See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/350793701

Rational Type Contractions in Extended b-Metric Spaces

Article · April 2021

CITATIONS

4 authors, including:

Stojan N Radenović
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering University of Belgrade Serbia
693 PUBLICATIONS   8,778 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Fixed Point Theory View project

it is not belongs to any project View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Stojan N Radenović on 11 April 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 SS symmetry
Article
Rational Type Contractions in Extended b-Metric Spaces
Huaping Huang 1, * , Yumnam Mahendra Singh 2






Citation: Huang, H.; Singh, Y.M.;
Khan, M.S.; Radenović, S. Rational
Type Contractions in Extended
b-Metric Spaces. Symmetry 2021, 13,
614. https://doi.org/10.3390/
sym13040614
Academic Editors: Sun Young Cho
and Alicia Cordero Barbero
Received: 28 February 2021
Accepted: 1 April 2021
Published: 7 April 2021
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Symmetry 2021, 13, 614. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym13040614
, Mohammad Saeed Khan 3 and Stojan Radenović 4
1 School of Mathematics and Statistics, Chongqing Three Gorges University, Wanzhou 404020, China
2 Department of Basic Sciences and Humanities, Manipur Institute of Technology, A Constituent College of
Manipur University, Takelpat 795004, Manipur, India; ymahenmit@rediffmail.com
3 Department of Mathematics and Applied Mathematics, Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University,
Ga-Rankuwa 0208, South Africa; mohammad@squ.edu.om or drsaeed9@gmail.com
4 Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of Belgrade, Kraljice Marije 16, 11120 Beograd, Serbia;
radens@beotel.net
* Correspondence: huaping@sanxiau.edu.cn
Abstract: In this paper, we establish the existence of fixed points of rational type contractions
in the setting of extended b-metric spaces. Our results extend considerably several well-known
results in the existing literature. We present some nontrivial examples to show the validity of our
results. Furthermore, as applications, we obtain the existence of solution to a class of Fredholm
integral equations.
Keywords: comparison function; α-admissible; rational type contraction; extended b-metric space;
Fredholm integral equation
1. Introduction and Preliminaries
The concept of distance between two abstract objects has received importance not
only for mathematical analysis but also for its related fields. Bakhtin [1] introduced
b-metric spaces as a generalization of metric spaces (see also Czerwik [2]). Recently,
Kamran et al. [3] gave the notion of extended b-metric space and presented a counterpart
of Banach contraction mapping principle. On the other hand, fixed point results dealing
with general contractive conditions involving rational type expression are also interesting.
Some well-known results in this direction are involved (see [4–10]).
First, of all, we recall some fixed point theorems for rational type contractions in
metric spaces.
Theorem 1 ([5]). Let T be a continuous self mapping on a complete metric space ( X, d). If T is a
rational type contraction, there exist α, β ∈ [0, 1), where α + β < 1 such that
d( x, Tx )d(y, Ty)
d( Tx, Ty) ≤ αd( x, y) + β ,
d( x, y)
for all x, y ∈ X, x 6= y, then T has a unique fixed point in X.
Theorem 2 ([4]). Let T be a continuous self mapping on a complete metric space ( X, d). If T is a
rational type contraction, there exist α, β ∈ [0, 1), where α + β < 1 such that
d(y, Ty)[1 + d( x, Tx )]
d( Tx, Ty) ≤ αd( x, y) + β · ,
1 + d( x, y)
for all x, y ∈ X, then T has a unique fixed point in X.
Fisher [11] refined the result of Khan [6] in the following way.
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/symmetry
Symmetry 2021, 13, 614 2 of 19

Theorem 3 ([11]). Let T be a self mapping on a complete metric space ( X, d). If T is a rational
type contraction, T satisfies the inequality
( d( x,Tx)d( x,Ty)+d(y,Ty)d(y,Tx)
d( x,Ty)+d(y,Tx )
, if d( x, Ty) + d(y, Tx ) 6= 0,
d( Tx, Ty) ≤ k
0, if d( x, Ty) + d(y, Tx ) = 0,

for all x, y ∈ X, where 0 ≤ k < 1. Then, T has a unique fixed point in X.

Ahmad et al. [12] extended Theorem 3 from metric spaces to generalized metric spaces
(see [13] for more details). Piri et al. [14] extended the result of Ahmad et al. [12] in the
following way.

Theorem 4 ([14]). Let T be a self mapping on a complete generalized metric space ( X, d g ). If T is

a rational type contraction, T satisfies the inequality
 n o
max d ( x, y), d g ( x,Tx)d g ( x,Ty)+d g (y,Ty)d g (y,Tx) , if A ( x, y) 6= 0,
g A ( x,y ) 0
d g ( Tx, Ty) ≤ k 0
0, if A ( x, y) = 0,
0

for all x, y ∈ X, x 6= y, where 0 ≤ k < 1 and A0 ( x, y) = max{d g ( x, Ty), d g (y, Tx )}. Then, T
has a unique fixed point in X.

Let us recall some basic concepts in b-metric spaces as follows.

Definition 1 ([1,2]). Let X be a nonempty set and s ≥ 1 be a given real number. A function db :
X × X → [0, +∞) is called a b-metric on X, if, for all x, y, z ∈ X, the following conditions hold:
(db 1) db ( x, y) = 0 if and only if x = y;
(db 2) db ( x, y) = db (y, x );
(db 3) db ( x, y) ≤ s[db ( x, z) + db (z, y)].

In this case, the pair ( X, db ) is called a b-metric space.

It is well-known that any b-metric space will become a metric space if s = 1. However,
any metric space does not necessarily be a b-metric space if s > 1. In other words, b-metric
spaces are more general than metric spaces (see [15]).
The following example gives us evidence that b-metric space is indeed different from
metric space.

Example 1 ([16]). Let ( X, d) be a metric space and db ( x, y) = (d( x, y)) p for all x, y ∈ X, where
p > 1 is a real number. Then, ( X, db ) is a b-metric space with s = 2 p−1 . However, ( X, db ) is not a
metric space.

Definition 2 ([17]). Let { xn } be a sequence in a b-metric space ( X, db ). Then,

(i) { xn } is called a convergent sequence, if, for each e > 0, there exists n0 = n0 (e) ∈ N such
that db ( xn , x ) < e, for all n ≥ n0 , and we write lim xn = x;
n→∞
(ii) { xn } is called a Cauchy sequence, if, for each e > 0, there exists n0 = n0 (e) ∈ N such
that db ( xn , xm ) < e, for all n, m ≥ n0 ;
(iii) ( X, db ) is said to be complete if every Cauchy sequence is convergent in X.

The following theorem is a basic theorem for Banach type contraction in b-metric space.

Theorem 5 ([18]). Let T be a self mapping on a complete b-metric space ( X, db ). Then, T has a
unique fixed point in X if
db ( Tx, Ty) ≤ kdb ( x, y)
Symmetry 2021, 13, 614 3 of 19

holds for all x, y ∈ X, where k ∈ [0, 1) is a constant. Moreover, for any x0 ∈ X, the sequence
{ T n x0 }n∈N converges to the fixed point.

Note that the distance function db utilized in b-metric spaces is generally discontinuous
(see [15,19]). For fixed point results and more examples in b-metric spaces, the readers may
refer to [15–18].
In what follows, we recall the concept of extend b-metric space and some examples.

Definition 3 ([3]). Let X be a nonempty set. Suppose that θ : X × X → [1, +∞) and dθ :
X × X → [0, +∞) are two mappings. If for all x, y, z ∈ X, the following conditions hold:
(dθ 1) dθ ( x, y) = 0 if and only if x = y;
(dθ 2) dθ ( x, y) = dθ (y, x );
(dθ 3) dθ ( x, y) ≤ θ ( x, y)[dθ ( x, z) + dθ (z, y)],
then dθ is called an extended b-metric, and the pair ( X, dθ ) is called an extended b-metric space.

Note that, if 1 ≤ θ ( x, y) = s (a finite constant), for all x, y ∈ X, then extended b-metric

space reduces to a b-metric space. That is to say, b-metric space is a generalization of metric
space, and extended b-metric space is a generalization of b-metric space.
In the following, we introduce some examples for extended b-metric spaces.

Example 2. Let X = [0, +∞). Define two mappings θ : X × X → [1, +∞) and dθ : X × X →
[0, +∞) as follows: θ ( x, y) = 1 + x + y, for all x, y ∈ X, and
(
x + y, x, y ∈ X, x 6= y,
dθ ( x, y) =
0, x = y.

Then, ( X, dθ ) is an extended b-metric space.

Indeed, (dθ 1) and (dθ 2) in Definition 3 are clear. Let x, y, z ∈ X. We prove that (dθ 3) in
Definition 3 is satisfied.
(i) If x = y, then (dθ 3) is clear.
(ii) If x 6= y, x = z, then

θ ( x, y)[dθ ( x, z) + dθ (z, y)] = (1 + x + y)[0 + (z + y)]

= (1 + x + y)( x + y)
≥ x + y = dθ ( x, y).

(iii) If x 6= y, y = z, then

θ ( x, y)[dθ ( x, z) + dθ (z, y)] = (1 + x + y)[( x + z) + 0]

= (1 + x + y)( x + y)
≥ x + y = dθ ( x, y).

(iv) If x 6= y, y 6= z, x 6= z, then

θ ( x, y)[dθ ( x, z) + dθ (z, y)] = (1 + x + y)[( x + z) + (z + y)]

≥ x + 2z + y
≥ x + y = dθ ( x, y).

Consider the above cases, it follows that (dθ 3) holds. Hence, the claim holds.
Symmetry 2021, 13, 614 4 of 19

Example 3. Let X = R. Define two mappings θ : X × X → [1, +∞) and dθ : X × X → [0, +∞)
as follows: θ ( x, y) = 1 + | x | + |y|, for all x, y ∈ X and
(
x2 + y2 , x, y ∈ X, x 6= y,
dθ ( x, y) =
0, x = y.

Then, ( X, dθ ) is an extended b-metric space.

Indeed, (dθ 1) and (dθ 2) in Definition 3 are obvious. Let x, y, z ∈ X. We prove that (dθ 3) in
Definition 3 is satisfied.
(i) If x = y, then (dθ 3) is obvious.
(ii) If x 6= y, x = z, then

θ ( x, y)[dθ ( x, z) + dθ (z, y)] = (1 + | x | + |y|)[0 + (z2 + y2 )]

= (1 + | x | + |y|)( x2 + y2 )
≥ x2 + y2 = dθ ( x, y).

(iii) If x 6= y, y = z, then

θ ( x, y)[dθ ( x, z) + dθ (z, y)] = (1 + | x | + |y|)[( x2 + z2 ) + 0]

= (1 + | x | + |y|)( x2 + y2 )
≥ x2 + y2 = dθ ( x, y).

(iv) If x 6= y, y 6= z, x 6= z, then

θ ( x, y)[dθ ( x, z) + dθ (z, y)] = (1 + | x | + |y|)[( x2 + z2 ) + (z2 + y2 )]

≥ (1 + | x | + |y|)( x2 + y2 )
≥ x2 + y2 = dθ ( x, y).

Consider the above cases, it follows that (dθ 3) holds. Hence, the claim holds.

Example 4. Let X = R. Define two mappings dθ : X × X → [0, +∞) and θ : X × X → [1, +∞)
as follows:

| x |+|y|
(
1+| x |+|y|
, x, y ∈ X, x 6= y,
dθ ( x, y) =
0, x = y,

and θ ( x, y) = 1 + | x | + |y|, for all x, y ∈ X. Then, ( X, dθ ) is an extended b-metric space.

Indeed, (dθ 1) and (dθ 2) in Definition 3 are valid. Let x, y, z ∈ X. We prove that (dθ 3) in
Definition 3 is satisfied.
(i) If x = y, then (dθ 3) holds.
(ii) If x 6= y, x = z, then

|z| + |y|
 
θ ( x, y)[dθ ( x, z) + dθ (z, y)] = (1 + | x | + |y|) 0 +
1 + |z| + |y|
| x | + |y|
= (1 + | x | + |y|) ·
1 + | x | + |y|
| x | + |y|
≥
1 + | x | + |y|
= dθ ( x, y).
Symmetry 2021, 13, 614 5 of 19

(iii) If x 6= y, y = z, then

| x | + |z|
 
θ ( x, y)[dθ ( x, z) + dθ (z, y)] = (1 + | x | + |y|) +0
1 + | x | + |z|
| x | + |y|
= (1 + | x | + |y|) ·
1 + | x | + |y|
| x | + |y|
≥
1 + | x | + |y|
= dθ ( x, y).

(iv) If x 6= y, y 6= z, x 6= z, then, by the fact that f (t) = 1+t t is nondecreasing on [0, +∞)
and | x | + |y| ≤ | x | + |z| + |y|, it follows that

| x | + |z| |z| + |y|

 
θ ( x, y)[dθ ( x, z) + dθ (z, y)] = (1 + | x | + |y|) +
1 + | x | + |z| 1 + |z| + |y|
| x | + |z| |z| + |y|
 
≥ (1 + | x | + |y|) +
1 + | x | + |z| + |y| 1 + | x | + |z| + |y|
| x | + 2| z | + | y |
= (1 + | x | + |y|) ·
1 + | x | + |z| + |y|
| x | + |z| + |y|
≥
1 + | x | + |z| + |y|
| x | + |y|
≥ = dθ ( x, y).
1 + | x | + |y|

Consider the above cases, it follows that (dθ 3) holds. Hence, the claim holds.

3+ x + y
Example 5. Let X = [0, +∞) and θ ( x, y) = 2 be a function on X × X. Define a mapping
dθ : X × X → [0, +∞) as follows:

dθ ( x, y) =0, for all x, y ∈ X, x = y,

dθ ( x, y) =dθ (y, x ) = 5, for all x, y ∈ X \ {0}, x 6= y,
dθ ( x, 0) =dθ (0, x ) = 2, for all x ∈ X \ {0}.

Then, ( X, dθ ) is an extended-b metric space.

As a matter of fact, obviously, (dθ 1) and (dθ 2) hold. For (dθ 3), we have the following cases:
(i) Let x, y, z ∈ X \ {0} such that x, y and z are distinct each other, then

dθ ( x, y) = 5 ≤ 5(3 + x + y) = θ ( x, y)[dθ ( x, z) + dθ (z, y)].

(ii) Let x, y ∈ X \ {0}, x 6= y and z = 0, then

dθ ( x, y) = 5 ≤ 2(3 + x + y) = θ ( x, y)[dθ ( x, 0) + dθ (0, y)].

(iii) Let x, z ∈ X \ {0}, x 6= z and y = 0, then

7
dθ ( x, 0) = 2 ≤ (3 + x ) = θ ( x, 0)[dθ ( x, z) + dθ (z, y)].
2
Therefore, (dθ 3) in Definition 3 holds. Thus, the claims hold.

Remark 1. Examples 2–5 are extended b-metric spaces but not b-metric spaces.

Similar to Definition 2, we recall some concepts in extended b-metric spaces as follows.

Definition 4 ([3]). Let { xn } be a sequence in an extended b-metric space ( X, dθ ). Then,

Symmetry 2021, 13, 614 6 of 19

(i) { xn } is called a convergent sequence, if, for each e > 0, there exists n0 = n0 (e) ∈ N such
that dθ ( xn , x ) < e, for all n ≥ n0 , and we write lim xn = x;
n→∞
(ii) { xn } is called a Cauchy sequence, if, for each e > 0, there exists n0 = n0 (e) ∈ N such
that dθ ( xn , xm ) < e, for all n, m ≥ n0 ;
(iii) ( X, dθ ) is said to be complete if every Cauchy sequence is convergent in X.

As we know, the limit of convergent sequence in extended b-metric space ( X, dθ ) is

unique provided that dθ is a continuous mapping (see [3]).

Definition 5 ([20,21]). Let T be a self mapping on an extended b-metric space ( X, dθ ). For x0 ∈ X,

the set
O( x0 , T ) = { x0 , Tx0 , T 2 x0 , T 3 x0 , · · · }
is said to be an orbit of T at x0 . T is said to be orbitally continuous at ξ ∈ X if lim T k x0 = ξ implies
k→∞
lim TT k x0 = Tξ. Moreover, if every Cauchy sequence of the form { T k x0 }∞
k =1 is convergent to
k→∞
some point in X, then ( X, dθ ) is said to be a T-orbitally complete space.

Note that, if ( X, dθ ) is complete extended b-metric space, then X is T-orbitally complete

for any self-mapping T on X. Moreover, if T is continuous, then it is obviously orbitally
continuous in X. However, the converse may not be true.
In the sequel, unless otherwise specified, we always denote Fix ( T ) = { x ∈ X | Tx = x }.

Definition 6 ([22]). Let X be a nonempty set and α : X × X → R be a mapping. A mapping

T : X → X is called α-admissible, if for all x, y ∈ X, α( x, y) ≥ 1 implies α( Tx, Ty) ≥ 1.

Definition 7 ([23]). Let X be a nonempty set and α : X × X → R be a mapping. Then, T : X → X

is called α*-admissible if it is a α-admissible mapping and α( x, y) ≥ 1 holds for all x, y ∈ Fix ( T ) 6= ∅.

x (1+ x )
Example 6. Let X = [0, +∞) and T : X → X be a mapping defined by Tx = 2 . Let
α : X × X → R be a function defined by
(
1, x, y ∈ [0, 1],
α( x, y) =
0, otherwise.

Then, T is α-admissible and Fix ( T ) = {0, 1}. Moreover, α( x, y) ≥ 1 is satisfied for all
x, y ∈ Fix ( T ). Consequently, T is α*-admissible.
q
x ( x 2 +2)
Example 7 ([23]). Let X = [0, +∞) and T : X → X be a mapping defined by Tx = 3 .
Let α : X × X → [0, +∞) be a function defined by
(
1, x, y ∈ [0, 1],
α( x, y) =
0, otherwise.

Then, T is a α-admissible mapping and Fix ( T ) = {0, 1, 2}. However, α( x, 2) = α(2, x ) = 0

is satisfied for x ∈ {0, 1}. Thus, T is not α*-admissible.

Definition 8 ([24]). Let T be a self mapping on a nonempty set X. Then, T is called α-orbitally
admissible if, for all x ∈ X, α( x, Tx ) ≥ 1 leads to α( Tx, T 2 x ) ≥ 1.

It is mentioned that each α-admissible mapping must be an α-orbitally admissible

mapping (for more details, see [24]). For the uniqueness of fixed point, we will use the
following definition frequently.
Symmetry 2021, 13, 614 7 of 19

Definition 9. An α-orbitally admissible mapping T is called α∗ -orbitally admissible if x, x ∗ ∈

Fix ( T ) 6= ∅ implies α( x, x ∗ ) ≥ 1.

Definition 10 ([17,25]). A function ψ : [0, +∞) → [0, +∞) is said to be a comparison function,
if it is nondecreasing and lim ψn (t) = 0 for all t > 0, where ψn denotes the nth iteration of ψ.
n→∞

In what follows, the set of all comparison functions is denoted by Ψ. Some examples
for comparison functions, the reader may refer to [26].

Lemma 1 ([27]). Let ψ ∈ Ψ. Then, ψ(t) < t for all t > 0 and ψ(0) = 0.

The following lemmas will be used in the sequel.

Lemma 2 ([28]). Let ( X, dθ ) be an extended b-metric space, x0 ∈ X and { xn } be a sequence in X.

If ψ ∈ Ψ satisfies
θ ( x n , x m ) ψ n d θ ( x0 , x1 )


lim <1 (1)
n,m→∞ ψ n −1 d θ ( x 0 , x 1 )

and

0 < d θ ( x n , x n +1 ) ≤ ψ d θ ( x n −1 , x n )
for all m > n ≥ 2, n, m ∈ N, then { xn } is a Cauchy sequence in X.

Proof. From the given conditions, we get

0 < d θ ( x n , x n +1 ) ≤ ψ d θ ( x n −1 , x n ) ≤ · · · ≤ ψ n d θ ( x 0 , x 1 ) .

On taking limit as n → ∞, we have

lim dθ ( xn , xn+1 ) = 0.
n→∞

Setting θi = θ ( xi , xn+ p ) for each i ∈ N, p ≥ 1 and dθ ( x0 , x1 ) = t, we obtain

 
d θ ( x n , x n + p ) ≤ θ ( x n , x n + p ) d θ ( x n , x n +1 ) + d θ ( x n +1 , x n + p )
≤ θ ( x n , x n + p ) d θ ( x n , x n +1 ) + θ ( x n , x n + p )
· θ ( xn+1 , xn+ p )[dθ ( xn+1 , xn+2 ) + dθ ( xn+2 , xn+ p )]
≤ ······
≤ θ ( x n , x n + p ) d θ ( x n , x n +1 ) + θ ( x n , x n + p ) θ ( x n +1 , x n + p ) d θ ( x n +1 , x n +2 )
+ θ ( x n , x n + p ) θ ( x n +1 , x n + p ) θ ( x n +2 , x n + p ) d θ ( x n +2 , x n +3 )
+ · · · + θ ( x n , x n + p ) θ ( x n +1 , x n + p ) · · · θ ( x n + p −2 , x n + p ) d θ ( x n + p −2 , x n + p −1 )
+ · · · + θ ( x n , x n + p ) θ ( x n +1 , x n + p ) · · · θ ( x n + p −2 , x n + p ) d θ ( x n + p −1 , x n + p )
≤ θ ( x n , x n + p ) d θ ( x n , x n +1 ) + θ ( x n , x n + p ) θ ( x n +1 , x n + p ) d θ ( x n +1 , x n +2 )
+ θ ( x n , x n + p ) θ ( x n +1 , x n + p ) θ ( x n +2 , x n + p ) d θ ( x n +2 , x n +3 )
+ · · · + θ ( x n , x n + p ) θ ( x n +1 , x n + p ) · · · θ ( x n + p −2 , x n + p ) d θ ( x n + p −2 , x n + p −1 )
+ · · · + θ ( x n , x n + p ) θ ( x n +1 , x n + p ) · · · θ ( x n + p −1 , x n + p ) d θ ( x n + p −1 , x n + p )
≤ θ n ψ n d θ ( x 0 , x 1 ) + θ n θ n +1 ψ n +1 d θ ( x 0 , x 1 )

+ · · · + θ n θ n +1 · · · θ n + p −1 ψ n + p −1 d θ ( x 0 , x 1 )

= θ n ψ n ( t ) + θ n θ n +1 ψ n +1 ( t ) + · · · + θ n θ n +1 · · · θ n + p −1 ψ n + p −1 ( t )
n + p −1 i n + p −1 i
= ∑ ψi ( t ) ∏ θ j ≤ ∑ ψi ( t ) ∏ θ j
i=n j=n i =n j =1
Symmetry 2021, 13, 614 8 of 19

n + p −1 i n −1 i
= ∑ ψi ( t ) ∏ θ j − ∑ ψi ( t ) ∏ θ j .
i =1 j =1 i =1 j =1

Notice that

 
θ ( x n , x n + p ) ψ n d θ ( x0 , x1 ) θn ψn (t)
lim = lim n−1 < 1,
n→∞ n→∞ ψ
 
ψ n −1 d θ ( x 0 , x 1 ) (t)

∞ i
then, by the Ratio test the series, ∑ ψi (t)∏θ j converges.
i =1 j =1
∞ i n i
Let S = ∑ ψi (t)∏θ j and Sn = ∑ ψi (t)∏θ j be the sequence of partial sum. Conse-
i =1 j =1 i =1 j =1
quently, for any n ≥ 1 and p ≥ 1, we obtain

d θ ( x n , x n + p ) ≤ S n + p −1 − S n −1 .

Taking the limit as n → ∞ from both side of the above inequality, we make a conclusion
that { xn } is a Cauchy sequence in X.

Lemma 3 ([29]). Let { xn } be a sequence in an extended b-metric space ( X, dθ ) such that

1
lim θ ( xn , xm ) <
n,m→∞ k

and
0 < dθ ( xn , xn+1 ) ≤ kdθ ( xn−1 , xn )
for any m > n ≥ 2, n, m ∈ N, where k ∈ [0, 1), then { xn } is a Cauchy sequence in X.

Proof. Choose ψ(t) = kt, where k ∈ [0, 1) in Lemma 2. Then, the proof is completed.

2. Fixed Points of Rational Type Contractions

In this section, we assume that ( X, dθ ) is an extended b-metric space with the continu-
ous functional dθ . Let T : X → X be a mapping. For x, y ∈ X, we always denote
n d (y, Ty)dθ ( x, Tx ) dθ ( x, Tx )[1 + dθ (y, Ty)]
N ( x, y) = max dθ ( x, y), θ , ,
dθ ( x, y) 1 + dθ ( x, y)
dθ (y, Ty)[1 + dθ ( x, Tx )] o
,
1 + dθ ( x, y)
n d ( x, Tx )dθ ( x, Ty) + dθ (y, Ty)dθ (y, Tx )
K( x, y) = max dθ ( x, y), θ ,
max{dθ ( x, Ty), dθ (y, Tx )}
dθ ( x, Tx )dθ (y, Ty) + dθ ( x, Ty)dθ (y, Tx ) o
.
max{dθ (y, Ty), dθ (y, Tx )}

Theorem 6. Let T be a self mapping on a T-orbitally complete extended b-metric space ( X, dθ ).

Assume that there exist two functions α : X × X → [0, +∞), ψ ∈ Ψ such that


α( x, y)dθ ( Tx, Ty) ≤ ψ N ( x, y) (2)

for all x, y ∈ X, x 6= y. That is, T is a rational type contraction. If

(i) T is α-orbitally admissible;
(ii) there exists x0 ∈ X satisfying α( x0 , Tx0 ) ≥ 1;
(iii) (1) is satisfied for xn = T n x0 (n = 0, 1, 2, · · · );
Symmetry 2021, 13, 614 9 of 19

(iv) T is either continuous or, orbitally continuous on X.

Then, T possesses a fixed point z ∈ X. Moreover, the sequence { T n x0 }n∈N converges to
z ∈ X.

Proof. By (ii), define a sequence { xn } in X such that xn+1 = Txn = T n+1 x0 , for all
n ∈ N ∪ {0}.
If xn = xn+1 , for, some n ∈ N ∪ {0}, then xn is a fixed point of T. This completes the
proof. Without loss of generality, we therefore assume that xn 6= xn+1 , for all n ∈ N ∪ {0}.
Based on (i), α( x0 , x1 ) = α( x0 , Tx0 ) ≥ 1 implies that α( x1 , x2 ) = α( Tx0 , Tx1 ) ≥ 1.
Then, α( x2 , x3 ) = α( Tx1 , Tx2 ) ≥ 1. Continuing this process, one has α( xn , xn+1 ) ≥ 1, for
all n ∈ N ∪ {0}.
Taking x = xn−1 and y = xn , for all n ∈ N in (2), we have

dθ ( xn , xn+1 ) = dθ ( Txn−1 , Txn )

≤ α( xn−1 , xn )dθ ( Txn−1 , Txn )


≤ ψ N ( x n −1 , x n ) , (3)

where

N ( x n −1 , x n )
n d ( xn , Txn )dθ ( xn−1 , Txn−1 )
= max dθ ( xn−1 , xn ), θ ,
d θ ( x n −1 , x n )
dθ ( xn−1 , Txn−1 )[1 + dθ ( xn , Txn )] dθ ( xn , Txn )[1 + dθ ( xn−1 , Txn−1 )] o
,
1 + d θ ( x n −1 , x n ) 1 + d θ ( x n −1 , x n )
n d θ ( x n , x n +1 ) d θ ( x n −1 , x n )
= max dθ ( xn−1 , xn ), ,
d θ ( x n −1 , x n )
dθ ( xn−1 , xn )[1 + dθ ( xn , xn+1 )] dθ ( xn , xn+1 )[1 + dθ ( xn−1 , xn )] o
,
1 + d θ ( x n −1 , x n ) 1 + d θ ( x n −1 , x n )
n dθ ( xn−1 , xn )[1 + dθ ( xn , xn+1 )] o
= max dθ ( xn−1 , xn ), dθ ( xn , xn+1 ), . (4)
1 + d θ ( x n −1 , x n )

Similar to ([10], Theorem 2.1), we can prove

0 < dθ ( xn , xn+1 ) ≤ ψ dθ ( xn−1 , xn ) , for all n ∈ N. (5)

In fact, we finish the proof via three cases.

(i) If N ( xn−1 , xn ) = dθ ( xn−1 , xn ), then by (3), it follows that

0 < dθ ( xn , xn+1 ) ≤ ψ(dθ ( xn−1 , xn )).

This is (5).
(ii) If N ( xn−1 , xn ) = dθ ( xn , xn+1 ), then by (3), we have

0 < dθ ( xn , xn+1 ) ≤ ψ(dθ ( xn , xn+1 )) < dθ ( xn , xn+1 ),

which is a contradiction.
dθ ( xn−1 ,xn )[1+dθ ( xn ,xn+1 )]
(iii) If N ( xn−1 , xn ) = 1+dθ ( xn−1 ,xn )
, then by (4), it is easy to say that

dθ ( xn−1 , xn )[1 + dθ ( xn , xn+1 )]

max{dθ ( xn−1 , xn ), dθ ( xn , xn+1 )} ≤ . (6)
1 + d θ ( x n −1 , x n )

In this case, we discuss it with two subcases.

(i) If max{dθ ( xn−1 , xn ), dθ ( xn , xn+1 )} = dθ ( xn−1 , xn ), then

d θ ( x n −1 , x n ) > d θ ( x n , x n +1 ). (7)
Symmetry 2021, 13, 614 10 of 19

By (6), we get

dθ ( xn−1 , xn )[1 + dθ ( xn , xn+1 )]

d θ ( x n −1 , x n ) ≤ ,
1 + d θ ( x n −1 , x n )

which means that

d θ ( x n −1 , x n ) ≤ d θ ( x n , x n +1 ).

This is in contradiction with (7).

(ii) If max{dθ ( xn−1 , xn ), dθ ( xn , xn+1 )} = dθ ( xn , xn+1 ), then

d θ ( x n , x n +1 ) > d θ ( x n −1 , x n ). (8)

By (6), we get

dθ ( xn−1 , xn )[1 + dθ ( xn , xn+1 )]

d θ ( x n , x n +1 ) ≤ ,
1 + d θ ( x n −1 , x n )

which establishes that

d θ ( x n , x n +1 ) ≤ d θ ( x n −1 , x n ).

This is in contradiction with (8).

This is to say, (iii) does not occur.
Thus, (5) is satified. Accordingly, we speculate that

d θ ( x n , x n +1 ) ≤ ψ d θ ( x n −1 , x n ) ≤ · · · ≤ ψ n d θ ( x 0 , x 1 ) .

Letting n → ∞, we obtain that lim dθ ( xn , xn+1 ) = 0.

n→∞
It follows from Lemma 2 that { T n x0 } is a Cauchy sequence in X. Since ( X, dθ ) is
T-orbitally complete, then there is z ∈ X such that lim T n x0 = z.
n→∞
Assume that T is continuous, then

dθ (z, Tz) = lim dθ ( xn , Txn ) = lim dθ ( xn , xn+1 ) = 0.

n→∞ n→∞

Therefore, T possesses a fixed point z in X.

Assume that T is orbitally continuous on X, thus, xn+1 = Txn = T ( T n x0 ) → Tz as
n → ∞. Since the limit of sequence in extended b-metric space is unique, then z = Tz.
Thus, T possesses a fixed point z in X, i.e., Fix ( T ) 6= ∅.

Example 8. Under all the conditions of Example 3, let T : X → X be a continuous mapping

defined by
(
2x
, 0 ≤ x ≤ 1,
Tx = 3 4
2x − 3 , otherwise.

In addition, we define a mapping α : X × X → [0, +∞) as

(
1, x, y ∈ [0, 1],
α( x, y) =
0, otherwise.

2
 Let x0∈ X be a point with α( x0 , Tx0 ) ≥ 1, then x0 ∈ [0, 1] ⊂ X and α( Tx0 , T x0 ) =
2x0 4
α 3 , 9 x0 ≥ 1. Therefore, T is α-orbitally admissible.
Set ψ(t) = kt, for all t > 0, where k = 49 , then ψn (t) = kn t.
Symmetry 2021, 13, 614 11 of 19

For all distinct x, y in X, ones have

4 2
α( x, y)dθ ( Tx, Ty) ≤ ( x + y2 ) = kdθ ( x, y) ≤ kN ( x, y).
9

Moreover, there is x0 ∈ X with α( x0 , Tx0 ) ≥ 1, then α( Tx0 , T 2 x0 ) ≥ 1. Now, we deduce

inductively that α( xn , xn+1 ) ≥ 1, where xn = T n x0 = ( 23 )n x0 , for all n ∈ N ∪ {0}. Obviously,
xn → 0 as n → ∞. Thus, ( X, dθ ) is T-orbitally complete.
Note that lim θ ( xn , xm ) = 1 < 94 = 1k , where k = 94 , that is to say,
n,m→∞

θ ( x n , x m ) ψ n d θ ( x0 , x1 )


lim k θ ( xn , xm ) = lim < 1.
n,m→∞ n,m→∞ ψ n −1 d θ ( x 0 , x 1 )

Thus, all the conditions of Theorem 6 hold and hence T possesses a fixed point in X and
Fix ( T ) = {0, 34 }.

Theorem 7. In addition to all the conditions of Theorem 6, suppose that the T is α∗ -orbitally
admissible. Then, T possesses a unique fixed point z ∈ X.

Proof. Following Theorem 6, T possesses a fixed point in X. Thus, Fix ( T ) 6= ∅. Assume

that T is α∗ -orbitally admissible. If possible, there exist z, z∗ ∈ Fix ( T ), z 6= z∗ such that
Tz = z and Tz∗ = z∗ , then α(z, z∗ ) = α( Tz, Tz∗ ) ≥ 1.

Taking x = z, y = z∗ in (2), we obtain

dθ (z, z∗ ) = dθ ( Tz, Tz∗ ) ≤ α(z, z∗ )dθ ( Tz, Tz∗ ) ≤ ψ N (z, z∗ )

n d (z∗ , Tz∗ )dθ (z, Tz) dθ (z, Tz)[1 + dθ (z∗ , Tz∗ )]
= ψ max dθ (z, z∗ ), θ , ,
dθ (z, z∗ ) 1 + dθ (z, z∗ )
dθ (z∗ , Tz∗ )[1 + dθ (z, Tz)] o
1 + dθ (z, z∗ )
= ψ(dθ (z, z∗ ))
< dθ (z, z∗ ),

which is a contradiction. Therefore, T possesses a unique fixed point in X.

Corollary 1. ([10], Theorem 2.1) Let T be a continuous self mapping on a complete extended
b-metric space ( X, dθ ) such that

dθ ( Tx, Ty) ≤ kN ( x, y)

for all x, y ∈ X, x 6= y, where k ∈ [0, 1). That is, T is a rational type contraction. In addition,
suppose that for all x0 ∈ X,

1
lim θ ( xn , xm ) < , (9)
n,m→∞ k

where xn = T n x0 , m > n ≥ 1. Then, T has a unique fixed point z ∈ X. Moreover, the sequence
{ T n x0 }n∈N converges to z ∈ X.

Proof. Setting α( x, y) = 1, for all x, y ∈ X, then α( x, Tx ) ≥ 1 implies that α( Tx, T 2 x ) ≥ 1.

Therefore, T is α-orbitally admissible.
Let ψ(t) = kt, for all t > 0, where 0 ≤ k < 1, then ψn (t) = kn t. Using (iii) of Theorem 6.
In view of (9), then (iii) of Theorem 6 is satisfied. Thus, all the conditions of Theorem 6 hold.
Therefore, T possesses a fixed point in X, i.e., Fix ( T ) 6= ∅. Because of Fix ( T ) ⊆ X, then T
is α∗ -orbitally admissible and hence, by Theorem 7, T has a unique fixed point in X.
Symmetry 2021, 13, 614 12 of 19

Remark 2. (i) The uniqueness of fixed point is not guaranteed if T is not α∗ -orbitally admissible.
In Example 8, T is α-orbitally admissible and Fix ( T ) = {0, 43 }. However, α( 43 , T 43 ) = 0 so T is
not α∗ -orbitally admissible. Therefore, Theorem 7 is not applicable in this case.
(ii) In Example 8, for x = 1 and y = 2, we obtain

68
dθ ( T1, T2) = > dθ (1, 2) = 5.
9
Therefore, ([3], Theorem 2) and ([10], Theorem 2.1) are not applicable in this case.

Motivated by Piri et al. [14], we extend a fixed point theorem for Khan type from
metric spaces to extended b-metric spaces.

Theorem 8. Let T be a self mapping on a T-orbitally complete extended b-metric space ( X, dθ ).

Suppose that α : X × X → [0, ∞), ψ ∈ Ψ are two functions satisfying
(

ψ K( x, y) , whenever A( x, y) 6= 0 and B( x, y) 6= 0,
α( x, y)dθ ( Tx, Ty) ≤ (10)
0, otherwise,

for all x, y ∈ X, x 6= y, where

A( x, y) = max{dθ ( x, Ty), dθ (y, Tx )}, B( x, y) = max{dθ (y, Ty), dθ (y, Tx )}.

If
(i) T is α-orbitally admissible;
(ii) there exists x0 ∈ X and α( x0 , Tx0 ) ≥ 1;
(iii) (1) is satisfied for xn = T n x0 (n = 0, 1, 2, · · · ).
Then, T possesses a fixed point z ∈ X. Moreover, the sequence { T n x0 }n∈N converges to z ∈ X.

Proof. By (ii), define a sequence { xn } in X such that xn+1 = Txn = T n+1 x0 , for all
n ∈ N ∪ {0}. Since T is α-orbitally admissible, then α( x0 , x1 ) = α( x0 , Tx0 ) ≥ 1 implies
α( x1 , x2 ) = α( Tx0 , T 2 x0 ) ≥ 1. Thus, inductively, we obtain that α( xn , xn+1 ) ≥ 1, for
all n ∈ N ∪ {0}. In order to show that T possesses a fixed point in X, we assume that
xn−1 6= xn , for all n ∈ N. We divide the proof into the following two cases:
Case 1
Suppose that

max{dθ ( xn−1 , Txn ), dθ ( xn , Txn−1 )} 6= 0

and

max{dθ ( xn , Txn ), dθ ( xn , Txn−1 )} 6= 0,

for all n ∈ N. From (10), we obtain that

dθ ( xn , xn+1 ) = dθ ( Txn−1 , Txn ) ≤ α( xn−1 , xn )dθ ( Txn−1 , Txn ) ≤ ψ K( xn−1 , xn ) ,

where
n
K( xn−1 , xn ) = max dθ ( xn−1 , xn ),
dθ ( xn−1 , Txn−1 )dθ ( xn−1 , Txn ) + dθ ( xn , Txn )dθ ( xn , Txn−1 )
,
max{dθ ( xn−1 , Txn ), dθ ( xn , Txn−1 )}
dθ ( xn−1 , Txn−1 )dθ ( xn , Txn ) + dθ ( xn−1 , Txn )dθ ( xn , Txn−1 ) o
max{dθ ( xn , Txn ), dθ ( xn , Txn−1 )}
n d (x , x n ) d θ ( x n −1 , x n +1 ) + d θ ( x n , x n +1 ) d θ ( x n , x n )
= max dθ ( xn−1 , xn ), θ n−1 ,
max{dθ ( xn−1 , xn+1 ), dθ ( xn , xn )}
Symmetry 2021, 13, 614 13 of 19

d θ ( x n −1 , x n ) d θ ( x n , x n +1 ) + d θ ( x n −1 , x n +1 ) d θ ( x n , x n ) o
max{dθ ( xn , xn+1 ), dθ ( xn , xn )}
= d θ ( x n −1 , x n ).

Therefore,

0 < d θ ( x n , x n +1 ) ≤ ψ d θ ( x n −1 , x n ) .

Furthermore,

0 < d θ ( x n , x n +1 ) ≤ ψ d θ ( x n −1 , x n ) ≤ · · · ≤ ψ n d θ ( x 0 , x 1 ) .

Letting n → ∞, we have

lim dθ ( xn , xn+1 ) = 0.
n→∞

It follows from Condition (iii) and Lemma 2 that { T n x0 } is a Cauchy sequence in X.

Notice that X is T-orbitally complete, thus, there is z ∈ X with xn = T n x0 → z as n → ∞.
Assume, if possible, Tz 6= z. From (10) and the triangular inequality, we obtain

dθ (z, Tz) ≤ θ (z, Tz)[dθ ( Tz, Txn ) + dθ ( Txn , z)]

= θ (z, Tz)dθ ( Tz, Txn ) + θ (z, Tz)dθ ( Txn , z)
≤ θ (z, Tz)α(z, xn )dθ ( Tz, Txn ) + θ (z, Tz)dθ ( xn+1 , z)
 
≤ θ (z, Tz)ψ K(z, xn ) + θ (z, Tz)dθ ( xn+1 , z)
< θ (z, Tz)K(z, xn ) + θ (z, Tz)dθ ( xn+1 , z), (11)

where
n d (z, Tz)dθ (z, Txn ) + dθ ( xn , Txn )dθ ( xn , Tz)
K(z, xn ) = max dθ (z, xn ), θ ,
max{dθ (z, Txn ), dθ ( xn , Tz)}
dθ (z, Tz)dθ ( xn , Txn ) + dθ (z, Txn )dθ ( xn , Tz) o
max{dθ ( xn , Txn ), dθ ( xn , Tz)}
n d (z, Tz)dθ (z, xn+1 ) + dθ ( xn , xn+1 )dθ ( xn , Tz)
= max dθ (z, xn ), θ ,
max{dθ (z, xn+1 ), dθ ( xn , Tz)}
dθ (z, Tz)dθ ( xn , xn+1 ) + dθ (z, xn+1 )dθ ( xn , Tz) o
.
max{dθ ( xn , xn+1 ), dθ ( xn , Tz)}

Taking n → ∞ from both sides of (11), we have dθ (z, Tz) ≤ 0, which is in contradiction
with Tz 6= z.
Case 2
Assume that

max{dθ ( xn−1 , Txn ), dθ ( xn , Txn−1 )} = 0

or

max{dθ ( xn , Txn ), dθ ( xn , Txn−1 )} = 0,

for all n ∈ N. Consider (10), it follows that

xn = xn+1 = Txn .
Symmetry 2021, 13, 614 14 of 19

Thus, T possesses a fixed point in X, i.e., Fix ( T ) 6= ∅.

Example 9. Under all the conditions of Example 5, let T : X → X be a mapping defined by

0 ≤ x < 32 ,

0,

3
Tx = 2, 2 ≤ x < 500,

100, x ≥ 500.


We also define a mapping α : X × X → [0, +∞) as

(
1, x, y ∈ [0, 32 ),
α( x, y) =
0, otherwise.

Let x ∈ X be a point such that α( x, Tx ) ≥ 1, then x ∈ [0, 32 ) ⊂ X and α( Tx, T 2 x ) ≥ 1.

Therefore, T is α-orbitally admissible.
Set ψ(t) = kt, for all t > 0, where k = 21 . For all x, y ∈ X, we obtain

α( x, y)dθ ( Tx, Ty) ≤ kK( x, y).

Clearly, there exists x0 ∈ X such that α( x0 , Tx0 ) ≥ 1, then α( Tx0 , T 2 x0 ) ≥ 1. Therefore, by

the mathematical induction, we have α( xn , xn+1 ) = α( T n x0 , T n+1 x0 ) ≥ 1, for all n ∈ N ∪ {0}.
Consequently, T n x0 → 0 as n → ∞. This shows that ( X, dθ ) is a T-orbitally complete extended
b-metric space.
Moreover, it is easy to see that

3 1
lim θ ( T n x0 , T m x0 ) = <2= .
n,m→∞ 2 k

Accordingly, all the conditions of Theorem 8 hold and, therefore, T possesses a fixed point and
Fix ( T ) = {0, 2}.

Theorem 9. In addition to Theorem 8, suppose that T is α∗ -orbitally admissible. Then, T possesses

a unique fixed point z ∈ X.

Proof. By Theorem 8, T possesses a fixed point in X, i.e., Fix ( T ) 6= ∅. For the uniqueness,
let z, z∗ ∈ Fix ( T ) such that z 6= z∗ . Then, by the α∗ -orbital admissibility of T, we have
α∗ (z, z∗ ) ≥ 1.
As in Theorem 8, we also divide the proof into two cases as follows:
Case 1
Suppose that
max{dθ (z, Tz∗ ), dθ (z∗ , Tz)} 6= 0
and
max{dθ (z∗ , Tz∗ ), dθ (z∗ , Tz)} 6= 0.
From (10), we obtain

dθ (z, z∗ ) = dθ ( Tz, Tz∗ ) ≤ α(z, z∗ )dθ ( Tz, Tz∗ ) ≤ ψ K(z, z∗ ) ,

where
n d (z, Tz)dθ (z, Tz∗ ) + dθ (z∗ , Tz∗ )dθ (z∗ , Tz)
K(z, z∗ ) = max dθ (z, z∗ ), θ ,
max{dθ (z, Tz∗ ), dθ (z∗ , Tz)}
dθ (z, Tz)dθ (z∗ , Tz∗ ) + dθ (z, Tz∗ )d(z∗ , Tz) o
max{dθ (z∗ , Tz∗ ), dθ (z∗ , Tz)}
= dθ (z, z∗ ).
Symmetry 2021, 13, 614 15 of 19

Therefore,
 
dθ (z, z∗ ) ≤ ψ dθ (z, z∗ ) < dθ (z, z∗ ).

This is a contradiction.
Case 2
Assume that
max{dθ (z, Tz∗ ), dθ (z∗ , Tz)} = 0
or
max{dθ (z∗ , Tz∗ ), dθ (z∗ , Tz)} = 0.
Consequently, z = Tz∗ = Tz = z∗ .
Thus, T possesses a unique fixed point in X. This completes the proof.

Corollary 2. Let T be a self mapping on a complete extended b-metric space ( X, dθ ) such that
(
K( x, y), whenever A( x, y) 6= 0 and B( x, y) 6= 0,
dθ ( Tx, Ty) ≤ k
0, otherwise,

for all x, y ∈ X, x 6= y, where 0 ≤ k < 1, A( x, y) and B( x, y) are defined in Theorem 8.

Furthermore, suppose, for all x0 ∈ X, that (9) is satisfied. Then, T has a unique fixed point z ∈ X.
Moreover, the sequence { T n x0 }n∈N converges to z.

Corollary 3. Let T be a self mapping on a complete extended b-metric space ( X, dθ ) such that
 n o
max d ( x, y), dθ ( x,Tx)dθ ( x,Ty)+dθ (y,Ty)dθ (y,Tx) , if A( x, y) 6= 0,
dθ ( Tx, Ty) ≤ k
θ A( x,y)
0, if A( x, y) = 0,

for all x, y ∈ X, x 6= y, where 0 ≤ k < 1 and A( x, y) = max{dθ ( x, Ty), dθ (y, Tx )}. Further
suppose, for all x0 ∈ X, that (9) is satisfied. Then, T has a unique fixed point z ∈ X. Moreover, the
sequence { T n x0 }n∈N converges to z.

Corollary 4. ([10], Theorem 2.2) Let T be a self mapping on a complete extended b-metric space
( X, dθ ) such that
 n o
max d ( x, y), dθ ( x,Tx)dθ ( x,Ty)+dθ (y,Ty)dθ (y,Tx) , if C( x, y) 6= 0,
dθ ( Tx, Ty) ≤ k
θ C( x,y)
0, if C( x, y) = 0,

for all x, y ∈ X, x 6= y, where 0 ≤ k < 1 and C( x, y) = dθ ( x, Ty) + dθ (y, Tx ). Further assume,

for all x0 ∈ X, that (9) is satisfied. Then, T has a unique fixed point z ∈ X. Moreover, the sequence
{ T n x0 }n∈N converges to z.

Remark 3. (i) In Example 9, T is α-orbitally admissible. Since Fix ( T ) = {0, 2}, but α(2, T2) =
α(2, 2) = 0, T is not α∗ -orbitally admissible. In this case, Theorem 9 is not applicable in Example 9.
(ii) In Example 9, if x = 2 and y = 500, then

1 n 5o
dθ ( Tx, Ty) = dθ ( T2, T500) = dθ (2, 100) = 5 > max 5, .
2 2
This shows that Corollaries 2–4 are not applicable in Example 9.

3. Applications
In this section, by using fixed point theorems mentioned above, we cope with some
problems for the unique solution to a class of Fredholm integral equations.
Symmetry 2021, 13, 614 16 of 19

Let X = C[ a, b] be a set of all real valued continuous functions on [ a, b]. Define two
mappings dθ : X × X → [0, +∞) by

dθ ( x, y) = sup | x (t) − y(t)| p ,

t∈[ a,b]

and θ : X × X → [1, +∞) by

θ ( x, y) = 2 p−1 + | x (t)| + |y(t)|,

where p > 1 is a constant. Then, ( X, dθ ) is a complete extended b-metric space.

Define a Fredholm integral equation by
Z b

x (t) = η (t) + λ I t, s, x (s) ds,
a

where t ∈ [ a, b], |λ| > 0 and I : [ a, b] × [ a, b] × X → R and η : [ a, b] → R are continuous

functions. Let T : X → X be an integral operator defined by
Z b

Tx (t) = η (t) + λ I t, s, x (s) ds. (12)
a

Theorem 10. Let T : X → X be an integral operator defined in (12). Suppose that the following
assumptions hold:
(i) for any x0 ∈ X, lim θ ( T n x0 , T m x0 ) < 1k , where k = 21p ,
n,m→∞
(ii) for any x, y ∈ X, x 6= y, it satisfies



I t, s, x (s) − I t, s, y(s)  ≤ ξ (t, s)| x (s) − y(s))|, (13)

where (s, t) ∈ [ a, b] × [ a, b] and ξ : [ a, b] × [ a, b] → R is a continuous function satisfying

Z b
1
sup ξ p (t, s)ds < . (14)
t∈[ a,b] a 2 p | λ | p ( b − a ) p −1

Then, the integral operator T has a unique solution in X.

Proof. Let x0 ∈ X and define a sequence { xn } in X by xn = T n x0 , n ≥ 1. From (12),

we obtain Z b

xn+1 = Txn (t) = η (t) + λ I t, s, xn (s) ds.
a
1 1
Let q > 1 be a constant with p + q = 1. Making full use of (13) and the Hölder’s
inequality, we speculate that
 Z b Z b
 p
 Tx (t) − Ty(t) p = λ
 

I t, s, x (s) ds − λ I t, s, y(s) ds
a a
Z b 

  p
≤ |λ|I t, s, x (s) − I t, s, y(s) ds
a
!p
Z b  qp Z b
  1
q I t, s, x (s) − I t, s, y(s)  p ds p


≤ |λ| ds
a a
Z b
 
= | λ | p ( b − a ) p −1 I t, s, x (s) − I t, s, y(s)  p ds


a
Z b
p p −1
≤ |λ| (b − a) ξ p (t, s)| x (s) − y(s)| p ds. (15)
a
Symmetry 2021, 13, 614 17 of 19

Making the most of (15) and (14), we deduce that

 p
dθ ( Tx, Ty) = sup Tx (t) − Ty(t)
 
t∈[ a,b]
hZ b p i
≤ |λ| p (b − a) p−1 sup ξ p (t, s) x (s) − y(s) ds

t∈[ a,b] a
 Z b 
≤ |λ| p (b − a) p−1 sup | x (s) − y(s)| p sup ξ p (t, s)ds
s∈[ a,b] t∈[ a,b] a
1
≤ N ( x, y).
2p
1
Setting k = 2p , we obtain that

dθ ( Tx, Ty) ≤ kN ( x, y).

Thus, all the conditions of Corollary 1 are satisfied and hence T possesses a unique
fixed point in X.

Theorem 11. Let T : X → X be an integral operator defined by (12). Assume that the following
assumptions hold:
(i) lim θ ( T n x0 , T m x0 ) < 1k , where k = 21p for any x0 ∈ X;
n,m→∞
(ii) for all distinct x, y in X, ones have
(
I t, s, x (s) − I t, s, y(s)  ≤ ξ (t, s)K( x (s), y(s)),


 where A 6= 0 and B 6= 0,
0, otherwise,

where

A = A( x (s), y(s)) = sup{| x (s) − Ty(s)| p , |y(s) − Tx (s)| p },

B = B( x (s), y(s)) = sup{|y(s) − Ty(s)| p , |y(s) − Tx (s)| p },

(s, t) ∈ [ a, b] × [ a, b] and ξ : [ a, b] × [ a, b] → R is a continuous function such that

Z b
1
sup ξ p (t, s)ds < .
t∈[ a,b] a 2 p |λ| p (b − a ) p −1

Then, the integral operator T has a unique solution in X.

Example 10. Let X = C [0, 1] be a set of all real valued continuous functions defined on [0, 1].
Then, ( X, dθ ) is a complete extended b-metric space equipped with dθ ( x, y) = sup | x (t) − y(t)|2 ,
t∈[0,1]
where θ ( x, y) = 2 + | x (t)| + |y(t)|, for all x, y ∈ X. Let T : X → X be an operator defined by
Z 1

Tx (t) = η (t) + I t, s, x (s) ds,
0

t

t(1+ x2 (s))
where η (t) = 4 and I t, s, x (s) = 3 , for all (t, s) ∈ [0, 1] × [0, 1].
We have
Z 1 Z 1
2
 Tx (t) − Ty(t)2 = 
 

I t, s, x (s) ds − I t, s, y(s) ds
0 0
Z 1
2
t 2 2
≤  x (s) − y (s)  ds. (16)
0 3
Symmetry 2021, 13, 614 18 of 19

Taking the supremum on both sides of (16), for all t ∈ [0, 1], we obtain
 2 1 1
dθ ( Tx, Ty) = sup  Tx (t) − Ty(t) ≤ dθ ( x, y) < N ( x, y).
t∈[0,1] 9 6

1 1 t
In addition, lim θ ( T m x0 , T n x0 ) = 2 < k, where k = 6 and x0 (t) = 4. Thus, all the
m,n→∞
conditions of Theorem 10 are satisfied and hence the integral operator T has a unique solution.
Author Contributions: H.H. designed the research and wrote the paper. Y.M.S. offered the draft
preparation and gave the methodology, M.S.K. and S.R. co-wrote and made revisions to the paper.
H.H. gave the support of funding acquisition. All authors have read and agreed to the published
version of the manuscript.
Funding: The first author acknowledges the financial support from the Natural Science Foundation
of Chongqing of China (No. cstc2020jcyj-msxmX0762), and the Initial Funding of Scientific Research
for High-level Talents of Chongqing Three Gorges University of China (No. 2104/09926601).
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available upon request from the
corresponding author.
Acknowledgments: The authors thank the editor and the referees for their valuable comments and
suggestions which greatly improved the quality of this paper.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Bakhtin, I.A. The contraction mapping principle in almost metric spaces. Funct. Anal. Gos. Ped. Inst. Unianowsk 1989, 30, 26–37.
2. Czerwik, S. Contraction mappings in b-metric spaces. Acta Math. Inf. Univ. Ostrav.o 1993, 1, 5–11.
3. Kamran, T.; Samreen, M.; Ul Ain, Q. A generalization of b-metric space and some fixed point theorems. Mathematics 2017, 5, 19.
[CrossRef]
4. Dass, B.K.; Gupta, S. An extension of Banach contraction principle through rational expressions. Indian J. Pure Appl. Math.
1975, 6, 1455–1458.
5. Jaggi, D.S. Some unique fixed point theorems. Indian J. Pure Appl. Math. 1977, 8, 223–230.
6. Khan, M.S. A fixed point theorems for metric spaces. Rendiconti Dell’Istituto Matematica Dell’Università Trieste Int. J. Math.
1976, 8, 69–72. [CrossRef]
7. Sarwar, M.; Humaira, Huang H. Fuzzy fixed point results with rational type contractions in partially ordered complex-valued
metric spaces. Commentat. Math. 2018, 58, 5–78. [CrossRef]
8. Choudhury, B.S.; Metiya, N.; Konar, P. Fixed point results for rational type contraction in partially ordered complex-valued metric
spaces. Bull. Int. Math. Virtual. Inst. 2015, 5, 73–80.
9. Cabrera, I.; Harjani, J.; Sadarangani, K. A fixed point theorem for contractions of rational type in partially ordered metric spaces.
Ann. Univ. Ferrara. 2013, 59, 251–258. [CrossRef]
10. Alqahtani, B.; Fulga, A.; Karapinar, E.; Rakočević, V. Contractions with rational inequalities in the extended b-metric spaces.
J. Inequal. Appl. 2019, 2019, 220. [CrossRef]
11. Fisher, B. A note on a theorem of Khan. Rendiconti Dell’lstituto Matematica Dell’Università Trieste Int. J. Math. 1978, 10, 1–4.
12. Ahmad, J.; Arshad, M.; Vetro, C. On a theorem of Khan in a generalized metric space. Int. J. Anal. 2013, 2013, 852727. [CrossRef]
13. Branciari, A. A fixed point theorem of Banach-Cacciopoli type on a class of generalized metric spaces. Publ. Math. Debrecen.
2000, 57, 31–37.
14. Piri, H.; Rahrovi, S.; Kumam, P. Khan type fixed point theorems in a generalized metric space. J. Math. Computer Sci.
2016, 16, 211–217. [CrossRef]
15. Boriceanu, M.; Bota, M.; Petruşusel, A. Multivalued fractals in b-metric spaces. Cent. Eur. J. Math. 2010, 8, 367–377. [CrossRef]
16. Aghajani, A.; Abbas, M.; Roshan, J.R. Common fixed point of generalized weak contractive mappings in partially ordered
b-metric spaces. Math. Slovaca. 2014, 64, 941–960. [CrossRef]
17. Berinde, V. Generalized contractions in quasimetric spaces. Semin. Fixed Point Theory Babes Bolyai Univ. 1993, 3, 3–9.
18. Huang, H; Radenović, S.; Deng, G. A sharp generalization on cone b-metric space over Banach algebra. J. Nonlinear Sci. Appl.
2017, 10, 429–435. [CrossRef]
19. Hussain, N.; Parvaneh, V.; Roshan, J.R.; Kadeburg, Z. Fixed points of cyclic weakly (ψ, ϕ, L, A, B)-contractive mappings ordered
b-metric spaces with applications. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013, 2013, 256. [CrossRef]
Symmetry 2021, 13, 614 19 of 19

20. Alsulami, H.H.; Karapınar, E.; Rakočević, V. Ćirić type non-unique fixed point theorems on b-metric spaces. Filomat
2017, 3, 3147–3156. [CrossRef]
21. Ćirić, L.B. Generalized contraction and fixed point theoremss. Publications L’Institut Mathématique 1971, 12, 19–26.
22. Samet, B.; Vetro, C.; Vetro, P. Fixed point theorems for α-ψ-contractive type mappings. Nonlinear Anal. 2012, 75, 2154–2165.
[CrossRef]
23. Mahendra Singh, Y.; Khan, M.S.; Kang, S.M. F-convex contraction via admissible mapping and related fixed point theorems with
an application. Mathematics 2018, 6, 105. [CrossRef]
24. Popescu, O. Some new fixed point theorems for α-Geraghty contraction type maps in metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl.
2014, 2014, 190. [CrossRef]
25. Berinde, V. Sequences of operators and fixed points in quasimetric spaces. Studia Univ. Babeş-Bolyai Math. 1996, 41, 23–27.
26. Berinde, V. On the approximation of fixed points of weak contractive mappings. Carpathian J. Math. 2003, 19, 7–22.
27. Matkowski, J. Fixed point theorems for mappings with a contractive iterate at a point. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 1977, 62, 344–348.
[CrossRef]
28. Khan, M.S.; Mahendra Singh, Y.; Abbas, M.; Rakočević V. On non-unique fixed point of Ćirić type operators in extended b-metric
spaces and applications. Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo II. Ser. 2020, 69, 1221–1241. [CrossRef]
29. Alqahtani, B.; Fulga, A.; Karapınar, E. Non-unique fixed point results in extended b-metric space. Mathematics 2018, 6, 68.
[CrossRef]

View publication stats