Open Access

Common fixed point for generalized weakly G-contraction mappings satisfying common ( E . A ) property in G-metric spaces

Fixed Point Theory and Applications20132013:309

https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2013-309

Received: 10 June 2013

Accepted: 22 October 2013

Published: 22 November 2013

Abstract

In this paper, using the concept of common ( E . A ) property, we prove some common fixed point theorems for three pairs of weakly compatible self-maps satisfying a generalized weakly G-contraction condition in the framework of a generalized metric space. Our results do not rely on any commuting or continuity condition of mappings. An example is provided to support our result in nonsymmetric G-metric space.

Keywords

generalized metric space common fixed point generalized weakly G-contraction weakly compatible mappings common ( E . A ) property

1 Introduction and preliminaries

The study of fixed points and common fixed points of mappings satisfying certain contractive conditions has been at the center of rigorous research activity. In 2006, Mustafa and Sims [1] introduced the concept of generalized metric spaces or simply G-metric spaces as a generalization of the notion of metric space. Based on the notion of generalized metric spaces, Mustafa et al. [25], Obiedat and Mustafa [6], Aydi [7], Gajié and Stojakovié [8], Shatanawi et al. [9], Zhou and Gu [10] obtained some fixed point results for mappings satisfying different contractive conditions. Shatanawi [11] obtained some fixed point results for Φ-maps in G-metric spaces. Chugh et al. [12] obtained some fixed point results for maps satisfying property P in G-metric spaces. Al-khaleel et al. [13] obtained several fixed point results for mappings that satisfy certain contractive conditions in generalized cone metric spaces. The study of common fixed point problems in G-metric spaces was initiated by Abbas and Rhoades [14]. Subsequently, many authors have obtained many common fixed point theorems for the mappings satisfying different contractive conditions; see [1534] for more details. Recently, Abbas et al. [35] and Mustafa et al. [36] obtained some common fixed point results for a pair of mappings satisfying the ( E . A ) property under certain generalized strict contractive conditions in G-metric spaces. Long et al. [37] obtained some common coincidence and common fixed points results of two pairs of mappings when only one pair satisfies the ( E . A ) property in G-metric spaces. Very recently, Gu and Yin [38] obtained some common fixed point theorems of three pairs of mappings for which only two pairs need to satisfy the common ( E . A ) property in the framework of G-metric spaces.

Now we give preliminaries and basic definitions which are used throughout the paper.

Definition 1.1 (see [1])

Let X be a nonempty set, and let G : X × X × X R + be a function satisfying the following axioms:
  1. (G1)

    G ( x , y , z ) = 0 if x = y = z ;

     
  2. (G2)

    0 < G ( x , x , y ) for all x , y X with x y ;

     
  3. (G3)

    G ( x , x , y ) G ( x , y , z ) for all x , y , z X with z y ;

     
  4. (G4)

    G ( x , y , z ) = G ( x , z , y ) = G ( y , z , x ) = (symmetry in all three variables);

     
  5. (G5)

    G ( x , y , z ) G ( x , a , a ) + G ( a , y , z ) for all x , y , z , a X (rectangle inequality);

     

then the function G is called a generalized metric or, more specifically, a G-metric on X and the pair ( X , G ) is called a G-metric space.

It is known that the function G ( x , y , z ) on a G-metric space X is jointly continuous in all three of its variables, and G ( x , y , z ) = 0 if and only if x = y = z ; for more details, see [1] and the references therein.

Definition 1.2 (see [1])

Let ( X , G ) be a G-metric space, and let { x n } be a sequence of points in X. A point x in X is said to be the limit of the sequence { x n } if lim m , n G ( x , x n , x m ) = 0 , and one says that the sequence { x n } is G-convergent to x.

Thus, if x n x in a G-metric space ( X , G ) , then for any ϵ > 0 , there exists N N (throughout this paper we mean by the set of all natural numbers) such that G ( x , x n , x m ) < ϵ for all n , m N .

Proposition 1.3 (see [1])

Let ( X , G ) be a G-metric space, then the following are equivalent:
  1. (1)

    { x n } is G-convergent to x;

     
  2. (2)

    G ( x n , x n , x ) 0 as n ;

     
  3. (3)

    G ( x n , x , x ) 0 as n ;

     
  4. (4)

    G ( x n , x m , x ) 0 as n , m .

     

Definition 1.4 (see [1])

Let ( X , G ) be a G-metric space. The sequence { x n } is called a G-Cauchy sequence if for each ϵ > 0 , there exists N N such that G ( x n , x m , x l ) < ϵ for all n , m , l N ; i.e., if G ( x n , x m , x l ) 0 as n , m , l .

Definition 1.5 (see [1])

A G-metric space ( X , G ) is said to be G-complete (or a complete G-metric space) if every G-Cauchy sequence in ( X , G ) is G-convergent in X.

Proposition 1.6 (see [1])

Let ( X , G ) be a G-metric space. Then the following are equivalent.
  1. (1)

    The sequence { x n } is G-Cauchy.

     
  2. (2)

    For every ϵ > 0 , there exists k N such that G ( x n , x m , x m ) < ϵ for all n , m k .

     

Proposition 1.7 (see [1])

Let ( X , G ) be a G-metric space. Then the function G ( x , y , z ) is jointly continuous in all three of its variables.

Proposition 1.8 (see [1])

Let ( X , G ) be a G-metric space. Then, for all x, y in X, it follows that G ( x , y , y ) 2 G ( y , x , x ) .

Definition 1.9 (see [39])

Let f and g be self-maps of a set X. If w = f x = g x for some x in X, then x is called a coincidence point of f and g, and w is called a point of coincidence of f and g.

Definition 1.10 (see [39])

Two self-mappings f and g on X are said to be weakly compatible if they commute at coincidence points.

Definition 1.11 (see [35])

Let X be a G-metric space. Self-maps f and g on X are said to satisfy the G- ( E . A ) property if there exists a sequence { x n } in X such that { f x n } and { g x n } are G-convergent to some t X .

Definition 1.12 Let ( X , d ) be a G-metric space and A, B, S and T be four self-maps on X. The pairs ( A , S ) and ( B , T ) are said to satisfy the common ( E . A ) property if there exist two sequences { x n } and { y n } in X such that lim n A x n = lim n S x n = lim n B y n = lim n T y n = t for some t X .

Definition 1.13 (see [19])

Self-mappings f and g of a G-metric space ( X , G ) are said to be compatible if lim n G ( f g x n , g f x n , g f x n ) = 0 and lim n G ( g f x n , f g x n , f g x n ) = 0 , whenever { x n } is a sequence in X such that lim n f x n = lim n g x n = t for some t X .

Definition 1.14 (see [18])

A pair of self-mappings ( f , g ) of a G-metric space is said to be weakly commuting if
G ( f g x , g f x , g f x ) G ( f x , g x , g x ) , x X .

Definition 1.15 (see [18])

A pair of self-mappings ( f , g ) of a G-metric space is said to be R-weakly commuting if there exists some positive real number R such that
G ( f g x , g f x , g f x ) R G ( f x , g x , g x ) , x X .

Recently, Shatanawi et al. [9] introduced the following definitions.

Definition 1.16 (see [9])

Let ( X , G ) be a G-metric space. A mapping f : X X is said to be weakly G-contractive if for all x , y , z X , the following inequality holds:
G ( f x , f y , f z ) 1 3 ( G ( x , f y , f y ) + G ( y , f z , f z ) + G ( z , f x , f x ) ) ϕ ( G ( x , f y , f y ) , G ( y , f z , f z ) , G ( z , f x , f x ) ) ,

where ϕ : [ 0 , + ) 3 [ 0 , + ) is a continuous function with ϕ ( t , s , u ) = 0 if and only if t = s = u = 0 .

Definition 1.17 (see [9])

Let ( X , G ) be a G-metric space. A mapping f : X X is said to be a weakly G-contractive-type mapping if for all x , y , z X , the following inequality holds:
G ( f x , f y , f z ) 1 3 ( G ( x , x , f y ) + G ( y , y , f z ) + G ( z , z , f x ) ) ϕ ( G ( x , x , f y ) , G ( y , y , f z ) , G ( z , z , f x ) ) ,

where ϕ : [ 0 , + ) 3 [ 0 , + ) is a continuous function with ϕ ( t , s , u ) = 0 if and only if t = s = u = 0 .

Khan et al. [40] introduced the concept of altering distance function that is a control function employed to alter the metric distance between two points enabling one to deal with relatively new classes of fixed point problems. Here, we consider the following notion.

Definition 1.18 (see [15])

The function ψ : [ 0 , + ) [ 0 , + ) is called an altering distance function if the following properties are satisfied:
  1. (1)

    ψ is continuous and increasing;

     
  2. (2)

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

     

In 2011, Aydi et al. [15] introduced the concept of generalized weakly G-contraction mapping of A and B as follows.

Definition 1.19 (see [15])

Let ( X , G ) be a G-metric space and f , g : X X be two mappings. We say that f is a generalized weakly G-contraction mapping of type A with respect to g if for all x , y , z X , the following inequality holds:
ψ ( G ( f x , f y , f z ) ) ψ ( 1 3 ( G ( g x , f y , f y ) + G ( g y , f z , f z ) + G ( g z , f x , f x ) ) ) ϕ ( G ( g x , f y , f y ) , G ( g y , f z , f z ) , G ( g z , f x , f x ) ) ,
where
  1. (1)

    ψ is an altering distance function;

     
  2. (2)

    ϕ : [ 0 , + ) 3 [ 0 , + ) is a continuous function with ϕ ( t , s , u ) = 0 if and only if t = s = u = 0 .

     

Definition 1.20 (see [15])

Let ( X , G ) be a G-metric space and f , g : X X be two mappings. We say that f is a generalized weakly G-contraction mapping of type B with respect to g if for all x , y , z X , the following inequality holds:
ψ ( G ( f x , f y , f z ) ) ψ ( 1 3 ( G ( g x , g x , f y ) + G ( g y , g y , f z ) + G ( g z , g z , f x ) ) ) ϕ ( G ( g x , g x , f y ) , G ( g y , g y , f z ) , G ( g z , g z , f x ) ) ,
where
  1. (1)

    ψ is an altering distance function;

     
  2. (2)

    ϕ : [ 0 , + ) 3 [ 0 , + ) is a continuous function with ϕ ( t , s , u ) = 0 if and only if t = s = u = 0 .

     

In this paper, using the concept of common ( E . A ) property, we prove some common fixed point results for six self-mappings f, g, h, R, S and T, where the triple ( f , g , h ) is a generalized weakly G-contraction mapping of types A and B with respect to the triple ( R , S , T ) . These notions will be given by Definitions 2.1 and 2.5.

2 Main results

We start with the following definition.

Definition 2.1 Let ( X , G ) be a G-metric space and f , g , h , R , S , T : X X be six mappings. We say that the triple ( f , g , h ) is a generalized weakly G-contraction mapping of type A with respect to the triple ( R , S , T ) if for all x , y , z X , the following inequality holds:
ψ ( G ( f x , g y , h z ) ) ψ ( 1 3 ( G ( R x , g y , g y ) + G ( S y , h z , h z ) + G ( T z , f x , f x ) ) ) ϕ ( G ( R x , g y , g y ) , G ( S y , h z , h z ) , G ( T z , f x , f x ) ) ,
(2.1)
where
  1. (1)

    ψ is an altering distance function;

     
  2. (2)

    ϕ : [ 0 , + ) 3 [ 0 , + ) is a continuous function with ϕ ( t , s , u ) = 0 if and only if t = s = u = 0 .

     
Theorem 2.2 Let ( X , G ) be a G-metric space and f , g , h , R , S , T : X X be six mappings such that ( f , g , h ) is a generalized weakly G-contraction mapping of type A with respect to ( R , S , T ) . If one of the following conditions is satisfied, then the pairs ( f , R ) , ( g , S ) and ( h , T ) have a common point of coincidence in X.
  1. (i)

    The subspace RX is closed in X, f X S X , g X T X , and two pairs of ( f , R ) and ( g , S ) satisfy the common ( E . A ) property;

     
  2. (ii)

    The subspace SX is closed in X, g X T X , h X R X , and two pairs of ( g , S ) and ( h , T ) satisfy the common ( E . A ) property;

     
  3. (iii)

    The subspace TX is closed in X, f X S X , h X R X , and two pairs of ( f , R ) and ( h , T ) satisfy the common ( E . A ) property.

     

Moreover, if the pairs ( f , R ) , ( g , S ) and ( h , T ) are weakly compatible, then f, g, h, R, S and T have a unique common fixed point in X.

Proof First, we suppose that the subspace RX is closed in X, f X S X , g X T X , and two pairs of ( f , R ) and ( g , S ) satisfy the common ( E . A ) property. Then by Definition 1.12 we know that there exist two sequences { x n } and { y n } in X such that
lim n f x n = lim n R x n = lim n g y n = lim n S y n = t

for some t X .

Since g X T X , there exists a sequence { z n } in X such that g y n = T z n . Hence lim n T z n = t . Next, we will show lim n h z n = t . In fact, from condition (2.1), we can get
ψ ( G ( f x n , g y n , h z n ) ) ψ ( 1 3 ( G ( R x n , g y n , g y n ) + G ( S y n , h z n , h z n ) + G ( T z n , f x n , f x n ) ) ) ϕ ( G ( R x n , g y n , g y n ) , G ( S y n , h z n , h z n ) , G ( T z n , f x n , f x n ) ) .
On letting n and using the continuities of ψ and ϕ, we can obtain
ψ ( G ( t , t , lim n h z n ) ) ψ ( 1 3 ( 0 + G ( t , lim n h z n , lim n h z n ) + 0 ) ) ϕ ( 0 , G ( t , lim n h z n , lim n h z n ) , 0 ) .
(2.2)
By Proposition 1.8, we have
G ( t , lim n h z n , lim n h z n ) 2 G ( t , lim n h z n , lim n h z n ) ,
and hence using the fact that ψ is increasing, (2.2) becomes
ψ ( G ( t , t , lim n h z n ) ) ψ ( 2 3 ( G ( t , t , lim n h z n ) ) ) ϕ ( 0 , G ( t , lim n h z n , lim n h z n ) , 0 ) ψ ( G ( t , t , lim n h z n ) ) ϕ ( 0 , G ( t , lim n h z n , lim n h z n ) , 0 ) ,

which implies that ϕ ( 0 , G ( t , lim n h z n , lim n h z n ) , 0 ) = 0 , and so lim n h z n = t .

Since RX is a closed subspace of X and lim n R x n = t , there exists p in X such that t = R p . We claim that f p = t . In fact, by using (2.1), we obtain
ψ ( G ( f p , g y n , h z n ) ) ψ ( 1 3 ( G ( R p , g y n , g y n ) + G ( S y n , h z n , h z n ) + G ( T z n , f p , f p ) ) ) ϕ ( G ( R p , g y n , g y n ) , G ( S y n , h z n , h z n ) , G ( T z n , f p , f p ) ) .
Taking n on the two sides of the above inequality, using the continuities of ψ and ϕ, Proposition 1.8 and the fact that ψ is increasing, we can get
ψ ( G ( f p , t , t ) ) ψ ( 1 3 ( 0 + 0 + G ( t , f p , f p ) ) ) ϕ ( 0 , 0 , G ( t , f p , f p ) ) ψ ( 2 3 ( G ( f p , t , t ) ) ) ϕ ( 0 , 0 , G ( t , f p , f p ) ) ψ ( G ( f p , t , t ) ) ϕ ( 0 , 0 , G ( t , f p , f p ) ) ,

which implies that ϕ ( 0 , 0 , G ( t , f p , f p ) ) = 0 , and hence f p = t = R p . Therefore, p is the coincidence point of a pair ( f , R ) .

By the condition f X S X and f p = t , there exist a point u in X such that t = S u . Now, we claim that g u = t . In fact, from (2.1) we have
ψ ( G ( f p , g u , h z n ) ) ψ ( 1 3 ( G ( R p , g u , g u ) + G ( S u , h z n , h z n ) + G ( T z n , f p , f p ) ) ) ϕ ( G ( R p , g u , g u ) , G ( S u , h z n , h z n ) , G ( T z n , f p , f p ) ) .
Letting n on the two sides of the above inequality, using the continuities of ψ and ϕ, Proposition 1.8 and the fact that ψ is increasing, we can obtain
ψ ( G ( t , g u , t ) ) ψ ( 1 3 ( G ( t , g u , g u ) + 0 + 0 ) ) ϕ ( G ( t , g u , g u ) , 0 , 0 ) ψ ( 2 3 ( G ( t , g u , t ) ) ) ϕ ( G ( t , g u , g u ) , 0 , 0 ) ψ ( G ( t , g u , t ) ) ϕ ( G ( t , g u , g u ) , 0 , 0 ) ,

which implies that ϕ ( G ( t , g u , g u ) , 0 , 0 ) = 0 , hence g u = t = S u , and so u is the coincidence point of a pair ( g , S ) .

Since g X T X and g u = t , there exist a point v in X such that t = T v . We claim that h v = t . In fact, from (2.1), using f p = R p = g u = S u = t , Proposition 1.8 and the fact that ψ is increasing, we have
ψ ( G ( t , t , h v ) ) = ψ ( G ( f p , g u , h v ) ) ψ ( 1 3 ( G ( R p , g u , g u ) + G ( S u , h v , h v ) + G ( T v , f p , f p ) ) ) ϕ ( G ( R p , g u , g u ) , G ( S u , h v , h v ) , G ( T v , f p , f p ) ) = ψ ( 1 3 ( G ( t , t , t ) + G ( t , h v , h v ) + G ( t , t , t ) ) ) ϕ ( G ( t , t , t ) , G ( t , h v , h v ) , G ( t , t , t ) ) ψ ( 2 3 ( G ( t , t , h v ) ) ) ϕ ( 0 , G ( t , h v , h v ) , 0 ) ψ ( G ( t , t , h v ) ) ϕ ( 0 , G ( t , h v , h v ) , 0 ) .

This implies that ϕ ( 0 , G ( t , h v , h v ) , 0 ) = 0 , and so h v = t = T v , hence v is the coincidence point of a pair ( h , T ) .

Therefore, in all the above cases, we obtain f p = R p = g u = S u = h v = T v = t . Now, weak compatibility of the pairs ( f , R ) , ( g , S ) and ( h , T ) gives that f t = R t , g t = S t and h t = T t .

Next, we show that f t = t . In fact, using (2.1), Proposition 1.8 and the fact that ψ is increasing, we have
ψ ( G ( f t , t , t ) ) = ψ ( G ( f t , g u , h v ) ) ψ ( 1 3 ( G ( R t , g u , g u ) + G ( S u , h v , h v ) + G ( T v , f t , f t ) ) ) ϕ ( G ( R t , g u , g u ) , G ( S u , h v , h v ) , G ( T v , f t , f t ) ) = ψ ( 1 3 ( G ( f t , t , t ) + G ( t , t , t ) + G ( t , f t , f t ) ) ) ϕ ( G ( f t , t , t ) , G ( t , t , t ) , G ( t , f t , f t ) ) ψ ( G ( f t , t , t ) ) ϕ ( G ( f t , t , t ) , 0 , G ( t , f t , f t ) ) ,

which implies that ϕ ( G ( f t , t , t ) , 0 , G ( t , f t , f t ) ) = 0 , and so G ( f t , t , t ) = G ( t , f t , f t ) = 0 , that is, f t = t , and so f t = R t = t . Similarly, it can be shown that g t = S t = t and h t = T t = t , so we get f t = g t = h t = R t = S t = T t = t , which means that t is a common fixed point of f, g, h, R, S and T.

Next, we will show that the common fixed point of f, g, h, R, S and T is unique. Actually, suppose that w X is another common fixed point of f, g, h, R, S and T, then by condition (2.1), Proposition 1.8 and the fact that ψ is increasing, we have
ψ ( G ( w , t , t ) ) = ψ ( G ( f w , g t , h t ) ) ψ ( 1 3 ( G ( R w , g t , g t ) + G ( S t , h t , h t ) + G ( T t , f w , f w ) ) ) ϕ ( G ( R w , g t , g t ) , G ( S t , h t , h t ) , G ( T t , f w , f w ) ) = ψ ( 1 3 ( G ( w , t , t ) + G ( t , t , t ) + G ( t , w , w ) ) ) ϕ ( G ( w , t , t ) , G ( t , t , t ) , G ( t , w , w ) ) ψ ( G ( w , t , t ) ) ϕ ( G ( w , t , t ) , 0 , G ( t , w , w ) ) ,

which implies that ϕ ( G ( w , t , t ) , 0 , G ( t , w , w ) ) = 0 , and so G ( w , t , t ) = G ( t , w , w ) = 0 , hence w = t , that is, mappings f, g, h, R, S and T have a unique common fixed point.

Finally, if condition (ii) or (iii) holds, then the argument is similar to that above, so we delete it.

This completes the proof of Theorem 2.2. □

Now we introduce an example to support Theorem 2.2.

Example 2.3 Let X = { 0 , 1 , 2 } be a set with G-metric defined by Table 1.
Table 1

The definition of G -metric on X

(x,y,z)

G(x,y,z)

(0,0,0), (1,1,1), (2,2,2),

0

(0,0,1), (0,1,0), (1,0,0), (0,1,1), (1,0,1), (1,1,0),

1

(1,2,2), (2,1,2), (2,2,1),

2

(0,0,2), (0,2,0), (2,0,0), (0,2,2), (2,0,2), (2,2,0),

3

(1,1,2), (1,2,1), (2,1,1), (0,1,2), (0,2,1), (1,0,2), (1,2,0), (2,0,1), (2,1,0)

4

Note that G is non-symmetric as G ( 1 , 2 , 2 ) G ( 1 , 1 , 2 ) . Let f , g , h , R , S , T : X X be defined by Table 2.
Table 2

The definition of maps f , g , h , R , S and T on X

x

f(x)

g(x)

h(x)

R(x)

S(x)

T(x)

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

1

2

0

2

2

0

1

0

2

2

1

Clearly, the subspace RX is closed in X, f X S X and g X T X with the pairs ( f , R ) , ( g , S ) and ( h , T ) being weakly compatible. Also, two pairs ( f , R ) and ( g , S ) satisfy the common ( E . A ) property, indeed, x n = 0 and y n = 1 for each n N are the required sequences. The control functions ψ : [ 0 , ) [ 0 , ) and ϕ : [ 0 , ) 3 [ 0 , ) are defined by
ψ ( t ) = 3 t and ϕ ( t , s , u ) = t + s + u 4 .
It is easy to show that the triple ( f , g , h ) is a generalized weakly G-contraction mapping of type A with respect to the triple ( R , S , T ) . In fact, contractive condition (2.1) and the following inequality are equivalent:
ψ ( G ( f x , g y , h z ) ) 3 4 ( G ( R x , g y , g y ) + G ( S y , h z , h z ) + G ( T z , f x , f x ) ) .
(2.3)

To check contractive condition (2.3) for all x , y , z X , we consider the following cases.

