Skip to content

Advertisement

Open Access

Fixed point theorems for fuzzy mappings and applications to ordinary fuzzy differential equations

  • Hemant Kumar Nashine1,
  • Calogero Vetro2,
  • Wiyada Kumam3Email author and
  • Poom Kumam4
Advances in Difference Equations20142014:232

https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1847-2014-232

Received: 28 April 2014

Accepted: 25 July 2014

Published: 20 August 2014

Abstract

Ran and Reurings (Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 132(5):1435-1443, 2004) proved an analog of the Banach contraction principle in metric spaces endowed with a partial order and discussed some applications to matrix equations. The main novelty in the paper of Ran and Reurings involved combining the ideas in the contraction principle with those in the monotone iterative technique. Motivated by this, we present some common fixed point results for a pair of fuzzy mappings satisfying an almost generalized contractive condition in partially ordered complete metric spaces. Also we give some examples and an application to illustrate our results.

MSC:46S40, 47H10, 34A70, 54E50.

Keywords

altering distance functioncomplete metric spacefuzzy mappingordinary fuzzy differential equation

1 Introduction

The Banach contraction principle [1] is a very popular tool in solving existence problems in many branches of mathematical analysis. This famous theorem can be stated as follows.

Theorem 1.1 ([1])

Let ( X , d ) be a complete metric space and T be a mapping of X into itself satisfying
d ( T x , T y ) k d ( x , y ) for all  x , y X ,

where k is a constant in ( 0 , 1 ) . Then T has a unique fixed point x X .

There is a great number of generalizations of the Banach contraction principle. In fact, existence theorems of fixed points have been established for mappings defined on various types of spaces and satisfying different types of contractive inequalities. Tasković [2] presented a comprehensive survey of such results in metric spaces. A new category of contractive fixed point problems was addressed by Khan et al. [3] that introduced the concept of altering distance function, which is a control function that alters distance between two points in a metric space (see also [46] and references therein).

Definition 1.2 ([3])

φ : [ 0 , + ) [ 0 , + ) is called an altering distance function if the following properties are satisfied:
  1. (i)

    φ is continuous and nondecreasing,

     
  2. (ii)

    φ ( t ) = 0 t = 0 .

     

Another generalization of the Banach contraction principle was suggested by Alber and Guerre-Delabriere [7] in Hilbert spaces by introducing the concept of weakly contractive mappings as follows.

Definition 1.3 Let ( X , d ) be a metric space. A mapping T : X X is called weakly contractive if and only if:
d ( T x , T y ) d ( x , y ) φ ( d ( x , y ) ) for all  x , y X ,

where φ is an altering distance function.

Rhoades [6] showed that most results of [7] are still valid for any Banach space. Weak inequalities of the above type have been used to establish fixed point results in a number of subsequent works (see [4, 5, 810] and references therein).

Recently, many results appeared related to fixed points in complete metric spaces endowed with a partial ordering . Most of them are hybrids of two fundamental principles: the Banach contraction principle and the monotone iterative technique. In fact, these results deal with a monotone (either order-preserving or order-reversing) self-mapping T satisfying, with some restrictions, a classical contractive condition and such that for some x 0 X , either x 0 T x 0 or T x 0 x 0 . The first result in this direction was given by Ran and Reurings [[11], Theorem 2.1]. In their paper, Ran and Reurings proved an analog of the Banach contraction principle in a metric space endowed with a partial ordering and gave applications to matrix equations. Subsequently, Nieto and Rodríguez-López [12] extended the result of Ran and Reurings [11] for nondecreasing mappings and applied to obtain a unique solution for a first order ordinary differential equation with periodic boundary conditions. Thereafter, many works related to fixed point problems have also been considered in partially ordered probabilistic metric spaces [13], partially ordered G-metric spaces [14, 15], partially ordered cone metric spaces [16], partially ordered fuzzy metric spaces [1722] and partially ordered non-Archimedean fuzzy metric spaces [23, 24]. For other related works one is referred to [11, 22, 2531].

On the other hand, in the year 1965, Zadeh [32] introduced the concept of fuzzy set which motivated a lot of mathematical activities on generalization of the notion of fuzzy set. Heilpern [33] introduced the concept of fuzzy mapping and proved a fixed point theorem for fuzzy contraction mappings, which was successively generalized by Estruch and Vidal [34]. Afterward, a number of papers appeared in which fixed points of fuzzy mappings satisfying contractive inequalities have been discussed (see [3537] and references therein). Recently, many authors studied fixed point results for application to partial differential equation and integral equations (see [3843]).

Now, we briefly describe our reasons for being interested in results of this kind. The applications of fixed point theorems are remarkable in different disciplines of mathematics, engineering and economics in dealing with problems arising in approximation theory, game theory and many others (see [44] and references therein).

Motivated by this, we prove a common fixed point theorem for a pair of fuzzy mappings without taking into account any commutativity condition in complete ordered metric spaces. The key feature of our theorem is that the contractive condition is only assumed to hold on elements that are comparable in respect to the partial ordering. We show that under such conditions, the conclusions of previous fixed point theorems of fuzzy mappings still hold. The main result is based on an almost generalized contractive condition and generalizes, improves and extends many known results in the comparable literature [46, 17, 35] in the sense of fuzziness under ordered metric spaces. At the end of the paper, we remark that some of the ideas existing in the literature can also be used to extend our result.

2 Preliminaries

For the sake of completeness, we briefly recall some basic concepts used in the sequel.

Throughout the rest of the paper unless otherwise stated ( X , d ) stands for a complete metric space. A fuzzy set in X is a function with domain X and values in [ 0 , 1 ] . If A is a fuzzy set on X and x X , then the functional value Ax is called the grade of membership of x in A. The α-level set of A, denoted by A α , is defined by
A α = { x : A x α } if  α ( 0 , 1 ] , A 0 = { x : A x > 0 } ¯ ,

where A ¯ denotes the closure of the set A. For any two subsets A and B of X we denote by H ( A , B ) the Hausdorff distance.

Definition 2.1 A fuzzy set A in a metric linear space is said to be an approximate quantity iff A α is compact and convex in X for each α [ 0 , 1 ] and sup x X A x = 1 .

Let I = [ 0 , 1 ] and W ( X ) I X be the collection of all approximate quantities in X. For α [ 0 , 1 ] , the family W α ( X ) is given by { A I X : A α  is nonempty and compact } .

For a metric space ( X , d ) we denote by V ( X ) the collection of fuzzy sets A in X for which A α is compact and sup A x = 1 for all α [ 0 , 1 ] . Clearly, when X is a metric linear space, W ( X ) V ( X ) .

Definition 2.2 Let A , B V ( X ) , α [ 0 , 1 ] . Then
p α ( A , B ) = inf x A α , y B α d ( x , y ) , D α ( A , B ) = H ( A α , B α ) ,

where H is the Hausdorff distance.

Definition 2.3 Let A , B V ( X ) . Then A is said to be more accurate than B (or B includes A), denoted by A B , if and only if A x B x for each x X .

According to [45], for x X we write { x } the characteristic function of the ordinary subset { x } of X. For α ( 0 , 1 ] the fuzzy point x α of X is the fuzzy set of X given by x α ( x ) = α and x α ( z ) = 0 if z x . Then we give the following definition.

Definition 2.4 Let x α be a fuzzy point of X. We will say that x α is a fixed fuzzy point of the fuzzy mapping F over X if x α F x (i.e., the fixed degree of x for F, say ( F x ) ( x ) , is at least α) [34]. In particular, and according to [33], if { x } F x , we say that x is a fixed point of F.

To complete the proof of our main result, we need the following lemma.

Lemma 2.5 ([33])

Let ( X , d ) be a metric space, x , y X and A , B W ( X ) :
  1. (1)

    if p α ( x , A ) = 0 , then x α A ,

     
  2. (2)

    p α ( x , A ) d ( x , y ) + p α ( y , A ) ,

     
  3. (3)

    if x α A , then p α ( x , B ) D α ( A , B ) .

     
Definition 2.6 Let X be a nonempty set. Then ( X , d , ) is called an ordered metric space if and only if:
  1. (i)

    ( X , d ) is a metric space,

     
  2. (ii)

    ( X , ) is partially ordered.

     

Definition 2.7 Let ( X , ) be a partially ordered set. Then x , y X are called comparable if x y or y x holds.

3 Main results

Denote with Φ, the family of nondecreasing functions φ : [ 0 , + ) [ 0 , + ) such that n = 1 φ n ( t ) < for all t > 0 . The next lemma is obvious.

Lemma 3.1 If φ Φ , then φ ( 0 ) = 0 and φ ( t ) < t for each t > 0 .

Our first result is the following common fixed point theorem involving an almost generalized contractive condition.

Theorem 3.2 Let ( X , d , ) be a complete ordered metric space and T 1 , T 2 : X W α ( X ) be two fuzzy mappings satisfying
D α ( T 1 x , T 2 y ) φ ( M ( x , y ) ) + L min { p α ( x , T 1 x ) , p α ( y , T 2 y ) , p α ( x , T 2 y ) , p α ( y , T 1 x ) }
(1)
for all comparable elements x , y X , where L 0 and
M ( x , y ) = max { d ( x , y ) , p α ( x , T 1 x ) , p α ( y , T 2 y ) , 1 2 [ p α ( x , T 2 y ) + p α ( y , T 1 x ) ] } .
Also suppose that
  1. (i)

    if y ( T 1 x 0 ) α , then y , x 0 X are comparable,

     
  2. (ii)

    if x , y X are comparable, then every u ( T 1 x ) α and every v ( T 2 y ) α are comparable,

     
  3. (iii)

    if a sequence { x n } in X converges to x X and its consecutive terms are comparable, then x n and x are comparable for all n.

     

Then there exists a point x X such that x α T 1 x and x α T 2 x .

Proof Let x 0 in X. Since ( T 1 x 0 ) α , then there exists x 1 X such that x 1 ( T 1 x 0 ) α . By assumption (i), x 0 and x 1 are comparable. Since ( T 2 x 1 ) α is a nonempty compact subset of X, there exists x 2 ( T 2 x 1 ) α such that
d ( x 1 , x 2 ) = p α ( x 1 , T 2 x 1 ) D α ( T 1 x 0 , T 2 x 1 ) .
Moreover, x 1 and x 2 are comparable. Continuing this process, one obtains a sequence { x n } in X such that x 2 n + 1 ( T 1 x 2 n ) α and x 2 n + 2 ( T 2 x 2 n + 1 ) α for all n 0 , x 2 n and x 2 n + 1 are comparable and
d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) D α ( T 1 x 2 n , T 2 x 2 n + 1 ) .
Since x 2 n and x 2 n + 1 are comparable, by taking x 2 n for x and x 2 n + 1 for y in the inequality (1), it follows that
d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) D α ( T 1 x 2 n , T 2 x 2 n + 1 ) φ ( M ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) ) + L min { p α ( x 2 n , T 1 x 2 n ) , p α ( x 2 n + 1 , T 2 x 2 n + 1 ) , p α ( x 2 n , T 2 x 2 n + 1 ) , p α ( x 2 n + 1 , T 1 x 2 n ) } ,
(2)
where
M ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) = max { d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) , p α ( x 2 n , T 1 x 2 n ) , p α ( x 2 n + 1 , T 2 x 2 n + 1 ) , 1 2 [ p α ( x 2 n , T 2 x 2 n + 1 ) + p α ( x 2 n + 1 , T 1 x 2 n ) ] } = max { d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) , p α ( x 2 n , T 1 x 2 n ) , p α ( x 2 n + 1 , T 2 x 2 n + 1 ) , 1 2 p α ( x 2 n , T 2 x 2 n + 1 ) } max { d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) , d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) , 1 2 d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 2 ) } = max { d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) , d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) } .
Therefore from (2), we have
d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) φ ( max { d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) , d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) } ) .

If d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) = 0 , it follows that d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) = 0 . Now, x 2 n = x 2 n + 1 = x 2 n + 2 implies x 2 n + 1 ( T 1 x 2 n ) α = ( T 1 x 2 n + 1 ) α and x 2 n + 1 = x 2 n + 2 ( T 2 x 2 n + 1 ) α , then the proof is finished. Therefore, we assume d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) > 0 . By Lemma 3.1, we get φ ( t ) < t for each t > 0 .

Consequently, if d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) > d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) , for some n, then we have
d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) φ ( d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) ) < d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) ,
which is a contradiction. Therefore
d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) φ ( d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) ) < d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) ,
that is,
d ( x 2 n + 1 , x 2 n + 2 ) < d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) .
(3)
Similarly it can be shown that
d ( x 2 n + 3 , x 2 n + 2 ) φ ( d ( x 2 n + 2 , x 2 n + 1 ) ) < d ( x 2 n + 2 , x 2 n + 1 ) ,
that is,
d ( x 2 n + 3 , x 2 n + 2 ) < d ( x 2 n + 2 , x 2 n + 1 ) .
(4)
Therefore, for all n, we get
d ( x n , x n + 1 ) φ ( d ( x n 1 , x n ) ) φ n ( d ( x 0 , x 1 ) ) .
Hence
d ( x n , x n + m ) d ( x n , x n + 1 ) + d ( x n + 1 , x n + 2 ) + + d ( x n + m 1 , x n + m ) φ n ( d ( x 0 , x 1 ) ) + + φ n + m 1 ( d ( x 0 , x 1 ) ) = k = n n + m 1 φ k ( d ( x 0 , x 1 ) ) .
Since n = 1 φ n ( d ( x 0 , x 1 ) ) < , then { x n } is a Cauchy sequence in X. Now, from the completeness of X, there exists x X such that x n x as n + and since consecutive terms of { x n } are comparable, by hypothesis also x n and x are comparable for all n. Now, we claim that p α ( x , T 2 x ) = 0 for each α [ 0 , 1 ] . If not, then for some α [ 0 , 1 ] , we have p α ( x , T 2 x ) > 0 . Consider
p α ( x , T 2 x ) d ( x , x 2 n + 1 ) + p α ( x 2 n + 1 , T 2 x ) d ( x , x 2 n + 1 ) + D α ( T 1 x 2 n , T 2 x ) d ( x , x 2 n + 1 ) + φ ( max { d ( x 2 n , x ) , p α ( x 2 n , T 1 x 2 n ) , p α ( x , T 2 x ) , 1 2 [ p α ( x 2 n , T 2 x ) + p α ( x , T 1 x 2 n ) ] } ) + L min { p α ( x 2 n , T 1 x 2 n ) , p α ( x , T 2 x ) , p α ( x 2 n , T 2 x ) , p α ( x , T 1 x 2 n ) } = d ( x , x 2 n + 1 ) + φ ( max { d ( x 2 n , x ) , d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) , p α ( x , T 2 x ) , 1 2 [ p α ( x 2 n , T 2 x ) + d ( x , x 2 n + 1 ) ] } ) + L min { d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) , p α ( x , T 2 x ) , p α ( x 2 n , T 2 x ) , p α ( x , T 1 x 2 n ) } .
We note that d ( x 2 n , x ) 0 , d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) 0 , and p α ( x 2 n , T 2 x ) p α ( x , T 2 x ) as n + . This implies that there exists n 0 N such that
max { d ( x 2 n , x ) , d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) , 1 2 [ p α ( x 2 n , T 2 x ) + d ( x , x 2 n + 1 ) ] } p α ( x , T 2 x )
for all n n 0 . Consequently, we have
p α ( x , T 2 x ) φ ( p α ( x , T 2 x ) ) + L min { d ( x 2 n , x 2 n + 1 ) , p α ( x , T 2 x ) , p α ( x 2 n , T 2 x ) , p α ( x , T 1 x 2 n ) }
for all n n 0 , which on taking the limit as n + gives
p α ( x , T 2 x ) φ ( p α ( x , T 2 x ) ) < p α ( x , T 2 x ) ,

a contradiction. Hence p α ( x , T 2 x ) = 0 and so x α T 2 x . Similarly we deduce that x α T 1 x . □

From Theorem 3.2, assuming φ ( t ) = q t with 0 < q < 1 and L = 0 , we deduce the following result.

Corollary 3.3 Let ( X , d , ) be a complete ordered metric space and T 1 , T 2 : X W α ( X ) be two fuzzy mappings satisfying
D α ( T 1 x , T 2 y ) q max { d ( x , y ) , p α ( x , T 1 x ) , p α ( y , T 2 y ) , 1 2 [ p α ( x , T 2 y ) + p α ( y , T 1 x ) ] }
(5)
for all comparable elements x , y X . Also suppose that
  1. (i)

    if y ( T 1 x 0 ) α , then y , x 0 X are comparable,

     
  2. (ii)

    if x , y X are comparable, then every u ( T 1 x ) α and every v ( T 2 y ) α are comparable,

     
  3. (iii)

    if a sequence { x n } in X converges to x X and its consecutive terms are comparable, then x n and x are comparable for all n.

     

Then there exists a point x X such that x α T 1 x and x α T 2 x .

Now, we give an illustrative example, by adapting Example 6 in [46]; also we refer to the same paper for a better understanding of the situation.

Example 3.4 Let X = [ 0 , 1 ] endowed with the usual order of real numbers and the Euclidean metric d ( x , y ) = | x y | for all x , y X . Clearly ( X , d ) is a complete (ordered) metric space. Let α ( 0 , 1 / 2 ) and define φ : [ 0 , + ) [ 0 , + ) and T 1 , T 2 : X W α ( X ) by
φ ( t ) = { t 3 / ( 1 + t ) if  x [ 0 , 1 ] , 1 2 if  x ( 1 , + ) , ( T 1 0 ) ( x ) = ( T 2 1 ) ( x ) = { 1 if  x = 0 , α if  x ( 0 , 1 / 2 ] , α / 2 if  x ( 1 / 2 , 1 ] , ( T 1 1 ) ( x ) = ( T 2 0 ) ( x ) = { 1 if  x = 0 , 2 α if  x ( 0 , 1 / 2 ] , α / 2 if  x ( 1 / 2 , 1 ] , ( T 1 z ) ( x ) = ( T 2 z ) ( x ) = { 1 if  x = 0 , α if  x ( 0 , 1 / 2 ] , 0 if  x ( 1 / 2 , 1 ] , where  z ( 0 , 1 ) .

Then we discuss the existence of fixed fuzzy points of mappings T 1 and T 2 . To this aim, we note that ( T i 0 ) α = ( T i z ) α = ( T i 1 ) α = [ 0 , 1 / 2 ] , ( T i 0 ) α / 2 = ( T i 1 ) α / 2 = [ 0 , 1 ] , and ( T i z ) α / 2 = [ 0 , 1 / 2 ] , where i = 1 , 2 . Consequently, it is easy to show (see also [46]) that all the hypotheses of Theorem 3.2 are satisfied. In particular, condition (1) holds trivially since D α ( T 1 x , T 2 y ) = 0 for all x , y X . We conclude that each x [ 0 , 1 / 2 ] is such that x α T 1 x and x α T 2 x .

On the other hand, in view of Definition 2.4, we can apply our Theorem 3.2 to establish the existence of a common fixed point of T 1 and T 2 . In this case, we note that ( T i 0 ) 1 = ( T i z ) 1 = ( T i 1 ) 1 = { 0 } , and hence x = 0 is a common fixed point of T 1 and T 2 .

Now, we briefly discuss the validity of our theorem. In fact, a question that arises naturally is: ‘Is it possible to prove this kind of result without assuming that n = 1 φ n ( t ) < for all t > 0 ?’. In the sequel we provide a positive answer to the above question. Precisely, Theorem 3.2 still holds if the condition:
  1. (a)

    φ : [ 0 , + ) [ 0 , + ) is a nondecreasing function such that n = 1 φ n ( t ) < for all t > 0 ,

     
is replaced by
  1. (b)

    φ : [ 0 , + ) [ 0 , + ) is a right-continuous function such that φ ( t ) < t for all t > 0 .

     

Next, we give the proof of Theorem 3.2 under condition (b). To this aim, we recall the following lemma.

Lemma 3.5 Let ( X , d ) be a metric space and let { x n } be a sequence in X such that
lim n + d ( x n , x n + 1 ) = 0 .
If { x 2 n } is not a Cauchy sequence, then there exist ε > 0 and two sequences { m k } and { n k } of positive integers such that the following four sequences converge to ε when k + :
{ d ( x 2 m k , x 2 n k ) } , { d ( x 2 m k , x 2 n k + 1 ) } , { d ( x 2 m k 1 , x 2 n k ) } , { d ( x 2 m k 1 , x 2 n k + 1 ) } .
(6)

Remark 3.6 Note that assertions similar to the above lemma (see, for example, [10]) were proved and used to obtain several fixed point results in many papers.

Finally, we state and prove the following result.

