Abstract
In this paper, we prove Hyers–Ulam–Rassias stability of \(C^{*}\)-algebra homomorphisms for the following generalized Cauchy–Jensen equation:
for all \(\mu\in\mathbb{S}:= \{ \lambda\in\mathbb{C} \mid|\lambda| =1\}\) and for any fixed positive integer \(\alpha\geq2\), which was introduced by Gao et al. [J. Math. Inequal. 3:63–77, 2009], on \(C^{*}\)-algebras by using fixed poind alternative theorem. Moreover, we introduce and investigate Hyers–Ulam–Rassias stability of generalized θ-derivation for such functional equations on \(C^{*}\)-algebras by the same method.
Similar content being viewed by others
1 Introduction and preliminaries
Throughout this paper, let \(\mathbb{N}\), \(\mathbb{R}\) and \(\mathbb{C}\) be the set of natural numbers, the set of real numbers, the set of complex numbers, respectively. The stability problem of functional equations was initiated by Ulam in 1940 [2] arising from concern over the stability of group homomorphisms. This form of asking the question is the object of stability theory. In 1941, Hyers [3] provided a first affirmative partial answer to Ulam’s problem for the case of approximately additive mapping in Banach spaces. In 1978, Rassias [4] gave a generalization of Hyers’ theorem for linear mapping by considering an unbounded Cauchy difference. A generalization of Rassias’ result was developed by Găvruţa [5] in 1994 by replacing the unbounded Cauchy difference by a general control function.
In 2006, Baak [6] investigated the Cauchy–Rassis stability of the following Cauchy–Jensen functional equations:
or
for all \(x,y,z \in X\), in Banach spaces.
The fixed point method was applied to study the stability of functional equations by Baker in 1991 [7] by using the Banach contraction principle. Next, Radu [8] proved a stability of functional equation by the alternative of fixed point which was introduced by Diaz and Margolis [9]. The fixed point method has provided a lot of influence in the development of stability.
In 2008, Park and An [10] proved the Hyers–Ulam–Rassias stability of \(C^{*}\)-algebra homomorphisms and generalized derivations on \(C^{*}\)-algebras by using alternative of fixed point theorem for the Cauchy–Jensen functional equation \(2f ( \frac{x+y}{2} + z ) = f(x) + f(y) +2f(z)\), which was introduced and investigated by Baak [6]
The definition of the generalized Cauchy–Jensen equation was given by Gao et al.[1] in 2009 as follows.
Definition 1.1
([1])
Let G be an n-divisible abelian group where \(n \in\mathbb{N}\) (i.e. \(a \mapsto na \mid G \to G\) is a surjection) and X be a normed space with norm \(\|\cdotp\|_{X}\). For a mapping \(f : G\to X\), the equation
for all \(x,y,z \in G\) and for any fixed positive integer \(n \geq2\) is said to be a generalized Cauchy–Jensen equation (GCJE, shortly).
In particular, when \(n = 2\), it is called a Cauchy–Jensen equation. Moreover, they gave the following useful properties.
Corollary 1.2
([1])
For a mapping \(f : G \to X\), the following statements are equivalent.
-
(i)
f is additive.
-
(ii)
\(n f (\frac{x+y}{n} + z ) = f(x) + f(y) +nf(z)\), for all \(x,y,z \in G\).
-
(iii)
\(\Vert nf (\frac{x+y}{n} + z ) \Vert _{X} \geq\| f(x) + f(y) + n f(z)\|_{X}\), for all \(x,y,z \in G\).
It is obvious that a vector space is n-divisible abelian group, so Corollary 1.2 works for a vector space G.
All over this paper, \(\mathbb{A}\) and \(\mathbb{B}\) are \(C^{*}\)-algebras with norm \(\|\cdotp\|_{\mathbb{A}}\) and \(\|\cdotp\|_{\mathbb{B}}\), respectively. We recall a fundamental result in fixed point theory. The following is the definition of a generalized metric space which was introduced by Luxemburg in 1958 [11].
Definition 1.3
([11])
Let X be a set. A function \(d: X\times X \to[0,\infty]\) is called a generalized metric on X if d satisfies the following conditions:
-
(i)
\(d(x,y) = 0\) if and only if \(x=y\),
-
(i)
\(d(x,y) = d(y,x)\), for all \(x,y \in X\),
-
(iii)
\(d(x,z) \leq d(x,y) + d(y,z)\), for all \(x,y,z \in X\).
The following fixed point theorem will play important roles in proving our main results.
Theorem 1.4
([9])
Let \((X,d)\) be a complete generalized metric space and \(T : X\to X\) be a strictly contractive mapping, that is,
for all \(x,y \in X\) and for some Lipschitz \(k < 1\). Then, for each given element \(x \in X\), either
for all nonnegative integer n or there exists a positive integer \(n_{0}\) such that
-
(i)
\(d(T^{n}x,T^{n+1}x) < \infty\) for all \(n \geq n_{0}\),
-
(ii)
the sequence \(\{ T^{n} x\}\) converges to a fixed point \(y^{*}\) of T,
-
(iii)
\(y^{*}\) is the unique fixed point of T in the set \(Y = \{ y \in X \mid d(T^{n_{0}}x,y) < \infty\}\),
-
(iv)
\(d(y,y^{*}) \leq \frac{1}{1-k} d(y,Ty)\), for all \(y \in Y\).
The following lemma is useful for proving our main results.
Lemma 1.5
([12])
Let \(f : \mathbb{A} \to\mathbb{B}\) be an additive mapping such that \(f(\mu x)=\mu f(x)\) for all \(x\in\mathbb{A}\) and all \(\mu\in\mathbb {S} := \{ \lambda\in\mathbb{C} \mid |\lambda| =1\}\). Then the mapping f is \(\mathbb{C}\)-linear.
2 Stability of \(C^{*}\)-algebra homomorphisms
Let f be a mapping of \(\mathbb{A}\) into \(\mathbb{B}\). We define
for all \(\mu\in\mathbb{S}\), for all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\) and for any fixed positive integer \(\alpha\geq2\).
We prove the Hyers–Ulam–Rassias stability of \(C^{*}\)-algebra homomorphisms for the functional equation \(E_{\mu}f(x,y,z) = 0\).
Theorem 2.1
Let \(\phi: \mathbb{A}^{3} \to[0,\infty )\) be a function such that there exists a \(k<1\) satisfying
for all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\). Let f be a mapping of \(\mathbb{A}\) into \(\mathbb{B}\) satisfying
for all \(\mu\in\mathbb{S}\) and for all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\). Then there exists a unique \(C^{*}\)-algebra homomorphism \(F : \mathbb{A} \to \mathbb{B}\) such that
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\).
Proof
Consider the set
and introduce the generalized metric on X as follows:
It is easy to show that \((X,d)\) is complete.
Now, we consider the linear mapping \(T : X \to X\) such that
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). Next, we will show that T is a strictly contractive self-mapping of X with the Lipschitz constant k. For any \(g,h \in X\), let \(d(g,h) = K\) for some \(K \in\mathbb{R}_{+}\). Then we have
By (2.2), we obtain
Hence, we obtain
Letting \(\mu= 1\) and \(x=y=z\) in (2.1), we get
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). By (2.3), we have
which implies that
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\), that is,
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). It follows from (2.7) that we have
By Theorem 1.4, there exists a mapping \(F : \mathbb{A} \to \mathbb{B}\) such that the following conditions hold.
-
(1)
F is a fixed point of T, that is, \(TF(x)= F(x)\) for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). Then we have
$$F(x) = TF(x)= \frac{\alpha}{2+\alpha} F \biggl(\frac{2+\alpha}{\alpha }x \biggr)\quad \Rightarrow\quad F \biggl(\frac{2+\alpha}{\alpha}x \biggr) = \frac {2+\alpha}{\alpha}F(x) $$for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). Moreover, the mapping F is a unique fixed point of T in the set
$$ Y = \bigl\{ g \in X \mid d(f,g) < \infty\bigr\} . $$From (2.7), there exists \(C \in(0,\infty)\) satisfying
$$ \bigl\Vert f(x)-F(x) \bigr\Vert _{\mathbb{B}} \leq C \phi(x,x,x), $$for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\).
-
(2)
The sequence \(\{T^{n}f\}\) converges to F. This implies that we have the equality
$$ F(x)=\lim_{n\to\infty} \biggl( \frac{\alpha}{2+\alpha} \biggr)^{n} f \biggl( \biggl(\frac{2+\alpha}{\alpha} \biggr)^{n} x \biggr) $$(2.8)for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\).
-
(3)
We obtain \(d(f,F) \leq \frac{1}{1-k} d(f,Tf)\), which implies that
$$ d(f,F) \leq \frac{1}{1-k} d(f,Tf) \leq\frac{1}{(1-k)(2+\alpha)}. $$(2.9)Therefore, inequality (2.6) holds.
From (2.2), for any \(j \in\mathbb{N}\), we have
for all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\). Since \(0 < k < 1\), we obtain
for all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\).
It follows from (2.3), (2.8) and (2.10) that
for all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\). Hence, we have
for all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\). From Corollary 1.2 and (2.11), we see that F is additive, that is,
for all \(x,y \in\mathbb{A}\). Next, we can show that \(F : \mathbb{A} \to\mathbb{B}\) is \(\mathbb{C}\)-linear. Firstly, we will show that, for any \(x \in\mathbb{A}\), \(F(\mu x) = \mu F(x)\) for all \(\mu\in\mathbb {S}\). For each \(\mu\in\mathbb{S}\), substituting \(x,y,z\) in (2.1) by \(( \frac{2+\alpha}{\alpha } )^{n} x\), we obtain
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). By (2.3), we have
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). From (2.13), in the case \(\mu=1\), we obtain the fact that
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). It follows from (2.3), (2.13) and (2.14) that
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). This implies that
for all \(x\in\mathbb{A}\). By (2.10), we have
which implies that
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). It follows from (2.12), (2.15) and Lemma 1.5 that \(F:\mathbb{A} \to\mathbb {B}\) is \(\mathbb{C}\)-linear. Next, we will show that F is a \(C^{*}\)-algebra homomorphism. It follows from (2.4) that
for all \(x,y \in\mathbb{A}\). Hence
for all \(x,y \in\mathbb{A}\).
Finally, it follows from (2.5) that
for all \(x\in\mathbb{A}\), which implies that
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). Therefore, \(F : \mathbb{A} \to\mathbb{B}\) is a \(C^{*}\)-algebra homomorphism. □
Corollary 2.2
Let \(p\in[0,1)\), \(\varepsilon\in[0,\infty)\) and f be a mapping of \(\mathbb{A}\) into \(\mathbb{B}\) such that
for all \(\mu\in\mathbb{S}\) and for all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\). Then there exists a unique \(C^{*}\)-algebra homomorphism \(F : \mathbb{A} \to \mathbb{B}\) such that
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\).
Proof
The proof follows from Theorem 2.1 by taking
for all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\). Then \(k= (\frac{2+\alpha}{\alpha } )^{p-1}\) and we get the desired results. □
Theorem 2.3
Let \(\phi: \mathbb{A}^{3} \to[0,\infty)\) be a function such that there exists a \(k < 1\) such that
for all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\). Let f be a mapping of \(\mathbb{A}\) into \(\mathbb{B}\) satisfying (2.3), (2.4) and (2.5). Then there exists a unique \(C^{*}\)-algebra homomorphism \(F : \mathbb{A} \to\mathbb{B}\) such that
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\).
Proof
We consider the linear mapping \(T : X\to X\) such that
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). By a similar proof to Theorem 2.1, T is a strictly contractive self-mapping of X with the Lipschitz constant k. Letting \(\mu= 1\) and substituting \(x,y,z\) in (2.3) by \(\frac {\alpha}{2+\alpha}x\), we have
for all \(x\in\mathbb{A}\). From inequality (2.22) we get
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\), that is,
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). Hence, we obtain
By Theorem 1.4, there exists a mapping \(F : \mathbb{A} \to \mathbb{B}\) such that the following conditions hold.
-
(1)
F is a fixed point of T, that is, \(TF(x) = F(x)\) for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). Then we have
$$F(x) = TF(x) = \frac{2+\alpha}{\alpha} F \biggl(\frac{\alpha}{2+\alpha }x \biggr) \quad \Rightarrow\quad F \biggl(\frac{\alpha}{2+\alpha}x \biggr) = \frac {\alpha}{2+\alpha}F(x) $$for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). Moreover, the mapping F is a unique fixed point of T in the set
$$ Y = \bigl\{ g \in X \mid d(f,g) < \infty\bigr\} . $$From (2.7), there exists \(C \in(0,\infty)\) satisfying
$$ \bigl\Vert f(x)-F(x) \bigr\Vert _{\mathbb{B}} \leq C \phi(x,x,x), $$for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\).
-
(2)
The sequence \(\{T^{n}f\}\) converges to F. This implies that the equality
$$ F(x)=\lim_{n\to\infty} \biggl( \frac{2+\alpha}{\alpha} \biggr)^{n} f \biggl( \biggl(\frac{\alpha}{2+\alpha} \biggr)^{n} x \biggr) $$(2.23)for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\).
-
(3)
We obtain \(d(f,F) \leq \frac{1}{1-k} d(f,Tf)\), which implies that
$$ d(f,F) \leq \frac{1}{1-k} d(f,Tf) \leq\frac{\alpha k}{(1-k)(2+\alpha)^{2}}. $$Therefore, inequality (2.20) holds.
It follows from (2.19) and same argument in Theorem 2.1 that we obtain
for all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\). It follows from (2.3), (2.23), (2.24) that
for all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\). Hence, we have
for all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\). From Corollary 1.2 and the above equation, we see that F is additive for all \(x,y \in\mathbb{A}\). Next, we can show that \(F : \mathbb{A} \to\mathbb{B}\) is \(\mathbb{C}\)-linear. Firstly, we will show that, for any \(x \in\mathbb{A}\), \(F(\mu x) = \mu F(x)\) for all \(\mu\in\mathbb {S}\). For each \(\mu\in\mathbb{S}\), substituting \(x,y,z\) in (2.1) by \(( \frac{\alpha}{2+\alpha } )^{n} x\), we obtain
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). By (2.3), we have
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). From (2.25), in the case \(\mu=1\), we obtain the fact that
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). It follows from (2.3), (2.25) and (2.26) that
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). This implies that
for all \(x\in\mathbb{A}\). By (2.24), we have
which implies that
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). By Lemma 1.5, we see that F is \(\mathbb{C}\)-linear. The fact that \(F(xy) = F(x)F(y)\) and \(F(x^{*})=F(x)^{*}\) for all \(x,y \in\mathbb{A}\) can be obtained in a similar method as in the proof of Theorem 2.1. □
Corollary 2.4
Let \(p\in(2,\infty)\), \(\varepsilon\in[0,\infty)\) and f be a mapping of \(\mathbb{A}\) into \(\mathbb{B}\) satisfying (2.16), (2.17) and (2.18). Then there exists a unique \(C^{*}\)-algebra homomorphism \(F : \mathbb{A} \to\mathbb{B}\) such that
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\).
Proof
The proof follows from Theorem 2.3 and Corollary 2.2 by taking
for all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\). Then \(k= (\frac{\alpha}{2+\alpha } )^{p-2}\) and we get the desired results. □
Remark 2.5
If \(\alpha=2\), then Theorem 2.1, Corollary 2.2 and Theorem 2.3 we recover Theorem 2.1, Corollary 2.2 and Theorem 2.3 in [10], respectively.
3 Stability of generalized θ-derivations on \(C^{*}\)-algebras
Let f be a mapping of \(\mathbb{A}\) into \(\mathbb{A}\). We define
for all \(\mu\in\mathbb{S}\) and all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\) and for any fixed positive integer \(\alpha\geq2\).
Definition 3.1
A generalized θ-derivation \(\delta: \mathbb{A} \to\mathbb{A}\) is a \(\mathbb{C}\)-linear map satisfying
for all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\), where \(\theta: \mathbb{A} \to\mathbb {A}\) is a \(\mathbb{C}\)-linear mapping.
We prove the Hyers–Ulam–Rassias stability of generalized θ-derivation on \(C^{*}\)-algebras for the functional equation \(E_{\mu} f(x,y,z) = 0\).
Theorem 3.1
Let \(\phi: \mathbb{A}^{3} \to[0,\infty)\) be a function such that there exists a \(k < 1\) satisfying (2.2). Let \(f, h\) be mappings of \(\mathbb{A}\) into itself satisfying
for all \(\mu\in\mathbb{S}\) and for all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\). Then there exist unique \(\mathbb{C}\)-linear mappings \(\delta, \theta: \mathbb{A} \to\mathbb{A}\) such that
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). Moreover, \(\delta: \mathbb{A} \to\mathbb {A}\) is a generalized θ-derivation on \(\mathbb{A}\).
Proof
Let \((X,d)\) be the generalized metric space as in the proof of Theorem 2.1. We consider the linear mapping \(T:X\to X\) such that
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\) and for all \(g \in X\). Letting \(\mu=1\) and \(y=x\) in (3.3), we get
for all \(x\in\mathbb{A}\), so we have
for all \(x\in\mathbb{A}\). Hence, we obtain
It follows from the proof of Theorem 2.1 that
By the same reasoning as the proof of Theorem 2.1, there exist a unique involutive \(\mathbb{C}\)-linear mapping \(\delta: \mathbb {A} \to\mathbb{A}\) and a mapping \(\theta: \mathbb{A} \to\mathbb{A}\) satisfying (3.5) and (3.6), respectively. The mappings δ and θ are given by
and
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\), respectively. It follows from (3.2) that
for all \(x,y,z\in\mathbb{A}\). Hence
for all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\). Next, we can show that \(\theta: \mathbb {A} \to\mathbb{A}\) is \(\mathbb{C}\)-linear. Firstly, we will show that, for any \(x \in\mathbb{A}\), \(\mu(\theta x) = \theta(\mu x)\) for all \(\mu\in\mathbb{S}\). For each \(\mu\in\mathbb{S}\), substituting \(x,y,z\) in (3.3) by \(( \frac{2+\alpha}{\alpha} )^{n}x\), we obtain
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). For \(\mu= 1\), we also have
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). It follows from (3.7) and (3.8) that
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). This implies that
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). By (2.2), we have
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). That is,
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). By Lemma 1.5, we obtain that θ is a \(\mathbb{C}\)-linear mapping. Thus, \(\delta: \mathbb{A} \to\mathbb {A}\) is generalized θ-derivation satisfying (3.5). □
Corollary 3.2
Let \(p \in[0,1)\), \(\varepsilon\in[0,\infty)\) and f be a mapping of \(\mathbb{A}\) into itself such that
for all \(\mu\in\mathbb{S}\) and for all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\). Then there exist unique \(\mathbb{C}\)-linear mappings \(\delta,\theta: \mathbb {A} \to\mathbb{A}\) such that
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). Moreover, \(\delta: \mathbb{A} \to\mathbb {A}\) is a generalized θ-derivation on \(\mathbb{A}\).
Proof
The proof follows from Theorem 3.1 by taking
for all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\). Then \(k= ( \frac{2+\alpha}{\alpha} )^{p-1}\) and we get the desired results. □
Theorem 3.3
Let \(\phi: \mathbb{A}^{3} \to[0,\infty)\) such that there exists a \(k<1\) satisfying
for all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\). Let \(f, h\) be mappings of \(\mathbb{A}\) into itself satisfying (3.1), (3.2), (3.3) and (3.4). Then there exist unique \(\mathbb {C}\)-linear mappings \(\delta,\theta: \mathbb{A} \to\mathbb{A}\) such that
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). Moreover, \(\delta: \mathbb{A} \to\mathbb {A}\) is a generalized θ-derivation on \(\mathbb{A}\).
Proof
The proof is similar to the proofs of Theorem 2.3 and Theorem 3.1. □
Corollary 3.4
Let \(p \in(3,\infty]\), \(\varepsilon\in[0,\infty)\) and f be a mapping of \(\mathbb{A}\) into itself satisfying (3.9), (3.10), (3.11) and (3.12). Then there exist unique \(\mathbb{C}\)-linear mappings \(\delta,\theta: \mathbb{A} \to\mathbb{A}\) such that
for all \(x \in\mathbb{A}\). Moreover, \(\delta: \mathbb{A} \to\mathbb {A}\) is a generalized θ-derivation \(\mathbb{A}\).
Proof
The proof follows from Theorem 3.3 by taking
for all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\). Then \(k= ( \frac{\alpha}{2+\alpha} )^{p-3}\) and we get the desired results. □
We recall definition of generalized derivations on \(C^{*}\)-algebra.
Definition 3.2
([13])
A generalized derivation \(\delta: \mathbb{A} \to\mathbb{A}\) is involutive \(\mathbb{C}\)-linear and satisfies
for all \(x,y,z \in\mathbb{A}\).
Remark 3.5
According to Definition 3.1, If \(\theta= I\), I is identity mapping on \(\mathbb{A}\), then a generalized θ-derivation is a generalized derivation. If the mapping h is identity mapping and \(\alpha= 2\), Then Theorem 3.1 and Theorem 3.3 we recover Theorem 3.2 and Theorem 3.4 in [10], respectively. Moreover, if we set the mapping h is identity mapping, \(\alpha= 2\) and \(\phi(x,y,z) = \varepsilon\cdotp\|x\|^{\frac{p}{3}}_{\mathbb{A}} \cdotp\|y\|^{\frac{p}{3}}_{\mathbb{A}}\cdotp\|z\|^{\frac{p}{3}}_{\mathbb{A}}\) in Theorem 3.1 where \(p\in[0,1)\) and \(\varepsilon\in [0,\infty)\), then Theorem 3.1 one recovers Corollary 3.3 in [10] with \(k= ( \frac{2+\alpha}{\alpha} )^{p-1}\).
4 Conclusions
In the first section of main results, we prove Hyers–Ulam–Rassias stability of \(C^{*}\)-algebra homomorphisms for the generalized Cauchy–Jensen equation \(C^{*}\)-algebras by using fixed point alternative theorem. In the second section of main results, we introduce and investigate the Hyers–Ulam–Rassias stability of generalized θ-derivation for such function \(C^{*}\)-algebras by the same method. By our main results we recover partial results of Park and An in [10] by Remark 2.5 and Remark 3.5.
References
Gao, Z.X., Cao, H.X., Zheng, W.T., Xu, L.: Generalized Hyers–Ulam–Rassias stability of functional inequalities and functional equations. J. Math. Inequal. 3, 63–77 (2009)
Ulam, S.M.: A Collection of Mathematical Problems. Interscience Tracts in Pure and Applied Mathematics. Interscience Publishers, New York (1960)
Hyers, D.H.: On the stability of the linear functional equation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 27, 222–224 (1941)
Rassias, Th.M.: On the stability of the linear mapping in Banach spaces. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 72, 297–300 (1978)
Găvruţa, P.: A generalization of the Hyers–Ulam–Rassias stability of approximately additive mapping. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 184, 431–436 (1994)
Baak, C.: Cauchy–Rassias stability of Cauchy–Jensen additive mappings in Banach spaces. Acta Math. Sin. 22, 1789–1796 (2006)
Baker, J.A.: The stability of certain functional equations. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 112, 729–732 (1991)
Radu, V.: The fixed point alternative and the stability of functional equations. Fixed Point Theory 4, 91–96 (2003)
Diaz, J.B., Margolis, B.: A fixed point theorem of the alternative for contractions on a generalized complete metric space. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 74, 305–309 (1968)
Park, C., An, J.S.: Stability of the Cauchy–Jensen functional equation in \(C^{*}\)-algebras: a fixed point approach. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2008, Article ID 872190 (2008)
Luxemburg, W.A.J.: On the convergence of successive approximations in the theory of ordinary differential equations II. Koninkl, Nederl. Akademie van Wetenschappen, Amsterdam, Proc. Ser. A (5) 61 Indag. Math. 20, 540–546 (1958)
Najati, A., Park, C., Lee, J.R.: Homomorphism and derivations in \(C^{*}\)-ternary algebras. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2009, Article ID 612392 (2009)
Ara, P., Mathieu, M.: Local Multipliers of \(C^{*}\)-Algebras. Springer, London (2003)
Acknowledgements
The author has greatly benefited from the referee’s report and would like to thank the referees for their valuable comments and kind suggestions, which have considerably contributed to the improvement of this work.
Funding
Not applicable.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors equally contributed to this work. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
About this article
Cite this article
Kaskasem, P., Klin-eam, C. Approximation of the generalized Cauchy–Jensen functional equation in \(C^{*}\)-algebras. J Inequal Appl 2018, 236 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13660-018-1824-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13660-018-1824-6