On some weak contractive mappings of integral type and fixed point results in $ b $-metric spaces

Hongyan Guan; Jinze Gou; Yan Hao; Hongyan Guan; Jinze Gou; Yan Hao

doi:10.3934/math.2024228

AIMS Mathematics

2024, Volume 9, Issue 2: 4729-4748. doi: 10.3934/math.2024228

Previous Article Next Article

Research article

On some weak contractive mappings of integral type and fixed point results in $b$ -metric spaces

School of Mathematics and Systems Science, Shenyang Normal University, Shenyang 110034, China

Received: 12 December 2023 Revised: 06 January 2024 Accepted: 12 January 2024 Published: 19 January 2024
MSC : 47H09, 47H10, 54H25

In the article, we considered the fixed point problem for contractive mappings of integral type in the setting of $b$ -metric spaces for the first time. First, we introduced the concepts of $\theta$ -weak contraction and $\theta$ - $\psi$ -weak contraction. Second, the existence and uniqueness of fixed points of contractive mappings of integral type in $b$ -metric spaces were studied. Meanwhile, two examples were given to prove the feasibility of our results. As an application, we proved the solvability of a functional equation arising in dynamic programming.

Keywords:

Citation: Hongyan Guan, Jinze Gou, Yan Hao. On some weak contractive mappings of integral type and fixed point results in $b$ -metric spaces[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(2): 4729-4748. doi: 10.3934/math.2024228

Related Papers:

[1]	Abigail Wiafe, Pasi Fränti . Affective algorithmic composition of music: A systematic review. Applied Computing and Intelligence, 2023, 3(1): 27-43. doi: 10.3934/aci.2023003
[2]	Abrhalei Tela, Abraham Woubie, Ville Hautamäki . Transferring monolingual model to low-resource language: the case of Tigrinya. Applied Computing and Intelligence, 2024, 4(2): 184-194. doi: 10.3934/aci.2024011
[3]	Pasi Fränti, Sami Sieranoja . Clustering accuracy. Applied Computing and Intelligence, 2024, 4(1): 24-44. doi: 10.3934/aci.2024003
[4]	Tinja Pitkämäki, Tapio Pahikkala, Ileana Montoya Perez, Parisa Movahedi, Valtteri Nieminen, Tom Southerington, Juho Vaiste, Mojtaba Jafaritadi, Muhammad Irfan Khan, Elina Kontio, Pertti Ranttila, Juha Pajula, Harri Pölönen, Aysen Degerli, Johan Plomp, Antti Airola . Finnish perspective on using synthetic health data to protect privacy: the PRIVASA project. Applied Computing and Intelligence, 2024, 4(2): 138-163. doi: 10.3934/aci.2024009
[5]	Francis Nweke, Abm Adnan Azmee, Md Abdullah Al Hafiz Khan, Yong Pei, Dominic Thomas, Monica Nandan . A transformer-driven framework for multi-label behavioral health classification in police narratives. Applied Computing and Intelligence, 2024, 4(2): 234-252. doi: 10.3934/aci.2024014
[6]	Hong Cao, Rong Ma, Yanlong Zhai, Jun Shen . LLM-Collab: a framework for enhancing task planning via chain-of-thought and multi-agent collaboration. Applied Computing and Intelligence, 2024, 4(2): 328-348. doi: 10.3934/aci.2024019
[7]	Elizaveta Zimina, Kalervo Järvelin, Jaakko Peltonen, Aarne Ranta, Kostas Stefanidis, Jyrki Nummenmaa . Linguistic summarisation of multiple entities in RDF graphs. Applied Computing and Intelligence, 2024, 4(1): 1-18. doi: 10.3934/aci.2024001
[8]	Yang Wang, Hassan A. Karimi . Exploring large language models for climate forecasting. Applied Computing and Intelligence, 2025, 5(1): 1-13. doi: 10.3934/aci.2025001
[9]	Marko Niemelä, Mikaela von Bonsdorff, Sami Äyrämö, Tommi Kärkkäinen . Classification of dementia from spoken speech using feature selection and the bag of acoustic words model. Applied Computing and Intelligence, 2024, 4(1): 45-65. doi: 10.3934/aci.2024004
[10]	Libero Nigro, Franco Cicirelli . Property assessment of Peterson's mutual exclusion algorithms. Applied Computing and Intelligence, 2024, 4(1): 66-92. doi: 10.3934/aci.2024005

Abstract

1. Introduction

The study of integral inequality is an interesting area for research in mathematical analysis [1,2]. The fundamental integral inequalities can be instrumental in cultivating the subjective properties of convexity. The existence of massive literature surrounding integral inequalities for convex functions [-] depicts the importance of this topic. The most beautiful fact about convex function is that, it has a very elegant representation based on an inequality presented when the functional value of a linear combination of two points in its domain does not exceed the linear combination of the functional values at those two points. Fractional calculus owes its starting point to whether or not the importance of a derivative to an integer order could be generalized to a fractional order which is not an integer. Following this unique conversation between L'Hopital and Leibniz, the concept of fractional calculus grabbed the eye of some extraordinary researchers like Euler, Laplace, Fourier, Lacroix, Abel, Riemann, and Liouville. Over time, fractional operators have been differentiated with their singularity, locality and having general forms with the improvements made in their kernel structures. In this sense, based on the basic concepts of fractional analysis, Riemann-Liouville(R-L) and Caputo operators, various new trends have been successful. Fractional integral inequalities are marvelous tools for building up the qualitative and quantitative properties of preinvex functions. There has been a ceaseless development of intrigue in such a region of research so as to address the issues of different utilizations of these variants. In $\rm 1938$ , Ostrowski inequality established the following useful and interesting integral inequality, (see [12] and [13]). This review assumed a vital part in growing and getting varieties of well-known integral inequalities with the assistance of fractional integral operators. Then again, by characterizing various forms of Riemann-Liouville(R-L) fractional operator somewhat recently, new forms and refinements of integral inequalities involving differentiable functions have been presented. Studies in the field of fractional calculus have carried another point of view and direction in different fields of applied sciences. It has revealed insight into numerous real-life issues with the utilizations of recently characterized fractional operators.

For recent result and their related some generalizations, variants and extensions concerning Ostrowski inequality (see [9,10,14-17]).

The aim of this paper is to establish some integral inequalities for functions whose derivatives in absolute value are preinvex. Now we recall some notions in invexity analysis which will be used through the paper (see [20,21,24,26,28]) and references therein.

Let $g:\mathcal K \rightarrow \Re$ and $\eta : \mathcal K \times \mathcal K \rightarrow \Re$ , where $\mathcal K$ is a nonempty set in $\Re^n,$ be continuous functions.

Definition [] A function $g:\mathcal K\subseteq \Re = \left( -\infty , \infty \right) \rightarrow \Re$ is said to be convex, if we have

$\begin{equation*} g\left( v\mathfrak{c}+\left( 1-v\right) \mathfrak{e}\right) \leq vg\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) +\left( 1-v\right) g\left( \mathfrak{e}\right). \end{equation*}$

for all $\mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e}\in \mathcal K\;$ and $v\in \left[0, 1\right].$

Definition [] The set $\mathcal K \subset \Re^n$ is said to be invex with respect to $\eta(., .)$ , if for every $\mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e}\in \mathcal K$ and $v\in[0, 1]$

$\begin{equation*} \mathfrak{c}+v\eta(\mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c})\in \mathcal K. \end{equation*}$

The above set $\mathcal K$ is also called $\eta$ -connected set.

It is obvious that every convex set is invex with respect to $\eta(\mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}) = \mathfrak{e}-\mathfrak{c}$ but there exist invex sets which are not convex [20].

Definition The function $g$ on the invex set $\mathcal K$ is said to be preinvex with respect to $\eta$ if

$\begin{equation*} g\left( \mathfrak{c}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) \right) \ \leq\ \left( 1-v\right) \ g\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \ +\ v\ g\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \ , \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \forall \mathfrak{c}\ , \ \mathfrak{e}\in \mathcal K\ , \ \ v\in \left[ 0, 1\right]. \end{equation*}$

The function $-g$ is said to be preconcave if and only if $g$ is preinvex .

The important note that every convex function is a preinvex function but the converse is not true []. For example $g(v) = -|v|, \ \ \forall \ v\in \Re$ , is not convex function but it is preinvex function with respect to

$\begin{equation*} \eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) = \left\{ \begin{array}{c} \mathfrak{e}-\mathfrak{c}\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ if\ \ \mathfrak{c} \mathfrak{e}\geq 0, \\ \mathfrak{c}-\mathfrak{e}\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ if\ \ \mathfrak{c} \mathfrak{e} < 0. \end{array} \right. \end{equation*}$

We also want the following hypothesis regarding the function $\eta$ which is due to Mohan et al. []. Condition- $\mathcal C$ : Let $\mathcal K \subset \Re^n$ be an open invex subset with respect to $\eta : \mathcal K \times \mathcal K \rightarrow \Re$ . For any $\mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e} \in \mathcal K$ and $v \in [0, 1]$

$\begin{eqnarray} \eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{e}+v\ \eta \left( \mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e}\right) \right) = \ \ -v\;\eta \left( \mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e}\right), \\ \eta \left( \mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e}+v\ \eta \left( \mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e}\right) \right) = \ \ \left( 1-v\right) \;\eta \left( \mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e}\right). \end{eqnarray}$

(1.1)

For any $\mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e}\in \mathcal K$ and $v_{1}, v_{2} \in [0, 1]$ from condition $\mathcal C$ , we have

$\begin{eqnarray*} \eta \left( \mathfrak{e}+v_{2}\ \eta \left( \mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e}\right) \ , \ \mathfrak{e}+v_{1}\ \eta \left( \mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e}\right) \right) = \ \ \left( v_{2}-v_{1}\right) \eta \left( \mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e}\right). \end{eqnarray*}$

If $g$ is a preinvex function on $[\mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{c}+\eta(\mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c})]$ and the mapping $\eta$ satisfies condition $\mathcal C$ , then for every $v \in [0, 1]$ , from Eq (1.1), it yields that

$\begin{eqnarray} \label{1.2} \left\vert g\left( \mathfrak{c}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) \right) \right\vert = \ \left\vert g\left( \mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) \right) +\left( 1-v\right) \eta \left( \mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) \right) \right\vert \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \leq \ v\ \left\vert g\left( \mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) \right) \right\vert +\left( 1-v\right) \left\vert g\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert, \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \end{eqnarray}$

and

$\begin{eqnarray*} \label{1.3} \left\vert g\left( \mathfrak{c}+\left( 1-v\right) \eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) \right) \right\vert = \ \left\vert g\left( \mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) \right) +v\eta \left( \mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{c}+\eta \left(\mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) \right) \right\vert \ \ \ \ \ \\ \leq \ \left( 1-v\right) \ \left\vert g\left( \mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) \right) \right\vert +v\left\vert g\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert .\notag \end{eqnarray*}$

There are many vector functions that satisfy the condition $\mathcal C$ in [], which trivial case $\eta \left( \mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e}\right) = \mathfrak{c}-\mathfrak{e}$ . For example suppose $\mathcal K = \Re\backslash \{0\}$ and

$\begin{eqnarray*} \eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) = \left\{ \begin{array}{c} \mathfrak{e}-\mathfrak{c}\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ if\ \ \mathfrak{c} > 0, \mathfrak{e} > 0 \\ \mathfrak{e}-\mathfrak{c}\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ if\ \ \mathfrak{c} < 0, \mathfrak{e} < 0 \\ -\mathfrak{e}, \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ otherwise \end{array} \right. \end{eqnarray*}$

The set $\mathcal K$ is invex set and $\eta$ satisfies the condition $\mathcal C$ .

Noor et al. [23], proved the following Hermite-Hadamard type inequalities.

Theorem 1.1. Let $g:\mathcal K = [\mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{c}+\eta(\mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c})]\to (0, \infty)$ be a preinvex function on the interval of real numbers $\mathcal K^0$ with $\eta(\mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c})>0$ , then the following inequalities hold:

$\begin{eqnarray*} g\left( \frac{2\mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }{2}\right) \leq \frac{1}{ \eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\int_{\mathfrak{c}}^{\mathfrak{c}+\; \eta \left(\mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\left( x\right) \ dx\leq \frac{g\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \ +\ g\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) }{2}. \end{eqnarray*}$

Then Riemann-Liouville(R-L) fractional integrals of order $\varepsilon >0$ with $\mathfrak{c} \geq 0$ are defined as follows:

$\begin{equation*} J_{\mathfrak{c}^{+}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) = \ \frac{1}{\Gamma \left( \varepsilon \right) }\int_{\mathfrak{c}}^{\mathfrak{z}}\left( \mathfrak{z}-v\right) ^{\varepsilon -1}\ g \left( v\right) \ dv\ , \ \ \ \ \mathfrak{z} > \mathfrak{c}, \ \end{equation*}$

and

$\begin{equation*} J_{\mathfrak{e}^{-}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) = \ \frac{1}{\Gamma \left( \varepsilon \right) }\int_{\mathfrak{z}}^{\mathfrak{e}}\left( v-\mathfrak{z}\right) ^{\varepsilon -1}\ g\left( v\right) \ dv\ , \ \ \ \ \mathfrak{z} < \mathfrak{e}. \end{equation*}$

In [30], Sarikaya et al. also described the inequality in fractional integral version. In this study, considering the above mentioned theoretical framework, firstly, an integral identity which is candidate to produce Ostrowski type inequalities has been proved. With the help of such identity like Hölder, Power mean, Young's inequalities, Hölder-İşcan, Improved power means inequality and convexity, a new type of inequality, Ostrowski type inequalities, has been obtained.

2. Main results

In this section, we give Ostrowski inequalities for Riemann-Liouville(R-L) fractional integrals operator are obtained for a differentiable functions on $(\mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right))$ . For this purpose, we give a new identity that involve Riemann-Liouville(R-L) fractional integrals operator whose second derivatives are preinvex functions.

Lemma 2.1. Suppose that a mapping $g:[\mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right)]\rightarrow \Re$ istwice differentiable with $\mathfrak{c}< \mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right)$ . If $g^{{\prime \prime }}\in \mathcal L_{1}[\mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right)],$ then for all $\mathfrak{z}\in\lbrack \mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right)]$ and $\varepsilon >0,$ the following equality

$\begin{align} & \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +1}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) -\eta^{\varepsilon +1}\left(\mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right)}{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g^{{\prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) -\ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon }\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c} \right) +\eta^{\varepsilon }\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \\ & +\frac{\Gamma \left( \varepsilon +1\right) }{ \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\{J_{\mathfrak{[\mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)]}^{-}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{c} \right) +J_{[\mathfrak{\mathfrak{e}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right)]}^{+}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) g\} \\ & = \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)}{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\ \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +1}g^{{ \prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)\right) dv\ \\ & +\frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right)}{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\ \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +1}g^{{ \prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right) \right)dv, \end{align}$

(2.1)

satisfies for $v\in [0, 1]$ .

Proof. Let us assume that

$\begin{align} & \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)}{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\ \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +1}g^{{ \prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)\right) dv\ \\ & +\frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right)}{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\ \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +1}g^{{ \prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right) \right)dv, \\& I = \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)}{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\ I_{1}+ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right)}{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\ I_{2} , \end{align}$

(2.2)

where

$\begin{align*} & I_{1} = \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +1}g^{{ \prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)\right) dv\ \\& = \frac{v^{\varepsilon +1}g^{{\prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)\right) } {\eta\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)} g|_{0}^{1}-\int_{0}^{1}\frac{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) v^{\varepsilon }\ g^{{\prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)\right) }{\eta(\mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c})}dv \\& = \; \frac{g^{{\prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\eta\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)}-\frac{\varepsilon +1}{\eta\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)} \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon }\ g^{{\prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)\right) dv \\& = \; \frac{g^{{\prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)}-\frac{\varepsilon +1}{ \eta ^{2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)}g\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) +\frac{\varepsilon \left( \varepsilon +1\right) }{\eta ^{2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)}\int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon -1}\ g\left( \mathfrak{c}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)\right) dv \\& = \; \frac{g^{{\prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)}-\frac{\varepsilon +1}{\eta ^{2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)}g\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \ +\frac{\Gamma \left( \varepsilon +2\right) }{ \eta ^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\ J_{\mathfrak{[\mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)]}^{-}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{c}\right), \end{align*}$

and similarly

$\begin{align*} & I_{2} = \ \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +1}g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right) \right) dv \\& = \frac{v^{\varepsilon +1}g^{{\prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right) \right) } {\eta\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right)} g|_{0}^{1}-\int_{0}^{1}\frac{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) v^{\varepsilon }\ g^{{\prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right) \right) }{\eta(\mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e})}dv \\& = \; \frac{g^{{\prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\eta\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right)}-\frac{\varepsilon +1}{\eta\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)} \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon }\ g^{{\prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)\right) dv \\& = \; -\frac{g^{{\prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right)}-\frac{\varepsilon +1}{ \eta ^{2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right)}g\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) +\frac{\varepsilon \left( \varepsilon +1\right) }{\eta ^{2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right)}\int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon -1}\ g\left( \mathfrak{e}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right)\right) dv \\& = \; -\frac{g^{{\prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right)}-\frac{\varepsilon +1}{\eta ^{2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right)}g\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \ +\frac{\Gamma \left( \varepsilon +2\right) }{ \eta ^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }\ J_{\mathfrak{[\mathfrak{e}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right)]}^{+}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{e}\right), \end{align*}$

Combining $I_{1}$ and $I_{2}$ with (2.2), we get (2.3).

Remark 2.1. If we set $\varepsilon = 1$ and $\eta\left( \mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e}\right) = \mathfrak{c}-\mathfrak{e}$ in Lemma 2.1, we get (Lemma 1 in [11]).

Theorem 2.1. Assume that all the assumptions as defined in Lemma 2.1 and $|g^{{\prime \prime }}|$ is preinvex function on $[\mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right)],$ then for all $\varepsilon >0,$ the following inequality

$\begin{align} & g|\frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +1}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) -\eta^{\varepsilon +1}\left(\mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right)}{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g^{{\prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) -\ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon }\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c} \right) +\eta^{\varepsilon }\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \\ & +\frac{\Gamma \left( \varepsilon +1\right) }{ \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\{J_{\mathfrak{[\mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)]}^{-}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{c} \right) +J_{[\mathfrak{\mathfrak{e}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right)]}^{+}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) g\}g| \\ & \leq \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right)\left( \varepsilon +3\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert \; +\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert \frac{1}{\varepsilon +2 }g\} \\ & +\ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right)\left( \varepsilon +3\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert \; +\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert \frac{1}{ \varepsilon +2 }g\}. \end{align}$

(2.3)

satisfies for $v\in \lbrack 0, 1].$

Proof. From Lemma 2.1 and since $|g^{{\prime \prime}}|$ is preinvex function on $[\mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right)],$ we obtain

$\begin{align*} & g|\frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +1}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) -\eta^{\varepsilon +1}\left(\mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right)}{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g^{{\prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) -\ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon }\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c} \right) +\eta^{\varepsilon }\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \\ & +\frac{\Gamma \left( \varepsilon +1\right) }{ \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\{J_{\mathfrak{[\mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)]}^{-}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{c} \right) +J_{[\mathfrak{\mathfrak{e}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right)]}^{+}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) g\}g| \\& \notag \leq \ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)}{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\ \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +1}|g^{{ \prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)\right)| dv\ \notag \\ & +\frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right)}{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\ \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +1}|g^{{ \prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right) \right)|dv \\& \notag \leq \ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\ \ \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +1}g\{v\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert +\left( 1-v\right) \left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert g\}dv \\& \notag +\; \frac{ \eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) } \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +1}g\{v\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert +\left( 1-v\right) \left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert g\}dv \\& \notag \leq \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right)\left( \varepsilon +3\right)\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert \; +\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert \frac{1}{\varepsilon +2 }g\} \notag \\ & +\ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right)\left( \varepsilon +3\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert \; +\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert \frac{1}{\varepsilon +2 }g\}. \end{align*}$

This completes the proof.

Remark 2.2. If we set $\varepsilon = 1$ and $\eta\left( \mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e}\right) = \mathfrak{c}-\mathfrak{e},$ then from Theorem 2.1, we get (Theorem 4 in []) with $s = 1$ .

Corollary 2.1. By using Theorem 2.1 with $|g^{{\prime \prime }}|\leq \mathcal M,$ we get the following inequality

Remark 2.3. If we set $\varepsilon = 1$ and $\eta\left( \mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e}\right) = \mathfrak{c}-\mathfrak{e},$ then from Corollary 2.1, we recapture (Theorem 2.1, [32]).

Corollary 2.2. If we set $\eta\left( \mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e}\right) = \mathfrak{c}-\mathfrak{e}$ and $\mathfrak{z} = \frac{\mathfrak{c}+\mathfrak{e}}{2},$ in Corollary 2.1, we get the mid-point inequality

$\begin{eqnarray*} &&\left\vert \frac{\Gamma \left( \varepsilon +1\right) }{ \left( \mathfrak{e}-\mathfrak{c}\right) }g\{J_{\left( \frac{\mathfrak{c}+\mathfrak{e}}{2} \right) ^{-}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) +J_{\left( \frac{\mathfrak{c}+ \mathfrak{e}}{2}\right) ^{+}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) g\}-\left( \frac{ \mathfrak{e}-\mathfrak{c}}{2}\right) ^{\varepsilon -1}g\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert \\ &\leq &\; \mathcal M\; \frac{\left( \mathfrak{e}-\mathfrak{c}\right) ^{\varepsilon +1}}{2^{\varepsilon +1}}\; g(\frac{1}{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \left( \varepsilon +2\right) }g). \end{eqnarray*}$

Theorem 2.2. Assume that all the assumptions as defined in Lemma 2.1 and $|g^{{\prime \prime }}|^q,$ $q>1$ is preinvex function on $[\mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right)],$ then for all $\varepsilon >0,$ the following inequality

$\begin{align} & g|\frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +1}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) -\eta^{\varepsilon +1}\left(\mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right)}{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g^{{\prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) -\ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon }\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c} \right) +\eta^{\varepsilon }\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \\ & +\frac{\Gamma \left( \varepsilon +1\right) }{ \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\{J_{\mathfrak{[\mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)]}^{-}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{c} \right) +J_{[\mathfrak{\mathfrak{e}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right)]}^{+}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) g\}g| \\ & \leq \ \left( \frac{1}{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) p+1}\right) ^{\frac{1}{p}}\; \\ & \times g[\frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\left( \frac{\left\vert g^{ {\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left\vert g^{{ \prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{2}\right) ^{\frac{1}{ q}}+\frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\left( \frac{\left\vert g^{{ \prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left\vert g^{{ \prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{2}\right) ^{\frac{1 }{q}}g], \end{align}$

(2.4)

satisfies for $v\in \lbrack 0, 1],$ where $q^{-1}+p^{-1} = 1.$

Proof. Suppose that $p>1.$ From Lemma 2.1, by using the well-known Hölder integral inequality and the preinvexity of $|g^{{\prime \prime}}|^q$ , we obtain

(2.5)

$\begin{align} & \leq \ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)}{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\ \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +1}|g^{{ \prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)\right)| dv\ \notag \\ & +\frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right)}{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\ \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +1}|g^{{ \prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right) \right)|dv \end{align}$

(2.6)

$\begin{align} & \leq \ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\ \ \left( \int_{0}^{1}v^{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) p}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{p}}\left( \int_{0}^{1}\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)\right) \right\vert ^{q}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}} \\& +\; \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2} \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\left( \int_{0}^{1}v^{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) p}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{p}}\left( \int_{0}^{1}\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right) \right) \right\vert ^{q}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}} . \end{align}$

(2.7)

Since $|g^{{\prime \prime}}|^q$ is preinvexity on $[\mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right)],$ we obtain

$\begin{align} & \int_{0}^{1}\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)\right) \right\vert ^{q}dv\leq \int_{0}^{1}g\{v\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left( 1-v\right) \left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert ^{q}g\}dv \\& = \ \frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{2}, \end{align}$

(2.8)

and

$\begin{align} & \int_{0}^{1}\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right) \right) \right\vert ^{q}dv\leq \int_{0}^{1}g\{v\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left( 1-v\right) \left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert ^{q}g\}dv \\& = \ \frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{2}. \end{align}$

(2.9)

By using (2.8) and (2.9) with (2.7), we obtain

This completes the proof.

Remark 2.4. If we set $\varepsilon = 1$ and $\eta\left( \mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e}\right) = \mathfrak{c}-\mathfrak{e},$ then from Theorem 2.2, we get ( Theorem 5, []) with $s = 1$ .

Corollary 2.3. Using Theorem 2.2 with $|g^{{\prime \prime }}|\leq \mathcal M,$ we get

Corollary 2.4. If in Corollary 2.3, we set $\eta\left( \mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e}\right) = \mathfrak{c}-\mathfrak{e}$ and $\mathfrak{z} = \frac{\mathfrak{c}+\mathfrak{e}}{2},$ then we get the mid-point inequality

Theorem 2.3. Assume that all the assumptions as defined in Lemma 2.1 and $|g^{{\prime \prime }}|^q,$ $q\geq1$ is preinvex function on $[\mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right)],$ then for all $\varepsilon >0,$ the following inequality

$\begin{align} & g|\frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +1}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) -\eta^{\varepsilon +1}\left(\mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right)}{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g^{{\prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) -\ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon }\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c} \right) +\eta^{\varepsilon }\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \\ & +\frac{\Gamma \left( \varepsilon +1\right) }{ \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\{J_{\mathfrak{[\mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)]}^{-}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{c} \right) +J_{[\mathfrak{\mathfrak{e}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right)]}^{+}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) g\}g| \\ & \leq \ \left( \frac{1}{\varepsilon +2}\right) ^{1-\frac{1}{q}}\; g[\frac{ \eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\left( \frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{\varepsilon +3}+\frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{\left( \varepsilon +2\right) \left( \varepsilon +3\right) }\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}} \\ & +\frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\left( \frac{\left\vert g^{{ \prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{\varepsilon +3}+\frac{ \left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{ \left( \varepsilon +2\right) \left( \varepsilon +3\right) }\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}}g] , \end{align}$

(2.10)

satisfies for $v\in \lbrack 0, 1].$

Proof. Suppose that $q\geq1.$ From Lemma 2.1, by using the power-mean integral inequality and preinvexity of $|g^{{\prime \prime }}|^q$ , we obtain

$\begin{align} & \leq \ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\ \ \left( \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +1}dv\right) ^{1-\frac{1}{q}}\left( \int_{0}^{1}\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)\right) \right\vert ^{q}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}} \\& +\; \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\left( \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +1}dv\right) ^{1-\frac{1}{q}}\left( \int_{0}^{1}\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right) \right) \right\vert ^{q}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}} . \end{align}$

(2.11)

Since $|g^{{\prime \prime}}|^q$ is preinvexity on $[\mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right)],$ we obtain

$\begin{align} & \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +1}\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)\right) \right\vert ^{q}dv\leq \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +1}g\{v\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left( 1-v\right) \left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert ^{q}g\}dv \\& = \ \frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{ \varepsilon +3}+\frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{\left( \varepsilon +2\right) \left( \varepsilon +3\right) } \end{align}$

(2.12)

and

$\begin{align} & \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +1}\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right) \right) \right\vert ^{q}dv\leq \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +1}g\{v\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left( 1-v\right) \left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert ^{q}g\}dv \\& = \ \frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{ \varepsilon +3}+\frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{\left( \varepsilon +2\right) \left( \varepsilon +3\right) }. \end{align}$

(2.13)

By using (2.12) and (2.13) with (2.11), we obtain

This completes the proof.

Remark 2.5. If we set $\varepsilon = 1$ and $\eta\left( \mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e}\right) = \mathfrak{c}-\mathfrak{e},$ then from Theorem 2.3, we get (Theorem 6, [])with $s = 1$ .

Corollary 2.5. Under the same assumptions in Theorem 2.3 with $|g^{{\prime \prime }}|\leq \mathcal M,$ we get the following inequality

Corollary 2.6. If in Corollary 2.5, we set $\eta\left( \mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e}\right) = \mathfrak{c}-\mathfrak{e}$ and $\mathfrak{z} = \frac{\mathfrak{c}+\mathfrak{e}}{2},$ then we get the mid-point inequality

Theorem 2.4. Assume that all the assumptions as defined in Lemma 2.1 and $|g^{{\prime \prime }}|^q,$ $q>1$ is preinvex function on $[\mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right)],$ then for all $\varepsilon >0,$ the following inequality

$\begin{align} & g|\frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +1}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) -\eta^{\varepsilon +1}\left(\mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right)}{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g^{{\prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) -\ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon }\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c} \right) +\eta^{\varepsilon }\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \\ & +\frac{\Gamma \left( \varepsilon +1\right) }{ \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\{J_{\mathfrak{[\mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)]}^{-}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{c} \right) +J_{[\mathfrak{\mathfrak{e}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right)]}^{+}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) g\}g| \\ & \leq \ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\{\frac{1}{\left( \left( \varepsilon +1\right) p+1\right) p}+\frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime } }\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime } }\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{2q}g\} \\ & +\; \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2} \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\{\frac{1}{\left( \left( \varepsilon +1\right) p+1\right) p}+\frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{2q}g\}, \end{align}$

(2.14)

satisfies for $v\in \lbrack 0, 1].$

Proof. From Lemma 2.1, we obtain

By using the Young's inequality as

$\begin{align*} & xy \ < \ \frac{1}{p}x^p + \frac{1}{q}y^q. \end{align*}$

$\begin{align*} & g|\frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +1}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) -\eta^{\varepsilon +1}\left(\mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right)}{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g^{{\prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) -\ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon }\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c} \right) +\eta^{\varepsilon }\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \\ & +\frac{\Gamma \left( \varepsilon +1\right) }{ \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\{J_{\mathfrak{[\mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)]}^{-}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{c} \right) +J_{[\mathfrak{\mathfrak{e}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right)]}^{+}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) g\}g| \\& \notag \leq \ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\{\frac{1}{p}\int_{0}^{1}v^{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) p}dv+\frac{1}{q}\int_{0}^{1}\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)\right) \right\vert ^{q}dvg\} \\& \notag +\ \; \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\; \; g\{\frac{1}{p}\int_{0}^{1}v^{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) p}dv+\frac{ 1}{q}\int_{0}^{1}\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right)\right) \right\vert ^{q}dvg\} \\& \notag \leq \ \frac{\eta ^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\{\frac{1}{p}\int_{0}^{1}v^{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) p}dv+\frac{1}{q}\int_{0}^{1}g\{v\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left( 1-v\right) \left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert ^{q}g\}g\} \\& \notag +\ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }\ g\{\frac{1}{p}\int_{0}^{1}v^{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) p}dv+\frac{ 1}{q}\int_{0}^{1}g\{v\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left( 1-v\right) \left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert ^{q}g\}g\} \\& \notag \leq \ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }{\left( \alpha +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\{ \frac{1}{\left( \left( \varepsilon +1\right) p+1\right) p}+\frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{2q}g\} \\& \notag +\; \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\{\frac{1}{\left( \left( \varepsilon +1\right) p+1\right) p}+\frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{2q}g\}. \end{align*}$

This completes the proof.

Corollary 2.7. If we set $\eta\left( \mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e}\right) = \mathfrak{c}-\mathfrak{e}$ and $\varepsilon = 1$ in Theorem 2.4, we get

$\begin{align*} & \left\vert \frac{1\ }{\mathfrak{e}-\mathfrak{c}}\int_{\mathfrak{c}}^{\mathfrak{e}}g\left( u\right) du-g\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) +\left( \mathfrak{z}-\frac{\mathfrak{c}+\mathfrak{e} }{2}\right) g^{{\prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert \\ & \leq \frac{\left( \mathfrak{z}-\mathfrak{c}\right) ^{3}}{2\left( \mathfrak{e}-\mathfrak{c} \right) }g[\frac{1}{\left( 2p+1\right) p}+\frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{2q}g]+\frac{\left( \mathfrak{e}-\mathfrak{z}\right) ^{3}}{2\left( \mathfrak{e}-\mathfrak{c}\right) }g[ \frac{1}{\left( 2p+1\right) p}+\frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{2q}g]. \end{align*}$

Corollary 2.8. If in Theorem 2.4, we set $\eta\left( \mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{e}\right) = \mathfrak{c}-\mathfrak{e}$ and $\mathfrak{z} = \frac{\mathfrak{c}+\mathfrak{e}}{2},$ then we get the mid-point inequality

$\begin{align*} & \left\vert \frac{\Gamma \left( \varepsilon +1\right) }{ \left( \mathfrak{e}-\mathfrak{c}\right) }g\{J_{\left( \frac{\mathfrak{c}+\mathfrak{e}}{2} \right) ^{-}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) +J_{\left( \frac{\mathfrak{c}+ \mathfrak{e}}{2}\right) ^{+}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) g\}-\left( \frac{\mathfrak{e}-\mathfrak{c}}{2}\right) ^{\varepsilon -1}g\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert \\ & \leq \frac{\left( \mathfrak{e}-\mathfrak{c}\right) ^{\varepsilon +1}}{2^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \varepsilon +1\right) }g\{\frac{2}{\left( \left( \varepsilon +1\right) p+1\right) p}+\frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \frac{\mathfrak{c}+ \mathfrak{e}}{2}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{2q}+\frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime } }\left( \frac{\mathfrak{c}+\mathfrak{e}}{2}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left\vert g^{{ \prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{2q}g\}. \end{align*}$

Theorem 2.5. Assume that all the assumptions as defined in Lemma 2.1 and $|g^{{\prime \prime }}|^q,$ $q>1$ is preinvex function on $[\mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right)],$ then for all $\varepsilon >0,$ the following inequality

(2.15)

$\begin{align*} & \leq \ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g[\left( \frac{1}{\left( \varepsilon p+p+1\right) \left( \varepsilon p+p+2\right) }\right) ^{\frac{1}{p}}\left( \frac{1}{6}\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\frac{1}{3}\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert ^{q}\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}} \notag \\ & +\; \left( \frac{1}{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) p+2}\right) ^{\frac{1}{p}}\left( \frac{1}{3}\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\frac{1}{6}\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert ^{q}\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}}g] \notag \\ & +\ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g[\; \left( \frac{1}{\left( \varepsilon p+p+1\right) \left( \varepsilon p+p+2\right) }\right) ^{\frac{1}{p}}\left( \frac{1}{6}\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\frac{1}{3}\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert ^{q}\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}} \notag \\ & +\; \left( \frac{1}{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) p+2}\right) ^{\frac{1}{p}}\left( \frac{1}{3}\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\frac{1}{6}\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert ^{q}\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}}g], \notag \end{align*}$

satisfies for $v\in \lbrack 0, 1],$ where $q^{-1}+p^{-1} = 1.$

Proof. From Lemma 2.1, by using the Hölder-İşcan integral inequality (see in []) and the preinvexity of $|g^{{\prime \prime}}|^q$ , we obtain

$\begin{align*} & \leq \ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g[\left( \int_{0}^{1}\left( 1-v\right) v^{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) p}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{p}}\left( \int_{0}^{1}\left( 1-v\right) \left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)\right) \right\vert ^{q}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}}\\& +\left( \int_{0}^{1}v^{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) p+1}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{p} }\left( \int_{0}^{1}v\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)\right) \right\vert ^{q}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}}g] \\& +\ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g[\left( \int_{0}^{1}\left( 1-v\right) v^{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) p}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{p}}\left( \int_{0}^{1}\left( 1-v\right) \left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right) \right) \right\vert ^{q}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}} \end{align*}$

$\begin{align*} & +\left( \int_{0}^{1}v^{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) p+1}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{p} }\left( \int_{0}^{1}v\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right) \right) \right\vert ^{q}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}}g] \\& \notag \leq \ \frac{\eta^{\alpha +2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g[\left( \int_{0}^{1}\left( 1-v\right) v^{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) p}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{p}}\left( \int_{0}^{1}\left( 1-v\right) \{v\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left( 1-v\right) \left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert ^{q}\}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}} \end{align*}$

$\begin{align*} & +\left( \int_{0}^{1}v^{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) p+1}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{p} }\left( \int_{0}^{1}v\{v\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left( 1-v\right) \left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert ^{q}\}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}}g] \\& \notag +\ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g[\left( \int_{0}^{1}\left( 1-v\right) v^{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) p}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{p}}\left( \int_{0}^{1}\left( 1-v\right) \{v\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left( 1-v\right) \left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert ^{q}\}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}} \\& \notag +\left( \int_{0}^{1}v^{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) p+1}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{p} }\left( \int_{0}^{1}v\{v\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left( 1-v\right) \left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert ^{q}\}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}}g]. \end{align*}$

After simplification, we get (2.15). This completes the proof.

Corollary 2.9. Using the same assumptions in Theorem 2.5 with $|g^{{\prime \prime }}|\leq \mathcal M,$ we get

Theorem 2.6. Assume that all the assumptions as defined in Lemma 2.1 and $|g^{{\prime \prime }}|^q,$ $q\geq1$ is preinvex function on $[\mathfrak{c}, \mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right)],$ then for all $\varepsilon >0,$ the following inequality

$\begin{align} & g|\frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +1}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) -\eta^{\varepsilon +1}\left(\mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right)}{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g^{{\prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) -\ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon }\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c} \right) +\eta^{\varepsilon }\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \\ & +\frac{\Gamma \left( \varepsilon +1\right) }{ \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g\{J_{\mathfrak{[\mathfrak{c}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right)]}^{-}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{c} \right) +J_{[\mathfrak{\mathfrak{e}+\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right)]}^{+}}^{\varepsilon }g\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) g\}g| \\ & \leq \ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g[\ \left( \frac{1}{\left( \varepsilon +2\right) \left( \varepsilon +3\right) }\right) ^{1-\frac{1}{q}}\left( \frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q} }{\left( \varepsilon +3\right) \left( \varepsilon +4\right) }+\frac{2\left\vert g^{{ \prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{\left( \varepsilon +2\right) \left( \varepsilon +3\right) \left( \varepsilon +4\right) }\right) ^{\frac{1 }{q}} \end{align}$

(2.16)

$\begin{align} & +\left( \frac{1}{\varepsilon +3}\right) ^{1-\frac{1}{q}}\left( \frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{\varepsilon +4}+ \frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{ \left( \varepsilon +3\right) \left( \varepsilon +4\right) }\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}}g] \\ & +\frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g[\ \left( \frac{1}{\left( \varepsilon +2\right) \left( \varepsilon +3\right) }\right) ^{1-\frac{1}{q}}\left( \frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q} }{\left( \varepsilon +3\right) \left( \varepsilon +4\right) }+\frac{2\left\vert g^{{ \prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{\left( \varepsilon +2\right) \left( \varepsilon +3\right) \left( \varepsilon +4\right) }\right) ^{\frac{1 }{q}} \\ & +\left( \frac{1}{\varepsilon +3}\right) ^{1-\frac{1}{q}}\left( \frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{\varepsilon +4}+ \frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert ^{q} }{\left( \varepsilon +3\right) \left( \varepsilon +4\right) }\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}} g], \end{align}$

satisfies for $v\in \lbrack 0, 1],$ where $q^{-1}+p^{-1} = 1.$

Proof. From Lemma 2.1, improved power-mean integral inequality(see in []) and the preinvexity of $|g^{{\prime \prime}}|^q$ , we obtain

$\begin{align*} & +\frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g[\left( \int_{0}^{1}\left( 1-v\right) v^{\varepsilon +1}dv\right) ^{1- \frac{1}{q}}\left( \int_{0}^{1}\left( 1-v\right) v^{\varepsilon +1}\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right) \right) \right\vert ^{q}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}} \\& \notag +\ \left( \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +2}dv\right) ^{1-\frac{1}{q}}\left( \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +2}\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}+v\eta \left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{e}\right) \right) \right\vert ^{q}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}}g] \\& \notag \leq \ \frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{z}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g[\left( \int_{0}^{1}\left( 1-v\right) v^{\varepsilon +1}dv\right) ^{1-\frac{1}{q}} \\& \times \left( \int_{0}^{1}\left( 1-v\right) v^{\varepsilon +1}\{v\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left( 1-v\right) \left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert ^{q}\}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}} \\& \notag +\ \left( \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +2}dv\right) ^{1-\frac{1}{q}}\left( \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +2}\{v\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left( 1-v\right) \left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert ^{q}\}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}}g] \\& \notag +\frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g[\left( \int_{0}^{1}\left( 1-v\right) v^{\varepsilon +1}dv\right) ^{1- \frac{1}{q}}\left( \int_{0}^{1}\left( 1-v\right) v^{\varepsilon +1}\{v\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left( 1-v\right) \left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert ^{q}\}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}} \\& \notag +\ \left( \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +2}dv\right) ^{1-\frac{1}{q}}\left( \int_{0}^{1}v^{\varepsilon +2}\{v\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}+\left( 1-v\right) \left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert ^{q}\}dv\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}}g] \end{align*}$

$\begin{align*} & +\left( \frac{1}{ \varepsilon +3}\right) ^{1-\frac{1}{q}}\left( \frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{\varepsilon +4}+\frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{\left( \varepsilon +3\right) \left( \varepsilon +4\right) }\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}}g] \\& \notag +\frac{\eta^{\varepsilon +2}\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{z}\right) }{\left( \varepsilon +1\right) \eta\left( \mathfrak{e}, \mathfrak{c}\right) }g[\ \left( \frac{1}{\left( \varepsilon +2\right) \left( \varepsilon +3\right) }\right) ^{1-\frac{1}{q}}\left( \frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{\left( \varepsilon +3\right) \left( \varepsilon +4\right) }+\frac{2\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{\left( \varepsilon +2\right) \left( \varepsilon +3\right) \left( \varepsilon +4\right) }\right) ^{\frac{1}{q}} \\& \notag +\left( \frac{1}{\varepsilon +3}\right) ^{1-\frac{1}{q}}\left( \frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{\varepsilon +4}+\frac{\left\vert g^{{\prime \prime }}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right\vert ^{q}}{\left( \varepsilon +3\right) \left( \varepsilon +4\right) } \right) ^{\frac{1}{q}}g]. \end{align*}$

This completes the proof.

Corollary 2.10. Using the same assumption of Theorem 2.6 with $|g^{{\prime \prime }}|\leq \mathcal M,$ we get

3. Modified bessel function

We recall the first kind modified Bessel function $\Im_m,$ which has the series representation (see [42], p.77)

$\begin{equation*} \Im_m(\zeta) = \Sigma_{n\geq 0}\frac{\left( \frac{\zeta }{2}\right) ^{m+2n}}{n!\Gamma \left( m+n+1\right) }. \end{equation*}$

where $\zeta \in \Re$ and $m>-1,$ while the second kind modified Bessel function $g_m$ (see [42], p.78) is usually defined as

$\begin{equation*} g_{m}\left( \zeta \right) = \frac{\pi }{2}\ \frac{\Im_{-m}\left( \zeta \right) -\Im_{m}\left( \zeta \right) }{\sin m\pi }. \end{equation*}$

Consider the function $\Omega_m\left( \zeta \right): \Re \rightarrow [1, \infty)$ defined by

$\begin{equation*} \Omega_m\left( \zeta \right) = 2^{m}\Gamma \left( m+1\right) \zeta ^{-m}\hbar_{m}\left( \zeta \right) , \end{equation*}$

where $\Gamma$ is the gamma function.

The first order derivative formula of $\Omega_m\left( \zeta \right)$ is given by [42]:

$\begin{equation} \Omega^{{\prime }}_m\left( \zeta \right) = \frac{\zeta }{2\left( m+1\right) }\Omega_{m+1}\left( \zeta \right) \end{equation}$

(3.1)

and the second derivative can be easily calculated from (3.1) as

$\begin{equation} \Omega^{{\prime \prime }}_m\left( \zeta \right) = \frac{\zeta ^{2}}{4\left( m+1\right) \left( m+2\right) }\ \Omega_{m+2}\left( \zeta \right)\ +\ \ \frac{1}{2\left( m+1\right) }\Omega_{m+1}\left( \zeta \right) . \end{equation}$

(3.2)

and the third derivative can be easily calculated from (3.2) as

$\begin{equation} \Omega _{m}^{{\prime \prime \prime }}\left( \zeta \right) = \frac{\zeta ^{3} }{4\left( m+1\right) \left( m+2\right) \left( m+3\right) }\Omega _{m+3}\left( \zeta \right) +\frac{3\zeta }{4\left( m+1\right) \left( m+2\right) }\Omega _{m+2}\left( \zeta \right) . \end{equation}$

(3.3)

Proposition 3.1. Suppose that $m>-1$ and $0<\mathfrak{c}<\mathfrak{e}.$ Then we get the inequality

$\begin{align*} & g|\frac{\Omega _{m}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) -\Omega _{m}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) }{ \mathfrak{e}-\mathfrak{c}}-\frac{\mathfrak{z}}{2\left( m+1\right) }\Omega _{m+1}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) +\left( \mathfrak{z}- \frac{\mathfrak{c}+\mathfrak{e}}{2}\right) \\&\times g\{\frac{\mathfrak{z}^{2}}{4\left( m+1\right) \left( m+2\right) } \Omega _{m+2}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) +\frac{1}{2\left( m+1\right) }\Omega _{m+1}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) g\}g| \\& \leq \frac{\left( \mathfrak{z}-\mathfrak{c}\right) ^{3}}{2\left( \mathfrak{e}-\mathfrak{c}\right) }g[\frac{1}{ \left( 2p+1\right) p}+\frac{1}{2q}g\{\left( \frac{\mathfrak{z}^{3}}{8\left( m+1\right) \left( m+2\right) \left( m+3\right) }\Omega _{m+3}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) +\frac{3\mathfrak{z}}{ 4\left( m+1\right) \left( m+2\right) }\Omega _{m+2}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right) ^{q} \\& +\left( \frac{\mathfrak{c}^{3}}{8\left( m+1\right) \left( m+2\right) \left( m+3\right) }\Omega _{m+3}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) +\frac{3\mathfrak{c}}{4\left( m+1\right) \left( m+2\right) }\Omega _{m+2}\left( \mathfrak{c}\right) \right) ^{q}g\}g] \\& +\frac{\left( \mathfrak{e}-\mathfrak{z}\right) ^{3}}{2\left( \mathfrak{e}-\mathfrak{c}\right) }g[\frac{1}{ \left( 2p+1\right) p}+\frac{1}{2q}g\{\left( \frac{\mathfrak{z}^{3}}{8\left( m+1\right) \left( m+2\right) \left( m+3\right) }\Omega _{m+3}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) +\frac{3\mathfrak{z}}{ 4\left( m+1\right) \left( m+2\right) }\Omega _{m+2}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) \right) ^{q} \\& +\left( \frac{\mathfrak{e}^{3}}{8\left( m+1\right) \left( m+2\right) \left( m+3\right) }\Omega _{m+3}\left( \mathfrak{z}\right) +\frac{3\mathfrak{e}}{4\left( m+1\right) \left( m+2\right) }\Omega _{m+2}\left( \mathfrak{e}\right) \right) ^{q}g\}g]. \end{align*}$

Proof. The assertion follows immediately from Corollary 2.7 using $g\left(\zeta\right) = \Omega^{\prime} _{m}(\zeta),$ $\zeta>0$ and the identities (3.2) and (3.3).

4. Conclusions

In this paper, we have defined an idea of fractional integral inequalities whose second derivatives are preinvex functions. We also investigated and proved a new lemma for the second derivatives of Riemann-Liouville fractional integral operator. Some new special cases are discovered in the form of corollaries. We hope that the strategies of this paper will motivate the researchers working in functional analysis, information theory and statistical theory. It is quite open to think about Ostrowski variants for generalized integral operators having Atangana-Baleanu operator etc. by applying generalized preinvexity. The results, which we have presented in this article, will potentially motivate researchers to study analogous and more general integral inequalities for various other kinds of fractional integral operators.

Conflict of interest

All authors have no conflict of interest.

References

[1]	S. Banach, Sur les operations dans les ensembles abstraits et leur application aux equations integrales, Fund. Math., 3 (1922), 51–57. https://doi.org/10.4064/fm-3-1-133-181 doi: 10.4064/fm-3-1-133-181
[2]	S. Czerwik, Contraction mappings in $b$ -metric spaces, Acta. Math. Inform. Univ. Ostrav., 1 (1993), 5–11.
[3]	S. Hussain, M. Sarwar, Y. Li, $n$ -tupled fixed point results with rational type contraction in $b$ -metric spaces, Eur. J. Pure Appl. Math., 11 (2018), 331–351. https://doi.org/10.29020/nybg.ejpam.v11i2.3136 doi: 10.29020/nybg.ejpam.v11i2.3136
[4]	W. Shatanawi, A. Pitea, R. Lazovic, Contraction conditions using comparison functions on $b$ -metric spaces, Fixed Point Theory A., 2014 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2014-135 doi: 10.1186/1687-1812-2014-135
[5]	M. Abbas, J. R. Roshan, S. Sedghi, Common fixed point of four maps in $b$ -metric spaces, Hacet. J. Math. Stat., 43 (2014), 613–624.
[6]	M. Iqbal, A. Batool, O. Ege, M. Sen, Fixed point of almost contraction in $b$ -metric spaces, J. Math., 2020 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13660-020-02520-8 doi: 10.1186/s13660-020-02520-8
[7]	D. W. Boyd, J. S. W. Wong, On nonlinear contractions, P. Am. Math. Soc., 20 (1969), 458–464. https://doi.org/10.1090/S0002-9939-1969-0239559-9 doi: 10.1090/S0002-9939-1969-0239559-9
[8]	Y. I. Alber, S. G. Delabriere, Principle of weakly contractive maps in Hilbert spaces, In: I. Gohberg, Y. Lyubich, Eds., New Results in Operator Theory and Its Applications, Basel: Birkhiiuser Verlag, 98 (1997), 7–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-0348-8910-0-2
[9]	B. E. Rhoades, Some theorems on weakly contractive maps, Nonlinear Anal., 47 (2001), 2683–2693. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0362-546X(01)00388-1 doi: 10.1016/S0362-546X(01)00388-1
[10]	I. Altun, D. Turkoglu, B. E. Rhoades, Fixed points of weakly compatible maps satisfying a general contractive condition of integral type, Fixed Point Theory A., 2007 (2007), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1155/2007/17301 doi: 10.1155/2007/17301
[11]	I. Altun, O. Acar, Fixed point theorems for weak contractions in the sense of Berinde on partial metric spaces, Topol. Appl., 159 (2012), 2642–2648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.topol.2012.04.004 doi: 10.1016/j.topol.2012.04.004
[12]	A. H. Ansari, S. Chandok, C. Ionescu, Fixed point theorems on b-metric spaces for weak contractions with auxiliary functions, J. Inequal. Appl., 2014 (2014), 429. https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2014-429 doi: 10.1186/1029-242X-2014-429
[13]	C. Mongkolkeha, P. Kumam, Fixed point and common fixed point theorems for generalized weak contraction mappings of integral type in modular spaces, Int. J. Math. Math. Sci., 2011 (2011), 705943. https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2011-93 doi: 10.1186/1687-1812-2011-93
[14]	V. Gupta, N. Mani, A. K. Tripathi, A fixed point theorem satisfying a generalized weak contractive condition of integral type, Int. J. Math. Anal., 6 (2012), 1883–1889.
[15]	A. Perveen, W. M. Alfaqih, S. Sessa, $\theta^$ -Weak contractions and discontinuity at the fixed point with applications to matrix and integral equations, Global J. Pure Appl. Math.*, 10 (2021), 209. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms10030209 doi: 10.3390/axioms10030209
[16]	M. Boriceanu, Strict fixed point theorems for multivalued operators in b-metric spaces, Int. J. Modern Math., 4 (2009), 285–301.
[17]	A. Aghaiani, M. Abbas, J. R. Roshan, Common fixed point of generalized weak contractive mappings in partially ordered $b$ -metric spaces, Math. Slovaca., 2014 (2014), 941–960. https://doi.org/10.2478/s12175-014-0250-6 doi: 10.2478/s12175-014-0250-6
[18]	J. R. Roshan, N. Shobkolaei, S. Sedghi, M. Abbas, Common fixed point of four maps in $b$ -metric spaces, Hacet. J. Math. Stat., 43 (2014), 613–624.
[19]	Z. Liu, X. Li, S. M. Kang, S. Y. Cho, Fixed point theorems for mappings satisfying contractive conditions of integral type and applications, Fixed Point Theory A., 2011 (2011), 5573983. https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2011-64 doi: 10.1186/1687-1812-2011-64
[20]	R. Bellman, Dynamic programming, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1957.
[21]	R. Bellman, E. S. Lee, Functional equations arising in dynamic programming, Aequationes Math., 17 (1978), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01818535 doi: 10.1007/BF01818535
[22]	P. C. Bhakta, S. Mitra, Some existence theorems for functional equations arising in dynamic programming, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 98 (1984), 348–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-247X(84)90254-3 doi: 10.1016/0022-247X(84)90254-3
[23]	Z. Liu, R. P. Agarwal, S. M. Kang, On solvability of functional equations and system of functional equations arising in dynamic programming, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 297 (2004), 111–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmaa.2004.04.049 doi: 10.1016/j.jmaa.2004.04.049
[24]	Z. Liu, Y. Xu, J. S. Ume, S. M. Kang, Solutions to two functional equations arising in dynamic programming, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 192 (2006), 251–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cam.2005.04.033 doi: 10.1016/j.cam.2005.04.033
[25]	S. B. Kaliaj, A functional equation arising in dynamic programming, Aequationes Math., 91 (2017), 635–645. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00010-017-0495-6 doi: 10.1007/s00010-017-0495-6

This article has been cited by:

1.	Mahyar Abbasian, Elahe Khatibi, Iman Azimi, David Oniani, Zahra Shakeri Hossein Abad, Alexander Thieme, Ram Sriram, Zhongqi Yang, Yanshan Wang, Bryant Lin, Olivier Gevaert, Li-Jia Li, Ramesh Jain, Amir M. Rahmani, Foundation metrics for evaluating effectiveness of healthcare conversations powered by generative AI, 2024, 7, 2398-6352, 10.1038/s41746-024-01074-z
2.	Muhammad Asif, Monica Palmirani, 2024, Chapter 4, 978-3-031-68210-0, 34, 10.1007/978-3-031-68211-7_4
3.	Andrea Zielinski, Simon Hirzel, Sonja Arnold-Keifer, 2024, Enhancing Digital Libraries with Automated Definition Generation, 9798400710933, 1, 10.1145/3677389.3702536

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2024 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

1.
沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院沈阳 110142

AIMS Mathematics

1.8 3.4

Metrics

Article views(1092) PDF downloads(88) Cited by(0)

Preview PDF

Download XML

Export Citation

Article outline

Show full outline

AIMS Mathematics

On some weak contractive mappings of integral type and fixed point results in $b$ -metric spaces

Related Papers:

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Main results

3. Modified bessel function

4. Conclusions

Conflict of interest

References

This article has been cited by:

Reader Comments

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

Metrics

Other Articles By Authors

Catalog

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Main results

3. Modified bessel function

4. Conclusions

Conflict of interest

References

AIMS Mathematics

On some weak contractive mappings of integral type and fixed point results in b b -metric spaces

Related Papers:

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Main results

3. Modified bessel function

4. Conclusions

Conflict of interest

References

This article has been cited by:

Reader Comments

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

Metrics

Other Articles By Authors

Related pages

Tools

Export File

Citation

Format

Content

Catalog

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Main results

3. Modified bessel function

4. Conclusions

Conflict of interest

References

On some weak contractive mappings of integral type and fixed point results in $b$ -metric spaces