Received: 3 March 2020 Revised: 21 April 2020 Accepted: 28 May 2020

DOI: 10.1002/cmm4.1115

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Some new fixed point theorems for generalized weak

contraction in partially ordered metric spaces

Vishal Gupta1 Naveen Mani2 Jonty Jindal1

1
Department of Mathematics, Maharishi
Markandeshwar (Deemed to be The main objective of our work is to establish unique fixed point results in par-
University) tially ordered metric spaces with the help of generalized (𝜓, 𝛼, 𝛽)-contractive
2
Department of Mathematics, Sandip mappings. An example and application to integral type contraction are given to
University
support our result.
Correspondence
Vishal Gupta, Department of KEYWORDS
Mathematics, Maharishi Markandeshwar control function, fixed point, integral type, metric spaces, partially ordered set, weak contraction
(Deemed to be University).
Email: vishal.gmn@gmail.com M O S S U B J EC T C L A S S I F I C AT I O N
Primary: 47H10; Secondary: 54H25

1 I N T RO DU CT ION

In modern research of topological spaces, fixed point theory has a wide range of applications in many branches of pure
and applied sciences such as economics, computer science, and many others. The contraction mapping principle and
monotone iterative technique are well known and is a very popular tool for solving and analyzing the results in many
branches of mathematics and applied sciences.
Jaggi1 extended the result of Banach2 and proved the following theorem for self map in complete metric spaces by
using rational contractive condition.
Theorem 1 (1). Let f be a continuous self map defined on a complete metric space (X,d). Suppose that f satisfies the

d(x, fx)d(y, fy)

d(fx, fy) ≤ 𝛼 + 𝛽d(x, y),
d(x, y)

for all x,y ∈ X, x ≠ y and for some 𝛼, 𝛽 ≥ 0 with 𝛼 + 𝛽 < 1, then f has a unique fixed point in X.
Definition 1 (3). A function 𝜓 ∶ [0, ∞) → [0, ∞) is known as control function, if the following properties are satisfied:

(i) 𝜓 is continuous and nondecreasing,

(ii) 𝜓(t) = 0 if and only if t = 0.

Dutta and Choudhury4 proved the following result by taking more than one control functions in a single inequality.
Theorem 2 (4). Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and suppose that f is a self map satisfying

𝜓(d(fx, fy)) ≤ 𝜓(d(x, y)) − 𝜙(d(x, y)),

for all x,y ∈ X, where 𝜙, 𝜓 are both altering distance functions. Then f has a unique fixed point.

Comp and Math Methods. 2020;2:e1115. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/cmm4 © 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 1 of 9
https://doi.org/10.1002/cmm4.1115
2 of 9 GUPTA et al.

From last 10 years and so, there have been trends to deteriorate the prerequisite on the contraction by in view of
metric spaces endowed with partial order. Ran and Reurings,5 in 2004, gave first result in this direction. Nieto and Lopez6
extended the result of Ran and Reurings for nondecreasing mappings and applied it to obtain a unique solution for a
first-order ordinary differential equation with periodic boundary conditions. More results can be found in References 7-18
and references there in.
Harjani and Sadarangani19 extended the result of Dutta and Choudhury4 in the sense of complete partially ordered
metric spaces and proved the following theorem.
Theorem 3 (19). Let (X, ≼) be a be a partially ordered set and suppose that there is a metric d such that (X,d) be a complete
metric space. Let f be a continuous and nondecreasing self map such that for all x,y ∈ X,

𝜓(d(fx, fy)) ≤ 𝜓(d(x, y)) − 𝜙(d(x, y)),

with x ≥ y, x ≠ y, where 𝜙, 𝜓 are both altering distance functions. If for some x0 ∈ X, x0 ≼ fx0 , then f has a fixed point.
In same year, Harjani et al20 extended the result of Jaggi1 and proved a fixed point theorem as a version of Theorem 1
in partially ordered metric space.
Theorem 4 (20). Let (X, ≼) be a be a partially ordered set and suppose that there is a metric d such that (X,d) be a complete
metric space. Let f be a non decreasing self map such that for all x,y ∈ X, x ≥ y, x ≠ y

d(x, fx)d(y, fy)

d(fx, fy) ≤ 𝛼 + 𝛽d(x, y),
d(x, y)

