Skip to main content
Log in

Double Inertial Proximal Gradient Algorithms for Convex Optimization Problems and Applications

  • Published:
Acta Mathematica Scientia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, we propose double inertial forward-backward algorithms for solving unconstrained minimization problems and projected double inertial forward-backward algorithms for solving constrained minimization problems. We then prove convergence theorems under mild conditions. Finally, we provide numerical experiments on image restoration problem and image inpainting problem. The numerical results show that the proposed algorithms have more efficient than known algorithms introduced in the literature.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bauschke H H, Combettes P L. Convex Analysis and Monotone Operator Theory in Hilbert Spaces. New York: Springer, 2011

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Bauschke H H, Borwein J M. Dykstra’s alternating projection algorithm for two sets. Journal of Approximation Theory, 1994, 79(3): 418–443

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Beck A, Teboulle M. A fast iterative shrinkage-thresholding algorithm for linear inverse problems. SIAM Journal on Imaging Sciences, 2009, 2(1): 183–202

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Bello Cruz J Y, Nghia T T. On the convergence of the forward-backward splitting method with linesearches. Optimization Methods and Software, 2016, 31(6): 1209–1238

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Burachik R S, Iusem A N. Set-Valued Mappings and Enlargements of Monotone Operators. Boston: Springer Science Business Media, 2007

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cai J F, Cands E J, Shen Z. A singular value thresholding algorithm for matrix completion. SIAM Journal on Optimization, 2010, 20(4): 1956–1982

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Combettes P L, Pesquet J C. Proximal splitting methods in signal processing//Bauschke H H, Burachik R S, Combettes P L, et al. Fixed-Point Algorithms for Inverse Problems in Science and Engineering. New York: Springer, 2011: 185–212

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Combettes P L, Wajs V R. Signal recovery by proximal forward-backward splitting. Multiscale Modeling Simulation, 2005, 4(4): 1168–1200

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Cui F, Tang Y, Yang Y. An inertial three-operator splitting algorithm with applications to image inpainting. arXiv:1904.11684

  10. Davis D, Yin W. A three-operator splitting scheme and its optimization applications. Set-Valued and Variational Analysis, 2017, 25(4): 829–858

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Goldstein A A. Convex programming in Hilbert space. Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, 1964, 70(5): 709–710

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Hanjing A, Suantai S. A fast image restoration algorithm based on a fixed point and optimization method. Mathematics, 2020, 8(3): 378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kankam K, Pholasa N, Cholamjiak P. Hybrid forward-backward algorithms using linesearch rule for minimization problem. Thai Journal of Mathematics, 2019, 17(3): 607–625

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Kankam K, Pholasa N, Cholamjiak P. On convergence and complexity of the modified forward-backward method involving new linesearches for convex minimization. Mathematical Methods in the Applied Sciences, 2019, 42(5): 1352–1362

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Levitin E S, Polyak B T. Constrained minimization methods. USSR Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics, 1966, 6(5): 1–50

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Moudafi A, Oliny M. Convergence of a splitting inertial proximal method for monotone operators. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 2003, 155(2): 447–454

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Nesterov Y E. A method for solving the convex programming problem with convergence rate O(1/k2). Dokl Akad Nauk SSSR, 1983, 269(3): 543–547

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Opial Z. Weak convergence of the sequence of successive approximations for nonexpansive mappings. Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, 1967, 73(4): 591–597

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Osilike M O, Aniagbosor S C. Weak and strong convergence theorems for fixed points of asymptotically nonexpensive mappings. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 2000, 32(10): 1181–1191

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Polyak B T. Some methods of speeding up the convergence of iteration methods. USSR Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics, 1964, 4(5): 1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Verma M, Shukla K K. A new accelerated proximal gradient technique for regularized multitask learning framework. Pattern Recognition Letters, 2017, 95: 98–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Wang Z, Bovik A C, Sheikh H R, Simoncelli E P. Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2004, 13(4): 600–612

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Prasit Cholamjiak.

Additional information

This work was supported by National Research Council of Thailand (NRCT) under grant no. N41A640094 and the Thailand Science Research and Innovation Fund and the University of Phayao under the pro ject FF66-UoE.

Electronic Supplementary Material

Supplementary material, approximately 1.3 MB.

Supplementary material, approximately 743 KB.

Supplementary material, approximately 746 KB.

Supplementary material, approximately 740 KB.

Supplementary material, approximately 755 KB.

Supplementary material, approximately 758 KB.

Supplementary material, approximately 758 KB.

Supplementary material, approximately 758 KB.

Supplementary material, approximately 758 KB.

Supplementary material, approximately 457 KB.

Supplementary material, approximately 447 KB.

Supplementary material, approximately 756 KB.

Supplementary material, approximately 758 KB.

Supplementary material, approximately 758 KB.

Supplementary material, approximately 758 KB.

Supplementary material, approximately 758 KB.

Supplementary material, approximately 7.43 MB.

Supplementary material, approximately 458 KB.

Supplementary material, approximately 755 KB.

Supplementary material, approximately 758 KB.

Supplementary material, approximately 758 KB.

Supplementary material, approximately 758 KB.

Supplementary material, approximately 758 KB.

Supplementary material, approximately 7.43 MB.

Supplementary material, approximately 7.43 MB.

Supplementary material, approximately 4.2 MB.

Supplementary material, approximately 4.3 MB.

Supplementary material, approximately 2.4 MB.

Supplementary material, approximately 2.4 KB.

Supplementary material, approximately 2.4 MB.

Supplementary material, approximately 7.8 MB.

Supplementary material, approximately 7.8 MB.

Supplementary material, approximately 4.3 MB.

Supplementary material, approximately 2.4 MB.

Supplementary material, approximately 2.4 MB.

Supplementary material, approximately 2.4 MB.

Supplementary material, approximately 7.8 MB.

Supplementary material, approximately 7.8 MB.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kankam, K., Cholamjiak, P. Double Inertial Proximal Gradient Algorithms for Convex Optimization Problems and Applications. Acta Math Sci 43, 1462–1476 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10473-023-0326-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10473-023-0326-x

Key words

2010 MR Subject Classification

Navigation