In this paper we prove an analogue of Banach and Kannan fixed point theorems by generalizing the Lipschitz constat $k$, in generalized Lipschitz mapping on cone metric space over Banach algebra, which are answers for the open problems proposed by Sastry et al, [K. P. R. Sastry, G. A. Naidu, T. Bakeshie, Fixed point theorems in cone metric spaces with Banach algebra cones, Int. J. of Math. Sci. ...

in this paper, we introduce a concept of a generalized $c$-distance in ordered cone $b$-metric spaces and, by using the concept, we prove some fixed point theorems in ordered cone $b$-metric spaces. our results generalize the corresponding results obtained by y. j. cho, r. saadati, shenghua wang (y. j. cho, r. saadati, shenghua wang, common fixed point  heorems on generalized distance in ordere...

In this paper, we give the idea of a generalized c-distance in a cone b-metric space. Then, we prove some common fixed point and fixed point theorems in cone b-metric spaces by using the distance.

This study involves new notions of continuity mapping between quasi-cone metrics spaces (QCMSs), cone metric (CMSs), and vice versa. The relation all were thoroughly studied supported with the help examples. In addition, these continuities compared various types two QCMSs. are

in this paper, several xed point theorems for t-contraction of two maps on cone metric spaces under normality condition are proved. obtained results extend and generalize well-known comparable results in the literature.

In this paper, we introduce the concept of generalized quasi-contractions in the setting of cone $b$-metric spaces over Banach algebras. By omitting the  assumption of normality we establish common fixed point theorems for the generalized quasi-contractions  with the spectral radius $r(lambda)$ of the quasi-contractive constant vector $lambda$ satisfying $r(lambda)in [0,frac{1}{s})$  in the set...

and Applied Analysis 3 effectively larger than that of the ordinary conemetric spaces. That is, every cone metric space is a cone b-metric space, but the converse need not be true. The following examples show the above remarks. Example 7. Let X = {−1, 0, 1}, E = R, andP = {(x, y) : x ≥ 0, y ≥ 0}. Define d : X × X → P by d(x, y) = d(y, x) for all x, y ∈ X, d(x, x) = θ, x ∈ X, and d(−1, 0) = (3, ...