- Open Access
Strong convergence and stability of Picard iteration sequences for a general class of contractive-type mappings
© Chidume; licensee Springer. 2014
Received: 18 April 2014
Accepted: 21 October 2014
Published: 17 November 2014
Let be a normed linear space, be a mapping of E into itself satisfying the following contractive condition: , for each , , where is a sub-additive monotone increasing function with and , , . It is shown that the Picard iteration process converges strongly to the unique fixed point of T. Furthermore, several classes of nonlinear operators studied by various authors are shown to belong to this class of mappings. Our theorem improves several recent important results. In particular, it improves a recent result of Akewe et al. (Fixed Point Theory Appl 2014:45, 2014), and a host of other results.
MSC:accretive-type mappings, pseudocontractive mappings, Picard sequence, contractive-type mappings.
1 Nonlinear operators of accretive-type and fixed points
If , the map T is called a contraction map, and if , T is called nonexpansive.
where is the normalized duality map on E. It follows, again from inequality (1.3), that A is accretive if and only if is expansive and, consequently, its inverse exists and is nonexpansive as a mapping from into , where denotes the range of . The range of does not need to be all of E. This leads to the following definition.
Definition 1.1 An operator A is said to be m-accretive if A is accretive and the range of is all of E for some .
where A is a maximal monotone operator is of great interest in nonlinear operator theory.
where A is an accretive operator amounts to solving for the equilibrium points of the evolution system (1.7).
Browder converted (1.8) to a fixed point problem. He introduced an operator T defined as follows: , where A is accretive and called such a T, pseudocontractive. It is clear that fixed points of T correspond to zeros of A.
is pseudocontractive but is neither nonexpansive nor continuous.
Existence of solutions of system (1.7) has been established. Browder  proved that the system is solvable if A is locally Lipschitzian and accretive on E, and utilizing the existence result for system (1.7), he proved that if A is locally Lipschitz and accretive on E, then A is m-accretive.
Martin  proved that if A is continuous and accretive on E, then A is m-accretive. Browder  further proved that if is Lipschitz and strongly accretive (i.e., there exists such that for each , there exists such that ) then A is surjective. This result was subsequently generalized by Deimling  to the continuous strongly accretive operators (see, e.g., Deimling [, Theorem 13.1]). For details of accretive and monotone operators, the reader may consult Reich [6, 7].
2 Iterative methods for solutions of certain nonlinear equations
We begin with the well-known and celebrated contraction mapping principle.
Theorem 2.1 (Contraction mapping principle)
T has a unique fixed point, say in X;
- (b)the sequence in X defined by ,(2.1)
converges to .
Theorem 2.1 is, perhaps, the most important fixed point theorem. The sequence of the recursion formula (2.1) is called the Picard sequence.
One important (see, e.g., [, p.57]) class of nonlinear mappings generalizing the class of contraction mappings is the class of nonexpansive mappings. Readers interested in nonexpansive mappings may consult, for example, Goebel and Reich , Reich .
If K is a nonempty compact convex subset of and is a nonexpansive map, even with a unique fixed point, the Picard sequence defined by (2.1) may fail to converge to the fixed point. It suffices to take and let be a rotation of K about the origin of coordinates through a fixed angle θ, (say). It is easy to check that T is nonexpansive, zero is the unique fixed point of T and that the Picard sequence (2.1) with fails to converge to zero.
Following research efforts by Mann , Krasnoselskii , Schaefer , Ishikawa , Edelstein [15–17], Reinermann , Edelstein and O’Brian , Chidume , and a host of other authors, the following recursion formula was developed and found to be effective for approximating fixed points of nonexpansive mappings.
where T maps K into K and proved that if K is bounded, then the convergence in (2.3) is uniform.
Chidume  considered the recursion formula (2.2), introduced the concept of admissible sequence, and proved that if K is bounded, then the convergence in (2.3) is uniform for the sequence defined by (2.2).
Remark 1 We note here that the recursion formula (2.2) which is certainly cumbersome when compared with Picard iteration was developed for the class of nonexpansive maps because the simpler Picard sequence will not always converge for nonexpansive maps. Furthermore, the recursion formula (2.2) can only yield the result that the sequence defined by (2.2) satisfies (2.3). In general, it does not yield convergence of the sequence to a fixed point of T. To obtain convergence to a fixed point of T, some type of compactness condition must be imposed either on K or on the map T (e.g., T may be required to be demicompact at zero, or may be required to map closed bounded subsets of E into closed subsets of E, etc.; see, e.g., Chidume ). The recursion formula (2.2) is now generally referred to as Mann formula in the light of Mann .
An important class of mappings generalizing the class of nonexpansive mappings is the class of Lipschitz pseudocontractive maps. It is not difficult to check that every nonexpansive map is a Lipschitz pseudocontraction. We have already given an example of a pseudocontractive map which is not even continuous. All attempts to use the Mann formula, which has been successfully employed for nonexpansive mappings, to approximate a fixed point of a Lipschitz pseudocontractive map even on a compact convex domain in a real Hilbert space, proved abortive. In 1974, Ishikawa  proved the following theorem.
where and are real sequences satisfying the following conditions: (i) ; (ii) ; (iii) . Then converges strongly to a fixed point of T.
Remark 2 It is clear that the recursion formulas (2.5) and (2.6) of the Ishikawa scheme are more cumbersome than the Mann formula (2.2). However, since it was not known whether or not the simpler Mann sequence would always converge to fixed points of Lipschitz pseudocontractive maps, the cumbersome Ishikawa scheme was applied for this class of maps. The question of whether or not the simpler Mann sequence had actually failed for this class of maps remained open for many years. This was resolved in 2001 by Chidume and Mutangadura  who produced an example of a Lipschitz pseudocontractive map defined on a compact convex subset of with a unique fixed point for which no Mann sequence converges.
Remark 3 (a) We first observe that if we set ∀n in the recursion formula (2.6) then condition (i) in Theorem IS shows that ∀n and so (2.5) and (2.6) reduce to ∀n, so that converges to , the initial approximation which may not be a fixed point of T.
(b) Because the Ishikawa formulas were used successfully in approximating a fixed point of T in Theorem IS, several authors started studying a modification of it in which condition (i) is replaced by the condition: (i)∗ , and condition (ii) is modified accordingly. In this modification, and are independent and it is permissible to set for all n. They still called such a modified formula an Ishikawa formula. This is wrong. To see this, it suffices to set ∀n and see that the sequence obtained from the modified scheme will not converge to a fixed point of T in Theorem IS. In particular, if ∀n, the modified formula generally reduces to the Mann formula and then the example of Chidume and Mutangadura  shows that the modified formula will not converge to a fixed point of T in the setting of Theorem IS (see, e.g.,  for more comments on the Ishikawa iteration formula).
(c) The order of convergence of the Picard sequence is that of a geometric progression, that of the Mann sequence is of the form , while that of the Ishikawa sequence is of the form . Furthermore, whenever Picard sequence converges, it is preferred to the Mann sequence which itself is preferred to the Ishikawa formula whenever it converges, because the preferred recursion formula is simpler (consequently requiring less computation and therefore reducing cost of computation).
Three other iteration methods have been introduced and have successfully been employed to approximate fixed points of Lipschitz pseudocontractive mappings even in Banach spaces more general than Hilbert spaces.
where the real sequences and are in and satisfy appropriate conditions and are such that has property A (see Schu  for a definition). Schu proved that converges strongly to the unique fixed point of T nearest to w.
This result was extended by Chidume  to real Banach spaces possessing weakly sequential continuous duality maps (e.g., spaces, ).
A second iteration scheme for approximating fixed points of Lipschitz pseudocontractive mappings was implicitly introduced by Bruck  who actually applied the scheme, still in Hilbert spaces, to approximate a solution of the inclusion where A is an m-monotone operator.
and proved that if and are bounded, then converges strongly to some , solution of , provided and are acceptably paired sequences (e.g., see  for a definition).
An example of acceptably paired sequences given in  is , , .
The ideas of sequences with property A and sequences that are acceptably paired are due to Halpern . Reich  also studied the recursion formula (2.9) for Lipschitz accretive operators on real uniformly convex Banach spaces with a duality mapping that is weakly sequentially continuous at zero.
where and are real sequences in satisfying appropriate conditions. They proved the following theorem.
Theorem CZ ()
for all positive integers n, where and are real sequences in satisfying appropriate conditions.
Then as .
Remark 5 We have shown in this section that a cumbersome recurrence relation is desirable and introduced only when a simpler recurrence formula is not available for the class of mappings under consideration. It is obvious that whenever a k-step method works for any class of maps, it is trivial to construct an n-step method that will work for the same class of maps, , . Such an n-step method will, in general, require more computation time and therefore will be less efficient than the k-step method. In general, the rate of convergence of such an n-step method is at best the same as that of the k-step method. Consequently, such n-step methods serve no useful purpose and are therefore not desirable.
3 A strong convergence theorem
Akewe et al.  stated the following theorem.
Theorem AOO ([, Theorem 2.2, p.7])
where , for each , , , .
T defined by (3.1) has a unique fixed point p;
the Kirk-multistep iterative scheme (defined by (3.2)) converges strongly to the fixed point p of T.
Remark 6 The authors of Theorem AOO did not prove (i) as claimed. The existence of a fixed point of T was not proved. What the authors showed is that if T has a fixed point, then the fixed point is unique.
He never introduced the multistep method defined in (3.2).
which is basically a compact form of (3.1).
Now, assuming the existence of a fixed point for a mapping T satisfying contractive condition (3.1) or (3.5), we prove that a Picard sequence for converges strongly to the unique fixed point of T.
Then converges strongly to p.
Hence, converges strongly to p. This completes the proof. □
Remark 9 If an operator satisfies inequality (3.7) where p is a fixed point of T, then p is necessarily unique. For assume that there exists such that . Then so that , which yields .
Remark 10 The T-stability of the Picard iterative scheme, whenever it converges, is well known (see, e.g., Ostrowski , Berinde [37, 38], Bruck , Rhoades , Harder and Hicks , Shahzad and Zegeye ).
Remark 11 In the light of Remark 5, our theorem is a significant improvement on the results of Akewe et al.  in the sense that the Picard sequence defined by (3.6) is much simpler than the multistep methods (3.2) considered in . Furthermore, the Picard sequence converges as fast as a geometric progression whereas convergence with the multistep methods considered in  is either of order or of order .
- Kato T: Nonlinear semigroups and evolution equations. J. Math. Soc. Jpn. 1967, 19: 508–520. 10.2969/jmsj/01940508View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Browder FE: Nonlinear mappings of nonexpansive and accretive type in Banach spaces. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 1969, 73: 875–882.View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Martin RH: A global existence theorem for autonomous differential equation in Banach spaces. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1970, 26: 307–314. 10.1090/S0002-9939-1970-0264195-6View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Deimling K: Zeros of accretive operators. Manuscr. Math. 1974, 13: 365–374. 10.1007/BF01171148View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Deimling K: Nonlinear Functional Analysis. Springer, Berlin; 1985.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Reich S: Extension problems for accretive sets in Banach spaces. J. Funct. Anal. 1977, 26: 378–395. 10.1016/0022-1236(77)90022-2View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Reich S: Constructive techniques for accretive and monotone operators. In Applied Nonlinear Analysis. Academic press, New York; 1979:335–345.Google Scholar
- Chidume C Lecture Notes in Mathematics 1965. Geometric Properties of Banach Spaces and Nonlinear Iterations 2009.Google Scholar
- Goebel K, Reich S: Uniform Convexity, Hyperbolic Geometry and Nonexpansive Mappings. Dekker, New York; 1984.Google Scholar
- Reich S: Weak convergence theorems for nonexpansive mappings in Banach spaces. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1979, 67: 274–276. 10.1016/0022-247X(79)90024-6View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Mann WR: Mean value methods in iteration. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1953, 4: 506–510. 10.1090/S0002-9939-1953-0054846-3View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Krasnoselskii MA: Two observations about the method of successive approximations. Usp. Mat. Nauk 1957, 10(1):131–140.Google Scholar
- Schaefer H: Über die Methode Sukzessiver Approximationen. Jahresber. Dtsch. Math.-Ver. 1957, 59(1):131–140. (German)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Ishikawa S: Fixed points and iteration of nonexpansive mapping in a Banach space. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1976, 73: 61–71.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Edelstein M: A remark on a theorem of Krasnoselskii. Am. Math. Mon. 1966, 13: 507–510.Google Scholar
- Edelstein M: On nonexpansive mappings. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1964, 15: 689–695. 10.1090/S0002-9939-1964-0165498-3View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Edelstein M, O’Brian RC: Nonexpansive mappings, asymptotic regularity and successive approximation. J. Lond. Math. Soc. 1978, 17(3):547–554.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Reinermann J: Über Fixpunkte kontrahierender Abbildungen und schwach konvergente Toeplitz-Verfahren. Arch. Math. 1969, 20: 59–64. 10.1007/BF01898992View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Chidume CE: On the approximation of fixed points of nonexpansive mapping. Houst. J. Math. 1981, 7: 345–554.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Ishikawa S: Fixed points by a new iteration method. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1974, 44(1):147–150. 10.1090/S0002-9939-1974-0336469-5View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Chidume CE, Mutangadura SA: An example of Mann iteration method for Lipschitz pseudocontractions. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 2001, 129(8):2359–2363. 10.1090/S0002-9939-01-06009-9View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Schu J: Iterative construction of fixed points of asymptotically nonexpansive mappings. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1991, 158: 407–413. 10.1016/0022-247X(91)90245-UView ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Chidume CE: Iterative approximation of fixed points of Lipschitz pseudocontractive maps. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 2001, 129(8):2245–2251. 10.1090/S0002-9939-01-06078-6View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Bruck RE:A strongly convergent iterative method for the solution of for a maximal monotone operator in Hilbert space. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1974, 48: 114–126. 10.1016/0022-247X(74)90219-4View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Halpern B: Fixed points of nonexpansive mappings. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 1967, 3: 957–961.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Reich S: Iterative methods for accretive sets. In Nonlinear Equations in Abstract Spaces. Academic Press, New York; 1978:317–326.Google Scholar
- Abbas M, Khan SH, Rhoades BE: Simpler is also better approximating fixed points. Appl. Math. Comput. 2008, 205(1):428–431. 10.1016/j.amc.2008.08.021View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Chidume CE: Nonexpansive mappings, generalizations and iterative algorithms. In Nonlinear Analysis and Applications. Edited by: Agarwal RP, O’Reagan D. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht; 2003:383–430.Google Scholar
- Reich S: Strong convergence theorems for resolvents of accretive operators in Banach spaces. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1980, 75: 287–292. 10.1016/0022-247X(80)90323-6View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Reich S: Product of formulas, nonlinear semigroups and accretive operators. J. Funct. Anal. 1980, 36: 147–168. 10.1016/0022-1236(80)90097-XView ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Shahzard N, Al-Dubiban R: Approximating common fixed points of nonexpansive mappings in Banach spaces. Georgian Math. J. 2006, 13(3):529–537.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Chidume CE, Zegeye H: Approximate fixed point sequences and convergence theorems for Lipschitz pseudocontractive maps. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 2004, 132(3):831–840. 10.1090/S0002-9939-03-07101-6View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Akewe H: Strong convergence and stability of Kirk-multistep-type iterative schemes for contractive-type operators. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2014., 2014: Article ID 45Google Scholar
- Kirk WA: On successive approximations for nonexpansive mappings in Banach spaces. Glasg. Math. J. 1971, 12: 6–9. 10.1017/S0017089500001063View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Hardy G, Rogers T: A generalization of fixed point theorem of Reich. Can. Math. Bull. 1973, 16(2):706–721.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Ostrowski AM: The round-off stability of iterations. Z. Angew. Math. Mech. 1967, 47: 77–81. 10.1002/zamm.19670470202View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Berinde V: On the stability of some fixed point procedures. Bul. Ştiinţ. - Univ. Baia Mare, Ser. B Fasc. Mat.-Inform. 2002, XVIII(1):7–14.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Berinde V: Iterative approximation of fixed points and Mann iteration for a general class of functions. J. Adv. Math. Stud. 2010, 3(2):1–3.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Rhoades BE: Fixed point theorems and stability results for fixed point iteration procedures II. Indian J. Pure Appl. Math. 1993, 24(11):691–703.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Harder AM, Hicks TL: Stability results for fixed point iteration procedures. Math. Jpn. 1988, 33(5):693–706.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Shahzad N, Zegeye H: On stability results for ϕ -strongly pseudocontractive mappings. Nonlinear Anal. 2006, 64(12):2619–2630. 10.1016/j.na.2005.09.007View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.