Skip to main content

On a finite family of variational inclusions with the constraints of generalized mixed equilibrium and fixed point problems

Abstract

In this paper, we introduce two iterative algorithms for finding common solutions of a finite family of variational inclusions for maximal monotone and inverse-strongly monotone mappings with the constraints of two problems: a generalized mixed equilibrium problem and a common fixed point problem of an infinite family of nonexpansive mappings and an asymptotically strict pseudocontractive mapping in the intermediate sense in a real Hilbert space. We prove some strong and weak convergence theorems for the proposed iterative algorithms under suitable conditions.

MSC:49J30, 47H09, 47J20, 49M05.

1 Introduction

Let H be a real Hilbert space with inner product , and norm , C be a nonempty closed convex subset of H and P C be the metric projection of H onto C. Let S:CH be a nonlinear mapping on C. We denote by Fix(S) the set of fixed points of S and by R the set of all real numbers. A mapping V is called strongly positive on H if there exists a constant γ ¯ (0,1] such that

Vx,x γ ¯ x 2 ,xH.

A mapping S:CH is called L-Lipschitz-continuous if there exists a constant L>0 such that

SxSyLxy,x,yC.

In particular, if L=1 then S is called a nonexpansive mapping; if L(0,1) then A is called a contraction.

Let φ:CR be a real-valued function, A:HH be a nonlinear mapping and Θ:C×CR be a bifunction. We consider the generalized mixed equilibrium problem (GMEP) [1] of finding xC such that

Θ(x,y)+φ(y)φ(x)+Ax,yx0,yC.
(1.1)

We denote the set of solutions of GMEP (1.1) by GMEP(Θ,φ,A). The GMEP (1.1) is very general in the sense that it includes, as special cases, optimization problems, variational inequalities, minimax problems, Nash equilibrium problems in noncooperative games and others. The GMEP is further considered and studied in, e.g., [28].

Throughout this paper, it is assumed as in [1] that Θ:C×CR is a bifunction satisfying conditions (H1)-(H4) and φ:CR is a lower semicontinuous and convex function with restriction (H5), where

  • (H1) Θ(x,x)=0 for all xC;

  • (H2) Θ is monotone, i.e., Θ(x,y)+Θ(y,x)0 for any x,yC;

  • (H3) Θ is upper-hemicontinuous, i.e., for each x,y,zC,

    lim sup t 0 + Θ ( t z + ( 1 t ) x , y ) Θ(x,y);
  • (H4) Θ(x,) is convex and lower semicontinuous for each xC;

  • (H5) for each xH and r>0, there exist a bounded subset D x C and y x C such that for any zC D x ,

    Θ(z, y x )+φ( y x )φ(z)+ 1 r y x z,zx<0.

Let Θ 1 , Θ 2 :C×CR be two bifunctions, and B 1 , B 2 :CH be two nonlinear mappings. Consider the system of generalized equilibrium problems (SGEP): find ( x , y )C×C such that

{ Θ 1 ( x , x ) + B 1 y , x x + 1 μ 1 x y , x x 0 , x C , Θ 2 ( y , y ) + B 2 x , y y + 1 μ 2 y x , y y 0 , y C ,
(1.2)

where μ 1 and μ 2 are two positive constants.

Let { T n } n = 1 be an infinite family of nonexpansive self-mappings on C and { λ n } n = 1 be a sequence of nonnegative numbers in [0,1]. For any n1, define a self-mapping W n on H as follows:

{ U n , n + 1 = I , U n , n = λ n T n U n , n + 1 + ( 1 λ n ) I , U n , n 1 = λ n 1 T n 1 U n , n + ( 1 λ n 1 ) I , U n , k = λ k T k U n , k + 1 + ( 1 λ k ) I , U n , k 1 = λ k 1 T k 1 U n , k + ( 1 λ k 1 ) I , U n , 2 = λ 2 T 2 U n , 3 + ( 1 λ 2 ) I , W n = U n , 1 = λ 1 T 1 U n , 2 + ( 1 λ 1 ) I .
(1.3)

Such a mapping W n is called the W-mapping generated by T n , T n 1 ,, T 1 and λ n , λ n 1 ,, λ 1 .

Let f:HH be a contraction and V be a strongly positive bounded linear operator on H. Assume that φ:HR is a lower semicontinuous and convex functional, that Θ, Θ 1 , Θ 2 :H×HR satisfy conditions (H1)-(H4), and that A, B 1 , B 2 :HH are inverse-strongly monotone. Very recently, motivated by Yao et al. [3], Cai and Bu [4] introduced the following hybrid extragradient-like iterative algorithm:

{ z n = S r n ( Θ , φ ) ( x n r n A x n ) , y n = T μ 1 Θ 1 ( I μ 1 B 1 ) T μ 2 Θ 2 ( I μ 2 B 2 ) z n , x n + 1 = α n ( u + γ f ( x n ) ) + β n x n + ( ( 1 β n ) I α n ( I + μ V ) ) W n y n , n 0 ,
(1.4)

for finding a common solution of GMEP (1.1), SGEP (1.2), and the fixed point problem of an infinite family of nonexpansive mappings { T i } i = 1 on H, where { r n }(0,), { α n },{ β n }(0,1), and x 0 ,uH are given. The authors proved the strong convergence of the sequence generated by the hybrid iterative algorithm (1.4) to a point x ( i = 1 Fix( T i ))GMEP(Θ,φ,A)SGEP(G) under some suitable conditions, where SGEP(G) is the fixed point set of the mapping G:= T μ 1 Θ 1 (I μ 1 B 1 ) T μ 2 Θ 2 (I μ 2 B 2 ). This point x also solves the following optimization problem:

min x ( n = 1 Fix ( T n ) ) GMEP ( Θ , φ , A ) SGEP ( G ) μ 2 Vx,x+ 1 2 x u 2 h(x),
(OP1)

where h:HR is the potential function of γf.

Let B be a single-valued mapping of C into H and R be a set-valued mapping with D(R)=C. Consider the following variational inclusion: find a point xC such that

0Bx+Rx.
(1.5)

We denote by I(B,R) the solution set of the variational inclusion (1.5). In particular, if B=R=0, then I(B,R)=C. If B=0, then problem (1.5) becomes the inclusion problem introduced by Rockafellar [9]. It is known that problem (1.5) provides a convenient framework for the unified study of optimal solutions in many optimization related areas including mathematical programming, complementarity problems, variational inequalities, optimal control, mathematical economics, equilibria and game theory, etc. Let a set-valued mapping R:D(R)H 2 H be maximal monotone. We define the resolvent operator J R , λ :H D ( R ) ¯ associated with R and λ as follows:

J R , λ = ( I + λ R ) 1 ,xH,

where λ is a positive number.

In 1998, Huang [10] studied problem (1.5) in the case where R is maximal monotone and B is strongly monotone and Lipschitz-continuous with D(R)=C=H. Subsequently, Zeng et al. [11] further studied problem (1.5) in the case which is more general than Huang’s [10]. Moreover, the authors [11] obtained the same strong convergence conclusion as in Huang’s result [10]. In addition, the authors also gave the geometric convergence rate estimate for approximate solutions. Also, various types of iterative algorithms for solving variational inclusions have been further studied and developed; for more details, refer to [5, 1217] and the references therein.

In 2011, for the case where C=H, Yao et al. [5] introduced and analyzed an iterative algorithms for finding a common element of the set of solutions of the GMEP (1.1), the set of solutions of the variational inclusion (1.5) for maximal monotone and inverse-strongly monotone mappings and the set of fixed points of a countable family of nonexpansive mappings on H.

Recently, Kim and Xu [18] introduced the concept of asymptotically κ-strict pseudocontractive mappings in a Hilbert space.

Definition 1.1 Let C be a nonempty subset of a Hilbert space H. A mapping S:CC is said to be an asymptotically κ-strict pseudocontractive mapping with sequence { γ n } if there exist a constant κ[0,1) and a sequence { γ n } in [0,) with lim n γ n =0 such that

S n x S n y 2 (1+ γ n ) x y 2 +κ x S n x ( y S n y ) 2 ,n1,x,yC.

Subsequently, Sahu et al. [19] considered the concept of asymptotically κ-strict pseudocontractive mappings in the intermediate sense, which are not necessarily Lipschitzian.

Definition 1.2 Let C be a nonempty subset of a Hilbert space H. A mapping S:CC is said to be an asymptotically κ-strict pseudocontractive mapping in the intermediate sense with sequence { γ n } if there exist a constant κ[0,1) and a sequence { γ n } in [0,) with lim n γ n =0 such that

lim sup n sup x , y C ( S n x S n y 2 ( 1 + γ n ) x y 2 κ x S n x ( y S n y ) 2 ) 0.
(1.6)

Put c n :=max{0, sup x , y C ( S n x S n y 2 (1+ γ n ) x y 2 κ x S n x ( y S n y ) 2 )}. Then c n 0 (n1), c n 0 (n), and (1.6) reduce to the relation

S n x S n y 2 (1+ γ n ) x y 2 +κ x S n x ( y S n y ) 2 + c n ,n1,x,yC.
(1.7)

Whenever c n =0 for all n1 in (1.7), then S is an asymptotically κ-strict pseudocontractive mapping with sequence { γ n }. The authors [19] derived the weak and strong convergence of the modified Mann iteration processes for an asymptotically κ-strict pseudocontractive mapping in the intermediate sense with sequence { γ n }. More precisely, they first established one weak convergence theorem for the following iterative scheme:

{ x 1 = x C  chosen arbitrarily , x n + 1 = ( 1 α n ) x n + α n S n x n , n 1 ,

where 0<δ α n 1κδ, n = 1 α n c n <, and n = 1 γ n <; and then obtained another strong convergence theorem for the following iterative scheme:

{ x 1 = x C  chosen arbitrary , y n = ( 1 α n ) x n + α n S n x n , C n = { z C : y n z 2 x n z 2 + θ n } , Q n = { z C : x n z , x x n 0 } , x n + 1 = P C n Q n x , n 1 ,

where 0<δ α n 1κ, θ n = c n + γ n Δ n , and Δ n =sup{ x n z 2 :zFix(S)}<.

Inspired by the above facts, we in this paper introduce two iterative algorithms for finding common solutions of a finite family of variational inclusions for maximal monotone and inverse-strongly monotone mappings with the constraints of two problems: a generalized mixed equilibrium problem and a common fixed point problem of an infinite family of nonexpansive mappings and an asymptotically strict pseudocontractive mapping in the intermediate sense in a real Hilbert space. We prove some strong and weak convergence theorems for the proposed iterative algorithms under suitable conditions. The results presented in this paper are the supplement, extension, improvement, and generalization of the previously known results in this area.

2 Preliminaries

Throughout this paper, we assume that H is a real Hilbert space whose inner product and norm are denoted by , and , respectively. Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of H. We write x n x to indicate that the sequence { x n } converges weakly to x and x n x to indicate that the sequence { x n } converges strongly to x. Moreover, we use ω w ( x n ) to denote the weak ω-limit set of the sequence { x n }, i.e.,

ω w ( x n ):= { x H : x n i x  for some subsequence  { x n i }  of  { x n } } .

Definition 2.1 A mapping A:CH is called

  1. (i)

    monotone if

    AxAy,xy0,x,yC;
  2. (ii)

    η-strongly monotone if there exists a constant η>0 such that

    AxAy,xyη x y 2 ,x,yC;
  3. (iii)

    ζ-inverse-strongly monotone if there exists a constant ζ>0 such that

    AxAy,xyζ A x A y 2 ,x,yC.

It is easy to see that the projection P C is 1-inverse-strongly monotone (in short, 1-ism). Inverse-strongly monotone (also referred to as co-coercive) operators have been applied widely in solving practical problems in various fields.

Definition 2.2 A differentiable function K:HR is called:

  1. (i)

    convex, if

    K(y)K(x) K ( x ) , y x ,x,yH,

    where K (x) is the Frechet derivative of K at x;

  2. (ii)

    strongly convex, if there exists a constant σ>0 such that

    K(y)K(x) K ( x ) , y x σ 2 x y 2 ,x,yH.

It is easy to see that if K:HR is a differentiable strongly convex function with constant σ>0 then K :HH is strongly monotone with constant σ>0.

The metric (or nearest point) projection from H onto C is the mapping P C :HC which assigns to each point xH the unique point P C xC satisfying the property

x P C x= inf y C xy=:d(x,C).

Some important properties of projections are gathered in the following proposition.

Proposition 2.1 For given xH and zC:

  1. (i)

    z= P C xxz,yz0, yC;

  2. (ii)

    z= P C x x z 2 x y 2 y z 2 , yC;

  3. (iii)

    P C x P C y,xy P C x P C y 2 , yH. (This implies that P C is nonexpansive and monotone.)

By using the technique of [20], we can readily obtain the following elementary result.

Proposition 2.2 (see [[6], Lemma 1 and Proposition 1])

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a real Hilbert space H and let φ:CR be a lower semicontinuous and convex function. Let Θ:C×CR be a bifunction satisfying the conditions (H1)-(H4). Assume that

  1. (i)

    K:HR is strongly convex with constant σ>0 and the function xyx, K (x) is weakly upper semicontinuous for each yH;

  2. (ii)

    for each xH and r>0, there exist a bounded subset D x C and y x C such that for any zC D x ,

    Θ(z, y x )+φ( y x )φ(z)+ 1 r K ( z ) K ( x ) , y x z <0.

Then the following hold:

  1. (a)

    for each xH, S r ( Θ , φ ) (x);

  2. (b)

    S r ( Θ , φ ) is single-valued;

  3. (c)

    S r ( Θ , φ ) is nonexpansive if K is Lipschitz-continuous with constant ν>0 and

    K ( x 1 ) K ( x 2 ) , u 1 u 2 K ( u 1 ) K ( u 2 ) , u 1 u 2 ,( x 1 , x 2 )H×H,

    where u i = S r ( Θ , φ ) ( x i ) for i=1,2;

  4. (d)

    for all s,t>0 and xH

    K ( S s ( Θ , φ ) x ) K ( S t ( Θ , φ ) x ) , S s ( Θ , φ ) x S t ( Θ , φ ) x s t s K ( S s ( Θ , φ ) x ) K ( x ) , S s ( Θ , φ ) x S t ( Θ , φ ) x ;
  5. (e)

    Fix( S r ( Θ , φ ) )=MEP(Θ,φ);

  6. (f)

    MEP(Θ,φ) is closed and convex.

In particular, whenever Θ:C×CR is a bifunction satisfying the conditions (H1)-(H4) and K(x)= 1 2 x 2 , xH, then, for any x,yH,

S r ( Θ , φ ) x S r ( Θ , φ ) y 2 S r ( Θ , φ ) x S r ( Θ , φ ) y , x y

( S r ( Θ , φ ) is firmly nonexpansive) and

S s ( Θ , φ ) x S t ( Θ , φ ) x | s t | s S s ( Θ , φ ) x x ,s,t>0,xH.

In this case, S r ( Θ , φ ) is rewritten as T r ( Θ , φ ) . If, in addition, φ0, then T r ( Θ , φ ) is rewritten as T r Θ (see [[21], Lemma 2.1] for more details).

We need some facts and tools in a real Hilbert space H which are listed as lemmas below.

Lemma 2.1 Let X be a real inner product space. Then we have the following inequality:

x + y 2 x 2 +2y,x+y,x,yX.

Lemma 2.2 Let H be a real Hilbert space. Then the following hold:

  1. (a)

    x y 2 = x 2 y 2 2xy,y for all x,yH;

  2. (b)

    λ x + μ y 2 =λ x 2 +μ y 2 λμ x y 2 for all x,yH and λ,μ[0,1] with λ+μ=1;

  3. (c)

    If { x n } is a sequence in H such that x n x, it follows that

    lim sup n x n y 2 = lim sup n x n x 2 + x y 2 ,yH.

Lemma 2.3 ([[19], Lemma 2.5])

Let H be a real Hilbert space. Given a nonempty closed convex subset of H and points x,y,zH and given also a real number aR, the set

{ v C : y v 2 x v 2 + z , v + a }

is convex (and closed).

Lemma 2.4 ([[19], Lemma 2.6])

Let C be a nonempty subset of a Hilbert space H and S:CC be an asymptotically κ-strict pseudocontractive mapping in the intermediate sense with sequence { γ n }. Then

S n x S n y 1 1 κ ( κ x y + ( 1 + ( 1 κ ) γ n ) x y 2 + ( 1 κ ) c n )

for all x,yC and n1.

Lemma 2.5 ([[19], Lemma 2.7])

Let C be a nonempty subset of a Hilbert space H and S:CC be a uniformly continuous asymptotically κ-strict pseudocontractive mapping in the intermediate sense with sequence { γ n }. Let { x n } be a sequence in C such that x n x n + 1 0 and x n S n x n 0 as n. Then x n S x n 0 as n.

Lemma 2.6 (Demiclosedness principle [[19], Proposition 3.1])

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a Hilbert space H and S:CC be a continuous asymptotically κ-strict pseudocontractive mapping in the intermediate sense with sequence { γ n }. Then IS is demiclosed at zero in the sense that if { x n } is a sequence in C such that x n xC and lim sup m lim sup n x n S m x n =0, then (IS)x=0.

Lemma 2.7 ([[19], Proposition 3.2])

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a Hilbert space H and S:CC be a continuous asymptotically κ-strict pseudocontractive mapping in the intermediate sense with sequence { γ n } such that Fix(S). Then Fix(S) is closed and convex.

Remark 2.1 Lemmas 2.6 and 2.7 give some basic properties of an asymptotically κ-strict pseudocontractive mapping in the intermediate sense with sequence { γ n }. Moreover, Lemma 2.6 extends the demiclosedness principles studied for certain classes of nonlinear mappings; see [19] for more details.

Lemma 2.8 ([[22], p.80])

Let { a n } n = 1 , { b n } n = 1 , and { δ n } n = 1 be sequences of nonnegative real numbers satisfying the inequality

a n + 1 (1+ δ n ) a n + b n ,n1.

If n = 1 δ n < and n = 1 b n <, then lim n a n exists. If, in addition, { a n } n = 1 has a subsequence which converges to zero, then lim n a n =0.

Recall that a Banach space X is said to satisfy the Opial condition [23] if, for any given sequence { x n }X which converges weakly to an element xX, we have the inequality

lim sup n x n x< lim sup n x n y,yX,yx.

It is well known in [23] that every Hilbert space H satisfies the Opial condition.

Lemma 2.9 (see [[24], Proposition 3.1])

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a real Hilbert space H and let { x n } be a sequence in H. Suppose that

x n + 1 p 2 (1+ λ n ) x n p 2 + δ n ,pC,n1,

where { λ n } and { δ n } are sequences of nonnegative real numbers such that n = 1 λ n < and n = 1 δ n <. Then { P C x n } converges strongly in C.

Lemma 2.10 (see [25])

Let C be a closed convex subset of a real Hilbert space H. Let { x n } be a sequence in H and uH. Let q= P C u. If { x n } is such that ω w ( x n )C and satisfies the condition

x n uuq,for all n,

then x n q as n.

Lemma 2.11 (see [[26], Lemma 3.2])

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a real Hilbert space H. Let { T n } n = 1 be a sequence of nonexpansive self-mappings on C such that n = 1 Fix( T n ) and let { λ n } be a sequence in (0,b] for some b(0,1). Then, for every xC and k1 the limit lim n U n , k x exists.

Remark 2.2 (see [[27], Remark 3.1])

It can be known from Lemma 2.11 that if D is a nonempty bounded subset of C, then for ϵ>0 there exists n 0 k such that for all n> n 0

sup x D U n , k x U k xϵ.

Remark 2.3 (see [[27], Remark 3.2])

Utilizing Lemma 2.11, we define a mapping W:CC as follows:

Wx= lim n W n x= lim n U n , 1 x,xC.

Such a W is called the W-mapping generated by T 1 , T 2 , and λ 1 , λ 2 , . Since W n is nonexpansive, W:CC is also nonexpansive. Indeed, observe that for each x,yC

WxWy= lim n W n x W n yxy.

If { x n } is a bounded sequence in C, then we put D={ x n :n1}. Hence, it is clear from Remark 2.2 that for an arbitrary ϵ>0 there exists N 0 1 such that for all n> N 0

W n x n W x n = U n , 1 x n U 1 x n sup x D U n , 1 x U 1 xϵ.

This implies that

lim n W n x n W x n =0.

Lemma 2.12 (see [[26], Lemma 3.3])

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a real Hilbert space H. Let { T n } n = 1 be a sequence of nonexpansive self-mappings on C such that n = 1 Fix( T n ), and let { λ n } be a sequence in (0,b] for some b(0,1). Then Fix(W)= n = 1 Fix( T n ).

Lemma 2.13 (see [[28], Theorem 10.4 (Demiclosedness Principle)])

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a real Hilbert space H. Let T:CC be nonexpansive. Then IT is demiclosed on C. That is, whenever { x n } is a sequence in C weakly converging to some xC and the sequence {(IT) x n } strongly converges to some y, it follows that (IT)x=y. Here I is the identity operator of H.

Recall that a set-valued mapping R:D(R)H 2 H is called monotone if, for all x,yD(R), fR(x), and gR(y) imply

fg,xy0.

A set-valued mapping R is called maximal monotone if R is monotone and (I+λR)D(R)=H for each λ>0, where I is the identity mapping of H. We denote by G(R) the graph of R. It is known that a monotone mapping R is maximal if and only if, for (x,f)H×H, fg,xy0 for every (y,g)G(R), we have fR(x). We illustrate the concept of maximal monotone mapping with the following example.

Let A:CH be a monotone, k-Lipschitz-continuous mapping and let N C v be the normal cone to C at vC, i.e.,

N C v= { w H : v u , w 0 , u C } .

Define

Tv= { A v + N C v if  v C , if  v C .

Then T is maximal monotone and 0Tv if and only if Av,yv0 for all yC (see [9]).

Assume that R:D(R)H 2 H is a maximal monotone mapping. Let λ>0. In terms of Huang [10] (see also [11]), we have the following property for the resolvent operator J R , λ :H D ( R ) ¯ .

Lemma 2.14 J R , λ is single-valued and firmly nonexpansive, i.e.,

J R , λ x J R , λ y,xy J R , λ x J R , λ y 2 ,x,yH.

Consequently, J R , λ is nonexpansive and monotone.

Lemma 2.15 (see [14])

Let R be a maximal monotone mapping with D(R)=C. Then for any given λ>0, uC is a solution of problem (1.6) if and only if uC satisfies

u= J R , λ (uλBu).

Lemma 2.16 (see [11])

Let R be a maximal monotone mapping with D(R)=C and let B:CH be a strongly monotone, continuous, and single-valued mapping. Then for each zH, the equation z(B+λR)x has a unique solution x λ for λ>0.

Lemma 2.17 (see [14])

Let R be a maximal monotone mapping with D(R)=C and B:CH be a monotone, continuous and single-valued mapping. Then (I+λ(R+B))C=H for each λ>0. In this case, R+B is maximal monotone.

Lemma 2.18 (see [29])

Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a real Hilbert space H, and g:CR+ be a proper lower semicontinuous differentiable convex function. If x is a solution the minimization problem

g ( x ) = inf x C g(x),

then

g ( x ) , x x 0,xC.

In particular, if x solves (OP1), then

u + ( γ f ( I + μ V ) ) x , x x 0.

3 Strong convergence theorems

In this section, we introduce and analyze an iterative algorithm for finding common solutions of a finite family of variational inclusions for maximal monotone and inverse-strongly monotone mappings with the constraints of two problems: a generalized mixed equilibrium problem and a common fixed point problem of an infinite family of nonexpansive mappings and an asymptotically strict pseudocontractive mapping in the intermediate sense in a real Hilbert space. Under appropriate conditions imposed on the parameter sequences we will prove strong convergence of the proposed algorithm.

Theorem 3.1 Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a real Hilbert space H. Let N be an integer. Let Θ be a bifunction from C×C to R satisfying (H1)-(H4) and φ:CR be a lower semicontinuous and convex functional. Let R i :C 2 H be a maximal monotone mapping and let A:HH and B i :CH be ζ-inverse-strongly monotone and η i -inverse-strongly monotone, respectively, where i{1,2,,N}. Let S:CC be a uniformly continuous asymptotically κ-strict pseudocontractive mapping in the intermediate sense for some 0κ<1 with sequence { γ n }[0,) such that lim n γ n =0 and { c n }[0,) such that lim n c n =0. Let { T n } n = 1 be a sequence of nonexpansive self-mappings on C and { λ n } be a sequence in (0,b] for some b(0,1). Let V be a γ ¯ -strongly positive bounded linear operator and f:HH be an l-Lipschitzian mapping with γl<(1+μ) γ ¯ . Assume that Ω:=( n = 1 Fix( T n ))GMEP(Θ,φ,A)( i = 1 N I( B i , R i ))Fix(S) is nonempty and bounded. Let W n be the W-mapping defined by (1.4) and { α n }, { β n } and { δ n } be three sequences in (0,1) such that lim n α n =0 and κ δ n d<1. Assume that:

  1. (i)

    K:HR is strongly convex with constant σ>0 and its derivative K is Lipschitz-continuous with constant ν>0 such that the function xyx, K (x) is weakly upper semicontinuous for each yH;

  2. (ii)

    for each xH, there exist a bounded subset D x C and z x C such that for any y D x ,

    Θ(y, z x )+φ( z x )φ(y)+ 1 r K ( y ) K ( x ) , z x y <0;
  3. (iii)

    0< lim inf n β n lim sup n β n <1;

  4. (iv)

    { λ i , n }[ a i , b i ](0,2 η i ), i{1,2,,N}, and { r n }[0,2ζ] satisfies

    0< lim inf n r n lim sup n r n <2ζ.

Pick any x 0 H and set C 1 =C, x 1 = P C 1 x 0 . Let { x n } be a sequence generated by the following algorithm:

{ u n = S r n ( Θ , φ ) ( I r n A ) x n , z n = J R N , λ N , n ( I λ N , n B N ) J R N 1 , λ N 1 , n ( I λ N 1 , n B N 1 ) J R 1 , λ 1 , n ( I λ 1 , n B 1 ) u n , k n = δ n z n + ( 1 δ n ) S n z n , y n = α n ( u + γ f ( x n ) ) + β n k n + ( ( 1 β n ) I α n ( I + μ V ) ) W n z n , C n + 1 = { z C n : y n z 2 x n z 2 + θ n } , x n + 1 = P C n + 1 x 0 , n 0 ,
(3.1)

where θ n =( α n + γ n ) Δ n ϱ+ c n ϱ, Δ n =sup{ x n p 2 + u + ( γ f I μ V ) p 2 :pΩ}<, and ϱ= 1 1 sup n 1 α n <. If S r ( Θ , φ ) is firmly nonexpansive, then the following statements hold:

  1. (I)

    { x n } converges strongly to P Ω x 0 ;

  2. (II)

    { x n } converges strongly to P Ω x 0 , which solves the optimization problem

    min x Ω μ 2 Vx,x+ 1 2 x u 2 h(x),
    (OP2)

    provided γ n + c n + x n y n =o( α n ) additionally, where h:HR is the potential function of γf.

Proof Since lim n α n =0 and 0< lim inf n β n lim sup n β n <1, we may assume, without loss of generality, that α n (1 β n ) ( 1 + μ V ) 1 . Since V is a γ ¯ -strongly positive bounded linear operator on H, we know that

V=sup { V u , u : u H , u = 1 } .

Observe that

( ( 1 β n ) I α n ( I + μ V ) ) u , u = 1 β n α n α n μ V u , u 1 β n α n α n μ V 0 ,

that is, (1 β n )I α n (I+μV) is positive. It follows that

( 1 β n ) I α n ( I + μ V ) = sup { ( ( 1 β n ) I α n ( I + μ V ) ) u , u : u H , u = 1 } = sup { 1 β n α n α n μ V u , u : u H , u = 1 } 1 β n α n α n μ γ ¯ .

Put

Λ n i = J R i , λ i , n (I λ i , n B i ) J R i 1 , λ i 1 , n (I λ i 1 , n B i 1 ) J R 1 , λ 1 , n (I λ 1 , n B 1 )

for all i{1,2,,N} and n1, and Λ n 0 =I, where I is the identity mapping on H. Then we have that z n = Λ n N u n . We divide the rest of the proof into several steps.

Step 1. We show that { x n } is well defined. It is obvious that C n is closed and convex. As the defining inequality in C n is equivalent to the inequality

2 ( x n z n ) , z x n 2 z n 2 + θ n ,

by Lemma 2.3 we know that C n is convex and closed for every n1.

First of all, we show that Ω C n for all n1. Suppose that Ω C n for some n1. Take pΩ arbitrarily. Since p= S r n ( Θ , φ ) (p r n Ap), A is ζ-inverse strongly monotone and 0 r n 2ζ, we have

u n p 2 = S r n ( Θ , φ ) ( I r n A ) x n S r n ( Θ , φ ) ( I r n A ) p 2 ( I r n A ) x n ( I r n A ) p 2 = ( x n p ) r n ( A x n A p ) 2 = x n p 2 2 r n x n p , A x n A p + r n 2 A x n A p 2 x n p 2 2 r n ζ A x n A p 2 + r n 2 A x n A p 2 = x n p 2 + r n ( r n 2 ζ ) A x n A p 2 x n p 2 .
(3.2)

Since p= J R i , λ i , n (I λ i , n B i )p, Λ n i p=p, and B i is η i -inverse-strongly monotone, where η i (0,2 η i ), i{1,2,,N}, by Lemma 2.14 we deduce that

z n p 2 = J R N , λ N , n ( I λ N , n B N ) Λ n N 1 u n J R N , λ N , n ( I λ N , n B N ) Λ n N 1 p 2 ( I λ N , n B N ) Λ n N 1 u n ( I λ N , n B N ) Λ n N 1 p 2 = ( Λ n N 1 u n Λ n N 1 p ) λ N , n ( B N Λ n N 1 u n B N Λ n N 1 p ) 2 Λ n N 1 u n Λ n N 1 p 2 + λ N , n ( λ N , n 2 η N ) B N Λ n N 1 u n B N Λ n N 1 p 2 Λ n N 1 u n Λ n N 1 p 2 Λ n 0 u n Λ n 0 p 2 = u n p 2 .
(3.3)

Combining (3.2) and (3.3), we have

z n p x n p.
(3.4)

By Lemma 2.2(b), we deduce from (3.1) and (3.4) that

k n p 2 = δ n ( z n p ) + ( 1 δ n ) ( S n z n p ) 2 = δ n z n p 2 + ( 1 δ n ) S n z n p 2 δ n ( 1 δ n ) z n S n z n 2 δ n z n p 2 + ( 1 δ n ) [ ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + κ z n S n z n 2 + c n ] δ n ( 1 δ n ) z n S n z n 2 = [ 1 + γ n ( 1 δ n ) ] z n p 2 + ( 1 δ n ) ( κ δ n ) z n S n z n 2 + ( 1 δ n ) c n ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + ( 1 δ n ) ( κ δ n ) z n S n z n 2 + c n ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n .
(3.5)

Set V ¯ =I+μV. Then, for γl(1+μ) γ ¯ , by Lemma 2.1 we obtain from (3.1), (3.4), and (3.5)

y n p 2 = α n ( u + γ f ( x n ) ) + β n k n + ( ( 1 β n ) I α n V ¯ ) W n z n p 2 = α n ( u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ p ) + β n ( k n p ) + ( ( 1 β n ) I α n V ¯ ) ( W n z n p ) 2 = α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p ) + α n γ ( f ( x n ) f ( p ) ) + β n ( k n p ) + ( ( 1 β n ) I α n V ¯ ) ( W n z n p ) 2 α n γ ( f ( x n ) f ( p ) ) + β n ( k n p ) + ( ( 1 β n ) I α n V ¯ ) ( W n z n p ) 2 + 2 α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p ) , y n p [ α n γ f ( x n ) f ( p ) + β n k n p + ( ( 1 β n ) I α n V ¯ ) ( W n z n p ) ] 2 + 2 α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p ) , y n p [ α n γ l x n p + β n k n p + ( 1 β n α n α n μ γ ¯ ) W n z n p ] 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p y n p [ α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ x n p + β n k n p + ( 1 β n α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ) z n p ] 2 + α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p 2 + y n p 2 ) α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ x n p 2 + β n k n p 2 + ( 1 β n α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ) z n p 2 + α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p 2 + y n p 2 ) α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ x n p 2 + β n ( ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n ) + ( 1 β n α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ) z n p 2 + α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p 2 + y n p 2 ) α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ x n p 2 + β n ( ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n ) + ( 1 β n α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ) ( ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n ) + α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p 2 + y n p 2 ) = α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ x n p 2 + ( 1 α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ) ( ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n ) + α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p 2 + y n p 2 ) α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ( ( 1 + γ n ) x n p 2 + c n ) + ( 1 α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ) ( ( 1 + γ n ) x n p 2 + c n ) + α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p 2 + y n p 2 ) = ( 1 + γ n ) x n p 2 + c n + α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p 2 + y n p 2 ) ,

which hence yields

y n p 2 1 + γ n 1 α n x n p 2 + α n 1 α n u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p 2 + 1 1 α n c n = ( 1 + α n + γ n 1 α n ) x n p 2 + α n 1 α n u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p 2 + 1 1 α n c n ( 1 + α n + γ n 1 α n ) x n p 2 + α n + γ n 1 α n u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p 2 + 1 1 α n c n = x n p 2 + α n + γ n 1 α n ( x n p 2 + u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p 2 ) + 1 1 α n c n x n p 2 + ( α n + γ n ) ϱ ( x n p 2 + u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p 2 ) + ϱ c n x n p 2 + ( α n + γ n ) Δ n ϱ + c n ϱ = x n p 2 + θ n ,
(3.6)

where θ n =( α n + γ n ) Δ n ϱ+ c n ϱ, Δ n =sup{ x n p 2 + u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p 2 :pΩ}<, and ϱ= 1 1 sup n 1 α n < (due to { α n }(0,1) and lim n α n =0). Hence p C n + 1 . This implies that Ω C n for all n1. Therefore, { x n } is well defined.

Step 2. We prove that x n k n 0 as n.

Indeed, let v= P Ω x 0 . From x n = P C n x 0 and vΩ C n , we obtain

x n x 0 v x 0 .
(3.7)

This implies that { x n } is bounded and hence { u n }, { z n }, { k n }, and { y n } are also bounded. Since x n + 1 C n + 1 C n and x n = P C n x 0 , we have

x n x 0 x n + 1 x 0 ,n1.

Therefore lim n x n x 0 exists. From x n = P C n x 0 , x n + 1 C n + 1 C n , by Proposition 2.1(ii) we obtain

x n + 1 x n 2 x 0 x n + 1 2 x 0 x n 2 ,

which implies

lim n x n + 1 x n =0.
(3.8)

It follows from x n + 1 C n + 1 that y n x n + 1 2 x n x n + 1 2 + θ n and hence

x n y n 2 2 ( x n x n + 1 2 + x n + 1 y n 2 ) 2 ( x n x n + 1 2 + x n x n + 1 2 + θ n ) = 2 ( 2 x n x n + 1 2 + θ n ) .

From (3.8) and lim n θ n =0, we have

lim n x n y n =0.
(3.9)

Also, utilizing Lemmas 2.1 and 2.2(b) we obtain from (3.1), (3.4), and (3.5)

y n p 2 = α n ( u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n ) + β n ( k n p ) + ( 1 β n ) ( W n z n p ) 2 β n ( k n p ) + ( 1 β n ) ( W n z n p ) 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n , y n p = β n k n p 2 + ( 1 β n ) W n z n p 2 β n ( 1 β n ) k n W n z n 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n y n p β n k n p 2 + ( 1 β n ) z n p 2 β n ( 1 β n ) k n W n z n 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n y n p β n ( ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n ) + ( 1 β n ) z n p 2 β n ( 1 β n ) k n W n z n 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n y n p β n ( ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n ) + ( 1 β n ) ( ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n ) β n ( 1 β n ) k n W n z n 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n y n p = ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n β n ( 1 β n ) k n W n z n 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n y n p ( 1 + γ n ) x n p 2 + c n β n ( 1 β n ) k n W n z n 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n y n p ,

which leads to

β n ( 1 β n ) k n W n z n 2 x n p 2 y n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n y n p x n y n ( x n p + y n p ) + γ n x n p 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n y n p .

Since lim n α n =0, lim n γ n =0, and lim n c n =0, it follows from (3.9) and condition (iii) that

lim n k n W n z n =0.
(3.10)

Note that

y n k n = α n ( u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n ) +(1 β n )( W n z n k n ),

which yields

x n k n x n y n + y n k n x n y n + α n ( u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n ) + ( 1 β n ) ( W n z n k n ) x n y n + α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n + ( 1 β n ) W n z n k n x n y n + α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n + W n z n k n .

So, from (3.9), (3.10), and lim n α n =0, we get

lim n x n k n =0.
(3.11)

Step 3. We prove that x n u n 0, u n z n 0, z n W z n 0, and z n S n z n 0 as n.

Indeed, taking into consideration that 0< lim inf n r n lim sup n r n <2ζ, we may assume, without loss of generality, that { r n }[c,d](0,2ζ). From (3.4) and (3.5) it follows that

k n p 2 [ 1 + γ n ( 1 δ n ) ] z n p 2 + ( 1 δ n ) ( k δ n ) z n S n z n 2 + ( 1 δ n ) c n z n p 2 + γ n z n p 2 + c n z n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n .
(3.12)

Next we prove that

lim n x n u n =0.
(3.13)

For pΩ, we find that

u n p 2 = S r n ( Θ , φ ) ( I r n A ) x n S r n ( Θ , φ ) ( I r n A ) p 2 ( I r n A ) x n ( I r n A ) p 2 = x n p r n ( A x n A p ) 2 x n p 2 + r n ( r n 2 ζ ) A x n A p 2 .
(3.14)

By (3.3), (3.12), and (3.14), we obtain

k n p 2 z n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n u n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n x n p 2 + r n ( r n 2 ζ ) A x n A p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n ,

which implies that

c ( 2 ζ d ) A x n A p 2 r n ( 2 ζ r n ) A x n A p 2 x n p 2 k n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n x n k n ( x n p + k n p ) + γ n x n p 2 + c n .

From lim n γ n =0, lim n c n =0, and (3.11), we have

lim n A x n Ap=0.
(3.15)

By the firm nonexpansivity of S r n ( Θ , φ ) and Lemma 2.2(a), we have

u n p 2 = S r n ( Θ , φ ) ( I r n A ) x n S r n ( Θ , φ ) ( I r n A ) p 2 ( I r n A ) x n ( I r n A ) p , u n p = 1 2 [ ( I r n A ) x n ( I r n A ) p 2 + u n p 2 ( I r n A ) x n ( I r n A ) p ( u n p ) 2 ] 1 2 [ x n p 2 + u n p 2 x n u n r n ( A x n A p ) 2 ] = 1 2 [ x n p 2 + u n p 2 x n u n 2 + 2 r n A x n A p , x n u n r n 2 A x n A p 2 ] ,

which implies that

u n p 2 x n p 2 x n u n 2 +2 r n A x n Ap x n u n .
(3.16)

Combining (3.12) and (3.16), we have

k n p 2 z n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n u n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n x n p 2 x n u n 2 + 2 r n A x n A p x n u n + γ n x n p 2 + c n ,

which implies

x n u n 2 x n p 2 k n p 2 + 2 r n A x n A p x n u n + γ n x n p 2 + c n x n k n ( x n p + k n p ) + 2 r n A x n A p x n u n + γ n x n p 2 + c n .

From lim n γ n =0, lim n c n =0, (3.11), and (3.15), we know that (3.13) holds.

Next we show that lim n B i Λ n i u n B i p=0, i=1,2,,N. It follows from Lemma 2.14 that

Λ n i u n p 2 = J R i , λ i , n ( I λ i , n B i ) Λ n i 1 u n J R i , λ i , n ( I λ i , n B i ) p 2 ( I λ i , n B i ) Λ n i 1 u n ( I λ i , n B i ) p 2 Λ n i 1 u n p 2 + λ i , n ( λ i , n 2 η i ) B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p 2 u n p 2 + λ i , n ( λ i , n 2 η i ) B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p 2 x n p 2 + λ i , n ( λ i , n 2 η i ) B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p 2 .
(3.17)

Combining (3.12) and (3.17), we have

k n p 2 z n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n Λ n i u n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n x n p 2 + λ i , n ( λ i , n 2 η i ) B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n ,

together with { λ i , n }[ a i , b i ](0,2 η i ), i{1,2,,N}, implies

a i ( 2 η i b i ) B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p 2 λ i , n ( 2 η i λ i , n ) B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p 2 x n p 2 k n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n x n k n ( x n p + k n p ) + γ n x n p 2 + c n .

From lim n γ n =0, lim n c n =0, and (3.11), we obtain

lim n B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p =0,i=1,2,,N.
(3.18)

By Lemma 2.14 and Lemma 2.2(a), we obtain

Λ n i u n p 2 = J R i , λ i , n ( I λ i , n B i ) Λ n i 1 u n J R i , λ i , n ( I λ i , n B i ) p 2 ( I λ i , n B i ) Λ n i 1 u n ( I λ i , n B i ) p , Λ n i u n p = 1 2 ( ( I λ i , n B i ) Λ n i 1 u n ( I λ i , n B i ) p 2 + Λ n i u n p 2 ( I λ i , n B i ) Λ n i 1 u n ( I λ i , n B i ) p ( Λ n i u n p ) 2 ) 1 2 ( Λ n i 1 u n p 2 + Λ n i u n p 2 Λ n i 1 u n Λ n i u n λ i , n ( B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p ) 2 ) 1 2 ( u n p 2 + Λ n i u n p 2 Λ n i 1 u n Λ n i u n λ i , n ( B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p ) 2 ) 1 2 ( x n p 2 + Λ n i u n p 2 Λ n i 1 u n Λ n i u n λ i , n ( B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p ) 2 ) ,

which implies

Λ n i u n p 2 x n p 2 Λ n i 1 u n Λ n i u n λ i , n ( B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p ) 2 = x n p 2 Λ n i 1 u n Λ n i u n 2 λ i , n 2 B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p 2 + 2 λ i , n Λ n i 1 u n Λ n i u n , B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p x n p 2 Λ n i 1 u n Λ n i u n 2 + 2 λ i , n Λ n i 1 u n Λ n i u n B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p .
(3.19)

Combining (3.12) and (3.19) we get

k n p 2 z n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n Λ n i u n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n x n p 2 Λ n i 1 u n Λ n i u n 2 + 2 λ i , n Λ n i 1 u n Λ n i u n B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p + γ n x n p 2 + c n ,

which implies

Λ n i 1 u n Λ n i u n 2 x n p 2 k n p 2 + 2 λ i , n Λ n i 1 u n Λ n i u n B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p + γ n x n p 2 + c n x n k n ( x n p + k n p ) + 2 λ i , n Λ n i 1 u n Λ n i u n B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p + γ n x n p 2 + c n .

From (3.11), (3.18), lim n γ n =0, and lim n c n =0, we have

lim n Λ n i 1 u n Λ n i u n =0,i=1,2,,N.
(3.20)

From (3.20) we get

u n z n = Λ n 0 u n Λ n N u n Λ n 0 u n Λ n 1 u n + Λ n 1 u n Λ n 2 u n + + Λ n N 1 u n Λ n N u n 0 as  n .
(3.21)

By (3.13) and (3.21), we have

x n z n x n u n + u n z n 0 as  n .
(3.22)

From (3.8) and (3.22), we have

z n + 1 z n z n + 1 x n + 1 + x n + 1 x n + x n z n 0 as  n .
(3.23)

By (3.11), (3.13), and (3.21), we get

k n z n k n x n + x n u n + u n z n 0 as  n .
(3.24)

We observe that

k n z n =(1 δ n ) ( S n z n z n ) .

From δ n d<1 and (3.24), we have

lim n S n z n z n =0.
(3.25)

We note that

S n z n S n + 1 z n S n z n z n + z n z n + 1 + z n + 1 S n + 1 z n + 1 + S n + 1 z n + 1 S n + 1 z n .

From (3.23), (3.25), and Lemma 2.4, we obtain

lim n S n z n S n + 1 z n =0.
(3.26)

On the other hand, we note that

z n S z n z n S n z n + S n z n S n + 1 z n + S n + 1 z n S z n .

From (3.25), (3.26), and the uniform continuity of S, we have

lim n z n S z n =0.
(3.27)

In addition, note that

z n W z n z n k n + k n W n z n + W n z n W z n .

So, from (3.10), (3.24), and Remark 2.3 it follows that

lim n z n W z n =0.
(3.28)

Step 4. we prove that x n v= P Ω x 0 as n.

Indeed, since { x n } is bounded, there exists a subsequence { x n i } which converges weakly to some w. From (3.13) and (3.20)-(3.22), we see that u n i w, Λ n i m u n i w, and z n i w, where m{1,2,,N}. Since S is uniformly continuous, by (3.27) we get lim n z n S m z n =0 for any m1. Hence from Lemma 2.6, we obtain wFix(S). In the meantime, utilizing Lemma 2.13, we deduce from (3.28) and z n i w that wFix(W)= n = 1 Fix( T n ) (due to Lemma 2.12). Next, we prove that w m = 1 N I( B m , R m ). As a matter of fact, since B m is η m -inverse-strongly monotone, B m is a monotone and Lipschitz-continuous mapping. It follows from Lemma 2.17 that R m + B m is maximal monotone. Let (v,g)G( R m + B m ), i.e., g B m v R m v. Again, since Λ n m u n = J R m , λ m , n (I λ m , n B m ) Λ n m 1 u n , n1, m{1,2,,N}, we have

Λ n m 1 u n λ m , n B m Λ n m 1 u n (I+ λ m , n R m ) Λ n m u n ,

that is,

1 λ m , n ( Λ n m 1 u n Λ n m u n λ m , n B m Λ n m 1 u n ) R m Λ n m u n .

In terms of the monotonicity of R m , we get

v Λ n m u n , g B m v 1 λ m , n ( Λ n m 1 u n Λ n m u n λ m , n B m Λ n m 1 u n ) 0

and hence

v Λ n m u n , g v Λ n m u n , B m v + 1 λ m , n ( Λ n m 1 u n Λ n m u n λ m , n B m Λ n m 1 u n ) = v Λ n m u n , B m v B m Λ n m u n + B m Λ n m u n B m Λ n m 1 u n + 1 λ m , n ( Λ n m 1 u n Λ n m u n ) v Λ n m u n , B m Λ n m u n B m Λ n m 1 u n + v Λ n m u n , 1 λ m , n ( Λ n m 1 u n Λ n m u n ) .

In particular,

v Λ n i m u n i , g v Λ n i m u n i , B m Λ n i m u n i B m Λ n i m 1 u n i + v Λ n i m u n i , 1 λ m , n i ( Λ n i m 1 u n i Λ n i m u n i ) .

Since Λ n m u n Λ n m 1 u n 0 (due to (3.20)) and B m Λ n m u n B m Λ n m 1 u n 0 (due to the Lipschitz-continuity of B m ), we conclude from Λ n i m u n i w and { λ i , n }[ a i , b i ](0,2 η i ), i{1,2,,N} that

lim i v Λ n i m u n i , g =vw,g0.

It follows from the maximal monotonicity of B m + R m that 0( R m + B m )w, i.e., wI( B m , R m ). Therefore, w m = 1 N I( B m , R m ).

Next, we show that wGMEP(Θ,φ,A). In fact, from z n = S r n ( Θ , φ ) (I r n A) x n , we know that

Θ( u n ,y)+φ(y)φ( u n )+A x n ,y u n + 1 r n K ( u n ) K ( x n ) , y u n 0,yC.

From (H2) it follows that

φ(y)φ( u n )+A x n ,y u n + 1 r n K ( u n ) K ( x n ) , y u n Θ(y, u n ),yC.

Replacing n by n i , we have

φ ( y ) φ ( u n i ) + A x n i , y u n i + K ( u n i ) K ( x n i ) r n i , y u n i Θ ( y , u n i ) , y C .
(3.29)

Put u t =ty+(1t)w for all t(0,1] and yC. Then, from (3.29), we have

u t u n i , A u t u t u n i , A u t φ ( u t ) + φ ( u n i ) u t u n i , A x n i K ( u n i ) K ( x n i ) r n i , u t u n i + Θ ( u t , u n i ) u t u n i , A u t A u n i + u t u n i , A u n i A x n i φ ( u t ) + φ ( u n i ) K ( u n i ) K ( x n i ) r n i , u t u n i + Θ ( u t , u n i ) .

Since u n i x n i 0 as i, we deduce from the Lipschitz-continuity of A and K that A u n i A x n i 0 and K ( u n i ) K ( x n i )0 as i. Further, from the monotonicity of A, we have u t u n i ,A u t A u n i 0. So, from (H4), we have the weakly lower semicontinuity of φ, K ( u n i ) K ( x n i ) r n i 0 and u n i w, then we have

u t w,A u t φ( u t )+φ(w)+Θ( u t ,w),as i.
(3.30)

From (H1), (H4), and (3.30) we also have

0 = Θ ( u t , u t ) + φ ( u t ) φ ( u t ) t Θ ( u t , y ) + ( 1 t ) Θ ( u t , w ) + t φ ( y ) + ( 1 t ) φ ( w ) φ ( u t ) = t [ Θ ( u t , y ) + φ ( y ) φ ( u t ) ] + ( 1 t ) [ Θ ( u t , w ) + φ ( w ) φ ( w ) φ ( u t ) ] t [ Θ ( u t , y ) + φ ( y ) φ ( u t ) ] + ( 1 t ) u t w , A u t = t [ Θ ( u t , y ) + φ ( y ) φ ( u t ) ] + ( 1 t ) t y w , A u t ,

and hence

0Θ( u t ,y)+φ(y)φ( u t )+(1t)yw,A u t .

Letting t0, we have, for each yC,

0Θ(w,y)+φ(y)φ(w)+Aw,yw.

This implies that wGMEP(Θ,φ,A). Therefore,

w n = 1 Fix( T n )GMEP(Θ,φ,A) ( i = 1 N I ( B i , R i ) ) Fix(S):=Ω.

This shows that ω w ( x n )Ω. From (3.7) and Lemma 2.10 we infer that x n v= P Ω x 0 as n.

Finally, assume additionally that γ n + c n + x n y n =o( α n ). Note that V is a γ ¯ -strongly positive bounded linear operator and f:HH is an l-Lipschitzian mapping with γl<(1+μ) γ ¯ . It is clear that

( V ¯ x ( u + γ f ( x ) ) ) ( V ¯ y ( u + γ f ( y ) ) ) , x y ( ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ γ l ) x y 2 ,x,yH.

Hence we deduce that V ¯ x(u+γf(x)) is ((1+μ) γ ¯ γl)-strongly monotone. In the meantime, it is easy to see that V ¯ x(u+γf(x)) is ( V ¯ +γl)-Lipschitzian with constant V ¯ +γl>0. Thus, there exists a unique solution p in Ω to the VIP

V ¯ p ( u + γ f ( p ) ) , u p 0,uΩ.

Equivalently, pΩ solves (OP2) (due to Lemma 2.18). Consequently, we deduce from (3.9) and x n v= P Ω x 0 (n) that

lim sup n ( u + γ f ( p ) ) V ¯ p , y n p = lim sup n ( ( u + γ f ( p ) ) V ¯ p , x n p + ( u + γ f ( p ) ) V ¯ p , y n x n ) = lim sup n ( u + γ f ( p ) ) V ¯ p , x n p = ( u + γ f ( p ) ) V ¯ p , v p 0 .
(3.31)

Furthermore, by Lemma 2.1 we conclude from (3.1), (3.4), and (3.5) that

y n p 2 = α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p ) + α n γ ( f ( x n ) f ( p ) ) + β n ( k n p ) + ( ( 1 β n ) I α n V ¯ ) ( W n z n p ) 2 α n γ ( f ( x n ) f ( p ) ) + β n ( k n p ) + ( ( 1 β n ) I α n V ¯ ) ( W n z n p ) 2 + 2 α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p ) , y n p [ α n γ f ( x n ) f ( p ) + β n k n p + ( ( 1 β n ) I α n V ¯ ) ( W n z n p ) ] 2 + 2 α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p ) , y n p [ α n γ l x n p + β n k n p + ( 1 β n α n α n μ γ ¯ ) W n z n p ] 2 + 2 α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p ) , y n p [ α n γ l x n p + β n k n p + ( 1 β n α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ) z n p ] 2 + 2 α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p ) , y n p = [ α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ γ l ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ x n p + β n k n p + ( 1 β n α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ) z n p ] 2 + 2 α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p ) , y n p α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ( γ l ) 2 ( 1 + μ ) 2 γ ¯ 2 x n p 2 + β n k n p 2 + ( 1 β n α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ) z n p 2 + 2 α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p ) , y n p α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ( γ l ) 2 ( 1 + μ ) 2 γ ¯ 2 x n p 2 + β n ( ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n ) + ( 1 β n α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ) z n p 2 + 2 α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p ) , y n p α n ( γ l ) 2 ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ x n p 2 + β n ( ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n ) + ( 1 β n α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ) ( ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n ) + 2 α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p ) , y n p = α n ( γ l ) 2 ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ x n p 2 + ( 1 α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ) ( ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n ) + 2 α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p ) , y n p α n ( γ l ) 2 ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ( ( 1 + γ n ) x n p 2 + c n ) + ( 1 α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ) ( ( 1 + γ n ) x n p 2 + c n ) + 2 α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p ) , y n p = ( 1 α n ( 1 + μ ) 2 γ ¯ 2 ( γ l ) 2 ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ) ( ( 1 + γ n ) x n p 2 + c n ) + 2 α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p ) , y n p ( 1 α n ( 1 + μ ) 2 γ ¯ 2 ( γ l ) 2 ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ) x n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n + 2 α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p ) , y n p ,

which hence yields

( 1 + μ ) 2 γ ¯ 2 ( γ l ) 2 ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ x n p 2 x n p 2 y n p 2 α n + γ n x n p 2 + c n α n + 2 ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p ) , y n p x n y n α n ( x n p + y n p ) + γ n + c n α n ( x n p 2 + 1 ) + 2 ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p ) , y n p .

Since γ n + c n =o( α n ), x n y n =o( α n ), and x n v= P Ω x 0 , we infer from (3.31) and 0γl<(1+μ) γ ¯ that as n

( 1 + μ ) 2 γ ¯ 2 ( γ l ) 2 ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ v p 2 0.

That is, p=v= P Ω x 0 . This completes the proof. □

Corollary 3.1 Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a real Hilbert space H. Let Θ be a bifunction from C×C to R satisfying (H1)-(H4) and φ:CR be a lower semicontinuous and convex functional. Let R i :C 2 H be a maximal monotone mapping and let A:HH and B i :CH be ζ-inverse strongly monotone and η i -inverse-strongly monotone, respectively, for i=1,2. Let S:CC be a uniformly continuous asymptotically κ-strict pseudocontractive mapping in the intermediate sense for some 0κ<1 with sequence { γ n }[0,) such that lim n γ n =0 and { c n }[0,) such that lim n c n =0. Let { T n } n = 1 be a sequence of nonexpansive self-mappings on C and { λ n } be a sequence in (0,b] for some b(0,1). Let V be a γ ¯ -strongly positive bounded linear operator and f:HH be an l-Lipschitzian mapping with γl<(1+μ) γ ¯ . Assume that Ω:=( n = 1 Fix( T n ))GMEP(Θ,φ,A)I( B 2 , R 2 )I( B 1 , R 1 )Fix(S) is nonempty and bounded. Let W n be the W-mapping defined by (1.4) and { α n }, { β n }, and { δ n } be three sequences in (0,1) such that lim n α n =0 and κ δ n d<1. Assume that:

  1. (i)

    K:HR is strongly convex with constant σ>0 and its derivative K is Lipschitz-continuous with constant ν>0 such that the function xyx, K (x) is weakly upper semicontinuous for each yH;

  2. (ii)

    for each xH, there exist a bounded subset D x C and z x C such that for any y D x ,

    Θ(y, z x )+φ( z x )φ(y)+ 1 r K ( y ) K ( x ) , z x y <0;
  3. (iii)

    0< lim inf n β n lim sup n β n <1;

  4. (iv)

    { λ i , n }[ a i , b i ](0,2 η i ) for i=1,2, and { r n }[0,2ζ] satisfies

    0< lim inf n r n lim sup n r n <2ζ.

Pick any x 0 H and set C 1 =C, x 1 = P C 1 x 0 . Let { x n } be a sequence generated by the following algorithm:

{ u n = S r n ( Θ , φ ) ( I r n A ) x n , z n = J R 2 , λ 2 , n ( I λ 2 , n B 2 ) J R 1 , λ 1 , n ( I λ 1 , n B 1 ) u n , k n = δ n z n + ( 1 δ n ) S n z n , y n = α n ( u + γ f ( x n ) ) + β n k n + ( ( 1 β n ) I α n ( I + μ V ) ) W n z n , C n + 1 = { z C n : y n z 2 x n z 2 + θ n } , x n + 1 = P C n + 1 x 0 , n 0 ,
(3.32)

where θ n =( α n + γ n ) Δ n ϱ+ c n ϱ, Δ n =sup{ x n p 2 + u + ( γ f I μ V ) p 2 :pΩ}<, and ϱ= 1 1 sup n 1 α n <. If S r ( Θ , φ ) is firmly nonexpansive, then the following statements hold:

  1. (I)

    { x n } converges strongly to P Ω x 0 ;

  2. (II)

    { x n } converges strongly to P Ω x 0 , which solves the optimization problem

    min x Ω μ 2 Vx,x+ 1 2 x u 2 h(x),
    (OP3)

    provided γ n + c n + x n y n =o( α n ) additionally, where h:HR is the potential function of γf.

Corollary 3.2 Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a real Hilbert space H. Let Θ be a bifunction from C×C to R satisfying (H1)-(H4) and φ:CR be a lower semicontinuous and convex functional. Let R:C 2 H be a maximal monotone mapping and let A:HH and B:CH be ζ-inverse strongly monotone and ξ-inverse-strongly monotone, respectively. Let S:CC be a uniformly continuous asymptotically κ-strict pseudocontractive mapping in the intermediate sense for some 0κ<1 with sequence { γ n }[0,) such that lim n γ n =0 and { c n }[0,) such that lim n c n =0. Let { T n } n = 1 be a sequence of nonexpansive self-mappings on C and { λ n } be a sequence in (0,b] for some b(0,1). Let V be a γ ¯ -strongly positive bounded linear operator and f:HH be an l-Lipschitzian mapping with γl<(1+μ) γ ¯ . Assume that Ω:=( n = 1 Fix( T n ))GMEP(Θ,φ,A)I(B,R)Fix(S) is nonempty and bounded. Let W n be the W-mapping defined by (1.4) and { α n }, { β n }, and { δ n } be three sequences in (0,1) such that lim n α n =0 and κ δ n d<1. Assume that:

  1. (i)

    K:HR is strongly convex with constant σ>0 and its derivative K is Lipschitz-continuous with constant ν>0 such that the function xyx, K (x) is weakly upper semicontinuous for each yH;

  2. (ii)

    for each xH, there exist a bounded subset D x C and z x C such that for any y D x ,

    Θ(y, z x )+φ( z x )φ(y)+ 1 r K ( y ) K ( x ) , z x y <0;
  3. (iii)

    0< lim inf n β n lim sup n β n <1;

  4. (iv)

    { ρ n }[a,b](0,2ξ), and { r n }[0,2ζ] satisfies

    0< lim inf n r n lim sup n r n <2ζ.

Pick any x 0 H and set C 1 =C, x 1 = P C 1 x 0 . Let { x n } be a sequence generated by the following algorithm:

{ u n = S r n ( Θ , φ ) ( I r n A ) x n , k n = δ n J R , ρ n ( I ρ n B ) u n + ( 1 δ n ) S n J R , ρ n ( I ρ n B ) u n , y n = α n ( u + γ f ( x n ) ) + β n k n + ( ( 1 β n ) I α n ( I + μ V ) ) W n J R , ρ n ( I ρ n B ) u n , C n + 1 = { z C n : y n z 2 x n z 2 + θ n } , x n + 1 = P C n + 1 x 0 , n 0 ,
(3.33)

where θ n =( α n + γ n ) Δ n ϱ+ c n ϱ, Δ n =sup{ x n p 2 + u + ( γ f I μ V ) p 2 :pΩ}<, and ϱ= 1 1 sup n 1 α n <. If S r ( Θ , φ ) is firmly nonexpansive, then the following statements hold:

  1. (I)

    { x n } converges strongly to P Ω x 0 ;

  2. (II)

    { x n } converges strongly to P Ω x 0 , which solves the optimization problem

    min x Ω μ 2 Vx,x+ 1 2 x u 2 h(x),
    (OP4)

    provided γ n + c n + x n y n =o( α n ) additionally, where h:HR is the potential function of γf.

4 Weak convergence theorems

In this section, we introduce and analyze another iterative algorithm for finding common solutions of a finite family of variational inclusions for maximal monotone and inverse-strongly monotone mappings with the constraints of two problems: a generalized mixed equilibrium problem and a common fixed point problem of an infinite family of nonexpansive mappings and an asymptotically strict pseudocontractive mapping in the intermediate sense in a real Hilbert space. Under mild conditions imposed on the parameter sequences we will prove weak convergence of the proposed algorithm.

Theorem 4.1 Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a real Hilbert space H. Let N be an integer. Let Θ be a bifunction from C×C to R satisfying (H1)-(H4) and φ:CR be a lower semicontinuous and convex functional. Let R i :C 2 H be a maximal monotone mapping and let A:HH and B i :CH be ζ-inverse-strongly monotone and η i -inverse-strongly monotone, respectively, where i{1,2,,N}. Let S:CC be a uniformly continuous asymptotically κ-strict pseudocontractive mapping in the intermediate sense for some 0κ<1 with sequences { γ n }[0,) and { c n }[0,). Let { T n } n = 1 be a sequence of nonexpansive self-mappings on C and { λ n } be a sequence in (0,b] for some b(0,1). Let V be a γ ¯ -strongly positive bounded linear operator and f:HH be an l-Lipschitzian mapping with γl<(1+μ) γ ¯ . Assume that Ω:=( n = 1 Fix( T n ))GMEP(Θ,φ,A)( i = 1 N I( B i , R i ))Fix(S) is nonempty. Let W n be the W-mapping defined by (1.4) and { α n }, { β n } and { δ n } be three sequences in (0,1) such that 0<κ+ε δ n d<1. Assume that:

  1. (i)

    K:HR is strongly convex with constant σ>0 and its derivative K is Lipschitz-continuous with constant ν>0 such that the function xyx, K (x) is weakly upper semicontinuous for each yH;

  2. (ii)

    for each xH, there exist a bounded subset D x C and z x C such that for any y D x ,

    Θ(y, z x )+φ( z x )φ(y)+ 1 r K ( y ) K ( x ) , z x y <0;
  3. (iii)

    n = 1 ( α n + γ n + c n )< and 0< lim inf n β n lim sup n β n <1;

  4. (iv)

    { λ i , n }[ a i , b i ](0,2 η i ), i{1,2,,N}, and { r n }[0,2ζ] satisfies

    0< lim inf n r n lim sup n r n <2ζ.

Pick any x 1 H and let { x n } be a sequence generated by the following algorithm:

{ u n = S r n ( Θ , φ ) ( I r n A ) x n , z n = J R N , λ N , n ( I λ N , n B N ) J R N 1 , λ N 1 , n ( I λ N 1 , n B N 1 ) J R 1 , λ 1 , n ( I λ 1 , n B 1 ) u n , k n = δ n z n + ( 1 δ n ) S n z n , x n + 1 = α n ( u + γ f ( x n ) ) + β n k n + ( ( 1 β n ) I α n ( I + μ V ) ) W n z n , n 1 .
(4.1)

Then { x n } converges weakly to w= lim n P Ω x n provided S r ( Θ , φ ) is firmly nonexpansive.

Proof First, let us show that lim n x n p exists for any pΩ. Put

Λ n i = J R i , λ i , n (I λ i , n B i ) J R i 1 , λ i 1 , n (I λ i 1 , n B i 1 ) J R 1 , λ 1 , n (I λ 1 , n B 1 )

for all i{1,2,,N}, n1, and Λ n 0 =I, where I is the identity mapping on H. Then we see that z n = Λ n N u n . Take pΩ arbitrarily. Similarly to the proof of Theorem 3.1, we obtain

u n p x n p,
(4.2)
z n p u n p,
(4.3)
u n p 2 x n p 2 + r n ( r n 2ζ) A x n A p 2 ,
(4.4)
u n p 2 x n p 2 x n u n 2 +2 r n A x n Ap x n u n ,
(4.5)
Λ n i u n p 2 x n p 2 + λ i , n ( λ i , n 2 η i ) B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p 2 , i { 1 , 2 , , N } ,
(4.6)
Λ n i u n p 2 x n p 2 Λ n i 1 u n Λ n i u n 2 + 2 λ i , n Λ n i 1 u n Λ n i u n B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p , i { 1 , 2 , , N } .
(4.7)

By Lemma 2.2(b) we get

k n p 2 = δ n ( z n p ) + ( 1 δ n ) ( S n z n p ) 2 = δ n z n p 2 + ( 1 δ n ) S n z n p 2 δ n ( 1 δ n ) z n S n z n 2 δ n z n p 2 + ( 1 δ n ) [ ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + κ z n S n z n 2 + c n ] δ n ( 1 δ n ) z n S n z n 2 = [ 1 + γ n ( 1 δ n ) ] z n p 2 + ( 1 δ n ) ( κ δ n ) z n S n z n 2 + ( 1 δ n ) c n ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + ( 1 δ n ) ( κ δ n ) z n S n z n 2 + c n ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n .
(4.8)

Repeating the same arguments as in the proof of Theorem 3.1 we have

( 1 β n ) I α n ( I + μ V ) 1 β n α n α n μ γ ¯ .

Then by Lemma 2.1 we deduce from (4.2), (4.3), (4.8), and 0γl(1+μ) γ ¯ that

x n + 1 p 2 = α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p ) + α n γ ( f ( x n ) f ( p ) ) + β n ( k n p ) + ( ( 1 β n ) I α n V ¯ ) ( W n z n p ) 2 α n γ ( f ( x n ) f ( p ) ) + β n ( k n p ) + ( ( 1 β n ) I α n V ¯ ) ( W n z n p ) 2 + 2 α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p ) , x n + 1 p [ α n γ f ( x n ) f ( p ) + β n k n p + ( ( 1 β n ) I α n V ¯ ) ( W n z n p ) ] 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p x n + 1 p [ α n γ l x n p + β n k n p + ( 1 β n α n α n μ γ ¯ ) W n z n p ] 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p x n + 1 p [ α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ x n p + β n k n p + ( 1 β n α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ) z n p ] 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p x n + 1 p α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ x n p 2 + β n k n p 2 + ( 1 β n α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ) z n p 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p x n + 1 p α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ x n p 2 + β n ( ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n ) + ( 1 β n α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ) z n p 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p x n + 1 p α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ x n p 2 + β n ( ( 1 + γ n ) x n p 2 + c n ) + ( 1 β n α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ) x n p 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p x n + 1 p α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ( ( 1 + γ n ) x n p 2 + c n ) + β n ( ( 1 + γ n ) x n p 2 + c n ) + ( 1 β n α n ( 1 + μ ) γ ¯ ) ( ( 1 + γ n ) x n p 2 + c n ) + 2 α n u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p x n + 1 p = ( 1 + γ n ) x n p 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p x n + 1 p ( 1 + γ n ) x n p 2 + c n + α n ( u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p 2 + x n + 1 p 2 ) ,

which hence yields

x n + 1 p 2 1 + γ n 1 α n x n p 2 + α n 1 α n u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p 2 + 1 1 α n c n = ( 1 + α n + γ n 1 α n ) x n p 2 + α n 1 α n u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p 2 + 1 1 α n c n [ 1 + ( α n + γ n ) ϱ ] x n p 2 + α n ϱ u + γ f ( p ) V ¯ p 2 + ϱ c n ,
(4.9)

where ϱ= 1 1 sup n 1 α n < (due to { α n }(0,1) and lim n α n =0). By Lemma 2.8, we see from n = 1 ( α n + γ n + c n )< that lim n x n p exists. Thus { x n } is bounded and so are the sequences { u n }, { z n }, and { k n }.

Also, utilizing Lemmas 2.1 and 2.2(b) we obtain from (4.2), (4.3), and (4.8)

x n + 1 p 2 = α n ( u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n ) + β n ( k n p ) + ( 1 β n ) ( W n z n p ) 2 β n ( k n p ) + ( 1 β n ) ( W n z n p ) 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n , x n + 1 p = β n k n p 2 + ( 1 β n ) W n z n p 2 β n ( 1 β n ) k n W n z n 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p β n k n p 2 + ( 1 β n ) z n p 2 β n ( 1 β n ) k n W n z n 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p β n ( ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n ) + ( 1 β n ) z n p 2 β n ( 1 β n ) k n W n z n 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p β n ( ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n ) + ( 1 β n ) ( ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n ) β n ( 1 β n ) k n W n z n 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n β n ( 1 β n ) k n W n z n 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p ( 1 + γ n ) x n p 2 + c n β n ( 1 β n ) k n W n z n 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p ,
(4.10)

which leads to

β n ( 1 β n ) k n W n z n 2 x n p 2 x n + 1 p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p .

Since lim n α n =0, lim n γ n =0, and lim n c n =0, it follows from the existence of lim n x n p and condition (iii) that

lim n k n W n z n =0.
(4.11)

Note that

x n + 1 k n = α n ( u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n ) +(1 β n )( W n z n k n ),

which yields

x n + 1 k n α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n + ( 1 β n ) W n z n k n α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n + W n z n k n .

So, from (4.11) and lim n α n =0, we get

lim n x n + 1 k n =0.
(4.12)

In the meantime, we conclude from (4.2), (4.3), (4.8), and (4.10) that

x n + 1 p 2 β n k n p 2 + ( 1 β n ) z n p 2 β n ( 1 β n ) k n W n z n 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p β n k n p 2 + ( 1 β n ) z n p 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p β n [ ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + ( 1 δ n ) ( κ δ n ) z n S n z n 2 + c n ] + ( 1 β n ) z n p 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p β n [ ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + ( 1 δ n ) ( κ δ n ) z n S n z n 2 + c n ] + ( 1 β n ) ( ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n ) + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + β n ( 1 δ n ) ( κ δ n ) z n S n z n 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p ( 1 + γ n ) x n p 2 + β n ( 1 δ n ) ( κ δ n ) z n S n z n 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p ,

which, together with 0<κ+ϵ δ n d<1, implies that

( 1 d ) ϵ β n z n S n z n 2 β n ( 1 δ n ) ( δ n κ ) z n S n z n 2 x n p 2 x n + 1 p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p .

Consequently, from lim n α n =0, lim n γ n =0, lim n c n =0, condition (iii), and the existence of lim n x n p, we get

lim n z n S n z n =0.
(4.13)

Since k n z n =(1 δ n )( S n z n z n ), from (4.13) we have

lim n k n z n =0.
(4.14)

Combining (4.4), (4.8), and (4.10), we have

x n + 1 p 2 β n ( ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n ) + ( 1 β n ) z n p 2 β n ( 1 β n ) k n W n z n 2 + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p β n ( ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n ) + ( 1 β n ) ( ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n ) + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p = ( 1 + γ n ) z n p 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p u n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p x n p 2 + r n ( r n 2 ζ ) A x n A p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p ,

which implies

r n ( 2 ζ r n ) A x n A p 2 x n p 2 x n + 1 p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p .

From condition (iv), lim n α n =0, lim n γ n =0, lim n c n =0, and the existence of lim n x n p, we get

lim n A x n Ap=0.
(4.15)

Combining (4.5), (4.8), and (4.10), we have

x n + 1 p 2 z n p 2 + γ n z n p 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p u n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p x n p 2 x n u n 2 + 2 r n A x n A p x n u n + γ n x n p 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p ,

which implies

x n u n 2 x n p 2 x n + 1 p 2 + 2 r n A x n A p x n u n + γ n x n p 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p .

From (4.15), lim n α n =0, lim n γ n =0, lim n c n =0, and the existence of lim n x n p, we obtain

lim n x n u n =0.
(4.16)

Combining (4.6), (4.8), and (4.10), we have

x n + 1 p 2 z n p 2 + γ n z n p 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p Λ n i u n p 2 + γ n z n p 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p x n p 2 + λ i , n ( λ i , n 2 η i ) B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p ,

which implies

λ i , n ( λ i , n 2 η i ) B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p 2 x n p 2 x n + 1 p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p .

From { λ i , n }[ a i , b i ](0,2 η i ), i{1,2,,N}, lim n α n =0, lim n γ n =0, lim n c n =0, and the existence of lim n x n p, we obtain

lim n B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p =0,i{1,2,,N}.
(4.17)

Combining (4.7), (4.8), and (4.10), we get

x n + 1 p 2 z n p 2 + γ n z n p 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p Λ n i u n p 2 + γ n x n p 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p x n p 2 Λ n i 1 u n Λ n i u n 2 + 2 λ i , n Λ n i 1 u n Λ n i u n B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p + γ n x n p 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p ,

which implies

Λ n i 1 u n Λ n i u n 2 x n p 2 x n + 1 p 2 + 2 λ i , n Λ n i 1 u n Λ n i u n B i Λ n i 1 u n B i p + γ n x n p 2 + c n + 2 α n u + γ f ( x n ) V ¯ W n z n x n + 1 p .

From (4.17), lim n α n =0, lim n γ n =0, lim n c n =0, and the existence of lim n x n p, we obtain

lim n Λ n i 1 u n Λ n i u n =0,i{1,2,,N}.
(4.18)

By (4.18), we have

u n z n = Λ n 0 u n Λ n N u n Λ n 0 u n Λ n 1 u n + Λ n 1 u n Λ n 2 u n + + Λ n N 1 u n Λ n N u n 0 as  n .
(4.19)

From (4.16) and (4.19), we have

x n z n x n u n + u n z n 0 as  n .
(4.20)

By (4.14) and (4.20), we obtain

k n x n k n z n + z n x n 0 as  n ,
(4.21)

which, together with (4.12) and (4.21), implies that

x n + 1 x n x n + 1 k n + k n x n 0 as  n .
(4.22)

On the other hand, we observe that

z n + 1 z n z n + 1 x n + 1 + x n + 1 x n + x n z n .

By (4.20) and (4.22), we have

lim n z n + 1 z n =0.
(4.23)

We note that

z n S z n z n z n + 1 + z n + 1 S n + 1 z n + 1 + S n + 1 z n + 1 S n + 1 z n + S n + 1 z n S z n .

From (4.13), (4.23), Lemma 2.4, and the uniform continuity of S, we obtain

lim n z n S z n =0.
(4.24)

In addition, note that

z n W z n z n k n + k n W n z n + W n z n W z n

So, from (4.11), (4.14), and Remark 2.3 it follows that

lim n z n W z n =0.
(4.25)

Since { x n } is bounded, there exists a subsequence { x n i } of { x n } which converges weakly to w. From (4.20) and (4.21), we have z n i w and k n i w. From (4.24) and the uniform continuity of S, we have lim n z n S m z n =0 for any m1. So, from Lemma 2.6, we have wFix(S). In the meantime, by (4.25) and Lemma 2.13, we get wFix(W)= n = 1 Fix( T n ) (due to Lemma 2.12). Utilizing similar arguments to those in the proof of Theorem 3.1, we can derive wGMEP(Θ,φ,A)( i = 1 N I( B i , R i )). Consequently, wΩ. This shows that ω w ( x n )Ω.

Next let us show that ω w ( x n ) is a single-point set. As a matter of fact, let { x n j } be another subsequence of { x n } such that x n j w . Then we get w Ω. If w w , from the Opial condition, we have

lim n x n w = lim i x n i w < lim i x n i w = lim n x n w = lim j x n j w < lim j x n j w = lim n x n w .

This attains a contradiction. So we have w= w . Put v n = P Ω x n . Since wΩ, we have x n v n , v n w0. By Lemma 2.9, we see that { v n } converges strongly to some w 0 Ω. Since { x n } converges weakly to w, we have

w w 0 , w 0 w0.

Therefore we obtain w= w 0 = lim n P Ω x n . This completes the proof. □

Corollary 4.1 Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a real Hilbert space H. Let Θ be a bifunction from C×C to R satisfying (H1)-(H4) and φ:CR be a lower semicontinuous and convex functional. Let R i :C 2 H be a maximal monotone mapping and let A:HH and B i :CH be ζ-inverse-strongly monotone and η i -inverse-strongly monotone, respectively, for i=1,2. Let S:CC be a uniformly continuous asymptotically κ-strict pseudocontractive mapping in the intermediate sense for some 0κ<1 with sequences { γ n }[0,) and { c n }[0,). Let { T n } n = 1 be a sequence of nonexpansive self-mappings on C and { λ n } be a sequence in (0,b] for some b(0,1). Let V be a γ ¯ -strongly positive bounded linear operator and f:HH be an l-Lipschitzian mapping with γl<(1+μ) γ ¯ . Assume that Ω:=( n = 1 Fix( T n ))GMEP(Θ,φ,A)I( B 2 , R 2 )I( B 1 , R 1 )Fix(S) is nonempty. Let W n be the W-mapping defined by (1.4) and { α n }, { β n }, and { δ n } be three sequences in (0,1) such that 0<κ+ε δ n d<1. Assume that:

  1. (i)

    K:HR is strongly convex with constant σ>0 and its derivative K is Lipschitz-continuous with constant ν>0 such that the function xyx, K (x) is weakly upper semicontinuous for each yH;

  2. (ii)

    for each xH, there exist a bounded subset D x C and z x C such that for any y D x ,

    Θ(y, z x )+φ( z x )φ(y)+ 1 r K ( y ) K ( x ) , z x y <0;
  3. (iii)

    n = 1 ( α n + γ n + c n )< and 0< lim inf n β n lim sup n β n <1;

  4. (iv)

    { λ i , n }[ a i , b i ](0,2 η i ) for i=1,2, and { r n }[0,2ζ] satisfies

    0< lim inf n r n lim sup n r n <2ζ.

Pick any x 1 H and let { x n } be a sequence generated by the following algorithm:

{ u n = S r n ( Θ , φ ) ( I r n A ) x n , z n = J R 2 , λ 2 , n ( I λ 2 , n B 2 ) J R 1 , λ 1 , n ( I λ 1 , n B 1 ) u n , k n = δ n z n + ( 1 δ n ) S n z n , x n + 1 = α n ( u + γ f ( x n ) ) + β n k n + ( ( 1 β n ) I α n ( I + μ V ) ) W n z n , n 1 .
(4.26)

Then { x n } converges weakly to w= lim n P Ω x n provided S r ( Θ , φ ) is firmly nonexpansive.

Corollary 4.2 Let C be a nonempty closed convex subset of a real Hilbert space H. Let Θ be a bifunction from C×C to R satisfying (H1)-(H4) and φ:CR be a lower semicontinuous and convex functional. Let R:C 2 H be a maximal monotone mapping and let A:HH and B:CH be ζ-inverse-strongly monotone and ξ-inverse-strongly monotone, respectively. Let S:CC be a uniformly continuous asymptotically κ-strict pseudocontractive mapping in the intermediate sense for some 0κ<1 with sequences { γ n }[0,) and { c n }[0,). Let { T n } n = 1 be a sequence of nonexpansive self-mappings on C and { λ n } be a sequence in (0,b] for some b(0,1). Let V be a γ ¯ -strongly positive bounded linear operator and f:HH be an l-Lipschitzian mapping with γl<(1+μ) γ ¯ . Assume that Ω:=( n = 1 Fix( T n ))GMEP(Θ,φ,A)I(B,R)Fix(S) is nonempty. Let W n be the W-mapping defined by (1.4) and { α n }, { β n }, and { δ n } be three sequences in (0,1) such that 0<κ+ε δ n d<1. Assume that:

  1. (i)

    K:HR is strongly convex with constant σ>0 and its derivative K is Lipschitz-continuous with constant ν>0 such that the function xyx, K (x) is weakly upper semicontinuous for each yH;

  2. (ii)

    for each xH, there exist a bounded subset D x C and z x C such that for any y D x ,

    Θ(y, z x )+φ( z x )φ(y)+ 1 r K ( y ) K ( x ) , z x y <0;
  3. (iii)

    n = 1 ( α n + γ n + c n )< and 0< lim inf n β n lim sup n β n <1;

  4. (iv)

    { ρ n }[a,b](0,2ξ), and { r n }[0,2ζ] satisfies

    0< lim inf n r n lim sup n r n <2ζ.

Pick any x 1 H and let { x n } be a sequence generated by the following algorithm:

{ u n = S r n ( Θ , φ ) ( I r n A ) x n , k n = δ n J R , ρ n ( I ρ n B ) u n + ( 1 δ n ) S n J R , ρ n ( I ρ n B ) u n , x n + 1 = α n ( u + γ f ( x n ) ) + β n k n + ( ( 1 β n ) I x n + 1 = α n ( I + μ V ) ) W n J R , ρ n ( I ρ n B ) u n , n 1 .
(4.27)

Then { x n } converges weakly to w= lim n P Ω x n provided S r ( Θ , φ ) is firmly nonexpansive.

References

  1. Peng JW, Yao JC: A new hybrid-extragradient method for generalized mixed equilibrium problems, fixed point problems and variational inequality problems. Taiwan. J. Math. 2008, 12: 1401-1432.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Ceng LC, Hu HY, Wong MM: Strong and weak convergence theorems for generalized mixed equilibrium problem with perturbation and fixed point problem of infinitely many nonexpansive mappings. Taiwan. J. Math. 2011,15(3):1341-1367.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Yao Y, Liou YC, Yao JC: New relaxed hybrid-extragradient method for fixed point problems, a general system of variational inequality problems and generalized mixed equilibrium problems. Optimization 2011,60(3):395-412. 10.1080/02331930903196941

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Cai G, Bu SQ: Strong and weak convergence theorems for general mixed equilibrium problems and variational inequality problems and fixed point problems in Hilbert spaces. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2013, 247: 34-52.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Yao Y, Cho YJ, Liou YC: Algorithms of common solutions for variational inclusions, mixed equilibrium problems and fixed point problems. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2011, 212: 242-250. 10.1016/j.ejor.2011.01.042

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Ceng LC, Ansari QH, Schaible S: Hybrid extragradient-like methods for generalized mixed equilibrium problems, system of generalized equilibrium problems and optimization problems. J. Glob. Optim. 2012, 53: 69-96. 10.1007/s10898-011-9703-4

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Ceng LC, Guu SM, Yao JC: Hybrid iterative method for finding common solutions of generalized mixed equilibrium and fixed point problems. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2012. Article ID 92, 2012:

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ceng LC, Petrusel A: Relaxed extragradient-like method for general system of generalized mixed equilibria and fixed point problem. Taiwan. J. Math. 2012,16(2):445-478.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Rockafellar RT: Monotone operators and the proximal point algorithms. SIAM J. Control Optim. 1976, 14: 877-898. 10.1137/0314056

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Huang NJ: A new completely general class of variational inclusions with noncompact valued mappings. Comput. Math. Appl. 1998,35(10):9-14. 10.1016/S0898-1221(98)00067-4

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Zeng LC, Guu SM, Yao JC: Characterization of H -monotone operators with applications to variational inclusions. Comput. Math. Appl. 2005,50(3-4):329-337. 10.1016/j.camwa.2005.06.001

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Ceng LC, Guu SM, Yao JC: Iterative approximation of solutions for a class of completely generalized set-valued quasi-variational inclusions. Comput. Math. Appl. 2008, 56: 978-987. 10.1016/j.camwa.2008.01.026

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Ceng LC, Guu SM, Yao JC: Iterative algorithm for finding approximate solutions of mixed quasi-variational-like inclusions. Comput. Math. Appl. 2008, 56: 942-952. 10.1016/j.camwa.2008.01.024

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Ceng LC, Ansari QH, Wong MM, Yao JC: Mann type hybrid extragradient method for variational inequalities, variational inclusions and fixed point problems. Comput. Math. Appl. 2012,13(2):403-422.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Ahmad R, Ansari QH, Irfan SS: Generalized variational inclusions and generalized resolvent equations in Banach spaces. Comput. Math. Appl. 2005, 29: 1825-1835.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Ahmad R, Ansari QH: Generalized variational inclusions and H -resolvent equations with H -accretive operators. Taiwan. J. Math. 2007, 111: 703-716.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Ahmad R, Ansari QH: System of vector quasi-variational inclusions with some applications. Nonlinear Anal. 2008, 69: 2812-2824. 10.1016/j.na.2007.08.053

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Kim TH, Xu HK: Convergence of the modified Mann’s iteration method for asymptotically strict pseudocontractions. Nonlinear Anal. 2008, 68: 2828-2836. 10.1016/j.na.2007.02.029

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Sahu DR, Xu HK, Yao JC: Asymptotically strict pseudocontractive mappings in the intermediate sense. Nonlinear Anal. 2009, 70: 3502-3511. 10.1016/j.na.2008.07.007

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Ceng LC, Yao JC: A relaxed extragradient-like method for a generalized mixed equilibrium problem, a general system of generalized equilibria and a fixed point problem. Nonlinear Anal. 2010, 72: 1922-1937. 10.1016/j.na.2009.09.033

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  22. Osilike MO, Aniagbosor SC, Akuchu BG: Fixed points of asymptotically demicontractive mappings in arbitrary Banach space. Panam. Math. J. 2002, 12: 77-88.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Opial Z: Weak convergence of the sequence of successive approximations for nonexpansive mappings. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 1967, 73: 591-597. 10.1090/S0002-9904-1967-11761-0

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Huang S: Hybrid extragradient methods for asymptotically strict pseudo-contractions in the intermediate sense and variational inequality problems. Optimization 2011, 60: 739-754. 10.1080/02331934.2010.527340

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. Martinez-Yanes C, Xu HK: Strong convergence of the CQ method for fixed point iteration process. Nonlinear Anal. 2006, 64: 2400-2411. 10.1016/j.na.2005.08.018

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. O’Hara JG, Pillay P, Xu HK: Iterative approaches to convex feasibility problems in Banach spaces. Nonlinear Anal. 2006,64(9):2022-2042. 10.1016/j.na.2005.07.036

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. Yao Y, Liou YC, Yao JC: Convergence theorem for equilibrium problems and fixed point problems of infinite family of nonexpansive mappings. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2007. Article ID 64363, 2007:

    Google Scholar 

  28. Goebel K, Kirk WA: Topics on Metric Fixed-Point Theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; 1990.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  29. Yao Y, Noor MA, Zainab S, Liou YC: Mixed equilibrium problems and optimization problems. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2009, 354: 319-329. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2008.12.055

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

In this research, first author was partially supported by the National Science Foundation of China (11071169), Innovation Program of Shanghai Municipal Education Commission (09ZZ133) and Ph.D. Program Foundation of Ministry of Education of China (20123127110002). The second author and third author were supported partly by the National Science Council of the Republic of China.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chin-Tzong Pang.

Additional information

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors’ contributions

All authors contributed equally and significantly in writing this article. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Rights and permissions

Open Access  This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, 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 licence, and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

To view a copy of this licence, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ceng, LC., Chen, CM. & Pang, CT. On a finite family of variational inclusions with the constraints of generalized mixed equilibrium and fixed point problems. J Inequal Appl 2014, 462 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2014-462

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2014-462

Keywords