International Refereed Journal of Engineering and Science (IRJES)

International Refereed Journal of Engineering and Science (IRJES)
ISSN (Online) 2319-183X, (Print) 2319-1821

Volume 2, Issue 4(April 2013), PP.22-28
www.irjes.com
www.irjes.com 22 | Page
Unique Common Fixed Point Theorem for Three Pairs of Weakly
Compatible Mappings Satisfying Generalized Contractive
Condition of Integral Type

1
Kavita B. Bajpai,
2
Manjusha P. Gandhi
Karmavir Dadasaheb Kannamwar College of Engineering, Nagpur, India
Yeshwantrao Chavan College of Engineering, Wanadongri, Nagpur, India

Abstract: We prove some unique common fixed point result for three pairs of weakly compatible mappings
satisfying a generalized contractive condition of Integral type in complete G-metric space.The present theorem
is the improvement and extension of Vishal Gupta and Naveen Mani [5] and many other results existing in
literature.
Keywords: Fixed point , Complete G- metric space , G-Cauchy sequence , Weakly compatible mapping ,
Integral Type contractive condition.

I. Introduction
Generalization of Banach contraction principle in various ways has been studied by many authors.
One may refer Beg I. & Abbas M.[2] , Dutta P.N. & Choudhury B.S.[3] ,Khan M.S., Swaleh M. & Sessa, S.[9] ,
Rhoades B.E.[12] , Sastry K.P.R. & Babu G.V.R.[13] , Suzuki T.[15] . Alber Ya.I. & Guerre-Delabriere S. [1]
had proved results for weakly contractive mapping in Hilbert space , the same was proved by Rhoades B.E.[12]
in complete metric space.
Jungck G.[6] proved a common fixed point theorem for commuting mappings which is the extension of Banach
contraction principle. Sessa S.[14] introduced the term Weakly commuting mappings which was generalized
by Jungck G.[6] as Compatible mappings. Pant R.P.[11] coined the notion of R-weakly commuting
mappings, whereas Jungck G.& Rhoades B.E. [8] defined a term called weakly compatible mappings in
metric space.
Fisher B. [4] proved an important Common Fixed Point theorem for weakly compatible mapping in complete
metric space.
Mustafa in collaboration with Sims [10] introduced a new notation of generalized metric space called G- metric
space in 2006. He proved many fixed point results for a self mapping in G- metric space under certain
conditions.
Now we give some preliminaries and basic definitions which are used through-out the paper.

Definition 1.1: Let X be a non empty set, and let
+
R X X X G: be a function satisfying the
following properties:
) (
1
G 0 ) , , ( = z y x G if z y x = =
) (
2
G ) , , ( 0 y x x G < for all X y x e , ,with y x =
) (
3
G ) , , ( ) , , ( z y x G y x x G s for all X z y x e , , , with z y =
) (
4
G ) , , ( ) , , ( ) , , ( x z y G y z x G z y x G = =

(Symmetry in all three variables)
) (
5
G ) , , ( ) , , ( ) , , ( z y a G a a x G z y x G + s , for all X a z y x e , , , (rectangle inequality)
Then the function G is called a generalized metric space, or more specially a G- metric on X, and the pair (X, G)
is called a Gmetric space.

Definition 1.2: Let ) , ( G X be a G - metric space and let } {
n
x be a sequence of points of X , a point X x e
is said to be the limit of the sequence } {
n
x , if 0 ) , , ( lim
,
=
+
m n
m n
x x x G , and we say that the sequence } {
n
x
is G - convergent to x or } {
n
x G -converges to x .
Unique Common Fixed Point Theorem for Three Pairs of Weakly Compatible Mappings Satisfying
Thus, x x
n
in a G - metric space ) , ( G X if for any 0 e> there exists N k e such that
<e ) , , (
m n
x x x G , for all k n m > ,

Proposition 1.3: Let ) , ( G X be a G - metric space. Then the following are equivalent:
i ) } {
n
x is G - convergent to x
ii ) 0 ) , , ( x x x G
n n
as + n
iii ) 0 ) , , ( x x x G
n
as + n
iv ) 0 ) , , ( x x x G
m n
as + m n,
Proposition 1.4 : Let ) , ( G X be a G - metric space. Then for any x , y , z , a in X it follows that
i) If 0 ) , , ( = z y x G then z y x = =
ii) ) , , ( ) , , ( ) , , ( z x x G y x x G z y x G + s
iii) ) , , ( 2 ) , , ( x x y G y y x G s
iv) ) , , ( ) , , ( ) , , ( z y a G z a x G z y x G + s
v) ( ) ) , , ( ) , , ( ) , , (
3
2
) , , ( z y a G z a x G a y x G z y x G + + s
vi) ( ) ) , , ( ) , , ( ) , , ( ) , , ( a a z G a a y G a a x G z y x G + + s
Definition 1.5: Let ) , ( G X be a G - metric space. A sequence } {
n
x is called a G - Cauchy sequence if for
any 0 e> there exists N k e such that <e ) , , (
l m n
x x x G for all k l n m > , , , that is 0 ) , , (
l m n
x x x G
as . , , + l m n

Proposition 1.6: Let ) , ( G X be a G - metric space .Then the following are equivalent:
i ) The sequence } {
n
x is G - Cauchy;
ii ) For any 0 e> there exists N k e such that <e ) , , (
m m n
x x x G for all k n m > ,
Proposition 1.7: A G - metric space ) , ( G X is called G -complete if every G -Cauchy sequence is G -
convergent in ) , ( G X .
Proposition 1.8: Let (X, G) be a G- metric space. Then the function G(x, y, z) is jointly continuous in all three of
its variables.
Definition 1.9 : Let f and g be two self maps on a set X . Maps f and g are said to be commuting if
gfx fgx = , for all X x e
Definition 1.10 : Let f and g be two self maps on a set X . If gx fx = , for some X x e then x is called
coincidence point of f and g.
Definition 1.11: Let f and g be two self maps defined on a set X , then f and g are said to be weakly
compatible if they commute at coincidence points. That is if gu fu = for some X u e , then gfu fgu = .
The main aim of this paper is to prove a unique common fixed point theorem for three pairs of weakly
compatible mappings satisfying Integral type contractive condition in a complete G metric space.
The result is the extension of the following theorem of Vishal Gupta and Naveen Mani [5].

II. Theorem
Let S and T be self compatible maps of a complete metric space (X, d)
satisfying the following conditions
i) ) ( ) ( X T X S c
ii)
} } }
s
) , (
0
) , (
0
) , (
0
) ( ) ( ) (
Ty Tx d Sy Sx d Ty Tx d
dt t dt t dt t |
for each X y x e , where | ) | ) + + , 0 , 0 : is a continuous and non decreasing function and
| ) | ) + + , 0 , 0 : | is a lower semi continuous and non decreasing function such that 0 ) ( ) ( = = t t | if
and only if 0 = t also | ) | ) + + , 0 , 0 : is a Lebesgue-integrable function which is summable on each
compact subset of
+
R , nonnegative, and such that for each 0 e> ,
}
e
>
0
0 ) ( dt t . Then S and T have a
unique common fixed point.

III. MAIN RESULT
Theorem 2.1 : Let ) , ( G X be a complete G-metric space and X X R Q P N M L : , , , , ,
be mappings such that
i) ) ( ) ( X P X L c , ) ( ) ( X Q X M c , ) ( ) ( X R X N c
ii)
)
`
)
`
s
)
`
} } }
) , , (
0
) , , (
0
) , , (
0
) ( ) ( ) (
Rz Qy Px G Rz Qy Px G Nz My Lx G
dt t f dt t f dt t f q ---------------------(2.1.1)
for all X z y x e , , where | ) | ) , 0 , 0 : is a continuous and non-decreasing function ,
| ) | ) , 0 , 0 : q is a lower semi continuous and non-decreasing function such that
0 ) ( ) ( = = t t q if and only if 0 = t , also | ) | ) , 0 , 0 : f is a Lebesgue integrable function
which is summable on each compact subset of
+
R , non negative and such that for each 0 e> ,
}
e
>
0
0 ) ( dt t f
iii) The pairs ) , ( P L , ) , ( Q M , ) , ( R N are weakly compatible.
Then R Q P N M L , , , , , have a unique common fixed point in X.
Proof : Let
0
x be an arbitrary point of X and define the sequence { }
n
x in X such that

1 +
= =
n n n
Px Lx y ,
2 1 1 + + +
= =
n n n
Qx Mx y ,
3 2 2 + + +
= =
n n n
Rx Nx y
Consider ,
} }
+ + + +
) , , (
0
) , , (
0
2 1 2 1
) ( ) (
n n n n n n
Nx Mx Lx G y y y G
dt t f dt t f

s
} }
+ + + +
) , , (
0
) , , (
0
2 1 2 1
) ( ) (
n n n n n n
Rx Qx Px G Rx Qx Px G
dt t f dt t f q

=
} }
+ +
) , , (
0
) , , (
0
1 1 1 1
) ( ) (
n n n n n n
y y y G y y y G
dt t f dt t f q --------------(2.1.2)

s
}
+
) , , (
0
1 1
) (
n n n
y y y G
dt t f
Since is continuous and has a monotone property ,

} }
+ + +
s
) , , (
0
) , , (
0
2 1 1 1
) ( ) (
n n n n n n
y y y G y y y G
dt t f dt t f ------------------(2.1.3)
Let us take
}
+ +
=
) , , (
0
2 1
) (
n n n
y y y G
n
dt t f o , then it follows that
n
o is monotone decreasing and lower bounded sequence
of numbers.
Therefore there exists 0 > k such that k
n
o as n . Suppose that 0 > k
Taking limit as n on both sides of (2.1.2) and using that q

is lower semi continuous , we get ,
) ( ) ( ) ( k k k q s ) (k < , which is a contradiction. Hence 0 = k .
This implies that 0
n
o as n

i.e.
}
+ +
) , , (
0
2 1
0 ) (
n n n
y y y G
dt t f as n
.----------------(2.1.4)
Now , we prove that { }
n
y is a G- Cauchy sequence. On the contrary , suppose it is not a
G- Cauchy sequence.
There exists 0 e> and subsequences { }
) (i m
y and { }
) (i n
y such that for each positive integer i , ) (i n is
minimal in the sense that , ( )>e
) ( ) ( ) (
, ,
i m i m i n
y y y G and ( )<e
) ( ) ( ) 1 (
, ,
i m i m i n
y y y G
Now , ( ) ( ) ( )
) ( ) ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (
, , , , , ,
i m i m i m i m i m i n i m i m i n
y y y G y y y G y y y G

+ s es
( )
) ( ) ( ) 1 (
, ,
i m i m i m
y y y G

+ <e ----------------(2.1.5)
Let o < 0
} } }
e
+ e

s s =
0
) , , (
0
) , , (
0
) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) 1 (
) ( ) ( ) (
i m i m i n i m i m i m
y y y G y y y G
dt t f dt t f dt t f
Taking i , and using (2.1.4) , we get ,
( )
}
=
) ( ) ( ) (
, ,
0
) ( lim
i m i m i n
y y y G
i
dt t f o -------------(2.1.6)
Now , using rectangular inequality , we have
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
) ( ) ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (
, , , , , , , ,
i m i m i m i m i m i n i n i n i n i m i m i n
y y y G y y y G y y y G y y y G

+ + s ----
(2.1.7)
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 (
, , , , , , , ,

+ + s
y y y G y y y G y y y G y y y G ----
(2.1.8)

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
} }

+ +
s
) ( ) ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (
, , , , , ,
0
,
0
) ( ) (
dt t f dt t f
and
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
} }

+ +
s
) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) 1 (
, ,
0
, , , , , ,
0
) ( ) (
i m i m i n i m i m i m i m i m i n i n i n i n
dt t f dt t f
Taking limit as i and using (2.1.4) , (2.1.6) we get
( ) ( )
} }

s s
) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 (
, ,
0
, ,
0
) ( ) (
i m i m i n i m i m i n
y y y G y y y G
dt t f dt t f o
This implies that ,
( )
}

=
) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 (
, ,
0
) ( lim
i m i m i n
y y y G
i
dt t f o ----------------------(2.1.9)
Now , from (2.1.1) , we have ,
( ) ( ) ( )
} } }
) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) ( ) ( ) (
, ,
0
, ,
0
, ,
0
) ( ) ( ) (
i m i m i n i m i m i n i m i m i n
y y y G y y y G y y y G
dt t f dt t f dt t f q
Taking limit as i and using (2.1.6) , (2.1.8) we will have , ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( o o q o o < s
which is a contradiction. Hence we have 0 = o .
Hence { }
n
y is a G- Cauchy sequence. Since ) , ( G X is a complete G-metric space , there exists a point
X ue such that u y
n
n
=
lim
i.e. u Px Lx
n
n
n
n
= =
+

1
lim lim , u Qx Mx
n
n
n
n
= =
+
2 1
lim lim , u Rx Nx
n
n
n
n
= =
+
3 2
lim lim
As u Lx
n
and u Px
n

+1
, therefore we can find some X he such that u Qh = .

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
} } } }
+ + + 1 1 1
, ,
0
, ,
0
, ,
0
, ,
0
) ( ) ( ) ( ) (
n n n n n n n
Rx Qh Px G Rx Qh Px G Nx Mh Lx G Mh Mh Lx G
dt t f dt t f dt t f dt t f q
On taking limit as n , we get ,
( )
) 0 ( ) 0 ( ) (
, ,
0
q s
)
`
}
Mh Mh u G
dt t f

( )
0 ) (
, ,
0
=
)
`
}
Mh Mh u G
dt t f , which implies that u Mh = .
Hence u Qh Mh = = i.e. h is the point of coincidence of M and Q.
Since the pair of maps M and Q are weakly compatible , we write QMh MQh = i.e. Qu Mu = .
Also , u Mx
n

+1
and u Qx
n

+2
, we can find some X ve such that u Pv = .

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
} } } }
+ + + + + + + + 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 1
, ,
0
, ,
0
, ,
0
, ,
0
) ( ) ( ) ( ) (
n n n n n n n n
Rx Qx Pv G Rx Qx Pv G Nx Mx Lv G Mx Mx Lv G
dt t f dt t f dt t f dt t f q
( )
) 0 ( ) 0 ( ) (
, ,
0
q s
)
`
}
u u Lv G
dt t f

( )
0 ) (
, ,
0
=
)
`
}
u u Lv G
dt t f , which implies that u Lv = . Hence we have u Pv Lv = = i.e. v is the point of
coincidence of L and P. Since the pair of maps L and P are weakly compatible , we can write PLv LPv = i.e.
Pu Lu = .
Again , u Nx
n

+2
and u Rx
n

+3
, therefore we can find some X we such that u Rw= .

( ) ( ) ( )
} } }
+ + +
Rw Qx Px G Rw Qx Px G Nw Mx Lx G
n n n n n n
, ,
0
, ,
0
, ,
0
1 1 1
) ( ) ( ) ( q
( )
) 0 ( ) 0 ( ) (
, ,
0
q s
)
`
}
Nw u u G
dt t f
i.e.
( )
0 ) (
, ,
0
=
)
`
}
Nw u u G
dt t f , which implies that u Nw= .
Thus we get u Rw Nw = = i.e. w is the coincidence point of N and R.
Since the pair of maps N and R are weakly compatible , we have RNw NRw= i.e. Ru Nu =
Now , we show that u is the fixed point of L.
Consider ,
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
)
`
)
`
s
)
`
=
)
`
} } } }
Rw Qh Pu G Rw Qh Pu G Nw Mh Lu G u u Lu G
dt t f dt t f dt t f dt t f
, ,
0
, ,
0
, ,
0
, ,
0
) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( q

( ) ( ) ( )
)
`
)
`
s
)
`
} } }
u u Lu G u u Lu G u u Lu G
, ,
0
, ,
0
, ,
0
) ( ) ( ) ( q
i.e.
( ) ( ) ( )
)
`
)
`
s
)
`
} } }
u u Lu G u u Lu G u u Lu G
, ,
0
, ,
0
, ,
0
) ( ) ( ) ( q
i.e.
( ) ( )
)
`
<
)
`
} }
u u Lu G u u Lu G
dt t f dt t f
, ,
0
, ,
0
) ( ) ( , which is a contradiction. we get u Lu =
u Pu Lu = = i.e. u is fixed point of L and P.
Now , we prove that u is fixed point of M .
Consider ,
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
)
`
)
`
s
)
`
=
)
`
} } } }
Rw Qu Pu G Rw Qu Pu G Nw Mu Lu G Mu u u G
, ,
0
, ,
0
, ,
0
, ,
0
) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( q

( ) ( ) ( )
)
`
)
`
s
)
`
} } }
u Mu u G u Mu u G Mu u u G
, ,
0
, ,
0
, ,
0
) ( ) ( ) ( q
i.e.
( ) ( )
)
`
<
)
`
} }
Mu u u G Mu u u G
dt t f dt t f
, ,
0
, ,
0
) ( ) ( , which is a contradiction. we get u Mu =
Hence u Qu Mu = = i.e. u is fixed point of M and Q.
At last we prove that u is fixed point of N.
Consider ,
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
)
`
)
`
s
)
`
=
)
`
} } } }
Ru Qu Pu G Ru Qu Pu G Nu Mu Lu G Nu u u G
, ,
0
, ,
0
, ,
0
, ,
0
) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( q
i.e.
( ) ( ) ( )
)
`
)
`
s
)
`
} } }
Ru u u G Ru u u G Nu u u G
, ,
0
, ,
0
, ,
0
) ( ) ( ) ( q
i.e.
( ) ( )
)
`
<
)
`
} }
Ru u u G Nu u u G
dt t f dt t f
, ,
0
, ,
0
) ( ) ( , which means
( ) ( )
)
`
<
)
`
} }
Nu u u G Nu u u G
dt t f dt t f
, ,
0
, ,
0
) ( ) ( as Ru Nu = .
Which implies that u Nu = . Hence we get u Ru Nu = = .
i.e. u is fixed point of N and R .
Thus u is the common fixed point of Q P N M L , , , , and R.
Now , we prove that u is the unique common fixed point of Q P N M L , , , , and R.
If possible , let us assume that is another fixed point of Q P N M L , , , , and R.

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
)
`
)
`
s
)
`
=
)
`
} } } }

q
R Qu Pu G R Qu Pu G N Mu Lu G u u G
, ,
0
, ,
0
, ,
0
, ,
0
) ( ) ( ) ( ) (

( ) ( )
)
`
)
`
=
} }

q
, ,
0
, ,
0
) ( ) (
u u G u u G
dt t f dt t f
i.e.
( ) ( )
)
`
<
)
`
} }

, ,
0
, ,
0
) ( ) (
u u G u u G
dt t f dt t f , which is again a contradiction.
Hence finally we will have = u .
Thus u is the unique common fixed point of Q P N M L , , , , and R.
Corollary 2.2: Let ) , ( G X be a complete G-metric space and X X P N M L : , , ,
be mappings such that
i) ) ( ) ( X P X L c , ) ( ) ( X P X M c , ) ( ) ( X P X N c
ii)
)
`
)
`
s
)
`
} } }
) , , (
0
) , , (
0
) , , (
0
) ( ) ( ) (
Pz Py Px G Pz Py Px G Nz My Lx G
+
}
e
>
0
0 ) ( dt t f
iii) The pairs ) , ( P L , ) , ( P M , ) , ( P N are weakly compatible.
Then P N M L , , , have a unique common fixed point in X.
Proof : By taking R Q P = = in Theorem 2.1 we get the proof.
Corollary 2.3: Let ) , ( G X be a complete G-metric space and X X P L : , be
mappings such that
i) ) ( ) ( X P X L c
ii)
)
`
)
`
s
)
`
} } }
) , , (
0
) , , (
0
) , , (
0
) ( ) ( ) (
Pz Py Px G Pz Py Px G Lz Ly Lx G
+
}
e
>
0
0 ) ( dt t f
iii) The pair ) , ( P L is weakly compatible.
Then P L, have a unique common fixed point in X.
Proof: By substituting N M L = = and R Q P = = in Theorem 2.1 we get the proof.
Remark: The Corollary 2.3 is the result proved by Vishal Gupta and Naveen Mani [5] in complete metric
space.

IV. References
[1] Alber Ya.I. & Guerre-Delabriere S. (1997). Principle of weakly contractive maps in Hilbert spaces, New Results in Operator
theory and its applications in I.Gohberg and Y.Lyubich (Eds.), 98, Operator Theory: Advances and Applications,(7-22).
Birkhauser, Basel, Switzerland.
[2] Beg I. & Abbas M.,Coincidence point and invariant approximation for mappings satisfying generalized weak contractive
condition. Fixed point theory and Appl., article ID 74503, 1-7.
[3] Dutta P.N. & Choudhury B.S. (2008). A generalization of contraction principle in metric spaces. Fixed point theory and Appl.,
article ID406368, 1-8.
[4] Fisher B., Common Fixed Point of Four Mappings, Bull. Inst. of .Math.Academia. Sinicia, 11(1983), 103-113.
[5] Gupta V. & Mani N. , A Common Fixed Point Theorem for Two Weakly Compatible Mappings Satisfying a New Contractive
Condition of Integral Type, Mathematical Theory and Modeling , Vol.1, No.1, 2011
[6] Jungck G. (1976). Commuting mappings and fixed points. Amer.Math.Monthly, 83, 261-263.
[7] Jungck G. (1986). Compatible mappings and common fixed points. Internat. J. Math. Sci ., 9, 43-49.
[8] Jungck, G. & Rhoades, B.E. (1998). Fixed points for set valued functions without continuity. Indian J.Pure.Appl.Math., 29, No. 3,
227-238.
[9] Khan M.S., Swaleh M.&Sessa S. (1984). Fixed point theorems by altering distances between the points, Bull.Austral.Math.Soc.,
30, 1-9.
[10] Mustafa Z., Sims B., A new approach to generalized metric spaces, J.Nonlinear Convex Anal. 7 (2006), 289-297.
[11] Pant R.P. (1994). Common fixed points of non commuting mappings. J.Math.Anal.Appl., 188, 436-440.
[12] Rhoades B.E. (2001). Some theorems on weakly contractive maps, Nonlinear Analysis:Theory. Methods&Applications,47 (4),
2683-2693.
[13] Sastry K.P.R., Naidu S.V.R., Babu, G.V.R. & Naidu, G.A. (2000). Generalizations of common fixed point theorems for weakly
commuting mappings by altering distances. Tamkang J.Math., 31, 243-250.
[14] Sessa S. (1982). On weak commutative condition of mappings in fixed point considerations. Publ.Inst.Math. N.S., 32, no.46, 149-
153.
[15] Suzuki T. (2008). A generalized Banach contraction principle that characterizes metric completeness. Proc.Amer.Math.soc.,136
(5), 1861-1869.

International Refereed Journal of Engineering and Science (IRJES)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Refereed Journal of Engineering and Science (IRJES)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Refereed Journal of Engineering and Science (IRJES)

ISSN (Online) 2319-183X, (Print) 2319-1821

You might also like