Strong convergence of an algorithm about strongly quasi nonexpansive mappings

Journal of Natural Sciences Research www.iiste.org
ISSN 2224-3186 (Paper) ISSN 2225-0921 (Online)
Vol.3, No.7, 2013
215
Strong Convergence of an Algorithm about Strongly Quasi-
Nonexpansive Mappings for the Split Common Fixed-Point
Problem in Hilbert Space
Lawan Bulama Mohammed1*
, Abba Auwalu2
and Salihu Afis3
1. Department of Mathematics, Bauchi State University, Gadau, Nigeria
2. College of Remedial and Advanced Studies, P.M.B. 048, Kafin Hausa, Jigawa State, Nigeria
3. Department of Mathematics, Gombe State University, Gombe, Nigeria
*
Corresponding Author Email: lawanbulama@gmail.com
Abstract
Based on the recent work by Censor and Segal (2009 J. Convex Anal.16), and inspired by Moudafi (2010
Inverse Problem 26), in this paper, we study the modified algorithm of Yu and Sheng [29] for the strongly quasi
- nonexpansive operators to solve the split common fixed-point problem (SCFP) in the framework of Hilbert
space. Furthermore we proved the strong convergence for the (SCFPP) by imposing some conditions. Our results
extend and improved/developed some recent result announced.
Keywords: Convex Feasibility, Split Feasibility, Split Common Fixed Point, Strongly Quasi-Nonexpansive
Operator, Iterative Algorithm and Strong Convergence.
1. Introduction
Let 1 2 be a Hilbert spaces, : → be a bounded linear operator and ∗
be an ad joint of A. Given
integer’s p, r ≥ 1 and also given sequence of nonempty, closed, convex subsets of 1 2
respectively, the convex feasibility problem (CFP) is formulated as finding a point ∗
∈ 1 satisfying the
property:
∗
∈ . (1.1)
Note that, CFP (1.1) has received a lot of attention due to its extensive applications in many applied displines,
diverse as approximation theorem, image recovery, signal processing, control theory, biomedical engineering,
communication and geophysics (see [1 - 3] and the reference therein).
The multiple set split feasibility problem (MSSFP) was recently introduced and studied by Censo, Elfving, Kopf
and Bortfeld, see [4] and is formulated as finding a point ∗
∈ 1 with the property:
∗
∈ ∗
∈ (1.2)
If in a MSSFP (1.2) p = r = 1, we get what is called the split feasibility problem (SFP) see [5], which is
formulated as finding a point ∗
∗
∈ ∗
∈ (1.3)
where C and Q are nonempty, closed and convex subsets of 1 2 respectively.
Note that, SFP (1.3) and MSSFP (1.2) model image retrieval (see [5]) and intensity modulated radiation therapy
(see [15, 16]) and have recently been studied by many Researchers [6, 7 and 17-25] and references therein.
The MSSFP (1.2) can be viewed as a special case of the CFP (1.1) since (1.2) can be rewriting as
∗
∈
+
, + = ∗
∈ : ∗
∈ −1
$ %, 1 ≤ ≤ .
However, the methodologies for studying the MSSFP (1.2) are actually different from those for the CFP (1.1) in
order to avoid usage of the inverse of A. In other word, the method for solving CFP (1.1) may not apply to solve

Vol.3, No.7, 2013
216
MSSFP (1.2) straight forwardly without involving the inverse of A. The CQ algorithm of Byne [6; 7] is such an
example where only the operator of A is used without involving the inverse.
Since every closed convex subset of Hilbert space is the fixed point set of its associating projection, the CFP
(1.1) becomes a special case of the common fixed-point problem (CFPP) of finding a point ∗
∈ with
property:
∗
∈ ' (( ). (1.4)
where each, ( : 1 → 2 are some (nonlinear) mapping. Similarly the MSSFP (1.2) becomes a special case of
the split common fixed point problem (SCFPP) [8] of finding a point ∗
∗
∈ ' (* ) ∗
∈ ' (( ), (1.5)
where each, * : 1 → 1 ( = 1, 2, 3 … ) and ( : 2 → 2 ( = 1, 2, 3, … , ) are some nonlinear operators.
If p = r = 1, problem (1.5) is reduces to find a point ∗
∈ 1 with property:
∗
∈ ' (*) ∗
∈ ' (() (1.6)
This is usually called the two-set SCFPP.
The concept of SCFPP in finite dimensional Hilbert space was first introduce by Censor and Segal (see [8]) who
invented an algorithm of the two-set SCFPP which generate a sequence according to the following iterative
procedure:
+1 = *( + . ∗
(( − /) ), ≥ 0, (1.7)
where the initial guess 0 ∈ is choosing arbitrarily and 0 < . ≤ ‖4‖5 .
Inspired by the work of Censor and Segal [8], Moudafi [27] introduced the following algorithm for
6 −demicontractive operator in Hilbert space:
7
8 = + . ∗
(( − /)
+1 = (1 − 9 )8 + 9 *(8 ), ≥ 0
(1.8)
where . ∈ ;0,
( <=)
>
? with @ being the spectral radius of the operator ∗
and 9 ∈ (0,1) 0 ∈ is
choosing arbitrarily. Using fejer-monotone and the demiclosed properties of (/ − *) and (/ − () at origin, in
2010, Moudafi (see [27]) proved convergence theorem based on the work of Censor and Segal [8]. And also in
2011, Moudafi, Sheng and Chen (see [28]) gave their result of pseudo-demicontractive operators for the split
common fixed-point problems. In 2012, Yu and Sheng [29] that modified the algorithm proposed by Moudafi
[27] and they extend the operator to the class of firmly pseudo-demicontractive operator. In this paper, we study
the modified algorithm of Yu and Sheng [29] and we used the strongly quasi nonexpansive operator to obtain the
strong convergence of SCFPP (1.5).
2. Preliminaries
Throughout this paper, we adopt the notation:
• I: the identity operator on Hilbert space H.
• ' ((): the set of fixed point of an operator (: →
• Ω: The solution set of SCFPP (1.5).
• BB( ): The set of the cluster point of C in the weak topology i.e. D∃ of ∋ ⇀ J
• → : C Converge in norm to x
• ⇀ : Converge weakly to x
Definition 2.1 Assume that C is a closed convex nonempty subset of a real Hilbert space H. A sequence in
H is said to be Fejer monotone with respect to C if and only if
‖ +1 − K‖ ≤ ‖ − K‖, LM NN ≥ 1 K ∈
Definition 2.2 let (: → be an operator. We say that (/ − () is demi closed at zero, if for any sequence in
H, there holds the following implication:
⇀ and (/ − () → 0 O → ∞ , then (/ − () = 0.
Definition 2.3 A Banach space E has Kadec-Klee property, if for every sequence ∈ Q such that ⇀

Vol.3, No.7, 2013
217
and ‖ C‖ → ‖ ‖, then → → ∞.
Definition 2.4 An operator (: → is said to be
(a) nonexpansive if ‖( − (R‖ ≤ ‖ − R‖, LM NN , R ∈
(b) quasi-nonexpansive if ' (() ≠ ∅ and ‖( − K‖ ≤ ‖ − K‖, for all ∈ K ∈ ' (()
(c) strictly quasi-nonexpansive if ' (() ≠ ∅ and ‖( − K‖ < ‖ − K‖, ∀ ∈ /' (() K ∈ ' (()
(d) W -strongly quasi-nonexpansive if there exist W > 0 with the property: ‖( − K‖2
≤ ‖ − K‖2
−
W‖ − ( ‖2
, for all ∈ K ∈ ' (().
This is an equivalent to
〈 − K, ( − 〉 ≤
−1−W
2
‖ − ( ‖2
, for all ∈ K ∈ ' (().
Definition 2.5 an operator (: → is said to be:
Demicontractive [27]; if there exist a constant [ < 1 such that ‖( − K‖2
≤ ‖ − K‖2
+ [‖ − ( ‖2
,
for all ∈ K ∈ ' (().
Pseudo-demicontractive [28]; if there exist a constant W > 1 such that ‖( − K‖2
≤ W‖ − K‖2
+
‖ − ( ‖2
, for all ∈ K ∈ ' (().
Firmly pseudo-demicontractive; if there exist a constants W > 1 and [ > 1 such that ‖( − K‖2
≤
W‖ − K‖2
+ [‖ − ( ‖2
, for all ∈ K ∈ ' (().
Lemma 2.6 [9] Let (: → be an operator. Then the following statements are equivalent
(a) T is class - operator ;
(b) ‖ − ( ‖2
≤ 〈 − K, − ( 〉, for all ∈ K ∈ ' (().
(c) there hold the relation: ‖( − K‖2
≤ ‖ − K‖2
− ‖ − ( ‖2
, for all ∈ K ∈ ' (().
Consequently a class - operator is 1 - strongly quasi - nonexpansive.
Lemma 2.7 [3] If a sequence is fejer monotone with respect to a closed convex nonempty subset C, then
the following hold.
(i) ⇀ if and if BB( ) ⊂ ;
(ii) The sequence _Ω converges strongly to some point in C;
(iii) L C ⇀ ∈ , then, = limC→c _d C.
Lemma 2.8 [30] Let H be a Hilbert space and let be a sequence in such that there exist a nonempty set
e ⊂ satisfying the following:
(a) For every sequence ∈ , limC→c‖ C − ‖ exist;
(b) Any weak-cluster point of the sequence belongs in S. Then there exist x in S such that
weakly converges to x.
3. Main Results
In what follows, we will focus our attention on the following general two-operator split common fixed-point
problem: find
∗
∈ ∗
∈ , (3.1)
where : → is bounded and linear operator, U: → and T: → are two strongly quasi-
nonexpansive operators with nonempty fixed-point set ' (*) = ' (() = ,
‖* − K‖2
≤ ‖ − K‖2
− W‖ − * ‖2
, for all ∈ K ∈ ' (*). (3.2)
‖( − K‖2
≤ ‖ − K‖2
− [‖ − ( ‖2
, for all ∈ K ∈ ' ((). (3.3)
And denote the solution set of the two-operator SCFPP by
Ω = ∗
∈ ∗
∈ . (3.4)
Based on the algorithm of [29], we have the following algorithm to solve (3.1)
7
8f = f
+ . ∗
(( − /) f
f+1 = (1 − 9f)8f + 9f*(8f), f ≥ 0
(3.5)
where 0< . <
<g
>
with @ being the spectral radius of the operator ∗
,∝> 9f > 0 0 ∈ is choosing
arbitrarily.

Vol.3, No.7, 2013
218
Theorem 3.1.Let : → be a bounded linear operator, U ∶ → and T ∶ → be two strongly
quasi-nonexpansive operator with ' (*) = ' (() = . Assume that (* − /) (( − /) are both
demiclosed at zero and let _Ω be a metric projection from onto Ω satisfying 〈 f − ∗
, f − _Ω f〉 ≤ 0. If Ω is
nonempty, then the sequence j generated by algorithm (3.5) converges strongly to a split common fixed-
point ∗
∈ Ω.
Proof. To show that f → ∗
, it suffices to show that f ⇀ ∗
and ‖ f ‖ → ‖ ∗
‖ as f → ∞.
As we are in Hilbert space, now, taking ∗
∈ Ω that is ∗
∈ ' (*) ∗
∈ ' (() and by definition (2.4
(d)) we deduce that that
‖ f+1 − ∗
‖2
= ‖(1 − 9f)8f + 9f*(8f) − ∗
‖2
= ‖8j − ∗‖ + 29j〈8j − ∗
, *8j − 8j〉 + 9j ‖*8j − 8j‖
≤ ‖8j − ∗‖ − 9j(1 + W)‖*8j − 8j‖ + 9f
2
‖*8f − 8f‖2
≤ ‖8f − ∗
‖2
− 9f(1 + W − 9f)‖*8f − 8f‖2
⟹ ‖ jl − ∗‖ ≤ ‖8j − ∗‖ − 9j(1 + W − 9j)‖*8j − 8j‖ (3.6)
On the other hand, we have
‖8f − ∗
‖2
= ‖ j + . ∗(( − /) j − ∗‖
= ‖ f − ∗
‖2
+ 2.〈 j − ∗
, ∗
(( − /) j〉 + . ‖ ∗(( − /) j‖
= ‖ f − ∗
‖2
+ 2.〈 ( j − ∗), (( − /) j〉 + .2
〈 ∗
(( − /) f , ∗
(( − /) f〉
= ‖ f − ∗
‖2
+2.〈 j − ∗
,(( − /) j 〉 + . 〈(( − /) j , ∗(( − /) j〉. (3.7)
From the definition of @, it follows that
.2
〈(( − /) f , ∗
(( − /) f〉 ≤ @.2
‖(( − /) f‖ . (3.8)
Now, by setting m: = 2.〈 f − ∗
, (( − /) f
〉, and using the fact that (2.4(d)) and its
equivalent form, we infer that
m: = 2.〈 f − ∗
, (( − /) f
〉 ≤ 2. n
−1 − [
2
o p(( − /) f
p
2
= .(−1 − [)‖(( − /) j‖ (3.9)
Substituting (3.9), (3.8), into (3.7) we get the following inequality
‖8j − ∗‖ ≤ ‖ j − ∗‖ − .(1 + [ − .@)‖(( − /) j‖ . (3.10)
Also, substituting (3.10) into (3.6), we get the following:
‖ f+1 − ∗
‖2
≤ ‖ f − ∗
‖2
− .(1 + [ − .@)‖(( − /) f‖2
− 9f(1 + W − 9f)‖*8f − 8f‖2
(3.11)
Since γ > 0; [ > 0; W > 9j > 0; @ > 0 and 9f> 0, we obtain that – .(1 + [ − .@) < 0
−9j(1 + W − 9j)< 0
then from equation (3.11), we deduce that j is a fejer monotone and moreover ‖ f+1 − ∗
‖ f∈ℕ is
monotonically decreasing sequence, hence converges. Therefore we have
lim
f→∞
‖(( − /) f‖ = 0. (3.12)
From the fejer monotonicity of j , it follows that the sequence is bounded. Denoting by ∗
a weak cluster
point of j , let j = 0,1,2,... be the sequence of indices, such that
s − lim
t→∞
ft
= ∗
. (3.13)
Then, from (3.12) and the demiclosedness of (( − /) at zero, we obtain
(( ∗) = ∗
. (3.14)
From which it follows ∗
∈ . from (3.5), by considering 8f= f + . ∗
(( − /) f, it follows that
s − lim
t→∞
8ft
= ∗
. (3.15)
Again from (3.11) and the convergence of the sequence ‖ f+1 − ∗
‖ f∈ℕ , we also have
lim
f→∞
‖(* − /)8f‖ = 0. (3.16)
Which, combined with the demicloseness of (* − /) at zero and weak convergence of 8ju
9M ∗
, yields
* ∗
= ∗
(3.17)
Hence ∗
∈ , and therefore ∗
∈ Ω . Since there is no morethan one weak-cluster point, the weak convergence
of the whole sequence f follows by applying Lemma (2.8) with e = Ω. i.e.
f ⇀ ∗
(3.18)

Vol.3, No.7, 2013
219
Next, we show that
‖ f‖ → ‖ ∗
‖ as k→ ∞
To show this,
it suffices to show that
‖ f+1‖ → ‖ ∗
‖ as k → ∞.
Now, from (3.11) we deduce that
|‖ f+1‖ − ‖ ∗
‖|2
≤ ‖ f+1 − ∗
‖2
≤ ‖ f − ∗
‖2
.
Therefore, we have
|‖ f+1‖ − ‖ ∗
‖|2
≤ ‖ f − ∗
‖2
⟹ |‖ jl ‖ − ‖ ∗‖| ≤ ‖ j − ∗ ‖ =‖ f − _Ω f + _Ω f − ∗
‖
≤ ‖ f − _Ω f ‖+ ‖_Ω f − ∗
‖ (3.19)
Claim ‖ f − _Ω f ‖ ≤ ‖_Ω f − ∗
‖
Proof of claim
‖ f − _Ω f‖2
= ‖ f − ∗
+ ∗
− _Ω f‖2
= ‖ j − ∗‖ + 2〈 j − ∗
, ∗
− _d j〉 +‖ ∗
− _Ω f‖2
= ‖ j − ∗‖ + 2〈 j − ∗
, ∗
− j + j − _d j〉 +‖ ∗
− _Ω f‖2
= ‖ f − ∗
‖2
+ 2〈 f − ∗
, ∗
− f〉 +2〈 j − ∗
, j − _d j〉 +‖ ∗
− _Ω f‖2
= − ‖ f − ∗
‖2
+2〈 j − ∗
, j − _d j〉 +‖ ∗
− _Ω f‖2
≤ ‖ ∗
− _Ω f‖2
⟹ ‖ j − _d j‖ ≤ ‖ ∗
− _Ω f‖2
⟹ ‖ j − _d j‖ ≤ ‖ ∗
− _Ω f‖ (3.20)
Now, put (3.20) in (3.19), it follows that
|‖ f+1‖ − ‖ ∗
‖| ≤ 2‖ ∗
− _Ω f‖
⟹0≤ limsupj→c|‖ jl ‖ − ‖ ∗‖| limsupj→c 2‖ ∗
− _d j‖ = 0
⟹ limsupj→c|‖ jl ‖ − ‖ ∗‖| = 0.
Hence
‖ f+1‖ → ‖ ∗
‖ (3.21)
By (3.15) and (3.18), we have that
f → ∗
as n → ∞ ∎
Conclusion
In this paper, we study the modified algorithm of Yu and Sheng [29] for the strongly quasi nonexpansive
operators to solve the split common fixed-point (1.5) and use some beautiful lemmas to prove the strong
convergence of the modified algorithm. Our result extends and improved some recent result announced.
Acknowledgment
I would like to thanks Bauchi state University, Gadau, Nigeria for the financial support given to me.
Reference
[1] H. Stark (Ed), (1987), Image Recovery Theorem and Application, Academic Press Orlando.
[2] P.L. Combettes, (1996), The Convex Feasibility Problem in Image recovery. In P. Hawkes (Ed), Advances in
Imaging and Electron Physics, Vol. 95, Academic Press, New York, 155-270.
[3] H.H Bauschke and J.M Borwein (1996), on projection algorithm for solving convex feasibility problems,
SIAM Review 38, 367-426.
[4] Y. Censo, T. Elfving, N. Kopf and T. Bortfeld (2005), The multiple-set split feasibility problem and its
application for inverse problems, Inverse problem 21, 2071-2084.
[5] Y. Censo and T. Elfving, (1994), A multi projection algorithm using Bragman projection in product space,
Journal of Numerical algorithm 8, 221-239.
[6] C. Byne, (2002), Iterative oblique projection onto convex sets and split feasibility problem, Inverse problem
18, 441-453.
[7] C. Byne, A unified treatment of some iterative algorithm in signal processing and image reconstruction,
Inverse Problem 20 (2004) 103-120.

Vol.3, No.7, 2013
220
[8] Y. Censor and A. Segal. (2009), the split common fixed point problem for direct operator, Journal of convex
analysis 16, 587-600.
[9] F. Wang and H.K. Xu. (2011), Cyclic algorithm for split feasibility problems in Hilbert Space. Nonlinear
Analysis 74, 4105-4111.
[10] Y. Haugazeau, (1968) Sur les inequality variationnelles etla minimmization de fonctionnelles convexes.
Thesis, Universite de paris, paris , France,
[11] H. H. Bauschke and P.L. Combettes, (2001), A Weak to Strong convergence principle for Fejer monotone
methods in Hilbert Space, Mathematics of operations research 26, 218- 264.
[12] M. Zaknoon,(2003), Algorithmic developments for the convex feasibility problem , Ph.D. Thesis,
University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel, April.
[13] A. Cegielski, (2010), Generalized relaxations of nonexpansive operator and convex feasibility problem in
Contemporary Mathematics Israel mathematical conference proceeding 513, 111 -123.
[14] A. Cegielski, Y. Censor, Opial - type Theorem and the common fixed point problem, in: H. Bauschke, R.
Burachik, P. Combettes, V. Elser, R. Luke and H. Wolkowicz (Eds.).(2001), Fixed -point algorithms for inverse
problem in science and engineering, Springer - Verlag, New York, NY, USA, 155-183.
[15] J.R. Palta and T.R. Mackie.(2003), Intensity - Modulated Radiation Therapy: The state of the Art, Medical
Physics Publishing, Madison, WI.
[16] Y. Censor , T. Bortfeld , B. Matin and A. Trofimov, (2006), A unified approach for inverse problem
intensity modulated radiation therapy, Physics in Medicine and Biology ,51, 2353-2365.
[17] G. Lopez, V. Matin and H.K. Xu,(2009) Iterative algorithm for the multiple - set split feasibility problem ,
in: Y. Censo, M. Jiang and G. Wang (Eds.) , biomedical mathematics: Promising direction in imaging , therapy
planning inverse problem, medical physics publishing, Madison , Wisconsin, USA,. 234-279.
[18] B. Qu and N. Xiu,(2005) A note on the CQ algorithm for the split feasibility problem, Inverse Problem, 21,
1655 - 1665.
[19] F. Wang and H.K. Xu (2010), Approximating curve and strong convergence of the CQ algorithm for the
split feasibility problem, Journal of inequalities and application, Vol. 2010, Article ID 102085, 13 pages
(dol:10.1155/2010/102085).
[20] Wang, H.K Xu, (2010), Strong convergent iterative algorithm for solving a class of variational inequalities,
Journal of convex and nonlinear analysis 11, 407-421.
[21] H.K. Xu, (2006) A variable Krasnonel'skii-Man algorithm and the multiple-set slit feasibility problem ,
Inverse problem 22, 2021 - 2034
[22] H.K. Xu, (2010), An Iterative regularization method for nonexpansive mapping with application,
Contemporary Mathematics 513, 239-263.
[23] H.K. Xu, (2010), Iterative method for the split feasibility problem in finite dimensional Hilbert space,
Inverse Problem 26, Article ID 105018, 17 pages.
[24] Q. Yang, (2004), The relaxed CQ algorithm for solving the split feasibility problem, Inverse Problem, 20,
1261-1266.
[25] J. Zhao and Q. Yang,(2005), Several solution method for the split feasibility problem, Inverse Problem 21,
1791-1799.
[26] C.E Chidume, (July 2006). Applicable Functional Analysis , ICTP.
[27] A. Moudafi, (2010), the split common fixed point problem for demi contractive mapping, Inverse problem.
Vol.26, no.5,article ID 055007, 6 pages.
[28] Y. Yu and D. Sheng, (2012), On the strong convergence of an algorithm about pseudo-demicontractive
mapping for the split common fixed point problem, Journal of applied mathematics, Volume 2012, Article ID
256930, 9 pages doi:10.1155/2012/256930.
[29] Y. Yu and D. Sheng, On the strong convergence of an algorithm about firmly pseudo-demicontractive
mappings for the split common fixed point problem journal of applied mathematics. Vol. 2012, ID 256930, 9
pages.
[30] A. Moudafi, (2011), A note on the split common fixed point problem for quasi-nonexpansive operator,
Nonlinear Analysis, vol. 74, no.12, pp. 4083-4087.

This academic article was published by The International Institute for Science,
Technology and Education (IISTE). The IISTE is a pioneer in the Open Access
Publishing service based in the U.S. and Europe. The aim of the institute is
Accelerating Global Knowledge Sharing.
More information about the publisher can be found in the IISTE’s homepage:
http://www.iiste.org
CALL FOR PAPERS
The IISTE is currently hosting more than 30 peer-reviewed academic journals and
collaborating with academic institutions around the world. There’s no deadline for
submission. Prospective authors of IISTE journals can find the submission
instruction on the following page: http://www.iiste.org/Journals/
The IISTE editorial team promises to the review and publish all the qualified
submissions in a fast manner. All the journals articles are available online to the
readers all over the world without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than
those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. Printed version of the
journals is also available upon request of readers and authors.
IISTE Knowledge Sharing Partners
EBSCO, Index Copernicus, Ulrich's Periodicals Directory, JournalTOCS, PKP Open
Archives Harvester, Bielefeld Academic Search Engine, Elektronische
Zeitschriftenbibliothek EZB, Open J-Gate, OCLC WorldCat, Universe Digtial
Library , NewJour, Google Scholar

Strong convergence of an algorithm about strongly quasi nonexpansive mappings

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Strong convergence of an algorithm about strongly quasi nonexpansive mappings (20)

More from Alexander Decker (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Strong convergence of an algorithm about strongly quasi nonexpansive mappings