Theorem 3.7 Let ( X , d , ) be a complete ordered metric space and T 1 , T 2 : X W α ( X ) be two fuzzy mappings satisfying
D α ( T 1 x , T 2 y ) φ ( M ( x , y ) ) + L min { p α ( x , T 1 x ) , p α ( y , T 2 y ) , p α ( x , T 2 y ) , p α ( y , T 1 x ) }
(7)
for all comparable elements x , y X , where L 0 ,
M ( x , y ) = max { d ( x , y ) , p α ( x , T 1 x ) , p α ( y , T 2 y ) , 1 2 [ p α ( x , T 2 y ) + p α ( y , T 1 x ) ] }
and φ : [ 0 , + ) [ 0 , + ) is a right-continuous function such that φ ( t ) < t for all t > 0 . Suppose that
  1. (i)

    if y ( T 1 x 0 ) α , then y , x 0 X are comparable,

     
  2. (ii)

    if x , y X are comparable, then every u ( T 1 x ) α and every v ( T 2 y ) α are comparable,

     
  3. (iii)

    if a sequence { x n } in X converges to x X and its consecutive terms are comparable, then x n and x are comparable for all n.

     

Then there exists a point x X such that x α T 1 x and x α T 2 x .

Proof Following the proof of Theorem 3.2, we can construct a sequence { x n } such that (3) and (4) hold. It follows that
d ( x n , x n + 1 ) < d ( x n 1 , x n ) for all  n .
(8)
Thus, in this case { d ( x n , x n + 1 ) } is a decreasing sequence of positive numbers and so there exists r 0 such that lim n + d ( x n , x n + 1 ) = r . Now, if r > 0 , then passing to the limit when n + in d ( x n , x n + 1 ) φ ( d ( x n 1 , x n ) ) , and using the properties of φ, we get
r φ ( r ) < r ,

a contradiction and so we have proved that lim n + d ( x n , x n + 1 ) = r = 0 .

Now, suppose that { x 2 n } is not a Cauchy sequence. Then Lemma 3.5 implies that there exist ε > 0 and two sequences { m k } and { n k } of positive integers such that the sequences (6) converge to ε (from above) when k + . Therefore, using (7) with x = x 2 m k and y = x 2 n k + 1 , we get
D α ( T 1 x 2 m k , T 2 x 2 n k + 1 ) φ ( M ( x 2 m k , x 2 n k + 1 ) ) + L min { p α ( x 2 m k , T 1 x 2 m k ) , p α ( x 2 n k + 1 , T 2 x 2 n k + 1 ) , p α ( x 2 m k , T 2 x 2 n k + 1 ) , p α ( x 2 n k + 1 , T 1 x 2 m k ) } ,
(9)
where
M ( x 2 m k , x 2 n k + 1 ) = max { d ( x 2 m k , x 2 n k + 1 ) , p α ( x 2 m k , T 1 x 2 m k ) , p α ( x 2 n k + 1 , T 2 x 2 n k + 1 ) , 1 2 [ p α ( x 2 m k , T 2 x 2 n k + 1 ) + p α ( x 2 n k + 1 , T 1 x 2 m k ) ] } ε , as  k + .

Using the properties of φ, we obtain the contradiction ε φ ( ε ) < ε , since ε > 0 . Thus { x 2 n } is a Cauchy sequence and hence also { x n } is a Cauchy sequence. The rest of the proof is the same as the proof of Theorem 3.2 and so to avoid repetition we omit the details. □

To conclude this section, we give an example to illustrate Theorem 3.7, in the case of a single mapping.

Example 3.8 Let a, b, and c be three real numbers such that a < b < c and consider X = { a , b , c } endowed with the Euclidean metric d ( x , y ) = | x y | for all x , y X . Let α ( 0 , 1 / 3 ) and define φ : [ 0 , + ) [ 0 , + ) by
φ ( t ) = { t 2 / 2 if  t 1 , t / 2 if  t > 1 ,
and T : X W α ( X ) by
( T a ) ( x ) = ( T b ) ( x ) = { 1 if  x = a , α / 2 if  x = b , α if  x = c , ( T c ) ( x ) = { 1 if  x = a , α / 2 if  x = b , 3 α if  x = c .

Firstly, searching for fixed fuzzy points, we notice that ( T a ) α / 2 = ( T b ) α / 2 = ( T c ) α / 2 = { a , b , c } and ( T a ) α = ( T b ) α = ( T c ) α = { a , c } . Also, it is easy to show that all the hypotheses of Theorem 3.7 with T 1 = T 2 = T are satisfied and hence c α is a fixed fuzzy point of X. Secondly, searching for fixed points, from ( T a ) 1 = ( T b ) 1 = ( T c ) 1 = { a } we deduce that a is a fixed point of T.

4 Application to ordinary fuzzy differential equation

In this section, we present a situation where our obtained results can be applied. Precisely, we study the existence of solution for the second order nonlinear boundary value problem:
{ x ( t ) = k ( t , x ( t ) , x ( t ) ) , t [ 0 , Λ ] , Λ > 0 , x ( t 1 ) = x 1 , x ( t 2 ) = x 2 , t 1 , t 2 [ 0 , Λ ] ,
(10)
where k : [ 0 , Λ ] × W ( X ) × W ( X ) W ( X ) is a continuous function. This problem is equivalent to the integral equation
x ( t ) = t 1 t 2 G ( t , s ) k ( s , x ( s ) , x ( s ) ) d s + β ( t ) , t [ 0 , Λ ] ,
(11)
where the Green’s function G is given by
G ( t , s ) = { ( t 2 t ) ( s t 1 ) t 2 t 1 if  t 1 s t t 2 , ( t 2 s ) ( t t 1 ) t 2 t 1 if  t 1 t s t 2 ,
and β ( t ) satisfies β = 0 , β ( t 1 ) = x 1 , β ( t 2 ) = x 2 . Let us recall some properties of G ( t , s ) , precisely we have
t 1 t 2 | G ( t , s ) | d s ( t 2 t 1 ) 2 8
and
t 1 t 2 | G t ( t , s ) | d s ( t 2 t 1 ) 2 .
If necessary, the reader can refer to [47, 48] for a more detailed explanation of the background of the problem. Here, we shall prove our result, by establishing the existence of a common fixed point for a pair of integral operators defined as
T i ( x ) ( t ) = t 1 t 2 G ( t , s ) k i ( s , x ( s ) , x ( s ) ) d s + β ( t ) , t [ 0 , Λ ] , i { 1 , 2 } ,
(12)

where k 1 , k 2 C ( [ 0 , Λ ] × W ( X ) × W ( X ) , W ( X ) ) , x C 1 ( [ 0 , Λ ] , W ( X ) ) , and β C ( [ 0 , Λ ] , W ( X ) ) .

Theorem 4.1 Assume that the following conditions are satisfied:
  1. (a)

    k 1 , k 2 : [ 0 , Λ ] × W ( X ) × W ( X ) W ( X ) are increasing in its second and third variables,

     
  2. (b)
    there exists x 0 C 1 ( [ 0 , Λ ] , W ( X ) ) such that, for all t [ 0 , Λ ] , we have
    x 0 ( t ) t 1 t 2 G ( t , s ) k 1 ( t , x 0 ( s ) , x 0 ( s ) ) d s + β ( t ) ,
     
where t 1 , t 2 [ 0 , Λ ] ,
  1. (c)
    there exist γ , δ > 0 such that, for all t [ 0 , Λ ] , we have
    | k 1 ( t , x ( t ) , x ( t ) ) k 2 ( t , y ( t ) , y ( t ) ) | γ | x ( t ) y ( t ) | + δ | x ( t ) y ( t ) |
     
for all comparable x , y C 1 ( [ 0 , Λ ] , W ( X ) ) ,
  1. (d)
    for γ , δ > 0 and t 1 , t 2 [ 0 , Λ ] we have
    γ ( t 2 t 1 ) 2 8 + δ ( t 2 t 1 ) 2 < 1 ,
     
  2. (e)

    if x , y C 1 ( [ 0 , Λ ] , W ( X ) ) are comparable, then every u ( T 1 x ) 1 and every v ( T 2 y ) 1 are comparable.

     
Then the pair of nonlinear integral equations
x ( t ) = t 1 t 2 G ( t , s ) k i ( s , x ( s ) , x ( s ) ) d s + β ( t ) , t [ 0 , Λ ] , i { 1 , 2 }
(13)

has a common solution in C 1 ( [ t 1 , t 2 ] , W ( X ) ) .

Proof Consider C = C 1 ( [ t 1 , t 2 ] , W ( X ) ) with the metric
D ( x , y ) = max t 1 t t 2 ( γ | x ( t ) y ( t ) | + δ | x ( t ) y ( t ) | ) .
The space ( C , D ) is a complete metric space, which can also be equipped with the partial ordering given by
x , y C , x y x ( t ) y ( t ) for all  t [ 0 , Λ ] .
In [12], it is proved that ( C , ) satisfies the following condition:
  1. (r)

    for every nondecreasing sequence { x n } in C convergent to some x C , we have x n x for all n N { 0 } .

     

Let T 1 , T 2 : C C be two integral operators defined by (12); clearly, T 1 , T 2 are well defined since k 1 , k 2 , and β are continuous functions. Now, x is a solution of (13) if and only if x is a common fixed point of T 1 and T 2 .

By hypothesis (a), T 1 , T 2 are increasing and, by hypothesis (b), x 0 T 1 ( x 0 ) . Consequently, in view of condition (r), hypotheses (i)-(iii) of Corollary 3.3 hold true.

Next, for all comparable x , y C , by hypothesis (c) we have successively
| T 1 ( x ) ( t ) T 2 ( y ) ( t ) | t 1 t 2 | G ( t , s ) | | k 1 ( s , x ( s ) , x ( s ) ) k 2 ( s , y ( s ) , y ( s ) ) | d s D ( x , y ) t 1 t 2 | G ( t , s ) | d s ( t 2 t 1 ) 2 8 D ( x , y )
(14)
and
| ( T 1 ( x ) ) ( t ) ( T 2 ( y ) ) ( t ) | t 1 t 2 | G t ( t , s ) | | k 1 ( s , x ( s ) , x ( s ) ) k 2 ( s , y ( s ) , y ( s ) ) | d s D ( x , y ) t 1 t 2 | G t ( t , s ) | d s ( t 2 t 1 ) 2 D ( x , y ) .
(15)
From (14) and (15), we obtain easily
D ( T 1 x , T 2 y ) ( γ ( t 2 t 1 ) 2 8 + δ ( t 2 t 1 ) 2 ) D ( x , y ) .
Consequently, in view of hypothesis (d), the contractive condition (5) is satisfied with
q = γ ( t 2 t 1 ) 2 8 + δ ( t 2 t 1 ) 2 < 1 .

Therefore, Corollary 3.3 applies to T 1 and T 2 , which have a common fixed point x C , that is, x is a common solution of (13). □

As an immediate consequence of Theorem 4.1, in the case T 1 = T 2 = T , we find that the integral equation (11) has a solution in C , and hence the second order nonlinear boundary value problem (10) has a solution.

5 Conclusions

Our Theorem 3.2 gives a contribution to the ‘fixed point arena’ in the sense of generalization by using fuzziness under ordered metric spaces and by assuming the validity of the contractive condition only on elements that are comparable in respect to partial ordering. Moreover, using recent ideas in the literature [13, 23, 24, 31], it is possible to extend our result to non-Archimedean fuzzy metric spaces and probabilistic metric spaces endowed with a partial ordering induced by an appropriate function.

Authors’ information

C Vetro is member of the Gruppo Nazionale per l’Analisi Matematica, la Probabilità e le loro Applicazioni (GNAMPA) of the Istituto Nazionale di Alta Matematica (INdAM).

Declarations

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the referees for their valuable comments and suggestions for the improvement of the manuscript. Moreover, W Kumam was supported by the National Research Council of Thailand (NRCT 2013-2014) and P Kumam was supported by the Higher Education Research Promotion and National Research University Project of Thailand, Office of the Higher Education Commission (Under NUR Project ‘Theoretical and Computational fixed points for Optimization problems’ No. 57000621).

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Mathematics, Disha Institute of Management and Technology, Satya Vihar, Vidhansabha-Chandrakhuri Marg, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India
(2)
Dipartimento di Matematica e Informatica, Università degli Studi di Palermo, Palermo, Italy
(3)
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Faculty of Science and Technology, Rajamangala University of Technology Thanyaburi (RMUTT), Thanyaburi, Pathumthani, Thailand
(4)
Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi (KMUTT), Bangkok, Thailand

References

  1. Banach S: Sur les opérations dans les ensembles abstraits et leur application aux équations intégrales. Fundam. Math. 1922, 3: 133-181.MATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Tasković MR: Some new principles in fixed point theory. Math. Jpn. 1990, 4: 645-666.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Khan MS, Swaleh M, Sessa S: Fixed point theorems by altering distances between the points. Bull. Aust. Math. Soc. 1984, 30: 1-9. 10.1017/S0004972700001659MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Abbas M, Ali Khan M: Common fixed point theorem of two mappings satisfying a generalized weak contractive condition. Int. J. Math. Math. Sci. 2009., 2009: Article ID 131068Google Scholar
  5. Dutta PN, Choudhury BS: A generalization of contraction principle in metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2008., 2008: Article ID 406368Google Scholar
  6. Rhoades BE: Some theorems on weakly contractive maps. Nonlinear Anal. 2001, 47: 2683-2693. 10.1016/S0362-546X(01)00388-1MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Alber YI, Guerre-Delabriere S: Principles of weakly contractive maps in Hilbert spaces. Oper. Theory Adv. Appl. 98. In New Results in Operator Theory and Its Applications. Edited by: Gohberg I, Lyubich Y. Birkhäuser, Basel; 1997:7-22.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Azam A, Arshad M, Vetro P: On a pair of fuzzy φ -contractive mappings. Math. Comput. Model. 2010, 52: 207-214. 10.1016/j.mcm.2010.02.010MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Nashine HK: New fixed point theorems for mappings satisfying generalized weakly contractive condition with weaker control functions. Ann. Pol. Math. 2011, 104: 109-119.MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Radenović S, Kadelburg Z, Jandrlić D, Jandrlić A: Some results on weak contraction maps. Bull. Iran. Math. Soc. 2012, 38: 625-645.MATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Ran ACM, Reurings MCB: A fixed point theorem in partially ordered sets and some applications to matrix equations. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 2004, 132(5):1435-1443. 10.1090/S0002-9939-03-07220-4MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Nieto JJ, Rodríguez-López R: Contractive mapping theorems in partially ordered sets and applications to ordinary differential equations. Order 2005, 22(3):223-239. 10.1007/s11083-005-9018-5MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Ćirić LB, Mihet D, Saadati R: Monotone generalized contractions in partially ordered probabilistic metric spaces. Topol. Appl. 2009, 156: 2838-2844. 10.1016/j.topol.2009.08.029View ArticleMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. Abbas M, Sintunavarat W, Kumam P: Coupled fixed point of generalized contractive mappings on partially ordered G -metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012., 2012: Article ID 31Google Scholar
  15. Saadati R, Vaezpour SM, Vetro P, Rhoades BE: Fixed point theorems in generalized partially ordered G -metric spaces. Math. Comput. Model. 2010, 52: 797-801. 10.1016/j.mcm.2010.05.009MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Shatanawi W: Partially ordered cone metric spaces and coupled fixed point results. Comput. Math. Appl. 2010, 60: 2508-2515. 10.1016/j.camwa.2010.08.074MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Ćirić LB, Abbas M, Damjanović B, Saadati R: Common fuzzy fixed point theorems in ordered metric spaces. Math. Comput. Model. 2011, 53: 1737-1741. 10.1016/j.mcm.2010.12.050View ArticleMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Shakeri S, Ćirić LB, Saadati R: Common fixed point theorem in partially ordered -fuzzy metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2010., 2010: Article ID 125082Google Scholar
  19. Sintunavarat W, Kumam P: Common fixed point theorems for a pair of weakly compatible mappings in fuzzy metric spaces. J. Appl. Math. 2011., 2011: Article ID 637958Google Scholar
  20. Sintunavarat W, Kumam P: Fixed point theorems for a generalized intuitionistic fuzzy contraction in intuitionistic fuzzy metric spaces. Thai J. Math. 2012, 10(1):123-135.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Sintunavarat W, Kumam P: Common fixed points for R -weakly commuting in fuzzy metric spaces. Ann. Univ. Ferrara 2012, 58(2):389-406. 10.1007/s11565-012-0150-zMathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. Chauhan S, Bhatnagar S, Radenović S: Common fixed point theorems for weakly compatible mappings in fuzzy metric spaces. Matematiche 2013, LXVIII(I):87-98. 10.4418/2013.68.1.8MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. Altun I: Some fixed point theorems for single and multi valued mappings on ordered non-Archimedean fuzzy metric spaces. Iran. J. Fuzzy Syst. 2010, 7(1):91-96.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. Altun I, Mihet D: Ordered non-Archimedean fuzzy metric spaces and some fixed point results. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2010., 2010: Article ID 782680Google Scholar
  25. Nashine HK, Altun I: Fixed point theorems for generalized weakly contractive condition in ordered metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2011., 2011: Article ID 132367Google Scholar
  26. Nashine HK, Altun I: A common fixed point theorem on ordered metric spaces. Bull. Iran. Math. Soc. 2012, 38(4):925-934.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. Nashine HK, Samet B:Fixed point results for mappings satisfying ( ψ , φ ) -weakly contractive condition in partially ordered metric spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2011, 74: 2201-2209. 10.1016/j.na.2010.11.024MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. Nashine HK, Samet B, Vetro C: Monotone generalized nonlinear contractions and fixed point theorems in ordered metric spaces. Math. Comput. Model. 2011, 54: 712-720. 10.1016/j.mcm.2011.03.014MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. O’Regan D, Petrusel A: Fixed point theorems for generalized contractions in ordered metric spaces. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2008, 341: 1241-1252. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2007.11.026MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. Sintunavarat W, Cho YJ, Kumam P: Coupled coincidence point theorems for contractions without commutative condition in intuitionistic fuzzy normed spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2011., 2011: Article ID 81Google Scholar
  31. Chauhan S, Imdad M, Radenović S, Vetro C: Some integral type fixed point theorems in non-Archimedean Menger PM-spaces with common property (E.A) and application of functional equations in dynamic programming. Rev. R. Acad. Cienc. Exactas Fís. Nat., Ser. A Mat. 2013. 10.1007/s13398-013-0142-6Google Scholar
  32. Zadeh LA: Fuzzy sets. Inf. Control 1965, 8: 103-112.MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. Heilpern S: Fuzzy mappings and fixed point theorems. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1981, 83: 566-569. 10.1016/0022-247X(81)90141-4MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. Estruch VD, Vidal A: A note on fixed fuzzy points for fuzzy mappings. Rend. Ist. Mat. Univ. Trieste 2001, 32: 39-45.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. Abbas M, Damjanović B, Lazović R: Fuzzy common fixed point theorems for generalized contractive mappings. Appl. Math. Lett. 2010, 23(11):1326-1330. 10.1016/j.aml.2010.06.023MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. Onjai-uea N, Kumam P: A generalized nonlinear random equations with random fuzzy mappings in uniformly smooth Banach spaces. J. Inequal. Appl. 2010., 2010: Article ID 728452Google Scholar
  37. Rashwan RA, Ahmed MA: Common fixed point theorems for fuzzy mappings. Arch. Math. 2002, 38: 219-226.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. Chaipunya P, Cho YJ, Kumam P: Geraghty-type theorems in modular metric spaces with an application to partial differential equation. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2012., 2012: Article ID 83Google Scholar
  39. Nashine HK, Kadelburg Z, Kumam P: Implicit relation type cyclic contractive mappings and applications to integral equations. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2012., 2012: Article ID 386253Google Scholar
  40. Nashine HK, Sintunavarat W, Kumam P: Cyclic generalized contractions and fixed point results with applications to an integral equation. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012., 2012: Article ID 217 10.1186/1687-1812-2012-217Google Scholar
  41. Sintunavarat W, Cho YJ, Kumam P: Urysohn integral equations approach by common fixed points in complex valued metric spaces. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2013., 2013: Article ID 49 10.1186/1687-1847-2013-49Google Scholar
  42. Sintunavarat W, Kumam P: Coupled fixed point results for nonlinear integral equations. J. Egypt. Math. Soc. 2013, 21: 266-272. 10.1016/j.joems.2013.03.006MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. Nashine HK, Pathak RP, Somvanshi PS, Pantelic S, Kumam P:Solutions for a class of nonlinear Volterra integral and integro-differential equation using cyclic ( φ , ψ , θ ) -contraction. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2013., 2013: Article ID 106 10.1186/1687-1847-2013-106Google Scholar
  44. Pathak HK, Hussain N: Common fixed points for Banach pairs with applications. Nonlinear Anal. 2008, 69: 2788-2802. 10.1016/j.na.2007.08.051MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  45. Pu P-M, Liu Y-M: Fuzzy topology. I. Neighborhood structure of a fuzzy point and Moore-Smith convergence. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1980, 76: 571-599. 10.1016/0022-247X(80)90048-7MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  46. Turkoglu D, Rhoades BE: A fixed fuzzy point for fuzzy mapping in complete metric spaces. Math. Commun. 2005, 10: 115-121.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  47. Lakshmikantham V, Mohapatra R: Theory of Fuzzy Differential Equations and Inclusions. Taylor & Francis, London; 2003.View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  48. Puri M, Ralescu D: Fuzzy random variables. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1986, 114: 409-422. 10.1016/0022-247X(86)90093-4MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Nashine et al.; licensee Springer. 2014

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.