In this section, we propose a Halpern-type iterative scheme for finding common zeros of an infinite family of accretive operators in a uniformly convex Banach space and prove the following strong convergence theorem.
Theorem 4.1 Let E be a real uniformly convex Banach space which admits the weakly sequentially continuous duality mapping . Let be an infinite family of accretive operators satisfying the range condition, and let C be a nonempty, closed and convex subset of E such that for each . Let and be such that , and let be the resolvent of A. Let , be sequences in satisfying the following control conditions:
-
(a)
;
-
(b)
;
-
(c)
, ;
-
(d)
, .
Let
be a sequence generated by
(4.1)
If , then the sequence defined in (4.1) converges strongly to , where is the sunny nonexpansive retraction from E onto Z.
Proof We divide the proof into several steps.
We first note that Z is closed and convex. Set .
Step 1. We prove that the sequences , and are bounded.
We first show that is bounded. Let be fixed. In view of Lemma 2.8, there exists a continuous, strictly increasing and convex function with such that for any ,
(4.2)
This implies that
By induction, we obtain
for all . This implies that the sequence is bounded and hence the sequence is bounded. This, together with (4.1), implies that the sequences and are bounded too.
Step 2. We prove that for any ,
(4.3)
Let us show (4.3). For any , in view of (4.2), we obtain
This implies that
(4.4)
Let . It follows from (4.4) that
(4.5)
In view of Lemma 2.1 and (4.2), we obtain
Step 3. We prove that as .
We discuss the following two possible cases.
Case 1. Suppose that there exists such that is nonincreasing. Then the sequence is convergent. Thus we have as . This, together with condition (d) and (4.5), implies that
From the properties of g, we conclude that
(4.6)
On the other hand, we have
This implies that
(4.7)
By the triangle inequality, we conclude that
It follows from (4.7) that
(4.8)
Exploiting Lemma 2.5 and (4.6), we obtain
This implies that
(4.9)
Since is bounded, there exists a subsequence of such that for all . This, together with Lemma 2.1, implies that
(4.10)
Thus we have the desired result by Lemma 2.6.
Case 2. Suppose that there exists a subsequence of such that
for all . Then, by Lemma 2.7, there exists a nondecreasing sequence such that ,
for all . This, together with (4.5), implies that
for all . Then, by conditions (a) and (c), we get
From the properties of g, we conclude that
By the same argument as Case 1, we arrive at
It follows from (4.3) that
(4.11)
Since , we have that
(4.12)
In particular, since , we obtain
In view of (4.12), we deduce that
This, together with (4.10), implies that
On the other hand, we have for all , which implies that as . Thus, we have as , which completes the proof. □
Theorem 4.2 Let E be a real uniformly convex Banach space having a Gâteaux differentiable norm. Let be an infinite family of accretive operators satisfying the range condition, and let C be a nonempty, closed and convex subset of E such that for each . Let and be such that , and let be the resolvent of A. Let , be sequences in satisfying the following control conditions:
-
(a)
;
-
(b)
;
-
(c)
, ;
-
(d)
, .
Let
be a sequence generated by
If , then the sequence converges strongly to , where is the sunny nonexpansive retraction from E onto Z.
Remark 4.1 The main results of [22, 23] gave strong convergence theorems for finding common zeros of an accretive operator, while the main results of the present paper (Theorems 4.1 and 4.2) give strong convergence theorems for finding common zeros of an infinite family of accretive operators. So our results extend and improve the corresponding results of [22, 23].
Remark 4.2 The two-step Halpern iteration process is a generalization of the one-step Halpern iteration process. It provides more flexibility in defining the algorithm parameters, which is important from the numerical implementation perspective.