Skip to main content

Advertisement

(α,ψ,ξ)-contractive multivalued mappings

Article metrics

  • 1738 Accesses

  • 20 Citations

Abstract

In this paper, we introduce the notion of (α,ψ,ξ)-contractive multivalued mappings to generalize and extend the notion of α-ψ-contractive mappings to closed valued multifunctions. We investigate the existence of fixed points for such mappings. We also construct an example to show that our result is more general than the results of α-ψ-contractive closed valued multifunctions.

MSC:47H10, 54H25.

1 Introduction and preliminaries

Recently, Samet et al. [1] introduced the notions of α-ψ-contractive and α-admissible self-mappings and proved some fixed-point results for such mappings in complete metric spaces. Karapınar and Samet [2] generalized these notions and obtained some fixed-point results. Asl et al. [3] extended these notions to multifunctions by introducing the notions of α -ψ-contractive and α -admissible mappings and proved some fixed-point results. Some results in this direction are also given in [46]. Ali and Kamran [7] further generalized the notion of α -ψ-contractive mappings and obtained some fixed-point theorems for multivalued mappings. Salimi et al. [8] modified the notions of α-ψ-contractive and α-admissible self-mappings by introducing another function η and established some fixed-point theorems for such mappings in complete metric spaces. N. Hussain et al. [9] extended these modified notions to multivalued mappings. Recently, Mohammadi and Rezapour [10] showed that the results obtained by Salimi et al. [8] follow from corresponding results for α-ψ-contractive mappings. More recently, Berzig and Karapinar [11] proved that the first main result of Salimi et al. [8] follows from a result of Karapınar and Samet [2]. The purpose of this paper is to introduce the notion of (α,ψ,ξ)-contractive multivalued mappings to generalize and extend the notion of α-ψ-contractive mappings to closed valued multifunctions and to provide fixed-point theorems for (α,ψ,ξ)-contractive multivalued mappings in complete metric spaces.

We recollect the following definitions, for the sake of completeness. Let (X,d) be a metric space. We denote by CB(X) the class of all nonempty closed and bounded subsets of X and by CL(X) the class of all nonempty closed subsets of X. For every A,BCL(X), let

H(A,B)={ max { sup x A d ( x , B ) , sup y B d ( y , A ) } , if the maximum exists ; , otherwise .

Such a map H is called the generalized Hausdorff metric induced by the metric d. Let Ψ be a set of nondecreasing functions, ψ:[0,)[0,) such that n = 1 ψ n (t)< for each t>0, where ψ n is the n th iterate of ψ. It is known that for each ψΨ, we have ψ(t)<t for all t>0 and ψ(0)=0 for t=0. More details as regards such a function can be found in e.g. [1, 2].

Definition 1.1 [3]

Let (X,d) be a metric space and α:X×X[0,) be a mapping. A mapping G:XCL(X) is α -admissible if

α(x,y)1 α (Gx,Gy)1,

where α (Gx,Gy)=inf{α(a,b):aGx,bGy}.

2 Main results

We begin this section by considering a family Ξ of functions ξ:[0,)[0,) satisfying the following conditions:

  1. (i)

    ξ is continuous;

  2. (ii)

    ξ is nondecreasing on [0,);

  3. (iii)

    ξ(0)=0 and ξ(t)>0 for all t(0,);

  4. (iv)

    ξ is subadditive.

Example 2.1 Suppose that ϕ:[0,)[0,) is a Lebesgue integrable mapping which is summable on each compact subset of [0,), for each ϵ>0, 0 ϵ ϕ(t)dt>0, and for each a,b>0, we have

0 a + b ϕ(t)dt 0 a ϕ(t)dt+ 0 b ϕ(t)dt.

Define ξ:[0,)[0,) by ξ(t)= 0 t ϕ(w)dw for each t[0,). Then ξΞ.

Lemma 2.2 Let (X,d) is a metric space and let ξΞ. Then (X,ξd) is a metric space.

Lemma 2.3 Let (X,d) be a metric space, let ξΞ and let BCL(X). Assume that there exists xX such that ξ(d(x,B))>0. Then there exists yB such that

ξ ( d ( x , y ) ) <qξ ( d ( x , B ) ) ,

where q>1.

Proof By hypothesis we have ξ(d(x,B))>0. We choose

ϵ=(q1)ξ ( d ( x , B ) ) .

By the definition of an infimum, since ξd is a metric space, it follows that there exists yB such that

ξ ( d ( x , y ) ) <ξ ( d ( x , B ) ) +ϵ=qξ ( d ( x , B ) ) .

 □

Definition 2.4 Let (X,d) be a metric space. A mapping G:XCL(X) is called (α,ψ,ξ)-contractive if there exist three functions ψΨ, ξΞ and α:X×X[0,) such that

x,yX,α(x,y)1ξ ( H ( G x , G y ) ) ψ ( ξ ( M ( x , y ) ) ) ,
(2.1)

where M(x,y)=max{d(x,y),d(x,Gx),d(y,Gy), d ( x , G y ) + d ( y , G x ) 2 }.

In case when ψΨ is strictly increasing, the (α,ψ,ξ)-contractive mapping is called a strictly (α,ψ,ξ)-contractive mapping.

Theorem 2.5 Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and let G:XCL(X) be a strictly (α,ψ,ξ)-contractive mapping satisfying the following assumptions:

  1. (i)

    G is an α -admissible mapping;

  2. (ii)

    there exist x 0 X and x 1 G x 0 such that α( x 0 , x 1 )1;

  3. (iii)

    G is continuous.

Then G has a fixed point.

Proof By hypothesis, there exist x 0 X and x 1 G x 0 such that α( x 0 , x 1 )1. If x 0 = x 1 , then we have nothing to prove. Let x 0 x 1 . If x 1 G x 1 , then x 1 is a fixed point. Let x 1 G x 1 . Then from equation (2.1), we have

0 < ξ ( H ( G x 0 , G x 1 ) ) ψ ( ξ ( max { d ( x 0 , x 1 ) , d ( x 0 , G x 0 ) , d ( x 1 , G x 1 ) , d ( x 0 , G x 1 ) + d ( x 1 , G x 0 ) 2 } ) ) = ψ ( ξ ( max { d ( x 0 , x 1 ) , d ( x 1 , G x 1 ) } ) ) ,
(2.2)

since d ( x 0 , G x 1 ) 2 max{d( x 0 , x 1 ),d( x 1 ,G x 1 )}. Assume that max{d( x 0 , x 1 ),d( x 1 ,G x 1 )}=d( x 1 ,G x 1 ). Then from equation (2.2), we have

0 < ξ ( d ( x 1 , G x 1 ) ) ξ ( H ( G x 0 , G x 1 ) ) ψ ( ξ ( max { d ( x 0 , x 1 ) , d ( x 1 , G x 1 ) } ) ) = ψ ( ξ ( d ( x 1 , G x 1 ) ) ) ,
(2.3)

which is a contradiction. Hence, max{d( x 0 , x 1 ),d( x 1 ,G x 1 )}=d( x 0 , x 1 ). Then from equation (2.2), we have

0<ξ ( d ( x 1 , G x 1 ) ) ξ ( H ( G x 0 , G x 1 ) ) ψ ( ξ ( d ( x 0 , x 1 ) ) ) .
(2.4)

For q>1 by Lemma 2.3, there exists x 2 G x 1 such that

0<ξ ( d ( x 1 , x 2 ) ) <qξ ( d ( x 1 , G x 1 ) ) .
(2.5)

From equations (2.4) and (2.5), we have

0<ξ ( d ( x 1 , x 2 ) ) <qψ ( ξ ( d ( x 0 , x 1 ) ) ) .
(2.6)

Applying ψ in equation (2.6), we have

0<ψ ( ξ ( d ( x 1 , x 2 ) ) ) <ψ ( q ψ ( ξ ( d ( x 0 , x 1 ) ) ) ) .
(2.7)

Put q 1 = ψ ( q ψ ( ξ ( d ( x 0 , x 1 ) ) ) ) ψ ( ξ ( d ( x 1 , x 2 ) ) ) . Then q 1 >1. Since G is an α -admissible mapping, then α (G x 0 ,G x 1 )1. Thus we have α( x 1 , x 2 ) α (G x 0 ,G x 1 )1. If x 2 G x 2 , then x 2 is a fixed point. Let x 2 G x 2 . Then from equation (2.1), we have

0 < ξ ( H ( G x 1 , G x 2 ) ) ψ ( ξ ( max { d ( x 1 , x 2 ) , d ( x 1 , G x 1 ) , d ( x 2 , G x 2 ) , d ( x 1 , G x 2 ) + d ( x 2 , G x 1 ) 2 } ) ) = ψ ( ξ ( max { d ( x 1 , x 2 ) , d ( x 2 , G x 2 ) } ) ) ,
(2.8)

since d ( x 1 , G x 2 ) 2 max{d( x 1 , x 2 ),d( x 2 ,G x 2 )}. Assume that max{d( x 1 , x 2 ),d( x 2 ,G x 2 )}=d( x 2 ,G x 2 ). Then from equation (2.8), we have

