Skip to main content

A hybrid iterative method for a combination of equilibria problem, a combination of variational inequality problems and a hierarchical fixed point problem

Abstract

In this paper, we introduce and analyze a general iterative algorithm for finding a common solution of a combination of variational inequality problems, a combination of equilibria problem, and a hierarchical fixed point problem in the setting of real Hilbert space. Under appropriate conditions we derive the strong convergence results for this method. Several special cases are also discussed. Preliminary numerical experiments are included to verify the theoretical assertions of the proposed method. The results presented in this paper extend and improve some well-known results in the literature.

MSC: 49J30, 47H09, 47J20.

1 Introduction

Let H be a real Hilbert space, whose inner product and norm are denoted by , and . Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of H. Let F 1 :C×CR be a bifunction, the equilibrium problem is to find xC such that

F 1 (x,y)0,yC,
(1.1)

which was considered and investigated by Blum and Oettli [1]. The solution set of (1.1) is denoted by EP( F 1 ). Equilibrium problems theory provides us with a unified, natural, innovative, and general framework to study a wide class of problems arising in finance, economics, network analysis, transportation, elasticity, and optimization. This theory has witnessed an explosive growth in theoretical advances and applications across all disciplines of pure and applied sciences; see [211].

If F 1 (u,v)=Au,vu, where A:CH is a nonlinear operator, then problem (1.1) is equivalent to finding a vector uC such that

vu,Au0,vC,
(1.2)

which is known as the classical variational inequality. The solution of (1.2) is denoted by VI(C,A). It is easy to observe that

u VI(C,A) u = P C [ u ρ A u ] ,where ρ>0.

Variational inequalities are being used as a mathematical programming tool in modeling a large class of problems arising in various branches of pure and applied sciences. In recent years, variational inequalities have been generalized and extended novel and new techniques in several directions. We now have a variety of techniques to suggest and analyze various iterative algorithms for solving variational inequalities and related optimization problems; see [133].

For i=1,2,,N, let F i :C×CR be bifunctions and a i (0,1) with i = 1 N a i =1. Define the mapping i = 1 N a i F i :C×CR. The combination of equilibria problem is to find xC such that

i = 1 N a i F i (x,y)0,yC,
(1.3)

which was considered and investigated by Suwannaut and Kangtunyakarn [12]. The set of solutions (1.3) is denoted by

EP ( i = 1 N a i F i ) = i = 1 N EP( F i ).

If F i = F 1 , i=1,2,,N, then the combination of equilibria problem (1.3) reduces to the equilibrium problem (1.1).

For i=1,2,,N, let A i be a strongly positive linear bounded operator on a Hilbert space H with coefficient ρ i >0 and b i (0,1) with i = 1 N b i =1. The combination of variational inequality problems is to find xC such that

i = 1 N b i A i x , y x 0,yC.
(1.4)

If A i =A, i=1,2,,N, then the combination of variational inequality problems (1.4) reduces to the variational inequality problem (1.2).

We introduce the following definitions, which are useful in the following analysis.

Definition 1.1 The mapping T:CH is said to be

  1. (a)

    monotone if

    TxTy,xy0,x,yC;
  2. (b)

    strongly monotone if there exists α>0 such that

    TxTy,xyα x y 2 ,x,yC;
  3. (c)

    strongly positive linear bounded if there exists α>0 such that

    Tx,xα x 2 ,xC;
  4. (d)

    nonexpansive if

    TxTyxy,x,yC;
  5. (e)

    k-Lipschitz continuous if there exists a constant k>0 such that

    TxTykxy,x,yC;
  6. (f)

    a contraction on C if there exists a constant 0k<1 such that

    TxTykxy,x,yC.

It is easy to observe that every α-inverse-strongly monotone T is monotone and Lipschitz continuous. It is well known that every nonexpansive operator T:HH satisfies, for all (x,y)H×H, the inequality

( x T ( x ) ) ( y T ( y ) ) , T ( y ) T ( x ) 1 2 ( T ( x ) x ) ( T ( y ) y ) 2
(1.5)

and therefore, we get, for all (x,y)H×Fix(T),

x T ( x ) , y T ( x ) 1 2 T ( x ) x 2 .
(1.6)

The fixed point problem for the mapping T is to find xC such that

Tx=x.
(1.7)

We denote by F(T) the set of solutions of (1.7). It is well known that F(T) is closed and convex, and P F (T) is well defined.

Let S:CH be a nonexpansive mapping. The following problem is called a hierarchical fixed point problem: Find xF(T) such that

xSx,yx0,yF(T).
(1.8)

It is well known that the hierarchical fixed point problem (1.8) links with some monotone variational inequalities and convex programming problems; see [13]. Various methods have been proposed to solve the hierarchical fixed point problem; see [1421]. By combining Korpelevich’s extragradient method and the viscosity approximation method, Ceng et al. [22] introduced and analyzed implicit and explicit iterative schemes for computing a common element of the set of fixed points of a nonexpansive mapping and the set of solutions of the variational inequality for an α-inverse-strongly monotone mapping in a Hilbert space. Under suitable assumptions, they proved the strong convergence of the sequences generated by the proposed schemes.

In 2010, Yao et al. [13] introduced the following strong convergence iterative algorithm to solve problem (1.8):

y n = β n S x n + ( 1 β n ) x n , x n + 1 = P C [ α n f ( x n ) + ( 1 α n ) T y n ] , n 0 ,
(1.9)

where f:CH is a contraction mapping and { α n } and { β n } are two sequences in (0,1). Under some certain restrictions on the parameters, Yao et al. proved that the sequence { x n } generated by (1.9) converges strongly to zF(T), which is the unique solution of the following variational inequality:

( I f ) z , y z 0,yF(T).
(1.10)

In 2011, Ceng et al. [23] investigated the following iterative method:

x n + 1 = P C [ α n ρ U ( x n ) + ( I α n μ F ) ( T ( y n ) ) ] ,n0,
(1.11)

where U is a Lipschitzian mapping, and F is a Lipschitzian and strongly monotone mapping. They proved that under some approximate assumptions on the operators and parameters, the sequence { x n } generated by (1.11) converges strongly to the unique solution of the variational inequality

ρ U ( z ) μ F ( z ) , x z 0,xFix(T).
(1.12)

Very recently, in 2013, Wang and Xu [24] investigated an iterative method for a hierarchical fixed point problem by

y n = β n S x n + ( 1 β n ) x n , x n + 1 = P C [ α n ρ U ( x n ) + ( I α n μ F ) ( T ( y n ) ) ] , n 0 ,
(1.13)

where S:CC is a nonexpansive mapping. They proved that under some approximate assumptions on the operators and parameters, the sequence { x n } generated by (1.13) converges strongly to the unique solution of the variational inequality (1.12).

In this paper, motivated by the work of Ceng et al. [23, 26], Yao et al. [13], Wang and Xu [24], Bnouhachem [15, 25] and by the recent work going in this direction, we give an iterative method for finding the approximate element of the common set of solutions of (1.3), (1.4), and (1.8) in a real Hilbert space. We establish a strong convergence theorem based on this method. We would like to mention that our proposed method is quite general and flexible and includes many known results for solving of variational inequality problems, equilibrium problems, and hierarchical fixed point problems; see, e.g., [13, 16, 18, 23, 25, 27] and relevant references cited therein.

2 Preliminaries

In this section, we list some fundamental lemmas that are useful in the consequent analysis. The first lemma provides some basic properties of projection onto C.

Lemma 2.1 Let P C denote the projection of H onto C. Then we have the following inequalities:

z P C [ z ] , P C [ z ] v 0,zH,vC;
(2.1)
u v , P C [ u ] P C [ v ] P C [ u ] P C [ v ] 2 ,u,vH;
(2.2)
P C [ u ] P C [ v ] uv,u,vH;
(2.3)
u P C [ z ] 2 z u 2 z P C [ z ] 2 ,zH,uC.
(2.4)

Assumption 2.1 [1]

Let F 1 :C×CR be a bifunction satisfying the following assumptions:

(A1) F 1 (x,x)=0, xC;

(A2) F 1 is monotone, i.e., F 1 (x,y)+ F 1 (y,x)0, x,yC;

(A3) for each x,y,zC, lim t 0 F 1 (tz+(1t)x,y) F 1 (x,y);

(A4) for each xC, y F 1 (x,y) is convex and lower semicontinuous.

