A common fixed point of integral type contraction in generalized metric spacess

Mathematical Theory and Modeling www.iiste.org
ISSN 2224-5804 (Paper) ISSN 2225-0522 (Online)
Vol.3, No.6, 2013-Selected from International Conference on Recent Trends in Applied Sciences with Engineering Applications
184
A Common Fixed Point of Integral Type Contraction in
Generalized Metric Spacess
1
Pravin B. Prajapati 2
Ramakant Bhardwaj, 2
Ankur Tiwari
1
S.P.B. Patel Engineering College, Linch
1
The Research Scholar of CMJ University, Shillong (Meghalaya)
2
Truba Institute of Engineering & Information Technology, Bhopal (M.P)
E-mail: 1
pravinprajapati86@gmail.com , 2
drrkbhardwaj100@gmail.com
Abstract
In this paper, we present a common fixed point theorem for two self-mappings satisfying a contractive condition
of integral type in G- metric spaces. Our result generalizes some well-known results.
1. Introduction and Preliminaries
Mustafa and Sims [9] introduced the concept of G – metric spaces in the year 2004 as a generalization of the
metric spaces. In this type of spaces a non- negative real number is assigned to every triplet of elements. In [11]
Banach contraction mapping principle was established and a fixed point results have been proved. After that
several fixed point results have been proved in these spaces. Some of these works may be noted in [2-4, 10-13]
and [14]. Several other studies relevant to metric spaces are being extended to G- metric spaces. For instances
we may note that a best approximation result in these type of spaces established by Nezhad and Mazaheri in
[15] .the concept of w- distance, which is relevant to minimization problem in metric spaces [8], has been
extended to G-metric spaces by Saadati et al .[23]. Also one can note that the fixed point results in G- metric
spaces have been applied to proving the existence of solutions for a class of integral equations [26].
Definition 1.1. G-metric Space
Let X be a nonempty set and let G :X X X→ be a function satisfying the following :
(1) G(x, y, z) = 0 if x=y=z.
(2) G(x, x, y) > 0 ; for all x,y,z ∈ , with x≠ .
(3) G(x, x, y) G(x, y, z); for all x, y , ∈ , with z≠ .
(4) G(x, y, z)= G(x, z, y)= G(y, z, x)= - - - - --
(5) G(x, y, z) G(x, a, a) + G(a, y, z) ; for all x ,y ,z, a ∈
Then the function is called a generalized metric, or a G- metric on X and the pair (X, G) is a G-metric space.
Definition 1.2 Let (X, G) be a G –metric space and { } be a sequence of points in X. We say that { } is G-
convergent to x∈ if
lim , → ( , , ) = 0.
That is for any > 0 , there exists N∈ ℕ such that ( , , ) < , for all n,m ≥ . We call x the limit of
the sequence and write → or lim ,→ = x.
Definition 1.3 Let (X, G) be a G –metric space. A sequence { } is called a G- Cauchy sequence if, for any
> 0 , there exists N∈ ℕ such that ( , , ) < , for all
l, n,m ≥ . That is ( , , ) → 0 as n, m→ ∞.
Definition 1.4 A G-metric space (X,G) is called G –complete if every G- Cauchy sequence is G-convergent
in (X,G) .
Every G-metric on X will define a metric on X by
(X, y) = G(x, y,y) + G(y,x,x) , for all x,y ∈
Proposition 1.1 Let (X, G) be a G –metric space. The following are equivalent:
(1) ( ) is G-convergent to x ;
(2) G( , , ) → 0 as n → ∞;
(3) G( , , ) → 0 as n → ∞;
(4) G ( , , ) → 0 as n, m→ ∞.
Proposition 1.2 Let (X, G) be a G –metric space .Then, for any x, y, z, a ∈ it follows that
(1) If G(x, y, z) = 0 then x = y =z.
(2) G(x, y, z) G(x, x, y) + G(x, x, z)
(3) G(x, y, y) 2G(y, x, x) ,
(4) G(x, y, z) G(x, a, z) + G(a, y, z) ,

185
There has been a considerable interest to study common fixed point for a pair of mappings satisfying some
contractive conditions in metric spaces. Several interesting and elegant results were obtained in this direction by
various authors .It was the turning point in the “fixed point arena” when the notion of commutativity was
introduced by G.jungck [5] to obtain common fixed point theorems. This result was further generalized and
extended in various ways by many authors.In one direction Jungck [6] introduced the compatibility in 1986. It
has also been noted that fixed point problems of non-compatible mappings are also important and have been
considered in a number of works. A few may be noted in [7,18]. In another direction weaker version of
commutativity has been considered in a large number of works. One such concept is R-weakly commutativity.
This is an extension of weakly commuting mappings [16, 24].Some other references may be noted in [17-20] and
[22].
Proposition 1.3 Let f and g be weakly compatible self-mappings on a set X. If f and g have unique point of
coincidence w = fx = gx, then w is the unique common fixed point of f and g.
Definition 1.5 Let f and g be two self-mappings on a metric space (X,d).The mappings f and g are said to be
compatible if lim → (!" ,gf ) = 0. Whenever { } is a sequence in X such that lim
→
f = lim
→
g = z
for some z ∈ .
In particular, now we look in the context of common fixed point theorem in G-metric spaces. Start with the
following contraction conditions:
Definition 1.6 Let (X, G) be a G-metric space and T: X → be a self-mapping on (X, G). Now T is said to be
a contraction if
G(Tx,Ty,Tz) #G(x,y,z) for all x,y,z ∈ where 0 ≤ # < 1. (1.1)
It is clear that every self-mapping T: X → satisfying condition (1.1) is continuous. Now we focus to
generalize the condition (1.1) for a pair of self-mappings S and T on X in the following way :
G(Sx,Sy,Sz) # G(Tx,Ty,Tz) for all x,y,z ∈ where 0 ≤ # < 1. (1.2)
Definition 1.7 Let f and g be two self-mappings on a G-metric space (X,G). The mappings f and g are said to be
compatible if lim
→
G (fg , gf , gf ) = 0. Whenever { } is a sequence in X such that lim
→
f = lim
→
g
= z for some z ∈ .
Theorem 1.1 Let (X,G) be a complete G-metric space and f ,g be two self-mappings on (X,G) satisfies the
following conditions :
1. F(X) g(X) ,
2. F or g is continuous,
3. G(fx, fy, fz ) # (! , gy, gz) + ' G(gx, fy, gz) +( G(gx,gy,fz)
For every x, y,z ∈ and #, ' , ( ≥ 0 with 0 ≤ #+3 ' +3 ( < 1.
Then f and g have a unique common fixed point in X provided f and g are compatible maps.
In 2002, Branciari [21] obtained a fixed point theorem for a single mapping satisfying an analogue of a
Banach contraction principle for integral type inequality. After the paper of
Branciari, a lot of research works have been carried out on generalizing contractive conditions of integral type
for different contractive mapping satisfying various known properties. The aim of this paper is to extend and
modified above theorem in integral type mapping.
2. MAIN REDSULT
Theorem 1.1 Let (X,G) be a complete G-metric space and f ,g be two self-mappings on (X,G) satisfies the
following conditions :
(1) F(X) g(X) , (2.1)
(2) F or g is continuous, (2.2)
(3) ) *(+) +
(,-,,.,,/)
0
# ) *(+) +
(,-,1.,1/)
0
+ ' ) *(+) +
(1-,,.,1/)
0
+ ( ) *(+) +
(1-,1.,,/)
0
+
) *(+) +
(1-,1.,1/)
0
(2.3)
For every x, y, z ∈ and#, ' , ( ≥ 0 with 0 ≤ 3 #+3 ' + ƞ < 1.
And * : [0,+∞) → [0,+∞) is a Lebesgue integrable mapping which is summable, non-negative and such
that for each > 0 , ) *(+) +
3
0
> 0 . Then f and g have a unique point of coincidence in X. Moreover if f
and g are weakly compatible, then f and g have a unique common fixed point.
Proof. Let 0 be arbitrary in X. Since F(X) g(X), choose 4 ∈ such that g 4 = f 0 .
Continuing this process, we choose 4 such that

186
= g 4 = f , ∀6 ∈ ℕ.
7 Inequality (2.3), we have
) *(+) +
(.89:.89:,.8)
0
= ) *(+) +
(,-89:,;-89:,,-8)
0
# ) *(+) +
(,-89:,1-89:,1-8)
0
+ ' ) *(+) +
(1-89:,,-89:,1-8)
0
+ ( ) *(+) +
(1-89:,1-89:,,-8)
0
+ ) *(+) +
(1-89:,1-89:,1-8)
0
= # ) *(+) +
(.89:,.8,.8<:)
0
+ ' ) *(+) +
(.8,.89:,.8<:)
0
+ ( ) *(+) +
(.8,.8,.8)
0
+ ) *(+) +
(.8,.8,.8<:)
0
Now, G ( =4, , 4) G ( =4, , ) + G ( , , 4)
G ( =4, , ) + 2 G ( , 4, 4)
(By using Proposition 1.2)
Then,
) *(+) +
(.89:.89:,.8)
0
(#+ ' ) ) *(+) +
>(.8<:,.8,.89:)
0
+ ) *(+) +
(.8,.8,.8<:)
0
(#+ ' ) [ ) *(+) +
>(.8<:,.8,.8)
0
+ ) *(+) +
?>(.8,.89:,.89:)
0
]
+ ) *(+) +
(.8,.8,.8<:)
0
= (#+' + ƞ) ) *(+) +
(.8,.8,.8<:)
0
+ (2#+2 ') ) *(+) +
>(.8,.89:,.89:)
0
(1-2#-2 ') ) *(+) +
(.89:.89:,.8)
0
(#+ ' + ƞ ) ) *(+) +
(.8,.8,.8<:)
0
) *(+) +
(.89:.89:,.8)
0
k
) *(+) +
(.8,.8,.8<:)
0
where k =
B C ƞ
4=?B=? C
1.
By induction, one can find
) *(+) +
(.89:.89:,.8)
0
D ) *(+) +
(.:,.:,.E)
0
Since k ∈ [0,1) , so lim
→
) *(+) +
(.89:.89:,.8)
0
= 0 . By a property of function * , we obtain lim
→
( 4 4, ) = 0 . (2.4)
Now, we shall show that { } is a G- Cauchy sequence in g(X).
Suppose to the contrary. Then there exist > 0 and sequences of natural numbers (m(k)) and (l(k)) such that
for every natural number k, m(k) > l(k) ≥ k and
G ( (G), (G), (G)) . (2.5)
Now corresponding to l(k) we choose m(k) to be the smallest for which (2.5) holds. So
G ( (G)=4, (G)=4, (G)) .
Using (2.5) and the rectangle inequality, we have
G ( (G), (G) , (G))
G ( (G), (G) , (G)=4) + G( (G)=4, (G)=4 , (G))
+ G ( (G), (G) , (G)=4) .
Letting k → ∞ in the above inequality and using (2.4), we get
lim
G→
G ( (G), (G) , (G)) = . (2.6)
Again, a rectangle inequality gives us
G ( (G)=4, (G)=4 , (G)=4) G ( (G)=4, (G)=4 , (G))
+ G ( (G), (G) , (G)=4)
+ G ( (G), (G) , (G)=4)
By (2.4), letting k → ∞ , we obtain
lim
G→
G ( (G)=4, (G)=4, (G)=4) . (2.7)
From (2.3), we have

187
) *(+) +
>(.H(I),.H(I) ,.J(I))
0
= ) *(+) +
>(K-H(I),,-H(I) ,,-J(I))
0
# ) *(+) +
(,-H(I),1-H(I),1-J(I))
0
+ ' ) *(+) +
(1-H(I),,-H(I),1-J(I))
0
+ (
) *(+) +
(1-H(I),1-H(I),,-J(I))
0
+ ) *(+) +
(1-H(I),1-H(I),1-J(I))
0
= # ) *(+) +
(.H(I),.H(I)<:,.J(I)<:)
0
+ ' ) *(+) +
(.H(I)<:,.H(I),.J(I)<:)
0
+ ( ) *(+) +
(.H(I)<:,.H(I)<:,.J(I))
0
+ ) *(+) +
(.H(I)<:,.H(I)<:,.J(I)<:)
0
Letting k → ∞ , we find using (2.6) and (2.7)
0 ) *(+) +
3
0
(# + ' ) ) *(+) +
LMN
I→O
(.H(I),.H(I)<:,.J(I)<:)
0
+ ( ) *(+) +
LMN
I→O
(.H(I)<:,.H(I)<:,.J(I))
0
+ ) *(+) +
LMN
I→O
(.H(I)<:,.H(I)<:,.J(I)<:)
0
(# + ' + ( + ƞ) ) *(+) +
3
0
Which is a contradiction, since # + ' + ( + ƞ [0,1) . Thus, we proved that { g } is a G- Cauchy
sequence g(X) . Since g(X) is G- complete, we obtain that { g } is G – convergent to some q g(X). So
there exists p X such that gp = q. From Proposition 1.1, we have
lim
→
G(g , g ,gp ) = lim
→
G(g , gp ,gp ) = 0 . (2.8)
We will show that gp = fp. Suppose that gp fp. By (2.3), we have
) *(+) +
>(P -8,KQ ,KQ )
0
= ) *(+) +
>(K -8<:,KQ ,KQ )
0
# ) *(+) +
(,-8<:,1R,1R)
0
+ ' ) *(+) +
(1-8<:,,R,1R)
0
+ ( ) *(+) +
(1-8<:,1R,,R)
0
+ ) *(+) +
(1-8<:,1R,1R)
0
Taking k → ∞ , we obtain
) *(+) +
>(P R,KQ ,KQ )
0
0.
Which implies that G(g U, fp , fp) = 0, so gp = fp. We now show that f and g have a unique point of coincidence.
Suppose that ft= gt for some t X . By applying (2.3), it follows that
) *(+) +
>(PX,PQ ,PQ )
0
= ) *(+) +
>(KX,KQ ,KQ )
0
# ) *(+) +
(,Y,1R,1R)
0
+ ' ) *(+) +
(1Y,,R,1R)
0
+ ( ) *(+) +
(1Y,1R,,R)
0
+ ) *(+) +
(1Y,1R,1R)
0
Which holds unless G(gt, gp , gp ) = 0 , so gt = gp , that is the uniqueness of coincidence point of f and g.
From Proposition 1.3 , f and g have a unique common fixed point .
Acknowledgement: One of the author (Dr. R.K. B.) is thankful to MPCOST Bhopal for the project No 2556
References
[1] M.Aamri and D.EI. Moutawakil, Some new common fixed point theorems under strict contractive conditions,
J.Math.Anal.Appl. , 270 (2002), 181-188.
[2] M. Abbas and B.E.Rhoades ,Common fixed point results for non commuting mappings without continuity
in generalized metric space, Appl.Math. Comput, (2009), doi: 10. 1016/j.amc.2009.04.085.
[3] Hassen Aydi, W. Shatanawi and Calogero Vetro,On generalized weakly G- contraction mapping in G-metric
spaces, Comput.Math.Appl.62 (2011)4222-4229.
[4] B.S.Choudhury and P.Maity. Coupled fixed point results in generalized metric spaces,
Math.Comput.Modeling, 54(2011), 73-79.
[5] G.jungck, Commuting mappings and fixed point, Amer.Math.Monthly,83(1976),261-263.
[6] G.jungck, Compatible mappings and common fixed points, Int.J.Math.Math.Sci, 9(1986),771-779.
[7] G.jungck, common fixed points for noncontinuous nonself mappings on non-metric spaces, Far East
J.Math.Sci,4(1996),199-212.
[8] O.Kada, T.Suzuki and W.Takahashi, Non convex minimization theorems and fixed point theorems in
complete metric spaces, Math.Japon, 44(1996), 381-391.

188
[9] Z.Mustafa and B.Sims, Some remarks concerning D-metric spaces, Proceedings of International Conference
on Fixed point Theory and Applications, Yokohama.Japan (2004)189-198.
[10] Z.Mustafa and B.Sims, A new approach to generalized metric spaces.Journal of Nonlinear Convex
Analysis,7(2006), 289-297.
[11] Z.Mustafa, H.Obiedat and F.Awawdeh, Some fixed point theorem for mapping on complete G-metric
spaces. Fixed point Theory and Applications, Volume (2008) Article ID 189870, doi: 10, 1155/2008/189870.
[12] Z.Mustafa, W.Shatanawi and M. Batainch, Fixed point theorem on uncomplete G-metric spaces.Journal of
Mathematics and Statistics, 4(2008), 196-201.
[13] Z.Mustafa, W.Shatanawi and M. Batainch, Existence of fixed point results in G-metric spaces,
Int.J.Math.Math.Sci.Volume (2009) Article ID283028, doi: 10, 1155/2009/283028.
[14] Z.Mustafa and B.Sims, Fixed point theorems for contractive mappings in complete G-metric spaces, Fixed
point Theory and Applications, Volume (2009) Article ID 917175, doi: 10, 1155/2009/917175.
[15] A.Dehghan Nezhad and H.Mazaheri. New results in G-best approximation in G-metric spaces, Ukrainian
Math.J.62 (2010)648-654.
[16] R.P.Pant, Common fixed points of weakly commuting mappings, Math.Student, 62(1993)97-102.
[17] R.P.Pant, Common fixed points of sequence of mappings, Ganita, 47(1996)43-49.
[18] R.P.Pant, Common fixed points of contractive maps, J.Math.Anal.Appl. 226(1998)251-258.
[19] R.P.Pant, R- weakly commutativity and common fixed points, Soochow J.Math, 25(1999)37-42.
[20] R.P.Pant, Common fixed points under strict contractive conditions, J.Math.Anal.Appl. 248(2000), 327-332.
[21] A. Branciari : A fixed point theorem for mappings satisfying a general contractive condition of
integral type, Int. J.Math.Math.Sci., 29(2002), 531-536.
[22] V.Pant, Contractive conditions and common fixed points, Acta Math.Acad.Paed. Nyir, 24(2008), 257-266.
[23] H.K.Pathak, Rosana Rodriguez- Lopez and R.K. Verma. A common fixed point theorem using implicit
relation and E.A property in metric spaces , Filomat , 21(2007) , 211-234.
[24] R. Saadati. S.M. Vaezpour , P. Vetro and B.E. Rhoades, Fixed point theorems in generalized partially
ordered G- metric spaces. Math. Comput.Modeling 52(2010) 797-801.
[25] S. Sessa, On a weak commutativity conditions of mappings in fixed point considerations,
Publ.Inst.Math.Beograd, 32(46) (1982), 146-153.
[26] W. Shatanawi, Some Fixed Point Theorems in Ordered G- Metric Spaces and Applications ,
Abst.Appl.Anal.(2011) Article ID 126205.

This academic article was published by The International Institute for Science,
Technology and Education (IISTE). The IISTE is a pioneer in the Open Access
Publishing service based in the U.S. and Europe. The aim of the institute is
Accelerating Global Knowledge Sharing.
More information about the publisher can be found in the IISTE’s homepage:
http://www.iiste.org
CALL FOR PAPERS
The IISTE is currently hosting more than 30 peer-reviewed academic journals and
collaborating with academic institutions around the world. There’s no deadline for
submission. Prospective authors of IISTE journals can find the submission
instruction on the following page: http://www.iiste.org/Journals/
The IISTE editorial team promises to the review and publish all the qualified
submissions in a fast manner. All the journals articles are available online to the
readers all over the world without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than
those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. Printed version of the
journals is also available upon request of readers and authors.
IISTE Knowledge Sharing Partners
EBSCO, Index Copernicus, Ulrich's Periodicals Directory, JournalTOCS, PKP Open
Archives Harvester, Bielefeld Academic Search Engine, Elektronische
Zeitschriftenbibliothek EZB, Open J-Gate, OCLC WorldCat, Universe Digtial
Library , NewJour, Google Scholar

A common fixed point of integral type contraction in generalized metric spacess

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to A common fixed point of integral type contraction in generalized metric spacess (20)

More from Alexander Decker (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

A common fixed point of integral type contraction in generalized metric spacess