0 < ξ ( d ( x 2 , G x 2 ) ) ξ ( H ( G x 1 , G x 2 ) ) ψ ( ξ ( max { d ( x 1 , x 2 ) , d ( x 2 , G x 2 ) } ) ) = ψ ( ξ ( d ( x 2 , G x 2 ) ) ) ,
(2.9)

which is a contradiction. Hence, max{d( x 1 , x 2 ),d( x 2 ,G x 2 )}=d( x 1 , x 2 ). Then from equation (2.8), we have

0<ξ ( d ( x 2 , G x 2 ) ) ξ ( H ( G x 1 , G x 2 ) ) ψ ( ξ ( d ( x 1 , x 2 ) ) ) .
(2.10)

For q 1 >1 by Lemma 2.3, there exists x 3 G x 2 such that

0<ξ ( d ( x 2 , x 3 ) ) < q 1 ξ ( d ( x 2 , G x 2 ) ) .
(2.11)

From equations (2.10) and (2.11), we have

0<ξ ( d ( x 2 , x 3 ) ) < q 1 ψ ( ξ ( d ( x 1 , x 2 ) ) ) =ψ ( q ψ ( ξ ( d ( x 0 , x 1 ) ) ) ) .
(2.12)

Applying ψ in equation (2.12), we have

0<ψ ( ξ ( d ( x 2 , x 3 ) ) ) < ψ 2 ( q ψ ( ξ ( d ( x 0 , x 1 ) ) ) ) .
(2.13)

Put q 2 = ψ 2 ( q ψ ( ξ ( d ( x 0 , x 1 ) ) ) ) ψ ( ξ ( d ( x 2 , x 3 ) ) ) . Then q 2 >1. Since G is an α -admissible mapping, then α (G x 1 ,G x 2 )1. Thus we have α( x 2 , x 3 ) α (G x 1 ,G x 2 )1. If x 3 G x 3 , then x 3 is a fixed point. Let x 3 G x 3 . Then from equation (2.1), we have

0 < ξ ( H ( G x 2 , G x 3 ) ) ψ ( ξ ( max { d ( x 2 , x 3 ) , d ( x 2 , G x 2 ) , d ( x 3 , G x 3 ) , d ( x 2 , G x 3 ) + d ( x 3 , G x 2 ) 2 } ) ) = ψ ( ξ ( max { d ( x 2 , x 3 ) , d ( x 3 , G x 3 ) } ) ) ,
(2.14)

since d ( x 2 , G x 3 ) 2 max{d( x 2 , x 3 ),d( x 3 ,G x 3 )}. Assume that max{d( x 2 , x 3 ),d( x 3 ,G x 3 )}=d( x 3 ,G x 3 ). Then from equation (2.14), we have

0 < ξ ( d ( x 3 , G x 3 ) ) ξ ( H ( G x 2 , G x 3 ) ) ψ ( ξ ( max { d ( x 2 , x 3 ) , d ( x 3 , G x 3 ) } ) ) = ψ ( ξ ( d ( x 3 , G x 3 ) ) ) ,
(2.15)

which is a contradiction to our assumption. Hence, max{d( x 2 , x 3 ),d( x 3 ,G x 3 )}=d( x 2 , x 3 ). Then from equation (2.14), we have

0<ξ ( d ( x 3 , G x 3 ) ) ξ ( H ( G x 2 , G x 3 ) ) ψ ( ξ ( d ( x 2 , x 3 ) ) ) .
(2.16)

For q 2 >1 by Lemma 2.3, there exists x 4 G x 3 such that

0<ξ ( d ( x 3 , x 4 ) ) < q 2 ξ ( d ( x 3 , G x 3 ) ) .
(2.17)

From equations (2.16) and (2.17), we have

0<ξ ( d ( x 3 , x 4 ) ) < q 2 ψ ( ξ ( d ( x 2 , x 3 ) ) ) = ψ 2 ( q ψ ( ξ ( d ( x 0 , x 1 ) ) ) ) .
(2.18)

Continuing the same process, we get a sequence { x n } in X such that x n + 1 G x n , x n + 1 x n , α( x n , x n + 1 )1, and

ξ ( d ( x n + 1 , x n + 2 ) ) < ψ n ( q ψ ( ξ ( d ( x 0 , x 1 ) ) ) ) for each nN{0}.
(2.19)

Let m>n, we have

ξ ( d ( x m , x n ) ) i = n m 1 ξ ( d ( x i , x i + 1 ) ) < i = n m 1 ψ i 1 ( q ψ ( ξ ( d ( x 0 , x 1 ) ) ) ) .

Since ψΨ, we have

lim n , m ξ ( d ( x m , x n ) ) =0.
(2.20)

This implies that

lim n , m d( x m , x n )=0.
(2.21)

Hence { x n } is a Cauchy sequence in (X,d). By completeness of (X,d), there exists x X such that x n x as n. Since G is continuous, we have

d ( x , G x ) = lim n d ( x n + 1 , G x ) lim n H ( G x n , G x ) =0.

Thus x =G x . □

Theorem 2.6 Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and let G:XCL(X) be a strictly (α,ψ,ξ)-contractive mapping satisfying the following assumptions:

  1. (i)

    G is an α -admissible mapping;

  2. (ii)

    there exist x 0 X and x 1 G x 0 such that α( x 0 , x 1 )1;

  3. (iii)

    if { x n } is a sequence in X with x n x as n and α( x n , x n + 1 )1 for each nN{0}, then we have α( x n ,x)1 for each nN{0}.

Then G has a fixed point.

Proof Following the proof of Theorem 2.5, we know that { x n } is a Cauchy sequence in X with x n x as n and α( x n , x n + 1 )1 for each nN{0}. By hypothesis (iii), we have α( x n , x )1 for each nN{0}. Then from equation (2.1), we have

ξ ( H ( G x n , G x ) ) ψ ( ξ ( max { d ( x n , x ) , d ( x n , G x n ) , d ( x , G x ) , d ( x n , G x ) + d ( x , G x n ) 2 } ) ) .
(2.22)

Suppose that d( x ,G x )0.

We let x n x . Taking ϵ= d ( x , G x ) 2 we can find N 1 N such that

d ( x , x m ) < d ( x , G x ) 2 for each m N 1 .
(2.23)

Moreover, as { x n } is a Cauchy sequence, there exists N 2 N such that

d( x m ,G x m )d( x m , x m + 1 )< d ( x , G x ) 2 for each m N 2 .
(2.24)

Furthermore,

d ( x , G x m ) d ( x , x m + 1 ) < d ( x , G x ) 2 for each m N 1 .
(2.25)

As d( x m ,G x )d( x ,G x ). Taking ϵ= d ( x , G x ) 2 we can find N 3 N such that

d ( x m , G x ) < 3 d ( x , G x ) 2 for each m N 3 .
(2.26)

It follows from equations (2.23), (2.24), (2.25), and (2.26) that

max { d ( x m , x ) , d ( x m , G x m ) , d ( x , G x ) , d ( x m , G x ) + d ( x , G x m ) 2 } = d ( x , G x ) ,

for mN=max{ N 1 , N 2 , N 3 }. Moreover, for mN, by the triangle inequality, we have

ξ ( d ( x , G x ) ) ξ ( d ( x , x m + 1 ) ) + ξ ( H ( G x m , G x ) ) ξ ( d ( x , x m + 1 ) ) + ψ ( ξ ( max { d ( x m , x ) , d ( x m , G x m ) , d ( x , G x ) , d ( x m , G x ) + d ( x , G x m ) 2 } ) ) = ξ ( d ( x , x m + 1 ) ) + ψ ( ξ ( d ( x , G x ) ) ) .
(2.27)

Letting m in the above inequality, we have

ξ ( d ( x , G x ) ) ψ ( ξ ( d ( x , G x ) ) ) .
(2.28)

This is not possible if ξ(d( x ,G x ))>0. Therefore, we have ξ(d( x ,G x ))=0, which implies that d( x ,G x )=0, i.e., x =G x . □

Example 2.7 Let X=R be endowed with the usual metric d. Define G:XCL(X) by

Gx={ ( , 0 ] if  x < 0 , { 0 , x 4 } if  0 x < 2 , { 0 } if  x = 2 , [ x 2 , ) if  x > 2

and α:X×X[0,) by

α(x,y)={ 1 if  x , y [ 0 , 2 ] , 1 2 otherwise .

Take ψ(t)= t 2 and ξ(t)= t for each t0. Then G is an (α,ψ,ξ)-contractive mapping. For x 0 =1 and 0G x 0 we have α(1,0)=1. Also, for each x,yX with α(x,y)=1, we have α (Gx,Gy)=1. Moreover, for any sequence { x n } in X with x n x as n and α( x n , x n + 1 )=1 for each nN{0}, we have α( x n ,x)=1 for each nN{0}. Therefore, all conditions of Theorem 2.6 are satisfied and G has infinitely many fixed points. Note that Nadler’s fixed-point theorem is not applicable here; see, for example, x=1.5 and y=2.

3 Consequences

It can be seen, by restricting G:XX and taking ξ(t)=t for each t0 in Theorems 2.5 and 2.6, that:

  • Theorem 2.1 and Theorem 2.2 of Samet et al.[1] are special cases of Theorem 2.5 and Theorem 2.6, respectively;

  • Theorem 2.3 of Asl et al.[3] is a special case of Theorem 2.6;

  • Theorem 2.1 of Amiri et al.[5] is a special case of Theorem 2.5;

  • Theorem 2.1 of Salimi et al.[8] is a special case of Theorems 2.5 and 2.6.

Further, it can be seen, by considering G:XCB(X) and ξ(t)=t for each t0, that

  • Theorem 3.1 and Theorem 3.4 of Mohammadi et al.[4] are special cases of our results;

  • Theorem 2.2 of Amiri et al.[5] is a special case of Theorem 2.6, when ψΨ is sublinear.

Remark 3.1 Observe that, in case G:XX, ψ may be a nondecreasing function in Theorem 2.5 and Theorem 2.6.

Remark 3.2 Note that in Example 2.7, ξ(t)= t . Therefore, one may not apply the aforementioned results and, as a consequence, conclude that G has a fixed point.

References

  1. 1.

    Samet B, Vetro C, Vetro P: Fixed point theorems for α - ψ -contractive type mappings. Nonlinear Anal. 2012, 75: 2154–2165. 10.1016/j.na.2011.10.014

  2. 2.

    Karapinar E, Samet B: Generalized α - ψ -contractive type mappings and related fixed point theorems with applications. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2012., 2012: Article ID 793486

  3. 3.

    Asl JH, Rezapour S, Shahzad N: On fixed points of α - ψ -contractive multifunctions. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012., 2012: Article ID 212 10.1186/1687-1812-2012-212

  4. 4.

    Mohammadi B, Rezapour S, Shahzad N: Some results on fixed points of α - ψ -Ciric generalized multifunctions. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013., 2013: Article ID 24 10.1186/1687-1812-2013-24

  5. 5.

    Amiri P, Rezapour S, Shahzad N: Fixed points of generalized α - ψ -contractions. Rev. R. Acad. Cienc. Exactas Fís. Nat., Ser. A Mat. 2013. 10.1007/s13398-013-0123-9

  6. 6.

    Minak G, Altun I: Some new generalizations of Mizoguchi-Takahashi type fixed point theorem. J. Inequal. Appl. 2013., 2013: Article ID 493 10.1186/1029-242X-2013-493

  7. 7.

    Ali MU, Kamran T:On ( α ,ψ)-contractive multi-valued mappings. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013., 2013: Article ID 137 10.1186/1687-1812-2013-137

  8. 8.

    Salimi P, Latif A, Hussain N: Modified α - ψ -contractive mappings with applications. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013., 2013: Article ID 151 10.1186/1687-1812-2013-151

  9. 9.

    Hussain N, Salimi P, Latif A: Fixed point results for single and set-valued α - η - ψ -contractive mappings. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013., 2013: Article ID 212 10.1186/1687-1812-2013-212

  10. 10.

    Mohammadi B, Rezapour S: On modified α - φ -contractions. J. Adv. Math. Stud. 2013, 6: 162–166.

  11. 11.

    Berzig, M, Karapinar, E: Note on ‘Modified α-ψ-contractive mappings with application’. Thai J. Math. (in press)

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the reviewers for their careful reviews and useful comments.

Author information

Correspondence to Erdal Karapınar.

Additional information

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors’ contributions

All authors contributed equally in writing this article. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ali, M.U., Kamran, T. & Karapınar, E. (α,ψ,ξ)-contractive multivalued mappings. Fixed Point Theory Appl 2014, 7 (2014) doi:10.1186/1687-1812-2014-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • α -admissible mappings
  • (α,ψ,ξ)-contractive mappings