AAA Abstract and Applied Analysis 1687-0409 1085-3375 Hindawi Publishing Corporation 245872 10.1155/2012/245872 245872 Research Article Fixed Point Theorems in Ordered Banach Spaces and Applications to Nonlinear Integral Equations Agarwal Ravi P. 1,2 Hussain Nawab 2 Taoudi Mohamed-Aziz 3,4 Reich Simeon 1 Department of Mathematics, Texas A&M University Kingsville 700 University Boulevard, Kingsville, TX 78363-8202 USA tamu.edu 2 Department of Mathematics King Abdulaziz University P.O. Box 80203, Jeddah 21589 Saudi Arabia kau.edu.sa 3 Laboratoire de Mathématiques et de Dynamique de Populations, Faculté des Sciences Semlalia, Université Cadi Ayyad, Marrakech 40 000 Morocco ucam.ac.ma 4 Centre Universitaire Kelaa des Sraghna, B.P. 263, Kelaa des Sraghna 43 000 Morocco 2012 15 7 2012 2012 05 03 2012 20 06 2012 2012 Copyright © 2012 Ravi P. Agarwal et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

We present some new common fixed point theorems for a pair of nonlinear mappings defined on an ordered Banach space. Our results extend several earlier works. An application is given to show the usefulness and the applicability of the obtained results.

1. Introduction

The problem of existence of common fixed points to a pair of nonlinear mappings is now a classical theme. The applications to differential and integral equations made it more interesting. A considerable importance has been attached to common fixed point theorems in ordered sets [1, 2]. In a recent paper, Dhage  proved some common fixed point theorems for pairs of condensing mappings in an ordered Banach space. More recently, Hussain et al.  extended the results of Dhage to 1-set contractive mappings. In the present paper we pursue the investigations started in the aforementioned papers and prove some new common fixed point theorems under weaker assumptions. Also we present some common fixed point results using the weak topology of a Banach space. The use of the concepts of ws-compactness and ww-compactness increases the usefulness of our results in many practical situations especially when we work in nonreflexive Banach spaces. We will illustrate this fact by proving the existence of nonnegative integrable solutions for an implicit integral equation. For the remainder of this section we gather some notations and preliminary facts. Let X be a real Banach space, ordered by a cone K. A cone K is a closed convex subset of X with λKK(λ0), and K(-K)={0}. As usual xyy-xK.

Definition 1.1.

Let X be an ordered Banach space with order . A mapping T:D(T)XX is said to be isotone increasing if for all x,yD(T), we have that xy implies TxTy.

Definition 1.2.

Let M be a nonempty subset of an ordered Banach space X with order . Two mappings S,T:MM are said to be weakly isotone increasing if SxTSx and TxSTx hold for all xM. Similarly, we say that S and T are weakly isotone decreasing if TxSTx and SxTSx hold for all xM. The mappings S and T are said to be weakly isotone if they are either weakly isotone increasing or weakly isotone decreasing.

In our considerations the following definition will play an important role. Let (X) denote the collection of all nonempty bounded subsets of X and 𝒲(X) the subset of (X) consisting of all weakly compact subsets of X. Also, let Br denote the closed ball centered at 0 with radius r.

Definition 1.3 (see  [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">5</xref>]).

A function ψ:(X)+ is said to be a measure of weak noncompactness if it satisfies the following conditions.

The family ker(ψ)={M(X):ψ(M)=0} is nonempty and ker(ψ) is contained in the set of relatively weakly compact sets of X.

M1M2ψ(M1)ψ(M2).

ψ(co¯(M))=ψ(M), where co¯(M) is the closed convex hull of M.

ψ(λM1+(1-λ)M2)λψ(M1)+(1-λ)ψ(M2) for λ[0,1].

If (Mn)n1 is a sequence of nonempty weakly closed subsets of X with M1bounded and M1M2Mn such that limnψ(Mn)=0,then M:=n=1Mn is nonempty.

