arxiv: v1 [math.ca] 13 May 2017

Transcription

1 Invariant measures of Markov operators associated to iterated function systems consisting of ϕ-max-contractions with probabilities ariv: v1 [math.ca] 13 May 2017 by Flavian GEORGECU, Radu MICULECU and Alexandru MIHAIL Abstract. We prove that the Markov operator associated to an iterated function system consisting of ϕ-max-contractions with probabilities has a unique invariant measure whose support is the attractor of the system Mathematics ubject Classification: 28A80, 37C70, 54H20 Key words and phrases: ϕ-max-contraction, comparison function, iterated function system with probabilities, Markov operator, fixed point, invariant measure 1. Introduction Iterated function systems with probabilities, which can be viewed as particular cases of random systems with complete connections (see [8], [21], and [24]), are well known for their applications in image compression or in learning theory (see [1], [2], [4], [5] and the references therein). The problem of asymptotic stability of iterated function systems consisting of contractions with probabilities has collected a lot of attention in the last two decades (see [9], [10], [11], [26], [28] and the references therein). The uniqueness of invariant probability measures for place-dependent random iterations is treated in [19] and [25]. The problem of the existence and uniqueness of invariant measures for Markov type operators associated to iterated function systems with probabilities (which was initiated by J. Hutchinson [7]) was also studied, in more general settings, in [3], [12], [14], [15], [17], [18], [23] and [27]. ince in one of our previous works we introduced a new kind of iterated function systems, namely those consisting of ϕ-max-contractions, and we prove the existence and uniqueness of their attractor (see [6]), along the lines of research previously mentioned, the next step, -which is accomplished in the present paper- is to study the Markov operators associated to such systems with probabilities. We prove that each such operator has a unique invariant measure whose support is the attractor of the system. Let us point out that the invariant measure is obtained via the Riesz representation theorem from 1

2 a positive linear functional which is generated by the dual operator of the Markov operator. B. 2. Preliminaries Notations and terminology Given the sets A and B, by B A we mean the set of functions from A to Given a set, a function f : and n N, by f [n] we mean. f f... f n times Given a metric space (,d), by: - diam(a) we mean the diameter of the subset A of - P cp () we mean the set of non-empty compact subsets of - C() we mean the set of continuous functions f : R - B() we mean the σ-algebra of Borel subsets of - the support of a finite positive borelian measure µ on (denoted by supp µ) we mean the smallest closed subset of on which µ is concentrated; so supp µ = F F=F, µ(f)=µ() - M() we mean the space of borelian normalized and positive measures on with compact support - Lip 1 (,R) we mean the set of functions f : R having the property that lip(f) def f(x) f(y) = sup 1 d(x,y) x,y,x y -thehausdorff-pompeiu metricwe mean H : P cp () P cp () [0,+ ) given by H(A,B) = max{sup(inf d(x,y)),sup (inf d(x,y))} x A y B x B y A for all A,B P cp () - a Picard operator we mean a function f : having the property that there exists a unique fixed point α of f and the sequence (f [n] (x)) n N is convergent to α for every x. 2

3 The Hutchinson distance Definition 2.1. Given a complete metric space (,d), the function d H : M() M() [0, )describedby d H (µ,ν) = sup fdµ fdν f Lip 1 (,R) for every µ,ν M(), turns out to be a distance which is called the Hutchinson distance. Remark 2.2 (see page 46 from [22]). Given a compact metric space (,d), µ M() and a sequence (µ n ) n N of elements from M(), the following statements are equivalent: a) the sequence (µ n ) n N converges to µ in the weak topology i.e. gdµ = lim gdµ n for every g C(); b) lim d H (µ n,µ) = 0. Comparison functions Definition 2.3. A function ϕ : [0, ) [0, ) is called a comparison function provided that it satisfies the following properties: i) ϕ is increasing; ii) lim ϕ [n] (x) = 0 for every x [0, ). Remark 2.4. For each comparison function the following two properties are valid: a) ϕ(0) = 0; b) ϕ(x) < x for every x (0, ). The shift space Given a nonempty set I, we denote the set I N by Λ(I). Thus Λ(I) is the set of infinite words with letters from the alphabet I and a standard element ω of Λ(I) can be presented as ω = ω 1 ω 2...ω n ω n Given a nonempty set I, we denote the set I {1,2,...,n} by Λ n (I). Thus Λ n (I) is the set of words of length n with letters from the alphabet I and a standard element ω of Λ n (I) can be presented as ω = ω 1 ω 2...ω n. By Λ 0 (I) 3

4 we mean the set having only one element, namely the empty word denoted by λ. Forn N,weshallusethefollowingnotation: V n (I) not = Λ k(i). k {0,1,2,...,n 1} Given a nonempty set I, m,n N and two words ω = ω 1 ω 2...ω n Λ n (I) and θ = θ 1 θ 2...θ m Λ m (I) or θ = θ 1 θ 2...θ m θ m+1... Λ(I), by ωθ we mean the concatenation of the words ω and θ, i.e. ωθ = ω 1 ω 2...ω n θ 1 θ 2...θ m and respectively ωθ = ω 1 ω 2...ω n θ 1 θ 2...θ m θ m For a family of functions (f i ) i I, where f i :, and ω = ω 1 ω 2...ω n not Λ n (I), we shall use the following notation: f ω = f ω1 f ω2... f ωn. For a function f :, by f λ we mean Id. A result concerning a sequence of compact subsets of a metric space Proposition 2.5 (see Proposition 2.8 from[16]). Let (, d) be a complete metric space, (Y n ) n N P cp () and Y P cp () such that limh(y n,y) = 0. Then Y ( Y n ) P cp (). n=0 3. The Markov operator associated to an iterated function system consisting of ϕ-max-contractions with probabilities Definition 3.1. An iterated function system consisting of ϕ-max-contractions ( ϕ-max-if for short) is described by: - a complete metric space (,d) - a finite family of continuous functions (f i ) i I, where f i :, having the property that there exist a comparison function ϕ : [0, ) [0, ) and p N such that max d(f ω(x),f ω (y)) ϕ( max d(f ω(x),f ω (y))) for every ω Λ p(i) ω V p(i) x,y. We denote such a system by = ((,d),(f i ) i I ). The fractal operator F : P cp () P cp (), associated to the ϕ-max-if, is given by F (K) = f i (K) for every K P cp (). i I We say that the ϕ-max-if has attractor if F is a Picard operator (with respect to the Hausdorff-Pompeiu metric) and the fixed point of F is called the attractor of the system and it is denoted by A. Theorem 3.2 (see Theorem 3.2 from[6]). Each ϕ-max-if has attractor. 4

5 Definition 3.3. An iterated function system consisting of ϕ-max-contractions with probabilities ( ϕ-max-ifp for short) is described by: - a ϕ-max-if = ((,d),(f i ) i {1,2,...,m} ) - a system of probabilities (p i ) i {1,2,...,m}, i.e. p i (0,1) for every i {1,2,...,m} and p 1 +p p m = 1. We denote such a system by = ((,d),(f i ) i {1,2,...,m},(p i ) i {1,2,...,m} ). Weassociatetosuchasystemthe Markov operator M : M() M() given by M (µ) = p 1 µ f p m µ fm 1, i.e. M (µ)(b) = p 1 µ(f1 1 (B))+...+p m µ(fm 1 (B)) for every B B() and every µ M(). A fixed point of M is called invariant measure. Lemma 3.4 (see Lemma 3 from [9]). The equality supp M [n] (µ) = F [n] (supp µ) is valid for every ϕ-max-ifp, every µ M() and every n N. Remark 3.5. The operator M is well defined, for every ϕ-max-ifp. Remark 3.6. Givena ϕ-max-ifp = ((,d),(f i ) i {1,...,m},(p i ) i {1,...,m} ), the Markov operator M is a Feller operator since gdm (µ) = p 1 g f 1 dµ +...+p m and every µ M(). g f m dµ for every continuous and bounded function g : R 4. The main result Our main result states that the Markov operator associated to an IFp is a Picard operator and the support of its fixed point is the attractor of the system. At the beginning, we shall consider for the case of a system for which the metric space is compact (see Theorem 4.9) and then we shall treat the general case (see Theorem 4.18). A. The case of a ϕ-max-ifp for which the metric space is compact Let us start with some: 5

6 Notations. For a ϕ-max-ifp = ((,d),(f i ) i {1,2,...,m},(p i ) i {1,2,...,m} ), g : R, x,y, n N, ω = ω 1 ω 2...ω n Λ n ({1,2,...,m}) and ε > 0, we shall use the following notations: not x,y,n = {d(f ω (x),f ω (y)) ω Λ n ({1,2,...,m})} not ε,n = {max x,y,n x,y, d(x,y) ε} a n (ε) not = sup ε,n O ε (g) not = sup x,y, d(x,y) ε g(x) g(y) B (g) not = p 1 g f 1 +p 2 g f p m g f m not p ω = p ω1 p ω2...p ωn. An easy mathematical induction argument proves the following: Remark 4.1. Forevery ϕ-max-ifp = ((,d),(f i ) i {1,...,m},(p i ) i {1,...,m} ), g : R and n N, we have (g) = p ω g f ω. O ε ( (g)) = sup x,y, d(x,y) ε ω Λ n({1,2,...,m}) Lemma 4.2. For every ϕ-max-ifp, g : R, n N and ε > 0, we have O ε ( (g)) O a n(ε)(g). Proof. Let us suppose that = ((,d),(f i ) i {1,2,...,m},(p i ) i {1,2,...,m} ). Then we have = sup x,y, d(x,y) ε ω Λ n({1,2,...,m}) sup ω Λ n({1,2,...,m}) x,y, d(x,y) ε ω Λ n({1,2,...,m}) p ω O an(ε)(g) = O an(ε)(g) (g)(x) B[n] (g)(y) Remark 4.1 = p ω ((g f ω )(x) (g f ω )(y)) p ω g(f ω (x)) g(f ω (y)) ω Λ n({1,2,...,m}) p ω = O an(ε)(g). Lemma 4.3. For every ϕ-max-ifp, n N and ε > 0, we have a n+p (ε) ϕ(max{a n+p 1 (ε),a n+p 2 (ε),...,a n (ε)}), where the meaning of the natural number p is the one from Definition 3.1. Proof. Let us suppose that = ((,d),(f i ) i {1,2,...,m},(p i ) i {1,2,...,m} ) and suppose that ϕ is the comparison function described in Definition 3.1. For 6

7 the sake of simplicity, in the framework of this proof, we denote a n (ε) by a n and max{a n+p 1,a n+p 2,...,a n } by M n. For all x,y, d(x,y) ε, θ V p ({1,2,...,m}) and ω Λ n ({1,2,...,m}), we have d(f θ (f ω (x)),f θ (f ω (y))) a n+ θ M n. Thus max θ V p({1,2,...,m}) d(f θ (f ω (x)),f θ (f ω (y))) M n, so ϕ( max d(f θ (f ω (x)),f θ (f ω (y)))) ϕ(m n ), (1) θ V p({1,2,...,m}) for every x,y, d(x,y) ε and ω Λ n ({1,2,...,m}). For each ω = ω 1 ω 2...ω p 1 ω p ω p+1...ω n+p Λ n+p ({1,2,...,m}), x,y, d(x,y) ε, with the notations v not = ω 1 ω 2...ω p 1 ω p and w not = ω p+1...ω n+p, we Definition 3.1 have d(f ω (x)),f ω (y)) ϕ( max d(f θ(f w (x)),f θ (f w (y)))) (1) θ V p({1,2,...,m}) ϕ(m n ). Hence max x,y,n+p ϕ(m n ) for every x,y, d(x,y) ε. Therefore, we come to the conclusion that max x,y,n+p ϕ(m n ), i.e. a n+p ϕ(max{a n+p 1,a n+p 2,...,a n }). sup x,y,d(x,y) ε Lemma 4.4. For every ϕ-max-ifp and ε > 0, we have lima n (ε) = 0. Proof. Let us suppose that = ((,d),(f i ) i {1,2,...,m},(p i ) i {1,2,...,m} ) and the meaning of p and ϕ is the one described in Definition 3.1. For the sake of simplicity, in the framework of this proof, we denote a n (ε) by a n and max{a 1,a 2,...,a p } by M. Claim. 0 a pk+j ϕ [k] (M) for every k N and every j {1,2,...,p}. Indeed, we have We also have Lemma 4.3 Remark 2.4 a p+1 ϕ(m) M. (1) a p+2 Lemma 4.3 ϕ(max{a p+1,a p,...,a 2 }). (2) The inequalities a 2 M,...,a p M and (1) lead to the conclusion that max{a p+1,a p,...,a 2 } M and in view of (2) we get a p+2 ϕ(m) and continuing the same line of reasoning we obtain that Moreover, we have Lemma 4.3 a 2p+1 a p+3 ϕ(m),..., a 2p ϕ(m). (3) ϕ(max{a 2p,a 2p 1,...,a p+1 }) (1),(2)&(3) 7 ϕ(ϕ(m)) = ϕ [2] (M)

8 and, as above, we come to the conclusion that a 2p+2 ϕ [2] (M),..., a 3p ϕ [2] (M). Now, inductively one can prove the claim. ince lim k ϕ [k] (M) = 0 (see Definition 2.3), based on the Claim and the squeeze theorem, the proof is done. Lemma 4.5. Forevery ϕ-max-ifp = ((,d),(f i ) i {1,...,m},(p i ) i {1,...,m} ), with (,d) compact, g : Rcontinuous and ε > 0, we have limo an(ε)(g) = 0. Proof. As (,d) is compact and g is continuous, for every ε > 0 there exists δ ε > 0 such that g(x) g(y) < ε for every x,y such that d(x,y) < δ ε. According to Lemma 4.4 there exists n ε N such that a n (ε) < δ ε for every n N, n n ε. Consequently we get g(x) g(y) < ε for every x,y such that d(x,y) < a n (ε) and n N, n n ε, so sup x,y, d(x,y) a n(ε) g(x) g(y) ε, i.e. O an(ε)(g) ε for every n N, n n ε. This means that lim O an(ε)(g) = 0. Lemma 4.6. Forevery ϕ-max-ifp = ((,d),(f i ) i {1,...,m},(p i ) i {1,...,m} ), with (,d) compact,g : R continuous and ε > 0, wehave limo ε ( (g)) = 0. Proof. The squeeze theorem, Lemma 4.2 and Lemma 4.5 assure us the validity of this Lemma. Proposition4.7. Forevery ϕ-max-ifp = ((,d),(f i ) i {1,...,m},(p i ) i {1,...,m} ), with (,d) compact, and g : R continuous, there exists a constant function c g : R such that (g) u c g. Proof. We divide the proof into three steps. tep 1. The sequence (sup (g)(x)) n N is decreasing and the sequence x (inf x B[n] (g)(x)) n N is increasing. We have B [n+1] Remark 4.1 (g)(x) = = i {1,2,...,m},v Λ n({1,2,...,m}) ω Λ n+1 ({1,2,...,m}) 8 p ω (g f ω )(x) = p i p v (g f v f i )(x) =

9 = i {1,2,...,m} = i {1,2,...,m} p i ( p i (g)(f i(x)) v Λ n({1,2,...,m}) i {1,2,...,m} for every x and every n N, so sup x p v (g f v )(f i (x))) p i sup x B [n+1] Remark 4.1 = (g)(x) = sup (g)(x) sup x x (g)(x), (g)(x) for every n N, i.e. the sequence (sup x A (g)(x)) n N is decreasing. In a similar manner one can prove that the sequence (inf x B[n] (g)(x)) n N is increasing. tep 2. The sequences ( inf x B[n] (g)(x)) n N and (sup (g)(x)) n N are x convergent and they have the same limit (which will be denoted by c g ). tep 1 assures us that there exist l 1,l 2 R such that lim (g)(x) = l 2 l 1 = lim inf x B[n] sup x (g)(x) = sup x,y inf x B[n] (g)(x). We have 0 l 1 l 2 sup ( (g)(x) B[n] x (g)(x) (g)(y)) O diam() (g) for every n N and by passing to limit as n, based on Lemma 4.6, we get not l 1 = l 2 = c g. tep3. There existsaconstantfunction c g : Rsuch that (g) u c g. Considering the constant function c g : R given by c g (x) = c g for every x, we have O diam() (g) = inf (g)(x) sup (g)(x) inf x B[n] (g)(x) c g (g)(x) c g sup x B[n] x x (g)(x) inf x B[n] (g)(x) = O diam() B (g), i.e. [n] (g)(x) c g(x) O diam() (g), for every x and every n N. The last inequality and Lemma 4.6 assure us that (g) u c g. Proposition4.8. Forevery ϕ-max-ifp = ((,d),(f i ) i {1,...,m},(p i ) i {1,...,m} ), with (,d) compact, there exists a unique borelian positive measure µ on such that c g = gdµ for every continuous function g : R. Proof. Let us consider the function I : C() R given by I(g) = c g for every g C(). As, according to Remark 4.1, (g+h) = B[n] (g)+b[n] (h) 9

10 and (αg) = αb[n] (g) for every g,h C(), α R and every n N, by passing to limit as n, we get I(g+h) = I(g)+I(h) and I(αg) = αi(g) for every g,h C() and every α R. Moreover, as (g) 0 for every n N and every g C() such that g 0, by passing to limit as n, we get I(g) 0 for every g C() such that g 0. We infer that I is a positive linear functional on C(), so, in view of Riesz representation theorem, we conclude that there exists a unique borelian positive measure µ on such that c g = for every g C(). gdµ Theorem 4.9. M : (M(),d H ) (M(),d H ) is a Picard operator for every ϕ-max-ifp = ((,d),(f i ) i {1,2,...,m},(p i ) i {1,2,...,m} ), with (,d) compact, and the support of the fixed point of M is A. Proof. FirstofallletusnotethatRemark3.6canberestatedas gdm (ν) = B (g)dν for every g C() and every ν M(). Therefore, we get gdm [n] (ν) = for every g C(), ν M() and n N. Now we divide the proof into three steps. (g)dν, (1) tep 1. The measure µ, provided by Proposition 4.8, belongs to M(). For the function g 0 : R given by g 0 (x) = 1 for every x, we have g 0(x) = 1 for every x and every n N. Consequently we have Proposition 4.7 c g0 = 1, i.e. = 1, so µ () = 1. Moreover, as supp µ is a 1dµ closed subset of the compact set, it is compact. tep 2. The measure µ M(), provided by Proposition 4.8, is the unique fixed point of M and supp µ = A. Ontheonehand, bypassing tolimitasn intherelationb [n+1] (g) = (B (g)) which is valid for every n N and every g C(), taking into account Proposition 4.7, we get gdµ = (g)dµ for every g C(). B In other words, we have M (µ )) = 0 for every g C() which gd(µ implies that M (µ ) = µ, i.e. µ is a fixed point of M. ince supp µ = Lemma 3.4 supp M (µ ) = F (supp µ ), we infer that supp µ is the fixed point of F, so supp µ = A. 10

11 On the other hand, if ν M() has the property that M (ν) = ν, then, from (1), we get gdν = (g)dν for every g C() and every n N. By passing to limit as n, based on Proposition 4.7, we get gdν = g dν. c As ν() = 1, we obtain gdν = gdµ, so µ ) = 0 for every gd(ν g C(). We conclude that ν = µ, i.e. µ is the unique fixed point of M. tep 3. limm [n] (ν) = µ for every ν M(). ince, based on Proposition 4.7, we have lim (g)dν = g d(ν), as c ν() = 1, we infer that lim lim (g)dν = gdµ. Hence, using (1), we get gdm [n] (ν) = gdµ for every g C(). Taking into account Remark 2.2, we conclude that lim d H (M [n] (ν),µ ) = 0. The last two steps assure us that M is a Picard operator. B. The case of a general ϕ-max-ifp Let us start with some: Notations. For a complete metric space (,d) and a compact subset Y of, we shall consider the following: the function R Y : Lip 1 (,R) Lip 1 (Y,R) given by R Y (f)(x) = f(x) for every f Lip 1 (,R) and every x Y the function E Y : Lip 1 (T,R) Lip 1 (,R) given by E Y (f)(x) = sup y Y (f(y) lip(f)d(x,y)) for every f Lip 1 (Y,R) and every x the function i Y : M(Y) M() given by i Y (µ)(b) = µ(y B) for every µ M(Y) and every B B() the Hutchinson distance d Y H : M(Y) M(Y) [0, ) described by d Y H (µ,ν) = sup fdµ fdν for every µ,ν M(Y). f Lip 1 (Y,R) Y Y For a ϕ-max-ifp = ((,d),(f i ) i {1,2,...,m},(p i ) i {1,2,...,m} ) and ν def M() we shall consider the set K ν = A ( (supp ν)). F [n] n N 11

12 Note that the functions R Y and E Y are well-defined (i.e. R Y (f) Lip 1 (Y,R) for every f Lip 1 (,R) and E Y (f) Lip 1 (,R) for every f Lip 1 (Y,R); moreover, R Y (E Y (f)) = f and lip(e Y (f)) = lip(f), according to a famous result due to E.J. Mchane -see Theorem 1 from [13]-). Remark Given a complete metric space (,d) and a compact subset Y of, for every µ M(Y), we have: i) R Y (f)dµ = Y (µ)) for every f Lip 1 (,R); Y fd(i ii) fdµ = Y (f)d(i Y (µ)) for every f Lip 1 (Y,R). Y E Indeed, sincesuppi Y (µ) = F = F F=F, i Y (µ)(f)=i Y (µ)() F=F, µ(f Y)=µ(Y) Y (as Y = Y and µ(y Y) = µ(y)), we have Y (µ)) = fd(i Y (µ)) = Yfd(i Y (f)dµ for every f Lip 1 (,R) and YR E Y (f)d(i Y (µ)) = Y (f)d(i Y (µ)) = YE fdµ for every f Lip 1 (Y,R). Y Lemma Given a complete metric space (,d) and a compact subset Y of, we have d Y H (µ 1,µ 2 ) = d H (i Y (µ 1 ),i Y (µ 2 )) for every µ 1,µ 2 M(Y). Proof. Ontheonehand,wehaved Y H (µ 1,µ 2 ) = sup fdµ 1 fdµ 2 f Lip 1 (Y,R) Y Y Remark 4.10, ii) = sup E Y (f)d(i Y (µ 1 )) E Y (f)d(i Y (µ 2 )) f Lip 1 (Y,R) sup fd(i Y (µ 1 )) fd(i Y (µ 2 )) f Lip 1 (,R) = d H(i Y (µ 1 ),i Y (µ 2 )), so d Y H(µ 1,µ 2 ) d H (i Y (µ 1 ),i Y (µ 2 )), (1) for every µ 1,µ 2 M(Y). Ontheotherhandd H (i Y (µ 1 ),i Y (µ 2 )) = sup fd(i Y (µ 1 )) fd(i Y (µ 2 )) f Lip 1 (,R) Remark 4.10, i) = sup R Y (f)dµ 1 R Y (f)dµ 2 f Lip 1 (,R) sup fdµ 1 fdµ 2 f Lip 1 (Y,R) 12 Y Y

13 = d Y H (µ 1,µ 2 ), so d H (i Y (µ 1 ),i Y (µ 2 )) d Y H (µ 1,µ 2 ), (2) for every µ 1,µ 2 M(Y). From (1) and (2), we get the conclusion. Remark Forevery ϕ-max-ifp = ((,d),(f i ) i {1,...,m},(p i ) i {1,...,m} ) and ν M(), we have: i) F (K ν ) K ν ; ii) K ν is compact. Indeed, we have F (K ν ) = F (A ( F [n] (supp ν))) F n N (A ) ( F (F [n] (supp ν)))) = F n N (A ) ( (F [n+1] (supp ν))) K ν. The compactness of K ν is assured, via Proposition 2.5, by the fact that n N lim H(F[n] (supp ν)),a ) = 0. Taking into account that f i (A ) A and f i (K ν ) K ν for every i {1,2,...,m} and every ν M(), we can consider the ϕ-max-ifps A = ((A,d),(φ i ) i {1,...,m},(p i ) i {1,...,m} )and Kν = ((K ν,d),(ψ i ) i {1,...,m},(p i ) i {1,...,m} ), where φ i (x) = f i (x) for every x A and every i {1,2,...,m} and ψ i (x) = f i (x) for every x K ν and every i {1,2,...,m}. We can also consider the Markov operator M A and the Markov operator M Kν : M(A ) M(A ) associated to A : M(K ν ) M(K ν ) associated to Kν. Ac- and M Kν are Picard operators and we denote cording to Theorem 4.9, M A the fixed point of M A by µ A and the fixed point of M Kν by µ Kν. Proposition The Markov operator M associated to a ϕ-max- IFp has a unique fixed point denoted by µ whose support is A. Proof. The function G : {µ M(A ) M A (µ) = µ} {µ M() M (µ) = µ} given by G (µ) = i A (µ) for every µ M(A ) such that M A (µ) = µ is a bijection (whose inverse is the function H : {µ M() M (µ) = µ} {µ M(A ) M A (µ) = µ} given by H (µ) = µ B(A ) for every µ M() such that M (µ) = µ. Therefore i A (µ A ) not = µ is Lemma 3.4 = the unique fixed point of M. In addition, supp µ =supp M (µ ) F (supp µ ), so, taking into account the uniqueness of the fixed point of F, we infer that supp µ = A. Lemma Forevery ϕ-max-ifp = ((,d),(f i ) i {1,...,m},(p i ) i {1,...,m} ) 13

14 and ν M(), the measure ν 0, given by ν 0 (B) = ν(b K ν ) for every B B(K ν ) = {B K ν B B()}, has the following properties: i) ν 0 M(K ν ); ii) i Kν (ν 0 ) = ν. Proof. We start by noting that, as B K ν B supp ν supp ν, we have 0 ν(b K ν ) ν(b definition of supp supp ν) ν( supp ν) = 0, so ν(b K ν ) = 0, (1) for every B B(). Then 1 ν M() = ν() = ν( K ν )+ν(k ν ) (1) = ν(k ν ), so i) is proved. Moreover, i Kν (ν 0 )(B ) = ν 0 (B K ν ) = ν(b K ν ) (1) = ν(b K ν )+ ν(b K ν ) = ν(b ) for every B B(), so ii) is also proved. Lemma Given a ϕ-max-ifp = ((,d),(f i ) i {1,...,m},(p i ) i {1,...,m} ), we have i Kν ((M Kν )[n] (ν)) = M [n] (i K ν (ν)) for every n N and every ν M(K ν ). Proof. First we prove that for every ν M(K ν ). p 1 i Kν (M Kν (ν)) = M (i Kν (ν)), (1) In order to justify (1), it suffices to check that g f 1 d(i Kν (ν)) p m boundedfunctiong : R. Thisistruesince gd(i Kν (M Kν (ν))) = g f m d(i Kν (ν)) for every continuous and gd(i Kν (M Kν Remark 4.10, i) (ν))) = R Kν (g)d(m Kν (ν)) = p 1 R Kν (g) ψ 1 dν p m R Kν (g) ψ m dν = K ν K ν K ν Remark 4.10, ii) p 1 R Kν (g f 1 )dν+...+p m R Kν (g f m )dν = p 1 g f 1 d(i Kν (ν))+ K ν K ν...+p m g f m d(i Kν (ν)). 14

15 Now, foreveryn N,wehavei Kν ((M Kν )[n] (ν)) = i Kν ((M Kν (MKν (1) = M (i Kν ((M Kν )[n 1] (ν))) = M [2] (i K ν ((M Kν )[n 2] (ν))) =... = M [n] (i K ν (ν)) for every ν M(K ν ). )[n 1] (ν))) Lemma Given a ϕ-max-ifp = ((,d),(f i ) i {1,...,m},(p i ) i {1,...,m} ), we have µ = i Kν (µ Kν ) for every ν M(). Proof. AsintheproofofProposition4.13, onecancheck thatthefunction µ i Kν (µ) is a bijection from the fixed points of M Kν to the fixed point of M, so µ = i Kν (µ Kν ). Proposition4.17. Given a ϕ-max-ifp = ((,d),(f i ) i {1,...,m},(p i ) i {1,...,m} ), we have limd H (M [n] (ν),µ ) = 0 for every ν M(). Proof. According to Lemma 4.14, for every ν M() there exists ν 0 M(K ν ) such that i Kν (ν 0 ) = ν. Then we have d H (M [n] (ν),µ ) = d H (M [n] (i Lemma 4.15 K ν (ν 0 )),µ ) = d H (i Kν ((M Kν )[n] Lemma 4.16 (ν 0 )),µ ) = d H (i Kν ((M Kν )[n] (ν 0 )),i Kν (µ Kν Lemma 4.11 )) = d Kν H ((MKν )[n] (ν 0 )),µ Kν ) for every n N, so limd H (M [n] (ν),µ ) = limd Kν H ((MKν )[n] (ν 0 )),µ Kν Theorem 4.9 ) = 0. Combining Proposition 4.13 with Proposition 4.17, we get the following Theorem M : (M(),d H ) (M(),d H ) is a Picard operator for every ϕ-max-ifp = ((,d),(f i ) i {1,2,...,m},(p i ) i {1,2,...,m} ) and the support of the fixed point of M is A. References [1] Barnsley, M.F., Demko,.G., Elton, J.H. and Geromino, J..: Invariant measures for Markov processes arising from iterated function systems with place-dependent probabilities, Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré Probab. tatist., 24 (1988), and 25 (1989), [2] Barnsley, M.F and Elton, J.H.: A new class of Markov processes for image encoding, Adv. in Appl. Prob., 20 (1988), [3] Chiţescu I. and Niţă L.: Fractal vector measures, ci. Bull., er. A, Appl. Math. Phys., Politeh. Univ. Buchar., 77 (2015), [4] Elton, J.H.: An ergodic theorem for iterated maps, Ergod. Theory Dynam. ystems, 7 (1987), [5] Fisher, Y.: Fractal Image Compression; Theory and Application, pringer-verlag, New York,

16 [6] Georgescu, F., Miculescu, R. and Mihail, A.: Iterated function systems consisting of ϕ-max-contractions have attractor, available at ariv: [7] Hutchinson, J.E.: Fractals and self similarity, Indiana Univ. Math. J., 30 (1981), [8] Iosifescu, M. and Grigorescu,.: Dependence with complete connections and its applications, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, [9] Jaroszewska, J.: Iterated function systems with continuous place dependent probabilities, Univ. Iagell. Acta Math., 40 (2002), [10] Jaroszewska, J.: How to construct asymptotically stable iterated function systems, tat. Probab. Lett., 78 (2008), [11] Lasota, A. and Myjak, J.: Markov operators and fractals, Bull. Pol. Acad. ci., Math., 45 (1997), [12] Marchi, M.V.: Invariant measures in quasi-metric spaces, Z. Anal. Anwend., 22 (2003), [13] Mchane, E.J.: Extension of range of functions, Bull. Amer. Math. oc., 40 (1934), [14] Mendivil, F.: A generalization of IF with probabilities to infinitely many maps, Rocky Mt. J. Math., 28 (1998), [15] Miculescu, R.: Generalized iterated function systems with place dependent probabilities, Acta. Appl. Math., 130 (2014), [16] Miculescu, R. and Mihail, A.: A generalization of Istrăţescu s fixed point theorem for convex contractions, Fixed Point Theory, in print, ariv: [17] Mihail, A. and Miculescu, R.: A generalization of the Hutchinson measure. Mediterr. J. Math., 6 (2009), [18] Mosco, U.: elf-similar measures in quasi-metric spaces. In: Festschrift Dedicated to Alfonso Vignoli on the Occasion of His 60th Birthday. Prog. Nonlinear Differ. Equ. Appl., vol. 40, pp Birkhäuser, Basel, [19] Öberg, A.: Approximation of invariant measures for random iterations, Rocky Mt. J. Math., 36 (2006), [20] Oliveira, O.: The ergodic theorem for a new kind of attractor of a GIF, Chaos olitons Fractals, 98 (2017), [21] Onicescu, O. and Mihoc, G.: ur les chaînes de variables statisques, Bull. oc. Math. Fr., 59 (1935), [22] ecelean, N.: Countable Iterated Function ystems, LAP Lambert Academic Publishing, [23] ecelean, N.: Invariant measure associated with a generalized countable iterated function system, Mediterr. J. Math.. 11 (2014),

17 [24] tenflo Ö.: Ergodic theorems for Markov chains represented by iterated function systems, Bull. Pol. Acad. ci., Math., 49 (2001), [25] tenflo Ö.: Uniqueness of Invariant Measures for Place-Dependent Random Iterations of Functions. In: Barnsley M.F., aupe D., Vrscay E.R. (eds) Fractals in Multimedia. The IMA Volumes in Mathematics and its Application, vol 132. pringer, New York, NY, [26] zarek, T.: Lower bound technique and its applications to function systems and stochastic partial differential equations, Math. Appl. (Warsaw), 41 (2013), [27] Werner, I.: Contractive Markov systems, J. Lond. Math. oc., 71 (2005), [28] Zaharopol, R.: Equicontinuity and existence of attractive probability measures for some iterated function systems, Rev. Roum. Math. Pures Appl., 52 (2007), Flavian Georgescu Faculty of Mathematics and Computer cience University of Piteşti, Romania Târgul din Vale 1, , Piteşti, Argeş, Romania Radu Miculescu Faculty of Mathematics and Computer cience Bucharest University, Romania tr. Academiei 14, , Bucharest Alexandru Mihail Faculty of Mathematics and Computer cience Bucharest University, Romania tr. Academiei 14, , Bucharest mihail 17