Journal of Applied Mathematics

Volume 2012 (2012), Article ID 683890, 10 pages

http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/683890

## A Note on Approximating Curve with 1-Norm Regularization Method for the Split Feasibility Problem

^{1}College of Science, Civil Aviation University of China, Tianjin 300300, China^{2}Tianjin Key Laboratory for Advanced Signal Processing, Civil Aviation University of China, Tianjin 300300, China

Received 21 March 2012; Accepted 6 June 2012

Academic Editor: Hong-Kun Xu

Copyright © 2012 Songnian He and Wenlong Zhu. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

#### Abstract

Inspired by the very recent results of Wang and Xu (2010), we study properties of the approximating curve with 1-norm regularization method for the split feasibility problem (SFP). The concept of the minimum-norm solution set of SFP in the sense of 1-norm is proposed, and the relationship between the approximating curve and the minimum-norm solution set is obtained.

#### 1. Introduction

Let and be nonempty closed convex subsets of real Hilbert spaces and , respectively. The problem under consideration in this paper is formulated as finding a point satisfying the property: where is a bounded linear operator. Problem (1.1), referred to by Censor and Elfving [1] as the split feasibility problem (SFP), attracts many authors’ attention due to its application in signal processing [1]. Various algorithms have been invented to solve it (see [2–13] and references therein).

Using the idea of Tikhonov's regularization, Wang and Xu [14] studied the properties of the approximating curve for the SFP. They gave the concept of the minimum-norm solution of the SFP (1.1) and proved that the approximating curve converges strongly to the minimum-norm solution of the SFP (1.1). Together with some properties of this approximating curve, they introduced a modification of Byrne’s CQ algorithm [2] so that strong convergence is guaranteed and its limit is the minimum-norm solution of SFP (1.1).

In the practical application, and are often and , respectively. Moreover, scientists and engineers are more willing to use 1-norm regularization method in the calculation process (see, e.g., [15–18]). Inspired by the above results of Wang and Xu [14], we study properties of the approximating curve with 1-norm regularization method. We also define the concept of the minimum-norm solution set of SFP (1.1) in the sense of 1-norm. The relationship between the approximating curve and the minimum-norm solution set is obtained.

#### 2. Preliminaries

Let be a normed linear space with norm , and let be the dual space of . We use the notation to denote the value of at . In particular, if is a Hilbert space, we will denote it by , and and are the inner product and its induced norm, respectively.

We recall some definitions and facts that are needed in our study.

Let denote the *projection* from onto a nonempty closed convex subset of ; that is,
It is well known that is characterized by the inequality

*Definition 2.1. *Let be a convex functional, . Set
If , is said to be *subdifferentiable* at and is called the *subdifferential* of at . For any , we say is a *subgradient* of at .

Lemma 2.2. *There holds the following property:
**
where denotes the subdifferential of the functional at . *

*Proof. *The process of the proof will be divided into two parts.*Case 1*. In the case of , for any such that and any , there holds the inequality
so we have , and thus,
Conversely, for any , we have from the definition of subdifferential that
Consequently,
and this implies that . Thus, we have verified that
Combining (2.6) and (2.9), we immediately obtain
*Case 2*. If , for any , we obviously have
which means that , and thus,
Conversely, if , we have
hence,
On the other hand, using (2.14), we get
and consequently,
that is,
Equation (2.17) together with (2.15) implies that
hence, . Note that (2.14) implies that ; we assert that
Thus we have from (2.14) and (2.19) that
The proof is finished by combining (2.12) and (2.20).

and will stand for -norm and -norm of any Euclidean space; respectively, that is, for any , we have

Corollary 2.3. *In l-dimensional Euclidean space , there holds the following result:
**
Let be a Hilbert space and a functional. Recall that *(i)*is convex if , for all , for all ;*(ii)* is strictly convex if , for all , for all with ;*(iii)* is coercive if whenever . See [19] for more details about convex functions. *

The following lemma gives the optimality condition for the minimizer of a convex functional over a closed convex subset.

Lemma 2.4 (see [20]). * Let be a Hilbert space and a nonempty closed convex subset of . Let be a convex and subdifferentiable functional. Then is a solution of the problem
**
if and only if there exists some satisfying the following optimality condition:
*

#### 3. Main Results

It is well known that SFP (1.1) is equivalent to the minimization problem Using the idea of Tikhonov's regularization method, Wang and Xu [14] studied the minimization problem in Hilbert spaces: where is the regularization parameter.

In what follows, and in SFP (1.1) are restricted to and , respectively, and will stand for the usual 2-norm of any Euclidean space ; that is, for any , Inspired by the above work of Wang and Xu, we study properties of the approximating curve with 1-norm regularization scheme for the SFP, that is, the following minimization problem: where is the regularization parameter. Let It is easy to see that is convex and coercive, so problem (3.4) has at least one solution. However, the solution of problem (3.4) may not be unique since is not necessarily strictly convex. Denote by the solution set of problem (3.4); thus we can assert that is a nonempty closed convex set but may contain more than one element. The following simple example illustrates this fact.

*Example 3.1. *Let , and
Then is a bounded linear operator. Obviously, and it contains more than one element.

Proposition 3.2. *For any , if and only if there exists some satisfying the following inequality:
*

*Proof. *Let
then
Since is convex and differentiable with gradient
is convex, coercive, and subdifferentiable with the subdifferential
that is,
By Corollary 2.3 and Lemma 2.4, the proof is finished.

Theorem 3.3. *Denote by an arbitrary element of , then the following assertions hold:*(i)* is decreasing for ;*(ii)* is increasing for . *

*Proof. *Let , for any , . We immediately obtain
Adding up (3.13) and (3.14) yields
which implies . Hence (i) holds.

Using (3.14) again, we have
which together with (i) implies
and hence (ii) holds.

Let , where . In what follows, we assume that ; that is, the solution set of SFP (1.1) is nonempty. The fact that is nonempty closed convex set thus allows us to introduce the concept of minimum-norm solution of SFP (1.1) in the sense of norm (induced by the inner product).

*Definition 3.4 (see [14]). * An element is said to be the *minimum*-*norm solution* of SFP (1.1) *in the sense of norm * if . In other words, is the projection of the origin onto the solution set of SFP (1.1). Thus there exists only one minimum-norm solution of SFP (1.1) in the sense of norm , which is always denoted by .

We can also give the concept of minimum-norm solution of SFP (1.1) in other senses.

*Definition 3.5. *An element is said to be a *minimum*-*norm solution* of SFP (1.1) *in the sense * 1-*norm* if . We use to stand for all minimum-norm solutions of SFP (1.1) in the sense of 1-norm and is called the minimum-norm solution set of SFP (1.1) in the sense of 1-norm.

Obviously, is a closed convex subset of . Moreover, it is easy to see that . Indeed, taking a sequence such that as , then is bounded. There exists a convergent subsequence of . Set , then since is closed. On the other hand, using lower semicontinuity of the norm, we have
and this implies that .

However, may contain more than one elements, in general (see Example 3.1, .

Theorem 3.6. *Let and . Then , where .*

*Proof. *Taking arbitrarily, for any , we always have
Since is a solution of SFP (1.1), . This implies that
then,
thus is bounded.

Take arbitrarily, then there exists a sequence such that and as . Put . By Proposition 3.2, we deduce that there exists some such that
This implies that
Since , the characterizing inequality (2.2) gives
then,
Combining (3.23) and (3.25), we have
Consequently, we get
Furthermore, noting the fact that and and are all continuous operators, we have ; that is, ; thus, . Since is a minimum-norm solution of SFP (1.1) in the sense of 1-norm, using (3.21) again, we get
Thus we can assert that and this completes the proof.

Corollary 3.7. *If contains only one element , then , (). *

*Remark 3.8. *It is worth noting that the minimum-norm solution of SFP (1.1) in the sense of norm is very different from the minimum-norm solution of SFP (1.1) in the sense of 1-norm. In fact, may not belong to ! The following simple example shows this fact.

*Example 3.9. *Let , , and
It is not hard to see that is a bounded linear operator and , for all . Obviously, , , but . Hence, .

#### Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (ZXH2012K001) and in part by the Foundation of Tianjin Key Lab for Advanced Signal Processing. W. Zhu was also supported by the Postgraduate Science and Technology Innovation Funds (YJSCX12-22).

#### References

- Y. Censor and T. Elfving, “A multiprojection algorithm using Bregman projections in a product space,”
*Numerical Algorithms*, vol. 8, no. 2–4, pp. 221–239, 1994. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus - Y. Yao, R. Chen, G. Marino, and Y. C. Liou, “Applications of fixed point and optimization methods to the multiple-sets split feasibility problem,”
*Journal of Applied Mathematics*, vol. 2012, Article ID 927530, 21 pages, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar - C. Byrne, “Iterative oblique projection onto convex sets and the split feasibility problem,”
*Inverse Problems*, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 441–453, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus - C. Byrne, “A unified treatment of some iterative algorithms in signal processing and image reconstruction,”
*Inverse Problems*, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 103–120, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus - B. Qu and N. Xiu, “A note on the CQ algorithm for the split feasibility problem,”
*Inverse Problems*, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 1655–1665, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus - H. K. Xu, “A variable Krasnosel'skii-Mann algorithm and the multiple-set split feasibility problem,”
*Inverse Problems*, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 2021–2034, 2006. View at Google Scholar - Q. Yang, “The relaxed CQ algorithm solving the split feasibility problem,”
*Inverse Problems*, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 1261–1266, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus - Q. Yang and J. Zhao, “Generalized KM theorems and their applications,”
*Inverse Problems*, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 833–844, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus - Y. Yao, J. Wu, and Y. C. Liou, “Regularized methods for the split feasibility problem,”
*Abstract and Applied Analysis*, vol. 2012, Article ID 140679, 15 pages, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar - X. Yu, N. Shahzad, and Y. Yao, “Implicit and explicit algorithms for solving the split feasibility problem,”
*Optimization Letters*. In press. - F. Wang and H. K. Xu, “Cyclic algorithms for split feasibility problems in Hilbert spaces,”
*Nonlinear Analysis, Theory, Methods and Applications*, vol. 74, no. 12, pp. 4105–4111, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus - H. K. Xu, “Averaged mappings and the gradient-projection algorithm,”
*Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications*, vol. 150, no. 2, pp. 360–378, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus - H. K. Xu, “Iterative methods for the split feasibility problem in infinite-dimensional Hilbert spaces,”
*Inverse Problems*, vol. 26, no. 10, Article ID 105018, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus - H. K. Xu and F. Wang, “Approximating curve and strong convergence of the CQ algorithm for the split feasibility problem,”
*Journal of Inequalities and Applications*, vol. 2010, Article ID 102085, 13 pages, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus - M. R. Kunz, J. H. Kalivas, and E. Andries, “Model updating for spectral calibration maintenance and transfer using 1-norm variants of tikhonov regularization,”
*Analytical Chemistry*, vol. 82, no. 9, pp. 3642–3649, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus - X. Nan, N. Wang, P. Gong, C. Zhang, Y. Chen, and D. Wilkins, “Gene selection using 1-norm regularization for multi-class microarray data,” in
*Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine (BIBM '10)*, pp. 520–524, December 2010. View at Scopus - X. Nan, Y. Chen, D. Wilkins, and X. Dang, “Learning to rank using 1-norm regularization and convex hull reduction,” in
*Proceedings of the 48th Annual Southeast Regional Conference (ACMSE '10)*, Oxford, Miss, USA, April 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus - H. W. Park, M. W. Park, B. K. Ahn, and H. S. Lee, “1-Norm-based regularization scheme for system identification of structures with discontinuous system parameters,”
*International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering*, vol. 69, no. 3, pp. 504–523, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus - J. P. Aubin,
*Optima and Equilibria: An Introduction to Nonliear Analysis*, vol. 140 of*Graduate Texts in Mathematics*, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 1993. - H. W. Engl, M. Hanke, and A. Neubauer,
*Regularization of Inverse Problems*, vol. 375 of*Mathematics and Its Applications*, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1996.