Extension of fixed point results in intuitionistic fuzzy b metric space

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to define the notion of intuitionistic fuzzy b metric space (in short, IFbMS) along with some useful results. We establish some important Lemmas in order to study the Cauchy sequence in IFbMS. To further develop the work, we establish some fixed point theorems and study the existence of unique fixed point of some self mappings in IFbMS. We also develop the concept of Ćirić quasi-Contraction theorem in IFbMS. Examples are provided to validate the non-triviality of the results.

Keywords

Cauchy sequence fixed point theorem unique fixed point Ćirić quasi-contraction theorem

1 Introduction

In 1965, Zadeh [23] introduced a new branch of concept called fuzzy set theory to explain and represent mathematical structure for the situations where data are imprecise or vague. Simultaneously, in 1986 Atanassaov [2] generalized this concept to a new form which deals with both the degree of membership (belongingness) and non-membership (non-belongingness) of an elements within a set and named it as intuitionistic fuzzy set. Initially the concept of fuzzy metric space was established by Kaleva and Seikkala [14]. After that some mathematician like Kramosil and Michalek [15], George and Veeramani [10] modify the definition of fuzzy metric space. By considering a weaker condition instead of the triangular inequality Bakhtin [4] and Czerwike [7] established the concept of b metric space.

Heilpern [13] initiated the study of fixed point theory in fuzzy metric spaces by establishing an extension of the Banach’s contraction principle in fuzzy setting. This famous principle has been further extended and generalized by many authors in fuzzy settings from different points of view [1 , 18–21].

The concept of b-metric space plays a paramount role to signify the existence of fixed point theory. Since existence of fixed point implies the existence of solution of graphs therefore the study of fixed point theory in various generalized spaces place great emphasis in the field of designing and modeling system. However sometimes modeling of systems seem difficult due to the lake of exact distance between two points or elements. In this case, fuzzy sets or fuzzy logic provide a consequential platform in the field of modeling and designing.

As intuitionistic fuzzy set is a generalized form of fuzzy set it deals with more complex situation for higher order fuzzy sets and rescue the complexity of modeling systems. Its more flexible nature in application motives us to work on the current study. The main objective of this work is to extent the concept of existence of fixed point theorems and contraction theorems into generalized intuitionistic fuzzy b metric space and establish some new results which are helpful for further generalization of the current work. In the present work we establish the definition of IFbMS along with some more results. Main motive of this work is to provides some new fixed point theorem and to study the unique fixed point for IFbMS. This work also contain the notion of Cauchy sequence in the setting of IFbMS. Due to the importance of contraction condition our work also study the Ćirić quasi-Contraction theorem for IFbMS along with some examples.

Following definitions are used for the main work.

Definition 1.1. Suppose X is a non-empty set. Consider a three-tuple (X, ℏ , ∗) where ∗ is a continuous t-norm and ℏ are fuzzy set on X² × (0, ∞). Then (X, ℏ , ∗) is called an fuzzy b-metric space if ∀ υ, ξ, z ∈ X and s, t > 0 and a given number b ≥ 1 following conditions are holds:

ℏ (υ, ξ, t) >0,

ℏ (υ, ξ, t) =1 iff υ = ξ,

ℏ (υ, ξ, t) = ℏ (ξ, υ, t),

$ℏ (υ, z, t + s) \geq (ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{b})) * (ℏ (ξ, z, \frac{s}{b}))$ ,

ℏ (υ, ξ, ·) : (0, ∞) → [0, 1] is continuous.

Definition 1.2. [2] Consider a non-empty set X. Then an intuitionistic fuzzy set (in short “IFS") I in X is defined as E = {(x, ℏ _E (x) , ℘ _E (x)) : x ∈ X, 0 ≤ ℏ _I + ℘ _I ≤ 1} where the functions $ℏ_{I} : X \to [0, 1] \subseteq ℝ$ and $℘_{I} : X \to [0, 1] \subseteq ℝ$ define the degree of membership and non-membership function of the element x ∈ X respectively.

Definition 1.3. [17] Consider F as a t-norm and for $n \in ℕ$ , υ ∈ [0, 1], we have F_n : [0, 1] → [0, 1] such that F₁ (υ) = F (υ, υ), F_n+1 (υ) = F (F_n (υ) , υ) then F is called H-type if {F_n (υ)}, for $n \in ℕ$ is equicontinuous at υ = 1.

Proposition 1.4. [12] Consider a sequence of numbers {υ_n} ∈ [0, 1] such that $lim_{n \to \infty} υ_{n} = 1$ and consider a t-norm F of H-type. Then $lim_{n \to \infty} T_{i = 1}^{\infty} υ_{i} = lim_{n \to \infty} T_{i = 1}^{\infty} υ_{n + i} = 1$ .

Main results of the paper is categorized as follows. In Section 2, we establish some propositions related to Convergence and Cauchy sequences in IFbMS. In Section 3, we prove the existence and uniqueness of certain fixed points in this space with respect to some new contractive conditions. Finally, Ciric-quasi contractions are studied in Section 4.

2 Intuitionistic fuzzy b metric space and related propositions

This section contains the concept of intuitionistic fuzzy b metric space(in short, IFbMS). We also established some Lemma and corollary in the settings of IFbMS.

Definition 2.1. Suppose X is a non-empty set. Consider a five-tuple (X, ℏ , ℘ , ∗ , ∘) where ∗ is a continuous t-norm, ∘ is a continuous t-conorm and ℏ, ℘ are fuzzy sets on X² × (0, ∞). Then (X, ℏ , ℘ , ∗ , ∘) is called an intuitionistic fuzzy b metric space(in short, IFbMS) if ∀ υ, ξ, z ∈ X and s, t > 0 and a given number b ≥ 1 following conditions are holds:

ℏ (υ, ξ, t) + ℘ (υ, ξ, t) ≤1,

ℏ (υ, ξ, t) >0,

ℏ (υ, ξ, t) =1 iff υ = ξ,

ℏ (υ, ξ, t) = ℏ (ξ, υ, t),

$ℏ (υ, z, t + s) \geq (ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{b})) * (ℏ (ξ, z, \frac{s}{b}))$ ,

ℏ (υ, ξ, ·) is non-decreasing function of $ℝ^{+}$ and $lim_{t \to \infty} ℏ (υ, ξ, t) = 1$ ,

℘ (υ, ξ, t) <1,

℘ (υ, ξ, t) =0 iff υ = ξ,

℘ (υ, ξ, t) = ℘ (ξ, υ, t),

$℘ (υ, z, t + s) \leq (℘ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{b})) \circ (℘ (ξ, z, \frac{s}{b}))$ ,

℘ (υ, ξ, ·) is non-increasing function of $ℝ^{+}$ and $lim_{t \to \infty} ℘ (υ, ξ, t) = 0$ .

Example 2.2. Consider that $ℏ (υ, ξ, t) = e^{\frac{- | υ - ξ |^{p}}{t}}$ and $℘ (υ, ξ, t) = 1 - e^{\frac{- | υ - ξ |^{p}}{t}}$ , where p > 1 is a real number. Then (X, ℏ , ℘ , ∗ , ∘) is become a IFbMS with b = 2^p-1.

Lemma 2.3. Consider a sequence {υ_n} in IFbMS (X, ℏ , ℘ , ∗ , ∘). Assume that there exists $λ \in (0, \frac{1}{b})$ , t > 0 such that $ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + 1}, t) \geq ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + 1}, \frac{t}{λ}), n \in ℕ$ (1) and $℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + 1}, t) \leq ℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + 1}, \frac{t}{λ}), n \in ℕ .$ (2) also there exist υ₀, υ₁ ∈ X, t > 0 and ι ∈ (0, 1) such that $lim_{n \to \infty} \sum_{i = n}^{\infty} ℏ (υ_{0}, υ_{1}, \frac{t}{ι^{i}}) = 1 and lim_{n \to \infty} \sum_{i = n}^{\infty} ℘ (υ_{0}, υ_{1}, \frac{t}{ι^{i}}) = 0 .$ (3) Then {υ_n} is a Cauchy sequence.

Proof. Consider ς ∈ (λb, 1). We have $\sum_{i = 1}^{\infty} ς^{i}$ is convergent. Therefore ∃ $n_{0} \in ℕ$ such that $\sum_{i = n}^{\infty} ς^{i} < 1$ for every n > n₀. Consider n > m > n₀. Since ℏ is b-nondecreasing, and ℘ is b-non-increasing, for every t > 0, we have

$\begin{matrix} ℏ (υ_{n}, & υ_{n + m}, t) \geq ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + m}, \frac{t \sum_{i = n}^{n + m - 1} ς^{i}}{b}) \\ \geq (ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + 1}, \frac{t ς^{n}}{b^{2}}) * \\ ℏ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n + m}, \frac{t \sum_{i = n + 1}^{n + m - 1} ς^{i}}{b^{2}})) \\ \geq (ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + 1}, \frac{t ς^{n}}{b^{2}}) * \\ (ℏ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n + 2}, \frac{t ς^{n + 1}}{b^{3}}) * \dots * \\ ℏ (υ_{n + m - 1}, υ_{n + m}, \frac{t ς^{n + m - 1}}{b^{m}} * \dots)) \end{matrix}$ (4) and

$\begin{matrix} ℘ (υ_{n}, & υ_{n + m}, t) \leq ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + m}, \frac{t \sum_{i = n}^{n + m - 1} ς^{i}}{b}) \\ \leq (℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + 1}, \frac{t ς^{n}}{b^{2}}) \circ \\ ℘ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n + m}, \frac{t \sum_{i = n + 1}^{n + m - 1} ς^{i}}{b^{2}})) \\ \leq (℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + 1}, \frac{t ς^{n}}{b^{2}}) \circ \\ (℘ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n + 2}, \frac{t ς^{n + 1}}{b^{3}}) \circ \dots \circ \\ ℘ (υ_{n + m - 1}, υ_{n + m}, \frac{t ς^{n + m - 1}}{b^{m}} \circ \dots)) \end{matrix}$ (5)

By 1 and 2 we have, $ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + 1}, t) \geq ℏ (υ_{0}, υ_{1}, \frac{t}{λ^{n}}), n \in ℕ$ (6) and $℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + 1}, t) \leq ℘ (υ_{0}, υ_{1}, \frac{t}{λ^{n}}), n \in ℕ .$ (7) and as n > m and b > 1, we have

$\begin{matrix} ℏ (υ_{n}, & υ_{n + m}, t) \geq (ℏ (υ_{0}, υ_{1}, \frac{t ς^{n}}{b^{2} λ^{n}}) * \\ (ℏ (υ_{0}, υ_{1}, \frac{t ς^{n + 1}}{b^{3} λ^{n + 1}}) * \dots * \\ ℏ (υ_{0}, υ_{1}, \frac{t ς^{n + m - 1}}{b^{m + 1} λ^{n + m - 1}}) * \dots)) \\ \geq \sum_{i = n}^{n + m - 1} (ℏ (υ_{0}, υ_{1}, \frac{t ς^{i}}{b^{i - n + 2} λ^{i}})) \\ \geq \sum_{i = n}^{n + m - 1} (ℏ (υ_{0}, υ_{1}, \frac{t ς^{i}}{b^{i} λ^{i}})) \\ \geq \sum_{i = n}^{\infty} (ℏ (υ_{0}, υ_{1}, \frac{t}{ι^{i}})), \end{matrix}$ (8) and

$\begin{matrix} ℘ (υ_{n}, & υ_{n + m}, t) \leq (℘ (υ_{0}, υ_{1}, \frac{t ς^{n}}{b^{2} λ^{n}}) \circ \\ (℘ (υ_{0}, υ_{1}, \frac{t ς^{n + 1}}{b^{3} λ^{n + 1}}) \circ \dots \circ \\ ℘ (υ_{0}, υ_{1}, \frac{t ς^{n + m - 1}}{b^{m + 1} λ^{n + m - 1}}) \circ \dots)) \\ \leq \sum_{i = n}^{n + m - 1} (℘ (υ_{0}, υ_{1}, \frac{t ς^{i}}{b^{i - n + 2} λ^{i}})) \\ \leq \sum_{i = n}^{n + m - 1} (℘ (υ_{0}, υ_{1}, \frac{t ς^{i}}{b^{i} λ^{i}})) \\ \leq \sum_{i = n}^{\infty} (℘ (υ_{0}, υ_{1}, \frac{t}{ι^{i}})), \end{matrix}$ (9) where $ι = \frac{b λ}{ς}$ . As ι ∈ (0, 1), from 3 we get {υ_n} is a Cauchy sequence.

