Next Article in Journal
Data Re-Identification—A Case of Retrieving Masked Data from Electronic Toll Collection
Next Article in Special Issue
Basic Concepts of Riemann–Liouville Fractional Differential Equations with Non-Instantaneous Impulses
Previous Article in Journal
The Development of a Fuzzy Logic System in a Stochastic Environment with Normal Distribution Variables for Cash Flow Deficit Detection in Corporate Loan Policy
Previous Article in Special Issue
Shrinking Extragradient Method for Pseudomonotone Equilibrium Problems and Quasi-Nonexpansive Mappings
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Non-Unique Fixed Point Theorems in Modular Metric Spaces

by
Sharafat Hussain
1,2,3
1
Department of Mathematics, Quaid-i-Azam University Islamabad, Islamabad 45320, Pakistan
2
Department of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2G1, Canada
3
Department of Mathematics, Women University of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Bagh 12500, AJK, Pakistan
Symmetry 2019, 11(4), 549; https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11040549
Submission received: 5 April 2019 / Revised: 11 April 2019 / Accepted: 15 April 2019 / Published: 16 April 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Fixed Point Theory and Fractional Calculus with Applications)

Abstract

:
This paper is devoted to the study of Ćirić-type non-unique fixed point results in modular metric spaces. We obtain various theorems about a fixed point and periodic points for a self-map on modular spaces which are not necessarily continuous and satisfy certain contractive conditions. Our results extend the results of Ćirić, Pachpatte, and Achari in modular metric spaces.

1. Introduction

Metric fixed point theory was initiated by the renowned theorem of Banach [1], known as the Banach Contraction Mapping Principle. He stated that every contraction in a complete metric space has a unique fixed point. Following this pioneering work, many authors have generalized this elegant result by refining the contraction condition and/or by changing the metric space to more refined abstract spaces (see, e.g., [2,3,4,5] and the related references therein). In 1974, Ćirić [6] studied non-unique fixed point results in metric spaces. He obtained various theorems about a fixed point and periodic points for a self-map f on a metric space M which is not necessarily continuous and satisfies the condition
min d ( f x , f y ) , d ( x , f x ) , d ( y , f y ) min d ( x , f y ) , d ( y , f x ) k d ( x , y ) ,
where x , y M and k ( 0 , 1 ) . Later on, Pachpatte [7] proved that an orbitally continuous self-map f on an f-orbitally complete metric space M satisfying the condition
min [ d ( f x , f y ) ] 2 , d ( x , y ) d ( f x , f y ) , [ d ( y , f y ) ] 2 min d ( x , f x ) d ( y , f y ) , d ( x , f y ) d ( y , f x ) k d ( x , f x ) d ( y , f y ) ,
where x , y M and k ( 0 , 1 ) , has a fixed point. Achari [8] established some fixed point theorems when the self-mapping f on a metric space ( M , d ) satisfies the inequality
min d ( f x , f y ) d ( x , y ) , d ( x , f x ) d ( y , f y ) min d ( x , f x ) d ( x , f y ) , d ( y , f y ) d ( y , f x ) min d ( x , f x ) , d ( y , f y ) k d ( x , y ) ,
where x , y M , k ( 0 , 1 ) , and d ( x , f x ) 0 , d ( y , f y ) 0 . Inspired by this pioneering work, many researchers have studied non-unique fixed point results for different types of contractions on metric spaces (see [9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18]), as well as in many other abstract spaces (see [19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26]).
On the other hand, Nakno [27] initiated the theory of modular spaces, which was re-defined and extended by Musielak and Orlicz [28,29,30]. In 2008, Chistyakov [31] gave the concept of a modular metric space generated by an F-modular and the advanced theory of modular spaces. As a generalization of metric spaces, Chistyakov [32,33]) introduced and studied modular metric spaces on an arbitrary set and, in [34], proved fixed point results for contractive maps in modular spaces. The existence of fixed point theorems in modular spaces has received a great deal of attention from researchers, recently (see [35,36,37,38] and references therein).
Inspired by the works of Chistyakov and Ćirić, in this paper, we study non-unique fixed points and periodic points in modular metric spaces. Our results extend the results of Ćirić, Pachpatte, and Achari in modular metric spaces.

2. Preliminaries

In this section, we recollect some basic notions and results about modular metric spaces, which will be used later. Throughout the article, we assume that M is a nonempty set, λ is a non-negative real number (i.e., λ ( 0 , ) ), and ω : ( 0 , ) × M × M [ 0 , ] is a function (that will also be written as ω ( λ , x , y ) = ω λ ( x , y ) for all λ > 0 and x , y M ) such that ω = ω λ λ > 0 with ω λ : M × M [ 0 , ] .
Definition 1.
[32] A map ω : ( 0 , ) × M × M [ 0 , ] is called a (metric) modular on M if it satisfies the following conditions:
(i) 
ω λ ( x , y ) = 0 if and only if x = y ;
(ii) 
ω λ ( x , y ) = ω λ ( y , x ) ; and
(iii) 
ω λ + μ ( x , y ) ω λ ( x , z ) + ω μ ( z , y ) ,
for all λ , μ > 0 and x , y , z M .
If, in lieu of (i), ω satisfies only
(ip)
ω λ ( x , x ) = 0 for all x M and λ > 0 ,
then ω is called a pseudomodular on M. Furthermore, ω is called a strict modular on M if it satisfies ( i p ) and
(is)
given x , y M , if there exists a non-negative real number λ, possibly depending on x and y, such that ω λ ( x , y ) = 0 , then x = y .
A modular (strict modular, pseudomodular) is called a convex modular if, in place of ( i i i ) , it satisfies
(iv) 
ω λ + μ ( x , y ) λ λ + μ ω λ ( x , z ) + μ λ + μ ω μ ( z , y )
for all λ , μ > 0 and x , y , z M .
It was shown, in [32], that if ω is a convex modular then, for all 0 < λ μ and x , y M , one has
ω μ ( x , y ) λ μ ω λ ( x , y ) ω λ ( x , y ) .
By using condition (iii) of Definition 1, one can show that a modular (pseudomodular) ω satisfies
ω μ 2 ( x , y ) ω μ 1 ( x , y )
for μ 1 < μ 2 and for all x , y M .
Definition 2.
[32] Let ω be a pseudomodular on M and x M . Then, the sets
  • M ω = M ω ( x ) = y M : ω λ ( x , y ) 0 a s λ
  • M ω * = M ω * ( x ) = y M : there exists λ = λ ( y ) > 0 such that ω λ ( x , y ) < ,
are called modular metric spaces (around x ).
It was shown, in [32], that, in general, M ω is contained in M ω * . According to ([32], Theorem 2.6), if ω is a modular metric on M, then the modular space M ω can be equipped with a non-trivial metric generated by ω , given by
d ω ( x , y ) = inf λ > 0 : ω λ ( x , y ) λ ,
for all x , y M ω . If ω is a convex modular on M, then it follows, from ([32], Section 3.5 and Theorem 3.6), that M ω = M ω * holds and they are equipped with the metric d ω * , given by
d ω * ( x , y ) = inf λ > 0 : ω λ ( x , y ) 1 .
Definition 3.
[32,33] Let M ω and M ω * be modular metric spaces.
(i) 
A sequence x n in M ω * ( or M ω ) is called ω-convergent to x M if and only if lim n ω λ ( x n , x ) = 0 , for some λ > 0 . Then, x is said to be the modular limit of x n
(ii) 
A sequence x n in M ω * ( or M ω ) is called ω-Cauchy if lim n , m ω λ ( x n , x m ) = 0 , for some λ > 0 .
(iii) 
A subset X of M ω * ( or M ω ) is called ω -complete if every ω-Cauchy sequence in X is ω-convergent to x X .
By using the properties of modular metrics and the definition of convergence, one can easily prove that if lim n ω λ ( x n , x ) = 0 for some λ > 0 , then lim n ω μ ( x n , x ) = 0 for all μ > λ > 0 . It was also shown, in [33], that if ω is pseudomodular on M, then the modular metric M ω * and M ω are closed with respect to ω -convergence.
Definition 4.
[34] A pseudomodular ω on M is said to satisfy the Δ 2 -condition ( on M ω * ) if the following condition holds: Given a sequence x n M ω * and x M ω * , if there exists a number λ > 0 , possibly depending on x n and x, such that lim n ω λ ( x n , x ) = 0 , then lim n ω λ 2 ( x n , x ) = 0 .
Now, we state the definitions of modular contractive mappings and a fixed point theorem for such mappings (given in [34]).
Definition 5.
Let ω be a modular metric on M.
(i) 
A map f : M ω * M ω * is said to be ω-contractive if there exists k ( 0 , 1 ) and λ 0 = λ 0 ( k ) > 0 such that
ω k λ ( f x , f y ) ω λ ( x , y ) ,
for all 0 < λ < λ 0 and x , y M ω * .
(ii) 
A map f : M ω * M ω * is said to be strong ω-contractive if there exists k ( 0 , 1 ) and λ 0 = λ 0 ( k ) > 0 such that
ω k λ ( f x , f y ) k ω λ ( x , y ) ,
for all 0 < λ < λ 0 and x , y M ω * .
Theorem 1.
Let ω be a strict convex metric modular on M and f : M ω * M ω * be a ω-contractive (or strong ω-contractive) mapping on a complete modular metric space M ω * induced by ω. If, for every λ > 0 , there exists an x = x ( λ ) M ω * such that ω λ ( x , f x ) < , then f has a fixed point in M ω * . Moreover, if ω λ ( x , y ) < for all x , y M ω * and every λ > 0 , then f has a unique fixed point in M ω * .

3. Extension of Non-Unique Fixed Point of Ćirić on Modular Metric Spaces

Let M ω * and M ω be modular metric spaces and f : M ω * M ω * ( or f : M ω M ω ) be a self-map. Let x M ω * ( or M ω ) . We call O ( x ) = f n x : n = 0 , 1 , 2 , 3 , the orbit of x, and f is called orbitally continuous if lim i f n i x = z implies lim i f f n i x = f z for each x M ω * ( or M ω ) . The space M ω * ( or M ω ) is f-orbitally ω -complete if every ω -Cauchy sequence of the form f n i x i = 1 , x M ω * , ( or M ω ) , converges in M ω * ( or M ω ) .
Definition 6.
Let ω be a metric modular on M. A mapping f : M ω * M ω * is called a strong Ćirić-type ω-contraction if there exists k ( 0 , 1 ) and λ 0 = λ 0 ( k ) , such that
min ω k λ ( f x , f y ) , ω k λ ( x , f x ) , ω k λ ( y , f y ) min ω k λ ( x , f y ) , ω k λ ( y , f x ) k ω λ ( x , y )
holds for all 0 < λ < λ 0 and x , y M ω * .
Theorem 2.
Let ω be a convex modular on M. Suppose f : M ω * M ω * is an orbitally continuous mapping on a f-orbitally ω-complete modular space M ω * and f is a strong Ćirić-type ω-contraction. Assume that, for every λ > 0 , there exists an x M ω * such that ω λ ( x , f x ) = C < . Then, for each x M ω * , the sequence f n x n = 1 converges to a fixed point of f.
Proof. 
Let x M ω * be arbitrary such that ω λ ( x , f x ) = C < . Define the iterative sequence { x n } by
x 0 = x , x 1 = f x 0 = f x , x 2 = f x 1 = f 2 x , , x n = f x n 1 = f n x .
We shall show that { x n } is an ω -Cauchy sequence. As ω λ ( x j 1 , x j ) = 0 for some j N immediately implies that { x n } is an ω -Cauchy sequence, we assume that ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) > 0 for all n N and λ > 0 . By inequality (3) with x = x n 1 and y = x n , we get
min ω k λ ( f x n 1 , f x n ) , ω k λ ( x n 1 , f x n 1 ) , ω k λ ( x n , f x n ) min ω k λ ( x n 1 , f x n ) , ω k λ ( x n , f x n 1 ) = min ω k λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) , ω k λ ( x n 1 , x n ) k ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) .
From the fact 0 < k λ < λ , we then have ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) ω k λ ( x n 1 , x n ) . As ω k λ ( x n 1 , x n ) k ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) k ω k λ ( x n 1 , x n ) is not possible (as k < 1 ), we have
ω k λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) k ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) ,
for all n N and 0 < λ < λ 0 . As 0 < k n λ < λ < λ 0 , by (4), we obtain
ω k n λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) = ω k k n 1 λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) k ω k n 1 λ ( x n 1 , x n ) ,
or, inductively,
ω k n λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) k n ω λ ( x , f x ) = k n C ,
for all n N and 0 < λ < λ 0 . By letting n , we get
lim n ω k n λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) = 0 ,
for all n N and 0 < λ < λ 0 . By setting λ 1 = ( 1 k ) λ 0 < λ 0 , we obtain
ω k n λ 1 ( x n , x n + 1 ) k n ω λ 1 ( x , f x ) = k n C ,
for all n N . By letting n , we get
lim n ω k n λ 1 ( x n , x n + 1 ) = 0 ,
for all 0 < λ 1 < λ 0 , As ω is convex, for any m , n N such that m < n , we get
ω λ * ( x n , x m ) j = m n 1 λ j λ * ω λ j ( x j , x j + 1 ) ,
where
λ * = j = m n 1 λ j .
Now, putting λ j = k j λ 1 , j = m , m + 1 , , n 1 , in (7), we have
ω λ * ( x n , x m ) j = m n 1 k j λ 1 λ * ω k j λ 1 ( x j , x j + 1 ) ,
where
λ * = j = m n 1 k j λ 1 = k m λ 1 1 k n m 1 k = k m ( 1 k n m ) λ 0 < λ 0 .
Taking into account 0 < k j λ 1 < λ 1 < λ 0 for j = m , m + 1 , , n 1 and (6), we get
lim n , m ω λ * ( x n , x m ) = 0 ,
for all 0 < λ * < λ 0 . From the fact that 0 < λ * < λ 0 , we then have
ω λ 0 ( x n , x m ) λ * λ 0 ω λ * ( x n , x m ) = k m ( 1 k m ) ω λ * ( x n , x m ) k m ω λ * ( x n , x m ) .
