Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to establish fixed-point theorems for the sum of two operators A and B, where the operator A is assumed to be contractive with respect to the measure of weak noncompactness, while B is an φ-nonlinear contraction. In the last section, we apply such results to study the existence of solutions to a nonlinear Hammerstein integral equation in space.
Similar content being viewed by others
1 Introduction
The existence of fixed points for the sum of two operators has been followed with interest for a long time. In 1958, to study the existence of solutions of nonlinear equations of the form
Krasnosel’skii [1] first proved operator has a fixed point whenever M is a nonempty closed convex subset of Banach space X and the operators A and B satisfy:
-
(i)
A is continuous on M, and is relatively compact,
-
(ii)
B is a k-contraction with ,
-
(iii)
.
In 1955, Darbo [2] extended the Schauder fixed-point theorem to the setting of noncompact operators, introducing the notion of k-set contraction. It is not hard to see that the Krasnosel’skii theorem is a particular case of the Darbo theorem. Namely, it appears that is a k-set contraction with respect to the Kuratowskii measure of noncompactness. In 1967, Sadovskii [3] gave a fixed-point result more general than the Darbo theorem using the concept of condensing operator.
In 1977, De Blasi [4] introduced the concept of measure of weak noncompactness. Emmanuele [5] established a Sadovskii-type fixed-point result using the concept of ω-condensing with respect to the measure of weak noncompactness, in which the weak continuity of the operator is required. Recently, Garcia-Falset and Latrach established a new version of Sadovskii-type fixed-point theorem for the weakly sequentially continuous operators (see [[6], Lemma 3.2]).
On the other hand, since the weak continuity condition is usually not easy to verify, Latrach et al. [7, 8] established generalizations of the Schauder, Darbo and Krasnosel’skii fixed-point theorems for the weak topology. Their analysis uses the concept of the Blasi measure of weak noncompactness. Moreover, and in contrast to previous works, to prove the new versions of the fixed-point theorems, they neither assume the weak continuity nor the weakly sequential continuity of the operators.
The purpose of this paper is to establish several fixed-point theorems for the sum of two operators under ω-condensing. By relaxing the condition of weak compactness of operators, these results extend and supplement some previous ones in the literatures.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we gather some notions and preliminary facts which will be needed in our further considerations. In Section 3, on the basis of a Sadovskii-type fixed-point theorem for ω-condensing operators and its variant on whole space, we discuss several fixed-point theorems for the sum of , where A is a ω-contraction and B is an φ-nonlinear contraction. In Section 4, we apply such results to study the existence of solutions to a nonlinear Hammerstein integral equation in space.
2 Preliminaries
We first gather together some notations and preliminary facts of some weak topology feature which will be needed in our further considerations. Let be the collection of all nonempty bounded subsets of a Banach space X, and let be the subset of consisting of all weakly compact subsets of X. Also, let denote the closed ball in X centered in 0 and with radius r.
De Blasi [4] introduced the map defined by
Before we launch into the details, we recall some important properties needed hereafter for the sake of completeness (for the proofs, we refer the reader to [4] and [9]).
Lemma 2.1 Let M, and be in ; we have:
-
(a)
whenever .
-
(b)
if and only if , where is the weak closure of M.
-
(c)
.
-
(d)
where refers to the convex hull of M.
-
(e)
, for all .
-
(f)
.
-
(g)
.
-
(h)
If is a decreasing sequence of nonempty, bounded and weakly closed subsets of X with , then and , i.e., is relatively weakly compact.
The map is called the De Blasi measure of weak noncompactness. In [9], Appell and De Pascale proved that in -spaces has the following form:
for all bounded subsets M of , where X is a finite dimensional Banach space and denotes the Lebesgue measure.
Throughout this paper, X denotes a Banach space; and , respectively, denote the domain and range of operator T; and denotes the De Blasi measure of weak noncompactness of bounded subset S.
Definition 2.2 An operator is said to be ω-contractive (or a ω-α-contraction) if it maps bounded sets into bounded sets, and there exists some such that for all bounded sets S in .
An operator is said to be ω-condensing if it maps bounded sets into bounded sets, and for all bounded sets S in with .
Remark 2.3 Obviously, every ω-α-contraction with is ω-condensing.
Let T be an operator from into X. Latrach et al. [7] introduce the following conditions:
() If is a weakly convergent sequence in , then has a strongly convergent subsequence in X.
() If is a weakly convergent sequence in , then has a weakly convergent subsequence in X.
The conditions () and () were already considered in [7, 8, 10–14].
Remark 2.4
-
(a)
Operators satisfying either () or () are not necessarily weakly continuous.
-
(b)
An operator satisfies () if and only if it maps relatively weakly compact sets into relatively strongly compact ones.
-
(c)
An operator satisfies () if and only if it maps relatively weakly compact sets into relatively weakly compact ones (Eberlein-Šmulian theorem, see, e.g., [[15], pp.248-250]).
-
(d)
Every ω-contractive operator satisfies ().
-
(e)
The condition () holds true for every bounded linear operator.
Lemma 2.5 Let operator satisfy (), and let operator be continuous. Then the compound operator satisfies ().
Proof Let be a weakly convergent sequence in . By the hypothesis of T satisfying (), has a strongly convergent subsequence, say . The continuity of Q implies that is also strongly convergent, and therefore satisfies (). □
Definition 2.6 An operator is said to be φ-nonlinear contractive (or an φ-nonlinear contraction), if there exists a continuous and nondecreasing function such that
where for .
Remark 2.7 Obviously, all strictly contractions are φ-nonlinear contractions.
Lemma 2.8 (see [[16], Lemma 1.11])
Let operator be φ-nonlinear contractive on a Banach space X and satisfy (). Then for each bounded subset M of X one has .
Lemma 2.9 If an operator is φ-nonlinear contractive, then is a homeomorphism of X onto X.
Proof For any , we define the operator from X to X, by . Since T is φ-nonlinear contractive, it is easy to see that is also φ-nonlinear contractive. According to Theorem 1 in [17], has a unique fixed point x such that , i.e. , and then is surjective on X.
If and , then
which implies that F is injective and exists on X.
For proving the continuity of , suppose that there exists a point x and a sequence in X such that , and . Consequently, from the inequality
we obtain that , which implies that and, therefore, is continuous. □
3 Fixed-point theorems for the sum of two operators
The following theorem was proved by Ben Amar and Garcia-Falset [13], and its more general form was presented by Agarwal et al. [14] is a variant of the Sadovskii fixed-point theorem for the classes of operators which satisfy ().
Theorem 3.1 (see [[13], Theorem 3.1] or [[14], Theorem 2.1 and Corollary 2.2])
Let M be a nonempty, bounded, closed and convex subset of a Banach space X. Assume that is continuous and satisfies (). If T is ω-condensing, then it has a fixed point in M.
Our purpose here is to establish a fixed-point theorem for the sum of a ω-contractive operator and an φ-nonlinear contractive operator.
Theorem 3.2 Let M be a nonempty, bounded, closed and convex subset of a Banach space X. Suppose that and are two operators such that
-
(i)
A is a continuous ω-α-contraction with , and A satisfies (),
-
(ii)
B is an φ-nonlinear contraction with for , and B satisfies (),
-
(iii)
.
Then there is a point such that .
Proof By Lemma 2.9, has a continuous inverse defined on X, and then is well defined on M. Once we prove that J has a fixed point in M, the proof is achieved.
For any , according to Lemma 2.9 there exists a unique such that . The hypothesis (iii) shows that , which implies that and, therefore, .
Obviously, the compound operator J is continuous since A and is continuous and by Lemma 2.5, J satisfies (). Now by referring to the formula
for every subset S of M with , we have
Since A is ω-α-contractive and B satisfies by Lemma 2.8, we have
Now, if , inequality (3.1) becomes , which implies that . Otherwise, by recalling the assumption that for , inequality (3.1) becomes
In both cases, J is shown to be ω-condensing. Now the use of Theorem 3.1 achieves the proof. □
Remark 3.3 It should be noticed to the following particular cases:
-
(1)
If we take , then we return the above theorem back to [[7], Theorem 2.2], which is an extension of the Darbo fixed-point theorem for ω-contractive operators.
-
(2)
If we take and the function () in the above theorem, we obtain a result which was [[7], Theorem 2.3].
-
(3)
If we only take the function () in the above theorem, we obtain the following Corollary 3.4, which is a new fixed-point theorem for the sum of two operators.
-
(4)
If we only take in the above theorem, we obtain the following Corollary 3.6, which is the new version of Krasnosel’skii-type fixed-point theorems.
Corollary 3.4 Let M be a nonempty, bounded, closed and convex subset of a Banach space X. Suppose that and are two operators such that
-
(i)
A is a continuous ω-α-contraction with , and A satisfies (),
-
(ii)
B is a strict contraction with , and B satisfies (),
-
(iii)
.
Then there is a point such that .
Remark 3.5 The above corollary is a variant and supplement of [[6], Theorem 3.3], in which the authors demand that the operators A and B are weakly sequentially continuous.
Corollary 3.6 Let M be a nonempty, bounded, closed and convex subset of a Banach space X. Suppose that and are two operators such that
-
(i)
A is a continuous, is relatively weakly compact and A satisfies (),
-
(ii)
B is an φ-nonlinear contraction, and B satisfies (),
-
(iii)
.
Then there is a point such that .
Remark 3.7 The above corollary is a variant and supplement of [[18], Theorem 2.1], in which the author demands that the operators A and B are weakly sequentially continuous, and B is strictly contractive.
Now, on the basis of Corollary 3.6, we prove the following fixed-point theorem for the sum of a weakly-strongly continuous operator and a nonexpansive operator.
Theorem 3.8 Let M be a nonempty, bounded, closed and convex subset of a Banach space X. Suppose that and are two operators such that
-
(i)
A is weakly-strongly continuous, and is relatively weakly compact,
-
(ii)
B is nonexpansive and ω-condensing,
-
(iii)
is demiclosed,
-
(iv)
if and for some , then .
Then there is a point such that .
Remark 3.9
-
(1)
Recall that an operator is said to be demiclosed if for any sequence in that and , then and .
-
(2)
The assumption (iv) in the above theorem was first introduced in [19], it is slight different with [[10], Corollary 3.1] and [[11], Theorem 2.1].
-
(3)
In [[11], Theorem 2.1] and [[18], Theorem 2.4], the following condition is required: if is a sequence of M such that is weakly convergent, then has a weakly convergent subsequence. In the above theorem, we replaced it with the ω-condensing of B.
Proof of Theorem 3.8 For each , the operators A and λB fulfill the conditions of Corollary 3.6 and, therefore, there is a point such that . Now choose a sequence such that . Consequently, there exists a sequence such that
Let . We claim that S is relatively weakly compact. Suppose that it is not the case, by assumption (i) and (ii), we have
This contradiction tells us that the sequence has a weakly convergent subsequence, i.e., there exists such that . By assumption (i), we have , and then . Since is contained in bounded set M, and B maps M into a bounded set (B is nonexpansive), then is norm bounded. Thus, we have . Moreover, we have
that is, . By assumption (iii), we have , and then the proof is achieved. □
If the Banach space X is reflexive, then B is always ω-condensing on M (see, e.g., [[15], p.251]). Moreover, if we supposed that X is uniformly convex Banach space, then is demiclosed (see, e.g., [[20], pp.476-478]). Thus, we obtain the following consequence.
Corollary 3.10 Let M be a nonempty, bounded, closed and convex subset of a uniformly convex Banach space X. Suppose that and are two operators such that
-
(i)
A is weakly-strongly continuous,
-
(ii)
B is nonexpansive,
-
(iii)
if and for some , then .
Then there is a point such that .
In order to use the above results on the whole space, we first prove the following result.
Theorem 3.11 Let X be a Banach space X. Assume that the operator be continuous ω-condensing and satisfies (). Then either
-
(a)
equation has a solution, or
-
(b)
the set is unbounded for some .
Proof Choose an arbitrary . Define for each
Clearly, ρ is a continuous retraction of X on . Thus, we can define the mapping by .
Since T and ρ are continuous, obviously is also continuous. Furthermore, since T satisfies () and ρ is continuous, hence also satisfies (). We next claim that for any with .
Indeed, . For any , there are two possibilities:
-
(1)
; in this case, .
-
(2)
; in this case, .
The above argument yields .
Now, by using the properties of the measure of weak noncompactness and properties of T, we have that
as claimed, that is, is a ω-condensing.
The above argument shows that is under the conditions of Theorem 3.1 and thus we have that there exists such that . Indeed, we obtain the following results:
-
(a)
if , then , that is, T has a fixed point; otherwise,
-
(b)
if , then , that is, is a solution of the equation for and .
Consequently, if there is no such that for any , then the above arguments show that the set of solutions of equation is unbounded for some . □
We are now in a position to prove the main result on the whole space.
Theorem 3.12 Let X be a Banach space. Suppose that are two operators such that
-
(i)
A is a continuous ω-α-contraction with , and A satisfies (),
-
(ii)
B is an φ-nonlinear contraction with for , and B satisfies (),
-
(iii)
function φ satisfies .
Then, either
-
(a)
the equation has a solution, or
-
(b)
the set is unbounded for some .
Remark 3.13 Obviously, assumption (iii) in the above theorem is unnecessary whenever .
Proof of Theorem 3.12 As in the proof of Theorem 3.2, it can be seen that the compound operator is well defined from X into X. Clearly, J is continuous and J satisfies () by Lemma 2.5.
Let us prove that J maps bounded set into a bounded set. For any bounded set S such that , there exist such that and , that is, and . Thus, by assumption (ii) and the boundness of , we have
Suppose that is unbounded, i.e., there exist sequences and such that , and then by assumption (iii). This is a contradiction with in (3.2) and, therefore, is bounded.
It is similar to that of Theorem 3.2 to prove that for every bounded set S in with . Now, by using Theorem 3.11 for operator J, we obtain that either
-
(a)
the equation has a solution which is the solution of equation , or
-
(b)
the set is unbounded for some .
□
Corollary 3.14 Let X be a Banach space. Suppose that are two operators such that
-
(i)
A is a continuous ω-α-contraction with , and A satisfies (),
-
(ii)
B is a strict contraction with , and B satisfies ().
Then, either
-
(a)
the equation has a solution, or
-
(b)
the set is unbounded for some .
Corollary 3.15 Let X be a Banach space. Suppose that are two operators such that
-
(i)
A is a continuous, is relatively weakly compact, and A satisfies (),
-
(ii)
B is an φ-nonlinear contraction, and B satisfies (),
-
(iii)
function φ satisfies .
Then, either
-
(a)
the equation has a solution, or
-
(b)
the set is unbounded for some .
4 Application to Hammerstein integral equations in space
Let Ω be a domain of . A function is said to be a Carathéodory function if
-
(i)
for any fixed , the function is measurable from Ω to Y;
-
(ii)
for almost any , the function is continuous.
Let be the set of all measurable functions . If f is a Carathéodory function, then f defines an operator by . This operator is called the Nemytskii operator associated to f (or the superposition operator). Regarding its continuity and weak compactness, we have the following lemma.
Lemma 4.1 Let X, Y be two finite dimensional Banach spaces. If is a Carathéodory function, then the Nemytskii operator maps into if and only if there exist a constant and a function such that
where denotes the positive cone of the space (see [21]or [22]).
With the conditions of Lemma 4.1, the operator is obviously continuous and maps bounded sets of into bounded sets of .
Lemma 4.2 (see [[8], Lemma 3.2])
Let Ω be a bounded domain in . If is a Carathéodory function and maps into , then satisfies ().
Remark 4.3 Although Nemytskii operator satisfies (), generally it is not weakly continuous. In fact, only linear functions generate weakly continuous Nemytskii operators in spaces (see, for instance, [[9], Theorem 2.6]). The question of considering the weak sequential continuity of the Nemytskii operator acting from space to space () is discussed in [22] and the answer is shown to be negative at least for .
Next, we give an example of application for Theorem 3.12 in the Banach space of integrable function .
Example 4.4 We will study now the existence of solutions for the following variant of Hammerstein’s integral equation
in , the space of Lebesgue integrable functions on a measurable subset Ω of with values in a finite dimensional Banach space X. Here, f is a nonlinear function and k is measurable, while g is a function satisfying φ-nonlinear contractive condition in .
First, observe that the above problem may be written in the form
where B is the Nemytskii operator associated to the function g (i.e., ) from into by
and is the product of the Nemytskii operator associated to f and the linear integral operator μL where and L is defined from into by
Let us now introduce the following assumptions.
Assumptions 4.5
-
(a)
f is a Carathéodory function and acts from into ;
-
(b)
(the constant b was introduced in Lemma 4.1);
-
(c)
is a measurable function with , and there exists a continuous and nondecreasing function such that
where for and ;
-
(d)
the function is strongly measurable and the linear operator L defined by (4.2) maps into ;
-
(e)
the functions , belong to ;
-
(f)
the solution of the integral equation
is bounded for .
Remark 4.6 (1) Clearly, the condition that in assumption (c) is unnecessary whenever ;
(2) It should be noted that assumptions (d) and (e) lead to the estimate
and so
This shows that the linear operator L is continuous, hence weakly continuous from into and that .
(3) By assumption (c), we get
for every . This shows that the Nemytskii operator is continuous and maps bounded sets of into bounded sets of . According to Lemma 4.2, the operator B satisfies ().
Now we are in a position to state our main result.
Theorem 4.7 Let X and Y be two finite dimensional Banach spaces and Ω be a bounded domain of . Assume that the conditions (a)-(f) are satisfied, then the problem (4.1) has at least one solution in .
Proof Let us first observe that Lemma 4.1 implies that there are and such that
So, for any bounded subset S of , we have
According to (2.1), this leads . Thus, we have
which implies that A is a ω--contractive.
On the other hand, clearly A is continuous (see Lemma 4.1 and Remark 4.6(2)). Now we check that A satisfies the condition (). For this end, let be a weakly convergent sequence of . Using the fact that satisfies (), and then has a weakly convergent subsequence, say . Moreover, the continuity of the linear operator L implies its weak continuity on . Thus, the sequence , i.e. converges pointwisely for a.e. . Using Vitali’s convergence theorem, we conclude that converges strongly in . Therefore, A satisfies ().
Let . It follows from assumption (c) that
So, B is φ-nonlinear contractive on and from Remark 4.6(3), B satisfies ().
The above arguments show that A and B satisfy the conditions of Theorem 3.12, and assumption (f) allows us to affirm that equation (4.1) has a solution. □
Remark 4.8 Equation (4.1) was respectively considered in [8] and [12] under different assumptions. However, our results relax some assumptions of [[8], Theorem 3.1] and [[12], Theorem 3.1].
References
Krasnosel’skii MA: Some problems of nonlinear analysis. Am. Math. Soc. Transl. Ser. 2 1958, 10(2):345–409.
Darbo G: Punti uniti in transformazioni a codominio non compatto. Rend. Semin. Mat. Univ. Padova 1955, 24: 84–92.
Sadovskii BN: On a fixed point principle. Funkc. Anal. Prilozh. 1967, 4(2):74–76.
De Blasi FS: On a property of the unit sphere in Banach spaces. Bull. Math. Soc. Sci. Math. Roum. 1977, 21: 259–262.
Emmanuele G: Measure of weak noncompactness and fixed point theorems. Bull. Math. Soc. Sci. Math. Roum. 1981, 25: 353–358.
Garcia-Falset J, Latrach K: Krasnosel’skii-type fixed-point theorems for weakly sequentially continuous mappings. Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. 2012, 44: 25–38. 10.1112/blms/bdr035
Latrach K, Taoudi MA, Zeghal A: Some fixed point theorems of the Schauder and Krasnosel’skii type and application to nonlinear transport equations. J. Differ. Equ. 2006, 221: 256–271. 10.1016/j.jde.2005.04.010
Latrach K, Taoudi MA:Existence results for a generalized nonlinear Hammerstein equation on -spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2007, 66: 2325–2333. 10.1016/j.na.2006.03.022
Appell J, De Pascale E: Su alcuni parametri connessi con la misura di non compattezza di Hausdorff in spazi di funzioni misurabili. Boll. Unione Mat. Ital, B 1984, 3: 497–515.
Garcia-Falset J, Latrach K, Moreno-Galvez E, Taoudi MA: Schaefer-Krasnosel’skii fixed point theorems using a usual measure of weak noncompactness. J. Differ. Equ. 2012, 252: 3436–3452. 10.1016/j.jde.2011.11.012
Agarwal RP, O’Regan D, Taoudi MA: Browder-Krasnosel’skii type fixed point theorems in Banach spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2010. doi:10.1155/2010/243716
Djebali S, Sahnoun Z:Nonlinear alternatives of Schauder and Krasnosel’skij types with applications to Hammerstein integral equations in spaces. J. Differ. Equ. 2010, 249: 2061–2075. 10.1016/j.jde.2010.07.013
Ben Amar A, Garcia-Falset J: Fixed point theorems for 1-set weakly contractive and pseudocontractive operators on an unbounded domain. Port. Math. 2011, 68(2):125–147.
Agarwal RP, O’Regan D, Taoudi MA: Fixed point theorems for ws-compact mappings in Banach spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2010., 2010: Article ID 183596
Megginson RE: An Introduction to Banach Space Theory. Springer, Berlin; 1991.
Agarwal RP, Hussain N, Taoudi MA: Fixed point theorems in ordered Banach spaces and applications to nonlinear integral equations. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2012. doi:10.1155/2012/245872
Boyd D, Wong JSW: On nonlinear contractions. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1969, 20: 458–464. 10.1090/S0002-9939-1969-0239559-9
Taoudi MA: Krasnosel’skii type fixed point theorems under weak topology features. Nonlinear Anal. 2010, 72: 478–482. 10.1016/j.na.2009.06.086
Barroso CS: Krasnosel’skii’s fixed point theorem for weakly continuous maps. Nonlinear Anal. 2003, 55: 25–31. 10.1016/S0362-546X(03)00208-6
Zeidler E: Nonlinear Functional Analysis and Its Application I: Fixed-Point Theorems. Springer, Berlin; 1986.
Lucchetti R, Patrone F: On Nemytskij’s operator and its application to the lower semicontinuity of integral functionals. Indiana Univ. Math. J. 1980, 29(5):703–735. 10.1512/iumj.1980.29.29051
Moreira DR, Teixeira EVO: Weak convergence under nonlinearities. An. Acad. Bras. Ciênc. 2003, 75(1):9–19.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Competing interests
The author declares that he has no competing interests.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
About this article
Cite this article
Wang, F. Fixed-point theorems for the sum of two operators under ω-condensing. Fixed Point Theory Appl 2013, 102 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2013-102
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2013-102