 Research
 Open Access
 Published:
Metric characterizations for wellposedness of split hemivariational inequalities
Journal of Inequalities and Applications volume 2018, Article number: 190 (2018)
Abstract
In this paper, we generalize the concept of wellposedness to a class of split hemivariational inequalities. By imposing very mild assumptions on involved operators, we establish some metric characterizations of the wellposedness for the split hemivariational inequality. The obtained results generalize some related theorems on wellposedness for hemivariational inequalities and variational inequalities in the literature.
Introduction
The concept of wellposedness, which was firstly introduced by Tykhonov in [1] for a minimization problem and thus was called Tykhonov wellposedness, has been studied widely in recent years for optimization problems, variational inequality problems, hemivariational inequality problems, fixed point problems, saddle point problems, equilibrium problems, and their related problems because of their important applications in physics, mechanics, engineering, economics, management science, etc. (see, for example, [2–13]). Tykhonov wellposedness for an optimization problem is defined by requiring the existence and uniqueness of its solution and the convergence to the unique solution of its approximating sequences. There are a great many kinds of generalizations for the concept of wellposedness, such as LevitinPolyak wellposedness, parametric wellposedness, and αwellposedness, to optimization problems, variational inequality problems, and their related problems (see, for example, [14–21]).
Due to the close relationship between optimization problems and variational inequality problems, the concept of wellposedness for optimization problems is generalized to variational inequalities and their related problems. The earliest research work of wellposedness for variational inequalities should at least date back to 1980s when Lucchetti and Patrone [22, 23] firstly introduced the concept of wellposedness for a variational inequality and proved some important results. After that, Lignola and Morgan [20], Fang and Hu [24], Huang and Yao [25] have made significant contributions to the study of wellposedness for variational inequalities. As an important generalization of variation inequality, hemivariational inequality has drawn much attention of mathematical researchers due to its abundant applications in mechanics and engineering. With the tools of nonsmooth analysis and nonlinear analysis, many kinds of hemivariational inequalities have been studied since 1980s [7, 26–30]. Also, many kinds of concepts of wellposedness hemivariational inequalities have been studied since Goeleven and Mentagui [31] firstly introduced the concept of wellposedness to a hemivariational inequality in 1995. For more research work on the wellposedness for variational inequalities and hemivariational inequalities, we refer the readers to [14, 20, 32–35].
Split variational inequality, which was introduced by Censor et al. in [36], can be regarded as a generalization of variational inequality and includes as a special case, the split feasibility problem, which is an important model for a wide range of practical problems arising from signal recovery, image processing, and tensitymodulated radiation therapy treatment planning (see, for example, [37–41]). Thus, the concepts of wellposedness and LevitinPolyak wellposedness for various split variational inequalities were studied by Hu and Fang recently [42]. Obviously, split hemivariational inequality could be regarded as a generalization of split variational inequality. It could arise in a system of hemivariational inequalities for modeling some frictional contact problems in mechanics, where two hemivariational inequalities are linked by a linear constraint. Also, when nonconvex and nonsmooth functionals are involved, the model for the above mentioned practical problems, such as signal recovery and image processing, turns to split hemivariational inequality rather than split variational inequality. However, as far as we know, there are few research works studying wellposedness for split hemivariational inequalities.
Inspired by recent research works on the wellposedness for split variational inequalities and hemivariational inequalities, in this paper, we focus on studying metric characterization of wellposedness for a class of split hemivariational inequalities specified as follows:
Find \((u_{1},u_{2})\in V_{1}\times V_{2}\) such that
where, for \(i=1,2\), \(\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle_{V_{i^{*}}\times V_{i}}\) denotes the duality paring between Banach space \(V_{i}\) and its dual space \(V_{i}^{*}\), \(A_{i}:V_{i}\to V_{i}^{*}\) is an operator from \(V_{i}\) to \(V_{i}^{*} \), \(f_{i}\) is a given point in \(V_{i}^{*}\), \(J_{i}:V_{i}\to\mathbb{R}\) is a locally Lipschitz functional on \(V_{i}\) with \(J_{i}^{\circ}(u_{i};v_{i}u_{i})\) being its generalized directional derivative at \(u_{i}\) in direction of \(v_{i}u_{i}\), which will be defined in the next section, and \(T:V_{1}\to V_{2}\) is a continuous mapping from \(V_{1}\) to \(V_{2}\). After defining the concept of wellposedness for the split hemivariational inequality (SHI), we present some metric characterizations for its wellposedness under very mild assumptions.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. In Sect. 2, we recall some crucial definitions and results. Under very mild assumptions on involved operators, Sect. 3 presents several results on the metric characterizations of wellposedness for the split hemivariational inequality (SHI). At last, some concluding remarks are provided in Sect. 4.
Preliminaries
In this section, we recall some useful definitions and key results which will be used to establish the metric characterizations of the split hemivariational inequality (SHI)in the next section and can be found in [7, 29, 43–45].
Let \(V_{1}\), \(V_{2}\) be two Banach spaces, then the product space V of \(V_{1}\) and \(V_{2}\), i.e., \(\mathbf{V}=V_{1}\times V_{2}\), is also a Banach space with the norm \(\\cdot\_{V_{1}\times V_{2}}\) specified as follows:
The dual paring between the product space V and its dual space \(\mathbf{V}^{*}\) is
Definition 2.1
Let V be a Banach space with \(V^{\ast}\) being its dual space. Then

(1)
a sequence \(\{{u_{n}}\}\subset V\) is said to be convergent if there exists \(u\in V\) such that
$$ \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} \u_{n}u\_{V}=0, $$which is denoted by \(u_{n} \to u\) as \(n\to\infty\);

(2)
a sequence \(\{{u_{n}}\}\subset V\) is said to be weakly convergent to a point \(u\in V\) if
$$ \langle f,u_{n}\rangle_{V^{\ast}\times V}\rightarrow\langle f,u \rangle_{V^{\ast}\times V},\quad \forall f\in V^{\ast}, $$which is denoted by \(u_{n} \rightharpoonup u\) as \(n\to\infty\);

(3)
a sequence \(\{u_{n}^{\ast}\}\subset V^{\ast}\) is said to be weakly^{∗} convergent to a point \(u^{\ast}\in V^{\ast}\) if
$$ \bigl\langle u^{\ast}_{n},u\bigr\rangle _{V^{\ast}\times V} \rightarrow\bigl\langle u^{\ast},u\bigr\rangle _{V^{\ast}\times V},\quad \forall u\in V, $$which is denoted by \(u_{n}^{*}\xrightarrow{w^{\ast}} u^{*}\) as \(n\to\infty\).
Definition 2.2
Let V be a Banach space and \(V^{\ast}\) be its dual space. A singlevalued operator A from V to \(V^{\ast}\) is said to be

(1)
monotone if
$$ \langle AuAv,uv\rangle_{V^{\ast}\times V}\geq0,\quad \forall u,v\in V; $$ 
(2)
strictly monotone if
$$ \langle AuAv,uv\rangle_{V^{\ast}\times V}>0,\quad \forall u,v\in V \mbox{ and } u \neq v; $$ 
(3)
relaxed monotone if there exists a constant \(c>0\) such that
$$ \langle AuAv,uv\rangle_{V^{\ast}\times V}\geqc\uv\ _{V}^{2}, \quad \forall u,v\in V; $$ 
(4)
strongly monotone if there exists a constant \(c>0\) such that
$$ \langle AuAv,uv\rangle_{V^{\ast}\times V}\geq c\uv\ _{V}^{2}, \quad \forall u,v\in V. $$
Definition 2.3
Let V be a Banach space and \(V^{\ast}\) be its dual space. An operator T from V to \(V^{\ast}\) is said to be

(1)
continuous if, for any sequence \(\{u_{n}\}\subset V\) converging to \(u\in V\), \(Tu_{n}\to Tu\) in \(V^{\ast}\);

(2)
demicontinuous if, for any sequence \(\{u_{n}\}\subset V\) converging to \(u\in V\), \(Tu_{n}\rightharpoonup Tu\) in \(V^{\ast}\);

(3)
hemicontinuous if, for any \(u,v,w\in V\), the function \(t\rightarrow\langle T(u+tv),w\rangle_{V^{\ast}\times V}\) is continuous on \([0,1]\);

(4)
weakly^{∗} continuous (or continuous with respect to weak^{∗} topology for \(V^{*}\)) if, for any sequence \(\{ u_{n}\}\subset V\) converging to \(u\in V\), \(Tu_{n}\xrightarrow{w^{\ast}} Tu\) in \(V^{\ast}\).
Remark 2.1
In [7, 44], demicontinuity of an operator T from V to \(V^{*}\) is defined by its continuity from V to its dual space \(V^{*}\) endowed with weak^{∗} topology, which is called here weak^{∗} continuity. In this paper, we define the demicontinuity of an operator T from V to \(V^{*}\) by its continuity from V to its dual space \(V^{*}\) endowed with weak topology, which is commonly used in most literature works.
Proposition 2.1
Let V be a Banach space with \(V^{\ast}\) being its dual space and \(T:V\to V^{*}\) be an operator. If T is continuous, then it is weakly^{∗} continuous, which, in turn, implies that it is hemicontinuous. Moreover, if T is a monotone operator, then the notions of weak^{∗} continuity and hemicontinuity coincide [7, 44].
Proposition 2.2
Let V be a Banach space with \(V^{*} \) being its dual space, and \(T:V\to V^{*}\) is a operator from V to \(V^{*}\). Then the following statement holds:
If \(\{u_{n}\}\subset V\), \(\{Tu_{n}\}\subset V^{*}\), \(u_{n}\rightarrow u\) in V and \(Tu_{n}\xrightarrow{w^{\ast}} Tu\) in \(V^{*}\), then
Definition 2.4
Let V be a Banach space and \(J:V\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\) be a functional on V. J is said to be Lipschitz continuous on V if there exists a constant \(L>0\) such that
Definition 2.5
Let V be a Banach space and \(J:V\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\) be a functional on V. J is said to be locally Lipschitz continuous on V if, for all \(u\in V\), there exist a neighborhood \(\mathscr {N}(u)\) and a constant \(L_{u}>0\) such that
Definition 2.6
Let V be a Banach space and the generalized directional derivative (in the sense of Clarke) of the locally Lipschitz function \(J:V\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) at a point of \(u\in V\) in the direction \(v\in V\), denoted by \(J^{\circ}(u;v)\) and defined by
Definition 2.7
Let V be a Banach space and \(J:V\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\) be a locally Lipschitz function. Then the generalized gradient in the sense of Clarke of J at \(v\in V\), denoted by \(\partial J(u)\), is the subset of its dual space \(V^{\ast}\) defined by
Definition 2.8
Let A be a nonempty subset of Banach space V. The measure of noncompactness μ of the set A is defined by
where diam denotes the diameter of the subset \(A_{i}\).
Definition 2.9
Let A, B be two nonempty subsets of Banach space V. The Hausdorff metric \(\mathscr {H}(\cdot,\cdot)\) between A and B is defined by
where \(e(A,B)=\sup_{a\in A}d(a,B)\) with \(d(a,B)=\inf_{b\in B}\ab\_{V}\).
Proposition 2.3
Let V be a Banach space and \(V^{*} \) be its dual space, \(J:V\to\mathbb {R}\) be a locally Lipschitz functional on V, and \(u,v\in V\) be two given elements. Then

(1)
the function \(v\to J^{\circ}(u,v)\) is finite, positively homogeneous, and subadditive, i.e.,
$$\begin{aligned} J^{\circ}(x;\lambda v)=\lambda J^{\circ}(x;v),\quad \forall \lambda \geq0, \end{aligned}$$and
$$\begin{aligned} J^{\circ}(x; v_{1}+v_{2})=J^{\circ}(x;v_{1})+ J^{\circ}(x;v_{2}), \quad \forall v_{1},v_{2} \in V; \end{aligned}$$ 
(2)
\(J^{\circ}(u,v)\) is upper semicontinuous on \(V\times V\) as a function of \((u,v)\), i.e., for all \(u,v\in V\), \({u_{n}}\subset V\), \({v_{n}}\subset V\) such that \(u_{n}\to u\), \(v_{n}\to v\) in V, we have
$$ \limsup_{n\rightarrow\infty} J^{\circ}(u_{n};v_{n}) \leq J^{\circ}(u;v). $$
Wellposedness and metric characterizations
In this section, we aim to extend the wellposedness to the split hemivariational inequality (SHI). We first give the definition of wellposedness for the split hemivariational inequality (SHI), and then we prove its metric characterizations for the wellposedness by using two useful sets defined.
Definition 3.1
A sequence \(\{(u_{1}^{n},u_{2}^{n})\}\subset V_{1}\times V_{2}\) is called an approximating sequence for the split hemivariational inequality (SHI) if there exists \(0<\epsilon_{n}\to0\) such that
Definition 3.2
The split hemivariational inequality (SHI) is said to be strongly (resp., weakly) wellposed if it has a unique solution and every approximating sequence for the split hemivariational inequality (SHI) converges strongly (resp., weakly) to the unique solution.
Definition 3.3
The split hemivariational inequality (SHI) is said to be wellposed in generalized sense (or generalized wellposed) if its solution set is nonempty and, for every approximating sequence, there always exists a subsequence converging to some point of its solution set.
In order to establish the metric characterizations for wellposedness of the split hemivariational inequality (SHI), we first define two sets on \(V_{1}\times V_{2}\) as follows: for \(\varepsilon>0\),
With the definition of two sets \(\Omega(\epsilon)\) and \(\Psi (\epsilon)\), we can get the following properties.
Lemma 3.1
Let \(V_{1}\), \(V_{2}\) be two Banach spaces with \(V_{1}^{\ast}\), \(V_{2}^{\ast}\) being their dual spaces, respectively. Suppose that, for \(i=1,2\), \(A_{i}:V_{i}\rightarrow V_{i}^{\ast}\) is monotone and hemicontinuous on \(V_{i}\) and \(J_{i}:V_{i}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\) is a locally Lipschitz functional. Then \(\Omega(\epsilon)=\Psi(\epsilon)\) for any \(\epsilon>0\).
Proof
First, we prove \(\Omega(\epsilon)\subset\Psi(\epsilon)\) for any \(\epsilon>0\). In fact, let \({\mathbf {u}}=(u_{1},u_{2})\in\Omega(\epsilon)\). By the monotonicity of the operators \(A_{1}\) and \(A_{2}\), it is easy to show that, for any \(v_{1}\in V_{1}\) and \(v_{2}\in V_{2}\),
and
which imply that
and
This together with the fact that \(\u_{2}Tu_{1}\_{V_{2}}\leq\epsilon\) due to \({\mathbf {u}}=(u_{1},u_{2})\in\Omega(\epsilon)\) indicates that \(\mathbf {u}\in\Psi(\epsilon)\), and thus \(\Omega(\epsilon)\subset\Psi (\epsilon)\).
Now, we turn to prove \(\Psi(\epsilon)\subset\Omega(\epsilon)\) for any \(\epsilon>0\). Let \(\mathbf{u}=(u_{1},u_{2})\in\Psi(\epsilon)\), and then
Let \(\mathbf{w}=(w_{1},w_{2})\) be any point in \(V_{1}\times V_{2}\) and \(t\in (0,1]\). Substituting \(v_{1}=u_{1}+t(w_{1}u_{1})\), \(v_{2}=u_{2}+t(w_{2}u_{2})\) in above inequality (3.1) yields that
From Proposition 2.3, the function \(J_{i}^{\circ}(u_{i},\cdot)\), \(i=1,2\), is positively homogeneous. Letting \(t\rightarrow0^{+}\) in the last two inequalities of (3.2), it follows from the hemicontinuity of the operators \(A_{1}\) and \(A_{2}\) that
By the arbitrariness of \(\mathbf {w}=(w_{1},w_{2})\in V_{1}\times V_{2}\), we conclude that \(\mathbf {u} \in\Omega(\varepsilon)\), and thus \(\Psi(\epsilon)\subset\Omega(\epsilon)\). This completes the proof of Lemma 3.1. □
Lemma 3.2
Let \(V_{1}\), \(V_{2}\) be two reflective Banach spaces with \(V_{1}^{\ast}\), \(V_{2}^{\ast}\) being their dual spaces, respectively, and \(J_{i}:V_{i}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\), \(i=1,2\), be a locally Lipschitz functional. Suppose that \(T:V_{1}\to V_{2}\) is a continuous operator from \(V_{1}\) to \(V_{2}\). Then, for any \(\epsilon>0\), \(\Psi(\epsilon)\) is closed in \(V_{1}\times V_{2}\).
Proof
Assume that \(\{\mathbf{u}^{n}=(u_{1}^{n},u_{2}^{n})\} \subset\Psi(\epsilon)\) and \(\mathbf{u}^{n}\to\mathbf {u}=(u_{1},u_{2})\) in \(V_{1}\times V_{2}\). It follows that
By Proposition 2.3, \(J_{i}^{\circ}(\cdot\, ; \cdot)\), \(i=1,2\), is upper continuous on \(V_{i}\times V_{i}\). By taking lim sup with \(n\to +\infty\) on both sides of the last two inequalities of (3.4), it follows from the fact \(u_{i}^{n}\to u_{i}\), \(i=1,2\), that
and
To complete the proof, we only need to prove \(\u_{2}Tu_{1}\_{V_{2}}\leq \epsilon\). Since, for any \(n\in\mathbb{N}\), \({\mathbf {u}}^{n}=(u_{1}^{n},u_{2}^{n})\in\Psi(\epsilon)\), it follows that \(\ u_{2}^{n}Tu_{1}^{n} \_{V_{2}} \leq\epsilon\), which together with the continuity of the functional \(\\cdot\_{V_{2}}:V_{2}\to\mathbb{R}\) and the operator T implies that
Thus \({\mathbf {u}}=(u_{1},u_{2})\in\Psi(\epsilon)\), which implies that \(\Psi (\epsilon)\) is closed on \(V_{1}\times V_{2}\). This completes the proof of Lemma 3.2. □
With Lemmas 3.1 and 3.2, it is easy to get the following corollary on the closedness of \(\Omega(\epsilon)\) for any \(\epsilon>0\), which is crucial to the metric characterizations for wellposedness of the split hemivariational inequality (SHI).
Corollary 3.1
Let \(V_{1}\), \(V_{2}\) be two Banach spaces with \(V_{1}^{\ast}\), \(V_{2}^{\ast}\) being their dual spaces, respectively. Suppose that, for \(i=1,2\), \(A_{i}:V_{i}\rightarrow V_{i}^{\ast}\) is monotone and hemicontinuous on \(V_{i}\), \(J_{i}:V_{i}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\) is a locally Lipschitz functional, and \(T:V_{1}\to V_{2}\) is a continuous operator from \(V_{1}\) to \(V_{2}\). Then \(\Omega(\epsilon)\) is closed for any \(\epsilon>0\).
Remark 3.1
Similar to the idea in many research works on wellposedness for variational inequalities and hemivariational inequalities [17, 25, 46, 47], the set \(\Psi (\epsilon)\) is defined to prove the closedness of \(\Omega(\epsilon)\) under the condition that, for \(i=1,2\), \(A_{i}\) is monotone and hemicontinuous on \(V_{i}\). Actually, without defining the set \(\Psi (\epsilon)\), we could prove directly the property of closedness of \(\Omega(\epsilon)\).
Lemma 3.3
Let \(V_{1}\), \(V_{2}\) be two Banach spaces with \(V_{1}^{\ast}\), \(V_{2}^{\ast}\) being their dual spaces, respectively, and \(J_{i}:V_{i}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\) be a locally Lipschitz functional for \(i=1,2\). Suppose that \(T:V_{1}\to V_{2}\) is a continuous operator from \(V_{1}\) to \(V_{2}\) and for \(i=1,2\), \(A_{i}:V_{i}\rightarrow V_{i}^{\ast}\) is monotone and hemicontinuous. Then \(\Omega(\epsilon)\) is closed for any \(\epsilon>0\).
Proof
Let \(\{\mathbf{u}^{n}=(u_{1}^{n},u_{2}^{n})\}\subset \Omega(\epsilon)\) be a sequence converging to \(\mathbf {u}=(u_{1},u_{2})\) in \(V_{1}\times V_{2}\), which implies that
Since, for \(i=1,2\), \(A_{i}:V_{i}\rightarrow V_{i}^{\ast}\) is monotone and hemicontinuous, it is weakly^{∗} continuous on \(V_{i}\) by Proposition 2.1 and thus \(A_{i}u_{i}^{n}\xrightarrow{w^{\ast}} A_{i}u_{i}\) when \(n\to \infty\). This together with the convergence of \(\{u_{i}^{n}\}\) and Proposition 2.2 implies that
and
By Proposition 2.3, \(J_{i}^{\circ}(\cdot\, ; \cdot)\), \(i=1,2\), is upper continuous on \(V_{i}\times V_{i}\). Taking lim sup with \(n\to +\infty\) on both sides of the last two inequalities of (3.5), it follows from (3.6) and (3.7) that
and
Moreover, by similar arguments as in Lemma 3.2, it is easy to show that
This together with (3.8) and (3.9) indicates that \({\mathbf {u}}=(u_{1},u_{2})\in\Omega(\epsilon)\). Thus \(\Omega(\epsilon)\) is closed on \(V_{1}\times V_{2}\). This completes the proof of Lemma 3.3. □
Now, with properties of the set \(\Omega(\epsilon)\) given above, we are in a position to prove metric characterizations for the split hemivariational inequality (SHI)by using similar methods for studying wellposedness of variational inequalities and hemivariational inequalities in research works [17, 25, 46, 47].
Theorem 3.1
Let \(V_{1}\), \(V_{2}\) be two Banach spaces and \(V_{1}^{\ast}\), \(V_{2}^{\ast}\) be their dual spaces, respectively. Suppose that, for \(i=1,2\), \(A_{i}:V_{i}\rightarrow V_{i}^{\ast}\) is an operator on \(V_{i}\) and \(J_{i}:V_{i}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\) is a locally Lipschitz functional. Then the split hemivariational inequality (SHI) is strongly wellposed if and only if its solution set S is nonempty and \(\operatorname{diam} \Omega(\varepsilon)\rightarrow0\) as \(\varepsilon\rightarrow0\).
Proof
“Necessity”: First of all, it is obvious that the solution set of the split hemivariational inequality (SHI) \(S\neq\phi\) since it has a unique solution due to its strong wellposedness. Assume that \(\operatorname{diam} \Omega(\epsilon)\nrightarrow0\) as \(\epsilon\rightarrow0\), then there exist \(\delta>0\), \(\epsilon_{k}\rightarrow0^{+}\), \(\mathbf {u}^{k}=(u_{1}^{k},u_{2}^{k})\in\Omega(\epsilon_{k})\), and \(\mathbf {p}^{k}=(p_{1}^{k},p_{2}^{k})\in\Omega(\epsilon_{k})\) such that
Clearly, both \(\{(u_{1}^{k},u_{2}^{k})\}\) and \(\{(p_{1}^{k},p_{2}^{k})\}\) are approximating sequences for the split hemivariational inequality (SHI) by the fact that \((u_{1}^{k},u_{2}^{k})\in\Omega (\epsilon_{k})\) and \((p_{1}^{k},p_{2}^{k})\in\Omega(\epsilon_{k})\). It follows from the wellposedness of (SHI) that both \(\{(u_{1}^{k},u_{2}^{k})\}\) and \(\{(p_{1}^{k},p_{2}^{k})\}\) converge to the unique solution of (SHI), which is a contradiction to (3.11). Thus, \(\operatorname{diam} \Omega(\varepsilon)\rightarrow0\) as \(\varepsilon\rightarrow0\).
“Sufficiency”: Suppose that the solution set S of the split hemivariational inequality (SHI) is nonempty and \(\operatorname{diam} \Omega(\epsilon)\rightarrow0\) as \(\epsilon\rightarrow0\). For any approximating sequence \(\{\mathbf{u}^{n}=(u_{1}^{n},u_{2}^{n})\}\subset V_{1}\times V_{2}\) for (SHI), there exists \(0<\epsilon_{n}\to0\) such that
which indicates that \((u_{1}^{n},u_{2}^{n})\in\Omega(\varepsilon_{n})\) with \(\varepsilon_{n}\rightarrow0\).
Now, we claim that the solution set S of the split hemivariational inequality (SHI)is a singleton, i.e., \(S=\{\mathbf{u}^{\ast }=(u_{1}^{\ast},u_{2}^{\ast})\}\) and \(\mathbf{u}^{n}\to\mathbf{u}^{*}\) as \(n\to\infty\), which indicate that the split hemivariational inequality (SHI)is strongly wellposed. For the purpose of getting contradiction, we suppose that there exists another solution \(\mathbf {u}^{\prime}=(u_{1}^{\prime},u_{2}^{\prime})\neq\mathbf{u}^{*}\) to the split hemivariational inequality (SHI). It is clear that \(\mathbf {u}^{\prime}, \mathbf{u}^{*}\in\Omega(\epsilon)\) for any \(\epsilon >0\) and
which is a contradiction. Thus, \(\mathbf{u}^{*}\) is the unique solution to the split hemivariational inequality (SHI). Moreover, since \(\mathbf{u}^{n}\), \(\mathbf{u}^{*}\in\Omega(\epsilon_{n})\) for any \(n\in \mathbb{N}\), it follows that
which implies that \(\mathbf{u}^{n}\to\mathbf{u}^{*}\) as \(n\to\infty\). This completes the proof of Theorem 3.1. □
Theorem 3.2
Let \(V_{1}\), \(V_{2}\) be two Banach spaces with \(V_{1}^{\ast}\), \(V_{2}^{\ast}\) being their dual spaces, respectively, and \(T:V_{1}\to V_{2}\) be a continuous operator from \(V_{1}\) to \(V_{2}\). Suppose that, for \(i=1,2\), \(A_{i}:V_{i}\rightarrow V_{i}^{\ast}\) is monotone and demicontinuous on \(V_{i}\) and \(J_{i}:V_{i}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\) is a locally Lipschitz functional. Then the split hemivariational inequality (SHI) is strongly wellposed if and only if
Proof
It is sufficient to prove the sufficiency of Theorem 3.2 since it is easy to get its necessity by Theorem 3.1 due to the fact that \(S\subset\Omega(\epsilon)\) for any \(\epsilon>0\). First, with condition (3.13), it is easy to show that the split hemivariational inequality (SHI) possesses a unique solution by similar arguments as in the proof of Theorem 3.1. Then, we suppose that \(\{\mathbf{u}^{n}=(u_{1}^{n},u_{2}^{n})\}\subset V_{1}\times V_{2}\) is an approximating sequence for the split hemivariational inequality, which indicates that there exists \(0<\epsilon_{n}\to0\) such that (3.12) holds and thus \(\mathbf {u}^{n}\in\Omega(\epsilon_{n})\). It follows from the condition \(\operatorname{diam} \Omega(\epsilon)\rightarrow0 as \epsilon\rightarrow0\) that \(\{\mathbf{u}^{n}\}\) is a Cauchy sequence. As a consequence, there exists \(\mathbf{u}=(u_{1},u_{2})\) such that \(\mathbf{u}^{n}\rightarrow \mathbf{u}\). Now, we show that \(\mathbf{u}=(u_{1},u_{2})\) is the unique solution of the split hemivariational inequality (SHI)to get its strong wellposedness. By taking limit on both sides of the first inequality in (3.12), it is easy to get from the continuity of the operation T that
Since, for \(i=1,2\), the operator \(A_{i}:V_{i}\rightarrow V_{i}^{\ast}\) is monotone and the Clarke generalized directional derivative \(J_{i}^{\circ }(\cdot\, ; \cdot)\) is upper semicontinuous by Proposition 2.3, taking lim sup on both sides of the last two inequalities in (3.12) yields that
and
By similar arguments for the proof of \(\Psi(\epsilon)\subset\Omega (\epsilon)\) for any \(\epsilon>0\) in Lemma 3.1, it can be proved by the hemicontinuity of operators \(A_{1}\), \(A_{2}\), (3.15), and (3.16) that
and
which together with (3.14) imply that \(\mathbf{u}=(u_{1},u_{2})\) is the unique solution of the split hemivariational inequality (SHI). This completes the proof of Theorem 3.2. □
The following is a concrete example to illustrate the metric characterization of wellposedness for a hemivariational inequality.
Example 3.1
Let \(V_{1}=V_{2}=\mathbb{R}\) and \(f_{1}=2\), \(f_{2}=1\). For any \(u_{1},u_{2}\in \mathbb{R}\), \(A_{1}:\mathbb{R}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\) such that \(A_{1}(u_{1})=2u_{1}\), \(A_{2}:\mathbb{R}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\) such that \(A_{2}(u_{2})=u_{2}\), \(T:\mathbb{R}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\) such that \(T(u_{1})=u_{1}^{2}\), and \(J_{1},J_{2}:\mathbb{R}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\) are defined by
It is obvious that \(J_{1}\) and \(J_{2}\) are locally Lipschitz and nonconvex functions on \(\mathbb{R}\). Thus, the split hemivariational inequality we consider is as follows:
Find \((u_{1},u_{2})\in\mathbb{R}\times\mathbb{R}\) such that
By some simple calculations, one can easily obtain that the Clarke subgradients for the functions \(J_{1}\) and \(J_{2}\) are
On the one hand, with some further deductions, it is not difficult to check that the split hemivariational inequality (3.17) has a unique solution \(\mathbf {u}^{*}=(u_{1}^{*},u_{2}^{*})=(1,1)\). Moreover, for any approximating sequence \(\{\mathbf {u}^{n}=(u_{1}^{n},u_{2}^{n})\}\) of the split hemivariational inequality (3.17), it satisfies
where \(0<\epsilon_{n}\rightarrow0\) when \(n\rightarrow\infty\). By taking limit of \(n\to\infty\) on both sides of the inequalities in (3.18), it is easy to obtain that the approximating sequence \(\{\mathbf {u}^{n}\}\) converges strongly to the unique solution \(\mathbf {u}^{*}\) of the split hemivariational inequality (3.17), which indicates that the split hemivariational inequality (3.17) is wellposed.
On the other hand, given \(\epsilon>0\), \(\Omega(\epsilon)\) for the split hemivariational inequality (3.17) is defined by
With some careful calculations, one can specify \(\Omega(\epsilon)\) for the split hemivariational inequality (3.17) as follows:
From Fig. 1, the graph of \(\Omega(\epsilon)\), it is easy to obtain that
Obviously, for any \(\epsilon>0\), \(\Omega(\epsilon)\) for the split hemivariational inequality (3.17) is nonempty and \(\operatorname {diam} \Omega(\epsilon)\to0\) when \(\epsilon\to0\).
Theorem 3.3
Let \(V_{1}\), \(V_{2}\) be two Banach spaces and \(V_{1}^{\ast}\), \(V_{2}^{\ast}\) be their dual spaces, respectively. Suppose that, for \(i=1,2\), \(A_{i}:V_{i}\rightarrow V_{i}^{\ast}\) is an operator on \(V_{i}\) and \(J_{i}:V_{i}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\) is a locally Lipschitz functional. Then the split hemivariational inequality (SHI) is generalized wellposed if and only if its solution set S is nonempty compact and \(\mathscr {H}(\Omega (\epsilon),S)\rightarrow0\) as \(\varepsilon\rightarrow0\).
Proof
First, suppose that the split hemivariational inequality (SHI) is generalized wellposed. This implies, by the definition of generalized wellposedness for (SHI) and the definition of \(\Omega(\epsilon)\), that \(\phi\neq S\subset \Omega(\epsilon)\) for all \(\epsilon>0\). We claim that the solution set S of (SHI) is compact. In fact, let \(\{\mathbf {u}^{n}=(u_{1}^{n},u_{2}^{n})\}\) be a sequence in S, which indicates that \(\{\mathbf{u}^{n}\}\) is an approximating sequence for the split hemivariational inequality. By the generalized wellposedness of (SHI), there exists a subsequence of \(\{\mathbf{u}^{n}\}\) converging to some element of S, which implies that S is compact. Now, we prove \(\mathscr {H}(\Omega(\epsilon),S)\rightarrow0\) as \(\varepsilon \rightarrow0\). If not, there exist \(\tau>0\), \(\varepsilon_{n}>0\) with \(\varepsilon_{n}\to0\), and \(\mathbf{u}^{n}=(u_{1}^{n},u_{2}^{n})\in\Omega (\varepsilon_{n})\) such that
By the fact that \(\mathbf{u}^{n}\in\Omega(\varepsilon_{n})\) for \(n\in \mathbb{N}\), \(\{\mathbf{u}^{n}\}\) is an approximating sequence for the split hemivariational inequality (SHI), which implies by the generalized wellposedness of (SHI) that there exists a subsequence of \(\{\mathbf{u}^{n}\}\) converging to some element of S, a contradiction to (3.19). Therefore, \(\mathscr {H}(\Omega(\epsilon),S)\rightarrow0\) as \(\varepsilon\rightarrow0\).
Conversely, we prove the sufficiency. Assume that S is nonempty compact and \(\mathscr {H}(\Omega(\epsilon), S)\rightarrow0\) as \(\varepsilon\rightarrow0\). For any approximating sequence \(\{\mathbf {u}^{n}=(u_{1}^{n},u_{2}^{n})\}\) for the split hemivariational inequality (SHI), there exists \(0<\epsilon_{n}\to0\) such that \(\{ \mathbf{u}^{n}\}\in\Omega(\varepsilon_{n})\). By virtue of \(S\subset \Omega(\epsilon_{n})\) for any \(n\in\mathbb{N}\), it is obvious that
Since S is compact, it follows that there exists a sequence \(\{ \mathbf{w}^{n}=(w_{2}^{n},w_{1}^{n})\}\subset S\) such that
Again by the compactness of the solution set S and \(\{\mathbf {w}^{n}\}\subset S\), there exists a sequence \(\{\mathbf{w}^{n_{k}}\}\) converging to some point \(\mathbf{w}^{\prime}\in S\). Thus
which implies that the split hemivariational inequality (SHI)is generalized wellposed since the solution set S for the split hemivariational inequality (SHI)is nonempty. This completes the proof of Theorem 3.3. □
Theorem 3.4
Let \(V_{1}\), \(V_{2}\) be two Banach spaces with \(V_{1}^{\ast}\), \(V_{2}^{\ast}\) being their dual spaces, respectively, and \(T:V_{1}\to V_{2}\) be a continuous operator from \(V_{1}\) to \(V_{2}\). Suppose that, for \(i=1,2\), \(A_{i}:V_{i}\rightarrow V_{i}^{\ast}\) is monotone and demicontinuous on \(V_{i}\) and \(J_{i}:V_{i}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\) is a locally Lipschitz functional. Then the split hemivariational inequality (SHI) is generalized wellposed if and only if
Proof
Necessity: With the generalized wellposedness for the split hemivariational inequality (SHI), it is easy to get from Theorem 3.3 that its solution set S is nonempty compact and
Obviously, \(\emptyset\neq S\subset\Omega(\epsilon)\) for any \(\epsilon>0\) and, with the compactness of the solution set S, (3.21) implies that
Sufficiency: Conversely, assume that condition (3.20) holds. Note that \(S=\bigcap_{\epsilon>0}\Omega(\epsilon)\) due to the closedness of \(\Omega(\epsilon)\) for any \(\epsilon>0\) by Corollary 3.1. Since \(\mu(\Omega(\epsilon))\rightarrow0\) as \(\epsilon \rightarrow0\), it follows from the theorem on p. 412 of [45] that S is nonempty compact and
which implies by Theorem 3.3 that the split hemivariational inequality (SHI) is generalized wellposed. This completes the proof of Theorem 3.4. □
Concluding remarks
In this paper, we generalize the concept of wellposedness to a split hemivariational inequality (SHI), which is a generalization of classic variational inequality and hemivariational inequality. After defining wellposedness for the split hemivariational inequality (SHI) with its approximating sequences, we establish some metric characterizations using very mild assumptions on operators involved. The obtained results generalize some theorems on wellposedness for hemivariational inequalities and variational inequalities in the literature.
Similar to many research papers on wellposedness for variational inequalities and hemivariational inequalities, in addition to the metric characterizations for wellposedness, it is important and interesting to study the relationships between the wellposedness and its solvability for the split hemivariational inequalities (SHI).
References
Tikhonov, A.N.: On the stability of the functional optimization problem. USSR Comput. Math. Math. Phys. 6(4), 28–33 (1966)
Chen, H.B., Wang, Y.J., Wang, G.: Strong convergence of extragradient method for generalized variational inequalities in Hilbert space. J. Inequal. Appl. 2014, 223 (2014)
Facchinei, F., Pang, J.S.: FiniteDimensional Variational Inequalities and Complementarity Problems. Springer, New York (2007)
Li, W., Xiao, Y.B., Huang, N.J., Cho, Y.J.: A class of differential inverse quasivariational inequalities in finite dimensional spaces. J. Nonlinear Sci. Appl. 10(8), 4532–4543 (2017)
Lu, J., Xiao, Y.B., Huang, N.J.: A stackelberg quasiequilibrium problem via quasivariational inequalities. Carpath. J. Math. (in press)
Sofonea, M., Matei, A.: Variational Inequalities with Applications: A Study of Antiplane Frictional Contact Problems, vol. 18. Springer, New York (2009)
Migórski, S., Ochal, A., Sofonea, M.: Nonlinear Inclusions and Hemivariational Inequalities: Models and Analysis of Contact Problems. Springer, New York (2013)
Nagurney, A.: Network Economics: A Variational Inequality Approach, vol. 10. Springer, Dordrecht (2013)
Panagiotopoulos, P.D.: Hemivariational Inequalities. Springer, New York (1993)
Sofonea, M., Xiao, Y.B.: Fully historydependent quasivariational inequalities in contact mechanics. Appl. Anal. 95(11), 2464–2484 (2016)
Xiao, Y.B., Huang, N.J., Cho, Y.J.: A class of generalized evolution variational inequalities in Banach spaces. Appl. Math. Lett. 25(6), 914–920 (2012)
Xiao, Y.B., Fu, X., Zhang, A.: Demand uncertainty and airport capacity choice. Transp. Res., Part B, Methodol. 57(5), 91–104 (2013)
Zaslavski, A.J.: Optimization on Metric and Normed Spaces. Springer, New York (2010)
Fang, Y.P., Hu, R.: Parametric wellposedness for variational inequalities defined by bifunctions. Comput. Math. Appl. 53(8), 1306–1316 (2007)
Huang, X.X., Yang, X.Q.: Generalized Levitin–Polyak wellposedness in constrained optimization. SIAM J. Optim. 17(1), 243–258 (2006)
Peng, J.W., Yang, X.M.: Levitin–Polyak wellposedness of a system of generalized vector variational inequality problems. J. Ind. Manag. Optim. 11(3), 701–714 (2015)
Xiao, Y.B., Huang, N.J., Wong, M.M.: Wellposedness of hemivariational inequalities and inclusion problems. Taiwan. J. Math. 15(3), 1261–1276 (2011)
Han, Y., Gong, X.: Levitin–Polyak wellposedness of symmetric vector quasiequilibrium problems. Optimization 64(7), 1537–1545 (2015)
Li, S.J., Li, M.H.: Levitin–Polyak wellposedness of vector equilibrium problems. Math. Methods Oper. Res. 69(1), 125–140 (2009)
Lignola, M.: Wellposedness and Lwellposedness for quasivariational inequalities. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 128(1), 119–138 (2006)
Reich, S., Zaslavski, A.J.: Generic wellposedness of fixed point problems. Vietnam J. Math. 46, 1–9 (2017)
Lucchetti, R., Patrone, F.: A characterization of Tyhonov wellposedness for minimum problems, with applications to variational inequalities. Numer. Funct. Anal. Optim. 3(4), 461–476 (1981)
Lucchetti, R., Patrone, F.: Some properties of “wellposed” variational inequalities governed by linear operators. Numer. Funct. Anal. Optim. 5(3), 349–361 (1983)
Hu, R., Fang, Y.P.: Levitin–Polyak wellposedness of variational inequalities. Nonlinear Anal. 72(1), 373–381 (2010)
Fang, Y.P., Huang, N.J., Yao, J.C.: Wellposedness by perturbations of mixed variational inequalities in Banach spaces. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 201(3), 682–692 (2010)
Liu, Z.H.: Browder–Tikhonov regularization of noncoercive evolution hemivariational inequalities. Inverse Probl. 21(1), 13–20 (2005)
Xiao, Y.B., Huang, N.J.: Generalized quasivariationallike hemivariational inequalities. Nonlinear Anal. 69(2), 637–646 (2008)
Migórski, S., Ochal, A.: Boundary hemivariational inequality of parabolic type. Nonlinear Anal. 57(4), 579–596 (2004)
Naniewicz, Z., Panagiotopoulos, P.D.: Mathematical Theory of Hemivariational Inequalities and Applications. Dekker, New York (1995)
Zhang, W., Han, D., Jiang, S.: A modified alternating projection based prediction correction method for structured variational inequalities. Appl. Numer. Math. 83(2), 12–21 (2014)
Goeleven, D., Mentagui, D.: Wellposed hemivariational inequalities. Numer. Funct. Anal. Optim. 16(7–8), 909–921 (1995)
Virmani, G., Srivastava, M.: On Levitin–Polyak alphawellposedness of perturbed variationalhemivariational inequality. Optimization 64(5), 1153–1172 (2015)
Liu, Z.B., Gou, J.H., Xiao, Y.B., Li, X.S.: A system of generalized variationalhemivariational inequalities with setvalued mappings. J. Appl. Math. 2013, Article ID 305068 (2013)
Liu, Z., Motreanu, D., Zeng, S.: On the wellposedness of differential mixed quasivariationalinequalities. Topol. Methods Nonlinear Anal. 51(1), 135–150 (2018)
Wang, Y.M., Xiao, Y.B., Wang, X., Cho, Y.J.: Equivalence of wellposedness between systems of hemivariational inequalities and inclusion problems. J. Nonlinear Sci. Appl. 9(3), 1178–1192 (2016)
Censor, Y., Gibali, A., Reich, S.: Algorithms for the split variational inequality problem. Numer. Algorithms 59(2), 301–323 (2012)
Censor, Y., Bortfeld, T., Martin, B., Trofimov, A.: A unified approach for inversion problems in intensitymodulated radiation therapy. Phys. Med. Biol. 51(10), 2353–2365 (2006)
Censor, Y., Elfving, T., Kopf, N., Bortfeld, T.: The multiplesets split feasibility problem and its applications for inverse problems. Inverse Probl. 21(6), 2071–2084 (2005)
He, H., Ling, C., Xu, H.K.: A relaxed projection method for split variational inequalities. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 166(1), 213–233 (2015)
Moudafi, A.: Split monotone variational inclusions. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 150(2), 275–283 (2011)
Masad, E., Reich, S.: A note on the multipleset split feasibility problem in Hilbert space. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 8(3), 367–371 (2007)
Hu, R., Fang, Y.P.: Characterizations of Levitin–Polyak wellposedness by perturbations for the split variational inequality problem. Optimization 65(9), 1717–1732 (2016)
Zeidler, E.: Nonlinear Functional Analysis and Its Applications, vol. II. Springer, Berlin (1990)
Zezislaw, D., Migórski, S.: An Introduction to Nonlinear Analysis: Applications. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht (2003)
Kuratowski, K.: Topology, vols. 1, 2. Academic Press, New York (1968)
Lv, S., Xiao, Y.B., Liu, Z.B., Li, X.S.: Wellposedness by perturbations for variationalhemivariational inequalities. J. Appl. Math. 2012, Article ID 804032 (2012)
Hu, R., Fang, Y.P.: Wellposedness of the split inverse variational inequality problem. Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. 40(4), 1733–1744 (2017)
Funding
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (11771067), the Applied Basic Project of Sichuan Province (2016JY0170), the Open Foundation of State Key Laboratory of Electronic Thin Films and Integrated Devices (KFJJ201611), and the Chongqing Big Data Engineering Laboratory for Children, Chongqing Electronics Engineering Technology Research Center for Interactive Learning.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed equally and significantly in writing this paper. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
About this article
Cite this article
Shu, Qy., Hu, R. & Xiao, Yb. Metric characterizations for wellposedness of split hemivariational inequalities. J Inequal Appl 2018, 190 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1186/s1366001817614
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s1366001817614
Keywords
 Split hemivariational inequality
 Monotone operator
 Hemicontinuity
 Metric characterization