Printer Friendly

A common fixed point theorem in intuitionistic fuzzy metric spaces.

Abstract

In this paper, we consider an intuitionistic fuzzy metric space and prove a common fixed point theorem in this space.

AMS subject classification: 47H10, 54E50

Keywords: Intuitionistic fuzzy metric spaces, completeness, fixed point theorem.

1. Introduction and Preliminaries

In this section, using the idea of intuitionistic fuzzy metric spaces introduced by Park [3] we define the new notion of intuitionistic fuzzy metric spaces with the help of the notion of continuous t-representable.

Lemma 1.1. ([2]) Consider the set [L.sup.*] and operation [[less than or equal to].sub.[L.sup.*] defined by:

[L.sup.*] = {([x.sub.1], [x.sub.2]) : ([x.sub.1], [x.sub.2]) [member of] [[0, 1].sup.2] and [x.sub.1] + [x.sub.2] [less than or equal to] 1},

([x.sub.1], [x.sub.2]) [[less than or equal to].sub.[L.sup.*]] ([y.sub.1], [y.sub.2]) [left and right arrow] [x.sub.1] [less than or equal to] [y.sub.1] and [x.sub.2] [greater than or equal to] [y.sub.2], for every ([x.sub.1], [x.sub.2]), ([y.sub.1], [y.sub.2]) [member of] [L.sup.*]. Then ([L.sup.*], [[less than or equal to].sub.[L.sup.*]]) is a complete lattice.

Definition 1.2. ([1]) An intuitionistic fuzzy set [A.sub.[zeta],[eta]] in a universe U is an object [A.sub.[zeta],[eta]] = {([[zeta].sub.A](u), [[eta].sub.A](u))|u [member of] U}, where, for all u [member of] U, [[zeta].sub.A](u) [member of] [0, 1] and [[eta].sub.A](u) [member of] [0, 1] are called the membership degree and the non-membership degree, respectively, of u in [A.sub.[zeta],[eta]], and furthermore they satisfy [[zeta].sub.A](u) + [[eta].sub.A](u) [less than or equal to] 1.

Definition 1.3. For every [z.sub.[alpha]] = ([x.sub.[alpha]], [y.sub.[alpha]]) [member of] [L.sup.*] we define

[??]([z.sub.[alpha]]) = (sup([x.sub.[alpha]]), inf([y.sub.[alpha]])).

Since [z.sub.[alpha]] [member of] [L.sup.*] then [x.sub.[alpha]] + [y.sub.[alpha]] [less than or equal to] 1 so sup([x.sub.[alpha]]) + inf([y.sub.[alpha]]) [less than or equal to] sup([x.sub.[alpha]] + [y.sub.[alpha]]) [less than or equal to] 1, i.e. [??] ([z.sub.[alpha]]) [member of] [L.sup.*]. We denote its units by [0.sub.[L.sub.*]] = (0, 1) and [1.sub.[L.sub.*]] = (1, 0).

Classically, a triangular norm * = T on [0, 1] is defined as an increasing, commutative, associative mapping T : [[0, 1].sup.2] [right arrow] [0, 1] satisfying T (1, x) = 1 x = x, for all x [member of] [0, 1]. A triangular conorm S = [??] is defined as an increasing, commutative, associative mapping S : [[0, 1].sup.2] [right arrow] [0, 1] satisfying S(0, x) = 0 [??] x = x, for all x [member of] [0, 1]. Using the lattice ([L.sup.*], [[less than or equal to].sub.[L.sup.*]]) these definitions can be straightforwardly extended.

Definition 1.4. ([2]) A triangular norm (t-norm) on [L.sup.*] is a mapping [tau] : [([L.sup.*]).sup.2] [right arrow] [L.sup.*] satisfying the following conditions:

([for all] x [member of] [L.sup.*])([tau] (x, [1.sub.[L.sup.*]]) = x), (boundary condition)

([for all] (x, y) [member of] [([L.sup.*]).sup.2])([tau] (x, y) = [tau] (y, x)), (commutativity)

([for all] (x, y, z) [member of] [([L.sup.*]).sup.3])([tau] (x, [tau] (y, z)) = [tau] ([tau] (x, y), z)), (associativity)

([for all] (x, x', y, y') [member of] [([L.sup.*]).sup.4])(x [[less than or equal to].sub.[L.sup.*]] x' and y [[less than or equal to].sub.[L.sup.*]] y' [??] [tau] (x, y) [[less than or equal to].sub.[L.sup.*]] [tau] (x', y')). (monotonicity).

Definition 1.5. ([2]) A continuous t-norm [tau] on [L.sup.*] is called continuous t-representable if and only if there exist a continuous t-norm * and a continuous t-conorm [??] on [0, 1] such that, for all x = ([x.sub.1], [x.sub.2]), y = ([y.sub.1], [y.sub.2]) [member of] [L.sup.*],

[tau] (x, y) = ([x.sub.1] * [y.sub.1], [x.sub.2] [??] [y.sub.2]).

We say the continuous t-representable is natural and write [[tau].sub.n] whenever [[tau].sub.n] (a, b) = [[tau].sub.n] (c, d) and a [[less than or equal to].sub.[L.sup.*]] c implies b [[greater than or equal to].sub.[L.sup.*]] d.

Definition 1.6. A negator on [L.sup.*] is any decreasing mapping N : [L.sup.*] [right arrow] [L.sup.*] satisfying N([0.sub.[L.sup.*]]) = [1.sub.[L.sup.*]] and N([1.sub.[L.sup.*]]) = [0.sub.[L.sup.*]]. If N(N(x)) = x, for all x [member of] L, then N is called an involutive negator.

Definition 1.7. LetM,N are fuzzy sets from [X.sub.2] x (0, +[infinity]) to [0, 1]such that M(x, y, t)+ N(x, y, t) [less than or equal to] 1 for all x, y [member of] X and t > 0. The 3-tuple (X,[M.sub.M,N], [tau]) is said to be an intuitionistic fuzzy metric space if X is an arbitrary (non-empty) set, [tau] is a continuous t-representable and [M.sub.M,N] is a mapping [X.sub.2] x(0,+[infinity]) [right arrow] [L.sup.*] (an intuitionistic fuzzy set, see Definition 1.2) satisfying the following conditions for every x, y [member of] X and t, s > 0:

(a) [M.sub.M,N](x, y, t) > [L.sup.*] [0.sub.[L.sup.*]];

(b) [M.sub.M,N](x, y, t) = [1.sub.[L.sup.*]] if and only if x = y;

(c) [M.sub.M,N](x, y, t) = [M.sub.M,N](y, x, t);

(d) [M.sub.M,N](x, y, t + s) [[greater than or equal to].sub.[L.sup.*]] [tau] ([M.sub.M,N](x, z, t),[M.sub.M,N](z, y, s));

(e) [M.sub.M,N](x, y, x) : (0,[infinity]) [right arrow] [L.sup.*] is continuous.

In this case [M.sub.M,N] is called an intuitionistic fuzzy metric. Here,

[M.sub.M,N](x, y, t) = (M(x, y, t),N(x, y, t)).

Example 1.8. Let (X, d) be a metric space. Denote [tau] (a, b) = ([a.sub.1] [b.sub.1], min([a.sub.2] + [b.sub.2], 1)) for all a = ([a.sub.1], [a.sub.2]) and b = ([b.sub.1], [b.sub.2]) [member of] [L.sup.*] and let M and N be fuzzy sets on [X.sub.2] x (0,[infinity]) defined as follows:

[M.sub.M,N](x, y, t) = (M(x, y, t),N(x, y, t)) = ([ht.sup.n]/[ht.sup.n] + md(x, y), md(x, y)/[ht.sup.n] + md(x, y)),

for all t, h, m, n [member of] [R.sup.+]. Then (X, [M.sub.M,N], [tau]) is an intuitionistic fuzzy metric space.

Lemma 1.9. Let (X, [M.sub.M,N], T) be an intuitionistic fuzzy metric space and define [E.sub.[lambda]], [M.sub.M,N] : [X.sub.2] [right arrow] [R.sup.+] [union] {0} by

[E.sub.[[lambda]], [M.sub.M,N] (x, y) = inf{t > 0 : [M.sub.M,N](x, y, t) > [L.sup.*] N([lambda])}

for each [lambda] [member of] L \ {[0.sub.[L.sup.*]], [1.sub.[L.sup.*]]} and x, y [member of] X; here, N is an involutive negator. Then we have

(i) For any [mu] [member of] L \ {[0.sub.[L.sup.*]], [1.sub.[L.sup.*]]} there exists [lambda] [member of] L {[0.sub.[L.sup.*]], [1.sub.[L.sup.*]]} such that

[E.sub.[mu]], [M.sub.M,N] (x, z) [less than or equal to] [E.sub.[lambda]], [M.sub.M,N] (x, y) + [E.sub.[lambda]] [M.sub.M,N] (y, z)

for any x, y, z [member of] X;

(ii) The sequence [{[x.sub.n]}.sub.n[member of]N] is convergent with respect to intuitionistic fuzzy metric [M.sub.M,N] if and only if [E.sub.[lambda]],[M.sub.M,N] ([x.sub.n], x) [right arrow] 0. Also the sequence {[x.sub.n]} is a Cauchy sequence with respect to intuitionistic fuzzy metric [M.sub.M,N] if and only if it is a Cauchy sequence with [E.sub.[lambda]], [M.sub.M,N].

Proof. For (i), by the continuity of t-norms, for every [mu] [member of] L \ {[0.sub.[L.sup.*]], [1.sub.[L.sup.*]]}, we can find a [lambda] [member of] L\{[0.sub.[L.sup.*]], [1.sub.[L.sup.*]]} such that [tau] (N([lambda]),N([lambda])) [[greater than or equal to].sub.[L.sup.*]] N([mu]). By Definition 1.7 (c), we have

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.]

for every [delta] > 0, which implies that

[E.sub.[mu]], [M.sub.M,N] (x, z) [less than or equal to] [E.sub.[lambda]], [M.sub.M,N] (x, y) + [E.sub.[lambda]], [M.sub.M,N] (y, z) + 2[delta].

Since [delta] > 0 was arbitrary, we have

[E.sub.[mu]], [M.sub.M,N] (x, z) [less than or equal to] [E.sub.[lambda]], [M.sub.M,N] (x, y) + [E.sub.[lambda]], [M.sub.M,N] (y, z).

For (ii), we have [M.sub.M,N]([x.sub.n], x, [eta]) > [L.sup.*] N([lambda]) [left and right arrow] [E.sub.[lambda]], [M.sub.M,N] ([x.sub.n],x) < [eta] for every [eta] > 0.

2. The Main Results

Theorem 2.1. Let {[A.sub.n]} be a sequence of mappings Ai of a complete intuitionistic fuzzy metric space (X, [M.sub.M,N], [tau]) into itself such that, for any two mappings [A.sub.i], [A.sub.j],

[M.sub.M,N]([A.sup.m.sub.i] (x), [A.sup.m.sub.j] (y), [[alpha].sub.i,j]t) [[greater than or equal to].sub.[L.sup.*]] [M.sub.M,N](x, y, t)

for some m; here 0 < [[alpha].sub.i,j] < k < 1 for i, j = 1, 2, ... , x, y [member of] X and t > 0. Then the sequence {[A.sub.n]} has a unique common fixed point in X.

Proof. Let [x.sub.0] be an arbitrary point in X and define a sequence {[x.sub.n]} in X by [x.sub.1] = [A.sup.m.sub.1] ([x.sub.0]), [x.sub.2] = [A.sup.m.sub.2]([x.sub.1]),.... Then we have

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.]

and so on. By induction, we have

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.]

which implies

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.]

for every [lambda] [member of] L \ {[0.sub.[L.sub.*]], [1.sub.[L.sub.*]]}.

Now, we show that {[x.sub.n]} is a Cauchy sequence. For every [mu] [member of] L \ {[0.sub.[L.sub.*]], [1.sub.[L.sub.*]]}, there exists [lambda] [member of] L \ {[0.sub.[L.sub.*]], [1.sub.[L.sub.*]]} such that

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.]

as m, n [right arrow] [infinity]. Since X is left complete, there is x [member of] X such that [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.]. Now we prove that x is a periodic point of [A.sub.i] for any i = 1, 2,...,. Notice,

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.]

as n [right arrow] [infinity]. Thus [M.sub.M,N](x, [A.sup.m.sub.i](x), t) = [1.sub.[L.sub.*]] and we get [A.sup.m.sub.i] (x) = x.

To show uniqueness, assume that y [not equal to] x is another periodic point of [A.sub.i]. Then we have

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.]

as n [right arrow [infinity]. Therefore, for every t > 0, we have M(x, y, t) = [1.sub.L], i.e., x=y. Also

[A.sub.i](x) = [A.sub.i]([A.sup.m.sub.i] (x)) = [A.sup.m.sub.i] ([A.sub.i](x)),

i.e., [A.sub.i](x) is also a periodic point of [A.sub.i]. Therefore, x = [A.sub.i](x), i.e., x is a unique common fixed periodic point of the mappings [A.sub.n] for n = 1, 2,.... This completes the proof.

References

[1] K. T. Atanassov, Intuitionistic fuzzy sets, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 20, pp. 87-96, 1986.

[2] G. Deschrijver and E. E. Kerre. On the relationship between some extensions of fuzzy set theory, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 23, pp. 227-235, 2003.

[3] J.H. Park, Intuitionistic fuzzy metric spaces, Chaos, Solitons and Fractals, 22, pp. 1039-1046, 2004.

Yeol J. Cho (1) and Reza Saadati (2)

(1) Department of Mathematics Education and the RINS, Gyeongsang National University, Chinju 660-701, Korea. E-mail: yjcho@gsnu.ac.kr

(2) Institute for Studies in Applied Mathematics 1, 4th Fajr, Amol 46176-54553, Iran. E-mail: rsaadati@eml.cc
COPYRIGHT 2007 Research India Publications
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2007 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

 Reader Opinion

Title:

Comment:



 

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Cho, Yeol J.; Saadati, Reza
Publication:International Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics
Geographic Code:9SOUT
Date:Jan 1, 2007
Words:2135
Next Article:Fuzzy left h-ideals in hemirings with respect to a s-norm.
Topics:


Related Articles
The evolution of fuzzy rules as strategies in two-player games.
Games in fuzzy environments.
Fixed point theory and applications; v.6.
[theta]-Euclidean fuzzy k-ideals of semirings.
On some results in intuitionistic fuzzy metric spaces.
Realistic ecosystem modelling with fuzzy cognitive maps.
Fuzzy left h-ideals in hemirings with respect to a s-norm.
Coincidence points for noncommuting f-weakly contractive mappings.
Existence of positive radial solutions for elliptic systems (1).
Multi-objective inventory model of deteriorating items with space constraint in a fuzzy environment.

Terms of use | Copyright © 2014 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters