Table of Contents
International Scholarly Research Notices
Volume 2014, Article ID 608725, 10 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/608725
Research Article

Common Coupled Fixed Point Theorems for Two Hybrid Pairs of Mappings under Contraction

Department of Mathematics, Govt. PG Arts & Science College, Ratlam, Madhya Pradesh 457001, India

Received 27 March 2014; Accepted 1 October 2014; Published 30 November 2014

Academic Editor: George L. Karakostas

Copyright © 2014 Bhavana Deshpande and Amrish Handa. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

We introduce the concept of (EA) property and occasional w-compatibility for hybrid pair and . We also introduce common (EA) property for two hybrid pairs and . We establish some common coupled fixed point theorems for two hybrid pairs of mappings under - contraction on noncomplete metric spaces. An example is also given to validate our results. We improve, extend and generalize several known results. The results of this paper generalize the common fixed point theorems for hybrid pairs of mappings and essentially contain fixed point theorems for hybrid pair of mappings.

1. Introduction and Preliminaries

Let be a metric space and let be the set of all nonempty closed bounded subsets of . Let denote the distance from to and let denote the Hausdorff metric induced by ; that is, The study of fixed points for multivalued contractions and nonexpansive mappings using the Hausdorff metric was initiated by Markin [1]. The existence of fixed points for various multivalued contractive mappings has been studied by many authors under different conditions. The theory of multivalued mappings has application in control theory, convex optimization, differential inclusions, and economics. In 1969, Nadler [2] extended the famous Banach contraction principle [3] from single-valued mapping to multivalued mapping and proved the fixed point theorem for the multivalued contraction. Many authors proved fixed point theorems for hybrid pair of mappings without assuming the continuity of any mapping involved including [47].

In [8], Gnana Bhaskar and Lakshmikantham established some coupled fixed point theorems and applied these results to study the existence and uniqueness of solution for periodic boundary value problems. Luong and Thuan [9] generalized the results of Gnana Bhaskar and Lakshmikantham [8]. Berinde [10] extended the results of Gnana Bhaskar and Lakshmikantham [8] and Luong and Thuan [9]. Lakshmikantham and Ćirić [11] proved coupled coincidence and common coupled fixed point theorems for nonlinear contractive mappings in partially ordered complete metric spaces and extended the results of Gnana Bhaskar and Lakshmikantham [8]. Jain et al. [12] extended and generalized the results of Berinde [10], Gnana Bhaskar and Lakshmikantham [8], Lakshmikantham and Ćirić [11], and Luong and Thuan [9].

Deshpande and Handa [13] generalized and intuitionistically fuzzified the results of Gnana Bhaskar and Lakshmikantham [8], Lakshmikantham and Ćirić [11], and Luong and Thuan [9], while Deshpande et al. [14] generalized and intuitionistically fuzzified the results of Berinde [10], Gnana Bhaskar and Lakshmikantham [8], Lakshmikantham and Ćirić [11], and Luong and Thuan [9]. In [15], Deshpande et al. proved a common coupled fixed point theorem for mappings under -contractive conditions on intuitionistic fuzzy metric spaces. As an application, the existence and uniqueness of solution to a nonlinear Fredholm integral equation have been studied.

Recently Samet et al. [16] claimed that most of the coupled fixed point theorems in the setting of single valued mappings on ordered metric spaces are consequences of well-known fixed point theorems.

These concepts were extended by Abbas et al. [17] to multivalued mappings and who obtained coupled coincidence point and common coupled fixed point theorems involving hybrid pair of mappings satisfying generalized contractive conditions in complete metric spaces. Very few authors studied coupled fixed point theorems for hybrid pair of mappings including [1720].

In [17], Abbas et al. introduced the following concept.

Definition 1. Let be a nonempty set, (a collection of all nonempty subsets of ), and let be a self-mapping on . An element is called(1)a coupled coincidence point of hybrid pair if and ,(2)a common coupled fixed point of hybrid pair if and .
We denote the set of coupled coincidence points of mappings and by ,. Note that if , then is also in .

Definition 2. Let be a multivalued mapping and let be a self-mapping on . The hybrid pair is called -compatible if whenever .