Corollary 2.4. Consider a sequence υ_n in an IFbMS (X, ℏ , ℘ , ∗ , ∘) and also consider that ℏ and ℘ is of H-type. Then {υ_n} is called a Cauchy sequence if for t > 0 ∃ $λ \in (0, \frac{1}{b})$ such that $ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + 1}, t) \geq ℏ (υ_{n - 1}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{λ}), n \in ℕ$ (10) and $℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + 1}, t) \leq ℘ (υ_{n - 1}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{λ}), n \in ℕ .$ (11)

Lemma 2.5. Suppose that for some λ ∈ (0, 1), t > 0 and υ, ξ ∈ X $\begin{matrix} ℏ (υ, ξ, t) \geq ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}) and \\ ℘ (υ, ξ, t) \leq ℘ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}) . \end{matrix}$ (12) then we have υ = ξ.

Proof. Using the given condition 12 we have, for $n \in ℕ$ , t > 0

$ℏ (υ, ξ, t) \geq ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ^{n}}) and ℘ (υ, ξ, t) \leq ℘ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ^{n}}) .$ (13)

Then from the definition of IFbMS υ = ξ.

3 Some Fixed point theorems on IFbMS

Theorem 3.1. Suppose (X, ℏ , ℘ , ∗ , ∘) is a complete IFbMS, υ, ξ ∈ X and f : X ⟶ X. Assume that ∃ $λ \in (0, \frac{1}{b})$ , t > 0, $\begin{matrix} ℏ (f (υ), f (ξ), t) \geq ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}) and \\ ℘ (f (υ), f (ξ), t) \leq ℘ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}) \end{matrix}$ (14) and there exists υ₀ ∈ X and ι ∈ (0, 1) such that $\begin{matrix} lim_{n \to \infty} \sum_{i = n}^{\infty} ℏ (υ_{0}, f (υ_{0}), \frac{t}{ι^{i}}) = 1 and \\ lim_{n \to \infty} \sum_{i = n}^{\infty} ℘ (υ_{0}, f (υ_{0}), \frac{t}{ι^{i}}) = 0 . \end{matrix}$ (15)

In this case f has a unique fixed point under X.

Proof. Consider υ₀ ∈ X and υ_n+1 = f (υ_n), ∀ $n \in ℕ$ .

Putting υ = υ_n and ξ = υ_n-1 in 14 we have for $n \in ℕ$ and t > 0 $ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + 1}, t) \geq ℏ (υ_{n - 1}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{λ}) and$ (16) $℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + 1}, t) \leq ℘ (υ_{n - 1}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{λ})$ (17) then from Lemma 2.3 {υ_n} is a Cauchy sequence.

As (X, ℏ , ℘ , ∗ , ∘) is complete therefore ∃ υ ∈ X such that for t > 0

$\begin{matrix} lim_{n \to \infty} υ_{n} = υ and \\ lim_{n \to \infty} ℏ (υ, υ_{n}, t) = 1, lim_{n \to \infty} ℘ (υ, υ_{n}, t) = 0 . \end{matrix}$

From the equation 15 and the definition of IFbMS, ∀ t > 0 we have

$\begin{matrix} ℏ (f (υ), υ, t) & \geq (ℏ (f (υ), υ_{n}, \frac{t}{2 b}) * (ℏ (υ_{n}, υ, \frac{t}{2 b})) \\ \geq (ℏ (υ, υ_{n - 1}, \frac{t}{2 b λ}) * (ℏ (υ_{n}, υ, \frac{t}{2 b})) \end{matrix}$ (18) and

$\begin{matrix} ℘ (f (υ), υ, t) & \leq (℘ (f (υ), υ_{n}, \frac{t}{2 b}) \circ (℘ (υ_{n}, υ, \frac{t}{2 b})) \\ \leq (℘ (υ, υ_{n - 1}, \frac{t}{2 b λ}) \circ (℘ (υ_{n}, υ, \frac{t}{2 b})) \end{matrix}$ (19)

Now letting n→ ∞, we have

$\begin{matrix} ℏ (f (υ), υ, t) \geq 1 * 1 = 1 and \\ ℘ (f (υ), υ, t) \leq 0 \circ 0 = 0 . \end{matrix}$

This implies f (υ) = υ. i.e. υ is a fixed point for f.

Consider two fixed points υ and ξ of f. Then

$\begin{matrix} ℏ (υ, ξ, t) = ℏ (f (υ), f (ξ), t) \geq ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}) \\ and \\ ℘ (υ, ξ, t) = ℘ (f (υ), f (ξ), t) \leq ℘ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}) \end{matrix}$

From the Lemma 2.5 we have υ = ξ.

Example 3.2. Suppose X = [0, 1]. Consider for all υ, ξ ∈ X and t > 0, $ℏ (υ, ξ, t) = e^{\frac{- (υ - y)^{2}}{t}}$ and $℘ (υ, ξ, t) = 1 - e^{\frac{- (υ - y)^{2}}{t}}$ . Then (X, ℏ , ℘ , ∗ , ∘) is a complete IFbMS with b = 2.

Consider f (υ) = kυ, $k < \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}$ , υ ∈ X. Then for υ, ξ ∈ X and t > 0,

$\begin{matrix} ℏ (f (υ), f (ξ), t) & = e^{\frac{k^{2} (υ - y)^{2}}{t}} \\ \geq e^{\frac{λ (υ - y)^{2}}{t}} \\ = ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}) \end{matrix}$ (20) and

$\begin{matrix} ℘ (f (υ), f (ξ), t) & = 1 - e^{\frac{k^{2} (υ - ξ)^{2}}{t}} \\ \leq 1 - e^{\frac{λ (υ - ξ)^{2}}{t}} \\ = ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}) \end{matrix}$ (21) for $\frac{1}{b} > λ > k^{2}$ .

Therefore, equation 15 of the Theorem 3.1 is satisfied and f has a unique fixed point under X.

Theorem 3.3. Suppose (X, ℏ , ℘ , ∗ , ∘) is a complete IFbMS, υ, ξ ∈ X and f : X ⟶ X. Assume that there exists $λ \in (0, \frac{1}{b})$ , t > 0, $\begin{matrix} ℏ (f (υ), f (ξ), t) & \geq min {ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}), ℏ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t}{λ}), \\ ℏ (f (y), y, \frac{t}{λ})} \end{matrix}$ (22) and $\begin{matrix} ℘ (f (υ), f (ξ), t) & \leq max {℘ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}), ℘ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t}{λ}), \\ ℘ (f (y), y, \frac{t}{λ})} \end{matrix}$ (23) and there exists υ₀ ∈ X and ι ∈ (0, 1) such that ∀ t > 0 $\begin{matrix} lim_{n \to \infty} \sum_{i = n}^{\infty} ℏ (υ_{0}, f (υ_{0}), \frac{t}{ι^{i}}) = 1 \\ and lim_{n \to \infty} \sum_{i = n}^{\infty} ℘ (υ, \frac{t}{ι^{i}}) = 0 . \end{matrix}$ (24)

In this case f has a unique fixed point under X.

Proof. Consider υ₀ ∈ X and υ_n+1 = f (υ_n), ∀ $n \in ℕ$ .

Putting υ = υ_n and ξ = υ_n-1 in 22 and 23 we have for $n \in ℕ$ and t > 0

$\begin{matrix} ℏ (υ_{n + 1}, & υ_{n}, t) \geq min {ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1}, \frac{t}{λ}), \\ ℏ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{λ}), ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1},, \frac{t}{λ})} \\ \geq min {ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1}, \frac{t}{λ}), ℏ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{λ})} \end{matrix}$ (25) and

$\begin{matrix} ℘ (υ_{n + 1}, & υ_{n}, t) \leq max {℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1},, \frac{t}{λ}), \\ ℘ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{λ}), ℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1},, \frac{t}{λ})} \\ \leq max {℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1},, \frac{t}{λ}), ℘ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{λ})} \end{matrix}$ (26)

If we consider $ℏ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, t) \geq ℏ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{λ})$ and $℘ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, t) \leq ℘ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{λ})$ then from the Lemma 2.5 υ_n = υ_n+1, $n \in ℕ$ .

Therefore, for $n \in ℕ$ , t > 0

$\begin{matrix} ℏ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, t) \geq ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1}, \frac{t}{λ}) \\ and ℘ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, t) \leq ℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1}, \frac{t}{λ}) . \end{matrix}$ (27) then from Lemma 2.3 {υ_n} is a Cauchy sequence.

Therefore, ∃ υ ∈ X such that for t > 0

$\begin{matrix} lim_{n \to \infty} υ_{n} = υ and \\ lim_{n \to \infty} ℏ (υ, υ_{n}, t) = 1, lim_{n \to \infty} ℘ (υ, υ_{n}, t) = 0 . \end{matrix}$ (28)

Next suppose ς₁ ∈ (λb, 1) and ς₂ = 1 - ς₁. From 22 and 23 we have,

$\begin{matrix} ℏ ( & f (υ), υ, t) \geq (ℏ (f (υ), f (υ_{n}), \frac{t ς_{1}}{b}) * \\ (ℏ (υ_{n + 1}, υ, \frac{t ς_{2}}{b})) \\ \geq (min {ℏ (υ, υ_{n}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), ℏ (υ, f (υ), \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), \\ ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + 1}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ})} * ℏ (υ_{n + 1}, υ, \frac{t ς_{2}}{b})) \end{matrix}$ (29) and

$\begin{matrix} ℘ ( & f (υ), υ, t) \leq (℘ (f (υ), f (υ_{n}), \frac{t ς_{1}}{b}) \circ \\ (℘ (υ_{n + 1}, υ, \frac{t ς_{2}}{b})) \\ \leq (max {℘ (υ, υ_{n}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), ℘ (υ, f (υ), \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), \\ ℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + 1}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ})} \circ ℘ (υ_{n + 1}, υ, \frac{t ς_{2}}{b})) \end{matrix}$ (30)

Now letting n→ ∞, we have for t > 0

$\begin{matrix} ℏ (f (υ), υ, t) & \geq (min 1, ℏ (υ, f (υ), \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), 1 * 1) \\ = (ℏ (υ, f (υ), \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}) * 1) \\ = ℏ (υ, f (υ), \frac{t}{ι}) \end{matrix}$ and $\begin{matrix} ℘ (f (υ), υ, t) & \leq (max 0, ℘ (υ, f (υ), \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), 0 \circ 0) \\ = (℘ (υ, f (υ), \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}) \circ 0) \\ = ℘ (υ, f (υ), \frac{t}{ι}) \end{matrix}$

where $ι = \frac{b λ}{ς_{1}} \in (0, 1)$ .

Using Lemma 2.5 we have f (υ) = υ. i.e. υ is a fixed point for f.

Consider two fixed points υ and ξ of f, i.e. f (υ) = υ and f (ξ) = ξ. Then from 22 and 23, for t > 0

$\begin{matrix} ℏ (f (υ), f (ξ), t) & \geq min {ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}), ℏ (υ, f (υ), \frac{t}{λ}), \\ ℏ (ξ, f (ξ), \frac{t}{λ})} \\ = min {ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}), 1, 1} \\ = ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}) \\ = ℏ (f (υ), f (ξ), \frac{t}{λ}) \end{matrix}$ and $\begin{matrix} ℘ (f (υ), f (ξ), t) & \leq max {℘ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}), ℘ (υ, f (υ), \frac{t}{λ}), \\ ℘ (ξ, f (ξ), \frac{t}{λ})} \\ = max {℘ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}), 0, 0} \\ = ℘ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}) \\ = ℘ (f (υ), f (ξ), \frac{t}{λ}) \end{matrix}$

Hence from the Lemma 2.5 we have f (υ) = f (ξ), i.e. υ = ξ.

Example 3.4. Consider X = (0, 2) and f : X ⟶ X be a function such that for all υ, ξ ∈ X,

$f (υ) = {\begin{matrix} 2 - υ, & υ \in (0, 1) \\ 1, & υ \in [1, 2), \end{matrix}$

Consider $ℏ (υ, ξ, t) = e^{\frac{- (υ - ξ)^{2}}{t}}$ and $℘ (υ, ξ, t) = 1 - e^{\frac{- (υ - ξ)^{2}}{t}}$ then (X, ℏ , ℘ , ∗ , ∘) is a complete IFbMS with b = 2.

Case 1: For t > 0 first assume υ, ξ ∈ [1, 2), then ℏ (f (υ) , f (ξ) , t) =1 and ℘ (f (υ) , f (ξ) , t) =0.

Therefore equation 22 and 23 are trivially satisfied.

Case 2: Consider υ ∈ [1, 2) and y ∈ (0, 1), then for $λ \in (\frac{1}{4}, \frac{1}{2})$ and t > 0 we have

$\begin{matrix} ℏ (f (υ), f (ξ), t) & = e^{\frac{- (1 - ξ)^{2}}{t}} \\ \geq e^{\frac{- 4 λ (1 - ξ)^{2}}{t}} \\ = ℏ (f (ξ), y, \frac{t}{λ}), \end{matrix}$ and $\begin{matrix} ℘ (f (υ), f (ξ), t) & = 1 - e^{\frac{- (1 - ξ)^{2}}{t}} \\ \leq 1 - e^{\frac{- 4 λ (1 - ξ)^{2}}{t}} \\ = ℘ (f (ξ), y, \frac{t}{λ}) \end{matrix}$ Case 3: Consider y ∈ [1, 2) and υ ∈ (0, 1), then for $λ \in (\frac{1}{4}, \frac{1}{2})$ and t > 0 we have

$\begin{matrix} ℏ (f (υ), f (ξ), t) & = e^{\frac{- (υ - 1)^{2}}{t}} \\ \geq e^{\frac{- 4 λ (υ - 1)^{2}}{t}} \\ = ℏ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t}{λ}), \end{matrix}$ and $\begin{matrix} ℘ (f (υ), f (ξ), t) & = 1 - e^{\frac{- (υ - 1)^{2}}{t}} \\ \leq 1 - e^{\frac{- 4 λ (υ - 1)^{2}}{t}} \\ = ℘ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t}{λ}) \end{matrix}$

Case 4: Finally consider υ, ξ ∈ (0, 1) then for $λ \in (\frac{1}{4}, \frac{1}{2})$ and t > 0 $\begin{matrix} ℏ (f (υ), f (ξ), t) & = e^{\frac{- (υ - ξ)^{2}}{t}} \\ \geq e^{\frac{- (1 - ξ)^{2}}{t}} \\ \geq e^{\frac{- 4 λ (1 - ξ)^{2}}{t}} \\ = ℏ (f (ξ), y, \frac{t}{λ}), \end{matrix}$ and $\begin{matrix} ℘ (f (υ), f (ξ), t) & = 1 - e^{\frac{- (υ - ξ)^{2}}{t}} \\ \leq 1 - e^{\frac{- (1 - ξ)^{2}}{t}} \\ \leq 1 - e^{\frac{- 4 λ (1 - ξ)^{2}}{t}} \\ = ℘ (f (ξ), y, \frac{t}{λ}), \end{matrix}$

In this case if we consider υ < y then we have $\begin{matrix} ℏ (f (υ), f (ξ), t) \geq ℏ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t}{λ}) \\ and ℘ (f (υ), f (ξ), t) \leq ℘ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t}{λ}) \end{matrix}$

Therefore the equation 22 and 23 of the theorem 3.3 are satisfied for all υ, ξ ∈ X and t > 0. Hence f has a fixed point in X and υ = 1 is a unique fixed point for f.

4 Ćirić quasi-contraction in IFbMS

This section contains study of Ćirić quasi-contraction as an extension work on fixed point theorem in IFbMS. We also establish a weaker contraction condition for existence of a fixed point under t-norm and t-conorm.

Theorem 4.1. Suppose (X, ℏ , ℘ , ∗ , ∘) is a complete IFbMS, υ, ξ ∈ X and f : X ⟶ X. Assume that for some $λ \in (0, \frac{1}{b^{2}})$ , t > 0, $\begin{matrix} ℏ ( & f (υ), f (ξ), t) \geq min {ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}), ℏ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t}{λ}), \\ ℏ (f (ξ), ξ, \frac{t}{λ}), ℏ (f (υ), ξ, \frac{2 t}{λ}), ℏ (υ, f (ξ), \frac{t}{λ})} \end{matrix}$ (31) and $\begin{matrix} ℘ ( & f (υ), f (ξ), t) \leq max {℘ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}), ℘ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t}{λ}), \\ ℘ (f (ξ), ξ, \frac{t}{λ}), ℘ (f (υ), ξ, \frac{2 t}{λ}), ℘ (υ, f (ξ), \frac{t}{λ})} \end{matrix}$ (32)

In this case f has a unique fixed point under X.

Proof. Consider υ₀ ∈ X and υ_n+1 = f (υ_n), for all $n \in ℕ$ .

Now putting υ = υ_n and ξ = υ_n-1 in 39 and 40 and using the definition of IFbMS we have for $n \in ℕ$ and t > 0

$\begin{matrix} ℏ ( & υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, t) \geq min {ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1}, \frac{t}{λ}), \\ ℏ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{λ}), ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1}, \frac{t}{λ}), \\ min {ℏ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{b λ}), \\ ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1},, \frac{t}{b λ})}, ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{λ})} \\ \geq min {ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1},, \frac{t}{b λ}), ℏ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{b λ})} \end{matrix}$ (33) and

$\begin{matrix} ℘ ( & υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, t) \geq max {℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1},, \frac{t}{λ}), \\ ℘ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{λ}), ℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1}, \frac{t}{λ}), \\ min {℘ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{b λ}), \\ ℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1},, \frac{t}{b λ})}, ℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{λ})} \\ \geq max {℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1},, \frac{t}{b λ}), ℘ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{b λ})} \end{matrix}$ (34)

Now from Theorem 3.3, Lemma 2.5 and Corollary 2.4 we have for $n \in ℕ$ , t > 0,

$\begin{matrix} ℏ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, t) \geq ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1}, \frac{t}{b λ}) and \\ ℘ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, t) \leq ℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1}, \frac{t}{b λ}) . \end{matrix}$ (35) and hence {υ_n} is a Cauchy sequence.

Therefore ∃ υ ∈ X such that for t > 0

$\begin{matrix} lim_{n \to \infty} υ_{n} = υ and \\ lim_{n \to \infty} ℏ (υ, υ_{n}, t) = 1, lim_{n \to \infty} ℘ (υ, υ_{n}, t) = 0 . \end{matrix}$ (36)

Next suppose ς₁ ∈ (λb², 1) and ς₂ = 1 - ς₁. From 39 and 40 we have, ∀ $n \in ℕ$ and t > 0,

$\begin{matrix} ℏ ( & f (υ), υ, t) \geq min {ℏ (f (υ), f (υ_{n}), \frac{t ς_{1}}{b}), \\ (ℏ (f (υ_{n}), υ, \frac{t ς_{2}}{b})} \\ \geq min {min {ℏ (υ, υ_{n}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), \\ ℏ (υ, f (υ), \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + 1}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), \\ min {ℏ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t ς_{2}}{b^{2} λ}), ℏ (υ, υ_{n}, \frac{t ς_{2}}{b^{2} λ})}, \\ ℏ (υ, υ_{n + 1}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ})}, ℏ (υ_{n + 1}, υ, \frac{t ς_{2}}{b})} \end{matrix}$ (37) and

$\begin{matrix} ℘ ( & f (υ), υ, t) \leq max {℘ (f (υ), f (υ_{n}), \frac{t ς_{1}}{b}), \\ (℘ (f (υ_{n}), υ, \frac{t ς_{2}}{b})} \\ \leq max {max {℘ (υ, υ_{n}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), \\ ℘ (υ, f (υ), \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), ℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + 1}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), \\ max {℘ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t ς_{2}}{b^{2} λ}), ℘ (υ, υ_{n}, \frac{t ς_{2}}{b^{2} λ})}, \\ ℘ (υ, υ_{n + 1}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ})}, ℘ (υ_{n + 1}, υ, \frac{t ς_{2}}{b})} \end{matrix}$ (38)

Now letting n→ ∞, we have for t > 0 $\begin{matrix} ℏ (f (υ), & υ, t) \geq min {min {1, ℏ (υ, f (υ), \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), \\ 1, min {ℏ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t ς_{2}}{b^{2} λ}), 1}, 1}, 1} \\ = ℏ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b^{2} λ}) \\ = ℏ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t}{ι}) \end{matrix}$ and $\begin{matrix} ℘ (f (υ), & υ, t) \leq max {max {0, ℏ (υ, f (υ), \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), \\ 0, min {ℏ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t ς_{2}}{b^{2} λ}), 0}, 0}, 0} \\ = ℘ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b^{2} λ}) \\ = ℘ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t}{ι}) \end{matrix}$ where $ι = \frac{b λ}{ς_{1}} \in (0, 1)$ .

Using Lemma 2.5 we have f (υ) = υ. i.e. υ is a fixed point for f.

Consider two fixed points υ and ξ of f, i.e. f (υ) = υ and f (ξ) = ξ. Then from 39 and 40, for t > 0 $\begin{matrix} ℏ ( & f (υ), f (ξ), t) \geq min {ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}), \\ ℏ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t}{λ}), ℏ (f (ξ), ξ, \frac{t}{λ}), \\ min {ℏ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t}{b λ}), ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{b λ})}, \\ ℏ (υ, f (ξ), \frac{t}{λ})} \\ = min {ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}), 1, 1, \\ min {1, ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{b λ})}, ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ})} \\ = ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{b λ}) = ℏ (f (υ), f (ξ), \frac{t}{b λ}) \end{matrix}$ and $\begin{matrix} ℘ ( & f (υ), f (ξ), t) \leq max {℘ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}), \\ ℘ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t}{λ}), ℘ (f (ξ), ξ, \frac{t}{λ}), \\ max {℘ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t}{b λ}), ℘ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{b λ})}, \\ ℘ (υ, f (ξ), \frac{t}{λ})} \\ = max {℘ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}), 0, 0, \\ max {0, ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{b λ})}, ℘ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ})} \\ = ℘ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{b λ}) = ℘ (f (υ), f (ξ), \frac{t}{b λ}) \end{matrix}$

Hence from the Lemma 2.5 we have f (υ) = f (ξ), i.e. υ = ξ.

Theorem 4.2. Suppose (X, ℏ , ℘ , ∗ , ∘) is a complete IFbMS, υ, ξ ∈ X and f : X ⟶ X. Assume that for some $λ \in (0, \frac{1}{b^{2}})$ , t > 0, $\begin{matrix} ℏ ( & f (υ), f (ξ), t) \geq min {ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}), ℏ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t}{λ}), \\ ℏ (f (ξ), ξ, \frac{t}{λ}), \sqrt{ℏ (f (υ), y, \frac{2 t}{λ})}, ℏ (υ, f (ξ), \frac{t}{λ})} \end{matrix}$ (39) and $\begin{matrix} ℘ ( & f (υ), f (ξ), t) \leq max {℘ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}), ℘ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t}{λ}), \\ ℘ (f (ξ), ξ, \frac{t}{λ}), \sqrt{℘ (f (υ), y, \frac{2 t}{λ})}, ℘ (υ, f (ξ), \frac{t}{λ})} \end{matrix}$ (40)

Also ∃ υ₀ ∈ X and ι ∈ (0, 1) such that $lim_{n \to \infty} \sum_{i = n}^{\infty} ℏ (υ_{0}, f (υ_{0}), \frac{t}{ι^{i}}) = 1 and$ (41) $lim_{n \to \infty} \sum_{i = n}^{\infty} ℘ (υ_{0}, f (υ_{0}), \frac{t}{ι^{i}}) = 0 .$ (42) in this case f has a unique fixed point under X.

Proof. Consider υ₀ ∈ X and υ_n+1 = f (υ_n), ∀ $n \in ℕ$ .

Now putting υ = υ_n and ξ = υ_n-1 in 39 and 40 and using the definition of IFbMS we have for $n \in ℕ$ and t > 0

$\begin{matrix} ℏ ( & υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, t) \geq min {ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1}, \frac{t}{λ}), \\ ℏ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{λ}), ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1},, \frac{t}{λ}), \\ \sqrt{ℏ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{b λ}) * ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1},, \frac{t}{b λ})}, \\ ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{λ})} \end{matrix}$ (43) and

$\begin{matrix} ℘ ( & υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, t) \geq max {℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1}, \frac{t}{λ}), \\ ℘ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{λ}), ℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1},, \frac{t}{λ}), \\ \sqrt{℘ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{b λ}) \circ ℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1}, \frac{t}{b λ})}, \\ ℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{λ})} \end{matrix}$ (44)

Since ℏ (υ, ξ, t) is b-nondecreasing and ℘ (υ, ξ, t) is b-nonincreasing and $\sqrt{a * b} \geq min a, b$ and $\sqrt{a \circ b} \leq max a, b$ , we have ∀ $n \in ℕ$ and t > 0, $\begin{matrix} ℏ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, t) & \geq min {ℏ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{b λ}), \\ ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1}, \frac{t}{b λ})} \end{matrix}$ and $\begin{matrix} ℘ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, t) & \leq max {℘ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, \frac{t}{b λ}), \\ ℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1}, \frac{t}{b λ})} \end{matrix}$

Now from Lemma 2.5 and 1 and 2 we have for $n \in ℕ$ , t > 0,

$\begin{matrix} ℏ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, t) \geq ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1},, \frac{t}{b λ}) and \\ ℘ (υ_{n + 1}, υ_{n}, t) \leq ℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n - 1},, \frac{t}{b λ}) . \end{matrix}$ (45) and hence {υ_n} is a Cauchy sequence.

Therefore there exists υ ∈ X such that for t > 0

$\begin{matrix} lim_{n \to \infty} υ_{n} = υ and \\ lim_{n \to \infty} ℏ (υ, υ_{n}, t) = 1, lim_{n \to \infty} ℘ (υ, υ_{n}, t) = 0 . \end{matrix}$ (46)

Next suppose ς₁ ∈ (λb², 1) and ς₂ = 1 - ς₁. From 39 and 40 we have, for all $n \in ℕ$ and t > 0,

$\begin{matrix} ℏ ( & f (υ), υ, t) \geq (ℏ (f (υ), f (υ_{n}), \frac{t ς_{1}}{b})) * \\ (ℏ (f (υ_{n}), υ, \frac{t ς_{2}}{b})) \\ \geq (min {ℏ (υ, υ_{n}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), ℏ (υ, f (υ), \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), \\ ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + 1}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), \\ \sqrt{ℏ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b^{2} λ}) * ℏ (υ, υ_{n}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b^{2} λ})}, \\ ℏ (υ, υ_{n + 1}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ})} * ℏ (υ_{n + 1}, υ, \frac{t ς_{2}}{b})) \\ \geq (min {ℏ (υ, υ_{n}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), ℏ (υ, f (υ), \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), \\ ℏ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + 1}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), min {ℏ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b^{2} λ}), \\ ℏ (υ, υ_{n}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b^{2} λ})}, ℏ (υ, υ_{n + 1}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ})} * \\ ℏ (υ_{n + 1}, υ, \frac{t ς_{2}}{b})) \end{matrix}$ (47) and

$\begin{matrix} ℘ ( & f (υ), υ, t) \leq (℘ (f (υ), f (υ_{n}), \frac{t ς_{1}}{b})) \circ \\ (℘ (f (υ_{n}), υ, \frac{t ς_{2}}{b})) \\ \leq (max {℘ (υ, υ_{n}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), ℘ (υ, f (υ), \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), \\ ℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + 1}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), \\ \sqrt{℘ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b^{2} λ}) \circ ℘ (υ, υ_{n}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b^{2} λ})}, \\ ℘ (υ, υ_{n + 1}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ})} \circ ℘ (υ_{n + 1}, υ, \frac{t ς_{2}}{b})) \\ \leq (max {℘ (υ, υ_{n}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), ℘ (υ, f (υ), \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), \\ ℘ (υ_{n}, υ_{n + 1}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), max {℘ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b^{2} λ}), \\ ℘ (υ, υ_{n}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b^{2} λ})}, ℘ (υ, υ_{n + 1}, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ})} \circ \\ ℘ (υ_{n + 1}, υ, \frac{t ς_{2}}{b})) \end{matrix}$ (48)

Now letting n→ ∞, we have for t > 0 $\begin{matrix} ℏ ( & f (υ), υ, t) \geq min {1, ℏ (υ, f (υ), \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), 1, \\ min {ℏ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b^{2} λ}), 1}, 1} * 1 \\ = ℏ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b^{2} λ}) = ℏ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t}{ι}) \end{matrix}$ and $\begin{matrix} ℘ ( & f (υ), υ, t) \leq max {0, ℏ (υ, f (υ), \frac{t ς_{1}}{b λ}), 0, \\ max {℘ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b^{2} λ}), 0}, 0} \circ 0 \\ = ℘ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t ς_{1}}{b^{2} λ}) \\ = ℘ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t}{ι}) \end{matrix}$ where $ι = \frac{b λ}{ς_{1}} \in (0, 1)$ .

Using Lemma 2.5 we have f (υ) = υ. i.e. υ is a fixed point for f.

Consider two fixed points υ and ξ of f, i.e. f (υ) = υ and f (ξ) = ξ. Then from 39 and 40, for t > 0 $\begin{matrix} ℏ ( & f (υ), f (ξ), t) \geq ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}) * ℏ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t}{λ}) * \\ ℏ (f (ξ), ξ, \frac{t}{λ}) * \sqrt{ℏ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t}{b λ}) * ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{b λ})} \\ * ℏ (υ, f (ξ), \frac{t}{λ}) \\ \geq ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}) * 1 * 1 * \\ min {1, ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{b λ})} * ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ})} \\ = ℏ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{b λ}) = ℏ (f (υ), f (ξ), \frac{t}{b λ}) \end{matrix}$ and $\begin{matrix} ℘ ( & f (υ), f (ξ), t) \leq ℘ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}) \circ ℘ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t}{λ}) \circ \\ ℘ (f (ξ), ξ, \frac{t}{λ}) \circ \sqrt{℘ (f (υ), υ, \frac{t}{b λ}) \circ ℘ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{b λ})} \\ \circ ℘ (υ, f (ξ), \frac{t}{λ}) \\ \leq ℘ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ}) \circ 0 \circ 0 \circ \\ min {0, ℘ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{b λ})} \circ ℘ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{λ})} \\ = ℘ (υ, ξ, \frac{t}{b λ}) = ℘ (f (υ), f (ξ), \frac{t}{b λ}) \end{matrix}$

Hence from the Lemma 2.5 we have f (υ) = f (ξ), i.e. υ = ξ.

Example 4.3. Consider X = 0, 1, 3 and $ℏ (υ, ξ, t) = e^{\frac{- (υ - ξ)^{2}}{t}}$ and $℘ (υ, ξ, t) = 1 - e^{\frac{- (υ - ξ)^{2}}{t}}$ , then (X, ℏ , ℘ , ∗ , ∘) is a complete IFbMS with b = 2.

Now define a function f : X → X such that f (0) = f (1) =1, f (3) =0.

First consider that υ = ξ or υ, ξ ∈ 0, 1, then ℏ (f (υ) , f (ξ) , t) =1 and ℘ (f (υ) , f (ξ) , t) =0 for t > 0. Hence equation 39 and 40 are satisfied.

Next consider υ = 1 and ξ = 3, then for $λ \in (\frac{1}{9}, \frac{1}{4})$ we have

$ℏ (f (υ), f (ξ), t) = e^{\frac{- 1}{t}} \geq min {e^{\frac{- 9 λ}{t}}, e^{\frac{- λ}{t}}, e^{\frac{- 9 λ}{t}}, e^{\frac{- λ}{t}}, 1}$

and $℘ (f (υ), f (ξ), t) = 1 - e^{\frac{- 1}{t}} \leq max {1 - e^{\frac{- 9 λ}{t}}, 1 - e^{\frac{- λ}{t}}, 1 - e^{\frac{- 9 λ}{t}}, 1 - e^{\frac{- λ}{t}}, 0}$

Again consider υ = 3 and ξ = 1, then for $λ \in (\frac{1}{9}, \frac{1}{4})$ we have

$ℏ (f (υ), f (ξ), t) = e^{\frac{- 1}{t}} \geq min {e^{\frac{- 4 λ}{t}}, 1, e^{\frac{- 9 λ}{t}}, e^{\frac{- λ}{t}}, e^{\frac{- λ}{t}}}$

and $℘ (f (υ), f (ξ), t) = 1 - e^{\frac{- 1}{t}} \leq max {1 - e^{\frac{- 4 λ}{t}}, 0.1 - e^{\frac{- 9 λ}{t}}, 1 - e^{\frac{- λ}{t}}, 1 - e^{\frac{- λ}{t}}}$

Finally when we consider υ = 3, ξ = 1 and υ = 1, ξ = 3 for $λ \in (\frac{1}{9}, \frac{1}{4})$ then also ℏ and ℘ satisfied the equation 39 and 40 for all υ, ξ ∈ X and t > 0.

Since all the condition of Theorem 4.2 is satisfied therefore υ = 1 is a unique fixed point for f in X.

5 Conclusion

In this paper we have introduced the concept of IFbMS and established some fixed point theorem in order to study the unique fixed point in this space. This work is the extended form of fuzzy b metric space. We have also presented the concept of Cauchy sequence in this newly develop space. After this we have extended Ćirić quasi-contraction in the setting of IFbMS. This work provide a new motivation to the researchers to develop the area of fixed point theory in a new manner. These results will be useful for finding new way to solve intuitionistic fuzzy differential and integral equations by developing intuitionistic fuzzy iteration schemes.

Since IFbMS is a generalized form of intuitionistic fuzzy metric space one can develop the extension version of Pythagorean fuzzy sets such as "Pythagorean fuzzy b metric space" with the help of this space. One important application is found in Pythagorean fuzzy interaction power Bonferroni mean aggregation operators in multiple attribute decision making. In future a huge application of IFbMS in a new generalized form of "Pythagorean fuzzy b metric space" can be found in the field of decision making, aggregation operators and information measure i.e. distance measure, entropy measure, inclusion measure etc. It would be a very interesting topic for future study to extend this kind of work in soft set or rough set models and also to apply them in multi-criteria group decision making. Some works on Pythagorean fuzzy sets in decision making found in [8 , 22].

Acknowledgments

The author is immensely thankful to the reviewers and the Associate Editor for their constructive feedback towards the overall improvement of the paper.

References

Alaca

, Turkoglu

and Yildiz

, Fixed points in intuitionistic fuzzy metric spaces, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 29 (2006), 1073–1078.

Atanassov

K.T.

, Intuitionistic fuzzy sets, Fuzzy Sets Syst 20 (1986), 87–96.

Babu

, Ravindranadh

and Mosissa

D.T.

, Fixed points in b-metric spaces via simulation function, Novi Sad J Math 47(2) (2017), 133–147.

Bakhtin

I.A.

, The contraction principle in quasimetric spaces, Funct Anal 30 (1989), 26–37.

Butnariu

, Fixed points for fuzzy mappings, Fuzzy Sets Sys 7(2) (1982), 191–207.

Cristiana

, Shahram

and Mohamad

S.E.

, Fixed points of some new contractions on intuitionistic fuzzy metric spaces, Fixed Point Theory Appl, DOI: 10.1186/1687-1812-2013-168

Czerwik

, Contraction mappings in b metric spaces, Acta Math Inform Univ Ostrav 1(1) (1993), 5–11.

Garg

, Linguistic pythagorean fuzzy sets and its applications in multiattribute decision-making process, Int J Intell Syst 33(6) (2018), 1234–1263.

Garg

, New logarithmic operational laws and their aggregation operators for pythagorean fuzzy set and their applications, Int J Intell Syst 34(1) (2019), 82–106.

10.

George

and Veeramani

, On some result in fuzzy metric spaces, Fuzzy Sets Syst 64 (1994), 359–399.

11.

Grabiec

, Fixed points in fuzzy metric spaces, Fuzzy Sets Syst 27 (1988), 385–389.

12.

Hadźić

, Fixed point theory in probalistic metric space, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 2001.

13.

Heilpern

, Fuzzy mappings and fixed point theorem, J Math Anal Appl 83(2) (1981), 566–569.

14.

Kaleva

and Seikkala

, A banach contraction theorem in fuzzy metric space, Fuzzy Sets Syst 12 (1984), 215–229.

15.

Kramosil

and Michalek

, Fuzzy metric and statistical metric spaces, Kybernetica 11 (1975), 326–334.

16.

Manro

and Tomar

, Faintly compatible maps and existence of common fixed point in fuzzy metric space, Ann Fuzzy Math Inform 8(2) (2014), 223–230.

17.

Mihet

, A banach contraction theorem in fuzzy metric space, Fuzzy Sets Syst 144 (2004), 431–439.

18.

Rakić

, Mukheimer

, Doŝenović

, Mitrović

Z.A.

and Radenović

, On some new fixed point results in fuzzymetric spaces, J Inequal Appl 1 (2020), 1–14.

19.

Saheli

, A contractive mapping on fuzzy normed linear spaces, Iranian Journal of Numerical Analysis and Optimization 6(1) (2016), 121–136.

20.

Shukla

, Gopal

and R-L-de Hierro

A.F.

, Some fixed point theorems in 1-M-complete fuzzy metric-like spaces, Int J Gen Syst, DOI: 10.1080/03081079.2016.1153084, 2016.

21.

Suzuki

, Basic inequality on a-metric space and its applications, J Inequal Appl 1 (2017), 256.

22.

Wang

and Li

, Pythagorean fuzzy interaction power bonferroni mean aggregation operators in multiple attribute decision making, Int J Intell Syst 35(1) (2020), 150–183.

23.

Zadeh

L.A.

, Fuzzy sets, Inform Cont 8 (1965), 338–353.