for some 𝛼, 𝛽 ≥ 0, 𝛼 + 𝛽 < 1. Also assume that either f is continuous or if {xn } is a nondecreasing sequence in X such that
xn → x then x = sup {xn }. If for some x0 ∈ X, x0 ≼ fx0 , then f has a fixed point.
In 2011, Luong et al21 proved a fixed point theorem for generalized weak contractions satisfying ratio-
nal expressions in partially ordered metric spaces, which is a generalized version of the result of Harjani and
Sadarangani.20
Theorem 5 (21). Let (X, ≼) be a be a partially ordered set and suppose that there is a metric d such that (X,d) be a complete
metric space. Let f be a non decreasing self map such that for all x,y ∈ X,

d(fx, fy) ≤ 𝜆(x, y) − 𝜙(𝜆(x, y)),

with x ≥ y, x ≠ y, where 𝜙 ∶ [0, ∞) → [0, ∞) is a lower semicontinuous function with 𝜙(t) = 0 if and only if t = 0 , and
{ }
d(x, fx).d(y, fy)
𝜆(x, y) = max , d(x, y) . (1)
d(x, y)

Also assume that either f is continuous or if {xn } is a nondecreasing sequence in X such that xn → x then x = sup {xn }. If
for some x0 ∈ X, x0 ≼ fx0 , then f has a fixed point.
In 2012, Yan et al22 proved a new result in sense of partially ordered metric spaces with some restricted condition on
𝜓 and 𝜙. To established their result, they also used following lemma.
Lemma 1 (22). If 𝜓 is an altering distance function and 𝜙 ∶ [0, ∞) → [0, ∞) is a continuous function with condition
𝜓(t) > 𝜙(t) for all t > 0, then 𝜙(0) = 0.
Theorem 6 (22). Let (X, ≼) be a partially ordered set and suppose that there exists a metric d ∈ X such that (X,d) is a
complete metric space. Let f : X → X be a continuous and nondecreasing mapping such that

𝜓(d(fx, fy)) ≤ 𝜙(d(x, y)),

for all x,y ∈ X with x ≥ y, where 𝜓 is an altering distance function and 𝜙 ∶ [0, ∞) → [0, ∞) is a continuous function with the
condition 𝜓(t) > 𝜙(t) for all t > 0. If there exists x0 ∈ X such that x0 ≤ fx0 , then f has a fixed point.
GUPTA et al. 3 of 9

Remark 1. In Theorem 6, the additional condition on 𝜓 and 𝜙 make the contraction new and open a scope for future
research.
Definition 2 (23). Define S = {𝛼|𝛼 ∶ [0, ∞) → [0, 1)} which satisfies the condition

𝛼(tn ) → 1 implies tn → 0.
Definition 3 (24). Let (X, ≼) be a partially ordered set. Two mappings f , g : X → X are said to be weakly increasing if
fx ≼ gfx and gx ≼ fgx for all x ∈ X.
Remark 2. Note that two weakly increasing mappings need not be nondecreasing. Some examples are given in
Reference 24.
Recently, Gupta et al25 established a common fixed point theorems for two weakly increasing mappings f and g
satisfying (𝜓, 𝛽)-Geraghty contraction type maps in an ordered complete metric space.
Theorem 7 (25). Let X be a partially ordered set and suppose that there exists a metric d in X such that (X,d) is a complete
metric space. Let f , g : X → X are weakly increasing mappings such that

𝜓(d(fx, gy)) ≤ 𝛼(d(x, y))𝛽(d(x, y)), ∀ x ≥ y,

where 𝛼 ∈ S, 𝜓 ∈ Ψ and 𝛽 ∶ [0, ∞) → [0, ∞) is a continuous function with condition 𝜓(t) > 𝛽(t) for all t > 0.
Suppose again that for each x,y ∈ X, there exists z ∈ X which is comparable to x and y.
Furthermore, if f or g is continuous, then f and g have a unique common fixed point.
Our main aim of this article is to prove a unique fixed point theorem for non decreasing mappings satisfying
(𝜓, 𝛼, 𝛽)-weak rational contraction in partially ordered metric spaces. Our main result is the generalized version of the
the result of Luong et al21 and Yan et al.22

