1. Introduction
Fixed point theory has an eminent position in pure and applied mathematics because it has a variety of applications in different fields within mathematics, such as differential and integral equations, variational inequalities, approximation theory, etc. The application of fixed point results is not merely confined to mathematics, but is also relevant in other fields, such as statistics, computer sciences, chemical sciences, physical sciences, economics, biological sciences, medical sciences, engineering, game theory, etc. (see, e.g., [
1,
2]). It is a domain that is of great interest in two research directions: the first is to find progressively wider classes of mappings and conditions under which the existence of fixed points can be proved; the second is to define iterative algorithms for the approximation of the fixed points of these mappings, as it is not always an easy task to approximate the fixed points using direct methods.
The fundamental result in metric fixed point theory is the Banach contraction principle, which was first introduced in the literature in 1922. This result provides the guarantee of the existence and uniqueness of the fixed point of a contraction mapping in a complete metric space. It not only demonstrates the existence and uniqueness of a fixed point, but also allows the Picard iterative algorithm to converge to that fixed point. Further, on account of its simplicity, utility and applicability, the Banach contraction principle has become an extremely well-known tool in solving existence problems in numerous branches of mathematical analysis. As such, several authors have improved, extended and generalized the Banach contraction principle. One of the most important generalizations of the Banach contraction principle was produced by Berinde [
3] in 2003. He defined almost contraction mapping as follows.
A self-mapping
defined on a non-empty subset
of a Banach space
is called an almost contraction when constants
and
exist in such a way that:
It is worth mentioning here that condition (
1) only ensures the existence of a fixed point of an almost contraction (see, [
3]). For the uniqueness of the fixed point of an almost contraction, he proved the following result.
Theorem 1 ([
3]).
Let be a complete metric space and be an almost contraction (1). When constants and exist in such a way that:Then has a unique fixed point, i.e., t, in . Berinde has also shown that almost contractions include the classes of Kannan [
4], Chatterjea [
5] and Zamfirescu [
6] mappings.
A widely studied extension of contraction mappings is the class of non-expansive mappings, which is natural and vast due to isometry and metric projections. A self-mapping
defined on a non-empty subset
of a Banach space
is said to be non-expansive when:
The fixed point theory for non-expansive mappings has a variety of applications in convex feasibility problems, convex optimization problems, monotone inequality problems, image restorations, etc. Due to its applicability, a large number of eminent researchers have generalized and extended this theory to the large classes of non-linear mappings. One of the most important generalizations of non-expansive mappings was produced by Garcia-Falset et al. [
7] in 2011, which is defined as follows.
Definition 1 ([
7]).
Let be a non-empty subset of a Banach space and . An operator is said to satisfy condition when:Moreover, is said to satisfy condition when satisfies condition with .
It can be easily seen that when
is a non-expansive mapping, it satisfies condition
with
. It is worth mentioning here that the class of operators that satisfy condition
properly includes the classes of Hardy and Rogers mappings [
8], mappings satisfying Suzuki’s condition
[
9], generalized
non-expansive mappings [
10] and generalized
–Reich–Suzuki non-expansive mappings [
11].
In many instances, it is not possible to find the exact solution of fixed point problems. Therefore, iterative algorithms are used to approximate the solutions of the fixed point problems. Thus, a large number of iterative algorithms have been introduced and studied for the approximation of solutions to fixed point problems (see, e.g., [
12,
13,
14,
15,
16,
17,
18,
19,
20,
21,
22], etc).
Very recently, Ali et al. [
23] introduced a new iterative algorithm called the JF iterative algorithm, which is defined as follows.
Let
be a non-empty closed and convex subset of a Banach space
and let
be the mapping. Then, the sequence
is generated by an initial point
and defined by:
where
and
are control sequences in
and
denotes the set of non-negative integers. They pointed that the JF iterative algorithm is independent from all other iterative algorithms that have been previously defined in the literature. They have produced some weak and strong convergence results for Hardy and Rogers generalized non-expansive mappings using the JF iterative algorithm in uniformly convex Banach spaces. They have also numerically shown that the JF iterative algorithm converges to the fixed point of Hardy and Rogers generalized non-expansive mappings faster than some other remarkable iterative algorithms.
On the other hand, many scientific and engineering problems are presented in the form of non-linear integral equations. The class of initial and boundary value problems can be transformed to Fredholm or Volterra non-linear integral equations. The solution of non-linear integral equations exists locally and has blow-up phenomena (see, [
24,
25]). In
Section 5, we apply the JF iterative method to approximate the solution of a non-linear integral equation in the setting of a Banach space.
Inspired by the above study, we aim to prove that the JF iterative algorithm is weakly
-stable with respect to almost contractions in the current manuscript. Further, we present some weak and strong convergence results for the operators that satisfy condition
using the JF iterative algorithm in uniformly convex Banach spaces. We numerically show that the JF iterative algorithm converges to the fixed point of the operators that satisfy condition
faster than Mann, Ishikawa, Noor, SP, S and Picard-S iterative algorithms. Finally, we approximate the solution of a mixed Volterra–Fredholm functional non-linear integral equation. The results of the present manuscript generalize and extend the results in existing literature, particularly those of [
20,
23].
4. Convergence Results for the Non-linear Operator (E)
The purpose of this section is to prove convergence results for the operator that satisfies condition in uniformly convex Banach spaces. First, we aim to prove the following fruitful lemmas that helped us to obtain the these results. Throughout this section, it is assumed that is a non-empty, closed and convex subset of a uniformly convex Banach space , is an operator that satisfies condition and .
Lemma 4. Assume that and let be a sequence that is developed by the iterative algorithm (4), then exists for all . Proof. As the operator
satisfies condition
and
, for
, we obtain:
for all
. Using the iterative algorithm (
4), we obtain:
Using Equation (
9), we obtain:
Using Equation (
10), we obtain:
This shows that the sequence
is non-increasing and bounded below
. Thus,
exists. □
Lemma 5. Let be a sequence that is developed by the iterative algorithm (4). Then, when, and only when, is bounded and . Proof. Presume that
and
. Then,
exists according to Lemma 4 and
is bounded. Presume that:
From Equations (
9), (
10) and (
12), we obtain:
Since
satisfies condition
, we obtain:
Now:
Taking
on both sides, we obtain:
So, it follows from (
14) and (
16) that:
Additionally:
Taking
on both sides, we obtain:
So, it follows from (
13) and (
18) that:
Thus:
Hence:
From (
13), (
15) and (
20) and using Lemma 2, we obtain:
Conversely, assume that
is bounded and
. Let
, then we obtain:
This implies that
. Since
is uniformly convex,
is a singleton, which implies that
. □
Now, we aim to prove the following weak convergence theorem for the operators that satisfy condition
using the iterative algorithm (
4).
Theorem 3. Presume that and satisfies Opial’s property, then the sequence that is defined by the iterative algorithm (4) converges weakly to a fixed point of the operator . Proof. In Lemma 4, we demonstrated that exists. Now, we have to show that has a unique weak subsequential limit in . Let t and q be two weak limits of and , respectively, where and are subsequences of . According to Lemma 5, and therefore, using Lemma 3, and similarly, .
Now, our aim is to show that
. When
, then using Opial’s property, we obtain:
which is not possible and hence,
. It can be deduced that
converges weakly to
. □
Theorem 4. The sequence that is defined by the iterative algorithm (4) converges strongly to when, and only when, , where . Proof. The first part is trivial. Now, we aim to prove the converse part. Presume that . According to Lemma 4, exists for all ; therefore, it can be hypothesized that .
Now, our claim is that
is a Cauchy sequence in
. Since
for a given
,
exists in such a way that for all
:
In particular,
. Therefore,
exists in such a way that:
Now, for
:
This implies that
is a Cauchy sequence in
, so there is an element
such that
. Since
, it follows that
and thus, we obtain
. □
We now aim to prove the following strong convergence result by applying condition .
Theorem 5. Assume that and the operator satisfies condition . Then, the sequence that is defined by the iterative algorithm (4) converges strongly to a fixed point of . Proof. We demonstrated in Lemma 5 that:
By applying condition
and Equation (
21), we obtain:
It then follows that:
Hence, using Theorem 4, the sequence
converges strongly to a fixed point of
. □
Now, we present the following example to support Theorem 5.
Example 2. Let be a Banach space with respect to the usual norm and be a non-empty, closed and convex subset of . Let be an operator that is defined by: Since is discontinuous at and we know that every non-expansive mapping is continuous, it follows that is not a non-expansive mapping. Now, we verify that satisfies condition . For this, the following cases arise:
Case-I. When
, then we obtain:
Case-II. When
, then we obtain:
Case-III. When
and
, then we obtain:
Case-IV. When
and
, then we obtain:
Hence, for all of the above cases,
satisfies condition
with
and
has a fixed point
. Thus,
. Now, we consider a function
, where
, which is non-decreasing and satisfies
and
for all
. Now:
Now, we have the following cases:
Case-I. When
, then we obtain:
Case-II. When
, then we obtain:
Hence, from both the cases, we obtain:
Thus, the operator
satisfies condition
. Now, all of the assumptions of Theorem 5 are satisfied. Hence, using Theorem 5, the sequence that is defined by the JF iterative algorithm converges strongly to the fixed point
of
.
Now, we extend the following example to compare the rate of convergence of the JF iterative algorithm to some other well-known iterative algorithms for operators that satisfy condition .
Example 3. Let be a Banach space with respect to the usual norm and let be a subset of . Let be defined by: It can easily be seen that the operator satisfies condition with .
Now, we choose control sequences , and for all with the initial estimate of to numerically compare the rate of convergence of remarkable iterative algorithms.
Using MATLAB 2015a, we demonstrate that the proposed iterative algorithm (
4) converges to the fixed point
of the operator
faster than Mann, Ishikawa, S, Picard-S, Noor and SP iterative algorithms, which can easily be seen in
Table 1 and
Figure 1.
5. Application
The purpose of this section is to estimate the solution of a mixed Volterra–Fredholm functional non-linear integral equation using the iterative algorithm (
4).
We considered the following non-linear integral equation (see [
32]):
where
is an interval in
,
,
are continuous functions and
.
Assume that the following prerequisites are satisfied:
;
;
constants
exist in such a way that:
for all
,
;
constants
and
exist in such a way that:
for all
;
.
Using the solution to problem (
22), we obtain a function
.
The following existence result for problem (
22) was proved by Crăciun and Şerban [
32].
Theorem 6. Assume that prerequisites are satisfied. Then, problem (22) has a unique solution of . We now demonstrate the main result of this section using the iterative algorithm (
4).
Theorem 7. Let be a Banach space with Chebyshev’s norm. Let be a sequence that is defined by the iterative algorithm (4) for the operator , which is defined as:where T, K and H are defined as above. Assume that prerequisites are satisfied. Then, the iterative algorithm (4) converges to the unique solution, i.e., of problem (22). Proof. In Theorem 6, we saw that problem (
22) has a unique solution, so let us assume that
is the fixed point of
. Now, we aim to show that the sequence
that is defined by the JF iterative algorithm (
4) converges to the solution of problem (
22), i.e.,
. First, we need to show that the operator
that is defined in (
23) is an almost contraction.
Presume that the prerequisites
are satisfied. Then:
By using condition
and defining
, then for any
Equation (
24) becomes:
This shows that
is an almost contraction. Hence, using Theorem 2, the sequence
that is defined by the JF iterative algorithm (
4) converges to the solution of problem (
22). This completes the proof. □