Next Article in Journal
Families of Integrals of Polylogarithmic Functions
Next Article in Special Issue
ON H+Type Multivalued Contractions and Applications in Symmetric and Probabilistic Spaces
Previous Article in Journal
More on Inequalities for Weaving Frames in Hilbert Spaces
Previous Article in Special Issue
An Iterative Algorithm for Solving Generalized Variational Inequalities and Fixed Points Problems
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Hybrid Mann Viscosity Implicit Iteration Methods for Triple Hierarchical Variational Inequalities, Systems of Variational Inequalities and Fixed Point Problems

1
Department of Mathematics, Shanghai Normal University, Shanghai 200234, China
2
School of Mathematics and Statistics, Linyi University, Linyi 276000, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Mathematics 2019, 7(2), 142; https://doi.org/10.3390/math7020142
Submission received: 22 December 2018 / Revised: 26 January 2019 / Accepted: 29 January 2019 / Published: 2 February 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Fixed Point, Optimization, and Applications)

Abstract

:
In the present work, we introduce a hybrid Mann viscosity-like implicit iteration to find solutions of a monotone classical variational inequality with a variational inequality constraint over the common solution set of a general system of variational inequalities and a problem of common fixed points of an asymptotically nonexpansive mapping and a countable of uniformly Lipschitzian pseudocontractive mappings in Hilbert spaces, which is called the triple hierarchical constrained variational inequality. Strong convergence of the proposed method to the unique solution of the problem is guaranteed under some suitable assumptions. As a sub-result, we provide an algorithm to solve problem of common fixed points of pseudocontractive, nonexpansive mappings, variational inequality problems and generalized mixed bifunction equilibrium problems in Hilbert spaces.

1. Introduction

We suppose that H is a real or complex Hilbert space and let H be with inner product · , · and norm · . We suppose that C is a convex nonempty closed set of H. We also suppose that P C is the metric projection from H onto C. Since C is a convex nonempty closed set, we conclude that P C is defined. Let T be a mapping on convex nonempty closed set C. Denote by Fix ( T ) the set of fixed points of T, i.e., Fix ( T ) = { x C : ( I T ) x = 0 } . → and ⇀ present strong convergence and weak convergence, respectively. A mapping T : C C is named to be asymptotically nonexpansive if there exists a sequence { θ n } [ 0 , + ) with lim n θ n = 0 such that
T n x T n y x y + θ n x y , n 0 , x , y C .
If θ 0 , then T is named to be nonexpansive, that is,
T x T y x y , x , y C .
Suppose that A is a nonself mapping from convex nonempty closed set C to entire space H. The classical variational inequality (VI) is to find x * C such that
μ A x * , x x * 0 , x C ,
where μ is some positive real number. We denote by VI ( C , A ) the set of solutions of VI (3).
Assume that B 1 is a nonself mapping from convex nonempty closed set C to entire space H and B 2 is a nonself mapping from convex nonempty closed set C to entire space H, respectively. we study the system of approximating ( x * , y * ) C × C such that
μ 1 B 1 y * y * + x * , x x * 0 , x C , μ 2 B 2 x * x * + y * , x y * 0 , x C .
Here, μ 1 and μ 2 are two real numbers. The system (4) is named to be a general system of variational inequalities (GSVI). We note that the system (4) can be transformed into a problem of zero points ( I T ) x = 0 , that is, the fixed point of T as following
Lemma 1 
([1]). Fix x * , y * C , where ( x * , y * ) satisfies the system (4) if and only if
x * GSVI ( C , B 1 , B 2 ) ,
where GSVI ( C , B 1 , B 2 ) is the set of solutions of the mapping G : = P C ( I μ 1 B 1 ) P C ( I μ 2 B 2 ) , and y * = P C ( I μ 2 B 2 ) x * .
Recently, the variational inequality (3) and the system (4) have been intensively investigated by many authors via fixed-point methods; see [2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11] and the references therein. A mapping f : C C is said to be a contraction on C if there exists a constant δ [ 0 , 1 ) such that f ( x ) f ( y ) δ x y for all x , y C . A mapping F : C H is called monotone if F x F y , x y 0 x , y C . It is called η -strongly monotone if there exists a constant η > 0 such that F x F y , x y η x y 2 x , y C . Moreover, it is called α -inverse-strongly monotone (or α -cocoercive), if there exists a constant α > 0 such that
F x F y , x y α F x F y 2 , x , y C .
Furthermore, let X be a real Banach space whose topological dual space is denoted with X * . The normalized duality J : X 2 X * is defined through
J ( x ) = { ψ X * : x , ψ = x 2 = ψ 2 } , x X ,
where · , · denotes the generalized duality pairing. We suppose that T is a mapping. Its domain and range are denoted by D ( T ) and range R ( T ) , respectively. It called pseudocontractive if
x y x y + r ( ( I T ) x ( I T ) y ) , x , y D ( T ) , r > 0 .
From a result of Kato [12], we know that the notion of pseudocontraction is equivalent to the following definition: There exists j ( x y ) J ( x y ) such that
j ( x y ) , T x T y x y 2 , x , y D ( T ) .
It is well known that the class of pseudocontractive mappings, whose complementary operators are accretive, is an important and significant generation of nonexpansive mappings (see [13,14,15,16,17,18,19]). In 2011, Ceng et al. [20] introduced an implicit viscosity approximation method for computing approximate fixed points of pseudocontractive mapping T, and obtained the norm convergence of sequence { x n } generated by their implicit method to a fixed-point of T.
The main aim of this paper is to introduce and analyze a hybrid Mann viscosity implicit iteration method for solving a monotone variational inequality with a variational inequality constraint over the common solution set of the GSVI (4) for two inverse-strongly monotone mappings and a common fixed point problem (CFPP) of a countable family of uniformly Lipschitzian pseudocontractive mappings and an asymptotically nonexpansive mapping in Hilbert spaces, which is called the triple hierarchical constrained variational inequality (THCVI). Here, the hybrid Mann viscosity implicit iteration method is based on the viscosity approximation method, Korpelevich extragradient method, Mann iteration method and hybrid steepest-descent method. With relatively weak assumptions, the authors prove the strong convergence analysis of the their method to the unique solution of the THCVI. As an application, we list an algorithm to solve problems of common fixed point of pseudocontractive and nonexpansive mappings, classical variational inequalities and generalized mixed equilibrium problems in Hilbert setting.

2. Preliminaries

In this subsection, we suppose H is a Hilbert space. Its inner product denoted by · , · . We also suppose C is a convex nonempty closed set of H. Here, we list some basic concepts and facts. A nonself mapping F from convex nonempty closed set C to entire space H is said to be κ -Lipschitzian if there is a number κ > 0 with F ( x ) F ( y ) κ x y x , y C . In particular, if κ = 1 , then the nonself mapping F is named to be a nonexpansive operator. A self mapping A on entire space H is name to be a strongly positive bounded linear operator if we have a number γ > 0 with
A x , x γ x 2 , x H .
It is easy to see that the self mapping A is a γ -strongly monotone A -Lipschitzian operator. Recall that a self mapping T on convex nonempty closed set C is named to be
(a)
a contraction if we have a number α ( 0 , 1 ) with
T x T y α x y , x , y C ;
(b)
a pseudocontraction if
T x T y , x y x y 2 , x , y C ;
(c)
strong pseudocontraction if we have a number α ( 0 , 1 ) with
T x T y , x y α x y 2 , x , y C .
We use the following concept in the sequel.
Definition 1.
Let { T n } n = 0 be a mapping sequence of continuous self pseudocontractions on C. Then, { T n } n = 0 is said to be a countable family of ℓ-uniformly Lipschitzian pseudocontractive self-mappings on C if we have a number > 0 such that each T n is ℓ-Lipschitz continuous.
Fix x H , there is a unique element in C, denoted by P C x , with
x P C x x y , y C .
where P C stands for a metric projection of entire space H onto convex nonempty closed set C. It is well known that P C is a nonexpansive mapping with
x y , P C x P C y P C x P C y 2 , x , y H .
Nevertheless, P C x has the functions: P C x C and
x P C x , y P C x 0 ,
x y 2 x P C x 2 y P C x 2 , x H , y C .
We also have
2 x y , y + x y 2 = x 2 y 2 .
We need the following propositions and lemmas for our main presentation.
Proposition 1 
([21]). We suppose C is a convex nonempty closed set of a Banach space X. We suppose S 0 , S 1 , is an operator sequence on convex nonempty closed C. Let
n = 1 sup { S n x S n 1 x : x C } < .
It follows that { S n y } converges strongly to some point of C for each y C . Nevertheless, we let S be a mapping on convex nonempty closed C defined through S y = lim n S n y for all y C . Then lim n sup { S x S n x : x C } = 0 .
Proposition 2 
([22]). We suppose C is a convex nonempty closed set of a Banach space X. We also suppose T is a continuous and strong pseudocontraction on convex nonempty closed C. This shows the fact that T has a fixed point in C. Indeed, it is also unique.
The following lemma is trivial. In fact, it an immediate consequence of the subdifferential of 1 2 · 2 .
Lemma 2.
We suppose H is a Hilbert space. In H, we have
x + y 2 x 2 2 y , x + y , x , y H .
Lemma 3 
([23]). We suppose { a n } is a number sequence such that
a n + 1 a n + λ n γ n λ n a n , n 0 ,
where { λ n } and { γ n } are real numbers such that
(i) 
{ λ n } [ 0 , 1 ] and n = 0 λ n = ; or, equivalently,
n = 0 ( 1 λ n ) : = lim n k = 0 n ( 1 λ k ) = 0 ;
(ii) 
lim sup n γ n 0 or n = 0 | λ n γ n | < .
Then, lim n a n = 0 .
Lemma 4 
([24]). We suppose T is a nonexpansive mapping defined on a convex nonempty subset C of a Hilbert space H. Let λ be a number in ( 0 , 1 ] . We suppose F is a self κ-Lipschitzian and η-strongly monotone mapping on entire space H. Define the mapping T λ : C H through
T λ x : = T x λ μ F ( T x ) , x C .
Then, T λ is a contraction if 0 < μ < 2 η κ 2 ; that is,
T λ x T λ y ( 1 λ τ ) x y , x , y C ,
where τ = 1 1 μ ( 2 η μ κ 2 ) ( 0 , 1 ] .
Lemma 5.
Let the mapping A : C H be α-inverse-strongly monotone. Then, for a given λ 0 ,
x y 2 + λ ( λ 2 α ) A x A y 2 ( I λ A ) x ( I λ A ) y 2 .
In particular, if 0 λ 2 α , then I λ A is nonexpansive.
Proof. 
( I λ A ) y ( I λ A ) x 2 = λ ( A y A x ) 2 2 λ ( A y A x ) , y x + y x 2 λ 2 A y A x 2 2 λ α A y A x 2 + y x 2 = λ ( λ 2 α ) A x A y 2 + y x 2 .
 □
Utilizing Lemma 5, we immediately obtain the following lemma.
Lemma 6.
We suppose the nonself mappings B 1 , B 2 is α-inverse-strongly monotone and β-inverse-strongly monotone defined on convex nonempty closed subset C of entire space H, respectively. Let the self mapping G be defined as G : = P C ( I μ 1 B 1 ) P C ( I μ 2 B 2 ) . If 0 μ 1 2 α and 0 μ 2 2 β , then G : C C is nonexpansive.
Lemma 7 
([25]). We suppose that X is a real Banach space with a weakly continuous duality and C is a convex nonempty closed set in X. Let T be a self mapping defined the set C and we also suppose it is asymptotically nonexpansive with a empty fixed-point set. Then, T I is demiclosed at zero, i.e., let { x n } be a sequence in set C converging weakly to some x, where x in C and the sequence { ( I T ) x n } converges strongly to 0, then ( T I ) x = 0 , where I is the identity mapping of X.
Lemma 8 
([26]). We suppose C is a convex nonempty closed set in a Hilbert space H and A is a monotone and hemicontinuous nonself mapping defined on convex nonempty closed set C to H. Then, we have
(i) 
VI ( C , A ) = { x * C : A y , y x * 0 , y C } ;
(ii) 
VI ( C , A ) = Fix ( P C ( I λ A ) ) for all λ > 0 ; and
(iii) 
VI ( C , A ) is singlton, if A is Lipschitz continuous strongly monotone.

3. Main Results

We suppose C is a convex nonempty closed set. Let the mappings A 1 , B i be nonself monotone mappings for i = 1 , 2 from C to H. We also let T be a self asymptotically nonexpansive mapping. Suppose { S n } n = 0 is a countable family of self mapping. We also assume it is -uniformly Lipschitzian pseudocontractive on set C. Consider the variational inequality for monotone mapping A 1 over the common solution set Ω of the GSVI (4) and the CFPP of { S n } n = 0 and T:
Find x ¯ VI ( Ω , A 1 ) : = { x ¯ Ω : A 1 x ¯ , y x ¯ 0 y Ω } ,
where Ω : = n = 0 Fix ( S n ) GSVI ( C , B 1 , B 2 ) Fix ( T ) .
This section introduces the following monotone variational inequality with the variational inequality constraint over the common solution set of the GSVI (4) and the CFPP of { S n } n = 0 and T, which is called the triple hierarchical constrained variational inequality (THCVI):
Problem 1.
Assume that
(C1) 
T : C C is an asymptotically nonexpansive mapping with a sequence { θ n } .
(C2) 
{ S n } n = 0 is a countable family of ℓ-uniformly Lipschitzian pseudocontractive self-mappings on C.
(C3) 
B 1 : C H is an α-inverse-strongly monotone operator and B 2 : C H is a β-inverse-strongly monotone operator.
(C4) 
GSVI ( C , B 1 , B 2 ) : = Fix ( G ) where G : = P C ( I μ 1 B 1 ) P C ( I μ 2 B 2 ) for μ 1 , μ 2 > 0 .
(C5) 
Ω : = n = 0 Fix ( S n ) GSVI ( C , B 1 , B 2 ) Fix ( T ) .
(C6) 
n = 1 sup x D S n x S n 1 x < for any bounded subset D of C.
(C7) 
S : C C is the mapping defined by S x = lim n S n x x C , such that
Fix ( S ) = n = 0 Fix ( S n ) .
(C8) 
A 1 : C H is an ζ-inverse-strongly monotone operator and A 2 : C H is a κ-Lipschitzian and η-strongly monotone operator.
(C9) 
f : C C is a contraction mapping with coefficient δ [ 0 , 1 ) .
(C10) 
VI ( Ω , A 1 ) .
Then, the objective is to
find x * VI ( VI ( Ω , A 1 ) , A 2 ) : = { x * VI ( Ω , A 1 ) : A 2 x * , v x * 0 v VI ( Ω , A 1 ) } .
Since the original problem is a variational inequality problem, we therefore call it a triple hierarchical constrained variational inequality (THCVI). We introduce the following hybrid Mann viscosity implicit iteration method to find the solution of such a problem.
We show the main result of this paper, that is, the strong convergence analysis for Algorithm 1.
Algorithm 1: Hybrid Mann viscosity-like implicit iterative algorithm.
  Step 0. Take { α n } n = 0 , { β n } n = 0 , { γ n } n = 0 , { δ n } n = 0 , { σ n } n = 0 ( 0 , ) , and μ > 0 ; arbitrarily choose x 0 C ; and let n : = 0 .
  Step 1. Given x n C , compute x n + 1 C as
u n = γ n x n + ( 1 γ n ) S n u n , v n = P C ( u n μ 2 B 2 u n ) , z n = P C ( v n μ 1 B 1 v n ) , y n = σ n x n + ( 1 σ n ) P C ( I δ n A 1 ) z n , x n + 1 = β n f ( y n ) + ( 1 β n ) P C ( I α n μ A 2 ) T n y n .

  Update n : = n + 1 and go to Step 1.
Theorem 1.
Assume that μ 1 ( 0 , 2 α ) , μ 2 ( 0 , 2 β ) , and δ < τ : = 1 1 μ ( 2 η μ κ 2 ) ( 0 , 1 ] for μ ( 0 , 2 η κ 2 ) . Suppose that { α n } , { β n } , { γ n } , { σ n } ( 0 , 1 ] and { δ n } ( 0 , 2 ζ ] are the sequences such that
(i) 
lim n α n = 0 , n = 0 α n = and n = 0 | α n + 1 α n | < .
(ii) 
lim n θ n α n = 0 , lim n β n α n = 0 , n = 0 | β n + 1 β n | < and n = 0 | δ n + 1 δ n | < .
(iii) 
0 < lim inf n σ n lim sup n σ n < 1 and n = 0 | σ n + 1 σ n | < .
(iv) 
0 < lim inf n γ n lim sup n γ n < 1 and n = 0 | γ n + 1 γ n | < .
(v) 
δ n α n and n = 0 T n + 1 y n T n y n < .
Then, the sequence { x n } n = 0 generated by Algorithm 1 satisfies the following properties:
(a) 
{ x n } n = 0 is bounded.
(b) 
lim n x n y n = 0 , lim n x n G x n = 0 , lim n x n T x n = 0 and
lim n x n S x n = 0 .
(c) 
{ x n } n = 0 converges to the unique solution of Problem 1 if x n y n δ n 0 as n .
Proof. 
First, let us show that P VI ( Ω , A 1 ) ( I μ A 2 ) is a contractive mapping. Indeed, by Lemma 4, we have
( 1 τ ) x y ( I μ A 2 ) x ( I μ A 2 ) y P VI ( Ω , A 1 ) ( I μ A 2 ) x P VI ( Ω , A 1 ) ( I μ A 2 ) y ,
for any x , y C , which implies that P VI ( Ω , A 1 ) ( I μ A 2 ) is a contraction mapping. Banach’s Contraction Mapping Principle tell us that P VI ( Ω , A 1 ) ( I μ A 2 ) has a fixed point and further it is unique. For example, x * C , that is, x * = P VI ( Ω , A 1 ) ( I μ A 2 ) x * . Hence, by Lemma 8, we get
{ x * } = Fix ( P VI ( Ω , A 1 ) ( I μ A 2 ) ) = VI ( VI ( Ω , A 1 ) , A 2 ) .
That is, Problem 1 has a unique solution. Taking into account that
0 < lim inf n γ n lim sup n γ n < 1 ,
we usually suppose { γ n } [ a , b ] ( 0 , 1 ) for some a , b ( 0 , 1 ) . Note that the mapping G : C C is defined as G : = P C ( I μ 1 B 1 ) P C ( I μ 2 B 2 ) , where μ 1 ( 0 , 2 α ) and μ 2 ( 0 , 2 β ) . Thus, by Lemma 6, we know that G is nonexpansive. It is easy to see that there exists an element u n C such that
u n = γ n x n + ( 1 γ n ) S n u n .
In fact, it is a unique element. Thus, we can consider the mapping
F n x = γ n x n + ( 1 γ n ) S n x , x C .
Since S n : C C is a continuous pseudocontraction mapping, we deduce that all x , y C ,
F n x F n y , x y = ( 1 γ n ) S n x S n y , x y ( 1 γ n ) x y 2 .
In addition, from { γ n } [ a , b ] ( 0 , 1 ) we get 0 < 1 γ n < 1 for all n 0 . Thus, F n is a continuous and strong pseudocontraction mapping of C into itself. By Proposition 2, we know that there exists a unique element u n C , for each n 0 , satisfying (11). Thus, it can be readily seen that the hybrid Mann viscosity implicit iterative scheme (10) can be rewritten as
  u n = γ n x n + ( 1 γ n ) S n u n ,   z n = G u n ,   y n = σ n x n + ( 1 σ n ) P C ( I δ n A 1 ) z n ,   x n + 1 = ( 1 β n ) P C ( I α n μ A 2 ) T n y n + β n f ( y n ) , n 0 .
Next, we divide the rest of the proof into several steps.
Step 1. We claim that { x n } , { y n } , { z n } , { u n } , { v n } , { T n y n } and { A 2 ( T n y n ) } are bounded. Indeed, take an element p Ω = n = 0 Fix ( S n ) GSVI ( C , B 1 , B 2 ) Fix ( T ) arbitrarily. Then, we have S n p = p , G p = p and T p = p . Since each S n : C C is a pseudocontraction mapping, it follows that
u n p 2 = γ n x n p , u n p + ( 1 γ n ) S n u n p , u n p γ n x n p u n p + ( 1 γ n ) u n p 2 ,
which hence yields
u n p x n p , n 0 .
Then, we get
z n p = G u n p u n p x n p .
Since 1 > lim sup n σ n lim inf n σ n > 0 , we reach { σ n } [ c , d ] for some c , d ( 0 , 1 ) . In addition, since lim n θ n α n = 0 and lim n β n α n = 0 , we may assume, without loss of generality, that
θ n α n ( τ δ ) 2 ( α n ( τ δ ) )
and β n α n for all n 0 . Taking into account the ζ -inverse-strong monotonicity of A 1 with { δ n } ( 0 , 2 ζ ] , we deduce from Lemma 5 and (14) that
y n p ( 1 σ n ) P C ( I δ n A 1 ) z n p + σ n p x n ( 1 σ n ) ( I δ n A 1 ) z n ( I δ n A 1 ) p δ n A 1 p + σ n p x n ( 1 σ n ) ( z n p + δ n A 1 p ) + σ n p x n ( 1 σ n ) x n p + δ n A 1 p + σ n p x n = x n p + δ n A 1 p .
Utilizing Lemma 4 and (15), we obtain from (12) that
x n + 1 p β n f ( y n ) p + ( 1 β n ) P C ( I α n μ A 2 ) T n y n p α n ( f ( y n ) f ( p ) + p f ( p ) ) + ( I α n μ A 2 ) T n y n ( I α n μ A 2 ) p α n μ A 2 p α n ( δ p y n + p f ( p ) ) + ( 1 α n τ ) T n y n p + α n μ A 2 p α n ( δ p y n + p f ( p ) ) + ( 1 α n τ ) ( 1 + θ n ) y n p + α n μ A 2 p α n ( δ p y n + p f ( p ) ) + ( 1 α n τ + θ n ) y n p + α n μ A 2 p = [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) + θ n ] y n p + α n ( f ( p ) p + μ A 2 p ) [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) + α n ( τ δ ) 2 ] ( x n p + δ n A 1 p ) + α n ( f ( p ) p + μ A 2 p ) [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) 2 ] x n p + δ n A 1 p + α n ( f ( p ) p + μ A 2 p ) [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) 2 ] x n p + α n ( A 1 p + μ A 2 p + f ( p ) p ) = [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) 2 ] x n p + α n ( τ δ ) 2 · 2 ( A 1 p + μ A 2 p + f ( p ) p ) τ δ max { x n p , 2 ( A 1 p + μ A 2 p + f ( p ) p ) τ δ } .
By induction, we have
x n + 1 p max { p x 0 , 2 ( A 1 p + p f ( p ) + μ A 2 p ) τ δ } , n 0 .
It immediately follows that { x n } is bounded, and so are the sequences { y n } , { z n } , { u n } , { T n y n } and { A 2 ( T n y n ) } (due to (13)–(15) and the Lipschitz continuity of T and A 2 ). Taking into account that { S n } is -uniformly Lipschitzian on C, we know that
S n u n S n u n p + p u n p + p ,
which implies that { S n u n } is bounded. In addition, from Lemma 1 and p Ω GSVI ( C , B 1 , B 2 ) , it also follows that ( p , q ) is a solution of GSVI (4) where q = P C ( I μ 2 B 2 ) p . Note that v n = P C ( I μ 2 B 2 ) u n for all n 0 . Then, by Lemma 5, we obtain
v n v n q + q = P C ( I μ 2 B 2 ) u n P C ( I μ 2 B 2 ) p + q ( I μ 2 B 2 ) u n ( I μ 2 B 2 ) p + q q + p u n .
This shows that { v n } is bounded.
Step 2. We claim that x n + 1 x n 0 and y n + 1 y n 0 as n . Indeed, we set p n = P C ( I δ n A 1 ) z n and q n = P C ( I α n μ A 2 ) T n y n . Then, from (12), we have
  u n = γ n x n + ( 1 γ n ) S n u n ,   y n = σ n x n + ( 1 σ n ) p n ,   x n + 1 = β n f ( y n ) + ( 1 β n ) q n .
Simple calculations show that
  u n u n 1 = γ n ( x n x n 1 ) + ( γ n γ n 1 ) ( x n 1 S n 1 u n 1 ) + ( 1 γ n ) ( S n u n S n 1 u n 1 ) ,   y n y n 1 = σ n ( x n x n 1 ) + ( σ n σ n 1 ) ( x n 1 p n 1 ) + ( 1 σ n ) ( p n p n 1 ) ,   x n + 1 x n = β n ( f ( y n ) f ( y n 1 ) ) + ( β n β n 1 ) ( f ( y n 1 ) q n 1 ) + ( 1 β n ) ( q n q n 1 ) .
It follows that
u n u n 1 2 = γ n x n x n 1 , u n u n 1 + ( 1 γ n ) S n u n S n 1 u n 1 , u n u n 1 + ( γ n γ n 1 ) x n 1 S n 1 u n 1 , u n u n 1 = γ n x n x n 1 , u n u n 1 + ( 1 γ n ) [ S n u n S n 1 u n , u n u n 1 + S n 1 u n S n 1 u n 1 , u n u n 1 ] + ( γ n γ n 1 ) x n 1 S n 1 u n 1 , u n u n 1 γ n x n 1 x n u n u n 1 + ( 1 γ n ) [ S n u n S n 1 u n u n u n 1 + u n 1 u n 2 ] + | γ n γ n 1 | x n 1 S n 1 u n 1 u n u n 1 ,
which hence yields
u n u n 1 γ n x n 1 x n + ( 1 γ n ) [ S n u n S n 1 u n + u n 1 u n ] + | γ n γ n 1 | x n 1 S n 1 u n 1 .
This immediately leads to
u n u n 1 x n 1 x n + 1 γ n γ n S n u n S n 1 u n + | γ n γ n 1 | x n 1 S n 1 u n 1 γ n x n x n 1 + 1 a S n u n S n 1 u n + | γ n γ n 1 | x n 1 S n 1 u n 1 a .
Putting D = { u n : n 0 } , we know that D is a bounded subset of C. Then, by the assumption, we get n = 1 sup x D S n x S n 1 x < . Noticing S n u n S n 1 u n sup x D S n x S n 1 x n 1 , we have
n = 1 S n u n S n 1 u n < .
In addition, from p n = P C ( I δ n A 1 ) z n and { δ n } ( 0 , 2 ζ ] , we observe that
p n p n 1 ( I δ n A 1 ) z n ( I δ n 1 A 1 ) z n 1 = ( I δ n A 1 ) z n ( I δ n A 1 ) z n 1 ( δ n δ n 1 ) A 1 z n 1 ( I δ n A 1 ) z n ( I δ n A 1 ) z n 1 + | δ n δ n 1 | A 1 z n 1 z n z n 1 + | δ n δ n 1 | A 1 z n 1 u n u n 1 + M 0 | δ n δ n 1 | ,
where sup n 0 A 1 z n M 0 for some M 0 > 0 . Thus, from (16), (17) and (19), we get
y n y n 1 σ n x n x n 1 + | σ n σ n 1 | x n 1 p n 1 + ( 1 σ n ) p n p n 1 σ n x n x n 1 + | σ n σ n 1 | x n 1 p n 1 + ( 1 σ n ) ( u n u n 1 + M 0 | δ n δ n 1 | ) σ n x n x n 1 + | σ n σ n 1 | x n 1 p n 1 + ( 1 σ n ) ( x n x n 1 + 1 a S n u n S n 1 u n + | γ n γ n 1 | x n 1 S n 1 u n 1 a + M 0 | δ n δ n 1 | ) x n x n 1 + | σ n σ n 1 | x n 1 p n 1 + 1 a S n u n S n 1 u n + | γ n γ n 1 | x n 1 S n 1 u n 1 a + M 0 | δ n δ n 1 | x n x n 1 + M ( | σ n σ n 1 | + S n u n S n 1 u n + | γ n γ n 1 | + | δ n δ n 1 | ) ,
where sup n 0 { x n p n + 1 a + x n S n u n a + M 0 } M for some M > 0 .
Furthermore, from q n = P C ( I α n μ A 2 ) T n y n and Lemma 4, we note that
q n q n 1 ( I α n μ A 2 ) T n y n ( I α n 1 μ A 2 ) T n 1 y n 1 = ( I α n μ A 2 ) T n y n ( I α n μ A 2 ) T n 1 y n 1 ( α n α n 1 ) μ A 2 T n 1 y n 1 ( 1 α n τ ) T n y n T n y n 1 + T n y n 1 T n 1 y n 1 + | α n α n 1 | μ A 2 T n 1 y n 1 ( 1 α n τ ) [ ( 1 + θ n ) y n y n 1 + T n y n 1 T n 1 y n 1 ] + | α n α n 1 | μ A 2 T n 1 y n 1 ( 1 α n τ + θ n ) y n y n 1 + T n y n 1 T n 1 y n 1 + | α n α n 1 | μ A 2 T n 1 y n 1 .
Hence, from (16), (20) and (21), we get
x n + 1 x n β n f ( y n ) f ( y n 1 ) + | β n β n 1 | f ( y n 1 ) q n 1 + ( 1 β n ) q n q n 1 α n δ y n y n 1 + | β n β n 1 | f ( y n 1 ) q n 1 + ( 1 α n τ + θ n ) y n y n 1 + T n y n 1 T n 1 y n 1 + | α n α n 1 | μ A 2 T n 1 y n 1 [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) + α n ( τ δ ) 2 ] y n y n 1 + | β n β n 1 | f ( y n 1 ) q n 1 + T n y n 1 T n 1 y n 1 + | α n α n 1 | μ A 2 T n 1 y n 1 ( 1 α n ( τ δ ) 2 ) [ x n x n 1 + M ( | σ n σ n 1 | + S n u n S n 1 u n + | γ n γ n 1 | + | δ n δ n 1 | ) ] + | β n β n 1 | f ( y n 1 ) q n 1 + T n y n 1 T n 1 y n 1 + | α n α n 1 | μ A 2 T n 1 y n 1 ( 1 α n ( τ δ ) 2 ) x n x n 1 + M 1 ( | α n α n 1 | + | β n β n 1 | + | γ n γ n 1 | + | δ n δ n 1 | + | σ n σ n 1 | + S n u n S n 1 u n ) + T n y n 1 T n 1 y n 1 ,
where sup n 1 { M + f ( y n 1 ) q n 1 + μ A 2 T n 1 y n 1 } M 1 for some M 1 > 0 . From (18) and Conditions (i)–(v), we know that n = 0 α n ( τ δ ) 2 = and
n = 1 { M 1 ( | α n α n 1 | + | β n β n 1 | + | γ n γ n 1 | + | δ n δ n 1 | + | σ n σ n 1 | + S n u n S n 1 u n ) + T n y n 1 T n 1 y n 1 } < .
Consequently, applying Lemma 3 to (22), we obtain that
lim n x n + 1 x n = 0 .
In terms of (18), (23) and Conditions (ii)–(iv), we deduce from (20) that
lim n y n + 1 y n = 0 .
Step 3. We claim that x n G x n 0 as n . Indeed, noticing q n = P C ( I α n μ A 2 ) T n y n for all n 0 , we obtain from (7) that for each p Ω ,
( I α n μ A 2 ) T n y n P C ( I α n μ A 2 ) T n y n , p q n 0 ,
which hence leads to
q n p 2 = P C ( I α n μ A 2 ) T n y n ( I α n μ A 2 ) T n y n , q n p + ( I α n μ A 2 ) T n y n p , q n p ( I α n μ A 2 ) T n y n p , q n p = ( I α n μ A 2 ) T n y n ( I α n μ A 2 ) p , q n p α n μ A 2 p , q n p 1 2 ( 1 α n τ ) 2 T n y n p 2 + 1 2 q n p 2 α n μ A 2 p , q n p .
It follows from (1) that
q n p 2 ( 1 α n τ ) ( 1 + θ n ) 2 y n p 2 2 α n μ A 2 p , q n p ( 1 α n τ ) y n p 2 + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 2 α n μ A 2 p , q n p .
From (15) and (24), we get
x n + 1 p 2 β n f ( y n ) f ( p ) 2 + ( 1 β n ) q n p 2 + 2 β n f ( p ) p , x n + 1 p α n δ y n p 2 + ( 1 α n τ ) y n p 2 + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 2 α n μ A 2 p , q n p + 2 β n f ( p ) p , x n + 1 p = [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] y n p 2 + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 2 α n μ A 2 p , q n p + 2 β n f ( p ) p , x n + 1 p [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] [ σ n x n p + ( 1 σ n ) ( z n p + δ n A 1 p ) ] 2 + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 2 α n μ A 2 p , q n p + 2 β n f ( p ) p , x n + 1 p [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] [ σ n x n p 2 + ( 1 σ n ) ( z n p + δ n A 1 p ) 2 ] + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 2 α n μ A 2 p , q n p + 2 β n f ( p ) p , x n + 1 p [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] [ σ n x n p 2 + ( 1 σ n ) z n p 2 + δ n A 1 p ( 2 z n p + δ n A 1 p ) ] + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 2 α n μ A 2 p , q n p + 2 β n f ( p ) p , x n + 1 p [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] [ σ n x n p 2 + ( 1 σ n ) z n p 2 ] + α n A 1 p ( 2 z n p + α n A 1 p ) + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 + 2 α n ( μ A 2 p q n p + f ( p ) p x n + 1 p ) .
We now note that q = P C ( p μ 2 B 2 p ) , v n = P C ( u n μ 2 B 2 u n ) and z n = P C ( v n μ 1 B 1 v n ) . Then z n = G u n . By Lemma 5, we have
v n q 2 = P C ( u n μ 2 B 2 u n ) P C ( p μ 2 B 2 p ) 2 u n p μ 2 ( B 2 u n B 2 p ) 2 u n p 2 μ 2 ( 2 β μ 2 ) B 2 u n B 2 p 2
and
z n p 2 = P C ( v n μ 1 B 1 v n ) P C ( q μ 1 B 1 q ) 2 v n q μ 1 ( B 1 v n B 1 q ) 2 v n q 2 μ 1 ( 2 α μ 1 ) B 1 v n B 1 q 2 .
Substituting (26) for (27), we obtain from (13) that
z n p 2 u n p 2 μ 2 ( 2 β μ 2 ) B 2 u n B 2 p 2 μ 1 ( 2 α μ 1 ) B 1 v n B 1 q 2 p x n 2 μ 2 ( 2 β μ 2 ) B 2 u n B 2 p 2 μ 1 ( 2 α μ 1 ) B 1 v n B 1 q 2 .
Combining (25) and (28), we get
x n + 1 p 2 [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] [ σ n p x n 2 + ( 1 σ n ) p z n 2 ] + α n A 1 p ( 2 p z n + α n A 1 p ) + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 + 2 α n ( μ A 2 p q n p + f ( p ) p x n + 1 p ) [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] { σ n p x n 2 + ( 1 σ n ) [ p x n 2 μ 2 ( 2 β μ 2 ) B 2 u n B 2 p 2 μ 1 ( 2 α μ 1 ) B 1 v n B 1 q 2 ] } + α n A 1 p ( 2 z n p + α n A 1 p ) + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 + 2 α n ( μ A 2 p p q n + p f ( p ) x n + 1 p ) [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] x n p 2 [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] ( 1 σ n ) [ μ 2 ( 2 β μ 2 ) B 2 u n B 2 p 2 + μ 1 ( 2 α μ 1 ) B 1 v n B 1 q 2 ] + α n A 1 p ( 2 z n p + α n A 1 p ) + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 + 2 α n ( μ A 2 p q n p + f ( p ) p x n + 1 p ) x n p 2 [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] ( 1 σ n ) [ μ 2 ( 2 β μ 2 ) B 2 u n B 2 p 2 + μ 1 ( 2 α μ 1 ) B 1 v n B 1 q 2 ] + α n A 1 p ( 2 z n p + α n A 1 p ) + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 + 2 α n ( μ A 2 p q n p + f ( p ) p x n + 1 p ) ,
which immediately yields
[ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] ( 1 σ n ) [ μ 2 ( 2 β μ 2 ) B 2 u n B 2 p 2 + μ 1 ( 2 α μ 1 ) B 1 v n B 1 q 2 ] x n p 2 x n + 1 p 2 + α n A 1 p ( 2 z n p + α n A 1 p ) + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 + 2 α n ( μ A 2 p q n p + f ( p ) p x n + 1 p ) ( p x n + p x n + 1 ) x n x n + 1 + α n A 1 p ( 2 z n p + α n A 1 p ) + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 + 2 α n ( μ A 2 p q n p + f ( p ) p x n + 1 p ) .
Since lim inf n ( 1 σ n ) > 0 (due to Condition (iii)), μ 1 ( 0 , 2 α ) , μ 2 ( 0 , 2 β ) , lim n θ n = 0 and lim n α n = 0 , we obtain from (23) that
lim n B 2 u n B 2 p = 0 and lim n B 1 v n B 1 q = 0 .
Additionally, from (6) and (9), we have
v n q 2 = P C ( u n μ 2 B 2 u n ) P C ( p μ 2 B 2 p ) 2 u n μ 2 B 2 u n ( p μ 2 B 2 p ) , v n q = u n p , v n q + μ 2 B 2 p B 2 u n , v n q 1 2 [ u n p 2 + v n q 2 u n v n ( p q ) 2 ] + μ 2 B 2 p B 2 u n v n q ,
which implies that
p v n 2 p u n 2 u n v n ( p q ) 2 + 2 μ 2 B 2 p B 2 u n v n q .
In the same way, we derive
p z n 2 = P C ( v n μ 1 B 1 v n ) P C ( q μ 1 B 1 q ) 2 v n μ 1 B 1 v n ( q μ 1 B 1 q ) , z n p = v n q , z n p + μ 1 B 1 q B 1 v n , z n p 1 2 [ v n q 2 + z n p 2 v n z n + ( p q ) 2 ] + μ 1 B 1 q B 1 v n z n p ,
which implies that
z n p 2 v n q 2 v n z n + ( p q ) 2 + 2 μ 1 B 1 q B 1 v n z n p .
Substituting (3) for (31), we deduce from (13) that
p z n 2 p u n 2 u n v n ( p q ) 2 v n z n + ( p q ) 2 + 2 μ 2 B 2 p B 2 u n v n q + 2 μ 1 B 1 q B 1 v n z n p p x n 2 u n v n ( p q ) 2 v n z n + ( p q ) 2 + 2 μ 1 B 1 q B 1 v n z n p + 2 μ 2 B 2 p B 2 u n v n q .
Combining (25) and (32), we have
x n + 1 p 2 [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] [ σ n x n p 2 + ( 1 σ n ) z n p 2 ] + α n A 1 p ( 2 z n p + α n A 1 p ) + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 + 2 α n ( μ A 2 p q n p + f ( p ) p x n + 1 p ) [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] { σ n x n p 2 + ( 1 σ n ) [ x n p 2 u n v n ( p q ) 2 v n z n + ( p q ) 2 + 2 μ 1 B 1 q B 1 v n z n p + 2 μ 2 B 2 p B 2 u n v n q ] } + α n A 1 p ( 2 z n p + α n A 1 p ) + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 + 2 α n ( μ A 2 p q n p + f ( p ) p x n + 1 p ) [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] x n p 2 [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] ( 1 σ n ) [ u n v n ( p q ) 2 + v n z n + ( p q ) 2 ] + 2 μ 1 B 1 q B 1 v n z n p + 2 μ 2 B 2 p B 2 u n v n q + α n A 1 p ( 2 z n p + α n A 1 p ) + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 + 2 α n ( μ A 2 p q n p + f ( p ) p x n + 1 p ) x n p 2 [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] ( 1 σ n ) [ u n v n ( p q ) 2 + v n z n + ( p q ) 2 ] + 2 μ 1 B 1 q B 1 v n z n p + 2 μ 2 B 2 p B 2 u n v n q + α n A 1 p ( 2 z n p + α n A 1 p ) + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 + 2 α n ( μ A 2 p q n p + f ( p ) p x n + 1 p ) ,
which hence yields
[ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] ( 1 σ n ) [ u n v n ( p q ) 2 + v n z n + ( p q ) 2 ] x n p 2 x n + 1 p 2 + 2 μ 1 B 1 q B 1 v n z n p + 2 μ 2 B 2 p B 2 u n v n q + α n A 1 p ( 2 z n p + α n A 1 p ) + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 + 2 α n ( μ A 2 p q n p + f ( p ) p x n + 1 p ) ( x n p + x n + 1 p ) x n x n + 1 + 2 μ 1 B 1 q B 1 v n z n p + 2 μ 2 B 2 p B 2 u n v n q + α n A 1 p ( 2 z n p + α n A 1 p ) + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 + 2 α n ( μ A 2 p q n p + f ( p ) p x n + 1 p ) .
Since lim inf n ( 1 σ n ) > 0 (due to Condition (iii)), lim n θ n = 0 and lim n α n = 0 , we conclude from (23) and (29) that
lim n u n v n ( p q ) = 0 and lim n v n z n + ( p q ) = 0 .
It follows that
u n z n u n v n ( p q ) + v n z n + ( p q ) 0 ( n ) .
That is,
lim n u n G u n = lim n u n z n = 0 .
In addition, according to (12), we have
p u n 2 = γ n p x n , p u n + ( 1 γ n ) S n u n p , u n p γ n x n p , u n p + ( 1 γ n ) u n p 2 ,
which, together with (9), yields
p u n 2 x n p , u n p = 1 2 [ x n p 2 + u n p 2 x n u n 2 ] .
This immediately implies that
p u n 2 p x n 2 u n x n 2 ,
which together with (14) and (26), yields
p x n + 1 2 [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] [ σ n p x n 2 + ( 1 σ n ) p u n 2 ] + α n A 1 p ( 2 p z n + α n A 1 p ) + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 + 2 α n ( μ A 2 p q n p + f ( p ) p x n + 1 p ) [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] { σ n x n p 2 + ( 1 σ n ) [ x n p 2 x n u n 2 ] } + α n A 1 p ( 2 z n p + α n A 1 p ) + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 + 2 α n ( μ A 2 p q n p + f ( p ) p x n + 1 p ) [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] x n p 2 [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] ( 1 σ n ) x n u n 2 + α n A 1 p ( 2 z n p + α n A 1 p ) + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 + 2 α n ( μ A 2 p q n p + f ( p ) p x n + 1 p ) x n p 2 [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] ( 1 σ n ) x n u n 2 + α n A 1 p ( 2 z n p + α n A 1 p ) + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 + 2 α n ( μ A 2 p q n p + f ( p ) p x n + 1 p ) .
Hence, we have
[ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] ( 1 σ n ) x n u n 2 x n p 2 x n + 1 p 2 + α n A 1 p ( 2 z n p + α n A 1 p ) + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 + 2 α n ( μ A 2 p q n p + f ( p ) p x n + 1 p ) ( x n p + x n + 1 p ) x n x n + 1 + α n A 1 p ( 2 z n p + α n A 1 p ) + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n p 2 + 2 α n ( μ A 2 p q n p + f ( p ) p x n + 1 p ) .
Since lim inf n ( 1 σ n ) > 0 (due to Condition (iii)), lim n θ n = 0 and lim n α n = 0 , we obtain from (23) that
lim n x n u n = 0 .
In addition, observe that
x n z n x n u n + u n G u n ,
x n G x n x n z n + G u n G x n x n z n + u n x n ,
and
x n y n ( 1 σ n ) x n ( I δ n A 1 ) z n x n z n + α n A 1 z n .
Then, from (34) and (35), it follows that
lim n x n z n = 0 , lim n x n G x n = 0 and lim n x n y n = 0 .
Step 4. We claim that x n S n x n 0 , x n q n 0 and x n T x n 0 as n . Indeed, combining (11) and (25), we obtain that
S n u n u n = γ n 1 γ n x n u n b 1 b x n u n 0 ( n ) .
That is,
lim n S n u n u n = 0 .
Since { S n } n = 0 is -uniformly Lipschitzian on C, we deduce from (35) and (37) that
S n x n x n S n x n S n u n + S n u n u n + u n x n x n u n + S n u n u n + u n x n = ( + 1 ) x n u n + S n u n u n 0 ( n ) .
That is,
lim n x n S n x n = 0 .
In addition, we observe that
x n T n y n x n + 1 x n + x n + 1 T n y n x n x n + 1 + β n f ( y n ) T n y n + ( 1 β n ) ( I α n μ A 2 ) T n y n T n y n x n x n + 1 + α n ( f ( y n ) T n y n + μ A 2 ( T n y n ) ) .
Hence, we get
y n T n y n y n x n + x n T n y n y n x n + x n x n + 1 + α n ( f ( y n ) T n y n + μ A 2 ( T n y n ) ) .
Consequently, from (23), (36) and lim n α n = 0 , we obtain that
lim n x n T n y n = 0 and lim n y n T n y n = 0 .
Thus, it follows that
x n q n x n ( I α n μ A 2 ) T n y n x n T n y n + α n μ A 2 ( T n y n ) 0 ( n ) .
That is,
lim n x n q n = 0 .
We also note that
y n T y n y n T n y n + T n y n T n + 1 y n + T n + 1 y n T y n y n T n y n + T n y n T n + 1 y n + ( 1 + θ 1 ) T n y n y n = T n y n T n + 1 y n + ( 2 + θ 1 ) T n y n y n .
By Condition (v) and (39), we get
lim n y n T y n = 0 .
In addition, noticing that
x n T x n x n y n + y n T y n + T y n T x n y n T y n + ( 2 + θ 1 ) x n y n ,
we deduce from (36) that
lim n x n T x n = 0 .
Step 5. We claim that x n S ¯ x n 0 as n where S ¯ : = ( 2 I S ) 1 . Indeed, first, let us show that S : C C is pseudocontractive and -Lipschitzian such that lim n S x n x n = 0 where S x = lim n S n x x C . Observe that for all x , y C , lim n S n x S x = 0 and lim n S n y S y = 0 . Since each S n is pseudocontractive, we get
S x S y , x y = lim n S n x S n y , x y x y 2 .
This means that S is pseudocontractive. Noting that { S n } n = 0 is -uniformly Lipschitzian on C, we have
S x S y = lim n S n x S n y x y , x , y C .
This means that S is -Lipschitzian. Taking into account the boundedness of { x n } and putting D = conv ¯ { x n : n 0 } (the closure of convex hull of the set { x n : n 0 } ), by Assumption (C6) we have n = 1 sup x D S n x S n 1 x < . Hence, by Proposition 1, we get
lim n sup x D S n x S x = 0 ,
which immediately yields
lim n S n x n S x n = 0 .
Thus, combining (38) with (42), we have
x n S x n x n S n x n + S n x n S x n 0 ( n ) .
That is,
lim n x n S x n = 0 .
Now, let us show that. if we define S ¯ : = ( 2 I S ) 1 , then S ¯ : C C is nonexpansive, Fix ( S ¯ ) = Fix ( S ) = n = 0 Fix ( S n ) and lim n x n S ¯ x n = 0 . Indeed, put S ¯ : = ( 2 I S ) 1 , where I is the identity mapping of H. Then, it is known that S ¯ is nonexpansive and the fixed point set Fix ( S ¯ ) = Fix ( S ) = n = 0 Fix ( S n ) . From (43), it follows that
x n S ¯ x n = S ¯ S ¯ 1 x n S ¯ x n S ¯ 1 x n x n = ( 2 I S ) x n x n = x n S x n 0 ( n ) .
That is,
lim n x n S ¯ x n = 0 .
Step 6. We claim that
lim sup n A 2 x * , x * q n 0 and lim sup n A 1 x * , x * z n 0 ,
where { x * } = VI ( VI ( Ω , A 1 ) , A 2 ) . Indeed, we fix sequence { q n i } of { q n } such that
lim sup n A 2 x * , x * q n = lim i A 2 x * , x * q n i .
Since { q n } is a bounded sequence in C, we may assume, without loss of generality, that q n i x ¯ C . Since lim n x n q n = 0 (due to (40)), it follows from q n i x ¯ that x n i x ¯ .
Note that G and S ¯ are nonexpansive and that T is asymptotically nonexpansive. Since ( I G ) x n 0 , ( I T ) x n 0 and ( I S ¯ ) x n 0 (due to (36), (41) and (44)), by Lemma 7 we have that x ¯ Fix ( G ) = GSVI ( C , B 1 , B 2 ) , x ¯ Fix ( T ) and x ¯ Fix ( S ¯ ) = n = 0 Fix ( S n ) . Then, x ¯ Ω = n = 0 Fix ( S n ) GSVI ( C , B 1 , B 2 ) Fix ( T ) . We claim that x ¯ VI ( Ω , A 1 ) . In fact, let y Ω be fixed arbitrarily. Then, it follows from (12), (14) and the ζ -inverse-strong monotonicity of A 1 that
y n y 2 σ n x n y 2 + ( 1 σ n ) P C ( z n δ n A 1 z n ) P C y 2 σ n x n y 2 + ( 1 σ n ) ( z n y ) δ n A 1 z n 2 = σ n x n y 2 + ( 1 σ n ) [ z n y 2 + 2 δ n A 1 z n , y z n + δ n 2 A 1 z n 2 ] x n y 2 + ( 1 σ n ) [ 2 δ n A 1 y , y z n + δ n 2 A 1 z n 2 ] ,
which together with { σ n } [ c , d ] , implies that for all n 0 ,
0 1 δ n ( 1 σ n ) ( x n y 2 y n y 2 ) + 2 A 1 y , y z n + δ n 1 σ n A 1 z n 2 ( x n y + y n y ) x n y n δ n ( 1 d ) + 2 A 1 y , y z n + δ n 1 d A 1 z n 2 .
From (36) it is easy to see that x n i x ¯ leads to z n i x ¯ . Since lim n δ n = 0 and x n y n = o ( δ n ) (due to the assumption), we have
0 lim inf n { ( x n y + y n y ) x n y n δ n ( 1 d ) + 2 A 1 y , y z n + δ n 1 d A 1 z n 2 } = lim inf n 2 A 1 y , y z n lim i 2 A 1 y , y z n i = 2 A 1 y , y x ¯ .
It follows that
A 1 y , y x ¯ 0 , y Ω .
Accordingly, Lemma 8 and the ζ -inverse-strong monotonicity of A 1 ensure that
A 1 x ¯ , y x ¯ 0 , y Ω ;
that is, x ¯ VI ( Ω , A 1 ) . Consequently, from { x * } = VI ( VI ( Ω , A 1 ) , A 2 ) , we have
lim sup n A 2 x * , x * q n = lim i A 2 x * , x * q n i = A 2 x * , x * x ¯ 0 .
On the other hand, we choose a subsequence { z n k } of { z n } such that
lim sup n A 1 x * , x * z n = lim k A 1 x * , x * z n k .
Since { z n } is a bounded sequence in C, we may assume, without loss of generality, that z n k x ^ C . From (36), it is easy to see that z n k x ^ yields x n k x ^ . By the same arguments as in the proof of x ¯ Ω , we have x ^ Ω . From x * VI ( Ω , A 1 ) , we get
lim sup n A 1 x * , x * z n = lim k A 1 x * , x * z n k = A 1 x * , x * x ^ 0 .
Therefore, the inequalities in (45) hold.
Step 7. We claim that x n x * as n . Indeed, putting p = x * in (14) and at Lines 5–6 in (25), we obtain that z n x * x n x * and
x n + 1 x * 2 [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] y n x * 2 + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n x * 2 2 α n μ A 2 x * , q n x * + 2 β n f ( x * ) x * , x n + 1 x * .
From (12) and the ζ -inverse-strong monotonicity of A 1 , it follows that
y n x * 2 σ n x n x * 2 + ( 1 σ n ) P C ( z n δ n A 1 z n ) x * 2 σ n x n x * 2 + ( 1 σ n ) ( z n x * ) δ n A 1 z n 2 = σ n x n x * 2 + ( 1 σ n ) [ z n x * 2 + 2 δ n A 1 z n , x * z n + δ n 2 A 1 z n 2 ] σ n x n x * 2 + ( 1 σ n ) [ x n x * 2 + 2 δ n A 1 x * , x * z n + δ n 2 A 1 z n 2 ] = x n x * 2 + ( 1 σ n ) [ 2 δ n A 1 x * , x * z n + δ n 2 A 1 z n 2 ] .
Thus, in terms of (47) and (48), we get
x n + 1 x * 2 [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] y n x * 2 + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n x * 2 + 2 α n μ A 2 x * , x * q n + 2 β n f ( x * ) x * , x n + 1 x * [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] { x n x * 2 + ( 1 σ n ) [ 2 δ n A 1 x * , x * z n + δ n 2 A 1 z n 2 ] } + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n x * 2 + 2 α n μ A 2 x * , x * q n + 2 β n f ( x * ) x * x n + 1 x * [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] x n x * 2 + ( 1 α n ( τ δ ) ) ( 1 σ n ) 2 δ n A 1 x * , x * z n + α n 2 A 1 z n 2 + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n x * 2 + 2 α n μ A 2 x * , x * q n + 2 β n f ( x * ) x * x n + 1 x * = [ 1 α n ( τ δ ) ] x n x * 2 + α n ( τ δ ) { ( 1 α n ( τ δ ) ) ( 1 σ n ) 2 δ n α n ( τ δ ) A 1 x * , x * z n + α n A 1 z n 2 τ δ + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n x * 2 α n ( τ δ ) + 2 τ δ μ A 2 x * , x * q n + 2 β n f ( x * ) x * x n + 1 x * α n ( τ δ ) } .
It can be readily seen that (45) guarantees that
lim sup n ( 1 α n ( τ δ ) ) ( 1 σ n ) 2 δ n α n ( τ δ ) A 1 x * , x * z n 0
and
lim sup n 2 τ δ μ A 2 x * , x * q n 0 .
In fact, from lim sup n A 1 x * , x * z n 0 , it follows that for any given ε > 0 there exists an integer n 0 1 such that A 1 x * , x * z n ε , n n 0 . Then, from δ n α n , we get
( 1 α n ( τ δ ) ) ( 1 σ n ) 2 δ n α n ( τ δ ) A 1 x * , x * z n ( 1 α n ( τ δ ) ) ( 1 σ n ) 2 δ n α n ( τ δ ) ε 2 τ δ ε , n n 0 ,
which hence yields
lim sup n ( 1 α n ( τ δ ) ) ( 1 σ n ) 2 δ n α n ( τ δ ) A 1 x * , x * z n 2 τ δ ε .
Letting ε 0 , we get lim sup n ( 1 α n ( τ δ ) ) ( 1 σ n ) 2 δ n α n ( τ δ ) A 1 x * , x * z n 0 .
Since n = 0 α n = , lim n θ n α n = 0 and lim n β n α n = 0 (due to Conditions (i) and (ii)), we deduce that n = 0 α n ( τ δ ) = and
lim sup n { ( 1 α n ( τ δ ) ) ( 1 σ n ) 2 δ n α n ( τ δ ) A 1 x * , x * z n + α n A 1 z n 2 τ δ + θ n ( 2 + θ n ) y n x * 2 α n ( τ δ ) + 2 τ δ μ A 2 x * , x * q n + 2 β n f ( x * ) x * x n + 1 x * α n ( τ δ ) } 0 .
We can apply Lemma 3 to the relation (49) and conclude that x n x * as n . This completes the proof. □
The following results can be obtained by Theorem 1 easily, and hence we omit the details.
Corollary 1.
We suppose C is a convex nonempty closed set of a real Hilbert space H and f : C C is a contraction with the parameter δ [ 0 , 1 ) . Let A 1 be a ζ-inverse-strongly monotone nonself mapping on C and A 2 be a strongly positive bounded linear self operator one H with the parameter γ > 0 , where δ < τ : = 1 1 μ ( 2 γ μ A 2 2 ) ( 0 , 1 ] , 0 < μ < 2 γ A 2 2 . Let the mappings B 1 , B 2 : C H be α-inverse-strongly monotone and β-inverse-strongly monotone, respectively. Let T be an asymptotically nonexpansive self mapping on set C with a sequence { θ n } . Let { S n } n = 0 be a countable family of ℓ-uniformly Lipschitzian pseudocontractive self-mappings on C satisfying the assumptions in Problem 1. For any given x 0 C , we suppose { x n } is a vector sequence through
  u n = x n + S n u n 2 ,   v n = P C ( u n μ 2 B 2 u n ) ,   z n = P C ( v n μ 1 B 1 v n ) ,   y n = σ n x n + ( 1 σ n ) P C ( I δ n A 1 ) z n ,   x n + 1 = β n f ( y n ) + ( 1 β n ) P C ( I α n μ A 2 ) T n y n , n 0 ,
where μ 1 ( 0 , 2 α ) and μ 2 ( 0 , 2 β ) . Suppose that { α n } , { β n } , { σ n } ( 0 , 1 ] and { δ n } ( 0 , 2 ζ ] are the sequences as in Theorem 1. Then, the sequence { x n } n = 0 generated by (50) satisfies the following properties:
(a) 
{ x n } n = 0 is bounded.
(b) 
lim n x n y n = 0 , lim n x n G x n = 0 , lim n x n T x n = 0 and
lim n x n S x n = 0 .
(c) 
{ x n } n = 0 reaches to the unique solution of Problem 1 if x n y n δ n 0 as n .
Proof. 
Since the linear bounded operator A 2 : H H is positive and strong with the parameter γ > 0 , we know that A 2 is κ -Lipschitzian and η -strongly monotone where κ = A 2 and η = γ . In this case, we obtain that 0 < μ < 2 η κ 2 = 2 γ A 2 2 , and
δ < τ : = 1 1 μ ( 2 η μ κ 2 ) = 1 1 μ ( 2 γ μ A 2 2 ) ( 0 , 1 ] .
Therefore, utilizing Theorem 1, we derive the desired result. □
Corollary 2.
We suppose C is a convex nonempty closed set of a real Hilbert space H. Let f : C C be a contraction with the parameter δ [ 0 , 1 ) . Let A 1 : C H be a ζ-inverse-strongly monotone mapping and A 2 : C H be κ-Lipschitzian and η-strongly monotone with the parameters κ , η > 0 , where δ < τ : = 1 1 μ ( 2 η μ κ 2 ) ( 0 , 1 ] , 0 < μ < 2 η κ 2 . We suppose the nonself mappings B 1 , B 2 : C H are α-inverse-strongly monotone and β-inverse-strongly monotone, respectively. Let T : C C be a nonexpansive mapping and { S n } n = 0 be a countable family of ℓ-uniformly Lipschitzian pseudocontractive self-mappings on C satisfying the assumptions in Problem 1. For any given x 0 C , let { x n } be the sequence generated by
  u n = γ n x n + ( 1 γ n ) S n u n ,   v n = P C ( u n μ 2 B 2 u n ) ,   z n = P C ( v n μ 1 B 1 v n ) ,   y n = σ n x n + ( 1 σ n ) P C ( I δ n A 1 ) z n ,   x n + 1 = β n f ( y n ) + ( 1 β n ) P C ( I α n μ A 2 ) T y n , n 0 ,
where μ 1 ( 0 , 2 α ) and μ 2 ( 0 , 2 β ) . Suppose that { α n } , { β n } , { γ n } , { σ n } ( 0 , 1 ] and { δ n } ( 0 , 2 ζ ] are the sequences as in Theorem 1. Then, the sequence { x n } n = 0 generated by (51) satisfies the following properties:
(a) 
{ x n } n = 0 is bounded.
(b) 
lim n x n y n = 0 , lim n x n G x n = 0 , lim n x n T x n = 0 and lim n x n S x n = 0 .
(c) 
{ x n } n = 0 reaches to the unique solution of Problem 1 if x n y n δ n 0 as n .
Proof. 
Since T is a nonexpansive self mapping defined on set C, T is, of course, an asymptotically nonexpansive mapping with the parameter sequence { θ n } , where θ n = 0 n 0 . Therefore, utilizing the similar argument process to that of Theorem 1, we obtain the desired result. □

4. Applications to Finite Generalized Mixed Equilibria

We suppose set C is convex nonempty closed and a mapping T with fixed points is named as a attracting nonexpansive mapping if it is nonexpansive and satisfies:
T x p < x p for all x Fix ( T ) and p Fix ( T ) .
Lemma 9 
([27]). Let X be a strictly convex space, T 1 be an attracting nonexpansive mapping and T 2 be a nonexpansive mapping. We suppose they have common fixed points. Then, Fix ( T 1 T 2 ) = Fix ( T 2 T 1 ) = Fix ( T 1 ) Fix ( T 2 ) .
Let A : C H be nonself mapping, φ : C R be a single-valued real function, and Θ : C × C R be a bifunction to R. The mixed generalized equilibrium problem (MGEP) is to find x C such that
Θ ( x , y ) + A x , y x 0 + φ ( y ) φ ( x ) , y C .
We borrow the collection of solutions of MGEP (52) by MGEP( Θ , φ , A ). The GMEP (52) is quite useful in the sense that it includes many problems, namely, vector optimization problems, minimax problems, classical variational inequalities, Nash equilibrium problems in noncooperative games and others. For different aspects and solution methods, we refer to [28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38] and the references therein.
In particular, if φ = 0 , then MGEP (52) become the generalized equilibrium problem (GEP) of finding x C such that
Θ ( x , y ) + A x , y x 0 , y C .
The collection of solutions of GEP is used by GEP( Θ , A ).
If A = 0 , then MGEP (52) become the mixed equilibrium problem (MEP). which is to find x C such that
Θ ( x , y ) + φ ( y ) φ ( x ) 0 , y C .
The collection of solutions of MEP is used by MEP( Θ , φ ).
If φ = 0 and A = 0 , then MGEP (52) become to the equilibrium problem (EP) (see Blum and Oettli [30]), which will approximate x C with
Θ ( x , y ) 0 , y C .
The collection of solutions of EP is used by EP(Θ).
Here, we list some elementary conclusions for the MEP.
It is first used in [38] that Θ : C × C R is a bifunction and φ : C R is a convex lower semicontinuous function restricted to the following items
(A1) 
x C , Θ ( x , x ) 0 .
(A2) 
Θ has the monotonicity, i.e., x , y C , Θ ( x , y ) + Θ ( y , x ) 0 .
(A3) 
lim sup t 0 + Θ ( t z + ( 1 t ) x , y ) Θ ( x , y ) .
(A4) 
x C , Θ ( x , · ) is lower semicontinuous convex.
(B1) 
x H and r > 0 , we fix a set D x C and y x C with
Θ ( z , y x ) + φ ( y x ) φ ( z ) + 1 r y x z , z x < 0
z C \ D x .
(B2) 
C acts as a bounded set.
Lemma 10 
([38]). We suppose that Θ : C × C R has conditions (A1)–(A4) and φ : C R has the properties proper lower semicontinuous and convex, if either condition (B1) or condition (B2) is true. For r > 0 and x H , generate an operator T r ( Θ , φ ) : H C through
T r ( Θ , φ ) ( x ) : = { z C : φ ( y ) + Θ ( z , y ) φ ( z ) + 1 r y z , z x 0 , y C }
for all x H . Then,
(i) 
Set T r ( Θ , φ ) ( x ) is a singleton set.
(ii) 
x , y H ,
T r ( Θ , φ ) x T r ( Θ , φ ) y 2 T r ( Θ , φ ) x T r ( Θ , φ ) y , x y .
(iii) 
MEP ( Θ , φ ) = Fix ( T r ( Θ , φ ) ) .
(iv) 
MEP ( Θ , φ ) is convex closed.
(v) 
T s ( Θ , φ ) x T t ( Θ , φ ) x 2 s t s T s ( Θ , φ ) x T t ( Θ , φ ) x , T s ( Θ , φ ) x x , s , t > 0 and x H .
Next, under some mild control conditions, we establish the strong convergence of the proposed algorithm to the unique element { x * } = VI ( VI ( Ω , A 1 ) , A 2 ) (i.e., the unique solution of a THCVI), where Ω : = i = 1 N GMEP ( Θ i , φ i , A i ) GSVI ( C , B 1 , B 2 ) Fix ( S ) Fix ( T ) .
Theorem 2.
We suppose C is a convex nonempty closed set. Assume that, i = 1 , 2 , , N , Θ i : C × C R a bifunction has Conditions (A1)–(A4), φ i : C R { + } is a lower semicontinuous, convex proper function with Condition (B1) or Condition (B2), and A i : C H is an η i -inverse-strongly monotone nonself mapping. Let f : C C be a contraction with the parameter δ [ 0 , 1 ) , A 1 : C H be a ζ-inverse-strongly monotone nonself mapping and A 2 : C H be κ-Lipschitzian and η-strongly monotone with parameters κ , η > 0 , where δ < τ : = 1 1 μ ( 2 η μ κ 2 ) ( 0 , 1 ] , 0 < μ < 2 η κ 2 . Let the nonself mappings B 1 , B 2 : C H be α-inverse-strongly monotone and β-inverse-strongly monotone, respectively. Let self mapping T, defined on C, be a nonexpansive mapping and self mapping S, also defined on C , be an ℓ-Lipschitzian pseudocontractive mapping such that Ω : = i = 1 N GMEP ( Θ i , φ i , A i ) GSVI ( C , B 1 , B 2 ) Fix ( S ) Fix ( T ) and VI ( Ω , A 1 ) , where GSVI ( C , B 1 , B 2 ) is the fixed point set of the mapping G : = P C ( I μ 1 B 1 ) P C ( I μ 2 B 2 ) with μ 1 ( 0 , 2 α ) and μ 2 ( 0 , 2 β ) . For any given x 0 C , let { x n } be the sequence generated by
  u n = γ n x n + ( 1 γ n ) S u n ,   v n = P C ( u n μ 2 B 2 u n ) ,   z n = P C ( v n μ 1 B 1 v n ) ,   y n = σ n x n + ( 1 σ n ) P C ( I δ n A 1 ) z n ,   x n + 1 = β n f ( y n ) + ( 1 β n ) P C ( I α n μ A 2 ) T Λ N y n , n 0 ,
where Δ N = T r 1 ( Θ 1 , φ 1 ) ( I r 1 A 1 ) T r N ( Θ N , φ N ) ( I r N A N ) with r i ( 0 , 2 η i ) for each i = 1 , 2 , , N . Suppose that { α n } , { β n } , { γ n } , { σ n } ( 0 , 1 ] and { δ n } ( 0 , 2 ζ ] are the sequences such that
(i) 
α n 0 as n , n = 0 α n = and n = 0 | α n + 1 α n | < .
(ii) 
β n α n 0 as n and n = 0 | β n + 1 β n | < .
(iii) 
0 < lim inf n σ n lim sup n σ n < 1 and n = 0 | σ n + 1 σ n | < .
(iv) 
0 < lim inf n γ n lim sup n γ n < 1 and n = 0 | γ n + 1 γ n | < .
(v) 
δ n α n n 0 and n = 0 | δ n + 1 δ n | < .
Then, the sequence { x n } n = 0 generated by (54) satisfies the following properties:
(a) 
{ x n } n = 0 is bounded.
(b) 
lim n x n y n = 0 , lim n x n G x n = 0 , lim n x n T Δ N x n = 0 and lim n x n S x n = 0 .
(c) 
{ x n } n = 0 converges strongly to the unique element { x * } = VI ( VI ( Ω , A 1 ) , A 2 ) (i.e., the unique solution of a THCVI), provided x n y n = o ( δ n ) .
Proof. 
First, let us show that for each i = 1 , 2 , , N , the composite mapping T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) with r i ( 0 , 2 η i ) is nonexpansive. Indeed, from Lemma 10 (iii), it is not difficult to obtain
GMEP ( Θ i , φ i , A i ) = Fix ( T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) ) .
Utilizing Lemma 5 and Lemma 10 (ii), we have
T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) x T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) y 2 ( I r i A i ) x ( I r i A i ) y 2 x y 2 + r i ( r i 2 η i ) A i A i y 2 x y 2 .
Thus, each composite mapping T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) is nonexpansive. Moreover, we claim that T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) is also attracting nonexpansive for each i = 1 , 2 , , N . In fact, for all x GMEP ( Θ i , φ i , A i ) and p GMEP ( Θ i , φ i , A i ) , by the firm nonexpansivity of T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) (due to Lemma 10 (ii)), we obtain
T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) x p 2 = T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) x T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) p 2 T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) x T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) p , ( I r i A i ) x ( I r i A i ) p = 1 2 { T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) x T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) p 2 + ( I r i A i ) x ( I r i A i ) p 2 T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) x T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) p ( I r i A i ) x + ( I r i A i ) p 2 } = 1 2 { T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) x p 2 + ( I r i A i ) x ( I r i A i ) p 2 T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) x p ( I r i A i ) x + ( I r i A i ) p 2 } ,
which immediately implies that
T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) x p 2 ( I r i A i ) x ( I r i A i ) p 2 T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) x p ( I r i A i ) x + ( I r i A i ) p 2 .
Next, we discuss two cases.
Case 1. If A i x = A i p , then from (55) we have
T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) x p 2 ( I r i A i ) x ( I r i A i ) p 2 T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) x p ( I r i A i ) x + ( I r i A i ) p 2 = x p 2 T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) x x 2 < x p 2 .
Case 2. If A i x A i p , then from (55) we get
T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) x p 2 ( x r i A i x ) ( p r i A i p ) 2 T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) x p ( I r i A i ) x + ( I r i A i ) p 2 ( x r i A i x ) ( p r i A i p ) 2 x p 2 + r i ( r i 2 η i ) A i x A i p 2 < x p 2
(due to r i ( 0 , 2 η i ) ). Summing up the above two cases, we know that each composite mapping T r i ( Θ i , φ i ) ( I r i A i ) is also attracting nonexpansive. Therefore, by Lemma 9, we conclude that Fix ( T Δ N ) = i = 1 N GMEP ( Θ i , φ i , A i ) Fix ( T ) . Then, we get the desired result by Theorem 1 easily. □

Author Contributions

These authors contributed equally to this work.

Funding

This research was funded by the Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province of China (ZR2017LA001) and Youth Foundation of Linyi University (LYDX2016BS023). The first author was partially supported by the Innovation Program of Shanghai Municipal Education Commission (15ZZ068), Ph.D. Program Foundation of Ministry of Education of China (20123127110002) and Program for Outstanding Academic Leaders in Shanghai City (15XD1503100).

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the editor and the referees for useful suggestions which improved the contents of this paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Ceng, L.C.; Wang, C.Y.; Yao, J.C. Strong convergence theorems by a relaxed extragradient method for a general system of variational inequalities. Math. Methods Oper. Res. 2008, 67, 375–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Ceng, L.C.; Kong, Z.R.; Wen, C.F. On general systems of variational inequalities. Comput. Math. Appl. 2013, 66, 1514–1532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Elster, R.; Hebestreit, N.; Khan, A.A.; Tammer, C. Inverse generalized vector variational inequalities with respect to variable domination structures and applications to vector approximation problems. Appl. Anal. Optim. 2018, 2, 341–372. [Google Scholar]
  4. Qin, X.; Cho, S.Y. Convergence analysis of a monotone projection algorithm in reflexive Banach spaces. Acta Math. Sci. 2017, 37, 488–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Ceng, L.C.; Yao, J.C. A relaxed extragradient-like method for a generalized mixed equilibrium problem, a general system of generalized equilibria and a fixed point problem. Nonlinear Anal. 2010, 72, 1922–1937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Zhao, X.; Ng, K.F.; Li, C.; Yao, J.-C. Linear regularity and linear convergence of projection-based methods for solving convex feasibility problems. Appl. Math. Optim. 2018, 78, 613–641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Qin, X.; Petrusel, A.; Yao, J.C. CQ iterative algorithms for fixed points of nonexpansive mappings and split feasibility problems in Hilbert spaces. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 2018, 19, 157–165. [Google Scholar]
  8. Takahashi, W.; Wen, C.F.; Yao, J.C. Split common fixed point problems and hierarchical variational inequality problems in Hilbert spaces. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 2017, 18, 777–797. [Google Scholar]
  9. Chang, S.S.; Wen, C.F.; Yao, J.C. Generalized viscosity implicit rules for solving quasi-inclusion problems of accretive operators in Banach spaces. Optimization 2017, 66, 1105–1117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Cho, S.Y. Weak convergence of a splitting algorithm in Hilbert spaces. J. Appl. Anal. Comput. 2017, 7, 427–438. [Google Scholar]
  11. Takahashi, W.; Wen, C.F.; Yao, J.C. The shrinking projection method for a finite family of demimetric mappings with variational inequality problems in a Hilbert space. Fixed Point Theory 2018, 19, 407–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Kato, T. Nonlinear semigroups and evolution equations. J. Math. Soc. Jpn. 1967, 19, 508–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Qin, X.; Yao, J.C. Weak convergence of a Mann-like algorithm for nonexpansive and accretive operators. J. Inequal. Appl. 2016, 2016, 232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Qin, X.; Yao, J.C. Projection splitting algorithms for nonself operators. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 2017, 18, 925–935. [Google Scholar]
  15. Qin, X.; Cho, S.Y.; Wang, L. A regularization method for treating zero points of the sum of two monotone operators. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2014, 2014, 75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Djedidi, M.; Mansour, A.; Nachi, K. Fixed point theorem for generalized set-valued contractions on partial metric space. Tamkang J. Math. 2017, 48, 331–344. [Google Scholar]
  17. Chidume, C.E.; Nnakwe, M.O. Convergence theorems of subgradient extragradient algorithm for solving variational inequalities and a convex feasibility problem. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2018, 2018, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Chang, S.S.; Wen, C.F.; Yao, J.C. Zero point problem of accretive operators in Banach spaces. Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. 2019, 42, 105–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Qin, X.; Cho, S.Y.; Wang, L. Strong convergence of an iterative algorithm involving nonlinear mappings of nonexpansive and accretive type. Optimization 2018, 67, 1377–1388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Ceng, L.C.; Petrusel, A.; Wong, M.M.; Yu, S.J. Strong convergence of implicit viscosity approximation methods for pseudocontractive mappings in Banach spaces. Optimization 2011, 60, 659–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Reich, S. Weak convergence theorems for nonexpansive mappings in Banach spaces. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1979, 67, 274–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Deimling, K. Zeros of accretive operators. Manuscr. Math. 1974, 13, 365–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Xue, Z.; Zhou, H.; Cho, Y.J. Iterative solutions of nonlinear equations for m-accretive operators in Banach spaces. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 2000, 1, 313–320. [Google Scholar]
  24. Xu, H.K.; Kim, T.H. Convergence of hybrid steepest-descent methods for variational inequalities. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 2003, 119, 185–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Lim, T.C.; Xu, H.K. Fixed point theorems for asymptotically nonexpansive mappings. Nonlinear Anal. 1994, 22, 1345–1355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Iiduka, H. Iterative algorithm for solving triple-hierarchical constrained optimization problem. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 2011, 148, 580–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Chancelier, J.P. Iterative schemes for computing fixed points of nonexpansive mappings in Banach spaces. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2009, 353, 141–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Qin, X.; Cho, S.Y.; Wang, L. Iterative algorithms with errors for zero points of m-accretive operators. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013, 2013, 148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Yao, Y.; Cho, Y.J.; Liou, Y.C. Constructed nets with perturbations for equilibrium and fixed point problems. J. Inequal. Appl. 2014, 2014, 334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Blum, E.; Oettli, W. From optimization and variational inequalities to equilibrium problems. Math. Stud. 1994, 63, 123–145. [Google Scholar]
  31. Yao, Y.; Postolache, Y.; Qin, X.; Yao, J.-C. Iterative algorithms for the proximal split feasibility problem. Univ. Politeh. Buchar. Sci. Bull. Appl. Math. Phys. 2018, 80, 37–44. [Google Scholar]
  32. Yao, Y.; Leng, L.; Liou, Y.C. Strong convergence of an iteration for the spllit common fixed points of demicontractive operators. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 2018, 19, 197–205. [Google Scholar]
  33. Cho, S.Y.; Qin, X.; Yao, J.-C.; Yao, Y. Viscosity approximation splitting methods for monotone and nonexpansive operators in Hilbert spaces. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 2018, 19, 251–264. [Google Scholar]
  34. Takahashi, S.; Takahashi, W. Strong convergence theorem for a generalized equilibrium problem and a nonexpansive mapping in a Hilbert space. Nonlinear Anal. 2008, 69, 1025–1033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Yao, Y.; Qin, X.; Yao, J.C. Projection methods for firmly type nonexpansive operators. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 2018, 19, 407–415. [Google Scholar]
  36. Ceng, L.C. Approximation of common solutions of a split inclusion problem and a fixed-point problem. J. Appl. Numer. Optim. 2019, 1, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  37. Argyros, I.K.; George, S. Extended optimality of the secant method on Banach spaces. Commun. Optim. Theory 2018, 2018, 3. [Google Scholar]
  38. Ceng, L.C.; Yao, J.C. A hybrid iterative scheme for mixed equilibrium problems and fixed point problems. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2008, 214, 186–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ceng, L.-C.; Yuan, Q. Hybrid Mann Viscosity Implicit Iteration Methods for Triple Hierarchical Variational Inequalities, Systems of Variational Inequalities and Fixed Point Problems. Mathematics 2019, 7, 142. https://doi.org/10.3390/math7020142

AMA Style

Ceng L-C, Yuan Q. Hybrid Mann Viscosity Implicit Iteration Methods for Triple Hierarchical Variational Inequalities, Systems of Variational Inequalities and Fixed Point Problems. Mathematics. 2019; 7(2):142. https://doi.org/10.3390/math7020142

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ceng, Lu-Chuan, and Qing Yuan. 2019. "Hybrid Mann Viscosity Implicit Iteration Methods for Triple Hierarchical Variational Inequalities, Systems of Variational Inequalities and Fixed Point Problems" Mathematics 7, no. 2: 142. https://doi.org/10.3390/math7020142

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop