1 Introduction

Fixed point theorems for monotone single-valued mappings in a metric space endowed with a partial ordering have been widely investigated. These theorems are hybrids of the two most fundamental and useful theorems in fixed point theory: the Banach contraction principle ([1], Theorem 2.1) and the Tarski fixed point theorem [2, 3]. Generalizing the Banach contraction principle for multivalued mapping to metric spaces, Nadler [4] obtained the following result.

Theorem 1.1

[4]

Let \((X,d)\) be a complete metric space. Denote by \(\mathcal{CB}(X)\) the set of all nonempty closed bounded subsets of X. Let \(F: X \rightarrow\mathcal{CB}(X)\) be a multivalued mapping. If there exists \(k\in[0,1)\) such that

$$H\bigl(F(x),F(y)\bigr)\leq k d(x,y) $$

for all \(x,y\in X\), where H is the Hausdorff metric on \(\mathcal{CB}(X)\), then F has a fixed point in X.

A number of extensions and generalizations of the Nadler theorem were obtained by different authors; see for instance [5, 6] and references cited therein. The Tarski theorem was extended to multivalued mappings by different authors; see [5, 79]. Investigation of the existence of fixed points for single-valued mappings in partially ordered metric spaces was initially considered by Ran and Reurings in [10] who proved the following result.

Theorem 1.2

[10]

Let \((X,\preceq)\) be a partially ordered set such that every pair \(x,y\in X\) has an upper and lower bound. Let d be a metric on X such that \((X,d)\) is a complete metric space. Let \(f: X\rightarrow X\) be a continuous monotone (either order preserving or order reversing) mapping. Suppose that the following conditions hold:

  1. (1)

    There exists \(k\in[0,1)\) with

    $$ d\bigl(f(x),f(y)\bigr)\leq k d(x,y) \quad \textit{for all } x,y\in X \textit{ such that } x \succeq y . $$
  2. (2)

    There exists an \(x_{0} \in X\) with \(x_{0} \preceq f(x_{0})\) or \(x_{0} \succeq f(x_{0})\).

Then f is a Picard operator (PO), that is, f has a unique fixed point \(x^{*}\in X\) and for each \(x\in X\), \(\lim_{n\rightarrow \infty} f^{n}(x)=x^{*}\).

After this, different authors considered the problem of existence of a fixed point for contraction mappings in partially ordered metric spaces; see [8, 1113] and references cited therein. Nieto et al. in [13] extended the ideas of [10] to prove the existence of solutions to some differential equations. Recently, two results have appeared, giving sufficient conditions for f to be a PO, if \((X,d)\) is endowed with a graph. The first of which was given by Jachymski [14] and the second one was given by Jachymski and Lukawska [15], generalizing the results of [11, 13, 16, 17] to a single-valued mapping in metric spaces with a graph instead of a partial ordering.

The aim of this paper is two folds: first to give a correct definition of monotone multivalued mappings, second to extend the conclusion of Theorem 1.2 to the case of monotone multivalued mappings in metric spaces endowed with a graph.

2 Preliminaries

It seems that the terminology of graph theory instead of partial ordering gives a clearer picture and yield interesting generalization of the Banach contraction principle. Let us begin this section with terminology for metric spaces which will be used throughout.

Let G be a directed graph (digraph) with set of vertices \(V(G)\) and a set of edges \(E(G)\) contains all the loops, i.e., \((x,x) \in E(G)\) for any \(x \in V(G)\). We also assume that G has no parallel edges (arcs) and so we can identify G with the pair \((V(G),E(G))\). Our graph theory notations and terminology are standard and can be found in all graph theory books, like [18, 19] and [20]. Moreover, we may treat G as a weighted graph (see [20], p.309]) by assigning to each edge the distance between its vertices. By \(G^{-1}\) we denote the conversion of a graph G, i.e., the graph obtained from G by reversing the direction of edges. Thus we have

$$E\bigl(G^{-1}\bigr)=\bigl\{ (y,x) \mid (x,y)\in E(G)\bigr\} . $$

A digraph G is called an oriented graph if whenever \((u,v)\in E(G)\), then \((v,u)\notin E(G)\). The letter \(\widetilde{G}\) denotes the undirected graph obtained from G by ignoring the direction of edges. Actually, it will be more convenient for us to treat \(\widetilde{G}\) as a directed graph for which the set of its edges is symmetric. Under this convention,

$$E(\widetilde{G})=E(G)\cup E\bigl(G^{-1}\bigr). $$

We call \((V',E')\) a subgraph of G if \(V'\subseteq V(G)\), \(E'\subseteq E(G)\) and for any edge \((x,y)\in E'\), \(x, y\in V'\).

