 Research
 Open access
 Published:
Feasibility of setvalued implicit complementarity problems
Journal of Inequalities and Applications volume 2013, Article number: 284 (2013)
Abstract
In this paper, we introduce new concepts of (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )exceptional family of elements and (\alpha ,\gamma )exceptional family of elements for the setvalued implicit complementarity problems in {R}^{n} and infinitedimensional Hilbert spaces, respectively. By utilizing these notions and the LeraySchauder type fixed point theorem, we study the feasibility and strict feasibility of the setvalued implicit complementarity problems. Our results generalize some corresponding previously known results in the literature.
MSC:49J40, 90C31.
1 Introduction
Let (H,\u3008\cdot ,\cdot \u3009) be a Hilbert space, f,g:H\to {2}^{H} be two setvalued mappings and K be a cone with its dual cone {K}^{\ast}. The setvalued implicit complementarity problem defined by the (ordered) pair of mappings (f,g) and K is
If f, g are singlevalued mappings, SICP(f,g,K) reduces to the implicit complementarity problem
If g=I (the identity mapping), SICP(f,g,K) reduces to the complementarity problem
SICP(f,g,K) is said to be feasible if
SICP(f,g,K) is said to be strictly feasible if
Complementarity theory has been intensively considered due to its various applications in operations research, economic equilibrium and engineering design. The reader is referred to [1, 2] and the reference therein. The implicit complementarity problem was introduced into the complementarity theory in [3] as a mathematical tool in the study of some stochastic optimal control problems.
Strict feasibility plays an important role in the development of the theory and algorithms of complementarity problems. It is closely related to the solvability of the complementarity problems. For example, when f is a quasi(pseudo)monotone map, or more generally, a quasi{P}_{\ast}map, then the strict feasibility is sufficient for the solvability of the CP; for more details, see [4–7]. An important method in studying the feasibility of the complementarity problems is based on the concept of an exceptional family of elements for a continuous function. In recent years, several authors have been dedicated to the feasibility of the (implicit) complementarity problems by using the exceptional family of elements method; for example, see [8–11].
At the end of the paper [9], Isac proposed three open problems and two of them can be extracted as follows.
(Q_{1}) Are Theorem 5.2 and Theorem 6.1 true without the assumption {K}^{\ast}\subseteq K?
(Q_{2}) Can the method presented in this paper be adapted to the study of strict feasibility?
Huang et al. [8] and Yoel et al. [11] considered the solvability of problems (Q_{1}) and (Q_{2}), respectively. In [8], they introduced new concepts of αexceptional family of elements and (\alpha ,\beta )exceptional family of elements for continuous functions and studied the feasibility for nonlinear complementarity problems in {R}^{n} and an infinitedimensional Hilbert space H without the assumption {K}^{\ast}\subseteq K. In [11], based on their new concepts of (\alpha ,\gamma )exceptional family of elements and (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )exceptional family of elements and the topological degree theory, they studied the feasibility and strict feasibility of ICP(f,g,K) in {R}^{n} and an infinitedimensional Hilbert space H, which partly answered the open problem (Q_{2}).
Isac et al. [10] introduced a new notion of exceptional family of elements for the pair of (f,g) involved in the implicit complementarity problems. By employing the LeraySchauder alternative, they gave more general existence theorems for ICP(f,g,K) and SICP(f,g,K) when f, g are setvalued lower semicontinuous mappings with closed convex values. When f is a setvalued upper semicontinuous mapping with closed convex values, g is a onetoone mapping, [10] established some new existence theorems.
Many of the wellknown existence theorems for the problem ICP(f,g,K) demand that the mappings f and g be subject to some strong restrictions. For example, Isac [12, 13] required that f be strongly monotone and Lipschitz continuous with respect to g.
Motivated by the works mentioned above, we introduce new concepts of (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )exceptional family of elements and (\alpha ,\gamma )exceptional family of elements for SICP(f,g,K) under weaker restrictions on the mappings f and g. By utilizing these notions and the LeraySchauder type fixed point theorem proposed in [14], we investigate the (strict) feasibility of SICP(f,g,K) in {R}^{n} and infinitedimensional Hilbert spaces, respectively. The results presented in this paper not only answer the above open problems (Q_{1}) and (Q_{2}) proposed in [9], but also generalize some corresponding previously known results in [8, 9, 11, 15].
The paper is arranged in the following way. In Section 2, we recall some required concepts and basic results for the later use. In Section 3, we introduce new concepts of (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )exceptional family of elements and (\alpha ,\gamma )exceptional family of elements for SICP(f,g,K) and discuss the (strict) feasibility in {R}^{n}. In Section 4, by using the new notion of (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )exceptional family of elements, we consider the (strict) feasibility for SICP(f,g,K) in infinitedimensional Hilbert spaces.
2 Notations and fundamental results
Let X and Y be topological spaces, the collection of all nonempty compact subsets of X is denoted by c(X). For any subset A of X, the interior, closure and boundary of A are denoted by intA, \overline{A} and ∂A, respectively. The relative boundary of U in K is denoted by {\partial}_{K}U.
Definition 2.1 The setvalued mapping F:X\to {2}^{Y} is said to be upper semicontinuous on X if \{x\in X:f(x)\subset V\} is open in X whenever V is an open subset of Y.
Definition 2.2 The setvalued mapping F:X\to {2}^{Y} is said to be compact if F(X) is relatively compact in Y.
Definition 2.3 An upper semicontinuous setvalued mapping F:X\to c(Y) is said to be admissible if there exist a topological space Z and continuous functions p:Z\to X and q:Z\to Y satisfying

