1. Introduction
The Hilbert space theory and the nonlinear fixed point problem are an important field in mathematics and optimization. Symmetry is closely related to the fixed point problem. And Hilbert space is one kind of reflexive space, and a reflexive Hilbert space is called a symmetric space. Let be a real symmetric Hilbert space and be a mapping. The set of fixed points of S is denoted by . It is known that S is a contraction if there exists a constant such that .
Let be a set valued mapping. Then, T is said to be monotone if for all with and . A monotone mapping T is maximal monotone if its graph is not properly contained in the graph of any other monotone mapping. The resolvent operator of mapping T defined by for each .
It is worth noting that the split variational inclusion problem serves as a model in image reconstruction, radiation therapy and sensor networks [
1,
2,
3]. There are many other special cases of split variational inclusion problem, such as split feasibility problem, variational inclusion problem, fixed point problem, split equilibrium problem and split minimization problem; see [
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9,
10] and the references therein. Let
and
be two real Hilbert spaces, and let
and
be maximal monotone mappings. In fact, the following is a split variational inclusion problem: to find a point
such that
where
is a bounded linear operator. Several iterative algorithms for finding the set of solutions of the split variational inclusion problem have been studied by many authors [
11,
12,
13]. Particularly, in 2012, Byrne et al. [
14] introduced the following iteration process for given
:
where
. They established the weak and strong convergence of the algorithm to solve the split variational inclusion problem. In 2014, Kazmi and Rivi [
13] proved a strong convergence result of the following algorithm to a solution of the split variational inclusion problem and the fixed point problem of a nonexpansive mapping in Hilbert space:
On the other hand, many authors are increasingly interested in using inertial techniques to build efficient iterative algorithms due to the effect that inertial techniques have to speed up convergence, see [
15,
16,
17,
18,
19,
20,
21] and references therein. In 2001, Alvarez and Attouch [
22] introduced the following inertial proximal point method to solve the variational inclusion problem:
where
,
. They proved that the sequence converges weakly to a zero of the maximal monotone operator
B. Thenceforward, in 2017, Chuang et al. [
23] extended this method to the hybrid inertial proximal algorithm in Hilbert spaces. They proved that their iterative sequence converges weakly to the solution of the split variational inclusion problem. In 2018, Cholamjiak et al. [
20] obtained strong convergence results by combining the inertial technique of the Halpern iteration method. Moreover, in 2020, Pham et al. [
24] proposed an algorithm which is a combination of Mann method and inertial method for solving the split variational inclusion problem in real Hilbert spaces:
They proved that the sequence converges strongly to a solution of the split variational inclusion problem with two set-valued maximal monotone mappings.
Motivated and inspired by the above work, we consider the following general split variational inclusion problem of finding a point
such that
where
are two families of maximal monotone mappings. The solution set of the general split variational inclusion problem is denoted by
. We present an inertial viscosity iterative algorithm for the general split variational inclusion problem and the fixed point problem of a nonexpansive mapping:
Then, the strong convergence theorem of this algorithm is proved. We apply this iterative scheme to studying the split feasibility problem and the split minimization problem. Finally, we give the numerical experiments to illustrate the feasibility and effectiveness of our main theorem. Our results extend and improve many recent ones [
12,
13,
14,
20,
23,
24].
2. Preliminaries
Let
be a nonempty closed convex subset of a real symmetric Hilbert space
with inner product
of regularity and symmetry and norm
.
and
denote the weak convergence and strong convergence of the sequence
to a point
x, respectively. A mapping
is called the metric projection if
. It is known that
is nonexpansive and
The following lemmas and concepts will be needed to prove our main results.
Definition 1. Suppose is a mapping. Then, S is called nonexpansive if S is said to be firmly nonexpansive if Lemma 1 ([
11])
. Suppose is a real Hilbert space. Then, for all , the following statements are hold:- (i)
;
- (ii)
.
Lemma 2 ([
17])
. Assume is a sequence of nonnegative real numbers satisfying:where and such that:- (i)
and
- (ii)
either or
Then .
Lemma 3 ([
25])
. Suppose is a nonexpansive mapping, and is a sequence in . If and , then . Lemma 4 ([
26])
. Suppose that is a sequence of nonnegative real numbers satisfying for all , where is a subsequence of . Then, there exists a nondecreasing sequence such that and , we haveIn fact, .
Lemma 5 ([
27])
. Let be a set-valued maximal monotone mapping and , the following relations hold:- (i)
For each , the resolvent mapping is is a single-valued and firmly nonexpansive mapping;
- (ii)
;
- (iii)
is a firmly nonexpansive mapping;
- (iv)
Suppose that , then for all , and ;
- (v)
Suppose that , then for all , and .
Lemma 6. Assume that and are two real Hilbert spaces. Let be a linear and bounded operator with its adjoint . Let are two families of maximal monotone mappings. Let and be the resolvent mapping of and , respectively. Suppose that the solution set of the the solution set Γ is nonempty and . Then, for any , z is a solution of general split variational inclusion problem if and only if .
Proof. ⇒ Let
, then
and
. From Lemma 5(ii), we have that
⇐ Let
and
. From Lemma 5(v), for any
, we get
which implies that
, then
. For any
, we also use Lemma 5(v) to obtain
Thus, we observe that
which means for any
and
, we have
Since
, then
and
, we get
, then
, so
. It follows that
which implies
, so
. Therefore
. □
3. Main Results
Theorem 1. Let and be two real Hilbert spaces. Let be a bounded linear operator and be the adjoint operator of A. Suppose that are two families of maximal monotone mappings. Let be a contraction with coefficient and be a nonexpansive mapping such that . Suppose . Assume that are sequences of positive real numbers and . If the sequence defined by (1) satisfies the following conditions: - (i)
Let the parameter chosen aswhere , is a positive real sequence such that ; - (ii)
, , ;
- (iii)
, , ,
then converges strongly to an element , where .
Proof. Let
, then we have
,
and
. By the convexity of
, we obtain
It follows from Lemma 5 that
are nonexpansive. Then, we get
which means
From condition (i), we have
is a constant. Define
, then we have
We compute that:
which implies that
is bounded; hence,
,
,
and
is also bounded.
Since
is bounded and
, there exists a constant
, we have
Therefore, using (
3), we observe that
It follows from (
2) that
which implies that
hence, by (
5),
Furthermore,
which indicates that
Moreover, for some
,
Observe that
then from (
3), (
4) and (
9) and conditions (ii), we get
It follows from (
4) and (
6) that
and by (
4) and (
7), we have that
It follows from (
3) and (
8) and conditions (ii), we deduce
and
Next, we consider the convergence of the sequence in two cases.
Case 1: There exists a
such that
for each
. This indicates that
is convergent. Thus, from (
11), (
13) and (
14), we have
Then, by the restriction conditions, we can get
From the definition of
, we obtain
From (
15) and (
16), we get
From (ii) and (
18), we have
Suppose that
is a subsequence of
such that
. From (
17) and (
18), there exist subsequences of
and
satisfying
and
, respectively. Since
A is a bounded linear operator, then
. Moreover, we know that
, which implies that
, by Lemma 6, we get
. From
and Lemma 3, we deduce
. Hence
. Then, it follows that
Apply Lemma 2 to (
10), we have
.
Case 2: Suppose that the sequence
is not monotonically decreasing. Then, there exists a subsequence
such that
By Lemma 4, there exists a nondecreasing sequence
such that
:
Similar to the proof in Case 1, we have
and
which implies
then using
, we get
By (
20), we obtain
. It follows from
for all
that
, by using Lemma 4, we deduce
. Therefore, the sequence
. This completes the proof. □
In Theorem 1, we put ; then, we have the following result.
Corollary 1. Let and be two real Hilbert spaces. Let be a bounded linear operator and be the adjoint operator of A. Suppose that , are two families of maximal monotone mappings. Let be fixed and be a nonexpansive mapping such that . For , the sequence defined by:where , are sequences of positive real numbers satisfying the following conditions: - (i)
Let the parameter chosen aswhere , is a positive real sequence such that ; - (ii)
, , ;
- (iii)
, , .
Then converges strongly to an element , where .
In Theorem 1, we set . Then, we obtain the following result.
Corollary 2. Let and be two real Hilbert spaces. Let be a bounded linear operator and be the adjoint operator of A. Suppose that are two maximal monotone mappings. Let be a contraction with coefficient and be a nonexpansive mapping such that . For , the sequence defined by:where , are sequences of positive real numbers satisfying the following conditions: - (i)
Let the parameter chosen aswhere , is a positive real sequence such that ; - (ii)
, , ;
- (iii)
.
Then, converges strongly to an element , where .
Let
and
be two nonempty closed convex subsets. Now, we recall that the following split feasibility problem is to find
The solution set of the split feasibility problem is denoted by . In Corollary 2, if and , we obtain the following result.
Corollary 3. Let and be nonempty closed convex subsets of Hilbert spaces and , respectively. Let be a bounded linear operator and be the adjoint operator of A. Let be a contraction with coefficient and be a nonexpansive mapping such that . For , the sequence defined by:where , are sequences of positive real numbers satisfying the following conditions: - (i)
Let the parameter chosen aswhere , is a positive real sequence such that ; - (ii)
, , ;
- (iii)
.
Then, converges strongly to an element , where .
Let
and
be proper lower semicontinuous convex functions. The split minimization problem is to find
The solution set of the split minimization problem is denoted by . It is well known that the subdifferential is maximal monotone and is firmly nonexpansive. In Corollary 2, if and , we obtain the following result.
Corollary 4. Let and be Hilbert spaces and , be proper lower semicontinuous convex functions. Let be a bounded linear operator and be the adjoint operator of A. Let be a contraction with coefficient and be a nonexpansive mapping such that . For , the sequence defined by:where , are sequences of positive real numbers satisfying the following conditions: - (i)
Let the parameter chosen aswhere , is a positive real sequence such that ; - (ii)
, , ;
- (iii)
.
Then, converges strongly to an element , where .