Next Article in Journal
Mathematical Modelling by Help of Category Theory: Models and Relations between Them
Previous Article in Journal
Solution of Inhomogeneous Fractional Differential Equations with Polynomial Coefficients in Terms of the Green’s Function, in Nonstandard Analysis
Previous Article in Special Issue
Nadler’s Theorem on Incomplete Modular Space
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Approximation of Fixed Points of Multivalued Generalized (α,β)-Nonexpansive Mappings in an Ordered CAT(0) Space

1
Department of Mathematics, Government College University, Katchery Road, Lahore 54000, Pakistan
2
Department of Medical Research, China Medical University Hospital, China Medical University, Taichung 404, Taiwan
3
Department of Sciences and Humanities, Lahore Campus, National University of Computer and Emerging Sciences, Lahore 54000, Pakistan
4
Institute of Research and Development of Processes, University of the Basque Country, 48940 Leioa, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Mathematics 2021, 9(16), 1945; https://doi.org/10.3390/math9161945
Submission received: 7 July 2021 / Revised: 9 August 2021 / Accepted: 10 August 2021 / Published: 15 August 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Nonlinear Problems and Applications of Fixed Point Theory)

Abstract

:
The purpose of this article is to initiate the notion of monotone multivalued generalized ( α , β )-nonexpansive mappings and explore the iterative approximation of the fixed points for the mapping in an ordered CAT(0) space. In particular, we employ the S-iteration algorithm in CAT(0) space to prove some convergence results. Moreover, some examples and useful results related to the proposed mapping are provided. Numerical experiments are also provided to illustrate and compare the convergence of the iteration scheme. Finally, an application of the iterative scheme has been presented in finding the solutions of integral differential equation.

1. Introduction and Preliminaries

Let M a nonempty subset of a metric space Y. A subset M is said to be proximinal if for each v Y , there exists an element k M such that
d ( v , k ) = d ( v , M ) = inf { d ( v , y ) : y M }
where d ( v , M ) is the distance from the point v to the set M. Denote the family of nonempty closed bounded subsets of Y by Ω ( Y ) , the family of nonempty bounded proximinal [1] subsets of Y by D ( Y ) , and the family of nonempty compact subsets of Y by κ ( Y ) . Define the Hausdroff distance, H ( . , . ) , on Ω ( Y ) by
H ( E , F ) = max { sup e E d ( e , F ) , sup f F d ( f , E ) } .
The mapping H is called Pompeiu-Hausdorff metric induced by d.
A multivalued mapping U : Y Ω ( Y ) is said to have a fixed point if there exists an element p Y such that p U p . The set F ( U ) denotes the set of all fixed points of U . This p Y is said to be a strict fixed point (or end point of U ) if U p = { p } . Denote the set of strict fixed points (end points) of U by S F ( U ) . Clearly, S F ( U ) is contained in F ( U ) . A multivalued mapping U : Y Ω ( Y ) ,
(1)
is nonexpansive if
H ( U v , U y ) d ( v , y ) , v , y Y .
(2)
is quasi-nonexpansive if F ( U is nonempty and for any p F ( U )
H ( U v , U p ) d ( v , p ) , v Y .
A multivalued mapping U : Y Ω ( Y ) satisfies the Condition (C) if for any v , y Y
1 2 d ( v , U v ) d ( v , y ) implies that H ( U v , U y ) d ( v , y ) .
A geodesic path is a map, ξ , joining two points v and y in a metric space Y from a closed interval [ 0 , l ] R to Y such that ξ ( 0 ) = v , ξ ( l ) = y and d ( ξ ( q ) , ξ ( q ) ) = | q q | for all q , q [ 0 , l ] . In particular, l = d ( v , y ) . The image of ξ is called the geodesic or metric segment joining v and y. If the image is unique then it is indicated by [ v , y ] . The space ( Y , d ) is called the geodesic space if any two points of Y are connected by a geodesic whereas Y is known to be uniquely geodesic if for each v , y Y , there is exactly one metric segment which joins v and y [2]. A subset M of Y containing every geodesic segment joining any two of its points is said to be convex. A geodesic triangle Δ ( a , b , c ) in a geodesic metric space ( Y , d ) consists of three points in Y where a , b and c are the vertices of Δ and a geodesic segments between them are the sides of Δ. A comparison triangle for Δ ( a , b , c ) in ( Y , d ) is a triangle Δ ¯ ( a , b , c ) = Δ ( a ¯ , b ¯ , c ¯ ) in the Euclidean plane R 2 such that d ( a , b ) = d R 2 ( a ¯ , b ¯ ) , d ( a , c ) = d R 2 ( a ¯ , c ¯ ) and d ( b , c ) = d R 2 ( b ¯ , c ¯ ) [3,4].
Suppose that Δ is a geodesic triangle in E and Δ ¯ is a comparison triangle for Δ . In a geodesic space, if all geodesic triangles of appropriate size satisfy the following comparison axiom called CAT(0) inequality:
d ( u , v ) d R 2 ( u ¯ , v ¯ ) , for all u , v Δ , u ¯ , v ¯ Δ ¯ ,
then such a geodesic space is said to be a CAT(0) space.
Thus, a CAT(0) space is a particular metric space which does not possess any linear structure. Complete CAT(0) spaces generalize Hilbert spaces to the nonlinear framework. Some examples of CAT(0) spaces are pre-Hilbert space [5], Hadamard manifold, R-trees [6], hyperbolic metric spaces [7] and Euclidean building [8]. We refer the readers interested in detailed study of such spaces to [2] and references therein.
A study of sufficient conditions for the existence of fixed points of multivalued contraction and nonexpansive mappings employing the Hausdroff metric was first carried out by Markin [9] which was later extended by Nadler [10]. A topological structure which relies on the properties of distance function defined on the domain and induced distance function on a codomain of multivalued contraction mapping plays vital role in proving the existence of fixed points of such mappings. Fixed point theory for multivalued contraction mappings initiated by Nadler [10] has been extended using different generalized distance structures such as b-metric, rectangular metric, partial metric, and dual metric [11,12,13,14].
Existence of fixed points of single valued and multivalued nonexpansive mappings however requires a rich geometric structure in addition to the topological structure of underlying domain see [15,16,17] and references therein. Kirk [6] instituted the study of fixed points in CAT(0) spaces. He established the existence of a fixed point for a nonexpansive single-valued mapping on bounded closed convex subset of a complete CAT(0) space. In fact, CAT(0) spaces constitute a suitable framework to obtain fixed points of nonexpansive mappings and its various generalizations [18,19,20]. Fixed point results of multivalued mappings in CAT(0) spaces have various applications in differential equations, optimization, control theory, graph theory, computer science, robotics [21,22,23,24,25].
The conditions for a mapping to be nonexpansive must hold for all points in the domain of the mappings. Therefore, the need for relaxed conditions arose which do not affect the outcome of the fixed point results. In order to address this problem, Suzuki [26] introduced a new class of mappings, formally known as the class of mapping satisfying the Condition (C) in the context of uniform convex Banach spaces. The class of nonexpansive mappings is the proper subclass of the class of mapping satisfying the Condition (C). This class of mappings need not be continuous. Akbar and Eslamian [27] extended this class of single valued mappings to the class of multivalued mappings and obtained fixed points of such mappings in the framework of Banach spaces. These results were then obtained in the setup of complete CAT(0) spaces [28,29].
The class of α -nonexpansive mappings in Banach spaces were suggested by Aoyama and Kohshaka [30] who also explored fixed points of such mappings. Recently, Iqbal et al. [31] proposed the concept of multivalued generalized α -nonexpansive mappings and obtained existence and approximation results in the setting of a Banach space. In 2018, Harandi et al. [32] presented the class of ( α , β ) -nonexpansive mappings which is properly larger than the class of α -nonexpansive mapping for a fixed point sequence. Many researchers have presented and studied iterative techniques for approximating the fixed points and established convergence results in CAT(0) spaces for the general class of multivalued mappings including Mann, Ishikawa and S-iterative schemes [20,25,33,34].
Motivated by [26,32], we present the class of monotone multivalued generalized ( α , β ) -nonexpansive multivalued mappings and establish the existence of fixed points for such mappings in the setting of an ordered CAT(0) space. We will approximate the fixed points of the proposed mapping using the S-iterative scheme. Under suitable conditions Δ-convergence and strong convergence results will be established. An application of the convergence results is also presented. Now, we recall some important definitions and results needed in the sequel. We assume that ( Y , d ) is a CAT(0) space.
Lemma 1.
[35] For v , y Y and q [ 0 , 1 ] , there exists a unique h [ v , y ] such that
d ( v , h ) = ( 1 q ) d ( v , y ) a n d d ( y , h ) = q d ( v , y ) .
We denote the unique point h [ v , y ] in the above Lemma by ( 1 q ) v q y .
Lemma 2.
[35] For v , y , z Y and q [ 0 , 1 ] , we have the following inequalities:
(i) 
d ( ( 1 q ) v q y , z ) ( 1 q ) d ( v , z ) + q d ( y , z ) .
(ii) 
d ( ( 1 q ) v q y , z ) 2 ( 1 q ) d ( v , z ) 2 + q d ( y , z ) 2 q ( 1 q ) d ( v , y ) 2 .
Let M be a bounded subset Y and { v n } a bounded sequence in Y then:
(i)
Define a mapping r ( . , { v n } ) : Y R + by
r ( v , { v n } ) = lim sup n d ( v n , v ) .
For each v Y , the value r ( v , { v n } ) is called asymptotic radius of { v n } at v [1].
(ii)
The asymptotic radius of { v n } [1] relative to M is the number r given by
r = inf { r ( v , { v n } ) ; v M } .
Denote asymptotic radius of { v n } relative to M by r ( M , { v n } ) .
(iii)
The asymptotic center of { v n } relative to M [1] is the set A ( { v n } ) of points in Y for which r ( M , { v n } ) = r ( v , { v n } ) , that is,
A ( { v n } ) = { v Y : r ( v , { v n } ) = r } .
Definition 1.
[35] A sequence { v n } in a CAT(0) space Y is Δ-convergent to v Y if v is the unique asymptotic center of every subsequence of { v n } . In such situation, we write Δ lim n v n = v and v is the Δ-limit of { v n } .
Given { v n } Y such that { v n } Δ -converges to v if we take y Y such that v y , then by the uniqueness of the asymptotic center, we have lim sup n d ( v n , v ) < lim sup n d ( v n , y ) .
Lemma 3.
[35] In a complete CAT(0) space, every bounded sequence admits a Δ-convergent subsequence.
Lemma 4.
[35] If { v n } is a bounded sequence in a closed convex subset M of a complete CAT(0) space, then the asymptotic center of { v n } is in M.
Lemma 5.
[36] Let p be an element of a complete CAT(0) space Y. Assuming { t n } is a sequence in [ θ , η ] for some θ , η ( 0 , 1 ) and that { v n } , { y n } are two sequences in Y satisfying the following for some r 0 :
lim sup n d ( v n , p ) r , lim sup n d ( y n , p ) r a n d lim sup n d ( t n v n + ( 1 t n ) y n , p ) = r .
Then
lim n d ( v n , y n ) = 0 .
Let M be a nonempty convex subset of Y and U : M Ω ( M ) with p F ( U ) . Then,
(1)
the Mann iterative process is defined by x 1 M ,
x n + 1 = ( 1 α n ) x n α n y n ,
where y n U v n satisfies
d ( y n + 1 , y n ) H ( U x n + 1 , U x n )
and α n [ 0 , 1 ] ,
(2)
the Ishikawa iterative process is defined as x 1 M ,
y n = ( 1 β n ) x n β n s n , x n + 1 = ( 1 α n ) x n α n s n ,
with s n U x n and s n U y n satisfying d ( s n , s n ) H ( U x n , U y n ) and d ( s n + 1 , s n ) H ( U x n + 1 , U y n ) , and α n , β n [ 0 , 1 ] .
The a modification of S-iterative scheme [37] in the frame work of CAT(0) spaces is given as follows:
Let v 1 M . Define
y n = ( 1 β n ) x n β n s n , x n + 1 = ( 1 α n ) s n α n z n ,
with s n U x n , s n U y n and d ( s n , s n ) H ( U x n , U y n ) satisfying d ( s n + 1 , s n ) H ( U x n + 1 , U y n ) and α n , β n ( 0 , 1 ) .
Consider a complete CAT(0) space, Y, endowed with partial order ⪯. Two elements v , y are comparable if v y or y v . For any a Y , define
[ a , ) = { v Y ; a v } and ( , a ] = { v Y ; v a } .
Let v , y Y . An order interval [ v , y ] is the set given by
[ v , y ] = { w Y : v w y } .
Let M be a nonempty closed convex subset of ( Y , ) . A mapping U : M Ω ( M ) is called monotone if for any u v U v there exists u y U y such that u v u y whenever v y for all v , y M . Moreover, the mapping U is:
(i)
monotone nonexpansive if U is monotone and such that for any comparable v , y M ,
H ( U v , U y ) d ( v , y ) ,
(ii)
monotone quasi-nonexpansive if U is monotone with p F ( U ) and v M such that whenever v , p are comparable,
H ( U v , U p ) d ( v , p )
holds.
Throughout this paper, we consider the order intervals to be closed convex subsets of an ordered CAT(0) space ( Y , ).

2. Multivalued Generalized ( α , β ) -Nonexpansive Mapping

In this section, we introduce a class of multivalued generalized ( α , β )-nonexpansive mapping in the setting of CAT(0) spaces which is a wider class of nonexpansive type mapping which properly contains nonexpansive, mappings satisfying the Condition (C) and generalized α -nonexpansive mappings. We also discuss some of its properties in CAT(0) space.
Definition 2.
Let M be a nonempty subset of a CAT(0) space ( Y , d ) . A multivalued mapping U : M Ω ( Y ) satisfies the Condition ( C ( α , β ) ) if there exists α , β ( 0 , 1 ) such that for any v , y M ,
1 2 d ( v , U v ) d ( v , y ) implies that
H ( U v , U y ) α d ( y , U v ) + β d ( v , U y ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( v , y ) .
If a multivalued mapping satisfies the Condition ( C ( α , β ) ) in a CAT(0) space then we say U is the multivalued generalized ( α , β )-nonexpansive mapping.
Let M be a nonempty closed subset of an ordered CAT(0) space ( Y , ). A mapping U : M Ω ( M ) is said to be a monotone multivalued generalized ( α , β ) nonexpansive mapping if
(a)
U is monotone,
(b)
U satisfies (9) for all v , y M and either v y or y v .
Remark 1.
(1) 
Multivalued generalized (α,β)-nonexpansive mappings extend and generalize the class of mappings introduced by [31]. Indeed, if α = β then the mapping is reduced to multivalued generalized α-nonexpansive mapping.
(2) 
Multivalued generalized (α,β)-nonexpansive mappings contain the class of mappings satisfying the Condition (C). Clearly, substituting α = β = 0 we get our desired mapping.
(3) 
Every nonexpansive mapping is generalized ( 0 , 0 ) -nonexpansive mapping.
We present an example of a multivalued generalized ( α , β )-nonexpansive mappings in an ordered CAT(0) space which is neither nonexpansive or satisfies the Condition (C).
Example 1.
Consider an Example 18 of [38] where
d ( v , y ) = | v 1 y 1 | + | v 1 v 2 y 1 y 2 | .
Define an order on Y as follows: for v = ( v 1 , v 2 ) and y = ( y 1 , y 2 ) , v < y if and only if v 1 y 1 and v 2 y 2 . Thus ( Y , d , ) is an ordered Hyperbolic space which is an example of an ordered CAT(0) space.
Let M = [ 0 , 2 ] × [ 0 , 2 ] Y and U : M Ω ( M ) be defined by
U ( v 1 , v 2 ) = { { ( 0 , 1 4 ) , ( 1 2 , 1 ) } , i f ( v 1 , v 2 ) ( 2 , 2 ) , { ( 3 2 , 3 2 ) , ( 19 10 , 19 10 ) } , i f ( v 1 , v 2 ) = ( 2 , 2 ) .
(1) 
The mapping U does not satisfy the Condition (C) on M and therefore is not nonexpansive. Indeed, for ( v 1 , v 2 ) = ( 1 , 1 ) and ( y 1 , y 2 ) = ( 2 , 2 ) we have
1 2 d ( v , U v ) = 1 2 min { 1 2 , 1 4 } = 1 8
and
d ( v , y ) = | 1 2 | + | 1 ( 1 ) 2 ( 2 ) | = 4 .
Thus, 1 2 d ( v , U v ) < d ( v , y ) . Note that
d i s t ( z , U y ) = inf { | s 1 3 2 | + | s 1 z 2 3 2 . 3 2 | , | s 1 3 2 | + | s 1 z 2 19 10 . 19 10 | }
If z U v then we have
sup z U v d i s t ( z , U y ) = sup { inf { 15 4 , 551 100 } , inf { 11 4 , 451 100 } } = sup { 15 4 , 11 4 } = 15 4
Also,
d i s t ( w , U v ) = inf { | w 1 | + | w 1 w 2 | , | w 1 1 2 | + | w 1 w 2 1 2 | }
If w U y , then we have
sup w U y d i s t ( w , U v ) = sup { inf { 15 4 , 11 4 } , inf { 551 100 , 451 100 } } = sup { 11 4 , 4.51 } = 4.51 .
Thus
H ( U v , U y ) = max { 15 4 , 451 100 } = 4.51
implies that H ( U v , U y ) > d ( v , y ) .
(2) 
Now, we show that U is multivalued generalized ( α , β )-nonexpansive mapping, where α = 7 8 and β = 1 8 . We consider the following cases.
CASE-IIf v = ( v 1 , v 2 ) ( 2 , 2 ) and y = ( y 1 , y 2 ) = ( 2 , 2 ) , Observe that
d i s t ( y , U v ) = inf { d ( ( y 1 , y 2 ) , { ( 0 , 1 4 ) , ( 1 2 , 1 ) } ) } = = 11 2
and
d i s t ( v , U y ) = inf { d ( ( v 1 , v 2 ) , { ( 3 2 , 3 2 ) , ( 19 10 , 19 10 ) } } = | v 1 3 2 | + | v 1 v 2 9 4 | .
For α = 7 8 and β = 1 8 , we obtain that
α d i s t ( y , U v ) + β d i s t ( v , U y ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( v , y ) = 7 8 . 11 2 + 1 8 ( | v 1 3 2 | + | v 1 v 2 9 4 | ) + ( 1 7 8 1 8 ) d ( v , y ) 1 8 | v 1 3 2 v 1 v 2 + 9 4 | + 77 16 4.51 = H ( U v , U y ) .
CASE-IIIf v = ( v 1 , v 2 ) = y = ( y 1 , y 2 ) ( 2 , 2 ) , then
d i s t ( z , U y ) = inf { d ( ( s 1 , z 2 ) , { ( 0 , 1 4 ) , ( 1 2 , 1 ) } ) } = inf { | s 1 | + | s 1 z 2 | , | s 1 1 2 | + | s 1 z 2 1 2 | }
Now z U v gives that
sup z U v d i s t ( z , U y ) = sup { inf { 0 , 1 } , inf { 1 , 0 } } = sup { 0 , 0 } = 0 .
Similarly,
d i s t ( w , U v ) = inf { | w 1 | + | w 1 w 2 | , | w 1 1 2 | + | w 1 w 2 1 2 | }
Now w U y gives
sup w U y d i s t ( w , U v ) = sup { inf { 0 , 1 } , inf { 1 , 0 } } = 0
Thus
H ( U v , U y ) = 0 .
Also,
d i s t ( v , U y ) = | v 1 1 2 | + | v 1 v 2 1 2 | a n d d i s t ( y , U v ) = | y 1 1 2 | + | y 1 y 2 1 2 | .
For α = 7 8 and β = 1 8 , we obtain that
α d i s t ( y , U v ) + β d i s t ( v , U y ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( v , y ) | = 7 8 ( | y 1 1 2 | + | y 1 y 2 1 2 | ) + 1 8 ( | v 1 1 2 | + | v 1 v 2 1 2 | ) + ( 1 7 8 1 8 ) d ( v , y ) 1 8 | v 1 v 1 v 2 7 y 1 7 y 1 y 2 3 4 | 0 = H ( U v , U y ) .
Hence U is ( 7 8 , 1 8 ) -nonexpansive multivalued mapping.
Proposition 1.
Let U : M Ω ( M ) be a multivalued mapping then the following hold.
(1) 
If U satisfies the Condition (C) as defined in ( 3 ) , then U satisfies the Condition ( C ( α , β ) ) .
(2) 
If U satisfies the Condition ( C ( α , β ) ) with F ( U ) , then U is quasi-nonexpansive.
Proof. 
(1)
If U satisfies the Condition (C) then it trivial that U satisfies the Condition ( C ( α , β ) ) for α = β = 0 .
(2)
Let p F ( U ) then,
1 2 d i s t ( p , U p ) = 0 d ( v , p ) for all v Y .
As U satisfies the Condition ( C ( α , β ) ), there exists α , β [ 0 , 1 ) such that
H ( U v , U p ) α d i s t ( p , U v ) + β d i s t ( v , U p ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( v , p )
holds. Then,
H ( U v , U y ) α H ( U v , U p ) + β d i s t ( p , U p ) + β d ( v , p ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( v , p )
implies
( 1 α ) H ( U v , U p ) ( 1 α ) d ( v , p ) .
Since 1 α > 0 , it follows that H ( U v , U p ) d ( v , p ) . Hence U is quasi-nonexpansive multivalued mapping.
Remark 2.
The converse of (i) in the Proposition 1 is not true in general. Indeed if a multivalued mapping satisfies the Condition ( C ( α , β ) ), it does not necessarily imply that the mapping satisfies the Condition (C).
Now, we characterize some properties of F ( U ) of multivalued mapping in CAT(0) space. For the following result sin this section, assume that M is a nonempty subset of a CAT(0) space Y and U : M Ω ( M ) a multivalued mapping satisfying the Condition ( C ( α , β ) ) for some α , β [ 0 , 1 ) ,
Theorem 1.
If M is closed then F ( U ) is closed. Moreover, if M is convex and F ( U ) with S F ( U ) = F ( U ) , then F ( U ) is convex.
Proof. 
Let { p n } be a sequence in F ( U ) such that lim n d ( p n , p ) = 0 for some p M . Since
1 2 d i s t ( p n , U p n ) = 0 d ( p n , p ) for all p M
and U satisfies the Condition ( C ( α , β ) ), there exists α , β [ 0 , 1 ) such that
H ( U p n , U p ) α d i s t ( p , U p n ) + β d i s t ( p n , U p ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( p n , p ) p M .
Thus
d i s t ( p n , U p ) H ( U p n , U p )
and
H ( U p n , U p ) α d i s t ( p , U p n ) + β d i s t ( p n , U p ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( p n , p )
imply that
( 1 β ) d i s t ( p n , U p ) ( 1 β ) d ( p n , p ) .
As 1 β > 0 , on taking the limit on both sides, we obtain that d ( p , U p ) = 0 . Therefore p U p and hence F ( U ) is closed.
Let v , y F ( U ) . We need to show that every geodesic segment joining v and y lies in F ( U ) . Let h [ v , y ] with h = t v ( 1 t ) y for some t [ 0 , 1 ] . Since M is convex and h [ v , y ] M . Let p U p . Then by Lemma 2 and 1 2 d ( p , U p ) = 0 , we have
d ( h , p ) 2 = d ( t v ( 1 t ) y , p ) 2 t d ( v , p ) 2 + ( 1 t ) d ( y , p ) 2 t ( 1 t ) d ( v , y ) 2 = t d i s t ( p , U v ) 2 + ( 1 t ) d i s t ( p , U y ) 2 t ( 1 t ) d ( v , y ) 2 t H ( U p , U v ) 2 + ( 1 t ) H ( U p , U y ) 2 t ( 1 t ) d ( v , y ) 2 t ( α d i s t ( v , U p ) + β d i s t ( p , U v ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( v , p ) ) 2 + ( 1 t ) ( α d i s t ( y , U p ) + β d i s t ( p , U y ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( y , p ) ) 2 t ( 1 t ) d ( v , y ) 2 .
Further, we have
d ( h , p ) 2 t ( α d ( v , p ) + β d ( v , p ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( v , p ) ) 2 + ( 1 t ) ( α d ( y , p ) + β d ( y , p ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( y , p ) ) 2 t ( 1 t ) d ( v , y ) 2 t d ( v , p ) 2 + ( 1 t ) d ( y , p ) 2 t ( 1 t ) d ( v , y ) 2 .
Now by using Lemma 2, we have
d ( h , p ) 2 t ( 1 t ) 2 d ( v , y ) 2 + t 2 ( 1 t ) d ( v , y ) 2 t ( 1 t ) d ( v , y ) 2 = 0 .
This implies that h = p U p , that is, p F ( U ) . Hence F ( U ) is convex. □
Now, we present some results associated with the multivalued mapping satisfying the Condition ( C ( α , β ) ).
Proposition 2.
For each v , y M and p U v we have the following:
(1) 
H ( U v , U p ) d ( v , p ) .
(2) 
Either 1 2 d i s t ( v , U v ) d ( v , y ) or 1 2 d i s t ( p , U p ) d ( y , p ) .
(3) 
Either H ( U v , U y ) α d i s t ( y , U v ) + β d i s t ( v , U y ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( v , y ) or
H ( U v , U p ) α d i s t ( p , U v ) + β d i s t ( v , U p ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( v , p ) .
Proof. 
(1)
As, 1 2 d i s t ( v , U v ) d i s t ( v , U v ) d ( v , p ) p U v , we have
H ( U v , U p ) α d i s t ( p , U v ) + β d i s t ( v , U p ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( v , p )
which implies that
H ( U v , U p ) α d ( v , p ) + α H ( U v , U p ) + β d ( v , p ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( v , p )
and hence
H ( U v , U p ) d ( v , p ) .
we have
H ( U v , U p ) α d i s t ( p , U v ) + β d i s t ( v , U p ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( v , p )
which implies that
H ( U v , U p ) α d ( v , p ) + α H ( U v , U p ) + β d ( v , p ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( v , p )
and hence
H ( U v , U p ) d ( v , p ) .
(2)
Suppose that 1 2 d i s t ( v , U v ) > d ( v , y ) and 1 2 d i s t ( p , U p ) > d ( y , p ) . From (i), we get
1 2 d i s t ( p , U p ) d i s t ( p , U p ) d ( v , p ) and d i s t ( p , U p ) d ( v , y ) + ( y , p ) < 1 2 d i s t ( v , U v ) + 1 2 d i s t ( p , U p ) .
Thus,
d i s t ( p , U p ) 1 2 d i s t ( p , U p ) < 1 2 d i s t ( v , U v )
implies that
d i s t ( p , U p ) < d i s t ( v , U v ) .
Also, we have
d i s t ( v , U v ) d ( v , p ) d ( v , y ) + d ( y , p ) < 1 2 d i s t ( v , U v ) + 1 2 d i s t ( p , U p ) .
Thus,
d i s t ( v , U v ) 1 2 d i s t ( v , U v ) < 1 2 d i s t ( p , U p ) implies that d i s t ( v , U v ) < d i s t ( p , U p )
Combining the inequalities ( 12 ) and ( 13 ) , we obtain d i s t ( v , U v ) < d i s t ( v , U v ) a contradiction. Hence (ii) holds.
(3)
The condition (iii) directly follow from the condition (ii).
Proposition 3.
Let M be closed and convex then
H ( U v , U y ) ( 2 + α + β ) ( 1 β ) d i s t ( v , U v ) + d ( v , y ) ,
holds for all v , y M .
Proof. 
Let v M , then there exists p U v such that d ( v , p ) = d i s t ( v , U v ) . By using Proposition 2, we have
H ( U v , U p ) d ( v , p ) .
Now, by proposition 3.2 (iii), we obtain
H ( U v , U y ) α d i s t ( y , U v ) + β d i s t ( v , U y ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( v , y ) ,
or
H ( U p , U y ) α d i s t ( y , U p ) + β d i s t ( p , U y ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( y , p ) .
If inequality ( 16 ) holds, then we get
H ( U v , U y ) α d i s t ( y , U v ) + β d i s t ( v , U y ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( v , y ) α d ( v , y ) + α d i s t ( v , U v ) + β d i s t ( v , U v ) + β d i s t ( U v , U y ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( v , y ) ( α + β ) d i s t ( v , U v ) + ( 1 β ) d ( v , y ) + β H ( U v , U y ) ( α + β ) ( 1 β ) d i s t ( v , U v ) + d ( v , y ) .
If ( 17 ) holds, then we have
H ( U v , U y ) H ( U v , U p ) + H ( U p , U y ) d ( v , p ) + α d i s t ( y , U p ) + β d i s t ( p , U y ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( y , p ) d ( v , p ) + α d ( v , y ) + α d i s t ( v , U p ) + β d ( v , p ) + β d i s t ( v , U y ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( y , p ) ( 1 + β ) d ( v , p ) + α d ( v , y ) + α d i s t ( v , U v ) + α d i s t ( U v , U p ) + β d i s t ( v , U v ) + β d i s t ( U v , U y ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( y , p ) ( 1 + β ) d ( v , p ) + α d ( v , y ) + ( α + β ) d i s t ( v , U v ) + α H ( U v , U p ) + β H ( U v , U y ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( y , p )
Thus
( 1 β ) H ( U v , U y ) ( 1 + α + β ) d ( v , p ) + α d ( v , y ) + ( α + β ) d i s t ( v , U v ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( y , p ) ( 1 + α + β ) d ( v , p ) + α d ( v , y ) + ( α + β ) d i s t ( v , U v ) + ( 1 α β ) ( d ( v , p ) + d ( v , y ) )
implies that
H ( U v , U y ) ( 2 + α + β ) ( 1 β ) d i s t ( v , U v ) + d ( v , y ) .
Hence our desired inequality is proved in both cases. □

3. Convergence Results

In this section, we present some existence result of fixed point of a multivalued generalized ( α , β ) nonexpansive multivalued mappings in the frame work of ordered CAT(0) space ( Y , ) .
Lemma 6.
Let M be a nonempty, closed and convex subset of a complete ordered CAT(0) space ( Y , ) and U : M Ω ( M ) be a monotone multivalued generalized ( α , β ) nonexpansive mapping. Then 1 2 d ( p , U v ) d ( p , v ) for all v M and p F ( U ) such that either v p or p v .
Lemma 7.
Let M and U : M Ω ( M ) be as in Lemma 6. Fix x 1 M such that x 1 s 1 or ( s 1 x 1 ). If { x n } is defined by ( 6 ) , then we have:
(1) 
x n s n x n + 1 or x n + 1 s n x n for any n 1 and s n U x n .
(2) 
x n x provided that { x n } Δ -converges to a point x M .
Proof. 
(1)
If x 1 s 1 , then by convexity of order interval [ x 1 , s 1 ] and ( 6 ) we have,
x 1 ( 1 β 1 ) x 1 β 1 s 1 s 1 .
Thus, there exists y 1 such that
x 1 y 1 s 1 .
As, U is monotone there exists s 1 U y 1 such that s 1 s 1 . Again by convexity of order interval [ s 1 , s 1 ] and ( 6 ) we have
s 1 ( 1 α 1 ) s 1 α z 2 z 2 .
Thus,
s 1 x 2 s 1 .
From ( 18 ) and ( 19 ) , we have
x 1 y 1 s 1 x 2 z 2
which implies that
x 1 s 1 x 2 .
Hence the statement is true for n = 1 .
Assuming the statement is true for n, that is, for s n U x n , we have
x n s n x n + 1 .
Now, we show ( 21 ) is true for n + 1 .
By the convexity of order interval [ x n , s n ] and ( 6 ) , we have
x n ( 1 β n ) x n β n s n s n .
Thus, we have
x n y n s n .
By monotonicity of U , there exists s n U y n such that s n s n . Again by convexity of order interval [ s n , s n ] and ( 6 ) we have
s n ( 1 α n ) s n α n s n s n
which implies that
s n x n + 1 s n .
It follows from ( 22 ) and ( 23 ) that
x n y n s n x n + 1 s n
and therefore
s n s n + 1 .
From ( 24 ) , we have
x n + 1 s n + 1 .
By the convexity of order interval [ x n + 1 , s n + 1 ] and ( 6 ) , we obtain that
x n + 1 ( 1 β n + 1 ) x n + 1 β n + 1 s n + 1 s n + 1
and hence
x n + 1 y n + 1 s n + 1 .
The monotonicity of U yields that there exists s n + 1 U y n + 1 such that s n + 1 s n + 1 . Now the convexity of order interval [ s n + 1 , s n + 1 ] and ( 6 ) gives that
s n + 1 ( 1 α n + 1 ) s n + 1 α n + 1 s n + 1 s n + 1
which implies that
s n + 1 x n + 2 s n + 1 .
So, from ( 25 ) and ( 26 ) , we obtain
x n + 1 s n + 1 x n + 2 .
Hence, (21) is true for all n .
(2)
Suppose that x is Δ-limit of { x n } . From (i), we have x n x n + 1 for all n 1 . Since the order interval [ x m , ) is closed and convex and the sequence is { x n } is increasing we deduce that x [ x m , ) for a fixed m N , if not, that is, if x [ x m , ) , then a subsequence { x k } of { x n } may be constructed by leaving the first m 1 terms of the sequence { x n } , and then the asymptotic center of { x r } would not be x, which contradicts that x is the Δ-limit of the sequence { x n } . This completes the proof.
Lemma 8.
Let M and U : M Ω ( M ) be as in Lemma 6 and { x n } be a sequence defined by ( 6 ) where F ( U ) such that S F ( U ) = F ( U ) . Suppose that there exists x 1 M such that x 1 s 1 , where s 1 U x 1 . Also, assume that either x 1 and p are comparable then
(1) 
lim n d ( x n , p ) exists for all p F ( U ) .
(2) 
lim n d ( x n , s n ) = 0 where s n U x n .
Proof. 
(1)
Let p F ( U ) . If p x 1 , then Lemma 7 and the transitivity of the order imply p x 2 . Applying mathematical induction, we obtain p x n for all n 1 . On the other hand, assume that x 1 p . Since there exists s 1 U x 1 we have s 1 p as F ( U ) = S F ( U ) . Further, (21) yields
y 1 = ( 1 β 1 ) x 1 β 1 s 1 p .
Again, there exists s 1 U y 1 which implies that s 1 p as F ( U ) = S F ( U ) . Finally, we have
x 2 = ( 1 α 1 ) s 1 α 1 s 1 p .
Continuing in this manner, we obtain y n p , s n p and x n p . Therefore, in both cases x n and p are comparable. Now, from (21) we have
d ( x n + 1 , p ) = d ( ( 1 α n ) s n + α n s n , p ) ( 1 α n ) d ( s n , p ) + α n d ( s n , p ) ( 1 α n ) d i s t ( s n , p ) + α n d i s t ( s n , U p ) ( 1 α n ) H ( U x n , U p ) + α n H ( U y n , U p )
As d ( p , U p ) = 0 1 2 d ( x n , p ) ,
H ( U x n , U p ) α d i s t ( p , U x n ) + β d i s t ( x n , U p ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( x n , p ) α { d i s t ( p , U p ) + d i s t ( U p , U x n ) } + β { d ( x n , p ) + d i s t ( p , U p ) } + ( 1 α β ) d ( x n , p ) α H ( U x n , U p ) + ( 1 α ) d ( x n , p ) d ( x n , p ) .
Also,
H ( U y n , U p ) α d i s t ( p , U y n ) + β d i s t ( y n , U p ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( y n , p ) α { d i s t ( p , U p ) + d i s t ( U p , U y n ) } + β { d ( y n , p ) + d i s t ( p , U p ) } + + ( 1 α β ) d ( y n , p ) α H ( U y n , U p ) + ( 1 α ) d ( y n , p ) d ( y n , p )
and
d ( y n , p ) = d ( ( 1 β n ) x n β n s n , p ) ( 1 β n ) d ( x n , p ) β n d ( s n , p ) ( 1 β n ) d ( x n , p ) + β n H ( U x n , U p ) ( 1 β n ) d ( x n , p ) + β n d ( x n , p ) d ( x n , p ) .
From ( 29 ) and ( 30 ) we obtain that
H ( U y n , U p ) d ( x n , p ) .
Now using ( 30 ) and ( 31 ) in ( 27 ) , we have
d ( x n + 1 , p ) d ( x n , p ) .
Thus, for all n 1 , d ( x n + 1 , p ) d ( x n , p ) that is, { d ( x n , p ) } is decreasing and consequently, lim n d ( x n , p ) exists.
(2)
We now prove that lim n d ( x n , s n ) = 0 .
From (1), we know that for each p F ( U ) , lim n d ( x n , p ) exists. For some r 0 , let
lim n d ( x n , p ) = r .
From ( 28 ) and on taking the limit superior as n , we have
lim sup n d ( s n , p ) lim sup n H ( U x n , U p ) lim sup n d ( x n , p ) = r ,
that is,
lim sup n d ( s n , p ) r .
Similarly, from ( 28 ) and on taking limit superior as n , we get
lim sup n d ( s n , p ) r
and hence
r = lim n d ( x n + 1 , p ) = lim n d ( 1 α n s n + α n s n , p ) .
Now, by applying Lemma 4, we get
lim sup n d ( s n , s n ) = 0 .
From ( 30 ) , we have
d ( y n , p ) d ( x n , p ) .
On taking limit superior as n , we obtain that
lim sup n d ( y n , p ) r .
Note that
d ( x n + 1 , p ) ( 1 α n ) d ( s n , p ) + α n d ( s n , p ) d ( s n , p ) α n d ( s n , p ) + α n d ( s n , p ) + α n d ( s n , s n ) d ( s n , p ) + α n d ( s n , s n ) .
r lim inf n d ( s n , p ) .
Combining ( 34 ) and ( 39 ) , we have
lim sup n d ( s n , p ) = r .
Also,
d ( s n , p ) d ( s n , s n ) + d ( s n , p ) d ( s n , s n ) + d i s t ( s n , U p ) d ( s n , s n ) + H ( U y n , U p ) d ( s n , s n ) + d ( y n , p ) .
By taking limit inferior as n on both sides, we have
r lim inf d ( y n , p ) .
Employing ( 34 ) and ( 40 ) , yields
lim n d ( y n , p ) = lim n d ( ( 1 β n x n + β n s n , p ) = r .
From ( 32 ) , ( 34 ) , ( 40 ) and applying Lemma 5, we get
lim n d ( x n , s n ) = 0 .
Now, we present the existence result associated with multivalued generalized ( α , β )-nonexpansive mapping.
Theorem 2.
Let M and U : M Ω ( M ) be as in Lemma 6. Fix x 1 M such that x 1 s 1 . If { x n } is a sequence given by ( 6 ) then the condition Δ l i m n x n = x and lim n d ( x n , s n ) = 0 are satisfied then x F ( U ) .
Proof. 
Since Δ lim n x n = x , Lemma 7 implies that x n x for all n 1 .
Utilizing the ( α , β ) nonexpansiveness of U and lim n d ( x n , s n ) = 0 , we have z U x . Further,
d ( z , x n ) d ( z , s n ) + d ( s n , x n ) lim sup n d ( z , x n ) lim sup n [ d ( z , s n ) + d ( s n , x n ) ] lim sup n d ( z , s n ) lim sup n d i s t ( z , s n ) lim sup n H ( U x , U x n ) lim sup n d ( x , x n ) .
Thus, from the uniqueness of the asymptotic center we have z = x where z U x . □
Here we discuss the convergence result regarding to our proposed mapping.
Theorem 3.
Let M and U : M Ω ( M ) be as in Lemma 6 with F ( U ) . Fix x 1 s 1 U x 1 . If { x n } is a sequence defined by ( 6 ) , then { x n } Δ-converges to an element of F ( U ) .
Proof. 
It follows from Lemma 7 that lim n d ( x n , p ) exists for each p F ( U ) . So, { x n } is bounded and lim n d ( x n , s n ) = 0 , where s n U x n .
Denote ϱ l ( x n ) = A k ( { u n } ) where the union is taken over all subsequence { u n } of { x n } . We now prove that { x n } is Δ-convergent to a fixed point of U . First we show ϱ l ( x n ) F ( U ) and therefore assert that ϱ l ( x n ) is singleton. To show ϱ l ( x n ) F ( U ) . Let y ϱ l ( x n ) . So there exists a subsequence { y n } of { x n } such that A ( { y n } ) = { y } . As a consequence of Lemma 3 and Lemma 4, there exists a subsequence { t n } of { y n } so that Δ l i m n t n = t and t M .
As lim n d ( x n , s n ) = 0 and { t n } is a subsequence of { x n } , we have that lim n d ( t n , U t n ) = 0 . By Theorem 2, we have t U t and hence t F ( U ) . Now we assert that t = y . Indeed, t y leads to a contradiction as
lim sup n d ( t n , t ) < lim sup n d ( t n , y ) lim sup n d ( y n , y ) < lim sup n d ( y n , t ) = lim sup n d ( x n , t ) = lim sup n d ( t n , t ) ,
and hence, t = y F ( U ) . To show that ϱ l ( x n ) is singleton set, let { y n } be a subsequence of { x n } . From Lemma 3 and 4, there exists a subsequence { t n } of { y n } such that Δ lim n t n = t . Let A ( { y n } ) = { y } and A ( { x n } ) = { x } . As it is already proved that t = y thus it is sufficient to demonstrate that t = x .
If t x , then by Lemma 8, { d ( x n , p ) } converges.
By uniqueness of asymptotic centers, we have
lim sup n d ( t n , t ) < lim sup n d ( t n , x ) lim sup n d ( x n , x ) < lim sup n d ( x n , t ) = lim sup n d ( t n , t ) ,
a contradiction that t x , consequently t = x F ( U ) . Hence the conclusion follows. □
In the following, we ascertain the strong convergence result which extends Theorem (1) in [39] for multivalued generalized ( α , β ) -nonexpansive mapping in the setup of ordered CAT(0) space.
Theorem 4.
Let M and U : M Ω ( M ) be as in Lemma 6 such that F ( U ) . Fix x 1 M such that x 1 s 1 U x 1 . If { x n } is a sequence described as ( 6 ) with Σ n = 1 α n β n = , then { x n } converges to a fixed point of U if and only if lim inf n d ( x n , F ( U ) ) = 0 .
Proof. 
If the sequence { x n } converges to a fixed point p F ( U ) , then it is obvious that lim inf n d ( x n , F ( U ) ) = 0 .
Conversely, suppose that lim inf n d ( x n , F ( U ) ) = 0 . From Lemma 8, we have d i s t ( x n + 1 , p ) d ( x n , p ) for any p F ( U ) . So, d i s t ( x n + 1 , F ( U ) ) d ( x n , F ( U ) and hence { d ( x n , F ( U ) } forms a decreasing sequence that is bounded below by zero which implies that lim n d ( x n , F ( U ) ) exists.
To show { x n } is a Cauchy sequence in M, choose an arbitrary number, say, ϵ > 0 .
As lim inf n d ( x n , F ( U ) ) = 0 we have lim d ( x n , F ( U ) ) = 0 . Thus, there exists n 0 such that for all n n 0 , we have
d ( x n , F ( U ) ) < ϵ 4 .
Specifically,
inf { d ( x n 0 , p ) : p F ( U ) } < ϵ 4
Thus, there must exists p F ( U ) such that d ( x n 0 , p ) < ϵ 2 . Now for m , n n 0 , we have
d ( x m + n , x n ) d ( x m + n , p ) + d ( p , x n ) < 2 d ( x n 0 , p ) < 2 ϵ 2 = ϵ .
Since M Y is closed, { x n } is a Cauchy sequence and consequently, converges in M. Let lim inf n x n = g . Note that
d i s t ( g , U g ) d i s t ( g , x n ) + d i s t ( x n , U x n ) + d i s t ( U x n , g ) d ( x n , g ) + d ( x n , s n ) + H ( U x n , U g ) d ( x n , g ) + d ( x n , s n ) + H ( U x n , U g ) .
On taking limit as n , we have g U g . This completes the proof. □
Remark 3.
(1) 
For α = β = 0 , our theorems extend the results in [27] to CAT(0) spaces.
(2) 
For α = β , these results extend the results in [31,40] to CAT(0) spaces.
(3) 
Our results extend and improve results in [20] for monotone nonexpansive mapping in a CAT(0) spaces.

4. Numerical Experiments

We start with the following example.
Example 2.
Let M = [ 0 , 2 ] and Y a CAT(0) space equipped with the order " " and the standard metric given by d ( v , y ) = | v y | . Define U : M Ω ( M ) by
U ( v ) = { [ 0 , v 2 ] i f 0 v < 1 2 { 0 } i f 1 2 v 1 .
Clearly, U is monotone. Indeed, if v y for v [ 1 2 , 1 ] and y [ 0 , 1 2 ) , then for any u v U v = { 0 } , there exists u y = 0 U y such that u v u y .
Note that U does not satisfy the Condition (C) and hence is not a nonexpansive multivalued mapping. If we take v = 1 2 and y = 11 20 , then
1 2 d i s t ( v , U v ) 1 2 d ( 1 4 , U ( 1 4 ) ) = 0 a n d d ( v , y ) = | 1 4 11 20 | = 0.05 > 0 i m p l i e s t h a t 1 2 d i s t ( v , U v ) d ( v , y ) . H ( U v , U y ) = H ( U ( 1 4 ) , U ( 11 20 ) )
Note that
H ( U v , U y ) = H ( U ( 1 4 ) , U ( 11 20 ) ) = H ( [ 0 , 1 4 ] , { 0 } ) = 1 4 > 0.05 .
Now, to demonstrate U is a multivalued generalized (α,β)-nonexpansive mapping, the following cases are considered:
Case 1:If v , y [ 0 , 1 2 ) , then
H ( U v , U y ) = | v y 2 | 1 3 | v y 2 | + 1 6 | y v 2 | + 1 2 | v y | .
Case 2:The case v , y ( 1 2 , 1 ] is trivial.
Case 3:If v [ 0 , 1 2 ] and y ( 1 2 , 1 ] ,
α d i s t ( y , U v ) + β d i s t ( v , U y ) + ( 1 α β ) d ( v , y ) = 1 3 | v | + 1 6 | y v 2 + 3 v y | 1 3 | v | + 5 12 | v | 3 4 | v | > 1 2 | v | = H ( U v , U y ) .
Hence, U is ( 1 3 , 1 6 ) nonexpansive multivalued mapping.
Now, we conduct some experiments to determine and compare the convergence behavior of iteration (6). In Table 1 we test the convergence of algorithms for different initial points. Fix parameters are α n = 1 2 n + 1 , β n = 1 n + 1 and choose the stopping criteria to be x n x * < 10 5 where x * is the solution of the fixed point problem. It is evident that S-iteration (6) converges faster to the fixed point of the multivalued generalized ( α , β ) -nonexpansive mapping.
In the figures, Figure 1 and Figure 2 we test the convergence of different iterative processes for different choices of parameters. For this, we chose initial point x 1 = 0.4 . Observe that for different choices of parameters the modified S-iteration (6) converges faster to the fixed point of the multivalued generalized ( α , β ) -nonexpansive mapping.

5. Application to Integral Equations

In this section, we show that our iterative scheme defined as in ( 6 ) can be used to find a solution of an integral equation. Let Y = L 2 ( [ 0 , 1 ] , R ) be the space of real valued functions on [ 0 , 1 ] such that + | f ( x ) | 2 < + . Since all Hilbert spaces are CAT(0) spaces then L 2 ( [ 0 , 1 ] , R ) is CAT(0). Define the order on Y by
y z if and only if y ( t ) z ( t )
for all t [ 0 , 1 ] . Consider the following integral equation:
y ( t ) = g ( t ) + 0 1 F ( t , s , y ( s ) ) d s
where t [ 0 , 1 ] , g L 2 ( [ 0 , 1 ] , R ) and F : [ 0 , 1 ] × [ 0 , 1 ] × L 2 ( [ 0 , 1 ] , R ) R . In addition, F is measurable and satisfies the inequality:
0 | F ( t , s , y ) F ( t , s , z ) | | y z |
for t , s [ 0 , 1 ] and y , z L 2 ( [ 0 , 1 ] , R ) such that y z .
Suppose that there exists a nonnegative function f ( . , . ) L 2 ( [ 0 , 1 ] × [ 0 , 1 ] ) and Q < 1 2 satisfying
| F ( t , s , y ) | f ( t , s ) + Q | y |
for t , s [ 0 , 1 ] and y L 2 ( [ 0 , 1 ] , R ) . Consider a closed ball M of L 2 ( [ 0 , 1 ] , R ) centered at 0 with radius σ , i.e.,
M = { y L 2 ( [ 0 , 1 ] , R ) such that y L 2 ( [ 0 , 1 ] , R ) σ } ,
where σ is sufficiently large.
Define the operator U : L 2 ( [ 0 , 1 ] , R ) L 2 ( [ 0 , 1 ] , R ) by
U ( y ( t ) ) = g ( t ) + 0 1 F ( t , s , y ( s ) ) d s .
Then U ( M ) M . Clearly, U monotone nonexpansive mapping and hence monotone generalized ( α , β )-nonexpansive. Choose Y = L 2 ( [ 0 , 1 ] , R ) and U as in ( 44 ) in Theorem 3, we get the following result.
Theorem 5.
Assuming the above stated assumptions, the sequence constructed by the iteration scheme ( 6 ) converges to a solution of the integral Equation ( 43 ) .

6. Conclusions

In this paper, we presented a new type of mappings, monotone multivalued generalized ( α , β )-nonexpansive mappings. We have investigated the iterative approximation of the fixed points for such mappings in an ordered CAT(0) space utilizing the S-iteration algorithm and some convergence results were established. Through numerical experiments we have shown that the process (6) converges faster than all the leading schemes. The proposed mapping and results generalize and extend various results in CAT(0) space including [20,27,31,40]. Furthermore, we have also presented an application of the results in approximating the solution of integral equations.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.A. and H.I.; methodology, H.I. and K.A.; validation, M.A., H.I. and M.D.l.S.; formal analysis, H.I. and K.A.; investigation, H.I. and K.A.; writing—original draft preparation, K.A.; writing—review and editing, M.A. and H.I.; supervision, M.A. and M.D.l.S.; project administration, M.D.l.S.; funding acquisition, M.D.l.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The authors are grateful to the Spanish Government for its support through grant RTI2018-094336-B-100 (MCIU/AEI/FEDER, UE) and to the Basque Government for its support through Grant IT1207-19. The first author was supported by the Higher Education Commission of Pakistan (project No. 9340).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

Authors are thankful to the reviewers and editor for their constructive comments which helped us a lot in improving the presentation of the paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Agarwal, R.P.; O’Regan, D.; Sahu, D.R. Fixed Point Theory for Lipschitzian-Type Mappings with Applications; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2009; Volume 6. [Google Scholar]
  2. Bridson, M.R.; Haefliger, A. Metric Spaces of Non-Positive Curvature; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin, Germany, 2013; Volume 319. [Google Scholar]
  3. Niculescu, C.P.; Rovenţa, I. Fan’s inequality in geodesic spaces. Appl. Math. Lett. 2009, 22, 1529–1533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. Shabanian, S.; Vaezpour, S.M. A minimax inequality and its applications to fixed point theorems in cat (0) spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2011, 2011, 61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Haeiger, A.; Bridson, M.R. Metric Spaces of Non-Positive Curvature, Fundamental Principle of Mathematical Sciences; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 1999; Volume 319. [Google Scholar]
  6. Kirk, W.A. Fixed point theorems in CAT(0) spaces and R-trees. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2004, 2004, 309–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Shafrir, I.; Reich, S. Nonexpansive iterations in hyperbolic spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 1990, 15, 537. [Google Scholar]
  8. Brown, K.S. Buildings; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1998; Volume 319. [Google Scholar]
  9. Markin, J.T. A fixed point theorem for set valued mappings. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 1968, 74, 639–640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Nadler, S.B., Jr. Multi-valued contraction mappings. Pac. J. Math. 1969, 30, 475–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Altun, I.; Simsek, H. Some fixed point theorems on dualistic partial metric spaces. J. Adv. Math. Stud. 2008, 1, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  12. Mlaiki, N.; Abodayeh, K.; Aydi, H.; Abdeljawad, T.; Abuloha, M. Rectangular metric-like type spaces and related fixed points. J. Math. 2018, 2018, 3581768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Oltra, S.; Valero, O. Banach’s Fixed Point Theorem for Partial Metric Spaces; Università degli Studi di Trieste. Dipartimento di Matematica e Informatica: Trieste, Italy, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  14. Shukla, S. Partial b-metric spaces and fixed point theorems. Mediter. J. Math. 2014, 11, 703–711. [Google Scholar]
  15. Aydi, H.; Abbas, M.; Vetro, C. Partial hausdorff metric and nadler’s fixed point theorem on partial metric spaces. Topol. Appl. 2012, 159, 3234–3242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Lim, T. A fixed point theorem for multivalued nonexpansive mappings in a uniformly convex banach space. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 1974, 80, 1123–1126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Shimizu, T.; Takahashi, W. Fixed points of multivalued mappings in certain convex metric spaces. Topol. Methods Nonlinear Anal. 1996, 8, 197–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Dhompongsa, S.; Kaewkhao, A.; Panyanak, B. Lim’s theorems for multivalued mappings in cat (0) spaces. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2005, 312, 478–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Razani, A.; Shabani, S. Approximating fixed points for nonself mappings in cat (0) spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2011, 2011, 65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Uddin, I.; Nieto, J.J.; Ali, J. One-step iteration scheme for multivalued nonexpansive mappings in CAT (0) spaces. Mediter. J. Math. 2016, 13, 1211–1225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Lu, H.; Lan, D.; Hu, Q.; Yuan, G. Fixed point theorems in CAT(0) spaces with applications. J. Inequal. Appl. 2014, 2014, 320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Bartolini, M.P.I.; Ciaccia, P. String Matching with Trees Using an Approximate Distance. In Spir Lecture Notes in Computer Science; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Kirk, W.A.; Espinola, R. Fixed point theorems in r-trees with applications to graph theory. Topol. Appl. 2006, 153, 1046–1055. [Google Scholar]
  24. La Sen, M.D. About fixed points in CAT(0) spaces under a combined structure of two self-mappings. J. Math. 2017, 2017, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Uddin, I.; Ali, J.; Nieto, J.J. An iteration scheme for a family of multivalued mappings in CAT (0) spaces with an application to image recovery. Rev. Real Acad. Cienc. Exactas Físicas Nat. Ser. A Matemáticas 2018, 112, 373–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Suzuki, T. Fixed point theorems and convergence theorems for some generalized nonexpansive mappings. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2008, 340, 1088–1095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Abkar, A.; Eslamian, M. Fixed point theorems for suzuki generalized nonexpansive multivalued mappings in banach spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2010, 2010, 457935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Chang, S.; Wen, C.; Yao, J. Proximal point algorithms involving cesaro type mean of asymptotically nonexpansive mappings in cat (0) spaces. J. Nonlinear Sci. Appl. 2016, 9, 4317–4328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Khan, S.H.; Abbas, M. Common fixed points of two multivalued nonexpansive maps in Kohlenbach hyperbolic spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2014, 2014, 181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Aoyama, K.; Kohsaka, F. Fixed point theorem for α-nonexpansive mappings in Banach spaces. Nonlinear Anal. Theory Methods Appl. 2011, 74, 4387–4391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Iqbal, H.; Abbas, M.; Husnine, S.M. Existence and approximation of fixed points of multivalued generalized α-nonexpansive mappings in banach spaces. Numer. Algor. 2020, 85, 1029–1049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Amini-Harandi, A.; Fakhar, M.; Hajisharifi, H.R. Approximate fixed points of α-nonexpansive mappings. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2018, 467, 1168–1173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Laowang, W.; Panyanak, B. Strong and convergence theorems for multivalued mappings in CAT(0) spaces. J. Inequal. Appl. 2009, 2009, 730132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Panyanak, B. Mann and Ishikawa iterative processes for multivalued mappings in Banach spaces. Comput. Math. Appl. 2007, 54, 872–877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Dhompongsa, S.; Panyanak, B. On Δ-convergence theorems in CAT (0) spaces. Comput. Math. Appl. 2008, 56, 2572–2579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Laowang, W.; Panyanak, B. Approximating fixed points of nonexpansive nonself mappings in cat (0) spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2009, 2010, 367274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Agarwal, R.P.; Regan, D.O.; Sahu, D.R. Iterative construction of fixed points of nearly asymptotically nonexpansive mappings. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 2007, 8, 61–79. [Google Scholar]
  38. Pandey, R.; Pant, R.; Al-Rawashdeh, A. Fixed point results for a class of monotone nonexpansive type mappings in hyperbolic spaces. J. Funct. Spaces 2018, 2018, 5850181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Khan, S.H. Convergence of iterates with errors of asymptotically quasi-nonexpansive mappings and applications. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2007, 328, 821–829. [Google Scholar]
  40. Pant, R.; Shukla, R. Approximating fixed points of generalized α-nonexpansive mappings in banach spaces. Numer. Funct. Anal. Optimiz. 2017, 38, 248–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Comparison of Iteration Processes for different choices of parameters: α n = n n + 1 , β n = 1 n + 7 (left plot), α n = 1 n + 1 , β n = n n + 3 (right plot).
Figure 1. Comparison of Iteration Processes for different choices of parameters: α n = n n + 1 , β n = 1 n + 7 (left plot), α n = 1 n + 1 , β n = n n + 3 (right plot).
Mathematics 09 01945 g001
Figure 2. Comparison of Iteration Processes for different choices of parameters: α n = 1 n + 1 , β n = 1 n + 1 (left plot), α n = n + 1 5 n + 1 , β n = 1 2 n + 5 (right plot).
Figure 2. Comparison of Iteration Processes for different choices of parameters: α n = 1 n + 1 , β n = 1 n + 1 (left plot), α n = n + 1 5 n + 1 , β n = 1 2 n + 5 (right plot).
Mathematics 09 01945 g002
Table 1. Convergence comparison of Iteration Processes for different choices of initial points.
Table 1. Convergence comparison of Iteration Processes for different choices of initial points.
Initial PointsIteration Processes
MannIshikawaS-iteration
0.1 1837913
0.4 23910414
0.6 23410814
0.7 24111114
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Abbas, M.; Iqbal, H.; De la Sen, M.; Ahmad, K. Approximation of Fixed Points of Multivalued Generalized (α,β)-Nonexpansive Mappings in an Ordered CAT(0) Space. Mathematics 2021, 9, 1945. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9161945

AMA Style

Abbas M, Iqbal H, De la Sen M, Ahmad K. Approximation of Fixed Points of Multivalued Generalized (α,β)-Nonexpansive Mappings in an Ordered CAT(0) Space. Mathematics. 2021; 9(16):1945. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9161945

Chicago/Turabian Style

Abbas, Mujahid, Hira Iqbal, Manuel De la Sen, and Khushdil Ahmad. 2021. "Approximation of Fixed Points of Multivalued Generalized (α,β)-Nonexpansive Mappings in an Ordered CAT(0) Space" Mathematics 9, no. 16: 1945. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9161945

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