IJMMSInternational Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences1687-04250161-1712Hindawi Publishing Corporation13106810.1155/2009/131068131068Research ArticleCommon Fixed Point Theorem of Two Mappings Satisfying a Generalized Weak Contractive ConditionAbbasM.KhanM. AliKorotyaevEvgenyDepartment of MathematicsLahore University of Management SciencesLahore 54792Pakistanlums.edu.pk20099122009200906082009111120092009Copyright © 2009This 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.

Existence of common fixed point for two mappings which satisfy a generalized weak contractive condition is established. As a consequence, a common fixed point result for mappings satisfying a contractive condition of integral type is obtained. Our results generalize, extend, and unify several well-known comparable results in literature.

1. Introduction and Preliminaries

Let X be a metric space and T:CC a mapping. Recall that T is contraction if d(Tx,Ty)kd(x,y) for all x,yX, where 0k<1. A point xC is a fixed point of T provided Tx=x. If a map T satisfies F(T)=F(Tn) for each nN, where F(T) denotes the set of all fixed points of T, then it is said to have property P. Banach contraction principle which gives an answer on existence and uniqueness of a solution of an operator equation Tx=x is the most widely used fixed point theorem in all of analysis. Branciari  obtained a fixed point theorem for a mapping satisfying an analogue of Banach's contraction principle for an integral type inequality. Akgun and Rhoades  have shown that a map satisfying a Meir- Keeler type contractive condition of integral type has a property P. Rhoades and Abbas  extended [4, Theorem1] for mappings satisfying contractive condition of integral type. They also studied several results for maps which have property P, defined on a metric space satisfying generalized contractive conditions of integral type. Rhoades  proved two fixed point theorems involving more general contractive condition of integral type (see, also [6, 7]). If maps S and T satisfy F(S)F(T)=F(Sn)F(Tn) for each nN, then they are said to have property Q. Jeong and Rhoades  studied the property Q for pairs of maps satisfying a number of contractive conditions.

Recently Dutta and Choudhury  gave a generalization of Banach contraction principle, which in turn generalize [4, Theorem 1] and corresponding result of . Sessa  defined the concept of weakly commuting to obtain common fixed point for pairs of maps. Jungck generalized this idea, first to compatible mappings  and then to weakly compatible mappings . There are examples that show that each of these generalizations of commutativity is a proper extension of the previous definition. The aim of this paper is to present a common fixed point theorem for weakly compatible maps satisfying a generalized weak contractive condition which is more general than the corresponding contractive condition of integral type. Our results substantially extend, improve, and generalize comparable results in literature [3, 14, 15].

The following definitions and results will be needed in the sequel.

Definition 1.1.

Let X be a set, and f,g selfmaps of X. A point x in X is called a coincidence point of f and g if and only if fx=gx. We will call w=fx=gx a point of coincidence of f and g.

Definition 1.2.

Two maps f and g are said to be weakly compatible if they commute at their coincidence points.

Lemma 1.3 (see [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">16</xref>]).

Let f and g be weakly compatible self maps of a set X. If f and g have a unique point of coincidence w (say), then w is the unique common fixed point of f and g.

2. A Common Fixed Point Theorem

Set Ϝ={ϕ:R+R+:ϕ is a Lebesgue integrable mapping which is summable and nonnegative and satisfies 0εϕ(t)dt>0, for each ε>0} and G={ψ:[0,][0,]:ψ is continuous and nondecreasing mapping with ψ(t)=0 if and only if t=0}.

The following is the main result of this paper.

Theorem 2.1.

Let f,g be two self maps of a metric space (X,d) satisfying ψ(d(fx,fy))ψ(d(gx,gy))-φ(d(gx,gy)) for all  x,yX, where ψ,φG. If range of g contains the range of f and g(X) is a complete subspace of X, then f and g have a unique point of coincidence in X. Moreover if f and g are weakly compatible, f and g have a unique common fixed point.

Proof.

Let x0 be an arbitrary point of X. Choose a point x1in X such that f(x0)=g(x1). This can be done, since the range of g contains the range of f. Continuing this process, having chosen xn in X, we obtain xn+1 in X such that f(xn)=g(xn+1),n=0,1,2,. Suppose for any n,g(xn)g(xn+1), since, otherwise, f and g have a point of coincidence. From (2.1), we have ψ(d(gxn+1,gxn))=ψ(d(fxn,fxn-1))ψ(d(gxn,gxn-1))-φ(d(gxn,gxn-1))<ψ(d(gxn,gxn-1)), that is, ψ(d(gxn+1,gxn))<ψ(d(gxn,gxn-1)), and hence d(gxn,gxn+1)d(gxn,gxn-1). It follows that {d(gxn,gxn+1)} is monotone decreasing sequence of numbers and consequently there exists r0 such that d(gxn,gxn+1)r as n. Suppose that r>0, then 0<ψ(r)ψ(d(gxn+1,gxn))=ψ(d(fxn,fxn-1))ψ(d(gxn,gxn-1))-φ(d(gxn,gxn-1)), which on taking limit as n yields ψ(r)ψ(r)-φ(r)<ψ(r), which is a contradiction. Therefore r=0. Now we prove that {gxn} is a Cauchy sequence. If not, then there exist some ε>0 and subsequences {gxnk} and {gxmk} of {gxn} with k<nk<mk such that d(gxnk,gxmk)3ε for each k. As d(gxnk+1,gxnk)0 as k, for large enough k, we have d(gxnk+1,gxnk)<ε and d(gxmk+1,gxmk)<ε. Thus we obtain d(gxnk+1,gxmk)d(gxnk,gxmk)-d(gxnk+1,gxnk)>ε,d(gxnk+1,gxmk-1)d(gxnk,gxmk)-d(gxmk-1,gxmk)-d(gxnk+1,gxnk)>ε. We may assume that nk are even and mk are odd and that d(gxnk,gxmk)>ε for all k. Put rk=min{mk:d(gxnk,gxmk)>ε}. Now, ε<d(gxnk,gxrk)d(gxnk,gxrk-2)+d(gxrk-2,gxrk-1)+d(gxrk-1,gxrk) implies that d(gxnk,gxrk)ε as k. Furthermore d(gxnk,gxrk)-d(gxnk,gxnk+1)-d(gxrk,gxrk+1)d(gxnk+1,gxrk+1)d(gxnk,gxrk)+d(gxnk,gxnk+1)+d(gxrk,gxrk+1) gives d(gxnk+1,gxrk+1)ε , as k. Therefore ψ(d(gxnk+1,gxrk+1))=ψ(d(fxnk,fxrk))ψ(d(gxnk,gxrk))-φ(d(gxnk,gxrk)). Taking limit as k yields ψ(ε)ψ(ε)-φ(ε), which is a contradiction. Hence {gxn} is a Cauchy sequence. From completeness of g(X), there exists a point q in g(X) such that gxnq as n. Consequently, we can find p in X such that g(p)=q. Now ψ(d(gxn+1,fp))=ψ(d(fxn,fp))ψ(d(gxn,gp))-φ(d(gxn,gp)) on taking limit as n implies ψ(d(q,fp))ψ(0)-φ(0),ψ(d(q,fp))=0, and f(p)=q. Hence q is the point of coincidence of f and g. Assume that there is another point of coincident r in X such that rq. Then there exists s in X such that f(s)=g(s)=r.    Using (2.1), we have ψ(d(gp,gs))=ψ(d(fp,fs))ψ(d(gp,gs))-φ(d(gp,gs))<ψ(d(gp,gs)), which is a contradiction which proves the uniqueness of point of coincidence; the result now follows from Lemma 1.3

Corollary 2.2.

Let f,g be two self maps of a metric space (X,d) satisfying 0ψ(d(fx,fy))ϕ(t)dt0ψ(d(gx,  gy))ϕ(t)dt-0φ(d(gx,gy))ϕ(t)dt for all x,yX, where ϕϜ and ψ,φG. If range of g contains the range of f and g(X) is a complete subspace of X, then f and g have a unique point of coincidence in X. Moreover if f and g are weakly compatible, f and g have a unique common fixed point.

Proof.

Define Φ:R+R+ by Φ(x)=0xϕ(t)dt, then ΦG and (2.15) becomes Φ(ψ(d(fx,fy)))Φ(ψ(d(gx,gy)))-Φ(φ(d(gx,gy))), which further can be written as ψ1(d(fx,fy))ψ1(d(gx,gy))-φ1(d(gx,gy)), where ψ1=Φψ and φ1=ΦφG. Clearly ψ1,φ1G. Hence by Theorem 2.1f and g have unique common fixed point.

Now we present two examples in the support of Theorem 2.1.

Example 2.3.

Let X=[0,1]{2,3,4,}, d(x,y)={|x-y|,ifx,y[0,1],xy,x+y,ifatleastoneofxory[0,1],xy,0,ifx=y. Then (X,d) is a complete metric space . Consider f:XX, and ψ,φG as given in : fx={x-12x2,if0x1,x-1,ifx>1,ψ(t)={t,if0t1,t2,ift1,φ(t)={12t2,if0t1,12,ift1. Let g:XX be defined as gx={x,if0x1,x+1,ifx>1. Assume that x>y and discuss the following cases.

When x[0,1], then ψ(d(fx,fy))=(x-12x2)-(y-12y2)(x-y)-12  (x-y)2=ψ(d(gx,gy))-φ(d(gx,gy)). Taking x in {3,4,}, and y in [0,1], we obtain ψ(d(fx,fy))=(x-1+y-12y2)2(x+y-1)2,ψ(d(gx,gy))  =(x+y+1)2,φ(d(gx,gy))=12. Hence ψ(d(fx,fy))ψ(d(gx,gy))-φ(d(gx,gy)). Now, when x{3,4,}, and y[0,1], then ψ(d(fx,fy))=(x-1+y-1)2<(x+y-1)2,ψ(d(gx,gy))=(x+y+2)2,φ(d(gx,gy))=12. Obviously (2.31) holds. Finally when x=2, we have y[0,1], fx=1, and d(fx,fy)=1-(y-12y2)1, so that ψ(d(fx,fy))1, then ψ(d(gx,gy))-φ(d(gx,gy))=(3+y)2-12>1ψ(d(fx,fy)). Thus all conditions of Theorem 2.1 are satisfied. Moreover f  and  g have a unique common fixed point.

Example 2.4.

Let X=[0,1] and  f,g:XX be given as f(x)=25x2+35,  g(x)=23x2+13. Consider ψ,φG as ψ(t)=(1/2)t and φ(t)=(1/10)t. Then we have ψ(d(fx,fy))=210|x2-y2|1223|x2-y2|-11023|x2-y2|=ψ(d(gx,gy))-φ(d(gx,gy)). Note that x=1 is the unique coincidence point of f and g, and f and g are commuting at x=1. Hence all conditions of Theorem 2.1 are satisfied. Moreover, x=1 is the unique common fixed point of f and g.

Following theorem can be viewed as generalization and extension of [3, Theorem 3].

Theorem 2.5.

Let f be a self map of a complete metric space (X,d) satisfying 0ψ(d(fx,fy))  ϕ(t)dt0ψ(d(x,y))ϕ(t)dt-0φ(d(x,y))ϕ(t)dt   for all x,yX, where ϕϜ and ψ,φG. Then f has a unique fixed point. Moreover f has property P.

Proof.

Existence and uniqueness of fixed point of f follows from Corollary 2.2. Now we prove that f has property P. Let uF(fn). We shall always assume that n>1, since the statement for n=1 is trivial. We claim that fu=u. If not, then, by (2.31), 0ψ(d(u,fu))ϕ(t)dt=0ψ(d(fnu,f(fnu)))ϕ(t)dt=0ψ(d(f(fn-1u),f(fnu)))ϕ(t)dt0ψ(d(fn-1u,fnu))ϕ(t)dt-0φ(d(fn-1u,fnu))ϕ(t)dt0ψ(d(fn-1u,fnu))ϕ(t)dt=0ψ(d(f(fn-2u),f(fn-1u)))ϕ(t)dt0ψ(d(fn-2u,fn-1u))ϕ(t)dt-0φ(d(fn-2u,fn-1u))ϕ(t)dt0ψ(d(fn-2u,fn-1u))ϕ(t)dt. Continuing this process we arrive at 0ψ(d(u,fu))ϕ(t)dt0ψ(d(u,fu))ϕ(t)dt-0φ(d(u,fu))  ϕ(t)dt<0ψ(d(u,fu))ϕ(t)dt, which is a contradiction. Hence the result follows.

Remark 2.6 s.

Existence and uniqueness of fixed point of f in above theorem also follows from [9, Theorem  1].

Remark 2.7 s.

(a) It is noted that if maps f and g involved in Theorem 2.1 are commuting, then they have property Q.

(b) Suzuki  observed that Branciari [1, Theorem  1] is a particular case of Meir-Keeler fixed point theorem . We pose an open problem to see if a link exists between the contractive conditions (2.15) and the Meir-Keeler condition.

Acknowledgment

The authors are thankful to referees for their precise remarks to improve the presentation of the paper.

BranciariA.A fixed point theorem for mappings satisfying a general contractive condition of integral typeInternational Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences2002299531536MR190034410.1155/S0161171202007524ZBL0993.54040AkgunF. A.RhoadesB. E.Maps satisfying a Meir-Keeler type contractive conditions of integral type for which F(T)=F(Tn)In pressRhoadesB. E.AbbasM.Maps satisfying generalized contractive conditions of integral type for which F(T)=F(Tn)International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics2008452225231MR2421863ZBL1161.54024RhoadesB. E.Some theorems on weakly contractive mapsNonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications20014742683269310.1016/S0362-546X(01)00388-1MR1972392ZBL1042.47521RhoadesB. E.Two fixed-point theorems for mappings satisfying a general contractive condition of integral typeInternational Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences20032003634007401310.1155/S0161171203208024MR2030391ZBL1052.47052AlioucheA.A common fixed point theorem for weakly compatible mappings in symmetric spaces satisfying a contractive condition of integral typeJournal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications2006322279680210.1016/j.jmaa.2005.09.068MR2250617ZBL1111.47046VijayarajuP.RhoadesB. E.MohanrajR.A fixed point theorem for a pair of maps satisfying a general contractive condition of integral typeInternational Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences20052005152359236410.1155/IJMMS.2005.2359MR2184475ZBL1113.54027JeongG. S.RhoadesB. E.Maps for which F(T)=F(Tn)Fixed Point Theory2005687131DuttaP. N.ChoudhuryB. S.A generalisation of contraction principle in metric spacesFixed Point Theory and Applications20082008810.1155/2008/406368406368MR2470177AlberYa. I.Guerre-DelabriereS.GohbergI.LyubichY.Principle of weakly contractive maps in Hilbert spacesNew Results in Operator Theory and Its Applications199798Basel, SwitzerlandBirkhäuser722Operator Theory: Advances and ApplicationsMR1478463ZBL0897.47044SessaS.On a weak commutativity condition of mappings in fixed point considerationsPublications de l'Institut Mathématique198232149153MR710984ZBL0523.54030JungckG.Compatible mappings and common fixed pointsInternational Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences198694771779MR87053410.1155/S0161171286000935JungckG.Common fixed points for noncontinuous nonself maps on nonmetric spacesFar East Journal of Mathematical Sciences199642199215MR1426938ZBL0928.54043BegI.AbbasM.Coincidence point and invariant approximation for mappings satisfying generalized weak contractive conditionFixed Point Theory and Applications20062006710.1155/FPTA/2006/7450374503MR2235486ZBL1133.54024KhanM. S.SwalehM.SessaS.Fixed point theorems by altering distances between the pointsBulletin of the Australian Mathematical Society198430119MR75355510.1017/S0004972700001659ZBL0553.54023AbbasM.JungckG.Common fixed point results for noncommuting mappings without continuity in cone metric spacesJournal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications20083411416420MR239409410.1016/j.jmaa.2007.09.070ZBL1147.54022BoydD. W.WongJ. S.On nonlinear contractionsProceedings of the American Mathematical Society196920458464MR023955910.2307/2035677ZBL0175.44903SuzukiT.Meir-Keeler contractions of integral type are still Meir-Keeler contractionsInternational Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences20072007610.1155/2007/3928139281MR2285999ZBL1142.54019MeirA.KeelerE.A theorem on contraction mappingsJournal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications1969282326329MR025029110.1016/0022-247X(69)90031-6ZBL0194.44904