1 Introduction

Throughout this paper we assume that E is a real Banach space with its dual E , C is a nonempty, closed, convex subset of E, and J:E 2 E is the normalized duality mapping defined by

Jx= { f E : x , f = x 2 = f 2 } ,xE.
(1.1)

In the sequel, we use F(T) to denote the set of fixed points of a mapping T. A point p in C is said to be an asymptotic fixed point of T if C contains a sequence { x n } which converges weakly to p such that the lim n ( x n T x n )=0. The set of asymptotic fixed points of T will be denoted by F ˆ (T). A mapping T:CC is said to be nonexpansive if

TxTyxy,x,yC.
(1.2)

A mapping T:CC is said to be relatively nonexpansive if F(T)= F ˆ (T) and

ϕ(p,Tx)ϕ(p,x),xC,pF(T),
(1.3)

where ϕ:E×E R 1 denotes the Lyapunov functional defined by

ϕ(x,y)= x 2 2x,Jy+ y 2 ,x,yE.
(1.4)

It is obvious from the definition of ϕ that

( x y ) 2 ϕ(x,y) ( x + y ) 2 ,
(1.5)
ϕ(x,y)=ϕ(x,z)+ϕ(z,y)+2xz,JzJy,
(1.6)

and

ϕ(x,y)=x,JxJy+yx,JyxJxJy+yxy.
(1.7)

The asymptotic behavior of a relatively nonexpansive mapping was studied in [14]. In 1953, Mann [5] introduced the iteration as follows: a sequence { x n } is defined by

x n + 1 = α n x n +(1 α n )T x n ,
(1.8)

where the initial element x 0 C is arbitrary and { α n } is a sequence of real numbers in [0,1]. The Mann iteration has been extensively investigated for nonexpansive mappings. One of the fundamental convergence results was proved by Reich [6]. In an infinite-dimensional Hilbert space, a Mann iteration can yield only weak convergence (see [7, 8]). Attempts to modify the Mann iteration method (1.8) so that strong convergence is guaranteed have recently been made. Nakajo and Takahashi [9] proposed the following modification of Mann iteration method (1.8) for a nonexpansive mapping T from C into itself in a Hilbert space: from an arbitrary x 0 C,

{ y n = α n x n + ( 1 α n ) T x n , C n = { z C : y n z x n z } , Q n = { z C : x n z , x 0 x n 0 } , x n + 1 = P C n Q n x 0 , n N { 0 } ,
(1.9)

where P K denotes the metric projection from a Hilbert space H onto a closed convex subset K of H and proved that the sequence { x n } converges strongly to P F ( T ) x 0 . A projection onto the intersection of two half-spaces is computed by solving a linear system of two equations with two unknowns (see [[10], Section 3]).

Let θ:C×C R 1 be a bifunction, ψ:C R 1 a real-valued function, and B:C E a nonlinear mapping. The so-called generalized mixed equilibrium problem (GMEP) is to find an uC such that

θ(u,y)+yu,Bu+ψ(y)ψ(u)0,yC,
(1.10)

whose set of solutions is denoted by Ω(θ,B,ψ).

The equilibrium problem is a unifying model for several problems arising in physics, engineering, science optimization, economics, transportation, network and structural analysis, Nash equilibrium problems in noncooperative games, and others. It has been shown that variational inequalities and mathematical programming problems can be viewed as a special realization of the abstract equilibrium problems. Many authors have proposed some useful methods to solve the EP (equilibrium problem), GEP (generalized equilibrium problem), MEP (mixed equilibrium problem), and GMEP.

In 2007, Plubtieng and Ungchittrakool [11] established strong convergence theorems for a common fixed point of two relatively nonexpansive mappings in a Banach space by using the following hybrid method in mathematical programming:

{ x 0 = x C , y n = J 1 [ α n J x n + ( 1 α n ) J z n ] , z n = J 1 [ β n ( 1 ) J x n + β n ( 2 ) J T x n + β n ( 3 ) J S x n ] , H n = { z C : ϕ ( z , y n ) ϕ ( z , x n ) } , W n = { z C : x n z , J x J y 0 } , x n + 1 = P H n W n x , n N { 0 } .
(1.11)

Their results extended and improved the corresponding ones announced by Nakajo and Takahashi [9], Martinez-Yanes and Xu [12], and Matsushita and Takahashi [4].

