- Research
- Open access
- Published:
On best proximity points for set-valued contractions of Nadler type with respect to b-generalized pseudodistances in b-metric spaces
Fixed Point Theory and Applications volume 2014, Article number: 39 (2014)
Abstract
In this paper, in b-metric space, we introduce the concept of b-generalized pseudodistance which is an extension of the b-metric. Next, inspired by the ideas of Nadler (Pac. J. Math. 30:475-488, 1969) and Abkar and Gabeleh (Rev. R. Acad. Cienc. Exactas Fís. Nat., Ser. A Mat. 107(2):319-325, 2013), we define a new set-valued non-self-mapping contraction of Nadler type with respect to this b-generalized pseudodistance, which is a generalization of Nadler’s contraction. Moreover, we provide the condition guaranteeing the existence of best proximity points for . A best proximity point theorem furnishes sufficient conditions that ascertain the existence of an optimal solution to the problem of globally minimizing the error , and hence the existence of a consummate approximate solution to the equation . In other words, the best proximity points theorem achieves a global optimal minimum of the map by stipulating an approximate solution x of the point equation to satisfy the condition that . The examples which illustrate the main result given. The paper includes also the comparison of our results with those existing in the literature.
MSC:47H10, 54C60, 54E40, 54E35, 54E30.
1 Introduction
A number of authors generalize Banach’s [1] and Nadler’s [2] result and introduce the new concepts of set-valued contractions (cyclic or non-cyclic) of Banach or Nadler type, and they study the problem concerning the existence of best proximity points for such contractions; see e.g. Abkar and Gabeleh [3–5], Al-Thagafi and Shahzad [6], Suzuki et al. [7], Di Bari et al. [8], Sankar Raj [9], Derafshpour et al. [10], Sadiq Basha [11], and Włodarczyk et al. [12].
In 2012, Abkar and Gabeleh [13] introduced and established the following interesting and important best proximity points theorem for a set-valued non-self-mapping. First, we recall some definitions and notations.
Let A, B be nonempty subsets of a metric space . Then denote: ; ; ; for . We say that the pair has the P-property if and only if
where and .
Theorem 1.1 (Abkar and Gabeleh [13])
Let be a pair of nonempty closed subsets of a complete metric space such that and has the P-property. Let be a multivalued non-self-mapping contraction, that is, . If is bounded and closed in B for all , and for each , then T has a best proximity point in A.
It is worth noticing that the map T in Theorem 1.1 is continuous, so it is u.s.c. on X, which by [[14], Theorem 6, p.112], shows that T is closed on X. In 1998, Czerwik [15] introduced of the concept of a b-metric space. A number of authors study the problem concerning the existence of fixed points and best proximity points in b-metric space; see e.g. Berinde [16], Boriceanu et al. [17, 18], Bota et al. [19] and many others.
In this paper, in a b-metric space, we introduce the concept of a b-generalized pseudodistance which is an extension of the b-metric. The idea of replacing a metric by the more general mapping is not new (see e.g. distances of Tataru [20], w-distances of Kada et al. [21], τ-distances of Suzuki [[22], Section 2] and τ-functions of Lin and Du [23] in metric spaces and distances of Vályi [24] in uniform spaces). Next, inspired by the ideas of Nadler [2] and Abkar and Gabeleh [13], we define a new set-valued non-self-mapping contraction of Nadler type with respect to this b-generalized pseudodistance, which is a generalization of Nadler’s contraction. Moreover, we provide the condition guaranteeing the existence of best proximity points for . A best proximity point theorem furnishes sufficient conditions that ascertain the existence of an optimal solution to the problem of globally minimizing the error , and hence the existence of a consummate approximate solution to the equation . In other words, the best proximity points theorem achieves a global optimal minimum of the map by stipulating an approximate solution x of the point equation to satisfy the condition that . Examples which illustrate the main result are given. The paper includes also the comparison of our results with those existing in the literature. This paper is a continuation of research on b-generalized pseudodistances in the area of b-metric space, which was initiated in [25].
2 On generalized pseudodistance
To begin, we recall the concept of b-metric space, which was introduced by Czerwik [15] in 1998.
Definition 2.1 Let X be a nonempty subset and be a given real number. A function is b-metric if the following three conditions are satisfied: (d1) ; (d2) ; and (d3) .
The pair is called a b-metric space (with constant ). It is easy to see that each metric space is a b-metric space.
In the rest of the paper we assume that the b-metric is continuous on . Now in b-metric space we introduce the concept of a b-generalized pseudodistance, which is an essential generalization of the b-metric.
Definition 2.2 Let X be a b-metric space (with constant ). The map , is said to be a b-generalized pseudodistance on X if the following two conditions hold:
(J1) ; and
(J2) for any sequences and in X such that
and
we have
Remark 2.1 (A) If is a b-metric space (with ), then the b-metric is a b-generalized pseudodistance on X. However, there exists a b-generalized pseudodistance on X which is not a b-metric (for details see Example 4.1).
(B) From (J1) and (J2) it follows that if , , then
Indeed, if and , then , since, by (J1), we get . Now, defining and , we conclude that (2.1) and (2.2) hold. Consequently, by (J2), we get (2.3), which implies . However, since , we have , a contradiction.
Now, we apply the b-generalized pseudodistance to define the -distance of Nadler type.
Definition 2.3 Let X be a b-metric space (with ). Let the class of all nonempty closed subsets of X be denoted by , and let the map be a b-generalized pseudodistance on X. Let . Define by
We will present now some indications that we will use later in the work.
Let be a b-metric space (with ) and let and be subsets of X and let the map be a b-generalized pseudodistance on X. We adopt the following denotations and definitions: and
Definition 2.4 Let X be a b-metric space (with ) and let the map be a b-generalized pseudodistance on X. Let be a pair of nonempty subset of X with .
-
(I)
The pair is said to have the -property if and only if
where and .
-
(II)
We say that the b-generalized pseudodistance J is associated with the pair if for any sequences and in X such that ; , and
then .
Remark 2.2 If is a b-metric space (with ), and we put , then:
-
(I)
The map d is associated with each pair , where . It is an easy consequence of the continuity of d.
-
(II)
The -property is identical with the P-property. In view of this, instead of writing the -property we will write shortly the P-property.
3 The best proximity point theorem with respect to a b-generalized pseudodistance
We first recall the definition of closed maps in topological spaces given in Berge [14] and Klein and Thompson [26].
Definition 3.1 Let L be a topological vector space. The set-valued dynamic system , i.e. is called closed if whenever is a sequence in X converging to and is a sequence in X satisfying the condition and converging to , then .
Next, we introduce the concepts of a set-valued non-self-closed map and a set-valued non-self-mapping contraction of Nadler type with respect to the b-generalized pseudodistance.
Definition 3.2 Let L be a topological vector space. Let X be certain space and A, B be a nonempty subsets of X. The set-valued non-self-mapping is called closed if whenever is a sequence in A converging to and is a sequence in B satisfying the condition and converging to , then .
It is worth noticing that the map T in Theorem 1.1 is continuous, so it is u.s.c. on X, which by [[14], Theorem 6, p.112], shows that T is closed on X.
Definition 3.3 Let X be a b-metric space (with ) and let the map be a b-generalized pseudodistance on X. Let be a pair of nonempty subsets of X. The map such that , for each , we call a set-valued non-self-mapping contraction of Nadler type, if the following condition holds:
It is worth noticing that if is a metric space (i.e. ) and we put , then we obtain the classical Nadler condition. Now we prove two auxiliary lemmas.
Lemma 3.1 Let X be a complete b-metric space (with ). Let be a pair of nonempty closed subsets of X and let . Then
Proof Let , and be arbitrary and fixed. Then, by the definition of infimum, there exists such that
Next,
Hence, by (3.3) we obtain , thus (3.2) holds. □
Lemma 3.2 Let X be a complete b-metric space (with ) and let the sequence satisfy
Then is a Cauchy sequence on X.
Proof From (3.4) we claim that
and, in particular,
Let , , be arbitrary and fixed. If we define
then (3.5) gives
Therefore, by (3.4), (3.7), and (J2),
From (3.8) and (3.6) we then claim that
and
Let now be arbitrary and fixed, let and let be arbitrary and fixed such that . Then and for some such that and, using (d3), (3.9), and (3.10), we get .
Hence, we conclude that . Thus the sequence is Cauchy. □
Next we present the main result of the paper.
Theorem 3.1 Let X be a complete b-metric space (with ) and let the map be a b-generalized pseudodistance on X. Let be a pair of nonempty closed subsets of X with and such that has the -property and J is associated with . Let be a closed set-valued non-self-mapping contraction of Nadler type. If is bounded and closed in B for all , and for each , then T has a best proximity point in A.
Proof To begin, we observe that by assumptions of Theorem 3.1 and by Lemma 3.1, the property (3.2) holds. The proof will be broken into four steps.
Step 1. We can construct the sequences and such that
and
and
Indeed, since and for each , we may choose and next . By definition of , there exists such that
Of course, since , by (3.18), we have . Next, since for each , from (3.2) (for , , , ) we conclude that there exists (since ) such that
Next, since , by definition of , there exists such that
Of course, since , by (3.20), we have . Since for each , from (3.2) (for , , , ) we conclude that there exists (since ) such that
By (3.18)-(3.21) and by the induction, we produce sequences and such that:
and
Thus (3.11)-(3.14) hold. In particularly (3.13) gives . Now, since the pair has the -property, from the above we conclude
Consequently, the property (3.15) holds.