2 MAIN RESULTS:

First, we recall the notion of a monotone nondecreasing function in a partially ordered set.
Definition 4 (24). Let (X, ≼) be a be a partially ordered set and f be self map then we say that f is monotone
nondecreasing if for all x,y ∈ X, x ≤ y , ⇒ fx ≤ fy.
Our main result is the following theorem.
Theorem 8. Let (X, ≼) be a be a partially ordered set and suppose that there is a metric d in X such that (X,d) is a complete
metric space. Let f be a non decreasing self map such that for each x,y ∈ X,

𝜓(d(fx, fy)) ≤ 𝛼(𝜆(x, y)) − 𝛽(𝜆(x, y)), (2)

with x ≥ y, x ≠ y, where 𝜆(x, y) is defined in Equation (1), 𝜓 is an altering distance function and 𝛼, 𝛽 ∶ [0, ∞) → [0, ∞), are
continuous functions with the condition 𝜓(t) > 𝛼(t) − 𝛽(t) for all t > 0, 𝛼 ≥ 𝛽.
Also, assume that
(i) f is continuous or if {xn } is a nondecreasing sequence in X such that xn → x, then x = sup {xn }
(ii) If there exist x0 ∈ X such that x0 ≼ fx0 , then f has a fixed point.

Moreover, if for every x,y ∈ X, there exists z ∈ X, which is comparable to x and y, then f has a unique fixed point.

Proof. Since f is a nondecreasing mapping, thus by induction, we get

x0 ≼ f x0 ≼ f 2 x0 … f n x0 ≼ f n+1 x0 ≼ …

Put xn + 1 = fxn . Suppose, if there exists n0 such xn0 = xn0 +1 = f xn0 , this means that xn0 is a fixed point of f and hence
the conclusion of the theorem follows.
4 of 9 GUPTA et al.

Thus assume that xn ≠ xn + 1 for all n. This implies that d(xn , xn+1 ) ≠ 0 for each n ≥ 0. Since xn − 1 and xn are comparable
for all n ≥ 1, therefore from Equation (2)

𝜓(d(xn+1 , xn )) = 𝜓(d(f xn , f xn−1 ))

≤ 𝛼(𝜆(xn , xn−1 )) − 𝛽(𝜆(xn , xn−1 )), (3)

where,
{ }
d(xn , f xn ).d(xn+1 , f xn−1 )
𝜆(xn , xn−1 ) = max , d(xn , xn−1 )
d(xn , xn−1 )
{ }
d(xn , xn+1 ).d(xn−1 , xn )
= max , d(xn , xn−1 )
d(xn , xn−1 )
= max {d(xn , xn+1 ), d(xn , xn−1 )}.

Thus from Equation (3),

𝜓(d(xn+1 , xn )) ≤ 𝛼(max {d(xn , xn+1 ), d(xn , xn−1 )}) − 𝛽(max {d(xn , xn+1 ), d(xn , xn−1 )}). (4)

Suppose d(xn , xn+1 ) > d(xn , xn−1 ), then from Equation (4)

𝜓(d(xn+1 , xn )) ≤ 𝛼(d(xn , xn+1 )) − 𝛽(d(xn , xn+1 )). (5)

By using condition of Theorem 8, we get

𝜓(d(xn+1 , xn )) < 𝜓(d(xn+1 , xn )).

This is a contradiction. Hence for all n ≥ 1, d(xn , xn+1 ) < d(xn , xn−1 ). Thus the sequence {d(xn , xn+1 )} is a monotone
decreasing sequence of nonnegative real and therefore there exist a 𝛿 ≥ 0 such that

lim d(xn , xn+1 ) = 𝛿.

n→∞

Suppose 𝛿 > 0. Taking limn→∞ on both sides of Equation (5), we get,

𝜓(𝛿) ≤ 𝛼(𝛿) − 𝛽(𝛿) < 𝜓(𝛿),

which is a contradiction, and hence 𝛿 = 0.

Therefore,
lim d(xn , xn+1 ) = 0. (6)
n→∞

Next we claim that {xn } is a Cauchy sequence. Suppose that {xn } is not a Cauchy sequence. Then there exist an 𝜖 > 0
for which we can find sub-sequence {xnk } and {xmk } of {xn } with nk > mk > k , k ≥ 1 satisfying

d(xmk , xnk ) ≥ 𝜖 and d(xmk , xnk−1 ) < 𝜖. (7)

Therefore, for all k > 0, we have

𝜖 ≤ d(xmk , xnk ) ≤ d(xmk , xnk−1 ) + d(xnk−1 , xnk ) < 𝜖 + d(xnk−1 , xnk ). (8)

Taking limit as limk→∞ and using Equation (7) in Equation (8), we get,

lim d(xmk , xnk ) = 𝜖. (9)

k→∞
GUPTA et al. 5 of 9

Also, by using triangle inequality,

d(xmk , xnk ) ≤ d(xmk , xmk−1 ) + d(xmk−1 , xnk−1 ) + d(xnk−1 , xnk )

d(xmk−1 , xnk−1 ) ≤ d(xmk−1 , xmk ) + d(xmk , xnk ) + d(xnk , xnk−1 ).

Taking limk→∞ in above both inequalities and using Equations (6) and (9), we get

lim d(xmk−1 , xnk−1 ) = 𝜖. (10)

k→∞

As nk > mk and xnk−1 and xmk−1 are comparable, then on using Equation (2), we have

𝜓(d(xnk , xmk )) = 𝜓(d(f xnk−1 , f xmk−1 )) ≤ 𝛼(𝜆(xnk−1 , xmk−1 )) − 𝛽(𝜆(xnk−1 , xmk−1 )), (11)

where,
{ }
d(xnk−1 , f xnk−1 ).d(xmk−1 , f xmk−1 )
𝜆(xnk−1 , xmk−1 ) = max , d(xnk−1 , xmk−1 )
d(xnk−1 , xmk−1 )
{ }
d(xnk−1 , xnk ).d(xmk−1 , xmk )
= max , d(xnk−1 , xmk−1 ) .
d(xnk−1 , xmk−1 )

Letting k → ∞ in the above equality and using Equations (6), (9), and (10), we get

lim 𝜆(xnk−1 , xmk−1 ) = max {0, 𝜖} = 𝜖. (12)

k→∞

Taking k → ∞ in Equation (11) and using Equation (12), we have

𝜓(𝜖) ≤ 𝛼(𝜖) − 𝛽(𝜖) < 𝜓(𝜖).

This is a contradiction to the condition of Theorem 8 and so our assumption is wrong. This proves that {xn } is a Cauchy
sequence. Call the limit z such that
lim xn = z. (13)
n→∞

Next claim that z is a fixed point of f . We prove this for two different assumptions.

Case I: Suppose f is continuous, therefore,

z = lim xn+1 = lim f xn = f ( lim xn ) = fz.
n→∞ n→∞ n→∞

This proves that z is a fixed point of f .

Case II: Assume that {xn } is a nondecreasing sequence in X such that xn → z, then z = sup {xn }. Particularly xn ≼ z for
all n. Since f is nondecreasing, therefore, fxn ≼ fz for all n, that is, xn + 1 ≼ fz for all n. Moreover, as xn ≼ xn + 1 ≼ fz
for all n and z = sup {xn }. Thus z ≤ fz. Consider the sequence {yn } which is defined as y0 = z, yn + 1 = fyn ,
n = 0,1,2 … . Since y0 ≤ fy0 , therefore {yn } is a nondecreasing sequence and thus z = sup {xn }. Hence for all n,
xn < z = y0 ≤ fz ≤ yn ≤ y.
Suppose that z ≠ y, hence from Equation (2), we have

𝜓(d(yn+1 , xn+1 )) = 𝜓(d(f yn , f xn )) ≤ 𝛼(𝜆(yn , xn )) − 𝛽(𝜆(yn , xn )). (14)

where,
{ }
d(yn , f yn ).d(xn , f xn )
𝜆(yn , xn ) = max , d(yn , xn )
d(yn , xn )
6 of 9 GUPTA et al.

{ }
d(yn , yn+1 ).d(xn , xn+1 )
= max , d(yn , xn ) .
d(yn , xn )

Taking limn→∞ in the above equality, we get

lim 𝜆(yn , xn ) = max {0, d(y, z)} = d(y, z). (15)

n→∞

Taking limn→∞ in Equation (14) and making use of Equation (15), we get

𝜓(d(y, z)) ≤ 𝛼(d(y, z)) − 𝛽(d(y, z)).

Thus from the condition of Theorem 8, we get d(y,z) = 0. Therefore, z = y. Thus we have z ≤ fz ≤ z. Therefore,
fz = z , that is z is a fixed point of f .

Uniqueness: Let us assume that x,y ∈ X are two fixed point of f , therefore there exist 𝜈 ∈ X which is comparable to
x and y. Define the sequence {𝜈n } as 𝜈0 = 𝜈, 𝜈n+1 = f 𝜈n for all n = 0,1,2,3⋅⋅⋅. Since 𝜈 is comparable with x, then we can
assume that 𝜈 ≤ x. Continuing in this way, we can show that 𝜈n ≤ x for all n. Now suppose that there exist n0 ≥ 1 such
that 𝜈n0 = x , then 𝜈n = f 𝜈n−1 = fx = x for all n ≥ n0 − 1. This implies that 𝜈n → x as n → ∞.
Now, if 𝜈n ≠ x for all n, then from Equation (2)

𝜓(d(x, 𝜈n )) = 𝜓(d(fx, f 𝜈n−1 )) ≤ 𝛼(𝜆(x, 𝜈n−1 )) − 𝛽(𝜆(x, 𝜈n−1 )), (16)

where,
{ }
d(x, fx), d(𝜈n−1 , f 𝜈n−1 )
𝜆(x, 𝜈n ) = max , d(x, 𝜈n−1 ) = d(x, 𝜈n−1 ).
d(x, 𝜈n−1 )

Thus from Equation (16) and condition of Theorem 8, we get

𝜓(d(x, 𝜈n )) ≤ 𝛼(d(x, 𝜈n−1 )) − 𝛽(d(x, 𝜈n−1 )) ≤ 𝜓(d(x, 𝜈n−1 )). (17)

Since 𝜓 is an altering distance function, thus d(x, 𝜈n ) ≤ d(x, 𝜈n−1 ) for all n ≥ 1 that is, d(x, 𝜈n ) is a decreasing sequence
of positive real numbers. Therefore, there exist a 𝜅 ≥ 0 such that d(x, 𝜈n ) → 𝜅. Let us assume that 𝜅 > 0 by taking limit
as n → ∞ on both sides of Equation (17), we arrive at contradiction and hence 𝜅 = 0. Thus in both case we have 𝜈n → x.
Similarly, 𝜈n → y this implies that x = y and hence uniqueness established. This completes the proof. ▪
Remark 3. Theorem 5 is the particular case of the Theorem 8 for 𝜓(t) = t and 𝛼(t) = t . In Reference 4, the author showed
that Theorem 4 is the particular case of Theorem 5. Hence our result is more generalized then the result of References
4,19, and 21. Here we give an example in support of our result.
Example 1. Let X = {0, 1}
x+y if x≠y ⎫
⎪
d(x, y) = 0 if x = y ⎬.
⎪
⎭

Then clearly (x,d) is a complete metric space. Let a partial order be defined as x ≼ y whenever y ≥ x Let us define
function f :X → X as,
}
fx = x − 1 if x ≠ 0
.
= 0 if x = 0

Let us define 𝜓, 𝛼, 𝛽 ∶ [0, ∞) → [0, ∞) for all t ≥ 0 as,

t t
𝜓(t) = t, 𝛼(t) = , 𝛽(t) = . (18)
2 4
GUPTA et al. 7 of 9

Clearly, the following conditions are satisfied.

(i) 𝛼(t) − 𝛽(t) = 2t − 4t = 4t ≤ t = 𝜓(t), if t > 0.

(ii) 𝜓(t) − 𝛼(t) + 𝛽(t) = 0, if t = 0.
(iii) 𝛼(t) ≥ 𝛽(t).

Now, if without loss of generality, we assume that x > y then clearly map f satisfies all the conditions of Theorem 8.
Also, 0 ≼ 0 and f (0) = 0. Therefore, “0” is the unique fixed point of f .

3 APPLICAT ION

Let us define a Lebesgue-integrable function 𝜒 ∶ (0, ∞) → (0, ∞) is Lebesgue summable for each compact of R. Let
t
us define its permittivity A:[0,∞) → [0,∞) as A(t) = ∫0 𝜒(t)dt , t > 0, is well defined, nondecreasing, and continuous.
Moreover, if for each 𝜖 > 0 , A(𝜖) > 0 this primitive fulfill A(t) = 0 if and only if t = 0.
Theorem 9. Let (X, ≼) be a be a partially ordered set and suppose that there is a metric d such that (X,d) be a complete
metric space. Let f be a nondecreasing self-map such that for all x,y ∈ X, x ≥ y, x ≠ y
( ) ( ) ( )
d(fx,fy) 𝜆(x,y) 𝜆(x,y)
𝜓 𝜒(t)dt ≤𝛼 𝜒(t)dt − 𝛽 𝜒(t)dt ,
∫0 ∫0 ∫0

where 𝜆(x, y) is defined in Equation (1), 𝜓 is an altering distance function, 𝜒(t) is a Lebesgue-Integrable function, and 𝛼, 𝛽 ∶
[0, ∞) → [0, ∞) are continuous functions with the condition 𝜓(t) > 𝛼(t) − 𝛽(t) for all t > 0, 𝛼 ≥ 𝛽. Also, assume that

(i) Either f is continuous or

(ii) If {xn } is a nondecreasing sequence in X such that xn → x then x = sup {xn }
(iii) If there exist x0 ∈ X such thatx0 ≼ fx0 ,

then f has a fixed point. Moreover, if for every x,y ∈ X, there exists z ∈ X that is comparable to x and y, then f has a unique
fixed point.

Proof. Follows from Theorem 8 by taking 𝜒(t) = 1 for all t ∈ R. ▪

4 CO N C LU S I O N

From the above remark 3, it is pertinent to note that the contractive condition given in Theorem 8 is a generalization and
improvement over the conditions given in Theorem 3 and Theorem 5. From Example 1, it is also clear that our contraction
is weaker then the contraction defined in Theorem 3 and Theorem 5. An application to integral type contraction is also
given which justify the existence and uses of our result in active fields of mathematical sciences.

ORCID
Vishal Gupta https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9727-2827
Naveen Mani https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7131-2664

REFERENCES
1. Jaggi DS. Some unique fixed point theorems. Indian J Pure Appl Math. 1977;8:223-230.
2. Banach S. On operations in abstract sets and their application to integral equations. Fundam Math. 1922;3:133-181. https://doi.org/10.
4064/fm-3-1-133-181.
3. Khan MS. Fixed point theorem by altering distance between the points. Bull Aust Math Soc. 1984;30(1):1-9. https://doi.org/10.1017/
S0004972700001659.
4. Dutta PN, Choudhury BS. A generalization of contractive principle in metric space. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2008;2008:114-121. https://
doi.org/10.1155/2008/406368.
8 of 9 GUPTA et al.

5. Ran ACM, Reurings MCB. A fixed point theorem in partially ordered sets and some applications to matrix equations. Proc Am Math Soc.
2004;132(5):1435-1443. https://doi.org/10.1090/S0002-9939-03-07220-4.
6. Nieto JJ, Lopez RR. Existence and uniqueness of fixed point in partially ordered sets and applications to ordinary differential equations.
Acta Math Sinica. 2007;23:2205-2212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10114-005-0769-0.
7. Nieto JJ, Pouso RL, Lopez RR. Fixed point theorems in ordered abstract spaces. Proc Am Math Soc. 2007;135(8):2505-2517. https://doi.
org/10.1090/S0002-9939-07-08729-1.
8. Gupta V, Ramandeep MN, Tripathi AK. Some fixed point result involving generalized altering distance function. Proc Comput Sci.
2016;79:112-117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2016.03.015.
9. Abbas M, Sintunavarat W, Kumam P. Coupled fixed point of generalized contractive mappings on partially ordered G - metric spaces.
Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012;2012:31. https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2012-31.
10. Sintunavarat W, Kim JK, Kumam P. Fixed point theorems for a generalized almost (𝜓, 𝜑) -contraction with respect to S in ordered metric
spaces. J Inequal Appl. 2012;2012:263. https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2012-263.
11. Sintunavarat W, Kumam P. Weak condition for generalized multi-valued (f , 𝛼, 𝛽) -weak contraction mappings. Appl Math Lett.
2011;24(4):460-465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aml.2010.10.042.
12. Mani N. Generalized C𝛽𝜓 -rational contraction and fixed point theorem with application to second order differential equation. Mathematica
Moravica. 2018;22(1):43-54. https://doi.org/10.5937/MatMor1801043M.
13. Gordji M, Baghani H, Kim GH. A fixed point theorem for contraction type maps in partially ordered metric spaces and application to
ordinary differential equations. Discret Dyn Nat Soc. 2012;2012:981517. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/981517.
14. Bhaskar TG, Lakshmikantham V. Fixed point theorems in partially ordered metric spaces and applications. Nonlinear Anal.
2006;65:1379-1393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.na.2005.10.017.
15. Ansari AH, Gupta V, Mani N. C - Class functions on some coupled fixed point theorems in partially ordered S-metric spaces. Commun
Fac Sci Univ Ank Ser A1 Math Stat. 2019;68(2):1694-1708. https://doi.org/10.31801/cfsuasmas.425424.
16. Gupta V, Mani N, Kaushik A. Fixed point theorems satisfying C𝛽𝜓 condition and application to boundary value problem. Func Anal-TMA.
2017;3:26-34.
17. Borisut P, Kumam P, Gupta V, Mani N. Generalized (𝜓, 𝛼, 𝛽)− weak contractions for initial value problems. Mathematics. 2019;7(3):266.
https://doi.org/10.3390/math7030266.
18. Gupta V, Jungck G, Mani N. Some novel fixed point theorems in partially ordered metric spaces. AIMS Math. 2020;5(5):4444-4452. https://
doi.org/10.3934/math.2020284.
19. Harjani J, Sadarangni K. Generalized contractions in partially ordered metric spaces and applications to ordinary differential equations.
Nonlinear Anal. 2010;72:1188-1197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.na.2009.08.003.
20. Harjani J, Lopez B, Sadarangani K. A fixed point theorem for mappings satisfying a contractive condition of rational type on a partially
ordered metric space. Abstr Appl Anal. 2010;2010:190701. https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/190701.
21. Luong NV, Thuan NX. Fixed point theorem for generalized weak contractions satisfying rational expressions in ordered metric spaces.
Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2011;2011:46. https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2011-46.
22. Yan F, Su Y, Feng Q. A new contraction mapping principle in partially ordered metric spaces and applications to ordinary differential
equations. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012;2012:152. https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2012-152.
23. Geraghty M. On contractive mappings. Proc Am Math Soc. 1973;40:604-608. https://doi.org/10.2307/2039421.
24. Altun I, Simsek H. Some fixed point theorems on ordered metric spaces and application. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2010;2010:621469.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/621469.
25. Gupta V, Shatanawi W, Mani N. Fixed point theorems for (𝜓, 𝛽)- Geraghty contraction type maps in ordered metric spaces and some appli-
cations to integral and ordinary differential equations. J Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2017;19(2):1251-1267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11784-
016-0303-2.

AU THOR BIOGRAPHIES

Vishal Gupta having more than 11 years of teaching experience, is working as Professor in
department of Mathematics, Maharishi Markandeshwar (deemed to be University), Mullana,
India. He received his Ph.D. degree in 2010. Also, he is M.Phil in Mathematics and M.Ed. He has
published one research book with international publisher and his immense contribution in jour-
nals of national and international repute is more than seventy. He has presented more than fifty
research papers in national and international conferences. His research interests are fixed point
theory, fuzzy set theory and fuzzy mappings, topology, differential and integral equations
GUPTA et al. 9 of 9

Naveen Mani is presently working as an Assistant Professor at Sandip University, Nashik, India.
His fields of research interest are fixed point theorems in various spaces, and their applications in
differential and integral equations, dynamic programming, color image processing, graph theory,
and economics.

Jonty Jindal is a research scholar in the department of Mathematics, Maharishi Markandeshwar

(Deemed to be University), Mullana, India. He has published many research papers in reputed
journals. His fields of research interest are fixed point theorems and their applications.

How to cite this article: Gupta V, Mani N, Jindal J. Some new fixed point theorems for generalized weak
contraction in partially ordered metric spaces. Comp and Math Methods. 2020;2:e1115. https://doi.org/10.1002/
cmm4.1115