Now, from (9) we have
lim n , m ω λ 0 ( x n , x m ) = 0 .
This shows that { x n } is a ω -Cauchy sequence in M ω * . By the f-orbitally ω -completeness of M ω * , there exists some z in M ω * such that lim n f n x = z . The orbital continuity of f implies
f z = lim n f f n x = z ,
which shows that z is a fixed point of f. □
Theorem 3.
Let ω be a convex modular on M. Suppose f : M ω * M ω * is an orbitally continuous mapping on a f-orbitally ω-complete modular space M ω * and let ε > 0 . Suppose that there exists k ( 0 , 1 ) , λ 0 = λ 0 ( k ) and x M ω * such that ω λ ( x , f q x ) < ε , for some q N and for all λ < λ 0 . If
0 < ω λ ( x , y ) < ε implies min ω k λ ( f x , f y ) , ω k λ ( x , f x ) , ω k λ ( y , f y ) k ω λ ( x , y )
holds, for all 0 < λ < λ 0 and x , y M ω * , then f has a periodic point.
Proof. 
Let Q = { q : ω λ ( x , f q x ) < ε for some x M ω * and for all λ < λ 0 } be the subset of N which is non-empty, due to the assumption of the Theorem. Let x M ω * such that ω λ ( x , f m x ) < ε , where m = min Q .
If m = 1 , by using ( 12 ) with x and f x , we get
min ω k λ ( f x , f 2 x ) , ω k λ ( x , f x ) , ω k λ ( f x , f 2 x ) k ω λ ( x , f x ) .
By the fact that k λ < λ , we have
ω λ ( x , f x ) ω k λ ( x , f x ) .
As ω k λ ( x , f x ) ω λ ( x , f x ) k ω k λ ( x , f x ) is impossible (as k < 1 ), we have
ω k λ ( f x , f 2 x ) k ω λ ( x , f x ) < k ε ,
for all 0 < λ < λ 0 . Proceeding as in Theorem 2, we obtain that f z = z for some z M ω * .
Now, take m 2 ; that is,
ω λ ( y , f y ) ε ,
for all y M ω * and λ < λ 0 . Then, from 0 < ω λ ( x , f m x ) < ε and by (22), we get
min ω k λ ( f x , f m + 1 x ) , ω k λ ( x , f x ) , ω k λ ( f m x , f m + 1 x ) k ω λ ( x , f m x ) .
By the fact that k λ < λ < λ 0 and (13), thus ω k λ ( x , f x ) ε and ω k λ ( f m x , f m + 1 x ) = ω k λ ( f m x , f f m x ) ε , and we get
ω k λ ( f x , f m + 1 x ) k ω λ ( x , f m x ) < k ε ,
for all x M ω * and λ < λ 0 . Similarly,
ω k 2 λ ( f 2 x , f m + 2 x ) k 2 ω λ ( x , f m x ) < k 2 ε .
Continuing in this manner, we get
ω k n λ ( f n x , f m + n x ) k n ω λ ( x , f m x ) < k n ε ,
for all n N . Therefore, for the sequence
x 0 = x , x 1 = f m x 0 , x 2 = f m x 1 , x n = f m x n 1 ,
we have that
ω k n m λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) = ω k n m λ ( f n m x , f m + n m x ) k n m ω λ ( x , f m x ) < k n m ε .
Then, following the same method as in Theorem 2, we conclude that { x n } is a Cauchy sequence. As { x n } { f n x } and M ω * is f-orbitally ω -complete, there exists some z M ω * such that
z = lim n x n = lim n f n m .
Taking into account that if f is orbital continuous, then f r is also orbital continuous for all r N , we have
f m z = lim n x n = lim n f m f n m = = lim n f ( n + 1 ) m = z ,
which shows that z is a periodic point of f. □
Theorem 4.
Let ω be a modular on M and f : M ω * M ω * be an orbitally continuous mapping on a modular space M ω * . Suppose that, whenever x y , f satisfies the following
min ω λ ( f x , f y ) , ω λ ( x , f x ) , ω λ ( y , f y ) min ω λ ( x , f y ) , ω λ ( y , f x ) < ω λ ( x , y ) ,
for all λ > 0 and x , y M ω * . If, for some x M ω * , the sequence f n x n = 1 has a limit point z M ω * , then z is a fixed point of f.
Proof. 
If, for some m N , ω λ ( x m 1 , x m ) = 0 , then x n = x m = z for n m , and the assertion holds. Suppose, then, that ω λ ( x m 1 , x m ) 0 for all m N . Let lim i x n i = z . Then, by (14), for x n 1 , x n M ω * . Then,
min ω λ ( f x n 1 , f x n ) , ω λ ( x n 1 , f x n 1 ) , ω λ ( x n , f x n ) min ω λ ( x n 1 , f x n ) , ω λ ( x n , f x n 1 ) = min ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) , ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) < ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) .
As ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) < ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) is impossible, we have ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) < ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) for all λ > 0 . Therefore, ω λ ( x n + 1 , x n ) n N is a decreasing, and hence convergent, sequence of real numbers. As lim i ω λ ( x n i , x n i + 1 ) = ω λ ( z , f z ) and ω λ ( x n i , x n i + 1 ) ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) , it follows that
lim n ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) = ω λ ( z , f z ) .
Furthermore, as lim i x n i + 1 = f z , lim i x n i + 2 = f 2 z , and ω λ ( x n i + 1 , x n i + 2 ) ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) , by (15), we have
lim n ω λ ( f z , f 2 z ) = ω λ ( z , f z ) .
If ω λ ( z , f z ) > 0 , then (14) implies that ω λ ( f z , f 2 z ) < ω λ ( z , f z ) , a contradiction. Hence, ω λ ( z , f z ) = 0 , i.e., f z = z . This completes the proof of the Theorem. □
Theorem 5.
Let ω be a modular on M satisfying the Δ 2 -condition on M ω * . Suppose that f : M ω * M ω * is an orbitally continuous mapping on a modular space M ω * and ε > 0 . Suppose that f satisfies the following
0 < ω λ ( x , y ) < ε implies min ω λ ( f x , f y ) , ω λ ( x , f x ) , ω λ ( y , f y ) < ω λ ( x , y ) ,
for all λ > 0 and x , y M ω * . If, for some x M ω * , the sequence f n x n = 1 has a limit point z M ω * , then z is the periodic point of f.
Proof. 
Let lim i x n i = z , then there exists r N such that i > r implies ω λ 2 ( x n i , z ) < ε 2 . Hence,
ω λ ( x n i , x n i + 1 ) ω λ 2 ( x n i , z ) + ω λ 2 ( x n i + 1 , z ) < ε 2 + ε 2 = ε ,
and the set
S = s N : ω λ ( x p , x p + s ) < ε for some p N
is non-empty. Put m = min S . If ω λ ( x s , x s + m ) = 0 for some s N , then z = x s = f m z , and the assertion holds. Now, assume that ω λ ( x s , x s + m ) > 0 for every s N and λ > 0 . Let q N such that ω λ ( x q , x q + m ) < ε .
If m = 1 , then, by (17) (as in the proof of the Theorem 4), ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) n N is a decreasing sequence for n q , which implies that f z = z .
So, suppose that m 2 ; that is, that
ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) ε ,
for all n N and λ > 0 . As f is orbital continuous, lim i x n i + s = f s z . By (18),
ω λ ( f s z , f s + 1 ) = lim i ( x n i + s , x n i + s + 1 ) ε ,
for all s N . By (17) and the assumption 0 < ω λ ( x q , x q + m ) < ε , we have
min ω λ ( f x q , f x q + m ) , ω λ ( x q , f x q ) , ω λ ( x q + m , f x q + m ) < ω λ ( x q , x q + m ) ,
or
min ω λ ( x q + 1 , x q + m + 1 ) , ω λ ( x q , x q + 1 ) , ω λ ( x q + m , x q + m + 1 ) < ω λ ( x q , x q + m ) .
Hence, by ( 18 ) , we get
ω λ ( x q + 1 , x q + m + 1 ) < ω λ ( x q , x q + m ) < ε .
In a similar way, we get
ε > ω λ ( x q , x q + m ) > ω λ ( x q + 1 , x q + m + 1 ) > ω λ ( x q + 2 , x q + m + 2 ) > ,
which shows that ω λ ( x n , x n + m ) : n q and λ > 0 is decreasing and, hence, is a convergent sequence of real numbers. As the subsequences ω λ ( x n i , x n i + m ) i N and ω λ ( x n i + 1 , x n i + m + 1 ) i N converge to ω λ ( z , f m z ) and ω λ ( z , f m + 1 z ) , respectively, then, by the orbital continuity of f and as lim i f n i = z , we have
ω λ ( f z , f m + 1 z ) = ω λ ( z , f m z ) = lim n ω λ ( x n , x m + n ) .
By (20) and (21), we get ω λ ( z , f m z ) < ε . If ω λ ( z , f m z ) > 0 , then, from (17), we obtain
min ω λ ( f z , f m + 1 z ) , ω λ ( z , f z ) , ω λ ( f m z , f m + 1 z ) < ω λ ( z , f m z ) < ε .
By (19),
ω λ ( f z , f m + 1 z ) < ω λ ( z , f m z ) ,
which is a contradiction. Hence, ω λ ( z , f m z ) = 0 , which implies that z is the periodic point of f. □

4. Extension of Non-Unique Fixed Point of Pachpatte on Modular Metric Spaces

In this section, non-unique fixed point theorems for Pachpatte-type contractions are proved in the setting of modular metric spaces. We start this section with the following definition.
Definition 7.
Let ω be a metric modular on M. A mapping f : M ω * M ω * is called a strong Pachpatte-type ω-contraction if there exists k ( 0 , 1 ) and λ 0 = λ 0 ( k ) , such that
min ω k λ ( f x , f y ) 2 , ω k λ ( x , y ) ω k λ ( f x , f y ) , ω k λ ( y , f y ) 2 min ω k λ ( x , f x ) , ω k λ ( y , f y ) , ω k λ ( x , f y ) ω k λ ( y , f x ) k ω λ ( x , f x ) ω λ ( y , f y )
holds, for all λ 0 > λ > 0 , and x , y M ω * .
Theorem 6.
Let ω be a convex modular on M. Suppose f : M ω * M ω * is an orbitally continuous mapping on a f-orbitally ω-complete modular space M ω * and f is a strong Pachpatte-type ω-contraction. Assume, for every λ > 0 , there exists an x M ω * such that ω λ ( x , f x ) = C < . Then, for each x M ω * , the sequence f n x n = 1 converges to a fixed point of f.
Proof. 
Let x M ω * be arbitrary, such that ω λ ( x , f x ) = C < . Define the iterative sequence { x n } by
x 0 = x , x 1 = f x 0 = f x , x 2 = f x 1 = f 2 x , , x n = f x n 1 = f n x .
We shall show that { x n } is an ω -Cauchy sequence. As ω λ ( x j 1 , x j ) = 0 for some j N immediately implies that { x n } is ω -Cauchy sequence, we assume that ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) > 0 for all n N and λ > 0 . By (22) with x = x n 1 and y = x n , we get
min ω k λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) 2 , ω k λ ( x n 1 , x n ) ω k λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) , [ ω k λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) ] 2 min ω k λ ( x n 1 , x n ) , ω k λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) , ω k λ ( x n 1 , x n + 1 ) ω k λ ( x n , x n ) = min ω k λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) 2 , ω k λ ( x n 1 , x n ) ω k λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) k ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) .
From the fact that 0 < k λ < λ , we have
ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) ω k λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) ω k λ ( x n 1 , x n ) .
As
ω k λ ( x n 1 , x n ) ω k λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) k ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) k ω k λ ( x n 1 , x n ) ω k λ ( x n , x n + 1 )
is impossible (as k < 1 ), we have
[ ω k λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) ] 2 k ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) k ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) ω k λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) ,
or
ω k λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) k ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) ,
for all n N and 0 < λ < λ 0 . As 0 < k n λ < λ < λ 0 , by (23), we obtain
ω k n λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) = ω k k n 1 λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) k ω k n 1 λ ( x n 1 , x n ) ,
or, inductively,
ω k n λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) k n ω λ ( x , f x ) = k n C ,
for all n N and 0 < λ < λ 0 . By letting n , we get
lim n ω k n λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) = 0 ,
for all n N and 0 < λ < λ 0 . Following the same procedure as in the proof of Theorem 2, we conclude that { x n } is an ω -Cauchy sequence in M ω * . By the f-orbitally ω -completeness of M ω * , there is some z in M ω * such that lim n f n x = z . The orbital continuity of f implies that
f z = lim n f f n x = z ,
which shows that z is a fixed point of f. □
Theorem 7.
Let ω be a modular on M and f : M ω * M ω * be an orbitally continuous mapping on a modular space M ω * . Suppose that, whenever x y , f satisfies the following
min ω λ ( f x , f y ) 2 , ω λ ( x , y ) ω λ ( f x , f y ) , ω λ ( y , f y ) 2 min ω λ ( x , f x ) , ω λ ( y , f y ) , ω λ ( x , f y ) ω λ ( y , f x ) < ω λ ( x , f x ) ω λ ( y , f y ) ,
for all λ > 0 and x , y M ω * . If, for some x M ω * , the sequence f n x n = 1 has a limit point z M ω * , then z is a fixed point of f.
Proof. 
If for some m N , ω λ ( x m 1 , x m ) = 0 , then x n = x m = z for n m , and the assertion holds. Suppose, then, that ω λ ( x m 1 , x m ) 0 for all m N . Let lim i x n i = z . Then, by (25), for x n 1 , x n M ω * , we have
min ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) 2 , ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) , [ ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) ] 2 min ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) , ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) , ω λ ( x n 1 , x n + 1 ) ω λ ( x n , x n ) = min ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) 2 , ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) < ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) .
As ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) < ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) is impossible, we have ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) < ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) for all λ > 0 . Therefore, ω λ ( x n + 1 , x n ) n N is a decreasing, and hence convergent, sequence of real numbers. As lim i ω λ ( x n i , x n i + 1 ) = ω λ ( z , f z ) and ω λ ( x n i , x n i + 1 ) ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) , it follows that
lim n ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) = ω λ ( z , f z ) .
Furthermore, as lim i x n i + 1 = f z , lim i x n i + 2 = f 2 z and ω λ ( x n i + 1 , x n i + 2 ) ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) , by (26), we have
ω λ ( f z , f 2 z ) = ω λ ( z , f z ) .
If ω λ ( z , f z ) ω λ ( f z , f 2 z ) > 0 , then (25) implies ω λ ( f z , f 2 z ) < ω λ ( z , f z ) , a contradiction. Hence, ω λ ( z , f z ) ω λ ( f z , f 2 z ) = 0 . From (27), we have ω λ ( z , f z ) = 0 ; that is, f z = z . This completes the proof of the Theorem. □
Remark 1.
The conclusion of Theorem 6 remains true if we replace condition (22) by
min ω k λ ( f x , f y ) 2 , ω k λ ( x , y ) ω k λ ( f x , f y ) , ω k λ ( y , f y ) 2 min ω k λ ( x , f y ) , ω k λ ( y , f x ) k ω λ ( x , f x ) ω λ ( y , f y ) ,
and, similarly, the conclusion of Theorem 7 remains true if we replace condition (25) by
min ω λ ( f x , f y ) 2 , ω λ ( x , y ) ω λ ( f x , f y ) , ω λ ( y , f y ) 2 min ω λ ( x , f y ) , ω λ ( y , f x ) < ω λ ( x , f x ) ω λ ( y , f y ) .

5. Extension of Non-Unique Fixed Point of Achari on Modular Metric Spaces

In this section, non-unique fixed point theorems for Achari-type contractions are proved in the setting of modular metric spaces. We start this section with the following definition.
Definition 8.
Let ω be a metric modular on M. A mapping f : M ω * M ω * is called a strong Achari-type ω-contraction if there exists k ( 0 , 1 ) and λ 0 = λ 0 ( k ) , such that
A ( x , y ) B ( x , y ) C ( x , y ) k ω λ ( x , y )
holds for all λ 0 > λ > 0 , and x , y M ω * , where
A ( x , y ) = min ω k λ ( f x , f y ) ω k λ ( x , y ) , ω k λ ( x , f x ) ω k λ ( y , f y ) , B ( x , y ) = min ω k λ ( x , f x ) ω k λ ( x , f y ) , ω k λ ( y , f y ) ω k λ ( y , f x ) ,
and
C ( x , y ) = min ω k λ ( x , f x ) , ω k λ ( y , f y ) ,
such that ω k λ ( x , f x ) 0 , ω k λ ( y , f y ) 0 .
Theorem 8.
Let ω be a convex modular on M. Suppose f : M ω * M ω * is an orbitally continuous mapping on a f-orbitally ω-complete modular space M ω * and f is a strong Achari-type ω-contraction. Assume that, for every λ > 0 , there exists an x M ω * such that ω λ ( x , f x ) = C < . Then, for each x M ω * , the sequence f n x n = 1 converges to a fixed point of f.
Proof. 
Let x M ω * be arbitrary, such that ω λ ( x , f x ) = C < . Define the iterative sequence { x n } by
x 0 = x , x 1 = f x 0 = f x , x 2 = f x 1 = f 2 x , , x n = f x n 1 = f n x .
We shall show that { x n } is an ω -Cauchy sequence. As ω λ ( x j 1 , x j ) = 0 for some j N immediately implies that { x n } is an ω -Cauchy sequence, we assume that ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) > 0 for all n N and λ > 0 . By inequality (28) with x = x 0 and y = x 1 , we get
ω k λ ( x 1 , x 2 ) ω k λ ( x 0 , x 1 ) min ω k λ ( x 1 , x 2 ) , ω k λ ( x 0 , x 1 ) k ω λ ( x 0 , x 1 ) .
From the fact 0 < k λ < λ , we have ω λ ( x 0 , x 1 ) ω k λ ( x 0 , x 1 ) . As ω k λ ( x 0 , x 1 ) k ω λ ( x 0 , x 1 ) k ω k λ ( x 0 , x 1 ) is not possible (as k < 1 ), we have
ω k λ ( x 1 , x 2 ) k ω λ ( x 0 , x 1 ) ,
for all 0 < λ < λ 0 . As 0 < k n λ < λ < λ 0 , proceeding in the same manner, we obtain
ω k n λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) = ω k k n 1 λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) k ω k n 1 λ ( x n 1 , x n ) k n ω λ ( x 0 , x 1 ) = k n C ,
for all n N and 0 < λ < λ 0 . By letting n , we get
lim n ω k n λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) = 0 ,
for all n N and 0 < λ < λ 0 . By setting λ 1 = ( 1 k ) λ 0 < λ 0 , we obtain
ω k n λ 1 ( x n , x n + 1 ) k n ω λ 1 ( x , f x ) = k n C ,
for all n N . By letting n , we get
lim n ω k n λ 1 ( x n , x n + 1 ) = 0 ,
for all 0 < λ 1 < λ 0 . Following the same procedure as in the proof of Theorem 2, we conclude that { x n } is an ω -Cauchy sequence in M ω * . By the f-orbitally ω -completeness of M ω * , there is some z in M ω * such that lim n f n x = z . The orbital continuity of f implies that
f z = lim n f f n x = z ,
which shows that z is a fixed point of f. □
Theorem 9.
Let ω be a modular on M and f : M ω * M ω * be an orbitally continuous mapping on a modular space M ω * . Suppose that whenever x y , f satisfies
P ( x , y ) Q ( x , y ) R ( x , y ) < ω λ ( x , y ) ,
for all λ > 0 , and x , y M ω * ; where
P ( x , y ) = min ω λ ( f x , f y ) ω λ ( x , y ) , ω λ ( x , f x ) ω λ ( y , f y ) , Q ( x , y ) = min ω λ ( x , f x ) ω λ ( x , f y ) , ω λ ( y , f y ) ω λ ( y , f x ) ,
and
R ( x , y ) = min ω λ ( x , f x ) , ω λ ( y , f y ) ,
such that ω λ ( x , f x ) 0 , ω λ ( y , f y ) 0 . If, for some x M ω * , the sequence f n x n = 1 has a limit point z M ω * , then z is a fixed point of f.
Proof. 
If, for some m N , ω λ ( x m 1 , x m ) = 0 , then x n = x m = z for n m , and the assertion holds. Suppose, then, that ω λ ( x m 1 , x m ) 0 for all m N . Let lim i x n i = z . Then, by (32), for x n 1 , x n M ω * , we have
min ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) , ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) 0 min ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) , ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) < ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) ,
or
ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) min ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) , ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) < ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) .
If min ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) , ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) = ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) , then ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) < ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) is impossible. Hence, we have ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) < ω λ ( x n 1 , x n ) for all λ > 0 and n N . Therefore, ω λ ( x n + 1 , x n ) n N is a decreasing, and hence convergent, sequence of real numbers. As lim i ω λ ( x n i , x n i + 1 ) = ω λ ( z , f z ) and ω λ ( x n i , x n i + 1 ) ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) , it follows that
lim n ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) = ω λ ( z , f z ) .
Furthermore, as lim i x n i + 1 = f z , lim i x n i + 2 = f 2 z , and ω λ ( x n i + 1 , x n i + 2 ) ω λ ( x n , x n + 1 ) , by (33), we have
ω λ ( f z , f 2 z ) = ω λ ( z , f z ) .
If ω λ ( z , f z ) > 0 , then (32) implies ω λ ( f z , f 2 z ) < ω λ ( z , f z ) , a contradiction. Hence, ω λ ( z , f z ) = 0 ; that is, f z = z . This completes the proof of the Theorem. □
Remark 2.
The conclusion of Theorem 8 remains true if we replace condition (28) by
A ( x , y ) min ω k λ ( x , f y ) , ω k λ ( y , f x ) C ( x , y ) k ω λ ( x , y ) ,
and, similarly, the conclusion of Theorem 9 remains true if we replace condition (32) by
P ( x , y ) min ω λ ( x , f y ) , ω λ ( y , f x ) R ( x , y ) < ω λ ( x , y ) .