Note that for Cases (1) x = y = z = 0 , (2) x = y = 0 , z = 2 , (3) x = z = 0 , y = 1 , (4) x = 0 , y = 1 , z = 2 , (5) x = 1 , y = z = 0 , (6) x = 1 , y = 0 , z = 2 , (7) x = y = 1 , z = 0 , (8) x = y = 1 , z = 2 , (9) x = 2 , y = z = 0 , (10) x = z = 2 , y = 0 , (11) x = 2 , y = 1 , z = 0 and (12) x = z = 2 , y = 1 , we have G ( f x , g y , h z ) = G ( 0 , 0 , 0 ) = 0 , and hence (2.3) is obviously satisfied.

Case (13) If x = y = 0 , z = 1 , then f x = g y = 0 , h z = 1 , R x = S y = 0 , T z = 2 , hence we have
ψ ( G ( f x , g y , h z ) ) = 3 G ( 0 , 0 , 1 ) = 3 = 3 4 4 = 3 4 ( G ( 0 , 0 , 0 ) + G ( 0 , 1 , 1 ) + G ( 2 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R 0 , g 0 , g 0 ) + G ( S 0 , h 1 , h 1 ) + G ( T 1 , f 0 , f 0 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R x , g y , g y ) + G ( S y , h z , h z ) + G ( T z , f x , f x ) ) .
Case (14) If x = 0 , y = z = 1 , then f x = g y = 0 , h z = 1 , R x = S y = 0 , T z = 2 , hence we have
ψ ( G ( f x , g y , h z ) ) = 3 G ( 0 , 0 , 1 ) = 3 = 3 4 4 = 3 4 ( G ( 0 , 0 , 0 ) + G ( 0 , 1 , 1 ) + G ( 2 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R 0 , g 1 , g 1 ) + G ( S 1 , h 1 , h 1 ) + G ( T 1 , f 0 , f 0 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R x , g y , g y ) + G ( S y , h z , h z ) + G ( T z , f x , f x ) ) .
Case (15) If x = z = 0 , y = 2 , then f x = h z = 0 , g y = 1 , R x = 0 , S y = 2 , T z = 0 , hence we have
ψ ( G ( f x , g y , h z ) ) = 3 G ( 0 , 1 , 0 ) = 3 = 3 4 4 = 3 4 ( G ( 0 , 1 , 1 ) + G ( 2 , 0 , 0 ) + G ( 0 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R 0 , g 2 , g 2 ) + G ( S 2 , h 0 , h 0 ) + G ( T 0 , f 0 , f 0 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R x , g y , g y ) + G ( S y , h z , h z ) + G ( T z , f x , f x ) ) .
Case (16) If x = 0 , y = 2 , z = 1 , then f x = 0 , g y = h z = 1 , R x = 0 , S y = T z = 2 , hence we have
ψ ( G ( f x , g y , h z ) ) = 3 G ( 0 , 1 , 1 ) = 3 < 3 4 8 = 3 4 ( G ( 0 , 1 , 1 ) + G ( 2 , 1 , 1 ) + G ( 2 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R 0 , g 2 , g 2 ) + G ( S 2 , h 1 , h 1 ) + G ( T 1 , f 0 , f 0 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R x , g y , g y ) + G ( S y , h z , h z ) + G ( T z , f x , f x ) ) .
Case (17) If x = 0 , y = z = 2 , then f x = h z = 0 , g y = 1 , R x = 0 , S y = 2 , T z = 1 , hence we have
ψ ( G ( f x , g y , h z ) ) = 3 G ( 0 , 1 , 0 ) = 3 < 3 4 5 = 3 4 ( G ( 0 , 1 , 1 ) + G ( 2 , 0 , 0 ) + G ( 1 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R 0 , g 2 , g 2 ) + G ( S 2 , h 2 , h 2 ) + G ( T 2 , f 0 , f 0 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R x , g y , g y ) + G ( S y , h z , h z ) + G ( T z , f x , f x ) ) .
Case (18) If x = z = 1 , y = 0 , then f x = g y = 0 , h z = 1 , R x = 2 , S y = 0 , T z = 2 , hence we have
ψ ( G ( f x , g y , h z ) ) = 3 G ( 0 , 0 , 1 ) = 3 < 3 4 7 = 3 4 ( G ( 2 , 0 , 0 ) + G ( 0 , 1 , 1 ) + G ( 2 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R 1 , g 0 , g 0 ) + G ( S 0 , h 1 , h 1 ) + G ( T 1 , f 1 , f 1 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R x , g y , g y ) + G ( S y , h z , h z ) + G ( T z , f x , f x ) ) .
Case (19) x = y = z = 1 , then f x = g y = 0 , h z = 1 , R x = 2 , S y = 0 , T z = 2 , hence we have
ψ ( G ( f x , g y , h z ) ) = 3 G ( 0 , 0 , 1 ) = 3 < 3 4 7 = 3 4 ( G ( 2 , 0 , 0 ) + G ( 0 , 1 , 1 ) + G ( 2 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R 1 , g 1 , g 1 ) + G ( S 1 , h 1 , h 1 ) + G ( T 1 , f 1 , f 1 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R x , g y , g y ) + G ( S y , h z , h z ) + G ( T z , f x , f x ) ) .
Case (20) If x = 1 , y = 2 , z = 0 , then f x = h z = 0 , g y = 1 , R x = 2 , S y = 2 , T z = 0 , hence we have
ψ ( G ( f x , g y , h z ) ) = 3 G ( 0 , 1 , 0 ) = 3 < 3 4 7 = 3 4 ( G ( 2 , 1 , 1 ) + G ( 2 , 0 , 0 ) + G ( 0 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R 1 , g 2 , g 2 ) + G ( S 2 , h 0 , h 0 ) + G ( T 0 , f 1 , f 1 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R x , g y , g y ) + G ( S y , h z , h z ) + G ( T z , f x , f x ) ) .
Case (21) If x = z = 1 , y = 2 , then f x = 0 , g y = h z = 1 , R x = S y = T z = 2 , hence we have
ψ ( G ( f x , g y , h z ) ) = 3 G ( 0 , 1 , 1 ) = 3 < 3 4 11 = 3 4 ( G ( 2 , 1 , 1 ) + G ( 2 , 1 , 1 ) + G ( 2 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R 1 , g 2 , g 2 ) + G ( S 2 , h 1 , h 1 ) + G ( T 1 , f 1 , f 1 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R x , g y , g y ) + G ( S y , h z , h z ) + G ( T z , f x , f x ) ) .
Case (22) If x = 1 , y = z = 2 , then f x = h z = 0 , g y = 1 , R x = S y = 2 , T z = 1 , hence we have
ψ ( G ( f x , g y , h z ) ) = 3 G ( 0 , 1 , 0 ) = 3 < 3 4 8 = 3 4 ( G ( 2 , 1 , 1 ) + G ( 2 , 0 , 0 ) + G ( 1 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R 1 , g 2 , g 2 ) + G ( S 2 , h 2 , h 2 ) + G ( T 2 , f 1 , f 1 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R x , g y , g y ) + G ( S y , h z , h z ) + G ( T z , f x , f x ) ) .
Case (23) If x = 2 , y = 0 , z = 1 , then f x = g y = 0 , h z = 1 , R x = 2 , S y = 0 , T z = 2 , hence we have
ψ ( G ( f x , g y , h z ) ) = 3 G ( 0 , 0 , 1 ) = 3 < 3 4 7 = 3 4 ( G ( 2 , 0 , 0 ) + G ( 0 , 1 , 1 ) + G ( 2 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R 2 , g 0 , g 0 ) + G ( S 0 , h 1 , h 1 ) + G ( T 1 , f 2 , f 2 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R x , g y , g y ) + G ( S y , h z , h z ) + G ( T z , f x , f x ) ) .
Case (24) If x = 2 , y = z = 1 , then f x = g y = 0 , h z = 1 , R x = 2 , S y = 0 , T z = 2 , hence we have
ψ ( G ( f x , g y , h z ) ) = 3 G ( 0 , 0 , 1 ) = 3 < 3 4 7 = 3 4 ( G ( 2 , 0 , 0 ) + G ( 0 , 1 , 1 ) + G ( 2 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R 2 , g 1 , g 1 ) + G ( S 1 , h 1 , h 1 ) + G ( T 1 , f 2 , f 2 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R x , g y , g y ) + G ( S y , h z , h z ) + G ( T z , f x , f x ) ) .
Case (25) If x = y = 2 , z = 0 , then f x = h z = 0 , g y = 1 , R x = 2 , S y = 2 , T z = 0 , hence we have
ψ ( G ( f x , g y , h z ) ) = 3 G ( 0 , 1 , 0 ) = 3 < 3 4 7 = 3 4 ( G ( 2 , 1 , 1 ) + G ( 2 , 0 , 0 ) + G ( 0 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R 2 , g 2 , g 2 ) + G ( S 2 , h 0 , h 0 ) + G ( T 0 , f 2 , f 2 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R x , g y , g y ) + G ( S y , h z , h z ) + G ( T z , f x , f x ) ) .
Case (26) x = y = 2 , z = 1 , then f x = 0 , g y = h z = 1 , R x = S y = T z = 2 , hence we have
ψ ( G ( f x , g y , h z ) ) = 3 G ( 0 , 1 , 1 ) = 3 < 3 4 11 = 3 4 ( G ( 2 , 1 , 1 ) + G ( 2 , 1 , 1 ) + G ( 2 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R 2 , g 2 , g 2 ) + G ( S 2 , h 1 , h 1 ) + G ( T 1 , f 2 , f 2 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R x , g y , g y ) + G ( S y , h z , h z ) + G ( T z , f x , f x ) ) .
Case (27) If x = y = z = 2 , then f x = h z = 0 , g y = 1 , R x = S y = 2 , T z = 1 , hence we have
ψ ( G ( f x , g y , h z ) ) = 3 G ( 0 , 1 , 0 ) = 3 < 3 4 8 = 3 4 ( G ( 2 , 1 , 1 ) + G ( 2 , 0 , 0 ) + G ( 1 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R 2 , g 2 , g 2 ) + G ( S 2 , h 2 , h 2 ) + G ( T 2 , f 2 , f 2 ) ) = 3 4 ( G ( R x , g y , g y ) + G ( S y , h z , h z ) + G ( T z , f x , f x ) ) .

Hence, all of the conditions of Theorem 2.2 are satisfied. Moreover, 0 is the unique common fixed point of f, g, h, R, S and T.

Corollary 2.4 Let ( X , G ) be a G-metric space. Suppose that mappings f , g , h , R , S , T : X X satisfy the following conditions:
G ( f x , g y , h z ) α ( G ( R x , g y , g y ) + G ( S y , h z , h z ) + G ( T z , f x , f x ) )
(2.4)
for all x , y , z X , where α [ 0 , 1 3 ) . If one of the following conditions is satisfied, then the pairs ( f , R ) , ( g , S ) and ( h , T ) have a common point of coincidence in X.
  1. (i)

    The subspace RX is closed in X, f X S X , g X T X , and two pairs of ( f , R ) and ( g , S ) satisfy the common ( E . A ) property;

     
  2. (ii)

    The subspace SX is closed in X, g X T X , h X R X , and two pairs of ( g , S ) and ( h , T ) satisfy the common ( E . A ) property;

     
  3. (iii)

    The subspace TX is closed in X, f X S X , h X R X , and two pairs of ( f , R ) and ( h , T ) satisfy the common ( E . A ) property.

     

Moreover, if the pairs ( f , R ) , ( g , S ) and ( h , T ) are weakly compatible, then f, g, h, R, S and T have a unique common fixed point in X.

Proof It suffices to take ψ ( t ) = t and ϕ ( t , s , u ) = ( 1 3 α ) ( t + s + u ) in Theorem 2.2. □

Definition 2.5 Let ( X , G ) be a G-metric space and f , g , h , R , S , T : X X be six mappings. We say that the triple ( f , g , h ) is a generalized weakly G-contraction mapping of type B with respect to the triple ( R , S , T ) if for all x , y , z X , the following inequality holds:
ψ ( G ( f x , g y , h z ) ) ψ ( 1 3 ( G ( R x , R x , g y ) + G ( S y , S y , h z ) + G ( T z , T z , f x ) ) ) ϕ ( G ( R x , R x , g y ) , G ( S y , S y , h z ) , G ( T z , T z , f x ) ) ,
(2.5)
where
  1. (1)

    ψ is an altering distance function;

     
  2. (2)

    ϕ : [ 0 , + ) 3 [ 0 , + ) is a continuous function with ϕ ( t , s , u ) = 0 if and only if t = s = u = 0 .

     

Using arguments similar to those in Theorem 2.2, we can prove the following theorem.

Theorem 2.6 Let ( X , G ) be a G-metric space and f , g , h , R , S , T : X X be six mappings such that ( f , g , h ) is a generalized weakly G-contraction mapping of type B with respect to ( R , S , T ) . If one of the following conditions is satisfied, then the pairs ( f , R ) , ( g , S ) and ( h , T ) have a common point of coincidence in X.
  1. (i)

    The subspace RX is closed in X, f X S X , g X T X , and two pairs of ( f , R ) and ( g , S ) satisfy the common ( E . A ) property;

     
  2. (ii)

    The subspace SX is closed in X, g X T X , h X R X , and two pairs of ( g , S ) and ( h , T ) satisfy the common ( E . A ) property;

     
  3. (iii)

    The subspace TX is closed in X, f X S X , h X R X , and two pairs of ( f , R ) and ( h , T ) satisfy the common ( E . A ) property.

     

Moreover, if the pairs ( f , R ) , ( g , S ) and ( h , T ) are weakly compatible, then f, g, h, R, S and T have a unique common fixed point in X.

As in the case of Theorem 2.2, we can deduce the following corollary from Theorem 2.6.

Corollary 2.7 Let ( X , G ) be a G-metric space. Suppose that mappings f , g , h , R , S , T : X X satisfy the following conditions:
G ( f x , g y , h z ) α ( G ( R x , R y , g y ) + G ( S y , S z , h z ) + G ( T z , T x , f x ) )
(2.6)
for all x , y , z X , where α [ 0 , 1 3 ) . If one of the following conditions is satisfied, then the pairs ( f , R ) , ( g , S ) and ( h , T ) have a common point of coincidence in X.
  1. (i)

    The subspace RX is closed in X, f X S X , g X T X , and two pairs of ( f , R ) and ( g , S ) satisfy the common ( E . A ) property;

     
  2. (ii)

    The subspace SX is closed in X, g X T X , h X R X , and two pairs of ( g , S ) and ( h , T ) satisfy the common ( E . A ) property;

     
  3. (iii)

    The subspace TX is closed in X, f X S X , h X R X , and two pairs of ( f , R ) and ( h , T ) satisfy the common ( E . A ) property.

     

Moreover, if the pairs ( f , R ) , ( g , S ) and ( h , T ) are weakly compatible, then f, g, h, R, S and T have a unique common fixed point in X.

Remark 2.8 If we take: (1) R = S = T ; (2) f = g = h ; (3) R = S = T = I (I is an identity mapping); (4) S = T and g = h ; (5) S = T , g = h = I in Theorems 2.2 and 2.6, Corollaries 2.4 and 2.7, then several new results can be obtained.

Declarations

Acknowledgements

The present studies are supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (11271105, 11071169), the Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province (Y6110287, LY12A01030).

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Institute of Applied Mathematics and Department of Mathematics, Hangzhou Normal University
(2)
Department of Mathematics, Hashemite University

References

  1. Mustafa Z, Sims B: A new approach to generalized metric spaces. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 2006, 7(2):289–297.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. Mustafa Z, Obiedat H, Awawdeh F: Some fixed point theorems for mappings on complete G -metric space. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2008., 2008: Article ID 189870 10.1155/2008/189870Google Scholar
  3. Mustafa Z, Sims B: Fixed point theorems for contractive mappings in complete G -metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2009., 2009: Article ID 917175Google Scholar
  4. Mustafa Z, Shatanawi W, Bataineh M: Existence of fixed points results in G -metric spaces. Int. J. Math. Math. Sci. 2009., 2009: Article ID 283028Google Scholar
  5. Mustafa Z, Khandagji M, Shatanawi W: Fixed point results on complete G -metric spaces. Studia Sci. Math. Hung. 2011, 48(3):304–319.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. Obiedat H, Mustafa Z: Fixed point results on a nonsymmetric G -metric spaces. Jordan J. Math. Stat. 2010, 3(2):65–79.Google Scholar
  7. Aydi H: A fixed point result involving a generalized weakly contractive condition in G -metric spaces. Bull. Math. Anal. Appl. 2011, 3(4):180–188.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. Gajié L, Stojakovié M: On Ćirié generalization of mappings with a contractive iterate at a point in G -metric spaces. Appl. Math. Comput. 2012, 219(1):435–441. 10.1016/j.amc.2012.06.041MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Shatanawi, W, Abbas, M, Aydi, H: On weakly C-contractive mappings in generalized metric spaces (submitted for publication)Google Scholar
  10. Zhou S, Gu F: Some new fixed points in G -metric spaces. J. Hangzhou Normal Univ. (Nat. Sci. Ed.) 2012, 11(1):47–50.Google Scholar
  11. Shatanawi W: Fixed point theory for contractive mappings satisfying Φ-maps in G -metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2010., 2010: Article ID 181650Google Scholar
  12. Chugh R, Kadian T, Rani A, Rhoades BE: Property P in G -metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2010., 2010: Article ID 401684Google Scholar
  13. Al-khaleel M, Al-sharif SH, Khandaqji M: Fixed point for contraction mappings in generalized cone metric space. Jordan J. Math. Stat. 2012, 5(4):291–307.Google Scholar
  14. Abbas M, Rhoades BE: Common fixed point results for noncommuting mappings without continuity in generalized metric spaces. Appl. Math. Comput. 2009, 215(1):262–269. 10.1016/j.amc.2009.04.085MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  15. Aydi H, Shatanawi W, Vetro C: On generalized weakly G -contraction mapping in G -metric spaces. Comput. Math. Appl. 2011, 62(11):4222–4229. 10.1016/j.camwa.2011.10.007MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Abbas M, Nazir T, Saadati R: Common fixed point results for three maps in generalized metric space. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2011, 49: 1–20.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. Abbas M, Nazir T, Radenović S: Some periodic point results in generalized metric spaces. Appl. Math. Comput. 2010, 217(8):4094–4099. 10.1016/j.amc.2010.10.026MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Abbas M, Khan SH, Nazir T: Common fixed points of R -weakly commuting maps in generalized metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2011., 2011: Article ID 784595Google Scholar
  19. Vats RK, Kumar S, Sihag V: Some common fixed point theorems for compatible mappings of type ( A ) in complete G -metric space. Adv. Fuzzy Math. 2011, 6(1):27–38.Google Scholar
  20. Abbas M, Nazir T, Vetro P: Common fixed point results for three maps in G -metric spaces. Filomat 2011, 25(4):1–17. 10.2298/FIL1104001AMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. Manro S, Kumar S, Bhatia SS: R -Weakly commuting maps in G -metric spaces. Fasc. Math. 2011, 47: 11–18.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. Gu F: Common fixed point theorems for six mappings in generalized metric spaces. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2012., 2012: Article ID 379212 10.1155/2012/379212Google Scholar
  23. Gu F, Ye H: Common fixed point theorems of Altman integral type mappings in G -metric spaces. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2012., 2012: Article ID 630457 10.1155/2012/630457Google Scholar
  24. Ye H, Gu F: Common fixed point theorems for a class of twice power type contraction maps in G -metric spaces. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2012., 2012: Article ID 736214Google Scholar
  25. Yin Y, Gu F: Common fixed point theorem about four mappings in G -metric spaces. J. Hangzhou Normal Univ. (Nat. Sci. Ed.) 2012, 11(6):511–515.Google Scholar
  26. Kaewcharoen A: Some common fixed point theorems for contractive mappings satisfying Φ-maps in G -metric spaces. Banach J. Math. Anal. 2012, 6(1):101–111.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  27. Tahat N, Aydi H, Karapinar E, Shatanawi W: Common fixed points for single-valued and multi-valued maps satisfying a generalized contraction in G -metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012., 2012: Article ID 48 10.1186/1687-1812-2012-48Google Scholar
  28. Mustafa Z: Some new common fixed point theorems under strict contractive conditions in G -metric spaces. J. Appl. Math. 2012., 2012: Article ID 248937Google Scholar
  29. Kaewcharoen A: Common fixed points for four mappings in G -metric spaces. Int. J. Math. Anal. 2012, 6(47):2345–2356.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  30. Popa V, Patriciu A-M: A general fixed point theorem for pairs of weakly compatible mappings in G -metric spaces. J. Nonlinear Sci. Appl. 2012, 5: 151–160.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. Mustafa Z: Common fixed points of weakly compatible mappings in G -metric spaces. Appl. Math. Sci. 2012, 6(92):4589–4600.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  32. Gugnani M, Aggarwal M, Chugh R: Common fixed point results in G -metric spaces and applications. Int. J. Comput. Appl. 2012, 43(11):38–42.Google Scholar
  33. Aydi H: A common fixed point of integral type contraction in generalized metric spaces. J. Adv. Math. Stud. 2012, 5(1):111–117.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  34. Rao KPR, Lakshmi KB, Mustafa Z, Raju VCC: Fixed and related fixed point theorems for three maps in G -metric spaces. J. Adv. Stud. Topol. 2012, 3(4):12–19.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  35. Abbas M, Nazir T, Dorić D:Common fixed point of mappings satisfying ( E . A ) property in generalized metric spaces. Appl. Math. Comput. 2012, 218(14):7665–7670. 10.1016/j.amc.2011.11.113MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  36. Mustafa Z, Aydi H, Karapinar E: On common fixed points in G -metric spaces using ( E . A ) property. Comput. Math. Appl. 2012, 64(6):1944–1956. 10.1016/j.camwa.2012.03.051MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  37. Long W, Abbas M, Nazir T, Radenović S:Common fixed point for two pairs of mappings satisfying ( E . A ) property in generalized metric spaces. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2012., 2012: Article ID 394830Google Scholar
  38. Gu F, Yin Y:Common fixed point for three pairs of self-maps satisfying common ( E . A ) property in generalized metric spaces. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2013., 2013: Article ID 808092Google Scholar
  39. Jungck G, Rhoades BE: Fixed point for set valued functions without continuity. Indian J. Pure Appl. Math. 1998, 29: 227–238.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  40. 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 ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Gu and Shatanawi; 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.