(1)
\mathrm{\varnothing}\ne q({p}^{1}x)\subset F(x) for each x\in X;

(2)
p is proper; that is, the inverse image {p}^{1}(A) of any compact set A\subset X is compact;

(3)
for each x\in X, {p}^{1}(x) is an acyclic subset of Z.
A nonempty topological space X is said to be acyclic provided that all of its reduced C̆ech homology groups over rational vanish. For a nonempty subset in a topological vector space, we have the following implications:
but not conversely.
It is well known that any upper semicontinuous setvalued mapping with compact acyclic values is admissible, and the composition of two admissible mappings is also admissible; see [14]. The admissible mapping is a large class of setvalued mappings, such a class contains composites of a lot of wellknown setvalued mappings, which appear in nonlinear analysis and algebraic topology; for more details, see [16].
The following property of admissible maps can be found in [17].
Lemma 2.1 Let X, Y be two topological spaces, E be a topological vector space, F,G:X\to c(E) be admissible, and let f:Y\to R be continuous. Then the mappings
are admissible.
Let E be a Banach space and A\subset E. The Kuratowski measure of noncompactness of A is defined by
where diam(A)=sup\{\parallel xy\parallel :x,y\in A\}. It is known that \alpha (A)=0 if and only if A is relatively compact.
An upper semicontinuous map F:E\to {2}^{E} is said to be condensing if for any subset B\subset E with \alpha (B)\ne 0, we have \alpha (F(B))<\alpha (B).
Let H be a Hilbert space, K\subset H is a closed pointed convex cone if and only if K is a closed subset of H satisfying
The dual cone of K is defined by
The following LeraySchauder type fixed point theorem is a particular form of Corollary 4.2 in [17], which is the basis of our arguments in this paper.
Theorem 2.1 Let H be a Hilbert space, C\subset H be closed and convex and U be a relatively open subset of C with 0\in U. Suppose that F:\overline{U}\to c(H) is a condensing admissible mapping such that
Then F has a fixed point in \overline{U}.
The projection operator onto K is denoted by {P}_{K}, for every x\in H, {P}_{K}(x) is the unique element in K satisfying
It is well known that, for each x\in H, the projection {P}_{K}(x) of x is characterized by the following properties:
(P_{1}) \u3008{P}_{K}(x)x,y\u3009\ge 0 for all y\in K;
(P_{2}) \u3008{P}_{K}(x)x,{P}_{K}(x)\u3009=0.
3 Feasibility and strict feasibility in {R}^{n}
In this section, we study the feasibility and strict feasibility of SICP(f,g,K) in {R}^{n}. We first introduce a new concept of (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )exceptional family of elements (for short, (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )EFE) for the pair (f,g) with respect to K.
Definition 3.1 Let K be a closed pointed convex cone in {R}^{n} with {K}^{\ast}\subseteq K and int{K}^{\ast}\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}. Let \epsilon :{R}^{n}\to c(int{K}^{\ast}), f,g:{R}^{n}\to c({R}^{n}) be admissible mappings. Given \alpha ,\beta ,\gamma \ge 0 with 0\le \alpha <\beta, we say that the family of elements {\{{x}_{r}\}}_{r>0}\subset {R}^{n} is an (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )EFE for the pair (f,g) with respect to K if the following conditions are satisfied:

(1)
\parallel {x}_{r}\parallel \to +\mathrm{\infty} as r\to +\mathrm{\infty};

(2)
for any r>0, there exist {\mu}_{r}>0 and elements {f}^{r}\in f({x}_{r}), {g}^{r}\in g({x}_{r}), {\epsilon}^{r}\in \epsilon ({x}_{r}) such that {s}^{r}={\mu}_{r}{x}_{r}+(\beta \alpha ){f}^{r}\gamma {\epsilon}^{r}\in {K}^{\ast}, {w}^{r}={\mu}_{r}{x}_{r}+{g}^{r}\alpha {f}^{r}\in K and \u3008{s}_{r},{w}_{r}\u3009=0.
Remark 3.1 If g=I, f is singlevalued, \gamma =0 and {\mu}_{r}=\frac{1}{{t}_{r}}1, then Definition 3.1 reduces to Definition 5.2 in [9].
Theorem 3.1 Let K be a closed pointed convex cone in {R}^{n} with {K}^{\ast}\subseteq K and int{K}^{\ast}\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}. Let \epsilon :{R}^{n}\to c(int{K}^{\ast}), f,g:{R}^{n}\to c({R}^{n}) be admissible mappings. Then either SICP(f,g,K) is feasible, or for any \alpha ,\beta ,\gamma \ge 0 with 0\le \alpha <\beta, there exists an (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )EFE (in the sense of Definition 3.1) for the pair (f,g) with respect to K.
Moreover, if \gamma >0, then either SICP(f,g,K) is strictly feasible, or for any \alpha \ge 0, there exists an (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )EFE (in the sense of Definition 3.1) for the pair (f,g) with respect to K.
Proof Define \varphi :{R}^{n}\to c({R}^{n}) by
Consider the equation
We have the following two cases to discuss.
Case 1. If equation (3.1) has a solution in {R}^{n}, denoted by {x}^{\ast}, then there exist {u}^{\ast}\in f({x}^{\ast}), {v}^{\ast}\in g({x}^{\ast}) and {\u03f5}^{\ast}\in \epsilon ({x}^{\ast}) such that
that is,
By the property (P_{1}) of {P}_{K}, we have
that is,
Then it follows from (3.3) that (\beta \alpha ){u}^{\ast}\gamma {\u03f5}^{\ast}\in {K}^{\ast}. Since \gamma \ge 0, it is clear that {u}^{\ast}\in {K}^{\ast} and so {u}^{\ast}\in f({x}^{\ast})\cap {K}^{\ast}. From (3.2) we obtain that {v}^{\ast}\in K+\alpha {u}^{\ast}\subset K+{K}^{\ast}, since {K}^{\ast}\subseteq K, thus {v}^{\ast}\in g({x}^{\ast})\cap K. Then SICP(f,g,K) is feasible.
Case 2. If equation (3.1) does not have a solution, set \psi =I\varphi, then the mapping ψ has no fixed point in {R}^{n}. Thus, for any r>0, let {U}_{r}=\{x\in {R}^{n}:\parallel x\parallel <r\}, the mapping ψ is fixedpoint free with respect to the set \overline{{U}_{r}}.
By the continuity of {P}_{K}, the upper semicontinuity of f, g and ε, it is clear to see that ψ is upper semicontinuous. Since any upper semicontinuous mapping with compact values is compact in {R}^{n}, thus ψ is compact.
Since I, {P}_{K}, f, g and ε all are admissible, it follows from Lemma 2.1 that ψ is admissible.
Applying Theorem 2.1 with the mapping ψ and the set U={U}_{r}, there exist {x}_{r}\in \partial {U}_{r}=\{x\in H:\parallel x\parallel =r\} and {\lambda}_{r}>1 such that
Setting {\mu}_{r}={\lambda}_{r}1, we have
From (3.4), it can be deduced that there exist {f}^{r}\in f({x}_{r}), {g}^{r}\in g({x}_{r}) and {\epsilon}^{r}\in \epsilon ({x}_{r}) such that
Then the properties (P_{1}) and (P_{2}) of {P}_{K} and (3.5) jointly yield that
and
Or equivalently,
and
Letting {s}^{r}={\mu}_{r}{x}_{r}+(\beta \alpha ){f}^{r}\gamma {\epsilon}^{r}, {w}^{r}={\mu}_{r}{x}_{r}+{g}^{r}\alpha {f}^{r}, then from (3.5) and (3.6), we obtain that {w}^{r}\in K and {s}^{r}\in {K}^{\ast}. Thus, (3.7) implies that \u3008{s}^{r},{w}^{r}\u3009=0.
Since {x}_{r}\in \partial {U}_{r}=\{x\in H:\parallel x\parallel =r\}, we have \parallel {x}_{r}\parallel \to +\mathrm{\infty} as r\to +\mathrm{\infty}.
Then {\{{x}_{r}\}}_{r>0} is an (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )EFE for the pair (f,g) with respect to K, thus the first assertion of the theorem is proved.
If \gamma >0, then it follows from (3.3) that (\beta \gamma ){u}^{\ast}\gamma {\u03f5}^{\ast}\in {K}^{\ast}, thus (\beta \gamma ){u}^{\ast}\in {K}^{\ast}+\gamma {\u03f5}^{\ast}\subset int{K}^{\ast}. This finishes the proof of the second assertion of the theorem, which completes the proof as a whole. □
Remark 3.2 Since Definition 3.1 is a generalization of Definition 5.2 in [9], then Theorem 5.2 in [9] is a special case of Theorem 3.1.
We now introduce a new notion of (\alpha ,\gamma )exceptional family of elements (for short, (\alpha ,\gamma )EFE) for the pair (f,g) with respect to K.
Definition 3.2 Let K be a closed pointed convex cone in {R}^{n} with int{K}^{\ast}\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}. Let \epsilon :{R}^{n}\to c(int{K}^{\ast}), f,g:{R}^{n}\to c({R}^{n}) be admissible mappings. Given \alpha ,\gamma \ge 0, we say that the family of elements {\{{x}_{r}\}}_{r>0}\subset {R}^{n} is an (\alpha ,\gamma )EFE for the pair (f,g) with respect to K if the following conditions are satisfied:

(1)
\parallel {x}_{r}\parallel \to +\mathrm{\infty} as r\to +\mathrm{\infty};

(2)
for any r>0, there exist {\mu}_{r}>0 and elements {f}^{r}\in f({x}_{r}), {g}^{r}\in g({x}_{r}), {\epsilon}^{r}\in \epsilon ({x}_{r}) such that {s}^{r}={\mu}_{r}{x}_{r}+{f}^{r}\gamma {\epsilon}^{r}\in {K}^{\ast}, {w}^{r}={\mu}_{r}{x}_{r}+{g}^{r}\alpha {P}_{K}({f}^{r})\in K and \u3008{s}_{r},{w}_{r}\u3009=0.
Remark 3.3

(1)
If g=I and f is singlevalued, Definition 3.2 reduces to Definition 3.1 in [11];

(2)
If g=I, f is singlevalued and \gamma =0, Definition 3.2 reduces to Definition 3.1 in [8];

(3)
If g=I, f is singlevalued and \alpha =\gamma =0, Definition 3.2 reduces to Definition 5.1 in [9] or Definition 3 in [15].
The following theorem shows us that the conclusion is true without the assumption {K}^{\ast}\subseteq K, which answers the open problem in [9]. And the assumption on f and g is weaker than that in [11].
Theorem 3.2 Let K be a closed pointed convex cone in {R}^{n} with int{K}^{\ast}\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}. Let \epsilon :{R}^{n}\to c(int{K}^{\ast}), f,g:{R}^{n}\to c({R}^{n}) be admissible mappings. Then either SICP(f,g,K) is feasible, or for any \alpha ,\gamma \ge 0, there exists an (\alpha ,\gamma )EFE (in the sense of Definition 3.2) for the pair (f,g) with respect to K.
Moreover, if \gamma >0, then either SICP(f,g,K) is strictly feasible, or for any \alpha \ge 0, there exists an (\alpha ,\gamma )EFE (in the sense of Definition 3.2) for the pair (f,g) with respect to K.
Proof Define \varphi :{R}^{n}\to c({R}^{n}) by
Consider the equation
We have the following two cases.
Case 1. If equation (3.8) has a solution in {R}^{n}, denoted by {x}^{\ast}\in {R}^{n}, then there exist {u}^{\ast}\in f({x}^{\ast}), {v}^{\ast}\in g({x}^{\ast}) and {\u03f5}^{\ast}\in \epsilon ({x}^{\ast}) such that
that is,
It follows from (3.9) that {v}^{\ast}\in K and thus {v}^{\ast}\in g({x}^{\ast})\cap K.
By the property (P_{1}) of {P}_{K}, we have
which is
It follows from (3.10) that {u}^{\ast}\gamma {\u03f5}^{\ast}\in {K}^{\ast}. Since \gamma \ge 0, it is clear that {u}^{\ast}\in {K}^{\ast}. Then {u}^{\ast}\in f({x}^{\ast})\cap {K}^{\ast}. Hence the problem SICP(f,g,K) is feasible.
Case 2. If equation (3.8) does not have a solution, set \psi =I\varphi, then the mapping ψ has no fixed point in {R}^{n}. For any r>0, let {U}_{r}=\{x\in {R}^{n}:\parallel x\parallel <r\}, the mapping ψ is fixedpoint free with respect to the set \overline{{U}_{r}}.
By the continuity of the projection operator {P}_{K}, and the upper semicontinuity of f, g and ε, it is clear to see that ψ is upper semicontinuous. Since any upper semicontinuous mapping is compact in {R}^{n}, thus ψ is compact.
Since I, {P}_{K}, f, g and ε all are admissible, it follows from Lemma 2.1 that ψ is admissible.
Applying Theorem 2.1 with the mapping ψ and the set U={U}_{r}, we obtain that there exist {x}_{r}\in \partial {U}_{r}=\{x\in H:\parallel x\parallel =r\} and {\lambda}_{r}>1 such that
Setting {\mu}_{r}={\lambda}_{r}1, we have
From (3.11), we deduce that there exist {f}^{r}\in f({x}_{r}), {g}^{r}\in g({x}_{r}) and {\epsilon}^{r}\in \epsilon ({x}_{r}) such that
From the properties (P_{1}) and (P_{2}) of {P}_{K} and (3.12), we have
and
Or equivalently,
and
Setting {s}^{r}={\mu}_{r}{x}_{r}+{f}^{r}\gamma {\epsilon}^{r} and {w}^{r}={\mu}_{r}{x}_{r}+{g}^{r}\alpha {P}_{K}({f}^{r}), from (3.12) and (3.13) we have that {w}^{r}\in K and {s}^{r}\in {K}^{\ast}. Thus, (3.14) implies that \u3008{s}^{r},{w}^{r}\u3009=0.
Since {x}_{r}\in \partial {U}_{r}=\{x\in H:\parallel x\parallel =r\}, thus we have \parallel {x}_{r}\parallel \to +\mathrm{\infty} as r\to +\mathrm{\infty}.
Then {\{{x}_{r}\}}_{r>0} is an (\alpha ,\gamma )EFE for the pair (f,g) with respect to K and so the first assertion of the theorem is proved.
If \gamma >0, then it follows from (3.10) that {u}^{\ast}\gamma {\u03f5}^{\ast}\in {K}^{\ast} and so {u}^{\ast}\in {K}^{\ast}+\gamma {\u03f5}^{\ast}\subset int{K}^{\ast}. This finishes the proof of the second assertion of the theorem, which completes the proof. □
4 Feasibility and strict feasibility in Hilbert spaces
In this section, we study the feasibility and strict feasibility of the problem SICP in Hilbert spaces. The following (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )EFE is new.
Definition 4.1 Let H be a Hilbert space, K\subset H be a closed convex cone with int{K}^{\ast}\ne \mathrm{\varnothing} and {K}^{\ast}\subseteq K. Let \epsilon :H\to c(int{K}^{\ast}) be compact admissible mappings, and let f,g:H\to c(H) be admissible mappings such that f(x)=\frac{1}{\beta}xS(x), g(x)=xT(x), where \beta >0, and S,T:H\to c(H) are compact. Given \alpha ,\gamma \ge 0 with 0\le \alpha <\beta, we say that the family of elements {\{{x}_{r}\}}_{r>0}\subset H is an (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )EFE for the pair (f,g) with respect to K, if the following conditions are satisfied:

(1)
\parallel {x}_{r}\parallel \to +\mathrm{\infty} as r\to +\mathrm{\infty};

(2)
for any r>0, there exist {\mu}_{r}>0 and elements {f}^{r}\in f({x}_{r}), {g}^{r}\in g({x}_{r}) and {\epsilon}^{r}\in \epsilon ({x}_{r}) such that {s}^{r}=\frac{{\mu}_{r}}{\beta}{x}_{r}+{f}^{r}\frac{1}{\beta \alpha}\gamma {\epsilon}^{r}\in {K}^{\ast}, {w}^{r}=(\beta \alpha ){\mu}_{r}{x}_{r}+\beta {g}^{r}\alpha \beta {f}^{r}\in K and \u3008{s}_{r},{w}_{r}\u3009=0.
Remark 4.1 If g=I, f is singlevalued, \gamma =0 and {\mu}_{r}=\frac{1}{{t}_{r}}1, then Definition 4.1 reduces to Definition 6.1 in [9].
Theorem 4.1 Let H be a Hilbert space, K\subset H be a closed convex cone with int{K}^{\ast}\ne \mathrm{\varnothing} and {K}^{\ast}\subseteq K. Let \epsilon :H\to c(int{K}^{\ast}) be a compact admissible mapping, and let f,g:H\to c(H) be admissible mappings such that f(x)=\frac{1}{\beta}xS(x) and g(x)=xT(x), where \beta >0 and S,T:H\to c(H) are compact. Then either SICP(f,g,K) is feasible, or for any \gamma \ge 0 and \alpha \ge 0 with 0\le \alpha <\beta, there exists an (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )EFE (in the sense of Definition 4.1) for the pair (f,g) with respect to K.
Moreover, if \gamma >0, then either SICP(f,g,K) is strictly feasible, or for any \alpha \ge 0, there exists an (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )EFE (in the sense of Definition 4.1) for the pair (f,g) with respect to K.
Proof Define \varphi :H\to c(H) by
Consider the equation
We consider the following two cases.
Case 1. If the mapping ϕ has a zero point in H, denoted by {x}^{\ast}\in H, then there exist {u}^{\ast}\in f({x}^{\ast}), {v}^{\ast}\in g({x}^{\ast}) and {\u03f5}^{\ast}\in \epsilon ({x}^{\ast}) such that
that is,
Using (4.2), as in the proof of Theorem 3.1, we obtain that SICP(f,g,K) is feasible if \gamma \ge 0. Moreover, if \gamma >0, then SICP(f,g,K) is strictly feasible.
Case 2. Equation (4.1) does not have a solution, set \psi =I\frac{\beta}{\beta \alpha}\varphi, then the mapping ψ has no fixed point in H. For any r>0, let {U}_{r}=\{x\in H:\parallel x\parallel <r\}, the mapping ψ is fixedpoint free with respect to the set \overline{{U}_{r}}.
Since f(x)=\frac{1}{\beta}xS(x) and g(x)=xT(x), thus, for any x\in H, we have
By the compactness of the mappings S, T and ε, it is easy to see that ψ is compact.
Since I, {P}_{K}, f, g and ε all are admissible, it follows from Lemma 2.1 that ψ is admissible.
Applying Theorem 2.1 with the restriction of the mapping ψ and the set U={U}_{r}, there exist {x}_{r}\in \partial {U}_{r}=\{x\in H:\parallel x\parallel =r\} and {\lambda}_{r}>1 such that
Setting {\mu}_{r}={\lambda}_{r}1, it can be deduced from (4.3) that there exist {f}^{r}\in f({x}_{r}), {g}^{r}\in g({x}_{r}) and {\epsilon}^{r}\in \epsilon ({x}_{r}) such that
Setting {s}^{r}=\frac{{\mu}_{r}}{\beta}{x}_{r}+{f}^{r}\frac{1}{\beta \alpha}\gamma {\epsilon}^{r} and {w}^{r}=(\beta \alpha ){\mu}_{r}{x}_{r}+\beta {g}^{r}\alpha \beta {f}^{r}, as in the proof of Theorem 3.1, we obtain that {\{{x}_{r}\}}_{r>0} is an (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )EFE for the pair (f,g) with respect to K. □
Remark 4.2 Since Definition 4.1 is a generalization of Definition 6.1 in [9], then Theorem 6.1 in [9] is a special case of Theorem 4.1.
Definition 4.2 Let K be a closed pointed convex cone in a Hilbert space H with int{K}^{\ast}\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}. Let f,g:H\to c(H) be two admissible mappings such that f(x)=\frac{1}{\beta}xS(x) and g(x)=\frac{1}{\beta}xT(x), where \beta >0, S,T:H\to c(H) are compact. Let \epsilon :H\to c(int{K}^{\ast}) be a compact admissible mapping. Given \alpha ,\gamma \ge 0, we say that the family of elements {\{{x}_{r}\}}_{r>0}\subset H is an (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )EFE for the pair (f,g) with respect to K, if the following conditions are satisfied:

(1)
\parallel {x}_{r}\parallel \to +\mathrm{\infty} as r\to +\mathrm{\infty};

(2)
for any r>0, there exist {\mu}_{r}>0 and elements {f}^{r}\in f({x}_{r}), {g}^{r}\in g({x}_{r}), {\epsilon}^{r}\in \epsilon ({x}_{r}) such that {s}^{r}={\mu}_{r}{x}_{r}+\beta {f}^{r}\gamma {\epsilon}^{r}\in {K}^{\ast}, {w}^{r}=\beta {\mu}_{r}{x}_{r}+\beta {g}^{r}\alpha {P}_{K}({x}_{r}\beta {f}^{r})\in K and \u3008{s}_{r},{w}_{r}\u3009=0.
Remark 4.3

(1)
If g=I and f is singlevalued, Definition 4.2 reduces to Definition 3.2 in [11];

(2)
If g=I, f is singlevalued and \gamma =0, Definition 4.2 reduces to Definition 3.2 in [8];

(3)
If g=I, f is singlevalued and \alpha =\gamma =0, Definition 4.2 reduces to Definition 6.1 in [9].
Theorem 4.2 Let H be a Hilbert space, and let K\subset H be a closed convex cone with int{K}^{\ast}\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}. Let \epsilon :H\to c(int{K}^{\ast}) be a compact admissible mapping, and let f,g:H\to c(H) be two admissible mappings such that f(x)=\frac{1}{\beta}xS(x) and g(x)=\frac{1}{\beta}xT(x), where \beta >0, S,T:H\to c(H) are compact. Then either SICP(f,g,K) is feasible, or for any \alpha \ge 0 and \gamma \ge 0, there exists an (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )EFE (in the sense of Definition 4.2) for the pair (f,g) with respect to K.
Moreover, if \gamma >0, then either SICP(f,g,K) is strictly feasible, or for any \alpha \ge 0, there exists an (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )EFE (in the sense of Definition 4.2) for the pair (f,g) with respect to K.
Proof Define \varphi :H\to c(H) by
Consider the equation
We consider the following two cases.
Case 1. If equation (4.4) has a solution in H, denoted by {x}^{\ast}\in H, then there exist {u}^{\ast}\in \beta f({x}^{\ast}), {v}^{\ast}\in \beta g({x}^{\ast}) and {\u03f5}^{\ast}\in \epsilon ({x}^{\ast}) such that
that is,
Using (4.5), as in the proof of Theorem 3.2, we obtain that the problem SICP(f,g,K) is feasible if \gamma \ge 0. Moreover, if \gamma >0, then SICP(f,g,K) is strictly feasible.
Case 2. If equation (4.4) does not have a solution, set \psi =I\varphi, then the mapping ψ has no fixed point in H. From the representations of f and g, we have
For any r>0, let {U}_{r}=\{x\in H:\parallel x\parallel <r\}, then the mapping ψ is fixedpoint free with respect to the set \overline{{U}_{r}}.
By the compactness of the mappings S, T and ε, it is clear that ψ is compact.
Since I, {P}_{K}, f, g and ε all are admissible, it follows from Lemma 2.1 that ψ is admissible.
Applying Theorem 2.1 with the restriction of the mapping ψ and the set U={U}_{r}, we obtain that there exist {x}_{r}\in \partial {U}_{r}=\{x\in H:\parallel x\parallel =r\} and {\lambda}_{r}>1 such that
Set {\mu}_{r}=\frac{{\lambda}_{r}1}{\beta}. Then it follows from (4.6) that there exist {f}^{r}\in f({x}_{r}), {g}^{r}\in g({x}_{r}) and {\epsilon}^{r}\in \epsilon ({x}_{r}) such that
Using (4.7), as in the proof of Theorem 3.2, we obtain that {\{{x}_{r}\}}_{r>0} is an (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )EFE for the pair (f,g) with respect to K.
The following theorem presents a sufficient condition which ensures that the problem SICP(f,g,K) does not have an (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )EFE for the pair (f,g) with respect to K. □
Theorem 4.3 Let H be a Hilbert space, K\subset H be a closed convex cone, and f,g:H\to {2}^{H} be two setvalued mappings satisfying the following condition.
(Condition ({\theta}_{g})) If there exist e\in {K}^{\ast} and a real number \rho >0 satisfying that for any x\in K with \parallel x\parallel >\rho, there exists {x}_{0}\in K such that for all y\in f(x) and z\in g(x), we have
Then SICP(f,g,K) does not have an (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )EFE (in the sense of Definition 4.2) for the pair (f,g) with respect to K. Thus, SICP(f,g,K) is strictly feasible.
Proof Define \epsilon :H\to c(int{K}^{\ast}) by
We show that SICP(f,g,K) does not have an (0,1,1)EFE (in the sense of Definition 4.2) for the pair (f,g).
Suppose on the contrary that there exists an (0,1,1)EFE {\{{x}_{r}\}}_{r>0}\subset K for the pair (f,g), that is, \parallel {x}_{r}\parallel \to +\mathrm{\infty} as r\to +\mathrm{\infty} and for any r>0, there exist {\mu}_{r}>0, {y}_{r}\in f({x}_{r}) and {z}_{r}\in g({x}_{r}) such that {s}_{r}={\mu}_{r}{x}_{r}+{y}_{r}e\in {K}^{\ast}, {w}_{r}={\mu}_{r}{x}_{r}+{z}_{r}\in K and \u3008{s}_{r},{w}_{r}\u3009=0.
For any r>\rho, \parallel {x}_{r}\parallel =r implies that \parallel {x}_{r}\parallel >\rho, thus there exists an element {x}_{0}^{r}\in K satisfying
Since {s}_{r}={\mu}_{r}{x}_{r}+{y}_{r}, it can be deduced from (4.8) that \u3008{z}_{r}{x}_{0}^{r},{s}_{r}\u3009>0.
Since {w}_{r}={\mu}_{r}{x}_{r}+{z}_{r}, {x}_{r},{x}_{0}^{r}\in K and {s}_{r}\in {K}^{\ast}, it is obvious that
which is a contradiction.
Therefore, SICP(f,g,K) does not have an (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma )EFE for the pair (f,g) with respect to K. Thus, by using Theorem 4.2, SICP(f,g,K) is strictly feasible. □
Remark 4.4 The condition ({\theta}_{g}) is a generalization of the Karamardian’s condition. We refer the reader to [5, 18, 19] for more details.
As a direct consequence of Theorem 4.3, we have the following corollary.
Corollary 4.1 Let H be a Hilbert space, K\subset H be a closed convex cone, and f,g:H\to {2}^{H} be two setvalued mappings satisfying the following condition.
(Condition (θ)) If there exists \rho >0 such that for any x\in K with \parallel x\parallel >\rho, there exists {x}_{0}\in K such that for all y\in f(x) and z\in g(x), we have
Then SICP(f,g,K) is strictly feasible.
References
Cottle RW, Pang JS, Stone RE: The Linear Complementarity Problem. Academic Press, New York; 1992.
Ferris MC, Pang JS: Engineering and economic applications of complementarity problems. SIAM Rev. 1997, 39: 669–713. 10.1137/S0036144595285963
Bensoussan A, Lions JL: Nouvelle formulation de problèmes de contròle impulsionnel et applications. C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris, Sér. AB 1973, 276: 1189–1192.
Harker PT, Pang JS: Finitedimensional variational inequality and nonlinear complementarity problems: a survey of theory, algorithms and applications. Math. Program. 1990, 48: 161–220. 10.1007/BF01582255
Karamardian S: Complementarity problems over cones with monotone and pseudomonotone maps. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 1976, 18: 445–454. 10.1007/BF00932654
Zhao YB, Isac G:Quasi{P}_{\ast}maps, P(\tau ,\alpha ,\beta )maps, exceptional family of elements, and complementarity problems. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 2000, 105: 213–231. 10.1023/A:1004674330768
Zhao YB, Li D: Strict feasibility conditions in nonlinear complementarity problems. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 2000, 107: 641–664. 10.1023/A:1026459501988
Huang N, Gao C, Huang X: Exceptional family of elements and feasibility for nonlinear complementarity problems. J. Glob. Optim. 2003, 25: 337–344. 10.1023/A:1022410913734
Isac G: Exceptional family of elements, feasibility and complementarity. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 2000, 104: 577–588. 10.1023/A:1004637625355
Isac G, Kalashnikov VV: Exceptional families of elements, LeraySchauder alternatives, pseudomonotone operators and complementarity. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 2001, 109: 69–83.
Yeol JC, Li J, Huang N: Solvability of implicit complementarity problems. Math. Comput. Model. 2007, 45: 1001–1009. 10.1016/j.mcm.2006.09.007
Isac G: On the implicit complementarity problem in Hilbert spaces. Bull. Aust. Math. Soc. 1985, 32: 251–260. 10.1017/S000497270000993X
Isac G: Fixed point theory and complementarity problems in Hilbert spaces. Bull. Aust. Math. Soc. 1987, 36: 295–310. 10.1017/S0004972700026575
Górniewicz L: Topological Fixed Point Theory of Multivalued Mappings. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht; 1999.
Isac G, Bulavski VA, Kalashnikov VV: Exceptional families, topological degree and complementarity problems. J. Glob. Optim. 1999, 10: 201–225.
Park S: Generalized LeraySchauder principles for condensing admissible multifunctions. Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. 1997, 172: 65–85. 10.1007/BF01782607
InSook K: Fixed point theorems for condensing admissible maps in topological vector spaces. Arch. Math. 2003, 80: 319–330.
Kalashnikov VV, Isac G: Solvability of implicit complementarity problems. Ann. Oper. Res. 2002, 116: 199–221. 10.1023/A:1021388515849
Karamardian S: Generalized complementarity problem. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 1971, 8: 161–168. 10.1007/BF00932464
Acknowledgements
The author thanks the anonymous referees for their valuable remarks and suggestions, which helped to improve the article considerably. This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (11061006), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (11226224), the Program for Excellent Talents in Guangxi Higher Education Institutions, the Guangxi Natural Science Foundation (2012GXNSFBA053008) and the Initial Scientific Research Foundation for PHD of Guangxi Normal University.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Authors’ contributions
All authors completed the paper together. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
About this article
Cite this article
Zhong, Ry., Wang, Xg. & Fan, Jh. Feasibility of setvalued implicit complementarity problems. J Inequal Appl 2013, 284 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/1029242X2013284
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1029242X2013284