Recently, Su and Qin [13] modified iteration (1.9), the so-called monotone CQ method for nonexpansive mapping, as follows: from an arbitrary x 0 C,

{ y n = α n x n + ( 1 α n ) T x n , C 0 = { z C : y 0 z x 0 z } , Q 0 = C , C n = { z C n 1 Q n 1 : y n z x n z } , Q n = { z C n 1 Q n 1 : x n z , x 0 x n 0 } , x n + 1 = P C n Q n x 0 , n N { 0 } ,
(1.12)

and proved that the sequence { x n } converges strongly to P F ( T ) x 0 .

Inspired and motivated by the studies mentioned above, in this paper, we use a modified hybrid iteration scheme for approximating common elements of the set of solutions to convex feasibility problem for a countable families of relatively nonexpansive mappings, of set of solutions to a system of generalized mixed equilibrium problems. A strong convergence theorem is established in the framework of Banach spaces. The results extend those of the authors, in which the involved mappings consist of just finitely many ones.

2 Preliminaries

We say that E is strictly convex if the following implication holds for x,yE:

x=y=1,xy x + y 2 <1.
(2.1)

It is also said to be uniformly convex if for any ϵ>0, there exists δ>0 such that

x=y=1,xyϵ x + y 2 1δ.
(2.2)

It is well known that if E is a uniformly convex Banach space, then E is reflexive and strictly convex. A Banach space E is said to be smooth if

lim t 0 x + t y x t
(2.3)

exists for each x,yS(E):={xE:x=1}. E is said to be uniformly smooth if the limit (2.3) is attained uniformly for x,yS(E).

Following Alber [14], the generalized projection P C :EC is defined by

P C =arg inf y C ϕ(y,x),xE.
(2.4)

Lemma 2.1 [14]

Let E be a smooth, strictly convex and reflexive Banach space and C be a nonempty, closed, convex subset of E. Then the following conclusions hold:

  1. (1)

    ϕ(x, P C y)+ϕ( P C y,y)ϕ(x,y) for all xC and yE.

  2. (2)

    If xE and zC, then z= P C xzy,JxJz0, yC.

  3. (3)

    For x,yE, ϕ(x,y)=0 if and only if x=y.

Lemma 2.2 [15]

Let E be a uniformly convex and smooth Banach space and let r>0. Then there exists a continuous, strictly increasing, and convex function h:[0,2r][0,) such that h(0)=0 and

h ( x y ) ϕ(x,y)
(2.5)

for all x,y B r :={zE:zr}.

Lemma 2.3 [16]

Let E be a uniformly convex and smooth Banach space and let { x n } and { y n } be two sequences of E. If ϕ( x n , y n )0, where ϕ is the function defined by (1.4), and either { x n } or { y n } is bounded, then x n y n 0.

Remark 2.4 The following basic properties for a Banach space E can be found in Cioranescu [17].

  1. (i)

    If E is uniformly smooth, then J is uniformly continuous on each bounded subset of E.

  2. (ii)

    If E is reflexive and strictly convex, then J 1 is norm-weak-continuous.

  3. (iii)

    If E is a smooth, strictly convex and reflexive Banach space, then the normalized duality mapping J:E 2 E is single valued, one-to-one, and onto.

  4. (iv)

    A Banach space E is uniformly smooth if and only if E is uniformly convex.

  5. (v)

    Each uniformly convex Banach space E has the Kadec-Klee property, i.e., for any sequence { x n }E, if x n xE and x n x, then x n x as n.

Lemma 2.5 [18]

Let E be a real uniformly convex Banach space and let B r (0) be the closed ball of E with center at the origin and radius r>0. Then there exists a continuous strictly increasing convex function g:[0,)[0,) with g(0)=0 such that

λ x + μ y + γ z 2 λ x 2 +μ y 2 +γ z 2 λμg ( x y )
(2.6)

for all x,y,z B r (0) and λ,μ,γ[0,1] with λ+μ+γ=1.

Lemma 2.6 [19]

The unique solutions to the positive integer equation

n= i n + ( m n 1 ) m n 2 , m n i n ,n=1,2,3,
(2.7)

are

i n =n ( m n 1 ) m n 2 , m n = [ 1 2 2 n + 1 4 ] ,n=1,2,3,,
(2.8)

where [x] denotes the maximal integer that is not larger than x.

3 Main results

Theorem 3.1 Let E be a real uniformly smooth and strictly convex Banach space, and C be a nonempty, closed, convex subset of E. Let { T i }:CC and { S i }:CC be two sequences of relatively nonexpansive mappings with F:= i = 1 (F( T i )F( S i )). Let { x n } be the sequence generated by

{ x 0 = x C , H 1 = W 1 = C , y n = J 1 [ λ n J x n + ( 1 λ n ) J z n ] , z n = J 1 [ α n J x n + β n J T i n x n + γ n J S i n x n ] , H n = { z H n 1 W n 1 : ϕ ( z , y n ) ϕ ( z , x n ) } , W n = { z H n 1 W n 1 : x n z , J x J y 0 } , x n + 1 = P H n W n x , n N { 0 } ,
(3.1)

where { λ n }, { α n }, { β n }, and { γ n } are sequences in [0,1] satisfying

  1. (1)

    0 λ n <1, nN{0}; lim sup n λ n <1;

  2. (2)

    α n + β n + γ n =1; lim n α n =0 and lim inf n β n γ n >0;

and i n is the solution to the positive integer equation n= i n + ( m n 1 ) m n 2 ( m n i n , n=1,2,), that is, for each n1, there exists a unique i n such that

i 1 = 1 , i 2 = 1 , i 3 = 2 , i 4 = 1 , i 5 = 2 , i 6 = 3 , i 7 = 1 , i 8 = 2 , i 9 = 3 , i 10 = 4 , i 11 = 1 , .

Then { x n } converges strongly to P F x, where P F x is the generalized projection from C onto F.

Proof We divide the proof into several steps.

  1. (I)

    H n and W n (nN{0}) both are closed and convex subsets in C.

This follows from the fact that ϕ(z, y n )ϕ(z, x n ) is equivalent to

2z,J x n J y n x n 2 y n 2 .
(3.2)

(II) F is a subset of n = 0 ( H n W n ).

In fact, we note by [[4], Proposition 2.4] that for each i1, F( S i ) and F( T i ) are closed convex sets and so is F. It is clear that FC= H 1 W 1 . Suppose that F C n 1 Q n 1 for some nN. For any uF, by the convexity of 2 , we have

ϕ ( u , z n ) = ϕ ( u , J 1 [ α n J x n + β n J T i n x n + γ n J S i n x n ] ) = u 2 2 u , α n J x n + β n J T i n x n + γ n J S i n x n + α n J x n + β n J T i n x n + γ n J S i n x n 2 u 2 2 α n u , J x n 2 β n u , J T i n x n 2 γ n u , J S i n x n + α n x n 2 + β n T i n x n 2 + γ n S i n x n 2 = α n ϕ ( u , x n ) + β n ϕ ( u , T i n x n ) + γ n ϕ ( u , S i n x n ) α n ϕ ( u , x n ) + β n ϕ ( u , x n ) + γ n ϕ ( u , x n ) = ϕ ( u , x n ) ,
(3.3)

and then

ϕ ( u , y n ) = ϕ ( u , J 1 [ λ n J x n + ( 1 λ n ) J z n ] ) = u 2 2 u , λ n J x n + ( 1 λ n ) J z n + λ n J x n + ( 1 λ n ) J z n 2 u 2 2 λ n u , J x n 2 ( 1 λ n ) u , J z n + λ n x n 2 + ( 1 λ n ) z n 2 = λ n ( u 2 2 u , J x n + x n 2 ) + ( 1 λ n ) ( u 2 2 u , J z n + z n 2 ) = λ n ϕ ( u , x n ) + ( 1 λ n ) ϕ ( u , z n ) λ n ϕ ( u , x n ) + ( 1 λ n ) ϕ ( u , x n ) = ϕ ( u , x n ) .
(3.4)

This implies that F H n . It follows from x n = P H n 1 W n 1 x and Lemma 2.1(2) that

x n z,JxJ x n 0,z H n 1 W n 1 .
(3.5)

Particularly,

x n z,JxJ x n 0,uF,
(3.6)

and hence F W n , which yields F H n W n . By induction, F n = 0 ( H n W n ).

  1. (III)

    lim n x n T i n x n = lim n x n S i n x n =0.

In view of x n + 1 = P H n W n x H n and the definition of H n , we also have

ϕ( x n + 1 , y n )ϕ( x n + 1 , x n ),nN.
(3.7)

This implies that

lim n ϕ( x n + 1 , y n )= lim n ϕ( x n + 1 , x n )=0.
(3.8)

It follows from Lemma 2.2 that

lim n x n + 1 y n = lim n x n + 1 x n =0.
(3.9)

Since J is uniformly norm-to-norm continuous on bounded sets, we have

lim n J x n + 1 J y n = lim n J x n + 1 J x n =0
(3.10)

and

J x n + 1 J y n (1 λ n )J x n + 1 J z n λ n J x n + 1 J x n ,nN{0}.
(3.11)

This implies that

J x n + 1 J z n 1 1 λ n ( J x n + 1 J y n + λ n J x n + 1 J x n ) 1 1 λ n ( J x n + 1 J y n + J x n + 1 J x n ) .
(3.12)

From (3.10) and lim sup n λ n <1, we have lim n J x n + 1 J z n =0. Since J 1 is also uniformly norm-to-norm continuous on bounded sets, we obtain

lim n x n + 1 z n = lim n J 1 ( J x n + 1 ) J 1 ( J z n ) =0.
(3.13)

From x n z n x n x n + 1 + x n + 1 z n we have lim n x n z n =0. Since { x n } is bounded, ϕ(p, T i n x n )ϕ(p, x n ) and ϕ(p, S i n x n )ϕ(p, x n ) for any pF. We also find that {J x n }, {J T i n x n } and {J S i n x n } are bounded, and then there exists an r>0 such that {J x n },{J T i n x n },{J S i n x n } B r (0). Therefore Lemma 2.5 is applicable and we observe that

ϕ ( p , z n ) = p 2 2 p , α n J x n + β n J T i n x n + γ n J S i n x n + α n J x n + β n J T i n x n + γ n J S i n x n 2 p 2 2 α n p , J x n 2 β n p , J T i n x n 2 γ n p , J S i n x n + α n x n 2 + β n T i n x n 2 + γ n S i n x n 2 β n γ n g ( J T i n x n J S i n x n ) = α n ϕ ( p , x n ) + β n ϕ ( p , T i n x n ) + γ n ϕ ( p , S i n x n ) β n γ n g ( J T i n x n J S i n x n ) ϕ ( p , x n ) β n γ n g ( J T i n x n J S i n x n ) .
(3.14)

That is,

β n γ n g ( J T i n x n J S i n x n ) ϕ(p, x n )ϕ(p, z n ),
(3.15)

where g:[0,)[0,) is a continuous strictly convex function with g(0)=0.

Let { T i n k x n k S i n k x n k } be any subsequence of { T i n x n S i n x n }. Since { x n k } is bounded, there exists a subsequence { x n j } of { x n k } such that for any pF,

lim j ϕ(p, x n j )= lim sup k ϕ(p, x n k ):=a.
(3.16)

From (1.6) we have

ϕ ( p , x n j ) = ϕ ( p , z n j ) + ϕ ( z n j , x n j ) + 2 p z n j , J z n j J x n j ϕ ( p , z n j ) + ϕ ( z n j , x n j ) + M J z n j J x n j
(3.17)

for some appropriate constant M>0. Since

lim j ϕ( z n j , x n j )=0= lim j J z n j J x n j ,
(3.18)

it follows that

a= lim inf j ϕ(p, x n j ) lim inf j ϕ(p, z n j ).
(3.19)

From (3.3), we have

lim sup j ϕ(p, z n j ) lim sup j ϕ(p, x n j )=a
(3.20)

and hence lim j ϕ(p, x n j )=a= lim j ϕ(p, z n j ). By (3.15), we observe that, as j,

β n j γ n j g ( J T i n j x n j J S i n j x n j ) ϕ(p, x n j )ϕ(p, z n j )0.
(3.21)

Since lim inf n β n γ n >0, it follows that lim j g(J T i n j x n j J S i n j x n j )=0. By the properties of the mapping g, we have lim j J T i n j x n j J S i n j x n j =0. Since J 1 is also uniformly norm-to-norm continuous on bounded sets, we obtain

lim j T i n j x n j S i n j x n j = lim j J 1 ( J T i n j x n j ) J 1 ( J S i n j x n j ) =0,
(3.22)

and then lim n T i n x n S i n x n =0. Next, we note by the convexity of 2 and (1.7) that, as n,

ϕ ( T i n x n , z n ) = T i n x n 2 2 T i n x n , α n J x n + β n J T i n x n + γ n J S i n x n + α n J x n + β n J T i n x n + γ n J S i n x n 2 T i n x n 2 2 α n T i n x n , J x n 2 β n T i n x n , J T i n x n 2 γ n T i n x n , J S i n x n + α n x n 2 + β n T i n x n 2 + γ n S i n x n 2 = α n ϕ ( T i n x n , x n ) + β n ϕ ( T i n x n , S i n x n ) 0 ,
(3.23)

since α n 0. By Lemma 2.3, we have lim n T i n x n z n =0 and hence

T i n x n x n T i n x n z n + z n x n 0
(3.24)

as n. Moreover, we observe that

S i n x n x n S i n x n T i n x n + T i n x n x n 0
(3.25)

as n.

  1. (IV)

    x n P F x as n.

It follows from the definition of W n and Lemma 2.1(2) that x n = P W n x. Since x n + 1 = P H n W n x W n , we have

ϕ( x n ,x)ϕ( x n + 1 ,x),n1.
(3.26)

Therefore, {ϕ( x n ,x)} is nondecreasing. Using x n = P W n x and Lemma 2.1(1), we have

ϕ( x n ,x)=ϕ( P W n x,x)ϕ(p,x)ϕ(p, x n )ϕ(p,x)
(3.27)

for all pF and for all nN, that is, {ϕ( x n ,x)} is bounded. Then

lim n ϕ( x n ,x) exists.
(3.28)

In particular, by (1.5), the sequence { ( x n x ) 2 } is bounded. This implies that { x n } is bounded. Note again that x n = P W n x and for any positive integer k, x n + k W n + k 1 W n . By Lemma 2.1(1),

ϕ ( x n + k , x n ) = ϕ ( x n + k , P W n x ) ϕ ( x n + k , x ) ϕ ( P W n x , x ) = ϕ ( x n + k , x ) ϕ ( x n , x ) .
(3.29)

By Lemma 2.2, we have, for m,nN with m>n,

h ( x m x n ) ϕ( x m , x n )ϕ( x m ,x)ϕ( x n ,x),
(3.30)

where h:[0,)[0,) is a continuous, strictly increasing, and convex function with h(0)=0. Then the properties of the function g show that { x n } is a Cauchy sequence in C, so there exists x C such that

x n x (n).
(3.31)

Now, set N i ={kN:k=i+ ( m 1 ) m 2 ,mi,mN} for each iN. Note that T i k = T i and S i k = S i whenever k N i . By Lemma 2.6 and the definition of N i , we have N 1 ={1,2,4,7,11,16,} and i 1 = i 2 = i 4 = i 7 = i 11 = i 16 ==1. Then it follows from (3.15) and (3.24) that

lim N i k T i x k x k = lim N i k S i x k x k =0,iN.
(3.32)

It then immediately follows from (3.31) and (3.32) that x F( T i )F( S i ) for each iN and hence x F.

Put u= P F x. Since uF H n W n and x n + 1 = P H n W n x, we have ϕ( x n + 1 ,x)ϕ(u,x), nN. Then

ϕ ( x , x ) = lim n ϕ( x n + 1 ,x)ϕ(u,x),
(3.33)

which implies that x =u since u= P F x, and hence x n x = P F x as n. This completes the proof. □

Remark 3.2 Note that the algorithm (3.1) is based on the projection onto an intersection of two closed and convex sets. We first give an example [20] of how to compute such a projection onto the intersection of two half-spaces.

Let H be a Hilbert space and suppose that (x,y,z) H 3 satisfies

{ w H : w y , x y 0 } { w H : w z , y z 0 } .
(3.34)

Set

π=xy,yz,μ= x y 2 ,ν= y z 2 ,ρ=μν π 2 ,
(3.35)

and

Q(x,y,z)= { z , if  ρ = 0  and  π 0 ; x + ( 1 + π / ν ) ( z y ) , if  ρ > 0  and  π ν ρ ; y + ( ν / ρ ) ( π ( x y ) + μ ( z y ) ) , if  ρ > 0  and  π ν < ρ .
(3.36)

In [21], Haugazeau introduced the operator Q as an explicit description of the projector onto the intersection of the two half-spaces defined in (3.34). He proved in [21] that the sequence { y n } defined by y 0 =x and

(nN) y n + 1 =Q ( x , Q ( x , y n , P B y n ) , P A Q ( x , y n , P B y n ) )
(3.37)

converges strongly to P C x.

Since the algorithm (3.1) involves the projection onto the intersection of two convex sets not necessarily half-spaces, we next give an example [22] to explain and illustrate how the projection is calculated in the general convex case.

Dykstra’s algorithm Let Ω 1 , Ω 2 ,, Ω p be closed and convex subsets of R n . For any i=1,2,,p and x 0 R n , the sequences { x i k } are defined by the following recursive formulas:

{ x 0 k = x p k 1 , x i k = P Ω i ( x i 1 k y i k 1 ) , i = 1 , 2 , , p , y i k = x i k ( x i 1 k y i k 1 ) , i = 1 , 2 , , p ,
(3.38)

for k=1,2, with initial values x p 0 = x 0 and y i 0 =0 for i=1,2,,p. If Ω:= i = 1 p Ω i , then { x i k } converges to x = P Ω ( x 0 ), where P Ω (x):=arg inf y Ω y x 2 , x R n .

Note Another iterative method termed HAAR (Haugazeau-like Averaged Alternating Reflections) for finding the projection onto intersection of finitely many closed convex sets in a Hilbert space can be found in [[20], Remark 3.4(iii)].

4 Applications

The so-called convex feasibility problem for a family of mappings { T i } i = 1 is to find a point in the nonempty intersection i = 1 F( T i ).

Note Although the problem mentioned above is indeed a convex feasibility problem, it is mainly referred to the finite case.

Let E be a smooth, strictly convex, and reflexive Banach space, and C be a nonempty, closed, convex subset of E. Let { B i } i = 1 :C E be a sequence of β i -inverse strongly monotone mappings, { ψ } i = 1 :C R 1 a sequence of lower semi-continuous and convex functions, and { θ i } i = 1 :C×C R 1 a sequence of bifunctions satisfying the conditions:

(A1) θ(x,x)=0;

(A2) θ is monotone, i.e., θ(x,y)+θ(y,x)0;

(A3) lim sup t 0 θ(x+t(zx),y)θ(x,y);

(A4) the mapping yθ(x,y) is convex and lower semicontinuous.

A system of generalized mixed equilibrium problems (GMEP) for { θ i } i = 1 , { B i } i = 1 and { ψ i } i = 1 is to find an x C such that

θ i ( x , y ) + y x , B i x + ψ i (y) ψ i ( x ) 0,yC,iN,
(4.1)

whose set of common solutions is denoted by Ω:= i = 1 Ω i , where Ω i denotes the set of solutions to generalized mixed equilibrium problem for θ i , B i , and ψ i .

Define a countable family of mappings { S r , i } i = 1 :EC with r>0 as follows:

S r , i (x)= { z C : τ i ( z , y ) + 1 r y z , J z J x 0 , y C } ,iN,
(4.2)

where τ i (x,y)= θ i (x,y)+yx, B i x+ ψ i (y) ψ i (x), x,yC, iN. It has been shown by Zhang [23] that

  1. (1)

    { S r , i } i = 1 is a sequence of single-valued mappings;

  2. (2)

    { S r , i } i = 1 is a sequence of closed relatively nonexpansive mappings;

  3. (3)

    i = 1 F( S r , i )=Ω.

Theorem 4.1 Let E be a smooth, strictly convex, and reflexive Banach space, and C be a nonempty, closed, convex subset of E. Let { T i } i = 1 :CC be a sequence of relatively nonexpansive mappings and { S r , i } i = 1 :CC be a sequence of mappings defined by (4.2) with F:= i = 1 (F( T i )F( S r , i )). Let { x n } be the sequence generated by

{ x 0 = x C , H 1 = W 1 = C , y n = J 1 [ λ n J x n + ( 1 λ n ) J z n ] , z n = J 1 [ α n J x n + β n J T i n x n + γ n J S r , i n x n ] , H n = { z H n 1 W n 1 : ϕ ( z , y n ) ϕ ( z , x n ) } , W n = { z H n 1 W n 1 : x n z , J x J y 0 } , x n + 1 = P H n W n x , n N { 0 } ,
(4.3)

where { λ n }, { α n }, { β n } and { γ n } are sequences in [0,1] satisfying

  1. (1)

    0 λ n <1, nN{0}; lim sup n λ n <1;

  2. (2)

    α n + β n + γ n =1; lim n α n =0 and lim inf n β n γ n >0;

and i n satisfies the equation n= i n + ( m n 1 ) m n 2 ( m n i n , n=1,2,). Then { x n } converges strongly to P F x, which is some common solution to the convex feasibility problem for { T i } i = 1 and a system of generalized mixed equilibrium problems for { S r , i } i = 1 .