- Research
- Open access
- Published:

# Stability of common fixed points in uniform spaces

*Fixed Point Theory and Applications*
**volume 2011**, Article number: 37 (2011)

## Abstract

Stability results for a pair of sequences of mappings and their common fixed points in a Hausdorff uniform space using certain new notions of convergence are proved. The results obtained herein extend and unify several known results.

**AMS(MOS) Subject classification 2010: 47H10; 54H25**.

## 1 Introduction

The relationship between the convergence of a sequence of self mappings *T*_{
n
} of a metric (resp. topological space) *X* and their fixed points, known as the stability (or continuity) of fixed points, has been widely studied in fixed point theory in various settings (cf. [1–18]). The origin of this problem seems into a classical result (see Theorem 1.1) of Bonsall [6] (see also Sonnenshein [18]) for contraction mappings. Recall that a self-mapping *f* of a metric space (*X*, *d*) is called a contraction mapping if there exists a constant *k*, 0 < *k* < 1 such that

**Theorem 1.1**. Let (*X*, *d*) be a complete metric space and *T* and *T*_{
n
} (*n* = 1, 2,...) be contraction mappings of *X* into itself with the same Lipschitz constant *k* < 1, and with fixed points *u* and *u*_{
n
} (*n* = 1, 2,...), respectively. Suppose that lim _{
n
} *T*_{
n
}*x* = *Tx* for every *x* ∈ *X*. Then, lim _{
n
} *u*_{
n
} = *u*.

Subsequent results by Nadler Jr. [11], and others address mainly the problem of replacing the completeness of the space *X* by the existence of fixed points (which was ensured otherwise by the completeness of *X*) and various relaxations on the contraction constant *k*. In most of these results, pointwise (resp. uniform) convergence plays invariably a vital role. However, if the domain of definition of *T*_{
n
} is different for each *n* ∈ ℕ (naturals), then these notions do not work. An alternative to this problem has recently been presented by Barbet and Nachi [5] (see also [4]) where some new notions of convergence have been introduced and utilized to obtain stability results in a metric space. For a uniform space version of these results, see Mishra and Kalinde [10]. On the other hand, a result of Jungck [19] on common fixed points of commuting continuous mappings has also been found quite useful. We note that the above-mentioned result of Jungck [19] includes the well-known Banach contraction principle. Using the above ideas of Barbet and Nachi [5] and Jungck [19], we obtain stability results for common fixed points in a uniform space whose uniformity is generated by a family of pseudometrics. These results generalize the recent results obtained by Mishra and Kalinde [10] and which in turn include several known results. Locally convex topological vector spaces being completely regular are uniformizable, where the uniformity of the space is induced by a family of seminorms. Therefore, all the results obtained herein for uniform spaces also apply to locally convex spaces (cf. Remark 4.4).

## 2 Preliminaries

Let \left(X,\mathcal{U}\right) be a uniform space. A family *P* = {*ρ*_{α} : *α*∈ *I*} of pseudometrics on *X*, where *I* is an indexing set is called an associated family for the uniformity \mathcal{U} if the family

where

is a subbase for the uniformity \mathcal{U}. We may assume \mathfrak{B} itself to be a base for \mathcal{U} by adjoining finite intersections of members of \mathfrak{B} if necessary. The corresponding family of pseudometrics is called an augmented associated family for \mathcal{U}. An augmented associated family for \mathcal{U} will be denoted by *P**. (cf. Mishra [9] and Thron [20]). In view of Kelley [21], we note that each member *V* (*α*, *ε*) of \mathfrak{B} is symmetric and *ρ*_{
α
} is uniformly continuous on *X* × *X* for each *α* ∈ *I*. Further, the uniformity \mathcal{U} is not necessarily pseudometrizable (resp. metrizable) unless \mathfrak{B} is countable, and in that case, \mathcal{U} may be generated by a single pseudometric (resp. a metric) *ρ* on *X*. For an interesting motivation, we refer to Reilly [[22], Example 2] (see also Kelley [[21], Example C, p. 204]). For further details on uniform spaces and a systematic account of fixed point theory there in (including applications), we refer to Kelleyl [21] and Angelov [3] respectively.

Now onwards, unless stated otherwise, \left(X,\mathcal{U}\right) will denote a uniform space defined by *P** while \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}=\mathbb{N}\cup \left\{\infty \right\}.

**Definition 2.1**. [23] Let \left(X,\mathcal{U}\right) be a uniform space and let {*ρ*_{α} : *α* ∈ *I*} = *P**. A mapping *T* : *X* → *X* is called a *P**- contraction if for each *α* ∈ *I*, there exists a real *k*(*α*), 0 < *k*(*α*) < 1 such that

It is well known that *T* : *X* → *X* is *P**-contraction if and only if it is *P-* contraction (see Tarafdar [[23], Remark 1]). Hence, now onwards, we shall simply use the term *k*-*contraction* (resp. *contraction*) to mean either of them. In case the above condition is satisfied for any *k* = *k*(*α*) > 0, *T* will be called *k*- *Lipschitz* (or simply *Lipschitz*).

The following result due to Tarafdar [[23], Theorem 1.1] (see also Acharya [[24], Theorem 3.1]) presents an exact analog of the well-known Banach contraction principle.

**Theorem 2.2**. Let \left(X,\mathcal{U}\right) be a Hausdorff complete uniform space and let {*ρ*_{α} : *α* ∈ *I*}= *P**. Let *T* be a contraction on *X*. Then, *T* has a unique fixed point *a* ∈ *X* such that *T*^{n}*x* → *a* in *τ*_{
u
} (the uniform topology) for each *x* ∈ *X*.

**Definition 2.3**. Let \left(X,\mathcal{U}\right) be a uniform space, *S*, *T* : *Y* ⊆ *X* → *X*. Then, the pair (*S*, *T*) will be called *J* - *Lipschitz* (Jungck Lipschitz) if for each *α* ∈ *I*, there exists a constant *μ* = *μ*(*α*) > 0 such that

The pair (*S*, *T*) is generally called *Jungck contraction* (or simply *J*-*contraction*) when 0 < *μ* < 1, and the constant *μ* in this case is a called *Jungck constant* (see, for instance, [13]). Indeed, *J-contractions* and their generalized versions became popular because of the constructive approach of proof adopted by Jungck [19]. Now onwards, a *J-Lpschitz map* (resp. *J-contraction*) with Jungck constant *μ* will be called a *J-Lipschitz* (resp. *J-contraction*) with constant *μ*.

The following example illustrates the generality of *J-Lipschitz maps*.

**Example 2.4**. Let *X* = (0, ∞) with the usual uniformity induced by *ρ*(*x*, *y*) = |*x* - *y*| for all *x*, *y* ∈ *X*. Define *S* : *X* → *X* by

Then,

Since \frac{1}{xy}\to \infty for small *x* or *y* ∈ *X*, *S* is not a Lipschitz map. However, if we consider the map *T* : *X* → *X* defined by

then

and *S* is Lipscitz with respect to *T* or the pair (*S*, *T*) is J-Lipschitz.

## 3 G-convergence and stability

**Definition 3.1**[5, 10]. Let \left(X,\mathcal{U}\right) be a uniform space, {\left\{{X}_{n}\right\}}_{n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}} a sequence of nonempty subsets of *X* and {\left\{{S}_{n}:{X}_{n}\to X\right\}}_{n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}} a sequence of mappings. Then {\left\{{S}_{n}\right\}}_{n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}} is said to converge *G-pointwise* to a map *S*_{∞}: *X*_{∞} → *X*, or equivalently {\left\{{S}_{n}\right\}}_{n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}}*satisfies the property* (*G*), if the following condition holds:

**(G)** *Gr*(*S*_{∞}) ⊂ lim inf *Gr*(*S*_{
n
} ): for every *x* ∈ *X*_{∞}, there exists a sequence {*x*_{
n
} } in {\prod}_{n\in \mathbb{N}}{X}_{n} such that for any *α* ∈ *I*,

where *Gr*(*T*) stands for the graph of *T*.

In view of Barbet and Nachi [5], we note that:

**(i)** A G-limit need not be unique.

**(ii)** The property (G) is more general than pointwise convergence. However, the two notions are equivalent provided the sequence {*S*_{
n
} }_{n∈ℕ}is equicontinuous when the domains of definitions are identical.

The following theorem gives a sufficient condition for the existence of a unique G-limit.

**Theorem 3.2**. Let \left(X,\mathcal{U}\right) be a uniform space, {\left\{{X}_{n}\right\}}_{n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}} a family of nonempty subsets of *X* and {\left\{{S}_{n}:{X}_{n}\to X\right\}}_{n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}} a sequence of J-Lipschitz maps relative to a continuous map *T* : *X* → *X* with Lipschitz constant *μ*. If *S*_{∞} : *X*_{∞} → *X* is a G-limit of the sequence {*S*_{
n
} }, then *S*_{∞} is unique.

**Proof**. Let U\in \mathcal{U} be an arbitrary entourage. Then, since \mathfrak{B} is base for \mathcal{U}, there exists *V* (*α*, *ε*) ∈ \mathfrak{B}, *α* ∈ *I*, *ε >* 0 such that *V* (*α*, *ε*) ⊂ *U*. Suppose that *S*_{∞} : *X*_{∞} → *X* and {S}_{\infty}^{*}:{X}_{\infty}\to X are G-limit maps of the sequence {*S*_{
n
} }. Then, for every *x* ∈ *X*_{∞}, there exist two sequences {*x*_{
n
} } and {*y*_{
n
} } in {\prod}_{n\in \mathbb{N}}{X}_{n} such that for any *α* ∈ *I*

Further, since *S*_{
n
} is J-Lipschitz, for any *α* ∈ *I*, there exists a constant *μ* = *μ*(*α*) > 0 such that

Therefore, for any *n* ∈ ℕ and *α* ∈ *I*,

Since *T* is continuous and *x*_{
n
} → *x* and *y*_{
n
} → *x* as *n* → ∞, it follows that *Tx*_{
n
} → *Tx*, *Ty*_{
n
} → *Tx*. Hence the R.H.S. of the above expression tends to 0 as *n* → ∞ and so, {\rho}_{\alpha}\left({S}_{\infty}x,{S}_{\infty}^{*}x\right)<\epsilon for all *n* ≥ *N* (*α*, *ε*). Therefore \left({S}_{\infty}x,{S}_{\infty}^{*}x\right)\in V\left(\alpha ,\epsilon \right)\subset U and since *X* is Hausdorff, it follows that {S}_{\infty}x={S}_{\infty}^{*}x.■

**Corollary 3.3**. Theorem 3.2 with J-Lipschitz replaced by J-contraction.

**Proof**. It comes from Theorem 3.2 for *μ* ∈ (0, 1).■

The following result due to Mishra and Kalinde [[10], Proposition 3.1, see also, Remark 3.2)], which in turn includes a result of Barbet and Nachi [[5], Proposition 1], follows as a corollary of Theorem 3.2.

**Corollary 3.4**. Let \left(X,\mathcal{U}\right) be a Hausdorff uniform space, {\left\{{X}_{n}\right\}}_{n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}} a family of nonempty subsets of *X* and *S*_{
n
} : *X*_{
n
} → *X* a *k-* contraction (resp. *k-* Lipschitz) mapping for each n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}. If *S*_{∞} : *X*_{∞} → *X* is a (*G*) - limit of {\left\{{S}_{n}\right\}}_{n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}} then *S*_{∞} is unique.

**Proof**. It comes from Theorem 3.2 when *T* is the identity map and *μ* ∈ (0, 1) (resp. *μ >* 0).■

Now, we present our first stability result.

**Theorem 3.5**. Let \left(X,\mathcal{U}\right) be a uniform space, {\left\{{X}_{n}\right\}}_{n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}} a family of nonempty subsets of *X* and {\left\{{S}_{n},\phantom{\rule{2.77695pt}{0ex}}{T}_{n}:{X}_{n}\to X\right\}}_{n\in \stackrel{-}{\mathbb{N}}} two families of maps each satisfying the property (G) and such that for all n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}, the pair (*S*_{
n
} , *T*_{
n
} ) is J-contraction with constant *μ*. If for all n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}, *z*_{
n
} is a common fixed point of *S*_{
n
} and *T*_{
n
} , then, the sequence {*z*_{
n
} } converges to *z*_{∞}.

**Proof**. Let W\in \mathcal{U} be arbitrary. Then, there exists V\left(\lambda ,\epsilon \right)\in \mathfrak{B},\lambda \in I,\epsilon >0 such that *V* (*λ*, *ε*) ⊂ *W*. Since *z*_{
n
} is a common fixed point of *S*_{
n
} and *T*_{
n
} for each n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}, and the property (G) holds and *z*_{∞} ∈ *X*_{∞}, there exists a sequence {*y*_{
n
} } such that *y*_{
n
} ∈ *X*_{
n
} (for all n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}) such that for any *λ* ∈ *I*,

Using the fact that the pair (*S*_{
n
} , *T*_{
n
} ) is J-contraction, for any *λ* ∈ *I*, we have

This gives

Since *μ*(*λ*) < 1, it follows that *ρ*_{
λ
} (*z*_{
n
} , *z*_{∞}) → 0 as *n* → ∞. Hence, *ρ*_{
λ
} (*z*_{
n
} , *z*_{∞}) *< ε* for all *n* ≥ *N* (*λ*, *ε*) and so (*z*_{
n
} , *z*_{∞}) ∈ *V* (*λ*, *ε*) ⊂ *W* and the conclusion follows.■

When for each n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}, *T*_{
n
} is the identity map on *X*_{
n
} in Theorem 3.5, we have the following result due to Mishra and Kalinde [[10], Theorem 3.3], which includes a result of Barbet and Nachi [[5], Theorem 2].

**Corollary 3.6**. Let \left(X,\mathcal{U}\right) be a Hausdorff uniform space, {\left\{{X}_{n}\right\}}_{n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}} a family of nonempty subsets of *X* and {\left\{{S}_{n}:{X}_{n}\to X\right\}}_{n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}} a family of mappings satisfying the property (*G*) and *S*_{
n
} is a *k-* contraction for each n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}. If *x*_{
n
} is a fixed point of *S*_{
n
} for each n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}, then the sequence {*x*_{
n
} }_{n∈ℕ}converges to *x*_{∞}.

Again, when *X*_{
n
} = *X*, for all n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}, we obtain, as a consequence of Theorem 3.5, the following result.

**Corollary 3.7**. Let \left(X,\mathcal{U}\right) be a uniform space and *S*_{
n
} , *T*_{
n
} : *X* → *X* be such that the pair (*S*_{
n
} , *T*_{
n
} ) is J-contraction with constant *μ* and with at least one common fixed point *z*_{
n
} for all n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}. If the sequences {*S*_{
n
} } and {*T*_{
n
} } converge pointwise respectively to *S*, *T* : *X* → *X*, then the sequence {*z*_{
n
} } converges to *z*_{∞}.

Notice that Corollary 3.7 includes as a special case a result of Singh [[13], Theorem 1] for metric spaces (metrizable spaces).

We remark that under the conditions of Theorem 3.5 the pair (*S*_{∞}, *T*_{∞}) of G-limit maps is also a J-contraction. Indeed, we have the following stability result.

**Theorem 3.8**. Let \left(X,\mathcal{U}\right) be a uniform space, {\left\{{X}_{n}\right\}}_{n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}} a family of nonempty subsets of *X* and {\left\{{S}_{n},\phantom{\rule{2.77695pt}{0ex}}{T}_{n}:{X}_{n}\to X\right\}}_{n\in \stackrel{-}{\mathbb{N}}} two families of maps each satisfying the property (G) and such that for all *n*∈ℕ, the pair (*S*_{
n
} , *T*_{
n
} ) is J-contraction with constant {*μ*_{
n
} }_{n∈ℕ}a bounded (resp. convergent) sequence. Then, the pair (*S*_{∞}, *T*_{∞}) is J-contraction with constant *μ* = sup_{n∈ℕ}*μ*_{
n
} (resp. *μ* = lim_{
n
} *μ*_{
n
}).

**Proof**. Let *x*, *y* ∈ *X*_{∞}. Then, by the property (G), there exist two sequences {*x*_{
n
} } and {*y*_{
n
} } in {\prod}_{n\in \mathbb{N}}{X}_{n} such that the sequences {*S*_{
n
}*x*_{
n
} }, {*S*_{
n
}*y*_{
n
} }, {*T*_{
n
}*x*_{
n
} } and {*T*_{
n
}*y*_{
n
} } converge respectively to *S*_{∞}*x*, *S*_{∞}*y*, *T*_{∞}*x*, and *T*_{∞}*y*.

Therefore, for any *n*∈N and each *α* ∈ *I*,

Since

the above inequality yields *ρ*_{
α
} (*S*_{∞}*x*, *S*_{∞}*y*) ≤ *μ ρ*_{
α
} (*T*_{∞}*x*, *T*_{∞}*y*) and the conclusion follows.■

**Remark 3.9**. Theorem 3.8 includes, as a special case, a result of Mishra and Kalinde [[10], Proposition 3.5] for uniform spaces when *X*_{
n
} = *X* and *T*_{
n
} is an identity mapping for each n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}. Consequently, a result of Barbet and Nachi [[5], Proposition 4] for metric spaces also follows when *X* is metrizable.

## 4 H-convergence and stability

**Definition 4.1**. [5, 10] Let \left(X,\mathcal{U}\right) be a uniform space, {\left\{{X}_{n}\right\}}_{n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}} a family of nonempty subsets of *X* and {\left\{{S}_{n}:{X}_{n}\to X\right\}}_{n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}} a family of mappings. Then,

*S*_{∞} is called an (*H*) - limit of the sequence {*S*_{
n
} }_{n∈ℕ}in or, equivalently {\left\{{S}_{n}\right\}}_{n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}} satisfies the property (*H*) if the following condition holds:

**(H)** For all sequences {*x*_{
n
} } in {\prod}_{n\in \mathbb{N}}{X}_{n}, there exists a sequence {*y*_{
n
} } in *X*_{∞} such that for any *α* ∈ *I*,

In case *X* is a metrizable uniform space (that is the uniformity \mathcal{U} is generated by a metric *d*), we get the corresponding definitions due to Barbet and Nachi [5].

In view of [5], we note that:

**(a)** A G-limit map is not necessarily an H-limit.

**(b)** If {\left\{{S}_{n}:Y\subseteq X\to X\right\}}_{n\in \mathbb{N}} converges uniformly to *S*_{∞} on *Y*, then *S*_{∞} is an H-limit of {*S*_{
n
} }.

**(c)** The converse of (*b*) holds only when *S*_{∞} is uniformly continuous on *Y*.

For details and examples, we refer to Barbet and Nachi [5].

**Theorem 4.2**. Let \left(X,\mathcal{U}\right) be a uniform space, {\left\{{X}_{n}\right\}}_{n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}} a family of nonempty subsets of *X*. Let {\left\{{S}_{n},\phantom{\rule{2.77695pt}{0ex}}{T}_{n}:{X}_{n}\to X\right\}}_{n\in \stackrel{-}{\mathbb{N}}} be two families of maps each satisfying the property (H). Further, let the pair (*S*_{∞}, *T*_{∞}) be a J-contraction with constant *μ*_{∞}. If, for every n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}, *z*_{
n
} is a common fixed point of *S*_{
n
} and *T*_{
n
} , then the sequence {*z*_{
n
} } converges to *z*_{∞}.

**Proof**. The property (H) implies that there exists a sequence {*y*_{
n
} } in *X*_{∞} such that for any *α* ∈ *I*, *ρ*_{
α
} (*z*_{
n
} , *y*_{
n
} ) → 0, *ρ*_{
α
} (*S*_{
n
}*z*_{
n
} , *S*_{∞}*y*_{
n
} ) → 0 and *ρ*_{
α
} (*T*_{
n
}*z*_{
n
} , *T*_{∞}*y*_{
n
} ) → 0 as *n* → ∞. Then

So, we get

Since the right hand side of the above inequality tends to 0 as *n* → ∞, we deduce that *z*_{
n
} → *z*_{∞} as *n* → ∞. ■

As a consequence of Theorem 4.2, we have the following result due to Mishra and Kalinde [[10], Theorem 3.13].

**Corollary 4.3**. Let \left(X,\mathcal{U}\right) be a Hausdorff uniform space, {\left\{{X}_{n}\right\}}_{n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}} a family of nonempty subsets of *X* and {\left\{{S}_{n}:{X}_{n}\to X\right\}}_{n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}} a family of mappings satisfying the property (*H*) and such that *S*_{∞} is a *k*_{∞} - contraction. If for any n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}, *x*_{
n
} is a fixed point of *T*_{
n
} , then {*x*_{
n
} }_{n∈ℕ}converges to *x*_{∞}.

**Proof**. It comes from Theorem 4.2 by taking *T*_{
n
} to be the identity mapping for each n\in \stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbb{N}}.■

If *X* is metrizable, then we get a stability result of Barbet and Nachi [[5], Theorem 11], which in turn includes a result of Nadler [[11], Theorem 1]. Indeed, Nadler's result is a direct consequence of Corollary 4.3 when *X*_{
n
} = *X* for each *n* ∈ ℕ with *X* being metrizable.

**Remark 4.4**. Every locally convex topological vector space *X* is uniformizable being completely regular (cf. Kelley [21], Shaefer [25]) where the family of pseudometrics {*ρ*_{
α
} : *α* ∈ *I*} is induced by a family of seminorms {*ρ*_{
α
} : *α* ∈ *I*} so that *ρ*_{
α
} (*x*, *y*) = *ρ*_{
α
} (*x* - *y*) for all *x*, *y* ∈ *X*. Therefore, all the results proved previously for uniform spaces also apply to locally convex spaces.

## References

Acharya SP:

**Convergence of a sequence of fixed points in a uniform space.***Mat Vesnik*1976,**13**(28):131–141.Angelov VG:

**A continuous dependence of fixed points of***ϕ***-contractive mappings in uniform spaces.***Archivum Mathematicum (Brno)*1992,**28**(3–4):155–162.Angelov VG:

*Fixed Points in Uniform Spaces and Applications.*Babeş-Bolyai University, Cluj University Press; 2009.Barbet L, Nachi K:

**Convergence des points fixes de***k***-contractions (convergence of fixed points of***k-***contractions).***University of Pau*2006. preprintBarbet L, Nachi K:

**Sequences of contractions and convergence of fixed points.***Monografias del Seminario Matemático Garcia de Galdeano*2006,**33:**51–58.Bonsall FF:

**Lectures on Some Fixed Point Theorems of Functional Analysis.***Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Bombay*1962.Mishra SN:

**On sequences of mappings and fixed points.***Rend Sem Mat Univers Politecn Torino*1976,**34:**405–410.Mishra SN:

**On sequences of mappings and fixed points II.***Indian J Pure Appl Math*1979,**10:**699–703.Mishra SN:

**A note on common fixed points of multivalued mappings in uniform spaces.***Math Semin Notes*1981,**9:**341–347.Mishra SN, Kalinde AK:

**On certain stability results of Barbet and Nachi.***Fixed Point Theory*2011,**12**(1):137–144.Nadler SB Jr:

**Sequences of contractions and fixed points.***Pacific J Math*1968,**27**(3):579–585.Rhoades BE:

**Fixed point theorems in a uniform space.***Publ L'Institute Mathématique Nouvelle śerie*1979,**25**(39):153–156.Singh SL:

**A note on the convergence of a pair of sequences of mappings.***Arch Math*1979,**15**(1):47–52.Singh SL, Mishra SN:

**Common fixed points and convergence theorems in uniform spaces.***Mat Vesnik*1981,**5;18**(33):403–410.Singh SP:

**Sequence of mappings and fixed points.***Annales Soc Sci Bruxelles*1969,**83**(2):197–201.Singh SP:

**On a theorem of Sonnenshein.***Bull de l'Académie Royale de Belgique*1969,**3:**413–414.Singh SP, Russel W:

**A note on a sequence of contraction mappings.***Can Math Bull*1969,**12:**513–516. 10.4153/CMB-1969-068-2Sonnenshein J:

**Opérateurs de même coefficient de contraction.***Bulletin de l' Académie Royale de Belgique*1966,**52:**1078–1082.Jungck G:

**Commuting mappings and fixed points.***Amer Math Monthly*1976,**83:**261–263. 10.2307/2318216Thron WJ:

*Topological Structures.*Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York; 1966.Kelley JL:

*General Topology.*Springer, New York; 1955.Reilly IL:

**A generalized contraction principle.***Bull Aust Math Soc*1974,**10:**359–363. 10.1017/S0004972700041046Tarafdar E:

**An approach to fixed point theorems on uniform spaces.***Trans Amer Math Soc*1974,**191:**209–225.Acharya SP:

**Some results on fixed points in uniform spaces.***Yokohama Math J*1974,**22**(1–2):105–116.Shaefer HH:

*Topological Vector Spaces.*Macmillan, New York; 1966.

## Acknowledgements

This research is supported by the Directorate of Research Development, Walter Sisulu University. A special word of thanks is also due to referee for his constructive comments.

## Author information

### Authors and Affiliations

### Corresponding author

## Additional information

### Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

### Authors' contributions

A seminar on the basic ideas of G and H-convergence was presented by SNM in 2009. Subsequently, SLS and SS joined him to extend these basic ideas to the setting of J-contractions. SNM finalized the paper in 2010 when SLS was visiting Walter Sisulu University again in 2010. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

## Rights and permissions

**Open Access** This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

## About this article

### Cite this article

Mishra, S., Singh, S.L. & Stofile, S. Stability of common fixed points in uniform spaces.
*Fixed Point Theory Appl* **2011**, 37 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2011-37

Received:

Accepted:

Published:

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2011-37