IOSR Journal Of Engineering (IOSRJEN) E-ISSN: 2250-3021, P-ISSN: 2278-8719, Www.Iosrjen.

Org Volume 2, Issue 10 (October 2012), PP 23-30

Common Fixed Point Theorems in Random Probabilistic Metric Spaces

Rajesh Shrivastava1& Richa Gupta2
1. Prof. & Head, Department of Mathematics, Govt. Science & Commerce college Benazir Bhopal,India 2. Head, Department of Mathematics, RKDF institute of Science & Technology Bhopal, India

Abstract: We prove some Common Fixed Point theorems for Random Operator in Probabilistic metric spaces,
by using some new type of contractive conditions taking self mappings. Key Words: - Probabilistic metric spaces, Random Operator, Random Fixed Point, Measurable Mapping, AMS Subject Classification: - 47H10, 54H25.

I.

Introduction

In 1942, Menger [5] was first who thought about distance distribution function in metric space and introduced the concept of probabilistic metric space. He replaced distance function d(x, y), the distance between two point x,y by distance distribution function Fx,y(t) where the value of Fx,y(t) is interpreted as probability that the distance between x, y is less than t, t > 0. The study of fixed point theorem in probabilistic metrics space is useful in the study of existence of solution of operator equation in probabilistic metric space probabilistic functional analysis. PM space has a nice topological properties. Many different topological structures may be defined on a PM space. The one That has received the most attention to date is the strong topology and it is the principle tool of this study. The convergence with respect to this topology is called strong convergence. Schweizer and Sklar [1], developed the study of fixed point theory in probabilistic metric spaces. In 1966, Sehgal [12] initiated the study of contraction mapping theorem in probabilistic metric spaces. Several interesting and elegant result have been proved by various author in probabilistic metric spaces. In 2005, Mihet [2] proved a fixed point theorem concerning probabilistic contractions satisfying an implicit relation. The purpose of the present paper is to prove a common fixed point theorem for six mappings via pointwise R-weakly commuting mappings in probabilistic metric spaces satisfying contractive type implicit relations. This generalizes several known results in the literature including those of Kumar and Pant [8], Kumar and Chugh [7] and others. Definition 2.1.1: Let R denote the set of reals and R+ the non-negative reals. A mapping F: R R+ is called a distribution function if it is non decreasing left continuous with inftR F(t) = 0 and suptR F(t) = 1 Definition 2.1.2: A probabilistic metric space is an ordered pair (X, F) where X is a nonempty set, L be set of all distribution function and F: X X L . We shall denote the distribution function by F (p, q) or Fp,q ; p, q X and Fp,q (x) will represents the value of F (p, q) at x R . The function F(p, q) is assumed to satisfy the following conditions: 2.1.2(a) Fp,q x = 1 for all x > 0 = 2.1.2(b)Fp,q 0 = 0 for every p, q X 2.1.2()Fp,q = Fq,p for every p, q X 2.1.2()Fp,q x = 1 and Fq,r y = 1 then Fp,r x + y = 1 for every p, q, r X. In metric space (X, d), the metric d induces a mapping F X X L such that Fp,q x = Fp,q = H (x d(p, q)) for every p, q X and x R, where H is the distribution function defined as 0, if x 0 H x = 1, if x > 0 Definition 2.1.3: A mapping : [0, 1] 2.1.3 a, 1 = a a 0,1 2.1.3 (0, 0) = 0, [0, 1] [0, 1] is called t-norm if

www.iosrjen.org

23 | P a g e

Common Fixed Point Theoems In Random Probabilistic Metric Spaces

2.1.3 (a, b) = (b, a), 2.1.3 (c, d) (a, b) for c a, d b, and 2.1.3 ( (a, b), c ) = ( a, (b, c )) Example: (i) (a, b) = ab, (ii) (a, b) = min (a, b) (iii) (a, b) = max (a + b 1; 0) Definition 2.1.4: A Menger space is a triplet (X, F, ) where (X, F)a PM-space and is is a t-norm with the following condition Fu,w x + y ( Fu,v x , Fv,w y The above inequality is called Mengers triangle inequality. Definition 2.1.5: Let (X, F, ) be a Menger space. If u X, > 0, (0, 1), then an (, ) neighbourhood of u, denoted by Uu (, ) is defined as Uu , = v X; Fu,v > 1 . If (X, F, ) be a Menger space with the continuous t-norm t, then the familyUu , ; u X; > 0, (0,1) of neighbourhood induces a hausdorff topology on X and if supa<1 a, a = 1, it is metrizable. Definition 2.1.6: A sequence pn in (X, F, ) is said to be convergent to a point p X if for every > 0 and > 0, there exists an integer N = N(, ) such that pn Up (, ) for all n N or equivalently Fx n ,x > 1 for all n N. Definition 2.1.7: A sequence pn in (X, F, ) is said to be Cauchy sequence if for every > 0 and > 0, there exists an integer N = N(, ) such that Fp n ,p m > 1 for all n, m N. Definition 2.1.8: A Menger space (X, F, ) with the continuous t-norm is said to be complete if every Cauchy sequence in X converges to a point in X. Definition 2.1.9: A coincidence point (or simply coincidence) of two mappings is a point in their domain having the same image point under both mappings. Formally, given two mappings f, g X Y we say that a point x in X is a coincidence point of f and g if f(x) = g(x). Definition 2.1.10: Let (X, F, ) be a Menger space. Two mappings f, g X X are said to be weakly compatible if they commute at the coincidence point, i.e., the pair {f, g} is weakly compatible pair if and only if fx = gx implies that fgx = gfx. Lemma 2.1.11: Let pn be a sequence in Menger space (X, F, ) where is continuous and (x, x) x for all x [0, 1]. If there exists a constant k (0, 1) such that x > 0 and n Fp n ,p n +1 (kx) Fp n 1 ,p n (x), then pn is a Cauchy sequence. Lemma 2.1.12: If (X, d) is a metric space, then the metric d induces a mapping F: X X L, defined by F (p, q) = H (x d (p, q)) , p, q X and x R. Further more if : 0,1 0,1 0,1 is defined by (a, b) = min(a, b), then (X, F, ) is a Menger space. It is complete if (X, d) is complete. The space (X, F, ) so obtained is called the induced Menger space. Lemma2.1.13: Let (X, F, ) be a Menger space. ]. If there exists a constant k (0, 1) such that Fx,y (kt) Fx,y t , for all x, y X and t > 0 then x = y . Now we give some definition which are used in this chapter. Throughout this chapter, (, ) denotes a measurable space. is a measurable selector. X is any non empty set. Definition2.1.14: A random probabilistic metric space is an ordered pair (X, F, ) where X is a nonempty set, L be set of all distribution function and F: X X L . We shall denote the distribution function by F (p, q) or Fp,q ; p, q X and Fp,q (x) will represents the value of F (p, q) at x R . The function F(p, q) is assumed to satisfy the following conditions: 2.1.14(a) Fp,q x = 1 for all x > 0 p = q

www.iosrjen.org

24 | P a g e

Common Fixed Point Theoems In Random Probabilistic Metric Spaces

2.1.14(b)Fp,q 0 = 0 for every p, q X 2.1.14()Fp,q = Fq,p for every p, q X 2.1.14()Fp,q x = 1 and Fq,r y = 1 then Fp,r x + y = 1 for every p, q, r X. Definition 2.1.15: A Random Menger space is a triplet (X, F, , ) where (X, F, )a RPM-space and is is a tnorm with the following condition Fu,w x + y ( Fu,v x , Fv,w y The above inequality is called Mengers triangle inequality. Definition 2.1.16: Let (X, F, , ) be a random menger space. If u X, > 0, (0, 1), then an (, ) neighbourhood of u, denoted by Uu (, ) is defined as Uu , = v X; Fu,v > 1 . If (X, F, , ) be a random menger space with the continuous t-norm t, then the familyUu , , u X, > 0, (0,1) of neighbourhood induces a hausdorff topology on X and if supa<1 a, a = 1, it is metrizable. Definition 2.1.17: A sequence pn in (X, F, , ) is said to be convergent to a point p X if for every > 0 and > 0, there exists an integer N = N(, ) such that pn Up (, ) for all n N or equivalently Fx n ,x > 1 for all n N. Definition2.1.18: A sequence pn in (X, F, ) is said to be Cauchy sequence if for every > 0 and > 0, there exists an integer N = N(, ) such that Fp n , p m > 1 for all n, m N. Definition 2.1.19: A random menger space (X, F, , ) with the continuous t-norm is said to be complete if every Cauchy sequence in X converges to a point in X. Definition 2.1.20: A coincidence point of two mappings is a point in their domain having the same image point under both mappings. Formally, given two mappings f, g X Y we say that a point x in X is a coincidence point of f and g if f(x) = g(x). Definition 2.1.21: Let (X, F, , ) be a Menger space. Two mappings f, g X X are said to be weakly compatible if they commute at the coincidence point, i.e., the pair {f, g} is weakly compatible pair if and only if f x = g x implies that fg x = gf x . Lemma2.1.22: Let pn be a sequence in Menger space (X, F, , ) where is continuous and (x, x) x for all x [0, 1] . If there exists a constant k (0, 1) such that x > 0 and n Fp n ,p n +1 (kx) Fp n 1 ,p n (x), then pn is a Cauchy sequence. Lemma 2.1.23: If (X, d, ) is a random metric space, then the metric d induces a mapping F: X X L, defined by F (p, q) = H (x d (p, q)) , p, q X and x R. Further more if : 0,1 0,1 0,1 is defined by (a, b) = min(a, b), then (X, F, , ) is a Menger space. It is complete if (X, d, ) is complete. The space (X, F, , ) so obtained is called the induced Menger space. Lemma 2.1.24: Let (X, F, , ) be a random menger space. If there exists a constant k (0, 1) such that Fx,y (kt) Fx,y t , for all x, y X and t > 0 then x = y . 2.2 COMMON FIXED POIONT THEOREMS IN RANDOM PROBABILISTIC METRIC SPACES Theorem 2.2.1: Let (X, F, , ) be a complete random menger space where is continuous and (t, t) t for all t [0,1]. Let A, B, T and S be mappings from X into itself such that 2.2.1.(a) S X A X and T(X) B(X) 2.2.1.2. AB = BA, ST = TS weakly commuting 2.2.1.3. The pair (S, A) and (T, B) are weakly compatible 2.2.1.4. There exists a number k (0,1) such that FSx,Ty kt
F A x ,S x t F A x ,B y t 1 +F S x ,B y t 2

, ( FBy,Ty t , (FAx,By t ,

www.iosrjen.org

25 | P a g e

Common Fixed Point Theoems In Random Probabilistic Metric Spaces

(F B y ,S x t ) (F S x ,B y t )

, FAx,Ty 2 t))

for all x, y X, 0,2 and t > 0; t1 + t 2 = t. Then, A, B, S and T have a unique common fixed point in X. Proof: Since S X A X for any x0 X there exists a point x1 X such thatSx0 = Ax1 . Since T X B X for this point x1 we can choose a point x2 X such that Tx1 = Bx2 . Inductively we can find a sequence yn as follows y2n = Sx2n = Ax2n+1 and y2n+1 = Tx2n+1 = Bx2n+2 For n = 0, 1, 2, 3 . for all t > 0 and = 1 q with q 0,1 , we have Fy 2n +1 ,y 2n +2 kt = FSx 2n +1 ,Tx 2n +2 kt
F A x 2n +1 ,S x 2n +1 t (F A x 2n +1 ,B x 2n +2 t 1 +F S x 2n +1 ,B x 2n +2 t 2 ) (F B x 2n +2 ,S x 2n +1 t ) (FAx 2n +1 ,Bx 2n +2 t , , (F t )
S x 2n +1 ,B x 2n +2

, (FBx 2n +2 ,Tx 2n +2 t , FAx 2n +1 ,Tx 2n +2 2t t ))

Fy 2n ,y 2n +1 t , ( Fy 2n +1 ,y 2n +2 t , (Fy 2n ,y 2n +1 t1 + Fy 2n +1 ,y 2n +1 t 2 )
(F y 2n +1 ,y 2n +1 t ) (F y 2n +1 ,y 2n +1 t ) F y 2n ,y 2n +1 t , ( Fy 2n +1 ,y 2n +2 (F t )
y 2n ,y 2n +1

(Fy 2n ,y 2n +1 t ,

, Fy 2n ,y 2n +2 1 + q t )) t , (Fy 2n ,y 2n +1 t ,

(F y 2n +1 ,y 2n +1 (1q)t ) (F y 2n +1 ,y 2n +1 t )

, Fy 2n ,y 2n +2 1 + q t )) (1, Fy 2n ,y 2n +1 t , Fy 2n +1 ,y 2n +2 qt ))

1, ( Fy 2n +1 ,y 2n +2 t , (Fy 2n ,y 2n +1 t , Fy 2n ,y 2n +1 t , Fy 2n +1 ,y 2n +2 qt Fy 2n +1 ,y 2n +2 kt Fy 2n ,y 2n +1 t , Fy 2n +1 ,y 2n +2 qt Since is continuous and the distribution function is left continuous, making q 1 we have Fy 2n +1 ,y 2n +2 kt Fy 2n ,y 2n +1 t , Fy 2n +1 ,y 2n +2 t Similarly Fy 2n +2 ,y 2n +3 kt Fy 2n +1 ,y 2n +2 t , Fy 2n +2 ,y 2n +3 t Therefore Fy n ,y n +1 kt Fy n 1 ,y n t , Fy n ,y n +1 t for all n N Consequently Fy n ,y n +1 t Fy n 1 ,y n k 1 t , Fy n ,y n +1 k 1 t for all n N Repeated application of this inequality will imply that Fy n ,y n +1 t Fy n 1 ,y n k 1 t , Fy n ,y n +1 k 1 t Fy n 1 ,y n k 1 t , Fy n ,y n +1 k i t
i

,i N

Since Fy n ,y n +1 k t 1 as i , it follows that Fy n ,y n +1 t Fy n 1 ,y n k 1 t for all n N Consequently Fy n ,y n +1 kt Fy n 1 ,y n t for all n N Therefore yn is a Cauchy sequence in X. Since X is complete, yn converges to a point z X. Since Sx2n , Tx2n+1 , Ax2n+1 and Bx2n+2 are subsequences of yn , they also converge to the point z, i. e. as n , Sx2n , Tx2n+1 , Ax2n+1 Bx2n+2 z. SinceS X A X , there exists a point u X such that Au = z. By putting x = u and y = 2n 1 with = 1 we have, FSu,Tx 2n 1 kt

www.iosrjen.org

26 | P a g e

Common Fixed Point Theoems In Random Probabilistic Metric Spaces

F A u ,S u t (F A u ,B x 2n 1 t 1 +F S u ,B x 2n 1 t 2 )

, ( FBx 2n 1 ,Tx 2n 1 t ,
(F B x 2n 1 ,S u t ) (F S u ,B x 2n 1 t )

(FAu,Bx 2n 1 t , Proceeding limit as n , we have FSu,z kt

F z ,Su t (F z ,z t 1 +F S u ,z t 2 )

, FAu,Tx 2n 1 t ))

, ( Fz,z t , (Fz,z t ,

(F z ,S u t ) (F S u ,z t )

, Fz,z t ))

Fz,Su t (Fz,Su t ) , ( Fz,z t , (Fz,z t , , Fz,z t )) (Fz,Su t ) (FSu,z t )

Fz,Su t , ( 1, (1,1, 1)) Consequently FSu,z t FSu,z k 1 t FSu,z k j t which tends to 1 and j tends to (j N) Therefore Su = z and thus Au = Su = z. SinceT(X) B(X), there exists a point v X such that Bv = z. Then by putting x = u and y = v with = 1 in we have FSu,Tv kt
F A u ,S u t (F A u ,B v t 1 +F S u ,B v t 2 )

, ( FBv,Tv t ,
(F B v ,S u t ) (F S u ,B v t )

(FAu,Bv t ,
F A u ,S u t (F A u ,S u t )

, FAu,Tv t ))
(F B v ,S u t ) (F S u ,B v t )

, ( FBv,Tv t , (FAu,Bv t ,
F z ,z t (F z ,z t )

, FAu,Tv t )) , Fz,Tv t ))

Using above we have we have FSu,Tv kt , ( Fz,Tv t , (Fz,z t ,

(F z ,z t ) (F z ,z t )

Fz,Tv kt Fz,Tv t As above we have Tv = z. Therefore Au = Su = Tv = Bv = z. Since pair of maps S and A are weakly compatible, then Su = Au implies S(A)u = (A)Su , i.e. Sz = Az. Now to show that z is a fixed point of P so by putting x = z and y = x2n with = 1 FSz,Tx 2n kt
F A z ,S z t , ( FBx 2n ,Tx 2n (F A z ,B x 2n t 1 +F S z ,B x 2n t 2 ) (F B x 2n ,S z t ) (FAz,Bx 2n t , , FAz,Tx 2n t )) (F t )

t ,

S z ,B x 2n

Using above, we have FSz,z kt

F S z ,S z t (F S z ,z t 1 +F S z ,z t 2 ) F S z ,S z t

, ( Fz,z t , (FSz,z t , , ( Fz,z t , (FSz,z t ,

(F z ,S z t ) (F S z ,z t ) (F z ,S z t ) (F S z ,z t )

, FSz,z t )) , FSz,z t ))

(F S z ,S z t )

Thus we have Sz = z. Hence Sz = z = Az . Similarly, pair of maps T and B is weakly compatible, then Tu = Bu. Now we show that z is a fixed point of T so by putting x = x2n and y = z with = 1 FSx 2n ,Tz kt (FAx 2n ,Bz t
F A x 2n ,S x 2n t (F A x 2n ,B z t 1 +F S x 2n ,B z t 2 ) (F B z ,S x 2n t ) , , FAx 2n ,Tz t )) (F t )
S x 2n ,B z

, ( FBz,Tz t ,

(FBz,Sx
2n

t )

FAx 2n ,Sx 2n t , ( FBz,Tz t , (FAx2n ,Bz t , (FAx 2n ,Sx 2n t )

(FSx ,Bz t ) 2n

, FAx2n ,Tz t ))

Proceeding limit as n , we have

www.iosrjen.org

27 | P a g e

Common Fixed Point Theoems In Random Probabilistic Metric Spaces

FSx2n ,Tz kt
Fz,z t (Fz,z t )

, ( FTz,Tz t , (Fz,Tz t ,

(FTz,z t ) (Fz,Tz t )

, Fz,Tz t ))

Thus we haveTz = z. Hence Tz = z = Bz . By combining the above results, we have Sz = Az = Tz = Bz = z. That is z is a common fixed point of S, T, A and B. For uniqueness, let w (w z) be another common fixed point of S, T, A and B and = 1, then we write FSz,Tw kt
FAz,Sz t (FAz,Bw t1 +FSz,Bw t2 ) FAz,Sz t (FAz,Sz t ) Fz,z t (Fz,z t )

, ( FBw,Tw t , (FAz,Bw t ,

(FBw,Sz t ) (FSz,Bw t )

, FAz,Tw t ))

FSz,Tw kt It follows that Fz,w kt , ( Fw,w t , (Fz,w t ,

(Fw,z t ) (Fz,w t )

, ( FBw,Tw t , (FAz,Bw t ,

(FBw,Sz t ) (FSz,Bw t )

, FAz,Tw t ))

, Fz,w t ))

1, ( 1, (Fz,w t , 1, Fz,w t )) Fz,w t Thus we have z = w. This completes the proof of the theorem. COROLLARY 3.1: Let (X, F, , ) be a complete random menger space where is continuous and (t, t) t for all t [0,1]. Let T and S be mappings from X into itself such that 3.1.1. ST = TS weakly commuting 3.1.2. There exists a number k (0,1) such that FSx,Ty kt
Fx,Sx t Fx,y t1 +FSx,y t2

, ( Fy,Ty t , (Fx,y t ,

(Fy,Sx t ) (FSx,y t )

, Fx,Ty 2 t ))

for all x, y X, 0,2 and t > 0; t1 + t2 = t Then S and T have a unique common fixed point in X. Proof: Put A = B = I in the proof of theorem COROLLARY 3.2: Let (X, F, , ) be a complete Menger space where is continuous and (t, t) t for all t [0,1]. Let A, B, T and S be mappings from X into itself such that 3.2.1. S X B(X) 3.2.2. The pair (S, B) is weakly compatible 3.2.3. There exists a number k (0,1) such that FSx,Sy kt
FBx,Sx t FBx,By t1 +FSx,By t2

, ( FBy,Sy t , (FBx,By t ,

(FBy,Sx t ) (FSx,By t )

, FBx,Sy 2 t) )

for all x, y X, 0,2 and t > 0; t1 + t2 = t. Then S and B have a unique common fixed point in X. Proof: Put T = S and A = B in the proof of above theorem Theorem 4.1 Let A, B, P and Q are self maps on a complete random probabilistic metric space (, , ) satisfying: 4.1. () (), () (); 4.1 , () , , ; 2 for all x, y X, t > 0, k (0, 1) 4.1 If one of (), (), (), () is complete subset of X then () P and A have a coincidence point and () Q and B have a coincidence point and if the pair (P,A) and (Q,B) are weakly compatible, then A,B, P and Q have a unique common fixed point in X. Proof: Since () () and () () so we can define sequences ( ) ( ) in X such that for all n = 0, 1, 2, 3, ... 2 +1 = 2 = 2 +1 , 2+2 = 2 +1 = 2 +2
, + ,

www.iosrjen.org

28 | P a g e

Common Fixed Point Theoems In Random Probabilistic Metric Spaces

Now we have, 2 , 2 +1 () 2 , 2 +1 ,

2 , 2

+ 2

2 , 2

2 +1 2 2 +1, 2 +2 () 2 , 2 +1 , 2 +1 2 2 2 +1, 2 +2 () 2 , 2 +1 () Similarly, 2 +2, 2 +3 () 2 +1, 2 +2 (). In general for any n and t, we have , +1 () 1, (). Hence is a Cauchy sequence in X. By compleness, . Thus the subsequence 2 , 2 +1 2 +2 also converses to . Therefore 2+1 , 2 , 2 +1 and 2 also converses to . Now suppose A(X) is complete. Note that the subsequence 2+2 contained in A(X) and has a limit in A(X) say z. Let 1 (). Then Aw = z. now consider

, 2 +1 () , 2 +1 , , 2 +2 () , 2 +1 , taking limit n, we have

, + , 2 , + , 2

, () , , 2 , , = 1 , () = 1 = . Since = so is a coincidence point of P and A. Since () () ans = implies (). then Bv = z. now consider 2 , () 2 , , 2 +1, () 2 , , Taking limit n, we have

2 , 2

, + ,

+ 2 + 2

2 , 2

2 +1 , 2

2 +1 , 2

, () , , 2 , , = 1 , () = 1 = Since Bv = z so v is a coincidence point of Q and B. Since the pair (P,A) is weakly compatible therefore P and A commute at their coincidence point that is = = and the pair (Q,B) is weakly compatible therefore Q and B commute at their coincidence point that is = = . Now we will prove that = . By (b), we have , 2 +1 () , 2 +1 , , 2 +2 () , 2 +1 , Taking limit , we have , () , ,
, + , 2 , + , 2

, + ,

, + , 2

, , , 1 since = and = , () = 1 = . Similarly we will prove that = . By (b), we have 2 , () 2 , , 2 +1, () 2 , , Taking limit , we have

2 , 2

+ , 2 2 2 + 2 +1 , 2 2

2 +1 , 2

www.iosrjen.org

29 | P a g e

Common Fixed Point Theoems In Random Probabilistic Metric Spaces

, () , , 2 , () { , (), 1} , () = 1 = . Hence z is a common fixed point of A,B, P and Q. Uniqueness Let w is an another common fixed point of A,B, P and Q. then we have , () , ,
, + , , + ,

, () , , 2 , () { , (), 1} , () = 1 = Hence z is unique common fixed point of A,B, P and Q.

2 , + ,

References:
[1]. [2]. [3]. [4]. [5]. [6]. [7]. [8]. [9]. [10]. [11]. [12]. B. Schweizer and A. Sklar, Probabilistic Metric Spaces, North Holland (Amsterdam,1983). D. Mihet, A Generalization of a contraction principle in probabilistic metric spaces, Part II, Int. J. Math. Math. Sci, 2005(2005),729-736. G. Jungck, Compatible Mapping and Common Fixed Points, Internat. J. Math. and Math. Sci., 9 (1986), 771-773. J.K., Kohli, Sachin Vashistha, D. Kumar, A Common Fixed Point Theorem for Six Mappings in Probabilistic Metric Spaces Satisfying Contractive type Implicit Relations, Int. J. of Math. Analysis, 4 (2010), 63-74. 5. K. Menger, Statistical Metrics, Proc.Nat.Acad.Sci.U.S.A. 28 (1042), 535-537. R.P. Pant, A Common Fixed Point Theorem Under a New Condition, Indian J. Pure Appl. Math. 30 (1999), 147-152. S. Kumar and R. Chugh, common fixed point theorem using minimal commutative and reciprocal continuity condition in metric space, Sci. Math. Japan 56 (2002), 269-275. S. Kumar, D. B. Pant, A Common Fixed Point Theorem in Probabilistic Metric Spaces Using Implicit Relation, Filomat 22:2 (2008),43-52. S.N. Mishra, Common Fixed Point of Compatible Mappings in Probabilistic Metric Spaces, Math, Japon., 36 (1991), 283-289. S.L. Singh and B.D. Pant, Common fixed point theorems in probabilistic metric spaces and extension to uniform spaces, Honam. Math. J. 6 (1984), 1-12. S.L. Singh, B.D. Pant and R. Talwar, Fixed points of weakly commuting mappings on Menger spaces, Jnanabha 23 (1993), 115-122. V. M. Sehgal, Some Fixed Point Theorem in Functional Analysis and Probability, Ph.D. Dissertation, Wayne State Univ. Michigan (1966).

www.iosrjen.org

30 | P a g e