Skip to main content

Best proximity points of implicit relation type modified α 3 -proximal contractions

Abstract

In this paper, we introduce the concept of an α 3 -proximal admissible mappings and establish the existence of best proximity point theorems for implicit relation type modified α 3 -proximal contractions. As applications of our theorems, we derive some new best proximity point results for implicit relation type contractions whenever the range space is endowed with a graph or with a partial order. The obtained results generalize, extend, and modify some best proximity point results in the literature. Several interesting consequences of our theorems are also provided.

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

1 Introduction

In nonlinear functional analysis, one of the most significant research areas is fixed point theory. On the other hand, fixed point theory has an application in distinct branches of mathematics and also in different sciences, such as engineering, computer science, economics, etc. In 1922, Banach proved that every contraction in a complete metric space has a unique fixed point. Following this celebrated result, many authors have generalized, improved, and extended this result in the context of different abstract spaces for various operators.

On the other hand, several classical fixed point theorems and common fixed point theorems have been recently unified by considering general contractive conditions expressed by an implicit relation (see Popa [1, 2]). Following Popa’s approach, many results on fixed point, common fixed points, and coincidence points have been obtained, in various ambient spaces (see [38], and references therein). On the other hand, Samet et al. [9] introduced and studied α-ψ-contractive mappings in complete metric spaces and provided applications of the results to ordinary differential equations. More recently, Salimi et al. [10] modified the notions of α-ψ-contractive and α-admissible mappings and established fixed point theorems to modify the results in [9]. For more details and applications of this line of research, we refer the reader to some related papers [1113] and references therein. In this paper, we introduce the concept of an α 3 -proximal admissible mappings and establish the existence of best proximity point theorems for implicit relation type modified α 3 -proximal contractions. As applications of our theorems, we derive some new best proximity point results for implicit relation type contractions whenever the range space is endowed with a graph or with a partial order. The obtained results generalize, extend, and modify some best proximity point results in the literature.

2 Main results

Let A and B be two nonempty subsets of metric space (X,d) and T:AB be a nonself mapping. We say that x is a best proximity of T if

d ( x , T x ) =d(A,B),

where

d(A,B)=inf { d ( x , y ) : x A , y B } .

We define A 0 and B 0 as follows:

A 0 = { x A : d ( x , y ) = d ( A , B )  for some  y B }

and

B 0 = { y B : d ( x , y ) = d ( A , B )  for some  x A } .

We denote by Ψ the set of all nondecreasing functions ψ:[0,+)[0,+) such that n = 1 ψ n (t)<+ for all t>0, where ψ n is the n th iterate of ψ.

Let be the set of all continuous functions F: R + 6 R satisfying the following assertions:

  • (F1) if F(u,v,v,u,u+v,0)0, where u,v>0, then uψ(v);

  • (F2) F( t 1 ,, t 6 ) is decreasing in t 5 ;

  • (F3) if F(u,v,0,u+v,u,v)0, where u,v0, then uψ(v);

  • (F4) F(u,u,0,0,u,u)>0 for all u>0.

Example 1 Let

F( t 1 , t 2 , t 3 , t 4 , t 5 , t 6 )= t 1 ψ ( max { t 2 , t 3 , t 4 , t 5 + t 6 2 } ) Lmin{ t 3 , t 4 , t 5 , t 6 },

where L0 and ψΨ. Then FF.

Example 2 Let

F( t 1 , t 2 , t 3 , t 4 , t 5 , t 6 )= t 1 a t 2 b [ 1 + t 3 ] t 4 1 + t 2 c[ t 3 + t 4 ]d[ t 5 + t 6 ],

where a+b+2c+2d<1. Then FF.

Definition 1 Let A, B be two nonempty subsets of a metric space (X,d) and α:A×A[0,+) be a function. We say that a nonself mapping T:AB is α 3 -proximal admissible if, for all x 1 , x 2 , u 1 , u 2 A,

{ α ( x 1 , x 1 ) 1 , α ( x 2 , x 2 ) 1 , α ( x 1 , x 2 ) 1 , d ( u 1 , T x 1 ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( u 2 , T x 2 ) = d ( A , B ) { α ( u 1 , u 2 ) 1 , α ( u 1 , u 1 ) 1 , α ( u 2 , u 2 ) 1 .

Definition 2 Let A and B be nonempty subsets of a metric space (X,d) and α:A×A[0,) be a function. Then T:AB is said to be an implicit relation type modified α 3 -proximal contraction, if for all x,y,u,vA,

{ α ( x , y ) 1 , d ( u , T x ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( v , T y ) = d ( A , B ) F ( d ( u , v ) , d ( x , y ) , d ( x , u ) , d ( y , v ) , d ( x , v ) , d ( y , u ) ) L [ 1 α ( x , x ) α ( y , y ) ] ,
(2.1)

where L0 and FF.

Definition 3 Let (X,d) be a metric space and A and B be two nonempty subsets of X. Then B is said to be approximatively compact with respect to A if every sequence { y n } in B, satisfying the condition d(x, y n )d(x,B) for some x in A, has a convergent subsequence.

Theorem 1 Let A, B be two nonempty subsets of a metric space (X,d) such that A is complete and A 0 is nonempty. Assume that T:AB is a continuous implicit relation type modified α 3 -proximal contraction such that the following conditions hold:

  1. (i)

    T is an α 3 -proximal admissible mapping and

    T( A 0 ) B 0 ,
  2. (ii)

    there exist x 0 , x 1 A 0 such that

    d( x 1 ,T x 0 )=d(A,B),α( x 0 , x 1 )1,α( x 0 , x 0 )1andα( x 1 , x 1 )1.

Then T has a best proximity point. Further, the best proximity point is unique if

  1. (iii)

    for every x,yA with d(x,Tx)=d(A,B)=d(y,Ty), we have α(x,y)1, α(x,x)1, and α(y,y)1.

Proof By (ii) there exist x 0 , x 1 A 0 such that

d( x 1 ,T x 0 )=d(A,B),α( x 0 , x 1 )1,α( x 0 , x 0 )1andα( x 1 , x 1 )1.

On the other hand, T( A 0 ) B 0 , then there exists x 2 A 0 such that

d( x 2 ,T x 1 )=d(A,B).

Now, since T is α 3 -proximal admissible, we have

α( x 1 , x 2 )1,α( x 1 , x 1 )1andα( x 2 , x 2 )1.

Hence,

d( x 2 ,T x 1 )=d(A,B),α( x 1 , x 2 )1,α( x 1 , x 1 )1andα( x 2 , x 2 )1.

Since T( A 0 ) B 0 , there exists x 3 A 0 such that

d( x 3 ,T x 2 )=d(A,B).

Then we have

d ( x 2 , T x 1 ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( x 3 , T x 2 ) = d ( A , B ) , α ( x 1 , x 2 ) 1 , α ( x 1 , x 1 ) 1 and α ( x 2 , x 2 ) 1 .

Again, since T is α 3 -proximal admissible, we obtain

α( x 2 , x 3 )1,α( x 2 , x 2 )1andα( x 3 , x 3 )1.

Also, there exists x 4 A 0 such that

d( x 4 ,T x 3 )=d(A,B),

and hence

d ( x 3 , T x 2 ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( x 4 , T x 3 ) = d ( A , B ) , α ( x 2 , x 3 ) 1 , α ( x 2 , x 2 ) 1 and α ( x 3 , x 3 ) 1 .

By continuing this process, we construct a sequence { x n } such that

α( x n , x n )1,α( x n 1 , x n 1 )1and { α ( x n 1 , x n ) 1 , d ( x n , T x n 1 ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( x n + 1 , T x n ) = d ( A , B )
(2.2)

for all nN. Now, from (4.2) with u= x n , v= x n + 1 , x= x n 1 , and y= x n , we get

F ( d ( x n , x n + 1 ) , d ( x n 1 , x n ) , d ( x n 1 , x n ) , d ( x n , x n + 1 ) , d ( x n 1 , x n + 1 ) , d ( x n , x n ) ) L [ 1 α ( x n 1 , x n 1 ) α ( x n , x n ) ] .

On the other hand from (2.2) we obtain

α( x n 1 , x n 1 )α( x n , x n )1.

That is, 1α( x n 1 , x n 1 )α( x n , x n )0 for all nN. Therefore,

F ( d ( x n , x n + 1 ) , d ( x n 1 , x n ) , d ( x n 1 , x n ) , d ( x n , x n + 1 ) , d ( x n 1 , x n + 1 ) , d ( x n , x n ) ) L [ 1 α ( x n 1 , x n 1 ) α ( x n , x n ) ] 0 .

Now, since F is decreasing in t 5

F ( d ( x n , x n + 1 ) , d ( x n 1 , x n ) , d ( x n 1 , x n ) , d ( x n , x n + 1 ) , d ( x n , x n + 1 ) + d ( x n 1 , x n ) , 0 ) 0,

and so from (F1) we get

d( x n , x n + 1 )ψ ( d ( x n 1 , x n ) ) .

By induction, we have

d( x n , x n + 1 ) ψ n ( d ( x 0 , x 1 ) ) .

Fix ϵ>0, there exists NN such that

n N ψ n ( d ( x 0 , x 1 ) ) <ϵfor all nN.

Let m,nN with m>nN. Then by the triangular inequality, we get

d( x n , x m ) k = n m 1 d( x k , x k + 1 ) n N ψ n ( d ( x 0 , x 1 ) ) <ϵ.

Consequently lim m , n , + d( x n , x m )=0. Hence { x n } is a Cauchy sequence. Since A is complete, there is zA such that x n z. Since T is continuous, T x n Tz as n. Hence,

d(A,B)= lim n d( x n + 1 ,T x n )=d(z,Tz).

Thus z is the desired best proximity point of T.

Let x,yA be two best proximity point of T such that xy. That is, d(x,Tx)=d(A,B)=d(y,Ty). From (iii), we get α(x,y)1, α(x,x)1, and α(y,y)1. So by (4.2) we derive

F ( d ( x , y ) , d ( x , y ) , d ( x , x ) , d ( y , y ) , d ( y , x ) , d ( x , y ) ) L [ 1 α ( x , x ) α ( y , y ) ] 0,

which implies

F ( d ( x , y ) , d ( x , y ) , 0 , 0 , d ( y , x ) , d ( x , y ) ) 0,

which is a contradiction to (F4). Hence, T has a unique best proximity point. □

Theorem 2 Let A, B be two nonempty subsets of a metric space (X,d) such that A is complete, B is approximatively compact with respect to A, and A 0 is nonempty. Assume that T:AB is an implicit relation type modified α 3 -proximal contraction such that the following conditions hold:

  1. (i)

    T is an α 3 -proximal admissible mapping and T( A 0 ) B 0 ,

  2. (ii)

    there exist x 0 , x 1 A 0 such that

    d( x 1 ,T x 0 )=d(A,B),α( x 0 , x 0 )1,α( x 1 , x 1 )1andα( x 0 , x 1 )1,
  3. (iii)

    if { x n } is a sequence in X such that α( x n , x n + 1 )1 for all nN{0} with x n x as n, then α( x n ,x)1 and α(x,x)1.

Then T has a best proximity point. Further, the best proximity point is unique if

  1. (iv)

    for every x,yA, where d(x,Tx)=d(A,B)=d(y,Ty), we have α(x,y)1, α(x,x)1, and α(y,y)1.

Proof Following the proof of Theorem 1, there exist a Cauchy sequence { x n }A and zA such that (4.2) holds and x n z as n+. On the other hand, for all nN, we can write

d ( z , B ) d ( z , T x n ) d ( z , x n + 1 ) + d ( x n + 1 , T x n ) = d ( z , x n + 1 ) + d ( A , B ) .