6. Conclusions

Several generalizations of the concept of metric spaces have been introduced. Among them, modular metric spaces [31], partial metric spaces [39], extended b-metric spaces [40], and cone metric spaces [41] have been studied by the several researchers recently. Non-unique fixed points of Ćirić-type were investigated in extended b-metric spaces [19], partial metric spaces [23], and cone metric spaces [25]. This approach can be applied in several abstract spaces and has various applications in (fractional) differential equations and integral equations. Inspired by this work, we studied non-unique fixed points of Ćirić-type in modular metric spaces. We obtained various theorems about fixed points and periodic points for self-maps on modular spaces which are not necessarily continuous and satisfy certain contractive conditions. Our results unify and extend some existing results in the literature. The study of non-unique fixed points in the current context would be an interesting topic for future study.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Erdal Karapinar for suggesting this problem, along with his extended help at various stages of this work. In addition, I would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their comments and suggestions.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Banach, S. Surles operations dans les ensembles abstraits et leur application aux equations integrales. Fund. Math. 1922, 3, 133–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Samreen, M.; Kamran, T. Fixed point theorems for weakly contractive mappings on a metric space endowed with a graph. Filomat 2014, 28, 441–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Samreen, M.; Kamran, T.; Shahzad, N. Some fixed point theorems in b-metric space endowed with graph. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2013, 967132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Bakhtin, I.A. The contraction mapping principle in almost metric spaces. Funct. Anal. 1989, 30, 26–37. [Google Scholar]
  5. Hicks, T.L.; Rhoades, B.E. A Banach type fixed point theorem. Math. Jpn. 1979, 24, 327–330. [Google Scholar]
  6. Ćirić, L.B. On some maps with a non-unique fixed point. Publ. Inst. Math. 1974, 17, 52–58. [Google Scholar]
  7. Pachpatte, B.G. On Ćirić type maps with a non-unique fixed point. Indian J. Pure Appl. Math. 1979, 10, 1039–1043. [Google Scholar]
  8. Achari, J. Results on nonunique fixed points. Publ. Inst. Math. 1979, 26, 5–9. [Google Scholar]
  9. Ćirić, L.B.; Jotić, N. A further extension of maps with non-unique fixed points. Matematički Vesnik 1998, 50, 1–4. [Google Scholar]
  10. Gupta, S.; Ram, B. Non-unique fixed point theorems of Ćirić type. Vijnana Parishad Anusandhan Patrika 1998, 41, 217–231. [Google Scholar]
  11. Karapınar, E.; Agarwal, R.P. A note on Ćirić type non-unique fixed point theorems. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2017, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Liu, Z.Q. On Ćirić type mappings with a non-unique coincidence points. Mathematica (Cluj) 1993, 35, 221–225. [Google Scholar]
  13. Karapınar, E. A new non-unique fixed point theorem. J. Appl. Funct. Anal. 2012, 7, 92–97. [Google Scholar]
  14. Zhang, F.; Kang, S.M.; Xie, L. Ćirić type mappings with a non-unique coincidence points. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2007, 6, 187–190. [Google Scholar]
  15. Dhage, B.C. Some theorems for the maps with a non-unique fixed point. Indian J. Pure Appl. Math. 1985, 16, 254–256. [Google Scholar]
  16. Liu, Z.Q.; Guo, Z.; Kang, S.M.; Lee, S.K. On Ćirić type mappings with non-unique fixed and periodic points. Int. J. Pure Appl. Math. 2006, 26, 399–408. [Google Scholar]
  17. Mishra, S.N. On fixed points of orbitally continuous maps. Nantha Math. 1979, 12, 83–90. [Google Scholar]
  18. Pathak, H.K. Some non-unique fixed points theorems for new class of mappings. Ranchi Univ. Math. J. 1986, 17, 65–70. [Google Scholar]
  19. Alqahtani, B.; Fulga, A.; Karapınar, E. non-unique fixed point results in extended b-metric space. Mathematics 2018, 6, 68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Alsulami, H.H.; Karapınar, E.; Rakočević, V. Ćirić type nonunique fixed point theorems on b-metric spaces. Filomat 2017, 31, 3147–3156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Aydi, H.; Karapınar, E.; Rakocevic, V. Nonunique fixed point theorems on b-metric spaces via simulation functions. Jordan J. Math. Stat. 2017, 47, 133–147. [Google Scholar]
  22. Jain, R.K.; Rajoriya, M.K. Non-unique fixed points in orbitally complete metric space. Pure Appl. Math. Sci. 1987, 25, 55–57. [Google Scholar]
  23. Karapınar, E.; Romaguera, S. Nonunique fixed point theorems in partial metric spaces. Filomat 2013, 27, 1305–1314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Karapınar, E. Ćirić type non-unique fixed points results: A review. Appl. Comput. Math. Int. J. 2019, 1, 3–21. [Google Scholar]
  25. Karapınar, E. Some nonunique fixed point theorems of Ćirić type on Cone Metric Spaces. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2010, 2010, 123094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Basu, T. Extension of Ćirić’s fixed point theorem in a uniform space. Ranchi Univ. Math. J. 1980, 11, 109–115. [Google Scholar]
  27. Nakano, H. Modular Semi-Ordered Spaces; Maruzen Co. Ltd.: Tokyo, Japan, 1950. [Google Scholar]
  28. Musielak, J.; Orlicz, W. On modular spaces. Stud. Math. 1959, 18, 49–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Musielak, J.; Orlicz, W. Some remarks on modular spaces. Bull. Acad. Polon. Sci. Ser. Sci. Math. Astron. Phys. 1959, 7, 661–668. [Google Scholar]
  30. Orlicz, W. A Note on Modular Spaces I. Bull. Acad. Polon. Sci. Ser. Sci. Math. Astron. Phys. 1961, 9, 157–162. [Google Scholar]
  31. Chistyakov, V.V. Modular metric spaces generated by F-modulars. Folia Math. 2018, 15, 3–24. [Google Scholar]
  32. Chistyakov, V.V. Modular metric spaces, I: Basic concepts. Nonlinear Anal. Theory Methods Appl. 2010, 72, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Chistyakov, V.V. Modular metric spaces, II: Application to superposition operators. Nonlinear Anal. Theory Methods Appl. 2010, 72, 15–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Chistyakov, V.V. A fixed point theorem for contractions in modular metric spaces. arXiv 2011, arXiv:1112.5561. [Google Scholar]
  35. Abobaker, H.; Ryan, R.A. Modular metric spaces. Ir. Math. Soc. Bull. 2017, 80, 35–44. [Google Scholar]
  36. Aksoy, U.; Karapinar, E.; Erhan, I.M. Fixed point theorems in complete modular metric spaces and an application to anti-periodic boundary value problems. Filomat 2017, 31, 5475–5488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Kumam, P. Fixed point theorems for nonexpanzive mapping in modular space. Arch. Math. 2004, 40, 345–353. [Google Scholar]
  38. Azadifar, B.; Sadeghi, G.; Saadati, R.; Park, C. Integral type contractions in modular metric spaces. J. Inequal. Appl. 2013, 2013, 483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Matthews, S. Partial metric topology. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1994, 728, 183–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Kamran, T.; Samreen, M.; Ain, O.U. A generalization of b-metric space and some fixed point theorems. Mathematics 2017, 5, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Huang, L.G.; Zhang, X. Cone metric spaces and fixed point theorems of contractive mappings. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2007, 332, 1468–1476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Hussain, S. Non-Unique Fixed Point Theorems in Modular Metric Spaces. Symmetry 2019, 11, 549. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11040549

AMA Style

Hussain S. Non-Unique Fixed Point Theorems in Modular Metric Spaces. Symmetry. 2019; 11(4):549. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11040549

Chicago/Turabian Style

Hussain, Sharafat. 2019. "Non-Unique Fixed Point Theorems in Modular Metric Spaces" Symmetry 11, no. 4: 549. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11040549

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop