Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/SVG/jax.js
Research article Special Issues

Stability of scientific big data sharing mechanism based on two-way principal-agent

  • Received: 18 February 2023 Revised: 08 May 2023 Accepted: 22 May 2023 Published: 02 June 2023
  • MSC : 20C25, 20C35

  • In the era of big data, facing the data-intensive scientific paradigm shift and the explosion of scientific big data, there is an urgent need for alliance cooperation between heterogeneous research groups to actively open and share scientific big data to support China's economic development, technological innovation and national security. Therefore, the study of scientific big data sharing mechanism has very important practical significance. We think science big data sharing is an ecosystem that is constantly evolving to higher-order ecological evolution. Based on the dual perspectives of psychological contract and contractual contract, the scientific big data sharing strategy evolution mechanism and sharing strategy incentive mechanism are explored.The research finds that the cooperation of scientific research groups is bound by psychological contract and contractual contract; stochastic evolutionary game has stronger explanatory power for sharing strategy evolution, complementarity is positive indicator, random interference and moral risk are negative indicators; two-way principal agent can describe Alliance members are mutually entrusted, and the shared strategy incentive contract consists of fixed wages and incentive wages, which are proportional to risk.

    Citation: Wang Zhang, Jingkun Zhang. Stability of scientific big data sharing mechanism based on two-way principal-agent[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(8): 18762-18779. doi: 10.3934/math.2023955

    Related Papers:

    [1] Qing Yang, Chuanzhi Bai . Fixed point theorem for orthogonal contraction of Hardy-Rogers-type mapping on O-complete metric spaces. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(6): 5734-5742. doi: 10.3934/math.2020368
    [2] Abdullah Shoaib, Tahair Rasham, Giuseppe Marino, Jung Rye Lee, Choonkil Park . Fixed point results for dominated mappings in rectangular b-metric spaces with applications. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(5): 5221-5229. doi: 10.3934/math.2020335
    [3] Seher Sultan Yeşilkaya, Cafer Aydın, Adem Eroǧlu . Fixed point results on ordered Prešić type mappings. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(5): 5140-5156. doi: 10.3934/math.2020330
    [4] Aftab Hussain . Fractional convex type contraction with solution of fractional differential equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(5): 5364-5380. doi: 10.3934/math.2020344
    [5] Muhammad Tariq, Muhammad Arshad, Mujahid Abbas, Eskandar Ameer, Saber Mansour, Hassen Aydi . A relation theoretic m-metric fixed point algorithm and related applications. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(8): 19504-19525. doi: 10.3934/math.2023995
    [6] Yue Wang, Ghulam Farid, Babar Khan Bangash, Weiwei Wang . Generalized inequalities for integral operators via several kinds of convex functions. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(5): 4624-4643. doi: 10.3934/math.2020297
    [7] Mourad Berraho . On a problem concerning the ring of Nash germs and the Borel mapping. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(2): 923-929. doi: 10.3934/math.2020063
    [8] Chen Lang, Hongyan Guan . Common fixed point and coincidence point results for generalized α-φE-Geraghty contraction mappings in b-metric spaces. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(8): 14513-14531. doi: 10.3934/math.2022800
    [9] Awais Asif, Sami Ullah Khan, Thabet Abdeljawad, Muhammad Arshad, Ekrem Savas . 3D analysis of modified F-contractions in convex b-metric spaces with application to Fredholm integral equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(6): 6929-6948. doi: 10.3934/math.2020444
    [10] Faiz Muhammad Khan, Weiwei Zhang, Hidayat Ullah Khan . Double-framed soft h-semisimple hemirings. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(6): 6817-6840. doi: 10.3934/math.2020438
  • In the era of big data, facing the data-intensive scientific paradigm shift and the explosion of scientific big data, there is an urgent need for alliance cooperation between heterogeneous research groups to actively open and share scientific big data to support China's economic development, technological innovation and national security. Therefore, the study of scientific big data sharing mechanism has very important practical significance. We think science big data sharing is an ecosystem that is constantly evolving to higher-order ecological evolution. Based on the dual perspectives of psychological contract and contractual contract, the scientific big data sharing strategy evolution mechanism and sharing strategy incentive mechanism are explored.The research finds that the cooperation of scientific research groups is bound by psychological contract and contractual contract; stochastic evolutionary game has stronger explanatory power for sharing strategy evolution, complementarity is positive indicator, random interference and moral risk are negative indicators; two-way principal agent can describe Alliance members are mutually entrusted, and the shared strategy incentive contract consists of fixed wages and incentive wages, which are proportional to risk.



    Fixed point results have a crucial role to construct methods for solving problems in applied mathematics and other sciences. A large number of mathematicians have focused on this interesting topic. The Banach contraction mapping principle is the most important result in fixed point theory. It is considered the source of metric fixed point theory. Metric spaces form a natural environment for exploring fixed points of single and multivalued mappings which can be noted to Banach contraction principle [7], that is, a very interesting useful and pivotal result in fixed point theory. The important feature of the Banach contraction principle is that it gives the existence, uniqueness and the covergence of the sequence of the successive approximation to a solution of the problem. Banach contraction principle is generalized in many different ways. Reader can see two short survey of the development of fixed point theory in [15,18].

    Recently, Samet et al. [24] introduced the notions of α-ψ-contractive mappings and α-admissible mappings. Also, Alizadeh et al. [2] offered the concept of cyclic (α,β) -admissible mappings and obtain some new fixed point results. For more information on fixed point results, see [1,4,5,8,9,11,12,17,19,20,22,23,25,26].

    Definition 1.1. [16] A function φ:[0,+)[0,+) is called an altering distance function if the following properties are satisfied:

    (i) φ is non-decreasing and continuous,

    (ii) φ(t)=0 if and only if t=0.

    Definition 1.2. [2] Let f:XX and α,β:X[0,+). We say that f is a cyclic (α,β)-admissible mapping if

    (i) α(x)1 for some xX implies β(fx)1;

    (ii) β(x)1 for some xX implies α(fx)1.

    Definition 1.3. [14] Let X be a nonempty set and f,T:XX. The pair (f,T) is said to be weakly compatible if f and T commute at their coincidence points (i.e., fTx=Tfx whenever fx=Tx). A point yX is called a point of coincidence of f and T if there exists a point xX such that y=fx=Tx.

    Following the direction in [10], we denote by Ψ the family of all functions ψ:R4+R+ such that

    (ψ1) ψ is nondecreasing in each coordinate and continuous;

    (ψ2) ψ(t,t,t,t)t, ψ(t,0,0,t)t and ψ(0,0,t,t2)t for all t>0;

    (ψ3) ψ(t1,t2,t3,t4)=0 if and only if t1=t2=t3=t4=0.

    Definition 1.4. [3] A mapping h:R+×R+R is a function of subclass of type I if x1, then  h(1,y)h(x,y).

    Example 1.5. [3] The following are some examples of function of subclass of type I, for all x,yR+ and positive integers m,n,

    (1) h(x,y)=(y+l)x,l>1;

    (2) h(x,y)=(x+l)y,l>1;

    (3) h(x,y)=xmy;

    (4) h(x,y)=xn+xn1++x1+1n+1y;

    (5) h(x,y)=(xn+xn1++x1+1n+1+l)y,l>1.

    Definition 1.6. [3] Suppose that F:R+×R+R. A pair (F,h) is called an upper class of type I if h is a subclass of type I and

    (1) 0s1F(s,t)F(1,t);

    (2) h(1,y)F(s,t)yst.

    Example 1.7. [3] The following are some examples of upper class of type I, for all s,tR+ and positive integers m,n,

    (1) h(x,y)=(y+l)x,l>1,F(s,t)=st+l;

    (2) h(x,y)=(x+l)y,l>1,F(s,t)=(1+l)st;

    (3) h(x,y)=xmy,F(s,t)=st;

    (4) h(x,y)=xn+xn1++x1+1n+1y,F(s,t)=st;

    (5) h(x,y)=(xn+xn1++x1+1n+1+l)y,l>1,F(s,t)=(1+l)st.

    Definition 1.8. [3] A mapping h:R+×R+×R+R is a function of subclass of type II if for x,y1, h(1,1,z)h(x,y,z).

    Example 1.9. [3] The following are some examples of subclass of type II, for all x,y,zR+,

    (1) h(x,y,z)=(z+l)xy,l>1;

    (2) h(x,y,z)=(xy+l)z,l>1;

    (3) h(x,y,z)=z;

    (4) h(x,y,z)=xmynzp,m,n,pN;

    (5) h(x,y,z)=xm+xnyp+yq3zk,m,n,p,q,kN.

    Definition 1.10. [3] Let h:R+×R+×R+R and F:R+×R+R. Then we say that the pair (F,h) is called an upper class of type II if h is a subclass of type II and

    (1) 0s1F(s,t)F(1,t);

    (2) h(1,1,z)F(s,t)zst.

    Example 1.11. [3] The following are some examples of upper class of type II, for all s,tR+,

    (1) h(x,y,z)=(z+l)xy,l>1,F(s,t)=st+l;

    (2) h(x,y,z)=(xy+l)z,l>1,F(s,t)=(1+l)st;

    (3) h(x,y,z)=z,F(s,t)=st;

    (4) h(x,y,z)=xmynzp,m,n,pN,F(s,t)=sptp;

    (5) h(x,y,z)=xm+xnyp+yq3zk,m,n,p,q,kN,F(s,t)=(st)k.

    Definition 1.12. [13] Let f, T:XX and α,β:X[0,+). We say that f is a T-cyclic (α,β)-admissible mapping if

    (i) α(Tx)1 for some xX implies β(fx)1;

    (ii) β(Tx)1 for some xX implies α(fx)1.

    Example 1.13. [13] Let f,T:RR be defined by fx=x and Tx=x. Suppose that α,β:RR+ are given by α(x)=ex for all xR and β(y)=ey for all yR. Then f is a T-cyclic (α,β) admissible mapping. Indeed, if α(Tx)=ex1, then x0 implies fx0 and so β(fx)=efx1. Also, if β(Ty)=ey1, then y0 which implies fy0 and so α(fy)=efy1.

    The following result will be used in the sequel.

    Lemma 1.14. [6,21] Let (X,d) be a metric space and {xn} be a sequence in X such that

    limn+d(xn,xn+1)=0.

    If {xn} is not a Cauchy sequence in X, then there exist ε>0 and two sequences {m(k)} and {n(k)} of positive integers such that n(k)>m(k)>k and the following sequences tend to ε+ when k+:

    d(xm(k),xn(k)),d(xm(k),xn(k)+1),d(xm(k)1,xn(k)),
    d(xm(k)1,xn(k)+1),d(xm(k)+1,xn(k)+1).

    In this paper, we introduce new notions of T-cyclic (α,β,H,F)-contractive and T-cyclic (α,β,H,F) -rational contractive using a pair (F,h) upper class functions to obtain new fixed point and common fixed point theorems.

    The following definitions will be used efficiently in the proof of main results.

    Definition 2.1. Let f, T:XX and λ,γ:X[0,+). We say that f is a T-cyclic (λ,γ)-subadmissible mapping if

    (i) λ(Tx)1 for some xX implies γ(fx)1;

    (ii) γ(Tx)1 for some xX implies λ(fx)1.

    Definition 2.2. Let (X,d) be a metric space and f be a T-cyclic (α,β)-admissible and T-cyclic (λ,γ)-subadmissible mapping. We say that f is a T-cyclic (α,β,H,F)-contractive mapping if

    H(α(Tx),β(Ty),φ(d(fx,fy)))F(γ(Tx)λ(Ty),η(M(x,y))), (2.1)

    for all x,yX, where

    M(x,y)=ψ(d(Tx,Ty),d(Tx,fx),d(Ty,fy),12[d(Tx,fy)+d(Ty,fx)])

    for ψΨ, the pair (F,h) is an upper class of type II, φ is an altering distance function and η:[0,+)[0,+) is a nondecreasing and right-continuous function with the condition φ(t)>η(t) for all t>0.

    Theorem 2.3. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and let f and T be self-mappings on X such that fXTX. Let f be a T -cyclic (α,β,H,F)-contractive mapping. Assume that TX is a closed subset of X and the following conditions are satisfied:

    (i) there exists x0X such that α(Tx0)1 and β(Tx0)1, and λ(Tx0)1 and γ(Tx0)1;

    (ii) if {xn} is a sequence in X such that xnx and β(xn)1 for all n, then β(x)1, and γ(xn)1 for all n, then γ(x)1;

    (iii) α(Tu)1 and β(Tv)1, and λ(Tu)1 and γ(Tv)1 whenever fu=Tu and fv=Tv.

    Then f and T have a unique point of coincidence in X. Moreover, if f and T are weakly compatible, then f and T have a unique common fixed point.

    Proof. Let x0X such that α(Tx0)1 and β(Tx0)1, and λ(Tx0)1 and γ(Tx0)1. Define the sequences {xn} and {yn} in X by

    yn=fxn=Txn+1,  nN{0}. (2.2)

    If yn=yn+1, then yn+1 is a point of coincidence of f and T. Suppose that ynyn+1 for all nN. Since f is a T-cyclic (α,β)-admissible mapping and α(Tx0)1, β(fx0)=β(Tx1)1 which implies α(Tx2)=α(fx1)1. By continuing this process, we get α(Tx2n)1 and β(Tx2n+1)1 for all nN{0}. Similarly, since f is a T-cyclic (α,β)-admissible mapping and β(Tx0)1, we have β(Tx2n)1 and α(Tx2n+1)1 for all nN{0}, that is, α(Txn)1 and β(Txn)1 for all nN{0}. Equivalently, α(Txn)β(Txn+1)1 for all nN{0}. Since f is a T-cyclic (λ,γ)-subadmissible mapping and λ(Tx0)1, γ(fx0)=γ(Tx1)1 which implies λ(Tx2)=λ(fx1)1. By continuing this process, we get λ(Tx2n)1 and γ(Tx2n+1)1 for all nN{0}. Similarly, since f is a T-cyclic (λ,γ)-admissible mapping and γ(Tx0)1, we have γ(Tx2n)1 and λ(Tx2n+1)1 for all nN{0}, that is, λ(Txn)1 and β(Txn)1 for all nN{0}. Equivalently, λ(Txn)γ(Txn+1)1 for all nN{0}. Therefore, by (2.1) and using (2.2), we get

    H(1,1,φ(d(yn,yn+1)))=H(1,1,φ(d(fxn,fxn+1)))H(α(Txn),β(Txn+1),φ(d(fxn,fxn+1)))F(λ(Txn)γ(Txn+1),η(M(xn,xn+1)))F(1,η(M(xn,xn+1))).

    This implies that

    φ(d(yn,yn+1))η(M(xn,xn+1))<φ(M(xn,xn+1)). (2.3)

    Since φ is nondecreasing, we have

    d(yn,yn+1)<M(xn,xn+1), (2.4)

    where

    M(xn,xn+1)=ψ(d(Txn,Txn+1),d(Txn,fxn),d(Txn+1,fxn+1),12[d(Txn,fxn+1)+d(Txn+1,fxn)])=ψ(d(yn1,yn),d(yn1,yn),d(yn,yn+1),12[d(yn1,yn+1)+d(yn,yn)])ψ(d(yn1,yn),d(yn1,yn),d(yn,yn+1),12[d(yn1,yn)+d(yn,yn+1)]). (2.5)

    Thus, from (2.4), we obtain

    d(yn,yn+1)<M(xn,xn+1)ψ(d(yn1,yn),d(yn1,yn),d(yn,yn+1),12[d(yn1,yn)+d(yn,yn+1)]).

    If d(yn1,yn)d(yn,yn+1) for some nN, then

    d(yn,yn+1)<ψ(d(yn1,yn),d(yn1,yn),d(yn,yn+1),12[d(yn1,yn)+d(yn,yn+1)])ψ(d(yn,yn+1),d(yn,yn+1),d(yn,yn+1),d(yn,yn+1))d(yn,yn+1),

    which is a contradiction and hence d(yn,yn+1)<d(yn1,yn) for all nN. Therefore, the sequence {d(yn,yn+1)} is decreasing and bounded below. Thus, there exists r0 such that limn+d(yn,yn+1)=r. Assume r>0. Also, from (2.3), (2.5) and using the properties of ψ, we deduce

    φ(d(yn,yn+1))η(M(xn,xn+1))η(ψ(d(yn1,yn),d(yn1,yn),d(yn,yn+1),12[d(yn1,yn)+d(yn,yn+1)]))η(ψ(d(yn1,yn),d(yn1,yn),d(yn1,yn),d(yn1,yn)))η(d(yn1,yn)). (2.6)

    Consider the properties of φ and η. Letting n+ in (2.6), we get

    φ(r)=limn+φ(d(yn,yn+1))limn+η(d(yn1,yn))=η(r)<φ(r),

    which implies r=0 and so

    limn+d(yn,yn+1)=0. (2.7)

    Now, we prove that {yn} is a Cauchy sequence. Suppose, to the contrary, that {yn} is not a Cauchy sequence. Then, by Lemma 1.14, there exist an ε>0 and two subsequences {ymk} and {ynk} of {yn} with mk>nk>k such that d(ym(k),yn(k))ε, d(ym(k)1,yn(k))<ε and

    limk+d(ynk,ymk)=limk+d(ynk1,ymk)=limk+d(ymk1,ynk)=limk+d(ymk1,ynk1)=ε. (2.8)

    From (2.1), we get

    H(1,1,φ(d(ynk,ymk)))=H(1,1,φ(d(fxnk,fxmk)))H(α(Txnk),β(Txmk),φ(d(fx,fy))F(λ(Txnk)γ(Txmk),η(M(xnk,xmk)))F(1,η(M(x,y))).

    This implies that

    φ(d(ynk,ymk))η(M(xnk,xmk))<φ(M(xnk,xmk)) (2.9)

    where

    M(xnk,xmk)=ψ(d(Txnk,Txmk),d(Txnk,fxnk),d(Txmk,fxmk),12[d(Txnk,fxmk)+d(Txmk,fxnk)])ψ(max{ε,d(ynk1,ymk1)},d(ynk1,ynk),d(ymk1,ymk),max{ε,12[d(ynk1,ymk)+d(ymk1,ynk)]}).

    Now, from the properties of φ,ψ and η and using (2.8) and the above inequality, as k+ in (2.9), we have

    φ(ε)η(ψ(ε,0,0,ε))η(ε)<φ(ε),

    which implies that ε=0, a contradiction with ε>0. Thus, {yn} is a Cauchy sequence in X. From the completeness of (X,d), there exists zX such that

    limn+yn=z. (2.10)

    From (2.2) and (2.10), we obtain

    fxnz   and    Txn+1z. (2.11)

    Since TX is closed, by (2.11), zTX. Therefore, there exists uX such that Tu=z. Since ynz and β(yn)=β(Txn+1)1 for all nN, by (ii), β(z)=β(Tu)1. Similarly, γ(z)=γ(Tu)1. Thus, λ(Txn)γ(Tu)1 for all nN.

    Now, applying (2.1), we get

    H(1,1,φ(d(fxn,fu)))H(α(Txn),β(Tu),φ(d(fxn,fu))F(λ(Txn)γ(Tu),η(M(xn,u)))F(1,η(M(xn,u))).

    This implies that

    φ(d(fxn,fu))η(M(xn,u)), (2.12)

    where

    M(xn,u)=ψ(d(Txn,Tu),d(Txn,fxn),d(Tu,fu),12[d(Txn,fu)+d(Tu,fxn)])ψ(d(Txn,Tu),d(Txn,fxn),d(Tu,fu),12max{d(Tu,fu),[d(Txn,fu)+d(Tu,fxn)]}).

    Taking k in the inequality (2.12) and using the properties of φ,ψ,η and the above inequality, we have

    φ(d(z,fu))η(ψ(0,0,d(z,fu),12d(z,fu)))η(d(z,fu))<φ(d(z,fu)),

    which implies d(z,fu)=0, that is, z=fu. Thus we deduce

    z=fu=Tu (2.13)

    and so z is a point of coincidence for f and T. The uniqueness of the point of coincidence is a consequence of the conditions (2.1) and (iii), and so we omit the details.

    By (2.13) and using weakly compatibility of f and T, we obtain

    fz=fTu=Tfu=Tz

    and so fz=Tz. Uniqueness of the coincidence point implies z=fz=Tz. Consequently, z is a unique common fixed point of f and T.

    Corollary 2.4. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and let f and T be self-mappings on X such that fXTX. Let f be a T-cyclic (α,β,H,F)-admissible mapping and T-cyclic (λ,γ)-subadmissible mapping such that

    H(α(Tx),β(Ty),φ(d(fx,fy)))F(γ(Tx)λ(Ty),η(M(x,y)))

    for all x,yX, where φ is an altering distance function and η:[0,+)[0,+) is a nondecreasing and right-continuous function with the condition φ(t)>η(t) for all t>0 and

    M(x,y)=ψ(d(Tx,Ty),d(Tx,fx),d(Ty,fy),12[d(Tx,fy)+d(Ty,fx)])

    for ψΨ. Assume that TX is a closed subset of X and the following conditions are satisfied:

    (i) there exists x0X such that α(Tx0)1 and β(Tx0)1, and λ(Tx0)1 and γ(Tx0)1;

    (ii) if {xn} is a sequence in X such that xnx and β(xn)1 for all n, then β(x)1, and γ(xn)1 for all n, then γ(x)1;

    (iii) α(Tu)1 and β(Tv)1, and λ(Tu)1 and γ(Tv)1 whenever fu=Tu and fv=Tv.

    Then f and T have a unique point of coincidence in X. Moreover, if f and T are weakly compatible, then f and T have a unique common fixed point.

    Corollary 2.5. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and let f and T be self-mappings on X such that fXTX. Let f be a T-cyclic (α,β,H,F)-admissible mapping and T-cyclic (λ,γ)-subadmissible mapping such that

    (α(Tx)β(Ty)+l)φ(d(fx,fy))(1+l)γ(Tx)λ(Ty)η(M(x,y))

    for all x,yX, where φ is an altering distance function and η:[0,+)[0,+) is a nondecreasing and right-continuous function with the condition φ(t)>η(t) for all t>0 and

    M(x,y)=ψ(d(Tx,Ty),d(Tx,fx),d(Ty,fy),12[d(Tx,fy)+d(Ty,fx)])

    for ψΨ. Assume that TX is a closed subset of X and the following conditions are satisfied:

    (i) there exists x0X such that α(Tx0)1 and β(Tx0)1, and λ(Tx0)1 and γ(Tx0)1;

    (ii) if {xn} is a sequence in X such that xnx and β(xn)1 for all n, then β(x)1, and γ(xn)1 for all n, then γ(x)1;

    (iii) α(Tu)1 and β(Tv)1, and λ(Tu)1 and γ(Tv)1 whenever fu=Tu and fv=Tv.

    Then f and T have a unique point of coincidence in X. Moreover, if f and T are weakly compatible, then f and T have a unique common fixed point.

    Corollary 2.6. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and let f and T be self-mappings on X such that fXTX. Let f be a T-cyclic (α,β,H,F)-admissible mapping and T-cyclic (λ,γ)-subadmissible mapping such that

    (φ(d(fx,fy))+l)α(Tx)β(Ty)(γ(Tx)λ(Ty)η(M(x,y))+l

    for all x,yX, where φ is an altering distance function and η:[0,+)[0,+) is a nondecreasing and right-continuous function with the condition φ(t)>η(t) for all t>0 and

    M(x,y)=ψ(d(Tx,Ty),d(Tx,fx),d(Ty,fy),12[d(Tx,fy)+d(Ty,fx)])

    for ψΨ. Assume that TX is a closed subset of X and the following conditions are satisfied:

    (i) there exists x0X such that α(Tx0)1 and β(Tx0)1, and λ(Tx0)1 and γ(Tx0)1;

    (ii) if {xn} is a sequence in X such that xnx and β(xn)1 for all n, then β(x)1, and γ(xn)1 for all n, then γ(x)1;

    (iii) α(Tu)1 and β(Tv)1, and λ(Tu)1 and γ(Tv)1 whenever fu=Tu and fv=Tv.

    Then f and T have a unique point of coincidence in X. Moreover, if f and T are weakly compatible, then f and T have a unique common fixed point.

    Corollary 2.7. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and let f and T be self-mappings on X such that fXTX. Let f be a T -cyclic (α,β,H,F)-admissible mapping and T-cyclic (λ,γ)-subadmissible mapping such that

    H(α(Tx),β(Ty),φ(d(fx,fy)))F(γ(Tx)λ(Ty),η(M(x,y))) (2.14)

    for all x,yX, where φ is an altering distance function and η:[0,+)[0,+) is a nondecreasing and right-continuous function with the condition φ(t)>η(t) for all t>0 and

    M(x,y)=max{d(Tx,Ty),d(Tx,fx),d(Ty,fy),12[d(Tx,fy)+d(Ty,fx)]}.

    Assume that TX is a closed subset of X and the following conditions are satisfied:

    (i) there exists x0X such that α(Tx0)1 and β(Tx0)1, and λ(Tx0)1 and γ(Tx0)1;

    (ii) if {xn} is a sequence in X such that xnx and β(xn)1 for all n, then β(x)1, and γ(xn)1 for all n, then γ(x)1;

    (iii) α(Tu)1 and β(Tv)1, and λ(Tu)1 and γ(Tv)1 whenever fu=Tu and fv=Tv.

    Then f and T have a unique point of coincidence in X. Moreover, if f and T are weakly compatible, then f and T have a unique common fixed point.

    Corollary 2.8. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and let f and T be self-mappings on X such that fXTX. Let f be a T-cyclic (α,β,H,F)-admissible mapping and T-cyclic (λ,γ)-subadmissible mapping such that

    (α(Tx)β(Ty)+l)φ(d(fx,fy))(1+l)γ(Tx)λ(Ty)η(M(x,y))

    for all x,yX, where φ is an altering distance function and η:[0,+)[0,+) is a nondecreasing and right-continuous function with the condition φ(t)>η(t) for all t>0 and

    M(x,y)=max{d(Tx,Ty),d(Tx,fx),d(Ty,fy),12[d(Tx,fy)+d(Ty,fx)]}.

    Assume that TX is a closed subset of X and the following conditions are satisfied:

    (i) there exists x0X such that α(Tx0)1 and β(Tx0)1, and λ(Tx0)1 and γ(Tx0)1;

    (ii) if {xn} is a sequence in X such that xnx and β(xn)1 for all n, then β(x)1, and γ(xn)1 for all n, then γ(x)1;

    (iii) α(Tu)1 and β(Tv)1, and λ(Tu)1 and γ(Tv)1 whenever fu=Tu and fv=Tv.

    Then f and T have a unique point of coincidence in X. Moreover, if f and T are weakly compatible, then f and T have a unique common fixed point.

    Corollary 2.9. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and let f and T be self-mappings on X such that fXTX. Let f be a T-cyclic (α,β,H,F)-admissible mapping and T-cyclic (λ,γ)-subadmissible mapping such that

    (φ(d(fx,fy))+l)α(Tx)β(Ty)γ(Tx)λ(Ty)η(M(x,y))+l

    for all x,yX, where φ is an altering distance function and η:[0,+)[0,+) is a nondecreasing and right-continuous function with the condition φ(t)>η(t) for all t>0 and

    M(x,y)=max{d(Tx,Ty),d(Tx,fx),d(Ty,fy),12[d(Tx,fy)+d(Ty,fx)]}.

    Assume that TX is a closed subset of X and the following conditions are satisfied:

    (i) there exists x0X such that α(Tx0)1 and β(Tx0)1, and λ(Tx0)1 and γ(Tx0)1;

    (ii) if {xn} is a sequence in X such that xnx and β(xn)1 for all n, then β(x)1, and γ(xn)1 for all n, then γ(x)1;

    (iii) α(Tu)1 and β(Tv)1, and λ(Tu)1 and γ(Tv)1 whenever fu=Tu and fv=Tv.

    Then f and T have a unique point of coincidence in X. Moreover, if f and T are weakly compatible, then f and T have a unique common fixed point.

    Corollary 2.10. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and let f and T be self-mappings on X such that fXTX. Let f be a T-cyclic (α,β,H,F)-admissible mapping such that

    H(α(Tx),β(Ty),φ(d(fx,fy)))F(1,η(M(x,y))) (2.15)

    for all x,yX, where φ is an altering distance function and η:[0,+)[0,+) is a nondecreasing and right-continuous function with the condition φ(t)>η(t) for all t>0 and

    M(x,y)=max{d(Tx,Ty),d(Tx,fx),d(Ty,fy),12[d(Tx,fy)+d(Ty,fx)]}.

    Assume that TX is a closed subset of X and the following conditions are satisfied:

    (i) there exists x0X such that α(Tx0)1 and β(Tx0)1, and λ(Tx0)1 and γ(Tx0)1;

    (ii) if {xn} is a sequence in X such that xnx and β(xn)1 for all n, then β(x)1;

    (iii) α(Tu)1 and β(Tv)1 whenever fu=Tu and fv=Tv.

    Then f and T have a unique point of coincidence in X. Moreover, if f and T are weakly compatible, then f and T have a unique common fixed point.

    Proof. Take γ(Tx)λ(Ty)=1, for x,yX. If we take ψ(t1,t2,t3,t4)=max{t1,t2,t3,t4} in Corollary 2.7, then from (2.15), we have

    α(Tx)β(Ty)φ(d(fx,fy))γ(Tx)λ(Ty)η(M(x,y)).

    This implies that the inequality (2.14) holds. Therefore, the proof follows from Corollary 2.7.

    If we choose T=IX in Theorem 2.3, then we have the following corollary.

    Corollary 2.11. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and f:XX be a cyclic (α,β,H,F)-admissible mapping and a cyclic (λ,γ)-subadmissible mapping such that

    H(α(x),β(y),φ(d(fx,fy)))F(γ(x)λ(y),η(M(x,y)))

    for all x,yX, where the pair (F,h) is an upper class of type II, φ is an altering distance function and η:[0,+)[0,+) is a nondecreasing and right-continuous function with the condition φ(t)>η(t) for all t>0 and

    Mf(x,y)=ψ(d(x,y),d(x,fx),d(y,fy),12[d(x,fy)+d(y,fx)]).

    Assume that the following conditions are satisfied:

    (i) there exists x0X such that α(x0)1 and β(x0)1, and λ(Tx0)1 and γ(Tx0)1;

    (ii) if {xn} is a sequence in X such that xnx and β(xn)1 for all n, then β(x)1;

    (iii) α(u)1 and β(v)1 whenever fu=u and fv=v.

    Then f has a unique fixed point.

    If we take η(t)=φ(t)η1(t) in Corollary 2.5, then we have the following corollary.

    Corollary 2.12. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and f:XX be a cyclic (α,β,H,F)-admissible mapping and a cyclic (λ,γ)-subadmissible mapping such that

    H(α(x),β(y),φ(d(fx,fy)))F(γ(x)λ(y),φ(Mf(x,y))η1(Mf(x,y)))

    for all x,yX, where the pair (F,h) is an upper class of type II, φ is an altering distance function and η1:[0,+)[0,+) is such that φ(t)η1(t) is nondecreasing and η1(t) is continuous from the right with the condition φ(t)>η1(t) for all t>0.

    Assume that the following conditions are satisfied:

    (i) there exists x0X such that α(x0)1 and β(x0)1, and λ(Tx0)1 and γ(Tx0)1;

    (ii) if {xn} is a sequence in X such that xnx and β(xn)1 for all n, then β(x)1;

    (iii) α(u)1 and β(v)1 whenever fu=u and fv=v.

    Then f has a unique fixed point.

    If we take φ(t)=t in Corollary 2.12, then we have the following corollary.

    Corollary 2.13. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and f:XX be a cyclic (α,β,H,F)-admissible mapping and a cyclic (λ,γ)-subadmissible mapping such that

    H(α(x),β(y),d(fx,fy))F(γ(x)λ(y),Mf(x,y)η1(Mf(x,y)))

    for all x,yX, where the pair (F,h) is an upper class of type II and η1:[0,+)[0,+) is such that tη1(t) is nondecreasing and η1(t) is continuous from the right with the condition η1(t)>0 for all t>0.

    Assume that the following conditions are satisfied:

    (i) there exists x0X such that α(x0)1 and β(x0)1;

    (ii) if {xn} is a sequence in X such that xnx and β(xn)1 for all n, then β(x)1;

    (iii) α(u)1 and β(v)1 whenever fu=u and fv=v.

    Then f has a unique fixed point.

    Example 2.14 Let X=R be endowed with the usual metric d(x,y)=|xy| for all x,yX. Let H:R+×R+×R+R+ be defined by H(x,y,z)=z and F:R+×R+R+ by F(s,t)=st for all x,y,s,tR+ and φ(t)=t, η(t)=15t for all t0, and ψ(t1,t2,t3,t4)=max{t1,t2,t3,t4} for all t1,t2,t3,t40.

    Now, we define the self-mappings f and T on X by

    fx={x5if x[0,1],x25if xR[0,1]   and   Tx={x5if x[1,0],x6if R[1,0].

    and the mappings α,β,γ,λ:X[0,) by

    α(x)=β(x)={1if x[14,0],0otherwise.γ(x)=1 and  λ(x)=12.

    Then it is clear that fXTX.

    Let xX such that α(Tx)1 so that Tx[15,0] and hence x[1,0]. By the definitions of f and β, we have fx[15,0] and so β(fx)1.

    Similarly, one can show that if β(Tx)1 then α(fx)1. Thus, f is a T-cyclic (α,β)-admissible mapping. Moreover, the conditions α(Tx0) 1 and β(Tx0) 1 are satisfied with x0=1.

    Now, let {xn} be a sequence in X such that β(xn)1 for all nN and {xn}x as n+. Then, by the definition of β, we have xn[15,0] for all nN and so x[15,0], that is, β(x)1.

    Next, we prove that f is a T-cyclic (α,β) -contractive mapping. By the definitions of the mappings we get

    H(α(Tx),β(Ty),φ(d(fx,fy)))F(γ(Tx)λ(Ty),η(M(x,y)))

    and so

    φ(d(fx,fy)))γ(Tx)λ(Ty)η(M(x,y)).

    Let α(Tx)β(Ty)1. Then Tx,Ty[15,0] and so x,y[1,0]. Thus, we get

    φ(d(fx,fy))=(d(fx,fy))=|fxfy|=125|xy|225|xy|=25|TxTy|=
    =1215M(x,y)=γ(Tx)λ(Ty)η(M(x,y)).

    Obviously, the assumption (iii) of Corollary 2.10 is satisfied. Consequently, all the conditions of Corollary 2.10 hold and hence f and T have a unique common fixed point. Here, 0 is the common fixed point of f and T.

    Definition 2.15. Let (X,d) be a metric space and let f be a T-cyclic (α,β)-admissible mapping and a cyclic (λ,γ)-subadmissible mapping. We say that f is a T -cyclic (α,β,H,F)-rational contractive mapping if

    H(α(Tx),β(Ty),φ(d(fx,fy)))F(γ(Tx)λ(Ty),η(N(x,y))) (2.16)

    for all x,yX, where

    N(x,y)=ϕ(d(Tx,Ty),12d(Tx,fy),d(Ty,fx),[1+d(Tx,fx)]d(Ty,fy)1+d(Tx,Ty))

    for ϕΦ, φ is an altering distance function, pair (F,h) is an upper class of type II and η:[0,+)[0,+) is a nondecreasing and right-continuous function with the condition φ(t)>η(t) for all t>0.

    Theorem 2.16. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and let f and T be self-mappings on X such that fXTX. Let f be a T-cyclic (α,β,H,F)-rational contractive mapping. Assume that TX is a closed subset of X and the following conditions are satisfied:

    (i) there exists x0X such that α(Tx0)1 and β(Tx0)1, and λ(Tx0)1 and γ(Tx0)1;

    (ii) if {xn} is a sequence in X such that xnx and β(xn)1 for all n, then β(x)1, and γ(xn)1 for all n, then γ(x)1;

    (iii) α(Tu)1 and β(Tv)1, and λ(Tu)1 and γ(Tv)1whenever fu=Tu and fv=Tv.

    Then f and T have a unique point of coincidence in X. Moreover, if f and T are weakly compatible, then f and T have a unique common fixed point.

    Proof. Similar to the proof of Theorem 2.3, we define sequences {xn} and {yn} in X by yn=fxn=Txn+1 and note that α(Txn),β(Txn+1)1 and also λ(Txn)γ(Txn+1)1 for all nN{0}. Also, we assume that ynyn1 for all nN. Then by (2.16), we have

    H(1,1,φ(d(yn,yn+1)))=H(1,1,φ(d(fxn,fxn+1)))H(α(Txn),β(Txn+1),φ(d(fxn,fxn+1)))F(λ(Txn)γ(Txn+1),η(N(xn,xn+1)))F(1,η(N(xn,xn+1))).

    This implies that

    φ(d(yn,yn+1))η(N(xn,xn+1))<φ(N(xn,xn+1)). (2.17)

    Since φ is nondecreasing, we get

    d(yn,yn+1)<N(xn,xn+1), (2.18)

    where

    N(xn,xn+1)=ϕ(d(Txn,Txn+1),12d(Txn,fxn+1),d(Txn+1,fxn),[1+d(Txn,fxn)]d(Txn+1,fxn+1)1+d(Txn,Txn+1))=ϕ(d(yn1,yn),12d(yn1,yn+1),d(yn,yn),[1+d(yn1,yn)]d(yn,yn+1)1+d(yn1,yn))ϕ(d(yn1,yn),12[d(yn1,yn)+d(yn,yn+1)],0,d(yn,yn+1)). (2.19)

    Thus, from (2.18), we deduce

    d(yn,yn+1)<N(xn,xn+1)ϕ(d(yn1,yn),12[d(yn1,yn)+d(yn,yn+1)],0,d(yn,yn+1)).

    If d(yn1,yn)d(yn,yn+1) for some nN, then

    d(yn,yn+1)<ϕ(d(yn1,yn),12[d(yn1,yn)+d(yn,yn+1)],0,d(yn,yn+1))ϕ(d(yn,yn+1),d(yn,yn+1),d(yn,yn+1),d(yn,yn+1))d(yn,yn+1),

    which is a contradiction and hence d(yn,yn+1)<d(yn1,yn) for all nN. Therefore, the sequence {d(yn,yn+1)} is decreasing and bounded from below. Thus, there exists δ0 such that limn+d(yn,yn+1)=δ. Also, from (2.17), (2.19) and using the properties of φ and η, we obtain

    φ(d(yn,yn+1))η(N(xn,xn+1))η(ϕ(d(yn1,yn),12[d(yn1,yn)+d(yn,yn+1)],0,d(yn,yn+1)))η(ϕ(d(yn1,yn),d(yn1,yn),d(yn1,yn),d(yn1,yn)))η(d(yn1,yn))<φ(d(yn1,yn)). (2.20)

    Consider the properties of φ and η. Letting n+ in (2.20), we get

    φ(δ)=limn+φ(d(yn,yn+1))limn+η(d(yn1,yn))=η(δ)<φ(δ),

    which implies δ=0 and so

    limn+d(yn,yn+1)=0. (2.21)

    Now, we want to show that {yn} is a Cauchy sequence. Suppose, to the contrary, that {yn} is not a Cauchy sequence. Then, by Lemma 1.14, there exist an ε>0 and two subsequences {ymk} and {ynk} of {yn} with mk>nk>k such that d(ym(k),yn(k))ε, d(ym(k)1,yn(k))<ε and

    limk+d(ynk,ymk)=limk+d(ynk1,ymk)=limk+d(ymk1,ynk)=limk+d(ymk1,ynk1)=ε. (2.22)

    From (2.16), we get

    H(1,1,φ(d(ynk,ymk)))=H(1,1,φ(d(fxnk,fxmk)))H(α(Txnk),β(Txmk),φ(d(fxnk,fxmk))F(λ(Txnk)γ(Txmk),η(N(xnk,xmk)))F(1,η(N(xnk,xmk))).

    This implies

    φ(d(ynk,ymk))η(N(xnk,xmk))<φ(N(xnk,xmk)), (2.23)

    where

    N(xnk,xmk)=ϕ(d(Txnk,Txmk),12d(Txnk,fxmk),d(Txmk,fxnk),[1+d(Txnk,fxnk)]d(Txmk,fxmk)1+d(Txnk,Txmk))=ϕ(d(ynk1,ymk1),12d(ynk1,ymk),d(ymk1,ynk),[1+d(ynk1,ynk)]d(ymk1,ymk)1+d(ynk1,ymk1))max{ε,N(xnk,xmk)}=ϕ(max{ε,d(ynk1,ymk1)},12max{ε,d(ynk1,ymk)},max{ε,d(ymk1,ynk)},[1+d(ynk1,ynk)]d(ymk1,ymk)1+d(ynk1,ymk1)).

    Therefore, limk+max{ε,N(xnk,xmk)}=ϕ(ε,ε2,ε,0)ε.

    Now, from the properties of φ and η and using (2.22) and the previous inequality, as k+ in (2.23), we have

    φ(ε)=limk+φ(d(ymk,ynk))limk+η(max{ε,N(xnk,xmk)})η(ε)<φ(ε),

    which implies that ε=0, a contradiction with ε>0. Thus, {yn} is a Cauchy sequence in X. From the completeness of (X,d), there exists wX such that

    limn+yn=w (2.24)

    and so by (2.24), we obtain

    fxnw   and   Txn+1w. (2.25)

    Since TX is closed, by (2.25), wTX. Therefore, there exists vX such that Tv=w. Since ynw and β(yn)=β(Txn+1)1 for all nN, by (ii), β(w)=β(Tv)1. Similarly, γ(z)=γ(Tu)1. Thus, λ(Txn)γ(Tv)1 for all nN.

    Now, applying (2.16), we get

    H(1,1,φ(d(fxn,fv)))H(α(Txn),β(Tv),φ(d(fxn,fv))F(λ(Txn)γ(Tv),η(N(xn,v)))F(1,η(N(xn,v))),

    which implies that

    φ(d(fxn,fv))η(N(xn,v)), (2.26)

    where

    N(xn,v)ϕ(d(Txn,Tv),12max{d(v,fv),d(Txn,fv)},d(Tv,fxn),d(Tv,fv)max{[1+d(Txn,fxn)]1+d(Txn,Tv),1}).

    Taking k+ in the inequality (2.26), using the properties of φ, η and the previous inequality, we have

    φ(d(w,fv))η(ϕ(0,12d(w,fv),0,d(w,fv)))η(d(w,fv))<φ(d(w,fv)),

    which implies d(w,fv)=0, that is, w=fv. Thus, we deduce

    w=fv=Tv, (2.27)

    and so w is a point of coincidence for f and T. The uniqueness of the point of coincidence is a consequence of the conditions (2.16) and (iii), and so we omit the details.

    By (2.27) and using weakly compatibility of f and T, we obtain

    fw=fTv=Tfv=Tw.

    The uniqueness of the point of coincidence implies w=fw=Tw. Consequently, w is the unique common fixed point of f and T.

    Corollary 2.17. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and let f and T be self-mappings on X such that fXTX. Let f be a T-cyclic (α,β,H,F)-admissible mapping and T-cyclic (λ,γ)-subadmissible mapping such that

    H(α(Tx),β(Ty),φ(d(fx,fy)))F(γ(Tx)λ(Ty),η(N(x,y)))

    for all x,yX, where φ is an altering distance function and η:[0,+)[0,+) is a nondecreasing and right-continuous function with the condition φ(t)>η(t) for all t>0 and

    N(x,y)=ϕ(d(Tx,Ty),12d(Tx,fy),d(Ty,fx),[1+d(Tx,fx)]d(Ty,fy)1+d(Tx,Ty))

    for ϕΦ. Assume that TX is a closed subset of X and the following conditions are satisfied:

    (i) there exists x0X such that α(Tx0)1 and β(Tx0)1, and λ(Tx0)1 and γ(Tx0)1;

    (ii) if {xn} is a sequence in X such that {xn}x and β(xn)1 for all n, then β(x)1, and γ(xn)1 for all n, then γ(x)1;

    (iii) α(Tu)1 and β(Tv)1, and λ(Tu)1 and γ(Tv)1 whenever fu=Tu and fv=Tv.

    Then f and T have a unique point of coincidence in X. Moreover, if f and T are weakly compatible, then f and T have a unique common fixed point.

    Corollary 2.18. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and let f and T be self-mappings on X such that fXTX. Let f be a T-cyclic (α,β,H,F)-admissible mapping and T-cyclic (λ,γ)-subadmissible mapping such that

    (α(Tx)β(Ty)+l)φ(d(fx,fy))(1+l)γ(Tx)λ(Ty)η(N(x,y))

    for all x,yX, where φ is an altering distance function and η:[0,+)[0,+) is a nondecreasing and right-continuous function with the condition φ(t)>η(t) for all t>0 and

    N(x,y)=ϕ(d(Tx,Ty),12d(Tx,fy),d(Ty,fx),[1+d(Tx,fx)]d(Ty,fy)1+d(Tx,Ty))

    for ϕΦ. Assume that TX is a closed subset of X and the following conditions are satisfied:

    (i) there exists x0X such that α(Tx0)1 and β(Tx0)1, and λ(Tx0)1 and γ(Tx0)1;

    (ii) if {xn} is a sequence in X such that {xn}x and β(xn)1 for all n, then β(x)1, and γ(xn)1 for all n, then γ(x)1;

    (iii) α(Tu)1 and β(Tv)1, and λ(Tu)1 and γ(Tv)1 whenever fu=Tu and fv=Tv.

    Then f and T have a unique point of coincidence in X. Moreover, if f and T are weakly compatible, then f and T have a unique common fixed point.

    Corollary 2.19. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and let f and T be self-mappings on X such that fXTX. Let f be a T-cyclic (α,β,H,F)-admissible mapping and T-cyclic (λ,γ)-subadmissible mapping such that

    (φ(d(fx,fy))+l)α(Tx)β(Ty)(γ(Tx)λ(Ty)η(N(x,y))+l

    for all x,yX, where φ is an altering distance function and η:[0,+)[0,+) is a nondecreasing and right-continuous function with the condition φ(t)>η(t) for all t>0 and

    N(x,y)=ϕ(d(Tx,Ty),12d(Tx,fy),d(Ty,fx),[1+d(Tx,fx)]d(Ty,fy)1+d(Tx,Ty))

    for ϕΦ. Assume that TX is a closed subset of X and the following conditions are satisfied:

    (i) there exists x0X such that α(Tx0)1 and β(Tx0)1, and λ(Tx0)1 and γ(Tx0)1;

    (ii) if {xn} is a sequence in X such that {xn}x and β(xn)1 for all n, then β(x)1, and γ(xn)1 for all n, then γ(x)1;

    (iii) α(Tu)1 and β(Tv)1, and λ(Tu)1 and γ(Tv)1 whenever fu=Tu and fv=Tv.

    Then f and T have a unique point of coincidence in X. Moreover, if f and T are weakly compatible, then f and T have a unique common fixed point.

    Corollary 2.20. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and let f and T be self-mappings on X such that fXTX. Let f be a T -cyclic (α,β,H,F)-admissible mapping and T-cyclic (λ,γ)-subadmissible mapping such that

    H(α(Tx),β(Ty),φ(d(fx,fy)))F(γ(Tx),λ(Ty),η(N(x,y)))

    for all x,yX, where φ is an altering distance function and η:[0,+)[0,+) is a nondecreasing and right-continuous function with the condition φ(t)>η(t) for all t>0 and

    N(x,y)=max{d(Tx,Ty),12d(Tx,fy),d(Ty,fx),[1+d(Tx,fx)]d(Ty,fy)1+d(Tx,Ty)}.

    Assume that TX is a closed subset of X and the following conditions are satisfied:

    (i) there exists x0X such that α(Tx0)1 and β(Tx0)1, and λ(Tx0)1 and γ(Tx0)1;

    (ii) if {xn} is a sequence in X such that {xn}x and β(xn)1 for all n, then β(x)1, and γ(xn)1 for all n, then γ(x)1;

    (iii) α(Tu)1 and β(Tv)1, and λ(Tu)1 and γ(Tv)1 whenever fu=Tu and fv=Tv.

    Then f and T have a unique point of coincidence in X. Moreover, if f and T are weakly compatible, then f and T have a unique common fixed point.

    Corollary 2.21. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and let f and T be self-mappings on X such that fXTX. Let f be a T-cyclic (α,β,H,F)-admissible mapping and T-cyclic (λ,γ)-subadmissible mapping such that

    (α(Tx)β(Ty)+l)φ(d(fx,fy))(1+l)γ(Tx)λ(Ty)η(N(x,y))

    for all x,yX, where φ is an altering distance function and η:[0,+)[0,+) is a nondecreasing and right-continuous function with the condition φ(t)>η(t) for all t>0 and

    N(x,y)=max{d(Tx,Ty),12d(Tx,fy),d(Ty,fx),[1+d(Tx,fx)]d(Ty,fy)1+d(Tx,Ty)}.

    Assume that TX is a closed subset of X and the following conditions are satisfied:

    (i) there exists x0X such that α(Tx0)1 and β(Tx0)1, and λ(Tx0)1 and γ(Tx0)1;

    (ii) if {xn} is a sequence in X such that {xn}x and β(xn)1 for all n, then β(x)1, and γ(xn)1 for all n, then γ(x)1;

    (iii) α(Tu)1 and β(Tv)1, and λ(Tu)1 and γ(Tv)1 whenever fu=Tu and fv=Tv.

    Then f and T have a unique point of coincidence in X. Moreover, if f and T are weakly compatible, then f and T have a unique common fixed point.

    Corollary 2.22. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and let f and T be self-mappings on X such that fXTX. Let f be a T-cyclic (α,β,H,F)-admissible mapping and T-cyclic (λ,γ)-subadmissible mapping such that

    (φ(d(fx,fy))+l)α(Tx)β(Ty)γ(Tx)λ(Ty)η(N(x,y))+l

    for all x,yX, where φ is an altering distance function and η:[0,+)[0,+) is a nondecreasing and right-continuous function with the condition φ(t)>η(t) for all t>0 and

    N(x,y)=max{d(Tx,Ty),12d(Tx,fy),d(Ty,fx),[1+d(Tx,fx)]d(Ty,fy)1+d(Tx,Ty)}.

    Assume that TX is a closed subset of X and the following conditions are satisfied:

    (i) there exists x0X such that α(Tx0)1 and β(Tx0)1, and λ(Tx0)1 and γ(Tx0)1;

    (ii) if {xn} is a sequence in X such that {xn}x and β(xn)1 for all n, then β(x)1, and γ(xn)1 for all n, then γ(x)1;

    (iii) α(Tu)1 and β(Tv)1, and λ(Tu)1 and γ(Tv)1 whenever fu=Tu and fv=Tv.

    Then f and T have a unique point of coincidence in X. Moreover, if f and T are weakly compatible, then f and T have a unique common fixed point.

    If we take ψ(t1,t2,t3,t4)=max{t1,t2,t3,t4} and γ(Tx)λ(Ty)=1 for all x,yX, then we have the following result.

    Corollary 2.23. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and let f and T be self-mappings on X such that fXTX. Let f be a T-cyclic (α,β,H,F)-admissible mapping such that

    H(α(Tx),β(Ty),φ(d(fx,fy)))F(1,η(N(x,y)))

    for all x,yX, where φ is an altering distance function and η:[0,+)[0,+) is a nondecreasing and right-continuous function with the condition φ(t)>η(t) for all t>0 and

    N(x,y)=max{d(Tx,Ty),12d(Tx,fy),d(Ty,fx),[1+d(Tx,fx)]d(Ty,fy)1+d(Tx,Ty)}.

    Assume that TX is a closed subset of X and the following conditions are satisfied:

    (i) there exists x0X such that α(Tx0)1 and β(Tx0)1, and λ(Tx0)1 and γ(Tx0)1;

    (ii) if {xn} is a sequence in X such that {xn}x and β(xn)1 for all n, then β(x)1;

    (iii) α(Tu)1 and β(Tv)1 whenever fu=Tu and fv=Tv.

    Then f and T have a unique point of coincidence in X. Moreover, if f and T are weakly compatible, then f and T have a unique common fixed point.

    If we choose T=IX in Theorem 2.3, then we have the following corollary.

    Corollary 2.24. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and f:XX be a cyclic (α,β,H,F)-admissible mapping and a cyclic (λ,γ)-subadmissible mapping such that

    H(α(x),β(y),φ(d(fx,fy)))F(γ(x)λ(y),η(Nf(x,y)))

    for all x,yX, where pair (F,h) is an upper class of type II, φ is an altering distance function and η:[0,+)[0,+) is a nondecreasing and right-continuous function with the condition φ(t)>η(t) for all t>0 and

    Nf(x,y)=ϕ(d(x,y),12d(x,fy),d(y,fx),[1+d(x,fx)]d(y,fy)1+d(x,y)).

    Assume that the following conditions are satisfied:

    (i) there exists x0X such that α(x0)1 and β(x0)1, and λ(Tx0)1 and γ(Tx0)1;

    (ii) if {xn} is a sequence in X such that {xn}x and β(xn)1 for all n, then β(x)1;

    (iii) α(u)1 and β(v)1 whenever fu=u and fv=v.

    Then f has a unique fixed point.

    If we take η(t)=φ(t)η1(t) in Corollary 2.5, then we have the following corollary.

    Corollary 2.25. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and f:XX be a cyclic (α,β)-admissible mapping and a cyclic (λ,γ)-subadmissible mapping such that

    H(α(x),β(y),φ(d(fx,fy)))F(γ(x)λ(y),φ(Nf(x,y))η1(Nf(x,y)))

    for all x,yX, where pair (F,h) is an upper class of type II, φ is an altering distance function and η1:[0,+)[0,+) is such that φ(t)η1(t) is nondecreasing and η1(t) is continuous from the right with the condition φ(t)>η1(t) for all t>0.

    Assume that the following conditions are satisfied:

    (i) there exists x0X such that α(x0)1 and β(x0)1, and λ(Tx0)1 and γ(Tx0)1;

    (ii) if {xn} is a sequence in X such that {xn}x and β(xn)1 for all n, then β(x)1;

    (iii) α(u)1 and β(v)1 whenever fu=u and fv=v.

    Then f has a unique fixed point.

    If we take φ(t)=t in Corollary 2.6, then we have the following corollary.

    Corollary 2.26. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and f:XX be a cyclic (α,β,H,F)-admissible mapping and a cyclic (λ,γ)-subadmissible mapping such that

    H(α(x),β(y),d(fx,fy))F(γ(x)λ(y),Nf(x,y)η1(Nf(x,y)))

    for all x,yX, where pair (F,h) is an upper class of type II and η1:[0,+)[0,+) is such that tη1(t) is nondecreasing and η1(t) is continuous from the right with the condition η1(t)>0 for all t>0.

    Assume that the following conditions are satisfied:

    (i) there exists x0X such that α(x0)1 and β(x0)1;

    (ii) if {xn} is a sequence in X such that {xn}x and β(xn)1 for all n, then β(x)1;

    (iii) α(u)1 and β(v)1 whenever fu=u and fv=v.

    Then f has a unique fixed point.

    In this paper, we have introduced the notions of T-cyclic (α,β,H,F)-contractive mappings using a pair (F,h)-upper class functions type in order to obtain new common fixed point results in the settings of metric spaces. The presented results have generalized and extended existing results in the literature.

    All the authors of this paper contributed equally. They have read and approved the final version of the paper.

    The authors of this paper declare that they have no conflict of interest.



    [1] R. Kitchin, Big data, new epistemologies and paradigm shift, Big Data Soc., 1 (2014), 1–12.
    [2] H. Guo, L. Wang, C. Fang, D. Liang, Scientific big data and digital earth, Chinese Sci. Bull., 59 (2014), 5066–5073. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11434-014-0645-3 doi: 10.1007/s11434-014-0645-3
    [3] C. L. Borgman, The conundrum of sharing research data, New Technol. Library Inf. Ser., 5 (2013), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.11925/infotech.1003-3513.2013.05.01 doi: 10.11925/infotech.1003-3513.2013.05.01
    [4] Z. Yang, Y. Shi, Y. Li, Analysis of intellectual property cooperation behavior and its simulation under two types of scenarios using evolutionary game theory, Comput. Ind. Eng., 125 (2018), 739–750. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2018.02.040 doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2018.02.040
    [5] J. Zuo, Y. Chen, The analysis on sharing mode of scientific data in the environment of big data, J. Intell., 32 (2013), 151–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50627-2 doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-50627-2
    [6] D. S. Sayogo, T. A. Pardo, Exploring the determinants of scientific data sharing: understanding the motivation to publish research data, Gov. Inform. Q., 30 (2013), 519–531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2012.06.011 doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2012.06.011
    [7] C. Li, L. Zhang, Scientific big data opening and sharing: models and mechanisms, Inf. Stud.: Theory Pract., 40 (2017), 45–51.
    [8] D. L. Nazareth, J. Choi, A system dynamics model for information security management, Inf. Manage., 52 (2015), 123–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2014.10.009 doi: 10.1016/j.im.2014.10.009
    [9] Y. Du, R. Zhang, M. Li, Research on a security mechanism for cloud computing based on virtualization, Telecommun. Syst., 53 (2013), 19–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11235-013-9672-7 doi: 10.1007/s11235-013-9672-7
    [10] Y. Kim, M. Adler, Social scientists' data sharing behaviors: investigating the roles of individual motivations, institutional pressures, and data repositories, Int. J. Inf. Manag., 35 (2015), 408–418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.04.007 doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.04.007
    [11] M. Janssen, Y. Charalabidis, A. Zuiderwijk, Benefits, adoption barriers and myths of open data and open government, Inf. Syst. Manag., 29 (2012), 258–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/10580530.2012.716740 doi: 10.1080/10580530.2012.716740
    [12] B. V. Loenen, H. J. Onsrud, Geographic data for academic research: assessing access policies, Cartogr. Geogr. Inf. Sci., 31 (2004), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1559/152304004773112730 doi: 10.1559/152304004773112730
    [13] C. Peng, X. Song, H. Jiang, Q. Zhu, H. Chen, J. M. Chen, et al., Towards a paradigm for open and free sharing of scientific data on global change science in China, Ecosyst. Health Sustain., 2 (2016), 23–45. https://doi.org/10.1002/ehs2.1225 doi: 10.1002/ehs2.1225
    [14] X. Gao, W. Zhong, S. Mei, Stochastic evolutionary game dynamics and their selection mechanisms, Comput. Econ., 41 (2013), 233–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10614-012-9320-4 doi: 10.1007/s10614-012-9320-4
    [15] S. Dai, G. Nie, N. Xiao, The study of the two-way principal-agent model based on asymmetric information, Wireless Pers. Commun., 102 (2018), 629–639. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-017-5071-9 doi: 10.1007/s11277-017-5071-9
    [16] Y. Wei, G. Liu, Analysis of research data management and sharing policy in foreign universities based on data lifecycle, J. Intell., 5 (2017), 153–158.
    [17] D. Hingu, K. S. M. Rao, A. J. Shaiju, Evolutionary stability of polymorphic population states in continuous games, Dyn. Games Appl., 8 (2016), 141–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13235-016-0207-1 doi: 10.1007/s13235-016-0207-1
    [18] A. Erwin, P. Alex, On the stability of evolutionary dynamics in games with incomplete information, Math. Soc. Sci., 58 (2009), 310–321.
    [19] Y. Xu, B. Hu, R. Qian, Analysis on stability of strategic alliances based on stochastic evolutionary game including simulations, Syst. Eng.-Theory Pract., 31 (2011), 920–926.
    [20] J. M. Huang, H. W. Zhang, A method for selecting defense strategies based on stochastic evolutionary game model, Acta Electron. Sinica, 46 (2018), 2222–2228. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.0372-2112.2018.09.025 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0372-2112.2018.09.025
    [21] S. Hu, C. Huang, Stochastic differential equation, Beijing: Science Press, 5 (2008), 66–70.
    [22] H. Sun, X. Wang, Y. Xue, Stochastic evolutionary game model for unexpected incidents involving mass participation based on different scenarios, Operat. Res. Manage. Sci., 25 (2016), 23–29.
    [23] B. Holmastrom, P. Milgrom, Aggregation and linearity in the provision of intertemporal incentives, Econometrica, 55 (1987), 303–328.
    [24] W. Zhang, Game theory and information economics, Shanghai: People's Publishing House, 5 (2012), 242–262.
    [25] Y. Ren, F. Zhu, P. K. Sharma, T. Wang, J. Wang, O. Alifarraj, et al., Data query mechanism based on hash computing power of blockchain in internet of things, Sensors, 20 (2020), 207–229. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20010207 doi: 10.3390/s20010207
    [26] Y. Ren, F. Zhu, J. Wang, P. K. Sharma, U. Ghosh, Novel vote scheme for decision-making feedback based on blockchain in internet of vehicles, IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., 23 (2022), 1639–1648. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2021.3100103 doi: 10.1109/TITS.2021.3100103
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2023 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(4092) PDF downloads(84) Cited by(2)

Figures and Tables

Figures(5)  /  Tables(3)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog