Citation: Thiyam Thadoi Devi, Khundrakpam Binod Mangang, Sonika Akoijam, Lalhmangaihzuala, Phinao Ramwungzan, Jay Prakash Singh. Mean chain transitivity and almost mean shadowing property of iterated function systems[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(8): 20811-20825. doi: 10.3934/math.20241012
[1] | Jingmin Pi, Tianxiu Lu, Jie Zhou . Shadowing properties and chaotic properties of non-autonomous product systems. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(9): 20048-20062. doi: 10.3934/math.20231021 |
[2] | Zhanjiang Ji . The research of $({\rm{G}}, {\rm{w}})$-Chaos and G-Lipschitz shadowing property. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(6): 10180-10194. doi: 10.3934/math.2022566 |
[3] | Yuki Takahashi . On iterated function systems with inverses. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(4): 9034-9041. doi: 10.3934/math.2025415 |
[4] | Haifeng Zheng, Dan Wang . A study of value iteration and policy iteration for Markov decision processes in Deterministic systems. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(12): 33818-33842. doi: 10.3934/math.20241613 |
[5] | Quanquan Yao, Yuanlin Chen, Peiyong Zhu, Tianxiu Lu . Some stronger forms of mean sensitivity. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(1): 1103-1115. doi: 10.3934/math.2024054 |
[6] | Georgia Irina Oros . Carathéodory properties of Gaussian hypergeometric function associated with differential inequalities in the complex plane. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(12): 13143-13156. doi: 10.3934/math.2021759 |
[7] | Raudys R. Capdevila, Alicia Cordero, Juan R. Torregrosa . Convergence and dynamical study of a new sixth order convergence iterative scheme for solving nonlinear systems. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(6): 12751-12777. doi: 10.3934/math.2023642 |
[8] | Doaa Alsharo, Eman Abuteen, Abd Ulazeez M. J. S. Alkouri, Mutasem Alkhasawneh, Fadi M. A. Al-Zubi . Complex shadowed set theory and its application in decision-making problems. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 16810-16825. doi: 10.3934/math.2024815 |
[9] | Zhongxuan Yang, Xiaojun Huang, Jiajun Zhang . Topological pressures of a factor map for iterated function systems. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(4): 10124-10139. doi: 10.3934/math.2025461 |
[10] | Baoxing Zhang, Yunkun Zhang, Yuanyuan Xie . Generating irregular fractals based on iterated function systems. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(5): 13346-13357. doi: 10.3934/math.2024651 |
A classical dynamical system consists of a phase space M together with a unique function g, where, by iterating this function, we obtain the orbits of points. However, we can find many systems with some finite maps rather than a single map that acts on the phase space. Indeed, we can find many natural processes involved with two or more interactions whose evolutions evolve with discrete time [1,2]. Therefore, there is a need to extend the study of dynamical systems by considering more than one mapping. Mathematicians have studied such systems either as non-autonomous systems or as iterated function systems (IFS). Therefore, these systems originate from a common study, specifically, the study of classical dynamical systems. Hence, important concepts in dynamics, including transitivity and shadowing [3], could be extended to IFSs.
In a dynamical system, generally, the future state follows from the initial state. Therefore, it is often deterministic. However, they often appear chaotic, i.e., minor changes in the initial state bring dramatically different long-term behavior. Both topological transitivity and shadowing are dynamical properties that are closely related to the chaoticity of dynamical systems. Usually, in chaos, topological transitivity is a part of its definition, or it is implied by it (at least in some spaces), or it implies chaos. Indeed, it is a part of the definition in Devaney's chaos [4], while in Li–Yorke chaos [5], if a function is topologically transitive (TT), then it is chaotic, but the converse is not valid. Moreover, a TT map g has points that eventually move under iteration from one arbitrary small neighborhood to any other. As a result, one cannot break the corresponding system into a pair of invariant subsystems under g. Recently, mathematicians have studied this property intensively since it is a global characteristic in the dynamical systems theory.
Topological transitivity was introduced to dynamical systems by Birkhoff [6] in the 1920s. The term 'topologically transitive (TT)' is not a unified one. Instead, some authors use 'regionally transitive' [7,8], 'nomadic' [9], 'topologically ergodic' [10], cf. [8], and 'topologically indecomposable (or irreducible)' [11]. A mapping g of a dynamical system (M,g) is TT if, for any pair of non-empty open sets W1,W2⊂M, there is some k>0 such that gk(W1)∩W2≠∅. The notion of topological transitivity was introduced to IFSs by Bahabadi in [3]. Devi and Mangang [12] have also discussed this notion in IFSs by giving several examples, and they also extend the notions of equicontinuity, sensitivity, and distality to IFSs. Moreover, Mangang [13] has studied the notions of mean equicontinuity, mean sensitivity, and mean distality of the product dynamical systems.
A natural generalization of topological transitivity is chain transitivity. It connects any two points of the phase space by a chain with any desired error bound. It is an essential notion of a dynamical system. For example, if a dynamical system is chain transitive, then several shadowing properties, including thick shadowing and shadowing, are equivalent [14]. In a dynamical system, there might be a circumstance where for any error bound γ, we could not find a γ-chain but it may be simpler to obtain an η-average (or η-mean) chain with any average (or mean) error bound γ. It leads to the introduction of average (or mean) chain transitivity to dynamical systems.
In dynamical systems theory, our main goal is to study the nature of all its orbits. Likewise, in IFSs, we study the orbit behaviors of the system. Yet, in particular cases, it is unlikely to compute the accurate initial value of a point, which gives rise to the approximate values of the orbits. Thus, we obtain pseudo-orbits of the system. The notion of shadowing puts these pseudo-orbits close to the actual orbits of the system. It was introduced independently by Anosov [15] and Bowen [16] in the 1970s. Shadowing plays an essential part in developing the qualitative theory of dynamical systems. In systems with shadowing property, any pseudo-orbit is followed uniformly by a true orbit over an arbitrarily long duration of time. Usually, it is crucial in systems with chaos, where even an arbitrarily small error in the initial position leads to a large divergence of orbits. Moreover, the shadowing lemma in [16] roughly states that shadowing is a common phenomenon in chaotic dynamical systems. In recent years, shadowing has developed intensively and has become a notion of great interest. Many researchers have introduced different aspects of shadowing in dynamical systems, including average shadowing [17], h-shadowing [18], ergodic shadowing [19], thick shadowing [20], and d-shadowing [20]. Consequently, these aspects of shadowing have also been extended to IFSs; for references, one can see, [3,21,22,23].
Ruchi Das and Mukta Garg introduced the notions of average (or mean) chain properties and the almost average (or mean) shadowing property to dynamical systems in [24]. Unlike the classical shadowing property, the notion of the almost mean shadowing property deals with pseudo-orbits with very small mean errors. In [25], the authors have also investigated the chaotic behavior of maps with almost average (or mean) shadowing property.
Motivated by this, in this work we wish to study the concepts of mean chain properties and the almost mean shadowing property in IFSs. In Section 2, we give some preliminary discussions on dynamical systems and IFSs. In Section 3, we introduce the notions of mean chain transitive (MCT), mean chain mixing (MCM), and totally mean chain transitive (TMCT) to IFSs and study the relations among them. We also give an example of an IFS that is not chain transitive (CT) but MCM (Example 3.5). In Section 4, we introduce the notion of almost mean shadowing property (AMSP) to IFSs and study some of its basic properties. We also study the relation between CT and AMSP in IFSs. In particular, in Theorem 4.7, we find that an IFS is CT if one of the constituent maps is surjective, and it has AMSP.
We consider (M,g) to be a dynamical system where, (M,d) is a compact metric space and f is a self-continuous map on M. Put Z+={n∈Z:n≥0}}. Then the set O(s,g)={gn(s):n∈Z+} is said to be the orbit of s∈M under (M,g).
Let (M,g) be a dynamical system. Let γ,η>0, then
ⅰ) A finite sequence {s0,s1,…,sn} in M is an η-chain if d(g(si),si+1)<η, ∀ 0≤i≤n−1. When i is not bounded above, it is called an η-pseudo-orbit.
ⅱ) An η-pseudo-orbit {si}i∈Z+ is γ-shadowed by s∈M if d(gi(s),si)<γ, ∀ i≥0.
A dynamical system (M,g) is said
a) To have shadowing property (SP) if ∀ γ>0, ∃ η>0 such that every η-pseudo-orbit is γ-shadowed by some point in M.
b) To be chain transitive (CT) if ∀ η>0, and for any pair of points s,t∈M, ∃ an η-chain joining s and t.
c) To be chain mixing (CM) if ∀ η>0, and for any pair of points s,t∈M, ∃ N>0, such that ∀ n≥N, ∃ an η-chain joining s and t of length n.
Hutchinson introduced IFSs in [26] and were popularized by Barnsley [27]. Moreover, Barnsley and Demko [28] first named the word IFS, and it has garnered much attention since then. Let Λ be a non-empty finite set; an IFS F={M;gα|α∈Λ} is a family of continuous mappings gα:M→M, where α∈Λ, and (M,d) is a compact metric space. Put ΛZ+={⟨αi⟩:αi∈Λ∀i∈Z+}. We use the short notation
Fσi=gαi−1∘gαi−2∘⋯∘gα1∘gα0. |
Let σ=⟨αi⟩ be a typical member of ΛZ+. An infinite sequence {si}i∈Z+ in M is an orbit of F if ∃ σ∈ΛZ+, such that si=Fσi(s0), where Fσi(s0)=gαi−1∘gαi−2∘⋯∘gα1∘gα0(s0) and Fσ0(s0)=s0. So, for any σ∈ΛZ+, we define Oσ(s)={Fσi(s):i∈Z+} as an orbit of s∈M related to σ. For an IFS F and for a fixed integer n>0, we define Λn={(α0,α1,…,αn−1):αi∈Λ,0≤i≤n−1}; fμ=gαn−1∘⋯∘gα1∘gα0; and Fn={fμ|μ∈Λn}.
Bahabadi [3] extended the notions of SP, average (or mean) SP (MSP), TT, CT and CM to IFSs. An IFS F is TT if for any pair of non-empty open sets W1,W2⊂M, ∃ σ∈ΛZ+ such that Fσk(W1)∩W2≠∅ for some k≥0.
Let F={M;gα|α∈Λ} be an IFS and let γ,η>0, then
ⅰ) A finite sequence {s0,s1,…,sn} in M is an η-chain if ∃ {α0,α1,…,αn−1} such that d(gαi(si),si+1)<η, ∀ 0≤i≤n−1. When i is not bounded above, it is called an η-pseudo-orbit.
ⅱ) An η-pseudo-orbit {si}i∈Z+ is γ-shadowed by s∈M if ∃ σ∈ΛZ+ such that d(Fσi(s),si)<γ, ∀ i≥0.
ⅲ) {si}i∈Z+ is an η-mean-pseudo-orbit if ∃ N>0, and ∃ σ∈ΛZ+ such that for any n≥N,
1nn−1∑i=0d(gαi(si),si+1)<η. |
ⅳ) An η-mean-pseudo-orbit {si}i∈Z+ is γ-mean shadowed by s∈M if
lim supn→∞1nn−1∑i=0d(Fσi(s),si)<γ. |
An IFS F={M;gα|α∈Λ} is said
a) To have SP if ∀ γ>0, ∃ η>0 such that every η-pseudo-orbit is γ-shadowed by a point in M.
b) To be CT if ∀ η>0, and for any pair of points s,t∈M, ∃ an η-chain joining s and t.
c) To be CM if ∀ η>0 and for any pair of points s,t∈M, ∃ N>0 such that ∀ n≥N, ∃ an η-chain joining s and t of length n.
d) To have mean shadowing property (MSP) if ∀ γ>0, ∃ η>0 such that every η-mean-pseudo-orbit is γ-mean shadowed by a point in M.
Mean chain properties and almost mean shadowing properties in dynamical systems have been introduced in [24]. The main aim of this paper is to extend these notions in IFSs. Therefore, we recall the following definitions in dynamical systems:
Let η>0, a finite sequence {s0,s1,…,sn} is an η-mean chain of length n if ∃ an integer 0<P≤n such that ∀ P≤m≤n,
1mm−1∑i=0d(g(si),si+1)<η. |
(M,g) is said to be mean chain transitive (MCT) if, for every η>0 and for any pair of points s,t∈M, ∃ an η-mean chain joining s and t. It is said to be totally mean chain transitive (TMCT) if gk is MCT for each k>0. And, it is said to be mean chain mixing (MCM) if for every η>0 and for any pair of points s,t∈M, ∃ an integer N>0 such that ∀ n≥N, ∃ an η-mean chain joining s and t of length n.
Let η>0, a sequence {si}i∈Z+ is an almost η-mean pseudo-orbit of (M,g) if
lim supn→∞1nn−1∑i=0d(g(si),si+1)<η. |
An almost η-mean pseudo-orbit {si}i∈Z+ is γ-mean shadowed by s∈M if
lim supn→∞1nn−1∑i=0d(gi(s),si)<γ. |
(M,g) has almost mean shadowing property (AMSP) if for every γ>0, ∃ an η>0 such that every almost η-mean pseudo-orbit {si}i∈Z+ is γ-mean shadowed by a point in M. Throughout the paper, we consider (M,d) to be a compact metric space and gα:X→X to be a continuous self-map in X for any α∈Λ.
This section introduces the notions of mean chain transitivity (MCT), mean chain mixing (MCM), and totally mean chain transitivity (TMCT) to IFSs, and proves some preliminary results.
Definition 3.1. Let η>0, a finite sequence {s0,s1,…,sn} is an η-mean chain of length n if ∃ {α0,α1,…,αn−1} and an integer 0<P≤n such that ∀ integer m with P≤m≤n,
1mm−1∑i=0d(gαi(si),si+1)<η. |
Definition 3.2. An IFS F is considered to be MCT if for any η>0 and for any pair of points s,t∈M, ∃ an η-mean chain joining s and t.
Definition 3.3. An IFS F is considered to be TMCT if Fk is MCT for each k>0.
Definition 3.4. An IFS F is considered to be MCM if for any η>0 and for any pair of points s,t∈M, ∃ an integer N>0 such that ∀ n≥N, ∃ an η-mean joining s and t of length n.
Following, we give an example of an IFS that is not CT but MCM.
Example 3.5. Consider (M,d) to be a metric space with more than two elements, and let a,b∈M. Let g1,g2 be two self-maps in M defined by g1(s)=a and g2(s)=b for every s∈M. Then, the IFS, F={M;g1,g2} is not CT but MCM.
Proof. Clearly, F is not CT, indeed for any pair s,t∈M with t∉{a,b}, there is no η-chain joining s and t with η<min{d(t,a),d(t,b)}. Now, we claim that F is MCM. Take η>0 and s,t∈M. For t∈{a,b}, it is obvious. Suppose t∉{a,b} and, let max{d(t,a),d(t,b)}=γ>0. Choose an integer N>0 for which N>γη. For every n≥N and a finite sequence {αi}n−1i=0 where αi∈{1,2}, define si=Fσi(s) for 0≤i≤n−1 and sn=t. Then, for every integer m with N≤m≤n, we have
1mm−1∑i=0d(gαi(si),si+1)<η. |
Thus, {si}ni=0 is an η-mean chain joining s and t of length n. Hence, F={M;g1,g2} is not CT but MCM.
Theorem 3.6. Let F be an IFS. Then, F is MCT if Fk is MCT for some k>1.
Proof. Let η>0 and let s,t∈M be two points. Let k>1 be fixed such that Fk is MCT. Then, there exists an η-mean chain {si}ni=0 of Fk joining s and t. Therefore, there exists a finite sequence {μ0,μ1,…,μn−1} and an integer 0<P≤n such that ∀ integer m with P≤m≤n,
1mm−1∑i=0d(fμi(si),si+1)<η | (3.1) |
where fμi=gαik−1∘gαik−2∘⋯∘gαi0 and μi={αi0,αi1,…,αik−1} for 0≤i≤n−1.
For 0≤i≤n, let
tj={si,if j=ki,gαij−ki−1∘gαij−ki−2∘⋯∘gαi0(si),if ki<j<(i+1)k, |
i.e.,
{tj}nkj=0={t0=s,t1=gα00(s),t2=gα01∘gα00(s),…,tk=s1,tk+1=gα10(s1), |
tk+2=gα11∘gα10(s1),…,tnk−1=gαn−1k−2∘⋯∘gαn−10(sn−1),tnk=t}. |
Again, let
{α′j}nkj=0={α00,α01,…,α10,α11,…,α1k−1,…,αn−1k−2,αn−1k−1}. |
Then, ∀ integer l with n≤l≤nk, we have
1ll−1∑j=0d(gα′j(tj),tj+1)≤1nnk−1∑j=0d(gα′j(tj),tj+1). |
For j≠ik, the term vanishes, therefore
1ll−1∑j=0d(gα′j(tj),tj+1)<1nn−1∑i=0d(fμi(si),si+1). |
By using (3.1), we have
1ll−1∑j=0d(gα′j(tj),tj+1)<η. |
Thus, {tj}nkj=0 is an η-mean chain joining s and t of length nk. Hence F is MCT.
Theorem 3.7 shows that a TMCT IFS is MCM if the constituent maps are Lipschitz. A self-continuous function g on a metric space M is a Lipschitz function if ∃ L>0 such that d(g(s),g(t))≤Ld(s,t), ∀ s,t∈M.
Theorem 3.7. Let F={M;gα|α∈Λ} be an IFS where each gα is a Lipschitz function. If F is MCM, then F is TMCT.
Proof. Let k>1 be an integer, let η>0 and let s,t∈M be any pair of points. For each α∈Λ, as gα is Lipschitz, ∃ Lα>0 such that d(gα(u),gα(v))≤Lαd(u,v), ∀ u,v∈M. Let L=max{Lα:α∈Λ}. Then, d(gα(u),gα(v))≤Ld(u,v), ∀ α∈Λ and ∀ u,v∈M. Without loss of generality, let L≥1 and take γ=ηkLk−1. Since F is MCM, ∃ N>0 such that ∀ n≥N, ∃ a γ-mean chain of F joining s and t of length n. Take an integer r>0 such that rk≥N. Then, we can get a γ-mean chain of F joining s and t of length rk, say {s0=s,s1,…,srk=t}. Therefore, there exists an integer 0<P≤rk and a finite sequence, say {αi}rk−1i=0={α00,α01,…,α0k−2,α0k−1,α10,α11,…,α1k−2,α1k−1,…,αr−1k−2,αr−1k−1} such that ∀ integer m with P≤m≤rk,
1mm−1∑i=0d(gαi(si),si+1)<γ. | (3.2) |
Put γi=d(gαi(si),si+1) for 0≤i≤rk−1. Then, from Eq (3.2), we get
1rkrk−1∑i=0γi<γ. | (3.3) |
Define ti=sik for 0≤i≤r. We claim that {t0,t1,…,tr} is an η-mean chain of Fk joining s and t.
Let fμi=gαik−1∘gαik−2∘⋯∘gαi0 where μi={αi0,αi1,…,αik−1}, ∀ 0≤i≤r−1. Then, ∀ 0≤i≤r−1, we have
d(fμi(ti),ti+1)=d(fμi(sik),s(i+1)k)=d(gαik−1∘gαik−2∘⋯∘gαi0(sik),(s(i+1)k))≤d(gαik−1∘gαik−2∘⋯∘gαi0(sik),gαik−1∘gαik−2∘⋯∘gαi1(sik+1))+⋯+d(gαik−1∘gαik−2(s(i+1)k−2),gαik−1(s(i+1)k−1))+d(gαik−1(s(i+1)k−1),s(i+1)k)≤Lk−1γik+⋯+L2γ(i+1)k−2+Lγ(i+1)k−1<Lk−1(γik+⋯+γ(i+1)k−2+γ(i+1)k−1). |
Therefore, using Eq (3.3), it is clear that
1rr−1∑i=0d(fμi(ti),ti+1)<1rLk−1rk−1∑i=0γi<Lk−1kγ=η. |
Thus, {t0,t1,…,tr} is an η-mean chain of Fk joining s and t. Hence, F is TMCT.
Given two compact metric spaces (M,d) and (M′,d′), we take the metric space M×M′ with metric
d″((s1,t1),(s2,t2))=max{d(s1,s2),d′(t1,t2)} |
and let F={M,gα|α∈Λ} and G={M′;gβ|β∈Γ} be two IFSs.
Then, we define the IFS, F×G as
F×G={M×M′;hα,β|α∈Λ,β∈Γ}, |
where hα,β(s,t)=(gα(s),gβ(t)), ∀ s∈M and t∈M′.
Theorem 3.8. If F={M;gα|α∈Λ} is a MCM IFS, then F×F is MCT.
Proof. Let η>0 and let (s,t),(u,v)∈M×M be any two points.
Since F is MCM and as η2>0, there exist integers N1,N2>0 such that for any n1≥N1 and n2≥N2, there are η2-mean chains joining s and u, and joining t and v respectively.
Put N=max{N1,N2}. Then, we can find two η2-mean chains joining s and u, t and v respectively; say {s0=s,s1,…,sN=u} and {t0=t,t1,…,tN=v}. Therefore, there exist finite sequences {α0,α1,…,αN−1} and {α′0,α′1,…,α′N−1}, and integers 0<P1,P2≤N such that ∀ integers m′,m″ with P1≤m′≤N and P2≤m″≤N, we have
1m′m′−1∑i=0d(gαi(si),si+1)<η2 |
and
1m″m″−1∑i=0d(gα′i(ti),ti+1)<η2. |
Take P=max{P1,P2} and consider {(si,ti)}Ni=0. Then, ∀ integer m with P≤m≤N, we have
1mm−1∑i=0d″((gαi(si),gα′i(ti)),(si+1,ti+1))≤1mm−1∑i=0d(gαi(si),si+1)+1mm−1∑i=0d(gα′i(ti),ti+1)<η2+η2=η. |
Thus, {(si,ti)}Ni=0 is an η-mean chain of F×F joining (s,t) and (u,v) of length N. Hence, F×F is MCT.
Theorem 3.9. If F is a TMCT IFS, then F×F is MCT.
Proof. Let η>0 and let (s,t),(u,v)∈M×M be any two points. By definition of TMCT, we have F is MCT. Suppose, {s0=s,s1,…,sn=u} and {u0=u,u1,…,uk=u} are two η4-mean chains respectively, joining s and u, and joining u to itself. Then, there exist finite sequences {α0,α1,…,αn−1} and {α′0,α′1,…,α′k−1} and integers 0<P1≤n and 0<P2≤k such that
1mm−1∑i=0d(gαi(si),si+1)<η4∀ integer m with P1≤m≤n, |
and
1m′m′−1∑i=0d(gα′i(ui),ui+1)<η4,∀ integer m′ with P2≤m′≤k. |
In particular,
1nn−1∑i=0d(gαi(si),si+1)<η4, |
and
1kk−1∑i=0d(gα′i(ui),ui+1)<η4. |
From the definition of TMCT, Fk is MCT. Let {t0=gαn−1∘⋯∘gα0(t),t1,…,tp=v} be an η2-mean chain of Fk joining gαn−1∘⋯∘gα0(t) and v of length p. Therefore, we can find a finite sequence {μ0,μ1,…,μp−1} and an integer 0<P≤p such that
1m″m″−1∑i=0d(fμi(ti),ti+1)<η2,∀ integer m′′ with P≤m′′≤p, |
where fμi=gαik−1∘gαik−2∘⋯∘gαi0 and μi={αi0,αi1,…,αik−1} for 0≤i≤p−1.
Consider
{zi}n+pki=0={t,gα0(t),…,gαn−1∘⋯∘gα0(t)=t0,gα00(t0),…,gα0k−2∘⋯∘gα00(t0),t1,gα10(t1),…,gα1k−2∘⋯∘gα10(t1),t2,gα20(t2),…,tp−1,gαp−10(tp−1),…,gαp−1k−2∘⋯∘gαp−10(tp−1),tp=v} |
with respect to the finite sequence
{α″i}n+pki=0={α0,α1,…,αn−1,α00,α01,…,α0k−1,α10,…,α1k−1,…,αp−10,…,αp−1k−1}. |
Then, it is clear that the term d(gα″i(zi),zi+1) vanishes whenever i≠n+jk where 0<j≤p−1. Therefore,
1n+pkn+pk−1∑i=0d(gα″i(zi),zi+1)=1n+pkp−1∑i=0d(gαik−1∘gαik−2∘⋯∘gαi0(ti),ti+1)=1n+pkp−1∑i=0d(fμi(ti),ti+1)<1pp−1∑i=0d(fμi(ti),ti+1)<η2. |
Thus, {zi}n+pki=0 is an η2-mean chain of F joining t and v.
Again, consider
{wi}n+pki=0={s0=s,s1,…,sn=u=u0,u1,…,uk=u⏟ptimes,u1,…,uk=u,…,u1,…,uk=u} |
with respect to the finite sequence
{α‴i}n+pki=0={α0,α1,…,αn−1,α′0,α′1,…,α′k−1⏟ptimes,…,α′0,α′1,…,α′k−1}. |
Now,
1n+pkn+pk−1∑i=0d(gα‴i(wi),wi+1)=1n+pk[n−1∑i=0d(gαi(si),si+1)+pk−1∑i=0d(gα′i(ui),ui+1)]=1n+pkn−1∑i=0d(gαi(si),si+1)+pn+pkk−1∑i=0d(gα′i(ui),ui+1)<1nn−1∑i=0d(gαi(si),si+1)+ppkk−1∑i=0d(gα′i(ui),ui+1)<η4+η4=η2. |
Thus, {wi}n+pki=0 is an η2-mean chain of F joining s and u. This implies that {(wi,zi)}n+pki=0 is an η2-mean chain of F×F joining (s,t) and (u,v) with respect to d″. Hence, F×F is MCT.
This section introduces the notion of almost mean shadowing property (AMSP) to IFSs.
Definition 4.1. Let η>0, a sequence {si}i∈Z+ is an almost η-mean pseudo-orbit of an IFS F if ∃ σ∈ΛZ+ such that
lim supn→∞1nn−1∑i=0d(gαi(si),si+1)<η. |
An almost η-mean pseudo-orbit {si}i∈Z+ of an IFS F is γ-mean shadowed by s∈M if
lim supn→∞1nn−1∑i=0d(Fσi(s),si)<γ. |
Definition 4.2. An IFS F has AMSP if for any γ>0, ∃ an η>0 such that every almost η-mean pseudo-orbit {si}i∈Z+ is γ-mean shadowed by a point in M.
Remark 4.3. From the definition, it is clear that AMSP implies MSP, but the converse may not be true.
In the following, we give an example of an IFS that has MSP but does not have the AMSP.
Example 4.4 Let (M,d) be the metric space as defined in [29, Example 9.1]. Let g1,g2 be self maps on M defined as
g1(p)=p,g1(an)=an+1,g1(bn)=bn+1,g2(p)=p,g2(an)=an,g2(bn)=bn+1. |
Then, the IFS, F={M;g1,g2} has MSP but does not have the AMSP.
Proof. Proceeding similarly, as in the proof of [29, Theorem 9.2], it is clear that F has MSP.
Also, in [24], it is given that (M,g1) does not have the AMSP. So, for any ϵ>0, we can find a δ>0 and an almost δ-pseudo orbit with respect to σ={g1,g1,g1,⋯} which is not ϵ-shadowed in average by any point in M. Hence, the IFS F={M;g1,g2} does not have the AMSP.
Example 4.5. Let F be the IFS as defined in [30, Example 3.5]. Then, F, does not have MSP and AMSP.
Proof. In [31, Remark 4.5], it has been given that F does not have MSP. Using, the above Remark 4.3, it is clear that F does not have the AMSP.
Theorem 4.6. If F is an IFS with AMSP, then so does Fk for every k≥2.
Proof. Let k≥2 and γ>0. By hypothesis, ∃ an η>0 such that every almost η-mean pseudo-orbit is γk-mean shadowed by a point in M.
Let {ti}i∈Z+ be an almost η-mean pseudo-orbit of Fk. Then, ∃ σ=⟨μi⟩ such that ∀ μi∈σ
lim supn→∞1nn−1∑i=0d(fμi(ti),ti+1)<η, |
where fμi=gαik−1∘gαik−2∘⋯∘gαi0 and μi={αi0,αi1,…,αik−1}∈Λk, ∀ i∈Z+.
Now, for some σ′=⟨α′j⟩={α00,α01,…,α0k−1,α10,…}, consider a sequence {sj}j∈Z+ defined by
sj={ti,if j=ki,gαij−ki−1∘gαij−ki−2∘⋯∘gαi0(ti),if ki<j<(i+1)k. |
For ki<j<(i+1)k, we have 0<l≤k−1 such that sj=sik+l=gαil−1∘gαil−2∘⋯∘gαi0(ti). Also, for any integer n>0, we can get some i≥0 and 0<l≤k−1 for which n=ik+l. Thus,
lim supn→∞1nn−1∑j=0d(gα′j(sj),sj+1)=lim supi→∞1ik+lik+l−1∑j=0d(gα′j(sj),sj+1). |
For j≠ki−1, the term vanishes. Therefore,
lim supn→∞1nn−1∑j=0d(gα′j(sj),sj+1)=lim supi→∞1ik+li−1∑j=0d(fμj(tj),tj+1)≤lim supi→∞1ii−1∑j=0d(fμj(tj),tj+1)<η. |
This implies that {sj}j∈Z+ is an almost η-mean pseudo-orbit of F with respect to σ′. Therefore, ∃ z∈M such that
lim supn→∞1nn−1∑j=0d(Fσ′j(z),sj)<γk. |
Now,
lim supn→∞1nn−1∑i=0d(Fkσi(z),ti)=lim supn→∞1nn−1∑i=0d(Fσ′ki(z),ski)≤lim supn→∞1nn−1∑i=0k−1∑l=0d(Fσ′ki+l(z),ski+l)=klim supn→∞1nknk−1∑j=0d(Fσ′j(z),sj)<γ. |
Hence, Fk hasAMSP for every k≥2.
Theorem 4.7. Let F={M;gα|α∈Λ} be an IFS, where one of the gα is surjective. If F has AMSP, then it is CT.
Proof. Let γ>0 and let s,t∈M be two points. Since {gα:α∈Λ} is a family of uniformly continuous mappings, it is uniformly equicontinuous. Thus, ∃ 0<η<γ such that ∀ u,v∈M and ∀ α∈Λ, d(gα(u),gα(v))<γ whenever d(u,v)<η. By hypothesis, F has AMSP. Therefore, ∃ δ>0 such that every almost δ-mean pseudo-orbit of F is η2-mean shadowed by a point in M.
Let D=diam(M) and let K>0 be an integer such that DK<δ. Suppose for a fixed α∗∈Λ, gα∗ is surjective. Then, we can easily see that g−lα∗(t) exists ∀ integer l with 0≤l≤K−1.
For i∈Z+, fix an infinite sequence σ=⟨αi⟩∈ΛZ+. Again, for j∈Z+, we consider an infinite sequence {sj}j∈Z+, where
sj={Fσj−2iK, 2iK≤j≤(2i+1)K−1,gj−2(i+1)K+1α∗(t), (2i+1)K≤j≤2(i+1)K−1. |
For any α′∈Λ, let us define σ′=⟨α′j⟩∈ΛZ+, where
α′j={αj−2iK, 2iK≤j≤(2i+1)K−2,α′, j=(2i+1)K−1,α∗, (2i+1)K≤j≤2(i+1)K−2,α′ j=2(i+1)K−1. |
Now, for any n>0 with iK≤n≤(i+1)K, we have
1nn−1∑j=0d(gα′j(sj),sj+1)≤iDiK=DK<η. |
Therefore,
lim supn→∞1nn−1∑j=0d(gα′j(sj),sj+1)<η. |
This implies that {sj}j∈Z+ is an almost δ-mean pseudo-orbit of F. By hypothesis, ∃ z∈M such that
lim supn→∞1nn−1∑j=0d(Fσ′j(z),sj)<η2. | (4.1) |
Notice that, there exist infinitely many i∈Z+ for which there is some l with 2iK≤l≤(2i+1)K−1, i.e., sl∈{s,Fσ1(s),Fσ2(s),…,FσK−1(s)} such that d(Fσ′l(z),sl)<η2. Otherwise,
lim supn→∞1nn−1∑j=0d(Fσ′j(z),sj)≥η2 |
which contradicts (4.1).
Similarly, the above statement holds when (2i+1)K≤l≤2(i+1)K−1, i.e., sl∈{g−(K−1)α∗(t),g−(K−2)α∗(t),…,g−1α∗(t),t}.
Thus, we can find two integers l1 and l2 with 0<l1<l2 such that sl1=Fσp1(s) for some 0≤p1≤K−1 satisfying d(Fσ′l1(z),sl1)<η2 and sl2=g−p2α∗(t) for some 0≤p2≤K−1 satisfying d(Fσ′l2(z),sl2)<η2. Using the condition of equicontinuity, we have, d(gα′l1(Fσ′l1(z)),gα′l1(sl1))<γ. This implies that d(Fσ′l1+1(z),gα′l1(sl1))<γ and d(Fσ′l2(z),sl2)<γ. Therefore,
{s,Fσ1(s),Fσ2(s),…,Fσp1−1(s),Fσp1(s)=sl1,Fσ′l1+1(z), |
Fσ′l1+2(z),…,Fσ′l2−1(z),g−p2α∗(t)=sl2,g−(p2−1)α∗(t),…,g−1α∗(t),t} is a γ-chain joining s and t with respect to the finite sequence {α0,α1,…,αp1−1,α′l1,α′l1+1,…,α′l2−1,α∗,α∗,…α∗⏟p2times}. Hence, F is CT.
In this work, we have introduced the notions of MCT, TMCT, MCM, and AMSP to IFSs and studied their interrelations. In Example 3.5, we have given an example of an IFS that is not CT but MCM. In Theorem 3.7, we proved that a TMCT IFS is MCM if the constituent maps are Lipschitz. For an iterated function system F, we show that F×F is MCT if F is MCM. We also showed that F×F is MCT if F is TMCT. Lastly, we prove that an IFS F, one of whose constituent maps gα is surjective and has AMSP, is CT.
Thiyam Thadoi Devi: ideas, states, proof, and examples; Khundrakpam Binod Mangang: ideas, conceptualization, states, examples, and submission; Sonika Akoijam: states, proofs, and first draft; Lalhmangaihzuala: states, proofs, and edition; Phinao Ramwungzan: states, proofs, and examples; Jay Prakash Singh: revision and draft of the manuscript. All authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript.
The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.
We would like to thank the anonymous referees for their careful reading and valuable suggestions that have help us to improve the initial manuscript.
The authors declare no conficts of interest.
[1] |
A. Allison, D. Abbott, Control systems with stochastic feedback, Chaos, 11 (2001), 715–724. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1397769 doi: 10.1063/1.1397769
![]() |
[2] |
J. M. R. Parrondo, P. G. Harmer, D. Abbott, New paradoxical games based on Brownian ratchets, Phys. Rev. Lett., 85 (2000), 5226. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.5226 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.5226
![]() |
[3] |
A. Z. Bahabadi, Shadowing and average shadowing properties of for iterated function systems, Georgian Math. J., 22 (2015), 179–184. https://doi.org/10.1515/gmj-2015-0008 doi: 10.1515/gmj-2015-0008
![]() |
[4] | R. Devaney, An introduction to chaotic dynamical systems, 2 Eds., CRC Press, 2003. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429502309 |
[5] | T. Y. Li, J. Yorke, Period three implies chaos, Amer. Math. Mon., 82 (1975), 985–992. https://doi.org/10.2307/2318254 |
[6] |
E. T. Whittaker, D. Birkhoff's collected papers, Nature, 167 (1951), 250–251. https://doi.org/10.1038/167250a0 doi: 10.1038/167250a0
![]() |
[7] | W. H. Gottschalk, G. A. Hedlund, Topological dynamics, American Mathematical Society Colloquium Publications, 1995. |
[8] | K. E. Petersen, Ergodic Theory, Cambridge University Press, 1983. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511608728 |
[9] |
A. M. Bruckner, T. Hu, On scrambled sets for chaotic functions, Trans. Am. Math. Soc., 301 (1987), 289–297. https://doi.org/10.2307/2000339 doi: 10.2307/2000339
![]() |
[10] | J. Vries, Elements of topological dynamics, Springer Dordrecht, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8171-4 |
[11] |
Y. A. Sidorov, Topologically indecomposable transformations of the n-dimensional space, Math. Notes Acad. Sci. USSR, 4 (1968), 939–943. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01110833 doi: 10.1007/BF01110833
![]() |
[12] |
T. T. Devi, K. B. Mangang, On equicontinuity, transitivity and distality of iterated function systems, J. Dyn. Syst. Geom. Theor., 18 (2020), 223–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/1726037X.2020.1847766 doi: 10.1080/1726037X.2020.1847766
![]() |
[13] |
K. B. Mangang, Mean equicontinuity, sensitivity, expansiveness and distality of product dynamical systems, J. Dyn. Syst. Geom. Theor., 13 (2015), 27–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/1726037X.2015.1027106 doi: 10.1080/1726037X.2015.1027106
![]() |
[14] |
W. Brian, J. Meddaugh, B. Raines, Chain transitivity and variations of the shadowing property, Ergod. Theory Dyn. Syst., 35 (2015), 2044–2052. https://doi.org/10.1017/etds.2014.21 doi: 10.1017/etds.2014.21
![]() |
[15] | D. V. Anosov, On a class of invariant sets of smooth dynamical systems, Proc. 5th Int. Conf. on Nonlin. Oscill, 2 (1970), 39–45. |
[16] |
R. Bowen, ω-limit sets for Axiom A diffeomorphisms, J. Differ. Equations, 18 (1975), 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0396(75)90065-0 doi: 10.1016/0022-0396(75)90065-0
![]() |
[17] |
D. Kwietniak, P. Oprocha, A note on the average shadowing property for expansive maps, Topol. Appl., 159 (2012), 19–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.topol.2011.04.016 doi: 10.1016/j.topol.2011.04.016
![]() |
[18] |
A. D. Barwell, C. Good, P. Oprocha, Shadowing and expansivity in subspaces, Fund. Math., 219 (2012), 223–243. https://doi.org/10.4064/fm219-3-2 doi: 10.4064/fm219-3-2
![]() |
[19] |
A. Fakhari, F. H. Ghane, On shadowing: ordinary and ergodic, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 349 (2010), 151–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmaa.2009.11.004 doi: 10.1016/j.jmaa.2009.11.004
![]() |
[20] | D. A. Dastjerdi, M. Hosseini, Sub-shadowings, Nonlinear Anal., 72 (2010), 3759–3766. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.na.2010.01.014 |
[21] |
A. Darabi, Periodic shadowing in iterated function systems, Asian-Eur. J. Math., 15 (2022), 2250064. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793557122500644 doi: 10.1142/S1793557122500644
![]() |
[22] |
J. Jiang, L. Wang, Y. Zhao, The d-shadowing property and average shadowing property for iterated function systems, Complexity, 2020 (2020), 4374508. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/4374508 doi: 10.1155/2020/4374508
![]() |
[23] |
H. Wang, Q. Liu, Ergodic shadowing properties of iterated function systems, Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc., 44 (2021), 767–783. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40840-020-00976-x doi: 10.1007/s40840-020-00976-x
![]() |
[24] |
R. Das, M. Garg, Average chain transitivity and the almost average shadowing property, Commun. Korean Math. Soc., 32 (2017), 201–214. https://doi.org/10.4134/CKMS.c160066 doi: 10.4134/CKMS.c160066
![]() |
[25] | M. Garg, R. Das, Chaotic behaviour of maps possesing the almost average shadowing property, Hacet. J. Math. Stat., 50 (2021), 1371–1383. |
[26] | J. E. Hutchinson, Fractals and self similarity, Indiana Univ. Math. J., 30 (1981), 713–747. |
[27] | M. F. Barnsley, Fractals everywhere, 2 Eds., Academic Press, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2013-0-10335-2 |
[28] |
M. F. Barnsley, S. Demko, Iterated function systems and the global construction of fractals, Proc. R. Soc. Lond., Ser. A, Math. Phys. Sci., 399 (1985), 243–275. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1985.0057 doi: 10.1098/rspa.1985.0057
![]() |
[29] |
M. Kulczycki, D. Kwietniak, P. Oprocha, On almost specification and average shadowing properties, Fund. Math., 224 (2014), 241–278. https://doi.org/10.4064/fm224-3-4 doi: 10.4064/fm224-3-4
![]() |
[30] |
M. F. Nia, Parameterized IFS with the asymptotic average shadowing property, Qual. Theory Dyn. Syst., 15 (2016), 367–381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12346-015-0184-6 doi: 10.1007/s12346-015-0184-6
![]() |
[31] |
X. Wu, L. Wang, J. Liang, The chain properties and average shadowing property of iterated function systems, Qual. Theory Dyn. Syst., 17 (2018), 219–227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12346-016-0220-1 doi: 10.1007/s12346-016-0220-1
![]() |