang J. Math. 2013,44(3):233–251.MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. Borcut M, Berinde V: Tripled coincidence theorems for contractive type mappings in partially ordered metric spaces. Appl. Math. Comput. 2012,218(10):5929–5936. 10.1016/j.amc.2011.11.049MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. Borcut M: Tripled coincidence theorems for contractive type mappings in partially ordered metric spaces. Appl. Math. Comput. 2012,218(14):7339–7346. 10.1016/j.amc.2012.01.030MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Vats et al.; licensee Springer. 2014

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 credited.