- Research
- Open Access

# Some fixed point theorems in locally *p*-convex spaces

- Leila Gholizadeh
^{1}, - Erdal Karapınar
^{2}Email author and - Mehdi Roohi
^{3}

**2013**:312

https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2013-312

© Gholizadeh et al.; licensee Springer. 2013

**Received:**19 July 2013**Accepted:**28 October 2013**Published:**25 November 2013

## Abstract

In this paper we investigate the existence of a fixed point of multivalued mapson almost *p*-convex and *p*-convex subsets of topological vectorspaces. Our results extend and generalize some fixed point theorems on the topicin the literature, such as the results of Himmelberg, Fan and Glicksberg.

**MSC:** 46T99, 47H10, 54H25, 54E50, 55M20, 37C25.

## Keywords

- fixed point theorems
- locally convex space
*p*-convex set

## 1 Introduction and preliminaries

In nonlinear analysis, one of the dynamic research areas is investigation ofexistence of a fixed point of maps on convex sets and *p*-convex sets.Recently, a number of fixed point theorems have appeared on the setting of*p*-convex sets. For instance, Alimohammady *et al.*[1] extended the Markov-Kakutani fixed point theorem for compact*p*-star shaped subsets in topological vector spaces by using*p*-convex sets instead of convex sets, see also [2, 3]. Further, in [4] authors achieved a fixed point theorem due to Park for a compact mappingon a *p*-star shaped subset of a topological vector space via Fan-KKMprinciple in a generalized convex space. In [5, 6], generalized versions of Brouwer and Kakutani fixed point theorems werecharacterized in the context of locally *p*-convex space.

On the other hand, in 1993 Park and Kim introduced the concept of generalized convexspace, which extends many generalized convex structures on topological vector spaces [7]. This new concept, developed in connection with fixed point theory andKKM theory, generalizes topological vector spaces.

Maki [8] introduced the notion of minimal spaces which is a generalization of theconcept of topological spaces (see also [9]). After these initial papers, many authors have paid attention to thesubject and have published several results in this direction; see, *e.g.*, [10–13]. Very recently, Darzi *et al.*[14] introduced the notion of minimal generalized convex space as to extendthe construction of the generalized convex space.

For the sake of completeness, we recall some basic definitions and fundamentalresults in the literature. All we need regarding topological vector spaces can befound in [15–18].

*U*be a subset of a vector space

*V*and $x,y\in U$ and $0<p\le 1$. Bayoumi [5] introduced the notion of

*arc segment joining*

*x*and

*y*, as follows:

A set *X* in a vector space *V* is said to be*p*-*convex* if ${A}_{x}^{y}\subseteq X$ for every $x,y\in X$. The *p*-*convex hull* of *X*denoted by ${C}_{p}(X)$ is the smallest *p*-convex set containing*X*[5]. Further, the *closed* *p*-*convex hull* of *X* denoted by ${\overline{C}}_{p}(X)$ is the smallest closed *p*-convex setcontaining $X\subseteq E$, where *E* is a topological vector space.Notice that if $p=1$ and $s+t=1$, then ${A}_{x}^{y}$ turns out to be the line segment joining *x*and *y*. In this case, ${C}_{p}(X)$ and ${\overline{C}}_{p}(X)$ become the convex hull and the closed convex hull of*X*, respectively. For more details, we refer to, *e.g.*, [5, 6, 19–23] and references therein.

*X*be a nonempty set. Then a family $\mathcal{M}\subseteq \mathcal{P}(X)$ is said to be a

*minimal structure*on

*X*if $\mathrm{\varnothing},X\in \mathcal{M}$. Moreover, the pair $(X,\mathcal{M})$ is called a

*minimal space*. The naturalexamples of minimal spaces can be listed as follows [8]:

*τ*, the collection of all semi-open sets$\mathit{SO}(X)$, the collection of all pre-open sets$\mathit{PO}(X)$, the collection of all

*α*-open sets$\alpha O(X)$ and the collection of all

*β*-open sets$\beta O(X)$, where $(X,\tau )$ is a topological space. In a minimal space$(X,\mathcal{M})$, a set $A\in \mathcal{P}(X)$ is said to be an

*m*-

*open set*if$A\in \mathcal{M}$. Similarly, a set $B\in \mathcal{P}(X)$ is an

*m*-

*closed set*if${B}^{c}\in \mathcal{M}$. Furthermore,

*m*-interior and

*m*-closure of a set

*A*are defined as follows:

For more details on minimal structure and minimal space, we refer the reader to,*e.g.*, [8, 9, 12–14, 24, 25].

The continuity of maps in a minimal space is defined as follows.

**Definition 1.1**[25]

Suppose that $(X,\tau )$ is a topological space, and also suppose that$(Y,\mathcal{N})$ is a minimal space. A function$f:(X,\tau )\u27f6(Y,\mathcal{N})$ is called $(\tau ,m)$-*continuous* if ${f}^{-1}(U)\in \tau $ for any $U\in \mathcal{N}$.

*X*and

*Y*be two nonempty sets and $\mathcal{P}(Y)$ be the set of all subsets of

*Y*. A

*set-valued map*or a

*set-valued function*from

*X*into

*Y*is a function from

*X*to $\mathcal{P}(Y)$ that assigns an element

*x*of

*X*to anonempty subset $T(x)$ of

*Y*and is denoted by$x\mid \u22b8T(x)$. The

*lower inverse of a point*$y\in Y$ of a set-valued map

*T*is the set-valued map${T}^{l}$ of

*Y*into

*X*defined by

*lower inverse of a subset of*$B\subset Y$ is defined as

We note that ${T}^{l}(\mathrm{\varnothing})=\mathrm{\varnothing}$. The set $\{x\in X:T(x)\subseteq B\}$ is the *upper inverse* of *B* and isdenoted by ${T}^{u}(B)$. A map *T* is *lower semicontinuous* if${T}^{l}(U)$ is open in *X* for every open set$U\subseteq Y$. Similarly, a map *T* is *uppersemicontinuous* if for every open set $U\subseteq Y$, the set ${T}^{u}(U)$ is open in *X*.

A set-valued map $T:X\u22b8Y$ is said to be *closed* if its graph,$Graph(T)=\{(x,y):y\in T(x)\}$, is a closed subset of $X\times Y$. Also, *T* is called *compact* if itsrange, $T(X)$, is contained in a compact subset of *Y*.

The notion of almost convex was introduced by Himmelberg [26]. A nonempty subset *B* of a topological vector space *X* issaid to be *almost convex* if for any neighborhood *V* of 0 and forany finite subset $\{{b}_{1},\dots ,{b}_{n}\}$ of *B*, there exists a finite subset$\{{x}_{1},\dots ,{x}_{n}\}\subseteq B$ such that ${x}_{i}-{b}_{i}\in V$ for each $i=1,\dots ,n$ and $co(\{{x}_{1},\dots ,{x}_{n}\})\subseteq B$. It is clear that any convex subset is almost convex.Moreover, if we delete a certain subset of the boundary of a closed convex set, thenwe have an almost convex set. Another example of an almost convex set is thefollowing: Let $C([0,1])$ be the Banach space of all continuous real functionsdefined on the unit interval $[0,1]$, and let $P([0,1])$ be a dense subset of all polynomials. Then any subsetof $C([0,1])$ containing $P([0,1])$ is almost convex.

Let *A* be a subset of a topological vector space *X*. A set-valued map$T:A\u22b8A$ is said to have the (*convexly*) *almostfixed point property* if for every (convex) neighborhood *U* of 0 in*X*, there exists a point ${a}_{U}\in A$ for which ${a}_{U}\in T({a}_{U})+U$ or $T({a}_{U})\cap ({a}_{U}+U)\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}$.

Let $\u3008D\u3009$ denote the set of all nonempty finite subsets of aset *D*, and let ${\mathrm{\Delta}}_{n}$ be the *n*-simplex with vertices${e}_{0},{e}_{1},\dots ,{e}_{n}$, ${\mathrm{\Delta}}_{J}$ be the face of ${\mathrm{\Delta}}_{n}$ corresponding to $J\in \u3008A\u3009$, where $A\in \u3008D\u3009$. For instance, if $A=\{{a}_{0},{a}_{1},\dots ,{a}_{n}\}$ and $J=\{{a}_{{i}_{0}},{a}_{{i}_{1}},\dots ,{a}_{{i}_{k}}\}\subseteq A$, then ${\mathrm{\Delta}}_{J}=co\{{e}_{{i}_{0}},{e}_{{i}_{1}},\dots ,{e}_{{i}_{k}}\}$. A *minimal generalized convex space* (briefly*MG*-convex space) $(X,D,\mathrm{\Gamma})$ consists of a minimal space $(X,\mathcal{M})$, a nonempty set *D* and a set-valued map$\mathrm{\Gamma}:\u3008D\u3009\u22b8X$ in which for $A\in \u3008D\u3009$ with $n+1$ elements, there exists a $(\tau ,m)$-continuous function ${\varphi}_{A}:{\mathrm{\Delta}}_{n}\u27f6{\mathrm{\Gamma}}_{A}:=\mathrm{\Gamma}(A)$ for which $J\in \u3008A\u3009$ implies that ${\varphi}_{A}({\mathrm{\Delta}}_{J})\subseteq {\mathrm{\Gamma}}_{J}$. If $\mathcal{M}=\tau $, then the notion of *MG*-convex space turnsinto *G*-convex space (see, *e.g.*, [27]). On the other hand, suppose that $(X,\mathcal{M})$ is a minimal vector space which is not a topologicalvector space. Consider the set-valued map $\mathrm{\Gamma}:\u3008X\u3009\u22b8X$ defined by $\mathrm{\Gamma}(\{{a}_{0},{a}_{1},\dots ,{a}_{n}\})=\{{\sum}_{i=0}^{n}{\lambda}_{i}{a}_{i}:0\le {\lambda}_{i}\le 1,{\sum}_{i=0}^{n}{\lambda}_{i}=1\}$. Then $(X,\mathrm{\Gamma})$ is a minimal generalized convex space; of course, weknow that $(X,\mathrm{\Gamma})$ is not a generalized convex space [14].

**Definition 1.2** Suppose that $(X,D,\mathrm{\Gamma})$ is an *MG*-convex space. A set-valued map$F:D\u22b8X$ is called a *KKM set-valued map* if${\mathrm{\Gamma}}_{A}\subseteq F(A)$ for any $A\in \u3008D\u3009$.

We state two useful theorems of Alimohammady *et al.*[25] as follows.

**Theorem 1.3**[25]

*Suppose that*$(X,D,\mathrm{\Gamma})$

*is an*

*MG*-

*convex space and*$F:D\u22b8X$

*is a set*-

*valued map satisfying*

- (a)
*for all*$x\in D$, $F(x)=m\text{-}Cl({A}_{x})$*for some*${A}_{x}\subseteq X$, - (b)
*F**is a KKM map*.

*Then*$\{F(z):z\in D\}$*has the finite intersection property*.

*Further*,

*if*

- (c)
${\bigcap}_{z\in N}F(z)$

*is**m*-*compact for some*$N\in \u3008D\u3009$,

*then*${\bigcap}_{z\in D}F(z)\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}$.

**Theorem 1.4**[25]

*Suppose that*$(X,D,\mathrm{\Gamma})$

*is an*

*MG*-

*convex space and*$F:D\u22b8X$

*is a set*-

*valued map satisfying*

- (a)
*for all*$x\in D$, $F(x)=m\text{-}Int({A}_{x})$*for some*${A}_{x}\subseteq X$, - (b)
*F**is a KKM map*.

*Then*$\{F(z):z\in D\}$*has the finite intersection property*.

In this paper we investigate the existence of a fixed point on the setting of locally*p*-convex spaces. In particular, we establish a generalized version ofAlexandroff-Pasynkoff theorem. Furthermore, we present a generalization of theHimmelberg fixed point theorem. We also prove Fan-Glicksberg result for*p*-convex sets.

## 2 Main results

We start this section with the following result which is inspired by Theorem 1.3and Theorem 1.4.

**Theorem 2.1**

*Suppose that*

*A*

*is a subset of a topological vector space*

*X*

*and*

*B*

*is a nonempty subset of*

*A*

*with*${C}_{p}(B)\subseteq A$.

*Also suppose that*$F:B\u22b8A$

*is a set*-

*valued map satisfying*

- (a)
$F(b)$

*is closed*(*resp*.*open*)*in**A**for all*$b\in B$, - (b)
${C}_{p}(N)\subseteq F(N)$

*for each*$N\in \u3008B\u3009$.

*Then*$\{F(b):b\in B\}$*has the finite intersection property*.

*Proof*Consider the set-valued map $\mathrm{\Gamma}:\u3008B\u3009\u22b8A$ defined by

*F*is a KKM map. For each $N=\{{b}_{0},{b}_{1},\dots ,{b}_{n}\}\subseteq B$, let us define

Now, one can verify that $(A,B,\mathrm{\Gamma})$ is a *G*-convex space. The fact that$\{F(b):b\in B\}$ has the finite intersection property follows fromTheorem 1.3 (resp. Theorem 1.4). □

**Theorem 2.2** *Suppose that* *A* *is a subset of an* *MG*-*convex space*$(X,D,\mathrm{\Gamma})$, $\{{A}_{0},{A}_{1},\dots ,{A}_{n}\}$*is a family of* *m*-*closure valued* (*resp*. *m*-*interiorvalued*) *subsets of* *X* *such that*$A\subseteq {\bigcup}_{i=0}^{n}{A}_{i}$, *and also suppose that*$N=\{{z}_{0},{z}_{1},\dots ,{z}_{n}\}$*is a family of points in* *D* *in which*$\mathrm{\Gamma}(N)\subseteq A$. *If*$\mathrm{\Gamma}(N\setminus \{{z}_{i}\})\subseteq {A}_{i}$*for each*$i=0,1,\dots ,n$, *then*${\bigcap}_{i=0}^{n}{A}_{i}\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}$.

*Proof*Set ${C}_{0}=\mathrm{\Gamma}(N\setminus {z}_{n})$ and for $i=1,2,\dots ,n$, let ${C}_{i}=\mathrm{\Gamma}(N\setminus \{{z}_{i-1}\})$. Consider the set-valued map $F:D\u22b8X$ defined by $F({z}_{0})={A}_{n}$, $F({z}_{i})={A}_{i-1}$ for $i=1,2,\dots ,n$ and $F(z)=X$ for all $z\in D\setminus N$. We claim that

*F*is a KKM map. To see this,we note that $\mathrm{\Gamma}(N)\subseteq A\subseteq {\bigcup}_{i=0}^{n}{A}_{i}=F(N)$ and for any choice of a proper subset$\{{z}_{{i}_{0}},{z}_{{i}_{1}},\dots ,{z}_{{i}_{k}}\}$ of

*N*with $0\le k<n$ and $0\le {i}_{0}<\cdots <{i}_{k}\le n$, one can see that

for some $j\in \{0,1,\dots ,k\}$. Notice that ${i}_{j}=0$ if and only if ${i}_{j}-1=n$, and so $\mathrm{\Gamma}(\{{z}_{{i}_{0}},{z}_{{i}_{1}},\dots ,{z}_{{i}_{k}}\})\subseteq {\bigcup}_{j=0}^{k}F({z}_{{i}_{j}})$. The fact that ${\bigcap}_{i=0}^{n}{A}_{i}\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}$ follows from Theorem 1.3 (resp.Theorem 1.4). □

**Remark 2.3**It should be noted that

- (a)
Theorem 1.3 and Theorem 1.4 are extended versions of the corresponding results in [14, 24], and hence they are generalizations of Theorem 1 in [27, 28] and Ky Fan’s lemma [29],

- (b)
Theorem 2.2 for closed (open) subsets of a topological vector space goes back to Park [30] and it is an extended version of Alexandroff-Pasynkoff theorem [31].

**Definition 2.4** A nonempty subset *B* of a topological vector space*X* is said to be *almost* *p*-*convex* if for any neighborhood *V* of 0 and for anyfinite subset $\{{b}_{1},\dots ,{b}_{n}\}$ of *B*, there exists a finite subset$\{{x}_{1},\dots ,{x}_{n}\}\subseteq B$ such that ${x}_{i}-{b}_{i}\in V$ for each $i=1,\dots ,n$ and ${C}_{p}(\{{x}_{1},\dots ,{x}_{n}\})\subseteq B$.

**Example 2.5** It is easy to see that any *p*-convex subset of atopological vector space *X* is almost *p*-convex. If we delete acertain subset of the boundary of a closed *p*-convex set, then we have analmost *p*-convex set.

**Definition 2.6** Let *A* be a subset of a topological vector space*X*. A set-valued map $T:A\u22b8A$ is said to have the *p*-*convexly almostfixed point property* if for every *p*-convex neighborhood *U*of 0 in *X*, there exists a point ${a}_{U}\in A$ for which ${a}_{U}\in T({a}_{U})+U$ or $T({a}_{U})\cap ({a}_{U}+U)\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}$.

**Theorem 2.7** *Let* *A* *be a subset of a topological vector space* *X* *and* *B* *be an almost* *p*-*convex dense subset of* *A*. *Suppose that*$T:A\u22b8X$*is a lower* (*resp*. *upper*) *semicontinuousset*-*valued map such that*$T(b)$*is* *p*-*convex for all*$b\in B$, *and also suppose that there is a precompactsubset* *K* *of* *A* *such that*$T(b)\cap K\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}$*for all*$b\in B$. *Then* *T* *has the* *p*-*convexly almost fixed point property*.

*Proof*Suppose that

*U*is a

*p*-convex neighborhood of 0 andsuppose that

*T*is lower semicontinuous. There is a symmetric openneighborhood

*V*of 0 for which $\overline{V}+\overline{V}\subseteq U$. Since

*K*is precompact, so there are${x}_{0},{x}_{1},\dots ,{x}_{n}$ in

*K*for which $K\subseteq {\bigcup}_{i=0}^{n}({x}_{i}+V)$. By using the fact that

*B*is almost

*p*-convex and dense in

*A*, we find $D=\{{b}_{0},{b}_{1},\dots ,{b}_{n}\}\subseteq B$ for which ${b}_{i}-{x}_{i}\in V$ for all $i\in \{0,1,\dots ,n\}$ and also $C={C}_{p}(D)\subseteq B$. Since

*T*is lower semicontinuous, the set$F({b}_{i}):=\{c\in C:T(c)\cap ({x}_{i}+V)=\mathrm{\varnothing}\}$ is closed in

*C*for each$i\in \{0,\dots ,n\}$. Regarding $\mathrm{\varnothing}\ne T(c)\cap K\subseteq T(c)\cap {\bigcup}_{i=0}^{n}({x}_{i}+V)$, we have ${\bigcap}_{i=0}^{n}F({b}_{i})=\mathrm{\varnothing}$. Now, Theorem 2.1 implies that there is$N=\{{b}_{{i}_{0}},{b}_{{i}_{1}},\dots ,{b}_{{i}_{k}}\}\in \u3008D\u3009$ and ${x}_{U}\in {C}_{p}(N)\subseteq B$ for which ${x}_{U}\notin F(N)$, and so $T({x}_{u})\cap ({x}_{{i}_{j}}+\overline{V})\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}$ for all $j\in \{0,1,\dots ,k\}$. Both ${b}_{i}-{x}_{i}\in V$ and $\overline{V}+\overline{V}\subseteq U$ imply that ${x}_{{i}_{j}}+\overline{V}\subseteq {b}_{{i}_{j}}+U$, which implies that $T({x}_{U})\cap ({b}_{{i}_{j}}+U)\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}$. Therefore

*C*, $T({x}_{U})$ and *U* are *p*-convex and hence*M* is *p*-convex. Consequently, ${x}_{U}\in M$, which implies that $T({x}_{U})\cap ({x}_{U}+U)\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}$; *i.e.*, *T* has the*p*-convexly almost fixed point property. Finally, for the case that*T* is upper semicontinuous, we note that $F({b}_{i}):=\{c\in C:T(c)\cap ({x}_{i}+\overline{V})=\mathrm{\varnothing}\}$ is open in *C* for each$i\in \{0,\dots ,n\}$. The rest of the proof is similar to the proof of thecase that *T* is l.s.c. Regarding the analogy, we skip theproof. □

**Corollary 2.8** *Let* *A* *be a* *p*-*convex subset of a topological vector space* *X*, *and let*$T:A\u22b8X$*be a lower* (*resp*. *upper*) *semicontinuousset*-*valued map such that*$T(a)$*is* *p*-*convex for all*$a\in A$. *Suppose that there is a precompact subset* *K* *of* *A* *such that*$T(a)\cap K\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}$*for all*$a\in A$. *Then* *T* *has the* *p*-*convexly almost fixed point property*.

*Proof* It is sufficient to take $A=B$ in Theorem 2.7. □

**Corollary 2.9**

*Let*

*A*

*be a subset of a topological vector space*

*X*,

*and let*

*B*

*be an almost*

*p*-

*convex dense subset of*

*A*.

*Suppose that*$T:A\u22b8X$

*is a set*-

*valued map satisfying*

- (a)
${T}^{l}(x)$ (

*resp*. ${T}^{u}(x)$)*is open for all*$x\in X$, - (b)
$T(b)$

*is**p*-*convex for all*$b\in B$, - (c)
*there is a precompact subset**K**of**A**such that*$T(b)\cap K\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}$*for all*$b\in B$.

*Then* *T* *has the* *p*-*convexly almost fixed point property*.

*Proof* It is clear that (a) implies that *T* is a lower (resp. upper)semicontinuous set-valued map and hence *T* has the *p*-convexlyalmost fixed point property by Theorem 2.7. □

**Corollary 2.10**

*Let*

*A*

*be a*

*p*-

*convex subset of a topological vector space*

*X*,

*and let*$T:A\u22b8X$

*be a compact set*-

*valued map satisfying the following conditions*:

- (a)
${T}^{l}(x)$ (

*resp*. ${T}^{u}(x)$)*is open for all*$x\in X$, - (b)
$T(a)$

*is nonempty and**p*-*convex for all*$a\in A$.

*Then* *T* *has the* *p*-*convexly almost fixed point property*.

*Proof* Consider $A=B$, it is easy to see that all the conditions ofCorollary 2.9 are satisfied. □

**Remark 2.11**It should be noted that

- (a)
Corollary 2.8 for a lower semicontinuous set-valued map on a locally convex Hausdorff topological vector space goes back to Ky Fan [32]. Corollary 2.8 for a single-valued map might be regarded as a generalization of the Thychonoff fixed point theorem to a noncompact (or precompact) convex set [32]. Also, Lassonde obtained Corollary 2.8 for a compact upper semicontinuous set-valued map with nonempty convex values [33].

- (b)
Convex versions of Theorem 2.7, Corollary 2.9 and Corollary 2.10 are due to Park [30].

**Theorem 2.12**

*Suppose that*

*A*

*is a subset of a locally*

*p*-

*convex space*

*X*

*and*

*B*

*is an almost*

*p*-

*convex dense subset of*

*A*.

*Suppose that*$T:A\u22b8A$

*satisfies the following*:

- (a)
*T**is compact upper semicontinuous*, - (b)
$T(a)$

*is closed for all*$a\in A$, - (c)
$T(b)$

*is nonempty**p*-*convex for all*$b\in B$.

*Then* *T* *has a fixed point*.

*Proof* Since all the conditions of Theorem 2.7 are satisfied and since*X* is a locally *p*-convex space, *T* has the almost fixedpoint property. Then, for an arbitrary neighborhood *U* of 0, there exist${a}_{U}$ and ${b}_{U}$ in *A* for which ${b}_{U}\in T({a}_{U})\cap ({a}_{U}+U)$. Since *T* is compact, we conclude that thereis ${a}_{0}\in \overline{T(A)}\subseteq A$ in which the net ${b}_{U}\u27f6{a}_{0}$. Because *X* is Hausdorff,${a}_{U}\u27f6{a}_{0}$. Since *T* is an upper semicontinuousset-valued map with closed values, $Graph(T)$ is closed. Consequently, ${a}_{0}$ is a fixed point of *T*. □

**Corollary 2.13**

*Suppose that*

*A*

*is a*

*p*-

*convex subset of a locally*

*p*-

*convex space*

*X*.

*Suppose that*$T:A\u22b8A$

*satisfies the following*:

- (a)
*T**is compact upper semicontinuous*, - (b)
$T(a)$

*is closed for all*$a\in A$, - (c)
$T(a)$

*is nonempty**p*-*convex for all*$a\in A$.

*Then* *T* *has a fixed point*.

**Theorem 2.14**

*Suppose that*

*A*

*is a*

*p*-

*convex subset of a locally*

*p*-

*convex space*

*X*.

*Suppose that*$T:A\u22b8A$

*satisfies the following*:

- (a)
*T**is compact and closed*, - (b)
*T**has the almost fixed point property*.

*Then* *T* *has a fixed point*.

*Proof* Suppose that
is the family of neighborhoods of 0 in *X*. For anyelement *U* of
,since *T* has the almost fixed point property, so there exist${a}_{U},{b}_{U}\in A$ for which ${b}_{U}\in T({a}_{U})$ and ${b}_{U}\in {a}_{U}+U$. Now, consider the nets $\{{a}_{U}\}$ and $\{{b}_{U}\}$. By (a) we have $\overline{T(A)}$ is compact and hence $\{{b}_{U}\}$ has a subnet converging to ${b}_{0}$. We may assume that ${b}_{U}\u27f6{b}_{0}$. Since *X* is Hausdorff, there is a subnet of${a}_{U}$ converging to ${b}_{0}$. The fact that ${b}_{0}\in T({b}_{0})$ follows from $({a}_{U},{b}_{U})\in Graph(T)$ and the fact that $Graph(T)$ is closed. □

**Corollary 2.15**

*Suppose that*

*A*

*is a*

*p*-

*convex subset of a locally*

*p*-

*convex space*

*X*

*and that*$T:A\u22b8A$

*satisfies the following*:

- (a)
*T**is compact and closed*, - (b)
${T}^{l}(x)$ (

*resp*. ${T}^{u}(x)$)*is open for all*$x\in X$, - (c)
$T(a)$

*is nonempty and**p*-*convex for all*$a\in A$.

*Then* *T* *has a fixed point*.

*Proof* It is an immediate consequence of Corollary 2.10 andTheorem 2.14. □

**Remark 2.16** Corollary 2.13 is a generalization of the main results ofHimmelberg [26]. Theorem 2.12 for $p=1$ goes back to Park [30]. Further, Theorem 2.14 for $p=1$ is an extension of Himmelberg’s theorem (see,*e.g.*, [34]).

For a set-valued map $T:X\u22b8Y$, set ${T}_{B}=\{x\in X:x\in T(x)+B\}$ for $B\subseteq Y$.

**Lemma 2.17**

*Suppose that*

*A*

*is a*

*p*-

*convex subset of a topological vector space*

*X*,

*and also suppose that*

*is a fundamental system of open neighborhoods of*0.

*Then*,

*fora set*-

*valued map*$T:A\u22b8X$,

*the following are equivalent*:

- (a)
*If*$a\in A$*satisfies*$a\notin T(a)+U$*for some*$U\in \mathcal{U}$,*then*$a\notin Cl\left(\{a\in A:a\in T(a)+{C}_{p}(V)\}\right)\phantom{\rule{1em}{0ex}}\mathit{\text{for some}}V\in \mathcal{U},$ - (b)
${\bigcap}_{U\in \mathcal{U}}{T}_{U}={\bigcap}_{U\in \mathcal{U}}\overline{{T}_{{C}_{p}(U)}}$.

*Proof* It is straightforward. □

**Remark 2.18** The conditions (a) and (b) considered in Lemma 2.17 for$p=1$ are due to Kim [35].

**Theorem 2.19**

*Let*

*A*

*be a*

*p*-

*convex compact subset of a topological vector space*

*X*,

*and let*$T:A\u22b8X$

*be a mapping satisfying the following conditions*:

- (a)
*T**has the**p*-*convexly almost fixed point property*, - (b)
${\bigcap}_{U\in \mathcal{U}}{T}_{U}={\bigcap}_{U\in \mathcal{U}}\overline{{T}_{{C}_{p}(U)}}$.

*Then*$\overline{T}$*has a fixed point*.

*Proof*Suppose that is a fundamental system of open neighborhoods of 0. Since

*T*has the

*p*-convexly almost fixed point property, for any$U\in \mathcal{U}$, there is an ${a}_{U}\in A$ such that ${a}_{U}\in T({a}_{U})+{C}_{p}(U)$. Hence, ${T}_{{C}_{p}(U)}\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}$ for each $U\in \mathcal{U}$. Now, since is a fundamental system of open neighborhoods of 0, wededuce that for any $U,V\in \mathcal{U}$, there is $W\in \mathcal{U}$ such that

Therefore $\{{T}_{{C}_{p}(U)}:U\in \mathcal{U}\}$ has the finite intersection property. It follows fromthe compactness of *A* that ${\bigcap}_{U\in \mathcal{U}}\overline{{T}_{{C}_{p}(U)}}\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}$. Therefore, by the condition (b) there is an${a}_{0}\in A$ for which ${a}_{0}\in {\bigcap}_{U\in \mathcal{U}}{T}_{U}$, that is, ${a}_{0}\in T({a}_{0})+U$ for all $U\in \mathcal{U}$. Regarding ${\bigcap}_{U\in \mathcal{U}}(T({a}_{0})+U)=\overline{T({a}_{0})}$, we derive that $\overline{T}$ has a fixed point. □

**Corollary 2.20**

*Let*

*A*

*be a*

*p*-

*convex compact subset of a topological vector space*

*X*,

*and let*$T:A\u22b8X$

*be a mapping such that*

- (a)
*T**has the**p*-*convexly almost fixed point property*, - (b)
${\bigcap}_{U\in \mathcal{U}}{T}_{U}={\bigcap}_{U\in \mathcal{U}}\overline{{T}_{{C}_{p}(U)}}$,

- (c)
*T**has closed values*.

*Then* *T* *has a fixed point*.

