Open Access

Fixed point property and approximation of a class of nonexpansive mappings

Fixed Point Theory and Applications20142014:81

https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2014-81

Received: 9 January 2014

Accepted: 14 March 2014

Published: 26 March 2014

Abstract

We introduce the concept of ψ-firmly nonexpansive mapping, which includes a firmly nonexpansive mapping as a special case in a uniformly convex Banach space. It is shown that every bounded closed convex subset of a reflexive Banach space has the fixed point property for ψ-firmly nonexpansive mappings, an important subclass of nonexpansive mappings. Furthermore, Picard iteration of this class of mappings weakly converges to a fixed point.

MSC:47H06, 47J05, 47J25, 47H10, 47H17.

Keywords

ψ-firmly nonexpansive mappings fixed points reflexive Banach spaces Picard iteration

1 Introduction

Throughout this paper, a Banach space E will be over the real scalar field. We denote its norm by and its dual space by E . Let F ( T ) = { x E : T x = x } , the set of all fixed points for a mapping T and denote the set of all positive integer.

Let K be a nonempty bounded closed convex subset of E. We say that K has the fixed point property for nonexpansive mapping if for every nonexpansive mapping T : K K (i.e. T x T y x y x , y K ), K contains a fixed point x of T (i.e. T x = x ); E has the fixed point property (FPP for short) if any nonempty bounded closed convex subset of E has the fixed point property for nonexpansive mapping; E has the weak fixed point property (WFPP for short) if any weakly compact convex subset of E has the fixed point property for nonexpansive mapping. For a reflexive Banach space, both properties are obviously the same.

The famous question whether a Banach space has the fixed point property (WFPP) had remained open for a long time [1, 2]. It has been answered in the negative by Sadovski [3] and Alspach [4] who constructed the following examples, respectively.

Example 1.1 (Sadovski [3] or Istrăţescu [[5], Example 6.3.3])

Let E = c 0 and K = { x c 0 ; x 1 } . Define T : K K by
T x = ( 1 , x 1 , x 2 , x 3 , ) , x = ( x 1 , x 2 , x 3 , ) K .

Example 1.2 (Alspach [4] or Kirk-Sims [[6], Example 401])

Let E = L 1 [ 0 , 1 ] and
K = { x L 1 [ 0 , 1 ] ; 0 x ( t ) 1  and  0 1 x ( t ) d t = 1 2 } .
Define T : K K by
( T x ) ( t ) = { min { 1 , 2 x ( 2 t ) } 0 t 1 2 , max { 0 , 2 x ( 2 t 1 ) 1 } 1 2 < t 1 .

Then K is bounded, closed, and convex; and T is an isometry ( T x T y = x y x , y K ) and is fixed point free. For more details, see [3, 4] or [57]. Namely, it is proved that c 0 and L 1 [ 0 , 1 ] do not have the fixed point property.

The above two examples suggest that to obtain positive results in the problem of the existence of fixed points for nonexpansive mappings, it is necessary to impose some restrictions either on T or on the Banach space E. Naturally, the following questions are asked also.

Problem 1.3 Which Banach spaces satisfy the WFPP?

Problem 1.4 Determine a subclass of nonexpansive mappings such that every Banach space satisfies the FPP for this subclass.

Considerable effort in the development of a fixed point theory for nonexpansive mappings, mainly for Problem 1.3, has been done in the last 40 years. A well-known result of Browder [8] asserts that if E is uniformly convex, then E has the weak fixed point property. This theorem was also proved independently by Göhde [9]. At the same time, Kirk [10] established a more general result by showing that if E has normal structure, then E has the weak fixed point property. Normal structure is a geometric property somewhat more general than uniform convexity. In [11], one can see a detailed study of sufficient conditions for this property as well as their permanence properties. It has also been shown [12] that a condition weaker than normal structure is sufficient to guarantee the weak fixed point property (WFPP). In 1981, it has been showed by Maurey [13] that the Hardy space H 1 and the reflexive subspace of L 1 [ 0 , 1 ] have the weak fixed point property (WFPP). For other examples of Banach spaces with the weak fixed point property see [6, 7, 14] and [15, 16] for more details.

However, the result about Problem 1.4 is not many. Up to now, a most relevant example is nonlinear isometries in a superreflexive Banach space who is proved by Maurey (see [17, 18] for a proof).

One of our main aims is to give an affirmative answer to Problem 1.4. In other words, we will study fixed point properties of ψ-firmly nonexpansive mapping, an important subclass of nonexpansive mappings, on weakly compact convex subsets of a Banach space.

On the other hand, using the Picard iterative method, the well-known Banach Contraction Principle is obtained: Let ( E , d ) be a complete metric space and T : E E is a contraction (i.e. d ( T x , T y ) k d ( x , y ) , x , y K and some k [ 0 , 1 ) ). Then T has a unique fixed point x and for each x E , Picard iteration { T n x } strongly converges to x .

It is known for some time that even in a Hilbert space setting, Picard iteration { T n x } of a nonexpansive mapping T need not actually converge to a fixed point. However, for some special nonexpansive mapping (or some nonexpansive mapping who is modified necessarily), the weak convergence of such iteration can be proved. Fox example, in the frame of a uniformly convex Banach space E with a Fréchet differentiable norm, Reich [19] showed that if S = I + T 2 where I is an identity operator and T is a nonexpansive self-mapping defined on a nonempty bounded closed convex subset K of E, then for each x K , Picard iteration { S n x } weakly converges to a fixed point of T; Bruck [20, 21] proved that for each x K , the Cesàro means T n x = 1 n + 1 i = 0 n T i x of the nonexpansive self-mapping T weakly converges to a fixed point of T. This fact was first established by Baillon [22] for the L p spaces ( 1 < p < ). Naturally, the following question is put forward.

Problem 1.5 Does there exist a subclass of nonexpansive mappings (not contraction) such that Picard iteration (weakly) converges to a fixed point of such mapping?

Another purpose of ours is to show that Picard iteration of ψ-firmly nonexpansive mapping weakly converges to its fixed point. That is, ψ-firmly nonexpansive mapping is actually an answer to Problem 1.5.

We also show that in a uniformly convex space, ψ-firmly nonexpansive mapping includes a firmly nonexpansive mapping and the resolvent of an accretive operator as a special case.

2 Fixed point property for ψ-firmly nonexpansive mapping

The concept of firmly nonexpansive mapping was introduced by Bruck [23]. A mapping T with domain D ( T ) and range R ( T ) in Banach space E is said to be firmly nonexpansive if for all x , y D ( T ) the function
Φ x , y ( t ) = ( 1 t ) ( x y ) + t ( T x T y ) , t [ 0 , 1 ]
is non-increasing on [ 0 , 1 ] , or equivalently,
T x T y ( 1 t ) ( x y ) + t ( T x T y ) , x , y D ( T ) , t [ 0 , 1 ] .
(2.1)
Obviously any firmly nonexpansive mapping is nonexpansive mapping ( Φ x , y ( 1 ) Φ x , y ( 0 ) ). The converse is not true (consider the mapping T x = x in E). However, there is an interesting observation. For any u D ( T ) and t [ 0 , 1 ) consider the F t by F t = t u + ( 1 t ) T . Banach Contraction Principle guarantees that F t has a unique fixed point x t , i.e.,
x t = F t x t = t u + ( 1 t ) T x t .

Since x t depends on u and t, we can define a family mappings F t u = x t . It is minor technicality to prove that all mappings F t are firmly nonexpansive. Moreover, for any t [ 0 , 1 ) , F ( F t ) = F ( T ) (see [[7], pp.120-122] for a proof). This shows that the fixed point property for firmly nonexpansive mapping coincides with the fixed point property for nonexpansive mapping.

In a Hilbert space, T is firmly nonexpansive if and only if
T x T y , x y T x T y 2 , x , y D ( T )
(2.2)
(see [[7], pp.127-128] for a proof). Clearly, the inequality (2.2) is equivalent to the following:
T x T y 2 x y 2 ( x T x ) ( y T y ) 2 , x , y D ( T ) .
(2.3)

In view of the above one might expect firmly nonexpansive mappings to exhibit better behavior than nonexpansive mappings in general. However, from the point of view of fixed point theory, the restriction is mild. Naturally, Song and Chai [24] introduced the notion of firmly type nonexpansive mapping.

A mapping T is said to be firmly type nonexpansive if for all x , y D ( T ) , there exists k ( 0 , + ) such that
T x T y 2 x y 2 k ( x T x ) ( y T y ) 2 .

Obviously, the firmly type nonexpansive mapping contains the firmly nonexpansive mapping and the resolvent of monotone operator as a special case in Hilbert space. For a detailed proof and more examples, see [[24], Examples 1-5].

Now we introduce the concept of ψ-firmly nonexpansive mapping which includes the firmly type nonexpansive mapping as a special case ( ψ ( t ) = k t 2 ).

A mapping T is said to be ψ-firmly nonexpansive if for all x , y D ( T ) , if there exists a continuous strictly increasing function ψ : [ 0 , + ) [ 0 , + ) with ψ ( 0 ) = 0 such that
T x T y 2 x y 2 ψ ( x T x ( y T y ) ) .
(2.4)

In order to achieving the objects mentioned in Section 1, solving Problem 1.4, we need the following fact.

Lemma 2.1 ([[5], Propositions 9.3.6])

Let C be a weakly compact subset in Banach space E and let f : C R be a weakly lower semi-continuous function. Then the function f attains its minimum on C. That is,
x C  such that  f ( x ) f ( x ) , for all  x C .

Now we show our main results.

Theorem 2.2 Let K be a weakly compact convex subsets of a Banach space E and T : K K be a ψ-firmly nonexpansive mapping. Then T has a fixed point, i.e. F ( T ) .

Proof Since K is bounded and convex, it is well known (even for nonexpansive mappings) that there exists a sequence { x n } in K such that
lim n x n T x n = 0 .
(2.5)
Let a real valued function φ be defined on K by
φ ( y ) = lim sup n x n y 2 , y K .
Then φ is convex and continuous, and hence weakly lower semi-continuous (see [[25], p.12, Proposition 5]). It follows from Lemma 2.1 that there exists x K such that
φ ( x ) φ ( y ) for all  y K .
In particular,
φ ( x ) φ ( T x ) .
(2.6)
Next, we show that x = T x . It is immediate from (2.5) that
lim n ( x n T x n ) ( x T x ) = x T x ,
and hence,
lim n ψ ( ( x n T x n ) ( x T x ) ) = ψ ( x T x ) .
(2.7)
Thus, we have
φ ( T x ) = lim sup n x n T x 2 lim sup n ( x n T x n + T x n T x ) 2 = lim sup n T x n T x 2 ( using  ( 2.5 ) ) lim sup n ( x n x 2 ψ ( ( x n T x n ) ( x T x ) ) ) lim sup n x n x 2 ψ ( x T x ) ( using  ( 2.7 ) ) = φ ( x ) ψ ( x T x ) .
Therefore together with (2.6), we have
ψ ( x T x ) φ ( x ) φ ( T x ) 0 ,

and so x = T x by the property of ψ. This yields the desired conclusion. □

Obviously, we also have the following.

Theorem 2.3 Let K be a nonempty bounded closed convex subset of a reflexive Banach space E and T : K K be a ψ-firmly nonexpansive mapping. Then T has a fixed point, i.e. F ( T ) .

Now we show that the firmly nonexpansive mapping is a subclass of ψ-firmly nonexpansive mapping in uniformly convex Banach space.

Lemma 2.4 (Xu [[26], Theorem 2])

Let q > 1 and M > 0 be two fixed real numbers. Then a Banach space is uniformly convex if and only if there exists a continuous strictly increasing convex function g : [ 0 , + ) [ 0 , + ) with g ( 0 ) = 0 such that
λ x + ( 1 λ ) y q λ x q + ( 1 λ ) y q ω q ( λ ) g ( x y ) ,
(2.8)

for all x , y B M ( 0 ) = { x E ; x M } and λ [ 0 , 1 ] , where ω q ( λ ) = λ q ( 1 λ ) + λ ( 1 λ ) q .

Theorem 2.5 Let K be a nonempty bounded closed convex subset of a uniformly convex Banach space E and T : K K be a firmly nonexpansive mapping. Then T is a ψ-firmly nonexpansive mapping.

Proof Since T is firmly nonexpansive, by (2.1), we have
T x T y x y 2 + T x T y 2 , x , y K .
By Lemma 2.4 ( q = 2 , λ = 1 2 ), we obtain
T x T y 2 x y 2 + T x T y 2 2 1 2 x y 2 + 1 2 T x T y 2 1 4 g ( x y ( T x T y ) ) 1 2 x y 2 + 1 2 x y 2 1 4 g ( x T x ( y T y ) ) = x y 2 1 4 g ( x T x ( y T y ) ) .

Let ψ ( s ) = 1 4 g ( s ) for all s [ 0 , ) . The desired result is reached. □

Let A : D ( A ) E 2 E be an accretive operator. Let J r A = ( I + r A ) 1 , the resolvent of A. It is well known that J r A : R ( I + r A ) D ( A ) is nonexpansive, where R ( I + r A ) is range of ( I + r A ) and I is an identity operator of E. Furthermore, for r > 0 and t > 0 and x E ,
J r A x = J t A ( t r x + ( 1 t r ) J r A x ) ,
(2.9)

which is referred to as the Resolvent Identity. Now we show that for each r > 0 , the resolvent of A is an ψ-firmly nonexpansive mapping also.

Example 2.6 Let E be a uniformly convex Banach space and A : D ( A ) E 2 E be an accretive operator. Then for each r > 0 , J r A is a ψ-firmly nonexpansive mapping defined on R ( I + r A ) B M ( 0 ) ( M > 0 ).

Proof It follows from the Resolvent Identity (2.9) that
J r A x = J r 2 A ( 1 2 x + 1 2 J r A x ) .
Then we have
J r A x J r A y J r 2 A ( 1 2 x + 1 2 J r A x ) J r 2 A ( 1 2 y + 1 2 J r A y ) 1 2 ( x y ) + 1 2 ( J r A x J r A y ) .
Using the same proof techniques as Theorem 2.5, we also have
J r A x J r A y 2 x n y 2 ψ ( x J r A x ( y J r A y ) ) ,

where ψ = 1 4 g . □

The other three similar mappings were introduced by Aoyama et al. [27]. For a subset C of a smooth Banach space E, a mapping T : C E is of
  1. (i)
    type (P) (or firmly nonexpansive-like) if
    T x T y , J ( x T x ) J ( y T y ) 0 x , y C ,
     
  2. (ii)
    type (Q) (or firmly nonexpansive type; see Kohsaka et al. [28]) if
    T x T y , ( J x J T x ) ( J y J T y ) 0 x , y C ,
     
  3. (iii)
    type (R) (or firmly generalized nonexpansive) if
    ( x T x ) ( y T y ) , J T x J T y 0 x , y C ,
     

where J is the normalized duality mapping of E and , is generalized dual pairs on E × E .

Remark 2.7 The common point between ψ-firmly nonexpansive mapping and the above three mappings is that they all include a firmly nonexpansive mapping in Hilbert spaces as a special case. However, in a uniformly convex Banach space, each firmly nonexpansive mapping is a ψ-firmly nonexpansive mapping, but it is not one of the above three mappings since a uniformly convex Banach space may not be smooth.

Remark 2.8 In the framework of a smooth, strictly convex and reflexive Banach space, the fixed point properties of the above three mappings were studied by Aoyama et al. [27], Kohsaka et al. [28] and many mathematical workers. Only in reflexive Banach space, we can obtain the fixed point property of ψ-firmly nonexpansive mappings.

3 Approximation methods of ψ-firmly nonexpansive mappings

We discuss the weak convergence of Picard iteration for ψ-firmly nonexpansive mapping.

Lemma 3.1 Let K be a nonempty closed convex subset of a Banach space E and T : K K be ψ-firmly nonexpansive with F ( T ) . If for any given x K , { x n } is defined by Picard iteration sequence
x n + 1 = T x n = T 2 x n 1 = = T n x .
(3.1)
Then { x n } is an asymptotic fixed point sequence of T, i.e.
lim n x n T x n = 0 .
Proof Take p F ( T ) . Then
x n + 1 p 2 = T x n p 2 x n p 2 ψ ( x n T x n ) .
Therefore, we have
x n + 1 p 2 x n p 2 x p 2
and
ψ ( x n T x n ) x n p 2 x n + 1 p 2 .
(3.2)
Consequently, { x n p } is non-increasing and bounded, and hence the limit lim n x n p exists. So, { x n } is bounded also. It follows from (3.2) that
lim n ψ ( x n T x n ) = 0 ,

and hence, by the property of ψ. The desired result is obtained. □

A Banach space E is said to satisfy Opial’s condition [29] if, for any sequence { x n } in E, x n x implies
lim sup n x n x < lim sup n x n y , y E  with  x y .

In particular, Opial’s condition is independent of uniformly convex (smooth) since the l p spaces satisfy this condition for 1 < p < while it fails for the L p ( p 2 ) spaces. In fact, spaces satisfying Opial’s condition need not even by isomorphic to uniformly convex spaces [30].

Theorem 3.2 Let K be a weakly compact convex subset of a Banach space E satisfying Opial’s condition and T : K K be firmly type nonexpansive. Then for any given x K , { x n } , defined by Picard iteration (3.1) weakly converges to some fixed point of T.

Proof It follows from Theorem 2.2 that F ( T ) . Then following Lemma 3.1, we see that { x n } is bounded, the limit lim n x n p exists for each p F ( T ) and
lim n x n T x n = 0 .
The weak compactness of K means that there exists a subsequence { x n k } of { x n } such that { x n k } weakly converges to some point of K, say x . Then using the proof technique of Theorem 2.2, we have x = T x since by Opial’s condition,
lim sup k x n k x lim sup k x n k x for all  x K .
Next we show that { x n } weakly converges to x . Let y is another weak limit point of { x n } and x y . Then we can choose a subsequence { x n j } that weakly converges to y, and hence y = T y . Since lim n x n p exists for each p F ( T ) , we have
lim n x n x = lim sup k x n k x < lim sup k x n k y = lim n x n y = lim sup j x n j y < lim sup j x n j x = lim n x n x ,

a contradiction, and hence x = y . □

Similarly, we also have the following.

Theorem 3.3 Let K be a nonempty closed convex subset of a reflexive Banach space E satisfying Opial’s condition and T : K K be firmly type nonexpansive with F ( T ) . Then for any given x K , { x n } , defined by Picard iteration (3.1) weakly converges to some fixed point of T.

Remark 3.4 Theorem 3.2 is applicable to l p ( 1 < p < ) and L 2 . However, we do not know whether it works in L p for 0 < p < 2 and 2 < p < .

Recall a Banach space E is said to have (i) a Gâteaux differentiable norm (we also say that E is smooth), if the limit
D x ( y ) = lim t 0 x + t y x t
(3.3)

exists for each x ( x 0 ), y E ; (ii) a uniformly Gâteaux differentiable norm, if for each y in E, the limit D x ( y ) is uniformly attained for bounded 0 x E ; (iii) a Fréchet differentiable norm, if for each x E , x 0 , the limit D x ( y ) is attained uniformly for bounded y E .

The value of x E at y E is denoted by y , x , and the normalized duality mapping from E into 2 E is denoted by J, that is,
J ( x ) = { f E : x , f = x f , x = f } , x E .
It is well known (see Brower [[31], p.44]) that for a smooth Banch space E, the normalized duality mapping J is single-valued, and, moreover,
D x ( y ) = y , J ( x ) x .
(3.4)

A Banach space E is said to be (iv) strictly convex if x = y = 1 , x y implies x + y 2 < 1 ; (v) uniformly convex if for all ε [ 0 , 2 ] , δ ε > 0 such that x = y = 1 implies x + y 2 < 1 δ ε whenever x y ε .

In 1979, Bruck [20] explicitly introduced the following concept. Let Γ denote the set of strictly increasing convex functions γ : R + R + with γ ( 0 ) = 0 . A mapping T is said to be of type Γ if there exists γ Γ such that for all x , y D ( T ) and c [ 0 , 1 ]
γ ( c T x + ( 1 c ) T y T ( c x + ( 1 c ) y ) ) x y T x T y .

Three facts about such mappings are easy to observe. Mappings of type Γ are nonexpansive; affine nonexpansive mappings are of type Γ; Mappings of type Γ have convex fixed point sets. Bruck [20, 21] showed that each nonexpansive mapping is of type Γ in a uniformly convex Banach space. See also [[7], Proposition 10.3] for a proof.

Next we give the weak convergence of Picard iteration in a uniformly convex Banach space by using the proof technique developed in Reich [19, 32].

Theorem 3.5 Let E be a uniformly convex Banach space with a Fréchet differentiable norm and K be a nonempty closed convex subset of E. If T : K K is ψ-firmly nonexpansive with F ( T ) , then for any given x K , { x n } , defined by Picard iteration (3.1) weakly converges to some fixed point of T.

Proof It follows from Lemma 3.1 that { x n } is bounded, the limit lim n x n y exists for each y F ( T ) and
lim n x n T x n = 0 .

Then { x n } is weakly compact. Similarly to the proof of Theorem 3.2, we only need show that { x n } has unique weak limit point. Let p and q are two weak limit points of { x n } . Then Browder Demiclosedness Principle [33] means that p , q F ( T ) . Thus both the limits lim n x n p and lim n x n q exist. Then the remainder of the proof is identical to the proof of Theorem 10.6 in Reference [[7], pp.114-115] with the help of the mappings of type Γ. Which is a repeat works, we omit it. □

By Theorem 2.5, the following corollary about firmly nonexpansive mappings is obvious.

Corollary 3.6 Let E be a uniformly convex Banach space with a Fréchet differentiable norm and K be a nonempty closed convex subset of E. If T : K K is firmly nonexpansive with F ( T ) , then for any given x K , { x n } , defined by Picard iteration (3.1) weakly converges to some fixed point of T.

Remark 3.7 Theorem 3.5 is dependent of Theorem 3.2 or 3.3 since the l p spaces satisfy Opial’s condition for 1 < p < while it fails for the L p ( p 2 ) spaces. On the other hand, spaces satisfying Opial’s condition need not even by isomorphic to uniformly convex spaces [30].

Declarations

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the editor and the anonymous referee for useful comments and valuable suggestions on the language and structure of our manuscript. This work is partially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of P.R. China (Grant Nos. 11171094, 11271112) and partially done when he was visiting The Hong Kong Polytechnic University.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
School of Mathematics and Information Science, Henan Normal University
(2)
Department of Applied Mathematics, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University

References

  1. Reich S: The fixed point property for nonexpansive mappings. I. Am. Math. Mon. 1976, 83: 266–268. 10.2307/2318219View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Reich S: The fixed point property for nonexpansive mappings. II. Am. Math. Mon. 1980, 87: 292–294. 10.2307/2321568View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Sadovski VN: Application of topological methods in the theory of periodic solutions of nonlinear differential-operator equations of neutral type. Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 1971, 200: 1037–1040. (in Russian). Sov. Phys. Dokl. 12 (1971)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. Alspach DE: A fixed point free nonexpansive map. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1981, 82: 423–424. 10.1090/S0002-9939-1981-0612733-0View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. Istrăţescu VI: Fixed Point Theory: An Introduction. Reidel, Dordrecht; 1981.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Kirk WA, Sims B: Examples of fixed point free mappings. In Handbook of Metric Fixed Point Theory. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht; 2001:35–91.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Goebel K, Kirk WA Cambridge Stud. Adv. Math. 28. In Topics in Metric Fixed Point Theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; 1990.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Browder FE: Non-expansive nonlinear operators in Banach spaces. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1965, 54: 1041–1044. 10.1073/pnas.54.4.1041View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. Göhde D: Zum prinzip der kontraktiven abbildung. Math. Nachr. 1965, 30: 251–258. 10.1002/mana.19650300312View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. Kirk WA: A fixed point theorem for mappings which do not increase distances. Am. Math. Mon. 1965, 72: 1004–1006. 10.2307/2313345View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. Sims B, Smyth MA: On some Banach space properties sufficient for weak normal structure and their permanence properties. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 1999, 351: 497–513. 10.1090/S0002-9947-99-01862-0View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. Baillon JB, Schöneberg R: Asymptotic normal structure and fixed points of nonexpansive mappings. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1981, 81: 257–264. 10.1090/S0002-9939-1981-0593469-1View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Maurey B:Points fixes des contractions sur un convex fermé de L 1 . In Seminaire d’Analyse Fonctionelle, 1980–1981. École Polytechnique, Palaiseau; 1981.Google Scholar
  14. Dowling PN, Lennard CJ, Turett B:Weak compactness is equivalent to the fixed point property in c 0 . Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 2004, 132: 1659–1666. 10.1090/S0002-9939-04-07436-2View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. Domínguez Benavides T, Pineda MAJ: Fixed points of nonexpansive mappings in spaces of continuous functions. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 2005, 133: 3037–3046. 10.1090/S0002-9939-05-08149-9View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Domínguez Benavides T, Pineda MAJ, Prus S: Weak compactness and fixed point property for affine mappings. J. Funct. Anal. 2004, 209: 1–15. 10.1016/j.jfa.2002.02.001View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. Aksoy A, Khamsi MA: Nonstandard Methods in Fixed Point Theory. Springer, Berlin; 1990.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Elton J, Lin P-K, Odell E, Szarek S: Remarks on fixed point problem for nonexpansive mappings. Contemporary Math. 18. In Fixed Points and Nonexpansive Maps Edited by: Sine R. 1983, 87–120.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. 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
  20. Bruck RE: A simple proof of the mean ergodic theorem for nonlinear contractions in Banach spaces. Isr. J. Math. 1979, 32: 107–116. 10.1007/BF02764907View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. Bruck RE: On the convex approximation property and the asymptotic behavior of nonlinear contractions in Banach spaces. Isr. J. Math. 1981, 38: 304–314. 10.1007/BF02762776View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. Baillon JB: Un théorème de type ergodique pour les contractions non linéairs dans un espaces de Hilbert. C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Sér. A-B 1975, 280: 1511–1541.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. Bruck RE: Nonexpansive projections on subsets of Banach spaces. Pac. J. Math. 1973, 47: 341–355. 10.2140/pjm.1973.47.341View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. Song Y, Chai X: Halpern iteration for firmly type nonexpansive mappings. Nonlinear Anal. 2009, 71(10):4500–4506. 10.1016/j.na.2009.03.018View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  25. Aubin JP, Ekeland I: Applied Nonlinear Analysis. A Wiley-Interscience Publication. Wiley, New York; 1984.Google Scholar
  26. Xu HK: Inequality in Banach spaces with applications. Nonlinear Anal. 1991, 16: 1127–1138. 10.1016/0362-546X(91)90200-KView ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  27. Aoyama K, Kohsaka F, Takahashi W: Three generalizations of firmly nonexpansive mappings: their relations and continuity properties. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 2009, 10(1):131–147.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  28. Kohsaka F, Takahashi W: Existence and approximation of fixed points of firmly nonexpansive type mappings in Banach spaces. SIAM J. Optim. 2008, 19(2):824–835. 10.1137/070688717View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  29. Opial Z: Weak convergence of the sequence of successive approximations for nonexpansive mappings in Banach spaces. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 1967, 73: 591–597. 10.1090/S0002-9904-1967-11761-0View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  30. Lami Dozo E: Multivalued nonexpansive mappings and Opial’s condition. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1973, 38: 286–292.View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. Browder FE: Nonlinear operators and nonlinear equations of evolution in Banach spaces. 18. In Proc. Symp. Pure Math.. Am. Math. Soc., Providence; 1976. Part 2Google Scholar
  32. 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
  33. Browder FE: Semicontractive and semiaccretive nonlinear mappings in a Banach space. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 1968, 74: 660–665. 10.1090/S0002-9904-1968-11983-4View ArticleMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Song and Huang; licensee Springer. 2014

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/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.