Common Fixed Point Theorems for Random Multivalued Contractive Mappings with Weak Compatibility ()
1. Introduction
The application of fixed point theory in different branches of mathematics, statistics, engineering and economics relating to problems associated with approximation theory, theory of differential equations, theory of integral equations etc. has been recognized in the existing literature [1]-[3]. Progress in the study on fixed points of non-expansive mappings, contractive mappings in various spaces like a metric space, a Banach space, a fuzzy metric space, a cone metric space etc. has been saturated at large. After the initial impetus given by the Prague school of Probability in 1950s, considerable attention has been given to the study of random fixed point theorems. This arises because of the significance of fixed point theorems in probabilistic functional analysis and probabilistic models along with several applications. Issues relating to measurability of solutions, probabilistic and statistical aspects of random solutions have arisen due to the introduction of randomness. It is no denying the fact that random fixed point theorems are stochastic generalizations of classical fixed point theorems that have been described as deterministic results.
Špaček [4] and Hanš [5] first proved random fixed point theorems for random contraction mappings on separable complete metric spaces. The article by Fierro et al. [6] in 2009 attracted the attention of several mathematicians and led to the development of this theory. Špaček and Hanš’s theorems have been extended to multivalued contraction mappings by Itoh [7]. A random version of Schaduer’s fixed point theorem on an atomic probability measure space has been provided by Mukherjee [8]. Itoh [7] obtained random fixed point theorems with an application to random differential equations in Banach spaces. Several random fixed point theorems including random analogue of the classical results have been obtained by many authors [9]-[20]. Kumam [19] proved some random coincidence points and random common fixed point theorems for nonlinear multivalued random operators. They also proved the existence of a random coincidence point for a pair of reciprocally continuous and compatible single-valued and multivalued operators. Later, many scholars have obtained a lot of multi-valued and single valued operator of fixed point results [21]-[27].
Motivated and inspired by the above results, our main objective is to prove some random fixed point theorems in a separable complete metric space for a certain class of random multivalued contractive mappings. The results are stochastic generalizations of deterministic fixed point theorems of single value mappings. The result obtained in this paper will also be useful in application to a random nonlinear integral equation.
Remark 1.1 (Motivation for the contraction condition). The rational expressions
in (3.2) are introduced to handle situations where the mappings
do not necessarily commute with
, and where the distances between image sets may vanish. These terms are inspired by the classical rational contraction inequalities of Ćirić and others, and they allow for a unified treatment of both single-valued and multivalued mappings under weak compatibility. The term
captures the product of distances between cross-images, which is essential when the usual triangle inequality fails to provide a contraction. These expressions are not arbitrary; they represent a natural generalization of the standard rational contractive conditions in the random multivalued setting.
In order to make the paper self-contained, we state some important definitions and Lemmas relate to our paper.
2. Preliminaries
Let
be a measurable space with Σ being a
-algebra of subsets of Ω, and let
be a complete separable metric space. We denote by
the family of all nonempty closed bounded subset of
, and by
the Hausdorff metric on
induced by
, that is
for
, where
is the distance from
to
.
Definition 2.1 ([18]). A measurable operator
is said to be a random fixed point of an operator
if
, for all
.
Definition 2.2 ([18]). A measurable operator
is said to be a random coincidence point of
and
if
Definition 2.3 ([18]). A measurable operator
is said to be a random common fixed point of
and
if
Definition 2.4. The random mapping
and
are said to be weakly random compatible, if for all
and
, the condition
implies
Remark 2.1. The notion of “weakly random compatible” is the random analogue of the deterministic “weakly compatible” condition. In this paper, both terms are used interchangeably in the context of random mappings, and they refer to the same compatibility condition.
Lemma 2.1 ([28]). A mapping
is called a multi-valued random operator if for every
,
is measurable. A mapping
is called a measurable selector of a measurable multifunction
if
is measurable and
, for all
.
Lemma 2.2 ([28]). Let
be measurable mappings, there is a measurable selector
of
, then for any measurable real valued function
, there exists measurable selector
of
such that
.
Lemma 2.3 ([6]). A multivalued operator
is called (Σ)-measurable, if for any open subset
of
,
. The set
be the fixed point set of
, if
. Then
has a random fixed point.
Recall that
is continuous, if for each fixed
, the operator
is continuous.
Throughout this paper, we assume that
,
,
, where
denotes the set of all positive integers and we give the following definition.
Definition 2.5.
is semi-continuous upper on
, if and only if
and
for each
,
does not decrease on
,
and
for each
.
3. Main Results
Now we show two random common fixed point theorems for random multivalued contractive mappings in metric spaces.
Theorem 3.1. Let
be a complete separable metric space, let
be a measurable space, and let
and
be mappings such that
(i)
are continuous for all
;
(ii)
are measurable for all
;
(iii)
and
;
(iv) the pairs
and
are weakly random compatible;
(v) one of
and
is complete and
(1)
where
and
(2)
Then
and
have a unique random common fixed point in
.
Proof. Let
be a family of measurable mappings. Define a function
as follows:
Since
is continuous for all
, we conclude that
is continuous for all
. Also, since
is measurable for all
, we conclude that
is measurable (see Wagner ([29], page 868, 31, 32)) for all
. Thus
is the Caratheodory function. Therefore, if
is a measurable mapping, then
is also measurable (see [29]). Let
be arbitrary. Then the multifunction
defined by
is measurable [30].
Now we will construct sequences of measurable mappings
, the sequence
By the Kuratowski-Ryll-Nardzewski selector theorem [28], there exists a measurable selector
. Then, using Lemma 2.2 with
, we obtain a measurable selector
such that
Since
and
, there exist measurable mappings
such that
Continuing this process inductively, and at each step applying Lemma 2.2 to select the next point with a controlled distance estimate, we construct sequences of measurable mappings
satisfying
(3)
(4)
The distance
is then controlled by the Hausdorff metric via Lemma 2.2, which justifies the subsequent inequalities involving
. Put
for each
.
Firstly, we show that
and
have at most a random common fixed point in
, for all
,
. Suppose that
and
are two different random common fixed points of
and
. It follows from (3.1), (3.2), we have
(5)
and
(6)
which is a contradiction. Hence
and
have at most a random common fixed point in
.
Secondly we show that
and
have a random common fixed point
, if there exist
satisfying
(7)
Assume that (3.4) holds for some measurable mappings
, i.e.,
Put
. Note that (iv) implies that
and
Suppose that
. In view of (3.1), (3.2), (3.4), (3.5) and
, we infer that
(8)
and
(9)
which is impossible. Consequently,
. Similarly we conclude that
. That is,
is a random common fixed point of
and
.
Thirdly we show that (3.4) holds for some
. In order to prove (3.4), we have to consider three possible cases as follows.
Case1. There exists
satisfying
. We claim that
, otherwise
. Using (3.1)-(3.3) and
, we deduce that
(10)
and
(11)
which is a contradiction. Hence
. It follows that
and
Put
and
. It is easy to see that (3.4) holds and
is a random common fixed point of
,
,
and
.
Case2. There exists
satisfying
. As in the proof of Case1, we infer similarly that (3.4) holds for
and
and
is a random common fixed point of
,
,
and
.
Case3.
for all
. Now we claim that
for all
. Suppose that
for some
. By virtue of (3.1), (3.2) and
, we arrive at
(12)
and
(13)
which is absurd. Hence
for each
. As in the proofs of (3.6) and (3.7), we infer similarly that
for all
. Consequently,
is a nonincreasing positive sequence, which means that there exists a constant
with
(14)
Suppose that
. Making use of (2.1), (2.2), (2.6), (2.8) and
, we get that
we take the limit and use the property of
,we get that
which is a contradiction. Hence
. That is,
(15)
In order to prove that
is a Cauchy sequence, by (3.9) we need only to prove that
is a Cauchy sequence. Suppose that
is not a Cauchy sequence. It follows that there exists
such that for each even integer
there are even integers
,
with
and
(16)
For every even integer
, let
be the least even integer exceeding
satisfying (3.10). It follows that
(17)
Note that
(18)
In terms of (2.9)-(2.12), we know that
(19)
In light of (3.1), (3.2), (3.9), (3.13),
, we deduce that
and
which is a contradiction. Therefore
is a Cauchy sequence, Assume that
is complete. Notice that
, which implies that
converges to a point
. Obviously
. Put
. It follows that
. Suppose that
. In view of (3.1)-(3.3),
, and
, we infer that
and
which is a contradiction. Therefore,
, which together with (iii) means that
. Put
, that is,
. Suppose that
. By means of (3.1), (3.2) and
, we get that
(20)
and
(21)
which is impossible. That is,
. Hence (3.4) holds.
Assume that
is complete. Notice that
, which implies that
converges to a point
. Obviously
. Put
. It follows that
. Observe that
, which implies that there exists
with
. As in the proof of completeness of
, we infer that (3.4) holds. Similarly we conclude that (3.4) holds if one of
and
is complete. This completes the proof.
**Example 3.1 (Concrete application of Theorem 3.1). Let
with the usual metric,
with the Borel
-algebra, and define
Then
, and
. Taking
, one can verify that condition (3.1)-(3.2) holds. The unique random common fixed point is
for all
. This example demonstrates that the rational contraction condition is not vacuous and can be satisfied by simple, non-trivial operators.** As in the proof of Theorem 3.1, we have the following result and omit its proof.
Theorem 3.2 Let
be a complete separable metric space, let
be a measurable space, and let
and
be mappings such that
(i)
are continuous for all
;
(ii)
are measurable for all
;
(iii)
and
;
(iv) the pairs
and
are weakly compatible;
(v) one of
and
is a complete and
(22)
Then
and
have a unique random common fixed point in
.
Remark 3.1. If in Theorem 3.1,
for all
, then we get the following random fixed point theorem.
Theorem 3.3. Let
be a complete separable metric space, let
be a measurable space, and let
be mappings such that
(i)
are continuous for all
;
(ii)
are measurable for all
;
(iii) one of
and
is a complete and
(23)
Then
and
have a unique random common fixed point in
.
For
we have the following results as a special case of the above theorem.
Corollary 3.1. Let
be a complete separable metric space, let
be a measurable space, and let
,
, be mappings such that
(i)
are continuous for all
;
(ii)
are measurable for all
;
(iii)
is a complete and
(24)
then
and
have a unique random common fixed point in
.
Remark 3.2. For
, then we obtain the corresponding theorem of [18].
Now we deduce the results for single-valued self-mappings from Theorem 3.1, 3.2.
Theorem 3.4. Let
be a complete separable metric space, let
be a measurable space, and let
and
be mappings such that
(i)
are continuous for all
;
(ii)
are measurable for all
;
(iii)
and
;
(iv) the pairs
and
are weakly random compatible;
(v) one of
and
is a complete and
(25)
where
and
(26)
Then
and
have a unique random common fixed point in
.
Remark 3.3. For
then we obtain the following Corollary.
Corollary 3.2. Let
be a complete separable metric space, let
be a measurable space, and let
and
be mappings such that
(i)
are continuous for all
;
(ii)
are measurable for all
;
(iii)
and
;
(iv) the pairs
and
are weakly random compatible;
(v) one of
and
is a complete and
(27)
where
and
(28)
Then
and
have a unique random common fixed point in
.