• Research
• Open Access

Common fixed point and approximation results for generalized (f, g)-weak contractions

Fixed Point Theory and Applications20122012:75

https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2012-75

• Accepted: 8 May 2012
• Published:

Abstract

The existence of common fixed points is established for three mappings where T is generalized (f, g)-weakly contractive mapping on a nonempty subset of a Banach space. As applications, the invariant approximation results are proved. Our results unify and improve several recent results in the literature.

Mathematics Subject Classification 2000: Primary, 47H10; 54H25; 47E10.

Keywords

• common fixed point
• Banach operator pair
• generalized (f, g)-weakly contractive maps
• generalized (f, g)-nonexpansive maps
• invariant approximation

1. Introduction and preliminaries

We first review needed definitions. Let (X, d) be a metric space. A map T : XX is called weakly contractive if, for each x, y X,
$d\left(Tx,Ty\right)\le d\left(x,y\right)-\varphi \left(d\left(x,y\right)\right),$

where ϕ: [0, ) → [0, ) is a lower semicontinuous function from right such that ϕ is positive on (0, ) and ϕ(0) = 0.

A map T : XX is called (f, g)-weakly contractive if, for each x, y X,
$d\left(Tx,Ty\right)\le d\left(fx,gy\right)-\varphi \left(d\left(fx,gy\right)\right),$
(1.1)
where f, g : XX are self-mappings and ϕ: [0, ) → [0, ) is a lower semicontinuous function from right such that ϕ is positive on (0, ) and ϕ(0) = 0. If g = f, then T is called f-weakly contractive. If f = I, the identity operator, then T is called weakly contractive. Note that if g = f = I and ϕ is continuous nondecreasing, then the definition of (f, g)-weakly contractive maps is same as the one which appeared in [1, 2]. Further if f = I and ϕ(t) = (1 - k)t for a constant k with 0 < k < 1, then an f-weakly contractive mapping is called a contraction. Also note that if f = g = I and ϕ is lower semicontinuous from the right, then ψ(t) = t - ϕ(t) is upper semicontinuous from the right and the condition (1.1) is replaced by
$d\left(Tx,Ty\right)\le \psi \left(d\left(x,y\right)\right).$
Therefore (f, g)-weakly contractive maps for which ϕ is lower semicontinuous from the right are of the type of Boyd and Wong [3]. And if we set k(t) = 1 - ϕ(t)/t for t > 0 and k(0) = 0 together with f = g = I, then the condition (1.1) is replaced by
$d\left(Tx,Ty\right)\le k\left(d\left(x,y\right)\right)d\left(x,y\right).$

Therefore (f, g)-weakly contractive maps are closely related to the maps studied by Mizoguchi and Takahashi [4].

If ϕ(t) = (1 - k)t for a constant k with 0 < k < 1, then an (f, g)-weakly contractive mapping is called a (f, g)-contraction, which has been investigated by Hussain and Jungck [5], Jungck and Hussain [6], Song [7] and many others.

The set of fixed points of T is denoted by F(T). A point x X is a coincidence point (common fixed point) of f and T if fx = Tx (x = fx = Tx). The set of coincidence points of f and T is denoted by C(f, T). The pair {f, T} is called;
1. (1)

commuting [8] if T fx = fTx for all x M;

2. (2)

compatible (see [6, 9]) if lim n d(Tfx n , fTx n ) = 0 whenever {x n } is a sequence such that lim n Tx n = lim n fx n = t for some t in M;

3. (3)

weakly compatible [10] if they commute at their coincidence points, i.e., if fTx = Tfx whenever fx = Tx;

4. (4)

Banach operator pair, if the set F(f) is T-invariant, namely T(F(f)) F(f). Obviously, commuting pair (T, f) is a Banach operator pair but converse is not true in general; see [1113]. If (T, f) is a Banach operator pair, then (f, T) need not be a Banach operator pair (cf. [[11], Example 1]).

The set M in a linear space X is called q-starshaped with q M, if the segment [q, x] = {(1 - k)q + kx :0 ≤ k ≤ 1} joining q to x is contained in M for all x M. The map f defined on a q-starshaped set M is called affine if

Suppose that M is q-starshaped with q F(f) and is both T- and f-invariant. Then T and f are called (5) pointwise R-subweakly commuting [14] if for given x M, there exists a real number R > 0 such that ||fTx - Tfx|| ≤ R dist(fx, [q, Tx]) (6) R-subweakly commuting on M (see [5]) if for all x M, there exists a real number R > 0 such that ||fTx - Tfx || ≤ R dist(fx, [q, Tx]); (7) C q -commuting (see [6, 7] if fTx = Tfx for all x C q (f, T), where C q (f, T) = {C(f, T k ): 0 ≤ k ≤ 1} where T k x = (1 - k)q + kTx.

A Banach space X satisfies Opial's condition if, for every sequence {x n } in X weakly convergent to x X, the inequality
$\underset{n\to \infty }{lim inf}∥{x}_{n}-x∥<\underset{n\to \infty }{lim inf}∥{x}_{n}-y∥$

holds for all yx. Every Hilbert space and the space l p (1 < p < ∞) satisfy Opial's condition. The map T : MX is said to be demiclosed at 0 if, for every sequence {x n } in M converging weakly to x and {Tx n } converges to 0 X, then 0 = Tx.

Let M be a subset of a normed space (X, ||·||). The set P M (u) = {x M : ||x - u|| = dist(u, M)} is called the set of best approximants to u X out of M, where dist(u, M) = inf{||y - u||: y M}. We denote by and cl(M) (wcl(M)), the set of positive integers and the closure (weak closure) of a set M in X, respectively.

The concept of the weak contractive mapping has been defined by Alber and Guerre-Delabriere [1]. Actually, in [1], the authors proved the existence of fixed points for a single-valued weakly contractive mapping on Hilbert spaces. In 2001, Rhoades [[2], Theorem 2] obtained a generalization of Banach's contraction mapping principle [Note the weakly con-traction contains contraction as the special case (ϕ(t) = (1-k)t)]. Recently, Chen and Li [11] introduced the class of Banach operator pairs, as a new class of noncommuting maps and it has been further studied by Ciric et al. [15, 16], Hussain [12, 13], Hussain et al. [17], Khan and Akbar [18, 19], Pathak and Hussain [20], Song and Xu [21] and Akbar and Khan [22].

In this article, we introduce the new concept of generalized (f, g)-weakly contractive map-pings, and consequently establish common fixed point and invariant best approximation results for the noncommuting generalized (f, g)-weakly contractive mapping. Our results improve and extend the recent common fixed point and invariant approximation results of Al-Thagafi [23], Al-Thagafi and Shahzad [24], Chen and Li [11], Habiniak [25], Hussain and Jungck [5], Jungck and Hussain [6], Jungck and Sessa [26], Pathak and Hussain [20], Sahab et al. [27], Singh [28, 29], Song [7] and Song and Xu [21] to the class of (f, g)-weakly contractive maps. The applications of fixed point theorems are remarkable in diverse disciplines of mathematics, statistics, engineering and economics in dealing with the problems arising in approximation theory, potential theory, game theory, theory of differential equations, theory of integral equations and others (see [20, 30, 31]).

2. Results for (f, g)-weak contractions

The following result is a particular case of Song [[32], Theorem 3.1].

Lemma 2.1. Let M be a nonempty subset of a metric space (X, d), and T be a self-map of M. Assume that clT (M) M, clT (M) is complete, and T is weakly contractive mapping. Then M ∩ F(T) is singleton.

Theorem 2.2. Let M be a nonempty subset of a metric space (X, d), and T, f and g be self-maps of M. Assume that F(f)∩F(g) is nonempty, clT(F(f)∩F(g)) F(f)∩F(g), cl(T(M)) is complete, and T is (f, g)-weakly contractive mapping. Then M ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) is singleton.

Proof. cl(T(F(f) ∩ F(g))) being subset of cl(T(M)) is complete. Further, for all x, y F(f) ∩ F(g), we have by (f, g)-weak contractiveness of T,
$d\left(Tx,Ty\right)\le d\left(fx,gy\right)-\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\varphi \left(d\left(fx,gy\right)\right)=d\left(x,y\right)-\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\varphi \left(d\left(x,y\right)\right)$

Hence T is weakly contractive mapping on F(f)∩F(g) and clT (F(f)∩F(g)) F(f)∩F(g). By Lemma 2.1, T has a unique fixed point z in F(f) ∩ F(g) and consequently, M ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) is singleton.

Corollary 2.3. Let M be a nonempty subset of a metric space (X, d), and (T, f) and (T, g) be Banach operator pairs on M. Assume that cl(T(M)) is complete, T is (f, g)-weakly contractive mapping and F(f)∩F(g) is nonempty and closed. Then M∩F(T)∩F(f)∩F(g) is singleton.

Corollary 2.4. Let M be a nonempty subset of a metric space (X, d), and T, f and g be self-maps of M. Assume that F(f) ∩ F(g) is nonempty, clT (F(f) ∩ F(g)) F(f) ∩ F(g), cl(T (M)) is complete. If T satisfies the following inequality for all x, y M,
$d\left(Tx,Ty\right)\le \psi \left(d\left(fx,gy\right)\right)$
(2.1)

where ψ: [0, ) [0, ) is upper semicontinuous from right such that ψ(0) = 0 and ψ(t) < t for each t > 0. Then M ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) is singleton.

Proof. Set ϕ(t) = t - ψ(t). Then inequality (2.1) implies
$d\left(Tx,Ty\right)\le d\left(fx,gy\right)-\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\varphi \left(d\left(fx,gy\right)\right),$

where ϕ: [0, ) → [0, ) is a lower semicontinuous function from right such that ϕ(t) > 0 for t > 0 and ϕ(0) = 0. The result follows from Theorem 2.2.

Corollary 2.5. Let M be a nonempty subset of a metric space (X, d), and T, f and g be self-maps of M. Assume that F(f) ∩ F(g) is nonempty, clT (F(f) ∩ F(g)) F(f) ∩ F(g), cl(T(M)) is complete. If T satisfies the following inequality for all x, y M,
$d\left(Tx,Ty\right)\le \alpha \left(d\left(fx,gy\right)\right)d\left(fx,gy\right)$
(2.2)

where α: [0, ) (0, 1) is an upper semicontinuous from right. Then M∩F(T)∩F(f)∩F(g) is singleton.

Proof. Set ϕ(t) = (1 - α(t))t, then inequality (2.2) implies
$d\left(Tx,Ty\right)\le d\left(fx,gy\right)-\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\varphi \left(d\left(fx,gy\right)\right),$

where ϕ: [0, ) [0, ) is a lower semicontinuous function from right such that ϕ(t) > 0 for t > 0 and ϕ(0) = 0. The result follows from Theorem 2.2.

In Corollary 2.3, if ϕ(t) = (1 - k)t for a constant k with 0 < k < 1, and f = g, then we easily obtain the following result which improves Lemma 3.1 of Chen and Li [11].

Corollary 2.6. Let M be a nonempty subset of a metric space (X, d), and (T, f) be a Banach operator pair on M. Assume that cl(T(M)) is complete, T is f-contraction and F(f) is nonempty and closed. Then M ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) is singleton.

The following result properly contains Theorems 3.2-3.3 of [11], Theorem 2.2 of [23], Theorem 4 of [25] and Theorem 6 of [26].

Theorem 2.7. Let M be a nonempty subset of a normed [resp. Banach] space X and T, f and g be self-maps of M. Suppose that F(f) ∩ F(g) is q-starshaped, clT(F(f) ∩ F(g)) F(f)∩F(g) [resp. wclT (F(f)∩F(g)) F(f)∩F(g)], cl(T(M)) is compact [resp. wcl(T(M)) is weakly compact], T is continuous on M [resp.id - T is demiclosed at 0, where id stands for identity map] and
$||Tx-Ty||\le \frac{||fx-gy||}{k}-\varphi \left(||fx-gy||\right),$
(2.3)

for all k (0, 1) and x, y M where ϕ: [0, ) → [0, ) is a lower semicontinuous function from right such that ϕ is positive on (0, ) and ϕ(0) = 0. Then M ∩F(T)∩F(f)∩F(g) ≠ .

Proof. Define T n : F(f) ∩ F(g) → F(f) ∩ F(g) by T n x = (1 - k n )q + k n Tx for all x F(f) ∩ F(g) and a fixed sequence of real numbers k n (0 < k n < 1) converging to 1. Since F(f)∩F(g) is q-starshaped and clT (F(f)∩F(g)) F(f)∩F(g) [resp. wclT (F(f)∩F(g)) F(f)∩F(g)], so clT n (F(f)∩F(g)) F(f)∩F(g)] [resp. wclT n (F(f)∩F(g)) F(f)∩F(g)] for each n ≥ 1. Let ϕ n : = k n ϕ. Then by (2.3),
$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill ||{T}_{n}x-{T}_{n}y||& ={k}_{n}||Tx-Ty||\hfill \\ \le {k}_{n}\left(\frac{||fx-gy||}{{k}_{n}}-\varphi \left(||fx-gy||\right)\right)\hfill \\ \le \phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}||fx-gy||-{k}_{n}\varphi \left(||fx-gy||\right)\hfill \\ =\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}||fx-gy||-{\varphi }_{n}\left(||fx-gy||\right),\hfill \end{array}$

for each x, y F(f)∩F(g) and for each n , ϕ n : [0, ) → [0, ) is a lower semicontinuous function from right such that ϕ n is positive on (0, ) and ϕ n (0) = 0.

If cl(T(M)) is compact, for each n , cl(T n (F(f)∩F(g))) is compact and hence complete. By Theorem 2.2, for each n there exists x n F(f) ∩ F(g) such that x n = fx n = gx n = T n x n . The compactness of cl(T(M)) implies that there exists a subsequence {Tx m } of {Tx n } such that Tx m z cl(T(M)) as m. Since {Tx m } is a sequence in T(F(f) ∩ F(g)) and clT(F(f) ∩ F(g)) F(f) ∩ F(g), therefore z F(f) ∩ F(g). Further, x m = T m x m = (1 - k m )q + k m Tx m z. By the continuity of T, we obtain Tz = z. Thus, M ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) ≠ proves the first case.

The weak compactness of wcl(T(M)) implies that wcl(T n (F(f)∩F(g))) is weakly compact and hence complete due to completeness of X. From Theorem 2.2, for each n ≥ 1, there exists x n F(f) ∩ F(g) such that x n = fx n = gx n = T n x n . Moreover, we have ||x n - Tx n || 0 as n. The weak compactness of wcl(T(M)) implies that there is a subsequence {Tx m } of {Tx n } converging weakly to y wcl(T(M)) as m. Since {Tx m } is a sequence in T(F(f)∩F(g)), therefore y wcl(T(F(f)∩F(g))) F(f)∩F(g). Also we have, x m -Tx m 0 as m. If id - T is demiclosed at 0, then y = Ty. Thus M ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) ≠ .

Corollary 2.8. Let M be a nonempty subset of a normed [resp. Banach] space X and T, f and g be self-maps of M. Suppose that F(f) ∩ F(g) is q-starshaped and closed [resp. weakly closed], cl(T(M)) is compact [resp. wcl(T(M)) is weakly compact], T is continuous on M [resp.id-T is demiclosed at 0], (T, f) and (T, g) are Banach operator pairs and satisfy (2.3) for all x, y M. Then M ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) ≠ .

In Theorem 2.7 and Corollary 2.8, if $\varphi \left(t\right)=\left(\frac{1}{k}-1\right)t$ for any constant k with 0 < k < 1, and g = f, then we easily obtain the following results.

Corollary 2.9. [[24], Theorem 2.4] Let M be a nonempty subset of a normed [resp. Banach] space X and T and f be self-maps of M. Suppose that F(f) is q-starshaped, clT (F(f)) F(f) [resp. wclT (F(f)) F(f)], cl(T(M)) is compact [resp. wcl(T(M)) is weakly compact and either id-T is demiclosed at 0 or X satisfies Opial's condition] and T is f-nonexpansive on M. Then F(T) ∩ F(I) ≠ .

Corollary 2.10. [[11], Theorems 3.2-3.3] Let M be a nonempty subset of a normed [resp. Banach] space X and T, f be self-maps of M. Suppose that F(f) is q-starshaped and closed [resp. weakly closed], cl(T(M)) is compact [resp. wcl(T(M)) is weakly compact and either id - T is demiclosed at 0 or X satisfies Opial's condition], (T, f) is a Banach operator pair and T is f-nonexpansive on M. Then M ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) ≠ .

Corollary 2.11. [[23], Theorem 2.1] Let M be a nonempty closed and q-starshaped subset of a normed space X and T and f be self-maps of M such that T(M) f(M). Suppose that T commutes with f and q F (f). If cl(T(M)) is compact, f is continuous and linear and T is f-nonexpansive on M, then M ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) ≠ .

Let $C={P}_{M}\left(u\right)\cap {C}_{M}^{f,g}\left(u\right)$, where ${C}_{M}^{f,g}\left(u\right)={C}_{M}^{f}\left(u\right)\cap {C}_{M}^{g}\left(u\right)$ and ${C}_{M}^{f}\left(u\right)=\left\{x\in M:fx\in {P}_{M}\left(u\right)\right\}$.

Corollary 2.12. Let X be a normed [resp. Banach] space X and T, f and g be self-maps of X. If u X, D C, D0: = D ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) is q-starshaped, cl(T(D0)) D0 [resp. wcl(T(D0)) D0], cl(T(D)) is compact [resp. wcl(T(D)) is weakly compact], T is continuous on D [resp.id - T is demiclosed at 0] and (2.3) holds for all x, y D, then P M (u) ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) ≠ .

Corollary 2.13. Let X be a normed [resp. Banach] space X and T, f and g be self-maps of X. If u X, D P M (u), D0: = D ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) is q-starshaped, cl(T(D0)) D0 [resp. wcl(T(D0)) D0], cl(T(D)) is compact [resp. wcl(T(D)) is weakly compact], T is continuous on D[resp.id - T is demiclosed at 0] and (2.3) holds for all x, y D, then P M (u) ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) ≠ .

Remark 2.14. Corollary 2.5 of [24], and Theorems 4.1 and 4.2 of Chen and Li [11] and the corresponding results in [23, 2529] are particular cases of Corollaries 2.12 and 2.13.

We denote by 0 the class of closed convex subsets of X containing 0. For M 0, we define M u = {x M : ||x|| 2 ||u||}. It is clear that P M (u) M u 0 (see [5, 23]).

Theorem 2.15. Let f, g, T be self-maps of a normed [resp. Banach] space X. If u X and M 0 such that T(M u ) M, cl(T(M u )) is compact [resp. wcl(T(M u )) is weakly compact] and ||Tx - u|| ||x - u|| for all x M u , then P M (u) is nonempty, closed and convex with T(P M (u)) P M (u). If, in addition, D P M (u), D0: = D ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) is q-starshaped, cl(T(D0)) D0 [resp. wcl(T(D0)) D0], T is continuous on D [resp.id - T is demiclosed at 0] and (2.3) holds for all x, y D, then P M (u) ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) ≠ .

Proof. We may assume that u M. If x M\M u , then ||x|| > 2 ||u||. Note that
$∥x-u∥\ge \phantom{\rule{2.77695pt}{0ex}}∥x∥-∥u∥\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}>\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}||u||\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\ge \mathsf{\text{dist}}\left(u,M\right).$

Thus, dist(u, M u ) = dist(u, M) ||u||. If cl(T(M u )) is compact, then by the continuity of norm, we get ||z - u|| = dist(u, cl(T(M u ))) for some z cl(T(M u )).

If we assume that wcl(T(M u )) is weakly compact, using Lemma 5.5 of [[33], p. 192] we can show the existence of a z wcl(T(M u )) such that dist(u, wcl(T(M u ))) = ||z - u||.

Thus, in both cases, we have
$\mathsf{\text{dist}}\left(u,{M}_{u}\right)\le \mathsf{\text{dist}}\left(u,\phantom{\rule{2.77695pt}{0ex}}\mathsf{\text{cl}}T\left({M}_{u}\right)\right)\le \mathsf{\text{dist}}\left(u,T\left({M}_{u}\right)\right)\le ∥Tx-u∥\le ∥x-u∥,$

for all x M u . Hence ||z - u|| = dist(u, M) and so P M (u) is nonempty, closed and convex with T(P M (u)) P M (u). The compactness of cl(T(M u )) [resp. weak compactness of wcl(T(M u ))] implies that cl(T(D)) is compact [resp. wcl(T(D)) is weakly compact]. The result now follows from Corollary 2.13.

Remark 2.16. Theorem 2.15 extends Theorems 4.1 and 4.2 of [23], Theorem 2.6 of [24], and Theorem 8 of [25].

3. Results for generalized (f, g)-weak contractions

Definition 3.1. A map T : XX is called generalized weak contraction [34] if, for each x, y X,
$d\left(Tx,Ty\right)\le M\left(x,y\right)-\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\varphi \left(M\left(x,y\right)\right),$
(3.1)
where ϕ: [0, ) → [0, ) is a lower semicontinuous function from right such that ϕ is positive on (0, ), ϕ(0) = 0 and
$M\left(x,y\right)=\mathsf{\text{max}}\left\{d\left(x,y\right),d\left(Tx,x\right),d\left(Ty,y\right),\frac{1}{2}\left[d\left(Tx,y\right)+d\left(Ty,x\right)\right]\right\}$
In (3.1), if we change M(x, y) by
$m\left(x,y\right):=\mathsf{\text{max}}\left\{d\left(fx,gy\right),d\left(Tx,fx\right),d\left(Ty,gy\right),\frac{1}{2}\left[d\left(Tx,gy\right)+d\left(Ty,fx\right)\right]\right\}$
then T is called generalized (f, g)-weak contraction. If
$d\left(Tx,Ty\right)\le m\left(x,y\right),$
(3.2)

then T is called generalized (f, g)-contraction (see [7]). Notice that m(x, y) coincides with M(x, y) on F(f) ∩ F(g).

The following result is a particular case of Theorem 2.1 of Zhang and Song [34].

Lemma 3.2. Let M be a nonempty subset of a metric space (X, d), and T be a self-map of M. Assume that clT(M) M, clT(M) is complete, and T is a generalized weak contraction. Then M ∩ F(T) is singleton.

Theorem 3.3. Let M be a nonempty subset of a metric space (X, d), and T, f and g be self-maps of M. Assume that F(f)∩F(g) is nonempty, clT(F(f)∩F(g)) F(f)∩F(g), cl(T(M)) is complete, and T is generalized (f, g)-weak contraction. Then M ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) is singleton.

Proof. cl(T(F(f) ∩ F(g))) being subset of cl(T(M)) is complete. Further, for all x, y F(f) ∩ F(g), we have by generalized (f, g)-weak contractiveness of T,
$d\left(Tx,Ty\right)\le m\left(x,y\right)-\varphi \left(m\left(x,y\right)\right)=M\left(x,y\right)-\varphi \left(M\left(x,y\right)\right)$

Hence T is generalized weak contraction mapping on F(f) ∩ F(g) and clT(F(f) ∩ F(g)) F(f) ∩ F(g). By Lemma 3.2, T has a unique fixed point z in F(f) ∩ F(g) and consequently, M ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) is singleton.

Corollary 3.4. Let M be a nonempty subset of a metric space (X, d), and (T, f) and (T, g) be Banach operator pairs on M. Assume that cl(T(M)) is complete, T is generalized (f, g)-weakly contractive mapping and F(f) ∩ F(g) is nonempty and closed. Then M ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) is singleton.

Corollary 3.5. Let M be a nonempty subset of a metric space (X, d), and T, f and g be self-maps of M. Assume that F(f) ∩ F(g) is nonempty, clT(F(f) ∩ F(g)) F(f) ∩ F(g), cl(T(M)) is complete. If T satisfies the following inequality for all x, y M,
$d\left(Tx,Ty\right)\le \psi \left(m\left(x,y\right)\right)$
(3.3)

where ψ: [0, ) → [0, ) is upper semicontinuous from right such that ψ(0) = 0 and ψ(t) < t for each t > 0, then M ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) is singleton.

Proof. Set ϕ(t) = t - ψ(t). Then inequality (3.3) implies
$d\left(Tx,Ty\right)\le m\left(x,y\right)-\varphi \left(m\left(x,y\right)\right),$

where ϕ: [0, ) → [0, ) is lower semicontinuous function from right such that ϕ(t) > 0 for t > 0 and ϕ(0) = 0. The result follows from Theorem 3.3.

In Theorem 3.3 and Corollary 3.4, if ϕ(t) = (1 - k)t for a constant k with 0 < k < 1, then we easily obtain the following results which improve Lemma 3.1 of Chen and Li [11] and provide the conclusions about common fixed points in Theorem 2.1 and Corollaries 2.2 and 2.3 for different classes of maps.

Corollary 3.6. Let M be a nonempty subset of a metric space (X, d), and T, f and g be self-maps of M. Assume that F(f) ∩ F(g) is nonempty, clT(F(f) ∩ F(g)) F(f) ∩ F(g), cl(T(M)) is complete, and T is generalized (f, g)-contraction. Then M ∩F(T) ∩F(f) ∩F(g) is singleton.

Corollary 3.7. Let M be a nonempty subset of a metric space (X, d), and (T, f) and (T, g) are Banach operator pairs on M. Assume that cl(T(M)) is complete, T is generalized (f, g)-contraction and F(f) ∩ F(g) is nonempty and closed. Then M ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) is singleton.

Theorem 3.8. Let M be a nonempty subset of a normed [resp. Banach] space X and T, f and g be self-maps of M. Suppose that F(f) ∩ F(g) is q-starshaped, clT(F(f) ∩ F(g)) F(f)∩F(g) [resp. wclT (F(f)∩F(g)) F(f)∩F(g)], cl(T(M)) is compact [resp. wcl(T(M)) is weakly compact], T is continuous on M [resp.id - T is demiclosed at 0, where id stands for identity map] and
$∥Tx-Ty∥\le \frac{n\left(x,y\right)}{k}-\varphi \left(n\left(x,y\right)\right),$
(3.4)
for all k (0, 1) and x, y M where ϕ: [0, ) → [0, ) is a lower semicontinuous function from right such that ϕ is positive on (0, ), ϕ(0) = 0 and

Then M ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) ≠ .

Proof. We utilize Theorem 3.3 instead of Theorem 2.2 in the proof of Theorem 2.7.

Corollary 3.9. Let M be a nonempty subset of a normed [resp. Banach] space X and T, f and g be self-maps of M. Suppose that F(f) ∩ F(g) is q-starshaped and closed [resp. weakly closed], cl(T(M)) is compact [resp. wcl(T(M)) is weakly compact], T is continuous on M [resp.id-T is demiclosed at 0], (T, f) and (T, g) are Banach operator pairs and satisfy (3.4) for all x, y M. Then M ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) ≠ .

In Theorem 3.8, if $\varphi \left(t\right)=\left(\frac{1}{k}-1\right)t$ for any constant k with 0 < k < 1, then (3.4) changes into
$∥Tx-Ty∥\le n\left(x,y\right)$
(3.5)

Such a map T is called generalized (f, g)-nonexpansive (see [7]).

Corollary 3.10. Let M be a nonempty subset of a normed [resp. Banach] space X and T, f and g be self-maps of M. Suppose that F(f)∩F(g) is q-starshaped, clT(F(f)∩F(g)) F(f)∩F(g) [resp. wclT (F(f)∩F(g)) F(f)∩F(g)], cl(T(M)) is compact [resp. wcl(T(M)) is weakly compact], T is continuous on M [resp.id-T is demiclosed at 0] and T is generalized (f, g)-nonexpansive. Then M ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) ≠ .

Remark 3.11. (1) By comparing Theorem 2.2(i) of Hussain and Jungck [5] with the first case of Corollary 3.10, their assumptions " M is complete, q-starshaped, f and g are affine and continuous on M, T(M) f(M) ∩ g(M), q F(f) ∩ F(g) and (T, f) and (T, g) are R-subweakly commuting on M" are replaced with " M is a nonempty subset, F(f) ∩ F(g) is q-starshaped, clT (F(f) ∩ F(g)) F(f) ∩ F(g)".
1. (2)

By comparing Theorem 2.2(ii) of Hussain and Jungck [5] with the second case of Corollary 3.10, their assumptions " M is weakly compact, q-starshaped, f and g are affine and continuous on M, T(M) f(M) ∩ g(M), q F(f) ∩ F(g), f - T is demiclosed at 0 and (T, f) and (T, g) are R-subweakly commuting on M" are replaced with " wcl(T(M)) is weakly compact, F(f) ∩ F(g) is q-starshaped, wclT(F(f) ∩ F(g)) F(f) ∩ F(g), id - T is demiclosed at 0".

2. (3)

By comparing Theorem 2.13 of Hussain and Jungck [5] with the first case of Corollary 3.10 with g = f, their assumptions " M is complete, q-starshaped, f(M) = M, f is continuous on M, the pair (T, f) is compatible, f fv = fv for v C(f, T)" are replaced with " M is a nonempty subset, F(f) is q-starshaped, clT(F(f)) F(f)".

3. (4)

By comparing Theorem 2.4 of Song [7] with the first case of Corollary 3.10, his assumptions " M is nonempty, q-starshaped, f g are continuous and affine with q F(f) ∩ F(g), clT(M) f(M) ∩ g(M) and (T, f) and (T, g) are C q -commuting on M" are replaced with " M is a nonempty subset, F(f) ∩ F(g) is q-starshaped, clT(F(f) ∩ F(g)) F(f) ∩ F(g)".

Corollary 3.12. Let X be a normed [resp. Banach] space X and T, f and g be self-maps of X. If u X, D C, D0: = D ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) is q-starshaped, cl(T(D0)) D0 [resp. wcl(T(D0)) D0], cl(T(D)) is compact [resp. wcl(T(D)) is weakly compact], T is continuous on D[resp.id - T is demiclosed at 0] and (3.4) holds for all x, y D, then P M (u) ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) ≠ .

Corollary 3.13. Let X be a normed [resp. Banach] space X and T, f and g be self-maps of X. If u X, D P M (u), D0: = D ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) is q-starshaped, cl(T(D0)) D0 [resp. wcl(T(D0)) D0], cl(T(D)) is compact [resp. wcl(T(D)) is weakly compact], T is continuous on D[resp.id - T is demiclosed at 0] and (3.4) holds for all x, y D, then P M (u) ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) ≠ .

Remark 3.14. (1) Corollaries 3.12 and 3.13 improve and develop Theorems 2.8-2.11 of Hussain and Jungck [5] and Theorems 3.1-3.4 of Song [7].

Theorem 3.15. Let f, g, T be self-maps of a normed [resp. Banach] space X. If u X and M 0 such that T(M u ) M, cl(T(M u )) is compact [resp. wcl(T(M u )) is weakly compact] and ||Tx - u|| ||x - u|| for all x M u , then P M (u) is nonempty, closed and convex with T(P M (u)) P M (u). If, in addition, D P M (u), D0: = D ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) is q-starshaped, cl(T(D0)) D0 [resp. wcl(T(D0)) D0], T is continuous on D [resp.id - T is demiclosed at 0] and (3.4) holds for all x, y D, then P M (u) ∩ F(T) ∩ F(f) ∩ F(g) ≠ .

Proof. We utilize Corollary 3.13 instead of Corollary 2.13 in the proof of Theorem 2.15.

Remark 3.16 Theorem 3.15 extends Theorem 4.1 and 4.2 of [23], Theorem 2.6 of [24], Theorem 8 of [25], Theorem 2.14 of [5], and Theorem 2.12 of [6].

Declarations

Acknowledgements

The author A.R. Khan is grateful to the King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals for supporting research project IN101037.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Mathematics, University of Sargodha, Sargodha, Pakistan
(2)
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia

References

1. Alber YaI, Guerre-Delabriere S: Principles of weakly contractive maps in Hilbert spaces. In New Results in Operator Theory Edited by: Gohberg I, Lyubich Yu. 1997, 98: 7–22. Advances and Appl. Birkhauser, Basel
2. Rhoades BE: Some theorems on weakly contractive maps. Nonlinear Anal 2001, 47: 2683–2693. 10.1016/S0362-546X(01)00388-1
3. Boyd DW, Wong TSW: On nonlinear contractions. Proc Am Math Soc 1996, 20: 458–464.
4. Mizoguchi N, Takahashi W: Fixed point theorems for multivalued mappings on complete metric spaces. J Math Anal Appl 1989, 141: 177–188. 10.1016/0022-247X(89)90214-X
5. Hussain N, Jungck G: Common fixed point and invariant approximation results for noncommuting generalized ( f , g )-nonexpansive maps. J Math Anal Appl 2006, 321: 851–861. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2005.08.045
6. Jungck G, Hussain N: Compatible maps and invariant approximations. J Math Anal Appl 2007, 325: 1003–1012. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2006.02.058
7. Song Y: Common fixed points and invariant approximations for generalized ( f , g )-nonexpansive mappings. Commun Math Anal 2007, 2: 17–26.
8. Jungck G: Commuting mappings and fixed points. Am Math Month 1976, 83: 261–263. 10.2307/2318216
9. Jungck G: Common fixed points for commuting and compatible maps on compacta. Proc Am Math Soc 1988, 103: 977–983. 10.1090/S0002-9939-1988-0947693-2
10. Jungck G: Common fixed point theorems for compatible self maps of Hausdorff topological spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl 2005, 3: 355–363.
11. Chen J, Li Z: Common fixed points for Banach operator pairs in best approximation. J Math Anal Appl 2007, 336: 1466–1475. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2007.01.064
12. Hussain N: Asymptotically pseudo-contractions, Banach operator pairs and best simultaneous approximations. Fixed Point Theory Appl 2011, 2011: 11. (Article ID 812813) 10.1186/1687-1812-2011-11
13. Hussain N: Common fixed points in best approximation for Banach operator pairs with Ćirić type I -contractions. J Math Anal Appl 2008, 338: 1351–1363. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2007.06.008
14. O'Regan D, Hussain N: Generalized I -contractions and pointwise R -subweakly commuting maps. Acta Math Sinica 2007, 23(8):1505–1508. 10.1007/s10114-007-0935-7
15. Ćirić LJB, Husain N, Akbar F, Ume JS: Common fixed points for Banach operator pairs from the set of best approximations. Bull Belg Math Soc Simon Stevin 2009, 16: 319–336.
16. Ćirić LJ, Hussain N, Cakic N: Common fixed points for Ciric type f -weak contraction with applications. Publ Math Debrecen 2010, 76(1–2):31–49.
17. Hussain N, Khamsi MA, Latif A: Banach operator pairs and common fixed points in hyperconvex metric spaces. Nonlinear Anal 2011, 743: 5956–5961.
18. Khan AR, Akbar F: Best simultaneous approximations, asymptotically nonexpansive mappings and variational inequalities in Banach spaces. J Math Anal Appl 2009, 354: 469–477. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2009.01.007
19. Khan AR, Akbar F: Common fixed points from best simultaneous approximations. Tiawanese J Math 2009, 13: 1379–1386.
20. Pathak HK, Hussain N: Common fixed points for Banach operator pairs with applications. Nonlinear Anal 2008, 69: 2788–2802. 10.1016/j.na.2007.08.051
21. Song Y, Xu S: A note on common fixed points for Banach operator pairs. Int J Contemp Math Sci 2007, 2: 1163–1166.
22. Akbar F, Khan AR: Common fixed point and approximation results for noncommuting maps on locally convex spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl 2009, 2009: 14. (Article ID 207503)
23. Al-Thagafi MA: Common fixed points and best approximation. J Approx Theory 1996, 85: 318–323. 10.1006/jath.1996.0045
24. Al-Thagafi MA, Shahzad N: Banach operator pairs, common fixed points, invariant approximations and *-nonexpansive multimaps. Nonlinear Anal 2008, 69: 2733–2739. 10.1016/j.na.2007.08.047
25. Habiniak L: Fixed point theorems and invariant approximation. J Approx Theory 1989, 56: 241–244. 10.1016/0021-9045(89)90113-5
26. Jungck G, Sessa S: Fixed point theorems in best approximation theory. Math Japon 1995, 42: 249–252.
27. Sahab SA, Khan MS, Sessa S: A result in best approximation theory. J Approx Theory 1988, 55: 349–351. 10.1016/0021-9045(88)90101-3
28. Singh SP: Application of Fixed Point Theorems in Approximation Theory. In Appl Nonlinear Anal. Academic Press, New York; 1979:389–394.Google Scholar
29. Singh SP: An application of fixed point theorem to approximation theory. J Approx Theory 1979, 25: 89–90. 10.1016/0021-9045(79)90036-4
30. Berinde V: Iterative Approximation of Fixed Points. In Lecture Notes in Mathematics. Volume 1912. 2nd edition. Springer-Verlag, Berlin; 2007.Google Scholar
31. Khamsi MA, Kirk WA: An Introduction to Metric Spaces and Fixed Point Theory. Wiley, New York; 2001.
32. Song Y: Coincidence points for noncommuting f -weakly contractive mappings. Int J Comput Appl Math 2007, 2: 51–57.
33. Singh SP, Watson B, Srivastava P: Fixed Point Theory and Best Approximation: The KKM-map Principle. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht; 1997.
34. Zhang Q, Song Y: Fixed point theory for generalized ϕ -weak contractions. Appl Math Lett 2009, 22: 75–78. 10.1016/j.aml.2008.02.007