**Corollary 2.21**

*Let*

*A*

*be a*

*p*-

*convex compact subset of a topological vector space*

*X*,

*and let*$T:A\u22b8A$

*be a mapping such that*

- (a)
*T**is lower*(*resp*.*upper*)*semicontinuous*, - (b)
*T**has**p*-*convex values*, - (c)
${\bigcap}_{U\in \mathcal{U}}{T}_{U}={\bigcap}_{U\in \mathcal{U}}\overline{{T}_{{C}_{p}(U)}}$.

*Then*$\overline{T}$*has a fixed point*.

*Proof* Since *A* is a *p*-convex and compact, by (a) and (b)one can see that all the conditions of Corollary 2.8 hold. Then *T* hasthe *p*-convexly almost fixed point property. The fact that$\overline{T}$ has a fixed point follows fromTheorem 2.19. □

**Corollary 2.22**

*Let*

*A*

*be a*

*p*-

*convex compact subset of a topological vector space*

*X*,

*and let*$T:A\u22b8A$

*be a mapping satisfying the following conditions*:

- (a)
*T**is lower*(*resp*.*upper*)*semicontinuous*, - (b)
*T**has closed**p*-*convex values*, - (c)
${\bigcap}_{U\in \mathcal{U}}{T}_{U}={\bigcap}_{U\in \mathcal{U}}\overline{{T}_{{C}_{p}(U)}}$.

*Then* *T* *has a fixed point*.

**Remark 2.23** Corollary 2.22 for $p=1$ and lower semicontinuous set-valued maps goes back toKim [35] and Park [36], and also this result for $p=1$ and upper semicontinuous set-valued maps is due toHuang and Jeng [37].

**Theorem 2.24**

*Let*

*A*

*be a compact*

*p*-

*convex subset of a locally*

*p*-

*convex space*

*X*,

*and let the set*-

*valued map*$T:A\u22b8A$

*be a mapping such that*

- (a)
*T**has the**p*-*convexly almost fixed point property*, - (b)
*T**is a closed set*-*valued map*.

*Then* *T* *has a fixed point*.

*Proof*Suppose that is a fundamental system of

*p*-convex openneighborhoods of 0. Then, for any $U\in \mathcal{U}$, there is $V\in \mathcal{U}$ for which $V\subseteq \overline{V}\subseteq U$. Now, we claim that ${T}_{{C}_{p}(\overline{V})}={T}_{\overline{V}}$ is closed. To see this, let $a\in \overline{{T}_{\overline{V}}}$. There is a net $\{{a}_{i}:i\in I\}\subseteq {T}_{\overline{V}}$ for which ${a}_{i}\u27f6a$. Then, for each $i\in I$, there exists ${b}_{i}\in T({a}_{i})$ in which ${a}_{i}-{b}_{i}\in \overline{V}$. Since

*T*is compact and since${b}_{i}\in T(A)$, so one can assume that ${b}_{i}\u27f6b$ for some $b\in \overline{T(A)}$, and so $a-b\in \overline{V}$. $b\in T(a)$, because

*T*is closed. Therefore,

*i.e.*, $a\in {T}_{\overline{V}}$. Finally, since ${T}_{\overline{V}}$ is closed, and $V\subseteq \overline{V}\subseteq U$, so

Consequently, all the conditions of Corollary 2.20 hold and hence *T*has a fixed point. □

**Remark 2.25** Theorem 2.24 is a generalization of the Fan-Glicksbergtheorem [38, 39] and its convex version can be found in [34]. Notice also that Theorem 2.24 can be derived fromTheorem 2.14.

## Declarations

## Authors’ Affiliations

## References

- Alimohammady M, Roohi M, Gholizadeh L: On the Markov-Kakutani’s fixed point theorem.
*Sci. Stud. Res. Ser. Math. Inform.*2009, 19(1):17–22.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - Kim WK: Some application of the Kakutani fixed point theorem.
*J. Math. Anal. Appl.*1987, 121: 119–122. 10.1016/0022-247X(87)90242-3MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Park S: Fixed points on star-shaped sets.
*Nonlinear Anal. Forum*2001, 6(2):275–279.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - Alimohammady M, Roohi M, Gholizadeh L: Remarks on the fixed points on star-shaped sets.
*Kochi J. Math.*2008, 3: 109–116.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - Bayoumi A North-Holland Mathematics Studies 193.
*Foundations of Complex Analysis in Nonlocally Convex Spaces*2003.Google Scholar - Bayoumi, A: Generalized Brouwer’s and Kakutani’s fixed pointstheorems in non-locally convex spaces. To appearGoogle Scholar
- Park S, Kim H: Admissible classes of multifunctions on generalized convex spaces.
*Proc. Coll. Nature Sci. SNU*1993, 18: 1–21.Google Scholar - Maki, H: On generalizing semi-open sets and preopen sets. In: Meeting onTopological Spaces Theory and Its Application. August (1996), 13–18Google Scholar
- Maki H, Umehara J, Noiri T:Every topological space is pre ${T}_{\frac{1}{2}}$.
*Mem. Fac. Sci. Kochi Univ. Ser. a Math.*1996, 17: 33–42.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - Alimohammady M, Roohi M: Extreme points in minimal spaces.
*Chaos Solitons Fractals*2009, 39(3):1480–1485. 10.1016/j.chaos.2007.06.028MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Alimohammady M, Roohi M: Fixed point in minimal spaces.
*Nonlinear Anal. Model. Control*2005, 10(4):305–314.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - Alimohammady M, Roohi M: Linear minimal space.
*Chaos Solitons Fractals*2007, 33(4):1348–1354. 10.1016/j.chaos.2006.01.100MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Popa V, Noiri T: On
*M*-continuous functions.*Anal. Univ. ”Dunarea Jos”-Galati, Ser. Mat. Fiz. Mec. Teor.Fasc. II*2000, 18(23):31–41. 10.2298/FIL1104165DGoogle Scholar - Darzi R, Delavar MR, Roohi M: Fixed point theorems in minimal generalized convex spaces.
*Filomat*2011, 25(4):165–176.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Adasch N, Ernst B, Keim D Lecture Notes in Mathematics 69. In
*Topological Vector Spaces, the Theory Without Convexity Conditions*. Springer, Berlin; 1978.Google Scholar - Kladelburg Z, Radenovic S:
*Subspaces and Quotients of Topological and Ordered Vector Spaces. Universityof Novi Sad*. Institute of Mathematics, Novi Sad; 1997.Google Scholar - Kothe G:
*Topological Vector Spaces, I*. Springer, New York; 1969.View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar - Schaefer HH:
*Topological Vector Spaces*. Springer, Berlin; 1970.MATHGoogle Scholar - Bastero J, Bernues J, Pena A:The theorems of Caratheodory and Gluskin for $0<p<1$.
*Proc. Am. Math. Soc.*1995, 123: 141–144. 10.1023/A:1006532522393MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - Bernues J, Pena A: On the shape of
*p*-convex hulls, $0<p<1$.*Acta Math. Hung.*1997, 74(4):345–353. 10.1016/j.chaos.2007.08.071MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Alimohammady M, Roohi M, Delavar MR: Transfer closed and transfer open multimaps in minimal spaces.
*Chaos Solitons Fractals*2009, 40(3):1162–1168.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Knaster B, Kuratowski K, Mazurkiewicz S: Ein Beweis des fixpunktsatzes fur
*n*-dimensionale simplexe.*Fundam. Math.*1929, 14: 132–137.Google Scholar - Shih M-H, Tan K-K: Covering theorem of convex sets related to fixed-point theorems. In
*Nonlinear and Convex Analysis-Proc. in Honor of Ky Fan*. Edited by: Lin B-L, Simons S. Marcel Dekker, New York; 1987:235–244.Google Scholar - Alimohammady M, Roohi M, Delavar MR:
**Knaster-Kuratowski-Mazurkiewicz theorem in minimal generalized convexspaces.***Nonlinear Funct. Anal. Appl.*2008, 13(3):483–492.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - Alimohammady M, Roohi M, Delavar MR: Transfer closed multimaps and Fan-KKM principle.
*Nonlinear Funct. Anal. Appl.*2008, 13(4):597–611. 10.1016/0022-247X(72)90128-XMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - Himmelberg CJ: Fixed points of compact multifunctions.
*J. Math. Anal. Appl.*1972, 38: 205–207.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Park S: Remarks on topologies of generalized convex spaces.
*Nonlinear Funct. Anal. Appl.*2000, 5(2):67–79.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - Park S: Ninety years of the Brouwer fixed point theorem.
*Vietnam J. Math.*1999, 27: 193–232. 10.1007/BF01353421Google Scholar - Fan K: A generalization of Tychonoff’s fixed point theorem.
*Math. Ann.*1961, 142: 305–310.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Park S: The Knaster-Kuratowski-Mazurkiewicz theorem and almost fixed points.
*Topol. Methods Nonlinear Anal.*2000, 16: 195–200.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - Alexandroff P, Pasynkoff B:
**Elementary proof of the essentiality of the identity mappings of asimplex.***Usp. Mat. Nauk*1957, 12: 175–179. (Russian)Google Scholar - Fan K:
**Covering properties of convex sets and fixed point theorems in topologicalvector spaces. Ann. of Math. Studies 69.***Symposium on Infinite Dimensional Topology*1972, 79–92.Google Scholar - Lassonde M: Sur le principle KKM.
*C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris*1990, 310: 573–576.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - Park S: Remarks on fixed point theorems for new classes of multimaps.
*J. Natl. Acad. Sci., Rep. Korea*2004, 43: 1–20.View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Kim WK: A fixed point theorem in a Hausdorff topological vector space.
*Comment. Math. Univ. Carol.*1995, 36: 33–38. 10.1023/A:1006535415322Google Scholar - Park S: Fixed points theorems for new classes of multimaps.
*Acta Math. Hung.*1998, 81: 155–161.View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Huang Y-Y, Jeng J-C: Fixed points theorems of the Park type in
*S*-KKM class.*Nonlinear Anal. Forum*2000, 5: 51–59.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - Park S: A unified fixed point theory of multimaps on topological vector spaces.
*J. Korean Math. Soc.*1998, 35: 803–829. Corrections, ibid. 36, 829–832 (1999)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - Park S:
**Some coincidence theorems on acyclic multifunctions and applications to KKMtheory.**In*Fixed Point Theory and Applications*. Edited by: Tan K-K. World Scientific, River Edge; 1992:248–277.Google Scholar

## Copyright

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