Open Access

Fixed points of cyclic weakly ( ψ , φ , L , A , B ) -contractive mappings in ordered b-metric spaces with applications

  • Nawab Hussain1Email author,
  • Vahid Parvaneh2,
  • Jamal Rezaei Roshan3 and
  • Zoran Kadelburg4
Fixed Point Theory and Applications20132013:256

https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2013-256

Received: 18 June 2013

Accepted: 23 September 2013

Published: 7 November 2013

Abstract

We introduce the notion of ordered cyclic weakly ( ψ , φ , L , A , B ) -contractive mappings, and we establish some fixed and common fixed point results for this class of mappings in complete ordered b-metric spaces. Our results extend several known results from the context of ordered metric spaces to the setting of ordered b-metric spaces. They are also cyclic variants of some very recent results in ordered b-metric spaces with even weaker contractive conditions. Some examples support our results and show that the obtained extensions are proper. Moreover, an application to integral equations is given here to illustrate the usability of the obtained results.

MSC:47H10, 54H25.

Keywords

common fixed point cyclic contraction almost contraction ordered b-metric space altering distance function

1 Introduction and preliminaries

The Banach contraction principle is a very popular tool for solving problems in nonlinear analysis. One of the interesting generalizations of this basic principle was given by Kirk et al. [1] in 2003 by introducing the following notion of cyclic representation.

Definition 1 [1]

Let A and B be non-empty subsets of a metric space ( X , d ) and T : A B A B . Then T is called a cyclic map if T ( A ) B and T ( B ) A .

The following interesting theorem for a cyclic map was given in [1].

Theorem 1 Let A and B be nonempty closed subsets of a complete metric space ( X , d ) . Suppose that T : A B A B is a cyclic map such that
d ( T x , T y ) k d ( x , y )

for all x A and y B , where k [ 0 , 1 ) is a constant. Then T has a unique fixed point u and u A B .

It should be noted that cyclic contractions (unlike Banach-type contractions) need not be continuous, which is an important gain of this approach. Following the work of Kirk et al., several authors proved many fixed point results for cyclic mappings, satisfying various (nonlinear) contractive conditions.

Berinde initiated in [2] the concept of almost contractions and obtained several interesting fixed point theorems. This has been a subject of intense study since then, see, e.g., [37]. Some authors used related notions as ‘condition (B)’ (Babu et al. [8]) and ‘almost generalized contractive condition’ for two maps (Ćirić et al. [9]), and for four maps (Aghajani et al. [10]). See also a note by Pacurar [11]. Here, we recall one of the respective definitions.

Definition 2 [9]

Let f and g be two self-mappings on a metric space ( X , d ) . They are said to satisfy almost generalized contractive condition, if there exist a constant δ ( 0 , 1 ) and some L 0 such that
d ( f x , g y ) δ max { d ( x , y ) , d ( x , f x ) , d ( y , g y ) , d ( x , g y ) + d ( y , f x ) 2 } + L min { d ( x , f x ) , d ( y , g y ) , d ( x , g y ) , d ( y , f x ) }

for all x , y X .

Khan et al. [12] introduced the concept of an altering distance function as follows.

Definition 3 [12]

A function φ : [ 0 , + ) [ 0 , + ) is called an altering distance function if the following properties hold:
  1. 1.

    φ is continuous and non-decreasing.

     
  2. 2.

    φ ( t ) = 0 if and only if t = 0 .

     

So far, many authors have studied fixed point theorems, which are based on altering distance functions.

The concept of a b-metric space was introduced by Bakhtin in [13], and later used by Czerwik in [14, 15]. After that, several interesting results about the existence of fixed points for single-valued and multi-valued operators in b-metric spaces have been obtained (see, e.g., [1628]). Recently, Hussain and Shah [29] obtained some results on KKM mappings in cone b-metric spaces.

Consistent with [15] and [28], the following definitions and results will be needed in the sequel.

Definition 4 [15]

Let X be a (nonempty) set, and let s 1 be a given real number. A function d : X × X R + is a b-metric if for all x , y , z X , the following conditions hold:

(b1) d ( x , y ) = 0 iff x = y ,

(b2) d ( x , y ) = d ( y , x ) ,

(b3) d ( x , z ) s [ d ( x , y ) + d ( y , z ) ] .

In this case, the pair ( X , d ) is called a b-metric space.

It should be noted that the class of b-metric spaces is effectively larger than the class of metric spaces, since a b-metric is a metric if (and only if) s = 1 . Here, we present an easy example to show that in general, a b-metric need not necessarily be a metric (see also [[28], p.264]).

Example 1 Let ( X , ρ ) be a metric space and d ( x , y ) = ( ρ ( x , y ) ) p , where p > 1 is a real number. Then d is a b-metric with s = 2 p 1 . Condition (b3) follows easily from the convexity of the function f ( x ) = x p ( x > 0 ).

The notions of b-convergent and b-Cauchy sequences, as well as of b-complete b-metric spaces are introduced in an obvious way (see, e.g., [18]).

It should be noted that in general, a b-metric function d ( x , y ) for s > 1 need not be jointly continuous in both variables. The following example (corrected from [22]) illustrates this fact.

Example 2 Let X = N { } , and let d : X × X R be defined by
d ( m , n ) = { 0 , if  m = n , | 1 m 1 n | , if one of  m , n  is even and the other is even or  , 5 , if one of  m , n  is odd and the other is odd  ( and  m n )  or  , 2 , otherwise .
Then considering all possible cases, it can be checked that for all m , n , p X , we have
d ( m , p ) 5 2 ( d ( m , n ) + d ( n , p ) ) .
Thus, ( X , d ) is a b-metric space (with s = 5 / 2 ). Let x n = 2 n for each n N . Then
d ( 2 n , ) = 1 2 n 0 as  n ,

that is, x n , but d ( x n , 1 ) = 2 5 = d ( , 1 ) as n .

Aghajani et al. [16] proved the following simple lemma about the b-convergent sequences.

Lemma 1 Let ( X , d ) be a b-metric space with s 1 , and suppose that { x n } and { y n } b-converge to x, y, respectively. Then we have
1 s 2 d ( x , y ) lim inf n d ( x n , y n ) lim sup n d ( x n , y n ) s 2 d ( x , y ) .
In particular, if x = y , then lim n d ( x n , y n ) = 0 . Moreover, for each z X , we have
1 s d ( x , z ) lim inf n d ( x n , z ) lim sup n d ( x n , z ) s d ( x , z ) .

The existence of fixed points for mappings in partially ordered metric spaces was first investigated in 2004 by Ran and Reurings [30], and then by Nieto and Lopez [31]. Afterwards, this area was a field of intensive study of many authors.

Shatanawi and Postolache proved in [32] the following common fixed point results for cyclic contractions in the framework of ordered metric spaces.

Theorem 2 [32]

Let ( X , , d ) be a complete ordered metric space, and let A, B be closed nonempty subsets of X with X = A B . Let f , g : X X be two mappings, which are ( A , B ) -weakly increasing (see further Definition 6). Assume that
  1. (a)

    A B is a cyclic representation of X w.r.t. the pair ( f , g ) , i.e., f ( A ) B and g ( B ) A ;

     
  2. (b)
    there exist 0 < δ < 1 and an altering distance function ψ such that for any two comparable elements x , y X with x A and y B , we have
    ψ ( d ( f x , g y ) ) δ ψ ( max { d ( x , y ) , d ( x , f x ) , d ( y , g y ) , 1 2 ( d ( x , g y ) + d ( y , f x ) ) } ) ;
     
  3. (c)

    f or g is continuous, or

     

(c′) the space ( X , , d ) is regular.

Then f and g have a common fixed point.

Here, the ordered metric space ( X , , d ) is called regular if for any non-decreasing sequence { x n } in X such that x n x X , as n , one has x n x for all n N .

By an ordered b-metric space, we mean a triple ( X , , d ) , where ( X , ) is a partially ordered set, and ( X , d ) is a b-metric space. Fixed points in such spaces were studied, e.g., by Aghajani et al. [16] and Roshan et al. [27]. In the last mentioned paper, the following common fixed point results for contractions in ordered b-metric spaces were proved.

Theorem 3 [27]

Let ( X , , d ) be a complete ordered b-metric space, and let f , g : X X be two weakly increasing mappings. Suppose that there exist two altering distance functions ψ, φ and a constant L 0 such that the inequality
ψ ( s 4 d ( f x , g y ) ) ψ ( M s ( x , y ) ) φ ( M s ( x , y ) ) + L ψ ( N ( x , y ) )
holds for all comparable x , y X , where
M s ( x , y ) = max { d ( x , y ) , d ( x , f x ) , d ( y , g y ) , d ( x , g y ) + d ( y , f x ) 2 s }
and
N ( x , y ) = min { d ( y , g y ) , d ( x , g y ) , d ( y , f x ) } .

If either [f or g is continuous], or the space ( X , , d ) is regular, then f and g have a common fixed point.

In this paper, we introduce the notion of ordered cyclic weakly ( ψ , φ , L , A , B ) -contractions and then derive fixed point and common fixed point theorems for these cyclic contractions in the setup of complete ordered b-metric spaces. Our results extend some fixed point theorems from the framework of ordered metric spaces, in particular Theorem 2. On the other hand, they are cyclic variants of Theorem 3 with even weaker contractive conditions.

We show by examples that the obtained extensions are proper. Moreover, an application to integral equations is given here to illustrate the usability of the obtained results.

2 Common fixed point results

In this section, we introduce the notion of ordered cyclic weakly ( ψ , φ , L , A , B ) -contractive pair of self-mappings and prove our main results.

Definition 5 Let ( X , , d ) be an ordered b-metric space, let f , g : X X be two mappings, and let A and B be nonempty closed subsets of X. The pair ( f , g ) is called an ordered cyclic weakly ( ψ , φ , L , A , B ) -contraction if
  1. (1)

    X = A B is a cyclic representation of X w.r.t. the pair ( f , g ) ; that is, f A B and g B A ;

     
  2. (2)
    there exist two altering distance functions ψ, φ and a constant L 0 , such that for arbitrary comparable elements x , y X with x A and y B , we have
    ψ ( s 2 d ( f x , g y ) ) ψ ( M s ( x , y ) ) φ ( M s ( x , y ) ) + L ψ ( N ( x , y ) ) ,
    (2.1)
     
where
M s ( x , y ) = max { d ( x , y ) , d ( x , f x ) , d ( y , g y ) , d ( x , g y ) + d ( y , f x ) 2 s }
(2.2)
and
N ( x , y ) = min { d ( y , g y ) , d ( x , g y ) , d ( y , f x ) } .
(2.3)

Definition 6 [32]

Let ( X , ) be a partially ordered set, and let A and B be closed subsets of X with X = A B . Let f , g : X X be two mappings. The pair ( f , g ) is said to be ( A , B ) -weakly increasing if f x g f x for all x A and g y f g y for all y B .

Theorem 4 Let ( X , , d ) be a complete ordered b-metric space, and let A and B be closed subsets of X. Let f , g : X X be two ( A , B ) -weakly increasing mappings with respect to . Suppose that
  1. (a)

    the pair ( f , g ) is an ordered cyclic weakly ( ψ , φ , L , A , B ) -contraction;

     
  2. (b)

    f or g is continuous.

     

Then f and g have a common fixed point u A B .

Proof Let us divide the proof into two parts.

First part. We prove that u A B is a fixed point of f if and only if u is a fixed point of g. Suppose that u is a fixed point of f. As u u and u A B , by (2.1), we have
ψ ( s 2 d ( u , g u ) ) = ψ ( s 2 d ( f u , g u ) ) ψ ( max { d ( u , f u ) , d ( u , g u ) , 1 2 s ( d ( u , g u ) + d ( u , f u ) ) } ) φ ( max { d ( u , f u ) , d ( u , g u ) , 1 2 s ( d ( u , g u ) + d ( u , f u ) ) } ) + L min { d ( u , g u ) , d ( u , f u ) } = ψ ( d ( u , g u ) ) φ ( d ( u , g u ) ) ψ ( s 2 d ( u , g u ) ) φ ( d ( u , g u ) ) .

It follows that φ ( d ( u , g u ) ) = 0 . Therefore, d ( u , g u ) = 0 , and hence g u = u . Similarly, we can show that if u is a fixed point of g, then u is a fixed point of f.

Second part (construction of a sequence by iterative technique).

Let x 0 A , and let x 1 = f x 0 . Since f A B , we have x 1 B . Also, let x 2 = g x 1 . Since g B A , we have x 2 A . Continuing this process, we can construct a sequence { x n } in X such that x 2 n + 1 = f x 2 n , x 2 n + 2 = g x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n A and x 2 n + 1 B . Since f and g are ( A , B ) -weakly increasing, we have
x 1 = f x 0 g f x 0 = x 2 = g x 1 f g x 1 = x 3 x 2 n + 1 = f x 2 n g f x 2 n = x 2 n + 2 .

If x 2 n = x 2 n + 1 , for some n N , then x 2 n = f x 2 n . Thus, x 2 n is a fixed point of f. By the first part of proof, we conclude that x 2 n is also a fixed point of g. Similarly, if x 2 n + 1 = x 2 n + 2 , for some n N , then x 2 n + 1 = g x 2 n + 1 . Thus, x 2 n + 1 is a fixed point of g. By the first part of proof, we conclude that x 2 n + 1 is also a fixed point of f. Therefore, we assume that x n x n + 1 for all n N . Now, we complete the proof in the following steps.

Step 1. We will prove that
lim n d ( x n , x n + 1 ) = 0 .
As x 2 n and x 2 n + 1 are comparable and x 2 n A and x 2 n + 1 B , by (2.1), we have
ψ ( d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) ) ψ ( s 2 d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) ) = ψ ( s 2 d ( f x 2 n , g x 2 n + 1 ) ) ψ ( M s ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) ) φ ( M s ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) ) + L ψ ( N ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) ) ,
where
M s ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) = max { d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) , d ( x 2 n , f x 2 n ) , d ( x 2 n + 1 , g x 2 n + 1 ) , d ( f x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) + d ( x 2 n , g x 2 n + 1 ) 2 s } = max { d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) , d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) , d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 2 ) 2 s } max { d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) , d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) , s [ d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) + d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) ] 2 s } = max { d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) , d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) } ,
and
N ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) = min { d ( x 2 n + 1 , g x 2 n + 1 ) , d ( x 2 n + 1 , f x 2 n ) , d ( x 2 n , g x 2 n + 1 ) } = min { d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) , d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 1 ) , d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 2 ) } = 0 .
Hence, we have
ψ ( d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) ) ψ ( max { d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) , d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) } ) φ ( max { d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) , d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) } ) .
(2.4)
If
max { d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) , d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) } = d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) ,
then (2.4) becomes
ψ ( d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) ) ψ ( d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) ) φ ( d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) ) < ψ ( d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) ) ,
which gives a contradiction. So,
max { d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) , d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) } = d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) ,
and hence, (2.4) becomes
ψ ( d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) ) ψ ( d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) ) φ ( d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) ) < ψ ( d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) ) .
(2.5)
Similarly, we can show that
ψ ( d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n ) ) < ψ ( d ( x 2 n , x 2 n 1 ) ) .
(2.6)
By (2.5) and (2.6), we get that { d ( x n , x n + 1 ) : n N } is a non-increasing sequence of positive numbers. Hence, there is r 0 such that
lim n d ( x n , x n + 1 ) = r .
Letting n in (2.5), we get
ψ ( r ) ψ ( r ) φ ( r ) ,
which implies that φ ( r ) = 0 , and hence r = 0 . So, we have
lim n d ( x n , x n + 1 ) = 0 .
(2.7)
Step 2. We will prove that { x n } is a b-Cauchy sequence. Because of (2.7), it is sufficient to show that { x 2 n } is a b-Cauchy sequence. Suppose on the contrary, i.e., that { x 2 n } is not a b-Cauchy sequence. Then there exists ε > 0 , for which we can find two subsequences { x 2 m i } and { x 2 n i } of { x 2 n } such that n i is the smallest index, for which
n i > m i > i , d ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i ) ε .
(2.8)
This means that
d ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i 2 ) < ε .
(2.9)
From (2.8) and using the triangular inequality, we get
ε d ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i ) s d ( x 2 m i , x 2 m i + 1 ) + s d ( x 2 m i + 1 , x 2 n i ) .
Using (2.7) and taking the upper limit as i , we get
ε s lim sup i d ( x 2 m i + 1 , x 2 n i ) .
(2.10)
On the other hand, we have
d ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i 1 ) s d ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i 2 ) + s d ( x 2 n i 2 , x 2 n i 1 ) .
Using (2.7), (2.9) and taking the upper limit as i , we get
lim sup i d ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i 1 ) ε s .
(2.11)
Again, using the triangular inequality, we have
d ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i ) s d ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i 2 ) + s d ( x 2 n i 2 , x 2 n i ) s d ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i 2 ) + s 2 d ( x 2 n i 2 , x 2 n i 1 ) + s 2 d ( x 2 n i 1 , x 2 n i )
and
d ( x 2 m i + 1 , x 2 n i 1 ) s d ( x 2 m i + 1 , x 2 m i ) + s d ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i 1 ) .
Taking the upper limit as i in the above inequalities, and using (2.7), (2.9) and (2.11), we get
lim sup i d ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i ) ε s
(2.12)
and
lim sup i d ( x 2 m i + 1 , x 2 n i 1 ) ε s 2 .
(2.13)
Since x 2 m i and x 2 n i 1 are comparable and x 2 m i A and x 2 n i 1 B , using (2.1) we have
ψ ( s 2 d ( x 2 m i + 1 , x 2 n i ) ) = ψ ( s 2 d ( f x 2 m i , g x 2 n i 1 ) ) ψ ( M s ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i 1 ) ) φ ( M s ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i 1 ) ) + L ψ ( N ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i 1 ) ) ,
(2.14)
where
M s ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i 1 ) = max { d ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i 1 ) , d ( x 2 m i , x 2 m i + 1 ) , d ( x 2 n i 1 , x 2 n i ) , d ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i ) + d ( x 2 m i + 1 , x 2 n i 1 ) 2 s }
(2.15)
and
N ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i 1 ) = min { d ( x 2 n i 1 , x 2 n i ) , d ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i ) , d ( x 2 n i 1 , x 2 m i + 1 ) } .
(2.16)
Taking the upper limit in (2.15) and using (2.7) and (2.11)-(2.13), we get
lim sup i M s ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i 1 ) = max { lim sup i d ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i 1 ) , 0 , 0 , lim sup i d ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i ) + lim sup i d ( x 2 m i + 1 , x 2 n i 1 ) 2 s } max { ε s , ε s + ε s 2 2 s } = ε s .
Hence, we have
lim sup i M s ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i 1 ) ε s ,
(2.17)
and, from (2.16),
lim sup i N ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i 1 ) = 0 .
(2.18)
Now, taking the upper limit as i in (2.14) and using (2.10), (2.17) and (2.18), we have
ψ ( ε s ) = ψ ( s 2 ε s ) ψ ( s 2 lim sup i d ( x 2 m i + 1 , x 2 n i ) ) ψ ( lim sup i M s ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i 1 ) ) φ ( lim inf i M s ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i 1 ) ) ψ ( ε s ) φ ( lim inf i M s ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i 1 ) ) ,

which implies that φ ( lim inf i M s ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i 1 ) ) = 0 . By (2.15), it follows that lim inf i d ( x 2 m i , x 2 n i ) = 0 , which is in contradiction with (2.8). Hence { x n } is a b-Cauchy sequence in X.

Step 3 (existence of a common fixed point).

As { x n } is a b-Cauchy sequence in X which is a b-complete b-metric space, there exists u X such that x n u as n , and
lim n x 2 n + 1 = lim n f x 2 n = u .
Now, without loss of generality, we may assume that f is continuous. Using the triangular inequality, we get
d ( u , f u ) s d ( u , f x 2 n ) + s d ( f x 2 n , f u ) .
Letting n , we get
d ( u , f u ) s lim n d ( u , f x 2 n ) + s lim n d ( f x 2 n , f u ) = 0 .

Hence, we have f u = u . Thus, u is a fixed point of f and, since A and B are closed subsets of X, u A B . By the first part of proof, we conclude that u is also a fixed point of g. □

The assumption of continuity of one of the mappings f or g in Theorem 4 can be replaced by another condition, which is often used in similar situations. Namely, we shall use the notion of a regular ordered b-metric space, which is defined analogously to the case of the standard metric (see the paragraph following Theorem 2).

Theorem 5 Let the hypotheses of Theorem 4 be satisfied, except that condition (b) is replaced by the assumption

(b′) the space ( X , , d ) is regular.

Then f and g have a common fixed point in X.

Proof Repeating the proof of Theorem 4, we construct an increasing sequence { x n } in X such that x n u for some u X . As A and B are closed subsets of X, we have u A B . Using the assumption (b′) on X, we have x n u for all n N . Now, we show that f u = g u = u . By (2.1), we have
ψ ( s 2 d ( x 2 n + 1 , g u ) ) = ψ ( s 2 d ( f x 2 n , g u ) ) ψ ( M s ( x 2 n , u ) ) φ ( M s ( x 2 n , u ) ) + L ψ ( N ( x 2 n , u ) ) ,
(2.19)
where
M s ( x 2 n , u ) = max { d ( x 2 n , u ) , d ( x 2 n , f x 2 n ) , d ( u , g u ) , d ( x 2 n , g u ) + d ( f x 2 n , u ) 2 s } = max { d ( x 2 n , u ) , d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) , d ( u , g u ) , d ( x 2 n , g u ) + d ( x 2 n + 1 , u ) 2 s }
(2.20)
and
N ( x 2 n , u ) = min { d ( u , g u ) , d ( u , f x 2 n ) , d ( x 2 n , g u ) } = min { d ( u , g u ) , d ( u , x 2 n + 1 ) , d ( x 2 n , g u ) } .
(2.21)
Letting n in (2.20) and (2.21) and using Lemma 1, we get
lim sup i M s ( x 2 n , u ) max { d ( u , g u ) , s d ( u , g u ) 2 s } = d ( u , g u ) ,
(2.22)
and N ( x 2 n , u ) 0 . Now, taking the upper limit as n in (2.19) and using Lemma 1 and (2.22), we get
ψ ( s d ( u , g u ) ) = ψ ( s 2 1 s d ( u , g u ) ) ψ ( s 2 lim sup n d ( x 2 n + 1 , g u ) ) ψ ( lim sup n M s ( x 2 n , u ) ) φ ( lim inf n M s ( x 2 n , u ) ) ψ ( s d ( u , g u ) ) φ ( lim inf n M s ( x 2 n , u ) ) .

It follows that φ ( lim inf n M s ( x 2 n , u ) ) = 0 , and hence, by (2.20), that d ( u , g u ) = 0 . Thus, u is a fixed point of g. On the other hand, similar to the first part of the proof of Theorem 4, we can show that f u = u . Hence, u is a common fixed point of f and g. □

3 Consequences and examples

As consequences, we have the following results.

By putting A = B = X in Theorems 4 and 5, we obtain improvements of the main results (Theorems 5 and 6) of Roshan et al. [27], i.e., of Theorem 3 of the present paper (note that we have s 2 instead of s 4 in the contractive condition).

Taking φ = ( 1 δ ) ψ , 0 < δ < 1 in Theorems 4 and 5, we get the following.

Corollary 1 Let ( X , , d ) be a complete ordered b-metric space, and let A and B be closed subsets of X. Let f , g : X X be two ( A , B ) -weakly increasing mappings with respect to . Suppose that
  1. (a)

    X = A B is a cyclic representation of X w.r.t. the pair ( f , g ) ;

     
  2. (b)
    there exist 0 < δ < 1 , L 0 and an altering distance function ψ such that for any comparable elements x , y X with x A and y B , we have
    ψ ( s 2 d ( f x , g y ) ) δ ψ ( M s ( x , y ) ) + L ψ ( N ( x , y ) ) ,
    (3.1)
     
where M s ( x , y ) and N ( x , y ) are given by (2.2) and (2.3), respectively;
  1. (c)

    f or g is continuous, or

     

(c′) the space ( X , , d ) is regular.

Then f and g have a common fixed point u A B .

Taking s = 1 and L = 0 in Corollary 1, we obtain Theorems 2.1 and 2.2 of Shatanawi and Postolache [32] (Theorem 2 in this paper).

Taking ψ ( t ) = t for t [ 0 , + ) in Corollary 1, we get the following.

Corollary 2 Let ( X , , d ) be a complete ordered b-metric space. Let A and B be nonempty closed subsets of X, and let f , g : X X be two ( A , B ) -weakly increasing mappings with respect to such that f ( A ) B and g ( B ) A . Suppose that there exist δ ( 0 , 1 ) and L 0 such that
d ( f x , g y ) δ s 2 max { d ( x , y ) , d ( x , f x ) , d ( y , g y ) , d ( x , g y ) + d ( f x , y ) 2 s } + L s 2 min { d ( y , g y ) , d ( x , g y ) , d ( y , f x ) }

for all comparable elements x , y X with x A and y B . If either f or g is continuous, or the space ( X , , d ) is regular, then f and g have a common fixed point.

Putting f = g in Theorems 4 and 5, the following corollary is obtained which extends and improves Theorems 3 and 4 in [27].

Corollary 3 Let ( X , , d ) be a complete ordered b-metric space, and let A and B be closed subsets of X. Let f : X X be a mapping such that f is non-decreasing with respect to . Assume the following:
  1. (a)

    A B is a cyclic representation of X w.r.t. f, that is, f A B , f B A ;

     
  2. (b)
    there exist two altering distance functions ψ, φ, and L 0 such that
    ψ ( s 2 d ( f x , f y ) ) ψ ( M s ( x , y ) ) φ ( M s ( x , y ) ) + L ψ ( N ( x , y ) )
    (3.2)
     
for all comparable x , y X with x A and y B , where
M s ( x , y ) = max { d ( x , y ) , d ( x , f x ) , d ( y , f y ) , d ( x , f y ) + d ( y , f x ) 2 s }
and
N ( x , y ) = min { d ( x , f x ) , d ( x , f y ) , d ( y , f x ) } .
  1. (c)

    f is continuous, or

     

(c′) the space ( X , , d ) is regular.

If there exists x 0 X such that x 0 f x 0 , then f has a fixed point.

Again, taking φ = ( 1 δ ) ψ , 0 < δ < 1 in Corollary 3, we get the following.

Corollary 4 Let ( X , , d ) be a complete ordered b-metric space, let and A and B be closed subsets of X. Let f : X X be a non-decreasing map with respect to . Suppose that
  1. (a)

    X = A B is a cyclic representation of X w.r.t. f;

     
  2. (b)
    there exist 0 < δ < 1 , L 0 and an altering distance function ψ such that for any comparable elements x , y X with x A and y B , we have
    ψ ( s 2 d ( f x , f y ) ) δ ψ ( M s ( x , y ) ) + L ψ ( N ( x , y ) ) ,
    (3.3)
     
where M s ( x , y ) and N ( x , y ) are given in Corollary 3;
  1. (c)

    f is continuous, or

     

(c′) the space ( X , , d ) is regular.

Then f has a fixed point u A B .

Remark 1 (Common) fixed points of the given mappings in Theorems 4 and 5 and Corollaries 3 and 4 need not be unique (see further Example 4). However, it is easy to show that they must be unique in the case that the respective sets of (common) fixed points are well ordered (recall that a subset W of a partially ordered set is said to be well ordered if every two elements of W are comparable).

We illustrate our results with the following two examples.

Example 3 Consider the b-metric space ( X , d ) given in Example 2, ordered by natural ordering and a mapping f : X X given as
f n = { 8 n , if  n N , , if  n = .

If A = { n : n N } { } and B = { 8 n : n N } { } , then A B is a cyclic representation of X with respect to f. Take ψ : [ 0 , + ) [ 0 , + ) given as ψ ( t ) = t , δ = 5 / 4 2 (<1) and L 0 arbitrary. In order to check the contractive condition (3.3), consider the following cases.

If x , y N , then
ψ ( s 2 d ( f x , f y ) ) = ψ ( ( 5 2 ) 2 d ( 8 x , 8 y ) ) = 5 2 2 2 8 | 1 x 1 y | 5 4 2 ψ ( d ( x , y ) ) δ ψ ( M s ( x , y ) ) + L ψ ( N ( x , y ) )
and (3.3) holds. If x = and y is an even integer, then
ψ ( s 2 d ( f x , f y ) ) = ψ ( ( 5 2 ) 2 d ( , 8 y ) ) = 5 2 2 2 8 1 y 5 4 2 ψ ( d ( x , y ) ) δ ψ ( M s ( x , y ) ) + L ψ ( N ( x , y ) ) .

Finally, if x = and y is an odd integer, then d ( x , y ) = 5 and (3.3) trivially holds.

Hence, all the conditions of Corollary 4 are satisfied. Obviously, f has a (unique) fixed point ∞, belonging to A B .

We now present an example showing that there are situations where our results can be used to conclude about the existence of (common) fixed points, while some other known results cannot be applied.

Example 4 Let X = { 0 , 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 } be equipped with the following partial order:
: = { ( 0 , 0 ) , ( 1 , 1 ) , ( 1 , 2 ) , ( 2 , 2 ) , ( 3 , 2 ) , ( 3 , 3 ) , ( 4 , 2 ) , ( 4 , 4 ) } .
Define a b-metric d : X × X R + by
d ( x , y ) = { 0 , if  x = y , ( x + y ) 2 , if  x y .
It is easy to see that ( X , d ) is a b-complete b-metric space with s = 49 / 25 . Set A = { 0 , 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 } and B = { 0 , 2 } , and define self-maps f and g by
f = ( 0 1 2 3 4 0 2 2 2 2 ) , g = ( 0 1 2 3 4 0 2 2 4 3 ) .

It is easy to see that f and g are ( A , B ) -weakly increasing mappings with respect to , and that f and g are continuous. Also, A B = X , f ( A ) B and g ( B ) A .

Define ψ : [ 0 , ) [ 0 , ) by ψ ( t ) = t . One can easily check that the pair ( f , g ) satisfies the requirements of Corollary 1, with any δ and L 0 , as the left-hand side of the contractive condition (3.1) is equal to 0 for all comparable x, y such that x A and y B . Hence, f and g have a common fixed point. Indeed, 0 and 2 are two common fixed points of f and g. (Note that the ordered set ( { 0 , 2 } , ) is not well ordered).

However, take x = 1 A and y = 0 B (which are not comparable). Then
ψ ( s 2 d ( f 1 , g 0 ) ) = s 2 ( 2 + 0 ) 2 = 2 s > 3 > 3 δ + L 0 = δ ψ ( M s ( 1 , 0 ) ) + L ψ ( N ( 1 , 0 ) ) ,
where 0 < δ < 1 and L 0 are arbitrary, since
M s ( 1 , 0 ) = max { d ( 1 , 0 ) , d ( 1 , 2 ) , d ( 0 , 0 ) , d ( 1 , 0 ) + d ( 0 , 2 ) 2 s } = 3 2
and
N ( 1 , 0 ) = min { d ( 0 , 0 ) , d ( 1 , 0 ) , d ( 0 , 2 ) } = 0 .

Hence, this result cannot be applied in the context of b-metric spaces without order.

4 Application to existence of solutions of integral equations

Integral equations like (4.1) have been studied in many papers (see, e.g., [22, 33] and the references therein). In this section, we look for a nonnegative solution to (4.1) in X = C ( [ 0 , T ] , R ) .

Consider the integral equation
u ( t ) = 0 T G ( t , s ) f ( s , u ( s ) ) d s for all  t [ 0 , T ] ,
(4.1)

where T > 0 , f : [ 0 , T ] × R R and G : [ 0 , T ] × [ 0 , T ] [ 0 , ) are continuous functions.

Let X = C ( [ 0 , T ] ) be the set of real continuous functions on [ 0 , T ] . We endow X with the b-metric
D ( u , v ) = max t [ 0 , T ] ( u ( t ) v ( t ) ) 2 for all  u , v X .
Clearly, ( X , D ) is a complete b-metric space (with the parameter s = 2 ). We endow X with the partial order given by
x y x ( t ) y ( t ) for all  t [ 0 , T ] .

Clearly, the space ( X , , D ) is regular.

Let α , β X and α 0 , β 0 R such that
α 0 α ( t ) β ( t ) β 0 for all  t [ 0 , T ] .
(4.2)
Assume that for all t [ 0 , T ] , we have
α ( t ) 0 T G ( t , s ) f ( s , β ( s ) ) d s
(4.3)
and
β ( t ) 0 T G ( t , s ) f ( s , α ( s ) ) d s .
(4.4)
Let for all s [ 0 , T ] , f ( s , ) be a decreasing function, that is,
x , y R , x y f ( s , x ) f ( s , y ) .
(4.5)
Assume that γ > 0 is such that
4 γ ( max t [ 0 , T ] 0 T G ( t , s ) d s ) 2 < 1 .
(4.6)
Define a mapping T : X X by
T u ( t ) = 0 T G ( t , s ) f ( s , u ( s ) ) d s for all  t [ 0 , T ] .
Suppose that for all s [ 0 , T ] and for all comparable x , y X with ( x ( s ) β 0 and y ( s ) α 0 ) or ( x ( s ) α 0 and y ( s ) β 0 ),
0 f ( s , x ( s ) ) f ( s , y ( s ) ) ( γ max { | x ( s ) y ( s ) | 2 , | x ( s ) T x ( s ) | 2 , | y ( s ) T y ( s ) | 2 , | x ( s ) T y ( s ) | 2 + | y ( s ) T x ( s ) | 2 4 } ) 1 2 .
(4.7)

Theorem 6 Under the assumptions (4.2)-(4.7), the integral equation (4.1) has a solution in the set { u C ( [ 0 , T ] ) : α u β } .

Proof Define closed subsets of X, A 1 and A 2 by
A 1 = { u X : u β } and A 2 = { u X : u α } .
Consider the mapping T : X X defined above. We will prove that
T ( A 1 ) A 2 and T ( A 2 ) A 1 .
(4.8)
Suppose that u A 1 , that is,
u ( s ) β ( s ) for all  s [ 0 , T ] .
Applying, condition (4.5), since G ( t , s ) 0 for all t , s [ 0 , T ] , we obtain that
G ( t , s ) f ( s , u ( s ) ) G ( t , s ) f ( s , β ( s ) ) for all  t , s [ 0 , T ] .
The above inequality with condition (4.3) implies that
0 T G ( t , s ) f ( s , u ( s ) ) d s 0 T G ( t , s ) f ( s , β ( s ) ) d s α ( t )

for all t [ 0 , T ] . Thus, we have T u A 2 .

Similarly, let u A 2 , that is,
u ( s ) α ( s ) for all  s [ 0 , T ] .
Using condition (4.5), since G ( t , s ) 0 for all t , s [ 0 , T ] , we obtain that
G ( t , s ) f ( s , u ( s ) ) G ( t , s ) f ( s , α ( s ) ) for all  t , s [ 0 , T ] .
The above inequality with condition (4.4) implies that
0 T G ( t , s ) f ( s , u ( s ) ) d s 0 T G ( t , s ) f ( s , α ( s ) ) d s β ( t )

for all t [ 0 , T ] . Hence, we have T u A 1 . Thus, (4.8) holds.

Now, let ( u , v ) A 1 × A 2 , that is, for all t [ 0 , T ] ,
u ( t ) β ( t ) , v ( t ) α ( t ) .
This implies from condition (4.2) that for all t [ 0 , T ] ,
u ( t ) β 0 , v ( t ) α 0 .
Also, if x y , then by (4.7), we have
T y ( t ) T x ( t ) = 0 T G ( t , s ) [ f ( s , y ( s ) ) f ( s , x ( s ) ) ] d s 0

for all t [ 0 , T ] . That is, T x T y . Hence, T is increasing.

Now, by the conditions (4.6) and (4.7), we have for all t [ 0 , T ] and for all

comparable x A 1 and y A 2 ,
( T x ( t ) T y ( t ) ) 2 = ( 0 T G ( t , s ) [ f ( s , x ( s ) ) f ( s , y ( s ) ) ] d s ) 2 ( 0 T G ( t , s ) [ f ( s , x ( s ) ) f ( s , y ( s ) ) ] d s ) 2 ( 0 T G ( t , s ) ( γ max { | x ( s ) y ( s ) | 2 , | x ( s ) T x ( s ) | 2 , | y ( s ) T y ( s ) | 2 , | x ( s ) T y ( s ) | 2 + | y ( s ) T x ( s ) | 2 4 } ) 1 2 d s ) 2 ( 0 T G ( t , s ) ( γ max { max s [ 0 , T ] | x ( s ) y ( s ) | 2 , max s [ 0 , T ] | x ( s ) T x ( s ) | 2 , max s [ 0 , T ] | y ( s ) T y ( s ) | 2 , max s [ 0 , T ] | x ( s ) T y ( s ) | 2 + max s [ 0 , T ] | y ( s ) T x ( s ) | 2 4 } ) 1 2 d s ) 2 = γ ( 0 T G ( t , s ) d s ) 2 max { D ( x , y ) , D ( x , T x ) , D ( y , T y ) , D ( x , T y ) + D ( y , T x ) 2 s } ,
which implies that
D ( T x , T y ) δ 2 s max { D ( x , y ) , D ( x , T x ) , D ( y , T y ) , D ( x , T y ) + D ( y , T x ) 2 s }

with δ = 4 γ ( max t [ 0 , T ] 0 T G ( t , s ) d s ) 2 < 1 .

Now, all the conditions of Corollary 2 (with T = g = f and L = 0 ) hold, and T has a fixed point z in
A 1 A 2 = { u C ( [ 0 , T ] ) : α ( t ) u ( t ) β ( t ) ,  for all  t [ 0 , T ] } .

That is, z A 1 A 2 is the solution to (4.1). □

Declarations

Acknowledgements

The authors are highly indebted to the referees of this paper who helped us to improve it in several places. This article was funded by the Deanship of Scientific Research (DSR), King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah. Therefore, the first author acknowledges with thanks DSR, KAU for financial support. The fourth author is thankful to the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of Serbia.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Mathematics, King Abdulaziz University
(2)
Young Researchers and Elite Club, Kermanshah Branch, Islamic Azad University
(3)
Department of Mathematics, Qaemshahr Branch, Islamic Azad University
(4)
Faculty of Mathematics, University of Belgrade

References

  1. Kirk WA, Srinivasan PS, Veeramani P: Fixed points for mappings satisfying cyclical contractive conditions. Fixed Point Theory 2003, 4(1):79–89.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Berinde V: Approximating fixed points of weak contractions using the Picard iteration. Nonlinear Anal. Forum 2004, 9: 43–53.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Berinde V: Some remarks on a fixed point theorem for Ćirić-type almost contractions. Carpath. J. Math. 2009, 25: 157–162.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Berinde V: Common fixed points of noncommuting almost contractions in cone metric spaces. Math. Commun. 2010, 15: 229–241.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Berinde V: Approximating common fixed points of noncommuting almost contractions in metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory 2010, 11: 179–188.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Pacurar M: Fixed point theory for cyclic Berinde operators. Fixed Point Theory 2012, 11: 419–428.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Suzuki T: Fixed point theorems for Berinde mappings. Bull. Kyushu Inst. Technol., Pure Appl. Math. 2011, 58: 13–19.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Babu GVR, Sandhya ML, Kameswari MVR: A note on a fixed point theorem of Berinde on weak contractions. Carpath. J. Math. 2008, 24: 8–12.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 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.2010.12.060MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Aghajani A, Radenović S, Roshan JR:Common fixed point results for four mappings satisfying almost generalized ( S , T ) -contractive condition in partially ordered metric spaces. Appl. Math. Comput. 2012, 218: 5665–5670. 10.1016/j.amc.2011.11.061MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Pacurar M: Remark regarding two classes of almost contractions with unique fixed point. Creative Math. 2010, 19: 178–183.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Khan MS, Swaleh M, Sessa S: Fixed point theorems by altering distances between the points. Bull. Aust. Math. Soc. 1984, 30: 1–9. 10.1017/S0004972700001659MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Bakhtin IA: The contraction principle in quasimetric spaces. 30. In Functional Analysis. Ul’yanovsk. Gos. Ped. Inst., Ul’yanovsk; 1989:26–37. (in Russian)Google Scholar
  14. Czerwik S: Contraction mappings in b -metric spaces. Acta Math. Inform. Univ. Ostrav. 1993, 1: 5–11.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Czerwik S: Nonlinear set-valued contraction mappings in b -metric spaces. Atti Semin. Mat. Fis. Univ. Modena 1998, 46(2):263–276.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Aghajani, A, Abbas, M, Roshan, JR: Common fixed point of generalized weak contractive mappings in partially ordered b-metric spaces. Math. Slovaca (2012, in press)Google Scholar
  17. Aydi H, Bota M-F, Karapinar E, Moradi S: A common fixed point for weak ϕ -contractions on b -metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory 2012, 13(2):337–346.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Boriceanu M: Fixed point theory for multivalued contraction on a set with two b -metrics. Creative Math. 2008, 17: 326–332.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. Boriceanu M: Strict fixed point theorems for multivalued operators in b -metric spaces. Int. J. Mod. Math. 2009, 4(3):285–301.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. Bota M: Multivalued fractals in b -metric spaces. Cent. Eur. J. Math. 2010, 8: 367–377. 10.2478/s11533-010-0009-4MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Bota M, Molnar A, Varga C: On Ekeland’s variational principle in b -metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory 2011, 12: 21–28.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. Hussain N, Ðorić D, Kadelburg Z, Radenović S: Suzuki-type fixed point results in metric type spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012., 2012: Article ID 126 10.1186/1687-1812-2012-126Google Scholar
  23. Khamsi MA: Remarks on cone metric spaces and fixed point theorems of contractive mappings. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2010., 2010: Article ID 315398 10.1155/2010/315398Google Scholar
  24. Khamsi MA, Hussain N: KKM mappings in metric type spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2010, 73(9):3123–3129. 10.1016/j.na.2010.06.084MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. Pacurar M: Sequences of almost contractions and fixed points in b -metric spaces. An. Univ. Vest. Timiş., Ser. Mat.-Inform. 2010, 3: 125–137.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. Roshan, JR, Shobkolaei, N, Sedghi, S, Abbas, M: Common fixed point of four maps in b-metric spaces. Hacet. J. Math. Stat. (2013, in press)Google Scholar
  27. Roshan JR, Parvaneh V, Sedghi S, Shobkolaei N, Shatanawi W: Common fixed points of almost generalized ( ψ , φ ) s -contractive mappings in ordered b -metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013., 2013: Article ID 159 10.1186/1687-1812-2013-159Google Scholar
  28. Singh SL, Prasad B: Some coincidence theorems and stability of iterative procedures. Comput. Math. Appl. 2008, 55: 2512–2520. 10.1016/j.camwa.2007.10.026MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. Hussain N, Shah MH: KKM mappings in cone b -metric spaces. Comput. Math. Appl. 2011, 62: 1677–1684. 10.1016/j.camwa.2011.06.004MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. Ran ACM, Reurings MCB: A fixed point theorem in partially ordered sets and some application to matrix equations. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 2004, 132: 1435–1443. 10.1090/S0002-9939-03-07220-4MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. Nieto JJ, Lopez RR: Contractive mapping theorems in partially ordered sets and applications to ordinary differential equations. Order 2005, 22: 223–239. 10.1007/s11083-005-9018-5MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. Shatanawi W, Postolache M: Common fixed point results of mappings for nonlinear contraction of cyclic form in ordered metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013., 2013: Article ID 60 10.1186/1687-1812-2013-60Google Scholar
  33. Agarwal RP, Hussain N, Taoudi M-A: Fixed point theorems in ordered Banach spaces and applications to nonlinear integral equations. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2012., 2012: Article ID 245872Google Scholar

Copyright

© Hussain et al.; licensee Springer. 2013

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.