Taking the limit as n+ in the above inequality, we get

lim n + d(z,T x n )=d(z,B)=d(A,B).
(2.3)

Since B is approximatively compact with respect to A, the sequence {T x n } has a subsequence {T x n k } that converges to some y B. Hence,

d ( z , y ) = lim n d( x n k + 1 ,T x n k )=d(A,B)

and so z A 0 . Now, since T( A 0 ) B 0 , we have d(w,Tz)=d(A,B) for some wA. By (iii) and (2.2), we have α( x n ,z)1, α(z,z)1, and d( x n + 1 ,T x n )=d(A,B) for all nN{0}. Also, since T is an implicit relation type α 3 -proximal contraction, we get

F ( d ( x n + 1 , w ) , d ( x n , z ) , d ( x n , x n + 1 ) , d ( z , w ) , d ( x n , w ) , d ( z , x n + 1 ) ) 0.

Taking the limit as n+ in the above inequality and applying continuity of F, we have

F ( d ( z , w ) , 0 , 0 , d ( z , w ) , d ( z , w ) , 0 ) 0.

Now, if we take u=d(z,w) and v=0, then we have

F(u,v,0,u+v,u,v)0

and so from (F3) we get uψ(v). That is, d(z,w)ψ(0)=0. Thus, z=w. Hence z is a best proximity point of T. Uniqueness follows similarly to the proof of Theorem 1. □

Using Example 2 and Theorem 2 we obtain the following corollary.

Corollary 1 Let A, B be two nonempty subsets of a metric space (X,d) such that A is complete, B is approximatively compact with respect to A, and A 0 is nonempty. Assume that T:AB is a nonself mapping satisfying the following conditions:

  1. (i)

    T is an α 3 -proximal admissible mapping and T( A 0 ) B 0 ,

  2. (ii)

    there exist x 0 , x 1 A 0 such that

    d( x 1 ,T x 0 )=d(A,B),α( x 0 , x 0 )1,α( x 1 , x 1 )1andα( x 0 , x 1 )1,
  3. (iii)

    if { x n } is a sequence in X such that α( x n , x n + 1 )1 for all nN{0} with x n x as n, then α( x n ,x)1 and α(x,x)1,

  4. (iv)

    there exist nonnegative real numbers a, b, c, d with a+b+2c+2d<1, such that for all x 1 , x 2 , u 1 , u 2 A,

    { α ( x 1 , x 2 ) 1 , d ( u 1 , T x 1 ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( u 2 , T x 2 ) = d ( A , B ) d ( u 1 , u 2 ) + L α ( x 1 , x 1 ) α ( x 2 , x 2 ) a d ( x 1 , x 2 ) + b [ 1 + d ( x 1 , u 1 ) ] d ( x 2 , u 2 ) 1 + d ( x 1 , x 2 ) d ( u 1 , u 2 ) + L α ( x 1 , x 1 ) α ( x 2 , x 2 ) + c [ d ( x 1 , u 1 ) + d ( x 2 , u 2 ) ] d ( u 1 , u 2 ) + L α ( x 1 , x 1 ) α ( x 2 , x 2 ) + d [ d ( x 1 , u 2 ) + d ( x 2 , u 1 ) ] + L ,

where L0.

Then T has a best proximity point. Further, the best proximity point is unique if

  1. (v)

    for every x,yA, where d(x,Tx)=d(A,B)=d(y,Ty), we have α(x,y)1, α(x,x)1, and α(y,y)1.

If in Corollary 1 we take b=c=d=0, then we have the following corollary.

Corollary 2 Let A, B be two nonempty subsets of a metric space (X,d) such that A is complete, B is approximatively compact with respect to A, and A 0 is nonempty. Assume that T:AB is a nonself mapping satisfying the following conditions:

  1. (i)

    T is an α 3 -proximal admissible mapping and T( A 0 ) B 0 ,

  2. (ii)

    there exist x 0 , x 1 A 0 such that

    d( x 1 ,T x 0 )=d(A,B),α( x 0 , x 0 )1,α( x 1 , x 1 )1andα( x 0 , x 1 )1,
  3. (iii)

    if { x n } is a sequence in X such that α( x n , x n + 1 )1 for all nN{0} with x n x as n, then α( x n ,x)1 and α(x,x)1,

  4. (iv)

    there exists a nonnegative real number a with a<1, such that for all x 1 , x 2 , u 1 , u 2 A,

    { α ( x 1 , x 2 ) 1 , d ( u 1 , T x 1 ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( u 2 , T x 2 ) = d ( A , B ) d( u 1 , u 2 )+Lα( x 1 , x 1 )α( x 2 , x 2 )ad( x 1 , x 2 )+L,

where L0.

Then T has a best proximity point. Further, the best proximity point is unique if

  1. (v)

    for every x,yA, where d(x,Tx)=d(A,B)=d(y,Ty), we have α(x,y)1, α(x,x)1, and α(y,y)1.

Example 3 Let X=R be endowed with the usual metric d(x,y)=|xy|, for all x,yX. Consider A=(,1], B=[1,+) and define T:AB by

Tx= { 11 , if  x ( , 14 ) , 7 , if  x [ 14 , 12 ) , 5 , if  x [ 12 , 10 ) , 2 , if  x [ 10 , 8 ) , 10 , if  x [ 8 , 6 ) , 17 , if  x [ 6 , 4 ) , 14 , if  x [ 4 , 2 ) , 1 , if  x [ 2 , 1 ] .

Define α:X×X[0,+) by

α(x,y)= { 1 , if  x , y [ 2 , 1 ] , 1 2 , otherwise .

Clearly, B is approximatively compact with respect to A and d(A,B)=2. Then A 0 ={1} and B 0 ={1}. Clearly, T( A 0 ) B 0 , d(1,T(1))=d(A,B)=2, and α(1,1)1.

Assume

{ α ( x 1 , x 2 ) 1 , d ( u 1 , T x 1 ) = d ( A , B ) = 2 , d ( u 2 , T x 2 ) = d ( A , B ) = 2 ,

then

{ x 1 , x 2 [ 2 , 1 ] , d ( u 1 , T x 1 ) = 2 , d ( u 2 , T x 2 ) = 2 .

Therefore, u 1 = u 2 =1, that is, α( u 1 , u 2 )1, α( u 1 , u 1 )1, and α( u 2 , u 2 )1. Further,

d ( u 1 , u 2 ) a d ( x 1 , x 2 ) + b [ 1 + d ( x 1 , u 1 ) ] d ( x 2 , u 2 ) 1 + d ( x 1 , x 2 ) + c [ d ( x 1 , u 1 ) + d ( x 2 , u 2 ) ] + d [ d ( x 1 , u 2 ) + d ( x 2 , u 1 ) ] + L [ 1 α ( x 1 , x 1 ) α ( x 2 , x 2 ) ] ,

that is, T is an α 3 -proximal admissible mapping and condition (iv) of Corollary 1 holds true. Moreover, if { x n } is a sequence such that α( x n , x n + 1 )1 for all nN{0} and x n x as n+, then { x n }[2,1] and hence x[2,1]. Consequently, α(x,x)1 and α( x n ,x)1 for all nN{0}. Therefore all the conditions of Corollary 1 hold for this example and T has a best proximity point. Here z=1 is the best proximity point of T.

If in Corollary 1 we take α(x,y)=1, then we have the following corollary.

Corollary 3 (Theorem 3.1 of [14])

Let A and B be nonempty closed subsets of a complete metric space (X,d) such that B is approximatively compact with respect to A. Assume that a+b+2c+2d<1. Let A 0 and B 0 be nonempty and T:AB be a nonself mapping satisfying the following assertions:

  1. (i)

    T( A 0 ) B 0 ,

  2. (ii)
    { d ( u 1 , T x 1 ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( u 2 , T x 2 ) = d ( A , B ) d ( u 1 , u 2 ) a d ( x 1 , x 2 ) + b [ 1 + d ( x 1 , u 1 ) ] d ( x 2 , u 2 ) 1 + d ( x 1 , x 2 ) d ( u 1 , u 2 ) + c [ d ( x 1 , u 1 ) + d ( x 2 , u 2 ) ] + d [ d ( x 1 , u 2 ) + d ( x 2 , u 1 ) ] .

Then there exists zA such that

d(z,Tz)=d(A,B).

By taking α(x,y)=1 in Theorem 2, we deduce the following corollary.

Corollary 4 Let A, B be two nonempty subsets of a metric space (X,d) such that A is complete, B is approximatively compact with respect to A, and A 0 is nonempty. Assume that T:AB is a nonself mapping such that T A 0 B 0 and for all x,y,u,vA,

{ d ( u , T x ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( v , T y ) = d ( A , B ) F ( d ( u , v ) , d ( x , y ) , d ( x , u ) , d ( y , v ) , d ( y , u ) , d ( x , v ) ) 0 ,

where FF. Then T has a unique best proximity point.

Using Example 1 and Corollary 4, we deduce the following result.

Corollary 5 Let A, B be two nonempty subsets of a metric space (X,d) such that A is complete, B is approximatively compact with respect to A, and A 0 is nonempty. Assume that T:AB is a nonself mapping such that T A 0 B 0 and, for all x,y,u,vA,

{ d ( u , T x ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( v , T y ) = d ( A , B ) d ( u , v ) ψ ( max { d ( x , y ) , d ( x , u ) , d ( y , v ) , d ( y , u ) + d ( x , v ) 2 } ) d ( u , v ) + L min { d ( x , u ) , d ( y , v ) , d ( y , u ) , d ( x , v ) } ,

where ψΨ. Then T has a unique best proximity point.

3 Some results in metric spaces endowed with a graph

Consistent with Jachymski [15], let (X,d) be a metric space and Δ denotes the diagonal of the Cartesian product X×X. Consider a directed graph G such that the set V(G) of its vertices coincides with X, and the set E(G) of its edges contains all loops, i.e., E(G)Δ. We assume G has no parallel edges, so we can identify G with the pair (V(G),E(G)). Moreover, we may treat G as a weighted graph (see [15]) by assigning to each edge the distance between its vertices. If x and y are vertices in a graph G, then a path in G from x to y of length N (NN) is a sequence { x i } i = 0 N of N+1 vertices such that x 0 =x, x N =y and ( x n 1 , x n )E(G) for i=1,,N. A graph G is connected if there is a path between any two vertices. G is weakly connected if G ˜ is connected (see for details [12, 15, 16]).

In 2006, Espínola and Kirk [17] established an important combination of fixed point theory and graph theory.

Definition 4 Let A, B be two nonempty closed subsets of a metric space (X,d) endowed with a graph G. Then T:AB is said to be an implicit relation type G-proximal contraction, if, for all x,y,u,vA,

{ ( x , y ) E ( G ) , d ( u , T x ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( v , T y ) = d ( A , B ) (u,v)E(G)

and

{ ( x , y ) E ( G ) , d ( u , T x ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( v , T y ) = d ( A , B ) F ( d ( u , v ) , d ( x , y ) , d ( x , u ) , d ( y , v ) , d ( y , u ) , d ( x , v ) ) 0 ,

where FF.

Theorem 3 Let A, B be two nonempty closed subsets of a metric space (X,d) endowed with a graph G. Assume that A is complete, A 0 is nonempty, and T:AB is a continuous implicit relation type G-proximal contraction such that the following conditions hold:

  1. (i)

    T( A 0 ) B 0 ,

  2. (ii)

    there exist elements x 0 , x 1 A 0 such that

    d( x 1 ,T x 0 )=d(A,B)and( x 0 , x 1 )E(G).

Then T has a best proximity point. Further, the best proximity point is unique if, for every x,yA such that d(x,Tx)=d(A,B)=d(y,Ty), we have (x,y)E(G).

Proof Define α:X×X[0,+) by

α(x,y)= { 1 , if  ( x , y ) E ( G ) , 1 2 , otherwise .

Firstly, we prove that T is an α 3 -proximal admissible mapping. To this aim, assume

{ α ( x , y ) 1 , d ( u , T x ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( v , T y ) = d ( A , B ) .

Therefore, we have

{ ( x , y ) E ( G ) , d ( u , T x ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( v , T y ) = d ( A , B ) .

Since T is an implicit relation type G-proximal contraction, we get (u,v)E(G). Also, since ΔE(G), (u,u),(v,v)E(G). That is, α(u,v)1, α(u,u)1, α(v,v)1, and

F ( d ( u , v ) , d ( x , y ) , d ( x , u ) , d ( y , v ) , d ( y , u ) , d ( x , v ) ) 0=L [ 1 α ( x , x ) α ( y , y ) ]

when L=0. Thus T is an α 3 -proximal admissible mapping with T( A 0 ) B 0 and continuous implicit relation type G-proximal contraction. From (ii) there exist x 0 , x 1 A 0 such that d( x 1 ,T x 0 )=d(A,B) and ( x 0 , x 1 )E(G), that is, d( x 1 ,T x 0 )=d(A,B), α( x 0 , x 1 )1, α( x 0 , x 0 )1, and α( x 1 , x 1 )1. Hence, all the conditions of Theorem 1 are satisfied and T has a best proximity point. □

Similarly, by using Theorem 2, we can prove the following theorem.

Theorem 4 Let A, B be two nonempty closed subsets of a metric space (X,d) endowed with a graph G. Assume that A is complete, B is approximatively compact with respect to A, and A 0 is nonempty. Also suppose that T:AB is an implicit relation type G-proximal contraction mapping such that the following conditions hold:

  1. (i)

    T( A 0 ) B 0 ,

  2. (ii)

    there exist elements x 0 , x 1 A 0 such that

    d( x 1 ,T x 0 )=d(A,B)and( x 0 , x 1 )E(G),
  3. (iii)

    if { x n } is a sequence in X such that ( x n , x n + 1 )E(G) for all nN{0} and x n x as n+, then ( x n ,x)E(G) for all nN{0}.

Then T has a best proximity point. Further, the best proximity point is unique if, for every x,yA such that d(x,Tx)=d(A,B)=d(y,Ty), we have (x,y)E(G).

Corollary 6 Let A, B be two nonempty closed subsets of a metric space (X,d) endowed with a graph G. Assume that A is complete, B is approximatively compact with respect to A, and A 0 is nonempty. Assume a+b+2c+2d<1. Also, suppose that T:AB satisfies the following conditions:

  1. (i)

    T( A 0 ) B 0 ,

  2. (ii)

    there exist elements x 0 , x 1 A 0 such that

    d( x 1 ,T x 0 )=d(A,B)and( x 0 , x 1 )E(G),
  3. (iii)

    if { x n } is a sequence in X such that ( x n , x n + 1 )E(G) for all nN{0} and x n x as n+, then ( x n ,x)E(G) for all nN{0},

  4. (iv)

    for x 1 , x 2 , u 1 , u 2 A 0 ,

    { ( x 1 , x 2 ) E ( G ) , d ( u 1 , T x 1 ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( u 2 , T x 2 ) = d ( A , B ) d ( u 1 , u 2 ) a d ( x 1 , x 2 ) + b [ 1 + d ( x 1 , u 1 ) ] d ( x 2 , u 2 ) 1 + d ( x 1 , x 2 ) d ( u 1 , u 2 ) + c [ d ( x 1 , u 1 ) + d ( x 2 , u 2 ) ] d ( u 1 , u 2 ) + d [ d ( x 1 , u 2 ) + d ( x 2 , u 1 ) ] .

Then T has a best proximity point. Further, the best proximity point is unique if, for every x,yA such that d(x,Tx)=d(A,B)=d(y,Ty), we have (x,y)E(G).

Corollary 7 Let A, B be two nonempty closed subsets of a metric space (X,d) endowed with a graph G. Assume that A is complete, B is approximatively compact with respect to A, and A 0 is nonempty. Also, suppose that T:AB satisfies the following conditions:

  1. (i)

    T( A 0 ) B 0 ,

  2. (ii)

    there exist elements x 0 , x 1 A 0 such that

    d( x 1 ,T x 0 )=d(A,B)and( x 0 , x 1 )E(G),
  3. (iii)

    if { x n } is a sequence in X such that ( x n , x n + 1 )E(G) for all nN{0} and x n x as n+, then ( x n ,x)E(G) for all nN{0},

  4. (iv)

    for x 1 , x 2 , u 1 , u 2 A 0 ,

    { ( x 1 , x 2 ) E ( G ) , d ( u 1 , T x 1 ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( u 2 , T x 2 ) = d ( A , B ) d ( u 1 , u 2 ) ψ ( max { d ( x 1 , x 2 ) , d ( x 1 , u 1 ) , d ( x 2 , u 2 ) , d ( u 1 , u 2 ) d ( x 2 , u 1 ) + d ( x 1 , u 2 ) 2 } ) d ( u 1 , u 2 ) + L min { d ( x 1 , u 1 ) , d ( x 2 , u 2 ) , d ( x 2 , u 1 ) , d ( x 1 , u 2 ) } ,

where ψΨ.

Then T has a best proximity point. Further, the best proximity point is unique if, for every x,yA such that d(x,Tx)=d(A,B)=d(y,Ty), we have (x,y)E(G).

4 Some results in metric spaces endowed with a partially ordered

The study of existence of fixed points in partially ordered sets has been established by Ran and Reurings [18] with applications to matrix equations. Agarwal et al. [19], Ćirić et al. [20], and Hussain et al. [12, 21] obtained some new fixed point results for nonlinear contractions in partially ordered Banach and metric spaces with some applications. In this section, as an application of our results we derive some new best proximity point results whenever the range space is endowed with a partial order.

Definition 5 [22]

Let (X,d,) be a partially ordered metric space. We say that a nonself mapping T:AB is proximally ordered-preserving if and only if, for all x 1 , x 2 , u 1 , u 2 A,

{ x 1 x 2 , d ( u 1 , T x 1 ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( u 2 , T x 2 ) = d ( A , B ) u 1 u 2 .

Theorem 5 Let A, B be two nonempty closed subsets of a partially ordered metric space (X,d,) such that A is complete, B is approximatively compact with respect to A, and A 0 is nonempty. Assume that T:AB satisfies the following conditions:

  1. (i)

    T is continuous and proximally ordered-preserving such that T( A 0 ) B 0 ,

  2. (ii)

    there exist elements x 0 , x 1 A 0 such that

    d( x 1 ,T x 0 )=d(A,B)and x 0 x 1 ,
  3. (iii)

    for all x,y,u,vA,

    { x y , d ( u , T x ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( y , T y ) = d ( A , B ) F ( d ( u , v ) , d ( x , y ) , d ( x , u ) , d ( y , v ) , d ( y , u ) , d ( x , v ) ) 0 .
    (4.1)

Then T has a best proximity point.

Proof Define α:A×A[0,+) by

α(x,y)= { 1 , if  x y , 1 2 , otherwise .

Firstly, we prove that T is an α 3 -proximal admissible mapping. To this aim, assume

{ α ( x , y ) 1 , d ( u , T x ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( v , T y ) = d ( A , B ) .

Therefore, we have

{ x y , d ( u , T x ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( v , T y ) = d ( A , B ) .

Now, since T is proximally ordered-preserving, then uv, that is, α(u,v)1. Further, by (ii) we have

d( x 1 ,T x 0 )=d(A,B)andα( x 0 , x 1 )1.

Moreover, from (iii) we get

{ α ( x , y ) 1 , d ( u , T x ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( y , T y ) = d ( A , B ) F ( d ( u , v ) , d ( x , y ) , d ( x , u ) , d ( y , v ) , d ( y , u ) , d ( x , v ) ) 0.

Thus all the conditions of Theorem 1 hold (when L=0) and T has a best proximity point. □

Theorem 6 Let A, B be two nonempty closed subsets of a partially ordered metric space (X,d,) such that A is complete, B is approximatively compact with respect to A, and A 0 is nonempty. Assume that T:AB satisfies the following conditions:

  1. (i)

    T is proximally ordered-preserving such that T( A 0 ) B 0 ,

  2. (ii)

    there exist elements x 0 , x 1 A 0 such that

    d( x 1 ,T x 0 )=d(A,B)and x 0 x 1 ,
  3. (iii)

    for all x,y,u,vA,

    { x y , d ( u , T x ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( y , T y ) = d ( A , B ) F ( d ( u , v ) , d ( x , y ) , d ( x , u ) , d ( y , v ) , d ( y , u ) , d ( x , v ) ) 0 ,
    (4.2)
  4. (iv)

    if { x n } is an increasing sequence in A converging to xA, then x n x for all nN.

Then T has a best proximity point.

Corollary 8 Let A, B be two nonempty closed subsets of a partially ordered metric space (X,d,) such that A is complete, B is approximatively compact with respect to A, and A 0 is nonempty. Assume a+b+2c+2d<1. Also, suppose that T:AB satisfies the following conditions:

  1. (i)

    T( A 0 ) B 0 ,

  2. (ii)

    there exist elements x 0 , x 1 A 0 such that

    d( x 1 ,T x 0 )=d(A,B)and x 0 x 1 ,
  3. (iii)

    if { x n } is a sequence in X such that x n x n + 1 for all nN{0} and x n x as n+, then x n x for all nN{0},

  4. (iv)

    for x 1 , x 2 , u 1 , u 2 A 0 ,

    { x 1 x 2 , d ( u 1 , T x 1 ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( u 2 , T x 2 ) = d ( A , B ) d ( u 1 , u 2 ) a d ( x 1 , x 2 ) + b [ 1 + d ( x 1 , u 1 ) ] d ( x 2 , u 2 ) 1 + d ( x 1 , x 2 ) d ( u 1 , u 2 ) + c [ d ( x 1 , u 1 ) + d ( x 2 , u 2 ) ] + d [ d ( x 1 , u 2 ) + d ( x 2 , u 1 ) ] .

Then T has a best proximity point. Further, the best proximity point is unique if, for every x,yA such that d(x,Tx)=d(A,B)=d(y,Ty), we have xy.

Corollary 9 Let A, B be two nonempty closed subsets of a partially ordered metric space (X,d,) such that A is complete, B is approximatively compact with respect to A, and A 0 is nonempty. Also, suppose that T:AB satisfies the following conditions:

  1. (i)

    T( A 0 ) B 0 ,

  2. (ii)

    there exist elements x 0 , x 1 A 0 such that

    d( x 1 ,T x 0 )=d(A,B)and x 0 x 1 ,
  3. (iii)

    if { x n } is a sequence in X such that x n x n + 1 for all nN{0} and x n x as n+, then x n x for all nN{0},

  4. (iv)

    for x 1 , x 2 , u 1 , u 2 A 0 ,

    { x 1 x 2 , d ( u 1 , T x 1 ) = d ( A , B ) , d ( u 2 , T x 2 ) = d ( A , B ) d ( u 1 , u 2 ) ψ ( max { d ( x 1 , x 2 ) , d ( x 1 , u 1 ) , d ( x 2 , u 2 ) , d ( u 1 , u 2 ) d ( x 2 , u 1 ) + d ( x 1 , u 2 ) 2 } ) d ( u 1 , u 2 ) + L min { d ( x 1 , u 1 ) , d ( x 2 , u 2 ) , d ( x 2 , u 1 ) , d ( x 1 , u 2 ) } ,

where ψΨ.

Then T has a best proximity point. Further, the best proximity point is unique if, for every x,yA such that d(x,Tx)=d(A,B)=d(y,Ty), we have xy.

5 Application to fixed point theory

5.1 Implicit relation type modified α-contraction

Definition 6 [9]

Let T be a self-mapping on X and α:X×X[0,+) be a function. We say that T is an α-admissible mapping if

x,yX,α(x,y)1α(Tx,Ty)1.

Remark 1 Note that every α-admissible mappings are α 3 -proximal admissible mappings when A=B=X.

Definition 7 Let (X,d) be a metric space and α:A×A[0,) be a function. Then T:XX is said to be an implicit relation type α-contraction, if for all x,yX with α(x,y)1, we have

F ( d ( T x , T y ) , d ( x , y ) , d ( x , T x ) , d ( y , T y ) , d ( y , T x ) , d ( x , T y ) ) L [ 1 α ( x , x ) α ( y , y ) ] ,
(5.1)

where L0 and FF.

Theorem 7 Let (X,d) be a complete metric space. Assume that T:XX is a continuous self-mapping satisfying the following conditions:

  1. (i)

    T is α-admissible,

  2. (ii)

    there exists x 0 in X such that α( x 0 , x 0 )1 and α( x 0 ,T x 0 )1,

  3. (iii)

    T is an implicit relation type modified α-contraction.

Then T has a fixed point.

Theorem 8 Let (X,d) be a complete metric space. Assume that T:XX is a self-mapping and the following conditions hold:

  1. (i)

    T is α-admissible,

  2. (ii)

    there exists x 0 in X such that α( x 0 , x 0 )1 and α( x 0 ,T x 0 )1,

  3. (iii)

    T is an implicit relation type modified α-contraction,

  4. (iv)

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

Then T has a fixed point.

Using Example 2 and Theorem 8, we deduce the following result.

Corollary 10 Let (X,d) be a complete metric space. Assume that T:XX is a self-mapping and the following conditions hold:

  1. (i)

    T is α-admissible,

  2. (ii)

    there exists x 0 in X such that α( x 0 , x 0 )1 and α( x 0 ,T x 0 )1,

  3. (iii)

    for all x,yX with α(x,y)1 we have

    d ( T x , T y ) + L α ( x , x ) α ( y , y ) a d ( x , y ) + b [ 1 + d ( x , T x ) ] d ( y , T y ) 1 + d ( x , y ) + c [ d ( x , T x ) + d ( y , T y ) ] + d [ d ( y , T x ) + d ( x , T y ) ] + L ,

where a+b+2c+2d<1 and L0,

  1. (iv)

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

Then T has a fixed point.

Corollary 11 Let (X,d) be a complete metric space. Assume that T:XX is a self-mapping and the following conditions hold:

  1. (i)

    T is α-admissible,

  2. (ii)

    there exists x 0 in X such that α( x 0 , x 0 )1 and α( x 0 ,T x 0 )1,

  3. (iii)

    for all x,yX with α(x,y)1 we have

    d(Tx,Ty)+Lα(x,x)α(y,y)ad(x,y)+L,

where 0a<1 and L0,

  1. (iv)

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

Then T has a fixed point.

5.2 Implicit relation type G-contraction

Definition 8 [15]

We say that a mapping T:XX is a Banach G-contraction or simply G-contraction if T preserves edges of G, i.e.,

x,yX ( ( x , y ) E ( G ) ( T ( x ) , T ( y ) ) E ( G ) )

and T decreases weights of edges of G in the following way:

α(0,1),x,yX ( ( x , y ) E ( G ) d ( T ( x ) , T ( y ) ) α d ( x , y ) ) .

Definition 9 [15]

A mapping T:XX is called G-continuous, if for given xX and sequence { x n }

x n xas nand( x n , x n + 1 )E(G)for all nNimplyT x n Tx.

Definition 10 Let (X,d) be a metric space endowed with a graph G. Then T:XX is said to be an implicit relation type G-contraction, if, for all x,yX,

(x,y)E(G)(Tx,Ty)E(G)

and

(x,y)E(G)F ( d ( T x , T y ) , d ( x , y ) , d ( x , T x ) , d ( y , T y ) , d ( y , T x ) , d ( x , T y ) ) 0,

where FF.

Theorem 9 Let (X,d) be a complete metric space endowed with a graph G. Assume that T:XX is a continuous self-mapping satisfying the following conditions:

  1. (i)

    there exists x 0 in X such that ( x 0 ,T x 0 )E(G),

  2. (ii)

    T is an implicit relation type G-contraction.

Then T has a fixed point.

Theorem 10 Let (X,d) be a complete metric space endowed with a graph G. Assume that T:XX is a self-mapping satisfying the following conditions:

  1. (i)

    there exists x 0 in X such that ( x 0 ,T x 0 )E(G),

  2. (ii)

    T is an implicit relation type G-contraction,

  3. (iii)

    if { x n } is a sequence in X such that ( x n , x n + 1 )E(G) and x n x as n+, then ( x n ,x)E(G) for all nN.

Then T has a fixed point.

5.3 Implicit relation type ordered contraction

Theorem 11 ([3], Theorem 3.2)

Let (X,d,) be a partially ordered complete metric space. Assume that T:XX is a self-mapping that satisfies the following conditions:

  1. (i)

    there exists x 0 in X such that x 0 T x 0 ,

  2. (ii)

    for all x,yX with xy we have

    F ( d ( T x , T y ) , d ( x , y ) , d ( x , T x ) , d ( y , T y ) , d ( y , T x ) , d ( x , T y ) ) 0,

where FF,

  1. (iii)

    either T is continuous or if { x n } is an increasing sequence in X such that x n x as n+, then x n x for all nN.

Then T has a fixed point.

Corollary 12 Let (X,d,) be complete metric space. Assume a+b+2c+2d<1. Also, suppose that T:XX is a self-mapping that satisfies the following conditions:

  1. (i)

    there exists an element x 0 X such that x 0 T x 0 ,

  2. (ii)

    if { x n } is an increasing sequence in X such that x n x as n+, then x n x for all nN{0},

  3. (iii)

    for x,yX with xy,

    d ( T x , T y ) a d ( x , y ) + b [ 1 + d ( x , T x ) ] d ( y , T y ) 1 + d ( x , y ) + c [ d ( x , T x ) + d ( y , T y ) ] + d [ d ( x , T y ) + d ( y , T x ) ] .

Then T has a fixed point.

Corollary 13 Let (X,d,) be complete metric space. Assume that T:XX is a self-mapping that satisfies the following conditions:

  1. (i)

    there exist element x 0 X such that x 0 T x 0 ,

  2. (ii)

    if { x n } is an increasing sequence in X such that x n x as n+, then x n x for all nN{0},

  3. (iii)

    for x,yX with xy,

    d ( T x , T y ) ψ ( max { d ( x , y ) , d ( x , T x ) , d ( y , T y ) , d ( y , T x ) + d ( x , T y ) 2 } ) + L min { d ( x , T x ) , d ( y , T y ) , d ( y , T x ) , d ( x , T y ) } ,

where ψΨ. Then T has a fixed point.

References

  1. Popa V: A general coincidence theorem for compatible multivalued mappings satisfying an implicit relation. Demonstr. Math. 2000,33(1):159-164.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Popa V, Mocanu M: Altering distance and common fixed points under implicit relations. Hacet. J. Math. Stat. 2009,38(3):329-337.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Altun I, Simsek H: Some fixed point theorems on ordered metric spaces and application. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2010. Article ID 621469, 2010: Article ID 621469

    Google Scholar 

  4. Altun I, Turkoglu D: Some fixed point theorems for weakly compatible mappings satisfying an implicit relation. Taiwan. J. Math. 2009,13(4):1291-1304.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Imdad M, Kumar S, Khan MS: Remarks on some fixed point theorems satisfying implicit relations. Rad. Mat. 2002,11(1):135-143.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Nashine HK, Kadelburg Z, Kumam P: Implicit-relation-type cyclic contractive mappings and applications to integral equations. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2012. Article ID 386253, 2012: Article ID 386253

    Google Scholar 

  7. Sharma S, Deshpande B: On compatible mappings satisfying an implicit relation in common fixed point consideration. Tamkang J. Math. 2002,33(3):245-252.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Shatanawi W: Best proximity point on nonlinear contractive condition. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2013. Article ID 012006, 435: Article ID 012006 10.1088/1742-6596/435/1/012006

    Google Scholar 

  9. Samet B, Vetro C, Vetro P: Fixed point theorem for α - ψ -contractive type mappings. Nonlinear Anal. 2012, 75: 2154-2165. 10.1016/j.na.2011.10.014

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Salimi P, Latif A, Hussain N: Modified α - ψ -contractive mappings with applications. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013. Article ID 151, 2013: Article ID 151

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hussain N, Latif A, Salimi P: Best proximity point results for modified Suzuki α - ψ -proximal contractions. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2014. Article ID 10, 2014: Article ID 10

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hussain N, Al-Mezel S, Salimi P: Fixed points for ψ -graphic contractions with application to integral equations. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2013. Article ID 575869, 2013: Article ID 575869

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hussain N, Kutbi MA, Salimi P: Best proximity point results for modified α - ψ -proximal rational contractions. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2013. Article ID 927457, 2013: Article ID 927457

    Google Scholar 

  14. Nashine HK, Kumam P, Vetro C: Best proximity point theorems for rational proximal contractions. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013. Article ID 95, 2013: Article ID 95

    Google Scholar 

  15. Jachymski J: The contraction principle for mappings on a metric space with a graph. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 2008,136(4):1359-1373.

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Bojor F: Fixed point theorems for Reich type contraction on metric spaces with a graph. Nonlinear Anal. 2012, 75: 3895-3901. 10.1016/j.na.2012.02.009

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Espínola R, Kirk WA: Fixed point theorems in R-trees with applications to graph theory. Topol. Appl. 2006, 153: 1046-1055. 10.1016/j.topol.2005.03.001

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Ran ACM, Reurings MCB: A fixed point theorem in partially ordered sets and some applications to matrix equations. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 2003, 132: 1435-1443.

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Agarwal RP, Hussain N, Taoudi MA: Fixed point theorems in ordered Banach spaces and applications to nonlinear integral equations. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2012. Article ID 245872, 2012: Article ID 245872

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ćirić L, Abbas M, Saadati R, Hussain N: Common fixed points of almost generalized contractive mappings in ordered metric spaces. Appl. Math. Comput. 2011, 217: 5784-5789. 10.1016/j.amc.2010.12.060

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Hussain N, Khan AR, Agarwal RP: Krasnosel’skii and Ky Fan type fixed point theorems in ordered Banach spaces. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 2010, 11: 475-489.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Sadiq Basha S, Veeramani P: Best proximity point theorem on partially ordered sets. Optim. Lett. 2012. 10.1007/s11590-012-0489-1

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abdolrahman Razani.

Additional information

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors’ contributions

All authors contributed equally to the writing of this paper. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits use, duplication, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zabihi, F., Razani, A. Best proximity points of implicit relation type modified α 3 -proximal contractions. J Inequal Appl 2014, 365 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2014-365

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2014-365

Keywords

  • fixed point
  • best proximity point
  • α 3 -proximal admissible mapping
  • implicit relation type α 3 -proximal contractions
  • metric space endowed with graph