Hindawi Publishing Corporation

Abstract and Applied Analysis

Volume 2014, Article ID 280817, 11 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/280817

Research Article
Fixed Point Theory in 𝛼-Complete Metric
Spaces with Applications

N. Hussain,1 M. A. Kutbi,1 and P. Salimi2

1
Department of Mathematics, King Abdulaziz University, P.O. Box 80203, 21589 Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
2
Young Researchers and Elite Club, Rasht Branch, Islamic Azad University, Rasht, Iran

Correspondence should be addressed to P. Salimi; [email protected]

Received 28 November 2013; Accepted 14 December 2013; Published 6 February 2014

Academic Editor: Ljubomir B. Ćirić

Copyright © 2014 N. Hussain 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.

The aim of this paper is to introduce new concepts of 𝛼-𝜂-complete metric space and 𝛼-𝜂-continuous function and establish fixed
point results for modified 𝛼-𝜂-𝜓-rational contraction mappings in 𝛼-𝜂-complete metric spaces. As an application, we derive some
Suzuki type fixed point theorems and new fixed point theorems for 𝜓-graphic-rational contractions. Moreover, some examples and
an application to integral equations are given here to illustrate the usability of the obtained results.

This paper is dedicated to Professor Miodrag Mateljević on the occasion of his 65th birthday

1. Preliminaries Assume that there exists 𝑟 ∈ [0, 1) such that

We know by the Banach contraction principle [1], which is
a classical and powerful tool in nonlinear analysis, that a 𝜃 (𝑟) 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥) ≤ 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦) 𝑖𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑠 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≤ 𝑟𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦)
self-mapping 𝑓 on a complete metric space (𝑋, 𝑑) such that (2)
𝑑(𝑓𝑥, 𝑓𝑦) ≤ 𝑐 𝑑(𝑥, 𝑦) for all 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋, where 𝑐 ∈ [0, 1), has a
unique fixed point. Since then, the Banach contraction prin- for all 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋. Then there exists a unique fixed point 𝑧 of 𝑇.
ciple has been generalized in several directions (see [2–26] Moreover, lim𝑛 → +∞ 𝑇𝑛 𝑥 = 𝑧 for all 𝑥 ∈ 𝑋.
and references cited therein).
In 2008, Suzuki [21] proved the following result that is an In 2012, Samet et al. [19] introduced the concepts of 𝛼-
interesting generalization of the Banach contraction principle 𝜓-contractive and 𝛼-admissible mappings and established
which also characterizes the metric completeness. various fixed point theorems for such mappings defined on
complete metric spaces. Afterwards Salimi et al. [16] and
Theorem 1. Let (𝑋, 𝑑) be a complete metric space and let 𝑇 Hussain et al. [7] modified the notions of 𝛼-𝜓-contractive and
be a self-mapping on 𝑋. Define a nonincreasing function 𝜃 : 𝛼-admissible mappings and established fixed point theorems
[0, 1) → (1/2, 1] by which are proper generalizations of the recent results in [12,
19].
{ (√5 − 1)
{
{ 1, 𝑖𝑓 0 ≤ 𝑟 ≤ , Definition 2 (see [19]). Let 𝑇 be a self-mapping on 𝑋 and let
{
{ 2
{
{ 𝛼 : 𝑋 × 𝑋 → [0, +∞) be a function. One says that 𝑇 is an
𝜃 (𝑟) = { (√5 − 1) (1)
{
{ (1 − 𝑟) 𝑟−2 , 𝑖𝑓 < 𝑟 < 2−1/2 , 𝛼-admissible mapping if
{
{ 2
{
{ −1
{(1 + 𝑟) , 𝑖𝑓 2−1/2 ≤ 𝑟 < 1. 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋, 𝛼 (𝑥, 𝑦) ≥ 1 󳨐⇒ 𝛼 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≥ 1. (3)
2 Abstract and Applied Analysis

Definition 3 (see [16]). Let 𝑇 be a self-mapping on 𝑋 and let where 𝛼(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ≥ 𝜂(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) for all 𝑛 ∈ N, then {𝑥𝑛 } ⊆
𝛼, 𝜂 : 𝑋 × 𝑋 → [0, +∞) be two functions. One says that 𝑇 is 𝑂(𝑤). Now, since 𝑋 is an orbitally 𝑇-complete metric space,
an 𝛼-admissible mapping with respect to 𝜂 if then {𝑥𝑛 } converges in 𝑋. That is, (𝑋, 𝑑) is an 𝛼-𝜂-complete
metric space. Also, suppose that 𝛼(𝑥, 𝑦) ≥ 𝜂(𝑥, 𝑦); then 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈
𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋, 𝛼 (𝑥, 𝑦) ≥ 𝜂 (𝑥, 𝑦) 󳨐⇒ 𝛼 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≥ 𝜂 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) . 𝑂(𝑤). Hence, 𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦 ∈ 𝑂(𝑤). That is, 𝛼(𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≥ 𝜂(𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦).
(4) Thus, 𝑇 is an 𝛼-admissible mapping with respect to 𝜂.
Note that if we take 𝜂(𝑥, 𝑦) = 1, then this definition reduces
to Definition 2. Also, if we take 𝛼(𝑥, 𝑦) = 1, then we say that Definition 7. Let (𝑋, 𝑑) be a metric space. Let 𝛼, 𝜂 : 𝑋 × 𝑋 →
𝑇 is an 𝜂-subadmissible mapping. [0, ∞) and 𝑇 : 𝑋 → 𝑋. One says 𝑇 is an 𝛼-𝜂-continuous
mapping on (𝑋, 𝑑), if for given 𝑥 ∈ 𝑋 and sequence {𝑥𝑛 } with
Here we introduce the notions of 𝛼-𝜂-complete metric
space and 𝛼-𝜂-continuous function and establish fixed point 𝑥𝑛 󳨀→ 𝑥, as 𝑛 󳨀→ ∞,
results for modified 𝛼-𝜂-𝜓-rational contractions in 𝛼-𝜂-
𝛼 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ≥ 𝜂 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) , ∀𝑛 ∈ N 󳨐⇒ 𝑇𝑥𝑛 󳨀→ 𝑇𝑥.
complete metric spaces which are not necessarily complete.
As an application, we derive some Suzuki type fixed point the- (7)
orems and new fixed point theorems for 𝜓-graphic-rational
contractions. Moreover, some examples and an application to Example 8. Let 𝑋 = [0, ∞) and 𝑑(𝑥, 𝑦) = |𝑥 − 𝑦| be a metric
integral equations are given here to illustrate the usability of on 𝑋. Assume that 𝑇 : 𝑋 → 𝑋 and 𝛼, 𝜂 : 𝑋 × 𝑋 → [0, +∞)
the obtained results. be defined by

𝑥5 , if 𝑥 ∈ [0, 1] ,
2. Main Results 𝑇𝑥 = {
sin 𝜋𝑥 + 2, if (1, ∞) ,
First, we introduce the notions of 𝛼-𝜂-complete metric space
and 𝛼-𝜂-continuous function. 𝑥2 + 𝑦2 + 1, if 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ [0, 1] , (8)
𝛼 (𝑥, 𝑦) = {
0, otherwise,
Definition 4. Let (𝑋, 𝑑) be a metric space and 𝛼, 𝜂 : 𝑋 × 𝑋 →
[0, +∞). The metric space 𝑋 is said to be 𝛼-𝜂-complete if 𝜂 (𝑥, 𝑦) = 𝑥2 .
and only if every Cauchy sequence {𝑥𝑛 } with 𝛼(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ≥
𝜂(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) for all 𝑛 ∈ N converges in 𝑋. One says 𝑋 is an 𝛼- Clearly, 𝑇 is not continuous, but 𝑇 is 𝛼-𝜂-continuous on
complete metric space when 𝜂(𝑥, 𝑦) = 1 for all 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋 and (𝑋, 𝑑). Indeed, if 𝑥𝑛 → 𝑥 as 𝑛 → ∞ and 𝛼(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ≥ 𝜂(𝑥𝑛 ,
one says (𝑋, 𝑑) is an 𝜂-complete metric space when 𝛼(𝑥, 𝑦) = 𝑥𝑛+1 ), then 𝑥𝑛 ∈ [0, 1] and so lim𝑛 → ∞ 𝑇𝑥𝑛 = lim𝑛 → ∞ 𝑥𝑛5 =
1 for all 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋. 𝑥5 = 𝑇𝑥.
Example 5. Let 𝑋 = (0, ∞) and 𝑑(𝑥, 𝑦) = |𝑥 − 𝑦| be a metric Remark 9. Define (𝑋, 𝑑) and 𝛼, 𝜂 : 𝑋 × 𝑋 → [0, +∞) as in
function on 𝑋. Let 𝐴 be a closed subset of 𝑋. Define 𝛼, 𝜂 : Remark 6. Let 𝑇 : 𝑋 → 𝑋 be a an orbitally continuous map
𝑋 × 𝑋 → [0, +∞) by on (𝑋, 𝑑). Then 𝑇 is 𝛼-𝜂-continuous on (𝑋, 𝑑). Indeed if 𝑥𝑛 →
2 𝑥 as 𝑛 → ∞ and 𝛼(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ≥ 𝜂(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) for all 𝑛 ∈ N, so
(𝑥 + 𝑦) , if 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝐴, 𝑥𝑛 ∈ 𝑂(𝑤) for all 𝑛 ∈ N, then there exists sequence (𝑘𝑖 )𝑖∈N
𝛼 (𝑥, 𝑦) = {
0, otherwise, (5) of positive integer such that 𝑥𝑛 = 𝑇𝑘𝑖 𝑤 → 𝑥 as 𝑖 → ∞.
Now since 𝑇 is an orbitally continuous map on (𝑋, 𝑑), then
𝜂 (𝑥, 𝑦) = 2𝑥𝑦.
𝑇𝑥𝑛 = 𝑇(𝑇𝑘𝑖 𝑤) → 𝑇𝑥 as 𝑖 → ∞ as required.
Clearly, (𝑋, 𝑑) is not a complete metric space, but (𝑋, 𝑑) is
an 𝛼-𝜂-complete metric space. Indeed, if {𝑥𝑛 } is a Cauchy A function 𝜓 : [0, ∞) → [0, ∞) is called Bianchini-
sequence in 𝑋 such that 𝛼(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ≥ 𝜂(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) for all Grandolfi gauge function [13, 14, 27] if the following condi-
𝑛 ∈ N, then 𝑥𝑛 ∈ 𝐴 for all 𝑛 ∈ N. Now, since (𝐴, 𝑑) is a tions hold:
complete metric space, then there exists 𝑥∗ ∈ 𝐴 such that
𝑥𝑛 → 𝑥∗ as 𝑛 → ∞. (i) 𝜓 is nondecreasing;
(ii) there exist 𝑘0 ∈ N and 𝑎 ∈ (0, 1) and a convergent
Remark 6. Let 𝑇 : 𝑋 → 𝑋 be a self-mapping on metric space series of nonnegative terms ∑∞
𝑘=1 V𝑘 such that
𝑋 and let 𝑋 be an orbitally 𝑇-complete. Define 𝛼, 𝜂 : 𝑋×𝑋 →
[0, +∞) by
𝜓𝑘+1 (𝑡) ≤ 𝑎𝜓𝑘 (𝑡) + V𝑘 , (9)
3, if 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑂 (𝑤) ,
𝛼 (𝑥, 𝑦) = { for 𝑘 ≥ 𝑘0 and any 𝑡 ∈ R+ .
0, otherwise, (6)
𝜂 (𝑥, 𝑦) = 1, In some sources, Bianchini-Grandolfi gauge function is
known as (𝑐)—comparison function (see e.g., [2]). We denote
where 𝑂(𝑤) is an orbit of a point 𝑤 ∈ 𝑋. Then (𝑋, 𝑑) is an 𝛼-𝜂- by Ψ the family of Bianchini-Grandolfi gauge functions. The
complete metric space. Indeed, if {𝑥𝑛 } be a Cauchy sequence, following lemma illustrates the properties of these functions.
Abstract and Applied Analysis 3

Lemma 10 (see [2]). If 𝜓 ∈ Ψ, then the following hold: that 𝛼(𝑥1 , 𝑥2 ) = 𝛼(𝑇𝑥0 , 𝑇2 𝑥0 ) ≥ 𝜂(𝑇𝑥0 , 𝑇2 𝑥0 ) = 𝜂(𝑥1 , 𝑥2 ).
Continuing this process, we get
(i) (𝜓𝑛 (𝑡))𝑛∈N converges to 0 as 𝑛 → ∞ for all 𝑡 ∈ R+ ;
𝛼 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ≥ 𝜂 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) = 𝜂 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑇𝑥𝑛 ) (13)
(ii) 𝜓(𝑡) < 𝑡, for any 𝑡 ∈ (0, ∞);
for all 𝑛 ∈ N ∪ {0}. Now, by (a) we get
(iii) 𝜓 is continuous at 0;
𝑑 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) = 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑇𝑥𝑛 ) ≤ 𝜓 (𝑀 (𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑥𝑛 )) , (14)
(iv) the series ∑∞ 𝑘 +
𝑘=1 𝜓 (𝑡) converges for any 𝑡 ∈ R .
where
Definition 11. Let (𝑋, 𝑑) be a metric space and let 𝑇 be a self-
mapping on 𝑋. Let 𝑀 (𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑥𝑛 ) = max {𝑑 (𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑥𝑛 ) ,

𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥) 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑦)

𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦) = max {𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦) , , , 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑇𝑥𝑛−1 ) 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑇𝑥𝑛 )
1 + 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥) 1 + 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑦) , ,
1 + 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑇𝑥𝑛−1 ) 1 + 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑇𝑥𝑛 )
𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) + 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑥)
}. 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑇𝑥𝑛 ) + 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑇𝑥𝑛−1 )
2 }
2
(10)
𝑑 (𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑥𝑛 )
Then, = max {𝑑 (𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑥𝑛 ) , ,
1 + 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑥𝑛 )
(a) we say 𝑇 is a modified 𝛼-𝜂-𝜓-rational contraction
mapping if 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑥𝑛+1 )
, }
1 + 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) 2
𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋,
(11) ≤ max {𝑑 (𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑥𝑛 ) , 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ,
𝜂 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥) ≤ 𝛼 (𝑥, 𝑦) 󳨐⇒ 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≤ 𝜓 (𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦)) ,

where 𝜓 ∈ Ψ; 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑥𝑛 ) + 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 )

}
(b) we say 𝑇 is a modified 𝛼-𝜓-rational contraction 2
mapping if
= max {𝑑 (𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑥𝑛 ) , 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 )}
𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋, 𝛼 (𝑥, 𝑦) ≥ 1 󳨐⇒ 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≤ 𝜓 (𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦)) , (15)
(12) and so, 𝑀(𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑥𝑛 ) ≤ max{𝑑(𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑥𝑛 ), 𝑑(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 )}. Now
since 𝜓 is nondecreasing, so from (14), we have
where 𝜓 ∈ Ψ.
𝑑 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ≤ 𝜓 (max {𝑑 (𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑥𝑛 ) , 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 )}) . (16)
The following is our first main result of this section.
Now, if max{𝑑(𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑥𝑛 ), 𝑑(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 )} = 𝑑(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) for some
Theorem 12. Let (𝑋, 𝑑) be a metric space and let 𝑇 be a self- 𝑛 ∈ N, then
mapping on 𝑋. Also, suppose that 𝛼, 𝜂 : 𝑋 × 𝑋 → [0, ∞) are 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ≤ 𝜓 (max {𝑑 (𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑥𝑛 ) , 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 )})
two functions and 𝜓 ∈ Ψ. Assume that the following assertions (17)
hold true: = 𝜓 (𝑑 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 )) < 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 )

(i) (𝑋, 𝑑) is an 𝛼-𝜂-complete metric space; which is a contradiction. Hence, for all 𝑛 ∈ N we have
(ii) 𝑇 is an 𝛼-admissible mapping with respect to 𝜂; 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ≤ 𝜓 (𝑑 (𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑥𝑛 )) . (18)
(iii) 𝑇 is modified 𝛼-𝜂-𝜓-rational contraction mapping on By induction, we have
𝑋;
𝑑 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ≤ 𝜓𝑛 (𝑑 (𝑥0 , 𝑥1 )) . (19)
(iv) 𝑇 is an 𝛼-𝜂-continuous mapping on 𝑋;
Fix 𝜖 > 0; there exists 𝑁 ∈ N such that
(v) there exists 𝑥0 ∈ 𝑋 such that 𝛼(𝑥0 , 𝑇𝑥0 ) ≥ 𝜂(𝑥0 , 𝑇𝑥0 ).
∑ 𝜓𝑛 (𝑑 (𝑥0 , 𝑥1 )) < 𝜖. (20)
Then 𝑇 has a fixed point. 𝑛≥𝑁

Let 𝑚, 𝑛 ∈ N with 𝑚 > 𝑛 ≥ 𝑁. Then by triangular inequality

Proof. Let 𝑥0 ∈ 𝑋 be such that 𝛼(𝑥0 , 𝑇𝑥0 ) ≥ 𝜂(𝑥0 , 𝑇𝑥0 ).
we get
Define a sequence {𝑥𝑛 } in 𝑋 by 𝑥𝑛 = 𝑇𝑛 𝑥0 = 𝑇𝑥𝑛−1 for all
𝑛 ∈ N. If 𝑥𝑛+1 = 𝑥𝑛 for some 𝑛 ∈ N, then 𝑥 = 𝑥𝑛 is a 𝑚−1
fixed point for 𝑇 and the result is proved. Hence, we suppose 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑚 ) ≤ ∑ 𝑑 (𝑥𝑘 , 𝑥𝑘+1 ) ≤ ∑ 𝜓𝑛 (𝑑 (𝑥0 , 𝑥1 )) < 𝜖.
that 𝑥𝑛+1 ≠ 𝑥𝑛 for all 𝑛 ∈ N. Since 𝑇 is 𝛼-admissible mapping 𝑘=𝑛 𝑛≥𝑁

with respect to 𝜂 and 𝛼(𝑥0 , 𝑇𝑥0 ) ≥ 𝜂(𝑥0 , 𝑇𝑥0 ), we deduce (21)

4 Abstract and Applied Analysis

Consequently lim𝑚,𝑛, → +∞ 𝑑(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑚 ) = 0. Hence {𝑥𝑛 } is a (i) let 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ [−1, 0) with 𝑥 ≠ 𝑦; then,
Cauchy sequence. On the other hand from (13) we know that
𝛼(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ≥ 𝜂(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) for all 𝑛 ∈ N. Now since 𝑋 is an 𝛼- 1
𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) = max {𝑥2 , 𝑦2 }
𝜂-complete metric space, there is 𝑧 ∈ 𝑋 such that 𝑥𝑛 → 𝑧 4
as 𝑛 → ∞. Also, since 𝑇 is an 𝛼-𝜂-continuous mapping, 1 󵄨 󵄨
so 𝑥𝑛+1 = 𝑇𝑥𝑛 → 𝑇𝑧 as 𝑛 → ∞. That is, 𝑧 = 𝑇𝑧 as ≤ max {|𝑥| , 󵄨󵄨󵄨𝑦󵄨󵄨󵄨} = 𝜓 (𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦)) ≤ 𝜓 (𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦)) ;
2
required. (24)

Example 13. Let 𝑋 = (−∞, −2)∪[−1, 1]∪(2, +∞). We endow (ii) let 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ (0, 1] with 𝑥 ≠ 𝑦; then
𝑋 with the metric
1 󵄨 󵄨
𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) = max {|𝑥| , 󵄨󵄨󵄨𝑦󵄨󵄨󵄨}
󵄨 󵄨 4
max {|𝑥| , 󵄨󵄨󵄨𝑦󵄨󵄨󵄨} , if 𝑥 ≠ 𝑦,
𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦) = { (22) 1 󵄨 󵄨
0, 𝑥 = 𝑦. ≤ max {|𝑥| , 󵄨󵄨󵄨𝑦󵄨󵄨󵄨} = 𝜓 (𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦)) ≤ 𝜓 (𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦)) ;
2
(25)

Define 𝑇 : 𝑋 → 𝑋, 𝛼, 𝜂 : 𝑋 × 𝑋 → [0, ∞), and 𝜓 : [0, (iii) let 𝑥 ∈ (−1, 0) and 𝑦 ∈ (0, 1); then
∞) → [0, ∞) by
1
𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) = max {𝑥2 , 𝑦}
4
{ √2𝑥2 − 1, if 𝑥 ∈ (−∞, −3] ,
{
{ 1 󵄨 󵄨
{
{
{ ≤ max {|𝑥| , 󵄨󵄨󵄨𝑦󵄨󵄨󵄨} = 𝜓 (𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦)) ≤ 𝜓 (𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦))
{
{𝑥3 − 1, if 𝑥 ∈ (−3, −2) , 2
{
{ (26)
{
{ 1 2
{
{
{ 𝑥, if 𝑥 ∈ [−1, 0] ,
𝑇𝑥 = { 4
{1 (iv) let 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∈ [−1, 0), 𝑥 = 𝑦 ∈ (0, 1] or let 𝑥 = −1, 𝑦 = 1;
{
{ then, 𝑇𝑥 = 𝑇𝑦. That is,
{
{ 𝑥, if 𝑥 ∈ (0, 1] ,
{
{ 4
{
{
{
{5 + sin 𝜋𝑥, if 𝑥 ∈ (2, 4) , 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) = 0 ≤ 𝜓 (𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦)) . (27)
{
{
{ 3 (23)
{3𝑥 + ln 𝑥 + 1, if 𝑥 ∈ [4, ∞) ,
Thus 𝑇 is a modified 𝛼-𝜂-𝜓-rational contraction mapping.
𝑥2 + 𝑦2 + 1, if 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ [−1, 1] , Hence all conditions of Theorem 12 are satisfied and 𝑇 has
𝛼 (𝑥, 𝑦) = { 2 a fixed point. Here, 𝑥 = 0 is fixed point of 𝑇.
𝑥, otherwise,
By taking 𝜂(𝑥, 𝑦) = 1 for all 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋 in Theorem 12, we
𝜂 (𝑥, 𝑦) = 𝑥2 + 𝑦2 ,
obtain the following corollary.
1
𝜓 (𝑡) = 𝑡. Corollary 14. Let (𝑋, 𝑑) be a metric space and let 𝑇 be a self-
2
mapping on 𝑋. Also, suppose that 𝛼 : 𝑋 × 𝑋 → [0, ∞) is a
function and 𝜓 ∈ Ψ. Assume that the following assertions hold
Clearly, (𝑋, 𝑑) is not a complete metric space. However, it true:
is an 𝛼-𝜂-complete metric space. In fact, if {𝑥𝑛 } is a Cauchy
(i) (𝑋, 𝑑) is an 𝛼-complete metric space;
sequence such that 𝛼(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ≥ 𝜂(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) for all 𝑛 ∈ N,
then {𝑥𝑛 } ⊆ [−1, 1] for all 𝑛 ∈ N. Now, since ([−1, 1], 𝑑) is (ii) 𝑇 is an 𝛼-admissible mapping;
a complete metric space, then the sequence {𝑥𝑛 } converges (iii) 𝑇 is a modified 𝛼-𝜓-rational contraction on 𝑋;
in [−1, 1] ⊆ 𝑋. Let 𝛼(𝑥, 𝑦) ≥ 𝜂(𝑥, 𝑦); then 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ [−1, 1]. (iv) 𝑇 is an 𝛼-continuous mapping on 𝑋;
On the other hand, 𝑇𝑤 ∈ [−1, 1] for all 𝑤 ∈ [−1, 1]. Then,
𝛼(𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≥ 𝜂(𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦). That is, 𝑇 is an 𝛼-admissible mapping (v) there exists 𝑥0 ∈ 𝑋 such that 𝛼(𝑥0 , 𝑇𝑥0 ) ≥ 1.
with respect to 𝜂. Let {𝑥𝑛 } be a sequence, such that 𝑥𝑛 → 𝑥 Then 𝑇 has a fixed point.
as 𝑛 → ∞ and 𝛼(𝑥𝑛+1 , 𝑥𝑛 ) ≥ 𝜂(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) for all 𝑛 ∈ N.
Then, {𝑥𝑛 } ⊆ [−1, 1] for all 𝑛 ∈ N. So, {𝑇𝑥𝑛 } ⊆ [−1, 1] Theorem 15. Let (𝑋, 𝑑) be a metric space and let 𝑇 be a self-
(since 𝑇𝑤 ∈ [−1, 1] for all 𝑤 ∈ [−1, 1]). Now, since 𝑇 is mapping on 𝑋. Also, suppose that 𝛼, 𝜂 : 𝑋 × 𝑋 → [0, ∞) are
continuous on [−1, 1]. Then, 𝑇𝑥𝑛 → 𝑇𝑥 as 𝑛 → ∞. That is, two functions and 𝜓 ∈ Ψ. Assume that the following assertions
𝑇 is an 𝛼-𝜂-continuous mapping. Clearly, 𝛼(0, 𝑇0) ≥ 𝜂(0, 𝑇0). hold true:
Let 𝛼(𝑥, 𝑦) ≥ 𝜂(𝑥, 𝑇𝑥). Now, if 𝑥 ∉ [−1, 1] or 𝑦 ∉ [−1, 1],
(i) (𝑋, 𝑑) is an 𝛼-𝜂-complete metric space;
then 𝑥2 ≥ 𝑥2 + 𝑦2 + 1 which implies 𝑦2 + 1 ≤ 0 which is
a contradiction. Then, 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ [−1, 1]. Now we consider the (ii) 𝑇 is an 𝛼-admissible mapping with respect to 𝜂;
following cases: (iii) 𝑇 is a modified 𝛼-𝜂-𝜓-rational contraction on 𝑋;
Abstract and Applied Analysis 5

(iv) there exists 𝑥0 ∈ 𝑋 such that 𝛼(𝑥0 , 𝑇𝑥0 ) ≥ 𝜂(𝑥0 , 𝑇𝑥0 ); which is a contradiction. Hence, 𝑑(𝑧, 𝑇𝑧) = 0 implies 𝑧 =
(v) if {𝑥𝑛 } is a sequence in 𝑋 such that 𝛼(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ≥ 𝑇𝑧. By the similar method we can show that 𝑧 = 𝑇𝑧 if
𝜂(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) with 𝑥𝑛 → 𝑥 as 𝑛 → ∞, then either 𝜂(𝑥𝑛+1 , 𝑥𝑛+2 ) ≤ 𝛼(𝑥𝑛+1 , 𝑧) holds for all 𝑛 ∈ N.

𝜂 (𝑇𝑥𝑛 , 𝑇2 𝑥𝑛 ) ≤ 𝛼 (𝑇𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥) Example 16. Let 𝑋 = (0, +∞). We endow 𝑋 with usual met-
(28) ric. Define 𝑇 : 𝑋 → 𝑋, 𝛼, 𝜂 : 𝑋 × 𝑋 → [0, ∞), and 𝜓 : [0,
𝑜𝑟 𝜂 (𝑇2 𝑥𝑛 , 𝑇3 𝑥𝑛 ) ≤ 𝛼 (𝑇2 𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥) ∞) → [0, ∞) by

holds for all 𝑛 ∈ N. √𝑥 2 + 1

{
{ , if 𝑥 ∈ (0, 1) ,
{
{ sin 𝑥 + cos 𝑥 + 3
Then 𝑇 has a fixed point. {
{
{1
{
𝑇𝑥 = { 𝑥2 + 1, if 𝑥 ∈ [1, 2] ,
Proof. Let 𝑥0 ∈ 𝑋 be such that 𝛼(𝑥0 , 𝑇𝑥0 ) ≥ 𝜂(𝑥0 , 𝑇𝑥0 ). {
{ 16
{
{
Define a sequence {𝑥𝑛 } in 𝑋 by 𝑥𝑛 = 𝑇𝑛 𝑥0 = 𝑇𝑥𝑛−1 for all 𝑛 ∈ { 3
{ 𝑥 +1 ,
{
if 𝑥 ∈ (2, ∞) ,
N. Now as in the proof of Theorem 12 we have 𝛼(𝑥𝑛+1 , 𝑥𝑛 ) ≥ { √ 𝑥2 + 1
𝜂(𝑥𝑛+1 , 𝑥𝑛 ) for all 𝑛 ∈ N and there exists 𝑧 ∈ 𝑋 such that (33)
𝑥𝑛 → 𝑧 as 𝑛 → ∞. Let 𝑑(𝑧, 𝑇𝑧) ≠ 0. From (v) either { 1
{ , if 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ [1, 2] ,
𝛼 (𝑥, 𝑦) = { 2
𝜂 (𝑇𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑇2 𝑥𝑛−1 ) ≤ 𝛼 (𝑇𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑧) {
(29) {0, otherwise,
or 𝜂 (𝑇2 𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑇3 𝑥𝑛−1 ) ≤ 𝛼 (𝑇2 𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑧) 1 1
𝜂 (𝑥, 𝑦) = , 𝜓 (𝑡) = 𝑡.
holds for all 𝑛 ∈ N. Then, 4 4
𝜂 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ≤ 𝛼 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑧) Note that (𝑋, 𝑑) is not a complete metric space. But it is an 𝛼-
(30) 𝜂-complete metric space. Indeed, if {𝑥𝑛 } is a Cauchy sequence
or 𝜂 (𝑥𝑛+1 , 𝑥𝑛+2 ) ≤ 𝛼 (𝑥𝑛+1 , 𝑧) such that 𝛼(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ≥ 𝜂(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) for all 𝑛 ∈ N, then {𝑥𝑛 } ⊆
[1, 2] for all 𝑛 ∈ N. Now, since ([1, 2], 𝑑) is a complete metric
holds for all 𝑛 ∈ N. Let 𝜂(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ≤ 𝛼(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑧) hold for all space, then the sequence {𝑥𝑛 } converges in [1, 2] ⊆ 𝑋. Let
𝑛 ∈ N. Now from (a) we get 𝛼(𝑥, 𝑦) ≥ 𝜂(𝑥, 𝑦); then 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ [1, 2]. On the other hand, 𝑇𝑤 ∈
[1, 2] for all 𝑤 ∈ [1, 2]. Then, 𝛼(𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≥ 𝜂(𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦). That is,
𝑑 (𝑥𝑛𝑘 +1 , 𝑇𝑧) 𝑇 is an 𝛼-admissible mapping with respect to 𝜂. If {𝑥𝑛 } is a
sequence in 𝑋 such that 𝛼(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ≥ 𝜂(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) with 𝑥𝑛 →
= 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥𝑛𝑘 , 𝑇𝑧)
𝑥 as 𝑛 → ∞. Then, 𝑇𝑥𝑛 , 𝑇2 𝑥𝑛 , 𝑇3 𝑥𝑛 ∈ [1, 2] for all 𝑛 ∈ N.
That is,
𝑑 (𝑥𝑛𝑘 , 𝑇𝑥𝑛𝑘 )
≤ 𝜓 (max {𝑑 (𝑥𝑛𝑘 , 𝑧) , , 𝜂 (𝑇𝑥𝑛 , 𝑇2 𝑥𝑛 ) ≤ 𝛼 (𝑇𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥) ,
1 + 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛𝑘 , 𝑇𝑥𝑛𝑘 )
(34)
𝜂 (𝑇2 𝑥𝑛 , 𝑇3 𝑥𝑛 ) ≤ 𝛼 (𝑇2 𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥) ,
𝑑 (𝑧, 𝑇𝑧) 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛𝑘 , 𝑇𝑧) + 𝑑 (𝑧, 𝑇𝑥𝑛𝑘 )
, })
1 + 𝑑 (𝑧, 𝑇𝑧) 2 holds for all 𝑛 ∈ N. Clearly, 𝛼(0, 𝑇0) ≥ 𝜂(0, 𝑇0). Let, 𝛼(𝑥, 𝑦) ≥
𝜂(𝑥, 𝑇𝑥). Now, if 𝑥 ∉ [1, 2] or 𝑦 ∉ [1, 2], then 0 ≥ 1/4, which
𝑑 (𝑥𝑛𝑘 , 𝑥𝑛𝑘 +1 ) is a contradiction. So, 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ [1, 2]. Therefore,
= 𝜓 (max {𝑑 (𝑥𝑛𝑘 , 𝑧) , ,
1 󵄨󵄨 2 󵄨
1 + 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛𝑘 , 𝑥𝑛𝑘 +1 ) 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) = 󵄨󵄨𝑥 − 𝑦2 󵄨󵄨󵄨
16 󵄨 󵄨
𝑑 (𝑧, 𝑇𝑧) 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛𝑘 , 𝑇𝑧) + 𝑑 (𝑧, 𝑥𝑛𝑘 +1 ) 1 󵄨󵄨 󵄨󵄨 󵄨 1󵄨 󵄨
, }) = 󵄨󵄨𝑥 − 𝑦󵄨󵄨󵄨 󵄨󵄨󵄨𝑥 + 𝑦󵄨󵄨󵄨 ≤ 󵄨󵄨󵄨𝑥 − 𝑦󵄨󵄨󵄨 (35)
1 + 𝑑 (𝑧, 𝑇𝑧) 2 16 4
1 1
𝑑 (𝑥𝑛𝑘 , 𝑥𝑛𝑘 +1 ) = 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦) ≤ 𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦) = 𝜓 (𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦)) .
< max {𝑑 (𝑥𝑛𝑘 , 𝑧) , , 4 4
1 + 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛𝑘 , 𝑥𝑛𝑘 +1 ) Therefore 𝑇 is a modified 𝛼-𝜂-𝜓-rational contraction map-
ping. Hence all conditions of Theorem 15 hold and 𝑇 has a
𝑑 (𝑧, 𝑇𝑧) 𝑑 (𝑥𝑛𝑘 , 𝑇𝑧) + 𝑑 (𝑧, 𝑥𝑛𝑘 +1 ) fixed point. Here, 𝑥 = 8 − 2√14 is a fixed point of 𝑇.
, }.
1 + 𝑑 (𝑧, 𝑇𝑧) 2
(31) If in Theorem 15 we take 𝜂(𝑥, 𝑦) = 1 for all 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋, then
we obtain the following result.
By taking limit as 𝑘 → ∞ in the above inequality we get
Corollary 17. Let (𝑋, 𝑑) be a metric space and let 𝑇 be a self-
𝑑 (𝑧, 𝑇𝑧) 𝑑 (𝑧, 𝑇𝑧)
𝑑 (𝑧, 𝑇𝑧) ≤ max { , } < 𝑑 (𝑧, 𝑇𝑧) mapping on 𝑋. Also, suppose that 𝛼 : 𝑋 × 𝑋 → [0, ∞) is a
1 + 𝑑 (𝑧, 𝑇𝑧) 2 function and 𝜓 ∈ Ψ. Assume that the following assertions hold
(32) true:
6 Abstract and Applied Analysis

(i) (𝑋, 𝑑) is a 𝛼-complete metric space; Proof. Define 𝛼, 𝜂 : 𝑋 × 𝑋 → [0, ∞) and 𝜓 : [0, ∞) →
(ii) 𝑇 is an 𝛼-admissible mapping; [0, ∞) by
(iii) 𝑇 is a modified 𝛼-𝜓-rational contraction mapping on 𝛼 (𝑥, 𝑦) = 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦) , 𝜂 (𝑥, 𝑦) = 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦) , (42)
𝑋;
(iv) there exists 𝑥0 ∈ 𝑋 such that 𝛼(𝑥0 , 𝑇𝑥0 ) ≥ 1; for all 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋 and 𝜓(𝑡) = 𝑟𝑡, where 0 ≤ 𝑟 < 1. Clearly,
(v) if {𝑥𝑛 } is a sequence in 𝑋 such that 𝛼(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ≥ 1 with 𝜂(𝑥, 𝑦) ≤ 𝛼(𝑥, 𝑦) for all 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋. That is, conditions (i)–(v)
𝑥𝑛 → 𝑥 as 𝑛 → ∞, then either of Theorem 12 hold true. Let 𝜂(𝑥, 𝑇𝑥) ≤ 𝛼(𝑥, 𝑦). Then, 𝑑(𝑥,
𝑇𝑥) ≤ 𝑑(𝑥, 𝑦). Now from (40) we have 𝑑(𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≤ 𝑟𝑀(𝑥,
𝛼 (𝑇𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥) ≥ 1 𝑜𝑟 𝛼 (𝑇2 𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥) ≥ 1 (36) 𝑦) = 𝜓(𝑀(𝑥, 𝑦)). That is, 𝑇 is a modified 𝛼-𝜂-𝜓-rational
contraction mapping on 𝑋. Then all conditions of Theorem 12
holds for all 𝑛 ∈ N. hold and 𝑇 has a fixed point. The uniqueness of the fixed point
follows easily from (40).
Then 𝑇 has a fixed point.
Corollary 21. Let (𝑋, 𝑑) be a complete metric space and let 𝑇
Corollary 18. Let (𝑋, 𝑑) be a complete metric space and let 𝑇 be a continuous self-mapping on 𝑋. Assume that there exists
be a continuous self-mapping on 𝑋. Assume that 𝑇 is a modified 𝑟 ∈ [0, 1) such that
rational contraction mapping, that is,
𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥) ≤ 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦) 𝑖𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑠 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≤ 𝑟𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦)
∀𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋, 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≤ 𝜓 (𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦)) , (37)
(43)
where 𝜓 ∈ Ψ. Then 𝑇 has a fixed point.
for all 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋. Then 𝑇 has a unique fixed point.
Corollary 19. Let (𝑋, 𝑑) be a complete metric space and let 𝑇
be a continuous self-mapping on 𝑋. Assume that 𝑇 satisfies the Now, we prove the following Suzuki type fixed point
following rational inequality: theorem without continuity of 𝑇.

∀𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋, 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≤ 𝑟𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦) , (38) Theorem 22. Let (𝑋, 𝑑) be a complete metric space and let 𝑇
be a self-mapping on 𝑋. Define a nonincreasing function 𝜌 :
where 0 ≤ 𝑟 < 1 and [0, 1) → (1/2, 1] by
𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥) 1
𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦) = max {𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦) , , 𝜌 (𝑟) = . (44)
1 + 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥) 1+𝑟
𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑦) 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) + 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑥) Assume that there exists 𝑟 ∈ [0, 1) such that
, }.
1 + 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑦) 2
(39) 𝜌 (𝑟) 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥) ≤ 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦) 𝑖𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑠 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≤ 𝑟𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦)
(45)
Then 𝑇 has a fixed point.
for all 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋. Then 𝑇 has a unique fixed point.
3. Consequences Proof. Define 𝛼, 𝜂 : 𝑋 × 𝑋 → [0, ∞) and 𝜓 : [0, ∞) →
3.1. Suzuki Type Fixed Point Results. From Theorem 12 we [0, ∞) by
deduce the following Suzuki type fixed point result.
𝛼 (𝑥, 𝑦) = 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦) , 𝜂 (𝑥, 𝑦) = 𝜌 (𝑟) 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦) (46)
Theorem 20. Let (𝑋, 𝑑) be a complete metric space and let 𝑇
be a continuous self-mapping on 𝑋. Assume that there exists for all 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋 and 𝜓(𝑡) = 𝑟𝑡, where 0 ≤ 𝑟 < 1. Now, since
𝑟 ∈ [0, 1) such that 𝜌(𝑟)𝑑(𝑥, 𝑦) ≤ 𝑑(𝑥, 𝑦) for all 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋, 𝜂(𝑥, 𝑦) ≤ 𝛼(𝑥, 𝑦) for
all 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋. That is, conditions (i)–(iv) of Theorem 15 hold
𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥) ≤ 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦) 𝑖𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑠 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≤ 𝑟𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦) true. Let {𝑥𝑛 } be a sequence with 𝑥𝑛 → 𝑥 as 𝑛 → ∞. Since
(40) 𝜌(𝑟)𝑑(𝑇𝑥𝑛 , 𝑇2 𝑥𝑛 ) ≤ 𝑑(𝑇𝑥𝑛 , 𝑇2 𝑥𝑛 ) for all 𝑛 ∈ N, then from
(45) we get
for all 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋, where
𝑑 (𝑇2 𝑥𝑛 , 𝑇3 𝑥𝑛 ) ≤ 𝑟𝑑 (𝑇𝑥𝑛 , 𝑇2 𝑥𝑛 ) (47)
𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥)
𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦) = max {𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦) , ,
1 + 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥) for all 𝑛 ∈ N.
𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑦) 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) + 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑥) Assume there exists 𝑛0 ∈ N such that
, }.
1 + 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑦) 2 𝜂 (𝑇𝑥𝑛0 , 𝑇2 𝑥𝑛0 ) > 𝛼 (𝑇𝑥𝑛0 , 𝑥) ,
(41) (48)
Then 𝑇 has a unique fixed point. 𝜂 (𝑇2 𝑥𝑛0 , 𝑇3 𝑥𝑛0 ) > 𝛼 (𝑇2 𝑥𝑛0 , 𝑥) ;
Abstract and Applied Analysis 7

then, That is, 𝑇 is a modified 𝛼-𝜓-rational contraction mapping. Let

2 {𝑥𝑛 } be a sequence such that 𝛼(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ≥ 1 with 𝑥𝑛 → 𝑥 as
𝜌 (𝑟) 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥𝑛0 , 𝑇 𝑥𝑛0 ) > 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥𝑛0 , 𝑥) , 𝑛 → ∞. So, {𝑥𝑛 } ⊆ 𝑂(𝑤). From (iii) we have 𝑥 ∈ 𝑂(𝑤). That
(49) is, 𝛼(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥) ≥ 1. Hence, all conditions of Corollary 17 hold and
𝜌 (𝑟) 𝑑 (𝑇2 𝑥𝑛0 , 𝑇3 𝑥𝑛0 ) > 𝑑 (𝑇2 𝑥𝑛0 , 𝑥) , 𝑇 has a fixed point.
and so by (47) we have Corollary 24. Let (𝑋, 𝑑) be a metric space and let 𝑇 : 𝑋 → 𝑋
2
𝑑 (𝑇𝑥𝑛0 , 𝑇 𝑥𝑛0 ) be a self-mapping on 𝑋. Suppose the following assertions hold:
(i) (𝑋, 𝑑) is an orbitally 𝑇-complete metric space;
≤ 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥𝑛0 , 𝑥) + 𝑑 (𝑇2 𝑥𝑛0 , 𝑥)
(ii) there exists 𝑟 ∈ [0, 1) such that
2 2 3
< 𝜌 (𝑟) 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥𝑛0 , 𝑇 𝑥𝑛0 ) + 𝜌 (𝑟) 𝑑 (𝑇 𝑥𝑛0 , 𝑇 𝑥𝑛0 ) (50) 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≤ 𝑟𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦) (55)
2 2
≤ 𝜌 (𝑟) 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥𝑛0 , 𝑇 𝑥𝑛0 ) + 𝑟𝜌 (𝑟) 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥𝑛0 , 𝑇 𝑥𝑛0 ) holds for all 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑂(𝑤) for some 𝑤 ∈ 𝑋, where

= 𝜌 (𝑟) (1 + 𝑟) 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥𝑛0 , 𝑇2 𝑥𝑛0 ) = 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥𝑛0 , 𝑇2 𝑥𝑛0 ) 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥)

𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦) = max {𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦) , ,
1 + 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥)
which is a contradiction. Hence, either
𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑦) 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) + 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑥)
𝜂 (𝑇𝑥𝑛 , 𝑇2 𝑥𝑛 ) ≤ 𝛼 (𝑇𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥) , };
(51) 1 + 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑦) 2
or 𝜂 (𝑇2 𝑥𝑛 , 𝑇3 𝑥𝑛 ) ≤ 𝛼 (𝑇2 𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥) (56)

holds for all 𝑛 ∈ N. That is condition (v) of Theorem 15 holds. (iii) if {𝑥𝑛 } is a sequence such that {𝑥𝑛 } ⊆ 𝑂(𝑤) with 𝑥𝑛 →
Let, 𝜂(𝑥, 𝑇𝑥) ≤ 𝛼(𝑥, 𝑦). So, 𝜌(𝑟)𝑑(𝑥, 𝑇𝑥) ≤ 𝑑(𝑥, 𝑦). 𝑥 as 𝑛 → ∞, then 𝑥 ∈ 𝑂(𝑤).
Then from (45) we get 𝑑(𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≤ 𝑟𝑑(𝑥, 𝑦) ≤ 𝑟𝑀(𝑥, 𝑦) =
𝜓(𝑀(𝑥, 𝑦)). Hence, all conditions of Theorem 15 hold and 𝑇 Then 𝑇 has a fixed point.
has a fixed point. The uniqueness of the fixed point follows
easily from (45). 3.3. Fixed Point Results for Graphic Contractions. Consistent
with Jachymski [11], let (𝑋, 𝑑) be a metric space and let Δ
denote the diagonal of the Cartesian product 𝑋×𝑋. Consider
3.2. Fixed Point Results in Orbitally 𝑇-Complete Metric Spaces
a directed graph 𝐺 such that the set 𝑉(𝐺) of its vertices
Theorem 23. Let (𝑋, 𝑑) be a metric space and let 𝑇 : 𝑋 → 𝑋 coincides with 𝑋, and the set 𝐸(𝐺) of its edges contains all
be a self-mapping on 𝑋. Suppose the following assertions hold: loops; that is, 𝐸(𝐺) ⊇ Δ. We assume that 𝐺 has no parallel
edges, so we can identify 𝐺 with the pair (𝑉(𝐺), 𝐸(𝐺)).
(i) (𝑋, 𝑑) is an orbitally 𝑇-complete metric space; Moreover, we may treat 𝐺 as a weighted graph (see [11]) by
(ii) there exists 𝜓 ∈ Ψ such that assigning to each edge the distance between its vertices. If 𝑥
and 𝑦 are vertices in a graph 𝐺, then a path in 𝐺 from 𝑥 to
𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≤ 𝜓 (𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦)) (52) 𝑦 of length 𝑁(𝑁 ∈ N) is a sequence {𝑥𝑖 }𝑁 𝑖=0 of 𝑁 + 1 vertices
holds for all 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑂(𝑤) for some 𝑤 ∈ 𝑋, where such that 𝑥0 = 𝑥, 𝑥𝑁 = 𝑦 and (𝑥𝑛−1 , 𝑥𝑛 ) ∈ 𝐸(𝐺) for 𝑖 =
1, . . . , 𝑁. A graph 𝐺 is connected if there is a path between
𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦) any two vertices. 𝐺 is weakly connected if 𝐺 ̃ is connected (see
for details [3, 6, 10, 11]).
𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥) Recently, some results have appeared providing sufficient
= max {𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦) , ,
1 + 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥) (53) conditions for a mapping to be a Picard operator if (𝑋, 𝑑) is
endowed with a graph. The first result in this direction was
𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑦) 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) + 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑥) given by Jachymski [11].
, };
1 + 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑦) 2
Definition 25 (see [11]). We say that a mapping 𝑇 : 𝑋 → 𝑋 is
(iii) if {𝑥𝑛 } is a sequence such that {𝑥𝑛 } ⊆ 𝑂(𝑤) with 𝑥𝑛 → a Banach 𝐺-contraction or simply 𝐺-contraction if 𝑇 pre-
𝑥 as 𝑛 → ∞, then 𝑥 ∈ 𝑂(𝑤). serves edges of 𝐺; that is,
Then 𝑇 has a fixed point. ∀𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋 ((𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝐸 (𝐺) 󳨐⇒ (𝑇 (𝑥) , 𝑇 (𝑦)) ∈ 𝐸 (𝐺))
(57)
Proof. Define 𝛼 : 𝑋 × 𝑋 → [0, +∞) as in Remark 6. From
Remark 6 we know that (𝑋, 𝑑) is an 𝛼-complete metric space and 𝑇 decreases weights of edges of 𝐺 in the following way:
and 𝑇 is an 𝛼-admissible mapping. Let 𝛼(𝑥, 𝑦) ≥ 1; then 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈
𝑂(𝑤). Then from (ii) we have ∃ 𝛼 ∈ (0, 1) , ∀𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋
(58)
𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≤ 𝜓 (𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦)) . (54) ((𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝐸 (𝐺) 󳨐⇒ 𝑑 (𝑇 (𝑥) , 𝑇 (𝑦)) ≤ 𝛼𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦)) .
8 Abstract and Applied Analysis

Definition 26 (see [11]). A mapping 𝑇 : 𝑋 → 𝑋 is called Theorem 28. Let (𝑋, 𝑑) be a complete metric space endowed
𝐺-continuous, if given 𝑥 ∈ 𝑋 and sequence {𝑥𝑛 } with a graph 𝐺 and let 𝑇 be a self-mapping on 𝑋. Suppose that
the following assertions hold:
𝑥𝑛 󳨀→ 𝑥, as 𝑛 󳨀→ ∞,
(59) (i) for all 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋, (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝐸(𝐺) ⇒ (𝑇(𝑥), 𝑇(𝑦)) ∈
(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ∈ 𝐸 (𝐺) , ∀𝑛 ∈ N implying 𝑇𝑥𝑛 󳨀→ 𝑇𝑥. 𝐸(𝐺);
Theorem 27. Let (𝑋, 𝑑) be a metric space endowed with a (ii) there exists 𝑥0 ∈ 𝑋 such that (𝑥0 , 𝑇𝑥0 ) ∈ 𝐸(𝐺);
graph 𝐺 and let 𝑇 be a self-mapping on 𝑋. Suppose that the (iii) there exists 𝜓 ∈ Ψ such that
following assertions hold:
(i) for all 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋, (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝐸(𝐺) ⇒ (𝑇(𝑥), 𝑇(𝑦)) ∈ 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≤ 𝜓 (𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦)) (66)
𝐸(𝐺);
for all (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝐸(𝐺), where
(ii) there exists 𝑥0 ∈ 𝑋 such that (𝑥0 , 𝑇𝑥0 ) ∈ 𝐸(𝐺);
(iii) there exists 𝜓 ∈ Ψ such that 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥)
𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦) = max {𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦) , ,
𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≤ 𝜓 (𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦)) (60) 1 + 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥)

for all (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝐸(𝐺), where 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑦) 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) + 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑥)
, };
1 + 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑦) 2
𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥) (67)
𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦) = max {𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦) , ,
1 + 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥)

𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑦) 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) + 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑥) (iv) 𝑇 is 𝐺-continuous.

, };
1 + 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑦) 2 Then 𝑇 has a fixed point.
(61)
As an application of Corollary 17, we obtain.
(iv) 𝑇 is 𝐺-continuous;
Theorem 29. Let (𝑋, 𝑑) be a metric space endowed with a
(v) if {𝑥𝑛 } is a Cauchy sequence in 𝑋 with (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ∈
graph 𝐺 and let 𝑇 be a self-mapping on 𝑋. Suppose that the
𝐸(𝐺) for all 𝑛 ∈ N, then {𝑥𝑛 } is convergent in 𝑋.
following assertions hold:
Then 𝑇 has a fixed point.
(i) for all 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋, (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝐸(𝐺) ⇒ (𝑇(𝑥), 𝑇(𝑦)) ∈
2
Proof. Define 𝛼 : 𝑋 → [0, +∞) by 𝐸(𝐺);
(ii) there exists 𝑥0 ∈ 𝑋 such that (𝑥0 , 𝑇𝑥0 ) ∈ 𝐸(𝐺);
1, if (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝐸 (𝐺) ,
𝛼 (𝑥, 𝑦) = { (62) (iii) there exists 𝜓 ∈ Ψ such that
0, otherwise.

At first we prove that 𝑇 is an 𝛼-admissible mapping. Let 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≤ 𝜓 (𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦)) (68)
𝛼(𝑥, 𝑦) ≥ 1; then (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝐸(𝐺). From (i), we have (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ∈
𝐸(𝐺). That is, 𝛼(𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≥ 1. Thus 𝑇 is an 𝛼-admissible for all (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝐸(𝐺), where
mapping. Let 𝑇 be 𝐺-continuous on (𝑋, 𝑑). Then,
𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥)
𝑥𝑛 󳨀→ 𝑥, as 𝑛 󳨀→ ∞, 𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦) = max {𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦) , ,
1 + 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥)
(63)
(𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ∈ 𝐸 (𝐺) , ∀𝑛 ∈ N implying 𝑇𝑥𝑛 󳨀→ 𝑇𝑥. 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑦) 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) + 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑥)
, };
That is, 1 + 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑦) 2
(69)
𝑥𝑛 󳨀→ 𝑥, as 𝑛 󳨀→ ∞,
(64)
𝛼 (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ≥ 1, ∀𝑛 ∈ N implying 𝑇𝑥𝑛 󳨀→ 𝑇𝑥 (iv) if {𝑥𝑛 } is a sequence such that (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ∈ 𝐸(𝐺) with
𝑥𝑛 → 𝑥 as 𝑛 → ∞, then either
which implies that 𝑇 is 𝛼-continuous on (𝑋, 𝑑). From (ii)
there exists 𝑥0 ∈ 𝑋 such that (𝑥0 , 𝑇𝑥0 ) ∈ 𝐸(𝐺). That is, (𝑇𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥) ∈ 𝐸 (𝐺) 𝑜𝑟 (𝑇2 𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥) ∈ 𝐸 (𝐺) (70)
𝛼(𝑥0 , 𝑇𝑥0 ) ≥ 1. Let 𝛼(𝑥, 𝑦) ≥ 1; then (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝐸(𝐺). Now,
from (iii) we have 𝑑(𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≤ 𝜓(𝑀(𝑥, 𝑦)). That is, holds for all 𝑛 ∈ N;
𝛼 (𝑥, 𝑦) ≥ 1 󳨐⇒ 𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≤ 𝜓 (𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦)) . (65) (v) if {𝑥𝑛 } is a Cauchy sequence in 𝑋 with (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ∈
𝐸(𝐺) for all 𝑛 ∈ N, then either {𝑥𝑛 } is convergent in
Condition (v) implies that (𝑋, 𝑑) is an 𝛼-complete metric 𝑋 or (𝑋, 𝑑) is a complete metric space.
space. Hence, all conditions of Corollary 14 are satisfied and
𝑇 has a fixed point. Then 𝑇 has a fixed point.
Abstract and Applied Analysis 9

Let (𝑋, 𝑑, ⪯) be a partially ordered metric space. Define (iii) there exists 𝜓 ∈ Ψ such that
the graph 𝐺 by
𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≤ 𝜓 (𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦)) (76)
𝐸 (𝐺) := {(𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝑋 × 𝑋 : 𝑥 ⪯ 𝑦} . (71)
for all 𝑥 ⪯ 𝑦, where
For this graph, condition (i) in Theorem 27 means that
𝑇 is nondecreasing with respect to this order [5]. From 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥)
Theorems 27–29 we derive the following important results in 𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦) = max {𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦) , ,
partially ordered metric spaces. 1 + 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥)

𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑦) 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) + 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑥)

Theorem 30. Let (𝑋, 𝑑, ⪯) be a partially ordered metric space , };
and let 𝑇 be a self-mapping on 𝑋. Suppose that the following 1 + 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑦) 2
assertions hold: (77)

(i) 𝑇 is nondecreasing map;

(iv) if {𝑥𝑛 } is a sequence such that 𝑥𝑛 ⪯ 𝑥𝑛+1 with 𝑥𝑛 → 𝑥
(ii) there exists 𝑥0 ∈ 𝑋 such that 𝑥0 ⪯ 𝑇𝑥0 ; as 𝑛 → ∞, then either
(iii) there exists 𝜓 ∈ Ψ such that
𝑇𝑥𝑛 ⪯ 𝑥 𝑜𝑟 𝑇2 𝑥𝑛 ⪯ 𝑥 (78)
𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≤ 𝜓 (𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦)) (72)
holds for all 𝑛 ∈ N;
for all 𝑥 ⪯ 𝑦, where
(v) if {𝑥𝑛 } is a Cauchy sequence in 𝑋 with 𝑥𝑛 ⪯ 𝑥𝑛+1 for all
𝑛 ∈ N, then either {𝑥𝑛 } is convergent in 𝑋 or (𝑋, 𝑑) is a
𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥)
𝑀 (𝑥, 𝑦) = max {𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦) , , complete metric space.
1 + 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑥)
Then 𝑇 has a fixed point.
𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑦) 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) + 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑥)
, };
1 + 𝑑 (𝑦, 𝑇𝑦) 2
(73) 4. Application to Existence of Solutions of
Integral Equations
(iv) either for a given 𝑥 ∈ 𝑋 and sequence {𝑥𝑛 } Fixed point theorems for monotone operators in ordered
metric spaces are widely investigated and have found various
𝑥𝑛 󳨀→ 𝑥, 𝑎𝑠 𝑛 󳨀→ ∞, applications in differential and integral equations (see [28–
(74) 30] and references therein). In this section, we apply our
𝑥𝑛 ⪯ 𝑥𝑛+1 , ∀𝑛 ∈ N, 𝑜𝑛𝑒 ℎ𝑎𝑠 𝑇𝑥𝑛 󳨀→ 𝑇𝑥
result to the existence of a solution of an integral equation.
Let 𝑋 = 𝐶([0, 𝑇], R) be the set of real continuous functions
or 𝑇 is continuous;
defined on [0, 𝑇] and let 𝑑 : 𝑋 × 𝑋 → R+ be defined by
(v) if {𝑥𝑛 } is a Cauchy sequence in 𝑋 with 𝑥𝑛 ⪯ 𝑥𝑛+1 for all
󵄩 󵄩
𝑛 ∈ N, then either {𝑥𝑛 } is convergent in 𝑋 or (𝑋, 𝑑) is a 𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦) = 󵄩󵄩󵄩𝑥 − 𝑦󵄩󵄩󵄩∞ (79)
complete metric space.
for all 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋. Then (𝑋, 𝑑) is a complete metric space. Also,
Then 𝑇 has a fixed point.
assume this metric space endowed with a graph 𝐺.
Corollary 31 (Ran and Reurings [15]). Let (𝑋, 𝑑, ⪯) be a Consider the integral equation as follows:
partially ordered complete metric space and let 𝑇 : 𝑋 → 𝑋 be 𝑇
a continuous nondecreasing self-mapping such that 𝑥0 ⪯ 𝑇𝑥0 𝑥 (𝑡) = 𝑝 (𝑡) + ∫ 𝑆 (𝑡, 𝑠) 𝑓 (𝑠, 𝑥 (𝑠)) 𝑑𝑠 (80)
for some 𝑥0 ∈ 𝑋. Assume that 0

𝑑 (𝑇𝑥, 𝑇𝑦) ≤ 𝑟𝑑 (𝑥, 𝑦) (75) and let 𝐹 : 𝑋 → 𝑋 be defined by

𝑇
holds for all 𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋 with 𝑥 ⪯ 𝑦, where 0 ≤ 𝑟 < 1. Then 𝑇 has
a fixed point. 𝐹 (𝑥) (𝑡) = 𝑝 (𝑡) + ∫ 𝑆 (𝑡, 𝑠) 𝑓 (𝑠, 𝑥 (𝑠)) 𝑑𝑠. (81)
0

Theorem 32. Let (𝑋, 𝑑, ⪯) be a partially ordered metric space We assume that
and let 𝑇 be a self-mapping on 𝑋. Suppose that the following
assertions hold: (A) 𝑓 : [0, 𝑇] × R → R is continuous;
(i) 𝑇 is nondecreasing map; (B) 𝑝 : [0, 𝑇] → R is continuous;
(ii) there exists 𝑥0 ∈ 𝑋 such that 𝑥0 ⪯ 𝑇𝑥0 ; (C) 𝑆 : [0, 𝑇] × R → [0, +∞) is continuous;
10 Abstract and Applied Analysis

(D) there exists a 𝜓 ∈ Ψ such that for all 𝑠 ∈ [0, 𝑇] 󵄩 󵄩

× (max { 󵄩󵄩󵄩𝑥 (𝑠) − 𝑦 (𝑠)󵄩󵄩󵄩 ,

󵄩󵄩 󵄩
∀𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋 (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝐸 (𝐺) 󳨐⇒ (𝐹 (𝑥) , 𝐹 (𝑦)) ∈ 𝐸 (𝐺) , ‖𝑥 (𝑠) − 𝐹 (𝑥 (𝑠))‖ 󵄩𝑦 (𝑠) − 𝐹 (𝑦 (𝑠))󵄩󵄩󵄩
, 󵄩 󵄩󵄩 ,
∀𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋 (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝐸 (𝐺) 󳨐⇒ 0 1 + ‖𝑥 (𝑠) − 𝐹 (𝑥 (𝑠))‖ 1 + 󵄩󵄩𝑦 (𝑠) − 𝐹 (𝑦 (𝑠))󵄩󵄩󵄩󵄩
1 󵄩󵄩 󵄩 󵄩 󵄩
≤ 𝑓 (𝑠, 𝑥 (𝑠)) − 𝑓 (𝑠, 𝑦 (𝑠)) [󵄩𝑥 (𝑠) − 𝐹 (𝑦 (𝑠))󵄩󵄩󵄩 + 󵄩󵄩󵄩𝑦 (𝑠) − 𝐹 (𝑥 (𝑠))󵄩󵄩󵄩] }) .
2 󵄩
󵄨󵄨 󵄨
󵄨𝑥 (𝑠) − 𝑦 (𝑠)󵄨󵄨󵄨
≤ 𝜓 (max { 󵄨 󵄨󵄨
(84)
󵄨,
1 + 󵄨󵄨𝑥 (𝑠) − 𝑦 (𝑠)󵄨󵄨󵄨
Then
|𝑥 (𝑠) − 𝐹 (𝑥 (𝑠))| 󵄨󵄨 󵄨 󵄩󵄩 󵄩
, 󵄨𝑦 (𝑠) − 𝐹 (𝑦 (𝑠))󵄨󵄨󵄨 , 󵄩󵄩𝐹𝑥 − 𝐹𝑦󵄩󵄩󵄩∞
1 + |𝑥 (𝑠) − 𝐹 (𝑥 (𝑠))| 󵄨
󵄩 󵄩
1 󵄨󵄨 󵄨 󵄨 󵄨
[󵄨𝑥 (𝑠) − 𝐹 (𝑦 (𝑠))󵄨󵄨󵄨 + 󵄨󵄨󵄨𝑦 (𝑠) − 𝐹 (𝑥 (𝑠))󵄨󵄨󵄨] }) ; ≤ 𝜓 (max { 󵄩󵄩󵄩𝑥 (𝑠) − 𝑦 (𝑠)󵄩󵄩󵄩 ,
2 󵄨
󵄩󵄩 󵄩
(82) ‖𝑥 (𝑠) − 𝐹 (𝑥 (𝑠))‖ 󵄩𝑦 (𝑠) − 𝐹 (𝑦 (𝑠))󵄩󵄩󵄩
, 󵄩 󵄩󵄩 ,
1 + ‖𝑥 (𝑠) − 𝐹 (𝑥 (𝑠))‖ 1 + 󵄩󵄩𝑦 (𝑠) − 𝐹 (𝑦 (𝑠))󵄩󵄩󵄩󵄩

(E) there exists 𝑥0 ∈ 𝑋 such that (𝑥0 , 𝐹(𝑥0 )) ∈ 𝐸(𝐺); 1 󵄩󵄩 󵄩 󵄩 󵄩

[󵄩𝑥 (𝑠) − 𝐹 (𝑦 (𝑠))󵄩󵄩󵄩 + 󵄩󵄩󵄩𝑦 (𝑠) − 𝐹 (𝑥 (𝑠))󵄩󵄩󵄩] }) .
2 󵄩
(F) if {𝑥𝑛 } is a sequence such that (𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥𝑛+1 ) ∈ 𝐸(𝐺) with (85)
𝑥𝑛 → 𝑥 as 𝑛 → ∞, then either
That is, (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝐸(𝐺) implies
2 󵄩󵄩 󵄩
(𝐹𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥) ∈ 𝐸 (𝐺) 𝑜𝑟 (𝐹 𝑥𝑛 , 𝑥) ∈ 𝐸 (𝐺) (83) 󵄩󵄩𝐹𝑥 − 𝐹𝑦󵄩󵄩󵄩∞

󵄩 󵄩
holds for all 𝑛 ∈ N; ≤ 𝜓 (max {󵄩󵄩󵄩𝑥 − 𝑦󵄩󵄩󵄩∞ ,
𝑇 󵄩󵄩 󵄩
(G) ∫0 𝑆(𝑡, 𝑠)𝑑𝑠 ≤ 1 for all 𝑡. ‖𝑥 − 𝐹(𝑥)‖∞ 󵄩𝑦 − 𝐹(𝑦)󵄩󵄩󵄩∞ (86)
, 󵄩 󵄩󵄩 ,
1 + ‖𝑥 − 𝐹(𝑥)‖∞ 1 + 󵄩󵄩𝑦 − 𝐹(𝑦)󵄩󵄩󵄩󵄩∞
Theorem 33. Under assumptions (A)–(G), the integral equa-
tion (80) has a solution in 𝑋 = 𝐶([0, 𝑇], R). 1 󵄩󵄩 󵄩 󵄩 󵄩
[󵄩𝑥 − 𝐹 (𝑦)󵄩󵄩󵄩∞ + 󵄩󵄩󵄩𝑦 − 𝐹 (𝑥)󵄩󵄩󵄩∞ ] }) .
2 󵄩
Proof. Consider the mapping 𝐹 : 𝑋 → 𝑋 defined by (81).
Let (𝑥, 𝑦) ∈ 𝐸(𝐺). Then from (D) we deduce It easily shows that all the hypotheses of Theorem 29 are
satisfied and hence the mapping 𝐹 has a fixed point that is a
󵄨󵄨 󵄨 solution in 𝑋 = 𝐶([0, 𝑇], R) of the integral equation (80).
󵄨󵄨𝐹 (𝑥) (𝑡) − 𝐹 (𝑦) (𝑡)󵄨󵄨󵄨
󵄨󵄨 𝑇 󵄨󵄨
󵄨 󵄨
= 󵄨󵄨󵄨󵄨∫ 𝑆 (𝑡, 𝑠) [𝑓 (𝑠, 𝑥 (𝑠)) − 𝑓 (𝑠, 𝑦 (𝑠))] 𝑑𝑠󵄨󵄨󵄨󵄨 Conflict of Interests
󵄨󵄨 0 󵄨󵄨
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests
𝑇
󵄨 󵄨 regarding the publication of this paper.
≤ ∫ 𝑆 (𝑡, 𝑠) 󵄨󵄨󵄨𝑓 (𝑠, 𝑥 (𝑠)) − 𝑓 (𝑠, 𝑦 (𝑠))󵄨󵄨󵄨 𝑑𝑠
0
𝑇 Acknowledgment
≤ ∫ 𝑆 (𝑡, 𝑠) 𝜓
0 This paper was funded by the Deanship of Scientific Research
󵄨 󵄨 (DSR), King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah. Therefore, the
× (max { 󵄨󵄨󵄨𝑥 (𝑠) − 𝑦 (𝑠)󵄨󵄨󵄨 , authors acknowledge with thanks DSR, KAU, for the financial
support.
󵄨󵄨 󵄨
|𝑥 (𝑠) − 𝐹 (𝑥 (𝑠))| 󵄨𝑦 (𝑠) − 𝐹 (𝑦 (𝑠))󵄨󵄨󵄨
, 󵄨 󵄨󵄨 ,
1 + |𝑥 (𝑠) − 𝐹 (𝑥 (𝑠))| 1 + 󵄨󵄨𝑦 (𝑠) − 𝐹 (𝑦 (𝑠))󵄨󵄨󵄨󵄨 References
1 󵄨󵄨 󵄨 󵄨 󵄨 [1] S. Banach, “Sur les opérations dans les ensembles abstraits et
[󵄨𝑥 (𝑠)−𝐹 (𝑦 (𝑠))󵄨󵄨󵄨 + 󵄨󵄨󵄨𝑦 (𝑠)−𝐹 (𝑥 (𝑠))󵄨󵄨󵄨] }) 𝑑𝑠
2 󵄨 leur application aux équations intégrales,” Fundamenta Mathe-
maticae, vol. 3, pp. 133–181, 1922.
𝑇
[2] V. Berinde, Iterative Approximation of Fixed Points, Springer,
≤ (∫ 𝑆 (𝑡, 𝑠) 𝑑𝑠) 𝜓 Berlin, Germany, 2007.
0
Abstract and Applied Analysis 11

[3] F. Bojor, “Fixed point theorems for Reich type contractions [21] T. Suzuki, “A generalized Banach contraction principle that
on metric spaces with a graph,” Nonlinear Analysis. Theory, characterizes metric completeness,” Proceedings of the American
Methods & Applications, vol. 75, no. 9, pp. 3895–3901, 2012. Mathematical Society, vol. 136, no. 5, pp. 1861–1869, 2008.
[4] L. Ćirić, N. Hussain, and N. Cakić, “Common fixed points for [22] N. Shobkolaei, S. Sedghi, J. R. Roshan, and N. Hussain, “Suzuki-
Ćirić type f -weak contraction with applications,” Publicationes type fixed point results in metric-like spaces,” Journal of Func-
Mathematicae Debrecen, vol. 76, no. 1-2, pp. 31–49, 2010. tion Spaces and Applications, vol. 2013, Article ID 143686, 9
[5] L. Ćirić, M. Abbas, R. Saadati, and N. Hussain, “Common fixed pages, 2013.
points of almost generalized contractive mappings in ordered [23] N. Hussain, D. Dorić, Z. Kadelburg, and S. Radenović, “Suzuki-
metric spaces,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 217, type fixed point results in metric type spaces,” Fixed Point
no. 12, pp. 5784–5789, 2011. Theory and Applications, vol. 2012, article 126, 2012.
[6] R. Espı́nola and W. A. Kirk, “Fixed point theorems in R-trees [24] D. Dorić, Z. Kadelburg, and S. Radenović, “Edelstein-Suzuki-
with applications to graph theory,” Topology and its Applications, type fixed point results in metric and abstract metric spaces,”
vol. 153, no. 7, pp. 1046–1055, 2006. Nonlinear Analysis. Theory, Methods & Applications, vol. 75, no.
[7] N. Hussain, P. Salimi, and A. Latif, “Fixed point results for 4, pp. 1927–1932, 2012.
single and set-valued 𝛼-𝜂-𝜓-contractive mappings,” Fixed Point [25] Z. Kadelburg and S. Radenović, “Generalized quasicontractions
Theory and Applications, vol. 2013, article 212, 2013. in orbitally complete abstract metric spaces,” Fixed Point Theory,
[8] N. Hussain, E. Karapınar, P. Salimi, and F. Akbar, “𝛼-admissible vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 527–536, 2012.
mappings and related fixed point theorems,” Journal of Inequal- [26] D. Dorić, Z. Kadelburg, S. Radenović, and P. Kumam, “A note
ities and Applications, vol. 2013, article 114, 11 pages, 2013. on fixed point results without monotone property in partially
[9] N. Hussain, M. A. Kutbi, and P. Salimi, “Best proximity ordered metric spaces,” Revista de la Real Academia de Ciencias
point results for modified 𝛼-𝜓-proximal rational contractions,” Exactas, Fisicas y Naturales.
Abstract and Applied Analysis, vol. 2013, Article ID 927457, 14 [27] R. M. Bianchini and M. Grandolfi, “Trasformazioni di tipo
pages, 2013. contrattivo generalizzato in uno spazio metrico,” Atti della
[10] N. Hussain, S. Al-Mezel, and P. Salimi, “Fixed points for 𝜓- Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. Rendiconti, vol. 45, pp. 212–216,
graphic contractions with application to integral equations,” 1968.
Abstract and Applied Analysis, vol. 2013, Article ID 575869, 11 [28] R. P. Agarwal, N. Hussain, and M.-A. Taoudi, “Fixed point the-
pages, 2013. orems in ordered Banach spaces and applications to nonlinear
[11] J. Jachymski, “The contraction principle for mappings on a integral equations,” Abstract and Applied Analysis, vol. 2012,
metric space with a graph,” Proceedings of the American Mathe- Article ID 245872, 15 pages, 2012.
matical Society, vol. 136, no. 4, pp. 1359–1373, 2008. [29] N. Hussain, A. R. Khan, and R. P. Agarwal, “Krasnosel’skii and
[12] E. Karapınar and B. Samet, “Generalized 𝛼-𝜓 contractive type Ky Fan type fixed point theorems in ordered Banach spaces,”
mappings and related fixed point theorems with applications,” Journal of Nonlinear and Convex Analysis, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 475–
Abstract and Applied Analysis, vol. 2012, Article ID 793486, 17 489, 2010.
pages, 2012. [30] N. Hussain and M. A. Taoudi, “Krasnosel’skii-type fixed point
[13] P. D. Proinov, “A generalization of the Banach contraction theorems with applications to Volterra integral equations,”
principle with high order of convergence of successive approx- Fixed Point Theory and Applications, vol. 2013, article 196, 2013.
imations,” Nonlinear Analysis. Theory, Methods & Applications,
vol. 67, no. 8, pp. 2361–2369, 2007.
[14] P. D. Proinov, “New general convergence theory for iterative
processes and its applications to Newton-Kantorovich type
theorems,” Journal of Complexity, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 3–42, 2010.
[15] A. C. M. Ran and M. C. B. Reurings, “A fixed point theorem in
partially ordered sets and some applications to matrix equa-
tions,” Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, vol.
132, no. 5, pp. 1435–1443, 2004.
[16] P. Salimi, A. Latif, and N. Hussain, “Modified 𝛼-𝜓-contractive
mappings with applications,” Fixed Point Theory and Applica-
tions, vol. 2013, article 151, 2013.
[17] P. Salimi, C. Vetro, and P. Vetro, “Fixed point theorems for
twisted (𝛼, 𝛽)-𝜓-contractive type mappings and applications,”
Filomat, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 605–615, 2013.
[18] P. Salimi, C. Vetro, and P. Vetro, “Some new fixed point results
in non-Archimedean fuzzy metric spaces,” Nonlinear Analysis.
Modelling and Control, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 344–358, 2013.
[19] B. Samet, C. Vetro, and P. Vetro, “Fixed point theorems for
𝛼-𝜓-contractive type mappings,” Nonlinear Analysis. Theory,
Methods & Applications, vol. 75, no. 4, pp. 2154–2165, 2012.
[20] W. Sintunavarat, S. Plubtieng, and P. Katchang, “Fixed point
result and applications on a b-metric space endowed with an
arbitrary binary relation,” Fixed Point Theory and Applications,
vol. 2013, article 296, 2013.