 Research
 Open access
 Published:
On shrinking projection method for cutter type mappings with nonsummable errors
Journal of Inequalities and Applications volume 2023, Article number: 92 (2023)
Abstract
We prove two key inequalities for metric and generalized projections in a certain Banach space. We then obtain some asymptotic behavior of a sequence generated by the shrinking projection method introduced by Takahashi et al. (J. Math. Anal. Appl. 341:276–286, 2008) where the computation allows some nonsummable errors. We follow the idea proposed by Kimura (Banach and Function Spaces IV (ISBFS 2012), pp. 303–311, 2014). The mappings studied in this paper are more general than the ones in (Ibaraki and Kimura in Linear Nonlinear Anal. 2:301–310, 2016; Ibaraki and Kajiba in Josai Math. Monogr. 11:105–120, 2018). In particular, the results in (Ibaraki and Kimura in Linear Nonlinear Anal. 2:301–310, 2016; Ibaraki and Kajiba in Josai Math. Monogr. 11:105–120, 2018) are both extended and supplemented. Finally, we discuss our results for finding a zero of maximal monotone operator and a minimizer of convex functions on a Banach space.
1 Introduction
Iterative methods play an important role in approximation theory. Several problems can be transformed into a problem of finding a fixed point of certain mappings. Many iterative methods have been proposed and analyzed (for example, see [3, 4, 6, 18, 19, 25, 28]). In this paper, we are interested in one of the promising methods, namely, the shrinking projection method. It was proposed by Takahashi et al. [24] who proved that a sequence generated by this method converges strongly to a fixed point of a certain mapping in the Hilbert space setting. Kimura [15] modified this iterative scheme in the sense that the inexact value of the projection is allowed, while the asymptotic behavior of the iterative sequence performs well. Our paper concerns cutter type mappings in Banach spaces with certain geometric properties, and it can be regarded as an extension and a supplement to the recent results of Ibaraki and Kimura [12] and of Ibaraki and Kajiba [11].
Let \(E:=(E,\\cdot \)\) be a real Banach space with the dual space \(E^{*}\). The strong and weak convergence in E are denoted by → and ⇀, respectively. The normalized duality mapping \(J:E\to 2^{E^{*}}\) is defined by
Recall that E is

smooth if \(\lim_{t\to 0}\frac{1}{t}(\x+ty\\x\)\) exists for all \(x,y\in E\);

strictly convex if \(\frac{1}{2}\x+y\<1\) for all \(x,y\in E\) with \(\x\=\y\=1\) and \(x\neq y\).
If E is smooth, strictly convex, and reflexive, then J is singlevalued and surjective. In this case, we can treat Jx as an element of \(E^{*}\). For more details on the duality mappings, we refer to [5].
Let C be a nonempty subset of a smooth Banach space E. In this paper, we are interested in the following three different generalizations of cutter mappings in the Banach space setting [2, 16]. A mapping \(T:C\to E\) with a nonempty fixed point set \(\operatorname{Fix}(T):=\{z\in C:z=Tz\}\) is said to be

a cutter mapping of type (P) if \(\langle Txz,J(Txx)\rangle \le 0\) for all \(x\in C\) and \(z\in \operatorname{Fix}(T)\);

a cutter mapping of type (Q) if \(\langle Txz,JTxJx\rangle \le 0\) for all \(x\in C\) and \(z\in \operatorname{Fix}(T)\);

a cutter mapping of type (R) if \(\langle JTxJz,Txx\rangle \le 0\) for all \(x\in C\) and \(z\in \operatorname{Fix}(T)\).
Suppose that \(V:E\times E\to [0,\infty )\) is a function defined by
It is known that

\((\x\\y\)^{2}\le V(x,y)\le (\x\+\y\)^{2}\) for all \(x,y\in E\);

\(V(x,y)=V(x,z)+V(z,y)+2\langle xz,JzJy\rangle \) for all \(x,y,z\in E\).
Lemma 1
Suppose that E is a smooth Banach space and C is a nonempty closed and convex subset of E. The following statements are true:

(a)
If \(T:C\to E\) is a cutter mapping of type (P), then \(\operatorname{Fix}(T)\) is closed and convex;

(b)
Suppose that E is strictly convex. If \(T:C\to E\) is a cutter mapping of type (Q), then \(\operatorname{Fix}(T)\) is closed and convex.
Proof
(a) Suppose that T is a cutter mapping of type (P) where C is closed and convex. We show that \(\operatorname{Fix}(T)\) is closed. Assume that \(\{z_{n}\}\) is a sequence in \(\operatorname{Fix}(T)\) such that \(z_{n}\to z\in C\); then \(\langle Tzz_{n},J(Tzz)\rangle \le 0\) for all \(n\ge 1\). In particular, \(\Tzz\^{2}=\langle Tzz,J(Tzz)\rangle \le 0\), that is, \(z\in \operatorname{Fix}(T)\). Hence, \(\operatorname{Fix}(T)\) is closed. Next, we prove that \(\operatorname{Fix}(T)\) is convex. To see this, let \(z,z'\in \operatorname{Fix}(T)\) and \(\lambda \in [0,1]\). We write \(w:=\lambda z+(1\lambda )z'\). Obviously, \(w\in C\). Moreover, \(\langle Twz,J(Tww)\rangle \le 0\) and \(\langle Twz',J(Tww)\rangle \le 0\). This implies that \(\Tww\^{2}=\langle Tww,J(Tww)\rangle \le 0\), that is, \(w\in \operatorname{Fix}(T)\).
(b) Suppose that E is strictly convex and \(T:C\to E\) is a cutter mapping of type (Q), where C is closed and convex. We show that \(\operatorname{Fix}(T)\) is closed. Assume that \(\{z_{n}\}\) is a sequence in \(\operatorname{Fix}(T)\) such that \(z_{n}\to z\in C\); then \(\langle Tzz_{n},JTzJz\rangle \le 0\) for all \(n\ge 1\). In particular, \(\langle Tzz,JTzJz\rangle \le 0\). It follows from the strict convexity of E that \(z\in \operatorname{Fix}(T)\). Hence, \(\operatorname{Fix}(T)\) is closed. Next, we prove that \(\operatorname{Fix}(T)\) is convex. To see this, let \(z,z'\in \operatorname{Fix}(T)\) and \(\lambda \in [0,1]\). We write \(w:=\lambda z+(1\lambda )z'\). Obviously, \(w\in C\). Moreover, \(\langle Twz,JTwJw\rangle \le 0\) and \(\langle Twz',JTwJw\rangle \le 0\). This implies that \(\langle Tww,JTwJw\rangle \le 0\) and hence \(w\in \operatorname{Fix}(T)\). □
In this paper, we also consider the following geometric properties. A Banach space E is

uniformly convex if \(\lim_{n}\x_{n}y_{n}\=0\) whenever \(\{x_{n}\}\) and \(\{y_{n}\}\) are sequences in E satisfying \(\lim_{n}\x_{n}\=\lim_{n}\y_{n}\=\lim_{n}\frac{1}{2}\x_{n}+y_{n} \=1\);

uniformly smooth if \(\lim_{t\to 0}\frac{1}{t}(\x+ty\\x\)\) exists uniformly for all \(x,y\in E\) with \(\x\=\y\=1\).
Note that every uniformly convex (uniformly smooth, respectively) space is reflexive and strictly convex (smooth, respectively). Moreover, uniform convexity and uniform smoothness are dual to each other, that is, E is uniformly convex (uniformly smooth, respectively) if and only if \(E^{*}\) is uniformly smooth (uniformly convex, respectively).
Lemma 2
([5])
If E is a uniformly smooth Banach space, then \(J:E\to E^{*}\) is normtonorm uniformly continuous on bounded sets.
Lemma 3
([14])
Suppose that E is a uniformly convex and smooth Banach space and suppose that \(\{x_{n}\}\) and \(\{y_{n}\}\) are sequences in E. If \(\lim_{n}V(x_{n},y_{n})=0\) and either \(\{x_{n}\}\) or \(\{y_{n}\}\) is bounded, then \(\lim_{n}\x_{n}y_{n}\=0\).
In each subsection, we present some prototypes of cutter type mappings of types (P), (Q), and (R) together with their properties.
1.1 Metric projections
Suppose that E is a strictly convex and reflexive Banach space. Let C be a closed convex subset of E and \(x\in E\). It is known that there exists a unique element \(z\in C\) such
Such an element z is denoted by \(P_{C}x\). Now, we call \(P_{C}\) the metric projection of E onto C. It is easy to see that \(\operatorname{Fix}(P_{C})=C\) and \(P_{C}\) is a cutter mapping of type (P). The following easy result is also needed in our study.
Lemma 4
Suppose that C is a closed convex subset of a strictly convex and reflexive Banach space E and \(u\in E\). If F is a nonempty closed convex subset of C such that \(P_{C}u\in F\), then \(P_{F}u=P_{C}u\).
Proof
It follows from the definition of \(P_{C}\) that \(\P_{C}uu\\le \yu\\) for all \(y\in C\). Since \(F\subset C\), we have \(\P_{C}uu\\le \yu\\) for all \(y\in F\). It follows from \(P_{C}u\in F\) that \(P_{C}u=P_{F}u\). □
The following lemma (see [15, Lemma 2.1]) is easily deduced from the result of Tsukada [26]. Recall that E satisfies the Kadec–Klee property if \(x_{n}\to x\) whenever \(\{x_{n}\}\) is a sequence in E such that \(x_{n}\rightharpoonup x\in E\) and \(\x_{n}\\to \x\\). It is known that every uniformly convex space satisfies the Kadec–Klee property.
Lemma 5
([15])
Suppose that E is a strictly convex reflexive Banach space and E satisfies the Kadec–Klee property. If \(\{C_{n}\}\) is a sequence of nonempty closed convex subsets of E such that \(C_{n+1}\subset C_{n}\) for all \(n\ge 1\) and \(C_{0}:=\bigcap_{n=1}^{\infty }C_{n}\) is nonempty, then \(\{P_{C_{n}}x\}\) converges strongly to \(P_{C_{0}}x\) for all \(x\in E\).
1.2 Generalized projections
Suppose that E is a smooth, strictly convex, and reflexive Banach space. Let C be a closed convex subset of E and \(x\in E\). It is known that there exists a unique element \(z\in C\) such
Such an element z is denoted by \(\varPi _{C}x\). Now, we call \(\varPi _{C}\) the generalized projection of E onto C. It is easy to see that \(\operatorname{Fix}(\varPi _{C})=C\) and \(\varPi _{C}\) is a cutter mapping of type (Q). Moreover, we have the following result.
Lemma 6
([1])
Let C be a closed convex subset of a smooth, strictly convex, and reflexive Banach space E. Suppose that \(x\in E\) and \(z\in C\). Then the following statements are equivalent:

\(z=\varPi _{C}x\);

\(\langle yz,JzJx\rangle \ge 0\) for all \(y\in C\);

\(V(y,z)+V(z,x)\le V(y,x)\) for all \(y\in C\).
Lemma 7
Suppose that C is a closed convex subset of a smooth, strictly convex, and reflexive Banach space E and \(u\in E\). If F is a nonempty closed convex subset of C such that \(\varPi _{C}u\in F\), then \(\varPi _{F}u=\varPi _{C}u\).
Proof
It follows from the definition of \(\varPi _{C}\) that \(V(\varPi _{C}u,u)\le V(y,u)\) for all \(y\in C\). Since \(F\subset C\), we have \(V(\varPi _{C}u,u)\le V(y,u)\) for all \(y\in F\). It follows from \(\varPi _{C}u\in F\) that \(\varPi _{C}u=\varPi _{F}u\). □
The following lemma is easily deduced from the result of Ibaraki et al. [13].
Lemma 8
([13])
Suppose that E is a strictly convex, smooth, and reflexive Banach space and E satisfies the Kadec–Klee property. If \(\{C_{n}\}\) is a sequence of nonempty closed convex subsets of E such that \(C_{n+1}\subset C_{n}\) for all \(n\ge 1\) and \(C_{0}:=\bigcap_{n=1}^{\infty }C_{n}\) is nonempty, then \(\{\varPi _{C_{n}}x\}\) converges strongly to \(\varPi _{C_{0}}x\) for all \(x\in E\).
1.3 Sunny generalized nonexpansive retractions
Suppose that E is a smooth Banach space and \(C\subset E\). A mapping \(R:C\to E\) is a generalized nonexpansive if \(\operatorname{Fix}(R)\neq \varnothing \) and \(V(Rx,p)\le V(x,p)\) for all \(x\in C\) and for all \(p\in \operatorname{Fix}(R)\). A mapping \(R:E\to C\) is

a retraction if \(R^{2}=R\);

sunny if \(R(Rx+t(xRx))=Rx\) for all \(x\in E\) and for all \(t>0\).
If \(R:E\to C\) is a sunny generalized nonexpansive retraction from E onto C, then \(\operatorname{Fix}(R)=C\) and R is a cutter mapping of type (R).
Kohsaka and Takahashi [17] proved the following result.
Lemma 9
([17])
Suppose that E is a smooth, strictly convex, and reflexive Banach space, and suppose that \(C^{*}\) is a nonempty closed convex subset of \(E^{*}\). Then \(R:=J^{1}\varPi _{C^{*}}J\) is a sunny generalized nonexpansive retraction from E onto \(J^{1}C^{*}\), where \(\varPi _{C^{*}}\) is the generalized projection of \(E^{*}\) onto \(C^{*}\).
The purpose of this paper is to present some asymptotic behavior of an iterative sequence generated by the shrinking projection method for cutter type mappings.
2 Preliminaries
In this section, we collect some auxiliary results used in our main results. For a Banach space \(E:=(E,\\cdot \)\) and \(r>0\), we let \(B_{r}:=\{x\in E:\x\\le r\}\).
Lemma 10
([27])
Suppose that E is a Banach space and \(r>0\). Then the following statements are true:

(a)
If E is uniformly convex, then there is a continuous, strictly increasing, and convex function \(\underline{g}_{r}:[0,2r]\to [0,\infty )\) such that \(\underline{g}_{r}(0)=0\) and
$$ \bigl\Vert (1\lambda )x+\lambda y \bigr\Vert ^{2}\le (1\lambda ) \Vert x \Vert ^{2}+\lambda \Vert y \Vert ^{2}(1\lambda )\lambda \underline{g}_{r}\bigl( \Vert xy \Vert \bigr) $$for all \(x,y\in B_{r}\) and for all \(\lambda \in [0,1]\);

(b)
If E is uniformly smooth, then there is a continuous, strictly increasing, and convex function \(\overline{g}_{r}:[0,2r]\to [0,\infty )\) such that \(\overline{g}_{r}(0)=0\) and
$$ \bigl\Vert (1\lambda )x+\lambda y \bigr\Vert ^{2}\ge (1\lambda ) \Vert x \Vert ^{2}+\lambda \Vert y \Vert ^{2}(1\lambda )\lambda \overline{g}_{r}\bigl( \Vert xy \Vert \bigr) $$for all \(x,y\in B_{r}\) and for all \(\lambda \in [0,1]\).
Lemma 11
([15])
Suppose that E is a Banach space and \(r>0\). Then the following statements are true:

(a)
If E is uniformly convex and smooth, then the function \(\underline{g}_{r}\) in Lemma 10(a) satisfies \(\underline{g}_{r}(\xy\)\le V(x,y)\) for all \(x,y\in B_{r}\);

(b)
If E is uniformly smooth, then the function \(\overline{g}_{r}\) in Lemma 10(b) satisfies \(\overline{g}_{r}(\xy\)\ge V(x,y)\) for all \(x,y\in B_{r}\).
3 Main results
The main results are presented according to the types of cutter mappings. The results of each subsection are given with respect to the functionals \(\\cdot \^{2}\) and \(V(\cdot ,\cdot )\). The corresponding remark about the related results is presented. Our results are some extensions of the recent ones proved by Ibaraki and Kajiba [11] for mappings of types (P), (Q), and (R). Recall that for a nonempty subset C of a smooth, strictly convex, and reflexive Banach space E, a mapping \(T:C\to E\) is of

type (P) if \(\langle TxTy,J(xTx)J(yTy)\rangle \ge 0\) for all \(x,y\in C\);

type (Q) if \(\langle TxTy,(JxJTx)(JyJTy)\rangle \ge 0\) for all \(x,y\in C\);

type (R) if \(\langle JTxJTy,(xTx)(yTy)\rangle \ge 0\) for all \(x,y\in C\).
It is clear that every mapping of type (X) with a fixed point is a cutter mapping of type (X) where X = P, Q, R. Moreover, it is not hard to see that if \(T:C\to E\) is a mapping of type (X) where X = P, Q, R, then \(IT\) is strongly closed at zero, that is, \(p\in \operatorname{Fix}(T)\) whenever \(\{x_{n}\}\) is a sequence in C such that \(x_{n}\to p\in C\) and \(Tx_{n}\to p\).
3.1 Two key inequalities for metric projections and generalized projections
We now prove two key inequalities of this paper. The first result is a Banach space version of the result in [23] concerning the generalized projection. The second one is for the metric projection.
Lemma 12
Suppose that E is a smooth, strictly convex, and reflexive Banach space and C is a closed convex subset of E. Suppose that \(u\in E\) and \(\delta \ge 0\). If \(x\in C\) satisfies
then \(V(x,\varPi _{C}u)\le \delta \).
Proof
Note that \(V(x,\varPi _{C}u)+V(C,u)=V(x,\varPi _{C}u)+V(\varPi _{C}u,u)\le V(x,u) \le V(C,u)+\delta \). Specifically, \(V(x,\varPi _{C}u)\le \delta \). □
Lemma 13
Suppose that E is a uniformly convex Banach space, \(u\in E\), and \(\delta \ge 0\). Suppose that C is a closed convex subset of E such that \(Cu\subset B_{r}\) for some \(r>0\). If \(x\in C\) satisfies
then \(\underline{g}_{r}(\xP_{C}u\)\le \delta \), where \(\underline{g}_{r}\) is the function defined in Lemma 10(a).
Proof
Let \(p:=P_{C}u\). Then \(\ux\^{2}\le \up\^{2}+\delta \). Let \(\lambda \in (0,1)\). It follows that \(\lambda p+(1\lambda )x\in C\). Note that \(\{pu,xu\}\subset Cu\subset B_{r}\), and we make use of the function \(\underline{g}_{r}\) in Lemma 10(a) to estimate the term \(\\lambda (pu)+(1\lambda )(xu)\^{2}\). Hence,
In particular, \(\lambda \underline{g}_{r}(\px\)\le \delta \). Letting \(\lambda \uparrow 1\) gives the result. □
3.2 Cutter mappings of type (P)
Theorem 14
Suppose that E is a smooth and uniformly convex Banach space and C is a closed convex subset of E. Suppose that \(T:C\to E\) is a cutter mapping of type (P). Suppose that \(\{\delta _{n}\}\) is a sequence of nonnegative real numbers such that \(\delta _{0}:=\limsup_{n}\delta _{n}\). For given \(u\in E\), a sequence \(\{x_{n}\}\subset C\) is generated as follows: \(x_{1}\in C\), \(C_{1}:=C\), and
for all \(n\ge 1\). Then the following statements are true:

(1)
If \(Cu\subset B_{r}\) for some \(r>0\), then \(\limsup_{n}\x_{n}Tx_{n}\\le \underline{g}_{r}^{1}(\delta _{0})\), where \(\underline{g}_{r}\) is defined by Lemma 10;

(2)
If \(\delta _{0}=0\) and \(IT\) is strongly closed at zero, then \(x_{n}\to P_{\operatorname{Fix}(T)}u\).
Proof
First, we note that each \(C_{n}\) is nonempty because \(\operatorname{Fix}(T)\subset C_{n}\). Moreover, it is clear that each \(C_{n}\) is closed and convex. For convenience, we write \(p_{n}:=P_{C_{n}}u\) and \(p:=P_{\bigcap _{n=1}^{\infty }C_{n}}u\). Note that \(p_{n}\to p\) (see Lemma 5). It follows from \(p\in C_{n+1}\) that
In particular,
(1) Suppose that \(Cu\subset B_{r}\) for some \(r>0\). It follows from Lemma 13 that
Hence, \(\limsup_{n}\x_{n}Tx_{n}\\le \underline{g}^{1}_{r}(\delta _{0})\).
(2) We assume that \(\delta _{0}=0\) and \(IT\) is strongly closed at zero. Note that \(\x_{n}u\^{2}\le \p_{n}u\^{2}+\delta _{n}\). In particular, \(\{x_{n}\}\) is bounded. We prove that \(x_{n}\rightharpoonup p\). Suppose that \(\{x_{n_{k}}\}\) is a subsequence of \(\{x_{n}\}\) such that \(x_{n_{k}}\rightharpoonup q\) for some \(q\in E\). It follows that \(q\in \bigcap_{n=1}^{\infty }C_{n}\) and \(\qu\^{2}\le \liminf_{k}\x_{n_{k}}u\^{2}\le \limsup_{k}\x_{n_{k}}u \^{2}\le \lim_{k}\p_{n_{k}}u\^{2}=\pu\^{2}\). Hence, \(q=p\). Moreover, we have \(\lim_{n}\x_{n}u\=\pu\\). It follows from the Kadec–Klee property and \(x_{n}u\rightharpoonup pu\) that \(x_{n}u\to pu\) and hence \(x_{n}\to p\). It follows from a part of (1) that \(\lim_{n}\x_{n}Tx_{n}\=0\). Since \(IT\) is strongly closed at zero, we have \(p\in \operatorname{Fix}(T)\subset \bigcap_{n=1}^{\infty }C_{n}\). Note that \(\operatorname{Fix}(T)\) is closed and convex (see Lemma 1). It follows from Lemma 4 that \(x_{n}\to p=P_{\operatorname{Fix}(T)}u\). □
Theorem 15
Suppose that E is a smooth and uniformly convex Banach space and C is a closed convex subset of E. Suppose that \(T:C\to E\) is a cutter mapping of type (P). Suppose that \(\{\delta _{n}\}\) is a sequence of nonnegative real numbers such that \(\delta _{0}:=\limsup_{n}\delta _{n}\). For given \(u\in E\), a sequence \(\{x_{n}\}\subset C\) is generated as follows: \(x_{1}\in C\), \(C_{1}:=C\), and
for all \(n\ge 1\). Then the following statements are true:

(1)
If \(C\subset B_{r}\) for some \(r>0\), then \(\limsup_{n}\x_{n}Tx_{n}\\le \underline{g}_{r}^{1}(\delta _{0})\), where \(\underline{g}_{r}\) is defined by Lemma 10.

(2)
If \(\delta _{0}=0\) and \(IT\) is strongly closed at zero, then \(x_{n}\to \varPi _{\operatorname{Fix}(T)}u\).
Proof
First, we note that each \(C_{n}\) is nonempty because \(\operatorname{Fix}(T)\subset C_{n}\). Moreover, it is clear that each \(C_{n}\) is closed and convex. For convenience, we write \(\pi _{n}:=\varPi _{C_{n}}u\) and \(\pi :=\varPi _{\bigcap _{n=1}^{\infty }C_{n}}u\). Note that \(\pi _{n}\to \pi \) (see Lemma 8). It follows from \(\pi \in C_{n+1}\) that
In particular,
Note that \(V(x_{n},\pi _{n})\le \delta _{n}\) (see Lemma 12).
(1) Suppose that \(C\subset B_{r}\) for some \(r>0\). It follows from Lemma 11 that \(\x_{n}\pi _{n}\\le \underline{g}^{1}_{r}(V(x_{n},\pi _{n}))\le \underline{g}^{1}_{r}(\delta _{n})\), which implies that
Hence, \(\limsup_{n}\x_{n}Tx_{n}\\le \underline{g}^{1}_{r}(\delta _{0})\).
(2) We assume that \(\delta _{0}=0\) and \(IT\) is strongly closed at zero. Since \(\delta _{0}=0\), we have \(\lim_{n}V(x_{n},\pi _{n})=0\). It follows from Lemma 3 that \(\lim_{n}\x_{n}\pi _{n}\=0\). In particular, \(\lim_{n}\x_{n}Tx_{n}\\le \lim_{n}\x_{n}\pi \=\lim_{n}\x_{n} \pi _{n}\=0\). Since \(IT\) is strongly closed at zero, we have \(\pi \in \operatorname{Fix}(T)\subset \bigcap_{n=1}^{\infty }C_{n}\). Note that \(\operatorname{Fix}(T)\) is closed and convex (see Lemma 1). It follows from Lemma 7 that \(x_{n}\to \pi =\varPi _{\operatorname{Fix}(T)}u\). □
Remark 16
Our Theorem 14 and Theorem 15 generalize Theorem 3.1 of [12] and Theorem 3.1 of [11], respectively. In fact, the mapping of type (P) in [11, 12] is replaced by the cutter mapping of type (P).
3.3 Cutter mappings of type (Q)
Theorem 17
Suppose that E is a uniformly smooth and uniformly convex Banach space and C is a closed convex subset of E. Suppose that \(T:C\to E\) is a cutter mapping of type (Q). Suppose that \(\{\delta _{n}\}\) is a sequence in \([0,\infty )\) with \(\delta _{0}:=\limsup_{n}\delta _{n}\). For given \(u\in E\), a sequence \(\{x_{n}\}\subset C\) is generated as follows: \(x_{1}\in C\), \(C_{1}:=C\) and
for all \(n\ge 1\). Then the following statements are true:

(1)
If \((Cu)\cup C\subset B_{r}\) for some \(r>0\), then \(\limsup_{n}\x_{n}Tx_{n}\\le \underline{g}^{1}_{r}(\overline{g}_{r}( \underline{g}_{r}^{1}(\delta _{0})))\), where \(\underline{g}_{r}\) and \(\overline{g}_{r}\) are defined by Lemma 10;

(2)
If \(\delta _{0}=0\) and \(IT\) is strongly closed at zero, then \(x_{n}\to P_{\operatorname{Fix}(T)}u\).
Proof
First, we note that each \(C_{n}\) is nonempty because \(\operatorname{Fix}(T)\subset C_{n}\). Moreover, it is clear that each \(C_{n}\) is closed and convex. For convenience, we write \(p_{n}:=P_{C_{n}}u\) and \(p:=P_{\bigcap _{n=1}^{\infty }C_{n}}u\). Note that \(p_{n}\to p\) (see Lemma 8). It follows from \(p \in C_{n+1}\) that \(\langle Tx_{n}p,Jx_{n}JTx_{n}\rangle \ge 0\) and hence
(1) Assume that \((Cu)\cup C\subset B_{r}\) for some \(r>0\). It follows from Lemma 13 that \(\underline{g}_{r}(\p_{n}x_{n}\)\le \delta _{n}\). By Lemma 11, we have \(V(p,x_{n})\le \overline{g}_{r}(\px_{n}\)\). This implies that
This implies that
In particular, \(\limsup_{n}\x_{n}Tx_{n}\\le \underline{g}^{1}_{r}(\overline{g}_{r}( \underline{g}_{r}^{1}(\delta _{0})))\).
(2) We assume that \(\delta _{0}=0\) and \(IT\) is strongly closed at zero. Note that \(\x_{n}u\^{2}\le \p_{n}u\^{2}+\delta _{n}\). In particular, \(\{x_{n}\}\) is bounded. We prove that \(x_{n}\rightharpoonup p\). Suppose that \(\{x_{n_{k}}\}\) is a subsequence of \(\{x_{n}\}\) such that \(x_{n_{k}}\rightharpoonup q\) for some \(q\in E\). It follows that \(q\in \bigcap_{n=1}^{\infty }C_{n}\) and \(\qu\^{2}\le \liminf_{k}\x_{n_{k}}u\^{2}\le \limsup_{k}\x_{n_{k}}u \^{2}\le \lim_{k}\p_{n_{k}}u\^{2}=\pu\^{2}\). Hence, \(q=p\). Moreover, we have \(\lim_{n}\x_{n}u\=\pu\\). It follows from the Kadec–Klee property and \(x_{n}u\rightharpoonup pu\) that \(x_{n}u\to pu\) and hence \(x_{n}\to p\). It follows from the uniform convexity of E and \(\lim_{n}V(p,x_{n})=0\) that \(\lim_{n}\x_{n}Tx_{n}\=0\). Since \(IT\) is strongly closed at zero, we have \(p\in \operatorname{Fix}(T)\subset \bigcap_{n=1}^{\infty }C_{n}\). Note that \(\operatorname{Fix}(T)\) is closed and convex (see Lemma 1). It follows from Lemma 4 that \(x_{n}\to p=P_{\operatorname{Fix}(T)}u\). □
Theorem 18
Suppose that E is a uniformly smooth and uniformly convex Banach space and C is a closed convex subset of E. Suppose that \(T:C\to E\) is a cutter mapping of type (Q). Suppose that \(\{\delta _{n}\}\) is a sequence in \([0,\infty )\) with \(\delta _{0}:=\limsup_{n}\delta _{n}\). For given \(u\in E\), a sequence \(\{x_{n}\}\subset C\) is generated as follows: \(x_{1}\in C\), \(C_{1}:=C\) and
for all \(n\ge 1\). Then the following statements are true:

(1)
If \(C\subset B_{r}\) for some \(r>0\), then \(\limsup_{n}\x_{n}Tx_{n}\\le \underline{g}^{1}_{r}(\overline{g}_{r}( \underline{g}_{r}^{1}(\delta _{0})))\), where \(\underline{g}_{r}\) and \(\overline{g}_{r}\) are defined by Lemma 10;

(2)
If \(\delta _{0}=0\) and \(IT\) is strongly closed at zero, then \(x_{n}\to \varPi _{\operatorname{Fix}(T)}u\).
Proof
First, we note that each \(C_{n}\) is nonempty because \(\operatorname{Fix}(T)\subset C_{n}\). Moreover, it is clear that each \(C_{n}\) is closed and convex. For convenience, we write \(\pi _{n}:=\varPi _{C_{n}}u\) and \(\pi :=\varPi _{\bigcap _{n=1}^{\infty }C_{n}}u\). It follows from \(\pi \in C_{n+1}\) that
and hence
Note that \(\pi _{n}\to \pi \) (see Lemma 8). By Lemma 12, we have \(V(x_{n},\pi _{n})\le \delta _{n}\).
(1) Suppose that \(C\subset B_{r}\) for some \(r>0\). It follows from Lemma 11 that \(V(\pi ,x_{n})\le \overline{g}_{r}(\\pi x_{n}\)\) and \(\underline{g}_{r}(\\pi x_{n}\)\le V(x_{n},\pi _{n})\le \delta _{n}\). In particular,
This implies that
In particular, \(\limsup_{n}\x_{n}Tx_{n}\\le \underline{g}^{1}_{r}(\overline{g}_{r}( \underline{g}_{r}^{1}(\delta _{0})))\).
(2) We assume that \(\delta _{0}=0\) and \(IT\) is strongly closed at zero. Since \(\delta _{0}=0\), we have \(\lim_{n}V(x_{n},\pi _{n})=0\). It follows from Lemma 3 that \(\lim_{n}\x_{n}\pi _{n}\=0\). In particular, \(\lim_{n}\x_{n}\pi \=0\). Now, we have \(\lim_{n}V(Tx_{n},x_{n})\le \lim_{n}V(\pi ,x_{n})=0\). It follows from the uniform convexity of E that \(\lim_{n}\x_{n}Tx_{n}\=0\). Since \(IT\) is strongly closed at zero, we have \(\pi \in \operatorname{Fix}(T)\subset \bigcap_{n=1}^{\infty }C_{n}\). Note that \(\operatorname{Fix}(T)\) is closed and convex (see Lemma 1). It follows from Lemma 7 that \(x_{n}\to \pi =\varPi _{\operatorname{Fix}(T)}u\). □
Remark 19
Our Theorem 17 and Theorem 18 generalize Theorem 4.1 of [12] and Theorem 4.1 of [11], respectively. In fact, the mapping of type (Q) in [11, 12] is replaced by the cutter mapping of type (Q).
3.4 Cutter mappings of type (R)
Suppose that \(V^{*}:E^{*}\times E^{*}\to [0,\infty )\) is defined by
Note that for \(x,y\in E\) we have
Inspired by the work of Honda et al. [7], we obtain the following results.
Lemma 20
Suppose that C is a nonempty subset of a smooth, strictly convex, and reflexive Banach space E. Suppose that \(T:C\to E\) is a mapping, and we define \(T^{*}:JC\to E^{*}\) by
Then the following statements are true:

(1)
\(J\operatorname{Fix}(T)=\operatorname{Fix}(T^{*})\);

(2)
T is a cutter mapping of type (Q) if and only if \(T^{*}\) is a cutter mapping of type (R);

(3)
T is a cutter mapping of type (R) if and only if \(T^{*}\) is a cutter mapping of type (Q).
Proof
(1) Suppose that \(p\in C\) and \(p^{*}:=Jp\). If \(p=Tp\), then \(T^{*}p^{*}=JTJ^{1}(Jp)=Jp=p^{*}\). If \(p^{*}=T^{*}p\), then \(Tp=J^{1}T^{*}Jp=J^{1}T^{*}p^{*}=J^{1}p^{*}=p\).
(2) Suppose that T is a cutter mapping of type (Q). To see that \(T^{*}\) is a cutter mapping of type (R), let \(x^{*}\in JC\) and \(p^{*}\in \operatorname{Fix}(T^{*})\). Then \(x^{*}=Jx\) and \(p^{*}=Jp\) for some \((x,p)\in C\times \operatorname{Fix}(T)\). It follows that
On the other hand, we assume that \(T^{*}\) is a cutter mapping of type (R). To see that T is a cutter mapping of type (Q), let \((x,p)\in C\times \operatorname{Fix}(T)\). We write \(x^{*}=Jx\) and \(p^{*}=Jp\). It follows that \(x^{*}\in JC\) and \(p^{*}\in \operatorname{Fix}(T^{*})\). Moreover, we have
(3) follows similarly. □
Based on Lemma 20 and Theorem 17, we obtain the following result.
Theorem 21
Suppose that E is a uniformly smooth and uniformly convex Banach space. Suppose that C is a subset of E such that JC is closed and convex. Suppose that \(T:C\to E\) is a cutter mapping of type (R). Suppose that \(\{\delta _{n}\}\) is a sequence of nonnegative real numbers such that \(\delta _{0}:=\limsup_{n}\delta _{n}\). For given \(u\in E\), a sequence \(\{x_{n}\}\subset C\) is generated as follows: \(x_{1}\in C\), \(C_{1}:=C\), and
for all \(n\ge 1\). Then the following statements are true:

(1)
If \((JCJu)\cup JC\subset B_{r}^{*}\) for some \(r>0\), then \(\limsup_{n}\x_{n}Tx_{n}\\le \underline{g}^{1}_{r}(\overline{g}^{*}_{r}({ \underline{g}^{*}_{r}}^{1}(\delta _{0})))\), where \(\underline{g}_{r}\) is defined by Lemma 10 (as E is uniformly convex) and \(\underline{g}^{*}_{r}\) and \(\overline{g}^{*}_{r}\) are defined by Lemma 10 (as \(E^{*}\) is uniformly convex and uniformly smooth, respectively). Here, \(B_{r}^{*}:=\{x^{*}\in E^{*}:\x^{*}\\le r\}\).

(2)
If \(\delta _{0}=0\) and \(IT\) is strongly closed at zero, then \(x_{n}\to J^{1}P^{*}_{J\operatorname{Fix}(T)}Ju\), where \(P^{*}_{J\operatorname{Fix}(T)}\) is a metric projection of \(E^{*}\) onto \(J\operatorname{Fix}(T)\).
Proof
Set \(T^{*}:=JTJ^{1}\). Then \(T^{*}:JC\to E^{*}\) is a cutter mapping of type (Q). Let \(u^{*}=Ju\). Define two sequences \(\{x_{n}^{*}\}\subset JC\) and \(\{C^{*}_{n}\}\) by
It follows that
and
(1) Suppose that \((JCJu)\cup JC\subset B_{r}^{*}\) for some \(r>0\). Using Theorem 17 for cutter mappings of type (Q) gives
This implies that
(2) We assume that \(\delta _{0}=0\) and \(IT\) is strongly closed at zero. It follows from the uniform convexity and uniform smoothness of E that \(I^{*}T^{*}\) is strongly closed at zero, where \(I^{*}\) is an identity mapping of \(E^{*}\). Using Theorem 17 for cutter mappings of type (Q) gives . Hence, \(x_{n}=J^{1}x^{*}_{n}\to J^{1}P^{*}_{J\operatorname{Fix}(T)}Ju\). □
Based on Lemma 20 and Theorem 18, we obtain the following result.
Theorem 22
Suppose that E is a uniformly smooth and uniformly convex Banach space. Suppose that C is a subset of E such that JC is closed and convex. Suppose that \(T:C\to E\) is a cutter mapping of type (R). Suppose that \(\{\delta _{n}\}\) is a sequence of nonnegative real numbers such that \(\delta _{0}:=\limsup_{n}\delta _{n}\). For given \(u\in E\), a sequence \(\{x_{n}\}\subset C\) is generated as follows: \(x_{1}\in C\), \(C_{1}:=C\), and
for all \(n\ge 1\). Then the following statements are true:

(1)
If \(C\subset B_{r}\) for some \(r>0\), then \(\limsup_{n}\x_{n}Tx_{n}\\le \underline{g}^{1}_{r}(\overline{g}^{*}_{r}({ \underline{g}^{*}_{r}}^{1}(\delta _{0})))\), where \(\underline{g}_{r}\) is defined by Lemma 10 (as E is uniformly convex) and \(\underline{g}^{*}_{r}\) and \(\overline{g}^{*}_{r}\) are defined by Lemma 10 (as \(E^{*}\) is uniformly convex and uniformly smooth, respectively);

(2)
If \(\delta _{0}=0\) and \(IT\) is strongly closed at zero, then \(x_{n}\to R_{\operatorname{Fix}(T)}u\).
Proof
Set \(T^{*}:=JTJ^{1}\). Then \(T^{*}:JC\to E^{*}\) is a cutter mapping of type (Q). Let \(u^{*}=Ju\). Define two sequences \(\{x_{n}^{*}\}\subset JC\) and \(\{C^{*}_{n}\}\) by
It follows that
and
(1) Suppose that \(C\subset B_{r}\) for some \(r>0\). Using Theorem 18 for cutter mappings of type (Q) gives
This implies that
(2) We assume that \(\delta _{0}=0\) and \(IT\) is strongly closed at zero. Note that \(I^{*}T^{*}\) is strongly closed at zero, where \(I^{*}\) is the identity mapping of \(E^{*}\). Using Theorem 18 for cutter mappings of type (Q) gives \(x_{n}^{*}\to \varPi ^{*}_{\operatorname{Fix}(T^{*})}u^{*}\), where \(\varPi ^{*}_{\operatorname{Fix}(T^{*})}\) is the generalized projection from \(E^{*}\) onto \(\operatorname{Fix}(T^{*})\). It follows from Lemma 9 that
□
Remark 23
Our Theorem 21 and Theorem 22 generalize Theorem 5.1 of [12] and Theorem 5.1 of [11], respectively. In fact, the mapping of type (R) in [11, 12] is replaced by the cutter mapping of type (R). It is worth mentioning that the bound of the limit superior \(\limsup_{n}\x_{n}Tx_{n}\\) in [11, 12] is \(\underline{g}_{r}^{1}(\overline{g}^{*}_{r}(\underline{g}^{*1}_{r}( \overline{g}^{*}_{r}({\underline{g}^{*}_{r}}^{1}(\delta _{0})))))\).
4 Deduced results for maximal monotone operators
We now discuss the problem of finding a zero of maximal monotone operators in a Banach space ([8–10]). Suppose that E is a smooth, strictly convex, and reflexive Banach space. An operator \(A\subset E\times E^{*}\) with domain \(\operatorname{dom}(A):=\{x\in E:Ax\neq \varnothing \}\) and range \(\operatorname{ran}(A):=\bigcup \{Ax:x\in E\}\) is monotone if \(\langle xy,x^{*}y^{*}\rangle \ge 0\) for all \((x,x^{*}),(y,y^{*})\in A\). A monotone operator \(A\subset E\times E^{*}\) is maximal if \(A'=A\) whenever \(A'\subset E\times E^{*}\) is monotone and \(A\subset A'\). We are interested in finding a zero of a maximal monotone operator, that is, an element \(u\in E\) such that \((u,0)\in A\). The set of zeros of A is denoted by \(\operatorname{Zer}(A)\).
Suppose that \(A\subset E\times E^{*}\) and \(B\subset E^{*}\times E(=E^{*}\times (E^{*})^{*})\) are maximal monotone. It is known that \(\overline{\operatorname{dom}(A)}\) and \(\overline{\operatorname{dom}(B)}\) are convex; and
for all \(\lambda >0\). Here, I is the identity operator. In particular, the following three singlevalued operators are well defined:
It is known that

(a)
\(\operatorname{Fix}(P_{\lambda})=\operatorname{Fix}(Q_{\lambda})= \operatorname{Zer}(A)\) and \(\operatorname{Fix}(R_{\lambda})=\operatorname{Zer}(BJ)\).

(b)
\(P_{\lambda}\), \(Q_{\lambda}\), and \(Q_{\lambda}\) are mappings of types (P), (Q), and (R), respectively.

(c)
If \(\operatorname{Zer}(A)\neq \varnothing \), then \(P_{\lambda}\) and \(Q_{\lambda}\) are cutter mappings of types (P) and (Q), respectively, and both \(IP_{\lambda}\) and \(IQ_{\lambda}\) are strongly closed at zero.

(d)
If \(\operatorname{Zer}(BJ)\neq \varnothing \), then \(R_{\lambda}\) is a cutter mapping of type (R), and \(IR_{\lambda}\) is strongly closed at zero.
We immediately obtain the following corollaries.
4.1 Results for the resolvent \(P_{\lambda}\)
Corollary 24
Suppose that E is a smooth and uniformly convex Banach space and \(A\subset E\times E^{*}\) is a maximal monotone operator such that \(\operatorname{Zer}(A)\neq \varnothing \). Suppose that \(u\in E\) and \(\lambda \in (0,\infty )\). Suppose that \(\{\delta _{n}\}\) is a sequence of nonnegative real numbers such that \(\delta _{0}:=\limsup_{n}\delta _{n}\). Construct a sequence \(\{x_{n}\}\subset \overline{\operatorname{dom}(A)}\) as follows: \(x_{1}\in \overline{\operatorname{dom}(A)}\), \(C_{1}:=\overline{\operatorname{dom}(A)}\), and
for all \(n\ge 1\). Then the following statements are true:

(1)
If \(\overline{\operatorname{dom}(A)}u\subset B_{r}\) for some \(r>0\), then \(\limsup_{n}\x_{n}P_{\lambda }x_{n}\\le \underline{g}_{r}^{1}( \delta _{0})\), where \(\underline{g}_{r}\) is defined by Lemma 10;

(2)
If \(\delta _{0}=0\), then \(x_{n}\to P_{\operatorname{Zer}(A)}u\).
Corollary 25
Suppose that E is a smooth and uniformly convex Banach space and \(A\subset E\times E^{*}\) is a maximal monotone operator such that \(\operatorname{Zer}(A)\neq \varnothing \). Suppose that \(u\in E\) and \(\lambda \in (0,\infty )\). Suppose that \(\{\delta _{n}\}\) is a sequence of nonnegative real numbers such that \(\delta _{0}:=\limsup_{n}\delta _{n}\). Construct a sequence \(\{x_{n}\}\subset \overline{\operatorname{dom}(A)}\) as follows: \(x_{1}\in \overline{\operatorname{dom}(A)}\), \(C_{1}:=\overline{\operatorname{dom}(A)}\), and
for all \(n\ge 1\). Then the following statements are true:

(1)
If \(\overline{\operatorname{dom}(A)}\subset B_{r}\) for some \(r>0\), then \(\limsup_{n}\x_{n}P_{\lambda }x_{n}\\le \underline{g}_{r}^{1}( \delta _{0})\), where \(\underline{g}_{r}\) is defined by Lemma 10;

(2)
If \(\delta _{0}=0\), then \(x_{n}\to \varPi _{\operatorname{Zer}(A)}u\).
4.2 Results for the resolvent \(Q_{\lambda}\)
Corollary 26
Suppose that E is a uniformly smooth and uniformly convex Banach space and that \(A\subset E\times E^{*}\) is a maximal monotone operator such that \(\operatorname{Zer}(A)\neq \varnothing \). Suppose that \(u\in E\) and \(\lambda \in (0,\infty )\). Suppose that \(\{\delta _{n}\}\) is a sequence of nonnegative real numbers such that \(\delta _{0}:=\limsup_{n}\delta _{n}\). Construct a sequence \(\{x_{n}\}\subset \overline{\operatorname{dom}(A)}\) as follows: \(x_{1}\in \overline{\operatorname{dom}(A)}\), \(C_{1}:=\overline{\operatorname{dom}(A)}\), and
for all \(n\ge 1\). Then the following statements are true:

(1)
If \((\overline{\operatorname{dom}(A)}u)\cup \overline{\operatorname{dom}(A)} \subset B_{r}\) for some \(r>0\), then \(\limsup_{n}\x_{n}Q_{\lambda }x_{n}\\le \underline{g}^{1}_{r}( \overline{g}_{r}(\underline{g}_{r}^{1}(\delta _{0})))\), where \(\underline{g}_{r}\) and \(\overline{g}_{r}\) are defined by Lemma 10;

(2)
If \(\delta _{0}=0\), then \(x_{n}\to P_{\operatorname{Zer}(A)}u\).
Corollary 27
Suppose that E is a uniformly smooth and uniformly convex Banach space and that \(A\subset E\times E^{*}\) is a maximal monotone operator such that \(\operatorname{Zer}(A)\neq \varnothing \). Suppose that \(u\in E\) and \(\lambda \in (0,\infty )\). Suppose that \(\{\delta _{n}\}\) is a sequence of nonnegative real numbers such that \(\delta _{0}:=\limsup_{n}\delta _{n}\). Construct a sequence \(\{x_{n}\}\subset \overline{\operatorname{dom}(A)}\) as follows: \(x_{1}\in \overline{\operatorname{dom}(A)}\), \(C_{1}:=\overline{\operatorname{dom}(A)}\), and
for all \(n\ge 1\). Then the following statements are true:

(1)
If \(\overline{\operatorname{dom}(A)}\subset B_{r}\) for some \(r>0\), then \(\limsup_{n}\x_{n}Q_{\lambda }x_{n}\\le \underline{g}^{1}_{r}( \overline{g}_{r}(\underline{g}_{r}^{1}(\delta _{0})))\), where \(\underline{g}_{r}\) and \(\overline{g}_{r}\) are defined by Lemma 10;

(2)
If \(\delta _{0}=0\), then \(x_{n}\to \varPi _{\operatorname{Zer}(A)}u\).
4.3 Results for the resolvent \(R_{\lambda}\)
Corollary 28
Suppose that E is a uniformly smooth and uniformly convex Banach space and \(B\subset E^{*}\times E\) such that \(\operatorname{Zer}(BJ)\neq \varnothing \). Suppose that \(u\in E\) and \(\lambda \in (0,\infty )\). Suppose that \(\{\delta _{n}\}\) is a sequence of nonnegative real numbers such that \(\delta _{0}:=\limsup_{n}\delta _{n}\). Construct a sequence \(\{x_{n}\}\subset \overline{\operatorname{dom}(BJ)}\) as follows: \(x_{1}\in \overline{\operatorname{dom}(BJ)}\), \(C_{1}:=\overline{\operatorname{dom}(BJ)}\), and
for all \(n\ge 1\). Then the following statements are true:

(1)
If \((J\overline{\operatorname{dom}(BJ)}Ju)\cup J \overline{\operatorname{dom}(BJ)} \subset B_{r}^{*}\) for some \(r>0\), then \(\limsup_{n}\x_{n}R_{\lambda }x_{n}\\le \underline{g}^{1}_{r}( \overline{g}^{*}_{r}({\underline{g}^{*}_{r}}^{1}(\delta _{0})))\), where \(\underline{g}_{r}\) is defined by Lemma 10 (as E is uniformly convex) and \(\underline{g}^{*}_{r}\) and \(\overline{g}^{*}_{r}\) are defined by Lemma 10 (as \(E^{*}\) is uniformly convex and uniformly smooth, respectively);

(2)
If \(\delta _{0}=0\), then \(x_{n}\to J^{1}P^{*}_{J\operatorname{Zer}(BJ)}Ju\), where \(P^{*}_{J\operatorname{Zer}(BJ)}\) is a metric projection of \(E^{*}\) onto \(J\operatorname{Zer}(BJ)\).
Corollary 29
Suppose that E is a uniformly smooth and uniformly convex Banach space and \(B\subset E^{*}\times E\) such that \(\operatorname{Zer}(BJ)\neq \varnothing \). Suppose that \(u\in E\) and \(\lambda \in (0,\infty )\). Suppose that \(\{\delta _{n}\}\) is a sequence of nonnegative real numbers such that \(\delta _{0}:=\limsup_{n}\delta _{n}\). Construct a sequence \(\{x_{n}\}\subset \overline{\operatorname{dom}(BJ)}\) as follows: \(x_{1}\in \overline{\operatorname{dom}(BJ)}\), \(C_{1}:=\overline{\operatorname{dom}(BJ)}\), and
for all \(n\ge 1\). Then the following statements are true:

(1)
If \(\overline{\operatorname{dom}(BJ)}\subset B_{r}\) for some \(r>0\), then \(\limsup_{n}\x_{n}R_{\lambda }x_{n}\\le \underline{g}^{1}_{r}( \overline{g}^{*}_{r}({\underline{g}^{*}_{r}}^{1}(\delta _{0})))\), where \(\underline{g}_{r}\) is defined by Lemma 10 (as E is uniformly convex) and \(\underline{g}^{*}_{r}\) and \(\overline{g}^{*}_{r}\) are defined by Lemma 10 (as \(E^{*}\) is uniformly convex and uniformly smooth, respectively);

(2)
If \(\delta _{0}=0\), then \(x_{n}\to R_{\operatorname{Zer}(BJ)}u\).
4.4 Applications to convex minimization problems
We discuss the convex minimization problem in a Banach space. This problem is to find a minimizer of a proper lower semicontinuous convex function in a Banach space. Suppose that E is a reflexive, smooth, and strictly convex Banach space with its dual \(E^{*}\) and \(f:E \to (\infty , \infty ]\) and \(f^{*}:E^{*} \to (\infty , \infty ]\) are proper lower semicontinuous convex functions. Then the subdifferentials of f and \(f^{*}\) are defined as follows:
By Rockafellar’s theorem [20, 21], the subdifferentials \(\partial f \subset E \times E^{*}\) and \(\partial f^{*} \subset E^{*} \times E\) are maximal monotone. It is easy to see that \(\operatorname{Zer}(\partial f)=\operatorname{argmin} \{f(x):x \in E \}\) and \(\operatorname{Zer}(\partial f^{*})=\operatorname{argmin} \{f^{*}(x^{*}):x^{*} \in E^{*}\}\).
Fix \(\lambda >0\) and \(z\in E\). Let \(P_{\lambda}\) and \(Q_{\lambda}\) be the resolvent of ∂f, and let \(R_{\lambda}\) be the resolvent of \(\partial f^{*}\), then we know that
See, for instance, [8, 10, 22]. As a direct consequence of our theorems, we can show the following applications.
Corollary 30
Suppose that E is a smooth and uniformly convex Banach space and \(f:E \to (\infty , \infty ]\) is a proper lower semicontinuous convex function such that \(\operatorname{Zer}(\partial f)\ne \emptyset \). Suppose that \(u\in E\) and \(\lambda \in (0,\infty )\). Suppose that \(\{\delta _{n}\}\) is a nonnegative real sequence such that \(\delta _{0}:=\limsup_{n} \delta _{n}\). Construct a sequence \(\{x_{n}\} \subset \overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f)}\) as follows: \(x_{1} \in \overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f)}\), \(C_{1} =\overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f)}\), and
for all \(n \geq 1\). Then the following statements are true:

(1)
If \(\overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f)}u\subset B_{r}\) for some \(r>0\), then \(\limsup_{n}\Vert x_{n}y_{n}\Vert \leq \underline{g}_{r}^{1}( \delta _{0})\), where \(\underline{g}_{r}\) is defined by Lemma 10;

(2)
If \(\delta _{0}=0\), then \(x_{n}\to P_{\operatorname{Zer}(\partial f)}u\).
Corollary 31
Suppose that E is a smooth and uniformly convex Banach space and \(f:E \to (\infty , \infty ]\) is a proper lower semicontinuous convex function such that \(\operatorname{Zer}(\partial f)\ne \emptyset \). Suppose that \(u\in E\) and \(\lambda \in (0,\infty )\). Suppose that \(\{\delta _{n}\}\) is a nonnegative real sequence such that \(\delta _{0}:=\limsup_{n} \delta _{n}\). Construct a sequence \(\{x_{n}\} \subset \overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f)}\) as follows: \(x_{1} \in \overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f)}\), \(C_{1} =\overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f)}\), and
for all \(n \geq 1\). Then the following statements are true:

(1)
If \(\overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f)}\subset B_{r}\) for some \(r>0\), then \(\limsup_{n}\Vert x_{n}y_{n}\Vert \leq \underline{g}_{r}^{1}( \delta _{0})\), where \(\underline{g}_{r}\) is defined by Lemma 10;

(2)
If \(\delta _{0}=0\), then \(x_{n}\to \varPi _{\operatorname{Zer}(\partial f)}u\).
Corollary 32
Suppose that E is a uniformly smooth and uniformly convex Banach space and \(f:E \to (\infty , \infty ]\) is a proper lower semicontinuous convex function such that \(\operatorname{Zer}(\partial f)\ne \emptyset \). Suppose that \(u\in E\) and \(\lambda \in (0,\infty )\). Suppose that \(\{\delta _{n}\}\) is a nonnegative real sequence such that \(\delta _{0}:=\limsup_{n} \delta _{n}\). Construct a sequence \(\{x_{n}\} \subset \overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f)}\) as follows: \(x_{1} \in \overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f)}\), \(C_{1} =\overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f)}\), and
for all \(n \geq 1\). Then the following statements are true:

(1)
If \((\overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f)}u)\cup \overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f)} \subset B_{r}\) for some \(r>0\), then \(\limsup_{n}\Vert x_{n}y_{n}\Vert \leq \underline{g}_{r}^{1}( \overline{g}_{r}(\underline{g}_{r}^{1}(\delta _{0})))\), where \(\underline{g}_{r}\) and \(\overline{g}_{r}\) are defined by Lemma 10;

(2)
If \(\delta _{0}=0\), then \(x_{n}\to P_{\operatorname{Zer}(\partial f)}u\).
Corollary 33
Suppose that E is a uniformly smooth and uniformly convex Banach space and \(f:E \to (\infty , \infty ]\) is a proper lower semicontinuous convex function such that \(\operatorname{Zer}(\partial f)\ne \emptyset \). Suppose that \(u\in E\) and \(\lambda \in (0,\infty )\). Suppose that \(\{\delta _{n}\}\) is a nonnegative real sequence such that \(\delta _{0}:=\limsup_{n} \delta _{n}\). Construct a sequence \(\{x_{n}\} \subset \overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f)}\) as follows: \(x_{1} \in \overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f)}\), \(C_{1} =\overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f)}\), and
for all \(n \geq 1\). Then the following statements are true:

(1)
If \(\overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f)}\subset B_{r}\) for some \(r>0\), then \(\limsup_{n}\Vert x_{n}y_{n}\Vert \leq \underline{g}_{r}^{1}( \overline{g}_{r}(\underline{g}_{r}^{1}(\delta _{0})))\), where \(\underline{g}_{r}\) and \(\overline{g}_{r}\) are defined by Lemma 10;

(2)
If \(\delta _{0}=0\), then \(x_{n}\to \varPi _{\operatorname{Zer}(\partial f)}u\).
Corollary 34
Suppose that E is a uniformly smooth and uniformly convex Banach space and \(f^{*}:E^{*} \to (\infty , \infty ]\) is a proper lower semicontinuous convex function such that \(\operatorname{Zer}(\partial f^{*})\ne \emptyset \). Suppose that \(u\in E\) and \(\lambda \in (0,\infty )\). Suppose that \(\{\delta _{n}\}\) is a nonnegative real sequence such that \(\delta _{0}:=\limsup_{n} \delta _{n}\). Construct a sequence \(\{x_{n}\} \subset \overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f^{*}J)}\) as follows: \(x_{1} \in \overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f^{*}J)}\), \(C_{1} =\overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f^{*}J)}\), and
for all \(n \geq 1\). Then the following statements are true:

(1)
If \((J\overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f^{*}J)}Ju)\cup J \overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f^{*}J)}\subset B^{*}_{r}\) for some \(r>0\), then \(\limsup_{n}\Vert x_{n}y_{n}\Vert \leq \underline{g}_{r}^{1}( \overline{g}^{*}_{r}({\underline{g}^{*}_{r}}^{1}(\delta _{0})))\), where \(\underline{g}_{r}\) is defined by Lemma 10 (as E is uniformly convex) and; \(\underline{g}^{*}_{r}\) and \(\overline{g}^{*}_{r}\) are defined by Lemma 10 (as \(E^{*}\) is uniformly convex and uniformly smooth, respectively);

(2)
If \(\delta _{0}=0\), then \(x_{n}\to J^{1}P^{*}_{J\operatorname{Zer}(\partial f^{*}J)}Ju\), where \(P^{*}_{J\operatorname{Zer}(\partial f^{*}J)}\) is a metric projection of \(E^{*}\) onto \(J\operatorname{Zer}(\partial f^{*}J)\).
Corollary 35
Suppose that E is a uniformly smooth and uniformly convex Banach space and \(f^{*}:E^{*} \to (\infty , \infty ]\) is a proper lower semicontinuous convex function such that \(\operatorname{Zer}(\partial f^{*})\ne \emptyset \). Suppose that \(u\in E\) and \(\lambda \in (0,\infty )\). Suppose that \(\{\delta _{n}\}\) is a nonnegative real sequence such that \(\delta _{0}:=\limsup_{n} \delta _{n}\). Construct a sequence \(\{x_{n}\} \subset \overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f^{*}J)}\) as follows: \(x_{1} \in \overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f^{*}J)}\), \(C_{1} =\overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f^{*}J)}\), and
for all \(n \geq 1\). Then the following statements are true:

(1)
If \(\overline{\operatorname{dom}(\partial f^{*}J)}\subset B_{r}\) for some \(r>0\), then \(\limsup_{n}\Vert x_{n}y_{n}\Vert \leq \underline{g}_{r}^{1}( \overline{g}^{*}_{r}({\underline{g}^{*}_{r}}^{1}(\delta _{0})))\), where \(\underline{g}_{r}\) is defined by Lemma 10 (as E is uniformly convex) and; \(\underline{g}^{*}_{r}\) and \(\overline{g}^{*}_{r}\) are defined by Lemma 10 (as \(E^{*}\) is uniformly convex and uniformly smooth, respectively);

(2)
If \(\delta _{0}=0\), then \(x_{n}\to R_{\operatorname{Zer}(\partial f^{*}J)}u\).
5 Conclusions
In this paper, we prove two key inequalities for metric projections and generalized projections in a certain Banach space. Using them, we obtain some asymptotic behavior of a sequence generated by the shrinking projection method introduced by Takahashi et al. [24] for cutter mappings of types (P), (Q), and (R). The mappings studied in this paper are more general than the ones in [8, 10]. In particular, the results in [8, 10] are both extended and supplemented. Finally, we discuss our results for finding a zero of maximal monotone operator and a minimizer of convex function defined on a Banach space. It would be interesting to extend our work to the class of quasinonexpansive mappings of Bregman type.
Availability of data and materials
Not applicable.
References
Alber, Y.I.: Metric and generalized projection operators in Banach spaces: properties and applications. In: Theory and Applications of Nonlinear Operators of Accretive and Monotone Type. Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math., vol. 178, pp. 15–50. Dekker, New York (1996)
Aoyama, K., Kohsaka, F., Takahashi, W.: Three generalizations of firmly nonexpansive mappings: their relations and continuity properties. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 10, 131–147 (2009)
Atalan, Y.: On a new fixed point iterative algorithm for general variational inequalities. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 20, 2371–2386 (2019)
Chairatsiripong, C., Yambangwai, D., Thianwan, T.: New iterative methods for nonlinear operators as concerns convex programming applicable in differential problems, image deblurring, and signal recovering problems. Math. Methods Appl. Sci. 46, 3332–3355 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1002/mma.8693
Cioranescu, I.: Geometry of Banach Spaces, Duality Mappings and Nonlinear Problems. Mathematics and Its Applications, vol. 62. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht (1990)
Hacıoğlu, E., Gürsoy, F., Maldar, S., Atalan, Y., Milovanović, G.V.: Iterative approximation of fixed points and applications to twopoint secondorder boundary value problems and to machine learning. Appl. Numer. Math. 167, 143–172 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnum.2021.04.020
Honda, T., Ibaraki, T., Takahashi, W.: Duality theorems and convergence theorems for nonlinear mappings in Banach spaces and applications. Int. J. Math. Stat. 6, 46–64 (2010)
Ibaraki, T.: Approximation of a zero point of monotone operators with nonsummable errors. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 2016 48 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s1366301605352
Ibaraki, T.: Iterative approximation with errors of zero points of maximal monotone operators in a Hilbert space. Linear Nonlinear Anal. 3, 171–178 (2017)
Ibaraki, T.: Iterative approximation with errors of zero points of monotone operators in a Banach space. Yokohama Math. J. 63, 91–109 (2017). http://hdl.handle.net/10131/00011742
Ibaraki, T., Kajiba, S.: A shrinking projection method for generalized firmly nonexpansive mappings with nonsummable errors. Josai Math. Monogr. 11, 105–120 (2018)
Ibaraki, T., Kimura, Y.: Approximation of a fixed point of generalized firmly nonexpansive mappings with nonsummable errors. Linear Nonlinear Anal. 2, 301–310 (2016)
Ibaraki, T., Kimura, Y., Takahashi, W.: Convergence theorems for generalized projections and maximal monotone operators in Banach spaces. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 2003, 621–629 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1155/S1085337503207065
Kamimura, S., Takahashi, W.: Strong convergence of a proximaltype algorithm in a Banach space. SIAM J. Optim. 13, 938–945 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1137/S105262340139611X
Kimura, Y.: Approximation of a fixed point of nonlinear mappings with nonsummable errors in a Banach space. In: Banach and Function Spaces IV (ISBFS 2012), pp. 303–311. Yokohama Publishers, Yokohama (2014)
Kimura, Y., Saejung, S.: Strong convergence for a common fixed point of two different generalizations of cutter operators. Linear Nonlinear Anal. 1, 53–65 (2015)
Kohsaka, F., Takahashi, W.: Generalized nonexpansive retractions and a proximaltype algorithm in Banach spaces. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 8, 197–209 (2007)
Maldar, S.: Iterative algorithms of generalized nonexpansive mappings and monotone operators with application to convex minimization problem. J. Appl. Math. Comput. 68, 1841–1868 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s1219002101593y
Maldar, S., Gürsoy, F., Atalan, Y., Abbas, M.: On a threestep iteration process for multivalued ReichSuzuki type αnonexpansive and contractive mappings. J. Appl. Math. Comput. 68, 863–883 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12190021015527
Rockafellar, R.T.: Characterization of the subdifferentials of convex functions. Pac. J. Math. 17, 497–510 (1966)
Rockafellar, R.T.: On the maximal monotonicity of subdifferential mappings. Pac. J. Math. 33, 209–216 (1970)
Rockafellar, R.T.: On the virtual convexity of the domain and range of a nonlinear maximal monotone operator. Math. Ann. 185, 81–90 (1970). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01359698
Saejung, S.: Fixed Point Algorithms and Related Topics. Yokohama Publishers, Yokohama (2017)
Takahashi, W., Takeuchi, Y., Kubota, R.: Strong convergence theorems by hybrid methods for families of nonexpansive mappings in Hilbert spaces. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 341, 276–286 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmaa.2007.09.062
Thianwan, T.: Mixed type algorithms for asymptotically nonexpansive mappings in hyperbolic spaces. Eur. J. Pure Appl. Math. 14(3), 650–665 (2021). https://doi.org/10.29020/nybg.ejpam.v14i3.4005
Tsukada, M.: Convergence of best approximations in a smooth Banach space. J. Approx. Theory 40, 301–309 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1016/00219045(84)900030
Xu, H.K.: Inequalities in Banach spaces with applications. Nonlinear Anal. 16, 1127–1138 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1016/0362546X(91)90200K
Yambangwai, D., Chairatsiripong, C., Thianwan, T.: Iterative manner involving sunny nonexpansive retractions for nonlinear operators from the perspective of convex programming as applicable to differential problems, image restoration and signal recovery. AIMS Math. 8, 7163–7195 (2023). https://doi.org/10.3934/math.2023361
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the reviewers for their comments and letting them know of some interesting articles.
Funding
TI was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers JP19K03632, JP19H01479. SS was supported by the Fundamental Fund of Khon Kaen University and the National Science, Research and Innovation Fund (NSRF), Thailand.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
TI and SS have equally made contributions. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare 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 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 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Ibaraki, T., Saejung, S. On shrinking projection method for cutter type mappings with nonsummable errors. J Inequal Appl 2023, 92 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13660023030041
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13660023030041