Research article

Convex contractions on extended b-metric spaces

  • Received: 08 February 2024 Revised: 02 April 2024 Accepted: 09 April 2024 Published: 29 May 2024
  • MSC : 47H09, 47H10, 54H25

  • This research investigated different types of convex contractions in the setting of extended b-metric spaces from the point of view of the existence and uniqueness of their fixed points. The assumptions imposed on involved mappings refer to convexity of order 2, two-sided convexity or Ćirić-type convexity, which also fulfill a continuity type condition. An example was provided to emphasize the usability of the results.

    Citation: Dan Ricinschi. Convex contractions on extended b-metric spaces[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(7): 18163-18185. doi: 10.3934/math.2024887

    Related Papers:

    [1] Yan Han, Shaoyuan Xu, Jin Chen, Huijuan Yang . Fixed point theorems for $ b $-generalized contractive mappings with weak continuity conditions. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 15024-15039. doi: 10.3934/math.2024728
    [2] Naeem Saleem, Salman Furqan, Mujahid Abbas, Fahd Jarad . Extended rectangular fuzzy $ b $-metric space with application. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(9): 16208-16230. doi: 10.3934/math.2022885
    [3] Wasfi Shatanawi, Taqi A. M. Shatnawi . Some fixed point results based on contractions of new types for extended $ b $-metric spaces. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(5): 10929-10946. doi: 10.3934/math.2023554
    [4] Jamshaid Ahmad, Abdullah Eqal Al-Mazrooei, Hassen Aydi, Manuel De La Sen . Rational contractions on complex-valued extended $ b $-metric spaces and an application. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(2): 3338-3352. doi: 10.3934/math.2023172
    [5] Shaoyuan Xu, Yan Han, Suzana Aleksić, Stojan Radenović . Fixed point results for nonlinear contractions of Perov type in abstract metric spaces with applications. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(8): 14895-14921. doi: 10.3934/math.2022817
    [6] Afrah A. N. Abdou, Maryam F. S. Alasmari . Fixed point theorems for generalized $ \alpha $-$ \psi $-contractive mappings in extended $ b $-metric spaces with applications. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(6): 5465-5478. doi: 10.3934/math.2021323
    [7] Afrah Ahmad Noman Abdou . Chatterjea type theorems for complex valued extended $ b $-metric spaces with applications. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(8): 19142-19160. doi: 10.3934/math.2023977
    [8] Basit Ali, Hafiza Aqsa Butt, Manuel De la Sen . Existence of fixed points of generalized set-valued $ F $-contractions of $ b $-metric spaces. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(10): 17967-17988. doi: 10.3934/math.2022990
    [9] Muhammad Suhail Aslam, Mohammad Showkat Rahim Chowdhury, Liliana Guran, Manar A. Alqudah, Thabet Abdeljawad . Fixed point theory in complex valued controlled metric spaces with an application. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(7): 11879-11904. doi: 10.3934/math.2022663
    [10] Abdullah Shoaib, Poom Kumam, Shaif Saleh Alshoraify, Muhammad Arshad . Fixed point results in double controlled quasi metric type spaces. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(2): 1851-1864. doi: 10.3934/math.2021112
  • This research investigated different types of convex contractions in the setting of extended b-metric spaces from the point of view of the existence and uniqueness of their fixed points. The assumptions imposed on involved mappings refer to convexity of order 2, two-sided convexity or Ćirić-type convexity, which also fulfill a continuity type condition. An example was provided to emphasize the usability of the results.



    Fixed point theory is one of the most important and significant research fields in nonlinear and functional analysis since it provides some of the most useful tools to solve many problems in applied sciences and engineering, such as dynamical systems, game theory, optimization theory, the existence of solutions to integrals, and differential and matrix equations. One of the most useful results in fixed point theory is the Banach-Picard-Caccioppoli contraction principle [1,2]. It states that a mapping T on a complete metric space X onto itself has a unique fixed point provided that T is a contractive mapping, i.e., there exists a constant k[0,1) such that

    d(Tx,Ty)kd(x,y)

    for all x, yX. Due to its importance, the result has since been studied and generalized.

    Broadly, there are two manners in the generalization of fixed point theorems. One is by weakening the conditions of the contraction and the other way is by generalizing the underlying space (which is usually done by weakening the triangle inequality).

    In 1962, Rakotch [3] generalized the contraction condition by defining a family of functions such that the contraction principle was still valid when the constant k was replaced by a function with suitable properties. After that, in 1969, Boyd and Wong [4] improved the result of Rakotch by introducing in the right hand member of the contraction an upper semicontinuous function φ() such that φ(t)<t, for any t>0 and, in the same year, Meir and Keeler [5] generalized the latter result by introducing a condition of weakly uniformly strict contraction. Inspired by the contraction principle, in 1968, the concept of the Kannan contraction [6] was introduced. Note that this type of contraction may not always be continuous, thus the independence of the Kannan fixed point theorem of the contraction principle. Also, note that a Kannan contraction characterizes the completeness of a metric space, as was shown in [7]. In 1972, the Chatterjea's fixed point theorem [8] was stated, while in 1971, Reich [9] generalized Banach's fixed point theorem and Kannan's fixed point theorem by putting together the terms from the right-hand side of both contractions. In the same manner, Hardy and Rogers [10] generalized, in 1973, the results of Reich and Chatterjea and one year later, in 1974, Ćirić [11] improved the Hardy-Rogers contraction. Also, one can consider different types of rational contractions, for example, in [12], researchers used an ICS function and some generalized weak contractions of Boyd-Wong-type to generalize the results from [13]. For a more perspicuous and comprehensive view of the contractive mappings that admit a unique fixed point, we address the reader to Rhoades [14] and the references therein. In 1982, Istrăţescu [15] inaugurated the class of convex contractive mappings by introducing several convexity conditions, thus bringing out new generalizations for the contraction principle. The convex contractions, too, were later subjected to generalization. For example, in [16], Miandaragh et al. defined the notions of generalized convex contractions and generalized convex contractions of order 2 and proved fixed point theorems regarding these type of mappings.

    In recent years, several generalizations of classical metric spaces have been given. For instance, Bakhtin [17] and Czerwik [18] introduced the concept of b-metric spaces. With the emergence of this space, a myriad of novel results has concurrently surfaced. For example, in [19], Ali et al. defined on b-metric spaces the notions of Hardy-Rogers-type (F-α)-contractions and Hardy-Rogers-type (F-α)-contractions and then established fixed point theorems for these contractions. In [20], Kamran et al. introduced on the same ambiental space the concepts of Feng-Liu-type (F-α)-contractions and Feng-Liu-type (F-α)-contractions and proved fixed point results regarding these contractions. In [21], Shatanawi et al. used a contraction condition by means of a comparison function to prove a result regarding a unique common fixed point of two mappings.

    In 2014, Kirk and Shahzad [22] defined the notion of strong b-metric spaces. In 2000, Branciari [23] defined the framework of generalized metric spaces (also known as rectangular metric spaces) and generalized metric spaces of order ν, and in the same year, Hitzler and Seda [24] introduced the notion of dislocated metric spaces. In 2014, Khojasteh et al. [25] defined the concept of θ-metric spaces. For related further results, including the metrization of such spaces, see [26]. In 2015 and 2018, Jleli and Samet introduced the generalized metric spaces [27] and F-metric spaces [28], respectively. In 2017, Kamran et al. [29] defined the concept of extended b-metric spaces, in this way generalizing the b-metric spaces. For fixed point results in the setting of this space, the reader can consult, for example, some of the following articles and references therein. In [30], Samreen et al. came up with a generalization of some of the main results from [31,32,33]. In [34], Alqahtani et al. proved fixed point theorems for two mappings that form an (α,β)-orbital-cyclic-admissible pair and obtained corollaries for (α,β)-orbital-cyclic-admissible mappings and α-orbital-admissible mappings. In [35], Abdeljawad et al. defined the concepts of Θe-contractions and Hardy-Rogers-type Θ-contractions and proved fixed point theorems for each one of them in the setting of extended b-metric spaces. Also, in [36], Shatanawi et al. introduced the notion of αψ-contractive mappings and proved a fixed point result for such functions. In [37], Alqahtani et al. proved some fixed point theorems for an orbitally continuous self-map T on a T-orbitally complete extended b-metric space. In [38], Mitrović et al. proved the fixed point theorems of Reich [9] and Nadler [39] in the setting of extended b-metric spaces. Huang et al. [40] and Alqahtani et al. [41] determined fixed point results for some rational type contractions and in [42], Kiran et al. generalized the Hardy-Rogers fixed point theorem [10] in the setting of extended b-metric spaces and also proved some theorems for multi-valued mappings.

    This paper is organized as follows: In Section 2, preliminary concepts and notions are recalled, such as b-metric spaces, extended b-metric spaces, and the convex contractive mappings used in the main results. Also, a new type of convex contractive mapping is presented—the Ćirić-convex contraction. In Section 3, some fixed point theorems are formulated and proven in the setting of extended b-metric spaces for the contractive mappings defined in the previous section.

    First, recall the definition of a b-metric space.

    Definition 2.1. [17,18] Let X be a nonempty set and s1 be a given real number. A function d:X×X[0,) is called a b-metric provided that, for all x, y, zX,

    d(x,y)=0 if and only if x=y,

    d(x,y)=d(y,x),

    d(x,z)s[d(x,y)+d(y,z)].

    A pair (X,d) is called a b-metric space of constant s.

    Second, recall the definition of an extended b-metric space.

    Definition 2.2. [29] Let X be a nonempty set and θ: X×X[1,). A function dθ: X×X[0,) is called an extended b-metric if for all x, y, zX, it satisfies:

    dθ(x,y)=0 if and only if x=y,

    dθ(x,y)=dθ(y,x),

    dθ(x,z)θ(x,z)[dθ(x,y)+dθ(y,z)].

    A pair (X,dθ) is called an extended b-metric space.

    It is obvious that a b-metric space is a particular case of an extended b-metric space by taking θ(x,y)=s. The following example shows that the class of extended b-metric spaces is larger than the class of b-metric spaces, in the sense of inclusion.

    Example 2.1. [43] Let X=[1,1] and θ: X×X[1,) be defined by

    θ(x,y)=1+x2+y2x2+y2,

    if x2+y2>0 and θ(0,0)=1. Define dθ: X×X[0,),

    dθ(x,y)={0,  if and only if x=y,1x2, if xy=0andx2+y20,1x2y2, if 0xy0.

    Thus, dθ defines an extended b-metric on X, therefore (X,dθ) is an extended b-metric space. Note that (X,dθ) is not a b-metric space. To prove this, consider x, y[1,1]{0} such that xy. We have that

    dθ(x,y)dθ(x,0)+dθ(0,y)=1x2y21x2+1y2=1x2+y2.

    Note that

    sup{1x2+y2:x,y[1,1]{0},xy}=+.

    Therefore, it is impossible to find s1 such that

    dθ(x,y)s[dθ(x,0)+dθ(0,y)].

    Onwards, we recollect the concepts of convergence, Cauchy sequence, and completeness in an extended b-metric space.

    Definition 2.3. [29] Let (X,dθ) be an extended b-metric space. Then a sequence {xn}n in X is said to be:

    ● Convergent if and only if there exists xX such that dθ(xn,x)0 as n, and we write limnxn=x,

    ● Cauchy if and only if dθ(xn,xm)0 as n, m.

    The extended b-metric space (X,dθ) is complete if every Cauchy sequence converges in X. We note that the extended b-metric dθ is not a continuous function in general.

    A useful result in proving fixed point theorems in the setting of extended b-metric spaces is presented here.

    Lemma 2.1. [30] Let (X,dθ) be an extended b-metric space. Then every convergent sequence has a unique limit.

    Proof. Consider a convergent sequence {xn}n of X and presume there exist u, vX such that

    limnxn=uandlimnxn=v.

    Then,

    dθ(u,v)θ(u,v)[dθ(u,xn)+dθ(xn,v)].

    As θ(,) is finite, by taking the limit when n in the previous inequality, we obtain that dθ(u,v)=0, thus u=v. Therefore, the limit of {xn}n is unique.

    Remark 2.1. If we define θ(,) as θ: X×X[1,], then the uniqueness of a convergent sequence would not yield from Definition 2.2.

    Henceforth, consider X to be a nonempty set and (X,d) to be an extended b-metric space.

    A usual property of functions used in proving fixed point results for convex contractive mappings is stated next.

    Definition 2.4. [44] A mapping T: XX is called orbitally continuous if

    limiTnix=z

    implies

    limiT(Tnix)=Tz,

    where Tn denotes the n-fold composition of T with itself.

    In the following, we present the types of convex contractive mappings that will be used in the main results.

    Definition 2.5. [15] A mapping T: XX is said to be a convex contraction of order 2 if there exist a, b[0,1) with a+b<1 such that, for all x, yX, the following inequality holds:

    d(T2x,T2y)ad(Tx,Ty)+bd(x,y).

    Note that this class of mappings contains the class of contractive mappings in the sense of [1,2].

    Definition 2.6. [15] A mapping T: XX is said to be a two-sided convex contraction if there exist a1, a2, b1, b2[0,1) with a1+a2+b1+b2<1 such that, for all x, yX, the following inequality holds:

    d(T2x,T2y)a1d(x,Tx)+a2d(Tx,T2x)+b1d(y,Ty)+b2d(Ty,T2y).

    Definition 2.7. [15] A mapping T: XX is said to be a convex contraction of type 2 if there exist constants c0, c1, a1, a2, b1, b2[0,1) with c0+c1+a1+a2+b1+b2<1 such that, for all x, yX, the following inequality holds:

    d(T2x,T2y)c0d(x,y)+c1d(Tx,Ty)+a1d(x,Tx)+a2d(Tx,T2x)+b1d(y,Ty)+b2d(Ty,T2y).

    Definition 2.8. [15] A mapping T: XX is said to be a convex contraction of order k2 if there exist a0, a1, , ak1[0,1) with a0+a1++ak1<1 such that, for all x, yX, the following inequality holds:

    d(Tkx,Tky)a0d(x,y)+a1d(Tx,Ty)++ak1d(Tk1x,Tk1y).

    Another type of convex contractive mapping is presented next.

    Definition 2.9. A mapping T: XX is said to be a Ćirić-convex contraction if there exists h[0,1) such that, for all x, yX, the following inequality holds:

    d(T2x,T2y)hmax{d(x,y),d(Tx,Ty),d(x,Tx),d(Tx,T2x),d(y,Ty),d(Ty,T2y)}.

    A valuable lemma that will be used throughout the proofs of the theorems in this section is given below.

    Lemma 3.1. Let (X,d) be an extended b-metric space, let T: XX be a mapping and the sequence {xn}n of Picard iterations based on an initial point x0X, i.e., xn=Tnx0, for all n0. If there exists λ[0,1) such that

    d(xn,xn+1)λn1max{d(x0,x1),d(x1,x2)}

    for all n0, and there exist

    β<1λ

    and n0N such that the inequality

    ji=nθ(xi,xn+p)βjn+1

    holds for all nn0, p1, and j{n,n+1,,n+p1}, then {xn}n is a Cauchy sequence.

    Proof. Set dn=d(xn,xn+1), for all n0 and M=max{d0,d1}. Consider n, p, jN with nn0, p1 and j{n,n+1,,n+p1}. Obviously, βλ<1.

    The following estimations will justify that {xn}n is a Cauchy sequence:

    d(xn,xn+p)θ(xn,xn+p)d(xn,xn+1)+θ(xn,xn+p)d(xn+1,xn+p)θ(xn,xn+p)dn+θ(xn,xn+p)θ(xn+1,xn+p)d(xn+1,xn+2)+θ(xn,xn+p)θ(xn+1,xn+p)d(xn+2,xn+p)θ(xn,xn+p)dn+θ(xn,xn+p)θ(xn+1,xn+p)dn+1++θ(xn,xn+p)θ(xn+1,xn+p)θ(xn+p1,xn+p)dn+p1βλn1M+β2λnM++βpλn+p2Mβλn1M[1+βλ++βp1λp1]=βλn1M1(βλ)p1βλβλn1M11βλ0,

    when n.

    The bounding condition imposed on the function θ(,) was dictated by the necessity to ensure that the Picard sequence under consideration meets the Cauchy sequence definition. Note that, in the previous lemma, if we replace the condition

    ji=nθ(xi,xn+p)βjn+1

    with the condition

    limn,mθ(xn,xm)βorlimn,mθ(xn,xm)<1h,

    the conclusion would still be valid.

    Another lemma, which will prove to be useful, is presented as follows. For the forthcoming result, which is self-evident and straightforward, we shall opt to omit the proof.

    Lemma 3.2. Let (X,d) be a complete extended b-metric space and let T: XX be an orbitally continuous mapping. If the Picard iterations sequence based on an initial point x0X, i.e., xn=Tnx0, for all n0, is a Cauchy sequence, then T has a fixed point.

    From now on, we present fixed point theorems for the previously introduced convex contractive mappings.

    Theorem 3.1. Let (X,d) be a complete extended b-metric space and let T: XX be an orbitally continuous convex contraction of type 2. Suppose there exist x0X,

    β<1b2c0+c1+a1+a2+b1

    and n0N such that the inequality

    ji=nθ(xi,xn+p)βjn+1

    holds for all nn0, p1, and j{n,n+1,,n+p1}, where xn=Tnx0, n0.

    Then T has a unique fixed point.

    Proof. {xn}n is the Picard iteration sequence based on the initial point x0.

    Set dn=d(xn,xn+1), for all n0,

    λ=c0+c1+a1+a2+b11b2andM=max{d0,d1}.

    Affirmation 1. dnλn1M, for all n0.

    The statement will be proven by complete induction on n. For n=0 and n=1, the inequality is obvious. For n=2, it follows that

    d2=d(x2,x3)=d(T2x0,T2x1)c0d(x0,x1)+c1d(x1,x2)+a1d(x0,x1)+a2d(x1,x2)+b1d(x1,x2)+b2d(x2,x3),

    then

    d2(1b2)(c0+a1)d0+(c1+a2+b1)d1(c0+a1)M+(c1+a2+b1)M=(c0+c1+a1+a2+b1)M,

    thus

    d2c0+c1+a1+a2+b11b2M=λM<λM=λ21M.

    Therefore, the base step is verified. Henceforth, consider k1 such that

    dkλk1Manddk1λk2M.

    Considering these inequalities, we present the inductive step:

    dk+1=d(xk+1,xk+2)=d(T2xk1,T2xk)c0dk1+c1dk+a1dk1+a2dk+b1dk+b2dk1,

    then

    dk+1(1b2)(c0+a1)dk1+(c1+a2+b1)dk(c0+a1)λk2M+(c1+a2+b1)λk1M(c0+a1)λk2M+(c1+a2+b1)λk2M=λk2M(c0+a1+c1+a2+b1),

    thus

    dk+1λk2Mc0+c1+a1+a2+b11b2=λk2Mλ=λ(k+1)1M.

    Therefore, by complete induction on n, we conclude that dnλn1M, for all n0.

    Affirmation 2. T has a fixed point.

    By using Lemma 3.1, we conclude that the sequence {xn}n is Cauchy. Also, by making use of Lemma 3.2, we get that T has a fixed point uX.

    Affirmation 3. T has a unique fixed point.

    Assume that there exists vX such that vu and Tv=v. Then,

    d(u,v)=d(T2u,T2v)c0d(u,v)+c1d(Tu,Tv)+a1d(u,Tu)+a2d(Tu,T2u)+b1d(v,Tv)+b2d(Tv,T2v)=(c0+c1)d(u,v)<d(u,v)

    is a contradiction.

    Consequently, u is the only fixed point of T.

    By setting a1=a2=b1=b2=0 and c0=c1=0 in Theorem 3.1, we obtain the corresponding results for convex contractions of order 2 and two-sided convex contractions, respectively.

    Corollary 3.1. Let (X,d) be a complete extended b-metric space and let T: XX be an orbitally continuous convex contraction of order 2. If there exist x0X,

    β<1a+b,

    n0N such that the inequality

    ji=nθ(xi,xn+p)βjn+1

    holds for all nn0, p1, and j{n,n+1,,n+p1}, where xn=Tnx0, n0, then T has a unique fixed point.

    Corollary 3.2. Let (X,d) be a complete extended b-metric space and let T: XX be an orbitally continuous two-sided convex contraction. Suppose there exist x0X,

    β<1b2a1+a2+b1

    and n0N such that the inequality

    ji=nθ(xi,xn+p)βjn+1

    holds for all nn0, p1, and j{n,n+1,,n+p1}, where xn=Tnx0, n0.

    Then T has a fixed point that is unique.

    Theorem 3.2. Let (X,d) be a complete extended b-metric space and let T: XX be an orbitally continuous Ćirić-convex contraction. Presume there exist x0X,

    β<1h

    and n0N such that the inequality

    ji=nθ(xi,xn+p)βjn+1

    holds for all nn0, p1, and j{n,n+1,,n+p1}, where xn=Tnx0, n0.

    Then T has a unique fixed point.

    Proof. Consider {xn}n as the Picard iteration sequence based on the initial point x0.

    If there exists n0N such that xn0=xn0+1, then xn0 is a fixed point of T. Without loss of generality, we may assume that xnxn+1 for any nN. Set dn=d(xn,xn+1), for all n0 and M=max{d0,d1}.

    Affirmation 1. dnhn1M, for all n0.

    The statement will be proven by complete induction on n. For n=0 and n=1, the inequality is obvious. For n=2, it follows that:

    d2=d(x2,x3)=d(T2x0,T2x1)hmax{d0,d1,d0,d1,d1,d2}=hmax{d0,d1,d2}=hmax{M,d2}.

    If max{M,d2}=d2, then

    d2hd2<d2,

    is a contradiction.

    Thus, max{M,d2}=M. Eventually,

    d2hMhM=h21M.

    Therefore, the base step is verified. Henceforth, consider k1 such that

    dkhk1Manddk1hk2M.

    Considering these inequalities, we present the inductive step:

    dk+1=d(xk+1,xk+2)=d(T2xk1,T2xk)max{dk1,dk,dk+1}.

    If max{dk1,dk,dk+1}=dk+1, then

    dk+1hdk+1<dk+1,

    which is a contradiction.

    Therefore,

    max{dk1,dk,dk+1}=max{dk1,dk}.

    Then,

    dk+1hmax{dk1,dk}hmax{hk2M,hk1M}=hhk2M=h(k+1)1M.

    Thus, by complete induction on n, we conclude that dnhn1M, for all n0.

    Affirmation 2. T has a fixed point.

    By using Lemma 3.1 with λ=h, {xn}n is a Cauchy sequence. Now, employing Lemma 3.2, T has a fixed point uX.

    Affirmation 3. T has a unique fixed point.

    Assume that there exists vX such that vu and Tv=v. Then,

    d(u,v)=d(T2u,T2v)hmax{d(u,v),d(Tu,Tv),d(u,Tu),d(Tu,T2u),d(v,Tv),d(Tv,T2v)}=hd(u,v)<d(u,v),

    which is a contradiction.

    Consequently, u is the only fixed point of T.

    In order to prove the next theorem, we first need to prove the following result.

    Lemma 3.3. Let (X,d) be an extended b-metric space and let T: XX be a mapping and the sequence {xn}n of Picard iterations based on an initial point x0X, i.e., xn=Tnx0, for all n0. If there exist λ[0,1) and an integer k2 such that

    d(xn,xn+1)kλnkM

    for all n0, where

    M=max{d(x0,x1),d(x1,x2),,d(xk1,xk)}

    and there exist β<1kλ and n0N such that the inequality

    ji=nθ(xi,xn+p)βjn+1

    holds for all nn0, p1, and j{n,n+1,,n+p1}, then {xn}n is a Cauchy sequence.

    Proof. Set dn=d(xn,xn+1), for all n0 and M=max{d0,d1}. Consider n, p, jN with nn0, p1, and j{n,n+1,,n+p1}. Obviously, βkλ<1.

    The following estimations will justify that {xn}n is a Cauchy sequence.

    d(xn,xn+p)θ(xn,xn+p)d(xn,xn+1)+θ(xn,xn+p)d(xn+1,xn+p)θ(xn,xn+p)dn+θ(xn,xn+p)θ(xn+1,xn+p)d(xn+1,xn+2)+θ(xn,xn+p)θ(xn+1,xn+p)d(xn+2,xn+p)θ(xn,xn+p)dn+θ(xn,xn+p)θ(xn+1,xn+p)dn+1++θ(xn,xn+p)θ(xn+1,xn+p)θ(xn+p1,xn+p)dn+p1βkλnkM+β2kλnk+1M++βpkλnk+p1MβkλnkM[1+βkλ++βp1kλp1]=βkλnkM1(βkλ)p1βkλβkλnkM11βkλ0,

    when n.

    The following result is an extension of Corollary 3.1.

    Theorem 3.3. Let (X,d) be a complete extended b-metric space, let k be an integer such that k2, and let T: XX be an orbitally continuous convex contraction of order k. Suppose there exist x0X,

    β<1ka0+a1++ak1

    and n0N such that the inequality

    ji=nθ(xi,xn+p)βjn+1

    holds for all nn0, p1, and j{n,n+1,,n+p1}, where xn=Tnx0, n0.

    Then T has a unique fixed point.

    Proof. Let x0X. Construct the sequence {xn}n of Picard iterations based on the initial point x0. Set dn=d(xn,xn+1), for all n0. Set

    λ=a0+a1++ak1andM=max{d0,d1,,dk1}.

    Affirmation 1. dnkλnkM, for all n0.

    The statement will be proven by complete induction on n.

    For n{0,1,,k1}, the inequality is obvious. For n=k, it follows that

    dk=d(xk,xk+1)=d(Tkx0,Tkx1)a0d(x0,x1)+a1d(x1,x2)++ak1d(xk1,xk)=a0d0+a1d1++ak1dk1a0M+a1M++ak1M=λMM=λ0M=kλkkM.

    Thus, the base step is verified. Henceforth, consider sk such that djkλjkM, for all js. Considering these inequalities, we present the inductive step:

    ds+1=d(xs+1,xs+2)=d(Tkxsk+1,Tkxsk+2)a0dsk+1+a1dsk+2++ak1dsa0kλs2k+1M+a1kλs2k+2M++ak1kλskMa0kλs2k+1M+a1kλs2k+1M++ak1kλs2k+1M=Mkλs2k+1[a0+a1+ak1]=Mkλs2k+1λ=kλ(s+1)kM.

    Affirmation 2. T has a fixed point.

    By using Lemma 3.3, {xn}n is a Cauchy sequence. Now, employing Lemma 3.2, T has a fixed point uX.

    Affirmation 3. T has a unique fixed point.

    Assume that there exists vX such that vu and Tv=v. Then,

    d(u,v)=d(Tku,Tkv)a0d(u,v)+a1d(Tu,Tv)++ak1d(Tk1u,Tk1v)=a0d(u,v)+a1d(u,v)++ak1d(u,v)=(a0+a1++ak1)d(u,v)<d(u,v),

    which is a contradiction.

    Consequently, u is the only fixed point of T.

    By taking c0=a1=b1=0 and a2=b2 in Theorem 3.1, we get the following power contraction version of the Reich fixed point theorem for extended b-metric spaces.

    Corollary 3.3. Let (X,dθ) be a complete extended b-metric space and let T: XX be an orbitally continuous mapping. Suppose there exist a, b[0,1) with a+2b<1 such that the inequality

    dθ(T2x,T2y)adθ(Tx,Ty)+b[dθ(Tx,T2x)+dθ(Ty,T2y)]

    holds for any x, yX. Also, presume there exist x0X, β<1ba+b, and n0N such that the inequality

    ji=nθ(xi,xn+p)βjn+1

    holds for all nn0, p1, and j{n,n+1,,n+p1}, where xn=Tnx0, n0. Then T has a unique fixed point.

    By setting c0=a1=a2=b1=b2=0 in Theorem 3.1, we obtain the following extension of the contraction principle in the framework of extended b-metric spaces.

    Corollary 3.4. Let (X,dθ) be a complete extended b-metric space and let T: XX be an orbitally continuous mapping. If there exists k[0,1) such that the inequality

    dθ(T2x,T2y)kdθ(Tx,Ty)

    holds for any x, yX, and if there exist x0X, β<1k, and n0N such that the inequality

    ji=nθ(xi,xn+p)βjn+1

    holds for all nn0, p1, and j{n,n+1,,n+p1}, where xn=Tnx0, n0, then T has a unique fixed point.

    If we pick c1=a1=a2=b1=b2=0 in Theorem 3.1, we get a power contraction version of the contraction principle on extended b-metric spaces.

    Corollary 3.5. Let (X,dθ) be a complete extended b-metric space and let T: XX be an orbitally continuous mapping. Presume there exists k[0,1) such that the inequality

    dθ(T2x,T2y)kdθ(x,y)

    holds for any x, yX, and suppose there exist x0X, β<1k, and n0N such that the inequality

    ji=nθ(xi,xn+p)βjn+1

    holds for all nn0, p1, and j{n,n+1,,n+p1}, where xn=Tnx0, n0. Then, T has a fixed point, which is unique.

    By choosing c0=c1=a1=b1=0 and a2=b2 in Theorem 3.1, we obtain a power contraction version of the Kannan fixed point theorem in the setting of extended b-metric spaces.

    Corollary 3.6. Let (X,dθ) be a complete extended b-metric space and let T: XX be an orbitally continuous mapping. If there exists k[0,12) such that the inequality

    dθ(T2x,T2y)k[dθ(Tx,T2x)+dθ(Ty,T2y)]

    holds for any x, yX, and if there exist x0X, β<1kk, and n0N such that the inequality

    ji=nθ(xi,xn+p)βjn+1

    holds for all nn0, p1, and j{n,n+1,,n+p1}, where xn=Tnx0, n0, then T has a unique fixed point.

    By taking θ(,)s1, we obtain the following analogous result for Theorem 3.1 in the setting of b-metric spaces.

    Corollary 3.7. Let (X,d) be a complete b-metric space and let T: XX be an orbitally continuous convex contraction of type 2. If

    s<1b2c0+c1+a1+a2+b1,

    then T has a unique fixed point.

    Also, we obtain the corresponding results for Corollaries 3.1 and 3.2 for b-metric spaces.

    Corollary 3.8. Let (X,d) be a complete b-metric space and let T: XX be an orbitally continuous two-sided convex contraction. If

    s<1b2a1+a2+b1,

    then T has a fixed point that is unique.

    Corollary 3.9. Let (X,d) be a complete b-metric space and let T: XX be an orbitally continuous convex contraction of order 2. Suppose that

    s<1a+b.

    Then T has a unique fixed point.

    Consequently, we also acquire the analogous results for Theorems 3.2 and 3.3 in the setting of b-metric spaces.

    Corollary 3.10. Let (X,d) be a complete b-metric space and let T: XX be an orbitally continuous Ćirić-convex contraction. Presume

    s<1h.

    Then T has a unique fixed point.

    Corollary 3.11. Let (X,d) be a complete extended b-metric space, let k be an integer such that k2, and let T: XX be an orbitally continuous convex contraction of order k. Suppose that

    s<1ka0+a1++ak1.

    Then T has a unique fixed point.

    By taking s=1, we obtain the main results from [15] and the analogue of Theorem 3.2 in the setting of metric spaces, stated next.

    Corollary 3.12. Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and let T: XX be a Ćirić-convex contraction. If T is orbitally continuous, then T has a unique fixed point.

    Now, we provide an application of our proven results by presenting an example of a mapping which fulfills the conditions of a convex contractive mapping of order 2 so that it has a unique fixed point, following the work in [34]. Similar examples can be found for all the other types of convex contractive mappings presented in this paper.

    Example 3.1. Let X=[0,1]. Define θ: X×X[1,),

    θ(x,y)={x+y+1x+y, if (x,y)(0,0),1.25, if (x,y)=(0,0).

    Define dθ: X×X[0,),

    dθ(x,y)={0, if and only if x=y,1x, if xy=0,andx2+y20,1xy, if 0xy0.

    Define T: XX,

    Tx={2x, if x[0,14],0, if x(14,1].

    We shall prove that the mapping T satisfies the conditions stated in Theorem 3.1, thus T has a unique fixed point.

    Affirmation 1. (X,dθ) is an extended b-metric space and is not a b-metric space.

    Justification 1. As it was shown in [34], dθ is an extended b-metric, thus (X,dθ) is an extended b-metric space.

    Due to an argument similar to the one used in Example 2.1, we conclude that (X,dθ) is not a b-metric space.

    Affirmation 2. T is a convex contraction of order 2.

    Justification 2. Note that

    T2x={4x, if x[0,18],0, if x(18,1].

    Observe, by induction, that

    Tkx={2kx, if x[0,12k+1],0, if x(12k+1,1].

    To prove that T is a convex contraction of order 2, we have to find constants a, b[0,1) with a+b<1 such that the inequality

    dθ(T2x,T2y)adθ(Tx,Ty)+bdθ(x,y)

    holds for any x, y[0,1]. We will prove that a=12 and b=18 satisfy the contractive inequality.

    Let x, yX. We have to consider different cases.

    Case 1. If x=y, note that Tx=Ty and T2x=T2y, thus

    dθ(x,y)=dθ(Tx,Ty)=dθ(T2x,T2y)=0,

    and then, the inequality

    dθ(T2x,T2y)adθ(Tx,Ty)+bdθ(x,y)

    becomes 00, thus the contractive inequality holds for any a and b.

    Next, we have to consider the cases where x=0 or y=0. Without loss of generality, due to the symmetry of dθ, we can assume that y=0.

    Case 2. If x(0,18] and y=0, note that Tx=2x, T2x=4x, Ty=0, and T2y=0. Thus, the inequality

    dθ(T2x,T2y)adθ(Tx,Ty)+bdθ(x,y)

    becomes

    14xa2x+bx,

    or, equivalently,

    12a+4b,

    which holds for a=12 and b=18.

    Case 3. If x(18,14] and y=0, note that Tx=2x, T2x=0, Ty=0, and T2y=0. Thus, the inequality

    dθ(T2x,T2y)adθ(Tx,Ty)+bdθ(x,y)

    becomes

    0a2x+bx,

    which holds for any a and b[0,1).

    Case 4. If x(14,1] and y=0, note that Tx=0, T2x=0, Ty=0, and T2y=0. Thus, the inequality

    dθ(T2x,T2y)adθ(Tx,Ty)+bdθ(x,y)

    becomes 00, thus the contractive inequality holds for any a and b.

    Henceforth, assume that 0xy0.

    Case 5. If x, y(0,18], note that Tx=2x, T2x=4x, Ty=2y, and T2y=4y. Thus, the inequality

    dθ(T2x,T2y)adθ(Tx,Ty)+bdθ(x,y)

    becomes

    116xya4xy+bxy,

    or, equivalently,

    14a+16b,

    which holds for a=12 and b=18.

    Case 6. If x, y(18,14], note that Tx=2x, T2x=0, Ty=2y, and T2y=0. Thus, the inequality

    dθ(T2x,T2y)adθ(Tx,Ty)+bdθ(x,y)

    becomes

    0a4xy+bxy,

    thus the contractive inequality holds for any a and b.

    Case 7. If x, y(14,1], note that Tx=0, T2x=0, Ty=0, and T2y=0. Thus, the inequality

    dθ(T2x,T2y)adθ(Tx,Ty)+bdθ(x,y)

    becomes

    00+bxy,

    which holds for any b[0,1).

    Due to the symmetry of dθ, it is enough to consider only three more cases.

    Case 8. If x(0,18] and y(18,14], note that Tx=2x, T2x=4x, Ty=2y, and T2y=0. Thus, the inequality

    dθ(T2x,T2y)adθ(Tx,Ty)+bdθ(x,y)

    becomes

    14xa4xy+bxy,

    or, equivalently,

    ya+4b.

    Note that with a=12 and b=18, we get that

    y1=a+4b.

    Case 9. If x(0,18] and y(14,1], note that Tx=2x, T2x=4x, Ty=0, and T2y=0. Thus, the inequality

    dθ(T2x,T2y)adθ(Tx,Ty)+bdθ(x,y)

    becomes

    14xa2x+bxy,

    or, equivalently,

    y2ay+4b.

    Considering a=12 and b=18, we get that

    yy+12=2ay+4b.

    Case 10. If x(18,14] and y(14,1], note that Tx=2x, T2x=0, Ty=0, and T2y=0. Thus, the inequality

    dθ(T2x,T2y)adθ(Tx,Ty)+bdθ(x,y)

    becomes

    0a2x+bxy,

    which holds for any a, b[0,1).

    Consequently, considering the cases presented above, we can conclude that T is a convex contraction of order 2 with a=12 and b=18.

    Affirmation 3. There exist

    β<1a+b

    and n0N such that the inequality

    ji=nθ(xi,xn+p)βjn+1

    holds for all nn0, p1, and j{n,n+1,,n+p1}, where xn=Tnx0, for all n0.

    Justification 3. Let p1.

    1a+b=112+18=2105.

    Let

    β=1.26<2105.

    To prove that there exists n0N such that the inequality

    ji=nθ(xi,xn+p)1.26jn+1

    holds for all nn0, p1, and j{n,n+1,,n+p1}, it is enough to prove that there exists n0N such that θ(xk,xn+p)<1.26 holds for all k{n,n+1,,n+p1}, kn0.

    Let k{n,n+1,,n+p1}. If x0=0, Tnx0=0, for all nN. Therefore,

    θ(xk,xn+p)=θ(0,0)=1.251.26.

    If x0(0,1], let qN be the largest number such that x0(0,12q]. Set n0=q+1. Therefore, xk=Tkx0=0, for any kn0. As kn+p, obviously, xn+p=0 also. Therefore,

    θ(xk,xn+p)=θ(0,0)=1.251.26

    for any kn0.

    Therefore, all the conditions from Theorem 3.1 are satisfied.

    Remark that 0 is a fixed point of T. We can conclude that 0 is the only fixed point of T.

    This research article delved into the exploration of convex contractions within the realm of extended b-metric spaces, with a particular emphasis on the existence and uniqueness of fixed points under various convexity conditions. The introduction of the Ćirić-convex contraction enriches the fixed point theory by broadening the understanding of contractive mappings.

    The findings underscore the versatility and potency of convex contractions in generalized metric spaces, offering novel insights and extending the boundaries of traditional fixed point theorems. This work not only contributes to the existing literature by providing generalizations and new perspectives on convex contractions, but also lays the groundwork for future research in the setting of generalized extended b-metric spaces, such as new extended b-metric spaces [45], controlled metric-type spaces [46] and double controlled metric-type spaces [47], etc.

    The author declares he has not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.

    This research was funded by the National University of Science and Technology Politehnica Bucharest [PUB Art] and the APC was funded by [PUB Art].

    The author declares that he has no competing interests.



    [1] S. Banach, Sur les opérations dans les ensembles abstraits et leur applications aux équations intégrales, Fund. Math., 3 (1922), 133–181. https://doi.org/10.4064/FM-3-1-133-181 doi: 10.4064/FM-3-1-133-181
    [2] R. Caccioppoli, Un teorema generale sull' esistenza di elementi uniti in una transformazione funzionale, Rend. Accad. Lincei, 11 (1930), 794–799.
    [3] E. Rakotch, A note on contractive mappings, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 13 (1962), 459–465. https://doi.org/10.1090/S0002-9939-1962-0148046-1 doi: 10.1090/S0002-9939-1962-0148046-1
    [4] D. Boyd, J. Wong, On nonlinear contractions, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 20 (1969), 458–464. https://doi.org/10.1090/S0002-9939-1969-0239559-9 doi: 10.1090/S0002-9939-1969-0239559-9
    [5] A. Meir, E. Keeler, A theorem on contraction mappings, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 28 (1969), 326–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-247X(69)90031-6 doi: 10.1016/0022-247X(69)90031-6
    [6] R. Kannan, Some results on fixed points, Bull. Calcutta Math. Soc., 60 (1968), 71–76.
    [7] V. Subrahmanyam, Completeness and fixed points, Monatsh. Math., 80 (1975), 325–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01472580 doi: 10.1007/BF01472580
    [8] S. K. Chatterjea, Fixed-point theorems, C. R. Acad. Bulg. Sci., 25 (1972), 727–730.
    [9] S. Reich, Some remarks concerning contraction mappings, Canad. Math. Bull., 14 (1971), 121–124. https://doi.org/10.4153/CMB-1971-024-9 doi: 10.4153/CMB-1971-024-9
    [10] G. E. Hardy, T. D. Rogers, A generalization of a fixed point theorem of Reich, Canad. Math. Bull., 16 (1973), 201–206. https://doi.org/10.4153/CMB-1973-036-0 doi: 10.4153/CMB-1973-036-0
    [11] L. B. Ćirić, A generalization of Banach's contraction principle, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 45 (1974), 267–273.
    [12] H. Aydi, W. Shatanawi, M. Postolache, Z. Mustafa, N. Tahat, Theorems for Boyd-Wong-type contractions in ordered metric spaces, Abstr. Appl. Anal., 2012 (2012), 359054. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/359054 doi: 10.1155/2012/359054
    [13] N. V. Luong, N. X. Thuan, Fixed point theorem for generalized weak contractions satisfying rational expressions in ordered metric spaces, Fixed Point Theory Appl., 2011 (2011), 46. https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2011-46 doi: 10.1186/1687-1812-2011-46
    [14] B. E. Rhoades, A comparison of various definitions of contractive mappings, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 226 (1977), 257–290. https://doi.org/10.1090/S0002-9947-1977-0433430-4 doi: 10.1090/S0002-9947-1977-0433430-4
    [15] V. I. Istrăţescu, Some fixed point theorems for convex contraction mappings and mappings with convex diminishing diameters. I, Ann. Mat. Pura Appl., 130 (1982), 89–104. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01761490 doi: 10.1007/BF01761490
    [16] M. A. Miandaragh, M. Postolache, S. Rezapour, Approximate fixed points of generalized convex contractions, Fixed Point Theory Appl., 2013 (2013), 255. https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2013-255 doi: 10.1186/1687-1812-2013-255
    [17] I. A. Bakhtin, The contraction mapping principle in almost metric spaces, Funct. Anal., 30 (1989), 26–37.
    [18] S. Czerwik, Contraction mappings in b-metric spaces, Acta Math. Inf. Univ. Ostraviensis, 1 (1993), 5–11.
    [19] M. U. Ali, T. Kamran, M. Postolache, Solution of Volterra integral inclusion in b-metric spaces via new fixed point theorem, Nonlinear Anal. Modell. Control, 22 (2017), 17–30. https://doi.org/10.15388/NA.2017.1.2 doi: 10.15388/NA.2017.1.2
    [20] T. Kamran, M. Postolache, M. U. Ali, Q. Kiran, Feng and Liu type F-contraction in b-metric spaces with application to integral equations, J. Math. Anal., 7 (2016), 18–27.
    [21] W. Shatanawi, A. Pitea, R. Lazović, Contraction conditions using comparison functions on b-metric spaces, Fixed Point Theory Appl., 2014 (2014), 135. https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2014-135 doi: 10.1186/1687-1812-2014-135
    [22] W. Kirk, N. Shahzad, Fixed point theory in distance spaces, Springer, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10927-5
    [23] A. Branciari, A fixed point theorem of Banach-Caccioppoli type on a class of generalized metric spaces, Publ. Math. Debrecen, 57 (2000), 31–37. https://doi.org/10.5486/pmd.2000.2133 doi: 10.5486/pmd.2000.2133
    [24] P. Hitzler, A. K. Seda, Dislocated topologies, J. Electr. Eng., 51 (2000), 3–7.
    [25] F. Khojasteh, E. Karapınar, S. Radenovic, θ-metric space: a generalization, Math. Probl. Eng., 2013 (2013), 504609. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/504609 doi: 10.1155/2013/504609
    [26] N. V. Dung, Further results on θ-metric spaces, Fixed Point Theory, 25 (2024), 99–110.
    [27] M. Jleli, B. Samet, A generalized metric space and related fixed point theorems, Fixed Point Theory Appl., 2015 (2015), 61. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13663-015-0312-7 doi: 10.1186/s13663-015-0312-7
    [28] M. Jleli, B. Samet, On a new generalization of metric spaces, Fixed Point Theory Appl., 20 (2018), 128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11784-018-0606-6 doi: 10.1007/s11784-018-0606-6
    [29] T. Kamran, M. Samreen, Q. U. Ain, A generalization of b-metric space and some fixed point theorems, Mathematics, 5 (2017), 19. https://doi.org/10.3390/math5020019 doi: 10.3390/math5020019
    [30] M. Samreen, T. Kamran, M. Postolache, Extened b-metric space, extended b-comparison function and nonlinear contractions, Sci. Bull., Ser. A, Appl. Math. Phys., Politeh. Univ. Buchar., 80 (2018), 21–28.
    [31] M. Samreen, Q. Kiran, T. Kamran, Fixed point theorems for φ-contractions, J. Inequal. Appl., 2014 (2014), 266. https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2014-266 doi: 10.1186/1029-242X-2014-266
    [32] P. D. Proinov, A generalization of the Banach contraction principle with high order of convergence of succesive approximations, Nonlinear Anal., 67 (2007), 2361–2369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.na.2006.09.008 doi: 10.1016/j.na.2006.09.008
    [33] T. L. Hicks, B. E. Rhoades, A Banach type fixed point theorem, Math. Japonica, 24 (1979), 327–330.
    [34] B. Alqahtani, A. Fulga, E. Karapınar, Common fixed point results on an extended b-metric space, J. Inequal. Appl., 2018 (2018), 158. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13660-018-1745-4 doi: 10.1186/s13660-018-1745-4
    [35] T. Abdeljawad, R. P. Agarwal, E. Karapınar, S. K. Panda, Solution of the nonlinear integral equation and fractional differential equation using the technique of a fixed point with a numerical experiment in extended b-metric space, Symmetry, 11 (2019), 686. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11050686 doi: 10.3390/sym11050686
    [36] W. Shatanawi, K. Abodayeh, A. Mukheimer, Some fixed point theorems in extended b-metric spaces, UPB Sci. Bull., 80 (2018), 71–78.
    [37] B. Alqahtani, A. Fulga, E. Karapınar, Non-unique fixed point results in extended b-metric space, Mathematics, 6 (2018), 68. https://doi.org/10.3390/math6050068 doi: 10.3390/math6050068
    [38] Z. D. Mitrović, H. Işik, S. Radenović, The new results in extended b-metric spaces and applications, Int. J. Nonlinear Anal. Appl., 11 (2020), 473–482. https://doi.org/10.22075/IJNAA.2019.18239.1998 doi: 10.22075/IJNAA.2019.18239.1998
    [39] S. B. Nadler, Multivalued contraction mappings, Pacific J. Math., 30 (1969), 475–488. https://doi.org/10.2140/PJM.1969.30.475 doi: 10.2140/PJM.1969.30.475
    [40] H. Huang, Y. M. Singh, M. S. Khan, S. Radenović, Rational type contractions in extended b-metric spaces, Symmetry, 13 (2021), 614. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym13040614 doi: 10.3390/sym13040614
    [41] B. Alqahtani, A. Fulga, E. Karapınar, V. Rakočević, Contractions with rational inequalities in the extended b-metric space, J. Inequal. Appl., 2019 (2019), 220. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13660-019-2176-6 doi: 10.1186/s13660-019-2176-6
    [42] Q. Kiran, N. Alamgir, N. Mlaiki, H. Aydi, On some new fixed-point results in complete extended b-metric spaces, Mathematics, 7 (2019), 476. https://doi.org/10.3390/math7050476 doi: 10.3390/math7050476
    [43] N. Haokip, N. Goswami, B. C. Tripathy, Common fixed point results for (α-β)-orbital-cyclic admissible triplet in extended b-metric spaces, Thai J. Math., 20 (2022), 563–576.
    [44] L. B. Ćirić, On contraction type mappings, Math. Balkanica, 1 (1971), 52–57.
    [45] H. Aydi, A. Felhi, T. Kamran, E. Karapınar, M. U. Ali, On nonlinear contractions in new extended b-metric spaces, Appl. Appl. Math., 14 (2019), 537–547.
    [46] N. Mlaiki, H. Aydi, N. Souayah, T. Abdeljawad, Controlled metric type spaces and the related contraction principle, Mathematics, 6 (2018), 194. https://doi.org/10.3390/math6100194 doi: 10.3390/math6100194
    [47] T. Abdeljawad, N. Mlaiki, H. Aydi, N. Souayah, Double controlled metric type spaces and some fixed point results, Mathematics, 6 (2018), 320. https://doi.org//10.3390/math6120320 doi: 10.3390/math6120320
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2024 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(988) PDF downloads(62) Cited by(0)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog