- Research
- Open Access

# Fixed point solutions for variational inequalities in image restoration over *q*-uniformly smooth Banach spaces

- Pongsakorn Sunthrayuth
^{1}and - Poom Kumam
^{1}Email author

**2014**:473

https://doi.org/10.1186/1029-242X-2014-473

© Sunthrayuth and Kumam; licensee Springer. 2014

**Received:**4 July 2014**Accepted:**6 November 2014**Published:**26 November 2014

## Abstract

In this paper, we introduce new implicit and explicit iterative methods for finding a common fixed point set of an infinite family of strict pseudo-contractions by the sunny nonexpansive retractions in a real *q*-uniformly and uniformly convex Banach space which admits a weakly sequentially continuous generalized duality mapping. Then we prove the strong convergence under mild conditions of the purposed iterative scheme to a common fixed point of an infinite family of strict pseudo-contractions which is a solution of some variational inequalities. Furthermore, we apply our results to study some strong convergence theorems in ${L}_{p}$ and ${\ell}_{p}$ spaces with $1<p<\mathrm{\infty}$. Our results mainly improve and extend the results announced by Ceng *et al.* (Comput. Math. Appl. 61:2447-2455, 2011) and many authors from Hilbert spaces to Banach spaces. Finally, we give some numerical examples for support our main theorem in the end of the paper.

**MSC:**47H09, 47H10, 47H17, 47J25, 49J40.

## Keywords

- variational inequality
- Banach space
- strong convergence
- iterative method
- common fixed point
- strongly accretive operator
- inverse strongly accretive operator

## 1 Introduction

Let ${C}_{1},{C}_{2},\dots ,{C}_{n}$ be nonempty, closed, and convex subsets of a real Hilbert space *H* such that ${\bigcap}_{i=1}^{n}{C}_{i}\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}$. The problem of image recovery in a Hilbert space setting by using convex of metric projections ${P}_{{C}_{i}}$, may be stated as follows: the original unknown image *z* is known *a priori* to belong to the intersection of ${\{{C}_{i}\}}_{i=1}^{n}$; given only the metric projections ${P}_{{C}_{i}}$ of *H* onto ${C}_{i}$ for $i=1,2,\dots ,n$ recover *z* by an iterative scheme. Youla and Webb [1] first used iterative methods for applied in image restoration. The problems of image recovery have been studied in a Banach space setting by Kitahara and Takahashi [2] (see also [3, 4]) by using convex combinations of sunny nonexpansive retractions in uniformly convex Banach spaces. On the other hand, Alber [5] studied the problem of image recovery by the products of generalized projections in a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space whose duality mapping is weakly sequentially continuous (see also [6, 7]). Nakajo *et al.* [8] and Kimura *et al.* [9] considered this problem by the sunny nonexpansive retractions and proved convergence of the iterative sequence to a common point of countable nonempty, closed, and convex subsets in a uniformly convex and smooth Banach space, and in a strictly convex, smooth and reflexive Banach space having the Kadec-Klee property, respectively. Some iterative methods have been studied in problem of image recovery by numerous authors (see [2–5, 10–12]).

The problems of image recovery are connected with the convex feasibility problem, convex minimization problems, multiple-set split feasibility problems, common fixed point problems, and variational inequalities. In particular, variational inequality theory has been studied widely in several branches of pure and applied sciences. This field is dynamics and is experiencing an explosive growth in both theory and applications. Indeed, applications of the variational inequalities span as diverse disciplines as differential equations, time-optimal control, optimization, mathematical programming, mechanics, finance, and so on. Note that most of the variational problems, including minimization or maximization of functions, variational inequality problems, quasivariational inequality problems, decision and management sciences, and engineering sciences problems. Recently, some iterative methods have been developed for solving the fixed point problems and variational inequality problems in *q*-uniformly smooth Banach spaces by numerous authors (see [13–24]).

*A*be a strongly positive bounded linear operator on

*H*, that is, there exists a constant $\overline{\gamma}>0$ such that

**Remark 1.1** From the definition of operator *A*, we note that a strongly positive bounded linear operator *A* is a $\parallel A\parallel $-Lipschitzian and *η*-strongly monotone operator.

*H*:

where *C* is the fixed point set of a nonexpansive mapping *T* on *H* and *u* is a given point in *H*.

*A*is a strongly positive bounded linear operator on a real Hilbert space

*H*. They proved that if the sequence $\{{\alpha}_{n}\}$ satisfies appropriate conditions, then the sequence $\{{x}_{n}\}$ generated by (1.3) converges strongly to the unique solution of the variational inequality

where *C* is the fixed point set of a nonexpansive mapping *T* and *h* is a potential function for *γf* (*i.e.*, ${h}^{\prime}(x)=\gamma f(x)$ for all $x\in H$).

*T*as follows:

*F*is a

*κ*-Lipschitzian and

*η*-strongly monotone operator on a real Hilbert space

*H*with constants $\kappa ,\eta >0$ and $0<\mu <\frac{2\eta}{{\kappa}^{2}}$. He proved that if $\{{\lambda}_{n}\}$ satisfy the appropriate conditions, then the sequence $\{{x}_{n}\}$ generated by (1.6) converges strongly to the unique solution of the variational inequality

*T*on a real Hilbert space

*H*as follows:

*et al.*[28] combined the iterative method (1.3) with Tian’s method (1.8) and consider the following a general composite iterative method:

*A*is a strongly positive bounded linear operator on

*H*with coefficient $\overline{\gamma}\in (1,2)$, and $\{{\alpha}_{n}\}\subset (0,1)$ and $\{{\beta}_{n}\}\subset (0,1]$ satisfy appropriate conditions. Then they proved that the sequence $\{{x}_{n}\}$ generated by (1.10) converges strongly to the unique solution ${x}^{\ast}\in C$ of the variational inequality

where $C=Fix(T)$.

In this paper, motivated by the above facts, we introduce new implicit and explicit iterative methods for finding a common fixed point set of an infinite family of strict pseudo-contractions by the sunny nonexpansive retractions in a real *q*-uniformly and uniformly convex Banach space *X* which admits a weakly sequentially continuous generalized duality mapping. Consequently, we prove the strong convergence under mild conditions of the purposed iterative scheme to a common fixed point of an infinite family of strict pseudo-contractions of nonempty, closed, and convex subsets of *X* which is a solution of some variational inequalities. Furthermore, we apply our results to the study of some strong convergence theorems in ${L}_{p}$ and ${\ell}_{p}$ spaces with $1<p<\mathrm{\infty}$. Our results extend the main result of Ceng *et al.* [28] in several aspects and the work of many authors from Hilbert spaces to Banach spaces. Finally, we give some numerical examples to support our main theorem in the end of the paper.

## 2 Preliminaries

*X*and ${X}^{\ast}$ a real Banach space and the dual space of

*X*, respectively. Let $q>1$ be a real number. The

*generalized duality mapping*${J}_{q}:X\to {2}^{{X}^{\ast}}$ is defined by

where $\u3008\cdot ,\cdot \u3009$ denotes the duality pairing between *X* and ${X}^{\ast}$. In particular, ${J}_{q}={J}_{2}$ is called the *normalized duality mapping* and ${J}_{q}(x)={\parallel x\parallel}^{q-2}{J}_{2}(x)$ for $x\ne 0$. If $X:=H$ is a real Hilbert space, then $J=I$, where *I* is the identity mapping. It is well known that if *X* is smooth, then ${J}_{q}$ is single-valued, which is denoted by ${j}_{q}$ (see [29]).

*X*is said to be

*strictly convex*if $\frac{\parallel x+y\parallel}{2}<1$ for all $x,y\in X$ with $\parallel x\parallel =\parallel y\parallel =1$ and $x\ne y$. A Banach space

*X*is said to be

*uniformly convex*if, for each $\u03f5>0$, there exists $\delta >0$ such that for $x,y\in X$ with $\parallel x\parallel ,\parallel y\parallel \le 1$ and $\parallel x-y\parallel \ge \u03f5$, $\frac{\parallel x+y\parallel}{2}\le 1-\delta $ holds. Let $S(X)=\{x\in X:\parallel x\parallel =1\}$. The norm of

*X*is said to be

*Gâteaux differentiable*(or

*X*is said to be smooth) if the limit

exists for each $x,y\in S(X)$. The norm of *X* is said to be *uniformly Gâteaux differentiable*, if, for each $y\in S(X)$, the limit is attained uniformly for $x\in S(X)$.

*X*defined by

A Banach space *X* is said to be *uniformly smooth* if $\frac{{\rho}_{X}(t)}{t}\to 0$ as $t\to 0$. Suppose that $q>1$, then *X* is said to be *q*-*uniformly smooth* if there exists $c>0$ such that ${\rho}_{X}(t)\le c{t}^{q}$ for all $t>0$. It is shown in [30] (see also [31]) that there is no Banach space which is *q*-uniformly smooth with $q>2$. If *X* is *q*-uniformly smooth, then *X* is uniformly smooth. It is well known that each uniformly convex Banach space *X* is reflexive and strictly convex and every uniformly smooth Banach space *X* is a reflexive Banach space with uniformly Gâteaux differentiable norm (see [29]). Typical examples of both uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach spaces are ${L}_{p}$, where $p>1$. More precisely, ${L}_{p}$ is $min\{p,2\}$-uniformly smooth for every $p>1$.

Let *C* be a nonempty, closed, and convex subset of *X* and *T* be a self-mapping on *C*. We denote the fixed points set of the mapping *T* by $Fix(T)=\{x\in C:Tx=x\}$.

**Definition 2.1**A mapping $T:C\to C$ is said to be:

- (i)
*λ*-*strictly pseudo*-*contractive*[32] if, for all $x,y\in C$, there exist $\lambda >0$ and ${j}_{q}(x-y)\in {J}_{q}(x-y)$ such that$\u3008Tx-Ty,{j}_{q}(x-y)\u3009\le {\parallel x-y\parallel}^{q}-\lambda {\parallel (I-T)x-(I-T)y\parallel}^{q},$(2.1)or equivalently$\u3008(I-T)x-(I-T)y,{j}_{q}(x-y)\u3009\ge \lambda {\parallel (I-T)x-(I-T)y\parallel}^{q}.$(2.2) - (ii)
*L*-*Lipschitzian*if, for all $x,y\in C$, there exists a constant $L>0$ such that$\parallel Tx-Ty\parallel \le L\parallel x-y\parallel .$

If $0<L<1$, then *T* is a contraction and if $L=1$, then *T* is a nonexpansive mapping. By the definition, we know that every *λ*-strictly pseudo-contractive mapping is $(\frac{1+\lambda}{\lambda})$-Lipschitzian (see [33]).

**Remark 2.2**Let

*C*be a nonempty subset of a real Hilbert space

*H*and $T:C\to C$ be a mapping. Then

*T*is said to be

*k*-

*strictly pseudo*-

*contractive*[32] if, for all $x,y\in C$, there exists $k\in [0,1)$ such that

*accretive*if, for all $x,y\in C$, there exists ${j}_{q}(x-y)\in {J}_{q}(x-y)$ such that

*strongly accretive*if, for all $x,y\in C$, there exists ${j}_{q}(x-y)\in {J}_{q}(x-y)$ such that

**Remark 2.3** If $X:=H$ is a real Hilbert space, accretive and strongly accretive mappings coincide with monotone and strongly monotone mappings, respectively.

*D*be a nonempty subset of

*C*. A mapping $Q:C\to D$ is said to be

*sunny*[34] if

whenever $Qx+t(x-Qx)\in C$ for $x\in C$ and $t\ge 0$. A mapping $Q:C\to D$ is said to be *retraction* if $Qx=x$ for all $x\in D$. Furthermore, *Q* is a sunny nonexpansive retraction from *C* onto *D* if *Q* is a retraction from *C* onto *D* which is also sunny and nonexpansive. A subset *D* of *C* is called a *sunny nonexpansive retraction* of *C* if there exists a sunny nonexpansive retraction from *C* onto *D*. It is well known that if $X:=H$ is a real Hilbert space, then a sunny nonexpansive retraction *Q* is coincident with the metric projection from *X* onto *C*.

**Lemma 2.4** ([14])

*Let*

*C*

*be a closed and convex subset of a smooth Banach space*

*X*.

*Let*

*D*

*be a nonempty subset of*

*C*.

*Let*$Q:C\to D$

*be a retraction and let*

*j*, ${j}_{q}$

*be the normalized duality mapping and generalized duality mapping on*

*X*,

*respectively*.

*Then the following are equivalent*:

- (a)
*Q**is sunny and nonexpansive*. - (b)
${\parallel Qx-Qy\parallel}^{2}\le \u3008x-y,j(Qx-Qy)\u3009$

*for all*$x,y\in C$. - (c)
$\u3008x-Qx,j(y-Qx)\u3009\le 0$

*for all*$x\in C$*and*$y\in D$. - (d)
$\u3008x-Qx,{j}_{q}(y-Qx)\u3009\le 0$

*for all*$x\in C$*and*$y\in D$.

**Lemma 2.5** ([35])

*Suppose that*$q>1$.

*Then the following inequality holds*:

*for arbitrary positive real numbers* *a*, *b*.

In a real *q*-uniformly smooth Banach space, Xu [36] proved the following important inequality:

**Lemma 2.6** ([36])

*Let*

*X*

*be a real*

*q*-

*uniformly smooth Banach space*.

*Then the following inequality holds*:

*for all* $x,y\in X$ *and for some* ${C}_{q}>0$.

**Remark 2.7** The constant ${C}_{q}$ satisfying (2.4) is called the *best* *q*-*uniform smoothness constant*.

**Lemma 2.8** ([21])

*Let* *C* *be a nonempty and convex subset of a real* *q*-*uniformly smooth Banach space* *X* *and* $T:C\to C$ *be a* *λ*-*strict pseudo*-*contraction*. *For* $\gamma \in (0,1)$, *define* $Sx=(1-\gamma )x+\gamma Tx$. *Then*, *as* $\gamma \in (0,\nu )$, $\nu =min\{1,{(\frac{q\lambda}{{C}_{q}})}^{\frac{1}{q-1}}\}$, $S:C\to C$ *is nonexpansive and* $Fix(S)=Fix(T)$, *where* ${C}_{q}$ *is the best* *q*-*uniform smoothness constant*.

**Definition 2.9** ([37])

*C*be a nonempty, closed, and convex subset of a real

*q*-uniformly smooth Banach space

*X*. Let ${T}_{n,k}={\theta}_{n,k}{S}_{k}+(1-{\theta}_{n,k})I$, where ${S}_{k}:C\to C$ is ${\lambda}_{k}$-strict pseudo-contraction and $\{{t}_{n}\}$ be a nonnegative real sequence with $0\le {t}_{n}\le 1$, $\mathrm{\forall}n\in \mathbb{N}$. For $n\ge 1$, define a mapping ${W}_{n}:C\to C$ as follows:

Such a mapping ${W}_{n}$ is called the *W*-mapping generated by ${T}_{n,n},{T}_{n,n-1},\dots ,{T}_{n,1}$ and ${t}_{n},{t}_{n-1},\dots ,{t}_{1}$.

Throughout this paper, we will assume that $\{{\theta}_{n,k}\}$ satisfies the following conditions:

(H1) ${\theta}_{n,k}\in (0,\nu ]$, $\nu =min\{1,{(\frac{q\overline{\lambda}}{{C}_{q}})}^{\frac{1}{q-1}}\}$ with $\overline{\lambda}=inf{\lambda}_{k}>0$, $\mathrm{\forall}n,k\in \mathbb{N}$;

(H2) $|{\theta}_{n+1,k}-{\theta}_{n,k}|\le {a}_{n}$, $\mathrm{\forall}n\in \mathbb{N}$ and $1\le k\le n$ with ${\sum}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{\infty}}{a}_{n}<\mathrm{\infty}$;

The hypothesis (H2) secures the existence of ${lim}_{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}{\theta}_{n,k}$, $\mathrm{\forall}k\in \mathbb{N}$. Set ${\theta}_{1,k}:={lim}_{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}{\theta}_{n,k}$, $\mathrm{\forall}n\in \mathbb{N}$. Furthermore, we assume

(H3) ${\theta}_{1,k}>0$, $\mathrm{\forall}k\in \mathbb{N}$.

It is obvious that ${\theta}_{1,k}$ satisfies (H1). Using condition (H3), from ${T}_{n,k}={\theta}_{n,k}{S}_{k}+(1-{\theta}_{n,k})I$, we define mappings ${T}_{1,k}x:={lim}_{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}{T}_{n,k}x={\theta}_{1,k}{S}_{k}x+(1-{\theta}_{1,k})x$, $\mathrm{\forall}x\in C$.

**Lemma 2.10** ([37])

*Let*

*C*

*be a nonempty*,

*closed*,

*and convex subset of a real*

*q*-

*uniformly smooth and strictly convex Banach space*

*X*.

*Let*${T}_{n,i}={\theta}_{n,i}{S}_{i}+(1-{\theta}_{n,i})I$,

*where*${S}_{i}:C\to C$ ($i=1,2,\dots $)

*is*${\lambda}_{i}$-

*strict pseudo*-

*contraction with*${\bigcap}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{\infty}}Fix({S}_{n})\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}$

*and*$inf{\lambda}_{i}>0$.

*Let*${t}_{1},{t}_{2},\dots $

*be nonnegative real numbers such that*$0<{t}_{n}\le b<1$, $\mathrm{\forall}n\ge 1$.

*Assume the sequence*$\{{\theta}_{n,k}\}$

*satisfies*(H1)-(H3).

*Then*

- (1)
${W}_{n}$

*is nonexpansive and*$Fix({W}_{n})={\bigcap}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{\infty}}Fix({S}_{n})$*for each*$n\ge 1$; - (2)
*for each*$x\in C$*and for each positive integer**k*,*the limit*${lim}_{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}{U}_{n,k}$*exists*; - (3)
*the mapping*$W:C\to C$*defined by*$Wx:=\underset{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}{lim}{W}_{n}x=\underset{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}{lim}{U}_{n,1}x,\phantom{\rule{1em}{0ex}}\mathrm{\forall}x\in C,$

*is a nonexpansive mapping satisfying* $Fix(W)={\bigcap}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{\infty}}Fix({S}_{n})$ *and it is called the* *W*-mapping *generated by* ${S}_{1},{S}_{2},\dots $ *and* ${t}_{1},{t}_{2},\dots $ *and* ${\theta}_{n,k}$, $\mathrm{\forall}n\in \mathbb{N}$ *and* $1\le k\le n$.

**Lemma 2.11** ([37])

*Let*

*C*

*be a nonempty*,

*closed*,

*and convex subset of a real*

*q*-

*uniformly smooth and strictly convex Banach space*

*X*.

*Let*${T}_{n,i}={\theta}_{n,i}{S}_{i}+(1-{\theta}_{n,i})I$,

*where*${S}_{i}:C\to C$ ($i=1,2,\dots $)

*is*${\lambda}_{i}$-

*strict pseudo*-

*contraction with*${\bigcap}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{\infty}}Fix({S}_{n})\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}$

*and*$inf{\lambda}_{i}>0$.

*Let*${t}_{1},{t}_{2},\dots $

*be nonnegative real numbers such that*$0<{t}_{n}\le b<1$, $\mathrm{\forall}n\ge 1$.

*Assume the sequence*$\{{\theta}_{n,k}\}$

*satisfies*(H1)-(H3).

*If*$\{{\omega}_{n}\}$

*is a bounded sequence in*

*C*,

*then*

In the following, the notation ⇀ and → denote the weak and strong convergence, respectively. The duality mapping ${J}_{q}$ from a smooth Banach space *X* into ${X}^{\ast}$ is said to be *weakly sequentially continuous generalized duality mapping* if, for all $\{{x}_{n}\}\subset X$, ${x}_{n}\rightharpoonup x$ implies ${J}_{q}({x}_{n}){\rightharpoonup}^{\ast}{J}_{q}(x)$.

*X*is said to be satisfy

*Opial’s condition*[38], that is, for any sequence $\{{x}_{n}\}$ in

*X*, ${x}_{n}\rightharpoonup x$ implies that

By Theorem 3.2.8 in [39], it is well known that if *X* admits a weakly sequentially continuous generalized duality mapping, then *X* satisfies Opial’s condition.

**Lemma 2.12** ([13])

*Let* *C* *be a nonempty*, *closed*, *and convex subset of a real* *q*-*uniformly smooth Banach space* *X* *which admits weakly sequentially continuous generalized duality mapping* ${j}_{q}$ *from* *X* *into* ${X}^{\ast}$. *Let* $T:C\to C$ *be a nonexpansive mapping*. *Then*, *for all* $\{{x}_{n}\}\subset C$, *if* ${x}_{n}\rightharpoonup x$ *and* ${x}_{n}-T{x}_{n}\to 0$, *then* $x=Tx$.

**Lemma 2.13** ([40])

*Let*$\{{a}_{n}\}$, $\{{\mu}_{n}\}$,

*and*$\{{\delta}_{n}\}$

*be real sequences of nonnegative numbers such that*

*where* ${\sigma}_{n}\in (0,1)$, ${\sum}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{\infty}}{\sigma}_{n}=\mathrm{\infty}$, ${\mu}_{n}=\circ ({\sigma}_{n})$ *and* ${\sum}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{\infty}}{\delta}_{n}<\mathrm{\infty}$. *Then* ${lim}_{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}{a}_{n}=0$.

## 3 Main results

In order to prove our main result, the following lemma is needed.

**Lemma 3.1** *Let* *C* *be a nonempty*, *closed*, *and convex subset of a real* *q*-*uniformly smooth Banach space* *X* *with the best* *q*-*uniform smoothness constant* ${C}_{q}>0$. *Let* $F:C\to X$ *be a* *κ*-*Lipschitzian and* *η*-*strongly accretive operator with constants* $\kappa ,\eta >0$. *Let* $0<\mu <{(\frac{q\eta}{{C}_{q}{\kappa}^{q}})}^{\frac{1}{q-1}}$ *and* $\tau =\mu (\eta -\frac{{C}_{q}{\mu}^{q-1}{\kappa}^{q}}{q})$. *Then for* $t\in (0,min\{1,\frac{1}{q\tau}\})$, *the mapping* $S:C\to X$ *defined by* $S:=I-t\mu F$ *is a contraction with constant* $1-t\tau $.

*Proof*Since $0<\mu <{(\frac{q\eta}{{C}_{q}{\kappa}^{q}})}^{\frac{1}{q-1}}$ and $t\in (0,min\{1,\frac{1}{q\tau}\})$. This implies that $1-t\tau \in (0,1)$. From Lemma 2.6, for all $x,y\in C$, we have

Hence, we have $S:=I-t\mu F$ is a contraction with constant $1-t\tau $. □

**Lemma 3.2**

*Let*

*C*

*be a nonempty*,

*closed*,

*and convex subset of a real*

*q*-

*uniformly smooth Banach space*

*X*

*and*$G:C\to X$

*be a mapping*.

- (i)
*If**G**is a**δ*-*strongly accretive and**λ*-*strictly pseudo*-*contractive mapping wit*$\delta +\lambda >1$,*then*$I-G$*is a contraction with constant*${L}_{\delta ,\lambda}:={(\frac{1-\delta}{\lambda})}^{\frac{1}{q}}$. - (ii)
*If**G**is a**δ*-*strongly accretive and**λ*-*strictly pseudo*-*contractive mapping with*$\delta +\lambda >1$.*For a fixed number*$t\in (0,1)$,*then*$I-tG$*is a contraction with constant*$1-(1-{L}_{\delta ,\lambda})t$.

*Proof*(i) For all $x,y\in C$, from (2.2), we have

Hence, $I-G$ is a contraction with constant ${L}_{\delta ,\lambda}$.

Hence, $I-tG$ is a contraction with constant $1-(1-{L}_{\delta ,\lambda})t$. This completes the proof. □

### 3.1 Implicit iteration scheme

*C*be a nonempty, closed, and convex subset of a real reflexive and

*q*-uniformly smooth Banach space

*X*which admits a weakly sequentially continuous generalized duality mapping ${j}_{q}$. Let ${Q}_{C}$ be a sunny nonexpansive retraction from

*X*onto

*C*. Let $F:C\to X$ be a

*κ*-Lipschitzian and

*η*-strongly accretive operator with constants $\kappa ,\eta >0$, $G:C\to X$ be a

*δ*-strongly accretive and

*λ*-strictly pseudo-contractive mapping with $\delta +\lambda >1$, $V:C\to X$ be an

*L*-Lipschitzian mapping with constant $L\ge 0$ and $T:C\to C$ be a nonexpansive mapping such that $Fix(T)\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}$. Let $0<\mu <{(\frac{q\eta}{{C}_{q}{\kappa}^{q}})}^{\frac{1}{q-1}}$ and $0\le \gamma L<\tau $, where $\tau =\mu (\eta -\frac{{C}_{q}{\mu}^{q-1}{\kappa}^{q}}{q})$. For each $\sigma \in (\frac{{L}_{\delta ,\lambda}}{\tau -\gamma L},min\{1,\frac{1}{q\tau},\frac{1+{L}_{\delta ,\lambda}}{\tau -\gamma L}\})$ and $t\in (0,1)$, we define a mapping ${S}_{t}:C\to C$ defined by

The following proposition summarizes the properties of the net $\{{x}_{t}\}$.

**Proposition 3.3**

*Let*$\{{x}_{t}\}$

*be defined by*(3.2).

*Then the following hold*:

- (i)
$\{{x}_{t}\}$

*is bounded for each*$t\in (0,1)$; - (ii)
${lim}_{t\to 0}\parallel {x}_{t}-T{x}_{t}\parallel =0$;

- (iii)
$\{{x}_{t}\}$

*defines a continuous curve from*$(0,1)$*into**C*.

*Proof*(i) Take $p\in Fix(T)$, and denote a mapping ${S}_{t}:C\to C$ by

- (ii)By definition of $\{{x}_{t}\}$, we have$\begin{array}{rcl}\parallel {x}_{t}-T{x}_{t}\parallel & =& \parallel {Q}_{C}[(I-tG)T{x}_{t}+t(T{x}_{t}-\sigma (\mu FT{x}_{t}-\gamma V{x}_{t}))]-{Q}_{C}T{x}_{t}\parallel \\ \le & t\parallel (I-G)T{x}_{t}-\sigma (\mu FT{x}_{t}-\gamma V{x}_{t})\parallel \to 0\phantom{\rule{1em}{0ex}}\text{as}t\to 0.\end{array}$
- (iii)Take $t,{t}_{0}\in (0,1)$ and calculate$\begin{array}{rcl}\parallel {x}_{t}-{x}_{{t}_{0}}\parallel & =& \parallel {Q}_{C}[(I-tG)T{x}_{t}+t(T{x}_{t}-\sigma (\mu FT{x}_{t}-\gamma V{x}_{t}))]\\ -{Q}_{C}[(I-{t}_{0}G)T{x}_{{t}_{0}}+t(T{x}_{{t}_{0}}-\sigma (\mu FT{x}_{{t}_{0}}-\gamma V{x}_{{t}_{0}}))]\parallel \\ \le & \parallel ({t}_{0}-t)GT{x}_{t}+(I-{t}_{0}G)(T{x}_{t}-T{x}_{{t}_{0}})+(t-{t}_{0})[T{x}_{t}-\sigma (\mu FT{x}_{t}-\gamma V{x}_{t})]\\ +{t}_{0}[T{x}_{t}-\sigma (\mu FT{x}_{{t}_{0}}-\gamma V{x}_{{t}_{0}})-[T{x}_{{t}_{0}}-\sigma (\mu FT{x}_{{t}_{0}}-\gamma V{x}_{{t}_{0}})]]\parallel \\ =& \parallel ({t}_{0}-t)GT{x}_{t}+(I-{t}_{0}G)(T{x}_{t}-T{x}_{{t}_{0}})+(t-{t}_{0})[T{x}_{t}-\sigma (\mu FT{x}_{t}-\gamma V{x}_{t})]\\ +{t}_{0}[\sigma \gamma (V{x}_{t}-V{x}_{{t}_{0}})+(I-\sigma \mu F)(T{x}_{t}-T{x}_{{t}_{0}})]\parallel \\ \le & |t-{t}_{0}|\parallel GT{x}_{t}\parallel +(1-(1-{L}_{\delta ,\lambda}))\parallel {x}_{t}-{x}_{{t}_{0}}\parallel \\ +|t-{t}_{0}|\parallel T{x}_{t}-\sigma (\mu FT{x}_{t}-\gamma V{x}_{t})\parallel \\ +{t}_{0}(1-\sigma (\tau -\gamma L))\parallel {x}_{t}-{x}_{{t}_{0}}\parallel .\end{array}$

Since $\{V{x}_{t}\}$, $\{FT{x}_{t}\}$, and $\{GT{x}_{t}\}$ are bounded. Hence $\{{x}_{t}\}$ defines a continuous curve from $(0,1)$ into *C*. □

**Theorem 3.4**

*Assume that*$\{{x}_{t}\}$

*is defined by*(3.2),

*then*$\{{x}_{t}\}$

*converges strongly to*${x}^{\ast}\in Fix(T)$

*as*$t\to 0$,

*where*${x}^{\ast}$

*is the unique solution of the variational inequality*

*Proof*We observe that

Note that (3.8) implies that ${x}^{\ast}=\tilde{x}$ and the uniqueness is proved. Below, we use $\tilde{x}$ to denote the unique solution of the variational inequality (3.3).

By reflexivity of a Banach space *X* and boundedness of $\{{x}_{n}\}$, there exists a subsequence $\{{x}_{{n}_{i}}\}$ of $\{{x}_{n}\}$ such that ${x}_{{n}_{i}}\rightharpoonup \tilde{x}$ as $i\to \mathrm{\infty}$. Since a Banach space *X* has a weakly sequentially continuous generalized duality mapping and by (3.11), we obtain ${x}_{{n}_{i}}\to \tilde{x}$. By Proposition 3.3(ii), we have ${x}_{{n}_{i}}-T{x}_{{n}_{i}}\to 0$ as $i\to \mathrm{\infty}$. Hence, it follows from Lemma 2.12 that $\tilde{x}\in Fix(T)$.

*i.e.*, $\u3008(I-T)x-(I-T)y,{j}_{q}(x-y)\u3009\ge 0$ for $x,y\in C$). For all $v\in Fix(T)$, it follows from (3.10) and (3.12) that

*t*in (3.13) with ${t}_{n}$ and taking the limit as $n\to \mathrm{\infty}$, we notice that ${x}_{{t}_{n}}-T{x}_{{t}_{n}}\to \tilde{x}-T\tilde{x}=0$, we obtain

That is, $\tilde{x}\in Fix(T)$ is the solution of the variational inequality (3.3). Consequently, $\tilde{x}={x}^{\ast}$ by uniqueness. In a summary, we have shown that each cluster point of $\{{x}_{t}\}$ is equal to ${x}^{\ast}$. Therefore ${x}_{t}\to {x}^{\ast}$ as $t\to 0$. This completes the proof. □

### 3.2 Explicit iteration scheme

**Theorem 3.5**

*Let*

*C*

*be a nonempty*,

*closed*,

*and convex subset of a real*

*q*-

*uniformly smooth and uniformly convex Banach space*

*X*

*which admits a weakly sequentially continuous generalized duality mapping*${j}_{q}$.

*Let*${Q}_{C}$

*be a sunny nonexpansive retraction such that*

*X*

*onto C*.

*Let*$F:C\to X$

*be a*

*κ*-

*Lipschitzian and*

*η*-

*strongly accretive operator with constants*$\kappa ,\eta >0$, $G:C\to X$

*be a*

*δ*-

*strongly accretive and*

*λ*-

*strictly pseudo*-

*contractive mapping with*$\delta +\lambda >1$, $V:C\to X$

*be an*

*L*-

*Lipschitzian mapping with constant*$L\ge 0$.

*Let*${\{{S}_{i}\}}_{i=1}^{\mathrm{\infty}}$

*be an infinite family of*${\lambda}_{i}$-

*strictly pseudo*-

*contractive mapping from*

*C*

*into itself such that*$\mathcal{F}:={\bigcap}_{i=1}^{\mathrm{\infty}}Fix({S}_{i})\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}$.

*For given*${x}_{1}\in C$,

*define the sequence*$\{{x}_{n}\}$

*by*

*where* $\{{\alpha}_{n}\}$ *is a sequence in* $(0,1)$ *which satisfies the following conditions*:

(C1) ${lim}_{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}{\alpha}_{n}=0$ *and* ${\sum}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{\infty}}{\alpha}_{n}=\mathrm{\infty}$;

(C2) $|{\alpha}_{n+1}-{\alpha}_{n}|\le \circ ({\alpha}_{n})+{\sigma}_{n}$ *with* ${\sum}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{\infty}}{\sigma}_{n}<\mathrm{\infty}$.

*Suppose in addition that*$\{{\theta}_{n,k}\}$

*satisfies*(H1)-(H3).

*Then the sequence*$\{{x}_{n}\}$

*defined by*(3.14)

*converges strongly to*${x}^{\ast}\in \mathcal{F}$

*as*$n\to \mathrm{\infty}$,

*where*${x}^{\ast}$

*is the unique solution of the variational inequality*

*Proof*From the condition (C1), we may assume, without loss of generality, that ${\alpha}_{n}\le min\{1,\frac{1}{q\tau}\}$ for all $n\in \mathbb{N}$. First, we show that $\{{x}_{n}\}$ is bounded. Take $p\in \mathcal{F}$, and denote a mapping ${S}_{n}^{{\alpha}_{n}}:C\to C$ by

Hence, $\{{x}_{n}\}$ is bounded, so are $\{V{x}_{n}\}$, $\{F{W}_{n}{x}_{n}\}$, and $\{G{W}_{n}{x}_{n}\}$.

where ${M}_{1}={inf}_{i=1,2,\dots}(\frac{1+2{\lambda}_{i}^{q-1}}{{\lambda}_{i}^{q-1}}){sup}_{n\ge 1}\{\parallel {x}_{n}-p\parallel \}$ with $p\in \mathcal{F}$.

*X*and boundedness of $\{{x}_{n}\}$, without loss of generality, we may assume that ${x}_{{n}_{i}}\rightharpoonup v$ as $i\to \mathrm{\infty}$. It follows from (3.20) and Lemma 2.12 that $v\in \mathcal{F}$. Since a Banach space

*X*has a weakly sequentially continuous generalized duality mapping, we obtain

Therefore, by Lemma 2.13, we conclude that ${x}_{n}\to {x}^{\ast}$ as $n\to \mathrm{\infty}$. This completes the proof. □

## 4 Some applications

*q*-uniformly smooth,

*i.e.*,

- (1)
For $2\le p<\mathrm{\infty}$, the spaces ${L}_{p}$ (or ${\ell}_{p}$) are 2-uniformly smooth with ${C}_{q}={C}_{2}=p-1$.

- (2)For $1<p\le 2$, the spaces ${L}_{p}$ (or ${\ell}_{p}$) are
*p*-uniformly smooth with ${C}_{q}={C}_{p}=(1+{t}_{p}^{p-1}){(1+{t}_{p})}^{1-p}$, where ${t}_{p}$ is the unique solution of the equation$(p-2){t}^{p-1}+(p-1){t}^{p-2}-1=0,\phantom{\rule{1em}{0ex}}0<t<1.$ - (3)
Every Hilbert spaces are 2-uniformly smooth with ${C}_{q}={C}_{2}=1$.

- (4)
Every ${L}_{p}$ (or ${\ell}_{p}$) spaces with $1<p<\mathrm{\infty}$ are

*q*-uniformly smooth and uniformly convex. - (5)
Every ${\ell}_{p}$ spaces with $1<p<\mathrm{\infty}$ have weakly sequentially continuous generalized duality mappings, but ${L}_{p}$ spaces ($1<p<\mathrm{\infty}$, $p\ne 2$) do not have weakly sequentially continuous generalized duality mappings.

**Lemma 4.1** *Let* $X:={L}_{p}$ (*or* ${\ell}_{p}$) *with* $1<p\le 2$. *Let* *C* *be a nonempty*, *closed*, *and convex subset of* *X*. *Let* $F:C\to X$ *be a* *κ*-*Lipschitzian and* *η*-*strongly accretive operator with constants* $\kappa ,\eta >0$. *Let* $0<\mu <{(\frac{p\eta}{{D}_{p}{\kappa}^{p}})}^{\frac{1}{p-1}}$ *and* $\tau =\mu (\eta -\frac{{D}_{p}{\mu}^{p-1}{\kappa}^{p}}{p})$. *Then for* $t\in (0,min\{1,\frac{1}{p\tau}\})$, *the mapping* $S:C\to X$ *defined by* $S:=I-t\mu F$ *is a contraction with constant* $1-t\tau $.

**Lemma 4.2** *Let* $X:={L}_{p}$ (*or* ${\ell}_{p}$) *with* $2\le p<\mathrm{\infty}$. *Let* *C* *be a nonempty*, *closed*, *and convex subset of* *X*. *Let* $F:C\to X$ *be a* *κ*-*Lipschitzian and* *η*-*strongly accretive operator with constants* $\kappa ,\eta >0$. *Let* $0<\mu <\frac{2\eta}{(p-1){\kappa}^{2}}$ *and* $\tau =\mu (\eta -\frac{(p-1)\mu {\kappa}^{2}}{2})$. *Then for* $t\in (0,min\{1,\frac{1}{2\tau}\})$, *the mapping* $S:C\to X$ *defined by* $S:=I-t\mu F$ *is a contraction with constant* $1-t\tau $.

**Lemma 4.3** *Let* $X:=H$ *be a real Hilbert space*. *Let* *C* *be a nonempty*, *closed*, *and convex subset of* *X*. *Let* $F:C\to X$ *be a* *κ*-*Lipschitzian and* *η*-*strongly accretive operator with constants* $\kappa ,\eta >0$. *Let* $0<\mu <\frac{2\eta}{{\kappa}^{2}}$ *and* $\tau =\mu (\eta -\frac{\mu {\kappa}^{2}}{2})$. *Then for* $t\in (0,min\{1,\frac{1}{2\tau}\})$, *the mapping* $S:C\to X$ *defined by* $S:=I-t\mu F$ *is a contraction with constant* $1-t\tau $.

### 4.1 Implicit iteration schemes

**Theorem 4.4** *Let* *C* *be a nonempty*, *closed*, *and convex subset of an* ${\ell}_{p}$ *space for* $1<p\le 2$. *Let* ${Q}_{C}$, *F*, *G*, *V*, *and* *T* *be the same as in Theorem * 3.4. *Assume that* $0<\mu <{(\frac{p\eta}{{D}_{p}{\kappa}^{p}})}^{\frac{1}{p-1}}$ *and* $0\le \gamma L<\tau $, *where* $\tau =\mu (\eta -\frac{{D}_{p}{\mu}^{p-1}{\kappa}^{p}}{p})$. *For* $\sigma \in (\frac{{L}_{\delta ,\lambda}}{\tau -\gamma L},min\{1,\frac{1}{p\tau},\frac{1+{L}_{\delta ,\lambda}}{\tau -\gamma L}\})$ *and* $t\in (0,1)$, *the sequence* $\{{x}_{t}\}$ *defined by* (3.2) *converges strongly to* ${x}^{\ast}\in Fix(T)$ *as* $t\to 0$, *where* ${x}^{\ast}$ *is the unique solution of the variational inequality* (3.3).

**Theorem 4.5** *Let* *C* *be a nonempty*, *closed*, *and convex subset of an* ${\ell}_{p}$ *space for* $2\le p<\mathrm{\infty}$. *Let* ${Q}_{C}$, *F*, *G*, *V*, *and* *T* *be the same as in Theorem * 3.4. *Assume that* $0<\mu <\frac{2\eta}{(p-1){\kappa}^{2}}$ *and* $0\le \gamma L<\tau $, *where* $\tau =\mu (\eta -\frac{(p-1)\mu {\kappa}^{2}}{2})$. *For* $\sigma \in (\frac{{L}_{\delta ,\lambda}}{\tau -\gamma L},min\{1,\frac{1}{2\tau},\frac{1+{L}_{\delta ,\lambda}}{\tau -\gamma L}\})$ *and* $t\in (0,1)$, *the sequence* $\{{x}_{t}\}$ *defined by* (3.2) *converges strongly to* ${x}^{\ast}\in Fix(T)$ *as* $t\to 0$, *where* ${x}^{\ast}$ *is the unique solution of the variational inequality* (3.3).

**Remark 4.6** If the spaces ${L}_{p}$ has a weakly sequentially continuous generalized duality mappings, then we obtain Theorems 4.4 and 4.5 hold for ${L}_{p}$ spaces with $1<p<\mathrm{\infty}$, $p\ne 2$.

### 4.2 Explicit iteration schemes

**Theorem 4.7** *Let* *C* *be a nonempty*, *closed*, *and convex subset of an* ${\ell}_{p}$ *space for* $1<p\le 2$. *Let* ${Q}_{C}$, *F*, *G*, *V*, *and* ${W}_{n}$ *be the same as in Theorem * 3.5. *Let* $\{{\alpha}_{n}\}$ *and* $\{{\beta}_{n}\}$ *are sequences in* $(0,1)$ *which satisfy the conditions* (C1) *and* (C2) *in Theorem * 3.5 *and* $\{{\theta}_{n,k}\}$ *satisfies* (H1)-(H3). *Then the sequence* $\{{x}_{n}\}$ *defined by* (3.14) *converges strongly to* ${x}^{\ast}\in \mathcal{F}$ *as* $n\to \mathrm{\infty}$, *where* ${x}^{\ast}$ *is the unique solution of the variational inequality* (3.15).

**Theorem 4.8** *Let* *C* *be a nonempty*, *closed*, *and convex subset of an* ${\ell}_{p}$ *space for* $2\le p<\mathrm{\infty}$. *Let* ${Q}_{C}$, *F*, *G*, *V*, *and* ${W}_{n}$ *be the same as in Theorem * 3.5. *Let* $\{{\alpha}_{n}\}$ *and* $\{{\beta}_{n}\}$ *are sequences in* $(0,1)$ *which satisfy the conditions* (C1) *and* (C2) *in Theorem * 3.5 *and* $\{{\theta}_{n,k}\}$ *satisfies* (H1)-(H3). *Then the sequence* $\{{x}_{n}\}$ *defined by* (3.14) *converges strongly to* ${x}^{\ast}\in \mathcal{F}$ *as* $n\to \mathrm{\infty}$, *where* ${x}^{\ast}$ *is the unique solution of the variational inequality* (3.15).

**Remark 4.9** If the spaces ${L}_{p}$ has a weakly sequentially continuous generalized duality mappings, then we obtain Theorems 4.7 and 4.8 hold for ${L}_{p}$ spaces with $1<p<\mathrm{\infty}$, $p\ne 2$.

## 5 Numerical examples

In this section, we give a simple example and some numerical experiment result to explain the convergence of the sequence (3.14) as follows:

**Example 5.1**Let $X=\mathbb{R}$ and $C=[0,\frac{1}{2}]$. Let $q=2$ and ${j}_{q}=I$. We define a mapping ${Q}_{C}$ as follows:

*F*,

*G*, and

*V*as follows:

*F*is 1-Lipschitzian and $\frac{2}{3}$-strongly accretive,

*G*is 1-strongly accretive and

*λ*-strictly pseudo-contraction for $\lambda >0$ and

*V*is 1-Lipschitzian. For each $n\in \mathbb{N}$, set ${S}_{n}=I$. We show that ${W}_{n}=I$. Since ${T}_{n,k}={\theta}_{n,k}{S}_{k}+(1-{\theta}_{n,k})I$, where ${S}_{k}$ is a ${\lambda}_{k}$-strictly pseudo-contractive mapping and $\{{\theta}_{n,k}\}$ satisfies (H1)-(H3). It is observe that ${T}_{n,k}$ is a nonexpansive mapping. From (2.5), we have

Since the assumptions of Theorem 3.5 are satisfied in Example 5.1, the sequence (5.1) converges to ${x}^{\ast}=0$, which is the unique fixed point of ${S}_{n}$.

Next, we show the numerical results by using MATLAB 7.11.0. We presented numerical comparisons for two cases of iteration process with different initial values, which show the convergence of the sequence (5.1).

**The value of sequence**
$\mathbf{\{}{\mathit{x}}_{\mathit{n}}\mathbf{\}}$
**with iteration values**
${\mathit{x}}_{\mathbf{1}}\mathbf{=}\mathbf{0.05}$
**and**
${\mathit{x}}_{\mathbf{1}}\mathbf{=}\mathbf{0.1}$

Iteration step (n) | Sequence value $\mathbf{(}{\mathit{x}}_{\mathit{n}}\mathbf{)}$ | Error | Sequence value $\mathbf{(}{\mathit{x}}_{\mathit{n}}\mathbf{)}$ | Error |
---|---|---|---|---|

1 | 0.0500 | 5 × 10 | 0.1000 | 1 × 10 |

2 | 0.0183 | 1.83 × 10 | 0.0400 | 4 × 10 |

3 | 0.0123 | 1.23 × 10 | 0.0272 | 2.72 × 10 |

4 | 0.0096 | 9.6 × 10 | 0.0213 | 2.13 × 10 |

5 | 0.0080 | 8 × 10 | 0.0178 | 1.78 × 10 |

⋮ | ⋮ | ⋮ | ⋮ | ⋮ |

1,658 | 0.0002 | 2 × 10 | 0.00321 | 3.21 × 10 |

⋮ | ⋮ | ⋮ | ⋮ | ⋮ |

5,570 | 0.0002 | 2 × 10 | 0.00217 | 2.17 × 10 |

⋮ | ⋮ | ⋮ | ⋮ | ⋮ |

8,614 | 0.0001 | 1 × 10 | 0.00184 | 1.84 × 10 |

8,615 | 0.0000 | 1 × 10 | 0.00184 | 1.84 × 10 |

⋮ | ⋮ | ⋮ | ⋮ | ⋮ |

28,945 | 0.0000 | 1 × 10 | 0.0001 | 1 × 10 |

28,946 | 0.0000 | 1 × 10 | 0.0000 | 0 |

From the figures, we can see that $\{{x}_{n}\}$ is a monotone decreasing sequence and converges to 0, but an iterative process with initial value ${x}_{1}=0.05$ is converges faster than an iterative process with initial value ${x}_{1}=0.1$.

**Remark 5.2** Note that Lemma 3.1 and Lemma 3.2 play an important role in the proof of Theorems 3.4 and 3.5. These are proved in the framework of the more general *q*-uniformly smooth Banach space.

**Remark 5.3**Our main result extends the main result of Ceng

*et al.*[28] in the following respects:

- (1)
An iterative process (1.10) is to extend to a general iterative process defined over the set of fixed points of an infinite family of strict pseudo-contractions in a more general

*q*-uniformly smooth Banach space. - (2)
The self contraction mapping $f:H\to H$ in [[28], Theorem 3.2] is extended to the case of a nonself Lipschitzian mapping $V:C\to X$ on a nonempty, closed, and convex subset

*C*of a real*q*-uniformly smooth Banach space*X*. - (3)
The control condition (C3) in [[28], Theorem 3.2] is removed by weaker than control condition $|{\alpha}_{n+1}-{\alpha}_{n}|\le \circ ({\alpha}_{n})+{\sigma}_{n}$ with ${\sum}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{\infty}}{\sigma}_{n}<\mathrm{\infty}$.

Furthermore, our method is extended to develop a new iterative method and method of proof is very different from that in Ceng *et al.* [28] because our method involves the sunny nonexpansive retraction and the infinite family of strict pseudo-contractions.

## Declarations

### Acknowledgements

The second author was supported by the Thailand Research Fund and the King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi (Grant No. RSA5780059).

## Authors’ Affiliations

## References

- Youla DC, Webb H:
**Image restoration by the method of convex projections: part 1 - theory.***IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging*1982,**1:**81–94.View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Kitahara S, Takahashi W:
**Image recovery by convex combinations of sunny nonexpansive retractions.***Topol. Methods Nonlinear Anal.*1993,**2**(2):333–342.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - Takahashi W, Tamura T:
**Limit theorems of operators by convex combinations of nonexpansive retractions in Banach spaces.***J. Approx. Theory*1997,**91**(3):386–397. 10.1006/jath.1996.3093MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Kimura Y, Nakajo K:
**The problem of image recovery by the metric projections in Banach spaces.***Abstr. Appl. Anal.*2013.,**2013:**Article ID 817392Google Scholar - Alber YI:
**Metric and generalized projections operators in Banach spaces: properties and applications. Lecture Notes in Pure and Applied Mathematics 178.**In*Theory and Applications of Nonlinear Operators of Accretive and Monotone Type*. Edited by: Kartsatos AG. Dekker, New York; 1996:15–50.Google Scholar - Alber YI, Reich S:
**An iterative method for solving a class of nonlinear operator equations in Banach spaces.***Panam. Math. J.*1994,**4**(2):39–54.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - Kamimura S, Takahashi W:
**Strong convergence of a proximal-type algorithm in a Banach space.***SIAM J. Optim.*2002,**13**(3):938–945. 10.1137/S105262340139611XMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Nakajo K, Shimoji K, Takahashi W:
**Strong convergence theorems by the hybrid method for families of mappings in Banach spaces.***Nonlinear Anal., Theory Methods Appl.*2009,**71**(3–4):812–818. 10.1016/j.na.2008.10.108MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Kimura Y, Nakajo K, Takahashi W:
**Strongly convergent iterative schemes for a sequence of nonlinear mappings.***J. Nonlinear Convex Anal.*2008,**9**(3):407–416.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - Kohsaka F, Takahashi W:
**Iterative scheme for finding a common point of infinitely many convex sets in a Banach space.***J. Nonlinear Convex Anal.*2004,**5**(3):407–414.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - Matsushita S, Takahashi W:
**A strong convergence theorem for relatively nonexpansive mappings in a Banach space.***J. Approx. Theory*2005,**134**(2):257–266. 10.1016/j.jat.2005.02.007MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Matsushita S, Nakajo K, Takahashi W:
**Strong convergence theorems obtained by a generalized projections hybrid method for families of mappings in Banach spaces.***Nonlinear Anal., Theory Methods Appl.*2010,**73**(6):1466–1480. 10.1016/j.na.2010.04.007MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Sunthrayuth P, Kumam P:
**Iterative methods for variational inequality problems and fixed point problems of a countable family of strict pseudo-contractions in a**q**-uniformly smooth Banach space.***Fixed Point Theory Appl.*2012.,**2012:**Article ID 65Google Scholar - Song Y, Ceng L-C:
**A general iteration scheme for variational inequality problem and common fixed point problems of nonexpansive mappings in**q**-uniformly smooth Banach spaces.***J. Glob. Optim.*2013. 10.1007/s10898-012-9990-4Google Scholar - Cholamjiak P, Suantai S:
**Strong convergence for a countable family of strict pseudocontractions in**q**-uniformly smooth Banach spaces.***Comput. Math. Appl.*2011,**62:**787–796. 10.1016/j.camwa.2011.06.008MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Zhang H, Su Y:
**Strong convergence theorems for strict pseudo-contractions in**q**-uniformly smooth Banach spaces.***Nonlinear Anal.*2009,**70:**3236–3242. 10.1016/j.na.2008.04.030MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Cai G, Hu CS:
**Strong convergence theorems of a general iterative process for a finite family of**${\lambda}_{i}$**-strict pseudo-contractions in**q**-uniformly smooth Banach spaces.***Comput. Math. Appl.*2010,**59:**149–160. 10.1016/j.camwa.2009.07.068MathSciNetView Article