 Research
 Open Access
 Published:
Remarks on contractive type mappings
Fixed Point Theory and Applications volume 2017, Article number: 8 (2016)
Introduction
In 2003, Ran and Reurings [1] established a fixed point theorem that extends the Banach contraction principle (BCP) to the setting of partially ordered metric spaces. In the original version, Ran and Reurings used a continuous function. In 2006, Nieto and RodríguezLópez [2] established a similar result replacing the continuity of the nonlinear operator by monotonicity. The key feature in this theorems is that the contractivity condition on the nonlinear map is only assumed to hold on elements that are comparable in the partial order.
As an application the authors obtained a theorem on the existence of a unique solution for periodic boundary problems relative to ordinary differential equations. Similar applications for a mixed monotone mapping were given by Gnana Bhaskar and Lakshmikantham [3]. Further improvements of the above results were found by Petruşel and Rus [4] and Jachymski [5].
In this paper we extend fixed point theorems established by Ran and Reurings and Nieto and RodríguezLópez to \(CJM\) contractions on preordered metric spaces, where a preordered binary relation is weaker than a partial order.
Definitions
We have to introduce many types of contractions.
Definition 2.1
Let T be a mapping on a metric space \((X,d)\).

1.
T is said to be a (usual) contraction (C, for short) [6], if there exists \(\lambda\in[0,1)\) such that
$$d(Tx,Ty)\leqslant\lambda d(x,y) \quad \mbox{for any }\quad x,y\in X. $$ 
2.
T is said to be a Browder contraction (\(Bro\), for short) [7], if there exists a function φ from \((0,\infty)\) into itself satisfying the following:

(a)
φ is nondecreasing and right continuous,

(b)
\(\varphi(t)< t\) for any \(t\in(0,\infty)\),

(c)
\(d(Tx,Ty)\leqslant\varphi(d(x,y))\) for any \(x,y\in X\).

(a)

3.
T is said to be a BoydWong contraction (\(BoWo\), for short) [8], if there exists a function φ from \((0,\infty)\) into itself satisfying the following:

(a)
φ is upper semicontinuous from the right, i.e., \(\lambda_{i}\downarrow\lambda\geqslant0\Rightarrow\limsup_{i\rightarrow\infty}\varphi(\lambda_{i})\leqslant\varphi (\lambda)\),

(b)
\(\varphi(t)< t\) for any \(t\in(0,\infty)\),

(c)
\(d(Tx,Ty)\leqslant\varphi(d(x,y))\) for any \(x,y\in X\).

(a)

4.
T is said to be an Ri contraction (Ri, for short) [9], if there exists a function φ from \([0,\infty)\) into itself satisfying the following:

(a)
\(\limsup_{s\rightarrow t+}\varphi(s)< t\) for any \(t\in(0,\infty)\),

(b)
\(\varphi(t)< t\) for any \(t\in(0,\infty)\),

(c)
\(d(Tx,Ty)\leqslant\varphi(d(x,y))\) for any \(x,y\in X\).

(a)

5.
T is said to be a MeirKeeler contraction (\(MeKe\), for short) [10], if for any \(\varepsilon>0\), there exists \(\delta>0\) such that, for all \(x,y\in X\),
$$\varepsilon\leqslant d(x,y)< \varepsilon+\delta \quad\mbox{implies }\quad d(Tx,Ty)< \varepsilon. $$ 
6.
T is said to be a Matkowski contraction (\(Mat\), for short) [11], if there exists a function φ from \((0,\infty)\) into itself satisfying the following:

(a)
φ is nondecreasing,

(b)
\(\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\varphi^{n}(t)=0\) for every \(t\in(0,\infty)\),

(c)
\(d(Tx,Ty)\leqslant\varphi(d(x,y))\) for any \(x,y\in X\).

(a)

7.
T is said to be a Wardowski contraction (\(War\), for short) [12], if there exists a function \(F:(0,\infty )\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\) satisfying the following:

(a)
F is strictly increasing,

(b)
for any sequence \(\{\alpha_{n}\}\) of positive numbers,
$$\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\alpha_{n}=0 \quad\mbox{iff }\quad \lim _{n\rightarrow\infty} F(\alpha_{n})=\infty, $$ 
(c)
there exists \(k\in(0,1)\) such that \(\lim_{\alpha \rightarrow0+}\alpha^{k}F(\alpha)=0\),

(d)
for some \(t>0\), if \(Tx\neq Ty\), then
$$t+F \bigl(d(Tx,Ty) \bigr)\leqslant F \bigl(d(x,y) \bigr). $$

(a)

8.
T is said to be a ĆirićJachymskiMatkowski contraction (\(CJM\), for short) [13–15], if the following hold:

(a)
for every \(\varepsilon>0\), there exists \(\delta>0\) such that, for all \(x,y\in X\),
$$d(x,y)< \varepsilon+ \delta \quad \mbox{implies } \quad d(Tx,Ty)\leqslant \varepsilon, $$ 
(b)
\(x\neq y\) implies \(d(Tx,Ty)< d(x,y)\).

(a)
We know the following implications:
Recently Suzuki [16] proved the following implications:
and
Remark 2.2
It is not difficult to prove that conditions (a) and (d) of Definition 2.1(7) and the assumption that F is continuous or upper semicontinuous from the right is sufficient for the existence and uniqueness of fixed point of T if T maps a complete metric space \((X,d)\) into itself (compare [12] Theorem 2.1).
Fixed point theorems
In this section we extended fixed point theorems established by Ran and Reurings and Nieto and RodríguezLópez to \(CJM\) contractions on preordered metric spaces, where a preordered binary relation is weaker than a partial order.
Definition 3.1
Let \(X\neq\emptyset\) be a set. Binary relation ≼ on X is

(a)
reflexive if \(x \preccurlyeq x\) for all \(x\in X\),

(b)
transitive if \(x\preccurlyeq z\) for all \(x,y,z\in X\) such that \(x\preccurlyeq y\) and \(y\preccurlyeq z\).
A reflexive and transitive relation on X is a preordered on X. In such a case \((X,\preccurlyeq)\) is a preordered space. Write \(x\prec y\) when \(x\preccurlyeq y\) and \(x\neq y\).
Example 3.2
Let ≼ be the binary relation on \(\mathbb{R}\) given by
Then ≼ is a partial order (and so preordered) on \(\mathbb {R}\), but it is different from ⩽.
Definition 3.3
An preordered metric space is a triple \((X,d,\preccurlyeq)\) where \((X,d)\) is a metric space and ≼ is a preorder on X.
One of the most important hypotheses that we shall use in this section is the monotonicity of the involved mappings.
Definition 3.4
Let ≼ be a binary relation on X and \(T:X\rightarrow X\) be a mapping. We say that T is ≼nondecreasing if \(Tx\preccurlyeq Ty\) for all \(x,y\in X\) such that \(x\preccurlyeq y\).
Definition 3.5
Let \((X,d)\) be a metric space, let \(A\subset X\) be a nonempty subset and let ≼ be a binary relation on X. Then the triple \((A,d,\preccurlyeq)\) is said to be nondecreasing regular if for all sequences \(\{x_{n}\}\subset A\) such that \(\{x_{n}\}\rightarrow x\in A\) and \(x_{n}\preccurlyeq x_{n+1}\) for all \(n\in\mathbb{N}\), we have \(x_{n}\preccurlyeq x\) for all \(n\in\mathbb {N}\).
The following result is the extension of Ran and Reurings’ result to \(CJM\) contraction on preordered metric spaces.
Theorem 3.6
Let \((X,d,\preccurlyeq)\) be a preordered metric space and let \(T:X\rightarrow X\) be a mapping. Suppose that the following conditions hold:

(i)
\((X,d)\) is complete,

(ii)
T is ≼nondecreasing,

(iii)
T is continuous,

(iv)
there exists \(x_{0}\in X\) such that \(x_{0}\preccurlyeq Tx_{0}\),

(v)
for all \(x,y\in X\) with \(x\succcurlyeq y\),

(a)
for every \(\varepsilon>0\), there exists \(\delta >0\) such that,
$$d(x,y)< \varepsilon+ \delta \quad \textit{implies } \quad d(Tx,Ty)\leqslant \varepsilon, $$ 
(b)
\(x\neq y\) implies \(d(Tx,Ty)< d(x,y)\).

