**Advances in Pure Mathematics**

Vol.06 No.10(2016), Article ID:70787,18 pages

10.4236/apm.2016.610057

Some Common Fixed Point Theorems for Four Mappings in Dislocated Metric Space

Dinesh Panthi^{1}, Kumar Subedi^{2}^{ }

^{1}Department of Mathematics, Valmeeki Campus, Nepal Sanskrit University, Kathmandu, Nepal

^{2}Department of Mathematics Education, Mahendra Ratna Multiple Campus, Tribhuvan University, Ilam, Nepal

Copyright © 2016 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY 4.0).

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Received: August 9, 2016; Accepted: September 19, 2016; Published: September 22, 2016

ABSTRACT

In this article, we establish some common fixed point theorems for two pairs of weakly compatible mappings with (E. A.) and (CLR) property in dislocated metric space which generalize and extend some similar results in the literature.

**Keywords:**

Dislocated Metric, Weakly Compatible Maps, Common Fixed Point

1. Introduction

In 1986, S. G. Matthews [1] introduced some concepts of metric domains in the context of domain theory. In 2000, P. Hitzler and A. K. Seda [2] introduced the concept of dislocated topology where the initiation of dislocated metric space is appeared. Since then, many authors have established fixed point theorems in dislocated metric space. In the literature, one can find many interesting recent articles in the field of dislocated metric space (see examples [3] - [12] ). Dislocated metric space plays very important role in topology, semantics of logical programming and in electronics engineering.

The purpose of this article is to establish some common fixed point theorems for two pairs of weakly compatible mappings with (E. A.) and (CLR) property in dislocated metric space.

2. Preliminaries

We start with the following definitions, lemmas and theorems.

Definition 1. [2] Let X be a non empty set and let be a function satisfying the following conditions:

1)

2) implies

3) for all.

Then, d is called dislocated metric (or d-metric) on X and the pair (X, d) is called the dislocated metric space (or d-metric space).

Definition 2. [2] A sequence in a d-metric space is called a Cauchy sequence if for given, there corresponds such that for all, we have.

Definition 3. [2] A sequence in d-metric space converges with respect to d (or in d) if there exists such that as

Definition 4. [2] A d-metric space is called complete if every Cauchy se- quence in it is convergent with respect to d.

Lemma 1. [2] Limits in a d-metric space are unique.

Definition 5. Let A and S be two self mappings on a set X. If for some, then x is called coincidence point of A and S.

Definition 6. [13] Let A and S be mappings from a metric space into itself. Then, A and S are said to be weakly compatible if they commute at their coincident point; that is, for some implies

Definition 7. [14] Let A and S be two self mappings defined on a metric space. We say that the mappings A and S satisfy (E. A.) property if there exists a sequence such that

for some.

Definition 8. [15] Let A and S be two self mappings defined on a metric space. We say that the mappings A and S satisfy property if there exists a sequence such that

3. Main Results

Now, we establish a common fixed point theorem for two pairs of weakly compatible mappings using E. A. property.

Theorem 1. Let (X, d) be a dislocated metric space. Let satisfying the following conditions

(1)

(2)

.

1) The pairs or satisfy E. A. property.

2) The pairs and are weakly compatible.

If T(X) is closed then

1) The maps A and T have a coincidence point.

2) The maps B and S have a coincidence point.

3) The maps A, B, S and T have an unique common fixed point.

Proof. Assume that the pair satisfy E. A. property, so there exists a sequence such that

(3)

for some. Since, so there exists a sequence such that. Hence,

(4)

From condition (2), we have

Taking limit as, we get

Since

Therefore we have,

which is a contradiction, since. Hence,. Now, we have

Assume is closed, then there exits such that. We claim that. Now, from condition (2)

(5)

Since

So, taking limit as in (5), We conclude that

(6)

which is a contradiction. Hence,. Now, we have

(7)

This proves that v is the coincidence point of.

Again, since so there exists such that

Now, we claim that. From condition (2)

which is a contradiction.

Hence,

Therefore,.

This represents that w is the coincidence point of the maps B and S.

Hence,

Since the pairs and are weakly compatible so,

We claim. From condition (2)

which is a contradiction.

Hence,

Therefore,. Similary,. Hence,. This represents that u is the common fixed point of the mappings and.

Uniqueness:

If possible, let be other common fixed point of the mappings, then by the condition (2)

which is a contradiction.

Hence, This establishes the uniqueness of the common fixed point of four mappings.

From the above theorem, one can obtain the following corollaries easily.

Corollary 1. Let (X, d) be a dislocated metric space. Let satisfying the following conditions

.

1) The pairs or satisfy E. A. property.

2) The pairs and are weakly compatible.

If T(X) is closed then,

1) The maps A and T have a coincidence point.

2) The maps A and S have a coincidence point.

3) The maps A, S and T have an unique common fixed point.

Corollary 2. Let (X, d) be a dislocated metric space. Let satisfying the following conditions

.

1) The pairs or satisfy E. A. property.

2) The pairs and are weakly compatible.

If T(X) is closed then,

1) The maps A and S have a coincidence point.

2) The maps B and S have a coincidence point.

3) The maps A, B and S have an unique common fixed point.

Corollary 3. Let (X, d) be a dislocated metric space. Let satisfying the following conditions

.

1) The pair satisfy E. A. property.

2) The pair is weakly compatible.

If S(X) is closed, then the mappings A and S have an unique common fixed point.

Now, we establish the following theorem.

Theorem 2. Let (X, d) be a dislocated metric space. Let satisfying the following conditions

(8)

(9)

.

1) The pairs or satisfy E. A. property.

2) The pairs and are weakly compatible.

If T(X) is closed then,

1) The maps A and T have a coincidence point.

2) The maps B and S have a coincidence point.

3) The maps A, B, S and T have an unique common fixed point.

Proof. Assume that the pair satisfy E. A. property, so there exists a sequence such that

(10)

for some. Since, so there exists a sequence such that. Hence,

(11)

From condition (9), we have

Taking limit as we get

Since

Therefore we have,

which is a contradiction, since. Hence,. Now, we have

Assume is closed, then there exits such that. We claim that. Now from condition (9)

(12)

Since

So, taking limit as in (12), We conclude that

(13)

which is a contradiction. Hence,. Now, we have

(14)

This proves that v is the coincidence point of.

Again, since so there exists such that

Now we claim that. From condition (9)

Since

So if or we get the contradiction, since

or

Hence,

Therefore,.

This represents that w is the coincidence point of the maps B and S.

Hence,

Since the pairs and are weakly compatible so,

We claim. From condition (9)

Since

So if or or we get the contradiction. Since,

or

Hence,

Therefore,. Similary,. Hence,. This represents that u is the common fixed point of the mappings and.

Uniqueness:

If possible, let be other common fixed point of the mappings, then by the condition (9)

Since

So if or or we get the contradiction, since

or

Hence, This establishes the uniqueness of the common fixed point of four mappings.

From the above theorem, we can establish the following corollaries:

Corollary 4. Let (X, d) be a dislocated metric space. Let satisfying the following conditions

.

1) The pairs or satisfy E. A. property.

2) The pairs and are weakly compatible.

If T(X) is closed then

1) The maps A and T have a coincidence point.

2) The maps A and S have a coincidence point.

3) The maps A, S and T have an unique common fixed point.

Corollary 5. Let (X, d) be a dislocated metric space. Let satisfying the following conditions

.

1) The pairs or satisfy E. A. property.

2) The pairs and are weakly compatible.

if T(X) is closed then

1) The maps A and S have a coincidence point.

2) The maps B and S have a coincidence point.

3) The maps A, B and S have an unique common fixed point.

Corollary 6. Let (X, d) be a dislocated metric space. Let satisfying the following conditions

.

1) The pair satisfy E. A. property.

2) The pair is weakly compatible.

If S(X) is closed, then the mappings A and S have an unique common fixed point.

Now, we establish a common fixed point theorem for weakly compatible mappings using (CLR)-property.

Theorem 3. Let (X, d) be a dislocated metric space. Let satisfying the following conditions

(15)

(16)

where,

(17)

1) The pairs or satisfy CLR-property.

2) The pairs and are weakly compatible.

Then

1) The maps A and T have a coincidence point.

2) The maps B and S have a coincidence point.

3) The maps A, B, S and T have an unique common fixed point.

Proof. Assume that the pair satisfy property, so there exists a se- quence such that

(18)

for some. Since, so there exists a sequence such that. We show that

(19)

From condition (16), we have

(20)

where

Taking limit as in (20), we get

(21)

Since

Hence, we have

which is a contradiction, since.

Therefore,

Now we have

Assume, then there exits such that.

We claim that.

Now from condition (16)

(22)

where

Since

So, taking limit as in (22), we conclude that

(23)

which is a contradiction.

Hence,.

This proves that v is the coincidence point of the maps B and S.

Therefore,.

Since the pair (B, S) is weakly compatible, so

Since, there exists a point such that We show that

From condition (16),

where,

Therefore,.

This proves that u is the coincidence point of the maps A and T.

Since the pair is weakly compatible so,

We show that.

From condition (16)

where

which is a contradiction.

Hence,. Similarly, we obtain.

. Hence, w is the common fixed point of four mappings and.

Uniqueness:

Let be other common fixed point of the mappings and, then by the condition (16)

(24)

where

which is a contradiction.

Hence, This establishes the uniqueness of the common fixed point.

Now we have the following corollaries:

Corollary 7. Let (X, d) be a dislocated metric space. Let satisfying the following conditions

where

1) The pairs or satisfy CLR-property.

2) The pairs and are weakly compatible.

Then

1) The maps A and S have a coincidence point.

2) The maps B and S have a coincidence point.

3) The maps A, B and S have an unique common fixed point.

Corollary 8. Let (X, d) be a dislocated metric space. Let satisfying the following conditions

where

1) The pair and satisfy CLR-property.

2) The pairs and are weakly compatible.

Then

1) The maps A and T have a coincidence point.

2) The maps A and S have a coincidence point.

3) The maps A, S and T have an unique common fixed point.

Corollary 9. Let (X, d) be a dislocated metric space. Let satisfying the following conditions

where

1) The pair satisfy CLR-property.

2) The pair is weakly compatible.

Then

1) The maps A and S have a coincidence point.

2) The maps A and S have an unique common fixed point.

Now, we establish the following theorem.

Theorem 4. Let (X, d) be a dislocated metric space. Let satisfying the following conditions

(25)

(26)

where

(27)

1) The pairs or satisfy CLR-property.

2) The pairs and are weakly compatible.

then

1) The maps A and T have a coincidence point.

2) The maps B and S have a coincidence point.

3) The maps A, B, S and T have an unique common fixed point.

Proof. Assume that the pair satisfy property, so there exists a se- quence such that

(28)

for some. Since, so there exists a sequence such that. We show that

(29)

From condition (26), we have

(30)

where

Taking limit as in (30), we get

(31)

Since

Hence, we have

which is a contradiction, since.

Hence,

Now, we have

Assume, then there exits such that.

We claim that.

Now from condition (26)

(32)

where

Since

So, taking limit as in (32) We conclude that

(33)

which is a contradiction. Hence,. This proves that v is the coincidence point of of the maps B and S.

Hence,.

Since the pair (B, S) is weakly compatible, so

Since there exists a point such that We show that

From condition (26)

where

Hence

Since

So if or, we get the contradic- tion for both cases.

Therefore,.

This proves that u is the coincidence point of the maps A and T.

Since the pair is weakly compatible so,

We show that.

From condition (26)

where

Since

So if or or

we have

which give contradictions for all three cases.

Hence,. Similarly, we obtain.

. Hence, w is the common fixed point of four mappings and T.

Uniqueness:

Let be other common fixed point of the mappings and T, then by the condition (26)

(34)

where

Since

So if or or we have

or

which give contradictions for all three cases.

Hence, This establishes the uniqueness of the common fixed point.

Now, we have the following corollaries:

Corollary 10. Let (X, d) be a dislocated metric space. Let satisfying the following conditions

where

1) The pairs or satisfy CLR-property.

2) The pairs and are weakly compatible.

Then

1) The maps A and S have a coincidence point.

2) The maps B and S have a coincidence point.

3) The maps A, B and S have an unique common fixed point.

Corollary 11. Let (X, d) be a dislocated metric space. Let satisfying the following conditions

where

1) The pair and satisfy CLR-property.

2) The pairs and are weakly compatible.

Then

1) The maps A and T have a coincidence point.

2) The maps A and S have a coincidence point.

3) The maps A, S and T have an unique common fixed point.

Corollary 12. Let (X, d) be a dislocated metric space. Let satisfying the following conditions

where

1) The pair satisfy CLR-property.

2) The pair is weakly compatible.

Then

1) The maps A and S have a coincidence point.

2) The maps A and S have an unique common fixed point.

Remarks: Our results generalize and extend the results of A. Amri and D. Moutawakil [14] , W. Sintunavarat and P. Kumam [15] in dislocated metric space.

Cite this paper

Panthi, D. and Subedi, K. (2016) Some Common Fixed Point Theorems for Four Mappings in Dislocated Metric Space. Advances in Pure Mathematics, 6, 695-712. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/apm.2016.610057

References

- 1. Matthews, S.G. (1986) Metric Domains for Completeness. Technical Report 76, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Warwick, Coventry.
- 2. Hitzler, P. and Seda, A.K. (2000) Dislocated Topologies. Journal of Electrical Engineering, 51, 3-7.
- 3. Kumari, P.S., Zoto, K. and Panthi, D. (2015) d-Neighborhood System and Generalized F-Contraction in Dislocated Metric Space. SpringerPlus, 4, 1-10.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40064-015-1095-3 - 4. Kumari, P.S. (2012) Common Fixed Point Theorems on Weakly Compatible Maps on Dislocated Metric Spaces. Mathematical Sciences, 6, 71.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2251-7456-6-71 - 5. Kumari, P.S. and Panthi, D. (2015) Cyclic Contractions and Fixed Point Theorems on Various Generating Spaces. Fixed Point Theory and Applications, 2016, 28.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13663-016-0521-8 - 6. Kumari, P.S., Ramana, C.V., Zoto, K. and Panthi, D. (2015) Fixed Point Theorems and Generalizations of Dislocated Metric Spaces. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 8, 154-158.

http://dx.doi.org/10.17485/ijst/2015/v8iS3/62247 - 7. Panthi, D. (2015) Common Fixed Point Theorems for Compatible Mappings in Dislocated Metric Space. International Journal of Mathematical Analysis, 9, 2235-2242.

http://dx.doi.org/10.12988/ijma.2015.57177 - 8. Panthi, D. (2014) Fixed Point Results in Cyclic Contractions of Generalized Dislocated Metric Spaces. Annals of Pure and Applied Mathematics, 5, 192-197.
- 9. Panthi, D. and Kumari, P.S. (2016) Some Integral Type Fixed Point Theorems in Dislocated Metric Space. American Journal of Computational Mathematics, 6, 88-97.

http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ajcm.2016.62010 - 10. Panthi, D. and Kumari, P.S. (2015) Common Fixed Point Theorems for Mappings of Compatible Type(A) in Dislocated Metric Space. Nepal Journal of Science and Technology, 16, 79-86.

http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/njst.v16i1.14360 - 11. Panthi, D. and Jha, K. (2012) A Common Fixed Point of Weakly Compatible Mappings in Dislocated Metric Space. Kathmandu University Journal of Science, Engineering and Tech-nology, 8, 25-30.
- 12. Sarma, I.R., Rao, J.M., Kumari, P.S. and Panthi, D. (2014) Convergence Axioms on Dislocated Symmetric Spaces. Abstract and Applied Analysis, 2014, Article ID: 745031.
- 13. Jungck, G. and Rhoades, B.E. (1998) Fixed Points for Set Valued Functions without Continuity. Indian Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics, 29, 227-238.
- 14. Amri, M. and El Moutawakil, D. (2002) Some New Common Fixed Point Theorems under Strict Contractive Conditions. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 270, 181-188.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-247X(02)00059-8 - 15. Sintunavarat, W. and Kumam, P. (2011) Common Fixed Points for a Pair of Weakly Compatible Maps in Fuzzy Metric Spaces. Journal of Applied Mathematics, 2011, 1-14.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/637958