Altun–Hancer–Ateş question on enriched P-contractions

Let XX be a normed linear space, let C⊆XC\subseteq X be nonempty, and let T:C→CT:C\to C. Is it true that if there exists b≥0b\geq 0 such that ∥b(x−y)+Tx−Ty∥2≤(b+1)2∥x−y∥2−∥(x−y)−(Tx−Ty)∥2\|b(x-y)+Tx-Ty\|^2\leq (b+1)^2\|x-y\|^2-\|(x-y)-(Tx-Ty)\|^2 for all x,y∈Cx,y\in C, then there exist β≥0\beta\geq 0 and θ∈[0,β+1)\theta\in[0,\beta+1) such that ∥β(x−y)+Tx−Ty∥≤θ∥x−y∥\|\beta(x-y)+Tx-Ty\|\leq\theta\|x-y\| for all x,y∈Cx,y\in C?

References

Progress summary

Refreshed
Claimed solved

A 2026 manuscript claims to settle the open question negatively by giving two counterexamples, but the result has not been independently verified.

Altun, Hancer, and Ateş posed the question in their 2024 study of enriched PP-contractions, which left one converse implication unresolved. The question asks whether that remaining implication between two contraction classes is valid.

Known results

  • Altun, Hancer, and Ateş (2024) proved that an enriched PP-contraction on a nonempty, closed, convex subset of a Banach space has a unique fixed point.
  • Their corresponding Krasnoselʹskiĭ iteration converges to that fixed point.
  • Their examples showed that several other converse implications fail, including examples on a finite set and on [0,1][0,1].

August 2026 counterexamples

The manuscript On The Existence of PP-Contractions that are not Enriched Contractions claims two explicit counterexamples: one on a finite subset and one given by a continuous operator on an entire normed linear space. It therefore claims that the remaining converse is false; the manuscript is unrefereed, so this resolution remains unverified.

Current status (as of August 2026): The 2024 theorem and earlier separations are established, while the 2026 manuscript claims a counterexample to the remaining converse; that claim has not been independently verified.

Sources

Solutions 0

No solutions have been posted yet.