Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Research
  • Open Access

A note on ‘Coupled fixed point theorems for α-ψ-contractive-type mappings in partially ordered metric spaces’

Fixed Point Theory and Applications20132013:216

https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2013-216

  • Received: 6 June 2013
  • Accepted: 30 July 2013
  • Published:

Abstract

In this paper, we show that some examples in (Mursaleen et al. in Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012:124, 2012) are not correct. Then, we extend, improve and generalize their results. Finally, we state some examples to illustrate our obtained results.

MSC:47H10, 54H25.

Keywords

  • coupled fixed point
  • fixed point
  • ordered set
  • metric space
  • α-ψ contractive mapping
  • α-admissible
  • ( c ) -comparison function
  • partial order

1 Introduction and preliminaries

In the sequel, let X be a non-empty set. Throughout the text, we use indifferently the notation Y or X 2 to denote the product space X × X . Let T : X X and F : X 2 X be two mappings. From now on, will denote a partial order on X, and d will be a metric on X. To determine sufficient conditions in order to ensure the existence of the following kind of points is the main aim of the present manuscript.

Definition 1.1 (See [1])

An element ( x , y ) X 2 is called a coupled fixed point of a mapping F : X 2 X if F ( x , y ) = x and F ( y , x ) = y .

Definition 1.2 (See [1])

Let ( X , ) be a partially ordered set, and let T : X X be a mapping. Then T is said to be non-decreasing with respect to if x y implies T x T y , and it is non-increasing (w.r.t. ) if x y implies T x T y for every x , y X .

Definition 1.3 (See, e.g., [2])

Let ( X , ) be a partially ordered set. A sequence { x n } X is said to be non-decreasing with respect to if x n x n + 1 for all n.

Definition 1.4 (See [2])

Let ( X , ) be a partially ordered set, and let d be a metric on X. We say that ( X , , d ) is regular if for every non-decreasing sequence { x n } X such that x n x X as n , there exists a subsequence { x n ( k ) } of { x n } such that x n ( k ) x for all k.

Definition 1.5 (See [1])

Let ( X , ) be a partially ordered set, and let F : X 2 X be a mapping. The mapping F is said to have the mixed monotone property if F ( x , y ) is monotone non-decreasing in x and monotone non-increasing in y, that is, for any x , y X ,
x 1 , x 2 X , x 1 x 2 F ( x 1 , y ) F ( x 2 , y )
and
y 1 , y 2 X , y 1 y 2 F ( x , y 1 ) F ( x , y 2 ) .
The partial order on X can be induced on X 2 in the following way
( x , y ) , ( u , v ) X 2 , ( x , y ) 2 ( u , v ) x u and y v .
(1)

We say that ( x , y ) is comparable to ( u , v ) if either ( x , y ) 2 ( u , v ) or ( x , y ) 2 ( u , v ) . According to the definitions above, a sequence { ( x n , y n ) } X 2 is non-decreasing with respect to 2 if ( x n , y n ) 2 ( x n + 1 , y n + 1 ) for all n.

If d is a metric on X, we will consider the metrics d 2 , d max : Y × Y [ 0 , ) defined, for all ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) Y , by
d 2 ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) = d ( x , u ) + d ( y , v ) , d max ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) = max ( d ( x , u ) , d ( y , v ) ) .

Notice that ( X 2 , 2 , d 2 ) is regular if for every non-decreasing sequence { ( x n , y n ) } X 2 such that ( x n , y n ) d 2 ( x , y ) Y as n , there exists a subsequence { ( x n ( k ) , y n ( k ) ) } of { ( x n , y n ) } such that ( x n ( k ) , y n ( k ) ) 2 ( x , y ) for all k.

Given a mapping F : X 2 X , the mapping T F : Y Y will be defined as follows:
T F ( x , y ) = ( F ( x , y ) , F ( y , x ) ) for all  ( x , y ) Y .

The following result can be easily shown.

Lemma 1.1 (See, e.g., [3])

The following properties hold:
  1. (a)

    if ( X , d ) is complete, then ( Y , d 2 ) and ( Y , d max ) are complete;

     
  2. (b)

    F has the mixed monotone property on ( X , ) if, and only if, T F is monotone non-decreasing with respect to 2;

     
  3. (c)

    ( x , y ) X × X is a coupled fixed point of F if and only if ( x , y ) is a fixed point of T F .

     

Let Ψ be the family of functions ψ : [ 0 , ) [ 0 , ) satisfying the following conditions:

( Ψ 1 ) ψ is non-decreasing;

( Ψ 2 ) n = 1 + ψ n ( t ) < for all t > 0 , where ψ n is the n th iterate of ψ.

These functions are known in the literature as Bianchini-Grandolfi gauge functions in some sources and as ( c ) -comparison functions in others (see, e.g., [4]). They have a crucial role in fixed point theory (see, e.g., [57]). It is easily proved that if ψ is a ( c ) -comparison function, then ψ ( t ) < t for any t > 0 .

Very recently, Samet et al. [8] introduced the following concepts.

Definition 1.6 Let ( X , d ) be a metric space, and let T : X X be a given mapping. We say that T is an α-ψ-contractive mapping if there exist two functions α : X × X [ 0 , ) and ψ Ψ such that
α ( x , y ) d ( T x , T y ) ψ ( d ( x , y ) ) for all  x , y X .
(2)

Clearly, any contractive mapping (that is, a mapping satisfying the Banach contraction property associated to k ( 0 , 1 ) ) is an α-ψ-contractive mapping with α ( x , y ) = 1 for all x , y X and ψ ( t ) = k t for all t 0 .

Definition 1.7 Let T : X X , and let α : X × X [ 0 , ) . We say that T is α-admissible if for all x , y X , we have
α ( x , y ) 1 α ( T x , T y ) 1 .

Various examples of such mappings are presented in [8]. The characterization of this notion for the setting of G-metric spaces was considered in [9, 10]. The main results in [8] are the following fixed point theorems.

Theorem 1.1 Let ( X , d ) be a complete metric space, and let T : X X be an α-ψ-contractive mapping. Suppose that
  1. (i)

    T is α-admissible;

     
  2. (ii)

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

     
  3. (iii)

    T is continuous.

     

Then there exists u X such that T u = u .

Theorem 1.2 Let ( X , d ) be a complete metric space, and let T : X X be an α-ψ-contractive mapping. Suppose that
  1. (i)

    T is α-admissible;

     
  2. (ii)

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

     
  3. (iii)

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

     

Then there exists u X such that T u = u .

Theorem 1.3 Adding to the hypotheses of Theorem  1.1 (resp. Theorem  1.2) the conditionFor all x , y X , there exists z X such that α ( x , z ) 1 and α ( y , z ) 1 ,’ we obtain the uniqueness of the fixed point.

In [8], the authors also mentioned some existing results can be considered as a particular case of their main results, see e.g. [1119]. Later, Karapınar and Samet [2] extended and generalized the result of Samet et al. [8] by stating the following definitions.

Definition 1.8 Let ( X , d ) be a metric space, and let T : X X be a given mapping. We say that T is a generalized α-ψ-contractive mapping of type I if there exist two functions α : X × X [ 0 , ) and ψ Ψ such that for all x , y X , we have
α ( x , y ) d ( T x , T y ) ψ ( M ( x , y ) ) ,
(3)

where M ( x , y ) = max { d ( x , y ) , d ( x , T x ) + d ( y , T y ) 2 , d ( x , T y ) + d ( y , T x ) 2 } .

Definition 1.9 Let ( X , d ) be a metric space, and let T : X X be a given mapping. We say that T is a generalized α-ψ-contractive mapping of type II if there exist two functions α : X × X [ 0 , ) and ψ Ψ such that for all x , y X , we have
α ( x , y ) d ( T x , T y ) ψ ( N ( x , y ) ) ,
(4)

where N ( x , y ) = max { d ( x , y ) , d ( x , T x ) + d ( y , T y ) 2 } .

Remark 1.1 Clearly, since ψ is non-decreasing, every α-ψ-contractive mapping is a generalized α-ψ-contractive mapping of types I and II. Notice also that every generalized α-ψ-contractive mapping of type II is also a generalized α-ψ-contractive mapping of type I.

Karapınar and Samet [2] proved the following theorems.

Theorem 1.4 Let ( X , d ) be a complete metric space. Suppose that T : X X is a generalized α-ψ-contractive mapping of type I (respectively, of type II) and satisfies the following conditions:
  1. (i)

    T is α-admissible;

     
  2. (ii)

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

     
  3. (iii)

    T is continuous.

     

Then there exists u X such that T u = u .

Theorem 1.5 Let ( X , d ) be a complete metric space. Suppose that T : X X is a generalized α-ψ-contractive mapping of type I (respectively, of type II), and the following conditions hold:
  1. (i)

    T is α-admissible;

     
  2. (ii)

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

     
  3. (iii)

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

     

Then there exists u X such that T u = u .

For the uniqueness of a fixed point of a generalized α-ψ-contractive mapping, we will consider the following hypothesis, in which Fix ( T ) denotes the set of all fixed points of T.
  1. (H)

    For all x , y Fix ( T ) , there exists z X such that α ( x , z ) 1 and α ( y , z ) 1 .

     

Theorem 1.6 Adding condition (H) to the hypotheses of Theorem  1.4 (resp. Theorem  1.5), we obtain that u is the unique fixed point of T.

Inspired by the above mentioned results, Mursaleen et al. [20] characterized the idea to prove the existence and uniqueness of a coupled fixed point. Before starting the main theorem of Mursaleen et al., we recall the basic definition and fundamental results in coupled fixed point theory.

The first result in the existence and uniqueness of fixed point of contraction mapping in partially ordered complete metric spaces was given by Ran and Reurings [21]. Following this initial work, a number of authors have investigated the fixed points of various mappings and their applications in the theory of differential equations. A notion of coupled fixed point was defined by Guo and Laksmikantham [22]. After that, Bhaskar and Lakshmikantham [1] proved the existence and uniqueness of a coupled fixed point in the context of partially ordered metric spaces by introducing the notion of mixed monotone property. In that paper, the authors proved the existence and uniqueness of a solution of periodic boundary value problems. After this remarkable paper, the notion of coupled fixed point have attracted attention of a number of authors (see, e.g., [2347]).

Mursaleen et al. [20] reconsidered the notion of an α-admissible mapping, introduced by Samet et al. [8], in the following way:

Definition 1.10 (See [20])

Let F : X 2 X and α : X 2 × X 2 [ 0 , ) be two mappings. We say that F is α-admissible if for all x , y , u , v X , we have
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) 1 α ( ( F ( x , y ) , ( F ( y , x ) ) ) , ( F ( u , v ) , ( F ( v , u ) ) ) ) 1 .

Remark 1.2 Notice that Definition 1.10 is exactly the same with Definition 1.7 by choosing  X 2 .

The main results in [20] are the following ones.

Theorem 1.7 Let ( X , ) be a partially ordered set, and suppose that there is a metric d on X such that ( X , d ) is a complete metric space. Let F : X × X X be a mapping having the mixed monotone property of X. Suppose that there exist ψ Ψ and α : X 2 × X 2 [ 0 , ) such that for all x , y , u , v X , the following holds
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) d ( F ( x , y ) , F ( u , v ) ) ψ ( d ( x , u ) + d ( y , v ) 2 )
(5)
for all x u and y v . Suppose also that
  1. (i)

    F is α-admissible;

     
  2. (ii)
    there exists x 0 , y 0 X such that
    α ( ( x 0 , y 0 ) , ( F ( x 0 , y 0 ) , F ( y 0 , x 0 ) ) ) 1 and α ( ( y 0 , x 0 ) , ( F ( y 0 , x 0 ) , F ( x 0 , y 0 ) ) ) 1 ;
     
  3. (iii)

    F is continuous.

     
If there exist x 0 , y 0 X such that x 0 F ( x 0 , y 0 ) and y 0 F ( y 0 , x 0 ) , then F has a coupled fixed point, that is, there exist x , y X such that
F ( x , y ) = x and F ( y , x ) = y .
Theorem 1.8 Let ( X , ) be a partially ordered set, and suppose that there is a metric d on X such that ( X , d ) is a complete metric space. Let F : X × X X be a mapping having the mixed monotone property of X. Suppose that there exist ψ Ψ and α : X 2 × X 2 [ 0 , ) such that for all x , y , u , v X , the following holds
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) d ( F ( x , y ) , F ( u , v ) ) ψ ( d ( x , u ) + d ( y , v ) 2 )
(6)
for all x u and y v . Suppose also that
  1. (i)

    F is α-admissible;

     
  2. (ii)
    there exists x 0 , y 0 X such that
    α ( ( x 0 , y 0 ) , ( F ( x 0 , y 0 ) , F ( y 0 , x 0 ) ) ) 1 and α ( ( y 0 , x 0 ) , ( F ( y 0 , x 0 ) , F ( x 0 , y 0 ) ) ) 1 ;
     
  3. (iii)

    if { x n } and { y n } are sequences in X such that α ( ( x n , y n ) , ( x n + 1 , y n + 1 ) ) 1 and α ( ( y n , x n ) , ( y n + 1 , x n + 1 ) ) 1 for all n, and lim n x n = x and lim n y n = y , then α ( ( x n , y n ) , ( x , y ) ) 1 and α ( ( y n , x n ) , ( y , x ) ) 1 for all n.

     
If there exist x 0 , y 0 X such that x 0 F ( x 0 , y 0 ) and y 0 F ( y 0 , x 0 ) , then F has a coupled fixed point, that is, there exist x , y X such that
F ( x , y ) = x and F ( y , x ) = y .
Theorem 1.9 In addition to the hypothesis of Theorem  1.7, suppose that for every ( x , y ) , ( s , t ) X × X , there exists ( u , v ) X × X , such that
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) 1 and α ( ( s , t ) , ( u , v ) ) 1 ,

and also assume that ( u , v ) is comparable to ( x , y ) and ( s , t ) . Then F has a unique fixed point.

In this paper, we show that coupled fixed point results of Mursaleen et al. [20] can be obtained by usual fixed point theorems. Moreover, by giving an example, we conclude that the main result of Mursaleen et al. [20] is not strong enough to be applied to their own examples. The object of this paper is to extend, improve and generalize their results in a more simple set up. Finally, we also note that the remarks and comments of this paper are also valid for [48].

2 Main results

We start this section by giving an example to show the weakness of Theorem 1.7. First, we notice that the function F ( x , y ) = 1 4 x y in Example 3.7 in [20, 48] and the function F ( x , y ) = 1 4 ln ( 1 + | x | ) + 1 4 ln ( 1 + | y | ) in Example 3.8 in [20, 48] do not satisfy the mixed monotone property.

Now, we state the following example.

Example 2.1 Let X = R and d : X × X [ 0 , ) be the Euclidean metric. Consider a mapping α : X 2 × X 2 [ 0 , ) defined by
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) = { 1 , if  x u , y v , 0 , otherwise .
Define a mapping F : X × X X as
F ( x , y ) = 3 x y 5 for all  x , y X .
It is clear that F is mixed monotone, but we claim that it does not satisfy condition (5). Indeed, assume that there exists ψ Ψ such that
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) d ( F ( x , y ) , F ( u , v ) ) ψ ( d ( x , u ) + d ( y , v ) 2 )
(7)
holds for all x u and v y . Let us take x u , y = v in the previous inequality. Hence, t = | x u | > 0 and inequality (7) turns into
3 t 5 = 3 | x u | 5 = d ( F ( x , y ) , F ( u , v ) ) ψ ( | x u | 2 ) = ψ ( t 2 ) .
(8)
Recall that ψ ( t ) < t for any t > 0 . Hence, inequality (8) turns into
3 t 5 ψ ( t 2 ) < t 2 ,

which is a contradiction. Hence, Theorem 1.7 is not applicable to the operator F in order to prove that ( 0 , 0 ) is the unique coupled fixed point of F.

We notice that Theorem 1.7 is not strong enough to conclude that F has a coupled fixed point. Inspired by Example 2.1, we suggest the following statement instead of Theorem 1.7.

Theorem 2.1 Let ( X , ) be a partially ordered set, and suppose there is a metric d on X such that ( X , d ) is a complete metric space. Let F : X 2 X be a mapping having the mixed monotone property on X. Suppose that there exist ψ Ψ and α : X 2 × X 2 [ 0 , ) such that for all x , y , u , v X the following holds
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) d ( F ( x , y ) , F ( u , v ) ) + d ( F ( y , x ) , F ( v , u ) ) 2 ψ ( d ( x , u ) + d ( y , v ) 2 )
(9)
for which x u and y v . Suppose also that
  1. (i)

    F is α-admissible;

     
  2. (ii)
    there exists x 0 , y 0 X such that
    α ( ( x 0 , y 0 ) , ( F ( x 0 , y 0 ) , F ( y 0 , x 0 ) ) ) 1 and α ( ( y 0 , x 0 ) , ( F ( y 0 , x 0 ) , F ( x 0 , y 0 ) ) ) 1 ;
     
  3. (iii)

    F is continuous.

     
If there exist x 0 , y 0 X such that x 0 F ( x 0 , y 0 ) and y 0 F ( y 0 , x 0 ) , then F has a coupled fixed point, that is, there exist x , y X such that
F ( x , y ) = x and F ( y , x ) = y .

Proof Following the lines of the proof of Theorem 1.7, we conclude the result. To avoid the repetition, we omit the details. □

Analogously, instead of Theorem 1.8, we state the following.

Theorem 2.2 Let ( X , ) be a partially ordered set, and suppose that there is a metric d on X such that ( X , d ) is a complete metric space. Let F : X 2 X be a mapping having the mixed monotone property on X. Suppose that there exist ψ Ψ and α : X 2 × X 2 [ 0 , ) such that for all x , y , u , v X , the following holds
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) d ( F ( x , y ) , F ( u , v ) ) ψ ( d ( x , u ) + d ( y , v ) 2 )
(10)
for which x u and y v . Suppose also that
  1. (i)

    F is α-admissible;

     
  2. (ii)
    there exists x 0 , y 0 X such that
    α ( ( x 0 , y 0 ) , ( F ( x 0 , y 0 ) , F ( y 0 , x 0 ) ) ) 1 and α ( ( y 0 , x 0 ) , ( F ( y 0 , x 0 ) , F ( x 0 , y 0 ) ) ) 1 ;
     
  3. (iii)

    if { x n } and { y n } are sequences in X such that α ( ( x n , y n ) , ( x n + 1 , y n + 1 ) ) 1 and α ( ( y n , x n ) , ( y n + 1 , x n + 1 ) ) 1 for all n, and lim n x n = x and lim n y n = y , then α ( ( x n , y n ) , ( x , y ) ) 1 and α ( ( y n , x n ) , ( y , x ) ) 1 for all n.

     
If there exist x 0 , y 0 X such that x 0 F ( x 0 , y 0 ) and y 0 F ( y 0 , x 0 ) , then F has a coupled fixed point, that is, there exist x , y X such that
F ( x , y ) = x and F ( y , x ) = y .

Proof Following the lines of the proof of Theorem 1.8, we easily conclude the result. We omit the details. □

Let us reconsider Example 2.1.

Example 2.2 Let X = R , and let d : X × X [ 0 , ) be the Euclidean metric. Consider the mapping α : X 2 × X 2 [ 0 , ) defined as
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) = { 1 , if  x u , y v  or  x u , y v , 0 , otherwise .
Consider the mapping F : X × X X defined by
F ( x , y ) = 3 x y 5 for all  x , y X .
Clearly, F has a mixed monotone property, and we claim that it also satisfies condition (9). Indeed, if α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) = 0 , then the result is straightforward. Suppose α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) = 1 . Without loss of generality, assume that x u and y v . Then we have that
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) d ( F ( x , y ) , F ( u , v ) ) + d ( F ( y , x ) , F ( v , u ) ) 2 = d ( F ( x , y ) , F ( u , v ) ) + d ( F ( y , x ) , F ( v , u ) ) 2 = 1 10 | 3 ( x u ) ( y v ) | + 1 10 | 3 ( y v ) ( x u ) | 2 5 [ | x u | + | y v | ]
(11)
holds for all x u and v y . On the other hand,
d ( ( x , y ) + d ( u , v ) ) 2 = 1 2 [ | x u | + | y v | ] .
(12)

Hence, it is sufficient to choose ψ ( t ) = 4 t 5 to provide all conditions of Theorem 2.1. Notice that the point ( 0 , 0 ) is the unique coupled fixed point of F.

Example 2.3 Let X = [ 1 , 1 ] , and let d : X × X [ 0 , ) be the Euclidean metric. Consider the mapping α : X 2 × X 2 [ 0 , ) defined as
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) = { 1 , if  x u , y v  or  x u , y v , 0 , otherwise .
Define a mapping F : X × X X as
F ( x , y ) = 5 x 3 y 3 24 for all  x , y X .
Then F is mixed monotone and satisfies all conditions of Theorem 2.1. Indeed, if α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) = 0 , the result is trivial. Suppose α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) = 1 . Without loss of generality, assume that x y , u v . Then we have that
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) d ( F ( x , y ) , F ( u , v ) ) + d ( F ( y , x ) , F ( v , u ) ) 2 = d ( F ( x , y ) , F ( u , v ) ) + d ( F ( y , x ) , F ( v , u ) ) 2 = 1 48 | 5 ( x 3 u 3 ) ( y 3 v 3 ) | + 1 48 | 5 ( y 3 v 3 ) ( x 3 u 3 ) | 1 8 [ | x 3 u 3 | + | y 3 v 3 | ] 3 8 [ | x u | + | y v | ]
holds for all x u and y v . On the other hand,
d ( ( x , y ) + d ( u , v ) ) 2 = 1 2 [ | x u | + | y v | ] .

Hence, it is sufficient to choose ψ ( t ) = 3 t 4 to provide all conditions of Theorem 2.1. Notice that the point ( 0 , 0 ) is the coupled fixed point of F.

Now, we improve Example 3.8 in [20] in the following way.

Example 2.4 Let X = [ 0 , ) , and let d : X × X [ 0 , ) be a Euclidean metric. Consider the mapping α : X 2 × X 2 [ 0 , ) defined by
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) = { 1 , if  x u , y v  or  x u , y v , 0 , otherwise .
Define the mapping F : X × X X as
F ( x , y ) = { 1 4 [ ln ( 1 + x ) ln ( 1 + y ) ] , if  x y , 0 , otherwise .
Then F is mixed monotone and satisfies all conditions of Theorem 2.1. Indeed, if α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) = 0 , the result follows trivially. Suppose α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) = 1 . Without loss of generality, assume that x u and y v . Then we have
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) d ( F ( x , y ) , F ( u , v ) ) + d ( F ( y , x ) , F ( v , u ) ) 2 = d ( F ( x , y ) , F ( u , v ) ) + d ( F ( y , x ) , F ( v , u ) ) 2 = 1 8 | ( ln ( 1 + x ) ln ( 1 + u ) ) ( ln ( 1 + y ) ln ( 1 + v ) ) | + 1 8 | ( ln ( 1 + y ) ln ( 1 + v ) ) ( ln ( 1 + x ) ln ( 1 + u ) ) | 1 8 [ | ln ( ( 1 + x ) 1 + u ) | ] + 1 8 [ | ln ( ( 1 + v ) 1 + y ) | ] + 1 8 [ | ln ( ( 1 + y ) 1 + v ) | ] + 1 8 [ | ln ( ( 1 + u ) 1 + x ) | ] 1 4 [ ln ( 1 + | x u | ) + ln ( 1 + | y v | ) ] , 1 2 ln ( 1 + [ | x u | + | y v | ] 2 )
(13)
holds for all x u and v y . On the other hand,
d ( ( x , y ) + d ( u , v ) ) 2 = 1 2 [ | x u | + | y v | ] .
(14)

Hence, it is sufficient to choose ψ ( t ) = 1 2 ln ( 1 + t ) , t > 0 to provide all conditions of Theorem 2.1. Notice that the point ( 0 , 0 ) is the coupled fixed point of F.

For the uniqueness of the coupled fixed point, we state the following theorem.

Theorem 2.3 In addition to the hypothesis of Theorem  2.1, suppose that for every ( x , y ) , ( s , t ) X × X , there exists ( u , v ) X × X such that
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) 1 and α ( ( s , t ) , ( u , v ) ) 1 ,

and also assume that ( u , v ) is comparable to ( x , y ) and ( s , t ) . Then F has a unique fixed point.

To avoid the repetition, we omit the proof, since the result is easily obtained by following the lines of the proof of Theorem 1.9.

3 From coupled fixed point theorem to usual fixed point theorem

According to the definitions above, we reconsider Definition 1.10 in the following way.

Definition 3.1 Let F : X 2 X , and let α : X 2 × X 2 [ 0 , ) . The operator F is α -admissible if for all ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) X 2 , we have
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) = α ( ( y , x ) , ( v , u ) ) and
(15)
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) 1 α ( ( F ( x , y ) , ( F ( y , x ) ) ) , ( F ( u , v ) , ( F ( v , u ) ) ) ) 1 .
(16)
Lemma 3.1 Let F : X 2 X , and let α : X 2 × X 2 [ 0 , ) . If F is α -admissible, then the operator T F : X 2 X 2 , defined by T F ( x , y ) = ( F ( x , y ) , F ( y , x ) ) for all ( x , y ) X 2 , is α-admissible in the sense of Definition  1.7, that is,
α ( z , w ) 1 α ( T F ( z ) , T F ( w ) ) 1

for all z = ( x , y ) , w = ( u , v ) Y = X 2 , where α = α : Y × Y [ 0 , ) .

We omit the proof, since it is straightforward.

Remark 3.1 Regarding the definition of d 2 : X × X [ 0 , ) , that is,
d 2 ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) = d ( x , u ) + d ( y , v ) = d ( y , v ) + d ( x , u ) = d 2 ( ( y , x ) , ( v , u ) ) ,
one can conclude the assumption (15) is very natural but not necessary. For example, consider a partially ordered set ( X , ) , then, we set ( X × X , 2 ) as in (1). Now, one can define
α ( ( x , y ) ( u , v ) ) = { 1 , if  ( x , y ) 2 ( u , v ) , 2 , if  ( x , y ) 2 ( u , v ) , 0 , otherwise ,

which is clearly not equal to α ( ( x , y ) ( u , v ) ) .

Theorem 3.1 Let ( X , d ) be a complete metric space, and let F : X × X X be a mapping. Suppose that there exist ψ Ψ and α : X 2 × X 2 [ 0 , ) such that the following holds
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) d ( F ( x , y ) , F ( u , v ) ) + d ( F ( y , x ) , F ( v , u ) ) 2 ψ ( d ( x , u ) + d ( y , v ) 2 )
(17)
for all x , y , u , v X . Suppose also that
  1. (i)

    F is α -admissible;

     
  2. (ii)
    there exists ( x 0 , y 0 ) X such that
    α ( ( x 0 , y 0 ) , ( F ( x 0 , y 0 ) , F ( y 0 , x 0 ) ) ) 1 ;
     
  3. (iii)

    F is continuous.

     
Then, there exist x , y X such that
F ( x , y ) = x and F ( y , x ) = y .

Remark 3.2 Theorem 3.1 coincides with Theorem 1.7 if we replace α with α in the statement of Theorem 1.7.

Theorem 3.2 Theorem  3.1 follows from Theorem  1.1.

Proof From (17), for all ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) X × X , we have
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) d ( F ( x , y ) , F ( u , v ) ) + d ( F ( v , u ) , F ( y , x ) ) 2 ψ ( d ( x , u ) + d ( y , v ) 2 ) ,
that is,
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) δ ( T F ( x , y ) , T F ( u , v ) ) φ ( δ ( ( x , u ) , ( y , v ) ) )
for all ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) Y , where δ : Y × Y [ 0 , ) is the metric on Y given by
δ ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) = d 2 ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) 2 for all  ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) Y ,

and T F ( x , y ) = ( F ( x , y ) , F ( y , x ) ) for all ( x , y ) X 2 . Thus, we proved that the mapping T F satisfies condition (2) and hence all conditions of Theorem 1.1 are satisfied. Then T F has a fixed point, which implies that F has a coupled fixed point. □

Theorem 3.3 Let ( X , d ) be a complete metric space, and let F : X × X X be a mapping. Suppose that there exist ψ Ψ and α : X 2 × X 2 [ 0 , ) such that the following holds
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) d ( F ( x , y ) , F ( u , v ) ) + d ( F ( y , x ) , F ( v , u ) ) 2 ψ ( d ( x , u ) + d ( y , v ) 2 )
(18)
for all x , y , u , v X . Suppose also that
  1. (i)

    F is α-admissible;

     
  2. (ii)
    there exists ( x 0 , y 0 ) X such that
    α ( ( x 0 , y 0 ) , ( F ( x 0 , y 0 ) , F ( y 0 , x 0 ) ) ) 1 ;
     
  3. (iii)

    if { x n } and { y n } are sequences in X such that α ( ( x n , y n ) , ( x n + 1 , y n + 1 ) ) 1 for all n and lim n x n = x and lim n y n = y , then α ( ( x n , y n ) , ( x , y ) ) 1 .

     
Then, there exist x , y X such that
F ( x , y ) = x and F ( y , x ) = y .

Remark 3.3 Theorem 3.3 coincides with Theorem 1.8 if we replace α with α in the statement of Theorem 1.8.

Theorem 3.4 Theorem  3.3 follows from Theorem  1.2.

Proof Following the lines of the proof of Theorem 3.2, we observe that T satisfies condition (2) and hence all conditions of Theorem 1.2 are satisfied. Then T F has a fixed point, which implies that F has a coupled fixed point. □

Theorem 3.5 In addition to the hypothesis of Theorem  3.2, suppose that for every ( x , y ) , ( s , t ) X × X , there exists ( u , v ) X × X such that
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) 1 and α ( ( s , t ) , ( u , v ) ) 1 ,

and also assume that ( u , v ) is comparable to ( x , y ) and ( s , t ) . Then F has a unique fixed point.

Proof Following the lines of the proof of Theorem 3.2, we observe that T satisfies condition (2) and hence all conditions of Theorem 1.3 are satisfied. Then T F has a unique fixed point, which implies that F has a unique coupled fixed point. □

Fixed point theorems on metric spaces endowed with a partial order

In the last decades, one of the most attractive research topics in fixed point theory was to prove the existence of fixed point on metric spaces endowed with partial orders. The first result in this direction was reported by Turinici [49] in 1986. Following this interesting paper, Ran and Reurings in [21] characterized the Banach contraction principle in partially ordered sets with some applications to matrix equations. Later, the results in [21, 49] were further extended and improved by many authors (see, for example, [5054] and the references cited therein). In this section, we will deduce that more general form of Theorem 1.7 (respectively, Theorem 1.8) can be obtained from our Theorem 3.1 (respectively, Theorem 3.2).

We obtain the following result whose analog can be found in [41].

Proposition 3.1 Let ( X , ) be a partially ordered set, and let d be a metric on X such that ( X , d ) is complete. Let F : X × X X have a mixed monotone property. Suppose that there exists a function ψ Ψ such that
d ( F ( x , y ) , F ( u , v ) ) + d ( F ( y , x ) , F ( v , u ) ) 2 ψ ( d ( x , u ) + d ( y , v ) 2 )
for all ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) Y with ( x , y ) 2 ( u , v ) . Suppose also that the following conditions hold:
  1. (i)

    there exists ( x 0 , y 0 ) Y such that ( x 0 , y 0 ) 2 ( F ( x 0 , y 0 ) , F ( y 0 , x 0 ) ) ;

     
  2. (ii)

    F is continuous or ( X , 2 , d ) is regular.

     

Then F has a coupled fixed point. Moreover, if for all ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) Y there exists ( z , w ) Y such that ( x , y ) 2 ( z , w ) and ( u , v ) 2 ( z , w ) , we have uniqueness of the fixed point.

Proof Define the mapping α : Y × Y [ 0 , ) by
α ( ( x , y ) ( u , v ) ) = { 1 if  ( x , y ) 2 ( u , v )  or  ( x , y ) 2 ( u , v ) , 0 , otherwise .
Clearly, T F is an α-ψ-contractive mapping, that is,
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) d 2 ( T F ( x , y ) , T F ( u , v ) ) ψ ( d 2 ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) )
for all ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) Y . From condition (i), we have α ( ( x 0 , y 0 ) , ( T F ( x 0 , y 0 ) , T F ( y 0 , x 0 ) ) ) 1 . Due to Lemma 1.1, T F is non-decreasing mapping with respect to 2. Moreover, for all ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) Y , from the monotone property of T F , we have
α ( ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) ) 1 ( x , y ) 2 ( u , v ) or ( x , y ) 2 ( u , v ) T F ( x , y ) T F ( u , v ) or T F ( x , y ) T F ( u , v ) α ( T F ( x , y ) , T F ( u , v ) ) 1 .

Thus F is α -admissible. Hence, due to Lemma 3.1 T F is α-admissible. Now, if F is continuous, the existence of a fixed point follows from Theorem 3.1. Suppose now that ( X , 2 , d ) is regular. Let { x n } be a sequence in X such that α ( ( x n , y n ) , ( x n + 1 , y n + 1 ) ) 1 for all n and ( x n , y n ) ( x , y ) X 2 as n . From the regularity hypothesis, there exists a subsequence { x n ( k ) } of { x n } such that x n ( k ) x and y n ( k ) y for all k. This implies from the definition of α that α ( ( x n ( k ) , y n ( k ) ) , ( x , y ) ) 1 for all k. In this case, the existence of a fixed point follows from Theorem 3.3. To show the uniqueness, let ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) X 2 . By hypothesis, there exists ( z , w ) X 2 such that ( x , y ) 2 ( z , w ) and ( u , v ) 2 ( z , w ) , which implies from the definition of α that α ( ( x , y ) , ( z , w ) ) 1 and α ( ( u , v ) , ( z , w ) ) 1 . Thus, we deduce the uniqueness of the fixed point by Theorem 3.3. □

Now, we state the result of [29] as an easy consequence of Proposition 3.1.

Corollary 3.1 Let ( X , ) be a partially ordered set, and d be a metric on X such that ( X , d ) is complete. Let F : X × X X have a mixed monotone property. Suppose that there exists a function k [ 0 , 1 ) such that
[ d ( F ( x , y ) , F ( u , v ) ) + d ( F ( y , x ) , F ( v , u ) ) ] k [ d ( x , u ) + d ( y , v ) ]
for all ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) Y with ( x , y ) 2 ( u , v ) , where 2 is defined as in (1). Suppose also that the following conditions hold:
  1. (i)

    there exists ( x 0 , y 0 ) Y such that ( x 0 , y 0 ) 2 ( F ( x 0 , y 0 ) , F ( y 0 , x 0 ) ) ;

     
  2. (ii)

    F is continuous or ( X , 2 , d ) is regular.

     

Then F has a coupled fixed point. Moreover, if for all ( x , y ) , ( u , v ) Y there exists ( z , w ) Y such that ( x , y ) 2 ( z , w ) and ( u , v ) 2 ( z , w ) , we have uniqueness of the fixed point.

Declarations

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Mathematics, Atilim University, İncek, Ankara, 06836, Turkey
(2)
Department of Mathematics, Texas A&M University-Kingsville, Kingsville, Texas 78363, USA
(3)
Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, 21589, Saudi Arabia

References

  1. Bhaskar TG, Lakshmikantham V: Fixed point theorems in partially ordered metric spaces and applications. Nonlinear Anal. 2006, 65: 1379–1393. 10.1016/j.na.2005.10.017MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Karapınar E, Samet B: Generalized α - ψ contractive type mappings and related fixed point theorems with applications. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2012., 2012: Article ID 793486Google Scholar
  3. Aydi H, Karapınar E, Samet B, Rajic C: Discussion on some coupled fixed point theorems. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013., 2013: Article ID 50Google Scholar
  4. Berinde V: Iterative Approximation of Fixed Points. Editura Efemeride, Baia Mare; 2002.Google Scholar
  5. Proinov PD: A generalization of the Banach contraction principle with high order of convergence of successive approximations. Nonlinear Anal., Theory Methods Appl. 2007, 67: 2361–2369. 10.1016/j.na.2006.09.008MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Bianchini RM, Grandolfi M: Transformazioni di tipo contracttivo generalizzato in uno spazio metrico. Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei, Rend. Cl. Sci. Fis. Mat. Nat. 1968, 45: 212–216.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. Proinov PD: New general convergence theory for iterative processes and its applications to Newton-Kantorovich type theorems. J. Complex. 2010, 26: 3–42. 10.1016/j.jco.2009.05.001MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. 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.2011.10.014MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Alghamdi MA, Karapınar E: G - β - ψ -Contractive type mappings in G -metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013., 2013: Article ID 123Google Scholar
  10. Alghamdi MA, Karapınar E: G - β - ψ -Contractive type mappings and related fixed point theorems. J. Inequal. Appl. 2013., 2013: Article ID 70Google Scholar
  11. Banach S: Sur les opérations dans les ensembles abstraits et leur application aux equations integrales. Fundam. Math. 1922, 3: 133–181.Google Scholar
  12. Rus IA: Cyclic representations and fixed points. Ann. T. Popoviciu, Sem. Funct. Equ. Approx. Convexity 2005, 3: 171–178.Google Scholar
  13. Karapınar E: Fixed point theory for cyclic weak ϕ -contraction. Appl. Math. Lett. 2011, 24(6):822–825. 10.1016/j.aml.2010.12.016MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Agarwal RP, Alghamdi MA, Shahzad N: Fixed point theory for cyclic generalized contractions in partial metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012., 2012: Article ID 40Google Scholar
  15. Chatterjea SK: Fixed point theorems. C. R. Acad. Bulgare Sci. 1972, 25: 727–730.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. Ćirić L, Cakić N, Rajović M, Ume JS: Monotone generalized nonlinear contractions in partially ordered metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2008., 2008: Article ID 131294Google Scholar
  17. Harjani J, Sadarangani K: Fixed point theorems for weakly contractive mappings in partially ordered sets. Nonlinear Anal. 2008, 71: 3403–3410.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Hardy GE, Rogers TD: A generalization of a fixed point theorem of Reich. Can. Math. Bull. 1973, 16: 201–206. 10.4153/CMB-1973-036-0MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Kannan R: Some results on fixed points. Bull. Calcutta Math. Soc. 1968, 10: 71–76.Google Scholar
  20. Mursaleen M, Mohiuddine SA, Agarwal RP: Coupled fixed point theorems for α - ψ contractive type mappings in partially ordered metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012., 2012: Article ID 124Google Scholar
  21. 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.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Guo D, Lakshmikantham V: Coupled fixed points of nonlinear operators with applications. Nonlinear Anal., Theory Methods Appl. 1987, 11: 623–632. 10.1016/0362-546X(87)90077-0MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  23. Abbas M, Khan MA, Radenović S: Common coupled fixed point theorems in cone metric space for w -compatible mappings. Appl. Math. Comput. 2010, 217: 195–203. 10.1016/j.amc.2010.05.042MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  24. Abbas M, Khan AR, Nazir T: Coupled common fixed point results in two generalized metric spaces. Appl. Math. Comput. 2011, 217(13):6328–6336. 10.1016/j.amc.2011.01.006MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  25. Agarwal RP, Karapınar E: Remarks on some coupled fixed point theorems in G -metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013., 2013: Article ID 2Google Scholar
  26. Aydi H: Some coupled fixed point results on partial metric spaces. Int. J. Math. Math. Sci. 2011., 2011: Article ID 647091Google Scholar
  27. Aydi H, Postolache M, Shatanawi W: Coupled fixed point results for ( ψ , ϕ ) -weakly contractive mappings in ordered G -metric spaces. Comput. Math. Appl. 2012. 10.1016/j.camwa.2011.11.022Google Scholar
  28. Aydi H, Damjanović B, Samet B, Shatanawi W: Coupled fixed point theorems for nonlinear contractions in partially ordered G -metric spaces. Math. Comput. Model. 2011, 54: 2443–2450. 10.1016/j.mcm.2011.05.059View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  29. Berinde V: Generalized coupled fixed point theorems for mixed monotone mappings in partially ordered metric spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2011, 74: 7347–7355. 10.1016/j.na.2011.07.053MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  30. Berinde V: Coupled fixed point theorems for Φ-contractive mixed monotone mappings in partially ordered metric spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2012, 75: 3218–3228. 10.1016/j.na.2011.12.021MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  31. Berinde V: Coupled coincidence point theorems for mixed monotone nonlinear operators. Comput. Math. Appl. 2012. 10.1016/j.camwa.2012.02.012Google Scholar
  32. Berinde V, Pacurar M: Coupled fixed point theorems for generalized symmetric Meir-Keeler contractions in ordered metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012., 2012: Article ID 115Google Scholar
  33. Berzig M, Samet B: An extension of coupled fixed point’s concept in higher dimension and applications. Comput. Math. Appl. 2012, 63: 1319–1334. 10.1016/j.camwa.2012.01.018MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  34. Berzig M: Solving a class of matrix equations via the Bhaskar-Lakshmikantham coupled fixed point theorem. Appl. Math. Lett. 2012, 25(11):1638–1643. 10.1016/j.aml.2012.01.028MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  35. Choudhury BS, Metiya N, Kundu A: Coupled coincidence point theorems in ordered metric spaces. Ann. Univ. Ferrara 2011, 57: 1–16. 10.1007/s11565-011-0117-5MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  36. Ćirić L, Olatinwo MO, Gopal D, Akinbo G: Coupled fixed point theorems for mappings satisfying a contractive condition of rational type on a partially ordered metric space. Adv. Fixed Point Theory 2012, 2(1):1–8.Google Scholar
  37. Choudhury 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 ArticleGoogle Scholar
  38. Cho YJ, Rhoades BE, Saadati R, Samet B, Shatanawi W: Nonlinear coupled fixed point theorems in ordered generalized metric spaces with integral type. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012., 2012: Article ID 8Google Scholar
  39. Cho YJ, Shah MH, Hussain N: Coupled fixed points of weakly-contractive mappings in topological spaces. Appl. Math. Lett. 2011, 24(7):1185–1190. 10.1016/j.aml.2011.02.004MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  40. Karapınar E: Coupled fixed point theorems for nonlinear contractions in cone metric spaces. Comput. Math. Appl. 2010, 59(12):3656–3668. 10.1016/j.camwa.2010.03.062MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  41. Lakshmikantham V, Ćirić LJ: Coupled fixed point theorems for nonlinear contractions in partially ordered metric spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2009, 70(12):4341–4349. 10.1016/j.na.2008.09.020MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  42. Luong NV, Thuan NX, Hai TT: Coupled fixed point theorems in partially ordered metric spaces depended on another function. Bull. Math. Anal. Appl. 2011, 3(3):129–140.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  43. Luong NV, Thuan NX: Coupled fixed points in partially ordered metric spaces and application. Nonlinear Anal. 2011, 74: 983–992. 10.1016/j.na.2010.09.055MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  44. Samet B: Coupled fixed point theorems for a generalized Meir-Keeler contraction in partially ordered metric spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2010, 74(12):4508–4517.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  45. Shatanawi W: Partially ordered cone metric spaces and coupled fixed point results. Comput. Math. Appl. 2010, 60: 2508–2515. 10.1016/j.camwa.2010.08.074MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  46. Shatanawi W, Samet B, Abbas M: Coupled fixed point theorems for mixed monotone mappings in ordered partial metric spaces. Math. Comput. Model. 2011. 10.1016/j.mcm.2011.08.042Google Scholar
  47. Shatanawi W: Some common coupled fixed point results in cone metric spaces. Int. J. Math. Anal. 2010, 4: 2381–2388.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  48. Mursaleen M, Mohiuddine SA, Agarwal RP: Corrigendum to ‘Coupled fixed point theorems for α - ψ -contractive type mappings in partially ordered metric spaces’. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013., 2013: Article ID 127Google Scholar
  49. Turinici M: Abstract comparison principles and multivariable Gronwall-Bellman inequalities. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1986, 117: 100–127. 10.1016/0022-247X(86)90251-9MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  50. Agarwal RP, El-Gebeily MA, O’Regan D: Generalized contractions in partially ordered metric spaces. Appl. Anal. 2008, 87: 109–116. 10.1080/00036810701556151MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  51. Altun I, Simsek H: Some fixed point theorems on ordered metric spaces and application. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2010., 2010: Article ID 621492Google Scholar
  52. Ćirić LB, Cakić N, Rajović M, Ume JS: Monotone generalized nonlinear contractions in partially ordered metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2008., 2008: Article ID 131294Google Scholar
  53. Harjani J, Sadarangani K: Generalized contractions in partially ordered metric spaces and applications to ordinary differential equations. Nonlinear Anal. 2010, 72: 1188–1197. 10.1016/j.na.2009.08.003MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  54. 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 ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

Advertisement