Advanced
COMMON n-TUPLED FIXED POINT FOR HYBRID PAIR OF MAPPINGS UNDER NEW CONTRACTIVE CONDITION
COMMON n-TUPLED FIXED POINT FOR HYBRID PAIR OF MAPPINGS UNDER NEW CONTRACTIVE CONDITION
Journal of the Korean Society of Mathematical Education Series B The Pure and Applied Mathematics. 2014. Jul, 21(3): 165-181
Copyright © 2014, Korean Society of Mathematical Education
  • Received : January 24, 2014
  • Accepted : April 14, 2014
  • Published : July 28, 2014
Download
PDF
e-PUB
PubReader
PPT
Export by style
Share
Article
Author
Metrics
Cited by
TagCloud
About the Authors
BHAVANA DESHPANDE
aDEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS, GOVT. ARTS & SCIENCE P.G. COLLEGE, RATLAM-457001(M.P.) INDIAEmail address:bhavnadeshpande@yahoo.com
AMRISH HANDA
bDEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS, GOVT. P. G. ARTS AND SCIENCE COLLEGE, RATLAM-457001(MP) INDIAEmail address:amrishhanda83@gmail.com

Abstract
We establish a common n -tupled fixed point theorem for hybrid pair of mappings under new contractive condition. It is to be noted that to find n -tupled coincidence point, we do not use the condition of continuity of any mapping involved. An example supporting to our result has also been cited. We improve, extend and generalize several known results.
Keywords
1. Introduction and Preliminaries
Let ( X, d ) be a metric space and CB ( X ) be the set of all nonempty closed bounded subsets of X . Let D ( x, A ) denote the distance from x to A X and H denote the Hausdorff metric induced by d , that is,
  • D(x,A) =
  • andH(A,B) =for allA,B∈CB(X).
The study of fixed points for multivalued contractions and non-expansive mappings using the Hausdorff metric was initiated by Markin [10] : The existence of fixed points for various multivalued contractive mappings has been studied by many authors under different conditions. For details, we refer the reader to [3 , 4 , 6 , 7 , 12] and the reference therein. The theory of multivalued mappings has application in control theory, convex optimization, differential inclusions and economics.
In [1] , Bhaskar and Lakshmikantham established some coupled fixed point theorems and apply these results to study the existence and uniqueness of solution for periodic boundary value problems. Lakshmikantham and Ciric [9] proved coupled coincidence and common coupled fixed point theorems for nonlinear contractive mappings in partially ordered complete metric spaces, extended and generalized the results of Bhaskar and Lakshmikantham [1] ,
Chandok, Sintunavarat and Kumam [2] established some coupled coincidence point and coupled common fixed point theorems for a pair of mappings having a mixed g-monotone property in partially ordered G-metric spaces. Kumam et al. [8] proved some tripled fixed point theorems in fuzzy normed spaces. Rahimi, Radenovic, Soleimani Rad [11] introduced some new definitions about quadrupled fixed point and obtained some new quadrupled fixed point results in abstract metric spaces.
Imdad, Soliman, Choudhury and Das [5] introduced the concept of n -tupled fixed point, n -tupled coincidence point and proved some n -tupled coincidence point and n -tupled fixed point results for single valued mapping.
These concepts was extended by Deshpande and Handa [4] to multivalued mappings and obtained n -tupled coincidence points and common n -tupled fixed point theorems involving hybrid pair of mappings under generalized Mizoguchi-Takahashi contraction. In [4] , Deshpande and Handa introduced the following for multivalued mappings:
Definition 1.1. Let X be a nonempty set, F : Xr → 2 X (a collection of all nonempty subsets of X ) and g be a self-mapping on X . An element ( x 1 , x 2 ,…, xr ) ∈ Xr is called
(1) an r−tupled fixed point of F if x 1 F ( x 1 , x 2 ,…, xr ), x 2 F ( x 2 ,…, xr , x 1 )…, xr F ( xr , x 1 ,…, x r−1 ).
(2) an r-tupled coincidence point of hybrid pair { F, g } if g ( x 1 ) ∈ F ( x 1 , x 2 ,…, xr ), g ( x 2 ) ∈ F ( x 2 ,…, xr , x 1 ),…, g ( xr ) ∈ F ( xr , x 1 ,…, x r−1 ).
(3) a common r−tupled fixed point of hybrid pair { F, g } if x 1 = g ( x 1 ) ∈ F ( x 1 , x 2 ,…, xr ), x 2 = g ( x 2 ) ∈ F ( x 2 ,…, xr , x 1 ),…, xr = g ( xr ) ∈ F ( xr , x 1 ,…, x r−1 ).
We denote the set of r −tupled coincidence points of mappings F and g by C { F, g }. Note that if ( x 1 , x 2 ,…, xr ) ∈ C { F, g }, then ( x 2 ,…, xr , x 1 ),…, ( xr , x 1 ,…, x r−1 ) are also in C { F, g }.
Definition 1.2. Let F : Xr → 2 X be a multivalued mapping and g be a self-mapping on X . The hybrid pair { F, g } is called w−compatible if g ( F ( x 1 , x 2 ,…, xr )) ⊆ F ( g ( x 1 ), g ( x 2 ),…, g ( xr )) whenever ( x 1 , x 2 ,…, xr ) ∈ C { F, g }.
Definition 1.3. Let F : Xr → 2 X be a multivalued mapping and g be a self-mapping on X . The mapping g is called F weakly commuting at some point ( x 1 , x 2 ,…, xr ) ∈ Xr if g 2 ( x 1 ) ∈ F ( g ( x 1 ), g ( x 2 ),…, g ( xr )), g 2 ( x 2 ) ∈ F ( g ( x 2 ),…, g ( xr ), g ( x 1 )),…, g 2 ( xr ) ∈ F ( g ( xr ), g ( x 1 ),…, g ( x r−1 )).
Lemma 1.1. Let ( X, d ) be a metric space. Then, for each a X and B CB ( X ), there is b 0 B such that D ( a, B ) = d ( a , b 0 ), where D ( a, B ) = inf bB d ( a, b ).
In this paper, we establish a common n −tupled fixed point theorem for hybrid pair of mappings satisfying new contractive condition. It is to be noted that to find n −tupled coincidence point, we do not use the condition of continuity of any mapping involved. Our result improves, extend, and generalize the results of Bhaskar and Lakshmikantham [1] and Lakshmikantham and Ciric [9] . An example is also given to validate our result.
2. Main Results
Let Φ denote the set of all functions φ : [0; +∞) → [0; +∞) satisfying (iφ) φ is non-decreasing, (iiφ) φ(t) < t for all t >0, (iiiφ) limrt+ φ(r) < t for all t > 0
and Ψ denote the set of all functions ψ : [0, +∞) → [0, +∞) which satisfies (iψ) ψ is continuous, (iiψ) ψ(t) < t, for all t > 0. Note that, by ( iψ ) and ( iiψ ) we have that ψ ( t ) = 0 if and only if t = 0.
For simplicity, we define the following:
Theorem 2.1. Let ( X, d ) be a metric space. Assume F : Xr CB ( X ) and g : X X be two mappings satisfying
PPT Slide
Lager Image
for all x 1 , x 2 ,…, xr , y 1 , y 2 ,…, yr X. where φ ∈ Φ and ψ ∈Ψ. Furthermore assume that F ( Xr ) ⊆ g ( X ) and g ( X ) is a complete subset of X. Then F and g have an r−tupled coincidence point. Moreover, F and g have a common r−tupled fixed point, if one of the following conditions holds:
( a ) F and g are w−compatible . lim i→∞ gix 1 = y 1 , lim i→∞ gix 2 = y 2 , …, lim i→∞ gixr = yr , for some ( x 1 , x 2 , …, xr ) ∈ C { F, g } and for some y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X and g is continuous at y 1 , y 2 , … , yr .
( b ) g is F−weakly commuting for some ( x 1 , x 2 , …, xr ) ∈ C { F, g }, gx 1 , gx 2 , …, gxr are fixed points of g, that is , g 2 x 1 = gx 1 , g 2 x 2 = gx 2 , …, g 2 xr = gxr .
( c ) g is continuous at x 1 , x 2 , …, xr . lim i→∞ giy 1 = x 1 , lim i→∞ giy 2 = x 2 , …, lim i→∞ giyr = xr for some ( x 1 , x 2 , …, xr ) ∈ C { F, g } and for some y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X .
( d ) g ( C { F, g }) is a singleton subset of C { F, g }.
Proof. Let
PPT Slide
Lager Image
X be arbitrary. Then F (
PPT Slide
Lager Image
), …, F (
PPT Slide
Lager Image
) are well defined. Choose
PPT Slide
Lager Image
F (
PPT Slide
Lager Image
), …, g
PPT Slide
Lager Image
F (
PPT Slide
Lager Image
) because F ( Xr ) ⊆ g ( X ). Since F : Xr CB ( X ), therefore by Lemma 1.1, there exist z 1 F (
PPT Slide
Lager Image
), …, z r F (
PPT Slide
Lager Image
) such that
Since F ( Xr ) ⊆ g ( X ), there exist
PPT Slide
Lager Image
∈ such that z 1 =
PPT Slide
Lager Image
, z 2 =
PPT Slide
Lager Image
, …, zr =
PPT Slide
Lager Image
Thus
Continuing this process, we obtain sequences
PPT Slide
Lager Image
X ,
PPT Slide
Lager Image
X , …,
PPT Slide
Lager Image
X such that for all i N , we have
PPT Slide
Lager Image
F
PPT Slide
Lager Image
,
PPT Slide
Lager Image
F
PPT Slide
Lager Image
, …,
PPT Slide
Lager Image
F
PPT Slide
Lager Image
such that
Thus
Similarly
Combining them, we get
PPT Slide
Lager Image
which implies, by ( iiφ ); that
This shows that the sequence
PPT Slide
Lager Image
defined by δi =
PPT Slide
Lager Image
is a decreasing sequence of positive numbers. Then there exists δ ≥ 0 such that
PPT Slide
Lager Image
We shall prove that δ = 0. Suppose that δ > 0. Letting i → ∞ in (2.2), by using (2.3) and ( iiiφ ), we get
which is a contradiction. Hence
PPT Slide
Lager Image
We now prove that
PPT Slide
Lager Image
are Cauchy sequences in ( X, d ). Suppose, to the contrary, that one of the sequences is not a Cauchy sequence.
Then there exists an ε > 0 for which we can find subsequences
PPT Slide
Lager Image
of
PPT Slide
Lager Image
of
PPT Slide
Lager Image
of
PPT Slide
Lager Image
such that
PPT Slide
Lager Image
We can choose i ( k ) to be the smallest positive integer satisfying (2:5). Then
PPT Slide
Lager Image
By (2.5), (2.6) and triangle inequality, we have Letting k → ∞ in the above inequality and using (2.4), we get
PPT Slide
Lager Image
By triangle inequality, we have Thus
PPT Slide
Lager Image
Since
PPT Slide
Lager Image
PPT Slide
Lager Image
PPT Slide
Lager Image
PPT Slide
Lager Image
, therefore by (2.1) and by triangle inequality, we have
Thus
Similarly Combining them, we get
PPT Slide
Lager Image
By (2.8) and (2.9), we get
Letting k → ∞ in the above inequality, by using (2.4), (2.7), ( A ), ( iψ ), ( iiψ ) and ( iiiφ ), we get
which is a contradiction. This shows that
PPT Slide
Lager Image
are Cauchy sequences in g ( X ). Since g ( X ) is complete, thus there exist x 1 , x 2 , …, xr X such that
PPT Slide
Lager Image
Now, since
PPT Slide
Lager Image
PPT Slide
Lager Image
therefore by using condition (2.1), we get
Letting i → ∞ in the above inequality, by using (2.10), ( A ), ( iψ ), ( iiψ ) and ( iiiφ ), we get D(gx1, F(x1, x2, …, xr)) ≤ φ(t) + 0 = 0 + 0 = 0.
Thus D(gx1, F(x1, x2, …, xr)) = 0.
Similarly D(gx2, F(x2, …, xr, x1)) = 0, …, D(gxr, F(xr, x1, …, xr−1)) = 0,
which implies that gx1F(x1, x2, …, xr), …, gxrF(xr, x1, …, xr−1), that is, ( x 1 , x 2 , …, xr ) is an r −tupled coincidence point of F and g .
Suppose now that ( a ) holds. Assume that for some ( x 1 , x 2 , …, xr ) ∈ C { F, g },
PPT Slide
Lager Image
Since g is continuous at y 1 , y 2 , …, yr , we have, by (2.11), that y 1 , y 2 , …, yr are fixed points of g , that is,
PPT Slide
Lager Image
As F and g are w −compatible, so for all i ≥ 1,
PPT Slide
Lager Image
By using (2.1) and (2.13), we obtain D(gix1, F(y1, y2, …, yr)) H(F(gi−1x1, gi−1x2, …, gi−1xr), F(y1, y2, …, yr)) φ [max {d(gix1, gy1), d(gix2, gy2), …, d(gixr, gyr)}] + ψ [M{gi−1x1, gi−1x2, …, gi−1xr, y1, y2, …, yr}].
On taking limit as i → ∞ in the above inequality, by using (2.11), (2.12), ( A ), ( iψ ), ( iiψ ) and ( iiiφ ), we get D(gy1, F(y1, y2,…, yr)) ≤ φ(t) + 0 = 0 + 0 = 0,
which implies that D(gy1, F(y1, y2,…, yr)) = 0.
Similarly D(gy2, F(y2,…, yr, y1)) = 0,…, D(gyr, F(yr, y1,…, yr−1)) = 0. Thus
PPT Slide
Lager Image
Thus, by (2.12) and (2.14), we get y1 = gy1F(y1, y2,…, yr), …, yr = gyrF(yr, y1,…, yr−1), that is, ( y 1 , y 2 ,…, yr ) is a common r −tupled fixed point of F and g .
Suppose now that ( b ) holds. Assume that for some ( x 1 , x 2 ,…, xr ) ∈ C { F, g }, g is F −weakly commuting, that is, g 2 x 1 F ( gx 1 , gx 2 ,…, gxr ), g 2 x 2 F ( gx 2 , …, gxr , gx 1 ),…, g 2 xr F ( gxr , gx 1 , …, gx r−1 ) and g 2 x 1 = gx 1 , g 2 x 2 = gx 2 ,…, g 2 xr = gxr . Thus gx 1 = g 2 x 1 F ( gx 1 , gx 2 ,…, gxr ), gx 2 = g 2 x 2 F ( gx 2 ,…, gxr , gx 1 ),…, gxr = g 2 xr F ( gxr , gx 1 ,…, gx r−1 ), that is, ( gx 1 , gx 2 ,…, gxr ) is a common r −tupled fixed point of F and g .
Suppose now that ( c ) holds. Assume that for some ( x 1 , x 2 ,…, xr ) ∈ C { F, g } and for some y 1 , y 2 ,…, yr X , lim i→∞ giy 1 = x 1 , lim i→∞ giy 2 = x 2 ,…, lim i→∞ giyr = xr . Since g is continuous at x 1 , x 2 ,…, xr . We have that x 1 , x 2 ,…, xr are fixed points of g , that is, gx 1 = x 1 , gx 2 = x 2 ,…, gxr = xr . Since ( x 1 , x 2 ,…, xr ) ∈ C { F, g }, therefore, we obtain x 1 = gx 1 F ( x 1 , x 2 ,…, xr ), x 2 = gx 2 F ( x 2 ,…, xr , x 1 ),…, xr = gxr F ( xr , x 1 ,…, x r−1 ), that is, ( x 1 , x 2 ,…, xr ) is a common r −tupled fixed point of F and g .
Finally, suppose that ( d ) holds. Let g ( C { F, g }) = {( x 1 , x 1 ,…, x 1 )}. Then { x 1 } = { gx 1 } = F ( x 1 , x 1 ,…, x 1 ). Hence ( x 1 , x 1 ,…, x 1 ) is a common r −tupled fixed point of F and g .
Example 2.1. Suppose that X = [0; 1], equipped with the metric d : X × X → [0, +∞) defined as d ( x, y ) = max{ x, y } and d ( x, x ) = 0 for all x, y X . Let F : Xr CB ( X ) be defined as
and g : X X be defined as g(x) = x2, for all xX.
Define φ : [0, +∞) → [0, +∞) by
and ψ : [0, +∞) → [0, +∞) by
PPT Slide
Lager Image
Now, for all x 1 , x 2 , …, xr , y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X with x 1 , x 2 ,…, xr , y 1 , y 2 …, yr ∈ [0, 1).
But If ( x 1 ) 2 + ( x 2 ) 2 + … + ( xr ) 2 < ( y 1 ) 2 + ( y 2 ) 2 + … + ( yr ) 2 , then
Similarly, we obtain the same result for ( y 1 ) 2 + ( y 2 ) 2 + … + ( yr ) 2 < ( x 1 ) 2 + ( x 2 ) 2 + … + ( xr ) 2 . Thus the contractive condition (2.1) is satisfied for all x 1 , x 2 , …, xr , y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X with x 1 , x 2 , …, xr , y 1 , y 2 , …, yr ∈ [0; 1). Again, for all x 1 , x 2 , …, xr , y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X with x 1 , x 2 , …, xr ∈ [0; 1) and y 1 , y 2 , …, yr = 1, we have
Thus the contractive condition (2.1) is satisfied for all x 1 , x 2 , …, xr , y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X with x 1 , x 2 , …, xr ∈ [0, 1) and y 1 , y 2 , …, yr = 1. Similarly, we can see that the contractive condition (2.1) is satisfied for all x 1 , x 2 , …, xr , y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X with x 1 , x 2 , …, xr , y 1 , y 2 , …, yr = 1. Hence, the hybrid pair { F, g } satisfy the contractive condition (2.1), for all x 1 , x 2 , …, xr , y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X . In addition, all the other conditions of Theorem 2.1 are satisfied and z = (0, 0, …, 0) is a common r −tupled fixed point of hybrid pair { F, g }. The function F : Xr CB ( X ) involved in this example is not continuous on Xr .
Corollary 2.2. Let (X, d) be a metric space. Assume F : Xr CB(X) and g : X X be two mappings satisfying
for all x 1 , x 2 , …, xr , y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X, where φ ∈ Φ and ψ ∈ Ψ. Furthermore assume that F ( Xr ) ⊆ g(X) and g(X) is a complete subset of X. Then F and g have an r−tupled coincidence point. Moreover, F and g have a common r−tupled fixed point, if one of the following conditions holds:
( a ) F and g are w−compatible . lim i→∞ gix 1 = y 1 , lim i→∞ gix 2 = y 2 , …, lim i→∞ gixr = yr , for some ( x 1 , x 2 , …, xr ) ∈ C { F, g } and for some y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X and g is continuous at y 1 , y 2 , …, yr .
( b ) g is F−weakly commuting for some ( x 1 , x 2 , …, xr ) ∈ C { F, g }, gx 1 , gx 2 , …, gxr are fixed points of g, that is , g 2 x 1 = gx 1 , g 2 x 2 = gx 2 , …, g 2 xr = gxr .
( c ) g is continuous at x 1 , x 2 , …, xr . lim i→∞ giy 1 = x 1 , lim i→∞ giy 2 = x 2 , …, lim i→∞ giyr = xr for some ( x 1 , x 2 , …, xr ) ∈ C { F, g } and for some y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X .
( d ) g ( C { F, g }) is a singleton subset of C { F, g }.
Proof . It suffices to remark that Then, we apply Theorem 2.1, since φ is non-decreasing.
If we put g = I (the identity mapping) in the Theorem 2.1, we get the following result:
Corollary 2.3. Let ( X, d ) be a complete metric space, F : Xr CB ( X ) be a mapping satisfying H(F(x1, x2, …, xr), F(y1, y2, …, yr)) φ [max {d(x1, y1), …, d(xr, yr)}] + ψ [m(x1, …, xr, y1, …, yr)], for all x 1 , x 2 , …, xr , y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X, where φ ∈ Φ and ψ ∈ Ψ. Then F has an r−tupled fixed point.
If we put g = I (the identity mapping) in the Corollary 2.2, we get the following result:
Corollary 2.4. Let ( X, d ) be a complete metric space, F : Xr CB ( X ) be a mapping satisfying for all x 1 , x 2 , …, xr , y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X, where φ ∈ Φ and ψ ∈ Ψ. Then F has an r−tupled fixed point .
If we put ψ ( t ) = 0 in Theorem 2.1, we get the following result:
Corollary 2.5. Let ( X, d ) be a metric space. Assume F : Xr CB ( X ) and g : X X be two mappings satisfying H(F(x1, x2, …, xr), F(y1, y2, …, yr)) φ [max {d(gx1, gy1), d(gx2, gy2), …, d(gxr, gyr)}], for all x 1 , x 2 , …, xr , y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X, where φ ∈ Φ. Furthermore assume that F ( Xr ) ⊆ g ( X ) and g ( X ) is a complete subset of X. Then F and g have an r−tupled coincidence point. Moreover, F and g have a common r−tupled fixed point, if one of the following conditions holds:
( a ) F and g are w−compatible . lim i→∞ gix 1 = y 1 , lim i→∞ gix 2 = y 2 , …, lim i→∞ gixr = yr , for some ( x 1 , x 2 , …, xr ) ∈ C { F, g } and for some y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X and g is continuous at y 1 , y 2 , …, yr .
( b ) g is F−weakly commuting for some ( x 1 , x 2 , …, xr ) ∈ C { F, g }, gx 1 , gx 2 , …, gxr are fixed points of g, that is , g 2 x 1 = gx 1 , g 2 x 2 = gx 2 , …, g 2 xr = gxr .
( c ) g is continuous at x 1 , x 2 , …, xr . lim i→∞ giy 1 = x 1 , lim i→∞ giy 2 = x 2 , …, lim i→∞ giyr = xr for some ( x 1 , x 2 , …, xr ) ∈ C { F, g } and for some y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X .
( d ) g ( C { F, g }) is a singleton subset of C { F, g }.
If we put ψ ( t ) = 0 in Corollary 2.2, we get the following result:
Corollary 2.6. Let ( X, d ) be a metric space. Assume F : Xr CB ( X ) and g : X X be two mappings satisfying for all x 1 , x 2 , …, xr , y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X, where φ ∈ Φ. Furthermore assume that F ( Xr ) ⊆ g ( X ) and g ( X ) is a complete subset of X : Then F and g have an r−tupled coincidence point. Moreover, F and g have a common r−tupled fixed point, if one of the following conditions holds:
( a ) F and g are w−compatible . lim i→∞ gix 1 = y 1 , lim i→∞ gix 2 = y 2 , …, lim i→∞ gixr = yr , for some ( x 1 , x 2 , …, xr ) ∈ C { F, g } and for some y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X and g is continuous at y 1 , y 2 , …, yr .
( b ) g is F−weakly commuting for some ( x 1 , x 2 , …, xr ) ∈ C { F, g }, gx 1 , gx 2 , …, gxr are fixed points of g, that is , g 2 x 1 = gx 1 , g 2 x 2 = gx 2 , …, g 2 xr = gxr .
( c ) g is continuous at x 1 , x 2 , …, xr . lim i→∞ giy 1 = x 1 , lim i→∞ giy 2 = x 2 , …, lim i→∞ giyr = xr for some ( x 1 , x 2 , …, xr ) ∈ C { F, g } and for some y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X .
( d ) g ( C { F, g }) is a singleton subset of C { F, g }.
If we put g = I (the identity mapping) in the Corollary 2.5, we get the following result:
Corollary 2.7. Let ( X, d ) be a complete metric space, F : Xr CB ( X ) be a mapping satisfying H(F(x1, x2, …, xr), F(y1, y2, …, yr)) φ [max {d(x1, y1), d(x2, y2), …, d(xr, yr)}], for all x 1 , x 2 , …, xr , y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X, where φ ∈ Φ. Then F has an r−tupled fixed point.
If we put g = I (the identity mapping) in the Corollary 2.6, we get the following result:
Corollary 2.8. Let ( X, d ) be a complete metric space, F : Xr CB ( X ) be a mapping satisfying for all x 1 , x 2 , …, xr , y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X, where φ ∈ Φ. Then F has an r−tupled fixed point.
If we put φ ( t ) = kt where 0 < k < 1 in Corollary 2.5, we get the following result:
Corollary 2.9. Let ( X, d ) be a metric space. Assume F : Xr CB ( X ) and g : X X be two mappings satisfying H(F(x1, x2, …, xr), F(y1, y2, …, yr)) k max {d(gx1, gy1), d(gx2, gy2), …, d(gxr, gyr)}, for all x 1 , x 2 , …, xr , y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X, where 0 < k < 1. Furthermore assume that F ( Xr ) ⊆ g ( X ) and g ( X ) is a complete subset of X . Then F and g have an r−tupled coincidence point. Moreover, F and g have a common r−tupled fixed point, if one of the following conditions holds:
( a ) F and g are w−compatible . lim i→∞ gix 1 = y 1 , lim i→∞ gix 2 = y 2 , …, lim i→∞ gixr = yr , for some ( x 1 , x 2 , …, xr ) ∈ C { F, g } and for some y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X and g is continuous at y 1 , y 2 , …, yr .
( b ) g is F−weakly commuting for some ( x 1 , x 2 , …, xr ) ∈ C { F, g }, gx 1 , gx 2 , …, gxr are fixed points of g, that is , g 2 x 1 = gx 1 , g 2 x 2 = gx 2 , …, g 2 xr = gxr .
( c ) g is continuous at x 1 , x 2 , …, xr . lim i→∞ giy 1 = x 1 , lim i→∞ giy 2 = x 2 , …, lim i→∞ giyr = xr for some ( x 1 , x 2 , …, xr ) ∈ C { F, g } and for some y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X .
( d ) g ( C { F, g }) is a singleton subset of C { F, g }.
If we put φ ( t ) = kt where 0 < k < 1 in Corollary 2.6, we get the following result:
Corollary 2.10. Let ( X, d ) be a metric space. Assume F : Xr CB ( X ) and g : X X be two mappings satisfying for all x 1 , x 2 , …, xr , y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X, where 0 < k < 1. Furthermore assume that F ( Xr ) ⊆ g ( X ) and g ( X ) is a complete subset of X . Then F and g have an r−tupled coincidence point. Moreover, F and g have a common r−tupled fixed point, if one of the following conditions holds:
( a ) F and g are w−compatible . lim i→∞ gix 1 = y 1 , lim i→∞ gix 2 = y 2 , …, lim i→∞ gixr = yr , for some ( x 1 , x 2 , …, xr ) ∈ C { F, g } and for some y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X and g is continuous at y 1 , y 2 , …, yr .
( b ) g is F−weakly commuting for some ( x 1 , x 2 , …, xr ) ∈ C { F, g }, gx 1 , gx 2 , …, gxr are fixed points of g, that is , g 2 x 1 = gx 1 , g 2 x 2 = gx 2 , …, g 2 xr = gxr .
( c ) g is continuous at x 1 , x 2 , …, xr . lim i→∞ giy 1 = x 1 , lim i→∞ giy 2 = x 2 , …, lim i→∞ giyr = xr for some ( x 1 , x 2 , …, xr ) ∈ C { F, g } and for some y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X .
( d ) g ( C { F, g }) is a singleton subset of C { F, g }.
If we put g = I (the identity mapping) in the Corollary 2.9, we get the following result:
Corollary 2.11. Let ( X, d ) be a complete metric space, F : Xr CB ( X ) be a mapping satisfying H(F(x1, x2, …, xr), F(y1, y2, …, yr)) ≤ k max {d(x1, y1), d(x2, y2), …, d(xr, yr)}, for all x 1 , x 2 , …, xr , y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X, where 0 < k < 1. Then F has an r−tupled fixed point.
If we put g = I (the identity mapping) in the Corollary 2.10, we get the following result:
Corollary 2.12. Let ( X, d ) be a complete metric space, F : Xr CB ( X ) be a mapping satisfying for all x 1 , x 2 , …, xr , y 1 , y 2 , …, yr X, where 0 < k < 1. Then F has an r−tupled fixed point.
References
Bhaskar T.G. , Lakshmikantham V. 2006 Fixed point theorems in partially ordered metric spaces and applications Nonlinear Anal. 65 (7) 1379 - 1393    DOI : 10.1016/j.na.2005.10.017
Chandok S. , Sintunavarat W. , Kumam P. 2013 Some coupled common fixed points for a pair of mappings in partially ordered G-metric spaces Mathematical Sciences 7 24 -    DOI : 10.1186/2251-7456-7-24
Deshpande B. 2007 Common fixed point for set and single valued functions without continuity and compatibility Mathematica Moravica 11 27 - 38
Deshpande B. , Handa A. Common n-tupled fixed point under generalized Mizoguchi-Takahashi contraction for hybrid pair of mappings Southeast Asian Bull. Math.
Imdad M. , Soliman A.H. , Choudhury B.S. , Das P. On n-tupled coincidence point results in metric spaces Hindawi Publishing Corporation Journal of Operators 2013 8 -
Kubiaczyk I. , Deshpande B. 2006 A common fixed point theorem for multivalued mappings through T-weak commutativity Mathematica Moravica 10 55 - 60
Kubiaczyk I. , Deshpande B. 2007 Common fixed point of multivalued mappings without continuity Fasciculi Mathematici 37 (9) 19 - 26
Kumam P. , Martinez-Moreno J. , Roldan A. , Roldan C. 2014 Berinde-Borcut tripled fixed point theorem in partially ordered (intuitionistic) fuzzy normed spaces Journal of Inequalities and Applications 2014 47 -    DOI : 10.1186/1029-242X-2014-47
Lakshmikantham V. , Ciric L. 2009 Coupled fixed point theorems for nonlinear contractions in partially ordered metric spaces Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Method and Applications 70 (12) 4341 - 4349    DOI : 10.1016/j.na.2008.09.020
Markin J.T. 1947 Continuous dependence of fixed point sets Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 38 545 - 547
Rahimi H. , Radenovic S. , Soleimani Rad G. , Kumam P. 2014 Quadrupled fixed point results in abstract metric spaces Comp.Appl. Math. 33 671 - 685    DOI : 10.1007/s40314-013-0088-5
Sharma S. , Deshpande B. 2007 Fixed point theorems for set and single valued mappings without continuity and compatibility Demonstratio Mathematica XL (3) 649 - 658