Open Access

Strong Convergence Theorems of Common Fixed Points for a Family of Quasi- -Nonexpansive Mappings

Fixed Point Theory and Applications20092010:754320

https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/754320

Received: 31 August 2009

Accepted: 19 November 2009

Published: 24 November 2009

Abstract

We consider a modified Halpern type iterative algorithm for a family of quasi- -nonexpansive mappings in the framework of Banach spaces. Strong convergence theorems of the purposed iterative algorithms are established.

1. Introduction

Let be a Banach space, a nonempty closed and convex subset of , and a nonlinear mapping. Recall that is nonexpansive if

(1.1)

A point is a fixed point of provided . Denote by the set of fixed points of , that is, .

One classical way to study nonexpansive mappings is to use contractions to approximate a nonexpansive mapping; see ([1, 2]). More precisely, take and define a contraction by

(1.2)

where is a fixed element. Banach Contraction Mapping Principle guarantees that has a unique fixed point in . It is unclear, in general, what the behavior of is as even if has a fixed point. However, in the case of having a fixed point, Browder [1] proved the following well-known strong convergence theorem.

Theorem 1 B.

Let be a bounded closed convex subset of a Hilbert space and a nonexpansive mapping on . Fix and define as for any . Then converges strongly to an element of nearest to .

Motivated by Theorem B, Halpern [3] considered the following explicit iteration:

(1.3)

and obtained the following theorem.

Theorem 1 H.

Let be a bounded closed convex subset of a Hilbert space and a nonexpansive mapping on . Define a real sequence in by , . Then the sequence defined by (1.3) converges strongly to the element of nearest to .

In [4], Lions improved the result of Halpern [3], still in Hilbert spaces, by proving the strong convergence of to a fixed point of provided that the control sequence satisfies the following conditions:

(C1)

(C2)

(C3)

It was observed that both the Halpern's and Lion's conditions on the real sequence excluded the canonical choice . This was overcome by Wittmann [5], who proved, still in Hilbert spaces, the strong convergence of to a fixed point of if satisfies the following conditions:

(C1)

(C2)

(C4)

In [6], Shioji and Takahashi extended Wittmann's results to the setting of Banach spaces under the assumptions (C1), (C2), and (C4) imposed on the control sequences . In [7], Xu remarked that the conditions (C1) and (C2) are necessary for the strong convergence of the iterative sequence defined in (1.3) for all nonexpansive self-mappings. It is well known that the iterative algorithm (1.3) is widely believed to have slow convergence because the restriction of condition (C2). Thus, to improve the rate of convergence of the iterative process (1.3), one cannot rely only on the process itself.

Recently, hybrid projection algorithms have been studied for the fixed point problems of nonlinear mappings by many authors; see, for example, [824]. In 2006, Martinez-Yanes and Xu [10] proposed the following modification of the Halpern iteration for a single nonexpansive mapping in a Hilbert space. To be more precise, they proved the following theorem.

Theorem 1 MYX.

Let be a real Hilbert space, a closed convex subset of , and a nonexpansive mapping such that . Assume that is such that Then the sequence defined by
(1.4)

converges strongly to

Very recently, Qin and Su [17] improved the result of Martinez-Yanes and Xu [10] from Hilbert spaces to Banach spaces. To be more precise, they proved the following theorem.

Theorem 1 QS.

Let be a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space, a nonempty closed convex subset of , and a relatively nonexpansive mapping. Assume that is a sequence in such that . Define a sequence in by the following algorithm:
(1.5)

where is the single-valued duality mapping on . If is nonempty, then converges to

In this paper, motivated by Kimura and Takahashi [8], Martinez-Yanes and Xu [10], Qin and Su [17], and Qin et al. [19], we consider a hybrid projection algorithm to modify the iterative process (1.3) to have strong convergence under condition (C1) only for a family of closed quasi- -nonexpansive mappings.

2. Preliminaries

Let be a Banach space with the dual space . We denote by the normalized duality mapping from to defined by

(2.1)

where denotes the generalized duality pairing. It is well known that, if is strictly convex, then is single-valued and, if is uniformly convex, then is uniformly continuous on bounded subsets of .

We know that, if is a nonempty closed convex subset of a Hilbert space and is the metric projection of onto , then is nonexpansive. This fact actually characterizes Hilbert spaces and, consequently, it is not available in more general Banach spaces. In this connection, Alber [25] recently introduced a generalized projection operator in a Banach space , which is an analogue of the metric projection in Hilbert spaces.

A Banach space is said to be strictly convex if for all with and . The space is said to be uniformly convex if for any two sequences and in such that and . Let be the unit sphere of . Then the space is said to be smooth if

(2.2)

exists for each It is also said to be uniformly smooth if the limit is attained uniformly for . It is well known that, if is uniformly smooth, then is uniformly norm-to-norm continuous on each bounded subset of .

In a smooth Banach space , we consider the functional defined by

(2.3)

Observe that, in a Hilbert space , (2.3) reduces to for all The generalized projection is a mapping that assigns to an arbitrary point the minimum point of the functional that is, where is the solution to the minimization problem:

(2.4)

The existence and uniqueness of the operator follows from some properties of the functional and the strict monotonicity of the mapping (see, e.g., [2528]). In Hilbert spaces, It is obvious from the definition of the function that

(2.5)

Remark 2.1.

If is a reflexive, strictly convex, and smooth Banach space, then, for any , if and only if . In fact, it is sufficient to show that, if , then . From (2.5), we have . This implies From the definition of one has . Therefore, we have (see [27, 29] for more details).

Let be a nonempty closed and convex subset of and a mapping from into itself. A point is said to be an asymptotic fixed point of ([30]) if contains a sequence which converges weakly to such that . The set of asymptotic fixed points of will be denoted by . A mapping from into itself is said to be relatively nonexpansive ([27, 31, 32]) if and for all and . The asymptotic behavior of a relatively nonexpansive mapping was studied by some authors ([27, 31, 32]).

A mapping is said to be -nonexpansive ([18, 19, 24]) if for all . The mapping is said to be quasi- -nonexpansive ([18, 19, 24]) if and for all and .

Remark 2.2.

The class of quasi- -nonexpansive mappings is more general than the class of relatively nonexpansive mappings, which requires the strong restriction: .

In order to prove our main results, we need the following lemmas.

Lemma 2.3 (see [28]).

Let be a uniformly convex and smooth Banach space and , two sequences of . If and either or is bounded, then

Lemma 2.4 (see [25, 28]).

Let be a nonempty closed convex subset of a smooth Banach space and . Then if and only if
(2.6)

Lemma 2.5 (see [25, 28]).

Let be a reflexive, strictly convex, and smooth Banach space, a nonempty closed convex subset of and Then
(2.7)

Lemma 2.6 (see [7, 18]).

Let be a uniformly convex and smooth Banach space, a nonempty, closed, and convex subset of and a closed quasi- -nonexpansive mapping from into itself. Then is a closed and convex subset of .

3. Main Results

From now on, we use to denote an index set. Now, we are in a position to prove our main results.

Theorem 3.1.

Let be a nonempty closed and convex subset of a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space and a family of closed quasi- -nonexpansive mappings such that . Let be a real sequence in such that . Define a sequence in in the following manner:
(3.1)

then the sequence defined by (3.1) converges strongly to .

Proof.

We first show that and are closed and convex for each . From the definitions of and , it is obvious that is closed and is closed and convex for each . We, therefore, only show that is convex for each . Indeed, note that
(3.2)
is equivalent to
(3.3)

This shows that is closed and convex for each and Therefore, we obtain that is convex for each .

Next, we show that for all . For each and , we have

(3.4)

which yields that for all and It follows that . This proves that for all .

Next, we prove that for all We prove this by induction. For we have Assume that for some . Next, we show that for the same . Since is the projection of onto we obtain that

(3.5)
Since by the induction assumption, (3.5) holds, in particular, for all . This together with the definition of implies that for all Noticing that and , one has
(3.6)
We, therefore, obtain that is nondecreasing. From Lemma 2.5, we see that
(3.7)
This shows that is bounded. It follows that the limit of exists. By the construction of , we see that and for any positive integer Notice that
(3.8)

Taking the limit as in (3.8), we get that From Lemma 2.3, one has as It follows that is a Cauchy sequence in . Since is a Banach space and is closed and convex, we can assume that as .

Finally, we show that To end this, we first show . By taking in (3.8), we have

(3.9)
From Lemma 2.3, we arrive at
(3.10)
Noticing that , we obtain
(3.11)
It follows from the assumption on and (3.9) that for each . From Lemma 2.3, we obtain
(3.12)

On the other hand, we have By the assumption on , we see that for each Since is also uniformly norm-to-norm continuous on bounded sets, we obtain that

(3.13)

On the other hand, we have

(3.14)

From (3.10)–(3.13), we obtain From the closedness of , we get

Finally, we show that From , we see that

(3.15)
Taking the limit as in (3.15), we obtain that
(3.16)

and hence by Lemma 2.4. This completes the proof.

Remark 3.2.

Comparing the hybrid projection algorithm (3.1) in Theorem 3.1 with algorithm (1.5) in Theorem QS, we remark that the set is constructed based on the set instead of for each We obtain that the sequence generated by the algorithm (3.1) is a Cauchy sequence. The proof is, therefore, different from the one presented in Qin and Su [17].

As a corollary of Theorem 3.1, for a single quasi- -nonexpansive mapping, we have the following result immediately.

Corollary 3.3.

Let be a nonempty, closed, and convex subset of a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space and a closed quasi- -nonexpansive mappings with a fixed point. Let be a real sequence in such that . Define a sequence in in the following manner:
(3.17)

then the sequence converges strongly to .

Remark 3.4.

Corollary 3.3 mainly improves Theorem of Qin and Su [17] from the class of relatively nonexpansive mappings to the class of quasi- -nonexpansive mappings, which relaxes the strong restriction:

In the framework of Hilbert spaces, Theorem 3.1 is reduced to the following result.

Corollary 3.5.

Let be a nonempty closed and convex subset of a Hilbert space and a family of closed quasi-nonexpansive mappings such that . Let be a real sequence in such that . Define a sequence in in the following manner:
(3.18)

then the sequence converges strongly to .

Remark 3.6.

Corollary 3.5 includes the corresponding result of Martinez-Yanes and Xu [10] as a special case. To be more precise, Corollary 3.5 improves Theorem 3.1 of Martinez-Yanes and Xu [10] from a single mapping to a family of mappings and from nonexpansive mappings to quasi-nonexpansive mappings, respectively.

Declarations

Acknowledgment

This work was supported by the Korea Research Foundation Grant funded by the Korean Government (KRF-2008-313-C00050).

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Mathematics, Hangzhou Normal University
(2)
Department of Mathematics Education and the RINS, Gyeongsang National University
(3)
Department of Mathematics, Gyeongsang National University
(4)
Department of Mathematics and the RINS, Gyeongsang National University

References

  1. Browder FE: Fixed-point theorems for noncompact mappings in Hilbert space. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 1965, 53: 1272–1276. 10.1073/pnas.53.6.1272MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Reich S: Strong convergence theorems for resolvents of accretive operators in Banach spaces. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 1980,75(1):287–292. 10.1016/0022-247X(80)90323-6MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Halpern B: Fixed points of nonexpanding maps. Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society 1967, 73: 957–961. 10.1090/S0002-9904-1967-11864-0MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Lions P-L: Approximation de points fixes de contractions. Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences de Paris, Série. A-B 1977,284(21):A1357-A1359.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. Wittmann R: Approximation of fixed points of nonexpansive mappings. Archiv der Mathematik 1992,58(5):486–491. 10.1007/BF01190119MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Shioji N, Takahashi W: Strong convergence of approximated sequences for nonexpansive mappings in Banach spaces. Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society 1997,125(12):3641–3645. 10.1090/S0002-9939-97-04033-1MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Xu H-K: Another control condition in an iterative method for nonexpansive mappings. Bulletin of the Australian Mathematical Society 2002,65(1):109–113. 10.1017/S0004972700020116MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Kimura Y, Takahashi W: On a hybrid method for a family of relatively nonexpansive mappings in a Banach space. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 2009,357(2):356–363. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2009.03.052MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Lewicki G, Marino G: On some algorithms in Banach spaces finding fixed points of nonlinear mappings. Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications 2009,71(9):3964–3972. 10.1016/j.na.2009.02.066MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Martinez-Yanes C, Xu H-K: Strong convergence of the CQ method for fixed point iteration processes. Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications 2006,64(11):2400–2411. 10.1016/j.na.2005.08.018MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Matsushita S-Y, Takahashi W: A strong convergence theorem for relatively nonexpansive mappings in a Banach space. Journal of Approximation Theory 2005,134(2):257–266. 10.1016/j.jat.2005.02.007MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Matsushita S-Y, Takahashi W: Weak and strong convergence theorems for relatively nonexpansive mappings in Banach spaces. Fixed Point Theory and Applications 2004,2004(1):37–47.MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Nakajo K, Shimoji K, Takahashi W: Strong convergence by the hybrid method for families of mappings in Hilbert spaces. Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications 2009,71(1–2):112–119. 10.1016/j.na.2008.10.034MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. Nakajo K, Takahashi W: Strong convergence theorems for nonexpansive mappings and nonexpansive semigroups. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 2003,279(2):372–379. 10.1016/S0022-247X(02)00458-4MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Nakajo K, Shimoji K, Takahashi W: Strong convergence theorems by the hybrid method for families of mappings in Banach spaces. Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications 2009,71(3–4):812–818. 10.1016/j.na.2008.10.108MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Plubtieng S, Ungchittrakool K: Strong convergence theorems for a common fixed point of two relatively nonexpansive mappings in a Banach space. Journal of Approximation Theory 2007,149(2):103–115. 10.1016/j.jat.2007.04.014MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Qin X, Su Y: Strong convergence theorems for relatively nonexpansive mappings in a Banach space. Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications 2007,67(6):1958–1965. 10.1016/j.na.2006.08.021MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Qin X, Cho YJ, Kang SM: Convergence theorems of common elements for equilibrium problems and fixed point problems in Banach spaces. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics 2009,225(1):20–30. 10.1016/j.cam.2008.06.011MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. Qin X, Cho YJ, Kang SM, Zhou HY: Convergence of a modified Halpern-type iteration algorithm for quasi--nonexpansive mappings. Applied Mathematics Letters 2009,22(7):1051–1055. 10.1016/j.aml.2009.01.015MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. Takahashi W, Takeuchi Y, Kubota R: Strong convergence theorems by hybrid methods for families of nonexpansive mappings in Hilbert spaces. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 2008,341(1):276–286. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2007.09.062MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Takahashi W, Zembayashi K: Strong convergence theorem by a new hybrid method for equilibrium problems and relatively nonexpansive mappings. Fixed Point Theory and Applications 2008, 2008:-11.Google Scholar
  22. Takahashi W, Zembayashi K: Strong and weak convergence theorems for equilibrium problems and relatively nonexpansive mappings in Banach spaces. Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications 2009,70(1):45–57. 10.1016/j.na.2007.11.031MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. Wei L, Cho YJ, Zhou HY: A strong convergence theorem for common fixed points of two relatively nonexpansive mappings and its applications. Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computing 2009,29(1–2):95–103. 10.1007/s12190-008-0092-xMathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. Zhou HY, Gao G, Tan B: Convergence theorems of a modified hybrid algorithm for a family of quasi--asymptotically nonexpansive mappings. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, in pressGoogle Scholar
  25. Alber YI: Metric and generalized projection operators in Banach spaces: properties and applications. In Theory and Applications of Nonlinear Operators of Accretive and Monotone Type, Lecture Notes in Pure and Applied Mathematics. Volume 178. Edited by: Kartsatos AG. Marcel Dekker, New York, NY, USA; 1996:15–50.Google Scholar
  26. Alber YI, Reich S: An iterative method for solving a class of nonlinear operator equations in Banach spaces. PanAmerican Mathematical Journal 1994,4(2):39–54.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. Cioranescu I: Geometry of Banach Spaces, Duality Mappings and Nonlinear Problems, Mathematics and Its Applications. Volume 62. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, The Netherlands; 1990:xiv+260.View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. Kamimura S, Takahashi W: Strong convergence of a proximal-type algorithm in a Banach space. SIAM Journal on Optimization 2002,13(3):938–945. 10.1137/S105262340139611XMathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. Takahashi W: Nonlinear Functional Analysis, Fixed Point Theory and Its Application. Yokohama Publishers, Yokohama, Japan; 2000:iv+276.MATHGoogle Scholar
  30. Reich S: A weak convergence theorem for the alternating method with Bregman distances. In Theory and Applications of Nonlinear Operators of Accretive and Monotone Type, Lecture Notes in Pure and Applied Mathematics. Volume 178. Edited by: Kartsatos AG. Dekker, New York, NY, USA; 1996:313–318.Google Scholar
  31. Butnariu D, Reich S, Zaslavski AJ: Asymptotic behavior of relatively nonexpansive operators in Banach spaces. Journal of Applied Analysis 2001,7(2):151–174. 10.1515/JAA.2001.151MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. Butnariu D, Reich S, Zaslavski AJ: Weak convergence of orbits of nonlinear operators in reflexive Banach spaces. Numerical Functional Analysis and Optimization 2003,24(5–6):489–508. 10.1081/NFA-120023869MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Xiaolong Qin et al. 2010

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.