Skip to main content

System of variational inequalities and an accretive operator in Banach spaces

Abstract

In this paper, we introduce composite Mann iteration methods for a general system of variational inequalities with solutions being also common fixed points of a countable family of nonexpansive mappings and zeros of an accretive operator in real smooth Banach spaces. Here, the composite Mann iteration methods are based on Korpelevich’s extragradient method, viscosity approximation method and the Mann iteration method. We first consider and analyze a composite Mann iterative algorithm in the setting of uniformly convex and 2-uniformly smooth Banach space, and then another composite Mann iterative algorithm in a uniformly convex Banach space having a uniformly Gâteaux differentiable norm. Under suitable assumptions, we derive some strong convergence theorems. The results presented in this paper improve, extend, supplement and develop the corresponding results announced in the earlier and very recent literature.

MSC:49J30, 47H09, 47J20.

1 Introduction

Let X be a real Banach space whose dual space is denoted by X . The normalized duality mapping J:X 2 X is defined by

J(x)= { x X : x , x = x 2 = x 2 } ,xX,

where , denotes the generalized duality pairing. It is an immediate consequence of the Hahn-Banach theorem that J(x) is nonempty for each xX. Let U={xX:x=1} denote the unit sphere of X. A Banach space X is said to be uniformly convex if for each ϵ(0,2], there exists δ>0 such that for all x,yU,

xyϵx+y/21δ.

It is known that a uniformly convex Banach space is reflexive and strict convex. A Banach space X is said to be smooth if the limit

lim t 0 x + t y x t

exists for all x,yU; in this case, X is also said to have a Gâteaux differentiable norm. X is said to have a uniformly Gâteaux differentiable norm if for each yU, the limit is attained uniformly for xU. Moreover, it is said to be uniformly smooth if this limit is attained uniformly for x,yU. The norm of X is said to be the Frechet differential if for each xU, this limit is attained uniformly for yU. Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of X. A mapping T:CC is called nonexpansive if TxTyxy for every x,yC. The set of fixed points of T is denoted by Fix(T). A mapping A:CX is said to be accretive if for each x,yC, there exists j(xy)J(xy) such that AxAy,j(xy)0.

Recently, Yao et al. [1] combined the viscosity approximation method and the Mann iteration method, and gave the following hybrid viscosity approximation method:

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a real uniformly smooth Banach space X, T:CC a nonexpansive mapping such that Fix(T) and f Ξ C with a contractive coefficient ρ(0,1), where Ξ C is the set of all contractive self-mappings on C. For an arbitrary x 0 C, define { x n } in the following way:

{ y n = α n x n + ( 1 α n ) T x n , x n + 1 = β n f ( x n ) + ( 1 β n ) y n , n 0 ,
(YCY)

where { α n } and { β n } are two sequences in (0,1). They proved under certain control conditions on the sequences { α n } and { β n } that { x n } converges strongly to a fixed point of T. Subsequently, Ceng and Yao [2] under the convergence of no parameter sequences to zero proved that the sequence { x n } generated by (YCY) converges strongly to a fixed point of T. Such a result includes [[1], Theorem 1] as a special case.

Theorem 1.1 (See [[2], Theorem 3.1])

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a uniformly smooth Banach space X. Let T:CC be a nonexpansive mapping with Fix(T) and f Ξ C with contractive coefficient ρ(0,1). Given sequences { α n } and { β n } in [0,1], the following control conditions are satisfied:

  1. (i)

    1 β n 1ρ, n n 0 for some integer n 0 1;

  2. (ii)

    n = 0 β n =;

  3. (iii)

    0< lim inf n α n lim sup n α n <1;

  4. (iv)

    lim n ( β n + 1 1 ( 1 β n + 1 ) α n + 1 β n 1 ( 1 β n ) α n )=0.

For an arbitrary x 0 C, let { x n } be generated by (YCY). Then

x n q β n ( f ( x n ) x n ) 0,

where qFix(T) solves the variational inequality problem (VIP):

q f ( q ) , J ( q p ) 0,pFix(T).

On the other hand, Cai and Bu [3] considered the following general system of variational inequalities (GSVI) in a real smooth Banach space X, which involves finding ( x , y )C×C such that

{ μ 1 B 1 y + x y , J ( x x ) 0 , x C , μ 2 B 2 x + y x , J ( x y ) 0 , x C ,
(1.1)

where C is a nonempty, closed and convex subset of X, B 1 , B 2 :CX are two nonlinear mappings and μ 1 and μ 2 are two positive constants. Here, the set of solutions of GSVI (1.1) is denoted by GSVI(C, B 1 , B 2 ). In particular, if X=H in a real Hilbert space, then GSVI (1.1) reduces to the following GSVI of finding ( x , y )C×C such that

{ μ 1 B 1 y + x y , x x 0 , x C , μ 2 B 2 x + y x , x y 0 , x C ,
(1.2)

which μ 1 and μ 2 are two positive constants. The set of solutions of problem (1.2) is still denoted by GSVI(C, B 1 , B 2 ). In particular, if B 1 = B 2 =A, then problem (1.2) reduces to the new system of variational inequalities (NSVI), introduced and studied by Verma [4]. Further, if x = y additionally, then the NSVI reduces to the classical variational inequality problem (VIP) of finding x C such that

A x , x x 0,xC.
(1.3)

The solution set of VIP (1.3) is denoted by VI(C,A). Variational inequality theory has been studied quite extensively and has emerged as an important tool in the study of a wide class of obstacle, unilateral, free, moving, equilibrium problems. It is now well known that the variational inequalities are equivalent to the fixed point problems, the origin of which can be traced back to Lions and Stampacchia [5]. This alternative formulation has been used to suggest and analyze projection iterative method for solving variational inequalities under the conditions that the involved operator must be strongly monotone and Lipschitz continuous.

Recently, Ceng et al. [6] transformed problem (1.2) into a fixed point problem in the following way.

Lemma 1.1 (See [6])

For given x ¯ , y ¯ C, ( x ¯ , y ¯ ) is a solution of problem (1.2) if and only if x ¯ is a fixed point of the mapping G:CC defined by

G(x)= P C [ P C ( x μ 2 B 2 x ) μ 1 B 1 P C ( x μ 2 B 2 x ) ] ,xC,
(1.4)

where y ¯ = P C ( x ¯ μ 2 B 2 x ¯ ) and P C is the projection of H onto C.

In particular, if the mappings B i :CH is β i -inverse strongly monotone for i=1,2, then the mapping G is nonexpansive provided μ i (0,2 β i ) for i=1,2.

In 1976, Korpelevich [7] proposed an iterative algorithm for solving the VIP (1.3) in Euclidean space R n :

{ y n = P C ( x n τ A x n ) , x n + 1 = P C ( x n τ A y n ) , n 0 ,

with τ>0 a given number, which is known as the extragradient method. The literature on the VIP is vast, and Korpelevich’s extragradient method has received great attention given by many authors, who improved it in various ways; see, e.g., [3, 814] and the references therein, to name but a few.

In particular, whenever X is still a real smooth Banach space, B 1 = B 2 =A and x = y , then GSVI (1.1) reduces to the variational inequality problem (VIP) of finding x C such that

A x , J ( x x ) 0,xC,
(1.5)

which was considered by Aoyama et al. [15]. Note that VIP (1.5) is connected with the fixed point problem for nonlinear mapping (see, e.g., [16, 17]), the problem of finding a zero point of a nonlinear operator (see, e.g., [18]) and so on. It is clear that VIP (1.5) extends VIP (1.3) from Hilbert spaces to Banach spaces.

In order to find a solution of VIP (1.5), Aoyama et al. [15] introduced the following Mann iterative scheme for an accretive operator A:

x n + 1 = α n x n +(1 α n ) Π C ( x n λ n A x n ),n1,
(1.6)

where Π C is a sunny nonexpansive retraction from X onto C. Then they proved a weak convergence theorem.

Obviously, it is an interesting and valuable problem of constructing some algorithms with strong convergence for solving GSVI (1.1), which contains VIP (1.5) as a special case. Very recently, Cai and Bu [3] constructed an iterative algorithm for solving GSVI (1.1) and a common fixed point problem of a countable family of nonexpansive mappings in a uniformly convex and 2-uniformly smooth Banach space.

Theorem 1.2 (See [[3], Theorem 3.1])

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a uniformly convex and 2-uniformly smooth Banach space X. Let Π C be a sunny nonexpansive retraction from X onto C. Let the mapping B i :CX be β i -inverse-strongly accretive with 0< μ i < β i κ 2 for i=1,2. Let f be a contraction of C into itself with coefficient δ(0,1). Let { T n } n = 1 be a countable family of nonexpansive mappings of C into itself such that F= i = 1 Fix( T i )Ω, where Ω is the fixed point set of the mapping G= Π C (I μ 1 B 1 ) Π C (I μ 2 B 2 ) on C. For arbitrarily given x 1 C, let { x n } be the sequence generated by

{ x n + 1 = β n x n + ( 1 β n ) T n y n , y n = α n f ( x n ) + ( 1 α n ) z n , z n = Π C ( u n μ 1 B 1 u n ) , u n = Π C ( x n μ 2 B 2 x n ) , n 1 .

Suppose that { α n } and { β n } are two sequences in (0,1) satisfying the following conditions:

  1. (i)

    lim n α n =0 and n = 1 α n =;

  2. (ii)

    0< lim inf n β n lim sup n β n <1.

Assume that n = 1 sup x D T n + 1 x T n x< for any bounded subset D of C, and let T be a mapping of C into X defined by Tx= lim n T n x for all xC and suppose that Fix(T)= n = 1 Fix( T n ). Then { x n } converges strongly to qF, which solves the following VIP:

q f ( q ) , J ( q p ) 0,pF.

Furthermore, recall that a (possibly multivalued) operator AX×X with domain D(A) and range R(A) in a real Banach space X is accretive if, for each x i D(A) and y i A x i (i=1,2), there exists a j( x 1 x 2 )J( x 1 x 2 ) such that y 1 y 2 ,j( x 1 x 2 )0. (Here J is the duality mapping.) An accretive operator A is said to satisfy the range condition if D ( A ) ¯ R(I+rA) for all r>0. An accretive operator A is m-accretive if R(I+rA)=X for each r>0. If A is an accretive operator which satisfies the range condition, then we can define, for each r>0 a mapping J r :R(I+rA)D(A) defined by J r = ( I + r A ) 1 , which is called the resolvent of A. We know that J r is nonexpansive and Fix( J r )= A 1 0 for all r>0. Hence,

Fix( J r )= A 1 0= { z D ( A ) : 0 A z } .

If A 1 0, then the inclusion 0Az is solvable. The following resolvent identity is well known to us; see [19], where more details on accretive operators can be found.

Proposition 1.1 (Resolvent identity)

For λ>0, μ>0 and xX,

J λ x= J μ ( μ λ x + ( 1 μ λ ) J λ x ) .

Recently, Aoyama et al. [20] studied the following iterative scheme in a uniformly convex Banach space having a uniformly Gâteaux differentiable norm: for resolvents J r n of an accretive operator A such that A 1 0 and D ( A ) ¯ C r > 0 R(I+rA) and { α n }(0,1)

{ x 0 = x C , x n + 1 = α n x + ( 1 α n ) J r n x n .
(1.7)

They proved that the sequence { x n } generated by (1.7) converges strongly to a zero of A under appropriate assumptions on { α n } and { r n }. Subsequently, Ceng et al. [21] introduced and analyzed the following composite iterative scheme in either a uniformly smooth Banach space or a reflexive Banach space having a weakly sequentially continuous duality mapping

{ x 0 = x X , y n = α n u + ( 1 α n ) J r n x n , x n + 1 = ( 1 β n ) y n + β n J r n y n ,
(1.8)

where u D ( A ) ¯ is an arbitrary (but fixed) element, under the following control conditions:

  1. (H1)

    lim n α n =0;

  2. (H2)

    n = 0 α n =, or, equivalently, n = 0 (1 α n )=0;

  3. (H3)

    n = 1 | α n α n 1 |<;

  4. (H4)

    r n ε, n0, for some ε>0 and n = 1 | r n r n 1 |<;

  5. (H5)

    β n [0,a) for some a(0,1) and n = 1 | β n β n 1 |<.

Further, as the viscosity approximation method, Jung [22] purposed and analyzed the following composite iterative scheme for finding a zero of an accretive operator A: for resolvent J r n of an accretive operator A such that A 1 0 and D ( A ) ¯ C r > 0 R(I+rA), f Ξ C ( Ξ C denotes the set of all contractions on C) and { α n },{ β n }(0,1),

{ x 0 = x C , y n = α n f ( x n ) + ( 1 α n ) J r n x n , x n + 1 = ( 1 β n ) y n + β n J r n y n .
(JS)

Theorem 1.3 (See [[22], Theorem 3.1])

Let X be a strictly convex and reflexive Banach space having a uniformly Gâteaux differentiable norm. Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of X and AX×X an accretive operator in X such that A 1 0 and D ( A ) ¯ C r > 0 R(I+rA). Let { α n } and { β n } be sequences in (0,1) which satisfy the conditions:

  1. (i)

    lim n α n =0 and n = 0 α n =;

  2. (ii)

    β n [0,a) for some 0<a<1 for all n0.

Let f Ξ C and x 0 C be chosen arbitrarily. Let { x n } be a sequence generated by (JS) for r n >0. If { x n } is asymptotically regular, i.e., lim n x n + 1 x n =0, then { x n } converges strongly to q A 1 0, which is the unique solution of the variational inequality problem (VIP)

( I f ) q , J ( q p ) 0,f Ξ C ,p A 1 0.

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a real smooth Banach space X. Let Π C be a sunny nonexpansive retraction from X onto C, and let f:CC be a contraction with coefficient ρ(0,1). Motivated and inspired by the research going on in this area, we introduce the composite Mann iteration methods for finding solutions of GSVI (1.1), which are also common fixed points of a countable family of nonexpansive mappings and zeros of an accretive operator AX×X such that D ( A ) ¯ C r > 0 R(I+rA). Here, the composite Mann iteration methods are based on Korpelevich’s extragradient method, viscosity approximation method and the Mann iteration method. We first consider and analyze a composite Mann iterative algorithm in the setting of uniformly convex and 2-uniformly smooth Banach space, and then another composite Mann iterative algorithm in a uniformly convex Banach space having a uniformly Gâteaux differentiable norm. Under suitable assumptions, we derive some strong convergence theorems. The results presented in this paper improve, extend, supplement and develop the corresponding results announced in the earlier and very recent literature; see, e.g., [2, 3, 6, 8, 22].

2 Preliminaries

Let X be a real Banach space. We define a function ρ:[0,)[0,) called the modulus of smoothness of X as follows:

ρ(τ)=sup { 1 2 ( x + y + x y ) 1 : x , y X , x = 1 , y = τ } .

It is known that X is uniformly smooth if and only if lim τ 0 ρ(τ)/τ=0. Let q be a fixed real number with 1<q2. Then a Banach space X is said to be q-uniformly smooth if there exists a constant c>0 such that ρ(τ)c τ q for all τ>0. As pointed out in [23], no Banach space is q-uniformly smooth for q>2. In addition, it is also known that J is single-valued if and only if X is smooth, whereas if X is uniformly smooth, then J is norm-to-norm uniformly continuous on bounded subsets of X. If X has a uniformly Gâteaux differentiable norm, then the duality mapping J is norm-to-weak uniformly continuous on bounded subsets of X. We use the notation to indicate the weak convergence and the one → to indicate the strong convergence.

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of X. Recall that a mapping A:CX is said to be

  1. (i)

    α-strongly accretive if for each x,yC, there exists j(xy)J(xy) such that

    A x A y , j ( x y ) α x y 2

    for some α(0,1);

  2. (ii)

    β-inverse-strongly-accretive if for each x,yC, there exists j(xy)J(xy) such that

    A x A y , j ( x y ) β A x A y 2

    for some β>0;

  3. (iii)

    λ-strictly pseudocontractive [24] if for each x,yC, there exists j(xy)J(xy) such that

    A x A y , j ( x y ) x y 2 λ x y ( A x A y ) 2

    for some λ(0,1).

It is worth emphasizing that the definition of the inverse strongly accretive mapping is based on that of the inverse strongly monotone mapping, which was studied by so many authors; see, e.g., [9, 25, 26].

Proposition 2.1 (See [27])

Let X be a 2-uniformly smooth Banach space. Then

x + y 2 x 2 +2 y , J ( x ) +2 κ y 2 ,x,yX,

where κ is the 2-uniformly smooth constant of X, and J is the normalized duality mapping from X into X .

Proposition 2.2 (See [28])

Let X be a real smooth and uniform convex Banach space, and let r>0. Then there exists a strictly increasing, continuous and convex function g:[0,2r]R, g(0)=0 such that

g ( x y ) x 2 2 x , J ( y ) + y 2 ,x,y B r ,

where B r ={xX:xr}.

Next, we list some lemmas that will be used in the sequel. Lemma 2.1 can be found in [29]. Lemma 2.2 is an immediate consequence of the subdifferential inequality of the function 1 2 2 .

Lemma 2.1 Let { s n } be a sequence of nonnegative real numbers satisfying

s n + 1 (1 α n ) s n + α n β n + γ n ,n0,

where { α n }, { β n } and { γ n } satisfy the conditions

  1. (i)

    { α n }[0,1] and n = 0 α n =;

  2. (ii)

    lim sup n β n 0;

  3. (iii)

    γ n 0, n0, and n = 0 γ n <.

Then lim sup n s n =0.

Lemma 2.2 In a real smooth Banach space X, the following inequality holds:

x + y 2 x 2 +2 y , J ( x + y ) ,x,yX.

Let D be a subset of C, and let Π be a mapping of C into D. Then Π is said to be sunny if

Π [ Π ( x ) + t ( x Π ( x ) ) ] =Π(x),

whenever Π(x)+t(xΠ(x))C for xC and t0. A mapping Π of C into itself is called a retraction if Π 2 =Π. If a mapping Π of C into itself is a retraction, then Π(z)=z for every zR(Π), where R(Π) is the range of Π. A subset D of C is called a sunny nonexpansive retract of C if there exists a sunny nonexpansive retraction from C onto D. The following lemma concerns the sunny nonexpansive retraction.

Lemma 2.3 (See [30])

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a real smooth Banach space X. Let D be a nonempty subset of C. Let Π be a retraction of C onto D. Then the following are equivalent:

  1. (i)

    Π is sunny and nonexpansive;

  2. (ii)

    Π ( x ) Π ( y ) 2 xy,J(Π(x)Π(y)), x,yC;

  3. (iii)

    xΠ(x),J(yΠ(x))0, xC, yD.

It is well known that if X=H in a Hilbert space, then a sunny nonexpansive retraction Π C is coincident with the metric projection from X onto C; that is, Π C = P C . If C is a nonempty closed convex subset of a strictly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space X, and if T:CC is a nonexpansive mapping with the fixed point set Fix(T), then the set Fix(T) is a sunny nonexpansive retract of C.

Lemma 2.4 Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a smooth Banach space X. Let Π C be a sunny nonexpansive retraction from X onto C, and let B 1 , B 2 :CX be nonlinear mappings. For given x , y C, ( x , y ) is a solution of GSVI (1.1) if and only if x = Π C ( y μ 1 B 1 y ), where y = Π C ( x μ 2 B 2 x ).

Proof We can rewrite GSVI (1.1) as

{ x ( y μ 1 B 1 y ) , J ( x x ) 0 , x C , y ( x μ 2 B 2 x ) , J ( x y ) 0 , x C ,

which is obviously equivalent to

{ x = Π C ( y μ 1 B 1 y ) , y = Π C ( x μ 2 B 2 x ) ,

because of Lemma 2.3. This completes the proof. □

In terms of Lemma 2.4, we observe that

x = Π C [ Π C ( x μ 2 B 2 x ) μ 1 B 1 Π C ( x μ 2 B 2 x ) ] ,

which implies that x is a fixed point of the mapping G. Throughout this paper, the set of fixed points of the mapping G is denoted by Ω.

Lemma 2.5 (See [27])

Given a number r>0. A real Banach space X is uniformly convex if and only if there exists a continuous strictly increasing function g:[0,)[0,), g(0)=0 such that

λ x + ( 1 λ ) y 2 λ x 2 +(1λ) y 2 λ(1λ)g ( x y )

for all λ[0,1] and x,yX such that xr and yr.

Lemma 2.6 (See [31])

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a Banach space X. Let S 0 , S 1 , be a sequence of mappings of C into itself. Suppose that n = 1 sup{ S n x S n 1 x:xC}<. Then for each yC, { S n y} converges strongly to some point of C. Moreover, let S be a mapping of C into itself defined by Sy= lim n S n y for all yC. Then lim n sup{Sx S n x:xC}=0.

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a Banach space X, and let T:CC be a nonexpansive mapping with Fix(T). As previously, let Ξ C be the set of all contractions on C. For t(0,1) and f Ξ C , let x t C be the unique fixed point of the contraction xtf(x)+(1t)Tx on C; that is,

x t =tf( x t )+(1t)T x t .

Lemma 2.7 (See [17, 32])

Let X be a uniformly smooth Banach space, or a reflexive and strictly convex Banach space with a uniformly Gâteaux differentiable norm. Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of X, let T:CC be a nonexpansive mapping with Fix(T), and f Ξ C . Then the net { x t } defined by x t =tf( x t )+(1t)T x t converges strongly to a point in Fix(T). If we define a mapping Q: Ξ C Fix(T) by Q(f):=s lim t 0 x t , f Ξ C , then Q(f) solves the VIP:

( I f ) Q ( f ) , J ( Q ( f ) p ) 0,f Ξ C ,pFix(T).

Lemma 2.8 (See [33])

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a strictly convex Banach space X. Let { T n } n = 0 be a sequence of nonexpansive mappings on C. Suppose that n = 0 Fix( T n ) is nonempty. Let { λ n } be a sequence of positive numbers with n = 0 λ n =1. Then a mapping S on C defined by Sx= n = 0 λ n T n x for xC is defined well, nonexpansive and Fix(S)= n = 0 Fix( T n ) holds.

Lemma 2.9 (See [15])

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a smooth Banach space X. Let Π C be a sunny nonexpansive retraction from X onto C, and let A:CX be an accretive mapping. Then for all λ>0,

VI(C,A)=Fix ( Π C ( I λ A ) ) .

Lemma 2.10 (See [34])

Let { x n } and { z n } be bounded sequences in a Banach space X, and let { β n } be a sequence of nonnegative numbers in [0,1] with 0< lim inf n β n lim sup n β n <1. Suppose that x n + 1 = β n x n +(1 β n ) z n for all integers n0 and lim sup n ( z n + 1 z n x n + 1 x n )0. Then lim n x n z n =0.

Lemma 2.11 (See [35])

Let X be a uniformly convex Banach space and B r ={xX:xr}, r>0. Then there exists a continuous, strictly increasing and convex function g:[0,][0,], g(0)=0 such that

α x + β y + γ z 2 α x 2 +β y 2 +γ z 2 αβg ( x y )

for all x,y,z B r and all α,β,γ[0,1] with α+β+γ=1.

3 Composite Mann iterative algorithms in uniformly convex and 2-uniformly smooth Banach spaces

In this section, we introduce our composite Mann iterative algorithms in uniformly convex and 2-uniformly smooth Banach spaces and show the strong convergence theorems. We will use some useful lemmas in the sequel.

Lemma 3.1 (See [[3], Lemma 2.8])

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a real 2-uniformly smooth Banach space X. Let the mapping B i :CX be α i -inverse-strongly accretive. Then we have

( I μ i B i ) x ( I μ i B i ) y 2 x y 2 +2 μ i ( μ i κ 2 α i ) B i x B i y 2 ,x,yC,

for i=1,2, where μ i >0. In particular, if 0< μ i α i κ 2 , then I μ i B i is nonexpansive for i=1,2.

Lemma 3.2 (See [[3], Lemma 2.9])

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a real 2-uniformly smooth Banach space X. Let Π C be a sunny nonexpansive retraction from X onto C. Let the mapping B i :CX be α i -inverse-strongly accretive for i=1,2. Let G:CC be the mapping defined by

Gx= Π C [ Π C ( x μ 2 B 2 x ) μ 1 B 1 Π C ( x μ 2 B 2 x ) ] ,xC.

If 0< μ i α i κ 2 for i=1,2, then G:CC is nonexpansive.

Theorem 3.1 Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a uniformly convex and 2-uniformly smooth Banach space X. Let Π C be a sunny nonexpansive retraction from X onto C. Let AX×X be an accretive operator in X such that D ( A ) ¯ C r > 0 R(I+rA). Let B i :CX be α i -inverse strongly accretive for i=1,2. Let f:CC be a contraction with coefficient ρ(0,1). Let { S i } i = 0 be a countable family of nonexpansive mappings of C into itself such that F= i = 0 Fix( S i )Ω A 1 0, where Ω is the fixed point set of the mapping G= Π C (I μ 1 B 1 ) Π C (I μ 2 B 2 ) with 0< μ i < α i κ 2 for i=1,2. For arbitrarily given x 0 C, let { x n } be the sequence generated by

{ y n = β n x n + γ n S n x n + δ n J r n G x n , x n + 1 = α n f ( x n ) + ( 1 α n ) y n , n 0 ,
(3.1)

where { α n }, { β n }, { γ n } and { δ n } are the sequences in [0,1] such that β n + γ n + δ n =1 for all n0. Suppose that the following conditions hold:

  1. (i)

    n = 0 α n = and 0 α n 1ρ, n n 0 for some integer n 0 0;

  2. (ii)

    lim inf n γ n >0 and lim inf n δ n >0;

  3. (iii)

    lim n (| α n + 1 1 ( 1 α n + 1 ) β n + 1 α n 1 ( 1 α n ) β n |+| δ n + 1 1 β n + 1 δ n 1 β n |)=0;

  4. (iv)

    lim n | r n + 1 r n |=0 and r n ε>0 for all n0;

  5. (v)

    0< lim inf n β n lim sup n β n <1.

Assume that n = 0 sup x D S n + 1 x S n x< for any bounded subset D of C, and let S be a mapping of C into itself defined by Sx= lim n S n x for all xC, and suppose that Fix(S)= i = 0 Fix( S i ). Then,

x n q α n ( f ( x n ) x n ) 0,

where qF solves the following VIP:

q f ( q ) , J ( q p ) 0,pF.

Proof First of all, let us show that the sequence { x n } is bounded. Indeed, take a fixed pF arbitrarily. Then we get p=Gp, p= S n p and p= J r n p for all n0. By Lemma 3.2, we know that G is nonexpansive. Then from (3.1), we have

y n p β n x n p + γ n S n x n p + δ n J r n G x n p β n x n p + γ n x n p + δ n G x n p β n x n p + γ n x n p + δ n x n p = x n p ,
(3.2)

and hence

x n + 1 p α n f ( x n ) p + ( 1 α n ) y n p α n ( f ( x n ) f ( p ) + f ( p ) p ) + ( 1 α n ) y n p α n ( ρ x n p + f ( p ) p ) + ( 1 α n ) x n p = ( 1 α n ( 1 ρ ) ) x n p + α n ( 1 ρ ) f ( p ) p 1 ρ max { x n p , f ( p ) p 1 ρ } .

By induction, we obtain

x n pmax { x 0 p , f ( p ) p 1 ρ } ,n0.
(3.3)

Thus, { x n } is bounded, and so are the sequences { y n }, {G x n } and {f( x n )}.

Let us show that

lim n x n + 1 x n =0.
(3.4)

As a matter of fact, put σ n =(1 α n ) β n , n0. Then it follows from (i) and (v) that

β n σ n =(1 α n ) β n ( 1 ( 1 ρ ) ) β n =ρ β n ,n n 0 ,

and hence

0< lim inf n σ n lim inf n σ n <1.
(3.5)

Define

x n + 1 = σ n x n +(1 σ n ) z n .
(3.6)

Observe that

z n + 1 z n = x n + 2 σ n + 1 x n + 1 1 σ n + 1 x n + 1 σ n x n 1 σ n = α n + 1 f ( x n + 1 ) + ( 1 α n + 1 ) y n + 1 σ n + 1 x n + 1 1 σ n + 1 α n f ( x n ) + ( 1 α n ) y n σ n x n 1 σ n = ( α n + 1 f ( x n + 1 ) 1 σ n + 1 α n f ( x n ) 1 σ n ) ( 1 α n ) [ β n x n + γ n S n x n + δ n J r n G x n ] σ n x n 1 σ n + ( 1 α n + 1 ) [ β n + 1 x n + 1 + γ n + 1 S n + 1 x n + 1 + δ n + 1 J r n + 1 G x n + 1 ] σ n + 1 x n + 1 1 σ n + 1 = ( α n + 1 f ( x n + 1 ) 1 σ n + 1 α n f ( x n ) 1 σ n ) + 1 α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 ( γ n + 1 S n + 1 x n + 1 + δ n + 1 J r n + 1 G x n + 1 ) 1 α n 1 σ n ( γ n S n x n + δ n J r n G x n ) = ( α n + 1 f ( x n + 1 ) 1 σ n + 1 α n f ( x n ) 1 σ n ) + ( 1 α n + 1 ) ( 1 β n + 1 ) 1 σ n + 1 [ γ n + 1 S n + 1 x n + 1 + δ n + 1 J r n + 1 G x n + 1 1 β n + 1 γ n S n x n + δ n J r n G x n 1 β n ] + [ ( 1 α n + 1 ) ( 1 β n + 1 ) 1 σ n + 1 ( 1 α n ) ( 1 β n ) 1 σ n ] γ n S n x n + δ n J r n G x n 1 β n = α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 ( f ( x n + 1 ) f ( x n ) ) + ( α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 α n 1 σ n ) f ( x n ) + ( 1 α n + 1 ) ( 1 β n + 1 ) 1 σ n + 1 [ γ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 ( S n + 1 x n + 1 S n x n ) + ( γ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 γ n γ n + δ n ) S n x n + δ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 ( J r n + 1 G x n + 1 J r n G x n ) + ( δ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 δ n γ n + δ n ) J r n G x n ] ( α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 α n 1 σ n ) γ n S n x n + δ n J r n G x n γ n + δ n = α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 ( f ( x n + 1 ) f ( x n ) ) + ( α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 α n 1 σ n ) ( f ( x n ) γ n S n x n + δ n J r n G x n γ n + δ n ) + 1 σ n + 1 α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 [ γ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 ( S n + 1 x n + 1 S n x n ) + ( γ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 γ n γ n + δ n ) S n x n + δ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 ( J r n + 1 G x n + 1 J r n G x n ) + ( δ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 δ n γ n + δ n ) J r n G x n ] ,

and hence

z n + 1 z n α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 f ( x n + 1 ) f ( x n ) + | α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 α n 1 σ n | f ( x n ) γ n S n x n + δ n J r n G x n γ n + δ n + 1 σ n + 1 α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 γ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 ( S n + 1 x n + 1 S n x n ) + ( γ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 γ n γ n + δ n ) S n x n + δ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 ( J r n + 1 G x n + 1 J r n G x n ) + ( δ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 δ n γ n + δ n ) J r n G x n ρ α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 x n + 1 x n + | α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 α n 1 σ n | ( f ( x n ) + S n x n + J r n G x n ) + 1 σ n + 1 α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 [ γ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 S n + 1 x n + 1 S n x n + | γ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 γ n γ n + δ n | S n x n + δ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 J r n + 1 G x n + 1 J r n G x n + | δ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 δ n γ n + δ n | J r n G x n ] .
(3.7)

On the other hand, if r n r n + 1 , using the resolvent identity in Proposition 1.1,

J r n + 1 G x n + 1 = J r n ( r n r n + 1 G x n + 1 + ( 1 r n r n + 1 ) J r n + 1 G x n + 1 ) ,

we get

J r n + 1 G x n + 1 J r n G x n = J r n ( r n r n + 1 G x n + 1 + ( 1 r n r n + 1 ) J r n + 1 G x n + 1 ) J r n G x n r n r n + 1 G x n + 1 G x n + ( 1 r n r n + 1 ) J r n + 1 G x n + 1 G x n x n + 1 x n + r n + 1 r n r n + 1 J r n + 1 G x n + 1 G x n x n + 1 x n + 1 ε | r n + 1 r n | J r n + 1 G x n + 1 G x n .

If r n + 1 r n , we derive in the similar way

J r n + 1 G x n + 1 J r n G x n x n x n + 1 + 1 ε | r n r n + 1 | J r n G x n G x n + 1 .

Thus, combining the above cases, we obtain

J r n + 1 G x n + 1 J r n G x n x n x n + 1 + M 0 | r n r n + 1 |,n0,
(3.8)

where sup n 0 { 1 ε ( J r n + 1 G x n + 1 G x n + J r n G x n G x n + 1 )} M 0 for some M 0 >0. Substituting (3.8) for (3.7), we have

z n + 1 z n ρ α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 x n + 1 x n + | α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 α n 1 σ n | ( f ( x n ) + S n x n + J r n G x n ) + 1 σ n + 1 α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 [ γ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 ( S n + 1 x n + 1 S n + 1 x n + S n + 1 x n S n x n ) + | γ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 γ n γ n + δ n | S n x n + δ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 ( x n x n + 1 + M 0 | r n r n + 1 | ) + | δ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 δ n γ n + δ n | J r n G x n ] ρ α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 x n + 1 x n + | α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 α n 1 σ n | ( f ( x n ) + S n x n + J r n G x n ) + 1 σ n + 1 α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 [ γ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 ( x n + 1 x n + S n + 1 x n S n x n ) + δ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 ( x n x n + 1 + M 0 | r n r n + 1 | ) + | δ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 δ n γ n + δ n | ( S n x n + J r n G x n ) ] = 1 σ n + 1 α n + 1 ( 1 ρ ) 1 σ n + 1 x n + 1 x n + | α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 α n 1 σ n | ( f ( x n ) + S n x n + J r n G x n ) + 1 σ n + 1 α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 [ γ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 S n + 1 x n S n x n + δ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 M 0 | r n r n + 1 | + | δ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 δ n γ n + δ n | ( S n x n + J r n G x n ) ] x n + 1 x n + | α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 α n 1 σ n | M + S n + 1 x n S n x n + M | r n r n + 1 | + | δ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 δ n γ n + δ n | M = x n + 1 x n + M ( | α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 α n 1 σ n | + | δ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 δ n γ n + δ n | + | r n + 1 r n | ) + S n + 1 x n S n x n ,

which hence yields

z n + 1 z n x n + 1 x n M ( | α n + 1 1 σ n + 1 α n 1 σ n | + | δ n + 1 γ n + 1 + δ n + 1 δ n γ n + δ n | + | r n + 1 r n | ) + S n + 1 x n S n x n ,
(3.9)

where sup n 0 {f( x n )+ S n x n + J r n G x n + M 0 }M for some M>0. So, from (3.9), conditions (iii), (iv) and the assumption on { S n }, it follows that

lim sup n ( z n + 1 z n x n + 1 x n ) 0.

Consequently, by Lemma 2.10, we have

lim n z n x n =0.
(3.10)

It follows from (3.5) and (3.6) that

lim n x n + 1 x n = lim n (1 σ n ) z n x n =0.
(3.11)

From (3.1), we have

x n + 1 x n = α n ( f ( x n ) x n ) +(1 α n )( y n x n ),

which hence implies that

ρ y n x n = ( 1 ( 1 ρ ) ) y n x n ( 1 α n ) y n x n = x n + 1 x n α n ( f ( x n ) x n ) x n + 1 x n + α n ( f ( x n ) x n ) .

Since x n + 1 x n 0 and α n (f( x n ) x n )0, we get

lim n y n x n =0.
(3.12)

Next, we show that x n G x n 0 as n.

Indeed, for simplicity, put q= Π C (p μ 2 B 2 p), u n = Π C ( x n μ 2 B 2 x n ) and v n = Π C ( u n μ 1 B 1 u n ). Then v n =G x n for all n0. From Lemma 3.1, we have

u n q 2 = Π C ( x n μ 2 B 2 x n ) Π C ( p μ 2 B 2 p ) 2 x n p μ 2 ( B 2 x n B 2 p ) 2 x n p 2 2 μ 2 ( α 2 κ 2 μ 2 ) B 2 x n B 2 p 2 ,
(3.13)

and

v n p 2 = Π C ( u n μ 1 B 1 u n ) Π C ( q μ 1 B 1 q ) 2 u n q μ 1 ( B 1 u n B 1 q ) 2 u n q 2 2 μ 1 ( α 1 κ 2 μ 1 ) B 1 u n B 1 q 2 .
(3.14)

Substituting (3.13) for (3.14), we obtain

v n p 2 x n p 2 2 μ 2 ( α 2 κ 2 μ 2 ) B 2 x n B 2 p 2 2 μ 1 ( α 1 κ 2 μ 1 ) B 1 u n B 1 q 2 .
(3.15)

From (3.1) and (3.15), we have

y n p 2 β n x n p 2 + γ n S n x n p 2 + δ n J r n G x n p 2 β n x n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + δ n v n p 2 β n x n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + δ n [ x n p 2 2 μ 2 ( α 2 κ 2 μ 2 ) B 2 x n B 2 p 2 2 μ 1 ( α 1 κ 2 μ 1 ) B 1 u n B 1 q 2 ] = x n p 2 2 δ n [ μ 2 ( α 2 κ 2 μ 2 ) B 2 x n B 2 p 2 + 2 μ 1 ( α 1 κ 2 μ 1 ) B 1 u n B 1 q 2 ] ,
(3.16)

which hence implies that

2 δ n [ μ 2 ( α 2 κ 2 μ 2 ) B 2 x n B 2 p 2 + μ 1 ( α 1 κ 2 μ 1 ) B 1 u n B 1 q 2 ] x n p 2 y n p 2 ( x n p + y n p ) x n y n .
(3.17)

Since 0< μ i < α i κ 2 for i=1,2, and { x n } is bounded, we obtain from (3.12), (3.17) and condition (ii) that

lim n B 2 x n B 2 p=0and lim n B 1 u n B 1 q=0.
(3.18)

Utilizing Proposition 2.2 and Lemma 2.3, we have

u n q 2 = Π C ( x n μ 2 B 2 x n ) Π C ( p μ 2 B 2 p ) 2 x n μ 2 B 2 x n ( p μ 2 B 2 p ) , J ( u n q ) = x n p , J ( u n q ) + μ 2 B 2 p B 2 x n , J ( u n q ) 1 2 [ x n p 2 + u n q 2 g 1 ( x n u n ( p q ) ) ] + μ 2 B 2 p B 2 x n u n q ,

which implies that

u n q 2 x n p 2 g 1 ( x n u n ( p q ) ) +2 μ 2 B 2 p B 2 x n u n q.
(3.19)

In the same way, we derive

v n p 2 = Π C ( u n μ 1 B 1 u n ) Π C ( q μ 1 B 1 q ) 2 u n μ 1 B 1 u n ( q μ 1 B 1 q ) , J ( v n p ) = u n q , J ( v n p ) + μ 1 B 1 q B 1 u n , J ( v n p ) 1 2 [ u n q 2 + v n p 2 g 2 ( u n v n + ( p q ) ) ] + μ 1 B 1 q B 1 u n v n p ,

which implies that

v n p 2 u n q 2 g 2 ( u n v n + ( p q ) ) +2 μ 1 B 1 q B 1 u n v n p.
(3.20)

Substituting (3.19) for (3.20), we get

v n p 2 x n p 2 g 1 ( x n u n ( p q ) ) g 2 ( u n v n + ( p q ) ) + 2 μ 2 B 2 p B 2 x n u n q + 2 μ 1 B 1 q B 1 u n v n p .
(3.21)

By Lemma 2.2, we have from (3.16) and (3.21)

y n p 2 β n x n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + δ n v n p 2 β n x n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + δ n [ x n p 2 g 1 ( x n u n ( p q ) ) g 2 ( u n v n + ( p q ) ) + 2 μ 2 B 2 p B 2 x n u n q + 2 μ 1 B 1 q B 1 u n v n p ] x n p 2 δ n [ g 1 ( x n u n ( p q ) ) + g 2 ( u n v n + ( p q ) ) ] + 2 μ 2 B 2 p B 2 x n u n q + 2 μ 1 B 1 q B 1 u n v n p ,

which hence leads to

δ n [ g 1 ( x n u n ( p q ) ) + g 2 ( u n v n + ( p q ) ) ] x n p 2 y n p 2 + 2 μ 2 B 2 p B 2 x n u n q + 2 μ 1 B 1 q B 1 u n v n p ( x n p + y n p ) x n y n + 2 μ 2 B 2 p B 2 x n u n q + 2 μ 1 B 1 q B 1 u n v n p .
(3.22)

From (3.18), (3.22), condition (ii) and the boundedness of { x n }, { y n }, { u n } and { v n }, we deduce that

lim n g 1 ( x n u n ( p q ) ) =0and lim n g 2 ( u n v n + ( p q ) ) =0.

Utilizing the properties of g 1 and g 2 , we deduce that

lim n x n u n ( p q ) =0and lim n u n v n + ( p q ) =0.
(3.23)

From (3.23), we get

x n v n x n u n ( p q ) + u n v n + ( p q ) 0as n.

That is,

lim n x n G x n =0.
(3.24)

Next, let us show that

lim n S n x n x n =0and lim n J r n x n x n =0.

Indeed, utilizing Lemma 2.5 and (3.1), we have

y n p 2 = δ n ( J r n G x n p ) + ( β n + γ n ) ( β n x n + γ n S n x n β n + γ n p ) 2 δ n J r n G x n p 2 + ( β n + γ n ) β n x n + γ n S n x n β n + γ n p 2 = δ n J r n G x n p 2 + ( β n + γ n ) β n β n + γ n ( x n p ) + γ n β n + γ n ( S n x n p ) 2 δ n G x n p 2 + ( β n + γ n ) [ β n β n + γ n x n p 2 + γ n β n + γ n S n x n p 2 β n γ n ( β n + γ n ) 2 g 3 ( x n S n x n ) ] δ n x n p 2 + β n x n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 β n γ n β n + γ n g 3 ( x n S n x n ) = x n p 2 β n γ n β n + γ n g 3 ( x n S n x n ) ,

which immediately implies that

β n γ n g 3 ( x n S n x n ) β n γ n β n + γ n g 3 ( x n S n x n ) x n p 2 y n p 2 ( x n p + y n p ) x n y n .

So, from (3.12), the boundedness of { x n }, { y n } and conditions (ii), (v), it follows that

lim n g 3 ( x n S n x n ) =0.

From the properties of g 3 , we have

lim n x n S n x n =0.
(3.25)

Taking into account that

y n x n = γ n ( S n x n x n )+ δ n ( J r n G x n x n ),

we have

δ n J r n G x n x n = y n x n γ n ( S n x n x n ) y n x n + γ n S n x n x n y n x n + S n x n x n .

From (3.12), (3.25) and condition (ii), it follows that

lim n J r n G x n x n =0.
(3.26)

Note that

x n S x n x n S n x n + S n x n S x n .

So, in terms of (3.25) and Lemma 2.6, we have

lim n x n S x n =0.
(3.27)

Also, note that

x n J r n x n x n J r n G x n + J r n G x n J r n x n x n J r n G x n + G x n x n .

From (3.24) and (3.26), we have

lim n x n J r n x n =0.
(3.28)

Furthermore, we claim that lim n x n J r x n =0 for a fixed number r such that ε>r>0. In fact, taking into account the resolvent identity in Proposition 1.1, we have

J r n x n J r x n = J r ( r r n x n + ( 1 r r n ) J r n x n ) J r x n ( 1 r r n ) x n J r n x n x n J r n x n .
(3.29)

Thus, we get from (3.28) and (3.29)

x n J r x n x n J r n x n + J r n x n J r x n x n J r n x n + x n J r n x n = 2 x n J r n x n 0 as  n .

That is,

lim n x n J r x n =0.
(3.30)

Define a mapping Wx=(1 θ 1 θ 2 ) J r x+ θ 1 Sx+ θ 2 Gx, where θ 1 , θ 2 (0,1) are two constants with θ 1 + θ 2 <1. Then by Lemma 2.8, we have that Fix(W)=Fix( J r )Fix(S)Fix(G)=F. We observe that

x n W x n = ( 1 θ 1 θ 2 ) ( x n J r x n ) + θ 1 ( x n S x n ) + θ 2 ( x n G x n ) ( 1 θ 1 θ 2 ) x n J r x n + θ 1 x n S x n + θ 2 x n G x n .

From (3.24), (3.27) and (3.30), we obtain

lim n x n W x n =0.
(3.31)

Now, we claim that

lim sup n f ( q ) q , J ( x n q ) 0,
(3.32)

where q=s lim t 0 x t with x t being the fixed point of the contraction

xtf(x)+(1t)Wx.

Then x t solves the fixed point equation x t =tf( x t )+(1t)W x t . Thus, we have

x t x n =(1t)(W x t x n )+t ( f ( x t ) x n ) .

By Lemma 2.2, we conclude that

x t x n 2 = ( 1 t ) ( W x t x n ) + t ( f ( x t ) x n ) 2 ( 1 t ) 2 W x t x n 2 + 2 t f ( x t ) x n , J ( x t x n ) ( 1 t ) 2 ( W x t W x n + W x n x n ) 2 + 2 t f ( x t ) x n , J ( x t x n ) ( 1 t ) 2 ( x t x n + W x n x n ) 2 + 2 t f ( x t ) x n , J ( x t x n ) = ( 1 t ) 2 [ x t x n 2 + 2 x t x n W x n x n + W x n x n 2 ] + 2 t f ( x t ) x t , J ( x t x n ) + 2 t x t x n , J ( x t x n ) = ( 1 2 t + t 2 ) x t x n 2 + f n ( t ) + 2 t f ( x t ) x t , J ( x t x n ) + 2 t x t x n 2 ,
(3.33)

where

f n (t)= ( 1 t ) 2 ( 2 x t x n + x n W x n ) x n W x n 0,as n.
(3.34)

It follows from (3.33) that

x t f ( x t ) , J ( x t x n ) t 2 x t x n 2 + 1 2 t f n (t).
(3.35)

Letting n in (3.35) and noticing (3.34), we derive

lim sup n x t f ( x t ) , J ( x t x n ) t 2 M 2 ,
(3.36)

where M 2 >0 is a constant such that x t x n 2 M 2 for all t(0,1) and n0. Taking t0 in (3.36), we have

lim sup t 0 lim sup n x t f ( x t ) , J ( x t x n ) 0.

On the other hand, we have

f ( q ) q , J ( x n q ) = f ( q ) q , J ( x n q ) f ( q ) q , J ( x n x t ) + f ( q ) q , J ( x n x t ) f ( q ) x t , J ( x n x t ) + f ( q ) x t , J ( x n x t ) f ( x t ) x t , J ( x n x t ) + f ( x t ) x t , J ( x n x t ) = f ( q ) q , J ( x n q ) J ( x n x t ) + x t q , J ( x n x t ) + f ( q ) f ( x t ) , J ( x n x t ) + f ( x t ) x t , J ( x n x t ) .

It follows that

lim sup n f ( q ) q , J ( x n q ) lim sup n f ( q ) q , J ( x n q ) J ( x n x t ) + x t q lim sup n x n x t + ρ q x t lim sup n x n x t + lim sup n f ( x t ) x t , J ( x n x t ) .

Taking into account that x t q as t0, we have

lim sup n f ( q ) q , J ( x n q ) = lim sup t 0 lim sup n f ( q ) q , J ( x n q ) lim sup t 0 lim sup n f ( q ) q , J ( x n q ) J ( x n x t ) .
(3.37)

Since X has a uniformly Frechet differentiable norm, the duality mapping J is norm-to-norm uniformly continuous on bounded subsets of X. Consequently, the two limits are interchangeable, and hence (3.32) holds. From (3.4), we get ( x n + 1 q)( x n q)0. Noticing the norm-to-norm uniform continuity of J on bounded subsets of X, we deduce from (3.32) that

lim sup n f ( q ) q , J ( x n + 1 q ) = lim sup n ( f ( q ) q , J ( x n q ) + f ( q ) q , J ( x n + 1 q ) J ( x n q ) ) = lim sup n f ( q ) q , J ( x n q ) 0 .
(3.38)

Finally, let us show that x n q as n. Utilizing Lemma 2.2, from (3.1) and the convexity of 2 , we get

y n q 2 β n x n q 2 + γ n S n x n q 2 + δ n J r n G x n q 2 β n x n q 2 + γ n x n q 2 + δ n x n q 2 = x n q 2 ,

and

x n + 1 q 2 = α n ( f ( x n ) f ( q ) ) + ( 1 α n ) ( y n q ) + α n ( f ( q ) q ) 2 α n ( f ( x n ) f ( q ) ) + ( 1 α n ) ( y n q ) 2 + 2 α n f ( q ) q , J ( x n + 1 q ) α n f ( x n ) f ( q ) 2 + ( 1 α n ) y n q 2 + 2 α n f ( q ) q , J ( x n + 1 q ) α n ρ x n q 2 + ( 1 α n ) x n q 2 + 2 α n f ( q ) q , J ( x n + 1 q ) = ( 1 α n ( 1 ρ ) ) x n q 2 + 2 α n f ( q ) q , J ( x n + 1 q ) = ( 1 α n ( 1 ρ ) ) x n q 2 + α n ( 1 ρ ) 2 f ( q ) q , J ( x n + 1 q ) 1 ρ .
(3.39)

Applying Lemma 2.1 to (3.39), we obtain that x n q as n. This completes the proof. □

Corollary 3.1 Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a uniformly convex and 2-uniformly smooth Banach space X. Let Π C be a sunny nonexpansive retraction from X onto C. Let AX×X be an accretive operator in X such that D ( A ) ¯ C r > 0 R(I+rA). Let V:CC be an α-strictly pseudocontractive mapping. Let f:CC be a contraction with coefficient ρ(0,1). Let { S i } i = 0 be a countable family of nonexpansive mappings of C into itself such that F= i = 0 Fix( S i )Fix(V) A 1 0. For arbitrarily given x 0 C, let { x n } be the sequence generated by

{ y n = β n x n + γ n S n x n + δ n J r n ( ( 1 l ) I + l V ) x n , x n + 1 = α n f ( x n ) + ( 1 α n ) y n , n 0 ,
(3.40)

where 0<l< α κ 2 , and { α n }, { β n }, { γ n } and { δ n } are the sequences in [0,1] such that β n + γ n + δ n =1 for all n0. Suppose that the following conditions hold:

  1. (i)

    n = 0 α n = and 0 α n 1ρ, n n 0 for some integer n 0 0;

  2. (ii)

    lim inf n γ n >0 and lim inf n δ n >0;

  3. (iii)

    lim n (| α n + 1 1 ( 1 α n + 1 ) β n + 1 α n 1 ( 1 α n ) β n |+| δ n + 1 1 β n + 1 δ n 1 β n |)=0;

  4. (iv)

    lim n | r n + 1 r n |=0 and r n ε>0 for all n0;

  5. (v)

    0< lim inf n β n lim sup n β n <1.

Assume that n = 0 sup x D S n + 1 x S n x< for any bounded subset D of C, and let S be a mapping of C into itself defined by Sx= lim n S n x for all xC, and suppose that Fix(S)= i = 0 Fix( S i ). Then

x n q α n ( f ( x n ) x n ) 0,

where qF solves the following VIP:

q f ( q ) , J ( q p ) 0,pF.

Proof In Theorem 3.1, we put B 1 =IV, B 2 =0 and μ 1 =l, where 0<l< α κ 2 . Then GSVI (1.1) is equivalent to the VIP of finding x C such that

B 1 x , J ( x x ) 0,xC.

In this case, B 1 :CX is α-inverse strongly accretive. It is not hard to see that Fix(V)=VI(C, B 1 ). As a matter of fact, we have, for l>0,

u VI ( C , B 1 ) B 1 u , J ( y u ) 0 , y C u l B 1 u u , J ( u y ) 0 , y C u = Π C ( u l B 1 u ) u = Π C ( u l u + l V u ) u l u + l V u u , J ( u y ) 0 , y C u V u , J ( u y ) 0 , y C u = V u u Fix ( V ) .

Accordingly, we know that F= i = 0 Fix( S i )Ω A 1 0= i = 0 Fix( S i )Fix(V) A 1 0, and

Π C ( I μ 1 B 1 ) Π C ( I μ 2 B 2 ) x n = Π C ( I μ 1 B 1 ) x n = Π C ( ( 1 l ) x n + l V x n ) = ( ( 1 l ) I + l V ) x n .

So, the scheme (3.1) reduces to (3.40). Therefore, the desired result follows from Theorem 3.1. □

Remark 3.1 Theorem 3.1 improves, extends, supplements and develops Jung [[22], Theorem 3.1], Ceng and Yao [[2], Theorem 3.1] and Cai and Bu [[3], Theorem 3.1] in the following aspects.

(i) The problem of finding a point q i = 0 Fix( S i )Ω A 1 0 in our Theorem 3.1 is more general and more subtle than any of the problems of finding a point q A 1 0 in [[22], Theorem 3.1], the problem of finding a point qFix(T) in [[2], Theorem 3.1], and the problem of finding a point q i = 1 Fix( T i )Ω in [[3], Theorem 3.1].

(ii) The iterative scheme in [[2], Theorem 3.1] is extended to develop the iterative scheme (3.1) of Theorem 3.1 by virtue of the iterative schemes of [[22], Theorem 3.1] and [[3], Theorem 3.1]. The iterative scheme (3.1) of Theorem 3.1 is more advantageous and more flexible than the iterative scheme of [[2], Theorem 3.1], because it can be applied to solving three problems (i.e., GSVI (1.1), fixed point problem and zero point problem) and involves several parameter sequences { r n }, { α n }, { β n }, { γ n } and { δ n }.

(iii) Our Theorem 3.1 extends and generalizes Ceng and Yao [[2], Theorem 3.1] from a nonexpansive mapping to a countable family of nonexpansive mappings, and Jung [[22], Theorems 3.1] to the setting of a countable family of nonexpansive mappings and GSVI (1.1) for two inverse-strongly accretive mappings. In the meantime, our Theorem 3.1 extends and generalizes Cai and Bu [[3], Theorem 3.1] to the setting of an accretive operator.

(iv) The iterative scheme (3.1) in Theorem 3.1 is very different from any in [[22], Theorem 3.1], [[2], Theorem 3.1] and [[3], Theorem 3.1], because the mapping G in [[3], Theorem 3.1] and the mapping J r n in [[22], Theorem 3.1] are replaced by the same composite mapping J r n G in the iterative scheme (3.1) of our Theorem 3.1.

(v) Cai and Bu’s proof in [[3], Theorem 3.1] depends on the argument techniques in [6], the inequality in 2-uniformly smooth Banach spaces (see Proposition 2.1) and the inequality in smooth and uniform convex Banach spaces (see Proposition 2.2). Because the composite mapping J r n G appears in the iterative scheme (3.1) of our Theorem 3.1, the proof of our Theorem 3.1 depends on the argument techniques in [6], the inequality in 2-uniformly smooth Banach spaces (see Proposition 2.1), the inequality in smooth and uniform convex Banach spaces (see Proposition 2.2), the inequalities in uniform convex Banach spaces (see Lemmas 2.5 and 2.9 in Section 2 of this paper), and the resolvent identity for accretive operators (see Proposition 1.1).

(vi) It is worth emphasizing that the assumption of asymptotic regularity on { x n } in [[22], Theorem 3.1] is dropped by Theorem 3.1, and there is no assumption of the convergence of parameter sequences to zero in our Theorem 3.1.

4 Composite Mann iterative algorithms in uniformly convex Banach spaces having uniformly Gâteaux differentiable norms

In this section, we introduce our composite Mann iterative algorithms in uniformly convex Banach spaces having uniformly Gâteaux differentiable norms and show the strong convergence theorems. First, we give some useful lemmas whose proofs will be omitted because they can be obtained by standard argument.

Lemma 4.1 Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a smooth Banach space X, and let the mapping B i :CX be λ i -strictly pseudocontractive and α i -strongly accretive with α i + λ i 1 for i=1,2. Then, for μ i (0,1] we have

( I μ i B i ) x ( I μ i B i ) y { 1 α i λ i + ( 1 μ i ) ( 1 + 1 λ i ) } xy,x,yC,

for i=1,2. In particular, if 1 λ i 1 + λ i (1 1 α i λ i ) μ i 1, then I μ i B i is nonexpansive for i=1,2.

Lemma 4.2 Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a smooth Banach space X. Let Π C be a sunny nonexpansive retraction from X onto C, and let the mapping B i :CX be λ i -strictly pseudocontractive and α i -strongly accretive with α i + λ i 1 for i=1,2. Let G:CC be the mapping defined by

G(x)= Π C [ Π C ( x μ 2 B 2 x ) μ 1 B 1 Π C ( x μ 2 B 2 x ) ] ,xC.

If 1 λ i 1 + λ i (1 1 α i λ i ) μ i 1, then G:CC is nonexpansive.

We now state and prove the main result of this section.

Theorem 4.1 Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a uniformly convex Banach space X which has a uniformly Gâteaux differentiable norm. Let Π C be a sunny nonexpansive retraction from X onto C. Let AX×X be an accretive operator in X such that D ( A ) ¯ C r > 0 R(I+rA). Let B i :CX be λ i -strictly pseudocontractive and α i -strongly accretive with λ i + α i 1 for i=1,2. Let f:CC be a contraction with coefficient ρ(0,1). Let { S i } i = 0 be a countable family of nonexpansive mappings of C into itself such that F= i = 0 Fix( S i )Ω A 1 0, where Ω is the fixed point set of the mapping G= Π C (I μ 1 B 1 ) Π C (I μ 2 B 2 ) with 1 λ i 1 + λ i (1 1 α i λ i ) μ i 1 for i=1,2. For arbitrarily given x 0 C, let { x n } be the sequence generated by

{ y n = α n f ( x n ) + β n x n + γ n S n x n + δ n J r n G x n , x n + 1 = σ n G x n + ( 1 σ n ) y n , n 0 ,
(4.1)

where { α n }, { β n }, { γ n }, { δ n } and { σ n } are the sequences in (0,1) such that α n + β n + γ n + δ n =1 for all n0. Suppose that the following conditions hold:

  1. (i)

    lim n α n =0 and n = 0 α n =;

  2. (ii)

    { γ n },{ δ n }[c,d] for some c,d(0,1);

  3. (iii)

    n = 1 (| σ n σ n 1 |+| α n α n 1 |+| β n β n 1 |+| γ n γ n 1 |+| δ n δ n 1 |)<;

  4. (iv)

    n = 1 | r n r n 1 |< and r n ε>0 for all n0;

  5. (v)

    0< lim inf n β n lim sup n β n <1 and 0< lim inf n σ n lim sup n σ n <1.

Assume that n = 1 sup x D S n x S n 1 x< for any bounded subset D of C, and let S be a mapping of C into itself defined by Sx= lim n S n x for all xC, and suppose that Fix(S)= i = 0 Fix( S i ). Then { x n } converges strongly to qF, which solves the following VIP:

q f ( q ) , J ( q p ) 0,pF.

Proof First of all, take a fixed pF arbitrarily. Then we obtain p=Gp, p= S n p and J r n p=p for all n0. By Lemma 4.2, we get from (4.1)

y n p α n f ( x n ) p + β n x n p + γ n S n x n p + δ n J r n G x n p α n ( ρ x n p + f ( p ) p ) + β n x n p + γ n x n p + δ n x n p = ( 1 α n ( 1 ρ ) ) x n p + α n f ( p ) p ,

and hence

x n + 1 p σ n G x n p + ( 1 σ n ) y n p σ n x n p + ( 1 σ n ) [ ( 1 α n ( 1 ρ ) ) x n p + α n f ( p ) p ] = ( 1 ( 1 σ n ) α n ( 1 ρ ) ) x n p + ( 1 σ n ) α n f ( p ) p = ( 1 ( 1 σ n ) α n ( 1 ρ ) ) x n p + ( 1 σ n ) α n ( 1 ρ ) f ( p ) p 1 ρ max { x n p , f ( p ) p 1 ρ } .
(4.2)

By induction, we have

x n pmax { x 0 p , f ( p ) p 1 ρ } ,n0,

which implies that { x n } is bounded and so are the sequences { y n }, {G x n }, {f( x n )}.

Let us show that

lim n x n + 1 x n =0.
(4.3)

As a matter of fact, observe that y n can be rewritten as follows

y n = β n x n +(1 β n ) z n ,

where z n = α n f ( x n ) + γ n S n x n + δ n J r n G x n 1 β n . Observe that

z n z n 1 = α n f ( x n ) + γ n S n x n + δ n J r n G x n 1 β n α n 1 f ( x n 1 ) + γ n 1 S n 1 x n 1 + δ n 1 J r n 1 G x n 1 1 β n 1 = y n β n x n 1 β n y n 1 β n 1 x n 1 1 β n 1 = y n β n x n 1 β n y n 1 β n 1 x n 1 1 β n + y n 1 β n 1 x n 1 1 β n y n 1 β n 1 x n 1 1 β n 1 y n β n x n 1 β n y n 1 β n 1 x n 1 1 β n + y n 1 β n 1 x n 1 1 β n y n 1 β n 1 x n 1 1 β n 1 = 1 1 β n y n β n x n ( y n 1 β n 1 x n 1 ) + | 1 1 β n 1 1 β n 1 | y n 1 β n 1 x n 1 = 1 1 β n y n β n x n ( y n 1 β n 1 x n 1 ) + | β n β n 1 | ( 1 β n 1 ) ( 1 β n ) y n 1 β n 1 x n 1 = 1 1 β n α n f ( x n ) + γ n S n x n + δ n J r n G x n α n 1 f ( x n 1 ) γ n 1 S n 1 x n 1 δ n 1 J r n 1 G x n 1 + | β n β n 1 | ( 1 β n 1 ) ( 1 β n ) y n 1 β n 1 x n 1 1 1 β n [ α n f ( x n ) f ( x n 1 ) + γ n S n x n S n 1 x n 1 + δ n J r n G x n J r n 1 G x n 1 + | α n α n 1 | f ( x n 1 ) + | γ n γ n 1 | S n 1 x n 1 + | δ n δ n 1 | J r n 1 G x n 1 ] + | β n β n 1 | ( 1 β n 1 ) ( 1 β n ) y n 1 β n 1 x n 1 .
(4.4)

On the other hand, repeating the same arguments as those of (3.8) in the proof of Theorem 3.1, we can deduce that for all n0,

J r n + 1 G x n + 1 J r n G x n x n x n + 1 + M 0 | r n r n + 1 |,n0,
(4.5)

where sup n 0 { 1 ε ( J r n + 1 G x n + 1 G x n + J r n G x n G x n + 1 )} M 0 for some M 0 >0. Taking into account 0< lim inf n β n lim sup n β n <1, we may assume, without loss of generality, that { β n }[ c ˆ , d ˆ ]. So, from (4.4) and (4.5), we have

z n z n 1 1 1 β n [ α n f ( x n ) f ( x n 1 ) + γ n ( S n x n S n x n 1 + S n x n 1 S n 1 x n 1 ) + δ n ( x n 1 x n + M 0 | r n 1 r n | ) + | α n α n 1 | f ( x n 1 ) + | γ n γ n 1 | S n 1 x n 1 + | δ n δ n 1 | J r n 1 G x n 1 ] + | β n β n 1 | ( 1 β n 1 ) ( 1 β n ) y n 1 β n 1 x n 1 1 1 β n [ α n ρ x n x n 1 + γ n ( x n x n 1 + S n x n 1 S n 1 x n 1 ) + δ n ( x n 1 x n + M 0 | r n 1 r n | ) + | α n α n 1 | f ( x n 1 ) + | γ n γ n 1 | S n 1 x n 1 + | δ n δ n 1 | J r n 1 G x n 1 ] + | β n β n 1 | ( 1 β n 1 ) ( 1 β n ) y n 1 β n 1 x n 1 = 1 1 β n { ( 1 β n α n ( 1 ρ ) ) x n x n 1 + γ n S n x n 1 S n 1 x n 1 + δ n M 0 | r n 1 r n | + | α n α n 1 | f ( x n 1 ) + | γ n γ n 1 | S n 1 x n 1 + | δ n δ n 1 | J r n 1 G x n 1 } + | β n β n 1 | ( 1 β n 1 ) ( 1 β n ) y n 1 β n 1 x n 1 = ( 1 α n ( 1 ρ ) 1 β n ) x n x n 1 + γ n 1 β n S n x n 1 S n 1 x n 1 + δ n M 0 1 β n | r n 1 r n | + 1 1 β n [ | α n α n 1 | f ( x n 1 ) + | γ n γ n 1 | S n 1 x n 1 + | δ n δ n 1 | J r n 1 G x n 1 ] + | β n β n 1 | ( 1 β n 1 ) ( 1 β n ) y n 1 β n 1 x n 1 ( 1 α n ( 1 ρ ) 1 β n ) x n x n 1 + S n x n 1 S n 1 x n 1 + M 0 | r n 1 r n | + 1 1 β n [ | α n α n 1 | f ( x n 1 ) + | γ n γ n 1 | S n 1 x n 1 + | δ n δ n 1 | J r n 1 G x n 1 ] + | β n β n 1 | ( 1 β n 1 ) ( 1 β n ) α n 1 f ( x n 1 ) + γ n 1 S n 1 x n 1 + δ n 1 J r n 1 G x n 1 ( 1 α n ( 1 ρ ) 1 β n ) x n x n 1 + M 1 [ | r n 1 r n | + | α n α n 1 | + | β n β n 1 | + | γ n γ n 1 | + | δ n δ n 1 | ] + S n x n 1 S n 1 x n 1 ,
(4.6)

where sup n 0 { 1 ( 1 d ˆ ) 2 (f( x n )+ S n x n + J r n G x n + M 0 )} M 1 for some M 1 >0. In the meantime, observe that

x n + 1 x n = σ n (G x n G x n 1 )+( σ n σ n 1 )(G x n 1 z n 1 )+(1 σ n )( z n z n 1 ).

This together with (4.6) implies that

x n + 1 x n σ n G x n G x n 1 + | σ n σ n 1 | G x n 1 z n 1 + ( 1 σ n ) z n z n 1 σ n x n x n 1 + | σ n σ n 1 | G x n 1 z n 1 + ( 1 σ n ) { ( 1 α n ( 1 ρ ) 1 β n ) x n x n 1 + M 1 [ | r n r n 1 | + | α n α n 1 | + | β n β n 1 | + | γ n γ n 1 | + | δ n δ n 1 | ] + S n x n 1 S n 1 x n 1 } ( 1 ( 1 σ n ) α n ( 1 ρ ) 1 β n ) x n x n 1 + | σ n σ n 1 | G x n 1 z n 1 + M 1 [ | r n r n 1 | + | α n α n 1 | + | β n β n 1 | + | γ n γ n 1 | + | δ n δ n 1 | ] + S n x n 1 S n 1 x n 1 ( 1 ( 1 σ n ) α n ( 1 ρ ) 1 β n ) x n x n 1 + M 2 [ | r n r n 1 | + | σ n σ n 1 | + | α n α n 1 | + | β n β n 1 | + | γ n γ n 1 | + | δ n δ n 1 | ] + S n x n 1 S n 1 x n 1 ,
(4.7)

where sup n 0 { M 1 +G x n z n } M 2 for some M 2 >0. Since ( 1 σ n ) α n ( 1 ρ ) 1 β n (1 σ n ) α n (1ρ), we obtain from conditions (i) and (v) that n = 0 ( 1 σ n ) α n ( 1 ρ ) 1 β n =. Thus, applying Lemma 2.1 to (4.7), we deduce from conditions (iii), (iv) and the assumption on { S n } that

lim n x n + 1 x n =0.

Next, we show that x n G x n 0 as n.

Indeed, according to Lemma 2.2, we have from (4.1)

y n p 2 = α n ( f ( x n ) f ( p ) ) + β n ( x n p ) + γ n ( S n x n p ) + δ n ( J r n G x n p ) + α n ( f ( p ) p ) 2 α n ( f ( x n ) f ( p ) ) + β n ( x n p ) + γ n ( S n x n p ) + δ n ( J r n G x n p ) 2 + 2 α n f ( p ) p , J ( y n p ) α n f ( x n ) f ( p ) 2 + β n x n p 2 + γ n S n x n p 2 + δ n J r n G x n p 2 + 2 α n f ( p ) p , J ( y n p ) α n ρ x n p 2 + β n x n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + δ n x n p 2 + 2 α n f ( p ) p y n p = ( 1 α n ( 1 ρ ) ) x n p 2 + 2 α n f ( p ) p y n p x n p 2 + 2 α n f ( p ) p y n p .
(4.8)

Utilizing Lemma 2.5, we get from (4.1) and (4.8)

x n + 1 p 2 = σ n ( G x n p ) + ( 1 σ n ) ( y n p ) 2 σ n G x n p 2 + ( 1 σ n ) y n p 2 σ n ( 1 σ n ) g ( G x n y n ) σ n x n p 2 + ( 1 σ n ) [ x n p 2 + 2 α n f ( p ) p y n p ] σ n ( 1 σ n ) g ( G x n y n ) x n p 2 + 2 α n f ( p ) p y n p σ n ( 1 σ n ) g ( G x n y n ) ,

which hence yields

σ n ( 1 σ n ) g ( G x n y n ) x n p 2 x n + 1 p 2 + 2 α n f ( p ) p y n p ( x n p + x n + 1 p ) x n x n + 1 + 2 α n f ( p ) p y n p .

Since α n 0 and x n + 1 x n 0, from condition (v) and the boundedness of { x n } and { y n }, it follows that

lim n g ( G x n y n ) =0.

Utilizing the properties of g, we have

lim n G x n y n =0,
(4.9)

which together with (4.1) and (4.3) implies that

x n y n x n x n + 1 + x n + 1 y n = x n x n + 1 + σ n G x n y n 0 as  n .

That is,

lim n x n y n =0.
(4.10)

Since

x n G x n x n y n + y n G x n ,

it immediately follows from (4.9) and (4.10) that

lim n x n G x n =0.
(4.11)

On the other hand, observe that y n can be rewritten as follows:

y n = α n f ( x n ) + β n x n + γ n S n x n + δ n J r n G x n = α n f ( x n ) + β n x n + ( γ n + δ n ) γ n S n x n + δ n J r n G x n γ n + δ n = α n f ( x n ) + β n x n + e n z ˆ n ,

where e n = γ n + δ n and z ˆ n = γ n S n x n + δ n J r n G x n γ n + δ n . Utilizing Lemma 2.11, we have

y n p 2 = α n ( f ( x n ) p ) + β n ( x n p ) + e n ( z ˆ n p ) 2 α n f ( x n ) p 2 + β n x n p 2 + e n z ˆ n p 2 β n e n g 1 ( z ˆ n x n ) = α n f ( x n ) p 2 + β n x n p 2 β n e n g 1 ( z ˆ n x n ) + e n γ n S n x n + δ n J r n G x n γ n + δ n p 2 = α n f ( x n ) p 2 + β n x n p 2 β n e n g 1 ( z ˆ n x n ) + e n γ n γ n + δ n ( S n x n p ) + δ n γ n + δ n ( J r n G x n p ) 2 α n f ( x n ) p 2 + β n x n p 2 β n e n g 1 ( z ˆ n x n ) + e n [ γ n γ n + δ n S n x n p 2 + δ n γ n + δ n J r n G x n p 2 ] α n f ( x n ) p 2 + β n x n p 2 β n e n g 1 ( z ˆ n x n ) + e n [ γ n γ n + δ n x n p 2 + δ n γ n + δ n x n p 2 ] = α n f ( x n ) p 2 + ( 1 α n ) x n p 2 β n e n g 1 ( z ˆ n x n ) α n f ( x n ) p 2 + x n p 2 β n e n g 1 ( z ˆ n x n ) ,

which hence implies that

β n e n g 1 ( z ˆ n x n ) α n f ( x n ) p 2 + x n p 2 y n p 2 α n f ( x n ) p 2 + ( x n p + y n p ) x n y n .

Utilizing (4.10), conditions (i), (ii), (v) and the boundedness of { x n }, { y n } and {f( x n )}, we get

lim n g 1 ( z ˆ n x n ) =0.

From the properties of g 1 , we have

lim n z ˆ n x n =0.
(4.12)

Utilizing Lemma 2.5 and the definition of z ˆ n , we have

z ˆ n p 2 = γ n S n x n + δ n J r n G x n γ n + δ n p 2 = γ n γ n + δ n ( S n x n p ) + δ n γ n + δ n ( J r n G x n p ) 2 γ n γ n + δ n S n x n p 2 + δ n γ n + δ n J r n G x n p 2 γ n δ n ( γ n + δ n ) 2 g 2 ( J r n G x n S n x n ) x n p 2 γ n δ n ( γ n + δ n ) 2 g 2 ( J r n G x n S n x n ) ,

which leads to

γ n δ n ( γ n + δ n ) 2 g 2 ( J r n G x n S n x n ) x n p 2 z ˆ n p 2 ( x n p + z ˆ n p ) x n z ˆ n .

Since { x n } and { z ˆ n } are bounded, we deduce from (4.12) and condition (ii) that

lim n g 2 ( S n x n J r n G x n ) =0.

From the properties of g 2 , we have

lim n S n x n J r n G x n =0.
(4.13)

Furthermore, y n can also be rewritten as follows:

y n = α n f ( x n ) + β n x n + γ n S n x n + δ n J r n G x n = β n x n + γ n S n x n + ( α n + δ n ) α n f ( x n ) + δ n J r n G x n α n + δ n = β n x n + γ n S n x n + d n z ˜ n ,

where d n = α n + δ n and z ˜ n = α n f ( x n ) + δ n J r n G x n α n + δ n . Utilizing Lemma 2.11 and the convexity of 2 , we have

y n p 2 = β n ( x n p ) + γ n ( S n x n p ) + d n ( z ˜ n p ) 2 β n x n p 2 + γ n S n x n p 2 + d n z ˜ n p 2 β n γ n g 3 ( x n S n x n ) = β n x n p 2 + γ n S n x n p 2 + d n α n f ( x n ) + δ n J r n G x n α n + δ n p 2 β n γ n g 3 ( x n S n x n ) = β n x n p 2 + γ n S n x n p 2 + d n α n α n + δ n ( f ( x n ) p ) + δ n α n + δ n ( J r n G x n p ) 2 β n γ n g 3 ( x n S n x n ) β n x n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + d n [ α n α n + δ n f ( x n ) p 2 + δ n α n + δ n J r n G x n p 2 ] β n γ n g 3 ( x n S n x n ) α n f ( x n ) p 2 + ( β n + γ n ) x n p 2 + δ n x n p 2 β n γ n g 3 ( x n S n x n ) = α n f ( x n ) p 2 + ( 1 α n ) x n p 2 β n γ n g 3 ( x n S n x n ) α n f ( x n ) p 2 + x n p 2 β n γ n g 3 ( x n S n x n ) ,

which hence implies that

β n γ n g 3 ( x n S n x n ) α n f ( x n ) p 2 + x n p 2 y n p 2 α n f ( x n ) p 2 + ( x n p + y n p ) x n y n .

Utilizing (4.10), conditions (i), (ii), (v) and the boundedness of { x n }, { y n } and {f( x n )}, we get

lim n g 3 ( x n S n x n ) =0.

From the properties of g 3 , we have

lim n x n S n x n =0.
(4.14)

Thus, from (4.13) and (4.14), we get

x n J r n G x n x n S n x n + S n x n J r n G x n 0as n.

That is,

lim n x n J r n G x n =0.
(4.15)

In terms of (4.14) and Lemma 2.6, we have

x n S x n x n S n x n + S n x n S x n 0as n.

That is,

lim n x n S x n =0.
(4.16)

Furthermore, repeating the same arguments as those of (3.30) in the proof of Theorem 3.1, we can conclude that

lim n x n J r x n =0
(4.17)

for a fixed number r such that ε>r>0.

Define a mapping Wx=(1 θ 1 θ 2 ) J r x+ θ 1 Sx+ θ 2 Gx, where θ 1 , θ 2 (0,1) are two constants with θ 1 + θ 2 <1. Then by Lemma 2.8, we have that Fix(W)=Fix( J r )Fix(S)Fix(G)=F. We observe that

x n W x n = ( 1 θ 1 θ 2 ) ( x n J r x n ) + θ 1 ( x n S x n ) + θ 2 ( x n G x n ) ( 1 θ 1 θ 2 ) x n J r x n + θ 1 x n S x n + θ 2 x n G x n .

From (4.11), (4.16) and (4.17), we obtain

lim n x n W x n =0.
(4.18)

Now, we claim that

lim sup n f ( q ) q , J ( x n q ) 0,
(4.19)

where q=s lim t 0 x t with x t being the fixed point of the contraction

xtf(x)+(1t)Wx.

Then x t solves the fixed point equation x t =tf( x t )+(1t)W x t . Repeating the same arguments as those of (3.37) in the proof of Theorem 3.1, we can obtain that

lim sup n f ( q ) q , J ( x n q ) = lim sup t 0 lim sup n f ( q ) q , J ( x n q ) lim sup t 0 lim sup n f ( q ) q , J ( x n q ) J ( x n x t ) .

Since X has a uniformly Gâteaux differentiable norm, the duality mapping J is norm-to-weak uniformly continuous on bounded subsets of X. Consequently, the two limits are interchangeable, and hence (4.19) holds. From (4.10), we get ( y n q)( x n q)0. Noticing the norm-to-weak uniform continuity of J on bounded subsets of X, we deduce from (4.19) that

lim sup n f ( q ) q , J ( y n q ) = lim sup n ( f ( q ) q , J ( x n q ) + f ( q ) q , J ( y n q ) J ( x n q ) ) = lim sup n f ( q ) q , J ( x n q ) 0 .
(4.20)

Finally, let us show that x n q as n. Indeed, observe that

y n q 2 = α n ( f ( x n ) f ( q ) ) + β n ( x n q ) + γ n ( S n x n q ) + δ n ( J r n G x n q ) + α n ( f ( q ) q ) 2 α n ( f ( x n ) f ( q ) ) + β n ( x n q ) + γ n ( S n x n q ) + δ n ( J r n G x n q ) 2 + 2 α n f ( q ) q , J ( y n q ) α n f ( x n ) f ( q ) 2 + β n x n q 2 + γ n S n x n q 2 + δ n J r n G x n q 2 + 2 α n f ( q ) q , J ( y n q ) α n ρ x n q 2 + β n x n q 2 + γ n x n q + δ n x n q 2 + 2 α n f ( q ) q , J ( y n q ) = ( α n ρ + β n + γ n + δ n ) x n q 2 + 2 α n f ( q ) q , J ( y n q ) = ( 1 α n ( 1 ρ ) ) x n q 2 + 2 α n f ( q ) q , J ( y n q ) ,

and hence

x n + 1 q 2 σ n G x n q 2 + ( 1 σ n ) y n q 2 σ n x n q 2 + ( 1 σ n ) [ ( 1 α n ( 1 ρ ) ) x n q 2 + 2 α n f ( q ) q , J ( y n q ) ] = ( 1 ( 1 σ n ) α n ( 1 ρ ) ) x n q 2 + 2 ( 1 σ n ) α n f ( q ) q , J ( y n q ) = ( 1 ( 1 σ n ) α n ( 1 ρ ) ) x n q 2 + ( 1 σ n ) α n ( 1 ρ ) 2 f ( q ) q , J ( y n q ) 1 ρ .
(4.21)

Applying Lemma 2.1 to (4.21), we conclude from conditions (i), (v) and (4.20) that x n q as n. This completes the proof. □

Corollary 4.1 Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a uniformly convex Banach space X, which has a uniformly Gâteaux differentiable norm. Let Π C be a sunny nonexpansive retraction from X onto C. Let AX×X be an accretive operator in X such that D ( A ) ¯ C r > 0 R(I+rA). Let V:CC be a self-mapping such that IV:CX is λ-strictly pseudocontractive and α-strongly accretive with α+λ1. Let f:CC be a contraction with coefficient ρ(0,1). Let { S i } i = 0 be a countable family of nonexpansive mappings of C into itself such that F= i = 0 Fix( S i )Fix(V) A 1 0. For arbitrarily given x 0 C, let { x n } be the sequence generated by

{ y n = α n f ( x n ) + β n x n + γ n S n x n + δ n J r n ( ( 1 l ) I + l V ) x n , x n + 1 = σ n ( ( 1 l ) I + l V ) x n + ( 1 σ n ) y n , n 0 ,
(4.22)

where 1 λ 1 + λ (1 1 α λ )l1, and { α n }, { β n }, { γ n }, { δ n } and { σ n } are the sequences in (0,1) such that α n + β n + γ n + δ n =1 for all n0. Suppose that the following conditions hold:

  1. (i)

    lim n α n =0 and n = 0 α n =;

  2. (ii)

    { γ n },{ δ n }[c,d] for some c,d(0,1);

  3. (iii)

    n = 1 (| σ n σ n 1 |+| α n α n 1 |+| β n β n 1 |+| γ n γ n 1 |+| δ n δ n 1 |)<;

  4. (iv)

    n = 1 | r n r n 1 |< and r n ε>0 for all n0;

  5. (v)

    0< lim inf n β n lim sup n β n <1 and 0< lim inf n σ n lim sup n σ n <1.

Assume that n = 1 sup x D S n x S n 1 x< for any bounded subset D of C, and let S be a mapping of C into itself defined by Sx= lim n S n x for all xC, and suppose that Fix(S)= i = 0 Fix( S i ). Then { x n } converges strongly to qF, which solves the following VIP:

q f ( q ) , J ( q p ) 0,pF.

Proof In Theorem 4.1, we put B 1 =IV, B 2 =0 and μ 1 =l, where 1 λ 1 + λ (1 1 α λ )l1. Then GSVI (1.1) is equivalent to the VIP of finding x C such that

B 1 x , J ( x x ) 0,xC.

In this case, B 1 :CX is λ-strictly pseudocontractive and α-strongly accretive. Repeating the same arguments as those in the proof of Corollary 3.1, we can infer that Fix(V)=VI(C, B 1 ). Accordingly, F= i = 0 Fix( S i )Ω A 1 0= i = 0 Fix( S i )Fix(V) A 1 0, and

G x n = ( ( 1 l ) I + l V ) x n ,n0.

So, the scheme (4.1) reduces to (4.22). Therefore, the desired result follows from Theorem 4.1. □

Remark 4.1 Theorem 4.1 improves, extends, supplements and develops Jung [[22], Theorem 3.1], Ceng and Yao [[2], Theorem 3.1] and Cai and Bu [[3], Theorem 3.1] in the following aspects.

(i) The problem of finding a point q i = 0 Fix( S i )Ω A 1 0 in our Theorem 4.1 is more general and more subtle than any of the problems of finding a point q A 1 0 in [[22], Theorem 3.1], the problem of finding a point qFix(T) in [[2], Theorem 3.1], and the problem of finding a point q i = 1 Fix( T i )Ω in [[3], Theorem 3.1].

(ii) The iterative scheme in [[22], Theorem 3.1] is extended to develop the iterative scheme (4.1) of Theorem 4.1 by virtue of the iterative schemes of [[2], Theorems 3.1] and [[3], Theorem 3.1]. The iterative scheme (4.1) of Theorem 4.1 is more advantageous and more flexible than the iterative scheme of [[2], Theorem 3.1], because it can be applied to solving three problems (i.e., GSVI (1.1), fixed point problem and zero point problem) and involves several parameter sequences { σ n }, { α n }, { β n }, { γ n }, { δ n } and { r n }.

(iii) Theorem 4.1 extends and generalizes Ceng and Yao [[2], Theorem 3.1] from a nonexpansive mapping to a countable family of nonexpansive mappings, and Jung [[22], Theorem 3.1] to the setting of a countable family of nonexpansive mappings and GSVI (1.1) for two strictly pseudocontractive and strongly accretive mappings. In the meantime, Theorem 4.1 extends and generalizes Cai and Bu [[3], Theorem 3.1] to the setting of an accretive operator.

(iv) The iterative scheme (4.1) in Theorem 4.1 is very different from any in [[22], Theorem 3.1], [[2], Theorem 3.1] and [[3], Theorem 3.1] because the mapping J r n in [[22], Theorem 3.1] and the mapping G in [[3], Theorem 3.1] are replaced by the same composite mapping J r n G in the iterative scheme (4.1) of Theorem 4.1.

(v) Cai and Bu’s proof in [[3], Theorem 3.1] depends on the argument techniques in [6], the inequality in 2-uniformly smooth Banach spaces (see Proposition 2.1) and the inequality in smooth and uniform convex Banach spaces (see Proposition 2.2). However, the proof of Theorem 4.1 does not depend on the argument techniques in [6], the inequality in 2-uniformly smooth Banach spaces (see Proposition 2.1), and the inequality in smooth and uniform convex Banach spaces (see Proposition 2.2). It depends on only the inequalities in uniform convex Banach spaces (see Lemmas 2.5 and 2.11 in Section 2 of this paper) and the resolvent identity for accretive operators (see Proposition 1.1).

(vi) The assumption of the uniformly convex and 2-uniformly smooth Banach space X in [[3], Theorem 3.1] is weakened to the one of the uniformly convex Banach space X having a uniformly Gâteaux differentiable norm in Theorem 4.1. Moreover, the assumption of the uniformly smooth Banach space X in [[2], Theorem 3.1] is replaced by the one of the uniformly convex Banach space X having a uniformly Gâteaux differentiable norm in Theorem 4.1. It is worth emphasizing that the assumption of asymptotic regularity on { x n } in [[22], Theorem 3.1] is dropped by Theorem 4.1.

References

  1. Yao Y, Chen R, Yao JC: Strong convergence and certain control conditions for modified Mann iteration. Nonlinear Anal. 2008, 68: 1687–1693. 10.1016/j.na.2007.01.009

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Ceng LC, Yao JC: Convergence and certain control conditions for hybrid viscosity approximation methods. Nonlinear Anal. 2010, 73(7):2078–2087. 10.1016/j.na.2010.05.036

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Cai G, Bu SQ: Convergence analysis for variational inequality problems and fixed point problems in 2-uniformly smooth and uniformly convex Banach spaces. Math. Comput. Model. 2012, 55: 538–546. 10.1016/j.mcm.2011.08.031

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Verma RU: On a new system of nonlinear variational inequalities and associated iterative algorithms. Math. Sci. Res. Hot-Line 1999, 3(8):65–68.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Lions JL, Stampacchia G: Variational inequalities. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 1967, 20: 493–512. 10.1002/cpa.3160200302

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Ceng LC, Wang CY, Yao JC: Strong convergence theorems by a relaxed extragradient method for a general system of variational inequalities. Math. Methods Oper. Res. 2008, 67: 375–390. 10.1007/s00186-007-0207-4

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Korpelevich GM: An extragradient method for finding saddle points and for other problems. Èkon. Mat. Metody 1976, 12: 747–756.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Yao Y, Liou YC, Kang SM, Yu YL: Algorithms with strong convergence for a system of nonlinear variational inequalities in Banach spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2011, 74(17):6024–6034. 10.1016/j.na.2011.05.079

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Iiduka H, Takahashi W: Strong convergence theorems for nonexpansive mappings and inverse-strongly monotone mappings. Nonlinear Anal. 2005, 61: 341–350. 10.1016/j.na.2003.07.023

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Ceng LC, Ansari QH, Yao JC: Relaxed extragradient iterative methods for variational inequalities. Appl. Math. Comput. 2011, 218: 1112–1123. 10.1016/j.amc.2011.01.061

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Ceng LC, Ansari QH, Wong NC, Yao JC: An extragradient-like approximation method for variational inequalities and fixed point problems. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2011., 2011: Article ID 22

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ceng LC, Hadjisavvas N, Wong NC: Strong convergence theorem by a hybrid extragradient-like approximation method for variational inequalities and fixed point problems. J. Glob. Optim. 2010, 46: 635–646. 10.1007/s10898-009-9454-7

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Ceng LC, Guu SM, Yao JC: Finding common solutions of a variational inequality, a general system of variational inequalities, and a fixed-point problem via a hybrid extragradient method. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2011., 2011: Article ID 626159

    Google Scholar 

  14. Zeng LC, Yao JC: Strong convergence theorem by an extragradient method for fixed point problems and variational inequality problems. Taiwan. J. Math. 2006, 10: 1293–1303.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Aoyama K, Iiduka H, Takahashi W: Weak convergence of an iterative sequence for accretive operators in Banach spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2006., 2006: Article ID 35390

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ceng LC, Petrusel A: Krasnoselski-Mann iterations for hierarchical fixed point problems for a finite family of nonself mappings in Banach spaces. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 2010, 146: 617–639. 10.1007/s10957-010-9679-0

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Xu HK: Viscosity approximation methods for nonexpansive mappings. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2004, 298: 279–291. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2004.04.059

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Ceng LC, Xu HK, Yao JC: Strong convergence of an iterative method with perturbed mappings for nonexpansive and accretive operators. Numer. Funct. Anal. Optim. 2008, 29(3–4):324–345. 10.1080/01630560801998203

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Barbu V: Nonlinear Semigroups and Differential Equations in Banach Spaces. Noordhoff, Leiden; 1976.

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Aoyama K, Kimura Y, Takahashi W, Toyoda T: Approximation of common fixed points of a countable family of nonexpansive mappings in Banach spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2007, 67: 2350–2360. 10.1016/j.na.2006.08.032

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Ceng LC, Khan AR, Ansari QH, Yao JC: Strong convergence of composite iterative schemes for zeros of m -accretive operators in Banach space. Nonlinear Anal. 2009, 70: 1830–1840. 10.1016/j.na.2008.02.083

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  22. Jung JS: Convergence of composite iterative methods for finding zeros of accretive operators. Nonlinear Anal. 2009, 71: 1736–1746. 10.1016/j.na.2009.01.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Takahashi Y, Hashimoto K, Kato M: On sharp uniform convexity, smoothness, and strong type, cotype inequalities. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 2002, 3: 267–281.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Zeng LC, Lee GM, Wong NC: Ishikawa iteration with errors for approximating fixed points of strictly pseudocontractive mappings of Browder-Petryshyn type. Taiwan. J. Math. 2006, 10: 87–99.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. Takahashi W, Toyoda M: Weak convergence theorems for nonexpansive mappings and monotone mappings. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 2003, 118: 417–428. 10.1023/A:1025407607560

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Iiduka H, Takahashi W, Toyoda M: Approximation of solutions of variational inequalities for monotone mappings. Panam. Math. J. 2004, 14: 49–61.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. Xu HK: Inequalities in Banach spaces with applications. Nonlinear Anal. 1991, 16: 1127–1138. 10.1016/0362-546X(91)90200-K

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  28. Kamimura S, Takahashi W: Strong convergence of a proximal-type algorithm in a Banach space. SIAM J. Optim. 2002, 13: 938–945. 10.1137/S105262340139611X

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Xu HK: Iterative algorithms for nonlinear operators. J. Lond. Math. Soc. 2002, 66: 240–256. 10.1112/S0024610702003332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Reich S: Weak convergence theorems for nonexpansive mappings in Banach spaces. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1979, 67: 274–276. 10.1016/0022-247X(79)90024-6

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  31. 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.2006.08.032

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  32. Jung JS: Iterative approaches to common fixed points of nonexpansive mappings in Banach spaces. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2005, 302: 509–520. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2004.08.022

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  33. Bruck RE: Properties of fixed point sets of nonexpansive mappings in Banach spaces. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 1973, 179: 251–262.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  34. Suzuki T: Strong convergence of Krasnoselskii and Mann’s type sequences for one parameter nonexpansive semigroups without Bochner integrals. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2005, 305: 227–239. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2004.11.017

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  35. Cho YJ, Zhou HY, Guo G: Weak and strong convergence theorems for three-step iterations with errors for asymptotically nonexpansive mappings. Comput. Math. Appl. 2004, 47: 707–717. 10.1016/S0898-1221(04)90058-2

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The first author was partially supported by the National Science Foundation of China (11071169), the Innovation Program of Shanghai Municipal Education Commission (09ZZ133) and the Ph.D. Program Foundation of Ministry of Education of China (20123127110002). The second author was partially supported by a grant from the NSC 102-2115-M-037-001.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ching-Feng Wen.

Additional information

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors’ contributions

All authors contributed equally and significantly in writing this paper. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ceng, LC., Wen, CF. System of variational inequalities and an accretive operator in Banach spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl 2013, 249 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2013-249

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2013-249

Keywords