We recall that the contractive condition (see (3.1)) is as follows:
In particular, by (3.22) (for , , ) we obtain
Next, by (3.15), (3.14), and (3.23) we calculate:
Hence,
Now, for arbitrary and fixed and all , , by (3.24) and (d3), we have
Hence
Thus, as in (3.25), we obtain
Next, by (3.15) we obtain . Then the properties (3.11)-(3.17) hold.
Step 2. We can show that the sequence is Cauchy.
Indeed, it is an easy consequence of (3.16) and Lemma 3.2.
Step 3. We can show that the sequence is Cauchy.
Indeed, it follows by Step 1 and by a similar argumentation as in Step 2.
Step 4. There exists a best proximity point, i.e. there exists such that
Indeed, by Steps 2 and 3, the sequences and are Cauchy and in particularly satisfy (3.12). Next, since X is a complete space, there exist such that and , respectively. Now, since A and B are closed (we recall that ), thus and . Finally, since by (3.12) we have , by closedness of T, we have
Next, since , and , by (3.26) we have and
We know that , . Moreover by (3.13)
Thus, since J and are associated, so by Definition 2.4(II), we conclude that
Finally, (3.27) and (3.28), give . □
4 Examples illustrating Theorem 3.1 and some comparisons
Now, we will present some examples illustrating the concepts having been introduced so far. We will show a fundamental difference between Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 3.1. The examples will show that Theorem 3.1 is an essential generalization of Theorem 1.1. First, we present an example of J, a generalized pseudodistance.
Example 4.1 Let X be a b-metric space (with constant ) where b-metric is of the form , . Let the closed set , containing at least two different points, be arbitrary and fixed. Let such that , where be arbitrary and fixed. Define the map as follows:
The map J is a b-generalized pseudodistance on X. Indeed, it is worth noticing that the condition (J1) does not hold only if some such that exists. This inequality is equivalent to where , and . However, by (4.1), shows that there exists such that ; gives ; gives . This is impossible. Therefore, , i.e. the condition (J1) holds.
Proving that (J2) holds, we assume that the sequences and in X satisfy (2.1) and (2.2). Then, in particular, (2.2) yields
By (4.2) and (4.1), since , we conclude that
From (4.3), (4.1), and (4.2), we get
Therefore, the sequences and satisfy (2.3). Consequently, the property (J2) holds.
The next example illustrates Theorem 3.1.
Example 4.2 Let X be a b-metric space (with constant ), where and , . Let and . Let and let the map be defined as follows:
Of course, since E is closed set and , by Example 4.1 we see that the map J is the b-generalized pseudodistance on X. Moreover, it is easy to verify that and . Indeed, , thus
and by (4.4) , so , and . Consequently . Similarly,
and, by (4.4), , so , and . Consequently .
Let be given by the formula
We observe the following.
(I) We can show that the pair has the -property.
Indeed, as we have previously calculated and . This gives the following result: for each and , such that and , since and are included in E, by (4.4) we have
(II) We can show that the map J is associated with .
Indeed, let the sequences and in X, such that , and
be arbitrary and fixed. Then, since , by (4.6) and (4.4), we have
Now, from (4.7) and by continuity of d, we have .
-
(III)
It is easy to see that T is a closed map on X.
-
(IV)
We can show that T is a set-valued non-self-mapping contraction of Nadler type with respect J (for ; as a reminder: we have ).
Indeed, let be arbitrary and fixed. First we observe that since , by (4.4) we have , for each . We consider the following two cases.
Case 1. If , then by (4.4), , and consequently . In consequence, .
Case 2. If , then . From the obvious property
can be deduced that . Hence, .
In consequence, T is the set-valued non-self-mapping contraction of Nadler type with respect to J.
-
(V)
We can show that is bounded and closed in B for all .
Indeed, it is an easy consequence of (4.5).
-
(VI)
We can show that for each .
Indeed, by (I), we have and , from which, by (4.5), we get .
All assumptions of Theorem 3.1 hold. We see that , i.e. 1 is the best proximity point of T.
Remark 4.1 (I) The introduction of the concept of b-generalized pseudodistances is essential. If X and T are like in Example 4.2, then we can show that T is not a set-valued non-self-mapping contraction of Nadler type with respect to d. Indeed, suppose that T is a set-valued non-self-mapping contraction of Nadler type, i.e. . In particular, for and we have , and . This is absurd.
(II) If X is metric space () with metric , , and T is like in Example 4.2, then we can show that T is not a set-valued non-self-mapping contraction of Nadler type with respect to d. Indeed, suppose that T is a set-valued non-self-mapping contraction of Nadler type, i.e. . In particular, for and we have . This is absurd. Hence, we find that our theorem is more general than Theorem 1.1 (Abkar and Gabeleh [13]).
References
Banach S: Sur les opérations dans les ensembles abstraits et leurs applications aux équations intégrales. Fundam. Math. 1922, 3: 133–181.
Nadler SB: Multi-valued contraction mappings. Pac. J. Math. 1969, 30: 475–488. 10.2140/pjm.1969.30.475
Abkar A, Gabeleh M: Best proximity points for asymptotic cyclic contraction mappings. Nonlinear Anal. 2011, 74: 7261–7268. 10.1016/j.na.2011.07.043
Abkar A, Gabeleh M: Generalized cyclic contractions in partially ordered metric spaces. Optim. Lett. 2012, 6(8):1819–1830. 10.1007/s11590-011-0379-y
Abkar A, Gabeleh M: Global optimal solutions of noncyclic mappings in metric spaces. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 2012, 153(2):298–305. 10.1007/s10957-011-9966-4
Al-Thagafi MA, Shahzad N: Convergence and existence results for best proximity points. Nonlinear Anal. 2009, 70: 3665–3671. 10.1016/j.na.2008.07.022
Suzuki T, Kikkawa M, Vetro C: The existence of best proximity points in metric spaces with the property UC. Nonlinear Anal. 2009, 71: 2918–2926. 10.1016/j.na.2009.01.173
Di Bari C, Suzuki T, Vetro C: Best proximity points for cyclic Meir-Keeler contractions. Nonlinear Anal. 2008, 69: 3790–3794. 10.1016/j.na.2007.10.014
Sankar Raj V: A best proximity point theorem for weakly contractive non-self-mappings. Nonlinear Anal. 2011, 74: 4804–4808. 10.1016/j.na.2011.04.052
Derafshpour M, Rezapour S, Shahzad N: Best proximity of cyclic φ -contractions in ordered metric spaces. Topol. Methods Nonlinear Anal. 2011, 37: 193–202.
Sadiq Basha S: Best proximity points: global optimal approximate solutions. J. Glob. Optim. 2011, 49: 15–21. 10.1007/s10898-009-9521-0
Włodarczyk K, Plebaniak R, Obczyński C: Convergence theorems, best approximation and best proximity for set-valued dynamic systems of relatively quasi-asymptotic contractions in cone uniform spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2010, 72: 794–805. 10.1016/j.na.2009.07.024
Abkar A, Gabeleh M: The existence of best proximity points for multivalued non-self-mappings. Rev. R. Acad. Cienc. Exactas Fís. Nat., Ser. A Mat. 2013, 107(2):319–325. 10.1007/s13398-012-0074-6
Berge C: Topological Spaces. Oliver & Boyd, Edinburg; 1963.
Czerwik S: Nonlinear set-valued contraction mappings in b -metric spaces. Atti Semin. Mat. Fis. Univ. Modena 1998, 46(2):263–276.
Berinde V: Generalized contractions in quasimetric spaces. 3. Seminar on Fixed Point Theory 1993, 3–9. Cluj-Napoca
Boriceanu M, Petruşel A, Rus IA: Fixed point theorems for some multivalued generalized contractions in b -metric spaces. Int. J. Math. Stat. 2010, 6(S10):65–76.
Boriceanu M, Bota M, Petruşel A: Multivalued fractals in b -metric spaces. Cent. Eur. J. Math. 2010, 8(2):367–377. 10.2478/s11533-010-0009-4
Bota M, Molnar A, Varga C: On Ekeland’s variational principle in b -metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory 2011, 12(1):21–28.
Tataru D: Viscosity solutions of Hamilton-Jacobi equations with unbounded nonlinear terms. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1992, 163: 345–392. 10.1016/0022-247X(92)90256-D
Kada O, Suzuki T, Takahashi W: Nonconvex minimization theorems and fixed point theorems in complete metric spaces. Math. Jpn. 1996, 44: 381–391.
Suzuki T: Generalized distance and existence theorems in complete metric spaces. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2011, 253: 440–458.
Lin L-J, Du W-S: Ekeland’s variational principle, minimax theorems and existence of nonconvex equilibria in complete metric spaces. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2006, 323: 360–370. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2005.10.005
Vályi I: A general maximality principle and a fixed point theorem in uniform spaces. Period. Math. Hung. 1985, 16: 127–134. 10.1007/BF01857592
Plebaniak R: New generalized pseudodistance and coincidence point theorem in a b -metric space. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013. 10.1186/1687-1812-2013-270
Klein E, Thompson AC Canadian Mathematical Society Series of Monographs and Advanced Texts. In Theory of Correspondences: Including Applications to Mathematical Economics. Wiley, New York; 1984.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Competing interests
The author declares that they have no competing interests.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
About this article
Cite this article
Plebaniak, R. On best proximity points for set-valued contractions of Nadler type with respect to b-generalized pseudodistances in b-metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl 2014, 39 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2014-39
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2014-39