The family kerψ described in (1) is said to be the kernel of the measure of weak noncompactness ψ. Note that the intersection set M from (5) belongs to kerψ since ψ(M)ψ(Mn) for every n and limnψ(Mn)=0. Also, it can be easily verified that the measure ψ satisfies (1.1)ψ(Mw¯)=ψ(M), where Mw¯ is the weak closure of M.

A measure of weak noncompactness ψ is said to be regular if (1.2)ψ(M)=0iffMisrelativelyweaklycompact,subadditive if (1.3)ψ(M1+M2)ψ(M1)+ψ(M2),homogeneous if (1.4)ψ(λM)=|λ|ψ(M),λR, and set additive (or have the maximum property) if (1.5)ψ(M1M2)=max(ψ(M1),ψ(M2)).

The first important example of a measure of weak noncompactness has been defined by De Blasi  as follows: (1.6)w(M)=inf{r>0:thereexistsWW(X)withMW+Br}, for each M(X).

Notice that w(·) is regular, homogeneous, subadditive, and set additive (see ).

By a measure of noncompactness on a Banach space X we mean a map ψ:(X)+ which satisfies conditions (1)–(5) in Definition 1.3 relative to the strong topology instead of the weak topology. The concept of a measure of noncompactness was initiated by the fundamental papers of Kuratowski  and Darbo . Measures of noncompactness are very useful tools in nonlinear analysis  especially the so-called Kuratowski measure of noncompactness  and Hausdorff (or ball) measure of noncompactness .

Definition 1.4.

Let X be a Banach space and ψ a measure of (weak) noncompactness on X. Let A:D(A)XX be a mapping. If A(D(A)) is bounded and for every nonempty bounded subset M of D(A) with ψ(M)>0, we have, ψ(A(M)))<ψ(M), then A is called ψ-condensing. If there exists k, 0k1, such that A(D(A)) is bounded and for each nonempty bounded subset M of D(A), we have ψ(A(M))kψ(M), then A is called k-ψ-contractive.

Remark 1.5.

Clearly, every k-ψ-contractive map with k<1 is ψ-condensing and every ψ-condensing map is 1-ψ-contractive.

Definition 1.6 (see [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">11</xref>]).

A map A:D(A)X is said to be ws-compact if it is continuous and for any weakly convergent sequence (xn)n in D(A) the sequence (Axn)n has a strongly convergent subsequence in X.

Remark 1.7.

The concept of ws-compact mappings arises naturally in the study of both integral and partial differential equations (see ).

Definition 1.8.

A map A:D(A)X is said to be ww-compact if it is continuous and for any weakly convergent sequence (xn)n in D(A) the sequence (Axn)n has a weakly convergent subsequence in X.

Definition 1.9.

Let X be a Banach space. A mapping T:D(T)XX is called a nonlinear contraction if there exists a continuous and nondecreasing function φ:++ such that (1.7)Tx-Tyφ(x-y) for all x,yD(T), where φ(r)<r for r>0.

Remark 1.10.

It is easy to prove that a nonlinear contraction mapping is a nonlinear set-contraction with respect to the Kuratowskii measure of noncompactness. We will prove that the same property holds for the De Blasi measure of weak noncompactness provided that the nonlinear contraction mapping is ww-compact.

Lemma 1.11.

Let T be a ww-compact nonlinear contraction mapping on a Banach X. Then for each bounded subset M of X one has (1.8)w(TM)ϕ(w(M)). Here, w is the De Blasi measure of weak noncompactness.

Proof.

Let M be a bounded subset of X and r>w(M). There exist 0r0<r and a weakly compact subset W of X such that MW+Br0. Since T is a ϕ-nonlinear contraction, then (1.9)TMTW+Bϕ(r0)TW¯w+Bϕ(r0). Moreover, since T is ww-compact, then TW¯w is weakly compact. Accordingly, (1.10)w(TM)ϕ(r0)ϕ(r). Letting rw(M) and using the continuity of ϕ we deduce that (1.11)w(TM)ϕ(w(M)).

The following theorem is a sharpening of [3, Theorem 2.1] and [4, Theorem 3.1].

Theorem 1.12.

Let X be an ordered Banach space and ψ a set additive measure of noncompactness on X. Let M be a nonempty closed convex subset of X and S,T:MM be two continuous mappings satisfying the following:

T is 1-ψ-contractive,

S is ψ-condensing,

S and T are weakly isotone.

Then T and S have a common fixed point.

Proof.

Let xM be fixed. Consider the sequence {xn} defined by (1.12)x0=x,x2n+1=Sx2n,x2n+2=Tx2n,n=0,1,2,. Suppose first that S and T are weakly isotone increasing on M. Then from (1.12) it follows that (1.13)x1x2xn. Set A={x1,x2,,xn,},A1={x2,x4,,x2n,}, and A2={x1,x3,,x2n+1,}. Clearly (1.14)A=A1A2,A2=S(A1){x1},A1=T(A2). We show that A1 is relatively compact. Suppose the contrary, then ψ(A1)>0. Since T is 1-ψ-contractive and S is ψ-condensing, it follows from (1.14) that (1.15)ψ(A2)=ψ(S(A1){x1})=ψ(S(A1))<ψ(A1),ψ(A1)=ψ(T(A2))ψ(A2). This is impossible. Thus A1 is relatively compact. The continuity of S implies that A2=S(A1){x1} is relatively compact. Consequently A is relatively compact. Since {xn} is monotone increasing in A, then it is convergent. Let x* be its limit. Using the continuity of S and T we get (1.16)x*=limnx2n+1=limnS(x2n)=S(limnx2n)=S(x*),x*=limnx2n+2=limnT(x2n+1)=T(limnx2n+1)=T(x*). To complete the proof we consider the case where S and T are weakly isotone decreasing on M. In this case, the sequence {xn} is monotone decreasing and then converges to a common fixed point of S and T.

Remark 1.13.

In [3, Theorem 2.1] T is assumed to be set condensing, while S is assumed to be affine, X is assumed to be reflexive and I-T is demiclosed in [4, Theorem 3.1].

Remark 1.14.

As an application of Theorem 1.12, the modified versions of Theorems 3.6–3.12 in  can be proved similarly.

As easy consequences of Theorem 1.12 we obtain the following results.

Corollary 1.15.

Let M be a nonempty closed convex subset of a Banach space X and let S,T:MM be two completely continuous mappings. Also assume T and S are weakly isotone mappings. Then T and S have a common fixed point.

Corollary 1.16.

Let M be a nonempty closed convex subset of a Banach space X and S,T:XX be two continuous mappings. Assume T is nonexpansive, that is, Tx-Tyx-y for all x,yX, and S is a nonlinear contraction. Also assume that S and T are weakly isotone mappings, T(M)M and S(M)M. Then T and S have a common fixed point in M.

Corollary 1.17.

Let M be a nonempty closed convex subset of a Banach space X and ψ a set additive measure of noncompactness on X. Let S,T:XX be two continuous mappings satisfying the following:

T(M)M and S(M)M,

T is a nonexpansive mapping,

S is ψ-condensing,

T and S are weakly isotone.

Then S and T have a common fixed point in M.

Note that in Corollary 1.17 we do not have uniqueness. However, if we assume T is shrinking, we obtain uniqueness. Recall that T:D(T)XX is shrinking if (1.17)Tx-Ty<x-ywheneverx,yD(T)withxy.

Corollary 1.18.

Let M be a nonempty closed convex subset of a Banach space X and ψ a set additive measure of noncompactness on X. Let S,T:XX be two continuous mappings satisfying the following:

T(M)M and S(M)M,

T is a shrinking mapping,

S is ψ-condensing,

T and S are weakly isotone.

Then S and T have a unique common fixed point in M.

Proof.

From Corollary 1.17 it follows that there exists xM such that Sx=Tx=x. Now from (1.17) we infer that T cannot have two different fixed points. This implies that S and T have a unique common fixed point.

Corollary 1.19.

Let M be a nonempty closed convex subset of a Banach space X and S,T:XX be two mappings satisfying the following:

T(M)M and S(M)M,

T is a shrinking mapping,

S is a nonlinear contraction,

T and S are weakly isotone.