Definition 3. Let be a multivalued mapping and let be a self-mapping on . The mapping is called -weakly commuting at some point if and .

Aamri and El Moutawakil [21] defined (EA) property for self-mappings which contained the class of noncompatible mappings. Kamran [22] extended the (EA) property for hybrid pair and . Liu et al. [23] introduced common (EA) property for hybrid pairs of single and multivalued mappings and gave some new common fixed point theorems under hybrid contractive conditions. Abbas and Rhoades [24] extended the concept of occasionally weakly compatible mappings for hybrid pair and .

In this paper, we introduce the concept of (EA) property and occasional -compatibility for hybrid pair and . We also introduce common (EA) property for two hybrid pairs and . We establish some common coupled fixed point theorems for two hybrid pairs of mappings under - contraction on noncomplete metric spaces. The - contraction is weaker contraction than the contraction defined in Gnana Bhaskar and Lakshmikantham [8] and Luong and Thuan [9]. We improve, extend, and generalize the results of Berinde [10], Gnana Bhaskar and Lakshmikantham [8], Jain et al. [12], Lakshmikantham and Ćirić [11], Liu et al. [23], and Luong and Thuan [9]. The results of this paper generalize the common fixed point theorems for hybrid pairs of mappings and essentially contain fixed point theorems for hybrid pair of mappings.

2. Main Results

We first define the following.

Definition 4. Mappings and are said to satisfy the (EA) property if there exist sequences in , some in , and ,   in such that

Definition 5. Let and . The pairs and are said to satisfy the common (EA) property if there exist sequences , and in , some in , and in such that

Example 6. Let with the usual metric. Define and by Consider the sequences Clearly, Therefore, the pairs and are said to satisfy the common (EA) property.

Definition 7. Mappings and are said to be occasionally -compatible if and only if there exists some point such that , and .

Example 8. Let with usual metric. Define by It can be easily verified that and are coupled coincidence points of and , but and . So and are not -compatible. However, the pair is occasionally -compatible.

Let denote the set of all functions satisfying the following:   is continuous and strictly increasing,   for all ,   for all .And let denote the set of all functions which satisfies   for all and ,   for all and .

Note that, by and , we have that if and only if . For example, functions where , and are in ,   where ,  , and are in .

Now, we prove our main results.

Theorem 9. Let be a metric space. Assume and to be mappings satisfying the following.(1) and satisfy the common (EA) property.(2)For all , there exist some and some such that (3) and are closed subsets of . Then(a) and have a coupled coincidence point,(b) and have a coupled coincidence point,(c) and have a common coupled fixed point, if is -weakly commuting at and and for ,(d) and have a common coupled fixed point, if is -weakly commuting at and and for ,(e),  and have common coupled fixed point provided that both (c) and (d) are true.

Proof. Since and satisfy the common (EA) property, there exist sequences , and in , some in , and in such that Since and are closed subsets of , then there exist , Now, by using condition (2) of Theorem 9, we get Letting in the above inequality, by using (9), (10), ,  , and , we obtain which, by and , implies Since and , it follows that That is, is a coupled coincidence point of and . This proves (a). Again, by using condition (2) of Theorem 9, we get Letting in the above inequality, by using (9), (10), ,  , and , we obtain which, by and , implies Since and , it follows that That is, is a coupled coincidence point of and . This proves (b).
Furthermore, from condition (c), we have which is -weakly commuting at ; that is, and . Thus, and ; that is, and . This proves (c). A similar argument proves (d). Then (e) holds immediately.

Put in Theorem 9, and we get the following result.

Corollary 10. Let be a metric space. Assume and to be mappings such that(1) and satisfy the common (EA) property,(2)for all ,,,, there exist some and some such that (3) is a closed subset of . Then(a) and have a coupled coincidence point,(b) and have a coupled coincidence point,(c) and have a common coupled fixed point, if is -weakly commuting at and and for ,(d) and have a common coupled fixed point, if is -weakly commuting at and and for ,(e),  and have common coupled fixed point provided that both (c) and (d) are true.

Put and in Theorem 9, and we get the following result.

Corollary 11. Let be a metric space. Assume and to be mappings such that(1) satisfies the (EA) property,(2)for all , there exist some and some such that If (3) of Corollary 10 holds. Then(a) and have a coupled coincidence point,(b) and have a common coupled fixed point, if is -weakly commuting at and and for .

Corollary 12. Let be a metric space. Assume and to be mappings satisfying (1) of Theorem 9 and(1)for all ,,,, there exists some such that If (3) of Theorem 9 holds, then(a) and have a coupled coincidence point,(b) and have a coupled coincidence point,(c) and have a common coupled fixed point, if is -weakly commuting at and and for ,(d) and have a common coupled fixed point, if is -weakly commuting at and and for ,(e), and   have common coupled fixed point provided that both (c) and (d) are true.

Proof. If , then for all . Now divide condition (1) of Corollary 12 by 4 and take , and then the above condition reduces to condition (2) of Theorem 9 with and hence by Theorem 9 we get Corollary 12.

Put in Corollary 12, and we get the following result.

Corollary 13. Let be a metric space. Assume and to be mappings satisfying (1) of Corollary 10 and(1)for all , there exists some such that If (3) of Corollary 10 holds, then(a) and have a coupled coincidence point,(b) and have a coupled coincidence point,(c) and have a common coupled fixed point, if is -weakly commuting at and and for ,(d) and have a common coupled fixed point, if is -weakly commuting at and and for ,(e), and   have common coupled fixed point provided that both (c) and (d) are true.

Put and in Corollary 12, we get the following result.

Corollary 14. Let be a metric space. Assume and to be mappings satisfying (1) of Corollary 11 and(1)for all , there exists some such that If (3) of Corollary 10 holds, then(a) and have a coupled coincidence point,(b) and have a common coupled fixed point, if is -weakly commuting at and and for .

Theorem 15. Let be a metric space. Assume and to be mappings satisfying (1) of Theorem 9 and (2) of Theorem 9 and(1) and are -compatible.(2)Suppose that either(a) is a closed subset of and or(b) is a closed subset of and .Then , and   have a common coupled fixed point.

Proof. Since and satisfy the common (EA) property, there exist sequences , and in , some in , and in satisfying (9). Suppose (a) holds; that is, is a closed subset of , and then there exist , and we have As in Theorem 9, we can prove that That is, is a coupled coincidence point of and . Hence, . From -compatibility of , we have ; hence, and ; that is, and . Now, we shall show that and . Suppose, not. Then, by condition (2) of Theorem 9, we get Letting in the above inequality, by using (9) and , we obtain Since , and , therefore, by , we get which is a contradiction. Thus, and . Hence, we have Since , then there exist such that and . Now, by condition (2) of Theorem 9, ,  , and , we get which, by and , implies Thus, That is, is a coupled coincidence point of and . Hence, . From -compatibility of , we have ; hence and ; that is, and . Now, we shall show that and . Suppose, not. Then, by condition (2) of Theorem 9 and , we get which is a contradiction. Thus, and . Hence, we have Therefore, is a common coupled fixed point of the pairs and . The proof is similar when (b) holds.

If we put in Theorem 15, we get the following result.

Corollary 16. Let be a metric space. Assume and to be mappings satisfying (1) of Corollary 10 and (2) of Corollary 10 and(1) and are -compatible;(2)suppose that either(a) is a closed subset of and or(b) is a closed subset of and .Then , and   have a common coupled fixed point.

If we put and in Theorem 15, we get the following result.

Corollary 17. Let be a metric space. Assume and to be mappings satisfying (1) of Corollary 11 and (2) of Corollary 11 and(1) is -compatible;(2) is a closed subset of and .Then and have a common coupled fixed point.

Corollary 18. Let be a metric space. Assume and to be mappings satisfying (1) of Theorem 9, (1) of Corollary 12, (1) of Theorem 15, and (2) of Theorem 15; then ,  and have a common coupled fixed point.

Proof. If , then for all . If we divide condition (1) of Corollary 12 by 4 and take , then it reduces to condition (2) of Theorem 9 with and hence by Theorem 15 we get Corollary 18.

If we put in Corollary 18, we get the following result.

Corollary 19. Let be a metric space. Assume and to be mappings satisfying (1) of Corollary 10, (1) of Corollary 13, (1) of Corollary 16, and (2) of Corollary 16; then , and have a common coupled fixed point.

If we put and in Corollary 18, we get the following result.

Corollary 20. Let be a metric space. Assume and to be mappings satisfying (1) of Corollary 11, (1) of Corollary 14, (1) of Corollary 17, and (2) of Corollary 17; then and have a common coupled fixed point.

Theorem 21. Let be a metric space. Assume and to be mappings satisfying (2) of Theorem 9 and(1) and are occasionally -compatible.Then ,  and have a common coupled fixed point.

Proof. Since the pairs and are occasionally -compatible, therefore there exist some points ,, such that It follows that Now, we shall show that and . Suppose, not. Then, by condition (2) of Theorem 9 and , we have which is a contradiction. Thus, and . Hence, Thus, by (36), we get Now, we shall show that and . Suppose, not. Then, by condition (2) of Theorem 9 and , we have which is a contradiction. Thus, Similarly, we can show that Thus, by (39), (41), and (42), we get That is, is a common coupled fixed point of ,  and .

Put in Theorem 21, and we get the following result.

Corollary 22. Let be a metric space. Assume and to be mappings satisfying (2) of Corollary 10 and(1) and are occasionally -compatible.Then ,  and have a common coupled fixed point.

Put and in Theorem 21, and we get the following result.

Corollary 23. Let be a metric space. Assume and to be mappings satisfying (2) of Corollary 11 and(1) is occasionally -compatible.Then and have a common coupled fixed point.

Corollary 24. Let be a metric space. Assume and to be mappings satisfying (1) of Corollary 12 and (1) of Theorem 21; then , and   have a common coupled fixed point.

Proof. If , then for all . If we divide condition (1) of Corollary 12 by 4 and take , then it reduces to condition (2) of Theorem 9 with and hence by Theorem 21 we get Corollary 24.

Put in Corollary 24, and we get the following result.

Corollary 25. Let be a metric space. Assume and to be mappings satisfying (1) of Corollary 13 and (1) of Corollary 22; then , and have a common coupled fixed point.

Put and in Corollary 24, and we get the following result.

Corollary 26. Let be a metric space. Assume and to be mappings satisfying (1) of Corollary 14 and (1) of Corollary 23; then and have a common coupled fixed point.

Example 27. Suppose that , equipped with the metric defined as and for all . Let be defined as Suppose be defined as Define by and by Now, for all with , we have
Case (a). If , then
Case (b). If with , then Similarly, we obtain the same result for . Thus, the contractive condition (2) of Theorem 9 is satisfied for all with . Again, for all with and , we have Thus, the contractive condition (2) of Theorem 9 is satisfied for all with and . Similarly, we can see that the contractive condition (2) of Theorem 9 is satisfied for all with . Hence, the hybrid pairs and satisfy condition (2) of Theorem 9, for all . In addition, all the other conditions of Theorem 9, Theorem 15, and Theorem 21 are satisfied and is a common coupled fixed point of , and  .

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgment

The authors thank the referee for the extremely careful reading and very deep and useful comments and suggestions that contributed to the improvement of the paper.

References

  1. J. T. Markin, “Continuous dependence of fixed point sets,” Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 38, pp. 545–547, 1973. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  2. S. B. Nadler, “Multi-valued contraction mappings,” Pacific Journal of Mathematics, vol. 30, pp. 475–488, 1969. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  3. S. Banach, “Sur les operations dans les ensembles abstraits et leur. Applications aux equations integrales,” Fundamenta Mathematicae, vol. 3, pp. 133–181, 1922. View at Google Scholar
  4. B. Deshpande, “Common fixed point for set and single valued functions without continuity and compatibility,” Mathematica Moravica, vol. 11, pp. 27–38, 2007. View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  5. B. Deshpande and S. Chouhan, “Fixed points for two hybrid pairs of mappings satisfying some weaker conditions on noncomplete metric spaces,” Southeast Asian Bulletin of Mathematics, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 851–858, 2011. View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  6. I. Kubiaczyk and B. Deshpande, “Noncompatibility, discontinuity in consideration of common fixed point of set and single valued maps,” Southeast Asian Bulletin of Mathematics, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 467–474, 2008. View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  7. S. Sharma and B. Deshpande, “Fixed point theorems for set and single valued mappings without continuity and compatibility,” Demonstratio Mathematica, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 649–658, 2007. View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  8. T. Gnana Bhaskar and V. Lakshmikantham, “Fixed point theorems in partially ordered metric spaces and applications,” Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications, vol. 65, no. 7, pp. 1379–1393, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  9. N. V. Luong and N. X. Thuan, “Coupled fixed points in partially ordered metric spaces and application,” Nonlinear Analysis. Theory, Methods & Applications, vol. 74, no. 3, pp. 983–992, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  10. V. Berinde, “Coupled fixed point theorems for φ-contractive mixed monotone mappings in partially ordered metric spaces,” Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications, vol. 75, no. 6, pp. 3218–3228, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  11. V. Lakshmikantham and L. Ćirić, “Coupled fixed point theorems for nonlinear contractions in partially ordered metric spaces,” Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications, vol. 70, no. 12, pp. 4341–4349, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  12. M. Jain, K. Tas, S. Kumar, and N. Gupta, “Coupled common fixed point results involving a φ,ψ-contractive condition for mixed g-monotone operators in partially ordered metric spaces,” Journal of Inequalities and Applications, vol. 2012, article 285, 19 pages, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  13. B. Deshpande and A. Handa, “Nonlinear mixed monotone-generalized contractions on partially ordered modified intuitionistic fuzzy metric spaces with application to integral equations,” Afrika Matematika, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  14. B. Deshpande, S. Sharma, and A. Handa, “φ-contractive mixed monotone mappings in coupled fixed point consideration on intuitionistic fuzzy metric spaces with application to integral equations,” The Journal of Fuzzy Mathematics, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 401–418, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  15. B. Deshpande, S. Sharma, and A. Handa, “Common coupled fixed point theorems for nonlinear contractive condition on intuitionistic fuzzy metric spaces with application to integral equations,” Journal of the Korean Society of Mathematical Education. Series B. The Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 159–180, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  16. B. Samet, E. Karapinar, H. Aydi, and V. Ć. Rajić, “Discussion on some coupled fixed point theorems,” Fixed Point Theory and Applications, vol. 2013, article 50, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. M. Abbas, L. Ćirić, B. Damjanović, and M. A. Khan, “Coupled coincidence and common fixed point theorems for hybrid pair of mappings,” Fixed Point Theory and Applications, vol. 2012, article 4, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  18. M. Abbas, B. Ali, and A. Amini-Harandi, “Common fixed point theorem for a hybrid pair of mappings in Hausdorff fuzzy metric spaces,” Fixed Point Theory and Applications, vol. 2012, article 225, 12 pages, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  19. W. Long, S. Shukla, and S. Radenovic, “Some coupled coincidence and common fixed point results for hybrid pair of mappings in 0-complete partial metric spaces,” Fixed Point Theory and Applications, vol. 2013, article 145, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  20. N. Singh and R. Jain, “Coupled coincidence and common fixed point theorems for set-valued and single-valued mappings in fuzzy metric space,” Journal of Fuzzy Set Valued Analysis, vol. 2012, Article ID jfsva-00129, 10 pages, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  21. M. Aamri and D. El Moutawakil, “Some new common fixed point theorems under strict contractive conditions,” Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, vol. 270, no. 1, pp. 181–188, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  22. T. Kamran, “Coincidence and fixed points for hybrid strict contractions,” Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, vol. 299, no. 1, pp. 235–241, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  23. Y. Liu, J. Wu, and Z. Li, “Common fixed points of single-valued and multivalued maps,” International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences, vol. 2005, no. 19, pp. 3045–3055, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  24. M. Abbas and B. E. Rhoades, “Common fixed point theorems for hybrid pairs of occasionally weakly compatible mappings satisfying generalized contractive condition of integral type,” Fixed Point Theory and Applications, vol. 2007, Article ID 054101, 9 pages, 2007. View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet