2013
DOI: 10.1080/00036811.2013.809067
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Iterative algorithms for systems of extended regularized nonconvex variational inequalities and fixed point problems

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…. , , then lim →∞ ‖ +1 − +1 ‖ = 0, which also implies that scheme (3) and scheme (2) converge to the same fixed point of .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…. , , then lim →∞ ‖ +1 − +1 ‖ = 0, which also implies that scheme (3) and scheme (2) converge to the same fixed point of .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…The purpose of this paper is not to criticize the authors of the articles, but to examine what is wrong with their publications to help researchers who are interested to avoid these mistakes and pay attention when using references on system of nonlinear variational inequalities. Also, I show that there is no favor in setting up this definition and all the results obtained in [1]- [25] have no pregress in H × H. We can redirect the previous studies [1]- [25] with the logical definitions as follow: Definition 3. A mapping T : H × H → H is said to be λ-Lipschitz in the first variable if there exists constant λ > 0 such that, for all u ∈ H, for all pairs x 1 , x 2 in H,…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…There are a lot of papers written on System of variational inequalities, in all these publications the authors used an unclear Lipschitz continuous in the first variable and/or second variable definition. The aim of this paper is to illustrate that there is no sense in setting up this definition and all the results obtained in [1]- [25] have no benefit in H × H.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where for each n ∈ N, (10), we know that max{k 1 , k 2 } ∈ (0, 1), and so ϑ ∈ (0, 1). Therefore, there exist θ ∈ (0, 1) (take θ = ϑ+1 2 ∈ (ϑ, 1)) and n 0 ∈ N such that ϑ(n) ≤ θ, for all n ≥ n 0 .…”
Section: Iterative Algorithms and Convergence Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%