Scholarly article on topic 'Fixed points of multivalued mappings in partial metric spaces'

Fixed points of multivalued mappings in partial metric spaces Academic research paper on "Mathematics"

0
0
Share paper
Academic journal
Fixed Point Theory Appl
OECD Field of science
Keywords
{""}

Academic research paper on topic "Fixed points of multivalued mappings in partial metric spaces"

0 Fixed Point Theory and Applications

a SpringerOpen Journal

RESEARCH

Open Access

Fixed points of multivalued mappings in partial metric spaces

Jamshaid Ahmad1, Akbar Azam1 and Muhammad Arshad2*

"Correspondence: marshadzia@iiu.edu.pk 2Department of Mathematics, Internationallslamic University, H-10, Islamabad, 44000, Pakistan Full list of author information is available at the end of the article

Abstract

We use the notion of Hausdorff metric on the family of closed bounded subsets of a partial metric space and establish a common fixed point theorem of a pair of multivalued mappings satisfying Mizoguchi and Takahashi's contractive condition. Our result extends some well-known recent results in the literature. MSC: 46S40; 47H10; 54H25

Keywords: partial Hausdorff metric; common fixed point; set-valued mappings; partial metric space

ft Spri

ringer

1 Introduction and preliminaries

In the last thirty years, the theory of multivalued functions has advanced in a variety of ways. In 1969, the systematic study of Banach-type fixed theorems of multivalued mappings started with the work of Nadler [1], who proved that a multivalued contractive mapping of a complete metric space X into the family of closed bounded subsets of X has a fixed point. His findings were followed by Agarwal et al. [2], Azam et al. [3] and many others (see, e.g., [4-9]).

In 1994, Matthews [10], introduced the concept of a partial metric space and obtained a Banach-type fixed point theorem on complete partial metric spaces. Later on, several authors (see, e.g., [11-17]) proved fixed point theorems of single-valued mappings in partial metric spaces. Recently Aydi et al. [18] proved a fixed point result for multivalued mappings in partial metric spaces. Haghi et al. [19] established that some metric fixed point generalizations to partial metric spaces can be obtained from the corresponding results in metric spaces. In this paper we obtain common fixed points of contractive-type multivalued mappings on partial metric spaces which cannot be deduced from the corresponding results in metric spaces. An example is also established to show that our result is a real generalization of analogous results for metric spaces [1, 9,10,18, 20]. We start with recalling some basic definitions and lemmas on a partial metric space.

Definition 1 A partial metric on a nonempty set X is a functionp: X x X ^ [0, tx>) such that for all x, y, z e X:

(Pi) p(x, x) = p(y,y) = p(x,y) if and only if x = y,

(P2) p(x,x) <p(x,y),

(P3) p(x,y)=p(y,x),

(P4) p(x,z) <p(x,y) + p(y,z) -p(y,y).

©2013 Ahmad et al.; licensee Springer. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the originalwork is properly cited.

The pair (X,p) is then called a partial metric space. Also, each partial metric p on X generates a T0 topology xp on X with a base of the family of open p-balls {Bp(x, r): x e X, r > 0}, where Bp(x, r) = {y e X:p(x,y) <p(x,x) + r}. If (X,p) is a partial metric space, then the functionps: X x X ^ R+ given byps(x,y) = 2p(x,y) -p(x,x) -p(y,y), x,y e X,isa metric on X. A basic example of a partial metric space is the pair (R+,p), where p(x, y) = max{x, y} for all x, y e R+.

Lemma 2 [10] Let (X, p) be a partial metric space, then we have the following.

1. A sequence {xn} in a partial metric space (X, p) converges to a point x e X if and only if limn^TO p(x, xn) = p(x, x).

2. A sequence {xn} in a partial metric space (X, p) is called a Cauchy sequence if the limn,m^TO p(xn, xm) exists and is finite.

3. A partial metric space (X, p) is said to be complete if every Cauchy sequence {xn} in X converges to a point x e X, that is, p(x, x) = limn,m^TOp(xn,xm).

4. A partial metric space (X, p) is complete if and only if the metric space (X, ps) is complete. Furthermore, limn^TO ps(xn, z) = 0 if and only if

p(z, z) = limn^TOp(xn, z) = limn,m^TOp(xn, xm).

A subset A of X is called closed in (X,p) if it is closed with respect to tp. A is called bounded in (X,p) if there is x0 e X and M >0 such that a e Bp(x0,M) for all a e A, i.e., p(x0, a) <p(x0,x0) +M for all a e A.

Let CBp(X) be the collection of all nonempty, closed and bounded subsets of X with respect to the partial metric p. For A e CBP(X), we define

p(x, A) = inf p(x, y).

For A, B e CBp(X),

Sp(A, B) = sup p(a, B),

Sp(B, A) = sup p(b, A),

Hp(A, B) = max {5p (A, B), Sp(B, A)}.

Note that [18] p(x, A) = 0 ^ps(x, A) = 0, whereps(x,A) = infyeAps(x,y).

Proposition3 [18] Let (X, p) be a partial metric space. For any A, B, C e CBp(X), we have

(i): Sp(A, A) = sup{p(a, a): a e A};

(ii): SpA,A) < SpA,B);

(iii): Sp(A, B) = 0 implies that A ç B;

(iv): SpA,B) < SpA, C) + Sp(C,B) - infcecp(c, c).

Proposition 4 [18] Let (X,p) be a partial metric space. For any A, B, C e CBp(X), we have

(hi) (h2 ) (h

Hp(A,A) < Hp(A,B); HPA, B)=Hp(B, A);

Hp (A, B) < Hp (A, C) + Hp(C, B) - infceC p(c, c).

It is immediate [18] to check that Hp(A,B) = 0 ^ A = B. But the converse does not hold always.

Remark 5 [18] Let (X,p) be a partial metric space and A be a nonempty set in (X,p), then a e A if and only if

p(a, A) = p(a, a),

where A denotes the closure of A with respect to the partial metric p. Note that A is closed in (X,p) if and only if A = A.

Lemma 6 [21] Let A and B be nonempty, closed and bounded subsets of a partial metric space (X,p) and 0 < h e R. Then, for every a e A, there exists b e B such that p(a, b) < HP(A, B) + h.

Definition? [22] A function y : [0,+c) ^ [0,1) is said to be an MT-function if it satisfies Mizoguchi and Takahashi's condition (i. e., limsupr^t+ y(r) < 1 for all t e [0, +c)). Clearly, if y : [0, +c) ^ [0,1) is a nondecreasing function or a nonincreasing function, then it is an MT-function. So, the set of MT-functions is a rich class.

Propositions [22] Let y : [0, +cc) ^ [0,1) be a function. Then the following statements are equivalent.

1. y is an MT-function.

2. For each t e [0, c), there exist r(1) e [0,1) and e(1) > 0 such that y(s) < r(1) for all s e (t, t + ef').

(2) (2) (2)

3. For each t e [0, c), there exist r( e [0,1) and e\ > 0 such that y(s) < r() for all

s e [t, t + e(2)].

(3) (3) (3)

4. For each t e [0, c), there exist r() e [0,1) and e\' > 0 such that y(s) < r( for all s e (t, t + e(3)].

5. For each t e [0, c), there exist r(4) e [0,1) and e(4) > 0 such that y(s) < r(4) for all s e [t, t + et4)).

6. For any nonincreasing sequence {xn}neN in [0, c), we have 0 < supneN y(xn) < 1.

7. y is a function of contractive factor [23], that is, for any strictly decreasing sequence {xn}neN in [0, c), we have 0 < supneN y(xn) < 1.

2 Main results

Mizoguchi and Takahashi proved the following theorem in [20].

Theorem 9 Let (X, d) be a complete metric space, S: X ^ CB(X) be a multivalued map and y : [0, +c) ^ [0,1) be an MT-function. Assume that

H(Sx, Sy) < y(d(x,y))d(x,y) (2.1)

for all x, y e X, then S has a fixed point in X.

In the following we show that in partial metric spaces Mizoguchi and Takahashi's contractive condition (2.1) is useful to achieve common fixed points of two distinct mappings. Whereas this condition is not feasible to obtain a common fixed point of two distinct mappings on a metric space.

Theorem 10 Let (X,p) be a complete partial metric space, S, T: X ^ CBp(X) be multivalued mappings and y : [0, ^ [0,1) be an MT-function. Assume that

Hp(Sx, Ty) < v(p(x,y))p(x,y) (2.2)

for all x, y e X, then there exists z e X such that z e Sz and z e Tz.

Proof Let x0 e X and x1 e Sx0. Ifp(x0,x1) = 0, then x0 = x1 and

Hp(Sx0, Tx1) < ^(p(x0,x1))p(x0,x1) = 0.

Thus Sx0 = Tx1, which implies that

x1 = x0 e Sx0 = Tx 1 = Tx0

and we finished. Assume that p(x0,x1) > 0. By Lemma 6, we can take x2 e Tx1 such that

Hp(Sx0, Txi) +p(x0,xi) p(xi, x2) < —-2-. (2.3)

Ifp(x1,x2) = 0, then x1 = x2 and

Hp(Txi,Sx2) < y(p(xi,x2))p(xi,x2) = 0.

Then, Tx1 = Sx2. That is,

x2 = x1 e Tx1 = Sx2 = Sx2

and we finished. Assume that p(x1,x2) > 0. Now we choose x3 e Sx2 such that

Hp (Txi, Sx2)+p(xi, x2) p(x2,x3) < —---. (2.4)

By repeating this process, we can construct a sequence xn of points in X and a sequence

An of elements in CBp(X) such that

, \Sxu j = 2k, k > 0, xi+i e A< = | j ! (2.5)

j j [Txj, j = 2k + 1,k > 0

Hp (Aj-i, Aj ) + »(x;_i, xj) p(xj, xj+i) < p j ' F ' ' with j > 0, (2.6)

along with the assumption that p(xj, xj+1) > 0 for each j > 0. Now, for j = 2k + 1, we have

Hp (Aj_i, Aj) +p(xj_i, xj) p(xj, xj+i) < -2-

Hp (Sx2k, Tx2k+i) + p(x2k, x2k+i)

v(p(x2k, x2k+l))p(x2k, x2k+l) + p(x2k, x2k+l) 2

< p(xj-i, xj).

Similarly, for j = 2k + 2, we obtain

p(xj, xj+i) <

Hp (Tx2k+l, ^x2k+2) + p(xj-l, xj) 2

(v(p(xj-l, x/)) + l\

|p(x/-l, xj)

It follows that the sequence |^(xn,xn+1)} is decreasing and converges to a nonnegative real number t > 0. Define a function ty : [0, to) ^ [0,1) as follows:

lim sup f (Ç)< l.

Using Proposition 8, for t > 0, we can find 5(t) > 0, A.t < l, such that t < r < S(t) + t implies f (r) < Xt and there exists a natural number N suchthat t < p(xn, xn+l) < 5(t) +1, whenever n > N. Hence

f (p(xn,xn+0) < A.t, whenever n > N. Then, for n = l, 2,3,...,

Put max{maxN=l f (p(xn-l,xn)), Xt} = ß, then ß < l, p(xn,xn+l) < ßnp(xo,xi)

p(xn, xn+m) <J2 p(x n+i-l, xn+i) ^ ^p(xn+i, xn+i)

< p(xn, xn+l) + p(xn+l, xn+2) + *** + p(xn+m-l, xn+m)

< (—n + —n+i + ... + —n+m-i)p(xc,xi) —n \

j-—— Ip(x0,xi) — 0 as n — to (since 0 < — < i).

By the definition of ps, we get, for any m e N,

ps(xn,xn+m) < 2p(xn,xn+m) — 0 as n — +to.

Which implies that {xn} is a Cauchy sequence in (X,ps). Since (X,p) is complete, so the corresponding metric space (X,ps) is also complete. Therefore, the sequence {xn} converges to some z e X with respect to the metricps, that is, limn—+tops(xn, z) = 0. Since,

p(xn,xn) < p(xn,xn+i) < —np(x0,xi) — 0 as n — to.

Therefore

p(z, z) = lim p(xn, z) = lim p(xn,xn) = 0. (2.8)

n—>+TO n—>to

Now from (P4) and (2.2), we get

p(Sz, z) < p(Sz, x2n+2) + p(x2n+2, z) _p(x2n+2, x2n+2)

< p(x2n+2, Sz) + p(x2n+2, z)

< SUp p(u, Sz)+p(x2n+2, z)

ueTx2n+i

< Sp(Tx2n+i, Sz) + p(x2n+2, z)

< Hp(Tx2n+i, Sz) + p(x2n+2, z)

< ^(p(x2n+i, z))p(x2n+i, z)+p(x2n+2, z)

< p(x2n+i, z)+p(x2n+2, z).

Taking limit as n — to, we get

p(Sz, z) = 0. (2.9)

Thus from (2.8) and (2.9), we get p(z, z) =p(Sz, z).

Thus by Remark 5, we get that z e Sz. It follows similarly that z e Tz. This completes the proof of the theorem. □

Remark 11 The above theorem cannot be deduced from an analogous result of metric spaces. Indeed the contractive condition (2.2) for a pair S, T : X — X of mappings on a metric space (X, d), that is,

Hd(Sx, Ty) < kd(x, y) for all x, y e X,

is not feasible. Because S = T implies that Su = Tu, for some u e X, then

Hd(Su, Tu) > 0 = kd(u, u)

and condition (2.2) is not satisfied for x = y = u. However, the same condition in a partial metric space is practicable to find a common fixed point result for a pair of mappings. This fact can been seen again in the following example.

Example 12 Let X = [0,1] andp(x,y) = max{x,y}, and let S, T: X — CBp(X) be defined by

Sx = B( 0,1xj, Tx = b(0,2x ).

il 2 \

ci -x,-x} U 7 J

0,1 x^,B^0, 2x ) ) = maxj ^x,^x\ and Hp(Sx, Ty) = 7 max{x,2y}

< — max{x, y} < kp(x, y).

Therefore, for ^(i) = 10, all the conditions of Theorem 10 are satisfied to find a common fixed point of S and T. However, note that for any metric d on X,

Hd(S1, T1)= H^B^0,1^,B^0,^ > kd(1,1) = 0 for any k e [0,1).

Therefore common fixed points of S and T cannot be obtained from an analogous metric fixed point theorem.

In the following we present a partial metric extension of the results in [1, 9,10,18, 20].

Theorem 13 (see [9,10]) Let (X, p) be a complete partial metric space, S: X — CBp(X) be a multivalued mapping and y : [0, — [0,1) be an MT-function. Assume that

Hp(Sx,Sy) < y(p(x,y))p(x,y)

for all x, y e X, then S has a fixed point.

For y(t) = kt, we have the following result as a special case of the above theorem.

Corollary 14 Let (X,p) be a complete partial metric space, and let S, T: X — CBp(X) be a multivalued mapping satisfying the following condition:

Hp(Sx, Ty) < kp(x,y) for all x, y e X and k e [0,1), then S and T have a common fixed point.

Corollary 15 [18] (see also [1]) Let (X,p) be a complete partial metric space, and let S: X ^ CBP(X) be a multivalued mapping satisfying the following condition:

Hp(Sx,Sy) < kp(x,y)

for all x, y e X and k e [0,1), then S has a fixed point.

Now we deduce the results for single-valued self-mappings from Theorem 10.

Theorem 16 Let (X,p) be a complete partial metric space, S, T be two self-mappings on X and y : [0, ^ [0,1) be an MT-function. Assume that

p(Sx, Ty) < y(p(x,y))p(x,y)

for all x, y e X, then S and T have a common fixed point.

Corollary 17 [10] Let (X,p) be a complete partial metric space, and let S : X ^ X be a mapping satisfying the following condition:

p(Sx, Sy) < kp(x, y)

for all x, y e X and k e [0,1), then S has a fixed point.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing Interests.

Authors' contributions

Allauthors contributed equally and significantly In writing this paper. Allauthors read and approved the finalmanuscript.

Author details

1 Department of Mathematics, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology, Chack Shahzad, Islamabad, 44000, Pakistan.

2Department of Mathematics, Internationallslamic University, H-10, Islamabad, 44000, Pakistan.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the editor and the referees for their valuable comments and suggestions which improved greatly the

quality of this paper.

Received: 11 April 2013 Accepted: 25 October 2013 Published: 25 Nov 2013

References

1. Nadler, S: Multi-valued contraction mappings. Pac. J. Math. 20,475-488 (1969)

2. Agarwal, RP, Cho, YJ, O'Regan, D: Fixed point and homotopy invariant results for multi-valued maps on complete gauge spaces. Bull. Aust. Math. Soc. 67, 241-248 (2003)

3. Azam, A, Arshad, M: Fixed points of sequence of locally contractive multivalued maps. Comput. Math. Appl. 57, 96-100(2009)

4. Beg, I, Azam, A: Fixed points of asymptotically regular multivalued mappings. J. Aust. Math. Soc. A 53, 313-326 (1992)

5. Cho, YJ, Hirunworakit, S, Petrot, N: Set-valued fixed points theorems for generalized contractive mappings without the Hausdorff metric. Appl. Math. Lett. 24,1957-1967 (2011)

6. Dhompongsa, S, Yingtaweesittikul, H: Fixed points for multivalued mappings and the metric completeness. Fixed Point Theory Appl. (2009). doi:10.1155/2009/972395

7. Hussain, N, Amin-Harandi, A, Cho, YJ: Approximate endpoints for set-valued contractions in metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2010, Article ID 614867 (2010)

8. Kikkawa, M, Suzuki, T: Three fixed point theorems for generalized contractions with constants in complete metric spaces. Nonlinear Anal., Theory Methods Appl. 69,2942-2949 (2008)

9. Suzuki, T: Mizoguchi-Takahashi's fixed point theorem is a realgeneralization of Nadler's. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 340, 752-755 (2008)

10. Matthews, SG: Partial metric topology. In: Proc. 8th Summer Conference on GeneralTopology and Applications. Ann. New York Acad. Sci., vol. 728, pp. 183-197(1994)

11. Abbas, M, Ali, B, Vetro, C: A Suzuki type fixed point theorem for a generalized multivalued mapping on partial Hausdorff metric spaces. Topol. Appl. 160, 553-563 (2013)

12. Abdeljawad, T: Fixed points for generalized weakly contractive mappings in partialmetric spaces. Math. Comput. Model. 54,2923-2927(2011)

13. Ahmad, J, Di Bari, C, Cho, YJ, Arshad, M: Some fixed point results for multi-valued mappings in partialmetric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013,175 (2013)

14. Di Bari, C, Vetro, P: Fixed points for weak ^-contractions on partialmetric spaces. Int. J. Eng. Contemp. Math. Sci. 1,4-9 (2011)

15. Erduran, A: Common fixed point of g-approximative multivalued mapping in ordered partialmetric space. Fixed Point Theory Appl. (2013). doi:10.1186/1687-1812-2013-36

16. Karapinar, E, Erhan, IM: Fixed point theorems for operators on partialmetric spaces. Appl. Math. Lett. 24,1894-1899 (2011)

17. Kutbi, MA, Ahmad, J, Hussain, N, Arshad, M: Common fixed point results for mappings with rationalexpressions. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2013, Article ID 549518 (2013)

18. Aydi, H, Abbas, M, Vetro, C: Partial Hausdorff metric and Nadler's fixed point theorem on partialmetric spaces. Topol. Appl. 159, 3234-3242(2012)

19. Haghi, RH, Rezapour, S, Shahzad, N: Be carefulon partialmetric fixed point results. Topol. Appl. 160,450-454 (2012)

20. Mizoguchi, N, Takahashi, W: Fixed point theorems for multivalued mappings on complete metric spaces. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 141, 177-188(1989)

21. Aydi, H, Abbas, M, Vetro, C: Common fixed points for multi-valued generalized contractions on partialmetric spaces. Rev. R. Acad. Cienc. Exactas Fis. Nat., Ser. A Mat. (2013). doi: 10.1007/s13398-013-0120-z

22. Du, WS: On coincidence point and fixed point theorems for nonlinear multivalued maps. Topol. Appl. 159,49-56 (2012)

23. Du, WS: Coupled fixed point theorems for nonlinear contractions satisfied Mizoguchi-Takahashi's condition in quasi-ordered metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2010, Article ID 876372 (2010). doi:10.1155/2010/876372

10.1186/1687-1812-2013-316

Cite this article as: Ahmad et al.: Fixed points of multivalued mappings in partial metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory and Applications 2013, 2013:316

Submit your manuscript to a SpringerOpen journal and benefit from:

► Convenient online submission

► Rigorous peer review

► Immediate publication on acceptance

► Open access: articles freely available online

► High visibility within the field

► Retaining the copyright to your article

Submit your next manuscript at ► springeropen.com