 Research
 Open access
 Published:
Coincidence point theorems in quasimetric spaces without assuming the mixed monotone property and consequences in Gmetric spaces
Fixed Point Theory and Applications volume 2014, Article number: 184 (2014)
Abstract
In this paper, we present some coincidence point theorems in the setting of quasimetric spaces that can be applied to operators which not necessarily have the mixed monotone property. As a consequence, we particularize our results to the field of metric spaces, partially ordered metric spaces and Gmetric spaces, obtaining some very recent results. Finally, we show how to use our main theorems to obtain coupled, tripled, quadrupled and multidimensional coincidence point results.
1 Introduction
In recent times, one of the branches of fixed point theory that has attracted much attention is the field devoted to studying this kind of results in the setting of partially ordered metric spaces. After the appearance of the first works in this sense (by Ran and Reurings [1], by Nieto and RodríguezLópez [2], by GnanaBhaskar and Lakshmikantham [3], and by Lakshmikantham and Ćirić [4], to cite some of them), the literature on this topic has expanded significantly. In [3], the authors introduced the notion of mixed monotone property, which has been one of the most usual hypotheses in this kind of results. However, some theorems avoiding these conditions have appeared very recently (see, for instance, [5]). One of the results on this line of study was given by Charoensawan and Thangthong in [6]. To understand their statement, the following notions were considered.
Definition 1.1 Let (X,d) be a metric space and F:X\times X\to X and g:X\to X be given mappings. Let M be a nonempty subset of {X}^{6}. We say that M is an ({F}^{\ast},g) invariant subset of {X}^{6} if and only if for all x,y,z,u,v,w\in X,

1.
(x,u,y,v,z,w)\in M\iff (w,z,v,y,u,x)\in M;

2.
(gx,gu,gy,gv,gz,gw)\in M\Rightarrow (F(x,u),F(u,x),F(y,v),F(v,y),F(z,w),F(w,z))\in M.
Definition 1.2 Let (X,d) be a metric space and M be a subset of {X}^{6}. We say that M satisfies the transitive property if and only if for all x,y,w,z,a,b,c,d,e,f\in X,
Definition 1.3 Let Φ be the family of all functions \phi :[0,\mathrm{\infty})\to [0,\mathrm{\infty}) satisfying

1.
{\phi}^{1}(\{0\})=\{0\},

2.
\phi (t)<t for all t>0,

3.
{lim}_{s\to {t}^{+}}\phi (s)<t for all t>0.
Using the previous preliminaries, they proved the following result in the context of Gmetric spaces, which is recalled in Section 2.1.
Theorem 1.1 (Charoensawan and Thangthong [6], Theorem 3.1)
Let (X,\preccurlyeq ) be a partially ordered set and G be a Gmetric on X such that (X,G) is a complete Gmetric space, and let M be a nonempty subset of {X}^{6}. Assume that there exists \phi \in \mathrm{\Phi} and also suppose that F:X\times X\to X and g:X\to X such that
for all (gx,gu,gy,gv,gz,gw)\in M.
Suppose also that F is continuous, F(X\times X)\subseteq g(X) and g is continuous and commutes with F. If there exist {x}_{0},{y}_{0}\in X such that
and M is an ({F}^{\ast},g)invariant set which satisfies the transitive property, then there exist x,y\in X such that gx=F(x,y) and gy=F(y,x).
First of all, notice that the partial order ≼ in the hypothesis has no sense in the statement of Theorem 1.1. This is only a mistake that proves the special importance of partial orders in this class of results.
In this paper, we show that Theorem 1.1 can be easily deduced from a unidimensional version of the same result. In fact, we prove that the middle variables of M\subseteq {X}^{6} are unnecessary. But the main aim of this work is to obtain some coincidence point theorems in the context of quasimetric spaces that can be applied in several frameworks, including metric spaces and Gmetric spaces. The hypotheses of our main results are very general, and they can be particularized in a variety of different contexts, unidimensional or multidimensional ones, even if the involved mappings do not have the mixed monotone property. Our results also extend and unify some recent theorems that can be found in [7]. As a consequence, we prove that many results in this field of study can be easily derived from our statements.
2 Preliminaries
For the sake of completeness, we collect in this section some basic definitions and wellknown results in this field. Firstly, let ℕ and ℝ denote the sets of all positive integers and all real numbers, respectively. Furthermore, we let {\mathbb{N}}_{0}=\mathbb{N}\cup \{0\}. If A\subseteq \mathbb{R} is a nonempty subset of ℝ, the Euclidean metric on A is d(x,y)=xy for all x,y\in A. In the sequel, let X be a nonempty set. Given a natural number n, we use {X}^{n} to denote the nth Cartesian power of X, that is, X\times X\times \cdots \times X (n times).
From now on, let T:X\to X be a selfmapping (also called operator). For simplicity, we denote T(x) by Tx and T\circ T by {T}^{2}. In general, the iterates of a selfmapping T are the mappings {\{{T}^{n}:X\to X\}}_{n\ge 0} defined by
Given a point x\in X, the Picard sequence of the operator T (based on x) is the sequence {\{{T}^{n}x\}}_{n\ge 0}, which we will denote by \{{x}_{n}\}.
The main aim of this manuscript is to show some sufficient conditions to ensure existence and uniqueness of the following kinds of points. A coincidence point of two mappings T,g:X\to X is a point x\in X such that Tx=gx. And a coupled coincidence point of two mappings F:{X}^{2}\to X and g:X\to X is a point (x,y)\in {X}^{2} such that F(x,y)=gx and F(y,x)=gy. If g is the identity mapping on X, then both kinds of points are called coupled fixed point of T and coupled fixed point of F, respectively.
A metric (or a distance function) on a nonempty set X is a mapping d:X\times X\to [0,\mathrm{\infty}) verifying the following conditions: for all x,y,z\in X,
In such a case, the pair (X,d) is called a metric space.
We say that two mappings T,g:X\to X are commuting if gTx=Tgx for all x\in X. We say that F:{X}^{n}\to X and g:X\to X are commuting if gF({x}_{1},{x}_{2},\dots ,{x}_{n})=F(g{x}_{1},g{x}_{2},\dots ,g{x}_{n}) for all {x}_{1},\dots ,{x}_{n}\in X.
A binary relation on X is a nonempty subset ℛ of {X}^{2}. For simplicity, we will write x\preccurlyeq y if (x,y)\in \mathcal{R}, and we will say that ≼ is the binary relation. We will write x\prec y when x\preccurlyeq y and x\ne y, and we will write y\succcurlyeq x when x\preccurlyeq y. We will say that x and y are ≼comparable if x\preccurlyeq y or y\preccurlyeq x.
A binary relation ≼ on X is transitive if x\preccurlyeq z for all x,y,z\in X such that x\preccurlyeq y and y\preccurlyeq z. A preorder (or a quasiorder) ≼ on X is a binary relation on X that is reflexive (i.e., x\preccurlyeq x for all x\in X) and transitive. In such a case, we say that (X,\preccurlyeq ) is a preordered space (or a preordered set). If a preorder ≼ is also antisymmetric (x\preccurlyeq y and y\preccurlyeq x implies x=y), then ≼ is called a partial order, and (X,\preccurlyeq ) is a partially ordered space.
If (X,\preccurlyeq ) is a preordered space and T,g:X\to X are two mappings, we say that T is a (g,\preccurlyeq ) nondecreasing mapping if Tx\preccurlyeq Ty for all x,y\in X such that gx\preccurlyeq gy. If g is the identity mapping on X, T is nondecreasing w.r.t. ≼ (or it is ≼nondecreasing).
If (X,d) is a metric space, a mapping T:X\to X is continuous if \{T{x}_{n}\}\to Tz for all sequences \{{x}_{n}\}\subseteq X such that \{{x}_{n}\}\to z\in X. If ≼ is a binary relation on X, we say that T is (g,\preccurlyeq ) nondecreasingcontinuous if \{T{x}_{n}\}\to Tz for all sequences \{{x}_{n}\}\subseteq X such that \{{x}_{n}\}\to z\in X verifying that g{x}_{n}\preccurlyeq g{x}_{n+1} for all n\in \mathbb{N}. If g is the identity mapping on X, we say that T is ≼nondecreasingcontinuous.
2.1 Gmetric spaces
The notion of Gmetric space is defined as follows.
Definition 2.1 (Mustafa and Sims [8])
Let X be a nonempty set, and let G:X\times X\times X\to {\mathbb{R}}^{+} be a function satisfying the following properties:
(G_{1}) G(x,y,z)=0 if x=y=z;
(G_{2}) 0<G(x,x,y) for all x,y\in X with x\ne y;
(G_{3}) G(x,x,y)\le G(x,y,z) for all x,y,z\in X with y\ne z;
(G_{4}) G(x,y,z)=G(x,z,y)=G(y,z,x)=\cdots (symmetry in all three variables);
(G_{5}) G(x,y,z)\le G(x,a,a)+G(a,y,z) (rectangle inequality) for all x,y,z,a\in X.
Then the function G is called a generalized metric, or, more specifically, a Gmetric on X, and the pair (X,G) is called a Gmetric space.
Note that every Gmetric on X induces a metric {d}_{G} on X defined by
For a better understanding of the subject, we give the following examples of Gmetrics.
Example 2.1 Let (X,d) be a metric space. The function G:X\times X\times X\to [0,+\mathrm{\infty}), defined by
for all x,y,z\in X, is a Gmetric on X.
Example 2.2 (see, e.g., [8])
Let X=[0,\mathrm{\infty}). The function G:X\times X\times X\to [0,\mathrm{\infty}), defined by
for all x,y,z\in X, is a Gmetric on X.
In their initial paper, Mustafa and Sims [8] also defined the basic topological concepts in Gmetric spaces as follows.
Definition 2.2 (Mustafa and Sims [8])
Let (X,G) be a Gmetric space, and let \{{x}_{n}\} be a sequence of points of X. We say that \{{x}_{n}\} is Gconvergent to x\in X if
that is, for any \epsilon >0, there exists N\in \mathbb{N} such that G(x,{x}_{n},{x}_{m})<\epsilon for all n,m\ge N. We call x the limit of the sequence, and we write \{{x}_{n}\}\to x or {lim}_{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}{x}_{n}=x.
It is clear that the limit of a convergent sequence is unique.
Proposition 2.1 (Mustafa and Sims [8])
In a Gmetric space (X,G), the following conditions are equivalent.

1.
\{{x}_{n}\} is Gconvergent to x.

2.
G({x}_{n},{x}_{n},x)\to 0 as n\to \mathrm{\infty}.

3.
G({x}_{n},x,x)\to 0 as n\to \mathrm{\infty}.
Definition 2.3 (Mustafa and Sims [8])
Let (X,G) be a Gmetric space. A sequence \{{x}_{n}\} is called a GCauchy sequence if, for any \epsilon >0, there exists N\in \mathbb{N} such that G({x}_{n},{x}_{m},{x}_{l})<\epsilon for all m,n,l\ge N, that is, G({x}_{n},{x}_{m},{x}_{l})\to 0 as n,m,l\to \mathrm{\infty}.
Proposition 2.2 (Mustafa and Sims [8])
In a Gmetric space (X,G), the following conditions are equivalent.

1.
The sequence \{{x}_{n}\} is GCauchy.

2.
For any \epsilon >0, there exists N\in \mathbb{N} such that G({x}_{n},{x}_{m},{x}_{m})<\epsilon for all m,n\ge N.
Definition 2.4 (Mustafa and Sims [8])
A Gmetric space (X,G) is called Gcomplete if every GCauchy sequence is Gconvergent in (X,G).
Definition 2.5 Let (X,G) be a Gmetric space. A mapping T:X\to X is said to be Gcontinuous if \{T{x}_{n}\} Gconverges to Tx for any Gconvergent sequence \{{x}_{n}\} to x\in X. In general, given m\in \mathbb{N}, a mapping F:{X}^{m}\to X is said to be Gcontinuous if \{F({x}_{n}^{1},{x}_{n}^{2},\dots ,{x}_{n}^{m})\} Gconverges to F({x}^{1},{x}^{2},\dots ,{x}^{m}) for any Gconvergent sequences \{{x}_{n}^{1}\},\{{x}_{n}^{2}\},\dots ,\{{x}_{n}^{m}\}\subseteq X such that \{{x}_{n}^{i}\}\to {x}^{i}\in X for all i\in \{1,2,\dots ,m\}.
The following lemma shows a simple way to consider some Gmetrics on {X}^{2} from a Gmetric on X.
Lemma 2.1 (Agarwal et al. [9])
Let G:{X}^{3}\to [0,\mathrm{\infty}) and {G}_{s}^{2},{G}_{m}^{2}:{({X}^{2})}^{3}\to [0,\mathrm{\infty}) be three mappings verifying
Then the following conditions are equivalent.

(a)
G is a {G}^{\ast}metric on X.

(b)
{G}_{s}^{2} is a {G}^{\ast}metric on {X}^{2}.

(c)
{G}_{m}^{2} is a {G}^{\ast}metric on {X}^{2}.
In such a case, the following properties hold.

1.
Every sequence \{({x}_{n},{y}_{n})\}\subseteq {X}^{2} verifies: \{({x}_{n},{y}_{n})\}\stackrel{{G}_{s}^{2}}{\u27f6}(x,y)\u27fa\{({x}_{n},{y}_{n})\}\stackrel{{G}_{m}^{2}}{\u27f6}(x,y)\u27fa[\{{x}_{n}\}\stackrel{G}{\u27f6}x\mathit{\text{and}}\{{y}_{n}\}\stackrel{G}{\u27f6}y].

2.
\{({x}_{n},{y}_{n})\}\subseteq {X}^{2} is {G}_{s}^{2}Cauchy ⟺ \{({x}_{n},{y}_{n})\} is {G}_{m}^{2}Cauchy ⟺ [\{{x}_{n}\}\mathit{\text{and}}\{{y}_{n}\}\mathit{\text{are}}G\mathit{\text{Cauchy}}].

3.
(X,G) is Gcomplete ⟺ ({X}^{2},{G}_{s}^{2}) is Gcomplete ⟺ ({X}^{2},{G}_{m}^{2}) is Gcomplete.
2.2 Quasimetric spaces
Definition 2.6 A mapping q:X\times X\to [0,\mathrm{\infty}) is a quasimetric on X if it satisfies (M_{1}), (M_{2}) and (M_{4}), that is, if it verifies, for all x,y,z\in X:
(q_{1}) q(x,y)=0 if and only if x=y,
(q_{2}) q(x,y)\le q(x,z)+q(z,y).
In such a case, the pair (X,q) is called a quasimetric space.
Remark 2.1 Any metric space is a quasimetric space, but the converse is not true in general.
Now, we recollect some basic topological notions and related results about quasimetric spaces (see also, e.g., [10–13]).
Definition 2.7 Let (X,q) be a quasimetric space, \{{x}_{n}\} be a sequence in X, and x\in X. We will say that:

\{{x}_{n}\} converges to x (and we will denote it by \{{x}_{n}\}\stackrel{q}{\u27f6}x or by \{{x}_{n}\}\to x) if {lim}_{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}q({x}_{n},x)={lim}_{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}q(x,{x}_{n})=0;

\{{x}_{n}\} is a Cauchy sequence if for all \epsilon >0, there exists {n}_{0}\in \mathbb{N} such that q({x}_{n},{x}_{m})<\epsilon for all n,m\ge {n}_{0}.
The quasimetric space (X,q) is said to be complete if every Cauchy sequence is convergent on (X,q).
As q is not necessarily symmetric, some authors distinguished between left/right Cauchy/convergent sequences and completeness.
Definition 2.8 (Jleli and Samet [14])
Let (X,q) be a quasimetric space, \{{x}_{n}\} be a sequence in X, and x\in X. We say that:

\{{x}_{n}\} rightconverges to x if {lim}_{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}q({x}_{n},x)=0;

\{{x}_{n}\} leftconverges to x if {lim}_{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}q(x,{x}_{n})=0;

\{{x}_{n}\} is a rightCauchy sequence if for all \epsilon >0 there exists {n}_{0}\in \mathbb{N} such that q({x}_{n},{x}_{m})<\epsilon for all m>n\ge {n}_{0};

\{{x}_{n}\} is a leftCauchy sequence if for all \epsilon >0 there exists {n}_{0}\in \mathbb{N} such that q({x}_{m},{x}_{n})<\epsilon for all m>n\ge {n}_{0};

(X,q) is rightcomplete if every rightCauchy sequence is rightconvergent;

(X,q) is leftcomplete if every leftCauchy sequence is leftconvergent;
Remark 2.2 (see, e.g., [14])
A sequence \{{x}_{n}\} in a quasimetric space is Cauchy if and only if it is leftCauchy and rightCauchy.
Remark 2.3

1.
The limit of a sequence in a quasimetric space, if it exists, is unique. However, this is false if we consider rightlimits or leftlimits.

2.
If \{{x}_{n}\}\to x and \{{y}_{n}\}\to y in a quasimetric space, then \{q({x}_{n},{y}_{n})\}\to q(x,y), that is, q is continuous in both arguments. It follows from
q(x,y)q(x,{x}_{n})q({y}_{n},y)\le q({x}_{n},{y}_{n})\le q({x}_{n},x)+q(x,y)+q(y,{y}_{n})
for all n. In particular, \{q({x}_{n},z)\}\to q(x,z) and \{q(z,{x}_{n})\}\to q(z,x) for all z\in X.

3.
If \{{x}_{n}\}\to x, \{q({x}_{n},{y}_{n})\}\to 0 and \{q({y}_{n},{x}_{n})\}\to 0, then \{{y}_{n}\}\to x. It follows from
q({y}_{n},x)\le q({y}_{n},{x}_{n})+q({x}_{n},x)\phantom{\rule{1em}{0ex}}\text{and}\phantom{\rule{1em}{0ex}}q(x,{y}_{n})\le q(x,{x}_{n})+q({x}_{n},{y}_{n}). 
4.
If a sequence \{{x}_{n}\} has a rightlimit x and a leftlimit y, then x=y, \{{x}_{n}\} converges and it has an only limit (from the right and from the left). However, it is possible that a sequence has two different rightlimits when it has no leftlimit.
Example 2.3 Let X be a subset of ℝ containing [0,1] and define, for all x,y\in X,
Then (X,q) is a quasimetric space. Notice that \{q(1/n,0)\}\to 0 but \{q(0,1/n)\}\to 1. Therefore, \{1/n\} rightconverges to 0 but it does not converge from the left.
The following result shows a simple way to consider quasimetrics from Gmetrics.
Lemma 2.2 (Agarwal et al. [9])
Let (X,G) be a Gmetric space, and let us define {q}_{G},{q}_{G}^{\prime}:{X}^{2}\to [0,\mathrm{\infty}) by
Then the following properties hold.

1.
{q}_{G} and {q}_{G}^{\prime} are quasimetrics on X. Moreover,
{q}_{G}^{\prime}(x,y)\le 2{q}_{G}(x,y)\le 4{q}_{G}^{\prime}(x,y)\phantom{\rule{1em}{0ex}}\mathit{\text{for all}}x,y\in X.(2) 
2.
In (X,{q}_{G}) and in (X,{q}_{G}^{\prime}), a sequence is rightconvergent (respectively, leftconvergent) if and only if it is convergent. In such a case, its rightlimit, its leftlimit and its limit coincide.

3.
In (X,{q}_{G}) and in (X,{q}_{G}^{\prime}), a sequence is rightCauchy (respectively, leftCauchy) if and only if it is Cauchy.

4.
In (X,{q}_{G}) and in (X,{q}_{G}^{\prime}), every rightconvergent (respectively, leftconvergent) sequence has a unique rightlimit (respectively, leftlimit).

5.
If \{{x}_{n}\}\subseteq X and x\in X, then \{{x}_{n}\}\stackrel{G}{\u27f6}x\u27fa\{{x}_{n}\}\stackrel{{q}_{G}}{\u27f6}x\u27fa\{{x}_{n}\}\stackrel{{q}_{G}^{\prime}}{\u27f6}x.

6.
If \{{x}_{n}\}\subseteq X, then \{{x}_{n}\} is GCauchy ⟺ \{{x}_{n}\} is {q}_{G}Cauchy ⟺ \{{x}_{n}\} is {q}_{G}^{\prime}Cauchy.

7.
(X,G) is complete ⟺ (X,{q}_{G}) is complete ⟺ (X,{q}_{G}^{\prime}) is complete.
2.3 Control functions
Functions in Φ (see Definition 1.3) verify the following properties.
Lemma 2.3 Let \phi \in \mathrm{\Phi}.

1.
\phi (t)\le t for all t\ge 0.

2.
If \{{t}_{n}\}\subset [0,\mathrm{\infty}) is a sequence such that {t}_{n+1}\le \phi ({t}_{n}) for all n, then \{{t}_{n}\}\to 0.

3.
If \{{t}_{n}\},\{{s}_{n}\}\subset [0,\mathrm{\infty}) are two sequences such that \{{t}_{n}\}\to 0 and {s}_{n}\le \phi ({t}_{n}) for all n, then \{{s}_{n}\}\to 0.
Proof (2) By item 1, {t}_{n+1}\le \phi ({t}_{n})\le {t}_{n} for all n, so \{{t}_{n}\} is a nonincreasing sequence of nonnegative real numbers. Then it is convergent. Let L={lim}_{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}{t}_{n}\ge 0. We claim that L=0. If L>0, then \{{t}_{n}\} is a sequence of numbers greater than L that converges to L. Hence,
which is a contradiction.

(3)
It follows from item 2 taking into account that 0\le {s}_{n}\le \phi ({t}_{n})\le {t}_{n} for all n. □
Inspired by Boyd and Wong’s theorem [15], Mukherjea [16] introduced the following kind of control functions:
Functions in Ψ are more general than those in Φ. The following properties are very useful.
Lemma 2.4 Let \phi \in \mathrm{\Psi} be a mapping, and let \{{t}_{m}\}\subset [0,\mathrm{\infty}) be a sequence.

1.
If {t}_{m+1}\le \phi ({t}_{m}) and {t}_{m}\ne 0 for all m, then \{{t}_{m}\}\to 0.

2.
Let \{{t}_{n}\},\{{s}_{n}\}\subset [0,\mathrm{\infty}) be two sequences such that \{{t}_{n}\}\to 0 and {s}_{n}\le \phi ({t}_{n}) for all n. Also assume that if {t}_{n}=0, then {s}_{n}=0. Hence \{{s}_{n}\}\to 0.
Proof (1) It is the same proof of item 2 of Lemma 2.3.
(2) It follows from the fact that {s}_{n}\le \phi ({t}_{n})<{t}_{n} if {t}_{n}>0, and {s}_{n}=0 if {t}_{n}=0. In any case, {s}_{n}\le {t}_{n} for all n. □
Remark 2.4 The difference between items 2 and 3 of Lemma 2.3 and items 1 and 2 of Lemma 2.4 is important. If we assume that \phi \in \mathrm{\Psi} and {t}_{m+1}\le \phi ({t}_{m}) for all m, then it is impossible to deduce that \{{t}_{m}\}\to 0 or \{\phi ({t}_{m})\}\to 0 in item 1 of the previous result. For instance, define \phi (t)=t/2 if t>0, and \phi (0)=1/2. Then \phi \in \mathrm{\Psi} and the sequence \{{t}_{m}\}=\{0,1/2,0,1/2,0,1/2,\dots \} verifies {t}_{m+1}\le \phi ({t}_{m}) for all m but it does not converge.
3 Coincidence point theorems on quasimetric spaces without the mixed monotone property
In this section, we present some coincidence point theorems in the framework of quasimetric spaces under very general conditions which can be extended to the coupled case and can be applied to mappings that have not necessarily the mixed monotone property.
3.1 Basic notions depending on a subset ℳ
Definition 3.1 (See Kutbi et al. [5])
We say that a nonempty subset ℳ of {X}^{2} is:

reflexive if (x,x)\in \mathcal{M} for all x\in X;

antisymmetric if x=y for all x,y\in X such that (x,y),(y,x)\in \mathcal{M};

transitive if (x,z)\in \mathcal{M} for all x,y,z\in X such that (x,y),(y,z)\in \mathcal{M}.
Given two mappings T,g:X\to X, we say that ℳ is:

gtransitive if (gx,gz)\in \mathcal{M} for all x,y,z\in X such that (gx,gy),(gy,gz)\in \mathcal{M};

gclosed if (gx,gy)\in \mathcal{M} for all x,y\in X such that (x,y)\in \mathcal{M};

(T,g) closed if (Tx,Ty)\in \mathcal{M} for all x,y\in X such that (gx,gy)\in \mathcal{M};

(T,g) compatible if Tx=Ty for all x,y\in X such that gx=gy and (gx,gy)\in \mathcal{M}.
Clearly, every transitive subset is also gtransitive. Moreover, ℳ is gclosed if and only if it is (g,{I}_{X})closed, where {I}_{X} denotes the identity mapping on X. The following lemma shows a simple way to consider gtransitive, (T,g)closed sets.
Lemma 3.1 Given a binary relation ≼ on X, let us consider {\mathcal{M}}_{\preccurlyeq}=\{(x,y)\in {X}^{2}:x\preccurlyeq y\}, and let T,g:X\to X be two mappings.

1.
If ≼ is a preorder on X, then {\mathcal{M}}_{\preccurlyeq} is reflexive, transitive and gtransitive.

2.
If ≼ is a partial order on X, then {\mathcal{M}}_{\preccurlyeq} is reflexive, transitive, antisymmetric and gtransitive.

3.
{\mathcal{M}}_{\preccurlyeq} is gclosed if and only if g is ≼nondecreasing.

4.
{\mathcal{M}}_{\preccurlyeq} is (T,g)closed if and only if T is (g,\preccurlyeq )nondecreasing.

5.
If ≼ is a partial order on X and {\mathcal{M}}_{\preccurlyeq} is (T,g)closed, then {\mathcal{M}}_{\preccurlyeq} is (T,g)compatible.
Proof First four properties are obvious. We prove the last one. Since T is (g,\preccurlyeq )nondecreasing,
□
It is convenient to highlight that the notion of gtransitive, (T,g)closed, nonempty subset \mathcal{M}\subseteq {X}^{2} is more general than the idea of nondecreasing mapping on a preordered space (following the previous lemma), as we show in the following example.
Example 3.1 Let X=[0,\mathrm{\infty}) and let us define T,g:X\to X by gx=x+3 and Tx=x+4 for all x\in X. Let ℳ be the subset
Then ℳ does not come from a preorder (or a partial order) on X because it is not reflexive ((0,0)\notin \mathcal{M}), nor transitive ((0,1),(1,2)\in \mathcal{M} but (0,2)\notin \mathcal{M}) nor antisymmetric ((0,1),(0,1)\in \mathcal{M} but 0\ne 1). However, ℳ is gtransitive and (T,g)closed.
In the following definitions, we will use sequences \{{x}_{n}\}\subseteq X such that ({x}_{n},{x}_{m})\in \mathcal{M} for all n,m\in \mathbb{N} with n<m. In this sense, the following notions must be called ‘rightnotions’ because the same concepts could also be introduced involving sequences \{{x}_{n}\}\subseteq X such that ({x}_{n},{x}_{m})\in \mathcal{M} for all n,m\in \mathbb{N} with n>m (in this case, they would be ‘leftnotions’). Then we could talk about (T,g,\mathcal{M}) rightPicard sequences, ℳrightcontinuity, (O,\mathcal{M}) rightcompatibility and rightregularity. However, we advice the reader that, in order not to complicate the notation, we will omit the term ‘right’.
Definition 3.2 Let (X,q) be a quasimetric space, let ℳ be a nonempty subset of {X}^{2}, and let T:X\to X be a mapping. We say that T is ℳcontinuous if \{T{x}_{n}\}\stackrel{q}{\u27f6}Tu for all sequences \{{x}_{n}\}\subseteq X such that \{{x}_{n}\}\stackrel{q}{\u27f6}u\in X and ({x}_{n},{x}_{m})\in \mathcal{M} for all n,m\in \mathbb{N} with n<m.
Remark 3.1 Every continuous mapping from a quasimetric space into itself is also ℳcontinuous, whatever the subset ℳ.
Definition 3.3 Let T,g:X\to X be two mappings, let {\{{x}_{n}\}}_{n\ge 0}\subseteq X be a sequence, and let ℳ be a nonempty subset of {X}^{2}. We say that \{{x}_{n}\} is a:

(T,g) Picard sequence if
g{x}_{n+1}=T{x}_{n}\phantom{\rule{1em}{0ex}}\text{for all}n\ge 0;(3) 
(T,g,\mathcal{M}) Picard sequence if it is a (T,g)Picard sequence and
(g{x}_{n},g{x}_{m})\in \mathcal{M}\phantom{\rule{1em}{0ex}}\text{for all}n,m\in {\mathbb{N}}_{0}\text{such that}nm.(4)
Lemma 3.2 Let T,g:X\to X be two mappings.

1.
If T(X)\subseteq g(X), then there exists a (T,g)Picard sequence based on each {x}_{0}\in X.

2.
If ℳ is a gtransitive, (T,g)closed, nonempty subset of {X}^{2}, then every (T,g)Picard sequence {\{{x}_{n}\}}_{n\ge 0} such that (g{x}_{0},T{x}_{0})\in \mathcal{M} is a (T,g,\mathcal{M})Picard sequence.
Proof (1) Let {x}_{0}\in X be arbitrary. Since T{x}_{0}\in T(X)\subseteq g(X), then there exists {x}_{1}\in X such that g{x}_{1}=T{x}_{0}. Similarly, since T{x}_{1}\in T(X)\subseteq g(X), then there exists {x}_{2}\in X such that g{x}_{2}=T{x}_{1}. Repeating this argument by induction, we may consider a (T,g)Picard sequence \{{x}_{n}\} based on {x}_{0}.
(2) Assume that {\{{x}_{n}\}}_{n\ge 0} is a (T,g)Picard sequence such that (g{x}_{0},T{x}_{0})\in \mathcal{M}. Since (g{x}_{0},g{x}_{1})=(g{x}_{0},T{x}_{0})\in \mathcal{M} and ℳ is (T,g)closed, then (T{x}_{0},T{x}_{1})\in \mathcal{M}, which means that (g{x}_{1},g{x}_{2})\in \mathcal{M}. By induction, it follows that (g{x}_{n},g{x}_{n+1})\in \mathcal{M} for all n\ge 0. And using that ℳ is gtransitive, we deduce that
for all n,m\in \mathbb{N} such that n<m. □
The following definition extends some ideas that can be found in [17–19].
Definition 3.4 Let (X,q) be a quasimetric space, and let ℳ be a nonempty subset of {X}^{2}. Two mappings T,g:X\to X are said to be (O,\mathcal{M}) compatible if
provided that \{{x}_{m}\} is a sequence in X such that (g{x}_{n},g{x}_{m})\in \mathcal{M} for all n<m and
Similarly, T and g are said to be ({O}^{\prime},\mathcal{M}) compatible if
provided that \{{x}_{m}\} is a sequence in X such that (g{x}_{n},g{x}_{m})\in \mathcal{M} for all n<m and
Clearly, if T and g are commuting, then they are both (O,\mathcal{M})compatible or ({O}^{\prime},\mathcal{M})compatible. The following notion also extends the regularity of an ordered metric space.
Definition 3.5 Let (X,q) be a quasimetric space, and let A\subseteq X and \mathcal{M}\subseteq {X}^{2} be two nonempty subsets. We say that (A,q,\mathcal{M}) is regular (or A is (q,\mathcal{M}) regular) if we have that ({x}_{n},u)\in \mathcal{M} for all n provided that \{{x}_{n}\} is a qconvergent sequence on A, u\in A is its qlimit and ({x}_{n},{x}_{m})\in \mathcal{M} for all n<m.
3.2 Coincidence point theorems using (g,\mathcal{M},\mathrm{\Phi})contractions of the first kind
Next, we present the kind of contractions we will use.
Definition 3.6 Let (X,q) be a quasimetric space, let T,g:X\to X be two mappings, and let \mathcal{M}\subseteq {X}^{2} be a nonempty subset of {X}^{2}. We say that T is a (g,\mathcal{M},\mathrm{\Phi}) contraction of the first kind if there exist \phi ,{\phi}^{\prime}\in \mathrm{\Phi} such that
for all x,y\in X such that (gx,gy)\in \mathcal{M}. If \phi ,{\phi}^{\prime}\in \mathrm{\Psi}, we say that T is a (g,\mathcal{M},\mathrm{\Psi}) contraction of the first kind.
Remark 3.2 It is not necessary that functions in Φ and in Ψ verify all their properties in [0,\mathrm{\infty}). In fact, as we shall only use inequalities (5)(6), the properties of functions in Φ and in Ψ must only be verified on the image of the quasimetric q, that is, on q(X\times X)\subseteq [0,\mathrm{\infty}), which does not necessarily coincide with [0,\mathrm{\infty}) (for instance, if X is qbounded).
Remark 3.3 One of the best advantages of using a subset \mathcal{M}\subseteq {X}^{2} is that a unique condition covers two particularly interesting cases:

\mathcal{M}={X}^{2}, in which contractivity conditions (5)(6) hold for all x,y\in X; and

\mathcal{M}={\mathcal{M}}_{\preccurlyeq}, where ≼ is a preorder or a partial order on X, in which (5)(6) must be assumed for all x,y\in X such that gx\preccurlyeq gy.
Both possibilities were independently studied in the past, but this new vision unifies them in an only assumption.
The following one is a first property of this kind of mappings.
Lemma 3.3 Let (X,q) be a quasimetric space, let T,g:X\to X be two mappings, and let \mathcal{M}\subseteq {X}^{2} be a gclosed, nonempty subset of {X}^{2} such that (X,q,\mathcal{M}) is regular. Suppose that, at least, one of the following conditions holds.

1.
T is a (g,\mathcal{M},\mathrm{\Phi})contraction of the first kind.

2.
T is a (g,\mathcal{M},\mathrm{\Psi})contraction of the first kind and ℳ is (T,g)compatible.
Then T is ℳcontinuous at every point in which g is ℳcontinuous.
Proof Let \{{x}_{n}\}\subseteq X be a sequence such that \{{x}_{n}\}\stackrel{q}{\u27f6}z\in X and ({x}_{n},{x}_{m})\in \mathcal{M} for all n,m\in \mathbb{N} with n<m. Taking into account that g is ℳcontinuous at z, then \{g{x}_{n}\}\stackrel{q}{\u27f6}gz. As ℳ is gclosed, then (g{x}_{n},g{x}_{m})\in \mathcal{M} for all n,m\in \mathbb{N} with n<m. Furthermore, as (X,q,\mathcal{M}) is regular, then (g{x}_{n},gz)\in \mathcal{M} for all n\in \mathbb{N}. Applying the contractivity conditions (5)(6), we have that, for all n,
If \phi ,{\phi}^{\prime}\in \mathrm{\Phi}, then item 3 of Lemma 2.3 guarantees that \{q(T{x}_{n},Tz)\}\to 0 and \{q(Tz,T{x}_{n})\}\to 0, so \{T{x}_{n}\} qconverges to Tz. If \phi ,{\phi}^{\prime}\in \mathrm{\Psi} and we additionally assume that ℳ is (T,g)compatible, we can use item 2 of Lemma 2.4 applied to the sequences \{{t}_{n}=q(T{x}_{n},Tz)\} and \{{s}_{n}=q(g{x}_{n},gz)\} in order to deduce that \{q(T{x}_{n},Tz)\}\to 0 (notice that if {s}_{n}=0, then {t}_{n}=0) and similarly \{q(Tz,T{x}_{n})\}\to 0. □
The first main result of this work is the following one.
Theorem 3.1 Let (X,q) be a quasimetric space, let T,g:X\to X be two mappings, and let ℳ be a nonempty subset of {X}^{2}. Suppose that the following conditions are fulfilled.

(A)
There exists a (T,g,\mathcal{M})Picard sequence on X.

(B)
T is a (g,\mathcal{M},\mathrm{\Phi})contraction of the first kind.
Also assume that, at least, one of the following conditions holds.

(a)
X (or g(X) or T(X)) is qcomplete, T and g are ℳcontinuous and the pair (T,g) is ({O}^{\prime},\mathcal{M})compatible;

(b)
X (or g(X) or T(X)) is qcomplete and T and g are ℳcontinuous and commuting;

(c)
(g(X),q) is complete and X (or g(X)) is (q,\mathcal{M})regular;

(d)
(X,q) is complete, g(X) is closed and X (or g(X)) is (q,\mathcal{M})regular;

(e)
(X,q) is complete, g is ℳcontinuous, ℳ is gclosed, the pair (T,g) is (O,\mathcal{M})compatible and X is (q,\mathcal{M})regular.
Then T and g have, at least, a coincidence point.
Notice that, by Lemma 3.2, the previous result also holds if we replace condition (A) by one of the following stronger hypotheses:
({\mathrm{A}}^{\prime}) T(X)\subseteq g(X) and ℳ is gtransitive and (T,g)closed.
({\mathrm{A}}^{\u2033}) ℳ is gtransitive and (T,g)closed, and there exists a (T,g)Picard sequence {\{{x}_{n}\}}_{n\ge 0} such that (g{x}_{0},T{x}_{0})\in \mathcal{M}.
And by Remark 3.1, the ℳcontinuity of the mappings can be replaced by continuity.
Proof Let \{{x}_{n}\} be an arbitrary (T,g,\mathcal{M})Picard sequence on X, and let \phi ,{\phi}^{\prime}\in \mathrm{\Phi} be such that (5)(6) hold. If there exists some {n}_{0}\in \mathbb{N} such that g{x}_{{n}_{0}}=g{x}_{{n}_{0}+1}, then g{x}_{{n}_{0}}=g{x}_{{n}_{0}+1}=T{x}_{{n}_{0}}, so {x}_{{n}_{0}} is a coincidence point of T and g, and the proof is finished. On the contrary, assume that g{x}_{n}\ne g{x}_{n+1} for all n\ge 0. Therefore,
Step 1. We claim that {lim}_{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}q(g{x}_{n},g{x}_{n+1})={lim}_{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}q(g{x}_{n+1},g{x}_{n})=0. Taking into account (4), if we apply the contractivity condition (5) to x=g{x}_{n+1} and y=g{x}_{n+2}, we obtain that
By item 2 of Lemma 2.3, we have that \{q(g{x}_{n},g{x}_{n+1})\}\to 0. Similarly, using x=g{x}_{n+2} and y=g{x}_{n+1} and the contractivity condition (6), we could deduce that \{q(g{x}_{n+1},g{x}_{n})\}\to 0. Therefore, we have proved that
Step 2. We claim that \{g{x}_{n}\} is rightCauchy in (X,q), that is, for all \epsilon >0, there is {n}_{0}\in N such that q(g{x}_{n},g{x}_{m})\le \epsilon for all m>n\ge {n}_{0} . We reason by contradiction. If \{g{x}_{n}\} is not rightCauchy, there exist {\epsilon}_{0}>0 and two subsequences {\{g{x}_{n(k)}\}}_{k\in {\mathbb{N}}_{0}} and {\{g{x}_{m(k)}\}}_{k\in {\mathbb{N}}_{0}} verifying that
Taking m(k) as the smallest integer, greater than n(k), verifying this property, we can suppose that
Therefore {\epsilon}_{0}<q(g{x}_{n(k)},g{x}_{m(k)})\le q(g{x}_{n(k)},g{x}_{m(k)1})+q(g{x}_{m(k)1},g{x}_{m(k)})\le {\epsilon}_{0}+q(g{x}_{m(k)1},g{x}_{m(k)}), and taking limit as k\to \mathrm{\infty}, it follows from (8) that
Notice that, for all k,
and
Joining both inequalities we deduce that, for all k,
Letting k\to \mathrm{\infty}, it follows from (8) that
Next, let us apply the contractivity condition (5) to x=g{x}_{n(k)} and y=g{x}_{m(k)}, taking into account that, by (7), (g{x}_{n(k)},g{x}_{m(k)})\in \mathcal{M}. We get that, for all k\ge 0,
Since q(g{x}_{n(k)},g{x}_{m(k)})>{\epsilon}_{0} for all n, \{q(g{x}_{n(k)},g{x}_{m(k)})\}\to {\epsilon}_{0} and \phi \in \mathrm{\Phi}, then
Letting k\to \mathrm{\infty} in (11) and taking into account (10) and (12), it follows that
which is a contradiction. This contradiction ensures us that \{g{x}_{n}\} is rightCauchy in (X,q), and Step 2 holds.
Similarly, using the contractivity condition (6), it can be proved that \{g{x}_{n}\} is leftCauchy in (X,q), so we conclude that \{g{x}_{n}\} is a Cauchy sequence in (X,q). Now, we prove that T and g have a coincidence point distinguishing between cases (a)(e).
Case (a): X (or g(X) or T(X)) is qcomplete, T and g are ℳcontinuous and the pair (T,g) is ({O}^{\prime},\mathcal{M}) compatible. As (X,q) is complete, there exists u\in X such that \{g{x}_{n}\}\to u (notice that as \{g{x}_{n+1}\}=\{T{x}_{n}\}\subset g(X)\cap T(X), then this property also occurs if g(X) or T(X) is qcomplete). As T and g are ℳcontinuous, it follows from (4) that \{Tg{x}_{n}\}\to Tu and \{gg{x}_{n}\}\to gu. Taking into account that the pair (T,g) is ({O}^{\prime},\mathcal{M})compatible, we deduce that
In such a case, using item 2 of Remark 2.3, we conclude that
(the other case is similar). Hence, u is a coincidence point of T and g.
Case (b): X (or g(X) or T(X)) is qcomplete and T and g are ℳcontinuous and commuting. It is obvious because (b) implies (a).
Case (c): (g(X),q) is complete and X (or g(X)) is (q,\mathcal{M}) regular. As \{g{x}_{m}\} is a Cauchy sequence in the complete space (g(X),q), there is u\in g(X) such that \{g{x}_{m}\}\to u. Let v\in X be any point such that u=gv. In this case, \{g{x}_{m}\}\to gv. We are also going to show that \{g{x}_{m}\}\to Tv, so we will conclude that gv=Tv (and v is a coincidence point of T and g).
Indeed, as \{g{x}_{n}\} is a convergent sequence in g(X) such that (g{x}_{n},g{x}_{m})\in \mathcal{M} for all n<m, and X (or g(X)) is (q,M)regular, then (g{x}_{n},gv)\in \mathcal{M} for all n, where gv=u\in g(X) is the limit of \{g{x}_{n}\}. Applying the contractivity conditions (5)(6),
By item 3 of Lemma 2.3, \{g{x}_{n}\} qconverges to Tv.
Case (d): (X,q) is complete, g(X) is closed and X (or g(X)) is (q,\mathcal{M}) regular. It follows from the fact that a closed subset of a complete quasimetric space is also complete. Then (g(X),q) is complete and case (c) is applicable.
Case (e): (X,q) is complete, g is ℳcontinuous, ℳ is gclosed, the pair (T,g) is (O,\mathcal{M}) compatible and X is (q,\mathcal{M}) regular. As (X,q) is complete, there exists u\in X such that \{g{x}_{m}\}\to u. As T{x}_{m}=g{x}_{m+1} for all m, we also have that \{T{x}_{m}\}\to u. As g is ℳcontinuous and (g{x}_{n},g{x}_{m})\in \mathcal{M} for all n<m, then \{gg{x}_{m}\}\to gu. Furthermore, as the pair (T,g) is (O,\mathcal{M})compatible, then
By item 3 of Remark 2.3, as \{gg{x}_{m}\}\to gu, the previous properties imply that \{Tg{x}_{m}\}\to gu. We are going to show that \{Tg{x}_{m}\}\to Tu and this finishes the proof.
Indeed, since X is (q,\mathcal{M})regular, \{g{x}_{m}\}\to u and (g{x}_{n},g{x}_{m})\in \mathcal{M} for all n<m, then (g{x}_{n},u)\in \mathcal{M} for all n. Moreover, taking into account that ℳ is gclosed, then (gg{x}_{n},gu)\in \mathcal{M} for all n. Applying the contractivity conditions (5)(6),
As \{gg{x}_{n}\}\to gu, then \{Tg{x}_{n}\}\to Tu. □
Example 3.2 To illustrate the applicability of Theorem 3.1, we show the following example in which mappings are nonlinear. Let X=\mathbb{R} and let
Clearly, ℳ does not come from any partial order on X as in Lemma 3.1 because it is not antisymmetric: (9,16),(16,9)\in \mathcal{M} but 9\ne 16. Let us consider on X the function q:X\times X\to [0,\mathrm{\infty}) given, for all x,y\in X, by
Then q is a complete quasimetric on ℝ. In fact, it has the same convergent sequences to the same limits as the Euclidean metric d(x,y)=xy for all x,y\in \mathbb{R} because
However, q is not a metric because q(1,2)\ne q(2,1).
Now, given a real number \lambda \in (0.5,1), let us consider the mappings T,g:\mathbb{R}\to \mathbb{R} defined, for all x\in \mathbb{R}, by
Also consider the function {\phi}_{\lambda}:[0,\mathrm{\infty})\to [0,\mathrm{\infty}) defined by {\phi}_{\lambda}(t)=\lambda t for all t\in [0,\mathrm{\infty}). Clearly, {\phi}_{\lambda}\in \mathrm{\Phi}\cap \mathrm{\Psi}. We are going to show that Theorem 3.1 is applicable to the previous setting, because the previous properties hold.

1.
The sequence \{{x}_{n}\}, given by {x}_{n}={\lambda}^{n} for all n\in {\mathbb{N}}_{0}, is a (T,g,\mathcal{M})Picard sequence.

2.
The function g:\mathbb{R}\to \mathbb{R} is bijective and nondecreasing.

3.
The range of g, which is g(X)=\mathbb{R}, is closed and complete in (\mathbb{R},q).

4.
We claim that T is a (g,\mathcal{M},\mathrm{\Phi})contraction of the first kind. To prove it, let x,y\in X be such that (gx,gy)\in \mathcal{M}. If Tx=Ty, then (5)(6) are obvious. Next, assume that Tx\ne Ty. In particular, x\ne y. Hence, gx\ne gy because g is bijective. Therefore, the condition (gx,gy)\in \mathcal{M} leads to two cases.

If 0\le gy<gx\le 1, then 0\le y<x\le 1. Therefore
\begin{array}{r}q(Tx,Ty)=q(\lambda x,\lambda y)=2\lambda (yx)={\phi}_{\lambda}(2(yx))={\phi}_{\lambda}(q(x,y));\\ q(Ty,Tx)=q(\lambda x,\lambda y)=\lambda (yx)={\phi}_{\lambda}(yx)={\phi}_{\lambda}(q(y,x)).\end{array} 
If \{gx,gy\}=\{9,16\}, then \{x,y\}=\{3,4\}. In such a case,
\begin{array}{r}q(T3,T4)=q(3,4)=1<7\lambda =\lambda q(9,16)={\phi}_{\lambda}(q(g3,g4));\\ q(T4,T3)=q(4,3)=2<14\lambda =\lambda q(16,9)={\phi}_{\lambda}(q(g4,g3)).\end{array}

5.
Let \{{x}_{n}\}\subset \mathbb{R} be a sequence such that ({x}_{n},{x}_{n+1})\in \mathcal{M} for all n\in {\mathbb{N}}_{0}. Then one, and only one, of the following cases holds.
(5.a) There exists {n}_{0}\in \mathbb{N} such that {x}_{{n}_{0}}\in [0,1]. In this case, {x}_{n}\in [0,1] and {x}_{n+1}\le {x}_{n} for all n\in {\mathbb{N}}_{0}.
To prove it, notice that ({x}_{{n}_{0}},{x}_{{n}_{0}+1})\in \mathcal{M} is only possible when {x}_{{n}_{0}}={x}_{{n}_{0}+1} or 0\le {x}_{{n}_{0}+1}<{x}_{{n}_{0}}\le 1. In any case, {x}_{{n}_{0}+1}\in [0,1]. Repeating this argument, {x}_{n}\in [0,1] for all n\ge {n}_{0}. But if {n}_{0}1\in \mathbb{N}, the condition ({x}_{{n}_{0}1},{x}_{{n}_{0}})\in \mathcal{M} also leads to {x}_{{n}_{0}1}\in [0,1]. And we can again repeat the argument.
(5.b) There exists {n}_{0}\in \mathbb{N} such that {x}_{{n}_{0}}\in \{9,16\}. In this case, {x}_{n}\in \{9,16\} for all n\in {\mathbb{N}}_{0}.
(5.c) There exists z\in \mathbb{R}\mathrm{\u2572}([0,1]\cup \{9,16\}) such that {x}_{n}=z for all \in {\mathbb{N}}_{0}. In this case, \{{x}_{n}\} is a constant sequence.

6.
The range g(X)=\mathbb{R} is (q,\mathcal{M})regular. To prove it, let u\in \mathbb{R} and let \{{x}_{n}\}\subset \mathbb{R} be a sequence such that\{{x}_{n}\}\stackrel{q}{\to}u and ({x}_{n},{x}_{n+1})\in \mathcal{M} for all n\in {\mathbb{N}}_{0}. In particular, \{{x}_{n}\}\to u using the Euclidean metric. We can distinguish the previous three cases.
(6.a) Suppose that {x}_{n}\in [0,1] and {x}_{n+1}\le {x}_{n} for all n\in {\mathbb{N}}_{0}. Therefore, u\in [0,1] and u\le {x}_{n+1}\le {x}_{n} for all n\in {\mathbb{N}}_{0}, so ({x}_{n},u)\in \mathcal{M} for all n\in {\mathbb{N}}_{0}.
(6.b) Suppose that {x}_{n}\in \{9,16\} for all n\in {\mathbb{N}}_{0}. Then u\in \{9,16\} and, therefore, ({x}_{n},u)\in \mathcal{M} for all n\in {\mathbb{N}}_{0}.
(6.c) Suppose that {x}_{n}=z\in \mathbb{R}\mathrm{\u2572}([0,1]\cup \{9,16\}) for all n\in {\mathbb{N}}_{0}. Therefore u=z and ({x}_{n},u)\in \mathcal{M} for all n\in {\mathbb{N}}_{0}.
The previous properties show that case (c) of Theorem 3.1 is applicable, so T and g have, at least, a coincidence point, which is x=0.
Notice that T and g do not satisfy the condition
because if x=2 and y=1, then
We extend the previous theorem to the case in which \phi \in \mathrm{\Psi}.
Theorem 3.2 If we additionally assume that ℳ is (T,g)compatible, then Theorem 3.1 also holds even if T is a (g,\mathcal{M},\mathrm{\Psi})contraction of the first kind.
Proof We can follow, point by point, the proof of the previous result and obtain inequalities (13)(14). In this case, we cannot use Lemma 2.3, but we may use the fact that ℳ is (T,g)compatible. Therefore, we know that, as (g{x}_{n},gv)\in \mathcal{M} for all n, then
By item 2 of Lemma 2.4 we conclude that \{q(g{x}_{n+1},Tv)\}\to 0. In the same way, \{q(Tv,g{x}_{n+1})\}\to 0, so \{g{x}_{n}\} qconverges to Tv.
The same argument is valid when applied to inequalities (15)(16). □
3.3 Coincidence point theorems using (g,\mathcal{M},\mathrm{\Phi})contractions of the second kind
Many results on fixed point theory in the setting of Gmetrics can be similarly proved using the quasimetrics {q}_{G} and {q}_{G}^{\prime} associated to G as in Lemma 2.2 (see, for instance, Agarwal et al. [9]). These families of quasimetrics verify additional properties that are not true for an arbitrary quasimetric. Using these properties, it is possible to relax some conditions on the kind of considered contractions, obtaining similar results. This is the case of the following kind of mappings.
Definition 3.7 Let (X,q) be a quasimetric space, let T,g:X\to X be two mappings, and let \mathcal{M}\subseteq {X}^{2} be a nonempty subset of {X}^{2}. We say that T is a (g,\mathcal{M},\mathrm{\Phi}) contraction of the second kind if there exists \phi \in \mathrm{\Phi} such that
for all x,y\in X such that (gx,gy)\in \mathcal{M}. If \phi \in \mathrm{\Psi}, we say that T is a (g,\mathcal{M},\mathrm{\Psi}) contraction of the second kind.
Notice that condition (17) is not symmetric on x and y because (gx,gy)\in \mathcal{M} does not imply (gy,gx)\in \mathcal{M}. In order to compensate this absence of symmetry, we will suppose an additional condition on the ambient space.
Definition 3.8 We say that a quasimetric space (X,q) is:

rightCauchy if every rightCauchy sequence in (X,q) is, in fact, a Cauchy sequence in (X,q);

leftCauchy if every leftCauchy sequence in (X,q) is, in fact, a Cauchy sequence in (X,q);

rightconvergent if every rightconvergent sequence in (X,q) is, in fact, a convergent sequence in (X,q);

leftconvergent if every leftconvergent sequence in (X,q) is, in fact, a convergent sequence in (X,q).
It is convenient not to confuse the previous notions with the concept of left/right complete quasimetric space given in Definition 2.8. Lemma 2.2 guarantees that there exists a wide family of quasimetrics that verify all the previous properties.
Corollary 3.1 Every quasimetric {q}_{G} and {q}_{G}^{\prime} associated to a Gmetric G on X is right and leftCauchy and right and leftconvergent.
Next we prove a similar result to Theorem 3.1. In this case, the contractivity condition is weaker but we suppose additional conditions on the ambient space.
Theorem 3.3 Let (X,q) be a rightCauchy quasimetric space, let T,g:X\to X be two mappings, and let ℳ be a nonempty subset of {X}^{2}. Suppose that the following conditions are fulfilled.

(A)
There exists a (T,g,\mathcal{M})Picard sequence on X.

(B)
T is a (g,\mathcal{M},\mathrm{\Phi})contraction of the second kind.
Also assume that, at least, one of the following conditions holds.

(a)
X (or g(X) or T(X)) is qcomplete, T and g are ℳcontinuous and the pair (T,g) is ({O}^{\prime},\mathcal{M})compatible;

(b)
X (or g(X) or T(X)) is qcomplete and T and g are ℳcontinuous and commuting;

(c)
(g(X),q) is complete and rightconvergent, and X (or g(X)) is (q,\mathcal{M})regular;

(d)
(X,q) is complete and rightconvergent, g(X) is closed and X (or g(X)) is (q,\mathcal{M})regular;

(e)
(X,q) is complete and rightconvergent, g is ℳcontinuous, ℳ is gclosed, the pair (T,g) is (O,\mathcal{M})compatible and X is (q,\mathcal{M})regular.
Then T and g have, at least, a coincidence point.
Notice that, by Lemma 3.2, the previous result also holds if we replace condition (A) by one of the following stronger hypotheses:
({\mathrm{A}}^{\prime}) T(X)\subseteq g(X) and ℳ is gtransitive and (T,g)closed.
({\mathrm{A}}^{\u2033}) ℳ is gtransitive and (T,g)closed, and there exists a (T,g)Picard sequence {\{{x}_{n}\}}_{n\ge 0} such that (g{x}_{0},T{x}_{0})\in \mathcal{M}.
And by Remark 3.1, the ℳcontinuity of the mappings can be replaced by continuity.
Proof We can follow, step by step, the lines of the proof of Theorem 3.1 to deduce, in the case g{x}_{n}\ne g{x}_{n+1} for all n\ge 0, that \{g{x}_{n}\} is rightCauchy in (X,q). Using that (X,q) is rightCauchy, then it is a Cauchy sequence in (X,q). Now, we prove that T and g have a coincidence point distinguishing between cases (a)(e). Cases (a) and (b) have the same proof as in Theorem 3.1.
Case (c): (g(X),q) is complete and rightconvergent, and X (or g(X)) is (q,\mathcal{M}) regular. As \{g{x}_{m}\} is a Cauchy sequence in the complete space (g(X),q), there is u\in g(X) such that \{g{x}_{m}\}\to u. Let v\in X be any point such that u=gv. In this case, \{g{x}_{m}\}\to gv. We are also going to show that \{g{x}_{m}\}\to Tv, so we will conclude that gv=Tv (and v is a coincidence point of T and g).
Indeed, as \{g{x}_{n}\} is a convergent sequence in g(X) such that (g{x}_{n},g{x}_{m})\in \mathcal{M} for all n<m, and X (or g(X)) is (q,M)regular, then (g{x}_{n},gv)\in \mathcal{M} for all n, where gv=u\in g(X) is the limit of \{g{x}_{n}\}. Applying the contractivity condition (17),
By item 3 of Lemma 2.3, we have that \{q(g{x}_{n+1},Tv)\}\to 0, which means that \{g{x}_{n}\} rightconverges to Tv. Since (X,q) is rightconvergent, then \{g{x}_{n}\} is a convergent sequence in (X,q), and by item 4 of Remark 2.3, it converges to Tv.
Case (d): (X,q) is complete and rightconvergent, g(X) is closed and X (or g(X)) is (q,\mathcal{M}) regular. It follows from the fact that a closed subset of a complete quasimetric space is also complete. Then (g(X),q) is complete and case (c) is applicable.
Case (e): (X,q) is complete and rightconvergent, g is ℳcontinuous, ℳ is gclosed, the pair (T,g) is (O,\mathcal{M}) compatible and X is (q,\mathcal{M}) regular. It follows step by step as in case (e) of the proof of Theorem 3.1 but, replacing (15)(16) by the only inequality
In this case, by item 3 of Lemma 2.3, we have that \{q(Tg{x}_{n},Tu)\}\to 0, which means that \{Tg{x}_{n}\} rightconverges to Tu. Since (X,q) is rightconvergent, then \{Tg{x}_{n}\} is a convergent sequence in (X,q), and by item 4 of Remark 2.3, it converges to Tu. □
Example 3.3 Theorem 3.3 can also be applied to mappings given in Example 3.2 because (\mathbb{R},q) is rightconvergent.
Repeating the arguments of Theorem 3.2, we extend the previous theorem to the case in which \phi \in \mathrm{\Psi}.
Theorem 3.4 If we additionally assume that ℳ is (T,g)compatible, then Theorem 3.3 also holds even if T is a (g,\mathcal{M},\mathrm{\Psi})contraction of the second kind.
3.4 Consequences
The previous theorems admit a lot of different particular cases employing continuity, the condition T(X)\subseteq g(X) and the case in which g is the identity mapping on X. We highlight the following one in which a partial order is involved. Preliminaries of the following result can be found in [20].
Corollary 3.2 (AlMezel et al. [20], Theorem 34)
Let (X,d,\preccurlyeq ) be an ordered metric space, and let T,g:X\to X be two mappings such that the following properties are fulfilled.

(i)
T(X)\subseteq g(X);

(ii)
T is monotone (g,\preccurlyeq )nondecreasing;

(iii)
there exists {x}_{0}\in X such that g{x}_{0}\preccurlyeq T{x}_{0};

(iv)
there exists \phi \in \mathrm{\Psi} verifying
d(Tx,Ty)\le \phi (d(gx,gy))\phantom{\rule{1em}{0ex}}\mathit{\text{for all}}x,y\in X\mathit{\text{such that}}gx\preccurlyeq gy.
Also assume that, at least, one of the following conditions holds.

(a)
(X,d) is complete, T and g are continuous and the pair (T,g) is Ocompatible;

(b)
(X,d) is complete and T and g are continuous and commuting;

(c)
(g(X),d) is complete and (X,d,\preccurlyeq ) is nondecreasingregular;

(d)
(X,d) is complete, g(X) is closed and (X,d,\preccurlyeq ) is nondecreasingregular;

(e)
(X,d) is complete, g is continuous and monotone ≼nondecreasing, the pair (T,g) is Ocompatible and (X,d,\preccurlyeq ) is nondecreasingregular.
Then T and g have, at least, a coincidence point.
Proof It is only necessary to apply Theorem 3.2 to the subset {\mathcal{M}}_{\preccurlyeq}=\{(x,y)\in {X}^{2}:x\preccurlyeq y\}, taking into account the properties given in Lemma 3.1. Notice that in case (e), we use Lemma 3.3 to avoid assuming that T is continuous. □
The following result improves the last one because we do not assume that T is ℳcontinuous in hypothesis (b).
Corollary 3.3 Let (X,q) be a complete quasimetric space, let T,g:X\to X be two mappings such that T(X)\subseteq g(X), and let ℳ be a gtransitive, (T,g)closed, nonempty subset of {X}^{2}. Suppose that T is a (g,\mathcal{M},\mathrm{\Phi})contraction (respectively, T is a (g,\mathcal{M},\mathrm{\Psi})contraction and ℳ is (T,g)compatible), g is ℳcontinuous, T and g are commuting and there exists {x}_{0}\in X such that (g{x}_{0},T{x}_{0})\in \mathcal{M}. Also assume that, at least, one of the following conditions holds.

(a)
T is ℳcontinuous, or

(b)
ℳ is gclosed and (X,q,\mathcal{M}) is regular.
Then T and g have, at least, a coincidence point.
Proof We show that case (b) in Theorem 3.1 is applicable. By item 1 of Lemma 3.2, X contains a (T,g)Picard sequence \{{x}_{n}\} based on {x}_{0}\in X, and by item 2 of the same lemma, \{{x}_{n}\} is a (T,g,\mathcal{M})Picard sequence.
If T is ℳcontinuous, item (b) of Theorem 3.1 (and also Theorem 3.2 in the case of a (g,\mathcal{M},\mathrm{\Psi})contraction) can be used to ensure that T and g have, at least, a coincidence point. In other case, if ℳ is gclosed and (X,q,\mathcal{M}) is regular, then Lemma 3.3 guarantees that T is ℳcontinuous. □
Another interesting particularization is the following one.
Corollary 3.4 (Karapınar et al. [7], Theorem 33)
Let (X,d) be a complete metric space, let T,g:X\to X be two mappings such that TX\subseteq gX, and let M\subseteq {X}^{2} be a (T,g)compatible, (T,g)closed, transitive subset. Assume that there exists \phi \in \mathrm{\Phi} such that
Also assume that, at least, one of the following conditions holds.

(a)
T and g are Mcontinuous and (O,M)compatible;

(b)
T and g are continuous and commuting;

(c)
(X,d,M) is regular and gX is closed.
If there exists a point {x}_{0}\in X such that (g{x}_{0},T{x}_{0})\in M, then T and g have, at least, a coincidence point.
As a consequence, in the following result, a partial order is not necessary.
Corollary 3.5 (Karapınar et al. [7], Corollary 35)
Let (X,d) be a complete metric space, and let ≼ be a transitive relation on X. Let T,g:X\to X be two mappings such that TX\subseteq gX and T is (g,\preccurlyeq )nondecreasing. Suppose that there exists \phi \in \mathrm{\Phi} such that
Also suppose that
Assume that either

(a)
T and g are continuous and commuting, or

(b)
(X,d,\preccurlyeq ) is regular and gX is closed.
If there exists a point {x}_{0}\in X such that g{x}_{0}\preccurlyeq T{x}_{0}, then T and g have, at least, a coincidence point.
4 Applications to Gmetric spaces
One of the most interesting, recent lines of research in the field of fixed point theory is devoted to Gmetric spaces. Taking into account Lemma 2.2, we can take advantage of our main results to present some new theorems in this area. The following result is an easy application to Gmetric spaces.
Corollary 4.1 Let (X,G) be a complete Gmetric space, let T,g:X\to X be two mappings such that T(X)\subseteq g(X), and let \mathcal{M}\subseteq {X}^{2} be a gtransitive, (T,g)closed, nonempty subset of {X}^{2}. Assume that T and g are continuous and commuting, and there exists \phi \in \mathrm{\Phi} such that
for all x,y\in X such that (gx,gy)\in \mathcal{M}. If there exists {x}_{0}\in X such that (g{x}_{0},T{x}_{0})\in \mathcal{M}, then T and g have, at least, a coincidence point.
Notice that this result is also valid if \phi \in \mathrm{\Psi} and ℳ is (T,g)compatible.
Proof It follows from Theorem 3.3 and Corollary 3.1 using the quasimetric {q}_{G}^{\prime} associated to G (as in Lemma 2.2). Notice that there exists a (T,g,\mathcal{M})Picard sequence on X by items 1 and 2 of Lemma 3.2. □
In order not to lose the power and usability of Theorems 3.3 and 3.4, we present the following properties comparing {q}_{G} and {q}_{G}^{\prime}.
Definition 4.1 Let (X,G) be a Gmetric space, and let A\subseteq X and \mathcal{M}\subseteq {X}^{2} be two nonempty subsets. We say that (A,G,\mathcal{M}) is regular (or A is (G,\mathcal{M}) regular) if we have that ({x}_{n},u)\in \mathcal{M} for all n provided that \{{x}_{n}\} is a Gconvergent sequence on A, u\in A is its Glimit and ({x}_{n},{x}_{m})\in \mathcal{M} for all n<m.
Lemma 4.1 Given a Gmetric space (X,G) and nonempty subsets \mathcal{M}\subseteq {X}^{2} and A\subseteq X, the following conditions are equivalent:

1.
the subset A is (G,\mathcal{M})regular;

2.
the subset A is ({q}_{G},\mathcal{M})regular;

3.
the subset A is ({q}_{G}^{\prime},\mathcal{M})regular.
Proof It follows from the fact that (X,G), (X,{q}_{G}) and (X,{q}_{G}^{\prime}) have the same convergent sequences, and they converge to the same limits. □
Similarly, the following result can be proved.
Lemma 4.2 Given a Gmetric space (X,G), a nonempty subset \mathcal{M}\subseteq {X}^{2} and two mappings T,g:X\to X, we have that the pair (T,g) is (O,\mathcal{M})compatible (respectively, ({O}^{\prime},\mathcal{M})compatible) in (X,{q}_{G}) if and only if it is (O,\mathcal{M})compatible (respectively, ({O}^{\prime},\mathcal{M})compatible) in (X,{q}_{G}^{\prime}).
Proof It follows from the fact that (X,{q}_{G}) and (X,{q}_{G}^{\prime}) have the same convergent sequences, and they converge to the same limits. Furthermore, taking into account that {q}_{G}\le 2{q}_{G}^{\prime}\le 4{q}_{G}, then \{{q}_{G}({x}_{n},{y}_{n})\}\to 0 if and only if \{{q}_{G}^{\prime}({x}_{n},{y}_{n})\}\to 0. □
Definition 4.2 Let (X,G) be a Gmetric space, and let ℳ be a nonempty subset of {X}^{2}. Two mappings T,g:X\to X are said to be (O,\mathcal{M}) compatible if the pair (T,g) is (O,\mathcal{M})compatible in (X,{q}_{G}) (or, equivalently, in (X,{q}_{G}^{\prime})).
Similarly, the notion of ({O}^{\prime},\mathcal{M})compatibility in a G metric space (X,G) can be defined. We present the following result, which is a complete version of our main results in the context of Gmetric spaces.
Corollary 4.2 Let (X,G) be a Gmetric space, let T,g:X\to X be two mappings, and let ℳ be a nonempty subset of {X}^{2}. Suppose that, at least, one of the following conditions holds.

(A)
There exists a (T,g,\mathcal{M})Picard sequence on X.
({\mathrm{A}}^{\prime}) T(X)\subseteq g(X) and ℳ is gtransitive and (T,g)closed.
({\mathrm{A}}^{\u2033}) ℳ is gtransitive and (T,g)closed, and there exists a (T,g)Picard sequence {\{{x}_{n}\}}_{n\ge 0} such that (g{x}_{0},T{x}_{0})\in \mathcal{M}.
Also assume that, at least, one of the following two conditions holds.
(B) There exists \phi \in \mathrm{\Phi} such that
for all x,y\in X for which (gx,gy)\in \mathcal{M}.
(B′) The subset ℳ is (T,g)compatible and there exists \phi \in \mathrm{\Psi} such that
for all x,y\in X for which (gx,gy)\in \mathcal{M}.
Additionally, assume that, at least, one of the following eight conditions holds.

(a)
X (or g(X) or T(X)) is Gcomplete, T and g are ℳcontinuous and the pair (T,g) is ({O}^{\prime},\mathcal{M})compatible;
(a′) X (or g(X) or T(X)) is Gcomplete, T and g are continuous and the pair (T,g) is ({O}^{\prime},\mathcal{M})compatible;

(b)
X (or g(X) or T(X)) is Gcomplete and T and g are ℳcontinuous and commuting;
(b′) X (or g(X) or T(X)) is Gcomplete and T and g are continuous and commuting;

(c)
(g(X),G) is complete and X (or g(X)) is (G,\mathcal{M})regular;

(d)
(X,G) is complete, g(X) is closed and X (or g(X)) is (G,\mathcal{M})regular;

(e)
(X,G) is complete, g is ℳcontinuous, ℳ is gclosed, the pair (T,g) is (O,\mathcal{M})compatible and X is (G,\mathcal{M})regular.
(e′) (X,G) is complete, g is continuous, ℳ is gclosed, the pair (T,g) is (O,\mathcal{M})compatible and X is (G,\mathcal{M})regular.
Then T and g have, at least, a coincidence point.
Proof It follows from Theorems 3.3 and 3.4 taking into account Corollary 3.1, Lemmas 2.2, 4.2 and Definition 4.2. Notice that (A′) ⇒ ({\mathrm{A}}^{\u2033}) ⇒ (A), (a′) ⇒ (a), (b′) ⇒ (b) and (e′) ⇒ (e). □
We particularize the previous result to the case in which \mathcal{M}={\mathcal{M}}_{\preccurlyeq}, associated to a preorder or a partial order ≼ on X. In such a case, Lemma 3.1 is applicable. We leave to the reader to interpret ≼nondecreasingcontinuity as {\mathcal{M}}_{\preccurlyeq}continuity, Gregularity as (G,{\mathcal{M}}_{\preccurlyeq})compatibility, Ocompatibility as (O,{\mathcal{M}}_{\preccurlyeq})compatibility, and {O}^{\prime}compatibility as ({O}^{\prime},{\mathcal{M}}_{\preccurlyeq})compatibility.
Corollary 4.3 Let (X,G) be a Gmetric space provided with a preorder ≼, and let T,g:X\to X be two mappings such that T(X)\subseteq g(X) and T is (g,\preccurlyeq )nondecreasing. Assume that, at least, one of the following two conditions holds.
(B) There exists \phi \in \mathrm{\Phi} such that
for all x,y\in X for which gx\preccurlyeq gy.
(B′) ≼ is a partial order on X and there exists \phi \in \mathrm{\Psi} such that
for all x,y\in X for which gx\preccurlyeq gy.
Additionally, assume that, at least, one of the following eight conditions holds.

(a)
X (or g(X) or T(X)) is Gcomplete, T and g are ≼nondecreasingcontinuous and the pair (T,g) is {O}^{\prime}compatible;
(a′) X (or g(X) or T(X)) is Gcomplete, T and g are continuous and the pair (T,g) is {O}^{\prime}compatible;

(b)
X (or g(X) or T(X)) is Gcomplete and T and g are ≼–nondecreasingcontinuous and commuting;
(b′) X (or g(X) or T(X)) is Gcomplete and T and g are continuous and commuting;

(c)
(g(X),G) is complete and X (or g(X)) is Gregular;

(d)
(X,G) is complete, g(X) is closed and X (or g(X)) is Gregular;

(e)
(X,G) is complete, g is ≼nondecreasing and ≼nondecreasingcontinuous, the pair (T,g) is Ocompatible and X is Gregular.
(e′) (X,G) is complete, g is ≼nondecreasing and continuous, the pair (T,g) is Ocompatible and X is Gregular.
If there exists {x}_{0}\in X verifying g{x}_{0}\preccurlyeq T{x}_{0}, then T and g have, at least, a coincidence point.
We also leave to the reader the task of particularizing the previous results to the case in which g is the identity mapping on X, obtaining fixed points of T.
5 Coupled coincidence point theorems
In this section, we deduce that Theorem 1.1 follows from Theorem 3.3. However, the main aim of this subsection is to describe how Theorems 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 can be employed in order to obtain some coupled coincidence point theorems, because these techniques can be extrapolated to many contexts.
We introduce the following notation. Given two mappings F:{X}^{2}\to X and g:X\to X, we define {T}_{F},\mathcal{G}:{X}^{2}\to {X}^{2}, for all (x,y)\in {X}^{2}, by
Lemma 5.1 Let F:{X}^{2}\to X and g:X\to X be two mappings.

1.
If F({X}^{2})\subseteq g(X), then {T}_{F}({X}^{2})\subseteq \mathcal{G}({X}^{2}).

2.
If F and g are commuting, then {T}_{F} and are also commuting.

3.
A point (x,y)\in {X}^{2} is a coincidence point of {T}_{F} and if and only if it is a coincidence point of F and g.
Proof (2) It follows from
for all (x,y)\in {X}^{2}. □
5.1 Charoensawan and Thangthong’s coupled coincidence point result in Gmetric spaces
One of the key objectives of this subsection is to prove that, in Theorem 1.1, the middle variables of M are not necessary. Indeed, given a nonempty subset M\subseteq {X}^{6}, let us define
Notice that {M}^{\prime} is a subset of {X}^{4}={X}^{2}\times {X}^{2}.
Lemma 5.2 Let F:{X}^{2}\to X and g:X\to X be two mappings, and let M\subseteq {X}^{6}.

1.
If there exist {x}_{0},{y}_{0}\in X such that
(F({x}_{0},{y}_{0}),F({y}_{0},{x}_{0}),F({x}_{0},{y}_{0}),F({y}_{0},{x}_{0}),g{x}_{0},g{y}_{0})\in M,
then (\mathcal{G}({x}_{0},{y}_{0}),{T}_{F}({x}_{0},{y}_{0}))\in {M}^{\prime}. In particular, {M}^{\prime} is nonempty.

2.
If M is transitive, then {M}^{\prime} is transitive and transitive.

3.
If M verifies the second property of Definition 1.1, then {M}^{\prime} is a ({T}_{F},\mathcal{G})closed set.

4.
If M is an ({F}^{\ast},g)invariant set, then {M}^{\prime} is a ({T}_{F},\mathcal{G})closed set.
We point out that we will only use the second property of the notion of ({F}^{\ast},g)invariant set (Definition 1.1). This shows that (T,g)closed sets are more general than an ({F}^{\ast},g)invariant set because the first property will not be employed (this was also established in Kutbi et al. [5]).
Proof (1) By definition, (F({x}_{0},{y}_{0}),F({y}_{0},{x}_{0}),F({x}_{0},{y}_{0}),F({y}_{0},{x}_{0}),g{x}_{0},g{y}_{0})\in M implies that (g{x}_{0},g{y}_{0},F({x}_{0},{y}_{0}),F({y}_{0},{x}_{0}))\in {M}^{\prime}, which means that (\mathcal{G}({x}_{0},{y}_{0}),{T}_{F}({x}_{0},{y}_{0}))\in {M}^{\prime}.
(2) Assume that M is transitive, and let x,u,y,v,z,w\in X be such that (x,u,y,v),(y,v,z,w)\in {M}^{\prime}. Therefore
As M is transitive, then (z,w,z,w,x,u)\in M, so (x,u,z,w)\in {M}^{\prime}. Therefore, {M}^{\prime} is transitive, and it is also transitive because every transitive subset is also transitive, whatever .

(3)
Assume that M is an ({F}^{\ast},g)invariant set, and let x,u,y,v\in X be such that (\mathcal{G}(x,u),\mathcal{G}(y,v))\in {M}^{\prime}. By definition, since (gx,gu,gy,gv)\in {M}^{\prime}, then (gy,gv,gy,gv,gx,gu)\in M. As M is ({F}^{\ast},g)invariant, then
(F(y,v),F(v,y),F(y,v),F(v,y),F(x,u),F(u,x))\in M.
In particular, (F(x,u),F(u,x),F(y,v),F(v,y))\in {M}^{\prime}, which means that ({T}_{F}(x,u),{T}_{F}(y,v))\in {M}^{\prime}. Hence, {M}^{\prime} is a ({T}_{F},\mathcal{G})closed set. □
In the following result, we use the quasimetric {q}_{{G}_{2}} on {X}^{2} associated, by Lemma 2.2, to the Gmetric {G}_{2}:{X}^{2}\times {X}^{2}\times {X}^{2}\to [0,\mathrm{\infty}) given by
that is, for all (x,u),(y,v)\in {X}^{2},
Using this notation, the following result is obvious.
Lemma 5.3 Let (X,G) be a Gmetric space, and let M be a nonempty subset of {X}^{6} such that {M}^{\prime} is nonempty. Let F:{X}^{2}\to X and g:X\to X be two mappings such that there exists \phi \in \mathrm{\Phi} verifying
for all (gy,gv,gy,gv,gx,gu)\in M. Then
for all (x,u),(y,v)\in {X}^{2} such that (\mathcal{G}(x,u),\mathcal{G}(y,v))\in {M}^{\prime}.
Notice that condition (21) is weaker than condition (1). The previous properties prove the following consequence.
Lemma 5.4 Let (X,G) be a Gmetric space, and let F:{X}^{2}\to X and g:X\to X be two mappings.

1.
If F is Gcontinuous, then {T}_{F} is {q}_{{G}_{2}}continuous.

2.
If g is Gcontinuous, then is {q}_{{G}_{2}}continuous.
Proof It is a straightforward exercise. □
Corollary 5.1 Theorem 1.1 follows from Theorem 3.3.
Proof Under the hypothesis of Theorem 1.1, let us consider the quasimetric space ({X}^{2},{q}_{{G}_{2}}), the mappings {T}_{F} and and the subset {M}^{\prime} defined by (20). By item 3 of Lemma 2.1, ({X}^{2},{G}_{2}) is a complete Gmetric space, and by item 7 of Lemma 2.2, ({X}^{2},{q}_{{G}_{2}}) is a complete quasimetric space. Furthermore, Corollary 3.1 guarantees that ({X}^{2},{q}_{{G}_{2}}) is left/rightCauchy and left/rightconvergent. Lemma 5.4 ensures that {T}_{F} and are {q}_{{G}_{2}}continuous. Lemma 5.2 proves that {T}_{F}({X}^{2})\subseteq \mathcal{G}({X}^{2}) and {M}^{\prime} is a transitive, ({T}_{F},\mathcal{G})closed, nonempty subset of {({X}^{2})}^{2}. Finally, Lemma 5.3 ensures that {T}_{F} is a (\mathcal{G},{M}^{\prime},\mathrm{\Phi})contraction of the second kind. As a consequence, case (b) of Theorem 3.3 (replacing condition (A) by (A′), and ℳcontinuity by continuity) guarantees that {T}_{F} and have, at least, a coincidence point, which is a coincidence point of F and g. □
In fact, the previous proof shows that two conditions are not necessary in Theorem 3.3: neither the first property of ({F}^{\ast},g)invariant sets nor the middle variables of M in {X}^{6}.
5.2 Kutbi et al.’s coupled fixed point theorems without the mixed monotone property
In [5], the authors introduced the following notion and proved the following result.
Definition 5.1 (Kutbi et al. [5])
Let F:{X}^{2}\to X be a mapping, and let M be a nonempty subset of {X}^{4}. We say that M is an Fclosed subset of {X}^{4} if, for all x,y,u,v\in X,
Corollary 5.2 (Kutbi et al. [5], Theorem 16)
Let (X,d) be a complete metric space, let F:X\times X\to X be a continuous mapping, and let M be a subset of {X}^{4}. Assume that:

(i)
M is Fclosed;

(ii)
there exists ({x}_{0},{y}_{0})\in {X}^{2} such that (F({x}_{0},{y}_{0}),F({y}_{0},{x}_{0}),{x}_{0},{y}_{0})\in M;

(iii)
there exists k\in [0,1) such that for all (x,y,u,v)\in M, we have
d(F(x,y),F(u,v))+d(F(y,x),F(v,u))\le k(d(x,u)+d(y,v)).
Then F has a coupled fixed point.
5.3 Sintunaravat et al.’s coupled fixed point theorems without the mixed monotone property
Similarly, the following result is a consequence of our main results.
Corollary 5.3 (Sintunaravat et al. [21])
Let (X,d) be a complete metric space and M be a nonempty subset of {X}^{4}. Assume that there is a function \phi :[0,\mathrm{\infty})\to [0,\mathrm{\infty}) with 0=\phi (0)<\phi (t)<t and {lim}_{r\to {t}^{+}}\phi (r)<t for each t>0, and also suppose that F:X\times X\to X is a mapping such that
for all (x,y,u,v)\in M. Suppose that either

(a)
F is continuous, or

(b)
for any two sequences \{{x}_{m}\}, \{{y}_{m}\} with ({x}_{m+1},{y}_{m+1},{x}_{m},{y}_{m})\in M,
\{{x}_{m}\}\to x,\phantom{\rule{2em}{0ex}}\{{y}_{m}\}\to y,
for all m\ge 1, then (x,y,{x}_{m},{y}_{m})\in M for all m\ge 1.
If there exists ({x}_{0},{y}_{0})\in X\times X such that (F({x}_{0},{y}_{0}),F({y}_{0},{x}_{0}),{x}_{0},{y}_{0})\in M and M is an Finvariant set which satisfies the transitive property, then there exist x,y\in X such that x=F(x,y) and y=F(y,x), that is, F has a coupled fixed point.
5.4 Choudhury and Kundu’s coupled coincidence point theorems under the mixed gmonotone property
Although our main results in Section 3 do not need the mixed monotone property, we show in this subsection how to interpret that property using a subset M\subseteq {X}^{4}, so that our main results are also applicable to this context. We start recalling this notion.
Definition 5.2 Let ≼ be a binary relation on X, and let F:{X}^{2}\to X and g:X\to X be two mappings. We say that F has the mixed gmonotone property (with respect to ≼) if F(x,y) is monotone gnondecreasing in x and monotone gnonincreasing in y, that is, for any x,y\in X ,
The binary relation ≼ on X can be extended to {X}^{2} as follows:
If ≼ is a partial order on X, then ⊑ is a partial order on {X}^{2}. It is easy to show that if F has the mixed (g,\preccurlyeq )monotone property, then {T}_{F} is a (\mathcal{G},\u2291)nondecreasing mapping and, by Lemma, {\mathcal{M}}_{\u2291}\subseteq {X}^{4} is ({T}_{F},\mathcal{G})closed.
Corollary 5.4 (Choudhury and Kundu [17], Theorem 3.1)
Let (X,\preccurlyeq ) be a partially ordered set, and let there be a metric d on X such that (X,d) is a complete metric space. Let \phi :[0,\mathrm{\infty})\to [0,\mathrm{\infty}) be such that \phi (t)<t and {lim}_{r\to {t}^{+}}\phi (r)<t for all t>0. Let F:X\times X\to X and g:X\to X be two mappings such that F has the mixed gmonotone property and satisfy
Let F(X\times X)\subseteq g(X), g be continuous and monotone increasing and F and g be compatible mappings. Also suppose that

(a)
F is continuous, or

(b)
X has the following properties:

(i)
if a nondecreasing sequence \{{x}_{n}\}\to x, then {x}_{n}\preccurlyeq x for all n\ge 0;

(ii)
if a nonincreasing sequence \{{y}_{n}\}\to y, then {y}_{n}\succcurlyeq y for all n\ge 0.
If there exist {x}_{0},{y}_{0}\in X such that g{x}_{0}\preccurlyeq F({x}_{0},{y}_{0}) and g{y}_{0}\succcurlyeq F({y}_{0},{x}_{0}), then there exist x,y\in X such that gx=F(x,y) and gy=F(y,x), that is, F and g have a coupled coincidence point in X.
Proof It is only necessary to consider the metric {D}^{2} on {X}^{2} given by
and to use the previous properties in ({X}^{2},{D}^{2},\u2291) using {T}_{F} and . □
6 Conclusions
As conclusion, we highlight that coupled coincidence point theorems can be easily deduced from Theorems 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 applied to the quintuple ({X}^{2},{q}_{{G}_{2}},{T}_{F},\mathcal{G},{M}^{\prime}). Exactly in the same way, tripled, quadrupled and multidimensional coincidence point results can be derived (following the arguments in [9, 20, 22–26]).
References
Ran ACM, Reurings MCB: A fixed point theorem in partially ordered sets and some applications to matrix equations. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 2004, 132: 1435–1443. 10.1090/S0002993903072204
Nieto JJ, RodríguezLópez R: Contractive mapping theorem in partially ordered sets and applications to ordinary differential equations. Order 2005, 22: 223–239. 10.1007/s1108300590185
GnanaBhaskar T, Lakshmikantham V: Fixed point theorems in partially ordered metric spaces and applications. Nonlinear Anal. 2006, 65: 1379–1393. 10.1016/j.na.2005.10.017
Lakshmikantham V, Ćirić LJ: Coupled fixed point theorems for nonlinear contractions in partially ordered metric spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2009, 70(12):4341–4349. 10.1016/j.na.2008.09.020
Kutbi MA, Roldán A, Sintunavarat W, MartínezMoreno J, Roldán C: F Closed sets and coupled fixed point theorems without the mixed monotone property. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013., 2013: Article ID 330
Charoensawan P, Thangthong C: On coupled coincidence point theorems on partially ordered G metric spaces without mixed g monotone. J. Inequal. Appl. 2014., 2014: Article ID 150
Karapınar E, Roldán A, Shahzad N, Sintunavarat W: Discussion of coupled and tripled coincidence point theorems for ϕ contractive mappings without the mixed g monotone property. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2014., 2014: Article ID 92
Mustafa Z, Sims B: A new approach to generalized metric spaces. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 2006, 7: 289–297.
Agarwal, R, Karapınar, E, Roldán, A: Fixed point theorems in quasimetric spaces and applications to coupled/tripled fixed points on {G}^{\ast}metric spaces. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. (to appear)
AlSulami HH, Karapınar E, Khojasteh F, Roldán A: A proposal to the study of contractions in quasi metric spaces. Discrete Dyn. Nat. Soc. 2014., 2014: Article ID 269286
Karapınar E, Lakzian H:(\alpha ,\psi )Contractive mappings on generalized quasimetric spaces. J. Funct. Spaces 2014., 2014: Article ID 914398
Karapınar E, Romaguera S, Tirado P: Contractive multivalued maps in terms of Q functions on complete quasimetric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2014., 2014: Article ID 53
Bilgili N, Karapınar E, Samet B: Generalized α  ψ contractive mappings in quasimetric spaces and related fixed point theorems. J. Inequal. Appl. 2014., 2014: Article ID 36
Jleli M, Samet B: Remarks on G metric spaces and fixed point theorems. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012., 2012: Article ID 210
Boyd DW, Wong JSW: On nonlinear contractions. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1969, 20: 458–464. 10.1090/S00029939196902395599