∎ 11institutetext: Akhtar Khan (Corresponding author) 22institutetext: School of Mathematical Sciences, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, New York, 14623, USA. 22email: [email protected] 33institutetext: Jinlu Li 44institutetext: Department of Mathematics, Shawnee State University, Portsmouth, Ohio 45662, USA. 44email: [email protected])
Approximating Properties of Metric and Generalized Metric Projections in Uniformly Convex and Uniformly Smooth Banach Spaces
Abstract
This note conducts a comparative study of some approximating properties of the metric projection, generalized projection, and generalized metric projection in uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach spaces. We prove that the inverse images of the metric projections are closed and convex cones, but they are not necessarily convex. In contrast, inverse images of the generalized projection are closed and convex cones. Furthermore, the inverse images of the generalized metric projection are neither a convex set nor a cone. We also prove that the distance from a point to its projection at a convex set is a weakly lower semicontinuous function for all three notions of projections. We provide illustrating examples to highlight the different behavior of the three projections in Banach spaces.
Keywords:
Generalized projection metric projection generalized metric projectioninverse images..MSC:
41A10, 41A50, 47A05, 58C06.1 Introduction
The notion of projection onto closed and convex sets has been extensively explored due to its wide-ranging applications. The projection map is equipped with immensely valuable properties in a Hilbert space, making it an indispensable tool in optimization, approximation theory, inverse problems, variational inequalities, image processing, neural networks, machine learning, and others. On the other hand, many critical applications require that projection maps be studied theoretically and computationally in Banach spaces. An important example is the inverse problem of identifying discontinuous parameters where the regularized problem is formulated in a Banach space. As a consequence, many researchers have studied projections in Banach spaces. Unfortunately, in this setting, metric projection loses many essential features. For an overview of these details and some of the related developments, see BalGol12 ; BalMarTei21 ; Bau03 ; BorDruChe17 ; Bou15 ; Bro13 ; BroDeu72 ; Bui02 ; Bur21 ; CheGol59 ; ChiLi05 ; Den01 ; DeuLam80 ; DutShuTho17 ; GJKS21 ; Ind14 ; FitPhe82 ; KonLiuLiWu22 ; KroPin13 ; Li04 ; Li04a ; LiZhaMa08 ; Nak22 ; Osh70 ; Pen05 ; PenRat98 ; QiuWan22 ; Ric16 ; Sha16 ; ShaZha17 ; ZhaZhoLiu19 , and the cited references.
Motivated by the shortcomings of the metric projection in Banach spaces, generalized projection, and generalized metric projection were proposed and used heavily in a Banach space framework, see Alb93 ; Alb96 . Although there are exceptions (see Li04a ; Li05 ), the two notions are mainly studied in Banach spaces with favorable topological structures, such as uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach spaces. The basic properties of the generalized projection and the generalized metric projection and their connections are largely unknown in general Banach spaces. Inspired by this, we recently focused on studying generalized projection and generalized metric projection in the framework of Banach spaces. In KhaLiRwi22 attempts were made to understand the similarities and differences in the three notions of projections in Banach spaces: the metric projection, the generalized projection, and the generalized metric projection. A comparative study of these projection should help shed some light on their utility and their strengths and weaknesses in various applications.
The main motivation of this research is to strengthen further the understanding of the relationship between the three notions of projections. Surprisingly, it turns out that all three projections exhibit different behaviors in computing inverse images. These results are related to a well-known result given in a Hilbert space setting by Zarantonello (Zar71, , Lemma 1.5), see also (GJKS21, , Theorem 3.1.3). We present several illustrating examples involving the computations of the duality map in finite-dimensional Banach spaces.
The contents of this paper are organized into three sections. After a brief introduction in Section 1, we recall various notions of projections and give new results concerning normalized duality mapping. The main results concerning the approximating properties of various projections are given in Section 3.
2 Preliminaries
2.1 The Normalized Duality Map and new characterizations
Let be a real Banach space with norm , let be the topological dual of with norm , and let be the duality pairing between and . Let and be the closed unit balls in and , respectively. For details on the notions recalled in this section, see Tak00 .
Given a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space with dual space , the normalized duality map is a single-valued mapping defined by
We recall that the modulus of smoothness of the Banach space , denoted by , is defined by
The modulus of convexity of is the function defined by
Lemma 2.1.
Let be a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space, and let be the dual of . Then, the normalized map has the following properties:
- ()
-
is one-to-one, onto, continuous and homogeneous.
- ()
-
is uniformly continuous on each bounded subset of .
- ()
-
For any , let and let be the Figiel’s constant of . Then,
The following example will be repeatedly used in this work.
Example 2.2.
Let be equipped with the -norm defined for any by
Then is a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space (and is not a Hilbert space). The dual space of is so that for any , we have
The normalized duality mappings and satisfy the following conditions. For any with , we have
(1) |
Moreover, for any with , we have
(2) |
We have the following new characteristic of the normalized duality map.
Proposition 2.3.
Let be a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space. Let Then, the set
is a closed cone with vertex at in . However, in general, it is not convex.
Proof.
Since the normalized duality map is continuous and homogeneous, it follows at once that the set is a closed cone with vertex at the origin. We construct a counterexample to show that the set is not convex.
A simple extension of the above result is the following variant.
Proposition 2.4.
Let be a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space. Let . Then the set
is a closed cone with vertex at in . However, in general, it is not convex.
By similar arguments used in the proof of Proposition 2.3, we prove the following result.
Proposition 2.5.
Let be a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space. For and , the set
is closed. However, in general, it is not convex.
Proof.
By the properties of the normalized duality map, it follows that is closed. To show that it is not convex, we modify the counterexample given in Proposition 2.3.
Let , and . For , we take with . Then,
For , as in Proposition 2.3, we have which proves that , and hence is not convex. ∎
A modification of Proposition 2.5 proves the following result.
Proposition 2.6.
Let be a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space. For and , the set
is closed. However, in general, it is not convex.
Before our next result, we recall notions of some specific sets in Banach spaces. Given any Banach space , for any with , we write
- ()
-
- ()
-
- ()
-
The set is a closed segment with end points and . The set is a closed ray in with initial point with direction , which is a closed convex cone with vertex at and is a special case of cones in . The set is a line in passing through points and .
We have the following result concerning the images of segments, rays, and lines under the normalized duality map.
Proposition 2.7.
Let be a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space. Let with If and are linearly dependent, that is, , then we have
- ()
-
, which is a closed segment in with end points and .
- ()
-
, which is a closed ray in with end points and .
- ()
-
, which is a 1-d subspace in through point and direction .
Furthermore, if and are linearly independent, that is, , then we have
- ()
-
is a closed curve in with end points and ; it may not be a segment.
- ()
-
is a closed curve in with end point and through ; it may not be a ray.
- ()
-
is a closed curve in through and ; it may not be a line.
Proof.
Suppose that and are linearly dependent, then we can assume that there is a real number such that . It follows that
Furthermore, by the homogeneity of , we have
which completes the proof of (a). Parts (b) and (c) can be proved by analogous arguments.
For (d), we note that since is a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space, the duality map is one-to-one and continuous mapping from into . It follows that is a closed curve in with end points and . We construct a counterexample to show that is not a segment.
Let be the uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space with dual space . Take and in . Then,we have
We take a convex combination of and by
Since and are both in , to prove that it is not a segment, we need to prove that
(5) |
Since , it is sufficient to show that . Since is homogeneous, we have
Next we prove that . If possible, assume that . Then, there exists such that
which implies
which is a contradiction. Hence we have shown that
Since is uniformly convex and uniformly smooth, both and are one-to-one and onto mappings, which are inverse of each other. Then, we have which implies (5). Parts (e) and (f) follow from (d) immediately. ∎
Corollary 2.8.
Let be a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space and let be a closed cone in with vertex at .
- (i)
-
If , then is a closed cone in with vertex at However, is not necessarily convex even if is convex.
- (ii)
-
If or is a ray with , then is not a cone. Here is a line containing the ray .
Proof.
Since is uniformly convex and uniformly smooth, is continuous and positive homogeneous, and hence is a closed cone in with vertex at To show that the convexity of does not imply the convexity of , we construct a counterexample. Let be as in Example 2.2. We take and define
(6) |
Then is a closed subspace of which is a closed and convex cone in with vertex . We claim that is not convex.
2.2 Projections in Banach Spaces
Let be a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space and let be a nonempty, closed, and convex subset of . We define a Lyapunov function by the formula:
We shall now recall useful notions of projections in Banach spaces.
Definition 2.9.
Let be a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space, let be the dual of , and let be a nonempty, closed, and convex subset of .
- 1.
-
The metric projection is a single-valued defined by
- 2.
-
The generalized projection is a single-value map that satisfies
(7) - 3.
-
The generalized metric projection is a single-valued map defined by
The following result collects some of the basic properties of the metric projection defined above.
Proposition 2.10.
Let be a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space and let be a nonempty, closed, and convex subset of .
- 1.
-
The metric projection is a continuous map that enjoys the following variational characterization:
(8) - 2.
-
The generalized projection enjoys the following variational characterization: For any and
(9) - 3.
-
The generalized metric projection enjoys the following variational characterization: For any and
(10)
To be specific, we show that a certain inverse image of the metric projection is a closed and convex cone, but it is not necessarily convex (Theorem 3.1). In contrast, inverse images of the generalized projection are closed and convex cones (Theorem 3.4). On the other hand, the inverse images of the generalized metric projection are neither a convex set nor a cone (Theorem 3.6). We also prove, for all three notions of projections, that the distance from a point to its projection at a convex set is a weakly lower semicontinuous function.
3 Approximating Properties of the Projections
3.1 Approximating Properties of the Metric projection
Theorem 3.1.
Let be a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space and let a nonempty, closed, and convex subset of . For any let be such that . We define the inverse image of under the metric projection by
Then is a closed cone with vertex at in . However, is not convex, in general.
Proof.
Since is continuous, is closed. To show that is a cone with vertex at , note that for any with , and for any , by the fact is homogeneous, we have
Thus, by (8), we get , ensuring that is a cone with vertex at .
We will construct a counter-example to show that the set is not convex. Let be the uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space equipped with the -norm as defined in Proposition 2.3. We take . We define the closed segment in with and as the end points by
For , , we define
Then, as in Proposition 2.3, for any with , we have
By (8), this implies that . We can similarly prove that . Next, we define
and compute for with
Again, by (8), we have , that is , and hence it is not convex. ∎
Remark 3.2.
Theorem 3.1 can be proved without using the basic variational principle of the metric projection.
Theorem 3.3.
Let be a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space and let be a nonempty, closed, and convex subset of . Then the distance from a point to its projection at is a weakly lower semicontinuous function. That is, for any and , we have
Proof.
Since the claim is trivial for we assume that For every , since by the variational characterization (8) of the metric projection, we have
which can be rearranged as
and subsequently
Since , we obtain
which implies
Taking in the above inequality, yields the desired result. Note that here we used the fact that for we have The proof is complete. ∎
3.2 Approximating Properties of the Generalized projection
Theorem 3.4.
Let be a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space and let be a nonempty, closed, and convex subset of . For any , and any with such that , we define the inverse image of under the generalized projection in by
Then is a -closed and convex cone with vertex at in .
Proof.
Let and be arbitrary. Then
which due to the variational characterization (9) implies that and hence . Thus, proving the convexity of .
Moreover, since for any and for any we have
by appealing to (9) once again, we obtain , and hence proving is a cone with vertex at in .
Finally, we prove that is -closed in . Let be a sequence converging to We note that for an arbitrary and fixed and for a fixed , we have
and since for , we infer that
which implies that and hence , proving that is indeed closed. ∎
If is a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space and is nonempty, closed, and convex, then the mapping is continuous. We have the following stronger result:
Theorem 3.5.
Let be a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space and let be a nonempty, closed, and convex subset of . Let , , and . Assume that the following conditions are satisfied:
- (a)
-
weak∗ as .
- (b)
-
is bounded.
- (c)
-
Then
Proof.
By the variational characterization (9), for each , we have
(11) |
For any arbitrary , we have
(12) |
The imposed conditions imply that and by the continuity of , we have and hence
(13) |
Then, for any fixed we have
(14) |
Combining (11), (12), (13), and (14) it follows that
and hence
It follows by the variational characterization (9) that ∎
3.3 Approximating Properties of the Generalized Metric projection
Theorem 3.6.
Let be a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space and let be a nonempty, closed, and convex subset of . For any , and with and , we define the inverse image of under the generalized metric projection in by
Then, we have
Furthermore, in general, is nether a convex set nor a cone.
Proof.
Suppose and with such that . By the definition of , we have
Since is a one-to-one, onto, and single-valued, from , it follows that . Recall that is a closed and convex cone with vertex at in . Notice that for any , we have . It follows that
For any and with , we have , if and only if, . That is, , if and only if,
We construct a counter-example to show that is not convex. Let be the uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space equipped with the norm. We take Then , and hence As before, we define a convex subset by .
Let , . We calculate
which gives
Then, using and we have , which implies that
The above inequality, due to (9) implies that . Analogously,
We take . Since,
we obtain
(15) |
By the above equation and we have
(16) |
Furthermore, the above estimates, for any with yields
Using (9), we deduce that that is, , and hence it is not convex.
Finally, since , it suffices to prove that is not a cone with vertex .
If is a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space and is nonempty, closed, and convex, then the mapping is continuous. Next, we prove a stronger result.
Theorem 3.7.
Let be a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space and let be a nonempty, closed, and convex subset of . Let , , and . Assume that the following conditions are satisfied:
- (a)
-
weakly ∗, as
- (b)
-
is bounded.
- (c)
-
Then
Proof.
We recall that we denote the modulus of convexity and the modulus of smoothness of a Banach space by and .
Theorem 3.8.
Let be a uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach space and let be a nonempty, closed, and convex subset of . Let and let Let . Then there is a number such that
Proof.
Since the proof is trivial for , we assume that For every , due to the variational characterization (9), we have
which can be rearranged as follows
Let be as given and let be the Figiel’s constant. Then, we have
Then,
which can be written as
We define a positive number by
Since we have
(20) |
For the fixed we have
(21) |
However, since letting in (20) and using (21), we get the desired result. ∎
References
- (1) Balashov, M.V., Golubev, M.O.: About the Lipschitz property of the metric projection in the Hilbert space. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 394(2), 545–551 (2012)
- (2) Balestro, V., Martini, H., Teixeira, R.: Convex analysis in normed spaces and metric projections onto convex bodies. J. Convex Anal. 28(4), 1223–1248 (2021)
- (3) Bauschke, H.H.: The composition of projections onto closed convex sets in Hilbert space is asymptotically regular. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 131(1), 141–146 (2003)
- (4) Borodin, P.A., Druzhinin, Y.Y., Chesnokova, K.V.: Finite-dimensional subspaces of with Lipschitz metric projection. Mat. Zametki 102(4), 514–525 (2017)
- (5) Bounkhel, M.: Generalized projections on closed nonconvex sets in uniformly convex and uniformly smooth Banach spaces. J. Funct. Spaces pp. Art. ID 478,437, 7 (2015)
- (6) Brown, A.L.: On lower semi-continuous metric projections onto finite dimensional subspaces of spaces of continuous functions. J. Approx. Theory 166, 85–105 (2013)
- (7) Brosowski, B., Deutsch, F.: Some new continuity concepts for metric projections. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 78, 974–978 (1972)
- (8) Kien, B.T.: On the metric projection onto a family of closed convex sets in a uniformly convex Banach space. Nonlinear Anal. Forum 7(1), 93–102 (2002)
- (9) Burusheva, L.S.: An example of a Banach space with non-lipschitzian metric projection on any straight line. Mat. Zametki 109(2), 196–205 (2021)
- (10) Cheney, W., Goldstein, A.A.: Proximity maps for convex sets. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 10, 448–450 (1959)
- (11) Chidume, C.E., Li, J.L.: Projection methods for approximating fixed points of Lipschitz suppressive operators. PanAmer. Math. J. 15(1), 29–39 (2005)
- (12) Dentcheva, D.: On differentiability of metric projections onto moving convex sets. pp. 283–298 (2001). Optimization with data perturbations, II
- (13) Deutsch, F., Lambert, J.M.: On continuity of metric projections. J. Approx. Theory 29(2), 116–131 (1980)
- (14) Dutta, S., Shunmugaraj, P., Thota, V.: Uniform strong proximinality and continuity of metric projection. J. Convex Anal. 24(4), 1263–1279 (2017)
- (15) Gwinner, J., Jadamba, B., Khan, A.A., Raciti, F.: Uncertainty Quantification in Variational Inequalities. CRC Press (2021)
- (16) Indumathi, V.: Semi-continuity properties of metric projections. In: Nonlinear analysis, Trends Math., pp. 33–59. Birkhäuser/Springer, New Delhi (2014)
- (17) Fitzpatrick, S., Phelps, R.R.: Differentiability of the metric projection in Hilbert space. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 270(2), 483–501 (1982)
- (18) Kong, D., Liu, L., Li, J., Wu, Y.: Isotonicity of the metric projection with respect to the mutually dual orders and complementarity problems. Optimization 71(16), 4855–4877 (2022)
- (19) Kroó, A., Pinkus, A.: On stability of the metric projection operator. SIAM J. Math. Anal. 45(2), 639–661 (2013)
- (20) Li, J.L.: The metric projection and its applications to solving variational inequalities in Banach spaces. Fixed Point Theory 5(2), 285–298 (2004)
- (21) Li, J.L.: On the existence of solutions of variational inequalities in Banach spaces. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 295(1), 115–126 (2004)
- (22) Li, J.L., Zhang, C., Ma, X.: On the metric projection operator and its applications to solving variational inequalities in Banach spaces. Numer. Funct. Anal. Optim. 29(3-4), 410–418 (2008)
- (23) Nakajo, K.: Strong convergence for the problem of image recovery by the metric projections in Banach spaces. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 23(2), 357–376 (2022)
- (24) Ošman, E.V.: Čebyšev sets and the continuity of metric projection. Izv. Vysš. Učebn. Zaved. Matematika 1970(9 (100)), 78–82 (1970)
- (25) Penot, J.P.: Continuity properties of projection operators. J. Inequal. Appl. (5), 509–521 (2005)
- (26) Penot, J.P., Ratsimahalo, R.: Characterizations of metric projections in Banach spaces and applications. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 3(1-2), 85–103 (1998)
- (27) Qiu, Y., Wang, Z.: The metric projections onto closed convex cones in a Hilbert space. J. Inst. Math. Jussieu 21(5), 1617–1650 (2022)
- (28) Ricceri, B.: More on the metric projection onto a closed convex set in a Hilbert space. In: Contributions in mathematics and engineering, pp. 529–534. Springer, Cham (2016)
- (29) Shapiro, A.: Differentiability properties of metric projections onto convex sets. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 169(3), 953–964 (2016)
- (30) Shang, S., Zhang, J.: Metric projection operator and continuity of the set-valued metric generalized inverse in Banach spaces. J. Funct. Spaces pp. Art. ID 7151,430, 8 (2017)
- (31) Zhang, Z., Zhou, Y., Liu, C.: Continuity of generalized metric projections in Banach spaces. Rev. R. Acad. Cienc. Exactas Fís. Nat. Ser. A Mat. RACSAM 113(1), 95–102 (2019)
- (32) Alber, Y.I.: Generalized projection operators in Banach spaces: properties and applications. In: Functional-differential equations, Funct. Differential Equations Israel Sem., vol. 1, pp. 1–21. Coll. Judea Samaria, Ariel (1993)
- (33) 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)
- (34) Li, J.L.: The generalized projection operator on reflexive Banach spaces and its applications. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 306(1), 55–71 (2005)
- (35) Khan, A.A., Li, J.L., Reich, S.: Generalized projection operators on general banach spaces. Journal of Nonlinear and Convex Analysis (at press) (2023)
- (36) Zarantonello, E.H.: Projections on convex sets in Hilbert space and spectral theory. I. Projections on convex sets pp. 237–341 (1971)
- (37) Takahashi, W.: Nonlinear functional analysis. Fixed point theory and its applications. Yokohama Publishers, Yokohama (2000)