Public health and social measures (PHSMs) targeting the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have potentially affected the epidemiological dynamics of endemic infectious diseases. In this study, we investigated the impact of PHSMs for COVID-19, with a particular focus on varicella dynamics in Japan. We adopted the susceptible-infectious-recovered type of mathematical model to reconstruct the epidemiological dynamics of varicella from Jan. 2010 to Sep. 2021. We analyzed epidemiological and demographic data and estimated the within-year and multi-year component of the force of infection and the biases associated with reporting and ascertainment in three periods: pre-vaccination (Jan. 2010–Dec. 2014), pre-pandemic vaccination (Jan. 2015–Mar. 2020) and during the COVID-19 pandemic (Apr. 2020–Sep. 2021). By using the estimated parameter values, we reconstructed and predicted the varicella dynamics from 2010 to 2027. Although the varicella incidence dropped drastically during the COVID-19 pandemic, the change in susceptible dynamics was minimal; the number of susceptible individuals was almost stable. Our prediction showed that the risk of a major outbreak in the post-pandemic era may be relatively small. However, uncertainties, including age-related susceptibility and travel-related cases, exist and careful monitoring would be required to prepare for future varicella outbreaks.
Citation: Ayako Suzuki, Hiroshi Nishiura. Transmission dynamics of varicella before, during and after the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan: a modelling study[J]. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(6): 5998-6012. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022280
[1] | Mustafa Mudhesh, Hasanen A. Hammad, Eskandar Ameer, Muhammad Arshad, Fahd Jarad . Novel results on fixed-point methodologies for hybrid contraction mappings in Mb-metric spaces with an application. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(1): 1530-1549. doi: 10.3934/math.2023077 |
[2] | 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 |
[3] | Huaping Huang, Bessem Samet . Two fixed point theorems in complete metric spaces. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(11): 30612-30637. doi: 10.3934/math.20241478 |
[4] | Hanadi Zahed, Zhenhua Ma, Jamshaid Ahmad . On fixed point results in F-metric spaces with applications. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(7): 16887-16905. doi: 10.3934/math.2023863 |
[5] | Umar Ishtiaq, Fahad Jahangeer, Doha A. Kattan, Manuel De la Sen . Generalized common best proximity point results in fuzzy multiplicative metric spaces. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(11): 25454-25476. doi: 10.3934/math.20231299 |
[6] | Leyla Sağ Dönmez, Abdurrahman Büyükkaya, Mahpeyker Öztürk . Fixed-point results via αji-(DC(PˆE))-contractions in partial ♭-metric spaces. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(10): 23674-23706. doi: 10.3934/math.20231204 |
[7] | Jamshaid Ahmad, Abdullah Shoaib, Irshad Ayoob, Nabil Mlaiki . Common fixed points for (κGm)-contractions with applications. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 15949-15965. doi: 10.3934/math.2024772 |
[8] | Muhammad Waseem Asghar, Mujahid Abbas, Cyril Dennis Enyi, McSylvester Ejighikeme Omaba . Iterative approximation of fixed points of generalized αm-nonexpansive mappings in modular spaces. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(11): 26922-26944. doi: 10.3934/math.20231378 |
[9] | Tahair Rasham, Muhammad Nazam, Hassen Aydi, Abdullah Shoaib, Choonkil Park, Jung Rye Lee . Hybrid pair of multivalued mappings in modular-like metric spaces and applications. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(6): 10582-10595. doi: 10.3934/math.2022590 |
[10] | Amer Hassan Albargi, Jamshaid Ahmad . Fixed point results of fuzzy mappings with applications. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(5): 11572-11588. doi: 10.3934/math.2023586 |
Public health and social measures (PHSMs) targeting the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have potentially affected the epidemiological dynamics of endemic infectious diseases. In this study, we investigated the impact of PHSMs for COVID-19, with a particular focus on varicella dynamics in Japan. We adopted the susceptible-infectious-recovered type of mathematical model to reconstruct the epidemiological dynamics of varicella from Jan. 2010 to Sep. 2021. We analyzed epidemiological and demographic data and estimated the within-year and multi-year component of the force of infection and the biases associated with reporting and ascertainment in three periods: pre-vaccination (Jan. 2010–Dec. 2014), pre-pandemic vaccination (Jan. 2015–Mar. 2020) and during the COVID-19 pandemic (Apr. 2020–Sep. 2021). By using the estimated parameter values, we reconstructed and predicted the varicella dynamics from 2010 to 2027. Although the varicella incidence dropped drastically during the COVID-19 pandemic, the change in susceptible dynamics was minimal; the number of susceptible individuals was almost stable. Our prediction showed that the risk of a major outbreak in the post-pandemic era may be relatively small. However, uncertainties, including age-related susceptibility and travel-related cases, exist and careful monitoring would be required to prepare for future varicella outbreaks.
In 1922, S. Banach [15] provided the concept of Contraction theorem in the context of metric space. After, Nadler [28] introduced the concept of set-valued mapping in the module of Hausdroff metric space which is one of the potential generalizations of a Contraction theorem. Let (X,d) is a complete metric space and a mapping T:X→CB(X) satisfying
H(T(x),T(y))≤γd(x,y) |
for all x,y∈X, where 0≤γ<1, H is a Hausdorff with respect to metric d and CB(X)={S⊆X:S is closed and bounded subset of X equipped with a metric d}. Then T has a fixed point in X.
In the recent past, Matthews [26] initiate the concept of partial metric spaces which is the classical extension of a metric space. After that, many researchers generalized some related results in the frame of partial metric spaces. Recently, Asadi et al. [4] introduced the notion of an M-metric space which is the one of interesting generalizations of a partial metric space. Later on, Samet et al. [33] introduced the class of mappings which known as (α,ψ)-contractive mapping. The notion of (α,ψ) -contractive mapping has been generalized in metric spaces (see more [10,12,14,17,19,25,29,30,32]).
Throughout this manuscript, we denote the set of all positive integers by N and the set of real numbers by R. Let us recall some basic concept of an M-metric space as follows:
Definition 1.1. [4] Let m:X×X→R+be a mapping on nonempty set X is said to be an M-metric if for any x,y,z in X, the following conditions hold:
(i) m(x,x)=m(y,y)=m(x,y) if and only if x=y;
(ii) mxy≤m(x,y);
(iii) m(x,y)=m(y,x);
(iv) m(x,y)−mxy≤(m(x,z)−mxz)+(m(z,y)−mz,y) for all x,y,z∈X. Then a pair (X,m) is called M-metric space. Where
mxy=min{m(x,x),m(y,y)} |
and
Mxy=max{m(x,x),m(y,y)}. |
Remark 1.2. [4] For any x,y,z in M-metric space X, we have
(i) 0≤Mxy+mxy=m(x,x)+m(y,y);
(ii) 0≤Mxy−mxy=|m(x,x)−m(y,y)|;
(iii) Mxy−mxy≤(Mxz−mxz)+(Mzy−mzy).
Example 1.3. [4] Let (X,m) be an M-metric space. Define mw, ms:X×X→R+ by:
(i)
mw(x,y)=m(x,y)−2mx,y+Mx,y, |
(ii)
ms={m(x,y)−mx,y, if x≠y0, if x=y. |
Then mw and ms are ordinary metrics. Note that, every metric is a partial metric and every partial metric is an M-metric. However, the converse does not hold in general. Clearly every M-metric on X generates a T0 topology τm on X whose base is the family of open M -balls
{Bm(x,ϵ):x∈X, ϵ>0}, |
where
Bm(x,ϵ)={y∈X:m(x,y)<mxy+ϵ} |
for all x∈X, ε>0. (see more [3,4,23]).
Definition 1.4. [4] Let (X,m) be an M-metric space. Then,
(i) A sequence {xn} in (X,m) is said to be converges to a point x in X with respect to τm if and only if
limn→∞(m(xn,x)−mxnx)=0. |
(ii) Furthermore, {xn} is said to be an M-Cauchy sequence in (X,m) if and only if
limn,m→∞(m(xn,xm)−mxnxm), and limn,m→∞(Mxn,xm−mxnxm) |
exist (and are finite).
(iii) An M-metric space (X,m) is said to be complete if every M-Cauchy sequence {xn} in (X,m) converges with respect to τm to a point x∈X such that
limn→∞m(xn,x)−mxnx=0, and limn→∞(Mxn,x−mxnx)=0. |
Lemma 1.5. [4] Let (X,m) be an M-metric space. Then:
(i) {xn} is an M-Cauchy sequence in (X,m) if and only if {xn} is a Cauchy sequence in a metric space (X,mw).
(ii) An M-metric space (X,m) is complete if and only if the metric space (X,mw) is complete. Moreover,
limn→∞mw(xn,x)=0 if and only if (limn→∞(m(xn,x)−mxnx)=0, limn→∞(Mxnx−mxnx)=0). |
Lemma 1.6. [4] Suppose that {xn} convergesto x and {yn} converges to y as n approaches to ∞ in M-metric space (X,m). Then we have
limn→∞(m(xn,yn)−mxnyn)=m(x,y)−mxy. |
Lemma 1.7. [4] Suppose that {xn} converges to xas n approaches to ∞ in M-metric space (X,m).Then we have
limn→∞(m(xn,y)−mxny)=m(x,y)−mxy for all y∈X. |
Lemma 1.8. [4] Suppose that {xn} converges to xand {xn} converges to y as n approaches to ∞ in M-metric space (X,m). Then m(x,y)=mxymoreover if m(x,x)= m(y,y), then x=y.
Definition 1.9. Let α:X×X→[0,∞). A mapping T:X→X is said to be an α-admissible mapping if for all x,y∈X
α(x,y)≥1⇒α(T(x),T(y))≥1. |
Let Ψ be the family of the (c)-comparison functions ψ:R+∪{0}→R+∪{0} which satisfy the following properties:
(i) ψ is nondecreasing,
(ii) ∑∞n=0ψn(t)<∞ for all t>0, where ψn is the n-iterate of ψ (see [7,8,10,11]).
Definition 1.10. [33] Let (X,d) be a metric space and α:X×X→[0,∞). A mapping T:X→X is called (α,ψ)-contractive mapping if for all x,y∈X, we have
α(x,y)d(T(x),T(x))≤ψ(d(x,y)), |
where ψ∈Ψ.
A subset K of an M-metric space X is called bounded if for all x∈K, there exist y∈X and r>0 such that x∈Bm(y,r). Let ¯K denote the closure of K. The set K is closed in X if and only if ¯K=K.
Definition 1.11. [31] Define Hm:CBm(X)×CBm(X)→[0,∞) by
Hm(K,L)=max{∇m(K,L),∇m(L,K)}, |
where
m(x,L)=inf{m(x,y):y∈L} and∇m(L,K)=sup{m(x,L):x∈K}. |
Lemma 1.12. [31] Let F be any nonempty set in M-metric space (X,m), then
x∈¯F if and only if m(x,F)=supa∈F{mxa}. |
Proposition 1.13. [31] Let A,B,C∈CBm(X), then
(i) ∇m(A,A)=supx∈A{supy∈Amxy},
(ii) (∇m(A,B)−supx∈Asupy∈Bmxy)≤(∇m(A,C)−infx∈Ainfz∈Cmxz)+
(∇m(C,B)−infz∈Cinfy∈Bmzy).
Proposition 1.14. [31] Let A,B,C∈CBm(X) followingare hold
(i) Hm(A,A)=∇m(A,A)=supx∈A{supy∈Amxy},
(ii) Hm(A,B)=Hm(B,A),
(iii) Hm(A,B)−supx∈Asupy∈Amxy)≤Hm(A,C)+Hm(B,C)−infx∈Ainfz∈Cmxz−infz∈Cinfy∈Bmzy.
Lemma 1.15. [31] Let A,B∈CBm(X) and h>1.Then for each x∈A, there exist at the least one y∈B such that
m(x,y)≤hHm(A,B). |
Lemma 1.16. [31] Let A,B∈CBm(X) and l>0.Then for each x∈A, there exist at least one y∈B such that
m(x,y)≤Hm(A,B)+l. |
Theorem 1.17. [31] Let (X,m) be a complete M-metric space and T:X→CBm(X). Assume that there exist h∈(0,1) such that
Hm(T(x),T(y))≤hm(x,y), | (1.1) |
for all x,y∈X. Then T has a fixed point.
Proposition 1.18. [31] Let T:X→CBm(X) be a set-valued mapping satisfying (1.1) for all x,y inan M-metric space X. If z∈T(z) for some z in Xsuch that m(x,x)=0 for x∈T(z).
We start with the following definition:
Definition 2.1. Assume that Ψ is a family of non-decreasing functions ϕM:R+→R+ such that
(i) ∑+∞nϕnM(x)<∞ for every x>0 where ϕnM is a nth-iterate of ϕM,
(ii) ϕM(x+y)≤ϕM(x)+ϕM(y) for all x,y∈R+,
(iii) ϕM(x)<x, for each x>0.
Remark 2.2. If ∑αn|n=∞ =0 is a convergent series with positive terms then there exists a monotonic sequence (βn)|n=∞ such that βn|n=∞=∞ and ∑αnβn|n=∞=0 converges.
Definition 2.3. Let (X,m) be an M-metric pace. A self mapping T:X→X is called (α∗,ϕM)-contraction if there exist two functions α∗:X×X→[0,∞) and ϕM∈Ψ such that
α∗(x,y)m(T(x),T(y))≤ϕM(m(x,y)), |
for all x,y∈X.
Definition 2.4. Let (X,m) be an M-metric space. A set-valued mapping T:X→CBm(X) is said to be (α∗,ϕM)-contraction if for all x,y∈X, we have
α∗(x,y)Hm(T(x),T(x))≤ϕM(m(x,y)), | (2.1) |
where ϕM∈Ψ and α∗:X×X→[0,∞).
A mapping T is called α∗-admissible if
α∗(x,y)≥1⇒α∗(a1,b1)≥1 |
for each a1∈T(x) and b1∈T(y).
Theorem 2.5. Let (X,m) be a complete M-metric space.Suppose that (α∗,ϕM) contraction and α∗-admissible mapping T:X→CBm(X)satisfies the following conditions:
(i) there exist x0∈X such that α∗(x0,a1)≥1 for each a1∈T(x0),
(ii) if {xn}∈X is a sequence such that α∗(xn,xn+1)≥1 for all n and {xn}→x∈X as n→∞, then α∗(xn,x)≥1 for all n∈N. Then T has a fixed point.
Proof. Let x1∈T(x0) then by the hypothesis (i) α∗(x0,x1)≥1. From Lemma 1.16, there exist x2∈T(x1) such that
m(x1,x2)≤Hm(T(x0),T(x1))+ϕM(m(x0,x1)). |
Similarly, there exist x3∈T(x2) such that
m(x2,x3)≤Hm(T(x1),T(x2))+ϕ2M(m(x0,x1)). |
Following the similar arguments, we obtain a sequence {xn}∈X such that there exist xn+1∈T(xn) satisfying the following inequality
m(xn,xn+1)≤Hm(T(xn−1),T(xn))+ϕnM(m(x0,x1)). |
Since T is α∗-admissible, therefore α∗(x0,x1)≥1⇒α∗(x1,x2)≥1. Using mathematical induction, we get
α∗(xn,xn+1)≥1. | (2.2) |
By (2.1) and (2.2), we have
m(xn,xn+1)≤Hm(T(xn−1),T(xn))+ϕnM(m(x0,x1))≤α∗(xn,xn+1)Hm(T(xn−1),T(xn))+ϕnM(m(x0,x1))≤ϕM(m(xn−1,xn))+ϕnM(m(x0,x1))=ϕM[(m(xn−1,xn))+ϕn−1M(m(x0,x1))]≤ϕM[Hm(T(xn−2),T(xn−1))+ϕn−1M(m(x0,x1))]≤ϕM[α∗(xn−1,xn)Hm(T(xn−1),T(xn))+ϕn−1M(m(x0,x1))]≤ϕM[ϕM(m(xn−2,xn−1))+ϕn−1M(m(x0,x1))+ϕn−1M(m(x0,x1))]≤ϕ2M(m(xn−2,xn−1))+2ϕnM(m(x0,x1)).... |
m(xn,xn+1)≤ϕnM(m(x0,x1))+nϕnM(m(x0,x1))m(xn,xn+1)≤(n+1)ϕnM(m(x0,x1)). |
Let us assume that ϵ>0, then there exist n0∈N such that
∑n≥n0(n+1)ϕnM(m(x0,x1))<ϵ. |
By the Remarks (1.2) and (2.2), we get
limn→∞m(xn,xn+1)=0. |
Using the above inequality and (m2), we deduce that
limn→∞m(xn,xn)=limn→∞min{m(xn,xn),m(xn+1,xn+1)}=limn→∞mxnxn+1≤limn→∞m(xn,xn+1)=0. |
Owing to limit, we have limn→∞m(xn,xn)=0,
limn,m→∞mxnxm=0. |
Now, we prove that {xn} is M-Cauchy in X. For m,n in N with m>n and using the triangle inequality of an M-metric we get
m(xn,xm)−mxnxm≤m(xn,xn+1)−mxnxn+1+m(xn+1,xm)−mxn+1xm≤m(xn,xn+1)−mxnxn+1+m(xn+1,xn+2)−mxn+1xn+1+m(xn+2,xm)−mxn+2xm≤m(xn,xn+1)−mxnxn+1+m(xn+1,xn+2)−mxn+1xn+2+⋅⋅⋅+m(xm−1,xm)−mxm−1xm≤m(xn,xn+1)+m(xn+1,xn+2)+⋅⋅⋅+m(xm−1,xm)=m−1∑r=nm(xr,xr+1)≤m−1∑r=n(r+1)ϕrM(m(x0,x1))≤m−1∑r≥n0(r+1)ϕrM(m(x0,x1))≤m−1∑r≥n0(r+1)ϕrM(m(x0,x1))<ϵ. |
m(xn,xm)−mxnxm→0, as n→∞, we obtain limm,n→∞(Mxnxm−mxnxm)=0. Thus {xn} is a M-Cauchy sequence in X. Since (X,m) is M-complete, there exist x⋆∈X such that
limn→∞(m(xn,x⋆)−mxnx⋆)=0 andlimn→∞(Mxnx⋆−mxnx⋆)=0. |
Also, limn→∞m(xn,xn)=0 gives that
limn→∞m(xn,x⋆)=0 and limn→∞Mxnx⋆=0, | (2.3) |
limn→∞{max(m(xn,x⋆),m(x⋆,x⋆))}=0, |
which implies that m(x⋆,x⋆)=0 and hence we obtain mx⋆T(x⋆)=0. By using (2.1) and (2.3) with
limn→∞α∗(xn,x⋆)≥1. |
Thus,
limn→∞Hm(T(xn),T(x⋆))≤limn→∞ϕM(m(xn,x⋆))≤limn→∞m(xn,x⋆). |
limn→∞Hm(T(xn),T(x⋆))=0. | (2.4) |
Now from (2.3), (2.4), and xn+1∈T(xn), we have
m(xn+1,T(x⋆))≤Hm(T(xn),T(x⋆))=0. |
Taking limit as n→∞ and using (2.4), we obtain that
limn→∞m(xn+1,T(x⋆))=0. | (2.5) |
Since mxn+1T(x⋆)≤m(xn+1,T(x⋆)) which gives
limn→∞mxn+1T(x⋆)=0. | (2.6) |
Using the condition (m4), we obtain
m(x⋆,T(x⋆))−supy∈T(x⋆)mx⋆y≤m(x⋆,T(x⋆))−mx⋆,T(x⋆)≤m(x⋆,xn+1)−mx⋆xn+1+m(xn+1,T((x⋆))−mxn+1T(x⋆). |
Applying limit as n→∞ and using (2.3) and (2.6), we have
m(x⋆,T(x⋆))≤supy∈T(x⋆)mx⋆y. | (2.7) |
From (m2), mx⋆y≤m(x⋆y) for each y∈T(x⋆) which implies that
mx⋆y−m(x⋆,y)≤0. |
Hence,
sup{mx⋆y−m(x⋆,y):y∈T(x⋆)}≤0. |
Then
supy∈T(x⋆)mx⋆y−infy∈T(x⋆)m(x⋆,y)≤0. |
Thus
supy∈T(x⋆)mx⋆y≤m(x⋆,T(x⋆)). | (2.8) |
Now, from (2.7) and (2.8), we obtain
m(T(x⋆),x⋆)=supy∈T(x⋆)mx⋆y. |
Consequently, owing to Lemma (1.12), we have x⋆∈¯T(x⋆)=T(x⋆).
Corollary 2.6. Let (X,m) be a complete M-metric space and anself mapping T:X→X an α∗-admissible and (α∗,ϕM)-contraction mapping. Assume that thefollowing properties hold:
(i) there exists x0∈X such that α∗(x0,T(x0))≥1,
(ii) either T is continuous or for any sequence {xn}∈X with α∗(xn,xn+1)≥1 for all n∈N and {xn}→x as n → ∞, we have α∗(xn,x)≥1 for all n∈N. Then T has a fixed point.
Some fixed point results in ordered M-metric space.
Definition 2.7. Let (X,⪯) be a partially ordered set. A sequence {xn}⊂X is said to be non-decreasing if xn⪯xn+1 for all n.
Definition 2.8. [16] Let F and G be two nonempty subsets of partially ordered set (X,⪯). The relation between F and G is defined as follows: F≺1G if for every x∈F, there exists y∈G such that x⪯y.
Definition 2.9. Let (X,m,⪯) be a partially ordered set on M-metric. A set-valued mapping T:X→CBm(X) is said to be ordered (α∗,ϕM)-contraction if for all x,y∈X, with x⪯y we have
Hm(T(x),T(y))≤ϕM(m(x,y)) |
where ϕM∈Ψ. Suppose that α∗:X×X→[0,∞) is defined by
α∗(x,y)={1 if Tx≺1Ty0 otherwise. |
A mapping T is called α∗-admissible if
α(x,y)≥1⇒α∗(a1,b1)≥1, |
for each a1∈T(x) and b1∈T(y).
Theorem 2.10. Let (X,m,⪯) be a partially orderedcomplete M-metric space and T:X→CBm(X) an α∗-admissible ordered (α∗,ϕM)-contraction mapping satisfying the following conditions:
(i) there exist x0∈X such that {x0}≺1{T(x0)}, α∗(x0,a1)≥1 for each a1∈T(x0),
(ii) for every x,y∈X, x⪯y implies T(x)≺1T(y),
(iii) If {xn}∈X is a non-decreasing sequence such that xn⪯xn+1 for all n and {xn}→x∈X as n →∞ gives xn⪯x for all n∈N. Then T has a fixed point.
Proof. By assumption (i) there exist x1∈T(x0) such that x0⪯x1 and α∗(x0,x1)≥1. By hypothesis (ii), T(x0)≺1T(x1). Let us assume that there exist x2∈T(x1) such that x1⪯x2 and we have the following
m(x1,x2)≤Hm(T(x0),T(x1))+ϕM(m(x0,x1)). |
In the same way, there exist x3∈T(x2) such that x2⪯x3 and
m(x2,x3)≤Hm(T(x1),T(x2))+ϕ2M(m(x0,x1)). |
Following the similar arguments, we have a sequence {xn}∈X and xn+1∈T(xn) for all n≥0 satisfying x0⪯x1⪯x2⪯x3⪯...xn⪯xn+1. The proof is complete follows the arguments given in Theorem 2.5.
Example 2.11. Let X=[16,1] be endowed with an M -metric given by m(x,y)=x+y2. Define T:X→CBm(X) by
T(x)={{12x+16,14}, if x=16{x2,x3}, if 14≤x≤13{23,56}, if 12≤x≤1. |
Define a mapping α∗:X×X→[0,∞) by
α∗(x,y)={1 if x,y∈[14,13]0 otherwise. |
Let ϕM:R+→R+ be given by ϕM(t)=1710 where ϕM∈Ψ, for x,y∈X. If x=16, y=14 then m(x,y)=524, and
Hm(T(x),T(y))=Hm({312,14},{18,112})=max(∇m({312,14},{18,112}),∇m({18,112},{312,14}))=max{316,212}=316≤ϕM(t)m(x,y). |
If x=13, y=12 then m(x,y)=512, and
Hm(T(x),T(y))=Hm({16,19},{23,1})=max(∇m({16,19},{23,1}),∇m({23,1},{16,19}))=max{1736,718}=1736≤ϕM(t)m(x,y). |
If x=16, y=1, then m(x,y)=712 and
Hm(T(x),T(y))=Hm({312,14},{23,56})=max(∇m({312,14},{23,56}),∇m({23,56},{312,14}))=max{1124,1324}=1324≤ϕM(t)m(x,y). |
In all cases, T is (α∗,ϕM)-contraction mapping. If x0=13, then T(x0)={x2,x3}.Therefore α∗(x0,a1)≥1 for every a1∈T(x0). Let x,y∈X be such that α∗(x,y)≥1, then x,y∈[x2,x3] and T(x)={x2,x3} and T(y)= {x2,x3} which implies that α∗(a1,b1)≥1 for every a1∈T(x) and b1∈T(x). Hence T is α∗-admissble.
Let {xn}∈X be a sequence such that α∗(xn,xn+1)≥1 for all n in N and xn converges to x as n converges to ∞, then xn∈[x2,x3]. By definition of α∗ -admissblity, therefore x∈[x2,x3] and hence α∗(xn,x)≥1. Thus all the conditions of Theorem 2.3 are satisfied. Moreover, T has a fixed point.
Example 2.12. Let X={(0,0),(0,−15),(−18,0)} be the subset of R2 with order ⪯ defined as: For (x1,y1),(x2,y2)∈X, (x1,y1)⪯(x2,y2) if and only if x1≤x2, y1≤y2. Let m:X×X→R+ be defined by
m((x1,y1),(x2,y2))=|x1+x22|+|y1+y22|, for x=(x1,y1), y=(x2,y2)∈X. |
Then (X,m) is a complete M-metric space. Let T:X→CBm(X) be defined by
T(x)={{(0,0)}, if x=(0,0),{(0,0),(−18,0)}, if x∈(0,−15){(0,0)}, if x∈(−18,0). |
Define a mapping α∗:X×X→[0,∞) by
α∗(x,y)={1 if x,y∈X0 otherwise. |
Let ϕM:R+→R+ be given by ϕM(t)=12. Obviously, ϕM∈Ψ. For x,y∈X,
if x=(0,−15) and y=(0,0), then Hm(T(x),T(y))=0 and m(x,y)=110 gives that
Hm(T(x),T(y))=Hm({(0,0),(−18,0)},{(0,0)})=max(∇m({(0,0),(−18,0)},{(0,0)}),∇m({(0,0)},{(0,0),(−18,0)}))=max{0,0}=0≤ϕM(t)m(x,y). |
If x=(−18,0) and y=(0,0) then Hm(T(x),T(y))=0, and m(x,y)=116 implies that
Hm(T(x),T(y))≤ϕM(t)m(x,y). |
If x=(0,0) and y=(0,0) then Hm(T(x),T(y))=0, and m(x,y)=0 gives
Hm(T(x),T(y))≤ϕM(t)m(x,y). |
If x=(0,−15) and y=(0,−15) then Hm(T(x),T(y))=0, and m(x,y)=15 implies that
Hm(T(x),T(y))≤ϕM(t)m(x,y). |
If x=(0,−18) and y=(0,−18) then Hm(T(x),T(y))=0, and m(x,y)=18 gives that
Hm(T(x),T(y))≤ϕM(t)m(x,y). |
Thus all the condition of Theorem 2.10 satisfied. Moreover, (0,0) is the fixed point of T.
In this section, we present an application of our result in homotopy theory. We use the fixed point theorem proved for set-valued (α∗,ϕM)-contraction mapping in the previous section, to establish the result in homotopy theory. For further study in this direction, we refer to [6,35].
Theorem 3.1. Suppose that (X,m) is a complete M-metricspace and A and B are closed and open subsets of X respectively, suchthat A⊂B. For a,b∈R, let T:B×[a,b]→CBm(X) be aset-valued mapping satisfying the following conditions:
(i) x∉T(y,t) for each y∈B/Aand t∈[a,b],
(ii) there exist ϕM∈Ψ and α∗:X×X→[0,∞) such that
α∗(x,y)Hm(T(x,t),T(y,t))≤ϕM(m(x,y)), |
for each pair (x,y)∈B×B and t∈[a,b],
(iii) there exist a continuous function Ω:[a,b]→R such that for each s,t∈[a,b] and x∈B, we get
Hm(T(x,s),T(y,t))≤ϕM|Ω(s)−Ω(t)|, |
(iv) if x⋆∈T(x⋆,t),then T(x⋆,t)={x⋆},
(v) there exist x0 in X such that x0∈T(x0,t),
(vi) a function ℜ:[0,∞)→[0,∞) defined by ℜ(x)=x−ϕM(x) is strictly increasing and continuous if T(.,t⊺) has a fixed point in B for some t⊺∈[a,b], then T(.,t) has afixed point in A for all t∈[a,b]. Moreover, for a fixed t∈[a,b], fixed point is unique provided that ϕM(t)=12t where t>0.
Proof. Define a mapping α∗:X×X→[0,∞) by
α∗(x,y)={1 if x∈T(x,t), y∈T(y,t) 0 otherwise. |
We show that T is α∗-admissible. Note that α∗(x,y)≥1 implies that x∈T(x,t) and y∈T(y,t) for all t∈[a,b]. By hypothesis (iv), T(x,t)={x} and T(y,t)={y}. It follows that T is α∗ -admissible. By hypothesis (v), there exist x0∈X such that x0∈(x0,t) for all t, that is α∗(x0,x0)≥1. Suppose that α∗(xn,xn+1)≥1 for all n and xn converges to q as n approaches to ∞ and xn∈T(xn,t) and xn+1∈T(xn+1,t) for all n and t∈[a,b] which implies that q∈T(q,t) and thus α∗(xn,q)≥1. Set
D={t∈[a,b]: x∈T(x,t) for x∈A}. |
So T(.,t⊺) has a fixed point in B for some t⊺∈[a,b], there exist x∈B such that x∈T(x,t). By hypothesis (i) x∈T(x,t) for t∈[a,b] and x∈A so D≠ϕ. Now we now prove that D is open and close in [a,b]. Let t0∈D and x0∈A with x0∈T(x0,t0). Since A is open subset of X, ¯Bm(x0,r)⊆A for some r>0. For ϵ=r+mxx0−ϕ(r+mxx0) and a continuous function Ω on [a,b], there exist δ>0 such that
ϕM|Ω(t)−Ω(t0)|<ϵ for all t∈(t0−δ,t0+δ). |
If t∈(t0−δ,t0+δ) for x∈Bm(x0,r)={x∈X:m(x0,x)≤mx0x+r} and l∈T(x,t), we obtain
m(l,x0)=m(T(x,t),x0)=Hm(T(x,t),T(x0,t0)). |
Using the condition (iii) of Proposition 1.13 and Proposition 1.18, we have
m(l,x0)≤Hm(T(x,t),T(x0,t0))+Hm(T(x,t),T(x0,t0)) | (2.9) |
as x∈T(x0,t0) and x∈Bm(x0,r)⊆A⊆B, t0∈[a,b] with α∗(x0,x0)≥1. By hypothesis (ii), (iii) and (2.9)
m(l,x0)≤ϕM|Ω(t)−Ω(t0)|+α∗(x0,x0)Hm(T(x,t),T(x0,t0))≤ϕM|Ω(t)−Ω(t0)|+ϕM(m(x,x0))≤ϕM(ϵ)+ϕM(mxx0+r)≤ϕM(r+mxx0−ϕM(r+mxx0))+ϕM(mxx0+r)<r+mxx0−ϕM(r+mxx0)+ϕM(mxx0+r)=r+mxx0. |
Hence l∈¯Bm(x0,r) and thus for each fixed t∈(t0−δ,t0+δ), we obtain T(x,t)⊂¯Bm(x0,r) therefore T:¯Bm(x0,r)→CBm(¯Bm(x0,r)) satisfies all the assumption of Theorem (3.1) and T(.,t) has a fixed point ¯Bm(x0,r)=Bm(x0,r)⊂B. But by assumption of (i) this fixed point belongs to A. So (t0−δ,t0+δ)⊆D, thus D is open in [a,b]. Next we prove that D is closed. Let a sequence {tn}∈D with tn converges to t0∈[a,b] as n approaches to ∞. We will prove that t0 is in D.
Using the definition of D, there exist {tn} in A such that xn∈T(xn,tn) for all n. Using Assumption (iii)–(v), and the condition (iii) of Proposition 1.13, and an outcome of the Proposition 1.18, we have
m(xn,xm)≤Hm(T(xn,tn),T(xm,tm))≤Hm(T(xn,tn),T(xn,tm))+Hm(T(xn,tm),T(xm,tm))≤ϕM|Ω(tn)−Ω(tm)|+α∗(xn,xm)Hm(T(xn,tm),T(xm,tm))≤ϕM|Ω(tn)−Ω(tm)|+ϕM(m(xn,xm))⇒m(xn,xm)−ϕM(m(xn,xm))≤ϕM|Ω(tn)−Ω(tm)|⇒ℜ(m(xn,xm))≤ϕM|Ω(tn)−Ω(tm)|ℜ(m(xn,xm))<|Ω(tn)−Ω(tm)|m(xn,xm)<1ℜ|Ω(tn)−Ω(tm)|. |
So, continuity of 1ℜ, ℜ and convergence of {tn}, taking the limit as m,n→∞ in the last inequality, we obtain that
limm,n→∞m(xn,xm)=0. |
Sine mxnxm≤m(xn,xm), therefore
limm,n→∞mxnxm=0. |
Thus, we have limn→∞m(xn,xn)=0=limm→∞m(xm,xm). Also,
limm,n→∞(m(xn,xm)−mxnxm)=0, limm,n→∞(Mxnxm−mxnxm). |
Hence {xn} is an M-Cauchy sequence. Using Definition 1.4, there exist x∗ in X such that
limn→∞(m(xn,x∗)−mxnx∗)=0 and limn→∞(Mxnx∗−mxnx∗)=0. |
As limn→∞m(xn,xn)=0, therefore
limn→∞m(xn,x∗)=0 and limn→∞Mxnx∗=0. |
Thus, we have m(x,x∗)=0. We now show that x∗∈T(x∗,t∗). Note that
m(xn,T(x∗,t∗))≤Hm(T(xn,tn),T(x∗,t∗))≤Hm(T(xn,tn),T(xn,t∗))+Hm(T(xn,t∗),T(x∗,t∗))≤ϕM|Ω(tn)−Ω(t∗)|+α∗(xn,t∗)Hm(T(xn,t∗),T(x∗,t∗))≤ϕM|Ω(tn)−Ω(t∗)|+ϕM(m(xn,t∗)). |
Applying the limit n→∞ in the above inequality, we have
limn→∞m(xn,T(x∗,t∗))=0. |
Hence
limn→∞m(xn,T(x∗,t∗))=0. | (2.10) |
Since m(x∗,x∗)=0, we obtain
supy∈T(x∗,t∗)mx∗y=supy∈T(x∗,t∗)min{m(x∗,x∗),m(y,y)}=0. | (2.11) |
From above two inequalities, we get
m(x∗,T(x∗,t∗))=supy∈T(x∗,t∗)mx∗y. |
Thus using Lemma 1.12 we get x∗∈T(x∗,t∗). Hence x∗∈A. Thus x∗∈D and D is closed in [a,b], D=[a,b] and D is open and close in [a,b]. Thus T(.,t) has a fixed point in A for all t∈[a,b]. For uniqueness, t∈[a,b] is arbitrary fixed point, then there exist x∈A such that x∈T(x,t). Assume that y is an other point of T(x,t), then by applying condition 4, we obtain
m(x,y)=Hm(T(x,t),T(y,t))≤αM(x,y)Hm(T(x,t),T(y,t))≤ϕM(m(x,y)). |
ForϕM(t)=12t, where t>0, the uniqueness follows.
In this section we will apply the previous theoretical results to show the existence of solution for some integral equation. For related results (see [13,20]). We see for non-negative solution of (3.1) in X=C([0,δ],R). Let X=C([0,δ],R) be a set of continuous real valued functions defined on [0,δ] which is endowed with a complete M-metric given by
m(x,y)=supt∈[0,δ](|x(t)+x(t)2|) for all x,y∈X. |
Consider an integral equation
v1(t)=ρ(t)+∫δ0h(t,s)J(s,v1(s))ds for all 0≤t≤δ. | (3.1) |
Define g:X→X by
g(x)(t)=ρ(t)+∫δ0h(t,s)J(s,x(s))ds |
where
(i) for δ>0, (a) J:[0,δ]×R→R, (b) h:[0,δ]×[0,δ]→[0,∞), (c) ρ:[0,δ]→R are all continuous functions
(ii) Assume that σ:X×X→R is a function with the following properties,
(iii) σ(x,y)≥0 implies that σ(T(x),T(y))≥0,
(iv) there exist x0∈X such that σ(x0,T(x0))≥0,
(v) if {xn}∈X is a sequence such that σ(xn,xn+1)≥0 for all n∈N and xn→x as n→∞, then σ(x,T(x))≥0
(vi)
supt∈[0,δ]∫δ0h(t,s)ds≤1 |
where t∈[0,δ], s∈R,
(vii) there exist ϕM∈Ψ, σ(y,T(y))≥1 and σ(x,T(x))≥1 such that for each t∈[0,δ], we have
|J(s,x(t))+J(s,y(t))|≤ϕM(|x+y|). | (3.3) |
Theorem 4.1. Under the assumptions (i)−(vii) theintegral Eq (3.1) has a solution in {X=C([0,δ],R) for all t∈[0,δ]}.
Proof. Using the condition (vii), we obtain that
m(g(x),g(y))=|g(x)(t)+g(y)(t)2|=|∫δ0h(t,s)[J(s,x(s))+J(s,y(s))2]ds|≤∫δ0h(t,s)|J(s,x(s))+J(s,y(s))2|ds≤∫δ0h(t,s)[ϕM|x(s)+y(s)2|]ds≤(supt∈[0,δ]∫δ0h(t,s)ds)(ϕM|x(s)+y(s)2|)≤ϕM(|x(s)+y(s)2|) |
m(g(x),g(y))≤ϕ(m(x,y)) |
Define α∗:X×X→[0,+∞) by
α∗(x,y)={1 if σ(x,y)≥0 0 otherwise |
which implies that
m(g(x),g(y))≤ϕM(m(x,y)). |
Hence all the assumption of the Corollary 2.6 are satisfied, the mapping g has a fixed point in X=C([0,δ],R) which is the solution of integral Eq (3.1).
In this study we develop some set-valued fixed point results based on (α∗,ϕM)-contraction mappings in the context of M-metric space and ordered M-metric space. Also, we give examples and applications to the existence of solution of functional equations and homotopy theory.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
[1] |
D. Enria, Z. Feng, A. Fretheim, C. Ihekweazu, T. Ottersen, A. Schuchat, et al., Strengthening the evidence base for decisions on public health and social measures, Bull. W. H. O., 99 (2021), 610–610A. https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.21.287054 doi: 10.2471/BLT.21.287054
![]() |
[2] |
B. J. Cowling, S. T. Ali, T. Ng, T. K. Tsang, J. C. M. Li, M. W. Fong, et al., Impact assessment of non-pharmaceutical interventions against coronavirus disease 2019 and influenza in Hong Kong: an observational study, Lancet Public Health, 5 (2020), E279–E288. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30090-6 doi: 10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30090-6
![]() |
[3] |
S. G. Sullivan, S. Carlson, A. C. Cheng, M. B. Chilver, D. E. Dwyer, M. Irwin, et al., Where has all the influenza gone? The impact of COVID-19 on the circulation of influenza and other respiratory viruses, Australia, March to September 2020, Eurosurveillance, 25 (2020). https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.47.2001847 doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.47.2001847
![]() |
[4] |
S. J. Olsen, A. K. Winn, A. P. Budd, M. M. Prill, J. Steel, C. M. Midgley, et al., Changes in influenza and other respiratory virus activity during the COVID-19 pandemic–United States, 2020–2021, Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep., 70 (2021), 1013–1019. https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm7029a1 doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm7029a1
![]() |
[5] | National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Tuberculosis and Infectious Diseases Department, Health Service Bureau, Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. Infect. Agents Surveill. Rep. (IASR), 42 (2021), 239–270. Available from: https://www.niid.go.jp/niid/images/idsc/iasr/42/501.pdf. |
[6] | National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Tuberculosis and Infectious Diseases Department, Health Service Bureau, Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. Infect. Dis. Wkly. Rep. (IDWR), 23 (2021), 29. Available from: https://www.niid.go.jp/niid/images/idsc/idwr/IDWR2021/idwr2021-29.pdf. |
[7] |
R. E. Baker, S. W. Park, W. Yang, G. A. Vecchi, C. J. E. Metcalf, B. T. Grenfell, The impact of COVID-19 nonpharmaceutical interventions on the future dynamics of endemic infections, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 117 (2020), 30547–30553. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2013182117 doi: 10.1073/pnas.2013182117
![]() |
[8] |
L. Madaniyazi, X. Seposo, C. F. S. Ng, A. Tobias, M. Toizumi, H. Moriuchi, et al., Respiratory syncytial virus outbreaks are predicted after the COVID-19 pandemic in Tokyo, Japan, Jpn. J. Infect. Dis., 75 (2022), 209–211. https://doi.org/10.7883/yoken.JJID.2021.312 doi: 10.7883/yoken.JJID.2021.312
![]() |
[9] |
M. Ujiie, S. Tsuzuki, T. Nakamoto, N. Iwamoto, Resurgence of respiratory syncytial virus infections during COVID-19 pandemic, Tokyo, Japan, Emerging Infect. Dis., 27 (2021), 2969–2970. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2711.211565 doi: 10.3201/eid2711.211565
![]() |
[10] |
A. A. Gershon, J. Breuer, J. I. Cohen, R. J. Cohrs, M. D. Gershon, D. Gilfen, et al., Varicella zoster virus infection, Nat. Rev. Dis. Primers, 1 (2015), 15016. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrdp.2015.16 doi: 10.1038/nrdp.2015.16
![]() |
[11] | WHO Vaccine-Preventable Diseases: Monitoring System 2018, World Health Organization. |
[12] |
M. Marin, M. Marti, A. Kambhampati, S. M. Jeram, J. F. Seward, Global varicella vaccine effectiveness: A meta-analysis, Pediatrics, 137 (2016), e20153741. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2015-3741 doi: 10.1542/peds.2015-3741
![]() |
[13] |
M. E. Halloran, S. L. Cochi, T. A. Lieu, M. Wharton, L. Fehrs, Theoretical epidemiologic and morbidity effects of routine varicella immunization of preschool children in the United States, Am. J. Epidemiol., 140 (1994), 81–104. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a117238 doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a117238
![]() |
[14] |
M. Brisson, W. J. Edmunds, N. J. Gay, B. Law, G. D. Serres, Modelling the impact of immunization on the epidemiology of varicella zoster virus, Epidemiol. Infect., 125 (2000), 651–669. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0950268800004714 doi: 10.1017/S0950268800004714
![]() |
[15] |
H. F. Gidding, M. Brisson, C. R. Macintyre, M. A. Burgess, Modelling the impact of vaccination on the epidemiology of varicella zoster virus in Australia, Aust. N. Z. J. Public Health, 29 (2005), 544–551. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-842X.2005.tb00248.x doi: 10.1111/j.1467-842X.2005.tb00248.x
![]() |
[16] |
Z. Gao, H. F. Gidding, J. G. Wood, C. R. MacIntyre, Modelling the impact of one-dose vs. two-dose vaccination regimens on the epidemiology of varicella zoster virus in Australia, Epidemiol. Infect., 138 (2010), 457–468. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0950268809990860 doi: 10.1017/S0950268809990860
![]() |
[17] |
M. Karhunen, T. Leino, H. Salo, I. Davidkin, T. Kilpi, K. Auranen, Modelling the impact of varicella vaccination on varicella and zoster, Epidemiol. Infect., 138 (2010), 469–481. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0950268809990768 doi: 10.1017/S0950268809990768
![]() |
[18] |
A. J. V. Hoek, A. Melegaro, E. Zagheni, W. J. Edmunds, N. Gay, Modelling the impact of a combined varicella and zoster vaccination programme on the epidemiology of varicella zoster virus in England, Vaccine, 29 (2011), 2411–2420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.01.037 doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.01.037
![]() |
[19] |
A. Melegaro, V. Marziano, E. D. Fava, P. Poletti, M. Tirani, C. Rizzo, et al., The impact of demographic changes, exogenous boosting and new vaccination policies on varicella and herpes zoster in Italy: A modelling and cost-effectiveness study, BMC Med., 16 (2018), 117. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-018-1094-7 doi: 10.1186/s12916-018-1094-7
![]() |
[20] |
J. Karsai, R. Csuma-Kovács, Å. Dánielisz, Z. Molnár, J. Dudás, T. Borsos, et al., Modeling the transmission dynamics of varicella in Hungary, J. Math. Ind., 10 (2020), 12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13362-020-00079-z doi: 10.1186/s13362-020-00079-z
![]() |
[21] |
J. Suh, T. Lee, J. K. Choi, J. Lee, S. H. Park, The impact of two-dose varicella vaccination on varicella and herpes zoster incidence in South Korea using a mathematical model with changing population demographics, Vaccine., 39 (2021), 2575–2583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.03.056 doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.03.056
![]() |
[22] |
M. Pawaskar, C. Burgess, M. Pillsbury, T. Wisløff, E. Flem, Clinical and economic impact of universal varicella vaccination in Norway: a modeling study, PLoS One, 16 (2021), e0254080. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254080 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0254080
![]() |
[23] | National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Tuberculosis and Infectious Diseases Department, Health Service Bureau, Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, Cumulative vaccination coverage report. Available from: https://www.niid.go.jp/niid/images/vaccine/cum-vaccine-coverage/cum-vaccine-coverage_30.pdf. |
[24] |
A. Suzuki, H. Nishiura, Reconstructing the transmission dynamics of varicella in Japan: An elevation of age at infection, PeerJ, 10 (2022), e12767. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.12767 doi: 10.7717/peerj.12767
![]() |
[25] | Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan. 2021a. Notification rules of infectious diseases: Chickenpox. Available from: https://www.mhlw.go.jp/bunya/kenkou/kekkaku-kansenshou11/01-05-19.html. |
[26] | Infectious Disease Surveillance Center, The report of national epidemiological surveillance of vaccine-preventable diseases. Available form: https://www.niid.go.jp/niid/ja/y-reports/669-yosoku-report.html. |
[27] |
T. Ozaki, Long-term clinical studies of varicella vaccine at a regional hospital in Japan and proposal for a varicella vaccination program, Vaccine, 31 (2013), 6155–6160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2013.10.060 doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2013.10.060
![]() |
[28] | National Institute of Population and Social Security Research, Population projections for Japan (2017): 2016 to 2065. Available from: http://www.ipss.go.jp/pp-zenkoku/e/zenkoku_e2017/pp29_summary.pdf. |
[29] |
P. E. Fine, J. A. Clarkson, Measles in England and Wales–I: An analysis of factors underlying seasonal patterns, Int. J. Epidemiol., 11 (1982), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/11.1.5 doi: 10.1093/ije/11.1.5
![]() |
1. | Amjad Ali, Muhammad Arshad, Eskandar Ameer, Asim Asiri, Certain new iteration of hybrid operators with contractive M -dynamic relations, 2023, 8, 2473-6988, 20576, 10.3934/math.20231049 | |
2. | Muhammad Tariq, Muhammad Arshad, Mujahid Abbas, Eskandar Ameer, Saber Mansour, Hassen Aydi, A relation theoretic m-metric fixed point algorithm and related applications, 2023, 8, 2473-6988, 19504, 10.3934/math.2023995 | |
3. | Imo Kalu Agwu, Naeem Saleem, Umar Isthiaq, A new modified mixed-type Ishikawa iteration scheme with error for common fixed points of enriched strictly pseudocontractive self mappings and ΦΓ-enriched Lipschitzian self mappings in uniformly convex Banach spaces, 2025, 26, 1989-4147, 1, 10.4995/agt.2025.17595 | |
4. | Muhammad Tariq, Sabeur Mansour, Mujahid Abbas, Abdullah Assiry, A Solution to the Non-Cooperative Equilibrium Problem for Two and Three Players Using the Fixed-Point Technique, 2025, 17, 2073-8994, 544, 10.3390/sym17040544 |