Lemma 2.2 [2]

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of H. Let F 1 :C×CR satisfy (A1)-(A4). Assume that for r>0 and xH, define a mapping T r :HC as follows:

T r (x)= { z C : F 1 ( z , y ) + 1 r y z , z x 0 , y C } .

Then the following hold:

  1. (i)

    T r is nonempty and single-valued;

  2. (ii)

    T r is firmly nonexpansive, i.e.;

    T r ( x ) T r ( y ) 2 T r ( x ) T r ( y ) , x y ,x,yH;
  3. (iii)

    F( T r )=EP( F 1 );

  4. (iv)

    EP( F 1 ) is closed and convex.

Lemma 2.3 [12]

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a real Hilbert space H. For i=1,2,,N, let F i :C×CR be bifunctions satisfying (A1)-(A4) with i = 1 N EP( F i ). Then i = 1 N a i F i satisfies (A1)-(A4) and

Fix( T r )=EP ( i = 1 N a i F i ) = i = 1 N EP( F i ),

where a i (0,1) for i=1,2,,N and i = 1 N a i =1.

Lemma 2.4 [28]

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a real Hilbert space H.

If T:CC is a nonexpansive mapping with Fix(T), then the mapping IT is demiclosed at 0, i.e., if { x n } is a sequence in C weakly converging to x, and if {(IT) x n } converges strongly to 0, then (IT)x=0.

Lemma 2.5 [23]

Let U:CH be a τ-Lipschitzian mapping, and let F:CH be a k-Lipschitzian and η-strongly monotone mapping, then for 0ρτ<μη, μFρU is μηρτ-strongly monotone, i.e.,

( μ F ρ U ) x ( μ F ρ U ) y , x y (μηρτ) x y 2 ,x,yC.

Lemma 2.6 [29]

Suppose that λ(0,1) and μ>0. Let F:CH be a k-Lipschitzian and η-strongly monotone operator. In association with a nonexpansive mapping T:CC, define the mapping T λ :CH by

T λ x=TxλμFT(x),xC.

Then T λ is a contraction provided μ< 2 η k 2 , that is,

T λ x T λ y (1λν)xy,x,yC,

where ν=1 1 μ ( 2 η μ k 2 ) .

Lemma 2.7 [30]

Assume that { a n } is a sequence of nonnegative real numbers such that

a n + 1 (1 υ n ) a n + δ n ,

where { υ n } is a sequence in (0,1) and δ n is a sequence such that

  1. (1)

    n = 1 υ n =;

  2. (2)

    lim sup n δ n / υ n 0 or n = 1 | δ n |<.

Then lim n a n =0.

Lemma 2.8 [31]

Let C be a closed convex subset of H. Let { x n } be a bounded sequence in H. Assume that

  1. (i)

    the weak w-limit set w w ( x n )C where w w ( x n )={x: x n i x};

  2. (ii)

    for each zC, lim n x n z exists.

Then { x n } is weakly convergent to a point in C.

Lemma 2.9 [12]

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a real Hilbert space H. For every i=1,2,,N, let A i be a strongly positive linear bounded operator on a Hilbert space H with coefficient ρ i >0, i.e., A i x,x ρ i x 2 , xH, and ρ ¯ = min i = 1 , 2 , , N ρ i . Let { b i } i = 1 N (0,1) with i = 1 N b i =1. Then the following properties hold:

  1. (i)

    Iλ i = 1 N b i A i 1λ ρ ¯ and Iλ i = 1 N b i A i is a nonexpansive mapping for every 0<λ< A i 1 (i=1,2,,N).

  2. (ii)

    VI(C, i = 1 N b i A i )= i = 1 N VI(C, A i ).

3 The proposed method and some properties

In this section, we suggest and analyze our method for finding common solutions of the combination of equilibria problem (1.3), the combination of variational inequality problems (1.4), and the hierarchical fixed point problem (1.8).

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a real Hilbert space H. For i=1,2,,N, let F i :C×CR be bifunctions satisfying (A1)-(A4), let A i be a strongly positive linear bounded operator on a Hilbert space H with coefficient ρ i >0 and ρ ¯ = min i = 1 , 2 , , N ρ i , and let S,T:CC be nonexpansive mappings such that F(T) i = 1 N EP( F i ) i = 1 N VI(C, A i ). Let F:CC be a k-Lipschitzian mapping and be η-strongly monotone, and let U:CC be a τ-Lipschitzian mapping.

Algorithm 3.1 For an arbitrarily given x 0 C, let the iterative sequences { u n }, { x n }, { y n }, and { z n } be generated by

{ i = 1 N a i F i ( u n , y ) + 1 r n y u n , u n x n 0 , y C ; z n = P C [ u n λ n i = 1 N b i A i u n ] ; y n = β n S x n + ( 1 β n ) u n ; x n + 1 = γ n x n + ( 1 γ n ) P C [ α n ρ U ( x n ) + ( I α n μ F ) ( T ( y n ) ) ] , n 0 .
(3.1)

Suppose that the parameters satisfy 0<μ< 2 η k 2 , 0ρτ<ν, where ν=1 1 μ ( 2 η μ k 2 ) . Also { γ n }, { α n }, { β n }, and { r n } are sequences in (0,1) satisfying the following conditions:

  1. (a)

    0<a γ n b<1,

  2. (b)

    lim n α n =0 and n = 1 α n =,

  3. (c)

    lim n ( β n / α n )=0,

  4. (d)

    i = 1 N a i = i = 1 N b i =1,

  5. (e)

    n = 1 | α n 1 α n |<, n = 1 | γ n 1 γ n |<, and n = 1 | β n 1 β n |<,

  6. (f)

    lim inf n r n >0 and n = 1 | r n 1 r n |<,

  7. (g)

    lim n λ n =0 and n = 1 | λ n 1 λ n |<.

If for i=1,2,,N, F i = F and A i =A, then Algorithm 3.1 reduces to Algorithm 3.2 for finding the common solutions of equilibrium problem (1.1), variational inequality problem (1.2) and the hierarchical fixed point problem (1.8).

Algorithm 3.2 For an arbitrarily given x 0 C arbitrarily, let the iterative sequences { u n }, { x n }, { y n }, and { z n } be generated by

{ F ( u n , y ) + 1 r n y u n , u n x n 0 , y C ; z n = P C [ u n λ n A u n ] ; y n = β n S x n + ( 1 β n ) z n ; x n + 1 = γ n x n + ( 1 γ n ) P C [ α n ρ U ( x n ) + ( I α n μ F ) ( T ( y n ) ) ] , n 0 .

Suppose that the parameters satisfy 0<μ< 2 η k 2 , 0ρτ<ν, where ν=1 1 μ ( 2 η μ k 2 ) . Also { γ n }, { α n }, { β n }, and { r n } are sequences in (0,1) satisfying the following conditions:

  1. (a)

    0<a γ n b<1,

  2. (b)

    lim n α n =0 and n = 1 α n =,

  3. (c)

    lim n ( β n / α n )=0,

  4. (d)

    n = 1 | α n 1 α n |<, n = 1 | γ n 1 γ n |<, and n = 1 | β n 1 β n |<,

  5. (e)

    lim inf n r n >0 and n = 1 | r n 1 r n |<,

  6. (f)

    lim n λ n =0 and n = 1 | λ n 1 λ n |<.

Remark 3.1 Our method can be viewed as an extension and improvement for some well-known results, for example the following.

  • If γ n =0, the proposed method is an extension and improvement of the method of Wang and Xu [24] and Bnouhachem [25] for finding the approximate element of the common set of solutions of a combination of variational inequality problems, a combination of equilibria problem and a hierarchical fixed point problem in a real Hilbert space.

  • If we have the Lipschitzian mapping U=f, F=I, ρ=μ=1, and γ n =0, we obtain an extension and improvement of the method of Yao et al.[13] for finding the approximate element of the common set of solutions of a combination of variational inequality problems, a combination of equilibria problem and a hierarchical fixed point problem in a real Hilbert space.

  • The contractive mapping f with a coefficient α[0,1) in other papers [13, 27, 29] is extended to the cases of the Lipschitzian mapping U with a coefficient constant γ[0,).

This shows that Algorithm 3.1 is quite general and unifying.

Lemma 3.1 Let x F(T) i = 1 N EP( F i ) i = 1 N VI(C, A i ). Then { x n }, { u n }, { z n }, and { y n } are bounded.

Proof Let x F(T) i = 1 N EP( F i ) i = 1 N VI(C, A i ); we have x = T r n ( x ). It follows from Lemmas 2.2 and 2.3 that u n = T r n ( x n ). Since T r n is nonexpansive mapping, we have

u n x x n x .
(3.2)

Since lim n λ n =0, without loss of generality, we may assume that 0< λ n < A i 1 , n0 and i=1,2,,N, by Lemma 2.9, the mapping I λ n i = 1 N b i A i is nonexpansive mapping, and we have

z n x = P C [ u n λ n i = 1 N b i A i u n ] P C [ x λ n i = 1 N b i A i x ] ( I λ n i = 1 N b i A i ) u n ( I λ n i = 1 N b i A i ) x u n x x n x .
(3.3)

We define V n = α n ρU( x n )+(I α n μF)(T( y n )). Next, we prove that the sequence { x n } is bounded, and without loss of generality we can assume that β n α n for all n1. From (3.1), we have

x n + 1 x = γ n ( x n x ) + ( 1 γ n ) ( P C [ V n ] P C [ x ] ) γ n x n x + ( 1 γ n ) α n ρ U ( x n ) + ( I α n μ F ) ( T ( y n ) ) x γ n x n x + ( 1 γ n ) ( α n ρ U ( x n ) μ F ( x ) + ( I α n μ F ) ( T ( y n ) ) ( I α n μ F ) T ( x ) ) = γ n x n x + ( 1 γ n ) ( α n ρ U ( x n ) ρ U ( x ) + ( ρ U μ F ) x + ( I α n μ F ) ( T ( y n ) ) ( I α n μ F ) T ( x ) ) γ n x n x + ( 1 γ n ) ( α n ρ τ x n x + α n ( ρ U μ F ) x + ( 1 α n ν ) y n x ) = γ n x n x + ( 1 γ n ) ( α n ρ τ x n x + α n ( ρ U μ F ) x + ( 1 α n ν ) β n S x n + ( 1 β n ) z n x ) γ n x n x + α n ρ τ ( 1 γ n ) x n x + α n ( 1 γ n ) ( ρ U μ F ) x + ( 1 α n ν ) ( 1 γ n ) ( β n S x n S x + β n S x x + ( 1 β n ) z n x ) γ n x n x + α n ρ τ ( 1 γ n ) x n x + α n ( 1 γ n ) ( ρ U μ F ) x + ( 1 α n ν ) ( 1 γ n ) ( β n S x n S x + β n S x x + ( 1 β n ) x n x ) γ n x n x + α n ρ τ ( 1 γ n ) x n x + α n ( 1 γ n ) ( ρ U μ F ) x + ( 1 α n ν ) ( 1 γ n ) ( β n x n x + β n S x x + ( 1 β n ) x n x ) = ( 1 α n ( ν ρ τ ) ( 1 γ n ) ) x n x + α n ( 1 γ n ) ( ρ U μ F ) x + ( 1 α n ν ) ( 1 γ n ) β n S x x ( 1 α n ( ν ρ τ ) ( 1 γ n ) ) x n x + α n ( 1 γ n ) ( ρ U μ F ) x + β n ( 1 γ n ) S x x ( 1 α n ( ν ρ τ ) ( 1 γ n ) ) x n x + α n ( 1 γ n ) ( ( ρ U μ F ) x + S x x ) = ( 1 α n ( ν ρ τ ) ( 1 γ n ) ) x n x + α n ( 1 γ n ) ( ν ρ τ ) ν ρ τ ( ( ρ U μ F ) x + S x x ) max { x n x , 1 ν ρ τ ( ( ρ U μ F ) x + S x x ) } ,

where the third inequality follows from Lemma 2.6 and the fifth inequality follows from (3.3). By induction on n, we obtain x n x max{ x 0 x , 1 ν ρ τ ((ρUμF) x +S x x )}, for n0 and x 0 C. Hence, { x n } is bounded and consequently, we deduce that { u n }, { z n }, { v n }, { y n }, {S( x n )}, {T( x n )}, {F(T( y n ))}, and {U( x n )} are bounded. □

Lemma 3.2 Let x F(T) i = 1 N EP( F i ) i = 1 N VI(C, A i ) and { x n } be the sequence generated by Algorithm  3.1. Then we have:

  1. (a)

    lim n x n + 1 x n =0.

  2. (b)

    The weak w-limit set w w ( x n )F(T) ( w w ( x n )={x: x n i x}).

Proof From the nonexpansivity of the mapping I λ n i = 1 N b i A i and P C , we have

z n z n 1 ( u n λ n i = 1 N b i A i u n ) ( u n 1 λ n 1 i = 1 N b i A i u n 1 ) = ( u n λ n i = 1 N b i A i u n ) ( u n 1 λ n i = 1 N b i A i u n 1 ) ( λ n λ n 1 ) i = 1 N b i A i u n 1 ( u n λ n i = 1 N b i A i u n ) ( u n 1 λ n i = 1 N b i A i u n 1 ) + | λ n λ n 1 | i = 1 N b i A i u n 1 u n u n 1 + | λ n λ n 1 | i = 1 N b i A i u n 1 .
(3.4)

Next, we estimate that

y n y n 1 = β n S x n + ( 1 β n ) z n ( β n 1 S x n 1 + ( 1 β n 1 ) z n 1 ) = β n ( S x n S x n 1 ) + ( β n β n 1 ) S x n 1 + ( 1 β n ) ( z n z n 1 ) + ( β n 1 β n ) z n 1 β n x n x n 1 + ( 1 β n ) z n z n 1 + | β n β n 1 | ( S x n 1 + z n 1 ) .
(3.5)

It follows from (3.4) and (3.5) that

y n y n 1 β n x n x n 1 + ( 1 β n ) { u n u n 1 + | λ n λ n 1 | i = 1 N b i A i u n 1 } + | β n β n 1 | ( S x n 1 + z n 1 ) .
(3.6)

On the other hand, u n = T r n ( x n ) and u n 1 = T r n 1 ( x n 1 ), we obtain

i = 1 N a i F i ( u n ,y)+ 1 r n y u n , u n x n 0,yC
(3.7)

and

i = 1 N a i F i ( u n 1 ,y)+ 1 r n 1 y u n 1 , u n 1 x n 1 0,yC.
(3.8)

Taking y= u n 1 in (3.7) and y= u n in (3.8), we get

i = 1 N a i F i ( u n , u n 1 )+ 1 r n u n 1 u n , u n x n 0
(3.9)

and

i = 1 N a i F i ( u n 1 , u n )+ 1 r n 1 u n u n 1 , u n 1 x n 1 0.
(3.10)

Adding (3.9) and (3.10) and using the monotonicity of i = 1 N a i F i , we have

u n u n 1 , u n 1 x n 1 r n 1 u n x n r n 0,

which implies that

0 u n u n 1 , r n r n 1 ( u n 1 x n 1 ) ( u n x n ) = u n 1 u n , u n u n 1 + ( 1 r n r n 1 ) u n 1 x n + r n r n 1 x n 1 = u n 1 u n , ( 1 r n r n 1 ) u n 1 x n + r n r n 1 x n 1 u n u n 1 2 = u n 1 u n , ( 1 r n r n 1 ) ( u n 1 x n 1 ) + ( x n 1 x n ) u n u n 1 2 u n 1 u n { | 1 r n r n 1 | u n 1 x n 1 + x n 1 x n } u n u n 1 2

and then

u n 1 u n |1 r n r n 1 | u n 1 x n 1 + x n 1 x n .

Without loss of generality, let us assume that there exists a real number χ such that r n >χ>0 for all positive integers n. Then we get

u n 1 u n x n 1 x n + 1 χ | r n 1 r n | u n 1 x n 1 .
(3.11)

It follows from (3.6) and (3.11) that

y n y n 1 β n x n x n 1 + ( 1 β n ) { x n x n 1 + 1 χ | r n r n 1 | u n 1 x n 1 + | λ n λ n 1 | i = 1 N b i A i u n 1 } + | β n β n 1 | ( S x n 1 + z n 1 ) = x n x n 1 + ( 1 β n ) { 1 χ | r n r n 1 | u n 1 x n 1 + | λ n λ n 1 | i = 1 N b i A i u n 1 } + | β n β n 1 | ( S x n 1 + z n 1 ) .
(3.12)

Next, we estimate that

x n + 1 x n = ( γ n x n + ( 1 γ n ) P C [ V n ] ) ( γ n 1 x n 1 + ( 1 γ n 1 ) P C [ V n 1 ] ) = γ n ( x n x n 1 ) + ( γ n γ n 1 ) x n 1 + ( 1 γ n ) ( P C [ V n ] P C [ V n 1 ] ) ( γ n γ n 1 ) P C [ V n 1 ] γ n x n x n 1 + | γ n γ n 1 | ( x n 1 + P C [ V n 1 ] ) + ( 1 γ n ) P C [ V n ] P C [ V n 1 ] .
(3.13)

Applying Lemma 2.6 to get

P C [ V n ] P C [ V n 1 ] α n ρ ( U ( x n ) U ( x n 1 ) ) + ( α n α n 1 ) ρ U ( x n 1 ) + ( I α n μ F ) ( T ( y n ) ) ( I α n μ F ) T ( y n 1 ) + ( I α n μ F ) ( T ( y n 1 ) ) ( I α n 1 μ F ) ( T ( y n 1 ) ) α n ρ τ x n x n 1 + ( 1 α n ν ) y n y n 1 + | α n α n 1 | ( ρ U ( x n 1 ) + μ F ( T ( y n 1 ) ) ) .
(3.14)

From (3.12) and (3.14), we have

P C [ V n ] P C [ V n 1 ] α n ρ τ x n x n 1 + ( 1 α n ν ) ( x n x n 1 + 1 μ | r n r n 1 | u n 1 x n 1 + | λ n λ n 1 | i = 1 N b i A i u n 1 ) + | β n β n 1 | ( S x n 1 + z n 1 ) + | α n α n 1 | ( ρ U ( x n 1 ) + μ F ( T ( y n 1 ) ) ) ( 1 ( ν ρ τ ) α n ) x n x n 1 + 1 μ | r n r n 1 | u n 1 x n 1 + | λ n λ n 1 | i = 1 N b i A i u n 1 + | β n β n 1 | ( S x n 1 + z n 1 ) + | α n α n 1 | ( ρ U ( x n 1 ) + μ F ( T ( y n 1 ) ) ) .
(3.15)

Substituting (3.15) into (3.13), we get

x n + 1 x n ( 1 ( ν ρ τ ) ( 1 γ n ) α n ) x n x n 1 + 1 μ | r n r n 1 | u n 1 x n 1 + | λ n λ n 1 | i = 1 N b i A i u n 1 + | β n β n 1 | ( S x n 1 + z n 1 ) + | α n α n 1 | ( ρ U ( x n 1 ) + μ F ( T ( y n 1 ) ) ) + | γ n γ n 1 | ( x n 1 + P C [ V n 1 ] ) ( 1 ( ν ρ τ ) ( 1 γ n ) α n ) x n x n 1 + M ( 1 μ | r n r n 1 | + | λ n λ n 1 | + | β n β n 1 | + | α n α n 1 | + | γ n γ n 1 | ) .
(3.16)

Here

M = max { sup n 1 u n 1 x n 1 , sup n 1 i = 1 N b i A i u n 1 , sup n 1 ( S x n 1 + z n 1 ) , sup n 1 ( ρ U ( x n 1 ) + μ F ( T ( y n 1 ) ) ) , sup n 1 ( x n 1 + P C [ V n 1 ] ) } .

It follows by conditions (a)-(b), (e)-(g) of Algorithm 3.1 and Lemma 2.7 that

lim n x n + 1 x n =0.

Since x n + 1 x n =(1 γ n )( P C [ V n ] x n ), we obtain

lim n P C [ V n ] x n =0.
(3.17)

Next, we show that lim n u n x n =0. Since T r n is firmly nonexpansive, we have

u n x 2 = T r n ( x n ) T r n ( x ) 2 u n x , x n x = 1 2 { u n x 2 + x n x 2 u n x ( x n x ) 2 } .

Hence, we get

u n x 2 x n x 2 u n x n 2 .

From (3.3) and the inequality above, we have

P C [ V n ] x 2 = P C [ V n ] x , P C [ V n ] x = P C [ V n ] V n , P C [ V n ] x + V n x , P C [ V n ] x α n ( ρ U ( x n ) μ F ( x ) ) + ( I α n μ F ) ( T ( y n ) ) ( I α n μ F ) ( T ( x ) ) , P C [ V n ] x = α n ρ ( U ( x n ) U ( x ) ) , P C [ V n ] x + α n ρ U ( x ) μ F ( x ) , P C [ V n ] x + ( I α n μ F ) ( T ( y n ) ) ( I α n μ F ) ( T ( x ) ) , P C [ V n ] x α n ρ τ x n x P C [ V n ] x + α n ρ U ( x ) μ F ( x ) , P C [ V n ] x + ( 1 α n ν ) y n x P C [ V n ] x α n ρ τ 2 ( x n x 2 + P C [ V n ] x 2 ) + α n ρ U ( x ) μ F ( x ) , P C [ V n ] x + ( 1 α n ν ) 2 ( y n x 2 + P C [ V n ] x 2 ) ( 1 α n ( ν ρ τ ) ) 2 P C [ V n ] x 2 + α n ρ τ 2 x n x 2 + α n ρ U ( x ) μ F ( x ) , P C [ V n ] x + ( 1 α n ν ) 2 ( β n S x n x 2 + ( 1 β n ) z n x 2 ) ( 1 α n ( ν ρ τ ) ) 2 P C [ V n ] x 2 + α n ρ τ 2 x n x 2 + α n ρ U ( x ) μ F ( x ) , P C [ V n ] x + ( 1 α n ν ) β n 2 S x n x 2 + ( 1 α n ν ) ( 1 β n ) 2 { x n x 2 u n x n 2 } ,
(3.18)

which implies that

P C [ V n ] x 2 α n ρ τ 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) x n x 2 + 2 α n 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) ρ U ( x ) μ F ( x ) , P C [ V n ] x + ( 1 α n ν ) β n 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) S x n x 2 + ( 1 α n ν ) ( 1 β n ) 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) { x n x 2 u n x n 2 } α n ρ τ 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) x n x 2 + 2 α n 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) ρ U ( x ) μ F ( x ) , P C [ V n ] x + ( 1 α n ν ) β n 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) S x n x 2 + x n x 2 ( 1 α n ν ) ( 1 β n ) 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) u n x n 2 .

Hence,

( 1 α n ν ) ( 1 β n ) 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) u n x n 2 α n ρ τ 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) x n x 2 + 2 α n 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) ρ U ( x ) μ F ( x ) , P C [ V n ] x + ( 1 α n ν ) β n 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) S x n x 2 + x n x 2 P C [ V n ] x 2 α n ρ τ 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) x n x 2 + ( 1 α n ν ) β n 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) S x n x 2 + 2 α n 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) ρ U ( x ) μ F ( x ) , P C [ V n ] x + ( x n x + P C [ V n ] x ) P C [ V n ] x n .

Since lim n P C [ V n ] x n =0, α n 0, β n 0, we obtain

lim n u n x n =0.
(3.19)

By (2.2) and the nonexpansivity of the mapping I λ n i = 1 N b i A i , we get

z n x 2 = P C [ u n λ n i = 1 N b i A i u n ] P C [ x λ n i = 1 N b i A i x ] 2 z n x , ( u n λ n i = 1 N b i A i u n ) ( x λ n i = 1 N b i A i x ) = 1 2 { z n x 2 + ( I λ n i = 1 N b i A i ) u n ( I λ n i = 1 N b i A i ) x 2 u n x λ n ( i = 1 N b i A i u n i = 1 N b i A i x ) ( z n x ) 2 } 1 2 { z n x 2 + u n x 2 u n z n λ n ( i = 1 N b i A i u n i = 1 N b i A i x ) 2 } 1 2 { z n x 2 + u n x 2 u n z n 2 + 2 λ n u n z n , i = 1 N b i A i u n i = 1 N b i A i x } 1 2 { z n x 2 + u n x 2 u n z n 2 + 2 λ n u n z n i = 1 N b i A i u n i = 1 N b i A i x } .

Hence

z n x 2 u n x 2 u n z n 2 + 2 λ n u n z n i = 1 N b i A i u n i = 1 N b i A i x x n x 2 u n z n 2 + 2 λ n u n z n i = 1 N b i A i u n i = 1 N b i A i x ,

where the second inequality follows from (3.2). From (3.18), and the inequality above, we have

P C [ V n ] x 2 ( 1 α n ( ν ρ τ ) ) 2 P C [ V n ] x 2 + α n ρ τ 2 x n x 2 + α n ρ U ( x ) μ F ( x ) , P C [ V n ] x + ( 1 α n ν ) 2 ( β n S x n x 2 + ( 1 β n ) z n x 2 ) ( 1 α n ( ν ρ τ ) ) 2 P C [ V n ] x 2 + α n ρ τ 2 x n x 2 + α n ρ U ( x ) μ F ( x ) , P C [ V n ] x + ( 1 α n ν ) 2 { β n S x n x 2 + ( 1 β n ) ( x n x 2 u n z n 2 + 2 λ n u n z n i = 1 N b i A i u n i = 1 N b i A i x ) } ,

which implies that

P C [ V n ] x 2 α n ρ τ 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) x n x 2 + 2 α n 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) ρ U ( x ) μ F ( x ) , P C [ V n ] x + ( 1 α n ν ) β n 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) S x n x 2 + ( 1 α n ν ) ( 1 β n ) 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) { x n x 2 u n z n 2 + 2 λ n u n z n i = 1 N b i A i u n i = 1 N b i A i x } α n ρ τ 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) x n x 2 + ( 1 α n ν ) β n 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) S x n x 2 + 2 α n 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) ρ U ( x ) μ F ( x ) , P C [ V n ] x + x n x 2 + ( 1 α n ν ) ( 1 β n ) 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) { u n z n 2 + 2 λ n u n z n i = 1 N b i A i u n i = 1 N b i A i x } .

Hence,

( 1 α n ν ) ( 1 β n ) 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) u n z n 2 α n ρ τ 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) x n x 2 + ( 1 α n ν ) β n 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) S x n x 2 + 2 α n 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) ρ U ( x ) μ F ( x ) , P C [ V n ] x + x n x 2 P C [ V n ] x 2 + ( 1 α n ν ) ( 1 β n ) 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) { 2 λ n u n z n i = 1 N b i A i u n i = 1 N b i A i x } α n ρ τ 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) x n x 2 + ( 1 α n ν ) β n 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) S x n x 2 + 2 α n 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) ρ U ( x ) μ F ( x ) , P C [ V n ] x + ( x n x + P C [ V n ] x ) P C [ V n ] x n + 2 λ n u n z n i = 1 N b i A i u n i = 1 N b i A i x .

Since lim n P C [ V n ] x n =0, α n 0, β n 0, and lim n λ n =0, we obtain

lim n u n z n =0.
(3.20)

It follows from (3.19) and (3.20) that

lim n x n z n =0.
(3.21)

Since T( x n )C, we have

x n T ( x n ) x n x n + 1 + x n + 1 T ( x n ) = x n x n + 1 + γ n ( x n T ( x n ) ) + ( 1 γ n ) ( P C [ V n ] T ( x n ) ) x n x n + 1 + γ n x n T ( x n ) + ( 1 γ n ) α n ( ρ U ( x n ) μ F ( T ( y n ) ) ) + T ( y n ) T ( x n ) x n x n + 1 + γ n x n T ( x n ) + α n ( 1 γ n ) ρ U ( x n ) μ F ( T ( y n ) ) + ( 1 γ n ) y n x n = x n x n + 1 + γ n x n T ( x n ) + α n ( 1 γ n ) ρ U ( x n ) μ F ( T ( y n ) ) + ( 1 γ n ) β n S x n + ( 1 β n ) z n x n x n x n + 1 + γ n x n T ( x n ) + α n ( 1 γ n ) ρ U ( x n ) μ F ( T ( y n ) ) + β n ( 1 γ n ) S x n x n + ( 1 β n ) ( 1 γ n ) z n x n ,

which implies that

x n T ( x n ) 1 1 γ n x n x n + 1 + α n ρ U ( x n ) μ F ( T ( y n ) ) + β n S x n x n + ( 1 β n ) z n x n .

Since lim n x n + 1 x n =0, α n 0, β n 0, and ρU( x n )μF(T( y n )) and S x n x n are bounded, and lim n z n x n =0, we obtain

lim n x n T ( x n ) =0.

Since { x n } is bounded, without loss of generality we can assume that x n x C. It follows from Lemma 2.4 that x F(T). Therefore w w ( x n )F(T). □

Theorem 3.1 The sequence { x n } generated by Algorithm  3.1 converges strongly to z, which is the unique solution of the variational inequality

ρ U ( z ) μ F ( z ) , x z 0,xF(T) i = 1 N EP( F i ) i = 1 N VI(C, A i ).
(3.22)

Proof Since { x n } is bounded x n w and from Lemma 3.2, we have wF(T). Next, we show that w i = 1 N EP( F i ). Since u n = T r n ( x n ), we have

i = 1 N a i F i ( u n ,y)+ 1 r n y u n , u n x n 0,yC.

It follows from the monotonicity of i = 1 N a i F i that

1 r n y u n , u n x n i = 1 N a i F i (y, u n ),yC

and

y u n k , u n k x n k r n k i = 1 N a i F i (y, u n k ),yC.
(3.23)

Since lim n u n x n =0, and x n w, it is easy to observe that u n k w. For any 0<t1 and yC, let y t =ty+(1t)w, and let us have y t C. Then from (3.23), we obtain

0 y t u n k , u n k x n k r n k + i = 1 N a i F i ( y t , u n k ).
(3.24)

Since u n k w, it follows from (3.24) that

0 i = 1 N a i F i ( y t ,w).
(3.25)

Since i = 1 N a i F i satisfies (A1)-(A4), it follows from (3.25) that

0 = i = 1 N a i F i ( y t , y t ) t i = 1 N a i F i ( y t , y ) + ( 1 t ) i = 1 N a i F i ( y t , w ) t i = 1 N a i F i ( y t , y ) ,
(3.26)

which implies that i = 1 N a i F i ( y t ,y)0. Letting t 0 + , we have

i = 1 N a i F i (w,y)0,yC,

therefore, wEP( i = 1 N a i F i )= i = 1 N EP( F i ).

Furthermore, we show that w i = 1 N VI(C, A i ). Let

Tv= { i = 1 N b i A i v + N C v , v C , , otherwise ,

where N C v:={wH:w,vu0,uC} is the normal cone to C at vC. Then T is maximal monotone and 0Tv if and only if vVI(C, i = 1 N b i A i ) (see [33]). Let G(T) denote the graph of T, and let (v,u)G(T); since u i = 1 N b i A i v N C v and z n C, we have

v z n , u i = 1 N b i A i v 0.
(3.27)

It follows from z n = P C [ u n λ n i = 1 N b i A i u n ] and vC that

v z n , z n ( u n λ n i = 1 N b i A i u n ) 0

and

v z n , z n u n λ n + i = 1 N b i A i u n 0.

Therefore, from (3.27) and strongly positivity of i = 1 N b i A i , we have

v z n k , u v z n k , i = 1 N b i A i v v z n k , i = 1 N b i A i v v z n k , z n k u n k λ n k + i = 1 N b i A i u n k = v z n k , i = 1 N b i A i v i = 1 N b i A i z n k + v z n k , i = 1 N b i A i z n k i = 1 N b i A i u n k v z n k , z n k u n k λ n k = v z n k , i = 1 N b i A i ( v z n k ) + v z n k , i = 1 N b i A i z n k i = 1 N b i A i u n k v z n k , z n k u n k λ n k v z n k , i = 1 N b i A i z n k i = 1 N b i A i u n k v z n k , z n k u n k λ n k .

Since lim n u n z n =0 and u n k w, it is easy to observe that z n k w. Hence, we obtain vw,u0. Since T is maximal monotone, we have w T 1 0, and hence, wVI(C, i = 1 N b i A i )= i = 1 N VI(C, A i ). Thus we have

wF(T) i = 1 N EP( F i ) i = 1 N VI(C, A i ).

Observe that the constants satisfy 0ρτ<ν and

k η k 2 η 2 1 2 μ η + μ 2 k 2 1 2 μ η + μ 2 η 2 1 μ ( 2 η μ k 2 ) 1 μ η μ η 1 1 μ ( 2 η μ k 2 ) μ η ν ,

therefore, from Lemma 2.5, the operator μFρU is μηρτ strongly monotone, and we get the uniqueness of the solution of the variational inequality (3.22) and denote it by zF(T) i = 1 N EP( F i ) i = 1 N VI(C, A i ).

Next, we claim that lim sup n ρU(z)μF(z), x n z0. Since { x n } is bounded, there exists a subsequence { x n k } of { x n } such that

lim sup n ρ U ( z ) μ F ( z ) , x n z = lim sup k ρ U ( z ) μ F ( z ) , x n k z = ρ U ( z ) μ F ( z ) , w z 0 .

By (3.17), we deduce

lim sup n ρ U ( z ) μ F ( z ) , P C [ V n ] z lim sup n ρ U ( z ) μ F ( z ) , P C [ V n ] x n + lim sup n ρ U ( z ) μ F ( z ) , x n z lim sup n ρ U ( z ) μ F ( z ) , x n z 0 .

Next, we show that x n z. Note that

P C [ V n ] z 2 = P C [ V n ] z , P C [ V n ] z = P C [ V n ] V n , P C [ V n ] z + V n z , P C [ V n ] z α n ( ρ U ( x n ) μ F ( z ) ) + ( I α n μ F ) ( T ( y n ) ) ( I α n μ F ) ( T ( z ) ) , P C [ V n ] z = α n ρ ( U ( x n ) U ( z ) ) , P C [ V n ] z + α n ρ U ( z ) μ F ( z ) , P C [ V n ] z + ( I α n μ F ) ( T ( y n ) ) ( I α n μ F ) ( T ( z ) ) , P C [ V n ] z α n ρ τ x n z P C [ V n ] z + α n ρ U ( z ) μ F ( z ) , P C [ V n ] z + ( 1 α n ν ) y n z P C [ V n ] z α n ρ τ x n z P C [ V n ] z + α n ρ U ( z ) μ F ( z ) , P C [ V n ] z + ( 1 α n ν ) { β n S x n S z + β n S z z + ( 1 β n ) z n z } P C [ V n ] z α n ρ τ x n z P C [ V n ] z + α n ρ U ( z ) μ F ( z ) , P C [ V n ] z + ( 1 α n ν ) { β n x n z + β n S z z + ( 1 β n ) x n z } P C [ V n ] z = ( 1 α n ( ν ρ τ ) ) x n z P C [ V n ] z + α n ρ U ( z ) μ F ( z ) , P C [ V n ] z + ( 1 α n ν ) β n S z z P C [ V n ] z 1 α n ( ν ρ τ ) 2 ( x n z 2 + P C [ V n ] z 2 ) + α n ρ U ( z ) μ F ( z ) , P C [ V n ] z + ( 1 α n ν ) β n S z z P C [ V n ] z ,

which implies that

P C [ V n ] z 2 1 α n ( ν ρ τ ) 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) x n z 2 + 2 α n 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) ρ U ( z ) μ F ( z ) , P C [ V n ] z + 2 ( 1 α n ν ) β n 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) S z z P C [ V n ] z ( 1 α n ( ν ρ τ ) ) x n z 2 + 2 α n ( ν ρ τ ) 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) { 1 ν ρ τ ρ U ( z ) μ F ( z ) , P C [ V n ] z + ( 1 α n ν ) β n α n ( ν ρ τ ) S z z P C [ V n ] z } .

From (3.1) and the inequality above, we get

x n + 1 z 2 γ n x n z 2 + ( 1 γ n ) P C ( V n ) z 2 γ n x n z 2 + ( 1 α n ( ν ρ τ ) ) ( 1 γ n ) x n z 2 + 2 α n ( 1 γ n ) ( ν ρ τ ) 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) { 1 ν ρ τ ρ U ( z ) μ F ( z ) , P C [ V n ] z + ( 1 α n ν ) β n α n ( ν ρ τ ) S z z P C [ V n ] z } = ( 1 α n ( ν ρ τ ) ( 1 γ n ) ) x n z 2 + 2 α n ( 1 γ n ) ( ν ρ τ ) 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) { 1 ν ρ τ ρ U ( z ) μ F ( z ) , P C [ V n ] z + ( 1 α n ν ) β n α n ( ν ρ τ ) S z z P C [ V n ] z } .

Let

υ n = α n (1 γ n )(νρτ)

and

δ n = 2 α n ( 1 γ n ) ( ν ρ τ ) 1 + α n ( ν ρ τ ) { 1 ν ρ τ ρ U ( z ) μ F ( z ) , P C [ V n ] z + ( 1 α n ν ) β n α n ( ν ρ τ ) S z z P C [ V n ] z } .

We have

n = 1 α n =

and

lim sup n { 1 ν ρ τ ρ U ( z ) μ F ( z ) , P C [ V n ] z + ( 1 α n ν ) β n α n ( ν ρ τ ) S z z P C [ V n ] z } 0.

It follows that

n = 1 υ n =and lim sup n δ n υ n 0.

Thus all the conditions of Lemma 2.7 are satisfied. Hence we deduce that x n z. This completes the proof. □

4 Applications

To verify the theoretical assertions, we consider the following examples.

Example 4.1 Let α n = 1 3 n , γ n = 1 2 n , β n = 1 n 3 , λ n = 1 8 ( n + 1 ) , and r n = n n + 1 .

We have

lim n α n = 1 3 lim n 1 n =0

and

n = 1 α n = 1 3 n = 1 1 n =.

The sequence { α n } satisfies condition (b),

lim n β n α n = lim n 3 n 2 =0.

Condition (c) is satisfied. We compute

α n 1 α n = 1 3 ( 1 n 1 1 n ) = 1 3 n ( n 1 ) .

It is easy to show n = 1 | α n 1 α n |<. Similarly, we can show n = 1 | γ n 1 γ n |< and n = 1 | β n 1 β n |<. The sequences { α n }, { γ n } and { β n } satisfy condition (e). We have

lim inf n r n = lim inf n n n + 1 =1

and

n = 1 | r n 1 r n | = n = 1 | n 1 n n n + 1 | = n = 1 1 n ( n + 1 ) n = 1 1 n 2 < .

Then the sequence { r n } satisfies condition (f),

n = 1 | λ n 1 λ n | = n = 1 | 1 8 n 1 8 ( n + 1 ) | = 1 8 n = 1 | 1 n 1 n + 1 | 1 8 .

Then the sequence { λ n } satisfies condition (g).

Let be the set of real numbers, and let the mapping T:RR be defined by

T(x)= x 2 ,xR,

let the mapping F:RR be defined by

F(x)= 2 x + 3 7 ,xR,

let the mapping S:RR be defined by

S(x)= x 3 ,xR,

let the mapping U:RR be defined by

U(x)= x 14 ,xR,

and, for i=1,2,,N, let the mapping A i :RR be defined by

A i x= i x 2 ,xR

and b i = 7 8 i + 1 N 8 N , and let the mapping F i :R×RR be defined by

F i (x,y)=i ( 3 x 2 + x y + 2 y 2 ) ,(x,y)R×R

and a i = 2 3 i + 1 N 3 N .

It is easy to show that T and S are nonexpansive mappings, F is a 1-Lipschitzian mapping and 1 7 -strongly monotone, U is a 1 7 -Lipschitzian, A i is a strongly positive linear bounded operator, and the F i satisfy (A1)-(A4). It is clear that

F(T) i = 1 N EP( F i ) i = 1 N VI(C, A i )={0}.

By the definition of F i , we have

0 i = 1 N a i F i ( u n , y ) + 1 r n y u n , u n x n = σ ( 3 u n 2 + u n y + 2 y 2 ) + 1 r n ( y u n ) ( u n x n ) ,

where σ= i = 1 N ( 2 3 i + 1 N 3 N )i. Then

0 σ r n ( 3 u n 2 + u n y + 2 y 2 ) + ( y u n y x n u n 2 + u n x n ) = 2 σ r n y 2 + ( σ r n u n + u n x n ) y 3 σ r n u n 2 u n 2 + u n x n .

Let B(y)=2σ r n y 2 +(σ r n u n + u n x n )y3σ r n u n 2 u n 2 + u n x n . B(y) is a quadratic function of y with coefficient a=2σ r n , b=σ r n u n + u n x n , c=3σ r n u n 2 u n 2 + u n x n . We determine the discriminant Δ of B as follows:

Δ = b 2 4 a c = ( σ r n u n + u n x n ) 2 8 σ r n ( 3 σ r n u n 2 u n 2 + u n x n ) = u n 2 + 10 σ r n u n 2 + 25 σ 2 u n 2 r n 2 2 x n u n 10 σ x n u n r n + x n 2 = ( u n + 5 σ u n r n ) 2 2 x n ( u n + 5 σ u n r n ) + x n 2 = ( u n + 5 σ u n r n x n ) 2 .

We have B(y)0, yR. If it has at most one solution in , then Δ=0, we obtain

u n = x n 1 + 5 σ r n .
(4.1)

For every n1, from (4.1), we rewrite (3.1) as follows:

{ z n = x n 1 + 5 σ r n i = 1 N b i i x n 16 ( n + 1 ) ( 1 + 5 σ r n ) ; y n = x n 3 n 3 + ( 1 1 n 3 ) z n ; x n + 1 = x n 2 n + ( 1 1 2 n ) ( ρ x n 42 n + y n 2 μ y n + 3 21 n ) .

In all the tests we take ρ= 1 15 and μ= 1 7 . In our example, η= 1 7 , k=1, τ= 1 7 . It is easy to show that the parameters satisfy 0<μ< 2 η k 2 , 0ρτ<ν, where ν=1 1 μ ( 2 η μ k 2 ) . All codes were written in Matlab, the values of { u n }, { z n }, { y n }, and { x n } with different n are reported in Tables 1 and 2.

Table 1 The values of { u n } , { z n } , { y n } , and { x n } with initial value x 1 =40
Table 2 The values of { u n } , { z n } , { y n } and { x n } with initial value x 1 =40

Remark 4.1 Tables 1 and 2, and Figures 1 and 2 show that the sequences { u n }, { z n }, { y n } and { x n } converge to 0, where {0}=F(T) i = 1 N EP( F i ) i = 1 N VI(C, A i ).

Figure 1
figure 1

The convergence of { u n } , { z n } , { y n } , and { x n } with initial value x 1 =40 for Algorithm  3.1 and Algorithm  3.2 .

Figure 2
figure 2

The convergence of { u n } , { z n } , { y n } , and { x n } with initial value x 1 =40 for Algorithm  3.1 and Algorithm  3.2 .

Tables 1 and 2 show that the convergence of Algorithm 3.1 is faster than Algorithm 3.2.

Example 4.2 In this example we take the same mappings and parameters as in Example 4.1 except T and F i .

Let T:[1,70][1,70] be defined by

T(x)= 2 x + 5 7 ,x[1,70],

and for i=1,2,,N, let the mapping F i :[1,70]×[1,70]R be defined by

F i (x,y)=i(yx)(y+2x3),(x,y)[1,70]×[1,70],

and a i = 4 5 i + 1 N 5 N . It is clear that

F(T) i = 1 N EP( F i ) i = 1 N VI(C, A i )={1}.

By the definition of F i , we have

0 i = 1 N a i F i ( u n , y ) + 1 r n y u n , u n x n = ω ( y u n ) ( y + 2 u n 3 ) + 1 r n ( y u n ) ( u n x n ) ,

where ω= i = 1 N 4 5 i + 1 N 5 N i. Then

0 ω r n ( y u n ) ( y + 2 u n 3 ) + ( y u n y x n u n 2 + u n x n ) = ω r n y 2 + ( ω r n u n + u n x n 3 ω r n ) y + 3 ω r n u n u n 2 2 ω r n u n 2 + u n x n .

Let A(y)=ω r n y 2 +(ω r n u n + u n x n 3ω r n )y+3ω r n u n u n 2 2ω r n u n 2 + u n x n . A(y) is a quadratic function of y with coefficient a=ω r n , b=ω r n u n + u n x n 3ω r n , c=3ω r n u n u n 2 2ω r n u n 2 + u n x n . We determine the discriminant Δ of A as follows:

Δ = b 2 4 a c = ( ω r n u n + u n x n 3 ω r n ) 2 4 ω r n ( 3 ω r n u n u n 2 2 ω r n u n 2 + u n x n ) = 9 ω 2 r n 2 6 ω r n u n 18 ω 2 r n 2 u n + u n 2 + 6 ω r n u n 2 + 9 ω 2 r n 2 u n 2 + 6 ω r n x n 2 u n x n 6 ω r n u n x n + x n 2 = ( u n 3 ω r n + 3 ω u n r n x n ) 2 .

We have A(y)0, yR. If it has at most one solution in , then Δ=0, we obtain

u n = x n + 3 ω r n 1 + 3 ω r n .
(4.2)

For every n1, we rewrite (3.1) as follows:

{ z n = P [ 1 , 70 ] ( u n i = 1 N b i i u n 16 ( n + 1 ) ) ; y n = x n 3 n 3 + ( 1 1 n 3 ) z n ; x n + 1 = x n 2 n + ( 1 1 2 n ) P [ 1 , 70 ] ( ρ x n 42 n + 2 y n + 5 7 μ 4 y n + 31 147 n ) .

Remark 4.2 Table 3 and Figure 3 show that the sequences { u n }, { z n }, { y n }, and { x n } converge to 1, where {1}=F(T) i = 1 N EP( F i ) i = 1 N VI(C, A i ).

Figure 3
figure 3

The convergence of { u n } , { z n } , { y n } , and { x n } with initial values x 1 =40 for Algorithm  3.1 and Algorithm  3.2 .

Table 3 The values of { u n } , { z n } , { y n } , and { x n } with initial value x 1 =40

Table 3 shows that the convergence of Algorithm 3.1 is faster than Algorithm 3.2.

5 Conclusions

In this paper, we suggest and analyze an iterative method for finding the approximate element of the common set of solutions of (1.3), (1.4), and (1.8) in real Hilbert space, which can be viewed as a refinement and improvement of some existing methods for solving a variational inequality problem, an equilibrium problem, and a hierarchical fixed point problem. Some existing methods (e.g. [13, 16, 18, 23, 25, 27]) can be viewed as special cases of Algorithm 3.1. Therefore, the new algorithm is expected to be widely applicable. In hierarchical fixed point problem (1.8), if S=I(ρUμF), then we can get the variational inequality (3.22).

In (3.22), if U=0 then we get the variational inequality

F ( z ) , x z 0,xF(T) i = 1 N EP( F i ) i = 1 N VI(C, A i ),

which just is the variational inequality studied by Suzuki [29] extending the common set of solutions of a combination of variational inequality problems, a combination of equilibria problem, and a hierarchical fixed point problem.

References

  1. Blum E, Oettli W: From optimization and variational inequalities to equilibrium problems. Math. Stud. 1994, 63: 123–145.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Combettes PL, Hirstoaga SA: Equilibrium programming using proximal like algorithms. Math. Program. 1997, 78: 29–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Combettes PL, Hirstoaga SA: Equilibrium programming in Hilbert spaces. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 2005, 6: 117–136.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Ceng LC, Yao JC: A hybrid iterative scheme for mixed equilibrium problems and fixed point problems. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2008, 214(1):186–201. 10.1016/j.cam.2007.02.022

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Takahashi S, Takahashi W: Strong convergence theorem for a generalized equilibrium problem and a nonexpansive mapping in a Hilbert space. Nonlinear Anal. 2008, 69(3):1025–1033. 10.1016/j.na.2008.02.042

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Reich S, Sabach S: Three strong convergence theorems regarding iterative methods for solving equilibrium problems in reflexive Banach spaces. Contemp. Math. 568. Optimization Theory and Related Topics 2012, 225–240.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Kassay G, Reich S, Sabach S: Iterative methods for solving systems of variational inequalities in reflexive Banach spaces. SIAM J. Optim. 2011, 21: 1319–1344. 10.1137/110820002

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Chang SS, Lee HWJ, Chan CK: A new method for solving equilibrium problem fixed point problem and variational inequality problem with application to optimization. Nonlinear Anal. 2009, 70: 3307–3319. 10.1016/j.na.2008.04.035

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Qin X, Shang M, Su Y: A general iterative method for equilibrium problem and fixed point problem in Hilbert spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2008, 69(11):3897–3909. 10.1016/j.na.2007.10.025

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Latif A, Ceng LC, Ansari QH: Multi-step hybrid viscosity method for systems of variational inequalities defined over sets of solutions of equilibrium problem and fixed point problems. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012., 2012: Article ID 186

    Google Scholar 

  11. Marino C, Muglia L, Yao JC: Viscosity methods for common solutions of equilibrium and variational inequality problems via multi-step iterative algorithms and common fixed points. Nonlinear Anal. 2012, 75(4):1787–1798. 10.1016/j.na.2011.09.019

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Suwannaut S, Kangtunyakarn A: The combination of the set of solutions of equilibrium problem for convergence theorem of the set of fixed points of strictly pseudo-contractive mappings and variational inequalities problem. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013., 2013: Article ID 291

    Google Scholar 

  13. Yao JC, Cho YJ, Liou YC: Iterative algorithms for hierarchical fixed points problems and variational inequalities. Math. Comput. Model. 2010, 52(9–10):1697–1705. 10.1016/j.mcm.2010.06.038

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Bnouhachem A: Strong convergence algorithm for split equilibrium problems and hierarchical fixed point problems. Sci. World J. 2014., 2014: Article ID 390956

    Google Scholar 

  15. Bnouhachem A: Strong convergence algorithm for approximating the common solutions of a variational inequality, a mixed equilibrium problem and a hierarchical fixed-point problem. J. Inequal. Appl. 2014., 2014: Article ID 154

    Google Scholar 

  16. Mainge PE, Moudafi A: Strong convergence of an iterative method for hierarchical fixed-point problems. Pac. J. Optim. 2007, 3(3):529–538.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Moudafi A: Krasnoselski-Mann iteration for hierarchical fixed-point problems. Inverse Probl. 2007, 23(4):1635–1640. 10.1088/0266-5611/23/4/015

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Cianciaruso F, Marino G, Muglia L, Yao Y: On a two-steps algorithm for hierarchical fixed point problems and variational inequalities. J. Inequal. Appl. 2009., 2009: Article ID 208692

    Google Scholar 

  19. Gu G, Wang S, Cho YJ: Strong convergence algorithms for hierarchical fixed points problems and variational inequalities. J. Appl. Math. 2011., 2011: Article ID 164978

    Google Scholar 

  20. Marino G, Xu HK: Explicit hierarchical fixed point approach to variational inequalities. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 2011, 149(1):61–78. 10.1007/s10957-010-9775-1

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Crombez G: A hierarchical presentation of operators with fixed points on Hilbert spaces. Numer. Funct. Anal. Optim. 2006, 27(3–4):259–277. 10.1080/01630560600569957

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  22. Ceng LC, Khan AR, Ansari QH, Yao JC: Viscosity approximation methods for strongly positive and monotone operators. Fixed Point Theory 2009, 10(1):35–71.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Ceng LC, Anasri QH, Yao JC: Some iterative methods for finding fixed points and for solving constrained convex minimization problems. Nonlinear Anal. 2011, 74(16):5286–5302. 10.1016/j.na.2011.05.005

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Wang Y, Xu W: Strong convergence of a modified iterative algorithm for hierarchical fixed point problems and variational inequalities. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2013., 2013: Article ID 121

    Google Scholar 

  25. Bnouhachem A: A modified projection method for a common solution of a system of variational inequalities, a split equilibrium problem and a hierarchical fixed-point problem. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2014., 2014: Article ID 22

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ceng LC, Anasri QH, Yao JC: Iterative methods for triple hierarchical variational inequalities in Hilbert spaces. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 2011, 151: 489–512. 10.1007/s10957-011-9882-7

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. Tian M: A general iterative algorithm for nonexpansive mappings in Hilbert spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2010, 73(3):689–694. 10.1016/j.na.2010.03.058

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  28. Geobel K, Kirk WA Stud. Adv. Math. 28. In Topics in Metric Fixed Point Theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; 1990.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  29. Suzuki N: Moudafi’s viscosity approximations with Meir-Keeler contractions. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2007, 325(1):342–352. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2006.01.080

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  30. Xu HK: Iterative algorithms for nonlinear operators. J. Lond. Math. Soc. 2002, 66(1):240–256. 10.1112/S0024610702003332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Acedo GL, Xu HK: Iterative methods for strictly pseudo-contractions in Hilbert spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2007, 67(7):2258–2271. 10.1016/j.na.2006.08.036

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  32. Cianciaruso F, Marino G, Muglia L, Yao Y: A hybrid projection algorithm for finding solutions of mixed equilibrium problem and variational inequality problem. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2010., 2010: Article ID 383740

    Google Scholar 

  33. Rockafellar RT: On the maximality of sums nonlinear monotone operators. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 1970, 149: 75–88. 10.1090/S0002-9947-1970-0282272-5

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The author would like to thank Professor Omar Halli, Rector, Ibn Zohr University, for providing excellent research facilities.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abdellah Bnouhachem.

Additional information

Competing interests

The author declares that he has no competing interests.

Authors’ original submitted files for images

Below are the links to the authors’ original submitted files for images.

Authors’ original file for figure 1

Authors’ original file for figure 2

Authors’ original file for figure 3

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits use, duplication, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bnouhachem, A. A hybrid iterative method for a combination of equilibria problem, a combination of variational inequality problems and a hierarchical fixed point problem. Fixed Point Theory Appl 2014, 163 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2014-163

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1812-2014-163

Keywords