(a)
Then there exists a fixed point of T, and it is unique, say u, if for every \((x,y)\in X\times X\) there exists \(w\in X\) such that \(x\preccurlyeq w\) and \(y\preccurlyeq w\). Moreover, for each \(x_{0}\in X\) such that \(x_{0}\preccurlyeq Tx_{0}\), the sequence \(\{T^{n}x_{0}\}\) of iterates converges to u.
Proof
Let \(x_{0}\in X\) be a point satisfying (iv), that is, \(x_{0}\preccurlyeq Tx_{0}\). We define a sequence \(\{x_{n}\} \subset X\) as follows:
Considering that T is a ≼nondecreasing mapping together with (1) we have
Inductively, we obtain
Assume that there exists \(n_{0}\) such that \(x_{n_{0}}=x_{n_{0}+1}\). Since \(x_{n_{0}}=x_{n_{0}+1}=Tx_{n_{0}}\), so \(x_{n_{0}}\) is the fixed point of T. Suppose that \(x_{n}\neq x_{n+1}\) for all \(n\geqslant0\). Then by (2),
and \(d(x_{n},x_{n+1})=d(Tx_{n1},Tx_{n})>0\) for all \(n\geqslant1\). Using (b) the following holds, for every \(n\geqslant0\):
Hence the sequence \(\{d(x_{n},x_{n+1})\}\) is monotone decreasing and bounded below, thus it is convergent and we let \(\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}d(x_{n},x_{n+1})=d\geqslant0\). If \(d>0\) we obtain a contradiction. Indeed, then there exists \(j\in\mathbb{N}\) such that
It follows from (a) that
which contradicts the above inequality, and therefore
Now, we show that \(\{d(x_{n},x_{n+1})\}\) is a Cauchy sequence. Fix an \(\varepsilon>0\). Without loss of generality we may assume that \(\delta =\delta(\varepsilon)<\varepsilon\). Since \(d(x_{n},x_{n+1})\downarrow0\), there exists \(j\in\mathbb{N}\) such that
We shall apply induction to show that, for any \(m\in\mathbb{N} \),
Obviously, (4) holds for \(m=1\); see (3). Assuming (4) to hold for some m, we shall prove it for \(m+1\). By the triangle inequality, we have
Using (3), observe that it suffices to show that \(d(x_{j+1},x_{m+j+1})\leqslant\varepsilon\). By the induction hypothesis \(d(x_{j},x_{j+m})<\varepsilon+\frac{1}{2}\delta<\varepsilon +\delta\). So, by (a), \(d(x_{j+1},x_{j+m+1})\leqslant\varepsilon\), completing the induction. Obviously, (4) implies that \(\{x_{n}\}\) is a Cauchy sequence in X.
From the completeness of X there exists \(u\in X\) such that \(\{x_{n}\} \rightarrow u\). The continuity of T yields
so \(u=Tu\).
To prove uniqueness, we assume that \(v\in X\) is another fixed point of T such that \(u\neq v\). By hypothesis, there exists \(w\in X\) such that \(u\preccurlyeq w\) and \(v\preccurlyeq w\).
Let \(\{w_{n}=Tw_{n1}\}\) be the Picard sequence of T based on \(w_{0}=w\). As T is ≼nondecreasing, \(v=Tv\preccurlyeq Tw=w_{1}\) and \(u=Tu\preccurlyeq Tw=w_{1}\). By induction, \(v\preccurlyeq w_{n}\) and \(u\preccurlyeq w_{n}\) for all \(n\geqslant0\).
Case 1. If \(v=w_{n_{0}}\) for some \(n_{0}\geqslant0\), then \(v=Tv=Tw_{n_{0}}=w_{n_{0}+1}\) and by induction, \(w_{n}=v\) for all \(n\geqslant n_{0}\), so \(\{w_{n}\}\rightarrow v\).
Case 2. If \(v\prec w_{n}\) for all \(n\geqslant0\), then by \((b)\), \(d(v,w_{n+1})=d(Tv,Tw_{n})< d(v,w_{n})\). Mimicking the previous part of the proof, we get \(\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}d(v,w_{n})=0\), so \(\{w_{n}\}\rightarrow v\).
Thus \(\{w_{n}\}\rightarrow v\) and \(\{w_{n}\}\rightarrow u\). The uniqueness of the limit concludes that \(u=v\), so T has a unique fixed point. □
Remark 3.7
Theorem 3.6 remains true in the more general case, on satisfying the following (see [14] the proof of Theorem 2):

(v)
for all \(x,y\in X\) with \(x\succcurlyeq y\) ,

(a)
for every \(\varepsilon>0\) , there exists \(\delta >0\) such that
$$\max \biggl\{ d(x,y),d(x,Tx),d(y,Ty),\frac{1}{2} \bigl[d(x,Ty)+d(y,Tx) \bigr] \biggr\} < \varepsilon + \delta\quad \mbox{implies }\quad d(Tx,Ty)\leqslant \varepsilon, $$ 
(b)
\(x\neq y\) implies
$$d(Tx,Ty)< \max \biggl\{ d(x,y),d(x,Tx),d(y,Ty),\frac{1}{2} \bigl[d(x,Ty)+d(y,Tx) \bigr] \biggr\} . $$

(a)
From Theorem 3.6 we get the following corollary.
Corollary 3.8
[1], Theorem 2.1
Let \((X,d,\preccurlyeq)\) be a preordered metric space and let \(T:X\rightarrow X\) be a mapping. Suppose that the following conditions hold:

(i)
\((X,d)\) is complete,

(ii)
T is ≼nondecreasing,

(iii)
T is continuous,

(iv)
there exists \(x_{0}\in X\) such that \(x_{0}\preccurlyeq Tx_{0}\),

(v)
there exists \(\lambda\in[0,1)\) such that, for all \(x,y\in X\) with \(x\succcurlyeq y\),
$$\begin{aligned} d(Tx,Ty)\leqslant\lambda d(x,y). \end{aligned}$$(5)
Then there exists a fixed point of T, and it is unique, say u, if for every \((x,y)\in X\times X\) there exists \(w\in X\) such that \(x\preccurlyeq w\) and \(y\preccurlyeq w\). Moreover, for each \(x_{0}\in X\) such that \(x_{0}\preccurlyeq Tx_{0}\), the sequence \(\{T^{n}x_{0}\}\) of iterates converges to u.
Observe that the BCP is stronger than Corollary 3.8, which only requires the inequality for comparable points, that is, for all \(x,y\in X\) such that \(x\succcurlyeq y\).
Example 3.9
Let \(X=\mathbb{R}\) be the set of all real numbers endowed with the metric \(d(x,y)=\vert xy\vert\) for all \(x,y\in\mathbb{R}\). Consider on \(\mathbb{R}\) the partial order
Define \(T:\mathbb{R}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\) by
Let \(x,y\in X\) be such that \(x\succcurlyeq y\). If \(x=y\), then
trivially holds. Assume that \(x\neq y\). Then \(y< x\leqslant0\). Hence
Hence (5) holds. However, Definition 2.1(1) is false in this case because if \(x=1\) and \(y=2\), then
Although the BCP is not applicable, Corollary 3.8 guarantees that T has a unique fixed point, which is \(u=0\).
After the appearance of the Ran and Reurings’ result, Nieto and RodríguezLópez exchanged the continuity of the mapping T with the condition nondecreasing regularity (Definition 3.5). The following result is an extension of Nieto and RodríguezLópez’ theorem to a \(CJM\) contraction on preordered metric spaces.
Theorem 3.10
Let \((X,d,\preccurlyeq)\) be a preordered metric space and let \(T:X\rightarrow X\) be a mapping. Suppose that the following conditions hold:

(i)
\((X,d)\) is complete,

(ii)
T is ≼nondecreasing,

(iii)
\((X,d,\preccurlyeq)\) is nondecreasing regular,

(iv)
there exists \(x_{0}\in X\) such that \(x_{0}\preccurlyeq Tx_{0}\),

(v)
for all \(x,y\in X\) with \(x\succcurlyeq y\),

(a)
for every \(\varepsilon>0\), there exists \(\delta >0\) such that
$$d(x,y)< \varepsilon+ \delta \quad\textit{implies }\quad d(Tx,Ty)\leqslant \varepsilon, $$ 
(b)
\(x\neq y\) implies \(d(Tx,Ty)< d(x,y)\).

(a)
Then there exists a fixed point of T, and it is unique, say u, if for every \((x,y)\in X\times X\) there exists \(w\in X\) such that \(x\preccurlyeq w\) and \(y\preccurlyeq w\). Moreover, for each \(x_{0}\in X\) such that \(x_{0}\preccurlyeq Tx_{0}\), the sequence \(\{T^{n}x_{0}\}\) of iterates converges to u.
Proof
Following the proof of Theorem 3.6, we have a ≼nondecreasing sequence \(\{x_{n}=Tx_{n1}\}\) which is convergent to \(u\in X\). Due to (iii), we have \(x_{n}\preccurlyeq u\) for all \(n\geqslant1\). Now, we show that u is a fixed point of T. Fix an \(\varepsilon>0\). Without loss of generality we may assume that \(\delta<\varepsilon\). Since \(d(u,x_{n})\rightarrow0\) as \(n\rightarrow\infty\), there exists \(j\in\mathbb{N}\) such that
So, by (a),
Therefore, by the triangle inequality, taking \(n\geqslant j\) and using \(x_{n}\preccurlyeq u\) for all n, we get
Since \(\varepsilon>0\) is arbitrary, \(d(Tu,u)=0\). Hence \(u=Tu\). Uniqueness of u can be observed as in the proof of Theorem 3.6. □
Corollary 3.11
[2], Theorem 2.2
Let \((X,d,\preccurlyeq)\) be a preordered metric space and let \(T:X\rightarrow X\) be a mapping. Suppose that the following conditions hold:

(i)
\((X,d)\) is complete,

(ii)
T is ≼nondecreasing,

(iii)
\((X,d,\preccurlyeq)\) is nondecreasing regular,

(iv)
there exists \(x_{0}\in X\) such that \(x_{0}\preccurlyeq Tx_{0}\),

(v)
there exists \(\lambda\in[0,1)\) such that, for all \(x,y\in X\) with \(x\succcurlyeq y\),
$$d(Tx,Ty)\leqslant\lambda d(x,y). $$
Then there exists a fixed point of T, and it is unique, say u, if for every \((x,y)\in X\times X\) there exists \(w\in X\) such that \(x\preccurlyeq w\) and \(y\preccurlyeq w\). Moreover, for each \(x_{0}\in X\) such that \(x_{0}\preccurlyeq Tx_{0}\), the sequence \(\{T^{n}x_{0}\}\) of iterates converges to u.
Gmetric spaces
We show the natural extension of RanReurings’ and NietoRodríguezLópez’ results to the setting of Gmetric spaces.
In 2006, Mustafa and Sims [17] introduced a new class of generalized metric spaces which are called Gmetric spaces as a generalization of metric spaces. Subsequently, many fixed point results on such spaces appeared; see [18]. Here, we present the necessary definitions and results, which will be useful for the rest of the paper. However, for more details, we refer to [18].
Definition 4.1
[17]
Let X be a nonempty set. A function \(G:X\times X\times X\rightarrow[0,+\infty)\) satisfying the following axioms:
 (\(G_{1}\)):

\(G(x,y,z)=0\) if \(x=y=z\),
 (\(G_{2}\)):

\(G(x,x,y)>0\) for all \(x,y\in X\) with \(x\neq y\),
 (\(G_{3}\)):

\(G(x,x,y)\leqslant G(x,y,z)\) for all \(x,y,z\in X\) with \(z\neq y\),
 (\(G_{4}\)):

\(G(x,y,z)=G(x,z,y)=G(y,z,x)=\cdots\) (symmetry in all three variables),
 (\(G_{5}\)):

\(G(x,y,z)\leqslant G(x,a,a)+G(a,y,z)\) for all \(x,y,z,a\in X\)
is called a Gmetric on X and the pair \((X,G)\) is called a Gmetric space.
Definition 4.2
[17]
Let \((X,G)\) be a Gmetric space, and let \(\{x_{n}\}\) be a sequence of points of X, therefore, we say that \(\{x_{n}\}\) is Gconvergent to \(x\in X\) if \(\lim_{n,m\rightarrow\infty}G(x,x_{n},x_{m})=0\), that is, for any \(\varepsilon>0\), there exists \(N\in\mathbb{N}\) such that \(G(x,x_{n},x_{m})<\varepsilon\) for all \(n,m\geqslant N\). We call x the limit of the sequence and write \(x_{n}\rightarrow x\) or \(\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}x_{n}=x\).
Proposition 4.3
[17]
Let \((X,G)\) be a Gmetric space. The following statements are equivalent:

(1)
\(\{x_{n}\}\) is Gconvergent to x,

(2)
\(G(x_{n},x_{n},x)\rightarrow0\) as \(n\rightarrow\infty\),

(3)
\(G(x_{n},x,x)\rightarrow0\) as \(n\rightarrow\infty\),

(4)
\(G(x_{n},x_{m},x)\rightarrow0\) as \(n,m\rightarrow\infty\).
Definition 4.4
[17]
Let \((X,G)\) be a Gmetric space. A sequence \(\{x_{n}\}\) in X is called a GCauchy sequence if for any \(\varepsilon>0\) there is \(N\in\mathbb {N}\) such that \(G(x_{n},x_{m},x_{k})<\varepsilon\) for all \(n,m,k\geqslant N\), that is, \(G(x_{n},x_{m},x_{k})\rightarrow0\) as \(n,m,k\rightarrow\infty \).
Definition 4.5
[17]
A Gmetric space \((X,G)\) is called Gcomplete if every GCauchy sequence is Gconvergent in \((X,G)\).
Definition 4.6
[19]
Let \((X,G)\) and \((X',G')\) be Gmetric spaces and \(f:(X,G)\rightarrow(X',G')\) be a function, then f is said to be Gcontinuous at a point \(a\in X\) if and only if, given \(\varepsilon>0\), there exists \(\delta >0\) such that \(x,y\in X\) and \(G(a,x,y)<\delta\) implies \(G'(f(a),f(x),f(y))<\varepsilon\). A function f is Gcontinuous at X if and only if it is Gcontinuous at all \(a\in X\).
Definition 4.7
[17]
A Gmetric space \((X,G)\) is said to be symmetric if \(G(x,y,y)=G(y,x,x)\) for all \(x,y\in X\).
In the symmetric case, many fixed point theorems on Gmetric spaces are particular cases of existing fixed point theorems in metric spaces. Also in the nonsymmetry case (such spaces have a quasimetric structure), many fixed point theorems follows directly from existing fixed point theorems on metric spaces. A key role in this case is played by the following theorem (see [20, 21]).
Theorem 4.8
Let \((X,G)\) be a Gmetric space. Let \(\delta_{G}:X\times X\rightarrow[0,+\infty)\) be defined by
for all \(x,y\in X\). Then

(1)
\((X,\delta_{G})\) is a metric space,

(2)
\(\{x_{n}\}\subset X\) is Gconvergent to \(x\in X\) if and only if \(\{x_{n}\}\) is convergent to x in \((X,\delta_{G})\),

(3)
\(\{x_{n}\}\subset X\) is GCauchy if and only if \(\{ x_{n}\}\) is Cauchy in \((X,\delta_{G})\),

(4)
\((X,G)\) is Gcomplete if and only if \((X,\delta _{G})\) is complete.
Definition 4.9
An preordered Gmetric space is a triple \((X,G,\preccurlyeq)\) where \((X,G)\) is a Gmetric space and ≼ is a preordered on X.
The following result can be considered as the natural extension of Ran and Reurings’ result to \(CJM\) contractions on preordered Gmetric spaces.
Theorem 4.10
Let \((X,G,\preccurlyeq)\) be a preordered Gmetric space and let \(T:X\rightarrow X\) be a mapping. Suppose that the following conditions hold:

(i)
\((X,G)\) is Gcomplete,

(ii)
T is ≼nondecreasing,

(iii)
T is Gcontinuous,

(iv)
there exists \(x_{0}\in X\) such that \(x_{0}\preccurlyeq Tx_{0}\),

(v)
for all \(x,y,z\in X\) with \(x\succcurlyeq y\succcurlyeq z\),

(a)
for every \(\varepsilon>0\), there exists \(\delta >0\) such that
$$G(x,y,z)< \varepsilon+ \delta \quad \textit{implies }\quad G(Tx,Ty,Tz)\leqslant \varepsilon, $$ 
(b)
\(G(x,y,z)>0\) implies \(G(Tx,Ty,Tz)< G(x,y,z)\).

(a)
Then there exists a fixed point of T, and it is unique, say u, if for every \(x,y,z\in X\) there exists \(w\in X\) such that \(x\preccurlyeq w\) and \(y\preccurlyeq w\) and \(z\preccurlyeq w\). Moreover, for each \(x_{0}\in X\) such that \(x_{0}\preccurlyeq Tx_{0}\), the sequence \(\{T^{n}x_{0}\}\) of iterates converges to u.
Proof
Theorem 4.10 is a particular case of Theorem 3.6. Taking \(z=y\) in (a) and (b), we get, for all \(x,y\in X\) with \(x\succcurlyeq y\),
and
Similarly, we can write
and
It follows from the above, and the definition of \(\delta_{G}\), that, for all \(x,y\in X\) with \(x\succcurlyeq y\),
and
The existence and uniqueness of the fixed point follow immediately by Theorem 3.6 and Theorem 4.8. □
Corollary 4.11
[18], Theorem 5.2.1
Let \((X,G,\preccurlyeq)\) be a preordered Gmetric space and let \(T:X\rightarrow X\) be a mapping. Suppose that the following conditions hold:

(i)
\((X,G)\) is Gcomplete,

(ii)
T is ≼nondecreasing,

(iii)
T is Gcontinuous,

(iv)
there exists \(x_{0}\in X\) such that \(x_{0}\preccurlyeq Tx_{0}\),

(v)
there exists \(\lambda\in[0,1)\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} G(Tx,Ty,Ty)\leqslant\lambda G(x,y,y) \quad \textit{for all }\quad x,y \in X \textit{ with } x\succcurlyeq y. \end{aligned}$$(6)
Then there exists a fixed point of T, and it is unique, say u, if for every \((x,y)\in X\times X\) there exists \(w\in X\) such that \(x\preccurlyeq w\) and \(y\preccurlyeq w\). Moreover, for each \(x_{0}\in X\) such that \(x_{0}\preccurlyeq Tx_{0}\), the sequence \(\{T^{n}x_{0}\}\) of iterates converges to u.
The main advantage of the contractivity condition (6) versus
is that (6) only requires the inequality to hold for comparable points, that is, for all \(x,y\in X\) such that \(x\succcurlyeq y\). As in Example 3.9, consider the Gmetric
Let \(x,y\in X\) be such that \(x\succcurlyeq y\). If \(x=y\), then \(G(Tx,Ty,Ty)\leqslant\lambda G(x,y,y)\) trivially holds. Assume that \(x\neq y\). Then \(y< x\leqslant0\). Hence
so (6) holds. However, (7) is false in this case, if \(x=1\) and \(y=2\), then
Definition 4.12
Let \((X,G)\) be a Gmetric space, let \(A\subset X\) be a nonempty subset and let ≼ be a binary relation on X. Then the triple \((A,G,\preccurlyeq)\) is said to be nondecreasing regular if for all sequences \(\{x_{n}\}\subset A\) such that \(\{x_{n}\}\rightarrow x\in A\) and \(x_{n}\preccurlyeq x_{n+1}\) for all \(n\in\mathbb{N}\), we have \(x_{n}\preccurlyeq x\) for all \(n\in \mathbb{N}\).
The following result can be considered as the natural extension of Nieto and RodríguezLópez’ result to \(CJM\) contractions on preordered Gmetric spaces.
Theorem 4.13
Let \((X,G,\preccurlyeq)\) be a preordered metric space and let \(T:X\rightarrow X\) be a mapping. Suppose that the following conditions hold:

(i)
\((X,G)\) is Gcomplete,

(ii)
T is ≼nondecreasing,

(iii)
\((X,G,\preccurlyeq)\) is nondecreasing regular,

(iv)
there exists \(x_{0}\in X\) such that \(x_{0}\preccurlyeq Tx_{0}\),

(v)
for all \(x,y,z\in X\) with \(x\succcurlyeq y\succcurlyeq z\),

(a)
for every \(\varepsilon>0\), there exists \(\delta >0\) such that
$$G(x,y,z)< \varepsilon+ \delta \quad\textit{implies }\quad G(Tx,Ty,Tz)\leqslant \varepsilon, $$ 
(b)
\(G(x,y,z)>0\) implies \(G(Tx,Ty,Tz)< G(x,y,z)\).

(a)
Then there exists a fixed point of T, and it is unique, say u, if for every \(x,y,z\in X\) there exists \(w\in X\) such that \(x\preccurlyeq w\) and \(y\preccurlyeq w\) and \(z\preccurlyeq w\). Moreover, for each \(x_{0}\in X\) such that \(x_{0}\preccurlyeq Tx_{0}\), the sequence \(\{T^{n}x_{0}\}\) of iterates converges to u.
Proof
Theorem 4.13 is a particular case of Theorem 3.10. □
Corollary 4.14
[18], Theorem 5.2.2
Let \((X,G,\preccurlyeq)\) be a preordered metric space and let \(T:X\rightarrow X\) be a mapping. Suppose that the following conditions hold:

(i)
\((X,G)\) is Gcomplete,

(ii)
T is ≼nondecreasing,

(iii)
\((X,G,\preccurlyeq)\) is nondecreasing regular,

(iv)
there exists \(x_{0}\in X\) such that \(x_{0}\preccurlyeq Tx_{0}\),

(v)
there exists \(\lambda\in[0,1)\) such that, for all \(x,y\in X\) with \(x\succcurlyeq y\),
$$G(Tx,Ty,Ty)\leqslant\lambda G(x,y,y). $$
Then there exists a fixed point of T, and it is unique, say u, if for every \((x,y)\in X\times X\) there exists \(w\in X\) such that \(x\preccurlyeq w\) and \(y\preccurlyeq w\). Moreover, for each \(x_{0}\in X\) such that \(x_{0}\preccurlyeq Tx_{0}\), the sequence \(\{T^{n}x_{0}\}\) of iterates converges to u.
References
Ran, ACM, Reurings, MCB: A fixed point theorem in partially ordered sets and some applications to matrix equations. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 132(5), 14351443 (2003)
Nieto, JJ, RodríguezLópez, R: Contractive mapping theorems in partially ordered sets and applications to ordinary differential equations. Order 22, 223239 (2005)
Gnana Bhaskar, T, Lakshmikantham, V: Fixed point theorems in partially ordered metric spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 65, 13791393 (2006)
Petruşel, A, Rus, IA: Fixed point theorems in ordered Lspaces. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 134, 411418 (2006)
Jachymski, J: The contraction principle for mappings on a metric space with a graph. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 136, 13591373 (2008)
Banach, S: Sur les opérations dans les ensembles abstraits et leur applications aux équations intégrales. Fundam. Math. 3, 133181 (1922)
Browder, FE: On the convergence of successive approximations for nonlinear funcional equations. Proc. K. Ned. Akad. Wet., Ser. A, Indag. Math. 30, 2735 (1968)
Boyd, DW, Wong, JSW: On nonlinear contractions. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 20, 458464 (1969)
Ri, SI: A new fixed point theorem in the fractal space. Indag. Math. 27, 8593 (2016)
Meir, A, Keeler, E: A theorem on contraction mappings. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 28, 326329 (1969)
Matkowski, J: Integrable solutions of functional equations. Diss. Math. 127, 168 (1975)
Wardowski, D: Fixed points of a new type of contractive mappings in complete metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012, 94 (2012)
Ćirić, LB: A new fixedpoint theorem for contractive mappings. Publ. Inst. Math. (Belgr.) 30, 2527 (1981)
Jachymski, J: Eqiuvalent conditions and the MeirKeeler type theorems. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 194, 293303 (1995)
Matkowski, J: Fixed point theorems for contractive mappings in metric spaces. C̆asopis. Pĕst. Mat. 105, 341344 (1980)
Suzuki, T: Discussion of several contractions by Jachymski’s approach. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2016, 91 (2016)
Mustafa, Z, Sims, B: A new approach to generalized metric space. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 7, 289297 (2006)
Agarwal, RP, Karapinar, E, O’Regan, D, RoldánLópezdeHierro, AF: Fixed Point Theory in Metric Type Spaces. Springer, Switzerland (2015)
Mustafa, Z, Sims, B: Fixed point theorems for contractive mappings in complete metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2009, Article ID 189870 (2009)
Jleli, M, Samet, B: Remarks on Gmetric spaces and fixed point theorems. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012, 210 (2012)
Samet, B, Vetro, C, Vetro, F: Remarks on Gmetric spaces. Int. J. Anal. 2013, Article ID 917158 (2013)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Competing interests
The author declares that he has no competing interests.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
About this article
Cite this article
Górnicki, J. Remarks on contractive type mappings. Fixed Point Theory Appl 2017, 8 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s1366301706014
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s1366301706014
MSC
 47H10
 54H25
Keywords
 contractive map
 fixed point
 preordered space
 Gmetric space