Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Research
  • Open Access

Convergence theorems of a three-step iteration method for a countable family of pseudocontractive mappings

Fixed Point Theory and Applications20132013:100

https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2013-100

  • Received: 14 January 2013
  • Accepted: 3 April 2013
  • Published:

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to construct a three-step iteration method (as follows) and obtain the convergence theorem for a countable family of Lipschitz pseudocontractive mappings in Hilbert space H. For the iteration format,

{ z n = ( 1 γ n ) x n + γ n T n x n , y n = ( 1 β n ) x n + β n T n z n , x n + 1 = ( 1 α n ) x n + α n T n y n ,

under suitable conditions, we prove that the sequence { x n } generated from above converges strongly to a common fixed point of { T n } n 1 . The results obtained in this paper improve and extend previous results that have been proved for this class of nonlinear mappings.

MSC:47H05, 47H09, 47H10.

Keywords

  • Lipschitz pseudocontractive mapping
  • uniformly closed
  • monotone mapping
  • strong convergence
  • common fixed point

1 Introduction

Let C be a nonempty subset of H. A mapping T : C H is said to be nonexpansive, if
T x T y x y , x , y C .
(1.1)
A mapping T : C H is called α-strictly pseudocontractive in the terminology of Browder and Petryshyn [1] if for all x , y C there exists α > 0 such that
T x T y , j ( x y ) x y 2 α x y ( T x T y ) 2 .
(1.2)
Without loss of generality, we may assume that α ( 0 , 1 ) . If I denotes the identity operator, then (1.2) can be rewritten as
( I T ) x ( I T ) y , j ( x y ) α ( I T ) x ( I T ) y 2 .
A mapping T is called pseudocontractive if
T x T y , x y x y 2 .
(1.3)
Note that inequality (1.3) can be equivalently written as
T x T y 2 x y 2 + ( I T ) x ( I T ) y 2 , x , y C .
(1.4)
Apart from their being an important generalization of nonexpansive mappings and α-strict pseudocontractive mappings, interest in pseudocontractive mappings stems mainly from their firm connection with the important class of nonlinear monotone mappings, where a mapping A with domain D ( A ) and range R ( A ) in H is called monotone if the inequality
x y x y + s ( A x A y )

holds for every x , y D ( A ) and for all s > 0 . We observe that A is monotone if and only if T : = I A is pseudocontractive, and thus a zero of A, N ( A ) : = { x D ( A ) : A x = 0 } , is a fixed point of T, F ( T ) : = { x D ( T ) : T x = x } . It is now well known (see, e.g., [2]) that if A is monotone then the solutions of the equation A x = 0 correspond to the equilibrium points of some evolution systems. Consequently, considerable research efforts, especially within the past 20 years or so, have been devoted to iterative methods for approximating fixed points of T when T is pseudocontractive (see, for example, [35] and the references contained therein).

The most general iterative algorithm for nonexpansive mappings studied by many authors is the following:
x 0 C , x n + 1 = ( 1 α n ) x n + α n T x n , n 0 ,
(1.5)

where { α n } n 0 ( 0 , 1 ) and satisfies the following additional assumptions: (i) lim n α n = 0 ; (ii) n = 1 α n = , the sequence { x n } n 1 generated by (1.5) is generally referred to as the Mann iteration scheme in the light of Mann [6].

The Mann iteration process does not generally converge to a fixed point of T even when the fixed point exists. If, for example, C is a nonempty, closed, convex and bounded subset of a real Hilbert space, T : C C is nonexpansive, and the Mann iteration process is defined by (1.5) with (i) lim n α n = 0 ; (ii) n = 1 α n = , one can only prove that the sequence is an approximate fixed point sequence, that is, x n T x n 0 as n . To get the sequence { x n } n 1 to converge to a fixed point of T (when such a fixed point exists), some type of compactness condition must be additionally imposed either on C (e.g., C is compact) or on T.

Later, some authors tried to prove convergence of Mann iteration scheme to a fixed point of a much more general and important class of Lipschitz pseudocontractive mappings. But, in 2001, Chidume and Mutangadura [7] gave an example of a Lipschitz pseudocontractive self-map of a compact convex subset of a Hilbert space with a unique fixed point for which no Mann sequence converges. Consequently, for this class of maps, the Mann sequence may not converge to a fixed point of Lipschitz pseudocontractive mappings even when C is a compact convex subset of H.

In 1974, Ishikawa [8] introduced an iteration process, which in some sense is more general than that of Mann and which converges to a fixed point of a Lipschitz pseudocontractive self-map T of C. The following theorem is proved.

Theorem IS [8]

If C is a compact convex subset of a Hilbert space H, T : C C is a Lipschitz pseudocontractive mapping and x 0 is any point of C, then the sequence { x n } converges strongly to a fixed point of T, where { x n } is defined iteratively for each integer n 0 by
{ y n = ( 1 β n ) x n + β n T x n , x n + 1 = ( 1 α n ) x n + α n T y n ,
(1.6)
where { α n } , { β n } are sequences of positive numbers satisfying the conditions:
( i ) 0 α n β n 1 ; ( ii ) lim n β n = 0 ; ( iii ) n = 0 α n β n = .

The iteration method of Theorem IS, which is now referred to as the Ishikawa iterative method has been studied extensively by various authors. But it is still an open question whether or not this method can be employed to approximate fixed points of Lipschitz pseudocontractive mappings without the compactness assumption on C or T (see, e.g., [4, 9, 10]).

In order to obtain a strong convergence theorem for pseudocontractive mappings without the compactness assumption, Zhou [11] established the hybrid Ishikawa algorithm for Lipschitz pseudocontractive mappings as follows:
{ y n = ( 1 α n ) x n + α n T x n , z n = ( 1 β n ) x n + β n T y n , C n = { z C : z n z 2 x n z 2 α n β n ( 1 2 α n L 2 α n 2 ) x n T x n 2 } , Q n = { z C : x n z , x 0 x n 0 } , x n + 1 = P C n Q n x 0 , n N .
(1.7)

He proved that the sequence { x n } defined by (1.8) converges strongly to P F ( T ) x 0 , where P C is the metric projection from H into C. We observe that the iterative algorithm (1.7) generates a sequence { x n } by projecting x 0 onto the intersection of closed convex sets C n and Q n for each n 0 .

In 2009, Yao et al. [12] introduced the hybrid Mann algorithm as follows. Let C be a nonempty, closed and convex subset of a real Hilbert space H. Let T : C C be a L-Lipschitz pseudocontractive mapping such that F ( T ) . Assume that the sequence { α n } [ a , b ] for some a , b ( 0 , 1 1 + L ) . Then for C 1 = C and x 1 = P C 1 x 0 , they proved that the sequence { x n } defined by
{ y n = ( 1 α n ) x n + α n T x n , C n + 1 = { z C n : α n ( I T ) y n 2 2 α n x n z , ( I T ) y n } , x n + 1 = P C n + 1 x 0 , n N ,
(1.8)

converges strongly to P F ( T ) x 0 .

More recently, Tang et al. [13] generalized algorithm (1.8) to the hybrid Ishikawa iterative process. Let C be a nonempty, closed and convex subset of a real Hilbert space H. Let T : C C be a Lipschitz pseudocontractive mapping. Let { α n } , { β n } be a sequence in [ 0 , 1 ] . Suppose that x 0 H . For C 1 = C and x 1 = P C 1 x 0 , define a sequence { x n } of C as follows:
{ y n = ( 1 α n ) x n + α n T z n , z n = ( 1 β n ) x n + β n T x n , C n + 1 = { z C n : α n ( I T ) y n 2 2 α n x n z , ( I T ) y n C n + 1 = + 2 α n β n L x n T x n y n x n + α n ( I T ) y n } , x n + 1 = P C n + 1 x 0 , n N .
(1.9)

Then they proved that the hybrid algorithm (1.9) strongly converges to a fixed point of Lipschitz pseudocontractive mappings. It is worth mentioning that the schemes in (1.7)-(1.9) are not easy to compute. They involve computation of the intersection of C n and Q n for each n 1 .

Recently, Habtu Zegeye et al. [18] generalized algorithm (1.9) to Ishikawa iterative process (not hybrid) as follows. Let C be a nonempty, closed and convex subset of a real Hilbert space H. Let T i : C C , i = 1 , 2 , , N , be a finite family of Lipschitz pseudocontractive mappings with Lipschitzian constants L i , for i = 1 , 2 , , N , respectively. Assume that the interior of F : = i = 1 N F ( T i ) is nonempty. Let { x n } be a sequence generated from an arbitrary x 0 C by
{ y n = ( 1 β n ) x n + β n T n x n , x n + 1 = ( 1 α n ) x n + α n T n y n .
(1.10)

Under some conditions, { x n } converges strongly to x F .

Our concern now is the following: Is it possible to construct a three-step iteration method and obtain a convergence theorem for a countable family of pseudocontractive mappings?

It is our purpose in this paper to construct a three-step iteration method and obtain the convergence theorem for a countable family of pseudocontractive mappings provided that the interior of the common fixed points is nonempty. No compactness assumption is imposed either on one of the mappings or on C. The results obtained in this paper improve and extend the results of Theorem IS, Zhou [14], Yao et al. [12], Tang et al. [13] and Habtu Zegeye et al. [18].

2 Preliminaries

Let C be a nonempty subset of a real Hilbert space H. The mapping T : C H is called Lipschitz or Lipschitz continuous if there exists L > 0 such that
T x T y L x y , x , y C .
(2.1)

If L = 1 , then T is called nonexpansive; and if L < 1 then T is called a contraction. It is easy to see from Eq. (2.1) that every contraction mapping is nonexpansive and every nonexpansive mapping is Lipschitz.

A countable family of mapping { T n } n = 1 : C H is called uniformly Lipschitz with Lipschitz constant L n > 0 , n 1 , if there exists 0 < L = sup n 1 L n such that
T n x T n y L x y , x , y C , n 1 .
(2.2)

A countable family of mapping { T n } n = 1 : C H is called uniformly closed if x n x and x n T n x n 0 imply x n = 1 F ( T n ) .

In the sequel, we also need the following definition and lemma.

Let H be a real Hilbert space. The function ϕ : H × H R defined by
ϕ ( x , y ) : = x y 2 = x 2 2 x , y + y 2 , for  x , y H ,

is studied by Alber [15], Kamimula and Takahashi [16] and Riech [17].

It is obvious from the definition of the function ϕ that
( x y ) 2 ϕ ( x , y ) ( x + y ) 2 , for  x , y H .
The function ϕ also has the following property:
ϕ ( y , x ) = ϕ ( y , z ) + ϕ ( z , x ) + 2 z y , x z , for  x , y , z H .
(2.3)
Lemma 2.1 Let H be a real Hilbert space. Then for all x , y H and α [ 0 , 1 ] the following inequality holds:
α x + ( 1 α ) y 2 = α x 2 + ( 1 α ) y 2 α ( 1 α ) x y 2 .
Remark 2.2 We now give an example of a countable family of uniformly closed and uniformly Lipschitz pseudocontractive mappings with the interior of the common fixed points nonempty. Suppose that X : = R and C : = [ 1 , 1 ] R . Let { T n } n 1 : C C be defined by
T n x : = { x , x [ 1 , 0 ) , ( 1 2 n + 1 2 ) x , x [ 0 , 1 ] .
(2.4)

Then we observe that F : = n = 1 F ( T n ) = [ 1 , 0 ] , and hence the interior of the common fixed points is nonempty.

Now, we show that { T n } n 1 is a countable family of pseudocontractive mappings. Suppose that C 1 = [ 1 , 0 ) and C 2 = [ 0 , 1 ] . If x , y C 1 , we have that
T n x T n y , x y = x y , x y = | x y | 2 .
(2.5)
If x , y C 2 , we have that
T n x T n y , x y = ( 1 2 n + 1 2 ) x ( 1 2 n + 1 2 ) y , x y = ( 1 2 n + 1 2 ) | x y | 2 | x y | 2 .
(2.6)
If x C 1 , y C 2 , considering ( 1 2 n 1 2 ) y ( x y ) > 0 , we have that
T n x T n y , x y = x ( 1 2 n + 1 2 ) y , x y = | x y | 2 ( 1 2 n 1 2 ) y ( x y ) | x y | 2 .
(2.7)

Therefore, from (2.5), (2.6) and (2.7) we obtain that { T n } n 1 is a countable family of pseudocontractive mappings.

Next, we show that { T n } n 1 is uniformly Lipschitz with Lipschitz constant L = sup n 1 L n = 2 . If x , y C 1 , we have that
| T n x T n y | = | x y | 2 | x y | .
(2.8)
If x , y C 2 , we have that
| T n x T n y | = ( 1 2 n + 1 2 ) | x y | 2 | x y | .
(2.9)
If x C 1 , y C 2 , we have that
| T n x T n y | = | x ( 1 2 n + 1 2 ) y | = | x y 1 2 n y + 1 2 y | | x y | + ( 1 2 n + 1 2 ) y | x y | + ( 1 2 n + 1 2 ) | x y | 2 | x y | .
(2.10)

Therefore, from (2.8), (2.9) and (2.10) we obtain that { T n } n 1 is uniformly Lipschitz.

Finally, we show that { T n } n 1 is uniformly closed.

If there exists { x n } C 1 such that x n x [ 1 , 0 ] , and | x n T n x n | = 0 , we observe that [ 1 , 0 ] F ;

If there exists { x n } C 2 such that x n x [ 0 , 1 ] , if and only if x = 0 , we have that | x n T n x n | = 0 , it is obvious that 0 F ;

If there exists { x n } C :
  1. (i)

    N, as n > N , x n C 2 . The proof is the same as the proof of the second situation;

     
  2. (ii)

    N, as n > N , x n C 1 . The proof is the same as the proof of the first situation;

     
  3. (iii)

    { x n k } C 1 , { x n j } C 2 . If there exists x n x , then we have that x = 0 . The proof is the same as the proof of the second situation. So, we can obtain that { T n } n 1 is uniformly closed.

     

3 Main results

Theorem 3.1 Let C be a nonempty, closed and convex subset of a real Hilbert space H, let { T n } n = 1 : C C be a countable family of uniformly closed and uniformly Lipschitz pseudocontractive mappings with Lipschitzian constants L n , let L : = sup n 1 L n . Assume that the interior of F : = n = 1 F ( T n ) is nonempty. Let { x n } be a sequence generated from an arbitrary x 0 C by the following algorithm:
{ z n = ( 1 γ n ) x n + γ n T n x n , y n = ( 1 β n ) x n + β n T n z n , x n + 1 = ( 1 α n ) x n + α n T n y n ,
(3.1)

where { α n } , { β n } , { γ n } ( 0 , 1 ) satisfying the following conditions: (i) α n β n γ n , n 0 ; (ii) lim inf n α n = α > 0 ; (iii) sup n 1 γ n γ with γ 3 L 4 + 2 γ 2 L 3 + γ 2 L 2 + γ L 2 + 2 γ < 1 . Then { x n } converges strongly to x F .

Proof Suppose that p F . Then from (3.1) and Lemma 2.1, we have that
(3.2)
(3.3)
(3.4)
In addition, using (3.1), we have that
z n T n z n 2 = ( 1 γ n ) ( x n T n z n ) + γ n ( T n x n T n z n ) 2 = ( 1 γ n ) x n T n z n 2 + γ n T n x n T n z n 2 γ n ( 1 γ n ) x n T n x n 2 ( 1 γ n ) x n T n z n 2 + γ n L 2 x n z n 2 γ n ( 1 γ n ) x n T n x n 2 = ( 1 γ n ) x n T n z n 2 + γ n 3 L 2 x n T n x n 2 γ n ( 1 γ n ) x n T n x n 2 = ( 1 γ n ) x n T n z n 2 + γ n ( γ n 2 L 2 + γ n 1 ) x n T n x n 2 .
(3.5)
Substituting (3.4) and (3.5) into (3.3), we obtain that
y n p 2 ( 1 β n ) x n p 2 + β n ( x n p 2 + γ n 2 x n T n x n 2 ) + β n [ ( 1 γ n ) x n T n z n 2 + γ n ( γ n 2 L 2 + γ n 1 ) x n T n x n 2 ] β n ( 1 β n ) x n T n z n 2 = x n p 2 + β n γ n ( γ n 2 L 2 + 2 γ n 1 ) x n T n x n 2 + β n ( β n γ n ) x n T n z n 2 .
(3.6)
Since
(3.7)
(3.8)
Then, substituting (3.8) into (3.7), we obtain that
y n T n y n 2 ( 1 β n ) x n T n y n 2 + β n L 2 ( γ n β n + β n γ n L ) 2 x n T n x n 2 β n ( 1 β n ) x n T n z n 2 .
(3.9)
Substituting (3.6) and (3.9) into (3.2), we obtain that
x n + 1 p 2 ( 1 α n ) x n p 2 + α n [ x n p 2 + β n γ n ( γ n 2 L 2 + 2 γ n 1 ) x n T n x n 2 + β n ( β n γ n ) x n T n z n 2 ] + α n [ ( 1 β n ) x n T n y n 2 + β n L 2 ( γ n β n + β n γ n L ) 2 x n T n x n 2 β n ( 1 β n ) x n T n z n 2 ] α n ( 1 α n ) x n T n y n 2 = x n p 2 + [ α n β n γ n ( γ n 2 L 2 + 2 γ n 1 ) + α n β n L 2 ( γ n β n + β n γ n L ) 2 ] x n T n x n 2 + α n ( α n β n ) x n T n y n 2 + α n β n ( 2 β n γ n 1 ) x n T n z n 2 .
(3.10)
Since from condition (iii), we have that
γ ( γ 2 L 2 + γ L 2 + 2 γ 1 ) + γ 2 L 2 ( 1 + γ L ) 2 < 0 γ n ( γ n 2 L 2 + γ n L 2 + 2 γ n 1 ) + L 2 ( γ n + γ n 2 L ) 2 < 0 α n β n γ n ( γ n 2 L 2 + 2 γ n 1 ) + α n β n L 2 ( γ n β n + β n γ n L ) 2 < 0 .
Again from condition (i), we have that α n β n 0 and 2 β n γ n 1 0 . So, inequality (3.10) implies that
x n + 1 p 2 x n p 2 [ α n β n γ n ( 1 γ n 2 L 2 2 γ n ) α n β n L 2 ( γ n β n + β n γ n L ) 2 ] x n T n x n 2 .
(3.11)
Then
x n + 1 p 2 x n p 2 .
(3.12)

It is obviously that lim n x n p exists, then { x n p } is bounded. This implies that { x n } , { T n x n } , { z n } , { T n z n } , { y n } and { T n y n } are also bounded.

Furthermore, from (2.3), we have that
ϕ ( p , x n ) = ϕ ( p , x n + 1 ) + ϕ ( x n + 1 , x n ) + 2 x n + 1 p , x n x n + 1 .
This implies that
x n + 1 p , x n x n + 1 + 1 2 ϕ ( x n + 1 , x n ) = 1 2 ( ϕ ( p , x n ) ϕ ( p , x n + 1 ) ) .
(3.13)
Moreover, since the interior of F is nonempty, there exists p F and r > 0 such that p + r h F whenever h 1 . Thus, from the fact that ϕ ( x , y ) = x y 2 , and (3.12) and (3.13), we get that
0 x n + 1 ( p + r h ) , x n x n + 1 + 1 2 ϕ ( x n + 1 , x n ) = 1 2 ( ϕ ( p + r h , x n ) ϕ ( p + r h , x n + 1 ) ) .
(3.14)
Then from (3.13) and (3.14), we obtain that
r h , x n x n + 1 x n + 1 p , x n x n + 1 + 1 2 ϕ ( x n + 1 , x n ) = 1 2 ( ϕ ( p , x n ) ϕ ( p , x n + 1 ) ) ,
and hence
h , x n x n + 1 1 2 r ( ϕ ( p , x n ) ϕ ( p , x n + 1 ) ) .
Since h with h 1 is arbitrary, we have
x n x n + 1 1 2 r ( ϕ ( p , x n ) ϕ ( p , x n + 1 ) ) .
So, if n > m , then we get that
x m x n = x m x m + 1 + x m + 1 x n 1 + x n 1 x n i = m n 1 x i x i + 1 1 2 r i = m n 1 ( ϕ ( p , x i ) ϕ ( p , x i + 1 ) ) = 1 2 r ( ϕ ( p , x m ) ϕ ( p , x n ) ) .
But we know that { ϕ ( p , x n ) } converges. Therefore, we obtain that { x n } is a Cauchy sequence. Since C is closed subset of H, there exists x C such that
x n x .
(3.15)
Furthermore, from (3.11) and conditions (i), (ii) and (iii), we get that
from which it follows that
lim n x n T n x n = 0 .
(3.16)

Since { T n } n = 1 are uniformly closed, then from (3.15) and (3.16), we obtain that x n = 1 F ( T n ) = F . The proof is complete. □

Theorem 3.2 Let C be a nonempty, closed and convex subset of a real Hilbert space H, let T n : C C be a finite family of uniformly closed and uniformly Lipschitz pseudocontractive mappings with Lipschitzian constants L n , n = 1 , 2 , , N . Assume that the interior of F : = n = 1 N F ( T n ) is nonempty. Let { x n } be a sequence generated from an arbitrary x 0 C by the following algorithm:
{ z n = ( 1 γ n ) x n + γ n T n x n , y n = ( 1 β n ) x n + β n T n z n , x n + 1 = ( 1 α n ) x n + α n T n y n ,
(3.17)

where T n : = T n ( mod N ) and { α n } , { β n } , { γ n } ( 0 , 1 ) satisfying the following conditions: (i) α n β n γ n , n 0 ; (ii) lim inf n α n = α > 0 ; (iii) sup n 1 γ n γ with γ 3 L 4 + 2 γ 2 L 3 + γ 2 L 2 + γ L 2 + 2 γ < 1 for L : = max { L n : n = 1 , 2 , , N } . Then { x n } converges strongly to x F .

If in Theorem 3.1, we consider a single Lipschitz pseudocontractive mapping, then we may change the conditions of Theorem 3.1.

Theorem 3.3 Let C be a nonempty, closed and convex subset of a real Hilbert space H, let T : C C be a Lipschitz pseudocontractive mappings with Lipschitzian constants L. Assume that the interior of F ( T ) is nonempty. Let { x n } be a sequence generated from an arbitrary x 0 C by the following algorithm:
{ z n = ( 1 γ n ) x n + γ n T x n , y n = ( 1 β n ) x n + β n T z n , x n + 1 = ( 1 α n ) x n + α n T y n ,
(3.18)

where { α n } , { β n } , { γ n } ( 0 , 1 ) satisfying the following conditions: (i) α n β n γ n , n 0 ; (ii) α n β n γ n = ; (iii) sup n 1 γ n γ with γ 3 L 4 + 2 γ 2 L 3 + γ 2 L 2 + γ L 2 + 2 γ < 1 . Then { x n } converges strongly to x F ( T ) .

Proof Following the method of proof of Theorem 3.1, we obtain that x n x C .

Furthermore, from (3.10) and conditions (i) and (ii), we obtain (3.11). From (3.11) and conditions (iii) and (iv), we obtain that
from which it follows that
lim inf n x n T x n = 0 ,
and hence there exists a subsequence { x n k } of { x n } such that
lim n T x n k x n k = 0 .

Thus, x n k x and the continuity of T imply that x = T x , and hence x F ( T ) . □

4 Applications

Theorem 4.1 Let H be a real Hilbert space, let { A n } n = 1 : H H be a countable family of uniformly Lipschitz monotone mappings with Lipschitzian constants L n , let L : = sup n 1 L n . And if A n x n 0 , x n x , then x n = 1 N ( A n ) . Assume that the interior of F : = n = 1 N ( A n ) is nonempty. Let { x n } be a sequence generated from an arbitrary x 0 C by the following algorithm:
{ z n = x n γ n A n x n , y n = x n β n ( x n z n ) β n A n z n , x n + 1 = x n α n ( x n y n ) α n A n y n ,
(4.1)

where { α n } , { β n } , { γ n } ( 0 , 1 ) satisfying the following conditions: (i) α n β n γ n , n 0 ; (ii) lim inf n α n = α > 0 ; (iii) sup n 1 γ n γ with γ 3 L 4 + 2 γ 2 L 3 + γ 2 L 2 + γ L 2 + 2 γ < 1 . Then { x n } converges strongly to x F .

Proof Suppose that T n x : = ( I A n ) x for n 1 . Then we get that { T n } n 1 is a countable family of uniformly closed and uniformly Lipschitz pseudocontractive mappings with n = 1 F ( T n ) = n = 1 N ( A n ) . Moreover, when A n is replaced by I T n , Scheme (4.1) reduces to Scheme (3.1) and hence the conclusion follows from Theorem 3.1. □

Corollary 4.2 Let H be a real Hilbert space, let A n : H H be a finite family of uniformly Lipschitz monotone mappings with Lipschitzian constants L n , n = 1 , 2 , , N . And if A n x n 0 , x n x , then x n = 1 N N ( A n ) . Assume that the interior of F : = n = 1 N N ( A n ) is nonempty. Let { x n } be a sequence generated from an arbitrary x 0 C by the following algorithm:
{ z n = x n γ n A n x n , y n = x n β n ( x n z n ) β n A n z n , x n + 1 = x n α n ( x n y n ) α n A n y n ,
(4.2)

where A n : = A n ( mod N ) and { α n } , { β n } , { γ n } ( 0 , 1 ) satisfying the following conditions: (i) α n β n γ n , n 0 ; (ii) lim inf n α n = α > 0 ; (iii) sup n 1 γ n γ with γ 3 L 4 + 2 γ 2 L 3 + γ 2 L 2 + γ L 2 + 2 γ < 1 for L : = max { L n : n = 1 , 2 , , N } . Then { x n } converges strongly to x F .

Corollary 4.3 Let H be a real Hilbert space, let A : H H be a Lipschitz monotone mappings with Lipschitzian constants L. Assume that the interior of N ( A ) is nonempty. Let { x n } be a sequence generated from an arbitrary x 0 C by the following algorithm:
{ z n = x n γ n A x n , y n = x n β n ( x n z n ) β n A z n , x n + 1 = x n α n ( x n y n ) α n A y n ,
(4.3)

where { α n } , { β n } , { γ n } ( 0 , 1 ) satisfying the following conditions: (i) α n β n γ n , n 0 ; (ii) α n β n γ n = ; (iii) sup n 1 γ n γ with γ 3 L 4 + 2 γ 2 L 3 + γ 2 L 2 + γ L 2 + 2 γ < 1 . Then { x n } converges strongly to x N ( A ) .

Remark 4.4 In the paper [18], Scheme (2.28) of Theorem 2.5 and Scheme (2.29) of Corollary 2.6 are not correct, they are replaced by the following iterative algorithms, respectively.
{ y n = x n β n A n x n , x n + 1 = x n α n ( x n y n ) α n A n y n ,
and
{ y n = x n β n A x n , x n + 1 = x n α n ( x n y n ) α n A y n .

Declarations

Acknowledgements

This project is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under grant (11071279).

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Mathematics, Tianjin Polytechnic University, Tianjin, 300387, China

References

  1. Browder FE, Petryshyn WV: Construction of fixed points of nonlinear mappings in Hilbert spaces. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1967, 20: 197–228. 10.1016/0022-247X(67)90085-6MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Zeidler E: Nonlinear Functional Analysis and Its Applications, Part II: Monotone Operators. Springer, Berlin; 1985.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Chidume CE, Moore C: The solution by iteration of nonlinear equations in uniformly smooth Banach spaces. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1997, 215: 132–146. 10.1006/jmaa.1997.5628MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Liu Q: The convergence theorems of the sequence of Ishikawa iterates for hemi-con tractive mappings. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1990, 148: 55–62. 10.1016/0022-247X(90)90027-DMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Zhang S: On the convergence problems of Ishikawa and Mann iteration processes with error for ϕ -pseudocontractive type mappings. Appl. Math. Mech. 2000, 21: 1–10.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Mann WR: Mean value methods in iteration. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1953, 4: 506–510. 10.1090/S0002-9939-1953-0054846-3View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Chidume CE, Mutangadura SA: An example of the Mann iteration method for Lipschitz pseudocontractions. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 2001, 129: 2359–2363. 10.1090/S0002-9939-01-06009-9MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Ishikawa S: Fixed points by a new iteration method. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1974, 44: 147–150. 10.1090/S0002-9939-1974-0336469-5MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Chidume CE, Moore C: Fixed point iteration for pseudocontractive maps. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1999, 127: 1163–1170. 10.1090/S0002-9939-99-05050-9MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Liu Q: On Naimpally and Singh’s open question. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1987, 124: 157–164. 10.1016/0022-247X(87)90031-XMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Zhou H: Convergence theorems of fixed points for Lipschitz pseudo-contractions in Hilbert spaces. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2008, 343: 546–556. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2008.01.045MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Yao YH, Liou YC, Marino G: A hybrid algorithm for pseudo-contractive mappings. Nonlinear Anal. 2009, 71: 4997–5002. 10.1016/j.na.2009.03.075MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Tang YC, Peng JG, Liu LW: Strong convergence theorem for pseudo-contractive mappings in Hilbert spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2011, 74: 380–385. 10.1016/j.na.2010.08.048MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Zhou H: Convergence theorems for λ -strict pseudocontractions in 2-uniformly smooth Banach spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2008, 69: 3160–3173. 10.1016/j.na.2007.09.009MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  15. Alber Y: Metric and generalized projection operators in Banach spaces: properties and applications. Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math. 178. In Theory and Applications of Nonlinear Operators of Accretive and Monotone Type. Edited by: Kartsatos AG. Dekker, New York; 1996:15–50.Google Scholar
  16. Kamimura S, Takahashi W: Strong convergence of proximal-type algorithm in a Banach space. SIAM J. Optim. 2002, 13: 938–945. 10.1137/S105262340139611XMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  17. Reich S: A weak convergence theorem for the alternating method with Bergman distance. Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math. 178. In Theory and Applications of Nonlinear Operators of Accretive and Monotone Type. Edited by: Kartsatos AG. Dekker, New York; 1996:313–318.Google Scholar
  18. Zegeye H, Shahzad N, Alghamdi MA: Convergence of Ishikawa’s iteration method for pseudocontractive mappings. Nonlinear Anal. 2011, 74: 7304–7311. 10.1016/j.na.2011.07.048MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

Advertisement