2007
DOI: 10.1007/s10107-007-0102-z
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Nonlinear error bounds for lower semicontinuous functions on metric spaces

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
34
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
1
34
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A different subdifferential criterion was obtained in [18,19] as a by-product in the investigation of calmness of a standard constraint system in the sense of [48]. Another criterion was worked out in [20] on the basis of a primal-type estimate; further important results of this nature can be found in [13,42,43,45]. This paper goes in the same direction by employing several groups of derivativelike objects both from the primal as well as from the dual space.…”
Section: D(x M(ȳ)) ≤ Kd(yȳ)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A different subdifferential criterion was obtained in [18,19] as a by-product in the investigation of calmness of a standard constraint system in the sense of [48]. Another criterion was worked out in [20] on the basis of a primal-type estimate; further important results of this nature can be found in [13,42,43,45]. This paper goes in the same direction by employing several groups of derivativelike objects both from the primal as well as from the dual space.…”
Section: D(x M(ȳ)) ≤ Kd(yȳ)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since the pioneering work of Hoffman [19], this notion (and its local version) have played an important role in many areas in mathematical programming and variational analysis (see the excellent surveys [23,31] for results before 1997, and for more recent results see [1,2,7,10,12,27,28,29,30,36] and references therein). The earlier results all are either under certain convexity assumption or restricted to the special case when n = 1.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The main assumption of Proposition 2.1 was already established in [CM,Proposition 4.1] (see also [AC2,Proposition 5.1]): it provides a socalled error bound estimate for f in a neighborhood of a "critical set" C, which was required to be nonempty for the purposes of [CM]. Allowing C = ∅ does not affect the proof (that we give for completeness), and fits our present purposes.…”
Section: Vol 8 (2011)mentioning
confidence: 80%