- Research
- Open Access

# Geodesic *r*-preinvex functions on Riemannian manifolds

- Meraj Ali Khan
^{1}Email author, - Izhar Ahmad
^{2}and - Falleh R Al-Solamy
^{3}

**2014**:144

https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2014-144

© Khan et al.; licensee Springer. 2014

**Received:**27 November 2013**Accepted:**24 March 2014**Published:**9 April 2014

## Abstract

In this article, we introduce a new class of functions called *r*-invexity and geodesic *r*-preinvexity functions on a Riemannian manifolds. Further, we establish the relationships between *r*-invexity and geodesic *r*-preinvexity on Riemannian manifolds. It is observed that a local minimum point for a scalar optimization problem is also a global minimum point under geodesic *r*-preinvexity on Riemannian manifolds. In the end, a mean value inequality is extended to a Cartan-Hadamard manifold. The results presented in this paper extend and generalize the results that have appeared in the literature.

**MSC:**58E17, 90C26.

## Keywords

- invex sets
- preinvex functions
*r*-invexity- Riemannian manifolds

## 1 Introduction

Convexity is one of the most frequently used hypotheses in optimization theory. It is well known that a local minimum is also a global minimum for a convex function. A significant generalization of convex functions is that of an invex function introduced by Hanson [1]. Hanson’s initial results inspired a great deal of subsequent work, which has greatly expanded the role and applications of invexity in non-linear optimization and other branches of pure and applied sciences.

Ben-Israel and Mond [2] introduced a new generalization of convex sets and convex functions, Craven [3] called them invex sets and preinvex functions, respectively. Jeyakumar [4] studied the properties of preinvex functions and their role in optimization and mathematical programming. Jeyakumar and Mond [5] introduced a new class of functions, namely *V*-invex functions, and established sufficient optimality criteria and duality results in the multiobjective programming problems. Antczak [6] introduced the concept of *r*-invexity and *r*-preinvexity in mathematical programming. Making a step forward Antczak [7] introduced the concept of $V-r$-invexity for differentiable multiobjective programming problems, which is a generalization of *V*-invex functions [5] and *r*-invex functions [6].

On the other hand, in the last few years, several important concepts of non-linear analysis and optimization problems have been extended from Euclidean space to a Riemannian manifolds. In general, a manifold is not a linear space, but naturally concepts and techniques from linear spaces to Riemannian manifold can be extended. Rapcsak [8] and Udriste [9] considered a generalization of convexity, called geodesic convexity, and extended many results of convex analysis and optimization theory to Riemannian manifolds. The notion of invex functions on Riemannian manifolds was introduced by Pini [10] and Mititelu [11], and they investigated its generalization. Barani and Pouryayevali [12] introduced the geodesic invex set, geodesic *η*-invex function, and geodesic *η*-preinvex functions on a Riemannian manifold and found some interesting results. Further, Agarwal *et al.* [13] generalized the notion of geodesic *η*-preinvex functions to geodesic *α*-preinvex functions. Recently, Zhou and Huang [14] introduced the concept of roughly *B*-invex set and functions on Riemannian manifolds.

Motivated by work of Barani and Pouryayevali [12] and Antczak [6, 7], we introduce the concept of geodesic *r*-preinvex functions and *r*-invex functions on Riemannian manifolds, which is a generalization of preinvexity as defined in [6, 12]. Some relations between *r*-invex and geodesic *r*-preinvex functions are investigated. The existence conditions for global minima of these functions under proximal subdifferential of lower semicontinuity are also explored. In the end, a mean value inequality is also derived.

## 2 Preliminaries

In this section we recall some basic definitions and some basic results of Riemannian manifolds, for further study these materials are available in (*cf.* [15]).

*M*be a ${C}^{\mathrm{\infty}}$-manifold modeled on a Hilbert space

*H*, either finite or infinite dimensional, endowed with a Riemannian metric ${g}_{p}$ on a tangent space ${T}_{p}M$. The corresponding norm is denoted by ${\parallel \phantom{\rule{0.25em}{0ex}}\parallel}_{p}$ and the length of a piecewise ${C}^{1}$ curve $\gamma :[a,b]\to M$ is defined by

then *d* is a distance which induces the original topology on *M*. We know that on every Riemannian manifold there exists exactly one covariant derivative called a Levi-Civita connection, denoted by ${\mathrm{\nabla}}_{X}Y$, for any vector fields $X,Y\in TM$; we also recall that a geodesic is a ${C}^{\mathrm{\infty}}$-smooth path *γ* whose tangent is parallel along the path *γ*, that is, *γ* satisfies the equation ${\mathrm{\nabla}}_{d\gamma (t)/dt}\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}d\gamma (t)/dt=0$. Any path *γ* joining *p* and *q* in *M* such that $L(\gamma )=d(p,q)$ is a geodesic and is called a minimal geodesic. The existence theorem for ordinary differential equation implies that for every $v\in TM$, there exist an open interval $J(v)$ containing 0 and exactly one geodesic ${\gamma}_{v}:J(v)\to M$ with $d{\gamma}_{v}(0)/dt=v$. This implies that there is an open neighborhood $\overline{T}M$ of the submanifold *M* of *TM* such that for every $exp:\overline{T}M\to M$ is there is defined $exp(v)={J}_{v}(1)$ and the restriction of exp to a fiber ${T}_{p}M$ in $\overline{T}M$ is denoted by ${exp}_{p}$ for every $p\in M$. We use parallel transport of vectors along the geodesic. Recall that for a given curve $\gamma :I\to M$, a number ${t}_{0}\in I$, and a vector ${v}_{0}\in {T}_{\gamma ({t}_{0})}M$, there exists exactly one parallel vector field $V(t)$ along $\gamma (t)$ such that $V({t}_{0})={v}_{0}$. Moreover, the mapping defined by ${v}_{0}\mapsto V(t)$ is a linear isometry between the tangent spaces ${T}_{\gamma ({t}_{0})}M$ and ${T}_{\gamma (t)}M$, for each $t\in I$. We denote this mapping by ${P}_{{t}_{0},\gamma}^{t}$ and we call it the parallel translation from ${T}_{\gamma ({t}_{0})}M$ to ${T}_{\gamma (t)}M$ along the curve *γ*.

If *f* is a differentiable map from the manifold *M* to manifold *N*, then $d{f}_{x}$, denotes the differential of *f* at *x*. We also recall that a simply connected complete Riemannian manifold of non-positive sectional curvature is called a Cartan-Hadamard manifold.

## 3 Geodesic *r*-invex functions

In this section, we define geodesic *r*-invex functions and *r*-preinvex functions. Barani and Pouryayevali [12] define the invex sets as follows.

**Definition 3.1**Let

*M*be a Riemannian manifold and $\eta :M\times M\to TM$ such that for every $x,y\in M$, $\eta (x,y)\in {T}_{y}M$. A non-empty subset

*S*of

*M*is said to be a geodesic invex set with respect to

*η*if for every $x,y\in S$, there exists a unique geodesic ${\gamma}_{x,y}:[0,1]\to M$ such that

for all $t\in [0,1]$.

**Remark 3.1** [12]

*M*to be a Cartan-Hadamard manifold (either infinite or finite dimensional), then on

*M*there exists a natural map

*η*playing the role of $x-y$ in the ${R}^{n}$. Indeed we define the function

*η*as

*y*to

*x*(see [[16], p.253]) as follows:

for all $t\in [0,1]$. Therefore, every geodesic convex set $S\subseteq M$ is a geodesic convex set with respect to *η* defined in above equation. The converse is not true in general.

**Example 3.1** [12]

*M*be a Cartan-Hadamard manifold and ${x}_{0},{y}_{0}\in M$, ${x}_{0}\ne {y}_{0}$. Let $B({x}_{0},{r}_{1})\cup B({y}_{0},{r}_{2})=\varphi $ for some $0<{r}_{1},{r}_{2}<\frac{1}{2}d({x}_{0},{y}_{0})$, where $B(x,r)=\{y\in M|d(x,y)<r\}$ is an open ball with center

*x*and radius

*r*. We define

*S*is not a geodesic convex set because every geodesic curve passing through ${x}_{0}$ and ${y}_{0}$ does not completely lie in

*S*. Now we define the function $\eta :M\times M\to TM$ such that

for all $t\in [0,1]$.

Hence ${\gamma}_{x,y}(0)=y$, ${\gamma}_{x,y}^{\prime}(0)=\eta (x,y)$. Barani and Pouryayevali [12] showed that *S* is a geodesic invex set with respect to *η*.

Let *S* be a geodesic convex subset of a finite dimensional Cartan-Hadamard manifold *M* and $x\in M$, then there exists a unique point ${p}_{s}(x)\in S$ such that for each $y\in S$, $d(x,{p}_{s}(x))\le d(x,y)$. The point ${p}_{s}(x)$ is called the projection of *x* onto *S* (see [[16], p.262]).

**Definition 3.2** [12]

*M*be an

*n*-dimensional Riemannian manifold and

*S*be an open subset of

*M*which is geodesic invex set with respect to $\eta :M\times M\to TM$. Let

*f*be a real valued function such that $f:S\to R$. Then

*f*is said to be an

*η*-invex function with respect to

*η*if

for all $x,y\in S$.

**Definition 3.3** [12]

*M*be a Riemannian manifold and $S\subseteq M$ be a geodesic

*η*-invex set with respect to $\eta :M\times M\to TM$. The function $f:S\to R$ is said to be geodesic

*η*-preinvex if for any $x,y\in S$

for all $t\in [0,1]$, where ${\gamma}_{x,y}$ is the unique geodesic defined in Definition 3.1. If the above inequality is strict, then *f* is called a strictly geodesic preinvex function.

Now we define an *r*-invex function and a geodesic *r*-preinvex function on *M*.

**Definition 3.4**Let

*M*be a Riemannian manifold and $S\subseteq M$ be a geodesic invex set with respect to $\eta :M\times M\to TM$. Let

*f*be a real differentiable function

*S*. Then

*f*is said to be

*r*-invex with respect to

*η*if

**Definition 3.5**Let

*M*be a Riemannian manifold and $S\subseteq M$ be a geodesic invex set with respect to $\eta :M\times M\to TM$. The function $f:S\to R$ is said to be geodesic

*r*-preinvex if for any $x,y\in S$, we have

If the above inequality is strict, then *f* is called a strictly geodesic *r*-preinvex function.

We give the following non-trivial example for a geodesic *r*-preinvex function that is yet not geodesic *η*-preinvex.

**Example 3.2** Let $M=\{{e}^{i\theta}:0<\theta <1\}$ and $f:M\to R$ defined by $f({e}^{i\theta})=cos\theta $ with $x,y\in M$, $x={e}^{i\alpha}$ and $y={e}^{i\beta}$. If ${\gamma}_{x,y}(t)={e}^{i((1-t)\beta +t\alpha )}$ then *f* is a geodesic *r*-preinvex function but not a geodesic *η*-preinvex function at $\alpha =\frac{\pi}{2}$, $\beta =\frac{\pi}{4}$, since $cos[\frac{\pi}{4}+\frac{\pi}{4}t]>\frac{t}{\sqrt{2}}$ at $t=0$.

**Proposition 3.1** *If* $f:S\to R$ *is a geodesic* *r*-*preinvex function with respect to* $\eta :S\times S\to TM$ *and* $y\in S$, *then for any real number* $\lambda \in R$, *the level set* ${S}_{\lambda}=\{x|x\in S,f(x)\le \lambda \}$ *is a geodesic invex set*.

*Proof*For any $x,y\in {S}_{\lambda}$ and $0\le t\le 1$, we have $f(x)\le \lambda $, $f(y)\le \lambda $. Since

*f*is geodesic

*r*-preinvex function, then we have

Therefore, ${\gamma}_{x,y}(t)\in {S}_{\lambda}$ for all $t\in [0,1]$, and the result is proved. □

## 4 Geodesic *r*-preinvexity and differentiability

In this section, we discuss property and condition (say condition (C)) introduced by Barani and Pouryayevali [12] on the function $\eta :M\times M\to TM$, which will be used in the subsequent analysis.

Pini [10] define the following property.

**Definition 4.1**Let

*M*be a Riemannian manifold and $\gamma :[0,1]\to M$ be a curve on

*M*such that ${\gamma}_{x,y}(0)=y$ and ${\gamma}_{x,y}(1)=x$. Then ${\gamma}_{x,y}$ is said to possess the property (P) with respect to $y,x\in M$ if

for all $s,t\in [0,1]$.

for all $s\in [0,1]$, which taken together are called condition (C).

**Theorem 4.1** *Let* *M* *be a Riemannian manifold and* *S* *be an open subset of* *M* *which is a geodesic invex set with respect to* $\eta :M\times M\to TM$. *Let* $f:S\to R$ *be a differentiable and geodesic* *r*-*preinvex function on* *S*. *Then* *f* *is an* *r*-*invex function on* *S*.

*Proof*Since

*S*is a geodesic invex set with respect to

*η*, then for all $x,y\in S$, there exists a unique geodesic ${\gamma}_{x,y}(0)=y$, ${\gamma}_{x,y}^{\prime}(0)=\eta (x,y)$, ${\gamma}_{x,y}(t)\in S$ for all $t\in [0,1]$. By the differentiability of

*f*at $y\in M$, we have

*f*is geodesic

*r*-preinvex for $t\in (0,1]$, and we have

*t*and taking the limit $t\to 0$, we get

Hence, *f* is an *r*-invex function on *S*. □

**Theorem 4.2** *Let* *M* *be a Riemannian manifold and* *S* *be an open subset of* *M*, *which is a geodesic invex set with respect to* $\eta :M\times M\to TM$. *Let* $f:S\to R$ *be a differentiable function*, *η* *satisfies the condition* (C), *then* *f* *is geodesic* *r*-*preinvex on* *S* *if* *f* *is* *r*-*invex on* *S*.

*Proof* We know that for a geodesic invex set with respect to *η* for every $x,y\in S$, there exists a unique geodesic ${\gamma}_{x,y}:[0,1]\to M$ such that ${\gamma}_{x,y}(0)=y$, ${\gamma}_{x,y}^{\prime}(0)=\eta (x,y)$, ${\gamma}_{x,y}(t)\in S$, for all $t\in [0,1]$.

*r*-invexity of

*f*on

*S*, we have

*t*and (2) by $(1-t)$, respectively, and then adding we get

Hence, *f* is geodesic *r*-preinvex on *S*. □

## 5 Geodesic *r*-preinvexity and semi-continuity

In this section, we discuss geodesic *r*-preinvexity on Riemannian manifold under proximal subdifferential of a lower semi-continuous function. First, we recall the definition of a proximal subdifferentiable of a function defined on a Riemannian manifold in [12].

**Definition 5.1**Let

*M*be a Riemannian manifold and $f:M\to (-\mathrm{\infty},\mathrm{\infty}]$ be a lower semi-continuous function. A point $\xi \in {T}_{y}M$ is said to be proximal subgradient of

*f*at $y\in dom(f)$, if there exist a positive number

*δ*and

*σ*such that

for all $x\in B(y,\delta )$, where $domf=\{x\in M:f(x)<\mathrm{\infty}\}$. The set of all proximal subgradient of $y\in M$ is denoted by ${\partial}_{p}f(y)$.

**Theorem 5.1**

*Let*

*M*

*be a Riemannian manifold and*

*S*

*be an open subset of*

*M*,

*which is geodesic invex with respect to*$\eta :M\times M\to TM$.

*Let*$f:S\to R$

*be geodesic*

*r*-

*preinvex*,

*if*$\overline{x}\in S$

*is a local minimum of the problem*

*then* $\overline{x}$ *is a global minimum of* (P).

*Proof*Let $\overline{x}\in S$ be a local minimum; then there exists a neighborhood ${N}_{\u03f5}(\overline{x})$ such that

for all $x\in S\cap {N}_{\u03f5}(\overline{x})$.

*f*, then there exists a point ${x}^{\ast}\in S$ such that

As *S* is a geodesic invex set with respect to *η*, there exists a unique geodesic *γ* such that $\gamma (0)=\overline{x}$, ${\gamma}^{\prime}(0)=\eta ({x}^{\ast},\overline{x})$, $\gamma (t)\in S$, for all $t\in [0,1]$.

*r*-preinvexity of

*f*, we have

for all $t\in (0,1]$. Therefore, for each $\gamma (t)\in S\cap {N}_{\u03f5}(\overline{x})$, $f(\gamma (t))<f(\overline{x})$, which is a contradiction to (5). Hence the result. □

**Theorem 5.2**

*Let*

*M*

*be a Cartan*-

*Hadamard manifold and*

*S*

*be an open subset of*

*M*,

*which is geodesic*

*r*-

*preinvex with respect to*$\eta :M\times M\to TM$

*with*$\eta (x,y)\ne 0$

*for all*$x\ne y$.

*Assume that*$f:S\to (-\mathrm{\infty},\mathrm{\infty}]$

*is a lower semi*-

*continuous geodesic*

*r*-

*preinvex function and*$y\in dom(f)$, $\xi \in {\partial}_{p}f(y)$.

*Then there exists a positive number*

*δ*

*such that*

*for all* $x\in S\cap B(y,\delta )$.

*Proof*From the definition of ${\partial}_{p}f(y)$, there are positive numbers

*δ*and

*σ*such that

for all $x\in B(y,\delta )$.

Now, fix $x\in S\cap B(y,\delta )$. Since *S* is a geodesic invex set with respect to *η*, there exists a unique geodesic ${\gamma}_{x,y}:[0,1]\to M$ such that ${\gamma}_{x,y}(0)=y$, ${\gamma}_{x,y}^{\prime}(0)=\eta (x,y)$, ${\gamma}_{x,y}(t)\in S$, for all $t\in [0,1]$.

Since *M* is a Cartan-Hadamard manifold, then ${\gamma}_{x,y}(t)={exp}_{y}(t\eta (x,y))$ for each $t\in [0,1]$ (see [[4], p.253]). If we choose ${t}_{0}=\frac{\delta}{{\parallel \eta (x,y)\parallel}_{y}}$, then ${exp}_{y}(t\eta (x,y))\in S\cap B(y,\delta )$ for all $t\in [0,{t}_{0})$.

*r*-preinvexity of

*f*, we get

*M*is a Cartan-Hadamard manifold, for each $t\in (0,{t}_{0})$, we have

This proves the theorem completely. □

## 6 Mean value inequality

In this section, we introduce a mean value inequality for Cartan-Hadamard manifold which is an extension of the result proved by Antczak [17] and Barani and Pouryayevali [12].

**Definition 6.1** [12]

Let *S* be a non-empty subset of a Riemannian manifold *M*, which is a geodesic *η*-invex set with respect to $\eta :M\times M\to TM$, and let *x* and *u* be two arbitrary points of *S*. Let $\gamma :[0,1]\to M$ be the unique geodesic such that $\gamma (0)=u$, ${\gamma}^{\prime}(0)=\eta (x,u)$, $\gamma (t)\in S$, for all $t\in [0,1]$.

*η*-path joining the points

*u*and $v=\gamma (1)$, if

*η*-path joining the point

*u*and

*v*is a set of the form

If $u=v$ we set ${P}_{uv}^{0}=\varphi $.

**Theorem 6.1** (Mean value inequality)

*Let*

*M*

*be a Cartan*-

*Hadamard manifold and*

*S*

*be an open subset of*

*M*,

*which is a geodesic invex set with respect to*$\eta :M\times M\to TM$

*such that*$\eta (a,b)\ne 0$

*for all*$a,b\in S$, $a\ne b$.

*Let*${\gamma}_{b,a}(t)={exp}_{a}(t\eta (b,a))$

*for every*$a,b\in S$, $t\in [0,1]$

*and*$c={\gamma}_{b,a}(1)$.

*Then a necessary and sufficient condition for a function*$f:S\to R$

*to be geodesic*

*r*-

*preinvex is that the inequality*

*is true for all* $x\in {P}_{ca}$.

*Proof*Let $f:S\to R$ be a geodesic preinvex function, $a,b\in S$ and $x\in {P}_{ca}$. If $x=a$ or $x=c$ then (9) is true trivially. If $x\in {P}_{ca}$, then $x=exp(t\eta (b,a))$, for some $t\in (0,1)$. From the geodesic

*η*-invexity of

*S*, we have $x\in S$ and

*f*is geodesic preinvex on

*S*, it follows that

*t*we get

which shows that *f* is geodesic *r*-preinvex function on *S*. □

## Declarations

## Authors’ Affiliations

## References

- Hanson MA:
**On sufficiency of the Kuhn-Tucker conditions.***J. Math. Anal. Appl.*1981,**80:**545–550. 10.1016/0022-247X(81)90123-2MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Ben-Israel B, Mond B:
**What is the invexity.***J. Aust. Math. Soc. B*1986,**28:**1–9. 10.1017/S0334270000005142MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Craven BD:
**Invex functions and constrained local minima.***Bull. Aust. Math. Soc.*1981,**24:**357–366. 10.1017/S0004972700004895MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Jeyakumar V:
**Strong and weak invexity in mathematical programming.***Math. Oper. Res.*1985,**55:**109–125.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - Jeyakumar V, Mond B:
**On generalized convex mathematical programming.***J. Aust. Math. Soc. B*1992,**34:**43–53. 10.1017/S0334270000007372MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Antczak T: r
**-Preinvexity and**r**-invexity in mathematical programming.***Comput. Math. Appl.*2005,**50:**551–566. 10.1016/j.camwa.2005.01.024MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Antczak T: V
**-**r**-Invexity in multiobjective programming.***J. Appl. Anal.*2005,**11:**63–80.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Rapcsak T:
*Smooth Nonlinear Optimization in Rn*. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht; 1997.View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Udriste C
**Math. Appl.**In*Convex Functions and Optimization Methods on Riemannian Manifolds*. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht; 1994.View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Pini R:
**Convexity along curves and invexity.***Optimization*1994,**29:**301–309. 10.1080/02331939408843959MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Mititelu S:
**Generalized invexity and vector optimization on differential manifolds.***Differ. Geom. Dyn. Syst.*2001,**3:**21–31.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - Barani A, Pouryayevali MR:
**Invex sets and preinvex functions on Riemannian manifolds.***J. Math. Anal. Appl.*2007,**328:**767–779. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2006.05.081MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Agarwal RP, Ahmad I, Iqbal A, Ali S:
**Generalized invex sets and preinvex functions on Riemannian manifolds.***Taiwan. J. Math.*2012,**16**(5):1719–1732.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - Zhou L-W, Huang N-J:
**Roughly geodesic**B**-invex and optimization problem on Hadamard manifolds.***Taiwan. J. Math.*2013,**17**(3):833–855.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - Lang S
**Graduate Texts in Mathematics.**In*Fundamentals of Differential Geometry*. Springer, New York; 1999.View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Ferreira OP, Oliveira PR:
**Proximal point algorithm on Riemannian manifolds.***Optimization*2002,**51:**257–270. 10.1080/02331930290019413MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Antczak T:
**Mean value in invexity analysis.***Nonlinear Anal.*2005,**60:**1471–1484.View ArticleGoogle Scholar

## Copyright

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.