Then S and T have a unique common fixed point in M which is the unique fixed point of S.

Theorem 1.20.

Let X be an ordered Banach space and ψ a set additive measure of weak noncompactness on X. Let M be a nonempty closed convex subset of X and S,T:MM be two sequentially weakly continuous mappings satisfying the following:

T is 1-ψ-contractive,

S is ψ-condensing,

S and T are weakly isotone.

Then T and S have a common fixed point in M.

Proof.

Let xM be fixed. Consider the sequence {xn} defined by (1.18)x0=x,x2n+1=Sx2n,x2n+2=Tx2n,n=0,1,2,. Suppose first that S and T are weakly isotone increasing on M. Then from (1.18) it follows that (1.19)x1x2xn. As in the proof of Theorem 1.12 we set A={x1,x2,,xn,}, A1={x2,x4,,x2n,}, and A2={x1,x3,,x2n+1,}. Clearly (1.20)A=A1A2,A2=S(A1){x1},A1=T(A2). We show that A1 is relatively weakly compact. Suppose the contrary, then ψ(A1)>0. Since T is 1-ψ-contractive and S is ψ-condensing, it follows from (1.20) that (1.21)ψ(A2)=ψ(S(A1){x1})=ψ(S(A1))<ψ(A1),ψ(A1)=ψ(T(A2))ψ(A2). This is impossible. Thus A1 is relatively weakly compact. The weak sequential continuity of S implies that A2=S(A1){x1} is relatively weakly compact. The same reasoning as in the proof of Theorem 1.12 gives the desired result.

As easy consequences of Theorem 1.20 we obtain the following results.

Corollary 1.21.

Let M be a nonempty closed convex subset of a Banach space X and let S,T:MM be two weakly completely continuous mappings. Also assume T and S are weakly isotone mappings. Then T and S have a common fixed point in M.

Corollary 1.22.

Let M be a nonempty closed convex subset of a Banach space X and let S,T:XX be two sequentially weakly continuous mappings. Assume T is nonexpansive and S is a nonlinear contraction. Also assume that S and T are weakly isotone mappings, T(M)M and S(M)M. Then T and S have a common fixed point in M.

Corollary 1.23.

Let M be a nonempty closed convex subset of a Banach space X and ψ a set additive measure of weak noncompactness on X. Let S,T:XX be two sequentially weakly continuous mappings satisfying the following:

T is a nonexpansive mapping,

S is ψ-condensing,

T and S are weakly isotone,

T(M)M and S(M)M.

Then S and T have a common fixed point.

Proof.

This follows from Theorem 1.20 on the basis of Lemma 1.11.

Corollary 1.24.

Let M be a nonempty closed convex subset of a Banach space X and ψ a set additive measure of weak noncompactness on X. Let S,T:XX be two sequentially weakly continuous mappings satisfying the following:

T is a shrinking mapping,

S is ψ-condensing,

T and S are weakly isotone,

T(M)M and S(M)M.

Then S and T have a unique common fixed point in M.

Corollary 1.25.

Let M be a nonempty closed convex subset of a Banach space X and let S,T:XX be two sequentially weakly continuous mappings satisfying the following:

T is a shrinking mapping,

S is a nonlinear contraction,

T and S are weakly isotone,

T(M)M and S(M)M.

Then S and T have a unique common fixed point in M which is the unique fixed point of S.

Remark 1.26.

It is worth noting that, in some applications, the weak sequential continuity is not easy to be verified. The ws-compactness seems to be a good alternative (see  and the references therein). In the following we provide a version of Theorem 1.20 where the weak sequential continuity is replaced with ws-compactness.

Theorem 1.27.

Let X be an ordered Banach space and ψ a set additive measure of weak noncompactness on X. Let M be a nonempty closed convex subset of X and S,T:MM two continuous mappings satisfying the following:

T is 1-ψ-contractive,

S is ws-compact and ψ-condensing,

S and T are weakly isotone.

Then T and S have a common fixed point.

Proof.

Let xM be fixed. Consider the sequence {xn} defined by (1.22)x0=x,x2n+1=Sx2n,x2n+2=Tx2n,n=0,1,2,. Suppose first that S and T are weakly isotone increasing on M. Then from (1.22) it follows that (1.23)x1x2xn. Set A={x1,x2,,xn,},A1={x2,x4,,x2n,}, and A2={x1,x3,,x2n+1,}. Clearly (1.24)A=A1A2,A2=S(A1){x1},A1=T(A2). Similar reasoning as in Theorem 1.20 gives that A1 is relatively weakly compact. From the ws-compactness of S it follows that A2=S(A1){x1} is relatively compact. Now the continuity of T yields that A1=T(A2) is relatively compact. Consequently, A=A1A2 is relatively compact. The rest of the proof runs as in the proof of Theorem 1.12.

As easy consequences of Theorem 1.27 we obtain the following results.

Corollary 1.28.

Let S,T:XX be two continuous mappings. Assume T is nonexpansive and ww-compact and S is a ws-compact nonlinear contraction. Also assume that S and T are weakly isotone mappings. Then T and S have a common fixed point.

Proof.

This follows from Theorem 1.27 on the basis of Lemma 1.11.

Corollary 1.29.

Let M be a nonempty closed convex subset of a Banach space X and ψ a set additive measure of weak noncompactness on X. Let S,T:XX be two continuous mappings satisfying the following the following:

T is a ww-compact nonexpansive mapping,

S is ws-compact and ψ-condensing,

T and S are weakly isotone,

T(M)M and S(M)M.

Then S and T have a common fixed point in M.

Proof.

This follows From Theorem 1.27 on the basis of Lemma 1.11.

Corollary 1.30.

Let M be a nonempty closed convex subset of a Banach space X and ψ a set additive measure of weak noncompactness on X. Let S,T:XX be two continuous mappings satisfying the following:

T is a ww-compact shrinking mapping,

S is ws-compact and ψ-condensing,

T and S are weakly isotone,

T(M)M and S(M)M.

Then S and T have a unique common fixed point in M.

Corollary 1.31.

Let M be a nonempty closed convex subset of a Banach space X and let S,T:XX two continuous mappings satisfying the following:

T is a ww-compact and shrinking mapping,

S is a ws-compact nonlinear contraction,

T and S are weakly isotone,

T(M)M and S(M)M.

Then S and T have a unique common fixed point in M which is the unique fixed point of S.

Note that if X is a Banach Lattice, then the ws-compactness in Theorem 1.27 can be removed, as it is shown in the following result.

Theorem 1.32.

Let X be a Banach lattice and ψ a set additive measure of weak noncompactness on X. Let M be a nonempty closed convex subset of X and S,T:MM two continuous mappings satisfying the following:

T is 1-ψ-contractive,

S is ψ-condensing,

S and T are weakly isotone.

Then T and S have a common fixed point in M.

Proof.

Let xM be fixed. Consider the sequence {xn} defined by (1.25)x0=x,x2n+1=Sx2n,x2n+2=Tx2n,n=0,1,2,. Suppose first that S and T are weakly isotone increasing on M. Then from (1.25) it follows that (1.26)x1x2xn. Set A={x1,x2,,xn,},A1={x2,x4,,x2n,}, and A2={x1,x3,,x2n+1,}. Clearly (1.27)A=A1A2,A2=S(A1){x1},A1=T(A2). Similar reasoning as in Theorem 1.20 gives that A1 is relatively weakly compact. Thus {xn} has a weakly convergent subsequence, say {xnk}. Since in a Banach lattice every weakly convergent increasing sequence is norm-convergent we infer that {xnk} is norm-convergent. Consequently A1 is relatively compact. Similar reasoning as in the proof of Theorem 1.12 gives the desired result.

2. Application to Implicit Integral Equations

The purpose of this section is to study the existence of integrable nonnegative solutions of the integral equation given by (2.1)p(t,x(t))=01ζ(t,s)f(s,x(s))ds,t[0,1].

Integral equations like (2.1) were studied in  in L2[0,1] and in  in Lp[0,1] with 1<p<+. In this section, we look for a nonnegative solution to (2.1) in L1[0,1]. For the remainder we gather some definitions and results from the literature which will be used in the sequel. Recall that a function f:[0,1]× is said to be a Carathéodory function if

for any fixed u, the function tf(t,u) is measurable from [0,1] to ,

for almost any x[0,1], the function f(t,·): is continuous.

Let m[0,1] be the set of all measurable functions x:[0,1]. If f is a Carathéodory function, then f defines a mapping Nf:m[0,1]m[0,1] by Nf(x)(t):=f(t,x(t)). This mapping is called the superposition (or Nemytskii) operator generated by f. The next two lemmas are of foremost importance for our subsequent analysis.

Lemma 2.1 (see [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">21</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">22</xref>]).

Let f:[0,1]× be a Carathéodory function. Then the superposition operator Nf maps continuously L1[0,1] into itself if and only if there exist a constant b0 and a function a(·)L+1[0,1] such that (2.2)|f(t,u)|a(t)+b|u|, where L+1[0,1] denotes the positive cone of the space L1[0,1].

Lemma 2.2 (see [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22">14</xref>]).

If f:[0,1]× is a Carathéodory function and Nf maps continuously L1[0,1] into itself, then Nf is ww-compact.

Remark 2.3.

Although the Nemytskii operator Nf is ww-compact, generally it is not weakly continuous. In fact, only linear functions generate weakly continuous Nemytskii operators in L1 spaces (see, for instance, [23, Theorem 2.6]).

The problem of existence of nonnegative integrable solutions to (2.1) will be discussed under the following assumptions:

ζ:[0,1]×[0,1] is strongly measurable and 01ζ(·,s)y(s)dsL1[0,1] whenever yL1[0,1] and there exists a function θ:[0,1] belonging to L[0,1] such that 0ζ(t,s)θ(t) for all (t,s)[0,1]×[0,1]. The function f:[0,1]× is a Carathéodory function and there exist a constant b>0 and a function a(·)L+1[0,1] such that |f(t,u)|a(t)+b|u| for all t[0,1] and u. Moreover, f(t,x(t))0 whenever xL+1[0,1];

the function p:[0,1]× is nonexpansive with respect to the second variable, that is, |p(t,u)-p(t,v)||u-v| for all t[0,1] and u,v;

for all r>0 and for all xBr+ we have (2.3)0θ(t)a+bθ(t)01p(s,x(s))dsp(t,x(t))x(t), where Br+={xL1[0,1]:0x(t)rforallt[0,1]},

bθ<1.

Remark 2.4.

If p(t,0)=0, then from assumption (b) it follows that p(t,x(t))x(t) whenever xL+1[0,1].

Remark 2.5.

From assumption (b) it follows that (2.4)|p(t,x(t))||p(t,0)|+|x(t)|. Using Lemma 2.2 together with Lemma 2.1 we infer that 𝒩p is ww-compact.

Theorem 2.6.

Assume that the conditions (a–d) are satisfied. Then the implicit integral equation (2.1) has at least one nonnegative solution in L1[0,1].

Proof.

The problem (2.1) may be written in the shape: (2.5)Tx=Sx, where T and S are the nonlinear operators given by (2.6)(Tx)(t)=p(t,x(t)),(Sx)(t)=01ζ(t,s)f(s,x(s)).

Note that T and S may be written in the shape: (2.7)T=Np,S=KNf.

Here 𝒩p and 𝒩f are the superposition operators associated to the functions p and f, respectively, and K denotes the linear integral defined by (2.8)K:L1[0,1]L1[0,1]:u(t)Ku(t):=μ01ζ(t,s)u(s)ds.

Let r0 be the real defined by (2.9)r0=aθ1-bθ and M be the closed convex subset of L1[0,1] defined by (2.10)M=Br0+={xL1[0,1]:0x(t)r0t[0,1]}.

Note that, for any xL1[0,1], the functions Tx and Sx belong to L1[0,1] which is a consequence of the assumptions (a, b). Moreover, from assumption (c) it follows that for each xM we have (2.11)0p(t,x(t))x(t)r0. This implies that T(M)M. Also, in view of assumption (b) we have for all xM and for all s[0,1](2.12)0f(s,x(s))a(s)+bx(s)a(s)+br0. Hence (2.13)0ζ(t,s)f(s,x(s))θ(t)(a(s)+br0). Thus (2.14)001ζ(t,s)f(s,x(s))dsθ(t)(a+br0)θ(a+br0)=r0. Therefore, S(M)M.

Our strategy consists in applying Corollary 1.29 to find a nonnegative common fixed point for S and T in M. For the sake of simplicity, the proof will be displayed into four steps.

Step 1.

S and T are continuous. Indeed, the assumption (a) and Lemma 2.1 guarantee that Np and 𝒩f map continuously L1[0,1] into itself. To complete the proof it remains only to show that K is continuous. This follows immediately from the hypothesis (b).

Step 2.

S is ws-compact. Indeed, let (ρn) be a weakly convergent sequence of L1[0,1]. Using Lemma 2.2, the sequence (𝒩f(ρn)) has a weakly convergent subsequence, say (𝒩f(ρnk)). Let ρ be the weak limit of (𝒩f(ρnk)). Accordingly, keeping in mind the boundedness of the mapping ζ(t,·) we get

(2.15) 0 1 ζ ( t , s ) f ( s , ρ n k ( s ) ) d s 0 1 ζ ( t , s ) f ( s , ρ ( s ) ) d s .

The use of the dominated convergence theorem allows us to conclude that the sequence (Sρnk) converges in L1[0,1].

Step 3.

S maps bounded sets of L1[0,1] into weakly compact sets. To see this, let 𝒪 be a bounded subset of L1[0,1] and let C>0 such that xC for all x𝒪. For x𝒪 we have (2.16)|(Sx)(t)|dt01|ζ(t,s)||f(s,x(s))|ds01θ(t)(a(s)+b|x(s)|)dsθ(t)(a+bC).

Consequently, (2.17)E|(Sx)(t)|dt(a+bC)Eθ(t)dt for all measurable subsets E of [0,1]. Taking into account the fact that any set consisting of one element is weakly compact and using Corollary 11 in [24, page 294] we get lim|E|0E|θ(t)|dt=0, where |E| is the Lebesgue measure of E. Applying Corollary 11 in [24, page 294] once again we infer that the set S(𝒪) is weakly compact.

Step 4.

S and T are weakly isotone decreasing. Indeed, using assumption (c) we get (2.18)01ζ(t,s)f(s,x(s))dsp(t,01ζ(t,s)f(s,x(s))ds), and from our assumptions we have (2.19)01ζ(t,s)f(s,p(s,x(s)))ds01ζ(t,s)a(s)ds+b01ζ(t,s)p(s,x(s))dsθ(t)a+bθ(t)01p(s,x(s))dsp(t,x(t)). Hence SxTSx and TxSTx and therefore S and T are weakly isotone decreasing.

Note that the Steps 14 show that the hypotheses of Corollary 1.29 are satisfied. Thus S and T have a common fixed point and therefore the problem (2.1) has at least one nonnegative solution in M.

Acknowledgment

The first and second authors gratefully acknowledge the support from the Deanship of Scientific Research (DSR) at King Abdulaziz University (KAU) during this research.

Hussain N. Shah M. H. KKM mappings in cone b-metric spaces Computers & Mathematics with Applications 2011 62 4 1677 1684 10.1016/j.camwa.2011.06.004 2834154 Janković S. Kadelburg Z. Radenović S. On cone metric spaces: a survey Nonlinear Analysis A 2011 74 7 2591 2601 10.1016/j.na.2010.12.014 2776511 ZBL1221.54059 Dhage B. C. Condensing mappings and applications to existence theorems for common solution of differential equations Bulletin of the Korean Mathematical Society 1999 36 3 565 578 1722186 ZBL0940.47043 Hussain N. Khan A. R. Agarwal R. P. Krasnoselskii and Ky Fan type fixed point theorems in ordered Banach spaces Journal of Nonlinear and Convex Analysis 2010 11 3 475 489 2778671 Banaś J. Rivero J. On measures of weak noncompactness Annali di Matematica Pura ed Applicata 1988 151 213 224 10.1007/BF01762795 964510 ZBL0653.47035 De Blasi F. S. On a property of the unit sphere in a Banach space Bulletin Mathématique de la Société des Sciences Mathématiques de Roumanie 1977 21 3-4 259 262 0482402 ZBL0365.46015 Kuratowski K. Sur les espaces complets Fundamenta Mathematicae 1930 15 301 309 Darbo G. Punti uniti in trasformazioni a codominio non compatto Rendiconti del Seminario Matematico della Università di Padova 1955 24 84 92 0070164 ZBL0064.35704 Khamsi M. A. Kirk W. A. An Introduction to Metric Spaces and Fixed Point Theory 2001 New York, NY, USA John Wiley & Sons x+302 10.1002/9781118033074 1818603 Banaś J. Goebel K. Measures of Noncompactness in Banach Spaces 1980 60 New York, NY, USA Marcel Dekker vi+97 Lecture Notes in Pure and Applied Mathematics 591679 Jachymski J. On Isac's fixed point theorem for selfmaps of a Galerkin cone Annales des Sciences Mathématiques du Québec 1994 18 2 169 171 1311753 ZBL0823.47057 García-Falset J. Existence of fixed points and measures of weak noncompactness Nonlinear Analysis A 2009 71 7-8 2625 2633 10.1016/j.na.2009.01.096 2532788 ZBL1194.47060 Latrach K. Taoudi M. A. Existence results for a generalized nonlinear Hammerstein equation on L1 spaces Nonlinear Analysis A 2007 66 10 2325 2333 10.1016/j.na.2006.03.022 2311035 ZBL1128.45006 Latrach K. Taoudi M. A. Zeghal A. Some fixed point theorems of the Schauder and the Krasnosel’skii type and application to nonlinear transport equations Journal of Differential Equations 2006 221 1 256 271 10.1016/j.jde.2005.04.010 2193851 Taoudi M. A. Integrable solutions of a nonlinear functional integral equation on an unbounded interval Nonlinear Analysis A 2009 71 9 4131 4136 10.1016/j.na.2009.02.072 2536318 ZBL1203.45004 Agarwal R. P. O'Regan D. Taoudi M.-A. Fixed point theorems for ws-compact mappings in Banach spaces Fixed Point Theory and Applications 2010 2010 13 183596 2747249 ZBL1206.47047 Taoudi M. A. Salhi N. Ghribi B. Integrable solutions of a mixed type operator equation Applied Mathematics and Computation 2010 216 4 1150 1157 10.1016/j.amc.2010.02.007 2607224 ZBL1195.45017 Salhi N. Taoudi M. A. Existence of integrable solutions of an integral equation of Hammerstein type on an unbounded interval Mediterranean Journal of Mathematics. In press 10.1007/s00009-011-0147-3 Djebali S. Sahnoun Z. Nonlinear alternatives of Schauder and Krasnosel'skij types with applications to Hammerstein integral equations in L1 spaces Journal of Differential Equations 2010 249 9 2061 2075 10.1016/j.jde.2010.07.013 2718651 ZBL1208.47044 Fečkan M. Nonnegative solutions of nonlinear integral equations Commentationes Mathematicae Universitatis Carolinae 1995 36 4 615 627 1378685 ZBL0840.45007 Krasnosel’skii M. A. Some problems of nonlinear analysis American Mathematical Society Translations, Series 2 1958 10 345 409 0094731 Krasnosel'skii M. A. Topological Methods in the Theory of Nonlinear Integral Equations 1964 New York, NY, USA Pergamon Press xi + 395 0159197 Appell J. De Pascale E. Some parameters associated with the Hausdorff measure of noncompactness in spaces of measurable functions Unione Matematica Italiana Bollettino B 1984 3 2 497 515 762715 Dunford N. Schwartz J. T. Schwartz, Linear Operators, Part I: General Theory 1958 New York, NY, USA Interscience Publishers xiv+858 1009162