If x and y are vertices in a graph G, then a (directed) path in G from x to y of length N is a sequence \((x_{i})_{i=1}^{i=N}\) of \(N + 1\) vertices such that \(x_{0} = x\), \(x_{N} = y\), and \((x_{n-1},x_{n})\in E(G)\) for \(i = 1,\ldots,N\). A graph G is connected if there is a directed path between any two vertices. G is weakly connected if \(\widetilde{G}\) is connected. If G is such that \(E(G)\) is symmetric and x is a vertex in G, then the subgraph \(G_{x}\) consisting of all edges and vertices which are contained in some path beginning at x is called the component of G containing x. In this case \(V(G_{x}) =[x]_{G}\), where \([x]_{G}\) is the equivalence class of the following relation ℛ defined on \(V(G)\) by the rule:

$$ y \, {\mathcal{R}}\, z \mbox{ if there is a (directed) path in } G \mbox{ from } y \mbox{ to } z . $$

Clearly \(G_{x}\) is connected.

Next we introduce the concept of hyperbolic metric spaces. Indeed let \((X,d)\) be a metric space. Suppose that there exists a family ℱ of metric segments such that any two points x, y in X are endpoints of a unique metric segment \([x,y] \in{\mathcal{F}}\) (\([x,y]\) is an isometric image of the real line interval \([0,d(x,y)]\)). We shall denote by \(\beta x \oplus(1-\beta) y\) the unique point z of \([x,y]\) which satisfies

$$d(x,z) = (1-\beta) d(x,y)\quad \mbox{and} \quad d(z,y) = \beta d(x,y), $$

where \(\beta\in[0,1]\). Such metric spaces with a family ℱ of metric segments are usually called convex metric spaces [21]. Moreover, if we have

$$d \bigl(\alpha p \oplus(1-\alpha) x, \alpha q \oplus(1-\alpha) y \bigr) \leq \alpha d(p,q)+ (1-\alpha)d(x,y) $$

for all p, q, x, y in X, and \(\alpha\in[0,1]\), then X is said to be a hyperbolic metric space (see [22]).

Obviously, normed linear spaces are hyperbolic spaces. As nonlinear examples, one can consider Hadamard manifolds [23], the Hilbert open unit ball equipped with the hyperbolic metric [24], and \(\operatorname{CAT}(0)\) spaces [2527]. We will say that a subset C of a hyperbolic metric space X is convex if \([x,y]\subset C\) whenever x, y are in C.

Definition 2.1

Let \((X,d)\) be a hyperbolic metric space. A graph G on X is said to be convex if and only if for any \(x,y, z, w \in X\) and \(\alpha\in[0,1]\), we have

$$(x,z) \in E(G)\quad \mbox{and} \quad (y,w) \in E(G)\quad \Longrightarrow\quad \bigl(\alpha x \oplus (1-\alpha) y, \alpha z \oplus(1-\alpha) w\bigr) \in E(G). $$

Next we introduce the concept of monotone multivalued mappings. In [9], the authors offered the following definition.

Definition 2.2

([9], Definition 2.6)

Let \(F: X \rightarrow2^{X}\) be a multivalued mapping with nonempty closed and bounded values. The mapping F is said to be a G-contraction if there exists \(k\in[0, 1)\) such that

$$ H\bigl(F(x), F(y)\bigr) \leq k d(x, y) \quad \mbox{for all } (x,y)\in E(G) $$

and if \(u\in F(x)\) and \(v\in F(y)\) are such that

$$ d(u,v)\leq k d(x,y)+\alpha \quad \mbox{for each } \alpha> 0 , $$

then \((u, v) \in E (G)\).

In particular, this definition implies that if \(u\in F(x)\) and \(v\in F(y)\) are such that

$$d(u,v)\leq k d(x,y), $$

then \((u, v) \in E (G)\), which is very restrictive. In fact in the proof of Theorem 3.1 in [9], the authors try to construct an orbit \((x_{n})\) such that \((x_{n}, x_{n+1}) \in E(G)\), for any \(n \geq1\), but this fails to happen according to Definition 2.2. Our definition of G-contraction multivalued mappings is more appropriate. It finds its roots in [28]. In the sequel, we assume that \((X,d)\) is a metric space, and G is a directed graph (digraph) with a set of vertices \(V(G)=X\) and the set of edges \(E(G)\) contains all the loops, i.e., \((x,x) \in E(G)\), for any \(x \in X\).

Definition 2.3

Let \((X,d)\) be a metric space and C a nonempty subset of X.

  1. (i)

    We say that a mapping \(T: C\rightarrow C\) is G-edge preserving if

    $$\forall x,y\in C,\quad (x,y)\in E(G)\quad \Rightarrow\quad \bigl(T(x),T(y)\bigr) \in E(G). $$
  2. (ii)

    We say that a mapping \(T: C\rightarrow C\) is G-contraction if T is G-edge preserving and there exists \(k \in [0,1)\) such that

    $$\forall x,y\in C, \quad (x,y)\in E(G)\quad \Rightarrow\quad d\bigl(T(x),T(y) \bigr) \leq k d(x,y). $$
  3. (iii)

    We say that a mapping \(T: C\rightarrow C\) is G-nonexpansive if T is G-edge preserving and

    $$\forall x,y\in C,\quad (x,y)\in E(G)\quad \Rightarrow\quad d\bigl(T(x),T(y) \bigr) \leq d(x,y). $$
  4. (iv)

    A multivalued mapping \(T: C \rightarrow2^{C}\) is said to be monotone increasing (resp. decreasing) G-contraction if there exists \(\alpha\in[0,1)\) such that for any \(x, y \in C\) with \((x,y)\in E(G)\) and any \(u \in T(x)\) there exists \(v \in T(y)\) such that

    $$(u,v) \in E(G)\qquad \bigl(\mbox{resp. }(v,u) \in E(G)\bigr) \quad \mbox{and} \quad d(u,v) \leq \alpha d(x,y). $$

    Similarly we will say that the multivalued mapping \(T: C \rightarrow 2^{C}\) is monotone increasing (resp. decreasing) G-nonexpansive if for any \(x, y \in C\) with \((x,y)\in E(G)\) and any \(u \in T(x)\) there exists \(v \in T(y)\) such that

    $$(u,v) \in E(G)\qquad \bigl(\mbox{resp. }(v,u) \in E(G)\bigr) \quad \mbox{and} \quad d(u,v) \leq d(x,y). $$

    \(x \in C\) is called a fixed point of a single-valued mapping T if and only if \(T(x) = x\). For a multivalued mapping T, x is a fixed point if and only if \(x \in T(x)\). The set of all fixed points of a mapping T is denoted by \(\operatorname{Fix}(T)\).

3 Main results

We begin with the following well-known theorem, which gives the existence of a fixed point for monotone single-valued and multivalued contraction mappings in metric spaces endowed with a graph.

Theorem 3.1

[14]

Let \((X,d)\) be a complete metric space, and let the triple \((X,d,G)\) have the following property:

(∗):

For any \((x_{n})_{n \geq1}\) in X, if \(x_{n} \rightarrow x\) and \((x_{n}, x_{n+1})\in E(G)\), for \(n \geq1\), then there is a subsequence \((x_{k_{n}})_{n \geq1}\) with \((x_{k_{n}}, x)\in E(G)\), for \(n \geq1\).

Let \(f: X \rightarrow X\) be a G-contraction, \(X_{f}:=\{ x\in X: (x,f(x))\in E(G) \}\). Then the following statements hold:

  1. (1)

    \(\operatorname{card}\operatorname{Fix} f=\operatorname{card}\{[x]_{\widetilde{G}} : x\in X_{f} \}\).

  2. (2)

    \(\operatorname{Fix} f\neq\emptyset\) if and only if \(X_{f}\neq\emptyset\).

  3. (3)

    f has a unique fixed point if and only if there exists an \(x_{0}\in X_{f}\) such that \(X_{f} \subseteq[x_{0}]_{\widetilde{G}}\).

  4. (4)

    For any \(x \in X_{f}\), \(f|_{[x]_{\widetilde{G}}}\) is a PO, that is, f has a unique fixed point \(x^{*}\in[x]_{\widetilde{G}}\) and for each \(x\in[x]_{\widetilde{G}}\), \(\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} f^{n}(x)=x^{*}\).

  5. (5)

    If \(X_{f} \neq\emptyset\) and G is weakly connected, then f is a PO, that is, f has a unique fixed point \(x^{*}\in X\) and for each \(x\in X\), \(\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} f^{n}(x)=x^{*}\).

The multivalued version of Theorem 3.1 may be stated as follows.

Theorem 3.2

[29]

Let \((X,d)\) be a complete metric space and suppose that the triple \((X,d,G)\) has property (∗). We denote by \({\mathcal{CB}}(X)\) the collection of all nonempty closed and bounded subsets of X. Let \(T:X \rightarrow{\mathcal{CB}}(X)\) be a monotone increasing G-contraction mapping and \(X_{T}:=\{x\in X; (x,u)\in E(G)\textit{ for some }u\in T(x)\}\). If \(X_{T}\neq\emptyset\), then the following statements hold:

  1. (1)

    For any \(x\in X_{T}\), \(T|_{[x]_{\widetilde{G}}}\) has a fixed point.

  2. (2)

    If \(x\in X\) with \((x,\bar{x})\in E(G)\) where \(\bar{x}\) is a fixed point of T, then \(\{T^{n}(x)\}\) converges to \(\bar{x}\).

  3. (3)

    If G is weakly connected, then T has a fixed point in G.

  4. (4)

    If \(X':=\bigcup\{[x]_{\widetilde{G}} : x\in X_{T}\}\), then \(T|_{X'}\) has a fixed point in X.

  5. (5)

    If \(T(X)\subseteq E(G)\) then T has a fixed point.

  6. (6)

    \(\operatorname{Fix}T\neq\emptyset\) if and only if \(X_{T}\neq\emptyset\).

Remark 3.1

The missing information in Theorem 3.2 is the uniqueness of the fixed point. In fact we do have a partial positive answer to this question. Indeed if \(\bar{u}\) and \(\bar{w}\) are two fixed points of T such that \((\bar {u},\bar{w})\in E(G)\), then we must have \(\bar{u} = \bar{w}\). In general T may have more than one fixed point.

Remark 3.2

If we assume G is such that \(E(G):=X\times X\) then clearly G is connected and Theorem 3.2 gives the Nadler theorem [4].

The following is a direct consequence of Theorem 3.2.

Corollary 3.1

Let \((X, d)\) be a complete metric space. Let G be a graph on X such that the triple \((X,d,G)\) has the Property (∗). If G is weakly connected then every G-contraction \(T: X\rightarrow\mathcal{CB}(X)\) such that \((x_{0}, x_{1})\in E(G)\), for some \(x_{0} \in X\) and \(x_{1}\in T(x_{0})\), has a fixed point.

Next we discuss some existence results for nonexpansive single-valued and multivalued G-monotone mappings. To the best of our knowledge, these results were never investigated for such mappings.

Theorem 3.3

Let \((X,d)\) be a complete hyperbolic metric space and suppose that the triple \((X,d,G)\) has property (∗). Assume G is convex. Let C be a nonempty, closed, convex, and bounded subset of X. Let \(T: C\rightarrow C\) be a G-nonexpansive mapping. Assume \(C_{T}:=\{ x\in C: (x,T(x))\in E(G) \} \neq\emptyset\). Then

$$\inf\bigl\{ d\bigl(x,T(x)\bigr); x \in C\bigr\} = 0. $$

In particular, there exists an approximate fixed point sequence \((x_{n})\) in C of T, i.e.,

$$\lim_{n \rightarrow\infty} d\bigl(x_{n},T(x_{n})\bigr) = 0. $$

Proof

Fix \(a \in C\). Let \(\lambda\in(0,1)\) and define \(T_{\lambda}: C \rightarrow C\) by

$$T_{\lambda}(x) = \lambda a \oplus(1-\lambda) T(x). $$

If \((x,y) \in E(G)\), then we have \((T(x),T(y)) \in E(G)\), since T is G-edge preserving. Moreover, since G is convex and \((a,a) \in E(G)\), we obtain

$$\bigl(T_{\lambda}(x),T_{\lambda}(y)\bigr) = \bigl(\lambda a \oplus(1- \lambda) T(x), \lambda a \oplus(1-\lambda) T(y)\bigr) \in E(G), $$

i.e., \(T_{\lambda}\) is G-edge preserving, and

$$d\bigl(\lambda a \oplus(1-\lambda) T(x), \lambda a \oplus(1-\lambda) T(y)\bigr) \leq(1-\lambda) d\bigl(T(x),T(y)\bigr) \leq(1-\lambda) d(x,y), $$

i.e., \(d(T_{\lambda}(x),T_{\lambda}(y)) \leq(1-\lambda) d(x,y)\). In other words, \(T_{\lambda}\) is a G-contraction. It is easy to see that \(C_{T} \subset C_{T_{\lambda}}\). Hence \(C_{T_{\lambda}}\) is not empty. Theorem 3.1 implies the existence of a fixed point \(\omega_{\lambda}\) of \(T_{\lambda}\) in C. So we have

$$\omega_{\lambda}= \lambda a \oplus(1-\lambda) T(\omega_{\lambda}), $$

which implies

$$d\bigl(\omega_{\lambda}, T(\omega_{\lambda})\bigr) \leq\lambda d \bigl(a, T(\omega_{\lambda})\bigr) \leq\lambda \delta(C), $$

where \(\delta(C) = \sup\{d(x,y); x,y \in C\}\) is the diameter of C. Set \(x_{n} = \omega_{1/n}\), for \(n \geq1\). Then we have \(d(x_{n}, T(x_{n})) \leq\delta(C)/n\), for \(n \geq1\). In particular, we have

$$\inf\bigl\{ d\bigl(x,T(x)\bigr); x \in X\bigr\} \leq\lim_{n \rightarrow\infty} d\bigl(x_{n},T(x_{n})\bigr) = 0. $$

The proof of Theorem 3.3 is therefore complete. □

In order to obtain a fixed point existence result for G-nonexpansive mappings, we need some extra assumptions.

Definition 3.1

We will say that G is transitive if, for any two vertices x and y that are connected by a directed finite path, we have \((x,y) \in E(G)\).

Note that if the triple \((X,d,G)\) has property (∗) and G is transitive, then we have the following property:

(∗∗):

For any \((x_{n})_{n \geq1}\) in X, if \(x_{n} \rightarrow x\) and \((x_{n}, x_{n+1})\in E(G)\), for \(n \geq1\), then \((x_{n}, x)\in E(G)\), for \(n \geq1\).

Definition 3.2

We will say that a nonempty subset C of X is G-compact if and only if for any \((x_{n})_{n \geq1}\) in C, if \((x_{n}, x_{n+1})\in E(G)\), for \(n \geq1\), then there exists a subsequence \((x_{k_{n}})\) of \((x_{n})\) which is convergent to a point in C.

Note that G-compactness does not necessarily imply compactness. Indeed, consider the metric set X, subset of \(\mathbb{R}^{3}\), built on a cone routed at the origin. All rays are bounded and compact. But X is unbounded. Define the graph G on X by \((x,y) \in E(G)\) if and only if x and y are on the same ray. Then any sequence \((x_{n}) \in X\) such that \((x_{n},x_{n+1}) \in E(G)\), for \(n \geq1\), will belong to a ray. Hence \((x_{n})\) has a convergent subsequence. This shows that X is G-compact but fails to be compact.

Theorem 3.4

Let \((X,d)\) be a complete hyperbolic metric space and suppose that the triple \((X,d,G)\) has property (∗). Assume G is convex and transitive. Let C be a nonempty, G-compact and convex subset of X. Let \(T: C\rightarrow C\) be a G-nonexpansive mapping. Assume \(C_{T}:=\{ x\in C: (x,T(x))\in E(G) \} \neq\emptyset\). Then T has a fixed point.

Proof

Since \(C_{T}\) is not empty, choose \(x_{0} \in C_{T}\). Let \((\lambda _{n})\) be a sequence of numbers in \((0,1)\) such that \(\lim_{n \rightarrow\infty} \lambda_{n} = 0\). As in the proof of Theorem 3.3, define the mapping \(T_{1}:C \rightarrow C\) by

$$T_{1}(x) = \lambda_{1} x_{0} \oplus(1- \lambda_{1}) T(x). $$

Since \((x_{0},T(x_{0})) \in E(G)\), we get \((x_{0},T_{1}(x_{0})) \in E(G)\). Since \(T_{1}\) is G-edge preserving, we obtain \((T_{1}^{n}(x_{0}),T^{n+1}_{1}(x_{0})) \in E(G)\) and

$$d\bigl(T_{1}^{n}(x_{0}),T^{n+1}_{1}(x_{0}) \bigr) \leq\lambda_{1}^{n} d\bigl(x_{0}, T_{1}(x_{0})\bigr)\quad \mbox{for }n\geq1. $$

Hence \((T^{n}_{1}(x_{0}))\) is a Cauchy sequence. Since C is G-compact, we conclude that \((T^{n}_{1}(x_{0}))\) is convergent. Set \(\lim_{n \rightarrow\infty} T^{n}_{1}(x_{0}) = x_{1}\). The property (∗∗) implies that \((x_{0},x_{1}) \in E(G)\). By induction, we construct a sequence \((x_{n})\) such that \(x_{n+1}\) is a fixed point of \(T_{n+1}:C \rightarrow C\) defined by

$$T_{n+1}(x) = \lambda_{n+1} x_{n} \oplus(1- \lambda_{n+1}) T(x), $$

obtained as the limit of \((T^{k}_{n+1}(x_{n}))_{k \geq1}\). In particular, we have \((x_{n},x_{n+1}) \in E(G)\), for any \(n \geq1\). Since C is G-compact, there exists a subsequence \((x_{k_{n}})\) which converges to \(\omega\in C\). Since G is transitive, the property (∗∗) implies that \((x_{k_{n}}, \omega) \in E(G)\). Using the G-nonexpansiveness of T, we conclude that

$$d\bigl(T(x_{k_{n}}), T(\omega)\bigr) \leq d(x_{k_{n}},\omega)\quad \mbox{for } n \geq1. $$

Hence \((T(x_{k_{n}}))\) converges to \(T(\omega)\). Since \(x_{n+1}\) is a fixed point of \(T_{n+1}\), we get \(x_{n+1} = \lambda_{n+1} x_{n} \oplus (1-\lambda_{n+1}) T(x_{n+1})\), which implies

$$d\bigl(x_{n+1}, T(x_{n+1})\bigr) \leq \lambda_{n+1} d \bigl(x_{n}, T(x_{n+1})\bigr) \leq \lambda_{n+1} \delta(C)\quad \mbox{for } n \geq1, $$

which implies \(\lim_{n \rightarrow\infty} d(x_{n},T(x_{n})) = 0\). Hence \((T(x_{k_{n}}))\) converges to ω as well. Therefore we must have \(T(\omega) = \omega\), i.e., T has a fixed point. □

Next we investigate the above results for multivalued mappings. The first result for these mappings is the analog to Theorem 3.3.

Theorem 3.5

Let \((X,d)\) be a complete hyperbolic metric space and suppose that the triple \((X,d,G)\) has property (∗). Assume G is convex. Let C be a nonempty, closed, convex, and bounded subset of X. Set \({\mathcal{C}}(C)\) to be the set of all nonempty closed subsets of C. Let \(T:C \rightarrow{\mathcal{C}}(C)\) be a monotone increasing G-nonexpansive mapping. If \(C_{T}:=\{x\in C; (x,y) \in E(G)\textit{ for some }y\in T(x)\}\) is not empty, then T has an approximate fixed point sequence \((x_{n}) \in C\), that is, for any \(n \geq1\), there exists \(y_{n} \in T(x_{n})\) such that

$$\lim_{n \rightarrow\infty} d(x_{n},y_{n}) = 0. $$

In particular, we have \(\lim_{n \rightarrow\infty} \operatorname{dist}(x_{n},T(x_{n})) = 0\), where

$$\operatorname{dist}\bigl(x_{n},T(x_{n})\bigr) = \inf \bigl\{ d(x_{n},y); y \in T(x_{n})\bigr\} . $$

Proof

Fix \(\lambda\in(0,1)\) and \(x_{0} \in C\). Define the multivalued map \(T_{\lambda}\) on C by

$$T_{\lambda}(x) = \lambda x_{0} \oplus(1-\lambda) T(x) = \bigl\{ \lambda x_{0} \oplus(1-\lambda) y; y\in T(x)\bigr\} . $$

Note that \(T_{\lambda}(x)\) is nonempty and closed subset of C. Let us show that \(T_{\lambda}\) is a monotone increasing G-contraction. Let \(x, y \in C\) such that \((x,y) \in E(G)\). Since T is a monotone increasing G-nonexpansive mapping, for any \(x^{*} \in T(x)\) there exists \(y^{*} \in T(y)\) such that \((x^{*},y^{*})\in E(G)\) and \(d(x^{*},y^{*}) \leq d(x,y)\). Since

$$d \bigl(\lambda x_{0} \oplus(1-\lambda) x^{*} , \lambda x_{0} \oplus (1-\lambda) y^{*} \bigr) \leq (1-\lambda) d\bigl(x^{*},y^{*} \bigr) \leq (1-\lambda) d(x,y), $$

which proves our claim. Since G is convex, we get \((\lambda x_{0} \oplus(1-\lambda) x^{*}, \lambda x_{0} \oplus(1-\lambda) y^{*}) \in E(G)\). This clearly shows that \(T_{\lambda}\) is a monotone increasing G-contraction as claimed. Note that we have \(C_{T} \subset C_{T_{\lambda}}\), which implies that \(C_{T_{\lambda}}\) is nonempty. Using Theorem 3.2 we conclude that \(T_{\lambda}\) has a fixed point \(x_{\lambda}\in C\). Thus there exists \(y_{\lambda}\in T(x_{\lambda})\) such that

$$x_{\lambda}= \lambda x_{0} \oplus(1-\lambda) y_{\lambda}. $$

In particular we have

$$d(x_{\lambda}, y_{\lambda}) \leq \lambda d(x_{0} , y_{\lambda}) \leq \lambda \delta(C), $$

which implies \(\operatorname{dist}(x_{\lambda},T(x_{\lambda})) \leq\lambda \delta(C)\). If we choose \(\lambda= \frac{1}{n}\), for \(n \geq1\), there exist \(x_{n} \in C\) and \(y_{n} \in T(x_{n})\) such that \(d(x_{n},y_{n}) \leq \delta(C)/n\), which implies

$$\operatorname{dist}\bigl(x_{n},T(x_{n})\bigr) \leq \frac{1}{n} \delta(C). $$

The proof of Theorem 3.5 is therefore complete. □

The multivalued version of Theorem 3.4 may be stated as follows.

Theorem 3.6

Let \((X,d)\) be a complete hyperbolic metric space and suppose that the triple \((X,d,G)\) has property (∗∗). Assume G is convex and transitive. Let C be a nonempty, G-compact, and convex subset of X. Then any \(T: C\rightarrow{\mathcal{C}}(C)\) monotone increasing G-nonexpansive mapping has a fixed point provided \(C_{T}:=\{x\in C; (x,y) \in E(G)\textit{ for some }y\in T(x)\}\) is not empty.

Proof

Since \(C_{T}\) is not empty, choose \(x_{0} \in C_{T}\). Let \((\lambda _{n})\) be a sequence of numbers in \((0,1)\) such that \(\lim_{n \rightarrow\infty} \lambda_{n} = 0\). As we did in the proof of Theorem 3.5, define the mapping \(T_{1}:C \rightarrow C\) by

$$T_{1}(x) = \lambda_{1} x_{0} \oplus(1- \lambda_{1}) T(x). $$

Since \(C_{T} \subset C_{T_{1}}\), there exists \(y_{0} \in T_{1}(x_{0})\) such that \((x_{0},y_{0}) \in E(G)\). Using the properties of \(T_{1}\), there exists \(y_{2} \in T_{1}(y_{1})\) such that \((y_{1},y_{2}) \in E(G)\) and

$$d(y_{1},y_{2}) \leq(1-\lambda_{1}) d(x_{0},y_{1}). $$

By induction we build a sequence \((y_{n})\), with \(y_{0} = x_{0}\), such that \(y_{n+1} \in T_{1}(y_{n})\), \((y_{n} ,y_{n+1}) \in E(G)\), and

$$d(y_{n},y_{n+1}) \leq(1-\lambda_{1}) d(y_{n-1}, y_{n}) \leq(1-\lambda _{1})^{n} d(x_{0}, y_{1}) \leq(1-\lambda_{1})^{n} \delta(C) $$

for \(n \geq1\). So \((y_{n})\) is Cauchy. Set \(\lim_{n \rightarrow+\infty} y_{n} = x_{1} \in C\). The property (∗∗) implies that \((y_{n},x_{1}) \in E(G)\), for any n. In particular, we have \((x_{0},x_{1}) \in E(G)\). Using the properties of \(T_{1}\), for any n there exists \(z_{n} \in T(x_{1})\) such that

$$d(y_{n+1}, z_{n}) \leq(1-\lambda_{1}) d(y_{n},x_{1}). $$

Clearly this implies that \((z_{n})\) converges to \(x_{1}\) as well. Since \(T(x_{1})\) is closed, we conclude that \(x_{1} \in T(x_{1})\), i.e., \(x_{1}\) is a fixed point of \(T_{1}\). By induction, we construct a sequence \((x_{n})\) in C such that \(x_{n+1}\) is a fixed point of \(T_{n+1}:C \rightarrow{\mathcal{C}}(C)\) defined by

$$T_{n+1}(x) = \lambda_{n+1} x_{n} \oplus(1- \lambda_{n+1}) T(x), $$

and \((x_{n},x_{n+1}) \in E(G)\). Since C is G-compact, there exists a subsequence \((x_{k_{n}})\) which converges to \(\omega\in C\). Since G is transitive, the property (∗∗) implies that \((x_{n}, \omega) \in E(G)\). Since \(x_{n}\) is a fixed point of \(T_{n}\), there exists \(z_{n} \in T(x_{n})\) such that

$$x_{n} = \lambda_{n} x_{n-1} \oplus(1- \lambda_{n}) z_{n} $$

for any \(n \geq1\). Note that \(d(x_{n},z_{n}) \leq \lambda_{n} d(x_{n_{1}},z_{n}) \leq\lambda_{n} \delta(C)\), for any \(n \geq1\). In particular we have \(\lim_{n \rightarrow\infty} d(x_{n},z_{n}) = 0\). Since C is G-compact, there exists a subsequence \((x_{k_{n}})\) which converges to some point \(\omega\in C\). Clearly \((z_{k_{n}})\) also converges to ω. Using the G-nonexpansiveness of T, since \((x_{k_{n}}, \omega) \in E(G)\), there exists \(\omega_{n} \in T(\omega)\) such that \(d(z_{k_{n}}, \omega_{n}) \leq d(x_{k_{n}}, \omega)\), for any n. Therefore we see that \((\omega_{n})\) converges to ω. Since \(T(\omega)\) is closed, we conclude that \(\omega\in T(\omega)\), i.e., ω is a fixed point of T. □