Open Access Research

Common fıxed points of almost generalized (ψ, ϕ)-contractive mappings in ordered metric spaces

Wasfı Shatanawi1 and Ahmed Al-Rawashdeh2*

Author Affiliations

1 Department of Mathematics, Hashemite University, Zarqa 13115, Jordan

2 Department of Mathematical Sciences, UAEU, 17551 Al Ain, United Arab Emirates

For all author emails, please log on.

Fixed Point Theory and Applications 2012, 2012:80 doi:10.1186/1687-1812-2012-80


The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at: http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80


Received:22 January 2012
Accepted:9 May 2012
Published:9 May 2012

© 2012 Shatanawi and Al-Rawashdeh; licensee Springer.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

In this article, we introduce the notion of almost generalized (ψ, ϕ)-contractive mappings in ordered metric spaces and we establish some fixed and common fixed point results in ordered complete metric spaces. Our results generalize several well-known comparable results in the literature. Finally, an example and an application are given in order to support the useability of our results.

Mathematics Subject Classifications 2000: 54H25; 47H10; 54E50

Keywords:
fıxed point; generalized contractions; complete ordered metric spaces

1 Introduction

A fundamental principle in computer science is iteration. Iterative techniques are used to find roots of equations, solutions of linear and nonlinear systems of equations, and solution of differential equations. So the attraction of the fixed point iteration is understandable to a large number of mathematicians.

The Banach contraction principle (see [1]) is a very popular tool for solving problems in nonlinear analysis. Some authors generalized this interesting theorem in different ways (see for example [2-20]).

Berinde [21-24] initiated the concept of almost contractions and studied many interesting fixed point theorems for a Ćirić strong almost contraction. So, let us recall the following definition.

Definition 1.1. [21]A single valued mapping f : X × X is called a Ćirić strong almost contraction if there exist a constant α ∈ [0, 1) and some L ≥ 0 such that

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M1','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M1">View MathML</a>

for all x, y X, where

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M2','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M2">View MathML</a>

Babu [25] introduced the class of mappings which satisfy "condition (B)".

Definition 1.2. [25]Let (X, d) be a metric space. A mapping f : X X is said to satisfy "condition (B)" if there exist a constant δ ∈ (0, 1) and some L ≥ 0 such that

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M3','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M3">View MathML</a>

for all x, y X.

Moreover, Babu proved in [25] the existence of fixed point theorem for such mappings on complete metric spaces.

Ćirić et al. [26] introduced the concept of almost generalized contractive condition and they proved some existing results.

Definition 1.3. [26]Let (X,≼) be a partially ordered set. Two mappings f, g : X X are said to be strictly weakly increasing if fx gfx and gx fgx, for all x X.

Definition 1.4. [26]Let f and g be two self mappings on a metric space (X, d). Then they are said to satisfy almost generalized contractive condition if there exist a constant δ ∈ (0, 1) and some L ≥ 0 such that

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M4','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M4">View MathML</a>

(1)

for all x, y X.

Then Ćirić et al. [26] proved the following theorems.

Theorem 1.1. Let (X, ≼) be a partially ordered set and suppose that there exists a metric d on X such that the metric space (X, d) is complete. Let f : X X be a strictly increasing continuous mapping with respect to ≼. Suppose that there exist a constant δ ∈ [0, 1) and some L ≥ 0 such that

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M5','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M5">View MathML</a>

for all comparable x, y X, where

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M6','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M6">View MathML</a>

If there exists x0 X such that x0 fx0, then f has a fixed point in X.

Theorem 1.2. Let (X, ≼) be a partially ordered set and suppose that there exists a metric d on X such that the metric space (X, d) is complete. Let f, g : X X be two strictly weakly increasing mappings which satisfy (1) with respect to ≼, for all comparable elements x, y X. If either f or g is continuous, then f and g have a common fixed point in X.

Khan et al. [27] introduced the concept of altering distance function as follows.

Definition 1.5. [27]The function ϕ : [0, +∞) [0, +∞) is called an altering distance function, if the following properties are satisfied:

(1) ϕ is continuous and non-decreasing.

(2) ϕ(t) = 0 if and only if t = 0.

Many authors studied fixed point theorems which are based on altering distance functions, see for example [27-36].

In this article, we introduce the notion of almost generalized (ψ, ϕ)-contractive mapping and we establish some results in complete ordered metric spaces, where ψ and ϕ are altering distance functions. Our results generalize Theorems 1.1 and 1.2.

2 Main results

In this section, we define the notion of almost generalized (ψ, ϕ)-contractive mapping, then we present and prove our new results. In particular, we generalize Theorems 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 of Ćirić et al. [26].

Let (X, ≼, d) be an ordered metric space and let f : X X be a mapping. Set

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M7','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M7">View MathML</a>

and

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M8','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M8">View MathML</a>

Now, we introduce the following definition.

Definition 2.1. Let (X, d) be a metric space and let ψ and ϕ be altering distance functions. We say that a mapping f : X X is an almost generalized (ψ, ϕ)-contractive mapping if there exists L ≥ 0 such that

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M9','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M9">View MathML</a>

(2)

for all comparable x, y X.

Throughout this article, the mappings ψ and ϕ denote altering distance functions. Now, let us prove our first result.

Theorem 2.1. Let (X, ≼) be a partially ordered set and suppose that there exists a metric d on X such that the metric (X, d) is complete. Let f : X X be a non-decreasing continuous mapping with respect to ≼. Suppose that f is an almost generalized (ψ, ϕ)-contractive mapping. If there exists x0 X such that x0 fx0, then f has a fixed point.

Proof. Let x0 X. Then, we define a sequences (xn) in X such that xn+1 = fxn. Since x0 fx0 = x1 and f is non-decreasing, we have x1 = fx0 x2 = fx1. Again, as x1 x2 and f is non-decreasing, we have x2 = fx1 x3 = fx2. By induction, we show that

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M10','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M10">View MathML</a>

If xn = xn+1 for some n ∈ ℕ, then xn = fxn and hence xn is a fixed point of f. So, we may assume that xn xn+1 for all n ∈ ℕ. By (2), we have

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M11','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M11">View MathML</a>

(3)

where

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M12','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M12">View MathML</a>

(4)

and

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M13','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M13">View MathML</a>

(5)

From (3)-(5) and the properties of ψ and ϕ, we get

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M14','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M14">View MathML</a>

(6)

If

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M15','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M15">View MathML</a>

then by (6) we have

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M16','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M16">View MathML</a>

which gives a contradiction. Thus,

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M17','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M17">View MathML</a>

Therefore (6) becomes

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M18','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M18">View MathML</a>

(7)

Since ψ is a non-decreasing mapping, we have {d(xn, xn+1): n ∈ ℕ ∪ {0}} is a non-increasing sequence of positive numbers. So, there exists r ≥ 0 such that

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M19','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M19">View MathML</a>

Letting n → +∞ in (7), we get

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M20','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M20">View MathML</a>

Therefore ϕ(r) = 0, and hence r = 0. Thus, we have

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M21','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M21">View MathML</a>

(8)

Next, we show that (xn) is a Cauchy sequence in X. Suppose to the contrary; that is, (xn) is not a Cauchy sequence. Then there exists ε > 0 for which we can find two subsequences (xm(i)) and (xn(i)) of (xn) such that n(i) is the smallest index for which

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M22','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M22">View MathML</a>

(9)

This means that

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M23','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M23">View MathML</a>

(10)

From (9), (10) and the triangular inequality, we get

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M24','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M24">View MathML</a>

Using (8) and letting i → +∞, we get

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M25','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M25">View MathML</a>

(11)

From (2), we have

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M26','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M26">View MathML</a>

(12)

where

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M27','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M27">View MathML</a>

(13)

and

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M28','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M28">View MathML</a>

(14)

Letting i +∞ in (13) and (14) then using (8) and (11), we get

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M29','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M29">View MathML</a>

(15)

and

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M30','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M30">View MathML</a>

(16)

Letting i → +∞ in (12) then using (11), (15) and (16) we have

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M31','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M31">View MathML</a>

which gives a contradiction. Thus (xn+1 = fxn) is a Cauchy sequence in X. As X is a complete space, there exists u X such that

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M32','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M32">View MathML</a>

Now, suppose that f is continuous, then fxn fu. By the uniqueness of limit, we have fu = u. Thus u is a fixed point of f. □

Notice that the continuity of f in Theorem 2.1 is not necessary and can be dropped.

Theorem 2.2. Under the same hypotheses of Theorem 2.1 and without assuming the continuity of f, assume that whenever (xn) is a non-decreasing sequence in X such that xn x X implies xn x, for all n ∈ ℕ. Then f has a fixed point in X.

Proof. Following similar arguments to those given in Theorem 2.1, we construct an increasing sequence (xn) in X such that xn u for some u X. Using the assumption of X, we have xn u for all n ∈ ℕ. Now, we show that fu = u. By (2), we have

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M33','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M33">View MathML</a>

(17)

where

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M34','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M34">View MathML</a>

(18)

and

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M35','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M35">View MathML</a>

(19)

Letting n → +∞ in (18) and (19) then we get M(xn, u) → d(u, fu) and N(xn, u) → 0. Again when n → +∞ in (17) then we get

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M36','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M36">View MathML</a>

Therefore, d(u, fu) = 0. Thus u = fu and hence u is a fixed point of f. □

Corollary 2.1. Let (X, ≼) be a partially ordered set and suppose that there exists a metric d on X such that the metric (X, d) is complete. Let f : X X be a non-decreasing continuous mapping with respect to ≼. Suppose that there exist k ∈ [0, 1) and L ≥ 0 such that

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M37','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M37">View MathML</a>

for all comparable x, y X. If there exists x0 X such that x0 ≤ fx0, then f has a fixed point.

Proof. Follows from Theorem (2.1) by taking ψ(t) = t and ϕ(t) = (1-k)t for all t ∈ [0, +∞) and noticing that f is an almost generalized (ψ, ϕ)-contractive mapping. □

The continuity of f in Corollary 2.1 is not necessary and can be dropped.

Corollary 2.2. Under the hypotheses of Corollary 2.1 and without assuming the continuity of f, assume that whenever (xn) is a non-decreasing sequence in X such that xn x X implies xn x for all n ∈ ℕ. Then f has a fixed point in X.

Proof. Follows from Theorem (2.2) by taking ψ(t) = t and ϕ(t) = (1 -k)t for all t ∈ [0, +∞). □

Now, let (X, ≼, d) be an ordered metric space and let f, g : X X be two mappings. Set

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M38','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M38">View MathML</a>

and

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M39','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M39">View MathML</a>

Then we introduce the following definition.

Definition 2.2. Let (X, ≼) be a partially ordered set having a metric d, and let ψ and ϕ be altering distance functions. We say that a mapping f : X X is an almost generalized (ψ, ϕ)-contractive mapping with respect to a mapping g : X X if there exists L ≥ 0 such that

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M40','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M40">View MathML</a>

(20)

for all comparable x, y X.

Definition 2.3. Let (X, ≼) be a partially ordered set. Then two mappings f, g : X X are said to be weakly increasing if fx gfx and gx fgx, for all X X.

Note that every strictly weakly increasing mapping is weakly increasing.

Theorem 2.3. Let (X, ≼) be a partially ordered set and suppose that there exists a metric d on X such that the metric (X, d) is complete, and let f, g : X X be two weakly increasing mappings with respect to ≼. Suppose that f is an almost generalized (ψ, ϕ)-contractive mapping with respect to g. If either f or g is continuous, then f and g have a common fixed point.

Proof. Let us divide the proof into two parts:

First part: We prove that u is a fixed point of f if and only if u is a fixed point of g. Now, suppose that u is a fixed point of f, then fu = u. As u u, by (20), we have

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M41','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M41">View MathML</a>

Thus we have ϕ(d(u, gu)) = 0. Therefore d(u, gu) = 0 and hence gu = u. Similarly, we show that if u is a fixed point of g, then u is a fixed point of f.

Second part (construction a sequence by iterative technique):

Let x0 X. We construct a sequence (xn) in X such that x2n+1 = fx2n and x2n+2 = gx2n+1, for all non-negative integers, i.e. n ∈ ℕ ∪ {0}. As f and g are weakly increasing with respect ≼, we obtain the following:

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M42','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M42">View MathML</a>

If x2n = x2n+1 for some n ∈ ℕ, then x2n = fx2n. Thus x2n is a fixed point of f. By the first part, we conclude that x2n is also a fixed point of g.

If x2n+1 = x2n+2 for some n ∈ ℕ, then x2n+1 = gx2n+1. Thus x2n+1 is a fixed point of g. By the first part, we conclude that x2n+1 is also a fixed point of f.

Therefore, we may assume that xn xn+1 for all n ∈ ℕ. Now we complete the proof in the following steps:

Step 1. We will prove that

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M43','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M43">View MathML</a>

As x2n+1 and x2n+2 are comparable, by (20), we have

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M44','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M44">View MathML</a>

where

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M45','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M45">View MathML</a>

and

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M46','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M46">View MathML</a>

So, we have

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M47','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M47">View MathML</a>

(21)

If

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M48','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M48">View MathML</a>

then (21) becomes

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M49','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M49">View MathML</a>

which gives a contradiction. So

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M50','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M50">View MathML</a>

and hence (21) becomes

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M51','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M51">View MathML</a>

(22)

Similarly, we show that

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M52','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M52">View MathML</a>

(23)

By (22) and (23), we get that {d(xn, xn+1); n ∈ ℕ} is a non-increasing sequence of positive numbers. Hence there is r ≥ 0 such that

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M53','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M53">View MathML</a>

Letting n →+∞ in (22), we get

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M54','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M54">View MathML</a>

which implies that ϕ(r) = 0 and hence r = 0.

So, we have

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M55','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M55">View MathML</a>

(24)

Step 2. We will prove that (xn) is a Cauchy sequence. It is sufficient to show that (x2n) is a Cauchy sequence. Suppose to the contrary; that is, (x2n) is not a Cauchy sequence. Then there exists ε > 0 for which we can find two subsequences of positive integers (x2m(i)) and (x2n(i)) such that n(i) is the smallest index for which

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M56','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M56">View MathML</a>

(25)

This means that

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M57','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M57">View MathML</a>

(26)

From (25), (26) and the triangular inequality, we get

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M58','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M58">View MathML</a>

By letting i +∞ in the above inequality and using (24), we have

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M59','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M59">View MathML</a>

(27)

Moreover,

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M60','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M60">View MathML</a>

Using (24), (27) and letting i → +∞, we get

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M61','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M61">View MathML</a>

(28)

Since x2n(i) and x2m(i)+1 are comparable, so by (20) we have

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M62','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M62">View MathML</a>

(29)

where

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M63','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M63">View MathML</a>

(30)

and

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M64','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M64">View MathML</a>

(31)

By letting i → +∞ in (30) and (31), we get

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M65','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M65">View MathML</a>

Now, letting i → +∞ in (29) we get

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M66','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M66">View MathML</a>

So ϕ(ε) = 0 and then ε = 0, which is a contradiction. Hence (xn) is a Cauchy sequence in X.

Step 3. (A common fixed point)

As (xn) is a Cauchy sequence in X which is a complete space, there exists u X such that xn u as n → +∞. Without loss of generality, we may assume that f is continuous. Since x2n u as n → +∞, we have x2n+1 = fx2n fu as n → +∞. By the uniqueness of limit we get fu = u. Thus u is a fixed point of f. By the first part, we conclude that u is also a fixed point of g. □

The continuity of one of the functions f or g in Theorem 2.3 is not necessary and can be dropped.

Theorem 2.4. Under the hypotheses of Theorem 2.3 and without assuming the continuity of one of the functions f or g, assume that whenever (xn) is a non-decreasing sequence in X such that xn x X implies xn x, for all n ∈ ℕ. Then f and g have a common fixed point in X.

Proof. Following similar arguments to those given in Theorem 2.3, we construct an increasing sequence (xn) in X such that xn u for some u X. Using the assumption on X, we have xn u for all n ∈ ℕ. Now, we show that fu = gu = u. By (2), we have

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M67','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M67">View MathML</a>

(32)

where

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M68','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M68">View MathML</a>

(33)

and

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M69','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M69">View MathML</a>

(34)

Letting n → +∞ in (33) and (34) then we get M(x2n, u) → d(u, gu) and N(x2n, u) → 0 as n → +∞. Again when n → +∞ in (32), we get

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M70','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M70">View MathML</a>

Therefore, d(u, gu) = 0 thus u = gu and then u is a fixed point of f. Similarly, we may show that fu = u. Hence u is a common fixed point of f and g. □

Then we have the following consequence results.

Corollary 2.3. Let (X, ≼) be a partially ordered set and suppose that there exists a metric d on X such that the metric (X, d) is complete. Let f, g : X → X be two strictly weakly increasing mappings with respect to ≼. Suppose that there exist k ∈ [0, 1) and L ≥ 0 such that

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M71','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M71">View MathML</a>

for all comparable x, y X. If either f or g is continuous, then f and g have a common fixed point.

Proof. Define ψ, ϕ : [0, +∞) [0, +∞) by ψ(t) = t and ϕ(t) = (1-k)t. Then f is an almost generalized (ψ, ϕ)-contractive mapping with respect to g. The proof follows from Theorem 2.3. □

The continuity of one of the functions f or g in Corollary 2.3 is not necessary and can be dropped.

Corollary 2.4. Under the hypotheses of Corollary 2.3 and without assuming the continuity of one of the functions f or g, assume that whenever (xn) is a non-decreasing sequence in × such that xn → X X implies xn x, for all n ∈ ℕ. Then f and g have a common fixed point in X.

Proof. Follows from Theorem 2.4. □

Now, in order to support the useability of our results, let us introduce the following example.

Example 2.1. Let × = {0, 1, 2, ...}. Define the function f, g : X X by

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M72','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M72">View MathML</a>

and

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M73','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M73">View MathML</a>

Let d : X × X → + be given by

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M74','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M74">View MathML</a>

Define ψ, ϕ: [0, +∞) → [0, +∞) by ψ(t) = t2 and ϕ(t) = t. Define a relation on X by × y iff y ≤ x. Then we have the following:

(1) (X, ≼) is a partially ordered set having the metric d, where the metric space (X, d) is complete.

(2) f and g are weakly increasing mappings with respect to ≼.

(3) f is continuous.

(4) f is an almost generalized (ψ, ϕ)-contractive mapping with respect to g, that is,

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M75','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M75">View MathML</a>

for x, y X with × y and L ≥ 0, where

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M76','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M76">View MathML</a>

and

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M77','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M77">View MathML</a>

Proof. The proof of (1) is clear. To prove (2), let x X. If x ∈ {0, 1, 2}, then fgx = 0 ≤ gx = 0 and gfx = 0 ≤ fx. So gx fgx and fx gfx. While, if x ≥ 3, then fgx = x - 3 ≤ x - 2 = gx and gfx = x - 3 ≤ x - 1 = fx. So gx fgx and fx gfx. Hence f and g are weakly increasing mappings with respect to ≼. To prove that f is continuous, let (xn) be a sequence in X such that xn → x X. By the definition of the metric d, there exists k ∈ ℕ such that xn = x for all n ≥ k. So fxn = fx for all n ≥ k. Hence fxn → fx that is, f is continuous. To prove (4), given x, y X with x y. So y ≤ x. Thus, we have the following cases:

Case 1. x ∈ {0, 1} and y ∈ {0, 1}. Then d(fx, fy) = 0 and hence

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M78','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M78">View MathML</a>

for each L ≥ 0.

Case 2. x, y ≥ 2 and x = y. Then d(fx, fy) = 0 and hence

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M79','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M79">View MathML</a>

for each L ≥ 0.

Case 3. x > y ≥ 2.

If x = y + 1, then

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M80','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M80">View MathML</a>

and

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M81','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M81">View MathML</a>

Since

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M82','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M82">View MathML</a>

we have

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M83','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M83">View MathML</a>

for each L ≥ 0.

If x > y + 1, then

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M84','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M84">View MathML</a>

and

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M85','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M85">View MathML</a>

As

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M86','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M86">View MathML</a>

we have

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M87','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M87">View MathML</a>

for each L ≥ 0. By combining all cases together, we conclude that f is an almost generalized (ψ, ϕ)-contractive mapping with respect to g. Thus f, g, ψ and ϕ satisfy all the hypotheses of Theorem 2.3 and hence f and g have a common fixed point. Indeed, 0 is the unique common fixed point of f and g. □

3 Applications

Let Φ denote the set of functions ϕ : [0, +∞) → [0, +∞) satisfying the following hypotheses:

(1) Every ϕ ∈ Φ is a Lebesgue integrable function on each compact subset of [0, +∞),

(2) For any ϕ ∈ Φ and ε > 0, <a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M88','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M88">View MathML</a>

It is an easy matter, to check that the mapping ψ : [0, +∞) [0, +∞) defined by

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M89','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M89">View MathML</a>

is an altering distance function. Therefore, we have the following results.

Corollary 3.1. Let (X, ≼) be a partially ordered set having a metric d, such that the metric space (X, d) is complete. Let f : X → X be a non-decreasing continuous mapping with respect to ≼. Suppose that there exist k ∈ [0, 1) and L ≥ 0 such that

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M90','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M90">View MathML</a>

for all comparable x, y X. If there exists x0 X such that x0 fx0, then f has a fixed point.

Proof. Follows from Corollary 2.1 by taking <a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M91','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M91">View MathML</a>

Corollary 3.2. Let (X, ≼) be a partially ordered set having a metric d, such that the metric space (X, d) is complete. Let f, g : X → X be two weakly increasing mappings with respect to ≼. Suppose that there exist k ∈ [0, 1) and L ≥ 0 such that

<a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M92','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M92">View MathML</a>

for all comparable x, y X. If there exists x0 X such that x0 fx0, then f has a fixed point.

Proof. Follows from Corollary 2.3 by taking <a onClick="popup('http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M91','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.fixedpointtheoryandapplications.com/content/2012/1/80/mathml/M91">View MathML</a>

Finally, let us finish this article by noticing the following remarks:

Remark 1. Theorem 2.1 of [26]is a special case of Corollary 2.1

Remark 2. Theorem 2.2 of [26]is a special case of Corollary 2.2

Remark 3. Theorem 2.3, Corollaries 2.4 and 2.6 of [26]are special cases of Corollary 2.3

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors' contributions

All the authors contributed equally. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgement

The authors thank the editor and the referees for their useful comments and suggestions.

References

  1. Banach, S: Surles operations dans les ensembles et leur application aux equation sitegrales. Fund Math. 3, 133–181 (1922)

  2. Agarwal, RP, El-Gebeily, MA, O'regan, D: Generalized contractions in partially ordered metric spaces. Appl Anal. 87, 109–116 (2008). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  3. Aghajani, A, Radenović, S, Roshan, JR: Common fixed point results for four mappings satisfying almost generalized (S, T)-contractive condition in partially ordered metric spaces. Appl Math Comput. 218, 5665–5670 (2012). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  4. Di Bari, C, Vetro, P: ϕ-paris and common fixed points in cone metric spaces. Rendiconti del Circolo Matematico di Palermo. 57, 279–285 (2008). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  5. Cho, YJ, Saadati, R, Wang, Sh: Common fixed point theorems on generalized distance in ordered cone metric spaces. Comput Math Appl. 61, 1254–1260 (2011). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  6. Ćirić, LjB: A generalization of Banach's contraction principle. Proc Am Math Soc. 45, 265–273 (1974)

  7. Ćirić, LjB: On contractive type mappings. Math Balkanica. 1, 52–57 (1971)

  8. Dutta, PN, Choudhury, BS: A generalization of contraction principle in metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2008, 8 (Article ID 406368), doi:10.1155/2008/406368 (2008)

  9. Gholizadeh, L, Saadati, R, Shatanawi, W, Vaezpour, SM: Contractive mapping in generalized, ordered metric spaces with application in integral equations. Math Probl Eng. 2011, 14 (Article ID 380784), doi:10.1155/2011/380784 (2011)

  10. Kadelburg, Z, Pavlović, M, Radenović, S: Common fixed point theorems for ordered contractions and quasicontractions in ordered cone metric spaces. Comput Math Appl. 59, 3148–3159 (2010). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  11. Luong, NV, Thuan, N: Fixed point theorem for generalized weak contractions satisfying rational expressions in ordered metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2011, 46 (2011). BioMed Central Full Text OpenURL

  12. Nashine, HK, Kadelburg, Z, Radenović, S: Common fixed point theorems for weakly is-tone increasing mappings in ordered partial metric spaces. Math Comput Model doi:10.1016/j.mcm.2011.12.019 (2011)

  13. Nieto, JJ, Rodŕiguez-López, R: Contractive mapping theorems in partially ordered sets and applications to ordinary differential equations. Order. 22, 223–239 (2005). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  14. Radenović, S, Kadelburg, Z: Generalized weak contractions in partially ordered metric spaces. Comput Math Appl. 60, 1776–1783 (2010). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  15. Radenović, S, Kadelburg, Z, Jandrlić, D, Jandrlić, A: Some results on weakly contractive maps. Bull Iran Math Soc (2012, in press)

  16. Rhoades, BE: Some theorems on weakly contractive maps. Nonlinear Anal. 47, 2683–2693 (2001). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  17. Shatanawi, W: Fixed point theorems for nonlinear weakly C-contractive mappings in metric spaces. Math Comput Model. 54, 2816–2826 (2011). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  18. Shatanawi, W, Mustafa, Z, Tahat, N: Some coincidence point theorems for nonlinear contraction in ordered metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2011, 68 (2011). BioMed Central Full Text OpenURL

  19. Samet, B, Rajović, M, Lazović, R, Stojiljković, R: Common fixed-point results for nonlinear contractions in ordered partial metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2011, 71 (2011). BioMed Central Full Text OpenURL

  20. Shatanawi, W: Fixed point theory for contractive mappings satisfying Φ-maps in G-metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2010, 9 (Article ID 181650), doi:10.1155/2010/181650 (2010)

  21. Berinde, V: Some remarks on a fixed point point theorem for Ćirić-type almost contractions. Carpathian J Math. 25, 157–162 (2009)

  22. Berinde, V: Approximating fixed points of weak contractions using the Picard iteration. Nolinear Anal Forum. 9, 43–53 (2004)

  23. Berinde, V: On the approximation fixed points of weak contractive mappings. Carpathian J Math. 19, 7–22 (2003)

  24. Berinde, V: General contractive fixed point theorems for Ćirić-type almost contraction in metric spaces. Carpathian J Math. 24, 10–19 (2008)

  25. Babu, GVR, Sandhya, ML, Kameswari, MVR: A note on a fixed point theorem of Berinde on weak contractions. Carpathian J Math. 24, 8–12 (2008)

  26. Ćirić, LjB, Abbas, M, Saadati, R, Hussain, N: Common fixed points of almost generalized contractive mappings in ordered metric spaces. Appl Math Comput. 217, 5784–5789 (2011). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  27. Khan, MS, Swaleh, M, Sessa, S: Fixed point theorems by altering distances between the points. Bull Aust Math Soc. 30, 1–9 (1984). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  28. Aydi, H: Common fixed point results for mappings satisfying (ψ, ϕ)-weak contractions in ordered partial metric space. Int J Math Stat. 12(2), (in press) (2012)

  29. Aydi, H, Postolache, M, Shatanawi, W: Coupled fixed point results for (ψ, ϕ))-weakly contractive mappings in ordered G-metric spaces. Comput Math Appl. 63, 298–309 (2012). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  30. Aydi, H, Karapinar, E, Shatanawi, W: Coupled fixed point results for (ψ, ϕ)-weakly contractive condition in ordered partial metric spaces. Comput Math Appl. 62, 4449–4460 (2011). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  31. Dorić, D: Common fixed point for generalized (ψ, ϕ)-weak contraction. Appl Math Lett. 22, 1896–1900 (2009). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  32. Karapinar, E, Sadarangani, K: Fixed point theory for cyclic (ψ, ϕ)-contractions. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2011, 69 (2011). BioMed Central Full Text OpenURL

  33. Nashine, HK, Samet, B: Fixed point results for mappings satisfying (ψ, ϕ)-weakly contractive condition in partially ordered metric spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 74, 2201–2209 (2011). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  34. Popescu, O: Fixed points for (ψ, ϕ)-weak contractions. Appl Math Lett. 24, 1–4 (2011). Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  35. Nashine, HK, Samet B Kim, J: Fixed point results for contractions involving generalized altering distances in ordered metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2011, 5 (2011). BioMed Central Full Text OpenURL

  36. Shatanawi, W, Samet, B: On (ψ, ϕ)-weakly contractive condition in partially ordered metric spaces. Comput Math Appl. 62, 3204–3214 (2011). Publisher Full Text OpenURL