Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Research
  • Open Access

Existence and iterative approximation for generalized equilibrium problems for a countable family of nonexpansive mappings in banach spaces

Fixed Point Theory and Applications20112011:11

https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2011-11

  • Received: 26 December 2010
  • Accepted: 28 June 2011
  • Published:

Abstract

We first prove the existence of a solution of the generalized equilibrium problem (GEP) using the KKM mapping in a Banach space setting. Then, by virtue of this result, we construct a hybrid algorithm for finding a common element in the solution set of a GEP and the fixed point set of countable family of nonexpansive mappings in the frameworks of Banach spaces. By means of a projection technique, we also prove that the sequences generated by the hybrid algorithm converge strongly to a common element in the solution set of GEP and common fixed point set of nonexpansive mappings.

AMS Subject Classification: 47H09, 47H10

Keywords

  • Banach space
  • Fixed point
  • Metric projection
  • Generalized equilibrium problem
  • Nonexpansive mapping

1. Introduction

Let E be a real Banach space with the dual E* and C be a nonempty closed convex subset of E. We denote by and the sets of positive integers and real numbers, respectively. Also, we denote by J the normalized duality mapping from E to 2E*defined by
where 〈·,·〉 denotes the generalized duality pairing. We know that if E is smooth, then J is single-valued and if E is uniformly smooth, then J is uniformly norm-to-norm continuous on bounded subsets of E. We shall still denote by J the single-valued duality mapping. Let be a bifunction and A : CE* be a nonlinear mapping. We consider the following generalized equilibrium problem (GEP):
(1.1)
The set of such u C is denoted by GEP (f), i.e.,
Whenever E = H a Hilbert space, the problem (1.1) was introduced and studied by Takahashi and Takahashi [1]. Similar problems have been studied extensively recently. In the case of A ≡ 0, GEP (f) is denoted by EP (f). In the case of f ≡ 0, EP is also denoted by VI(C, A). Problem (1.1) is very general in the sense that it includes, as spacial cases, optimization problems, variational inequalities, minimax problems, the Nash equilibrium problem in noncooperative games, and others; see, e.g., [2, 3]. A mapping T : CE is called nonexpansive if ||Tx - Ty|| ≤ ||x - y|| for all x, y C. Denote by F (T ) the set of fixed points of T , that is, F (T ) = {x C : Tx = x}. A mapping A : CE* is called α-inverse-strongly monotone, if there exists an α > 0 such that

It is easy to see that if A : CE* is an α-inverse-strongly monotone mapping, then it is 1/α- Lipschitzian.

In 1953, Mann [4] introduced the following iterative procedure to approximate a fixed point of a nonexpansive mapping T in a Hilbert space H:
(1.2)

where the initial point x0 is taken in C arbitrarily and {α n } is a sequence in [0, 1].

However, we note that Manns iteration process (1.2) has only weak convergence, in general; for instance, see [57].

Let C be a nonempty, closed, and convex subset of a Banach space E and {T n } be sequence of mappings of C into itself such that . Then, {T n } is said to satisfy the NST-condition if for each bounded sequence {z n } C,

implies , where ω w (z n ) is the set of all weak cluster points of {z n }; see [810].

In 2008, Takahashi et al. [11] has adapted Nakajo and Takahashi's [12] idea to modify the process (1.2) so that strong convergence has been guaranteed. They proposed the following modification for a family of nonexpansive mappings in a Hilbert space: x0 H, C1 = C, and
(1.3)

where 0 ≤ α n a < 1 for all . They proved that if {T n } satisfies the NST-condition, then {u n } generated by (1.3) converges strongly to a common fixed point of T n .

Recently, motivated by Nakajo and Takahashi [12] and Xu [13], Matsushita and Takahashi [14] introduced the iterative algorithm for finding fixed points of nonexpansive mappings in a uniformly convex and smooth Banach space: x0 = x C and
(1.4)

where denotes the convex closure of the set D, {t n } is a sequence in (0,1) with t n → 0, and is the metric projection from E onto C n D n . They proved that {x n } generated by (1.4) converges strongly to a fixed point of T .

Very recently, Kimura and Nakajo [15] investigated iterative schemes for finding common fixed points of a family of nonexpansive mappings and proved strong convergence theorems by using the Mosco convergence technique in a uniformly convex and smooth Banach space. In particular, they proposed the following algorithm: x1 = x C and
(1.5)

where {t n } is a sequence in (0,1) with t n → 0 as n → ∞. They proved that if {T n } satisfies the NST-condition, then {x n } converges strongly to a common fixed point of T n .

Motivated and inspired by Nakajo and Takahashi [12], Takahashi et al. [11], Xu [13], Masushita and Takahashi [14], and Kimura and Nakajo [15], we introduce a hybrid projection algorithm for finding a common element in the solution set of a GEP and the common fixed point set of a family of nonexpansive mappings in a Banach space setting.

2. Preliminaries

Let E be a real Banach space and let U = {x E : ||x|| = 1} be the unit sphere of E. A Banach space E is said to be strictly convex if for any x, y U,
It is also said to be uniformly convex if for each ε (0, 2], there exists δ > 0 such that for any x, y U,
It is known that a uniformly convex Banach space is reflexive and strictly convex. Define a function δ: [0, 2] → [0, 1] called the modulus of convexity of E as follows:
Then, E is uniformly convex if and only if δ(ε) > 0 for all ε (0, 2]. A Banach space E is said to be smooth if the limit
(2.1)
exists for all x, y U. Let C be a nonempty, closed, and convex subset of a reflexive, strictly convex and smooth Banach space E. Then, for any x E, there exists a unique point x0 C such that
The mapping P C : EC defined by P C × = x0 is called the metric projection from E onto C. Let x E and u C. Then, it is known that u = P C × if and only if
(2.2)

for all y C; see [16] for more details. It is well known that if P C is a metric projection from a real Hilbert space H onto a nonempty, closed, and convex subset C, then P C is nonexpansive. However, in a general Banach space, this fact is not true.

In the sequel, we will need the following lemmas.

Lemma 2.1. [17] Let E be a uniformly convex Banach space, {α n } be a sequence of real numbers such that 0 < bα n c < 1 for all n ≥ 1, and {x n } and {y n } be sequences in E such that lim supn→∞||x n || ≤ d, lim supn→∞||y n || ≤ d and limn→∞||α n x n + (1 - α n )y n || = d. Then, limn→∞||x n - y n || = 0.

Lemma 2.2. [18] Let C be a bounded, closed, and convex subset of a uniformly convex Banach space E. Then, there exists a strictly increasing, convex, and continuous function γ : [0, ∞) → [0, ∞) such thatγ (0) = 0 and

for all , {x1, x2,..., x n } C, {λ1, λ2,..., λ n } [0, 1] with and nonexpansive mapping T of C into E.

Following Bruck's [19] idea, we know the following result for a convex combination of nonexpansive mappings which is considered by Aoyama et al. [20] and Kimura and Nakajo [15].

Lemma 2.3. [15] Let C be a nonempty, closed, and convex subset of a uniformly convex Banach space E and {S n } be a family of nonexpansive mappings of C into itself such that . Let be a family of nonnegative numbers with indices n, with kn such that
  1. (i)

    for every ;

     
  2. (ii)

    for every

     

and let for all , where {α n } [a, b] for some a, b (0, 1) with ab. Then, {T n } is a family of nonexpansive mappings of C into itself with and satisfies the NST-condition.

Now, let us turn to following well-known concept and result.

Definition 2.4. Let B be a subset of topological vector space X. A mapping G : B → 2 X is called a KKM mapping if for x i B and i = 1, 2,..., m, where coA denotes the convex hull of the set A.

Lemma 2.5. [21] Let B be a nonempty subset of a Hausdorff topological vector space × and let G : B → 2 X be a KKM mapping. If G(x) is closed for all × B and is compact for at least one x B, then xBG(x) ≠ .

3. Existence results of gep

Motivated by Takahashi and Zembayashi [22], and Ceng and Yao [23], we next prove the following crucial lemma concerning the GEP in a strictly convex, reflexive, and smooth Banach space.

Theorem 3.1. Let C be a nonempty, bounded, closed, and convex subset of a smooth, strictly convex, and reflexive Banach space E, let f be a bifunction from C × C to satisfying (A1)-(A4), where

(A1) f(x, x) = 0 for all x C;

(A2) f is monotone, i.e. f(x, y) + f(y, x) ≤ 0 for all x, y C;

(A3) for all y C, f(., y) is weakly upper semicontinuous;

(A4) for all x C, f(x,.) is convex.

Let A be α-inverse strongly monotone of C into E*. For all r > 0 and × E, define the mapping S r : E → 2 C as follows:
(3.1)
Then, the following statements hold:
  1. (1)

    for each x E, S r (x) ≠ ;

     
  2. (2)

    S r is single-valued;

     
  3. (3)

    S r (x) - S r (y), J(S r x - x)〉 ≤ 〈S r (x) - S r (y), J(S r y - y)〉 for all x, y E;

     
  4. (4)

    F (S r ) = GEP (f);

     
  5. (5)

    GEP(f) is nonempty, closed, and convex.

     
Proof. (1) Let x0 be any given point in E. For each y C, we define the mapping G : C → 2 E by
It is easily seen that y G(y), and hence G(y). ≠
  1. (a)
    First, we will show that G is a KKM mapping. Suppose that there exists a finite subset {y1, y2,..., y m } of C and α i > 0 with such that for all i = 1, 2,..., m. It follows that
    By (A1) and (A4), we have

    which is a contradiction. Thus, G is a KKM mapping on C.

     
  2. (b)
    Next, we show that G(y) is closed for all y C. Let {z n } be a sequence in G(y) such that z n z as n → ∞. It then follows from z n G(y) that,
    (3.2)
    By (A3), the continuity of J, and the lower semicontinuity of || · ||2, we obtain from (3.2) that

    This shows that z G(y), and hence G(y) is closed for all y C.

     
  3. (c)

    We prove that G(y) is weakly compact. We now equip E with the weak topology. Then, C, as closed, bounded convex subset in a reflexive space, is weakly compact. Hence, G(y) is also weakly compact.

     
Using (a), (b), and (c) and Lemma 2.5, we have xCG(y) ≠ . It is easily seen that

Hence, s r (x0) ≠ . Since x0 is arbitrary, we can conclude that s r (x) ≠ for all x E.

(2) We prove that S r is single-valued. In fact, for x C and r > 0, let z1, z2 S r (x). Then,
and
Adding the two inequalities and from the condition (A2) and monotonicity of A, we have
(3.3)
and hence,
Hence,

Since J is monotone and E is strictly convex, we obtain that z1 - x = z2 - x and hence z1 = z2.

Therefore S r is single-valued.

(3) For x, y C, we have
and
Again, adding the two inequalities, we also have
It follows from monotonicity of A that
(4) It is easy to see that

Hence, F (S r ) = GEP (f).

(5) Finally, we claim that GEP (f) is nonempty, closed, and convex. For each y C, we define the mapping Θ : C → 2 E by
Since y Θ (y), we have Θ(y) ≠ We prove that Θ is a KKM mapping on C. Suppose that there exists a finite subset {z1, z2,..., z m } of C and α i > 0 with such that for all i = 1, 2,..., m. Then,
From (A1) and (A4), we have

which is a contradiction. Thus, Θ is a KKM mapping on C.

Next, we prove that Θ (y) is closed for each y C. For any y C, let {x n } be any sequence in Θ (y) such that x n x0. We claim that x0 Θ (y). Then, for each y C, we have
By (A3), we see that

This shows that x0 Θ (y) and Θ(y) is closed for each y C. Thus, is also closed.

We observe that Θ (y) is weakly compact. In fact, since C is bounded, closed, and convex, we also have Θ(y) is weakly compact in the weak topology. By Lemma 2.5, we can conclude that .

Finally, we prove that GEP (f) is convex. In fact, let u, v F (S r ) and z t = tu+(1 - t)v for t (0, 1). From (3), we know that
This yields that
(3.4)
Similarly, we also have
(3.5)
It follows from (3.4) and (3.5) that

Hence, z t F (S r ) = GEP (f) and hence GEP (f) is convex. This completes the proof.

4. Strong convergence theorem

In this section, we prove a strong convergence theorem using a hybrid projection algorithm in a uniformly convex and smooth Banach space.

Theorem 4.1. Let E be a uniformly convex and smooth Banach space and C be a nonempty, bounded, closed, and convex subset of E. Let f be a bifunction from C × C to satisfying (A1)-(A4), A an α-inverse strongly monotone mapping of C into E* and a sequence of nonexpansive mappings of C into itself such that and suppose that satisfies the NST-condition. Let {x n } be the sequence in C generated by
(4.1)

where {t n } and {r n } are sequences which satisfy the following conditions:

(C1) {t n } (0, 1) and limn→∞t n = 0;

(C2) {r n } (0, 1) and lim infn→∞r n > 0.

Then, the sequence {x n } converges strongly to P F x0.

Proof. First, we rewrite the algorithm (4.1) as the following:
(4.2)
where S r is the mapping defined by (3.1) for all r > 0. We first show that the sequence {x n } is well defined. It is easy to verify that C n D n is closed and convex and Ω C n for all n ≥ 0. Next, we prove that Ω C n D n . Since D0 = C, we also have Ω C0D0. Suppose that Ω Ck - 1D k - 1 for k ≥ 2. It follows from Lemma (3) that
for all u Ω. This implies that
for all u Ω. Hence, Ω D k . By the mathematical induction, we get that Ω C n D n for each n ≥ 0 and hence {x n } is well defined. Let w = P F x0. Since Ω C n D n and , we have
(4.3)
Since {x n } is bounded, there exists a subsequence of {x n } such that . Since xn+2 Dn+1 D n and , we have
Since {x n - x0} is bounded, we have limn→∞||x n - x0|| = d for some a constant d. Moreover, by the convexity of D n , we also have and hence
This implies that

By Lemma 2.1, we have limn →∞||x n - xn+1|| = 0.

Next, we show that . Since xn+1 C n and t n > 0, there exists , {λ0, λ1,..., λ m } [0, 1] and {y0, y1,..., y m } C such that
for each i = 0, 1,..., m. Since C is bounded, by Lemma 2.2, we have

where M = supn≥0||x n - w||. It follows from (C1) that limn →∞||x n - T n x n || = 0. Since {T n } satisfies the NST-condition, we have .

Next, we show that v GEP (f). By the construction of D n , we see from (2.2) that . Since xn+1 D n , we obtain
as n → ∞. From (C2), we also have
(4.4)

as n → ∞. Since {x n } is bounded, it has a subsequence which weakly converges to some v E.

By (4.4), we also have . By the definition of , for each y C, we obtain
By (A3) and (4.4), we have

This shows that v GEP (f) and hence .

Note that w = PΩx0. Finally, we show that x n w as n → ∞. By the weakly lower semicontinuity of the norm, it follows from (4.3) that
This shows that

and v = w. Since E is uniformly convex, we obtain that . It follows that . Hence, we have x n w as nw. This completes the proof.

5. Deduced theorems

If we take f ≡ 0 and A ≡ 0 in Theorem 4.1, then we obtain the following result.

Theorem 5.1. Let E be a uniformly convex and smooth Banach space, C a nonempty, bounded, closed, and convex subset of E and a sequence of nonexpansive mappings of C into itself such that and suppose that satisfies the NST-condition. Let {x n } be the sequence in C generated by
(5.1)

If {t n } (0, 1) and limn→∞t n = 0, then {x n } converges strongly to PΩx0.

Remark 5.2. By Lemma 2.3, if we define for all n 0 in Theorems 3.1 and 5.1, then the theorems also hold.

If we take T n I, the identity mapping on C, for all n ≥ 0 in Theorem 4.1, then we obtain the following result.

Theorem 5.3. Let E be a uniformly convex and smooth Banach space, C a nonempty, bounded, closed, and convex subset of E. Let f be a bifunction from C × C to satisfying (A1)-(A4) and A an α-inverse strongly monotone mapping of C into E*. Let {x n } be the sequence in C generated by
(5.2)

If {r n } (0, 1) and lim infn→∞r n > 0, then {x n } converges strongly to P GEP (f) x0.

If we take A ≡ 0 in Theorem 4.1, then we obtain the following result concerning an equilibrium problem in a Banach space setting.

Theorem 5.4. Let E be a uniformly convex and smooth Banach space and C be a nonempty, bounded, closed, and convex subset of E. Let f be a bifunction from C × C to satisfying (A1)-(A4) and let be a sequence of nonexpansive mappings of C into itself such that and suppose that satisfies the NST-condition. Let {x n } be the sequence in C generated by
(5.3)

where {t n } and {r n } are sequences which satisfy the conditions:

(C1) {t n } (0, 1) and limn→∞t n = 0;

(C2) {r n } (0, 1) and lim infn→∞r n > 0.

Then, the sequence {x n } converges strongly to PΩx0.

Abbreviations

GEP: 

generalized equilibrium problem.

Declarations

Acknowledgements

U. Kamraksa was supported by grant from under the program "Strategic Scholarships for Frontier Research Network for the Ph.D." Program Thai Doctoral degree from the Office of the Higher Education Commission, Thailand. The project was supported by the "Centre of Excellence in Mathematics" under the Commission on Higher Education, Ministry of Education, Thailand and the grant from under the program Strategic Scholarships for Frontier Research Network for the Ph.D. Program Thai Doctoral degree from the Office of the Higher Education Commission.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, Naresuan University, Phitsanulok, 65000, Thailand
(2)
Centre of Excellence in Mathematics, Che, Si Ayutthaya Road, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand

References

  1. Takahashi S, Takahashi W: Strong convergence theorem for a generalized equilibrium problem and a nonexpansive mappings in a Hilbert space. J Nonlinear Anal 2008, 69: 1025–1033. 10.1016/j.na.2008.02.042View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Kohsaka F, Takahashi W: Strong convergence of an iterative sequence for maximal monotone operators in a Banach space. Abstr Appl Anal 2004, 3: 239–249.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Martinet B: Regularisation d'inequations variationnelles par approximations successives. Rev Fr Autom Inf Res Oper 1970, 4: 154–159.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. Mann WR: Mean value methods in iteration. Proc Am Math Soc 1953, 4: 506–510. 10.1090/S0002-9939-1953-0054846-3View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Bauschke HH, Matouskova E, Reich S: Projection and proximal point methods: convergence results and counterex-amples. Nonlinear Anal 2004, 56: 715–738. 10.1016/j.na.2003.10.010MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Genal A, Lindenstrass J: An example concerning fixed points. Isr J Math 1975, 22: 81–86. 10.1007/BF02757276View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Reich S: Weak convergence theorems for nonexpansive mappings in Banach spaces. J Math Anal Appl 1979, 67: 274–276. 10.1016/0022-247X(79)90024-6MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Bauschke HH, Combettes PL: A weak-to-strong convergence principle for Fejer-Monotone methods in Hilbert spaces. Math Oper Res 2001, 26: 248–264. 10.1287/moor.26.2.248.10558MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Shimoji K, Takahashi W: Strong convergence to common fixed points of families of nonexpansive mappings in Banach spaces. J Nonlinear Convex Anal 2007, 8: 11–34.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. Nakajo K, Shimoji K, Takahashi W: Strong convergence theorems by the hybrid method for families of nonexpansive mappings in Hilbert spaces. Taiwan J Math 2006, 10: 339–360.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. Takahashi W, Takeuchi Y, Kubota R: Strong convergence theorems by hybrid methods for families of nonexpansive mappings in Hilbert spaces. J Math Anal Appl 2008, 341: 276–286. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2007.09.062MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Nakajo K, Takahashi W: Strong convergence theorems for nonexpansive mappings and nonexpansive semigroups. J Math Anal Appl 2003, 279: 372–379. 10.1016/S0022-247X(02)00458-4MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Xu H-K: Strong convergence of approximating fixed point sequences for nonexpansive mappings. Bull Aust Math Soc 2006, 74: 143–151. 10.1017/S0004972700047535View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Matsushita S, Takahashi W: Approximating fixed points of nonexpansive mappings in a Banach space by metric projections. Appl Math Comput 2008, 196: 422–425. 10.1016/j.amc.2007.06.006MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  15. Kimura Y, Nakajo K: Some characterizations for a family of nonexpansive mappings and convergence of a generated sequence to their common fixed point. Fixed Point Theory Appl 2010.Google Scholar
  16. Takahashi W: Nonlinear Functional Analysis. Yokohama Publishers; 2000.Google Scholar
  17. Zeidler E: Nonlinear Functional Analysis and Its Applications, vol. I: Fixed-Point Theorems. Springer, New York; 1986.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Bruck RE: On the convex approximation property and the asymptotic behaviour of nonlinear contractions in Banach spaces. Isr J Math 1981, 38: 304–314. 10.1007/BF02762776MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Bruck RE: Properties of fixed-point sets of nonexpansive mappings in Banach spaces. Trans Am Math Soc 1973, 179: 251–262.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. Aoyama K, Kimura Y, Takahashi W, Toyoda M: Approximation of common fixed points of a countable family of nonexpansive mappings in a Banach space. Nonlinear Anal 2007, 67: 2350–2360. 10.1016/j.na.2006.08.032MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. Fan K: A generalization of Tychonoffs fixed point theorem. Math Ann 1961, 142: 305–310. 10.1007/BF01353421MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Takahashi W, Zembayashi K: Strong and weak convergence theorems for equilibrium problems and relatively non-expansive mappings in Banach spaces. J Nonlinear Anal 2009, 70: 45–57. 10.1016/j.na.2007.11.031MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  23. Ceng L-C, Yao J-C: A hybrid iterative scheme for mixed equilibrium problems and fixed point problems. J Comput Appl Math 2008, 214: 186–201. 10.1016/j.cam.2007.02.022MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

Advertisement